| Literature DB >> 26462935 |
Claire Duménil1, Gary J R Judd2, Dolors Bosch3, Mario Baldessari4, César Gemeno5, Astrid T Groot6,7.
Abstract
The codling moth, Cydia pomonella L. (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae), is a major pest of apple, pear and walnut orchards worldwide. This pest is often controlled using the biologically friendly control method known as pheromone-based mating disruption. Mating disruption likely exerts selection on the sexual communication system of codling moth, as male and female moths will persist in their attempt to meet and mate. Surprisingly little is known on the intraspecific variation of sexual communication in this species. We started an investigation to determine the level of individual variation in the female sex pheromone composition of this moth and whether variation among different populations might be correlated with use of mating disruption against those populations. By extracting pheromone glands of individual females from a laboratory population in Canada and from populations from apple orchards in Spain and Italy, we found significant between- and within-population variation. Comparing females that had been exposed to mating disruption, or not, revealed a significant difference in sex pheromone composition for two of the minor components. Overall, the intraspecific variation observed shows the potential for a shift in female sexual signal when selection pressure is high, as is the case with continuous use of mating disruption.Entities:
Keywords: Cydia pomonella; Lepidoptera; Tortricidae; codlemone; communication interference; mating disruption; pheromone; sexual communication
Year: 2014 PMID: 26462935 PMCID: PMC4592601 DOI: 10.3390/insects5040705
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Insects ISSN: 2075-4450 Impact factor: 2.769
Female sex pheromone gland content and male response to pheromone components in Cydia pomonella in the literature.
| Compound | Gland Content (ng) | Amount (%) | EAG * | Male Attraction ** WT Field | References | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | 2.1 | 100 | +++ | + | + | [ |
| ( | 0.005 | 0.01 | ++ | − (>1%) + (<1%) | − (>1%) | [ |
| ( | 1 | 18.4 | + | + | 0 | [ |
| ( | nd | 0.9 | + | 0 | nd | [ |
| ( | 0.2 | 5.1 | + | 0 | 0 | [ |
| ( | 0.02 | 3.9 | + | − | 0 | [ |
| ( | 0.01 | 0.8 | + | 0 | nd | [ |
| ( | 0.08 | 1.8 | + | − (>20%) | − | [ |
| ( | nd | 0.3 | (+) | − (>20%) | nd | [ |
| ( | 0.005 | 1.4 | 0 | nd | nd | [ |
| ( | 0.2 | 3.8 | 0 | nd | 0 | [ |
| ( | 0.04 | 2.6 | 0 | nd | nd | [ |
| ( | 0.08 | 3.9 | 0 | nd | nd | [ |
| ( | nd | 6.3 | 0 | nd | nd | [ |
| Blend 1 + 3 + 11 | nd | +0 | +0 | [ | ||
| Blend 1 + 3 + 5 + 11 | nd | nd | 0 | [ | ||
| Blend 1 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 8 + 11 | nd | + | 0 | [ | ||
| Blend 1 + 2 + 8 | nd | nd | − | [ | ||
| Blend 1 +3 + 5 + 7 + 8 + 10 + 11 + 12 + 13 | nd | 0 | nd | [ | ||
(y): Compounds identified and analyzed by GC in this study. (n): Amount too small to be detected in this study. 1 Compound could not be detected due to coelution with a non-target compound. (na): Compound not analyzed in this study. * Male response by Electro-antennogram (EAG) to each individual compound, from no response (0) to high response (+++). ** Wind tunnel and field behavioral responses of males to multiple component blends of codlemone (E8E10-12OH) with minor compounds. +: Increase of attraction. −: Decrease of attraction. 0: No difference in attraction, compared to codlemone alone. nd: Not documented.
Figure 1(A) Box-whisker plots of the total amount of sex pheromone in individual glands of females from a laboratory population in Canada and field collected females with mating disruption (+MD) in Spain, Italy and The Netherlands, and field collected females without mating disruption (−MD) in Italy. Numbers above the bars are the sample sizes. * p < 0.05; (B) Box plots showing variation in the ratio of codlemone to dodecanol in each population. See text for further explanation.
Statistical analysis to compare the sex pheromone amount and composition of Cydia pomonella females from different geographic origin, exposed or not to mating disruption.
| Source | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dependent variable: Total amount | |||||
| Mating disruption (+MD, −MD) | 0.102 | 1 | 0.102 | 0.019 | 0.891 |
| Countries | 76.725 | 4 | 19.181 | 3.965 | 0.005 |
| Canada * Spain +MD | 0.632 | ||||
| Canada * Italy −MD | 0.025 | ||||
| Canada * Italy +MD | 0.093 | ||||
| Canada * Neth +MD | 0.135 | ||||
| Spain + MD * Italy −MD | 0.250 | ||||
| Spain + MD * Italy +MD | 0.307 | ||||
| Spain + MD * Neth +MD | 0.499 | ||||
| Neth + MD * Italy −MD | 1.000 | ||||
| Neth + MD * Italy +MD | 0.979 | ||||
| Italy − MD * Italy +MD | |||||
| Dependent variable: Relative amounts | |||||
| E8E10-12Al | 9.787 | 2 | 4.893 | 25.916 | <0.001 |
| Canada * Spain | 0.148 | ||||
| Canada * Italy | <0.001 | ||||
| Spain * Italy | <0.001 | ||||
| 12OH | 0.696 | 2 | 0.348 | 4.170 | 0.018 |
| Canada * Spain | 0.373 | ||||
| Canada * Italy | 0.112 | ||||
| Spain * Italy | 0.007 | ||||
| E8-12OH | 0.053 | 2 | 0.026 | 0.093 | 0.911 |
| Z8E10-12OH | 0.916 | 2 | 0.458 | 2.129 | 0.125 |
| E8E10-12OH | 0.146 | 2 | 0.073 | 0.350 | 0.706 |
| E8E10-12Al | 0.274 | 1 | 0.274 | 0.920 | 0.340 |
| 12OH | 0.476 | 1 | 0.476 | 5.603 | 0.020 |
| E8-12OH | 0.161 | 1 | 0.161 | 0.557 | 0.458 |
| Z8E10-12OH | 0.165 | 1 | 0.165 | 0.816 | 0.369 |
| E8E10-12OH | 0.001 | 1 | 0.001 | 0.003 | 0.958 |
| Dependent variable: Ratio to E8E10-12OH | |||||
| 12OH | 0.507 | 2 | 0.254 | 2.176 | 0.120 |
| E8E10-12Al | 8.019 | 2 | 4.009 | 10.585 | <0.001 |
| Canada * Spain | 0.488 | ||||
| Canada * Italy | <0.001 | ||||
| Spain * Italy | 0.001 | ||||
| E8E10-12Al | 0.249 | 1 | 0.249 | 0.537 | 0.465 |
| 12OH | 0.443 | 1 | 0.443 | 3.821 | 0.054 |
Figure 2Mean relative percentage (±SEM) of the integrated sex pheromone components in females from the three populations with sample size >10. The sum total of all compounds within a population equals 100%. ** p < 0.01. −MD: females collected from a population that had not been exposed to mating disruption; +MD: females collected from a population that had been exposed to mating disruption. See text for further explanation.