TY - JOUR
T1 - Do caterpillars secrete "oral secretions"?
AU - Peiffer, Michelle
AU - Felton, Gary W.
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments The support of the USDA NRI is greatly appreciated (2005-35607-15242 and 2007-35302-18218 awarded to G.W.F.). Statistical advice by Torrence Gill was helpful. All confocal (or digital) microscopy was done at the Cytometry Facility, University Park (Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Penn State University). This project is funded, in part, under a grant with the Pennsylvania Department of Health using Tobacco Settlement Funds. The Department specifically disclaims responsibility for any analyses, interpretations, or conclusions.
Copyright:
Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2009/3
Y1 - 2009/3
N2 - The oral secretions or regurgitant of caterpillars contain potent elicitors of plant induced responses. These elicitors are recognized by host plants to differentiate between simple mechanical injury and the presence of herbivores. In some cases, this level of recognition is highly specific. Despite the in-depth chemical characterization of these elicitors, little is known about the amounts delivered in regurgitant during feeding. In this study, we use a fluorescent dye to label regurgitant in order to visualize caterpillar regurgitation during feeding. The procedure is highly sensitive and allows us to visualize nanoliter amounts of regurgitant. We examined the propensity of larval Helicoverpa zea, Heliothis virescens, Spodoptera exigua, Spodoptera frugiperda, and Manduca sexta to regurgitate on various host plants. These species were selected because they have been among the most intensely studied in terms of elicitors. Our results indicate that most larvae did not regurgitate following a brief feeding bout (∼10 min) during which they ate ca. 0.40 cm2 of leaf. When larvae did regurgitate, it was typically less than 10 nl. This is several orders of magnitude less than is typically used in most studies on oral secretions. The frequency of regurgitation appears to vary depending upon the host plant. Larval H. zea are less likely to regurgitate when feeding on tomato leaves compared to corn mid-whorl tissue. Our results have importance in understanding the role of oral secretions in plant recognition of herbivory. Because caterpillars did not routinely regurgitate during feeding, it is likely that they avoid the elicitation of some plant defensive responses during most feeding bouts.
AB - The oral secretions or regurgitant of caterpillars contain potent elicitors of plant induced responses. These elicitors are recognized by host plants to differentiate between simple mechanical injury and the presence of herbivores. In some cases, this level of recognition is highly specific. Despite the in-depth chemical characterization of these elicitors, little is known about the amounts delivered in regurgitant during feeding. In this study, we use a fluorescent dye to label regurgitant in order to visualize caterpillar regurgitation during feeding. The procedure is highly sensitive and allows us to visualize nanoliter amounts of regurgitant. We examined the propensity of larval Helicoverpa zea, Heliothis virescens, Spodoptera exigua, Spodoptera frugiperda, and Manduca sexta to regurgitate on various host plants. These species were selected because they have been among the most intensely studied in terms of elicitors. Our results indicate that most larvae did not regurgitate following a brief feeding bout (∼10 min) during which they ate ca. 0.40 cm2 of leaf. When larvae did regurgitate, it was typically less than 10 nl. This is several orders of magnitude less than is typically used in most studies on oral secretions. The frequency of regurgitation appears to vary depending upon the host plant. Larval H. zea are less likely to regurgitate when feeding on tomato leaves compared to corn mid-whorl tissue. Our results have importance in understanding the role of oral secretions in plant recognition of herbivory. Because caterpillars did not routinely regurgitate during feeding, it is likely that they avoid the elicitation of some plant defensive responses during most feeding bouts.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=62549095437&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=62549095437&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10886-009-9604-x
DO - 10.1007/s10886-009-9604-x
M3 - Article
C2 - 19221841
AN - SCOPUS:62549095437
SN - 0098-0331
VL - 35
SP - 326
EP - 335
JO - Journal of Chemical Ecology
JF - Journal of Chemical Ecology
IS - 3
ER -