DOCSLIB.ORG

Review of Insect and Disease Challenges to Alberta Coniferous Forests in Relation to Resistance Breeding and Climate Change

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Review of Insect and Disease Challenges to Alberta Coniferous Forests in Relation to Resistance Breeding and Climate Change H.F. Cerezke Research Scientist (retired), Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forestry Service, Edmonton N.K. Dhir Manager, Genetics and Tree Improvement (retired) L.K. Barnhardt Manager, Alberta Tree Improvement and Seed Centre, Smoky Lake, Alberta Abstract Increasing temperatures with climate change during the coming decades are predicted to drastically alter forests and forest ecosystem dynamics. These changes will impact forest insects and diseases in many ways through changes in host tree distributions, population dynamics, moisture and nutrition, tree defence compounds, and through effects on natural predators, parasites, and mutualist feeders. Predicted changes in Alberta’s forests with climate change provide many new challenges for the integrated management of forest pests. To explore the scope of these challenges, a list was developed of insect and disease species considered to be currently the most economically important pests of concern in the management of Alberta’s coniferous forests, based on their past historical presence. Each of the 20 pest species identified is rated in relative economic importance according to management priority and on potential levels of damage impact they cause to forest values. The biology of each of the 20 species is briefly reviewed, their damage impacts are described, and information is summarized on likely interactions and potential responses to the changing climate. The science of genetics and tree breeding for pest resistance is reviewed to examine and explore possible opportunities that could have application in the management of future forests and pest populations in the province. Case history studies of four high-profile pests, including white pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola), white pine weevil (Pissodes strobi), dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium americanum), and mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae) are reviewed in detail. Information is provided on life histories, populations, epidemiology, damage impacts, current management practices, climate relationships, and emphasis on genetics and tree breeding for pest resistance. The information in this report is intended to serve as a guide to help select and prioritize opportunities for genetic tree resistance breeding as part of climate change adaptation strategy, and to incorporate any new strategies into integrated pest management practices for protecting the health, productivity, and diversity of Alberta’s coniferous forests. Acknowledgements Initial planning and discussions for the content of this report involved contribution by Dr. Donald Lester. We also thank Dr. Deogratias Rweyongeza for his review of the manuscript and suggestions for improvement and Pearl Gutknecht and Pat Franchuk for providing secretarial assistance toward finalizing the report. This publication may be cited as: Cerezke, H.F., Dhir, N.K. and Barnhardt, L.K. 2013. Review of insect and disease challenges to Alberta coniferous forests in relation to resistance breeding and climate change. Alberta Environment and Sustainable Resource Development. Forest Management Branch. Edmonton. 122 pp. ISBN: 978-1-4601-1278-6 (Printed Version) 978-1-4601-1279-3 (Online Version) Printed: July 2014 insect and disease challenges Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................1 2.0 Review of Important Forest Pests of Conifers in Alberta .............................................................4 3.0 Review of Science Pertaining to Genetics and Breeding Applicability.........................................6 4.0 Review of the Role of Climate Change on Identified Pest Species,Their Life Histories, Damage Impacts, and Prediction of Future Changes of Pests and Impact on Forest Health ........................................................................................................................13 4.1 Overview of Climate Change Issues in Alberta .................................................................13 4.2 Review of Potential Climate Change Effects on Insects and Diseases ............................15 4.3 Review of Potential Climate Change Effects on Important Insect and Disease Pests in Alberta ..................................................................................................21 4.3.1 Mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) .................................21 4.3.2 Spruce budworm (Choristoneura fumiferana [Clemens]) ......................................23 4.3.3 Spruce beetle (Dendroctonus rufipennis [Kirby]) ...................................................25 4.3.4 White pine weevil (Pissodes strobi [Peck]) ............................................................27 4.3.5 Whitespotted sawyer beetle (Monochamus scutellatus [Say]) ..............................28 4.3.6 Yellowheaded spruce sawfly (Pikonema alaskensis [Rohwer]) .............................30 4.3.7 Western spruce budworm (Choristoneura occidentalis Freeman) ........................31 4.3.8 Douglas-fir beetle (Dendroctonus pseudotsugae Hopkins) ...................................33 4.3.9 Warren rootcollar weevil (Hylobius warreni Wood) ................................................35 4.3.10 Spruce cone maggot (Strobilomyia neanthracina Michelsen) ...............................37 4.3.11 Armillaria root disease (Armillaria ostoyae [Romagn.] Herink) ..............................38 4.3.12 Tomentosus root rot (Inonotus tomentosus Karst.) ................................................41 4.3.13 Red ring rot (Phellinus pini [Brot. Fr.] Ames) .........................................................43 4.3.14 Stalactiform and comandra blister rusts (Cronartium coleosporioides Arthur and C. comandrae Peck) ..............................44 4.3.15 White pine blister rust (Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fischer) ......................................47 4.3.16 Western gall rust (Endochronartium harknessii [J.P. Moore] Y. Hiratsuka) ......................................................................................49 4.3.17 Atropellis canker (Atropellis piniphilia [Weir] Lohman & Cash)..............................52 4.3.18 Pine needle cast (Lophodermella concolor [Dearn.] Darker) ................................54 4.3.19 Dwarf mistletoe (Arceuthobium americanum Nutt.) ...............................................56 5.0 Review of Some Case Histories of Successful Programs and Approaches ..............................58 5.1 Case History 1: White Pine Blister Rust (Cronartium ribicola J.C. Fisch) .........................58 5.1.1 Taxonomy of pine susceptible species to WPBR ..................................................58 5.1.2 Distribution, infection and disease development of WPBR ...................................59 i insect and disease challenges 5.1.3 WPBR control and limber/whitebark pine restoration strategies ...........................61 5.1.4 Research and development of WPBR-resistant trees ...........................................62 5.1.5 Strategies, guidelines, and research for WPBR resistance breeding programs ...64 5.2 Case History 2: White Pine Weevil (Pissodes strobi [Peck]) .............................................68 5.3 Case History 3: Lodgepole Pine Dwarf Mistletoe (Arceuthobium americanum Nutt.) .......71 5.4. Case History 4: Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) ...................76 5.4.1 Hosts, distributions, and life history .......................................................................76 5.4.2 Host selection, behaviour, and associated microorganisms ..................................77 5.4.3 Natural control and management strategies .........................................................80 5.4.4 Genetics and tree resistance .................................................................................81 5.4.5 Mountain pine beetle and pine host genomics ......................................................83 6.0 Reviews and Prioritization of Coniferous Pests for Resistance Breeding and Climate Change Adaptation Work ...........................................................................................................87 7.0 Discussion of Important Pests that Need to be Addressed through Genetics and Breeding in Alberta ....................................................................................................................90 8.0 Conclusions ..............................................................................................................................96 9.0 Literature Cited ..........................................................................................................................98 List of Tables Table 1. List of important forest insect and disease pests of conifers in Alberta and their current relative management priority and potential impact ratings on the forest resource values in the province. .........................................................................................5 Table 2. Categories and the number of points allotted in each category for rating important insect and disease pests of conifers in Alberta. ................................................................88 Table 3. Summary of the number of point ratings for each insect and disease species identified in Table 1 and according to the seven categories given in Table 2. ...................89 Table 4. List of important conifer pest species in Alberta and priority ratings from highest to lowest for considering the development of new or strengthening of
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bacterial Symbionts in Lepidoptera: Their Diversity, Transmission, and Impact on the Host
    fmicb-09-00556 March 26, 2018 Time: 16:39 # 1 REVIEW published: 27 March 2018 doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00556 Bacterial Symbionts in Lepidoptera: Their Diversity, Transmission, and Impact on the Host Luis R. Paniagua Voirol1, Enric Frago2, Martin Kaltenpoth3, Monika Hilker1 and Nina E. Fatouros4* 1 Institute of Biology, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany, 2 Centre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement, Unité Mixte de Recherche Peuplements Végétaux et Bioagresseurs en Milieu Tropical, Saint-Pierre, La Réunion, 3 Department for Evolutionary Ecology, Institute of Organismic and Molecular Evolution, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, Mainz, Germany, 4 Biosystematics Group, Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands The insect’s microbiota is well acknowledged as a “hidden” player influencing essential insect traits. The gut microbiome of butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) has been shown to be highly variable between and within species, resulting in a controversy on the functional relevance of gut microbes in this insect order. Here, we aim to (i) review current knowledge on the composition of gut microbial communities across Lepidoptera and (ii) elucidate the drivers of the variability in the lepidopteran gut microbiome and provide an overview on (iii) routes of transfer and (iv) the putative functions of microbes in Lepidoptera. To find out whether Lepidopterans possess a Edited by: core gut microbiome, we compared studies of the microbiome from 30 lepidopteran Sébastien Duperron, species. Gut bacteria of the Enterobacteriaceae, Bacillaceae, and Pseudomonadaceae National Museum of Natural History, families were the most widespread across species, with Pseudomonas, Bacillus, France Staphylococcus, Enterobacter, and Enterococcus being the most common genera.
    [Show full text]
  • Insect Egg Size and Shape Evolve with Ecology but Not Developmental Rate Samuel H
    ARTICLE https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1302-4 Insect egg size and shape evolve with ecology but not developmental rate Samuel H. Church1,4*, Seth Donoughe1,3,4, Bruno A. S. de Medeiros1 & Cassandra G. Extavour1,2* Over the course of evolution, organism size has diversified markedly. Changes in size are thought to have occurred because of developmental, morphological and/or ecological pressures. To perform phylogenetic tests of the potential effects of these pressures, here we generated a dataset of more than ten thousand descriptions of insect eggs, and combined these with genetic and life-history datasets. We show that, across eight orders of magnitude of variation in egg volume, the relationship between size and shape itself evolves, such that previously predicted global patterns of scaling do not adequately explain the diversity in egg shapes. We show that egg size is not correlated with developmental rate and that, for many insects, egg size is not correlated with adult body size. Instead, we find that the evolution of parasitoidism and aquatic oviposition help to explain the diversification in the size and shape of insect eggs. Our study suggests that where eggs are laid, rather than universal allometric constants, underlies the evolution of insect egg size and shape. Size is a fundamental factor in many biological processes. The size of an 526 families and every currently described extant hexapod order24 organism may affect interactions both with other organisms and with (Fig. 1a and Supplementary Fig. 1). We combined this dataset with the environment1,2, it scales with features of morphology and physi- backbone hexapod phylogenies25,26 that we enriched to include taxa ology3, and larger animals often have higher fitness4.
    [Show full text]
  • Pinyon Pine Mortality Alters Communities of Ground-Dwelling Arthropods
    Western North American Naturalist 74(2), © 2014, pp. 162–184 PINYON PINE MORTALITY ALTERS COMMUNITIES OF GROUND-DWELLING ARTHROPODS Robert J. Delph1,2,6, Michael J. Clifford2,3, Neil S. Cobb2, Paulette L. Ford4, and Sandra L. Brantley5 ABSTRACT.—We documented the effect of drought-induced mortality of pinyon pine (Pinus edulis Engelm.) on com- munities of ground-dwelling arthropods. Tree mortality alters microhabitats utilized by ground-dwelling arthropods by increasing solar radiation, dead woody debris, and understory vegetation. Our major objectives were to determine (1) whether there were changes in community composition, species richness, and abundance of ground-dwelling arthro- pods associated with pinyon mortality and (2) whether specific habitat characteristics and microhabitats accounted for these changes. We predicted shifts in community composition and increases in arthropod diversity and abundance due to the presumed increased complexity of microhabitats from both standing dead and fallen dead trees. We found signifi- cant differences in arthropod community composition between high and low pinyon mortality environments, despite no differences in arthropod abundance or richness. Overall, 22% (51 taxa) of the arthropod community were identified as being indicators of either high or low mortality. Our study corroborates other research indicating that arthropods are responsive to even moderate disturbance events leading to changes in the environment. These arthropod responses can be explained in part due to the increase in woody debris and reduced canopy cover created by tree mortality. RESUMEN.—Documentamos el efecto de la mortalidad causada por la sequía del pino piñonero (Pinus edulis Engelm.) sobre comunidades de artrópodos subterráneos. Utilizamos tres variantes en el microhábitat de los artrópodos incrementando la radiación solar, desechos de madera muerta y vegetación baja.
    [Show full text]
  • From Plant Exploitation to Mutualism
    From Plant Exploitation to Mutualism. Chapter 3 François Lieutier, Kalina Bermudez-Torres, James Cook, Marion O. Harris, Luc Legal, Aurélien Sallé, Bertrand Schatz, David Giron To cite this version: François Lieutier, Kalina Bermudez-Torres, James Cook, Marion O. Harris, Luc Legal, et al.. From Plant Exploitation to Mutualism. Chapter 3. Nicolas Sauvion, Denis Thiéry, Paul-André Calatayud. Insect-Plant Interactions in a Crop Protection Perspective, 81, 2017, Advances in Botanical Research, 978-0-12-803318-0. hal-02318872 HAL Id: hal-02318872 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02318872 Submitted on 1 May 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. VOLUME EIGHTY ONE ADVANCES IN BOTANICAL RESEARCH Insect-Plant Interactions in a Crop Protection Perspective Volume Editor NICOLAS SAUVION INRA,UMR BGPI 0385 (INRA-CIRAD-SupAgro), Montpellier, France DENIS THIERY INRA, UMR SAVE 1065, Bordeaux Sciences Agro, Centre INRA de recherches de Bordeaux- Aquitaine, Institut des Sciences de la Vigne et du Vin, Villenave d’Ornon, France PAUL-ANDRE CALATAYUD IRD UMR EGCE (Evolution, Génome, Comportement, Ecologie), CNRS-IRD-Univ. Paris-Sud, IDEEV, Université Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France; IRD c/o ICIPE, Nairobi, Kenya Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier 125 London Wall, London EC2Y 5AS, United Kingdom The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, United Kingdom 50 Hampshire Street, 5th Floor, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States 525 B Street, Suite 1800, San Diego, CA 92101-4495, United States First edition 2017 Copyright Ó 2017 Elsevier Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • Provisional Checklist of the Sesiidae of the World (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia)
    Mitt.Ent.Arb.gem.Salzkammergut 4 1-85 4.12.2004 Provisional checklist of the Sesiidae of the world (Lepidoptera: Ditrysia) Franz PÜHRINGER & Axel KALLIES Abstract: A checklist of Sesiidae of the world provides 2453 names, 1562 of which are currently considered valid taxa (1 family, 2 subfamilies, 10 tribes, 149 genera, 1352 species, and 48 subspecies). Data concerning distribution, type species or type genus, designation, incorrect spelling and emendation, preoccupation and replacement names, synonyms and homonyms, nomina nuda, and rejected names are given. Several new combinations and synonyms are provided. Key words: Sesioidea, systematics, taxonomy, zoogeographic regions. Introduction: Almost 25 years have passed since HEPPNER & DUCKWORTH (1981) published their 'Classification of the Superfamily Sesioidea'. In the meantime great progress has been made in the investigation and classification of the family Sesiidae (clearwing moths). Important monographs covering the Palearctic and Nearctic regions, and partly South America or South-East Asia have been made available (EICHLIN & DUCKWORTH 1988, EICHLIN 1986, 1989, 1995b and 1998, ŠPATENKA et al. 1999, KALLIES & ARITA 2004), and numerous descriptions of new taxa as well as revisions of genera and species described by earlier authors have been published, mainly dealing with the Oriental region (ARITA & GORBUNOV 1995c, ARITA & GORBUNOV 1996b etc.). Therefore, the authors felt the need to provide an updated checklist of the Sesiidae of the world. This list solely aims to summarize the changes in taxonomy and classification of the Sesiidae and to provide a thorough bibliography of relevant literature. An updated version of this list can be found in the Internet (URL: http://members.eunet.at/f.puehringer/checklst.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • (Dendroctonus Ponderosae Hopkins) Under Climate Change
    Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 8-2021 Susceptibility of High-Elevation Forests to Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) Under Climate Change David N. Soderberg Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons Recommended Citation Soderberg, David N., "Susceptibility of High-Elevation Forests to Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) Under Climate Change" (2021). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 8139. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/8139 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SUSCEPTIBILITY OF HIGH-ELEVATION FORESTS TO MOUNTAIN PINE BEETLE (DENDROCTONUS PONDEROSAE HOPKINS) UNDER CLIMATE CHANGE by David N. Soderberg A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Ecology Approved: ______________________ ______________________ Karen E. Mock, Ph.D. Barbara J. Bentz, Ph.D. Major Professor Committee Member ______________________ ______________________ R. Justin DeRose, Ph.D. Zachariah Gompert, Ph.D. Committee Member Committee Member ______________________ ______________________ Justin B. Runyon, Ph.D. D. Richard Cutler, Ph.D. Committee Member Interim Vice Provost of Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, UT 2021 ii Copyright © David N. Soderberg 2021 All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Susceptibility of High-elevation Forests to Mountain Pine Beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae Hopkins) Under Climate Change by David N. Soderberg, Doctor of Philosophy Utah State University, 2021 Major Professor: Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Largest Organisms
    Largest organisms From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to navigationJump to search See also: Megafauna and Largest prehistoric animals Although it appears to be multiple trees, Pando is a clonal colony of an individual quaking aspen with an interconnected root system. It is widely held to be the world's most massive single organism. The largest organisms now found on Earth can be determined according to various aspects of an organism's size, such as: mass, volume, area, length, height, or even genome size. Some organisms group together to form a superorganism (such as ants or bees), but such are not classed as single large organisms. The Great Barrier Reef is the world's largest structure composed of living entities, stretching 2,000 km (1,200 mi), but contains many organisms of many types of species. This article lists the largest species for various types of organisms, and mostly considers extant species. The organism sizes listed are frequently considered "outsized" and are not in the normal size range for the respective group. If considered singular entities, the largest organisms are clonal colonies which can spread over large areas. Pando, a clonal colony of the quaking aspen tree, is widely considered to be the largest such organism by mass.[1] Even if such colonies are excluded, trees retain their dominance of this listing, with the giant sequoia being the most massive tree.[2] In 2006 a huge clonal colony of Posidonia oceanica was discovered south of the island of Ibiza. At 8 kilometres (5 mi) across, and estimated at around 100,000 years old,[3] it may be one of the largest and oldest clonal colonies on Earth.[4][5][6] Among animals, the largest species are all marine mammals, specifically whales.
    [Show full text]
  • Hawaiian Entomological Society
    Tot. If, No. 3. PROCEEDINGS OF THE Hawaiian Entomological Society FOR July—December 1909 (with 2 Plates) HONOLULU, HAWAII. PRICE, SO CENTS. OFFICERS FOR 19Q9. J : PRESIDENT.................................,. .OTTO H. VICE-PRESIDENT «'-... .>,........ 1 F; W. TER&Y** . ■ , '■" ' v ■■■ ■'.■"•■■.■■ ■ "•■"■ "" ...' ."■■" ' ".iD.lt VAST DOTE* , S^GRETARY-TJIEASURER....................:..... .D. B. ItXJHNS . EDITOR OF gllOGEEPINGS..................... ,.. OTT0 H. SWEZEY *■ Resigned in April. ** To fill vacancy. ME.1ME|fR8MI,P' 1909. Austin, C. J. o, Jas. * Blackburn, I*. *Newell, Bro. Matthias Bryan, W. A. Paxtpn, E. fe. , Garter^ GL R. *PerMns, R; G. U Cooke, Ji'p, Pfptenhauer, W. Copper, H. E. Potter, W. R. R. Babies, T. G. Reed, Miss "M, Deering, G, W. C. Rock, Jos; Eckart, C. F. *Sharp, D. " Ehrhorn, E. M. Swezey, O. H, ; Fulluway, B. T* ^We?ey, Mrs. O. H. Gri^ard, W. M. Tenn^y, E. p. Holmes, Hw Terryi F. ^ ■ . Jordan.^ G. A. Van I)ine, D. L. ' Kirkaldy, Gb W, Waidron, J. W. *Koebele, A. Waterhouse, A. Kptinsky, -J, Wilcox, E. V. D. 3B. Wilder, G. ?. fe Honorary. All correspondence to be addressed to the Secretary, af the Bureau of Agriculture and Forestry, Honolulu, Hawaii, from whom copies bt the Proceedings may be purchased. • V Volume I of the Proceedings, for 1905-07 (in S' numbers), contains 210 pages, 4 plates, and 5 text figures. Price dt the complete volume $2.00. Volume II, Np. 1, contains 85 pages, 1 cut and one Etortralt. \Vpluttiie II, No, 2, contains 53 pages, 2 plates and 3 cuts. Price of any single number 50 cents. 87 • with upper half black and lavender mixed, lower half white; one has black tubercles, in the other they are concolorous.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Moths the Missing Pollinators in Subantarctic New Zealand? Max N
    RESEARCH ARTICLE Are moths the missing pollinators in Subantarctic New Zealand? Max N. Buxton1,2, Barbara J. Anderson3, Robert J.B. Hoare4 & Janice M. Lord1 1Department of Botany, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand; 2The New Zealand Institute for Plant and Food Research Limited, Ruakura, Hamilton, New Zealand; 3The Otago Museum, Dunedin, New Zealand; 4Manaaki Whenua - Landcare Research, Auckland, New Zealand Abstract Keywords Pollination; islands; interactions; On offshore islands, flowers are typically small, simple in colour and shape Lepidoptera; ecology; mutualism and more reliant on wind- or self-pollination than insect-mediated pollination. Islands also tend to have a species-poor pollinating fauna. The New Zealand Correspondence Subantarctic islands (latitude between about 46° and 60°) have a depauper- Max N. Buxton, The New Zealand Institute ate pollinator fauna. However, many flowers in this region are large, brightly for Plant and Food Research Limited, Bisley coloured and apparently completely reliant on insect visitors for pollination. In Road, Ruakura, Hamilton 3214, New Zealand. the absence of bees and butterflies, moths and flies may be particularly import- E-mail [email protected] ant pollinators in the region. Using six Heath moth traps simultaneously over four nights in three different habitat types, 241 moths were caught, represent- ing six species. We found that moths carried pollen identified to four plant spe- cies (Bulbinella rossii, Dracophyllum longifolium, Gentianella concinna and Acaena minor), with B. rossii and D. longifolium pollen being most abundant on moth bodies. Weather conditions explained moth abundance and distribution, but neither weather nor the number of moths caught were reliable predictors of their potential as pollinators; moths carried on average more pollen grains from more plant species in the shrubland despite harsh weather conditions and few individuals caught.
    [Show full text]
  • Gut Microbiota of the Pine Weevil Degrades Conifer Diterpenes And
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/116020; this version posted March 12, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 1 Gut microbiota of the pine weevil degrades conifer diterpenes and 2 increases insect fitness 3 Aileen Berasategui1,2, Hassan Salem 2,3, Christian Paetz. 4, Maricel Santoro1,5, 4 Jonathan Gershenzon. 1, Martin Kaltenpoth 6, Axel Schmdit 1 5 6 1 Biochemistry Department, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, 07745 Jena, 7 Germany. 8 2 Insect Symbiosis Research Group, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, 9 07745 Jena, Germany. 10 3 Department of Biology, Emory University, 30320 Atlanta, GA, U.S.A. 11 4 NMR Department, Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, 07445 Jena, 12 Germany. 13 5 Departamento de Biología Molecular, Universidad Nacional de Río Cuarto, Campus 14 Universitario, 5800 Río Cuarto, Argentina 15 6 Department for Evolutionary Ecology, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55122 16 Mainz, Germany 17 18 Correspondence to: 19 Aileen Berasategui: [email protected] 20 Martin Kaltenpoth: [email protected] 21 22 23 Running title: 24 Insect gut symbionts degrade plant defenses 25 26 27 Keywords: pine weevil, microbiota, symbiosis, terpene degradation, plant secondary 28 metabolites 29 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/116020; this version posted March 12, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission. 30 Abstract 31 The pine weevil (Hylobius abietis), a major pest of conifer forests throughout Europe, 32 feeds on the bark and cambium, tissues rich in terpenoid resins that are toxic to 33 many insect herbivores.
    [Show full text]