林业科学 ›› 2026, Vol. 62 ›› Issue (10): 161-171.doi: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.LYKX20260248
• 研究论文 • 上一篇
郭帅1,2(
),谷奇1,李涵1,郝恩华1,董琦1,余梦琦2,陆鹏飞1,*(
)
收稿日期:2026-04-27
出版日期:2026-10-10
发布日期:2026-10-16
通讯作者:
陆鹏飞
E-mail:gsnznb98@126.com;lpengfei224@126.com
基金资助:
Shuai Guo1,2(
),Qi Gu1,Han Li1,Enhua Hao1,Qi Dong1,Mengqi Yu2,Pengfei Lu1,*(
)
Received:2026-04-27
Online:2026-10-10
Published:2026-10-16
Contact:
Pengfei Lu
E-mail:gsnznb98@126.com;lpengfei224@126.com
摘要:
目的: 基于宁夏固原光肩星天牛种群在旱柳和洋白蜡混生生境中偏好危害洋白蜡的现象,比较该种群与黑龙江齐齐哈尔主要危害复叶槭的光肩星天牛种群在寄主适应性上的分化,揭示固原种群适应洋白蜡的生理机制,为针对不同地理种群的光肩星天牛区域化监测与生态治理提供生理学依据。方法: 供试光肩星天牛分别采自宁夏固原和黑龙江齐齐哈尔,前者主要危害洋白蜡,记为固原种群(G);后者主要危害复叶槭,记为齐齐哈尔种群(Q)。2个种群成虫分别取食洋白蜡和复叶槭,形成4个处理:固原种群取食洋白蜡(G-Y)、固原种群取食复叶槭(G-F)、齐齐哈尔种群取食复叶槭(Q-F)、齐齐哈尔种群取食洋白蜡(Q-Y)。测定2种寄主植物1年生枝条树皮的营养和次生代谢物质,2个种群对2种寄主植物的选择性取食及产卵量、非选择性取食量、取食单一寄主植物存活时长以及4个处理组中肠消化酶、解毒酶和保护酶活性。结果: 1) 2种寄主树皮内含物差异显著,复叶槭含水率、纤维素、可溶性糖、倍半萜含量显著高于洋白蜡,洋白蜡黄酮类化合物、单宁含量显著更高,二者淀粉、蛋白质、生物碱含量无显著差异。2) 天牛行为与存活呈明显种群特异性,齐齐哈尔种群对复叶槭取食偏好极显著,取食洋白蜡后存活时长显著缩短,且在洋白蜡上无产卵行为,固原种群虽偏好复叶槭,但在2种寄主上非选择性取食量、存活时长无显著差异,且可在洋白蜡上刻槽产卵。3) 不同处理组消化酶、解毒酶和保护酶活性存在显著差异,整体表现为寄主转换与种群来源共同调控天牛中肠酶活性,消化酶活性与寄主营养水平相关,解毒酶和保护酶活性主要响应寄主次生物质差异的调控。结论: 不同种群在对洋白蜡的生理适应性上存在显著分化。2个地理种群均保持对复叶槭的取食和产卵偏好,但仅固原种群通过其高效的解毒酶系统发展出对洋白蜡的生理耐受和利用能力,从而能够在该抗性寄主上完成取食、存活和产卵,这种分化是地理种群在长期局部寄主选择压力下形成适应性进化的体现。
中图分类号:
郭帅,谷奇,李涵,郝恩华,董琦,余梦琦,陆鹏飞. 光肩星天牛不同种群的寄主适应性[J]. 林业科学, 2026, 62(10): 161-171.
Shuai Guo,Qi Gu,Han Li,Enhua Hao,Qi Dong,Mengqi Yu,Pengfei Lu. Host Adaptability of Different Populations of Anoplophora glabripennis[J]. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2026, 62(10): 161-171.
表1
不同寄主植物树皮中营养物质、次生物质及水分的含量①"
| 项目Item | 复叶槭 Acer negundo | 洋白蜡 Fraxinus pennsylvanica |
| 含水率 Moisture content (%) | 1.561±0.045 a | 1.067±0.049 b |
| 纤维素 Cellulose/(mg?g?1) | 221.436±5.316 a | 198.768±4.315 b |
| 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar/(mg?g?1) | 21.115±0.318 a | 18.608±0.079 b |
| 淀粉 Starch/(mg?g?1) | 16.218±0.536 a | 15.151±0.154 a |
| 蛋白质 Protein/(mg?g?1) | 44.328±0.996 a | 42.000±1.184 a |
| 黄酮类化合物 Flavonoids/(mg?g?1) | 1.844±0.039 b | 1.995±0.035 a |
| 生物碱 Alkaloids/(mg?g?1) | 0.907±0.042 a | 1.011±0.033 a |
| 倍半萜 Sesquiterpenes/(mg?g?1) | 8.784±0.134 a | 8.006±0.035 b |
| 单宁 Tannins/(mg?g?1) | 19.483±0.315 b | 21.202±0.309 a |
表3
齐齐哈尔种群的光肩星天牛取食选择、存活时长、中肠酶活性和寄主植物树皮内含物的相关性分析①"
| 项目Item | 含水率 Moisture content | 纤维素 Cellulose | 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar | 淀粉 Starch | 蛋白质 Protein | 黄酮类 化合物 Flavonoids | 生物碱 Alkaloids | 倍半萜 Sesquiterpenes | 单宁 Tannins |
| 选择性取食Selective feeding | 0.657 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.714 | ?0.943** | ?0.657 | 0.714 | ?0.714 |
| 非选择性取食Non-selective feeding | 0.714 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.657 | ?0.771 | ?0.714 | 0.657 | ?0.657 |
| 存活时长Survival duration | 0.794 | 0.618 | 0.618 | 0.618 | 0.794 | ?0.883* | ?0.794 | 0.794 | ?0.794 |
| 胰蛋白酶活性Trypsin activity | 0.886* | 0.943** | 0.943** | 0.943** | 0.829* | ?0.6 | ?0.886* | 0.829* | ?0.829* |
| α-淀粉酶活性α-amylase activity | ?0.943** | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.943** | 0.657 | 0.943** | ?0.943** | 0.943** |
| 纤维素酶活性Cellulase activity | 0.714 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.829* | ?0.771 | ?0.714 | 0.829* | ?0.829* |
| 羧酸酯酶活性Carboxylesterase activity | ?0.829* | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.714 | 0.771 | 0.829* | ?0.714 | 0.714 |
| 谷胱甘肽-S-转移酶活性 Glutathione S-transferase activity | ?0.771 | ?0.829* | ?0.829* | ?0.829* | ?0.6 | 0.714 | 0.771 | ?0.6 | 0.6 |
| 细胞色素P450酶活性Cytochrome P450 activity | 0.829* | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.714 | ?0.771 | ?0.829* | 0.714 | ?0.714 |
| 超氧化物歧化酶活性 Superoxide dismutase activity | ?1.000** | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.886* | 0.6 | 1.000** | ?0.886* | 0.886* |
| 过氧化氢酶活性Catalase activity | ?0.943** | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.943** | 0.657 | 0.943** | ?0.943** | 0.943** |
| 过氧化物酶活性Peroxidase activity | ?0.714 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.829* | 0.771 | 0.714 | ?0.829* | 0.829* |
表4
固原种群的光肩星天牛取食选择、存活时长、中肠酶活性和寄主植物树皮内含物的相关性分析①"
| 项目Item | 含水率 Moisture content | 纤维素 Cellulose | 可溶性糖 Soluble sugar | 淀粉 Starch | 蛋白质 Protein | 黄酮类 化合物 Flavonoids | 生物碱 Alkaloids | 倍半萜 Sesquiterpenes | 单宁 Tannins |
| 选择性取食Selective feeding | 0.714 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.829* | ?0.943** | ?0.714 | 0.829* | ?0.829* |
| 非选择性取食Non-selective feeding | 0.029 | 0.257 | 0.257 | 0.257 | ?0.029 | 0.143 | ?0.029 | ?0.029 | 0.029 |
| 存活时长Survival duration | 0.2 | ?0.429 | ?0.429 | ?0.429 | ?0.029 | 0.2 | ?0.2 | ?0.029 | 0.029 |
| 胰蛋白酶活性Trypsin activity | 0.657 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.771 | 0.543 | ?0.771 | ?0.657 | 0.543 | ?0.543 |
| α-淀粉酶活性α-amylase activity | ?0.714 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.771 | ?0.829* | 0.771 | 0.714 | ?0.829* | 0.829* |
| 纤维素酶活性Cellulase activity | 0.6 | 0.657 | 0.657 | 0.657 | 0.6 | ?0.886* | ?0.6 | 0.6 | ?0.6 |
| 羧酸酯酶活性Carboxylesterase activity | ?0.943** | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.886* | ?0.943** | 0.657 | 0.943** | ?0.943** | 0.943** |
| 谷胱甘肽-S-转移酶活性Glutathione S-transferase activity | 0.943** | 0.886* | 0.886* | 0.886* | 0.943** | ?0.657 | ?0.943** | 0.943** | ?0.943** |
| 细胞色素P450酶活性Cytochrome P450 activity | 0.371 | 0.429 | 0.429 | 0.429 | 0.314 | ?0.714 | ?0.371 | 0.314 | ?0.314 |
| 超氧化物歧化酶活性Superoxide dismutase activity | ?0.6 | ?0.371 | ?0.371 | ?0.371 | ?0.6 | ?0.029 | 0.6 | ?0.6 | 0.6 |
| 过氧化氢酶活性Catalase activity | 0.714 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.486 | ?0.543 | ?0.714 | 0.486 | ?0.486 |
| 过氧化物酶活性Peroxidase activity | 0.943** | 0.886* | 0.886* | 0.886* | 0.943** | ?0.657 | ?0.943** | 0.943** | ?0.943** |
| 陈 萍, 刘 欢, 侯茂林. 寄主转换对稻纵卷叶螟寄主种群适合度及生命表参数的影响. 昆虫学报, 2021, 64 (3): 400- 408. | |
| Chen P, Liu H, Hou M L. Effects of host shift on fitness and life table parameters of Cnaphalocrocis medinalis host populations. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 2021, 64 (3): 400- 408. | |
| 黄竞芳, 骆有庆, 周章义. 中国光肩星天牛研究的新进展. 陕西林业科技, 1992, (2): 57- 62. | |
| Huang J F, Luo Y Q, Zhou Z Y. New progress in the research on Anoplophora glabripennis in China. Shaanxi Forest Science and Technology, 1992, (2): 57- 62. | |
|
黄铭昊, 尚素琴, 崔树鹏, 等. 不同树种树皮物理特征与光肩星天牛危害的关系. 西北农业学报, 2023, 32 (6): 952- 959.
doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2023.06.014 |
|
|
Huang M H, Shang S Q, Cui S P, et al. Relationship between physical characteristics of bark from different tree species and damage by Anoplophora glabripennis. Northwest China Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 2023, 32 (6): 952- 959.
doi: 10.7606/j.issn.1004-1389.2023.06.014 |
|
| 赖城玲, 张 珺, 申屠旭萍, 等. 植物次生代谢物对植食性昆虫防御作用的研究进展. 应用昆虫学报, 2022, 59 (5): 969- 978. | |
| Lai C L, Zhang J, Shentu X P, et al. Research progress on defensive effects of plant secondary metabolites on phytophagous insects. Chinese Journal of Applied Entomology, 2022, 59 (5): 969- 978. | |
| 李浩培, 吕 飞, 毕拥国, 等. 我国林业重要蛀干害虫光肩星天牛研究进展. 林业与生态科学, 2020, 35 (1): 1- 9. | |
| Li H P, Lü F, Bi Y G, et al. Research progress on Anoplophora glabripennis, an important wood-boring pest in China’s forestry. Journal of Forestry and Ecological Sciences, 2020, 35 (1): 1- 9. | |
|
梁 瑶, 吴宜亭, 马 瑞, 等. 单宁酸对红色和绿色豌豆蚜酶活性的影响. 草原与草坪, 2024, 44 (3): 217- 223.
doi: 10.13817/j.cnki.cyycp.2024.03.026 |
|
|
Liang Y, Wu Y T, Ma R, et al. Effects of tannic acid on enzyme activities of red and green Acyrthosiphon pisum. Grassland and Turf, 2024, 44 (3): 217- 223.
doi: 10.13817/j.cnki.cyycp.2024.03.026 |
|
| 刘 利, 郅军锐, 岳文波, 等. 西花蓟马抗氧化酶基因FoCAT对寄主转换的响应. 山地农业生物学报, 2019, 38 (3): 22- 26. | |
| Liu L, Zhi J R, Yue W B, et al. Response of the antioxidant enzyme gene FoCAT in Frankliniella occidentalisto host shift. Journal of Mountain Agriculture and Biology, 2019, 38 (3): 22- 26. | |
|
聂佳佳, 张爱莲, 张 爽. 取食不同植物对舞毒蛾幼虫生长发育及生化酶的影响. 西南林业大学学报(自然科学), 2024, 44 (5): 200- 206.
doi: 10.11929/j.swfu.202312023 |
|
|
Nie J J, Zhang A L, Zhang S. Effects of feeding on different plants on the growth, development, and biochemical enzymes of Lymantria disparlarvae. Journal of Southwest Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2024, 44 (5): 200- 206.
doi: 10.11929/j.swfu.202312023 |
|
|
沈海燕, 梁 运, 陈正浩, 等. 不同寄主植物对云南松毛虫生长发育、繁殖及生理酶活性的影响. 林业科学研究, 2022, 35 (5): 63- 70.
doi: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2022.005.007 |
|
|
Shen H Y, Liang Y, Chen Z H, et al. Effects of different host plants on growth, reproduction and physiological enzyme activities of Dendrolimus houi. Forest Research, 2022, 35 (5): 63- 70.
doi: 10.13275/j.cnki.lykxyj.2022.005.007 |
|
| 孙守慧, 郑雅楠, 吕长利, 等. 杨树次生代谢物质与青杨天牛酶活性的关系. 林业科学, 2011, 47 (8): 108- 114. | |
| Sun S H, Zheng Y N, Lü C L, et al. Relationship between secondary metabolites of poplar and enzyme activities of Saperda populnea. Scientia Silvae Sinicae, 2011, 47 (8): 108- 114. | |
|
王欢廷, 黄立飞, 曹雪梅, 等. 不同寄主植物对豆大蓟马体内消化酶活性及营养物质含量的影响. 中国农业科学, 2025, 58 (21): 4429- 4438.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.21.012 |
|
|
Wang H T, Huang L F, Cao X M, et al. Effects of different host plants on digestive enzyme activities and nutrient contents in Megalurothrips usitatus. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2025, 58 (21): 4429- 4438.
doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2025.21.012 |
|
|
王 可, 张久明, 史振平, 等. 极地与深海生境链霉菌产生的吲哚咔唑生物碱杀虫活性及作用机理初探. 环境昆虫学报, 2015, 37 (1): 85- 89.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0858.2015.01.13 |
|
|
Wang K, Zhang J M, Shi Z P, et al. Preliminary study on insecticidal activity and mechanism of indolocarbazole alkaloids produced by Streptomyces from polar and deep-sea habitats. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 2015, 37 (1): 85- 89.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0858.2015.01.13 |
|
|
王睿琦, 王 莹, 张嶴颖, 等. 美国白蛾幼虫取食对低适合度寄主植物山槐诱导防御的影响. 昆虫学报, 2025, 68 (8): 1123- 1135.
doi: 10.16380/j.kcxb.2025.08.011 |
|
|
Wang R Q, Wang Y, Zhang A Y, et al. Effects of larval feeding of Hyphantria cunea on induced defense of Maackia amurensis, a low-fitness host plant. Acta Entomologica Sinica, 2025, 68 (8): 1123- 1135.
doi: 10.16380/j.kcxb.2025.08.011 |
|
| 王秀吉, 路 浩, 冯宇倩, 等. 不同寄主对小线角木蠹蛾幼虫消化解毒酶的影响. 环境昆虫学报, 2020, 42 (2): 480- 492. | |
| Wang X J, Lu H, Feng Y Q, et al. Effects of different host plants on digestive and detoxification enzymes of Holcocerus insularis larvae. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 2020, 42 (2): 480- 492. | |
| 王学奎, 黄见良. 2015. 植物生理生化实验原理与技术. 3版. 北京: 高等教育出版社. | |
| Wang X K, Huang J L. 2015. Principles and techniques of plant physiological biochemical experiment. 3rd ed. Beijing: Higher Education Press. [in Chinese] | |
|
王紫薇, 徐华潮, 汪云珍, 等. 树皮内含物对光肩星天牛取食与刻槽产卵量的影响. 环境昆虫学报, 2016, 38 (5): 942- 949.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0858.2016.05.11 |
|
|
Wang Z W, Xu H C, Wang Y Z, et al. Effects of bark components on feeding and oviposition groove number of Anoplophora glabripennis. Journal of Environmental Entomology, 2016, 38 (5): 942- 949.
doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1674-0858.2016.05.11 |
|
| 吴明可. 2022. 广聚萤叶甲与豚草重新互作对AMF侵染率的影响及其代谢机制研究. 郑州: 河南大学. | |
| Wu M K. 2022. Effects of re-interaction between Ophraella communa and Ambrosia artemisiifolia on AMF infection rate and its metabolic mechanism. Zhengzhou: Henan University. [in Chinese] | |
| 阎雄飞, 刘永华. 4种寄主对光肩星天牛成虫体重、寿命、产卵量和孵化率的影响研究. 中国农学通报, 2012, 28 (25): 52- 56. | |
| Yan X F, Liu Y H. Effects of four host plants on body weight, longevity, oviposition, and hatching rate of adult Anoplophora glabripennis. Chinese Agricultural Science Bulletin, 2012, 28 (25): 52- 56. | |
|
张守科, 张 威, 舒金平, 等. 黄脊竹蝗趋泥行为激发与氮素收支的关系. 生态学杂志, 2019, 38 (10): 3136- 3142.
doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.201910.013 |
|
|
Zhang S K, Zhang W, Shu J P, et al. Relationship between mud-puddling behavior excitation and nitrogen budget in the yellow-spined bamboo locust, Ceracris kiangsu. Chinese Journal of Ecology, 2019, 38 (10): 3136- 3142.
doi: 10.13292/j.1000-4890.201910.013 |
|
|
朱香镇, 雒珺瑜, 张 帅, 等. 植物源次生物质棉酚和芸香苷对绿盲蝽保护酶与解毒酶活性的影响. 植物保护学报, 2018, 45 (5): 1044- 1053.
doi: 10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2017061 |
|
|
Zhu X Z, Luan J Y, Zhang S, et al. Effects of plant-derived secondary metabolites gossypol and rutin on protective and detoxification enzyme activities of Apolygus lucorum. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica, 2018, 45 (5): 1044- 1053.
doi: 10.13802/j.cnki.zwbhxb.2018.2017061 |
|
|
Aboshi T, Yoshinaga N, Nishida R, et al. Phospholipid biosynthesis in the gut of Spodoptera litura larvae and effects of tannic acid ingestion. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 2010, 40 (4): 325- 330.
doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2010.02.007 |
|
|
Ana Patricia S O, Afonso C A, Emmanuel V P, et al. Evaluation of the insecticidal activity of Moringa oleifera seed extract and lectin (WSMoL) against Sitophilus zeamais. Journal of Stored Products Research, 2020, 87, 101615.
doi: 10.1016/j.jspr.2020.101615 |
|
|
Barbehenn R V, Niewiadomski J, Kochmanski J. Importance of protein quality versus quantity in alternative host plants for a leaf-feeding insect. Oecologia, 2013, 173 (1): 1- 12.
doi: 10.1007/s00442-012-2574-7 |
|
|
Cao Y, Qi G L, Jiang F Y, et al. Population performance and detoxifying and protective enzyme activities of four thrips species feeding on flowers of Magnolia grandiflora (Ranunculales: Magnolia). Pest Management Science, 2023, 79 (9): 3239- 3249.
doi: 10.1002/ps.7509 |
|
|
Dong W B, Hou D L, Hou Q F, et al. Effects of ultraviolet light stress on protective and detoxification enzymes in insects. Tropical Plants, 2024, 3, e007..
doi: 10.48130/tp-0024-0008 |
|
|
Dres M, Mallet J. Host races in plant-feeding insects and their importance in sympatric speciation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series B Biological Sciences, 2002, 357 (1420): 471- 492.
doi: 10.1098/rstb.2002.1059 |
|
|
Forbes A A, Devine S N, Hippee A C, et al. Revisiting the particular role of host shifts in initiating insect speciation. Evolution, 2017, 71 (5): 1126- 1137.
doi: 10.1111/evo.13164 |
|
|
Gloss A D, Dittrich A, Goldman-Huertas B, et al. Maintenance of genetic diversity through plant-herbivore interactions. Current Opinion in Plant Biology, 2013, 16 (4): 443- 450.
doi: 10.1016/j.pbi.2013.06.002 |
|
|
Guo H J, Zhang Y J, Tong J H, et al. An aphid-secreted salivary protease activates plant defense in phloem. Current Biology, 2020, 30 (24): 4826- 4836.
doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.09.020 |
|
|
Javal M, Roques A, Haran J, et al. Complex invasion history of the Asian long-horned beetle: fifteen years after first detection in Europe. Journal of Pest Science, 2019, 92 (1): 173- 187.
doi: 10.1007/s10340-017-0917-1 |
|
|
Li S Y, Li H, Wang J T, et al. Hormetic response and co-expression of cytochrome P450 and cuticular protein reveal the tolerance to host-specific terpenoid defences in an emerging insect pest, Pagiophloeus tsushimanus (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Journal of Pest science, 2023, 96, 141- 160.
doi: 10.1007/s10340-022-01509-0 |
|
|
Liu Y X, Dietrich C H, Wei C. The impact of geographic isolation and host shifts on population divergence of the rare cicada Subpsaltria yangi. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 2024, 199, 108146.
doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2024.108146 |
|
| Matsubayashi K W, Ohshima I, Nosil P. Ecological speciation in phytophagous insects. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 2010, 134 (1): 1- 27. | |
|
Naidoo S, Christie N, Acosta J J, et al. Terpenes associated with resistance against the gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa, in Eucalyptus grandis. Plant Cell and Environment, 2018, 41 (8): 1840- 1851.
doi: 10.1111/pce.13323 |
|
|
Nenaah G E. Potential of using flavonoids, latex and extracts from Calotropis procera (Ait.) as grain protectants against two coleopteran pests of stored rice. Industrial Crops and Products, 2013, 45, 327- 334.
doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2012.12.043 |
|
|
Qi R H, Pei J H, Zhou Q, et al. Comparative metabolic defense responses of three tree species to the supplemental feeding behavior of Anoplophora glabripennis. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 2024, 25 (23): 12716.
doi: 10.3390/ijms252312716 |
|
|
Slatyer R A, Hirst M, Sexton J P. Niche breadth predicts geographical range size: a general ecological pattern. Ecology Letters, 2013, 16 (8): 1104- 1114.
doi: 10.1111/ele.12140 |
|
|
Vidal M C, Lill J T, Marquis R J, et al. Geographic variation in performance of a widespread generalist insect herbivore. Ecological Entomology, 2020, 45 (3): 617- 625.
doi: 10.1111/een.12833 |
|
|
Vidal M C, Quinn T W, Stireman J O, et al. Geography is more important than host plant use for the population genetic structure of a generalist insect herbivore. Molecular Ecology, 2019, 28 (18): 4317- 4334.
doi: 10.1111/mec.15218 |
|
|
Wang G J, Wang X, Yang Z J, et al. Effects of Fusarium solani on the growth and development of Anoplophora glabripennis larvae. Microbial Ecology, 2023b, 87 (1): 23.
doi: 10.1007/s00248-023-02332-5 |
|
| Wang L X, Li C C, Luo Y Q, et al. 2023a. Current and future control of the wood-boring pest Anoplophora glabripennis. Insect Science, 30(6): 1534−1551. | |
|
Wang X, Du Z Y, Duan Y G, et al. Population genomics analyses reveal the role of hybridization in the rapid invasion of fall armyworm. Journal of Advanced Research, 2025, 74, 43- 55.
doi: 10.1016/j.jare.2024.09.028 |
|
| Winkler I, Scheffer S J, Lewis M L, et al. 2018. Anatomy of a neotropical insect radiation. Bmc Evolutionary Biology, 18(1): 30. | |
|
Zou X P, Xu Z B, Zou H W, et al. Glutathione s-transferase sigste1 in Spodoptera litura may be associated with feeding adaptation of host plants. Insect Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 2016, 70, 32- 43.
doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2015.10.005 |
| [1] | 周兴隆,刘竟星,吕宁,李健荣,杨金娟,于丽,杨俊丽,姬宇翔. 西北地区枸杞木虱不同地理种群遗传分析[J]. 林业科学, 2025, 61(5): 171-179. |
| [2] | 贾若峰,谷奇,孙一鸣,陆鹏飞,俱世博,乔海莉. 取食洋白蜡和旱柳光肩星天牛幼虫肠道中的细菌多样性差异及关键纤维素降解细菌筛选[J]. 林业科学, 2023, 59(4): 117-131. |
| [3] | 唐汉尧,郑吉阳,王敦. 摩泽蒲螨携带杀虫真菌靶向防治光肩星天牛[J]. 林业科学, 2022, 58(8): 157-164. |
| [4] | 王志刚, 苏智, 刘明虎, 赵英铭, 张格, 崔振荣, 淡慧丽, 陈星明. 新疆杨与北抗杨抗光肩星天牛特性的比较[J]. 林业科学, 2018, 54(9): 89-96. |
| [5] | 周艳涛, 李硕, 孟昭军, 王嘉冰, 刘英胜, 张爱军, 严善春. 光肩星天牛诱捕器颜色的改进及其引诱剂最佳缓释量的确定[J]. 林业科学, 2017, 53(6): 168-174. |
| [6] | 崔晓宁, 伊志豪, 王明, 刘德广, 廖书江, 许正. 苹小吉丁成虫补充营养的偏好性及相关植物挥发物分析[J]. 林业科学, 2016, 52(11): 96-106. |
| [7] | 崔贝, 林若竹, 赵文霞, 兰宗科. 秦岭南坡北桑寄生生态危害状况评价[J]. 林业科学, 2014, 50(10): 86-93. |
| [8] | 杨钤, 谢映平, 樊金华, 邵生富, 吴俊, 王彦士, 赵常胜, 张英伟. 日本松干蚧3个地理种群的遗传分化[J]. 林业科学, 2013, 49(12): 88-96. |
| [9] | 邓彩萍;闫喜中;刘红霞;骆有庆. 光肩星天牛刻槽的微生境[J]. , 2013, 49(1): 169-173. |
| [10] | 邓彩萍;闫喜中;刘红霞;郝赤;骆有庆. 球孢白僵菌侵染光肩星天牛幼虫的扫描电镜及组织病理观察[J]. 林业科学, 2012, 48(3): 105-109. |
| [11] | 项颖颖孙绪艮王秀利张霞孟繁玲. 槐小卷蛾的寄主选择行为项[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(11): 184-188. |
| [12] | 阎雄飞;孙月琴刘永华李晓娟骆有庆. 光肩星天牛触角感受器的环境扫描电镜观察[J]. 林业科学, 2010, 46(11): 104-109. |
| [13] | 王宝辉;郑建伟 黄大庄 王达 马向超 韩小勇. 绿僵菌MS01菌株的生物学特性及在不同温湿度下对光肩星天牛幼虫的致病力*[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 12(9): 158-162. |
| [14] | 刘英胜. 严善春 程 红 王 琪 文 攀 王艳军. 落叶松毛虫对兴安落叶松9种挥发性物质的行为反应*[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 12(4): 72-77. |
| [15] | 李孟楼 李有忠 雷 琼 杨忠岐. 释放花绒寄甲卵对光肩星天牛幼虫的防治效果*[J]. 林业科学, 2009, 12(4): 78-82. |
| 阅读次数 | ||||||
|
全文 |
|
|||||
|
摘要 |
|
|||||