4.5 Article

Distinct binding affinities of odorant-binding proteins from the natural predator Chrysoperla sinica suggest different strategies-to-hunt-prey

期刊

JOURNAL OF INSECT PHYSIOLOGY
卷 111, 期 -, 页码 25-31

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2018.10.004

关键词

Fluorescence binding assay; Lacewing; Tissue expression pattern; Odorant-binding protein

资金

  1. National Key Research & Development Plan [2016YFD0200900]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31701795]
  3. Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System [CARS-23]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chrysoperla sinica is an important natural predator of many notorious agricultural pests. Understanding its olfactory mechanism can help enhance the effectiveness of C. sinica in biological control. In the present study, we investigated the tissue expression patterns of 12 odorant-binding protein (OBP) genes from C. sinica (CsinOBPs). The results of quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) showed that CsinOBP1, CsinOBP2, CsinOBP3, CsinOBP4, CsinOBP6, CsinOBP7, CsinOBP9, CsinOBP10, and CsinOBP12 were predominantly expressed in the antennae of both sexes, indicating their roles in olfaction. Additionally, the qPCR analysis revealed that the 12 CsinOBP genes had distinct expression patterns, while the motif-pattern investigation suggested that the OBPs had different ligands. The ligand-binding assay showed that CsinOBP1 and CsinOBP10 had broader binding spectra than did the other OBPs. Thus, CsinOBP1 was able to bind not only plant volatiles (such as farnesol, cis-3-hexenyl hexanoate, geranylacetone, beta-ionone, 2-tridecanone, and trans-nerolidol) but also the aphid alarm pheromone (E)-beta-farnesene. On the other hand, CsinOBP2 and CsinOBP6 exhibited relatively narrow binding spectra, only binding ethyl benzoate. The study also identified several compounds that can potentially be used to develop slow-release agents attracting C. sinica and to improve search strategies for insect pest control.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据