Parasitoid assemblage size and host

ranges in a parasitoid
(Hymenoptera)-Agromyzidae (Diptera)
system from central Argentina

A. Salvo* and G. Valladares

Centro de Investigaciones Entomologicas de Cordoba, Universidad
Nacional de Cordoba, Avda. Velez Sarsfield 299, CP 5000 Cordoba,
Argentina

Abstract

A parasitoid community on Agromyzidae leafminers from Cordoba, Argentina was analyzed in terms of parasi-
toid assemblage size and host ranges of parasitoid species. Samples were taken during 1991-1995 at natural, urban and
agricultural habitats. The system consisted of 69 parasitoid species and 51 leafminer species on 109 plant species. On
average, 12 species parasitized each host, when only numerically well represented leafminer species were considered
for analysis. Each parasitoid species exploited on average seven species and three genera of Agromyzidae leafminers.
Both parasitoid assemblage size and parasitoid host range were notably high when compared with similar Systems from
other regions.

Introduction

Leafminers are insects whose larvae feed between the epidermises of leaves, consuming foliar
mesophyllum (Askew & Shaw, 1974). In the galleries thus excavated the feeding larvae find shelter against
harsh environmental conditions but little protection against parasitoids, which are the most frequent natural
enemies of the group. In fact, this guild of phytophagous insects supports the richest parasitoid communi-
ties, seemingly due to the physical characteristics of leaf mines (Hawkins, 1988).
Parasitoid assemblages of phytophagous insects are usually studied in relation to a definite host spe-
cies in a definite habitat. But knowledge of the entire community of parasitoids attacking all available host
species within an ecological guild or a phylogenetically related group, on a regional scale over a variety of
habitats, is essential to obtain reliable information about parasitoid host ranges, number of shared parasitoid
species and host species, etc. (Askew & Shaw, 1986; Godfray, 1994). We aim to contribute to that knowl-
edge by analyzing a parasitoid-leafminer-host plant system in Central Argentina. The fauna of leafminers in
the study area is largely dominated by Agromyzidae (Diptera) (Valladares, 1982), a family which is well
represented worldwide (Spencer, 1990). Knowledge about parasitoids associated with Agromyzidae in Ar-
gentina is limited (Diaz & Valladares, 1979; Neder de Roman & Arce de Hamity, 1985; Valladares et al.,
1982; Salvo, 1996; Salvo & Valladares, 1993, 1996, 1997) despite the hosts being relatively well known
(e.g. Valladares, 1982, 1984, 1991, 1996). This paper provides a description of the system, analyzing the
size of parasitoid assemblages on Agromyzidae species and parasitoid host ranges.

Materials and methods

Mined leaves were sampled from 1991 to 1995 at 30 localities in Cordoba province, central Argen-
tina, including natural, urban and agricultural habitats. Some localities were sampled monthly whereas
others were visited occasionally. Mined leaves of each available host plant were cut and placed in plastic
bags, in which they were carried to the laboratory and kept until flies and parasitoids emerged. Special

* Fax: 5451 332097

rearing methods were developed for leaves with high water content or those that rapidly dried once excised.
In the former case, a box covered with gauze was used instead of a bag, or the mined portion of the leaf was
cut out from the rest, to reduce the risk of the mine becoming infected with mould. To avoid excessive
desiccation, stems with several leaves were collected or humid cotton wool pieces were added to the bags.
Adults were stored in small glass tubes plugged with cotton wool and after emergence had ceased they were
counted and identified. A reference collection of both Agromyzidae and parasitoids has been deposited in
Catedra de Entomologia, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba.
Average, maximum, minimum and standard error (X, max., mm., and SE) were calculated for the
parasitoid assemblage size of agromyzid species and for host ranges of the parasitoid species. These figures
were estimated separately for the total number of species and for those species with a sample size of over
100 agromyzid or ten parasitoid adults, in order to reduce errors attributable to the use of small samples.
Parasitoid assemblage size was estimated for both species and genera of leafminers, whereas host ranges of
parasitic species were assessed at both the specific and generic level of host identification. The influence of
sample size on both parasitoid assemblage size and host range of parasitoids was described by using linear
regressions. Although the overall relationships must eventually be asymptotic, some nonlinear models tested
did not show a better adjustment of the data. Parasitoid assemblage size, host range and sample size were log
transformed prior to analysis.
The effect of host taxonomic isolation on parasitoid assemblage size was assessed by regressing the
latter on the number of agromyzid species ii each genus occurring in the study area. The residuals from the
regression of parasitoid assemblage size on agromyzid genus sample size were then regressed against
agromyzid generic species richness to remove sample size effects.
Possible differences in host ranges among taxonomic families of parasitoids were analyzed by
ANCOVA, with specific and generic host ranges of all parasitoids or parasitoids with more than ten indi-
viduals as dependent variables and sample size as covariate, in order to incorporate its effect (Steel & Torrie,
1981).

Results and Discussion

The leafminer-host plant-parasitoid community

Leaf miners

Fifty-one leaf mining agromyzid species in ten genera were found in central Argentina during the
study period. The most speciose genera were Liriomyza Mik 15 species), Calycomyza Hendel (ten species)
and Haplopeodes Steyskal (nine species). Ophiomyia Braschnikov and Phytamyza Fallen were represented
by three species each, while just one species was reared for Agromyza Fallen, Amauromyza Hendel,
Chromatamyia Hardy, Japanagromyza Sasakawa and Phytoliriomyza Hendel.

Host plants

Agromyzid species mined leaves from 31 families, 55 genera and 109 species of plants in the study
area. A preliminary analysis of the relative importance of leafminer and plant affiliation on the host ranges
of some of the parasitoid species has previously been reported (Salvo & Valladares, 1997).

Parasitoids

A rich parasitoid community exploited agromyzid leafminers in this region. All the parasitoid species
known from the Agromyzidae in Argentina were represented in the area, and many more were recorded for
the first time from this study (Salvo & Valladares, in press; Van Achterberg & Salvo, 1997).
 Out of 41,534 adult insects reared (flies and parasitoids), hymenopterous parasitoids comprised 40%
percent, in three super families, five families and 69 species. Seventeen of the latter were identified to
species level, and the rest were considered morphospecies, 37 at the genus level, two at the subfamily level
and 14 at the family level.
Eulophidae, Pteromalidae and Braconidae each accounted for almost a third of the parasitoid species,
while Eucoilidae and Mymaridae had little representation. However, in terms of the abundance of parasitoid
individuals, the Eulophidae was distinctly the best-represented family, followed by the Braconidae (table 1).

Parasitoid assemblage size on agromyzid leafminers

Parasitoid assemblage size was largely determined by sample size (P < 0.0001, R2 = 0.74) (fig.1), an
effect noticed almost whenever this factor has been considered (Askew & Shaw, 1974; Hawkins & Lawton,
1987; Hawkins, 1988, 1990; Towner, 1992; God fray, 1994). To a lesser degree, sample size also influenced
parasitoid assemblage size when genera instead of species of leafminers were considered (P=0.02, Model:
R2= (0.50, log (y + 1) =0.672+0.189* lot,, (x + 1)).
On average, each agromyzid species hosted 9.2 (SE = 0.78, max. = 23, mm. = 0, n = 51) parasitoid
species in the study site. When only those host species with more than 100 reared adults were considered
(fig. 2) the average rose to 12.3 (SE = 0.89, max. = 23, mm. = 1, n = 30); and reached to 19.3 (SE = 1.92,
max. = 23, mm. = 6, n = 6) parasitoid species per leafminer species with 1000 or more adults. These figures
seem remarkably high when compared to the average of two species in the parasitoid assemblages of leafminers
from three insect orders in Costa Rica (Memmot et al., 1994). Similarly, each host species in a dipteran leaf-
mining community in Great Britain supported just over three parasitoid species (Towner, 1992).
Based on a literature survey, Hawkins 1990) recorded an average of six parasitoid species for Neotro-
pical leafminer species. At a global scale, 11 parasitoid species were found on average for leafminer species,
with sample size above 1000 individuals (Hawkins, 1994). Therefore, parasitoid communities of agromyzid
flies in Central Argentina seem to be notably rich. Although the abovementioned studies included leafminers
other than Agromyzidae, there is no obvious reason for this group to sustain a higher parasitoid assemblage
size than leafminers in other insect orders or families. Differences in sampling methods and objectives of
the studies (specifically designed to obtain information on this topic in the present paper) could explain the
higher species richness of the parasitoid assemblages in central Argentina, in relation to those studied by
Hawkins, but not in relation to the Costa Rican and the British systems. In the latter cases, sampling inten-
sity might be a more satisfactory explanation since only 13 and 12 leafminer species, respectively, were
represented by 100 or more individuals in those studies, compared to 28 leafminer species in the present
study.

Table 1. Representation of each parasitoid family as a percentage of total parasitoid species and total parasitoid indi-
viduals reared.

Taxonomic family Individuals (%) Species (%)

(n=16,543) (n = 69)

Braconidae 26.8 27.5

Eucoilidae 5.7 7.3
Eulophidae 57.8 33.3
Mymaridae 1.2 1.5
Pteromalidae 8.5 30.4

Fig. 1. Relationship parasitoid assemblage size of Fig. 2. Frequency distribution of leafminer species (sample
agromyzid leafminer species and sample size. Model log size 100 adults) in relation to the size of their parasitoid
(y + 1) = 0.33 +0.28 * log (x + 1) assemblage.

Fig. 4. Mean host range (SE), at species () and genus

Fig. 3. Relationship between parasitoid assemblage size () level of identification, of parasitoid species depend-
of agromyzid leafminer genera and number of species in ing on the sample size of the species considered in the
the genus. Model P = 0.003, R2 = 0.67 log (y + 1) = 0.96 analysis.Number within the bars indicate number of spe-
+ 0.50 log (x + 1). cies included in each category.

Fig. 6. Relationship between parasitoid taxonomic fam-

Fig. 5. Relationship between species host ranges of para- ily and mean host range (species () and genera ()) ad-
sitoid species and sample size. Model log (y + 1) = 0.087 justed for parasitoid sample size by ANCOVA. Data from
* log (x + 1) parasitoids with sample size 10 individuals.
 Host taxonomic isolation is usually included among the many potential explanatory factors for para-
sitoid assemblage size patterns (Hawkins & Lawton, 1987; Hawkins, 1988). In the present system, the
richest agromyzid genera support the richest parasitoid assemblages (fig. 3), reflecting their higher apparency
as a colonizable resource for parasitoids, and the consequent accumulation of parasitoid species over evolu-
tionary and ecological time. This effect was maintained even after the effect of sample size was removed (P
= 0.05 R2 = 0.39).

Parasitoid host ranges

Thirty out of 69 parasitoid species recorded in this study were apparently monophagous, being reared
from only one agromyzid species, while 33 were restricted to one agromyzid genus. But only 19% (eight
species) or 26% (ten species) of the parasitoids represented by ten or more individuals restricted their attack
to one species or genus of host, respectively.
On average, each parasitoid species attacked nearly seven species of agromyzid leafminers in the
study region, and these values rose considerably when the analysis was restricted to parasitoids with larger
sample sizes (fig. 4).
It has been proposed that hosts in concealed situations, such as leafminers, should sustain a generalist-
dominated parasitoid fauna (Hawkins et al., 1992), which is fully supported by the present data. But even
then, the figures reported above suggest a remarkable degree of polyphagy for the parasitoids of agromyzid
leafminers in central Argentina. Monophagous species were much better represented (63% of species) in the
system studied by Memmot et al. (1994) in Costa Rica, where an average host range of two leafminer
species was recorded. This difference is even more noticeable given the much higher number of available
host species in that study (90) than in the present one (51). Dipteran leafminer parasitoids in Great Britain
also presented a much narrower average host range (three species) than the one discussed here (Towner,
1992). Again, comparisons must be made carefully given the differences in the sampling intensity of the
different studies.
Sample size greatly influenced the number of host species (P c 0.00~, R2 = 0.80) (fig. 5) and to a lesser
degree host genera (P < 0.0001 R2 =0.26 Model: log (y + 1) = 0.318 + 0.139 * log (x + 1)) exploited by each
parasitoid species. This renders the polyphagy of parasitoids in central Argentina even more noticeable,
since a greater sampling effort would be expected to reveal even broader host ranges.
Also, it must be noted that very few individuals mainly represent monophagous species. This con-
tradicts the expectancy of a supposedly higher efficiency of resource utilization by specialists. Their scar-
city suggests they could actually be generalists, possibly feeding on various groups of leafminers (at supra-
family level), among which Agromyzidae could be non-preferred hosts.
Specialization or generalism could be phylogenetically conserved (Godfray, 1994), and thus host
ranges could be linked to parasitoid taxonomy. Host ranges (measured at both the specific and generic level)
varied among parasitoid families. When an ANCOVA analysis was performed, the preliminary test for
homogeneity of slopes was not significant for either the species (F = 1.56, P = 0.20) or the generic (F = 1.09,
P = 0.36) host ranges. In the final model, sample size highly affected host ranges, both at generic and
specific level (P <0.001). For species host range, parasitoid family remained a highly important factor (P =
0.004), but it was irrelevant for generic host ranges. A similar analysis restricted to parasitoids with more
than ten individuals showed a similar pattern: regression slopes were not significantly different (species
host range: F = 1.01, P = 0.40, generic host range: F = 0.21, P = 0.89), sample size significantly affected
species and generic (P <0.0001) host ranges, and parasitoid family was important at the species level of host
ranges (P = 0.01). Adjusted means for species and generic host ranges show Eucoilidae as the most polypha-
gous family followed by Eulophidae, Pteromalidae and Braconidae. When only parasitoids with more than
ten reared individuals were considered, Eulophidae and Eucoilidae have equally wide host ranges (fig. 6).
The latter results are probably more realistic, because parasitoid species obtained only once can spuriously
be considered as strictly monophagous.
 Currently, research is being carried out on the effects of plant and agromyzid host on the parasitoid
community described here, which is expected to improve our knowledge and understanding of this system
and of parasitoid communities in general.

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank L. De Santis, C. Van Achterberg, J. La Salle, M. Schauff and C. Hansson for helping
to identify the parasitoids, B. Hawkins, C. Godfray and N. Mills for greatly improving our original manu-
script, P. Hobson for reviewing the English manuscript translation, and A. Mangeaud for helping with data
analysis. A. Salvo was supported by a CONICET grant. CONICOR/SECyT funded this research.

References

Askew, R.R. & Shaw, M.R. (1974) An account of the Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera) parasitizing leaf-mining
insects of deciduous trees in Britain. Biological Journal of the Linneans Society 6, 289-335.
Askew, R.R. & Shaw, M.R. (1986) Parasitoid communities: their size, Structure and development. pp. 22-
234 in Waage, J. & Greathead, D. (Eds) Insect parasitoids. London Academic Press.
Diaz, N.B. & Valladares, G.R. (1979) Nota sobre Agrostocynips clavatus y sus agromicidos hospedantes
(Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea). Neotropica 25, 2~26.~
Godfray, H.C.J. 1994) Parasitoids: behavioral and evolutionary biology. Chichester, Princeton University
Press.
Hawkins, B.A. (1988) Species diversity in the third and fourth tropic levels: patterns and mechanisms.
Journal of Animal Ecology 57, 137-62.
Hawkins, B.A. (1990) Global patterns of parasitoid assemblage size. Journal of Animal Ecology 59, 57-72.
Hawkins, B.A. (1994) Pattern and process in host-parasitoid interactions. Cambridge, Cambridge Univer-
sity Press.
Hawkins, B.A. & Lawton, J. (1987) Species richness for parasitoids of British phytophagous inSects.
Nature 326, 78-790.
Hawkins, B.A., Shaw, M.R. & Askew, R.R. (1992) Relations among assemblage size, host speciatization
and climatic variability in North American parasitoid communities. The American Naturalist 139, 5-
79.
Memmot, J., Godfray, H.CJ. & Gauld, I.D. 1994) The structure of a tropical host-parasitoid community.
Journal of Animal Ecology 63, 521-540.
Neder de Roman, L.E. & Arce de Hamity, M.G. (1985) Complejo de parasitoides de Liriomyza huidobrensis
en la Quebrada de Humahuaca (Jujuy). Neotropica 31, 181-186.
Salvo, A. (1996). Diversidad y estructura en comunidades de parasitoides (Hymenoptera: Parasitica) de
minalores de hojas (Di ptera: Agromyzidac) Tesis Doctoral, Universidad Nacional de Cordoba.
Salvo, A. & Valladares, G.R. (1993) Estudio preliminar del complejo parasitico de Phytoliriomyza
jacarandae (Diptera: Agromyzidae) en Jacaranda mimosifolia (Bignoniaceae) en Cordoba, Argen-
tina. Acta Entomologica Chilena 18, 113-118.
Salvo, A. & Valladares, G.R. (1996) Regulacion de la mosca minadora Liriomyza huidobrensis (Diptera:
Agromyzidae) por parasitoides (Hymenoptera: Parasitica) en haba. Agriscientia 12, 39-7.
Salvo, A. & Valladares, G.R. (1997) An analysis of leaf miner and plant host ranges of three Chrysocharis
species (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) from Argentina. Entomophaga 42, 387-396
Salvo, A. & Valladares, G.R. (1998) Taxonomic composition of parasitoid communities (Hymenoptera:
Parasitica) of Agromyzidae leafminers (Diptera: Agromyzidae) in Argentina. Studies on Neotropical
Fauna and Environment, in press.
Spencer, K.A. (1990) Host specialization in the world Agromyzidae (Diptera). Series Entomologica 45.
London, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Steel, R.G.D. & Torrie, J.H. (1981) Principles and procedures of statistics. A biometrical approach. Lon-
don, Mc Graw Hill Book Company.
Towner, C. (1992) Community ecology of phytophagous insects and their parasitoids. PhD thesis, Univer-
sity of London.
Valladares, G.R. (1982) Agromyzidae (Diptera) de la Provincia de C6rdoba. Tesis Doctoral. Universidad
de Cordoba.
Valladares, G.R. (1984) Sobre el genero Liriomyza Mik, 1984. (Dipt.: Agromyzidae) en la Rep. Argentina.
Revista de Ia Sociedad Entomoldgica Argentina 43, 13-36.
Valladares, G.R. (1991) Contribucion al conocimiento de las especies de Calycomyza Hendel (Diptera:
Agromyzidae) minadoras de hojas de la Republica Argentina II. Revista de Ia Sociedad Entomoldgica
Argentina 50, 179-200.
Valladares, G.R. (1996) Three new species of Ha plo peodes Steyskal (Diptera: Agromyzidae) from Argen-
tina. Entomological Mon thIp Magazine 134, 31-38.
Valladares, G., Diaz, N.B. & De Santis, L. (1982) Tres notas sobre dipteros agromicidos de Ia RepOblica
Argentina y sus himenopteros parasitoides (Insecta). Revista Ic la Sociedad Entomoligica Argentina
41, 319-330.
Van Achterberg, C. & Salvo, A. (1997) Reared Opunse (Hym.: Braconidae) from Argentina. Zoologisehe
Mededelingen 71,189-214.