期刊文献+

黄守瓜取食行为的机理及黄瓜的化学应答 被引量:6

原文传递
导出
摘要 黄足黄守瓜先用口器在黄瓜幼苗叶面划圈,然后再取食圈内叶组织,但黄足黄守瓜却直接取食离体黄瓜子叶,而不发生划圈取食行为.研究显示,黄守瓜这一有趣的划圈取食行为和黄瓜的化学应答显著相关.当黄瓜被黄守瓜取食后,子叶中葫芦素C的含量在60min内增加10倍以上,15min后子叶还出现葫芦素Ⅰ,并在60min内达到75μg/g鲜重的水平,而且黄瓜子叶中这一高水平的葫芦素至少要持续24h.进一步的实验证实,葫芦素C在10~250μg/g浓度范围刺激黄守瓜取食,250μg/g以上浓度则抑制黄守瓜取食;而葫芦素Ⅰ在50μg/g浓度就抑制黄守瓜取食,尤其是和葫芦素C混合后,对黄守瓜取食的抑制效应显著增加.结果表明,黄瓜通过增加葫芦素种类和浓度以避免被黄守瓜进一步侵食,而黄守瓜为了应对黄瓜的这一化学响应机制,采用先划圈阻断黄瓜圈内叶组织合成葫芦素和使圈外葫芦素不能迁移到圈内。以保证能取食圈内叶组织.黄守瓜的取食行为和黄瓜的化学应答是它们为生存而形成的一种巧妙的自我保护策略.
出处 《科学通报》 EI CAS CSCD 北大核心 2004年第13期1258-1262,共5页 Chinese Science Bulletin
  • 相关文献

参考文献26

  • 1Rausher M D. Co-evolution and plant resistance to natural enemies. Nature, 2001,411:857~864
  • 2Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Defensive function of herbivore-induced plant volatile emissions in nature. Science, 2001, 291:2141~2144
  • 3康乐,T.L.Hopkins.黑蝗初孵蝗蝻对植物气味和植物挥发性化合物的行为和嗅觉反应[J].科学通报,2004,49(1):81-85. 被引量:12
  • 4Abe M, Matsnda K, Tamaki Y. Differences in feeding response among three cucurbitaceous feeding leaf beetles to cucurbitacins.Appl Entomol Zool, 2000, 35:137~142
  • 5Carroll C R, Hoffman C A. Chemical feeding deterrent mobilized in response to insect herbivory and counter adaptation by Epilachna tredecimnotata. Science, 1980, 209:414~416
  • 6Tallamy D W. Squash beetle feeding behavior: an adaptation against induced cucurbit defense. Ecology, 1985, 66:1574~1579
  • 7Tallamy D W, Mullin C A, Frazier J L. An alternate route to insect pharmacophagy: The loose receptor hypothesis. J Chem Ecol,1999, 25:1987~1997
  • 8Dhillon N P S. The lack of a relationship between bitterness and resistance of cucurbits to red pumpkin beetle (Aulacophora foveicollis). Plant Breed, 1993, 110:73~76
  • 9McCloud E S, Tallamy D W, Halaweish F T. Squash beetle trenching behavior: Avoidance of cucurbitacin induction or mucilaginous plant sap? Ecol Entomol, 1995, 20:51~59
  • 10华南农业大学主编.农业昆虫学,第二版,下册.北京:农业出版社,1991.273

二级参考文献29

  • 1[1]Visser J H. Host odour perception in phytophagous insects. Ann Rev Entomol, 1986, 31: 121~144
  • 2[2]Mustaparta H. Olfaction. In: Bell W J, Cardé R T, eds. Chemical Ecology of Insects. Sunderland: Sinauer Associates, 1984. 37~70
  • 3[3]Haskell P T, Paskin M W J, Moorhouse J E. Laboratory observations of factors affecting the movements of hoppers of the desert locust. J Insect Physiol, 1962, 8: 53~78
  • 4[4]Kennedy J S, Moorhouse J E. Laboratory observations on locust responses to wind-borne grass odour. Entomol Exp Appl, 1969, 12: 487~503
  • 5[5]Moorhouse J E. Experimental analysis of the locomotor behaviour of Schistocerca gregaria induced by odour. J Insect Physiol, 1971, 17: 913~920
  • 6[6]Hopkins T L, Young H, Williams E M, et al. Olfaction and food plant selection by black field cricket. In: Chapman A B, ed. Proc 4th Austral Conf Grassl Invert Ecol. Christhurch: Caxton Press, 1985. 146~151
  • 7[7]Blust M H, Hopkins T L. Olfactory responses of a specialist and a generalist grasshopper to volatiles of Artemisia ludoviciana Nutt (Asteracea). J Chem Ecol, 1987, 13: 1893~1902
  • 8[8]Kang L, Charlton R, Hopkins T L. Olfactory response of the grasshopper Melanoplus sanguinipes to plant odours and volatile compounds. Entomol Sinica, 1995, 2: 136~144
  • 9[9]Chen H H, Kang L. Olfactory responses of two species of grasshoppers to plant odours. Entomol Exp Appl, 2000, 95: 129~134
  • 10[10]Hopkins T L, Young H. Attraction of the grasshopper, Melanoplus saguinipes, to host plant odours and volatile components. Entomol Exp Appl, 1990, 56: 249~259

共引文献11

同被引文献162

引证文献6

二级引证文献78

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部