Sequence similarity and functional comparisons of pheromone receptor orthologs in two closely related Helicoverpa species

Jiang, Xiaojing; Guo, Hao; Di, Chang; Shan-lin, YU; Zhu, Lei; Huang, Ling-Qiao; Wang, Chen‐Zhu

doi:10.1016/j.ibmb.2014.02.010

Cited by 70 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 46 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

103

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…SlitOR11 could be expressed in Drosophila but remained silent, even after stimulation with such a large panel. Neither could OR11 orthologs be deorphanized in previous studies carried out in other noctuid species, including S. exigua and S. litura (Wang et al, 2011;Liu et al, 2013a,b;Jiang et al, 2014;Zhang et al, 2015). In D. melanogaster, it has been observed that OR67d-expressing neurons need the pheromone-binding protein (PBP) LUSH to detect its pheromone ligand (Ha and Smith, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…At an extreme, some receptors belonging to the PR sub-family do not bind sex pheromone components but rather plant volatiles (Jordan et al, 2009;Bengtsson et al, 2014). Whereas functional properties are generally more conserved between orthologous genes from closely related species, only a few amino acid changes can modify these properties, sometimes drastically (Leary et al, 2012;Jiang et al, 2014;Steinwender et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evolution of two receptors detecting the same pheromone compound in crop pest moths of the genus Spodoptera

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In moths, mate finding strongly rely on the detection of sex pheromones by pheromone receptors (PRs). Any modification in the functional properties of these receptors can have a drastic impact on reproduction. In the course of characterizing candidate PRs in the noctuid moth Spodoptera littoralis, we expressed them in Drosophila olfactory sensory neurons and stimulated them with a large panel of moth pheromone compounds. We found that two PRs detect (Z,E)-9,12-14:OAc, a minor component of the female pheromone blend. Whereas SlitOR6 is highly specific to this component, SlitOR13 is less sensitive and not strictly specific as it also detects (Z)9-14:OAc, another minor component of the sex pheromone. Interestingly, SlitOR13 expression is restricted to the distal part of male antennae, where we could identify a novel functional class of pheromone-sensitive neurons whose response spectrum matches that of SlitOR13. Based on a phylogenetic analysis of Lepidoptera PRs, we found that the ability to bind (Z,E)-9,12-14:OAc appeared independently within three paralogous lineages, and an analysis of selective pressures revealed sites under positive selection that could have played a role in the emergence of functional properties of OR6 and OR13 in Spodoptera species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evolution of two receptors detecting the same pheromone compound in crop pest moths of the genus Spodoptera

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, our results show that the response profiles of CpomOR19 and SlitOR19, with 58% amino acid identity, are virtually the same: both respond to 1-indanone and structurally related compounds (Figures 1, 3A). Similarly, pheromone receptors from heliothinae moths, HarmOR14b, HassOR16 and HvirOR6, with amino acid identities between 53 and 65%, all responded to (Z)-9-tetradecenal (Jiang et al, 2014). In contrast, FIGURE 3 | (A) Amino acid alignment of CpomOR19 and SlitOR19.…”

Section: Structurally and Functionally Conserved Orsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…gambiae share 69% of amino acid identity and both respond strongly to indole, an important host signal for both species (Bohbot et al, 2011). Within Lepidoptera, several examples of conserved function for orthologous receptors have been reported, especially within the pheromone receptor family Jiang et al, 2014). There are clusters of ORs, however, that share high amino acid identity across species but whose function has not yet been elucidated; for example, OR18, a highly conserved receptor in six noctuid species, with an average of 88% amino acid identity (Brigaud et al, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Conserved Odorant Receptor Detects the Same 1-Indanone Analogs in a Tortricid and a Noctuid Moth

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Odorant receptors (ORs) interface animals with airborne chemical signals. They are under strong selection pressure and are therefore highly divergent in different taxa. Yet, some OR orthologs are highly conserved. These ORs may be tuned to odorants of broad importance, across species boundaries. Two widely distributed lepidopteran herbivores, codling moth Cydia pomonella (Tortricidae) feeding in apples and pears, and the African cotton leafworm Spodoptera littoralis (Noctuidae), a moth feeding on foliage of a wide range of herbaceous plants, both express a receptor ortholog, OR19, which shares 58% amino acid identity and 69% amino acid similarity. Following heterologous expression in the empty neuron system of Drosophila melanogaster, we show by single sensillum recordings that CpomOR19 and SlitOR19 show similar affinity to several substituted indanes. Tests with a series of compounds structurally related to 1-indanone show that 2-methyl-1-indanone, 2-ethyl-1-indanone, 3-methyl-1-indanone, and 1-indanone elicit a strong response from both ORs. A keto group in position 1 is essential for biological activity and so are both rings of the indane skeleton. However, there is an important difference in steric complementary of the indane rings and the receptor. Methyl substituents on the benzene ring largely suppressed the response. On the other hand, alkyl substituents at position 2 and 3 of the five-membered ring increased the response indicating a higher complementarity with the receptor cavity, in both CpomOR19 and SlitOR19. Our results demonstrate a conserved function of an odorant receptor in two moths that are phylogenetically and ecologically distant. It is conceivable that a conserved OR is tuned to signals that are relevant for both species, although their ecological roles are yet unknown. Our finding demonstrates that functional characterization of ORs leads to the discovery of novel semiochemicals that have not yet been found through chemical analysis of odorants from insects and their associated host plants.

show abstract

“…The OR repertoire of Drosophila has been studied exhaustively (Hallem et al, 2004;Kreher et al, 2005;Hallem and Carlson, 2006) and current research aims at other insect groups. For moths, a number of ORs and PRs have been identified and functionally characterized, using various heterologous expression systems, including human embryonic kidney (HEK) cells (Grosse-Wilde et al, 2007), Xenopus oocytes (Sakurai et al, 2004;Nakagawa et al, 2005;Jiang et al, 2014), Sf9, a cell line derived from fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda ovaries (Jordan et al, 2009), and Drosophila OSNs (Syed et al, 2010;Montagné et al, 2012), which is an in vivo antennal expression approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A predicted sex pheromone receptor of codling moth Cydia pomonella detects the plant volatile pear ester

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant volatiles mediate host discrimination and host finding in phytophagous insects. Understanding how insects recognize these signals is a current challenge in chemical ecology research. Pear ester, ethyl (E,Z )-2,4-decadienoate, is a powerful, bisexual attractant of codling moth Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae) and strongly synergizes the male response to female-produced sex pheromone. We show here that the codling moth odorant receptor (OR) CpomOR3 is dedicated to detecting this plant volatile. Heterologous expression of CpomOR3 in Drosophila T1 trichoid and ab3A basiconic sensilla, followed by a screening with codling moth pheromone compounds and known plant volatile attractants, confirms that CpomOR3 binds to pear ester. Although CpomOR3 does not respond to any of the pheromone components tested, a phylogenetic analysis of lepidopteran chemosensory receptor genes reveals a close relationship of CpomOR3 with pheromone receptors (PRs) in moths. This corroborates the interaction of ecological and social chemosensory cues during premating communication. The finding that a plant volatile compound, pear ester, is a specific ligand for a PR-like lepidopteran receptor adds to our understanding of insect-plant interactions and emphasizes the interaction of natural and sexual selection during the phylogenetic divergence of insect herbivores.

show abstract

Sequence similarity and functional comparisons of pheromone receptor orthologs in two closely related Helicoverpa species

Cited by 70 publications

References 46 publications

Evolution of two receptors detecting the same pheromone compound in crop pest moths of the genus Spodoptera

Evolution of two receptors detecting the same pheromone compound in crop pest moths of the genus Spodoptera

A Conserved Odorant Receptor Detects the Same 1-Indanone Analogs in a Tortricid and a Noctuid Moth

A predicted sex pheromone receptor of codling moth Cydia pomonella detects the plant volatile pear ester

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About