Bedoukian   RussellIPM   RussellIPM   Piezoelectric Micro-Sprayer


Home
Animal Taxa
Plant Taxa
Semiochemicals
Floral Compounds
Semiochemical Detail
Semiochemicals & Taxa
Synthesis
Control
Invasive spp.
References

Abstract

Guide

Alphascents
Pherobio
InsectScience
E-Econex
Counterpart-Semiochemicals
Print
Email to a Friend
Kindly Donate for The Pherobase

« Previous Abstract"Floral isolation, specialized pollination, and pollinator behavior in orchids"    Next AbstractThe evolution of floral scent and olfactory preferences in pollinators: coevolution or pre-existing bias? »

Ecol Lett


Title:The evolution of floral scent and insect chemical communication
Author(s):Schiestl FP;
Address:"Institute of Systematic Botany, Zollikerstrasse 107, University of Zurich, 8008 Zurich, Switzerland. florian.schiestl@systbot.uzh.ch"
Journal Title:Ecol Lett
Year:2010
Volume:20100310
Issue:5
Page Number:643 - 656
DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01451.x
ISSN/ISBN:1461-0248 (Electronic) 1461-023X (Linking)
Abstract:"Plants have evolved a range of strategies to manipulate the behaviour of their insect partners. One powerful strategy is to produce signals that already have a role in the animals' own communication systems. To investigate to what extent the evolution of floral scents is correlated with chemical communication in insects, I analyse the occurrence, commonness, and evolutionary patterns of the 71 most common 'floral' volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in 96 plant families and 87 insect families. I found an overlap of 87% in VOCs produced by plants and insects. 'Floral' monoterpenes showed strong positive correlation in commonness between plants (both gymnosperms and angiosperms) and herbivores, whereas the commonness of 'floral' aromatics was positively correlated between angiosperms and both pollinators and herbivores. According to a multivariate regression analysis the commonness of 'floral' aromatics was best explained by their commonness in pollinators, whereas monoterpenes were best explained by herbivores. Among pollinator orders, aromatics were significantly more common in Lepidoptera than in Hymenoptera, whereas monoterpenes showed no difference among the two orders. Collectively, these patterns suggest that plants and insects converge in overall patterns of volatile production, both for attraction and defence. Monoterpenes seem to have evolved primarily for defence under selection by herbivores, whereas aromatics evolved signalling functions in angiosperms, primarily for pollinator attraction"
Keywords:*Animal Communication Animals *Biological Evolution *Flowers Hymenoptera/*physiology Lepidoptera/*physiology Multivariate Analysis *Odorants Volatile Organic Compounds;
Notes:"MedlineSchiestl, Florian P eng Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S. England 2010/03/27 Ecol Lett. 2010 May; 13(5):643-56. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01451.x. Epub 2010 Mar 10"

 
Back to top
 
Citation: El-Sayed AM 2024. The Pherobase: Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. <http://www.pherobase.com>.
© 2003-2024 The Pherobase - Extensive Database of Pheromones and Semiochemicals. Ashraf M. El-Sayed.
Page created on 26-06-2024