Next Article in Journal
Bugs on Drugs: Paracetamol Exposure Reveals Genotype-Specific Generational Effects on Life History Traits in Drosophila melanogaster
Previous Article in Journal
Phylogeny of the Neotropical Hypoctonine Whip-Scorpions (Thelyphonida, Thelyphonidae), with Descriptions of Two New Genera and Species
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 15
Issue 10
10.3390/insects15100762
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Studies on Lygus pratensis’ (Hemiptera: Miridae) Flight Ability

by
Yixiang Zheng
1,2,3,4,†,
Pengfei Li
1,2,3,4,†,
Tailong Li
1,2,3,4,
Kunyan Wang
1,2,3,4,
Changqing Gou
1,2,3,4,* and
Hongzu Feng
1,2,3,4,*
1
Agricultural College, Tarim University, Alar 843300, China
2
Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) of Xinjiang Production and Construction Corps in Southern Xinjiang, Alar 843300, China
3
Scientific Observing and Experimental Station of Crop Pests in Alar, Ministry of Agriculture, Alar 843300, China
4
The National-Local Joint Engineering Laboratory of High Efficiency and Superior-Quality Cultivation and Fruit Deep Processing Technology on Characteristic Fruit Trees, Alar 843300, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Insects 2024, 15(10), 762; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15100762
Submission received: 5 September 2024 / Revised: 20 September 2024 / Accepted: 26 September 2024 / Published: 30 September 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Insect Pest and Vector Management)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Lygus pratensis transfers frequently between cotton and different host plants, harms a wide range of crops, possesses a strong dispersal ability, and poses great difficulty in predicting pests, but its flight ability and the factors that affect it are not well understood. We found that Lygus pratensis possesses strong flight ability, that the strength of flight ability is affected by the temperature and relative humidity of the environment, and that an unsuitable environment will greatly reduce the flight ability. Furthermore, we found that flight ability will be enhanced and then weakened with the increase in age, that the flight ability of females is slightly stronger than that of males, and that mating will increase the flight ability of females and weaken the flight ability of males. The above results can provide a basis for predicting the spreading range of Lygus pratensis in different seasons or different reproductive periods.

Abstract

Lygus pratensis (Linnaeus) is an important agricultural pest with a strong ability to move and spread between hosts. However, L. pratensis’ flight potential and factors affecting its flight ability are unclear. We used the insect flight information system (flight mill) to determine the effects of temperature, humidity, age, sex, and mating on L. pratensis’ flight ability in an artificial climate chamber. Temperature and relative humidity significantly affected L. pratensis’ flight ability; however, low and high temperature, as well as low humidity, were unsuitable, and the optimal flight environment was 20–28 °C and 60–75% RH. Lygus pratensis’ flying ability initially increased and then decreased with age and was highest at 10 days old (flight rate: 71.43%; total flight distance: 18.63 ± 1.89 km; total flight time: 6.84 ± 0.60 h). At 15 days old, flight speed was the highest (3.36 ± 0.18 km h−1). Sex had little effect on L. pratensis’ flying ability; it was marginally stronger for females than males, but the difference was insignificant. Mating increased female flying ability but decreased that of males, but the difference was insignificant. Overall, L. pratensis had strong flight dispersal ability, was largely unaffected by sex and mating, and optimal flight conditions were mild temperature and humidity. This knowledge provides a scientific basis for L. pratensis outbreak prediction, prevention, and control.

1. Introduction

The plant bug Lygus pratensis (Linnaeus) (Hemiptera: Miridae) is widely distributed in Eurasia, North America, and northern Africa [1] and is an important agricultural pest in Xinjiang, China, where it causes cotton boll shedding. Recently, L. pratensis has again become rampant, with boll damage in cotton fields as high as 56% [2,3]. Simultaneously, L. pratensis can invade orchards and damage flower buds and young fruits. Fruit trees such as fragrant pear, apple, jujube, and walnut may suffer fruit deformity in light cases, and numerous flowers and fruits may fall off in severe cases [4,5]. There are many L. pratensis host plant species [6], but most of them are annual crops and weeds, which are suitable for feeding and rapid reproduction. Therefore, inter-host diffusion and transfer is an important link in the life history of L. pratensis. Overwintering L. pratensis adults first feed and reproduce in early spring in wheat fields, alfalfa fields, and weeds in orchards. Then, there are several large migration activities: first-generation adults move to cotton fields in mid-June, and then in early September, and third-generation adult insects begin to move from the cotton fields to autumn hosts (Lepidaceae and Asteraceae weeds) [7,8]. In L. pratensis, there is an important relationship between its ability to move and spread between hosts and its flying ability.
Miridae have strong migration and diffusion ability and readily proliferate when in a suitable living environment [9]. Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) and Lygus rugulipennis (Poppius) were captured in the mid-20th century at altitudes of 1500 m and 900 m [10,11]. Carrière et al., using GIS technology, monitored Lygus hesperus (Knight) and found that it had a strong flight diffusion ability in host–plant transfer [12]. Indoor flight tests (flight grinding and vertical flight capsule) on L. lineolaris and L. hesperus, respectively, identified strong flight potential [13,14]. Lu was the first to study mirid flight capabilities in China and found that Apolygus lucorum (Meyer-Dür), Adelphocoris suturalis (Jakovlev), Adelphocoris fasciaticollis (Reuter), and Adelphocoris lineolatus (Goez) had strong flying ability [15]. Therefore, it is speculated that L. pratensis also has a strong flight ability, but no studies have yet been conducted.
The insect flight ability test is an important method for studying insect flight laws [16]. The indoor test primarily uses an insect flight law simulation device, usually called a flight mill. Insects are fixed on the flight mill to make them fly autonomously; then, relevant insect flight parameters are obtained through computer analysis and calculation [17,18].
Many factors affect insect flying ability, including external environmental factors and internal factors (age, sex, reproduction). After insect emergence, flight muscles develop gradually, relevant enzymes and energy substances in the body are constantly supplemented, and flight ability enhanced with increasing age. Simultaneously, insects consume considerable energy for reproductive activities, which will also affect flight ability [10,19,20]. There are also some differences in flying ability between male and female insects. Most female insects have stronger flight ability than males, which is conducive to finding a wider range of host plants for reproduction and egg laying and may be related to sex size differences [21,22]. Food, temperature, humidity, and light intensity are also critical to flying ability [19,23]. Temperature and humidity play a key role in insect growth and development and also affect insect flight ability. Low (high) temperature and low humidity will lower insect body water content, which will reduce metabolic capacity and material conversion ability, thus weakening flight ability [24,25].
In this study, the effects of temperature and humidity, age, sex, and mating on L. pratensis flight ability were determined to explore the ability of L. pratensis to move and spread in the field and to provide a scientific basis for forecasting and control.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Insects

Female and male L. pratensis were captured in an alfalfa field in Aral City (Xinjiang, China) (40°52′15″ N, 81°30′94″ E) in April 2023, raised at 24 °C with a 5:9 (L:D) photoperiod, relative humidity of 70 ± 10%, and light intensity of 480 ± 20 lx, and fed cauliflower. Females and males of L. pratensis were raised together to allow for mating and the production of first- and second-generation adults.

2.2. Test Instruments and Materials

The test instrument consisted of an RXZ intelligent artificial climate box (Ningbo Jiangnan Instrument Factory, Ningbo, China), a JIADUO insect flight information System (Hebi Jiaduo Weinong Agriculture and Forestry Technology Co., Ltd., Hebi, China), a flying mill (FXM-Z, 24-way), an insect small flying mill (FXM-X, 12-way), and a Leica M205C Stereo Microscope (Leica Biosystems, Nußloch, Germany).
The test material included a CO2 generator (reaction equation); a flight power transmission unit made of copper wire, insect needles, and black blackout paper, an insect-box (made by us); and 502 glue (Deli Group Co., Ltd., Ningbo, China).

2.3. Tethered Flight Test

Before the test, L. pratensis were treated with CO2 for 25 s to induce coma; then, the tip of the boom of the flight power transmission unit was attached to the L. pratensis nolum with 502 glue. After L. pratensis awakened, the flight power transmission device was placed between the two insect small flying mill magnets. Paying attention to the black blackout paper suspended in the middle of the infrared counting sensor recess, the small flying mill was then placed into the RXZ intelligent artificial climate chamber for testing. The test began at 9:00 AM and lasted for 24 h. Flight distance, time, and average flight speed over the 24 h period were recorded by the insect flight information system computer. Lygus pratensis death or flight times less than 10 min were not included in the statistics. Insects with total flight time greater than 10 min were deemed fliers and included in the data, while those that did not (non-fliers) were not included [13].

2.4. L. pratensis’ Flight Ability at Different Temperatures

After emergence, female insects were raised alone until 10 days old and then fixed on the flight mill and put into the artificial climate chamber for flight tests. The artificial climate chamber was set at a photocycle of 15:9 (L:D), light intensity 480 ± 20 lx, relative humidity 75%, and temperature gradients of 16, 20, 24, 28, 32, and 36 °C, successively. There were 6 temperature treatments with 20 repetitions for each treatment (20 worms).

2.5. L. pratensis’ Flight Ability under Different Relative Humidities

After emergence, female insects were raised alone until 10 days old and then fixed on the flight mill and put into the artificial climate chamber for flight tests. The artificial climate chamber were set at a photocycle of 15:9 (L:D), light intensity 480 ± 20 lx, temperature 24 °C, and relative humidity 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90%, successively. There were 5 humidity treatments with 20 repetitions for each treatment (20 worms).

2.6. L. pratensis’ Flight Ability at Different Ages

Female L. pratensis that emerged on the same day were kept alone without mating and tested for flight ability at different ages (1, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, and 30 d old). There were 7-day-old treatments with 20 replicates per treatment (20 worms). Flight parameters were measured, and flight probability was calculated (fliers). Test conditions: temperature: 24 °C; photoperiod: 15:9 (L:D); relative humidity: 70 ± 10%; light intensity: (480 ± 20) lx.

2.7. L. pratensis’ Flight Ability in Relation to Sex and Mating

Male and female adult L. pratensis were reared separately without mating. The flight ability of unmated females and males was tested on the 7th day of breeding. In another group, male and female L. pratensis adults were bred in pairs. According to Lu and proof of pre-test, breeding females and twice the number of males together can ensure female mating, and the same treatment was applied to mated females and mated males [15]. The flight ability of mated females and males was tested on the 7th day of breeding. Lygus pratensis ontogeny studies show that it begins to lay eggs around 8 days after emergence [26]. To avoid the influence of spawning on the test, the flight ability test was started on the 7th day of emergence. The experiment was divided into 4 treatments—unmated females, unmated males, mated females, and mated males—with 20 replicates per treatment (20 worms).
Measurement of wing area, body weight, and body length of 10 day old Lygus pratensis male and female adults. Five adults of each sex were taken, the anterior and posterior wings of one side were separated, the wings were photographed using a Leica M205C stereomicroscope, the photographs of each wing were processed using ImageJ (v1.54d), and the anterior and posterior wing areas were measured. A group of 10 adults of each sex was taken for weighing and the weight of one L. pratensis was calculated; each group was repeated three times, and another 10 adults of each sex were taken for body length measurement.

2.8. Data Analysis

Total flight distance, total flight time, and average flight speed data were analyzed using SPSS 25.0. A normality test was performed on the raw data first. If the data did not conform to a normal distribution, logarithmic conversion was performed, and then the Duncan multiple range test (new complex range method) was used to compare differences (p < 0.05). t-tests were used to compare the effects of sex and mating on L. pratensis’ flight ability (p < 0.05).
The relationship between temperature and relative humidity and total flight distance, total flight time, and average flight speed was expressed as a curvilinear equation. In the model, Y was the conversion value (LgX) of the total flight distance (or time, speed) and X represented the variables (temperature, relative humidity).

3. Results

3.1. The Effect of Temperature on Flight Ability

Temperature significantly affected L. pratensis’ total flight distance (F = 9.747; df = 5, 144; p < 0.05), which initially increased and then decreased with increasing temperature. At 24 °C, L. pratensis’ total flight distance was 18.63 ± 1.89 km, which was not significantly different from at 20 °C (15.67 ± 2.20 km); however, it was significantly higher than at other temperatures. At 28 °C, it was 13.14 ± 1.94 km; at 32 °C, 8.62 ± 1.30 km; and the shortest flight distance was at 36 °C (5.30 ± 1.03 km) (Table 1). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ flight velocity reached its maximum at 22.9 °C (Figure 1a).
Temperature significantly affected L. pratensis’ total flight time (F = 4.845; df = 5, 144; p < 0.05), which initially increased and then decreased with increasing temperature. At 24 °C, L. pratensis’ total flight time was the longest (6.84 ± 0.60 h), which was higher (although not significantly) than that at 20 °C (5.86 ± 0.79 h). Total flight time at 16 °C was similar to that at 28, 32, and 36 °C (Table 1). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ flight time reached its maximum at 22.3 °C (Figure 1b).
There was a significant effect of temperature on the average flight speed of L. pratensis (F = 3.543; df = 5, 144; p < 0.05), with a trend of increasing and then decreasing flight speeds with increasing temperature. Lygus pratensis had the fastest mean flight speed at 24 °C (2.84 ± 0.27 km h−1), which was not significantly different from the mean flight speeds at 20 °C, 28 °C, and 32 °C but was significantly different from the lowest temperature of 16 °C (1.79 ± 0.15 km h−1) and the highest temperature of 36 °C (2.09 ± 0.21 km h−1) (Table 1). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ flight velocity reached its maximum at 24.3 °C (Figure 1c).

3.2. Effect of Relative Humidity on Flight Ability

Relative humidity significantly affected L. pratensis’ total flight distance (F = 9.086; df = 4, 95; p < 0.05), which initially increased and then decreased with increasing relative humidity. Lygus pratensis had the longest total flight distance at 75% RH (18.63 ± 1.89 km), which was not significantly different from that at 60% RH (15.75 ± 2.17 km) but significantly higher than at other relative humidities. There was no significant difference in total flight distance between 90% relative humidity (11.14 ± 1.69 km) and 60% relative humidity (15.75 ± 2.17 km). When the minimum relative humidity was 30%, the total flight distance was 5.25 ± 1.03 km, which was significantly lower than at other relative humidities (Table 2). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ total flight distance reached a maximum when relative humidity was 68.3% (Figure 2a).
Lygus pratensis’ total flight time was significantly affected by relative humidity (F = 9.664; df = 4, 95; p < 0.05), which initially increased and then decreased with increasing humidity. When relative humidity was 75%, total flight time was the longest (6.84 ± 0.60 h), and the second-longest total flight time (5.79 ± 0.73 h) was not significantly different. Total flight times at 45 and 90% relative humidity were similar (4.23 ± 0.54 h and 4.22 ± 0.52 h, respectively) but significantly lower than total flight time at 75% relative humidity. At 30% relative humidity, L. pratensis had the shortest total flight time (2.26 ± 0.33 h), which was significantly lower than at other relative humidities (Table 2). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ total flight time reached its maximum at 67.6% relative humidity (Figure 2b).
Lygus pratensis’ average flight speed was not significantly affected by relative humidity (F = 1.302; df = 4, 95; p = 0.275), which initially increased and then decreased with increasing relative humidity. L. pratensis had the highest average flight speed (2.84 ± 0.270 km h−1) at 75% relative humidity and the slowest (2.13 ± 0.27 km h−1) at 30% relative humidity, but the average flight speed difference was not significantly different (Table 2). According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ average flight speed reached its maximum at 68.7% relative humidity (Figure 2c).

3.3. The Influence of Age on Flight Ability

Lygus pratensis’ flight ability initially increased and then decreased with increasing age. Total flight distance (F = 15.915; df = 6, 135; p < 0.05), total flight time (F = 10.363; df = 6, 133; p < 0.05) and average flight speed (F = 7.822; df = 6, 147; p < 0.05) were significantly affected by age. Lygus pratensis had the weakest flight ability at 1 day old, with the lowest flight rate (30.95%), total flight distance (3.97 ± 0.68 km), and total flight time (2.10 ± 0.41 h), and the slowest average flight speed (2.19 ± 0.11 km) at 5 days old. However, flight abilities at 1, 25, and 30 days old were similar to at 5 days old and not significantly different. At 10 days old, L. pratensis had the highest flight rate (71.43%), total flight distance (18.63 ± 1.89 km), and total flight time (6.84 ± 0.60 h). However, average flight speed was fastest at 15 days old (3.36 ± 0.18 km h−1). There was no significant difference between total flight distance and average flight speed at 10, 15, and 20 days old; total flight time did not differ between 10 and 15 days old; and flight ability at 10 days old was significantly higher than at 1, 5, 25, and 30 days old (Table 3).

3.4. The Effect of Sex and Mating on Flight Ability

In the mating state, female L. pratensis’ flight ability (19.54 ± 2.09 km, 6.95 ± 0.70 h, 2.94 ± 0.20 km h−1) was stronger than male (10.17 ± 1.50 km, 4.50 ± 0.62 h, 2.52 ± 0.23 km h−1), and there were significant differences in total flight distance (t = 3.647; df = 38; p < 0.05) and total flight time (t = 2.628; df = 38; p < 0.05). Average flight speed (t = 1.418; df = 38; p = 0.1655) was not significantly different. However, unmated female L. pratensis’ flight ability (15.86 ± 1.96 km, 6.13 ± 0.74 h, 2.68 ± 0.20 km h−1) was also stronger than unmated male (12.92 ± 1.72 km, 4.88 ± 0.54 h, 2.56 ± 0.21 km h−1). But differences in total flight distance (t = 1.130; df = 38; p = 0.266), total flight time (t = 1.370; df = 38; p = 0.179), and average flight speed (t = 0.412; df = 38; p = 0.682) were not significant (Table 4).
Lygus pratensis mated female flight ability was better than for non-mated females, but their total flight distance (t = 1.287; df = 38; p = 0.206), total flight time (t = 0.806; df = 38; p = 0.425), and average flight speed (t = 0.937; df = 38; p = 0.355) were not significantly different. Lygus pratensis mated male flight ability was weaker than for non-mating males, but the differences in total flight distance (t = 1.204; df = 38; p = 0.236), total flight time (t = 0.464; df = 38; p = 0.645), and average flight speed (t = 0.145; df = 38; p = 0.885) were not significant (Table 5).
There was no significant difference in forewing area (t = 0.372; df = 8; p = 0.719) between the females and males, nor was there a significant difference in hindwing area (t = 0.291; df = 8; p = 0.778). The body weight (8.09 ± 0.13 mg) and body length (5.25 ± 0.07 mm) of females were significantly greater than those of males (t = 13.531; df = 4; p < 0.05) (t = 4.794; df = 18; p < 0.05) (Table 6).

4. Discussion

Lygus pratensis’ flight ability was significantly affected by temperature and relative humidity in the flight environment. Lygus pratensis’ flight ability was highest when the temperature was 24 °C and the relative humidity was 75%, and the total flight distance was 18.63 ± 1.20 km. Total flight time was 6.84 ± 0.60 h, and average flight speed was 2.84 ± 0.27 km h−1. According to the curve model, L. pratensis’ flight ability initially increased and then decreased with increasing temperature and relative humidity, and optimal flight temperature and relative humidity were 20–28 °C and 65–70%, respectively. L. pratensis’ flight ability decreased significantly when the temperature was lower than 20 °C or higher than 28 °C. Lygus pratensis’ total flight distance and total flight time were shortest when the temperature was 16, 32, and 36 °C, respectively, indicating that the optimum temperature range suitable for L. pratensis’ flight was 20–28 °C, which is consistent with the biological characteristics of L. pratensis [27,28]. In an average velocity comparison, only the lowest and the highest temperature affected L. pratensis’ flight velocity; all other temperatures had no significant effect. L. pratensis’ flight ability was strongest when relative humidity was 60–75% and was weakened when the air humidity was outside this range. Field investigation showed that relative humidity drives L. pratensis population changes, a feature also noted by Bai et al. [29]. Lygus pratensis had the weakest flight ability at low (16 °C) and high temperature (36 °C) and low humidity (30% RH). It is hypothesized that the above results reflect the insects’ ability to regulate their own temperature by evaporating water from their bodies in high temperatures [24], as well as in low humidity environments, lowering the likelihood that unsuitable temperatures and humidity will cause dehydration, thus reducing energy transformation [25] and the ability to fly. Previous studies on Carpomya vesuviana (Costa) (Diptera: Tephritidae) found that high- and low-temperature environments reduced the utilization of flight energy substances in the body, thus reducing flight ability [30]. Optimum conditions for L. pratensis are similar to A. lucorum, A. suturalis, A. fasciaticollis, and A. lineolatus optimal flight environments (temperature 18–23 °C, relative humidity 64–68%) [15]. They are also consistent with temperature and humidity effects on optimal flight in other insect studies; for example, Spodoptera frugiperda’s (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) optimal flight temperature and humidity were 20–25 °C and 60–90% RH [31], while Agrypon flexorius (Thunberg) (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae) had the highest flight capability at 20 °C and 60% RH [32]. Sitophilus zeamais’ (Motschulsky) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) flight ability decreased significantly at 34 °C [33], whereas Mamestra brassicae (Linnaeus) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) had the best flight capability from 23–25 °C and 64–75% RH [34].
According to the age-related flight ability test results, L. pratensis had the longest total flight distance (18.63 ± 1.89 km) and total flight time (6.84 ± 0.60 h) at 10 days old and the highest average flight speed (3.36 ± 0.18 km h−1) at 15 days old. Apolygus lucorum and other species of mirids are more capable of flying than L. pratensis. For example, A. suturalis’ flight ability (flight distance of 40 km, flight time of 7.5 h, flight speed of 5.25 km h−1) was significantly better than that of L. pratensis. Only A. lineolatus is close to L. pratensis in flight ability, while A. lucorum flew 96.55% of the time at 10 days old, about 25% higher than the grass bug [15]. However, some bugs, such as L. lineolaris, had a flight rate of 42% [13], and L. hesperus had a flight rate of only about 20% [14], both significantly lower than L. pratensis. Lygus pratensis’ flight ability initially increased and then decreased with age. Lygus pratensis’ flight ability was weakest at 1 day old, strongest at 10 days old, declined slowly at 15–20 days of age, and then decreased sharply after 25 days old. This pattern is similar to other insects such as Corythucha ciliata (Say) (Hemiptera: Tingidae) [35] and Agrotis segetum (Denis and Schiffermulle) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) [36], in addition to other mirids. According to previous studies and analyses, insects that have just emerged (1 day old) have imperfect flight muscle development, and the enzymes and energy substances required for flight are insufficient, so flight ability is relatively weak. Lygus pratensis began to lay eggs at 8 days old, which may have affected flight by transferring more energy to reproduction. When L. pratensis nears the end of life after 30 days, energy materials in the body decline and degradation of flight organs begins [10,37].
Both female and male L. pratensis have strong flight ability. Unmated adult (7 days old) females (15.86 ± 1.96 km, 6.13 ± 0.74 h, 2.68 ± 0.20 km h−1) had stronger flight ability than unmated males (12.92 ± 1.72 km, 4.88 ± 0.54 h, 2.56 ± 0.21 km h−1), although the difference was not significant. This is similar to A. suturalis, A. fasciaticollis, and A. lineolatus [15]. The study of wing area, body weight, and body length of L. pratensis revealed that females and males had similar wing areas with no significant differences, but females of the same day old had larger body weights and body lengths than males, and there were physiological and morphological differences, which might be the main reason for the females’ stronger flight ability when compared to the males [21,38]. Total flight distances and times of female L. pratensis after mating were significantly higher than male L. pratensis. Experiments on the effects of mating on L. pratensis’ flight ability showed that mating enhanced female flight ability and weakened that of the male, although the differences were not significant. This may be the main reason for the superior female flight ability after mating. Therefore, there is a small difference in flight ability between female and male L. pratensis, but it is more significant after mating. Previous studies have shown that other female and male insects have different flight abilities. For example, for C. vesuviana [30] and Dastarcus helophoroides (Fairmaire) (Coleoptera: Bothrideridae) [39], female and male insects did not differ in flight ability; but for L. hesperus [40] and A. lucorum [21], females flew better than males. Conversely, the male Spissistilus festinus’ (Say) (Hemiptera: Membracidae) flight distance was greater than that of the female [41]. Mating also has different effects on insect flight ability. In some insects, after mating, females will enhance their flight ability to find new host plants for laying eggs [20]. For example, the flight distance and flight time of mated Amyelois transitella (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) females were significantly higher than unmated females [42]. Conversely, after mating, for Euzophera pyriella (Yang) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) [43] and A. segetum [36], female flight ability decreased and was lower than in the non-mating state. This phenomenon may be caused by mating activities, stimulating the transfer of energy substances to reproduction and inhibiting flight muscles’ development [44].
The flight distance, time, and speed of L. pratensis were measured in the laboratory, and its theoretical maximum dispersal distance for a single day (24 h) was approximately 18 km, but this was not free flight. Flight mills could visually compare the effects of different factors on the strength of an insect’s flight [45,46], but there were some differences from free flight; for example, in a comparison of flight mills and free-flight chambers, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura) (Diptera: Drosophilidae) was found to fly longer in free-flight chambers [47]. Agrilus planipennis (Fairmaire) (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) was three times as fast in free flight as it was on the flight mill [48]. Thus, the flight experiments in laboratory might over- or under-estimate the flight potentials of insects [49,50]. The flight tests in the laboratory could only be used as predictors of the potential dispersal capacity of insects in the field and need to be combined with outdoor monitoring methods to predict the extent of L. pratensis dispersal more accurately. The effects of temperature, humidity, age, sex, and mating on L. pratensis’ flight ability were determined. Since flight ability was tested under changes in a single environmental factor, our research results only reflect the effects of these changes and do not accurately reflect L. pratensis’ flight ability with temperature and humidity changes during the day. In the future, L. pratensis’ flight ability can be tested in the natural environment to investigate its relationship with environmental factors further. Our experimental results preliminarily proved that mating had little effect on L. pratensis, but whether it had “Oogenesis-flight syndrome” remains to be determined.

5. Conclusions

Temperature and humidity significantly affect L. pratensis’ flight ability. Low temperature, high temperature, and low humidity are unsuitable for flight, and the optimal flight environment is 20–28 °C and 60–75% RH. Lygus pratensis’ flight ability initially increased and then decreased with age and was strongest at 10 days old. Sex had little effect on flying ability; female flying ability was slightly stronger than males, but the difference was in significant. Mating enhanced female L. pratensis’ flight ability and weakened that of males, but the differences were insignificant.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.Z., P.L. and H.F.; methodology, Y.Z., P.L. and C.G.; software, Y.Z., P.L. and C.G.; validation, Y.Z., P.L. and H.F.; formal analysis, Y.Z., P.L. and T.L.; investigation, Y.Z., P.L. and K.W.; resources, Y.Z., P.L., T.L. and K.W.; data curation, Y.Z., P.L., T.L. and K.W.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.Z. and P.L.; writing—review and editing, Y.Z., P.L. and H.F.; supervision, C.G.; project administration, H.F.; funding acquisition, H.F. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was supported by the National Natural Science of China (32272539).

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Lan Wang (College of Agriculture, Tarim University, Alar City, Xinjiang, China) for her help and guidance in the experiment, thesis, and life, and the Green Prevention and Control Team for providing good conditions for the experimental environment.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Liu, B.; Li, H.Q.; Ali, A.; Li, H.B.; Liu, J.; Yang, Y.Z.; Lu, Y.H. Effects of temperature and humidity on immature development of Lygus pratensis (L.) (Hemiptera: Miridae). J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2015, 18, 139–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Xia, X.; Zheng, Y.X.; Yao, C.C.; Gou, C.Q.; Feng, H.Z. Electrophysiological and Behavioral Responses of Lygus pratensis to Plant Volatiles and Regulation of Brassica campestris Trapping Belt on L. pratensis in Cotton Fields. Cotton Sci. 2023, 35, 128–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wang, W.; Zhang, R.F.; Liu, H.Y.; Zhang, Y.; Yao, J. Control Indices for Lygus pratensis (Heteroptera: Miridae) in Cotton Plantations in Kashgar, Xinjiang. Chin. J. Appl. Entomol. 2016, 53, 1146–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Xu, Y.; Wu, K.M.; Li, H.B.; Liu, J.; Ding, R.F.; Wang, F.; Ahtam, U.; Li, H.Q.; Wang, D.M.; Chen, X.X. Effects of transgenic bt+ cpti cotton on field abundance of non-target pests and predators in Xinjiang, China. J. Integr. Agric. 2012, 11, 1493–1499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Lu, Y.H.; Liang, G.M. Research Advance on the Succession of Insect Pest Complex in Bt Crop Ecosystem. Plant Prot. 2016, 42, 7–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Cao, N.; Leng, L.Y.; Liu, D.C.; Feng, H.Z. Study on the Host Plants and Diet Selection of Lygus pratensis. China Cotton 2017, 44, 27–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhao, J.P. Study on the Biological Characteristics and Population Dynamics after Diapause in Lygus pratensis (L.). Master’s Thesis, Tarim University, Alar, China, 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhang, R.F.; Wang, W.; Liu, H.Y.; Yao, J. Seasonal Succession Patterns of Host Species and their Host Feeding in the Cotton Region of Lygus pratensis. Xinjiang Acad. Agric. Sci. 2022, 59, 707–715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Varis, A.; Holopainen, J. Biology of the Plant Bugs (Hemiptera: Miridae). Entomol. Fenn. 2002, 13, 194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Johnson, C.G. Migration and Dispersal of Insects by Flight; Methuen Publishing: London, UK, 1969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Glick, P.A. The Distribution of Insects, Spiders, and Mites in the Air; Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, USA, 1939; pp. 12–16. [CrossRef]
  12. Carrière, Y.; Ellsworth, P.C.; Dutilleul, P.; Ellers-Kirk, C.; Barkley, V.; Antilla, L. A GIS-based approach for areawide pest management: The scales of Lygus hesperus movements to cotton from alfalfa, weeds, and cotton. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2006, 118, 203–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Stewart, S.D.; Gaylor, M.J. Effects of age, sex, and reproductive status on flight by the tarnished plant bug (Heteroptera: Miridae). Environ. Entomol. 1994, 23, 80–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Blackmer, J.L.; Naranjo, S.E.; Williams III, L.H. Tethered and untethered flight by Lygus hesperus and Lygus lineolaris (Heteroptera: Miridae). Environ. Entomol. 2004, 33, 1389–1400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lu, Y.H. Studies on Ecological Adaptability of the Mirids. Ph.D. Thesis, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China, 2008. [Google Scholar]
  16. Campos, W.G.; Schoereder, J.H.; Sperber, C.F. Does the Age of the Host Plant Modulate Migratory Activity of Plutella xylostella. Entomol. Sci. 2004, 7, 323–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Hocking, B. The intrinsic range and speed of flight of insects. Trans. R. Entomol. Soc. Lond. 1953, 104, 225–345. [Google Scholar]
  18. Cui, J.X.; Fang, J.; Hou, J.P.; Wang, X.L.; Yao, G.F.; Zhang, S.P.; Wu, S.Y.; Ma, J.M.; Zuo, X.G.; Wang, J.Y. Flight Visualizating Technique of Tethered Insect with it’s Application in Related Studies. J. Henan Inst. Sci. Technol. (Nat. Sci. Ed.) 2016, 44, 27–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Liu, S.; Lv, Z.Y.; Gao, H.H.; Zhai, Y.F.; Liu, Q.; Yang, P.Y.; LI, P.; Zheng, L.; Li, Q.; Yu, Y. Research Advances on Flight Capacity of Insect. J. Environ. Entomol. 2018, 40, 995–1002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Hashiyama, A.; Nomura, M.; Kurihara, J.; Toyoshima, G. Laboratory evaluation of the flight ability of female Autographa nigrisigna (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), measured by actograph and flight mill. J. Econ. Entomol. 2013, 106, 690–694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Lu, Y.; Wu, K.; Guo, Y. Flight potential of Lygus lucorum (Meyer-Dür)(Heteroptera: Miridae). Environ. Entomol. 2007, 36, 1007–1013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Martínez, A.S.; Villacide, J.; Fernández Ajó, A.A.; Martinson, S.J.; Corley, J.C. Sirex noctilio flight behavior: Toward improving current monitoring techniques. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2014, 152, 135–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yao, Q.; Zhang, Z.T. Research Advances on Migratory Insects. Chin. Bull. Entomol. 1999, 4, 239–243. [Google Scholar]
  24. Prange, H.D. Evaporative Cooling in Insects. J. Insect Physiol. 1996, 42, 493–499. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Cao, Y.Z.; Huang, K.; Li, G.B. The Effect of Relative Humidity on Flight Activity of Adult Oriental Armyworm. Acta Phytophylacica Sin. 1995, 2, 134–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Zhang, X.F. A preliminary report on the study of individual developmental processes in Lygus pratensis. Shaanxi J. Agric. Sci. 2014, 60, 43–44. [Google Scholar]
  27. Yao, C.C.; Zheng, Y.X.; Gou, C.Q.; Feng, H.Z. Effects of short-term high temperature exposure on the survival and fecundity of Lygus pratensis. China Cotton 2023, 50, 6–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Li, Y.; Yang, A.; Feng, L.K.; Wang, P.L. Effect of Different Temperatures on the Development and Reproduction of Lygus pratensis. Plant Prot. 2015, 41, 59–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Bai, S.X.; Zhao, J.P.; Gou, C.Q.; Yao, C.C.; Feng, H.Z. Effects of farmland lands cape pattern on adult population dynamics of Lygus pratensis in Aral Reclamation Area of Xinjiang. Cotton Sci. 2022, 34, 523–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Ding, J.T.; Adili, S.; Zhu, H.F.; Yu, F.; Alimasi, A.; Luo, L. Flight capacity of adults of the ber fruit fly, Carpomya vesuviana (Diptera: Tephritidae). Acta Entomol. Sin. 2014, 57, 1315–1320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Ge, S.S.; He, L.M.; Wei, H.E.; Yan, R.; Wyckhuys, K.A.; Wu, K.M. Laboratory-based flight performance of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. J. Integr. Agric. 2021, 20, 707–714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Su, C.F.; Liu, A.P.; Gao, S.J.; Xu, L.B.; Xie, B.R.; Wang, H.P. Influence of Temperature and Humidity on Flight Capacity of Agrypon flexorius Thunberg. Chin. J. Biol. Control 2014, 30, 612–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cui, J.; Li, S.; Spurgeon, D.W.; Jia, W.; Lu, Y.; Gouge, D.H. Flight Capacity of Sitophilus zeamais Motschulsky1 in Relation to Gender and Temperature. Southwest. Entomol. 2016, 41, 667–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Guo, J.L.; Li, X.K.; Shen, X.J.; Wang, M.L.; Wu, K.M. Flight performance of Mamestra brassicae (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) under different biotic and abiotic conditions. J. Insect Sci. 2020, 20, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Lu, S.H.; WeiI, M.C.; Yuan, G.J.; Cui, J.X.; Gong, D.F. Flight behavior of the sycamore lace bug, Corythucha ciliata, in relation to temperature, age, and sex. J. Integr. Agric. 2019, 18, 2330–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Guo, J.L.; Fu, X.W.; Zhao, X.C.; Wu, K.M. Preliminary study on the flight capacity of Agrotis segetum (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Environ. Entomol. 2016, 38, 888–895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Sun, B.B.; Jiang, X.F.; Zhang, L.; Stanley, D.W.; Luo, L.Z.; Long, W. Methoprene influences reproduction and flight capacity in adults of the rice leaf roller, Cnaphalocrocis Medinalis (GuenỂe) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2013, 82, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Jia, B.; Tan, Y.; Fu, X.T.; Han, H.B.; Chang, J.; Pang, B.P. Effect of host plants on development, reproduction, and digestive enzyme activity of Lygus pratensis. Pratacultural Sci. 2018, 35, 1975–1984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Sun, C.W. Flying Ability and its Influencing Factors of Dastarcus helophoroides Adults. Master’s Thesis, Shandong Agricultural University, Taian, China, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  40. Shrestha, G.; Wiman, N.G.; Rondon, S.I. Flight potential of western tarnished plant bug (Hemiptera: Miridae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2022, 115, 93–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Antolínez, C.A.; Chandler, M.; Hoyle, V.; Fuchs, M.; Rivera, M.J. Differential Flight Capacity of Spissistilus festinus (Hemiptera: Membracidae) by Sex and Age. J. Insect Behav. 2023, 36, 347–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Rovnyak, A.M.; Burks, C.S.; Gassmann, A.J.; Sappington, T.W. Interrelation of mating, flight, and fecundity in navel orangeworm females. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2018, 166, 304–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Cui, X.X.; Ma, Z.H.; Xiong, R.C.; Li, Z.X.; Yao, Y.S. A study on the flight ability of Euzophera pyriella Yang. J. Environ. Entomol. 2020, 42, 1223–1229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wang, W.; Yin, J.; Cao, Y.Z.; Li, K.B. The effect of feeding and mating on the development of flight muscle in Agrotis ypsilon. Chin. J. Appl. Entomol. 2013, 50, 1573–1585. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Fahrner, S.J.; Lelito, J.P.; Blaedow, K.; Heimpel, G.E.; Aukema, B.H. Factors affecting the flight capacity of Tetrastichus planipennisi (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), a classical biological control agent of Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae). Environ. Entomol. 2014, 43, 1603–1612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Kees, A.M.; Hefty, A.R.; Venette, R.C.; Seybold, S.J.; Aukema, B.H. Flight capacity of the walnut twig beetle (Coleoptera: Dcolytidae) on a laboratory flight mill. Environ. Entomol. 2017, 46, 633–641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tran, A.K.; Kees, A.M.; Hutchison, W.D.; Aukema, B.H.; Rao, S.; Rogers, M.A.; Asplen, M.K. Comparing Drosophila suzukii flight behavior using free-flight and tethered flight assays. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2022, 170, 973–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Taylor, R.A.J.; Bauer, L.S.; Poland, T.M.; Windell, K.N. Flight performance of Agrilus planipennis (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) on a flight mill and in free flight. J. Insect Behav. 2010, 23, 128–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Minter, M.; Pearson, A.; Lim, K.S.; Wilson, K.; Chapman, J.W.; Jones, C.M. The tethered flight technique as a tool for studying life- history strat- egies associated with migration in insects. Ecol. Entomol. 2018, 43, 397–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Naranjo, S.E. Assessing insect flight behavior in the laboratory: A primer on flight mill methodology and what can be learned. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2019, 112, 182–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Insects 15 00762 g001
Figure 1. Nonlinear curve fitting of temperature versus flight distance (a), flight time (b), and flight speed (c). LgX is the logarithmic value of the flight distance (time, speed). ● is the temperature value of the maximum flight distance (time, speed).
Figure 1. Nonlinear curve fitting of temperature versus flight distance (a), flight time (b), and flight speed (c). LgX is the logarithmic value of the flight distance (time, speed). ● is the temperature value of the maximum flight distance (time, speed).
Insects 15 00762 g001
Insects 15 00762 g002
Figure 2. Nonlinear curve fitting of relative humidity to flight distance (a), flight time (b), and flight speed (c). LgX is the logarithmic value of the flight distance (time, speed). ● is the relative humidity value of the maximum flight distance (time, speed).
Figure 2. Nonlinear curve fitting of relative humidity to flight distance (a), flight time (b), and flight speed (c). LgX is the logarithmic value of the flight distance (time, speed). ● is the relative humidity value of the maximum flight distance (time, speed).
Insects 15 00762 g002
Table 1. Effects of different temperatures on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Table 1. Effects of different temperatures on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Temperature
(°C)		Total Flight Distance (km)LgXTotal Flight Time (h)LgXAverage Flying Speed (km h−1)LgX
167.35 ± 1.31 d0.8673.98 ± 0.64 bc0.6001.79 ± 0.15 c0.252
2015.67 ± 2.20 ab1.1955.86 ± 0.79 ab0.7682.78 ± 0.26 ab0.444
2418.63 ± 1.89 a1.2706.84 ± 0.60 a0.8352.84 ± 0.27 a0.453
2813.14 ± 1.94 bc1.1184.86 ± 0.63 bc0.6872.75 ± 0.20 ab0.439
328.62 ± 1.30 cd0.9364.04 ± 0.68 bc0.6062.53 ± 0.26 ab0.402
365.30 ± 1.03 d0.7242.905 ± 0.523 c0.4632.085 ± 0.213 bc0.319
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in Duncan’s multiple comparisons (p < 0.05).
Table 2. Effects of different relative humidity values on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Table 2. Effects of different relative humidity values on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Relative Humidity (%)Total Flight Distance (km)LgXTotal Flight Time
(h)		LgXAverage Flying Speed (km h−1)LgX
305.25 ± 1.03 d0.7202.26 ± 0.33 c0.3552.13 ± 0.27 a0.328
4510.46 ± 1.57 c1.0204.23 ± 0.54 b0.6272.45 ± 0.23 a0.389
6015.75 ± 2.17 ab1.1975.79 ± 0.73 ab0.7632.76 ± 0.25 a0.441
7518.63 ± 1.89 a1.2706.84 ± 0.60 a0.8352.84 ± 0.27 a0.453
9011.14 ± 1.69 bc1.0474.22 ± 0.52 b0.6252.54 ± 0.21 a0.404
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in Duncan’s multiple comparisons (p < 0.05).
Table 3. Effects of different ages on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Table 3. Effects of different ages on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Day of Age (d)Flight Probability
(%)		Total Flight Distance (km)Total Flight Time (h)Average Flying Speed (km h−1)
130.953.97 ± 0.68 d2.10 ± 0.41 d2.28 ± 0.17 c
564.299.62 ± 1.42 b4.32 ± 0.54 bc2.19 ± 0.11 c
1071.4318.63 ± 1.89 a6.84 ± 0.60 a2.84 ± 0.16 ab
1569.0517.32 ± 2.06 a5.45 ± 0.73 ab3.36 ± 0.18 a
2057.1414.79 ± 1.87 a4.68 ± 0.58 bc3.19 ± 0.16 a
2540.478.65 ± 1.21 bc3.32 ± 0.48 cd2.60 ± 0.18 bc
3038.094.54 ± 0.85 cd2.14 ± 0.36 d2.22 ± 0.18 c
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in Duncan’s multiple comparisons (p < 0.05).
Table 4. Effect of sex on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Table 4. Effect of sex on flight ability of L. pratensis.
Mating StatusSexDay of Age
(d)		Total Flight Distance
(km)		Total Flight Time
(h)		Average Flying Speed
(km h−1)
MatedFemale719.54 ± 2.09 a6.95 ± 0.70 a2.94 ± 0.20 a
Male710.17 ± 1.50 b4.50 ± 0.62 b2.52 ± 0.23 a
UnmatedFemale715.86 ± 1.96 a6.13 ± 0.74 a2.68 ± 0.20 a
Male712.92 ± 1.72 a4.88 ± 0.54 a2.56 ± 0.21 a
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in t-test comparisons (p < 0.05).
Table 5. The effect of mating on the flight ability of L. pratensis.
Table 5. The effect of mating on the flight ability of L. pratensis.
SexMating StatusDay of Age
(d)		Total Flight Distance
(km)		Total Flight Time
(h)		Average Flying Speed
(km h−1)
FemaleMated719.54 ± 2.09 a6.95 ± 0.70 a2.94 ± 0.20 a
Unmated715.86 ± 1.96 a6.13 ± 0.74 a2.68 ± 0.20 a
MaleMated710.17 ± 1.50 a4.50 ± 0.62 a2.52 ± 0.23 a
Unmated712.92 ± 1.72 a4.88 ± 0.54 a2.56 ± 0.21 a
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in t-test comparisons (p < 0.05).
Table 6. Comparison of wing area and body size of adult L. pratensis males and females.
Table 6. Comparison of wing area and body size of adult L. pratensis males and females.
SexDay of Age (d)Forewing Area
(mm2)		Hindwing Area (mm2)Weight
(mg)		Body Length
(mm)
Female105.70 ± 0.22 a5.86 ± 0.40 a8.09 ± 0.13 a5.25 ± 0.07 a
Male105.89 ± 0.44 a5.71 ± 0.33 a5.62 ± 0.13 b4.71 ± 0.09 b
The data in the table are average ± SE, and different lowercase letters indicate significant differences in t-test comparisons (p < 0.05).
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Zheng, Y.; Li, P.; Li, T.; Wang, K.; Gou, C.; Feng, H. Studies on Lygus pratensis’ (Hemiptera: Miridae) Flight Ability. Insects 2024, 15, 762. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15100762

AMA Style

Zheng Y, Li P, Li T, Wang K, Gou C, Feng H. Studies on Lygus pratensis’ (Hemiptera: Miridae) Flight Ability. Insects. 2024; 15(10):762. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15100762

Chicago/Turabian Style

Zheng, Yixiang, Pengfei Li, Tailong Li, Kunyan Wang, Changqing Gou, and Hongzu Feng. 2024. "Studies on Lygus pratensis’ (Hemiptera: Miridae) Flight Ability" Insects 15, no. 10: 762. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15100762

APA Style

Zheng, Y., Li, P., Li, T., Wang, K., Gou, C., & Feng, H. (2024). Studies on Lygus pratensis’ (Hemiptera: Miridae) Flight Ability. Insects, 15(10), 762. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects15100762

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop