Response of fire ants (Formicidae: Solenopsis invicta and S.gerninata) to artificial nectars with amino acids

Abstract.

• 1 The role that amino acids in extrafloral nectars play in attracting ants to plants was investigated. Workers from laboratory colonies of Solenopsis invicta Buren and S.geminafa (F). (Formicidae) fed from artificial nectaries containing mimics of the extrafloral nectar of Passiflora menispermifoh and P.caerulea; P.menispermifoh nectar contains higher levels of amino acids (1347.3 pdml) than does the nectar of P.currulea (125.2 μm /ml).
• 2 When sugar-only and sugar—amino acid nectar mimics were presented simultaneously, more S.invicta workers were counted at sugar—amino acid nectar mimics than at sugar-only nectars. S.geminatu did not discriminate between the two nectars.
• 3 When the two Pamiflora L. nectar mimics were presented simultaneously, S.invicta and S.geminata workers were more abundant at the nectaries containing high levels of amino acids (P.menispermifolia HBK mimic) than at the nectaries containing low levels of amino acids (P.cuerulea L. mimic).
• 4 The behaviour shown by S.invicta and S.gerninata suggests that plants with high levels of amino acids in their extrafloral nectars attract more ant protectors and might suffer less herbivory than plants producing nectars with low levels of amino acids. If so, ants may favour, over evolutionary time, plants that produce nectars with high levels of amino acids.
• 5 Day-to-day variability in ant behaviour was considerable even among laboratory colonies maintained on the same diet in similar environmental conditions. This variability will reduce the selective impact that ants have on plants and may help to explain why most ant-plant interactions are facultative.

     

Facultative Ant-Plant Interactions: Nectar Sugar Preferences of Introduced Pest Ant Species in South Florida1

We observed nectar use by native and exotic ant species in nature, garden, and urban situations, and found ants utilizing floral and extrafloral nectar of a variety of flowering plant species. We collected 31 plant nectars (29 floral, 2 extrafloral) and used them in feeding preference tests against standard solutions of sugars (20 percent fructose, glucose, and sucrose, and their mixture), 10 trials for each nectar-ant comparison. We compared time-to-discovery and total ant visits to each droplet using ANOVA, and found that both trial and solution contributed significantly to the variation in most experiments. Seven of the floral nectars tested were significantly more attractive to certain ant species than the sugar solutions. Not only do ants use floral nectar, but it appears that some floral nectars contain compounds that are especially attractive to ants.     

Foliar Extrafloral Nectar of Humboldtia brunonis (Fabaceae), a Paleotropic Ant‐plant,is Richer than Phloem Sap and More Attractive than Honeydew

The ant‐plant Humboldtia brunonis secretes extrafloral nectar (EFN) despite the lack of antiherbivore protection from most ants. EFN was richer in composition than phloem sap and honeydew from untended Hemiptera on the plant, suggesting that EFN could potentially distract ants from honeydew, since ants rarely tended Hemiptera on this plant.     

Honeydew amino acids in relation to sugars and their role in the establishment of ant-attendance hierarchy in eight species of aphids feeding on tansy (Tanacetum vulgare)

Abstract. The ratio of the concentration of honeydew total amino acids to total sugars in the honeydew of eight species of aphids, all feeding on tansy, Tanacetum vulgare (L.), was determined and correlated with honeydew production and ant‐attendance. The honeydew of the five ant‐attended aphid species [Metopeurum fuscoviride (Stroyan), Trama troglodytes (v. Hayd), Aphis vandergooti (Börner), Brachycardus cardui (L.), Aphis fabae (Scopoli)] was rich in total amino acids, ranging from 12.9 to 20.8 nmol µL^?1 compared with the unattended aphid Macrosiphoniella tanacetaria (Kalt.) with only 3 nmol µL^?1. Asparagine, glutamine, glutamic acid and serine (all nonessential amino acids) were the predominant amino acids in the honeydew of all species. The total concentration of amino acids in the phloem sap of tansy was much higher (78.7 nmol µL^?1) then in the honeydew samples, and the predominant amino acids were glutamate (34.3%) and threonine (17.7%). A somewhat unexpected result was the finding that those aphid species with the highest total amino acid concentration in the honeydew always had the highest concentration of sugars. The lowest amino acid–sugar combined value was 104–28.8 nmol µL^?1 in the non ant‐attended species M. tanacetaria, and the highest value was an average of 270–89.9 nmol µL^?1 for the three most intensely attended aphid species M. fuscoviride, A. vandergooti and T. troglodytes. There is no evidence that any single amino acid or group of amino acids in the honeydew acted as an attractant for ant‐attendance in these eight aphid species. The richness of the honeydew (rate of secretion × total concentration of sugars), along with the presence of the attractant sugar melezitose, comprised the critical factors determining the extent of ant‐attendance of the aphids feeding on T. vulgare. The high total amino acid concentration in sugar‐rich honeydews can be explained by the high flow‐through of nutrients in aphids that are particularly well attended by ants.     

Why do ants shift their foraging from extrafloral nectar to aphid honeydew?

When aphids parasitize plants with extrafloral nectaries (EFNs) and aphid colony size is small, ants frequently use EFNs but hardly tend aphids. However, as the aphid colony size increases, ants stop using EFNs and strengthen their associations with aphids. Although the shift in ant behavior is important for determining the dynamics of the ant–plant–aphid interaction, it is not known why this shift occurs. Here, we test two hypotheses to explain the mechanism responsible for this behavioral shift: (1) Extrafloral nectar secretion changes in response to aphid herbivory, or (2) plants do not change extrafloral nectar secretion, but the total reward to ants from aphids will exceed that from EFNs above a certain aphid colony size. To judge which mechanism is plausible, we investigated secretion patterns of extrafloral nectar produced by plants with and without aphids, compared the amount of sugar supplied by EFNs and aphids, and examined whether extrafloral nectar or honeydew was more attractive to ants. Our results show that there was no inducible extrafloral secretion in response to aphid herbivory, but the sugar concentration in extrafloral nectar was higher than in honeydew, and more ant workers were attracted to an artificial extrafloral nectar solution than to an artificial aphid honeydew solution. These results indicate that extrafloral nectar is a more attractive reward than aphid honeydew per unit volume. However, even an aphid colony containing only two individuals can supply a greater reward to ants than EFNs. This suggests that the ant behavioral shift may be explained by the second hypothesis.     

Detection of amino acids in artificial nectars by two tropical ants,Leptothorax and Monomorium

Summary Many ants forage at extrafloral nectar on plants and provide the plant with some measure of protection from herbivory. These nectars contain sugars, amino acids and, often, other compounds. The role of amino acids in attracting ants to extrafloral nectars was studied by baiting with Karo-syrup-based solutions. Control (without amino acids) and experimental (with amino acids) solutions were placed in second growth forest in Trinidad, W.I. The number of ants visiting the solutions was counted at fiveminute intervals for 45 min. In tests of solutions with only one amino acid, both Leptothorax sp. and Monomorium sp. visited solutions with alanine, arginine, serine, cysteine, methionine or aspartic acid more frequently than sugaronly controls. Monomorium preferred control solutions to tyrosine solutions; Leptothorax preferred control solutions to histidine solutions. Leptothorax did not discriminate between control and tyrosine solutions; Monomorium did not discriminate between control and histidine solutions. However, in six of eight tests of combinations of amino acids, ants visited control solutions more frequently than experimental solutions. These results suggest that ants can act as selective agents, favoring plants with particular amino acids in their nectars.     

FACULTATIVE MUTUALISM BETWEEN WEEDY VETCHES BEARING EXTRAFLORAL NECTARIES AND WEEDY ANTS IN CALIFORNIA

Vetches (Vicia spp.) were studied in the San Francisco Bay Area of California in the spring of 1978. The stipular nectaries of the vetches are visited by the Argentine ant, Iridomyrmex humilis Mayr. The nectaries were removed to exclude ants in controlled experiments to determine if these ants protect the vetches from herbivores or seed predators. Plants with excised nectaries suffered substantially greater damage to their foliage than control plants, indicating that ants protect the foliage. There was no indication that ants protect the vetches from seed predators, but fruit set was substantially lower in plants with excised nectaries. Analysis of sugar and amino acid composition of extrafloral nectar served as a basis for feeding tests with Argentine ants by using artificial nectar solutions. Ants preferred sucrose and glucose solutions over fructose. They showed no preference for any one sugar mixture over another, nor did they exhibit differential recruitment to artificial nectar solutions containing only sugars or sugars and amino acids.     

Amino acids and sugars in nectar,and their putative evolutionary significance

Individual amino acids and sugars from flower nectar of 32 plant species with different pollination systems were quantified and compared. Data show that there is no correlation between sugar and amino acid concentration. Furthermore there is no correlation between composition and concentration of amino acids and evolutionary advancement, nor any direct relation with pollination systems. However, higher sugar concentrations are often linked with more advanced morphological characters. Nectars from pierced or damaged flowers or nectars contaminated with pollen exhibit modifications and increases in amino acid composition. The presence of proline probably indicates such pollen contamination. Most pollinating animals depend on flower nectar in their energetic requirements, yet innumerable alternative amino acid and protein sources exist. Future research has to consider the relationship between nutritional requirements of pollinating animals and dependence on flower nectars.Dedicated to Prof. Dr.L. van der Pijl, Den Haag, in honour of his 80th birthday.     

Does the availability of arboreal honeydew determine the prevalence of ecologically dominant ants in restored habitats?

Ants are extensive users of arboreal sugars, but little is known about how ecological dominance or habitat succession influences this interaction. We investigated how the availability and use of arboreal sugar resources by ants changes across a restoration chronosequence. We surveyed the use and availability of hemipteran honeydew and floral nectar on the two dominant plant genera, Eucalyptus and Acacia, in study sites in south eastern Australia. Sugars used by ants are likely to drive their role as ecosystem engineers, while sugars not used by ants remain available to other organisms. We also tested whether the use of sugars differed between ecologically dominant and non-dominant ants; taxa likely to perform different functions in ecosystems. No floral nectar was available on Acacia, but later successional eucalypts supported more floral resources and fewer mutualist hemiptera. Successional stage significantly affected how much sugar remained unexploited by ants, with similar trends for ant use of sugars. Non-dominant ants used mainly floral nectar, while hemipteran honeydew resources were used disproportionately by dominant ants, consistent with the prediction that this group monopolises persistent carbohydrate resources. This pattern was similar across successional stages, but the difference was least in habitats with the greatest availability of floral nectar, suggesting that high sugar availability may reduce the incentive to defend honeydew. Across habitat types, the proportion of dominant ants increased with the availability of hemipteran honeydew. This suggests that honeydew availability may regulate ecological dominance, thus affecting ant-driven ecosystem processes.     

Getting carbohydrates in ants: damage of the young cereal sprouts by ants of the genus Myrmica Latreille, 1804 (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), to obtain plant sap

Summary

Carbohydrate food is of high importance for survival of ant colonies. Ants are known to use sugary excretions (honeydew) of various insects, nectar of floral and extrafloral nectaries, and even sap of some trees. However, the ability of ants to use sap of herbaceous plants has not been mentioned. This is the first evidence that ants of the genus Myrmica can intentionally ‘cut off’ young cereal sprouts to obtain plant sap. The investigation was carried out in a laboratory in 2018 and 2019 and involved three ant species of the genus Myrmica [12 colonies of M. rubra (Linnaeus, 1758); eight colonies of M. ruginodis Nylander, 1846; and five colonies of M. scabrinodis Nylander, 1846]. First observations were made occasionally in 10 ant colonies during the study of ant–aphid interactions. After three days of carbohydrate starvation, ants were supplied with the plants of wheat infested with aphids of Schizaphis graminum (Rondani, 1852). Within the first day in addition to ordinary trophobiotic relations with aphids, the workers of all the studied colonies demonstrated unexpected behaviour: they ‘cut off’ some sprouts and collected sap of these plants. The experimental investigation in 15 ant colonies of various sizes (about 150, 300 and 500 workers) supplied with the plants infested or non-infested with aphids has shown that getting sap of herbs depends greatly on ant colony needs and available resources. The number of damaged plants was much higher both in the larger colonies of ants and in the absence of aphids. This way of getting carbohydrates allows ants to quickly obtain some extra food needed to maintain colony viability and seems to be one of the mechanisms promoting survival of ants in conditions of acute carbohydrate deficiency. At the same time, ants avoid using plant sap when there are more available alternative carbohydrate resources.     

Do additional sugar sources affect the degree of attendance of Dysmicoccus brevipes by the fire ant Solenopsis geminata?

Mutualistic interactions between ants and Hemiptera are mediated to a large extent by the amount and quality of sugar‐rich honeydew produced. Throughout the neotropics, the predaceous fire ant Solenopsis geminata (Fabricius) (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) is found in association with colonies of the pineapple mealybug, Dysmicoccus brevipes (Cockerell) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), which they actively tend and protect from attack by natural enemies. In this study, we evaluate the effects of access to a sucrose solution on the mutualistic association between S. geminata and D. brevipes. Ten colonies of either species were established, with D. brevipes maintained on pumpkin, Cucurbita maxima Duchesne (Cucurbitaceae), in screen cages. Five of the S. geminata colonies were permitted access to vials with 20% sucrose solution and a pumpkin with 20 adult mealybugs. The remaining ant colonies were allowed access to mealybug‐infested pumpkins. Ant colonies with access to the sucrose solution attended mealybugs significantly less than those without additional sugar sources. Mealybug survival rates were similar under both treatments. Total body sugars and fructose were nearly twice as high in ants with access to honeydew and sucrose vs. those with access to honeydew and water. Fructose accumulated on the pumpkins over time in both treatments, suggesting that honeydew was not fully exploited by the ants. In conclusion, D. brevipes enjoy lower degrees of ant attendance when S. geminata have alternative sources of carbohydrates. We further discuss the significance of these findings for the conservation of predaceous ants and mealybug biological control.     

Bottom-up control and co-occurrence in complex communities: honeydew and nectar determine a rainforest ant mosaic

Complex distribution patterns of species-rich insect communities in tropical rainforests have been intensively studied, and yet we know very little about processes that generate these patterns. We provide evidence for the key role of homopteran honeydew and plant nectar in structuring ant communities in an Australian tropical rainforest canopy and understorey. We also test the ant visitation of these resources against predictions derived from the 'ant-mosaic' hypothesis. Two ant species were highly dominant in terms of territorial behaviour and abundance: Oecophylla smaragdina and Anonychomyrma gilberti . Both dominant ant species monopolised large aggregations of honeydew-producing homopterans. Attended homopteran species were highly segregated between these two ant species. For the use of extrafloral and floral nectar (involving 43 ant species on 48 plant species), partitioning of ant species among plant species and between canopy and understorey was also significant, but less pronounced. In contrast to trophobioses, simultaneous co-occurrence of different nectar foraging ant species on the same plant individuals was frequent (23% of all surveys). While both dominant ant species were mutually exclusive on honeydew and nectar sources, co-occurrence with non-dominant ant species on nectaries was common. The proportion of visits with co-occurrences was low for dominant ants and high for many sub-ordinate species. These findings support the ant mosaic theory. The differential role of honeydew (as a specialised resource for dominant ants) and nectar (as an opportunistic resource for all ants including the co-occurring non-dominant species) provides a plausible structuring mechanism for the Australian canopy ant community studied.     

Flexibility in the composition and concentration of amino acids in honeydew of the drepanosiphid aphid Tuberculatus quercicola

Abstract 1. Mutualistic interactions between aphids and ants are mediated by honeydew that aphids produce. Previous work showed that when attended by the ant Formica yessensis Forel (Hymenoptera: Formicidae), nymphs of the aphid Tuberculatus quercicola (Matsumura) (Homoptera: Aphididae) developed into significantly smaller adults with lower fecundity than did nymphs that were not ant attended.
2. This study tested the hypothesis that this cost of ant attendance arises through changes in the quality and quantity of honeydew. Ant-attended and ant-excluded aphid colonies were prepared in the field. The composition and concentration of amino acids were compared between the honeydew produced by ant-attended colonies and that produced by ant-excluded colonies.
3. The aphids excreted smaller droplets of honeydew, but also excreted them more frequently, in ant-attended colonies than in ant-excluded colonies. The honeydew of ant-attended aphids contained more types of amino acid, and a significantly higher total concentration of amino acids, than did the honeydew of ant-excluded aphids.
4. These results suggest that the increase in the concentration of amino acids in honeydew leads to a shortage of nitrogen available for aphid growth and reproduction, resulting in lower performance under ant attendance.
5. With the advance of seasons, a significant reduction was found in both the total free amino acid concentration in phloem sap and the frequency of honeydew excretion; however the total concentration of amino acids in the honeydew did not vary significantly during the seasons, suggesting that aphids keep the quality of honeydew constant in order to maintain ant visitation.     

Induced Floral and Extrafloral Nectar Production Affect Ant‐pollinator Interactions and Plant Fitness

Thousands of plant species throughout tropical and temperate zones secrete extrafloral nectar to attract ants, whose presence provides an indirect defense against herbivores. Extrafloral nectaries are located close to flowers and may modify competition between ants and pollinators. Here, we used Lima bean (Phaseolus lunatus L.) to study the plants interaction between ants and flower visitors and its consequences for plant fitness. To test these objectives, we carried out two field experiments in which we manipulated the presence of ants and nectar production via induction with jasmonic acid (JA). We then measured floral and extrafloral nectar production, the number of patrolling ants and flower visitors as well as specific plant fitness traits. Lima bean plants under JA induction produced more nectar in both extrafloral nectaries and flowers, attracted more ants and produced more flowers and seeds than non‐induced plants. Despite an increase in floral nectar in JA plants, application of this hormone had no significant effects on flower visitor attraction. Finally, ant presence did not result in a decrease in the number of visits, but our results suggest that ants could negatively affect pollination efficiency. In particular, JA‐induced plants without ants produced a greater number of seeds compared with the JA‐treated plants with ants.     

THE EXTRAFLORAL NECTARIES OF IPOMOEA CARNEA (CONVOLVULACEAE)

Ipomoea carnea (Convolvulaceae) possesses two types of extrafloral nectaries, located on the petiole and on the pedicel. These secrete a complex nectar containing sugars and amino acids. The insects attracted to the extrafloral nectaries are predominantly ants and they are relatively abundant throughout the year. A number of incidents of plant defense as a result of the presence of extrafloral nectary visitors at the extrafloral nectaries of I. carnea were observed and are consistent with the ant-guard theory of the function of extrafloral nectaries.     

How plants shape the ant community in the Amazonian rainforest canopy: the key role of extrafloral nectaries and homopteran honeydew

Ant-plant interactions in the canopy of a lowland Amazonian rainforest of the upper Orinoco, Venezuela, were studied using a modified commercial crane on rails (Surumoni project). Our observations show a strong correlation between plant sap exudates and both abundance of ants and co-occurrence of ant species in tree canopies. Two types of plant sap sources were compared: extrafloral nectaries (EFNs) and honeydew secretions by homopterans. EFNs were a frequent food source for ants on epiphytes (Philodendron spp., Araceae) and lianas (Dioclea, Fabaceae), but rare on canopy trees in the study area, whereas the majority of trees were host to aggregations of homopterans tended by honeydew-seeking ants (on 62% of the trees examined). These aggregations rarely occurred on epiphytes. Baited ant traps were installed on plants with EFNs and in the crowns of trees from three common genera, including trees with and without ant-tended homopterans: Goupia glabra (Celastraceae), Vochysia spp. (Vochysiaceae), and Xylopia spp. (Annonaceae). The number of ant workers per trap was significantly higher on plants offering one of the two plant sap sources than on trees without such resources. Extrafloral nectaries were used by a much broader spectrum of ant species and genera than honeydew, and co-occurrence of ant species (in traps) was significantly higher on plants bearing EFNs than on trees. Homopteran honeydew (Coccidae and Membracidae), on the other hand, was mostly monopolised by a single ant colony per tree. Homopteran-tending ants were generally among the most dominant ants in the canopy. The most prominent genera were Azteca, Dolichoderus (both Dolichoderinae), Cephalotes, Pheidole, Crematogaster (all Myrmicinae), and Ectatomma (Ponerinae). Potential preferences were recorded between ant and homopteran species, and also between ant-homopteran associations and tree genera. We hypothesize that the high availability of homopteran honeydew provides a key resource for ant mosaics, where dominant ant colonies and species maintain mutually exclusive territories on trees. In turn, we propose that for nourishment of numerous ants of lower competitive capacity, Philodendron and other sources of EFNs might be particularly important.     

Nutritional suitability of individual carbohydrates and amino acids for adult Pieris brassicae

Abstract Many adult Lepidoptera are dependent on carbohydrate-rich solutions such as nectar and honeydew. These food sources can contain a range of carbohydrates as well as low levels of other compounds, including free amino acids, proteins and lipids. Little is known about the nutritional value of individual nectar sugars and amino acids for adult Lepidoptera. Ten sugars occurring in nectar and honeydew were tested with respect to their effects on a number of Pieris brassicae life-table parameters. In similar experiments it was investigated whether the butterfly derives nutritional benefits from mixtures of common non-essential or essential amino acids when provided either in water or in a sucrose solution. Food sources were found to have a significant effect on butterfly fertility, longevity, lifetime fecundity and daily oviposition rate. Whereas a number of sugars significantly increase longevity, melibiose and melezitose reduce P. brassicae longevity. Butterfly fecundity is compromized significantly by sucrose and melibiose. Glucose is the only sugar that has a positive effect on both longevity and fecundity as well as a number of oviposition parameters. Amino acids seem to have no or only a minor effect on the life-table parameters tested. However, when provided in sucrose, they appear to compensate for the negative effect of pure sucrose on fecundity. A comparison with an earlier study on the gustatory response of P. brassicae shows that there is only a weak correlation between the nutritional value of sugars and amino acid mixtures and their perceptibility.     

Interactions between extrafloral nectaries, aphids and ants: are there competition effects between plant and homopteran sugar sources?

Broad bean (Vicia faba), an annual plant bearing extrafloral nectaries (EFN) at the base of the upper leaves, is regularly infested by two aphid species, Aphis fabae and Acyrthosiphon pisum. EFN and A. fabae are commonly attended by the ant, Lasius niger, while Ac. pisum usually remains uninfested. Sugar concentration and sugar composition of extrafloral nectar did not change significantly after aphid infestation. The sugar concentration was significantly higher in EFN (c. 271 µg µl^-1) than in the honeydew of A. fabae (37.5 µg µl^-1). The presence of small A. fabae colonies had no significant effect on ant attendance of EFN, which remained at the same level as that on plants without A. fabae. Obviously, there was no significant competitive effect between the two sugar sources. We suggest that the high sugar concentration in the extrafloral nectar may outweigh the higher quality (due to the presence of melezitose) and quantity of aphid honeydew. Ants and the presence of EFN influenced aphid colony growth. While A. fabae colonies generally grew better in the presence of ants, Ac. pisum colonies declined on plants with EFN or A. fabae colonies. We conclude that EFN may provide some degree of protection for V. faba against those sucking herbivores that are not able to attract ants.     

Nectar and pollination drops: how different are they?

Background

Pollination drops and nectars (floral nectars) are secretions related to plant reproduction. The pollination drop is the landing site for the majority of gymnosperm pollen, whereas nectar of angiosperm flowers represents a common nutritional resource for a large variety of pollinators. Extrafloral nectars also are known from all vascular plants, although among the gymnosperms they are restricted to the Gnetales. Extrafloral nectars are not generally involved in reproduction but serve as ‘reward’ for ants defending plants against herbivores (indirect defence).

Scope

Although very different in their task, nectars and pollination drops share some features, e.g. basic chemical composition and eventual consumption by animals. This has led some authors to call these secretions collectively nectar. Modern techniques that permit chemical analysis and protein characterization have very recently added important information about these sugary secretions that appear to be much more than a ‘reward’ for pollinating (floral nectar) and defending animals (extrafloral nectar) or a landing site for pollen (pollination drop).

Conclusions

Nectar and pollination drops contain sugars as the main components, but the total concentration and the relative proportions are different. They also contain amino acids, of which proline is frequently the most abundant. Proteomic studies have revealed the presence of common functional classes of proteins such as invertases and defence-related proteins in nectar (floral and extrafloral) and pollination drops. Invertases allow for dynamic rearrangement of sugar composition following secretion. Defence-related proteins provide protection from invasion by fungi and bacteria. Currently, only few species have been studied in any depth. The chemical composition of the pollination drop must be investigated in a larger number of species if eventual phylogenetic relationships are to be revealed. Much more information can be provided from further proteomic studies of both nectar and pollination drop that will contribute to the study of plant reproduction and evolution.Key words: Nectar, pollination drop, ovular secretion, plant reproduction, proteins, sugars, gymnosperms, angiosperms, plant–animal interaction     

Comparing floral nectar and aphid honeydew diets on the longevity and nutrient levels of a parasitoid wasp

We compared the effects of floral nectar from buckwheat, Fagopyrum esculentum Moench, and honeydew produced by the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura (Homoptera: Aphididae), on longevity, nutrient levels, and egg loads of the parasitoid Diadegma insulare Cresson (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). Diadegma insulare lived for 2 days in control treatments of water or clean soybean leaves, for 6–7 days with honeydew, and in excess of 2 weeks with buckwheat nectar. Potential reasons for the superiority of buckwheat nectar over soybean aphid honeydew for extending the longevity of parasitoids include: (i) parasitoids ingest more sugars from floral sources, (ii) oligosaccharides in honeydew have a lower nutritional value than nectar sugars, and (iii) honeydew has antagonistic compounds. Overall sugar levels were lower in honeydew‐ vs. nectar‐fed female wasps, suggesting a lower feeding rate, but other explanations cannot be excluded. Diadegma insulare eclosed with high levels of lipids and glycogen, and low levels of gut and storage sugars. All carbohydrates increased over the life of both nectar‐ and honeydew‐fed wasps, but remained low or decreased in starved wasps. Lipid levels declined over the lifespan of female wasps, but females fed floral nectar showed the slowest rate of lipid decline. Diet did not affect egg load, probably because the females were not given hosts in the experiment.