4.7 Article

Bt rice could provide ecological resistance against nontarget planthoppers

Journal

PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL
Volume 16, Issue 10, Pages 1748-1755

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12911

Keywords

genetically engineered plant; metabolome analysis; host preference; plant-mediated insect interaction; non-Bt refuge; ecological resistance

Funding

  1. National GMO New Variety Breeding Program of PRC [2016ZX08011-001]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Genetically engineered (GE) rice lines expressing Lepidoptera-active insecticidal cry genes from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) have been developed in China. Field surveys indicated that Bt rice harbours fewer rice planthoppers than non-Bt rice although planthoppers are not sensitive to the produced Bt Cry proteins. The mechanisms underlying this phenomenon remain unknown. Here, we show that the low numbers of planthoppers on Bt rice are associated with reduced caterpillar damage. In laboratory and field-cage experiments, the rice planthopper Nilapavata lugens had no feeding preference for undamaged Bt or non-Bt plants but exhibited a strong preference for caterpillar-damaged plants whether Bt or non-Bt. Under open-field conditions, rice planthoppers were more abundant on caterpillar-damaged non-Bt rice than on neighbouring healthy Bt rice. GC-MS analyses showed that caterpillar damage induced the release of rice plant volatiles known to be attractive to planthoppers, and metabolome analyses revealed increased amino acid contents and reduced sterol contents known to benefit planthopper development. That Lepidoptera-resistant Bt rice is less attractive to this important nontarget pest in the field is therefore a first example of ecological resistance of Bt plants to nontarget pests. Our findings suggest that non-Bt rice refuges established for delaying the development of Bt resistance may also act as a trap crop for N.lugens and possibly other planthoppers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available