4.5 Article

Physiological responses of Corythucha ciliata adults to high temperatures under laboratory and field conditions

Journal

JOURNAL OF THERMAL BIOLOGY
Volume 45, Issue -, Pages 15-21

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jtherbio.2014.07.002

Keywords

Heat stress; Laboratory population; Metabolic process; Nature population; Sycamore lace bug

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [31300467]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Under high temperature conditions, insects can tolerate to survive through various physiological mechanisms, which have been well documented in laboratory studies. However, it is still unclear as to whether these laboratory data can scale up to those in the field. Here we studied dynamics of heat-induced metabolites in Corythucha ciliata adults under both laboratory and field conditions to examine their significance in thermal tolerance of the species. We compared the effects of controlled thermal treatments (2 h at 33-43 degrees C at 2 degrees C intervals in the laboratory) and naturally increasing thermal conditions (10:00-14:00 at 2-h intervals (33.5-37.2 degrees C) on a hot summer day in a field in Shanghai, China) on water content and levels of water-soluble protein, triglycerides, mannitol, and sorbitol in the adult bodies. The results showed that water content significantly decreased and all other metabolic parameters significantly increased in response to temperature stresses with similar patterns in both the laboratory and field, although the respective threshold temperatures were different under the two conditions. The close linkage observed in the two conditions suggests that a short period of heat stress induces water loss and accumulation of thermal metabolites in C. ciliata adults. This heat-resistance provides a defense mechanism counteracting thermal damage in C. ciliata. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available