Advertisement

Oecologia

, Volume 108, Issue 2, pp 328–337 | Cite as

Impact of two specialist insect herbivores on reproduction of horse nettle, Solanum carolinense

  • Michael J. Wise
  • Christopher F. Sacchi
Plant Animal Interactions

Abstract

The frequency of coevolution as a process of strong mutual interaction between a single plant and herbivore species has been questioned in light of more commonly observed, complex relationships between a plant and a suite of herbivore species. Despite recognition of the possibility of diffuse coevolution, relatively few studies have examined ecological responses of plants to herbivores in complex associations. We studied the impact of two specialist herbivores, the horse nettle beetle, Leptinotarsa juncta, and the eggplant flea beetle, Epitrix fuscula, on reproduction of their host, Solanum carolinense. Our study involved field and controlled-environment experimental tests of the impact on sexual and potential asexual reproduction of attack by individuals of the two herbivore species, individually and in combination. Field tests demonstrated that under normal levels of phytophagous insect attack, horse nettle plants experienced a reduction in fruit production of more than 75% compared with plants from which insects were excluded. In controlled-environment experiments using enclosure-exclosure cages, the horse nettle's two principal herbivores, the flea beetle and the horse nettle beetle, caused decreases in sexual reproduction similar to those observed in the field, and a reduction in potential asexual reproduction, represented by root biomass. Attack by each herbivore reduced the numbers of fruits produced, and root growth, when feeding in isolation. When both species were feeding together, fruit production, but not root growth, was lower than when either beetle species fed alone. Ecological interactions between horse nettle and its two primary herbivores necessary for diffuse coevolution to occur were evident from an overall analysis of the statistical interactions between the two herbivores for combined assessment of fruit and vegetative traits. For either of these traits alone, the interactions necessary to promote diffuse coevolution apparently were lacking.

Key words

Herbivory Solanum carolinense Plant reproduction Diffuse coevolution Pairwise coevolution 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrahamson WG, McCrea KD (1986) Nutrient and biomass allocation in Solidago altissima: effects of two stem gallmakers, fertilization, and ramet isolation. Oecologia 68:174–180Google Scholar
  2. Baldwin IT (1990) Herbivory simulations in ecological research. Trends Ecol Evol 5:91–93Google Scholar
  3. Belsky AJ (1986) Does herbivory benefit plants? A review of the evidence. Am Nat 127:870–892Google Scholar
  4. Berenbaum M (1988) Flea beetles. Horticulture 66:62–63Google Scholar
  5. Berenbaum MR, Zangerl AR (1988). Stalemates in the coevolutionary arms race: synthesis, synergisms, and sundry other sins. In: Spencer KC (ed) Chemical mediation of coevolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 113–132Google Scholar
  6. Borror DJ, Triplehorn CA, Johnson NF (1989) An introduction to the study of insects, 6th edn. Saunders College, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowers MD (1988) Chemistry and coevolution: iridoid glycosides, plants, and herbivorous insects. In: Spencer KC (ed) Chemical mediation of coevolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 133–165Google Scholar
  8. Cain ML, Carson WL, Root RB (1991) Long-term suppression of insect herbivores increases the production and growth of Solidago altissima clones. Oecologia 88:251–257Google Scholar
  9. Campbell JM, Sarasin MJ, Lyons DB (1989) Canadian beetles (Coleoptera) injurious to crops, ornaments, stored products, and buildings (publication 1826). Agriculture Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  10. Craig TP, Price PW, Clancy KM, Waring GL, Sacchi CF (1988) Forces preventing coevolution in the three-trophic-level system: willow, a gall-forming herbivore, and parasitoid. In: Spencer KC (ed) Chemical mediation of coevolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 57–80Google Scholar
  11. Crawley MJ (1983) Herbivory, the dynamics of animal-plant interactions. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  12. Crawley MJ (1987) Benevolent herbivores? Trends Ecol Evol 2:167–168Google Scholar
  13. Crawley MJ (1989) Insect herbivores and plant population dynamics. Annu Rev Entomol 31:531–564Google Scholar
  14. Da Costa CP, Jones CM (1971) Cucumber beetle resistance and mite susceptibility controlled by the bitter gene in Cucumis sativus L. Science 172:1145–1146Google Scholar
  15. Dirzo R (1984) Herbivory: a phytocentric overview. In: Dirzo R, Sarukhan J (eds) Perspectives on plant population ecology. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 141–165Google Scholar
  16. Doak DF (1992) Lifetime impacts of herbivory for a perennial plant. Ecology 73:2086–2099Google Scholar
  17. Duncan WH, Foote LE (1975) Wildflowers of the Southeastern United States. University of Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  18. Fay PA, Hartnett DC (1991) Constraints on growth and allocation of Silphium integrifolium (Asteraceae) caused by a cynipid gall wasp. Oecologia 88:243–250Google Scholar
  19. Fox LR (1981) Defense and dynamics in plant-herbivore systems. Am Zool 21:853–864Google Scholar
  20. Futuyma DJ (1983) Evolutionary interactions among herbivorous insects and plants. In: Futuyma DJ, Slatkin M (eds) Coevolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 207–231Google Scholar
  21. Futuyma DJ, Slatkin M (1983) Introduction. In: Futuyma DJ, Slatkin M (eds) Coevolution. Sinauer, Sunderland, pp 1–13Google Scholar
  22. Gould F (1988) Genetics of pairwise and multispecies plant-herbivore coevolution. In: Spencer KC (ed) Chemical mediation of coevolution. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 13–55Google Scholar
  23. Hardin JW, Doerksen G, Herndon H, Hobson M, Thomas F (1972) Pollination ecology and floral biology of four weedy genera in southern Oklahoma. Southwest Nat 16:403–412Google Scholar
  24. Hare JD (1990) Ecology and management of the Colorado potato beetle. Annu Rev Entomol 35:81–100Google Scholar
  25. Hare JD, Futuyma DJ (1978) Different effects of variation in Xanthium strumarium L. (Compositae) on two insect seed predators. Oecologia 37:109–120Google Scholar
  26. Hare JD, Kennedy GG (1986) Genetic variation in plant-insect associations: survival of Leptinotarsa decemlineata populations on Solanum carolinense. Evolution 40:1031–1043Google Scholar
  27. Hartnett DC, Abrahamson WG (1986) The effects of stem gall insects on life history patterns in Solidago canadensis. Ecology 60:910–917Google Scholar
  28. Heithaus ER, Stashko E, Anderson PK (1982) Cumulative effects of plant-animal interactions on seed production by Bauhinia ungulata, a neotropical legume. Ecology 63:1294–1302Google Scholar
  29. Hendrix SD (1988) Herbivory and its impact on plant reproduction. In: Lovett Doust J, Lovett Doust L (eds) Plant reproductive ecology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 246–263Google Scholar
  30. Hougen-Eitzman D, Rausher MD (1994) Interactions between herbivorous insects and plant-insect coevolution. Am Nat 143: 677–697Google Scholar
  31. Hsiao TH (1986) Specificity of certain chrysomelids for Solanaceae. In: D'Arcy WG (ed) Solanaceae: biology and systematics. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 345–377Google Scholar
  32. Huitema BE (1980) The analysis of covariance and alternatives. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  33. Inouye DW (1982) The consequences of herbivory: a mixed blessing for Jurinea mollis (Asteraceae). Oikos 39:269–272Google Scholar
  34. Jacques RL (1988) The potato beetles: the genus Leptinotarsa in North America (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) (Flora and Fauna Handbook No. 3. E.J. Brill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Janzen DH (1979) New horizons in the biology of plant defenses. In: Rosenthal GA, Janzen DH (eds) Herbivores: their interaction with secondary plant metabolites. Academic Press, New York, pp 331–350Google Scholar
  36. Janzen DH (1980) When is it coevolution? Evolution 34:611–612Google Scholar
  37. Jermy T (1976) Insect-host-plant relationship-coevolution or sequential evolution? In: Jermy T (ed) The host-plant in relation to insect behavior and reproduction. Plenum, New York, pp 109–113Google Scholar
  38. Jermy T (1984) Evolution of insect/host plant relationships. Am Nat 124:609–630Google Scholar
  39. Jones VP, Toscano NC, Jonson MW, Welter SC, Youngman RR (1986) Pesticide effects on plant physiology: integration into a pest management program. Bull Entomol Soc Am 32:103–109Google Scholar
  40. Kiltz BF (1930) Perennial weeds which spread vegetatively. J Am Soc Agron 22:216–234Google Scholar
  41. Kleinbaum DG, LL Kupper (1978) Applied regression analysis and other multivariable methods. Duxbury Press, North ScituateGoogle Scholar
  42. Louda SM (1984) Herbivore effect on stature, fruiting, and leaf dynamics of a native crucifer. Ecology 65:1379–1386Google Scholar
  43. Maddox GD, Root RB (1990) Structure of the encounter between goldenrod (Solidago altissima) and its diverse insect fauna. Ecology 71:2115–2124Google Scholar
  44. Marquis RJ (1992) The selective impact of herbivores. In: Fritz RS, Simms EL (eds) Plant resistance to herbivores and pathogens. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 301–325Google Scholar
  45. Maschinski J, Whitham TG (1989) The continuum of plant responses to herbivory: the influence of plant association, nutrient availability, and timing. Am Nat 134:1–19Google Scholar
  46. McNaughton SJ (1983) Compensatory plant growth as a response to herbivory. Oikos 40:329–336Google Scholar
  47. McNaughton SJ (1986) On plants and herbivores. Am Nat 128:765–770Google Scholar
  48. Meyer GA (1993) A comparison of the impacts of leaf-and sap-feeding insects on growth and allocation of goldenrod. Ecology 74:1101–1116Google Scholar
  49. Meyer GA, Root RB (1993) Effects of herbivorous insects and soil fertility on goldenrod reproduction. Ecology 74:1117–1128Google Scholar
  50. Norusis MJ (1990) SPSS/PC+ advanced statistics 4.0. SPSS, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  51. Owen DF, Wiegert RG (1976) Do consumers maximize plant fitness? Oikos 27:488–492Google Scholar
  52. Paige KN, Whitham TG (1987) Overcompensation in response to mammalian herbivory: the advantage of being eaten. Am Nat 129:407–416Google Scholar
  53. Radford AE, Ahles HE, Bell CR (1968) Manual of the vascular flora of the Carolinas. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel HillGoogle Scholar
  54. Sacchi CF, Price PW, Craig TP, Itami JK (1988) Impact of shoot galler attack on sexual reproduction in the arroyo willow. Ecology 69:2021–2030Google Scholar
  55. Simberloff D, Brown BJ, Lowrie S (1978) Isopod and insect root borers may benefit Florida mangroves. Science 201:630–632Google Scholar
  56. Simms EL, Fritz RS (1990) The ecology and evolution of hostplant resistance to insects. Trends Ecol Evol 5:356–360Google Scholar
  57. Simms EL, Rausher MD (1987) Costs and benefits of plant resistance to herbivory. Am Nat 130:570–581Google Scholar
  58. Simms EL, Rausher MD (1989) The evolution of resistance to herbivory in Ipomoea purpurea. II. Natural selection by insects and costs of resistance. Evolution 43:573–585Google Scholar
  59. Sokal RR, Rohlf FJ (1981) Biometry, 2nd edition. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Solomon BP (1981) Response of a host-specific herbivore to resource density, relative abundance, and phenology. Ecology 62:1205–1214Google Scholar
  61. Solomon BP (1983) Compensatory production in Solanum carolinense following attack by a host-specific herbivore. J Ecol 71:681–690Google Scholar
  62. Stamp NE (1984) Effects of defoliation by checkerspot caterpillars (Euphydryas phaeton) and sawfly larvae (Macrophya nigra and Tenthredo grandis) on their host plants (Chelone spp.). Oecologia 63:275–280Google Scholar
  63. Stenseth NC (1978) Do grazers maximize individual plant fitness? Oikos 31:299–306Google Scholar
  64. Strausbaugh PD, Core EL (1978) Flora of West Virginia. Seneca, GrantsvilleGoogle Scholar
  65. Strauss SY (1991) Direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of three native herbivores on a shared host plant. Ecology 72:543–558Google Scholar
  66. Strong DR, Lawton JH, Southwood R (1984) Insects on plants. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  67. Thompson JN (1986) Patterns in coevolution. In: Stone AR, Hawksworth DI (eds) Coevolution and systematics. Clarendon, Oxford, pp 119–143Google Scholar
  68. Tisdell TF (1961) A life cycle study of horse nettle (Solanum carolinense). Ph. D. Dissertation, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New Jersey, USAGoogle Scholar
  69. Tower WL (1906) An investigation of evolution in chrysomelid beetles of the genus Leptinotarsa (publication 48). Carnegie Institute, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  70. Waloff N, Richards OW (1977) The effect of insect fauna on growth mortality and natality of broom, Sarothamnus scoparius. J Appl Ecol 14:787–798Google Scholar
  71. Winder JA, Emden HF van (1980) Selection of effective biological control agents from artificial defoliation/insect cage experiments. In: Delfosse ES (ed) Proceedings of the Vth international symposium on the biological control of weeds. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Australia. pp 415–439Google Scholar
  72. Winder JA, Harley KLS (1982) The effects of natural enemies on the growth of Lantana in Brazil. Bull Entomol Res 27:599–616Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Wise
    • 1
  • Christopher F. Sacchi
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Environmental SciencesUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  2. 2.Department of Environmental SciencesUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Blandy Experimental FarmUniversity of VirginiaBoyceUSA

Personalised recommendations