Kernel volatiles of some pigmented wheats do not elicit a preferential orientation in Sitophilus granarius adults
- 60 Downloads
The granary weevil, Sitophilus granarius (L.) (Coleoptera, Dryophthoridae), is a primary pest of stored cereals worldwide. To identify possible sources of wheat resistance toward this pest, two commercial durum and bread wheat varieties with yellow pericarp were compared with anthocyanin-pigmented durum and bread wheat genotypes that have never entered commercial production. The composition of the kernel head-space volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and the olfactory responses of granary weevil adults to these kernel VOCs were investigated. Head-space solid-phase micro-extraction and gas chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis highlighted 17 and 13 kernel VOCs from durum and bread wheats, respectively. These compounds mainly included aldehydes and alcohols, and to a lesser extent, terpenes and benzene derivatives. Quantitative and qualitative differences were seen between the odor profiles of yellow and pigmented wheat kernels. In two-choice behavioral bioassays, granary weevil adults were significantly attracted by the kernel odors from the yellow commercial wheat varieties and their hexane extracts, but not by those of the pigmented wheat genotypes and their hexane extracts. Electroantennography confirmed the presence of VOCs in all of the hexane extracts that stimulated the olfactory system of both sexes of the granary weevil in a dose-dependent manner. Thus, differences among the odor blends were responsible for the different olfactory responses of granary weevils to the yellow and pigmented wheat kernels. These differences in VOC emissions and olfactory responses induced in granary weevils by the yellow and pigmented wheat kernels can be exploited to characterize resistance mechanisms associated with different genotypes and to incorporate resistance into improved varieties.
KeywordsWheat Granary weevil Anthocyanins Volatile organic compounds VOCs Electroantennography EAG Post-harvest losses
This work was financially supported by Ministero Italiano dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Ministero Italiano dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica and Assessorato Bilancio e Programmazione Regione Puglia (Program Art. 13-DD prot. 713/Ric. 29 October 2010. Title: Innovative packaging solutions to extend shelf life of food products) and by Ministero Italiano per le Politiche Agricole, Alimentari e Forestali (National Project RGV/FAO). The authors thank Roberto Albanese and Carolina Leggieri for insect rearing and assistance in behavioral bioassays.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
The authors accepted that the paper is submitted for publication in the Journal of Pest Science and report that this paper has not been published or accepted for publication in another journal, and it is not under consideration at another journal.
- Ahmad F, Khan MR, Ahmad M (1992) Post-harvest food grain losses and their containment. Pak Entomol 14(1–2):104–112Google Scholar
- Anon (1979) Post-harvest food losses in developing countries. National Academy of Sciences, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
- Castagnoli M, Liguori M, Nanelli R, Simoni S (1996) Effectiveness of benzyl alcohol in the control of house dust and stored crops mites (Acari: Astigmata). In: Proceedings of the XX international congress of entomology, Firenze, Italy, 25-31 August 1996, p 577Google Scholar
- FAO (2016) Food outlook. Biannual report on global food markets, pp 1–130Google Scholar
- Ficco DBM, Mastrangelo AM, Trono D, Borrelli GM, De Vita P, Fares C, Beleggia R, Platani C, Papa R (2014) The colours of durum wheat: a review. Crop Past Sci 65:1–15Google Scholar
- Germinara GS, Di Stefano MG, De Acutis L, Pati S, Delfine S, De Cristofaro A, Rotundo G (2017) Bioactivities of Lavandula angustifolia essential oil against the stored grain pest Sitophilus granarius (L.) (Coleoptera, Curculionidae). Bull Insectol 70:129–138Google Scholar
- Horber E (1993) Principles, problems, progress and potential in host resistance to stored-grain insects. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on stored-product entomology, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kansas, pp 391–417Google Scholar
- Kaissling KE, Thorson J (1980) Insect olfactory sensilla: structural, chemical and electrical aspects of the functional organization. In: Sattelle DB, Hall LM, Hildebrand JG (eds) Receptors for neurotransmitters, hormones, and pheromones in insects. Elsevier/North-Holland Biomedical Press, New York, pp 261–282Google Scholar
- Kučerová Z, Stejskal V (1994) Susceptibility of wheat cultivars to post-harvest losses caused by Sitophilus granarius L Coleoptera Curculionidae. J Plant Dis Protect 101:641–648Google Scholar
- Lazink Z, Vidrih M, Trdan S (2012) Efficacy of four essential oils against Sitophilus granarius (L.) adults after short-term exposure. Afric J Agric Res 7:3175–3181Google Scholar
- Nawrot J, Warchalewski JR, Piasecka-Kwiatkowska D, Niewiada A, Gawlak M, Grundas ST, Fornal J (2006) The effect of some biochemical and technological properties of wheat grain on granary weevil (Sitophilus granarius L.) (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) development. In: Lorini I, Bacaltchuk B, Beckel H, Deckers D, Sundfeld E, Santos JP, Biagi JD, Celaro JC, Faroni LRD, Bortolini L de OF, Sartori MR, Elias MC, Guedes RNC, Fonseca RG da, Scussel VM (eds) Proceedings of the 9th international working conference on stored-product protection, ABRAPOS, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil. 15–18 October 2006, pp 400–407Google Scholar
- Rajendran S (2002) Post-harvest pest losses. In: Pimentel D (ed) Encyclopedia of Pest Management. Marcel Dekker Inc, New York, pp 654–656Google Scholar
- Trematerra P, Colacci P (2015) Preliminary results on impact of nitrogen fertilisation on Sitophilus zeamais wheat-food preferences and progeny production. Bull Insectol 68:281–286Google Scholar