Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparative electrophysiological analysis of plant odor perception in females of threePapilio species

  • Research papers
  • Published:
CHEMOECOLOGY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Antennae of femalePapilio butterflies perceive many volatile plant constituents with widely differing, constituent-specific sensitivities. We compared the responses of threePapilio species to volatiles from host and non-host plants to assess species-specificity and the degree of evolutionary conservatism in olfactory responses.

Since previous studies had demonstrated that the polar constituents in odor fromDaucus carota stimulate oviposition behavior inPapilio polyxenes, we collected headspace volatiles fromD. carota, Pastinaca sativa (both Apiaceae) andArtemisia dracunculus (Asteraceae) and separated the polar fraction of these volatiles by gas chromatography. GC-coupled electroantennograms (GC-EAG) were recorded from the speciesPapilio polyxenes, P. machaon hippocrates andP. troilus. In addition, the responses of the three species to five compounds known as generally occurring constituents of plant odor were recorded. The relative sensitivities for these compounds were nearly identical in all threePapilio species. The response spectra to the separated plant volatiles also showed considerable similarities among the species.

From the limited set of GC peaks evoking a response in one of the species, 64% (D. carota), 44% (P. sativa) and 29% (A. dracunculus) also evoked a response in both of the other species. The responses of the two closely related Apiaceae feeders (P. polyxenes, P. m. hippocrates) to volatiles fromD. carota were more similar to each other than was either to the response ofP. troilus, which feeds on Lauraceae. However, this was not true for the responses to volatiles fromP. sativa. The least congruence among the three species was found in the responses to volatiles fromA. dracunculus, a non-host for all of them. The differences and similarities found in the response profiles of the threePapilio species are discussed with respect to evolutionary adaptation to host odor versus evolutionary conservatism in adaptation of olfactory receptors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baur R, Feeny PP (1992) Comparison of electroantennogram responses by females of the black swallowtail butterfly,Papilio polyxenes, to volatiles from two host-plant species. Pp 122–124in Menken SBJ, Visser JH, Harrewijn P (eds) Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Insect-Plant Relationships. NL-Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic

    Google Scholar 

  • Baur R, Feeny P, Städler E (1993) Oviposition stimulants for the black swallowtail butterfly: identification of electrophysiologically active compounds in carrot volatiles. J Chem Ecol 19:919–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernays EA, Chapman RF (1987) The evolution of deterrent responses in plant-feeding insects. Pp 159–173in Chapman RF, Bernays EA, Stoffolano JR (eds) Perspectives in Chemoreception and Behavior. New York: Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernays EA, Chapman RF (1994) Host-Plant Selection by Phytophagous Insects. New York: Chapman & Hall

    Google Scholar 

  • Dethier VG (1941) Chemical factors determining the choice of food-plants byPapilio larvae. Am Nat 75:61–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P (1991) Chemical constraints on the evolution of swallowtail butterflies. Pp 315–340in Price PW, Lewinsohn TM, Fernandes GW, Benson WW (eds) Plant-Animal Interactions: Evolutionary Ecology in Tropical and Temperate Regions. New York: John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P (1995) Ecological opportunism and chemical constraints on the host associations of swallowtail butterflies. Chapter 2in Scriber JM, Tsubaki Y, Lederhouse RC (eds) Swallowtail Butterflies, Their Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Gainesville: Scientific Publishers (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P, Rosenberry L, Carter M (1983) Chemical aspects of oviposition behavior in butterflies. Pp 27–76in Ahmad S (ed.) Herbivorous Insects. New York: Academic

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P, Blau WS, Kareiva PM (1985) Larval growth and survivorship of the black swallowtail butterfly in central New York. Ecol Monographs 55:167–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Feeny P, Städler E, Åhman I, Carter M (1989) Effects of plant odor on oviposition by the black swallowtail butterfly,Papilio polyxenes (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). J Insect Behav 2:803–827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey JE, Bierbaum TJ, Bush GL (1992) Differences among sibling speciesRhagoletis mendax andR. pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae) in their antennal sensitivity to host fruit compounds. J Chem Ecol 18:2011–2024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guerin PM, Städler E (1982) Host odour perception in three phytophagous Diptera — a comparative study. Pp 95–105in Visser JH, Minks AK (eds) Proc 5th Int Symp Insect-Plant Relationships. NL-Wageningen: Poduc

    Google Scholar 

  • Hansson BS, Van der Pers JNC, Lövquist C. (1989) Comparison of male and female olfactory cell response to pheromone compounds and plant volatiles in the turnip mothAgrotis segetum. Physiol Entomol 14:147–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegnauer R (1962–1992) Chemotaxonomie der Pflanzen: eine Übersicht über die Verbreitung und die systematische Bedeutung der Pflanzenstoffe. Vol. 1–10. CH-Basel: Birkhäuser

    Google Scholar 

  • Jermy T, Szentesi A, Horváth J (1988) Host plant finding in phytophagous insects: the case of the Colorado potato beetle. Entomol exp appl 49:83–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masada Y (1976) Analysis of essential oils by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. New York: John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Masson C, Mustaparta H (1990) Chemical information processing in the olfactory systems of insects. Physiol Rev 70:199–245

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer MS, Mankin RW, Lemire GF (1984) Quantitiation of the insect electroantennogram: measurement of sensillar contributions, elimination of background potentials, and relationship to olfactory sensation. J Insect Physiol 30:757–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JS (1987) Host-plant relationships in the Papilionidae (Lepidoptera): parallel cladogenesis or colonization? Cladistics 3:105–120

    Google Scholar 

  • Nishida R (1995) Oviposition stimulants of swallowtail butterflies. Chapter 3in Scriber JM, Tsubaki Y, Lederhouse RC (eds) Swallowtail Butterflies: Their Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Gainesville: Scientific Publishers (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohsugi T, Nishida R, Fukami H (1991) Multi-component system of oviposition stimulants for a Rutaceae-feeding swallowtail butterfly,Papilio xuthus (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Appl Entomol Zool 26:29–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramachandran R, Khan ZR, Caballero P, Juliano BO (1990) Olfactory sensitivity of two sympatric species of rice leaf folders (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) to plant volatiles. J Chem Ecol 16:2647–2666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sachdev-Gupta K, Feeny PP, Carter M (1993) Oviposition stimulants for the pipevine swallowtail butterfly,Battus philenor (Papilionidae), from anAristolochia host plant: synergism between inositols, aristolochic acids and a monogalactosyl diglyceride. Chemoecology 4:19–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scriber JM, Lederhouse RC, Hagen RH (1991) Foodplants and evolution withinPapilio glaucus andPapilio troilus species groups (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Pp 341–371in Price PW, Lewinsohn TM, Fernandes GW, Benson WW (eds) Plant-Animal Interactions: Evolutionary Ecology in Tropical and Temperate Regions. New York: John Wiley & Sons

    Google Scholar 

  • Sperling FAH, Feeny P (1995) Umbellifer and composite feeding inPapilio: phylogenetic frameworks and constraints on caterpillars. Chapter 26in Scriber JM, Tsubaki Y, Lederhouse RC (eds) Swallowtail Butterflies: Their Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. Gainesville: Scientific Publishers (in press)

    Google Scholar 

  • Städler E (1992) Behavioral responses of insects to plant secondary compounds. Pp 45–88in Rosenthal GA, Berenbaum MR (eds) Herbivores, Their Interactions with Secondary Plant Metabolites. Vol. 2. San Diego: Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Städler E (1994) Oviposition behavior of insects influenced by chemoreceptors. Pp 821–826in Kurihara K, Suzuki N, Ogawa H (eds) Olfaction and Taste XI. Tokyo: Springer

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson JN (1988) Variation in preference and specificity in monophagous and oligophagous swallowtail butterflies. Evolution 42:118–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Topazzini A, Mazza M, Pelosi P (1990) Electroantennogram responses of five Lepidoptera species to 26 general odourants. J Insect Physiol 36:619–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Pers JNC (1981) Comparison of electroantennogram response spectra to plant volatiles in seven species ofYponomeuta and in the tortricidAdoxophyes orana. Entomol exp appl 30:181–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Pers JNC (1982) Comparison of single cell responses of antennal sensilla trichodea in the nine european small ermine moths (Yponomeuta spp.). Entomol exp appl 31:255–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Loon JJA, Frentz WH, van Eeuwijk FA (1992) Electroantennogram responses to plant volatiles in two species ofPieris butterflies. Entomol exp appl 62:253–260

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser JH (1979) Electroantennogram responses of the Colorado beetle,Leptinotarsa decemlineata, to plant volatiles. Entomol exp appl 25:86–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser JH (1986) Host odor perception in phytophagous insects. Annu Rev Entomol 31:121–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Visser JH, Nielsen JK (1977) Specificity in the olfactory orientation of the colorado beetle,Leptinotarsa decemlineata. Entomol exp appl 21:14–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White PR, Chapman RF (1990) Olfactory sensitivity of gomphocerine grasshoppers to the odours of host and non-host plants. Entomol exp appl 55:205–212

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Swiss Federal Research Station, Schloss 333, CH-8820, Wädenswil, Switzerland

    Robert Baur

  2. Section of Ecology and Systematics, Cornell University, Corson Hall, 14853-2701, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Paul Feeny

Authors
  1. Robert Baur
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Paul Feeny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Baur, R., Feeny, P. Comparative electrophysiological analysis of plant odor perception in females of threePapilio species. Chemoecology 5, 26–36 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01259970

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01259970

Key words

Search

Navigation