Investigating dispersal abilities of Aphrophoridae in European temperate regions to assess the threat of potential Xylella fastidiosa-based pathosystems

12Citations
Citations of this article
20Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Modeling the potential spread of Xylella fastidiosa can document contingency plans in northern Europe, so far uncolonized by the bacterium. Through mark–release–recapture (MRR) and flight-mill experiments, the flight capacity of two potential vectors for temperate Europe was studied: Philaenus spumarius, the reported southern European vector, and Aphrophora salicina, a xylem-specialist feeding on potential host plants of X. fastidiosa. Aphrophora salicina displayed significantly better flight performances than P. spumarius. In flight-mills, the average distance flown was, respectively, 623 m vs. 102 m and the maximal distance flown was 6.16 km vs. 1.54 km in 2.5 h. In MRRs, A. salicina travelled more than 30 m in a single flight, with a maximal interception distance of 80 m after two days, highlighting that dispersal is driven by connectivity and host plant quality. Philaenus spumarius mainly jumped, with 1 m movements in length and a maximal interception distance of 32 m in 27 days. Models estimated P. spumarius' daily mean dispersal at 1.5 m and A. salicina's at 3.5 m. Although only a small part of the population moves over very long distances, this pool of efficient insects could already be sufficient to effectively spread an epidemic. As Salicaceae have been reported as host plants of the bacterium, the association of Aphrophoridae and Salicaceae in riparian areas could create bacterium reservoirs in corridors allowing for transportation over medium to long distances.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Casarin, N., Hasbroucq, S., Carestia, G., Glibert, A., Bragard, C., & Grégoire, J. C. (2023). Investigating dispersal abilities of Aphrophoridae in European temperate regions to assess the threat of potential Xylella fastidiosa-based pathosystems. Journal of Pest Science, 96(2), 471–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10340-022-01562-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free