Advertisement

Researches on Population Ecology

, Volume 24, Issue 2, pp 250–269 | Cite as

Group versus individual functional responses ofVenturia [=Nemeritis] canescens (Grav.)

  • C. B. Huffaker
  • B. M. Matsumoto
Article

Keywords

Functional Response Parasite Density Host Density Host Larva Mutual Interference 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Hassell, M. P. (1971a) Mutual interference between searching insect parasites.J. Anim. Ecol.40: 473–486.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Hassell, M. P. (1971b) Parasite behaviour as a factor contributing to the stability of insect host-parasite introductions. 366–379. In:Boer, P. J. den andG. R. Gradwell (eds)Dynamics of populations. Proc. Adv. Study Inst. Dynamics Numbers Popul., Osterbeek, 1970.Google Scholar
  3. Hassell, M. P. andC. B. Huffaker (1969) Regulatory processes and population cyclicity in laboratory populations ofAnagasta kuhniella (Zeller). (Lepidoptera: Phycitidae). III. The development of population models.Res. Popul. Ecol.11: 186–210.Google Scholar
  4. Hassell, M. P. andG. C. Varley (1969) New inductive population model for insect parasites and its bearing on biological control.Nature223: 1133–1137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Holling, C. S. (1959) The components of predation as revealed by a study of small mammal predation of the European pine sawfly.Can. Entomol.9: 293–320.Google Scholar
  6. Huffaker, C. B. andC. E. Kennett (1969) Some aspects of assessing efficiency of natural enemies.Can. Entomol.101: 425–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Huffaker, C. B. andB. M. Matsumoto (1982) Differences in egg wastage by superparasitism, contrastingVenturia (=Nemeritis) canescens searching singly versus searching in groups.Res. Popul Ecol.24: 270–275.Google Scholar
  8. Iwao, S. (1968) A new regression method for analyzing the aggregation pattern of animal populations.Res. Popul. Ecol.10: 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lenteren, J. C. van (1976) The development of host discrimination and the prevention of superparasitism in the parasitePseudeucoila bocheiWeld (Hym.: Cynipidae).Netherlands J. Zool.26: 1–83.Google Scholar
  10. Lloyd, M. (1967) Mean crowding.J. Anim. Ecol.36: 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Matsumoto, B. M. andC. B. Huffaker (1973) Regulatory processes and population cyclicity in laboratory populations ofAnagasta kühniella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Phycitidae). V. Host finding and parasitization in a “small” universe by an entomophagous parasite,Venturia canescens (Gravenhorst) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae).Res. Popul. Ecol.15: 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Matsumoto, B. M. andC. B. Huffaker (1974) Regulatory processes and population cyclicity in laboratory populations ofAnagasta kühniella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Phycitidae). VI. Host finding and parasitization in a “large” universe by an entomophagous parasite,Venturia canescens (Gravenhorst) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae).Res. Popul. Ecol.15: 193–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Morisita, M. (1959) Measuring the dispersion of individuals and analysis of the distributional patterns.Mem. Fac. Sci. Kyushu Univ., Ser. E,2: 215–235.Google Scholar
  14. Narayanan, E. S. (1945) Factors affecting the rate of reproduction inNemeritis canescens (Grav.) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Ph.D. Thesis, London Univ. (Unpublished)Google Scholar
  15. Nicholson, A. J. (1933) The balance of animal populations.J. Anim. Ecol.2: 132–178.Google Scholar
  16. Nicholson, A. J. andV. A. Bailey (1935) The balance, of animal populations.Proc. Zool. Soc. London, Pt. 1 pp. 551–598.Google Scholar
  17. Rogers, D. (1972) Random search and insect population models.J. Anim. Ecol.41: 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rogers, D. (1975) A model for avoidance of superparastism by solitary insect parasitoids.J. Anim. Ecol.44: 623–638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Royama, T. (1971) A comparative study of models for predation and parasitism.Res. Popul. Ecol. (Suppl.)1: 1–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Samson-Boshuizen, M., J. C. vanLenteren andK. Bakker (1974) Success of parasitization ofPseudeucoila bocheiWeld., a matter of experience.Neth. J. Zool.24: 67–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Sokol, R. R. andF. J. Rohlf (1969)Biometry. Freeman, San Francisco.Google Scholar
  22. Southwood, T. R. E. (1966)Ecological methods, with particular reference to the study of insect populations. Methuen and Co. Ltd., London.Google Scholar
  23. Stinner, R. E. (1970) Mutual interference at high parasite densities in a host-parasite interaction. Ph. D. thesis, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  24. Stinner, R. E. (1976) Ovipositional response ofVenturia canescens (Grav.) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) to various host and parasite densities.Res. Popul. Ecol.18: 57–73.Google Scholar
  25. Taylor, R. L. (1974) Role of learning in insect parasitism.Ecol. Monogr.44: 89–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Thompson, W. R. (1924) La theorie mathematique de l'action des parasites entomophages et le facteur du hasard.Ann. Fac. Sci. Marseille2: 69–89.Google Scholar
  27. Thompson, W. R. (1939) Biological control and the theories of the interaction of populations.Parasitology31: 299–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ullyett, G. C. (1950) Distribution of progeny byCryptus inornatusPratt (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae).Can. Entomol.82: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society of Population Ecology 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. B. Huffaker
    • 1
  • B. M. Matsumoto
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Biological Control, Department of Entomological SciencesUniversity of CaliforniaBerkeley

Personalised recommendations