Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:18:29.189Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Protein-feeding by the males of the Australian bushfly Musca vetustissima Wlk. in relation to mating performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Marina Tyndale-Biscoe
Marina Tyndale-Biscoe
Affiliation:
CSIRO, Division of Entomology, Canberra, A.C.T.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Male bushflies (Musca vetustissima Wlk.) are attracted to and feed on proteincontaining substances, although under laboratory conditions they ingested smaller quantities of blood and dung than did the females. Laboratory experiments showed that they are able to obtain water from fresh dung and blood, but no physiological requirement for the protein was found. Feeding on protein did not increase the life span or the total numbers of matings; it did not improve the mating success of males that had previously been multiple-mated; and it did not enhance sexual activity, contrary to the situation found in Lucilia cuprina (Wied.). It is concluded that protein feeding in male bushflies is casual, possibly a behaviour pattern that ensures their presence near females.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 60 , Issue 4 , June 1971 , pp. 607 - 614
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bartell, R. J., Shorey, H. H. & Barton Browne, L. (1969). Pheromonal stimulation of the sexual activity of males of the sheep blowfly Lucilia cuprina (Calliphoridae) by the female.—Anim. Behav. 17, 576–585.Google Scholar
Hughes, R. D. (1970). The seasonal distribution of bushfly (Musca vetustissima Walker) in south-east Australia.—J. Anim. Ecol. 39, 691–706.Google Scholar
Leahy, M. G. (1967). Non-specificity of the male factor enhancing egg laying in Diptera.—J. Insect Physiol. 13, 1283–1292.Google Scholar
Lodha, K. R., Treece, R. E. & Koutz, F. R. (1970). Studies on mating behavior of the face fly.—J. econ. Ent. 63, 207–212.Google Scholar
Nelson, D. R., Adams, T. S. & Pomonis, J. G. (1969). Initial studies on the extraction of the active substance inducing monocoitic behavior in house flies, black blow flies and screw-worm flies.—/, econ. Ent. 62, 634–639.Google Scholar
Norris, K. R. (1966). Notes on the ecology of the bushfly, Musca vetustissima Walk. (Diptera: Muscidae) in the Canberra district—Aust. J. Zool. 14, 1139–1156.Google Scholar
Riemann, J. G., Moen, D. J. & Thorson, B. J. (1967). Female monogamy and its control in houseflies.—J. Insect Physiol. 13, 407–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riemann, J. G. & Thorson, B. J. (1969). Effect of male accessory material on oviposition and mating by female house flies.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 62, 828–834.Google Scholar
Tyndale-Biscoe, M. & Hughes, R. D. (1969). Changes in the female reproductive system as age indicators in the bushfly Musca vetustissima Wlk.—Bull. ent. Res. 59, 129–141.Google Scholar
Whitten, M. J. & Taylor, W. C. (1970). A role for sterile females in insect control.—]. econ. Ent. 63, 269–272.Google Scholar