MARKING PHEROMONES DETERRING REPEATED OVIPOSITION IN <i>RHAGOLETIS</i> FLIES

Prokopy, Ronald J.; Reissig, W. H.; Moericke, V.

doi:10.1111/j.1570-7458.1976.tb02630.x

Cited by 78 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Volatile esters isolated from whole fruit extracts have been shown by electroantennogram (EAG) assays and behavioral observations to be important in eliciting the response to fruits Carlé et al 1987;Averill et al 1988;Frey et al 1992). For instance, baiting fly traps with volatiles isolated from apples resulted in significantly higher catches of flies in the field than unbaited traps (Prokopy et al 1976;Reissig et al 1982). Also, tests using either the active chemical fraction or synthetic host fruit volatiles present in apples resulted in the positive orientation of flies in olfactometer tubes, a wind tunnel and the field Aluja & Prokopy, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in the electroantennal responses of apple- and hawthorn-infesting races of Rhagoletis pomonella to host fruit volatile compounds

Frey

Feder²,

Palma

et al. 1998

Chemoecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domestic apple (Malus pumila)-and hawthorn (Crataegus sp.)-infesting races of Rhagoletis pomonella, Walsh (Diptera: Tephritidae) provide an excellent model to examine the role that host plant specificity plays during sympatric speciation (i.e., divergence in the absence of geographic isolation). Previous work has shown that these races differ in their propensities to accept apple and hawthorn fruits in behavioral choice assays, and that this discrimination translates into ''host fidelity'' in the field (i.e., apple flies tend to mate on and oviposit into apples and hawthorn flies on hawthorns).We present the results of a study examining possible physiological factors contributing to host choice differences in R. pomonella. We tested whether apple and hawthorn flies differ in their electroantennogram (EAG) responses to biologically relevant volatile compounds emitted from apples and hawthorns. Significant differences were found in the relative EAG responses of apple and hawthorn flies to host fruit compounds at five of six paired study sites across the eastern United States. The geographic pattern of EAG variation was complex, however, with local populations of apple and hawthorn flies tending to be more similar to one another than to flies of the same race at distant sites. This pattern was largely due to EAG responses for several compounds showing longitudinal or latitudinal clines, the latitudinal clines being similar to those observed for allozyme loci in the host races. We also found evidence for sex-related differences, as males tended to have higher mean EAG responses to compounds than females. Host-associated differences were therefore nested within geographic and sex-related differentiation in R. pomonella.Further behavioral studies are needed to distinguish whether the EAG differences are responsible for, as opposed to being a consequence of, host-plant fidelity and adaptation. Crosses are also required to establish a genetic basis for the EAG responses, although we did find significant correlations between EAG scores for several compounds and the allozymes NADH-Diaphorase-2 and Hydroxyacid dehydrogenase at one of the study sites. Questions therefore remain concerning the evolutionary significance of the EAG response differences between apple and hawthorn fly races. Nevertheless, these differences raise the possibility that antennal responses to fruit-related volatile compounds contribute to host plant discrimination in R. pomonella. Regardless, the EAG responses represent another set of traits, in addition to diapause/eclosion time phenotypes and allozyme frequencies, differing between apple and hawthorn host races of R. pomonella.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Differences in the electroantennal responses of apple- and hawthorn-infesting races of Rhagoletis pomonella to host fruit volatile compounds

Frey

Feder²,

Palma

et al. 1998

Chemoecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…cingulata (the latter three species do not recognize!. pomonella ODP) (Prokopy et al, 1976;Averill and Prokopy, 1980b;Bowdan et al, unpub. data).…”

Section: Inter-population and Inter-species Recognition Of Pheromonementioning

confidence: 97%

“…15 generations in Geneva, New York. Females were found to deposit a type or amount of ODP much less active than ODP deposited by lab-caged wild flies (Prokopy et al, 1976). A lab population of f. capitata flies cultured on artificial media for more than 200 generations in Honolulu, Hawaii, was almost completely unresponsive to an amount of ODP that effectively deterred lab-caged wild flies .…”

Section: Inter-population and Inter-species Recognition Of Pheromonementioning

confidence: 99%

“…indifferens (Prokopy et al, 1976); blueberry maggot fly, ~. mend ax (Prokopy et al, 1976); two species of dogwood berry flies, R. cornivora and R. tabellaria (Prokopy et al, 1976); rose hip fl~ ~. basiola (Averill and Prokopy, 1980b): Caribbean fruit fly, Anastrepha suspensa ; Mediterranean fruit fly, Ceratitis capitata ; an anthomyiid fly, Hylemya spp.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…cingulata and~. indifferens (Prokopy et al, 1976); blueberry maggot fly, ~. mend ax (Prokopy et al, 1976); two species of dogwood berry flies, R. cornivora and R. tabellaria (Prokopy et al, 1976); rose hip fl~ ~.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations