Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 16, Issue 6, pp 1751–1759 | Cite as

Susceptibility ofHeliothis zea (Boddie) larvae toNomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson

Effects of α-tomatine at the third trophic level
  • F. Gallardo
  • D. J. Boethel
  • J. R. Fuxa
  • A. Richter


To determine the impact of α-tomatine at the third trophic level, the following model was developed:Nomuraea rileyi (Farlow) Samson, the secondary consumer, acting onHeliothis zea (Boddie), the primary consumer, fed an artificial diet modified with α-tomatine. In vitro, the allelochemical inhibited colony formation and growth of the fungus. The in vivo test revealed that larval growth and developmental time were affected by α-tomatine andN. rileyi. Detrimental effects on pupal development were observed in larvae fed diet containing α-tomatine and also treated withN. rileyi (LC90). The fungus was detected in the hemolymph and tissue of larvae treated with two lethal concentrations (LC50 and LC90) ofN. rileyi, including those fed α-tomatine. At the LC50, α-tomatine protected larvae againstN. rileyi and increased survivorship; at the LC90, it inhibited the development ofN. rileyi, thereby reducing production of conidia. Thus, the allelochemical α-tomatine retains its antifungal qualities beyond the second trophic level, inhibiting the development ofN. rileyi inH. zea.

Key words

Heliothis zea Lepidoptera Noctuidae Nomuraea rileyi Deuteromycotina fungi α-tomatine allelochemical third trophic level 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arneson, P.A., andDurbin, R.D. 1968. Studies on the mode of action of tomatine as a fungitoxic agent.Plant Physiol. 43:683–686.Google Scholar
  2. Barbosa, P., andSaunders, J.A. 1984. Plant allelochemicals: Lineage between herbivores and their natural enemies.Phytochem. Soc. North Am. Newslett. 24:23 (abstract).Google Scholar
  3. Barbosa, P.,Saunders, J.A., andWaldvogel, M. 1982. Plant mediated variation in herbivore suitability and parasitoid fitness. Proceedings, 5th International Symposium on Plant-Insect Relationships. Wageningen, pp. 63–71.Google Scholar
  4. Boucias, D.G., Bradford, L.D., andBarfield, C.S. 1984. Susceptibility of the velvetbean caterpillar and soybean looper (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) toNomumea rileyi: Effects of pathotype, dosage, temperature, and host age.J. Econ. Entomol. 77:247–53.Google Scholar
  5. Burton, R.L. 1969. Mass-rearing of the corn earworm in the laboratory. U.S. Department of Agriculture Research Service (Report) ARS 33–134.Google Scholar
  6. Campbell, B.C., andDuffey, S.S. 1981. Alleviation of α-tomatine induced toxicity to the parasitoid,Hyposoter exiguae, by phytosterols in the diet of the host,Heliothis zea.J. Chem. Ecol. 7:927–946.Google Scholar
  7. Carruthers, R.I., andSoper, R.S. 1987. Fungal diseases, pp. 357–416,in J.R. Fuxa and Y. Tanada (eds.). Epizootiology of Insect Diseases. John Wiley & Sons, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Costa, S.D., andGaugler, R.R. 1989. Sensitivity ofBeauveria bassiana to solanine and tomatine: Plant defensive chemicals inhibit an insect pathogen.J. Chem. Ecol. 15:697–707.Google Scholar
  9. Défago, G., andKern, H. 1983. Induction ofFusarium solani mutants insensitive to tomatine, their pathogenicity and aggressiveness to tomato fruits and pea plants.Physiol. Plant Pathol. 22:29–37.Google Scholar
  10. Duffey, S.S., Bloem, K.A., andCampbell, B.C. 1986. Consequences of sequestration of plant natural products in plant-insect-parasitoid interactions, pp. 31–61,in D.J. Boethel and R.D. Eikenbary (eds.). Interactions of Plant Resistance and Parasitoids and Predators of Insects. Ellis Horwood Limited, London, England.Google Scholar
  11. Gardner, W.A. 1985. Effects of temperature on the susceptibility ofHeliothis zea larvae toNomuraea rileyi.J. Invertebr. Pathol. 46:348–349.Google Scholar
  12. Hare, J.D., andAndreadis, T.G. 1983. Variation in the susceptibility ofLeptinotarsa decemlineata (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) when reared on different host plants to the fungal pathogen,Beauveria bassiana in the field and laboratory.Environ. Entomol. 12:1892–1897.Google Scholar
  13. Krischik, V.A., Barbosa, P., andReichelderfer, C.F. 1988. Three trophic level interactions: Allelocheniicals,Manduca sexta (L.) andBacillus thuringiensis var.kurstaki Berliner.Environ. Entomol. 17:476–482.Google Scholar
  14. Mohamed, A.K.A., Sikorowski, P.P., andBell, J.V. 1978. Histopathology ofNomuraea rileyi in larvae ofHeliothis zea and in vitro enzymatic activity.J. Invertebr. Pathol. 31:345–352.Google Scholar
  15. Ramoska, W.A., andTodd, T. 1985. Variation in efficacy and viability ofBeauveria bassiana in the chinch bug (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae) as a result of feeding activity on selected host plants.Environ. Entomol. 14:146–148.Google Scholar
  16. Roddick, J.G. 1974. The steroidal glycoalkaloid tomatine.Phytochemistry 13:9–25.Google Scholar
  17. Roddick, J.G. 1979. Complex formation between solanaceous steroidal glycoalkaloids and free sterols in vitro.Phytochemistry 18:1467–1470.Google Scholar
  18. SAS Institute. 1985. SAS/STAT; guide for personal computers. SAS, Institute, Cary, North Carolina.Google Scholar
  19. Schlosser, E. 1975. Role of saponins in antifungal resistance. III. Tomatine dependent development of fruit rot organism of tomato fruits.Z. Pflanzenkr. Pflanzenschutz 82:476–484.Google Scholar
  20. Thurston, R., andFox, P.M. 1972. Inhibition by nicotine of emergence ofApanteles congregatus from its host, the tobacco hornworm.Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 65:547–550.Google Scholar
  21. Wigglesworth, V.B. 1972. The Principles of Insect Physiology. Chapman and Hall, London.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. Gallardo
    • 1
  • D. J. Boethel
    • 1
  • J. R. Fuxa
    • 1
  • A. Richter
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of EntomologyLouisiana Agricultural Experiment Station Louisiana State University Agricultural CenterBaton Rouge

Personalised recommendations