Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T15:14:42.907Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effect of the symbiont Candidatus Erwinia dacicola on mating success of the olive fly Bactrocera oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2014

Anne M. Estes ,
Diego F. Segura ,
Andrew Jessup ,
Viwat Wornoayporn  and
Elizabeth A. Pierson
Anne M. Estes*
Affiliation:
Department of Ecology and Evolution, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica, Instituto de Genética “E.A. Favret”, INTA, Castelar, Argentina
Diego F. Segura
Affiliation:
Laboratorio de Genética de Insectos de Importancia Económica, Instituto de Genética “E.A. Favret”, INTA, Castelar, Argentina
Andrew Jessup
Affiliation:
Insect Pest Control Laboratory, FAO/IAEA Agriculture and Biotechnology Laboratories, International Atomic Energy Agency, Wagramer Strasse 5, PO Box 100, A1400Vienna, Austria
Viwat Wornoayporn
Affiliation:
Insect Pest Control Laboratory, FAO/IAEA Agriculture and Biotechnology Laboratories, International Atomic Energy Agency, Wagramer Strasse 5, PO Box 100, A1400Vienna, Austria
Elizabeth A. Pierson
Affiliation:
Department of Horticultural Sciences, Texas A&M University, 2133 TAMU, College Station, TX, USA
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access

Abstract

Mutualistic bacterial endosymbionts provide many benefits to their insect hosts, but their role in mating has not been studied in the past. In this study, we examined copulatory success and mating latency as two parameters of mating success to assess the influence of Candidatus Erwinia dacicola on mating between a laboratory population of olive flies (Bactrocera oleae Rossi) of Israel origin and a wild population of olive flies from Israel. Previous studies have shown that in many species of tephritid flies, laboratory-reared males have lower fitness and achieve fewer matings than wild males. Our research has shown that this Israeli population of olive flies reared in the laboratory on an artificial diet lacked an endosymbiont, Ca. E. dacicola, found in wild-caught insects from Israel. We hypothesized that decreased fitness and mating ability in laboratory-reared flies could be due to the absence of this endosymbiont. Mating assays between both sexes of these two Israeli populations revealed matings to occur primarily between laboratory-reared females and wild males. Laboratory-reared males achieved only 22% of the total matings. Candidatus Erwinia dacicola was found in significantly fewer insects from the laboratory population than in the wild population; within populations, male and female olive flies were equally likely to have the endosymbiont. However, differences in readiness to mate between the two populations, and not the presence of the endosymbiont, explained mating latency.

Keywords

Candidatus Erwinia dacicolaBactrocera oleaemating latencyendosymbiontsterile insect technique
Type
Research Papers
Information
International Journal of Tropical Insect Science , Volume 34 , Issue S1 , November 2014 , pp. S123 - S131
Copyright
Copyright © ICIPE 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aksoy, S. (ed.) (2003) Symbiosis in Tsetse. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Baumann, P. (2005) Biology of bacteriocyte-associated endosymbionts of plant sap-sucking insects. Annual Reviews in Microbiology 59, 155–189.Google Scholar
Belcari, A., Sacchetti, P., Marchi, G. and Surico, G. (2003) La mosca delle olive e la simbiosi batterica. Informatore Fitopatologico 9, 55–59.Google Scholar
Ben-Yosef, M., Aharon, Y., Jurkevitch, E. and Yuval, B. (2010) Give us the tools and we will do the job: symbiotic bacteria affect olive fly fitness in a diet-dependent fashion. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 277, 1545–1552.Google Scholar
Ben-Yosef, M., Jurkevitch, E. and Yuval, B. (2008) Effect of bacteria on nutritional status and reproductive success of the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata. Physiological Entomology 33, 145–154.Google Scholar
Buchner, P. (1965) Endosymbiosis of Animals with Plant Microorganisms. Interscience Publishers, New York.Google Scholar
Capuzzo, C., Firrao, G., Mazzon, L., Squartini, A. and Girolami, V. (2005) Candidatus Erwinia dacicola, a coevolved symbiotic bacterium of the olive fly Bactrocera oleae (Gmelin). International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 55, 1641–1647.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavalloro, R. and Delrio, G. (1974) Mating behavior and competitiveness of gamma-irradiated olive fruit flies. Journal of Economic Entomology 67, 253–255.Google Scholar
Cayol, J. P., Vilardi, J., Rial, E. and Vera, M. T. (1999) New indices and method to measure the sexual compatibility and mating performance of medfly (Diptera: Tephritidae) laboratory-reared strains under field cage conditions. Journal of Economic Entomology 92, 140–145.Google Scholar
Conord, C., Despres, L., Vallier, A., Balmand, S., Miquel, C., Zundel, S., Lemperiere, G. and Heddi, A. (2008) Long-term evolutionary stability of bacterial endosymbiosis in Curculionoidea: additional evidence of symbiont replacement in the Dryophthoridae family. Molecular Biology and Evolution 25, 859–868.Google Scholar
Cosmides, N., Loukas, M. and Zouros, E. (1997) Differences in fitness components among alcohol dehydrogenase genotypes of the olive fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) under artificial rearing. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 90, 363–371.Google Scholar
Dillion, R. J., Vennard, C. T. and Charnley, A. K. (2000) Exploitation of gut bacteria in the locust. Nature 403, 851.Google Scholar
Dillion, R. J., Vennard, C. T. and Charnley, A. K. (2002) A note: gut bacteria produce components of a locust cohesion pheromone. Journal of Applied Microbiology 92, 759–763.Google Scholar
Douglas, A. E. (2009) The microbial dimension in insect nutritional ecology. Functional Ecology 23, 38–47.Google Scholar
Economopoulos, A. P., Giannakakis, A., Tzanakakis, M. E. and Voyadjoglou, A. V. (1971) Reproductive behavior and physiology of the olive fruit fly. 1. Anatomy of the adult rectum and odors emitted by adults. Annals of the Entomological Society of America 64, 1112–1116.Google Scholar
Estes, A. M., Hearn, D. J., Bronstein, J. L. and Pierson, E. A. (2009) The olive fly endosymbiont, “Candidatus Erwinia dacicola,” switches from an intracellular existence to an extracellular existence during host insect development. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 75, 7097–7106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estes, A. M., Hearn, D. J., Burrack, H. J., Rempoulakis, P. and Pierson, E. A. (2012 a) Prevalence of Candidatus Erwinia dacicola in wild and laboratory olive fruit fly populations and across developmental stages. Environmental Entomology 41, 265–274.Google Scholar
Estes, A. M., Nestel, D., Belcari, A., Jessup, A., Rempoulakis, P. and Economopoulos, A. P. (2012 b) A basis for the renewal of sterile insect technique for the olive fly, Bactrocera oleae (Rossi). Journal of Applied Entomology 136, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
FAO/IAEA/USDA (2003) Manual for Product Quality Control and Shipping Procedures for Sterile Mass-Reared Tephritid Fruit Flies. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.Google Scholar
Fletcher, B. S. and Economopoulos, A. (1976) Dispersal of normal and irradiated laboratory strains and wild strains of the olive fly Dacus oleae in an olive grove. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 20, 183–194.Google Scholar
Fletcher, B. S. and Kapatos, E. (1981) Dispersal of the olive fly Dacus oleae, during the summer period on Corfu. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 29, 1–8.Google Scholar
Gavriel, S., Jurkevitch, E., Gazit, Y. and Yuval, B. (2011) Bacterially enriched diet improves sexual performance of sterile male Mediterranean fruit flies. Journal of Applied Entomology 135, 564–573.Google Scholar
Gil, R., Latorre, A. and Moya, A. (2004) Bacterial endosymbionts of insects: insights from comparative genomics. Environmental Microbiology 6, 1109–1122.Google Scholar
Hendrichs, J., Robinson, A. S., Cayol, J. P. and Enkerlin, W. (2002) Medfly area-wide sterile insect technique programmes for prevention, suppression or eradication: the importance of mating behavior studies. Florida Entomologist 85, 1–13.Google Scholar
Hosokawa, T., Kikuchi, Y., Nikoh, N., Shimada, M. and Fukatsu, T. (2006) Strict host–symbiont cospeciation and reductive genome evolution in insect gut bacteria. PLoS Biology 4, e337.Google Scholar
Knipling, E. F. (1955) Possibilities in insect control or eradication through the use of sexually sterile males. Journal of Economic Entomology 48, 459–462.Google Scholar
Konstantopoulou, M., Economopoulos, A. and Manoukas, A. (1996) Olive fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) ADH allele selected under artificial rearing produced bigger flies than other ADH alleles. Journal of Economic Entomology 89, 1387–1391.Google Scholar
Konstantopoulou, M. A. and Raptopoulos, D. (2003) Alcohol dehydrogenase allele frequencies in Bactrocera oleae (Dipt., Tephritidae): effect of ethanol addition in larval diet. Journal of Applied Entomology-Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Entomologie 127, 243–247.Google Scholar
Konstantopoulou, M. A., Raptopoulos, D. G. and Economopoulos, A. P. (1999) Artificial rearing antimicrobials as selecting factors of Adh alleles in Bactrocera (Dacus) oleae (Diptera: Tephritidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 92, 563–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kounatidis, I., Crotti, E., Sapountzis, P., Sacchi, L., Rizzi, A., Chouaia, B., Bandi, C., Alma, A., Daffonchio, D., Mavragani-Tsipidou, P. and Bourtzis, K. (2009) Acetobacter tropicalis is a major symbiont in the olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 75, 3281–3288.Google Scholar
Lane, D. J. (1991) 16S/23S rRNA sequencing. In Nucleic Acid Techniques in Bacterial Systematics,pp. 115–147 (edited by Stackenbrandt, E. and Goodfellow, M.). John Wiley and Sons, Chichester.Google Scholar
Lauzon, C. R. (2003) Symbiotic relationships of tephritids. In Insect Symbiosis, pp. 115–129 (edited by Bourtzis, K. and Miller, T. A.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Loukas, M., Economopoulos, A. P., Zouros, E. and Vergini, Y. (1985) Genetic changes in artificially reared colonies of the olive fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 78, 159–165.Google Scholar
Montllor, C. B., Maxmen, A. and Purcell, A. H. (2002) Facultative bacterial endosymbionts benefit pea aphids Acyrthosiphon pisum under heat stress. Ecological Entomology 27, 189–195.Google Scholar
Moran, N. A., McCutcheon, J. P. and Nakabachi, A. (2008) Genomics and evolution of heritable bacterial symbionts. Annual Review of Genetics 42, 165–190.Google Scholar
Niyazi, N., Lauzon, C. R. and Shelly, T. E. (2004) Effect of probiotic adult diets on fitness components of sterile male Mediterranean fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) under laboratory and field cage conditions. Journal of Economic Entomology 97, 1570–1580.Google Scholar
Oliver, K. M., Moran, N. A. and Hunter, M. S. (2005) Variation in resistance to parasitism in aphids is due to symbionts not host genotype. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) 102, 12795–12800.Google Scholar
Oliver, K. M., Moran, N. A. and Hunter, M. S. (2006) Costs and benefits of a superinfection of facultative symbionts in aphids. Proceedings of the Royal Society, B: Biological Sciences 273, 1273–1280.Google Scholar
Oliver, K. M., Russell, J. A., Moran, N. A. and Hunter, M. S. (2003) Facultative bacterial symbionts in aphids confer resistance to parasitic wasps. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) 100, 1803–1807.Google Scholar
Parker, A. G. (2005) Mass-rearing for sterile insect release. In Sterile Insect Technique: Principles and Practice in Area-wide Integrated Pest Management (edited by Dyck, V. A., Hendrichs, J. and Robinson, A. S.). Springer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Petri, L. (1909) Ricerchi sopra I batteri intestinali della mosca olearia. Mem. Staz. Pat.Veg., Roma, 1–129.Google Scholar
Prado, S. and Almeida, R. P. (2009) Phylogenetic placement of pentatomid stink bug gut symbionts. Current Microbiology 58, 64–69.Google Scholar
Prokopy, R. J., Haniotakis, G. E. and Economopoulos, A. P. (1975) Comparative behaviour of lab-cultured and wild-type Dacus oleae flies in the field. In Panel and Research Co-ordination Meeting on the Sterile-male Technique for Control of Fruit Flies. IAEA, Vienna.Google Scholar
Rempoulakis, P., Nemny-Lavy, E., Dimou, I., Economopoulos, A. and Nestel, D. (2008) Mating compatibility and competitiveness of a lab-reared, sterilized, hybrid strain of olive fruit fly Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) (Diptera: Tephritidae), compared with wild flies originated from Israel. In First Meeting of TEAM, 7–8 April 2008, Palma of Mallorca, Spain.Google Scholar
Sacchetti, P., Granschietti, A., Landini, S., Viti, C., Giovannetti, L. and Belcari, A. (2008) Relationships between the olive fly and bacteria. Journal of Applied Entomology 132, 682–689.Google Scholar
Savio, C., Mazzon, L., Martinez-Sanudo, I., Simonato, M., Squartini, A. and Girolami, V. (2012) Evidence of two lineages of the symbiont ‘Candidatus Erwinia dacicola’ in Italian populations of Bactrocera oleae (Rossi) based on 16S rRNA gene sequences. International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology 62, 179–187.Google Scholar
Shelly, T. E. and Kennelly, S. (2002) Influence of male diet on male mating success and longevity and female remating in the Mediterranean fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) under laboratory conditions. Florida Entomologist 85, 572–579.Google Scholar
Sivinski, J., Martin, A., Gary, D., Amnon, F., David, H., Kenneth, K. and Peter, L. (2000) Topics in the evolution of sexual behavior in the Tephritidae. In Fruit Flies (Tephritidae): Phylogeny and Evolution of Behavior (edited by Aluja, M. and Norrbom, A. L.). CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.Google Scholar
Toenshoff, E. R., Gruber, D. and Horn, M. (2012) Co-evolution and symbiont replacement shaped the symbiosis between adelgids (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) and their bacterial symbionts. Environmental Microbiology 14, 1284–1295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tsakas, S. C. and Zouros, E. (1980) Genetic-differences among natural and laboratory-reared populations of the olive fruit-fly Dacus oleae (Diptera, Tephritidae). Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 28, 268–276.Google Scholar
Tzanakakis, M., Tsitsipis, J. and Economopoulos, A. (1968) Frequency of mating in females of the olive fruit fly under laboratory conditions. Journal of Economic Entomology 61, 1309–1312.Google Scholar
Zervas, G. A. (1983) Sexual and reproductive maturation in wild and lab cultured olive fruit flies Dacus oleae (Gmelin) (Diptera: Tephritidae), pp. 429–438. In Fruit Flies of Economic Importance (edited by Cavalloro, R.). Balkema, Rotterdam.Google Scholar
Zervas, G. A. and Economopoulos, A. (1982) Mating frequency in caged populations of wild and artificially reared (normal or gamma sterilized) olive fruit flies. Environmental Entomology 11, 17–20.Google Scholar