1985
DOI: 10.1007/bf00988203
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Determining pheromone content of hairpencils from individual virgin males ofPseudaletia unipuncta (Haw.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Abstract: Levels of benzaldehyde recovered from virginPseudaletia unipuncta (Haw.) males were not influenced by (1) the time hairpencils remained in the solvent (1-72 hr), (2) anesthetization or agitation of males prior to excision of hairpencils, or (3) the time (photophase or scotophase) that hairpencils were excised. Thus the interindividual variability observed is not a methodological artifact. Most males had similar concentrations in both hairpencils, although in some cases only one hairpencil contained pheromone. … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1987
1987
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(Salicaceae),, also in the bark of other angiosperm trees (this paper), disruptive to aggregation of mountain pine beetle (Borden et al 1998). Male hairpencil pheromone component in some noctuid moths (Fitzpatrick et al 1985;Jaquin et al 1991). Antennal responses elicited in Microplitis croceipes (Cresson) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) (Li et al 1992) and in Trichoplusia ni (Hü bner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) (Todd & Baker 1993).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(Salicaceae),, also in the bark of other angiosperm trees (this paper), disruptive to aggregation of mountain pine beetle (Borden et al 1998). Male hairpencil pheromone component in some noctuid moths (Fitzpatrick et al 1985;Jaquin et al 1991). Antennal responses elicited in Microplitis croceipes (Cresson) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) (Li et al 1992) and in Trichoplusia ni (Hü bner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) (Todd & Baker 1993).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A possible explanation may be that the marker's effectiveness is area-restricted and thus may need time to spread (Wylie 1971;Rogers 1972;van Lenteren 1981). Individual variation in pheromones has been documented in several insects, among others, moths (Fitzpatrick et al 1985;Lofstedt et al 1985), bark beetles (Birgersson et al 1988), and honey bees (Breed et al 1988;Moritz 1988). By contrast, the rate of acceptance of conspecific-parasitized aphids varied with the mean number of mature eggs available in a female's ovaries, reaching a maximum on day 4 (Table 2; Figs.…”
Section: Marchiapril 1990mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This bias partially emerges from the distinctive difference in male and female pheromone biosynthesis in the Lepidoptera. Males often use various secondary plant components as precursors for their sex pheromones (e.g., pyrrolizidine alkaloids (Löfstedt et al 1989; Eisner and Meinwald 1994; but see Fitzpatrick et al 1985; Landolt and Heath 1990), and the pheromones honestly signal the amount of the alkaloids in the spermatophore that is later incorporated in the eggs as a means of protection against predators (Eisner and Meinwald 1994). Females, however, synthesize their species‐specific sex pheromone de novo from available fatty acids (Jurenka 2004) that are not influenced much by the origin of the larval diet (Miller et al 1976), and the typically small amount of the pheromone (ngs) (El‐Sayed 2010) released by the females is traditionally considered as not costly to females (Cardé and Baker 1984; Kokko and Wong 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%