Colorado potato beetles show differential digestive compensatory responses to host plants expressing distinct sets of defense proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Herbivorous insects fed plants expressing proteinase inhibitors (PIs) compensate for the loss of digestive proteolytic functions by producing novel proteinases. We assessed here whether such compensatory responses represent a general, non-specific adaptation to defense-related proteins in host plant tissues, or if distinct responses occur depending on the stress exerted on the plant. As a model, growth, development, and digestive proteases of the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say) were monitored after feeding larvae with plants pre-treated with either methyl jasmonate or arachidonic acid, two compounds inducing different sets of defense genes in potato. In brief, larvae fed plants treated with jasmonate or arachidonate were negatively affected compared to larvae fed non-treated plants, suggesting the potency of both molecules to induce partial resistance to potato beetles in potato. On the other hand, larvae fed treated plants partially compensated for the presence of defense-related proteins by adapting their digestive proteolytic system, both quantitatively and qualitatively. These compensatory processes varied depending on the treatment, the larvae fed arachidonate-treated plants showing the most dramatic response. Compensation to jasmonate and arachidonate was also influenced by a cysteine PI from rice expressed in the plant, pointing out the possible indirect effects of recombinant defense proteins on naturally-occurring plant-insect interactions. These observations, while showing the potential of jasmonate and arachidonate as inducers of partial resistance to the potato beetle in potato, also suggest that digestive compensation in herbivorous insects is determined, at least in part, by defense-related compounds found in the plant in response to different stress stimuli or as a result of ectopic expression in transgenic plants.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".