Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection

, Volume 125, Issue 6, pp 529–538 | Cite as

Are synthetic volatiles, typically emitted by insect-damaged peach cultivars, navigation signals for two-spotted lady beetle (Adalia bipunctata L.) and green lacewing (Chrysoperla carnea [Stephens]) larvae?

  • Žiga LaznikEmail author
  • Stanislav Trdan
Original Article


Upon herbivore attack, plants produce and emit volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Some of these compounds may be used in defensive strategy namely the attraction of the herbivores natural enemies. To increase our knowledge of aboveground-induced VOCs on beneficial organisms, we describe laboratory study on the chemotactic behavior of two-spotted lady beetle (Adalia bipunctata L.) and green lacewing (Chrysoperla carnea [Stephens]) larvae toward synthetic VOCs (methyl salicylate, (E)-β-farnesene, (E)-β-ocimene, and E-nerolidol) typically emitted by insect-damaged peach cultivars. All tested VOCs influenced the behavior of both tested organisms. Our results are suggesting that VOCs can influence the movement of green lacewing larvae only for short period of time, while on the other hand two-spotted lady beetle larvae can follow the chemical signal for longer period of time. Results demonstrate a laboratory attraction of two-spotted lady beetle and the green lacewing larvae to a synthetic (E)-β-ocimene. Furthermore, our study showed a repellency of two-spotted lady beetle and the green lacewing larvae to a synthetic (E)-nerolidol, (E)-β-farnesene, and methyl salicylate.


Methyl salicylate (E)-β-farnesene (E)-β-ocimene E-nerolidol Herbivore-induced plant volatiles Adalia bipunctata Chrysoperla carnea Attraction behavior Biological control 



This work was conducted within Horticulture No. P4-0013-0481, a program funded by the Slovenian Research Agency. Part of this research was funded within Professional Tasks from the Field of Plant Protection, a program funded by the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Food of Phytosanitary Administration of the Republic Slovenia. Special thanks are given to Nika Lokar and Jaka Rupnik for their technical assistance.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Al Abassi SA, Birkett MA, Pettersson J, Pickett JA, Wadhams LJ, Woodcock CM (2000) Response of the seven-spot ladybird to an alarm pheromone and an alarm pheromone inhibitor is mediated by paired olfactory cells. J Chem Ecol 26:1765–1771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alhmedi A, Haubruge E, Francis F (2010) Identification of limonene as a potential kairomone of the harlequin ladybird Harmonia axyridis (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Eur J Entomol 107:541–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Amorós-Jiménez R, Robert CAM, Marcos-García MA, Fereres A, Turlings TDJ (2015) A differential role of volatiles from conspecific and heterospecific competitors in the selection of oviposition sites by the aphidophagous hoverfly Sphaerophoria rueppellii. J Chem Ecol 41:493–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arimura G, Matsui K, Takabayashi J (2009) Chemical and molecular ecology of herbivore-induced plant volatiles: proximate factors and their ultimate functions. Plant Cell Physiol 50:911–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bargmann CI, Horvitz HR (1991) Chemosensory neurons with overlapping functions direct chemotaxis to multiple chemicals in C. elegans. Neuron 7:729–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boo KS, Chung IB, Han KS, Pickett JA, Wadham LJ (1998) Response of the lacewing Chrysopa cognata to pheromones of its aphid prey. J Chem Ecol 24:631–639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowers WS, Nault LR, Webb RE, Dutky SR (1972) Aphid alarm pheromone: isolation, identification, synthesis. Science 177:1121–1122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danner H, Brown P, Cator EA, Harren FJM, van Dam NM, Cristescu SM (2015) Aboveground and belowground herbivores synergistically induce volatile organic sulfur compound emissions from shoots but not from roots. J Chem Ecol 41:631–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Boer JG, Dicke M (2004) The role of methyl salicylate in prey searching behavior of predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis. J Chem Ecol 30:255–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dicke M, Sabelis MW (1988) How plants obtain predatory mites as bodyguards. Neth J Zool 38:148–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Francis F, Lognay G, Haubruge E (2004) Olfactory responses to aphid and host plant volatile releases: E-ß-Farnesene an effective kairomone for the predator Adalia bipunctata. J Chem Ecol 30:741–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gosset V, Harmel N, Göbel C, Francis F, Haubruge E, Wathelet J-P, du Jardin P, Feussner I, Fauconnier M-L (2009) Attacks by piercing-sucking insect (Myzus persicae Sultzer) or a chewing insect (Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say) on potato plants (Solanum tuberosum L.) induce differential changes in volatile compound release and oxylipin synthesis. J Exp Bot 60:1231–1240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hardie J, Isaacs R, Pickett JA, Wadhams LJ, Woodcock CM (1994) Methyl salicylate and (-)-(1 R, 5S)-myrtenal are plant-derived repellents for black bean aphid, Aphis fabae Scop. (Homoptera: Aphididae). J Chem Ecol 20:2847–2855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ishiwari H, Suzuki T, Maeda T (2007) Essential compounds in herbivore-induced plant volatiles that attract the predatory mite Neosiulus womersleyi. J Chem Ecol 33:1670–1681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. James DG (2003) Field evaluation of herbivore-induced plant volatiles as attractants for beneficial insects: methyl salicylate and the green lacewing, Chrysopa nigricornis. J Chem Ecol 29:1601–1609CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. James DG (2006) Methyl salicylate is a field attractant for the goldeneyed lacewing, Chrysopa oculata. Biocontrol Sci Technol 16:107–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. James DG, Price TS (2004) Field-testing of methyl salicylate for recruitment and retention of beneficial insects in hops and grapes. J Chem Ecol 30:1613–1627CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. James DG, Price TS, Wright LC (2004) Field-testing of methyl salicylate for recruitment and retention of beneficial insects in grapes and hops. J Chem Ecol 30:1613–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kappers IF, Hoogerbrugge H, Bouwmeester HJ, Dicke M (2011) Variation in herbivory-induced volatiles among cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) varieties has consequences for the attraction of carnivorous natural enemies. J Chem Ecol 37:150–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kielty JP, Allen-Williams LJ, Underwood N, Eastwood EA (1996) Behavioral responses of three species of ground beetle (Coleoptera: Carabidae) to olfactory cues associated with prey and habitat. J Insect Behav 9:237–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Laznik Ž, Trdan S (2016) Attraction behaviors of entomopathogenic nematodes (Steinernematidae and Heterorhabditidae) to synthetic volatiles emitted by insect damaged potato tubers. J Chem Ecol 42:314–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Laznik Ž, Tóth T, Lakatos T, Vidrih M, Trdan S (2010) Oulema melanopus (L.) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) adults are susceptible to entomopathogenic nematodes (Rhabditida) attack: results from a laboratory study. J Plant Dis Prot 117:30–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Laznik Ž, Košir IJ, Rozman L, Kač M, Trdan S (2011) Preliminary results of variability in mechanical-induced volatile root-emissions of different maize cultivars. Maydica 56:343–350Google Scholar
  24. Mondor E, Roitberg B (2000) Has the attraction of predatory coccinelids to cornicle droplets constrained aphid alarm signaling behavior? J Insect Behav 3:321–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ninkovic V, Abasi SA, Pettersson J (2001) The influence of aphid-induced plant volatiles on ladybird beetle searching behavior. Biol Control 21:191–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ozawa R, Shimoda T, Kawaguchi M, Arimura G, Horiuchi J, Nishioka T, Takabayashi J (2000) Lotus japonicus infested with herbivorous mites emits volatile compounds that attract predatory mites. J Plant Res 113:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rasmann S, Köllner TG, Degenhardt J, Hiltpold I, Toepfer S, Kuhlmann U, Gershenzon J, Turlings TCJ (2005) Recruitment of entomopathogenic nematodes by insect-damaged maize roots. Nature 434:732–737CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rojht H, Kač M, Trdan S (2009) Nontarget effect of entomopathogenic nematodes on larvae of twospotted lady beetle (Coleoptera: occinellidae) and green lacewing (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) under laboratory conditions. J Econ Entomol 102:1440–1443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Staudt M, Jackson B, El-Aouni H, Buatois B, Lacrozze J-P, Poëssel J-L, Sauge M-H (2010) Volatile organic compound emissions induced by the aphid Myzus persicae differ among resistant and susceptible peach cultivars and a wild relative. Tree Physiol 30:1320–1334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Takabayashi J, Dicke M (1996) Plant-carnivore mutualism through herbivore-induced carnivore attractants. Trends Plant Sci 1:109–113CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Turlings TCJ, Loughrin JH, McCall PJ, Ose USR, Lewis WJ, Tumlinson JH (1995) How caterpillar damaged plants protect themselves by attracting parasitic wasps. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA 92:4169–4174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Verheggen FJ, Anaud L, Bartram S, Gohy M, Haubruge E (2008) Aphid and plant secondary metabolites induce oviposition in an aphidophagous hoverfly. J Chem Ecol 34:301–307CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Zhang Q-H, Sheng M, Chen G, Aldrich JR, Chauhan KR (2006) Iridodial: a powerful attractant for the green lacewing, Chrysopa septempunctata (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Naturwissenschaften 93:461–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Zhu JW, Cossé AA, Obrycki JJ, Boo KS, Baker TC (1999) Olfactory reactions of the twelve-spotted lady beetle, Coleomegilla maculata and the green lacewing, Chrysoperla carnea to semiochemicals released from their prey and host plant: electroantennogram and behavioral responses. J Chem Ecol 25:1163–1177CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Deutsche Phytomedizinische Gesellschaft 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Agronomy, Biotechnical FacultyUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations