桉树枝瘿姬小蜂侵害机理及寄主桉树化学防御研究
|
摘要
桉树枝瘿姬小蜂Leptocybe invasa Fisher et La Salle是危害桉属Eucalyptus植物枝叶的重要危险性害虫，该虫自2007年入侵我国以来，已对我国桉树资源造成严重的危害。本文通过对该虫在福建发生危害特点、生物学和生态学特性的调查研究基础上，从该虫产卵趋性、寄主选择行为和寄主的适合度，以及不同桉树品系（种）叶片生理生化指标与抗虫性关系等方面进行深入分析，综合评价了不同桉树品系（种）的抗虫性。以巨桉E. grandis为研究对象，深入探讨桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害、机械损伤和喷施外源茉莉酸甲酯（MeJA）等诱导因子处理后，其叶片中化学物质的时序变化。从营养物质、次生物质、防御酶系、蛋白酶抑制剂和植物挥发物等角度探讨了不同诱导因子对桉树化学防御反应机理，以及诱导防御对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生长发育和种群趋势的影响。研究揭示了该虫侵害、选择寄主的行为机理和桉树诱导化学防御反应策略的互作关系，从抗性选育和提高寄主防御能力方面，为该虫的防治提供新的思路和技术途径。通过试验研究，得到如下结果：
1、调查了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂在福建省危害现状及不同桉树品系（种）受害情况。结果表明：（1）福建省桉树主栽品系（种）大部分都可遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害，并可在尾赤桉DH201-2、巨桉QG3、邓恩桉、尾叶桉U6、巨尾桉GL9、大叶桉和窿缘桉等7种桉树品系（种）上形成虫瘿，正常生长发育，并完成其生活史。（2）研究发现不同桉树品系（种）受害程度和对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的适合程度是不同的。桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对不同桉树寄主的选择频次率、产卵量和幼虫数量均有差异。（3）以不同桉树品系（种）为食的桉树枝瘿姬小蜂，除雌性比差别不大外，其余如出蜂数、雌成虫体重、怀卵量、寿命等生长发育和繁殖力指标都有极显著的差异。（4）对寄主进行适合度分析，并用聚类分析法将桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的寄主划分为适宜寄主、较适宜寄主、较不适宜寄主、不适宜寄主4类。在适宜寄主上寄生取食，每雌怀卵量都达70粒以上，存在种群暴发的生物学潜能。在生产上可使用寄主适合度指标做为抗虫品系筛选的综合性评价指标。
2、研究了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂雌成虫对不同桉树品系（种）气味及颜色的行为趋性，以及对各桉树品系（种）产卵选择情况。结果表明：（1）桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对13种桉树品系（种）挥发性气味的趋性存在明显的差异，其中对尾赤桉DH201-2、尾巨桉DH32-28和巨桉QG3等10种品系（种）有不同程度的正趋性，尤其是对尾赤桉DH201-2的趋性最强，而对韦赤桉GL3和大花序桉则表现出负趋性或不选择性；（2）不同色卡对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的引诱效果差异明显，其中纯白色（RAL9010）和信号黄（RAL1003）引诱效果较好，选择系数分别为0.29和0.28；（3）不同桉树品系（种）上的桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵刻痕数明显不同，其中尾赤桉DH201-2上的产卵刻痕数明显大于其它品系（种）。
3、调查了13种福建主栽的桉树品系（种）幼苗受害情况，按制定的抗性分级标准，并用灰色关联分析法，综合评价了桉树品系（种）的水分、营养物质及次生物质含量与受害程度和抗性值关联度情况。结果表明：（1）13个品系（种）中，尾巨桉DH32-28、尾巨桉DH32-26、韦赤桉GL3、尾细桉M1、巨桉JG1、大花序桉和柳桉等7个品系为抗性品系（种），其余的品系（种）具有不同程度的感虫性。研究发现同一桉树品种不同无性系的抗性也存在显著区别。（2）不同感虫品系（种）的样枝着生的虫瘿数和每瘿孕虫数差异极显著。（3）不同桉树品系（种）嫩枝嫩叶的含水率差异极显著，感虫品系（种）显著低于抗虫品系（种）；不同桉树品系（种）可溶性糖、多糖和蛋白质等营养物质的含量随着抗性的增强而减少；而黄酮、单宁和总酚等次生代谢物质含量随着抗性的增强而增加。（4）灰色关联分析表明，桉树嫩枝、嫩叶中的营养物质，特别是多糖的含量对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生长发育影响和抗性影响较大。
4、研究了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害及不同诱导方式对桉树叶片化学物质和挥发物影响。结果表明：（1）桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害、机械损伤和外源MeJA处理都会诱导桉树叶中可溶性糖、多糖和蛋白质等营养物质的含量发生变化，与对照相比有明显的下降趋势，但MeJA处理引起桉树防御反应的变化幅度更大。（2）3种诱导处理都能明显影响桉树叶黄酮、单宁和总酚等次生代谢物质的含量，与对照相比有明显的上升趋势，并在时序上各种次生物质含量呈现不同的变化规律。（3）桉树叶PAL、SOD、POD和PPO等4种保护酶活性变化与不同诱导处理有一定的相关性，表明了不同的诱导方式对桉树叶中保护酶活力的作用不同，总体上虫害和MeJA处理诱导的酶活力较机械损伤更为明显。（4）不同诱导处理均可激发桉树叶中TI和CI2种蛋白酶抑制剂活性发生变化，且不同处理在时序上有不同的反应表现。与机械损伤处理相比，桉树受MeJA诱导处理后，桉树叶的TI和CI活性增幅更显著，且更迅速，与虫害诱导的变化情况相近。（5）采用动态顶空吸附法和气相色谱－质谱法分析表明，不同处理的桉树植株释放出的挥发物的种类和相对含量存在显著差异。不同诱导处理后，大部分萜烯类化合物在诱导后1-3d大量释放，5-7d后释放量逐渐减少。
5、对不同诱导处理后，桉树叶片生理生化指标的变化，以及对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的生长发育、繁殖力和种群趋势等生物学指标的影响进行研究。结果表明：（1）用诱导处理后的植株接入桉树枝瘿姬小蜂，发现其子代存活率降低、雌虫体重下降、怀卵量减少、寿命缩短和种群趋势指数下降。（2）用模糊相似优先比法分析综合比较评价了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害诱导与其它诱导处理的相似程度，结果表明，喷施1.0mmol·L~(-1)MeJA诱导能够产生与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害较为相似的结果，证明了喷施外源MeJA在诱导抗性中有积极的作用，可作为害虫综合治理的一种有效辅助手段。
The Eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa, is one of the most devastating pests, whichcauses severe injury to young foliage of Eucalyptus spp. Since its first recorded occurrence inChina in2007, the pest had caused serious damage to the eucalypt plantation resource in thiscountry. Based on investigations and studies of the biological and ecological characteristics of thepest in Fujian, this paper provides detailed analysis regarding host preference, oviposition taxis,resistance among eucalypt taxa and the relationship between some physio-biochemical indices inleaves of different species and plant resistance. Further research into chemical defense of E.grandis by different induced treatments, which included by gall wasp oviposition, physicaldamage and exogenous methyl jasmonate (MeJA), was carried out. Result analysed includedtemporal changes of chemical substances in leaves. From the aspects of nutrients, secondarymetabolites, defense enzymes, protease inhibitors and plant volatiles, we investigated themechanisms involved in chemical defenses of E. grandis and the effects of these changes on thegrowth, development and population trend of L. invasa. This research revealed interactionsbetween the pest infestation and chemical defense of Eucalyptus species, and provided newinsights for technical approaches to control the pest by breeding insect-resistant species andimproving host defense capability. After three years of research, the major results obtained are asfollows:
1. The harm status and levels of damage to different varieties caused by L. invasa weresurveyed in Fujian. Results showed:(1) Most of the infested eucalypt varieties can attacked by L.invasa in Fujian; when the larvae feed on E. urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2, E.gradis clone QG3, E. dunnii, E. urophylla clone U6, E. grandis×E. urophylla clone GL9, E.robusta and E. exserta respectively, they can form galls, grow normally and complete their lifecycle.(2) There were differences among varieties for the degree of damage and host fitness of L.invasa, which resulted in changes to frequency through selection, and the fecundity and number oflarvae on differ among different Eucalyptus varieties.(3) L. invasa larvae fed by differentEucalyptus varieties, aside from the female ratio, differed significantly in other attributesincluding emergence rate, female weight, fecundity and longevity of female.(4) According to thefitness index (FI), the host plants of L. invasa were divided into4categories by cluster analysis:the most suitable, suitable, secondary and unsuitable. Fed on suitable host, fecundity reaches morethan70eggs per female which is adequate to lead to potential population explosion of the pest.We can use host fitness index as a comprehensive evaluation index for the screening of resistant clones in practice.
2. The effects of smell and color of different Eucalyptus varieties on host preference by L.invasa were studied in laboratory. In addition, selection behavior of oviposition of the pest wasstudied in the field. The results revealed that:(1) There were significant differences amongeucalypt species for female adult preference by smell–out of10Eucalyptus varieties femaleadults showed the strongest preference for E. urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2.However, the pest had negative taxis or no selection for either E. wetarensis×E.camaldulensisclone GL3or E. cloeziana.(2) Color tests showed that there were obvious differences amongcolor cards for their pest-attracting effect, pure white cards (RAL9010) and signal yellow cards(RAL1003) had an obvious attraction effect, with the selection coefficients accounting for0.29and0.28respectively.(3) The analyzed results showed that the number of oviposition scars weresignificantly different among Eucalyptus varieties. It is obvious that the oviposition scars on E.urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2were more than other varieties.
3. In order to investigate relationships between L. invasa and different Eucalyptus varietiesand to examine the change process of the host stress response after being damaged, we screened13infested eucalypt clones and species in Fujian and graded these for resistance, then measuredthe contents of water, nutrients and secondary substances in young foliage of these differentvarieties. Data obtained from this work was analyzed by the grey relational analysis. The resultsshowed that:(1)13varieties showed resistance, including E. urophylla×E. grandis clonesDH32-28and, DH32-26, E. grandis×E. urophylla clone GL3, E. urophylla×E. tereticornisclone M1, E. grandis clone JG1, E. cloeziana and E. saligna. All other varieties screened haddifferent degrees of susceptibility. The research also showed that the resistance of different clonesfrom same species differed significantly.(2) The number of galls per sample branchlet and thenumber of wasp larvae per gall differed greatly among varieties.(3) The water content in youngfoliage of different varieties differed greatly, with susceptible varieties having much lower foliagewater contents than did resistant varieties. As the level of resistance increased, the contents ofsoluble sugars, polysaccharides and proteins in young foliage decreased, whilst the content offlavonoids, tannins and total phenols increased.(4) Grey relational analysis between contents ofnutrients and secondary substances in young foliage of different varieties and damage degrees bythe gall wasp, showed that the content of nutrients, especially the content of polysaccharide, hadgreater impact on the growth of the wasp and varieties resistance than did other attributesmeasured.
4. Chemical analysis of some chemical substances in leave and volatiles emitted from E.grandis after inductions by gall wasp oviposition, physical damage and exogenous MeJA was studied. The results showed that:(1) Induction treatments can all induce changes in the nutrientcontent of Eucalyptus leaves, including contents of soluble sugars, polysaccharides and proteins.Compared with the control group, the content of these compounds tended to decline. But, theintensity of defense reaction caused by MeJA treatment was higher.(2) In regard to three methodsof induction, compared with the control group, the content of secondary metabolites, such asflavones, tannins and total phenols, all had obvious tendencies to increase, and the contents of allkinds of secondary metabolites showed different results over time.(3) Variation in the activitylevels of PAL、SOD、POD and PPO enzymes in Eucalyptus leaves showed some correlations withdifferent induction treatments, indicating that different methods of induction had differing effectson the activity of protective enzymes. Generally speaking, enzymatic activity induced by insectattack and MeJA treatment was more obvious than physical damage.(4) Different inductiontreatments can all stimulate change to the activity of TI and CI in eucalyptus leaves, moreover,different treatments had different results over time. Induced by MeJA, compared with physicaldamage, increased the amplitude of TI and CI activities in Eucalyptus leaves–the amplitude washigher and peaked quicker–which was similar to the change caused by insect attack.（5） VOCsof E. grandis were studied by the methods of headspace enrichment and GC-MS in this paper. Theresults showed that the composition and quantity of the VOCs were significantly different amongthe four treatments. After different inductions, terpene volatiles emitted largely in1-3days, butthe volatile emissions decreased gradually after5-7days.
5. Through different induction treatments, changes on physiological and biochemical indicesof Eucalyptus leaves were studied, along with the effects on indices of the growth, development,reproductive activity and population trends of L. invasa. The results showed that:(1) Plants withinduction treatments that were inoculated with L. invasa, revealed that the survival rate ofoffsprings of L. invasa decreased, average weight of females declined, fecundity reduced, averagelife span shortened, and the index of population trend decreased.(2) Vague comparative methodon similarity evolution between oviposition-induction and other induction treatments, showed thatspraying1.0mmol·L~(-1)MeJA can make the similar result as oviposition, demonstrated sprayingMeJA plays an active role in induced resistance, which can be used as the supplementary methodfor integrated pest management.
1、调查了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂在福建省危害现状及不同桉树品系（种）受害情况。结果表明：（1）福建省桉树主栽品系（种）大部分都可遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害，并可在尾赤桉DH201-2、巨桉QG3、邓恩桉、尾叶桉U6、巨尾桉GL9、大叶桉和窿缘桉等7种桉树品系（种）上形成虫瘿，正常生长发育，并完成其生活史。（2）研究发现不同桉树品系（种）受害程度和对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的适合程度是不同的。桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对不同桉树寄主的选择频次率、产卵量和幼虫数量均有差异。（3）以不同桉树品系（种）为食的桉树枝瘿姬小蜂，除雌性比差别不大外，其余如出蜂数、雌成虫体重、怀卵量、寿命等生长发育和繁殖力指标都有极显著的差异。（4）对寄主进行适合度分析，并用聚类分析法将桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的寄主划分为适宜寄主、较适宜寄主、较不适宜寄主、不适宜寄主4类。在适宜寄主上寄生取食，每雌怀卵量都达70粒以上，存在种群暴发的生物学潜能。在生产上可使用寄主适合度指标做为抗虫品系筛选的综合性评价指标。
2、研究了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂雌成虫对不同桉树品系（种）气味及颜色的行为趋性，以及对各桉树品系（种）产卵选择情况。结果表明：（1）桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对13种桉树品系（种）挥发性气味的趋性存在明显的差异，其中对尾赤桉DH201-2、尾巨桉DH32-28和巨桉QG3等10种品系（种）有不同程度的正趋性，尤其是对尾赤桉DH201-2的趋性最强，而对韦赤桉GL3和大花序桉则表现出负趋性或不选择性；（2）不同色卡对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的引诱效果差异明显，其中纯白色（RAL9010）和信号黄（RAL1003）引诱效果较好，选择系数分别为0.29和0.28；（3）不同桉树品系（种）上的桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵刻痕数明显不同，其中尾赤桉DH201-2上的产卵刻痕数明显大于其它品系（种）。
3、调查了13种福建主栽的桉树品系（种）幼苗受害情况，按制定的抗性分级标准，并用灰色关联分析法，综合评价了桉树品系（种）的水分、营养物质及次生物质含量与受害程度和抗性值关联度情况。结果表明：（1）13个品系（种）中，尾巨桉DH32-28、尾巨桉DH32-26、韦赤桉GL3、尾细桉M1、巨桉JG1、大花序桉和柳桉等7个品系为抗性品系（种），其余的品系（种）具有不同程度的感虫性。研究发现同一桉树品种不同无性系的抗性也存在显著区别。（2）不同感虫品系（种）的样枝着生的虫瘿数和每瘿孕虫数差异极显著。（3）不同桉树品系（种）嫩枝嫩叶的含水率差异极显著，感虫品系（种）显著低于抗虫品系（种）；不同桉树品系（种）可溶性糖、多糖和蛋白质等营养物质的含量随着抗性的增强而减少；而黄酮、单宁和总酚等次生代谢物质含量随着抗性的增强而增加。（4）灰色关联分析表明，桉树嫩枝、嫩叶中的营养物质，特别是多糖的含量对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生长发育影响和抗性影响较大。
4、研究了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害及不同诱导方式对桉树叶片化学物质和挥发物影响。结果表明：（1）桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害、机械损伤和外源MeJA处理都会诱导桉树叶中可溶性糖、多糖和蛋白质等营养物质的含量发生变化，与对照相比有明显的下降趋势，但MeJA处理引起桉树防御反应的变化幅度更大。（2）3种诱导处理都能明显影响桉树叶黄酮、单宁和总酚等次生代谢物质的含量，与对照相比有明显的上升趋势，并在时序上各种次生物质含量呈现不同的变化规律。（3）桉树叶PAL、SOD、POD和PPO等4种保护酶活性变化与不同诱导处理有一定的相关性，表明了不同的诱导方式对桉树叶中保护酶活力的作用不同，总体上虫害和MeJA处理诱导的酶活力较机械损伤更为明显。（4）不同诱导处理均可激发桉树叶中TI和CI2种蛋白酶抑制剂活性发生变化，且不同处理在时序上有不同的反应表现。与机械损伤处理相比，桉树受MeJA诱导处理后，桉树叶的TI和CI活性增幅更显著，且更迅速，与虫害诱导的变化情况相近。（5）采用动态顶空吸附法和气相色谱－质谱法分析表明，不同处理的桉树植株释放出的挥发物的种类和相对含量存在显著差异。不同诱导处理后，大部分萜烯类化合物在诱导后1-3d大量释放，5-7d后释放量逐渐减少。
5、对不同诱导处理后，桉树叶片生理生化指标的变化，以及对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的生长发育、繁殖力和种群趋势等生物学指标的影响进行研究。结果表明：（1）用诱导处理后的植株接入桉树枝瘿姬小蜂，发现其子代存活率降低、雌虫体重下降、怀卵量减少、寿命缩短和种群趋势指数下降。（2）用模糊相似优先比法分析综合比较评价了桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害诱导与其它诱导处理的相似程度，结果表明，喷施1.0mmol·L~(-1)MeJA诱导能够产生与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂产卵危害较为相似的结果，证明了喷施外源MeJA在诱导抗性中有积极的作用，可作为害虫综合治理的一种有效辅助手段。
The Eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa, is one of the most devastating pests, whichcauses severe injury to young foliage of Eucalyptus spp. Since its first recorded occurrence inChina in2007, the pest had caused serious damage to the eucalypt plantation resource in thiscountry. Based on investigations and studies of the biological and ecological characteristics of thepest in Fujian, this paper provides detailed analysis regarding host preference, oviposition taxis,resistance among eucalypt taxa and the relationship between some physio-biochemical indices inleaves of different species and plant resistance. Further research into chemical defense of E.grandis by different induced treatments, which included by gall wasp oviposition, physicaldamage and exogenous methyl jasmonate (MeJA), was carried out. Result analysed includedtemporal changes of chemical substances in leaves. From the aspects of nutrients, secondarymetabolites, defense enzymes, protease inhibitors and plant volatiles, we investigated themechanisms involved in chemical defenses of E. grandis and the effects of these changes on thegrowth, development and population trend of L. invasa. This research revealed interactionsbetween the pest infestation and chemical defense of Eucalyptus species, and provided newinsights for technical approaches to control the pest by breeding insect-resistant species andimproving host defense capability. After three years of research, the major results obtained are asfollows:
1. The harm status and levels of damage to different varieties caused by L. invasa weresurveyed in Fujian. Results showed:(1) Most of the infested eucalypt varieties can attacked by L.invasa in Fujian; when the larvae feed on E. urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2, E.gradis clone QG3, E. dunnii, E. urophylla clone U6, E. grandis×E. urophylla clone GL9, E.robusta and E. exserta respectively, they can form galls, grow normally and complete their lifecycle.(2) There were differences among varieties for the degree of damage and host fitness of L.invasa, which resulted in changes to frequency through selection, and the fecundity and number oflarvae on differ among different Eucalyptus varieties.(3) L. invasa larvae fed by differentEucalyptus varieties, aside from the female ratio, differed significantly in other attributesincluding emergence rate, female weight, fecundity and longevity of female.(4) According to thefitness index (FI), the host plants of L. invasa were divided into4categories by cluster analysis:the most suitable, suitable, secondary and unsuitable. Fed on suitable host, fecundity reaches morethan70eggs per female which is adequate to lead to potential population explosion of the pest.We can use host fitness index as a comprehensive evaluation index for the screening of resistant clones in practice.
2. The effects of smell and color of different Eucalyptus varieties on host preference by L.invasa were studied in laboratory. In addition, selection behavior of oviposition of the pest wasstudied in the field. The results revealed that:(1) There were significant differences amongeucalypt species for female adult preference by smell–out of10Eucalyptus varieties femaleadults showed the strongest preference for E. urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2.However, the pest had negative taxis or no selection for either E. wetarensis×E.camaldulensisclone GL3or E. cloeziana.(2) Color tests showed that there were obvious differences amongcolor cards for their pest-attracting effect, pure white cards (RAL9010) and signal yellow cards(RAL1003) had an obvious attraction effect, with the selection coefficients accounting for0.29and0.28respectively.(3) The analyzed results showed that the number of oviposition scars weresignificantly different among Eucalyptus varieties. It is obvious that the oviposition scars on E.urophylla×E. camaldulensis clone DH201-2were more than other varieties.
3. In order to investigate relationships between L. invasa and different Eucalyptus varietiesand to examine the change process of the host stress response after being damaged, we screened13infested eucalypt clones and species in Fujian and graded these for resistance, then measuredthe contents of water, nutrients and secondary substances in young foliage of these differentvarieties. Data obtained from this work was analyzed by the grey relational analysis. The resultsshowed that:(1)13varieties showed resistance, including E. urophylla×E. grandis clonesDH32-28and, DH32-26, E. grandis×E. urophylla clone GL3, E. urophylla×E. tereticornisclone M1, E. grandis clone JG1, E. cloeziana and E. saligna. All other varieties screened haddifferent degrees of susceptibility. The research also showed that the resistance of different clonesfrom same species differed significantly.(2) The number of galls per sample branchlet and thenumber of wasp larvae per gall differed greatly among varieties.(3) The water content in youngfoliage of different varieties differed greatly, with susceptible varieties having much lower foliagewater contents than did resistant varieties. As the level of resistance increased, the contents ofsoluble sugars, polysaccharides and proteins in young foliage decreased, whilst the content offlavonoids, tannins and total phenols increased.(4) Grey relational analysis between contents ofnutrients and secondary substances in young foliage of different varieties and damage degrees bythe gall wasp, showed that the content of nutrients, especially the content of polysaccharide, hadgreater impact on the growth of the wasp and varieties resistance than did other attributesmeasured.
4. Chemical analysis of some chemical substances in leave and volatiles emitted from E.grandis after inductions by gall wasp oviposition, physical damage and exogenous MeJA was studied. The results showed that:(1) Induction treatments can all induce changes in the nutrientcontent of Eucalyptus leaves, including contents of soluble sugars, polysaccharides and proteins.Compared with the control group, the content of these compounds tended to decline. But, theintensity of defense reaction caused by MeJA treatment was higher.(2) In regard to three methodsof induction, compared with the control group, the content of secondary metabolites, such asflavones, tannins and total phenols, all had obvious tendencies to increase, and the contents of allkinds of secondary metabolites showed different results over time.(3) Variation in the activitylevels of PAL、SOD、POD and PPO enzymes in Eucalyptus leaves showed some correlations withdifferent induction treatments, indicating that different methods of induction had differing effectson the activity of protective enzymes. Generally speaking, enzymatic activity induced by insectattack and MeJA treatment was more obvious than physical damage.(4) Different inductiontreatments can all stimulate change to the activity of TI and CI in eucalyptus leaves, moreover,different treatments had different results over time. Induced by MeJA, compared with physicaldamage, increased the amplitude of TI and CI activities in Eucalyptus leaves–the amplitude washigher and peaked quicker–which was similar to the change caused by insect attack.（5） VOCsof E. grandis were studied by the methods of headspace enrichment and GC-MS in this paper. Theresults showed that the composition and quantity of the VOCs were significantly different amongthe four treatments. After different inductions, terpene volatiles emitted largely in1-3days, butthe volatile emissions decreased gradually after5-7days.
5. Through different induction treatments, changes on physiological and biochemical indicesof Eucalyptus leaves were studied, along with the effects on indices of the growth, development,reproductive activity and population trends of L. invasa. The results showed that:(1) Plants withinduction treatments that were inoculated with L. invasa, revealed that the survival rate ofoffsprings of L. invasa decreased, average weight of females declined, fecundity reduced, averagelife span shortened, and the index of population trend decreased.(2) Vague comparative methodon similarity evolution between oviposition-induction and other induction treatments, showed thatspraying1.0mmol·L~(-1)MeJA can make the similar result as oviposition, demonstrated sprayingMeJA plays an active role in induced resistance, which can be used as the supplementary methodfor integrated pest management.
引文
[1]祁述雄.中国桉树[M].北京:中国林业出版社,2002:71-83.
[2]李淑仪.桉树土壤与营养研究[M].广东科技出版社,2007:1-4.
[3]徐大平,张宁南.桉树人工林生态效应研究进展[J].广西林业科学,2006,35(4):179-189.
[4]减国长,马祥庆,蔡丽平.我国桉树人工林施肥研究进展[J].福建林业科技,2007,34(4):253-258.
[5]黄昭平.广西桉树人工林种植情况及其对生态环境的影响[J].河北林业科技,2011,(2):44-46,55.
[6]奚福生,罗基同,李贵玉,等.中国桉树病虫害及害虫天敌[M].广西科学技术出版社,2007.
[7]黄咏槐,黄焕华.我国桉树主要病虫害现状及控制策略初探[J].广东林业科,2006,22(1):83-85.
[8]潘志彬.福建省主要桉树病虫害种类及防治方法[J].林业勘察设计,2007(2):121-123.
[9]赵丹阳,徐家雄,林明生,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后桉树损失量测定[J].广东林业科技,2009(6):58-60.
[10] Mendel Z, Protasov A, Fisher N, et al. Taxonomy and biology of Leptocybe invasa gen.&sp.n.(Hymenoptera: Eurlophidae), an invasive gall inducer on Eucalyptus[J]. Ausralian Journal ofEntomology,2004(43):101-113.
[11] Fatih A. Natural history, distribution and hosts of Eucalyptus gall wasps in turkey [Z]. Ⅷth EuropeanCongress of Entomology, Izmir, Turkey,2006.
[12] Nyeko P. The cause, incidence and severity of a new gall damage on Eucalyptus species at Oruchingarefugee settlement in Mbarara district, Uganda [J]. Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2005(11):47-50.
[13] Jacob J P, D evaraj R, N atarajan R. Outbreak of the invasive gall inducing wasp Leptocybe invasa onEucalyptus in India [J].News letter of the Asia Pacific Forest Invasive Species Net work,2007,8:4-5.
[14] Dhahri S, Jamaa M L B. First Record of Leptocybe invasa and Ophelimus maskelli Eucalyptus GallWasps in Tunisia [J]. Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection,2010,5(2):231-236.
[15] Laudonia S, Sasso R. The bronze bug Thaumastocoris peregrinus: a new insect recorded in Italy,damaging to Eucalyptus trees [J]. Bulletin of Insectology,2012,65(1):89-93.
[16] Hassan F R. First record of the eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), in Iraq [J]. Acta Agrobotanica,2012,65(3):93-98.
[17] Quang Thu P, Dell B, Burgess T I. Susceptibility of18eucalypt species to the gall wasp Leptocybeinvasa in the nursery and young plantations in Vietnam [J]. Science Asia,2009,35(2):113-117.
[18] Wingfield M J, Slippers B, Hurley B P, et al. Eucalypt pests and diseases: growing threats to plantationproductivity [J]. Southern Forests: Journal of Forest Science,2008,70(2):139-144.
[19] Akhtar M S, Patankar N V, Gaur A. Observations on the biology and male of eucalyptus gall waspLeptocybe invasa Fisher and Lla Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Indian Journal of Entomology,2012,74(2):173-175.
[20] Branco M, Franco J C, Valente C, et al. Survey of Eucalyptus gall wasps (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)in Portugal [J]. Boletín de Sanidad Vegetal, Plagas,2006,32(2):199-202.
[21] Goud K B, Kumari N K, Vastrad A S, et al. Screening of eucalyptus genotypes against gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Karnataka Journal of AgriculturalSciences,2010,23(1):213-214.
[22] La Salle J, Arakelian G, Garrison R W, et al. A new species of invasive gall wasp (Hymenoptera:Eulophidae: Tetrastichinae) on blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) in California [J].2009,43(2):101-113.
[23] Almatni W, Mayhoob M. Eucalyptus gall-wasp Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Eulophidae,Hymenoptera), a new insect in the Mediterranean region and Syria [J]. Arab and Near East PlantProtection Newsletter, FAO,2005,40:38.
[24]伍荔霞.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂现身并为害广西[J].广西林业,2008(5):53-53.
[25]吴耀军,蒋学建,李德伟,等.我国发现1种重要的林业外来入侵害虫——桉树枝瘿姬小蜂(膜翅目:姬小蜂科)[J].林业科技,2009,45(7):161-163.
[26]唐超,王小君,万方浩,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂入侵海南省[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(6):967-971.
[27]谷平,蒋新革,李坦优,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂研究现状与展望[J].江西林业科技,2012(1):32-34.
[28]张华峰,康文通,陈顺立,等.不同桉树品系与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害关系的研究[J].福建林学院学报,2012,32(4):345-349.
[29] Gene-Sheng T, John L. S. Pest alert-a newly discovered invasion of gall-forming wasps, Leptocybeinvasa (Fisher&La Salle), on Eucalyptus trees in Taiwan [J].Taiwang Insect,2010,30(3):241-245
[30]陈华燕,姚捷敏,许再福.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂雄虫首次在中国发现[J].环境昆虫学报,2009,3l(3):285-287.
[31] Do anlar O. Occurrence of Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle，2004(Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea:Eulophidae) on Eucalyptus camaldulensis in Turkey，with description of the male sex [J]. Zoology in theMiddle East,2005,35,112-114.
[32] Gupta A，Poorani J, Taxonomic studies on a collection of Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera) from Indiawith new distribution records[J]. Joumal of Threatened Taxa,2009,1(5):300-304.
[34]吴耀军,奚福生,罗基同,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性及控制技术[J].广西植保,2009,22(2):5-7.
[35]罗基同,蒋金培,王缉健,等.广西博白桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性研究[J].中国森林病虫,2011,30(4):10-12.
[36]朱方丽,邱宝利,任顺祥.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂连续世代种群生命表[J].生态学报,2013,33(1):97-102.
[37]朱方丽,韩鹏飞,任顺祥,等.寄主植物对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性的影响[J].应用昆虫学报,2011,48(5):1451-1457.
[38]陈磊,金启安,韦曼丽,等.补充营养材料和温度对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂寿命的影响[J].热带作物学报,2011,32(2):302-304.
[39]徐家雄,任辉,赵丹阳,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂种群发生规律与空间分布格局研究[J].广东林业科技,2009(6):50-57.
[40]汤行昊,张华峰,张思禄,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿空间格局及其抽样技术研究[J].福建林学院学报,2013，33(1)：73-76.
[41]罗丰,许彦,杨礼哲,等.三亚市桉树枝瘿姬小蜂监测模型研究[J].热带农业科学,2011,30(11):37-39.
[42]武海卫,贾薪玉,黄焕华,等.五种桉树对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的抗性研究[J].环境昆虫学报,2009,31(2):132-136.
[43]张华峰,康文通,陈顺立.不同桉树品系与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害关系的研究[J].福建林学院学报,2012,32(4):345-349.
[44] Nyeko P, Mutitu E K, Day R K. Farmers' knowledge, perceptions and management of the gall-formingwasp, Leptocybe invasa (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), on Eucalyptus species in Uganda [J]. InternationalJournal of Pest Management,2007,53(2):111-119.
[45] Kulkarni H D. Screening eucalyptus clones against Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):132-136.
[46] Javaregowda J, Prabhu S T. Susceptibility of eucalyptus species and clones to gall wasp, Leptocybeinvasa Fisher and La Salle (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera) in Karnataka [J]. Karnataka Journal ofAgricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):220-221.
[47]钱军,梁居智,蔡兴新,等.海南省桉树枝瘿姬小峰危害现状及桉树抗品系调查[J].热带林业,2010,38(001):49-51.
[48]梁一萍,郭飞,江洁,等.桂南桉树主栽品种对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂抗性林间试验研究[J].中国植保导刊,2011,31(7):14-17.
[49]徐家雄,林明生,邱焕秀.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对苗圃不同桉树品系袋苗的感虫性测定[J].广东林业科技,2011,27(3):40-43.
[50]王伟.桉树对枝瘿姬小蜂抗性及其机制研究[D].中国林业科学研究院,2012.
[51]刘慧清.不同桉树种质对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的抗性研究[D].海南大学,2012.
[52]李诺,王美英,罗基同,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿生理生化初步研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010(8):4126-4127.
[53]吴耀军,常明山,李德伟,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树缩合单宁含量的影响[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2010(6):1-4.
[54]吴耀军,常明山,李德伟,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树类黄酮,花色素苷含量的影响[J].广西林业科学,2010,39（3):119-123.
[55]吕文玲,李诺,杨振德,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树化学成分的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2012,40(12):7137-7139.
[56]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.24个桉树品系遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后保护酶活性变化[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(6).
[57]吴耀军,常明山,盛双,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿解剖特征与寄主叶片生理指标的变化[J].生态学报,2012,32(23):7576-7585.
[58]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.桉树不同无性系叶片内含物变化与枝瘿姬小蜂抗性的关系[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2012,20(6):539-545.
[59] Nambiar-Veetil M, Sangeetha M, Rani K S, et al. Identification of insect-specific target genes fordevelopment of RNAi based control of the Eucalyptus gall pest Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[C]//BMC Proceedings. BioMed Central Ltd,2011,5(Suppl7):98.
[60]林明生,徐家雄,赵丹阳,等.虫线清乳油防治桉树枝瘿姬小蜂试验[J].广东林业科技,2009,25(1):41-43.
[61]蒋金培,王缉健,陈江,等.化学农药控制桉树枝瘿姬小蜂成虫羽化初试[J].广西林业科学,2009,38(3):137-140.
[62] Dose T, Mean D B S. Evaluation of botanicals and synthetic insecticides against eucalyptus gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23:1.
[63]王缉健,罗基同,蒋金培,等.几种农药对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂药效时间的观察[J].广西林业科学,2011,40(2):128-130.
[64]孙德莹,罗基同,张天栋,等.噻虫啉防治桉树枝瘿姬小蜂试验[J].现代化农业,2011(1):17-18.
[65]徐家雄.桉树无性系对对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的感虫性测定与苗圃袋苗上虫瘿灵防治试验[C].重庆:2009,12:2.
[66] Dose T, Mean D B S. Evaluation of botanicals and synthetic insecticides against eucalyptus gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23:1.
[67]罗基同,陈尚文,杨秀好,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂新监测技术应用及其在广西的扩散现状[J].广西林业科学,2011,40(3):204-205.
[68]陈尚文,罗基同,杨秀好,等.黄色粘板对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂成虫的引诱及在监测中的应用[J].广西林业科学,2009,38(4):199-203.
[69] Protasov A, Do anlar M, La Salle J, et al. Occurrence of two local Megastigmus species parasitic onthe eucalyptus gall wasp Leptocybe invasa in Israel and Turkey [J]. Phytoparasitica,2008,36(5):449-459.
[70] Kulkarni H, Kumari N K, Vastrad A S, et al. Release and recovery of parasitoids in eucalyptus againstgall wasp, Leptocybe invasa (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) under green house [J]. Karnataka Journal ofAgricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):2314-2319.
[71] Kim I K, Mendel Z, Protasov A, et al. Taxonomy, biology, and efficacy of two Australian parasitoidsof the eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae:Tetrastichinae)[J]. Zootaxa,2008,1910:1-20.
[72] Kelly J, La Salle J, Harney M, et al. Selitrichodes neseri n. sp, a new parasitoid of the eucalyptus gallwasp Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae: Tetrastichinae)[J].2012:1-11.
[73]梁一萍,郑礼飞,李奕震,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂中国本地自然天敌调查与捕食性天敌的捕食观察[J].广东林业科技,2010(5):1-5.
[74]李德伟,吴耀军,蒋学建,等.寄生于桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的一种长尾啮小蜂[J].林业科技开发,2010,24(4):52-54.
[75] Nigel E S. Biodiversity: World of insects [J]. Nature,2007,448:657-658.
[76] Zheng S J, Dicke M. Ecological genomics of plant-insect interactions: From gene to community [J].Plant Physiology,2008,146:812-817.
[77]钦俊德.植食性昆虫食性的生理基础[J].昆虫学报,1980.,23(1):106-121.
[78] Kirby W, Spence W. An introduction to Entomology [M]. Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme&Brown,1826.
[79]秦秋菊,高希武.昆虫取食诱导的植物防御反应[J].昆虫学报,2005,48(1):125-134.
[80]康乐.植物对昆虫的化学防御[J].植物学通报,1995,12(4):22-27.
[81] Piesik D, Pańka D, Delaney K J, et al. Cereal crop volatile organic compound induction aftermechanical injury, beetle herbivory (Oulema spp.), or fungal infection (Fusarium spp.)[J]. Journal ofplant physiology,2011,168(9):878-886.
[82]Burk T. Insect Behavioral Ecology: Some Future Paths [J]. Annual Review of Entomology,1988,33:319-335.
[83] Sehoonhoven L M, van Loon J J A, Dieke M. Insect-Plant Biology(2nd Edition)[M]. OxfordUniversity Press,2005.
[84]侯照远,严福顺.寄生蜂寄主选择行为研究进展[J].昆虫学报,1997,40(1):94-107.
[85]陆宴辉,张永军,吴孔明.植食性昆虫的寄主选择机理及行为调控策略[J].生态学报,2008,28(10):5113-5122.
[86]赵国强,刘晓光,罗梅浩.昆虫对寄主植物选择的化学感受机理[J].河南科技大学学报:自然科学版,2006,27(4):80-83.
[87]樊慧,金幼菊,李继泉,等.引诱植食性昆虫的植物挥发性信息化合物的研究进展[J].北京林业大学学报,2004,26(3):76-81.
[88]尹姣,曹雅忠,罗礼智,等.草地螟对寄主植物的选择性及其化学生态机制[J].生态学报,2005,25(8):1844-1852.
[89]陈辉,李宗波.植物挥发性化合物在小蠹虫寄主选择中的作用[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):87-91.
[90]赵云鲜,康乐.多食性斑潜蝇对寄主植物的选择[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(4):567-573.
[91]赵冬香,高景林,陈宗懋.植食性昆虫对寄主植物的定向行为研究进展[J].热带农业科学,2004,24(2):62-68.
[92]李旭颖.植食性昆虫与寄主植物之间的相互关系和影响[J].科技创新导报,2011(11):130-130.
[93]钦俊德.诠释植食性昆虫是怎样选择食料植物的[J].生物学通报,2003,38(006):1-3.
[94]张文辉,刘光杰.植物抗虫性次生物质的研究概况[J].植物学通报,2003,20(5):522-530.
[95]钦俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[96] Dethier V G. Mechanism of host-plant recognition [J]. Entomologia experimentalis et applicata,1982,31(1):49-56.
[97]彭露,严盈,刘万学,等.植食性昆虫对植物的反防御机制[J].昆虫学报,2010,53(5):572-580.
[98] Mauricio R, Rausher M D, Burdick D S. Variation in the defense strategies of plants: are resistanceand tolerance mutually exclusive?[J]. Ecology,1997,78(5):1301-1311.
[99]谢辉,王燕,刘银泉,等.植物组成型防御对植食性昆虫的影响[J].植物保护,2012,38(1):1-5.
[100] Agrawal A A. Induced responses to herbivory and increased plant performance [J]. Science,1998,279(5354):1201-1202.
[101]常金华,张丽,夏雪岩,等.不同基因型高粱植株的物理性状与抗蚜性的关系[J].河北农业大学学报,2004,27(002):5-7.
[102] Massey F P, Ennos A R, Hartley S E. Silica in grasses as a defence against insect herbivores:contrasting effects on folivores and a phloem feeder [J]. Journal of Animal Ecology,2006,75(2):595-603.
[103]张寰,王志刚,黄大庄,等.柳树物理性状与光肩星天牛危害相关性分析[J].河北农业大学学报,2005,28(005):75-79.
[104]庞保平,鲍祖胜,周晓榕,等.寄主挥发物、叶色和表皮毛在美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择中的作用[J].生态学报,2004,24(3):547-551.
[105]汤德良.植食性昆虫对寄主的选择:实夜蛾属二近缘种的比较研究[D].中国科学院博士学位论文,1999:121.
[106]曹凤勤. B型烟粉虱寄主定向行为的化学机制研究[D].华南热带农业大学,2005:24-98.
[107]娄永根,程家安.植物的诱导抗虫性[J].昆虫学报,1997,40(3):320-331.
[108]徐涛,张古忍,王方海,等.虫害诱导的植物化学防御及其产生机制[J].走向21世纪的中国昆虫学——中国昆虫学会2000年学术年会论文集,2000.
[109]孔垂华,徐涛,胡飞,等.环境胁迫下植物的化感作用及其诱导机制[J].生态学报,2000,20(5):849-854.
[110]李新岗,刘惠霞,黄建.虫害诱导植物防御的分子机理研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(4):893-900.
[111] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Plant responses to insect herbiovory: The emerging molecular analysis [J].Annual Review of Plant Biology,2002,53:299-328.
[112]高艳.玉米诱导抗虫性对甜菜夜蛾和淡足侧沟茧蜂相关生理行为的影响[D].中国农业科学院,2006.
[113]徐涛,周强,陈威,等.茉莉酸信号传导途径参与了水稻的虫害诱导防御过程[J].科学通报,2004,48(13):1442-1446.
[114]刘芳,娄永根,程家安.虫害诱导的植物挥发物:植物与植食性昆虫及其天敌相互作用的进化产物[J].昆虫知识,2003,40(6):481-486.
[115]张瑛,严福顺.虫害诱导的植物挥发性次生物质及其在植物防御中的作用[J].昆虫学报,1998,41(2):204-214.
[116]樊春燕,黄寿山.植物挥发性次生物质与昆虫诱导因子研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2003,4:36-39.
[117]陈明顺,仵均祥,张国辉.植物诱导性直接防御[J].昆虫知识,2009(2):175-186.
[118]桂连友,刘树生,陈宗懋.外源茉莉酸和茉莉酸甲酯诱导植物抗虫作用及其机理[J].昆虫学报,2004,47(4):507-514.
[119] Arimura G, Ozawa R, Nishioka T, et al. Herbivore-induced volatiles induce the emission of ethylenein neighboring lima bean plants [J]. The Plant Journal,2002,29(1):87-98.
[120]郭线茹,罗梅浩.烟蚜危害对烟草生理及生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1995,10(2):95-99.
[121]李镇宇,陈华盛.油松对赤松毛虫的诱导化学防御[J].林业科学,1998,34(2):43-50.
[122] Hopkins R J, van Dam N M, van Loon J J A. Role of glucosinolates in insect-plant relationships andmultitrophic interactions [J]. Annual review of entomology,2009,54:57-83.
[123] Zheng S J, Dicke M. Ecological genomics of plant-insect interactions: from gene to community [J].Plant Physiology,2008,146(3):812-817.
[124] Howe G A, Jander G. Plant immunity to insect herbivores [J]. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.,2008,59:41-66.
[125] Rausher M D. Co-evolution and plant resistance to natural enemies [J]. Nature,2001,411(6839):857-864.
[126] Dicke M, Sabelis M W, Takabayashi J, et al. Plant strategies of manipulating predatorpreyinteractions through allelochemicals: prospects for application in pest control [J]. Journal of ChemicalEcology,1990,16(11):3091-3118.
[127] Paré P W, Tumlinson J H. Plant volatiles as a defense against insect herbivores [J]. Plant Physiology,1999,121(2):325-332.
[128]戴建青,韩诗畴,杜家纬.植物挥发性信息化学物质在昆虫寄主选择行为中的作用[J].环境昆虫学报,2010,32(3):407-414.
[129]魏建荣,杨忠岐,杜家纬.天敌昆虫利用信息化学物质寻找寄主或猎物的研究进展[J].生态学报,2007,27(6):2563-2573.
[130] Arimura G, Kost C, Boland W. Herbivore-induced, indirect plant defences [J]. Biochimica etBiophysica Acta (BBA)-Molecular and Cell Biology of Lipids,2005,1734(2):91-111.
[131] Mumm R, Posthumus M A, Dicke M. Significance of terpenoids in induced indirect plant defenceagainst herbivorous arthropods [J]. Plant, cell&environment,2008,31(4):575-585.
[132] Rasmann S, K llner T G, Degenhardt J, et al. Recruitment of entomopathogenic nematodes byinsect-damaged maize roots [J]. Nature,2005,434(7034):732-737.
[133] Avdiushko S A, Brown G C, Dahlman D L, Hildebrand D F, Methyl jasmonate exposure inducesinsect resistance in cabbage and tobacco[J]. Environ Entomol,1997,26(3):642-654.
[134] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Defensive function of herbivore-induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[135] Howe G A. Jasmonates as signals in the wound response [J]. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation,2004,23(3):223-237.
[136]陈旭,陈树仁.茉莉酸诱导植物抗虫性及其在烟草上的应用[J].安徽农学通报,2009,15(12):38-40.
[137]杨帆.水杨酸、茉莉酸甲酯诱导黄瓜对西花蓟马(缨翅目:蓟马科)的抗性[D].华中农业大学,2009:5-16.
[138]刘志源,孙玉诚,王国红.植物与植食性昆虫相互作用的分子机制[J].应用昆虫学报,2013,49(6):1696-1702.
[139]祝传书.蚜虫取食诱导小麦抗性的分子机制及对蚜虫行为的影响[D].西北农林科技大学,2005.
[140]吕延华.不同害虫胁迫下水稻防御化合物比较及相关基因OPR1, PLD3反义抑制水稻品系的建立[D].浙江大学,2007.
[141] Arimura G, Huber D P W, Bohlmann J. Forest tent caterpillars (Malacosoma disstria) induce localand systemic diurnal emissions of terpenoid volatiles in hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa×deltoides):cDNA cloning, functional characterization, and patterns of gene expression of ()‐germacrene Dsynthase, PtdTPS1[J]. The Plant Journal,2004,37(4):603-616.
[142]汪霞,吕延华,王霞,等.稻纵卷叶螟为害对水稻防御化合物及信号分子含量的影响[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2008,34(5):532-539.
[143]徐建祥,曹卫菊.外用茉莉素诱导植物抗虫性研究进展[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(3):250-254.
[144] Farmer E E, Ryan C A. Octadecanoid precursors of jasmonic acid activate the synthesis ofwound-inducible proteinase inhibitors [J]. Plant Cell,1992,4:129-134.
[145] Avdiushko S A, Brown G C, Dahlman D L, et al. Methyl jasmonate exposure induces insectresistance in cabbage and tobacco [J]. Environmental entomology,1997,26(3):642-654.
[146] Thaler J S. Induced resistance in agricultural crops: effects of jasmonic acid on herbivory and yield intomato plants [J]. Environmental Entomology,1999,28(1):30-37.
[147] Bolter C J, Jongsma M A. Colorado potato beetles (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) adapt to proteinaseinhibitors induced in potato leaves by methyl jasmonate [J]. Journal of Insect Physiology,1995,41(12):1071-1078.
[148] Constabel C P, Ryan C A. A survey of wound-and methyl jasmonate-induced leaf polyphenol oxidasein crop plants[J]. Phytochemistry,1998,47(4):507-511.
[149]桂连友,陈宗懋,刘树生.外源茉莉酸甲酯处理茶树对茶尺蠖幼虫生长的影响[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(2):302-307.
[150]宫玉艳,段立清,王爱清,等.外源茉莉酸诱导枸杞对枸杞蚜生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].昆虫学报,2010,53(6):670-674.
[151]吕要斌,刘树生,外源茉莉酸诱导植物反应对小菜蛾生长发育的影响[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(1):193-195.
[152]桂连友,陈宗懋,刘树生.外源茉莉酸甲酯诱导茶树挥发物对昆虫寄生选择行为的影响[J].茶叶科学,2004,24(3):166-171.
[153] Agrawal A A, Strauss S Y, Stout M J. Costs of induced responses and tolerance to herbivory in maleand female fitness components of wild radish [J]. Evolution,1999:1093-1104.
[154]娄永根,程家安.虫害诱导的植物挥发物:基本特性,生态学功能及释放机制[J].生态学报,2000,20(6):1097-1106.
[155]冯春富,严善春,毛洪波,等.落叶松诱导抗性对舞毒蛾生长发育的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2010,38(005):136-137.
[156]徐伟,付晓霞,田径,等.诱导因子对苜蓿夜蛾和大豆食心虫嗅觉与产卵选择的影响[J].吉林农业大学学报,2010,32(005):488-491.
[157]张蓬军.植物对专性植食者的组成抗性和诱导抗性的平衡调节机制[D].浙江大学,2007.
[158]尤民生,侯有明,魏辉,等.植物诱导防御的空间和时间效应[J].武夷科学,2000,16:195-201.
[159]王燕,戈峰,李镇宇.马尾松诱导化学物质变化的时空动态[J].生态学报,2001,21(8):1256-1261.
[160]董梅,王建武,徐涛.外源乙烯利诱导玉米化学防御作用的时间和浓度效应[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(4):887-893.
[161]赵玲.外源信号物质诱导杨树系统抗虫性的初步研究[D].北京林业大学,2004.
[162]福建省地方志编纂委员会编[M].福建林业志,北京:方志出版社,1996,87.
[163]李宝福.福建省桉树引种栽培与选育试验研究概述[J].福建省速生丰产用材林基地办公室:2004,21-22.
[164]顾晓军,田素芬.害虫适合度与害虫生态控制[J].世界科技研究与发展,2001,23(2):70-73.
[165]刘凤沂,须志平,薄仙萍,等.昆虫抗药性与适合度[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(3):374-378.
[166]汤金仪,姜玉英,王建强,等.病虫发生表征新方法——为害指数的定义与应用[J].植保技术与推广,2003,23(11):3-7.
[167]柏立新,孙以文,孙洪武.棉铃虫寄主潜在适合度表达的影响因素研究[J].棉花学报,2001,13(6):367-371.
[168]张茂新,凌冰,梁广文.不同寄主植物对黄曲条跳甲的适合度及自然种群增长的影响[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,25(3):64-66.
[169]张慧杰,李建社,张丽萍,等.美洲斑潜蝇的寄主植物种类,适合度及其为害性的评价[J].生态学报,2000,20(1):134-138.
[170]张慧杰,王会金.不同寄主植物对美洲班潜蝇的适合度及其与叶片结构的关系[J].动物学研究,2001,22(2):137-141.
[171]王江平,康新丽,时玲莉,等.新疆阿瓦提县棉铃虫寄主植物种类及其适合度初析[J].植物保护,2004,29(6):34-36.
[172]莫圣书,王玉洁,赵冬香.蔬菜抗虫性研究进展[J].中国蔬菜,2010(12):14-19.
[173] Gratton C, Welter S C. Oviposition preference and larval performance of Liriomyza helianthi(Diptera:Agromyzidaz) on normal and novel host plants[J]. Environ Entomol,1998,27(4):926-935.
[174]卢伟,侯茂林,文吉辉,等.烟粉虱成虫对黄瓜叶龄的喜好性及与后代发育适合度间的关系[J].生态学报,2007,27(7):2948-2957.
[175]裴元慧,孔锋,韩国华,昆虫取食行为研究进展[J].山东林业科技,2007,173(6):97-101.
[176]钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展和前景[J].动物学报,1995,41(1):12-19.
[177]王红,杨益众,王冬生,等.烟粉虱若虫在甘蓝和花椰菜莲座期不同叶位层上的分布[J].昆虫知识,2007,44(5):719-721.
[178] Kennedy J S. Host-plant finding by flying aphids [J]. Symp Bio Hung,1976,16:121-123.
[179] Smart L. E., Blight M. M. Field discrimination of oilseed rape, Brassica napus volatiles by cabbageseed weevil, Ceuthohynchus assimilis [J]. J Chem Ecol,1997,23(4):889-902.
[180] Kostal V. Physical and chemical factors influencing landing and oviposition by the cabbage root flyon host plant models. Ent Exp Appl,1993,66(2):109-118.
[181]常润磊,周旭东.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂国外研究现状[J].中国森林病虫,2010(001):22-25.
[182]吴耀军,李德伟,常明山,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性研究[J].中国森林病虫,2010,29(5):1-3.
[183]严善春,程红,杨慧,等.青杨脊虎天牛对植物源挥发物的EAG和行为反应[J].昆虫学报,2006,49(5):759-767.
[184]曹凤勤,刘万学,万方浩,等.寄主挥发物、叶色在B型烟粉虱寄主选择中的作用[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(3):431-436.
[185]张同心.松阿扁叶蜂寄主选择行为及其机理研究[D].山东农业大学,2003.
[186]赵辉,张茂新,凌冰,等.非寄主植物挥发油对黄曲条跳甲成虫嗅觉,取食及产卵行为的影响[J].华南农业大学学报,2003,24(2):38-40.
[187]丁岩钦,高慰曾,李典谟.夜蛾趋光特性的研究:棉铃虫和烟青虫成虫对单色光的反应[J].昆虫学报,1974,17(3):307-317.
[188]侯无危,马幼飞,高慰曾,等.桃小食心虫蛾的趋光性[J].昆虫学报,1994,37(2):165-170.
[189]郭瑞，王义平，吴鸿.虫瘿多样性及其与寄主植物和环境间关系[J].环境昆虫学报,2012，34(3):370-376.
[190]韩鹏飞,吴建辉,邱宝利,等.枝树枝瘿姬小蜂的耐寒性测定[J].应用昆虫学报,2013,49(6):1553-1558.
[191]李国清,王荫长.营养和次生物质与植物的抗虫性[J].植物生理学通报,1997,6(2):113-115.
[192]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:教育出版社,2001:184-185.
[193]郝建军,康宗利,于洋.植物生理学实验技术[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2007:141-142.
[194]朱俊洪,张方平,任洪刚,等.四种食料植物对斜纹夜蛾生长发育及营养指标的影响[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(6):643-646.
[195]梁洪柱,陈倩,张秋双,等.寄主植物对杨扇舟蛾生长发育和存活的影响[J].中国森林病虫,2009,28(2):13-14.
[196]李会平，黄大庄，杨敏生．林木抗虫机制研究进展[J].河北林果研究，2001,16(1)：91-96.
[197]董红霞,王敬淑,刘光华,等.植物次生化合物在害虫防治中的作用[J].仲恺农业技术学院学报,2005,18(2):65-71.
[198]戈峰,李镇宇,谢映平,等.我国主要松树诱导抗虫性的一些规律比较[J].北京林业大学学报2002,24(3):61-65.
[199]莫圣书,王玉洁,赵冬香.植物诱导抗虫性及其在害虫治理中的应用[J].湖北农业科学,2011,50(4):656-659.
[200]陈晨,于福才,范秀琴,等.植物诱导抗虫性研究与应用[J].河北林果研究,2010,25(4):394-398.
[201]刘兴平，陈春平，王国红,等.我国松树诱导抗虫性研究进展[J].林业科学,2003,39(5):119-128.
[202]汤德良,王武刚.棉花诱导抗虫性对棉铃虫生长发育和行为的影响[J].棉花学报,1996,8(5):276-278.
[203]方海涛,段立清.机械损伤诱导林木抗虫性研究进展[J].西北林学院学报,2011,26(6):91-94.
[204]程新胜,杨丽文,王方晓,等.机械损伤和茉莉酸甲酯诱导烟草抗虫作用的互作效应研究[C].中国烟草学会2005年年会.2005,80-87.
[205]宋圆圆,徐建峰,梁笑婷,等.利用气相色谱法同时测定番茄叶片中的信号物质水杨酸和茉莉酸[J].江西农业大学学报,2010,32(5):1056-1060.
[206] Pieterse C. M., Van Loon L.C.. Salicylic acid-independent plant defence pathways [J]. Trends PlantSci,1999,4:52-58.
[207] Felton G W, Korth K L. Trade-offs between pathogen and herbivore resistance [J]. Curr Opin PlantPathol.2000,3:309-314.
[208]徐伟,严善春.茉莉酸在植物诱导防御中的作用[J].生态学报,2005,25(8):2074-2082.
[209] Mirjalili N, Linden J C. Methyl jasmonate induced production of taxol in suspension cultures ofTaxus cuspidata: ethylene interaction and induction models [J]. Biotechnology progress,2008,12(1):110-118.
[210]桂连友,刘树生,陈宗懋.外源茉莉酸和茉莉酸甲酯对植物抗虫作用的诱导及其机理[J].昆虫学报,2004,47(4):507-514.
[211] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Defensive function of herbivore-induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[212] Kessler A, Halitschke R, Baldwin I T. Silencing the jasmonate cascade: induced plant defenses andinsect populations [J]. Science Signalling,2004,305(5684):665.
[213]周福才,任顺祥,杜予州,等.寄主转换对B型烟粉虱生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].昆虫知识,2006,43(4):524-526.
[214]陈建明.水稻品种对褐飞虱为害的耐性及其生理机制研究[D].浙江大学,2004:1-20.
[215]郭线茹,罗梅浩.烟蚜危害对烟草生理及生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1995,10(2):95-99.
[216]王荣富,赵国荣,丁震乾.两种稻飞虱的取食为害对稻株氨基酸含量的影响[J].安徽农业大学学报,2001,28(2): l33-138.
[217]孙丽艳.对云斑天牛有不同抗性的杨树品种中化学物质的分析[J].林业科学,1995,31(4):339-344.
[218]李淑玲,美青,李继东,等.毛白杨无性系树皮有机物质含量与抗性关系的研究[J].河南农业大学学报,2001,35(3):216-220.
[219]吴名全.植物—植食性昆虫—天敌相互关系中化学物质的变化[J].宜春学院学报,2003,25(2):71-74.
[220]周索,陈顺立,陈德兰,等.受害马尾松针叶营养及次生物质含量与思茅松毛虫种群参数的相关分析[J].昆虫学报,2012,55(4):435-443.
[221]尹飞,冯夏,张德雍,等.小菜蛾取食对寄主植物蛋白质和糖含量影响研究[J].环境昆虫学报,2012,34(2):168-173.
[222]王俊斌,王海凤,崔新仪,等.茉莉酸甲酯对烟草抵御棉铃虫的诱导作用[J].中国农学通报,2010,17(2):277-280.
[223] Farmer E E, Johnson R R, Ryan C A. Regulation of expression of proteinaqe-inhibitor genes bymethyl jasmonate and jasmonic acid [J]. Plant Physiol,1992,98:995-1002.
[224]王妮妍,蒋德安.茉莉酸及其甲酯与植物诱导抗病性[J].植物生理学通讯,2002,38(3):279-284.
[225]冼继东,庞雄飞,曾玲.异源次生化合物对美洲斑潜蝇种群控制作用的田间试验[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(1):97-100.
[226]张彦广,王志刚,黄大庄.桑天牛羧酸酯酶和谷胱甘肽S-转移酶与杨树次生代谢物质相关性研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(3):106-111.
[227]薛英伟.柘叶[Cudrania tricuspidata (Carr.) Bur.]饲养对家蚕抗性生理影响的研究[D].西南大学硕士学位论文,2009:14-29.
[228]吕蔷.杨树对天牛抗性的研究进展[J].现代农业科技,2010,35(8):170-172.
[229]周丹丹.棉花对烟粉虱刺吸胁迫的生理响应[D].甘肃农业大学硕士学位论文,2008:14-22.
[230]张华峰,陈顺立,朱建华,等.松墨天牛为害对马尾松针叶化学成分的影响[J].福建林学院学报,2004,24(1):28-31.
[231]戴沿海.松突圆蚧为害对马尾松针叶主要次生物质的影响[J].华东昆虫学报,2006,15(2):103-106.
[232]张飞萍,邓秀明,陈清林,等.毛竹尖胸沫蝉危害对毛竹枝叶黄酮和单宁含量的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2002,22(1):16-18.
[233]王文杰,祖元刚,李雪莹.兴安落叶松单宁含量的器官差异与季节变化[J].林产化学与工业,2007,27(2):81-84.
[234]雒瑶瑜,崔金杰,王春义,等.棉花叶片中棉酚和单宁含量与绿盲蝽抗性的关系[J].棉花学报,2012,24(3):279-283.
[235]周嘉熹,杨雪彦,宋占邦.树木单宁含量可作为对两种星天牛的抗性指标[J].陕西林业科技,1996(4):15-18.
[236]李会平,张世红.杨树单宁与酚类物质种类及含量与光肩星天牛危害之间关系的研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2003,26(1):36-39.
[237]徐伟.兴安落叶松诱导抗虫性研究[D].东北林业大学博士学位论文,2006.
[238]吴莹莹,吴碧球,陈燕,茉莉酸甲酯诱导水稻对褐飞虱抗性与植株总酚含量的关系研究[J].西南农业学报,2012,25(2):462-466.
[239] Hulme M A. Resistance by transected Sitka spruce to damage by Pissodes strobe (Coleoptera:Curculionidae) related to tree phonology [J]．Journal of Economic Entomology,1995,88(6):1525-1530.
[240] Eom T J, Son D S, Lee S W, et al., Resistance to pine-midge and phenolic acid content in pineneedles [J]. Mokchae Konghak, l998,26(3):33-40.
[241] Hirotaka Tofikata, Shuichiro Matsui. On the polyphendic of the contents of them to the resistance tochestnut gall wasps [J]. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticulture Science,1996,35:89-97.
[242]史忠良,仇松英,马爱萍,等.冬小麦对麦红吸浆虫抗性机制研究初报[J].华北农学报,2003,18(1):100-102.
[243]蔡青年,张青文,高希武,等.小麦体内次生物质对麦蚜的抗性作用研究[J].中国农业科学,2003,36（8):910-915.
[244]程璐,贺春贵,胡桂馨,等.苜蓿斑蚜为害对5种苜蓿品种(系) PAL、POD、PPO酶活性的影响[J].植物保护,2009,35(6):87-90.
[245]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.24个桉树品系遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后防御酶活性变化[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(6):24-28.
[246]王琪,严善春,金虎,等.叶损伤对兴安落叶松防御酶活性的系统诱导[J].东北林业大学学报,2012,40(9):77-80.
[247]沙品洁,亓永凤,吕超,等.棉铃虫持续取食对棉花三种防御酶活性的作[J].应用昆虫学报,2012,49(2):414-421.
[248] Agarwal S. Increased antioxidant activity in Cassia seedlings under UV-B radiation [J]. Biol.Plantarum,2007,51(1):157-160.
[249] Maleck K, Dietrich R A. Defense on multiple fronts: how do plants cope with diverse enemies?[J].Trends in Plant Science,1999,4(6):215-219.
[250]邵从本.几种检测SOD活性反应的比较[J].植物生理学通讯,1983(5):46-49.
[251]郝再彬.植物生理实验[M].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学出版社,2004:115-116.
[252]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,2006:217-221.
[253]李玲.植物生理学模块实验指导[M].科学出版社,2009,80-83.
[254]赵艳.黄瓜植株机械损伤效应及防御酶应答的研究[D].内蒙古农业大学硕士学位论文,2009:10-17.
[255]吕超,沙品洁,李秀霞,等.3种常用杀虫剂胁迫对小麦防御相关酶活性的影响[J].中国农业大学学报,2012,17(1):65-71.
[256]梁喜龙,郑殿峰,左豫虎.病害逆境下寄主植物生理生化指标的研究现状与展望[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(15):3576-3578.
[257]王晨芳,黄丽丽,张宏昌,等.小麦－条锈菌互作过程中活性氧及保护酶系的变化研究[J].植物病理学报,2009,39(1):52-60.
[258] Forslund K, Pettersson J, Bryngelsson T, et al., Aphid infestation induces PR-proteins differently inbarley susceptible or resistant to the birdcherry-oat aphid (Rhopalosiphum padi)[J]. PhysiologiaPlantarum,2000,110(4):496-502.
[259] Ni X, Quisenberry SS, Heng-Moss T, et al., Oxidative responses of resistant and susceptible cerealleaves to symptomatic and nonsymptomatic cereal aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) feeding [J]. Journal ofEconomic Entomology,2001,94(3):743-751.
[260] Zhang S Z, Zhang F, Hua B Z. Enhancement of phenylalanine ammonia lyase, polyphenoloxidase,and peroxidase in cucumber seedlings by Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius)(Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)infestation [J]. Agricultural Sciences in China,2008,7(1):82-87.
[261]张廷伟,刘长仲.禾谷缢管蚜对三个小麦品种幼苗保护酶的影响[J].植物保护,2011,37(4):72-75.
[262]彭露,严盈,刘万学,等.植食性昆虫对植物的反防御机制.昆虫学报,2010,53(5):572-580.
[263]董艳珍.植物苯丙氨酸解氨酶基因的研究进展[J].生物技术通报,2006,增刊:31-33.
[264]张健,严善春,王琪.落叶松结实量对其防御酶和蛋白酶抑制剂活力的影响[J].林业科学,2009,45(8):96-100.
[265]陈建波,王全喜,章洁.绿豆芽超氧化物歧化酶在胁迫条件下的活性变化[J].上海师范大学学报:自然科学版,2007,36(1):49-53.
[266]李玉泉,金祖荫,宋占午.朱砂叶螨危害对豇豆幼苗叶片活性氧代谢相关酶的影响[J].西北植物学报,2004,24(5):877-880.
[267]陈晨,徐鹏飞,张淑珍,等.大豆疫霉根腐病菌毒素处理不同大豆品种后过氧化物酶活性的变化[J].大豆科学,2010,29(5):840-844.
[268] Schmittbernner A F. Problem and progress in control of phytophthora root rot of soybean [J]. PlantDisease,1984,69(4):362-368.
[269]黄明,彭世清.植物多酚氧化酶研究进展[J].广西师范大学学报:自然科学版,1998,16(2):65-70.
[270]胡瑞波,田纪春,吕建华.小麦多酚氧化酶(PPO)活性的基因型、环境及其互作效应的分析[J].中国粮油学报,2004,19(1):16-18,22.
[271]王承香. B型烟粉虱取食烟草对烟蚜的影响及生理机制探讨[D].山东农业大学博士学位论文,2009.
[272]严盈,刘万学,万方浩.唾液成分在刺吸式昆虫与植物关系中的作用[J].昆虫学报,2008,51(5):537-544.
[273]刘长仲,兰金娜.苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响[J].草地学报,2009,17(1):32-35.
[274]卢晓风,夏玉先.植物蛋白酶抑制剂在植物抗虫与抗病中的作用[J].生物化学与生物物理进展,1998,25(4):328-333.
[275]宗娜,阎云花,王琛柱.昆虫对植物蛋白酶抑制素的诱导及适应机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(4):533-539.
[276]王琪,严善春,王艳军,等.剪叶及昆虫取食对兴安落叶松蛋白酶抑制剂的影响[J].昆虫学报,2008,51(8):798-803.
[277] Arimura GI, Kost C, Boland W, Herbivore-induced, indirect plant defences [J]. Biochim BiophysActa,2005,1734(2):91-111.
[278]程仲毅,薛庆中.植物蛋白酶抑制剂基因结构、调控及其控制害虫的策略[J].遗传学报,2003,30(8):790-796.
[279]王转花,杨斌,张政.植物蛋白酶抑制剂抗虫基因工程研究进展[J].植物保护学报,2001,28(1):83-87.
[280]徐鸿林,翟红利,王锋,等.豇豆胰蛋白酶抑制剂基因(cpti)及其在抗虫转基因作物中的应用[J].中国农业科技导报,2008,10(1):18-27.
[281]马建平,牟志美.植物蛋白酶抑制剂的研究进展[J].中国蚕业,2006,27(3):4-8.
[282]曹鑫,孙文婷,邹世慧,等:植物蛋白酶抑制剂抗虫基因工程研究现状与对策研究[J].南方农业,2011,5(5):4-10.
[283]王琪.叶损伤方式诱导兴安落叶松防御蛋白的研究[D].东北林业大学硕士学位论文,2008:9-19.
[284]张风娟,任琴,金幼菊.虫害诱导植物体内信号.西北林学院学报,2005,20(2):160-163,178.
[285]刘丽艳,李传友,李柱刚.番茄受伤反应防御信号的遗传解析[J].东北农业大学学报,2005,36(1):23-27.
[286] Green T R, Ryan C A. Wound inducible proteinase inhibitors in plant leaves: a possible defensemechanism against insects [J]. Science,1972,175:776-777.
[287] Bode W, Huber R. Structural basis of the endoproteinase protein inhibitor interaction [J]. BiochemBiophys Acta,2001,477:241-252.
[288]杨丽文,程新胜,薛泽春,等.机械损伤和茉莉酸甲酯对烟株蛋白酶抑制剂的诱导作用研究[J].中国烟草学报,2006,12(6):33-37.
[289] Leather S R, Watt A D, Forrest G I. Insect induced chemical changes in young lodgpole pine (Pinuscontorta): The effect of previous defoliation on oviposition, growth and survival of the pine beauty moth,Panolis flamea [J]. Ecological Entomology,1987,2(3):275-281.
[290]沈应柏,高海波.植株间伤害信息的传递:信号分子及感受机制[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):92-96.
[291]许冬,张永军,陈洋,等.虫害诱导植物间接防御机制[J].植物保护,2009,35(1):13-21.
[292] Karban R, Baldwin I T, Baxter K J, et a1. Communication between plants: induced resistance in wildtobacco plants following clipping of neighboring sagebrush [J]. Oecologia,2000,125(1):66-71.
[293]左照江,张汝民,高岩.植物间挥发物信号的研究进展[J].植物学报,2009,44(2):245-252.
[294]赵丽华.草履蚧为害对柿树化学防御的诱导效应研究[D].山西大学生命科学学院,2008.
[295] Kessler A, Baldwin T. Defensive function of herbivore induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[296] Dicke M, Sabelis M W, Takabayashi J et al. Plant strategies of manipulation in predator-preyinteractions through allelochemicals: prospects for application on pest control [J]. Journalof Chemical Ecology,1990,16(3):3091-3118.
[297]王洪涛,薛明,李庆亮,等. B型烟粉虱取食诱导的烟草对斜纹夜蛾生长发育和繁殖的影响及机制探讨[J].中国农业科学,2011,44(22):4600-4609.
[298]尹姣,陈巨莲,曹雅忠,等.茉莉酸诱导小麦抗病虫性初步研究[J].植物保护,2005,31(4):35-37.
[299]庞雄飞,梁广文,曾玲.昆虫天敌作用的评价[J].生态学报,1984,4(1):46-56.
[300]韩兰芝,翟保平,张孝羲.不同温度下的甜菜夜蛾实验种群生命表研究[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(2):184-189.
[301]李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(9):2050-2054.
[302]王晓红,陈训,耿芳.基于模糊相似优先比法对杜鹃花观赏性状的综合评价[J].福建林业科技,2009(003):190-195.
[303]王振,张京伟,张德顺.基于模糊相似优先比法划分与上海气候相似的全球区域[J].中国园林,2012,28(1):91-93.
[304]李富生,何丽莲.植物对非生物胁迫的生理响应及甘蔗抗旱抗寒性研究进展[J].甘蔗,2004,11(1):31-37.
[305]乐关旺,陈实,潘庆华,等.水稻和稻瘟病菌互作中的信号传导及防御反应基因诱导表达的研究[J].植物病理学报,2007,37(1):42-49.
[306]吴中伟,朱友林.植物防卫基因研究进展[J].江西植保,2001,24(1):30-32.
[307] Rossiter M C, Schultz J C, Baldwin I T. Relationships among defoliation, red oak phenolics, andgypsy moth growth and reproduction [J]. Ecology,1988,69(1):267-277.
[308]陆群,张玉凤.植物性次生物质对光肩星天牛成虫作用机理的初探[J].内蒙古林业科技,1997(4):3-6.
[309] Inbar M, Doostdar H, Leibee G L, et al. The role of plant rapidly induced responses in asymmetricinterspecific interactions among insect herbivores [J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology,1999,25(8):1961-1979.
[310] Denno R F, Peterson M A, Gratton C, et al. Feeding-induced changes in plant quality mediateinterspecific competition between sap-feeding herbivores [J]. Ecology,2000,81(7):1814-1827.
[311]秦飞,李云岘,杨学民,等.林木抗虫性及测定方法的研究[J].林业科技,2001,26(1):19-22.
[312]廖乾生,林福呈,李德葆.植物防御素及其研究进展[J].浙江大学学报,2003,29(1):113-118.
[313]周兆斓,朱祯.植物抗虫基因工程研究进展[J].生物工程进展,1994,14(4):18-24.
[314]王万能,全学军,肖崇刚.植物诱导抗性的机理和应用研究进展[J].湖北农业科学,2010(1):204-206.
[315]鲁玉杰,张孝羲.信息化合物对昆虫行为的影响[J].昆虫知识,2001,38(4):262-266.
[316]尹淑艳,孙绪艮.化学信息素在植物一植食性昆虫(螨类)一天敌相互关系中的作用[J].山东农业大学学报:自然科学版,2000,31(4):441-445.
[317]卢伟,侯茂林,文吉辉,等.植物挥发性次生物质对植食性昆虫的影响[J].植物保护,2007,33(3):7-11.
[318]沈应柏,高海波.植株间伤害信息的传递:信号分子及感受机制[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):92-96.
[319]许冬,张永军,陈洋,等.虫害诱导植物间接防御机制[J].植物保护,2009,35(1):13-21.
[320] Hilker M, Kobs C, Varama M, et al. Insect egg deposition induces Pinus sylvestris to attract eggparasitoids [J]. Journal of Experimental Biology,2002,205(4):455-461.
[321] Mumm R, Schrank K, Wegener R, et al. Chemical analysis of volatiles emitted by Pinus sylvestrisafter induction by insect oviposition [J]. Journal of chemical ecology,2003,29(5):1235-1252.
[322] Schr der R, Forstreuter M, Hilker M. A plant notices insect egg deposition and changes its rate ofphotosynthesis [J]. Plant Physiology,2005,138(1):470-477.
[323] Colazza S, Fucarino A, Peri E, et al. Insect oviposition induces volatile emission in herbaceous plantsthat attracts egg parasitoids [J]. Journal of Experimental Biology,2004,207(1):47-53.
[324]解晓军,高媛媛,戚舒,等.水稻胰蛋白酶抑制剂对褐飞虱产卵刺激的响应[J].中山大学学报:自然科学版,2011,50(5):104-109.
[325]冯远娇,王建武,骆世明.植物地上部与地下部的诱导防御反应研究综述[J].生态科学,2010(3):292-297.
[326] Van Dam N M, Harvey J A, W ckers F L, et al. Interactions between aboveground and belowgroundinduced responses against phytophages [J]. Basic and Applied Ecology,2003,4(1):63-77.
[327]陈辉,袁锋.树木抗性与小蠹虫生存策略的进化[J].林业科学,2002,38(5):147-151.
[2]李淑仪.桉树土壤与营养研究[M].广东科技出版社,2007:1-4.
[3]徐大平,张宁南.桉树人工林生态效应研究进展[J].广西林业科学,2006,35(4):179-189.
[4]减国长,马祥庆,蔡丽平.我国桉树人工林施肥研究进展[J].福建林业科技,2007,34(4):253-258.
[5]黄昭平.广西桉树人工林种植情况及其对生态环境的影响[J].河北林业科技,2011,(2):44-46,55.
[6]奚福生,罗基同,李贵玉,等.中国桉树病虫害及害虫天敌[M].广西科学技术出版社,2007.
[7]黄咏槐,黄焕华.我国桉树主要病虫害现状及控制策略初探[J].广东林业科,2006,22(1):83-85.
[8]潘志彬.福建省主要桉树病虫害种类及防治方法[J].林业勘察设计,2007(2):121-123.
[9]赵丹阳,徐家雄,林明生,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后桉树损失量测定[J].广东林业科技,2009(6):58-60.
[10] Mendel Z, Protasov A, Fisher N, et al. Taxonomy and biology of Leptocybe invasa gen.&sp.n.(Hymenoptera: Eurlophidae), an invasive gall inducer on Eucalyptus[J]. Ausralian Journal ofEntomology,2004(43):101-113.
[11] Fatih A. Natural history, distribution and hosts of Eucalyptus gall wasps in turkey [Z]. Ⅷth EuropeanCongress of Entomology, Izmir, Turkey,2006.
[12] Nyeko P. The cause, incidence and severity of a new gall damage on Eucalyptus species at Oruchingarefugee settlement in Mbarara district, Uganda [J]. Uganda Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2005(11):47-50.
[13] Jacob J P, D evaraj R, N atarajan R. Outbreak of the invasive gall inducing wasp Leptocybe invasa onEucalyptus in India [J].News letter of the Asia Pacific Forest Invasive Species Net work,2007,8:4-5.
[14] Dhahri S, Jamaa M L B. First Record of Leptocybe invasa and Ophelimus maskelli Eucalyptus GallWasps in Tunisia [J]. Tunisian Journal of Plant Protection,2010,5(2):231-236.
[15] Laudonia S, Sasso R. The bronze bug Thaumastocoris peregrinus: a new insect recorded in Italy,damaging to Eucalyptus trees [J]. Bulletin of Insectology,2012,65(1):89-93.
[16] Hassan F R. First record of the eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), in Iraq [J]. Acta Agrobotanica,2012,65(3):93-98.
[17] Quang Thu P, Dell B, Burgess T I. Susceptibility of18eucalypt species to the gall wasp Leptocybeinvasa in the nursery and young plantations in Vietnam [J]. Science Asia,2009,35(2):113-117.
[18] Wingfield M J, Slippers B, Hurley B P, et al. Eucalypt pests and diseases: growing threats to plantationproductivity [J]. Southern Forests: Journal of Forest Science,2008,70(2):139-144.
[19] Akhtar M S, Patankar N V, Gaur A. Observations on the biology and male of eucalyptus gall waspLeptocybe invasa Fisher and Lla Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Indian Journal of Entomology,2012,74(2):173-175.
[20] Branco M, Franco J C, Valente C, et al. Survey of Eucalyptus gall wasps (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)in Portugal [J]. Boletín de Sanidad Vegetal, Plagas,2006,32(2):199-202.
[21] Goud K B, Kumari N K, Vastrad A S, et al. Screening of eucalyptus genotypes against gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Karnataka Journal of AgriculturalSciences,2010,23(1):213-214.
[22] La Salle J, Arakelian G, Garrison R W, et al. A new species of invasive gall wasp (Hymenoptera:Eulophidae: Tetrastichinae) on blue gum (Eucalyptus globulus) in California [J].2009,43(2):101-113.
[23] Almatni W, Mayhoob M. Eucalyptus gall-wasp Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Eulophidae,Hymenoptera), a new insect in the Mediterranean region and Syria [J]. Arab and Near East PlantProtection Newsletter, FAO,2005,40:38.
[24]伍荔霞.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂现身并为害广西[J].广西林业,2008(5):53-53.
[25]吴耀军,蒋学建,李德伟,等.我国发现1种重要的林业外来入侵害虫——桉树枝瘿姬小蜂(膜翅目:姬小蜂科)[J].林业科技,2009,45(7):161-163.
[26]唐超,王小君,万方浩,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂入侵海南省[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(6):967-971.
[27]谷平,蒋新革,李坦优,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂研究现状与展望[J].江西林业科技,2012(1):32-34.
[28]张华峰,康文通,陈顺立,等.不同桉树品系与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害关系的研究[J].福建林学院学报,2012,32(4):345-349.
[29] Gene-Sheng T, John L. S. Pest alert-a newly discovered invasion of gall-forming wasps, Leptocybeinvasa (Fisher&La Salle), on Eucalyptus trees in Taiwan [J].Taiwang Insect,2010,30(3):241-245
[30]陈华燕,姚捷敏,许再福.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂雄虫首次在中国发现[J].环境昆虫学报,2009,3l(3):285-287.
[31] Do anlar O. Occurrence of Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle，2004(Hymenoptera: Chalcidoidea:Eulophidae) on Eucalyptus camaldulensis in Turkey，with description of the male sex [J]. Zoology in theMiddle East,2005,35,112-114.
[32] Gupta A，Poorani J, Taxonomic studies on a collection of Chalcidoidea (Hymenoptera) from Indiawith new distribution records[J]. Joumal of Threatened Taxa,2009,1(5):300-304.
[34]吴耀军,奚福生,罗基同,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性及控制技术[J].广西植保,2009,22(2):5-7.
[35]罗基同,蒋金培,王缉健,等.广西博白桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性研究[J].中国森林病虫,2011,30(4):10-12.
[36]朱方丽,邱宝利,任顺祥.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂连续世代种群生命表[J].生态学报,2013,33(1):97-102.
[37]朱方丽,韩鹏飞,任顺祥,等.寄主植物对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性的影响[J].应用昆虫学报,2011,48(5):1451-1457.
[38]陈磊,金启安,韦曼丽,等.补充营养材料和温度对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂寿命的影响[J].热带作物学报,2011,32(2):302-304.
[39]徐家雄,任辉,赵丹阳,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂种群发生规律与空间分布格局研究[J].广东林业科技,2009(6):50-57.
[40]汤行昊,张华峰,张思禄,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿空间格局及其抽样技术研究[J].福建林学院学报,2013，33(1)：73-76.
[41]罗丰,许彦,杨礼哲,等.三亚市桉树枝瘿姬小蜂监测模型研究[J].热带农业科学,2011,30(11):37-39.
[42]武海卫,贾薪玉,黄焕华,等.五种桉树对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的抗性研究[J].环境昆虫学报,2009,31(2):132-136.
[43]张华峰,康文通,陈顺立.不同桉树品系与桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害关系的研究[J].福建林学院学报,2012,32(4):345-349.
[44] Nyeko P, Mutitu E K, Day R K. Farmers' knowledge, perceptions and management of the gall-formingwasp, Leptocybe invasa (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), on Eucalyptus species in Uganda [J]. InternationalJournal of Pest Management,2007,53(2):111-119.
[45] Kulkarni H D. Screening eucalyptus clones against Leptocybe invasa Fisher and La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):132-136.
[46] Javaregowda J, Prabhu S T. Susceptibility of eucalyptus species and clones to gall wasp, Leptocybeinvasa Fisher and La Salle (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera) in Karnataka [J]. Karnataka Journal ofAgricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):220-221.
[47]钱军,梁居智,蔡兴新,等.海南省桉树枝瘿姬小峰危害现状及桉树抗品系调查[J].热带林业,2010,38(001):49-51.
[48]梁一萍,郭飞,江洁,等.桂南桉树主栽品种对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂抗性林间试验研究[J].中国植保导刊,2011,31(7):14-17.
[49]徐家雄,林明生,邱焕秀.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂对苗圃不同桉树品系袋苗的感虫性测定[J].广东林业科技,2011,27(3):40-43.
[50]王伟.桉树对枝瘿姬小蜂抗性及其机制研究[D].中国林业科学研究院,2012.
[51]刘慧清.不同桉树种质对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的抗性研究[D].海南大学,2012.
[52]李诺,王美英,罗基同,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿生理生化初步研究[J].安徽农业科学,2010(8):4126-4127.
[53]吴耀军,常明山,李德伟,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树缩合单宁含量的影响[J].南京林业大学学报:自然科学版,2010(6):1-4.
[54]吴耀军,常明山,李德伟,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树类黄酮,花色素苷含量的影响[J].广西林业科学,2010,39（3):119-123.
[55]吕文玲,李诺,杨振德,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害对桉树化学成分的影响[J].安徽农业科学,2012,40(12):7137-7139.
[56]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.24个桉树品系遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后保护酶活性变化[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(6).
[57]吴耀军,常明山,盛双,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂虫瘿解剖特征与寄主叶片生理指标的变化[J].生态学报,2012,32(23):7576-7585.
[58]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.桉树不同无性系叶片内含物变化与枝瘿姬小蜂抗性的关系[J].热带亚热带植物学报,2012,20(6):539-545.
[59] Nambiar-Veetil M, Sangeetha M, Rani K S, et al. Identification of insect-specific target genes fordevelopment of RNAi based control of the Eucalyptus gall pest Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae)[C]//BMC Proceedings. BioMed Central Ltd,2011,5(Suppl7):98.
[60]林明生,徐家雄,赵丹阳,等.虫线清乳油防治桉树枝瘿姬小蜂试验[J].广东林业科技,2009,25(1):41-43.
[61]蒋金培,王缉健,陈江,等.化学农药控制桉树枝瘿姬小蜂成虫羽化初试[J].广西林业科学,2009,38(3):137-140.
[62] Dose T, Mean D B S. Evaluation of botanicals and synthetic insecticides against eucalyptus gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23:1.
[63]王缉健,罗基同,蒋金培,等.几种农药对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂药效时间的观察[J].广西林业科学,2011,40(2):128-130.
[64]孙德莹,罗基同,张天栋,等.噻虫啉防治桉树枝瘿姬小蜂试验[J].现代化农业,2011(1):17-18.
[65]徐家雄.桉树无性系对对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的感虫性测定与苗圃袋苗上虫瘿灵防治试验[C].重庆:2009,12:2.
[66] Dose T, Mean D B S. Evaluation of botanicals and synthetic insecticides against eucalyptus gall wasp,Leptocybe invasa (Eulophidae: Hymenoptera)[J]. Karnataka Journal of Agricultural Sciences,2010,23:1.
[67]罗基同,陈尚文,杨秀好,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂新监测技术应用及其在广西的扩散现状[J].广西林业科学,2011,40(3):204-205.
[68]陈尚文,罗基同,杨秀好,等.黄色粘板对桉树枝瘿姬小蜂成虫的引诱及在监测中的应用[J].广西林业科学,2009,38(4):199-203.
[69] Protasov A, Do anlar M, La Salle J, et al. Occurrence of two local Megastigmus species parasitic onthe eucalyptus gall wasp Leptocybe invasa in Israel and Turkey [J]. Phytoparasitica,2008,36(5):449-459.
[70] Kulkarni H, Kumari N K, Vastrad A S, et al. Release and recovery of parasitoids in eucalyptus againstgall wasp, Leptocybe invasa (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) under green house [J]. Karnataka Journal ofAgricultural Sciences,2010,23(1):2314-2319.
[71] Kim I K, Mendel Z, Protasov A, et al. Taxonomy, biology, and efficacy of two Australian parasitoidsof the eucalyptus gall wasp, Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae:Tetrastichinae)[J]. Zootaxa,2008,1910:1-20.
[72] Kelly J, La Salle J, Harney M, et al. Selitrichodes neseri n. sp, a new parasitoid of the eucalyptus gallwasp Leptocybe invasa Fisher&La Salle (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae: Tetrastichinae)[J].2012:1-11.
[73]梁一萍,郑礼飞,李奕震,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂中国本地自然天敌调查与捕食性天敌的捕食观察[J].广东林业科技,2010(5):1-5.
[74]李德伟,吴耀军,蒋学建,等.寄生于桉树枝瘿姬小蜂的一种长尾啮小蜂[J].林业科技开发,2010,24(4):52-54.
[75] Nigel E S. Biodiversity: World of insects [J]. Nature,2007,448:657-658.
[76] Zheng S J, Dicke M. Ecological genomics of plant-insect interactions: From gene to community [J].Plant Physiology,2008,146:812-817.
[77]钦俊德.植食性昆虫食性的生理基础[J].昆虫学报,1980.,23(1):106-121.
[78] Kirby W, Spence W. An introduction to Entomology [M]. Longman, Hurst, Rees, Orme&Brown,1826.
[79]秦秋菊,高希武.昆虫取食诱导的植物防御反应[J].昆虫学报,2005,48(1):125-134.
[80]康乐.植物对昆虫的化学防御[J].植物学通报,1995,12(4):22-27.
[81] Piesik D, Pańka D, Delaney K J, et al. Cereal crop volatile organic compound induction aftermechanical injury, beetle herbivory (Oulema spp.), or fungal infection (Fusarium spp.)[J]. Journal ofplant physiology,2011,168(9):878-886.
[82]Burk T. Insect Behavioral Ecology: Some Future Paths [J]. Annual Review of Entomology,1988,33:319-335.
[83] Sehoonhoven L M, van Loon J J A, Dieke M. Insect-Plant Biology(2nd Edition)[M]. OxfordUniversity Press,2005.
[84]侯照远,严福顺.寄生蜂寄主选择行为研究进展[J].昆虫学报,1997,40(1):94-107.
[85]陆宴辉,张永军,吴孔明.植食性昆虫的寄主选择机理及行为调控策略[J].生态学报,2008,28(10):5113-5122.
[86]赵国强,刘晓光,罗梅浩.昆虫对寄主植物选择的化学感受机理[J].河南科技大学学报:自然科学版,2006,27(4):80-83.
[87]樊慧,金幼菊,李继泉,等.引诱植食性昆虫的植物挥发性信息化合物的研究进展[J].北京林业大学学报,2004,26(3):76-81.
[88]尹姣,曹雅忠,罗礼智,等.草地螟对寄主植物的选择性及其化学生态机制[J].生态学报,2005,25(8):1844-1852.
[89]陈辉,李宗波.植物挥发性化合物在小蠹虫寄主选择中的作用[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):87-91.
[90]赵云鲜,康乐.多食性斑潜蝇对寄主植物的选择[J].昆虫学报,2001,44(4):567-573.
[91]赵冬香,高景林,陈宗懋.植食性昆虫对寄主植物的定向行为研究进展[J].热带农业科学,2004,24(2):62-68.
[92]李旭颖.植食性昆虫与寄主植物之间的相互关系和影响[J].科技创新导报,2011(11):130-130.
[93]钦俊德.诠释植食性昆虫是怎样选择食料植物的[J].生物学通报,2003,38(006):1-3.
[94]张文辉,刘光杰.植物抗虫性次生物质的研究概况[J].植物学通报,2003,20(5):522-530.
[95]钦俊德.昆虫与植物的关系[M].北京:科学出版社,1987.
[96] Dethier V G. Mechanism of host-plant recognition [J]. Entomologia experimentalis et applicata,1982,31(1):49-56.
[97]彭露,严盈,刘万学,等.植食性昆虫对植物的反防御机制[J].昆虫学报,2010,53(5):572-580.
[98] Mauricio R, Rausher M D, Burdick D S. Variation in the defense strategies of plants: are resistanceand tolerance mutually exclusive?[J]. Ecology,1997,78(5):1301-1311.
[99]谢辉,王燕,刘银泉,等.植物组成型防御对植食性昆虫的影响[J].植物保护,2012,38(1):1-5.
[100] Agrawal A A. Induced responses to herbivory and increased plant performance [J]. Science,1998,279(5354):1201-1202.
[101]常金华,张丽,夏雪岩,等.不同基因型高粱植株的物理性状与抗蚜性的关系[J].河北农业大学学报,2004,27(002):5-7.
[102] Massey F P, Ennos A R, Hartley S E. Silica in grasses as a defence against insect herbivores:contrasting effects on folivores and a phloem feeder [J]. Journal of Animal Ecology,2006,75(2):595-603.
[103]张寰,王志刚,黄大庄,等.柳树物理性状与光肩星天牛危害相关性分析[J].河北农业大学学报,2005,28(005):75-79.
[104]庞保平,鲍祖胜,周晓榕,等.寄主挥发物、叶色和表皮毛在美洲斑潜蝇寄主选择中的作用[J].生态学报,2004,24(3):547-551.
[105]汤德良.植食性昆虫对寄主的选择:实夜蛾属二近缘种的比较研究[D].中国科学院博士学位论文,1999:121.
[106]曹凤勤. B型烟粉虱寄主定向行为的化学机制研究[D].华南热带农业大学,2005:24-98.
[107]娄永根,程家安.植物的诱导抗虫性[J].昆虫学报,1997,40(3):320-331.
[108]徐涛,张古忍,王方海,等.虫害诱导的植物化学防御及其产生机制[J].走向21世纪的中国昆虫学——中国昆虫学会2000年学术年会论文集,2000.
[109]孔垂华,徐涛,胡飞,等.环境胁迫下植物的化感作用及其诱导机制[J].生态学报,2000,20(5):849-854.
[110]李新岗,刘惠霞,黄建.虫害诱导植物防御的分子机理研究进展[J].应用生态学报,2008,19(4):893-900.
[111] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Plant responses to insect herbiovory: The emerging molecular analysis [J].Annual Review of Plant Biology,2002,53:299-328.
[112]高艳.玉米诱导抗虫性对甜菜夜蛾和淡足侧沟茧蜂相关生理行为的影响[D].中国农业科学院,2006.
[113]徐涛,周强,陈威,等.茉莉酸信号传导途径参与了水稻的虫害诱导防御过程[J].科学通报,2004,48(13):1442-1446.
[114]刘芳,娄永根,程家安.虫害诱导的植物挥发物:植物与植食性昆虫及其天敌相互作用的进化产物[J].昆虫知识,2003,40(6):481-486.
[115]张瑛,严福顺.虫害诱导的植物挥发性次生物质及其在植物防御中的作用[J].昆虫学报,1998,41(2):204-214.
[116]樊春燕,黄寿山.植物挥发性次生物质与昆虫诱导因子研究进展[J].广东农业科学,2003,4:36-39.
[117]陈明顺,仵均祥,张国辉.植物诱导性直接防御[J].昆虫知识,2009(2):175-186.
[118]桂连友,刘树生,陈宗懋.外源茉莉酸和茉莉酸甲酯诱导植物抗虫作用及其机理[J].昆虫学报,2004,47(4):507-514.
[119] Arimura G, Ozawa R, Nishioka T, et al. Herbivore-induced volatiles induce the emission of ethylenein neighboring lima bean plants [J]. The Plant Journal,2002,29(1):87-98.
[120]郭线茹,罗梅浩.烟蚜危害对烟草生理及生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1995,10(2):95-99.
[121]李镇宇,陈华盛.油松对赤松毛虫的诱导化学防御[J].林业科学,1998,34(2):43-50.
[122] Hopkins R J, van Dam N M, van Loon J J A. Role of glucosinolates in insect-plant relationships andmultitrophic interactions [J]. Annual review of entomology,2009,54:57-83.
[123] Zheng S J, Dicke M. Ecological genomics of plant-insect interactions: from gene to community [J].Plant Physiology,2008,146(3):812-817.
[124] Howe G A, Jander G. Plant immunity to insect herbivores [J]. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol.,2008,59:41-66.
[125] Rausher M D. Co-evolution and plant resistance to natural enemies [J]. Nature,2001,411(6839):857-864.
[126] Dicke M, Sabelis M W, Takabayashi J, et al. Plant strategies of manipulating predatorpreyinteractions through allelochemicals: prospects for application in pest control [J]. Journal of ChemicalEcology,1990,16(11):3091-3118.
[127] Paré P W, Tumlinson J H. Plant volatiles as a defense against insect herbivores [J]. Plant Physiology,1999,121(2):325-332.
[128]戴建青,韩诗畴,杜家纬.植物挥发性信息化学物质在昆虫寄主选择行为中的作用[J].环境昆虫学报,2010,32(3):407-414.
[129]魏建荣,杨忠岐,杜家纬.天敌昆虫利用信息化学物质寻找寄主或猎物的研究进展[J].生态学报,2007,27(6):2563-2573.
[130] Arimura G, Kost C, Boland W. Herbivore-induced, indirect plant defences [J]. Biochimica etBiophysica Acta (BBA)-Molecular and Cell Biology of Lipids,2005,1734(2):91-111.
[131] Mumm R, Posthumus M A, Dicke M. Significance of terpenoids in induced indirect plant defenceagainst herbivorous arthropods [J]. Plant, cell&environment,2008,31(4):575-585.
[132] Rasmann S, K llner T G, Degenhardt J, et al. Recruitment of entomopathogenic nematodes byinsect-damaged maize roots [J]. Nature,2005,434(7034):732-737.
[133] Avdiushko S A, Brown G C, Dahlman D L, Hildebrand D F, Methyl jasmonate exposure inducesinsect resistance in cabbage and tobacco[J]. Environ Entomol,1997,26(3):642-654.
[134] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Defensive function of herbivore-induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[135] Howe G A. Jasmonates as signals in the wound response [J]. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation,2004,23(3):223-237.
[136]陈旭,陈树仁.茉莉酸诱导植物抗虫性及其在烟草上的应用[J].安徽农学通报,2009,15(12):38-40.
[137]杨帆.水杨酸、茉莉酸甲酯诱导黄瓜对西花蓟马(缨翅目:蓟马科)的抗性[D].华中农业大学,2009:5-16.
[138]刘志源,孙玉诚,王国红.植物与植食性昆虫相互作用的分子机制[J].应用昆虫学报,2013,49(6):1696-1702.
[139]祝传书.蚜虫取食诱导小麦抗性的分子机制及对蚜虫行为的影响[D].西北农林科技大学,2005.
[140]吕延华.不同害虫胁迫下水稻防御化合物比较及相关基因OPR1, PLD3反义抑制水稻品系的建立[D].浙江大学,2007.
[141] Arimura G, Huber D P W, Bohlmann J. Forest tent caterpillars (Malacosoma disstria) induce localand systemic diurnal emissions of terpenoid volatiles in hybrid poplar (Populus trichocarpa×deltoides):cDNA cloning, functional characterization, and patterns of gene expression of ()‐germacrene Dsynthase, PtdTPS1[J]. The Plant Journal,2004,37(4):603-616.
[142]汪霞,吕延华,王霞,等.稻纵卷叶螟为害对水稻防御化合物及信号分子含量的影响[J].浙江大学学报(农业与生命科学版),2008,34(5):532-539.
[143]徐建祥,曹卫菊.外用茉莉素诱导植物抗虫性研究进展[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(3):250-254.
[144] Farmer E E, Ryan C A. Octadecanoid precursors of jasmonic acid activate the synthesis ofwound-inducible proteinase inhibitors [J]. Plant Cell,1992,4:129-134.
[145] Avdiushko S A, Brown G C, Dahlman D L, et al. Methyl jasmonate exposure induces insectresistance in cabbage and tobacco [J]. Environmental entomology,1997,26(3):642-654.
[146] Thaler J S. Induced resistance in agricultural crops: effects of jasmonic acid on herbivory and yield intomato plants [J]. Environmental Entomology,1999,28(1):30-37.
[147] Bolter C J, Jongsma M A. Colorado potato beetles (Leptinotarsa decemlineata) adapt to proteinaseinhibitors induced in potato leaves by methyl jasmonate [J]. Journal of Insect Physiology,1995,41(12):1071-1078.
[148] Constabel C P, Ryan C A. A survey of wound-and methyl jasmonate-induced leaf polyphenol oxidasein crop plants[J]. Phytochemistry,1998,47(4):507-511.
[149]桂连友,陈宗懋,刘树生.外源茉莉酸甲酯处理茶树对茶尺蠖幼虫生长的影响[J].中国农业科学,2005,38(2):302-307.
[150]宫玉艳,段立清,王爱清,等.外源茉莉酸诱导枸杞对枸杞蚜生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].昆虫学报,2010,53(6):670-674.
[151]吕要斌,刘树生,外源茉莉酸诱导植物反应对小菜蛾生长发育的影响[J].应用生态学报,2005,16(1):193-195.
[152]桂连友,陈宗懋,刘树生.外源茉莉酸甲酯诱导茶树挥发物对昆虫寄生选择行为的影响[J].茶叶科学,2004,24(3):166-171.
[153] Agrawal A A, Strauss S Y, Stout M J. Costs of induced responses and tolerance to herbivory in maleand female fitness components of wild radish [J]. Evolution,1999:1093-1104.
[154]娄永根,程家安.虫害诱导的植物挥发物:基本特性,生态学功能及释放机制[J].生态学报,2000,20(6):1097-1106.
[155]冯春富,严善春,毛洪波,等.落叶松诱导抗性对舞毒蛾生长发育的影响[J].东北林业大学学报,2010,38(005):136-137.
[156]徐伟,付晓霞,田径,等.诱导因子对苜蓿夜蛾和大豆食心虫嗅觉与产卵选择的影响[J].吉林农业大学学报,2010,32(005):488-491.
[157]张蓬军.植物对专性植食者的组成抗性和诱导抗性的平衡调节机制[D].浙江大学,2007.
[158]尤民生,侯有明,魏辉,等.植物诱导防御的空间和时间效应[J].武夷科学,2000,16:195-201.
[159]王燕,戈峰,李镇宇.马尾松诱导化学物质变化的时空动态[J].生态学报,2001,21(8):1256-1261.
[160]董梅,王建武,徐涛.外源乙烯利诱导玉米化学防御作用的时间和浓度效应[J].中国生态农业学报,2008,16(4):887-893.
[161]赵玲.外源信号物质诱导杨树系统抗虫性的初步研究[D].北京林业大学,2004.
[162]福建省地方志编纂委员会编[M].福建林业志,北京:方志出版社,1996,87.
[163]李宝福.福建省桉树引种栽培与选育试验研究概述[J].福建省速生丰产用材林基地办公室:2004,21-22.
[164]顾晓军,田素芬.害虫适合度与害虫生态控制[J].世界科技研究与发展,2001,23(2):70-73.
[165]刘凤沂,须志平,薄仙萍,等.昆虫抗药性与适合度[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(3):374-378.
[166]汤金仪,姜玉英,王建强,等.病虫发生表征新方法——为害指数的定义与应用[J].植保技术与推广,2003,23(11):3-7.
[167]柏立新,孙以文,孙洪武.棉铃虫寄主潜在适合度表达的影响因素研究[J].棉花学报,2001,13(6):367-371.
[168]张茂新,凌冰,梁广文.不同寄主植物对黄曲条跳甲的适合度及自然种群增长的影响[J].华南农业大学学报,2004,25(3):64-66.
[169]张慧杰,李建社,张丽萍,等.美洲斑潜蝇的寄主植物种类,适合度及其为害性的评价[J].生态学报,2000,20(1):134-138.
[170]张慧杰,王会金.不同寄主植物对美洲班潜蝇的适合度及其与叶片结构的关系[J].动物学研究,2001,22(2):137-141.
[171]王江平,康新丽,时玲莉,等.新疆阿瓦提县棉铃虫寄主植物种类及其适合度初析[J].植物保护,2004,29(6):34-36.
[172]莫圣书,王玉洁,赵冬香.蔬菜抗虫性研究进展[J].中国蔬菜,2010(12):14-19.
[173] Gratton C, Welter S C. Oviposition preference and larval performance of Liriomyza helianthi(Diptera:Agromyzidaz) on normal and novel host plants[J]. Environ Entomol,1998,27(4):926-935.
[174]卢伟,侯茂林,文吉辉,等.烟粉虱成虫对黄瓜叶龄的喜好性及与后代发育适合度间的关系[J].生态学报,2007,27(7):2948-2957.
[175]裴元慧,孔锋,韩国华,昆虫取食行为研究进展[J].山东林业科技,2007,173(6):97-101.
[176]钦俊德.昆虫与植物关系的研究进展和前景[J].动物学报,1995,41(1):12-19.
[177]王红,杨益众,王冬生,等.烟粉虱若虫在甘蓝和花椰菜莲座期不同叶位层上的分布[J].昆虫知识,2007,44(5):719-721.
[178] Kennedy J S. Host-plant finding by flying aphids [J]. Symp Bio Hung,1976,16:121-123.
[179] Smart L. E., Blight M. M. Field discrimination of oilseed rape, Brassica napus volatiles by cabbageseed weevil, Ceuthohynchus assimilis [J]. J Chem Ecol,1997,23(4):889-902.
[180] Kostal V. Physical and chemical factors influencing landing and oviposition by the cabbage root flyon host plant models. Ent Exp Appl,1993,66(2):109-118.
[181]常润磊,周旭东.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂国外研究现状[J].中国森林病虫,2010(001):22-25.
[182]吴耀军,李德伟,常明山,等.桉树枝瘿姬小蜂生物学特性研究[J].中国森林病虫,2010,29(5):1-3.
[183]严善春,程红,杨慧,等.青杨脊虎天牛对植物源挥发物的EAG和行为反应[J].昆虫学报,2006,49(5):759-767.
[184]曹凤勤,刘万学,万方浩,等.寄主挥发物、叶色在B型烟粉虱寄主选择中的作用[J].昆虫知识,2008,45(3):431-436.
[185]张同心.松阿扁叶蜂寄主选择行为及其机理研究[D].山东农业大学,2003.
[186]赵辉,张茂新,凌冰,等.非寄主植物挥发油对黄曲条跳甲成虫嗅觉,取食及产卵行为的影响[J].华南农业大学学报,2003,24(2):38-40.
[187]丁岩钦,高慰曾,李典谟.夜蛾趋光特性的研究:棉铃虫和烟青虫成虫对单色光的反应[J].昆虫学报,1974,17(3):307-317.
[188]侯无危,马幼飞,高慰曾,等.桃小食心虫蛾的趋光性[J].昆虫学报,1994,37(2):165-170.
[189]郭瑞，王义平，吴鸿.虫瘿多样性及其与寄主植物和环境间关系[J].环境昆虫学报,2012，34(3):370-376.
[190]韩鹏飞,吴建辉,邱宝利,等.枝树枝瘿姬小蜂的耐寒性测定[J].应用昆虫学报,2013,49(6):1553-1558.
[191]李国清,王荫长.营养和次生物质与植物的抗虫性[J].植物生理学通报,1997,6(2):113-115.
[192]李合生.植物生理生化实验原理和技术[M].北京:教育出版社,2001:184-185.
[193]郝建军,康宗利,于洋.植物生理学实验技术[M].北京:化学工业出版社,2007:141-142.
[194]朱俊洪,张方平,任洪刚,等.四种食料植物对斜纹夜蛾生长发育及营养指标的影响[J].昆虫知识,2005,42(6):643-646.
[195]梁洪柱,陈倩,张秋双,等.寄主植物对杨扇舟蛾生长发育和存活的影响[J].中国森林病虫,2009,28(2):13-14.
[196]李会平，黄大庄，杨敏生．林木抗虫机制研究进展[J].河北林果研究，2001,16(1)：91-96.
[197]董红霞,王敬淑,刘光华,等.植物次生化合物在害虫防治中的作用[J].仲恺农业技术学院学报,2005,18(2):65-71.
[198]戈峰,李镇宇,谢映平,等.我国主要松树诱导抗虫性的一些规律比较[J].北京林业大学学报2002,24(3):61-65.
[199]莫圣书,王玉洁,赵冬香.植物诱导抗虫性及其在害虫治理中的应用[J].湖北农业科学,2011,50(4):656-659.
[200]陈晨,于福才,范秀琴,等.植物诱导抗虫性研究与应用[J].河北林果研究,2010,25(4):394-398.
[201]刘兴平，陈春平，王国红,等.我国松树诱导抗虫性研究进展[J].林业科学,2003,39(5):119-128.
[202]汤德良,王武刚.棉花诱导抗虫性对棉铃虫生长发育和行为的影响[J].棉花学报,1996,8(5):276-278.
[203]方海涛,段立清.机械损伤诱导林木抗虫性研究进展[J].西北林学院学报,2011,26(6):91-94.
[204]程新胜,杨丽文,王方晓,等.机械损伤和茉莉酸甲酯诱导烟草抗虫作用的互作效应研究[C].中国烟草学会2005年年会.2005,80-87.
[205]宋圆圆,徐建峰,梁笑婷,等.利用气相色谱法同时测定番茄叶片中的信号物质水杨酸和茉莉酸[J].江西农业大学学报,2010,32(5):1056-1060.
[206] Pieterse C. M., Van Loon L.C.. Salicylic acid-independent plant defence pathways [J]. Trends PlantSci,1999,4:52-58.
[207] Felton G W, Korth K L. Trade-offs between pathogen and herbivore resistance [J]. Curr Opin PlantPathol.2000,3:309-314.
[208]徐伟,严善春.茉莉酸在植物诱导防御中的作用[J].生态学报,2005,25(8):2074-2082.
[209] Mirjalili N, Linden J C. Methyl jasmonate induced production of taxol in suspension cultures ofTaxus cuspidata: ethylene interaction and induction models [J]. Biotechnology progress,2008,12(1):110-118.
[210]桂连友,刘树生,陈宗懋.外源茉莉酸和茉莉酸甲酯对植物抗虫作用的诱导及其机理[J].昆虫学报,2004,47(4):507-514.
[211] Kessler A, Baldwin I T. Defensive function of herbivore-induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[212] Kessler A, Halitschke R, Baldwin I T. Silencing the jasmonate cascade: induced plant defenses andinsect populations [J]. Science Signalling,2004,305(5684):665.
[213]周福才,任顺祥,杜予州,等.寄主转换对B型烟粉虱生长发育和繁殖的影响[J].昆虫知识,2006,43(4):524-526.
[214]陈建明.水稻品种对褐飞虱为害的耐性及其生理机制研究[D].浙江大学,2004:1-20.
[215]郭线茹,罗梅浩.烟蚜危害对烟草生理及生长发育的影响[J].华北农学报,1995,10(2):95-99.
[216]王荣富,赵国荣,丁震乾.两种稻飞虱的取食为害对稻株氨基酸含量的影响[J].安徽农业大学学报,2001,28(2): l33-138.
[217]孙丽艳.对云斑天牛有不同抗性的杨树品种中化学物质的分析[J].林业科学,1995,31(4):339-344.
[218]李淑玲,美青,李继东,等.毛白杨无性系树皮有机物质含量与抗性关系的研究[J].河南农业大学学报,2001,35(3):216-220.
[219]吴名全.植物—植食性昆虫—天敌相互关系中化学物质的变化[J].宜春学院学报,2003,25(2):71-74.
[220]周索,陈顺立,陈德兰,等.受害马尾松针叶营养及次生物质含量与思茅松毛虫种群参数的相关分析[J].昆虫学报,2012,55(4):435-443.
[221]尹飞,冯夏,张德雍,等.小菜蛾取食对寄主植物蛋白质和糖含量影响研究[J].环境昆虫学报,2012,34(2):168-173.
[222]王俊斌,王海凤,崔新仪,等.茉莉酸甲酯对烟草抵御棉铃虫的诱导作用[J].中国农学通报,2010,17(2):277-280.
[223] Farmer E E, Johnson R R, Ryan C A. Regulation of expression of proteinaqe-inhibitor genes bymethyl jasmonate and jasmonic acid [J]. Plant Physiol,1992,98:995-1002.
[224]王妮妍,蒋德安.茉莉酸及其甲酯与植物诱导抗病性[J].植物生理学通讯,2002,38(3):279-284.
[225]冼继东,庞雄飞,曾玲.异源次生化合物对美洲斑潜蝇种群控制作用的田间试验[J].应用生态学报,2003,14(1):97-100.
[226]张彦广,王志刚,黄大庄.桑天牛羧酸酯酶和谷胱甘肽S-转移酶与杨树次生代谢物质相关性研究[J].林业科学,2001,37(3):106-111.
[227]薛英伟.柘叶[Cudrania tricuspidata (Carr.) Bur.]饲养对家蚕抗性生理影响的研究[D].西南大学硕士学位论文,2009:14-29.
[228]吕蔷.杨树对天牛抗性的研究进展[J].现代农业科技,2010,35(8):170-172.
[229]周丹丹.棉花对烟粉虱刺吸胁迫的生理响应[D].甘肃农业大学硕士学位论文,2008:14-22.
[230]张华峰,陈顺立,朱建华,等.松墨天牛为害对马尾松针叶化学成分的影响[J].福建林学院学报,2004,24(1):28-31.
[231]戴沿海.松突圆蚧为害对马尾松针叶主要次生物质的影响[J].华东昆虫学报,2006,15(2):103-106.
[232]张飞萍,邓秀明,陈清林,等.毛竹尖胸沫蝉危害对毛竹枝叶黄酮和单宁含量的影响[J].竹子研究汇刊,2002,22(1):16-18.
[233]王文杰,祖元刚,李雪莹.兴安落叶松单宁含量的器官差异与季节变化[J].林产化学与工业,2007,27(2):81-84.
[234]雒瑶瑜,崔金杰,王春义,等.棉花叶片中棉酚和单宁含量与绿盲蝽抗性的关系[J].棉花学报,2012,24(3):279-283.
[235]周嘉熹,杨雪彦,宋占邦.树木单宁含量可作为对两种星天牛的抗性指标[J].陕西林业科技,1996(4):15-18.
[236]李会平,张世红.杨树单宁与酚类物质种类及含量与光肩星天牛危害之间关系的研究[J].河北农业大学学报,2003,26(1):36-39.
[237]徐伟.兴安落叶松诱导抗虫性研究[D].东北林业大学博士学位论文,2006.
[238]吴莹莹,吴碧球,陈燕,茉莉酸甲酯诱导水稻对褐飞虱抗性与植株总酚含量的关系研究[J].西南农业学报,2012,25(2):462-466.
[239] Hulme M A. Resistance by transected Sitka spruce to damage by Pissodes strobe (Coleoptera:Curculionidae) related to tree phonology [J]．Journal of Economic Entomology,1995,88(6):1525-1530.
[240] Eom T J, Son D S, Lee S W, et al., Resistance to pine-midge and phenolic acid content in pineneedles [J]. Mokchae Konghak, l998,26(3):33-40.
[241] Hirotaka Tofikata, Shuichiro Matsui. On the polyphendic of the contents of them to the resistance tochestnut gall wasps [J]. Journal of the Japanese Society for Horticulture Science,1996,35:89-97.
[242]史忠良,仇松英,马爱萍,等.冬小麦对麦红吸浆虫抗性机制研究初报[J].华北农学报,2003,18(1):100-102.
[243]蔡青年,张青文,高希武,等.小麦体内次生物质对麦蚜的抗性作用研究[J].中国农业科学,2003,36（8):910-915.
[244]程璐,贺春贵,胡桂馨,等.苜蓿斑蚜为害对5种苜蓿品种(系) PAL、POD、PPO酶活性的影响[J].植物保护,2009,35(6):87-90.
[245]王伟,徐建民,李光友,等.24个桉树品系遭受桉树枝瘿姬小蜂危害后防御酶活性变化[J].中南林业科技大学学报,2012,32(6):24-28.
[246]王琪,严善春,金虎,等.叶损伤对兴安落叶松防御酶活性的系统诱导[J].东北林业大学学报,2012,40(9):77-80.
[247]沙品洁,亓永凤,吕超,等.棉铃虫持续取食对棉花三种防御酶活性的作[J].应用昆虫学报,2012,49(2):414-421.
[248] Agarwal S. Increased antioxidant activity in Cassia seedlings under UV-B radiation [J]. Biol.Plantarum,2007,51(1):157-160.
[249] Maleck K, Dietrich R A. Defense on multiple fronts: how do plants cope with diverse enemies?[J].Trends in Plant Science,1999,4(6):215-219.
[250]邵从本.几种检测SOD活性反应的比较[J].植物生理学通讯,1983(5):46-49.
[251]郝再彬.植物生理实验[M].哈尔滨:哈尔滨工业大学出版社,2004:115-116.
[252]高俊凤.植物生理学实验指导[M].高等教育出版社,2006:217-221.
[253]李玲.植物生理学模块实验指导[M].科学出版社,2009,80-83.
[254]赵艳.黄瓜植株机械损伤效应及防御酶应答的研究[D].内蒙古农业大学硕士学位论文,2009:10-17.
[255]吕超,沙品洁,李秀霞,等.3种常用杀虫剂胁迫对小麦防御相关酶活性的影响[J].中国农业大学学报,2012,17(1):65-71.
[256]梁喜龙,郑殿峰,左豫虎.病害逆境下寄主植物生理生化指标的研究现状与展望[J].安徽农业科学,2006,34(15):3576-3578.
[257]王晨芳,黄丽丽,张宏昌,等.小麦－条锈菌互作过程中活性氧及保护酶系的变化研究[J].植物病理学报,2009,39(1):52-60.
[258] Forslund K, Pettersson J, Bryngelsson T, et al., Aphid infestation induces PR-proteins differently inbarley susceptible or resistant to the birdcherry-oat aphid (Rhopalosiphum padi)[J]. PhysiologiaPlantarum,2000,110(4):496-502.
[259] Ni X, Quisenberry SS, Heng-Moss T, et al., Oxidative responses of resistant and susceptible cerealleaves to symptomatic and nonsymptomatic cereal aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) feeding [J]. Journal ofEconomic Entomology,2001,94(3):743-751.
[260] Zhang S Z, Zhang F, Hua B Z. Enhancement of phenylalanine ammonia lyase, polyphenoloxidase,and peroxidase in cucumber seedlings by Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius)(Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae)infestation [J]. Agricultural Sciences in China,2008,7(1):82-87.
[261]张廷伟,刘长仲.禾谷缢管蚜对三个小麦品种幼苗保护酶的影响[J].植物保护,2011,37(4):72-75.
[262]彭露,严盈,刘万学,等.植食性昆虫对植物的反防御机制.昆虫学报,2010,53(5):572-580.
[263]董艳珍.植物苯丙氨酸解氨酶基因的研究进展[J].生物技术通报,2006,增刊:31-33.
[264]张健,严善春,王琪.落叶松结实量对其防御酶和蛋白酶抑制剂活力的影响[J].林业科学,2009,45(8):96-100.
[265]陈建波,王全喜,章洁.绿豆芽超氧化物歧化酶在胁迫条件下的活性变化[J].上海师范大学学报:自然科学版,2007,36(1):49-53.
[266]李玉泉,金祖荫,宋占午.朱砂叶螨危害对豇豆幼苗叶片活性氧代谢相关酶的影响[J].西北植物学报,2004,24(5):877-880.
[267]陈晨,徐鹏飞,张淑珍,等.大豆疫霉根腐病菌毒素处理不同大豆品种后过氧化物酶活性的变化[J].大豆科学,2010,29(5):840-844.
[268] Schmittbernner A F. Problem and progress in control of phytophthora root rot of soybean [J]. PlantDisease,1984,69(4):362-368.
[269]黄明,彭世清.植物多酚氧化酶研究进展[J].广西师范大学学报:自然科学版,1998,16(2):65-70.
[270]胡瑞波,田纪春,吕建华.小麦多酚氧化酶(PPO)活性的基因型、环境及其互作效应的分析[J].中国粮油学报,2004,19(1):16-18,22.
[271]王承香. B型烟粉虱取食烟草对烟蚜的影响及生理机制探讨[D].山东农业大学博士学位论文,2009.
[272]严盈,刘万学,万方浩.唾液成分在刺吸式昆虫与植物关系中的作用[J].昆虫学报,2008,51(5):537-544.
[273]刘长仲,兰金娜.苜蓿斑蚜对三个苜蓿品种幼苗氧化酶的影响[J].草地学报,2009,17(1):32-35.
[274]卢晓风,夏玉先.植物蛋白酶抑制剂在植物抗虫与抗病中的作用[J].生物化学与生物物理进展,1998,25(4):328-333.
[275]宗娜,阎云花,王琛柱.昆虫对植物蛋白酶抑制素的诱导及适应机制[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(4):533-539.
[276]王琪,严善春,王艳军,等.剪叶及昆虫取食对兴安落叶松蛋白酶抑制剂的影响[J].昆虫学报,2008,51(8):798-803.
[277] Arimura GI, Kost C, Boland W, Herbivore-induced, indirect plant defences [J]. Biochim BiophysActa,2005,1734(2):91-111.
[278]程仲毅,薛庆中.植物蛋白酶抑制剂基因结构、调控及其控制害虫的策略[J].遗传学报,2003,30(8):790-796.
[279]王转花,杨斌,张政.植物蛋白酶抑制剂抗虫基因工程研究进展[J].植物保护学报,2001,28(1):83-87.
[280]徐鸿林,翟红利,王锋,等.豇豆胰蛋白酶抑制剂基因(cpti)及其在抗虫转基因作物中的应用[J].中国农业科技导报,2008,10(1):18-27.
[281]马建平,牟志美.植物蛋白酶抑制剂的研究进展[J].中国蚕业,2006,27(3):4-8.
[282]曹鑫,孙文婷,邹世慧,等:植物蛋白酶抑制剂抗虫基因工程研究现状与对策研究[J].南方农业,2011,5(5):4-10.
[283]王琪.叶损伤方式诱导兴安落叶松防御蛋白的研究[D].东北林业大学硕士学位论文,2008:9-19.
[284]张风娟,任琴,金幼菊.虫害诱导植物体内信号.西北林学院学报,2005,20(2):160-163,178.
[285]刘丽艳,李传友,李柱刚.番茄受伤反应防御信号的遗传解析[J].东北农业大学学报,2005,36(1):23-27.
[286] Green T R, Ryan C A. Wound inducible proteinase inhibitors in plant leaves: a possible defensemechanism against insects [J]. Science,1972,175:776-777.
[287] Bode W, Huber R. Structural basis of the endoproteinase protein inhibitor interaction [J]. BiochemBiophys Acta,2001,477:241-252.
[288]杨丽文,程新胜,薛泽春,等.机械损伤和茉莉酸甲酯对烟株蛋白酶抑制剂的诱导作用研究[J].中国烟草学报,2006,12(6):33-37.
[289] Leather S R, Watt A D, Forrest G I. Insect induced chemical changes in young lodgpole pine (Pinuscontorta): The effect of previous defoliation on oviposition, growth and survival of the pine beauty moth,Panolis flamea [J]. Ecological Entomology,1987,2(3):275-281.
[290]沈应柏,高海波.植株间伤害信息的传递:信号分子及感受机制[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):92-96.
[291]许冬,张永军,陈洋,等.虫害诱导植物间接防御机制[J].植物保护,2009,35(1):13-21.
[292] Karban R, Baldwin I T, Baxter K J, et a1. Communication between plants: induced resistance in wildtobacco plants following clipping of neighboring sagebrush [J]. Oecologia,2000,125(1):66-71.
[293]左照江,张汝民,高岩.植物间挥发物信号的研究进展[J].植物学报,2009,44(2):245-252.
[294]赵丽华.草履蚧为害对柿树化学防御的诱导效应研究[D].山西大学生命科学学院,2008.
[295] Kessler A, Baldwin T. Defensive function of herbivore induced plant volatile emissions in nature [J].Science,2001,291(5511):2141-2144.
[296] Dicke M, Sabelis M W, Takabayashi J et al. Plant strategies of manipulation in predator-preyinteractions through allelochemicals: prospects for application on pest control [J]. Journalof Chemical Ecology,1990,16(3):3091-3118.
[297]王洪涛,薛明,李庆亮,等. B型烟粉虱取食诱导的烟草对斜纹夜蛾生长发育和繁殖的影响及机制探讨[J].中国农业科学,2011,44(22):4600-4609.
[298]尹姣,陈巨莲,曹雅忠,等.茉莉酸诱导小麦抗病虫性初步研究[J].植物保护,2005,31(4):35-37.
[299]庞雄飞,梁广文,曾玲.昆虫天敌作用的评价[J].生态学报,1984,4(1):46-56.
[300]韩兰芝,翟保平,张孝羲.不同温度下的甜菜夜蛾实验种群生命表研究[J].昆虫学报,2003,46(2):184-189.
[301]李亚,程立生,彭正强,等.寄主植物对椰心叶甲生长发育和繁殖力的影响[J].应用生态学报,2007,18(9):2050-2054.
[302]王晓红,陈训,耿芳.基于模糊相似优先比法对杜鹃花观赏性状的综合评价[J].福建林业科技,2009(003):190-195.
[303]王振,张京伟,张德顺.基于模糊相似优先比法划分与上海气候相似的全球区域[J].中国园林,2012,28(1):91-93.
[304]李富生,何丽莲.植物对非生物胁迫的生理响应及甘蔗抗旱抗寒性研究进展[J].甘蔗,2004,11(1):31-37.
[305]乐关旺,陈实,潘庆华,等.水稻和稻瘟病菌互作中的信号传导及防御反应基因诱导表达的研究[J].植物病理学报,2007,37(1):42-49.
[306]吴中伟,朱友林.植物防卫基因研究进展[J].江西植保,2001,24(1):30-32.
[307] Rossiter M C, Schultz J C, Baldwin I T. Relationships among defoliation, red oak phenolics, andgypsy moth growth and reproduction [J]. Ecology,1988,69(1):267-277.
[308]陆群,张玉凤.植物性次生物质对光肩星天牛成虫作用机理的初探[J].内蒙古林业科技,1997(4):3-6.
[309] Inbar M, Doostdar H, Leibee G L, et al. The role of plant rapidly induced responses in asymmetricinterspecific interactions among insect herbivores [J]. Journal of Chemical Ecology,1999,25(8):1961-1979.
[310] Denno R F, Peterson M A, Gratton C, et al. Feeding-induced changes in plant quality mediateinterspecific competition between sap-feeding herbivores [J]. Ecology,2000,81(7):1814-1827.
[311]秦飞,李云岘,杨学民,等.林木抗虫性及测定方法的研究[J].林业科技,2001,26(1):19-22.
[312]廖乾生,林福呈,李德葆.植物防御素及其研究进展[J].浙江大学学报,2003,29(1):113-118.
[313]周兆斓,朱祯.植物抗虫基因工程研究进展[J].生物工程进展,1994,14(4):18-24.
[314]王万能,全学军,肖崇刚.植物诱导抗性的机理和应用研究进展[J].湖北农业科学,2010(1):204-206.
[315]鲁玉杰,张孝羲.信息化合物对昆虫行为的影响[J].昆虫知识,2001,38(4):262-266.
[316]尹淑艳,孙绪艮.化学信息素在植物一植食性昆虫(螨类)一天敌相互关系中的作用[J].山东农业大学学报:自然科学版,2000,31(4):441-445.
[317]卢伟,侯茂林,文吉辉,等.植物挥发性次生物质对植食性昆虫的影响[J].植物保护,2007,33(3):7-11.
[318]沈应柏,高海波.植株间伤害信息的传递:信号分子及感受机制[J].福建林学院学报,2006,26(1):92-96.
[319]许冬,张永军,陈洋,等.虫害诱导植物间接防御机制[J].植物保护,2009,35(1):13-21.
[320] Hilker M, Kobs C, Varama M, et al. Insect egg deposition induces Pinus sylvestris to attract eggparasitoids [J]. Journal of Experimental Biology,2002,205(4):455-461.
[321] Mumm R, Schrank K, Wegener R, et al. Chemical analysis of volatiles emitted by Pinus sylvestrisafter induction by insect oviposition [J]. Journal of chemical ecology,2003,29(5):1235-1252.
[322] Schr der R, Forstreuter M, Hilker M. A plant notices insect egg deposition and changes its rate ofphotosynthesis [J]. Plant Physiology,2005,138(1):470-477.
[323] Colazza S, Fucarino A, Peri E, et al. Insect oviposition induces volatile emission in herbaceous plantsthat attracts egg parasitoids [J]. Journal of Experimental Biology,2004,207(1):47-53.
[324]解晓军,高媛媛,戚舒,等.水稻胰蛋白酶抑制剂对褐飞虱产卵刺激的响应[J].中山大学学报:自然科学版,2011,50(5):104-109.
[325]冯远娇,王建武,骆世明.植物地上部与地下部的诱导防御反应研究综述[J].生态科学,2010(3):292-297.
[326] Van Dam N M, Harvey J A, W ckers F L, et al. Interactions between aboveground and belowgroundinduced responses against phytophages [J]. Basic and Applied Ecology,2003,4(1):63-77.
[327]陈辉,袁锋.树木抗性与小蠹虫生存策略的进化[J].林业科学,2002,38(5):147-151.