Effects of Quercetin on Herbivores

Version	Summary	Created by	Modification	Content Size	Created at	Operation
1		Eric W. RIDDICK	+ 1884 word(s)	1884	2021-05-25 11:16:29	\|
2	format correct	Nora Tang	Meta information modification	1884	2021-06-25 02:45:04	\|

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/agriculture11060476

Quercetin is one of the most abundant flavonoids in terrestrial plants and pollen. In living plants, quercetin can function as a secondary metabolite to discourage insect herbivory. Literature on insect-quercetin interactions was searched and data synthesized to test the hypothesis that quercetin can become an effective biocide to reduce herbivory. The USDA, National Agricultural Library, DigiTop Navigator platform was used to search the literature for harmful versus nonharmful effects of quercetin on insect behavior, physiology, and life history parameters. Quercetin effects were evaluated on herbivores in five insect orders. Quercetin was significantly more harmful to Hemiptera, Diptera, and Lepidoptera but significantly more nonharmful to Coleoptera. Harmful and nonharmful effects to Orthoptera were indistinguishable. Quercetin had significantly more harmful (than nonharmful) effects on herbivores when data from the five insect orders were combined. Quercetin concentration (mg/mL) did not significantly affect these results. This study suggests that quercetin could prevent herbivory but field experiments are necessary to substantiate these results.

chemical ecology flavonoids insect-plant interactions

1. Hemiptera (True Bugs)

Four herbivorous hemipterans (three aphid species and one mirid species) were subjects in bioassays with quercetin based on the review of the literature (Table 1). Quercetin had harmful (negative) effects on survival rate of the aphid species Macrosiphum rosae (L.) and Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris, both nymphs and adults. Quercetin also had harmful (negative) effects on development, preoviposition time, and fecundity of A. pisum and fecundity of the aphid Sitobion miscanthi (Takahashi) via innate resistance in wheat ears in a field bioassay. In contrast, quercetin had nonharmful (positive) effects on the mirid Tupiocoris notatus (Distant); nymphs were attracted to quercetin treated leaves in the laboratory.

Table 1. Exemplary research that tested the effects of quercetin on behavior and life history parameters of agriculturally important insect herbivores.

In a summary of this section, quercetin caused 0.857 and 0.143 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects on hemipteran species; the two effects were significantly different (z = 2.672, p = 0.008; n = 7). A concentration of 1 mg/mL or less was sufficient to cause harmful effects on M. rosae, A. pisum, and S. miscanthi, whereas an extremely low quercetin concentration (0.9 × 10⁻⁴ mg) caused nonharmful (positive) effects on T. notatus (Table 1). Quercetin concentrations were variable amongst these studies. Concentration data were not subjected to statistical analysis for this order, only for combined data for all five orders.

Table 1. Exemplary research that tested the effects of quercetin on behavior and life history parameters of agriculturally important insect herbivores.

Category	Bioassay Method	¹ Effects on Behavior and Life History	² Effective Concn.	Reference
Herbivore: Hemiptera; true bugs
Macrosiphum rosae, nymphs and adults (Aphididae)	Treated red rose (Rosa) foliage	Survival (−−)	1 mg/mL	^[1]
Acyrthosiphon pisum, nymphs and adults (Aphididae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−), Pre-oviposition time (−−), Fecundity (−−), Survival (−−)	1–10 mg/mL, 0.1–10 mg/mL, 1–10 mg/mL, 0.01–10 mg/mL	^[2]
Sitobion miscanthi, adults (Aphididae)	Innate resistance in wheat ears in field	Fecundity (−−)	0.199 mg/mL	^[3]
Tupiocoris notatus, nymphs (Miridae)	Treated tobacco (Nicotiana) leaves	Attractancy (++)	0.09 μg	^[4]
Herbivore: Coleoptera; beetles
Callosobruchus chinensis, eggs and adults (Bruchidae)	On filter paper and in plastic jar	Survival (−−), Oviposition (−−)	5.0 mg/mL, 5.0 mg/mL	^[5]
C. chinensis, adults	On glass beads	Oviposition (oo)	0.001–1.0 mg/mL	^[6]
Tribolium castaneum, adults (Tenebrionidae)	On wheat wafer discs	Feeding (−−)	2.0 mg/mL	^[7]
Melolontha melolontha, larvae (Scarabaeidae)	In potted soil, in field	Survival (oo)	20.0 mg/mL	^[8]
Popillia japonica, adults (Scarabaeidae)	In artificial diet	Feeding (++)	30.2 mg/mL	^[9]
P. japonica, adults	In artificial diet	Feeding (++)	0.302–3.02 mg/mL	^[10]
Carpophilus hemipterus, larvae and adults (Nitidulidae)	In artificial diet	Feeding (++)	0.025 mg/mL	^[11]
Leptinotarsa decemlineata, larvae (Chrysomelidae)	In artificial diet plus insecticide	Survival (−−)	0.1 mg/mL	^[12]
Phaedon brassicae, adults (Chrysomelidae)	Treated filter paper	Feeding (−−)	3.02 mg/mL	^[13]
Oulema oryzae, adults (Chrysomelidae)	Treated filter paper	Feeding (−−)	3.02 mg/mL	^[13]
Plagiodera versicolora, adults (Chrysomelidae)	Treated filter paper	Feeding (++)	3.02 mg/mL	^[13]
Altica oleracea, adults (Chrysomelidae)	Treated filter paper	Feeding (+ +)	3.02 mg/mL	^[13]
Altica nipponica, adults	Treated filter paper	Feeding (++)	3.02 mg/mL	^[13]
Anthonomus grandis, larvae and adults (Curculionidae)	In artificial diet	Feeding (oo), Oviposition (oo), Body weight (++)	1–10 mg/mL, 1–10 mg/mL, 6 mg/mL	^[14]
A. grandis, adults	Treated filter paper	Feeding (++)	0.5 mg/mL	^[15]
Epilachna paenulata, larvae (Coccinellidae)	Treated squash (Curcubita) leaves	Feeding (++), Survival (−−)	0.01 μg/cm², 10–100 μg/cm²	^[16]
E. paenulata, larvae	Treated squash (Cucurbita) leaves	Feeding (oo), Body Weight (oo), Survival (oo)	0.1–50.0 μg/cm², 0.1–50.0 μg/cm², 0.1–50.0 μg/cm²	^[16]
Herbivore: Lepidoptera; moths/butterflies
Helicoverpa armigera, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet; leaf-dip toxicity test	Development (−−), Pesticide sensitivity (oo)	0.1% (w/w), 0.1% (w/w)	^[17]
Spodoptera litura, larvae (Noctuidae)	Toxicity test	Development (−−), Survival (−−)	0.005 mg/mL, 0.005 mg/mL	^[18]
Helicoverpa armigera, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−), Survival (−−), Pesticide sensitivity (oo)	16 mg/g, 16 mg/g, 16 mg/g	^[19]
Helicoverpa armigera, larvae (Noctuidae)	Ingested with liquid solution	Development (−−), Survival (−−)	3 mg/g, 3 mg/g	^[20]
Spodoptera frugiperda, larvae (Noctuidae)	Treated foliage (Lettuce)	Feeding (++), Feeding (−−)	0.01 μg/cm², 100 μg/cm²	^[21]
Chilesia rudis, larvae (Arctiidae)	Treated foliage (cultivated Murtilla)	Feeding (++)	0.005 mg/mL	^[22]
Lymantria dispar, larvae (Lymantriidae)(from Quercus forest)	In artificial diet	Survival (−−), Body weight (−−)	2% (w/w), 2% (w/w)	^[23]
Bombyx mori, larvae (Bombycidae)	In artificial diet	Body weight/Weight gain (−−)	0.1% (w/w)	^[24]
Ostrinia nubilalis, larvae (Pyralidae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−) Survival (−−)	1 mg/g	^[25]
Heliothis virescens, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−)	0.25% (w/w)	^[26]
Heliothis virescens, larvae Helicoverpa zea, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet	Body Weight (−−) Feeding (oo)	0.10% (w/w)	^[27]
Pectinophora gossypiella, larvae Heliothis virescens, larvae Helicoverpa zea, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet	Body Weight (−−) Development (−−)	0.10% (w/w), P. gossypiella; 0.10% (w/w), H. virescens; 0.20% (w/w), H. zea	^[28]
Heliothis virescens, larvae Helicoverpa zea, larvae (Noctuidae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−) Survival (−−)	0.20% (w/w), H. virescens; 0.80% (w/w), H. zea	^[29]
Herbivore: Diptera; true flies
Bactrocera cucurbitae, adults (Tephritidae)	On substrate (pumpkin)	Oviposition (−−)	0.125 mg/mL	^[30]
B. cucurbitae, eggs, larvae, and pupae	Dipped in test solution	Development (−−), Development (−−), Development (−−)	3.125 mg/mL, 0.125 mg/mL, 0.005 mg/mL	^[31]
Rhagoletis pomonella, larvae (Tephritidae)	In artificial diet	Development (−−)	1.0 mg/mL	^[32]
Drosophila melanogaster, larvae (Drosophilidae)	In artificial diet	Development (++)	1.75% (w/w)	^[33]
D. melanogaster, adults	In artificial diet	Fecundity (++)	5% (w/w)	^[34]
Lycoriella pleuroti, larvae (Sciaridae)	In artificial culture media	Survival (−−)	0.1–0.3% (w/w)	^[35]
Herbivore: Orthoptera; grasshoppers
Calliptamus abbreviatus, nymphs (Acrididae)	Sprayed on alfalfa foliage, field cages	Development (−−) Survival (−−)	0.10 mg/mL	^[36]
Oedaleus asiaticus, nymphs (Acrididae)	Sprayed on natural host plant foliage, field cages	Development (−−) Survival (−−)	0.10–10 mg/mL	^[37]
Melanoplus sanguinipes, nymphs (Acrididae)	In artificial diet	Body weight (oo) Survival (oo)	0.125–4.0% (w/w)	^[38]

¹ Quercetin had harmful effects (negative (−−)) or non-harmful effects (positive (++) or neutral (oo)) on insects in comparison to control. ² Effective concentration (concn) was the minimum concentration that caused a significant effect on insect behavior, physiology, or a life history parameter.

2. Coleoptera (Beetles)

Fourteen herbivorous coleopteran species were exposed to quercetin in bioassays (Table 1). The species included one bruchid Callosobruchus chinensis L., one tenebrionid Tribolium castaneum Herbst, two scarabaeids Melolontha melolontha (L.) and Popillia japonica Newman, one nitidulid Carpophilus hemipterus (L.), six chrysomelids Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say, Phaedon brassicae Baly, Oulema oryzae Kuwayama, Plagiodera versicolora Laicharting, Altica oleracea (L.), Altica nipponica (Ohno), one curculionid Anthonomus grandis Boheman, and one herbivorous coccinellid Epilachna paenulata (Germar). Quercetin had harmful (negative) effects and nonharmful (neutral and positive) effects on these species. For example, quercetin decreased the survival of C. chinensis eggs, L. decemlineata larvae, and E. paenulata larvae, and reduced feeding by T. castaneum adults, P. brassicae adults, and O. oryzae adults. In contrast, quercetin did not affect the survival of M. melolontha and E. paenulata larvae or feeding behavior by A. grandis and E. paenulata larvae. In other coleopteran species, quercetin increased feeding behavior (Table 1).

In summary, quercetin caused 0.304 and 0.696 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects, respectively, on herbivorous coleopterans (z = 2.652, p = 0.008, n = 23); nonharmful effects were predominant. There was variability in quercetin concentration and positive feeding responses between and within coleopteran species. For example, a concentration of 0.30 mg/mL stimulated feeding by P. japonica adults in one study; but a higher concentration of 30.22 mg/mL stimulated feeding of the same species in another study (Table 1). Quercetin had harmful effects on oviposition by C. chinensis in one study but not in another; quercetin concentration was at least five times greater in the bioassay indicating reduced oviposition than in the one indicating neutral effects. At 1–10 mg/mL, quercetin had nonharmful (neutral) effects on oviposition and feeding behavior by A. grandis in one study, but nonharmful (positive) effects on feeding behavior at a lower concentration, 0.5 mg/mL, in another study.

3. Lepidoptera (Moths/Butterflies)

Ten lepidopteran species, representing five families, were challenged with quercetin in bioassays (Table 1). The noctuids included Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner), Helicoverpa zea (Boddie), Heliothis virescens (F.), Spodoptera litura (F.), Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith), and Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders). One arctiid Chilesia rudis (Butler), one lymantriid Lymantria dispar (L.), one bombycid Bombyx mori (L.), and one pyralid Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) were also challenged with quercetin.

Quercetin had harmful effects on development or body weight, i.e., growth, of noctuid larvae in most studies (Table 1). Effects on feeding behavior were variable, with nonharmful (positive) effects on S. frugiperda at low concentration (0.01 μg/cm²) on treated foliage as well as nonharmful (neutral) effects on H. virescens and H. zea at low concentration (0.10%, w/w) in an artificial diet. Quercetin also had nonharmful (positive) effects on feeding behavior of the arctiid C. rudis at 0.005 mg/mL on treated foliage. Quercetin had harmful effects on development, body weight, or survival of L. dispar, B. mori, and O. nubilalis at a concentration ranging from 0.1–2% (w/w) in an artificial diet (Table 1).

In summary, quercetin caused 0.792 and 0.208 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects on lepidopterans, respectively. A statistical analysis indicated a significant difference between the two effects (z = 4.046, p < 0.001, n = 24); harmful effects were predominant.

4. Diptera (True Flies)

Dipteran species subjected to quercetin in bioassays included two tephritids Rhagoletis pomonella (Walsh) and Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett), one drosophilid Drosophila melanogaster Meigen and one sciarid Lycoriella pleuroti Yang & Zhang. Records indicated harmful (negative) effects of quercetin on B. cucurbitae, R. pomonella, and L. pleuroti after direct physical bodily contact with the compound in test arenas, in an artificial diet or artificial culture media at variable quercetin concentrations. For example, quercetin at 0.05–3.1 mg/mL, in bioassays involving B. cucurbitae, reduced egg hatch rate, pupation, adult emergence, oviposition, and survival rate (Table 1). In two studies, quercetin had nonharmful (positive) effects on development time and fecundity of D. melanogaster larvae and adult females, respectively. Quercetin concentration ranged from 1.7% to 5.0% across these two studies. In summary of this section, quercetin caused 0.75 and 0.25 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects on dipterans, respectively. The statistical analysis indicated a significant difference between the two effects (z = 2.00, p = 0.046, n = 8); harmful effects were more prevalent.

5. Orthoptera (Grasshoppers)

Three acridid species were tested against quercetin in field cage and laboratory bioassays. These species included Calliptamus abbreviatus Ikonn, Oedaleus asiaticus Bey-Bienko, and Melanoplus sanguinipes (F.) (Table 1). Quercetin had harmful (negative) effects on development and survival of C. abbreviatus nymphs at a concentration of 0.10 mg/mL. Quercetin concentrations ranging from 0.10–10 mg/mL significantly reduced growth/development and survival of O. asiaticus nymphs. In contrast, body weight and survival rate of M. sanguinipes nymphs were unaffected by quercetin at a concentration of ranging from 0.125–4.0% (w/w). In summary, quercetin caused 0.67 and 0.33 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects on orthopterans, respectively. A statistical analysis did not indicate a significant difference between the two effects (z = 1.155, p = 0.248, n = 6).

6. Summary of Herbivores

The sections above indicated that quercetin caused more harmful effects to Hemiptera, Lepidoptera, and Diptera but more nonharmful effects to Coleoptera. In concluding the herbivore section, quercetin caused 0.618 and 0.382 proportional harmful and nonharmful effects on herbivores, respectively, across the five insect orders combined. The two effects were significantly different (z = 2.744, p = 0.006, n = 68); harmful effects were predominant. Quercetin concentration (mg/mL) did not significantly influence the observed harmful and nonharmful effects on herbivores, based on pooling of data, when available, across the five insect orders (U = 105.50; p = 0.583; n = 20 for harmful effects; n = 12 for nonharmful effects). Median values with 25% and 75% confidence intervals were 0.56 mg/mL (0.10, 2.76) for harmful effects and 1.00 mg/mL (0.09, 3.02) for nonharmful effects. Specific harmful effects of quercetin on herbivores, of five orders combined, are illustrated in Figure 1. Quercetin frequently affected survival rate and development/growth.

Figure 1. Proportion of specific harmful effects of quercetin on herbivores in five insect orders combined.

References

Gupta, G.; Dharma, K.; Kumar, N.R. Insecticidal effects of aqueous extracts of wild pomegranate peel and seed (Punica granatum L.) against rose aphids, Macrosiphum rosaeformis. J. Appl. Nat. Sci. 2017, 9, 1397–1405.
Goławska, S.; Sprawka, I.; Łukasik, I.; Goławski, A. Are naringenin and quercetin useful chemicals in pest-management strategies? J. Pest Sci. 2014, 87, 173–180.
Li, X.-Q.; Guo, X.-R.; Li, K.-B.; Yin, J.; Cao, Y.-Z. Resistance of wheat varieties (lines) to Sitobion miscanthi (Takahashi) (Aphidoidea: Aphididae). Acta Entomol. Sin. 2006, 49, 963–968.
Roda, A.L.; Oldham, N.J.; Svatos, A.; Baldwin, I.T. Allometric analysis of the induced flavonols on the leaf surface of wild tobacco (Nicotiana attenuata). Phytochemistry 2003, 62, 527–536.
Salunke, B.K.; Kotkar, H.M.; Mendki, P.S.; Upasani, S.M.; Maheshwari, V.L. Efficacy of flavonoids in controlling Callosobruchus chinensis (L.) (Coleoptera: Bruchidae), a post-harvest pest of grain legumes. Crop. Prot. 2005, 24, 888–893.
Matsumoto, H.; Tebayashi, S.; Kuwahara, Y.; Matsuyama, S.; Suzuki, T.; Fujii, K. Identification of taxifolin present in the Azuki bean as an oviposition stimulant of the Azuki bean weevil. J. Pest Sci. 1994, 19, 181–186.
Adeyemi, M.M.; Agbaji, A.S.; Adebote, D.A.; Amupitan, J.O.; Oyewale, A.O. Antifeedant activity of quercetin isolated from the stem bark of Bobgunnia madagascariensis (Desv.) J.H.Kirkbr & Wiersema (Caesalpiniaceae). Aust. J. Basic. Appl. Sci. 2010, 4, 3342–3346.
Skrzecz, I.; Sowińska, A.; Janiszewski, W. Effects of botanical antifeedants on Melolontha melolontha grub feeding on Scots pine roots. Folia For. Pol. Series A 2014, 56, 135–140.
Fulcher, A.F.; Ranney, T.G.; Burton, J.D.; Walgenbach, J.F.; Danehower, D.A. Role of foliar phenolics in host plant resistance of Malus taxa to adult Japanese beetles. Hortscience 1998, 33, 862–865.
Patton, C.A.; Ranney, T.G.; Burton, J.D.; Walgenbach, J.F. Feeding responses of Japanese beetle to naturally occurring metabolites found in rosaceous plants. J. Environ. Hort. 1997, 15, 222–227.
Dowd, P.F. Responses of Carpophilus hemipterus larvae and adults to selected secondary metabolites of maize. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1990, 54, 29–36.
Wang, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Cheng, X.; Liu, S.; Wei, Q.; Scott, I.M. Conifer flavonoid compounds inhibit detoxification enzymes and synergize insecticides. Pest Biochem. Physiol. 2016, 127, 1–7.
Matsuda, K. Feeding stimulation of flavonoids for various leaf beetles (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1978, 13, 228–230.
Maxwell, F.G.; Jenkins, J.N.; Parrott, W.L. Influence of constituents of the cotton plant on feeding, oviposition, and development of the boll weevil. J. Econ. Entomol. 1967, 60, 1294–1297.
Hedin, P.A.; Miles, L.R.; Thompson, A.C.; Minyard, J.P. Constituents of a cotton bud formulation of a boll weevil feeding stimulant mixture. J. Agric. Food. Chem. 1968, 16, 505–513.
Diaz Napal, G.N.; Defagó, M.T.; Valladares, G.R.; Palacios, S.M. Response of Epilachna paenulata to two flavonoids, pinocembrin and quercetin, in a comparative study. J. Chem. Ecol. 2010, 36, 898–904.
Chen, C.; Yan, W.; Wang, S.; Shi, X.; Gao, X.; Han, P.; Zhou, X.; Desneux, N. Uptake of quercetin reduces larval sensitivity to lambda-cyhalothrin in Helicoverpa armigera. J. Pest Sci. 2018, 91, 919–926.
Selin-Rani, S.; Senthil-Nathan, S.; Thanigaivel, A.; Vasantha-Srinivasan, P.; Edwin, E.-S.; Ponsankar, A.; Lija-Escaline, J.; Kalaivani, K.; Abdel-Megeed, A.; Hunter, W.B.; et al. Toxicity and physiological effect of quercetin on generalist herbivore, Spodoptera litura Fab. and a non-target earthworm Eisenia fetida Savigny. Chemosphere 2016, 165, 257–267.
Li, Z.; Guan, X.; Zhang, Q.; Liu, X.; Michaud, J.P. Quercetin interacts with Cry1Ac protein to affect larval growth and survival of Helicoverpa armigera. Pest Manag. Sci. 2016, 72, 1359–1365.
Liu, D.; Yuan, Y.; Li, M.; Qiu, X. Effects of dietary quercetin on performance and cytochrome P450 expression of the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera. Bull Entomol. Res. 2015, 105, 771–777.
Diaz Napal, G.N.; Palacios, S.M. Bioinsecticidal effect of the flavonoids pinocembrin and quercetin against Spodoptera frugiperda. J. Pest Sci. 2015, 88, 629–635.
Chacón-Fuentes, M.; Parra, L.; Rodriguez-Saona, C.; Seguel, I.; Ceballos, R.; Quiroz, A. Domestication in Murtilla (Ugni molinae) reduced defensive flavonol levels but increased resistance against a native herbivorous insect. Environ. Entomol. 2015, 44, 627–637.
Perić-Mataruga, V.; Hackenberger, B.K.; Vlahović, M.; Ilijin, L.; Mrdaković, M. Potential improvement of Lymantria dispar L. management by quercetin. Arch. Biol. Sci. 2014, 66, 1125–1129.
Zhang, Y.-E.; Ma, H.-J.; Feng, D.-D.; Lai, X.-F.; Chen, Z.-M.; Xu, M.-Y.; Yu, Q.-Y.; Zhang, Z. Induction of detoxification enzymes by quercetin in the silkworm. J. Econ. Entomol. 2012, 105, 1024–1042.
Abou-Zaid, M.M.; Beninger, C.W.; Arnason, J.T.; Nozzolillo, C. The effect of one flavone, two catechins and four flavonols on mortality and growth of the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis Hubner). Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1993, 21, 415–420.
Gould, F. Stress specificity of maternal effects in Heliothis virescens (Boddie) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) larvae. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Canada 1988, 146, 191–197.
Shaver, T.N.; Lukefahr, M.J.; Garcia, J. Food utilisation, ingestion, and growth of larvae of the bollworm and tobacco budworm on diets containing gossypol. J. Econ. Entomol. 1970, 63, 1544–1546.
Shaver, T.N.; Lukefahr, M.J. Effect of flavonoid pigments and gossypol on growth and development of the bollworm, tobacco budworm, and pink bollworm. J. Econ. Entomol. 1969, 62, 643–646.
Lukefahr, M.J.; Martin, D.F. Cotton-plant pigments as a source of resistance to the bollworm and tobacco budworm. J. Econ. Entomol. 1966, 59, 176–179.
Sharma, R.; Sohal, S.K. Oviposition response of melon fruit fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) to different phenolic compounds. J. Biopest. 2016, 9, 46–51.
Sharma, R.; Sohal, S.K. Bioefficacy of quercetin against melon fruit fly. Bull Insectol. 2013, 66, 79–83.
Pree, D.J. Resistance to development of larvae of the apple maggot in crab apples. J. Econ. Entomol. 1977, 70, 611–614.
Saric, A.; Kalafatic, M.; Rusak, G.; Kovacevic, G.; Franjevic, D.; Gutzeit, H.O. Postembryonic development of Drosophila melanogaster Meigen, 1830 under the influence of quercetin. Entomol. News 2007, 118, 235–240.
Schramm, D.D.; Collins, H.E.; Hawley, R.S.; German, J.B. Unaltered meiotic chromosome segregation in Drosophila melanogaster raised on a 5% quercetin diet. Food Chem. Toxicol. 1998, 36, 585–589.
Xu, B.; Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Yuan, F.; Su, N.; Chen, Y.; Wu, Y.; Zhang, Q. Effects of CryIAc and secondary metabolites in Bt transgenic cottonseed on Lycoriella pleuroti Yang et Zhang (Diptera: Sciaridae). Environ. Entomol. 2006, 35, 807–810.
Wang, Y.; Huang, X.; Chang, B.H.; Zhang, Z. Growth performance and enzymatic response of the grasshopper, Calliptamus abbreviatus (Orthoptera: Acrididae), to six plant-derived compounds. J. Insect Sci. 2020, 20, 1–8.
Cui, B.Y.; Huang, X.B.; Li, S.; Hao, K.; Chang, B.H.; Tu, X.B.; Pang, B.P.; Zhang, Z.H. Quercetin affects the growth and development of the grasshopper Oedaleus asiaticus (Orthoptera: Acrididae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2019, 112, 1175–1182.
Westcott, N.D.; Hinks, C.F.; Olfert, O. Dietary effects of secondary plant compounds on nymphs of Melanoplus sanguinipes (Orthoptera: Acrididae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1992, 85, 304–309.

© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Upload a video for this entry

Information

Subjects: Agriculture, Dairy & Animal Science

Contributor MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :

Eric RIDDICK

View Times: 420

Update Date: 25 Jun 2021

Table of Contents

Video Upload Options

Confirm