| Literature DB >> 29503500 |
Finbarr G Horgan1, Ainara Peñalver Cruz2,3, Carmencita C Bernal2, Angelee Fame Ramal2, Maria Liberty P Almazan2, Andrew Wilby3.
Abstract
High resource availability can reduce anti-herbivore resistance (a plant's ability to defend against herbivores and reduce damage) in rice, Oryza sativa L, but may also increase tolerance (a plant's ability to withstand damage by, for example, compensatory growth). Through a series of greenhouse, screenhouse and field experiments, this study examines fitness (survival and development × reproduction) of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stål), on resistant (IR62) and susceptible (IR22) rice varieties and age-related rice tolerance to planthopper damage under varying resource (nitrogenous fertilizer) availability. Planthoppers reared on IR62 in the greenhouse had lower fitness than planthoppers on IR22. IR62 became increasingly resistant as plants aged. IR22 was generally more tolerant of planthopper damage, and tolerance increased in IR22, but declined in IR62, as the plants aged. Rice plants infested at pre-tillering stages (3-4 leaf stage) in the screenhouse had greater losses to root, shoot and grain yield per unit weight of planthopper than plants infested at tillering stages, particularly in IR22. These trends were mainly due to the impact of planthoppers during pre-tillering stages and the length of exposure to the planthoppers. High nitrogen compromised IR62 resistance, particularly in tillering plants in the greenhouse study; however, high nitrogen did not increase planthopper biomass-density on IR62 in greenhouse or field cages. Tolerance to damage in IR62 at mid-tillering stages declined under increasing levels of nitrogen, but nitrogen increased tolerance during late-tillering stages. Planthopper damage to IR22 in field cages was severe and hopperburn (plant death) occurred in 83% of IR22 plants under high nitrogen (60-150 kg N ha-1). In contrast, despite planthopper infestations, damage to IR62 was low in field-grown plants and productivity (tillers, roots, shoots and grain) increased in IR62 under increasing nitrogen. Our results indicate that, whereas nitrogenous fertilizer increases planthopper fitness on susceptible and resistant varieties, the net effects of high nitrogen on IR62 include decreased planthopper biomass-density (apparent in all experiments) and higher tolerance to damage during later growth stages (observed in the greenhouse, and during one of two seasons in field cages).Entities:
Keywords: Anti-feeding; Herbivory; Host plant resistance; Ontogenetics; Phloem-feeding; Plant vigour hypothesis
Year: 2018 PMID: 29503500 PMCID: PMC5777095 DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2017.12.008
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Field Crops Res ISSN: 0378-4290 Impact factor: 5.224
Functional categories of plant-herbivore interaction.a
| Functional category | Definition | Effects on herbivores | Effects on plant | Estimated in this study |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Susceptibility | Inability of a plant to deter or defend against damage from herbivores | No negative effects | Normally high damage | Comparison of damage (biomass loss) against resistant variety |
| Resistance | A plant trait that reduces potential damage from herbivores compared to susceptible plants | Relative decline in fitness through antixenotic or antibiotic effects | Relative decline in damage | Comparison of damage (biomass loss) against susceptible variety |
| Antixenosis | Plant traits (mechanisms) that deter herbivores from ovipositing or from initiating feeding | Relatively low oviposition and/or feeding preferences | Relative decline in damage | Not estimated here (requires choice bioassays) |
| Antibiosis | Plant traits (mechanisms) that adversely affect the survival, growth or reproductive output of herbivores | Relative decline in survival, biomass, development time, or fecundity | Relative decline in damage | Comparisons of oviposition, nymph survival, nymph biomass, development times, and feeding efficiency (honeydew) with susceptible variety |
| Tolerance | A plant's capacity to withstand herbivore damage and continue to grow and/or yield satisfactorily during and after herbivore attack | No negative effects | Maintains relatively high growth rates (biomass) or reproductive output (yield) per unit of herbivore biomass | Estimated as the relative decline in plant fitness per unit weight of planthopper across a gradient of environments |
For further details see Strauss and Agrawal (1999) and Smith (2005).
Comparative effects relative to a susceptible variety.
Fitness is a quantitative representation of reproductive success (genetic contribution to future generations through survival and development × reproductive output) in a given environment.
Observed during low levels of intraspecific competition between herbivores.
Results from greenhouse bioassays on the effects of rice variety, nitrogen level and plant age on Nilaparvata lugens fitness parameters.
| Variety | Nitrogen level (kg ha−1) | Plant age (DAS) | Xylem as a proportion of total honeydew | Nymph survival (%) | Nymph development (% adults) | Nymph biomass (mg plant−1) | Number of eggs per plant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IR22 | |||||||
| 0 | 15 | 0.16 (0.07) | 68.33 (12.24) | 100.00 (0.00) | 7.13 (1.77) | 89.33 (20.02) | |
| 0 | 30 | 0.01 (0.01) | 85.00 (5.00) | 100.00 (0.00) | 8.54 (0.80) | 140.67 (24.77) | |
| 0 | 45 | 0.34 (0.21) | 76.67 (7.15) | 100.00 (0.00) | 7.21 (1.02) | 176.75 (14.10) | |
| 60 | 15 | 0.17 (0.13) | 65.00 (15.44) | 100.00 (0.00) | 6.12 (1.81) | 152.67 (16.38) | |
| 60 | 30 | 0.01 (0.01) | 76.67 (16.06) | 100.00 (0.00) | 10.92 (2.61) | 161.00 (18.63) | |
| 60 | 45 | 0.06 (0.05) | 80.00 (6.83) | 100.00 (0.00) | 10.09 (0.79) | 144.20 (18.63) | |
| 150 | 15 | 0.22 (0.10) | 65.00 (9.57) | 100.00 (0.00) | 6.53 (1.52) | 123.80 (21.28) | |
| 150 | 30 | 0.04 (0.04) | 91.67 (5.43) | 100.00 (0.00) | 11.03 (0.86) | 179.00 (27.75) | |
| 150 | 45 | 0.18 (0.18) | 95.00 (3.42) | 100.00 (0.00) | 13.24 (0.55) | 145.00 (26.85) | |
| IR62 | |||||||
| 0 | 15 | 0.70 (0.18) | 88.33 (11.95) | 100.00 (0.00) | 6.44 (0.86) | 105.00 (17.38) | |
| 0 | 30 | 0.80 (0.20) | 83.33 (7.15) | 89.68 (6.55) | 4.79 (0.97) | 86.00 (25.81) | |
| 0 | 45 | 0.89 (0.11) | 15.00 (9.57) | 11.11 (11.11) | 0.24 (0.18) | 42.50 (9.92) | |
| 60 | 15 | 0.75 (0.16) | 78.33 (8.72) | 95.83 (4.17) | 5.90 (0.50) | 154.50 (19.50) | |
| 60 | 30 | 0.77 (0.15) | 36.67 (11.16) | 65.95 (17.21) | 2.08 (0.71) | 88.40 (20.51) | |
| 60 | 45 | 0.24 (0.19) | 26.67 (12.29) | 21.88 (12.88) | 0.67 (0.34) | 87.75 (22.80) | |
| 150 | 15 | 0.08 (0.08) | 83.33 (5.58) | 100.00 (0.00) | 7.65 (0.87) | 102.00 (30.00) | |
| 150 | 30 | 0.51 (0.21) | 86.67 (9.55) | 97.22 (2.78) | 4.20 (0.68) | 130.50 (32.40) | |
| 150 | 45 | 0.31 (0.13) | 56.67 (15.20) | 76.17 (12.96) | 3.27 (1.63) | 68.50 (9.25) | |
| Rank | arcsine | None | Rank | lg(sqrt) | |||
| F-variety (V) | 1 | 59.749 | 11.229 | 82.524 | 62.158 | ||
| F-nitrogen (N) | 2 | 2.468 ns | 5.103 | 38.240 | 4.746 | 6.592 | |
| F-age (A) | 2 | 1.264 ns | 5.611 | 10.846 | 1.396 ns | 5.356 | |
| F-V × N | 2 | 4.401 | 1.214 ns | 1.271 ns | 1.269 ns | ||
| F-V × A | 2 | 8.357 | 16.167 | 22.944 | 19.082 | ||
| F-N × A | 4 | 1.621 ns | 2.643 | 4.556 | 1.811 ns | 2.987 | |
| F-V × N × A | 4 | 1.569 ns | 0.786 ns | 0.651 ns | 3.834 | ||
| Error | 90 | ||||||
denominator df = 38.
ns = P > 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.01.
=P ≤ 0.001.
Fig. 1Biomass density of Nilaparvata lugens nymphs on susceptible (IR22) and resistant (IR62) rice plants. Rice plants were grown under three levels of nitrogen (0, 60 and 150 kg N ha−1) for 15, 30 or 45 days (corresponding to pre-tillering, early tillering and late tillering plant stages, respectively) before simultaneous infestation with planthoppers. Plants with 0 added nitrogen had low, residual nitrogen levels in the soil that were not determined during the bioassays. Standard errors are indicated (N = 6).
Fig. 2Changes (Δ) in root biomass (A,D), shoot biomass (B,C) and grain biomass (C,D) per mg of Nilaparvata lugens biomass on IR62 (A,B,C) and IR22 (D,E,F) under three nitrogen levels and infested with a constant density of planthoppers at 15, 30 and 45 DAS (corresponding to pre-tillering, early tillering and late tillering plant stages, respectively). Details of plant growth and yields in the experiment are available in Supplementary Tables S1 and S2. Standard errors are indicated (N = 6).
Fig. 3Total planthopper biomass in infested field cages with IR22 (open bars) and IR62 (shaded bars) rice plants during (A) the 2011 wet season and (B) the 2012 dry season. Changes (Δ) in plant tiller number and biomass (g-plant mg-planthopper−1) resulting from planthopper infestations were estimated for IR62 plants in 2011 (C,E,G,I) and 2012 (D,F,H,J). Changes in tiller number (C,D), shoot biomass (E,F), root biomass (G,H) and grain yield (I,J) under three levels of nitrogen fertilizer are presented. Standard errors are indicated (N = 6).
Rice growth parameters at time of harvest (including plants that had died) from field exposures conducted during the 2011 wet season. Planthopper biomass density is indicated from field cages infested with laboratory reared Nilaparvata lugens (infested) and cages colonized by wild N. lugens (control).
| Treatment (infestation and variety) | Nitrogen level (kg ha−1) | Planthopper biomass density (mg g-plant−1) | Number of tillers | Shoot biomass (g dry weight) | Root biomass (g dry weight) | Percentage filled grain | Biomass of filled grain (g dry weight) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | |||||||
| IR22 | 0 | 0.07 (0.02) | 18.00 (1.86) | 17.78 (2.68) | 5.69 (1.24) | 75.36 (15.14) | 23.37 (5.43) |
| 60 | 0.13 (0.08) | 24.33 (1.58) | 21.83 (5.03) | 6.30 (1.66) | 80.61 (4.04) | 22.53 (2.70) | |
| 150 | 0.13 (0.09) | 27.83 (3.20) | 36.58 (9.28) | 12.05 (3.72) | 76.70 (3.70) | 30.30 (5.64) | |
| IR62 | 0 | 0.01 (0.01) | 21.50 (2.31) | 24.94 (2.91) | 6.00 (0.83) | 78.63 (2.42) | 32.84 (5.07) |
| 60 | 0.04 (0.03) | 22.50 (2.83) | 28.09 (6.48) | 5.92 (1.51) | 81.64 (2.31) | 31.35 (4.46) | |
| 150 | 0.02 (0.01) | 23.33 (4.02) | 43.04 (9.13) | 12.95 (2.94) | 77.51 (8.34) | 31.85 (6.46) | |
| Infested | |||||||
| IR22 | 0 | 6.86 (1.95) | 7.00 (3.27) | 12.00 (2.32) | 2.72 (0.64) | 52.66 (16.36) | 3.67 (2.72) |
| 60 | 5.47 (1.29) | 3.83 (3.83) | 14.35 (4.27) | 3.13 (0.80) | 57.76 (0.00) | 1.24 (1.24) | |
| 150 | 7.34 (2.54) | 5.67 (4.27) | 22.40 (5.07) | 5.83 (0.87) | 37.32 (21.36) | 2.10 (1.94) | |
| IR62 | 0 | 0.27 (0.26) | 15.50 (1.52) | 23.01 (5.33) | 4.96 (0.74) | 84.59 (2.00) | 22.81 (3.90) |
| 60 | 1.18 (1.14) | 27.83 (4.56) | 19.83 (3.22) | 6.00 (1.10) | 82.01 (3.44) | 26.13 (7.04) | |
| 150 | 0.06 (0.03) | 35.00 (4.09) | 38.82 (4.57) | 9.03 (2.25) | 82.27 (1.22) | 50.44 (6.86) | |
| F-nitrogen (N) | 0.006 ns | 0.893 ns | 2.938 ns | 0.383 ns | 0.245 ns | 0.667 ns | |
| (Linear contrast) | 0.031 ns | 4.910 | 16.160 | 2.106 | 1.030 ns | 3.668 | |
| F-control/infested (I) | 18.625 | 7.277 | 4.844 | 6.754 | 3.796 ns | 8.103 | |
| F-variety (V) | 14.653 | 13.915 | 5.314 | 5.319 | 8.021 | 23.517 | |
| F-N × V | 0.319 ns | 0.550 ns | 0.169 ns | 0.454 ns | 0.482 ns | 0.692 ns | |
| F-N × I | 0.021 ns | 0.135 ns | 0.296 ns | 0.675 ns | 0.303 ns | 0.655 ns | |
| F-V × I | 13.808 | 16.716 | 0.583 ns | 5.181 | 6.520 | 9.828 | |
| F-N × V × I | 0.313 ns | 2.657 ns | 0.103 ns | 0.952 ns | 0.488 ns | 2.206 ns | |
Nominator df = 2 (nitrogen – main plot), 1 (infested/control), 1 (variety), 2 (N × V), 2 (N × I), 1 (V × I), 2 (N × V × I); denominator df = 71 (split–split plot design).
Plants with 0 added nitrogen had low residual, background nitrogen levels in the soil. These were not determined during the experiment.
Numbers in parentheses are standard errors (N = 6).
ns = P > 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.01.
=P ≤ 0.001.
Rice growth parameters at time of harvest (including plants that had died) from field exposures conducted during the 2012 dry season. Planthopper biomass density is indicated from field cages infested with laboratory reared Nilaparvata lugens (infested) and cages colonized by wild N. lugens (control).
| Treatment (infestation and variety) | Nitrogen level (kg ha−1) | Planthopper biomass density (mg g-plant−1) | Number of tillers | Shoot biomass (g dry weight) | Root biomass (g dry weight) | Percentage filled grain | Biomass of filled grain (g dry weight) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control | |||||||
| IR22 | 0 | 0.17 (0.05) | 12.50 (0.89) | 20.87 (3.80) | 5.20 (1.42) | 88.80 (2.03) | 13.29 (2.33) |
| 60 | 0.23 (0.22) | 19.67 (1.74) | 25.65 (3.28) | 11.36 (2.63) | 82.28 (3.21) | 23.42 (3.05) | |
| 150 | 0.30 (0.26) | 20.00 (1.46) | 36.57 (5.08) | 13.62 (3.22) | 70.63 (8.37) | 19.80 (3.54) | |
| IR62 | 0 | 0.09 (0.09) | 12.50 (1.26) | 17.65 (1.96) | 4.78 (0.96) | 75.72 (4.07) | 14.04 (1.66) |
| 60 | 0.20 (0.11) | 19.50 (1.06) | 26.46 (2.74) | 8.70 (1.52) | 78.79 (1.27) | 19.65 (3.32) | |
| 150 | 0.11 (0.09) | 26.00 (0.06) | 34.12 (4.60) | 15.45 (3.31) | 74.90 (5.45) | 31.20 (5.36) | |
| Infested | |||||||
| IR22 | 0 | 174.12 (47.88) | 8.17 (1.74) | 16.11 (2.23) | 2.53 (0.69) | 25.23 (17.32) | 1.47 (1.15) |
| 60 | 140.56 (33.60) | 7.67 (3.52) | 24.17 (4.68) | 1.70 (0.79) | 28.61 (14.35) | 5.21 (2.50) | |
| 150 | 139.59 (32.94) | 9.50 (4.30) | 31.26 (3.09) | 6.15 (3.32) | 27.41 (9.81) | 2.92 (1.41) | |
| IR62 | 0 | 52.17 (19.52) | 16.67 (1.96) | 14.94 (1.99) | 7.04 (1.36) | 68.86 (5.94) | 15.64 (3.12) |
| 60 | 19.68 (12.57) | 22.00 (1.41) | 27.77 (2.76) | 8.36 (1.19) | 75.64 (4.71) | 21.74 (1.68) | |
| 150 | 31.04 (11.65) | 27.33 (1.82) | 29.00 (4.45) | 14.20 (3.33) | 72.12 (4.97) | 30.74 (4.55) | |
| F-nitrogen (N) | 0.126 ns | 2.768 ns | 4.037 | 2.189 ns | 0.199 ns | 2.232 ns | |
| (Linear contrast) | 0.694 ns | 15.223 | 12.281 | 0.915 ns | 15.223 | 22.223 | |
| F-control/infested (I) | 31.102 | 3.579 ns | 1.392 ns | 3.496 ns | 41.896 | 10.273 | |
| F-variety (V) | 12.441 | 21.816 | 0.093 ns | 3.081 ns | 21.364 | 24.103 | |
| F-N × V | 0.016 ns | 1.819 ns | 0.343 ns | 0.325 ns | 0.362 ns | 3.487 | |
| F-N × I | 0.383 ns | 0.849 ns | 0.357 ns | 0.776 ns | 0.616 ns | 0.232 ns | |
| F-V × I | 12.397 | 12.242 | 0.107 ns | 3.995 ns | 30.570 | 13.539 | |
| F-N × V × I | 0.017 ns | 0.274 ns | 0.023 ns | 0.144 ns | 0.257 ns | 0.189 ns | |
Nominator df = 2 (nitrogen − main plot), 1 (infested/control), 1 (variety), 2 (N × V), 2 (N × I), 1 (V × I), 2 (N × V × I); denominator df = 71 (split–split plot design).
Plants with 0 added nitrogen had low residual, background nitrogen levels in the soil. These were not determined during the experiment.
Numbers in parentheses are standard errors (N = 6).
ns = P > 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.05.
=P ≤ 0.01.
=P ≤ 0.001.