CARABIDAE (COLEOPTERA) ASSOCIATED WITH GYPSY MOTH, <i>LYMANTRIA DISPAR</i> (L.) (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE), POPULATIONS SUBJECTED TO <i>BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS</i> BERLINER TREATMENTS IN PENNSYLVANIA

Cameron, E. Alan; Reeves, R. Marcel

doi:10.4039/ent122123-1

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Dempster, 1960;Sutton, 1970;Service, 1973;Tod, 1973;Ashby, 1974;Vickerman & Sunderland, 1975;Lund & Turpin, 1977;Allen & Hagley, 1982;Dennison & Hodkinson, 1983;Doane et al, 1985) and ELISAs (e.g. Ragsdale et al, 1981;Crook & Sunderland, 1984;Schoof et al, 1986;Walter et al, 1986;Sopp, 1987;Cameron & Reeves, 1990). However, although this approach is possibly the most practical solution where small prey are involved, such as aphids or mites, it does mean that the antisera will usually contain a large number of antibody species.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The development and characterization of an anti‐haemolymph antiserum for the detection of mollusc remains within carabid beetles

Symondson

Liddell

1993

Biocontrol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molluscan haemolymph was evaluated as an antigen for the detection, by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), of mollusc proteins within the crop contents of carabid beetles, using an anti-haemolymph antiserum. The value of using a narrow range of prey-specific immunogens, rather than whole-body macerates, was discussed. Predators and potential prey were tested by a quantitative indirect ELISA, with separate evaluation of antigen reactions with non-specific and specific antibodies. The assay proved to be capable of detecting less than 1 ng of haemolymph protein and the antiserum reacted strongly with all molluscs tested. Initial cross-reactions with earthworms were effectively eliminated by absorption. A range of invertebrates was tested, and a significance level established relative to the invertebrates giving the strongest cross-reaction, which proved to be wolf spiders, Pardosa sp. Harvestmen (Opiliones), that initially gave strong reactions to the antiserum, were shown to have fed upon molluscs. Laboratory tests on the crop contents of slug-fed beetles demonstrated clear detection for at least 4 days after feeding.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

The development and characterization of an anti‐haemolymph antiserum for the detection of mollusc remains within carabid beetles

Symondson

Liddell

1993

Biocontrol Science and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are critical parts of forested ecosystems [3][4][5] due to the wide breadth of ecosystem services they provide. Namely, litter-inhabiting arthropods act as predators [6][7][8][9][10], decomposers of organic matter [11,12] and serve to mineralize certain nutrients into the soil [13]. Feeding by these arthropods stimulates microorganism growth [14] and also adds fecal matter to the substrate [15].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Forest Management Effects on Terrestrial Leaf Litter Inhabiting Arthropods

Hartshorn

2020

Forests

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Leaf litter arthropods are some of the most abundant and diverse communities in forests and provide myriad ecosystem services from decomposition and mineralization to pollination and predation. They are important to forest health and management and, in turn, are affected by how we manage our forests. Various forest management techniques such as clear cutting, burning, and chemical control of invasive species all have differing effects on ground dwelling arthropods and, despite their importance, a review of the literature on these effects does not currently exist. My objective with this paper is to review the effects of different types of forest management on arthropods in leaf litter systems.

show abstract

“…Coaker & Williams 1963; Dennison & Hodkinson 1983; Sunderland et al . 1987; Cameron & Reeves 1990; Symondson et al . 1996) and (currently the preferred technique) detection of family, genus, species and even stage‐specific protein epitopes using monoclonal antibodies (e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Secondary predation: quantification of food chain errors in an aphid–spider–carabid system using monoclonal antibodies

Harwood

Phillips

Sunderland³

et al. 2001

Molecular Ecology

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"Secondary predation" occurs when one predator feeds on a second predator, which has in turn eaten a target prey. Detection of prey remains within predators using monoclonal antibodies cannot distinguish between primary and secondary predation, potentially leading to quantitative and qualitative food chain errors. We report the first fully replicated experiments to measure secondary predation effects, using an aphid-spider-carabid system. Aphids, Sitobion avenae, were fed to spiders, Lepthyphantes tenuis, which were allowed to digest their prey for a range of time intervals. The spiders were then fed to carabids, Poecilus (=Pterostichus) cupreus, which were again allowed to digest their prey for set periods. The anti-aphid monoclonal antibody used to identify S. avenae remains in P. cupreus was one that detected an epitope that increased in availability over the first few hours of digestion, amplifying the signal, extending detection periods and thus increasing the chances of detecting secondary predation. Despite this, and the fact that spiders are known to digest their prey more slowly than many other predators, detection of secondary predation was only possible if the carabids were killed immediately after consuming at least two spiders which were, in turn, eaten immediately after consuming aphids. As this scenario is unlikely to occur frequently in the field it was concluded that secondary predation is unlikely to be a serious source of error during field studies.

show abstract

CARABIDAE (COLEOPTERA) ASSOCIATED WITH GYPSY MOTH, LYMANTRIA DISPAR (L.) (LEPIDOPTERA: LYMANTRIIDAE), POPULATIONS SUBJECTED TO BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS BERLINER TREATMENTS IN PENNSYLVANIA

Cited by 14 publications

References 8 publications

The development and characterization of an anti‐haemolymph antiserum for the detection of mollusc remains within carabid beetles

The development and characterization of an anti‐haemolymph antiserum for the detection of mollusc remains within carabid beetles

A Review of Forest Management Effects on Terrestrial Leaf Litter Inhabiting Arthropods

Secondary predation: quantification of food chain errors in an aphid–spider–carabid system using monoclonal antibodies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About