4.2 Article

Quantitative method for pheromone delivery in studies of sensory adaptation of moth antennae

期刊

PHYSIOLOGICAL ENTOMOLOGY
卷 32, 期 4, 页码 388-393

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3032.2007.00591.x

关键词

antennae; Choristoneura rosaceana; constant rates and ratios of pheromone compounds; Grapholita molesta; obliquebanded leafroller; oriental fruit moth; pheromone delivery; sensory adaptation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A pheromone sprayer and an electroantennogram (EAG) are used to study sensory adaptation in the antennae of male obliquebanded leafrollers, Choristoneura rosaceana and oriental fruit moths, Grapholita molesta, to the main pheromone compounds (Z)-11-tetradecen-1-yl acetate (Z11-14:Ac) and (Z)- 8-dodecen-1-yl acetate (Z8-12:Ac), respectively. The atomization of 0.125, 0.25, 0.5 or 1 mu L ethanol min(-1) into the EAG air delivery tube at an airflow rate of 2 L min(-1), with resultant concentrations of 6.25, 12.5, 25 or 50 x 10(-5) mu L ethanol mL air(-1), respectively, does not affect the EAG response of C. rosaceana or C. molesta after a 30-min exposure period. The atomization of 0.125 mu L min(-1) of a solution of 8 mg Z11-14:Ac mL(-1) ethanol into the EAG air delivery tube at an airflow rate of 2 L min(-1), with a resultant concentration of 0.5 ng pheromone mL(-1) air, reduces the EAG response of C. rosaceana by approximately 70% after a 15-min exposure period. An additional 15 min of exposure to pheromone does not result in increased sensory adaptation. Antennae recover 32% of the lost responsiveness when exposed to pheromone-free air for 15 min. The atomization of 0.125 mu L min - 1 of a solution of 8 mg Z8-12: Ac mL(-1) ethanol into the EAG air delivery tube at an airflow rate of 2 L min(-1), with a resultant concentration of 0.5 ng pheromone mL(-1) air, reduces the EAG response of C. molesta antenna by approximately 80% after a 15- or 30-min exposure period. The antennae of this species do not recover responsiveness when exposed to pheromone-free air for 15 min.

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

4.2
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