Open Access

Luise Thümmel, Colin Degoutrie, Alicia Fonseca-Muñoz, Jens Amendt

• • Mexican and German populations of L. sericata differ in their development times. • Mexican L. sericata had a shorter development time at 20°C than German flies. • At 30 °C, German L. sericata pupariated and eclosed earlier than the Mexican flies. • Differences in study design make the comparison of developmental studies difficult. Abstract The cosmopolitan blow fly Lucilia sericata is often used in forensic case work for estimating the minimum postmortem interval (PMImin). For this, the age of immature specimens developing on the dead body is calculated by measuring the time taken to reach the sampled developmental stage at a given temperature. To test whether regional developmental data of L. sericata is valid on a global scale, the time taken to reach different developmental stages was compared between a population from Mexico and one from Germany at two different constant temperatures. The German population of L. sericata was collected in Frankfurt/Main, while the Mexican population originated near Oaxaca de Juarez and was transported to Germany in the larval stage. Only the F1 generation was used to avoid adaption of the Mexican flies. Eggs were immediately placed at 20 °C and 30 °C. Five times 30 freshly eclosed larvae per replicate (n = 5) were then transferred to a cup of minced meat in separate containers. The larvae were checked every 8 h for migration, pupariation or emergence of adult flies. The time at which the first individual and 50 % of the specimens per container entered each of these stages, was recorded. Significant differences in the time of development between the two populations were observed at both temperatures. At 20 °C, the first specimens of the Mexican population reached all developmental stages a little (< 1 day to < 2 days) earlier than the German L. sericata. At 30 °C, the Mexican flies also reached the post-feeding stage slightly earlier (0.2 days). However, at 30 °C, the German flies started pupariation significantly earlier (after 5 days) than the Mexican flies (6.9 days) and the adults from Germany also emerged earlier (10.5 days compared to 13.1 days). The same pattern was observed when looking at 50 % of the total number of specimens per container. A comparison with previously published developmental studies was difficult as the experimental design varied widely between studies. However, the results were within the range of most studies. Our study has shown that age estimation can vary widely depending on the population on which the reference data used for the calculations are based. This highlights the importance of using local and population-specific developmental data for estimating the age of blow flies in case work.