Advertisement

Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 109–115 | Cite as

Quinolizidine and Pyrrolizidine Alkaloid Chemical Ecology – a Mini-Review on Their Similarities and Differences

  • Michael WinkEmail author
Review Article

Abstract

This mini-review summarizes over 40 years of research on quinolizidine (QAs) and pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs). Emphasis is on the chemical ecology of both groups of alkaloids, which serve as general defense compounds against herbivores for the plants producing them. For QAs and PAs, a number of insects (aphids, moths, beetles) have acquired tolerance. These specialists store the alkaloids and use them as defense chemicals against predators. In some PA sequestering moths, the adaptation is even more intricate and advanced. PAs can function as a morphogen to induce the formation of male coremata, inflatable organs that dissipate pheromones. In these insects, PAs are additionally used as a precursor for male pheromones. Female moths utilize their own PAs and those obtained from males via the spermatophore as nuptial gift, to transfer them to the eggs that thus become chemically protected. Novel genomic technologies will allow deeper insights in the molecular evolution of these two classes of alkaloids in plant-insect interactions.

Keywords

Quinolizidine alkaloids Pyrrolizidine alkaloids Chemical ecology Lupins Insect herivores Plant-herbivore interactions 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Thomas Hartmann was my PhD supervisor at the Technical University of Braunschweig between 1977 and 1980. From 1980 to 1985 he was a mentor for my Post-Doc studies leading to my habilitation in 1985. I am always thankful to Thomas Hartmann that he had lured me away from zoology into botany and pharmaceutical biology for my PhD studies. What both of us did not know at that time, was that we would develop a serious interest in chemical ecology and the functional aspects of plant alkaloids and various trophic levels. After 40 years of endeavour, I am happy to say that this deviation was worth it.

References

  1. Aardema ML, Andolfatto P (2016) Phylogenetic incongruence and evolutionary origins of cardenolide-resistant forms of Na+,K+-ATPase in Danaus butterflies. Evolution 70:1913–1921CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ali JG, Agrawal AA (2012) Specialist versus generalist insect herbivores and plant defense. Trends Plant Sci 17:292–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernays EA, Chapman RF, Hartmann T (2002) A taste receptor neurone dedicated to the perception of pyrrolizidine alkaloids in the medial galeal sensillium of two polyphagous arctiid caterpillars. Physiol Entomol 27:312–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernays EA, Chapman RF, Lamunyon CW, Hartmann T (2003) Taste receptors for pyrrolizidine alkaloids in a monophagous caterpillar. J Chem Ecol 29:1709–1722CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bezzerides A, Eisner T (2002) Apportionment of nuptial alkaloidal gifts by a multiply-mated female moth (Utetheisa ornatrix): eggs individually receive alkaloids from more than one male source. Chemoecol 12:213–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bogner F, Boppré M (1989) Single cell recordings reveal hydroxydanaidal as the volatile compound attracting insects to pyrrolizidine alkaloids. Entomol Exp Appl 50:171–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boppré M (1984) Redefining “pharmacophagy”. J Chem Ecol 10:1151–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boppré M (1986) Insects pharmacophagously utilising defensive plant chemicals (pyrrolizidine alkaloids). Naturwissenschaften 73:17–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cogni R, Trigo JR, Futuyma DJ (2012) A free lunch? No cost for acquiring defensive plant pyrrolizidine alkaloids in a specialist arctiid moth (Utetheisa ornatrix). Mol Ecol 21:6152–6162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Conner WE, Boada R, Schroeder FC, Gonzalez A, Meinwald J, Eisner T (2000) Chemical defense: bestowal of a nuptial alkaloidal garment by a male moth on its mate. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 97:14406–14411CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dobler S (2001) Evolutionary aspects of defense by recycled plant compounds in herbivorous insects. Basic Appl Ecol 2:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dobler S, Dalla S, Wagschal V, Agrawal AA (2012) Community-wide convergent evolution in insect adaptation to toxic cardenolides by substitutions in the Na,K-ATPase. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 109:13040–13045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Egelhaaf A, Cölln K, Schmitz B, Buck M, Wink M, Schneider D (1990) Organ specific storage of dietary pyrrolizidine alkaloids in the arctiid moth Creatonotos transiens. J Biosci 45 c:115–120Google Scholar
  14. Eisner T, Eisner M, Siegler M (2007) Secret weapons: defenses of insects, spiders, scorpions, and other many-legged creatures. Harvard University Press, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. El-Shazly A, Wink M (2014) Structures, distribution, and biological properties of pyrrolizidine alkaloids of the Boraginaceae. Diversity 6:188–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Frick KM, Kamphuis LG, Siddique KHM, Singh KB, Foley RC (2017) Quinolizidine alkaloid biosynthesis in lupins and prospects for grain quality improvement. Front Plant Sci 8:87.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.00087 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gonzalez A, Rossini C, Eisner M, Eisner T (1999) Sexually transmitted chemical defense in a moth (Utetheisa ornatrix). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 96:5570–5574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Harborne JB (2014) Introduction to ecological biochemistry. 4th ed. Academic Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. Hartmann T (1999) Chemical ecology of pyrrolizidine alkaloids. Planta 207:483–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hartmann T (2004) Plant-derived secondary metabolites as defensive chemicals in herbivorous insects: a case study in chemical ecology. Planta 219:1–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hartmann T (2007) From waste products to ecochemicals: fifty years research of plant secondary metabolism. Phytochemistry 68:2831–2846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hartmann T, Witte L (1995) Chemistry, biology and chemoecology of the pyrrolizidine alkaloids. In: Pelletier SW (ed) Alkaloids: Chemical and Biological Perspectives, vol 9. pp 155–233Google Scholar
  23. Holzinger F, Wink M (1996) Mediation of cardiac glycoside insensitivity in the monarch (Danaus plexippus): role of an amino acid substitution in the ouabain binding site of Na+,K+ -ATPase. J Chem Ecol 22:1921–1937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Holzinger F, Frick C, Wink M (1992) Molecular base for the insensitivity of the monarch (Danaus plexippus) to cardiac glycosides. FEBS Lett 314:477–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Käss E, Wink M (1997) Molecular phylogeny and phylogeography of the genus Lupinus (family Leguminosae) inferred from nucleotide sequences of the RbcL gene and ITS 1+2 sequences of rDNA. Plant Syst Evol 208:139–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kelly CA, Bowers MD (2016) Preference and performance of generalist and specialist herbivores on chemically defended host plants. Ecol Entomol 41:308–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Laurent P, Braekman J-C Daloze D (2005) Insect chemical defense. Top Curr Chem 240:167–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lindigkeit R, Biller A, Buch M, Schiebel HM, Boppré M, Hartmann T (1997) The two faces of pyrrolizidine alkaloids: the role of the tertiary amine and its N-oxide in chemical defense of insects with acquired plant alkaloids. Eur J Biochem 245:626–636CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Macel M (2011) Attract and deter: a dual role for pyrrolizidine alkaloids in plant-insect interactions. Phytochem Rev 10:75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Martins CHZ, Cunha BP, Solferini VN, Trigo JR (2015) Feeding on host plants with different concentrations and structures of pyrrolizidine alkaloids impacts the chemical defense effectiveness of a specialist herbivore. PLoS One 10(10):e0141480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mason PA, Singer MS (2015) Defensive mixology: combining acquired chemicals towards defence. Funct Ecol 29:441–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mende P, Wink M (1987) Uptake of the quinolizidine alkaloid lupanine by protoplasts and isolated vacuoles of suspension-cultured Lupinus polyphyllus cells. Diffusion or carrier-mediated transport? J Plant Physiol 129:229–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nevado B, Atchison GW, Hughes CE, Filatov DA (2016) Widespread adaptive evolution during repeated evolutionary radiations in New World lupins. Nat Commun.  https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms12384
  34. Pennisi E (2017) How do gut microbes help herbivores? Counting the ways. Science 355:236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Petschenka G, Agrawal AA (2016) How herbivores coopt plant defences: natural selection, specialization and sequestration. Curr Opin Insect Sci 14:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Schmeller T, El-Shazly A, Wink M (1997) Allelochemical activities of pyrrolizidine alkaloids: interactions with neuroreceptors and acetylcholine related enzymes. J Chem Ecol 23:399–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Schneider D, Boppré M, Zweig J, Horsley SB, Bell TW, Meinwald J, Hansen K, Diehl EW (1982) Scent organ development in Creatonotos moths: regulation by pyrrolizidine alkaloids. Science 215:1264–1265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schulz S (1998) Insect-plant interactions – metabolism of plant compounds to pheromones and allomones by Lepidoptera and leaf beetles. Eur J Org Chem 1998:13–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schulz S, Francke W, Boppré M, Eisner T, Meinwald J (1993) Insect pheromone biosynthesis: Stereochemical pathway of hydroxydanaidal production from alkaloidal precursors in Creatonotos transiens (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae). Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 90:6834–6838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Trigo JR (2011) Effects of pyrrolizidine alkaloids through different trophic levels. Phytochem Rev 10:83–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Vleugels R, Verlinden H, van den Broeck J (2015) Serotonin, serotonin receptors and their action in insects. Neurotransmitter 2:e314Google Scholar
  42. von Nickisch-Rosenegk E, Wink M (1993) Sequestration of pyrrolizidine alkaloids in several arctiid moths (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). J Chem Ecol 19:1889–1903CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. von Nickisch-Rosenegk E, Schneider D, Wink M (1990) Time-course of pyrrolizidine alkaloid processing in the alkaloid exploiting arctiid moth, Creatonotos transiens. J Biosci 45(c):881–894Google Scholar
  44. Wang L, Beuerle T, Timbilla J, Ober D (2012) Independent recruitment of a flavin-dependent monooxygenase for safe accumulation of sequestered pyrrolizidine alkaloids in grasshoppers and moths. PLoS One 7(2):e31796CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wink M (1984) N-methylation of quinolizidine alkaloids: an S-adenosyl-L-methionine: cytisine N-methyltransferase from Laburnum anagyroides plants and cell cultures of L. alpinum and Cytisus canariensis. Planta 161:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wink M (1988) Plant breeding: importance of plant secondary metabolites for protection against pathogens and herbivores. Theor Appl Genet 75:225–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wink M (1992) The role of quinolizidine alkaloids in plant insect interactions. In: Bernays EA (ed) Insect- plant interactions, vol IV. CRC-Press, Boca Raton, pp 133–169Google Scholar
  48. Wink M (1993) In: Waterman P (ed) Quinolizidine alkaloids: In methods in plant biochemistry, vol 8. Academic Press, London, pp 197–239Google Scholar
  49. Wink M (2000) Interference of alkaloids with neuroreceptors and ion channels. Bioactive Nat Prod 21:3–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wink M (2003) Evolution of secondary metabolites from an ecological and molecular phylogenetic perspective. Phytochemistry 64:3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Wink M (2018) Plant secondary metabolites modulate insect behaviour- steps towards addiction? Front Physiol 9:364.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2018.00364 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wink M, Hartmann T (1978) Cadaverine-pyruvate transamination: the pricipal step of enzymatic quinolizidine alkaloid biosynthesis in Lupinus polyphyllus cell suspension cultures. FEBS Lett 101:343–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Wink M, Hartmann T (1982a) Enzymatic synthesis of alkaloid esters: a tigloyl-CoA: 13-hydroxylupanine O-tigloyl transferase from Lupinus albus. Planta 156:560–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Wink M, Hartmann T (1982b) Localization of the enzymes of quinolizidine alkaloid biosynthesis in leaf chloroplasts of Lupinus polyphyllus. Plant Physiol 70:74–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Wink M, Römer P (1986) Acquired toxicity- the advantages of specializing on alkaloid-rich lupins to Macrosiphum albifrons (Aphidae). Naturwissenschaften 73:210–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wink M, Schneider D (1988) Carrier-mediated uptake of pyrrolizidine alkaloids in larvae of the aposematic and alkaloid exploiting moth, Creatonotos. Naturwissenschaften 75:524–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wink M, Schneider D (1990) Fate of plant-derived secondary metabolites in three moth species (Syntomis mogadorensis, Syntomeida epilais, and Creatonotos transiens). J Comp Physiol B 160:389–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Wink M, Hartmann T, Schiebel HM (1979) A model mechanism for the enzymatic synthesis of lupin alkaloids. Z Naturforsch 34c:704–708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wink M, Schneider D, Witte L (1988) Biosynthesis of pyrrolizidine alkaloid-derived pheromones in the arctiid moth, Creatonotos transiens: Stereochemical conversion of heliotrine. J Biosci 43c:737–741Google Scholar
  60. Wink M, Monttlor C, Bernays EA, Witte L (1991) Uresiphita reversalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): carrier-mediated uptake and sequestration of quinolizidine alkaloids obtained from the host plant Teline monspessulana. Z Naturforsch 46c:1080–1088Google Scholar
  61. Wink M, Meißner C, Witte L (1995) Patterns of quinolizidine alkaloids in 56 species of the genus Lupinus. Phytochemistry 38:139–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wink M, Schmeller T, Latz-Brüning B (1998) Modes of action of allelochemical alkaloids: interaction with neuroreceptors, DNA and other molecular targets. J Chem Ecol 24:1881–1937CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wink M, Botschen F, Gosmann C, Schäfer H, Waterman PG (2010) Chemotaxonomy seen from a phylogenetic perspective and evolution of secondary metabolism. In: Wink M (ed) Biochemistry of plant secondary metabolism. Blackwell, Oxford, Annual Plant Reviews, vol 40. pp 364–433Google Scholar
  64. Zagrobelny M, Moller BL (2011) Cyanogenic glucosides in the biological warfare between plants and insects: the Burnet moth- Birdsfoot trefoil model system. Phytochemistry 72:1585–1592CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Heidelberg University, Institute of Pharmacy and Molecular BiotechnologyHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations