UV-induced anthocyanin in the host plant Sedum lanceolatum has little effect on feeding by larval Parnassius smintheus
- 13 Downloads
Climate change has resulted in shorter periods of snow cover in alpine meadows, increasing the duration of UV exposure. We established the relationship between increased exposure to UV light and anthocyanin pigment levels in host plant Sedum lanceolatum and tested whether increased exposure changed the feeding behavior of its herbivore Parnassius smintheus. Anthocyanin concentrations were significantly greater in plants exposed to UV. Under field conditions, we found a preference of P. smintheus caterpillars for plants with slightly above average levels of anthocyanin; however, no-choice feeding experiments in which larvae ranging from 1 to 3 days old were placed on UV-rich and UV-low plants showed no difference in feeding. These results indicate that the reduction of snow cover in alpine meadows will change the pigment profile of plants, but these changes may have little effect on herbivory.
KeywordsAnthocyanin Herbivory Climate change Plant defense
We thank Kelsey Harrison, Sarah Senne, and Alexus Wimbish for assistance in the field. Research was supported by a National Geographic Society Grant (NGS-9905-16) to SFM and a University of Cincinnati, Department of Biological Sciences STEM summer fellowship to JPB.
SFM and JPB conceived the research. JPB carried out the laboratory experiments. JPB and SFM conducted the field research and analyzed the data. JPB wrote the first draft of the manuscript and SFM edited it.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
- Apelt A, Bavin L, Dickey E, et al. (2019) The effect of UV light intensity on anthocyanin content of Richea continentis leaves. Field Stud Ecol 2:1–7Google Scholar
- Clausen RT (1966) Sedum of North America North of the Mexican Plateau. Cornell Univ Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
- Ferreira T, Rasband W (2012) ImageJ User Guide. National Institutes of Health, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
- Gould KS, Davies KM, Winefield C (2009) Anthocyanins. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
- IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. IPCC, GenevaGoogle Scholar
- Lee J, Durst RW, Wrolstad RE (2005) Determination of total monomeric anthocyanin pigment content of fruit juices, beverages, natural colorants, and wines by the pH differential method: collaborative study. J AOAC Int 88:1269–1278Google Scholar
- Mendez M, Jones DG, Manetas Y (1999) Enhanced UV-B radiation under field conditions increases anthocyanin and reduces the risk of photoinhibition but does not affect growth in the carnivorous plant Pinguicula vulgaris. New Phytol 144:275–282. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1469-8137.1999.00511.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Nishida R (2002) Sequestration of defensive substances from plants by Lepidoptera. Annu Rev Entomol 47:57–92. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145121 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Parmesan C (2006) Ecological and evolutionary responses to recent climate change. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 37:637–669. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.37.091305.110100 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Robinson DA (2018) Northern hemisphere continental snow cover extent. Bull Am Meteorol Soc 99:S22–S23Google Scholar
- Takahashi A, Takeda K, Ohnish T (1991) Light-Induced anthocyanin reduces the extent of damage to DNA in UV-irradiated Centaurea cyanus cells in culture. Plant Cell Physiol 32:541–547. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pcp.a078113 Google Scholar