Advertisement

Zoomorphology

, Volume 135, Issue 3, pp 323–332 | Cite as

The Diachasmimorpha longicaudata complex in Thailand discriminated by its wing venation

Reference-based morphometric identification
  • Sangvorn Kitthawee
  • Jean-Pierre Dujardin
Original Article

Abstract

It has been proven that Diachasmimorpha longicaudata consists of three sibling species (A, B, and BB) exhibiting strong shape differences as based on their wing venation geometry. We used these differences to classify specimens collected from different parts of Thailand. Thus, 414 adult D. longicaudata (206 males and 208 females) were collected from 10 provinces in Thailand, mounted under transparent tape in the field and submitted to individual morphometric identification. To perform such identification, the shape of the right wing of each individual was compared to the average shape of wings from old laboratory colonies corresponding to each species and assigned to the closest one. Since this process made the identification depending on the choice of the reference groups, we performed several tests modifying the reference groups. The modifications applied to the reference groups were the mounting technique, the sex, and the number of generations spent in the laboratory. Although liable to modify the size, and to some extent the shape, of the wings used as a reference, these various effects could not impair the classification. Thus, for species recognition within the D. longicaudata complex, the individual morphometric identification appears as a reliable technique, not or poorly influenced by the mounting technique, by the sex or by our laboratory conditions. According to this classification, and as previously observed in Thailand, species A was the most abundant and widely distributed one (eight provinces), followed by the B species found in six provinces. The less abundant BB species was more frequent in the southern part of the country.

Keywords

Geometric morphometrics Parasitoid Diachasmimorpha longicaudata Bactrocera Thailand 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank Ms Pakamas Tabrod for maintaining the fruit fly and parasitoid colonies. This work was supported by the Higher Education Research Promotion (HERP) under the Commission on Higher Education and Faculty of Science, Mahidol University.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest related to the present work.

Ethical statements

The authors declare that there is no ethical issue associated with their work.

References

  1. Bess HA, van den Bosch R, Haramoto FH (1961) Fruit fly parasites and their activities in Hawaii. Proc Hawaiian Entomol Soc 17:367–378Google Scholar
  2. Bookstein FL (1991) Morphometric tools for landmark data. Geometry and Biology. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Clarke AR, Allwood A, Chinajariyawong A, Drew RAI, Hengsawad C, Jirasurat M, Kong Krong C, Kritsaneepiboon S, Vijaysegaran S (2001) Seasonal abundance and host use patterns of seven Bactrocera Macquart species (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Thailand and peninsular Malaysia. Bull Zool 49(2):207–220Google Scholar
  4. Clausen CP (1978) Introduced parasites and predators of arthropod pests and weeds: a world review. U.S. Dep. Agric. Agric. Handb. No. 480. USDA, ARC, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  5. Clausen CP, Clancy DW, Chock QC (1965) Biological control of the Oriental fruit fly (Dacus dorsalis hendel) and other fruit flies in Hawaii. USDA Tech Bull 1322:1–102Google Scholar
  6. Dujardin JP, Kaba D, Henry AB (2010) The exchangeability of shape. BMC Res Notes 3:266. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-3-266 PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Dujardin JP, Kitthawee S (2013) Phenetic structure of two Bactrocera tau cryptic species (Diptera: Tephritidae) infesting Momordica cochinchinensis (Cucurbitaceae) in Thailand and Laos. Zoology 116:129–138CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Jirakanjanakit N, Leemingsawat S, Dujardin JP (2008) The geometry of the wing of Aedes (Stegomyia) aegypti in isofemale lines through successive generations. Infect Genet Evol 8:414–421CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Julsirikul D, Worapong J, Kitthawee S (2013) Analysis of mitochondrial COI sequences of the Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) species complex in Thailand. Entomol Sci. doi: 10.1111/ens.1205
  10. Kitthawee S (2008) Forced-contact mating: a technique for crossing experiments with the fruit fly parasitoid, Diachasmimorpha longicaudata (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biol Control 44:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kitthawee S (2013) ITS2 sequence variations among members of Diachasmimorpha longicaudata complex (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in Thailand. J Asia-Pacific Entomol 16:173179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kitthawee S, Dujardin JP (2009) Diachasmimorpha longicaudata: reproductive isolation and geometric morphometrics of the wings. Biol Control 51(1):191–197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ovruski S, Aluja M, Sivinski J, Wharton RA (2000) Hymenopteran parasitoids on fruit-infesting Tephritidae (Diptera) in Latin America and the southern United States: Diversity, distribution, taxonomic status and their use in fruit fly biological control. Integr Pest Manag Rev. 5:81–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rohlf FJ(1990) Rotational fit (Procrustes) methods. In: Rohlf F, Bookstein F (eds) Proceedings of the Michigan morphometrics workshop. Special Publication Number 2. The University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. Ann Arbor, pp. 227–236Google Scholar
  15. Sivinski JM, Webb JC (1989) Acoustic signals produced during courtship in Diachasmimorpha (=Biosteres) longicaudata (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and other Braconidae. Ann Entomol Soc Am 82(1):116–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Thompson J(1999) Specific hypotheses on the geographic mosaic of coevolution. Am Nat 1–14Google Scholar
  17. Vargas RI, Stark JD, Uchida GK, Purcell M (1993) Opiine parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) of oriental fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) on Kauai island, Hawaii: islandwide relative abundance and parasitism rates in wild and orchard guava habitats. Environ Entomol 22:246253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wharton RA, Gilstrap FE (1983) Key to and status of opiine braconid (Hymenoptera) parasitoids used in biological control of Ceratitis and Dacus s. l. (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 76: 721–742Google Scholar
  19. Wharton RA, Gilstrap FE (1983) Key to and status of opiine braconid (Hymenoptera) parasitoids used in biological control of Ceratitis and Dacus s. l. (Diptera: Tephritidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 76:721–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wong TTY, Ramadan MM (1987) Parasitization of the Mediterranean and Oriental fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) in the Kula area of Maui. Hawaii J Econ Entomol 80:77–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Biology, Faculty of ScienceMahidol UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.UMR17 IRD-CIRAD INTERTRYP TA A 17/G Campus International de BaillarguetMontpellier Cedex 5France

Personalised recommendations