槐绿虎天牛对葡萄和杏11种挥发物的EAG及行为反应

Research on the EAG and behavioral responses of Chlorophorus diadema to eleven Vitis vinifera and Prunus armeniaca volatiles

【目的】为了研究槐绿虎天牛Chlorophorus diadema(Motschulsky)成虫对寄主植物葡萄6种挥发物和非寄主杏5种挥发物的引诱活性。【方法】通过触角电位(EAG)和嗅觉行为测定,分析槐绿虎天牛对11种挥发物单组分和其19种组合配方的EAG和行为反应。【结果】结果显示对槐绿虎天牛具引诱活性有10种单组分和12种组合配方,EAG反应结果中,各组分反应强弱依次为:N(非寄主配方)、M(非寄主配方)、B(寄主配方)、O(非寄主配方)、反式-2-己烯-1-醇、K(非寄主配方)、反-2-己烯醛、亚油酸甲酯、A(寄主配方)、D(寄主配方)、J(非寄主配方)、丁酸丁酯、1-戊烯-3-醇、R-柠檬烯、S-柠檬烯、3-蒈烯、异戊醇、4-甲基-1-戊醇、E(寄主配方)、F(寄主配方);行为测定结果中,相对选择率在30%以上的组分是:J(非寄主配方)、F(寄主配方)、A(寄主配方)、反式-2-己烯-1-醇、反-2-己烯醛、R-柠檬烯、D(寄主配方)、N(非寄主配方)、E(寄主配方)、B(寄主配方),其它组分1-戊烯-3-醇、异戊醇、4-甲基-1-戊醇、K(非寄主配方)、亚油酸甲酯、3-蒈烯、M(非寄主配方)、丁酸丁酯、S-柠檬烯则次之。因此引诱性好的组分依次为:N(非寄主配方)、A(寄主配方)、D(寄主配方)、J(非寄主配方)、F(寄主配方)、反式-2-己烯-1-醇、反-2-己烯醛、R-柠檬烯。【结论】(1)寄主植物挥发物引诱活性不都是绝对地高于非寄主植物挥发物;(2)含有某种化合物成分的组合配方的引诱活性有时低于单一组分;(3)总体来看组合配方引诱活性高于单一组分。本研究为槐绿虎天牛植物源引诱剂的研发提供了重要的理论依据。

[Objectives] To study the effects of six volatiles from the host-plant Vitis vinifera, and five from the non-host plant Prunus armeniaca, on EAG and behavior of adult Chlorophorus diadema（Motschulsky）. [Methods] The electroantennogram and behavioral responses of C. diadema adults to 11 single components and 19 blends of these were tested using an EAG meter and a Y-tube olfactometer. [Results] 10 single components and 12 blends induced obvious EAG and behavioral responses. The relative levels of EAG response to different compounds were, in decreasing order; N（non-host formula）, M（host formula）, B（host formula）, O（host formula）, trans-2-hexen-1-ol, K（host formula）, trans-2-hexena, methyl linoleate, A（host formula）, D（host formula）, J（non-host formula）, Butyl butyrate, 1-Penten-3-ol,（R）-（＋）-limonene,（S）-（-）-limonene, 3-carene, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 4-methyl-1-pentanol, E（host formula） and F（host formula）. In behavioral tests, the relative attractiveness of components with more than 30% relative attractiveness were, in decreasing order; J（host formula）, F（host formula）, A（host formula）, trans-2-hexen-1-ol, trans-2-hexenal,（R）-（＋）-limonene, D（host formula）, N（non-host formula）, E（host formula） and B（host formula）. Others compounds, including 1-penten-3-ol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, 4-methyl-1-pentanol, K（host formula）, methyl linoleate, 3-carene, M（host formula）, butyl butyrate,（S）-（-）-limonene, and C（host formula）, were less attractive than those previously mentioned. Therefore, the 8 most attractive components to C. diadema were N（host formula）, A（host formula）, D（host formula）, J（host formula）, F（host formula）, trans-2-hexenal, trans-2-hexen-1-ol, and（R）-（＋）-limonene. [Conclusion] We conclude that（1） The attractiveness of host plant volatiles is not absolutely higher than that of non-host plant volatiles;（2） The EAG response to a particular compound was sometimes less than the relative attractiveness of that component in Y-tube olfactometer tests;（3） Overall, blends of different volatiles were more attractive than that of single compounds in Y-tube olfactometer tests. These results provide a theoretical bacground for the development of attractants for C. diadema.