Lasioptera populnea Wachtl, 1883

on Populus

Lasioptera populna: gall on Populus alba

Populus alba, Hungary, Mosonmagyaróvár © László Érsek

Lasioptera populna: gall on Populus alba

concentration of (fused) galls near the leaf base

Lasioptera populna: opened gall with larvae

as this section shows, the mine protrudes at upperside and underside of the leaf to the same degree

_3449_83Lasioptera populnea: larva

two larvae. According to Dr. Skuhravá the left one belongs to Contarinia populi; see the note below.

Lasioptera populna: galls drawn by Wachtl

drawing by Wachtl, the author of the species (from Wachtl, 1886a)

gall

± smooth, unilocular swelling of the lamina, equally protruding at both sides; often several galls fused near tha base of the leaf. Larva solitary, orange, not jumping. Univoltine, pupation in the soil.

hostplants

Salicaceae, monophagous

Populus alba, x canescens, tremula.

“inner gall”

according to the description by Wachtl, the gall has an inner gall – a phenomenon common in gall wasps, unique among gall midges. Below the, perhaps somewhat diagrammatic, illustration given by him. The two lower pictures showing hand-section made by László confirm the impression that the inner gall is funnel-shaped and open above. That is in agreement with the many upper-surface openings in the -still occupied- galls in the pictures and in the drawing. Actually the larva does not live in the funnel but around it. The way the funnel evolves, and it’s function, are unclear; probably the oviposition plays a central role.

Lasioptera populnea, section through the galls

section through some gall, showing the inner gall Wachtl (1886a)

Lasioptera populnea: inner gall

section through a gall

Lasioptera populnea: inner gall

section through a gall

notes

Under the name of Contarinia populi Skuhravý, Skuhravá & Brewer depict a gall that clearly belongs to L. populnea, as conceived above. This is because according to several authors populnea is but an inquiline of Contarinia populi and Harmandiola species (Skuhravá & Skuhravý, 2012a). How this can be reconciled with the observations by Wachtl is not clear.

references

Barnes (1951a), Buhr (1965a), Cilbircioğlu & Ünal (2009a), Cogolludo (1921a), Gagné (2010a), Lambinon, Carbonelle & Claerebout (2015a), Lambinon, Schneider & Feitz (2001b, 2012a), Redfern & Shirley (2011a), Roskam (2009a), Roskam & Carbonelle (2015a), Simova-Tošić & Skuhravá (2001a), Simova-Tošić, Skuhravá & Skuhravý (1996a, 2000a, 2004a, 2007a), Simova-Tošić, Skuhravá, Skuhravý & Postolovski (2007a), Skuhravá (2011a), Skuhravá, Bayram, Çam ao (2005a), Skuhravá & Skuhravý (1999a, 2012a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý, Blasco-Zumeta & Pujade-Villar (2006a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý & Carbonnelle (2017a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý, Dauphin & Coutin (2005a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý & Meyer (2014a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý & Neacsu (1972a), Skuhravá, Skuhravý, Skrzypczyńska & Szadziewski (2008a), Skuhravý, Skuhravá & Brewer (1997a), Tomasi (2014a), Unal & Akkuzu (2009a), Wachtl (1886a), Wahlgren (1963b).

mod 1.i.2018