Skip to main content
Log in

Oviposition stimulants inBarbarea vulgaris forPieris rapae andP. napi oleracea: isolation, identification and differential activity

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

Abstract

The closely related butterflies,Pieris rapae andP. napi oleracea, readily laid eggs onBarbarea vulgaris in greenhouse cages. When offered a choice between cabbage andB. vulgaris, P. rapae showed no preference, butP. napi oleracea preferredB. vulgaris. Bioassays of extracts ofB. vulgaris foliage revealed the presence of oviposition deterrent(s) in l-butanol extracts as well as stimulants in the postbutanol water extracts. However, the deterrent effect was apparently outweighed by the strong stimulatory effect in the whole plants. The postbutanol water extract was preferred over an equivalent cabbage extract by both species, but more significantly in the case ofP. napi oleracea. The stimulants were isolated by open column chromatography and HPLC, and the activity was associated with three glucosinolates.P. napi oleracea was more sensitive thanP. rapae to the natural concentration of compounds1 and3, whereas both species were strongly stimulated to oviposit by natural concentrations of compound2. Compounds1 and2 were identified as (2R)-glucobarbarin and (2S)-glucobarbarin, respectively, and3 was identified as glucobrassicin, on the basis of their UV, mass, and NMR spectra. When the pure compounds were tested at the same concentrations applied to bean plants, the (2R)-glucobarbarin at 0.2 mg/plant was preferred over a standard cabbage extract by both butterfly species. However, at a dose of 0.02 mg/plant,P. rapae preferred the cabbage extract whereasP. napi oleracea still preferred the (2R)-glucobarbarin. No such difference in response of the two species to the same two concentrations of (2S)-glucobarbarin was obtained. The results indicate a distinct difference in sensitivity of these butterflies to the epimers of glucobarbarin, and the differences in behavioral responses of the two butterfly species depend to a large extent on the concentration of stimulant present.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Chew, F.S., 1977a. Coevolution of pierid butterflies and their cruciferous foodplants. II. The distribution of eggs on potential foodplants.Evolution 31:568–579.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, F.S. 1977b. The effects of introduced mustards (Cruciferae) on some native north American cabbage butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae).J. Xerces Soc. 5:13–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Costello, C.E. 1990. Mass spectra of matrix materials.Methods Enzymol. 193:876.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daxenbichler, M.E., Spencer, G.F., Carlson, D.G., Rose, G.B., Brinker, A.M., andPowell, R.G. 1991. Glucosinolate composition of seeds from 297 species of wild plants.Phytochemistry 30:2623–2638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dethier, V.G. 1982. Mechanisms of host-plant recognition.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 31:49–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, X.P., andRenwick, J.A.A. 1993. Differential selection of host plants by twoPieris species: The role of oviposition stimulants and deterrents.Entomol. Exp. Appl. 68:59–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, X.P., andRenwick, J.A.A. 1994. Relative activities of glucosinolates as oviposition stimulants forPieris rapae andP. napi oleracea. J. Chem. Ecol. Submitted.

  • Huang, X.P., Renwick, J.A.A., andSachdev-Gupta, K. 1993a. A chemical basis for differential acceptance ofErysimum cheiranthoides by twoPieris species.J. Chem. Ecol. 19:195–210.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, X.P., Renwick, J.A.A., andSachdev-Gupta, K. 1993b. Oviposition stimulants and deterrents regulating differential acceptance ofIberis amara byPieris rapae andP. napi oleracea.J. Chem. Ecol. 19:1645–1663.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, S.K. 1990. Biochemical and physiological investigations of the meal and syrup fractions from aqueous enzymatic rapeseed processing. PhD thesis. Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, [Copenhagen], Denmark.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjaer, A. 1960. Naturally derived isothiocyanates (mustard oils) and their parent glucosides.Tortschr. Chem. Org. Naturst. 18:122–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjaer, A., andGmelin, R. 1957. Isothiocyanates XXVIII. A new isothiocyanate glucoside (glucobarbarin) furnishing (-)-5-phenyl-2-oxazolidinethione upon enzymaic hydrolysis.Acta Chem. Scand. 11:906–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kjaer, A., andGmelin, R. 1958. Isothiocyanates XXXIII. An isothiocyanate glucoside (glucobarbarin) ofReseda luteola L.Acta Chem. Scand. 12:1693–1694.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, J.R., andStrickler, K.L. 1984. Finding and accepting host plants, pp. 127–157,in W.J. Bell and R.T. Cardé (eds.). Chemical Ecology of Insects. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minchinton, I., Sang, J., Burke, D., andTruscott, R.J.W. 1982. Separation of desulfoglucosinolates by reversed-phase high performance liquid chromatography.J. Chromatogr. 247:141–148.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, J.A.A., andRadke, C.D. 1987. Chemical stimulants and deterrents regulating acceptance or rejection of crucifers by cabbage butterflies.J. Chem. Ecol. 13:1771–1776.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, J.A.A. andRadke, C.D. 1988. Sensory cues in host selection for oviposition by the cabbage butterfly,Pieris rapae.J. Insect Physiol. 34:251–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, J.A.A., Radke, C.D., andSachdev-Gupta, 1989. Chemical constituents ofErysimum cheiranthoides deterring oviposition by the cabbage butterfly,Pieris rapae.J. Chem. Ecol. 15:2161–2169.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renwick, J.A.A., Radke, C.D., Sachdev-Gupta, K., andStädler, E. 1992. Leaf surface chemicals stimulating oviposition byPieris rapae (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) on cabbage.Chemoecology 3:33–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richards, O.W. 1940. The biology of the small white butterfly (Pieris rapae), with special reference to the factors controlling its abundance.J. Anim. Ecol. 9:243–288.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachdev-Gupta, K., Radke, C.D., andRenwick, J.A.A. 1992. Chemical recognition of diverse hosts byPieris rapae butterflies, pp. 136–138, Proceedings, 8th International Symposium on Plant-Insect Relationships, Wageningen. (S.B.J. Menken, J.H. Visser & P. Harrewijn, eds.) Kluwer Academic Press, Dordrecht. pp. 136–138.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traynier, R.M.M., andTruscott, R.J.W. 1991. Potent natural egg-laying stimulant for cabbage butterflyPieris rapae.J. Chem. Ecol. 17:1371–1380.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Huang, X., Renwick, J.A.A. & Sachdev-Gupta, K. Oviposition stimulants inBarbarea vulgaris forPieris rapae andP. napi oleracea: isolation, identification and differential activity. J Chem Ecol 20, 423–438 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02064448

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02064448

Key Words

Navigation