Journal of Chemical Ecology

, Volume 30, Issue 8, pp 1509–1529 | Cite as

Investigation of Long-Range Female Sex Pheromone of the European Tarnished Plant Bug, Lygus rugulipennis: Chemical, Electrophysiological, and Field Studies

  • P. J. Innocenzi
  • D. R. Hall
  • J. V. Cross
  • H. Masuh
  • S. J. Phythian
  • S. Chittamaru
  • S. Guarino
Article

Abstract

The European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis, is an important pest of agricultural and horticultural crops throughout Europe. Adult male L. rugulipennis were previously shown to be attracted to traps baited with live virgin females, which suggests the females produce a sex pheromone. Volatiles produced by virgin female L. rugulipennis were shown to contain three components, hexyl butyrate, (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate, and (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal which elicited electroantennographic (EAG) responses from males in analyses by linked gas chromatography–electroantennography (GC-EAG). They were produced in 1.5:1:0.08 ratio, respectively, by single females. Collections from 1, 2, or 4 virgin females showed the proportions of hexyl butyrate and (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal to increase relative to that of (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate with increasing number of females. Although these compounds were found in body extracts of both male and female L. rugulipennis, they were not detected in volatiles released by virgin males. EAG dose–response studies showed that both males and females responded to these chemicals with minimal differences in sensitivity between the sexes or to the three components, except that males were more responsive than females to (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal at the two highest doses tested. Release rates of the compounds from rubber septa, polyethylene vials, and polyethylene sachets were measured under laboratory conditions. Four field tests were carried out using sticky traps baited with all possible binary and tertiary combinations of the three chemicals using different combinations of dispensing systems. Catches of male L. rugulipennis in baited traps were similar to those in unbaited traps. Significantly fewer females were caught on traps baited with blends containing hexyl butyrate than on traps without hexyl butyrate or unbaited traps in one test and overall. The roles of the three compounds and possible reasons for their failure to attract males are discussed.

Lygus rugulipennis Heteroptera Miridae tarnished plant bug pheromone electroantennography repellence hexyl butyrate (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Aldrich, J. R. 1988. Chemical ecology of the Heteroptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 33:211-238.Google Scholar
  2. Aldrich, J. R., Numata, H., Borges, M., Bin, F., Waite, G. K., and Lusby, W. R. 1993. Artifacts and pheromone blends from Nezara spp. and other stink bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Z. Naturforsch. 48c:73-79.Google Scholar
  3. Blum, M. S. 1981. Chemical Defenses of Arthropods. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Blum, M. S. 1996. Semiochemical parsimony in the arthropoda. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 41:353-374.Google Scholar
  5. Blumenthal, M. A. 1978. The metathoracic gland system of Lygus lineolaris (Hetroptera: Miridae). MSc., Thesis, Cornell University, Ithaca New York, 142 pp.Google Scholar
  6. Chinta, S., Dickens, J. S., and Aldrich, J. R. 1994. Olfactory reception of potential pheromones and plant odors by tarnished plant bug, Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera: Miridae). J. Chem. Ecol. 20:3251-3267.Google Scholar
  7. Cork, A., Beevor, P. S., Gough, J. E., and Hall, D. R. 1990. Gas chromatography linked to electroantennography: A versatile technique for identifying insect semiochemicals, pp. 271-279, in A. R. McCaffery and I. D. Wilson (eds.). Chromatography and Isolation of Insect Hormones and Pheromones. Plenum, London.Google Scholar
  8. Dickens, J. C. 1984. Olfaction in the boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis Boh. (Coleoptera: Curculionidae): Electroantennogram studies. J. Chem. Ecol. 10:1759-1785.Google Scholar
  9. Drijfhout, E. P., Groot, A. T., Posthumus, M. A., Van Beek, T. A., and De Groot, A. 2002. Coupled gas chromatographic-electroantennographic responses of Lygocoris pabulinus (L.) to female and male produced volatiles. Chemoecology 12:113-118.Google Scholar
  10. Erdelyi, C., Manninger, S., Manninger, K., Gergely, K., Hangyel, L., and Bernath, I. 1994. Climatic factors affecting population dynamics of the main seed pests of lucerne in Hungary. J. Appl. Entomol. 117:195-209.Google Scholar
  11. Groot, A. T., Drijfhout, F. P., Heijboer, A., Van Beek, T. A., and Visser, J. H. 2001. Disruption of sexual communication in the mirid bug Lygocoris pabulinus by hexyl butyrate. Agric. For. Entomol. 3:49-55.Google Scholar
  12. Gueldner, R. C. and Parrot, W. L. 1978. Volatile constituents of the tarnished plant bug. Insect Biochem. 8:389-391.Google Scholar
  13. Hedin, P. A., Parrott, W. L., Tedders, W. L., and Reed, D. K. 1985. Field responses of the tarnished plant bug to its own volatile components. J. Miss. Acad. Sci. 30:63-66.Google Scholar
  14. Ho, H. Y. and Millar, J. G. 2002. Identification, electroantennogram screening, and field bioassays of volatile chemicasl from Lygus hesperus Knight (Heteroptera: Miridae). Zool. Stud. 41:311-320.Google Scholar
  15. Holopainen, J. 1989. Host plant preference of the tarnished plant bug Lygus rugulipennis Popp. (Het., Miridae). J. Appl. Entomol. 107:78-82.Google Scholar
  16. Innocenzi, P. J., Hall, D. R., Sumathi, C., Cross, J. V., and Jacobson, R. J. 1998. Studies of the sex pheromone of the European tarnished plant bug, Lygus rugulipennis (Het. Miridae). Brighton Crop Prot. Conf.–Pests Dis. 8:829-832.Google Scholar
  17. Kakazaki, M. and Sugie, H. 2001. Identification of female sex pheromone of the rice leaf bug, Trigonotylus caelestialium. J. Chem. Ecol. 27:2447-2458.Google Scholar
  18. Marques, F. De A., McElfresh, J. S., and Millar, J. G. 2000. Female-produced sex pheromone of the predatory bug Geocoris punctipes. J. Chem. Ecol. 26:2843-2855.Google Scholar
  19. McBrien, H. L. and Millar, J. G. 1999. Phytophagous bugs, pp. 277-304, in J. Hardie and A. K. Minks (eds.). Pheromones of Non-Lepidopteran Insects Associated with Agricultural Plants. CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.Google Scholar
  20. Millar, J. G. and Rice, R. E. 1998. Sex pheromone of the plant bug Phytocoris californicus. J. Econ. Entomol. 23:1743-1755.Google Scholar
  21. Millar, J. G., Rice, R.E., and Wang, Q. 1997. Sex pheromone of the mirid bug Phytocoris relativus. J. Chem. Ecol. 23:1743-1755.Google Scholar
  22. Smith, R. F., Pierce, H. D., Jr., and Borden, J. H. 1991. Sex pheromone of the mullen bug, Campylomma verbasci (Meyer) (Heteroptera: Miridae). J. Chem. Ecol. 17:1437-1447.Google Scholar
  23. Taksdal, G. and Sorum, O. 1971. Capsids (Heteroptera, Miridae) in strawberries, and their influence on fruit malformation. J. Hort. Sci. 46:43-50.Google Scholar
  24. Todd, J. L. and Baker, T. C. 1999. Function of peripheral olfactory organs, pp. 67-96, in B. S. Hanson (ed.). Insect Olfaction. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  25. Torr, S. J., Hall, D. R., Phelps, R. J., and Vale, G. A. 1997. Methods for dispensing odour attractants for tsetse files (Diptera: Glossinidae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 87:299-311.Google Scholar
  26. Ward, J. P. and Van Dorp, D. A. 1969. A stereospecific synthesis of 4-oxo-2-trans-hexenal Rec. Trav. Chim. 88:989-993.Google Scholar
  27. Wardle, A. R., Borden, J. H., Pierce, H. D., Jr., and Gries, R. 2003. Volatile compounds released by disturbed and calm adults of the tarnished plant bug, Lygus lineolaris. J. Chem. Ecol. 29:931-944.Google Scholar
  28. Zhang, Q. H. and Aldrich, J. R. 2003a. Male-produced anti-sex pheromone in a plant bug. Natur-wissenschaften 90:505-508.Google Scholar
  29. Zhang, Q. H. and Aldrich, J. R. 2003b. Pheromones of milkweed bugs (Heteroptera: Lygaeidae) attract wayward plant bugs: Sex pheromones of two Phytocoris Mirids. J. Chem. Ecol. 29:1835-1851.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. J. Innocenzi
    • 1
  • D. R. Hall
    • 2
  • J. V. Cross
    • 3
  • H. Masuh
    • 2
  • S. J. Phythian
    • 2
  • S. Chittamaru
    • 2
  • S. Guarino
    • 2
  1. 1.Horticulture Research InternationalUniversity of Greenwich, Chatham Maritime, Kent ME4 4TBUK
  2. 2.Natural Resources InstituteUniversity of GreenwichUK
  3. 3.Horticulture Research InternationalUK

Personalised recommendations