ABSTRACT Leaf rolls by herbivorous insects evolved in various lepidopteran groups, aphids, and some attelabid weevil species. Leaf rolls are known to have a positive effect on the survival

of immature insects, protecting them from natural enemies such as birds, ants, predatory wasps, and parasitoids as well as environmental stress. On the other hand, leaf rolls are considered

to have a negative effect on immature survival, attracting natural enemies because of their noticeability and subsequent learning or specialization. In this study, we directly tested the

effects of leaf rolls using an attelabid species by comparing the fate of immature insects between artificial leaf rolls and unrolled leaves. The results showed the following positive

total survival rates increased in leaf shelters. SIMILAR CONTENT BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS ROLE OF EGGPLANT TRICHOME IN WHITEFLY OVIPOSITION AND ITS RELEVANCE TO BIOLOGICAL CONTROL UNDER

GREENHOUSE CONDITIONS Article Open access 30 September 2024 LIGHT ENVIRONMENTS AFFECT HERBIVORY PATTERNS BUT NOT REPRODUCTIVE PERFORMANCE OF A MULTIVOLTINE SPECIALIST MOTH, _PAREUCHAETES

PSEUDOINSULATA_ Article Open access 09 October 2020 MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIVES FOR _CARMENTA THEOBROMAE_ (BUSCK, 1910) (LEPIDOPTERA: SESIIDAE) AND _SIMPLICIVALVA AMPLIOPHILOBIA_ (LEPIDOPTERA:

COSSIDAE), LIMITING PESTS OF GUAVA IN COLOMBIA Article Open access 04 February 2021 INTRODUCTION Herbivorous insects are one of the most diverse organisms in terrestrial ecosystems, and have

evolved various types of feeding niches such as leaf chewers, leaf gallers, leaf miners, and stem borers1,2,3,4. Leaf roller is one of various feeding niches of herbivorous insects and many

species in different taxa, for examples, tortricid moths, pyralid moths, gelechiid moths, aphids, and attelabid weevils, all show leaf rolling traits and grow in leaf rolls during their

immature period or the adult period. Leaf shelters, including leaf rolls, folds and ties, are known to have positive effects on immature survival by providing protection from predators such

as birds, ants, spiders and wasps, as well as from environmental stress1,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15. Additionally, it is indicated that leaf rolls have a protective effect against parasitic

wasps16. In attelabid weevils, leaf rolling behavior by female insects to provide shelter and food for immatures evolved in the tribes Deporaini and Byctiscini (Rhynchitinae), and subfamily

Attelabinae17. However, the effects of leaf shelters are only indirectly shown by interspecific comparison, experimental exposure to predators, or using dummy larvae, and few studies have

shown the direct impact of leaf shelters under natural conditions. In contrast, leaf shelters may negatively affect immature insect survival, attracting natural enemies because of their

noticeability18,19. In Byctiscini and Attelabinae, leaf rolling behavior evolved once at the common ancestor. On the other hand, species of Deporaini are basically leaf miners of leaves cut

by female insects, and leaf rolling behavior evolved several times independently, but most species remain non-leaf-rolling species. Thus, in Deporaini, leaf rollers and non-leaf rollers

coexist within closely related species, suggesting that the leaf rolling behavior is not always preferred by natural selection, with selective pressure affected by subtle changes in

conditions at the particular time and place. For example, females of _Deporaus betulae_ construct a funnel-shaped open leaf roll using leaves of _Betula platyphylla_ (Betulaceae), but

females of the closely related species, _D. affectatus_, do not construct leaf rolls only cutting leaves of Betulaceae17. Similarly, females of _D. unicolor_ construct cigar-like closed leaf

rolls using leaves of some species of Fagaceae and Betulaceae, but females of _D. insularis_, do not construct leaf rolls, only cutting leaves of some evergreen Fagaceae17. Leaf-rolling

attelabids suffer lower parasitism rates than non-leaf-rolling attelabids, and leaf-roll type and parasitoid communities are well associated; species with similar leaf roll types also show

similar parasitoid communities even if they are not so closely related16,17. Thus, in Attelabidae, it appears that the evolution of leaf rolling behavior and leaf roll shape were greatly

influenced by parasitoids. In this study, we evaluated the direct effect of leaf rolls using an attelabid weevil, _Apoderites commodus_ (Deporaini, Attelabidae, Fig. 1), by comparing the

immature fate between insects in artificial leaf rolls and those in unrolled control leaves in the field. RESULTS Of the 50 eggs in the collected leaves (unplaced, Fig. 2), 22 (44.0%) died

of parasitism by Mymarid wasps and 4 (8.0%) died of parasitism by _Ophioneurus_ sp. Similarly, in the eggs of the recollected rolled and non-rolled leaves (control), 114 (41.8%) and 93

(43.9%) died of parasitism by Mymarid wasps, and 28 (10.3%) and 22 (10.4%) died of parasitism by _Ophioneurus_ sp., respectively (Fig. 2). Both mymarid wasps and _Ophioneurus_ sp. are

solitary endoparasitoids of eggs. Parasitism rates of Mymaridae and _Ophioneurus_ sp. were quite similar among the collected (unplaced) and recollected rolled and unrolled leaves with no

significant difference (Fisher’s exact test, χ2 = 0.519, _df_ = 4, _P_ = 0.9716). This indicates that at the start of the experiment, approximately 40% of eggs had been parasitized by

Mymarid wasps and approximately 10% had been parasitized by _Ophioneurus_ sp. Thus, parasitism by Mymaridae and _Ophioneurus_ sp. can be regarded as mortality before the experiment, so these

mortalities were excluded from the following analysis comparing experimentally rolled leaves and unrolled leaves. Some emerged mymarid wasps were identified as _Anaphes_ sp., but others

could not be identified because of specimen damage. Overall, the survival rate of immatures in experimentally rolled leaves was significantly higher (19.6%) than in non-rolled leaves (7.6%;

bootstrap possibility, _P_ < 0.001; Fig. 3). In experimentally rolled leaves, eggs or larvae were free from mortality by parasitism by Eulophidae, which are solitary endoparasitoids of

eggs or larvae. On the other hand, in unrolled leaves, 7 eggs and 3 larvae (36.6%) suffered from parasitism by Eulophidae. The increase in the survival rate and the decrease in the

parasitism rate by Eulophidae occurred simultaneously in significant possibility (bootstrap possibility, _P_ < 0.001). Furthermore, the egg predation rate was significantly lower in

experimentally rolled leaves than in unrolled leaves (bootstrap possibility, _P_ < 0.001). The increase in the survival rate and the decrease in the egg predation rate occurred

simultaneously in significant possibility (bootstrap possibility, _P_ < 0.001). However, in experimentally rolled leaves, mortality by herbivory was significantly higher than that in

unrolled leaves (bootstrap possibility, _P_ < 0.001). Herbivory was mainly caused by lepidopteran larvae estimated by infestation form or remaining frass in leaf rolls, as well as direct

observation of larvae. DISCUSSION In this study, we showed that simple modification of leaves, that is, leaf rolling, caused marked changes in the fate of immature attelabid weevils related

to natural enemies. In particular, a decrease in the parasitism rate by Eulophidae and the egg predation rate contributed to the increase in the survival rate. The fact that parasitism rate

by Eulophidae in experimentally rolled leaves was 0% compared to that in unrolled leaves (36.6%) suggests that leaf roll acted as an “insuperable barrier” against Eulophidae. This result is

consistent with our previous study revealing that leaf rolling species in Attelabidae were less parasitized by eulophid wasps16. The reason why eulophid wasps do not parasitize eggs or

larvae in experimentally rolled leaves may be explained by two different hypotheses: failure-in-access and failure-in-finding. The failure-in-access hypothesis is that eulophid wasps can

find hosts and attempt to parasitize, but the leaf roll acts as a structural barrier and eulophid wasps cannot reach weevil eggs or larvae. Considering that leaf rolls in this experiment

were loosely rolled and oviposition sites would be easy to access, the plausibility of this hypothesis seems relatively low. On the other hand, the failure-in-finding hypothesis is that

eulophid wasps cannot find hosts in leaf rolls because they cannot recognize a “rolled leaf” as a target structure containing hosts. Eulophidae are known as one of the dominant parasitoids

of various leaf miners such as leaf mining moths, flies, sawflies, or beetles20,21. Some parasitoids of leaf miners have been reported to have evolved specific visual searching traits for

leaf miners during flight22,23,24,25. For example, parasitoids were more attracted to the leaves with many leaf mines using visual cues25. In addition to visual cues, parasitoids of leaf

miners also use chemical and vibrational cues for host searching, similar to other parasitoids26,27,28. Considering that in the present study, chemical and vibrational cues would not differ

between experimentally rolled and unrolled treatments, changes in the visual cues likely affected the search success of eulophid wasps. In our study, of the 36.6% of eggs and larvae from

unrolled leaves parasitized by Eulophidae, 25.6% was attributable to egg parasitism. This means that mine shape would not be an important visual cue in this case because no mine existed on

leaves in the egg stage. Thus, eulophid wasps might have a host searching image of “cut-off leaf on the ground”, which was basically flat and thin, and leaf rolls were not recognized as a

host because the shape differed from the searching image. The protective barrier effect of leaf roll for inner insects has been reported previously1,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15. However,

this study suggests that the leaf roll effect is not only a structural barrier but also a “visual modification” itself. In order to confirm this visually protective effect of leaf rolls,

further experiments controlling leaf shapes in various patterns and comparing parasitism rates among treatments are needed. In this study, important information on the timing of parasitoid

attack was also indicated: Mymarid wasps and _Ophioneurus_ sp. were suggested to attack hosts on the tree shortly after weevil oviposit into the leaf and before the leaf was completely cut

from the tree. The time from oviposition to leaf cutting is reported to be approximately 30 min in a rhynchitin non-leaf-roller species, _Deporaus septemtrionalis_29. It is surprising that

parasitoids can finish their host finding and oviposit in such a brief time and probably represents a product of the arms race between parasitoids and weevils16. In addition, the weevil

behavior of cutting leaves from the host tree might contribute to avoidance of heavier parasitism rates. If leaves including eggs remain suspended from the tree, the success rate of

parasitism would most likely increase due to prolonged opportunity for parasitoids to attack. The other factor related to the increase in survival rate of immature weevils was the decrease

in mortality due to egg predation. Our results indicate the presence of predators on the ground that feed primarily on eggs in leaf tissue instead of on eggs in leaf tissue within leaf

rolls. Few studies have revealed predators of leaf miners in the egg stage, and most studies of leaf miner mortality focus on larvae30. Digweed31 reported potential egg predators of a leaf

mining sawfly as spiders, staphylinid beetles, coccinellid beetles, Hemiptera, and thrips. However, in this study, we should consider potential egg predators not on the tree but on the

ground. From the soil meso-organisms and macro-organisms lists, predators and opportunistic predators in the litter would be mites, Opiliones, Isopoda, centipedes, millipedes, ground

beetles, and spiders32. Furthermore, ants and dipteran larvae could also be considered as potential predators or opportunistic predators33,34. Eggs in unrolled and rolled leaves were

protected in the leaf tissue, but leaf decomposition or egg dislodgement by soil organisms might occur more easily in unrolled leaves than in rolled leaves. Such decomposition or

dislodgement causes exposure of eggs and a higher risk of predation. Thus, eggs in rolled leaves might show lower predation rates than those in unrolled leaves. In contrast to predation,

weevil mortality due to herbivory, especially by moth larvae, increased in experimentally rolled leaves compared to unrolled leaves. Thus, leaf rolls are not only protective refuges but also

potentially risky hiding places for immature weevils. Our observations could be attributed to the fact that leaf rolls were preferred by herbivorous moth larvae as shelters; leaf shelters,

that is, leaf rolls, leaf galls, leaf folds, or leaf ties, are often preferred and secondarily used by several insect species, sometimes providing them with a protective

effect13,35,36,37,38. The reason why previous studies on the effect of leaf rolls did not detect the negative effect of herbivory could be that the observed leaf rolls were constructed by

lepidopteran larvae that could escape herbivory and construct new leaf rolls. In the litter on the forest floor in Japan, lepidopteran larvae, such as those belonging to Blastobasidae or

Tineidae, crawl while searching for fallen leaves to feed on. In an attelabid species, _Cycnotrachelus roelofsi_ (Attelabinae), _Neoblastobasis spiniharpella_ (Blastobasidae) larvae were

found to infest the inside of leaf rolls; as a result, weevil larvae sometimes died of direct infestation or the lack of food34. In such cases, leaf roll construction had a negative effect

on immature survival. However, in the species of Attelabinae, leaf roll construction is crucial to avoiding egg parasitoids, while mortality by herbivory is not so high34. Thus, the

protective effect of leaf rolling against egg parasitoids exceeds the negative effects of herbivory. Further, leaf roll construction using excessive leaves by some Byctiscini species

(Attelabidae, Rhynchitinae) may be a counter evolution to avoid mortality by herbivory. Various lepidopteran species and dipteran species emerge from leaf rolls of some Byctiscini species

consuming leaf rolls (Kobayashi C, unpublished data), and competition for leaf roll resources sometimes causes larval death because weevil larvae cannot exit leaf rolls and search for new

leaves. Thus, excessive leaves in the leaf roll may save weevil larvae from dying from food loss or infestation because of herbivory. Regarding environmental stress, we did not detect any

effect of leaf rolls. This may be because immature weevils in unrolled leaves were not directly exposed to environmental stresses due to their leaf mining habit. Therefore, both rolled and

unrolled treatments experienced the same environmental conditions. In summary, the survival rate of the attelabid weevil in this study was significantly increased by leaf rolling. Thus, this

study suggests that selection pressure to evolve leaf rolling behavior still exists in the natural population, at least in Attelabidae. However, whether the leaf rolling behavior evolves

will depend on the balance of positive and negative effects of leaf roll, that is, the degree of pressure exerted by parasitoids, predators and herbivores. Furthermore, constructing leaf

rolls incurs energy costs and time for oviposition. Considering that most Deporaini species are less than 5 mm in length, the behavioral costs for rolling leaves would be high. In Deporaini,

few species evolved leaf rolling traits independently, while the others were leaf miners in cut leaves and did not roll leaves17. Although the total survival rate was higher in rolled

leaves than in unrolled leaves, contradictory effects of leaf rolls added to construction costs may explain this sporadic evolutionary pattern in leaf rolls of Deporaini. If leaf rolling

traits have a mostly positive effect on egg and larval survival, leaf rolling behavior may have evolved more frequently or further diversification of leaf rolling species may have occurred.

MATERIALS AND METHODS STUDY SPECIES _Apoderites commodus_ (Coleoptera; Attelabidae; Deporaini, Fig. 1a) is a “cut” leaf miner, i.e., female weevils oviposit into leaf blade tissue creating a

slit (Fig. 1c, d), cut it off from the tree (Fig. 1b), and then hatched larvae grow inside the leaf tissue on the ground by feeding on inner leaf tissue without being exposed or moving to

the outside of the infested leaf. Usually, one egg or two eggs are laid into the leaf tissue. After leaf mining for 1 or 2 months, mature larvae exit the leaf, pupate in the soil, and then

emerge the next spring. Plant-cutting behavior for oviposition by female insects is a unique trait of Attelabidae acquired once by the common ancestor of Attelabidae16, and is considered an

adaptation to avoid chemical defenses of fresh or intact plants towards immature insects. STUDY SITE AND EXPERIMENT We collected 642 cut leaves of _Carpinus laxiflora_ (Betulaceae) from the

ground, in which _A_. _commodus_ oviposited (Fig. 1b) at Yomogida (38.45° N, 140.46° E), Miyagi, Japan on 21, 23, 24 and 26 June 2011. Study site was temperate deciduous forest dominated by

_Q. serrata_ and _Castanea crenata_ at 170 m elevation. Of the 642 collected leaves, 50 were taken to the laboratory in order to check survival or mortality rate before the experiment and

were individually kept in an incubator at 20 °C. Of the other collected leaves, 319 leaves were only labeled by plastic tape with no leaf roll treatment (Fig. 4a), and 273 leaves were

experimentally rolled using plastic tape (Fig. 4b), before being placed on the ground as similar to natural dispersal as possible. Experimental leaf rolls were loosely rolled and we took

care not to cover the weevil’s oviposition holes with the leaf layer. Note that in this case, contrary to other common leaf rollers, weevil larvae are leaf miners and therefore would be

“mining” in artificial leaf rolls. In addition, for leaves with no leaf roll treatment, eggs and larvae would not be exposed to external surroundings as internal leaf feeders. Thus,

comparison between leaf-rollers and non-leaf rollers in this study indicate the effect of leaf rolls for internal feeders. The placed leaves were recollected on July 14, 2011, approximately

3 weeks after placement, by which time the larvae were nearly ready to pupate but had not yet exited the leaves for pupation. Of the 273 experimentally rolled and 319 unrolled leaves with

marking, 212 and 273 leaves were recollected, respectively. The recollected leaves were taken to the laboratory and the developmental stage (egg or larva), status (living or dead), and the

cause of mortality were recorded for each individual. If a larva was still alive in the leaf, it was kept individually in an incubator at 20 °C until an larva or a parasitoid emerged.

Emerged larva was kept individually in the soil for pupation in an incubator at 20 °C for three months, at gradual winter condition for four months (4 °C), and then at gradual spring

condition (20 °C) until adult weevil or a parasitoid emerged. These recollected leaves contained 212 eggs in the experimentally rolled treatment and 270 eggs in the unrolled treatment.

MORTALITY CLASSIFICATION Egg and larval mortalities were classified into seven categories: unknown larval death, unknown egg death, egg predation, herbivory, parasitism by Eulophidae,

parasitism by Mymaridae, and parasitism by _Ophioneurus_ sp. (Trichogrammatidae). Parasitoids were identified by specimens that emerged from weevil eggs or larvae using a stereomicroscope.

We categorized the mortality as unknown egg death and unknown larval death when we found dead eggs or larvae without external damage; unknown egg death and unknown larval death were caused

not by external factors such as predators or parasitoids, but by inner factors such as developmental failure, intrinsic damage, poisoning, and so on. Unknown egg death and unknown larval

death would contain mortalities due to abiotic factors such as temperature, relative humidity, precipitation, etc. We categorized the mortality as predation when we could not find any egg or

larva in leaves without herbivory. Herbivory is a mortality caused by leaf infestation mainly by moth larvae. In such leaves, weevil eggs or larvae would die because of direct infestation

or a lack of food. In most cases, moth larvae had already exited from recollected leaves before the sampling. Thus, in such cases, herbivory by moth larvae were identified only by the frass

or moth larval exuviae in leaves. Some moth larvae were found in recollected leaves and were kept in the laboratory, but moth species could not be identified because of failure in adult

emergence. Missing samples were excluded from the statistical analyses because their status could not be ascertained and were considered not to interact with mortality differences between

treatments. Survival and mortality rates between treatments were analyzed by non-parametric bootstrap with 106 replicates using R ver.3.2.1 (https://www.R-project.org). REFERENCES * Strong,

D. R., Lawton, J. H. & Southwood, T. R. E. _Insects on Plant: Community Patterns and Mechanisms_ (Blackwell, Oxford, 1984). Google Scholar  * May, R. M. How many species are there on

Earth?. _Science_ 241, 1441–1449. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.241.4872.1441 (1988). Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar  * Farrell, B. “Inordinate Fondness” explained: why are

there so many beetles?. _Science_ 281, 555–559. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5376.555 (1998). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Futuyma, D. J. & Agrawal, A. A. Evolutionary

history and species interactions. _Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A._ 106, 18043–18044. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0910334106 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  ADS  Google

Scholar  * Fowler, S. V. & Macgarvin, M. The impact of hairy wood ants, _Formica lugubris_, on the guild structure of herbivorous insects on birch, _Betula pubescens_. _J. Anim. Ecol._

54, 847–855. https://doi.org/10.2307/4382 (1985). Article  Google Scholar  * Heads, P. A. & Lawton, J. H. Bracken, ants and extrafloral nectaries. III. How insect herbivores avoid ant

predation. _Ecol. Entomol._ 10, 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1985.tb00532.x (1985). Article  Google Scholar  * Damman, H. Leaf quality and enemy avoidance by the larvae of a

pyralid moth. _Ecology_ 68, 88–97. https://doi.org/10.2307/1938808 (1987). Article  Google Scholar  * Atlegrim, O. Exclusion of birds from bilberry stands: impact on insect larval density

and damage to the bilberry. _Oecologia_ 79, 136–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00378251 (1989). Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar  * Hunter, M. D. & West, C. Variation in the effects

of spring defoliation on the late season phytophagous insects of _Quercus robur_. In _Population Dynamics of Forest Insects_ (eds Watt, A. D. _et al._) 123–135 (Intercept, Andover, 1990).

Google Scholar  * Ito, F. & Higashi, S. Variance of ant effects on the different life forms of moth caterpillars. _J. Anim. Ecol._ 60, 327–334. https://doi.org/10.2307/5463 (1991).

Article  Google Scholar  * Vasconcelos, H. L. Mutualism between _Maieta guianensis_ Aubl., a myrmecophytic melastome, and one of its ant inhabitants: ant protection against insect

herbivores. _Oecologia_ 87, 295–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00325269 (1991). Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar  * Atlegrim, O. Mechanisms regulating bird predation on a herbivorous

larva guild in boreal coniferous forests. _Ecography_ 15, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0587.1992.tb00003.x (1992). Article  Google Scholar  * Cappuccino, N. Mutual use of

leaf-shelters by lepidopteran larvae on paper birch. _Ecol. Entomol._ 18, 287–292. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1993.tb01103.x (1993). Article  Google Scholar  * Loeffler, C. C.

Caterpillar leaf folding as a defense against predation and dislodgement: staged encounters using _Dichomeris_ (Gelechiidae) larvae on goldenrods. _J. Lepid. Soc._ 50, 245–260 (1996). Google

Scholar  * Tvardikova, K. & Novotny, V. Predation on exposed and leaf-rolling artificial caterpillars in tropical forests of Papua New Guinea. _J. Trop. Ecol._ 28, 331–341.

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266467412000235 (2012). Article  Google Scholar  * Kobayashi, C. _et al._ Arms race between leaf rollers and parasitoids: diversification of plant-manipulation

behavior and its consequences. _Ecol. Monogr._ 85, 253–268. https://doi.org/10.1890/14-0280.1.sm (2015). Article  Google Scholar  * Kobayashi, C., Okuyama, Y., Kawazoe, K. & Kato, M. The

evolutionary history of maternal plant-manipulation and larval feeding behaviours in attelabid weevils (Coleoptera; Curculionidae). _Mol. Phylogen. Evol._ 64, 318–330. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2012.04.006 (2012). Article  Google Scholar  * Frost, S. W. Insect Life and Natural History (Dover, New York, 1959). * Danthanarayana, W. Population ecology

of the light brown apple moth, _Epiphyras postvittana_ (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). _J. Anim. Ecol._ 52, 1–33. https://doi.org/10.2307/4585 (1983). Article  Google Scholar  * Connor, E. F.

& Taverner, M. P. The evolution and adaptive significance of the leaf-mining habit. _Oikos_ 79, 6–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/3546085 (1997). Article  Google Scholar  * Salvo, A.,

Valladares, G. R. & Cagnolo, L. Parasitic assemblages on leafminers: a comparison of structure and function among host orders. _Stud. Neotrop. Fauna Environ._ 46, 11–22.

https://doi.org/10.1080/01650521.2010.536351 (2011). Article  Google Scholar  * Sugimoto, T., Shimono, Y., Hata, Y., Nakai, A. & Yahara, M. Foraging for patchily-distributed leaf-miners

by the parasitoid, _Dapsilarthra rufiventris_ (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). III. Visual and acoustic cues to a close range patchy-location. _Appl. Entomol. Zool._ 23, 113–121.

https://doi.org/10.1303/aez.23.113 (1988). Article  Google Scholar  * Casas, J. Foraging behaviour of a leafminer parasitoid in the field. _Ecol. Entomol._ 14, 257–265.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2311.1989.tb00954 (1989). Article  Google Scholar  * Salvo, A. & Valladares, G. R. Looks are important: parasitic assemblages of agromyzid leafminers

(Diptera) in relation to mine shape and contrast. _J. Anim. Ecol._ 73, 494–505. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-8790.2004.00824.x (2004). Article  Google Scholar  * Low, G. Grouping increases

visual detection risk by specialist parasitoids. _Behav. Ecol._ 19, 532–538. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/arm157 (2008). Article  Google Scholar  * Dicke, M. & Minkenberg, O. P. J. M.

Role of volatile infochemicals in foraging behavior of the leafminer parasitoid _Dacnusa sibirica_ (Diptera: Agromyzidae). _J. Insect Behav._ 4, 489–508. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01049333

(1991). Article  Google Scholar  * Petitt, F. L., Turlings, T. C. J. & Wolf, S. P. Adult experience modifies attraction of the leafminer parasitoid _Opius dissitus_ (Hymenoptera:

Braconidae) to volatile semiochemicals. _J. Insect Behav._ 5, 623–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01048009 (1992). Article  Google Scholar  * Mayhöfer, R., Casas, J. & Dorn, S.

Vibration-mediated interactions in a host-parasitoid system. _Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser B Bio Sci_ 264, 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.1997.0037 (1997). Article  ADS  Google Scholar  *

Sawada, Y. Two weevil species of the genus _Deporaus_ cutting cherry leaves–the divergence of their oviposition behaviors. _Insects Nat._ 38, 32–36 (2003). Google Scholar  * Hespenheide, H.

A. Bionomics of leaf-mining insects. _Annu. Rev. Enlomol._ 36, 535–560. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.en.36.010191.002535 (1991). Article  Google Scholar  * Digweed, S. C. Mortality of

birch leafmining sawflies (Hymenoptera: Tenthredinidae): impacts of natural enemies on introduced pests. _Environ. Entomol._ 27, 1357–1367. https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/27.6.1357 (1998).

Article  Google Scholar  * Swift, M. J., Heal, O. W. & Anderson, J. M. _Decomposition in Terrestrial Ecosystems_ (Blackwell, Oxford, 1979). Google Scholar  * Hölldobler, B. & Wilson,

E. O. _The Ants_ (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1990). Book  Google Scholar  * Kobayashi, C. & Kato, M. To be suspended or to be cut off? Differences in the performance of two

types of leaf-rolls constructed by the attelabid beetle _Cycnotrachelus roelofsi_. _Popul. Ecol._ 46, 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-004-0179-7 (2004). Article  Google Scholar  *

Larsson, S., Haggstrom, H. E. & Denno, R. F. Preference for protected feeding sites by larvae of the willow-feeding leaf beetle _Galerucella lineola_. _Ecol. Entomol._ 22, 445–452.

https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2311.1997.00083.x (1997). Article  Google Scholar  * Martinsen, G. D., Floate, K. D., Waltz, A. M., Wimp, G. M. & Whitham, T. G. Positive interactions

between leafrollers and other arthropods enhance biodiversity on hybrid cottonwoods. _Oecologia_ 123, 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004420050992 (2000). Article  CAS  PubMed  ADS  Google

Scholar  * Nakamura, M. & Ohgushi, T. Positive and negative effects of leaf shelters on herbivorous insects: linking multiple herbivore species on a willow. _Oecologia_ 136, 445–449.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1285-5 (2003). Article  PubMed  ADS  Google Scholar  * Vieira, C. & Romero, G. Q. Ecosystem engineers on plants: indirect facilitation of arthropod

communities by leaf-rollers at different scales. _Ecology_ 94, 1510–1518. https://doi.org/10.1890/12-1151.1 (2013). Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  Download references ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We

thank Yutaka Osada for his helpful comments on the statistical analysis. We thank Yukari Suzuki-Ohno, Tomoko Hamabata, and Daiki Sato for their suggestions in improving the text. This study

was supported by the JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP10J05814. We would like to thank Editage (www.editage.com) for English language editing. AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS *

Graduate School of Life Sciences, Tohoku University, 3−6 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba, Sendai, Miyagi, 980-8578, Japan Chisato Kobayashi & Masakado Kawata * Biosystematics Laboratory, Faculty of

Social and Cultural Studies, Kyushu University, 744 Motooka, Nishi, Fukuoka, Fukuoka, 819‑0395, Japan Kazunori Matsuo Authors * Chisato Kobayashi View author publications You can also search

for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Kazunori Matsuo View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Masakado Kawata View author publications You

can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS C.K. and M.K. conceived and designed the field experiments. C.K. performed the experiments. K.M. and C.K. identified

parasitoids. C.K. wrote the manuscript. K.M. and M.K. provided editorial and specialized advice. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR Correspondence to Chisato Kobayashi. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING

INTERESTS The authors declare no competing interests. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PUBLISHER'S NOTE Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and

institutional affiliations. RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS OPEN ACCESS This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing,

adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons

license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a

credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted

use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Reprints and permissions ABOUT

THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Kobayashi, C., Matsuo, K. & Kawata, M. Contradictory effects of leaf rolls in a leaf-mining weevil. _Sci Rep_ 10, 12180 (2020).

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69002-1 Download citation * Received: 14 April 2020 * Accepted: 06 July 2020 * Published: 22 July 2020 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-69002-1

SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to

clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative