Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 42, Issue 8, pp 821–828 | Cite as

Messages from the Other Side: Parasites Receive Damage Cues from their Host Plants

  • Muvari Connie Tjiurutue
  • Philip C. Stevenson
  • Lynn S. Adler
Article

Abstract

As sessile organisms, plants rely on their environment for cues indicating imminent herbivory. These cues can originate from tissues on the same plant or from different individuals. Since parasitic plants form vascular connections with their host, parasites have the potential to receive cues from hosts that allow them to adjust defenses against future herbivory. However, the role of plant communication between hosts and parasites for herbivore defense remains poorly investigated. Here, we examined the effects of damage to lupine hosts (Lupinus texensis) on responses of the attached hemiparasite (Castilleja indivisa), and indirectly, on a specialist herbivore of the parasite, buckeyes (Junonia coenia). Lupines produce alkaloids that act as defenses against herbivores that can be taken up by the parasite. We found that damage to lupine host plants by beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua) significantly increased jasmonic acid (JA) levels in both the lupine host and parasite, suggesting uptake of phytohormones or priming of parasite defenses by using host cues. However, lupine host damage did not induce changes in alkaloid levels in the hosts or parasites. Interestingly, the parasite had substantially higher concentrations of JA and alkaloids compared to lupine host plants. Buckeye herbivores consumed more parasite tissue when attached to damaged compared to undamaged hosts. We hypothesize that increased JA due to lupine host damage induced higher iridoid glycosides in the parasite, which are feeding stimulants for this specialist herbivore. Our results demonstrate that damage to hosts may affect both parasites and associated herbivores, indicating cascading effects of host damage on multiple trophic levels.

Keywords

Alkaloids Herbivory Parasitism Plant communication Plant-plant interactions Performance Phytohormones 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Adler lab members, D. Chan, L. Ndanga, and A. Soleil with plant propagation and data collection, A. Agrawal and A. Kessler labs for help with phytohormone analysis, C. Joyner and colleagues at the UMass CNS greenhouses, Dudley Farman (Nat Res Inst) for help with chemical analysis, and S. McArt and two anonymous reviewers for providing valuable feedback on this manuscript. Thanks to Fulbright Fellowship (MCT), Faculty for the Future Fellowship (MCT), Plant Biology Graduate program (MCT), USDA/CSREES (Hatch) MAS000411 (LSA) and USDA NRI 2008-02346 (LSA) for funding.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Funding

The study was funded by Fulbright Fellowship (MCT), Faculty for the Future Fellowship (MCT), Plant Biology Graduate program (MCT), USDA/CSREES (Hatch) MAS000411 (LSA) and USDA NRI 2008–02,346 (LSA).

Conflict of Interest

Author LSA has received recent research grants from USDA-AFRI, NSF-DEB, the North American Pollinator Protection Campaign (co-PI), and the Dartmouth Scholarly Innovation and Advancement Awards (co-PI). All other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Supplementary material

10886_2016_746_MOESM1_ESM.docx (118 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 118 kb)

References

  1. Adler LS (2000) Alkaloid uptake increases fitness in a hemiparasitic plant via reduced herbivory and increased pollination. Am Nat 156:92–99CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Adler LS (2002) Host effects on herbivory and pollination in a hemiparasitic plant. Ecology 83:2700–2710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Adler LS, Wink M (2001) Transfer of quinolizidine alkaloids from hosts to hemiparasites in two Castilleja-Lupinus associations: analysis of floral and vegetative tissues. Biochem Syst Ecol 29:551–561CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Adler LS, Karban R, Strauss SY (2001) Direct and indirect effects of alkaloids on plant fitness via herbivory and pollination. Ecology 82:2032–2044CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Agrawal AA (1999) Induced responses to herbivory in wild radish: effects on several herbivores and plant fitness. Ecology 80:1713–1723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowers MD (1984) Iridoid glycosides and host-plant specificity in larvae of the buckeye butterfly, Junonia coenia (Nymphalidae. J Chem Ecol 10:1567–1577CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Cabezas NJ, Urzua AM, Niemeyer HM (2009) Translocation of isoquinoline alkaloids to the hemiparasite, Tristerix verticillatus from its host, Berberis montana. Biochem Syst Ecol 37:225–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Callaway RM (1995) Positive interactions among plants. Bot Rev 61:306–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chludil HD, Vilarino MD, Franco ML, Leicach SR (2009) Changes in Lupinus albus and Lupinus angustifolius alkaloid profiles in response to mechanical damage. J Agric Food Chem 57:6107–6113CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Chludil HD, Leicach SR, Corbino GB, Barriga LG, Vilarino MD (2013) Genistin and quinolizidine alkaloid induction in L. angustifolius aerial parts in response to mechanical damage. J Plant Interact 8:117–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Erb M, Robert CAM, Hibbard BE, Turlings TCJ (2011) Sequence of arrival determines plant-mediated interactions between herbivores. J Ecol 99:7–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. The Univeristy of Chicago Press, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Karban R, Myers JH (1989) Induced plant responses to herbivory. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 20:331–348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karban R, Baldwin IT, Baxter KJ, Laue G, Felton GW (2000) Communication between plants: induced resistance in wild tobacco plants following clipping of neighboring sagebrush. Oecologia 125:66–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Karban R, Shiojiri K, Huntzinger M, McCall AC (2006) Damage-induced resistance in sagebrush: volatiles are key to intra- and interplant communication. Ecology 87:922–930CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Karban R, Shiojiri K, Ishizaki S, Wetzel WC, Evans RY (2013) Kin recognition affects plant communication and defence. Proc R Soc B-Biol Sci 280:5Google Scholar
  17. Karban R, Wetzel WC, Shiojiri K, Ishizaki S, Ramirez SR, Blande JD (2014) Deciphering the language of plant communication: volatile chemotypes of sagebrush. New Phytol 204:380–385CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kuijt J (1969) The biology of parasitic flowering plants, illustrated edn. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  19. Lattanzio V, Lattanzio VMT, Cardinali A (2006) Role of phenolics in the resistance mechanisms of plants against fungal pathogens and insects. Phytochemistry. Adv Dent Res 661:23–67Google Scholar
  20. Lehtonen P, Helander M, Wink M, Sporer F, Saikkonen K (2005) Transfer of endophyte-origin defensive alkaloids from a grass to a hemiparasitic plant. Ecol Lett 8:1256–1263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loughmiller C, La L, Sherrod L (1984) Texas wildflowers: A field guide. University of Texas Press, AustinGoogle Scholar
  22. Marvier MA (1996) Parasitic plant-host interactions: plant performance and indirect effects on parasite-feeding herbivores. Ecology 77:1398–1409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Marvier MA (1998) A mixed diet improves performance and herbivore resistance of a parasitic plant. Ecology 79:1272–1280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mithöfer A, Boland W (2012) Plant defense against herbivores: chemical aspects. Annu Rev Plant Biol 63:431–450CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Moeller DA (2004) Facilitative interactions among plants via shared pollinators. Ecology 85:3289–3301CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nykanen H, Koricheva J (2004) Damage-induced changes in woody plants and their effects on insect herbivore performance: a meta-analysis. Oikos 104:247–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Palmer TM, Stanton ML, Young TP (2003) Competition and coexistence: exploring mechanisms that restrict and maintain diversity within mutualist guilds. Am Nat 162:S63–S79CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Phoenix GK, Press MC (2005) Linking physiological traits to impacts on community structure and function: the role of root hemiparasitic Orobanchaceae (ex-scrophulariaceae. J Ecol 93:67–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Poelman EH, Broekgaarden C, Van Loon JJA, Dicke M (2008) Early season herbivore differentially affects plant defence responses to subsequently colonizing herbivores and their abundance in the field. Mol Ecol 17:3352–3365CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Press MC, Graves JD (1995) Parasitic plants. First edn. Chapman & Hall. 2–6 Boundary Row, London SE1 8HNGoogle Scholar
  31. R: A language and environment for statistical computing (2014) R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Reference Source.Google Scholar
  32. Runyon JB, Mescher MC, De Moraes CM (2008) Parasitism by Cuscuta pentagona attenuates host plant defenses against insect herbivores. Plant Physiol 146:987–995CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Runyon JB, Mescher MC, Felton GW, De Moraes CM (2010) Parasitism by Cuscuta pentagona sequentially induces JA and SA defense pathways in tomato. Plant Cell Environ 33:290–303CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Smith JD, Mescher MC, De Moraes CM (2013) Implications of bioactive solute transfer from hosts to parasitic plants. Curr Opin Plant Biol 16:464–472CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Stam JM, Kroes A, Li YH, Gols R, van Loon JJA, Poelman EH, Dicke M (2014) Plant interactions with multiple insect herbivores: from community to genes. Ann rev. Plant Biol 65:689–713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stermitz FR, Pomeroy M (1992) Chemistry of the schrophulariaceae. 23. Iridoid glycosides from Castilleja purpurea and C. indivisa, and quinolizidine alkaloid transfer from Lupinus texensis to C. indivisa via root parasitism. Biochem Syst Ecol 20:473–475CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stermitz FR, Belofsky GN, Ng D, Singer MC (1989) Quinolizidine alkaloids obtained by Pedicularis-semibarbata (scrophulariaceae) from Lupinus-fulcratus (leguminosae) fail to influence the specialist herbivore Euphydryas-editha (lepidoptera. J Chem Ecol 15:2521–2530CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Strauss SY, Siemens DH, Decher MB, Mitchell-Olds T (1999) Ecological costs of plant resistance to herbivores in the currency of pollination. Evolution 53:1105–1113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Thaler JS, Stout MJ, Karban R, Duffey SS (2001) Jasmonate-mediated induced plant resistance affects a community of herbivores. Ecol Entomol 26:312–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Thaler JS, Agrawal AA, Halitschke R (2010) Salicylate-mediated interactions between pathogens and herbivores. Ecology 91:1075–1082CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Theodoratus D, Bowers MD (1999) Effects of sequestered iridoid glycosides on prey choice of the prairie wolf spider, Lycosa carolinensis. J Chem Ecol 25:283–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Vilarino MD, Mareggiani G, Grass MY, Leicach SR, Ravetta DA (2005) Post-damage alkaloid concentration in sweet and bitter lupin varieties and its effect on subsequent herbivory. J Appl Entomol 129:233–238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wink M (1983) Wounding-induced increase of quinolizidine alkaloid accumulation in lupin leaves. Z Naturforsch(C) 38:905–909Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Muvari Connie Tjiurutue
    • 1
    • 2
  • Philip C. Stevenson
    • 3
    • 4
  • Lynn S. Adler
    • 1
  1. 1.Biology DepartmentUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstAmherstUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry & BiochemistryUniversity of NamibiaWindhoekNamibia
  3. 3.Natural Resources InstituteUniversity of GreenwichKentUK
  4. 4.Royal Botanic GardensRichmondUK

Personalised recommendations