水椰八角铁甲寄主适应性研究
|
摘要
本文初步调查了水椰八角铁甲在福州地区的寄主范围,在此基础上,从水椰八角铁甲的形态学特征,生长发育、繁殖力三个方面研究了不同寄主对水椰八角铁甲生长的影响,并分析了铁甲在不同寄主上的适应能力。研究了水椰八角铁甲对棕榈科不同植物的选择性,并分析了水椰八角铁甲寄主选择性与心叶蜡质含量和心叶乙醇粗提物的关系,初步探讨水椰八角铁甲寄主的选择机理,并对该研究结果在水椰八角铁甲综合治理中的应用进行了讨论。主要结论如下:
水椰八角铁甲的寄主主要限于棕榈科植物。据报道,大多数棕榈科植物,如:椰子(Cocos nucifera)、大王椰子(Royston earegia)、棕榈(Trachycarpus fortunei)、刺葵(Phoenix roebelenii. )、蒲葵(Livistona chinensis)、省藤(Calamus ritang)等,其中椰子是最主要的寄主。其在福州地区的主要寄主为海枣(Phoenix dactylifera),而在其他棕榈科上均未发现。在调查中还发现,与受危害很重的海枣距离很近的同为棕榈科植物的蒲葵植株上却没有水椰八角铁甲危害发生。
形态学试验研究发现,不同寄主植物上的水椰八角铁甲幼虫头宽体长在一龄时没有显著差异。但在二龄后到四龄各寄主的幼虫头宽差异明显。棕榈和刺葵上的幼虫头部较宽,蒲葵较窄。其幼虫体长的比较结果是:各寄主一龄幼虫的体长即表现出明显的区别,并且这种差异一直到四龄也非常明显。对于其成虫,先将其雌雄分开,并分别测量其7个不同部位的形态,结果发现:雌虫在体长、鞘翅宽、触角长上表现为刺葵上的水椰八角铁甲显著差异于另外两种寄主,棕榈与刺葵上的雌虫差异显著,海枣与棕榈、刺葵差异不显著;不同寄主对雄虫的影响情况较复杂,海枣上的雄虫的鞘翅长、触角长和体长都最大,显著差异于其他两种寄主。四种寄主上的水椰八角铁甲雌性成虫体型都略大于雄性成虫。
本文室内试验研究了水椰八角铁甲对棕榈科不同植物的选择性,分为选择试验和非选择试验。结果表明:水椰八角铁甲较多嗜食海枣、棕榈,刺葵次之,蒲葵取食量较少,国王椰子最少。幼虫和成虫规律相似。选择性取食规律与非选择试验相似,这与田间调查的结果相同。同等条件下水椰八角铁甲表现出对优良寄主的优先取食,这是首次提出。在繁殖力的选择上,试验结果表明,随着时间的推移,水椰八角铁甲在不同寄主上的选择差异逐渐明显,在24h时达到稳定,水椰八角铁甲在海枣上的产卵量最多(15.2±4.97),与刺葵、棕榈无显著差异,与蒲葵差异显著,蒲葵和刺葵、棕榈之间无明显差异。着虫数和取食量规律与产卵量选择规律相同。
本文就四种寄主心叶表面蜡质含量对其取食影响做了对比研究,结果发现水椰八角铁甲不喜欢取食的蒲葵心叶的蜡质含量最高,而其他三种心叶的蜡质含量较低。结果还发现在不超过一定蜡质含量时,蜡质含量对水椰八角铁甲的取食影响不大,超过这个值则会明显影响其取食量。去除寄主叶片蜡质后发现,对四种寄主的取食量前后差异均达到显著性相关水平,表明去除蜡质会明显影响水椰八角铁甲对寄主叶片的取食量。
在不同浓度的四种寄主乙醇粗提物对水椰八角铁甲成虫的诱集试验中,棕榈、海枣和刺葵均对水椰八角铁甲有诱集作用,分别是:棕榈,0.05gDW/ml—0.1 gDW/ml;海枣,0.5 gDW/ml;刺葵,0.4 gDW/ml;蒲葵在低浓度<0.05 gDW/ml和对照区域内聚集的成虫较多。因此可以说明,水椰八角铁甲成虫对棕榈、海枣和刺葵乙醇粗提物的辨别在寄主选择中有重要作用。水椰八角铁甲对蒲葵的选择不明显。
在以上研究的基础上,本文提出了水椰八角铁甲的寄主选择模式,并指出选用蜡质含量高的棕榈科植株作为园林树种的可行性,同时还提出可以将海枣的提纯液用于诱集农药的制造。
In this paper, the host plants of Octodonta nipae (Maulik,1921) were investigated in Fuzhou. The effects of the morphology, feeding capacity, development and fertility of O. nipae affected by different host plants were studied. Based on those, the adaptablity of O. nipae in different host plants was analysed. The relationship between the selectivity of O nipae to host waxiness content and crude extract in alcohol of interior leaves was analysed too. The selectivity mechanistic of this insect and the application of preventing Octodonta nipae harming the agriculture was discussed. The results were as follows:
The plamae plants are the main host of O. nipae. It is reported that most of the plamae plants are their host, such as Cocos nucifera, Metroxy-lon sagu, Royston earegia, Trachycarpusfortunei, Caryota ochlandra and so on. The Cocos nucifera is the main host. But in Fuzhou, Phoenix dactylifera is the main host of O. nipae. O. nipae has not been found on other plants. However, in our investigation, Livistona chinensis which was near the Phoenix dactylifera hadn’t been dangered.
Studies on the morphological shows that: Under different hosts, little difference was acquitted in the head width and body length of the first instar larva. a significant difference was acquitted in the head width from the second instar larvae to the fourth instar larvae, wider on the Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix L, narrower on Livistona chinensis. The result of body length of larvae comparison showed that significant difference between the first instar larvae and the fourth instar larvae. Seven parts of the adult were measured and compared between the male and the female respectively. The results shows the body length, elytron width and antenna length of the female insect on the Phoenixsp were remarkable difference from others; the Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix. L also had significant difference; but the Phoenix L. was a little difference between Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix dactylifera. The effect of different hosts on male insect was much more complex, the body length, elytron and antenna length of male insect are longest on Phoenix dactylifera, which was a remarkable difference to other hosts. The female adult insects were much bigger than the male under the four hosts in 7 targets.
In this paper, the selectiong of were studied in Lab, including selective experiments and non-selective experiments. The result showed that the Phoenix dactylifera and Trachycarpusfortunei were eaten by O. nipae mostly, and Phoenix L. and Livistona chinensis were the second. The selective experiments corresponded with non-selective experiments, and they were the same with the field surveys. In the same condition, the favourable host was selected by O. nipae. This conclusion was firstly suggested. On the fecundity ability selection, the results showed that the difference on the selectivity of Octodonta nipae to different hosts was increased as the time went on, it reached stable after 24 hours. The egg laying amount was the biggest on the Phoenix dactylifera (15.2±4.97) and had a little difference between the Phoenix L. and Trachycarpusfortunei, but had significant difference to Livistona chinensis. Therefore, the Livistona chinensis had a little difference between Phoenix L.and Trachycarpusfortunei. The insect amount and the feeding capacity had the same law with the egg-mass.
A comparison experiment of the waxiness content to the interior leaf of the four hosts in the feeding capacity of O. nipae was conducted, the results showed that the waxiness content of Livistona chinensis interior leaf which was disliked by Octodonta nipae was the highest; however, the others were much lower. The results already showed that the waxiness content had a little effect if lower than a certain degree; but had a significant effect after exceed the point. After removing the waxiness of the host leaf, found that the feeding capacity had a significant difference on the four hosts, this results showed that the affect of waxiness removal to feeding capacity was significant.
The experiment of O. nipae tempted by different concentrations of alcohol crude extract of four hosts showed that the Trachycarpusfortunei, Phoenix dactylifera and Phoenix L. all had the tempted effect to this insect. Trachycarpusfortunei, 0.05gDW/ml-0.1gDW/ml; Phoenix dactylifera 0.5gDW/ml; Phoenix L. 0.4gDW/ml, respectively; Livistona chinensis had many adult insects crowed both in <0.05 gDW/ml and CK. These results illustrated that distinguish to the alcohol crude extract by O. nipae was very important to the host choice from Trachycarpusfortunei, Phoenix L. and Phoenix dactylifera; it had no significant effect to the choice on Livistona chinensis.
Based on the above study, this article presented the host selection mode of O. nipae and showed the feasibility of using palm plants which had high waxiness content as landscape trees. The extract of Phoenix dactylifera could be used in tempted pesticide.manufacture.
水椰八角铁甲的寄主主要限于棕榈科植物。据报道,大多数棕榈科植物,如:椰子(Cocos nucifera)、大王椰子(Royston earegia)、棕榈(Trachycarpus fortunei)、刺葵(Phoenix roebelenii. )、蒲葵(Livistona chinensis)、省藤(Calamus ritang)等,其中椰子是最主要的寄主。其在福州地区的主要寄主为海枣(Phoenix dactylifera),而在其他棕榈科上均未发现。在调查中还发现,与受危害很重的海枣距离很近的同为棕榈科植物的蒲葵植株上却没有水椰八角铁甲危害发生。
形态学试验研究发现,不同寄主植物上的水椰八角铁甲幼虫头宽体长在一龄时没有显著差异。但在二龄后到四龄各寄主的幼虫头宽差异明显。棕榈和刺葵上的幼虫头部较宽,蒲葵较窄。其幼虫体长的比较结果是:各寄主一龄幼虫的体长即表现出明显的区别,并且这种差异一直到四龄也非常明显。对于其成虫,先将其雌雄分开,并分别测量其7个不同部位的形态,结果发现:雌虫在体长、鞘翅宽、触角长上表现为刺葵上的水椰八角铁甲显著差异于另外两种寄主,棕榈与刺葵上的雌虫差异显著,海枣与棕榈、刺葵差异不显著;不同寄主对雄虫的影响情况较复杂,海枣上的雄虫的鞘翅长、触角长和体长都最大,显著差异于其他两种寄主。四种寄主上的水椰八角铁甲雌性成虫体型都略大于雄性成虫。
本文室内试验研究了水椰八角铁甲对棕榈科不同植物的选择性,分为选择试验和非选择试验。结果表明:水椰八角铁甲较多嗜食海枣、棕榈,刺葵次之,蒲葵取食量较少,国王椰子最少。幼虫和成虫规律相似。选择性取食规律与非选择试验相似,这与田间调查的结果相同。同等条件下水椰八角铁甲表现出对优良寄主的优先取食,这是首次提出。在繁殖力的选择上,试验结果表明,随着时间的推移,水椰八角铁甲在不同寄主上的选择差异逐渐明显,在24h时达到稳定,水椰八角铁甲在海枣上的产卵量最多(15.2±4.97),与刺葵、棕榈无显著差异,与蒲葵差异显著,蒲葵和刺葵、棕榈之间无明显差异。着虫数和取食量规律与产卵量选择规律相同。
本文就四种寄主心叶表面蜡质含量对其取食影响做了对比研究,结果发现水椰八角铁甲不喜欢取食的蒲葵心叶的蜡质含量最高,而其他三种心叶的蜡质含量较低。结果还发现在不超过一定蜡质含量时,蜡质含量对水椰八角铁甲的取食影响不大,超过这个值则会明显影响其取食量。去除寄主叶片蜡质后发现,对四种寄主的取食量前后差异均达到显著性相关水平,表明去除蜡质会明显影响水椰八角铁甲对寄主叶片的取食量。
在不同浓度的四种寄主乙醇粗提物对水椰八角铁甲成虫的诱集试验中,棕榈、海枣和刺葵均对水椰八角铁甲有诱集作用,分别是:棕榈,0.05gDW/ml—0.1 gDW/ml;海枣,0.5 gDW/ml;刺葵,0.4 gDW/ml;蒲葵在低浓度<0.05 gDW/ml和对照区域内聚集的成虫较多。因此可以说明,水椰八角铁甲成虫对棕榈、海枣和刺葵乙醇粗提物的辨别在寄主选择中有重要作用。水椰八角铁甲对蒲葵的选择不明显。
在以上研究的基础上,本文提出了水椰八角铁甲的寄主选择模式,并指出选用蜡质含量高的棕榈科植株作为园林树种的可行性,同时还提出可以将海枣的提纯液用于诱集农药的制造。
In this paper, the host plants of Octodonta nipae (Maulik,1921) were investigated in Fuzhou. The effects of the morphology, feeding capacity, development and fertility of O. nipae affected by different host plants were studied. Based on those, the adaptablity of O. nipae in different host plants was analysed. The relationship between the selectivity of O nipae to host waxiness content and crude extract in alcohol of interior leaves was analysed too. The selectivity mechanistic of this insect and the application of preventing Octodonta nipae harming the agriculture was discussed. The results were as follows:
The plamae plants are the main host of O. nipae. It is reported that most of the plamae plants are their host, such as Cocos nucifera, Metroxy-lon sagu, Royston earegia, Trachycarpusfortunei, Caryota ochlandra and so on. The Cocos nucifera is the main host. But in Fuzhou, Phoenix dactylifera is the main host of O. nipae. O. nipae has not been found on other plants. However, in our investigation, Livistona chinensis which was near the Phoenix dactylifera hadn’t been dangered.
Studies on the morphological shows that: Under different hosts, little difference was acquitted in the head width and body length of the first instar larva. a significant difference was acquitted in the head width from the second instar larvae to the fourth instar larvae, wider on the Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix L, narrower on Livistona chinensis. The result of body length of larvae comparison showed that significant difference between the first instar larvae and the fourth instar larvae. Seven parts of the adult were measured and compared between the male and the female respectively. The results shows the body length, elytron width and antenna length of the female insect on the Phoenixsp were remarkable difference from others; the Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix. L also had significant difference; but the Phoenix L. was a little difference between Trachycarpusfortunei and Phoenix dactylifera. The effect of different hosts on male insect was much more complex, the body length, elytron and antenna length of male insect are longest on Phoenix dactylifera, which was a remarkable difference to other hosts. The female adult insects were much bigger than the male under the four hosts in 7 targets.
In this paper, the selectiong of were studied in Lab, including selective experiments and non-selective experiments. The result showed that the Phoenix dactylifera and Trachycarpusfortunei were eaten by O. nipae mostly, and Phoenix L. and Livistona chinensis were the second. The selective experiments corresponded with non-selective experiments, and they were the same with the field surveys. In the same condition, the favourable host was selected by O. nipae. This conclusion was firstly suggested. On the fecundity ability selection, the results showed that the difference on the selectivity of Octodonta nipae to different hosts was increased as the time went on, it reached stable after 24 hours. The egg laying amount was the biggest on the Phoenix dactylifera (15.2±4.97) and had a little difference between the Phoenix L. and Trachycarpusfortunei, but had significant difference to Livistona chinensis. Therefore, the Livistona chinensis had a little difference between Phoenix L.and Trachycarpusfortunei. The insect amount and the feeding capacity had the same law with the egg-mass.
A comparison experiment of the waxiness content to the interior leaf of the four hosts in the feeding capacity of O. nipae was conducted, the results showed that the waxiness content of Livistona chinensis interior leaf which was disliked by Octodonta nipae was the highest; however, the others were much lower. The results already showed that the waxiness content had a little effect if lower than a certain degree; but had a significant effect after exceed the point. After removing the waxiness of the host leaf, found that the feeding capacity had a significant difference on the four hosts, this results showed that the affect of waxiness removal to feeding capacity was significant.
The experiment of O. nipae tempted by different concentrations of alcohol crude extract of four hosts showed that the Trachycarpusfortunei, Phoenix dactylifera and Phoenix L. all had the tempted effect to this insect. Trachycarpusfortunei, 0.05gDW/ml-0.1gDW/ml; Phoenix dactylifera 0.5gDW/ml; Phoenix L. 0.4gDW/ml, respectively; Livistona chinensis had many adult insects crowed both in <0.05 gDW/ml and CK. These results illustrated that distinguish to the alcohol crude extract by O. nipae was very important to the host choice from Trachycarpusfortunei, Phoenix L. and Phoenix dactylifera; it had no significant effect to the choice on Livistona chinensis.
Based on the above study, this article presented the host selection mode of O. nipae and showed the feasibility of using palm plants which had high waxiness content as landscape trees. The extract of Phoenix dactylifera could be used in tempted pesticide.manufacture.
引文
曹凤勤,刘万学,范中南,等. B型烟粉虱对三种寄主植物及其挥发物的行为反应[J].昆虫学报, 2008, (08): 431-436.
陈伟,张方平,刘奎,等.不同寄主植物对橡副珠蜡蚧发育和繁殖的影响[J].热带作物学报, 2009, (1): 70-74.
陈永兵,张纯胄,胡丽秋.寄主植物对甜菜夜蛾生长发育的影响[J].昆虫知识, 1999, (6): 332-334.
褚栋,张友军,丛斌,等.世界性重要害虫B型烟粉虱的入侵机制[J].昆虫学报, 2004, (03): 1536-1543.
戴小华,尤民生,付丽君.美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择性与寄主植物叶片营养物质含量的关系[J].山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2001, (3): 311-313.
戴小华,尤民生,傅丽君.美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择性的初步研究[J].山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, (2): 202-205.
丁建清,陈志群,付卫东,等.水葫芦象甲的生物学及其寄主专一性[J].中国生物防治, 2002, (4): 153-157.
方宇凌,张钟宁.植物气味化合物对棉铃虫产卵及田间诱蛾的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2002, (1): 63-67.
高瑞桐,王宏乾,徐邦新,等.云斑天牛补充营养习性及与寄主树关系的研究[J].林业科学研究, 1995, (6): 619-623.
郭小奇,付晓伟,封洪强,等.不同寄主对中黑盲蝽(Adelphocoris suturalis)生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].生态学报, 2008, (4): 1514-1520.
郝德君,张永慧,戴华国,等.松墨天牛对寄主树木的产卵选择[J].昆虫学报, 2005, (3): 460-464.
花蕾.桃蛀果蛾在不同寄主上有关生物学特性差异的研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 1993, (2): 99-103.
黄保宏,邹运鼎,毕守东,等.朝鲜球坚蚧对8种寄主植物的产卵和取食选择性及其机制[J].植物保护学报, 2008, (1): 3875-3881.
江丽辉,王栋,刘树生.寄主植物对小菜蛾产卵选择性及菜蛾绒茧蜂寄主选择行为的影响[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2001, (3): 273-276.
金党琴,祝树德.寄主植物对烟粉虱试验种群的影响[J].植物检疫, 2005, (2): 73-76.
康敏,任静涛,苏鹏娟,等, . 3种植物提取物对马铃薯块茎蛾产卵的抑制作用[J].安徽农业科学, 2007, (10): 2858-2859.
雷慧德,岳碧松,黄良炉.湿度和寄主对黑点蚧试验种群生长的影响[J].西南农业大学学报, 1990, (4): 349-352.
李德家,刘益宁,所雅彦,等.光肩星天牛成虫在寄主选择过程中的判断机制研究[J].北京林业大学学报, 1999, (4): 28-32.
李小珍,刘映红,田艳.六种寄主植物对二点叶蝉生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2004, (8): 1431-1434.
李新岗,张克斌.影响黄斑星天牛寄主选择的因素.西北林学院学报, 1991, (1): 34-41.
李亚,程立生,彭正强.寄主植物及温度对椰心叶甲幼虫生长发育的影响.海南农业科技, 2007, (1): 2-6.
李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物叶片生长阶段对椰心叶甲幼虫生长发育的影响.热带农业科学, 2006, (5): 17-20.
李亚,程立生.椰子心叶和成熟叶片对椰心叶甲生育指标的影响.海南大学学报:自然科学版, 2009, (3): 252-255, 258.
李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2007, (9): 2050-2054.
李子玲,韦绥概,韦飚,等.寄主植物对甜菜夜蛾的发育和繁殖及体内酯酶活性的影响[J].昆虫知识, 2005, (3): 284-289.
练永国,王素琴,白树雄,等.挥发性信息化合物对玉米螟赤眼蜂寄主选择行为的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2007, (5).
梁琼超,黄法余,黄箭,等.从进境棕榈植物中截获的几种铁甲科害虫[J].植物检疫, 2002, (1): 160-161.
林克剑,吴孔明,张永军,等. B型烟粉虱成虫对五种寄主植物的取食和产卵行为[J].植物保护学报, 2008, (3): 870-877.
陆宴辉,张永军,吴孔明.植食性昆虫的寄主选择机理及行为调控策略.生态学报, 2008, (10): 5113-5122.
陆永跃,赵思华,尹楚道.寄主对棉铃虫生长发育及种群动态的影响[J].安徽农业大学学报(自然科学版), 1998, (3) : 230-235.
吕仲贤,杨樟法,胡萃.寄主植物对亚洲玉米螟取食、生长发育和生殖的影响[J].植物保护学报, 1996, (2): 126-130.
罗晨,向玉勇,郭晓军,等.寄主植物对B型烟粉虱(Bemisia tabaci)和温室粉虱(Trialeurodes vaporariorum)个体发育和种群繁殖的影响[J].生态学报, 2007, (3): 1035-1040.
潘洪玉,席景会,王旭明,等.蓼蓝齿胫叶甲寄主专食性的研究[J].中国生物防治, 2001, (2): 60-62.
庞保平,周晓榕,史丽,等.不同寄主植物对截形叶螨生长发育及繁殖的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2004, (1): 26-28.
钦俊德,王琛柱.论昆虫与植物的相互作用和进化的关系[J].昆虫学报, 2001, (3): 360-365.
钦俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[J].生物学通报, 1985, (10).
钦俊德.动物行为的生理基础[J].生物学通报, 1999, (10): 1-4.
钦俊德.近二十年来我国试验昆虫学的发展[J].昆虫学报, 2000, (3): 318-326.
钦俊德.昆虫与寄主植物的适应性及协调进化[J].生物学通报, 1996, (1): 1-3.
钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展和前景[J].动物学报, 1995, (1): 12-20.
钦俊德.诠释植食性昆虫是怎样选择食料植物的[J].生物学通报, 2003, (6): 1-3.
钦俊德.植食性昆虫食性的生理基础[J].昆虫学报, 1980, (1): 105-113.
孙江华,虞佩玉,张彦周,等.海南省新发现的林业外来入侵害虫——水椰八角铁甲[J].昆虫知识, 2003, (3): 286-287, F004.
覃伟权,余凤玉,黄山春,等.植物乙醇提取物对椰心叶甲生物活性的影响.热带作物学报, 2007, (4): 84-88.
王琛柱,钦俊德.昆虫与植物的协同进化:寄主植物-铃夜蛾-寄生蜂相互作用.昆虫知识, 2007, (3): 311-319.
文丽萍,高云霞.昆虫与寄主植物的相互关系[J].世界农业, 1995, (11): 33-35.
吴大军,杜奕华,陈秀绢,等.水椰八角铁甲的检验检疫及传入顺德的风险[J].植物检疫, 2007, (1): 25-26.
闫争亮,孙江华,张钟宁.外来入侵林业害虫强大小蠹的侵袭以及相关信息化学物质[J].昆虫知识, 2003, (05): 22-33.
余凤玉,覃伟权,李朝绪,等.不同椰子品种对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响.热带作物学报, 2009, (6): 846-850.
曾玲,周荣,崔志新,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育的影响[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, (4): 37-39.
张茂新,凌冰,梁广文.不同寄主植物对黄曲条跳甲的适合度及自然种群增长的影响[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2004, (3): 25-28.
中国科学院.海南发现外来害虫—水椰八角铁甲[J].中国生物入侵警报, 2003, 2.
AMANO K. Host Preference of the yellow striped flea beetle, Phyllotreta striolata Fab. (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. Annual Report of the Society of Plant Protection of North Japan, 1984, 35:132-135.
Bardnor, R. and K E. Fleteher 1974 Inscet infestations and their effete on the growth and yield of field crops: a review. Bull. Entmnol. Res. 64: 141-160.
Bell, E A. and B. V. Charlwood 1980 Secondary plant products. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, Vol. 8. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Bernays E. A. 1989 Insect-plant Interaction. Boca Raton, CRC Press.
BODNARYK R. P. Leaf epicuticular wax, an anticuticular factor in Brassieaeeae that affects the rate and Pattern of feeding of flea beetles,Phyllotreta crucifefae (Goeze) [J]. Canadian Journal of Plant Seinee, 1992, 72: 1295-1303.
Boeckh J. K. D. Ernest, H. Sass and U. Waldow 1984 Anatomical and physiological characteristics of inidividual neurons in the central antennal pathway of insects. J. Insect Physinl. 30: 15-26.
Boer. de, G.,V. Manduca G. Dethier, and L. M. Schoonhoven 1977 Chemoreceptor in the preoralcavity of the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta, and their possible function in feeding behavior. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 21: 287-298.
Bruce. C. T. 1920 The selection of food plants by insects, with special reference to lepidopteran larvae. Am. Na 54: 313-332.
CHOIJAESEONG. Insect Past fauna and their spatial clistribution Pattern of kale [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science Crop Protection, 1996, 38(1):489-494.
Duan J J, Prokopy R J. Control of apple maggot flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) with pesticide-treated red sphere. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1995, 88: 700-707
EDWARDS P J, Wratten S D, Ecology of Insect-Plant Interactions [M]. Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited, 1980.
Edwards, p. J. and S. D. Wratten 1986 Palatability of British trees to insects: constitutive and induced defences. Oecologia 69: 316-319.
EIGENBRODE S. D. and SHELTON A.M. Behavior of neonate diamondback moth lavae (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) on glossy-leafed resistant Brassica oleracea L [J]. Environmental Entomology, 1990, 19(5):1566-1571.
Fabre, J. H. 1886 Souvenirs entomologiques, vol. 3, Delagrave, Paris.
Farmer, E. E. and C. A. Ryan 1992 Octadecanoid precursors of jasmonic acid activate the wound-inducible proteinase inhibitors. Planet Cell 4. 129-134.
FEENY P, PAAUKE K .L. , FENWICK G.R. Flea beetles and mustard oils: host plant specificity of phylloterta cruciferae and P. striolata adults[J]. Entomology Society of Ameriea, 1970, 63(3):832-842.
Fraenkel, G. 1958 The basis of food selection in insects which feed on leaves. Invited paper, 8th Ann. Meetings, Entomol. Soc. Japan.
Fraenkel, G. 1959 The "raison d'etre" of secondary plant substances. 129: 1966-1970.
Fraley, R. et al. 1983 Expression of bacterial genes in plant cells. Proc. Acad. Sci. USA. 80: 4803-4807.
Green, T. R. and C. A. Ryan 1972 Wound induced proteinase inhibitor in plant leaves; a possible defense mechanism against insects. Science 175: 776-777.
Gressit J S. Papuan-West Polynesian Hispinae Beetles (Chrysomelidae).Pacific Insects, 1960, 2(1):8-13.
Heath R. R., Landolt P, Dueben R. Identification of floral compounds in Night-blooming Jassemine attractive to cabbage looper moths. Environ. Entomol. 1992, 21(4): 854-859.
Hilder, V. A. et al. 1987 A novel mechanism of insect resistance engineered into tobacco. Nature 330: 160-163.
Hofte, H. et al. 1986 Structural and functional analysis of a cloned delta endotoxin of Bacillus thuringumsis Berliner 1715. Eur. J. Biochem. 161: 273-280.
Kennedy, J. S. 1950 Host finding and host alternation in aphids. 8th int. Congr Entomol. (Stockholm) 423-426.
Kennedy J. S. 1965 Mechanism of host plant selection. Ann. Appl. Biol. 56: 317-322.
Khan Z R., Clepiela A., Norris D. M. Behavioral and physiological responses of cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni (Hubener) to steam distillates from resistant versus susceptible soybean plants. J. Chem. Ecol., 1987, 13 (8): 1903-1915.
Li SW. Ecological biochemistry. Beijing: BeijingUniversity Press, 2001.
Lu J, Liu S, Shelton A M. Laboratory evaluations of a wild cruciferBarbarea ulgarisas a management tool for the diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2004, 94: 509-516.
Maulik S. Proceedings of Zoological Society of London (Series A), 1937,107 (Part 2): 129~159.
Metcalf R L, Ferguson J E, Lampan R,et al. Dry cucurbitacin-containing baits for controlling diabroticite beetles(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 1987, 80: 870-875.
Mickel, C. E. and J. Standish 1947 Susceptibilty of processed soy flour and soy grits in storage to attack by Tribolium cas- tarneum. Minn. Agric. Exp. Atn. Tech. Bull. 178: 1-20.
P·F·克雷兰德,李君.寄主有效性对四纹豆象雌虫(鞘翅目、豆象科)生殖行为的影响[J].粮食储藏, 1987, (6).
Painter, R. H. 1951 Insect Resistance in Crop Plants. 520pp. Macmillian, New York.
PALANISWAMY P, LAMB R. J. Host Preferences of the flea beetles phylloterta cruciferae and P. striolata (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) for crucifer seedings [J]. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1992, 85(3):743-752.
PIVNICK K. A., et al. Response of flea beetles, Phyllotreta spp., to mustard oils and nitrils in field trapping experiments [J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1992, 18 (6):863-873.
Qin JD. The relationships between insects and plants. Beijing: Science Press, 1987.
Schoonhoven L M, van Loon J J A, DickeM. Insect-Plant Biology (2nd Edition). Oxford University Press, 2005.
Schoonhoven, L. M. 1967 Loss of hostplant specificity by Mandaca sexta after rearing on an artificial diet. Ent. exp. & appl. 10:270-2.
Shelton AM, Nault B A. Dead-end trap cropping: a technique to improvemanagement of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae).Crop Protection, 2004, 23(6): 497-503.
Stern. V. M. 1973 Economic threshold. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 18: 259-280.
STONER K. A., Density of important cabbageworms (LepidoPtera: Pieridae), cabbage aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae), and flea beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on glossy and triehome-bearing lines of Brassica oleraeea [J]. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1992,85(3):1023-1030.
SYED T.S., ABRO G.H.,陆永跃,梁广文.寄主植物对小菜蛾试验种群生物学参数的影响(英文)[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版) , 2002,(04)
Thompson J N. Evolutionary ecology of the relationship between oviposition reference and performance of offspring in phytophagous insects. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 1988, 47: 3-14.
Vaeck. M. et al. 1987 Transgenic plants protected from insect attack. Nature 325: 33-37.
Visser. J. H. 1986 Host odor perception in phytophagous insects. Ann. Rev. Eniomol. 31: 121-144.
WYLIE H. G. Factors affecting facultative diapause of Microtonus vittatae (HymenoPtera: Braconidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1980, 112:747-749.
WYLIE H. G. Oviposition and survival of three nearctic euphorine braconids in crucifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1984, 116(l): l-4.
WYLIE H. G. Posterior dispersal of eggs and larvae of Microtonus vittatae (HymenoPtera: Braconidae) in crucifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeooPtera: Chry somelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1985, 117:541-545.
WYLIE H. G., LOAN C. Five nearctic and one introduced euphorine species (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) that Parasitize adults of crueifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1984, 116:235-246.
Yan F M. Chemical Ecology. Beijing: China Science Press, 2003.
陈伟,张方平,刘奎,等.不同寄主植物对橡副珠蜡蚧发育和繁殖的影响[J].热带作物学报, 2009, (1): 70-74.
陈永兵,张纯胄,胡丽秋.寄主植物对甜菜夜蛾生长发育的影响[J].昆虫知识, 1999, (6): 332-334.
褚栋,张友军,丛斌,等.世界性重要害虫B型烟粉虱的入侵机制[J].昆虫学报, 2004, (03): 1536-1543.
戴小华,尤民生,付丽君.美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择性与寄主植物叶片营养物质含量的关系[J].山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2001, (3): 311-313.
戴小华,尤民生,傅丽君.美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择性的初步研究[J].山东农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, (2): 202-205.
丁建清,陈志群,付卫东,等.水葫芦象甲的生物学及其寄主专一性[J].中国生物防治, 2002, (4): 153-157.
方宇凌,张钟宁.植物气味化合物对棉铃虫产卵及田间诱蛾的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2002, (1): 63-67.
高瑞桐,王宏乾,徐邦新,等.云斑天牛补充营养习性及与寄主树关系的研究[J].林业科学研究, 1995, (6): 619-623.
郭小奇,付晓伟,封洪强,等.不同寄主对中黑盲蝽(Adelphocoris suturalis)生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].生态学报, 2008, (4): 1514-1520.
郝德君,张永慧,戴华国,等.松墨天牛对寄主树木的产卵选择[J].昆虫学报, 2005, (3): 460-464.
花蕾.桃蛀果蛾在不同寄主上有关生物学特性差异的研究[J].西北农林科技大学学报(自然科学版), 1993, (2): 99-103.
黄保宏,邹运鼎,毕守东,等.朝鲜球坚蚧对8种寄主植物的产卵和取食选择性及其机制[J].植物保护学报, 2008, (1): 3875-3881.
江丽辉,王栋,刘树生.寄主植物对小菜蛾产卵选择性及菜蛾绒茧蜂寄主选择行为的影响[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版), 2001, (3): 273-276.
金党琴,祝树德.寄主植物对烟粉虱试验种群的影响[J].植物检疫, 2005, (2): 73-76.
康敏,任静涛,苏鹏娟,等, . 3种植物提取物对马铃薯块茎蛾产卵的抑制作用[J].安徽农业科学, 2007, (10): 2858-2859.
雷慧德,岳碧松,黄良炉.湿度和寄主对黑点蚧试验种群生长的影响[J].西南农业大学学报, 1990, (4): 349-352.
李德家,刘益宁,所雅彦,等.光肩星天牛成虫在寄主选择过程中的判断机制研究[J].北京林业大学学报, 1999, (4): 28-32.
李小珍,刘映红,田艳.六种寄主植物对二点叶蝉生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2004, (8): 1431-1434.
李新岗,张克斌.影响黄斑星天牛寄主选择的因素.西北林学院学报, 1991, (1): 34-41.
李亚,程立生,彭正强.寄主植物及温度对椰心叶甲幼虫生长发育的影响.海南农业科技, 2007, (1): 2-6.
李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物叶片生长阶段对椰心叶甲幼虫生长发育的影响.热带农业科学, 2006, (5): 17-20.
李亚,程立生.椰子心叶和成熟叶片对椰心叶甲生育指标的影响.海南大学学报:自然科学版, 2009, (3): 252-255, 258.
李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响[J].应用生态学报, 2007, (9): 2050-2054.
李子玲,韦绥概,韦飚,等.寄主植物对甜菜夜蛾的发育和繁殖及体内酯酶活性的影响[J].昆虫知识, 2005, (3): 284-289.
练永国,王素琴,白树雄,等.挥发性信息化合物对玉米螟赤眼蜂寄主选择行为的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2007, (5).
梁琼超,黄法余,黄箭,等.从进境棕榈植物中截获的几种铁甲科害虫[J].植物检疫, 2002, (1): 160-161.
林克剑,吴孔明,张永军,等. B型烟粉虱成虫对五种寄主植物的取食和产卵行为[J].植物保护学报, 2008, (3): 870-877.
陆宴辉,张永军,吴孔明.植食性昆虫的寄主选择机理及行为调控策略.生态学报, 2008, (10): 5113-5122.
陆永跃,赵思华,尹楚道.寄主对棉铃虫生长发育及种群动态的影响[J].安徽农业大学学报(自然科学版), 1998, (3) : 230-235.
吕仲贤,杨樟法,胡萃.寄主植物对亚洲玉米螟取食、生长发育和生殖的影响[J].植物保护学报, 1996, (2): 126-130.
罗晨,向玉勇,郭晓军,等.寄主植物对B型烟粉虱(Bemisia tabaci)和温室粉虱(Trialeurodes vaporariorum)个体发育和种群繁殖的影响[J].生态学报, 2007, (3): 1035-1040.
潘洪玉,席景会,王旭明,等.蓼蓝齿胫叶甲寄主专食性的研究[J].中国生物防治, 2001, (2): 60-62.
庞保平,周晓榕,史丽,等.不同寄主植物对截形叶螨生长发育及繁殖的影响[J].昆虫学报, 2004, (1): 26-28.
钦俊德,王琛柱.论昆虫与植物的相互作用和进化的关系[J].昆虫学报, 2001, (3): 360-365.
钦俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[J].生物学通报, 1985, (10).
钦俊德.动物行为的生理基础[J].生物学通报, 1999, (10): 1-4.
钦俊德.近二十年来我国试验昆虫学的发展[J].昆虫学报, 2000, (3): 318-326.
钦俊德.昆虫与寄主植物的适应性及协调进化[J].生物学通报, 1996, (1): 1-3.
钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展和前景[J].动物学报, 1995, (1): 12-20.
钦俊德.诠释植食性昆虫是怎样选择食料植物的[J].生物学通报, 2003, (6): 1-3.
钦俊德.植食性昆虫食性的生理基础[J].昆虫学报, 1980, (1): 105-113.
孙江华,虞佩玉,张彦周,等.海南省新发现的林业外来入侵害虫——水椰八角铁甲[J].昆虫知识, 2003, (3): 286-287, F004.
覃伟权,余凤玉,黄山春,等.植物乙醇提取物对椰心叶甲生物活性的影响.热带作物学报, 2007, (4): 84-88.
王琛柱,钦俊德.昆虫与植物的协同进化:寄主植物-铃夜蛾-寄生蜂相互作用.昆虫知识, 2007, (3): 311-319.
文丽萍,高云霞.昆虫与寄主植物的相互关系[J].世界农业, 1995, (11): 33-35.
吴大军,杜奕华,陈秀绢,等.水椰八角铁甲的检验检疫及传入顺德的风险[J].植物检疫, 2007, (1): 25-26.
闫争亮,孙江华,张钟宁.外来入侵林业害虫强大小蠹的侵袭以及相关信息化学物质[J].昆虫知识, 2003, (05): 22-33.
余凤玉,覃伟权,李朝绪,等.不同椰子品种对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响.热带作物学报, 2009, (6): 846-850.
曾玲,周荣,崔志新,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育的影响[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2003, (4): 37-39.
张茂新,凌冰,梁广文.不同寄主植物对黄曲条跳甲的适合度及自然种群增长的影响[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2004, (3): 25-28.
中国科学院.海南发现外来害虫—水椰八角铁甲[J].中国生物入侵警报, 2003, 2.
AMANO K. Host Preference of the yellow striped flea beetle, Phyllotreta striolata Fab. (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. Annual Report of the Society of Plant Protection of North Japan, 1984, 35:132-135.
Bardnor, R. and K E. Fleteher 1974 Inscet infestations and their effete on the growth and yield of field crops: a review. Bull. Entmnol. Res. 64: 141-160.
Bell, E A. and B. V. Charlwood 1980 Secondary plant products. Encyclopedia of Plant Physiology, Vol. 8. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Bernays E. A. 1989 Insect-plant Interaction. Boca Raton, CRC Press.
BODNARYK R. P. Leaf epicuticular wax, an anticuticular factor in Brassieaeeae that affects the rate and Pattern of feeding of flea beetles,Phyllotreta crucifefae (Goeze) [J]. Canadian Journal of Plant Seinee, 1992, 72: 1295-1303.
Boeckh J. K. D. Ernest, H. Sass and U. Waldow 1984 Anatomical and physiological characteristics of inidividual neurons in the central antennal pathway of insects. J. Insect Physinl. 30: 15-26.
Boer. de, G.,V. Manduca G. Dethier, and L. M. Schoonhoven 1977 Chemoreceptor in the preoralcavity of the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta, and their possible function in feeding behavior. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 21: 287-298.
Bruce. C. T. 1920 The selection of food plants by insects, with special reference to lepidopteran larvae. Am. Na 54: 313-332.
CHOIJAESEONG. Insect Past fauna and their spatial clistribution Pattern of kale [J]. Journal of Agricultural Science Crop Protection, 1996, 38(1):489-494.
Duan J J, Prokopy R J. Control of apple maggot flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) with pesticide-treated red sphere. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1995, 88: 700-707
EDWARDS P J, Wratten S D, Ecology of Insect-Plant Interactions [M]. Edward Arnold (Publishers) Limited, 1980.
Edwards, p. J. and S. D. Wratten 1986 Palatability of British trees to insects: constitutive and induced defences. Oecologia 69: 316-319.
EIGENBRODE S. D. and SHELTON A.M. Behavior of neonate diamondback moth lavae (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) on glossy-leafed resistant Brassica oleracea L [J]. Environmental Entomology, 1990, 19(5):1566-1571.
Fabre, J. H. 1886 Souvenirs entomologiques, vol. 3, Delagrave, Paris.
Farmer, E. E. and C. A. Ryan 1992 Octadecanoid precursors of jasmonic acid activate the wound-inducible proteinase inhibitors. Planet Cell 4. 129-134.
FEENY P, PAAUKE K .L. , FENWICK G.R. Flea beetles and mustard oils: host plant specificity of phylloterta cruciferae and P. striolata adults[J]. Entomology Society of Ameriea, 1970, 63(3):832-842.
Fraenkel, G. 1958 The basis of food selection in insects which feed on leaves. Invited paper, 8th Ann. Meetings, Entomol. Soc. Japan.
Fraenkel, G. 1959 The "raison d'etre" of secondary plant substances. 129: 1966-1970.
Fraley, R. et al. 1983 Expression of bacterial genes in plant cells. Proc. Acad. Sci. USA. 80: 4803-4807.
Green, T. R. and C. A. Ryan 1972 Wound induced proteinase inhibitor in plant leaves; a possible defense mechanism against insects. Science 175: 776-777.
Gressit J S. Papuan-West Polynesian Hispinae Beetles (Chrysomelidae).Pacific Insects, 1960, 2(1):8-13.
Heath R. R., Landolt P, Dueben R. Identification of floral compounds in Night-blooming Jassemine attractive to cabbage looper moths. Environ. Entomol. 1992, 21(4): 854-859.
Hilder, V. A. et al. 1987 A novel mechanism of insect resistance engineered into tobacco. Nature 330: 160-163.
Hofte, H. et al. 1986 Structural and functional analysis of a cloned delta endotoxin of Bacillus thuringumsis Berliner 1715. Eur. J. Biochem. 161: 273-280.
Kennedy, J. S. 1950 Host finding and host alternation in aphids. 8th int. Congr Entomol. (Stockholm) 423-426.
Kennedy J. S. 1965 Mechanism of host plant selection. Ann. Appl. Biol. 56: 317-322.
Khan Z R., Clepiela A., Norris D. M. Behavioral and physiological responses of cabbage looper, Trichoplusia ni (Hubener) to steam distillates from resistant versus susceptible soybean plants. J. Chem. Ecol., 1987, 13 (8): 1903-1915.
Li SW. Ecological biochemistry. Beijing: BeijingUniversity Press, 2001.
Lu J, Liu S, Shelton A M. Laboratory evaluations of a wild cruciferBarbarea ulgarisas a management tool for the diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2004, 94: 509-516.
Maulik S. Proceedings of Zoological Society of London (Series A), 1937,107 (Part 2): 129~159.
Metcalf R L, Ferguson J E, Lampan R,et al. Dry cucurbitacin-containing baits for controlling diabroticite beetles(Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 1987, 80: 870-875.
Mickel, C. E. and J. Standish 1947 Susceptibilty of processed soy flour and soy grits in storage to attack by Tribolium cas- tarneum. Minn. Agric. Exp. Atn. Tech. Bull. 178: 1-20.
P·F·克雷兰德,李君.寄主有效性对四纹豆象雌虫(鞘翅目、豆象科)生殖行为的影响[J].粮食储藏, 1987, (6).
Painter, R. H. 1951 Insect Resistance in Crop Plants. 520pp. Macmillian, New York.
PALANISWAMY P, LAMB R. J. Host Preferences of the flea beetles phylloterta cruciferae and P. striolata (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) for crucifer seedings [J]. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1992, 85(3):743-752.
PIVNICK K. A., et al. Response of flea beetles, Phyllotreta spp., to mustard oils and nitrils in field trapping experiments [J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1992, 18 (6):863-873.
Qin JD. The relationships between insects and plants. Beijing: Science Press, 1987.
Schoonhoven L M, van Loon J J A, DickeM. Insect-Plant Biology (2nd Edition). Oxford University Press, 2005.
Schoonhoven, L. M. 1967 Loss of hostplant specificity by Mandaca sexta after rearing on an artificial diet. Ent. exp. & appl. 10:270-2.
Shelton AM, Nault B A. Dead-end trap cropping: a technique to improvemanagement of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae).Crop Protection, 2004, 23(6): 497-503.
Stern. V. M. 1973 Economic threshold. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 18: 259-280.
STONER K. A., Density of important cabbageworms (LepidoPtera: Pieridae), cabbage aphids (Homoptera: Aphididae), and flea beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on glossy and triehome-bearing lines of Brassica oleraeea [J]. Journal of Economic Entomology, 1992,85(3):1023-1030.
SYED T.S., ABRO G.H.,陆永跃,梁广文.寄主植物对小菜蛾试验种群生物学参数的影响(英文)[J].华南农业大学学报(自然科学版) , 2002,(04)
Thompson J N. Evolutionary ecology of the relationship between oviposition reference and performance of offspring in phytophagous insects. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 1988, 47: 3-14.
Vaeck. M. et al. 1987 Transgenic plants protected from insect attack. Nature 325: 33-37.
Visser. J. H. 1986 Host odor perception in phytophagous insects. Ann. Rev. Eniomol. 31: 121-144.
WYLIE H. G. Factors affecting facultative diapause of Microtonus vittatae (HymenoPtera: Braconidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1980, 112:747-749.
WYLIE H. G. Oviposition and survival of three nearctic euphorine braconids in crucifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1984, 116(l): l-4.
WYLIE H. G. Posterior dispersal of eggs and larvae of Microtonus vittatae (HymenoPtera: Braconidae) in crucifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeooPtera: Chry somelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1985, 117:541-545.
WYLIE H. G., LOAN C. Five nearctic and one introduced euphorine species (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) that Parasitize adults of crueifer-infesting flea beetles (ColeoPtera: Chrysomelidae) [J]. The Canadian Entomologist, 1984, 116:235-246.
Yan F M. Chemical Ecology. Beijing: China Science Press, 2003.