No abstract

Features shared by host-specific phytophagous insects and biotrophic plant pathogens include gene-for-gene interactions and the ability to induce susceptibility in plants. The Hessian fly shows both. To protect against Hessian fly, grasses have H genes. Avirulent larvae die on H-gene-containing resistant plants but the cause of death is not known. Imaging techniques were used to examine epidermal cells at larval attack sites, comparing four resistant wheat genotypes (H6, H9, H13, and H26) to a susceptible genotype. Present in both resistant and susceptible plants attacked by larvae were small holes in the tangential cell wall, with the size of the holes (0.1 microm in diameter) matching that of the larval mandible. Absent from attacked resistant plants were signs of induced susceptibility, including nutritive tissue and ruptured cell walls. Present in attacked resistant plants were signs of induced resistance, including cell death and fortification of the cell wall. Both presumably limit larval access to food, because the larva feeds on the leaf surface by sucking up liquids released from ruptured cells. Resistance was associated with several subcellular responses, including elaboration of the endoplasmic reticulum-Golgi complex and associated vesicles. Similar responses are observed in plant resistance to fungi, suggesting that "vesicle-associated penetration resistance" also functions against insects.

It has been postulated that sex pheromones, in addition to their role in mate recognition and/or finding, may also serve a role in assessment of mate quality. For this, a sex pheromone must give honest information about a signaler's quality, with honesty ensured by a direct metabolic or indirect fitness cost to the signaler. Using a stable isotope tracer-tracee method, we characterized the nutrient pools that fuel sex pheromone production in females of the moth Heliothis virescens, as well as the relative importance of larval-and adultacquired nutrients to this process. Females used three pools for de novo biosynthesis of sex pheromone, hemolymph trehalose, glycogen (via trehalose) and fat, and produced ca. 25% of pheromone directly from stored ( previously synthesized) precursor fatty acids. Pheromone was produced roughly equally from carbohydrate and fat. Adult feeding was very important for pheromone biosynthesis, with a maximum of 65% of de novo biosynthesized pheromone produced from a single adult feed (carbohydrate). Although these nutrient pools are shared with other reproductive physiologies, notably oocyte production, it is unlikely that pheromone production imposes a significant metabolic cost on females, because (i) the amount of nutrients used for pheromone production is negligible compared with that available, (ii) the hemolymph trehalose pool is readily replaceable throughout the adult life, and (iii) in mated females, carbohydrate shortages result in reduced allocation to pheromone.

Moths are exemplars of chemical communication, especially with regard to specificity and the minute amounts they use. Yet, little is known about how females manage synthesis and storage of pheromone to maintain release rates attractive to conspecific males and why such small amounts are used. We developed, for the first time, a quantitative model, based on an extensive empirical data set, describing the dynamical relationship among synthesis, storage (titer) and release of pheromone over time in a moth (Heliothis virescens). The model is compartmental, with one major state variable (titer), one time-varying (synthesis), and two constant (catabolism and release) rates. The model was a good fit, suggesting it accounted for the major processes. Overall, we found the relatively small amounts of pheromone stored and released were largely a function of high catabolism rather than a low rate of synthesis. A paradigm shift may be necessary to understand the low amounts released by female moths, away from the small quantities synthesized to the (relatively) large amounts catabolized. Future research on pheromone quantity should focus on structural and physicochemical processes that limit storage and release rate quantities. To our knowledge, this is the first time that pheromone gland function has been modeled for any animal.

Although there has been much investigation of the steps involved in sex pheromone biosynthesis in moths, little is known about the kinetics of biosynthesis in vivo, primarily because there are few techniques suitable for studying the small amounts of pheromone produced without perturbing a female moth's normal physiology. In this paper, female Heliothis virescens moths fed on U-(13)C-glucose were subjected to mass isotopomer distribution analysis, enabling calculation of fractional (FSR) and absolute (ASR) synthetic rates of the main pheromone component, (Z)-11-hexadecenal, at two different photoperiodic times: during the scotophase (when adults are sexually active) and during the photophase (when adults do not engage in mating behavior). FSRs differed substantially at the two times with, as expected, the greater rate occurring during the scotophase. After determining Z11-16:Ald pool sizes, ASR through the scotophase was calculated to be roughly 20 times greater than ASR in the photophase. These differences are consistent with the release/non-release of the pheromone biosynthesis-activating neuropeptide. This approach should facilitate determination of more quantitative measures of semiochemical production in moths and other sugar-feeding insects that synthesize semiochemicals from glycolytic metabolites.

No abstract

Female moths release sex pheromone to attract mates. In most species, sex pheromone is produced in, and released from, a specific gland. In a previous study, we used empirical data and compartmental modeling to account for the major pheromone gland processes of female Chloridea virescens: synthesis, storage, catabolism and release. Surprisingly, we found that females released little (20-30%) of their pheromone, with most catabolized. The recent publication of a new pheromone collection method led us to reinvestigate pheromone release and catabolism in C. virescens on the basis that our original study might have underestimated release rate (thereby overestimating catabolism) due to methodology and females not calling (releasing) continuously. Further we wished to compare pheromone storage/catabolism between calling and non-calling females. First, we observed calling intermittency of females. Then, using decapitated females, we used the new collection method, along with compartmental modeling, gland sampling and stable isotope labeling, to determine differences in pheromone release, catabolism and storage between (forced) simulated calling and non-calling females. We found, (i) intact 1 d females call intermittently; (ii) pheromone is released at a higher rate than previously determined, with simulations estimating that continuously calling females release ca. 70% of their pheromone (only 30% catabolized); (iii) extension (calling)/retraction of the ovipositor is a highly effective "on/off' mechanism for release; (iv) both calling and non-calling females store most pheromone on or near the gland surface, but calling females catabolize less pheromone; (v) females are capable of producing and releasing pheromone very 3 rapidly. Thus, not only is the moth pheromone gland efficient, in terms of the proportion of pheromone released Vs. catabolized, but it is highly effective at shutting on/off a high flux of pheromone for release.

No abstract