| Literature DB >> 20623328 |
Santiago R Ramírez1, Thomas Eltz, Falko Fritzsch, Robert Pemberton, Elizabeth G Pringle, Neil D Tsutsui.
Abstract
Male orchid bees collect volatiles, from both floral and non-floral sources, that they expose as pheromone analogues (perfumes) during courtship display. The chemical profile of these perfumes, which includes terpenes and aromatic compounds, is both species-specific and divergent among closely related lineages. Thus, fragrance composition is thought to play an important role in prezygotic reproductive isolation in euglossine bees. However, because orchid bees acquire fragrances entirely from exogenous sources, the chemical composition of male perfumes is prone to variation due to environmental heterogeneity across habitats. We used Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) to characterize the perfumes of 114 individuals of the green orchid bee (Euglossa aff. viridissima) sampled from five native populations in Mesoamerica and two naturalized populations in the southeastern United States. We recorded a total of 292 fragrance compounds from hind-leg extracts, and found that overall perfume composition was different for each population. We detected a pronounced chemical dissimilarity between native (Mesoamerica) and naturalized (U.S.) populations that was driven both by proportional differences of common compounds as well as the presence of a few chemicals unique to each population group. Despite these differences, our data also revealed remarkable qualitative consistency in the presence of several major fragrance compounds across distant populations from dissimilar habitats. In addition, we demonstrate that naturalized bees are attracted to and collect large quantities of triclopyr 2-butoxyethyl ester, the active ingredient of several commercially available herbicides. By comparing incidence values and consistency indices across populations, we identify putative functional compounds that may play an important role in courtship signaling in this species of orchid bee.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2010 PMID: 20623328 PMCID: PMC2908462 DOI: 10.1007/s10886-010-9821-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Chem Ecol ISSN: 0098-0331 Impact factor: 2.626
Fig. 1Map of Mesoamerica and southern United States indicating sampling localities where male Euglossa aff. viridissima were collected. Native range populations in Mesoamerica were El Chote, Monte Pio, El Remate, Xmatkuil and ACG. Naturalized populations in the United States were Gumbo-Limbo and Fern Forest
Fig. 2Overlaid total ion current chromatograms corresponding to hind-leg (black) and labial gland (grey) extracts from the same individual bee. Compounds present in both hind legs and labial glands were considered endogenous in origin and thus were excluded from the analysis. The Y axis indicates ion abundance
Most common exogenous fragrance compounds collected by male Euglossa aff. viridissima ranked by their incidence (%) across populations
| Compound name | Compound class | Retention time (min) | Entry # | Incidence (%) | Contribution to dissimilarity (%) USA vs. Mesoamericaa |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| eugenol | phenylpropanoid | 23.679 | 164 | 79 |
|
| 2-hydroxy-6-nona-1,3-dienyl-benzaldehyde 4 (HNDB4) | aromate | 50.698 | 54 | 74 |
|
| caryophyllene | sesquiterpene | 26.288 | 173 | 68 |
|
| isolemecin, trans- | NA | 35.388 | 61 | 50 |
|
| ocimene, beta- | monoterpene | 10.547 | 199 | 44 |
|
| benzyl benzoate | aromate | 39.306 | 218 | 42 |
|
| 2-hydroxy-6-nona-1,3-dienyl-benzaldehyde 1 (HNDB1) | aromate | 45.628 | 51 | 41 |
|
| m/z:55,69,81,95,107,119,135,147,161,175,189,207,218,426 | triterpene | 80.675 | 59 | 40 |
|
| 2-hydroxy-6-nona-1,3-dienyl-benzaldehyde 3 (HNDB3) | aromate | 48.890 | 53 | 38 |
|
| m/z:53,65,74,92,120,155 | unknown | 16.572 | 373 | 36 |
|
| humulene, alpha- | sesquiterpene | 27.673 | 165 | 36 |
|
| cadinene, delta- | sesquiterpene | 30.465 | 110 | 35 | 0.07 |
| benzyl cinnamate | NA | 49.863 | 208 | 34 |
|
| m/z:55,68,81,93,107,121,133,147,161,175,189,204 | sesquiterpene | 25.149 | 245 | 32 |
|
| pinene, alpha- | monoterpene | 6.639 | 174 | 28 | 0.61 |
| m/z:55,69,81,95,107,119,135,147,161,175,189,203,218 | unknown | 79.337 | 127 | 26 | 0.25 |
| 3-cyclohexane-1ol, 4-methyl-1m ethylethyl | monoterpene | 15.926 | 180 | 25 | 0.23 |
| 2-hydroxy-6-nona-1,3-dienyl-benzaldehyde 2 (HNDB2) | aromate | 47.231 | 52 | 25 |
|
| triclopyr 2-butoxyethyl ester | aromate | 53.553 | 76 | 25 |
|
| germacrene, D | sesquiterpene | 28.794 | 359 | 25 | 0.69 |
| similar to elemicin | aromate | 31.781 | 413 | 25 | 0.48 |
| similar to amorphene, alpha- | sesquiterpene | 30.105 | 45 | 23 | 0.29 |
| similar to elemicin | unknown | 31.753 | 49 | 23 | 0.33 |
| similar to amyrin, alpha- | triterpene | 79.800 | 424 | 23 | 0.55 |
| 1,4-dimethoxybenzene, | aromate | 15.308 | 179 | 19 | 0.14 |
| cubene, beta- | sesquiterpene | 28.789 | 194 | 19 |
|
| epizonarene | sesquiterpene | 29.504 | 43 | 18 | 0.45 |
| m/z:55,115,127,173,183,201,215,228,244,269,283,293,311,326,344 | unknown | 64.722 | 333 | 18 | 0.28 |
| cineole, 1,8- | monoterpene | 9.906 | 255 | 18 | 0.23 |
| copaene, alpha- | sesquiterpene | 24.486 | 182 | 18 | 0.20 |
| methyl ester | NA | 36.067 | 235 | 18 |
|
| myrcene, beta- | monoterpene | 8.424 | 254 | 17 | 0.25 |
| bisabolene, beta- | sesquiterpene | 29.922 | 378 | 16 | 0.82 |
| pinene, beta- | monoterpene | 7.989 | 175 | 15 | 0.30 |
| barbatene, beta- | sesquiterpene | 27.227 | 188 | 15 | 0.17 |
| m/z:55,67,77,81,91,105,119,133,161,204 | sesquiterpene | 28.068 | 193 | 15 | 0.13 |
| m/z:65,77,91,115,129,147,175,244,260 | unknown | 51.766 | 72 | 15 | 0.26 |
| m/z:55,71,99,115,128,141,157,171,186,200,213,228,245,301,326 | unknown | 62.691 | 311 | 15 | 0.10 |
| m/z:55,69,83,95,108,115,127,145,159,173,183,201,215,225,244,253,285,299,324,342 | unknown | 66.279 | 334 | 15 | 0.16 |
| similar to amorphene, alpha- | sesquiterpene | 28.611 | 161 | 14 | 0.15 |
aSimilarity Percentage (SIMPER) was used to calculate the relative contribution of each compound to the observed dissimilarity between US and Mesoamerican populations. Values >1% are indicated in bold
Fig. 3Boxplots of the number of volatile exogenous compounds per capita in fragrances of male Euglossa aff. viridissima in native and introduced populations
Fig. 4Non-metric multidimensional scaling (nMDS) plots based on the chemical composition of exogenous compounds present in hind legs of male Euglossa aff. viridissima. Ordination plots were computed based on a all volatile compounds, b all volatile compounds except the two most dissimilar between U.S. and Mesoamerican populations (i.e., HNDB4, triclopyr BEE), c the 50 compounds with highest incidence across all populations, and d all volatile compounds coded as binary characters (presence/absence). Filled circles and triangles correspond to individuals from naturalized populations
Fig. 5Bubble plot overlaid on an MDS ordination based on all exogenous fragrance compounds. Circle diameters correspond to the number of volatile exogenous compounds present in the fragrances of each individual. Analyses were performed using the software primer (Clarke and Gorley 2006). Filled circles and triangles correspond to individuals from naturalized populations
Fig. 6Boxplots of per-capita relative concentration (relative amount of each compound over all compounds) of ten chemicals detected in bees sampled from native (Mesoamerica) and naturalized (U.S.) populations. These ten compounds had the greatest contributions to dissimilarity between native and naturalized populations
Fig. 7Mass spectrum of triclopyr 2-butoxyethyl ester, a prevalent compound found in leg extracts of males from naturalized populations of Euglossa aff. viridissima in Florida (U.S.) and absent in native (Mesoamerican) populations