How aphids find their host plants,and how they don't

There is a considerable interest in trying to understand how aphids find their host plants because they are a major cause of economic losses in agricultural and horticultural production systems. Indeed, the specific behavioural sequences during host finding by aphids are one of the main reasons for their prominent role as vectors of plant pathogenic viruses. This paper reviews the visual and olfactory stimuli involved in host‐finding behaviour of aphids, both basic and applied aspects are covered. Although controlling aphids by manipulation of visual and olfactory stimuli involved in host finding and host selection can be highly successful, as shown by research, most of these measures can still be further optimised and adoption in practice is currently limited. Research therefore needs to address some critical open questions, including (a) the effects of visual contrasts on aphid behaviour; (b) the specific responses of aphids to ultraviolet (UV) light during different stages in host finding; (c) the quantification of behavioural sequences in the field and (d) the response of aphid behaviour to plant diversity at varying spatial scales; further, (e) a much more comprehensive coverage of aphid taxa and aphid ecological groups is needed in host‐finding related research to uncover ecological principles underlying this critical behaviour.     

Biomarker discovery from the top down: Protein biomarkers for efficient virus transmission by insects (Homoptera: Aphididae) discovered by coupling genetics and 2-D DIGE

Yellow dwarf viruses cause the most economically important virus diseases of cereal crops worldwide and are vectored by aphids. The identification of vector proteins mediating virus transmission is critical to develop sustainable virus management practices and to understand viral strategies for circulative movement in all insect vectors. Previously, we applied 2-D DIGE to an aphid filial generation 2 population to identify proteins correlated with the transmission phenotype that were stably inherited and expressed in the absence of the virus. In the present study, we examined the expression of the DIGE candidates in previously unstudied, field-collected aphid populations. We hypothesized that the expression of proteins involved in virus transmission could be clinically validated in unrelated, virus transmission-competent, field-collected aphid populations. All putative biomarkers were expressed in the field-collected biotypes, and the expression of nine of these aligned with the virus transmission-competent phenotype. The strong conservation of the expression of the biomarkers in multiple field-collected populations facilitates new and testable hypotheses concerning the genetics and biochemistry of virus transmission. Integration of these biomarkers into current aphid-scouting methodologies will enable rational strategies for vector control aimed at judicious use and development of precision pest control methods that reduce plant virus infection.     

The role of olfaction in aphid host location

Aphids are major economic pests of many of the worlds' crops, causing damage directly by feeding and by acting as vectors for plant viruses. By understanding how aphids locate their host plants, it may become possible to develop new means of controlling populations by taking advantage of these natural host location/nonhost avoidance behaviours. Aphids have also become important model organisms in the study of insect–plant interactions and an improved understanding of host location in aphids could yield insights into the behaviour and ecology of other insect orders. The use of olfaction by host‐seeking aphids is well documented and, in recent years, considerable information has been gained on how volatiles can encode host identity and suitability, as well as the specific behaviours they elicit from aphids. The purpose of this review is to highlight the major findings on how aphids respond behaviourally to volatile compounds and how they can use them to locate their host plants and avoid unsuitable hosts.     

Complex interactions between a plant pathogen and insect parasitoid via the shared vector-host: consequences for host plant infection

Plant viruses modify the development of their aphid vectors by inducing physiological changes in the shared host plant. The performance of hymenopterous parasitoids exploiting these aphids can also be modified by the presence of the plant pathogen. We used laboratory and glasshouse microcosms containing beans (Vicia faba) as the host plant to examine the interactions between a plant virus (pea enation mosaic virus; PEMV) and a hymenopterous parasitoid (Aphidius ervi) that share the aphid vector/host Acyrthosiphon pisum. Neither PEMV-infection of V. faba, nor the carriage of PEMV virions by A. pisum, affected the growth or morphology of the aphid, or the oviposition behaviour and development of A. ervi. The presence of developing Aphidius ervi larvae within Acyrthosiphon pisum did not affect the ability of the aphids to transmit PEMV. However, by reducing their longevity, parasitism ultimately decreased the time viruliferous aphids were able to inoculate plants. In terms of virus dispersal, parasitized aphids exhibited more movement around experimental arenas than unparasitized controls, causing a slight increase in the proportion of beans infected with PEMV. Exposure to adult Aphidius ervi caused Acyrthosiphon pisum to rapidly drop off bean plants and disperse to new hosts, resulting in considerably higher plant infection rates (70%) than that seen in control arenas (25%). The results of this investigation demonstrate that when parasitoids are added to a plant-pathogen-vector system, benefits to the host plant due to reduced herbivore infestation must be balanced against the consequences of parasitoid-induced aphid dispersal and a subsequent increase in the level of plant infection.     

Foraging behaviour at the fourth trophic level: a comparative study of host location in aphid hyperparasitoids

In studies of foraging behaviour in a multitrophic context, the fourth trophic level has generally been ignored. We used four aphid hyperparasitoid species: Dendrocerus carpenteri (Curtis) (Hymenoptera: Megaspilidae), Asaphes suspensus Walker (Hymenoptera: Pteromalidae), Alloxysta victrix (Westwood) (Hymenoptera: Alloxystidae) and Syrphophagus aphidivorus (Mayr) (Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), to correlate their response to different cues with their ecological attributes such as host range and host stage. In addition, we compared our results with studies of primary parasitoids on the same plant–herbivore system. First, the olfactory response of females was tested in a Y‐tube olfactometer (single choice: plant, aphid, honeydew, parasitised aphid, aphid mummy, or virgin female parasitoid; dual choice: clean plant, plant with aphids, or plant–host complex). Second, their foraging behaviour was described on plants with different stimuli (honeydew, aphids, parasitised aphids, and aphid mummies). The results indicated that olfactory cues are probably not essential cues for hyperparasitoid females. In foraging behaviour on the plant, all species prolonged their total visit time and search time as compared to the control treatment (clean plant). Only A. victrix did not react to the honeydew. Oviposition in mummies prolonged the total visit time because of the long handling time, but the effect of this behaviour on search time could not be determined. No clear correlation between foraging behaviour and host stage or host range was found. In contrast to specialised primary aphid parasitoids that have strong fixed responses to specific kairomones and herbivore‐induced synomones, more generalist aphid hyperparasitoids seem to depend less on volatile olfactory stimuli, but show similarities with primary parasitoids in their use of contact cues while searching on a plant.     

Vector activity of three aphid species (Hemiptera: Aphididae) modulated by host plant selection behaviour on potato (Solanales: Solanaceae)

Viral diseases non-persistently transmitted by aphids are of great economic importance in several annual crops. Transmission efficiency of these non-persistent phytoviruses is dependant on vector efficiency (i.e. vector intrinsic ability to transmit the virus) but also on the vector activity that implies the early steps of aphid host plant selection process (i.e. brief intracellular stylet punctures after landing) and to their interplant movement ability. In Europe, Macrosiphum euphorbiae (Thomas 1878) is considered as one of the most serious virus vectors on potato (Solanum tuberosum L. 1753). Nevertheless, several alate aphid species that do not colonise potato plants are trapped in potato crops. Therefore, we investigated, through laboratory experiments, vector activity of one potato colonising aphid, M. euphorbiae, and two non-colonising potato aphids, the bird cherry-oat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi (L. 1758) and the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum (Harris 1776). A settling experiment was used to evaluate dispersal activity, and the electrical penetration graph (EPG) technique was used to investigate probing activity on potato plants. Results showed that M. euphorbiae exhibited a better vector activity than other two aphid species in terms of landing and probing. By contrast, interplant movements were only recorded on non-colonising aphids, suggesting a better vector activity than M. euphorbiae in terms of locomotive behaviour. These data confirm the involvement of A. pisum and R. padi in the spread of non-persistent viruses.     

Cucurbit aphid‐borne yellows virus (CABYV) modifies the alighting,settling and probing behaviour of its vector Aphis gossypii favouring its own spread

Plant pathogens are able to influence the behaviour and fitness of their vectors in such a way that changes in plant–pathogen–vector interactions can affect their transmission. Such influence can be direct or indirect, depending on whether it is mediated by the presence of the pathogen in the vector's body or by host changes as a consequence of pathogen infection. We report the effect that the persistently aphid‐transmitted Cucurbit aphid‐borne yellows virus (CABYV, Polerovirus) can induce on the alighting, settling and probing behaviour activities of its vector, the cotton aphid Aphis gossypii. Only minor direct changes on aphid feeding behaviour were observed when viruliferous aphids fed on non‐infected plants. However, the feeding behaviour of non‐viruliferous aphids was very different on CABYV‐infected than on non‐infected plants. Non‐viruliferous aphids spent longer time feeding from the phloem in CABYV‐infected plants compared to non‐infected plants, suggesting that CABYV indirectly manipulates aphid feeding behaviour through its shared host plant in order to favour viral acquisition. Viruliferous aphids showed a clear preference for non‐infected over CABYV‐infected plants at short and long time, while such behaviour was not observed for non‐viruliferous aphids. Overall, our results indicate that CABYV induces changes in its host plant that modifies aphid feeding behaviour in a way that virus acquisition from infected plants is enhanced. Once the aphids become viruliferous they prefer to settle on healthy plants, leading to optimise the transmission and spread of this phloem‐limited virus.     

Virus mediated trophic interactions between aphids and their natural enemies

Microbial endosymbionts alter the phenotype of their host which may have cascading effects at both population and community levels. However, we currently lack information on whether the effects of viruses on both host phenotypic traits and host population demography can modify interactions with upper trophic levels. To fill this gap, we investigated whether a prevalent densovirus infecting the aphid Myzus persicae (i.e. MpDNV) can modify trophic interactions between host aphids and their natural enemies (i.e. predators and parasitoids) by influencing aphid phenotypic traits (i.e. body mass and defensive behaviours), population demography (i.e. density and age-structure) and susceptibility towards both predation and parasitism. We found that the virus decreased aphid body mass but did not influence their behavioural defences. At the population level, the virus had a minor effect on aphid adult mortality whereas it strongly reduced the density of nymphs and influenced the stage structure of aphid populations. In addition, the virus enhanced the susceptibility of aphids to parasitism regardless of the parasitoid species. Predation rate on adult aphids was not influenced by the virus but ladybeetle predators strongly decreased the number of aphid nymphs, especially for uninfected ones compared to infected ones. As a result, the virus decreased predator effect on aphid populations. By reducing both aphid quality and availability, increasing their susceptibility to parasitism, and modulating predator effect on aphid populations, we highlighted that viral endosymbionts can be prevalent drivers of their host ecology as they modify their phenotypes and interspecific interactions. These virus-mediated ecological effects may have consequences on enemies foraging strategies as well as trophic webs dynamics and structure.     

Risk assessment for non-crop hosts of pea enation mosaic virus and the aphid vector Acyrthosiphon pisum

1. Viral insect-borne plant pathogens have devastating impacts in agroecosystems. Vector-borne pathogens are often transmitted by generalist insects that move between non-crop and crop hosts. Insect vectors can have wide diet breadths, but it is often unknown which hosts serve as pathogen reservoirs and which non-crop host harbours the highest density of vectors.
2. In the Pacific Northwest USA, the pea aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum) is a key virus vector in pulse crops. Despite pea aphid having a large number of potential non-crop plant hosts occuring in the region, no reservoir has yet been identified for the economically-costly pathogen Pea Enation Mosaic Virus (PEMV).
3. We addressed these issues by linking field surveys of an aphid vector and plant virus with statistical models to develop risk assessments for common non-crop legumes; in 2018, we completed a 65-site survey where aphids were surveyed in weedy legumes within and outside dry pea fields.
4. We quantified the abundance of pea aphids on 17 hosts, and plant tissue was tested for PEMV. Relatively high densities of A. pisum were found in habitats dominated by hairy vetch (Vicia villosa), which was the only legume other than cultivated dry pea where PEMV was detected.
5. Our results indicate that V. villosa is a key alternative host for PEMV, and that pest management practices in this region should consider the distribution and abundance of this weedy host in viral disease mitigation efforts for pulses.

     

Parasitoids aid dispersal of a nonpersistently transmitted plant virus by disturbing the aphid vector

• 1 Aphids are the major group of insects that vector plant viruses, and they often display a preference for foliage showing disease symptoms. Although this behaviour will increase the numbers of vectors acquiring the pathogen, it will not in itself result in a greater spread of the disease.
• 2 The present study examined how infection of Vicia faba by the nonpersistently transmitted virus bean yellow mosaic virus (BYMV) affected colonization by pea aphids Acyrthosiphon pisum. We then examined how foraging by the hymenopterous parasitoid Aphidius ervi affected aphid settling/movement behaviour and the consequences for dissemination of the virus.
• 3 In Petri dish arenas, aphids colonized discs from BYMV‐infected leaves more rapidly than discs from uninfected plants. Reflectance from infected foliage was approximately 20% higher than from uninfected leaves in the green–yellow wavelengths, indicating that aphids might be responding to visual cues from the brighter foliage. Settling was reduced by A. ervi, with the foraging wasps preventing the aphids reaching and/or remaining on the leaf tissue.
• 4 In multiple plant arenas, A. ervi caused a reduction in aphid numbers but also a nine‐fold increase in BYMV infection. It is hypothesized that disturbance by the parasitoids resulted in more aphid movement as well as more cases of aphids probing on a BYMV‐infected plant and then a new host within the critical time period for successful inoculation to occur. This effect of parasitoids on virus dispersal should be considered in epidemiological models of insect‐vectored plant diseases, and also when evaluating the use of natural enemies in biocontrol strategies of insect herbivore/vector pests.

     

Discovery and Targeted LC-MS/MS of Purified Polerovirus Reveals Differences in the Virus-Host Interactome Associated with Altered Aphid Transmission

Circulative transmission of viruses in the Luteoviridae, such as cereal yellow dwarf virus (CYDV), requires a series of precisely orchestrated interactions between virus, plant, and aphid proteins. Natural selection has favored these viruses to be retained in the phloem to facilitate acquisition and transmission by aphids. We show that treatment of infected oat tissue homogenate with sodium sulfite reduces transmission of the purified virus by aphids. Transmission electron microscopy data indicated no gross change in virion morphology due to treatments. However, treated virions were not acquired by aphids through the hindgut epithelial cells and were not transmitted when injected directly into the hemocoel. Analysis of virus preparations using nanoflow liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry revealed a number of host plant proteins co-purifying with viruses, some of which were lost following sodium sulfite treatment. Using targeted mass spectrometry, we show data suggesting that several of the virus-associated host plant proteins accumulated to higher levels in aphids that were fed on CYDV-infected plants compared to healthy plants. We propose two hypotheses to explain these observations, and these are not mutually exclusive: (a) that sodium sulfite treatment disrupts critical virion-host protein interactions required for aphid transmission, or (b) that host infection with CYDV modulates phloem protein expression in a way that is favorable for virus uptake by aphids. Importantly, the genes coding for the plant proteins associated with virus may be examined as targets in breeding cereal crops for new modes of virus resistance that disrupt phloem-virus or aphid-virus interactions.     

小麦蚜虫田间调查及监测技术

小麦蚜虫是世界范围内小麦生产中一类重要害虫。针对麦蚜世代历期短、繁殖力强,具有趋光、趋化及迁飞等生物学及行为习性;在田间多呈聚集分布,且麦蚜易受寄主植物抗性、天敌、气象因素及农田生态条件等生物与非生物因素影响等发生为害特点,本文阐述了我国小麦蚜虫田间调查、监测技术及防治策略,以期为我国小麦蚜虫综合防控提供基础科学支撑。     

How aphid alarm pheromone can control aphids: a review

Aphids are the major pests of arable crops, mostly in temperate regions. They are monophagous as well as polyphagous. They inflict damage in brassica, potato, cotton, vegetable and fruit crops. They damage their host plant directly by feeding upon their phloem sap, or indirectly by transmitting pathogens to them. Their life cycle can be autoecious as well as heteroecious. Aphids use semiochemicals for various purposes, in gathering information from their environment and for communication among themselves. They protect themselves from predators and parasitoids by escape response which is arbitrated by use of alarm pheromone signalling. When alarm pheromone, (E)-ß-farnesene, is released, nearby aphids exhibit a variety of behaviours like moving away, running, dropping off the plant and even attacking the predator. Previous studies of integrated pest management strategies have been aimed at the usage of alarm pheromone. However, scientists require complete knowledge of aphid ecology as well as aphid interaction with its natural enemies to establish efficient and viable biological control. This review presents analysis of the existing aphid pest management methodologies and effectiveness of alarm pheromone on aphids and their natural enemies.     

Habitat and food specificity in aphidophagous predators

Current knowledge of the processes underlying prey location and choice by aphidophagous predators is reviewed by considering the succession of behavioural mechanisms required for the predator to obtain prey. The predator may locate areas where prey are likely to be found by responding to physical aspects of the habitat, or to semiochemicals produced by the host plant. The predator may then respond to visual or olfactory cues to locate the aphid prey. The predator's readiness to attack and consume aphids is influenced by any behavioural or chemical defence strategies, and by the palatability or nutrient value of the aphids. Toxic allelochemicals ingested by aphids from their host plant may have a detrimental effect on predators.     

Seasonal phenology of Aphis glycines (Hemiptera: Aphididae) and other aphid species in cultivated bean and noncrop habitats in Wisconsin

The occurrence of aphid-transmitted viruses in agricultural crops of the Midwest and northeastern United States has become more frequent since the arrival and establishment of the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura (Hemiptera: Aphididae). A. glycines is a competent vector of plant viruses and may be responsible for recent virus epidemics in Wisconsin snap bean, Phaseolus vulgaris L., fields. To determine whether vegetation surrounding crop fields could serve as sources of virus inocula, we examined the settling activity ofA. glycines and other aphid species in agricultural crops and noncrop field margins adjacent to snap bean fields. Noncrop field margins were made up of numerous virus-susceptible plant species within 10 m from snap bean field edges. During summers 2006 and 2007, horizontal pan traps were placed in commercial soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.], snap bean, and surrounding field margins to characterize aphid flight activity patterns in the different habitat types. Alate abundance and peak occurrence across years varied between crop and noncrop field margins and differed among patches of plants in field margins. Overall aphid activity peaked late in the season (21 August in 2006 and 28 July in 2007); with the majority (52%) of total aphids trapped in all habitats being A. glycines. Susceptibility to viral infection and confirmed visitation of A. glycines to these forage plants suggests the importance ofnoncrop habitats as potential sources of primary virus inoculum. Viral disease onset followed peak aphid flights and further implicates A. glycines as a likely vector of viruses in commercial bean and other crops in Wisconsin.     

VAPA, an innovative "virus-acquisition phenotyping assay" opens new horizons in research into the vector-transmission of plant viruses

Host-to-host transmission--a key step in plant virus infection cycles--is ensured predominantly by vectors, especially aphids and related insects. A deeper understanding of the mechanisms of virus acquisition, which is critical to vector-transmission, might help to design future virus control strategies, because any newly discovered molecular or cellular process is a potential target for hampering viral spread within host populations. With this aim in mind, an aphid membrane-feeding assay was developed where aphids transmitted two non-circulative viruses [cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) and turnip mosaic virus] from infected protoplasts. In this assay, virus acquisition occurs exclusively from living cells. Most interestingly, we also show that CaMV is less efficiently transmitted by aphids in the presence of oryzalin--a microtubule-depolymerising drug. The example presented here demonstrates that our technically simple "virus-acquisition phenotyping assay" (VAPA) provides a first opportunity to implement correlative studies relating the physiological state of infected plant cells to vector-transmission efficiency.     

Field‐level effects of preventative management tactics on soybean aphids (Aphis glycines Matsumura) and their predators

A 2‐year field experiment was conducted in northern Illinois to evaluate the effects of host plant resistance and an insecticidal seed treatment (thiamethoxam) on soybean aphids, Aphis glycines Matsumura and their predators. Densities of soybean aphids varied between the 2 years of the experiment. During both years, resistant plants experienced fewer cumulative aphid days than susceptible plants. Populations of soybean aphids on resistant plants rarely exceeded the economic injury level of 250 soybean aphids per plant. The use of thiamethoxam reduced cumulative aphid days in 2007, but not in 2008. Although soybean aphids reached densities that were sufficient to cause yield‐loss for untreated and susceptible plants, no yield‐benefit was associated with using the two management tactics in either year. This latter finding suggests that densities of soybean aphids need to be greater and sustained for a longer period of time than what we observed if the two management tactics are expected to provide a yield‐benefit. Monitoring natural enemies revealed that densities of key aphidophagous predators were relatively unaffected by host plant resistance or thiamethoxam; the effect of these management tactics on densities of predators, as well as the effectiveness of the method used to sample predators, is discussed.     

Antagonistic effects of soybean viruses on soybean aphid performance

Although there is long-standing recognition that pest complexes require different management approaches than individual pests, relatively little research has explored how pests interact. In particular, little is known of how herbivorous insects and plant pathogens interact when sharing the same host plant. The soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Mastumura, a recently introduced pest of soybean in the upper midwestern United States, and a complex of plant viruses vectored to soybean by insects have become a major concern for growers in the region. Given the abundance of soybean aphid and the increase in virus incidence in recent years, soybean aphids often use soybean infected by plant viral pathogens. We tested the hypothesis that soybean aphid performance is affected by virus infection of soybean plants. We conducted a series of field and laboratory experiments that examined how infection of soybeans with the common plant viruses, alfalfa mosaic, soybean mosaic, and bean pod mottle viruses, influenced soybean aphid performance. Soybean plants (in the field and laboratory) were hand inoculated with individual viruses, and aphids were allowed to colonize plants naturally in field experiments or added to the plants in clip-cages or within mesh bags in laboratory assays. In the field, aphid density on uninfected control soybean plants was nearly double that on infected plants. In laboratory assays, aphid population growth rates were on average 20% lower for aphids on virus infected compared with uninfected plants. Life table analyses showed that increased mortality on virus-infected plants likely explain differences in aphid population growth. Although there was some heterogeneity in the significance of treatment effects among different experiments, when independent experiments are taken together, there is on average an overall negative effect of these viruses on soybean aphids.     

The performance of an aphid parasitoid is negatively affected by the presence of a circulative plant virus

Plant viruses and aphids can interact via contest competition for plant resources and induce changes in plant physiology, which can have effects on a third trophic level. The aim of this study was to determine how the interactions between a circulative plant virus and its aphid vector may affect the performance of an endoparasitoid and how parasitism may affect the efficiency of virus transmission by its aphid vector. The timing when parasitized aphids were transferred to virus-infected lettuce leaves was critical for the performance of A. ervi. Higher parasitoid larvae mortality, longer developmental times and lower percentages of mummification were detected on viruliferous/parasitized aphid nymphs when the time lag between parasitism and exposure to the virus was less than 24 h. No significant differences were detected in virus transmission rate between parasitized and non-parasitized M. euphorbiae aphids.     

Papaya Ring Spot Virus: An Understanding of a Severe Positive-Sense Single Stranded RNA Viral Disease and Its Management

Viral diseases have been studied in-depth for reducing quality, yield, health and longevity of the fruit, to highlight the economic losses. Positive-sense single-stranded RNA viruses are more devastating among all viruses that infect fruit trees. One of the best examples is papaya ringspot virus (PRSV). It belongs to the genus Potyvirus and it is limited to cause diseases on the family Chenopodiaceae, Cucurbitaceae and Caricaceae. This virus has a serious threat to the production of papaya, which is famous for its high nutritional and pharmaceutical values. The plant parts such as leaves, latex, seeds, fruits, bark, peel and roots may contain the biological compound that can be isolated and used in pharmaceutical industries as a disease control. Viral disease symptoms consist of vein clearing and yellowing of young leaves. Distinctive ring spot patterns with concentric rings and spots on fruit reduce its quality and taste. The virus has two major strains P and W. The former cause disease in papaya while the later one in papaya. Virion comprises 94.4% protein, including a 36 kDa coat protein which is a component responsible for a non-persistent transmission through aphids, and 5.5% nucleic acid. Cross protection, development of transgenic crops, exploring the resistant sources and induction of pathogen derived resistance have been recorded as effective management of PRSV. Along with these practices reduced aphid population through insecticides and plant extracts have been found ecofriendly approaches to minimize the disease incidence. Adoption of transgenic crops is a big challenge for the success of disease resistant papaya crops. The aim of this review is to understand the genomic nature of PRSV, detection methods and the different advanced control methods. This review article will be helpful in developing the best management strategies for controlling PRSV.