Effects of in Development and Leaf-Cutting Ant Behavior.

Kamilla Otoni Marques Batista, Dayara Vieira Silva, Vitor L Nascimento, Danival José de Souza
Author Information
  1. Kamilla Otoni Marques Batista: Graduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade Federal do Tocantins-UFT, Gurupi 77410-530, Brazil. ORCID
  2. Dayara Vieira Silva: Graduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade Federal do Tocantins-UFT, Gurupi 77410-530, Brazil.
  3. Vitor L Nascimento: Graduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade Federal do Tocantins-UFT, Gurupi 77410-530, Brazil. ORCID
  4. Danival José de Souza: Graduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade Federal do Tocantins-UFT, Gurupi 77410-530, Brazil.

Abstract

Fungal endophytes can protect plants against herbivory and be used to control leaf-cutting ants. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the potential of endophytic colonization of by three filamentous fungal species and their influence on the plant development and foraging behavior of . The study design was completely randomized and comprised a factorial scheme of 4 × 3, three antagonistic fungal species ( sp., , and ) of the leaf-cutting ant, and one control and three inoculation methods (conidial suspension via foliar spray [FS] and soil drench [SD] inoculation, and seedlings inoculated with mycelium [SWM]). The SWM method allowed to colonize all plant organs, and these plants exhibited higher height, leaf number, shoot dry mass, and total dry mass than the ones subjected to the other inoculation methods. The SWM method increased the plant height than the control plants and those inoculated with sp. and . , previously isolated from soil, colonized plants and positively influenced their development, as demonstrated by the SWM method. promoted the increase in height compared with when the FS and SD methods were used (by 19.62% and 18.52%, respectively). Our results reveal that workers preferentially began cutting the leaves from plants not previously colonized by . This behavior can be explained by modifications in the phenotypic traits of the eucalyptus leaves.

Keywords

References

  1. J Basic Microbiol. 2017 Aug;57(8):699-704 [PMID: 28614606]
  2. Sci Prog. 2004;87(Pt 2):79-99 [PMID: 15782772]
  3. Biol Res. 2019 Sep 17;52(1):51 [PMID: 31530279]
  4. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1999 Jul;65(7):2926-33 [PMID: 10388685]
  5. Microb Ecol. 2008 Nov;56(4):604-14 [PMID: 18369523]
  6. J Invertebr Pathol. 2003 Sep;84(1):15-23 [PMID: 13678708]
  7. Plant Dis. 2019 Apr;103(4):677-684 [PMID: 30742552]
  8. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004 Jan;2(1):43-56 [PMID: 15035008]
  9. Pest Manag Sci. 2014 Jan;70(1):14-23 [PMID: 24115496]
  10. Nat Methods. 2012 Jul;9(7):671-5 [PMID: 22930834]
  11. Int Microbiol. 2004 Dec;7(4):249-60 [PMID: 15666245]
  12. New Phytol. 2019 Mar;221(4):2250-2260 [PMID: 30347456]
  13. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2004 Oct 15;239(2):319-23 [PMID: 15476982]
  14. J Invertebr Pathol. 2004 Jan;85(1):46-53 [PMID: 14992860]
  15. New Phytol. 2013 Apr;198(1):241-251 [PMID: 23406415]
  16. Nat Commun. 2018 Jun 7;9(1):2208 [PMID: 29880868]
  17. Bioessays. 2006 Jan;28(1):65-71 [PMID: 16369938]
  18. Microbiol Res. 2020 Nov;240:126552 [PMID: 32659716]
  19. R Soc Open Sci. 2017 Apr 5;4(4):160628 [PMID: 28484603]
  20. Planta. 2006 Nov;224(6):1449-64 [PMID: 16832690]
  21. J Vis Exp. 2013 Apr 11;(74): [PMID: 23603853]
  22. PLoS One. 2016 Jul 14;11(7):e0158974 [PMID: 27415014]
  23. Proc Biol Sci. 2009 Jul 7;276(1666):2419-26 [PMID: 19364739]
  24. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2004 Sep;54(Pt 5):1891-1894 [PMID: 15388759]
  25. Biol Lett. 2011 Feb 23;7(1):30-2 [PMID: 20610420]

Grants

  1. 403708-2013-3/National Council for Scientific and Technological Development
  2. PROAP 2020-2021/Coordenação de Aperfeicoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
  3. Support to publication./Federal University of Tocantins

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0plantscontrolthreeplantinoculationmethodsSWMmethodheightcanherbivoryusedleaf-cuttingstudyendophyticcolonizationfungalspeciesdevelopmentbehaviorantagonisticspsoilinoculateddrymasspreviouslycolonizedleavesFungalendophytesprotectantsaimedevaluatepotentialfilamentousinfluenceforagingdesigncompletelyrandomizedcomprisedfactorialscheme4×3antoneconidialsuspensionviafoliarspray[FS]drench[SD]seedlingsmycelium[SWM]allowedcolonizeorgansexhibitedhigherleafnumbershoottotalonessubjectedincreasedisolatedpositivelyinfluenceddemonstratedpromotedincreasecomparedFSSD1962%1852%respectivelyresultsrevealworkerspreferentiallybegancuttingexplainedmodificationsphenotypictraitseucalyptusEffectsDevelopmentLeaf-CuttingAntBehaviorfungideterrentmicrobialpestmanagementsymbiosis

Similar Articles

Cited By