Ursula S. R. Röse

Volatile Semiochemicals Released from Undamaged Cotton Leaves (A Systemic Response of Living Plants to Caterpillar Damage).

Cotton plants (Gossypium hirsutum L.), attacked by herbivorous insects release volatile semiochemicals (chemical signals) that attract natural enemies of the herbivores to the damaged plants. We found chemical evidence that volatiles are released not only at the damaged site but from the entire cotton plant. The release of volatiles was detected from upper, undamaged leaves after 2 to 3 d of continuous larval damage on lower leaves of the same plant. Compounds released systemically were (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, (E)-[beta]-ocimene, linalool, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene, (E)-[beta]-farnesene, (E,E)-[alpha]-farnesene, and (E,E)-4,8,12-trimethyl-1,3,7,11-tridecatetraene. All systemically released compounds are known to be induced by caterpillar damage and are not released in significant amounts by undamaged plants. Other compounds, specifically indole, isomeric hexenyl butyrates, and 2-methylbutyrates, known to be released by cotton in response to caterpillar damage, were not released systemically. However, when upper, undamaged leaves of a caterpillar-damaged plant were damaged with a razor blade, they released isomeric hexenyl butyrates, 2-methylbutyrates, and large amounts of constitutive compounds in addition to the previously detected induced compounds. Control plants, damaged with a razor blade in the same way, did not release isomeric hexenyl butyrates or 2-methylbutyrates and released significantly smaller amounts of constitutive compounds. Indole was not released systemically, even after artificial damage.

SPECIFICITY OF SYSTEMICALLY RELEASED COTTON VOLATILES AS ATTRACTANTS FOR SPECIALIST AND GENERALIST PARASITIC WASPS

Cotton plants under herbivore attack release volatile semiochemicals that attract natural enemies of the herbivores to the damaged plant. The volatiles released in response to herbivory are not only released from the damaged leaves but from the entire cotton plant. We found that cotton plants that released myrcene, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, (E)-β-ocimene, linalool, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene, (E)-β-farnesene, and (E, E)-4,8,12-trimethyl-1,3,7,11-tridecatetraene systemically from undamaged leaves of caterpillar damaged plants were attractive to the generalist parasitoid Cotesia marginiventris and the specialist parasitoid Microplitis croceipes. Plants from which the caterpillar damaged leaves were removed and that released those compounds systemically were significantly preferred over undamaged control plants in two-choice experiments in a flight tunnel. Artificially damaged cotton plants that released green leafy volatiles and constitutive terpenoids were less attractive for M. croceipes and C. marginiventris. Only C. marginiventris preferred artificially damaged plants over undamaged control plants, whereas M. croceipes showed no preference. The apparent lack of specificity of systemically released compounds in response to different herbivores feeding on the lower leaves is discussed.

Volatile composition, emission pattern, and localization of floral scent emission in Mirabilis jalapa (Nyctaginaceae).

We elucidated scent components, daily emission patterns, and the localization of floral scent release of Mirabilis jalapa. Volatiles emitted by the whole plant as well as by detached flowers were investigated using dynamic headspace analysis and gas chromatography/ mass spectrometry. Among several constituents including (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, β-myrcene, (Z)-ocimene, and benzyl benzoate, the monoterpene (E)-β-ocimene was the major fragrance component. Fragrance release occurred in a time-dependent manner. The emission of volatiles, including (E)-β-ocimene, showed an evening-specific maximum (1700-2000 pm). The emission of (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate reached its maximum 3 h later. Histological (neutral red staining) and morphological studies (electron and light microscopy) of the flower surface and tissues of M. jalapa revealed differences in surface structures and tissue characteristics. The flower could be divided into four main sections, including the tube, the transition zone between tube and limb, a star-shaped center of the limb, and petaloid lobes of the limb. These petaloid lobes are the site of (E)-β-ocimene release. Stomata and trichomes found on the abaxial flower surface were not directly involved in fragrance release. Clear indications of osmophores involved in scent release could not be found. Thus, the results indicate that floral volatiles probably are released by diffuse emission in M. jalapa.

Alarm pheromone emission by pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum , clones under predation by lacewing larvae

Genetic variation in anti‐predator traits has been shown for a variety of species. Aphid alarm pheromone, (E)‐β‐farnesene, is released by attacked aphids and causes a variety of behavioral defense reactions in the signal receivers. In pea aphids, Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris (Homoptera: Aphididae), (E)‐β‐farnesene mediates the production of winged offspring in the presence of natural enemies. While variation in the propensity for pea aphids to produce winged offspring is well‐documented, little quantitative information is available about clonal differences in (E)‐β‐farnesene emission or the amount of alarm pheromone released in aphid colonies. We tested the wing induction response of four clones when attacked by a predatory lacewing larva, Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae), and found that three of the four clones increased the proportion of winged offspring under predator attack. We then investigated the emission of aphid alarm pheromone of these clones of pea aphid under attack. Alarm pheromone emission in aphid colonies of initially 25 adults varied from 81.2 to 10 851.0 ng per aphid colony over 24 h. There were no differences between clones in total emission or in emission per consumption event. These results show that there is substantial variability in alarm pheromone emission within clones and that the propensity to produce winged offspring in some clones is not a simple function of the propensity of alarm pheromone production in these clones.