dc.creatorAluja, Martín
dc.creatorOvruski Alderete, Sergio Marcelo
dc.creatorGuillén, Larissa
dc.creatorOroño, Luis Eduardo
dc.creatorSivinski, John
dc.date.accessioned2018-04-13T19:06:39Z
dc.date.available2018-04-13T19:06:39Z
dc.date.created2018-04-13T19:06:39Z
dc.date.issued2009-05
dc.identifierAluja, Martín; Ovruski Alderete, Sergio Marcelo; Guillén, Larissa; Oroño, Luis Eduardo; Sivinski, John; Comparison of the Host Searching and Oviposition Behaviors of the Tephritid (Diptera) Parasitoids Aganaspis pelleranoi and Odontosema anastrephae (Hymenoptera: Figitidae, Eucoilinae); Springer/Plenum Publishers; Journal of Insect Behaviour; 22; 6; 5-2009; 423-451
dc.identifier0892-7553
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/42035
dc.identifierCONICET Digital
dc.identifierCONICET
dc.description.abstractWe compared the host-searching and oviposition behaviors of two Neotropical figitid parasitoids (Hymenoptera) that exploit the same resource: ripe fruit infested by fruit fly larvae (Tephritidae) that have fallen to the ground. Sexually mature Aganaspis pelleranoi (Brèthes) and Odontosema anastrephae Borgmeier females were exposed individually, under no choice conditions, to four types of fruit: 1) Clean, intact guavas, Psidium guajava L. (no fruit fly larvae, no perforations); 2) clean, with artificial perforations; 3) artificially infested (with larvae), no perforations; 4) infested with artificial perforations. A behavioral transition matrix and sequence diagram of the following behaviors was constructed: walking on fruit, detection of larvae via the antennae, tarsi or aculeus, fruit perforation and penetration, and oviposition. Overall, we found that infested fruit (intact and with artificial perforations) elicited the most activity in the females of both species and that A. pelleranoi females exhibited a significantly more diverse behavioral repertoire (i.e., more transitions) and were significantly more active than O. anastrephae females. Females of both species penetrated the fruit in search of larvae by biting through the epi- and mesocarp, but O. anastrephae remained inside for significantly longer periods (up to eight hours). A. pelleranoi females used both their antennae and tarsi to detect larvae but the use of these structures varied depending on in infested fruit tarsi were used preferentially (usually while standing still) while in uninfested fruit, antennae were mainly used (usually while walking). In the case of O. anastrephae females the reverse pattern was usually observed with antennae most commonly used to detect larvae in infested fruit. We discuss our findings in light of their evolutionary, ecological and practical implications.
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherSpringer/Plenum Publishers
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10905-009-9182-3
dc.relationinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10905-009-9182-3
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subjectHost-Search Behavior
dc.subjectOviposition
dc.subjectFigitidae
dc.subjectTephritidae
dc.titleComparison of the Host Searching and Oviposition Behaviors of the Tephritid (Diptera) Parasitoids Aganaspis pelleranoi and Odontosema anastrephae (Hymenoptera: Figitidae, Eucoilinae)
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:ar-repo/semantics/artículo
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución