Isoprene emission by poplar is not important for the feeding behaviour of poplar leaf beetles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chrysomela populi (poplar leaf beetle) is a common herbivore in poplar plantations whose infestation causes major economic losses. Because plant volatiles act as infochemicals, we tested whether isoprene, the main volatile organic compound (VOC) produced by poplars (Populus x canescens), affects the performance of C. populi employing isoprene emitting (IE) and transgenic isoprene non-emitting (NE) plants. Our hypothesis was that isoprene is sensed and affects beetle orientation or that the lack of isoprene affects plant VOC profiles and metabolome with consequences for C. populi feeding. RESULTS: Electroantennographic analysis revealed that C. populi can detect higher terpenes, but not isoprene. In accordance to the inability to detect isoprene, C. populi showed no clear preference for IE or NE poplar genotypes in the choice experiments, however, the beetles consumed a little bit less leaf mass and laid fewer eggs on NE poplar trees in field experiments. Slight differences in the profiles of volatile terpenoids between IE and NE genotypes were detected by gas chromatography - mass spectrometry. Non-targeted metabolomics analysis by Fourier Transform Ion Cyclotron Resonance Mass Spectrometer revealed genotype-, time- and herbivore feeding-dependent metabolic changes both in the infested and adjacent undamaged leaves under field conditions. CONCLUSIONS: We show for the first time that C. populi is unable to sense isoprene. The detected minor differences in insect feeding in choice experiments and field bioassays may be related to the revealed changes in leaf volatile emission and metabolite composition between the IE and NE poplars. Overall our results indicate that lacking isoprene emission is of minor importance for C. populi herbivory under natural conditions, and that the lack of isoprene is not expected to change the economic losses in poplar plantations caused by C. populi infestation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".