Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices

Selecting optimal host plants is critical for herbivorous insects, such as fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda), an important maize pest in the Americas and Africa. Fall armyworm larvae are presumed to have limited mobility, hence female moths are presumed to be largely responsible for selecting hosts. We addressed host selection by fall armyworm moths and neonate and older (3rd-instar) larvae, as mediated by resistance and herbivory in maize plants. Thus, we compared discrimination among three maize cultivars with varying degrees of resistance to fall armyworm, and between plants subjected or not to two types of herbivory. The cultivars were: (i) susceptible, and deficient in jasmonic acid (JA) production and green leaf volatiles (GLV) emissions (inbred line B73-lox10); (ii) modestly resistant (B73), and; (iii) highly resistant (Mp708). The herbivory types were: (i) ongoing (= fall armyworm larvae present), and; (ii) future (= fall armyworm eggs present). In choice tests, moths laid more eggs on the highly resistant cultivar, and least on the susceptible cultivar, though on those cultivars larvae performed poorest and best, respectively. In the context of herbivory, moths laid more eggs: (i) on plants subject to versus free of future herbivory, regardless of whether plants were deficient or not in JA and GLV production; (ii) on plants subject versus free of ongoing herbivory, and; (iii) on plants not deficient in compared to deficient in JA and GLV production. Neonate larvae dispersed aerially from host plants (i.e. ballooned), and most larvae colonized the modestly resistant cultivar, and fewest the highly resistant cultivar, suggesting quasi-directional, directed aerial descent. Finally, dispersing older larvae did not discriminate among the three maize cultivars, nor between maize plants and (plastic) model maize plants, suggesting random, visually-oriented dispersal. Our results were used to assemble a model of host selection by fall armyworm moths and larvae, including recommendations for future research.

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426, Kolomiets, Michael V. autor/a, Bernal, Julio S. autor/a 15468
Format: Texto biblioteca
Language:eng
Subjects:Spodoptera frugiperda, Maíz, Oviposición, Plagas agrícolas, Ecología animal,
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197628
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id KOHA-OAI-ECOSUR:39478
record_format koha
institution ECOSUR
collection Koha
country México
countrycode MX
component Bibliográfico
access En linea
En linea
databasecode cat-ecosur
tag biblioteca
region America del Norte
libraryname Sistema de Información Bibliotecario de ECOSUR (SIBE)
language eng
topic Spodoptera frugiperda
Maíz
Oviposición
Plagas agrícolas
Ecología animal
Spodoptera frugiperda
Maíz
Oviposición
Plagas agrícolas
Ecología animal
spellingShingle Spodoptera frugiperda
Maíz
Oviposición
Plagas agrícolas
Ecología animal
Spodoptera frugiperda
Maíz
Oviposición
Plagas agrícolas
Ecología animal
Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426
Kolomiets, Michael V. autor/a
Bernal, Julio S. autor/a 15468
Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
description Selecting optimal host plants is critical for herbivorous insects, such as fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda), an important maize pest in the Americas and Africa. Fall armyworm larvae are presumed to have limited mobility, hence female moths are presumed to be largely responsible for selecting hosts. We addressed host selection by fall armyworm moths and neonate and older (3rd-instar) larvae, as mediated by resistance and herbivory in maize plants. Thus, we compared discrimination among three maize cultivars with varying degrees of resistance to fall armyworm, and between plants subjected or not to two types of herbivory. The cultivars were: (i) susceptible, and deficient in jasmonic acid (JA) production and green leaf volatiles (GLV) emissions (inbred line B73-lox10); (ii) modestly resistant (B73), and; (iii) highly resistant (Mp708). The herbivory types were: (i) ongoing (= fall armyworm larvae present), and; (ii) future (= fall armyworm eggs present). In choice tests, moths laid more eggs on the highly resistant cultivar, and least on the susceptible cultivar, though on those cultivars larvae performed poorest and best, respectively. In the context of herbivory, moths laid more eggs: (i) on plants subject to versus free of future herbivory, regardless of whether plants were deficient or not in JA and GLV production; (ii) on plants subject versus free of ongoing herbivory, and; (iii) on plants not deficient in compared to deficient in JA and GLV production. Neonate larvae dispersed aerially from host plants (i.e. ballooned), and most larvae colonized the modestly resistant cultivar, and fewest the highly resistant cultivar, suggesting quasi-directional, directed aerial descent. Finally, dispersing older larvae did not discriminate among the three maize cultivars, nor between maize plants and (plastic) model maize plants, suggesting random, visually-oriented dispersal. Our results were used to assemble a model of host selection by fall armyworm moths and larvae, including recommendations for future research.
format Texto
topic_facet Spodoptera frugiperda
Maíz
Oviposición
Plagas agrícolas
Ecología animal
author Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426
Kolomiets, Michael V. autor/a
Bernal, Julio S. autor/a 15468
author_facet Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426
Kolomiets, Michael V. autor/a
Bernal, Julio S. autor/a 15468
author_sort Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426
title Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
title_short Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
title_full Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
title_fullStr Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
title_full_unstemmed Nonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
title_sort nonsensical choices? fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197628
work_keys_str_mv AT rojasjuliocdoctorautora5426 nonsensicalchoicesfallarmywormmothschooseseeminglybestorworsthostsfortheirlarvaebutneonatelarvaemaketheirownchoices
AT kolomietsmichaelvautora nonsensicalchoicesfallarmywormmothschooseseeminglybestorworsthostsfortheirlarvaebutneonatelarvaemaketheirownchoices
AT bernaljuliosautora15468 nonsensicalchoicesfallarmywormmothschooseseeminglybestorworsthostsfortheirlarvaebutneonatelarvaemaketheirownchoices
_version_ 1794790979807477760
spelling KOHA-OAI-ECOSUR:394782024-03-12T12:45:22ZNonsensical choices? Fall armyworm moths choose seemingly best or worst hosts for their larvae, but neonate larvae make their own choices Rojas, Julio C. Doctor autor/a 5426 Kolomiets, Michael V. autor/a Bernal, Julio S. autor/a 15468 textengSelecting optimal host plants is critical for herbivorous insects, such as fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda), an important maize pest in the Americas and Africa. Fall armyworm larvae are presumed to have limited mobility, hence female moths are presumed to be largely responsible for selecting hosts. We addressed host selection by fall armyworm moths and neonate and older (3rd-instar) larvae, as mediated by resistance and herbivory in maize plants. Thus, we compared discrimination among three maize cultivars with varying degrees of resistance to fall armyworm, and between plants subjected or not to two types of herbivory. The cultivars were: (i) susceptible, and deficient in jasmonic acid (JA) production and green leaf volatiles (GLV) emissions (inbred line B73-lox10); (ii) modestly resistant (B73), and; (iii) highly resistant (Mp708). The herbivory types were: (i) ongoing (= fall armyworm larvae present), and; (ii) future (= fall armyworm eggs present). In choice tests, moths laid more eggs on the highly resistant cultivar, and least on the susceptible cultivar, though on those cultivars larvae performed poorest and best, respectively. In the context of herbivory, moths laid more eggs: (i) on plants subject to versus free of future herbivory, regardless of whether plants were deficient or not in JA and GLV production; (ii) on plants subject versus free of ongoing herbivory, and; (iii) on plants not deficient in compared to deficient in JA and GLV production. Neonate larvae dispersed aerially from host plants (i.e. ballooned), and most larvae colonized the modestly resistant cultivar, and fewest the highly resistant cultivar, suggesting quasi-directional, directed aerial descent. Finally, dispersing older larvae did not discriminate among the three maize cultivars, nor between maize plants and (plastic) model maize plants, suggesting random, visually-oriented dispersal. Our results were used to assemble a model of host selection by fall armyworm moths and larvae, including recommendations for future research.Selecting optimal host plants is critical for herbivorous insects, such as fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda), an important maize pest in the Americas and Africa. Fall armyworm larvae are presumed to have limited mobility, hence female moths are presumed to be largely responsible for selecting hosts. We addressed host selection by fall armyworm moths and neonate and older (3rd-instar) larvae, as mediated by resistance and herbivory in maize plants. Thus, we compared discrimination among three maize cultivars with varying degrees of resistance to fall armyworm, and between plants subjected or not to two types of herbivory. The cultivars were: (i) susceptible, and deficient in jasmonic acid (JA) production and green leaf volatiles (GLV) emissions (inbred line B73-lox10); (ii) modestly resistant (B73), and; (iii) highly resistant (Mp708). The herbivory types were: (i) ongoing (= fall armyworm larvae present), and; (ii) future (= fall armyworm eggs present). In choice tests, moths laid more eggs on the highly resistant cultivar, and least on the susceptible cultivar, though on those cultivars larvae performed poorest and best, respectively. In the context of herbivory, moths laid more eggs: (i) on plants subject to versus free of future herbivory, regardless of whether plants were deficient or not in JA and GLV production; (ii) on plants subject versus free of ongoing herbivory, and; (iii) on plants not deficient in compared to deficient in JA and GLV production. Neonate larvae dispersed aerially from host plants (i.e. ballooned), and most larvae colonized the modestly resistant cultivar, and fewest the highly resistant cultivar, suggesting quasi-directional, directed aerial descent. Finally, dispersing older larvae did not discriminate among the three maize cultivars, nor between maize plants and (plastic) model maize plants, suggesting random, visually-oriented dispersal. Our results were used to assemble a model of host selection by fall armyworm moths and larvae, including recommendations for future research.Spodoptera frugiperdaMaízOviposiciónPlagas agrícolasEcología animalPLoS Onehttps://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197628Acceso en línea sin restricciones