Review on Predatory Aquatic insect Backswimmer Notonecta (Hemiptera, notonectidae) species

Annu Kumari

doi:10.52711/2349-2988.2026.00039

Research Journal of Science and Technology

ISSN

2349-2988 (Online)
0975-4393 (Print)

Submit Article

Review on Predatory Aquatic insect Backswimmer Notonecta (Hemiptera, notonectidae) species

Author(s): Annu Kumari

Email(s): sainiannu6553@gmail.com

DOI: 10.52711/2349-2988.2026.00039

Address: Annu Kumari
Research Scholar, Jai Prakash University, Chapra, Bihar, India.
*Corresponding Author

Published In: Volume - 18, Issue - 3, Year - 2026

View HTML

Purchase PDF

ABSTRACT:
Backswimmers, belonging to the family Notonectidae and particularly the genus Notonecta, are key predatory insects found in freshwater habitats across the globe. These insects serve a dual ecological function: they help control mosquito larvae and other aquatic invertebrates, yet they also pose a significant risk to fish seed production by preying on fish eggs, spawn, fry, and fingerlings. This review provides an overview of the taxonomy, morphology, distribution, life cycle, predatory habits, and ecological importance of Notonecta species, with a focus on their effects on aquaculture. Backswimmers have developed impressive adaptations for life in water, such as specialized swimming legs, body hairs that retain air, and effective predatory mouthparts, allowing them to capture and eat a variety of prey. Their predatory success is affected by factors like prey density, prey size, habitat features, and environmental conditions. Numerous studies have reported significant losses of fish larvae due to Notonecta spp., especially in nursery ponds used for cultivating Indian major carps (Catla catla, Labeo rohita, and Cirrhinus mrigala). The review emphasizes the economic impact of backswimmer infestations in aquaculture and explores available management strategies, including selective insecticides and traditional pond management techniques. Gaining insight into the biology and predatory behavior of Notonecta species is crucial for creating effective control methods that reduce fish seed mortality while maintaining beneficial aquatic life. This review offers valuable information for fisheries scientists, aquaculture professionals, and aquatic entomologists engaged in sustainable fish production and aquatic ecosystem management.

Keywords:

Cite this article:
Annu Kumari. Review on Predatory Aquatic insect Backswimmer Notonecta (Hemiptera, notonectidae) species. Research Journal of Science and Technology. 2026; 18(3):279-3. doi: 10.52711/2349-2988.2026.00039

Cite(Electronic):
Annu Kumari. Review on Predatory Aquatic insect Backswimmer Notonecta (Hemiptera, notonectidae) species. Research Journal of Science and Technology. 2026; 18(3):279-3. doi: 10.52711/2349-2988.2026.00039 Available on: https://rjstonline.com/AbstractView.aspx?PID=2026-18-3-6

REFERENCES:
1. Ellis, R. A., and Borden, J. H. Predation by Notonecta undulata (Heteroptera: Notonectidae) on larvae of the yellow-fever mosquito. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 1970; 63(4): 963-973.
2. Nelson, F.R.S. Predation on mosquito larvae by beetle larvae Hydrophilus triangularis and dytiscus marginalis. Mosquito News. 1977; 37(4): 628-630.
3. Rath, R.K. (2018). Freshwater aquaculture. Scientific publishers, (1-162pp).
4. Zalom, F. G., and Grigarick, A. A. Predation by Hydrophilus triangularis and Tropisternus lateralis in California rice fields. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 1980; 73(2): 167-171.
5. Sigutová, H., Šigut, M., Dolný, A., and Harabiš, F. Individual variability in habitat selection by aquatic insects is driven by taxonomy rather than specialization. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12(1): 20735.
6. Tripathi, S. D., and Sharaf, R. K. Predatory role of weed fish’s vis-a-vis aquatic insects, tadpoles and frog-lets. JNKVV Res. J. Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwa Vidylaya. 1975; 480: 1974-1978.
7. Weterings, R., Vetter, K. C., and Umponstira, C. Factors influencing the predation rates of Anisops breddini (Hemiptera: Notonectidae) feeding on mosquito larvae. Journal of Entomological and Acarological Research. 2014; 46(1): 107-111.
8. Berchi, G. M., Copilaș-Ciocianu, D., Kment, P., and Mumladze, L. Water bugs (Heteroptera: Gerromorpha, Nepomorpha) of the Caucasus eco-region. The European Zoological Journal. 2023; 90(1): 167-192.
9. Briers, R. A. (1999). Meta-population ecology of Notonecta in small ponds (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield), 1-205, pp.
10. Reynaldi, S., Meiser, M., and Liess, M. Effects of the pyrethroid fenvalerate on the alarm response and on the vulnerability of the mosquito larva Culexpipiens molestus to the predator Notonecta glauca. Aquatic Toxicology. 2011; 104(1-2): 56.
11. Giller, P. S., and McNeill, S. Predation strategies, resource partitioning and habitat selection in Notonecta (Hemiptera/Heteroptera).The Journal of Animal Ecology. 1981; 50(5): 789-808.
12. González, A. V., and Leal, J. M. Predation potential of some aquatic insects (Pantala, Coenagrion, Tropisternus, Notonecta and Sigara) on common carp fry. Journal of Applied Aquaculture. 1995; 5(1): 77-82.
13. Ditsche-Kuru, P., Schneider, E. S., Melskotte, J. E., Brede, M., Leder, A., and Barthlott, W. Super-hydrophobic surfaces of the water bug Notonecta glauca: a model for friction reduction and air retention. Beilstein Journal of Nanotechnology. 2011; 2(1): 137-144.
14. Cockrell, B. J. Effects of temperature and oxygenation on predator-prey overlap and prey choice of Notonecta glauca. The Journal of Animal Ecology. 1984; 17(6): 519-532.
15. Papacek, M. Small aquatic and ripicolous bugs (Heteroptera: Nepomorpha) as predators and prey: The question of economic importance. EJE. 2013; 98(1): 1-12.
16. Pondinformer 2019. List of aquatic pond insects in garden ponds. https://pondinformer.com/ list-of-aquatic-pond-insects.
17. Gergs, A., and Ratte, H. T. Predicting functional response and size selectivity of juvenile Notonecta maculata foraging on Daphnia magna. Ecological Modelling. 2009; 220(23): 3331-3341.
18. Martín, J., and López, P. Balancing predation risk, social interference, and foraging opportunities in backswimmers, Notonecta maculata. Acta Ethologica. 2004; 6(3): 59-63.
19. Gittelman, S. H. Leg segment proportions, predatory strategy and growth in backswimmers (Hemiptera: Pleidae, Notonectidae). Journal of the Kansas Entomological Society. 1977; 50(2): 161-171.
20. Kats, L. B., and Dill, L. M. The scent of death: chemosensory assessment of predation risk by prey animals. Ecoscience. 1998; 5(3): 361-394.
21. Fernando, C. H., and Leong, C. Y. Taxonomic study of the Malayan Notonectidae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Indian Journal of Zoology. 1976; 12(2): 88-92.
22. Shirgur, G. A., and Kewalramani, H. G. Observations on comparative propensities for carp fry destruction by adults and last instar pre-imaginal stages of predatory aquatic insects. In: Proceedings/Indian Academy of Sciences. 1972; 76(3): 85-89. New Delhi: Springer India.
23. Hirvonen, H. Effects of backswimmer (Notonecta) predation on crayfish (Pacifastacus) young: Autotomy and behavioural responses. Annales Zoologici Fennici. 1992; 29(4): 261–271.
24. Berezina, N. A. On the feeding of some water bugs-competitors and pest of fish fry. Trudy Mosk. Technol. Inst. Rybn. Promyshl. 1962; 7: 142-148.
25. Dahm, E. On the biology of Notonecta glauca (Insecta, Hemiptera) with special reference to its damage to fisheries. Internationale Revue der gesamten Hydrobiologie und Hydrographie. 1972; 57(3): 429-461.
26. Yurembam Motilan,Y.M., Radhakrishore, R., Konsam Nishikanta, K.N., Khaidem Alka, K. A., Gojendro, O., and Ruhini, T. Predatory aquatic insects of nursery ponds of Manipur. 2016; 19(2): 799-803.
27. Singh, J., Shoeb, M., Chandra, H., Gupta, Y. K., Singh, S., and Sharma, H. N. Description of Digestive Tract of Notonecta glauca Linn., the Indian Backswimmer. Journal of Advanced Laboratory Research in Biology. 2017; 8(1): 18-24.
28. Kashyap, A., Gupta, M., and Serajuddin, M. Predatory insects of various fish ponds detrimental to polyculture: a survey. Research Journal of Life Sciences. 2013; 2(8): 21-24.