• 沒有找到結果。

We found that decomposition levels do affect blow flies oviposition (especially the

C. megacephala), in addition, both the highest eggs number laid and the incidence of

oviposition did not appear on the fresh treatment. However, when a body was exposed,

fresh condition is usually of the case, and that kind of the fresh condition will not as

attractive to blow flies as we though before. This study also shows the sequential

oviposition data under different decomposition levels and the oviposition preference

when different decay-aged pork livers were provided simultaneously. We suggest the

factors of water content, microbial composition, emitted VOCs of the oviposition media

should be considered as the possible reasons which might trigger or inhibit the blow fly

oviposition. However, the detailed mechanism that cause those results here are still

unknown. Although we found that 2-day-old pork liver has the highest incidence of

oviposition in our research, it does not mean that C. megacephala will skip the fresh

media without lay eggs in the field. Because we believe insects with such the high

fecundity as C. megacephala do not have to choose the best oviposition media, except the

media is beyond the acceptable condition. In addition, durations in the acceptance phase

of female blow fly did not changed by the different decay-aged media, but the acceptance

duration or the oviposition delay may up to 9 hours which should be carefully considered

in the future applications.

References

Amendt J, Krettek R, Zehner R. 2004. Forensic entomology. Naturwissenschaften 91:

51-65.

Amendt J, Richards CS, Campobasso CP, Zehner R, Hall MJR. 2011. Forensic

entomology: applications and limitations. Forensic Sci Med Pathol: 379-392.

Aponte C, Barreto GR, Terborgh J. 2003. Gregarious oviposition and clutch size

adjustment by a Heliconius butterfly. Biotropica 35: 555-559.

Beaver RA. 1977. Nonequilibrium island communities-Diptera breeding in dead snails. J

Anim Ecol 46: 783-798.

Birkett MA, Agelopoulos N, Jensen KMV, Jespersen JB, Pickett JA, Prijs HJ, Thomas G,

Trapman JJ, Wadhams LJ, Woodcock CM. 2004. The role of volatile

semiochemicals in mediating host location and selection by nuisance and

disease-transmitting cattle flies. Med Vet Entomol 18: 313-322.

Bourel B, Callet B, Hedouin V, Gosset D. 2003. Flies eggs: a new method for the

estimation of short-term post-mortem interval? Forensic Sci Int 135: 27-34.

Browne LB. 1993. Physiologically induced changes in resource-oriented behavior. Annu

Rev Entomol 38: 1-25.

Bunchu N, Sukontason KL, Olson JK, Kurahashi H, Sukontason K. 2008. Behavioral

responses of Chrysomya megacephala to natural products. Parasitol Res 102:

419-429.

Burkepile DE, Parker JD, Woodson CB, Mills HJ, Kubanek J, Sobecky PA, Hay ME.

2006. Chemically mediated competition between microbes and animals: microbes

as consumers in food webs. Ecology 87: 2821-2831.

Byrd JH, Castner JL. 2009. Insect of forensic importance. In: Byrd JH, Castner JL, (eds).

Forensic entomology: the utility of arthropods in legal investigations, second

edition CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp pp 39-126.

Campobasso CP, Di Vella G, Introna F. 2001. Factors affecting decomposition and Diptera

colonization. Forensic Sci Int 120: 18-27.

Catts EP. 1992. Problems in estimating the postmortem interval in death investigations. J

Agric Entomol 9: 245-255.

Catts EP, Goff ML. 1992. Forensic entomology in criminal investigations. Annu Rev

Entomol 37: 253-272.

Clark K, Evans L, Wall R. 2006. Growth rates of the blowfly, Lucilia sericata, on different

body tissues. Forensic Sci Int 156: 145-149.

IBM Corp. 2013. IBM SPSS statistic for windows, version 22.0. IBM Crop. Armonk, NY.

Das SK, Dasgupta B. 1982. Sex-ratio of blowflies in Calcutta. Orient Insects 16: 129-133.

Davies L. 1950. The hatching mechanism of muscid eggs (Diptera). J Exp Biol 27:

437-445.

Day DM, Wallman JF. 2006a. A comparison of frozen/thawed and fresh food substrates

in development of Calliphora augur (Diptera: Calliphoridae) larvae. Int J Legal

Med 120: 391-394.

Day DM, Wallman JF. 2006b. Influence of substrate tissue type on larval growth in

Calliphora augur and Lucilia cuprina (Diptera: Calliphoridae). J Forensic Sci

51:657-663.

Early M, Goff ML. 1986. Arthropod succession patterns in exposed carrion on the island

of Oahu, Hawaiian-Islands, USA. J Med Entomol 23: 520-531.

Erzinclioglu YZ. 1990. On the interpretation of maggot evidence in forensic cases. Med

Sci Law 30: 65-66.

Erzinclioglu YZ. 1996. Blowflies Richmond Publishing Co Ltd, United Kingdom.

Esser JR. 1990. Factors influencing oviposition, larval growth and mortality in

Chrysomya megacephala (Diptera, Calliphoridae), a pest of salted dried fish in

south-east asia. Bull Entomol Res 80: 369-376.

Gabre RA, Adham FK, Chi H. 2005. Life table of Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius)

(Diptera: Calliphoridae). Acta Oecol 27: 179-183.

Gennard DE. 2007. The breadth of forensic entomology. Forensic entomology: an

introduction Wiley-Blackwell, United Kingdom. pp pp. 1-18.

George KA, Archer MS, Toop T. 2012. Effects of bait age, larval chemical cues and

nutrient depletion on colonization by forensically important calliphorid and

sarcophagid flies. Med Vet Entomol 26:188-193.

Goddard J, Lago PK. 1985. Notes on blow fly (Diptera, Calliphoridae) succession on

carrion in northern Mississippi. J Entomol Sci 20: 312-317.

Goff ML. 2010. Early postmortem changes and stages of decomposition. In: Amendt. J,

Goff. ML, Campobasso. CP, Grassberger M, (eds). Current concepts in forensic

entomology Springer, Netherlands. pp pp 1-24.

Gomes L, Gomes G, Casarin FE, Da Silva IM, Sanches MR, Von Zuben CJ, Fowler HG.

2007. Visual and olfactory factors interaction in resource-location by the blowfly,

Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius) (Diptera: Calliphoridae), in natural

conditions. Neotrop Entomol 36: 633-639.

Grassberger M, Reiter C. 2001. Effect of temperature on Lucilia sericata (Diptera:

Calliphoridae) development with special reference to the isomegalen-and

isomorphen-diagram. Forensic Sci Int 120: 32-36.

Greenberg B. 1985. Forensic entomology: case studies. Bull Entomol Soc Am:31: 25-28

Greenberg B. 1990. Nocturnal oviposition behavior of blow flies (Diptera, Calliphoridae).

J Med Entomol 27: 807-810.

Greenberg B, Kunich J. 2002. Entomology and the law: flies as forensic indicator

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Hall RD, Huntington TE. 2010. Introduction: perceptions and status of forensic

entomology. In: Byrd JH, Castner JL, (eds). Forensic entomology: The utility of

arthropods in legal investigations CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp pp. 1-16.

Higley LG, Haskell NH. 2010. Insect development and forensic entomology. In: Byrd JH,

Castner JL, (eds). Forensic entomology: The utility of arthropods in legal

investigations. 2nd ed CRC Press, Boca Raton. pp pp. 389-406.

Hung TC. 1995. The life table and mass rearing of Chrysomya megacephala (Fabricius).

M. S. Thesis, National Taiwan University, Taiwan.

Ireland S, Turner B. 2006. The effects of larval crowding and food type on the size and

development of the blowfly, Calliphora vomitoria. Forensic Sci Int 159: 175-181.

Kaneshrajah G, Turner B. 2004. Calliphora vicina larvae grow at different rates on

different body tissues. Int J Legal Med 118: 242-244.

Kasper J, Mumm R, Ruther J. 2012. The composition of carcass volatile profiles in

relation to storage time and climate conditions. Forensic Sci Int 223: 64-71.

Keh B. 1985. Scope and applications of forensic entomology. Annu Rev Entomol 30:

137-154.

Lord WD, Catts EP, Scarboro DA, Hadeld DB. 1986. The green blow fly, Lucilia illustris

(Meigen), as an indicator of human post-mortem interval: a case of homicide from

Fort Lewis, Washington. Bull Soc Vector Ecol 11: 271-75.

Megnin JP. 1894. La faune des cadavres: application de l'entomologie a la mcdecine

legale. Encyclopedie Scientõique des Aides-Memoires. Paris: Masson et

Gauthiers-Villars. 214 pp.

Norris KR. 1965. Bionomics of blow flies. Annu Rev Entomol 10: 47-68.

Payne JA. 1965. A summer carrion study of the baby pig sus-scrofa Linnaeus. Ecology

46: 592-602.

Richards CS, Rowlinson CC, Cuttiford L, Grimsley R, Hall MJR. 2013. Decomposed

liver has a significantly adverse affect on the development rate of the blowfly

Calliphora vicina. Int J Legal Med 127: 259-262.

Shiao SF, Yeh TC. 2008. Larval competition of Chrysomya megacephala and Chrysomya

rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae): behavior and ecological studies of two blow

fly species of forensic significance. J Med Entomol 45: 785-799.

Singh D, Bharti M. 2001. Further observations on the nocturnal oviposition behaviour of

blow flies (Diptera: Calliphoridae). Forensic Sci Int 120: 124-126.

Smith KGV. 1986. A manual of forensic entomology The trustees of the British Museum,

London.

Thompson CR, Brogan RS, Scheifele LZ, Rivers DB. 2013. Bacterial interactions with

necrophagous flies. Ann Entomol Soc Am 106: 799-809.

Tomberlin JK, Benbow ME, Tarone AM, Mohr RM. 2011a. Basic research in evolution

and ecology enhances forensics. Trends Ecol Evol 26: 53-55.

Tomberlin JK, Crippen TL, Tarone AM, Singh B, Adams K, Rezenom YH, Benbow ME,

Flores M, Longnecker M, Pechal JL, Russell DH, Beier RC, Wood TK. 2012.

Interkingdom responses of flies to bacteria mediated by fly physiology and

bacterial quorum sensing. Anim Behav 84: 1449-1456.

Tomberlin JK, Mohr R, Benbow ME, Tarone AM, VanLaerhoven S. 2011b. A roadmap

for bridging basic and applied research in forensic entomology. Annu Rev

Entomol 56: 401-421.

Ueno K, Ueno T. 2005. Effect of wasp size, physiological state, and prior host experience

on host-searching behavior in a parasitoid wasp (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae).

J Ethol 23: 43-49.

Villet MH, Richards CS, Midgley M. 2011. Contemporary precision, bias and accuracy

of minimum post-mortem intervals estimated using development of

carrion-feeding insects. In: Amendt J, Goff ML, Campobasso CP, Grassberger M, (eds).

Current concepts in forensic entomology Springer Science + Business Media,

Netherlands. pp 109-137.

Wall R. 1993. The reproductive output of the blowfly Lucilia sericata. J Insect Physiol

39: 743-750.

Yang ST, Shiao SF. 2012. Oviposition preferences of two forensically important blow fly

species, Chrysomya megacephala and C. rufifacies (Diptera: Calliphoridae), and

implications for postmortem interval estimation. J Med Entomol 49:424-435.

Yang ST, Shiao SF. 2014. Taxonomy of blow flies in Taiwan and reproductive behavior

of Chrysomya megacephala (Diptera: Calliphoridae): Ph.D Thesis, National

Taiwan University, Taiwan.

Figure 1. Experimental set-up of oviposition media. According to our

observation, pork liver would coat a harden layer on the external

surface along the time passed by. Because of the harden coat ing,

texture and decomposition process will be different both in the

external and internal pork liver. In order to minimize those effects,

each decay-aged pork liver we used was homogenized by blender

before experiment. In addition, since the texture of the pork liver was

different in each decay-aged treatment, a fine mesh was covered on

the top to keep the surface texture uniformed and to prevent the blow

fly drowning in the media.

Figure 2. Surveillance system setup. The cover of the bug cage was replaced

with a plastic membrane. On the top of the plastic membrane , covered

with another transparent plastic sheet to prevent the camera crushing

the cover membrane. Both plastic membrane and plastic sheet are

transparent and a hole was opened in the center of cover in order to

set up a camera. We also opened a hole on the right side of the

incubator for the cable connection to the monitor outside the

incubator. The hole on the incubator was sealed with aluminum foil to

minimize the disturbance of light, temperature and humidity in the

incubator.

Figure 3. Field experimental set-up. A cup of pork liver weighted 60 grams

(without cup) was placed inside a wire cage, which can prevent the

possible interference from other vertebrates. A transparent plastic

sheet was covered on the top of the wire cage to avoid rainfall and not

block the exposure of sunlight. Experiments lasted for 8 hours, from

9 am to 5 pm. Replacing the cup of pork liver inside the wire cage

with different decay-aged treatments every day.

Figure 4. The results of field experiments. To test the effects of different decay-aged

pork livers on blow fly oviposition. Six replications were conducted (N=6),

p-value = 0.001. Two-day-old pork liver have the highest number of eggs,

and no egg was laid on the fresh and 8-day-old pork liver. Letter a, b and ab

represent the statistically different groups in each treatment. Two-day-old

pork livers (a) show significant difference with fresh pork liver (b),

7-day-old pork livers (b) and 8-day-7-day-old pork livers (b). The rest of the groups (ab)

show no significant difference in the post analysis.

Figure 5. The results of preference test of C. megacephala oviposition behavior among

different decay-aged treatments inside a bug cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). Thirteen replications were conducted (N = 13), p-value = 0.001. Ten

adult females were used in each replication. Letter a and b represent the

statistically different groups in each treatment. Four-day-old pork livers (a)

have the highest number of eggs. Eight-day-old pork livers (b) have no egg.

The rest of the treatment groups have no significant different between each

other.

Figure 6. The results of the incidence of oviposition of C. megacephala when single

medium of different decomposition levels was provided in a bug cage (30 cm × 30 cm × 30 cm). Binary logistic regression analysis were applied.

Twenty-seven replications were conducted, p-value < 0.001. Different letters

represent statistically different groups in post hoc analysis (Bonferroni test).

2-day-old pork livers (a) have significant difference with 11-day-old pork

livers (b). The rest of the treatment groups have no significant difference

between each other.

Figure 7. The results of duration of acceptance phase when different decay-aged

oviposition media were provided respectively. p-value = 0.822 > 0.05, which

indicate that there are no significant difference among each treatments under

95% confidence interval.

Table 1. ANOVA table of duration of acceptance phase, the results show there are no

significant difference among groups. (Abbrev: DL = decomposition level

(decay-days), N = data collected, SD = standard deviation, SE = standard error,

CI = confidential interval, LL = lower limit, UL = upper limit)

DL N Mean SD SE 95% CI

LL UL

0 3 10.8867 0.82136 0.47421 8.8463 12.9270

1 8 9.4325 2.31044 0.81686 7.5009 11.3641

2 10 9.0430 2.39716 0.75805 7.3282 10.7578

3 4 9.7075 1.92609 0.96305 6.6427 12.7723

4 2 10.6150 0.75660 0.53500 3.8172 17.4128

5 5 10.5680 1.28741 0.57575 8.9695 12.1665

6 3 10.6100 0.85159 0.49166 8.4945 12.7255

7 4 9.3150 2.51577 1.25789 5.3118 13.3182

8 3 10.0267 1.97257 1.13886 5.1265 14.9268

9 2 10.9600 1.11723 0.79000 0.9221 20.9979

Sum 44 9.8305 1.92059 0.28954 9.2465 10.4144

相關文件