Interactions between herbivorous insects and plants storing terpenoids are poorly understood. This study describes the ability of Chrysolina herbacea to use volatiles emitted by undamaged Mentha aquatica plants as attractants and the plant's response to herbivory, which involves the production of deterrent molecules. Emitted plant volatiles were analyzed by GC-MS. The insect's response to plant volatiles was tested by Y-tube olfactometer bioassays. Total RNA was extracted from control plants, mechanically damaged leaves, and leaves damaged by herbivores. The terpenoid quantitative gene expressions (qPCR) were then assayed. Upon herbivory, M. aquatica synthesizes and emits (+)-menthofuran, which acts as a deterrent to C. herbacea. Herbivory was found to up-regulate the expression of genes involved in terpenoid biosynthesis. The increased emission of (+)-menthofuran was correlated with the upregulation of (+)-menthofuran synthase.
Interactions between herbivorous insects and plants storing terpenoids are poorly understood. This study describes the ability of Chrysolina herbacea to use volatiles emitted by undamaged Mentha aquatica plants as attractants and the plant's response to herbivory, which involves the production of deterrent molecules. Emitted plant volatiles were analyzed by GC-MS. The insect's response to plant volatiles was tested by Y-tube olfactometer bioassays. Total RNA was extracted from control plants, mechanically damaged leaves, and leaves damaged by herbivores. The terpenoid quantitative gene expressions (qPCR) were then assayed. Upon herbivory, M. aquatica synthesizes and emits (+)-menthofuran, which acts as a deterrent to C. herbacea. Herbivory was found to up-regulate the expression of genes involved in terpenoid biosynthesis. The increased emission of (+)-menthofuran was correlated with the upregulation of (+)-menthofuran synthase.
To deter herbivores, plants have evolved a broad range of defense mechanisms that can
be generalized into two categories: pre-formed constitutive defenses and inducible
defenses [1].
Constitutive defenses include the physical and chemical barriers that exist before
insects attack, whereas induced defenses includes direct and indirect defenses.
Direct defenses are plant traits that by themselves affect the susceptibility of
host plants to insect attacks. Indirect defenses, on the other hand, include plant
traits that by themselves do not affect the susceptibility of host plants, but can
serve as attractants to natural enemies of attacking insects [2]–[7]. Insects may respond to plants
by choosing different feeding sites, by altering their consumption rates or by
induction of physiological/detoxification enzymes [8].Approximately 90% of herbivorous insects have narrow host ranges, feeding on
plants within a single taxonomic family, and many species are confined to a single
host species [9].
The variability in fitness on different host plant species favors behavioral
genotypes that restrict feeding to the most suitable hosts; on the other hand,
maintaining mechanisms that nullify the disparate defensive adaptations of many
different plant species is too costly for generalist herbivores [10]. Thus, the key
to understanding why certain herbivores remain specialized lies in the observation
that specialization involves both behavioral and physiological adaptation [8], [11], [12].The defense strategy in aromatic plants like Mentha aquatica is a
direct defense, through the constitutive production of terpenoids in specialized
tissues known as the glandular trichomes [2]. These plants may have chemical
barriers to potential herbivore colonists, and they appear to be accessible to
relatively few insect lineages, which may be pre-adapted to chemically similar or
related host plants [13]. As some insects become adapted to these metabolites,
interactions between the two groups of organisms occasionally lead to highly
specific relationships, as in the case of M. aquatica and the
herbivore Chrysolina herbacea.M. aquatica, or watermint, is a perennial plant belonging to the
Lamiaceae. It produces leaf glandular trichomes secreting volatile organic compounds
(VOCs) of varying chemical composition [14], [15]. The presence of the
oxygenated monoterpenes(+)-pulegone and (+)-menthofuran contributes to
the plant's toxicity. Both viridiflorol from the essential oil and
(S)-naringenin from an ethanolic extract have been isolated by bioassay-guided
fractionation with binding to the GABA-benzodiazepine site. Furthermore, M.
aquatica contains psychoactive compounds that display both monoamine
oxidase-inhibitory activity and mitochondrial respiration uncoupling [16]–[19]. At least
24 species of insect herbivores have been observed feeding on M.
aquatica
[20], [21], and among
these, C. herbacea, also known as the mint beetle, is quite diffuse
in mint fields. The feeding behavior of this beetle has been described recently
[22]. Both
larvae and adult beetles attack the leaves. Leaf beetles like C.
herbacea are also known for their ability to import structurally
distinct allelochemicals (reviewed by [23]). The ability to produce
deterrents to natural enemies from plant-derived compounds is typical of some
Chrysolina species [24]–[26]. Because herbivore feeding
alters the aromatic profile of essential oil-producing plants like M.
aquatica, the issue is both ecologically and economically relevant
[27]–[29].In this work we describe the chemical interaction between M.
aquatica and C. herbacea by evaluating the ability of
the herbivore to locate and recognize plant chemical cues and the capacity of the
host plant to respond to herbivory by emitting deterrent molecules. To this end,
plant VOC emissions we analyzed before and after herbivore feeding, and the ability
of the emitted molecules to attract or deter C. herbacea was tested
by bioassay.
Results
C. herbacea responds to M. aquatica VOC
emission
Successful co-adaptation between plants and insects requires that plants produce
specific compounds in response to herbivory, and that insects respond adequately
to molecules emitted by plants. To look for possible relationships between
M. aquatica VOC emissions and herbivore responses, the
behavior of C. herbacea was first evaluated in Y-tube
olfactometry tests.C. herbacea was found to be attracted to undamaged plants, with
respect to pure air. When the choice was between infested plants, undamaged
plants or air, the insect was found to be deterred by infested plants (Fig. 1). Furthermore, the
insects were found to lay eggs on undamaged plants and they produced larvae
capable of surviving successive instars up to the adult phase (see Supporting
Fig.
S3). Preliminary studies demonstrated that the qualitative response
of M. aquatica to larvae feeding was not significantly
different from that of adult insects. For this reason, the study focused on
adult insects.
Figure 1
Response of C. herbacea in a Y-tube olfactometer
when offered to M. aquatica cuttings of undamaged and
C. herbacea-infested leaves versus pure GC-grade
air.
A χ2 test served to evaluate differences from a
50∶50 distribution over two olfactometer arms. Insects that did
not reach the end of either olfactometer arm within 10 min (NC: no
choice) are indicated by white bars. The asterisks indicate significant
(P<0.05) differences.
Response of C. herbacea in a Y-tube olfactometer
when offered to M. aquatica cuttings of undamaged and
C. herbacea-infested leaves versus pure GC-grade
air.
A χ2 test served to evaluate differences from a
50∶50 distribution over two olfactometer arms. Insects that did
not reach the end of either olfactometer arm within 10 min (NC: no
choice) are indicated by white bars. The asterisks indicate significant
(P<0.05) differences.
M. aquatica reacts to C. herbacea herbivory
by emitting specific deterrent molecules
The reason why C. herbacea was differentially attracted to
undamaged and infested plants was examined. VOCs emitted by untreated M.
aquatica were analyzed by SPME, which revealed the presence of two
major compounds, (+)-pulegone and (+)-menthofuran (Fig. 2a), along with other
minor terpenoids including the monoterpenes (−)-limonene,
(−)-menthone and α-terpineol, and the sesquiterpene,
(E)-β-caryophyllene (Fig. 2b). However, it is important to note
that the major compounds were emitted at much higher levels (0.13–0.75
µg g−1 f. wt) than the minor compounds in the range of
3–35 ng g−1 f. wt. The feeding activity of C.
herbacea significantly changed the quantitative VOC composition of
M. aquatica VOC emissions by dramatically increasing the
content of (+)-menthofuran and decreasing the content of (+)-pulegone
(Fig. 2a). The levels of
all minor compounds, with particular reference to myrcene, were also elevated
significantly upon herbivory; with the sole exception of
p-cymene, which declined significantly (Fig. 2b). Since herbivory leads to the
rupture of glandular trichomes, which are the main storage tissues of terpenoids
in the Lamiaceae [2], [30], whether mechanical injury alone was able to increase
the VOC emissions in M. aquatica was evaluated. Surprisingly,
leaves damaged mechanically by a pattern wheel and having the same extent of
herbivore damage had lower emissions of both major and minor compounds in
comparison to control plants, particularly in comparison to herbivore wounded
leaves (Figs. 2a and
2b).
Figure 2
VOC emission by M. aquatica in undamaged plants
(control), in response to mechanical damage caused by a pattern wheel
(MD) and after herbivory by C. herbacea (HW).
a, Content of the major components; b, content
of the minor components. Bars indicate the standard error over the mean
of at least three biological replicates. Asterisks indicate significant
differences with respect to controls (P<0.05).
VOC emission by M. aquatica in undamaged plants
(control), in response to mechanical damage caused by a pattern wheel
(MD) and after herbivory by C. herbacea (HW).
a, Content of the major components; b, content
of the minor components. Bars indicate the standard error over the mean
of at least three biological replicates. Asterisks indicate significant
differences with respect to controls (P<0.05).
C. herbacea responds differentially to specific monoterpenes
emitted by M. aquatica
Following assessment of the chemical composition of the major VOCs released by
undamaged and infested M. aquatica, the responses of C.
herbacea to the main monoterpenes(+)-menthofuran and
(+)-pulegone were tested. C. herbacea was significantly
attracted to (+)-pulegone when the choice was limited to pure air, infested
plants or (+)-menthofuran, whereas the insect preferred undamaged plants
when offered with (+)-pulegone. On the contrary, (+)-menthofuran was
always found to repel the insects, no matter which choice test was performed
(Fig. 3). To evaluate
whether the synthetic mixture composed of both major and minor compounds
identified from leaf volatiles affected C. herbacea behavior,
insect preference was determined by performing choice tests with several
comparisons. C. herbacea was significantly attracted to the
synthetic mixture typical of uninfested plants when compared to both air and a
synthetic mixture typical of infested plants (Fig. 3). When only minor compounds of
synthetic mixtures were compared to either air or other mixtures, no significant
difference could be found (Fig.
3).
Figure 3
Response of C. herbacea in a Y-tube olfactometer
when offered to either Sigma-grade (+)-pulegone,
(+)-menthofuran, synthetic mixtures of compounds with the same
content of typical intact plant emissions (Synt Mix Plant), synthetic
mixtures of compounds with the same content of typical infested plant
emissions (Synt Mix Infested Plant), synthetic mixtures of only minor
compounds with the same content of typical intact plant emissions (Synt
Minor Plant), synthetic mixtures of only minor compounds with the same
content of typical infested plant emissions (Synt Minor Infested Plant)
or GC-grade air.
A χ2 test served toevaluate differences from a
50∶50 distribution over two olfactometer arms. Insects that did
not reach the end of either olfactometer arm within 10 min (NC: no
choice) are indicated by white bars. Asterisks indicate significant
differences (P<0.05).
Response of C. herbacea in a Y-tube olfactometer
when offered to either Sigma-grade (+)-pulegone,
(+)-menthofuran, synthetic mixtures of compounds with the same
content of typical intact plant emissions (Synt Mix Plant), synthetic
mixtures of compounds with the same content of typical infested plant
emissions (Synt Mix Infested Plant), synthetic mixtures of only minor
compounds with the same content of typical intact plant emissions (Synt
Minor Plant), synthetic mixtures of only minor compounds with the same
content of typical infested plant emissions (Synt Minor Infested Plant)
or GC-grade air.
A χ2 test served toevaluate differences from a
50∶50 distribution over two olfactometer arms. Insects that did
not reach the end of either olfactometer arm within 10 min (NC: no
choice) are indicated by white bars. Asterisks indicate significant
differences (P<0.05).
Feeding of C. herbacea induces terpenoid gene expression in
M. aquatica
Herbivory was found to affect the percentage of some monoterpenes emitted by
M. aquatica. For this reason, gene expression involved in
the biosynthetic pathway leading to the bioactive monoterpenes(+)-pulegone
and (+)-menthofuran was evaluated. Previous studies have established the
biochemical pathway that in mints that leads to the production of these two
important monoterpenes (Fig.
4) [31]. We considered early genes such as
Dxs and Ippi, which are involved in the
formation and isomerization of the precursors isopentenyl diphosphate (IPP) and
dimethylallyl diphosphate (DMAPP), respectively. Dxp showed no
regulation by either herbivory or mechanical damage, whereas
Ippi was down-regulated by mechanical damage and
up-regulated by herbivory. Gpps, the gene coding for the enzyme
that condenses one unit each of IPP and DMAPP into the monoterpene precursor
geranyl pyrophosphate (GPP), was up-regulated almost 3-fold by herbivory and to
a lesser extent by mechanical damage. Ls, coding for the enzyme
conducting cyclisation of the universal precursor GPP to the parent olefin
(−)-limonene, showed the same trend as Ippi, being
up-regulated by herbivory and down-regulated by mechanical damage (Fig. 5). Several genes were
always up-regulated by herbivory and showed no regulation after mechanical
damage (Fig. 5). The genes
included L3oh, which codes for the enzyme responsible for the
NADPH- and O2-dependent hydroxylation of (−)-limonene to
(−)-trans-isopiperitenol, Ipd, which
codes the operationally soluble, NAD-dependent isopiperitenol dehydrogenase that
catalyzes allylic oxidation to the α,β-unsaturated ketone
(−)-isopiperitenone, Ipr, which codes the soluble enzyme
(−)-isopiperitenone reductase that catalyzes the stereospecific,
NADPH-dependent reduction of (−)-isopiperitenone to
(+)-(1R,4R)-cis-isopulegone, and Mfs, which codes for
menthofuran synthase, an enzyme responsible for the transformation of
(+)-pulegone to (+)-menthofuran (Fig. 4). Isopulegone isomerase, which
catalyzes double bond migration and causes the isopropenyl double bond of
(+)-(1R,4R)-cis-isopulegone to yield (+)-pulegone, has not yet been
isolated and was not assayed. Finally, Pr, which codes for
pulegone reductase, the enzyme responsible for NADPH-dependent reduction of the
conjugated double bond of the terpenone to yield (−)-menthone, was
down-regulated by herbivory and showed no significant regulation upon mechanical
damage (Figs. 4 and 5).
Figure 4
Schematic representation of the monoterpene biochemical pathway in
M. aquatica.
qPCR terpenoid gene expression of M. aquatica in
mechanically damaged (MD) and herbivore damaged (HW) leaves, with
respect to control leaves.
Bars indicate the standard error over the mean of at least three
biological replicates. Asterisks indicate significant differences with
respect to controls (P<0.05).
Schematic representation of the monoterpene biochemical pathway in
M. aquatica.
qPCR terpenoid gene expression of M. aquatica in
mechanically damaged (MD) and herbivore damaged (HW) leaves, with
respect to control leaves.
Bars indicate the standard error over the mean of at least three
biological replicates. Asterisks indicate significant differences with
respect to controls (P<0.05).
Discussion
Over the past two decades it has been documented that plants produce blends of
volatile compounds in vegetative tissues in response to damage and herbivore attack
[4], [6], [32]–[38], suggesting that
these substances act in plant defense [39]. Several lines of evidence
indicate that VOCs released from vegetative tissues act as direct repellents against
herbivores [40] and that the release of VOCs can result from the bursting
of pre-existing structures in which volatiles are stored, such as glandular
trichomes [41]. Plant
VOCs can also attract natural enemies of attacking herbivores, such as parasitic
wasps, flies, predatory mites or birds that can protect the signaling plant from
further damage [7], [32], [37], [42], [43]The results of this work show that C. herbacea is perfectly adapted
to the blend of terpenoids emitted by undamaged M. aquatica and it
uses this blend as a cue to locate plants. The fact that the insect lays eggs on
undamaged plants is further evidence of such adaptation. In the case of the
lepidopteran Plutella xylostella, the insect does not normally lay
eggs on Chrysanthemum morifolium, because of the repellence of the
monoterpene volatiles emitted from undamaged plants [44].In the attracting blend of terpenoids produced by M. aquatica,
(+)-pulegone was found to be the major compound in undamaged leaves and a
potent attractant to C. herbacea in olfactometer bioassays.
Volatiles emitted from plants can stimulate the behavioral or antennal responses of
herbivores [45].As a response to herbivore feeding, M. aquatica activates genes for
terpenoid biosynthesis, diverting most of the terpene production toward the
synthesis of (+)-menthofuran, which was found to repel C.
herbacea in bioassay tests. Over the past decade, evidence that
vegetative volatile compounds function to directly repel herbivores has begun to
accumulate [39],
[46]. However,
the minor compounds emitted by uninfested and infested leaves were not effective in
attracting or deterring C. herbacea.An open question is why M. aquatica produces a herbivore attractant.
One possible explanation is that the emission of (+)-pulegone is exploited by
plants because of the antimicrobial [47], [48], nematocidal [49], acaricidal
[50],
antifeedant [51] and mitochondrial respiration uncoupling [19] properties
of this compound. Preliminary studies have identified a C. herbacea
egg parasite and studies on its behavior are under way.This work suggests that constitutive plant defense can be modulated by interactions
with herbivorous insects. The latter can trigger plant terpenoid gene expression and
synthesis in a way that simple mechanical damage cannot. Usually, mechanical damage
to plant foliage elevates VOC release in case of artificial damage carried out by
researchers [40]; however, mechanically damaged M.
aquatica does not exhibit emissions as intense or with the same
compositional pattern as after herbivory.Most genes directly involved in the biosynthesis of p-menthanemonoterpenes in mints are transcriptionally regulated in a coordinated fashion [52] and it seems
likely that the expression of these genes is controlled by a common transcription
factor [53].
Herbivory had no effect on the expression of M. aquatica Dxs, a
gene involved in the early steps of terpenoid biosynthesis for the
mevalonate-independent (MEP)-pathway gene, the product of which is considered to
catalyze one of the rate-limiting steps of this pathway [54]. On the contrary, herbivory
up-regulated almost all other genes involved in the pathway. Over-expression of
Gpps, Ls and L3oh would be
expected to increase production of both GPP and other key monoterpenes [53]. The synthesis
of (−)-limonene, providing the first committed intermediate of the pathway, is
a possible rate limiting step of monoterpene production in mints [31]. Thus, the
over-expression of both Gpps and Ls justifies the
increase in the precursor (−)-limonene and the end-products of the pathway
(particularly (+)-menthofuran). The up-regulation of Mfs
parallels the increase in (+)-menthofuran; the latter was found to be a
competitive inhibitor of Pr [55]. In transgenic lines with increased expression of
Mfs and more (+)-menthofuran in the essential oil,
(+)-pulegone amounts were greater than in controls. This finding led to the
hypothesis that the metabolic fate of (+)-pulegone is controlled by
(+)-menthofuran-mediated transcriptional down-regulation of Pr levels [56]. In M.
aquatica, herbivory down-regulated the expression of
Pr and up-regulated Ipr; however, the amounts
of (+)-pulegone were never significantly different from those in the controls.
This might indicate the presence of other factors that may exert post-translational
control over the enzyme activity of Mfs or the regulation of the isopulegone
isomerase, which has not yet been isolated.In general, following herbivore attack, plants release green leaf volatiles (GLV),
six-carbon aldehydes, alcohols, and esters, that are considered typical wound
signals [4], [32], [57]–[59]. By contrast,
significant amounts of green-leaf volatiles were not emitted by M.
aquatica during herbivory. This may be related the high amount of
terpenoids produced in the glandular trichomes; by comparison plants that do not
accumulate these compounds in secretory tissues (e.g., Arabidopsis
or Lima bean) usually released smaller amounts of terpenoids [36], [60]. In some cases it has been
suggested that oxidative damage of membranes is one of the primary factors inducing
GLV emissions [58]. The function of VOCs in alleviating oxidative stresses
has been shown to be related to the high reactivity of certain monoterpenes [40], suggesting
that the release of VOCs upon herbivory in M. aquatica might have
other functions in addition to deterrence.The proportions of emitted monoterpenes (VOCs) may differ from those in the plant oil
of glandular trichomes with regard to chemical composition [27], [61]. Nonetheless, molecular
data support the hypothesis that terpenoid biosynthesis is modulated by C.
herbacea herbivory.In conclusion, C. herbacea attacks undamaged M.
aquatica, but it avoids herbivore-infested M.
aquatica. Upon herbivory, M. aquatica produces repellent
compounds, thus reducing the damage from further insect attacks (Fig. 6, see also Supporting Fig. S4).
Figure 6
The behavior of C. herbacea and M.
aquatica before and during herbivore feeding.
a, Undamaged plants emit (+)-pulegone, which acts as an
attractant for C. herbacea. b, Feeding
activity induces gene expression and increases content of the deterrent
compound (+)-menthofuran, along with the emission of the attractant
compound (+)-pulegone; as a result, fewer insects are attracted to the
plants. c, Intense feeding induces a reduction in
(+)-pulegone content and a dramatic increase in the repellent compound
(+)-menthofuran; C. herbacea avoids over-fed plants
and moves towards undamaged plants.
The behavior of C. herbacea and M.
aquatica before and during herbivore feeding.
a, Undamaged plants emit (+)-pulegone, which acts as an
attractant for C. herbacea. b, Feeding
activity induces gene expression and increases content of the deterrent
compound (+)-menthofuran, along with the emission of the attractant
compound (+)-pulegone; as a result, fewer insects are attracted to the
plants. c, Intense feeding induces a reduction in
(+)-pulegone content and a dramatic increase in the repellent compound
(+)-menthofuran; C. herbacea avoids over-fed plants
and moves towards undamaged plants.
Materials and Methods
Plant material and growth conditions
Stolons of Mentha aquatica L. were collected from wild
populations growing in Cambiano (Turin province, Italy, alt 240 m a.s.l.) and
San Secondo di Pinerolo (Turin province, Italy, alt 413 m a.s.l.). Stolons were
surface sterilized with 70% ethanol (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA)
for 20 s and with sodium hypochlorite (1% v/v available chlorine)
(Sigma-Aldrich) for 5 min. Stolons were then rinsed three times with sterile
distilled water. Plants were grown in plastic pots with sterilized peat and
vermiculite (V/V 4∶1) at 23°C and 60% humidity using daylight
fluorescent tubes at 270 µE m−2 s−1 with
a photophase of 16 h.
Insect collection and rearing
Adults of Chrysolina herbacea (Duftschmid 1825) (Coleoptera,
Chrysomelidae, Chrysomelinae) were collected by hand picking from infested
M. aquatica fields. After collection, beetles were reared
at 22°C in ventilated glass chambers and fed to M. aquatica
cuttings. The beetles were starved for 24 h. prior the experiments.
Collection of plant volatiles, gas chromatography and mass
spectrometry
Experiments were conducted in 4 l glass desiccators by using non-flowering
M. aquatica five-node cuttings, placed in 100 ml
Erlenmeyer's flasks filled with 60 ml tap water and sealed with aluminium
foil to prevent fall of insects into the water during experiments. Three
cuttings per flask in a single desiccator where used. Plants were illuminated
with fluorescent light bulbs generating about 50 µmol m−2
s−1 with a photophase of 16 h, the temperature inside
desiccators was about 24°C and the relative humidity about 70%. Glass
desiccators were connected to a GC-grade air generator (HPZA-3500-220, Parker
Balston, Cleveland, OH, USA) through a cork plug with two openings allowing
gases to go in and out. Air was pumped into the jars at a flow rate of 300 ml
min−1. A clean Pasteur glass pipette was inserted in the
outlet of the cork plug and VOCs were sampled with a
Carboxen/Polydimethylsiloxane (CAR/PDMS) Supelco (Bellefonte, PA, USA)
solid-phase micro-extraction (SPME) fibre (model 57334-U). Before use, SPME
fibres were always conditioned at 250°C, according to manufacturer's
instructions (see also Supporting Fig. S1 for more details).Undamaged plants, leaves mechanically damaged with a pattern wheel and plants
infested for 6 h were assayed for VOC emission. All experiments were
standardized at 6 h, because the presence of eight herbivores for 6 h was found
to cause about 30% of leaf damage.SPME fibres, which were placed in various paths to adsorb VOCc for 6 h (see
Supporting Figs.
S1 and S2), were desorpted and VOCs were analyzed by
gas-chromatography mass spectrometry (GC-MS 6890N-5973A, Agilent Technologies,
Santa Clara, CA, US). The desorpted compounds were separated on a ZB-5MS Zebron
(7HG-G010-11, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA, US) capillary column (stationary phase:
polydimethylsiloxane - 5% diphenyl, 30 m length, 250 µm internal
diameter, and 0.25 µm film thickness) with a temperature program of
60°C (kept for 5 min) followed by a temperature rise at a rate of 3°C
min−1 to 270°C (kept for 5 min). Working conditions
were: injector 250°C, transfer line to MSD 280°C, oven temperature:
start 60°C, hold 5 min, programmed from 60°C to 270°C at 3°C
min-1, hold 5 min; carrier gas was He under a constant flow of 1 ml min-1; in
SPME desorption and subsequent analysis the fibre was exposed in the injection
port during the entire GC run; the injector was maintained in splitless mode
during the desorption phase; ionization energy: EI 70 eV; acquisition
parameters: scanned m/z 50–250 amu. Separated compounds were identified by
pure standard comparison, by comparison of their mass spectra and retention
indexes (Kováts indexes) with those of reference substances and by
comparison with the NIST mass spectral search software v2.0 using the libraries
NIST 98 library and Adams [62] library. Different concentraitions of
(+)-menthofuran, (+)-pulegone, myrcene, p-cymene,
(−)-limonene, (−)-menthone, α-terpineol and
(E)-β-caryophyllene were used to create a standard curve
used as an external standard for SPME quantitative measurements. Reference
compounds were mixed in relative proportions similar to those that were
quantified in the plant samples.
Total RNA extraction and quantitative Real Time-PCR (qPCR)
After each experiment, leaves were collected and immediately frozen in liquid
nitrogen. One hundred mg of frozen control, herbivore damaged, and mechanically
damaged leaves were ground in liquid nitrogen with mortar and pestle. Total RNA
was isolated using Qiagen RNeasy Plant RNA kit and RNase-Free DNase set (Qiagen,
Hilden, Germany). Sample quality and quantity was checked by using the RNA 6000
Nano kit and the Agilent 2100 Bioanalyzer (Agilent Technologies) according to
manufacturer's instructions. Quantification of RNA was also confirmed
spectrophotometrically by using a NanoDrop ND-1000 (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
Waltham, MA, US).First strand cDNA synthesis was accomplished with 2 µg of total RNA and
random primers using the High-Capacity cDNA Reverse Transcription Kit (Applied
Biosystems, Foster City, CA, US), according to the manufacturer's
recommendations. Primers for real-time PCR were designed on Mentha
piperita available sequences using the Primer 3 software [63]. qPCR was
done on an Mx3000P Real-Time PCR System (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA, US). The
reaction was performed with 25 µl of mixture consisting of 12.5 µl
of 2× Maxima™ SYBR Green qPCR Master Mix (Fermentas International,
Inc, Burlington, ON, Canada), 0.5 µl of cDNA and 100 nM primers
(Integrated DNA Technologies, Coralville, IA, US).Relative RNA levels were calibrated and normalized with the level of two
housekeeping genes: actin and 18S ribosomal mRNA.PCR conditions were determined by comparing threshold values in dilution series
of the RT product, followed by non-template control for each primer pair.
Relative expression levels of genes were calculated by using the Pfaffl method
[64]. A
suitable melt curve analysis was always performed.PCR conditions were the following: 18S: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
58°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Actin: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Dxs: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
58°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Ippi: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Gpps: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
58°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Ls: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; L3oh: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Ipd: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
58°C, and 30 s at 72°C ; Ipr: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Pr: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
57°C, and 30 s at 72°C; Mfs: initial polymerase
activation of 10 min at 95°C; and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C, 30 s at
58°C, and 30 s at 72°C.Primers used for qPCR were the following: 18S, (NCBI GenBank accession no.
NR_022795), forward primer 5′-ATGATAACTCGACGGATCGC-3′, reverse primer
5′-CTTGGATGTGGTAGCCGTTT
-3′; actin, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AW255057),
forward primer 5′-GCTCCAAGGGCTGTGTTCC-3′, reverse primer
5′-
TCTTTCTGTCCCATGCCAAC-3′
[65].
Dxs, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AF019383), [66], forward
primer 5′-CCACCAGGCTTACCCACACAA-3′, reverse primer
5′-GCCACCGCCATCCCTAAAC-3. Ippi,
(NCBI GenBank accession no. AW255524), [65], forward primer
5′-CTCTTGGGGTGAGAAATGCT-3′ reverse primer
5′-CATCTGAGGGGGCTTTGTA-3. Gpps,
(NCBI GenBank accession no. EU108696), [67], forward primer
5′-ATGATAAGCGGGCTGCATAG-3′ reverse primer
5′-CCGAAATTCCTCAGCTTCTG-3′.
Ls, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AW255536), [65], forward
primer 5′-CGGTGGTGGAGAAATACTGGGTTT-3′, reverse primer
5′-CCGTAATCAGAGCGTGACTTTGC-3′.
L3oh, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AF124817), [68], forward
primer 5′-CCCCATCACCACCAACTCCA-3′, reverse primer
5′-GCTCCGCCAGCACCCATAG-3′;
Ipd, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AY641428), [69], forward
primer 5′-GAGCTTCTATGGGCAGGTCA-3′, reverse primer
5′-
GGCCACGAATGGTAAACACT-3′. Ipr, (NCBI
GenBank accession no. AY300162), [70], forward primer
5′-AGCCAATGGAGAAATGATCG-3′, reverse primer
5′-
GAGAGGAATGAGGGCTTGTG-3′. Pr, (NCBI
GenBank accession no. AAQ75423), [70], forward primer
5′-ACAGCCTGAAGCAGCCTGAA-3′, reverse primer
5′-CGGCAGAACCATCTCAAGGA-3′.
Mfs, (NCBI GenBank accession no. AF346833), [71], forward
primer 5′-GCAGAACGAGGTGCGAGAAG
-3′, reverse primer 5′-TGCGAAAGGTGGATGTAGGC-3′. The length of PCR
products was from 98 to 200 bp.
Bioassays
Experiments were conducted in a glass Y-tube olfactometer connected to the glass
jars. GC-grade air was pumped into the jars at a flow rate of 300 ml
min−1. The Y-tube was housed in a blackened box with a
diffused fluorescent lamp giving a constant light directly above the centre
point of the Y-tube. Thirty C. herbacea were monitored for up
to 7 min by recording “choice” or “no-choice” events.
All glassware was carefully washed to remove any contaminating substances and
air-dried at 120°C for 4 h to remove volatile compounds. Test temperature
was maintained at about 24°C and 70% humidity. (+)-Menthofuran,
(−)-pulegone, myrcene, p-cymene, (−)-limonene,
(−)-menthone, α-terpineol and (E)-β-caryophyllene
pure standards were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and were used in chemical tests
(see also Supporting Fig. S2). The concentration of pure standards
in Y-tube tests was used at the same concentrations as found in leaf volatile
emissions.
Statistical analysis
Initial and final choice data were analyzed using a Chi-squared test. Yates'
correction was applied to adjust for the data with only one degree of freedom.
Data were also statistically processed using a log-likelihood test (G-test) and
by ANOVA by using the statistical program SPSS (version 16.0,SPSS Inc., Chicago,
IL, USA). For genomic and chemical analyses, the overall data sets are expressed
as mean values of at least three biological replicates each one repeated three
times (technical replicates). Metric bars indicate SD. Significance of
differences observed in data sets was tested by ANOVA using the SYSTAT 10
software.Left panel, glass desiccators containing the plants are connected to the
GC-grade air generator. The cork plug has two holes: one for allowing the
GC-grade air to enter the jar and the other hosts a glass Pasteur pipette.
In the right figure the arrow indicates the SPME fibre that adsorbs the VOCs
exiting from the jar.(PDF)Click here for additional data file.Left panel, a glass Y-tube olfactometer is connected to the jars where a flux
of GC-grade air blows the VOCs produced by undamaged and infested leaves.
Arrows indicate the presence of the SPME fibre which is located just before
the olfactometer arms, into the air path. Right upper panel shows C.
herbacea making a choice. The lower right panel shows the
flow-meter used to standardize the air flow blowing from the jars and the
timer used during the choice tests.(PDF)Click here for additional data file.C. herbacea was found to lay eggs on undamaged M.
aquatica plants. The left panel shows clutches of eggs laid on
a young M. aquatica leaf. The right panel shows young
C. herbacea larvae feeding on M.
aquatica leaves.(PDF)Click here for additional data file.M. aquatica plants observed in the wild. The upper left
panel shows an undamaged M. aquatica in full bloom. The
upper right panel shows male and female C. herbacea mating
on partially damaged M. aquatica leaves. The two lower
panels show the typical level of damage inferred by C.
herbacea on wild M. aquatica leaves.(PDF)Click here for additional data file.
Authors: Ian T Baldwin; Rayko Halitschke; Anja Paschold; Caroline C von Dahl; Catherine A Preston Journal: Science Date: 2006-02-10 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: B M Lange; M R Wildung; E J Stauber; C Sanchez; D Pouchnik; R Croteau Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2000-03-14 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Rigoberto Rios-Estepa; Glenn W Turner; James M Lee; Rodney B Croteau; B Markus Lange Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Asaph Aharoni; Ashok P Giri; Stephan Deuerlein; Frans Griepink; Willem-Jan de Kogel; Francel W A Verstappen; Harrie A Verhoeven; Maarten A Jongsma; Wilfried Schwab; Harro J Bouwmeester Journal: Plant Cell Date: 2003-11-20 Impact factor: 11.277
Authors: Tapan Kumar Mohanta; Andrea Occhipinti; Simon Atsbaha Zebelo; Maria Foti; Judith Fliegmann; Simone Bossi; Massimo E Maffei; Cinzia M Bertea Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Graziano Pizzolante; Chiara Cordero; Salvatore M Tredici; Davide Vergara; Paola Pontieri; Luigi Del Giudice; Andrea Capuzzo; Patrizia Rubiolo; Chidananda N Kanchiswamy; Simon A Zebelo; Carlo Bicchi; Massimo E Maffei; Pietro Alifano Journal: BMC Plant Biol Date: 2017-03-02 Impact factor: 4.215
Authors: Nayara Sabrina Freitas Alves; Suzana G Kaory Inoue; Adriana Ribeiro Carneiro; Ulisses Brigatto Albino; William N Setzer; José Guilherme Maia; Eloisa Helena Andrade; Joyce Kelly R da Silva Journal: PLoS One Date: 2022-01-21 Impact factor: 3.240