Aristolochic acids affect the feeding behaviour and development of Battus polydamas archidamas larvae (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae: Troidini)

European Journal of Entomology

Volumn 106, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 357-361

  Pinto, Carlos F ^a   Troncoso, Alejandra J ^a   Urzúa, Alejandro ^b   Niemeyer, Hermann M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHILE   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DE SANTIAGO DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

Aristolochia chilensis; Aristolochic acid content; Battus polydamas archidamas; Foraging substrate; Larval development; Lepidoptera; Papilionidae

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL DIET; BUTTERFLY; CONCENTRATION (COMPOSITION); FORAGING BEHAVIOR; LARVAL DEVELOPMENT; ORGANIC ACID; OVIPOSITION;

ARISTOLOCHIA; ARISTOLOCHIA CHILENSIS; BATTUS POLYDAMAS; LEPIDOPTERA; PAPILIONIDAE; PAPILIONOIDEA; TROIDINI;

EID: 71949113060     PISSN: 12105759     EISSN: 18028829     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.14411/eje.2009.044     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Agrawal A. & Dorken M.E. 2001: Law of the unspecialized broken. Trends Ecol. Evol. 16: 426.
2. Barbosa P. 1988: Natural enemies and herbivore plant interactions: influence of plant allelochemicals and host specificity. In Barbosa P. & Letorneau D.K. (eds): Novel Aspects of Insect-Plant Interactions. John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 201-229.
3. Bergvinson D.J., Hamilton R.I. & Arnason J.T. 1995: Leaf profile of maize resistance factors to European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis. J. Chem. Ecol. 21: 343-354.
4. Chachin M., Honda K. & Ômura H. 2007: Appraisal of the acceptability of subtropical rutaceous plants for a swallowtail butterfly, Papilio protenor demetrius (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 42: 121-128.
5. Ehlrich P.R. & Raven P.H. 1964: Butterflies and plants: a study in coevolution. Evolution 18: 586-608.
6. Fordyce J.A. 2000: A model without a mimic: aristolochic acids from the California pipevine swallowtail, Battus philenor hirsuta, and its host plant, Aristolochia californica. J. Chem. Ecol. 26: 2567-2578.
7. Fordyce J.A. & Nice C.C. 2008: Antagonistic, stage-specific selection on defensive chemical sequestration in a toxic butterfly. Evolution 62: 1610-1617.
8. Fordyce J.A., Marion Z.H. & Shapiro A.M. 2005: Phenological variation in chemical defense of the pipevine swallowtail. J. Chem. Ecol. 31: 3835-2846.
9. Jaenike J. 1990: Host specialization in phytophagous insects. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 21: 243-274.
10. Mao J.Q., Burt A.J., Ramputh A.I., Simmonds J., Cass L., Hubbard K., Miller S., Altosaar I. & Arnason J.T. 2007: Diverted secondary metabolism and improved resistance to European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis) in maize (Zea mays L.) transformed with wheat oxalate oxidase. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55: 2582-2589.
11. Miller J.J. & Feeny P.P. 1989: Interspecific differences among swallowtail larvae (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae) in susceptibility to aristolochic acids and berberine. Ecol. Entomol. 14: 287-296.
12. Phytochemical-mediated differential acceptance of four rutaceous plants by a swallowtail butterfly, Papilio polytes (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 38: 37-43.
13. Niemeyer H.M. 2009: Hydroxamic acids derived from 2-hydroxy-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-one: key defense chemicals of cereals. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57: 1677-1696.
14. Nishida R. 2002: Sequestration of defensive substances from plants by Lepidoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 57-92.
15. Nishida R. 2005: Chemosensory basis of host recognition in butterflies - multi-component system of oviposition stimulants and deterrents. Chem. Senses (Suppl. 1) 30: 293-294.
16. Nishida R. & Fukami H. 1989: Ecological adaptation of an Aristolochiaceae-feeding swallowtail butterfly, Atrophaneura alcinous, to aristolochic acids. J. Chem. Ecol. 15: 2549-2563.
17. Pinto C.F., Troncoso A.J., Urzúa A. & Niemeyer H.M. 2009: Use of volatiles of Aristolochia chilensis (Aristolochiaceae) in host searching by fourth-instar larvae and adults of Battus polydamas archidamas (Lepidoptera: Papilionidae: Troidini). Eur. J. Entomol. 106: 63-68.
18. Poonam V.K., Prasad A.K. & Parmar V.S. 2003: Natural occurring aristolactams, aristolochic acids and dioxoaporphines and their biological activities. Nat. Prod. Rep. 20: 565-583.
19. Rausher M.D. 1980: Host abundance, juvenile survival, and ovoposition preference in Battus philenor. Evolution 34: 342-355.
20. Sachdev-Gupta K., Feeny P.P. & Carter M. 1993: Oviposition stimulants for the pipevine swallowtail butterfly, Battus philenor (Papilionidae), from an Aristolochia host plant: synergism between inositols, aristolochic acids and monogalactosyl diglyceride. Chemoecology 4: 19-28.
21. Scriber J.M. & Slansky F. Jr. 1981: The nutritional ecology of immature insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 26: 183-211.
22. Sime K.R. 2002: Chemical defence of Battus philenor larvae against attack by the parasitoid Trogus pennator. Ecol. Entomol. 27: 337-345.
23. Sime K.R., Feeny P.P. & Haribal M.M. 2000: Sequestration of aristolochic acids by the pipevine swallowtail, Battus philenor (L.): evidence and ecological implications. Chemoecology 10: 169-178.
24. Sokal R.R. & Rohlf F.J. 1995: Biometry: The Principles and Practice of Statistics in Biological Research. 3rd ed. W.H. Freeman, New York, 887 pp.
25. Zalucki M.P., Malcolm S.B., Paine T.D., Hanlon C.C., Brower L.P. & Clarke A.R. 2001: It's the first bite that counts: survival of first instar monarchs on milkweeds. Austr. Ecol. 26: 547-555.
26. Zalucki M.P., Clarke A.R. & Malcolm S. 2002: Ecology and behaviour of first instar larval lepidoptera. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 47: 361-393.