Cross-Resistance and Resistance Longevity as Induced by Bean Leaf Beetle, Cerotoma trifurcata and Soybean Looper, Pseudoplusia includens herbivory on Soybean

Abstract

Cross-resistance, and longevity of resistance, induced by the bean leaf beetle, Cerotoma trifurcata, was studied IN the soybean PI 227687 that exhibited induced response in earlier studies. Bean leaf beetle adults and soybean looper, Pseudoplusia includens, larvae were used to induce resistance and to determine beetle feeding preference. Beetles were collected from soybean fields 2 to 5 days prior to the feeding preference test. The level of cross-resistance induced by soybean looper herbivory to subsequent bean leaf beetle feeding was higher when compared to cross-resistance induced by bean leaf beetle herbivory against subsequent feeding by soybean looper. Further, herbivory by the bean leaf beetle also induced resistance against soybean looper feeding. In the longevity study, leaflets from treated plants were collected 5, 10, 12, 14, 16, 20 and 25 days after initiation of feeding. Pairwise comparisons of leaflets from plants treated by bean leaf beetle herbivory with untreated plants revealed that induced responses were highest 14 and lowest 25 days after initiation of feeding. On other sampling days, levels of induced response varied with the sampling day.

Proteomic analysis of soybean defense response induced by cotton worm (prodenia litura, fabricius) feeding

“…The timing of induced resistance varied with the insect species feeding on soybean. The longevity of resistance induced by C. trifurcata was two weeks [ 16 ]. The induced response was effective for 3 days after damage against the Mexican bean beetle in soybean.…”

“…Compared with constitutive resistance, induced resistance may be more durable and compromises plant fitness less by either decreasing further herbivore damage or increasing plant tolerance to herbivory [ 6 ]. Induced responses that lead to increased resistance against herbivores have been reported for over 100 species of plants, such as Arabidopsis [ 7 - 9 ], tobacco [ 10 ], tomato [ 11 , 12 ], rice [ 13 ], and soybean [ 14 - 16 ]. The resistance responses induced in plants change with different attackers.…”

“…The resistance responses induced in plants change with different attackers. For example, the level of resistance induced by soybean looper herbivory with subsequent bean leaf beetle feeding was higher than that induced by bean leaf beetle herbivory with subsequent soybean looper feeding [ 16 ]. Resistance induced by the soybean looper, Mexican bean beetle and corn earworm in soybean has been reported in many studies [ 14 - 17 ].…”

Climate and host plant availability impact the future distribution of the bean leaf beetle (Cerotoma trifurcata)

“…Because information on bean leaf beetle physiological tolerances is limited, we followed the methods of model fit from Sutherst et al . (), with parameters being adjusted primarily to match North American distribution and relative abundance data obtained from a variety of sources (Leonard & Turner, ; Nichols et al ., ; Herzog, ; Boiteau et al ., ; Loughran & Ragsdale, ; Payah & Boethel, ; Felton et al ., ; Pedigo, ; Tonhasca, ; Buntin et al ., ; Danielson et al ., ; Lam et al ., ; Srinivas et al ., ; Krell et al ., ; Mabry et al ., ; Riley et al ., ; Carrillo et al ., ; Park & Krell, ; Lundgren & Riedell, ; Hammack et al ., ; Vlach et al ., ; Musser et al ., ; Tiroesele et al ., ). Southern Ontario distribution data were obtained from extensive sampling in 2010 by T. Baute (unpublished data).…”

“…The temperate template in CLIMEX was used as an initial base for the BEM of the bean leaf beetle and parameter values were then altered according to known tolerances of the bean leaf beetle where possible based on physiological data from previous studies. Because information on bean leaf beetle physiological tolerances is limited, we followed the methods of model fit from Sutherst et al (2007), with parameters being adjusted primarily to match North American distribution and relative abundance data obtained from a variety of sources (Leonard & Turner, 1918;Nichols et al, 1974;Herzog, 1977;Boiteau et al, 1980;Loughran & Ragsdale, 1986;Payah & Boethel, 1986;Felton et al, 1994;Pedigo, 1994;Tonhasca, 1994;Buntin et al, 1995;Danielson et al, 2000;Lam et al, 2001;Srinivas et al, 2001;Krell et al, 2003;Mabry et al, 2003;Riley et al, 2003;Carrillo et al, 2005;Park & Krell, 2005;Lundgren & Riedell, 2008;Hammack et al, 2010;Vlach et al, 2010;Musser et al, 2012;Tiroesele et al, 2013). Southern Ontario distribution data were obtained from extensive sampling in 2010 by T. Baute (unpublished data).…”