Cited by 31Insect-Plant Interactions and ControlInsect Pheromone Research and ControlLepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy

Plant inbreeding and prior herbivory influence the attraction of caterpillars ( Manduca sexta ) to odors of the host plant Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae)

Kariyat, Rupesh R., Scanlon, Sarah R., Moraski, Ryan P., Stephenson, Andrew G., Mescher, Mark C., De Moraes, Consuelo M.·2014·American Journal of Botany

Abstract

• Premise of this study: The mediation of plant–insect interactions by plant odors has been studied extensively, but most previous work has focused on documenting the role of constitutive and herbivore‐ or pathogen‐induced plant volatiles as foraging cues for insect herbivores and their natural enemies. Relatively little work has explored genotypic variation in plant‐odor profiles within species, and few studies have addressed the perception and use of olfactory cues by lepidopteran larvae or other herbivores during feeding. • Methods: We examined the effects of plant breeding (inbred vs. outbred individuals) and plant exposure to prior herbivory on the preferences of caterpillars ( Manduca sexta ) for odors of Solanum carolinense in leaf‐disc and whole‐plant choice assays. • Key results: Second‐ and third‐instar larvae of M. sexta clearly and consistently preferred undamaged over herbivore‐damaged plants of both breeding types and also consistently preferred inbred over outbred plants that had the same damage status. Similar preferences were observed even when plants were covered with bridal‐veil cloth to mask visual cues, demonstrating that olfactory cues influence larval preferences. • Conclusions: The observed preferences are consistent with our previous findings regarding the constitutive and induced volatile profiles of inbred and outbred horsenettle plants and their effects on plant–herbivore interactions. They furthermore correspond to differences in host‐plant quality predicted by previous work and, thus, suggest that naive larvae of M. sexta can accurately assess aspects of host‐plant quality via olfactory cues perceived at a distance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3732/ajb.1300295

Cites

33 of 33 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kariyat, R. R., Scanlon, S. R., Moraski, R. P., Stephenson, A. G., Mescher, M. C., & De Moraes, C. M.
Affiliations
Pennsylvania State University (US)
Venue
American Journal of Botany
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-02
Volume
101
Issue
2
Pages
376-380
ISSN
  • 0002-9122 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2197
OpenAlex
W2155737392
Cited by
31
References
33
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1
FWCI
4.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Journal of Botany (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (DEB1050998)
  • David and Lucile Packard Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect-Plant Interactions and Control
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect Pheromone Research and Control
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Lepidoptera: Biology and Taxonomy
Keywords
Manduca sexta, Solanum carolinense, plant volatiles, olfactory cues, host plant quality, plant-insect interactions, induced plant volatiles
MeSH terms
Animals, Inbreeding, Larva, Odorants, Plant Diseases, Manduca, Plant Leaves, Solanum, Volatile Organic Compounds, Herbivory

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review