, Volume 29, Issue 3, pp 249–265 | Cite as

Literature review ofOoencyrtus kuvanae [Hym.: Encyrtidae], an egg parasite ofLymantria dispar [Lep: Lymantriidae]

  • M. W. Brown


Literature onOoencyrtus kuvanae (Howard) from throughout the world is reviewed. References from Asia, Japan, Europe, Africa, and North America, covering the years 1900–1983, are included. The information is divided into the following subject areas: taxonomy, host range, distribution and introductions, biology and life history, host suitability, behavior and spatial distribution, effectiveness, and population dynamics. Suggestions for future research are presented.


Spatial Distribution Life History Plant Pathology Population Dynamic Host Range 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Compte est rendu ici de la documentation mondiale au sujet de l'Ooencyrtus kuvanae. Des références entre les années 1900 et 1983 sont comprises, notamment de l'Asie, du Japon, de l'Europe, de l'Afrique, et de l'Amérique du Nord. L'information est divisée selon les thèmes suivants: taxonomie, étendue régionale de l'hôte, répartition et implantation, cycle de dévelopement et biologie, appropriation de l'hôte, comportement et répartition régionale, efficacité et dynamique (forces motrices) de la population. On présente également de nouvelles suggestions pour des recherches futures.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alzofon, J. — 1984. The biology and behavior ofOoencyrtus kuvanae (Howard) [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae], a gypsy moth egg parasite. —Ph.D. Diss. Fordham Univ., New York, N.Y.Google Scholar
  2. Ashmead, W.H. — 1900. On the genera of the chalcid-flies belonging to the subfamilyEncyrtinae. —Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., 22, 323–412.Google Scholar
  3. Aulló, M. — 1923. The study of eradication ofPorthetria dispar in Villaneuva de Cordoba. —Rev. Fitopatol., 1, 45–52. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol., (A) 11, 577].Google Scholar
  4. Aulló, M. — 1924. The study and eradication ofProthetria dispar or “hairy caterpillar” at Villaneuva de Cordoba. —Rev. Fitopatol., 1, 93–95. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 12, 145].Google Scholar
  5. Baeta Neves, C.M., Azevedo, F. &Silva, E. — 1944. Notes on the application of biological control in the campaign againstLymantria. —Bol. Junta Nac. Cortica (Lisbon), 63, 101–103. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 33, 310].Google Scholar
  6. Bess, H.A. — 1961. Population ecology of the gypsy mothPorthetria dispar (L.) [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae]. — Conn. Agric. Exp. Stn. Bull. 646, 43 pp.Google Scholar
  7. Bjegović, P. — 1962. A new method of multiplying the egg parasiteOoencyrtus kuwanai How. —ARH Poljo-Privredne Nuake, 15, 105–113, (In Serbo-Croatian, English summary).Google Scholar
  8. Bjegović, P. — 1963a. Laboratory test of the reduction capacity, and some biological characteristics of the egg parasites of the gypsy moth. —ARH Poljo-Privredne Nauke., 16, 53–58. [Abstr. in:Biol. Abst., 47; Nbr. 34616].Google Scholar
  9. Bjegović, P. — 1963b. Competition betweenOoencyrtus kuwanai How. andAnastatus disparis R. —Zast. Bilja., 14, 543–552. (Transl. from Serbo-Croatian).Google Scholar
  10. Bjegović, P. — 1972. Reproduction ofOoencyrtus kuwanai Howard [hymenoptera: Encyrtidae] in the killed gypsy moth eggs with radiation. —Zast. Bilja, 23, 3–6 [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 63, 4570].Google Scholar
  11. Bjegović, P. — 1974. Geographical distribution and reduction role of the gypsy moth egg parasites in Yugoslavia. —Zast. Bilja., 25, 173–182. (In Serbo-Croatian, English summary).Google Scholar
  12. Bowditch, F.C. — 1922. Notes on the gipsy moth in my unsprayed woods at East Marion, Mass., 1922. —Psyche J. Entomol., 29, 213–216.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, M.W. — 1981a. The role ofOoencyrtus kuvanae (Howard) [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae] in the population dynamics of the gypsy moth. —M.S. Thesis.The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pennsylvania, X + 71 pp.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, M.W. — 1981b. Population dynamics of the gypsy moth egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuvanae (Howard) [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae]. —Ph. D. Diss.The Pennsylvania State Univ., University Park, Pennsylvania, XV + 165 pp.Google Scholar
  15. Brown, M.W. &Cameron, E.A. — 1979. Effects of disparlure and egg mass size on parasitism by the gypsy moth egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuwanai. —Environ. Entomol., 8, 77–80.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, M.W. &Cameron, E.A. — 1982a. Natural enemies ofLymantria dispar [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae] eggs in central Pennsylvania, U.S.A., and a review of the world literature on natural enemies ofL. dispar eggs. —Entomophaga, 27, 311–322.Google Scholar
  17. Brown, M.W. &Cameron, E.A. — 1982b. Spatial distribution of adults ofOoencyrtus kuvanae [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae], an egg parasite ofLymantria dispar [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae]. —Can. Entomol., 114, 1109–1120.Google Scholar
  18. Brown, M.W. &Respicio, N.C. — 1981. The effect of diflubenzuron on the gypsy moth egg parasiteOoencyrtus kuvanae. —Melsheimer Entomol. Ser., 31, 1–7.Google Scholar
  19. Brown, M.W., Cameron, E.A. &Williams F.M. — 1982. Population model for the gypsy moth [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae] egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuvanae [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae]. —Environ. Entomol., 11, 1299–1304.Google Scholar
  20. Brown, M.W., Rosenberger, J.L. &Cameron, E.A. — 1981. Development and evaluation of a sampling scheme for the gypsy moth egg parasitoidOoencyrtus kuvanae [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae]. —Can. Entomol., 113, 575–584.Google Scholar
  21. Brown, M.W., Williams, F.M. &Cameron, E.A. — 1983. Simulations on the role of the egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuvanae (Howard), in the population dynamics of the gypsy moth. —Ecol. Modelling, 18, 253–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Burgess, A.F. — 1914. The gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth, with suggestions for their control. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Farmers' Bull. 564, 24 pp.Google Scholar
  23. Burgess, A.F. & Crossman, S.S. — 1929. Imported insect enemies of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 86, 147 pp.Google Scholar
  24. Campbell, R.W. — 1967. The analysis of numerical changes in gypsy moth populations. —For. Sci. Monogr., 15, 1–33.Google Scholar
  25. Cambell, R.W. — 1978. Some effects of gypsy moth density on rate of development, pupation time, and fecundity. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 71, 442–448.Google Scholar
  26. Coulson, J.R. — 1981. Foreign explorations: recent history, 1961–77.In: The Gypsy Moth: Research toward Integrated Pest Management (C.C. Doane & M.L. McManus eds.). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 302–310.Google Scholar
  27. Crossman, S.S. — 1917. Some methods of colonizing imported parasites and determining their increase and spread. —J. Econ. Entomol., 10, 177–183.Google Scholar
  28. Crossman, S.S. — 1925. Two imported egg parasites of the gypsy moth,Anastatus bifasciatus Fonsc. andSchedius kuvanae Howard. —J. Agric. Res., 30, 643–675.Google Scholar
  29. Delépiney, J. — 1930. Contribution à l'étude du complexe biologique deLymantria dispar. —Mem. Soc. Sci. Nat. Maroc., 23, 1–100. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 18: 569].Google Scholar
  30. Delépiney, J. — 1933. Le rôle de la direction des eaux et forêts du Maroc et de l'Institut scientifique chérifien dans la lutte biologique entreprise contreLymantria dispar à l'aide deSchedius kuwanai. —Congr. Int. Entomol. Paris. 1932., 5, 807–812. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 22, 196].Google Scholar
  31. Doane, C.C. — 1968. Changes in egg mass density, size, and amount of parasitism after chemical treatments of a heavy population of the gypsy moth. —J. Econ. Entomol., 61, 1288–1291.Google Scholar
  32. Dowden, P.B. — 1961a. The persistence of gypsy moth parasites in heavily sprayed areas of Cape Cod, Mass. —J. Econ. Entomol., 54, 873–875.Google Scholar
  33. Dowden, P.B. — 1961b. The gypsy moth egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuwanai, in southern Connecticut in 1960. —J. Econ. Entomol. 54, 876–878.Google Scholar
  34. Dowden, P.B. — 1962. Parasites and predators of forest insects liberated in the United States through 1960. —U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Serv. Handbook 226, 70 pp.Google Scholar
  35. Ferrière, C. — 1931. New chalcidoid egg parasite from South Asia. —Bull. Entomol. Res., 22, 279–295.Google Scholar
  36. Fraval, A., Hérard, F. &Jarry, M. — 1978. Sampling methods to estimate the density of egg masses ofLymantria dispar L. [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae] in the Mamora forest (Morocco). —Ann. Zool. Ecol. Anim., 10, 267–279 (Transl. from French).Google Scholar
  37. Fuester, R.W., Drea, J.J., jr., Gruber, F. & Hérard, F. — 1981. Explorations in Europe and Iran by the ARS European parasite laboratory 1972–1977. In: The Gypsy Moth: Research toward Integrated Pest Management. (C.C. Doane & M.L. McManus eds.). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 324–340.Google Scholar
  38. Fuester, R.W., Drea, J.J., Gruber, F., Hoyer, H. &Mercadier, G. — 1983. Larval parasites and other natural enemies ofLymantria dispar [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae] in Burgenland, Austria, and Würtzburg, Germany. —Environ. Entomol., 12, 724–737.Google Scholar
  39. Gordh, G. — 1979. FamilyEncyrtidae. In: Catalogue ofHymenoptera in America North of Mexico. Vol. 1. (K.V. Krombein, P.D. Hurd jr., D.R. Smith &B.D. Burks eds). —Smith-sonian Inst. Press. Washington, D.C., 953.Google Scholar
  40. Granek, I. & McDonough, J.L. — 1973 Collecting, rearing and releasing the gypsy moth egg parasiteOoencyrtus kuwanai (Howard). —U.S. Dep. Agric. APHIS, S. 81–11, 8 pp.Google Scholar
  41. Granett, J., Weseloh, R.M. &Helgert, E. — 1975. Activity of juvenile hormone analogues on hymenopterous parasitoids of the gypsy moth. —Entomol. Exp. Appl., 18, 377–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Griffiths, K.J. — 1981. The natural enemies of the gypsy moth in Canada.Forestry Research Newsletter. Great Lakes Forest Research Centre. Fall-Winter 1981, 2 pp.Google Scholar
  43. Griffiths, K.J. &Sullivan, C.R. — 1978. The potential for establishment of the egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuwanai in Ontario populations of the gypsy moth. —Can. Entomol., 110, 633–638.Google Scholar
  44. Hérard, F. — 1978. Ethology of the adults ofOoencyrtus kuwanai (Howard) [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae], oophagous parasite ofLymantria dispar (L.) [Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae] in the Mamora forest (Morocco). —Ann. Zool. Ecol. Anim., 10, 603–612, (Transl. from French).Google Scholar
  45. Hérard, F. — 1979. Action des ennemis naturels deLymantria dispar [Lep.: Lymantriidae] en forêt de Mamora (Maroc). —Entomophaga, 24, 163–175, (In French, English summary).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hérard, F. &Mercadier, G. — 1980. Bionomies comparées de deux souches (Maroccaine et Américaine) d'Ooencyrtus kuvanae [Hym.: Encyrtidae], parasite oophage deLymantria dispar [Lep.: Lymantriidae]. —Entomophaga, 25, 129–138.Google Scholar
  47. Hérard, F. & Drea, J.J., jr. — 1981. Agricultural Research Service sponsored Public Law 480 project in Morocco: 1972–75.In: The Gypsy Moth: Research toward Integrated Pest Management. — (C.C. Doane & M.L. McManus eds). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 317–321.Google Scholar
  48. Hirose, Y. — 1964. The activity of the egg parasites of the pinemoth,Dendrolimus spectabilis Butler, in Japanese black pine forest on the seacoast. —Sci. Bull. Fac. Agric. Kyushi Univ., 21, 13–24. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 53, 305].Google Scholar
  49. Hitchcock, S.W. — 1959. Numbers of fall generations ofOoencyrtus kuwanai (How.) in gypsy moth eggs. —J. Econ. Entomol., 52, 764–765.Google Scholar
  50. Hitchcock, S.W. — 1972. Generation time ofOoencyrtus kuwanai on gypsy moth eggs in the field. —J. Econ. Entomol., 65, 284–285.Google Scholar
  51. Howard, L.O. — 1910. Technical results from the gipsy moth parasite laboratory. I. The parasites reared or supposed to have been reared from the eggs of the gypsy moth. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Ser. Bull., 19, 1–12.Google Scholar
  52. Howard, L.O. — 1916. The practical use of the insect enemies of injurious insects. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Yearbook. 1917, 273–288.Google Scholar
  53. Howard, L.O. — 1919. Report of the Entomologist.U.S. Dep. Agric. Bur. Entomol., 27 pp. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 8, 93].Google Scholar
  54. Howard, L.O. & Fiske, W.F. — 1911. The importation into the United States of the parasites of the gipsy moth and the brown-tail moth: A report of progress with some consideration of previous and concurrent efforts of this kind. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Bur. Entomol. Bull. 91.Google Scholar
  55. Kamay, B.A. — 1976. The effects of various constant temperatures on oviposition, sex ratio, and rate of development of the gypsy moth egg parasite,Ooencyrtus kuwanai Howard. —M.S. Thesis, Southern Connecticut State College, New Haven, Connecticut. 50 pp.Google Scholar
  56. Koidzumi, K. &Shobata, K. — 1940. Studies onEriogyna pyretorum Westw., and its fishing thread. XI. Epiparasites. —J. Soc. Trop. Agric. Formosa., 12, 259–265, [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 30, 6].Google Scholar
  57. Krnjaić, S. — 1967. Survey of species and number of gypsy moth egg parasites in some localities of Yugoslavia. (Transl. from Serbo-Croatian). —Zast. Bilja, 18, 247–255.Google Scholar
  58. Lee, H-P. — 1980 Egg parasitoids parasitizing gypsy moth (Porthetria dispar) in Korea. —16th Int. Congr. Entomol. Kyoto, Japan, Abstr. 3R-3, 9, p. 295.Google Scholar
  59. Leonard, D.E. — 1981. Bioecology of the gypsy moth.In: The Gypsy Moth: Research toward Integrated Pest Management. — (C.C. Doane & M.L. McManus eds). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 9–29.Google Scholar
  60. Lepigre, A. — 1932. Note sur l'apparition en Algérie deSchedius (Ooencyrtus) kuwanai How. [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae]. —Bull. Soc. Hist. Nat. Afrique Nord, 23, 227, [Abstr. in:Biol. Abstr. 7:Nbr. 19142].Google Scholar
  61. Li, Y.G., Chen, S.L., Xie, O.M., Cai, Q.J., Wu, J., Li, Y.W., Zheng, X.Z., Zhu, Z.W., Zhou, B.T. &Zheng, H.Q. — 1981. Studies on the lymantriid mothLymantria xylina Swinhoe. —Acta Entomol. Sinica, 24, 174–183. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 70, 355].Google Scholar
  62. Lloyd, D.C. — 1938. A study of some factors governing the choice of hosts and distribution of progeny by the chalcidOoencyrtus kuvanae Howard. —Phil. Trans. R. Soc. (Lond.) (B)., 229, 275–322.Google Scholar
  63. Maksimović, M., Bejegović, P. &Vasiljević, L. — 1972. Feeding and maintaining the density of the gypsy moth's enemies as a method of biological control. —Proc. 13th Int. Congr. Entomol. 1968, Nauke Leningrad, 3, 67.Google Scholar
  64. Maple, J.D. — 1937. The biology ofOoencyrtus johnsoni (Howard), and the role of the egg shell in the respiration of certain encyrtid larvae [Hymenoptera]. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 30, 123–154.Google Scholar
  65. Marcu, O. &Tudor, I. — 1978. Parasitic insects playing a destructive role in populations ofLymantria dispar L. in Romania. —Zast. Bilja, 29, 111–118 (In French).Google Scholar
  66. Matteson, P.C. — 1981. Egg parasitoids of hemipteran pests of cowpea in Nigeria and Tanzania, with special reference toOoencyrtus patriciae Subba Rao [Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae] attackingClavigralla tomentosicollis Stål [Hemiptera : Coreidae]. —Bull. Entomol. Res., 71, 547–554.Google Scholar
  67. Mercet, R.G. — 1917. Spanish microhymenoptera beneficial to agriculture. —Assoc. Espan. Progr. Ciencias Congr. Valladolid, 4a, 367–377. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 6, 113].Google Scholar
  68. Mercet, R.G. — 1921. Fauna Iberica. Himenoteros, Fam.Encirtidae. —Museo Nac. Cienc. Nat., Madrid. (Hipodromo), 732 + XI pp.Google Scholar
  69. Metterhouse, W.W. — 1981. New Jersey permanent gypsy moth plot system, 1970–77.In: The Gypsy Moth : Research toward Integrated Pest Management (C.C. Doane and M.L. McManus eds.). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 92–93.Google Scholar
  70. Muesebeck, C.F.W. & Dohanian, S.M. — 1927. A study in hyperparasitism, with particular reference to the parasites ofApanteles melanoscelus (Ratzeburg). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Bull. 1487, 35 pp.Google Scholar
  71. Muesebeck, C.F.W., Krombein, K.V. &Townes, H.K. — 1951. Hymenoptera of America north of Mexico: Synoptic Catalogue.U. S. Dep. Agric. Monogr. 2, 496.Google Scholar
  72. New Jersey Department of Agriculture. 1968–1972. Annual Reports. —Div. of Plant Industry. Bur. of Plant Laboratory. Trenton.Google Scholar
  73. New York Department of Environmental Conservation. 1967–1972. Progress Reports.New York State Gypsy Moth Parasite Survey, Albany.Google Scholar
  74. Ochieng, R.S. — 1977. Studies on the bionomics of two major pests of cowpea (Vignia unguicalata), Ootheca mutabilis andAnoplocnemis curvipes. —Ph. D. Diss.Univ. Ibadan, Nigeria. (cited byMatteson, 1981).Google Scholar
  75. Parker, D.L. — 1933. The interrelations of two hymenopterous egg parasites of the gypsy moth, with notes on the larval instars of each. —J. Agric. Res., 46, 23–34.Google Scholar
  76. Picardi, A.C. — 1973. Gypsy moth population simulation : system postulation, validation, analysis. —Proc. 1973 Summer Computer Simulation Conf., Montreal, 73 CH081 5-1 SMC, 1069-1074.Google Scholar
  77. Prota, R. — 1966. Contributi alla conoscenza dell' entomofauna della Quercio da sughero (Quercus suber L.) V. Osservazioni condotte in Sardegna suOoencyrtus kuwanai (Howard) [Hymenoptera : Encyrtidae] nuovo per la fauna italiana. —Stazione Sperimentale del Sughero, Tempio Pausania. Memoria 17, 26 pp. (Italian with English summary).Google Scholar
  78. Romanyk, N. — 1965. The study of the parasites, predators, and diseases of the gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) and the possibility of their application in biological control. —Final Tech. Rep. Proj. No. E-25-FS-10, Grant No. FG-Sp-106-60. Servico de Plagas Forestales. Madrid, Spain, 65 pp. [Abstr. in :R.W. Campbell, L.C. Levitan, E.R. Sobecki & M.F. Tardiff. 1978. Population Dynamics of the Gypsy Moth : An Annotated Bibliography.U.S. Dep. Agric. For. Ser. Tech. Rep. NE-48. p. 98].Google Scholar
  79. Schaefer, P.W. — 1981. Explorations in Japan and Korea by the ARS Asian parasite laboratory : 1975–77. In : The Gypsy Moth: Research toward Integrated Pest Management. (C.C. Doane & M.L. McManus eds). —U.S. Dep. Agric. Tech. Bull. 1584, 340–348.Google Scholar
  80. Schieferdecker, H. — 1969. Zur Vermehrung vonOoencyrtus kuwanai (Howard, 1910) unter Laborverhältnissen. —Beitr. Entomol., 19, 803–815 (Transl. from German).Google Scholar
  81. Smilowitz, Z. &Rhoads, L. — 1973. An assessment of gypsy moth natural enemies in Pennsylvania. —Environ Entomol., 2, 797–799.Google Scholar
  82. Summers, J.N. — 1916. Parasites of the gypsy and brown-tail moths in Maine. —Annu. Rep. Maine Comm. Agric., 1915, 14, 120–127.Google Scholar
  83. Summers, J.N. — 1922. Effect of low temperature on the hatching of gypsy moth eggs. —U.S. Dep. Agric. Bull. 1080, 14 pp.Google Scholar
  84. Tadić, M.D. — 1959. Incidence of gypsy moth egg parasitesAnastatus disparis R. andOoencyrtus kuwanai How. in some localities in Macedonia in 1958/59. —Zast. Bilja, 56, 27–37. (Trans. from Serbo-Croatian).Google Scholar
  85. Tadić, M.D. — 1962. Contribution ot the knowledge of diapause of the gypsy moth egg-parasiteAnastatus disparis R. in Hvar. —Zast. Bilja 63–64, 13–19. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 51, 327].Google Scholar
  86. Tadić, M. — 1979. Toxicity of some synthetic insecticides to hymenopteransOoencyrtus kuwanae andTelenomus terebrans. —Zast. Bilja, 30, 205–210. (In Serbo-Croatian. Englishsumm.).Google Scholar
  87. Tadić, M.D. &Binčev, B. — 1959.Ooencyrtus kuwanai How. in Yugoslavia. —Zast. Bilja, 10, 51–59 (Trans. from Serbo-Croatian).Google Scholar
  88. Templado, J. — 1957. Data onOoencyrtus kuwanai, a chalcid parasite onLymantria dispar L., in Spain —Publ. Inst. Biol. Applicada 25, 119–129. [Abstr. in:Rev. Appl. Entomol. (A), 46, 294].Google Scholar
  89. Timberlake, P.H. — 1923. Review of Mercet's work on theEncyrtidae [Hymenoptera] on the Iberian Pennisula. —Proc. Entomol. Soc. Wash., 25, 57–60.Google Scholar
  90. Vasić, K. — 1957. Parasitic Hymenoptera of the gypsy moth. —Zast. Bilja, 8, 17–21. (Transl. from Serbo-Croatian).Google Scholar
  91. Vasić, K. &Salatić, S. — 1959. A new contribution to the knowledge of the parasitic Hymenoptera of the gypsy moth: Parasitic Hymenoptera of the gypsy moth in 1958. —Zast. Bilja, 52/53, 45–50. (In Serbo-Croatian, English summary).Google Scholar
  92. Weseloh, R.M. — 1971. Behavioral responses of the gypsy moth egg parasitoidOoencyrtus kuwanai to abiotic environmental factors. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 64, 1050–1057.Google Scholar
  93. Weseloh, R.M. — 1972a. Spatial distribution of the gypsy moth [Lepdoptera: Lymantriidae] and some of its parasitoids within the forest environment. —Entomophaga, 17, 339–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Weseloh, R.M. — 1972b. Influence of gypsy moth egg mass dimensions and microhabitat distribution on parasitization byOoencyrtus kuwanai. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 65, 64–69.Google Scholar
  95. Weseloh, R.M. — 1972c. Field responses of gypsy moths and some parasites to colored surfaces. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 65, 742–746.Google Scholar
  96. Weseloh, R.M. — 1972d. Diel periodicities of some parasitoids of gypsy moth and noctuid cutworms. —Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 65, 1126–1131.Google Scholar
  97. Weseloh, R.M. — 1978. Seasonal and spatial mortality patterns ofApanteles melanoscelus due to predators and gypsy moth hyperparasites. —Environ. Entomol., 7, 662–665.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Lavoisier Abonnements 1984

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. W. Brown
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyThe Pennsylvania, State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations