ترجیح طعمه و سوئیچینگ بالتوری سبز Chrysoperla carnea روی شته‌ی سبز مرکبات Aphis spiraecola و شته‌ی جالیز Aphis gossypii

نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 گروه گیاه پزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

2 گروه گیاه پزشکی، دانشکده کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی، دانشگاه محقق اردبیلی، اردبیل، ایران

چکیده

بالتوری سبزChrysoperla carnea  یکی از دشمنان طبیعی است که به آفات مختلف گیاهان زراعی و باغی حمله می­کند. ترجیح غذایی دشمنان طبیعی یکی از مهم­ترین معیارهایی است که در بررسی کارایی آن­ها مورد استفاده قرار می­ گیرد. در این بررسی، ترجیح غذایی و سوئیچینگ لاروهای سن دوم و سوم بالتوری سبز روی شته­ ی سبز مرکبات، Aphis spiraecola و شته­ ی­ جالیز، Aphis gossypii مورد مطالعه قرار گرفت. آزمایش روی برگ پرتقال، رقم تامسون ناول، در اتاقک رشد در دمای 2±27 درجه­ ی سلسیوس، رطوبت نسبی 5±65 درصد و دوره­ ی نوری 16 ساعت روشنایی و 8 ساعت تاریکی انجام شد. نتایج نشان داد که وقتی شته ­ی سبز مرکبات یا شته ­ی جالیز به تنهایی در اختیار لاروهای سن دوم و سوم شکارگر قرار گرفت، نرخ شکارگری لاروها روی شته­ ی جالیز در مقایسه با شته­ ی سبز مرکبات بیشتر بود. در آزمایش سوئیچینگ، ارائه­ ی ترکیب­ های مختلفی از شته­ ی جالیز: شته ­ی سبز مرکبات تفاوت معنی ­داری در میزان تغذیه­ ی لاروهای بالتوری سبز ایجاد کرد. در ترکیب­ های مختلف طعمه، تغذیه ­ی لاروهای سن دوم و سوم شکارگر از شته ­ی سبز مرکبات به ترتیب بین 90/7 تا 10/21 و 70/15 تا 00/31 و از شته ­ی جالیز به ترتیب بین 60/14 تا 60/29 و 50/24 تا 20/38 عدد متغیر بود. مقدار شاخص ترجیح منلی در نسبت مساوی شته­ ی جالیز:شته­ی سبز مرکبات برای لارو سن دوم و سوم شکارگر به ترتیب 632/0: 368/0 و 647/0: 353/0 محاسبه شد که نشان دهنده­ ی ترجیح لاروها به شته­ ی جالیز بود. این تحقیق نشان داد که نوع طعمه و تراکم آن روی ویژگی ­های رفتاری لاروهای بالتوری سبز موثر است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Prey preference and switching of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea on the citrus aphid Aphis spiraecola and the melon aphid Aphis gossypii

نویسندگان [English]

  • M. Moradi 1
  • M. Hassanpour 2
  • A. Golizadeh 1
  • S. A. A. Fathi 1
1 Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran
2 Department of Plant Protection, Faculty of Agriculture and Natural Resources, University of Mohaghegh Ardabili, Ardabil, Iran.
چکیده [English]

The green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea is one of the natural enemies, which attacks various pests on crops and orchards. Feeding preference of natural enemies is one of the most important criteria used in evaluation of their efficiency. In this research, feeding preferences and switching of the second and third instar larvae of C. carnea were studied on the citrus aphid, Aphis spiraecola and the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. The experiments were carried out on orange leaves in a growth chamber at 27±2°C, 65±5% RH and a photoperiod of 16L: 8D h. The results showed that when A. spiraecola or A. gossypii were separately offered to the second and third instar larvae of predator, the predation rate was higher on A. gossypii compared to A. spiraecola. Providing different combinations of A. gossypii: A. spiraecola significantly affected the consumption of C. carnea larvae in switching experiment. In different combinations, the consumption of the second and third instar larvae of the predator varied from 7.90 to 21.10 and from 15.70 to 31.00 on A. spiraecola, and from 14.60 to 29.60 and from 24.50 to 38.20 on A. gossypii, respectively. The values of Manly’s preference index in equal ratios of A. gossypii: A. spiraecola were calculated 0.632:0.368 and 0.647:0.353 for second and third larval instars, respectively, showing the preference of the larvae to A. gossypii. The results of the present study showed that the types 

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • biological control
  • predator-prey interaction
  • choice and no-choice tests
  • preference index

Alaee, T. and Allahyari, H. 2013. Prey preference of Hippodamia variegata (Col., Coccinellidae) on two aphid species: Lipaphis erysimi and Brevicoryne brassicae. Plant Pests Research 3: 11-19 (In Farsi with English abstract).

Bigler, F. 1984. Biological control by Chrysopids: Integration with pesticides. In: Canard, M., Séméria, Y. and New, T. R. (Eds.). Biology of the Chrysopidae. Dr Junk, The Hague, pp. 233-245.

Blackman, R. L. and Eastop, V. F. 2000. Aphids on the world’s crops. An identification and information guide. Second edition, The Natural History Museum. London.

Butler, C. D. and O’Neil, R. J. 2008. Voracity and prey preference of insidious flower bug (Hem: Anthocoridae) for immature stages of soybean aphid (Hem: Aphididae) and soybean thrips (Thys.: Thripidae). Environmental Entomology 37: 964-972.

Charnov, E. L. 1976. Optimal foraging, the marginal value theorem. Theoretical Population Biology 9: 129-136.              

Delfosse, E. S. 2005. Risk and ethics in biological control. Biological Control 35: 319-329.

Esmaeili, M. 1997. The most important pests of fruit trees. Publishing Center Sepehr (in Farsi).

Eubanks, M. D. and Denno, R. F. 2000. Health food versus fast food: the effect of prey quality and mobility on prey selection by a generalist predator and indirect interactions among prey species. Ecological Entomology 25: 140-146.

Fantinou, A. A., Perdikis, D. C., Labropoulos, P. D. and Maselou, D. A. 2009. Preference and

 

consumption of Macrolophus pygmaeus preying on mixed instar assemblages of Myzus persicae. Biological Control 51: 76-80.

Hassanpour, M., Maghami, R., Rafiee-Dastjerdi, H., Golizadeh, H., Yazdanian, M., and Enkegaard, A. 2015. Predation activity of Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) upon Aphis fabae (Hemiptera: Aphididae): Effect of different hunger levels. Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology 18, 297–302.

Hassell, M. P. 1978. The dynamics of arthropod predator-prey system. New Jersey, Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA.

Jervis, M. A. 2005. Insect as natural enemies: a practical perspective. Springer, Wales.

Jervis, M. A. and Kidd, N. A. C. 1996. Insect natural enemies: Practical approaches to their study and evaluation. Chapman and Hall, London.

Jokar, M. and Zarabi, M. 2012. Prominence of three diets on life table parameters for Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) to mass rearing under laboratory conditions. Archives of Phytopathology and Plant Protection 45: 2213-2222.

Khuhro, N. H., Chen, H., Zhang, Y., Zhang, L. and Wang, M. 2012. Effect of different prey species on the life history parameters of Chrysoperla sinica (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). European Journal of Entomology 109: 175-180.  

Liu, T. X. and Chen, T. Y. 2001. Effects of three aphid species (Homoptera: Aphididae) on development, survival and predation of Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Applied Entomology and Zoology 36: 361-366.

Mahdavi, T. S. and Madadi, H. 2017. Prey preference ofNabis pseudoferus on Aphis gossypii Glover and Tuta absoluta. Plant Protection 40: 33-47.(In Farsi with English abstract)

Manly, B. F. J. 1973. A linear model for frequency-dependent selection by predators. Researches on Population Ecology 14: 137-150.

Manly, B. F. J. 1974. A model for certain types selection experiments. Biometrics 30: 281-294.

Manly, B. F. J., Miller, P. and Cook, L. M. 1972. Analysis of a selective predation experiment. American Naturalist 106: 719–736.

Marco, F. G. 2015. Integrated pest management of Aphis spiraecola (Hemiptera: Aphididae) in clementines: enhancing its biological control. PhD. Thesis. Universitat Politècnica de València. Spain.

Mirabzadeh, A., Sahragard, A., Mossaddegh, M. S. and Azema, M. 1998. Host species and host stage preference by predator larvae Chrysoperla carnea Steph. (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Journal of Entomological Society of Iran 16 and 17: 57-69. (In Farsi with English abstract).

Murdoch, W. W. 1969. Switching in general predators: experiments on predator specificity and stability of prey populations. Ecological Monographs 39(4): 335-354.                                                   

Murdoch, W. W. and Marks, J. R. 1973. Predation by coccinellid beetles: experiments on switching. Ecology 54: 160-167.

Naruka, P., Meena, A. and Meena, B. M. 2017. Feeding potential of Chrysoperla zastrowi arabica (Henry et al.) on different prey hosts. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies 5: 608-612.                                                                                               

Oaten, A. and Murdoch, W. W. 1975. Switching, functional response, and stability in predator- prey systems. American Naturalist 109: 299-318.                                                                            

Orlando, A., CamauBa, T., Sobrinho and Suplicy, F. N. 1970. Tests on the control of yellow beetle Coccinella vulgate on guava with new pesticides. Biologica 36: 79-82.

Provost, C., Lucas, E. and Coderre, D. 2006. Prey preference of Hyaliodes vitripennis as an intraguild predator, active predator choice or passive selection. Biological Control 37: 148-154.

Rafiei Karahroudi, Z. and Hatami, B. 2003.Comparison of two methods of releasing Chrysoperla carnea (Steph.).Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources 7: 215-225. (in Farsi with English abstract)

Sabelis, M. W. 1985. Predation on spider mites. In Helle, W. and Sabelis, M. W. (Eds.) Spider mites: their biology, natural enemies and control. Vol. 1B. Elsevier Science Publisher, Amsterdam. pp. 103-129.

Shrestha, G. and Enkegaard, A. 2013. The green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea: preference between lettuce aphids, Nasonovia ribisnigri, and western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis. Journal of Insect Science 13: 1-10.

Stephens, D.W. and Krebs, J. R. 1986. Foraging theory. Princeton University Press. Princeton.

Symondson, W., Sunderland, K. and Greenstone, M. 2002. Can generalist predators be effective biocontrol agent? Annual Review of Entomology 47: 561-594.

Tena, A. and Garcia-Mari, F. 2011. Current situation of citrus pests and diseases in the Mediterranean basin. IOBC-WPRS Bulletin 62: 365-378. 

Vacante, V. and Gerson, U. 2012. Integrated control of citrus pests in the Mediterranean region. Bentham Books.

van Emden, H. F. and Harrington, R. D. 2007. Aphids as crop pests. CAB International, Wallingford.

Vogt, H., Bigler, F., Brown, k., Candolfi, M. P., Kemmeter, F., Kuhner. Ch., Moli, M., Travis, A., Ufer, A., Vineula, E., Wiadburger, M. and Waltersdorfer, A. 2000. Laboratory method to test effects of plant protection products on larvae of Chrysoperla carnea Stephen (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). In Condolfi, M. P., Blomel, S. and Forster, R. (Eds.). Guidelines to evaluate side effects of plant protection products to non-target Arthropods. IOBC, BART, and EPPO Joint Initiative, pp. 27-44.

Waage, J. 1990. Ecological theory and the selection of biological control agents. In Mackauer, M., Ehler, L. E. and Roland, J. (Eds.). Critical issues in biological control. Intercept press, Andover, pp. 135-157.