↓ Skip to main content

Increased plant volatile production affects oviposition, but not larval development, in the moth Helicoverpa armigera

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Biology, October 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Increased plant volatile production affects oviposition, but not larval development, in the moth Helicoverpa armigera
Published in
Journal of Experimental Biology, October 2011
DOI 10.1242/jeb.059923
Pubmed ID
Authors

Emily J. McCallum, John Paul Cunningham, Joost Lücker, Myron P. Zalucki, James J. De Voss, José R. Botella

Abstract

It is well established that herbivorous insects respond to changes in plant odour production, but little attention has been given to whether these responses relate to direct fitness costs of plant volatile production on insect growth and survival. Here, we use transgenic Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco) plants that produce relatively large amounts of the volatile (S)-linalool to study whether the responses of egg-laying herbivorous insects to linalool production relate directly to the growth and survival of offspring. In choice tests, fewer eggs were laid on transgenic plants compared with non-transformed controls, indicating that increased linalool emissions have a deterrent effect on Helicoverpa armigera oviposition. Larval survival and larval mass after feeding on transgenic leaves, however, was comparable to non-transformed controls. (S)-linalool, whether in volatile or sequestered form, does not appear to have a direct effect on offspring fitness in this moth. We discuss how the ecology of this polyphagous moth species may necessitate a high tolerance for certain volatiles and their related non-volatile compounds, and suggest that responses by adult female H. armigera moths towards increased linalool production may be context specific and relate to other indirect effects on fitness.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Nepal 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Postgraduate 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 11 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 49 69%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 3%
Unspecified 1 1%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 1%
Environmental Science 1 1%
Other 2 3%
Unknown 15 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2012.
All research outputs
#20,656,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Biology
#8,188
of 9,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,999
of 148,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Biology
#63
of 89 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,330 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 148,282 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 89 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.