Do fecal shields provide physical protection to larvae of the tortoise beetles Plagiometriona flavescens and Stolas chalybea against natural enemies?
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 wordsCassidinae Chrysomelidae Aureliana fasciculata Solanaceae Calea pinnatifida Asteraceae physical protection chemical protection predation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 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
- 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
- Hilker, M., 1992. Protective devices of early developmental stages in Pyrrhalta viburni ( Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Oecologia 92: 71–75.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- Ripperger, H., K. Schreiber, 1981. Solanum steroid alkaloids. The Alkaloids 19: 81–192.Google Scholar
- 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
- 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
- Zar, J. H., 1999. Biostatistical Analysis, 4th Edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA.Google Scholar