Plant-mediated effects in the Brassicaceae on the performance and behaviour of parasitoids

By R. Gols, Jeffrey A. Harvey. Phytochemistry Reviews, 2008

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Direct and indirect plant defences are well studied, particularly in the Brassicaceae. Glucosinolates (GS) are secondary plant compounds characteristic in this plant family. They play an important role in defence against herbivores and pathogens. Insect herbivores that are specialists on brassicaceous plant species have evolved adaptations to excrete or detoxify GS. Other insect herbivores may even sequester GS and employ them as defence against their own antagonists, such as predators. Moreover, high levels of GS in the food plants of non-sequestering herbivores can negatively affect the growth and survival of their parasitoids. In addition to allelochemicals, plants produce volatile chemicals when damaged by herbivores. These herbivore induced plant volatiles (HIPV) have been demonstrated to play an important role in foraging behaviour of insect parasitoids. In addition, biosynthetic pathways involved in the production of HIPV are being unraveled using the model plant Arabidopsis thialiana. However, the majority of studies investigating the attractiveness of HIPV to parasitoids are based on experiments mainly using crop plant species in which defence traits may have changed through artificial selection. Field studies with both cultivated and wild crucifers, the latter in which defence traits are intact, are necessary to reveal the relative importance of direct and indirect plant defence strategies on parasitoid and plant fitness. Future research should also consider the potential conflict between direct and indirect plant defences when studying the evolution of plant defences against insect herbivory.

Subfields: Molecular Biology, Plant Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5fbe64925a4edf2142ea54841f7bc95b115b0e58

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Molecular Biology

1. R. Mumm
2. Atle M. Bones
3. M. Dicke
4. N. V. van Dam

In Plant Science

1. M. Dicke
2. N. V. van Dam
3. R. Mumm
4. J. V. van Loon
5. Atle M. Bones
6. I. Ahuja
7. J. Rohloff
8. S. Dorn

Citations in the corpus

• Fungal entomopathogens in a tritrophic context (2010, background): “DeMoraes et al. 1998; Fatouros et al. 2005; Gols and Harvey 2009 ).”
• Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review (2010, background): “Plants’ responses upon damage caused by herbivores occurs through the regulation of several biochemical pathways that lead to the release of chemical compounds, which cause either repellence to herbivore insects or attraction to natural enemies (predators or parasitoids) of herbivore insects (Karban”
• Drought changes plant chemistry and causes contrasting responses in lepidopteran herbivores (2011, background): “For example, glucosinolate-rich food plants of a non-sequestering herbivore can negatively affect the growth and survival of its parasitoids (Gols and Harvey 2009), or drought-induced increases in volatile emission (Vallat et al.”
• Variation in natural plant products and the attraction of bodyguards involved in indirect plant defense (2010, background): “Several specialist insects have developed counteradaptations to circumvent the toxic effects of glucosinolates and their hydrolysis products (Wittstock et al. 2003; Gols and Harvey 2009; Hopkins et al. 2009).”
• Herbivore‐induced plant responses in Brassica oleracea prevail over effects of constitutive resistance and result in enhanced herbivore attack (2010, background): “Domestication of B. oleracea has resulted in a variety of cultivars that differ in constitutive resistance against herbivores and show relatively low genetic variation within the cultivars (Gols & Harvey, 2009).”