Cassida rubiginosa Muller 1776
Cassida rubiginosa Müller, 1776 Identification. Live adults of C. rubiginosa are vivid green on dorsal surface, often with yellowish elytral margins, and are black underneath. This green pigment is ephemeral, and dried specimens preserved in collections quickly turn brownish. Its medium size (6-8 mm...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Text |
| Language: | unknown |
| Published: |
Zenodo
2008
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6228615 https://zenodo.org/record/6228615 |
| Summary: | Cassida rubiginosa Müller, 1776 Identification. Live adults of C. rubiginosa are vivid green on dorsal surface, often with yellowish elytral margins, and are black underneath. This green pigment is ephemeral, and dried specimens preserved in collections quickly turn brownish. Its medium size (6-8 mm), confused elytral punctures, and the vivid light green color make adults recognizable immediately, even by non-experts (Fig. 1). The first instar larva was described and illustrated by Świçtojańska (2004). Egg bursters are absent (Cox 1994 a). The mature larva was described by Paterson (1931, sub Cassida viridis ) and illustrated by Peterson (1951). It can be identified using the key to species of the British cassidine larvae (Van Emden 1962). Descriptions and illustrations of the pupa of C. rubiginosa , are found in Paterson (1931) ( sub C. viridis ) and Palij & Klepikova (1957). A key, including C. rubiginosa , is provided by Palij & Klepikova (1957). History and distribution. Cassida rubiginosa was first discovered in North America in 1902 in Lévis, near Québec City, where beetles were observed to be defoliating burdock ( Arctium minus (Hill.) Bernh., Asteraceae) (Fyles 1902, 1903; Roy 1902). Schaeffer (1903, 1904a, 1904 b) contributed to clarify its identity. It was subsequently reported by Brown (1940) on burdock, in Montréal, at Knowlton and Brome in the Eastern Townships of Québec, and in Shediac, New Brunswick. The species is now widely established both across Canada from Alberta east to New Brunswick, and in the United States from Maine south to Virginia and west through Ohio to Wisconsin and South Dakota (Riley et al. 2003). In the Old World, it is found throughout continental Europe (not yet recorded in the Netherlands) from Fennoscandia south through the Baltic republics to Greece and Spain, in Great Britain, and across Siberia to the northern Far East of Russia (Audisio 2005 b). Biology. Cassida rubiginosa has been well studied in Europe by Kleine (1917 a) and Kosior (1975). In Eastern Canada, C. rubiginosa is found in habitats where Canada thistle and burdocks grow, such as agriculture lands, pastures, abandoned fields, sparsely wooded meadows, neglected orchards, clear cut areas, or similar open and/or disturbed habitats. The species is univoltine in Ontario and Québec (LeSage, personal observations), in Virginia (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 a), and very likely so in the Maritime Provinces. Hibernation is in the adult stage. In Poland, Kosior (1975) observed a migration of adults from thistles to forest floor litter in the fall. In Virginia, Spring & Kok (1999) found that leaf litter was the preferred hibernaculum of field caged adults, and inability to access preferred hibernating locations combined with fluctuating winter temperatures may result in the survival of less that one in four beetles. Adults leave their winter shelters in early spring. The earliest specimens in the Canadian National Collection (CNC) were collected on April 2 in southern Ontario and on May 15 in the Ottawa area. The earliest adults collected in the Maritime Provinces are from May 31 (Kentville, Nova Scotia). Females began to oviposit between mid-March and April in Virginia (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 a). In Europe, Kosior (1975) stated that oviposition started 3-7 days after mating according to temperature, day length, rain, and wind. Eggs are usually laid on the underside of the leaves, more rarely on the upper surface, and sporadically on the stem. Ward & Pienkowski (1978 a) referring to the midrib, observed that 74 % of the oöthecae were deposited on the abaxial surface, and 18 % on the adaxial surface. The number of eggs in oöthecae is variable but is usually three, although oöthecae with only one egg are not rare (Kosior 1975). In Virginia, Ward & Pienkowski (1978 a) found an average of 4.6 eggs per oötheca, and Spring & Kok (1997) found an average of 61.1 oöthecae laid per individual female over a 15 -week period. In Maryland, Tipping (1993) observed that many oöthecae were laid on leaves closest to the soil. In laboratory rearing, the fecundity averaged 815 eggs per female; eggs hatched in two weeks at 18 °C, in four days above 32 °C (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 a). The egg-laying period lasted 12 weeks (Kosior 1975). The eggs are usually laid on the lower surface of the leaves. Each egg is enclosed in secretion which turns from whitish to brown in about ten minutes, and finally, the oötheca is closed with a layer of excreta (Engel 1935; Bibolini 1973). Excremental coverings are thought to conceal eggs or act as physical or chemical barriers to repel natural enemies (Muir & Sharp 1904; Damman & Cappucino 1991; Olmstead 1996). Egg deposition, coverings, and oviposition were reviewed by Hilker (1994), Olmstead (1994), and Selman (1994). Damman & Cappucino (1991), who studied this form of double defense (egg clumping and excrement cover) in the hispine Microrhopala vittata (Fabricius), found that the fecal covering significantly reduced egg mortality. Since the parasites generally attacked the bottom egg, and while the predators rarely penetrated the fecal covering, egg masses were virtually protected against all natural enemies likely to pose a threat. Such a protection can be expected in Cassida rubiginosa which also lays small oöthecae of a few eggs (Kosior 1975; Ward & Pienkowski 1978 a). There are five larval instars in C. rubiginosa , each one easy to recognize by its exuviae attached to the caudal fork together with excrement. In addition to the shield and fork, the larvae possess lateral spines, or scoli, that are used as sensory organs, and when they are stimulated the shield is moved to cover the body (Olmstead 1996). This distinctive structure, made of dried exuviae and accumulated fecal wastes, attracted the attention of early naturalists (ex. Réaumur 1737)."Stercoraceous parasol" (Walsh & Riley 1869), "faeces pack" (Rabaud 1915 b), and "frass mask" (Engel 1935), were used to described this structure but the term "fecal shield" popularized by Eisner et al. (1967) is now in use. The smallest exuviae (first instar) is attached at the extremity of the fork, the largest at base, each sliding on the branches of the new fork after each molt (Rabaud 1915 b). As the larvae feed again, the newly produced faeces accumulate behind the previous ones. Consequently, the fecal shield grows and moves forward at each molt with the result that before pupation, this pack contains the whole series of exuviae and all the faeces produced by the larvae during their life (Rabaud 1915 b). The shield is also highly maneuverable and can be moved to cover areas of the body that are stimulated (Olmstead 1994). The anus is extrudable. Consequently, it can be projected and curved over the back and, through the aid of the fork and of some of the lateral spines, it forms the protective fecal shield (Walsh & Riley 1869). The role of the shield has been the subject of several hypotheses. According to Frisch (1720), cited by Engel (1935), the fecal shield protects the body from rain and pests, while for Huber (1846) and others, it is a protective shelter from insolation, but this assumption was recently rejected (Bacher & Luder 2005). Larvae covered with their fecal shield are similar to droppings which may confuse large predators like birds, but not insect predators. For Eisner et al. (1967), ants are undoubtedly among its chief natural enemies. They were always seen foraging in large numbers in the dense herbage that included the beetle's host plants. Confronted with the inanimate shield rather than with the body of the larvae, they were quick to lose interest in such potential prey. Larvae deprived of their shield were bitten and killed, or carried away live into ant nests. On the other hand, these authors noted that the shield did not protect larvae from all predators. For instance, tests with a lycosid spider invariably resulted in the larvae being killed, an observation already made by Engel (1935) with the larvae of Cassida viridis Linnaeus. Engel (1935) also stated that the violent movements of the larvae when disturbed actually constitute a protection insofar as they chase away enemies. According to Franz (1941), the shield can protect against parasites although its effectiveness is not absolute. Eisner et al. (1967) argued that the fecal shield of C. rubiginosa larvae was effective in deterring ants in laboratory tests. Vencl et al. (1999) found that shields were necessary for the survival of the larvae of Plagiometriona clavata (Fabricius) and that the chemicals derived from their nightshade host plant ( Solanum dulcamara L.) formed a deterrent barrier against the ant ( Formica subsericea Say) attacks. They concluded that the incorporation of deterrent metabolites in shield defenses represented responses to selection from invertebrate predators. The role of these allelochemicals from host plants and other antipredator devices was reviewed by Blum (1994). Olmstead & Denno (1992) estimated that the cost of bearing fecal shields was minimal. Being made of recycled waste products, fecal shields provide an inexpensive mode of protection from certain natural enemies. Tipping (1993) noticed that smaller larvae were very susceptible to generalist predators, especially coccinellids. However, Olmstead & Denno (1993) observed that predators with short mandibles, such as coccinellids, were effectively deterred by the larval shields of cassidines whereas nabids and pentatomids with long piercing mouthparts easily circumvented the shield defense. Consequently, a particular kind of defense does not provide complete protection against generalist predators in natural habitats. Müller (2002) found that feeding by the lacewing larvae Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens, 1836) was not influenced by fecal shields, and concluded that the effectiveness of shields of tansy-feeding cassidine larvae ( C. denticollis and C. stigmatica ) varied with predators and might be based more on mechanical than on chemical modes of action. Shields also proved to be useless against the paper wasp Polistes domidulus Christ and ultraviolet radiation (Bacher & Luder 2005). Larvae of C. rubiginosa are not very mobile and tend to remain on the same ramet throughout their development. The main larval feeding activity is postponed to a period when the nitrogen content of the leaves had dropped to 50 % of its initial value, but when the host plant biomass had increased by 30 % (Obermaier & Zwölfer 1999). Early-season larval feeding had no measurable effect on Canada thistle growth while late-season feeding significantly reduced shoot growth (Bacher & Schwab 2000). When full grown, the larvae discard their load of excrement and exuviae, attach their last 2-3 ventral abdominal segments to the plant by means of a sticky secretion, and pupate there. The preferred site for pupation is along the midrib of leaves or on the main plant stalk (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 a). According to these authors, the pupation period averaged 9.6 days at 17.8°C and 3.5 days at 32.5°C. In Germany, adults of the new generation appear in mid-July onwards with a peak in late August (Obermaier & Zwölfer 1999), an emergence period that roughly corresponds to what we have observed in Eastern Canada. Larvae and adults do not eat leaves from the edges but attack them from a surface, usually the upper face. Rabaud (1915 a) stated that the under face remained untouched but this is true only for younger larvae. Adults and larger larvae can skeletonize and severely damage the leaves (Batra et al. 1981). According to Koji & Nakamura (2006) in Japan, the population of C. rubiginosa was characterized by a high density of over-wintered adults and a low variability in annual population density for both over-wintered and new adults. This exceptional stability for a herbivorous insect population was attributed to the longevity of the adults, some being still alive after three years. Parasitism. Parasitism of Chrysomelidae by Hymenoptera and Diptera was extensively reviewed by Cox (1994 b), and this topic is treated in detail for several European Cassida species, including C. rubiginosa , by Kosior (1975). The following paragraphs primarily concern the North American populations. According to Tschanz et al. (2005), the degree of exposure of C. rubiginosa larvae on plants had a significant effect on predation but the rate of parasitism was equal on exposed or hidden plants. Ten years after the release of this cassidine in southwestern Virginia, Ang & Kok (1995) estimated that parasitism and incomplete development were two major mortality factors. In North America, six species of parasitoids have already been identified from larvae and pupae of C. rubiginosa, but none from eggs and adults (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 b; Tipping 1993; Ang & Kok 1995; Olmstead 1996). In Europe, Girault (1914) reported the hymenopteran eulophid Oomyzus gallerucae Fonscolombe ( sub Tetracampe galerucae Jonsc.) as an egg parasite but questioned its identity. Delucchi (1960) listed the mymarid Anaphes pannonica Soyka as an egg parasite of C. rubiginosa . According to Muir & Sharp (1904), the fecal covering of the oöthecae do not protect against parasites. Tetrastichus rhosaces (Walker) is a gregarious obligate European eulophid endoparasitoid of the larvae and pupae (Kaufmann 1933; Graham 1991). According to Ward & Pienkowski (1975, 1978b), it is the most important parasitoid of C. rubiginosa in North America, accounting for 14.2-23.8% of the total parasitism. The numbers of parasites reached an average of 9.9 per host, most of them being commonly located in the anal or cephalic regions. In larvae, signs of parasitism were not evident until the last larval instar when parasitized larvae showed a noticeable discoloration. Affected pupae became slightly darker. Tipping (1993) did not find it in Maryland in his field study of C. rubiginosa on Canada thistle. Ang & Kok (1995) assumed that the Aprostocetus sp. collected by them in southwestern Virginia was T. rhosaces which parasitized up to 9 % of the larvae and as much as 96 % of the pupae. The endoparasitoid solitary tachinid fly, Eucelatoria dimmocki Aldrich, accounted for 2.7-7.5% of the total parasitism in a study of the parasites in northern Virginia (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 b), 0-2 % in southwestern Virginia (Ang & Kok 1995), and 19.5% in Maryland (Tipping 1993). It is a native polyphagous parasitoid of larvae and pupae which has been previously recorded from several other cassidine hosts including Chelymorpha cassidea (Fabricius), Plagiometriona clavata (Fabricius, sub Deloyala clavata ), Charidotella sexpunctata bicolor (Fabricius, sub Metriona bicolor ), and Agroiconota bivittata (Say, sub Metriona bivittata ) (Aldrich 1932; Stearns 1933). Ward & Pienkowski (1978 b) measured only 0.7-2.1% of parasitism by the hymenopteran chalcidid Conura albifrons (Walsh, sub Spilochlacis albifrons ). It is a polyphagous, solitary endoparasitoid. In North America, Musesebeck et al. (1951) and Peck (1963) listed 38 other hosts in 14 families in 4 orders. This chalcid is also a hyperparasite of Tachinidae and Braconidae (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 b). Tipping (1993) reported that Conura side (Walker, sub Spilochalcis side ) emerged from 1.4% of the pupae. It is another polyphagous, solitary endoparasitoid with at least 45 known hosts, mostly Lepidoptera (Peck 1963). In western Virginia, this parasitoid ( sub Cornura torvina (Walsh)) appeared late in the season and accounted for the second highest rate of parasitism with 0-8 % of the pupae parasitized (Ang & Kok 1995). The hymenopteran eupelmid Macroneura vesicularis (Retzius, sub Eupelmella vesicularis ) is another polyphagous, solitary endoparasitoid, but of negligible importance in C. rubiginosa . Its level of parasitism in this species did not exceed 0.1% (Ward & Pienkowski 1978 b). At least 70 additional hosts, in various orders and families, are known for this parasitoid (Muesebeck et al. 1951; Krombein 1958; Peck 1963). In their two-year study of the parasites of C. rubiginosa , Ward & Pienkowski (1978 b) recovered only one individual of the solitary ichneumonid, Itoplectis conquisitor (Say). In Maryland, it accounted for 1.4% of the total parasitism (Tipping 1993). In southern Virginia, it was found at all sites but without exceeding 2 % of the hosts affected (Ang & Kok 1995). This solitary parasite is polyphagous with over 100 hosts recorded in North America (Muesebeck et al. 1951; Krombein 1958; Peck 1963; Krombein & Burks 1967). Parasitic nematodes are known but not yet reported in North America. In Europe, Hexamermis sp. (96 %) is the most important parasite of larvae and pupae, whereas Mermis sp. (2 %) and Agamermis sp. (2 %) (Mermithidae) are occasionally found; adults were primarily parasitized by Mermis sp. (84 %) and Hexamermis (15 %) (Kosior 1975). Loktin & Ivanova (1970), using suspensions of Neoaplectana sp. (Steinernematidae) larvae, killed 33-60 % of the larvae of C. rubiginosa in the field. Predation. Very little is known about the predators of C. rubiginosa in North America, although the subject has been well treated in Europe (Kosior 1975; Olmstead 1996). In Virginia, Ward & Pienkowski (1978 b) reported that the phalangiid Leiobunum sp., the reduviids Arilus sp. and Sinea diadema (Fabricius), the pentatomid Podisus maculiventris (Say), and the neuropteran chrysopid Chrysoperla ( sub Chrysopa ) carnea (Stephens) fed on C. rubiginosa in the field but did not specify the life stage preyed upon. In Maryland, Olmstead & Denno (1993) studied the predation of some mandibulate, piercing/sucking, and chelicerate predators of Charidotella sexpunctata bicolor (Fabricius) and of Deloyala guttata (Olivier). The selected mandibulate predators were the coccinellid beetles Coleomegilla maculata (DeGeer), Coccinella septempunctata Linnaeus, and the carabid Lebia fuscata Dejean. Geocoris punctipes (Say) was a short rostrum species whereas the heteropteran nabid Nabis americoferus Carayon, and P. m a c u l i v e n t r i s had long beak. For the chelicerate predators, two spiders were selected: Oxyopes salticus Hentz (Oxyopidae) and a Phidippus sp. (Salticidae). The larvae were protected against the short mandibulate coccinellids but not from haustellate bugs which could pierce the shield or insert their long rostrum under the shield and feed. All these predators are generalists and common in the Northeast. Consequently, they are very likely to prey on C. rubiginosa larvae as well. Research on insect predators of C. rubiginosa is currently ongoing in Europe. In Switzerland Schenk & Bacher (2002) estimated that the : Published as part of Majka, Christopher G. & Lesage, Laurent, 2008, Introduced leaf beetles of the Maritime Provinces, 7: Cassida rubiginosa Müller and Cassida flaveola Thunberg (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), pp. 37-56 in Zootaxa 1811 on pages 38-46, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.182782 : {"references": ["Swictojanska, J. (2004) Comparative description of first instar larvae of Cassida stigmatica Suffrian, 1844 and Cassida rubiginosa Muller, 1776 (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae: Cassidinae). Annales Zoologici, 54, 427 - 438.", "Cox, M. (1994 a) Egg bursters in the Chrysomelidae, with a review of their occurrence in Chrysomeloidea (Coleoptera). In: Jolivet, P. H., Cox, M. L. & Petitpierre, E. (Eds.), Novel aspects of the biology of the Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 75 - 110.", "Paterson, N. F. (1931) Studies on the Chrysomelidae. - Part II. The bionomics and comparative morphology of the early stages of certain Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera, Phytophaga). Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, 3, 879 - 948.", "Peterson, A. (1951) Larvae of insects. Part II. Coleoptera, Diptera, Neuroptera, Siphonaptera, Mecoptera, Trichoptera. Edwards Brothers, Inc., Columbus, Ohio. 416 pp.", "Van Emden, H. F. (1962) Key to species of British Cassidinae larvae (Col. Chrysomelidae). The Entomologists Monthly Magazine, 98, 33 - 36.", "Palij, V. F. & Klepikova, P. I. (1957) [Cassids (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae) of the central Black Earth area of the RSFSR, their economic importance and the description of the pupae of the most common species]. Entomologicheskoe obozrenie, 36, 75 - 95. (in Russian).", "Fyles, T. W. (1902) A tortoise beetle new to Quebec. The Canadian Entomologist, 34 (9), 273 - 274.", "Fyles, T. W. (1903) Cassida thoracica ou viridis? Le Naturaliste canadien, 10, 22 - 23.", "Roy, E. (1902) Encore un. Le Naturaliste canadien, 29, 145 - 149.", "Schaeffer, C. (1903) [The newly discovered Cassida viridis from Canada: Proceedings of the New York Entomological Society, Meeting of January 6, 1903]. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 11, 113.", "Schaeffer, C. (1904 a) [A correction to the minutes about a Cassida from Canada. Proceedings of the New York Entomological Society, Meeting of October 6, 1903]. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 12, 60.", "Schaeffer, C. (1904 b) [Some notes on Coleoptera. Proceedings of the New York Entomological Society, Meeting of April 19, 1904]. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 12, 258.", "Brown, W. J. (1940) Notes on the American distribution of some species of Coleoptera common to the European and North American continents. The Canadian Entomologist, 72, 65 - 78.", "Riley, E. G., Clark, S. M., & Seeno, T. N. (2003) Catalog of the leaf beetles of America north of Mexico. Coleopterists Society Special Publication No. 1, 290 pp.", "Audisio, P. (2005 b) Cassida rubiginosa Muller, 1776. Fauna Europea, version 1.3. Available from http: // www. faunaeur. org / (accessed 1 September 2007).", "Kleine, von R., (1917 a) Cassidenstudien III. Uber Cassida rubiginosa Mull. Entomologische Blatter, 13, 63 - 73.", "Kosior, A. (1975) Biology, ecology, and economic importance of cassids (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae, Cassidinae) of the Ojcow National Park. Acta Zoologica Cracoviensia, 20, 251 - 393.", "Ward R. H. & Pienkowski, R. L. (1978 a) Biology of Cassida rubiginosa, a thistle-feeding shield beetle. Annals of the Entomological Society of America, 71, 585 - 591.", "Spring, A. & Kok, L. T. (1999) Winter survival of Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a biological control agent of Canada thistle. Journal of Entomological Science, 34, 489 - 493.", "Spring, A. & Kok, L. T. (1997) Field studies on the reproductive capacity and development of Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on musk and Canada thistles. Population Ecology, 26, 876 - 881.", "Tipping, P. W. (1993) Field studies with Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in Canada thistle. Environmental Entomology, 22, 1402 - 1407.", "Engel, H. (1935) Biologie und Okologie von Cassida viridis L. Zeitschrift fur die Morphologie und Okologie der Tiere, 30, 41 - 96.", "Bibolini, C. (1973) Contributo alla conoscenza dei crisomelidi italiani (Coleoptera - Chrysomelidae). Frustula Entomologica, 11, 1 - 220.", "Muir, F. & Sharp, D. (1904) On the egg-cases and early stages of some Cassididae. Transactions of the Entomological Society of London, (1904), 1 - 23.", "Damman, H. & Cappucino, N. (1991) Two forms of egg defence in a chrysomelid beetle: egg clumping and excrement cover. Ecological Entomology, 16, 163 - 167.", "Olmstead, K. L. (1996) Cassidine defenses and natural enemies. In: Jolivet, P. H. A. & Cox, M. L. (Eds.), Chrysomelidae Biology. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, pp. 3021.", "Hilker, M. (1994) Egg deposition and protection of eggs in the Chrysomelidae. In: Jolivet, P. H., Cox, M., & Petitpierre, E. (Eds.), Novel aspects of the biology of the Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 263 - 276.", "Selman, B. J. (1994) Eggs and oviposition in chrysomelid beetles. In: Jolivet P. H., Cox, M. L., & Petitpierre E. (Eds.), Novel aspects of the biology of Chrysomelidae, pp. 69 - 74.", "Reaumur, R. A. F., de (1737) Memoires pour servir a l'histoire des insectes. Septieme memoire. Des vers ou teignes qui se couvrent de leurs excremens. Paris, De l'Imprimerie Royale. Tome troisieme, 219 - 244.", "Walsh, D. B. & Riley, C. V. (1869) Insects infesting the sweet-potato. The American Entomologist and Botanist, 2, 234 - 238.", "Rabaud, E. (1915 b) Notes sommaires sur la biologie des Cassides (Col.) II. Le cycle evolutif; les mues et le paquet d'excrements. Bulletin de la Societe entomologique de France, [1915], pp. 209 - 212.", "Eisner, T., van Tassell, E., & Carrel, J. E. (1967) Defensive use of a \" fecal shield \" by a beetle larva. Science, 158, 1471 - 1473.", "Frisch, J. L. (1720) Beschreibung von allerley Insekten in Teutschland. Berlin, Nicolai. Band 4, Series 30.", "Huber, J. P. (1846) Memoire pour servir a l'histoire de quelques Cassides. Memoires de la Societe de physique et d'histoire naturelle de Geneve, 2, 177 - 185.", "Bacher, S. & Luder, S. (2005) Picky predators and the function of the faecal shield of a cassidine larva. Functional Ecology, 19, 263 - 272.", "Franz, J. 1941. Der grune Schildkafer, Cassida viridis L., als Schadling der Pfefferminz in Bayern. Anzeiger fur Schadlingskunde, 17, 37 - 41.", "Vencl, F. V., Timothy, C., Morton, C., Mumma, R. O., & Schultz, J. C. (1999) Shield defence of a larval tortoise beetle. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 25, 549 - 566.", "Blum, M. S. (1994) Antipredator devices in larvae of the Chrysomelidae: a unified synthesis for defensive eclecticism. In: Jolivet, P. H., Cox, M. L., & E. Petitpierre (Eds.), Novel Aspects of the biology of the Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 277 - 288.", "Olmstead, K. L. & Denno, R. F. (1992) Cost of shield defense for tortoise beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Ecological Entomology, 17, 237 - 143.", "Olmstead, K. L. & Denno, R. F. (1993) Effectiveness of tortoise beetle larval shields against different predator species. Ecology, 74, 1394 - 1405.", "Muller, C. (2002) Variation in the effectiveness of abdominal shields of cassidine larvae against predators. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 102, 191 - 198.", "Obermaier, E. & Zwolfer, H. (1999) Plant quality or quantity? Host exploitation strategies in three Chrysomelidae species associated with Asteraceae host plants. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 92, 165 - 177.", "Bacher, S. & Schwab, F. (2000) Effect of herbivore density, timing of attack, and plant community on performance of creeping thistle Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. (Asteraceae). Biocontrol Science and Technology, 10 (3), 343 - 352.", "Rabaud, E. (1915 a) Notes sommaires sur la biologie des Cassides (Col.) I. Mode de ponte et d'alimentation. Bulletin de la Societe entomologique de France, [1915], 196 - 198.", "Batra, S. W. T., Coulson, J. R., Dunn, P. H., & Boldt, P. E. (1981) Insects and fungi associated with Carduus thistles (Compositae). United States Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin, 1616, 1 - 100.", "Koji, S. & Nakamura, K. (2006) Seasonal fluctuation, age structure, and annual changes in a population of Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) in a natural habitat. Ecology and Population Biology, 99, 292 - 299.", "Cox, M. (1994 b) The Hymenoptera and Diptera parasitoids of Chrysomelidae. In: Jolivet, P. H., Cox, M. L. & Petitpierre, E. (Eds), Novel aspects of the biology of the Chrysomelidae. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 419 - 468.", "Tschanz, B., Schmid, E., & Bacher, S. (2005) Host plant exposure determines larval vulnerability - do prey females know? Functional Ecology, 19, 391 - 395.", "Ward R. H. & Pienkowski, R. L. (1978 b) Mortality and parasitism of Cassida rubiginosa, a thistle-feeding shield beetle accidentally introduced into North America. Environmental Entomology, 7, 536 - 540.", "Girault, A. A. (1914) Host of insect egg-parasites in Europe, Asia, Africa and Australasia, with a supplementary American list. Zeitschrift fur wissenschaftliche Insektenbiologie Berlin, 10, 87 - 91.", "Delucchi, V. (1960) Liste d'identification No. 3 (Presentee par le secretariat du Service d'identification des entomophages). Entomophaga, 5: 3337 - 3353.", "Kaufmann, O. (1933) Der glanastreifige Schildkafer (Cassida nobilis L.) nebst einigen Bermerkungen urber den nebligen Schilkafer (Cassida nebulosa L.). Arbeiten aus der biologischen Abteilung fur Land-u Forstwirstschaft, 20, 457 - 516.", "Graham, M. W. R. de V. (1991) A reclassification of the European Tetrastichinae (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae): revision of the remaining genera. Memoirs of the American Entomological Institute, 49, 1 - 322.", "Ward R. H. & Pienkowski, R. L. (1975) Cassida rubiginosa Muller (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a potential biocontrol agent of thistles in Virginia. Journal of the New York Entomological Society, 83, 247.", "Aldrich, J. M. (1932) Records of dipterous insects of the family Tachinidae reared by the late George Dimmock, with description of one new species and notes on the genus Anetia Robineau-Desvoidy. Proceedings of the United States National Museum, 2920, 1 - 8.", "Stearns, L. A. (1933) Observations on the biology and control of Metriona bivittata Say. Journal of Economic Entomology, 26, 151 - 154.", "Peck, O. (1963) A catalog of the Nearctic Chalciodoidea (Insecta: Hymenoptera). The Canadian Entomologist Supplement, 30, 1 - 1092.", "Muesebeck, C. F., Krombein, K. V. & Townes, H. K. (1951) Hymenoptera of America north of Mexico. USDA Agriculture Monograph No. 2. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 1420 pp.", "Krombein, K. V. (1958) Hymenoptera of America North of Mexico Synoptic Catalog. Agriculture Monograph No. 2, First Supplement. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. 305 pp.", "Krombein, K. V. & Burks, B. D. (1967) Hymenoptera of America north of Mexico. USDA Agriculture Monograph No. 2, Second Supplement. United States Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C. 584 pp.", "Loktin, Yu. G. & Ivanova, S. G. (1970) [A parasitic nematode - Neoaplectana - in the control of insect pests]. Trudy Sakhalin Oblast St Zashchity Rast, 1, 55 - 56. (in Russian).", "Schenk, D. & Bacher, S. (2002) Functional response of a generalist insect predator to one of its prey species in the field. Journal of Animal Ecology, 71, 524 - 531.", "Schenk, D. & Bacher, S. (2004) Detection of shield beetle remains in predators using a monoclonal antibody. Journal of Applied Entomology, 128, 273 - 278.", "Clark, S. M., LeDoux, D. G, Seeno, T. N., Riley, E. G., Gilbert, A. J., & Sullivan, J. M. (2004) Host plants of leaf beetle species occurring in the United States and Canada (Coleoptera: Megalopodidae, Orsodacnidae and Chrysomelidae, excluding Bruchinae). Coleopterists Society Special Publication, 2, 1 - 476.", "Zwolfer, H. & Eichhorn, O. (1966) The host ranges of Cassida spp. (Col. Chrysomelidae) attacking Cynareae (Compositae) in Europe. Zeitschrift fur angewandte Entomologie, 58, 384 - 397.", "Wilcox, J. A. (1954) The leaf beetles of Ohio (Chrysomelidae: Coleoptera). Bulletin of the Ohio Biological Survey, 43, 353 - 506.", "Wilcox, J. A. (1979) Leaf beetle host plants in Northeastern North America (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). North American Beetle Fauna Project. The Biological Research Institute of America, Inc. World Natural History Publications, Marlton, New Jersey. 30 pp.", "Chagnon, G. (1917) A preliminary list of the insects of the province of Quebec. Part III - Coleoptera. Supplement to Report of the Quebec Society for the Protection of Plants, pp. 161 - 277.", "Chagnon, G. (1939) Contribution a l'etude des Coleopteres de la province de Quebec. Le Naturaliste canadien, 66, 1 - 16.", "Chagnon, G. (1940) Contribution a l'etude des Coleopteres de la province de Quebec. Departement de biologie de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal. 385 pp.", "Chagnon, G. & Robert, A. (1962) Principaux coleopteres de la province de Quebec. Les Presses de l'Universite de Montreal, Montreal. 440 pp.", "Maw, M. G. (1976) An annotated list of insects associated with Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) in Canada. The Canadian Entomologist, 108, 235 - 244.", "Hacker, J. D. (1977 a) A chrysomelid beetle (Cassida rubiginosa). Cooperative Plant Pest Report, 2 (26), 520.", "Hacker, J. D. (1977 b) A chrysomelid beetle (Cassida rubiginosa). Cooperative Plant Pest Report, 2 (26), 597.", "Batra, S. W. T. (1978) Carduus thistle distribution and biological control in the Northeastern States. Biological control of thistle in the genus Carduus in the United States - A progress report, pp. 18 - 22.", "Peschken, D. P. (1984 a) Host range of Lema cyanella (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), a candidate for biocontrol of Canada thistle, and of four stenophagous, foreign thistle insects in North America. The Canadian Entomologist, 116, 1377 - 1384.", "Erskine, D. S. (1960) Plants of Prince Edward Island. Canada Department of Agriculture Research Branch, Publication 1088. Ottawa, Ontario. 270 pp.", "Hinds, H. R. (1986) Flora of New Brunswick. Primrose Press, Fredericton, N. B. 460 pp.", "Roland, A. E. (1998) Roland's Flora of Nova Scotia. Revised by M. Zinck. Nova Scotia Museum, Halifax, Nova Scotia. 1297 pp.", "Holm, L. G., Plucknett, D. L., Pancho, J. V., & Herberger, J. P. (1977) T he World's Worst Weeds: Distribution and Biology.", "Hays, S. M. (1991) Ten weeds we could live without. Agricultural Research, June 1991, 4 - 9.", "White, R. E. (1996) Leaf beetles as biological control agents against injurious plants in North America. In: Jolivet, P. H. A. & Cox, M. L. (Eds.), Chrysomelidae Biology, vol. 2: Ecological Studies. SPB Academic Publishing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 373 - 399.", "Kok, L. T. (1998) Biological control of musk and plumeless thistles. Recent Research Development in Entomology, 2, 33 - 45.", "Julien, M. H. & Griffiths, M. W. (1998) Biological control of weeds: A world catalogue of agents and target weeds. Fourth Edition. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK. 223 pp.", "McLeod J. H. (1962) A review of the biological control attempts against insects and weeds in Canada. Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Farnham Royal, England. Technical Communication No. 2. 216 pp.", "Harris, P. & Zwolfer, H. (1971) 29. Carduus acanthoides L., welted thistle, and C. nutans L., nodding thistle (Compositae). In: Corbet, P. S. (Ed.), Biological control programmes against insects and weeds in Canada 1959 - 1968. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau, Farnham, England, pp. 76 - 79.", "Peschken, D. P. (1971) 30. Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop., Canada thistle (Compositae). In: Corbet, P. S. (Ed.), Biological control programmes against insects and weeds in Canada 1959 - 1968. Commonwealth Agricultural Bureau, Farnham, England, pp. 79 - 83.", "Harris, P. & Wilkinson, A. T. S. (1984) Cirsium vulgare (Savi) Ten., Bull Thistle (Compositae). In: J. S. Kelleher & Hulme, M. A. (Eds.), Biological programmes against insects and weeds in Canada 1969 - 1980. Commonwealth Agriculture Bureau, Farnham, England, pp. 147 - 153.", "Peschken. D. P. (1984 b) Cirsium arvense (L.) Scop. Canada Thistle (Compositae). In: Kelleher, J. S. & Hulme, M. A. (Eds.), Biological programmes against insects and weeds in Canada 1969 - 1980. Commonwealth Agriculture Bureau, Farnham, England, pp. 139 - 146.", "Zwolfer, H. (1969) Experimental feeding ranges of species of Chrysomelidae (Col.) associated with Cynareae (Compositae) in Europe. Technical Bulletin, Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, 12, 115 - 130.", "Kok, L. T. (1978) Status of biological control of musk thistle in Virginia. Biological control of thistles in the genus Carduus in the United States - A progress report. pp. 23 - 30.", "Kok, L. T. (1979) Biological control of Carduus thistles in northeastern U. S. A. Proceedings of the 4 th International Symposium on Biological Control of Weeds. pp. 101 - 104.", "Forsyth, S. F. & Watson, A. K. (1985) Stress inflicted by organism on Canada thistle. Proceedings of the VI International Symposium on Biological Control of weeds. pp. 425 - 431.", "Cartwright, B. O. (1984) Response of Carduus thistles to three biological control agents. Dissertation Abstracts, 45, 57.", "Tipping, P. W. (1992) The impact of three insect herbivores on seed production of musk thistle (Carduus thoermeri). Maryland Entomologist, 3, 155 - 159.", "Cartwright, B. & Kok, L. T. (1990) Feeding by Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and the effects of defoliation on growth of musk thistles. Journal of Entomological Science, 25, 538 - 547.", "Liu, Z., Clay, S. A., & Brinkman, M. (2000) Biological control of Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) in South Dakota. Proceedings of the South Dakota Academy of Sciences, 79, 21 - 34.", "Reed, C. C., Larson, D. L., & Larson, J. L. (2006) Canada thistle biological control agents on two South Dakota wildlife refuges. Natural Areas Journal, 26, 47 - 52.", "Ang, B. N., Kok, L. T., Holtzman, G. I., & Wolf, D. D. (1994) Competitive growth of Canada thistle, tall fescue and crownvetch in the presence of a thistle defoliator, Cassida rubiginosa Muller (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Biological Control, 4, 277 - 284.", "Kok, L. T. & Abad, R. G. (1994) Transmission of Puccinia carduorum by the musk thistle herbivores, Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), Trichosirocalus horridus and Rhinocyllus conicus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Journal of Entomological Science, 29, 186 - 191.", "Baudoin, A. B. A. M., Abad, R. G., Kok, L. T., & Bruckart, W. L. (1993) Field evaluation of Puccinia carduorum for biological control of musk thistle. Biological control, 3, 53 - 60.", "Kok, L. T., Abad, R. G., & Baudoin, A. B. A. M. (1996) Effects of Puccinia carduorum on musk thistle herbivores. Biological Control, 6, 123 - 129.", "Kok, L. T. (2001) Classical biological control of nodding and plumeless thistles. Biological Control, 21, 206 - 213.", "Kluth, S., Kruess, A., & Tscharntke, T. (2001) Herbivore Insekten als Ubertrager pflanzenpathogener Pilze - schadet oder nutzt der Pilz den Herbivoren? Mitteilungun der Deutschen Gesellschaft fur allgemeine und angewandte Entomologie, 13, 61 - 64.", "Kluth, S., Kruess, A., & Tscharntke, T. (2002) Insects as vectors of plant pathogens: mutualistic and antagonistic interactions. Oecologia, 133, 193 - 199.", "Majka, C. G. & LeSage, L. (2006) Introduced leaf beetles of the Maritime Provinces, 1: Sphaeroderma testaceum (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Proceedings of the Entomological Society of Washington, 108, 243 - 247."]} |
|---|