Analysis of the Courtship Behavior of the Navel Orangeworm, Amyelois transitella (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), with a Commentary on Methods for the Analysis of Sequences of Behavioral Transitions

Article

The courtship behavior of the navel orangeworm, Amyelois transitella, was examined in a wind tunnel. Sixty nine courtship sequences were analyzed and successful sequences divided into two categories: rapid courtship sequences, which involved few breaks in contact, short or no periods of male/female chasing and lasted <10 s between initial contact and mating; and prolonged courtship sequences, which involved many breaks in contact, extended periods of male/female chasing and lasted >10 s. Fifty six (81%) courtships were successful (50.7% rapid courtship and 30.4% prolonged courtship); the remaining 13 (18.8%) sequences were failed courtships. Of failed courtships, 9 (13.0%) were due to males losing contact with females during courtship chases and 4 (5.8%) due to females flying away immediately after male contact. Of all courtship sequences involving a break in contact during a chase, 38.5% resulted in an unsuccessful mating attempt. These findings contrast with previous studies of the courtship behavior of the navel orangeworm, potentially indicating that the type of bioassay used to study courtship may have a large effect on the behavioral sequences displayed. We evaluate several diagnostic techniques for the analysis of sequences of behavioral transitions.

KEY WORDS:

Navel orangeworm moth Insecta behavioral sequences courtship mating wind tunnel 

Notes

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Dr. L.P.S. Keunen generously provided the stock used to initiate our colony of NOW and the rearing procedures. T. Berhane supervised colony maintenance. We thank Drs. R. Beaver and K. Haynes for statistical advice, and Dr. P. L. Phelan for his valuable comments on the manuscript. This work was supported by Paramount Farms, Inc. and the California Pistachio Commission. We thank Brad Higbee of Paramount Farms for his interest in this project and his suggestions.

REFERENCES

  1. Baker, T. C., and Cardé, R. T. (1979). Courtship behavior of the oriental fruit moth (Grapholita molesta): Experimental analysis and consideration of the role of sexual selection in the evolution of courtship pheromones in the Lepidoptera. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 72: 173–188.Google Scholar
  2. Batschelet, E. (1981). Circular Statistics in Biology. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  3. Birch, M. C., Lucas, D., and White, P. R. (1989). The courtship behavior of the cabbage moth, Mamestra brassicae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), and the role of male hair-pencils. J. Insect Behav. 2: 227–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Birch, M. C., Poppy, G. M., and Baker, T. C. (1990). Scents and eversible scent structures of male moths. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 35: 25–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bishop, Y. M. M., Fienberg, S. E., and Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice. MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  6. Burns E. L., and Teal, P. E. A. (1989). Response of the male potato stem borer moths, Hydraecia micacea (Esper) to conspecific females and synthetic pheromone blends in the laboratory and field. J. Chem. Ecol. 15: 1365–1378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cardé, R. T., and Minks, A. K. (1995). Control of moth pests by mating disruption: successes and constraints. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 40: 559–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Castrovillo, P. J., and Cardé, R. T. (1980). Male codling moth (Laspeyresia pomonella) orientation to visual cues in the presence of pheromone and sequences of courtship behaviors. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 73: 100–105.Google Scholar
  9. Charlton, R. E., and Cardé, R. T. (1990). Behavioral interactions in the courtship of Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 83: 89–96.Google Scholar
  10. Cibrian-Tovar, J., and Mitchell, E. R. (1991). Courtship behavior of Heliothis subflexa (Gn.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and associated backcross insects obtained from hybridization with H. virescens (F.). Environ. Entomol. 20: 419–426.Google Scholar
  11. Coffelt, J. A., Sower, L. L., and Vick, K. W. (1978). Quantitative analysis of identified compounds in pheromone gland rinses of Plodia interpunctella and Ephestia cautella at different times of day. Environ. Entomol. 7: 502–505.Google Scholar
  12. Coffelt, J. A., Vick, K. W., Sonnet, P. E., and Doolittle, R. E. (1979). Isolation, identification and synthesis of a female sex pheromone of the navel orangeworm, Amyelois transitella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 5: 955–966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Conner, W. E. (1987). Ultrasound: its role in the courtship of the arctiid moth, Cycnia tenera. Experientia 43: 1029–1031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Curtis, C. E., Landolt, P. J., and Clark, J. D. (1985). Disruption of navel orangeworm (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) mating in large-scale plots with synthetic sex pheromone. J. Econ. Entomol. 78: 1425–1430.Google Scholar
  15. Fagen R. M., and Young, D. M. (1978). Temporal patterns of behaviors: durations, intervals, latencies, and sequences. In Colgan, P. W. (ed.), Quantitative Ethology, John Wiley and Sons, NY, New York, pp. 79–114.Google Scholar
  16. Haynes, K. F., and Birch, M. C. (1984). Mate-locating and courtship behaviors of the artichoke plume moth, Platyptilia carduidactyla (Lepidoptera: Pterophoridae). Environ. Entomol. 13: 399–408.Google Scholar
  17. Heinrich, C. (1956). American moths of the subfamily Phycitinae. U.S. National Museum Bulletin 207. Smithsonian Institute, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  18. Justus, K. A., Murlis, J., Jones, C. D., and Cardé, R. T. (2002). Measurement of odor-plume structure in a wind tunnel using a photoionization detector and a tracer gas. Environ. Fluid Mech. 2:115–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Koshio, C. (1996). Reproductive behaviour of the white-tailed zygaenid moth, Elcysma westwoodii (Lepidoptera, Zygaenidae). II. Female mating strategy. J. Ethol. 14: 21–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Krasnoff, S. B., and Yager, D. D. (1988). Acoustic response to a pheromonal cue in the arctiid moth Pyrrharctia isabella. Physiol. Entomol. 13: 433–440.Google Scholar
  21. Krasnoff, S. B., and Roelofs, W. L. (1990). Evolutionary trends in the male pheromone systems of arctiid moths: Evidence from studies of courtship in Phragmatobia fuliginosa and Pyrrharctia isabella (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). Zoo. J. Linn. Soc. 99: 319–338.Google Scholar
  22. Landolt, P. J., and Curtis, C. E. (1982). Interspecific sexual attraction between Pyralis farinalis L. and Amyelois transitella (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). J. Kans. Entomol. Soc. 55: 248–252.Google Scholar
  23. Leal, W. S., Parra-Pedrazzoli, A. L., Kaissling, K.-E., Morgan, T. I., Zalom, F. G., Pesak, D. J., Dundulis, E. A., Burks, C. S., and Higbee, B. S. (2005). Unusual pheromone chemistry in the navel orangeworm: novel sex attractants and a behavioral antagonist. Naturwissenschaften 92: 139–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mafra-Neto, A., and Cardé, R. T. (1995). Effect of the fine-scale structure of pheromone plumes: pulse frequency modulates activation and upwind flight of almond moth males. Physiol. Entomol. 20: 229–242.Google Scholar
  25. Millar, J. G., Grant, G. G., McElfresh, S., Strong, W., Rudolph, C., Stein, J. D., and Moreira, J. A. (2005). (3Z,6Z,9Z,12Z,15Z)-Pentacosapentaene, a key pheromone component of the fir coneworm moth, Dioryctria abietivorella. J. Chem. Ecol. 31: 1229–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ono, T. (1980) Role of the scales as a releaser of the copulation attempt in the silkworm moth, Bombyx mori (Lepidoptera, Bombycidae). Kontyû 48: 540–544.Google Scholar
  27. Phelan, P. L., and Baker, T. C. (1990). Comparative study of courtship in twelve phycitine moths (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). J. Insect Behav. 3: 303–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Portilla, N., Coro, F., Otazo, A., Perez, M., and Alonso, N. (1987). Mating behavior and auditory information flow in an arctiid moth. Naturwissenschaften 74: 503–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sanderford, M. V. (1998). Courtship behavior in Empyreuma affinis Roths. (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae, Ctenuchinae): Acoustic signals and tympanic organ response. Naturwissenschaften 85: 82–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sanderford, M. V., and Conner, W. E. (1995). Acoustic courtship communication in Syntomeida epilais Wlk. (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae, Ctenuchinae). J. Insect Behav. 8: 19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sanders, C. J., and Lucuik, G. S. M. (1992). Mating behavior of spruce budworm moths, Choristoneura fumiferana (Clem.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Can. Entomol. 124: 273–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schmieder-Wenzel, C., and Schruft, G. (1990). Courtship behaviour of the European grape berry moth, Eupoecilia ambiguella Hb. (Lep., Tortricidae) in regard to pheromonal and tactile stimuli. J. Appl. Entomol. 109: 341–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Shorey, H. H., and Gaston, L. K. (1970). Sex pheromones of noctuid moths.·XX. Short-range visual orientation by pheromone-stimulated males of Trichoplusia ni. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 63: 829–832.Google Scholar
  34. Siegel, S., and Castellan, N. J. (1988). Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.), McGraw-Hill, Boston, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  35. Simmons, R. B., and Conner, W. E. (1996). Ultrasonic signals in the defense and courtship of Euchaetes egle Drury and E. bolteri Strech (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). J. Insect Behav. 9: 909–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Slater, J. B., and Ollason, J. C. (1973). The temporal patterning of behaviour in isolated male zebra finches: transition analysis. Behaviour 2: 248–269.Google Scholar
  37. Stevenson, M. F., and Poole, T. B. (1976). An ethogram of the common marmoset (Calithrix jacchus jacchus): general behavioural repertoire. Anim. Behav. 24: 428–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Teal, P. E. A., McLaughlin, J. R., and Tumlinson, J. H. (1981). Analysis of the reproductive behavior of Heliothis virescens (F.) under laboratory conditions. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 74: 324–330.Google Scholar
  39. Trematerra, P. (1997). Some aspects of the sexual behaviour of the Lepidoptera Pyralidae infesting stored-products. Anz. Szhädl.kd, Pflanzenschutz Umweltschutz 70: 87–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trematerra, P., and Pavan, G. (1995). Ultrasound production in the courtship behavior of Ephestia cautella (Walk.), E. kuehniella Z. and Plodia interpunctella (Hb.) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). J. Stored Prod. Res. 31: 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EntomologyUniversity of CaliforniaRiversideUSA

Personalised recommendations