Zeitschrift für vergleichende Physiologie

, Volume 45, Issue 6, pp 636–694 | Cite as

Über die biologische Bedeutung der Duftdrüsen bei den Landwanzen (Geocorisae)

  • Heinz Remold
Article

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Blum, M. S.: The presence of 2-hexenal in the scentgland of the pentatomid Brochymena quadripustulata. Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 54, 410–412 (1961).Google Scholar
  2. —, J. B. Crain and J. B. Chidester: Trans-2-hexenal in the scentgland of the hemiptera Acanthocephala femorata. Nature (Lond.) 189, 245–246 (1961).Google Scholar
  3. —, J. G. Traynham, J. B. Chidester and J. D. Boggus: n-Tridecane and trans-2-heptenal in the scentgland of the rice stinkbug Oebalus pugnax (F.). Science 132, 1480–1481 (1960).Google Scholar
  4. Bonnemaison, L.: Morphologie et biologie de la punaise ornée du chon (Eurydema v entrale Kol.). Ann. Inst. nat. recher. agr., Ser. C 3, 127–272 (1952).Google Scholar
  5. Bordas, L.: Sur les glandes (salivaires céphaliques et métathoraciques) de quelques Hémiptères. C. R. Acad. Sci. (Paris) 140, 595–597 (1905).Google Scholar
  6. Brindley, N. D. H.: On the metasternal scentglands of certain Heteroptera. Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 78, 199–208 (1930).Google Scholar
  7. Carayon, J.: Dimorphisme sexuel des glandes odorantes métathoraciques chez quelques Hémiptères. C. R. Acad. Sci. (Paris) 227, 303–305 (1948).Google Scholar
  8. —: Charactères anatomiques et position systématique des Hémiptères. Nabidae (note préliminaire). Bull. Mus. Hist. nat. 22, 95–101 (1950).Google Scholar
  9. —: Quelques charactères anatomiques de Hémiptères Aradides. Rev. franç. Ent. 22, 169–180 (1955).Google Scholar
  10. Casper, A.: Die Körperdecke und die Drüsen von Dytiscus marginalis, ein Beitrag zum feineren Bau des Insektenkörpers. Z. wiss. Zool. 107, 387–508 (1913).Google Scholar
  11. Conradi, A. F.: Variations in the protective value of the odoriferous secretions of some Heteroptera. Science 19, 393–394 (1904).Google Scholar
  12. Dennell, R.: A study of an insect cuticula: the larval cuticle of Sarcophaga falculata Pand. (Diptera). Proc. roy. Soc. B 133, 348–373 (1946).Google Scholar
  13. —: A study of an insect cuticle: the formation of the puparium of Sarcophaga falculata Pand. (Diptera). Proc. roy. Soc. B 134, 348–373 (1947).Google Scholar
  14. —: The epicuticle of blowfly larvae. Nature (Lond.) 165, 275 (1950).Google Scholar
  15. —, and S. R. A. Malek: Homology of the layers of the epicuticle of insects. Nature (Lond.) 171, 296 (1953).Google Scholar
  16. —: The cuticle of the cockroach Periplaneta americana. The epicuticle. Proc. roy. Soc. B 143, 126–136 (1954).Google Scholar
  17. Dethier, V. G.: Chemical insect attractants and repellents. Philadelphia and Toronto 1947.Google Scholar
  18. —: Repellents. Ann. Rev. Ent. 1, 181–202 (1956).Google Scholar
  19. Dufour, L.: Recherches anatomiques et physiologiques sur les Hémiptères. Mém. Savants. Etrang. Acad. Sci. 4, 129–462 (1833).Google Scholar
  20. Dusham, E. H.: The waxglands of the cockroach Blatta germanica. J. Morph. 31, 563–574 (1918).Google Scholar
  21. Eisner, T.: The protective role of the spray mechanism of the bombardier beetle Brachynus ballistarius Lec. J. Ins. Physiol. 2, 215–220 (1958a).Google Scholar
  22. —: Spray mechanism of the cockroach Diploptera punctata. Science 128, 148–149 (1958b).Google Scholar
  23. —, F. McKittrick and R. Payne: Defense sprays of roaches. Pest Control 27, 9, 11–12, 44–45 (1959).Google Scholar
  24. - The effectiveness of Arthropod defensive secretions. XI. Int. Kongr. Entomol., Wien III, 1960.Google Scholar
  25. —, J. Meinwald, A. Monro and R. Ghent: Defense mechanisms of Arthropods I. The composition and function of the spray of the whipscorpion Mastigoproctus giganteus (Lucas). J. Ins. Physiol. 6, 4, 272–298 (1961).Google Scholar
  26. Fraenkel, G., and K. M. Rudall: A study of the physical and chemical properties of the insect cuticle. Proe. roy. Soc. B 129, 1–35 (1940).Google Scholar
  27. —: The structure of insect cuticles. Proc. roy. Soc. B 134, 111–143 (1947).Google Scholar
  28. Gäbler, H.: Das Eindringungsvermögen verschiedener Flüssigkeiten in die Tracheen und seine Folgen. Z. angew. Entomol. 26, 1–26 (1939).Google Scholar
  29. Geer, c. de: Mémoires pour servir à l'histoire des insectes. Stockholm 1773.Google Scholar
  30. Gulde, L.: Die Dorsaldrüsen der Larven der Hemiptera. Ber. senckenberg. naturforsch. Ges. Frankfurt 85–136 (1902).Google Scholar
  31. Heikertinger, F.: Sind die Wanzen durch Ekelgeruch geschützt? Biol. Zbl. 42, 441–464 (1922).Google Scholar
  32. Henrici, H.: Die Hautdrüsen der Landwanzen. I, II. Zool. Jb., Abt. Anat. u. Ontog. 65, 141–228 (1938); 66, 371–402 (1940).Google Scholar
  33. Hirsch, Th. v., u. I. W. Boellaard: Metacrylsäureester als Einbettungsmittel in der Histologie. Z. wiss. Mikr. 64, 24–28 (1958).Google Scholar
  34. Hurst, H.: Principles of insecticidal action as a guide to drug reactivity phase distribution relationships. Trans. Faraday Soc. 39, 390–411 (1943).Google Scholar
  35. —: Assymmetrical behavior of insect cuticle in relation to water permeability. Disc. Faraday Soc. 3, 193–210 (1948).Google Scholar
  36. Imms, A. D.: A General textbook of entomology. London: Methuen 1957.Google Scholar
  37. Johansson, A. S.: The functional anatomy of the metathoracic scentglands of the milkweed-bug, Oncopeltus fasciatus (Dall.) (Heteroptera-Lygaeidae). Norsk Entomol. Tidskr. 95, 95–109 (1957).Google Scholar
  38. Kemper, H.: Beitrag zur Kenntnis des Stinkapparates von Cimex lectularius L. Z. Morph. Ökol. Tiere 15, 524–545 (1929).Google Scholar
  39. Kramer, S., and V. B. Wigglesworth: The outer layers of the cuticle in the cockroach Periplaneta americana and the function of the oenocytes. Quart. J. micr. Sci. 91, 63–72 (1950).Google Scholar
  40. Kremer, J.: Die Flügeldecken der Coleopteren. Eine kritische Studie. Zool. Jb., Abt. Anat. u. Ontog. 41, 175–272 (1920).Google Scholar
  41. Künckel d'Herculais: Recherches sur les organes de sécrétion chez les insectes de l'ordre des Hémiptères. C. R. Acad. Paris 63, 433–436 (1866).Google Scholar
  42. Kullenberg, B.: Studien über die Biologie der Capsiden. Zool. Bidr. Uppsala 23, 1–522 (1944).Google Scholar
  43. Landois, L.: Zur Anatomie der Bettwanze mit Berücksichtigung verwandter Hemipterengeschlechter. Z. wiss. Zool. 18/19, 206–224 (1868/1869).Google Scholar
  44. Lennox, F. G.: The action of contact larvicides on Lucilia cuprina. Concil Sci. Ind. Res. Australia Pamph. 101, 67–131 (1940).Google Scholar
  45. Malouf, N. S. R.: Studies on internal anatomy of the stinkbug Nezara viridula L. Bull. Soc. ent. Egypte 17, 96–115 (1933).Google Scholar
  46. Mayer, P.: Die Anatomie von Pyrrhocoris apterus L. Arb. Anat. Physiol. 313–347 (1874); 309–355 (1875).Google Scholar
  47. Moody, D. L.: The Morphology of the repugnatorial glands of Anasa tristis De Geer. Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 23, 81–104 (1930).Google Scholar
  48. Morozov, S. F.: The penetration of contact insecticides I. Methods of investigations and general properties of the cuticle with regard to its permeability. Plant Protection III, 6, 38–48 (1935).Google Scholar
  49. Murray, C. H.: Notes on the anatomy of the bedbug Acanthia lectularia. Parasitology 7, 278–321 (1914).Google Scholar
  50. O'Kane, W. C., L. C. Glover, R. L. Blinckle and B. M. Parker: Penetration of certain liquids through the pronotum of the American roach. Tech. Bull. N. Y. Agr. Exp. Stat. 74, 1–16 (1940).Google Scholar
  51. Pätau, K.: Zur statistischen Beurteilung von Messungsreihen (eine neue t-Tafel). Biol. Zbl. 63, 152–168 (1943).Google Scholar
  52. Pfaff, W.: Untersuchungen über den Aufbau der Insektencuticula und den Eindringungsmechanismus des Kontaktinsektizides E 605. Höfchen-Briefe 5, 93–160 (1952).Google Scholar
  53. Pryor, M. G. M.: On the hardening of the cuticle of insects. Proc. roy. Soc. B 128, 393–407 (1940).Google Scholar
  54. Puri, I. M.: Studies on the anatomy of Cimex lectularius L. II. The stinkorgans. Parasitology 16, 269–278 (1924).Google Scholar
  55. Ramsay, J. A.: The evaporation of water from the Cockroach. J. exp. Biol. 12, 373–383 (1935).Google Scholar
  56. Rathmayer, W.: Methylmetacrylat als Einbettungsmedium für Insekten. Experientia (Basel) 18, 47–48 (1962).Google Scholar
  57. Reuter, O. M.: Remarques sur le polymorphisme des Hémiptères. Ann. Soc. Entom. France 5, 225–226 (1875).Google Scholar
  58. Richards, A. G.: The Integument of Arthropods. Minneapolis 1951.Google Scholar
  59. —: The cuticle of Arthropods. Ergebn. Biol. 20, 1–26 (1958).Google Scholar
  60. Roth, L. M., and T. Eisner: Chemical defenses of arthropods. Ann. Rev. Ent. 7, 107–136 (1962).Google Scholar
  61. Schulze, P.: Zur Flügeldeckenstruktur der Cicindelen und über ein in dieser Beziehung interessantes Exemplar von Cicindela campestris L. Berlin. Ent. Z. 58, 242–243 (1913).Google Scholar
  62. Stegmann, F.: Ist die Insektencuticula wirklich einheitlich gebaut ? Untersuchungen an Cicindeliden. Zool. Jb., Abt. Anat. u. Ontog. 50, 571–580 (1929a).Google Scholar
  63. —: Die Flügeldecken der Cicindelinae. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der Insektencuticula. Z. Morph. Ökol. Tiere 18, 1–73 (1929b).Google Scholar
  64. Stichel, W.: Die Wanzen Europas. II. Berlin 1962.Google Scholar
  65. Trim, A. R. H.: Studies in the chemistry of the insect cuticle. 1. Some general observations on certain arthropod cuticles with special reference to the characterization of the protein. Biochem. J. 35, 1088–1098 (1941).Google Scholar
  66. Umbach, W.: Untersuchungen über die Wirkungsweise der Kontaktgifte. Mitt. Forstwirtsch. u. Forstwiss. 5, 216–218 (1934).Google Scholar
  67. Watanabe, T.: Substances in mullberry leaves which attract silkworm larvae (Bombyx mori). Nature (Lond.) 182, 325–326 (1958).Google Scholar
  68. Waterhouse, D. F., D. A. Forss and R. H. Hackman: Characteristic odour components of the scent of stinkbugs. J. Ins. Physiol. 6, 113–121 (1961).Google Scholar
  69. Weber, H.: Biologie der Hemipteren. Berlin: Springer 1930.Google Scholar
  70. Wigglesworth, V. B.: The physiology of the cuticle and of ecdysis in Rhodnius prolixus (Triatomidae, Hem.); with special reference to the function of the oenooytes and of the dermal glands. Quart. J. micr. Sci. 76, 269–318 (1933).Google Scholar
  71. —: Transpiration through the cuticle of insects. J. exp. Biol. 21, 97–114 (1945).Google Scholar
  72. —: The epicuticle in an insect, Rhodnius prolixus. Proc. roy. Soc. B 134, 163–181 (1947).Google Scholar
  73. —: The structure and deposition of the cuticle in the adult mealworm, Tenebrio molitor. Quart. J. micr. Sci. 89, 197–217 (1948a).Google Scholar
  74. —: The insect cuticle as a living system. Disc. Farady Soc. 3, 172–177 (1948b).Google Scholar
  75. —: The insect cuticle. Biol. Rev. 23, 408–451 (1948c).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1962

Authors and Affiliations

  • Heinz Remold
    • 1
  1. 1.Zoologischen Institut der Universität MünchenDeutschland

Personalised recommendations