Find research datasets worth reusing

Figs. 111–122 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 111–122. Lateral aspect of genitalia (females). 111 – Ephedrus plagiator (Nees, 1811); 112 – Lysiphlebus desertorum Starý, 1965; 113 – Pauesia antennata (Mukerji, 1950); 114 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 115 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811); 116 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 117 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 118 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 119 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833); 120 – Praon yomenae Takada, 1968; 121 – Trioxys complanatus Quilis, 1931; 122 – Trioxys pallidus (Haliday, 1833).

Figs. 96–110 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 96–110. Lateral aspect of genitalia (females). 96 – Adialytus ambiguus (Haliday, 1834); 97 – Adialytus salicaphis (Fitch, 1855); 98 – Adialytus thelaxis (Starý, 1961); 99 – Aphidius arvensis (Starý, 1960); 100 – Aphidius funebris Mackauer, 1961; 101 – Aphidius hieraciorum Starý, 1962; 102 – Aphidius matricariae Haliday, 1834; 103 – Aphidius persicus Rakhshani & Starý, 2006; 104 – Aphidius setiger (Mackauer, 1961); 105 – Binodoxys acalephae (Marshall, 1896); 106 – Binodoxys angelicae (Haliday, 1833); 107 – Binodoxys heraclei (Haliday, 1833); 108 – Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh, 1855); 109 – Ephedrus niger Gautier, Bonnamour & Gaumont, 1929; 110 – Ephedrus persicae Froggatt, 1904.

Figs. 76–91 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 76–91. Dorsal aspect of petiole. 76 – Adialytus salicaphis (Fitch, 1855); 77 – Adialytus thelaxis (Starý, 1961); 78 – Aphidius arvensis (Starý, 1960); 79 – Binodoxys acalephae (Marshall, 1896); 80 – Binodoxys angelicae (Haliday, 1833); 81 – Binodoxys heraclei (Haliday, 1833); 82 – Ephedrus niger Gautier, Bonnamour & Gaumont, 1929; 83 – Ephedrus persicae Froggatt, 1904; 84 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 85 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811); 86 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 87 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 88 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 89 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833); 90 – Praon yomenae Takada, 1968; 91 – Trioxys pallidus (Haliday, 1833).

Figs. 54–63 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 54–63. Fore wings (females). 54 – Pauesia antennata (Mukerji, 1950); 55 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 56 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811); 57 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 58 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 59 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 60 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833); 61 – Praon yomenae Takada, 1968; 62 – Trioxys complanatus Quilis, 1931; 63 – Trioxys pallidus (Haliday, 1833).

Figs. 40–53 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 40–53. Fore wings (females). 40 – Aphidius cf. salicis Haliday, 1834; 41 – Aphidius setiger (Mackauer, 1961); 42 – Aphidius smithi Sharma & Subba Rao, 1959; 43 – Aphidius transcaspicus Telenga, 1958; 44 – Aphidius uzbekistanicus Luzhetzki, 1960; 45 – Binodoxys acalephae (Marshall, 1896); 46 – Binodoxys angelicae (Haliday, 1833); 47 – Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh, 1855); 48 – Ephedrus niger Gautier, Bonnamour & Gaumont, 1929; 49 – Ephedrus persicae Froggatt, 1904; 50 – Ephedrus plagiator (Nees, 1811); 51 – Lysiphlebus confusus Tremblay & Eady, 1978; 52 – Lysiphlebus desertorum Starý, 1965; 53 – Lysiphlebus fabarum (Marshall, 1896).

Figs. 26–39 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 26–39. Fore wings (females). 26 – Adialytus ambiguus (Haliday, 1834); 27 – Adialytus salicaphis (Fitch, 1855); 28 – Adialytus thelaxis (Starý, 1961); 29 – Aphidius arvensis (Starý, 1960); 30 – Aphidius colemani Viereck, 1912; 31 – Aphidius eadyi Starý, Gonzalez & Hall, 1980; 32 – Aphidius ervi Haliday, 1834; 33 – Aphidius funebris Mackauer, 1961; 34 – Aphidius hieraciorum Starý, 1962; 35 – Aphidius matricariae Haliday, 1834; 36 – Aphidius persicus Rakhshani & Starý, 2006; 37 – Aphidius popovi Starý, 1978; 38 – Aphidius rhopalosiphi De Stefani-Perez, 1902; 39 – Aphidius rosae Haliday, 1834.

Figs. 1–16 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 1–16. Head and mouthparts (females). 1 – Adialytus ambiguus (Haliday, 1834); 2 – Aphidius colemani Viereck, 1912; 3 – Aphidius eadyi Starý, Gonzalez & Hall, 1980; 4 – Aphidius funebris Mackauer, 1961; 5 – Aphidius matricariae Haliday, 1834; 6 – Aphidius popovi Starý, 1978; 7 – Aphidius setiger (Mackauer, 1961); 8 – Aphidius transcaspicus Telenga, 1958; 9 – Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh, 1855); 10 – Lysiphlebus fabarum (Marshall, 1896); 11 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 12 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811); 13 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 14 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 15 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 16 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833).

Figs. 17–25 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 17–25. Mesoscutum (females). 17 – Aphidius eadyi Starý, Gonzalez & Hall, 1980; 18 – Binodoxys heraclei (Haliday, 1833); 19 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 20 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811); 21 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 22 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 23 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 24 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833); 25 – Praon yomenae Takada, 1968.

Figs. 64–75 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 64–75. Propodeum (females). 64 – Adialytus ambiguus (Haliday, 1834); 65 – Aphidius arvensis (Starý, 1960); 66 – Diaeretiella rapae (M'Intosh, 1855); 67 – Lysiphlebus confusus Tremblay & Eady, 1978; 68 – Pauesia antennata (Mukerji, 1950); 69 – Praon barbatum Mackauer, 1959; 70 – Praon exsoletum (Nees, 1811) 71 – Praon gallicum Starý, 1971; 72 – Praon cf. necans Mackauer, 1959; 73 – Praon pubescens Starý, 1961; 74 – Praon volucre (Haliday, 1833); 75 – Praon yomenae Takada, 1968.

Figs. 92–95 in Diversity and host associations of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) in the farmlands of western Iran

Figs. 92–95. Lateral aspect of petiole. 92 – Aphidius colemani Viereck, 1912; 93 – Aphidius ervi Haliday, 1834; 94 – Aphidius funebris Mackauer, 1961; 95 – Aphidius transcaspicus Telenga, 1958.

opencc-zeroDec 2014View details →

dryad36/100

Data from: Does sex-biased dispersal account for the lack of geographic and host-associated differentiation in introduced populations of an aphid parasitoid?

Host recognition and use in female parasitoids strongly relies on host fidelity, a plastic behavior which can significantly restrict the host preferences of parasitoids, thus reducing the gene flow between parasitoid populations attacking different insect hosts. However, the effect of migrant males on the genetic differentiation of populations has been frequently ignored in parasitoids, despite its known impact on gene flow between populations. Hence, we studied the extent of gene flow mediated by female and male parasitoids by assessing sibship relationships among parasitoids within and between populations, and its impact on geographic and host-associated differentiation in the aphid parasitoid Aphidius ervi. We report evidences of a high gene flow among parasitoid populations on different aphid hosts and geographic locations. The high gene flow among parasitoid populations was found to be largely male mediated, suggested by significant differences in the distribution of full-sib and paternal half-sib dyads of parasitoid populations.

dryad36/100

Data from: Does sex-biased dispersal account for the lack of geographic and host-associated differentiation in introduced populations of an aphid parasitoid?

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.

publicApr 2016View details →

opencc-zeroDec 2016View details →

Data from: Aphid specialization on different summer hosts is associated with strong genetic differentiation and unequal symbiont communities despite a common mating habitat

Specialization on different host plants can promote evolutionary diversification of herbivorous insects. Work on pea aphids (Acyrthosiphon pisum) has contributed significantly to the understanding of this process, demonstrating that populations associated with different host plants exhibit performance trade-offs across hosts, show adaptive host choice and genetic differentiation, and possess different communities of bacterial endosymbionts. Populations specialized on different secondary host plants during the parthenogenetic summer generations are also described for the black bean aphid (Aphis fabae complex) and are usually treated as different (morphologically cryptic) subspecies. In contrast to pea aphids, however, host choice and mate choice are decoupled in black bean aphids, because populations from different summer hosts return to the same primary host plant to mate and lay overwintering eggs. This could counteract evolutionary divergence, and it is currently unknown to what extent black bean aphids using different summer hosts are indeed differentiated. We addressed this question by microsatellite genotyping and endosymbiont screening of black bean aphids collected in summer from the goosefoot Chenopodium album (subspecies A. f. fabae) and from thistles of the genus Cirsium (subspecies A. f. cirsiiacanthoides) across numerous sites in Switzerland and France. Our results show clearly that aphids from Cirsium and Chenopodium show strong and geographically consistent genetic differentiation, and that they differ in their frequencies of infection with particular endosymbionts. The dependence on a joint winter host has thus not prevented the evolutionary divergence into summer host-adapted populations that appear to have evolved mechanisms of reproductive isolation within a common mating habitat.

opencc-zeroDec 2015View details →

Data from: Buchnera has changed flatmate but the repeated replacement of co-obligate symbionts is not associated with the ecological expansions of their aphid hosts

Symbiotic associations with bacteria have facilitated important evolutionary transitions in insects and resulted in long-term obligate interactions. Recent evidence suggests that these associations are not always evolutionarily stable and that symbiont replacement and/or supplementation of an obligate symbiosis by an additional bacterium has occurred during the history of many insect groups. Yet, the factors favoring one symbiont over another in this evolutionary dynamic are not well understood; progress has been hindered by our incomplete understanding of the distribution of symbionts across phylogenetic and ecological contexts. While many aphids are engaged into an obligate symbiosis with a single Gammaproteobacterium, Buchnera aphidicola, in species of the Lachninae subfamily, this relationship has evolved into a "ménage à trois", in which Buchnera is complemented by a co-symbiont, usually Serratia symbiotica. Using deep sequencing of 16S rRNA bacterial genes from 128 species of Cinara (the most diverse Lachninae genus), we reveal a highly dynamic dual symbiotic system in this aphid lineage. Most species host both Serratia and Buchnera but, in several clades, endosymbionts related to Sodalis, Erwinia or an unnamed member of the Enterobacteriaceae have replaced Serratia. Endosymbiont genome sequences from four aphid species confirm that these co-resident symbionts fulfill essential metabolic functions not ensured by Buchnera. We further demonstrate through comparative phylogenetic analyses that co-symbiont replacement is not associated with the adaptation of aphids to new ecological conditions. We propose that symbiont succession was driven by factors intrinsic to the phenomenon of endosymbiosis, such as rapid genome deterioration or competitive interactions between bacteria with similar metabolic capabilities.

FIGURES 1–6. 1 in Identification key, diversity and host associations of parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) of aphids attacking cereal crops in Egypt

FIGURES 1–6. 1. Aphidius matricariae, maxillary and labial palpi; 2. Aphidius colemani, forewing; 3. Aphidius matricariae, forewing; 4. Aphidius transcaspicus, forewing; 5. Aphidius uzbekistanicus, forewing; 6. Binodoxys angelicae, forewing.

FIGURE 19 in Identification key, diversity and host associations of parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) of aphids attacking cereal crops in Egypt

FIGURE 19. Map of Egypt with sampled localities (present and previous studies): 1, Kafr El-Sheikh; 2, Gharbia; 3, Menofia; 4, Behaara; 5, Dakahlia, 6, Sharkia; 7, Qalubia; 8, Ismailia; 9, Giza; 10, Beni-Suef; 11, Assiut; 12, Sohag; 13, Dakhla-New Valley; 14, Kharga- New Valley.

FIGURES 13–18. 13 in Identification key, diversity and host associations of parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) of aphids attacking cereal crops in Egypt

FIGURES 13–18. 13. Aphidius matricariae, anterolateral aspect of petiole; 14. Aphidius rhopalosiphi, anterolateral aspect of petiole; 15. Aphidius uzbekistanicus, anterolateral aspect of petiole; 16. Binodoxys angelicae, lateral aspect of ovipositor sheath; 17. Binodoxys angelicae, lateral aspect of last sternal prong; 18. Diaeretiella rapae, lateral aspect of ovipositor sheath.

FIGURES 7–12. 7 in Identification key, diversity and host associations of parasitoids (Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Aphidiinae) of aphids attacking cereal crops in Egypt

FIGURES 7–12. 7. Diaeretiella rapae, forewing; 8. Ephedrus persicae, forewing; 9. Lysiphlebus fabarum, forewing; 10. Praon volucre, forewing; 11. Aphidius colemani, anterolateral aspect of petiole; 12. Aphidius ervi, anterolateral aspect of petiole.

publicJan 2017View details →

Data from: Aphid specialization on different summer hosts is associated with strong genetic differentiation and unequal symbiont communities despite a common mating habitat

Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.