Laboratory of Entomology, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 8031, 6700 EH Plant Breeding, Wageningen UR, P.O. Box 386, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Insect Sci. 2013 Apr;20(2):207-27. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7917.2012.01505.x. Epub 2012 May 7.
Plants protect themselves against aphid attacks by species-specific defense mechanisms. Previously, we have shown that Solanum stoloniferum Schlechtd has resistance factors to Myzus persicae Sulzer (Homoptera: Aphididae) at the epidermal/mesophyll level that are not effective against Macrosiphum euphorbiae Thomas (Homoptera: Aphididae). Here, we compare the nymphal mortality, the pre-reproductive development time, and the probing behavior of M. persicae and M. euphorbiae on S. stoloniferum and Solanum tuberosum L. Furthermore, we analyze the changes in gene expression in S. stoloniferum 96 hours post infestation by either aphid species. Although the M. euphorbiae probing behavior shows that aphids encounter more probing constrains on phloem activities-longer probing and salivation time- on S. stoloniferum than on S. tuberosum, the aphids succeeded in reaching a sustained ingestion of phloem sap on both plants. Probing by M. persicae on S. stoloniferum plants resulted in limited feeding only. Survival of M. euphorbiae and M. persicae was affected on young leaves, but not on senescent leaves of S. stoloniferum. Infestation by M. euphorbiae changed the expression of more genes than M. persicae did. At the systemic level both aphids elicited a weak response. Infestation of S. stoloniferum plants with a large number of M. persicae induced morphological changes in the leaves, leading to the development of pustules that were caused by disrupted vascular parenchyma and surrounding tissue. In contrast, an infestation by M. euphorbiae had no morphological effects. Both plant species can be regarded as good host for M. euphorbiae, whereas only S. tuberosum is a good host for M. persicae and S. stoloniferum is not. Infestation of S. stoloniferum by M. persicae or M. euphorbiae changed the expression of a set of plant genes specific for each of the aphids as well as a set of common genes.
植物通过特定的防御机制来保护自己免受蚜虫的侵害。以前，我们已经表明，匍匐茎茄（Solanum stoloniferum Schlechtd）在表皮/叶肉水平上具有抵抗桃蚜（Myzus persicae Sulzer）（同翅目：蚜科）的抗性因子，但对马铃薯长管蚜（Macrosiphum euphorbiae Thomas）（同翅目：蚜科）无效。在这里，我们比较了桃蚜和马铃薯长管蚜在匍匐茎茄和马铃薯上的若虫死亡率、繁殖前发育时间和探测行为。此外，我们分析了这两种蚜虫侵染匍匐茎茄 96 小时后基因表达的变化。尽管马铃薯长管蚜的探测行为表明，蚜虫在匍匐茎茄的韧皮部活动中遇到更多的探测限制——较长的探测和唾液分泌时间——但蚜虫在这两种植物上都成功地达到了持续吸食韧皮部汁液的状态。桃蚜在匍匐茎茄植物上的探测仅导致有限的取食。在匍匐茎茄的幼叶上，马铃薯长管蚜和桃蚜的存活率受到影响，但在衰老的匍匐茎茄叶片上则不受影响。马铃薯长管蚜的侵染改变了比桃蚜更多的基因表达。在系统水平上，两种蚜虫都引起了微弱的反应。大量桃蚜侵染匍匐茎茄植物会导致叶片形态发生变化，形成脓疱，这是由维管束薄壁组织和周围组织的破坏引起的。相比之下，马铃薯长管蚜的侵染则没有形态影响。匍匐茎茄和马铃薯都可以被认为是马铃薯长管蚜的良好寄主，而只有马铃薯是桃蚜的良好寄主，匍匐茎茄则不是。桃蚜或马铃薯长管蚜侵染匍匐茎茄会改变特定于每种蚜虫的一组植物基因以及一组共同基因的表达。
