| Literature DB >> 31261896 |
Nurhayat Tabanca1, Marco Masi2, Nancy D Epsky3, Paola Nocera2, Alessio Cimmino2, Paul E Kendra3, Jerome Niogret4, Antonio Evidente5.
Abstract
Ceratitis capitata, the Mediterranean fruit fly, is one of the most serious agricultural pests worldwide responsible for significant reduction in fruit and vegetable yields. Eradication is expensive and often not feasible. Current control methods include the application of conventional insecticides, leading to pesticide resistance and unwanted environmental effects. The aim of this study was to identify potential new attractants for incorporation into more environmentally sound management programs for C. capitata. In initial binary choice bioassays against control, a series of naturally occurring plant and fungal aromatic compounds and their related analogs were screened, identifying phenyllactic acid (7), estragole (24), o-eugenol (21), and 2-allylphenol (23) as promising attractants for male C. capitata. Subsequent binary choice tests evaluated five semisynthetic derivatives prepared from 2-allylphenol, but none of these were as attractive as 2-allylphenol. In binary choice bioassays with the four most attractive compounds, males were more attracted to o-eugenol (21) than to estragole (24), 2-allylphenol (23), or phenyllactic acid (7). In addition, electroantennography (EAG) was used to quantify antennal olfactory responses to the individual compounds (1-29), and the strongest EAG responses were elicited by 1-allyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzene (11), estragole (24), 4-allyltoluene (14), trans-anethole (9), o-eugenol (21), and 2-allylphenol (23). The compounds evaluated in the current investigation provide insight into chemical structure-function relationships and help direct future efforts in the development of improved attractants for the detection and control of invasive C. capitata.Entities:
Keywords: attractants; electroantennography; estragole; invasive species; kairomone; o-eugenol; phenyllactic acid
Year: 2019 PMID: 31261896 PMCID: PMC6651369 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24132409
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1The structures of compounds 1–29.
Log P values and number (mean ± std dev) of sterile male C. capitata attracted to compounds 1–29 presented in binary choice bioassays against control (Experiment 1).
| Compound | Log | Number |
|---|---|---|
| phenyllactic acid ( | 1.16 | 32.6 ± 12.4 * |
| estragole (methyl chavicol, 4-allylanisole) ( | 2.96 | 21.0 ± 9.0 * |
| 2-allyl-6-methoxyphenol ( | 2.57 | 20.2 ± 4.3 * |
| 2-allylphenol ( | 2.7 | 16.0 ± 3.8 * |
| 2-allylphenyl acetate ( | 2.67 | 10.0 ± 8.7 |
| 4-allyltoluene ( | 3.57 | 8.8 ± 8.3 |
| 2.91 | 6.0 ± 2.3 * | |
| 2-allylphenyl 4-bromobenzoate ( | 5.4 | 5.0 ± 2.3 * |
| 1-allyl-4-(trifluoromethyl)benzene ( | 4.01 | 3.2 ± 1.3 * |
| 2-methoxy 4-propylphenol ( | 2.84 | 3.0 ± 3.3 |
| 2-allylphenyl methanesulfonate ( | 1.99 | 3.0 ± 0.7 |
| 4-hydroxybenzaldehyde ( | 1.39 | 2.8 ± 2.6 |
| 2-allylphenyl 5-azidopentanoate ( | 3.65 | 2.6 ± 1.3 |
| 1-allylbenzene ( | 3.24 | 2.2 ± 1.1 |
| 4-allylphenol (chavicol) ( | 2.7 | 2.2 ± 1.1 |
| tyrosol ( | 1.35 | 2.0 ± 1.6 |
| resorcinol ( | 1.26 | 2.0 ± 2.5 |
| 4-methylcatechol ( | 1.74 | 1.6 ± 2.1 |
| 2-allyl-4,5-dimethoxyphenol ( | 2.44 | 1.6 ± 0.5 * |
| allylbenzene ( | 3.09 | 1.4 ± 0.9 |
| 4-allyl-1,2-dimethoxybenzene (= methyl eugenol) ( | 2.83 | 1.4 ± 0.5 |
| 3-hydroxy acetophenone ( | 0.96 | 1.2 ± 1.3 |
| 4-hydroxy-3-methoxymandelic acid ( | 0.36 | 1.2 ± 1.3 |
| 2-allylanisole ( | 2.96 | 1.2 ± 0.8 |
| 4-allyl-2,6-trimethoxybenzene ( | 2.71 | 1.0 ± 0.7 |
| eugenol (4-allyl-2-methoxyphenol) ( | 2.52 | 0.8 ± 0.8 |
| piceol ( | 0.96 | 0.6 ± 0.9 |
| 4-allyl-2,6-dimethoxyphenol ( | 2.44 | 0.6 ± 0.9 |
| acetovanillone ( | 0.83 | 0.4 ± 0.5 |
*Number of flies (n = 5 replicates, 50 flies per replicate) on treated paper was greater than number on solvent control (paired t-test, p < 0.05). as detailed in the Material and Methods section.
Number (mean ± std dev) of male C. capitata attracted to each choice in pairwise comparisons of the top four compounds in Experiment 2 for 10 replicate tests with 50 flies per replicate.
| Compounds | Number Responding to Each Compound in Bioassay | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 21 | 23 | 24 |
| df |
| |
| 2.1 ± 2.3 | 17.3 ± 4.4 | 10.75 | 16.6 | <0.0001 | |||
| 3.2 ± 5.7 | 14.2 ± 4.3 | 5.3 | 22 | <0.0001 | |||
| 2.4 ± 2.0 | 16.1 ± 5.6 | 7.97 | 13.7 | < 0.0001 | |||
| 17.8 ± 6.0 | 7.8 ± 2.8 | 4.54 | 15.6 | 0.0001 | |||
| 17.1 ± 5.7 | 7.8 ± 5.4 | 4.14 | 22 | 0.0004 | |||
| 10.3 ± 3.2 | 10.4 ± 4.9 | 0.05 | 22 | 0.9809 | |||
Figure 2Mean (± SE) electroantennogram (EAG) responses of male C. capitata to 1 mL doses of saturated vapor from compounds 1–29 (neat material). Analyses were conducted using four groupings of randomly chosen samples; responses were measured from 10 replicate males per group. All EAG responses expressed as normalized percentages relative to the standard reference sample (tea tree essential oil, 1 mL saturated vapor). Black bars indicate compounds found attractive in short-range bioassays; gray bars indicate non-attractive compounds. Within each group comparison, bars topped with the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey mean separation, p < 0.05).