Herbivore-Specific, Density-Dependent Induction of Plant Volatiles: Honest or “Cry Wolf” Signals?

Plants release volatile chemicals upon attack by herbivorous arthropods. They do so commonly in a dose-dependent manner: the more herbivores, the more volatiles released. The volatiles attract predatory arthropods and the amount determines the probability of predator response. We show that seedlings of a cabbage variety (Brassica oleracea var. capitata, cv Shikidori) also show such a response to the density of cabbage white (Pieris rapae) larvae and attract more (naive) parasitoids (Cotesia glomerata) when there are more herbivores on the plant. However, when attacked by diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) larvae, seedlings of the same variety (cv Shikidori) release volatiles, the total amount of which is high and constant and thus independent of caterpillar density, and naive parasitoids (Cotesia vestalis) of diamondback moth larvae fail to discriminate herbivore-rich from herbivore-poor plants. In contrast, seedlings of another cabbage variety of B. oleracea (var. acephala: kale) respond in a dose-dependent manner to the density of diamondback moth larvae and attract more parasitoids when there are more herbivores. Assuming these responses of the cabbage cultivars reflect behaviour of at least some genotypes of wild plants, we provide arguments why the behaviour of kale (B. oleracea var acephala) is best interpreted as an honest signaling strategy and that of cabbage cv Shikidori (B. oleracea var capitata) as a “cry wolf” signaling strategy, implying a conflict of interest between the plant and the enemies of its herbivores: the plant profits from being visited by the herbivore's enemies, but the latter would be better off by visiting other plants with more herbivores. If so, evolutionary theory on alarm signaling predicts consequences of major interest to students of plant protection, tritrophic systems and communication alike

Can plants betray the presence of multiple herbivore species to predators and parasitoids? The role of learning in phytochemical information netowrks

Abstract In response to feeding by phytophagous arthropods, plants emit volatile chemicals. This is shown to be an active physiological response of the plant and the released chemicals are therefore called herbivore-induced plant volatiles (HIPV). One of the supposed functions of HIPV for the plant is to attract carnivorous natural enemies of herbivores. Depending on which plant and herbivore species interact, blends of HIPV show qualitative and quantitative variation. Hence, one may ask whether this allows the natural enemies to discriminate between volatiles from plants infested by herbivore species that are either suitable or unsuitable as a food source for the natural enemy. Another question is whether natural enemies can also recognise HIPV when two or more herbivore species that differ in suitability as a food source simultaneously attack the same plant species. By reviewing the literature we show that arthropod predators and parasitoids can tell different HIPV blends apart in several cases of single plant-single herbivore systems and even in single plant-multiple herbivore systems. Yet, there are also cases where predators do not discriminate or discriminate only after having learned the association between HIPV and herbivores that are either suitable or non-suitable as a source of food. In this case, suitable herbivores may profit from colonising plants that are already infested by another non-suitable herbivore. The resulting temporal or partial refuge may have important population dynamical consequences, as such refuges have been shown to stabilise otherwise unstable predator-prey models of the Lotka-Volterra or Nicholson-Bailey type