FiguresFull Size Figure 1. Effect of age on the mating willingness of Propylea dissecta... Full Size Figure 2. Effect of male age on mating duration of Propylea dissecta... Full Size Figure 3. Effect of female age on mating duration of Propylea dissecta... Full Size Figure 4. Effect of female age on fecundity of Propylea dissecta... Full Size Figure 5. Effect of male age on percent egg viability of Propylea dissecta... TablesFull Size Table 1. Biological attributes of females of varying ages of P. dissecta... Full Size Table 2. Paired sample t-test of mating duration, pre-oviposition period and oviposition period of P. dissecta... Full Size Table 3. Paired sample t-test of Post-Oviposition Period, Fecundity and Egg Viability of P. dissecta... |
![]() |
The influence of age on reproductive performance of the predatory ladybird beetle, Propylea dissectaAhmad Pervez1, Omkar 1 and Aaron S. Richmond21Ladybird Research Laboratory, Department of Zoology, University of Lucknow, Lucknow – 226007, India2Department of Counseling & Educational Psychology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV 89557 dr_omkar@hotmail.com Received 13 October 2003 Accepted 3 May 2004 Published 9 July 2004 Cite this paper as: Pervez, A, Omkar and Richmond, AS. 2004. The influence of age on reproductive performance of the predatory ladybird beetle, Propylea dissecta. 8pp. Journal of Insect Science, 4:22, Available online: insectscience.org/4.22 Keywordsage, mating duration, fecundity, egg viability, aphid, Aphis gossypiiABSTRACT Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Acknowledgements References
The influence of age on reproductive performance of an aphidophagous ladybird beetle, Propylea dissecta was examined using male and female beetles of varying ages (1–30 days) after a single mating stimulus. All the intermediate (10 to 20 days old) and old (30 days old) age females mated with all intermediate and old age males, while only a fraction (0.29%) of younger females, 1 to 5 days old, mated with males of similar or older age. The willingness to mate was male age dependent. It increased sigmoidally with increase in adult age. Adult males were more willing to mate with females irrespective of age. Mating duration was longest amongst older adults (30 day-old males and 20 day-old females). Male age did not contribute to shaping the fecundity of the female ladybird. Fecundity was female age dependent and it increased with age up to 20 days and thereafter decreased. 20 day-old females were most fecund producing 867 eggs after a single mating. Progeny production was male age dependent and eggs sired by 20–30 day-old males had significantly higher viability than those sired by younger males. Prolonged mating increased fecundity and egg viability. The results reveal that males of intermediate age were better mates. This information may improve our understanding of the effect of aging on reproduction in ladybirds and may help mass-multiplication of the ladybird beetles using adults of optimal age. INTRODUCTION Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion Acknowledgements References
MATERIALS AND METHODS Abstract Introduction Results Discussion Acknowledgements References
Stock maintenance
Experimental design
Statistical Analysis
RESULTS Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Discussion Acknowledgements References
Mating behavior
Are older males more willing to mate?
Is mating duration dependent on the age of mating partners?
Does age have a regulating role in reproductive performance of female?
Does paternal age contribute to fecundity and progeny production?Do prolonged matings affect quantitative progeny production?
Are older males better mates?Although 20–30 day-old males showed the best reproductive performance in terms of mating duration and percent egg viability (Tables 1, 3), best-fit lines suggest that a decrease in mating duration and viability of eggs may occur in males aged over 30 days (Figs. 3 and 5). DISCUSSION Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Acknowledgements References
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion References
REFERENCES Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results Discussion Acknowledgements
Anderson M. 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. |
![]() |
|
||