| Literature DB >> 32943688 |
Davide Scaccini1, Luka Vanishvili2, Paola Tirello2, Vaughn M Walton3, Carlo Duso2, Alberto Pozzebon4.
Abstract
Cold winter temperatures can influence insects' survival in temperate zones. Brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Stål) overwinters as adults in natural and human-made structures. In this study, we characterized low temperature mortality rates of H. halys adults that were either entering (ENA) or exiting (EXA) overwintering microhabitats. We considered the effect of different duration of cold exposure on mortality. We determined the impact of insect nutritional status and weight on cold tolerance. We additionally evaluated the effects of cold exposure on H. halys adult longevity and fecundity. Mortality of ENA and EXA adults was determined for 6 h and 2 h periods at - 2.5 °C and 2.5 °C respectively. EXA adults displayed higher mortality rates compared to ENA individuals at the low-temperature regimes. Halyomorpha halys adult survival rate was higher when their nutrient index (EXA individuals only) and weight were high. Low-temperature exposure increased longevity, but reduced fecundity of ENA females. The data further highlight how extreme spring frost events can result in significantly increased mortality levels of H. halys adults.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32943688 PMCID: PMC7498604 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-72120-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Mortality rate [observed and estimated values 95% confidence interval (CI)] of EXA and ENA Halyomorpha halys adults after exposure to controlled low temperatures for 2 h.
Figure 2Mortality rate [observed and estimated values 95% confidence interval (CI)] of EXA and ENA Halyomorpha halys adults after exposure to controlled low temperatures for 4 h.
Figure 3Mortality rate [observed and estimated values 95% confidence interval (CI)] of EXA and ENA Halyomorpha halys adults after exposure to controlled low temperatures for 6 h.
Lethal low temperatures LT50 and LT99 with 95% confidence interval (CI) and probit regression parameters for ENA and EXA Halyomorpha halys adults exposed for the three time periods (2, 4 and 6 h).
| Stage of dormancy | Exposure time (h) | n | LT50 (°C)a | 95% CILT50 (°C) | LT99 (°C)a | 95% CILT99 (°C) | Intercept | s.e.m.Intercept | Slope | s.e.m.Slope | Χ2 b | df | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | Lower | Upper | |||||||||||||
| EXA | 2 | 220 | − 5.7331 | a | − 6.7300 | − 4.5745 | − 14.7794 | a | − 17.8056 | − 12.9101 | − 1.4743 | 0.2680 | − 0.2572 | 0.0342 | 5.7715 | 6 |
| ENA | 2 | 280 | − 10.4234 | b | − 10.9874 | − 9.7738 | − 15.4251 | a | − 17.3399 | − 14.3061 | − 4.8481 | 0.7488 | − 0.4651 | 0.0675 | 4.7132 | 6 |
| EXA | 4 | 250 | − 5.3761 | a | − 6.2781 | − 4.2754 | − 14.3180 | a | − 17.2263 | − 12.5417 | − 1.3987 | 0.2628 | − 0.2602 | 0.0349 | 5.4501 | 6 |
| ENA | 4 | 300 | − 8.9576 | b | − 9.6253 | − 8.2295 | − 16.0277 | b | − 18.0063 | − 14.7096 | − 2.9474 | 0.3705 | − 0.3290 | 0.0370 | 10.2708 | 6 |
| EXA | 6 | 260 | − 3.3432 | a | − 4.2764 | − 2.2652 | − 13.4989 | a | − 16.4673 | − 11.5920 | − 0.7658 | 0.1666 | − 0.2291 | 0.0277 | 6.3769 | 6 |
| ENA | 6 | 300 | − 7.5746 | b | − 8.2368 | − 6.8462 | − 14.6200 | a | − 16.5422 | − 13.3306 | − 2.5011 | 0.3218 | − 0.3302 | 0.0366 | 8.1116 | 6 |
aLT values within a column for each exposure time paired with the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) according to the Lethal Dose ratios method[64].
bAll χ2 values fit the model at α = 0.05.
Statistics of GLMM models (α = 0.05) on the weight and nutrient index measured on Halyomorpha halys exposed to low temperatures.
| Source of variation | Weight | Nutrient index | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F value | df | F value | df | |||
| Status (dead or alive) | ||||||
| Stage of dormancy (EXA or ENA) | ||||||
| Stage of dormancy*Status | 1.18 | 1, 194 | 0.2795 | |||
| Time | 0.73 | 2, 194 | 0.4843 | 0.40 | 2, 194 | 0.6729 |
| Time*Status | 0.59 | 2, 194 | 0.5526 | 0.92 | 2, 194 | 0.4000 |
| Time*Stage of dormancy | 0.09 | 2, 194 | 0.9142 | 0.01 | 2, 194 | 0.9882 |
| Time*Stage of dormancy*Status | 0.17 | 2, 194 | 0.8446 | 0.05 | 2, 194 | 0.9553 |
Statistically significant sources of variation are reported in bold.
Figure 4Mean (± s.e.m.) of Halyomorpha halys weight (a) and nutrient index (b) exposed to low temperatures in relation to their status (dead or alive) and the stage of dormancy (EXA or ENA). Different letters indicate significant differences at the Tukey–Kramer test (α = 0.05). Capital letters: comparisons between EXA and ENA adults; lowercase letters: comparisons between alive and dead adults.
Statistics of GLMM models (α = 0.05) on Halyomorpha halys female pre-oviposition period and longevity.
| Stage of dormancy | Effect | Pre-oviposition period | Longevity | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F value | df | F value | df | ||||
| ENA | Temperature | 0.47 | 3, 43 | 0.7030 | |||
| ENA | Time | 0.62 | 2, 43 | 0.5419 | 0.78 | 2, 70 | 0.4626 |
| ENA | Temperature*Time | 1.26 | 6, 43 | 0.2939 | 0.51 | 6, 70 | 0.8012 |
| EXA | Temperature | 1.28 | 4, 27 | 0.3010 | 0.79 | 4, 30 | 0.5431 |
| EXA | Time | 0.43 | 2, 27 | 0.6573 | 0.63 | 2, 30 | 0.5372 |
| EXA | Temperature*Time | 1.89 | 8, 27 | 0.1031 | 1.33 | 8, 30 | 0.2684 |
Data were analysed separately by the stage of dormancy (EXA vs. ENA). Statistically significant effects are reported in bold.
Figure 5Mean (± s.e.m.) of Halyomorpha halys female longevity (a) and mean (± s.e.m.) number of eggs laid per egg mass (b) at different low-temperature exposures, in relation to their stage of dormancy. Different letters indicate significant differences at the Tukey–Kramer test (α = 0.05).
Statistics of GLMM models (α = 0.05) on Halyomorpha halys fecundity (i.e., number of egg masses laid, the mean number of eggs per egg mass, and the total number of laid eggs per female) and egg hatching rate.
| Stage of dormancy | Effect | No. of egg masses | Mean no. of eggs per egg mass | Total no. of eggs | % of hatching | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F value | df | F value | df | F value | df | F value | df | ||||||
| ENA | Temperature | 1.78 | 3, 47 | 0.1642 | 2.19 | 3, 41 | 0.1043 | 0.95 | 3, 47 | 0.4241 | |||
| ENA | Time | 1.84 | 2, 47 | 0.1702 | 1.79 | 2, 41 | 0.1802 | 0.82 | 2, 41 | 0.4489 | 1.70 | 2, 47 | 0.1941 |
| ENA | Temperature*Time | 0.94 | 6, 47 | 0.4783 | 1.13 | 6, 41 | 0.3628 | 1.25 | 6, 41 | 0.3028 | 1.58 | 6, 47 | 0.1737 |
| EXA | Temperature | 0.41 | 4, 30 | 0.7975 | 0.87 | 4, 30 | 0.4959 | 0.99 | 4, 31 | 0.4293 | 0.54 | 4, 31 | 0.7068 |
| EXA | Time | 0.34 | 2, 30 | 0.7166 | 0.47 | 2, 30 | 0.6314 | 0.65 | 2, 31 | 0.5291 | 0.64 | 2, 31 | 0.5322 |
| EXA | Temperature*Time | 0.71 | 8, 30 | 0.6828 | 0.44 | 8, 30 | 0.8847 | 0.70 | 8, 31 | 0.6856 | 1.93 | 8, 31 | 0.0900 |
Data were analysed separately by the stage of dormancy (EXA vs. ENA). Statistically significant effects are reported in bold.