Skip to main content

Table 1 Easy bleeding, cuticle microstructures and hydrophobic property in sawfly larvae

From: Surface structure, model and mechanism of an insect integument adapted to be damaged easily

Species

Easy bleeding1

Microstructures2

Droplet3

2 μl

Diameter3

4 μl

   TENTHREDINIDAE

    

   Allantiinae

    

Athalia rosae (L.)

EB

+

?

? or 2.1 ± 0.0

   Blennocampinae

    

Eurhadinoceraea ventralis (Panzer)

EB

-

·

·

Monophadnus monticola (Hartig)

EB

+

·

·

Monophadnus spinolae (Klug)

EB

-

·

·

Phymatocera aterrima (Klug)

EB

+

? or 1.5 ± 0.0

? or 2.0 ± 0.0

Rhadinoceraea bensoni Beneš

EB

+

·

·

Rhadinoceraea micans (Klug)

EB

+

?

?

Rhadinoceraea nodicornis Konow

EB

+

? or 1.6 ± 0.1

? or 2.0 ± 0.1

Tomostethus nigritus (Fabricius)

N-EB

-

·

·

   Nematinae

    

Craesus alniastri (Sharfenberg)

N-EB

-

1.6 ± 0.0

2.1 ± 0.0

Craesus septentrionalis (L.)

N-EB

-

1.7 ± 0.0

2.2 ± 0.1

Hemichroa australis (Serville)

N-EB*

-

1.6 ± 0.1

2.2 ± 0.1

Hemichroa crocea (Geoffr.)

N-EB

-

·

·

Hoplocampa testudinea (Klug)

N-EB

-

·

·

Nematus melanocephalus Hartig

·

-

·

·

Nematus miliaris (Panzer)

N-EB*

-

·

·

Nematus pavidus Serville

N-EB*

-

·

·

Pristiphora laricis (Hartig)

N-EB

-

·

·

Pristiphora testacea (Jurine)

N-EB

-

1.9 ± 0.0

2.6 ± 0.0

Pseudodineura parvula (Klug)

·

-

·

·

   Selandriinae

    

Aneugmenus padi (L.)

EB

+

1.7 ± 0.2

2.2 ± 0.2

Strongylogaster mixta (Klug)

N-EB

-

1.7 ± 0.1

2.1 ± 0.1

Strongylogaster multifasciata (Geoffr.)

N-EB

-

1.6 ± 0.1

2.1 ± 0.0

   Tenthredininae

    

Tenthredo scrophulariae L.

N-EB*

-

·

·

   ARGIDAE

    

Arge sp.

N-EB

-

·

·

   DIPRIONIDAE

    

Gilpinia hercyniae (Hartig)

N-EB

-

1.6 ± 0.0

2.0 ± 0.0

  1. 1 Species was an easy bleeder (EB), or a non-easy bleeder (N-EB). Data from Boevé & Schaffner [4], except data from U Schaffner & JLB, unpublished results (*).
  2. 2 Spider-like microstructures were present (+) or absent (-) by observations of the cuticle surface by SEM and/or of cuticle sections by LM.
  3. 3 Cuticle was either too hydrophobic so that adherence of water droplet was impossible (?) or the diameter (mean ± SD, in mm) of a 2 and 4 μl droplet on the cuticle was measured. (·) Not tested.