It has been known that ants (
Lasius niger LINNAEUS) protect
Aphis fabae SCOPOLI, infesting bean plants, from many of its insect predators, and allow it to produce large, dense colonies on rapidly growing apical leaves and stems (BANKS, 1962). Similar results to those of BANKS were confirmed in our own expeiment with the apple aphid (
Aphis pomi DEGEER) and the apple leaf-curling aphid (
Myzusmalisucuts MATSUMURA), both can severely damage apple trees.
Prior to the assessment of the effects of ants and predators on aphid numbers, the potted apple seedlings in cage experiment and 8-year-old apple trees of Ralls Janet in orchards were infested with
Aphis aphids and
Myzus aphids. The reproduction of aphids with the attendance of
Lasius niger LINNAEUS and that without ants were thus read for comparison. Of course, the ants, attending aphids, and predators (mainly coccinellid adults and larvae, chrysopid adults and larvae and syrphid larvae) were also recorded at the same time.
During these courses, as has already been seen in Tables 1-4, the ant-attended
Aphis aphids were always numerous than the ant-free aphids on apple leaves, regardless of the seedling or 8-year-old tree, in the absence or scarcity of predators. This may be depend on the important aspect that the present aphids were partially protected by the ants which drove most of natural enemies of the Homoptera away from their colonies. But when the ants were excluded from the plants by a thick smear of tree-banding grease at the base of each branch or twig, predators were much more common and increased steadily in numbers. Therefore it would be considered that the rapid multiplication of ant-attended aphids was, in part, atributed to the repelling of the predators by the ants. In contrast, sucha a situation did not keenly appear in the relation between
Myzus aphids and ants, because of the feeding site different from that of
Aphis aphids or other factors which does not clearly shown.
Aside from the above argument, one interesting point is the amount of honeydew excreted by aphids. As will be seen in Table 5, the area of a droplet produced by
Aphis aphids, which was spreaded on pH testing paper, was greater than that of
Myzus aphids. Moreover, as shown in Fig. 1, many sorts of sugar were determined in the honeydew droplet of the
Aphis aphids than in
Myzus aphids. This would prove that the honeydew of
Aphis aphids is more attractive for the assiduity in repelling activities of ants against predators, attending aphids, on plants.
View full abstract