Advertisement

Entomophaga

, Volume 32, Issue 5, pp 493–501 | Cite as

Intrinsic competition between the gregarious parasite,Cotesia glomeratus and the solitary parasite.Cotesia rubecula [Hymenoptera: Braconidae] for their host.Artogeia rapae [Lepidoptera: Pieridae]

  • J. E. Laing
  • J. E. Corrigan
Article

Abstract

The solitary endoparasite,Cotesia rubecula, was superior to the gregarious endoparasite,Cotesia glomeratus, in tests of intrinsic competition for their hostArtogeia rapae. When an egg ofC. rubecula was oviposited in the host prior to those ofC. glomeratus, C. rubecula always won the ensuing competition. When an egg ofC. rubecula was laid in the same host within 48 h after oviposition byC. glomeratus, C. rubecula was successful in more than 90% of the interactions. Even when the egg ofC. rubecula was oviposited in the same host 72 to 96 h after oviposition byC. glomeratus, C. rubecula won the competition approximately 33% of the time. The implications of intrinsic competition are discussed in relation to the establishment ofC. rubecula in an ecosystem containingA. rapae andC. glomeratus.

Key-Words

multiple parasitism intrinsic competition Cotesia glomeratus Cotesia rubecula Artogeia rapae 

Résumé

L'endoparasite solitaireCotesia rubecula était supérieur à l'endoparasite grégaire,Cotesia glomeratus dans des tests de compétition interspécifique au niveau de leur hôteArtogeia rapae. Quand un œuf deC. rubecula était pondu dans l'hôte avant celui deC. glomeratus, C. rubecula gagnait toujours la compétition s'ensuivant. Quand un œuf deC. rubecula était déposé dans le même hôte dans les 48 heures après la ponte deC. glomeratus, C. rubecula l'emportait dans plus de 90% des interactions. Même quand l'œuf deC. rubecula était pondu dans le même hôte de 72 à 96 heures après la ponte deC. glomeratus, C. rubecula remportait la compétition approximativement dans les 33% des cas. Les implications de la compétition interspécifique sont discutées en relation avec l'établissement deC. rubecula dans un écosystème renfermantA. rapae etC. glomeratus.

Mots Clefs

Parasitisme multiple compétition interspécifique Cotesia glomeratus Cotesia rubecula Artogeia rapae 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Conde, J.E. &Rabinovich, J.E. — 1979. Larval competition betweenTelenomus costalimai [Hymenoptera: Scelionidae] andOencyrtus trinidadensis venatorius [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae] after simultaneous oviposition inRhodnius prolixus eggs [Hemiptera: Reduviidae]. —J. Med. Entomol., 76, 428–431.Google Scholar
  2. Corrigan, J.E. — 1982.Cotesia (Apanteles) rubecula [Hymenoptera: Braconidae] recovered in Ottawa, Ontario ten years after its release. —Proc. Entomol. Soc. Ont., 113, 71.Google Scholar
  3. Fisher, R.C. — 1961. A study in insect multiparasitism. II. The mechanism and control of competition for the host. —J. Exp. Biol., 38, 605–628.Google Scholar
  4. Parker, F.D., Lawson, F.R. &Pinnell, R.E. — 1971. Suppression ofPieris rapae using a new control system: mass releases of both the pest and its parasites. —J. Econ. Entomol., 64, 721–735.Google Scholar
  5. Pemberton, C.E. &Willard, H. F. — 1918. Inter-relations of fruit fly parasites in Hawaii. —J. Agric. Res., 12, 285–295.Google Scholar
  6. Puttler, B., Parker, F.D., Pinnell, R.E. &Thewke, S.E. — 1970. Introduction ofApanteles rubecula into the United States as a parasite of the imported cabbageworm. —J. Econ. Entomol., 63, 304–305.Google Scholar
  7. Richards, O.W. — 1940. The biology of the small white butterfly (Pieris rapae), with special reference to the factors controlling its abundance. —J. Anim. Ecol., 9, 243–288.Google Scholar
  8. Salt, G. — 1961. Competition among insect parasitoids. —Symp. Soc. Exp. Biol., 15, 96–119.Google Scholar
  9. Vinson, S.B. &Ables, J.R. — 1980. Interspecific competition among endoparasitoids of tobacco budworm larvae [Lep.: Noctuidae]. —Entomophaga, 25, 357–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Wallner, W.E., Weseloh, R.M. &Grinberg, P.S. — 1982. Intrinsic competition betweenApanteles melanoscelus [Hym.: Braconidae] andRogas lymantriae [Hym.: Braconidae] reared onLymantria dispar [Lep.: Lymantriidae]. —Entomophaga, 27, 99–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Wilkinson, A.T.S. — 1966.Apanteles rubecula Marsh. and other parasites ofPieris rapae in British Columbia —J. Econ. Entomol., 59, 1012–1013.Google Scholar
  12. Williamson, G.D. — 1971. Insect liberations in Canada. Parasites and predators 1970. —Agric. Can. Liberation Bulletin, No. 34., 16 pp.Google Scholar
  13. Williamson, G.D. — 1972. Insect liberations in Canada. Parasites and predators 1971. —Agric. Can. Liberation Bulletin, No. 35., 16 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Wylie, H.G. — 1972. Larval competition among three hymenopterous parasite species on multiparasitized housefly (Diptera) pupae. —Can. Entomol., 104, 1181–1190.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Lavoisier Abonnements 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. E. Laing
    • 1
  • J. E. Corrigan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental BiologyUniversity of GuelphGuelphCanada

Personalised recommendations