Talk:Parasitoid wasp/Archive 1

Untitled

Parasitic is misleading and incorrect, These animals are parasitoidsPlcoffey (talk) 04:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Virus Particles Clarification

In the Channel 4 (UK) documentary series outlined see in the womb it was stated that the parasitoid wasp injects virus like particles which affect a caterpillars behavior so that it defends the wasp lave from predators. Please can somone clarify this as I've not been able to find further info on this.

May be useful to expand ecology of parasitoids

Harvey, J. A.; Van Dam, N. M.; Gols, R. (2003). "Interactions over four trophic levels: Foodplant quality affects development of a hyperparasitoid as mediated through a herbivore and its primary parasitoid". Journal of Animal Ecology. 72 (3): 520. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2656.2003.00722.x.

Chrysomelid larva picture misinterpreted

Under the section "hosts" there is a picture of a cereal leaf beetle larva, Oulema melanopus L. This picture needs to be deleted from this section, or at least have its legend corrected. The term "polyembryonic" is wrong, as well as "consumed from within". What this picture shows is a cereal leaf beetle covered with a layer of mucus filled with the beetle own excrements (usuall refered as "fecal coat"), as well as a single insect larva stuck on its side. It is indeed likely that this insect larvae on its side is an parasitoid, but since it is in the mucus layer, not actually inside the beetle body, if it is a parasitoid then it is an "ectoparasitoid" (probably Necremnus leucarthros (Nees), which is as far as my research went, the only recorded ectoparasitoid parasitizing the cereal leaf beetle (http://www.taxapad.com/local.php?newwolp=79691785)). Necremnus leucarthros is not polyembryonic (Jan Gallo, 2007. Parasites on Oulema (Lema) lichenis Voet, 1826. In: Encyclopedia of pest management, Volume 2. Ed: David Pimentel, CRC Press, p. 447), and so far no larval parasitoid of the cereal leaf beetle has been demonstrated to be polyembryonic (list of parasitoids of the cereal leaf beetle available on "TAXAPAD" online). Furthermore, in no circumstance this picture shows that this cereal leaf beetle larva is parasitized with a "polyembrionic parasitoid". All that this picture shows is a single larva, probably of N. leucarthros, on the side of the fecal coat of the cereal leaf beetle larva. In addition, since this larva on the side of the beetle larva in not actually inside of the beetle larva body, but rather in the layer of mucus covering its back, saying "consumed from within" is also innapropriate. Entomologger (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Article misconceived

I have done some editing to the article, but its content as it stands at present is badly misconceived or grossly mislabelled. It refers to parasitoidal wasps as though the only ones were in the Braconidae and Ichneumonidae and as though all the members of those families were (probably polyembryonic) polyDNAvirus associates. Which is nonsense on both counts. There are parasitoidal Hymenoptera in well over a dozen families, and not all of them have any known, necessary or even significant viral associations, let alone polyembryony. As it stands this is quite unacceptably misleading, and, to coin a term, unencyclopedic. Is anyone thinking of doing something about it? I suggest either merging it with Parasitoid (together with drastic surgery) or changing its titles and internal scope to match its intended content (also with drastic surgery). JonRichfield (talk) 18:10, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Parasitoid wasp/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)

Press [show] to view →

This article needs: headers to divide it up into appropriate sections (an obvious one that comes to mind is "Superfamilies" or "Diversity") a taxobox (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Arthropods/Style suggestions if necessary) references, and if necessary external links. IronChris | (talk) 04:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC) I disagree. The article is so short that no subdivision into sections is necessary. A taxobox would suggest that parasitic wasps form a taxon. They don't. It is a polyphyletic group of more or less related insects that share a similar ecology. References and links would, however, be helpful. --Stemonitis 10:04, 21 November 2006 (UTC) Well, a taxobox to the Apocrita level would work, wouldn't it? And for the rest, just "see text". What I meant by sections was essentially "History of the term" and "Superfamilies" (and then external links and references if appropriate), just to give it some structure, so that readers can see at a glance where the article is going. There is no clear separation between the introduction and the body. It's a pain to read an article with no structure or obvious purpose, even if it is short like this one. IronChris | (talk) 18:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Last edited at 16:18, 28 June 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 20:10, 1 May 2016 (UTC)