摘要
美国白蛾是世界性检疫害虫,给我国林业、果树等造成巨大经济损失。探究对美国白蛾具有活性的植物挥发性化合物,为美国白蛾生态防治提供理论依据。利用气相色谱-质谱联用仪(GC-MS)分析了海棠叶片挥发物的主要成分,对美国白蛾雌、雄虫进行了主要挥发物成分的触角电位活性试验。结果表明,海棠叶片中共鉴定出包含烷烃类、酯类、醇类等在内的16种化合物,其中邻苯二甲酸二丁酯(14.64%)、正二十九烷(12.89%)、4-乙烯基愈创木酚(11.67%)、α-亚麻酸(9.53%)、邻苯二甲酸单乙基己基酯(7.58%)和正二十七烷(6.51%)占挥发物的62.82%。触角电位反应中,美国白蛾成虫EAG反应值随着挥发物浓度增大而显著不同。美国白蛾成虫对邻苯二甲酸二丁酯的反应最为强烈,浓度为10-2(v/v)时,雌、雄虫EAG相对反应值均达最高(分别为3.70、2.08);4-乙烯基愈创木酚浓度为1 mg/mL时,美国白蛾雌、雄虫反应最高,EAG相对反应值分别为1.52、1.24;美国白蛾雌虫对1 mg/mL正二十九烷反应值最高(1.28),雌虫对10-1 mg/mL正二十九烷反应值最高(1.13)。
引文
[1]Kergunteuil A,Dugravot S,Danner H,et al.Characterizing volatiles and attractiveness of five Brassicaceous plants with potential for a‘Push-Pull’strategy toward the cabbage root fly,Delia radicum.Journal of Chemical Ecology,2015,41(4):330-339.
[2]Cha D H,Olsson S B,Yee W L,et al.Identification of host fruit volatiles from snowberry(Symphoricarpos albus),attractive to Rhagoletis zephyria flies from the Western United States.Journal of Chemical Ecology,2017,43(2):188-197.
[3]Yang L,Hu X P,Van S E,et al.Attractiveness of host plants at different growth stage to Kudzu Bug,Megacopta cribraria(Heteroptera:Plataspidae):behavioral responses to whole plant and constitutive volatiles.Journal of Economic Entomology,2017,180(6):279.
[4]刘璇,胡春祥,曹传旺,等.3种植物源引诱剂对鞘翅目甲虫引诱效果比较.林业科学,2016,52(10):153-160.
[5]康云凤,高占林,李耀发,等.对二点委夜蛾幼虫有引诱作用的植物源物质及其活性成分的分析.河北农业大学学报,2015,38(3):69-74,80.
[6]Hosseini S A,Goldansaz S H,Menken S,et al.Field attraction of carob moth to host plants and conspecific females.Journal of Economic Entomology,2017,43(6):1-7.
[7]朱宁,张冬勇,吴利平,等.聚集信息素和寄主植物挥发物对光肩星天牛和星天牛的引诱作用.昆虫学报,2017,60(4):421-430.
[8]Zhang Y K,Zhao D,Yan X P,et al.Identification and characterization of Hyphantria cunea aminopeptidase N as a binding protein of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab35 Toxin.International Journal of Molecular Sciences,2017,18(12):2575.
[9]Schowalter T D,Ring D R.Biology and management of the Fall Webworm,Hyphantria cunea(Lepidoptera:Erebidae).Journal of Integrated Pest Management,2017,8(1):1-6.
[10]Travis H J.The effect of eastern tent caterpillar(Malacasoma americanum)infestation on fall webworm(Hyphantria cunea)selection of black cherry(Prunus serotina)as a host tree.Am Midl Nat,2005,153:270-275.
[11]唐睿,苏茂文,张钟宁.重大林业入侵害虫美国白蛾对植物次生挥发物质的触角电位活性.科学通报,2012,57(25):2380-2389.
[12]Tang R,Zhang F,Zhang Z N.Electrophysiological responses and reproductive behavior of fall webworm moths(Hyphantria cunea Drury)are influenced by volatile compounds from its mulberry host(Morus alba L.).Insects,2016,7(19):1-12.
[13]Tang R,Zhang J P,Zhang Z N.Electrophysiological and behavioral responses of male fall webworm Moths(Hyphantria cunea)to herbivoryinduced mulberry(Morus alba)leaf volatiles.Plos One,2012,7(11):1-7.
[14]白鹏华,相伟芳,刘宝生,等.刺槐挥发性物质分析及美国白蛾的触角电位反应.山东农业科学,2018,50(5):103-108.
[15]秦勤,王建华,雷玲,等.绒毛白蜡精油的提取及其成分分析.天津师范大学学报(自然科学版),2013,33(2):74-76.
[16]张婷婷,杨玉红,王世强,等.丁香花精油提取工艺及不同花期香气成分分析.湖南农业科学,2011(1):97-100.
[17]吴曼,沈向,王超,等.童期长度不同的海棠叶挥发性物质的差异分析.中国农业科学,2012,45(12):2438-2446.
[18]Bhowmik B,Lakare S,Sen A,et al.Olfactory stimulation of Apis cerana indica towards different doses of volatile constituents:SEM and EAGapproaches.Journal of Asia-Pacific Entomology,2016,19(3):847-859.
[19]张国娜,王进军.桔小实蝇对几种寄主挥发物的触角电位反应.环境昆虫学报,2016,38(1):126-131.
[20]李为争,杨雷,申小卫,等.金龟甲蓖麻源引诱剂的配方筛选及田间效果评价.中国生态农业学报,2013,21(4):480-486.
[21]李为争,杨雷,申小卫,等.金龟甲对蓖麻叶挥发物的触角电位和行为反应.生态学报,2013,33(21):6895-6903.
[22]刘婷,李为争,游秀峰,等.常见植物挥发物对烟蚜的驱避和抑制定殖活性.中国烟草学报,2013,19(2):77-84.
[23]王建华,秦勤,汪敏捷,等.日本双棘长蠹成虫对8种植物挥发物的EAG和行为反应.天津师范大学学报(自然科学版),2013,33(3):75-78.
[24]曹凤勤,刘万学,范中南,等.B型烟粉虱对三种寄主植物及其挥发物的行为反应.昆虫学报,2008,51(8):830-838.
[25]黄安平,韩宝瑜,包小村.茶刺蛾危害后茶树挥发性有机化合物释放变化.应用与环境生物学报,2011,17(6):819-823.
[26]赵海燕,梁广文,陆永跃.虫害诱导果实挥发物对蝇蛹金小蜂趋性行为的影响及其成分初步鉴定.植物保护,2016,42(4):83-88.
[27]蒋兴川,董文霞,肖春,等.甘蔗和玉米挥发物差异及其对亚洲玉米螟幼虫取食行为的调控作用.应用昆虫学报,2017,54(5):803-812.
[28]Tooker J H,Crumrin A L,Hanks L M.Plant volatiles are behavioral cues for adult females of the gall wasp Antistrophus rufus.Chemoecology,2005,15(2):85-88.
[29]Webster B,Bruce T,Pickett J,et al.Volatiles functioning as host cues in a blend become nonhost cues when presented alone to the black bean aphid.Animal Behaviour,2010,79:451-457.