Specificity of Induced Resistance in Tomato Against Specialist Lepidopteran and Coleopteran Species

Article
First Online:
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:

Abstract

When challenged by herbivorous insects, plants produce a suite of antinutritive proteins that disrupt digestion and absorption of essential nutrients by the insects. We hypothesized that plants would induce distinct defense responses corresponding to the distinct midgut conditions of different herbivores. We investigated whether or not tomato responds specifically to two specialist herbivores: Colorado potato beetle (CPB; Leptinotarsa decemlineata; Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and tobacco hornworm (THW; Manduca sexta; Lepidoptera: Sphingidae), and we evaluated whether the induced defenses triggered by either species affect CPB growth. Tomato did not induce different defense genes in response to CPB or THW but accumulated more transcripts for some defense genes after damage by THW feeding compared to damage by CPB feeding. In addition, trypsin protease inhibitor activity and polyphenol oxidase activity were higher in plants damaged by THW than in plants damaged by CPB. Application of oral secretions from THW to wounded tomato plants increased transcripts compared to controls, but oral secretions from CPB decreased defense transcripts. CPB growth was compromised on plants damaged by either species, suggesting a low specificity of effect. Together, these data suggest distinct quantitative responses of tomato to two different specialist herbivores. Herbivore oral secretions might be responsible for these species-specific responses.

Key Words

Oral secretions Plant defense Tomato Colorado potato beetle Tobacco hornworm Protease inhibitors Induced resistance Specificity 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We thank the USDA AFRI programs (2010-65105-20639 and proposal 2010–03720 awarded to GWF and DSL) for support of the project.

Supplementary material

10886_2011_9937_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 16.6 kb)
10886_2011_9937_MOESM2_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 2 (DOCX 17.3 kb)
10886_2011_9937_MOESM3_ESM.docx (368 kb)
ESM 3 (DOCX 368 kb)

References

  1. Agrawal, A. A. 2000. Specificity of induced resistance in wild radish: causes and consequences for two specialist and two generalist caterpillars. Oikos 89:493–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bede, J., Musser, R., Felton, G., and Korth, K. 2006. Caterpillar herbivory and salivary enzymes decrease transcript levels of Medicago truncatula genes encoding early enzymes in terpenoid biosynthesis. Plant. Mol. Biol. 60:519–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolter, C. J. 1993. Methyl jasmonate induced papain inhibitor(s) in tomato leaves. Plant Physiol. 103:1347–1353.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen, H., Mccaig, B. C., Melotto, M., He, S. Y., and Howe, G. A. 2004. Regulation of plant arginase by wounding, jasmonate, and the phytotoxin coronatine. J. Biol. Chem. 279:45998–46007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chen, H., Wilkerson, C. G., Kuchar, J. A., Phinney, B. S., and Howe, G. A. 2005. Jasmonate-inducible plant enzymes degrade essential amino acids in the herbivore midgut. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 102:19237–19242.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, H., Gonzales-Vigil, E., Wilkerson, C.G., and Howe, G. A. 2007. Stability of plant defense proteins in the gut of insect herbivores. Plant Physiol. 143:1954–1967.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Diezel, C., Von Dahl, C. C., Gaquerel, E., and Baldwin, I. T. 2009. Different lepidopteran elicitors account for cross-talk in herbivory-induced phytohormone signaling. Plant Physiol. 150:1576–1586.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Felton, G. W. 2005. Indigestion is a plant’s best defense. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 102:18771–18772.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Felton, G. W., and Duffey, S. S. 1991. Protective action of midgut catalase in lepidopteran larvae against oxidative plant defenses. J. Chem. Ecol. 17:1715–1732.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Felton, G. W., and Tumlinson, J. H. 2008. Plant-insect dialogs: complex interactions at the plant-insect interface. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 11:457–463.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Felton, G. W., Donato, K., Vecchio, R. J., and Duffey, S. S. 1989. Activation of plant foliar oxidases by insect feeding reduces nutritive quality of foliage for noctuid herbivores. J. Chem. Ecol. 15:2667–2694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Felton, G. W., Workman, J., and Duffey, S. S. 1992. Avoidance of antinutritive plant defense: role of midgut pH in Colorado potato beetle. J. Chem. Ecol. 18:571–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Girard, C., Rivard, D., Kiggundu, A., Kunert, K., Gleddie, S. C., Cloutier, C., and Michaud, D. 2007. A multicomponent, elicitor-inducible cystatin complex in tomato, Solanum lycopersicum. New Phytol. 173:841–851.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Graham, J. S., Pearce, G., Merryweather, J., Titani, K., Ericsson, L. H., and Ryan, C. A. 1985. Wound-induced proteinase inhibitors from tomato leaves. II. The cDNA-deduced primary structure of pre-inhibitor II. J. Biol. Chem. 260:6561–6564.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Green, T. R., and ryan, C. A. 1972. Wound-induced proteinase inhibitor in plant leaves: a possible defense mechanism against insects. Science 175:776–777.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Halitschke, R., Schittko, U., Pohnert, G., Boland, W., and Baldwin, I. T. 2001. Molecular interactions between the specialist herbivore Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera, Sphingidae) and its natural host Nicotiana attenuata. III. Fatty acid-amino acid conjugates in herbivore oral secretions are necessary and sufficient for herbivore-specific plant responses. Plant Physiol. 125:711–717.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Halitschke, R., Gase, K., Hui, D., Schmidt, D. D., and Baldwin, I. T. 2003. Molecular interactions between the specialist herbivore Manduca sexta (lepidoptera, sphingidae) and its natural host Nicotiana attenuata. VI. Microarray analysis reveals that most herbivore-specific transcriptional changes are mediated by fatty acid-amino acid conjugates. Plant Physiol. 131:1894–1902.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Howe, G. A., and Jander, G. 2008. Plant immunity to insect herbivores. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 59:41–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Karban, R., and Baldwin, I. T. 1997. Induced Responses to Herbivory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  20. Korth, K. L., and Dixon, R. A. 1997. Evidence for chewing insect-specific molecular events distinct from a general wound response in leaves. Plant Physiol. 115:1299–1305.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Lawrence, S., Novak, N., and Blackburn, M. 2007. Inhibition of proteinase inhibitor transcripts by Leptinotarsa decemlineata regurgitant in Solanum lycopersicum. J. Chem. Ecol. 33:1041–1048.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Livak, K., and Schmittgen, T. D. 2001. Analysis of relative gene expression data using Real-Time Quantitative PCR and the 2−ΔΔCT Method. Methods 25:402–408.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mithöfer, A., and Boland, W. 2008. Recognition of herbivory-associated molecular patterns. Plant Physiol. 146:825–831.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mithöfer, A., Wanner, G., and Boland, W. 2005. Effects of feeding Spodoptera littoralis on lima bean leaves. II. Continuous mechanical wounding resembling insect feeding is sufficient to elicit herbivory-related volatile emission. Plant Physiol. 137:1160–1168.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Musser, R. O., Hum-Musser, S. M., Eichenseer, H., Peiffer, M., Ervin, G., Murphy, J. B., and Felton, G. W. 2002. Herbivory: caterpillar saliva beats plant defences. Nature 416:599–600.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Peiffer, M., and Felton, G. 2009. Do caterpillars secrete “Oral Secretions”? J. Chem. Ecol. 35:326–335.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Reymond, P., Bodenhausen, N., Van Poecke, R. M. P., Krishnamurthy, V., Dicke, M., and Farmer, E. E. 2004. A conserved transcript pattern in response to a specialist and a generalist herbivore. Plant Cell 16:3132–3147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Roda, A., Halitschke, R., Steppuhn, A., and Baldwin, I. T. 2004. Individual variability in herbivore-specific elicitors from the plant’s perspective. Mol. Ecol. 13:2421–2433.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rodriguez-Saona, C., Chalmers, J., Raj, S., and Thaler, J. 2005. Induced plant responses to multiple damagers: differential effects on an herbivore and its parasitoid. Oecologia 143:566–577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rotenberg, D., Thompson, T. S., German, T. L., and Willis, D. K. 2006. Methods for effective real-time RT-PCR analysis of virus-induced gene silencing. J. Virol. Methods 138:49–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ryan, C. A. 1990. Protease inhibitors in plants: Genes for improving defenses against insects and pathogens. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 28:425–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ryan, C. A. 2000. The systemin signaling pathway: differential activation of plant defensive genes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1477:112–121.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Samach, A., Hareven, D., Gutfinger, T., Ken-Dror, S., and Lifschitz, E. 1991. Biosynthetic threonine deaminase gene of tomato: isolation, structure, and upregulation in floral organs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 88:2678–2682.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schmelz, E. A., Engelberth, J., Alborn, H. T., Tumlinson, J. H., and Teal, P. E. A. 2009. Phytohormone-based activity mapping of insect herbivore-produced elicitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 106:653–657.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stout, M. J., Workman, K. V., Bostock, R. M., and Duffey, S. S. 1998. Specificity of induced resistance in the tomato, Lycopersicon esculentum. Oecologia 113:74–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Traw, M. B., and Dawson, T. E. 2002. Reduced performance of two specialist herbivores (Lepidoptera: Pieridae, Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) on new leaves of damaged black mustard plants. Environ. Entomol. 31:714–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Uppalapati, S. R., Ayoubi, P., Weng, H., Palmer, D. A., Mitchell, R. E., Jones, W., and Bender, C. L. 2005. The phytotoxin coronatine and methyl jasmonate impact multiple phytohormone pathways in tomato. Plant J. 42:201–217.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Voelckel, C., and Baldwin, I. T. 2004. Generalist and specialist lepidopteran larvae elicit different transcriptional responses in Nicotiana attenuata, which correlate with larval FAC profiles. Ecol. Lett. 7:770–775.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vogel, H., Kroymann, J., and Mitchell-Olds, T. 2007. Different transcript patterns in response to specialist and generalist herbivores in the wild Arabidopsis relative Boechera divaricarpa. PLoS ONE 2:e1081.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Walling, L. 2000. The myriad plant responses to herbivores. J. Plant Growth Reg. 19:195–216.Google Scholar
  41. Winz, R. A., and Baldwin, I. T. 2001. Molecular interactions between the specialist herbivore Manduca sexta (Lepidoptera, Sphingidae) and its natural host Nicotiana attenuata. IV. Insect-induced ethylene reduces jasmonate-induced nicotine accumulation by regulating putrescine N-methyltransferase transcripts. Plant Physiol. 125:2189–2202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wolfson, J. L., and Murdock, L. L. 1987. Suppression of larval Colorado potato beetle growth and development by digestive proteinase inhibitors. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 44:235–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Worthington, C. C. 1988. Worthington Enzyme Manual. Worthington Biochemical Corporation, Freehold, NJ.Google Scholar
  44. Wu, J. W., and Haard, N. F. 2002. Cystatin accumulation in tomato leaves after methyl jasmonate treatment or mechanical injury. J. Food Biochem. 26:21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhu-Salzman, K., Luthe, D. S., and Felton, G. W. 2008. Arthropod-inducible proteins: broad spectrum defenses against multiple herbivores. Plant Physiol. 146:852–858.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Entomology and Center for Chemical EcologyPenn State UniversityUniversity ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations