Diversity and Distribution of Xylophagous Beetles from <i>Pinus thunbergii</i> Parl. and <i>Pinus massoniana</i> Lamb. Infected by Pine Wood Nematode
The vectors of pinewood nematode of <i>Bursaphelenchus xylophilus</i> (Steiner & Bührer, 1934) are mainly known as xylophagous beetles. Understanding the composition and distribution of these xylophagous beetles in host pine trees infected by PWN is critical to control the spread of...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
MDPI AG
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/23210f5c5caf406a94eedcf7ec8e0ff3 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | The vectors of pinewood nematode of <i>Bursaphelenchus xylophilus</i> (Steiner & Bührer, 1934) are mainly known as xylophagous beetles. Understanding the composition and distribution of these xylophagous beetles in host pine trees infected by PWN is critical to control the spread of PWN. In this study, we investigated the community structures of the xylophagous beetles in two main host trees in Fujian and Shandong, <i>Pinus massoniana</i> Lamb. and <i>Pinus thunbergia</i> Parl., in different stages of infection. All beetles were collected by dissecting the whole pine trees and then identified by their morphological characteristics and COI genes. The results showed that the diversity of xylophagous beetles was different not only between the two host pine trees but also among the different infection stages. The diversity of <i>P</i>. <i>massoniana</i> xylophagous beetles was significantly higher than that of <i>P</i>. <i>thunbergii</i>, and there were also significant differences in the different stages of PWN infection. In total, Scolytinae was the most common (53.70%), followed by Curculionidae (18.26%), Cerambycidae (16.31%), and Cleridae (6.04%). <i>Monochamus alternatus</i>, the most important vector of PWN, occupied a large niche and showed different aggregation positions during the three infection stages in both host trees. This result might be related to the resistance of bark beetles to host trees and competition with other xylophagous beetles. The community diversity of xylophagous beetles was jointly affected by both the infection stages of PWN and the spatial niche of xylophagous beetles. Knowledge of the diversity and competitive relationships among xylophagous beetles might help regulate the population dynamics of these beetles. |
|---|