It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Recent studies have demonstrated that cultivar mixtures can reduce aphid plant acceptance and population development. It is still unknown as to which underlying mechanisms may contribute to this phenomenon. We investigated the effects of volatile interactions between undamaged barley cultivars on aphid feeding behavior and performance in the laboratory. Spring barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) cultivar Salome was exposed to volatiles from Fairytale (SeF), Anakin (SeA), or clean air (Se0). We used an electrical penetration graph to test the effect of exposure to neighbor volatiles on the feeding behavior and performance of bird cherry-oat aphids (Rhopalosiphum padi L.). We also assessed aphid relative growth rate, intrinsic rate of increase, and development time on exposed and unexposed Salome plants. Aphids spent significantly longer time on epidermis and mesophyll plant tissues on SeF than Se0, and no difference was observed between SeA and Se0. Significant decreases in the duration of phloem ingestion and phloem sustained ingestion were recorded in SeF showing that volatile-induced effects cause difficulty for aphids to feed. However, no differences in these variables were detected between SeA and Se0. We also observed reduced aphid relative growth rate and intrinsic rate of increase on SeF compared to Se0 and SeA. Our study demonstrated that, in a specific combination, exposure of one barley cultivar to volatiles from another one can change aphid feeding behavior and performance, probably due to changes in host plant properties/quality. Our results provide an insightful explanation of mechanisms responsible for the reduced aphid population development previously observed in the field.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details

1 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Ecology, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.6341.0) (ISNI:0000 0000 8578 2742); Royal University of Phnom Penh, Department of Biology, Phnom Penh, Cambodia (GRID:grid.20440.32) (ISNI:0000 0001 1364 8832)
2 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Crop Production Ecology, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.6341.0) (ISNI:0000 0000 8578 2742); University of Banja Luka, Faculty of Agriculture, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina (GRID:grid.35306.33) (ISNI:0000 0000 9971 9023)
3 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Crop Production Ecology, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.6341.0) (ISNI:0000 0000 8578 2742)
4 Royal University of Phnom Penh, Department of Biology, Phnom Penh, Cambodia (GRID:grid.20440.32) (ISNI:0000 0001 1364 8832)
5 Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Ecology, Uppsala, Sweden (GRID:grid.6341.0) (ISNI:0000 0000 8578 2742)