Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species

Autores
Liendo, María Clara; Parreño, María Alejandra; Pietrek, Alejandro G.; Bouvet, Juan Pedro; Milla, Fabian Horacio; Vera, María Teresa; Cladera, Jorge Luis; Segura, Diego Fernando
Año de publicación
2020
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Tephritidae fruit fly larvae develop entirely in the host chosen by the females. To improve the fitness of their progeny, females would benefit from rejecting previously exploited hosts. Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata are two species of fruit flies having similar nutritional requirements and overlapping in their distribution. Previous studies found that competition between the larvae of these species might reach high levels, suggesting that cross‐recognition would be an adaptive trait. In this work, we tested the ability of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to recognize and avoid fruits previously infested by both conspecific and heterospecific females. In laboratory behavioural arenas, females were presented with fruits that had been previously exposed to either conspecific or heterospecific females. Then, we conducted choice and non‐choice assays to compare the response of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to infested and non‐infested fruits. In non‐choice tests, the females from both species rejected fruits previously infested by conspecific and heterospecific individuals. However, the rejection occurred at different steps of the sequence leading to oviposition: A. fraterculus showed a lower rate of visits to infested fruits, whereas C. capitata visited both infested and non‐infested fruits, but the latency to visit a fruit and the rejection frequency were higher and the duration of the visit to infested fruit was lower. In choice assays, the rejection of heterospecific infested fruit was higher than that of conspecific infested fruits, for both species. Our results suggest that, regardless of the sensory mechanism used by females, the recognition of previous infestation is bidirectional and females of both species, belonging to different genera, recognize fruit infested by heterospecifics. These responses indicate that cross‐recognition, supposedly a highly beneficial trait, could be occurring in nature, thus reducing interspecific competition and contributing to the coexistence of these species.
Instituto de Genética
Fil: Liendo, Marí­a Clara. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Parreño, Marí­a Alejandra. University of Zurich. Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies; Suiza
Fil: Pietrek, Alejandro G. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Bio y Geociencias (IBIGEO); Argentina
Fil: Bouvet, Juan Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concordia; Argentina
Fil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Vera, Maria Teresa. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; Argentina
Fil: Cladera, Jorge Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fuente
Journal of Applied Entomology 144 (8) : 701-709 (Septiembre 2020)
Materia
Anastrepha fraterculus
Ceratitis capitata
Disuasores de Oviposición
Hembra
Oviposition Deterrents
Females
Coexistence
Cross Recognition
Coexistencia
Reconocimiento Cruzado
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso restringido
Condiciones de uso
Repositorio
INTA Digital (INTA)
Institución
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
OAI Identificador
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/7893
Acceder
id INTADig_41c215bdae7adc4f2a23f5c77295a549
oai_identifier_str oai:localhost:20.500.12123/7893
network_acronym_str INTADig
repository_id_str l
network_name_str INTA Digital (INTA)
spelling Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly speciesLiendo, María ClaraParreño, María AlejandraPietrek, Alejandro G.Bouvet, Juan PedroMilla, Fabian HoracioVera, María TeresaCladera, Jorge LuisSegura, Diego FernandoAnastrepha fraterculusCeratitis capitataDisuasores de OviposiciónHembraOviposition DeterrentsFemalesCoexistenceCross RecognitionCoexistenciaReconocimiento CruzadoTephritidae fruit fly larvae develop entirely in the host chosen by the females. To improve the fitness of their progeny, females would benefit from rejecting previously exploited hosts. Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata are two species of fruit flies having similar nutritional requirements and overlapping in their distribution. Previous studies found that competition between the larvae of these species might reach high levels, suggesting that cross‐recognition would be an adaptive trait. In this work, we tested the ability of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to recognize and avoid fruits previously infested by both conspecific and heterospecific females. In laboratory behavioural arenas, females were presented with fruits that had been previously exposed to either conspecific or heterospecific females. Then, we conducted choice and non‐choice assays to compare the response of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to infested and non‐infested fruits. In non‐choice tests, the females from both species rejected fruits previously infested by conspecific and heterospecific individuals. However, the rejection occurred at different steps of the sequence leading to oviposition: A. fraterculus showed a lower rate of visits to infested fruits, whereas C. capitata visited both infested and non‐infested fruits, but the latency to visit a fruit and the rejection frequency were higher and the duration of the visit to infested fruit was lower. In choice assays, the rejection of heterospecific infested fruit was higher than that of conspecific infested fruits, for both species. Our results suggest that, regardless of the sensory mechanism used by females, the recognition of previous infestation is bidirectional and females of both species, belonging to different genera, recognize fruit infested by heterospecifics. These responses indicate that cross‐recognition, supposedly a highly beneficial trait, could be occurring in nature, thus reducing interspecific competition and contributing to the coexistence of these species.Instituto de GenéticaFil: Liendo, Marí­a Clara. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Parreño, Marí­a Alejandra. University of Zurich. Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies; SuizaFil: Pietrek, Alejandro G. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Bio y Geociencias (IBIGEO); ArgentinaFil: Bouvet, Juan Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concordia; ArgentinaFil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Vera, Maria Teresa. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; ArgentinaFil: Cladera, Jorge Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaWiley2020-09-15T11:22:03Z2020-09-15T11:22:03Z2020-09info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7893https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jen.127911439-0418https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12791Journal of Applied Entomology 144 (8) : 701-709 (Septiembre 2020)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess2025-09-11T10:23:30Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/7893instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-09-11 10:23:31.579INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
title Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
spellingShingle Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
Liendo, María Clara
Anastrepha fraterculus
Ceratitis capitata
Disuasores de Oviposición
Hembra
Oviposition Deterrents
Females
Coexistence
Cross Recognition
Coexistencia
Reconocimiento Cruzado
title_short Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
title_full Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
title_fullStr Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
title_full_unstemmed Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
title_sort Infestation of fruit by conspecific and heterospecific females deters oviposition in two Tephritidae fruit fly species
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Liendo, María Clara
Parreño, María Alejandra
Pietrek, Alejandro G.
Bouvet, Juan Pedro
Milla, Fabian Horacio
Vera, María Teresa
Cladera, Jorge Luis
Segura, Diego Fernando
author Liendo, María Clara
author_facet Liendo, María Clara
Parreño, María Alejandra
Pietrek, Alejandro G.
Bouvet, Juan Pedro
Milla, Fabian Horacio
Vera, María Teresa
Cladera, Jorge Luis
Segura, Diego Fernando
author_role author
author2 Parreño, María Alejandra
Pietrek, Alejandro G.
Bouvet, Juan Pedro
Milla, Fabian Horacio
Vera, María Teresa
Cladera, Jorge Luis
Segura, Diego Fernando
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
author
author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Anastrepha fraterculus
Ceratitis capitata
Disuasores de Oviposición
Hembra
Oviposition Deterrents
Females
Coexistence
Cross Recognition
Coexistencia
Reconocimiento Cruzado
topic Anastrepha fraterculus
Ceratitis capitata
Disuasores de Oviposición
Hembra
Oviposition Deterrents
Females
Coexistence
Cross Recognition
Coexistencia
Reconocimiento Cruzado
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Tephritidae fruit fly larvae develop entirely in the host chosen by the females. To improve the fitness of their progeny, females would benefit from rejecting previously exploited hosts. Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata are two species of fruit flies having similar nutritional requirements and overlapping in their distribution. Previous studies found that competition between the larvae of these species might reach high levels, suggesting that cross‐recognition would be an adaptive trait. In this work, we tested the ability of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to recognize and avoid fruits previously infested by both conspecific and heterospecific females. In laboratory behavioural arenas, females were presented with fruits that had been previously exposed to either conspecific or heterospecific females. Then, we conducted choice and non‐choice assays to compare the response of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to infested and non‐infested fruits. In non‐choice tests, the females from both species rejected fruits previously infested by conspecific and heterospecific individuals. However, the rejection occurred at different steps of the sequence leading to oviposition: A. fraterculus showed a lower rate of visits to infested fruits, whereas C. capitata visited both infested and non‐infested fruits, but the latency to visit a fruit and the rejection frequency were higher and the duration of the visit to infested fruit was lower. In choice assays, the rejection of heterospecific infested fruit was higher than that of conspecific infested fruits, for both species. Our results suggest that, regardless of the sensory mechanism used by females, the recognition of previous infestation is bidirectional and females of both species, belonging to different genera, recognize fruit infested by heterospecifics. These responses indicate that cross‐recognition, supposedly a highly beneficial trait, could be occurring in nature, thus reducing interspecific competition and contributing to the coexistence of these species.
Instituto de Genética
Fil: Liendo, Marí­a Clara. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Parreño, Marí­a Alejandra. University of Zurich. Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies; Suiza
Fil: Pietrek, Alejandro G. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Bio y Geociencias (IBIGEO); Argentina
Fil: Bouvet, Juan Pedro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Concordia; Argentina
Fil: Milla, Fabian Horacio. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Vera, Maria Teresa. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán. Facultad de Agronomía y Zootecnia; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Tucumán; Argentina
Fil: Cladera, Jorge Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Segura, Diego Fernando. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Genética. Laboratorio de Insectos de Importancia Agronómica; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Agrobiotecnología y Biología Molecular; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description Tephritidae fruit fly larvae develop entirely in the host chosen by the females. To improve the fitness of their progeny, females would benefit from rejecting previously exploited hosts. Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata are two species of fruit flies having similar nutritional requirements and overlapping in their distribution. Previous studies found that competition between the larvae of these species might reach high levels, suggesting that cross‐recognition would be an adaptive trait. In this work, we tested the ability of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to recognize and avoid fruits previously infested by both conspecific and heterospecific females. In laboratory behavioural arenas, females were presented with fruits that had been previously exposed to either conspecific or heterospecific females. Then, we conducted choice and non‐choice assays to compare the response of A. fraterculus and C. capitata females to infested and non‐infested fruits. In non‐choice tests, the females from both species rejected fruits previously infested by conspecific and heterospecific individuals. However, the rejection occurred at different steps of the sequence leading to oviposition: A. fraterculus showed a lower rate of visits to infested fruits, whereas C. capitata visited both infested and non‐infested fruits, but the latency to visit a fruit and the rejection frequency were higher and the duration of the visit to infested fruit was lower. In choice assays, the rejection of heterospecific infested fruit was higher than that of conspecific infested fruits, for both species. Our results suggest that, regardless of the sensory mechanism used by females, the recognition of previous infestation is bidirectional and females of both species, belonging to different genera, recognize fruit infested by heterospecifics. These responses indicate that cross‐recognition, supposedly a highly beneficial trait, could be occurring in nature, thus reducing interspecific competition and contributing to the coexistence of these species.
publishDate 2020
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020-09-15T11:22:03Z
2020-09-15T11:22:03Z
2020-09
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7893
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jen.12791
1439-0418
https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12791
url http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/7893
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/jen.12791
https://doi.org/10.1111/jen.12791
identifier_str_mv 1439-0418
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
eu_rights_str_mv restrictedAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Wiley
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Journal of Applied Entomology 144 (8) : 701-709 (Septiembre 2020)
reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)
instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
reponame_str INTA Digital (INTA)
collection INTA Digital (INTA)
instname_str Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.name.fl_str_mv INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
repository.mail.fl_str_mv tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar
_version_ 1842975491955359744
score 12.993085

Publicaciones similares