Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 40, Issue 1, pp 71–83

Further Studies on Sex Pheromones of Female Lygus and Related Bugs: Development of Effective Lures and Investigation of Species-Specificity

  • Michelle Fountain
  • Gunnhild Jåstad
  • David Hall
  • Paul Douglas
  • Dudley Farman
  • Jerry Cross
Article

Abstract

Mirid bugs (Heteroptera: Miridae) are important pests of many crops worldwide. In previous work by others and ourselves, several species of Lygus bugs were shown to produce blends of three compounds, hexyl butyrate, (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate, and (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal. These have been proposed as components of the female-produced sex pheromones, but attraction of males to synthetic lures has been difficult to demonstrate. We studied the volatiles released by females of four species: Lygus rugulipennis, Lygus pratensis, Lygocoris pabulinus, and Liocoris tripustulatus. Analyses of volatiles from individual, undisturbed insects showed that the three compounds were produced in species-specific blends, by females only, or in greater quantities by females than by males. The three compounds were loaded into pipette tips, which released the defined blends over at least 30 days. Traps baited with the blend for L. rugulipennis caught more males than traps baited with virgin females, with all three compounds required for maximum attractiveness. Traps baited with the specific blends for each of the four species caught males of three of the species, indicating considerable cross-attraction. There is evidence that other, non-chemical factors, such as time-of-day of production of pheromone, contribute to species-specificity of attraction. This is the first report of consistent attraction of Lygus bugs to synthetic lures in the field.

Keywords

Lygus rugulipennis Lygocoris pabulinus Lygus pratensis Liocoris tripustulatus Hexyl butyrate (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal Trapping 

Supplementary material

10886_2013_375_MOESM1_ESM.docx (156 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 155 kb)

References

  1. Aldrich JR (1988) Chemical ecology of the Heteroptera. Annu Rev Entomol 33:211–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aldrich JR, Numata H, Borges M, Bin F, Waite GK, Lusby WR (1993) Artifacts and pheromone blends from Nezara spp. and other stink bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Z Naturforsch 48c:73–79Google Scholar
  3. Blackmer JL, Rodriguez-Saona CC, Byers JA, Shope KL, Smith JP (2004) Behavioral response of Lygus hesperus to conspecifics and headspace volatiles of alfalfa in a Y-tube olfactometer. J Chem Ecol 30:1547–1564PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackmer JL, Byers JA, Rodriguez-Saona C (2008) Evaluation of color traps for monitoring Lygus spp.: design, placement, height, time of day, and non-target effects. Crop Prot 27:171–181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blommers L, Bus V, de Jongh E, Lentjes G (1988) Attraction of males by virgin females of the green capsid bug, Lygocoris pabulinus (Heteroptera: Miridae). Entomol Ber Amst 48:175–179Google Scholar
  6. Blum MS (1981) Chemical defenses of arthropods. Academic, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Blum MS (1996) Semiochemical parsimony in the Arthropoda. Annu Rev Entomol 41:353–374PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boivin G, Stewart RK (1982) Attraction of male green apple bugs, Lygocoris communis (Hemiptera: Miridae), to caged females. Can Entomol 114:765–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bus VGM, Mols PJM, Blommers LHM (1985) Monitoring of green capsid bug Lygocoris pabulinus (Hemiptera: Miridae) in apple orchards. Meded Rijksfac Landb Wetensch Gent 50:505–510Google Scholar
  10. Byers JA (2006) Production and predator-induced release of volatile chemicals by the plant bug Lygus hesperus. J Chem Ecol 32:2205–2218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cassis G, Schuh RT (2012) Systematics, biodiversity, biogeography, and host associations of the Miridae (Insecta: Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Cimicomorpha). Annu Rev Entomol 57:377–404PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cross JV (2004) European tarnished plant bug on strawberries and other soft fruits. Horticultural Development Council Fact Sheet 19/04, p 6Google Scholar
  13. Drijfhout FP, Groot AT (2001) Close-range attraction in Lygocoris pabulinus. J Chem Ecol 27:1133–1149PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Drijfhout FP, Groot AT, Posthumus MA, van Beek TA, de Groot A (2002) Coupled gas chromatographic-electroantennographic responses of Lygocoris pabulinus (L.) to female and male produced volatiles. Chemoecology 12:113–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Drijfhout FP, Groot AT, van Beek TA, Visser JH (2003) Mate location in the green capsid bug, Lygocoris pabulinus. Entomol Exp Appl 106:73–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fountain MT, Cross JV, Jåstad G, Farman D, Hall D (2010) Developing an effective trap and lure to monitor Lygus rugulipennis. IOBC/WPRS Bull 54:47–51Google Scholar
  17. Frati F, Salerno G, Conti E, Bin F (2008) Role of the plant conspecific complex in host location and intra-specific communication of Lygus rugulipennis. Physiol Entomol 33:129–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Frati F, Chamberlain K, Birkett M, Dufour S, Mayon P, Woodcock C, Wadhams L, Pickett J, Salerno G, Conti E, Bin F (2009) Vicia faba – Lygus rugulipennis interactions: induced plant volatiles and sex pheromone enhancement. J Chem Ecol 35:201–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glinwood R, Pettersson J, Kularatne S, Ahmed E, Kumar V (2003) Female European tarnished plant bugs, Lygus rugulipennis (Heteroptera: Miridae), are attracted to odours from conspecific females. Acta Agric Scand Sect A 53:29–32Google Scholar
  20. Graham HM (1987) Attraction of Lygus spp. males by conspecific ad congeneric females. Southwest Entomol 12:147–155Google Scholar
  21. Groot AT, Timmer R, Gort G, Lelyveld GP, Drijfhout FP, van Beek TA, Visser JH (1999) Sex-related perception of insect and plant volatiles in Lygocoris pabulinus. J Chem Ecol 25:2357–2371CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gueldner RC, Parrot WL (1978) Volatile constituents of the tarnished plant bug. Insect Biochem 8:389–391CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Halloran S, Mauck K, Fleisher S, Tumlinson J (2013) Volatiles from intact and Lygus-damaged Erigeron annuus (L.) Pers. are highly attractive to ovipositing Lygus and its parasitoid Peristenus relictus Ruthe. J Chem Ecol 39:1115–1128PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ho HY, Millar JG (2002) Identification, electroantennogram screening, and field bioassays of volatile chemicals from Lygus hesperus Knight (Heteroptera: Miridae). Zool Stud 41:311–320Google Scholar
  25. Innocenzi PJ, Hall DR, Sumathi C, Cross JV, Jacobson RJ (1998) Studies of the sex pheromone of the European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis (Het. Miridae). Brighton Crop Prot Conf Pests Dis 8:829–832Google Scholar
  26. Innocenzi PJ, Hall DR, Cross JV, Masuh H, Phythian SJ, Chittamuru S, Guarino S (2004) Investigation of long-range female sex pheromone of the European tarnished plant bug Lygus rugulipennis: chemical, electrophysiological and field studies. J Chem Ecol 30:1509–1529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Innocenzi PJ, Hall DR, Cross JV, Hesketh H (2005) Attraction of male European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis, to components of the female sex pheromone in the field. J Chem Ecol 31:1401–1413PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jacobson RJ (1999) Capsids (Het. Miridae): a new challenge to IPM in protected salad crops in the UK. Med Fac Landbouww Univ Gent 64/3a:67–72Google Scholar
  29. Jay CN, Cross JV, Burgess C (2004) The relationship between populations of European tarnished plant bug (Lygus rugulipennis) and crop losses due to fruit malformation in everbearer strawberries. Crop Prot 23:825–834CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kakazaki M, Sugie H (2001) Identification of female sex pheromone of the rice leaf bug, Trigonotylus caelestialium. J Chem Ecol 27:2447–2458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Koczor S, Vuts J, Tóth M (2012) Attraction of Lygus rugulipennis and Adelphocoris lineolatus to synthetic floral odour compounds in field experiments in Hungary. J Pest Sci 85:239–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lowor ST, Del Socorro AP, Gregg PC (2009) Sex pheromones of the green mirid, Creontiades dilutus (Stal) (Hemiptera: Miridae). Int J Agric Res 4:137–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Millar JG, Rice RE (1998) Sex pheromone of the plant bug Phytocoris californicus. J Econ Entomol 23:1743–1755Google Scholar
  34. Millar JG, Rice RE, Wang Q (1997) Sex pheromone of the mirid bug Phytocoris relativus. J Chem Ecol 23:1743–1755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Millar JG, Ho H, Hudson N (2000) Progress and obstacles to developing Lygus bug pheromones. Proceedings, Lygus Bug Summit, 28 November, 2000. University of CA Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, VisaliaGoogle Scholar
  36. Moreira JA, Millar JG (2005) Short and simple syntheses of 4-oxo-(E)-2-hexenal and homologs: pheromone components and defensive compounds of Hemiptera. J Chem Ecol 31:965–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nau B (2004) Identification of plantbugs of the genus Lygus in Britain. Het News 3:11Google Scholar
  38. Okutani-Akamatsu K, Watanabe T, Azuma M (2007) Mating attraction by Stenotus rubrovittatus (Heteroptera: Miridae) females and its relationship to ovarian development. J Econ Entomol 100:1276–1281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Scales AL (1968) Female tarnished plant bugs attract males. J Econ Entomol 61:1466–1467Google Scholar
  40. Scott WP, Snodgrass GL (2000) Response of tarnished plant bugs (Heteroptera: Miridae) to traps baited with virgin males or females. Southwest Entomol 25:101–107Google Scholar
  41. Steiger S, Schmitt T, Schaefer M (2011) The origin and dynamic evolution of chemical information transfer. Proc R Soc B 278:970–979PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Strong FE, Sheldah JA, Hughes PR, Hussein EMK (1970) Reproductive biology of Lygus hesperus Knight. Hilgardia 40:105–147Google Scholar
  43. Wardle AR, Borden JH (2003) Sexual attraction among Lygus (Hemiptera: Miridae) species. Can Entomol 135:733–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wardle AR, Borden JH, Pierce HD Jr, Gries R (2003) Volatile compounds released by disturbed and calm adults of the tarnished plant bug, Lygus lineolaris. J Chem Ecol 29:931–944PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wheeler AG (2000) Plant bugs (Miridae) as plant pests. In: Schaefer CW, Panizzi AR (eds) Heteroptera of economic importance. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 37–84Google Scholar
  46. Yasuda T, Higuchi H (2012) Sex pheromones of Stenotus rubrovittatus and Trigonotylus caelestialium, two mirid bugs causing pecky rice, and their application to insect monitoring in Japan. Psyche 2012:8ppCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Yasuda T, Shigehisa S, Yuasa K, Okutani-Akamatsu Y (2008) Sex attractant pheromone of the sorghum plant bug Stenotus rubrovittatus (Matsumura) (Heteroptera: Miridae). Appl Entomol Zool 43:219–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhang T (2012). The study of the extraction, identification and application of sex pheromone produced by Apolygus lucorum. http://www.globethesis.com/?t=1103330335479304
  49. Zhang QH, Aldrich JR (2003) Pheromones of milkweed bugs (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae) attract wayward plant bugs: sex pheromones of two Phytocoris mirids. J Chem Ecol 29:1835–1851PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zhang Q-H, Aldrich JR (2008) Sex pheromone of the plant bug, Phytocoris calli Knight. J Chem Ecol 34:719–724PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang O-H, Chauhan KR, Zhang A, Snodgrass LG, Dickens JC, Aldrich JR (2007) Antennal and behavioral responses of Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) (Heteroptera: Miridae) to metathoracic scent gland compounds. J Entomol Sci 42:92–104Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle Fountain
    • 1
  • Gunnhild Jåstad
    • 1
  • David Hall
    • 2
  • Paul Douglas
    • 2
  • Dudley Farman
    • 2
  • Jerry Cross
    • 1
  1. 1.East Malling ResearchKentUK
  2. 2.Natural Resources InstituteUniversity of GreenwichKentUK

Personalised recommendations