春季茶蚜种群动态及与茶树、食蚜蝇等天敌化学通讯联系
|
摘要
茶蚜是我国和近邻越南、缅甸等产茶国的重要茶树害虫之一。其刺吸幼嫩茶梢，排泄“蜜露”孳生烟煤病，引发茶煤病，并具有较强的迁飞习性。本文调查了春季茶蚜种群动态，探究了化学信息物质在茶树—茶蚜—食蚜蝇等天敌间的通讯效应，期望为茶蚜的无公害防治提供依据。
调查发现茶蚜在3月29日到4月13日期间种群数量急剧上升。4月3日查得茶蚜数量最高；而天敌的种群动态与茶蚜种群动态有一时滞，虫口高峰稍延迟，出现在4月8日以后。
分析计算了茶蚜天敌群落的物种丰富度、多样性指数、均匀度和优势度指数，发现群落物种丰富度由2到7变化较大。多样性指数与均匀度指数在春季呈现增长趋势，优势度指数早春较高，之后逐步降低。
计算了茶蚜及其天敌的时间、空间生态位宽度和生态位重叠。茶蚜的时间生态位较小。几种天敌中以食蚜蝇的生态位宽度最小，蜘蛛的生态位宽度最大，而与茶蚜的生态位重叠度以蜘蛛的最小，食蚜蝇的最大。龟纹瓢虫、异色瓢虫、七星瓢虫、大草蛉、中华草蛉间的差别不大。对空间生态位的研究发现茶蚜的空间生态位较低，蜘蛛的空间生态位宽度最高。而食蚜蝇的空间生态位最窄，草蛉类空间生态位宽度也偏小。几种天敌中，以食蚜蝇与茶蚜的空间生态位重叠度最大，其次为三种瓢虫。蜘蛛、中华草蛉和茶蚜的空间生态位重叠度最小。
以四臂嗅觉仪测定了有翅茶蚜对15茶树挥发物的行为反应。结果表明，在四臂嗅觉仪中有翅茶蚜对多数味源物都有明显的行为反应，当供试剂量为10~(-4)ug／ul时，对有翅茶蚜有活性的味源物为：顺-3-己烯-1-醇、乙酸顺-3-己烯酯、反-2-己烯醛、反-4-己烯-1-醇、烯丙基异硫氰酸酯、橙花醇、α-石竹烯、芳樟醇、己醛、苯甲醛、正-辛醇、水杨酸甲酯；并且，这些味源物中，除烯丙基异硫氰酸酯和α-石竹烯外，各味源物对茶蚜的作用均达到极显著水平。当供试剂量为10~(-2)ug／ul时，对有翅茶蚜有活性的物质与10~(-4)ug／ul浓度下的相同；各味源物中，除苯甲醛外，对茶蚜的引诱活性均达到极显著水平。不同味源物间的引诱作用存在显著差异。新复极差测验发现，在两种供试剂量下均以水杨酸甲酯的诱效最强。芳樟醇、α-石竹烯在不同供试剂量时各自的作用有显著差异。芳樟醇在低剂量时呈现正引诱效应，高剂量时呈现负引诱效应；α-石竹烯在10~(-2)ug／ul的作用强于10~(-4)ug／ul浓度时的作用。
采用Y形嗅觉仪，以顺-3-己烯-1-醇、乙酸顺-3-己烯酯、反-2-己烯-1-醇、
芳樟醇、反－2－己烯醛、反－4己烯－1醇、罗勒烯、香叶醇、烯丙基异硫氰酸酯、
橙花醇、O－石竹烯、己醛、苯甲醛、正－辛醇、水杨酸甲酯为味源，其中基本上
为蚜害茶梢挥发物，各设10一、分山、10一、以UI两个处理浓度，以生物测定方法检
测了它们对食蚜蝇的引诱效应。结果发现，在 10、灿山浓度时，食蚜蝇对反刁－
己烯－1－醇、芳樟醇、反－2－己烯醛、罗勒烯、香叶醇、橙花醇、正辛醇、水杨酸甲
酯有显著的趋性。在10”二g巾1浓度时，食蚜蝇对己醛和苯甲醛有显著趋性，而对
其它味源物的趋性不显著。还检测了茶蚜天敌大草蛤对上述味源物的趋性。在
10一、川浓度下，大草岭显著趋向于味源物己醛和正辛醇，对其他味源物没有明
显的行为反应。在10－h以UI浓度下，大草岭显著趋向于反上－己烯才醇、香叶醇
和己醛，而对其他昧源物没有反应。其中反－2－己烯刁醇为绿叶气味，香叶醇为单
酝类，并且在蚜害茶梢中存在。
本研究认为，茶蚜为茶树卜较转化的、趋嫩为害的、有一定迁飞习性的害虫，
春季采摘春茶时其种群数量有影响，其天敌较多。茶梢释放的顺－3－己烯－1－醇、反
－2－己烯醛等“绿叶气味”引诱茶蚜，蚜害茶梢挥发物苯甲醛、反－2－己烯醛、水杨
酸甲酯等组分显著地引诱食蚜蝇等天敌。如何有效地利用化学信息物质防治茶蚜
值得深入研究。
Tea aphid (Toxoptera aurantii Boyer) is one of the serious pests in our country and other neighboring tea-producing countries, like Vietnam and Burma. It pierces and sucks young tea shoots, and excretes honeydew infesting Neocapnadium theae Kara. Again it has a strong migrating habit. In order to find some useful method in the uncontaminated management of tea aphid, we made a continuous survey on the population dynamics of tea aphid in spring, and studied the communicating function of semiochemicals in the tritrophic level of tea plant-tea aphid-tea aphid's natural enemies.
Tea aphid's population increased sharply from March 29 to April 13. Population peak emerged around April 3. There was a time lag between the natural enemies' population and tea aphid's population. Natural enemies' population peak was found on 8 April.
Richness, diversity indices, evenness degree and dominant degree of the natural enemies' community were calculated and analyzed. Species richness of the community changed from 2 to 7. Diversity indices and evenness degree increased in spring, domination degree was high in early spring, then, decreased.
Temporal niche width, spatial niche width and the overlap of the two niches of tea aphid and its natural enemies were calculated. Temporal niche width of tea aphid was small. Spiders' temporal niche width was the greatest among all the natural enemies, however, it had the smallest niche overlap with tea aphid. Syrphids' niche overlap with tea aphid was the greatest. No significant difference among Propylaeajapoinca (Thunberg), Lets axyridis (Pallas), Coccinella septempunctata L., Chrysopa septempunctata Wesmeal and C. sinica Tjedea was found. Tea aphid had a small spatial niche width. Spiders had the greatest one among all the natural enemies, while syrphids had the smallest. Lacewings' niche width was also small. Syphids had the greatest niche overlap with tea aphids, beetles' had smaller niche overlap with tea aphid, and spiders and lacewings had the smallest niche overlap with tea aphid.
The behavioral reactions of winged tea aphid to 15 various odor sources were" tested in a four-armed olfactometer. Winged Tea aphid had significant olfactory responses to most of the odor sources in the olfactometer. At 10-4ug/ul dose level, those odor sources are: (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol acetate,
Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, (E)-4-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Aallyl isothiocyanate, Nerolidol, a -caryophyllene, Hexenal, Benzaldehyde, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. Those odor sources also have significant effects on tea aphid at 10-2ug/ul dose level. Attracting ability of different ordours varies. New multiple range test found that, among all the odor sources, Methyl Salicylate had the most significant effect on tea aphid at both of the two dose level. It was also found that the effect of Linalool and a -caryophyllene had varied effects at the two dose levels respectively. The linalool affected alatae adversely at the two consistency levels i.e. it attracted tea aphid significantly at 10-4ug/ul, while it affected tea aphid adversely at 10-2ug/ul; a -caryophyllene was found to be more attractive to alatae at 10-2ug/ul than at 10-4ug/ul.
Y-shaped olfactometer was used to test taxis of syrphid Sphaerophoria menthastri L. and lacewings to various odor sources. Those odor sources are: (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, acetate, (E)-2-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, (E)-4-hexen-l-ol, l,3,6-octatriere-3,7- dimethyl, Geraniol, Aallyl isothiocyanate, Nerol, a -caryophyllene, Hexanal, Benzaldehyde, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. Most of them are volatiles from tea aphid infested tea shoots. It was found that syrphids were attracted at 10-4ug/ul dose level to odor sources such as (E)-2-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, l,3,6-octatriere-3,7-dimethyl, Geraniol, Nerol, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. At 10-2ug/ul dose level, syrphids had significant taxis towards Hexenal and Benzaldehyde. Y-shaped olfactometer was also used to test taxis of lacewing (Chiysopa septempunctata Wesmeal), one of tea aphid's e
调查发现茶蚜在3月29日到4月13日期间种群数量急剧上升。4月3日查得茶蚜数量最高；而天敌的种群动态与茶蚜种群动态有一时滞，虫口高峰稍延迟，出现在4月8日以后。
分析计算了茶蚜天敌群落的物种丰富度、多样性指数、均匀度和优势度指数，发现群落物种丰富度由2到7变化较大。多样性指数与均匀度指数在春季呈现增长趋势，优势度指数早春较高，之后逐步降低。
计算了茶蚜及其天敌的时间、空间生态位宽度和生态位重叠。茶蚜的时间生态位较小。几种天敌中以食蚜蝇的生态位宽度最小，蜘蛛的生态位宽度最大，而与茶蚜的生态位重叠度以蜘蛛的最小，食蚜蝇的最大。龟纹瓢虫、异色瓢虫、七星瓢虫、大草蛉、中华草蛉间的差别不大。对空间生态位的研究发现茶蚜的空间生态位较低，蜘蛛的空间生态位宽度最高。而食蚜蝇的空间生态位最窄，草蛉类空间生态位宽度也偏小。几种天敌中，以食蚜蝇与茶蚜的空间生态位重叠度最大，其次为三种瓢虫。蜘蛛、中华草蛉和茶蚜的空间生态位重叠度最小。
以四臂嗅觉仪测定了有翅茶蚜对15茶树挥发物的行为反应。结果表明，在四臂嗅觉仪中有翅茶蚜对多数味源物都有明显的行为反应，当供试剂量为10~(-4)ug／ul时，对有翅茶蚜有活性的味源物为：顺-3-己烯-1-醇、乙酸顺-3-己烯酯、反-2-己烯醛、反-4-己烯-1-醇、烯丙基异硫氰酸酯、橙花醇、α-石竹烯、芳樟醇、己醛、苯甲醛、正-辛醇、水杨酸甲酯；并且，这些味源物中，除烯丙基异硫氰酸酯和α-石竹烯外，各味源物对茶蚜的作用均达到极显著水平。当供试剂量为10~(-2)ug／ul时，对有翅茶蚜有活性的物质与10~(-4)ug／ul浓度下的相同；各味源物中，除苯甲醛外，对茶蚜的引诱活性均达到极显著水平。不同味源物间的引诱作用存在显著差异。新复极差测验发现，在两种供试剂量下均以水杨酸甲酯的诱效最强。芳樟醇、α-石竹烯在不同供试剂量时各自的作用有显著差异。芳樟醇在低剂量时呈现正引诱效应，高剂量时呈现负引诱效应；α-石竹烯在10~(-2)ug／ul的作用强于10~(-4)ug／ul浓度时的作用。
采用Y形嗅觉仪，以顺-3-己烯-1-醇、乙酸顺-3-己烯酯、反-2-己烯-1-醇、
芳樟醇、反－2－己烯醛、反－4己烯－1醇、罗勒烯、香叶醇、烯丙基异硫氰酸酯、
橙花醇、O－石竹烯、己醛、苯甲醛、正－辛醇、水杨酸甲酯为味源，其中基本上
为蚜害茶梢挥发物，各设10一、分山、10一、以UI两个处理浓度，以生物测定方法检
测了它们对食蚜蝇的引诱效应。结果发现，在 10、灿山浓度时，食蚜蝇对反刁－
己烯－1－醇、芳樟醇、反－2－己烯醛、罗勒烯、香叶醇、橙花醇、正辛醇、水杨酸甲
酯有显著的趋性。在10”二g巾1浓度时，食蚜蝇对己醛和苯甲醛有显著趋性，而对
其它味源物的趋性不显著。还检测了茶蚜天敌大草蛤对上述味源物的趋性。在
10一、川浓度下，大草岭显著趋向于味源物己醛和正辛醇，对其他味源物没有明
显的行为反应。在10－h以UI浓度下，大草岭显著趋向于反上－己烯才醇、香叶醇
和己醛，而对其他昧源物没有反应。其中反－2－己烯刁醇为绿叶气味，香叶醇为单
酝类，并且在蚜害茶梢中存在。
本研究认为，茶蚜为茶树卜较转化的、趋嫩为害的、有一定迁飞习性的害虫，
春季采摘春茶时其种群数量有影响，其天敌较多。茶梢释放的顺－3－己烯－1－醇、反
－2－己烯醛等“绿叶气味”引诱茶蚜，蚜害茶梢挥发物苯甲醛、反－2－己烯醛、水杨
酸甲酯等组分显著地引诱食蚜蝇等天敌。如何有效地利用化学信息物质防治茶蚜
值得深入研究。
Tea aphid (Toxoptera aurantii Boyer) is one of the serious pests in our country and other neighboring tea-producing countries, like Vietnam and Burma. It pierces and sucks young tea shoots, and excretes honeydew infesting Neocapnadium theae Kara. Again it has a strong migrating habit. In order to find some useful method in the uncontaminated management of tea aphid, we made a continuous survey on the population dynamics of tea aphid in spring, and studied the communicating function of semiochemicals in the tritrophic level of tea plant-tea aphid-tea aphid's natural enemies.
Tea aphid's population increased sharply from March 29 to April 13. Population peak emerged around April 3. There was a time lag between the natural enemies' population and tea aphid's population. Natural enemies' population peak was found on 8 April.
Richness, diversity indices, evenness degree and dominant degree of the natural enemies' community were calculated and analyzed. Species richness of the community changed from 2 to 7. Diversity indices and evenness degree increased in spring, domination degree was high in early spring, then, decreased.
Temporal niche width, spatial niche width and the overlap of the two niches of tea aphid and its natural enemies were calculated. Temporal niche width of tea aphid was small. Spiders' temporal niche width was the greatest among all the natural enemies, however, it had the smallest niche overlap with tea aphid. Syrphids' niche overlap with tea aphid was the greatest. No significant difference among Propylaeajapoinca (Thunberg), Lets axyridis (Pallas), Coccinella septempunctata L., Chrysopa septempunctata Wesmeal and C. sinica Tjedea was found. Tea aphid had a small spatial niche width. Spiders had the greatest one among all the natural enemies, while syrphids had the smallest. Lacewings' niche width was also small. Syphids had the greatest niche overlap with tea aphids, beetles' had smaller niche overlap with tea aphid, and spiders and lacewings had the smallest niche overlap with tea aphid.
The behavioral reactions of winged tea aphid to 15 various odor sources were" tested in a four-armed olfactometer. Winged Tea aphid had significant olfactory responses to most of the odor sources in the olfactometer. At 10-4ug/ul dose level, those odor sources are: (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol acetate,
Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, (E)-4-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Aallyl isothiocyanate, Nerolidol, a -caryophyllene, Hexenal, Benzaldehyde, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. Those odor sources also have significant effects on tea aphid at 10-2ug/ul dose level. Attracting ability of different ordours varies. New multiple range test found that, among all the odor sources, Methyl Salicylate had the most significant effect on tea aphid at both of the two dose level. It was also found that the effect of Linalool and a -caryophyllene had varied effects at the two dose levels respectively. The linalool affected alatae adversely at the two consistency levels i.e. it attracted tea aphid significantly at 10-4ug/ul, while it affected tea aphid adversely at 10-2ug/ul; a -caryophyllene was found to be more attractive to alatae at 10-2ug/ul than at 10-4ug/ul.
Y-shaped olfactometer was used to test taxis of syrphid Sphaerophoria menthastri L. and lacewings to various odor sources. Those odor sources are: (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, (Z)-3-hexen-l-ol, acetate, (E)-2-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, (E)-4-hexen-l-ol, l,3,6-octatriere-3,7- dimethyl, Geraniol, Aallyl isothiocyanate, Nerol, a -caryophyllene, Hexanal, Benzaldehyde, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. Most of them are volatiles from tea aphid infested tea shoots. It was found that syrphids were attracted at 10-4ug/ul dose level to odor sources such as (E)-2-hexen-l-ol, Linalool, Trans-2-hexen-l-yl, l,3,6-octatriere-3,7-dimethyl, Geraniol, Nerol, n-octanol, Methyl Salicylate. At 10-2ug/ul dose level, syrphids had significant taxis towards Hexenal and Benzaldehyde. Y-shaped olfactometer was also used to test taxis of lacewing (Chiysopa septempunctata Wesmeal), one of tea aphid's e
引文
1．韩宝瑜．昆虫化学信息物质及其在害虫治理中的应用展望．安徽农学通报，2002，8(1)：12—13．
2．陈汉杰，邱同铎．张金勇。用性信息素加农药诱杀器防治梨小食心虫的田间试验．昆虫知识，1998，35(5)：280-284．
3．蔡双虎，程立生．昆虫性信息素的研究进展．华南热带农业大学学报，2002，8(1)：47-53．
4. Marsh D.. Responses of male aphids to the female sex pheromone in Megoura viciae Buckton. J. Entomol. Ser. A, 1975, 50: 43-64.
5. Dowson, G. W.. Identification of an aphid sex pheromone. Nature, 1987, 325: 614-616.
6．段金花，张润杰．蚜虫性信息素研究进展．昆虫天敌，2001，23(2)：80-85．
7. Boo, K. S. sex pheromone of the peach aphid, Tuberocephalus momonis, and optimal blends for trapping males and females in the field. J. Chem. Ecol., 2000, 26(3): 601-609.
8．耿文军，向余劲攻，张钟宁．蚜虫性信息素的田间引诱蚜虫试验．昆虫知识，1997，34(5)：295—297．
9．杜家纬．植物昆虫间的化学通讯及其行为控制．植物生理学报，2001，27(3)：193-200．
10 丁红建，郭予元．寄主植物它感化合物与害虫行为的关系及其利用．植物保护，1995(5)：33—36．
11．周琼，梁广文．植物挥发性物质在蚜虫寄主定位中的作用．昆虫知识，2001，38(5)：334-337．
12. Paul W. Paré and James H. Tumlinson. Plant volatiles as a defense against insect herbivores. 1999, (121): 325-331.
13．娄永根，程家安．植物-植食性昆虫-天敌三营养层次的相互作用及其研究方法．应用生态学报，1997，8(3)：325—331．
14．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．蚜虫化学生态学研究进展及展望．生态学杂志，1999，18(3)：39—45．
15．郑浩，杨长举，华红霞．与昆虫有关的植物挥发性次生物质的研究方法．昆虫知识，2002，39(1)：9—13．
16．张峰，阚炜，张钟宁．寄主植物-蚜虫-天敌三重营养关系的化学生态学研究进展．生态学报，2001，21(6)：1025—1033．
17. Visser J H and Taanman J W. Odor-conditioned anemotaxis of apterous aphids (Cryptomyzus korschelti) in response to host plants. Physiol. Entomol.,1987,12:473-479.
18. A.Quiroz and H. M. Miemeyer. Olfactometer-assessed responses of aphid Rhopalosiphum padi to wheat and oat volatiles. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1998,24(1): 113-124.
19. Pettersson J. Studies on Rhopalosiphum padi (L.). I. Laboratory studies on olfactometric responses to the winter host Prunus padus L. Lantbrukhoegsk. Ann., 1970,36:381-399.
20. Campbell C A M, Dawson G W, Griffiths D C, et al. Sex attractant pheromone of damson-hop aphid Phorodon humuli (Homoptera: Aphididae). J. Chem. Ecol., 1990,12:3455-3465.
21. Nottingham, S. F. W. Et al. Behavioural and electrophysiological responses of aphids to host and non-host plant volatiles. J. Chem. Ecol., 1992,17:1231-1242.
22. Pospisii J. Olfactory orientation of certain phytophagous insects in Cuba. Acta Entomol. Bohemoslov., 1972,69:7-17.
23．杜永均，严福顺，韩心丽．大豆蚜嗅觉在选择寄主植物中的作用．昆虫学报，1994，37(4)：385—392．
24. Tamaki G, Butt B A and Ladis B J. Arrest and aggregation of male Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 1970.63:955-960.
25. Pettersson J. Aphids and host plant communication. Symp. Bot. Uppsala,1979,22:107-113.
26. Chapman R F, Bernays E A and Simpson S J, Attraction and repulsion of the aphid, Cavariella aegopodii, by plant odors. J. Chem. Ecol.. 1981,7:881-888.
27. Reed H C, Tan S H, Haapanen K.et al. Olfactory responses of the parasitoid Diaeretiella rapae (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) to odor of plants, aphids, and plant-aphid complexes. J. Chem. Ecol., 1995.21:407-418.
28. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W. Relative importance of semiochemicals from the first and second trophic level in host foraging behavior of Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1996,22: 1591-1605.
29. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W, et al. Chemically mediated associative learning in the host
foraging behavior of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). J. Insect Behav., 1997,10:509-522.
30. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W, et al. Identification of semiochemicals released during aphid feeding that attract parasitoid Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1998,24:1355-1368.
31. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. and Tremblay E. Flight behavior of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in response to plant and host volatiles. Eur. J. Entomol.. 1993,90:415-421.
32. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. and Tremblay E. Effect of adult experience on in-flight orientation to plant and plant-host complex bolatiles in Aphidius ervi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biol. Control, 1997,10:159-165.
33. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. Powell W, et al. Induction and systemic release of herbivore-induced plant volatiles mediating in-flight orientation of Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1999, 25:1247-1261.
34. Read D P, Feeny P P and Root R B. Habitat selection by the aphid parasite Diaeretiella rapae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and hyperparasite Charips brassicae (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae). Can. Entomol.. 1970,102:1567-1578.
35. Powell W and Zhang Z-L. The reactions of two cereal aphid parasitoids, Aphidius uzbeckistanicus and A. ervi to host aphids and their food plants. Physiol. Entomol., 1983,8:439-443.
36. Turlings T C J, Bernasconi M. Bertossa R, et al. The induction of volatile emissions in maize by three herbivore species with different feeding habitats: Possible consequences for their natural enemies. Biol. Control, 1998,11:122-129.
37．向余劲攻，张广学，张钟宁．蚜虫性信息素．昆虫学报，2001，44(2)：235—242．
38. Hardie J. Nottingham S F, Powell W et al. Synthetic aphid sex pheromone lures female parasitoids. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 1991,61:97-99.
39. Hardie J. Hick A J, H(?)ller C. et al. The responses of Praon spp. Parasitoids to aphid sex pheromone components in the field. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 1994,71:95-99.
40. Powell W, Hardie J, Hick A J, et al. Responses of the parasitoid Praon volucre (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) to aphid sex pheromone lures in cereal fields in autumn: Implications for parasitoid manipulation. Eur. J. Entomol., 1993, 90:435-438.
41. Gabrys B J, Gadomski H J. Klukowski Z, et al. Sex pheromone of cabbage aphid Brevicoryne brassicae: Identification and field trapping of male aphids and parasioids. J. Chem. Ecol., 1997,23:1881-1890.
42. Lilley R, Hardie J and Wadhams L J. Field manipulation of Praon populations using semiochemicals. Norw. J. Agric. Sci. Suppl., 1994,16:221-226.
43. Glinwood R T. Powell W and Tripathi C P M. Increased parasitization of aphids on trap plants alongside vials releasing synthetic apid sex pheromone and effective range of the pheromone. Biocontrol Sci. Technol., 1998,8:607-614.
44. Glinwood R T, Du Y-J, Smiley D W M, et al. Comparative responsesof parasitoids to synthetic and plant-extracted nepetalactone component of aphid sex peromones. J. Chem. Ecol.. 1999,25:1481-1488.
45. K, S. Boo, I. B. Chung, K. S. Han, J. A. Pickett. and L. J. Wadhams. Response of the lacewing Chrysopa cognata to pheromones of its aphid prey. J. Chem. Ecol., 1998,24(4): 631-643.
46. JunWei Zhu, Allard A. Coss(?) et al. Olfactory reactions of the twelve-spotted lady beetle, Coleomegilla maculata and the green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea to semiochemicals released from their prey and host plant: electroantennogram and behavioral responses. J. Chem. Ecol. 1999,25(5): 1163-1177.
47. Nakamuta K. Aphid alarm pheromone component, (E)-β-farnesene, ad local search by a predatory lady beetle, Coccinella septempunctata bruckii Mulsant (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1991.26:1-7.
48. Strong F E. Observations on aphid cornicle secretions. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.,1967.60:668-673.
49. Callow R K, Greenway A R and Griffiths D C. Chemistry of the secretion from the cornicles of various species of aphids. J. Insect Physiol.. 1973,19:737-748.
50. Van Emden H F and Hagen K S. Olfactory reacions of the green lacewing, Chrysopa carnea, to tryptophan and certain breakdown products. Environ. Entomol., 196,5:469-473.
51. Wickremasinghe M G V and Van Emden H F. Reactions of adult female parasitoids, particularly Aphidius rhopalosiphi, to volatile cues from the host plants of their aphid
prey. Physiol. Entomol., 1992.17:297-304.
52. Bouchard Y and Cloutier C. Honeydew as a source of host-searching kairomones for the aphid parasitoid Aphidius nigripes (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae). Can. J. Zool., 1984,62:1513-1520.
53. J. P. Sutherland, M. S. Sullivan, G. M. Poppy. Oviposition behaviour and host colony size discrimination in Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2001, (91): 411-417.
54．韩宝瑜，张钟宁，方宇凌．小菜蛾对白菜挥发性次生物质的触角电生理和行为反馈．科学通报，2001，41(16)：1384—1386．
55. Han Baoyu, Zhang Zhongning, Fang Yuling. Electrophysiology and behaviour feedback of diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella, to volatile secondary metabolites emitted by Chinese cabbage. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2001,46(24):2086-2088.
56. Cheng Zong-mao. Xu Ning, Hah Bao-yu. Role of volatile allelochemicals on host location of tea pests and host foraging of natural enemies in tea ecosystem. In: Special Committee of Chemical Ecology, ESC&Shanghai Institute of Entomology, Chinese Academy of science et al. First Asia-pacific Conference on Chemical Ecology. Nov. 1-4,1999, Shanghai, China.
57．韩宝瑜．茶树—茶蚜—捕食、寄生性天敌昆虫间定位取食的物理、化学通讯机制．北京：中国农业科学院博士学位论文．1999．
58．韩宝瑜．茶蚜和蚜茧蜂触角感器的扫描电镜观察．茶业通报，2000，22(1)：25—26．
59. Han Baoyu, Chen Zongmao. Difference in probing behaviour of tea aphid on tea plant and non-host plants. Entomologia Sinica, 2000,7(3): 233-239.
60．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．异色瓢虫4变种成虫对茶和茶蚜气味行为反应．应用生态学报，2000，11(3)：413-416．
61．韩宝瑜，茶蚜体表漂洗物对多种天敌引诱活性及组分分析．昆虫学报，2001，44(4)：541-547．
62．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．蚜茧蜂对不同味源的选择性．茶叶科学，1999，19(1)：29—34．
63．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．七星瓢虫和异色瓢虫四变种成虫对茶蚜蜜露的搜索行为和蜜露的组分分析。生态学报，2000，20(3)：495-501．
64．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋，张钟宁。异色瓢虫对蚜害茶梢挥发物和蚜虫利它素EAG和行为反应。
生态学报，2001，21(12)：2131—2135．
65．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋，王梅．七星瓢虫和异色瓢虫3变种成虫触角感器扫描电镜观察．华东昆虫学报，2000，11(3)：413—416．
66．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．茶蚜在茶树不同部位上刺探行为的差异．植物保护学报，2001，28(1)：7—11．
67．韩宝瑜，张钟宁，周成松．皖南山区、丘陵和皖中平原春茶期间茶园昆虫群落结构及差异．见：李典谟主编，走向21世纪的中国昆虫学—中国昆虫学会2000年学术年会论文集，北京：中国科学技术出版社，2000，505-509．
68. Sudoi V., Jane M. Mwangi. David Kipsang. Preliminary survey of natural enemies of citrus aphid, Toxoptera aurantii(Homoptera: Aphidae), in tea at Timbilil estate, Kericho. Tea, 1996,17(2): 50-52.
69. Sudoi V., Rotich F.. The rearing of hoverfly xanthogramma aegyptium (Diptera: Syrphidae) for use as a biocontrol agent in controlling cirtrus aphids Toxoptera aurantii (Homoptera: Aphidae) in tea. Tea, 1997,18(1): 42-44.
70. Das S.C. Kakoty N.N. Biological studies on tea aphis, Toxoptera aurantii Boyer and its natural enemy complex. Two and a bud, 1992,39(1): 29-33.
71．张汉鹄，彭仁康．茶蚜天敌及其对茶蚜的控制作用．茶业通报．1984，(4)：13—18．
72．夏英三．人工助迁瓢虫控制茶蚜发生。茶叶，1989，(3)：13．
73．林丽玲，郭晨，杨生华．福建省烟田食蚜蝇科昆虫种类调查．武夷科学，2000，(16)：51—54．
74．薛宝东，高俊峰，王伟华。长白山西南坡大豆田食蚜蝇种类及幼虫对大豆蚜的控制作用．吉林农业科学，2000．2；(4)：33—34．
75．杨友兰，白素芬，王红武．山西省食蚜蝇名录．山西农业大学学报，1999，19(3)：191—194．
76．戴轩．贵州东部地区茶园的食蚜蝇．中国生物防治，1995，11(4)：184．
77. Radhakrishnan B. Muraleedharan N. Ladybird beetles in tea fields. Newsletter, UPASI TRI. 1991,1(1): 4.
78．韩宝瑜．茶园昆虫群落时空格局及多样性稳定性．茶叶科学，1997，17(1)：27—32．
79．文喜贤，詹根祥．柑橘蚜虫及天敌生态位的研究．植保技术与推广，1997，17(6)：6—8．
80. Baoyu Han, Zongmao Chen. Behavioral and electrophysiologicai responses of natural enemies to synomones from tea shoots and kairomones from tea aphids, Toxoptera aurantii. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2002, 23(11):2203-2219.
81. B. Y. Hah, Z. M. Chen. Composition of the volatiles from intact and mechanically pierced and tea aphid-tea shoot complexes and their attraction to natural enemies of the tea aphid. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2002, 50(9): 2571-2575.
82. Bao-yu Hah, Zong-mao chen. Composition of the volatiles from intact and tea aphid-damaged tea shoots and their allurement to several natural enemies of the tea aphid. Journal of Applied Entomology, 2002, 126(9): 497-500.
83. Torbj(?)rn Norin. Pheromones and kairomones for control of pest insects. Some current results from a Swedish research program. Pure Appl. Chem., 2001,73(3): 607-612.
84．李桂亭，邹运鼎，周夏芝等．干扰作用及空间异质性对大草蛉雄成虫捕食作用的影响．应用生态学报，2002，13(4)：433—434．
85．邹运鼎，李桂亭，周夏芝等．饥饿对大草蛉雄成虫捕食作用的影响．应用生态学报，2000，11(6)：848—850．
86．罗佑珍，李学燕。黑带食蚜蝇对烟蚜的捕食功能反应．云南农业大学学报，2000，15(2)：109-111．
87．刘勇．小麦—麦蚜—天敌互作关系研究．杭州．浙江大学博士学位论文，2001．
88. Bao Yu Han. ZongMao Chen. Behavioral and electrophysiological responses of natural enemies to synomones from tea shoots and kairomones from tea aphids, Toxoptera aurantii. J. Chem. Ecol., 2002,28(11): 2203-2219.
89. J. P. Sutherland, M. S. Sullivan, G. M. Poppy. Oviposition behavior and host colony size discrimination in Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2001 (91):411-417.
90．李学燕，罗佑珍．大灰食蚜蝇对3种蚜虫的捕食作用研究．云南农业大学学报，2001，16(2)：102—110．
91. Paré, P. W. and Tumlison, J. Plant volatile signals in response to herbivore feeding. Florida Entomologist., 1996,79(2):93-103.
92．杨广，尤民生。植食者取食诱导植物产生互益素的研究．生态学杂志，1998，17(6)：33—39．
2．陈汉杰，邱同铎．张金勇。用性信息素加农药诱杀器防治梨小食心虫的田间试验．昆虫知识，1998，35(5)：280-284．
3．蔡双虎，程立生．昆虫性信息素的研究进展．华南热带农业大学学报，2002，8(1)：47-53．
4. Marsh D.. Responses of male aphids to the female sex pheromone in Megoura viciae Buckton. J. Entomol. Ser. A, 1975, 50: 43-64.
5. Dowson, G. W.. Identification of an aphid sex pheromone. Nature, 1987, 325: 614-616.
6．段金花，张润杰．蚜虫性信息素研究进展．昆虫天敌，2001，23(2)：80-85．
7. Boo, K. S. sex pheromone of the peach aphid, Tuberocephalus momonis, and optimal blends for trapping males and females in the field. J. Chem. Ecol., 2000, 26(3): 601-609.
8．耿文军，向余劲攻，张钟宁．蚜虫性信息素的田间引诱蚜虫试验．昆虫知识，1997，34(5)：295—297．
9．杜家纬．植物昆虫间的化学通讯及其行为控制．植物生理学报，2001，27(3)：193-200．
10 丁红建，郭予元．寄主植物它感化合物与害虫行为的关系及其利用．植物保护，1995(5)：33—36．
11．周琼，梁广文．植物挥发性物质在蚜虫寄主定位中的作用．昆虫知识，2001，38(5)：334-337．
12. Paul W. Paré and James H. Tumlinson. Plant volatiles as a defense against insect herbivores. 1999, (121): 325-331.
13．娄永根，程家安．植物-植食性昆虫-天敌三营养层次的相互作用及其研究方法．应用生态学报，1997，8(3)：325—331．
14．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．蚜虫化学生态学研究进展及展望．生态学杂志，1999，18(3)：39—45．
15．郑浩，杨长举，华红霞．与昆虫有关的植物挥发性次生物质的研究方法．昆虫知识，2002，39(1)：9—13．
16．张峰，阚炜，张钟宁．寄主植物-蚜虫-天敌三重营养关系的化学生态学研究进展．生态学报，2001，21(6)：1025—1033．
17. Visser J H and Taanman J W. Odor-conditioned anemotaxis of apterous aphids (Cryptomyzus korschelti) in response to host plants. Physiol. Entomol.,1987,12:473-479.
18. A.Quiroz and H. M. Miemeyer. Olfactometer-assessed responses of aphid Rhopalosiphum padi to wheat and oat volatiles. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 1998,24(1): 113-124.
19. Pettersson J. Studies on Rhopalosiphum padi (L.). I. Laboratory studies on olfactometric responses to the winter host Prunus padus L. Lantbrukhoegsk. Ann., 1970,36:381-399.
20. Campbell C A M, Dawson G W, Griffiths D C, et al. Sex attractant pheromone of damson-hop aphid Phorodon humuli (Homoptera: Aphididae). J. Chem. Ecol., 1990,12:3455-3465.
21. Nottingham, S. F. W. Et al. Behavioural and electrophysiological responses of aphids to host and non-host plant volatiles. J. Chem. Ecol., 1992,17:1231-1242.
22. Pospisii J. Olfactory orientation of certain phytophagous insects in Cuba. Acta Entomol. Bohemoslov., 1972,69:7-17.
23．杜永均，严福顺，韩心丽．大豆蚜嗅觉在选择寄主植物中的作用．昆虫学报，1994，37(4)：385—392．
24. Tamaki G, Butt B A and Ladis B J. Arrest and aggregation of male Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 1970.63:955-960.
25. Pettersson J. Aphids and host plant communication. Symp. Bot. Uppsala,1979,22:107-113.
26. Chapman R F, Bernays E A and Simpson S J, Attraction and repulsion of the aphid, Cavariella aegopodii, by plant odors. J. Chem. Ecol.. 1981,7:881-888.
27. Reed H C, Tan S H, Haapanen K.et al. Olfactory responses of the parasitoid Diaeretiella rapae (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) to odor of plants, aphids, and plant-aphid complexes. J. Chem. Ecol., 1995.21:407-418.
28. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W. Relative importance of semiochemicals from the first and second trophic level in host foraging behavior of Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1996,22: 1591-1605.
29. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W, et al. Chemically mediated associative learning in the host
foraging behavior of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). J. Insect Behav., 1997,10:509-522.
30. Du Y-J, Poppy G M, Powell W, et al. Identification of semiochemicals released during aphid feeding that attract parasitoid Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1998,24:1355-1368.
31. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. and Tremblay E. Flight behavior of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi(Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in response to plant and host volatiles. Eur. J. Entomol.. 1993,90:415-421.
32. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. and Tremblay E. Effect of adult experience on in-flight orientation to plant and plant-host complex bolatiles in Aphidius ervi (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Biol. Control, 1997,10:159-165.
33. Guerrieri E, Pennacchio F. Powell W, et al. Induction and systemic release of herbivore-induced plant volatiles mediating in-flight orientation of Aphidius ervi. J. Chem. Ecol., 1999, 25:1247-1261.
34. Read D P, Feeny P P and Root R B. Habitat selection by the aphid parasite Diaeretiella rapae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and hyperparasite Charips brassicae (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae). Can. Entomol.. 1970,102:1567-1578.
35. Powell W and Zhang Z-L. The reactions of two cereal aphid parasitoids, Aphidius uzbeckistanicus and A. ervi to host aphids and their food plants. Physiol. Entomol., 1983,8:439-443.
36. Turlings T C J, Bernasconi M. Bertossa R, et al. The induction of volatile emissions in maize by three herbivore species with different feeding habitats: Possible consequences for their natural enemies. Biol. Control, 1998,11:122-129.
37．向余劲攻，张广学，张钟宁．蚜虫性信息素．昆虫学报，2001，44(2)：235—242．
38. Hardie J. Nottingham S F, Powell W et al. Synthetic aphid sex pheromone lures female parasitoids. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 1991,61:97-99.
39. Hardie J. Hick A J, H(?)ller C. et al. The responses of Praon spp. Parasitoids to aphid sex pheromone components in the field. Entomol. Exp. Appl., 1994,71:95-99.
40. Powell W, Hardie J, Hick A J, et al. Responses of the parasitoid Praon volucre (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) to aphid sex pheromone lures in cereal fields in autumn: Implications for parasitoid manipulation. Eur. J. Entomol., 1993, 90:435-438.
41. Gabrys B J, Gadomski H J. Klukowski Z, et al. Sex pheromone of cabbage aphid Brevicoryne brassicae: Identification and field trapping of male aphids and parasioids. J. Chem. Ecol., 1997,23:1881-1890.
42. Lilley R, Hardie J and Wadhams L J. Field manipulation of Praon populations using semiochemicals. Norw. J. Agric. Sci. Suppl., 1994,16:221-226.
43. Glinwood R T. Powell W and Tripathi C P M. Increased parasitization of aphids on trap plants alongside vials releasing synthetic apid sex pheromone and effective range of the pheromone. Biocontrol Sci. Technol., 1998,8:607-614.
44. Glinwood R T, Du Y-J, Smiley D W M, et al. Comparative responsesof parasitoids to synthetic and plant-extracted nepetalactone component of aphid sex peromones. J. Chem. Ecol.. 1999,25:1481-1488.
45. K, S. Boo, I. B. Chung, K. S. Han, J. A. Pickett. and L. J. Wadhams. Response of the lacewing Chrysopa cognata to pheromones of its aphid prey. J. Chem. Ecol., 1998,24(4): 631-643.
46. JunWei Zhu, Allard A. Coss(?) et al. Olfactory reactions of the twelve-spotted lady beetle, Coleomegilla maculata and the green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea to semiochemicals released from their prey and host plant: electroantennogram and behavioral responses. J. Chem. Ecol. 1999,25(5): 1163-1177.
47. Nakamuta K. Aphid alarm pheromone component, (E)-β-farnesene, ad local search by a predatory lady beetle, Coccinella septempunctata bruckii Mulsant (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1991.26:1-7.
48. Strong F E. Observations on aphid cornicle secretions. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.,1967.60:668-673.
49. Callow R K, Greenway A R and Griffiths D C. Chemistry of the secretion from the cornicles of various species of aphids. J. Insect Physiol.. 1973,19:737-748.
50. Van Emden H F and Hagen K S. Olfactory reacions of the green lacewing, Chrysopa carnea, to tryptophan and certain breakdown products. Environ. Entomol., 196,5:469-473.
51. Wickremasinghe M G V and Van Emden H F. Reactions of adult female parasitoids, particularly Aphidius rhopalosiphi, to volatile cues from the host plants of their aphid
prey. Physiol. Entomol., 1992.17:297-304.
52. Bouchard Y and Cloutier C. Honeydew as a source of host-searching kairomones for the aphid parasitoid Aphidius nigripes (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae). Can. J. Zool., 1984,62:1513-1520.
53. J. P. Sutherland, M. S. Sullivan, G. M. Poppy. Oviposition behaviour and host colony size discrimination in Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2001, (91): 411-417.
54．韩宝瑜，张钟宁，方宇凌．小菜蛾对白菜挥发性次生物质的触角电生理和行为反馈．科学通报，2001，41(16)：1384—1386．
55. Han Baoyu, Zhang Zhongning, Fang Yuling. Electrophysiology and behaviour feedback of diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella, to volatile secondary metabolites emitted by Chinese cabbage. Chinese Science Bulletin, 2001,46(24):2086-2088.
56. Cheng Zong-mao. Xu Ning, Hah Bao-yu. Role of volatile allelochemicals on host location of tea pests and host foraging of natural enemies in tea ecosystem. In: Special Committee of Chemical Ecology, ESC&Shanghai Institute of Entomology, Chinese Academy of science et al. First Asia-pacific Conference on Chemical Ecology. Nov. 1-4,1999, Shanghai, China.
57．韩宝瑜．茶树—茶蚜—捕食、寄生性天敌昆虫间定位取食的物理、化学通讯机制．北京：中国农业科学院博士学位论文．1999．
58．韩宝瑜．茶蚜和蚜茧蜂触角感器的扫描电镜观察．茶业通报，2000，22(1)：25—26．
59. Han Baoyu, Chen Zongmao. Difference in probing behaviour of tea aphid on tea plant and non-host plants. Entomologia Sinica, 2000,7(3): 233-239.
60．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．异色瓢虫4变种成虫对茶和茶蚜气味行为反应．应用生态学报，2000，11(3)：413-416．
61．韩宝瑜，茶蚜体表漂洗物对多种天敌引诱活性及组分分析．昆虫学报，2001，44(4)：541-547．
62．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．蚜茧蜂对不同味源的选择性．茶叶科学，1999，19(1)：29—34．
63．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．七星瓢虫和异色瓢虫四变种成虫对茶蚜蜜露的搜索行为和蜜露的组分分析。生态学报，2000，20(3)：495-501．
64．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋，张钟宁。异色瓢虫对蚜害茶梢挥发物和蚜虫利它素EAG和行为反应。
生态学报，2001，21(12)：2131—2135．
65．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋，王梅．七星瓢虫和异色瓢虫3变种成虫触角感器扫描电镜观察．华东昆虫学报，2000，11(3)：413—416．
66．韩宝瑜，陈宗懋．茶蚜在茶树不同部位上刺探行为的差异．植物保护学报，2001，28(1)：7—11．
67．韩宝瑜，张钟宁，周成松．皖南山区、丘陵和皖中平原春茶期间茶园昆虫群落结构及差异．见：李典谟主编，走向21世纪的中国昆虫学—中国昆虫学会2000年学术年会论文集，北京：中国科学技术出版社，2000，505-509．
68. Sudoi V., Jane M. Mwangi. David Kipsang. Preliminary survey of natural enemies of citrus aphid, Toxoptera aurantii(Homoptera: Aphidae), in tea at Timbilil estate, Kericho. Tea, 1996,17(2): 50-52.
69. Sudoi V., Rotich F.. The rearing of hoverfly xanthogramma aegyptium (Diptera: Syrphidae) for use as a biocontrol agent in controlling cirtrus aphids Toxoptera aurantii (Homoptera: Aphidae) in tea. Tea, 1997,18(1): 42-44.
70. Das S.C. Kakoty N.N. Biological studies on tea aphis, Toxoptera aurantii Boyer and its natural enemy complex. Two and a bud, 1992,39(1): 29-33.
71．张汉鹄，彭仁康．茶蚜天敌及其对茶蚜的控制作用．茶业通报．1984，(4)：13—18．
72．夏英三．人工助迁瓢虫控制茶蚜发生。茶叶，1989，(3)：13．
73．林丽玲，郭晨，杨生华．福建省烟田食蚜蝇科昆虫种类调查．武夷科学，2000，(16)：51—54．
74．薛宝东，高俊峰，王伟华。长白山西南坡大豆田食蚜蝇种类及幼虫对大豆蚜的控制作用．吉林农业科学，2000．2；(4)：33—34．
75．杨友兰，白素芬，王红武．山西省食蚜蝇名录．山西农业大学学报，1999，19(3)：191—194．
76．戴轩．贵州东部地区茶园的食蚜蝇．中国生物防治，1995，11(4)：184．
77. Radhakrishnan B. Muraleedharan N. Ladybird beetles in tea fields. Newsletter, UPASI TRI. 1991,1(1): 4.
78．韩宝瑜．茶园昆虫群落时空格局及多样性稳定性．茶叶科学，1997，17(1)：27—32．
79．文喜贤，詹根祥．柑橘蚜虫及天敌生态位的研究．植保技术与推广，1997，17(6)：6—8．
80. Baoyu Han, Zongmao Chen. Behavioral and electrophysiologicai responses of natural enemies to synomones from tea shoots and kairomones from tea aphids, Toxoptera aurantii. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 2002, 23(11):2203-2219.
81. B. Y. Hah, Z. M. Chen. Composition of the volatiles from intact and mechanically pierced and tea aphid-tea shoot complexes and their attraction to natural enemies of the tea aphid. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 2002, 50(9): 2571-2575.
82. Bao-yu Hah, Zong-mao chen. Composition of the volatiles from intact and tea aphid-damaged tea shoots and their allurement to several natural enemies of the tea aphid. Journal of Applied Entomology, 2002, 126(9): 497-500.
83. Torbj(?)rn Norin. Pheromones and kairomones for control of pest insects. Some current results from a Swedish research program. Pure Appl. Chem., 2001,73(3): 607-612.
84．李桂亭，邹运鼎，周夏芝等．干扰作用及空间异质性对大草蛉雄成虫捕食作用的影响．应用生态学报，2002，13(4)：433—434．
85．邹运鼎，李桂亭，周夏芝等．饥饿对大草蛉雄成虫捕食作用的影响．应用生态学报，2000，11(6)：848—850．
86．罗佑珍，李学燕。黑带食蚜蝇对烟蚜的捕食功能反应．云南农业大学学报，2000，15(2)：109-111．
87．刘勇．小麦—麦蚜—天敌互作关系研究．杭州．浙江大学博士学位论文，2001．
88. Bao Yu Han. ZongMao Chen. Behavioral and electrophysiological responses of natural enemies to synomones from tea shoots and kairomones from tea aphids, Toxoptera aurantii. J. Chem. Ecol., 2002,28(11): 2203-2219.
89. J. P. Sutherland, M. S. Sullivan, G. M. Poppy. Oviposition behavior and host colony size discrimination in Episyrphus balteatus (Diptera: Syrphidae). Bulletin of Entomological Research, 2001 (91):411-417.
90．李学燕，罗佑珍．大灰食蚜蝇对3种蚜虫的捕食作用研究．云南农业大学学报，2001，16(2)：102—110．
91. Paré, P. W. and Tumlison, J. Plant volatile signals in response to herbivore feeding. Florida Entomologist., 1996,79(2):93-103.
92．杨广，尤民生。植食者取食诱导植物产生互益素的研究．生态学杂志，1998，17(6)：33—39．