Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T04:40:29.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semiochemical profile of four aphidophagous Indian Coccinellidae (Coleoptera)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 August 2015

Rojalin Pattanayak ,
Geetanjali Mishra ,
Chandan Singh Chanotiya ,
Prasant Kumar Rout ,
Chandra Sekhar Mohanty  and
Omkar
Rojalin Pattanayak
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Lucknow, Lucknow 226007, Uttar Pradesh, India
Geetanjali Mishra
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Lucknow, Lucknow 226007, Uttar Pradesh, India
Chandan Singh Chanotiya
Affiliation:
Chemical Science Division, CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, 226015, Uttar Pradesh, India
Prasant Kumar Rout
Affiliation:
Chemical Science Division, CSIR-Central Institute of Medicinal and Aromatic Plants, Lucknow, 226015, Uttar Pradesh, India
Chandra Sekhar Mohanty
Affiliation:
Plant Molecular Biology and Genetic Engineering Division, National Botanical Research Institute, Lucknow 226001, Uttar Pradesh, India
Omkar*
Affiliation:
Department of Zoology, University of Lucknow, Lucknow 226007, Uttar Pradesh, India
*
1 Corresponding author (e-mail: [email protected]).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The emitted aliphatic hydrocarbon profile of four Indian Coccinellidae (Coleoptera), Coccinella septempunctata (Linnaeus) (C7), Coccinella transversalis Fabricius (Ct), Menochilus sexmaculatus (Fabricius) (Ms), and Propylea dissecta (Mulsant) (Pd) has been investigated by simple solvent-less headspace solid-phase microextraction (HS-SPME) technique coupled with gas chromatography and mass spectroscopy (GC-MS). Identified volatile and non-volatile compounds were confirmed by running corresponding standards and comparing with the National Institute of Standards and Technology library. Among the 56 identified aliphatic hydrocarbons, saturated aliphatic hydrocarbons were more in number than unsaturated ones. Among saturated hydrocarbons, methyl branched hydrocarbons were more in number in C7 and Ct than Ms and Pd. Menochilus sexmaculatus and Pd had higher percentages of unsaturated hydrocarbons than C7 and Ct. Among branched chain-hydrocarbons, mono-methylated saturated hydrocarbons were more in number than dimethylated saturated hydrocarbons. Further analysis of the semiochemical profile revealed a closeness between C7 and Ct, and between Ms and Pd. Quantitative analysis revealed that straight chain hydrocarbons form separate clusters to branched chain methylated hydrocarbons. This is the first attempt to identify the semiochemical profile of some Indian coccinellids using the headspace solid phase micro-extraction technique coupled with the gas chromatography-mass spectrometry technique. This report will be helpful for various chemotaxonomic studies of the species in the future.

Type
Biodiversity & Evolution
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 148 , Issue 2 , April 2016 , pp. 171 - 186
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2015 

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.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Véronique Martel

References

Adams, R.P. 1995. Identification of essential oil components by gas chromatography mass spectroscopy. Allured Publishing Corporation, Carol Stream, Illinois, United States of America.Google Scholar
Al Abassi, S., Birkett, M.A., Pettersson, J., Pickett, J.A., and Woodcock, C.M. 1998. Ladybird beetle odour identified and found to be responsible for attraction between adults. Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, 54: 876–879.Google Scholar
Arthur, C.L. and Pawliszyn, J. 1990. Solid phase microextraction with thermal desorption using fused silica optical fibres. Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 62: 2145–2148.Google Scholar
Augusto, F. and Valente, A.L.P. 2002. Applications of solid-phase microextraction to chemical analysis of live biological samples. Trends in Analytical Chemistry, 21: 428–438.Google Scholar
Blomquist, G.J. 2010. Structure and analysis of insect hydrocarbons. In Insect hydrocarbons: biology, biochemistry and chemical ecology. Edited by G.J. Blomquist and A.G. Bagenres. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Pp. 19–34.Google Scholar
Blount, J.D., Rowland, H.M., Drijfhout, F.P., Endler, J.A., Inger, R., Sloggett, J.J., et al. 2012. How the ladybird got its spots: effects of resource limitation on the honesty of aposematic signals. Functional Ecology, 26: 334–342.Google Scholar
Blum, M.S. 1996. Semiochemical parsimony in the Arthropoda. Annual Review of Entomology, 41: 353–374.Google Scholar
Braga, M.V., Pinto, Z.T., de Carvalho Queiroz, M.M., Matsumoto, N., and Blomquist, G.J. 2013. Cuticular hydrocarbons as a tool for the identification of insect species: puparial cases from Sarcophagidae. Acta Tropica, 128: 479–485.Google Scholar
Brown, A.E., Riddick, E.W., Aldrich, J.R., and Holmes, W.E. 2006. Identification of (−)-β-caryophyllene a gender-specific terpene produced by the multicolored Asian ladybeetle. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 32: 2489–2499.Google Scholar
Burman, J., Bertolo, E., Capelo, J.L., and Ponsonby, D. 2010. Preliminary results on the analysis of volatile and non-volatile pheromones in Chilocorus nigritus by GC/MS. Electronic Journal of Environmental Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 9: 1274–1282.Google Scholar
Chapman, R.F. 1998. The insects: structure and function. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Cuvillier-Hot, V., Cobb, M., Malosse, C., and Peeters, C. 2001. Sex, age and ovarian activity affect cuticular hydrocarbons in Diacamma ceylonense, a queenless ant. Journal of Insect Physiology, 47: 485–493.Google Scholar
Dillwith, J.W., Adams, T.S., and Blomquist, G.J. 1983. Correlation of housefly sex-pheromone production with ovarian development. Journal of Insect Physiology, 29: 377–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durieux, D., Fischer, C., Brostaux, Y., Sloggett, J.J., Denebourg, J.L., Vandereycken, A., et al. 2012. Role of long-chain hydrocarbons in the aggregation behaviour of Harmonia axyridis (Pallas) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Journal of Insect Physiology, 58: 801–807.Google Scholar
Gefen, E., Talal, S., Brendzel, O., Dror, A., and Fishman, A. 2015. Variation in quantity and composition of cuticular hydrocarbons in the scorpion Buthus occitanus (Buthidae) in response to acute exposure to dessication stress. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: Molecular and Integrative Physiology, 182: 58–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Geiselhardt, S.F., Geiselhardt, S., and Peschke, K. 2011. Congruence of epicuticular hydrocarbons and tarsal secretions as a principle in beetles. Chemoecology, 21: 181–186.Google Scholar
Gibbs, A. 1998. Water-proofing properties of cuticular lipids. American Zoology Journal, 38: 471–482.Google Scholar
Gibbs, A. 2002. Lipid melting and cuticular permeability: new insights into an old problem. Journal of Insect Physiology, 48: 391–400.Google Scholar
Gibbs, A. and Pomonis, J.G. 1995. Physical properties of insect cuticular hydrocarbons: the effects of chain length, methyl-branching and unsaturation. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology, 112B: 243–249.Google Scholar
Hefetz, A. 2007. The evolution of hydrocarbon pheromone parsimony in ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) – interplay of colony odor uniformity and odor idiosyncrasy: a review. Myrmecological News, 10: 59–68.Google Scholar
Hemptinne, J.L. and Dixon, A.F.G. 2000. Defence, oviposition and sex: semiochemical parsimony in two species of ladybird beetle (Coleoptera, Coccinellidae)? A short review. European Journal of Entomology, 97: 443–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemptinne, J.L., Lognay, G., and Dixon, A.F.G. 1998. Mate recognition in the two-spot ladybird beetle, Adalia bipunctata: role of chemical and behavioural cues. Journal of Insect Physiology, 44: 1163–1171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hemptinne, J.L., Lognay, G., Doumbia, M., and Dixon, A.F.G. 2001. Chemical nature and persistence of the oviposition deterring pheromone in the tracks of the larvae of the two spot ladybird, Adalia bipunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Chemoecology, 11: 43–47.Google Scholar
Hemptinne, J.L., Lognay, G., Gauthier, C., and Dixon, A.F.G. 2000. Role of surface chemical signals in egg cannibalism and intraguild predation in ladybirds (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Chemoecology, 10: 123–128.Google Scholar
Holloway, G.J., Dejong, P.W., Brakefield, P.M., and De Vose, H. 1991. Chemical defense in ladybird beetles (Coccinellidae). I. Distribution of coccinelline and individual variation in defence in 7-spot ladybirds (Coccinella septempunctata). Chemoecology, 2: 7–14.Google Scholar
Klewer, N., Ruzicka, Z., and Schulz, S. 2007. (Z)-Pentacos-12-ene, an oviposition-deterring pheromone of Cheilomenes sexmaculata . Journal of Chemical Ecology, 33: 2167–2170.Google Scholar
Kosaki, A. and Yamaoka, R. 1996. Chemical composition of footprints and cuticular lipids of three species of lady beetles. Japanese Journal of Applied Entomology and Zoology, 40: 47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liang, D. and Silverman, J. 2000. You are what you eat: diet modifies cuticular hydrocarbons and nest mate recognition in the Argentine ant, Linepithema humile . Naturwissenschaften, 87: 412–416.Google Scholar
Magro, A., Ducamp, C., Ramon-Portugal, F., Lemopte, E., Crouau-Roy, B., Dixon, A.F.G., et al. 2010. Oviposition deterring infochemicals in ladybirds: the role of phylogeny. Evolutionary Ecology, 24: 251–271.Google Scholar
Magro, A., Tene, J.N., Bastin, N., Dixon, A.F.G., and Hemptinne, J.L. 2007. Assessment of patch quality by ladybirds: relative response to conspecific and heterospecific larval tracks a consequence of habitat similarity? Chemoecology, 17: 37–45.Google Scholar
Martin, S. and Drijfhout, F. 2009. A review of ant cuticular hydrocarbons. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 35: 1151–1161.Google Scholar
Matsuda, Y. and Mori, K. 2002. Synthesis of the four stereoisomers of 3,12-dimethylheptacosane, (Z)-9-pentacosene and (Z)-9-heptacosene, the cuticular hydrocarbons of the ant, Diacamma sp. Bioscience Biotechnology and Biochemistry, 66: 1032–1038.Google Scholar
McCarthy, E.D., Han, J., and Calvin, M. 1968. Hydrogen atom transfer in mass spectrometric fragmentation pattern of saturated aliphatic hydrocarbons. Analytical Chemistry, 40: 1475–1480.Google Scholar
Mishra, G., Singh, N., Shahid, M., and Omkar. 2012. Effect of presence and semiochemicals of conspecific stages on oviposition by ladybirds (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology, 109: 363–371.Google Scholar
Mishra, G., Singh, N., Shahid, M., and Omkar. 2013. The effects of three sympatric ladybird species on oviposition by Menochilus sexmaculatus (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Chemoecology, 23: 103–111.Google Scholar
Moore, H.E., Adam, C.D., and Drijfhout, F.P. 2014. Identifying 1st instar larvae for three forensically important blowfly species using “fingerprint” cuticular hydrocarbon analysis. Forensic Science International, 240: 48–53.Google Scholar
Nakashima, Y., Birkett, M.A., Pye, B.J., Pickett, J.A., and Powell, W. 2004. The role of semiochemicals in the avoidance of the seven-spot ladybird, Coccinella septempunctata, by the aphid parasitoid, Aphidius ervi . Journal of Chemical Ecology, 30: 1103–1116.Google Scholar
Nakashima, Y., Birkett, M.A., Pye, B.J., and Powell, W. 2006. Chemically mediated intraguild predator avoidance by aphid parasitoids: interspecific variability in sensitivity to semiochemical trails of ladybird predators. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 32: 1989–1998.Google Scholar
Nunes, T.M., Turatti, I.C.C., Mateus, S., Nascimento, F.S., Lopes, N.P., and Zucchi, R. 2009. Cuticular hydrocarbons in the stingless bee Schwarziana quadripunctata (Hymenoptera, Apidae, Meliponini): differences between colonies, castes and age. Genetics and Molecular Research, 8: 589–595.Google Scholar
Omkar. 2004. Reproductive behaviour of two aphidophagous ladybird beetles, Cheilomenes sexmaculata and Coccinella transversalis . Entomologia Sinica, 11: 47–60.Google Scholar
Omkar and Bind, R.B. 2004. Prey quality dependent growth, development and reproduction of a biocontrol agent, Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Fabricius) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology, 14: 665–673.Google Scholar
Omkar, Gupta, A.K., and Pervez, A. 2006. Attack, escape and predation rates of the larvae of two aphidophagous ladybirds during conspecific and heterospecific interactions. Biocontrol Science and Technology, 16: 295–305.Google Scholar
Omkar and James, B.E. 2004. Influence of prey species on immature survival, development, predation and reproduction of Coccinella transversalis Fabricius (Col., Coccinellidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 28: 150–157.Google Scholar
Omkar and James, B.E. 2005. Reproductive behaviour of an aphidophagous ladybeetle, Coccinella transversalis Fabricius. International Journal of Tropical Insect Science, 25: 96–102.Google Scholar
Omkar and Mishra, G. 2005. Preference-performance of a generalist predatory ladybird: a laboratory study. Biological Control, 34: 187–195.Google Scholar
Omkar and Pervez, A. 2005. Mating behaviour of an aphidophagous ladybird beetle, Propylea dissecta (Mulsant). Insect Science, 12: 37–44.Google Scholar
Omkar and Srivastava, S. 2002. The reproductive behaviour of an aphidophagous ladybeetle, Coccinella septempunctata Linnaeus. European Journal of Entomology, 99: 465–470.Google Scholar
Omkar and Srivastava, S. 2003. Influence of six aphid prey species on development and reproduction of a ladybird beetle, Coccinella septempunctata . BioControl, 48: 379–393.Google Scholar
Pan, C.Y., Mo, J.C., and Cheng, M.L. 2006. Influence of diet and soil on inter-colonial aggression of Coptotermes formosanus (Isoptera: Rhinotermitidae). Sociobiology, 48: 841–848.Google Scholar
Panek, L.M., Gamboa, G.J., and Espelie, K.E. 2001. The effect of a wasp’s age on its cuticular hydrocarbon profile and its tolerance by nestmate and non‐nestmate conspecifics (Polistes fuscatus, Hymenoptera: Vespidae). Ethology, 107: 55–63.Google Scholar
Pattanayak, R., Mishra, G., Chanotiya, C.S., Rout, P.K., Mohanty, C.S., and Omkar. 2014. Does the volatile hydrocarbon profile differ between the sexes: a case study on five aphidophagous ladybirds. Archives of Insect Biochemistry and Physiology, 87: 105–125.Google Scholar
Provost, E., Blight, O., Tirard, A., and Renucci, M. 2008. Hydrocarbons and insects’ social physiology. In Insect physiology: new research. Edited by R.P. Maes. Nova Science Publishers, Hauppauge, New York, United States of America. Pp. 19–72.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 1997. Recognition of oviposition-deterring allomones by aphidophagous predators (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae, Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology, 94: 431–434.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 2001a. Oviposition responses of aphidophagous coccinellids to tracks of ladybird (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) and lacewing (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) larvae. European Journal of Entomology, 98: 183–188.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 2001b. Response of chrysopids (Neuroptera) to larval tracks of aphidophagous coccinellids (Coleoptera). European Journal of Entomology, 98: 283–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 2002. Persistence of deterrent larval tracks in Coccinella septempunctata, Cycolneda limbifer and Semiadalia undecimnotata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology, 99: 471–475.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 2003. Perception of oviposition-deterring larval tracks in aphidophagous coccinellids Cycloneda limbifer and Ceratomegilla undecimnotata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology, 100: 345–350.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. 2006. Oviposition-deterring effects of conspecific and heterospecific larval tracks on Cheilomenes sexmaculata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). European Journal of Entomology, 103: 757–763.Google Scholar
Ruzicka, Z. and Zemek, R. 2008. Deterrent effects of larval tracks on conspecific larvae in Cycloneda limbifer . Biocontrol, 53: 763–771.Google Scholar
Sonenshine, D.E. 2004. Phermones and other semiochemicals of ticks and their use in tick control. Parasitology, 129: 405–425.Google Scholar
Swofford, D.L. 1998. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (* and other methods). Version 4, Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts, United States of America.Google Scholar
Symonds, M.R.E. and Elgar, M.A. 2008. The evolution of pheromone diversity. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 23: 220–228.Google Scholar
Villaverde, M.L., Juarez, M.P., and Mijilovsky, S. 2007. Detection of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst) volatile defensive secretions by solid phase microextraction-capillary gas chromatography (SPME-CGC). Journal of Stored Product Research, 43: 540–545.Google Scholar
Wakonigg, G., Eveleigh, L., Arnold, G., and Crailshiem, K. 2000. Cuticular hydrocarbon profiles reveal age-related changes in honey bee drones (Apis mellifera carnica). Journal of Apicultural Research, 39: 137–141.Google Scholar
Zhang, Z. and Pawliszyn, J. 1993. Head space solid-phase microextraction. Analytical Chemistry, 65: 1843–1852.Google Scholar