Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T02:06:13.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mortality and life-tables of Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) compared on two host-plant species

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 July 2009

Hamish G. Robertson  and
J. H. Hoffmann
Hamish G. Robertson
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, Grahamstown 6140, South Africa
J. H. Hoffmann
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Cape Town, Rondebosch 7700, South Africa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The performance of Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg) as a biological control agent of the cactus weeds Opuntia ficus-indica and O. aurantiaca was assessed by compiling life-tables for each host-plant, in both a summer and a winter generation, at a site in South Africa. Egg predation, mostly by ants, ranged from 54 to 74% and was significantly higher on O. aurantiaca than on O. ficus-indica. Larval mortality on O. aurantiaca was high during the summer generation (65%), possibly because of dehydration of cladodes. Survival on O. aurantiaca was 55 and 60% of that on O. ficus-indica in the summer and winter generations, respectively. Adult mortality, calculated from the life-tables, was 45 and 84% in the summer and winter generations, respectively. The most important components of mortality were natural enemies in the summer generation and weather-related factors in the winter generation. Host-plant-related mortality was not as great as was formerly supposed.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 79 , Issue 1 , March 1989 , pp. 7 - 18
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

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

Annecke, D. P. & Moran, V. C. (1978). Critical reviews of biological pest control in South Africa. 2. The prickly pear, Opuntia ficus-indica (L.) Miller.—J. ent. Soc. sth. Afr. 41, 161–188.Google Scholar
Courtney, S. P. (1982). Coevolution of pierid butterflies and their cruciferous foodplants. IV. Crucifer apparency and Anthocharis cardamines (L.) oviposition.—Oecologia 52, 258–265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dodd, A. P. (1940). The biological campaign against prickly-pear.—177 pp. Brisbane, Commonw. Prickly Pear Bd.Google Scholar
Harcourt, D. G. (1969). The development and use of life tables in the study of natural insect populations.—A. Rev. Ent. 14, 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Julien, M. H. (Ed.) (1982). Biological control of weeds: a world catalogue of agents and their target weeds.—108 pp. Slough, Commonw. Agric. Bur.Google Scholar
Mann, J. (1969). Cactus-feeding insects and mites.—Bull. U.S. natn. Mus. no. 256, 158pp.Google Scholar
Monro, J. M. (1975). Environmental variation and the efficiency of biological control—Cactoblastis in the southern hemisphere.—pp. 204–212in Kikkawa J. & Nix H. A. (Eds). Managing terrestrial ecosystems.—Proc. ecol. Soc. Aust. 9, 204–212.Google Scholar
Pettey, F. W. (1948). The biological control of prickly pears in South Africa.—Sci. Bull. Dep. Agric. Un. S. Afr. no. 271, 163 pp.Google Scholar
Pickett, C. H. & Clark, W. D. (1979). The function of extrafloral nectaries in Opuntia acanthocarpa (Cactaceae).—Am. J. Bot. 66, 618–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, H. G. (1985 a). The ecology of Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) in relation to its effectiveness as a biological control agent of prickly pear and jointed cactus in South Africa.—181 pp. Ph.D. thesis, Rhodes Univ., Grahamstown.Google Scholar
Robertson, H. G. (1985 b). Egg predation by ants as a partial explanation of the difference in performance of Cactoblastis cactorum on cactus weeds in South Africa and Australia.—pp. 83–88in Delfosse, E. S. (Ed.). Proceedings of the VI International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds, University of British Columbia, Vancouver B. C., Canada, 19–2508 1984.—885 pp. Ottawa, Agric. Can.Google Scholar
Robertson, H. G. (1987). Oviposition site selection in Cactoblastis cactorum (Lepidoptera): constraints and compromises.—Oecologia 73, 601–608.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Robertson, H. G. (1988). Spatial and temporal patterns of predation by ants on eggs of Cactoblastis cactorum.—Ecol. Entomol. 13, 207–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robertson, H. G. (in press). Seasonal temperature effects on fecundity of Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): differences between South Africa and Australia.—J. ent. Soc. sth. Afr. 52.Google Scholar