Advertisement

Tree Genetics & Genomes

, Volume 8, Issue 5, pp 1051–1060 | Cite as

A rare major plant QTL determines non-responsiveness to a gall-forming insect in willow

  • Solveig HöglundEmail author
  • Ann Christin Rönnberg-Wästljung
  • Ulf Lagercrantz
  • Stig Larsson
Original Paper

Abstract

Growth and defence are plant traits that determine attack success by sessile herbivorous insects. Models of plant resistance suggest induced resistance to be an especially important mechanism in growth-dominated plant species. Little is known, however, about the effects of absence of induced responses as an alternative resistance mechanism. Large genetically based intraspecific variation in resistance (neonate larval mortality) occurs in Salix viminalis against the gall midge Dasineura marginemtorquens. In certain resistant genotypes, larval mortality is associated with formation of necrotic lesions and biochemical changes commonly found in hypersensitive response (HR). More detailed studies, however, have shown that resistance can occur without HR symptoms. By means of a quantitative trait locus (QTL) analysis, this study tested whether (1) resistance is caused by the HR or (2) by the failure of the midge to initiate a gall (non-responsiveness). One QTL explained 68 and 18 % of the variation in resistance in the experimental population during 2 years of investigation. Co-location of QTLs for resistance and HR was found in only one of the years, i.e. when HR was suppressed. The data suggest that the mechanism of resistance involves non-responsiveness, implying that the insect starves to death due to lack of resources. Such symptomless defence may be more important than previously thought because it is difficult to observe in nature.

Keywords

Dasineura marginemtorquens Gall midge Non-responsiveness Resistance QTL Salix viminalis Hypersensitive response HR 

Notes

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Carolyn Glynn, Colin Orians and two anonymous reviewers who commented on the earlier draft of this article, to Urban Pettersson for making the plant cross and to Ingrid Eriksson, Marika Pettersson, Yvonne Tillman, Marielle Stenmark and Anders Thorsten for field and laboratory assistance. This work was supported by the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (FORMAS)

Supplementary material

11295_2012_485_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (16 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 16 kb)

References

  1. Beavis WD (1994) The power and deceit of QTL experiments: lessons from comparative QTL studies. In proceedings of the forty-ninth annual corn and sorghum industry research conference. Am Seed Trade Assoc, Washington, DC. pp. 250–266Google Scholar
  2. Benjamins R, Scheres B (2008) Auxin: the looping star in plant development. Ann Rev Plant Biol 59:443–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berlin S, Lagercrantz U, von Arnold S, Öst T, Rönnberg-Wästljung AC (2010) High-density linkage mapping and evolution of paralogs and orthologs in Salix and Populus. BMC Genomics 11:129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen MS (2008) Inducible direct plant defence against insect herbivores: a review. Insect Sci 15:101–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Christian M, Steffens B, Schenck D, Burmester S, Böttger M, Lüthen H (2006) How does auxin enhance cell elongation? Roles of auxin-binding proteins and potassium channels in growth control. Plant Biol 8:346–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Crawley MJ (1997) Plant–herbivore dynamics. In: Crawley MJ (ed) Plant ecology. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp 401–474Google Scholar
  7. Espírito-Santo MM, Neves FS, Andrade-Neto FR, Fernandes GW (2007) Plant architecture and meristem dynamics as the mechanisms determining the diversity of gall-inducing insects. Oecologia 153:353–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fernandes GW (1990) Hypersensitivity: a neglected plant resistance mechanism against insect herbivores. Environ Entomol 19:1173–1182Google Scholar
  9. Flaherty L, Quring D (2008) Plant module size and dose of gall induction stimulus influence gall induction and galler performance. Oikos 117:1601–1608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Garcia-Lorenzo M, Sjödin A, Jansson S, Funk C (2006) Protease gene families in Populus and Arabidopsis. BMC Plant Biol 6:30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glynn C, Larsson S (1994) Gall initiation success and fecundity of Dasineura marginemtorquens on variable Salix viminalis host plants. Entomol Exp Appl 73:11–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hardwick RC (1986) Physiological consequences of modular growth in plants. Phil Trans R Soc Lond B 313:161–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Harris MO, Stuart JJ, Mohan M, Nair S, Lamb RJ, Rohfritsch O (2003) Grasses and gall midges: plant defense and insect adaptation. Annu Rev Entomol 48:549–577PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harris MO, Freeman TP, Rohfritsch O, Anderson KG, Payne SA, Moore JA (2006) Virulent Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) Larval induce a nutritive tissue during compatible interactions with wheat. Ann Entomol Soc Am 99:305–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Herms DA, Mattson WJ (1992) The dilemma of plants: to grow or defend. Q Rev Biol 67:283–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Höglund S, Larsson S (2005) Abiotic induction of susceptibility in insect-resistant willow. Entomol Exp Appl 115:89–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Höglund S, Larsson S, Wingsle G (2005) Both hypersensitive and non-hypersensitive responses are associated with resistance in Salix viminalis against the gall midge Dasineura marginemtorquens. J Exp Bot 56:3215–3222PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hylander N (1971) Första litteraturuppgift för Sveriges vildväxande kärlväxter jämte uppgifter om första fynd. Svensk Botanisk Tidskrift 64:1–322 (In Swedish)Google Scholar
  19. Ingestad T (1987) New concepts in soil fertility and plant nutrition as illustrated by research on forest trees and stands. Geoderma 40:237–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jansen RC, Stam P (1994) High resolution of quantitative traits into multiple loci via interval mapping. Genetics 136:1447–1455PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jonsell B (ed) (2000) Flora nordica. Bergius Foundation, StockholmGoogle Scholar
  22. Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  23. Kohler A, Rinaldi C, Duplessis S, Baucher M, Geelen D, DuchaussayF MBC, Boerjan W, Martin F (2008) Genome-wide identification of NBS resistance genes in Populus trichocarpa. Plant Mol Biol 66:619–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lander ES, Botstein D (1989) Mapping Mendelian factors underlying quantitative traits using RFLP linkage maps. Genetics 121:185–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Larson KC, Whitham TG (1991) Manipulation of food resources by a gall-forming aphid: the physiology of sink–source interactions. Oecologia 88:15–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Larsson S, Ekbom B (1995) Oviposition mistakes in herbivorous insects: confusion or a step towards a new host plant? Oikos 72:155–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Larsson S, Strong DR (1992) Oviposition choice and larval survival of Dasineura marginemtorquens (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) on resistant and susceptible Salix viminalis. Ecol Entomol 17:227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Larsson S, Glynn C, Höglund S (1995) High oviposition rate of Dasineura marginemtorquens on Salix viminalis genotypes unsuitable for offspring survival. Entomol Exp Appl 77:263–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lascoux M, Thorsén J, Gullberg U (1996) Population structure of a riparian willow species, Salix viminalis L. Genet Res 68:45–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ledin S (1992) The energy forestry production systems. Biomass Bioenergy 2:17–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Maffei ME, Mithöfer A, Boland W (2007) Insect feeding on plants: rapid signals and responses preceding the induction of phytochemical release. Phytochem 68:2946–2959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Major IT, Constabel CP (2008) Functional analysis of the Kunitz trypsin inhibitor family in poplar reveals biochemical diversity and multiplicity in defense against herbivores. Plant Physiol 146:888–903PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mani M (1964) The ecology of plant galls. Dr. W. Junk, The HagueGoogle Scholar
  34. Moyle R, Schrader J, Stenberg A, Olsson O, Saxena S, Sandberg G, Bhalero RP (2002) Environmental and auxin regulation of wood formation involves members of the Aux/IAA gene family in hybrid aspen. Plant J 31:675–685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mur LA, Kenton P, Lloyd AJ, Ougham H, Prats E (2008) The hypersensitive response; the centenary is upon us but how much do we know? J Exp Botany 3:501–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ollerstam O, Larsson S (2003) Salicylic acid mediates resistance in the willow Salix viminalis against the gall midge Dasineura marginemtorquens. J Chem Ecol 1:163–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ollerstam O, Rohfritsch O, Höglund S, Larsson S (2002) A rapid hypersensitive response associated with resistance in the willow Salix viminalis against the gall midge Dasineura marginemtorquens. Entomol Exp Appl 102:153–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Painter RH (1951) Insect Resistance in Crop Plants. The Macmillan Company, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Price PW (1991) The plant vigour hypothesis and herbivore attack. Oikos 62:244–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Price PW, Fernandes GW, Waring GL (1987) Adaptive nature of insect galls. Environ Entomolol 16:15–24Google Scholar
  41. Rehill BJ, Schultz JC (2001) Hormaphis hamamelidis and gall size: a test of the plant vigor hypothesis. Oikos 95:94–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Richael C, Gilchrist D (1999) The hypersensitive response: A case of hold or fold? Physiol Mol Plant Pathol 55:5–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Rohfritsch O (1992) Patterns in gall development. In: Shorthouse J, Rohfritsch O (eds) Biology of insect-induced galls. Oxford Univ. Press, New York, pp 60–86Google Scholar
  44. Roush TL, Granett J, Walker MA (2007) Inheritance of gall formation relative to Phylloxera resistance levels in hybrid grapevines. Am J Enol Vitic 2:234–241Google Scholar
  45. Saltzmann KD, Giovanini MP, Zheng C, Williams CE (2008) Virulent Hessian fly larvae manipulate the free amino acid content of host wheat plants. J Chem Ecol 34:1401–1410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sardesai N, Rajyashri KR, Behura SK, Nair S, Mohan M (2001) Genetic, physiological and molecular interactions of rice ant its major dipteran pest, gall midge. Plant Cell Tissue Organ Cult 64:115–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sewell MM, Bassoni DL, Megraw RA, Wheeler NC, Neale DB (2000) Identification of QTLs influencing wood property traits in loblolly pine (Pinus taeda L.) I. Physical wood properties. Theor Appl Genet 101:1273–1281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Shorthouse JD, Rohfritsch O (eds) (1992) Biology of insect-induced galls. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  49. Sirén G, Sennerby-Forsse L, Ledin S (1987) Energy plantations—short rotation forestry in Sweden. In: Hall DO, Overend RP (eds) Biomass regenerable energy. Wiley, London, pp 35–45Google Scholar
  50. Stone GN, Schönrogge K (2003) The adaptive significance of insect gall morphology. Trends Ecol Evol 18:512–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Strong DR, Larsson S, Gullberg U (1993) Heritability of host plant resistance to herbivory changes with gall midge density during an outbreak on willow. Evolution 47:291–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tsai C-J, Harding SA, Tschaplinski TJ, Lindroth RL, Yuan Y (2006) Genome-wide analysis of the structural genes regulating defense phenylpropanoid metabolism in Populus. New Phytol 172:47–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Van Ooijen JW (1992) Accuracy of mapping quantitative trait loci in autogamous species. Theor Appl Genet 84:803–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Van Ooijen JW (2009) MapQTL ® 6, Software for the mapping of quantitative trait loci in experimental populations of diploid species. Kyazma B.V, Wageningen, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  55. Walters DR (2011) Plant defense. Wiley-Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  56. Weis AE, Walton R, Crego CL (1988) Reactive plant tissue sites and the population biology of gall makers. Annu Rev Entomol 33:467–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Solveig Höglund
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ann Christin Rönnberg-Wästljung
    • 2
  • Ulf Lagercrantz
    • 3
  • Stig Larsson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EcologySwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Plant Biology and Forest GeneticsSwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden
  3. 3.Department of Evolutionary Functional GenomicsUppsala UniversityUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations