New insights into oviposition preference of 5 Trichogramma species
Up and to the light: intra- and interspecific variability of photo- and geo-tactic oviposition preferences in genus Trichogramma
Insects exhibit a great diversity of life-history traits that often vary not only between species but also between populations of the same species (Flatt and Heyland, 2011). A better understanding of the variation in these traits can be of paramount importance when it comes to species of economic and agricultural interest (Wilby and Thomas, 2002). In particular, the control of the development and expansion of agricultural pests generally requires a good understanding of the parameters that favour the reproduction of these pests and/or the reproduction of the species used to control them (Bianchi et al., 2013; Gäde and Goldsworthy, 2003).
Parasitoid wasps of the genus Trichogramma are a classic example of insects involved in pest control (Smith, 1996). This genus comprises over 200 species worldwide, which have been used to control populations of a wide range of lepidopteran pests since the 1900s (Flanders, 1930; Hassan, 1993). Despite its common use, the egg-laying preference of this genus is only partially known. For example, all Trichogramma species are often thought to have positive phototaxis (or negative geotaxis) (e.g. Brower & Cline, 1984; van Atta et al., 2015), but comprehensive studies simultaneously testing this (or other) parameter among Trichogramma species and populations remain rare.
This is exactly the aim of the present study (Burte et al., 2021). Using a new experimental approach based on automatic image analysis, the authors compared the photo- and geo-tactic oviposition preference among 5 Trichogramma species from 25 populations. Their results first confirm that most Trichogramma species and populations prefer light to shade, and higher to lower positions for oviposition. Interestingly, they also reveal that the levels of preference for light and gravity show inter- and intraspecific variation (probably due to local adaptation to different strata) and that both preferences tend to relax over time.
Overall, this study provides important information for improving the use of Trichogramma species as biological agents. For example, it may help to establish breeding lines adapted to the microhabitat and/or growing parts of plants on which agricultural pests lay eggs most. Similarly, it suggests that the use of multiple strains with different microhabitat selection preferences could lead to better coverage of host plants, as well as a reduction in intraspecific competition in the preferred parts. Finally, this study provides a new methodology to efficiently and automatically study oviposition preferences in Trichogramma, which could be used in other insects with a particularly small size.
Bianchi, F. J. J. A., Schellhorn, N. A. and Cunningham, S. A. (2013). Habitat functionality for the ecosystem service of pest control: reproduction and feeding sites of pests and natural enemies. Agricultural and Forest Entomology, 15, 12–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-9563.2012.00586.x
Burte V., Perez G., Ayed F., Groussier G., Mailleret L, van Oudenhove L. and Calcagno V. (2021). Up and to the light: intra- and interspecific variability of photo-and geo-tactic oviposition preferences in genus Trichogramma. bioRxiv, 2021.03.30.437671, ver. 4 peer-reviewed and recommended by PCI Zoology. https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.30.437671
Brower, J. H. and Cline, L. D. (1984). Response of Trichogramma pretiosum and T. evanescens to Whitelight, Blacklight or NoLight Suction Traps. The Florida Entomologist, 67, 262–268. https://doi.org/10.2307/3493947
Flanders, S. E. (1930). Mass production of egg parasites of the genus Trichogramma. Hilgardia, 4, 465–501. https://doi.org/10.3733/hilg.v04n16p465
Flatt, T. and Heyland, A. (2011). Mechanisms of life history evolution: the genetics and physiology of life history traits and trade-offs. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199568765.001.0001
Gäde, G. and Goldsworthy, G. J. (2003). Insect peptide hormones: a selective review of their physiology and potential application for pest control. Pest Management Science, 59, 1063–1075. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.755
Hassan, S. A. (1993). The mass rearing and utilization of Trichogramma to control lepidopterous pests: Achievements and outlook. Pesticide Science, 37, 387–391. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2780370412
Smith, S. M. (1996). Biological Control with Trichogramma : Advances, Successes, and Potential of Their Use. Annual Review of Entomology, 41, 375–406. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.41.010196.002111
van Atta, K. J., Potter, K. A. and Woods, H. A. (2015). Effects of UV-B on Environmental Preference and Egg Parasitization by Trichogramma Wasps (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Journal of Entomological Science, 50, 318–325. https://doi.org/10.18474/JES15-09.1
Wilby, A. and Thomas, M. B. (2002). Natural enemy diversity and pest control: patterns of pest emergence with agricultural intensification. Ecology Letters, 5, 353–360. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1461-0248.2002.00331.x
Joel Meunier (2021) New insights into oviposition preference of 5 Trichogramma species. Peer Community in Zoology, 100008. 10.24072/pci.zool.100008
Evaluation round #1
DOI or URL of the preprint: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.30.437671
Author's Reply, 06 Jul 2021
Decision by Joel Meunier, 11 May 2021
Dear Dr Calcagno,
I have received the detailed comments of two reviewers on your manuscript entitled “Up and to the light: intra- and interspecific variability of photo- and geo-tactic oviposition preferences in genus Trichogramma". As you will see, both reviewers liked your study. I agree with them, in that your manuscript is pleasant to read and provides useful, novel and interesting data about the egg-laying behaviour of Trichogramma wasps.
Having said that, the reviewers raise numerous points that need to be addressed to improve the clarity of the text and strengthen the conclusions. Among them, I would like to stress the importance to provide more details about the lab rearing conditions of the tested populations. This would allow you to exclude that the reported results are simple by-products of standard laboratory conditions selecting for “up and to the light” egg-laying sites, thus strengthening the relevance of your results.
I look forward to reading your detailed responses to the numerous and detailed reviewers' comments, and the associated changes in the manuscript.