Arthropod-Plant Interactions

, Volume 3, Issue 4, pp 215–224 | Cite as

Airborne interactions between undamaged plants of different cultivars affect insect herbivores and natural enemies

  • Robert GlinwoodEmail author
  • Elham Ahmed
  • Erika Qvarfordt
  • Velemir Ninkovic
  • Jan Pettersson
Original Paper


This study investigated the effects of airborne interaction between different barley cultivars on the behaviour of bird cherry-oat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi, the ladybird Coccinella septempunctata and the parasitoid Aphidius colemani. In certain cultivar combinations, exposure of one cultivar to air passed over a different cultivar caused barley to have reduced aphid acceptance and increased attraction of ladybirds and parasitoids. Parasitoids attacked aphids that had developed on plants under exposure more often than those from unexposed plants, leading to a higher parasitisation rate. Ladybirds, but not parasitoids, were more attracted to combined odours from certain barley cultivars than either cultivar alone. The results show that airborne interactions between undamaged plants can affect higher trophic levels, and that odour differences between different genotypes of the same plant species may be sufficient to affect natural enemy behaviour.


Aphid Ladybird Parasitoid Volatiles 



This work was financially supported by Mistra through the PlantComMistra program and by the Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning (Formas).


  1. Andow DA (1991) Vegetational diversity and arthropod population response. Annu Rev Entomol 36:561–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baldwin IT, Halitschke R, Paschold A et al (2006) Volatile signaling in plant–plant interactions: talking trees in the genomics era. Science 311:812–815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Banks JE (1999) Differential response of two agroecosystem predators, Pterostichus manarius (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and Coccinella septempunctata (Coleptera: Coccinellidae), to habitat-composition and fragmentation-scale manipulations. Can Entomol 131:645–657Google Scholar
  4. Bi H, Zeng R, Su L et al (2007) Rice allelopathy induced by methyl jasmonate and methyl salicylate. J Chem Ecol 33:1089–1103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Cadet P, Berry SD, Leslie GW et al (2007) Management of nematodes and a stalk borer by increasing within-field sugarcane cultivar diversity. Plant Pathol 56:526–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Degen T, Dillmann C, Marion-Poll F et al (2004) High genetic variability of herbivore-induced volatile emission within a broad range of maize inbred lines. Plant Physiol 135:1928–1938CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dicke M, van Poecke RMP, de Boer JG (2003) Inducible indirect defence of plants: from mechanisms to ecological functions. Basic Appl Ecol 4:27–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott NC, Kieckhefer RW, Michels GJ Jr et al (2002) Predator abundance in alfalfa fields in relation to aphids, within-field vegetation, and landscape matrix. Environ Entomol 31:253–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elzen GW, Williams HJ, Vinson SB (1986) Wind tunnel flight responses by hymenopterous parasitoid Campoletis sonorensis to cotton cultivars and lines. Entomol Exp Appl 42:285–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glinwood RT, Pettersson J, Ninkovic V et al (2003) Change in acceptability of barley plants to aphids after exposure to allelochemicals from couch-grass (Elytrigia repens). J Chem Ecol 29:259–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Glinwood RT, Ninkovic V, Ahmed E et al (2004) Barley exposed to aerial allelopathy from thistles (Cirsium spp.) becomes less acceptable to aphids. Ecol Entomol 29:188–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glinwood RT, Gradin T, Karpinska B et al (2007) Aphid acceptance of barley exposed to volatile phytochemicals differs between plants exposed in daylight and darkness. Plant Signal Behav 2:205–210Google Scholar
  13. Karl T, Guenther A, Turnipseed A et al (2008) Chemical sensing of plant stress at the ecosystem scale. Biogeosciences 5:1287–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu S-S, Morton R, Hughes R (1984) Oviposition preferences of a hymenopterous parasitoid for certain instars of its aphid host. Entomol Exp Appl 35:249–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Loughrin JH, Manukian A, Heath RR et al (1995) Volatiles emitted by different cotton varieties damaged by feeding beet armyworm larvae. J Chem Ecol 21:1217–1227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Morrison LW, King JR (2004) Host location behavior in a parasitoid of imported fire ants. J Insect Behav 17:367–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mundt CC (2002) Use of multiline cultivars and cultivar mixtures for disease management. Annu Rev Phytopathol 40:381–410CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ninkovic V (2003) Volatile communication between barley plants affects biomass allocation. J Exp Bot 54:1931–1939Google Scholar
  19. Ninkovic V, Pettersson J (2003) Searching behaviour of seven-spotted ladybird, Coccinella septempunctata—effects of plant-plant odour interaction. Oikos 100:65–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ninkovic V, Al Albassi A, Pettersson J (2001) The influence of aphid-induced plants volatiles on ladybird beetle searching. Biol Control 21:191–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ninkovic V, Olsson U, Pettersson J (2002) Mixing barley cultivars affects aphid host plant acceptance in field experiments. Entomol Exp Appl 102:177–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ninkovic V, Ahmed E, Glinwood R et al (2003) Effects of two types of semiochemical on population development of the bird cherry oat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi in a barley crop. Agric For Entomol 5:1–7Google Scholar
  23. Ninkovic V, Glinwood R, Pettersson J (2006) Communication between undamaged plants by volatiles: the role of allelobiosis. In: Baluška F, Mancuso S, Volkmann D (eds) Communication in plants: neuronal aspects of plant life. Springer, Berlin, pp 421–434Google Scholar
  24. Nissinen A, Ibrahim M, Kainulainen P et al (2005) Influence of carrot psyllid (Trioza apicalis) feeding or exogenous limonene or methyl jasmonate treatment on composition of carrot (Daucus carota) leaf essential oil and headspace volatiles. J Agric Food Chem 53:8631–8638CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Pettersson J, Ninkovic V, Ahmed E (1999) Volatiles from different barley cultivars affect aphid acceptance of neighbouring plants. Acta Agric Scand B 49:152–157Google Scholar
  26. Pettersson J, Ninkovic V, Glinwood R, Birkett MA, Pickett JA (2005) Foraging in a complex environment—semiochemicals support searching behaviour of the seven spot ladybird. Eur J Entomol 102:365–370Google Scholar
  27. Pettersson J, Ninkovic V, Glinwood R et al (2008) Chemical stimuli supporting foraging behaviour of Coccinella septempunctata L (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae): volatiles and allelobiosis—a minireview. Appl Entomol Zool 43:315–321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Power AG (1991) Virus spread and vector dynamics in genetically diverse plant populations. Ecology 72:232–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Prado E, Tjallingii WF (1997) Effects of previous plant infestation on sieve element acceptance by two aphids. Entomol Exp Appl 82:189–200Google Scholar
  30. Rapusas HR, Bottrell DG, Coll M (1996) Intraspecific variation in chemical attraction of rice to insect predators. Biol Control 6:394–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rice EL (1984) Allelopathy, 2nd edn. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Root RB (1973) Organization of a plant–arthropod association in simple and diverse habitats: the fauna of collards (Brassica oeracea). Ecol Monogr 43:95–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Russell EP (1989) Enemies hypothesis: a review of the effect of vegetational diversity on insect predators and parasitoids. Environ Entomol 18:590–599Google Scholar
  34. Scutareanu P, Bruin J, Posthumus MA et al (2003) Constitutive and herbivore-induced volatiles in pear, alder and hawthorn trees. Chemoecology 13:63–74Google Scholar
  35. Starý P (1975) Aphidius colemani Viereck: its taxonomy, distribution and host range (Hymenoptera, Aphidiidae). Acta Entomol Bohemoslov 72:156–163Google Scholar
  36. Takabayashi J, Dicke M, Posthumus MA (1991) Variation in composition of predator-attracting allelochemicals emitted by herbivore-infested plants: relative influence of plant and herbivore. Chemoecology 2:1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Uvah III, Coaker TH (1984) Effect of mixed cropping on some insect pests of carrots and onions. Entomol Exp Appl 36:159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Vet LEM, Dicke M (1992) Ecology of infochemical use by natural enemies in a tritophic context. Ann Rev Entomol 37:141–172Google Scholar
  39. Vinson SB (1976) Host selection by insect parasitoids. Annu Rev Entomol 21:109–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wang Y, Kays SJ (2002) Sweetpotato volatile chemistry in relation to sweetpotato weevil (Cylas formicarius) behavior. J Am Soc Hortic Sci 127:656–662Google Scholar
  41. Weston LA, Duke SO (2003) Weed and crop allelopathy. Crit Rev Plant Sci 22:367–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Glinwood
    • 1
    Email author
  • Elham Ahmed
    • 1
  • Erika Qvarfordt
    • 1
  • Velemir Ninkovic
    • 1
  • Jan Pettersson
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EcologySwedish University of Agricultural SciencesUppsalaSweden

Personalised recommendations