| Literature DB >> 28634374 |
Agnieszka Kiedrowicz1, Lechosław Kuczyński2, Mariusz Lewandowski3, Heather Proctor4, Anna Skoracka2.
Abstract
Passively dispersing organisms should optimise the time and direction of dispersal by employing behaviours that increase their probability of being successfully transported by dispersal agents. We rigorously tested whether two agriculturally important passively-dispersing eriophyoid species, wheat curl mite (WCM) and cereal rust mite (CRM), display behaviours indicating their readiness to depart from current host plants in the presence of potential dispersal cues: wind, an insect vector and presence of a fresh plant. Contrary to our expectations, we found that both species decreased their general activity in the presence of wind. When exposed to wind, WCM (but not CRM) significantly increased behaviour that has previously been considered to facilitate dispersal (in this case, standing vertically). Our study provides the first sound test of the function of what have been interpreted as dispersal-related behaviours of eriophyid mites. The low proportion of WCM exhibiting dispersal behaviour suggests there may be predisposed dispersers and residents in the population. Moreover, we found that WCM was generally more active than CRM, which is likely a contributing factor to its high invasive potential.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28634374 PMCID: PMC5478656 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-04372-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1SEM images of eriophyid mites. Scale bars are 10 μm on each photo. (a) – Wheat curl mite (Aceria tosichella WCM MT-1 genotype) on wheat leaf; (b) – Cereal rust mite (CRM, Abacarus hystrix) on wheat leaf; (c) – standing-erect mite belonging to the WCM complex; (d) – chain- forming mites belonging to the WCM complex.
Analysis of deviance table testing influence of treatment, species and their interaction (dispersal cue x species) on mite behavioural responses.
| Behavioural response | variable | Df | LR Chi square | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feeding | dispersal cue | 3 | 42.7 | <0.0001 |
| species | 1 | 257.0 | <0.0001 | |
| dispersal cue × species | 3 | 5.1 | 0.1674 | |
| Walking | dispersal cue | 3 | 57.7 | <0.0001 |
| species | 1 | 258.9 | <0.0001 | |
| dispersal cue × species | 3 | 7.1 | 0.0674 | |
| Standing erect | dispersal cue | 3 | 31.1 | <0.0001 |
| species | 1 | 9.2 | 0.0024 | |
| dispersal cue × species | 3 | 5.1 | 0.1632 | |
| Chain formation | dispersal cue | 3 | 17.1 | 0.0007 |
| species | 1 | 14.3 | 0.0001 | |
| dispersal cue × species | 3 | 6.5 | 0.0912 |
Model terms, test statistics and associated p-values are given.
Figure 2Results of Simultaneous Tests for General Linear Hypotheses. Effects of potential dispersal cues on the proportion of mites displaying particular behaviours (feeding, walking, standing erect, chain formation) when comparing to the control for the two species of eriophyid mites. Values on vertical axes are partial residuals. Significance codes: ***p < 0.001; **p < 0.01; *p < 0.05; ·p < 0.1. Exact p values can be found in Supplementary Table S2.