The maxillary and labial sensory receptors of the first-to-last instar larvae of Heliothis virescens and H. zea (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae) are described. The distribution, morphology, and number of sensilla on these mouthparts remain constant from instar to instar in both species. Several distinct differences in the morphology and number of certain sensory receptors (e.g. styloconic, digitiform, and multiporous plate sensilla) exist between H. virescens and H. zea . The sensory receptors on the maxillae and labium of both species are compared with those of other lepidopterous larvae.

Sensory receptors on the larval maxillae and labia of Heliothis zea (Boddie) and Heliothis virescens (F.) (Lepidoptera : Noctuidae)

Reactions of lesser peachtree borer [Synanthedon pictipes (G&R)] to volatiles of peach wood, either natural or chemically fractionated, were observed. Mated females were stimulated by and responsive to such materials and deposited significantly more eggs on substrates, including unnatural hosts, that had been treated with aqueous mixtures of bark-canker materials. Stimulation to oviposit occurred even when the female was blinded, indicating the presence of chemical cues. Natural canker-bark extracts immediately stimulated ovipostion and for a few hours significantly increased the number of eggs laid. However, average fecundity was not increased. Antennectomy did not significantly decrease response to volatiles by gravid females, and alternate sites of such chemoreception were not located. Complex mixtures derived by solvent extraction, steam distillation, and volatiles trapping from bark, canker, and gum all had activity. Observations of insect behavior in outdoor cages and also in the laboratory indicated that visual, chemosensory, and mechanosensory receptors are involved in host finding and oviposition.

Ovipositional behavior of lesser peachtree borer in presence of host-plant volatiles

In insects, sexual communication by pheromones generally occurs within defined iel and seasonal periodicities; imilarly, olfactory host location by phytophagous and parasitic species tends to be restricted to particular daily and seasonal intervals. Freeland (1980) has proposed that volatiles released by plants occur in atmospheric concentrations sufficient tointerfere with location by olfactory cues of plant hosts and mates. This general hypothesis was based upon (1) the well-documented occurrence of plant-emitted hydrocarbons (e.g., OL-pinene, pinene, limonene, etc.) in the atmosphere; and (2) the assumption that these plant volatiles at natural concentrations interfere with host and pheromone-location behaviors. Freeland suggested that insect flight times (for these behaviors) might be tailored to those daily or seasonal atmospheric conditions, such as following rain, that maximize these \"blinding effects\" and that this constraint would be most important in the tropics where concentrations ofatmospheric hydrocarbons may be elevated perhaps 50-fold over concentrations intemperate regions. Other environmental conditions, including temperature, humidity, wind velocity, etc., also were recognized as important factors. Validation of this hypothesis, as Freeland noted, awaits experiments designed to simulate natural concentrations and blends of plant volatiles and to determine their effects upon olfactory location of hosts or mates. However, the currently available evidence does not suggest hat insects experience \"difficulty\" inperception and orientation totheir pheromones. By reviewing the evidence presented by Freeland I will consider his hypothesis as it relates to two distinct cases, those of pheromones and host plant volatiles interfering with insect orientation. Tahvanainen and Root's (1972) study on the effects of vegetational diversity upon a specialized chrysomelid herbivore of collards did not conclude that volatiles produced by nonhost (tomato and ragweed) plants were \"blocking insect perception\" of the host plant, in contrast o Freeland's citation (p. 738) of this study. Rather they suggested that reduced feeding on collards was the result of \"repulsion\" and possibly \"feeding inhibition.\" The distinction between blocking perception and a repellent effect caused by nonhost volatiles is an important one, because blocking and repellency imply very different sensory reception and behavioral mechanisms. Presumably, repulsion is related to the nonhost and host volatiles together yielding the incorrect sensory coding patterns for attraction (Stddler 1980). Tahvanainen and Root (1972) suggest hat behavioral antagonism of host stimuli by nonhost stimuli may be widespread and that \"neutral or repellent stimuli may dilute the potency of specific, host-finding cues\" (p. 337). The general conclusion that nonhost volatiles may interfere with olfactory host location (Tahvanainen and Root 1972; Freeland 1980; Stadler 1980) is a reasonable hypothesis.

Flight Periodicity in Insects and the Influence of Atmospheric Hydrocarbons

Chemoreception is reviewed from the point of view of the arthropod's environmental stimuli, namely decaying organic materials, stored products, plant roots, undamaged plant surfaces, flowers, plant interior (plant saps), animal hosts and pheromones. Arthropods living in the same environment seem to have receptor cells with similar action spectra. Chemically pure stimuli, highly specific receptors and unique behavioural responses are the exception rather than the rule. It is concluded that the sensory system provides the central nervous system with a multitude of sensory information coded in across fiber patterns.

Chemoreception in arthropods: sensory physiology and ecological chemistry

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

E. Städler

Author Tools

Chat about Author

Papers

Chemoreception in arthropods: sensory physiology and ecological chemistry