4.2 Review

The Ancient Chemistry of Avoiding Risks of Predation and Disease

Journal

EVOLUTIONARY BIOLOGY
Volume 36, Issue 3, Pages 267-281

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11692-009-9069-4

Keywords

Isopoda; Caterpillars; Death recognition; Shelter selection; Necromones; Behavior; Predation; Disease; Fatty acids

Funding

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Illness, death, and costs of immunity and injury strongly select for avoidance of predators or contagion. Ants, cockroaches, and collembola recognize their dead using unsaturated fatty acids (e.g., oleic or linoleic acid) as necromone cues. Ants, bees, and termites remove dead from their nests (necrophoric behavior) whereas semi-social species seal off corpses or simply avoid their dead or injured (necrophobic behavior). Alarm and avoidance responses to exudates from injured conspecifics are widespread. This involves diverse pheromones, complex chemistry and learning. We hypothesized that necromones are a phylogenetically ancient class of related signals and predicted that terrestrial Isopoda (that strongly aggregate and lack known dispersants) would avoid body fluids and corpses using fatty acid necromones. Isopods were repelled by crushed conspecifics (blood), intact corpses, and alcohol extracts of bodies. As predicted, the repellent fraction contained oleic and linoleic acids and authentic standards repelled several isopod species. We further predicted a priori that social caterpillars (lacking known dispersants) would be repelled by their own body fluids and unsaturated fatty acids. Both tent caterpillars and fall webworms avoided branches treated with conspecific body fluid. Oleic and linoleic acids were also strongly avoided by both species. Necromone signaling appears widespread and likely traces to aquatic ancestors pre-dating the divergence of the Crustacea and Hexapoda at least 420 million years ago.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available