, Volume 163, Issue 4, pp 973–984 | Cite as

How aphids decide what is good for them: experiments to test aphid feeding behaviour on Tanacetum vulgare (L.) using different nitrogen regimes

Plant-Animal interactions - Original Paper


Leaf-chewing herbivores select food with a protein/carbohydrate ratio of 0.8–1.5, whereas phloem sap, which aphids feed on, has a ratio of ~0.1. Enhanced N fertilization increases the amino acid concentration in phloem sap and elevates the N/C ratio. The study examines: (1) whether aphids select between plants of different N nutrition, (2) whether feeding time correlates with the amino acid composition of phloem sap, and (3) at which stage of probing aphids identify the quality of the plant. Uroleucon tanaceti (Mordvilko) and Macrosiphoniella tanacetaria (Kaltenbach), specialist aphids feeding on tansy (Tanacetum vulgare L.), were reared on this host plant grown essentially hydroponically (in Vermiculite) in the greenhouse on 1, 3, 6, or 12 mM NH4NO3. One and 3 mM NH4NO3 corresponds to the situation found in natural tansy stands. Aphid stylet penetration was monitored by electrical penetration graphs whilst phloem sap was sampled by stylectomy. Both aphid species settled 2–3 times more frequently on plants fertilized with 6 or 12 mM NH4NO3. The phloem sap of these plants contained up to threefold higher amino acid concentrations, without a change in the proportion of essential amino acids. No time differences were observed before stylet penetration of plant tissue. After the first symplast contact, most aphids penetrated further, except M. tanacetaria on low-N plants, where 50% withdrew the stylet after the first probing. The duration of phloem feeding was 2–3 times longer in N-rich plants and the time spent in individual sieve tubes was up to tenfold longer. Aphids identified the nutritional quality of the host plant mainly by the amino acid concentration of phloem sap, not by leaf surface cues nor the proportion of essential amino acids. However, U. tanaceti infestation increased the percentage of methionine plus tryptophan in phloem tenfold, thus manipulating the plants nutritional quality, and causing premature leaf senescence.


Electrical penetration graph Macrosiphoniella tanacetaria Phloem amino acids Phloem feeding Stylectomy 


  1. Abisgold JD, Simpson SJ, Douglas AE (1994) Nutrient regulation in the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum: application of the novel geometric framework to sugar and amino acid consumption. Physiol Entomol 19:95–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Behmer ST (2009) Insect herbivore nutrient regulation. Annu Rev Entomol 54:165–187CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Bergmeyer HU, Bernt E (1974) Sucrose. In: Bergmeyer HU (ed) Methods of enzymatic analysis II (3). Verlag Chemie, Academic Press, WeinheimGoogle Scholar
  4. Bromley AK, Anderson M (1982) An electrophysiological study of olfaction in the aphid, Nasonovia ribis-nigri. Entomol Exp Appl 32:101–110Google Scholar
  5. Couldridge C, Newbury HJ, Ford-Lloyd B, Bale J, Pritchard J (2007) Exploring plant responses to aphid feeding using a full Arabidopsis microarray reveals a small number of genes with significantly altered expression. Bull Entomol Res 97:523–532CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Dadd RH (1985) Nutrition: organisms. In: Kerkut GA, Gilbert LI (eds) Comprehensive insect physiology biochemistry and pharmacology. Regulation: digestion, nutrition, excretion, vol 4. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 313–390Google Scholar
  7. Divol F, Vilaine F, Thibivilliers S, Amselem J, Palauqui JC, Kusiak C, Dinant S (2005) Systemic response to aphid infestation by Myzus persicae in the phloem of Apium graveolens. Plant Mol Biol 57:517–540CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Douglas AE (1988) Sulphate utilization in an aphid symbiosis. Insect Biochem 18:599–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Douglas AE (1998) Nutritional interactions in insect-microbial symbioses: aphids and their symbiotic bacteria Buchnera. Annu Rev Entomol 43:17–37CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Douglas AE (2003) The nutritional physiology of aphids. Adv Insect Physiol 31:73–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Douglas AE, Minto LB, Wilkinson TL (2001) Quantifying nutrient production by the microbial symbionts in an aphid. J Exp Biol 204:349–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Downing N, Unwin DM (1977) A new method for cutting the mouth-parts of feeding aphids, and for collecting plant sap. Physiol Entomol 2:275–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Epstein E (1972) Mineral nutrition of plants: principles and perspectives. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Febvay G, Bonnin J, Rahbé Y, Bournoville R, Delrot S, Bonnemain JL (1988) Resistance of different lucerne cultivars to the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum: influence of phloem composition on aphid fecundity. Entomol Exp Appl 48:127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Febvay G, Liadouze I, Guillaud J, Bonnot G (1995) Analysis of energetic amino acid metabolism in Acyrthosiphon pisum: a multidimensional approach to amino acid metabolism in aphids. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 29:45–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Febvay G, Rahbe Y, Rynkiewicz M, Guillaud J, Bonnot G (1999) Fate of dietary sucrose and neosynthesis of amino acids in the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum, reared on different diets. J Exp Biol 202:2639–2652PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Fischer MK (2001) Die Zuckerzusammensetzung des Honigtaus bei verschiedenen Blattlausarten und die Konsequenzen für den Mutualismus Blattlaus-Ameise. Dissertation Universität BayreuthGoogle Scholar
  18. Fischer MK, Völkl W, Schopf R, Hoffmann KH (2002) Age-specific pattern in honeydew production and honeydew composition in the aphid Metopeurum fuscoviride: implications for ant-attendance. J Insect Physiol 48:319–326CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Girousse C, Bournoville R (1994) Role of phloem sap quality and exudation characteristics on performance of pea aphid grown on lucerne genotypes. Entomol Expt Appl 70:227–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Girousse C, Faucher M, Kleinpeter C, Bonnemain JL (2003) Dissection of the effect of the aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum feeding on assimilate partitioning in Medicago sativa. New Phytol 157:83–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Matt P, Geiger M, Walch-Liu P, Engels C, Krapp A, Stitt M (2001) The immediate cause of the diurnal changes of nitrogen metabolism in leaves of nitrate-replete tobacco: a major imbalance between the rate of nitrate reduction and the rates of nitrate uptake and ammonium metabolism during the first part of the light period. Plant Cell Environ 24:177–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McLean DL, Kinsey MG (1964) A technique for electronically recording aphid feeding and salivation. Nature 202:1358–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Powell G, Hardie J (2000) Host-selection behaviour by genetically identical aphids with different plant preferences. Physiol Entomol 25:54–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Prosser WA, Simpson SJ, Douglas AE (1992) How an aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum) symbiosis responds to variation in dietary nitrogen. J Insect Physiol 38:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sandström JP, Moran NA (2001) Amino acid budgets in the three aphid species using the same host plant. Physiol Entomol 26:202–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Sandström J, Telang A, Moran NA (2000) Nutritional enhancement of host plants by aphids—a comparison of three aphid species on grasses. J Insect Physiol 46:33–40CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Shambaugh GF, Frazier JL, Castell AEM, Coons LB (1978) Antennal sensilla of seventeen aphids (Homoptera: Aphidinae). Int J Insect Morphol Embryol 7:389–404CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stadler B (2004) Wedged between bottom-up and top-down processes: aphids on tansy. Ecol Entomol 29:106–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Stadler B, Dixon AFG, Kindlmann P (2002) Relative fitness of aphids: effects of plant quality and ants. Ecol Lett 5:216–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Telang A, Sandström J, Dyreson E, Moran NA (1999) Feeding damage by Diuraphis noxia results in nutritionally enhanced phloem diet. Entomol Exp Appl 91:403–412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tjallingii WF (1978) Electronic recording of penetration behaviour by aphids. Entomol Exp Appl 24:521–530Google Scholar
  32. Tjallingii WF (1985) Membrane potentials as an indication for plant cell penetration by aphid stylets. Entomol Exp Appl 38:187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tjallingii WF (1988) Electrical recording of stylet penetration activities. In: Minks AK, Harrewijn P (eds) Aphids, their biology, natural enemies and control. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 95–108Google Scholar
  34. Tjallingii WF, Hogen Esch T (1993) Fine structure of aphid stylet routes in plant tissues in correlation with EPG signals. Physiol Entomol 18:317–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Van Giessen WA, Jackson DM (1998) Rapid analysis of electronical monitored homopteran feeding behaviour. Ann Entomol Soc Am 91(1):145–154Google Scholar
  36. Van Helden M, Tjallingii WF (1993) Tissue localisation of lettuce resistance to the aphid Nasonovia ribisnigri using electrical penetration graphs. Entomol Expt Appl 68:269–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Van Helden M, Tjallingii WF (2000) Experimental design and analysis in EPG experiments with emphasis on plant resistance research. In: Walker GP, Backus EA (eds) Principles and applications of electronic monitoring and other techniques in the study of homopteran feeding behaviour. Say, Entomological Society of America, Lanham, pp 144–171Google Scholar
  38. Woodring J, Wiedemann R, Fischer MK, Hoffmann KH, Völkl W (2004) Honeydew amino acids in relation to sugar and their role in the establishment of ant-attendance hierarchy in eight species of aphids feeding on tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). Physiol Entomol 29:311–319CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.PflanzenphysiologieUniversität BayreuthBayreuthGermany

Personalised recommendations