Plant-Insect Interactions

Abstract

Within the broad topic of plant-insect interactions, insect pest management and insect plant pollination are among the most relevant research areas because of the economic impact that they can have on crop yield [1,2,3,4,5]. In gladiolus Gladiolus hybridus L. (Iridaceae), host-plant resistance to western flower thrips Frankliniella occidentalis Pergande (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) can be conferred by morphological factors, such as the density of epicuticular papillae, and by chemical factors, such as content of triterpenoid saponins [15]. Pollinators and natural enemies of pests are essential for food production [28,29,30,31,32]. Because of this, insectary plants can be used for conservation biological control and pollinator conservation [33,34]. In other plant species, based on the changes observed in insect resistance, ontogenetic, phenological, and seasonal changes in saponin content seem to occur [48,49,50]. [...]the effect of bacteria on plant repair mechanisms after insect herbivory and plant-insect interactions in general also deserves being subject to further research.

1. Introduction

The central part of the study of plant-insect interactions comes from our quest for knowledge on why and how these interactions occur. Within the broad topic of plant-insect interactions, insect pest management and insect plant pollination are among the most relevant research areas because of the economic impact that they can have on crop yield [1,2,3,4,5]. This Special Issue presents a collection of papers dealing with basic and applied topics in plant-insect interactions, but showing the relative importance that pest management and pollination have in this field.

2. Key Messages

Host-plant resistance is a prominent part of integrated pest management [6]. In Brassicae, glucosinolates play a key role in host-plant resistance [7]. Three papers in this Special Issue deal with glucosinolates and host-plant resistance to insect pests [8,9,10]. Genotypes of kale Brassica oleracea L. var. acephala (Brassicaceae) that have different glucosinolate content can differ in glucosinolate induction and resistance to the cabbage moth, Mamestra brassicae L. (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) [8]. Another generalist lepidopteran, the cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), can metabolize glucosinolates via conjugation to glutathione, however a high content of nitrogen and sulphur amino acid contents in the plant facilitates this process [9,11]. Helicoverpa armigera, however, does not seem to improve its performance on plants containing glucosinolates after selection for glucosinolate adaptation [10]. Despite this, H. armigera has a pest status in Brassicaceae, and this is also due to other factors, such as the damage that this insect causes to plant reproductive structures [12], insecticide resistance [13], and suppression of natural enemies by insecticide use [14].

In gladiolus Gladiolus hybridus L. (Iridaceae), host-plant resistance to western flower thrips Frankliniella occidentalis Pergande (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) can be conferred by morphological factors, such as the density of epicuticular papillae, and by chemical factors, such as content of triterpenoid saponins [15]. Triterpenoid saponins have also been suggested as being involved in resistance to F. occidentalis in a different plant, Barbarea vulgaris R. Br. (Brassicaceae) [16].

Insect population dynamics are greatly affected by weather conditions [17,18,19]. Bažok et al. show that corn damage caused by the first generation of European corn borer Ostrinica nubilalis Hübner (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) is positively correlated with air temperature and negatively correlated with air humidity [20]. Fertilizer use can also affect insect preference and development on plants [21,22,23]. In this regard, Li et al. show that the white-backed planthopper Sogatella furcifera (Horváth) (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) prefers plants grown in substrate containing high content of nitrogen fertilizer, developing also faster and having a longer lifespan when feeding on plants grown under high nitrogen conditions [24]. Endophytic microorganisms can also influence plant-insect interactions and the plant response to herbivory [25,26]. Bacillus subtilis 26D Cohn secretes cytokinins that help plantlets of potato Solanum tuberosum L. (Solanaceae) recover after herbivory by the Colorado potato beetle Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) [27].

Pollinators and natural enemies of pests are essential for food production [28,29,30,31,32]. Because of this, insectary plants can be used for conservation biological control and pollinator conservation [33,34]. The paper by Kati et al. shows that some wildflowers planted in the field margins of tomato fields attract high numbers of wild bees, honeybees, and parasitoids [35]. Their research also shows that flower cover is correlated with the abundance of wild bees and honeybees. Tomato is one of the crops that requires insect pollination in order to maximize yield [36] and, therefore, the presence of wildflowers that attract pollinators is likely to have a positive effect on tomato yield. The paper by Kati et al. also includes some plant species that have not been previously tested as insectary plants. The study of insectary plants often focuses on few plant species that have often been proven to fulfill their purpose, such as buckwheat Fagopyrum esculentum Moench (Polygonaceae), Lobularia maritima L. Desv. (Brassicales), and Phacelia tanacetifolia Benth. (Boraginaceae) [37,38,39]. In terms of understanding the mechanisms of attraction of flowers to pollinators, Giuliani et al. show that glandular trichomes and monoterpene VOCs could be involved in attracting pollinators to two Salvia spp., S. blepharophylla Brandegee ex Epling and S. greggii A. Gray (Lamiaceae) [40].

3. Future Directions

Plant-insect interactions include a tremendous diversity of relationships deserving further research [41,42]. In these interactions, plant secondary metabolites can play an important role [43,44,45]. In this Special Issue, different chemical compounds were studied for their role in host-plant resistance. However, identification of additional chemical compounds involved in plant-insect interactions continues to be of importance. For example, in Brassicaceae, a lot of the research conducted in plant-insect interactions in the context of chemical ecology has been conducted with glucosinolates [7,46,47]. Future research is necessary to study the role that other plant secondary metabolites may play in plant-insect interactions that have so far been studied mostly by measuring glucosinolate content. The paper by Jeschke et al. [9] indicates that content of other plant compounds, such as amino acids, can affect the ability of the insect to detoxify plant secondary metabolites. Furthermore, the identification of the two unidentified triterpenoid saponins that seem to confer gladiolus resistance to F. occidentalis [15] could uncover additional compounds of importance in host-plant resistance to this and other herbivores. It should also be investigated if there are ontogenetic and seasonal changes in saponin content in gladiolus. In other plant species, based on the changes observed in insect resistance, ontogenetic, phenological, and seasonal changes in saponin content seem to occur [48,49,50]. Moreover, the effect of bacteria on plant repair mechanisms after insect herbivory and plant-insect interactions in general also deserves being subject to further research. In terms of pollination, after having tested the effect of wildflowers on attraction to pollinators and natural enemies, as in the case of the margins of tomato fields [35], further research should measure how the presence of wildflowers affects fruit quality and yield.

Acknowledgments

I thank the authors who contributed to this Special Issue.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

1. Klein, A.M.; Vaissière, B.E.; Cane, J.H.; Steffan-Dewenter, I.; Cunningham, S.A.; Kremen, C.; Tscharntke, T. Importance of pollinators in changing landscapes for world crops. Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci.; 2007; 274, pp. 303-313. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2006.3721] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17164193]

2. Zalucki, M.P.; Shabbir, A.; Silva, R.; Adamson, D.; Shu-Sheng, L.; Furlong, M.J. Estimating the economic cost of one of the world’s major insect pests, Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae): Just how long is a piece of string?. J. Econ. Entomol.; 2012; 105, pp. 1115-1129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EC12107] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22928287]

3. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; Shelton, A.M. Pest management and other agricultural practices among farmers growing cruciferous crops in the central and western highlands of Kenya and the western Himalayas of India. Int. J. Pest Manag.; 2006; 52, pp. 303-315. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09670870600819169]

4. Badenes-Pérez, F.R. Benefits of insect pollination in Brassicaceae: A meta-analysis of self-compatible and self-Incompatible crop species. Agriculture; 2022; 12, 446. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12040446]

5. Hutchison, W.D.; Burkness, E.C.; Mitchell, P.D.; Moon, R.D.; Leslie, T.W.; Fleischer, S.J.; Abrahamson, M.; Hamilton, K.L.; Steffey, K.L.; Gray, M.E. et al. Areawide suppression of European corn borer with Bt maize reaps savings to non-Bt maize Growers. Science; 2010; 330, pp. 222-225. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1190242]

6. Stout, M.J. Reevaluating the conceptual framework for applied research on host-plant resistance. Insect Sci.; 2013; 20, pp. 263-272. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.12011]

7. Hopkins, R.J.; van Dam, N.M.; van Loon, J.J.A. Role of glucosinolates in insect-plant relationships and multitrophic interactions. Annu. Rev. Entomol.; 2009; 54, pp. 57-83. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.54.110807.090623]

8. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; Cartea, M.E. Glucosinolate induction and resistance to the cabbage moth, Mamestra brassicae, differs among kale genotypes with high and low content of sinigrin and glucobrassicin. Plants; 2021; 10, 1951. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10091951]

9. Jeschke, V.; Zalucki, J.M.; Raguschke, B.; Gershenzon, J.; Heckel, D.G.; Zalucki, M.P.; Vassão, D.G. So much for glucosinolates: A generalist does survive and develop on Brassicas, but at what cost?. Plants; 2021; 10, 962. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10050962]

10. Zalucki, J.M.; Heckel, D.G.; Wang, P.; Kuwar, S.; Vassão, D.G.; Perkins, L.; Zalucki, M.P. A generalist feeding on Brassicaceae: It does not get any better with selection. Plants; 2021; 10, 954. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10050954]

11. Wang, P.; Vassão, D.G.; Raguschke, B.; Furlong, M.J.; Zalucki, M.P. Balancing nutrients in a toxic environment: The challenge of eating. Insect Sci.; 2022; 29, pp. 289-303. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1744-7917.12923] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33890407]

12. Perkins, L.E.; Cribb, B.W.; Hanan, J.; Zalucki, M.P. The movement and distribution of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) larvae on pea plants is affected by egg placement and flowering. Bull. Entomol. Res.; 2010; 100, pp. 591-598. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007485309990654] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20504381]

13. Downes, S.; Kriticos, D.; Parry, H.; Paull, C.; Schellhorn, N.; Zalucki, M.P. A perspective on management of Helicoverpa armigera: Transgenic Bt cotton, IPM, and landscapes. Pest Manag. Sci.; 2017; 73, pp. 485-492. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ps.4461] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27753247]

14. Zalucki, M.P.; Adamson, D.; Furlong, M.J. The future of IPM: Whither or wither?. Aust. J. Entomol.; 2009; 48, pp. 85-96. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-6055.2009.00690.x]

15. Wahyuni, D.S.C.; Choi, Y.H.; Leiss, K.A.; Klinkhamer, P.G.L. Morphological and chemical factors related to western flower thrips resistance in the ornamental gladiolus. Plants; 2021; 10, 1384. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10071384]

16. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; López-Pérez, J.A. Resistance and susceptibility to powdery mildew, root-knot nematode, and western flower thrips in two types of winter cress (Brassicaceae). Crop Prot.; 2018; 110, pp. 41-47. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2018.03.015]

17. Chambó, E.D.; de Oliveira, N.T.E.; Garcia, R.C.; Ruvolo-Takasusuki, M.C.C.; Arnaut de Toledo, V.A. Statistical modeling of insect behavioral response to changes in weather conditions in Brassica napus L. Arthropod-Plant Interact.; 2017; 11, pp. 613-621. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11829-017-9506-8]

18. Vasconcelos, T.M.; Duarte, I.M. How can global change affect insect population dynamics in Mediterranean ecosystems? A case study with pine shoot beetle and pine processionary moth. Clim. Change Manag.; 2018; pp. 479-490. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72874-2_27]

19. Furlong, M.J.; Zalucki, M.P. Climate change and biological control: The consequences of increasing temperatures on host–parasitoid interactions. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci.; 2017; 20, pp. 39-44. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2017.03.006]

20. Bažok, R.; Pejić, I.; Čačija, M.; Virić Gašparić, H.; Lemić, D.; Drmić, Z.; Kadoić Balaško, M. Weather conditions and maturity group impacts on the infestation of first generation European corn borers in maize hybrids in Croatia. Plants; 2020; 9, 1387. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants9101387]

21. Wang, L.; Gao, F.; Reddy, G.V.P.; Zhao, Z. Optimization of nitrogen fertilizer application enhances biocontrol function and net income. J. Econ. Entomol.; 2020; 113, pp. 2035-2038. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jee/toaa112] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32474597]

22. Rashid, M.M.; Ahmed, N.; Jahan, M.; Islam, K.S.; Nansen, C.; Willers, J.L.; Ali, M.P. Higher fertilizer inputs increase fitness traits of brown planthopper in rice. Sci. Rep.; 2017; 7, 4719. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-05023-7] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28680158]

23. Gu, S.; Zalucki, M.P.; Men, X.; Li, J.; Hou, R.; Zhang, Q.; Ge, F.; Ouyang, F. Organic fertilizer amendment promotes wheat resistance to herbivory and biocontrol services via bottom-up effects in agroecosystems. J. Pest Sci.; 2022; 95, pp. 339-350. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10340-021-01377-0]

24. Li, Z.; Xu, B.; Du, T.; Ma, Y.; Tian, X.; Wang, F.; Wang, W. Excessive nitrogen fertilization favors the colonization, survival, and development of Sogatella furcifera via bottom-up effects. Plants; 2021; 10, 875. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10050875]

25. Frago, E.; Dicke, M.; Godfray, H.C.J. Insect symbionts as hidden players in insect–plant interactions. Trends Ecol. Evol.; 2012; 27, pp. 705-711. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.08.013]

26. Jallow, M.F.A.; Dugassa-Gobena, D.; Vidal, S. Influence of an endophytic fungus on host plant selection by a polyphagous moth via volatile spectrum changes. Arthropod-Plant Interact.; 2008; 2, pp. 53-62. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11829-008-9033-8]

27. Sorokan, A.; Veselova, S.; Benkovskaya, G.; Maksimov, I. Endophytic strain Bacillus subtilis 26D increases levels of phytohormones and repairs growth of potato plants after Colorado potato beetle damage. Plants; 2021; 10, 923. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10050923]

28. Senapathi, D.; Biesmeijer, J.C.; Breeze, T.D.; Kleijn, D.; Potts, S.G.; Carvalheiro, L.G. Pollinator conservation—the difference between managing for pollination services and preserving pollinator diversity. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci.; 2015; 12, pp. 93-101. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2015.11.002]

29. Aizen, M.A.; Garibaldi, L.A.; Cunningham, S.A.; Klein, A.M. Long-term global trends in crop yield and production reveal no current pollination shortage but increasing pollinator dependency. Curr. Biol.; 2008; 18, pp. 1572-1575. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2008.08.066]

30. Gallai, N.; Salles, J.-M.; Settele, J.; Vaissière, B.E. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol. Econ.; 2009; 68, pp. 810-821. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2008.06.014]

31. Naylor, R.; Ehrlich, P. Natural pest control services and agriculture. Nature’s Services: Societal Dependence on Natural Ecosystems; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1997; pp. 151-174.

32. Losey, J.E.; Vaughan, M. The economic value of ecological services provided by insects. Bioscience; 2006; 56, pp. 311-323. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2006)56[311:TEVOES]2.0.CO;2]

33. Amoabeng, B.W.; Stevenson, P.C.; Mochiah, M.B.; Asare, K.P.; Gurr, G.M. Economic analysis of habitat manipulation in Brassica pest management: Wild plant species suppress cabbage webworm. Crop Prot.; 2021; 150, 105788. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2021.105788]

34. Albrecht, M.; Kleijn, D.; Williams, N.M.; Tschumi, M.; Blaauw, B.R.; Bommarco, R.; Campbell, A.J.; Dainese, M.; Drummond, F.A.; Entling, M.H. et al. The effectiveness of flower strips and hedgerows on pest control, pollination services and crop yield: A quantitative synthesis. Ecol. Lett.; 2020; 23, pp. 1488-1498. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ele.13576] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32808477]

35. Kati, V.; Karamaouna, F.; Economou, L.; Mylona, P.V.; Samara, M.; Mitroiu, M.-D.; Barda, M.; Edwards, M.; Liberopoulou, S. Sown wildflowers enhance habitats of pollinators and beneficial arthropods in a tomato field margin. Plants; 2021; 10, 1003. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants10051003] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34067935]

36. Cooley, H.; Vallejo-Marín, M. Buzz-Pollinated crops: A global review and meta-analysis of the effects of supplemental bee pollination in tomato. J. Econ. Entomol.; 2021; 114, pp. 505-519. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jee/toab009]

37. Badenes-Pérez, F.R. Trap crops and insectary plants in the order Brassicales. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.; 2019; 112, pp. 318-329. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aesa/say043]

38. Landis, D.A.; Wratten, S.D.; Gurr, G.M. Habitat management to conserve natural enemies of arthropod pests in agriculture. Annu. Rev. Entomol.; 2000; 45, pp. 175-201. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.45.1.175]

39. Parolin, P.; Bresch, C.; Desneux, N.; Brun, R.; Bout, A.; Boll, R.; Poncet, C. Secondary plants used in biological control: A review. Int. J. Pest Manag.; 2012; 58, pp. 91-100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2012.659229]

40. Giuliani, C.; Giovanetti, M.; Lupi, D.; Mesiano, M.P.; Barilli, R.; Ascrizzi, R.; Flamini, G.; Fico, G. Tools to tie: Flower characteristics, VOC emission profile, and glandular trichomes of two Mexican Salvia species to attract bees. Plants; 2020; 9, 1645. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/plants9121645]

41. Giron, D.; Dubreuil, G.; Bennett, A.; Dedeine, F.; Dicke, M.; Dyer, L.A.; Erb, M.; Harris, M.O.; Huguet, E.; Kaloshian, I. et al. Promises and challenges in insect–plant interactions. Entomol. Exp. Appl.; 2018; 166, pp. 319-343. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/eea.12679]

42. Sharma, G.; Malthankar, P.A.; Mathur, V. Insect-plant interactions: A multilayered relationship. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am.; 2021; 114, [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aesa/saaa032]

43. Rothwell, E.M.; Holeski, L.M. Phytochemical defences and performance of specialist and generalist herbivores: A meta-analysis. Ecol. Entomol.; 2020; 45, pp. 396-405. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/een.12809]

44. Fraenkel, G.S. The raison d’être of secondary plant substances. Science; 1959; 129, pp. 1466-1470. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.129.3361.1466] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/13658975]

45. Bouwmeester, H.; Schuurink, R.C.; Bleeker, P.M.; Schiestl, F. The role of volatiles in plant communication. Plant J.; 2019; 100, pp. 892-907. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/tpj.14496] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31410886]

46. Ahuja, I.; Rohloff, J.; Bones, A.M. Defence mechanisms of Brassicaceae: Implications for plant-insect interactions and potential for integrated pest management. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev.; 2010; 30, pp. 311-348. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1051/agro/2009025]

47. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; Gershenzon, J.; Heckel, D.G. Plant glucosinolate content increases susceptibility to diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) regardless of its diet. J. Pest Sci.; 2020; 93, pp. 491-506. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10340-019-01139-z]

48. Agerbirk, N.; Olsen, C.E.; Nielsen, J.K. Seasonal variation in leaf glucosinolates and insect resistance in two types of Barbarea vulgaris Ssp. arcuata. Phytochemistry; 2001; 58, pp. 91-100. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0031-9422(01)00151-0]

49. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; Gershenzon, J.; Heckel, D.G. Insect attraction versus plant defense: Young leaves high in glucosinolates stimulate oviposition by a specialist herbivore despite poor larval survival due to high saponin content. PLoS ONE; 2014; 9, e95766. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0095766]

50. Badenes-Pérez, F.R.; Márquez, B.P.; Petitpierre, E. Can flowering Barbarea spp. (Brassicaceae) be used simultaneously as a trap crop and in conservation biological control?. J. Pest Sci.; 2017; 90, pp. 623-633. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10340-016-0815-y]