Title: | Factors involved in the post-copulatory neural inhibition of pheromone production in Choristoneura fumiferana and C. rosaceana females |
Address: | "Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Laurentian Forestry Centre, PO Box 3800, 1055 du P.E.P.S., QC, G1V 4C7, Sainte-Foy, Canada" |
DOI: | 10.1016/s0022-1910(01)00162-7 |
ISSN/ISBN: | 1879-1611 (Electronic) 0022-1910 (Linking) |
Abstract: | "Normal mating lasts approximately 3 h in Choristoneura fumiferana and C. rosaceana. Data generated from interrupted matings showed that the act of mating did not suppress pheromone production (pheromonostasis) in either species although, in C. rosaceana, pheromone titre declined slightly the night following mating. In both species the migration of sperm to the spermatheca (SP) occurred several hours after mating, and coincided with a significant and permanent depression in pheromone titre, as well as egg fertilisation and oviposition. However, disrupting matings within 2 h of the onset resulted in oviposition patterns similar to virgins in both species, with mostly infertile eggs being laid by C. fumiferana females while oviposition was totally inhibited in C. rosaceana. The transection of the ventral nerve cord (VNC) 1 h post-mating did not result in the depression of pheromone titres the following night in either species but if the VNC was transected 3 h post-mating, pheromonostasis was observed. While 25% of C. fumiferana females had sperm in their SP 2 h after mating, it took at least 4 h in C. rosaceana. This suggests that while the physical presence of sperm in the SP may play some role in the termination of pheromone production in C. fumiferana, other factors must trigger the neural signal that elicits pheromonostasis in both species. A better understanding of the temporal dynamics of both apyrene and eupyrene sperm within the different parts of the female reproductive system might clarify these interspecific differences" |
Notes: | "PubMed-not-MEDLINEDelisle, Johanne Simard, Jocelyne eng England 2003/05/29 J Insect Physiol. 2002 Feb; 48(2):181-188. doi: 10.1016/s0022-1910(01)00162-7" |