Abstract
Abstract Herbivorous insects may be informed about the presence of competitors on the same host plant by a variety of cues. These cues can derive from either the competitor itself or the damaged plant. In the mustard leaf beetle Phaedon cochleariae (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae), adults are known to be deterred from feeding and oviposition by the exocrine glandular secretion of conspecific co‐occurring larvae. We hypothesised that the exocrine larval secretion released by feeding larvae may adsorb to the surface of Chinese cabbage leaves, and thus, convey the information about their former or actual presence. Further experiments tested the influence of leaves damaged by conspecific larvae, mechanically damaged leaves, larval frass and regurgitant on the oviposition and feeding behaviour of P. cochleariae . Finally, the effect of previous conspecific herbivory on larval development and larval host selection was assessed. Our results show that (epi)chrysomelidial, the major component of the exocrine secretion from P. cochleariae larvae, was detectable by GC‐MS in surface extracts from leaves upon which larvae had fed. However, leaves exposed to volatiles of the larval secretion were not avoided by female P. cochleariae for feeding or oviposition. Thus, we conclude that secretion volatiles did not adsorb in sufficient amounts on the leaf surface to display deterrent activity towards adults. By contrast, gravid females avoided to feed and lay their eggs on leaves damaged by second‐instar larvae for three days when compared to undamaged leaves. Mechanical damage of leaves and treatment of artificially damaged leaves with larval frass or regurgitant did not affect oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariae . Since no adverse effects of previous herbivory on larval development were detected, we suggest that female P. cochleariae avoid Chinese cabbage leaves damaged by feeding larvae for other reasons than escape from competition or avoidance of direct negative effects that result from consuming induced plant material.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 9
Claim · model-written summary
(Epi)chrysomelidial was detected on leaves after P. cochleariae larvae fed.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbage
Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0 - Interactor
- P. cochleariae
Phaedon cochleariaee0herbivore - Outcome
- (epi)chrysomelidial, the major component of the exocrine secretion from P. cochleariae larvae, was detectablee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“(epi)chrysomelidial, the major component of the exocrine secretion from P. cochleariae larvae, was detectable by GC‐MS in surface extracts from leaves upon which larvae had fed.”
Claim · model-written summary
Females did not avoid leaves exposed to secretion volatiles for feeding or oviposition.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- exposed to volatiles of the larval secretione0
- Interactor
- P. cochleariaePhaedon cochleariaee0herbivore
- Outcome
- feeding or ovipositione0
- Direction
- not avoidede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“leaves exposed to volatiles of the larval secretion were not avoided by female P. cochleariae for feeding or oviposition.”
Claim · model-written summary
Females avoided feeding on leaves damaged by second-instar larvae for three days.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- leaves damaged by second‐instar larvaee0
- Outcome
- feede0
- Direction
- avoidede0
- Qualifier
- for three dayse0
- Comparator
- undamaged leavese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“gravid females avoided to feed and lay their eggs on leaves damaged by second‐instar larvae for three days when compared to undamaged leaves.”
Claim · model-written summary
Females avoided laying eggs on leaves damaged by second-instar larvae for three days.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- leaves damaged by second‐instar larvaee0
- Outcome
- lay their eggse0
- Direction
- avoidede0
- Qualifier
- for three dayse0
- Comparator
- undamaged leavese0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“gravid females avoided to feed and lay their eggs on leaves damaged by second‐instar larvae for three days when compared to undamaged leaves.”
Claim · model-written summary
Mechanical leaf damage did not change beetle oviposition or feeding.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- Mechanical damage of leavese0
- Interactor
- P. cochleariaePhaedon cochleariaee0herbivore
- Outcome
- oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariaee0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“Mechanical damage of leaves and treatment of artificially damaged leaves with larval frass or regurgitant did not affect oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariae .”
Claim · model-written summary
Larval frass applied to damaged leaves did not change beetle oviposition or feeding.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- larval frasse0
- Interactor
- P. cochleariaePhaedon cochleariaee0herbivore
- Outcome
- oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariaee0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“treatment of artificially damaged leaves with larval frass or regurgitant did not affect oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariae .”
Claim · model-written summary
Larval regurgitant applied to damaged leaves did not change beetle oviposition or feeding.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- regurgitante0
- Interactor
- P. cochleariaePhaedon cochleariaee0herbivore
- Outcome
- oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariaee0
- Direction
- did not affecte0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“treatment of artificially damaged leaves with larval frass or regurgitant did not affect oviposition and feeding of P. cochleariae .”
Claim · model-written summary
Previous herbivory had no detected adverse effect on larval development.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Treatment
- previous herbivorye0
- Outcome
- larval developmente0
- Direction
- no adverse effectse0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“no adverse effects of previous herbivory on larval development were detected”
Claim · model-written summary
Authors inferred that secretion volatiles did not accumulate sufficiently on leaves to deter adults.
- Taxon
- Chinese cabbageBrassica rapa subsp. pekinensist0
- Outcome
- deterrent activity towards adultse0
- Qualifier
- did not adsorb in sufficient amounts on the leaf surfacee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
t0“surface of Chinese cabbage leaves”
e0“secretion volatiles did not adsorb in sufficient amounts on the leaf surface to display deterrent activity towards adults.”
The same questions in other papers
grazing · growth · Brassica rapa (field mustard)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- positive
- negative
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.