Bark beetle olfaction—II. Antennal morphology of sixteen species of Scolytidae (Coleoptera)

Payne, T. L.; Moeck, Henry A.; Willson, Clyde D.; Coulson, Robert N.; Humphreys, W. J.

doi:10.1016/0020-7322(73)90027-5

Cited by 50 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The sensilla chaetica in both species occurred predominantly in the antennal scape and funicle, but in other bark and ambrosia beetles, such as Dendroctonus terebrans (Olivier) and Dendroctonus ponderosae, these sensilla were found on all segments of the antenna (Borden and Wood 1966, Moeck 1968, Borg and Norris 1971, Payne et al 1973, Wang et al 2012). Morphological differences in species of Dendroctonus have been observed between the sensilla chaetica of the scape and funicle and those found within and between the sensory bands of the club (Payne et al 1973). Based on electrophysiological and anatomical data, several authors agree that these sensilla in bark beetles likely have a mechanoreceptor function associated with exploration of the environment through contact with the substrate (Borden and Wood 1966, Borden 1968, Moeck 1968, Borg and Norris 1971, Payne et al 1973, Dickens and Payne 1978, Wang et al 2012.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…The antennae were brushed with a paintbrush to remove foreign matter before their observation under ESEM (model Evo 40 VP,Carl Zeiss,Oberkochen,Germany). Past studies on the morphological and ultrastructural organization of bark beetle antennae have identiÞed four types of sensilla: chaetica, trichodea, ßuted (grooved), and basiconica, which have been associated with mechano-, chemo-, or thermoreceptor functions (Borden and Wood 1966;Borden 1968;Moeck 1968;Borg and Norris 1971;Payne et al 1973;Dickens and Payne 1977;Whitehead 1981;Hallberg 1982;Dickens et al 1985;Faucheux 1989Faucheux , 1994Chen et al 2010;Wang et al 2012). For this study, sensilla were classiÞed based on their length and morphological features following Schneider (1964).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Comparative Study of the Antennae of Dendroctonus rhizophagus and Dendroctonus valens (Curculionidae: Scolytinae): Sensilla Types, Distribution and Club Shape

López

Armendáriz-Toledano

Sámano³

et al. 2014

Annals of the Entomological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We compared the antennae of two sibling bark beetle species, Dendroctonus rhizophagus Thomas and Bright and Dendroctonus valens LeConte, to identify biologically and taxonomically relevant differences. Specifically, we characterized the diversity of sensilla types by using environmental scanning electron microscopy, quantified the abundance and distribution of the different types of sensilla on the antennal club, and characterized club shape through multivariate and geometric morphometric analyses. We identified four classes of sensilla in both species: chaetica, fluted, trichodea (three distinct types), and basiconica (long and short). ANOVA and MANOVA demonstrated that the number and distribution of sensilla with the potential for chemoreception (i.e., short and long basiconica) differed between species and sexes. Notably, the long sensilla basiconica in the third sensory band were clustered in D. rhizophagus but not in D.valens. Geometric morphometric analysis using 27 landmarks showed that antennal club shape differed significantly between the two species and was not correlated with antennal size. The shape differences were associated with the number and distribution of sensilla.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Study of the Antennae of Dendroctonus rhizophagus and Dendroctonus valens (Curculionidae: Scolytinae): Sensilla Types, Distribution and Club Shape

López

Armendáriz-Toledano

Sámano³

et al. 2014

Annals of the Entomological Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The well-developed antennal receptor system in the male moths indicates a high sensitivity towards the pheromones emitted by the females (Kaissling 1971). In bark beetles, on the other hand, both males and females respond to the aggregation pheromones, and the antennal receptors are equally well developed in the two sexes (Payne et al 1973). It has been proposed that two types of single-walled sensilla constitute the pheromone-sensitive receptors in bark beetles (Dickens and Payne 1978).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Funicular sensilla of Dαcus oleαe: fine structural characteristics

Hallberg

Pers

Haniotakis³

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The funicular sensilla in Dacus oleae (Gmelin) (Diptera: Tephritidae) are found both on the surface and in the single olfactory pit.The surface sensilla are of three types: two are single-walled, the third is doublewalled. The fine structure of these three sensillar types indicates olfactory function capabilities. The single-walled sensilla are, as a rule, innervated by two sensory cells. The long single-walled sensilla have unbranchcd sensory processes, whereas in the short they are branched. The double-walled sensilla usually possess three sensory cells that send unbranched sensory processes towards the tip of the hair.The olfactory pit sensilla are of two types: one type is identical to the double-walled type found on the funicular surface. The second type is poreless and found only in the olfactory pit. The poreless sensilla are innervated by three sensory cells, two of which terminate inside the cuticular hair, while the third does not enter inside the hair but terminates freely below it. The functional capabilities of this sensillar type are unknown.

show abstract

“…Most work has involved the antennae (Fig. 5.2), which are known to have sensilla responsive to volatile pheromone and host components as well as other airborne chemostimulants (Borden and Wood, 1966;Payne et al, 1973;Payne, 1979;Mustaparta, 1984;Faucheux, 1989).…”

Section: Sensory Organsmentioning

confidence: 99%