| Literature DB >> 19568812 |
Anna Fontana1, Michael Reichelt, Stefan Hempel, Jonathan Gershenzon, Sybille B Unsicker.
Abstract
Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi can strongly influence the metabolism of their host plant, but their effect on plant defense mechanisms has not yet been thoroughly investigated. We studied how the principal direct defenses (iridoid glycosides) and indirect defenses (volatile organic compounds) of Plantago lanceolata L. are affected by insect herbivory and mechanical wounding. Volatile compounds were collected and quantified from mycorrhizal and non-mycorrhizal P. lanceolata plants that underwent three different treatments: 1) insect herbivory, 2) mechanical wounding, or 3) no damage. The iridoids aucubin and catalpol were extracted and quantified from the same plants. Emission of terpenoid volatiles was significantly higher after insect herbivory than after the other treatments. However, herbivore-damaged mycorrhizal plants emitted lower amounts of sesquiterpenes, but not monoterpenes, than herbivore-damaged non-mycorrhizal plants. In contrast, mycorrhizal infection increased the emission of the green leaf volatile (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate in untreated control plants, making it comparable to emission from mechanically wounded or herbivore-damaged plants whether or not they had mycorrhizal associates. Neither mycorrhization nor treatment had any influence on the levels of iridoid glycosides. Thus, mycorrhizal infection did not have any effect on the levels of direct defense compounds measured in P. lanceolata. However, the large decline in herbivore-induced sesquiterpene emission may have important implications for the indirect defense potential of this species.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19568812 PMCID: PMC2712616 DOI: 10.1007/s10886-009-9654-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Chem Ecol ISSN: 0098-0331 Impact factor: 2.626
Fig. 1Total emission of terpenes (a) and green leaf volatiles (GLV) (b) from Plantago lanceolata after herbivory (black bars) and mechanical wounding (light gray bars) in comparison to untreated control plants (dark grey bars). Bars represent means ± SE. Different letters indicate significant differences between the means according to ANCOVA followed by Tukey test (adjusted P < 0.05)
Emission rate of the six major volatiles and content of the iridoid glycosides in the leaves of herbivory-treated, mechanically wounded and untreated control Plantago lanceolata plants
| Compound | Mycorrhizal | Non-mycorrhizal | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Herbivory | Mechanical wounding | Control | Herbivory | Mechanical wounding | Control | |
| Volatiles | ||||||
| ng (gDW)−1 hr−1; mean ± SE | ||||||
| ( | 376.61 ± 97.56 | 552.15 ± 65.96 | 364.37 ± 99.6 | 581.96 ± 104.68 | 376.61 ± 71.3 | 97.19 ± 13.59 |
| ( | 75.37 ± 15.19 | 6.94 ± 2.21 | 1.01 ± 0.71 | 103.04 ± 17.41 | 4.06 ± 1.10 | 0.94 ± 0.60 |
| DMNT | 22.05 ± 4.64 | 0.19 ± 0.19 | 0.00 | 68.65 ± 11.71 | 0.70 ± 0.52 | 0.00 |
| ( | 45.90 ± 10.06 | 2.23 ± 0.92 | 0.00 | 107.69 ± 25.83 | 0.23 ± 0.19 | 0.65a |
| (E)- | 25.84 ± 5.03 | 1.13 ± 0.81 | 0.00 | 70.16 ± 12.64 | 0.45a | 0.45a |
| ( | 31.84 ± 8.05 | 0.88 ± 0.61 | 0.00 | 101.75 ± 21.67 | 0.00 | 0.59a |
| Iridoid glycosides | ||||||
| µg (mgDW)−1; mean ± SE | ||||||
| Catalpol | 2.79 ± 0.32 | 2.87 ± 0.35 | 3.26 ± 0.34 | 3.03 ± 0.32 | 2.95 ± 0.33 | 2.94 ± 0.47 |
| Aucubin | 7.13 ± 0.58 | 6.61 ± 0.54 | 6.89 ± 0.49 | 7.35 ± 0.51 | 6.54 ± 0.60 | 5.37 ± 0.54 |
aThese volatiles were emitted by a single plant, therefore the SE has not been calculated
Fig. 2Linear regression of (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate emission and plant dry weight for mycorrhizal (solid line) and non-mycorrhizal (dashed line) plants. Black dots represent all mycorrhizal plants (herbivory-treated, mechanically wounded and untreated), while open dots represent all non-mycorrhizal plants (herbivory-treated, mechanically wounded and untreated)
ANCOVA summary table for the effects of mycorrhization, treatment and dry weight on the VOC emission of Plantago lanceolata
| VOC | Factors | Covariate | df residuals | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mycorrhiza (df = 1) | Treatment (df = 2) | Dry weight (df = 1) | |||||
| ( | 2.45 | 0.119b | 15.47 | 1.34 | 0.242b | 170 | |
| ( | 0.04 | 0.845 | 46.85 | 6.78 | 82 | ||
| DMNT | 7.68 | 8.55 | 1.20 | 0.279 | 48 | ||
| ( | 11.20 | 12.98 | 3.00 | 0.089 | 50 | ||
| (E)- | 18.14 | 1.74 | 0.185 | 1.84 | 0.180 | 54 | |
| ( | 7.57 | 1.066 | 0.353 | 1.19 | 0.281 | 46 | |
aBold numbers indicate significant effects
bFor (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate two interactions were significant: mycorrhiza x treatment (F = 8.41, P < 0.001) and mycorrhiza x dry weight (F = 4.36, P = 0.038). There was no significant interaction for any of the other volatile organic compounds
Fig. 3Aboveground biomass of Plantago lanceolata. Fresh weight was recorded once for each plant, on the day the volatile collection was performed. Black bars = mycorrhizal plants, grey bars = non-mycorrhizal plants. Bars represent means ± SE. Asterisks represent significant differences according to Student’s t-test (**P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001)