Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Leaf Physical and Chemical Features Influence Selection of Plant Genotypes by Hessian Fly

  • Published:
Journal of Chemical Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To identify features of plants that mediate host selection behavior in the Hessian fly, we established the ranking of six grasses by ovipositing females and then ran choice tests with plant models that incorporated physical and/or chemical features of the six grasses. In tests with real plants, egg counts revealed the following ranking: 18ITSN triticale > Otane hexaploid bread wheat > Fleet barley > PND tetraploid durum wheat > 3424 hexaploid bread wheat > Awapuni oat. On all six grasses, the adaxial side of the leaf received more eggs than the abaxial side. In tests with green paper models treated with extracts of the six grasses, egg counts were similar to egg counts on real plants. In tests with models that incorporated a molded resin imprint of an abaxial or adaxial leaf surface, egg counts on adaxial models, but not abaxial models, again were similar to egg counts on real plants. In two final tests a factorial design was used to compare the effects of the chemical and physical features of two pairs of grasses: (1) two bread wheats, Otane and 3424; and (2) a bread wheat and an oat, Otane and Awapuni. In the two tests, the effects of the physical features of the models were at least as important as the effects of the chemical features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Bergh, J. C., Harris, M. O., and Rose, S. 1990. Temporal patterns of Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor, emergence and reproductive behavior. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 83:998-1004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernays, E., and Chapman, R. 1994. Host Plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects. Chapman & Hall, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernays, E., Woodhead, S., and Haines, L. 1985. Climbining by newly hatched larvae of the spotted stalk borer Chilo partellus to the top of sorghum plants. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 39:73-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, T. A., and Hatchett, J. H. 1986. Genetic model for wheat ?Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) interaction strategies for deployment of resistant genes in wheat cultivars. Environ. Entomol. 15:24-31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, J. E., Ohm, H. W., Patterson, F. L., and Taylor, P. L. 1991. Effectiveness of deploying single gene resistances in wheat for controlling damage by the Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae). Environ. Entomol. 20:964-969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S. P., and Harris, M. O. 1992. Foliar chemicals of wheat and related grasses influencing oviposition by Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor. J. Chem. Ecol. 18:1965-1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster, S. P., and Harris, M. O. 1997. Behavioral manipulation methods for insect pest-management. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 42:123-146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, F. 1986. Simulation models for predicting durability of insect-resistant germ plasm: Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae)-resistant winter wheat. Environ. Entomol. 15:11-23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, F. 1998. Sustainability of transgenic insecticidal cultivars: Integrating pest genetics and ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 43:701-726.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grover, P. B., JR. 1995. Hypersensitive response of wheat to the Hessian fly. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 74:283-294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hallberg, E., and Ahman, I. 1987. Sensillar types of the ovipositor of Dasineura brassicae: Structure and relation to oviposition behaviour. Physiol. Entomol. 12:51-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., and Foster, S. P. 1995. Behavior and integration. pp. 3-46, in R. T. Cardè and W. J. Bell (eds.). Chemical Ecology of Insects 2. Chapman & Hall, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., and Rose, S. 1989. Temporal changes in the egglaying behavior of the Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 53:17-29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., and Rose, S. 1990. Chemical, color and tactile cues influence egglaying behavior of the Hessian fly. Environ. Entomol. 19:303-308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., and Rose, S. 1991. Factors influencing the onset of egglaying in a cecidomyiid fly, Mayetiola destructor. Physiol. Entomol. 16:183-190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., Rose, S., and Malsch, P. 1993. The role of vision in the host plant-finding behaviour of the Hessian fly. Physiol. Entomol. 18:31-42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., Dando, J. L., Griffin, W., and Madie, C. 1996. Susceptibility of cereal and non-cereal grasses to attack by Hessian fly (Mayetiola destructor). N.Z. J. Crop Hortic. Sci. 24:229-238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harris, M. O., Sandanayaka, M., and Griffin, W. 2000. Oviposition preferences of the Hessian fly and their consequences for the survival and reproductive potential of offspring. Ecol. Entomol. In press.

  • Jones, E. T. 1936. Hordeum grasses as hosts of the Hessian fly. J. Econ. Entomol. 29:704-710.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. T. 1938. Infestation of grasses of the genus Aegilops by the Hessian fly. J. Econ. Entomol. 31:333-337.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, E. T. 1939. Grasses of the tribe Hordeae as hosts of the Hessian fly. J. Econ. Entomol. 32:505-510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanno, H., and Harris, M. D. 2000. Physical features of grass leaves influence the placement of eggs within the plant by the Hessian fly. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 96:69-80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mccolloch, J. W. 1923. The Hessian fly in Kansas. Kans. State Agric. Exp. Stn. Tech. Bull. 11:25-96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell-Olds, T., Gershenzon, J., Baldwin, I., and Boland, W. 1998. Chemical ecology in the molecular era. Trends Plant Sci. 3:362-365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, B. D., Foster, S. P., and Harris, M. O. 2000. Identification of 1-octacosanal and 6-methoxy-2-benzoxazolinone from wheat as ovipositional stimulants for the Hessian fly. J. Chem. Ecol. 26:859-873.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novartis Foundation. 1999. Insect–Plant Interactions and Induced Plant Defence. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Painter, R. H. 1951. Insect Resistance in Crop Plants. Macmillan, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prestidge, R. A. 1992. Population biology and parasitism of Hessian fly (Mayetiola destructor) (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) on Bromus willdenowii in New Zealand. N.Z. J. Agric. Res. 35:423-428.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe, R. H., and Hatchett, J. H. 1997. Biology and genetics of the Hessian fly and resistance in wheat, pp. 47-56, in K. Bondari (ed.). New Developments in Entomology. Research Signpost, Scientific Information Guild, Trivandrum, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe, R. H., Safranski, G. G., Patterson, F. L., Ohm, H. W., and Taylor, P. L. 1994. Biotype status of Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) populations from the eastern United States and their response to 14 Hessian fly resistance genes. J. Econ. Entomol. 87:1113-1121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ratcliffe, R. H., Ohm, H. W., Patterson, F. L., Cambron, S. E., and Safranski, G. G. 1996. Response of resistance genes H9 to H19 in wheat to Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) laboratory biotypes and field populations from the Eastern United States. J. Econ. Entomol. 89:1309-1317.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sas. 1995. JMP version 3.1—Statistics and Graphics Guide. SAS Institute Inc., Cary, North Carolina.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spurr, A. R. 1969. A low viscosity epoxy resin embedding medium for electron microscopy. J. Ultrastruc. Res. 26:31-43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Withers, T. M., and Harris, M. O. 1996. Foraging for oviposition sites in the Hessian fly (Mayetiola destructor): Random and nonrandom aspects of movement. Ecol. Entomol. 21:382-395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Withers, T. M., and Harris, M. O. 1997. The influence of wind on Hessian fly flight and egglaying behavior. Environ. Entomol. 26:327-333.

    Google Scholar 

  • Withers, T. M., Madie, C., and Harris, M. O. 1997a. The influence of clutch size on survival and reproductive potential of Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 83:205-212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Withers, T. M., Harris, M. O., and Madie, C. 1997b. Dispersal of mated female Hessian flies in field arrays of host and non-host plants. Environ. Entomol. 26:1247-1257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeiss, M. R., Brandenburg, R. L., and Van Duyn, J. W. 1993. Suitability of seven grass weeds as Hessian fly (Diptera: Cecidomyiidae) hosts. J. Agric. Entomol. 10:107-119.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. H. Kanno

    Present address: Kyushu National Agricultural Experiment Station, 2421 Suya, Nishigoshi, Kikuchi, Kumamoto, 861-1192, Japan

  2. M. O. Harris

    Present address: Department of Entomology, North Dakota State University, Fargo, North Dakota, 58105-5346

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Horticulture and Food Research Institute of New Zealand, Private Bag 92169, Auckland, New Zealand

    H. Kanno & M. O. Harris

Authors
  1. H. Kanno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. M. O. Harris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kanno, H., Harris, M.O. Leaf Physical and Chemical Features Influence Selection of Plant Genotypes by Hessian Fly. J Chem Ecol 26, 2335–2354 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005526927582

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005526927582

Search

Navigation