PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 8, 2026Journal of Animal Ecology0 citations

Development time and host‐parasitoid stability: An experimental test

View Full Paper
JCJames T. CroninJRJohn D. Reeve

Key Points

  • This research investigates how changes in the development time of hosts influence host-parasitoid interactions and stability.
  • Conducted microcosm experiments with cowpea weevil and its parasitoid
  • Implemented long-duration and short-duration treatments to manipulate host stage duration
  • Monitored population dynamics and oscillations among treatments
  • Developed simulation models to replicate observed dynamics
  • In control treatment, persistent population oscillations occurred; period lasted about one generation
  • Short-duration treatment led to disappearance of cycles and 41%-49% suppression in host density
  • Long-duration treatment produced cycles similar to control, contrary to predictions of longer periods
  • Parasitoid density variability was 24%-27% lower in short-duration treatment than in others

Abstract

The duration of specific life stages and relative lengths of the predator and prey life cycles can, in theory, exert strong influences on population dynamics and may be important considerations in managing pest outbreaks. However, rigorous experimental tests of this theory do not exist. We conducted a microcosm experiment using the cowpea weevil (Callosobruchus maculatus) and its parasitoid (Anisopteromalus calandrae) to assess how a 60% increase (long-duration treatment) or 60% decrease (short-duration treatment) in the invulnerable (late larval to mid pupal) host stage affected host-parasitoid population dynamics. We predicted that stability is most likely for microcosms in the short-duration treatment, whereas generation cycles should occur for the long-duration and control treatments, with a longer period in the long-duration treatment. Our results largely support these predictions. In the control treatment, persistent oscillations occurred with a period of about one generation, consistent with theory. The long-duration treatment produced cycles similar in period and strength to the control, rather than predicted longer period ones. As expected, cycles disappeared in the short-duration treatment and host densities were suppressed by 41%-49% relative to the other treatments. Variability in host densities in the short-duration treatment was high, likely a consequence of demographic stochasticity in small populations, whereas variability in parasitoid densities was 24%-27% lower than in the other treatments. Complementary simulation models that closely matched the biological details and protocols used in the experiment reproduced the observed dynamics in the short-duration and control treatments. The oscillatory period observed in the long-duration treatment was also replicated when stronger, scramble-type competition in the weevil attack process was incorporated into the model. We conclude that age structure and development time are critical determinants of host-parasitoid population dynamics and should be explicitly considered in the selection of biological control agents and in evaluations of program success or failure.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cronin et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d5f05d74eaea4b11a79c45https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.70241
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A reconciliation of simple and complex models of age-dependent predation1987 · 27 citations
  2. 2Selecting effective parasitoids for biological control introductions: Codling moth as a case study2005 · 105 citations
  3. 3Population Cycles2002 · 122 citations
  4. 4Stage‐structured competition and the cyclic dynamics of host–parasitoid populations2004 · 30 citations
  5. 5An experimental test of the effects of dispersal and the paradox of enrichment on metapopulation persistence2019 · 17 citations