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 AbstractThe Effects of an Advanced Air Purification Technology on Environmental and Clinical Outcomes in a Long-Term Care Facility    Next AbstractIndoor monoterpene emission rates from commercial cannabis cultivation facilities in Colorado »

J Chem Ecol


Title:Links Between Feeding Preferences and Electroantennogram Response Profiles in Dung Beetles: The Importance of Dung Odor Bouquets
Author(s):Urrutia MA; Cortez V; Verdu JR;
Address:"Research Institute CIBIO (Centro Iberoamericano de la Bioaffiliationersidad) Science Park, University of Alicante, E-03690, Alicante, Spain. Research Institute CIBIO (Centro Iberoamericano de la Bioaffiliationersidad) Science Park, University of Alicante, E-03690, Alicante, Spain. jr.verdu@ua.es"
Journal Title:J Chem Ecol
Year:2022
Volume:20220909
Issue:9-Oct
Page Number:690 - 703
DOI: 10.1007/s10886-022-01383-1
ISSN/ISBN:1573-1561 (Electronic) 0098-0331 (Print) 0098-0331 (Linking)
Abstract:"The detection of dung odors is a crucial step in the food-searching behavior of dung beetles (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea). Yet, whether certain compounds characteristic of a given dung type contribute to a 'choosy generalism' behavior proposed for this taxonomic group is unknown. To address this, we analyzed the chemical composition of three types of dung (cow, horse, and rabbit) and conducted behavioral and electroantennogram (EAG) bioassays on 15 species of dung beetles using 19 volatile organic compounds representing the three dung samples. Chemical analyses revealed substantial qualitative and quantitative differences among dung types. When offered these food options in an olfactometer, 14 species exhibited a feeding preference. Surprisingly, all 19 compounds used in the EAG assays elicited antennal responses, with species displaying different olfactory profiles. The relationship between behavioral preferences and electrophysiological profiles highlighted that species with different food preferences had differences in antennal responses. Moreover, a specific set of EAG-active compounds (nonanal, sabinene, acetophenone, rho-cresol, 2-heptanone, 1H-indole, and 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one) were the strongest drivers in the distinct sensory profiles of the trophic preference groups. Our results point to the importance of the whole bouquet of dung-emanating compounds in driving food-searching behavior, but specific volatiles could aid in determining highly marked trophic preferences in certain species"
Keywords:Cattle Female Horses Rabbits Animals *Coleoptera/physiology Odorants Feces/chemistry Food Preferences Smell/physiology Electroantennography Olfactometry Scarabaeoidea Trophic preference Volatile organic compounds;
Notes:"MedlineUrrutia, Miguel A Cortez, Vieyle Verdu, Jose R eng PID2019-105418RB-I00/Spanish National Plan for Scientific and Technical Research and Innovation/ AICO-2020-031/Conselleria de Innovacion, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana/ GRISOLIAP/2021/185/Conselleria de Innovacion, Universidades, Ciencia y Sociedad Digital, Generalitat Valenciana/ 2022/09/10 J Chem Ecol. 2022 Oct; 48(9-10):690-703. doi: 10.1007/s10886-022-01383-1. Epub 2022 Sep 9"

 
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 06-07-2024