Literature DB >> 22422313

Inducibility of chemical defenses in Norway spruce bark is correlated with unsuccessful mass attacks by the spruce bark beetle.

Christian Schiebe1, Almuth Hammerbacher, Göran Birgersson, Johanna Witzell, Peter E Brodelius, Jonathan Gershenzon, Bill S Hansson, Paal Krokene, Fredrik Schlyter.   

Abstract

Secondary attraction to aggregation pheromones plays a central role in the host colonization behavior of the European spruce bark beetle Ips typographus. However, it is largely unknown how the beetles pioneering an attack locate suitable host trees, and eventually accept or reject them. To find possible biomarkers for host choice by I. typographus, we analyzed the chemistry of 58 Norway spruce (Picea abies) trees that were subsequently either (1) successfully attacked and killed, (2) unsuccessfully attacked, or (3) left unattacked. The trees were sampled before the main beetle flight in a natural Norway spruce-dominated forest. No pheromones were used to attract beetles to the experimental trees. To test the trees' defense potential, each tree was treated in a local area with the defense hormone methyl jasmonate (MeJ), and treated and untreated bark were analyzed for 66 different compounds, including terpenes, phenolics and alkaloids. The chemistry of MeJ-treated bark correlated strongly with the success of I. typographus attack, revealing major chemical differences between killed trees and unsuccessfully attacked trees. Surviving trees produced significantly higher amounts of most of the 39 analyzed mono-, sesqui-, and diterpenes and of 4 of 20 phenolics. Alkaloids showed no clear pattern. Differences in untreated bark were less pronounced, where only 1,8-cineole and (-)-limonene were significantly higher in unsuccessfully attacked trees. Our results show that the potential of individual P. abies trees for inducing defense compounds upon I. typographus attack may partly determine tree resistance to this bark beetle by inhibiting its mass attack.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22422313     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-012-2298-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  15 in total

Review 1.  Effect size, confidence interval and statistical significance: a practical guide for biologists.

Authors:  Shinichi Nakagawa; Innes C Cuthill
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2007-11

Review 2.  Anatomical and chemical defenses of conifer bark against bark beetles and other pests.

Authors:  Vincent R Franceschi; Paal Krokene; Erik Christiansen; Trygve Krekling
Journal:  New Phytol       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 10.151

3.  Host resistance elicited by methyl jasmonate reduces emission of aggregation pheromones by the spruce bark beetle, Ips typographus.

Authors:  Tao Zhao; Anna-Karin Borg-Karlson; Nadir Erbilgin; Paal Krokene
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2011-05-26       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Quantitative variation of pheromone components in the spruce bark beetleIps typographus from different attack phases.

Authors:  G Birgersson; F Schlyter; J Löfqvist; G Bergström
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  1984-07       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Specificity and redundancy in the olfactory system of the bark beetle Ips typographus: single-cell responses to ecologically relevant odors.

Authors:  Martin N Andersson; Mattias C Larsson; Fredrik Schlyter
Journal:  J Insect Physiol       Date:  2009-02-21       Impact factor: 2.354

6.  Host selection behavior of bark beetles (Coleoptera: Scolytidae) attackingPinus ponderosa, with special emphasis on the western pine beetle,Dendroctonus brevicomis.

Authors:  H A Moeck; D L Wood; K Q Lindahl
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  1981-01       Impact factor: 2.626

7.  Exogenous application of methyl jasmonate elicits defenses in Norway spruce (Picea abies) and reduces host colonization by the bark beetle Ips typographus.

Authors:  Nadir Erbilgin; Paal Krokene; Erik Christiansen; Gazmend Zeneli; Jonathan Gershenzon
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2006-03-03       Impact factor: 3.225

8.  Mountain pine beetle and forest carbon feedback to climate change.

Authors:  W A Kurz; C C Dymond; G Stinson; G J Rampley; E T Neilson; A L Carroll; T Ebata; L Safranyik
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2008-04-24       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Methyl jasmonate and oxalic acid treatment of Norway spruce: anatomically based defense responses and increased resistance against fungal infection.

Authors:  Paal Krokene; Nina Elisabeth Nagy; Halvor Solheim
Journal:  Tree Physiol       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 4.196

10.  Induced terpene accumulation in Norway spruce inhibits bark beetle colonization in a dose-dependent manner.

Authors:  Tao Zhao; Paal Krokene; Jiang Hu; Erik Christiansen; Niklas Björklund; Bo Långström; Halvor Solheim; Anna-Karin Borg-Karlson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  23 in total

1.  Weathering the storm: how lodgepole pine trees survive mountain pine beetle outbreaks.

Authors:  Nadir Erbilgin; Jonathan A Cale; Altaf Hussain; Guncha Ishangulyyeva; Jennifer G Klutsch; Ahmed Najar; Shiyang Zhao
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 3.225

2.  The lodgepole × jack pine hybrid zone in Alberta, Canada: a stepping stone for the mountain pine beetle on its journey East across the boreal forest?

Authors:  Inka Lusebrink; Nadir Erbilgin; Maya L Evenden
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2013-08-17       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  The Bark-Beetle-Associated Fungus, Endoconidiophora polonica, Utilizes the Phenolic Defense Compounds of Its Host as a Carbon Source.

Authors:  Namita Wadke; Dineshkumar Kandasamy; Heiko Vogel; Ljerka Lah; Brenda D Wingfield; Christian Paetz; Louwrance P Wright; Jonathan Gershenzon; Almuth Hammerbacher
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2016-04-22       Impact factor: 8.340

4.  Differences in vole preference, secondary chemistry and nutrient levels between naturally regenerated and planted Norway spruce seedlings.

Authors:  Virpi Virjamo; Riitta Julkunen-Tiitto; Heikki Henttonen; Eveliina Hiltunen; Reijo Karjalainen; Juhani Korhonen; Otso Huitu
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2013-10-09       Impact factor: 2.626

5.  Overexpression of an isoprenyl diphosphate synthase in spruce leads to unexpected terpene diversion products that function in plant defense.

Authors:  Raimund Nagel; Aileen Berasategui; Christian Paetz; Jonathan Gershenzon; Axel Schmidt
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 8.340

6.  Variation in Methyl Jasmonate-Induced Defense Among Norway Spruce Clones and Trade-Offs in Resistance Against a Fungal and an Insect Pest.

Authors:  Adriana Puentes; Tao Zhao; Lina Lundborg; Niklas Björklund; Anna-Karin Borg-Karlson
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-05-24       Impact factor: 5.753

7.  Non-host volatile blend optimization for forest protection against the European spruce bark beetle, Ips typographus.

Authors:  C Rikard Unelius; Christian Schiebe; Björn Bohman; Martin N Andersson; Fredrik Schlyter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-01-14       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Do water-limiting conditions predispose Norway spruce to bark beetle attack?

Authors:  Sigrid Netherer; Bradley Matthews; Klaus Katzensteiner; Emma Blackwell; Patrick Henschke; Peter Hietz; Josef Pennerstorfer; Sabine Rosner; Silvia Kikuta; Helmut Schume; Axel Schopf
Journal:  New Phytol       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 10.323

9.  Functional annotation of the Ophiostoma novo-ulmi genome: insights into the phytopathogenicity of the fungal agent of Dutch elm disease.

Authors:  André M Comeau; Josée Dufour; Guillaume F Bouvet; Volker Jacobi; Martha Nigg; Bernard Henrissat; Jérôme Laroche; Roger C Levesque; Louis Bernier
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2014-12-24       Impact factor: 3.416

10.  Combining QTL Mapping and Transcriptomics to Decipher the Genetic Architecture of Phenolic Compounds Metabolism in the Conifer White Spruce.

Authors:  Justine Laoué; Claire Depardieu; Sébastien Gérardi; Manuel Lamothe; Claude Bomal; Aïda Azaiez; Marie-Claude Gros-Louis; Jérôme Laroche; Brian Boyle; Almuth Hammerbacher; Nathalie Isabel; Jean Bousquet
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2021-05-17       Impact factor: 5.753

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.