Cargando…

Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?

Plants have evolved numerous defensive traits that enable them to resist herbivores. In turn, this resistance has selected for herbivores that can cope with defenses by either avoiding, resisting or suppressing them. Several species of herbivorous mites, such as the spider mites Tetranychus urticae...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blaazer, C. Joséphine H., Villacis-Perez, Ernesto A., Chafi, Rachid, Van Leeuwen, Thomas, Kant, Merijn R., Schimmel, Bernardus C. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077234/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30105039
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01057
_version_ 1783344867379773440
author Blaazer, C. Joséphine H.
Villacis-Perez, Ernesto A.
Chafi, Rachid
Van Leeuwen, Thomas
Kant, Merijn R.
Schimmel, Bernardus C. J.
author_facet Blaazer, C. Joséphine H.
Villacis-Perez, Ernesto A.
Chafi, Rachid
Van Leeuwen, Thomas
Kant, Merijn R.
Schimmel, Bernardus C. J.
author_sort Blaazer, C. Joséphine H.
collection PubMed
description Plants have evolved numerous defensive traits that enable them to resist herbivores. In turn, this resistance has selected for herbivores that can cope with defenses by either avoiding, resisting or suppressing them. Several species of herbivorous mites, such as the spider mites Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus evansi, were found to maximize their performance by suppressing inducible plant defenses. At first glimpse it seems obvious why such a trait will be favored by natural selection. However, defense suppression appeared to readily backfire since mites that do so also make their host plant more suitable for competitors and their offspring more attractive for natural enemies. This, together with the fact that spider mites are infamous for their ability to resist (plant) toxins directly, justifies the question as to why traits that allow mites to suppress defenses nonetheless seem to be relatively common? We argue that this trait may facilitate generalist herbivores, like T. urticae, to colonize new host species. While specific detoxification mechanisms may, on average, be suitable only on a narrow range of similar hosts, defense suppression may be more broadly effective, provided it operates by targeting conserved plant signaling components. If so, resistance and suppression may be under frequency-dependent selection and be maintained as a polymorphism in generalist mite populations. In that case, the defense suppression trait may be under rapid positive selection in subpopulations that have recently colonized a new host but may erode in relatively isolated populations in which host-specific detoxification mechanisms emerge. Although there is empirical evidence to support these scenarios, it contradicts the observation that several of the mite species found to suppress plant defenses actually are relatively specialized. We argue that in these cases buffering traits may enable such mites to mitigate the negative side effects of suppression in natural communities and thus shield this trait from natural selection.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6077234
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60772342018-08-13 Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses? Blaazer, C. Joséphine H. Villacis-Perez, Ernesto A. Chafi, Rachid Van Leeuwen, Thomas Kant, Merijn R. Schimmel, Bernardus C. J. Front Plant Sci Plant Science Plants have evolved numerous defensive traits that enable them to resist herbivores. In turn, this resistance has selected for herbivores that can cope with defenses by either avoiding, resisting or suppressing them. Several species of herbivorous mites, such as the spider mites Tetranychus urticae and Tetranychus evansi, were found to maximize their performance by suppressing inducible plant defenses. At first glimpse it seems obvious why such a trait will be favored by natural selection. However, defense suppression appeared to readily backfire since mites that do so also make their host plant more suitable for competitors and their offspring more attractive for natural enemies. This, together with the fact that spider mites are infamous for their ability to resist (plant) toxins directly, justifies the question as to why traits that allow mites to suppress defenses nonetheless seem to be relatively common? We argue that this trait may facilitate generalist herbivores, like T. urticae, to colonize new host species. While specific detoxification mechanisms may, on average, be suitable only on a narrow range of similar hosts, defense suppression may be more broadly effective, provided it operates by targeting conserved plant signaling components. If so, resistance and suppression may be under frequency-dependent selection and be maintained as a polymorphism in generalist mite populations. In that case, the defense suppression trait may be under rapid positive selection in subpopulations that have recently colonized a new host but may erode in relatively isolated populations in which host-specific detoxification mechanisms emerge. Although there is empirical evidence to support these scenarios, it contradicts the observation that several of the mite species found to suppress plant defenses actually are relatively specialized. We argue that in these cases buffering traits may enable such mites to mitigate the negative side effects of suppression in natural communities and thus shield this trait from natural selection. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC6077234/ /pubmed/30105039 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01057 Text en Copyright © 2018 Blaazer, Villacis-Perez, Chafi, Van Leeuwen, Kant and Schimmel. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Plant Science
Blaazer, C. Joséphine H.
Villacis-Perez, Ernesto A.
Chafi, Rachid
Van Leeuwen, Thomas
Kant, Merijn R.
Schimmel, Bernardus C. J.
Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title_full Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title_fullStr Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title_full_unstemmed Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title_short Why Do Herbivorous Mites Suppress Plant Defenses?
title_sort why do herbivorous mites suppress plant defenses?
topic Plant Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6077234/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30105039
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01057
work_keys_str_mv AT blaazercjosephineh whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses
AT villacisperezernestoa whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses
AT chafirachid whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses
AT vanleeuwenthomas whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses
AT kantmerijnr whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses
AT schimmelbernarduscj whydoherbivorousmitessuppressplantdefenses