Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 41, Issue 10, pp 937–947 | Cite as

Effects of Terpene Chemotypes of Melaleuca alternifolia on Two Specialist Leaf Beetles and Susceptibility to Myrtle Rust

  • Carlos Bustos-Segura
  • Carsten Külheim
  • William Foley
Article

Abstract

Plant chemical polymorphisms, or plant chemotypes, are characterized by intraspecific discrete differences of plant secondary metabolites in the same plant tissue. Chemotypes that differ in foliar terpene composition are found commonly in Myrtaceae. In this study, we focused on terpene chemotypes of medicinal tea tree, Melalecua alternifolia, to explore whether this variation affects two specialist herbivores Paropsisterna tigrina and Faex sp. (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae), and if this could explain the maintenance of this variation. We tested whether insect performance, oviposition preference, and plant damage were associated with different chemotypes. We found that larval growth rate of Faex sp. was higher in chemotypes with high concentrations of 1,8-cineole, and that oviposition preference depended on the chemotype of the larval diet. Although performance traits and preference for oviposition of P. tigrina did not vary among chemotypes, adults inflicted less damage on plants with a high concentration of terpinolene. Additionally, we tested whether different chemotypes showed different levels of susceptibility by myrtle rust (Puccinia psidii). We found that plants with a high concentration of 1,8-cineole were more likely to be infected under controlled conditions. Although there is evidence that terpene chemotypes are a mediator of the interaction with natural enemies, the most detrimental pest of this plant, P. tigrina, does not seem to be affected by variation in plant terpenes.

Keywords

Terpenoids Chemotype Chemical variation Melaleuca Herbivory Chrysomelidae Myrtle rust 

Supplementary material

10886_2015_628_MOESM1_ESM.docx (72 kb)
ESM 1(DOCX 72 kb)

References

  1. Agrawal AA (2011) Current trends in the evolutionary ecology of plant defence. Funct Ecol 25:420–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bidart-Bouzat MG, Kliebenstein DJ (2008) Differential levels of insect herbivory in the field associated with genotypic variation in glucosinolates in Arabidopsis thaliana. J Chem Ecol 34:1026–1037CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Brophy JJ, Davies NW, Southwell IA, Stiff IA, Williams LR (1989) Gas chromatographic quality control for oil of Melaleuca terpinen-4-ol type (Australian tea tree). J Agric Food Chem 37:1330–1335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butcher PA, Matheson A, Slee U (1996) Potential for genetic improvement of oil production in Melaleuca alternifolia and M. linariifolia. New forests 11:31–51Google Scholar
  5. Carnegie AJ, Lidbetter JR (2012) Rapidly expanding host range for Puccinia psidii sensu lato in Australia. Australas Plant Pathol 41:13–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carroll AJ, Badger MR, Harvey Millar A (2010) The MetabolomeExpress Project: enabling web-based processing, analysis and transparent dissemination of GC/MS metabolomics datasets. BMC Bioinforma 11:376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carson CF, Hammer KA, Riley TV (2006) Melaleuca alternifolia (Tea Tree) Oil : a review of antimicrobial and other medicinal properties. Clin Microbiol Rev 19:50–62PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Chan EKF, Rowe HC, Corwin JA, Joseph B, Kliebenstein DJ (2011) Combining genome-wide association mapping and transcriptional networks to identify novel genes controlling glucosinolates in Arabidopsis thaliana. PLoS Biol 9, e1001125PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Fritz RS, Simms EL (1992) In: Fritz RS, Simms EL (eds) Plant resistance to herbivores and pathogens: ecology, evolution, and genetics. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hammer KA, Carson CF, Riley TV (2003) Antifungal activity of the components of Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) oil. J Appl Microbiol 95:853–860CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hartmann T (1996) Diversity and variability of plant secondary metabolism: a mechanistic view. Entomol Exp Appl 80:177–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Homer L, Leach D, Lea D, Slade Lee L, Henry R, Baverstock P (2000) Natural variation in the essential oil content of Melaleuca alternifolia Cheel (Myrtaceae). Biochem Syst Ecol 28:367–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ireland BF, Hibbert DB, Goldsack RJ, Doran JC, Brophy JJ (2002) Chemical variation in the leaf essential oil of Melaleuca quinquenervia (Cav.) S.T. Blake. Biochem Syst Ecol 30:457–470CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Keefover-Ring K, Thompson JD, Linhart YB (2009) Beyond six scents: defining a seventh Thymus vulgaris chemotype new to southern France by ethanol extraction. Flavour Fragr J 24:117–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Keszei A, Brubaker CL, Foley WJ (2008) A molecular perspective on terpene variation in Australian Myrtaceae. Aust J Bot 56:197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keszei A, Hassan Y, Foley WJ (2010) A biochemical interpretation of terpene chemotypes in Melaleuca alternifolia. J Chem Ecol 36:652–661CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Kleine S, Müller C (2011) Intraspecific plant chemical diversity and its relation to herbivory. Oecologia 166:175–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kursar TA, Dexter KG, Lokvam J, Pennington RT, Richardson JE, Weber MG, Murakami ET, Drake C, McGregor R, Coley PD (2009) The evolution of antiherbivore defenses and their contribution to species coexistence in the tropical tree genus Inga. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106:18073–18078PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee L, Brooks L, Homer L, Rossetto M, Henry R, Baverstock P (2002) Geographic variation in the essential oils and morphology of natural populations of Melaleuca alternifolia (Myrtaceae). Biochem Syst Ecol 30:343–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Linhart Y, Thompson J (1995) Terpene-based selective herbivory by Helix aspersa (Mollusca) on Thymus vulgaris (Labiatae). Oecologia 102:126–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Linhart Y, Thompson J (1999) Thyme is of the essence: biochemical polymorphism and multi-species deterrence. Evol Ecol Res 1:151–171Google Scholar
  22. Linhart Y, Keefover-Ring K, Mooney KA, Breland B, Thompson JD (2005) A chemical polymorphism in a multitrophic setting: thyme monoterpene composition and food web structure. Am Nat 166:517–529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. May J, Chan CH, King A, Williams L, French GL (2000) Time-kill studies of tea tree oils on clinical isolates. J Antimicrob Chemother 45:639–643CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Mayhew PJ (2001) Herbivore host choice and optimal bad motherhood. Trends Ecol Evol 16:165–167CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Mithen R, Clarket J, Listert C, Deanf C (1995a) Genetics of aliphatic glucosinolates. III. Side chain structure of aliphatic glucosinolates in Arabidopsis thaliana. Heredity 74:210–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mithen R, Raybould AF, Giamoustaris A (1995b) Divergent selection for secondary metabolites between wild populations of Brassica oleracea and its implications for plant—herbivore interactions. Heredity 75:472–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Moore BD, Andrew RL, Külheim C, Foley WJ (2014) Explaining intraspecific diversity in plant secondary metabolites in an ecological context. New Phytol 201:733–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Morin L, Aveyard R, Lidbetter JR, Wilson PG (2012) Investigating the host-range of the rust fungus Puccinia psidii sensu lato across tribes of the family Myrtaceae present in Australia. PLoS One 7, e35434PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Newton EL, Bullock JM, Hodgson DJ (2009) Glucosinolate polymorphism in wild cabbage (Brassica oleracea) influences the structure of herbivore communities. Oecologia 160:63–76CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Padovan A, Keszei A, Köllner TG, Degenhardt J, Foley WJ (2010) The molecular basis of host plant selection in Melaleuca quinquenervia by a successful biological control agent. Phytochemistry 71:1237–1244CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Poelman EH, Galiart RJFH, Raaijmakers CE, van Loon JJA, van Dam NM (2008a) Performance of specialist and generalist herbivores feeding on cabbage cultivars is not explained by glucosinolate profiles. Entomol Exp Appl 127:218–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Poelman EH, van Loon JJA, Dicke M (2008b) Consequences of variation in plant defense for biodiversity at higher trophic levels. Trends Plant Sci 13:534–541CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Poelman EH, van Dam NM, van Loon JJA, Vet LEM, Dicke M (2009) Chemical diversity in Brassica oleracea affects biodiversity of insect herbivores. Ecology 90:1863–1877CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Reid C, Ohmart C (1989) Determination of the sex of pupae of Paropsis atomaria Olivier, and related Paropsina (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Aust J Entomol 28:29–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rosenthal GA, Berenbaum MR (1992) In: Rosenthal GA, Berenbaum MR (eds) Herbivores: their interactions with secondary plant metabolites: ecological and evolutionary processes. Academic, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
  36. Scheirs J, De Bruyn L, Verhagen R (2000) Optimization of adult performance determines host choice in a grass miner. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:2065–2069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Southwell IA, Stiff I (1990) Differentiation between Melaleuca alternifolia and M. linariifolia by monoterpenoid comparison. Phytochemistry 29:3529–3533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Southwell IA, Lowe RF (1999) Tea tree. The genus Melaleuca. Harwood Academic Publishers, AmsterdamCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Southwell IA, Russell MF (2002) Volatile oil comparison of cotyledon leaves of chemotypes of Melaleuca alternifolia. Phytochemistry 59:391–393CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Southwell IA, Maddox CDA, Zalucki MP (1995) Metabolism of 1, 8-cineole in tea tree (Melaleuca alternifolia and M. linariifolia) by pyrgo beetle (Paropsisterna tigrina). J Chem Ecol 21:439–453Google Scholar
  41. Southwell IA, Russell MF, Maddox CDA, Wheeler GS (2003) Differential metabolism of 1,8-cineole in insects. J Chem Ecol 29:83–94Google Scholar
  42. Steppuhn A, Gase K, Krock B, Halitschke R, Baldwin IT (2004) Nicotine’s defensive function in nature. PLoS Biol 2:1074–1080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Vernet P, Gouyon R, Valdeyron G (1986) Genetic control of the oil content in Thymus vulgaris L: a case of polymorphism in a biosynthetic chain. Genetica 4:227–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wheeler GS (2006) Chemotype variation of the weed Melaleuca quinquenervia influences the biomass and fecundity of the biological control agent Oxyops vitiosa. Biol Control 36:121–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wheeler GS, Ordung KM (2005) Secondary metabolite variation affects the oviposition preference but has little effect on the performance of Boreioglycaspis melaleucae: a biological control agent of Melaleuca quinquenervia. Biol Control 35:115–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wise MJ, Partelow JM, Everson KJ, Anselmo MK, Abrahamson WG (2008) Good mothers, bad mothers, and the nature of resistance to herbivory in Solidago altissima. Oecologia 155:257–266CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Wolf VC, Gassmann A, Müller C (2012) Choice behaviour and performance of Cassida stigmatica on various chemotypes of Tanacetum vulgare and implications for biocontrol. Entomol Exp Appl 144:78–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Züst T, Heichinger C, Grossniklaus U, Harrington R, Kliebenstein DJ, Turnbull LA (2012) Natural enemies drive geographic variation in plant defenses. Science 338:116–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos Bustos-Segura
    • 1
  • Carsten Külheim
    • 1
  • William Foley
    • 1
  1. 1.Evolution, Ecology and Genetics, Research School of BiologyThe Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations