Discrimination among floral resources by an obligately pollinating seed-eating moth: Host-marking signals and pollination and florivory cues

Evolutionary Ecology Research

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2010, Pages 119-129

  Horn, Katherine C ^a   Holland, J Nathaniel ^a  

^a RICE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Cue; Florivory; Oviposition; Pheromone; Signal

Indexed keywords

HEXAPODA; LEPIDOPTERA; PACHYCEREUS SCHOTTII;

EID: 76049095818     PISSN: 15220613     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Allen, G.R. and Hunt, J. 2001. Larval competition, adult fitness, and reproductive strategies in the acoustically orienting ormiine Homotrixa alleni (Diptera: Tachinidae). J. Insect. Behav., 14: 283-297.
2. Dukas, R., Prokopy, R.J. and Duan, J.J. 2001. Effects of larval competition on survival and growth in Mediterranean fruit flies. Ecol. Entomol., 26: 587-593.
3. Fatouros, N.E., Van Loon, J.J.A., Hordijk, K.A., Smid, H.M. and Dicke, M. 2005. Herbivoreinduced plant volatiles mediate in-flight host discrimination by parasitoids. J. Chem. Ecol., 31: 2033-2047.
4. Fleming, T.H. and Holland, J.N. 1998. The evolution of obligate pollination mutualisms: senita cactus and senita moth. Oecologia, 114: 368-375.
5. Fox, C.W., Martin, J.D., Thakar, M.S. and Mousseau, T.A. 1996. Clutch size manipulations in two seed beetles: consequences for progeny fitness. Oecologia, 108: 88-94.
6. Fretwell, S.D. 1972. Populations in a Seasonal Environment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7. Fretwell, S.D. and Lucas, H.L. 1970. On territorial behavior and other factors influencing habitat distribution in birds. Acta Biotheor., 19: 16-36.
8. Godfray, H.C.J. 1994. Parasitoids: Behavioral and Evolutionary Ecology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9. Hassell, M.P. 2000. The Spatial and Temporal Dynamics of Host-Parasitoid Interactions. New York: Oxford University Press.
10. Hochberg, M.E. and Ives, A.R. 2000. Parasitoid Population Biology. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
11. Holland, J.N. 2002. Benefits and costs of mutualism: demographic consequences in a pollinating seed-consumer interaction. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B, 269: 1405-1412.
12. Holland, J.N. and DeAngelis, D.L. 2002. Ecological and evolutionary conditions for fruit abortion to regulate pollinating seed-eaters and increase plant reproduction. Theor. Pop. Biol., 61: 251-263.
13. Holland, J.N. and DeAngelis, D.L. 2006. Interspecific population regulation and the stability of mutualism: fruit abortion and density-dependent mortality of pollinating seed-eating insects. Oikos, 113: 563-571.
14. Holland, J.N. and Fleming, T.H. 1999. Mutualistic interactions between Upiga virescens (Pyralidae), a pollinating seed-consumer, and Lophocereus schottii (Cactaceae). Ecology, 80: 2074-2084.
15. Holland, J.N. and Fleming, T.H. 2002. Co-pollinators and specialization in the pollinating seed-consumer mutualism between senita cacti and senita moths. Oecologia, 133: 535-540.
16. Holland, J.N., Buchanan, A.L. and Loubeau, R. 2004a. Oviposition choice and larval survival of an obligately pollinating granivorous moth. Evol. Ecol. Res., 6: 607-618.
17. Holland, J.N., Bronstein, J.L. and DeAngelis, D.L. 2004b. Testing hypotheses for excess flower production and fruit-to-flower ratios in a pollinating seed-consuming mutualism. Oikos, 105: 633-640.
18. Huth, C.J. and Pellmyr, O. 1999. Yucca moth oviposition and pollination behavior is affected by past flower visitors: evidence for a host-marking pheromone. Oecologia, 119: 593-599.
19. McCall, A.C. and Irwin, R.E. 2006. Florivory: the intersection of pollination and herbivory. Ecol. Lett., 9: 1351-1365.
20. McClure, M., Quiring, D.T. and Turgeon, J.J. 1998. Proximate and ultimate factors influencing oviposition site selection by endoparasites on conifer seed cones: two sympatric dipteran species on larch. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 87: 1-13.
21. Messina, F.J. 1991. Competitive interactions between larvae from divergent strains of the cowpea weevil (Coleoptera, Bruchidae). Environ. Entomol., 20: 1438-1443.
22. Nagelkerke, C.J., van Baalen, M. and Sabelis, M.W. 1996. When should a female avoid adding eggs to the clutch of another female? A simultaneous oviposition and sex allocation game. Evol. Ecol., 10: 475-497.
23. Nufio, C.R. and Papaj, D.R. 2001. Host marking behavior in phytophagous insects and parasitoids. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 99: 273-293.
24. Nufio, C.R. and Papaj, D.R. 2004. Host-marking behaviour as a quantitative signal of competition in the walnut fly Rhagoletis juglandis. Ecol. Entomol., 29: 336-344.
25. Pellymr, O. 2003. Yuccas, yucca moths, and coevolution: a review. Ann. Missouri Bot. Gard., 90: 35-55.
26. Pellmyr, O. and Huth, C.J. 1994. Evolutionary stability of mutualism between yuccas and yucca moths. Nature, 372: 257-260.
27. Pellmyr, O., Thompson, J.N., Brown, J.M. and Harrison, R.G. 1996. Evolution of pollination and mutualism in the yucca moth lineage. Am. Nat., 148: 827-847.
28. Price, P.W. and Ohgushi, T. 1995. Preference and performance linkage in a Phyllocolpa sawfly on the willow, Salix miyabeana, on Hokkaido. Res. Pop. Ecol., 37: 23-28.
29. Quiring, D.T. and McNeil, J.N. 1984. Intraspecific competition between different aged larvae of Agromyza frontella (Rondani) (Diptera: Agromyzidae): advantages of an oviposition-deterring pheromone. Can. J. Zool., 62: 2192-2196.
30. Quiring, D.T., Sweeney, J.W. and Bennett, R.G. 1998. Evidence for a host-marking pheromone in white spruce cone fly, Strobilomyia neanthracina. J. Chem. Ecol., 24: 709-721.
31. Roitberg, B.D. and Prokopy, R.J. 1987. Insects that mark host plants: an ecological, evolutionary perspective on host-marking chemicals. Bioscience, 37: 400-406.
32. Sweeney, J. and Quiring, D.T. 1998. Oviposition site selection and intraspecific competition influence larval survival and pupal weight of Strobilomyia neanthracina (Diptera: Anthomyiidae) in white spruce. Ecoscience, 5: 454-462.
33. Weiblen, G.D. 2002. How to be a fig wasp. Annu. Rev. Entomol., 47: 299-330.
34. Wilson, R.D. and Addicott, J.F. 1998. Regulation of mutualism between yuccas and yucca moths: is oviposition behavior responsive to selective abscission of flowers? Oikos, 81: 109-118.
35. Zar, J.H. 1999. Biostatistical Analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.