Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T06:45:32.906Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pheromone communication channels in tortricid moths: lower specificity of alcohol vs. acetate geometric isomer blends

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

P. Witzgall ,
P. Trematerra ,
I. Liblikas ,
M. Bengtsson  and
C.R. Unelius
P. Witzgall*
Affiliation:
Chemical Ecology Group, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 230 53Alnarp, Sweden
P. Trematerra
Affiliation:
Department of Animal, Plant and Environmental Science, University of Molise, 86 100Campobasso, Italy
I. Liblikas
Affiliation:
School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences, University of Kalmar, 391 82Kalmar, Sweden
M. Bengtsson
Affiliation:
Chemical Ecology Group, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 230 53Alnarp, Sweden
C.R. Unelius
Affiliation:
School of Pure and Applied Natural Sciences, University of Kalmar, 391 82Kalmar, Sweden
*
*Author for correspondence Fax: +46-40-461991 E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Discrimination of conspecific and heterospecific signals is a key element in the evolution of specific mate recognition systems. Lepidopteran pheromone signals are typically composed of several compounds that synergize attraction of conspecific and inhibit attraction of heterospecific males. Blends convey specificity, but not their single components, that are typically shared by several species. Many sex pheromones are blends of geometric or positional isomers of straight-chain acetates, while species-specific blends of analogous alcohols have not been described. We have, therefore, studied the attraction of tortricid moths to the geometric isomers (E,E)-, (E,Z)-, (Z,E)- and (Z,Z)-8,10-dodecadien-1-ol. Only one species responding to these alcohols seemed to be attracted to a blend of two isomers, while most species are attracted to only one alcohol isomer. Lack of a pronounced synergist or antagonist effect of the other geometric isomers explains the lack of specific attraction to isomer blends and reduces accordingly the number of specific communication signals composed of these alcohols. In comparison, many more species respond to the analogous (E,E)-, (E,Z)-, (Z,E)- and (Z,Z)-8,10-dodecadienyl acetates and their binary blends. The acetate isomers all play a behavioural role, either as attractants, attraction synergists or antagonists, and thus promote specific communication with acetate blends. Male moths seem to discriminate the acetate isomers with greater precision than the analogous alcohols. It is proposed that discrimination is facilitated by steric differences between the four acetate isomers, as compared to the more uniform steric properties of the alcohols.

Keywords

sex pheromonesynergistantagonistmate recognitionreproductive isolationTortricidaeLepidoptera
Type
Research Paper
Information
Bulletin of Entomological Research , Volume 100 , Issue 2 , April 2010 , pp. 225 - 230
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arn, H., Tóth, M. & Priesner, E. (1992) List of Sex Pheromones of Lepidoptera and Related Attractants. 123 pp. Montfavet, France, International Organization for Biological and Integrated Control.Google Scholar
Bäckman, A.-C., Anderson, P., Bengtsson, M., Löfqvist, J., Unelius, C.R. & Witzgall, P. (2000) Antennal response of codling moth males, Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), to the geometric isomers of codlemone and codlemone acetate. Journal of Comparative Physiology A 186, 513–519.Google Scholar
Baeckström, P., Stridh, K., Li, L. & Norin, T. (1987) Claisen rearrangements with mesityl oxide dimethyl ketal. Synthesis of ipsdienone, E- and Z-ocimenone, 2,6-dimethyl-2,7-octadien-4-one and 2,6-dimethyl-2,7-octadien-4-ol. Acta Chemica Scandinaviae B 41, 442–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, T.C. (2002) Mechanism for saltational shifts in pheromone communication systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 99, 13368–13370.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bengtsson, B.O. & Löfstedt, C. (2007) Direct and indirect selection in moth pheromone evolution: population genetical simulations of asymmetric sexual interactions. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 90, 117–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bradley, J.D., Tremewan, W.G. & Smith, A. (1979) British Tortricoid Moths. Tortricidae: Olethreutinae. London, UK, The Ray Society.Google Scholar
Cardé, R.T. (2007) Using pheromones to disrupt mating of moth pests. pp. 122–169 in Kogan, M. & Jepson, P. (Eds) Perspectives in Ecological Theory and Integrated Pest Management. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cardé, R.T. & Haynes, K.F. (2004) Structure of the pheromone communication channel in moths. pp. 283–332 in Cardé, R.T. & Millar, J.G. (Eds) Advances in Insect Chemical Ecology. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chisholm, M.D., Reed, D.W., Underhill, E.W., Palaniswamy, P. & Wong, J.W. (1985) Attraction of tortricid moths of subfamily Olethreuthinae to field traps baited with dodecadienes. Journal of Chemical Ecology 11, 217–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Domingue, M.J., Musto, C.J., Linn, C.E., Roelofs, W.L. & Baker, T.C. (2007) Evidence of olfactory antagonistic imposition as a facilitator of evolutionary shifts in pheromone blend usage in Ostrinia spp. (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Journal of Insect Physiology 53, 488–496.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
El-Sayed, A.M. (2009) The Pherobase: database of insect pheromones and semiochemicals. http://www.pherobase.com.Google Scholar
El-Sayed, A., Unelius, R.C., Liblikas, I., Löfqvist, J., Bengtsson, M. & Witzgall, P. (1998) Effect of codlemone isomers on codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) male attraction. Environmental Entomology 27, 1250–1254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frérot, B., Priesner, E. & Gallois, M. (1979) A sex attractant for the green budworm moth, Hedya nubiferana. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung 34C, 1248–1252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greenfield, M.D. & Karandinos, M.G. (1979) Resource partitioning of the sex communication channel in clearwing moths (Lepidoptera: Sesiidae) of Wisconsin. Ecological Monographs 49, 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustavsson, A.-L., Tuvesson, M., Larsson, M.C., Wenqi, W., Hansson, B.S. & Liljefors, T. (1997) Bioisosteric approach to elucidation of binding of the acetate group of a moth sex pheromone component to its receptor. Journal of Chemical Ecology 23, 2755–2776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karpati, Z., Dekker, T. & Hansson, B.S. (2008) Reversed functional topology in the antennal lobe of the male European corn borer. Journal of Experimental Biology 211, 2841–2848.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Linn, C.E. & Roelofs, W.L. (1983) Effect of varying proportions of the alcohol component on sex pheromone blend discrimination in male oriental fruit moths. Physiological Entomology 8, 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linn, C.E. & Roelofs, W.L. (1995) Pheromone communication in moths and its role in the speciation process. pp. 263–300 in Lambert, D.M. & Spencer, H. (Eds) Speciation and the Recognition Concept: Theory and Application. Baltimore, MD, USA, Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Löfstedt, C. (1993) Moth pheromone genetics and evolution. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society London, Series B 340, 167–177.Google Scholar
Löfstedt, C. & Van der Pers, J.N.C. (1985) Sex pheromones and reproductive isolation in 4 European small ermine moths (Lepidoptera, Yponomeutidae). Journal of Chemical Ecology 11, 649–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norinder, U., Gustavsson, A.-L. & Liljefors, T. (1997) A 3D-Qsar study of analogs of (Z)-5-decenyl acetate, a pheromone component of the turnip moth, Agrotis segetum. Journal of Chemical Ecology 23, 2917–2934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phelan, P.L. (1992) Evolution of sex pheromones and the role of asymmetric tracking. pp. 265–314 in Roitberg, B.D. & Isman, M.B. (Eds) Insect Chemical Ecology: An Evolutionary Approach. New York, NY, USA, Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Priesner, E. (1986) Correlating sensory and behavioural responses in multichemical pheromone systems of Lepidoptera. pp. 225–233 in Payne, T.L., Birch, M. & Kennedy, C. (Eds) Mechanisms in Insect Olfaction. Oxford, UK, Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Roelofs, W.L. & Rooney, A.P. (2003) Molecular genetics and evolution of pheromone biosynthesis in Lepidoptera. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 100, 9179–9184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, W.L., Liu, W., Hao, G., Jiao, H., Rooney, A.P. & Linn, C.E. (2002) Evolution of moth sex pheromones via ancestral genes. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 99, 13621–13626.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suckling, D.M., Hill, R.L., Gourlay, A.H. & Witzgall, P. (1999) Sex attractant-based monitoring of a biological control agent of gorse. Biocontrol Science and Technology 9, 99–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witzgall, P., Bengtsson, M., Unelius, C.R. & Löfqvist, J. (1993) Attraction of pea moth Cydia nigricana F. (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to female sex pheromone (E,E)-8,10-dodecadien-1-yl acetate, is inhibited by geometric isomers E,Z, Z,E and Z,Z. Journal of Chemical Ecology 19, 1917–1928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witzgall, P., Chambon, J.-P., Bengtsson, M., Unelius, C.R., Appelgren, M., Makranczy, G., Muraleedharan, N., Reed, D.W., Hellrigl, K., Buser, H.-R., Hallberg, E., Bergström, G., Tóth, M., Löfstedt, C. & Löfqvist, J. (1996) Sex pheromones and attractants in the Eucosmini and Grapholitini (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae). Chemoecology 7, 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witzgall, P., Stelinski, L., Gut, L. & Thomson, D. (2008) Codling moth management and chemical ecology. Annual Review of Entomology 53, 503–522.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xue, B., Rooney, A.P., Kajikawa, M., Okada, N. & Roelofs, W.L. (2007) Novel sex pheromone desaturases in the genomes of corn borers generated through gene duplication and retroposon fusion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA 104, 4467–4472.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed