ebook img

Kaliofenusa carpinifoliae Liston (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae), a newly recognized leaf-miner on field elms in Britain PDF

4 Pages·1994·1.2 MB·
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Kaliofenusa carpinifoliae Liston (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae), a newly recognized leaf-miner on field elms in Britain

BR. .1. ENT. NAT. HIST.. 7: 1994 15 KALIOFENUSA CARPINIFOLIAE LISTON (HYMENOPTERA: TENTHREDINIDAE), A NEWLY RECOGNIZED LEAF-MINER ON FIELD ELMS IN BRITAIN A. D. LiSTON Heckenbeck 24, D-3758I Bad Gandersheim, Germany. ThreeEuropean leaf-miningsawflies ofthegenusKatiofenusaViereck areattached to elm (Ulmus) species (Liston, 1993). When the group was first revised, the only British material available to the author was of Scottish origin and exclusively from wych elm (U. glabra Hudson). Now it has been possible to study material collected in England, made available by the Natural History Museum, London (NHM) and National Museums of Scotland, Edinburgh (NMS). Two species are represented in this material, one being an addition to the British list of Hymenoptera Symphyta. Identification The sawsheath characters mentioned in Liston (1993) are of limited value in the separation ofspecies and might mislead. After examination oflonger series ofeach species, it seemsthat thesawsheathvalvulaeoftheserathersmallinsectsmaybeprone to severe distortion in dried specimens. By contrast, the form of the frons is very stable and specimens intermediate to ulmi and carpinifoliae have not been found. Both species key to Fenusa ulmi in Benson (1952). DrE. Altenhofersent samplesoflarvaecollectedon U. minorMillerand U. glabra fromseveralcentral European localities. Apart fromthetendency, alreadyobserved by Altenhofer in the fresh samples, to a more intense and extended dark coloration on the thoracic segments in the U. minor {IK. carpinifoliae) samples, no absolute characters were found to separate the larvae. There is however a slight doubt as to thepurityofthesamples, andthelarvaewouldwarrantastudywithmoresophisticated equipment than that available to the author. Separation of British Kaliofenusa species A: Frons with lateral walls appearing deeply indented (Fig. 1). Lateral foveae contained in short, deep ellipsoid furrows which do not run out past the upper edge ofthe frontal wall (Fig. 1). Apical segment of flagellum more than 1.5 times length of the preceding segment (Fig. 3). On field elms {U. minor, U. procera Salisbury), and possibly hybrid elms. Leaf- mines starting mostly in leaf margins (Figs 5-7) carpinifoliae Liston, 1993 B: Fronswith lateralwallsnearlystraight-sided(Fig. 2). Groovescontaininglateral foveaelongand narrow, furrowedthrough abovetorunontouppersurfaceofhead (Fig. 2). Apical segment of flagellum shorter than 1.5 times the length ofpreceding segment (Fig. 4). Onwych elm {U. glabra). Leaf-mines startingmostlyin leafbladeinterior(Fig. 8). ulmi (Sundevall, 1847)* *Thedate, 1847,iscorrect,although1843(or1844)isusuallywronglygiven.Thepublicationisthe'Transactions ofthe4thmeetingofScandinaviannaturalhistoriansinChristiania', 1844,butitwasnotpublisheduntil 1847. The British list (Kloet& Hincks, 1978)containsacoupleofprintingerrorsandthedategiven forK. ulmi (1884)isprobablyatypographicerrorfortheequallyincorrect 1844,likewiseSundewallinsteadofSundevall. Students ofthe Symphyta might also be interested to know that nearly all the dates ofpublication for Klugspeciesarewrong in thechecklist! Theoriginalerror, copiedthroughout theEuropean literaturelies mostly with Kreichbaumer(1884)whoreprintedKlug'sworksinasinglevolumebutwith thedatesofthe volume year, not theactualyear ofpublication (oftena few years later). BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST.,7: 1994 Figs 1 and 2. Head viewed from front to show form offrons in 1: Kaliofenusacarpinifoliae; 2: K. ulmi. Figs 3 and 4. Apical flagellar segments of 3: K. carpinifoliae; 4: K. ulmi. Material examined Kaliofenusa carpinifoliae Liston England: 1 female, Sudbury, Suffolk, 1919(Harwood, Natural HistoryMuseum— NHM); 1 female, Badingham, Suffolk, 5.vii.l927 (R. B. Benson, NHM): 4 females, Wimborne, Dorset, 10.v.1936 (B. Rings, NHM); 1 female, Colchester, Essex (Harwood, NHM); 1 female, Reading, Berks., ex mine on Ulmus procera, coll. 4.vi.l992 em. Il.vi.l993 (B. J. Parsons/M. R. Shaw, National Museums of Scotland—NMS); 1 male, without locality or date, ex Cameron Collection (NHM) may be of British origin. Kaliofenusa ulmi (Sundevall) England: 1 male, "GorgeAvon", 1903 (J. J. F. X. King, NHM); 1 female, Gade Valley, Herts., 20.v.l934(R. B. Benson, NHM); 1 female, Boxhill, Surrey, 9.V.1936; 1 female, Claygate, Surrey, ll.v.1937(J. F. Perkins, NHM); 1 female, Tring, Herts., 21.iv.1946 (R. B. Benson, NHM); 3 females, Beetham, Cumbria, mine on Ulmus glabra, coll. 13.vi.1992 em. 17.v.1993 (M. R. Shaw, NMS). Biology In Continental Europe, carpinifoliae has been reared only from Ulmus minor {^carpinifolia Gleditsch) (Altenhofer, 1980). The record from Reading shows that U. procera (English elm) is also used as a host. From Perring & Walters (1962), it appears likely that the host ofcarpinifoliaein East Anglia may have been U. minor or U. procera, but in the other localities most probably U. procera. BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 7: 1994 Figs 5-8. Completed leaf-mines, scale line=lcm. 5: U. procera/?K. carpinifoliae, Reading, England; 6: U. ininor/K. carpinifoliae, Gottfrieding, Bavaria; 7: U. minor var. sarniensis/?K. carpinifoliae, Edinburgh, Scotland; 8: U. glabra/K. ulmi, Cumbria, England. In a sample of mined U. procera leaves from which the Reading carpinifoliae specimen was obtained, the mines start almost exclusively in the leafblade margins (Fig. 5). The position of mines in U. minor leaves in Germany is similar (Fig. 6), wherehoweverthe fullydevelopedmineoftentakesupthewholecontent oftheusually smaller leaves ofthis elm. Fresh mines often start at or close to the leaftip. Empty Kaliofenusa leaf-mines on U. minor var. sarniensis (Loud.) Rehd. (Wheatley elm) in Princes Street Gardens, Edinburgh, August 1992 were of this type (Fig. 7). Oviposition of K. ulmi typically takes place in the leaf blade interior; even the completed mines often do not touch the leaf edge (Fig. 8). Because the collection of Reading mines was heavily parasitized by a Lathrolestes sp. (Ichneumonidae: Ctenopelmatinae)(M. R. Shaw, pers. comm.), it wasnot possibletoestablishwhether the few mines in the leaf interiors of U. procera were indeed made by K. ulmi. 18 BR. J. ENT. NAT. HIST., 7: 1994 DrD. R. Smith(pers. comm.)hasdiscoveredthattheK. ulmipopulationsintroduced to North America feed there on at least three elm species which are probably less closely related to oneanother than are the European elms named here. Nevertheless it seems unwise toextrapolateSmith's findings (which he intendsto publish in detail) back to the native European populations. To contend that ulmi should feed on all elms present in Europe becauseit does so in North America is prematurein the light of'regional foodplantchange' (Zwolfer, 1970), bywhich is meant acomplexofbiotic andabioticinfluenceswhich leadstotheselectionofdifferent hostplantsindifferent partsofthesameinsectspecies' range. Moredata from rearingwould helptoclarify these problems. At least in the short term, the future ofthese sawflies seems well assured despite the continuing destruction of older elms by Dutch elm disease. An abundant food resource is supplied by the sucker regrowth ofdiseased elm trees. Thisjuvenile type growth ispreferentiallyusedbyKaliofenusacomparedtonormal foliageinthecrowns of mature trees, and it may be that elm disease has temporarily favoured the local build-up of large populations of these sawflies. Acknowledgements Manythanksto DrE. Altenhofer(GroBGerungs, Austria), DrM. R. Shaw(NMS, Edinburgh), Dr D. R. Smith (UnitedStates Department ofAgriculture, Washington, D.C.), L. Ficken and Dr M. Fitton (NHM, London) for information and the loan of material. References Altenhofer, E. 1980. Zur Biologic der in Baumblattern minierenden Blattwespen. Z. Angew. Ent. 89: 122-134. Benson, R. B. 1952. Hymenoptera Symphyta. Handbk Ident. Br. Insects 6 (2b): 51-138. Kloet, G. S. & Hincks, W. D. 1978. A check list of British insects. 2nd edn. HandbksIdent. Br. Insects 11 (4): 7. Liston,A. D. 1993.TaxonomyandhostassociationsofWestPalaearcticKaliofenusaViereck: leaf-mining sawflies on Ulmus (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae). Ent. Gaz. 44: 45-54. Perring, F. H. & Walters, S. M. 1962. Atlas ofthe British Flora. Nelson, London. Sundevall, C. J. 1847. [Notitle, butintroducedwith: ProfessorSundevallomhandledeLarverne afTenthredinet-SlaegtetFenusa]. ForhandlingerveddeskandinaviskeNaturforskeresfjerde Mode, i Christiania den 11-18 JuH 1844: 240-241. Zwolfer, H. 1970. Der "Regionale Futterpflanzenwechsel" bei phytophagen Insekten als evolutionares Problem. Z. Angew. Ent. 66: 233-239. ANNOUNCEMENT Hoverfly book reprinted.—The BEHNS is pleased to announce that its very successfulbook Britishhover/lies:an illustratedidentificationguidebyA. E. Stubbs and S. J. Falk is now available again after being out of print for 2 years. Since its originalpublicationin 1983, this book hasremainedthedefinitiveguidetotheBritish hoverfly fauna,andwithover 190speciesbeingillustratedonthe 12spectacularcolour plates it isalsooneofthemost attractive. A 16-pagesupplement was added in 1986. Hardback copies are available at £26 each, (£18 for BENHS members) plus £2.80 postageand packing(£3.50overseas), from theSalesSecretary, R. D. Hawkins, 30d Meadowcroft Close, Horley, Surrey RH6 9EL.

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.