Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:31:54.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in the photoperiodic response within natural populations of Myzus persicae (Sulz.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

R. L. Blackman
R. L. Blackman
Affiliation:
Imperial College Field Station, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In laboratory experiments, the responses to short photoperiod (10 h) of clones of Myzus persicae (Sulz.) established from random samples of summer populations in southern England were generally stable and characteristic for each clone, and were of four distinct categories: (i) holocyclic, with clones terminated under short photoperiod by production of male and female sexual forms, (ii) intermediate, with a mixed response involving alatae intermediate between gynoparae and virginoparae, (iii) androcyclic, with production of some males along with continued parthenogenesis, and (iv) truly anholocyclic, with no significant response to short photoperiod. All four types can occur within one population, but holocyclic and androcyclic forms are most common. There were clear differences in the proportions of these forms occurring simultaneously on adjacent crops of different host-plants, and in different years on the same crop in the same field. Males of androcyclic clones were able to transmit their partially anholocyclic character through the sexual phase.

Type
Research Article
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 60 , Issue 4 , June 1971 , pp. 533 - 546
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

Adams, J. B. (1967). A physiologic difference in aphids (Homoptera) raised on excised leaves and on intact plants.—Can. J. Zool. 45, 588–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackman, R. L. (1971). Chromosomal abnormalities in an anholocyclic biotype of Myzus persicae (Sulzer).—Experientia (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonnemaison, L. (1951). Contribution á l'égtude des facteurs provoquant l'apparition des formes ailées et sexuées chez les Aphidinae.—Annls Épiphyt. 2, 1–380.Google Scholar
Bonnemaison, L. (1964). Action combinée de la photopériode et de l'effet de groupe sur l'apparition des sexupares ailés de Dysaphis planlaginea Pass.—C.r. hebd. Seanc. Acad. Sci., Paris 259, 1663–1665.Google Scholar
Bonnemaison, L. (1965). Recherches sur le détermination de la production des sexupares ailés et des males de Dysaphis plantaginea Pass. (Homopteres, Aphididae).—Annls Soc. ent. Fr. (N.S.) 1, 659–688.Google Scholar
Broadbent, L. & Heathcote, G. D. (1955). Sources of overwintering Myzus persicae (Sulzer) in England.—Pl Path. 4, 135–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cognetti, G. (1961 a). Citogenetica della partenogenesi negli Afidi.—Archo zool. ital. 46, 89–122.Google Scholar
Cognetti, G. (1961 b). Endomeiosis in parthenogenetic lines of aphids.—Experientia 17, 168–169.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cognetti, G. (1962). La partenogenesi negli Afidi.—Boll. Zool. 29, 129–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cognetti, G. (1965). Determination of reproductive categories in the life cycle of aphids.—Experientia 21, 449–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cognetti, G. (1967). Sexual genotypes and migratory tendencies in Myzus persicae Sulz. (Homoptera: Aphididae).—Monitore zool. ital. (N.S.) 1, 229–234.Google Scholar
Danblevskii, A. S. (1965). Photoperiodism and seasonal development of insects.—283 pp. Edinburgh, Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. S. (1965). On the use of gut characters to determine the origin of migrating aphids.—Ann. appl. Biol. 55, 485–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Emden, H. F., EASTOP, V. F., Hughes, R. D. & Way, M. J. (1969). The ecology of Myzus persicae.—A. Rev. Ent. 14, 197–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewing, H. E. (1916). Eighty-seven generations in a parthenogenetic pure line of Aphis avenae Fab.—Biol. Bull. mar. biol. Lab., Woods Hole 31, 53–112.Google Scholar
Heathcote, G. D., Dunning, R. A. & Wolfe, M. D. (1965). Aphids on sugar beet and some weeds in England, and notes on weeds as a source of beet viruses.—PL Path. 14, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hille Ris Lambers, D. (1955). Potato aphids and virus diseases in the Netherlands.—Ann. appl. Biol. 42, 355–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, F. H. (1941). The over-wintering of Myzus persicae Sulz. on Brassicae in North Wales.—Ann. appl. Biol. 28, 119–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, F. D. (1968). Polymorphism in a subterranean aphid, Pemphigus bursarius. I. Factors affecting the development of sexuparae.—Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 61, 819–827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1959). The role of photoperiod and temperature in the determination of parthenogenetic and sexual forms in the aphid Megoura viciae Buckton—I The influence of these factors on apterous virginoparae and their progeny.—J. Insect Physiol. 3, 92–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, A. D. (1964). The location of the photoperiodic receptors in the aphid Megoura viciae Buckton.—J. exp. Biol. 41, 119–133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lees, A. D. (1966). The control of polymorphism in aphids. In Beament, J. W. L., Treheme, J. E., Wigglesworth, V. B. (Eds.) Advances in Insect Physiology 3, 382 pp.Google Scholar
MacGiixivray, M. E. & Anderson, G. B. (1964). The effect of photoperiod and temperature on production of gamic and agamic forms in Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas).—Can. J. Zool. 42, 491–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, J. P. (1961). Preference of aphids for excised leaves to whole plants.—Can. J. Zool. 39, 445–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Moericke, V. (1950). Wo entstehen Gynoparen und Mannchen der Pfirsichblattlaus (Myzodes persicae Sulz.)?—NachrBl. dt. PflSchutzdienst, Stuttg. 2, 99–102.Google Scholar
Müller, F. P. (1954). Holozyklie und Anholozyklie bei der Griinen Pfirsichblattlaus, Myzodes persicae (Sulz.).—Z. angew. Ent. 36, 369–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Müller, F. P. (1958). Binomische Rassen der griinen Pfirsichblattlaus Myzus persicae (Sulz.).—Arch. Freunde NatGesch. Mecklenb. 4, 200–233.Google Scholar
Shaw, M. W. (1955). Overwintering of Myzus persicae (Sulzer) in North-east Scotland.—PI. Path. 4, 137–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shuix, A. F. (1942). The mechanism through which light and heat influence genetic factors for wing development in aphids.—J. exp. Zool. 89, 183–195.Google Scholar
Waldhauer, W. (1953). Über Rassendifferenzierung im Formenkreis der Griinen Pfirsichblattlaus (Myzodes persicae Sulz.).—NachrBl. dt. PflSchutzdienst, Bed. 7, 95–99.Google Scholar
Waldhauer, W. (1957). Untersuchungen an Klonen der Griinen Pfirsichblattlaus Myzodes persicae (Sulz.) zur Frage ihrer virginogenen Uberwinterung. (Inaug. Diss.) 115 pp.Google Scholar