Biology, images, analysis, design...
Aphids Find them How to ID AphidBlog
"It has long been an axiom of mine that the little things are infinitely the most important" (Sherlock Holmes)

Search this site

Aphidinae : Aphidini : Aphis urticata


Identification & Distribution:

Aphis urticata is a small to medium size aphid. Early generations of the dark green nettle aphid are dark bluish-green often mottled with a lighter green (see first picture below) with no wax covering. Later generations of dwarf summer apterae become pale yellowish. The abdominal dorsum is either unsclerotized or rarely with rather narrow dusky bands across tergites 7-8. The longest posterior hairs on the femora, and the longest tibial hairs, are always much longer than the least width of the tibiae. The pale tapering siphunculi are usually slightly dusky at the tips, and are 0.90-1.78 times the length of the tongue shaped cauda (cf. Microlophium carnosum which has long tapering siphunculi with flared apices, 2.3 to 3.1 times the length of the cauda). The cauda is also pale. The body length of adult Aphis urticata apterae is 1.7-2.2 mm.

Aphis urticata alatae (see second picture above) have more sclerotization than apterae with bands across tergites 7-8 and some marginal sclerites. The siphunculi of alates are uniformly dusky and cylindical. The body length of the alate is 1.5-1.8 mm.

Early generations of the dark green nettle aphid form dense colonies on stems and leaves of the common nettle (Urtica dioica). The dwarf summer form of Aphis urticata can be found scattered on the undersides of the leaves. The dark green nettle aphid is generally common, and sometimes abundant, throughout Europe and into Asia.  

Biology & Ecology:

The overwintering eggs of Aphis urticata laid on nettle stems hatch in early May to give the fundatrices. These reproduce parthenogentically to produce relatively small but very dense colonies. An unusual dwarf aptera form is present on the leaves in summer. This is yellowish (see picture below) rather than blue-green, and much smaller with a body length of 0.9-1.4 mm.

The dwarf form requires lower levels of nutrition, which enables aphids to get through mid-summer when available levels of nitrogen in the phloem are very low. Another strategy for getting through this period is to have a period of reproductive diapause in summer as with the common sycamore aphid Drepanosiphum platanoidis.

Aphis urticata is one of two aphid species that only feed on stinging nettle - the other is Microlophium carnosum. In some areas both species of nettle aphid may be very common, but in other areas Aphis urticata is much less common. This has led to some hypothesizing that the local rarity of Aphis urticata might be explained by competitive exclusion by the Microlophium carnosum, mediated indirectly through natural enemies.

Kean & Möller (2004) used experimental aphid colonies on potted nettles to test for effects of Microlophium carnosum on Aphis urticata in the field. Despite the presence of numerous predators, the colony dynamics of the rare aphid were not different on potted nettles when a colony of the common aphid occurred on the same plant or on a plant nearby or when the common aphid was altogether absent. It was concluded that there was no evidence for competition being a major factor causing the local rarity of Aphis urticata.


A more likely explanation for the scarcity of Aphis urticata in some sites is the lack of suitable ants to attend the colonies (Müller & Godfray, 1997). We have always found successful Aphis urticata colonies to be ant-attended, whether by red ants (picture above right), black ants (picture below left) or southern wood ants (picture below right).


Lang & Menzel (2011) used Aphis urticata as one example of an ant-loving (myrmecophilous) aphid in their study to test their hypothesis that ants would discriminate between ant-loving and non-ant-loving aphids using cuticular hydrocarbons, rather than honeydew quality or quantity. This was on the basis that ant-loving aphids only produced honeydew of higher quality or quantity after tending commenced, so any signal to ants has to be independent of honeydew quality.

They looked at the responses of ants to live aphids, dead aphids and dummies covered with aphid cuticular hydrocarbons. Lasius niger invariably attacked individuals covered with non-ant-loving aphid hydrocarbons, but tended those covered with ant-loving aphid hydrocarbons. Further analysis suggested that myrmecophilous aphid species had a common cuticular hydrocarbon signal, which Lasius niger used to classify aphids into potential partners and potential prey.

Colonies of Aphis urticata often suffer high rates of parasitism as indicated by the picture below which shows a cluster of parasitized mummies.

The parasitoid adults are evidently not discouraged by the attending ants, similar to the situation with Lysiphlebus confusus parasitizing Aphis farinosa. Lysiphlebus fabarum is the key parasitoid of Aphis urticata on stinging nettles, whilst Aphidius ervi (now Aphidius microlophii) is the key-parasitoid of of the other nettle aphid Microlophium carnosum (Stary, 1983).

We have not found any predators present on colonies tended by southern wood ants which seem to be remarkably effective at protecting their honeydew providers. Predators are sometimes present on Aphis urticata colonies attended by black ants (Lasius) in particular larvae and adults of the seven-spot ladybird Coccinella septempunctata. The larva is shown in the first picture below and the adult in the second picture below.


The seven-spot ladybird has a rather pronounced proclivity for cannibalism (Khan et al., 2003) which the one in the picture demonstrated by attempting to eat a larva of its own species (see image below). This larva did eventally manage to escape, but it looked somewhat worse for its experience.


Other aphids on same host:

Aphis urticata has been recorded from 8 Urtica species.

Blackman & Eastop list about 18 species of aphids as feeding on common stinging nettle (Urtica dioica) worldwide, and provides formal identification keys for aphids on Urtica (Show World list). Of those aphid species Baker (2015) lists 10 as occurring in Britain (Show British list).


Beneficial effects

There remains the issue of whether nettle provides a reservoir for aphid natural enemies which move to nearby crops when aphid numbers on nettle decline in the summer. We consider this on the page on the common nettle aphid Microlophium carnosum. The commonest predator of the common nettle aphid is the coccinellid Harmonia axyridis, but that species tends not to be found on crops (Alhmedi et al., 2007). Similarly the main parasitoid of Microlophium evansi - Aphidius microlophii - will not attack crop aphids.

However, the coccinellid Coccinella septempunctata that we have found attacking Aphis urticata (at least early in the year) certainly does attack crop aphids, as does the parasitoid of Aphis urticata - namely Lysiphlebus fabarum. Hence it seems that the Aphis urticae offers a much better prospect of providing useful natural enemies from nettle strips to nearby crops than does Microlophium carnosum. Having said that, we still need some experimental work to demonstrate that predators really will move to crops, and more importantly will actually reduce pest populations.


Whilst we make every effort to ensure that identifications are correct, we cannot absolutely warranty their accuracy. We have mostly made identifications from high resolution photos of living specimens, along with host plant identity. In the great majority of cases, identifications have been confirmed by microscopic examination of preserved specimens. We have used the keys and species accounts of Blackman & Eastop (1994) and Blackman & Eastop (2006) supplemented with Blackman (1974), Stroyan (1977), Stroyan (1984), Blackman & Eastop (1984), Heie (1980-1995), Dixon & Thieme (2007) and Blackman (2010). We fully acknowledge these authors as the source for the (summarized) taxonomic information we have presented. Any errors in identification or information are ours alone, and we would be very grateful for any corrections. For assistance on the terms used for aphid morphology we suggest the figure provided by Blackman & Eastop (2006).

Useful weblinks


  • Alhmedi, A. et al. (2007). Aphidophagous guilds on nettle (Urtica dioica) strips close to fields of green pea, rape and wheat Insect Science 14, 419-424. Abstract Full text

  • Blackman, R.L. & Eastop, V.F. (2006). Aphids on the world's herbaceous plants and shrubs. Vols 1 and 2. John Wiley & Sons.

  • Kean, J. M. and Müller, C. B. (2004). Can competition explain local rarity of a nettle aphid?. Ecological Entomology 29, 706-710. Abstract

  • Khan, M.R. et al. (2003). Cannibalism and interspecific predation in ladybird beetle Coccinella septempunctata (L.) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in laboratory. Pakistan Journal of Biological Sciences 6(24), 2013-2016. Full text

  • Lang, C. and Menzel, F. (2011). Lasius niger ants discriminate aphids based on their cuticular hydrocarbons. Animal Behaviour 82(6), 1245-1254. Abstract Full text

  • Müller, C.B. & Godfray, H.C.J. (1997). Predators and mutualists influence the exclusion of aphid species from natural communities. Oecologia 119(1), 120-125. Abstract

  • Stary, P. (1983). The perennial stinging nettle (Urtica dioica ) as a reservoir of aphid parasitoids (Hymenoptera, Aphidiidae). Acta Entomologica Bohemoslovaca 80(2), 81-86. AbstractUrtica dioica ) as a reservoir of aphid parasitoids" border=0>

  • Stroyan, H.L.G. (1984). Aphids - Pterocommatinae and Aphidinae (Aphidini). Handbooks for the identification of British insects. 2(6) Royal Entomological Society of London.