Next Article in Journal
The Hesperornithiformes: A Review of the Diversity, Distribution, and Ecology of the Earliest Diving Birds
Previous Article in Journal
First Record of Ophidonais serpentina (Müller, 1773) (Oligochaeta: Naididae) in China: The Occurrence or Absence of Needles Are Intraspecific Differences
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Diversity
Volume 14
Issue 4
10.3390/d14040266
diversity-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

The Similarity of Floral Scent Composition in Two Breynia Species Pollinated by the Same Host-Specific Epicephala Moth

by
Daihong Huang
1,2,
Jannathan Mamut
1,2,
Xiaofei Yang
3,
Fuchen Shi
4,* and
Houhun Li
4
1
College of Life Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
2
Ministry of Education Key Laboratory for Western Arid Region Grassland Resources and Ecology, College of Grassland Sciences, Xinjiang Agricultural University, Urumqi 830052, China
3
College of Tea Science, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China
4
College of Life Sciences, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diversity 2022, 14(4), 266; https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040266
Submission received: 1 March 2022 / Revised: 24 March 2022 / Accepted: 28 March 2022 / Published: 31 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Chemical Diversity and Chemical Ecology)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Floral scent has been thought to play a critical role in the obligate pollination–seed consumption mutualism between Breynia (Phyllanthaceae) species and Epicephala moths. The two closely related Breynia species, B. fruticosa and B. Rostrata are jointly pollinated by the same moth species (E. lativalvaris and E. mirivalvata), which has led to an obligate pollination mutualism of ‘two-to-two’ species specificity. However, empirical data on host floral volatiles as chemical cues maintaining the plant−moth specificity are missing. In the present study, 27 volatile compounds were identified from floral scents of the two Breynia species. A total of 25 compounds were shared jointly by the two species, and only one compound, β-humulene, was species specific and exclusively produced by B. fruticosa. The two Breynia species clearly showed no interspecific floral scent profiles within both sexes, especially in male flowers. Male and female flowers of floral scent from these plants exhibited major qualitative differences, and male flowers produced more scent than female flowers. For male flowers of B. fruticosa, there was significant temporal variation in the volatile chemical profiles and total floral scent emission before and after pollination. Interestingly, β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol were present in maximal amounts during pollination, but they rapidly reduced in concentration after pollination. The findings suggest that the similar floral scent profiles of the two Breynia species reflect adaptations to the same pollinator, Epicephala, for their pollination. Sexually dimorphic floral scent between male and female flowers has been selected to provoke pollinator’s active pollination behavior on host flowers. Temporal changes in floral scent of male flowers before and after pollination may have evolved to limit the overexploitation of the ovaries by seed predators, Epicephala moths. We speculate that the two most abundant compounds in the male flowers, β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol, may be two signal compounds to attract Epicephala in a species-specific manner.

1. Introduction

Nursery pollination mutualisms exist between seed predators and their host plants, where seed predators lay eggs within the flowers after pollinating their host plants and, in return, the hosts offer seeds to nourish pollinator larvae. Presently, this is the most specialized case known in insect–plant interactions [1]. Among these mutualisms, the most thoroughly studied examples are the interactions between figs and fig wasps [2], and those between yuccas and yucca moths [3]. In addition, several analogous pollinating seed parasite systems have been documented more recently: Epicephala moths on Phyllanthaceae plants, mainly including Glochidion [4], Phyllanthus [5], and Breynia species [6,7], Chiastocheta flies on globeflower Trollius europaeus [8], and the moth Upiga virescens on the senita cactus Lophocereus schotti [9].
Floral scents have been suggested to be an important signal for mediating chemical communication between flowering plants and their pollinators [10], ranging from antagonistic to mutualistic relationships [11,12,13,14]. In horizontally transmitted, highly specialized mutualisms, these chemical signals are often essential for guiding obligate pollinators to encounter their host plants [15,16]. Recently, several studies have highlighted the importance of specific sensory cues in nursery pollination mutualism. The floral volatiles have been chemically characterized for many host species of figs [17,18,19,20,21,22,23], yucca [24,25,26], and Phyllanthaceae [27,28,29,30], and the host floral scents for the attraction of obligate pollinators have been investigated for fig wasps [18,20,31,32,33,34,35,36], yucca moths [26] and Epicephala moths [27,28]; however, the specific attractants for obligate pollinators have only been chemically identified for Ficus semicordata [35] and B. vitis-idaea [28] in such mutualisms.
Plants of the family Phyllanthaceae are involved in obligate nursery pollination mutualisms with Epicephala moths. Pollination of the Phyllanthaceae species generally depends entirely on species-specific Epicephala pollinators [4,5,6]. At night, the female Epicephala moth actively collects pollen grains on the male flower, transports pollen grains on the female flower with its proboscises, and subsequently lays an egg within the pollinated female flower with its specialized acicular ovipositor. Single Epicephala larvae develop to maturity by consuming all seeds of each developed fruit, whereas a fraction of the fruits is left untouched in favor of plant reproduction [6,37]. Because female Epicephala moths are nocturnally active in pollinating their hosts, they use olfactory information to localize host plants and discriminate hosts from nonhosts [27,28]. To adapt to specific pollinators in these interactions, floral scents exhibit interspecific variation among host species [27,29]. In the Epicephala-pollinated Phyllanthaceae species, the active pollination behavior of their pollinating moths can promote divergence in floral scent between the male and female host flowers, where sexual dimorphism in floral scent may signal pollinator moths to facilitate alternative rewards in both flower sexes [28]. The post-pollination change in floral scent from host plants in this mutualism has led to the evolution of mechanisms to stabilize the interaction by avoiding the overexploitation of pollinated female flowers [30].
Breynia, a monoecious shrubs/trees genus of the family Phyllanthaceae, comprises 35 species mainly distributed in tropical and subtropical regions of Asia, Australia, and the Pacific Islands [38]. Recently, two closely related species, B. fruticosa and B. Rostrata, jointly pollinated by two Epicephala moths (E. lativalvaris and E. mirivalvata) at night, has led to ‘two-to-two’ obligate pollination mutualism [27,29]. Until recently, few studies have investigated floral scents guiding obligate pollinator moths to B. fruticosa and B. Rostrata species. Therefore, the following hypotheses were addressed in this study: (1) to attract the same pollinator, Epicephala, the two Breynia species may have selected a similar floral odor; (2) the two Breynia species are expected to show the sexual dimorphism in floral scents to signal alternative rewards from the two sexes for Epicephala moth; and (3) the changes in floral scent of male flowers of host plants B. fruticosa before, during, and after the pollination stage act as a mechanism to avoid already visited female flowers. To test these hypotheses, we first collected the floral scents of both male and flowers of the two monoecious Breynia species during pollination, and collected the odor bouquets of male flowers of B. fruticosa before pollination and after pollination, using the dynamic headspace adsorption technique. Secondly, we chemically identified the volatile composition using gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC-MS). Finally, we investigated the interspecific variations and intersexual differences in floral scents among the two Breynia species during pollination and tested the changes in the floral scents of male flowers of B. fruticosa before, during, and after pollination with non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) and correspondence analysis (CA). Our study may provide a theoretical basis to further reveal the chemical and ecological mechanisms in obligate pollination mutualisms between Phyllanthaceae plants and Epicephala moths.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plants

The two studied Breynia (Phyllanthaceae) species, B. fruticosa (L.) Hook. f. and B. rostrata Merr., usually grow in tropical and subtropical forests in south China [39]. These two plants are monoecious shrubs or trees with male flowers and female flowers arranged at the base and the apex of a branch. The small, inconspicuous flowers lack petals. B. fruticosa and B. rostrata share similar male floral morphology (Figure 1). Their male flowers are funnel shaped and have fused calyx lobes. With development of male flowers, green and small fused calyx at pre-pollination stage gradually change into green-yellow calyx at pollination stage, when the fused calyx crack into a small opening at the tip, and the three stamens fusing into a column and concealing in the calyx are exposed, then become faint yellow calyx at the post-pollination stage. This unique floral architecture of the male flowers of the two species makes pollen collection by floral visitors other than Epicephala moths very difficult. However, although female flowers of the two species bear free calyx and three styles, two Breynia species show morphological differences in calyx and stigmas (Figure 1): in B. fruticosa, female flowers have radial calyx sepals spreading into a disk and excurved stigmas; in B. rostrata, female flowers have reflex calyx sepals and erect stigmas. Because of their small size and lack of brilliant color, at night Breynia flowers’ visuals may become less important for attracting Epicephala moths to visit. In contrast, flowers of Breynia species are fragrant to the human nose at night, suggesting that floral scent may be the key signal for attracting obligate pollinator Epicephala moths [39].
B. fruticosa and B. rostrata are closely related and sister taxa in terms of phylogeny, and are exclusively and jointly pollinated by the same female moths of the Epicephala species (E. lativalvaris and E. mirivalvata). In this study, the two investigated Breynia species were grown at different study sites and were allopatric.

2.2. Floral Scent Collection

Floral scent was collected using the dynamic headspace adsorption technique from two Breynia species in Xiamen city of Fujian Province from China in October 2013 [29]. A total of 100 male and 300 female flowers per tree were cut from the plants and enclosed separately in polyvinylacetate oven bags for collection. Air was purified by an active charcoal filter (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) and then pumped into the sample bag (entrance flux: 400 mL min−1) with a mini air-pump, through a Teflon tube (VICI Jour Ltd., Schenkon, Switzerland). Volatiles were drawn out of the bag (exit flux: 400 mL min−1) and pulled into the glass cartridge (outer diameter, 6 mm; length, 75 mm) filled with 150 mg of Tenax-TA (mesh 60/80; Sigma-Aldrich) with a mini air-pump, a through Teflon tube, for odor adsorption. Synchronously, an air sample was also collected from an empty bag as a control to check for possible background contaminants from the odor collection system. Scent collection was performed for 5 h at night (from about 19:00 to 23:00) at ambient temperature (25–28 °C). After volatile collection, the filters containing captured flower volatiles were sealed with Parafilm, wrapped with silver paper, and stored at −20 °C until being used for analysis.

2.3. Chemical Analysis of Floral Scent

To analyze the chemical composition of floral scents of the two Breynia species, GC–MS was carried out using an HP 6890 gas chromatograph (Agilent Technologies Inc., California, PA, USA), equipped with an HP-5MS capillary column (30 m × 0.25 mm; film thickness, 250 μm; Agilent Technologies Inc., California, PA, USA), and linked to an HP 5975 mass spectrometer (Agilent Technologies Inc., California, PA, USA). Before GC-MS analysis, Tenax-TA filters adsorbing floral scents were eluted with 1.5 mL of hexane into 2 mL brown small glass vials (Agilent Technologies Inc., California, PA, USA), and we added 10 μL, methyl stearate (1 mg mL−1) to each as an internal standard. The eluate was carefully concentrated down to 100 µL under N2 flow. For GC, 2 µL of each sample was injected in split mode (the split ratio was 1:1) with an injector temperature of 250 °C. The solvent delay was set as 1 min to minimize the interference from solvents. Helium was used as the carrier gas at a flow rate of 1.0 mL min−1. The column temperature was programmed to be maintained at 40 °C for 5 min after injection, and then increased at 8 °C min−1 to 200 °C, where it was held for 5 min. For MS, mass spectra were obtained at 70 eV in the electron impact ionization mode, and the ionic source temperature was 230 °C.
For a preliminary identification of the compounds, we compared their mass spectra with those reported in the NIST 08 mass spectral libraries. Further compound identification was confirmed by comparison of retention indices with those reported in the Pherobase (http://www.pherobase.com/, accessed on 1 May 2015) [40] and the NIST Chemistry WebBook (http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/, accessed on 1 May 2015) [41]. Volatile compounds in the samples at higher or similar percentages in controls were considered as contaminants and excluded from our analysis. Their relative amounts were calculated with the peak area normalization method.

2.4. Statistical Analyses

All data are expressed as the mean ± SD. The total floral scent emission was compared between male and female flowers of each Breynia species using unpaired t-tests. One-way ANOVA was used to test the significant differences between floral development stage (at pre-pollination, pollination, and post-pollination stage) from male flowers of B. fruticosa. To compare floral scent composition (the relative proportions of all the compounds) of the different kinds of floral headspace samples, NMDS was performed using Canoco 5.0 for Windows (Microcomputer Power, New York, NY, USA). Proportions of odor compounds were first square-root transformed to better fit a normal distribution. Then, a data matrix of pairwise comparisons among floral samples was calculated based on the Bray–Curtis distance index to visualize the dissimilarity between floral samples. Finally, the Mann–Whitney U-test was used to check for significant differences among samples. Correspondence analysis (CA) was used to explore the relationship between the different floral development stages of the two Breynia species and the composition of their volatile compound blends using SPSS 17.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). All figures were plotted with Graphpad Prism 8.0 (Graphpad Software, San Diego, CA, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Chemical Composition of Floral Scent

The floral scent profiles of male and female flowers of two investigated Breynia species are summarized in Table 1. In total, 27 volatile compounds were identified from two Breynia (B. fruticosa: male flowers at pre-pollination stage, M0f, 10 compounds; male and female flowers at pollination stage, Mf and FMf, 17 and 16 compounds, respectively; male flowers at post-pollination stage M1f, 19 compounds; B. rostrata: male and female at pollination, Mr and FMr, 17 and 15 compounds, respectively). The 27 compounds were assigned to four chemical classes: fatty acid derivatives (11), monoterpenes (3), sesquiterpenes (5), and benzenoid derivatives (8).
At pollination stage, 25 compounds were shared jointly by the two study species; only one compound, β-humulene, which was exclusively produced by B. fruticosa, is species specific. A total of five compounds, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, (Z)-3-hexenyl butyrate, and (Z)- and (E)-β-ocimene, were found in flowers of both species, regardless of sex. More surprisingly, two benzenoid derivatives, β-phenylethyl butyrate (66.79 and 66.99%, respectively) and phenylethyl alcohol (10.37 and 10.13%, respectively) dominated the male flower scent of both B. fruticosa and B. rostrata, and together represented more than 80% of the total volatile signal, whereas the two compounds were absent in the female floral scent of the two species. Female flower scent of the two species (B. fruticosa and B. rostrata) predominantly contained (E)-β-ocimene (34.19 and 21.31%, respectively) and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate (18.79 and 25.70%, respectively), whereas no such dominance was observed in the male floral scent.
The relative quantities of four chemical classes of compounds emitted by the male and female flowers of two species are shown in Figure 2. At pollination stage, the male floral scent of two species contained large quantities of benzenoid compounds, which accounted for 85.25 and 83.29% of the totals, respectively; however, sequiterpenes (53.07%) and fatty acid derivatives (70.37%) dominated, respectively, the female floral scent of the two species. In addition, fatty acid derivatives (82.42%) and sequiterpenes (53.07%) were included, respectively, in the male floral scent of B. fruticosa at pre- and post-pollination stages.

3.2. Interspecific, Intersexual, and Temporal Variation of Floral Scents

The dissimilarity of floral volatile profiles among individual samples was subjected to NMDS analysis. Scatterplots resulting from NMDS are shown in Figure 3. All floral samples were divided into four groups. For each sex, volatile samples of the two Breynia species at the pollination stage were closely spaced on the NMDS scatterplot. In particular, a significant overlap can be seen in male floral scents compared to female floral scents. In addition, the headspace samples of male and female flowers are clearly separated for both Breynia species on the NMDS scatterplot. For male flowers of B. fruticosa, volatile samples of the three developmental stages are evidently distinguished from each other on the NMDS scatterplot. These results suggest that the two Breynia species exhibited no obvious interspecific variation in the volatile chemical proles for each sex. In particular, the male flower showed conservation of floral scent composition for the two Breynia species. However, sexual dimorphism of the volatile chemical profiles was very clear in both B. fruticosa and B. rostrata. Furthermore, there was significant temporal variation in the volatile chemical profiles produced by male flowers of B. fruticosa before and after pollination.
Fifteen compounds, each with >2% mean relative amounts of floral volatile profiles in two Breynia species, were included in the CA (see Table 1). Scatterplots resulting from CA are shown in Figure 4. The CA revealed that the chemistry profile of the two Breynia species was mainly dominated by a few of the main compounds. For example, the male flower scent of the two Breynia species predominantly contained (Z)-methyl jasmonate, phenylacetaldehyde, phenylethyl, phenylethanenitrile, and β-phenylethyl butyrate (compounds 18, 21, 22, 23, and 27); in particular, the two most abundant compounds in male flowers, β-phenylethyl butyrate (compounds 27) and phenylethyl alcohol (compounds 22), were located close to the male flower scent of the two Breynia species in the CA.

3.3. Emission of Floral Scents

The total emissions of floral scents produced by male and female flowers of both Breynia species are shown in Figure 5. For each investigated species, a male flower emitted significantly more scent than a female flower (B. fruticosa: 2.25 ± 0.75 ng h−1 vs. 0.17 ± 0.11 ng h−1, t = 6.307, p < 0.001; B. rostrata: 2.07 ± 0.96 ng h−1 vs. 0.22 ± 0.03 ng h−1, t = 3.97, p < 0.05). In male flowers of B. fruticosa, the amount of floral scent was significantly higher at the pollination stage (2.25 ± 0.75 ng h−1) than at the pre-pollination stage (0.43 ± 0.15 ng h−1) and at the pre-pollination stage (1.04 ± 0.17 ng h−1) (F = 15.28, p < 0.001). The emission of the nine main compounds (>5% mean relative amounts in one or more developmental stages) varied with the developmental stage (Figure 1), especially for β-phenylethyl butyrate (F = 25.62, p < 0.0001) and phenylethyl alcohol (F = 32.63, p < 0.0001). At pre-pollination, the male flower produced neither of these compounds. Until pollination, the release of these two compounds reached the maximum, whereas the two compounds significantly decreased at post-pollination. These results suggest that these Breynia species exhibit obvious quantitative differences in in their sexes’ floral scents. The total emission of floral scents appeared to change with the developmental stage of the male flower of B. fruticosa; in particular, the quantity of emission of β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol changed significantly between before and after pollination.

4. Discussion

Overall, 27 volatile compounds were detected in both male and female flowers of the two monoecious Breynia species investigated in this study. These volatile organic compounds belong to three large chemical classes depending on the different biosynthetic pathways: (1) terpendoids (monoterpenes and sequiterpenes) were synthesized by the mevalonate pathway; (2) fatty acid derivatives were synthesized from fatty acids; and (3) benzene derivatives were synthesized by the shikimate pathway [42]. Almost all identified compounds occur widely in the floral scents of many flowering plants [42]. In particular, the 25 identified compounds have been reported in floral odors of 13 Epicephala moth-pollinated Phyllantheae species [27,28,29,43]. Therefore, the two studied Breynia species are thought to attract the obligate pollinators via general floral compounds in the Breynia–Epicephala mutualisms; however, the physiologically active compounds that exclusively attract host-specific pollinators in these interactions have not been further identified using electroantennographic detection analysis and behavioral testing with authentic chemicals. Interestingly, our findings are similar to scent data from other obligate pollination mutualisms between Phyllantheae species and Epicephala moths, which suggests that these interactions are mediated by the conventional floral volatiles [27,28]. The Breynia species–Epicephala moth associations contrast with the mutualism between F. semicordata and fig wasps, which has been demonstrated to be mediated by a single specific chemical compound (4-methylanisole) through ‘private channels’ to alone maintain the extreme species specificity [35].
In these specialized pollination systems, variation in the floral scent was found for almost all investigated species. This is an important isolation mechanism for closely related sympatric species to maintain the specificity of obligate pollinator attraction [15,44]. In highly species-specific Epicephala–Phyllantheae interactions, the reported floral scent profile of host plants is generally composed of several dominant compounds, rather than a single volatile constituting the attractive signals [27,28,29], and these major volatiles may account for variation in floral scents among species [27,29]. Similarly, our GC-MS analysis revealed that the male floral scent of the two Breynia species at the pollination stage was dominated by two compounds: β-phenylethyl butyrate (66.79 and 66.99%, respectively) and phenylethyl alcohol (10.37 and 10.13%, respectively), which are also known not to be largely emitted by the other sympatric Phyllantheae species studied here [27,28,29]. Conversely, 2-phenylacetonitrile (50.70%) and phenylethyl alcohol (29.66%) were the most abundant compounds in male floral scents of B. vitis-idaea, a close relative of the two investigated Breynia species, and which is also exclusively pollinated by host-specific Epicephala moths [6,28,37]. By comparison, based on dominant compounds from floral scents, the floral scent profile exhibited a significant variation between the two studied Breynia species and B. vitis-idaea. To facilitate host specificity in these mutualisms, strong divergent selection should act on the floral scent profiles among sympatrically occurring species involving pollinating Epicephala moths. Thus, our study confirmed the hypothesis that the chemical blend emitted from B. fruitcosa and B. rostrata is species-specific.
B. fruitcosa and B. rostrata, which are also closely related and sister taxa, share the same two Epicephala pollinators [37]. Our NMDS analysis showed the odor similarity in male flowers of the two investigated Breynia species. Similarly, Glochidion obovatum and G. rubrum, two species pollinated by the same two species of Epicephala moths, also produced similar floral odors [27]. In addition, other two Glochidion species, G. hirsutum and G. zeylanicum, sharing the same Epicephala moth, also had similar compositions of floral scent [29]. The phenomenon illustrated here for two Breynia species also occurred in several other highly species-specific pollination systems. For example, two southern Africa Ficus species, Ficus. natalensis and F. burkei pollinated by the same two fig wasps emitted the similar floral volatile blends [45]. When different plant species are pollinated by the same group of pollinators, they may be expected to have floral volatiles of similar chemical composition [46]. Thus, selection for odor convergence between two Breynia species may be suggested to attract the same pollinator, Epicephala, for their pollination [45]. Imperfect chemical differentiation may facilitate a dynamic reticulate evolution of host–pollinator associations. Zhang et al. found that natural cross-pollination occurs in the two studied Breynia plants [37]. Due to the similar floral scent profiles among the two Breynia species, the Epicephala moth may not distinguish the scent signal of the two hosts, and may also favor natural interspecific hybridization among the two host plants.
The main purpose of insect pollination for the plant is that the pollinator obtains constant floral rewards from the flowers [47]. Generally, in unisexual plants pollinated by insects, both male and female flowers advertise the same floral rewards (e.g., floral nectar) for pollinators; thus, they are jointly selected to produce similar floral signals to ensure conspecific transfer pollen [48]. Conversely, if male and female flowers provide different floral rewards (e.g., pollen and ovule, respectively) for the pollinator, sexually dimorphic floral signals are evolved to guide pollinators to alternative rewards in male and female flowers [49]. Our NMDS revealed clear sexual dimorphism in the floral scent profile of the two monoecious B. fruitcosa and B. rostrata. In addition, these male flowers emitted much higher quantities of volatile compounds compared with female flowers. A similar pattern has been observed in other Epicephala-pollinated Phyllanthaceae [28,29,43]. Recently, the role of sexual dimorphism in floral scent in these mutualisms was elucidated by Okamoto et al. [43]. In Epicephala-pollinated Phyllanthaceae, male flowers emitting more scent can attract more pollinator visits compared with female flowers, and then elicit active pollination behavior. Sexually dimorphic floral scent of male and female flowers can provoke the pollinator’s legitimate altruistic behavior on host flowers, that is, pollen collection on male flowers and pollen deposition and oviposition on female flowers, and simultaneously signal an alternative reward provided by each sex for moths. Therefore, the two monoecious Breynia species studied may be selected to produce different floral scents to induce active pollination behavior from Epicephala moths. It is necessary to further analyze moth behavioral assays on sexual floral scent dimorphism in plant studies.
Floral scent production is a dynamic process. Pollinator attraction at the pollination stage is not just an important function of floral volatile compounds. With pollination, the functions of volatile compounds will change, and the floral scent profile is thus also likely to vary [21]. Our study also revealed that the floral scent produced by male flowers of B. fruitcosa changed both in terms of quantity (the chemical composition of volatile compounds) and quality (the emission of compounds) during their development. The chemical profiles of the floral scent from male flowers of this species exhibited clear differences before, during, and after pollination. Furthermore, the quantity of floral scents emitted in male flowers of this species was significantly higher at the pollination stage than at pre-pollination and post-pollination stages. In the obligate nursery pollination mutualisms, floral odor changes have been observed in several host plant species [21,30,35,50,51,52,53]. For example, Epicephala-pollinated G. rubrum exhibited significant changes in the floral scent of female flowers. The post-pollination change in the floral scent emission of G. rubrum may be optimized to reduce further visits and oviposition by the pollinator moth. A similar post-pollination change in floral scent has been observed in several Ficus species. Although figs produce volatile compounds during their entire developmental period, only the fig odor at the receptive stage is strongly attractive to fig wasps [21,35,54,55]. Therefore, the strongly reduced emission of floral bouquet and significant change in the chemical composition of male flower scents of B. fruitcosa after pollination may also function as post-pollination mechanisms to rapidly decrease pollinator attraction and further reduce flowers visits, thereby limiting the overexploitation of the ovaries by Epicephala moths that are also seed predators [56]. Due to the greater odor emitted by male flowers in Epicephala-pollinated Phyllanthaceae, the moth prefers the scent of male flowers compared to that of female flowers, resulting in pollen-collecting behavior [43]. Therefore, temporal changes in the odor production and composition of male flowers before and after pollination are important for maintaining the stability of the nursery pollination mutualisms between Phyllanthaceae species and Epicephala moths.
In several insect-pollinated plants, post-pollination changes in floral scent usually result from a decrease in the total amount of odor production and changes in the relative amounts of the main scent’s compounds [21,35,51,54,57,58]. For example, the main compound, 4-methylanisole, is strongly predominant (94–98%) among the volatile compounds produced by F. semicordata during pollination, whereas it disappears totally after pollination. Further bioassays showed 4-methylanisole is the main signal compound in the floral scent of F. semicordata, which attracts its obligate wasps to the host figs [35]. As shown in this study, two benzenoid compounds, β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol, were not produced in male flowers at the pre-pollination stage. Interestingly, these two compounds were present in maximal amounts (66.79 and 10.13%, respectively) at pollination stage, but they rapidly reduced in concentration at the post-pollination stage. Thus, it is speculated that the two most abundant compounds, β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol, produced by the male flowers of B. fruitcosa, may be two signal compounds that attract species-specific Epicephala. A combination of electrophysiological screening and behavioral experiments on these two active compounds should be carried out. Thus far, the identification of attractants mediating Breynia–Epicephala obligate pollination mutualisms has only been documented in B. vitis-idaea species. A blend of 2-phenylethyl alcohol and 2-phenylacetonitrile as attractants constituted the attractive signals for the obligate pollinator in B. vitis-idaea–Epicephala interaction [28].

5. Conclusions

Our results showed that the two Breynia species had no clear interspecific variation in floral scent profiles within both sexes, especially in male flowers. Both species exhibited obvious qualitative intersexual differences in floral scent profiles: male flowers produced more scent than female flowers. Both volatile chemical profiles and the total emission of floral scents from male flowers of B. fruticosa significantly changed between before and after pollination. Interestingly, β-phenylethyl butyrate and phenylethyl alcohol were present in maximal amounts during pollination, but they rapidly reduced in concentration after pollination. Thus, our findings suggest that the volatile similarity of floral scent among the two Breynia species reflects adaptations to the same pollinator, Epicephala. The sexually dimorphic floral scent of male and female flowers has been selected to provoke pollinators’ active pollination for both host flowers. Temporal changes in the floral scent of male flowers before and after pollination may have evolved to limit the overexploitation of the ovaries by seed predators, Epicephala moths. In summary, we speculate that the two most abundant compounds produced by the male flowers from both species may be potential signal compounds that attract species-specific Epicephala moths. Floral scent has been thought to play a key role in the obligate pollination mutualism between two Breynia species and two Epicephala moths (‘two-to-two’). Our study provides a theoretical basis to further reveal the chemical and ecological mechanisms in obligate pollination mutualisms between Phyllantheae plants and Epicephala moths.

Author Contributions

D.H., F.S. and H.L. conceived and designed the experiments; D.H. and X.Y. performed fieldwork and collected samples. D.H. and F.S. analyzed the samples in the laboratory; D.H. and J.M. analyzed the data; D.H., J.M. and F.S. wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was financially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31760139, 30930014) and Tianshan Youth Program of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region (2019Q019).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Zongbo Li for technical help in scent collection and GC-MS analysis. We also are grateful to Zhibo Wang, Zhenguo Zhang, and Guoping Chen for dedicated assistance in the field work. Special thanks are given to Peng Wang for drawing the structure of volatile compounds.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Dufay, M.; Anstett, M.C. Conflicts between plants and pollinators that reproduce within inflorescences, evolutionary variations on a theme. Oikos 2003, 100, 3–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Weiblen, G.D. How to be a fig wasp. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2002, 47, 299–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Pellmyr, O. Yuccas, yucca moths, and coevolution, a review. Ann. Mo. Bot. Gard. 2003, 90, 35–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kato, M.; Takimura, A.; Kawakita, A. An obligate pollination mutualism and reciprocal diversification in the tree genus Glochidion (Euphorbiaceae). Proc. Biol. Sci. 2003, 100, 5264–5267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  5. Kawakita, A.; Kato, M. Evolution of obligate pollination mutualism in New Caledonian Phyllanthus (Euphorbiaceae). Am. J. Bot. 2004, 91, 410–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kawakita, A.; Kato, M. Obligate pollination mutualism in Breynia (Phyllanthaceae), further documentation of pollination mutualism involving Epicephala moth (Gracillariidae). Am. J. Bot. 2004, 91, 1319–1325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhang, J.; Hu, B.B.; Wang, S.X.; Li, H.H. Six new species of the genus Epicephala Meyrick, 1880 (Lepidoptera, Gracillariidae) associated with Euphorbiaceae plants. Zootaxa 2012, 3275, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Pellmyr, O.; Thien, L.B. Insect reproduction and floral fragrances: Keys to the evolution of the angiosperms? Taxon 1986, 35, 76–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Fleming, T.H.; Holland, J.N. The evolution of obligate pollination mutualisms: Senita cactus and senita moth. Oecologia 1998, 114, 368–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  10. Raguso, R.A. Wake up and smell the roses, the ecology and evolution of floral scent. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 2008, 39, 549–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Andrews, E.S.; Theis, N.; Adler, L.S. Pollinator and her-bivore attraction to cucurbita floral volatiles. J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1682–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Milet-Pinheiro, P.; Silva, J.B.F.; Navarro, D.M.; Machado, I.C.; Gerlach, G. Notes on pollination ecology and floral scent chemistry of the rare neotropical orchid Catasetum galeritum Rchb.f. Plant Spec. Biol. 2018, 33, 158–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Theis, N.; Lerdau, M.; Raguso, R.A. The challenge of attracting pollinators while evading floral herbivores: Patterns of fragrance emission in Cirsium arvense and Cirsium repandum (Asteraceae). Int. J. Plant Sci. 2007, 168, 587–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Willmer, P.G.; Nuttman, C.V.; Raine, N.E.; Stone, G.N.; Pattrick, J.G.; Henson, K.; Stillman, P.; Mcllroy, L.; Potts, S.G.; Knudsen, J.T. Floral volatiles controllingant behaviour. Funct. Ecol. 2009, 23, 888–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hossaert-McKey, M.; Soler, C.; Schatz, B.; Proffit, M. Floral scents, their role in nursery pollination mutualisms. Chemoecology 2010, 20, 75–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dufaÿ, M.; Hossaert-McKey, M.; Anstett, M.C. When leavesact like flowers: How dwarf palms attract their pollinators. Ecol. Lett. 2003, 6, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Grison, L.; Edwards, A.A.; Hossaert-McKey, M. Interspecies variation in floral fragrances emitted by tropical Ficus species. Phytochemistry 1999, 52, 1293–1299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Song, Q.S.; Yang, D.R.; Zhang, G.M.; Yang, C.R. Volatiles from Ficus hispida and their attractiveness to fig wasps. J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 1929–1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Grison-Pige, L.; Hossaert-McKey, M.; Greeff, J.M.; Bessiere, J.M. Fig volatile compounds—A first comparative study. Phytochemistry 2002, 61, 61–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Proffit, M.; Chen, C.; Soler, C.; Bessiere, J.M.; Schatz, B.; Hossaert-McKey, M. Can chemical signals responsible for mutualistic partner encounter promote the specific exploitation of nursery pollination mutualisms? The case of figs and fig wasps. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2009, 131, 46–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Proffit, M.; Schatz, B.; Bessiere, J.M. Signalling receptivity, comparison of the emission of volatile compounds by figs of Ficus hispida before, during and after the phase of receptivity to pollinators. Symbiosis 2008, 45, 15–24. [Google Scholar]
  22. Gu, D.; Peng, Y.; Yang, D. Convergence in host recognition behavior between obligate pollinating fig wasps and non-pollinating fig wasps. Biodivers. Sci. 2012, 20, 324–329. [Google Scholar]
  23. Okamoto, T.; Su, Z.H. Chemical analysis of floral scents in sympatric Ficus species: Highlighting different compositions of floral scents in morphologically and phylogenetically close species. Plant Syst. Evol. 2021, 307, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Svensson, G.P.; Hickman, M.O.; Bartram, S.; Boland, W.; Pellmyr, O.; Raguso, R.A. Chemistry and geographic variation of floral scent in Yucca filamentosa (Agavaceae). Am. J. Bot. 2005, 92, 1624–1631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Svensson, G.P.; Pellmyr, O.; Raguso, R.A. Strong conservation of floral scent composition in two allopatric yuccas. J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2657–2665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Svensson, G.P.; Pellmyr, O.; Raguso, R.A. Pollinator attraction to volatiles from virgin and pollinated host flowers in a yucca moth obligate mutualism. Oikos 2011, 120, 1577–1583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Okamoto, T.; Kawakita, A.; Kato, M. Interspecific variation of floral scent composition in Glochidion and its association with host-specific pollinating seed parasite (Epicephala). J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1065–1081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Svensson, G.P.; Okamoto, T.; Kawakita, A.; Goto, R.; Kato, M. Chemical ecology of an obligate pollination mutualism, testing the ‘private channel’ hypothesis in the Breynia-Epicephala association. New Phytol. 2010, 186, 995–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Huang, D.H.; Shi, F.C.; Chai, M.W.; Li, R.L.; Li, H.H. Interspecific and intersexual differences in the chemical composition of floral scent in Glochidion species (Phyllanthaceae) in south China. J. Chem. 2015, 2015, 865694. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Okamoto, T.; Svensson, G.P.; Goto, R.; Kawakita, A.; Kato, M. Nocturnal emission and post-pollination change of floral scent in the leafflower tree, Glochidion rubrum, exclusively pollinated by seed-parasitic leafflower moths. Plant Spec. Biol. 2022, 37, 197–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hossaert-McKey, M.; Gibernau, M.; Frey, J.E. Chemosensory attraction of fig wasps to substances produced by receptive figs. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1994, 70, 185–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ware, A.B.; Compton, S.G. Responses of fig wasps to host plant volatile cues. J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 785–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Gibernau, M.; Hossaert-McKey, M.; Frey, J.; Kjellberg, F. Are olfactory signals sufficient to attract fig pollinators? Ecoscience 1998, 5, 306–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Grison-Pige, L.; Bessiere, J.M.; Hossaert-McKey, M. Specific attraction of fig-pollinating wasps, role of volatile compounds released by tropical figs. J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 283–295. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Chen, C.; Song, Q.S.; Proffit, M.; Bessiere, J.M.; Li, Z.B.; Hossaert-McKey, M. Private channel, a single unusual compound assures specific pollinator attraction in Ficus semicordata. Funct. Ecol. 2009, 23, 941–950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Proffit, M.; Lapeyre, B.; Buatois, B.; Deng, X.; Arnal, P.; Gouzerh, F.; Gar-rasco, D.; Hossaert-McKey, M. Chemical signal is in the blend: Based of plant-pollinator encounter in a highly specialized interaction. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 10071. [Google Scholar]
  37. Zhang, J.; Wang, S.X.; Li, H.H.; Hu, B.B.; Yang, X.F.; Wang, Z.B. Diffuse coevolution between two Epicephala species (Gracillariidae) and two Breynia species (Phyllanthaceae). PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e35071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  38. Govaerts, R.; Fronding, R.G.; Randcliffe-Smith, A. World Checklist and Bibliography of Euphorbiaceae; Royal Botanic Gardens: London, UK, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  39. Li, B.T.; Qiu, H.X.; Ma, J.S.; Zhu, H.; Gilbert, M.G.; Esser, H.J.; Dressler, S.; Hoffmann, P.; Gillespie, L.J.; Maria, V.; et al. Flora of China; Science Press and Missouri Botanical Garden Press: Beijing, China, 2008; Volume 11, (Oxalidaceae through Aceraceae). [Google Scholar]
  40. El-Sayed, A.M. The Pherobase: Database of Insect Pheromones and Semiochemicals. 2008. Available online: http://www.pherobase.com/ (accessed on 1 May 2015).
  41. Linstrom, P.J.; Mallard, W.G. (Eds.) NIST Chemistry WebBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69; National Institute of Standards and Technology: Gaithersburg, MD, USA, 2012. Available online: http://webbook.nist.gov (accessed on 1 May 2015).
  42. Knudsen, J.T.; Eriksson, R.; Gershenzon, J.; Stahl, B. Diversity and distribution of floral scent. Bot. Rev. 2006, 72, 20132280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Okamoto, T.; Kawakita, A.; Goto, R.; Svensson, G.P.; Kato, M. Active pollination favours sexual dimorphism in floral scent. Proc. Biol. Sci. 2013, 280, 22–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Roxane, D.V.; Bertrand, S.; Mathilde, D. Understanding intraspecific variation of floral scent in light of evolutionary ecology. Ann. Bot. 2017, 120, 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  45. Cornille, A.; Underhill, J.G.; Cruaud, A.; Hossaert-McKey, M.; Tolley, K.A.; Kjellberg, F.; van Noort, S.; Proffit, M. Floral volatiles, pollinator sharing and diversification in the fig–wasp mutualism, insights from Ficus natalensis, and its two wasp pollinators (South Africa). Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 2011, 19, 72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Knudsen, J.T.; Lars, T. Floral scent in bat-pollinated plants: A case of convergent evolution. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 1995, 119, 45–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Proctor, M.; Yeo, P.; Lack, A. The Natural History of Pollination; Timber Press: Portland, OR, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
  48. Chittka, L.; Thomson, J.D. Cognitive Ecology of Pollination: Animal Behaviour and Floral Evolution; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  49. Hemborg, A.M.; Bond, W.J. Different rewards in female and male flowers can explain the evolution of sexual dimorphism in plant. Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2005, 85, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Schiestle, F.P.; Ayasse, M.; Paulus, H.F. Variation of floral scent emission and post-pollination changes in individual flowers of Ophrys sphegodes subsp. sphegodes. J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2281–2289. [Google Scholar]
  51. Schiestl, F.P.; Ayasse, M. Post-pollination emission of a repellent compound in a sexually deceptive orchid, a new mechanism for maximizing reproductive success? Oecologia 2001, 126, 531–534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Muhlemann, J.K.; Waelti, M.O.; Widmer, A.; Schiestl, F.P. Post-pollination changes in floral odor in Silene latifolia, adaptive mechanisms for seed-predator avoidance. J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 8, 1855–1860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Horn, K.C.; Holland, J.N. Discrimination among floral resources by an obligately pollinating seed-eating moth, host-marking signals and pollination and florivory cues. Evol. Ecol. Res. 2010, 12, 119–129. [Google Scholar]
  54. Grison-Pigé, J.M.; Bessière, T.C.J.; Turlings, F.; Kjellberg, J.; Roy, M.M.; Hossaert-McKey, M.M. Limited intersex mimicry of floral odour in Ficus carica. Funct. Ecol. 2001, 15, 551–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Gu, D.; Compton, S.G.; Peng, Y.Q.; Yang, D.R. ‘Push’ and ‘pull’ responses by fig wasps to volatiles released by their host figs. Chemoecology 2012, 22, 217–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bouchaib, K.; Marc, G.; Marie-Charlotte, A.; Finn, K.; Martine, H.M. When figs wait for pollinators, the length of fig receptivity. Am. J. Bot. 1995, 82, 992–999. [Google Scholar]
  57. Negre, F.; Kish, C.M.; Boatright, J.; Underwood, B.; Shibuya, K.; Wagner, C.; Clark, D.G.; Dudareva, N. Regulation of methylbenzoate emission after pollination in snapdragon and petunia flowers. Plant Cell 2003, 15, 2992–3006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  58. Theis, N.; Raguso, R.A. The effect of pollination on floral fragrance in thistles. J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2581–2600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Diversity 14 00266 g001 550
Figure 1. Flowers of the two Breynia species in this study: male flowers of B. fruticosa (A) and B. rostrata (B); female flowers of B. fruticosa (C) and B. rostrata (D).
Figure 1. Flowers of the two Breynia species in this study: male flowers of B. fruticosa (A) and B. rostrata (B); female flowers of B. fruticosa (C) and B. rostrata (D).
Diversity 14 00266 g001
Diversity 14 00266 g002 550
Figure 2. Relative quantity (%) of volatile compounds of four chemical classes emitted by the male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Figure 2. Relative quantity (%) of volatile compounds of four chemical classes emitted by the male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Diversity 14 00266 g002
Diversity 14 00266 g003 550
Figure 3. Score plots from nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) of floral scents in male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Figure 3. Score plots from nonmetric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) of floral scents in male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Diversity 14 00266 g003
Diversity 14 00266 g004 550
Figure 4. Score plots from correspondence analysis (CA) of floral scents in male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Figure 4. Score plots from correspondence analysis (CA) of floral scents in male and female flowers of the two Breynia species studied.
Diversity 14 00266 g004
Diversity 14 00266 g005 550
Figure 5. Total emission of scent compounds from male and female flowers of two Breynia species studied: (A) male and female flowers of two Breynia species studied at pollination stage, * and ** indicated respecitively significant p values (p < 0.05) and extremely significant p values (p < 0.01); (B) male flowers of B. fruticosa during different floral development stages; (C) the nine main compounds from male flowers of B. fruticosa during different floral development stages, The different lowercase showed significant p values (p < 0.05).
Figure 5. Total emission of scent compounds from male and female flowers of two Breynia species studied: (A) male and female flowers of two Breynia species studied at pollination stage, * and ** indicated respecitively significant p values (p < 0.05) and extremely significant p values (p < 0.01); (B) male flowers of B. fruticosa during different floral development stages; (C) the nine main compounds from male flowers of B. fruticosa during different floral development stages, The different lowercase showed significant p values (p < 0.05).
Diversity 14 00266 g005
Table
Table 1. Chemical composition of floral scents of both male flowers and female flowers of two Breynia species.
Table 1. Chemical composition of floral scents of both male flowers and female flowers of two Breynia species.
CompoundsRT aB. fruticosaB. rostrata
M0f  dMf  dM1f  dFMf  dMr  dFMr  d
(N = 3)(N = 7)(N = 5)(N = 6)(N = 3)(N = 4)
Fatty acid derivatives
13-Hexenal802– c––2.04 ± 2.46–3.41 ± 2.42
2(E)-2-Hexenal b8542.77 ± 1.01–3.05 ± 1.571.84 ± 2.19–14.86 ± 2.24
3(Z)-3-Hexen-1-ol b85711.73 ± 2.650.51 ± 0.584.07 ± 0.403.56 ± 4.360.36 ± 0.426.09 ± 2.44
4Decane b1000–––5.86 ± 1.13–1.53 ± 1.02
5(Z)-3-Hexenyl acetate b100750.96 ± 5.351.12 ± 0.396.64 ± 0.3318.79 ± 6.060.70 ± 0.7825.70 ± 3.93
6Hexyl acetate10111.51 ± 0.52–––––
7(E)-2-Hexenyl acetate1012–––0.76 ± 0.59–0.57 ± 0.14
83-Hexenyl acetate1015–––0.92 ± 0.57–0.97 ± 0.12
9(Z)-3-Hexenyl butyrate b118513.59 ± 1.643.52 ± 1.1415.95 ± 1.420.97 ± 0.371.03 ± 0.4514.04 ± 2.81
10Hexyl butyrate1192–0.50 ± 0.302.96 ± 0.36–0.12 ± 0.100.49 ± 0.12
11(E)-2-Hexenyl butyrate1195–0.72 ± 0.561.20 ± 0.51–0.06 ± 0.080.68 ± 0.10
Monoterpenes
12(Z)-β-Ocimene1038–0.89 ± 1.001.21 ± 0.850.79 ± 0.500.23 ± 0.310.62 ± 0.08
13(E)-β-Ocimene b 10483.51 ± 0.451.44 ± 0.782.43 ± 0.4634.19 ± 8.420.47 ± 0.2321.31 ± 1.35
14cis-Linaloloxide(furanoid) b1088–––1.62 ± 1.95–8.69 ± 3.22
Sequiterpenes
15β-Caryophyllene b14186.40 ± 1.010.88 ± 0.6713.44 ± 1.8412.44 ± 8.850.01 ± 0.02–
16β-Humulene b14541.42 ± 0.33–6.83 ± 3.644.74 ± 2.60––
17(E,E)-α-Farnesene b15065.36 ± 1.310.88 ± 0.6728.67 ± 4.3410.42 ± 4.660.53 ± 0.51–
18(Z)-Methyl jasmonate b1657–2.66 ± 0.662.50 ± 0.52–11.83 ± 1.29–
19[1.α,2.α,(Z)]-3-oxo-2-(2-pentenyl)-
Cyclopentaneacetic acid, methyl ester		16850.55 ± 0.151.10 ±1.581.63 ± 0.63–0.97 ± 0.14–
Benzenoid dervatives
20Benzaldehyde962–––0.56 ± 0.33–0.59 ± 0.20
21Phenylacetaldehyde b1043–1.44 ± 0.780.59 ± 0.25–5.45 ± 0.10–
22Phenylethyl alcohol b1116–10.37 ± 1.031.67 ± 0.32–10.13 ± 1.28–
23Phenylethanenitrile b1143–5.88 ± 0.811.16 ± 0.66–0.04 ± 0.06–
24Methylsalicylate1190–––0.22 ± 0.30–0.15 ± 0.06
25β-Phenylethy acetate1256–0.25 ± 0.202.25 ± 0.47–0.35 ± 0.22–
26Eugenol1359–0.50 ± 0.981.80 ± 1.26–0.75 ± 0.09–
27β-Phenylethyl butyrate b1447–66.79 ± 2.511.96 ± 0.57–66.99 ± 0.99–
a Retention index. b Compounds were used for correspondence analysis. c Compounds were not found in the scent. d M0, Mf, and M1f represent the male flowers from Breynia fruticosa at pre-pollination, pollination, and post-pollination stage, respectively; FMf represents the female flowers from B. fruticosa at pollination stage; Mr and FMr represent, respectively, the male and female flowers from B. rostrata at pollination stage (the same below).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Huang, D.; Mamut, J.; Yang, X.; Shi, F.; Li, H. The Similarity of Floral Scent Composition in Two Breynia Species Pollinated by the Same Host-Specific Epicephala Moth. Diversity 2022, 14, 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040266

AMA Style

Huang D, Mamut J, Yang X, Shi F, Li H. The Similarity of Floral Scent Composition in Two Breynia Species Pollinated by the Same Host-Specific Epicephala Moth. Diversity. 2022; 14(4):266. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040266

Chicago/Turabian Style

Huang, Daihong, Jannathan Mamut, Xiaofei Yang, Fuchen Shi, and Houhun Li. 2022. "The Similarity of Floral Scent Composition in Two Breynia Species Pollinated by the Same Host-Specific Epicephala Moth" Diversity 14, no. 4: 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040266

APA Style

Huang, D., Mamut, J., Yang, X., Shi, F., & Li, H. (2022). The Similarity of Floral Scent Composition in Two Breynia Species Pollinated by the Same Host-Specific Epicephala Moth. Diversity, 14(4), 266. https://doi.org/10.3390/d14040266

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop