Transgenerational effects of Aphidius platensis (Hymenoptera, Braconidae) on Schizaphis graminum (Hemiptera, Aphididae)
Data files
Sep 25, 2026 version files 365.55 MB
-
Data_AphidCV_x_Crop.xlsx
46.66 KB
-
Image_F1NP.zip
78.06 MB
-
Image_F1P.zip
96.55 MB
-
ImageF2NP.zip
40.67 MB
-
ImageF2P.zip
37.74 MB
-
ImageF3NP.zip
32.47 MB
-
ImageF3P.zip
29.28 MB
-
ImageF4NP.zip
25.59 MB
-
ImageF4P.zip
25.13 MB
-
README.md
8.51 KB
Abstract
Koinobiont parasitoids such as Aphidius platensis Brèthes (Hyme noptera: Braconidae) develop within living hosts and may alter host physiology and development to enhance parasitoid offspring performance. Aphids, however, can respond to natural enemies through a range of defensive strategies, including increased reproductive investment (fecundity compensation) and phenotypic plasticity, such as the production of winged morphs.
This study examined whether successive generations of Schizaphis graminum (Rondani) (Hemiptera: Aphididae) exposed to the parasitoid A. platensis exhibit changes in parasitism rates and reproductive output. Aphid populations were maintained under two treatments across four generations: exposure to parasitoids and absence of parasitoids.
Parasitism rates declined over generations in the exposed treatment, suggesting that repeated parasitoid pressure may induce host changes that reduce parasitoid developmental success. In all generations, aphids in the parasitoid-free treatment showed higher reproductive output than those exposed to parasitoids, providing no evidence for fecundity compensation. Additionally, parasitoid-free aphids produced more nymphs and winged adults than aphids exposed to parasitoids, indicating that parasitoid presence may not influence aphid polyphenism.
Overall, the results suggest that S. graminum responses to parasitism by A. platensis can shift across generations, potentially reflecting rapid adjustments in host defense under sustained parasitoid pressure.
Dataset DOI: 10.5061/dryad.tx95x6bbr
Description of the data and file structure
Two treatments were evaluated: aphids without parasitoid exposure (NP) and aphids exposed to parasitoids (P), each with 30 replicates. Generations are represented by F1, F2, F3, F4, where F1 is the first generation.
Files and variables
File: ImageF2NP.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: Image_F1NP.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: ImageF2P.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: ImageF3NP.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: Image_F1P.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: ImageF4NP.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: ImageF4P.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: ImageF3P.zip
Description: Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
File: Data_AphidCV_x_Crop.xlsx
Description: tabulated data from the images
1. File Description
File name: Data AphidCV x Crop.xlsx
File format: Microsoft Excel (.xlsx)
The Excel file is composed of nine worksheets, each representing a specific generation/treatment pairing (sheets 1-8) and notes (sheet 9). Below is a listing of each worksheet:
- Worksheet 1 – F1NP
- Worksheet 2 – F1P
- Worksheet 3 – F2NP
- Worksheet 4 – F2P
- Worksheet 5 – F3NP
- Worksheet 6 – F3P
- Worksheet 7 – F4NP
- Worksheet 8 – F4P
- Worksheet 9 – NOTE
Structure:
- Rows represent individual observations (replicates within experiments).
- Columns represent experimental variables and measured parameters.
- Each Worksheet is an generation of experiment evaluated.
Note: The first two rows of the dataset contain metadata (labels and units/headers clarification).
2. Variables Description
Experimental Factors
- ExperimentGeneration:
Indicates the aphid generation (e.g., F1, F2, F3, F4). - ExperimentT/C:
Treatment condition:- T = Treatment = NP No parasitoids exposure
- C = Control = P parasitoid exposure
- ExperimentRepetition:
Replicate number within each treatment and generation.
AphidCV Variables (Aphid Colony Variables)
- AphidCVNymphs:
Number of aphid nymphs. - AphidCVWingless adults:
Number of apterous (wingless) adult aphids. - AphidCVWinged adults:
Number of alate (winged) adult aphids. - AphidCVTotal:
Total number of aphids (sum of all stages).
Crop Variables
- CropNymphs:
Number of aphid nymphs recorded on the crop. - CropWingless adults:
Number of wingless adult aphids on the crop. - CropWinged adults:
Number of winged adult aphids on the crop. - CropErros:
Number of errors or invalid observations recorded during data collection. - CropTotal:
Total number of aphids recorded on the crop.
3. Abbreviations and Codes
Abbreviation = Meaning
T = Treatment = NP No parasitoids exposure
C = Control = P parasitoid exposure
F1, F2, F3, F4= Experimental generations Worksheets
Nymphs = Immature aphids juvenils
Wingless adults = Aphids Apterous adults
Winged adults = Aphids Alate adults
4. Data Notes
- The dataset includes raw observational counts, not normalized values.
- Missing or zero values may represent either true absence or sampling limitations.
- The column "CropErros" refers to data collection inconsistencies and should be considered during analysis.
Code/software
Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026).
Statistical analysis
For the parasitoid treatment (P), the proportion of aphids that became mummified was calculated for generations F2–F4. In the F1 generation, a parasitism rate of 100% was required to initiate the experiment. Differences in parasitism rates among generations were analyzed using a generalized linear model (GLM) with a quasi-binomial error distribution, followed by Tukey’s post hoc tests.
Maternal investment was assessed by comparing aphid reproductive output (number of offspring per female) across generations and between treatments. For the parasitoid treatment (P), offspring production was partitioned into total offspring, mummified individuals, and non-mummified individuals. In the control treatment (NP), total offspring production was recorded. Data were visualized using boxplots and analyzed using a GLM with a quasi-Poisson error distribution to account for overdispersion, followed by Tukey’s multiple comparisons.
Aphid defensive polyphenism were evaluated by comparing the production of nymphs, winged adults, and apterous adults across generations (F1–F4) within each treatment (P and NP). Data were log-transformed to reduce the influence of extreme values. Boxplots were generated for visualization, and differences were analyzed using GLMs with quasi-Poisson error distribution followed by Tukey’s post hoc tests.
Statistical analysis was performed with packages: GLM models implemented using packages: “Stats” R statistical functions, version 4.2.2 (R Core Team, 2022). “hnp” Half-Normal Plots with Simulation Envelopes, version 1.2-6 (Moral et al., 2018) “multicomp” Simultaneous Inference in General Parametric Models, version 1.4-20 (Hothorn et al., 2022). For all analyzes a significance level α = 0.05 was adopted, and were accomplished on interface R Studio, and software R (https://www.r-project.org/).
Access information
Other publicly accessible locations of the data:
- Not applicable
Data was derived from the following sources:
- Not applicable
Two treatments were evaluated: aphids without parasitoid exposure (NP) and aphids exposed to parasitoids (P), each with 30 replicates. For each replicate, a single apterous adult of S. graminum (approximately 5 days old) was placed individually on a wheat plant enclosed within a translucent acetate cage (8 cm diameter × 45 cm height) covered with white voile fabric and maintained under the same controlled conditions used for colony rearing. In the parasitoid treatment (P), aphids were exposed to a female parasitoid for 6 h. After this period, parasitoids were removed, and any nymphs present were also removed in both treatments.
Nine days later, aphids in the parasitoid treatment were inspected for mummy formation. Only the offspring of aphids that became mummified were used to establish the next generation (F1), ensuring that subsequent generations (F1–F4) originated from parasitised lineages. For each replicate, one apterous adult aphid was retained on the plant to continue the lineage, while all remaining individuals were removed and transferred to a Petri dish (9 cm diameter) using a Pasteur pipette (3 mL) with distilled water.
Individuals were scanned using a flatbed CCD scanner (Charge-Coupled Device, Epson Perfection V600), and images were analyzed using the AphidCV 3.0, the software performs pre-processing (cropping) and data recording on Brazilian Insect Survey platform – BIS (Slongo Taca et al., 2025; Embrapa; UPF; IFSul, 2026). This procedure allowed quantification of total offspring production as well as the number of winged and apterous adults and nymphs in each treatment (P and NP). After scanning, aphids were preserved in 70% ethanol in 2 mL microtubes. Both treatments were conducted simultaneously across generations throughout the experiment.