X (hb). £34.95 (pb), £75.00 (hb).This new edition of a book first published in 1998 has been updated to include some of the advances in plant-insect coevolution and plant biochemistry. Each chapter has been updated with relevant examples of different aspects of insect -plant interactions. The style of the book is engaging and it is very well written and illustrated. The book could become a classic textbook for those who have an interest in insect-ecology. It provides examples of how the different aspects of biology influence insect -plant interactions.The book is divided into chapters that cover factors involved in host specification. The chapter on plant structure provides data on how insect feeding is influenced by plant trichomes, leaf toughness, galls and C 3 and C 4 plants. The chapter covering plant chemistry has benefited from the input from the new co-author Marcel Dicke; it provides information on the importance of signal transduction and interactions between herbivore-induced and pathogen-induced changes. The input from Marcel Dicke can also be seen in the ecology and evolution chapters. The chapter on plants as insect food covers the utilization of food, the influence of plant pathogens, endophytic fungi and environmental factors. The chapters on different aspects of host-selection behaviour cover many classical reviews as well as new information about gustatory coding.Further chapters cover insects and flowers and the development of ways to control insect pests. Overall, this book will provide students with an entry into insect-plant biology. For those researchers who have the first edition I would recommend you up-date, as this edition contains many relevant new references.

KEY WORDS:predators, parasitoids, searching behavior, learning, evolutionary theory, integrated pest management PERSPECTIVES AND OVERVIEW Parasitoids and predators of herbivores have evolved and function within a multitrophic context. Consequently, their physiology and behavior are influenced by elements from other trophic levels such as their herbivore victim (second trophic level) and its plant food (first trophic level) (126). Natural enemies base their foraging decisions on information from these different trophic levels, and chemical information plays an important role. This review is restricted to the ecology of chemical information from the first and second trophic levels. The importance of so-called infochemicals, a subcategory of semiochemicals, in foraging by parasitoids and predators has been well documented (e.g. reviewed in 31,78,111,183,185), and we do not intend repeat the details. But because of a lack of testable hypotheses, all this research is conducted rather haphazardly: the total puzzle of infochemical use has not been solved for any natural enemy species. Here we approach the use of infochemicals by natural enemies from an evolutionary and ecological standpoint. Our basic concept is that information from the first and second trophic levels differs in availability and in reliability, a difference that shapes the way infochemicals are used by a species. We generate hypotheses on (a) 141

Plant defenses against pathogens and insects are regulated differentially by cross-communicating signaling pathways in which salicylic acid (SA), jasmonic acid (JA), and ethylene (ET) play key roles. To understand how plants integrate pathogen-and insect-induced signals into specific defense responses, we monitored the dynamics of SA, JA, and ET signaling in Arabidopsis after attack by a set of microbial pathogens and herbivorous insects with different modes of attack. Arabidopsis plants were exposed to a pathogenic leaf bacterium (Pseudomonas syringae pv. tomato), a pathogenic leaf fungus (Alternaria brassicicola), tissuechewing caterpillars (Pieris rapae), cell-content-feeding thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis), or phloem-feeding aphids (Myzus persicae). Monitoring the signal signature in each plant-attacker combination showed that the kinetics of SA, JA, and ET production varies greatly in both quantity and timing. Analysis of global gene expression profiles demonstrated that the signal signature characteristic of each Arabidopsis-attacker combination is orchestrated into a surprisingly complex set of transcriptional alterations in which, in all cases, stress-related genes are overrepresented. Comparison of the transcript profiles revealed that consistent changes induced by pathogens and insects with very different modes of attack can show considerable overlap. Of all consistent changes induced by A. brassicicola, Pieris rapae, and F. occidentalis, more than 50% also were induced consistently by P. syringae. Notably, although these four attackers all stimulated JA biosynthesis, the majority of the changes in JA-responsive gene expression were attacker specific. All together, our study shows that SA, JA, and ET play a primary role in the orchestration of the plant's defense response, but other regulatory mechanisms, such as pathway cross-talk or additional attacker-induced signals, eventually shape the highly complex attacker-specific defense response.

No abstract

Transcript patterns elicited in response to attack reveal, at the molecular level, how plants respond to aggressors. These patterns are fashioned both by inflicted physical damage as well as by biological components displayed or released by the attacker. Different types of attacking organisms might therefore be expected to elicit different transcription programs in the host. Using a large-scale DNA microarray, we characterized gene expression in damaged as well as in distal Arabidopsis thaliana leaves in response to the specialist insect, Pieris rapae. More than 100 insect-responsive genes potentially involved in defense were identified, including genes involved in pathogenesis, indole glucosinolate metabolism, detoxification and cell survival, and signal transduction. Of these 114 genes, 111 were induced in Pieris feeding, and only three were repressed. Expression patterns in distal leaves were markedly similar to those of local leaves. Analysis of wild-type and jasmonate mutant plants, coupled with jasmonate treatment, showed that between 67 and 84% of Pieris-regulated gene expression was controlled, totally or in part, by the jasmonate pathway. This was correlated with increased larval performance on the coronatine insensitive1 glabrous1 (coi1-1 gl1) mutant. Independent mutations in COI1 and GL1 led to a faster larval weight gain, but the gl1 mutation had relatively little effect on the expression of the insect-responsive genes examined. Finally, we compared transcript patterns in Arabidopis in response to larvae of the specialist P. rapae and to a generalist insect, Spodoptera littoralis. Surprisingly, given the complex nature of insect salivary components and reported differences between species, almost identical transcript profiles were observed. This study also provides a robustly characterized gene set for the further investigation of plant-insect interaction.

Every plant is a member of a complex insect community that consists of tens to hundreds of species that belong to different trophic levels. The dynamics of this community are critically influenced by the plant, which mediates interactions between community members that can occur on the plant simultaneously or at different times. Herbivory results in changes in the plant's morphological or chemical phenotype that affect interactions with subsequently arriving herbivores. Changes in the plant's phenotype are mediated by molecular processes such as phytohormonal signaling networks and transcriptomic rearrangements that are initiated by oral secretions of the herbivore. Processes at different levels of biological complexity occur at timescales ranging from minutes to years. In this review, we address plant-mediated interactions with multiple species of the associated insect community and their effects on community dynamics, and link these to the mechanistic effects that multiple attacks have on plant phenotypes.

Several soil-borne microbes such as mycorrhizal fungi and plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria can help plants to deal with biotic and abiotic stresses via plant growth promotion and induced resistance. Such beneficial belowground microbes interact in a bidirectional way via the plant with aboveground insects such as herbivores, their natural enemies and pollinators. The role of these interactions in natural and agricultural ecosystems is receiving increased attention, and the molecular and physiological mechanisms involved in these interactions should be the focus of more attention. Here, we review the recent discoveries on plant-mediated interactions between beneficial belowground microbes and aboveground insects.

A volatile kairomone emitted from lima bean plants (Phaseolus lunatus) infested with the spider miteTetranychus urticae, was collected on Tenax-TA and analyzed with GC-MS. Two components were identified as the methylene monoterpene (3E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene and the methylene sesquiterpene (3E,7E)-4,8,12-dimethyl-1,3,7,11-tridecatetraene, respectively, after purification by preparative GC on a megabore column and recording of UV, IR, and [(1)H]NMR spectra. The response of two species of predatory mites towards the identified chemicals was tested in a Y-tube olfactometer. Four of the compounds tested, linalool (3,7-dimethyl-1,6-octadien-3-ol), (E)-β-ocimene [(3E)-3,7-dimethyl-1,3,6-octatriene], (3E)-4,8-dimethyI-1,3,7-nonatriene, and methyl salicylate attracted females ofPhytoseiulus persimilis. Linalool and methyl salicylate attracted females ofAmblyseius potentillae. The response ofA. potentillae to these two kairomone components was affected by the rearing diet of the predators in the same way as was reported for the response to the natural kairomone blend: when reared on a carotenoid-deficient diet, the predators responded to the volatile kairomone ofT. urticae, but when reared on a carotenoid-containing diet they did not. The identified kairomone components are all known from the plant kingdom. They are not known to be produced by animals de novo. In addition to biological evidence, this chemical evidence suggests that the plant is involved in production of the kairomone. Based on the present study and literature data on the response ofT. urticae to infochemicals, it is concluded that the kairomone component linalool is also a component of a volatile spider-mite dispersing pheromone.