Applied Entomology and Zoology

, Volume 49, Issue 2, pp 249–253 | Cite as

Leaf beetle larvae, Plagiodera versicolora (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), show decreased performance on uninfested host plants exposed to airborne factors from plants infested by conspecific larvae

  • Kinuyo Yoneya
  • Soichi Kugimiya
  • Junji Takabayashi
Original Research Paper


Undamaged plants are known to suffer less damage from herbivores when previously exposed to airborne factors from neighboring plants that are either infested or artificially damaged. However, to date, the effects of such a defensive phenomenon on performance of herbivorous insects have not been clearly shown. Here, we studied such effects in an interaction between a willow plant, Salix eriocarpa Franchet et Savatier (Salicales: Salicaceae), and a specialist leaf beetle, Plagiodera versicolora (Laicharting) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). In a wind tunnel, uninfested willow plants were placed downwind of willow plants infested by leaf beetle larvae for 4 days. As a control, we placed uninfested plants downwind of uninfested plants in the tunnel. After exposure, downwind plants were served to leaf beetle larvae. Pupal weight, larval survival rates, and the leaf area consumed by larvae all decreased significantly, and larval developmental duration increased significantly, when larvae fed on willow plants downwind of infested plants were compared with those downwind of uninfested plants. These results showed that airborne factors from infested willow plants negatively affected the performance of leaf beetle larvae. Further studies are needed to identify the active factor(s) from the infested willow plants affecting the performance of leaf beetle larvae.


Plagiodera versicolora Wind tunnel Airborne factors Performance Mode of action Slow growth–high mortality hypothesis 



This research was partly supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (S) (No. 240 19101009), Japanese Society for Promotion of Science Core-to-Core project, Japan, and by the Global Center of Excellence Program 241 “Formation of a Strategic Base for Biodiversity and Evolutionary Research: from Genome to 242 Ecosystem” of Kyoto University, Japan.


  1. Arimura G, Ozawa R, Shimoda T, Nishioka T, Boland W, Takabayashi J (2000) Herbivory-induced volatiles elicit defence genes in lima bean leaves. Nature 406:512–515PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arimura G, Matsui K, Takabayashi J (2009) Chemical and molecular ecology of herbivore-induced plant volatiles: proximate factors and their ultimate functions. Plant Cell Physiol 50:911–923PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999999-0.
  4. Benrey B, Denno RF (1997) The slow-growth–high-mortality hypothesis: a test using the cabbage butterfly. Ecology 78:987–999Google Scholar
  5. Brostrom G, Holmberg H (2011) glmmML: Generalized linear models with clustering. R packageGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruin J, Dicke M, Sabelis M (1992) Plants are better protected against spider-mites after exposure to volatiles from infested conspecifics. Cell Mol Life Sci 48:525–529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Choh Y, Shimoda T, Ozawa R, Dicke M, Takabayashi J (2004) Exposure of lima bean leaves to volatiles from herbivore-induced conspecific plants results in emission of carnivore attractants: active or passive process? J Chem Ecol 30:1305–1317PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fowler SV, Lawton JH (1985) Rapidly induced defenses and talking trees: the devil’s advocate position. Am Nat 126:181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fox J, Weisberg S (2011) An {R} companion to applied regression, 2nd edn. Sage, Thousand Oaks.
  10. Frost CJ, Appel HM, Carlson JE, De Moraes CM, Mescher MC, Schultz JC (2007) Within-plant signalling via volatiles overcomes vascular constraints on systemic signalling and primes responses against herbivores. Ecol Lett 10:490–498PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Heil M, Karban R (2010) Explaining evolution of plant communication by airborne signals. Trends Ecol Evol 25:137–144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heil M, Silva Bueno JC (2007) Within-plant signalling by volatiles leads to induction and priming of an indirect plant defence in nature. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:5467–5472PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hood CE (1940) Life history and control of the imported willow leaf beetle. US Dept Agric Circ 572:1–9Google Scholar
  14. Karban R, Shiojiri K (2009) Self-recognition affects plant communication and defense. Ecol Lett 12:502–506PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 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
  16. Karban R, Shiojiri K, Huntzinger M, McCall AC (2006) Damage-induced resistance in sagebrush: volatiles are key to intra- and interplant communication. Ecology 87:922–930PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kimoto S, Takizawa H (1994) Leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae) of Japan. Tokai University Press, Kanagawa (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  18. Kimura Y (1989) Salicaceae. In: Satake Y, Hara H, Watari S, Tominari T (eds) Wild flowers of Japan: woody plants. Heibonsha, Tokyo, pp 31–51 (in Japanese)Google Scholar
  19. Pearse IS, Hughes K, Shiojiri k, Ishizaki S, Karban R (2013) Interplant volatile signalling in willows: revisiting the original talking trees. Oecologia 172:869–875PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. R Core Team (2012) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
  21. Rhoades DF (1983) Responses of alder and willow to attack by tent caterpillars and webworms: evidence for pheromonal sensitivity of willows. In: Hedin P (ed) Plant resistance to insects. ACS Symp. Ser, Washington, DC, pp 55–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sugimoto T, Shimono Y, Hata Y, Nakai A, Yahara M (1998) Foraging for patchily-distributed leaf-miners by the parasitoid, Dapsilarthra rufiventris (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) III. Visual and acoustic cues to a close range patch-location. Appl Entomol Zool 23:113–121Google Scholar
  23. Williams I (1999) Slow-growth, high-mortality—a general hypothesis, or is it? Ecol Entomol 24:490–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Yoneya K, Takabayashi J (2013) Interaction-information networks mediated by plant volatiles: a case study on willow trees. J Plant Inter 8:197–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Yoneya K, Kugimiya S, Takabayashi J (2009a) Do adult leaf beetles (Plagiodera versicolora) discriminate between odors from uninfested and leaf-beetle-infested willow shoots? J Plant Interact 4:125–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yoneya K, Kugimiya S, Takabayashi J (2009b) Can herbivore-induced plant volatiles inform predatory insects about the most suitable stage of its prey? Physiol Entomol 34:379–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Yoneya K, Ozawa R, Takabayashi J (2010) Specialist leaf beetle larvae use volatiles from willow leaves infested by conspecifics for reaggregation in a tree. J Chem Ecol 36:671–679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Society of Applied Entomology and Zoology 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kinuyo Yoneya
    • 1
  • Soichi Kugimiya
    • 1
    • 2
  • Junji Takabayashi
    • 1
  1. 1.Center for Ecological ResearchKyoto UniversityOtsuJapan
  2. 2.National Institute for Agro-Environmental SciencesTsukubaJapan

Personalised recommendations