| Literature DB >> 29681864 |
Fengqi Li1, Ningning Fu1, Du Li1, Hetang Chang2, Cheng Qu1, Ran Wang1, Yihua Xu1, Chen Luo1.
Abstract
The spread of the exotic insect pest sycamore lace bug Corythucha ciliata (Say) is increasing worldwide. The identification of behaviorally active compounds is crucial for reducing the current distribution of this pest. In this study, we identified and documented the expression profiles of genes encoding chemosensory proteins (CSPs) in the sycamore lace bug to identify CSPs that bind to the alarm pheromone geraniol. One CSP (CcilCSP2) that was highly expressed in nymph antennae was found to bind geraniol with high affinity. This finding was confirmed by fluorescence competitive binding assays. We further discovered one candidate chemical, phenyl benzoate, that bound to CcilCSP2 with even higher affinity than geraniol. Behavioral assays revealed that phenyl benzoate, similar to geraniol, significantly repelled sycamore lace bug nymphs but had no activity toward adults. This study has revealed a novel repellent compound involved in behavioral regulation. And, our findings will be beneficial for understanding the olfactory recognition mechanism of sycamore lace bug and developing a push-pull system to manage this pest in the future.Entities:
Keywords: alarm pheromone; behavioral study; chemosensory proteins; geraniol; sycamore lace bug
Year: 2018 PMID: 29681864 PMCID: PMC5897531 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00354
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
The behavioral response of sycamore lace bug nymphs to geraniol and phenyl benzoate in petri dish tests.
| Geraniol vs. Hexane | 5.444 | 10.965 | 13.928 |
| Phenyl benzoate vs. Hexane | 0.615 | 14.629 | 5.818 |
| Geraniol vs. Phenyl benzoate | 0.214 | 0.267 | 0.083 |
| Naphthalene vs. Hexane | 0.243 | 1.190 | 0.333 |
| p-Cymene vs. Hexane | 0.083 | 0.026 | 0.048 |
| Thymol vs. Hexane | 0.400 | 0.111 | 0.125 |
| Hexane vs. Blank | 0.020 | 0.160 | 0.169 |
Chi-square value.
P < 0.05,
P < 0.01.
Figure 1Relative expression levels of candidate CSP genes in the antennae of sycamore lace bugs. AF, adult female; AM, adult male. Transcription levels of the CcilCSP2 gene were normalized by GAPDH and the 18S rRNA gene. Data are presented as the mean (± SD), and different letters indicate significant differences in transcript levels (p < 0.05, LSD test).
Figure 2The transcript levels of CcilCSP2 in different nymph tissues. Transcription levels of the CcilCSP2 gene were normalized by GAPDH and the 18S rRNA genes. Transcript levels are shown relative to those in the leg. Data are presented as the mean (± SD), and different letters indicate significant differences in transcript levels (p < 0.05, LSD test).
Candidate sycamore lace bug chemosensory protein unigenes.
| c27606_g1 | AGD80088.1 | 293 | 6.43E−29 | Chemosensory protein 8 ( | 123 | |
| c29803_g1 | ADG96052.1 | 142 | 6E−39 | Putative chemosensory binding protein ( | 131 | |
| c61187_g1 | AGD80088.1 | 315 | 3.79E−34 | Chemosensory protein 8 ( | 128 | |
| CcilCSP2 (c32563_g2) | ANA10244.1 | 187 | 4E−58 | Chemosensory protein 2 ( | 111 | |
| c24353_g1 | AEP95757.1 | 342 | 1.76E−36 | Chemosensory protein 3 ( | 130 | |
| c31796_g1 | ACJ64054.1 | 349 | 8.87E−38 | Putative chemosensory protein CSP8 ( | 128 | |
| c18915_g1 | AHX37222.1 | 195 | 7.1E−16 | Chemosensory protein 8 ( | 133 | |
| c17400_g1 | ACZ58022.1 | 420 | 7.9E−50 | Chemosensory protein 4 ( | 131 | |
| c26326_g1 | AEP95757.1 | 400 | 3.66E−46 | Chemosensory protein 3 ( | 129 | |
| c32323_g1 | ACZ58022.1 | 264 | 9.36E−26 | Chemosensory protein 4 ( | 134 | |
| c25739_g1 | AEP95755.1 | 291 | 4.44E−30 | Chemosensory protein 1 ( | 130 | |
| CcilCSP1 (c39058_g2) | AEP95755.1 | 726 | 0.0 | Chemosensory protein 1 ( | 130 | |
| c22873_g1 | ACZ58022.1 | 308 | 1.01E−32 | Chemosensory protein 4 ( | 125 | |
| c15789_g1 | AGD80084.1 | 395 | 2.04E−45 | Chemosensory protein 4 ( | 131 | |
| c17680_g1 | AGZ04936.1 | 112 | 2.29E−26 | Chemosensory protein 8 ( | 148 |
Figure 3Phylogenetic tree of CcilCSP2 and related CSPs from other insects. Only bootstrap values > 50% are shown. The scale bar indicates the evolutionary distances.
CcilCSP2 model quality estimations.
| CcilCSP2 | −0.09 | −0.46 | −0.39 | 82.42% | 60.241 | −4.96 |
Binding affinities of six compounds for CcilCSP2 estimated by AutoDock 4.2.
| Geraniol | 106-24-1 | −5.33 | 122.98 |
| Naphthalene | 91-20-3 | −5.68 | 68.86 |
| Thymol | 89-83-8 | −5.36 | 117.04 |
| p-Cymene | 99-87-6 | −5.82 | 54.53 |
| Phenyl benzoate | 93-99-2 | −6.42 | 19.75 |
Figure 4Molecular docking of CcilCSP2 with geraniol (A) and phenyl benzoate (B).
Figure 5Binding of N-phenyl-1-naphthylamine (1-NPN) and selected ligands to CcilCSP2. (A) Affinity of CcilCSP2 for 1-NPN. (a), Binding curve. (b), Scatchard plot. (B) Competitive binding assays.
The repellency rate of sycamore lace bug nymphs to geraniol and phenyl benzoate in plant leaf tests.
| 2 min | 8.42% | 25% | 50% | 72.41% |
| 4 min | 8.68% | 25% | 57.14% | 79.41% |
| 2 min | 8.65% | 12% | 50% | 63.16% |
| 4 min | 8.75% | 13% | 57.14% | 73.68% |
P < 0.05.