Do fecal shields provide physical protection to larvae of the tortoise beetles Plagiometriona flavescens and Stolas chalybea against natural enemies?

  • Flávia Nogueira-de-Sá
  • José Roberto Trigo
Conference paper
Part of the Series Entomologica book series (SENT, volume 57)

Abstract

During their larval phase, Plagiometriona flavescens(Boheman, 1855) and Stolas chalybea (Germar, 1824) (Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae), carry masses of feces and exuviae on their back called fecal shield, and it is suggested to protect larvae against natural enemies. We investigated if the physical barrier provided by the shield plays any role in the defense of these larvae. We conducted a field experiment checking the mortality of larvae of both species with their natural shields substituted by an artificial shield, with shields removed and with their shields intact. Mortality controls for each of the 3 shield treatments were carried out on host plants protected against natural enemies. On both species we observed that larvae with their shields intact had a significant lower mortality proportion than larvae with artificial shields or without shields. Control larvae on protected plants had low mortality. Our results agree with literature data, showing that fecal shields do not provide a physical protection to larvae but are important in their defense, probably due to the chemicals present in them.

Key words

Cassidinae Chrysomelidae Aureliana fasciculata Solanaceae Calea pinnatifida Asteraceae physical protection chemical protection predation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buzzi, J. Z., 1994. Host plants of Neotropical Cassidinae. In: P. H. Jolivet, M. L. Cox & E. Petitpierre (eds), Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 205–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Damman, H. & N. Cappuccino, 1991. Two forms of defence in a chrysomelid beetle: egg clumping and excrement cover. Ecological Entomology 16: 163–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eisner, T., E. Tassel, J. E. Carrel, 1967. Defensive use of `fecal shield’ by a beetle larva. Science 158: 1471–1473.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Eisner, T., M. Eisner, 2000. Defensive use of a fecal thatch by a beetle larva (Hemisphaerota cyanea). Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 97: 2632–2636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ferraz, J. M. G., 1991. Estudos bioecológicos sobre Spodoptera frugiperda (Abbot, Smith, 1797 ) ( Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) como subsfdio ao manejo integrado de pragas na cultura do milho. Ph.D Thesis. Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brazil.Google Scholar
  6. Gómez, N. E., L. Witte, T. Hartmann, 1999. Chemical defense in larval tortoise beetles: essential oil composition of fecal shields of Eurypedus nigrosignata and foliage of its host plant, Cordia curassavica. Journal of Chemical Ecology 25: 1007–1027.Google Scholar
  7. Hilker, M., 1992. Protective devices of early developmental stages in Pyrrhalta viburni ( Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Oecologia 92: 71–75.Google Scholar
  8. Morton, T. C., F. V. Vend, 1998. Larval beetles form a defense from recycled host plant chemicals discharged as fecal wastes. Journal of Chemical Ecology 24: 765–785.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Müller, C., M. Hilker, 1999. Unexpected reactions of a generalist predator towards defensive devices of cassidine larvae ( Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). Oecologia 118: 166–172.Google Scholar
  10. Nogueira-de-Sa, F., M. V. Macêdo, 1998. Host plant preference of Plagiometrionoa flavescens (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) for two Solanaceous species. In: M. Biondi, M. Daccordi, D. Furth (eds), Proceedings of the Fourth International Symposium on the Chrysomelidae. Museo Regionale Di Scienze Naturali, Turin, pp. 287–297.Google Scholar
  11. Olmstead, K., 1994. Waste products as chrysomelid defenses In: P. H. Jolivet, M. L. Cox, E. Petitpierre (eds.), Novel Aspects of the Biology of Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 311–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Olmstead, K., R. F. Denno, 1993. Effectiveness of tortoise beetle larval shields against different predator species. Ecology 74: 1394–1405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ripperger, H., K. Schreiber, 1981. Solanum steroid alkaloids. The Alkaloids 19: 81–192.Google Scholar
  14. Root, R. B., F. J. Messina, 1983. Defensive adaptations and natural enemies of a case bearing beetle, Exema canadensis ( Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Psyche 90: 67–80.Google Scholar
  15. Vend, F. V., T. C. Morton, 1998. The shield defense of the sumac flea beetle, Blepharida rhois ( Chrysomelidae: Alticinae). Chemoecology 8: 25–32.Google Scholar
  16. Vend, F. V., T. C. Morton, R. O. Mumma, J. C. Schultz, 1999. Shield defense of larval tortoise beetles. Journal of Chemical Ecology 25: 549–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Zar, J. H., 1999. Biostatistical Analysis, 4th Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Flávia Nogueira-de-Sá
    • 1
  • José Roberto Trigo
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratorio de Ecologia Química, Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de BiologiaUniversidade Estadual de CampinasCampinasBrazil

Personalised recommendations