Literature DB >> 28421324

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

Nadir Erbilgin1, Jonathan A Cale2, Altaf Hussain2, Guncha Ishangulyyeva2, Jennifer G Klutsch2, Ahmed Najar2, Shiyang Zhao2.   

Abstract

Recent mountain pine beetle outbreaks in western North America killed millions of lodgepole pine trees, leaving few survivors. However, the mechanism underlying the ability of trees to survive bark beetle outbreaks is unknown, but likely involve phytochemicals such as monoterpenes and fatty acids that can drive beetle aggregation and colonization on their hosts. Thus, we conducted a field survey of beetle-resistant lodgepole pine (Pinus contorta) trees to retrospectively deduce whether these phytochemicals underlie their survival by comparing their chemistry to that of non-attacked trees in the same stands. We also compared beetle attack characteristics between resistant and beetle-killed trees. Beetle-killed trees had more beetle attacks and longer ovipositional galleries than resistant trees, which also lacked the larval establishment found in beetle-killed trees. Resistant trees contained high amounts of toxic and attraction-inhibitive compounds and low amounts of pheromone-precursor and synergist compounds. During beetle host aggregation and colonization, these compounds likely served three critical roles in tree survival. First, low amounts of pheromone-precursor (α-pinene) and synergist (mycrene, terpinolene) compounds reduced or prevented beetles from attracting conspecifics to residual trees. Second, high amounts of 4-allyanisole further inhibited beetle attraction to its pheromone. Finally, high amounts of toxic limonene, 3-carene, 4-allyanisole, α-linolenic acid, and linoleic acid inhibited beetle gallery establishment and oviposition. We conclude that the variation of chemotypic expression of local plant populations can have profound ecological consequences including survival during insect outbreaks.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anti-herbivore defence mechanism; Conifers; Dendroctonus ponderosae; Outbreaks; Tree resistance and susceptibility

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28421324     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-017-3865-9

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


  25 in total

1.  Chemical similarity between historical and novel host plants promotes range and host expansion of the mountain pine beetle in a naïve host ecosystem.

Authors:  Nadir Erbilgin; Cary Ma; Caroline Whitehouse; Bin Shan; Ahmed Najar; Maya Evenden
Journal:  New Phytol       Date:  2013-10-30       Impact factor: 10.151

2.  Tradeoffs associated with constitutive and induced plant resistance against herbivory.

Authors:  Anne Kempel; Martin Schädler; Thomas Chrobock; Markus Fischer; Mark van Kleunen
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-03-09       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  MONOTERPENE VARIATION IN PONDEROSA PINE XYLEM RESIN RELATED TO WESTERN PINE BEETLE PREDATION.

Authors:  Kareen B Sturgeon
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1979-09       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 4.  Genes, enzymes and chemicals of terpenoid diversity in the constitutive and induced defence of conifers against insects and pathogens.

Authors:  Christopher I Keeling; Jörg Bohlmann
Journal:  New Phytol       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 10.151

Review 5.  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

6.  The effect of dietary fatty acids on the cuticular hydrocarbon phenotype of an herbivorous insect and consequences for mate recognition.

Authors:  Tobias Otte; Monika Hilker; Sven Geiselhardt
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2014-12-18       Impact factor: 2.626

7.  Pheromone Production by an Invasive Bark Beetle Varies with Monoterpene Composition of its Naïve Host.

Authors:  Spencer Taft; Ahmed Najar; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2015-05-27       Impact factor: 2.626

8.  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

9.  β-Phellandrene: kairomone for pine engraver,Ips pini (Say) (Coleoptera: Scolytidae).

Authors:  D R Miller; J H Borden
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 2.626

10.  Fatty Acid Composition of Novel Host Jack Pine Do Not Prevent Host Acceptance and Colonization by the Invasive Mountain Pine Beetle and Its Symbiotic Fungus.

Authors:  Guncha Ishangulyyeva; Ahmed Najar; Jonathan M Curtis; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-01       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  9 in total

1.  Successful Colonization of Lodgepole Pine Trees by Mountain Pine Beetle Increased Monoterpene Production and Exhausted Carbohydrate Reserves.

Authors:  Marla Roth; Altaf Hussain; Jonathan A Cale; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2018-01-04       Impact factor: 2.626

2.  Primary and Secondary Metabolite Profiles of Lodgepole Pine Trees Change with Elevation, but Not with Latitude.

Authors:  Melanie Mullin; J G Klutsch; J A Cale; A Hussain; S Zhao; C Whitehouse; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  J Chem Ecol       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 2.626

3.  Ectomycorrhizal fungal species differentially affect the induced defensive chemistry of lodgepole pine.

Authors:  Sanat S Kanekar; Jonathan A Cale; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2018-07-21       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Larger Resin Ducts Are Linked to the Survival of Lodgepole Pine Trees During Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak.

Authors:  Shiyang Zhao; Nadir Erbilgin
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2019-11-26       Impact factor: 5.753

5.  Hotter droughts alter resource allocation to chemical defenses in piñon pine.

Authors:  Amy M Trowbridge; Henry D Adams; Adam Collins; Lee Turin Dickman; Charlotte Grossiord; Megan Hofland; Shealyn Malone; David K Weaver; Sanna Sevanto; Paul C Stoy; Nate G McDowell
Journal:  Oecologia       Date:  2021-10-17       Impact factor: 3.225

Review 6.  Interactions among Norway spruce, the bark beetle Ips typographus and its fungal symbionts in times of drought.

Authors:  Sigrid Netherer; Dineshkumar Kandasamy; Anna Jirosová; Blanka Kalinová; Martin Schebeck; Fredrik Schlyter
Journal:  J Pest Sci (2004)       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 5.742

7.  Pathophysiology and transcriptomic analysis of Picea koraiensis inoculated by bark beetle-vectored fungus Ophiostoma bicolor.

Authors:  Ya Liu; Qinzheng Zhou; Zheng Wang; Huiming Wang; Guiheng Zheng; Jiaping Zhao; Quan Lu
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2022-07-19       Impact factor: 6.627

8.  Single-generation effects on terpenoid defenses in lodgepole pine populations following mountain pine beetle infestation.

Authors:  Sharleen L Balogh; Dezene P W Huber; B Staffan Lindgren
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Factors governing outbreak dynamics in a forest intensively managed for mountain pine beetle.

Authors:  Mélodie Kunegel-Lion; Mark A Lewis
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 4.379

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.