4.3 Article

Differences in host use efficiency of larvae of a generalist moth, Operophtera brumata on three chemically divergent Salix species

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL ECOLOGY
Volume 27, Issue 8, Pages 1595-1615

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1023/A:1010458208335

Keywords

Salix spp.; willow; phenolic glycosides; salicylates; Operophtera brumata; polyphagy; insect herbivory

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The food selection, growth, and fecundity of insect herbivores are largely dictated by the chemical composition and nutritive values of plant foliage. We studied the host-use efficiency of larvae of the generalist moth, Operophtera brumata (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) on three chemically divergent but nutritively similar willows (Salix spp.). The 4th instars were able to use the salicylate-free leaves of S. phylicifolia efficiently. Growth was slightly reduced on S. pentandra, which contained a moderate level of acetylated salicylates. The high concentration of salicylates found in the leaves of S. myrsinifolia seemed to provide efficient protection against non-specialized O. brumata. We also studied assimilation of nutrients and degradation of salicylates and other secondary compounds in the digestive tract of O. brumata larvae. Neither the assimilation of nitrogen nor of carbon were affected by secondary chemicals of ingested food. Salicylates were shown to be degraded to salicin and catechol, while further degradation of salicin to saligenin was rather slow. In an artificial diet experiment, we showed that two degradation products of salicylates, catechol and saligenin markedly reduced the growth of the larvae. Neither salicin nor chlorogenic acid affected larval growth. We conclude that salicylates reduced the growth of the generalist winter moth mainly by feeding deterrence caused by 6-hydroxy-2-cyclohexenone and catechol. Compared to the deleterious effects of salicylates the effects of other secondary compounds were minor.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available