Next Article in Journal
Hemophilia A Resulting in Severe Hyperesthesia Due to Extraparenchymal Spinal Cord Hemorrhage in a Young Golden Retriever Puppy
Previous Article in Journal
The Barretos Cancer Hospital Animal Facility: Implementation and Results of a Dedicated Platform for Preclinical Oncology Models
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Isolation and Identification of Volatile Substances with Attractive Effects on Wohlfahrtia magnifica from Vagina of Bactrian Camel

1
College of Veterinary Medicine, Inner Mongolia Agricultural University, Key Laboratory of Clinical Diagnosis and Treatment Technology in Animal Disease, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Hohhot 010018, China
2
Alxa Left Banner Bayannorogon Comprehensive Administrative Law Enforcement Bureau, Bayannorogon 750300, China
3
Supply and Marketing Cooperative Union, Ejina Banner, Alxa League, Dalaihub 735400, China
4
Alxa Left Banner Centre of Animal Disease Prevention and Control, Alxa League, Bayanhot 750300, China
5
Comprehensive security and Technology Promotion Center of Dalaihub Town, Ejina Banner, Alxa League 735400, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Vet. Sci. 2022, 9(11), 637; https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9110637
Submission received: 17 October 2022 / Revised: 11 November 2022 / Accepted: 12 November 2022 / Published: 16 November 2022

Abstract

:

Simple Summary

Vaginal myiasis is one of the most serious parasitic diseases in Bactrian camels, and the disease has brought serious economic impacts to local herdsmen. Wohlfahrtia magnifica is the main pathogen causing hemorrhagic trauma and myiasis in the natural openings of humans and animals. The study showed that methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate can all cause an antennae reaction of Wohlfahrtia magnifica. Moreover, except for propyl butyrate, the higher the concentrations of the other two compounds, the stronger the attractivity to the Wohlfahrtia magnifica, and the mixture of them at the ratio of 1:1 can enhance the attractivity. This study laid a foundation for biological control of vaginal myiasis in Bactrian camels.

Abstract

Vaginal myiasis is one of the most serious parasitic diseases in Bactrian camels. At present, there are no reports on biological control measures of the disease. In this paper, the metabolomic analysis of vaginal secretions from susceptible and non-susceptible camels was performed by ACQUITY UPLC H-Class Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph. The results matched in 140 vaginal compounds. Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate and their mixtures were selected for gas chromatography-electroantennography (GC-EAD), electroantennography (EAG), behavioral experiments and trapping experiments of Wohlfahrtia magnifica (W. magnifica). Results showed that the W. magnifica had EAG responses to the three compounds, respectively. The EAG responses of female flies to different concentrations of methylheptenone were significantly different, but to the others had no significant difference, and there was no significant difference in the same compounds between the different sexes. Behavioral and trapping experiments showed that methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol have significant attraction to W. magnifica, but there was no significant difference to propyl butyrate. When methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol were mixed in different proportions, it was found that a mixture at the ratio of 1:1 and 0.5:1 had extremely significant and significant attraction, respectively, to both male and female W. magnifica. The study showed that, except for propyl butyrate, the higher the concentrations of the other two compounds, the stronger the attractivity to the W. magnifica, and a mixture at the ratio of 1:1 could enhance the attractivity to the W. magnifica.

1. Introduction

Bactrian camels are mainly distributed in Asia and surrounding cold desert areas, such as Mongolia, China, Kazakhstan, Russia and so on, and are an important material resource for people’s livelihoods. For a long time, the breeding industry of Bactrian camels has been affected by vaginal myiasis. The incidence of this disease is 20–30%, and the mortality rate is 2%. If the infected animals are not treated with deworming in time, the W. magnifica constantly produces maggots at the focus, the trauma of the body continues to worsen, the reproduction rate of sick camels declines, and the production of meat, milk and villi also declines, all of which cause serious economic impacts to the local herdsmen [1].
Some insects are good for humans, while others can cause serious diseases to humans and animals [2]. W. magnifica belongs to the order Diptera, family Sarcophagidae, genus Wohlfahrtia Brauer, which is widely distributed in Eurasia and other regions [3]. It is the main pathogen causing hemorrhagic trauma and myiasis in the natural openings of humans and animals [4,5]. It includes three metamorphic processes: larva, pupa. and adult. Larva within stage Ⅰ, Ⅱ and Ⅲ parasitize camel vaginas causing vaginal myiasis of Bactrian camels [6].
Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are ubiquitous in insect communication, and are important chemical clues for insects to identify and locate food, find mates or avoid predators [7,8,9]. Smell, that is, the perception of chemicals from the air, is a key process of insect survival [10]. Antennae and maxillary tentacles are the main olfactory organs in insects, and many insects rely on them to find food and mates [11,12,13,14,15]. When the olfactory receptor receives the stimulation of volatile substances, the receptor converts the stimulation into electrical impulses and transmits them to the brain through neurons, thus producing different responses to different stimuli. In nature, insects’ sense of smell is usually stimulated by a mixture of chemical components. Different concentrations and proportions of these components can cause different behavioral responses, and at the same time, the ability to cause behavioral response is also different [16]. Studies have shown that herbivorous insects’ behavioral responses to the hosts’ mixed volatiles often exceed their responses to individual components [17]. With the recognition and accumulation of specific volatile compounds that have an impact on insect behavior, synthetic VOCs have been developed and applied to pest management [18].
Electroantennography (EAG) is a technique established by Schneider to study the olfactory pathway of insects [19]. EAG and gas chromatography-electroantennography (GC-EAD) are effective methods to study the identification and perception of volatile substances and pheromones in insects [20]. In recent years, GC-EAD has been widely used to screen chemical mixtures of plant volatile compounds and insect pheromones [21,22]. For example, by using GC-EAD, compounds that can be perceived through the olfactory receptors of Drosophila melanogaster can be identified, which lays a foundation for the development of new attractants [23].
At present, livestock myiasis caused by flies is mainly dewormed by drugs, and there are few methods for human intervention of flies in the environment. According to the statistics of our research group, in the Mongolian plateau, a female W. magnifica can lay and hatch about 100,000 adult flies in summer. Although pesticide deworming treatment can kill parasitic maggots, this has little impact on the W. magnifica in the environment, so it is difficult to control the disease by pesticide deworming alone. Biological control of pests is commonly used in agriculture and forestry, but rarely reports in the veterinary field. For pest management, it has been reported that, besides the use of pesticides, vector control can also be carried out through trapping experiments [24]. More and more studies have been devoted to the development of new trapping techniques for mosquitoes, including attempts to trap mosquitoes by using bait that attracts mosquitoes [25,26]. In some cases, the use of traps or a great number of recently developed trapping techniques have been proven to be effective and sustainable in reducing vector populations [27,28].
In this study, the vaginal secretions of susceptible and non-susceptible Bactrian camels with vaginal myiasis were identified and analyzed, and volatile substances with attractive effects on W. magnifica were screened, thereby finding a biological control method of vaginal myiasis, which in turn could reduce the contact opportunities between W. magnifica and Bactrian camels and reduce the incidence of the disease.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Liquid Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Vaginal Secretions from Bactrian Camels

The vaginal secretions of Bactrian camels were collected with sterile cotton swabs, where 10 samples, 10 samples, and 6 samples were collected from female camels that recovered after the disease, that were in a period of disease, and that did not suffer from the disease, and were recorded as group1, group2 and group3, respectively. The heads of cotton swabs with samples from each group were placed in a 5 mL centrifuge tube and marked, 1 mL ethyl acetate (Shanghai Maclin Biotechnology Co., LTD, Shanghai, China) was added, and the samples were fully dissolved by continuous oscillations of constant temperature ultrasonator in a water bath for 1 h. The solution was filtered into a sample bottle by inorganic filter and detected by Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography.
Setting of test parameters of AQUITY UPLC H-Class Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph (Waters): ACQUITY UPLC C18 BEH (2.1 mm × 100 mm,1.7 µm, Waters) was selected as the chromatographic column; the column temperature and sample chamber temperature were constant at 40 °C and 10 °C, respectively; mobile phase A was water (0.1% methanoic acid); and mobile B was acetonitrile (0.1% methanoic acid). The test gradient and parameters are shown in the following table (Table 1 and Table 2).

2.2. GC-EAD of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

Methylheptenone (Shanghai Yuanye Biotechnology Co., LTD, Shanghai, China), 1-octen-3-ol (Shanghai Yuanye Biotechnology Co., LTD, Shanghai, China) and propyl butyrate (Shanghai Maclin Biotechnology Co., LTD, Shanghai, China) were prepared into 10−2 µg/µL samples with n-hexane (Shanghai Maclin Biotechnology Co., LTD, Shanghai, China), respectively. The antennae of the W. magnifica were cut off under a microscope, and the two ends of the antennae were connected to the corresponding electrodes using a capillary tube. The 1-day-old and 7-day-old W. magnifica were selected for the experiment. Each sample was repeated three times for male and female, and each antenna was used once.
Gas Chromatography (GC) (Agilent) conditions: the initial temperature was 120 °C, kept for 1 min, and then increased to 280 °C at a rate of 20 °C/min, and kept for 15 min; 5:10 split injection, each injection of 1 µL.

2.3. EAG of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

The three compounds were prepared into 10−4 µg/µL, 10−3 µg/µL, 10−2 µg/µL, 10−1 µg/µL, and 1 µg/µL samples with n-hexane, respectively.
Adult antennae of 5-day-old to 7-day-old W. magnifica were connected to an antenna potentiometer (SYNTECH). We took 10µL of the sample to be tested and dropped it on a 30 mm × 10 mm filter paper and placed it in a clean container. After the solvent was volatilized for 5 min, the antennae were stimulated. N-hexane was used as a blank control, and blank control experiments were conducted for each antenna before and after the test.
The stimulation time of each test was 0.2 s, the stimulation interval was 60 s, the stimulation airflow speed was 300 mL/min, and the continuous airflow was 1000 mL/min. Each sample was repeated six times for male and female. The sequence of EAG stimulation of each sample was blank control→10−4 µg/µL→10−3 µg/µL→10−2 µg/µL→10−1 µg/µL→1 µg/µL→ blank control.
The calculation formula of EAG relative reaction value is as follows:
EAG relative reaction value = (2 × Test the EAG value of the sample) ÷ (EAG value of solvent control before testing sample + EAG value of solvent control after testing sample).
The response data were analyzed and plotted by Graphpad Prism 8.0.1. One-Way ANOVA was used to analyze the EAG response of the same sex to different test samples and the EAG response of different sexes to the same test sample.

2.4. Behavioral Experiment of W. magnifica on Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

The three compounds were prepared into 10−4 µg/µL, 10−3 µg/µL, 10−2 µg/µL, 10−1 µg/µL, and 1 µg/µL samples with n-hexane, respectively.
We selected 5-day-old to 7-day-old W. magnifica for behavioral experiments. Only one W. magnifica was placed into a Y-shaped tube each time, and the test time was 5 min. When it entered more than half of the side arm and remained there for at least 30 s, the results were recorded. If no choice was made within 5 min, the behavioral experiment for the W. magnifica was stopped. A group of 20 females and 20 males were selected, and the tests were repeated three times. N-hexane was used as blank control, and the experiment was carried out at room temperature.
Graphpad Prism was used for the t-test analysis of the results and plotted by Origin PRO.

2.5. Behavioral Experiment of W. magnifica on the Mixture of Methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in Different Proportions

Two compounds were prepared according to the following table (Table 3), and all reagents were prepared 1 h before the experiment.
We selected 5-day-old to 7-day-old W. magnifica for behavioral experiments. Only one W. magnifica was placed into a Y-shaped tube each time, and the test time was 5 min. When it entered more than half of the side arm and remained there for at least 30 s, the results were recorded. If no choice was made within 5 min, the behavior experiment for the W. magnifica was stopped. A group of 20 females and 20 males were selected, and the tests were repeated three times. Distilled water was used as blank control, and the experiment was carried out at room temperature.

2.6. Trapping Experiment of W. magnifica on Different Concentrations of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Their Mixtures in Different Proportions

Concentrations of 10−2 µg/µL, 10−1 µg/µL, and 1µg/µL methylheptenone, concentrations of 10−1 µg/µL and 1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol, and methylheptenone:1-octen-3-ol (1:1, 1:0.5) were selected for the trapping experiment on W. magnifica.
Our previous studies found that the behavioral response of W. magnifica mainly rely on olfactory sensors, so we did not apply light-avoidance treatment in this experiment. We took 2 mL of prepared reagent and put it into the bait basin of a fly catcher. Different concentrations of single products were compared with the same amount of n-hexane, while different proportions of mixtures were compared with the same amount of distilled water. The fly catcher was randomly hung in a fly cage. In this experiment, a hundred males and a hundred females were selected each time, and the experiment was repeated three times. Each experiment lasted for 12 h, and the data were recorded every 2 h.
The experiment data were analyzed and plotted by Graphpad Prism.

3. Results

3.1. Liquid Mass Spectrometry Analysis of Vaginal Secretions from Bactrian Camels

3.1.1. UPLC-QTof/MS BPI Total Ion Chromatogram

UPLC-QTof/MS BPI total ion chromatograms of the three groups of samples were respectively drawn by ACQUITY UPLC H-Class Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph (Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3). The results showed that the second group detected more abundant sample information.

3.1.2. Structure Determination of the Main Components

The raw data were collected by ACQUITY UPLC H-Class Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph; the UNIFI was used for the qualitative analysis. Setting appropriate acquisition parameters and using the overall workflow of UNIFI software were combined with a self-built database of common vaginal compounds for data processing and structure matching. A total of 140 vaginal compounds of Bactrian camels were identified by the software, among which, 9 compounds with a high matching degree were identified (Figure 4).

3.1.3. Multivariate Statistical Analysis-PCA Analysis

A PCA analysis was performed on the test data and a score plot was drawn (Figure 5). The PCA intuitively shows the separation of different groups of samples, that is, the obvious separation trend of groups of samples.

3.1.4. Analysis Results of OPLS-DA

An OPLS discriminant analysis was performed on the test data of each of two groups of samples and an OPLS-DAS plot (“S” shape) was drawn to show the difference between the two groups. The compounds with the most significant difference between the two groups of samples were located on both sides of the “S” shape, which were potential markers with high research value [29].
There are significant differences in the score plots among all groups (Figure 6, Figure 7 and Figure 8), and the S-plot among all groups is shown in Figure 9, Figure 10 and Figure 11 (the green part is the same part; the blue and red parts at both ends are significant differences). The results showed that the contents of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol were significantly increased in group 2 compared with group 1 and group 3, while propyl butyrate was significantly increased in group 3 compared with the other two groups.

3.2. GC-EAD Results of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

The results of GC-EAD showed that female and male W. magnifica at different ages responded to the three compounds (Figure 12, Figure 13, Figure 14, Figure 15, Figure 16 and Figure 17).

3.3. EAG Results of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

3.3.1. EAG Results of Three Compounds in Different Concentrations for Male W. magnifica

There was no significant difference in the EAG relative response value of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate (p > 0.05) (Table 4, Figure 18, Figure 19 and Figure 20).

3.3.2. EAG Results of three Compounds in Different Concentrations for Female W. magnifica

There was no significant difference in the EAG relative response values of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol and propyl butyrate (p > 0.05). The EAG relative response values of 1µg/µL methylheptenone were significantly higher than those of 10−4 µg/µL and 10−3 µg/µL (0.01 < p < 0.05), but the other concentrations were not significant (p > 0.05) (Table 5, Figure 21, Figure 22 and Figure 23).

3.3.3. The Study of Comparative on EAG Responses of Different sexes of W. magnifica to the Same Compound

The results showed that there was no significant difference in the EAG relative reaction value of different sexes to methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol and propyl butyrate (p > 0.05) (Figure 24, Figure 25 and Figure 26).

3.4. Behavioral Experiment of W. magnifica on Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

3.4.1. Behavioral Response of Male W. magnifica to Different Concentrations of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

The experiment results showed that 10−1 µg/µL, 1 µg/µL methylheptenone and 1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had extremely significant attraction to male W. magnifica (p < 0.01). 10−2 µg/µL methylheptenone and 10−1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had significant attraction to them (0.01 < p < 0.05). Concentrations of 10−3 µg/µL, 10−4 µg/µL methylheptenone and 10−2 µg/µL, 10−3 µg/µL, 10−4 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had no attraction to them (p > 0.05). The low concentration of propyl butyrate has no significant attraction to the male W. magnifica, but compared with 10−1 µg/µL and 1 µg/µL propyl butyrate, the control group has significant attraction to them (Figure 27, Figure 28 and Figure 29).

3.4.2. Behavioral Response of Female W. magnifica to Different Concentrations of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Propyl Butyrate

The results showed that 10−2 µg/µL, 10−1 µg/µL, 1µg/µL methylheptenone and 10−1 µg/µL, 1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had extremely significant attraction to female W. magnifica (p < 0.01). A concentration of 10−2 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had significant attraction on them (0.01 < p < 0.05). However, 10−3 µg/µL, 10−4 µg/µL methylheptenone and 10−3 µg/µL, 10−4 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol had no significant attraction to them (p > 0.05). The low concentration of propyl butyrate has no significant attraction to the female W. magnifica, but compared with 10−1 µg/µL and 1 µg/µL propyl butyrate, the control group has significant attraction to them (Figure 30, Figure 31 and Figure 32).

3.4.3. Comparative Study of the Behavioral Response of Different Sexes W. magnifica to the Same Compound

The results showed that 1 µg/µL methylheptenone had extremely significant attraction to female compared with male W. magnifica (p < 0.01). When the concentration was 10−1 µg/µL, it had significant attraction to female W. magnifica (0.01 < p < 0.05). The other concentrations of methylheptenone had no significant attraction to female or male W. magnifica (p > 0.05) (Figure 33).
The results of behavioral experiments of different sexes of W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol showed that when the concentration was 1 µg/µL, the attraction to females was significantly higher than that to males (0.01 < p < 0.05). The other concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol had no significant attraction to female or male W. magnifica (p > 0.05) (Figure 34).
The behavioral experiment of propyl butyrate showed that the attraction of propyl butyrate at five different concentrations were not significant for female and male W. magnifica (p > 0.05) (Figure 35).

3.4.4. Behavioral Experiment of W. magnifica on the Mixture of Methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in Different Proportions

The results showed that methylheptenone:1-octen-3-ol (1:1) had extremely significant attraction to both male and female W. magnifica (p < 0.01). Methylheptenone:1-octen-3-ol (0.5:1) had extremely significant attraction to female W. magnifica (p < 0.01). The other concentrations had no significant attraction to male or female W. magnifica (p > 0.05) (Figure 36).

3.4.5. Trapping Experiment of W. magnifica on Different Concentrations of Methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and Their Mixtures in Different Proportions

The experiment results showed that compared with n-hexane, 1µg/µL methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol had extremely significant attraction to both male and female W. magnifica (p < 0.01). A concentration of 10−1 µg/µL methylheptenone had significant attraction to male W. magnifica (0.01 < p < 0.05), but no significant attraction to females. The other concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol had no significant attraction to male or female W. magnifica (p > 0.05) (Table 6 and Table 7, Figure 37).
The results of trapping W. magnifica with the mixtures of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions showed that compared with distilled water, the mixture of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in the ratio of 1:1 had extremely significant attraction to both male and female W. magnifica (p < 0.01). The ratio of 0.5:1 had significant attraction to both male and female W. magnifica (0.01 < p < 0.05) (Table 8 and Table 9, Figure 38).

4. Discussion

At present, the treatment of vaginal myiasis of Bactrian camels rely on pesticide deworming, but this method can’t eradicate the disease, and would be cause environmental pollution. The results of liquid mass spectrometry showed that methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate were the important components with attractive efficacy to W. magnifica in the vaginal secretions of Bactrian camels.
The GC-EAD and EAG results of W. magnifica to methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate showed that there was a response to the three compounds at different ages of W. magnifical. Behavioral experiments and trapping experiments were carried out on W. magnifica with different concentrations of methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, propyl butyrate, and mixtures of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions, the results showed that, except for propyl butyrate, the higher the concentration of the other two compounds, the more attractive to the W. magnifica, and the 1:1 ratio mixture of these could enhance the attraction to W. magnifical.
A host is indispensable for insect survival. Host volatiles play an important role in mate selection and reproduction for insects [30]. For example, the volatile of cow urine is attractive to Musca autumnalis [31]. Studies showed that lepidopteron insects rely on smell and plant volatiles for host selection, and they can identify and locate their hosts by sensing specific compounds from their hosts [32]. At present, GC-EAD and EAG are mainly used in the research of insects and their host plants and non-host plants.
The main function of GC-EAD is to detect whether there are substances that have relevant reactions to insect antennae from the crude extracts of host volatiles, and then using the separation and discrimination ability of GC to screen out the corresponding substances. EAG mainly reflects the reactions of insects to different compounds, so as to screen out the substances with stronger reactions. The results showed that the three compounds had EAG responses to both male and female W. magnifica, and the response of females was higher than males in general. Studies have found that ®-3-hydroxy-2-hexanone had EAG responses to both male and female Diploschema rotundicolle [33], similar to our results, while other studies have shown that the EAG response of male moths to (Z)-3-hexenol butyrate, (Z)-3-hexene-1-ol, and 3,7-dimethyl-1,3,7-octantriene was significantly higher than that of female moths [34]. The insect species, sex, sensitivity to compounds, and the concentration of compounds affects the EAG response. For example, compared with Apis mellifera, the EAG response of Apis cerana to queen mandibular pheromone is always weaker [35]; 1 µg of compound can cause a higher EAG response of Triatoma dimidiate complex [36]. In addition, the response of antennae to volatiles varies with the time of day because the olfactory response and the pulse-tracking ability of antennae follow the circadian rhythm of insects [37].
In addition to the use of pesticides, using insect pheromones and volatile compounds related to food to trap insect pests has become an effective pest control method. At present, there is no report on biological control methods of W. magnifica, but some studies have found that using human-odor extracts to attract adult female mosquitoes into traps can reduce the survival rate of mosquitoes [38]. Kaidi Cui found that 1-octen-3-ol is attractive to blood-sucking insects, and can be used as an attractant of mosquitoes [39]; in addition, it can inhibit Drosophila melanogaster and Rhynchophorus ferrugineus from ovipositing [40,41]. Many studies have found that mixing host volatiles can change the trapping rate [42]. For example, compared with 1-octen-3-ol alone, mixed use of it with CO2 can improve its trapping rate [43,44]; vanillin and DEET used at the same time can enhance the repellency of DEET to mosquitoes [45]; and a synthetic terpenoid mixture has strong attraction to houseflies [46]. Thus, adding particular combinations of attractants to traps can improve the trapping rate of insects [47]. Many insects detect their specific proportion of key volatiles to find their hosts; therefore, even a few small changes in proportions may increase or decrease the attraction of hosts to insects [48].

5. Conclusions

Our study showed that methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate can cause an antennae reaction of W. magnifica. Different concentrations of methylheptenone, 1-octen-3-ol, and propyl butyrate are attractive to W. magnifica, and the mixture of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol at the ratio of 1:1 can attract more W. magnifica. This experiment laid a foundation for biological control of vaginal myiasis in Bactrian camels.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.E.; methodology, J.X., D.A. and D.E.; software, X.X. and C.W.; validation, J.X., D.A., X.J. and T.H.; formal analysis, J.X., D.A., X.J. and T.H.; investigation, X.X. and C.W.; resources, X.X., C.W., X.J. and T.H.; data curation, D.A.; writing—original draft preparation, J.X.; writing—review and editing, D.E.; visualization, X.X. and C.W.; supervision, X.J. and T.H.; project administration, D.E.; funding acquisition, D.E. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The research was funded by the Inner Mongolia Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 2022MS03044).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Inner Mongolia Agricultural University (No. NND2021016), and strictly followed animal welfare and ethical guidelines.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets during and/or analyzed study available from the corresponding author and can be provided upon request.

Acknowledgments

We thank the Inner Mongolia Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 2022MS03044) and all partners and laboratory members for their kind help.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zhi, L.; Ai, D.; Yong, M.; Bao, H.; Han, B.; Sun, B.; Tu, Y.; Er, D. The effects of genital myiasis on the diversity of the vaginal microbiota in female Bactrian camels. BMC Vet. Res. 2022, 18, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Reisenman, C.E.; Lei, H.; Guerenstein, P.G. Neuroethology of Olfactory-Guided Behavior and Its Potential Application in the Control of Harmful Insects. Front. Physiol. 2016, 7, 271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Li, H.; An, X.; Zhou, J.; Ba, L.; Cha, H.; Bao, H.; Yang, B.; Li, Y.; Er, D. Morphological observation of the Wohlfahrtia magnifica in mongolia plateau. J. Camel Pract. Res. 2020, 27, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Rafinejad, J.; Akbarzadeh, K.; Rassi, Y.; Nozari, J.; Sedaghat, M.M.; Hosseini, M.; Alipour, H.; Ranjbar, A.; Zeinali, D. Traumatic myiasis agents in Iran with introducing of new dominant species, Wohlfahrtia magnifica (Diptera: Sarcophagidae). Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 2014, 4, 451–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Boscarelli, A.; Levi Sandri, G.B. Periungual myiasis caused by Wohlfahrtia magnifica mimicking an ingrown toenail. Transl. Pediatr. 2016, 5, 95–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Wangchao; Li, H.; Oyun, G.; Bao, H.; Yunzhang, L.; Yang, B.; Liu, T.; Tuya; Demtu, E. Morphological and scanning electron microscopic (SEM) studies of the pupae of Wohlfahrtia magnifica. J. Camel Pract. Res. 2020, 27, 17–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Stahr, C.; Seidelmann, K. Individual Pheromone Signature in Males: Prerequisite for Pheromone-Mediated Mate Assessment in the Central American Locust, Schistocerca Piceifrons. J. Chem. Ecol. 2016, 42, 1304–1313. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Zhao, Z.; McBride, C.S. Evolution of olfactory circuits in insects. J. Comp. Physiol. A Neuroethol. Sens. Neural Behav. Physiol. 2020, 206, 353–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Conchou, L.; Lucas, P.; Meslin, C.; Proffit, M.; Staudt, M.; Renou, M. Insect Odorscapes: From Plant Volatiles to Natural Olfactory Scenes. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kepchia, D.; Moliver, S.; Chohan, K.; Phillips, C.; Luetje, C.W. Inhibition of insect olfactory behavior by an airborne antagonist of the insect odorant receptor co-receptor subunit. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0177454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Clark, J.T.; Ray, A. Olfactory Mechanisms for Discovery of Odorants to Reduce Insect-Host Contact. J. Chem. Ecol. 2016, 42, 919–930. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Reisenman, C.E.; Scott, K. Food-derived volatiles enhance consumption in Drosophila melanogaster. J. Exp. Biol. 2019, 222, jeb202762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  13. Nowińska, A.; Brożek, J. Morphological study of the antennal sensilla in Gerromorpha (Insecta: Hemiptera: Heteroptera). Zoomorphology 2017, 136, 327–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Larter, N.K.; Sun, J.S.; Carlson, J.R. Organization and function of Drosophila odorant binding proteins. Elife 2016, 5, e20242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Barrozo, R.B.; Reisenman, C.E.; Guerenstein, P.; Lazzari, C.R.; Lorenzo, M.G. An inside look at the sensory biology of triatomines. J. Insect Physiol. 2017, 97, 3–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Xie, L.; Yang, W.; Liu, H.; Liu, T.; Xie, Y.; Lin, F.; Zhou, G.; Zhou, X.; Wu, K.; Gu, J.; et al. Enhancing attraction of the vector mosquito Aedes albopictus by using a novel synthetic odorant blend. Parasit. Vectors 2019, 12, 382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Webster, B.; Bruce, T.; Pickett, J.; Hardie, J. Volatiles functioning as host cues in a blend become nonhost cues when presented alone to the black bean aphid. Anim. Behav. 2010, 79, 451–457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhou, S.; Jander, G. Molecular ecology of plant volatiles in interactions with insect herbivores. J. Exp. Bot. 2022, 73, 449–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zhao, J.; Li, Z.; Zhao, Z.; Yang, Y.; Yan, S. Electroantennogram reveals a strong correlation between the passion of honeybee and the properties of the volatile. Brain Behav. 2020, 10, e01603. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Li, C.; Cao, J.; Wang, X.; Xu, P.; Wang, X.; Ren, G. Efficacy of an improved method to screen semiochemicals of insect. PeerJ 2021, 9, e11510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Pawlowski, S.P.; Sweeney, J.D.; Hillier, N.K. Electrophysiological Responses of the Beech Leaf-Mining Weevil, Orchestes fagi, to Seasonally-Variant Volatile Organic Compounds Emitted by American Beech, Fagus grandifolia. J. Chem. Ecol. 2020, 46, 935–946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Johnson, S.D.; Sivechurran, J.; Doarsamy, S.; Shuttleworth, A. Dung mimicry: The function of volatile emissions and corolla patterning in fly-pollinated Wurmbea flowers. New Phytol. 2020, 228, 1662–1673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Mas, F.; Manning, L.A.; Singlet, M.; Butler, R.; Mille, C.; Suckling, D.M. Electrophysiological and Behavioral Responses of Queensland Fruit Fly Females to Fruit Odors. J. Chem. Ecol. 2020, 46, 176–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Achee, N.L.; Grieco, J.P.; Vatandoost, H.; Seixas, G.; Pinto, J.; Ching-Ng, L.; Martins, A.J.; Juntarajumnong, W.; Corbel, V.; Gouagna, C.; et al. Alternative strategies for mosquito-borne arbovirus control. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 2019, 13, e0006822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Akhoundi, M.; Jourdain, F.; Chandre, F.; Delaunay, P.; Roiz, D. Effectiveness of a field trap barrier system for controlling Aedes albopictus: A “removal trapping” strategy. Parasit. Vectors 2018, 11, 101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  26. Roiz, D.; Duperier, S.; Roussel, M.; Boussès, P.; Fontenille, D.; Simard, F.; Paupy, C. Trapping the Tiger: Efficacy of the Novel BG-Sentinel 2 With Several Attractants and Carbon Dioxide for Collecting Aedes albopictus (Diptera: Culicidae) in Southern France. J. Med. Entomol. 2016, 53, 460–465. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Degener, C.M.; Eiras, A.E.; Azara, T.M.; Roque, R.A.; Rösner, S.; Codeço, C.T.; Nobre, A.A.; Rocha, E.S.; Kroon, E.G.; Ohly, J.J.; et al. Evaluation of the effectiveness of mass trapping with BG-sentinel traps for dengue vector control: A cluster randomized controlled trial in Manaus, Brazil. J. Med. Entomol. 2014, 51, 408–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Johnson, B.J.; Ritchie, S.A.; Fonseca, D.M. The State of the Art of Lethal Oviposition Trap-Based Mass Interventions for Arboviral Control. Insects 2017, 8, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Lamont, R.F.; Sobel, J.D.; Akins, R.A.; Hassan, S.S.; Chaiworapongsa, T.; Kusanovic, J.P.; Romero, R. The vaginal microbiome: New information about genital tract flora using molecular based techniques. Bjog 2011, 118, 533–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Xu, H.; Turlings, T.C.J. Plant Volatiles as Mate-Finding Cues for Insects. Trends Plant Sci. 2018, 23, 100–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Nordéus, K.; Webster, B.; Söderquist, L.; Båge, R.; Glinwood, R. Cycle-characteristic odour of cow urine can be detected by the female face fly (Musca autumnalis). Reprod. Domest. Anim. 2014, 49, 903–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Tang, X.; Gao, T.; Lu, J.; Hong, D.; Tong, X.; Ren, Y. Relationship between volatile compounds of Picea likiangensis var. linzhiensis cone and host selection of Dioryctria abietella. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2020, 105, e21733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Amorós, M.E.; Lagarde, L.; Carmo, H.D.; Heguaburu, V.; González, A. Pheromone Chemistry of the Citrus Borer, Diploschema rotundicolle (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae). J. Chem. Ecol. 2020, 46, 809–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Magsi, F.H.; Luo, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Li, Z.; Cai, X.; Bian, L.; Chen, Z. Electrophysiological and Behavioral Responses of Dasychira baibarana (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae) to Tea Plant Volatiles. Environ. Entomol. 2021, 50, 589–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Dong, S.; Wen, P.; Zhang, Q.; Li, X.; Tan, K.; Nieh, J. Resisting majesty: Apis cerana, has lower antennal sensitivity and decreased attraction to queen mandibular pheromone than Apis mellifera. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 44640. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  36. May-Concha, I.J.; Guerenstein, P.G.; Malo, E.A.; Catalá, S.; Rojas, J.C. Electroantennogram responses of the Triatoma dimidiata complex to volatiles produced by its exocrine glands. Acta Trop. 2018, 185, 336–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Nagari, M.; Szyszka, P.; Galizia, G.; Bloch, G. Task-Related Phasing of Circadian Rhythms in Antennal Responsiveness to Odorants and Pheromones in Honeybees. J. Biol. Rhythm. 2017, 32, 593–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Dormont, L.; Mulatier, M.; Carrasco, D.; Cohuet, A. Mosquito Attractants. J. Chem. Ecol. 2021, 47, 351–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Cui, K.; Zhang, L.; He, L.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, T.; Mu, W.; Lin, J.; Liu, F. Toxicological effects of the fungal volatile compound 1-octen-3-ol against the red flour beetle, Tribolium castaneum (Herbst). Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2021, 208, 111597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Guarino, S.; Colazza, S.; Peri, E.; Bue, P.L.; Germanà, M.P.; Kuznetsova, T.; Gindin, G.; Soroker, V. Behaviour-modifying compounds for management of the red palm weevil (Rhynchophorus ferrugineus Oliver). Pest Manag. Sci. 2015, 71, 1605–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Wallingford, A.K.; Hesler, S.P.; Cha, D.H.; Loeb, G.M. Behavioral response of spotted-wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii Matsumura, to aversive odors and a potential oviposition deterrent in the field. Pest Manag. Sci. 2016, 72, 701–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Gregg, P.C.; Del Socorro, A.P.; Hawes, A.J.; Binns, M.R. Developing Bisexual Attract-and-Kill for Polyphagous Insects: Ecological Rationale versus Pragmatics. J. Chem. Ecol. 2016, 42, 666–675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Xu, P.; Zhu, F.; Buss, G.K.; Leal, W.S. 1-Octen-3-ol-the attractant that repels. F1000Res 2015, 4, 156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  44. Majeed, S.; Hill, S.R.; Birgersson, G.; Ignell, R. Detection and perception of generic host volatiles by mosquitoes modulate host preference: Context dependence of (R)-1-octen-3-ol. R Soc. Open Sci. 2016, 3, 160467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Corda, G.; Solari, P.; Dettori, M.A.; Fabbri, D.; Delogu, G.; Crnjar, R.; Sollai, G. Association between olfactory sensitivity and behavioral responses of Drosophila suzukii to naturally occurring volatile compounds. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2020, 104, e21669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Sohail, M.; Aqueel, M.A.; Dai, P.; Ellis, J.D. The Larvicidal and Adulticidal Effects of Selected Plant Essential Oil Constituents on Greater Wax Moths. J. Econ. Entomol. 2021, 114, 397–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Tian, J.; Mao, J.; Yu, B.; Fouad, H.; Ga′al, H.; Mao, G.; Mo, J. Laboratory and Field Evaluation of Multiple Compound Attractants to Culex pipiens pallens. J. Med. Entomol. 2018, 55, 787–794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Bian, L.; Cai, X.M.; Luo, Z.X.; Li, Z.Q.; Xin, Z.J.; Chen, Z.M. Design of an Attractant for Empoasca onukii (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) Based on the Volatile Components of Fresh Tea Leaves. J. Econ. Entomol. 2018, 111, 629–636. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 1.
Figure 1. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 1.
Vetsci 09 00637 g001
Figure 2. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 2.
Figure 2. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 2.
Vetsci 09 00637 g002
Figure 3. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 3.
Figure 3. BPI total ion chromatogram of group 3.
Vetsci 09 00637 g003
Figure 4. Structure determination of the major compounds in positive ion mode for Bactrian camels’ vaginal secretion samples.
Figure 4. Structure determination of the major compounds in positive ion mode for Bactrian camels’ vaginal secretion samples.
Vetsci 09 00637 g004
Figure 5. Score plot of PCA.
Figure 5. Score plot of PCA.
Vetsci 09 00637 g005
Figure 6. OPLS-DA score plots between group 1 and group 2.
Figure 6. OPLS-DA score plots between group 1 and group 2.
Vetsci 09 00637 g006
Figure 7. OPLS-DA score plots between group 2 and group 3.
Figure 7. OPLS-DA score plots between group 2 and group 3.
Vetsci 09 00637 g007
Figure 8. OPLS-DA score plots between group 1 and group 3.
Figure 8. OPLS-DA score plots between group 1 and group 3.
Vetsci 09 00637 g008
Figure 9. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 1 and group 3. Note: Different colors indicate different correlations. The same below.
Figure 9. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 1 and group 3. Note: Different colors indicate different correlations. The same below.
Vetsci 09 00637 g009
Figure 10. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 2 and group 3.
Figure 10. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 2 and group 3.
Vetsci 09 00637 g010
Figure 11. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 1 and group 2.
Figure 11. OPLS-DAS-plot diagram between group 1 and group 2.
Vetsci 09 00637 g011
Figure 12. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to methylheptenone. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 12. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to methylheptenone. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g012
Figure 13. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 13. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g013
Figure 14. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to propyl butyrate. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 14. GC-EAD responses of 1-day-old W. magnifica to propyl butyrate. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g014
Figure 15. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to methylheptenone. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 15. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to methylheptenone. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g015
Figure 16. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 16. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g016
Figure 17. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to propyl butyrate. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Figure 17. GC-EAD responses of 7-day-old W. magnifica to propyl butyrate. (A) Male. (B) Female.
Vetsci 09 00637 g017
Figure 18. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of methylheptenone. Note: The same letter indicates no difference (p > 0.05), but different letters indicate significant difference (p < 0.05), so a and b are both indicate no difference, ab indicates significant difference. Different column shapes represent different concentrations of samples. The same below.
Figure 18. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of methylheptenone. Note: The same letter indicates no difference (p > 0.05), but different letters indicate significant difference (p < 0.05), so a and b are both indicate no difference, ab indicates significant difference. Different column shapes represent different concentrations of samples. The same below.
Vetsci 09 00637 g018
Figure 19. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol.
Figure 19. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol.
Vetsci 09 00637 g019
Figure 20. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of propyl butyrate.
Figure 20. EAG responses of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of propyl butyrate.
Vetsci 09 00637 g020
Figure 21. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of methylheptenone.
Figure 21. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of methylheptenone.
Vetsci 09 00637 g021
Figure 22. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol.
Figure 22. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of 1-octen-3-ol.
Vetsci 09 00637 g022
Figure 23. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of propyl butyrate.
Figure 23. EAG responses of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of propyl butyrate.
Vetsci 09 00637 g023
Figure 24. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to methylheptenone.
Figure 24. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to methylheptenone.
Vetsci 09 00637 g024
Figure 25. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol.
Figure 25. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol.
Vetsci 09 00637 g025
Figure 26. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to propyl butyrate.
Figure 26. Comparison of EAG responses of W. magnifica to propyl butyrate.
Vetsci 09 00637 g026
Figure 27. Behavioral responses to methylheptenone in male W. magnifica. Note: ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); *: significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); **: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01); x-axis: sample grouping; y-axis: sample concentration. The same below.
Figure 27. Behavioral responses to methylheptenone in male W. magnifica. Note: ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); *: significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); **: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01); x-axis: sample grouping; y-axis: sample concentration. The same below.
Vetsci 09 00637 g027
Figure 28. Behavioral responses to 1-octen-3-ol in male W. magnifica.
Figure 28. Behavioral responses to 1-octen-3-ol in male W. magnifica.
Vetsci 09 00637 g028
Figure 29. Behavioral responses to propyl butyrate in male W. magnifica.
Figure 29. Behavioral responses to propyl butyrate in male W. magnifica.
Vetsci 09 00637 g029
Figure 30. Behavioral responses to methylheptenone in female W. magnifica.
Figure 30. Behavioral responses to methylheptenone in female W. magnifica.
Vetsci 09 00637 g030
Figure 31. Behavioral responses to 1-octen-3-ol in female W. magnifica.
Figure 31. Behavioral responses to 1-octen-3-ol in female W. magnifica.
Vetsci 09 00637 g031
Figure 32. Behavioral responses to propyl butyrate in female W. magnifica.
Figure 32. Behavioral responses to propyl butyrate in female W. magnifica.
Vetsci 09 00637 g032
Figure 33. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to methylheptenone.
Figure 33. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to methylheptenone.
Vetsci 09 00637 g033
Figure 34. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol.
Figure 34. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to 1-octen-3-ol.
Vetsci 09 00637 g034
Figure 35. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to propyl butyrate.
Figure 35. Comparison of behavioral responses of W. magnifica to propyl butyrate.
Vetsci 09 00637 g035
Figure 36. Behavioral responses of W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions. Note: A: methylheptenone; B: 1-octen-3-ol; ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); ** and ***: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01). The same below.
Figure 36. Behavioral responses of W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions. Note: A: methylheptenone; B: 1-octen-3-ol; ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); ** and ***: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01). The same below.
Vetsci 09 00637 g036
Figure 37. Attractive effects of different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol on W. magnifica. Note: A1: 10−1 µg/µL methylheptenone; A2: 10−2 µg/µL methylheptenone; A3: 1 µg/µL methylheptenone; B1: 10−1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol; B2: 1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol; ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); *: significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); ** and ***: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01). The same below.
Figure 37. Attractive effects of different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol on W. magnifica. Note: A1: 10−1 µg/µL methylheptenone; A2: 10−2 µg/µL methylheptenone; A3: 1 µg/µL methylheptenone; B1: 10−1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol; B2: 1 µg/µL 1-octen-3-ol; ns: no significant difference (p > 0.05); *: significant difference (0.01 < p < 0.05); ** and ***: extremely significant difference (p < 0.01). The same below.
Vetsci 09 00637 g037
Figure 38. Attractive effects of W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Figure 38. Attractive effects of W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Vetsci 09 00637 g038
Table 1. Gradient mobile phase for Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph.
Table 1. Gradient mobile phase for Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatograph.
TimeFlow Rate (mL/min)Mobile Phase A (%)Mobile Phase B (%)
00.67030
120.62080
150.60100
200.67030
Table 2. Mass spectrometry condition.
Table 2. Mass spectrometry condition.
ProjectConditions
Collection quality range50–1200 Da
Sweep time0.1 s
Acquisition modeESI+, MSE
Lock massLeucine enkephalin (LE) 1 ppm (scanning time: 0.3 s; interval: 15 s)
A tube voltage3 KV
Taper hole voltage100 V
Collision energy (eV)Low CE: 6/High CE: 20–50
Ionization source temperature100 °C
Desolvation temperature300 °C
Cone hole gas flow rate100 L/h
Desolvation gas flow rate800 L/h
Date acquisition time20 min
Table 3. The proportion of the mixture.
Table 3. The proportion of the mixture.
ReagentMixing Ratio
Methylheptenone:1-octen-3-ol1:1
1:0.5
0.5:1
Table 4. EAG relative response value of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of three compounds.
Table 4. EAG relative response value of male W. magnifica to different concentrations of three compounds.
Sample Concentration10−4 µg/µL10−3 µg/µL10−2 µg/µL10−1 µg/µL1 µg/µL
methylheptenone1.167 mv1.313 mv1.688 mv1.654 mv1.803 mv
1-octen-3-ol1.143 mv1.240 mv1.396 mv1.362 mv1.382 mv
Propyl butyrate1.092 mv1.204 mv1.417 mv1.573 mv1.521 mv
Table 5. EAG relative response value of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of three compounds.
Table 5. EAG relative response value of female W. magnifica to different concentrations of three compounds.
Sample Concentration10−4 µg/µL10−3 µg/µL10−2 µg/µL10−1 µg/µL1 µg/µL
methylheptenone1.157 mv1.263 mv1.824 mv1.841 mv2.318 mv
1-octen-3-ol1.313 mv1.456 mv1.726 mv1.775 mv1.749 mv
Propyl butyrate1.375 mv1.490 mv1.635 mv1.618 mv1.666 mv
Table 6. Statistical table of the trapping experiment for female W. magnifica with different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol.
Table 6. Statistical table of the trapping experiment for female W. magnifica with different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol.
Time2 h4 h6 h8 h10 h12 h
Concentration of Reagent (µg/µL)Number of Experiments
methylheptenone10−112820303038
22410141820
34612243446
10−212614182022
2022101216
3228161620
114816243444
241426385262
3228161620
1-octen-3-ol10−110410202426
241016243040
32810142430
1141220383848
281628405058
34820283444
n-hexane102661416
22444818
3226101212
Table 7. Statistical table of the trapping for male W. magnifica with different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol.
Table 7. Statistical table of the trapping for male W. magnifica with different concentrations of methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol.
Time2 h4 h6 h8 h10 h12 h
Concentration of Reagent (µg/µL)Number of Experiments
methylheptenone10−11224102846
22612161826
3668182438
10−214610161818
22810121418
30226816
112612243446
221020304462
3488203044
1-octen-3-ol10−11226122022
22610162628
34412202430
11068182838
261020344856
32810243442
n-hexane102681014
24446812
302661218
Table 8. Statistical table of the trapping for female W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Table 8. Statistical table of the trapping for female W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Time2 h4 h6 h8 h10 h12 h
Mixing Ratio of Methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-olNumber of Experiments
1:114412285264
281010263852
326882438
0.5:11488152740
2448162638
381010202842
Distilled water18812202424
2444666
3022688
Table 9. Statistical table of the trapping for male W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Table 9. Statistical table of the trapping for male W. magnifica by mixing methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-ol in different proportions.
Time2 h4 h6 h8 h10 h12 h
Mixing Ratio of Methylheptenone and 1-octen-3-olNumber of Experiments
1:114412203044
261010242852
34616263438
0.5:114816204448
204481832
34810162436
Distilled water1121220202020
2688101414
304461214
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xue, J.; Ai, D.; Xu, X.; Wang, C.; Jiang, X.; Han, T.; Er, D. Isolation and Identification of Volatile Substances with Attractive Effects on Wohlfahrtia magnifica from Vagina of Bactrian Camel. Vet. Sci. 2022, 9, 637. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9110637

AMA Style

Xue J, Ai D, Xu X, Wang C, Jiang X, Han T, Er D. Isolation and Identification of Volatile Substances with Attractive Effects on Wohlfahrtia magnifica from Vagina of Bactrian Camel. Veterinary Sciences. 2022; 9(11):637. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9110637

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xue, Jiaqi, Dongdong Ai, Xiangjun Xu, Changmei Wang, Xinji Jiang, Tana Han, and Demtu Er. 2022. "Isolation and Identification of Volatile Substances with Attractive Effects on Wohlfahrtia magnifica from Vagina of Bactrian Camel" Veterinary Sciences 9, no. 11: 637. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci9110637

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