Eavesdropping on sexual vibratory signals of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) by the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi

Laumann, R. A.; Blassioli‐Moraes, Maria Carolina; Čokl, Andrej; Borges, Miguel

doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2006.09.011

Cited by 67 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a series of experiments, Laumann et al (2007Laumann et al ( , 2011 recently demonstrated that scelionid egg parasitoid wasps (Telenomus podisi) eavesdrop on the plant-restricted sexual vibratory signals of their preferred stink bug (Euschistus heros) hosts. They showed that the parasitoids selectively responded to the vibratory calls of female hosts over those from males, male-female duets or control vibrations (Laumann et al 2007).…”

Section: Signal Range and Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They showed that the parasitoids selectively responded to the vibratory calls of female hosts over those from males, male-female duets or control vibrations (Laumann et al 2007). Furthermore, the parasitoids distinguished between (and preferred) the vibratory signals of female E. heros hosts over those from females of alternative-host (Piezodorus guildinii) and non-host (Chinavia impicticornis) species (Laumann et al 2011).…”

Section: Signal Range and Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dangerous liaisons: the predation risks of receiving social signals

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Individuals are at risk when communicating because conspicuous signals attract both conspecifics and eavesdropping predators. This predation cost of communicating has typically been attributed to signalling individuals because of their conspicuous role, and is a core concept within sexual selection and communication ecology. But, if predators are attracted to signals, then receivers, both intended or otherwise, may also find themselves at risk of predation. Here, we review the theoretical basis and empirical evidence that receiving also carries a risk of predation. We distinguish between the risks of receiving and responding to signals, and we argue that receivers of signals that are long lived, are highly predictable in time or place and/or cannot be received quickly are likely to be at greater risk of predation compared to receivers of signals without these properties. We review recent empirical evidence from a variety of taxa that supports the hypothesis that receivers (including heterospecific prey) are aware of these risks and that they modify their behaviour to balance the risks against the benefits of receiving under predation threat. We also discuss the wider implications of risky receiving for receiving and signalling behaviour in prey, as well as for the prey's predators.

show abstract

Section: Signal Range and Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Signal Range and Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Dangerous liaisons: the predation risks of receiving social signals

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interestingly, in addition to chemical footprints, Te. podisi also uses vibratory signals mediating sexual behavior of the host species, E. heros [49].…”

Section: Exploitation Of Indirect Versus Direct Host-related Chemicalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical Ecology of Egg Parasitoids Associated with True Bugs

Conti

Colazza

2012

Psyche: A Journal of Entomology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Parasitoids representing some 15 families of Hymenoptera develop in insect eggs; three of these families, Platygastridae (= Scelionidae), Mymaridae, and Encyrtidae, are associated with Heteroptera. Several species of heteropteran egg parasitoids are or may be important for biological pest control. Successful parasitism of insect herbivores by insect parasitoids arises through several phases of host searching, which lead female wasps to the vicinity of, or in contact with, their hosts. During the host location process, females encounter and explore a variety of stimuli, among which chemical cues (i.e., semiochemicals or infochemicals) play a pivotal role. Female parasitoids are under selection pressure to efficiently invest their limited time on the location and exploitation of host-derived stimuli. In general, the levels of reliability and detectability of a particular stimulus are inversely correlated. Female parasitic wasps adopt differing strategies to solve this dilemma. In this paper we focus on the various host selection strategies employed by heteropteran egg parasitoids and possible means whereby the chemically mediated behavior of these wasps may be exploited to enhance biological pest control.

show abstract

“…podisi (Moraes et al, 2005(Moraes et al, , 2008. In addition, there is also some evidence that these parasitoids may selectively respond to semiochemicals from stink bugs (Borges et al, 2003;Conti et al, 2004;Salerno et al, 2006;Silva et al, 2006;Laumann et al, 2009) or substrate-borne vibratory signals used in the stink bug sexual communication (Laumann et al, 2007 complexes in tri-trophic interactions, as well as other relevant biological and ecological aspects need to be established.…”

Section: Trissolcus Brochymenaementioning

confidence: 99%