Paper · 2024 · Frontiers in Plant Science

Limited effects of plant-beneficial fungi on plant volatile composition and host-choice behavior of Nesidiocoris tenuis

Caroline Meesters; Berhane T. Weldegergis; Marcel Dicke; et al.

4
claims
9
verbatim quotes
8
citations
2
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Biological control using plant-beneficial fungi has gained considerable interest as a sustainable method for pest management, by priming the plant for enhanced defense against pathogens and insect herbivores. However, despite promising outcomes, little is known about how different fungal strains mediate these beneficial effects. In this study, we evaluated whether inoculation of tomato seeds with the plant-beneficial fungi Beauveria bassiana ARSEF 3097, Metarhizium brunneum ARSEF 1095 and Trichoderma harzianum T22 affected the plant’s volatile organic compound (VOC) profile and the host-choice behavior of Nesidiocoris tenuis , an emerging pest species in NW-European tomato cultivation, and the related zoophytophagous biocontrol agent Macrolophus pygmaeus . Results indicated that fungal inoculation did not significantly alter the VOC composition of tomato plants. However, in a two-choice cage assay where female insects were given the option to select between control plants and fungus-inoculated plants, N. tenuis preferred control plants over M. brunneum -inoculated plants. Nearly 72% of all N. tenuis individuals tested chose the control treatment. In all other combinations tested, no significant differences were found for none of the insects. We conclude that inoculation of tomato with plant-beneficial fungi had limited effects on plant volatile composition and host-choice behavior of insects. However, the observation that N. tenuis was deterred from the crop when inoculated with M. brunneum and attracted to non-inoculated plants may provide new opportunities for future biocontrol based on a push-pull strategy.

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 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fungal inoculation did not significantly alter tomato volatile composition.

Treatment
fungal inoculatione0
Outcome
VOC compositione0
Direction
did not significantly altere0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“fungal inoculation did not significantly alter the VOC composition of tomato plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 790–873 · show in text ↑
e1

“Beauveria bassiana ARSEF 3097, Metarhizium brunneum ARSEF 1095 and Trichoderma harzianum T22”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 427–519 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Nesidiocoris tenuis preferred controls over Metarhizium-inoculated tomato plants.

Treatment
M. brunneum -inoculated plantse0
Interactor
N. tenuisNesidiocoris tenuise0pest
Second interactor
M. brunneumMetarhizium brunneume0symbiont
Outcome
preferred control plantse0
Direction
preferrede0
Value
72%e1
Comparator
control plantse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nesidiocoris tenuis
Nesidiocoris tenuis · InteractorGüney Baloğlu · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“N. tenuis preferred control plants over M. brunneum -inoculated plants”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1017–1087 · show in text ↑
e1

“Nearly 72% of all N. tenuis individuals tested chose the control treatment”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1089–1163 · show in text ↑
e2

“tomato seeds with the plant-beneficial fungi Beauveria bassiana ARSEF 3097, Metarhizium brunneum ARSEF 1095 and Trichoderma harzianum T22”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 382–519 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Other fungus and insect combinations showed no significant host-choice differences.

Treatment
all other combinations testede0
Outcome
differencese0
Direction
no significant differencese0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“In all other combinations tested, no significant differences were found for none of the insects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1165–1260 · show in text ↑
e1

“tomato seeds with the plant-beneficial fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 382–426 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

Authors propose Metarhizium inoculation for a potential push-pull biocontrol strategy.

Interactor
N. tenuisNesidiocoris tenuise0pest
Second interactor
M. brunneumMetarhizium brunneume0symbiont
Outcome
future biocontrol based on a push-pull strategye0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Solanum lycopersicum
Solanum lycopersicum · TaxonKod B · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗
Nesidiocoris tenuis
Nesidiocoris tenuis · InteractorGüney Baloğlu · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“N. tenuis was deterred from the crop when inoculated with M. brunneum and attracted to non-inoculated plants may provide new opportunities for future biocontrol based on a push-pull strategy”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1446–1636 · show in text ↑
e1

“tomato with plant-beneficial fungi”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1294–1328 · show in text ↑

inoculation · quality: general · Solanum lycopersicum (tomato)Positive and negative results

21 papers: 16 positive, 5 negative or no effect

4 papers in the same direction as this paper · 16 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

17 papers more in this group

See all 21 papers →

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.