Contents of all Volumes

Contributors to all Volumes xvii

Preface xxxvii
Introduction xxxix
Editors-in-Chief xliii
Volume Editors xlv

Volume 1 Natural Products Structural Diversity-I Secondary Metabolites:

Organization and Biosynthesis
01 Overview and Introduction 1
Craig A. Townsend, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
02 Unsaturated Fatty Acids 5
Peter H. Buist, Carleton University, ON, Canada
03 Prostaglandin Endoperoxide Synthases: Structure, Function, and Synthesis of Novel Lipid
Signaling Molecules 35
Melissa V. Turman and Lawrence J. Marnett, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine,
Nashville, TN, USA
04 Mycolic Acid/Cyclopropane Fatty Acid/Fatty Acid Biosynthesis and Health Relations 65
David B. Kastrinsky, Nicholas S. McBride, Keriann M. Backus, Jason J. LeBlanc, and
Clifton E. Barry, III, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA
05 Microbial Type III Polyketide Synthases 147
Yohei Katsuyama and Sueharu Horinouchi, The University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
06 Plant Type III PKS 171
Hiroyuki Morita and Ikuro Abe, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Tokyo, Japan
Hiroshi Noguchi, University of Shizuoka, Yada, Shizuoka, Japan
07 Type II PKS 227
Jürgen Rohr, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Christian Hertweck, Leibniz Institute for Natural Product Research and Infection Biology,
HKI, Jena, Germany
08 Structural Enzymology of Polyketide Synthase: The Structure–Sequence–Function Correlation 305
Tyler Paz Korman, Brian Ames, and Shiou-Chuan (Sheryl) Tsai, University of California,
Irvine, CA, USA
09 Fungal Type I Polyketides 347
Russell J. Cox and Thomas J. Simpson, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
10 Type I Modular PKS 385
Alison M. Hill, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
James Staunton, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

v
vi Contents of all Volumes

11 NRPS/PKS Hybrid Enzymes and Their Natural Products 453

Christopher M. Rath, Jamie B. Scaglione, Jeffrey D. Kittendorf, and David H. Sherman,
Life Sciences Institute University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
12 Mevalonate Pathway in Bacteria and Archaea 493
Tomohisa Kuzuyama, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Hisashi Hemmi, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
Shunji Takahashi, RIKEN, Advanced Science Institute, Saitama, Japan
13 Methylerythritol Phosphate Pathway 517
Michel Rohmer, Universite´ de Strasbourg/CNRS, Strasbourg, France
14 Prenyltransferase 557
Hirofumi Kurokawa and Tanetoshi Koyama, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
15 Advances in the Enzymology of Monoterpene Cyclization Reactions 585
Edward M. Davis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
16 Sesquiterpenes 609
Joe Chappell, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Robert M. Coates, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL, USA
17 Diterpenes 643
Tomonobu Toyomasu and Takeshi Sassa, Yamagata University, Tsuruoka, Japan
18 Triterpenes 673
Tetsuo Kushiro and Yutaka Ebizuka, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
19 Bacterial Squalene Cyclase 709
Ikuro Abe, The University of Tokyo, Hongo, Tokyo, Japan
20 Carotenoids 733
Norihiko Misawa, Kirin Holdings Co. Ltd., Nonoichi-machi, Ishikawa, Japan
21 Sterol and Steroid Biosynthesis and Metabolism in Plants and Microorganisms 755
Hubert Schaller, Universite´ de Strasbourg and CNRS, Strasbourg, France
22 Isoprenoid in Actinomycetes 789
Tohru Dairi, Toyama Prefectural University, Toyama, Japan
23 Lignans (Neolignans) and Allyl/Propenyl Phenols: Biogenesis, Structural Biology, and
Biological/Human Health Considerations 815
Daniel G. Vassão, Kye-Won Kim, Laurence B. Davin, and Norman G. Lewis,
Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
24 Plant Phenolics: Phenylpropanoids 929
Shin-ichi Ayabe, Hiroshi Uchiyama, Toshio Aoki, and Tomoyoshi Akashi, Nihon University,
Fujisawa, Japan
25 Alkaloids 977
Sarah E. O’Connor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Volume 2 Natural Products Structural Diversity-II Secondary Metabolites:

Sources, Structures and Chemical Biology
01 Overview and Introduction 1
Bradley S. Moore, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
Phillip Crews, University of California at Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA
02 Terrestrial Plants as a Source of Novel Pharmaceutical Agents 5
Gordon M. Cragg and David J. Newman, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA
David G. I. Kingston, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
 Contents of all Volumes vii

03 Marine Macroalgal Natural Products 41

E. Paige Stout and Julia Kubanek, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
04 Insect Natural Products 67
Matthew Gronquist, SUNY College at Fredonia, Fredonia, NY, USA
Frank C. Schroeder, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
05 Terrestrial Microorganisms – Filamentous Bacteria 109
Sheo B. Singh, Merck Research Laboratories, Rahway, NJ, USA
Olga Genilloud and Fernando Peláez, CIBE, Merck Sharp & Dohme de España, Madrid, Spain
06 The Natural Products Chemistry of Cyanobacteria 141
Kevin Tidgewell, Benjamin R. Clark, and William H. Gerwick, University of California
San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA
07 Myxobacteria – Unique Microbial Secondary Metabolite Factories 189
Silke C.Wenzel and Rolf Müller, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
08 Natural Product Diversity from Marine Fungi 223
Rainer Ebel, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK
09 Bioactive Metabolites from Marine Dinoflagellates 263
Jun’ichi Kobayashi and Takaaki Kubota, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
10 Marine Invertebrates: Sponges 327
Yoichi Nakao, Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan
Nobuhiro Fusetani, Hokkaido University, Hakodate, Japan
11 The Natural Products Chemistry of the Gorgonian Genus Pseudopterogorgia (Octocorallia:
Gorgoniidae) 363
Jeffrey Marrero, Ileana I. Rodrı́guez, and Abimael D. Rodrı́guez, University of Puerto Rico,
San Juan, PR, USA
12 Exploiting Genomics for New Natural Product Discovery in Prokaryotes 429
Christophe Corre and Gregory L. Challis, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
13 Unlocking Environmental DNA Derived Gene Clusters Using a Metagenomics Approach 455
Jeffrey H. Kim, T. Luke Simmons, and Sean F. Brady, The Rockefeller University,
New York, NY, USA
14 The Chemistry of Symbiotic Interactions 475
Jörn Piel, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
15 Natural Peptide Toxins 511
Frank Marı́, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, FL, USA
Jan Tytgat, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
16 Cyanobactins – Ubiquitous Cyanobacterial Ribosomal Peptide Metabolites 539
Mohamed S. Donia and Eric W. Schmidt, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
17 The Role of Synthesis and Biosynthetic Logic 559
Yousong Ding and David H. Sherman, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
18 Missasigned Structures: Case Examples from the Past Decade 581
Taro Amagata, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, CA, USA
19 Natural Products of Therapeutic Importance 623
David J. Newman and Gordon M. Cragg, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA
20 Natural Products as Probes of Selected Targets in Tumor Cell Biology and Hypoxic Signaling 651
Dale G. Nagle and Yu-Dong Zhou, University of Mississippi, University, MS, USA
viii Contents of all Volumes

Volume 3 Development & Modification of Bioactivity

01 Overview and Introduction 1
Rob Verpoorte, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
02 Natural Products as Lead Sources for Drug Development 5
Stefan Wetzel, Hugo Lachance, and Herbert Waldmann, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology,
Dortmund, Germany
03 Topical Chemical Space Relation to Biological Space 47
Anders Backlund, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden
04 The NAPRALERT Database as an Aid for Discovery of Novel Bioactive Compounds 81
James G. Graham and Norman R. Farnsworth, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA
05 Plant Diversity from Brazilian Cerrado and Atlantic Forest as a Tool for Prospecting Potential
Therapeutic Drugs 95
Dulce Helena Siqueira Silva, Ian Castro-Gamboa, and Vanderlan Da Silva Bolzani, São Paulo State
University, Araraquara, São Paulo, Brazil
06 Nature as Source of Medicines; Novel Drugs from Nature; Screening for Antitumor Activity 135
Gordon M. Cragg and David J. Newman, NCI-Frederick, Frederick, MD, USA
07 The Identification of Bioactive Natural Products by High Throughput Screening (HTS) 177
Vicky M. Avery, David Camp, Anthony R. Carroll, Ian D. Jenkins, and Ronald J. Quinn,
Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
08 Natural Products Drug Discovery 205
Giovanni Appendino, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
Gabriele Fontana, Indena S.p.A., Milano, Italy
Federica Pollastro, Università del Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
09 Natural Product-Based Biopesticides for Insect Control 237
Azucena Gonzalez-Coloma, Instituto de Ciencias Agrarias-CCMA, Madrid, Spain
Matı̀as Reina, Carmen E. Diaz, and Braulio M. Fraga, Instituto de Productos Naturales y
Agrobiologia, Tenerife, Spain
10 Natural Products as Sweeteners and Sweetness Modifiers 269
A. Douglas Kinghorn, Young-Won Chin, and Li Pan, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
Zhonghua Jia, Givaudan Flavors Corporation, Cincinnati, OH, USA
11 Chemistry of Cosmetics 317
Masahiro Ota and Mineyuki Yokoyama, Shiseido Co., Ltd., Yokohama, Japan
12 Ethnopharmacology and Drug Discovery 351
Michael Heinrich, University of London, London, UK
13 Chinese Traditional Medicine 383
Min Yang, Sijia Tao, Shuhong Guan, Xiaohui Wu, Pingping Xu, and De-an Guo,
Shanghai Institute of Materia Medica, Shanghai, China
14 Ayurveda in Modern Medicine: Development and Modification of Bioactivity 479
Pulok K. Mukherjee, M. Venkatesh, and Arunava Gantait, Jadavpur University, Kolkata, India
15 Biologically Active Compounds in Food Products and Their Effects on Obesity and Diabetes 509
Renger F. Witkamp, Wageningen University and TNO Quality of Life, Wageningen, The Netherlands
16 Chemistry of Flavonoid-Based Colors in Plants 547
Øyvind M. Andersen and Monica Jordheim, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
17 Production of Pharmaceuticals by Plant Tissue Cultures 615
Toshiya Muranaka, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan, RIKEN Plant Science Center,
Yokohama, Japan
Kazuki Saito, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan, RIKEN Plant Science Center, Yokohama, Japan
 Contents of all Volumes ix

18 Plant Secondary Metabolism Engineering: Methods, Strategies, Advances, and Omics 629
Rafael Zárate, The University of La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain
19 Biotransformation of Monoterpenoids 669
Yoshiaki Noma and Yoshinori Asakawa, Tokushima Bunri University, Yamashiro-cho,
Tokushima, Japan
20 Biotransformation of Sesquiterpenoids 803
Yoshinori Asakawa and Yoshiaki Noma, Tokushima Bunri University, Yamashiro-cho,
Tokushima, Japan
21 Biotransformation of Di- and Triterpenoids, Steroids, and Miscellaneous Synthetic Substrates 893
Yoshinori Asakawa and Yoshiaki Noma, Tokushima Bunri University, Yamashiro-cho,
Tokushima, Japan
22 Beer Flavor 967
Leen C. Verhagen, University of Leiden, Leiden, The Netherlands
23 Chemistry of Tea 999
Ulrich H. Engelhardt, Institut für Lebensmittelchemie, Braunschweig, Germany
24 Chemistry of Cannabis 1033
Arno Hazekamp, Justin T. Fischedick, Mónica Llano Dı́ez, Andrea Lubbe, and
Renee L. Ruhaak, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands
25 Chemistry of Coffee 1085
S. Oestreich-Janzen, CAFEA GmbH, Hamburg, Germany
26 Chemistry of Wine 1119
Véronique Cheynier, Rémi Schneider, Jean-Michel Salmon, and Hélène Fulcrand,
Montpellier Research Centre, Montpellier, France
27 Trees: A Remarkable Biochemical Bounty 1173
Ann M. Patten, Daniel G. Vassão, Michael P. Wolcott, Laurence B. Davin, and
Norman G. Lewis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
28 The Chemistry of Arabidopsis thaliana 1297
M. Soledade, C. Pedras and Qingan Zheng, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Volume 4 Chemical Ecology

01 Overview and Introduction 1
Kenji Mori, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
02 Plant Hormones 9
Isomaro Yamaguchi, Maebashi Institute of Technology, Gunma, Japan
Jerry D. Cohen and Angela H. Culler, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
Marcel Quint, Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry, Halle, Germany
Janet P. Slovin, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA
Masatoshi Nakajima, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Shinjiro Yamaguchi, Hitoshi Sakakibara, and Takeshi Kuroha, RIKEN Plant Science Center,
Kanagawa, Japan
Nobuhiro Hirai, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
Takao Yokota, Teikyo University, Utsunomiya, Japan
Hiroyuki Ohta and Yuichi Kobayashi, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan
Hitoshi Mori and Yoji Sakagami, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
03 Insect Hormones 127
E. David Morgan, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
04 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 153
Wittko Francke, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Stefan Schulz, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
x Contents of all Volumes

05 Pheromones in Vertebrates 225

Peter W. Sorensen and Thomas R. Hoye, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
06 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 263
Masaki Kita, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
Makoto Kitamura and Daisuke Uemura, Keio University, Yokohama, Japan
07 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 283
Sueharu Horinouchi, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Kenji Ueda, Nihon University, Kanagawa, Japan
Jiro Nakayama, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
Tsukasa Ikeda, Utsunomiya University, Tochigi, Japan
08 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 339
Hisakazu Yamane, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Kotaro Konno, National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Maurice Sabelis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Junji Takabayashi, Kyoto University, Otsu, Shiga, Japan
Takeshi Sassa, Yamagata University, Tsuruoka, Japan
Hideaki Oikawa, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
09 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 387
Konrad Dettner, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
10 Toxins of Microorganisms 411
Shohei Sakuda, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Makoto Kimura, RIKEN, Saitama, Japan
11 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 457
Falko P. Drijfhout and E. David Morgan, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
12 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 503
Mary J. Garson, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
13 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 539
Koichi Yoneyama, Utsunomiya University, Utsunomiya, Japan
Masahiro Natsume, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Tokyo, Japan
14 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 563
Keiichi Honda and Hisashi Ômura, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Japan
Masatoshi Hori, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
Yooichi Kainoh, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
15 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 595
Masashi Ishikawa, Yasuhiro Warita, Eisuke Takahisa, and Yasutaka Ohkubo, T. Hasegawa Co.,
Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
16 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 631
Kunisuke Izawa, Yusuke Amino, Masanori Kohmura, Yoichi Ueda, and Motonaka Kuroda,
Ajinomoto Co., Inc., Kawasaki, Japan

Volume 5 Amino Acids, Peptides and Proteins

01 Overview and Introduction 1
John C. Vederas, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
02 Nonprotein L-Amino Acids 5
Sabesan Yoganathan and John C. Vederas, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
03 Novel Enzymes for Biotransformation and Resolution of Alpha-Amino Acids 71
Paul C. Engel and Francesca Paradisi, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
 Contents of all Volumes xi

04 1-Aminocyclopropane-1-Carboxylate Synthase, an Enzyme of Ethylene Biosynthesis 91

Małgorzata Jakubowicz and Witold Nowak, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland
05 Specific and Nonspecific Incorporation of Selenium into Macromolecules 121
William T. Self, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA
06 Protein Toxins from Bacteria 149
Holger Barth, University of Ulm Medical Center, Ulm, Germany
Bradley G. Stiles, Wilson College, Chambersburg, PA, USA; US Army Medical Research
Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, MD, USA
07 Host Defense Peptides: Bridging Antimicrobial and Immunomodulatory Activities 175
Jason Kindrachuk, Anastasia Nijnik, and R. E. W. Hancock, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, BC, Canada
08 Biosynthesis and Mode of Action of Lantibiotics 217
Lisa E. Cooper, Bo Li, and Wilfred A. van der Donk, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Urbana, IL, USA
09 Plant Peptide Toxins from Nonmarine Environments 257
Jan-Christoph Westermann and David J. Craik, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
10 Therapeutic Value of Peptides from Animal Venoms 287
Nicolas Andreotti, Besma Jouirou, Stephanie Mouhat, Ludovic Mouhat, and Jean-Marc Sabatier,
Universite´ de la Me´diterrane´e – Ambrilia Biopharma Inc., Marseille Cedex, France
11 Signal Transduction in Gram-Positive Bacteria by Bacterial Peptides 305
Ingolf F. Nes, Ola Johnsborg, and Dzung Bao Diep, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Aas,
Norway
12 A New Generation of Artificial Enzymes: Catalytic Antibodies or ‘Abzymes’ 323
Rémy Ricoux and Jean-Pierre Mahy, Universite´ de Paris-sud 11, Orsay Cedex, France
13 Recent Progress on Understanding Ribosomal Protein Synthesis 353
Ute Kothe, University of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, AB, Canada
14 Glutaminyl-tRNA and Asparaginyl-tRNA Biosynthetic Pathways 383
Jonathan L. Huot, Jacques Lapointe, and Robert Chênevert, Universite´ Laval, Que´bec, QC, Canada
Marc Bailly and Daniel Kern, Institut de Biologie Mole´culaire et Cellulaire, Strasbourg, France
15 Posttranslational Modification of Proteins 433
Keith D. Green and Sylvie Garneau-Tsodikova, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
16 Collagen Formation and Structure 469
Hans Peter Bächinger, Kazunori Mizuno, Janice A. Vranka, and Sergei P. Boudko,
Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA
17 Lipidation of Peptides and Proteins 531
Kristina Görmer and Herbert Waldmann, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology and
Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany
Luc Brunsveld, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology and Chemical Genomics Centre of the
Max Planck Society, Dortmund, Germany
18 Genetic Incorporation of Unnatural Amino Acids into Proteins 587
Angela R. Parrish and Lei Wang, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, CA, USA
19 Nonribosomal Peptide Synthetases 619
Timothy J. Montavon and Steven D. Bruner, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
20 The Properties, Formation, and Biological Activity of 2,5-Diketopiperazines 657
P. J. Milne and G. Kilian, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
xii Contents of all Volumes

21 Ubiquitin-Dependent Protein Degradation 699

Ashok N. Hegde, Wake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston Salem, NC, USA

Volume 6 Carbohydrates, Nucleosides & Nucleic Acids

01 Overview and Introduction 1
Robert Woodward and Peng George Wang, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
02 Enzymatic Synthesis of Complex Carbohydrates 5
Wei Zhao and Tiehai Li, Nankai University, Tianjin, China
Robert Woodward, Chengfeng Xia, and Peng George Wang, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH, USA
Wanyi Guan, Shandong University, Shandong, China
03 New Strategies for Glycopeptide, Neoglycopeptide, and Glycoprotein Synthesis 55
Ashraf Brik, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel
04 Carbohydrate Vaccines 91
Qianli Wang and Zhongwu Guo, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA
05 MS-Based Glycoanalysis 123
Kay-Hooi Khoo, Institute of Biological Chemistry, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
06 Glycoanalysis of Bacterial Glycome 157
Chuan Wang, Camille L. A. Hamula, and Xing-Fang Li, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB,
Canada
Xin Liu and Jianjun Li, National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
07 Chemical Glycobiology 175
Chad M. Whitman and Michelle R. Bond, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Jennifer J. Kohler, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA
08 Alkaloid Glycosidase Inhibitors 225
Alan D. Elbein, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, AR, USA
Russell J. Molyneux, Western Regional Research Center, ARS-USDA, Albany, CA, USA
09 Molecular Probes for Protein Glycosylation 261
Howard C. Hang, The Rockefeller University, New York, NY, USA
10 O Antigen Biosynthesis 297
Miguel A. Valvano, The University of Western Ontario, London, ON, Canada
11 Biosynthesis of Complex Mucin-Type O-Glycans 315
Inka Brockhausen, Queen’s University, Kingston, ON, Canada
12 Bacterial Protein Glycosylation 351
Amirreza Faridmoayer and Mario F. Feldman, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada
13 Structure and Biosynthesis of the Mycobacterial Cell Wall 381
Dean C. Crick, Delphi Chatterjee, Michael S. Scherman, and Michael R. McNeil,
Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, USA
14 Structure, Biosynthesis, and Function of Glycosaminoglycans 407
Courtney L. Jones and Jian Liu, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
Ding Xu, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA
15 Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Glycogen Synthesis in Bacteria and Mammals and
Starch Synthesis in Plants 429
Jack Preiss, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
16 Celluloses 493
Rajai H. Atalla, Cellulose Sciences International, Madison, WI, USA
Akira Isogai, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
 Contents of all Volumes xiii

17 Vascular Plant Lignification: Biochemical/Structural Biology Considerations of Upstream

Aromatic Amino Acid and Monolignol Pathways 541
Dhrubojyoti D. Laskar, Oliver R. A. Corea, Ann M. Patten, ChulHee Kang,
Laurence B. Davin, and Norman G. Lewis, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA
18 Proanthocyanidins: Chemistry and Biology 605
Daneel Ferreira, Jannie P. J. Marais, Christina M. Coleman, and Desmond Slade,
University of Mississippi, Oxford, MS, USA
19 Nucleoside Analogues 663
Darrell R. Davis, The University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
20 RNA Modifying Enzymes 683
George A. Garcia, Julie K. Hurt, and Yi-Chen Chen, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
21 Riboswitches 743
Tina M. Henkin, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

Volume 7 Cofactors
01 Overview and Introduction 1
Tadhg P. Begley, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, USA
02 Riboflavin Biosynthesis 3
Markus Fischer, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Adelbert Bacher, Technical University of Munich, Garching, Germany
03 Flavin-Dependent Enzymes 37
Rebecca L. Fagan and Bruce A. Palfey, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
04 Biotechnology of Riboflavin Production 115
Hans-Peter Hohmann, DSM Nutritional Products, Kaiseraugst, Switzerland
Klaus-Peter Stahmann, Fachhochschule Lausitz, Senftenberg, Germany
05 The Use of Subsystems to Encode Biosynthesis of Vitamins and Cofactors 141
Andrei L. Osterman, Burnham Institute for Medical Research, La Jolla, CA, USA
Ross Overbeek, Fellowship for Interpretation of Genomes, Burr Ridge, IL, USA
Dmitry A. Rodionov, Burnham Institute for Medical Research, La Jolla, CA, USA
06 Biosynthesis of Biotin 161
Andrée Marquet, Universite´ Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
07 Lipoic Acid Biosynthesis and Enzymology 181
Elizabeth S. Billgren, Robert M. Cicchillo, Natasha M. Nesbitt, and Squire J. Booker,
The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA
08 Genomics and Enzymology of NAD Biosynthesis 213
Leonardo Sorci, Oleg Kurnasov, Dmitry A. Rodionov, and Andrei L. Osterman,
Burnham Institute for Medical Research, La Jolla, CA, USA
09 Pyridoxal Phosphate Biosynthesis 259
Jeremiah W. Hanes, Steven E. Ealick, and Tadhg P. Begley, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ivo Tews, Heidelberg University Biochemistry Center, Heidelberg, Germany
10 Pyridoxal 59-Phosphate-Dependent Enzymes: Catalysis, Conformation, and Genomics 273
Samanta Raboni, Francesca Spyrakis, Barbara Campanini, Alessio Amadasi, Stefano Bettati,
Alessio Peracchi, and Andrea Mozzarelli, University of Parma, Parma, Italy ; Present address:
University of Padua, Padua, Italy
Roberto Contestabile, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza,’ Rome, Italy
11 Coenzyme A Biosynthesis and Enzymology 351
Erick Strauss, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
xiv Contents of all Volumes

12 Menaquinone/Ubiquinone Biosynthesis and Enzymology 411

R. Meganathan, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA
13 Biosynthesis of Heme and Vitamin B12 445
Gunhild Layer and Dieter Jahn, Technical University of Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
Evelyne Deery, Andrew D. Lawrence, and Martin J. Warren, University of Kent, Kent, UK
14 Cobalamin Coenzymes in Enzymology 501
Perry Allen Frey, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA
15 Thiamin Biosynthesis 547
Tadhg P. Begley and Steven E. Ealick, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
16 Thiamin Enzymology 561
Frank Jordan, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ, USA
17 The Biosynthesis of Folate and Pterins and Their Enzymology 599
Markus Fischer, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Beat Thöny, University Children’s Hospital, Zürich, Switzerland
Silke Leimkühler, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
18 Cofactor Catabolism 649
Tathagata Mukherjee, Kathryn M. McCulloch, Steven E. Ealick, and Tadhg P. Begley,
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
19 Protein-Derived Cofactors 675
Victor L. Davidson, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA
20 Biosynthesis of the Methanogenic Coenzymes 711
Laura L. Grochowski and Robert H. White, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Blacksburg, VA, USA

Volume 8 Enzymes and Enzyme Mechanisms

01 Overview and Introduction 1
Christian P. Whitman, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA
02 Evolution and the Enzyme 9
Shelley D. Copley, University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA
03 Enzyme Promiscuity – Evolutionary and Mechanistic Aspects 47
Olga Khersonsky and Dan S. Tawfik, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
04 Mechanistic and Structural Studies of Microbial Dehalogenases: How Nature
Cleaves a Carbon–Halogen Bond 89
Gerrit J. Poelarends, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
Christian P. Whitman, The University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA
05 Guanidine-Modifying Enzymes in the Pentein Superfamily 125
Thomas W. Linsky and Walter Fast, University of Texas, Austin, TX, USA
06 Tunnels and Intermediates in the Glutamine-Dependent Amidotransferases 161
Nigel G. J. Richards, Robert N. Humkey, Kai Li, and Megan E. Meyer, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL, USA
Tania C. Córdova de Sintjago, Universidad Central de Venezuela, Caracas, Venezuela
07 Fatty Acid Biosynthesis and Oxidation 231
Huaning Zhang, Carl A. Machutta, and Peter J. Tonge, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook,
NY, USA
08 Diels–Alderases 277
Hideaki Oikawa, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
 Contents of all Volumes xv

09 Phosphoryl and Sulfuryl Transfer 315

Tiago A. S. Brandao and Alvan C. Hengge, Utah State University, Logan, UT, USA
10 Catalytic Mechanism of DNA Polymerases 349
Michelle P. Roettger, Marina Bakhtina, and Sandeep Kumar, The Ohio State University,
Columbus, OH, USA
Ming-Daw Tsai, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
11 Mechanisms of Enzymatic Glycosyl Transfer 385
Ran Zhang, Vivian L.Y. Yip, and Stephen G. Withers, University of British Columbia,
Vancouver, BC, Canada
12 Synthesis of Alginate in Bacteria 423
Peter A. Tipton, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA
13 Enzymology of Bacterial Resistance 443
Jed F. Fisher and Shahriar Mobashery, University of Notre Dame, IN, USA
14 Copper Metalloenzymes 489
Albrecht Messerschmidt, Max-Planck-Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
15 Mechanisms of Metal-Dependent Hydrolases in Metabolism 547
Marcy Hernick, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA
Carol Fierke, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
16 Dioxygenase Enzymes and Oxidative Cleavage Pathways 583
Timothy D. H. Bugg, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
17 S-Adenosylmethionine and Iron–Sulfur Clusters in Biological Radical Reactions:
The Radical SAM Superfamily 625
Eric M. Shepard and Joan B. Broderick, Montana State University, Bozeman, MT, USA
18 Detection of Novel Enzyme Intermediates 663
Cristina M. Furdui, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA
Karen S. Anderson, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
19 Bisubstrate Analog Inhibitors 689
Patrick A. Frantom and John S. Blanchard, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA
20 Quantum Chemical Modeling of Enzymatic Reactions – Applications to Epoxide-Transforming
Enzymes 719
Kathrin H. Hopmann and Fahmi Himo, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden

Volume 9 Modern Methods for the Investigation of Natural Products

01 Overview and Introduction 1
Lew Mander, Australia National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
02 High Performance Liquid Chromatographic Separation Methods 5
Reinhard I. Boysen and Milton T. W. Hearn, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
03 Introduction to Macromolecular X-Ray Crystallography 51
Esko Oksanen and Adrian Goldman, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
04 Characterization by Circular Dichroism Spectroscopy 91
Nina Berova, George A. Ellestad, and Nobuyuki Harada, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA
05 Determination of Structure including Absolute Configuration of Bioactive Natural Products 147
Kenji Mori, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
06 NMR – Small Molecules and Analysis of Complex Mixtures 169
Arthur S. Edison, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
Frank C. Schroeder, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
xvi Contents of all Volumes

07 Biomolecular Recognition by Oligosaccharides and Glycopeptides: The NMR Point of View 197
Katalin E. Kövér, László Szilágyi, and Gyula Batta, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
Dušan Uhrı́n, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
Jesús Jiménez-Barbero, Centro de Investigaciones Biolo´gicas, Madrid, Spain
08 Determination of Three-Dimensional Structures of Nucleic Acids by NMR 247
Nikolai B. Ulyanov and Thomas L. James, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco,
CA, USA
09 Derivation of Peptide and Protein Structure using NMR Spectroscopy 279
Glenn F. King and Mehdi Mobli, The University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia
10 Mass Spectrometry: An Essential Tool for Trace Identification and Quantification 327
Charles H. Hocart, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
11 Applications of Modern Mass Spectrometry Techniques in Natural Products Chemistry 389
Roland D. Kersten, Michael J. Meehan, and Pieter C. Dorrestein, University of California, San Diego,
La Jolla, CA, USA
12 Mass Spectrometry: Structure Determination of Proteins and Peptides 457
Chhabil Dass, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA
13 Application of Mass Spectrometry to Rapid Analysis of Bacterial Polysaccharides 497
Jianjun Li and Eleonora Altman, Institute for Biological Sciences, Ottawa, ON, Canada
14 Modern Methods for the Isolation of Natural Product Receptors 513
Peter Karuso, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
15 Bioinformatics 569
Yi-Ping Phoebe Chen, Deakin University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Elena P. Ivanova and Feng Wang, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
Paolo Carloni, International School for Advanced Studies, Trieste, Italy
16 Natural Products Research and Metabolomics 595
V. Craige Trenerry and Simone J. Rochfort, DPI-Werribee Centre, Werribee, VIC, Australia
17 Small Molecules as Versatile Tools for Activity-Based Protein Profiling Experiments 629
Stephan A. Sieber, Thomas Böttcher, Isabell Staub, and Ronald Orth,
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany
18 Metabolic Studies Using the Retrobiosynthesis Concept – Theory, Technology, and Examples 675
Adelbert Bacher and Wolfgang Eisenreich, Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany
19 Bacterial Protein Overexpression Systems and Strategies 695
C. Kinsland, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
20 Directed Evolution of Enzymes 723
Colin J. Jackson, CSIRO Entomology, Black Mountain, ACT, Australia
Elizabeth M. J. Gillam, University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia
David L. Ollis, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia
21 Single Molecule Fluorescence Methods in Enzymology 751
Peng Chen and Nesha May Andoy, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Volume 10 Cumulative Index 1

 4.01 Overview and Introduction
Kenji Mori, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.01.1 Scope of Volume 4 1

4.01.2 Comments on Progress in the Chemistry and Biology of Semiochemicals 1
4.01.2.1 Progress in Structure Elucidation 1
4.01.2.2 Complexity of the Multicomponent Pheromone 2
4.01.2.3 Progress in Unraveling the Stereochemical Aspects of Chemical Ecology 3
4.01.2.4 Dual Roles of Semiochemicals as Pheromones and Kairomones 4
4.01.2.5 New Trends in Mammalian Chemical Ecology 5
4.01.3 Future Perspectives in Chemical Ecology 6
References 6

4.01.1 Scope of Volume 4

The present Volume 4 is a continuation of Volume 8 of the first edition,1 which summarizes progress in
chemical ecology. Chemical ecology is an expanding new discipline in the study of chemistry and biology of
semiochemicals or biofunctional molecules, which spreads information among individuals.
This volume treats pheromones (Chapters 4.04–4.06), defensive substances and toxins (Chapters 4.08–4.10),
antifeedants (Chapters 4.11–4.12), compounds employed in plant-plant and plant-microbe interactions
(Chapter 4.13), plant-insect interactions (Chapter 4.14) and microbe-microbe interactions (Chapter 4.07).
Hormones of plants (Chapter 4.02) and insects (Chapter 4.03) are also treated in this volume. A unique attempt
in the present volume is to regard flavor and fragrance (Chapter 4.15) and taste (Chapter 4.16) as phenomena of
human–environmental interactions or human chemical ecology.
Consequently, all organisms including humans will be treated in the light of bioactive natural products. In other
words, bioactive natural products related to biological industries including agriculture, forestry, fishery, food industry,
cosmetics and personal care, and fermentation industries will be treated in this volume. The treatise, however, will be
basic to include chemistry in all aspects of chemical ecology. Many of the applications are treated in Volume 3.
Prior to delving into the details, this overview briefly summarizes the recent progress made as follows:
(1) progress in structure elucidation, (2) complexity of the multicomponent pheromone, (3) stereochemical
aspects of chemical ecology, (4) dual roles of semiochemicals such as pheromones and kairomones, and (5) new
trends in mammalian chemical ecology.
The author originally reviewed three important aspects of semiochemical research that has been discussed
in Volume 9. They are as follows: (1) determination of structure including the absolute configuration of
bioactive natural products, (2) problems of biological homochirality, and (3) study of structure–activity
relationships to invent mimics of bioactive small molecules so as to utilize them as pesticides or medicinals.
Bergström2,3 recently published two excellent reviews on the birth and growth of chemical ecology as an
interdisciplinary field. These two reviews are recommended for those who wish to know the history of chemical
ecology over the past 50 years.

4.01.2 Comments on Progress in the Chemistry and Biology

of Semiochemicals
4.01.2.1 Progress in Structure Elucidation
Progress in microanalytical methods continuously improves the ability of chemists to clarify the structures of
new semiochemicals. In 2002, a new and revolutionary strategy in the structure determination of a biofunc-
tional and small molecule was reported by Hughson and coworkers.4 It was to determine the structure of a

1
2 Overview and Introduction

Figure 1 Structures of bioregulators of microbial or plant origins.

biofunctional molecule even without isolating the compound itself. Autoinducer-2 (AI-2) is a universal signal
for interspecies communication (quorum sensing) in bacteria, which allows them to coordinate gene expression.
The structure of AI-2 remained elusive until 2002, when the X-ray crystallographic analysis of AI-2 sensor
protein (LuxP from bioluminescent marine bacterium Vibrio harveyi) in a complex with AI-2 was successfully
carried out.4 LuxP is the primary AI-2 receptor, and recombinant LuxP was overproduced in Escherichia coli
strain BL21. Eight milligrams of LuxP-AI-2 complex was necessary for the X-ray work. As shown in Figure 1,
the bound ligand AI-2 was a furanosyl borate diester 1. The fact that the ligand contains boron could be
confirmed by 11B-NMR (nuclear magnetic resonance) analysis of LuxP–AI-2 complex.
This work demonstrates that we can determine the structure of a biofunctional molecule by isolating its
complex with a receptor protein, and analyzing the structure of the complex by X-ray. In case a receptor
protein is available in a sufficient amount by recombinant technology to make the complex crystalline,
Hughson’s strategy will be the ideal way to elucidate the structure of a scarce and elusive biofunctional ligand.
In the past, isolation of a bioactive but scarce ligand and its structure elucidation was a prerequisite, which then
enabled the detection and isolation of its receptor protein. In Hughson’s strategy, the receptor protein was the
first target, and subsequently, the structure of its ligand was clarified. This is indeed a new method – the
so-called ‘reversed natural products chemistry.’
The second example of the structure elucidation of a new semiochemical followed the traditional way, but
on a very small scale to isolate 18 mg of target molecule 2, a factor inducing hyphal branching in arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungus Gigaspora margarita.5 Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi form symbiotic associations with the
roots of more than 80% of land plants. Host roots release a semiochemical that triggers hyphal branching. In
2005, Akiyama et al.5 isolated 5-deoxystrigol 2 (18 mg) from the root exudates of Lotus japonica, and determined
its structure by spectral [UV (ultraviolet), IR (infrared), 1H-NMR, EI-MS (mass spectrometry), and CD
(circular dichroism)] analysis and synthesis of ()-2. They used activated charcoal to recover 2 from the
hydroponic solution of L. japonica. 5-Deoxystrigol 2 elicited hyphal branching of G. margarita at concentrations
ranging from 1 ng to 1 pg per disc. A related compound strigol 3 had been known since 1966 as a germination
stimulant for the parasitic witchweed, Striga lutea.
Through Akiyama’s work, strigolactones such as 2 and 3 were shown to be bioactive in two different
phenomena in the plant kingdom, germination of parasitic weeds and hyphal branching in arbuscular mycor-
rhizal fungi. Perhaps, the parasitic weeds used the plant’s signals for symbiosis with fungi to find out their hosts
for parasitism.

4.01.2.2 Complexity of the Multicomponent Pheromone

In 1959 when the first pheromone bombykol [(10E,12Z)-10,12-hexadecadien-1-ol] was identified as the female-
produced sex attractant of the silkworm moth Bombyx mori, the pheromonal activity was thought to be totally
due to that single compound.6 At present, it is generally believed that a pheromone is composed of many
pheromone components (see Chapter 4.04), which resembles the present concept in flavor and fragrance
chemistry, that is, to consider a mixture as a whole to be responsible for a particular sense of smell (see
Chapter 4.15).
Recently in 2008, Lacey et al.7 reported a typical example showing the complexity of a multicomponent
pheromone. A male-produced aggregation pheromone of the cerambycid beetle Megacyllene caryae contained as
 Overview and Introduction 3

Figure 2 Components of the male-produced aggregation pheromone of the cerambycid beetle Megacyllene caryae.
Percent compositions are indicated within parentheses.

many as eight male-specific compounds as shown in Figure 2. They are (2R,3S)-2,3-hexanediol 4, its
enantiomer (2S,3R)-2,3-hexanediol 4, (S)-limonene 5, 2-phenylethanol 6, (S)--terpineol 7, nerol 8, neral 9,
and geranial 10.7 None of these compounds was attractive as a single component. Both sexes of M. caryae were
attracted to the complete blend of these eight compounds, but the elimination of any one of them resulted in a
decreased trap capture. Blends that were missing such as (2S,3R)-4, (2R,3S)-4, or a mixture of 9 and 10 (1:1)
were pheromonally inactive. Modern studies on semiochemicals revealed the importance of a proper mixture
to evoke a biological reaction.

4.01.2.3 Progress in Unraveling the Stereochemical Aspects of Chemical Ecology

The author’s overview in Volume 8 of CONAP (first edition) briefly treated the relationship between
stereochemistry and pheromone activity among insects.1 The significance of chirality in pheromone science
was also discussed in depth by the author in 2007.8 Further examples were reported to show the importance of
chirality in chemical communications among microorganisms9,10 and mammals.11 The microbial cases will be
summarized in this section.
Fungi in the genus Phytophthora are destructive phytopathogens, and caused the well-known Irish potato
famine in 1840s. A factor known as hormone 1 is secreted by the A1 mating type of Phytophthora nicotianae, and
induces the formation of sexual spores in the A2 mating type. By isolating 1.2 mg of the hormone 1 from 1830 l
of culture broth of P. nicotianae, its structure was proposed as (15R)-11 shown in Figure 3. The configurations at
the other three stereogenic centers remained obscure. Interestingly, 11 induces sexual spore formation in the
A2 mating types of several other species in the genus Phytophthora, and therefore 11 is a universal mating signal
in the heterothallic species of Phytophthora. In order to determine the absolute configuration of hormone 1,
Yajima et al.9 synthesized and bioassayed various stereoisomers of 11. The only bioactive stereoisomer at a dose
of 10 ng was (3R,7R,11R,15R)-11, which must therefore be the natural hormone 1.
4 Overview and Introduction

Figure 3 Structures of microbial semiochemicals.

N-Acyl homoserine lactones (AHLs) are important pheromones controlling quorum sensing among
Gram-negative bacteria. An AHL called small bacteriocin possesses the structure (2S,39R,79Z)-12 as shown in
Figure 3, and is the quorum-sensing pheromone of a nitrogen fixer Rhizobium leguminosarum living in symbiosis
with leguminous plants. Yajima’s synthesis of 12 and its stereoisomers enabled the examination of the
stereochemistry–bioactivity relationships in the case of small bacteriocin.10 The natural (2S,39R,79Z)-12 exhib-
ited the greatest bioactivity, whereas the other three stereoisomers showed 5–500 times weaker bioactivity.
Chirality was shown to be also important for chemical communications among bacteria.

4.01.2.4 Dual Roles of Semiochemicals as Pheromones and Kairomones

It has been believed that pheromones act only as pheromones of a certain species. Recent studies have revealed
that pheromones act also as kairomones for the predators against the pheromone releasers. Two examples are
given below.
The scarab beetle Osmoderma eremita and its larval predator, the click beetle Elater ferrugineus, are known as
indicators of the species richness of insect fauna of hollow deciduous trees in Northern Europe. (R)-4-
Decanolide 13 (Figure 4) is the male-produced sex pheromone of O. eremita.12 Lactone 13 is also employed
by E. ferrugineus as a kairomone for the detection of tree hollows containing the larvae of O. eremita.12
Dunkelblum and coworkers,13,14 in association with the author’s group, studied both the pheromonal and
kairomonal activities of three female-produced sex pheromones 14–16 of the pine bast scales of Matsucoccus
species together with their analogues 17 and 18. The Israeli pine bast scale, M. josephi, employs (2E,5R,6E,8E)-
14 as its sex pheromone, whereas (3S,7R,8E,10E)-15 is used by M. feytaudi and (2E,4E,6R,10R)-16 by
M. matsumurae. The pheromone 14 was found to be a potent kairomone for Elatophilus hebraicus adults, the

Figure 4 Structures of insect pheromones and their mimics to illustrate the pheromone–kairomone relationship.
 Overview and Introduction 5

major predatory bug against M. josephi. Strangely enough, the Israeli predator E. hebraicus was also attracted by
15 and 16, although both M. feytaudi and M. matsumurae are absent in Israel. It seems as if the presence of the
diene moiety of 14–16 is sufficient to attract the adult E. hebraicus. The kairomonal activity of 14–16 is a general
phenomenon, and M. feytaudi pheromone attracts predators such as Elatophilus crassicornis and Hemerobius stigma
in Portugal and E. nigricornis and H. stigma in Italy and France.
The pheromone analogues 17 and 18 showed interesting biological properties. The nor-analogue 17 of
M. josephi pheromone 14 preserved the pheromonal activity but eliminated its kairomonal activity.13 Similarly,
the removal of the terminal methyl group from the diene moiety of 15, producing the nor-analogue 18, again
preserved its pheromonal activity but eliminated the kairomonal activity.14 Thus, subtle and designed altera-
tions in the structure of the diene system change the mode of the kairomonal activity markedly. The two
mimics 17 and 18 may be useful to capture only the pest pine bast scales without disturbing their predators.

4.01.2.5 New Trends in Mammalian Chemical Ecology

As the science of insect pheromones has fully developed, studies on the pheromones of mammals and aquatic
organisms are now gaining popularity among scientists. Two examples involving acetal pheromones in
mammals are discussed. As can be seen in the pheromone chapter of Francke and Schulz, acetals have been
known originally as aggregation pheromones of bark beetles (Chapter 4.04).
According to Rasmussen’s recent study, the male Asian elephants, Elephas maximus, release frontalin 19
(Figure 5) from the temporal gland on the face during musth, which is an annual period of sexual activity and
aggression.11 The ratio of frontalin enantiomers enables other elephants to distinguish both the maturity of male
elephants in musth and the phase of musth. In young males, significantly more (1R,5S)-(þ)-frontalin 19 than
(1S,5R)-()-frontalin 19 is released. As the elephant reaches maturity, the ratio becomes almost equal to emit
()-frontalin. Musth periods get longer as males age. Secretions containing high concentration of frontalin 19 at
racemic ratios attracted follicular-phase females, whereas the secretions repulsed males as well as luteal phase
and pregnant females. The importance of the enantiomeric composition of frontalin 19 in the behavior of Asian
elephants was observed only after the advent of enantioselective (chiral) gas chromatography (GC). It should be
noted that bark beetles employ (1S,5R)-()-frontalin 19 as their pheromone component.
Genes in the major histocompatibility complex (MHC), known for their role in immune recognition and
transplantation success, are involved in modulating mate choice in mice and perhaps also in humans.15 Volatile
body odors of mice are regulated by MHC genes, and it is these odor differences that underline mate choice and
familial recognition. An individual’s olfactory identity is coded in part by a pattern of volatile semiochemicals,
which is regulated by genes in MHC.16 In this connection, the effects of mice pheromone components on the
attractiveness of a male mouse evolved as an interesting research topic. For this study, previously synthesized
mice pheromone components 20 and 2117 as well as newly synthesized ones 22 and 2318 were employed.
In many wild animals, older males are often preferred by females, because they carry ‘good’ genes that account
for their viability. In the case of mice, Mus musculus, higher levels of (1R,5S,7R)-dehydro-exo-brevicomin 20

Figure 5 Structures of pheromone components of male Asian elephants and mice.

6 Overview and Introduction

(exo-brevicomin is a bark beetle pheromone) and (S)-2-sec-butyl-4,5-dihydrothiazole 21 and 2-isopropyl-4,5-

dihydrothiazole 22 were detected in the urine of aged male mice than in normal adult males, whereas a lower
level of 6-hydroxy-6-methyl-3-heptanone 23 was observed.19 When 20–22 were added to the urine of normal
adult males, their urine showed an enhanced attractiveness against female mice. The addition of 23 had no effect
at all. Accordingly, it is established in the case of mice that semiochemicals control the mate selection process.19 A
search to understand the role of semiochemicals in higher animals including humans will continue to be an
interesting area of chemical ecology with potential impact on perfume industries.

4.01.3 Future Perspectives in Chemical Ecology

In order to preserve our global ecological system, we require an in-depth knowledge in chemical ecology to
understand more about the role of bioactive natural products in the environment. This will enable us to resolve
many problems that remain unraveled. Chemical ecology is an interdisciplinary science between chemistry and
biology. No one can be an expert in both the areas unless one wants to remain superficial. Thus, this calls us to
remember the following words of the Apostle Paul: ‘‘The person who thinks he knows something really does not
know as he ought to know (1 Corinthians 8:2).’’ This sentence was also contained in Volume 9 Chapter 5.

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Dr. T. Tashiro for his help.

Glossary
kairomone A kairomone is a chemical substance produced and released by a living organism that benefits the
receiver and disadvantages the donor. The kairomone improves the fitness of the recipient and in this respect
differs from an allomone.

References
1. K. Mori, Ed., Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry, Vol. 8: Miscellaneous Natural Products including Marine Natural
Products, Pheromones, Plant Hormones, and Aspect of Ecology, Elsevier: Oxford, 1999; pp 1–749.
2. G. Bergström, Pure Appl. Chem. 2007, 79, 2305–2323.
3. L. G. W. Bergström, Chem. Commun. 2008, 3959–3979.
4. X. Cheng; S. Schauder; N. Potier; A. Van Dorsselaer; I. Pelczer; B. L. Bassler; F. M. Hughson, Nature 2002, 415, 545–549.
5. K. Akiyama; K. Matsuzaki; H. Hayashi, Nature 2005, 435, 824–827.
6. A. Butenandt; R. Beckmann; D. Stamm; E. Hecker, Z. Naturforsch. 1959, 14b, 283–284.
7. E. S. Lacey; J. A. Moreira; J. G. Millar; L. M. Hanks, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 408–417.
8. K. Mori, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 7505–7523.
9. A. Yajima; Y. Qin; X. Zhou; N. Kawanishi; X. Xiao; J. Wang; D. Zhang; Y. Wu; T. Nukada; G. Yabuta; J. Qi; T. Asano; Y. Sakagami,
Nat. Chem. Biol. 2008, 4, 235–237.
10. A. Yajima; A. A. N. van Brussel; J. Schripsema; T. Nukada; G. Yabuta, Org. Lett. 2008, 10, 2047–2050.
11. D. R. Greenwood; D. Comeskey; M. B. Hunt; L. E. L. Rasmussen, Nature 2005, 438, 1097–1098.
12. G. P. Svensson; M. C. Larsson, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 189–197.
13. S. Kurosawa; M. Takenaka; E. Dunkelblum; Z. Mendel; K. Mori, ChemBioChem 2000, 1, 56–66.
14. Z. Mendel; E. Dunkelblum; M. Branco; J. C. Franco; S. Kurosawa; K. Mori, Naturwissenschaften 2003, 90, 313–317.
15. K. Yamazaki; G. K. Beauchamp, Adv. Genet. 2007, 59, 129–145.
16. G. K. Beauchamp; K. Yamazaki, Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2003, 31 (Part 1), 147–151.
17. T. Tashiro; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 2167–2173.
18. T. Tashiro; K. Osada; K. Mori, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2008, 72, 2398–2402.
19. K. Osada; T. Tashiro; K. Mori; H. Izumi, Chem. Senses 2008, 33, 815–823.
 Overview and Introduction 7

Biographical Sketch

Kenji Mori was born in 1935 and has spent a total of 42 years at the University of Tokyo. He
obtained a B.Sc. degree in agricultural chemistry (1957), followed by an M.Sc. in biochem-
istry (1959), and Ph.D. in organic chemistry (1962). He was then appointed assistant (1962),
associate professor (1968), and served as a professor of organic chemistry (1978) at the
University of Tokyo until 1995. He is now professor emeritus. Dr. Mori worked for 7 years
(1995–2001) as a professor at the Science University of Tokyo. At present, he is a research
consultant at RIKEN (Institute of Physical and Chemical Research) and at Toyo Gosei Co.,
Ltd. He was awarded the Japan Academy Prize (1981), the Silver Medal of the International
Society of Chemical Ecology (1996), the American Chemical Society’s Ernest Guenther
Award in the Chemistry of Natural Products (1999), the Special Prize of the Society of
Synthetic Organic Chemistry, Japan (2003), and the Frantisek Sorm Memorial Medal of the
Academy of the Czech Republic (2003).
 4.02 Plant Hormones
Isomaro Yamaguchi, Maebashi Institute of Technology, Gunma, Japan
Jerry D. Cohen and Angela H. Culler, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
Marcel Quint, Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry, Halle, Germany
Janet P. Slovin, United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA
Masatoshi Nakajima, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Shinjiro Yamaguchi, Hitoshi Sakakibara, and Takeshi Kuroha, RIKEN Plant Science Center,
Kanagawa, Japan
Nobuhiro Hirai, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan
Takao Yokota, Teikyo University, Utsunomiya, Japan
Hiroyuki Ohta and Yuichi Kobayashi, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan
Hitoshi Mori and Yoji Sakagami, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.02.1 Introduction 12
4.02.2 Auxins 13
4.02.2.1 Introduction 13
4.02.2.2 Chemistry 14
4.02.2.2.1 IAA conjugates in plants 14
4.02.2.2.2 IAA peptide conjugates 14
4.02.2.2.3 Amino acid conjugates 14
4.02.2.2.4 Amide conjugate hydrolysis 15
4.02.2.2.5 Ester conjugates 15
4.02.2.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 16
4.02.2.3.1 Tryptophan-independent biosynthesis 17
4.02.2.3.2 Tryptophan-dependent pathways 17
4.02.2.3.3 IAA degradation 22
4.02.2.4 Perception and Signaling 22
4.02.2.4.1 Transcriptional responses to auxin stimuli 22
4.02.2.4.2 Regulation of auxin response by the ubiquitin pathway 24
4.02.2.4.3 Auxin receptors 24
4.02.3 Gibberellins 24
4.02.3.1 Introduction 24
4.02.3.2 Chemistry 25
4.02.3.2.1 Fungal gibberellins 25
4.02.3.2.2 Plant gibberellins 26
4.02.3.2.3 Isolation and characterization 26
4.02.3.2.4 Qualitative and quantitative analysis 27
4.02.3.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 27
4.02.3.3.1 Biosynthesis in plants 27
4.02.3.3.2 Deactivation in plants 30
4.02.3.3.3 Regulation of gibberellin levels in plants 30
4.02.3.3.4 Biosynthesis in fungi 31
4.02.3.4 Biological Activities 32
4.02.3.4.1 Effects on shoot elongation 32
4.02.3.4.2 Effects on enzyme activities and inductions 33
4.02.3.4.3 Effects on flowering 33
4.02.3.4.4 Other effects 33

9
10 Plant Hormones

4.02.3.5 Perception and Signaling 34

4.02.3.5.1 Overview of GA signaling in plants 34
4.02.3.5.2 GID1, the cytosolic gibberellin receptor 34
4.02.3.5.3 DELLA protein, a key regulator of GA signaling 36
4.02.3.5.4 F-box protein, recruiter of DELLA for its degradation 37
4.02.4 Cytokinins 37
4.02.4.1 Introduction 37
4.02.4.2 Chemistry 37
4.02.4.2.1 Structures 37
4.02.4.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 40
4.02.4.3.1 Two pathways for isoprenoid cytokinin biosynthesis 40
4.02.4.3.2 Cytokinin biosynthesis in microorganisms 40
4.02.4.3.3 Cytokinin biosynthesis in higher plants 40
4.02.4.3.4 Cytokinin production by degradation of tRNA 42
4.02.4.3.5 IPT in Physcomitrella patens 42
4.02.4.3.6 Metabolic origins of isoprenoid side chains 42
4.02.4.3.7 Activation step of cytokinin biosynthesis 42
4.02.4.3.8 Modification of isoprenoid side chain 43
4.02.4.3.9 Modification of adenine moiety 46
4.02.4.3.10 Degradation of cytokinins 46
4.02.4.4 Translocation 47
4.02.4.5 Biological Activities 48
4.02.4.5.1 Delay of leaf senescence 48
4.02.4.5.2 Control of the cell cycle 48
4.02.4.5.3 Control of shoot meristem activity 48
4.02.4.5.4 Control of root meristem activity 49
4.02.4.5.5 Regulation of vascular development 49
4.02.4.5.6 Release of buds from apical dominance 49
4.02.4.5.7 Regulation of root formation 49
4.02.4.5.8 Regulation of nodule formation 50
4.02.4.5.9 Interactions between macronutrients and cytokinins 50
4.02.4.6 Perception and Signaling 51
4.02.4.6.1 Cytokinin-binding proteins 51
4.02.4.6.2 Cytokinin receptor as a histidine protein kinase (His-kinase) 51
4.02.4.6.3 Phosphotransfer proteins 52
4.02.4.6.4 Response regulators 53
4.02.4.6.5 Branch of the two-component pathway 53
4.02.5 Abscisic Acid 53
4.02.5.1 Introduction 53
4.02.5.2 Chemistry 54
4.02.5.2.1 Isolation and analysis 54
4.02.5.2.2 Physicochemical properties 55
4.02.5.2.3 Structure–activity relationship 58
4.02.5.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 60
4.02.5.3.1 Biosynthesis in plants 60
4.02.5.3.2 Biosynthesis in fungi 62
4.02.5.3.3 Metabolism 63
4.02.5.4 Biological Activities 65
4.02.5.4.1 Stomatal closure 65
4.02.5.4.2 Inhibition of seed germination and other activities 66
4.02.5.4.3 Receptors of ABA and ABA-related genes and proteins 66
 Plant Hormones 11

4.02.6 Brassinosteroids 67
4.02.6.1 Introduction 67
4.02.6.2 Chemistry 68
4.02.6.2.1 Distribution 68
4.02.6.2.2 Structure 68
4.02.6.2.3 Analysis 68
4.02.6.2.4 Synthesis 70
4.02.6.2.5 Structure–activity relationship 70
4.02.6.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 72
4.02.6.3.1 Biosynthesis of castasterone 72
4.02.6.3.2 Biosynthesis of brassinolide from castasterone 75
4.02.6.3.3 Regulation of biosynthesis 75
4.02.6.3.4 Metabolism and its regulation 75
4.02.6.4 Physiology and Signal Transduction 75
4.02.6.4.1 Physiology 75
4.02.6.4.2 Signal transduction 76
4.02.7 Jasmonates and Oxylipins 77
4.02.7.1 Introduction 77
4.02.7.2 Chemistry 78
4.02.7.2.1 Chemical structure 78
4.02.7.2.2 Chemical stability 79
4.02.7.2.3 Chemical synthesis of the metabolites on the linolenic acid cascade 79
4.02.7.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism 83
4.02.7.3.1 Biosynthetic pathway in plants 83
4.02.7.3.2 Lipid-derived reactive electrophile species and nonenzymatically formed oxylipins 84
4.02.7.4 Physiology 84
4.02.7.4.1 Responses to biotic and abiotic stresses 84
4.02.7.4.2 Stress response in the absence of jasmonic acid 85
4.02.7.4.3 Effect of jasmonates on developmental processes 85
4.02.7.4.4 OPDA on developmental processes 86
4.02.7.5 Signaling 86
4.02.8 Ethylene 87
4.02.8.1 Introduction 87
4.02.8.2 Chemistry 87
4.02.8.3 Biosynthesis 87
4.02.8.3.1 Transcriptional regulation of ACC synthase 88
4.02.8.3.2 Posttranslational regulation of ACC synthase 88
4.02.8.4 Perception and Signaling 89
4.02.8.4.1 Ethylene receptors 89
4.02.8.4.2 RTE1/GR 90
4.02.8.4.3 CTR1 90
4.02.8.4.4 EIN2 90
4.02.8.4.5 EIN3 90
4.02.9 Peptide Hormones in Plants 91
4.02.9.1 Introduction 91
4.02.9.2 Systemins 91
4.02.9.3 AtPep1 92
4.02.9.4 Phytosulfokine 93
4.02.9.5 Regulatory Factors for Self-Incompatibility 94
4.02.9.6 MCLV3 and CLE Peptides 94
4.02.9.7 Other Peptides 95
4.02.9.8 Remarks 95
12 Plant Hormones

4.02.10 Strigolactones 96
4.02.10.1 Introduction 96
4.02.10.1.1 Strigolactones as rhizosphere signaling molecules 96
4.02.10.1.2 A novel shoot branching inhibitor suggested by genetic studies 97
4.02.10.2 Chemistry 98
4.02.10.3 Biological Activity 98
4.02.10.4 Biosynthesis and Its Regulation 99
References 100

4.02.1 Introduction

The definition of a plant hormone has not been clearly established, so the compounds classified as plant
hormones often vary depending on which definition is considered. In this chapter, auxins, gibberellins (GAs),
cytokinins, abscisic acid, brassinosteroids (BRs), jasmonic acid-related compounds, and ethylene are described
as established plant hormones, while polyamines and phenolic compounds are not included, according to the
definition used in the previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry.1 On the other hand,
several peptides that have been proven to play a clear physiological role(s) in plant growth and development,
similar to the established plant hormones, are referred to in this chapter (see Section 4.02.9), and strigolactone,
which was recently claimed to be included in the members of plant hormones,2,3 is also described in Section
4.02.10. Research on plant hormones can be traced to the comprehensive review and studies published as the
‘Power of Movement of Plants’4 written by Darwin, and published in 1892. However, it was in the 1930s that the
active principles later designated plant hormones were characterized, and it was after the 1950s that the term
‘plant hormone’ became popular.
The word ‘hormone’ was originally used in a narrow sense for the secretory substances of mammals that
were produced in special organs, glands, tissues, or cells, were translocated through veins (or similar tissues) to
more or less specific tissues, and exerted some influence on the metabolism in the target tissues, as described in
the previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry.1 Today, however, the term is
universally used for mobile signals of living organisms and is often used with a heading to show the living
species, namely animal hormones, plant hormones, insect hormones, etc. The hormones of each living species
are often characteristic of that species, reflecting the characteristics of its life phenomena.
The characteristics of plant hormones can be related, at least partially, to the peculiar growth phenomena
known as developmental plasticity, where a plant keeps forming new organs and tissues throughout its life
cycle. New growth is frequently associated with sites where plant hormones are synthesized and this can be
summarized in the following points.
1. The number of known plant hormones is fewer than the number of mammalian hormones. The number of
plant hormones has increased since the publication of the previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural
Products Chemistry in 1998; BRs are added to the plant hormone group, and the group of jasmonic acid-related
compounds, a group of peptides, and strigolactone are also included.
2. Plant hormones appear to be ubiquitous, that is, they are present in all higher plants (and many are also
present in lower plants, and even in fungi and bacteria). This universality of plant hormones is remarkable.
3. The effects of plant hormones are quite complex, one plant hormone often having a wide range of effects.
However, the various phenomena observed when a plant hormone is applied do not always establish that the
plant hormone is directly causing the effect in untreated plants. Some effects of a plant hormone may be
direct while others are indirect, with the site of action being quite remote from the location of the end effect.
Additionally, there is evidence for rather complex interactions among the various plant hormones.
Although plants do not have a nervous system, they must perceive environmental signals and use them for
regulation of growth and organ development. The response systems in plants do not involve a biological
architecture similar to a nervous system; nevertheless, they employ small molecule signals with remarkable
structural similarities to the neurotransmitters. The basic program for growth and development is recorded in
 Plant Hormones 13

the genome and modified by environmental signals. This modification by the environment yielding develop-
mental plasticity, as reflected in changes in plant growth and development, is one of the clear differences from
mammalian hormones, and plant hormones are considered to act as mediators. Light, temperature, and moisture
are particular environmental signals, and these affect the biosynthesis, catabolism, and translocation of plant
hormones. Sensitivity to plant hormones is also likely to be affected by environmental conditions. For example,
the effect of GA on shoot elongation is greater under a low light intensity than under a high light intensity.
Although progress in plant hormone research had often traditionally trailed that of mammalian hormones,
progress during the last decade has been particularly noticeable. The biosynthetic pathways of most plant
hormones have been determined, and the genes encoding many of the enzymes that catalyze the biosynthetic
steps have been cloned. However, the exact steps in the biosynthesis of auxin (indole-3-acetic acid) still remain
obscure in part because of the apparent existence of redundant pathways for its production. The progress in
molecular biology has enabled the relationship between the phenomena to be determined, and the responsible
genes and the mechanisms regulating their expression have been extensively studied. The microarray techni-
que enables the genes responsive to each plant hormone to be identified and the signal transduction pathways of
the plant hormones to be clarified. Recent extensive studies have elucidated significant and clear examples of
the cross talk occurring between plant hormones. For example, numerous publications can be found in the
literature when it is searched with the keywords cross talk and the name of each plant hormone in PubMed.
Some of these interactions are referred to in this chapter.
Among the most noticeable findings from the research on plant hormones, the identification of receptors and
receptor genes must be emphasized. In the last decade, since the publication of the previous edition of the book
Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry,5 the receptors and the receptor genes for ethylene, BRs, cytokinins,
auxins, GAs, and abscisic acid have been identified, as described in the section for each plant hormone.
The previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry5 describes how plant hormones
were discovered by a wide range of interesting approaches, and this is introduced in the section for each plant
hormone. Progress in molecular biology and the methodology used have introduced new approaches for
identifying a new class of plant hormones, as described in Section 8.02.9. Briefly, the complete genomes of
model plants such as Arabidopsis and rice have been determined and are available in public databases, and the
existence of many orphan receptors has been suggested. Surveys of the ligands for such orphan receptors led to
the discovery of MCLV3 and tracheary element differentiation inhibitory factor (TDIF (CLE4/44)).6,7 It
would not be an exaggeration that many new plant hormones can be predicted to be discovered through these
new approaches.
Since Chailakhyan8 postulated the ‘florigen’ concept, the plant hormone that regulates the floral bud
induction has attracted the interests of scientists: ‘florigen’ has, however, remained elusive, although extensive
information has been accumulated in the last decade. Four promotive pathways are now proposed for floral
initiation based on the studies using Arabidopsis: the ‘photoperiodic,’ ‘autonomous,’ ‘vernalization,’ and ‘gibber-
ellin’ pathways. These promotive pathways all converge on the ‘integrator’ genes SUPPRESSOR OF
OVEREXPRESSION OF CO 1 (SOC1) and FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT).9,10 Review articles on recent
progress in flowering are available,11,12 and the role of GA in flowering is referred to in Section 4.02.3.4.3.

4.02.2 Auxins
4.02.2.1 Introduction
Auxins function as key regulators at the intersection of developmental and environmental events and the
response pathways that they trigger. Naturally occurring members of this hormone group include indole-3-
acetic acid (IAA), indole-3-butyric acid (IBA), and 4-chloro-indole-3-acetic acid (4-Cl-IAA). Auxin levels vary
dramatically within the plant body and throughout the life cycle of the plant, forming complex gradients that
appear to be a central component of its regulatory activity for plant development.13–17 Accordingly, plants have
evolved intricate networks with adaptive plasticity as well as genetic and biochemical redundancy to regulate
auxin levels in specific tissues in response to changing environmental and developmental conditions.
Our knowledge about auxin has progressed markedly in many areas over the last several years. Accordingly,
this chapter will focus primarily on the more recent discoveries and their impact on our current understanding.
14 Plant Hormones

In some cases, however, it is critical to place recent work in a proper historical context and we have tried to do
this within the confines of the space permitted. Readers are referred to four recent reviews that cover aspects of
auxin biology that may prove helpful.18–21

4.02.2.2 Chemistry
IAA is a B-excessive hetero-aromatic organic acid, consisting of an indole ring with a weak net positive charge
and an acetic acid side chain. The acetic acid–indole bond at the third position of the indole ring in IAA is freely
rotating, with the carboxyl group exhibiting a strong negative charge at neutral pH.22 IAA has a UV absorption
spectrum characteristic of substituted indoles, with a strong maximum at 220 nm (E220 ¼ 33 200) and a
characteristic of three overlapping peaks with maxima at 274, 282, and 288 nm (E282 ¼ 6060).
Auxins are defined as organic substances that promote cell elongation when applied in low concentrations to
plant tissue segments in a bioassay. By this definition, there are several other native auxins that have been
reported to occur in plants in addition to the most often studied auxin, IAA. These include the halogen-
substituted 4-Cl-IAA,23 as well as phenylacetic acid and indole-3-butyric acid.24 All native auxins are found in
planta as both free acids and conjugated forms through ester or amide linkages. IAA, the auxin most extensively
studied, will be the focus of this chapter.

4.02.2.2.1 IAA conjugates in plants

IAA conjugates identified from plants can be esters or acyl anhydrides with simple sugars or cyclitols, esters
with larger molecular weight polysaccharides, or polysaccharide moieties of glycoproteins. IAA can also be
found conjugated by amide linkage to amino acids such as aspartate or to peptides or proteins.

4.02.2.2.2 IAA peptide conjugates

Several early studies had indicated that protein-like compounds were formed by plants from supplied radio-
active IAA, although they were generally not well characterized. Native higher molecular weight amide
conjugates isolated from plants include a hydrophobic 3.6 kDa peptide25 and a 35 kDa protein26 from bean as
well as several proteins from Arabidopsis. The gene for the major bean IAA protein (iap1) was isolated and
cloned.26 The IAP1 protein was produced in transformed Arabidopsis and Medicago, but the expressed protein
was not modified with IAA in either plant species, indicating selectivity in its use by specific plant species.27
There are also immunological data from several other species26,28 pointing to peptide conjugates, and a class
of maize zein proteins was shown to contain an indole-acyl modification.29 Immunological and analytical
studies suggested that these modifications may be a feature common to many plants. For example, previous
studies had shown that Arabidopsis has both ester- and amide-conjugated IAA;30 however, in total, the low-
molecular-weight conjugates identified did not account for the bulk of the conjugate pool, which could be
accounted for by the presence of IAA.20
A common feature of these studies was that they were conducted on seed tissues and the IAA-modified
proteins had the characteristics of storage proteins or late embryogenesis abundant proteins. Thus, from these
results, it was difficult to assign a specific function to the IAA proteins beyond a possible storage role for the
phytohormone. More recently, this picture has changed somewhat with the isolation of an IAA protein from
rapidly expanding strawberry fruit.31 Based on sequence homology, this IAA protein appears to be an ATP
synthase, the first IAA protein that has an apparent enzymatic function.

4.02.2.2.3 Amino acid conjugates

The formation of IAA conjugates is widely believed to be a means for removal of excess IAA produced during
certain times of plant development and also in mutant plants where indolic precursors and IAA metabolites
accumulate.32 In all higher and many lower plants, applied IAA is rapidly conjugated to form IAA–aspartate.33
The ability of plant tissues to make aspartate conjugates of a variety of active auxins is induced by pretreatment
with auxin,34 and this induction was shown to be blocked by inhibitors of RNA and protein synthesis. After
almost 50 years of study, an in vitro system from plants was described that accounts for the formation of IAA
amide conjugates35 via a mechanism where the acidic auxin is adenylated followed by acyl transfer to the amino
acid. The gene for this reaction had been discovered almost 20 years before, when GH3 from soybean was shown
 Plant Hormones 15

to be rapidly induced following auxin treatment.36 Several IAA–amino acid conjugates (e.g., IAA–aspartate,
IAA–glutamate, IAA–alanine) have been identified in untreated plants and plant cell cultures37,38 and it appears
that several of these could be formed by similar mechanisms.

4.02.2.2.4 Amide conjugate hydrolysis

In vitro hydrolysis of amide IAA conjugates was shown with applied conjugates,39 and a specific conjugate
hydrolase was induced in Chinese cabbage with Plasmodiophora brassicae infection.40 Auxin conjugates have also
been used as ‘slow-release’ forms of IAA in plant tissue cultures.41 A genetic analysis of IAA conjugate
hydrolysis in plants identified the gene ILR1 coding for a hydrolase of IAA conjugates.42,43 The enzyme
hydrolyzed IAA–leucine and IAA–phenylalanine and ILR1 was shown to be representative of a gene family
whose members exhibit varying substrate specificities.44 IAR3 hydrolyzed IAA–L-alanine, while ILL2 was
promiscuous in its substrate requirements.45 Analysis of triple mutants (ilr1, iar3, and ill2) revealed that lateral
shoot number, hypocotyl elongation, auxin sensitivity, and IAA levels were altered, suggesting that conjugate
hydrolysis is involved in the regulation of such processes in planta.46
Enzymes from bacterial sources catalyzing the selective hydrolysis of IAA–amino acid conjugates have been
described as well. IAA–L-aspartate hydrolase was cloned from Enterobacter agglomerans47 and IAA–L-alanine
hydrolase was reported from Arthrobacter ilicis.48 Additional characterization at the level of the gene and analysis
of the enzyme protein revealed that the IAA–aspartate hydrolase was related to other bacterial amidohydro-
lases and with homology to the ILR1 gene of Arabidopsis.49 Transformation into Arabidopsis showed a mild high-
auxin phenotype.30 Subsequent analyses revealed that two zinc-binding histidine residues conserved in
bacterial and plant enzymes, His-404 and His-405, were critical for the determination of substrate specificity
and activity, respectively.50

4.02.2.2.5 Ester conjugates

The ester conjugates of maize endosperm have been extensively studied and reviewed.33 A higher molecular
weight maize ester cellulosic glucan is predominate, with IAA–glucose, IAA–myo-inositol, and IAA–inositol
glycosides accounting for the remainder. The in vitro synthesis of 1-O--D-IAA–glucose from IAA and UDP-
glucose has been described51–53and other conjugate-synthesizing reactions of Zea mays have also been studied in
vitro.54–57 In maize, IAA–glucose is transacylated to myo-inositol to form IAA–myo-inositol.55,58 The bond
energy of the acyl alkyl acetal bond between IAA and the aldehydic oxygen of glucose is approximately
1.4 kcal above that of the bond between glucose and UDP.52 Because the formation of IAA–glucose is
energetically unfavorable, the conjugate formation reaction is driven by the energetically favored
second step of transacylation of the IAA moiety.52,59 The product of these two steps, IAA–inositol, may
then be glycosylated to form IAA–myo-inositol–galactoside or IAA–myo-inositol–arabinoside by reactions
with the appropriate uridine diphosphosugar.55 The enzyme catalyzing the synthesis of 1-O-IAA–glucose,
IAA–glucose synthetase, has been purified to homogeneity, characterized, and cloned.51,52,59 Enzymatic activity
and protein levels of IAA–glucose synthase are increased following auxin treatment of maize coleoptiles.60
Isolation of the Arabidopsis gene encoding an IAA–glucose-forming enzyme61 as well as the availability of the
maize gene has resulted in several groups generating transgenic plants with elevated and/or reduced capacity
for IAA–glucose formation. The effect of the transgene likely depends on the availability of both excess UDP-
glucose and possibly a suitable transacylation receptor in the transformed plant. The use of amino acids or other
amines as alternative substrates for transacylations from IAA–glucose or, as recently proposed,62 IAA–peptides
or IAA–proteins could result from such an acyl transfer mechanism. IAA–glucose synthase antisense tomato
seedlings showed reduced levels of IAA–glucose and ester IAA pools, but no corresponding alteration in the
levels of amide conjugates,48 suggesting that ester and amide conjugation are not linked via a common acyl
transfer intermediate of IAA–glucose, and that amino acids may not, in this instance, serve as suitable indole-
acyl acceptors. Unexpectedly, the levels of free IAA either remain unaffected by the level of expression of
enzymes for IAA–glucose formation63 or increase or decrease in parallel with IAA–glucose changes.61,63
The cofractionation of IAA–glucose synthetase and two enzymes for IAA–glucose hydrolysis, 1-O-IAA–
glucose hydrolase and 6-O-IAA–glucose hydrolase, suggested that these enzymes exist as a hormone-metabo-
lizing complex.56,57,64 A bifunctional indole-3-acetyl transferase catalyzes the synthesis and hydrolysis of
indole-3-acetyl-myo-inositol in the immature endosperm of Z. mays.65
16 Plant Hormones

4.02.2.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

It appears that an early evolutionary adaptation in plants was the ability to regulate levels of IAA via the
interplay of both tryptophan-dependent and tryptophan-independent pathways (Figure 1) for IAA biosynth-
esis.66 The use of individual pathways can differ according to a plant’s developmental stage and in response to
various environmental stimuli.67–69 Tryptophan-dependent IAA biosynthesis is thought to occur via

Figure 1 Biosynthetic pathways that have been proposed for the formation of indole-3-acetic acid. The tryptophan-
independent pathway, A, is shown from indole, although indole-3-glycerol phosphate and indole are freely interconvertible
and the exact branch point has yet to be precisely determined. Reactions B, C, and D (NIT1–4, ZmNit1, ZmNit2; nitrilases)
define the indole-3-acetonitrile pathway. Reaction sequences E, F, and G (SUR1; IAAld oxidase) or B, H, and G are
characteristic of the IAAld pathway. The indole-3-acetaldoxime pathway would include B (CYP79B2 CYP79B3; cytochrome
P450s), C, and D or B, H, and G. Although various routes using tryptamine have been proposed over the years, the route
defined by yucca, I, J, K and either C and D or H and G, has attracted the most attention recently. The indole-3-pyruvate
pathway, E, F, and G, has received much attention recently with the description of the sav3 and tir2 mutants that appear to
block reaction E. The conversion of tryptophan to indole-3-acetamide and its conversion to IAA, reactions L and M, were
previously thought to be only microbial, but evidence for plant conversions has also emerged.
 Plant Hormones 17

deamination and decarboxylation steps without cleavage of the 3039 bond.70 Although a number of individual
genes or enzymes have been implicated in the process, the exact reaction sequence, as well as the totality of the
genes and enzymes associated, remains largely unknown,21 and for tryptophan-independent biosynthesis the
reaction leading to the addition of the 2-carbon side chain has not been elucidated.71–73

4.02.2.3.1 Tryptophan-independent biosynthesis

Since the first studies conducted in the 1940s,74 the biosynthesis of IAA focused on the degradation of
tryptophan,38 although IAA biosynthesis pathways that did not directly involve tryptophan had been proposed
in early studies dating back to the 1950s. However, a series of studies using stable isotopic tracers, backed up by
tryptophan biosynthesis mutant plant lines, changed this view.69 The first studies showed, using metabolic flux
analysis, that tryptophan could not be the only precursor of IAA in Lemna gibba since the rate of labeling of the
IAA pool from tryptophan was too slow to account for the needs of the plant.75 Computational arguments were
soon complemented by genetic analyses when tryptophan biosynthesis mutants became available. The first
such mutant, orange pericarp (orp) of maize76 – a true tryptophan auxotroph, was examined using the stable
isotope approach and D2O labeling to show IAA was made de novo in plants unable to make tryptophan.32 A
detailed labeling study of carrot cells in culture showed that IAA was made de novo and was labeled by D2O and
labeled precursors to the same extent with or without 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) in the medium.
2,4-D, which induces embryogenesis, changes the labeling of IAA from tryptophan dramatically without
changing the efficacy of labeling from indole or D2O.67 A series of Arabidopsis mutants in specific steps in
tryptophan biosynthesis allowed a more detailed analysis than was possible in the maize orp.71,73 The presence
of a tryptophan-independent pathway to IAA biosynthesis was confirmed using an in vitro system obtained from
maize seedlings72 where indole but not tryptophan yielded IAA.
The choice of biosynthetic pathways has been shown to be controlled both temporally and spatially.37
Tryptophan-independent biosynthesis appears to be important for providing a morphogenic signal as in later
stages of embryogenesis when fine control over low levels of IAA may be critical for the development of a polar
axis.74 Tryptophan-dependent biosynthesis seems to occur when higher levels of IAA are required, as at
fertilization and in wounding responses.78–80 In tomato, the IAA biosynthesis pathway changes during fruit
development, switching from the tryptophan-dependent to a tryptophan-independent pathway between the
mature-green and red-ripe stages of fruit development.81 Although it is not known for all plants, at least L. gibba,
maize, bean, Arabidopsis, and carrot use both tryptophan-dependent and tryptophan-independent IAA biosynth-
esis pathways, confirmed by stable label feeding studies.67,72,80,82–84 Tryptophan-independent IAA biosynthesis
occurs as well in lower land plants such as liverworts, mosses, and ferns, suggesting that it has very early
origins.85

4.02.2.3.2 Tryptophan-dependent pathways

Biosynthesis of IAA from tryptophan uses the L-form of the amino acid.75 Some of the enzymes that catalyze the
conversion of specific intermediates have been identified, and some of the genes coding for the enzymes have
been cloned. Such findings establish that plants are competent to carry out such metabolic conversions;
however, the specific involvement of these genes and intermediates requires confirmation, because biochemical
studies carried out with applications to tissue segments or with extracts could disrupt tissue and cellular
compartmentalization and because enzymes that catalyze the conversion of tryptophan to IAA in vitro may
never come into contact with the intermediates in vivo. Thus, the physiological relevance of some of these
pathways remains an open question.69 An additional concern is that many of the enzymes have wide substrate
specificities, so it has been difficult to implicate them solely in IAA biosynthesis. Some of the intermediates and
enzymes that have been described to have the competence to carry out these reactions are discussed below.

4.02.2.3.2(i) Indole-3-acetonitrile pathway Indole-3-acetonitrile (IAN) has been found mainly in plants of
the Brassicaceae family, including Arabidopsis thaliana and Brassica chinensis,86 which produce a large variety of
indole compounds in sufficient quantity. IAN may be produced by several routes including the conversion of
tryptophan to indole-3-acetaldoxime (IAOx) and to IAN. Interest increased following the description of a
family of nitrilases (NIT1–4) in Arabidopsis with close homology to genes in bacteria.87,88 There is tissue
specificity in expression, and NIT1 and NIT2 are expressed in response to pathogen infection.87,89 NIT3 was
18 Plant Hormones

shown to be expressed in the vascular tissue of hypocotyls, cotyledons, leaves, and roots, but not in root tips or
reproductive structures. NIT4 expression occurred in seedling root tips, distal tips of young leaves, mature
stems, sepals, and the tip and base of siliques. Arabidopsis mutants trp2 and trp3, which over-accumulated IAA
conjugates,71 also accumulated IAN 6–11-fold over wild type. When Arabidopsis roots were fed
[2H5]tryptophan, both [2H5]IAN and [2H5]IAA were extracted from the roots and [13C1]IAN was converted
to [13C1]IAA in vivo.90
Nitrilase enzyme activities have also been found in Gramineae and Musaceae91 and in tobacco,92 and
homologs of NIT4 are present in rice.93 The enzymes encoded by the tobacco genes were not able to hydrolyze
exogenous IAN to IAA,94 but expression of the Arabidopsis NIT2 gene in tobacco conferred increased sensitivity
to exogenous IAN and IAA. Overexpression of nitrilase genes apparently does not cause phenotypic changes
under normal growth conditions.37 NIT1 was postulated to encode the predominant nitrilase isozyme based on
expression studies, while NIT2–4 were 4–8-fold less abundant.87 However, the Km values of NIT1–3 for IAN
were an order of magnitude higher than those for their preferred substrate 3-phenyl-propionate.93 The nit1
mutant had no dramatic phenotype in the absence of IAN and had levels of free IAA and IAA conjugates similar
to wild type. NIT4 did not accept IAN as a substrate.95 The nit2 and nit3 mutants retained sensitivity to applied
IAN, which suggests that they do not function in the IAA biosynthesis pathway in vivo. Also, the high-IAA
phenotype caused by the Arabidopsis rnt1-1 mutant was not blocked by the nit1-1 mutant, suggesting that NIT1
was not involved in IAA biosynthesis in rnt1-1 mutants.
In maize, two nitrilases, ZmNIT1 and ZmNIT2, are expressed in aleurone/pericarp and at lower levels in the
endosperm.96 In in vitro enzyme assays, ZmNIT1 did not convert IAN to IAA, but ZmNIT2 did, and it also
released indole-3-acetamide (IAM) as a by-product. ZmNIT2 activity converted several nitriles previously
tested as substrates for Arabidopsis nitrilases93,95 and they were converted to their respective acids with greater
efficiency than was IAN. The temperature optimum for IAN was also very high (40  C), as was the apparent Km
of ZmNIT2 (4.1 mmol l1), and there was no substrate inhibition by IAN in quantities greater than 3 mmol l1,
as had been found in Arabidopsis.93 IAN was present in maize kernels in concentrations ranging from 20 to
350 pmol g1 fresh weight. Given the low substrate levels and high Km, and the high rate of IAA production in
the endosperm (0.23 mg IAA g1 h1),97 IAN would likely need to be channeled to obtain the requisite localized
concentration.

4.02.2.3.2(ii) Indole-3-acetaldehyde pathway The natural occurrence of indole-3-acetaldehyde (IAAld) in

plants was first described in the extracts of cucumber seedlings98 where the concentration of IAAld was
0.7 ng g1 fresh weight. Possibly arising via IAOx or indole-3-pyruvate (IPyA), IAAld may act as a conver-
gence point for tryptophan-dependent pathways.78 In an early study, the capacity to metabolize
[14C1]tryptophan via IPyA and IAAld was determined.99 Two primarily cytoplasmic enzymes were involved
and the process was NAD-dependent.
The IAAld pathway has been well characterized in microorganisms100 where the conversion of IAAld to IAA
is catalyzed by IAAld oxidases. Related activities have been characterized in several plants such as potato
tubers,101 oat coleoptiles,102 cucumber,98 and pea.103 Further evidence for the involvement of IAAld oxidases
comes from the Arabidopsis superroot (sur1, allelic to rooty, alf1, hls3, and ivr) mutant,104–106 which accumulated an
aldehyde oxidase isozyme specific for IAAld, and had a high-auxin phenotype including increased lateral and
adventitious rooting, epinastic cotyledons, and lack of apical hook when grown in darkness.105 Sur1 also
accumulated free IAA and IAA conjugates.106,107 The sur1 mutant phenotype is due to a defect in cysteine-
sulfoxide lyase (C-S lyase) that is involved in glucosinolate production from IAOx. As would be expected, the
enzymatic activity and transcription of the aldehyde oxidase is elevated in the rooty mutant.105,108
The sur2 (rnt1) Arabidopsis mutant is defective in CYP83B1, a cytochrome P450 monooxygenase that is able
to convert IAOx to its N-oxide.109 This is the first committed step in indole-3-methyl glucosinolate biosynth-
esis, and the mutant had decreased levels of indolic glucosinolates and accumulated high levels of IAAld and
IAA. However, little of the IAAld itself was converted to IAA,110 which seemed to rule out both IAN and IAAld
as intermediates in IAA biosynthesis in this case. Indeed, double mutants for CYP83B1 and NIT1 had increased
IAA production, so this may point to a pathway that does not involve IAN in the IAOx/IAAld pathway, or to
another pathway that is in fact also active and compensating.
 Plant Hormones 19

Aldehyde oxidase purified from maize coleoptiles is a multicomponent enzyme that contains a molybdenum
cofactor, nonheme iron, and flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) as prosthetic groups.111 When substrate
specificity of the aldehyde oxidase was tested, good activity was detected with IAAld, indole-3-aldehyde,
and benzaldehyde among others. The addition of NADP and NADPH did not change the activity. In contrast,
in maize endosperm, tryptophan-dependent IAA biosynthesis was dependent on an NADP/NADPH redox
system, which may mean that the two tissues of maize are utilizing different pathways or different redox
systems for IAA biosynthesis.112
The variety of aldehyde oxidases discovered in other plants have similarities to the maize enzyme, but also
have some very important differences. Enzymes contained in a cell wall fraction from barley seedlings were
able to oxidize IAAld to form IAA at a pH optimum of 7 and Km of 5 mmol l1, which was very similar to the
enzyme found in maize.113 Two aldehyde oxidases from potato have also been identified;101 they had a similar
pH optimum (between 7 and 8), but preferred aliphatic aldehydes to aromatic aldehydes. Although oat and
cucumber aldehyde oxidases have been shown to oxidize IAAld to produce IAA,102,114 the oat enzyme had a
lower pH optimum and higher Km than the maize enzyme, and the cucumber enzyme was inhibited by
synthetic auxin and activated by 2-mercaptoethanol, which was not true for the maize enzyme. The difference
in the enzymes makes it difficult to envision a common evolutionary origin for the IAAld pathway in plants if
these particular enzymes are involved in each case.
Enzymes that can catalyze the formation of IAAld from N-hydroxyl tryptamine or IAOx, two most likely
precursors of IAAld, have not been unequivocally identified.78 An IAA-forming activity in maize coleoptile
extracts was partially purified using chromatography and ammonium sulfate fractionation, and the IAAld
oxidase activity copurified with the IAA-forming activity.115 However, the relative rates of IAA-forming
activity to IAAld activity decreased through purification, casting doubt on the role of IAAld in IAA
biosynthesis.

4.02.2.3.2(iii) Indole-3-acetaldoxime pathway IAOx is thought to be important for IAA biosynthesis in

plants of the Brassicacae family that make indolic glucosinolate secondary metabolites. IAOx is a logical
precursor of both IAAld and IAN, and has been proposed as the branch point between indole-3-methyl
glucosinolate production and IAA biosynthesis. Recently, the cytochrome P450 CYP83B1 that encodes the
enzyme that N-hydroxylates indole-3-acetaldoxime to the corresponding aci-nitro compound 1-aci-nitro-
indolyl-ethane116,117 was identified. The aci-nitro compound reacts nonenzymatically with thiol compounds
to produce an N-alkyl-thiohydroximate adduct, the first committed step in glucosinolate production. CYP83B1
had a high affinity for IAOx, with a Km of 3 mmol l1, and could also bind tryptamine. IAOx had the ability to
displace tryptamine in the enzyme’s active site. The low Km would prevent the accumulation of IAOx.
Expression of CYP83B1 was global; however, it was preferentially expressed in roots, and was induced by
wounding or by dehydration. This enzyme has also been suggested to be a regulator of auxin production in
Arabidopsis, and auxin response elements are found in the promoter region.116 Knockout mutants lacking the
enzyme had phenotypes that included severe apical dominance and overexpression lines exhibited decreased
apical dominance. The null mutation of CYP83B1, also known as rnt1-1, is allelic to sur2, a mutant known to
accumulate elevated levels of free IAA.109 rnt1-1 plants exhibited increased hypocotyl length, epinastic
cotyledons, exfoliation of the hypocotyls, adventitious root formation from the hypocotyl, and enhanced
secondary root and root hair formation.117 Wild-type Arabidopsis seedlings grown on media supplemented
with IAN phenocopied rnt1-1 seedlings with adventitious lateral root primordia on the hypocotyls and
epinastic cotyledons.118
Microsomal membrane fractions from cabbage, pea, and maize can convert tryptophan to IAOx, and
recently, the enzymes that complete the conversion of tryptophan to IAOx in vitro have been characterized.119
The enzymes in Arabidopsis have been identified as the cytochrome P450s CYP79B2 and CYP79B3.120
Cytochrome P450 monooxygenases are heme-thiolate, membrane-localized enzymes involved in the oxidative
metabolism of lipophilic substrates, and are involved in the biosynthesis of phenylprenoids, alkaloids, terpe-
noids, glucosinolates, cyanogenic glucosides, phytoalexins, and plant hormones.121 Plants overexpressing
CYP79B2 contained elevated levels of free auxin and displayed auxin overproduction phenotypes such as
long hypocotyls and epinastic cotyledons. Overexpression of CYP79B2 also increased expression of AUX/IAA
genes, SAURS, and GH3. Expression profiles of CYP79B2 were similar to that of yucca, an auxin overproduction
20 Plant Hormones

mutant discussed below. Interestingly, the CYP79B2 overexpression lines also contained elevated levels of IAN,
pointing to IAN being derived from IAOx produced by cytochrome P450s. Although single knockout mutants
cyp79B2 or cyp79B3 had no profound phenotype, cyp79B2 and cyp79B3 double mutants contained reduced IAA
levels, showed growth defects such as shorter petioles and smaller leaves, which was consistent with partial
auxin deficiency, and contained reduced levels of IAN.119 The CYP79B2 overexpression line had increased
sensitivity to 5-methyltryptophan,120 and the double mutant had even higher sensitivity to this toxic trypto-
phan analog. The lack of orthologs in rice119 suggests that this pathway may not be well represented in
monocots.

4.02.2.3.2(iv) Tryptamine pathway Tryptamine is another potential intermediate of IAA biosynthesis path-
way.122 Recently, yucca, an activation-tagged mutant of Arabidopsis, was shown to overexpress a flavin
monooxygenase catalyzing the N-hydroxylation of tryptamine to form N-hydroxyl-tryptamine.123 The domi-
nant yucca line exhibited an elevated auxin level phenotype: epinastic cotyledons and elongated petioles when
grown in white light, and short hypocotyls and lack of apical hook when grown in dark. Mature leaves were
narrower and epinastic with long blades and petioles, and adults also had increased apical dominance. Free IAA
levels were 50% higher than in wild type. The yucca mutant could proliferate and differentiate in cell culture on
auxin-free medium. Overexpression of the bacterial IAA conjugation gene iaaL in the yucca plants124 suppressed
the mutant phenotype.123
There are 11 members of the YUCCA family in Arabidopsis. The roles of YUC1 and its closest homologs
YUC2, YUC4, and YUC6 were studied by overexpression, and all yielded phenotypes suggestive of auxin
overproduction.125 The expression patterns of the genes differed, with YUC1 and YUC4 showing similar
expression in apical meristems and young floral primordial, but each also expressed elsewhere. YUC2 and
YUC6 were expressed at a low level in the inflorescence apex and were more widely expressed in young flower
buds, petals, stamens and gynoecium of young flowers (YUC2), and in stamens and pollen (YUC6). Single gene
mutants did not display obvious developmental defects, while double mutants produced mixed results, with
yuc1yuc4 and yuc2yuc6 showing growth and developmental defects and yuc1yuc4 and yuc2yuc6 having reduced
fertility or complete sterility. The triple mutants showed similar floral development defects as the double
mutants and the quadruple mutants showed even stronger phenotypes. The triple mutants had reduced
venation in flowers and reduced vasculature in leaves, and the quadruple mutants had even more pronounced
phenotypes.125 The disruption of these genes also led to decreased expression of the auxin reporter DR5-
GUS126 in the cells where the YUCCA genes are normally expressed, such as young leaves. Auxin application to
mutant plants did not complement yucca phenotypes but when transformed with iaaM127,128 (under the YUC6
promoter), floral reproductive organ development was partially rescued, as well as fertility, in double and triple
mutants.125
A homolog of YUCCA, floozy,129 was found in petunia as a flower mutant, and overexpression lines contained
increased IAA levels and had high-auxin phenotypes. Seven YUCCA-like genes were identified in rice130 and
segregated into three protein clusters, similar to those in Arabidopsis. Expression analysis of the genes showed
that they were differentially expressed, with OsYUCCAs 1, 5, and 6 preferentially expressed at the tip of rice
coleoptiles. Rice calli overexpressing OsYUCCA1 had a decreased growth rate and lower regeneration fre-
quency, and leaf growth and root elongation were also inhibited. OsYUCCA1 protein sequence is closest to
Arabidopsis YUCCAs 1, 4, 10, and 11, of which 1 and 4 appear to be involved in Arabidopsis IAA biosynthesis.125 In
rice, decreasing YUCCA expression using antisense caused a dramatic phenotype,130 while in Arabidopsis,
multiple genes needed to be knocked out in order to get a significant phenotype. Combinations of knockouts
from different clusters seem to be the most detrimental in Arabidopsis.125 Recently, a YUC/FZY homolog,
ToFZY, was described from tomato and converted tryptamine to N-hydroxyl-tryptamine in vitro.131
Tryptamine has been identified as a native compound in tomato,132 and the gene encoding tryptophan
decarboxylase has been isolated from Catharanthus roseus.133 Plants grown on deuterium oxide incorporated
more label into tryptamine than IAA, which was consistent with the result expected for a precursor of IAA.
IAOx may be a YUCCA pathway intermediate for IAA biosynthesis in A. thaliana, and perhaps in rice and maize
as well; however, no enzyme has yet been identified for the conversion of N-hydroxyl tryptamine to IAOx.
Because tryptamine is not a compound universally present in plants69 and deuterium oxide labeling ruled out
tryptamine as an intermediate in tomato,132 the pathway would have to be species-specific.
 Plant Hormones 21

4.02.2.3.2(v) Indole-3-pyruvic acid pathway IPyA is present as a natural component in tomato, and in
deuterium oxide-labeling studies, incorporated more label than IAA,132 which one would expect from an
upstream precursor. IPyA has also been found in Arabidopsis seedlings134 and pea roots.135 Although there are
several possible reactions leading to the formation of IPyA by oxidative deamination, recent evidence points to
a specific aminotransferase that is likely responsible for this reaction, and suggests that an aminotransferase
annotated as an allinase is involved.136,137 One mutant line, sav3, was isolated as a shade avoidance deficient
mutant,136 and proved to be allelic to a gene called TIR2. Knockout mutants of TIR2 showed reduced levels of
IAA, decreased hypocotyl elongation, and reduced lateral root formation.
In some microorganisms, IPyA is a known precursor of IAA.138 The bacterial tryptophan aminotransferase,
which catalyzes the rate-limiting step in the reaction from tryptophan to IPyA, has a low substrate specificity
and high Km for tryptophan. Bacterial indolepyruvate decarboxylase (IPDC), taking part in the second step in
the reaction sequence, has a low Km for its substrate (Km ¼ 15 mmol l1). The IPDC activity in plant prepara-
tions is difficult to assay because of the instability of IPyA.139 While no specific IPDC genes have been isolated
from plants thus far, it is possible that the product of one of the five candidate pyruvate decarboxylase genes
performs this conversion in Arabidopsis.140

4.02.2.3.2(vi) Indole-3-acetamide pathway The involvement of IAM in IAA biosynthesis was proposed
based on its involvement in the bacterial pathway in Pseudomonas savastanoi141 and in crown gall tissues.100
The bacterial pathway occurs in two steps utilizing tryptophan monooxygenase and IAM hydrolase. The
catalytic domain sequence of the bacterial acylamidohydrolase was used to identify an Arabidopsis amidase
(AMI1).142 The gene was shown to be part of an Arabidopsis gene family (AMI1–4) and AMI1 message and
protein are found in leaves. IAM has been found as a naturally occurring compound in Arabidopsis,143 and it
appeared to be a by-product in the conversion of IAN to IAA by the nitrilase genes NIT1–3. The occurrence
of IAM is widespread, however, being found in mung bean seeds,144 orange fruits,145 clubroots of Chinese
cabbage,146 wounded potato tubers,147 and aseptically grown cherry seedlings.148 In some cases, IAM was
attributed to microbial activity.
When the IAA biosynthesis gene IaaM from Agrobacterium is introduced into plants defective in IAA
biosynthesis, IAA is produced,127,128 which may point to the involvement of this intermediate in some plants
and demonstrates the ability of the plants to hydrolyze IAM to IAA. IAM has also been found in etiolated
seedlings of aseptically grown squash seedlings.149 The hydrolase was partially purified from roots. However,
the bacterial hydrolase had a higher affinity for IAM than the squash root enzyme. IAM hydrolase activity has
also been found in cultivated and wild rice.150 The enzyme in cultivated rice hydrolyzed IAM, 1-naphthalene-
acetamide, and IAA–ester conjugates.151 However, feeding labeled tryptophan to rice yielded labeled IAA, but
not labeled IAM.150

4.02.2.3.2(vii) IAA synthase An activity associated with a protein fraction described as an ‘enzyme complex’
was isolated from Arabidopsis and proposed to act as a channel system that could catalyze the entire pathway of
biosynthesis of IAA from tryptophan.152 The complex was 160–180 kDa, soluble, and required no additional
cofactors. There was also evidence for a nitrilase-like protein in the complex, which suggested that the reaction
proceeded through IAN. When an excess of [2H5]tryptophan (10 mmol l1) was fed to 0.2 mg of the protein
fraction containing the complex and incubated at high temperatures (30  C), IAA was produced. Labeled IAN,
IAOx, and IAAld were not detected in the reaction mixture, and did not interfere with the conversion of
tryptophan to IAA. However, addition of an excess of unlabeled intermediates did dilute the isotopic
abundance of [2H] in the IAA recovered, probably due to the conversion of unlabeled IAN or IAAld to IAA.
Labeled IAN or IAAld was not tested to determine which was being converted to IAA in this case. The high
temperature optimum for this complex (40  C) makes it an unlikely candidate as an in vivo IAA biosynthesis
pathway in Arabidopsis and no genetic evidence exists for this complex.
Preliminary data presented in a short review153 suggested that IAA biosynthesis in maize endosperm is due
to a protein complex of 180 kDa, which was partially purified by gel filtration chromatography. It was found to
have a specific activity of 32 pmol mg1 min1, which was a 64-fold enrichment over the crude endosperm
extract. No indolic metabolites were detected that could function as biosynthetic intermediates, but further
22 Plant Hormones

purification attempts resulted in loss of activity perhaps pointing to an unstable complex. It remains to be seen if
this complex is able to be further purified, and, if so, if it is involved in IAA biosynthesis.

4.02.2.3.3 IAA degradation

Initially, IAA catabolism was thought to occur primarily through the action of IAA oxidase, a companion
activity to most plant peroxidases.69 This idea has been extensively reviewed38,69 and it seems likely that the
contribution of the decarboxylation pathway to IAA degradation was significantly overestimated in studies of
IAA oxidation in homogenates or with cut tissue pieces. We now know that the general process of ring
oxidation followed by glycosylation appears to a general theme (Figure 2), although variable in its specific
details in different species.38,154 In maize, oxidation of IAA in vivo yields oxindole-3-acetic acid (oxIAA).155,156
The discovery that the IAA conjugate IAA–aspartate can either be hydrolyzed to yield free IAA39 or serve as
an entry point into IAA catabolism157 placed new emphasis on understanding the biochemistry of this branch-
point compound.154 IAA–aspartate and oxIAA–aspartate were the major metabolites present after feeding IAA
to Populus tremula.158 At least three different pathways for the direct oxidation of this IAA conjugate, and likely
IAA–glutamate as well, are known.154 Thus, specific IAA conjugates have a significant role in IAA degradation,
and these findings demonstrate that the processes of conjugation and degradation have aspects in common.
Recently, several new oxidative metabolites from Arabidopsis have been described. 6-OH-IAA conjugates with
phenylalanine, valine, and oxIAA–1-O-glucose.159 The same group also reported on a novel series of com-
pounds in rice, the N--D-glucopyranosyl derivative and their aspartate and glutamate conjugates.160 These are
very exciting findings, but exactly where these new compounds fit in the overall scheme for auxin metabolism
will need to await further analysis of their flux as well as the determination of their metabolic fate.

4.02.2.4 Perception and Signaling

As mentioned above, auxin induces a multitude of effects modulating plant development. It has always been a
central question in plant biology how this simple molecule can regulate such a dazzling variety of diverse
responses, and in recent years we have seen tremendous progress in our understanding of the mechanism of
auxin signal transduction. While a model for auxin-induced transcriptional changes with the ubiquitin–
proteasome system as its key player had been known for some time, the major breakthrough was the unraveling
of the perception mechanism161,162 and with it the identification of a family of auxin receptors163 revealing a
potentially complete, and surprisingly simple, signaling pathway from perception to transcriptional response.
However, the historical path to the discovery of the current model took a number of turns to finally arrive at
one of the components that was among the first to be identified.

4.02.2.4.1 Transcriptional responses to auxin stimuli

Early molecular approaches to elucidate auxin action revealed that the hormone induces a number of rapid
transcriptional changes in several gene families. Three of these – SMALL AUXIN-UP RNAs (SAURs), GH3s,
and AUXIN/INDOLE-3-ACETIC ACID genes (Aux/IAAs) – have been most thoroughly characterized.
Levels of early transcripts are dramatically induced only minutes after auxin application,164–166 suggesting
that regulation of transcription would be a major function of the yet-to-be-identified receptor.
Conserved auxin-responsible elements (AuxREs) in the promoters of several auxin-inducible genes167 led to
the identification of proteins that mediate their transcription. AUXIN RESPONSE FACTORs (ARFs) interact
with the AuxRE and, thus, facilitate auxin-responsive gene expression.168,169 The ARF family comprises 23
members, which are characterized by an N-terminal DNA-binding domain (DBD), a long middle region, and
domains III and IV near the C-terminus. While the DBD binds to the AuxRE, domains III and IV function as
dimerization domains. In addition to homodimerizing and heterodimerizing with other ARF family members,
domains III and IV also enable interaction with the 29-member family of AUX/IAA proteins.170 Aux/IAA genes
encode nuclear proteins with similar domains (domains III and IV).171 They do not seem to bind DNA directly
but instead act as transcriptional repressors through domain I when interacting with ARFs.172 Aux/IAAs are
extremely unstable proteins with half-lives starting in the minutes range, which can be further reduced by auxin
or dramatically increased by the application of proteasome inhibitors.173,174
Figure 2 Summary of the major oxidative routes for IAA catabolism. These include oxidation at the 2-position to form oxIAA and its metabolites (A and D), the recently described
oxidations at indole-6 (B) and the formation of N-glucosides (C), and, finally, the conjugation to IAA–aspartate and its subsequent oxidation (E).
24 Plant Hormones

4.02.2.4.2 Regulation of auxin response by the ubiquitin pathway

Forward genetic screens initiated in the 1980s resulted in the identification of a number of auxin-resistant (axr)
mutants that shed new light on the regulation of auxin response. The first gene isolated was AUXIN
RESISTANT1 (AXR1), which encoded a protein related to ubiquitin-activating E1 enzymes,175 indicating
the role of proteasomal degradation in auxin signaling. This was in agreement with the short half-lives of the
abovementioned Aux/IAA proteins and fit well with the identification of the dominant axr3 and axr2 gain-of-
function mutations in Aux/IAA family members.176,177 Further confirmation of the key role of the ubiquitin
pathway was provided by the isolation of TRANSPORT INHIBITOR RESPONSE1 (TIR1).178 TIR1 was
initially identified in a screen for mutants resistant to polar auxin transport inhibitors,179 but a number of
response-related phenotypes suggested a role in auxin signaling. TIR1 encodes an F-box protein.
F-box proteins are the target recruiting subunits of SCF-type E3 ubiquitin ligases. SCF complexes are
composed of Skp1, cullin, an F-box protein, and a small RING protein RING-BOX1 (Rbx1). The cullin
subunit acts as a scaffold, binding Skp1 at its N-terminus and Rbx1 at its C-terminus. Skp1 functions as an
adaptor connecting the F-box protein to the rest of the complex. While the F-box domain binds to the Skp1
subunit, TIR1 also contains a C-terminal leucine-rich repeat (LRR) as the protein–protein interaction domain
for target recruitment. Therefore, SCFTIR1-mediated ubiquitination was established as the central player in
auxin signaling.180 In the following years, mutants in each of the core SCF subunits were identified and shown
to have defects in auxin response.181,182 And indeed, TIR1 directly interacts with the degron domain II of Aux/
IAA proteins in a cell-free system.183 Remarkably, auxin promotes this interaction. Taken together, genetic
approaches suggested a model with auxin promoting Aux/IAA ubiquitination by SCFTIR1 resulting in
derepression of ARF-mediated transcription of auxin-inducible genes.

4.02.2.4.3 Auxin receptors

Amid an ever clearer picture of auxin action, the auxin receptor remained a conspicuous omission from
signaling models. Early biochemical efforts to isolate auxin receptors identified AUXIN-BINDING
PROTEIN1 (ABP1).184,185 However, the majority of ABP1 localizes to the endoplasmic reticulum where the
pH is too high for auxin binding. Furthermore, embryo-lethal null mutants and the lack of weak mutant alleles
complicated detailed analysis.
The finding that auxin increases the otherwise low affinity of TIR1 toward its substrate AUX/IAA has
suggested that TIR1 may also function as an auxin receptor.161,162 Furthermore, the close homologs AUXIN
SIGNALING F-BOX PROTEIN1–3 (AFB1–3) perform the same receptor function as TIR1.163 The mole-
cular mechanism behind this affinity enforcement was described by elucidating the crystal structure of TIR1 in
complex with several auxins and an AXR2 peptide containing the domain II degron sequence.186 It was found
that the AUX/IAA peptide and auxin bind to the same pocket within the LRRs with inositol hexakisphosphate
acting as a putative cofactor. The exceptionally long intra-repeat loops of LRRs 2, 12, and 14 are crucial for the
formation of the auxin–substrate binding pocket with a pivotal role for loop 2. While auxin binds to a
hydrophobic cavity at the base of the pocket, the AUX/IAA peptide docks on top of the auxin molecule.
Thereby, auxin enlarges the binding surface and stabilizes the interaction of AUX/IAA with TIR1.186
Ten years after the initial identification of the tir1-1 mutant, its central role in the auxin signaling pathway
has been revealed and with this the identification of a novel class of intracellular receptors. However, several
early auxin responses occur too rapidly after auxin treatment to be caused by transcriptional changes and de
novo protein synthesis. This, together with the fact that tir1/afb1–3 higher order mutants still seem to possess
auxin responses,163 points to further auxin signaling routes waiting to be discovered.

4.02.3 Gibberellins
4.02.3.1 Introduction
GAs are a family of plant hormones comprising more than 135 members, and belong to a class of diterpenoids
carrying a basic skeleton that is called ent-gibberellane (Figure 3). Each different GA that has been found to be
naturally occurring and whose structure has been chemically characterized is allocated an A-number, according
 Plant Hormones 25

Figure 3 ent-Gibberellane skeleton and numbering.

to the proposal by MacMillan and Takahashi to adopt chronological numbering system,187 and this A-number
allocation system has now been managed by Hedden and Kamiya.
The history of gibberellin has been well described in the previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural
Products Chemistry,188 in other books, in a review,189–191 and on the website http://www.plant-hormones.info/
gibberellinhistory.htm and so is briefly reviewed in this chapter.
Only specific GAs carrying a characteristic structural property had been considered to be recognized by a
receptor(s) and to show biological activity, although each GA demonstrates diverse biological activities
depending on the structure and assay used.192–194 This has been well shown by the extensive studies using
biosynthetic mutants195–197 and was conclusively confirmed in 2005 by examining the affinity of several GAs
for the receptor protein GID1.198 GID1 was named after the gene responsible for the rice dwarf mutant,
gibberellin insensitive dwarf 1.
The biosynthesis of GAs was extensively surveyed during the 1960–70s by feeding experiments using
Gibberella fujikuroi and radioactive precursors.199,200 The studies on the biosynthesis of GAs in plants were led by
Graebe and coworkers.201–203 Recent research progress in the biosynthesis of GAs is described in
Section 4.02.3.4.
The signal transduction of GAs has been studied by analyzing the mutants204–210 insensitive or constitu-
tively sensitive to GAs as introduced in Section 4.02.3.6. The identification of a GA receptor had been
attempted without promising results until 2005. Physiological and cell biological studies using aleurone cells
have shown that GAs to be perceived on the outer surface of the cell membrane.211–213 Finally, Matsuoka’s
group and Yamaguchi’s group collaborated and succeeded in identifying the cytosolic GA receptor, GID1, in
2005.198 As GID1 plays a decisive role in both the shoot elongation of rice and Arabidopsis and -amylase
induction in rice,198 it remains uncertain whether another GA receptor is located in the cell membrane.
Some gibberellins and related compounds show the antheridiogen activity, which induces the male sex
organ and suppresses the formation of the female organ in schizaeaceous ferns. Antheridic acid214,215 and
GA104216,217 have been isolated and characterized as the principal antheridiogens in Anemia phyllitidis, A. hirsute,
A. rotundifolia, A. flexuosa, and A. mexicana. GA73 methyl ester218 has been identified as an antheridiogen from
Lygodium japonicum, L. circinnatum, and L. flexuosum, and GA9 methyl ester from L. japonicum and L. circinnatum.
The fern antheridiogens have been fully reviewed in the literature,219 so the details are not described in
this chapter.

4.02.3.2 Chemistry
4.02.3.2.1 Fungal gibberellins
After the pathogenetic study on Bakanae disease (foolish rice disease) by Hori220 and Kurosawa,221 Yabuta and
Sumiki222 succeeded in 1938 in purifying chemical substances inducing etiolation of the rice seedling, which is
a symptom of Bakanae disease, from a culture broth of G. fujikuroi and named the active principle gibberellin.
The ICI group223 and the NRRL group224 followed this work to isolate the active substances. The active
substance of Yabuta and Sumiki was later proved to be a mixture of gibberellins GA1, GA2, and GA3 by
comparing the samples of the three groups; the ICI group isolated GA3 (gibberellic acid) and the NRRL group
isolated a mixture of GA1 and GA3. Many GAs have been isolated from the culture broth of G. fujikuroi.
After 1979, some other fungi were found to produce GAs, and it was after 1988 that some bacteria were also
found to produce GAs. The fungi and bacteria that were proved to produce GAs are listed in the literature225
26 Plant Hormones

and information on the GAs in microorganisms is also available on the websites http://www.plant-hormones.info/
occurrence_of_gas_in_fungi.htm and http://www.plant-hormones.info/gasinbacteriai.htm.

4.02.3.2.2 Plant gibberellins

4.02.3.2.2(i) Free gibberellins Mitchell et al.226 first reported in 1951 the occurrence of substances that
showed gibberellin-like activity in immature beans, and MacMillan and Suter227 succeeded in the isolation of
GA1, GA5, GA6, and GA8 from immature seeds of the scarlet bean, Phaseolus coccineus (P. multiflorus), in 1958.
This was the first isolation of gibberellin from a plant. West and Phinney228 also showed the occurrence of GA-
like substances in immature seeds of Phaseolus vulgaris in 1959. Kawarada and Sumiki229 reported the isolation of
GA1 from water sprouts of the mandarin orange tree, Citrus unshu, in 1959. This was the first report on the
isolation of GA from a vegetative tissue. The most notable GA isolated from a vegetative tissue was GA19,230
which is an important biosynthetic intermediate.
As many as 135 GAs had been identified from many plant species by July 2007. It is now considered that all
plant species produce GAs in nature, although the number of plant species from which GAs have been
conclusively identified is still limited. Some mutants lacking the GA biosynthetic enzyme(s) cannot produce
physiologically active GAs and show a dwarf phenotype. The plants from which the identification of GAs has
been reported and the information on plant GAs are reviewed in the literature225 and are available on the
website http://www.plant-hormones.info/occurrence_of_gas_in_plants.htm. The publications reporting the
characterization of GAs after GA118 are cited in the literature.231–234

4.02.3.2.2(ii) Gibberellin conjugates In addition to free gibberellins, several gibberellin conjugates have
been isolated and characterized. Most of the conjugates are gibberellin glucosyl ethers (GA-GEts). The 3-O--
235
D-glucosyl ether of GA3 (GA3-GEt) was the first to be isolated and characterized, and GA8-GEt was
reported at almost the same time. GA26-GEt, GA27-GEt, GA29-GEt,237 GA35-GEt,238 GA1-GEt,239 and
236

the 17-O--D-glucosyl ethers of 16,17-dihydroxy-16,17-dihydro GA4 and 16,17-dihydroxy-16,17-dihydro

GA7 followed.240 GAs-GEt were often identified as metabolites of exogenously fed GAs,241,242 and are
considered to be inactive catabolites, the formation of GAs-GEt contributing to the homeostasis of the active
GA level242 as well as to other inactivation processes like the oxidation at the C2 position.
Other conjugates are the glucosyl esters of GAs (GA-GEs). GA1-GEs, GA4-GEs, GA37-GEs, and GA38-GEs
were isolated from mature seeds of P. vulgaris,243 and GA5-GEs and GA44-GEs from immature seeds of Pharbitis
purpurea.244 The physiological roles of GAs-GEs remain unknown, because there is the possibility that they
could be easily hydrolyzed to give free Gas, which are active or can be converted to the active type.245
Gibberethion is a unique conjugate formed by the coupling between 3-oxo-GA3 and 2-oxo-thiopropionate,
and is found only in immature seeds of Pharbitis nil, and possibly in another inactive metabolite of GA3.246
Some reviews on gibberellin conjugates are listed in the literature.247,248

4.02.3.2.3 Isolation and characterization

Efficient purification performed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and high-sensitivity gas
chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) using a capillary column dramatically improved the purification
and identification procedure for GAs as in other natural products. The improved sensitivity in instrumental
analyses also requires a correspondingly smaller quantity of GAs for characterization. The purification
procedure for GAs has become simpler than that in earlier decades.
Immunoaffinity249–250 chromatography is expected to be a convenient and powerful technique for purifying
GAs, although it has not yet become popular because of the tedium of preparing useful antibodies. The single-
chain Fv (scFv) technique, however, enables easier preparation of anti-GA-scFv on a large scale by using
transformed microorganisms,251 and this will facilitate the use of immunoaffinity for purifying GAs.
The accumulation of GC-MS data enables known GAs to be identified or the structure of unknown
GAs to be speculated with a picogram level. The structure of a new GA was recently speculated from its
GC-MS data and then confirmed by comparing the GC-MS data with those of candidates that were
chemically prepared.231–234
 Plant Hormones 27

4.02.3.2.3(i) Solvent fractionation Plant materials are usually extracted by homogenizing in methanol or
50–80% aqueous acetone and then filtering. After removing the organic solvent of the extract in vacuo, the
aqueous residue is submitted to solvent fractionation, affording an acidic ethyl acetate-soluble (AE) fraction, a
neutral ethyl acetate-soluble (NE) fraction, an acidic 1-butanol-soluble (AB) fraction, and a neutral 1-butanol-
soluble (NB) fraction. Most of the free GAs are partitioned into the AE fraction, some of the polar GAs such as
GA28 and GA32 into the AB fraction, the glucosyl ethers of GAs (GA-GEts) into the AB fraction, and the
glucosyl esters of GAs (GA-GEs) into the NE and/or the NB fractions. Today, HPLC is used for the
purification of GAs from plant material. Details of column chromatography for large-scale purification can
be found elsewhere.252,253

4.02.3.2.3(ii) Solid-phase extraction and immunoaffinity purification Instead of solvent–solvent partition-

ing, solid-phase extraction, using a small disposable column or a small cartridge prepacked with chemically
bonded octadecylsilanized silica (ODS) or with a chemically bonded anion-exchange group such as dimeth-
ylaminoalkyl group, is often used as a prepurification tool for instrumental analyses. Solid-phase extraction
using an ODS cartridge has been used to separate GAs and their glucosyl conjugates from the less-polar
kaurenoid precursors by eluting the cartridge with an increasing concentration of methanol or acetonitrile in
water. Immunoaffinity purification using the immobilized anti-GA antibody is also effective.249–250

4.02.3.2.4 Qualitative and quantitative analysis

4.02.3.2.4(i) Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry GC-MS is the most powerful technique to identify
and quantify GAs in very small quantities at the picogram levels. GAs are identified by comparing the full-scan
spectrum and Kovats’ retention index of a sample with the reference data, which are available on the website
http://www.plant-hormones.info/ga1info.htm. HPLC is frequently used as a purification method before con-
ducting a GC-MS analysis of GAs. Reversed-phase HPLC with an ODS column is most commonly used, and
an ion-exchange column is also sometimes used.
Gas chromatography-selected ion monitoring (GC-SIM) is often used for the quantification of GAs by GC-
MS, an internal standard labeled with stable isotopes (usually with deuterium) being used as the most reliable
and sensitive method. A mass chromatogram reconstructed from full-scan GC-MS is also used for semiquanti-
fication. The amounts of GAs are determined by measuring the peak areas of ions characteristic for each GA
and comparing these areas to those of authentic samples. When an internal standard labeled with a stable
isotope is used, the ratio of the area of an ion peak characteristic for a sample and the area of the corresponding
peak of the labeled internal standard is used for quantification. The analysis of GAs by GC-MS has been
discussed in numerous publications and review articles.254–256

4.02.3.2.4(ii) Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

(LC-MS) analysis of GAs has also been reported. LC-MS is as sensitive as GC-MS, having the advantage
that both GAs and GA conjugates can be analyzed without derivatization,257–259 which is essential for GC-MS
analysis. The disadvantage of LC-MS is the tendency for fragmentation to be hardly apparent and that the
ionization efficiency is often affected by contaminants.

4.02.3.2.4(iii) Immunoassay Immunoassay using an antibody of high specificity is also a very powerful tool
to quantify GAs. Although it cannot exclude ambiguity due to the cross-reactivity of the antibody used, it has
the advantage of analysis of samples without an extensive prepurification. When combined with suitable HPLC
prepurification, it gives fairly reliable results.260

4.02.3.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

4.02.3.3.1 Biosynthesis in plants
The biosynthesis pathway of GAs in plants has long been studied since their discovery as endogenous growth
regulators. There have been two key approaches to unravel the biosynthetic routes and identify the genes
encoding the biosynthetic enzymes. First, a cell-free system prepared from immature seeds of dicotyledonous
species such as Marah macrocarpus and Cucurbita maxima allowed researchers to purify and characterize the GA
28 Plant Hormones

biosynthetic enzymes, as these species are rich sources of these enzymes.261 Second, dwarf mutants defective in
GA biosynthesis capability have been beneficial to determine the biologically active forms and to identify the
GA biosynthetic genes. More recently, the availability of genomics tools in model plant species has accelerated
our understanding of the GA pathway and its regulation. An outline of GA biosynthesis and the deactivation
pathways in plants and fungi is presented here, with emphasis on recent findings related to these pathways.
There are numerous recent reviews that summarize the identification of individual biosynthetic and deactiva-
tion genes and their regulation.262–266
GAs are synthesized from geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGDP), a common C20 precursor for diterpenoids
(Figure 4). Three different classes of enzymes are required for the biosynthesis of bioactive GAs from GGDP
in plants: terpene cyclases, cytochrome P450 monooxygenases (P450s), and 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxy-
genases (2ODDs). Recent work using isotope-labeled precursors has shown that the methylerythritol phosphate
(MEP) pathway in the plastid provides the majority of isoprene units to GAs in Arabidopsis seedlings, although
there is a minor contribution from the cytosolic mevalonate (MVA) pathway.267 The relative contributions of
the MEP and MVA pathways to GA biosynthesis may vary among tissue types and also depend on the growth
conditions.
The cyclization of GGDP to the hydrocarbon intermediate ent-kaurene requires two enzymes: ent-copalyl
diphosphate synthase (CPS) and ent-kaurene synthase (KS) (Figure 4). There is some experimental evidence to
indicate that both CPS and KS are located in the plastids.268,269 ent-Kaurene is then converted to GA12 by two
P450s. ent-Kaurene oxidase (KO; CYP701A) catalyzes a consecutive three-step oxygenation reaction at C-19 to
produce ent-kaurenoic acid, which is subsequently converted to GA12 by another P450, ent-kaurenoic acid
oxidase (KAO; CYP88A270). Experiments using fusion enzymes with green fluorescent protein (GFP) have
suggested that KO is located in the outer membrane of the plastid, whereas KAO is present in the endoplasmic
reticulum.269

Figure 4 Early part of the GA biosynthesis pathway in plants.

 Plant Hormones 29

GA12 is converted to GA4, a biologically active form, through oxidation at C-20 and C-3 positions by GA
20-oxidase and GA 3-oxidase, respectively, both of which are soluble 2ODDs (Figure 5). Although the
subcellular location of these 2ODDs has not been experimentally demonstrated, they are thought to be
cytosolic enzymes because of the lack of any apparent targeting sequence. GA12 is also a substrate for GA
13-oxidase for the production of GA53, which acts as a precursor of GA1 in the 13-hydroxylated pathway. Since
no 13-oxidase gene has been identified, the nature of this enzyme and the biological relevance of 13-
hydroxylation are still unclear.

Figure 5 Conversion of GA12 into various GAs in plants.

30 Plant Hormones

4.02.3.3.2 Deactivation in plants

Deactivation mechanisms are important for effective regulation of the concentrations of bioactive hormones in
plants. GAs are metabolically deactivated in several different ways. The best-characterized deactivation
reaction has been 2-hydroxylation by GA 2-oxidases, a class of 2ODDs (Figure 5). Conventional GA 2-
oxidases use C19-GAs as substrates, including bioactive GAs and their immediate precursors (GA9 and
GA20).271 A new type of GA 2-oxidase that accepts only C20-GAs has recently been reported.272,273 These
GA 2-oxidases are responsible for the production of 2-hydroxylated GAs such as GA97 and GA110 and are
likely to play a role in depleting the pool of GAs that are to be converted to bioactive forms.
Another deactivation mechanism has recently been found in rice from studies on the recessive tall mutant
elongated uppermost internode (eui).274 EUI is a P450 designated as CYP714D1270 and epoxidizes the 16,17-double
bond of non-13-hydroxylated GAs (Figure 6). There is an accumulation of 16,17-dihydrodiols, hydrated
products of the 16,17-epoxides either in planta or during purification, in transgenic rice plants that overexpress
the EUI gene. Thus, the discovery of this enzyme explains the occurrence of GA 16,17-dihydrodiols in many
plant species.274 More recently, S-adenosine-L-methionine-dependent methylation of the C-6 carboxyl group of
GAs by methyltransferases, GAMT1 and GAMT2, has been shown to constitute an additional deactivation
mechanism in Arabidopsis (Figure 6).257 GAMT1 and GAMT2 utilize a variety of GAs, including bioactive GA1
and GA4, as substrates in vitro, and produce the corresponding methyl esters. It has yet to be investigated whether
methylation of GAs is a common deactivation reaction in other plant species. The formation of GA conjugates
such as glucosyl ethers and esters of GAs may also serve as deactivation reactions.275 Identification of glycosyl
transferase(s) responsible for GA conjugations will be helpful to better understand their role in plants.
The identification of the majority of GA biosynthetic/deactivating enzymes has provided a clearer view of
the mechanism by which a large variety of GAs are produced in plants. First, only six enzymes are required for
the 12-step conversions of GGDP to GA4, because of the multifunctionality of several enzymes on the pathway.
Second, many GA-modifying enzymes, including the 2ODDs, 16,17-epoxidase (CYP714D1), and GAMTs,
accept multiple GAs as substrates. The promiscuous nature of these enzymes should contribute to the
production of diverse GAs by a relatively small number of enzymes.

4.02.3.3.3 Regulation of gibberellin levels in plants

Both GA biosynthesis and deactivation are regulated by a range of endogenous and environmental signals,
consistent with the role of GAs as the key regulators of growth and development. There is accumulating evidence
that such signals affect the GA content, at least in part, by altering the transcript abundance of the biosynthetic
and deactivating genes. In some cases, transcription factors that directly regulate the GA biosynthetic or
deactivating genes have been identified.276–279 Some plant hormones, including GA itself, act as endogenous
regulators of GA concentrations in plants. For example, plants maintain the homeostasis of the bioactive GA
levels through feedback and feed-forward regulation of the biosynthetic and deactivating genes.262,280,281 Auxin,

Figure 6 Deactivation by oxidation and methylation.

 Plant Hormones 31

another class of growth hormones, positively regulates GA biosynthesis in the stem tissues of pea and
barley.282,283 Evidence has been provided that the GA biosynthetic and/or deactivating pathways are regulated
by environmental signals such as light and temperature in various developmental processes.284–289 These results
support the idea that GAs act as key regulators of the environmental responses in plants.

4.02.3.3.4 Biosynthesis in fungi

GAs were first isolated as secondary metabolites of the rice pathogen G. fujikuroi. The occurrence of GAs in
some other fungi and bacteria has also been reported.219 Recent identification of the genes encoding the GA
biosynthetic enzymes from G. fujikuroi and a species of Phaeosphaeria has revealed remarkable differences in the
GA biosynthetic enzymes between plants and fungi.
In plants, two separate terpene cyclases (CPS and KS) are involved in the synthesis of ent-kaurene from
GGDP (Figure 4), while these two reactions are catalyzed by a single bifunctional enzyme (CPS/KS) in fungi
(Figure 6).290–292 In G. fujikuroi, the multifunctional P450s, P450-4 and P450-1, respectively, play a similar role
to KOs (CYP701As) and KAOs (CYP88As) in plants.293 However, despite their similar catalytic activities, the
fungal P450s are distantly related to the plant enzymes in their amino acid sequence. Of particular note is that
P450-1 has 3-hydroxylase activity in addition to KAO activity and produces GA14 (Figure 7). Thus,

Figure 7 Comparison of the GA biosynthesis pathways in Gibberella fujikuroi and plants.

32 Plant Hormones

3-hydroxylation is catalyzed by a P450 at an early stage of the pathway in G. fujikuroi, in contrast to plant GA
3-oxidases, which are soluble 2ODDs and catalyze 3-hydroxylation at the final stage to produce bioactive
GAs (Figure 5). GA14 is converted to GA4 by another P450, P450-2.294 Thus, GA 20-oxidation in G. fujikuroi is
also catalyzed by a P450, unlike the case with plant GA 20-oxidases. GA4 is then converted to GA7 by GA4-
desaturase and finally to GA3 by P450-3 through 13-hydroxylation (Figure 7).295 Interestingly, these GA
biosynthetic genes are clustered on a particular chromosome in fungi, whereas they are randomly located on
chromosomes in plants.296,297 Taken together, these substantial differences suggest that the complex GA
biosynthetic pathways in plants and fungi have evolved independently.

4.02.3.4 Biological Activities

More than 135 free GAs have been characterized from the plant kingdom, including higher and lower plants,
fungi, and bacteria. GAs show biological activity in many aspects of plant growth, shoot elongation and -
amylase induction being commonly used for the evaluation of the biological activity of each GA. Among the
free GAs, only a limited number of GAs are biologically active per se. GAs that show biological activities in
bioassays are those that can be perceived by receptor(s) or those that can be converted to biologically active
GAs (see Section 4.02.3.3.1). GAs that are physiologically active in shoot elongation and GAs that are active in
-amylase induction in aleurone cells of cereal seeds carry characteristic and common structural
functionalities.
In general, judged from the affinity to the GA receptor (GID1)198,298 and the activities in bioassays, the
following structural characteristics are required for GAs to be active: carrying (1) a 3-hydroxy group, (2) a free
carboxyl group on C-6, and (3) a -lactone from C-4 to C-10 (a -lactone from C-4 to C-20 instead of -lactone
reduces the activity, but still results in some affinity to the receptor and activity). The introduction of a
hydroxyl group at C-2 or C-17 makes GAs inactive.
Variation in the biological activity of each GA results from the affinity of each GA to a receptor and the
susceptibility of each GA to deactivation enzymes such as GA 2-oxidases in the assay plants. In rice shoot
elongation assay, GA1 and GA4 show no apparent difference in their biological activity, while the affinity of
GA4 to the GA receptor, GID1, is as high as 5 times that of GA1,198 suggesting that exogenously applied GA4 is
more easily deactivated than GA1 before reaching the receptor.
Table 1 shows the relative biological activity of some GAs toward rice shoot elongation, and their relative
affinity to OsGID1, the GA receptor in rice.

4.02.3.4.1 Effects on shoot elongation

Shoot elongation is the most apparent effect of GAs, and is mainly caused by cell expansion in the axis and
partly by cell division. This effect is prominent with the exogenous application of GAs to young seedlings, the
response of maturing plants to GAs generally being low or negligible. The assay systems have been developed

Table 1 Affinity of GAs to OsGID1 and biological activity on rice seedlings

Relative activity on shoot elongation

Relative affinity to OsGID1194 (rice: Tang-ginbozu)188

GA1 5 High
GA3 5 Very high
GA4 100 Moderate
16,17-dihydro GA4 20 Moderatea
3-epi-GA4 <0.1 Not tested
GA4 methyl ester 0.6 Very lowa
GA9 0.1 Moderate
GA35 2 Moderate
GA37 1 Moderate
GA51 <0.1 Inactive
a
Not listed in Murofushi et al.188
 Plant Hormones 33

according to the shoot elongation effects, and dwarf mutants lacking a specific enzyme catalyzing a certain step
in the biosynthesis of physiologically active GAs help to enhance the assay sensitivity and indicate the GA
species in the assay mixture. Dwarf maize (Z. mays) d1 and d5 and dwarf rice (Oryza sativa L.) cv. Tan-ginbozu
and cv. Waito-C have been widely used as assay plants.192–194 The cucumber hypocotyls assay has also been
frequently used.193–194 Dwarf mutants of A. thaliana lacking an enzyme catalyzing each step of GA biosynthesis
are also now available.195,204

4.02.3.4.2 Effects on enzyme activities and inductions

4.02.3.4.2(i) Effects on enzymes in aleurone cells of cereal seeds GAs increase the activity of -amylase
in cereal seeds such as barley and rice by enhancing the transcription of some of the -amylase genes in the
aleurone cells.299 These aleurone cells do not have the set of enzymes for GA biosynthesis, and cannot convert
precursor GAs to physiologically active GAs. Only physiologically active GAs show activity in this assay
system, while their biosynthetic precursors do not.193 The activities of protease, -glucanase, ribonuclease,
catalase, peroxidase, citrate synthase, isocitrate lyase, nuclease, and so on in the cereal aleurone cells are also
increased by GA application.299–302 The embryo-less half-seed of barley does not induce -amylase without an
exogenous GA application, while the other half with the embryo does. Based on the foregoing observations and
on the expression patterns of the genes for GA biosynthetic enzymes and -amylase genes, the physiological
role of GA in the cereal seeds has been speculated to be as follows.299 GAs secreted from the developing seed
embryo move to the aleurone layer and stimulate the de novo synthesis of -amylase and proteases. These
enzymes then move out of the aleurone cells into the endosperm to hydrolyze starch and storage proteins
respectively, resulting in the production of sugars and amino acids, which are finally used for further
development of the seed embryo.

4.02.3.4.2(ii) Effects on enzymes in vegetative tissues Microarray technique and proteomics analyses of
wild plants and their GA-deficient mutants and the analyses of GA-treated and GA-untreated plants enable to
profile the proteins that are regulated by GAs in vegetative tissues. GIP in petunia,303 carboxypeptidase (PsCP)
in pea,304 and xyloglucan-endotransferase (XET), pyruvate dehydrogenase, fructose-biphosphate aldolase, and
so on in rice are detected as the GA-regulated proteins.300–302

4.02.3.4.3 Effects on flowering

A GA treatment induces flower formation in some species of long-day plants under short-day conditions,308,309
while the flower induction in short-day plants is not generally affected by the GA treatment. Based on the
studies using Arabidopsis, four promotive routes have been proposed for the floral initiation. These are the
photoperiodic, autonomous, vernalization, and gibberellin pathways, all of which converge on the ‘integrator’
genes SUPPRESSOR OF OVEREXPRESSION OF CO 1 (SOC1) and FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT), and
recent studies have highlighted a role for the product of FT as a component of the floral stimulus or
‘florigen’.9,10 The classic florigen concept8 can be explained by FTmRNA moving through phloem from the
leaf to shoot apex, this movement being responsible for long-day-induced flowering in Arabidopsis. The
flowering of Arabidopsis under short-day conditions is induced by the increase of GA4 in the shoot apex; GA4
regulates the transcription of both LFY and SOC1.310
Another example of GAs regulating flowering has been reported for Lolium temulentum.311 GA5 and GA6 are
more active in the induction of flowering in L. temulentum than GA1 and GA4, which are more active in shoot
elongation of the same plant. The GA-dependent degradation of DELLA protein is suggested to be one of the
factors for the floral initiation under long-day condition in L. perenne.312

4.02.3.4.4 Other effects

GAs are also active in breaking the dormancy of tubers or seeds.313 GAs can replace the stimuli in the induction
of seed germination in light- or cold-requiring seeds of Lactuca, Nicotiana, Perilla, and so on. The increase of
physiologically active GAs through the induction of 3-hydroxylase by red light has been shown to be a key
point in the germination of photoblastic lettuce seeds.314
Parthenocarpy is also induced by GAs in plant species such as grape, apple, peach, pear, tomato, and
almond.301,315,316
34 Plant Hormones

4.02.3.5 Perception and Signaling

4.02.3.5.1 Overview of GA signaling in plants
The GA receptors have recently been identified;198,298 this has enabled the molecular mechanisms of GA
perception and signal transduction in plant growth, development, and environmental response to be elucidated.
Combining this with all the other information, we can present the GA signal cascade as follows.
When GA binds to its receptor GID1, the GID1–GA complex has affinity for key regulators called DELLA
proteins that usually suppress GA signaling. After the binding of these DELLA proteins with the GID1–GA
complex, the (GID1–GA)-decorated DELLA protein is recruited by a specific F-box protein of the SCF
complex into the 26S proteasome after being tagged with polymerized ubiquitins, to be degraded there. Finally,
as the repression of GA signaling by the DELLA protein begins to erode, the signaling begins to pass toward the
expressional regulation of various GA-responsive genes (Figure 8).

4.02.3.5.2 GID1, the cytosolic gibberellin receptor

It was believed that GA molecules are able to permeate the plasma membrane of plant cells by passive diffusion,
because of their hydrophobic nature under the neutral pH condition. Some researchers therefore expected that
GA perception would occur in a similar fashion to that of mammalian steroid hormones. In fact, some results
have suggested that GA perception occurred in the nucleus; the composition of RNA in nuclei isolated from
pea317 or cucumber318 seedlings changed when GA was applied. Many attempts were made to identify those
proteins that showed a high affinity and a high specificity toward GA from GA-responsive plant materials, one
being from elongating seedlings and another from the aleurones of cereal seeds. UK researchers led this field

Transcription proceeds
Transcription inhibited

Transcription
factors
Transcription
factors
DELLA

SCFGID2 SCF GID2

DELLA complex complex
OC O OC O

HO COOH HO COOH DELLA DELLA

OC O OC O
GID1 GID1 HO COOH HO COOH

GID1 GID1
OC O

HO COOH GA4

GID1

Figure 8 Perception of GA by GID1 and the degradation of DELLA protein. An active GA is perceived by GID1 in the
nucleus. Once GA binds to the cavity of GID1, the N-terminal peptide of GID1, which plays the role of a lid, covers GA. DELLA
protein, which holds transcription factor(s) to suppress gene transcription, binds to GA–GID1 complex and releases the
transcription factor(s). The released transcription factor(s) activates gene transcription. The GA–GID1–DELLA complex forms
another complex with SCF(GID2) and DELLA protein in the complex is ubiquitinated and degraded by 226S proteasome.
 Plant Hormones 35

and showed that GA-inducible -amylase could be induced, particularly in the cereal aleurone, even by the
applications of membrane-impermeable GA derivatives.211 These findings strongly imbued researchers with
the notion that GA perception should occur on the outer surface of the plasma membrane of cereal aleurone
cells. The cell-biological experiments by Gilroy and Jones also supported this idea;213 they showed that
microinjected GA failed to induce -amylase in aleurone protoplasts, but that the incubation of aleurone
protoplasts in a GA solution induced -amylase. The receptor candidates have been biochemically character-
ized, although none have yet been isolated.319–321
The big breakthrough came from the isolation of the rice recessive mutant (GIBBERELLIN I NSENSITIVED
WARF 1 gid1), which showed a typical GA-insensitive phenotype.198 A double mutant of gid1 with slr1, which
carries a mutation in the key regulator gene for GA signaling, SLR1 (details are described in Section 4.02.3.5.3),
exhibited the slr1 phenotype and a GA treatment did not reduce the SLR1 level in gid1 plants, indicating that
SLR1 was epistatic to GID1.198 Although the GA-insensitive phenotype of gid1 is similar to that of gid2 mutants,
which also carry a mutation in another regulatory gene for GA signaling, GID2 (described in Section 4.02.3.5.4),
there are some differences between the two mutants: the dwarfed level of gid1 was much stronger than that of
gid2 and the SLR1 level in gid1 was much lower than that in gid2. In general, the phenotypes of gid1 resembled a
GA-deficient rice mutant cps, suggesting that GID1 functioned upstream of SLR1 in the GA signaling path-
way.198 The results of biochemical analyses showed that the recombinant GID1 bound to a radio-labeled GA4
derivative with a dissociation constant (Kd) of 1.4  106 mol l1. Its binding characteristics fulfilled the criteria
required for a receptor: (1) reversibility, (2) saturability, (3) high affinity to biologically active GAs, and (4)
reasonable specificity, that is, a specific preference for active GAs. GID1 was an unknown protein with
similarity to a hormone-sensitive lipase (HSL) family.322 However, it was predicted in silico that GID1 should
lose its lipase activity because the amino acid histidine, which is one of the HSL catalytic triad, was replaced by
valine. In fact, the recombinant GID1 showed no enzymatic activity with artificial substrates for HSL. In
addition, GID1 was mainly detected in nuclei and its localization was not changed by the application of GA.198
Analyses of some gid1 mutants and of point-mutated recombinant GID1s elucidated that most areas of this
receptor molecule were influenced by the binding with GA.323
Three receptor genes (AtGID1a, b, and c) exist in Arabidopsis, and they have been identified by their structural
similarity to rice GID1 (Figure 9).298 Their products showed ligand specificities that were similar to those of
rice GID1. Among the three products, AtGID1b showed stronger pH dependence and 4 times higher affinity to

OsGID1 ---MAGSDEVNRNECKTVVPLHTWVLISNFKLSYNILRRADGTFERDLGEYLDRRVPANARPLEGVSSFDHIIDQSVGLE
AtGID1a ---MAASDEVNLIESRTVVPLNTWVLISNFKVAYNILRRPDGTFNRHLAEYLDRKVTANANPVDGVFSFDVLIDRRINLL
AtGID1b ---MAGGNEVNLNECKRIVPLNTWVLISNFKLAYKVLRRPDGSFNRDLAEFLDRKVPANSFPLDGVFSFDHVDS-TTNLL
AtGID1c ---MAGSEEVNLIESKTVVPLNTWVLISNFKLAYNLLRRPDGTFNRHLAEFLDRKVPANANPVNGVFSFDVIIDRQTNLL

OsGID1 VRIYRAAAEGDAEEGAAAVTRPILEFLTDAPAAEPFPVIIFFHGGSFVHSSASSTIYDSLCRRFVKLSKGVVVSVNYRRA
AtGID1a SRVYRPAYADQEQPPSILDLEKPVDG-------DIVPVILFFHGGSFAHSSANSAIYDTLCRRLVGLCKCVVVSVNYRRA
AtGID1b TRIYQPASLLHQTRHGTLELTKPLSTT------EIVPVLIFFHGGSFTHSSANSAIYDTFCRRLVTICGVVVVSVDYRRS
AtGID1c SRVYRPADAG--TSPSITDLQNPVDG-------EIVPVIVFFHGGSFAHSSANSAIYDTLCRRLVGLCGAVVVSVNYRRA

OsGID1 PEHRYPCAYDDGWTALKWVMSQ--------PFMRSGGDAQARVFLSGDSSGGNIAHHVAVRAADEG--------VKVCGN
AtGID1a PENPYPCAYDDGWIALNWVNSR--------SWLKSKKDSKVHIFLAGDSSGGNIAHNVALRAGESG--------IDVLGN
AtGID1b PEHRYPCAYDDGWNALNWVKSR--------VWLQSGKDSNVYVYLAGDSSGGNIAHNVAVRATNEG--------VKVLGN
AtGID1c PENRYPCAYDDGWAVLKWVNSS--------SWLRSKKDSKVRIFLAGDSSGGNIVHNVAVRAVESR--------IDVLGN

OsGID1 ILLNAMFGGTERTESERRLDGKYFVTLQ--DRDWYWKAYLPEDADRDHPACNPFGPNGRRLGGLPFAKSLIIVSGLDLTC
AtGID1a ILLNPMFGGNERTESEKSLDGKYFVTVR--DRDWYWKAFLPEGEDREHPACNPFSPRGKSLEGVSFPKSLVVVAGLDLIR
AtGID1b ILLHPMFGGQERTQSEKTLDGKYFVTIQ--DRDWYWRAYLPEGEDRDHPACNPFGPRGQSLKGVNFPKSLVVVAGLDLVQ
AtGID1c ILLNPMFGGTERTESEKRLDGKYFVTVR--DRDWYWRAFLPEGEDREHPACSPFGPRSKSLEGLSFPKSLVVVAGLDLIQ

OsGID1 DRQLAYADALREDG-HHVKVVQCENATVGFYLLPNT----VHYHEVMEEISDFLNANLYY-----------
AtGID1a DWQLAYAEGLKKAG-QEVKLMHLEKATVGFYLLPNN----NHFHNVMDEISAFVNAEC-------------
AtGID1b DWQLAYVDGLKKTG-LEVNLLYLKQATIGFYFLPNN----DHFHCLMEELNKFVHSIEDSQSKSSPVLLTP
AtGID1c DWQLKYAEGLKKAG-QEVKLLYLEQATIGFYLLPNN----NHFHTVMDEIAAFVNAECQ------------

Figure 9 Deduced amino acid sequences of GID1s. The two shaded amino acid residues are essential for maintaining the
GA-binding activity of OsGID1, and these are substituted by other residues in the gid1-1 or gid1-2 rice mutant; arrows show
the three catalytic centers (Ser (S), Asp (D), and His (H)) for hormone-sensitive lipase.
36 Plant Hormones

GA (Kd ¼ 4.8  107 mol l1) than the other two. The expression of each in rice gid1 mutants rescued the GA-
insensitive dwarf phenotype, demonstrating that AtGID1s function as GA receptors in rice.298 Multiple loss-of-
function mutants of the three AtGID1s have recently shown severely dwarfed and GA-insensitive phenotypes
resembling the rice gid1 mutant.324–326
Chandler et al.327 showed that Gse1, the gene responsible for GA-insensitive mutation (gse1) of barley
(Hordeum vulgare L.), is an ortholog of GID1.
The crystallographic analyses of GA4–OsGID1 complex and the complex of GA1–AtGID1–DELLA
fragment (the N-terminal peptide of GAI) have been reported.328,329 These two crystallographic analyses
explain the formation of the GA–GID1–DELLA protein complex. As expected from the amino acid sequence
similarity to HSLs, GID1 has a cavity that corresponds to a substrate-binding site in HSL, and an active GA
binds to the cavity through the interaction of C6-carboxyl group and 3-hydroxyl group with GID1. After GA
is held in the cavity, the N-terminal peptide of GID1, which plays the role of a lid, covers and holds the GA, and
this is followed by the binding with DELLA protein (Figure 8).328,329

4.02.3.5.3 DELLA protein, a key regulator of GA signaling

The DELLA proteins constitute a small group as part of the GRAS family, which was named after the highly
conserved motif detected near the C-terminus of the three proteins, GAI; RGA, and SCR, in Arabidopsis.330 The
wheat DELLA gene, Rht, is a well-known contributor to the famous ‘green revolution’. The DELLA proteins
play a negative but important role in GA signaling. Their gain-of-function mutations like Arabidopsis gai,331
wheat Rht,332 maize D8,332 and rice SLR1333,334 have shown dwarfed phenotypes and a reduced responsiveness
to GA. Moreover, sequence analysis of their alleles has revealed that an in-frame deletion occurred in the N-
terminal DELLA motif or its neighboring TVHYNP motif. On the other hand, its loss-of-function mutations
caused a GA-constitutive response (a slender phenotype) and the induction of GA-inducible -amylase even at
low GA concentrations.333–335 These results suggest that the N-terminal region around the DELLA motif
functions in the perception of the GA signal, and that its C-terminal region is concerned with the suppression of
GA signaling. The activity or stability of the DELLA proteins is thought to be regulated by O-GlcNAc
modification by SPINDLY, another negative regulator of GA signaling, or by phosphorylation by unknown
kinases.209 Unlike the DELLA protein in rice or barley mutant plants, the Arabidopsis loss-of-function mutants
have shown no clear phenotypes,336,337 which was probably caused by functional redundancy between the five
DELLA proteins, GAI, RGA, RGL1, RGL2, and RGL3, in Arabidopsis.331,336,338–340 However, the analysis of
their multiple loss-of-function mutants has shown that only a part of the five Arabidopsis DELLA proteins
tended to have specific roles in a specific organ or at a specific developmental stage: that is, the loss of function
of both RGA and GAI induced a clear phenotype of constitutive GA signaling in stem elongation and early
flowering time, while it did not show a clear effect on either germination or flower development, suggesting
that other DELLA proteins might have some decisive functions.338,341,342 It has also been reported that RGL1
and RGL2 were functional in seed germination,339,340,343 and that RGL2 was the predominant repressor of seed
germination, while GAI, RGA, and RGL1 were functional enhancers of RGL2,344 and that RGA and RGL2
acted dominantly, but that Rhat GL1 did only to a minor extent, in floral development.343,345,346
A recent major discovery in GA signaling has been that the GA receptor, GID1, bound directly to the rice
DELLA, SLR1, in a GA-dependent manner,198 indicating that the GA–GID1 complex transduced the GA
signal to the DELLA protein through their direct interaction. The GA-binding activity of GID1 was enhanced
in vitro in the presence of SLR1. This means that SLR1 stabilized the interaction between GID1 and GA: in
other words, the GID1–GA complex bound to SLR1, making the GID1–GA interaction even tighter, and
resulting in more likely transmission of the GA signal through the formation of GID1–GA–SLR1 complex.
A domain analysis has revealed that the DELLA and TVHYNP motifs located in the N-terminal region of the
SLR1 were essential for its GA-dependent interaction with GID1.323–325 Moreover, it has been experimentally
shown that this GA-dependent GID1–SLR1 interaction occurred in the nuclei of plant cells.323 Three GID1s
and five DELLA proteins exist in Arabidopsis, so 15 GID1–DELLA combinations are possible. A yeast two-
hybrid analysis has confirmed that the GA-dependent interaction of GID1–DELLA occurred in all combina-
tions. This suggests that other mechanisms besides the preferences for the GID1–DELLA interaction exist to
explain why the five Arabidopsis DELLA proteins are mostly redundant in their functions, despite their
differential involvement in GA-dependent events being partially required, as already mentioned above.
 Plant Hormones 37

4.02.3.5.4 F-box protein, recruiter of DELLA for its degradation

The DELLA proteins are subjected to GA-dependent proteolysis via the ubiquitin–proteasome pathway. The
degradation of the protein by 26S proteasome-mediated proteolysis was first suggested by the observation that
the level of the barley DELLA protein, SLN1, increases when inhibitors of 26S proteasome existed.347 Later,
the F-box genes for GA signaling, rice GID2 and Arabidopsis SLY1, were cloned,348,349 and their loss-of-function
mutations, which resulted in a GA-insensitive phenotype, were found. F-box proteins are a component of the
SCF complex, which is named after its three subunits, Skp1, Cullin, and F-box. The SCF complex catalyzes the
tagging of the target protein with ubiquitins, prior to its sorting to the proteasome.350 F-box proteins, in general,
have a protein–protein interaction domain at the C-terminus. Although both GID2 and SLY1 do not have this
domain, their C-terminal region is highly conserved and important, because the deletion of this site causes a
loss of function.348,349
Some results support the notion that the targets of SCFGID2 or of SCFSLY1 are DELLA proteins, because a
high accumulation of SLR1 or RGA has been observed in gid2 or sly1 mutant plants. In addition, the rice gid2
slr1 and Arabidopsis sly1 rga double mutants have respectively shown the slr1 and rga phenotypes, suggesting that
the GA-insensitive phenotype of gid2 or sly1 depended on the function of SLR1 or RGA.348,351 Finally, SLY1
interacts directly with RGA or GAI via their C-terminal GRAS domains in vivo and in vitro,351 and the product
of a gain-of-function allele of SLY1, gar2, showed a higher affinity to DELLA proteins than normal SLY1.

4.02.4 Cytokinins
4.02.4.1 Introduction
About 50 years ago, a chemical substance that strongly stimulates cell proliferation in tobacco tissue culture was
first purified and crystallized by Skoog and his collaborators from autoclaved herring sperm DNA
extracts.352,353 The compound stimulating plant cell growth, N6-furfurylaminopurine, was named kinetin
(Figure 10), although it has never been found in living plants. A naturally occurring kinetin-like substance
was first isolated from immature maize endosperm and named zeatin (trans-zeatin (tZ); Figure 10).354 Usage of
the term cytokinin for kinetin-like compounds was proposed by Skoog’s group,355 defining cytokinin as ‘a
generic name for substances which promote cell division and exert other growth regulatory functions in the
same manner as kinetin’.356 Since then, various species of cytokinins that fit the definition have been isolated
from plants, fungi, bacteria, and algae. Natural cytokinins are currently defined to be a group of phytohormones
that contain a common adenine moiety with an N6-conjugated side chain and play critical roles not only in cell
division but also in many aspects of plant growth and development.
Shortly after the discovery of cytokinins, degradation of tRNA was proposed to be the major source of the
hormone because prenylated adenines were identified in the hydrolysates of tRNAs.357–359 Identification of the
reaction catalyzed by adenosine phosphate-isopentenyltransferase (IPT) using dimethylallyl diphosphate
(DMAPP) and AMP as substrates in Dictyostelium discoideum, a slime mold,360 changed the concept of the
cytokinin biosynthetic pathway. In addition, since the publication of the previous edition of the book
Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry,361 remarkable progress in cytokinin research has revealed basic
schemes of cytokinin metabolism and signal transduction and their roles in plant growth and development at
the molecular level. This section outlines recent research progress toward understanding cytokinin structural
diversity, metabolic pathways, signal transduction, and biological actions.

4.02.4.2 Chemistry
4.02.4.2.1 Structures
Natural cytokinins are N6-substituted adenine derivatives. The N6 side chain is either isoprenoid or aromatic
(Figure 10), with the former occurring in greater abundance than the latter. The prenyl side chains vary in the
presence or absence of a hydroxyl group and the stereoisomeric position. Common active isoprenoid cytokinins
are isopentenyladenine (iP; N6-(
2-isopentenyl)adenine), trans-zeatin (tZ; N6-(4-hydroxyisopentenyl)adenine;
(E)-2-methyl-4-(1H-purin-6-ylamino)but-2-en-1-ol), cis-zeatin (cZ; (Z)-2-methyl-4-(1H-purin-6-ylamino)but-
38 Plant Hormones

Figure 10 Structures of representative cytokinin species. Trivial names and commonly used abbreviations (parentheses)
are shown.

2-en-1-ol), and dihydrozeatin (DZ; N6-(4-hydroxyisopentanyl)adenine; 2-methyl-4-(1H-purin-6-ylamino)butan-

1-ol) (Figure 10).362,363
Natural cytokinins are also present as the corresponding nucleosides, nucleotides, and other glycosides or
amino acid conjugates in plants (Figure 11). Generally, such conjugations greatly reduce the biological activity
but increase the biological stability. The nucleoside and nucleotide, especially the latter, occur abundantly in
various plant species rather than the biologically active nucleobase. Cytokinin nucleosides, especially tZ
riboside (tZR), are the major cytokinin components of xylem sap in various plants.364–368 On the other hand,
iP riboside (iPR) and iP nucleotide are found in leaf phloem exudate in A. thaliana;369 in addition, cZ-type
species (cZ and cZ conjugates) are also found.370 Glycosylation of cytokinin occurs at the N3, N7, or N9 position
of the purine moiety as N-glucosides (Figure 11). In tZ, DZ, and cZ, glycosylation can also occur at the end
hydroxyl group of the side chain as O-glucosides or O-xylosides (Figure 11). Abundance of the four cytokinins
depends on plant species, tissue type, and developmental stage. iP- and tZ-type cytokinins are the major forms
in Arabidopsis and many other plant species, whereas cZ-type cytokinins are abundantly found in maize,371
rice,372 and chickpea.373 DZ-type cytokinins are generally less abundant in plants.
Amino acid conjugates of cytokinin have also been isolated from some organisms.374 Alanine conjugated to
tZ at the N9 position of the adenine moiety, (S)-2-amino-3-(((E)-4-hydroxy-3-methylbut-2-enylamino)purin-
9-yl)propanoic acid (Figure 12), was found in lupin seedlings and named lupinic acid.375 Alanine conjugated to
N6-benzyladenine (BA; N-benzyl-1H-purin-6-amine) at the same position was also identified in bean seed-
lings.376 Lupinic acid shows increased biological stability and less biological activity in comparison to the
 Plant Hormones 39

Figure 11 Structures of naturally occurring cytokinin derivatives conjugated with sugars and amino acids.

Figure 12 Structures of lupinic acid and discadenine.

corresponding bases in bioassays,377 suggesting that alanine conjugates of cytokinin may be storage forms. To
date, enzymes catalyzing the removal of amino acids from cytokinins have not been identified. In D. discoideum,
3-(3-amino-3-carboxypropyl)-N6-(
2-isopentenyl)-adenine, called discadenine (Figure 12), has been isolated
and characterized as a spore germination inhibitor.378
Aromatic cytokinins are found in poplar,379–381 anise,382 tomato,383 Cocos nucifera,384 and Arabidopsis.381 In
addition to BA, aromatic cytokinins are found as ortho-topolins, meta-topolins, hydroxylated BAs, ortho-meth-
oxytopolins, and meta-methoxytopolins (Figure 11).380,381 Other derivatives have been isolated as N3-, N7-, and
N9-glucosides and N9-alanine on the adenine ring,385 and nucleosides and a glucoside linked to the ribosyl
moiety.386 In spite of the several reports of their occurrence, it is not clear whether the aromatic species are
common in plants.
40 Plant Hormones

Figure 13 Synthetic phenylurea-type cytokinins.

Phenylurea-related compounds (Figure 13) also have cytokinin activity although there is no evidence for
the natural occurrence of this class of compounds, strongly suggesting that they are artificial cytokinins. N,N9-
diphenylurea was first reported as a novel type of cytokinin from the liquid endosperm of coconut, but it was
later found to be a contaminant from prior chemical analyses. To date, several analogs such as N-phenyl-N9-(2-
chloro-4-pyridyl)urea and thidiazuron387 have been developed.388 These compounds are highly stable and
have high cytokinin activity.388

4.02.4.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

4.02.4.3.1 Two pathways for isoprenoid cytokinin biosynthesis
The biosynthetic pathway producing isoprenoid cytokinins has been identified, whereas that of aromatic
cytokinins is poorly characterized.363,385 Two distinct pathways for isoprenoid cytokinin biosynthesis have
been described, and each pathway employs a different type of isopentenyltransferase at the initial step. The
major pathway in higher plants, which is catalyzed by IPT, is conjugation of adenine nucleotide and DMAPP or
4-hydroxy-3-methyl-2-(E)-butenyl diphosphate (HMBDP) (Figure 14). In the less frequently used pathway,
cytokinins are formed by degradation of prenylated tRNAs. The initial prenylation reaction of tRNA is
catalyzed by tRNA-isopentenyltransferase (tRNA-IPT) (Figure 14).

4.02.4.3.2 Cytokinin biosynthesis in microorganisms

4.02.4.3.2(i) Biosynthesis in Dictyostelium discoideum Cytokinin biosynthesis through a reaction cata-
lyzed by IPT was first characterized in D. discoideum and the reaction product was discadenine (3-(3-amino-3-
carboxypropyl)-N6-(
2-isopentenyl)-adenine).378 In the biosynthesis of discadenine, iP nucleotide is first
synthesized from DMAPP and AMP by IPT.360 After the formation of iP from iP nucleotide, a methylthiol
moiety is conjugated at the N3-position of adenine with S-adenosyl-L-methionine by discadenine synthetase.389
Dictyostelium IPT utilizes AMP or ADP as a prenyl acceptor, but not ATP or cyclic AMP.360,390 It is interesting
that discadenine has cytokinin activity in tobacco callus growth assay, although the effect is weaker than that of
kinetin.391

4.02.4.3.2(ii) Biosynthesis in Agrobacterium tumefaciens Cytokinin is also synthesized by phytopatho-

genic bacteria, such as Agrobacterium tumefaciens and P. savastanoi, and is a key factor in the formation of plant
tumors.392 The A. tumefaciens Ti plasmids commonly contain an IPT gene, designated as Tmr, on the T-region
that is integrated into the nuclear genome of host plants after infection. Nopaline-forming Ti plasmids contain
another IPT gene, Tzs, in the vir region.393–395 In vitro, both Tmr and Tzs utilize DMAPP and HMBDP as a
prenyl-donor substrate for the production of iP nucleotide and tZ nucleotide, respectively (Figure 14).396,397 In
contrast, crown galls and transgenic plants expressing Tmr most exclusively contain tZ-type cytokinins.396,398–400
It has been demonstrated that Tmr protein is targeted to host plastids, where it utilizes HMBDP to produce the
tZ-type cytokinins.396 Another IPT, Tzs, is expected to function in bacterial cells and to play a role in the
promotion of T-DNA transfer.394,395

4.02.4.3.3 Cytokinin biosynthesis in higher plants

Plant IPT genes have been identified from Arabidopsis,401–403 petunia,404 hop,405 and rice406 and constitute a
small gene family. In contrast to Agrobacterium IPT, biochemical analysis revealed that plant IPT predominantly
utilizes ATP and ADP rather than AMP as a prenyl acceptor401,405,406 and DMAPP as the donor396 (Figure 14).
 Plant Hormones 41

3′ 3′

5′ 5′

+ + PP

A A
A A

tRNA DMAPP Prenyl-tRNA

Figure 14 IPT and tRNA-IPT reaction for primary cytokinin biosynthesis. Circles and A in tRNA show anticodon and
adenosine, respectively. iPRMP, iP riboside 59-monophosphate; iPRDP, iP riboside 59-diphosphate; iPRTP, iP riboside
59-triphosphate; tZRMP, tZ riboside 59-monophosphate; PP, diphosphoric acid.

Arabidopsis and rice have seven (AtIPT1 and AtIPT3–8)401,402 and eight (OsIPT1–8) IPT genes.406 Each member
of the Arabidopsis and rice IPT gene family has a unique spatial expression pattern and different sensitivity to
plant hormones and nitrogen nutrition, suggesting the existence of functional differences among each member
of the plant IPT gene family.406–408 The multiple mutants of AtIPTs show severely decreased levels of iP- and
tZ-type cytokinins, suggesting that plant IPTs are responsible for the bulk of iP- and tZ-type cytokinin
synthesis.409
42 Plant Hormones

4.02.4.3.4 Cytokinin production by degradation of tRNA

Not only plants but also other organisms, such as mammals, yeasts, and bacteria, contain prenylated adenine in
a subset of tRNA species.410 The modification occurs at the 39-adenosine adjacent to anticodons starting with
adenine. It is thought that the presence of the prenyl group affects the stability of the mRNA–ribosome
complex during translation. Degradation of tRNA molecules releases cytokinin, and several cytokinin species
derived from tRNA degradation have been reported, such as iPR, methylthio-iPR, cis-zeatin riboside (cZR),
tZR, and cis- and trans-methylthio-ZRs.410 The first step of modification is catalyzed by tRNA-IPT
(Figure 14). Arabidopsis has two tRNA-IPT genes, AtIPT2 and AtIPT9,401,402 and rice also has two homologous
genes to tRNA-IPT (OsIPT9 and OsIPT10).406 In Arabidopsis, AtIPT2 has been shown to complement a yeast
mutant, mod5, deficient in yeast tRNA-IPT.411 The atipt2 atipt9 double mutant lacked tRNA with isopentenyl
and cis-hydroxylated side chains, and also cZ-type cytokinins,409 strongly suggesting that cZ-type cytokinins
originate from tRNA degradation in Arabidopsis. On the other hand, the level of cZR in tRNA of the atipt2
mutant was less compared to wild type, whereas the iPR level in tRNA was unchanged.409 This observation
implies that AtIPT2 might be able to transfer a cis-hydroxylated isopentenyl side chain to tRNA, although the
predicted precursor, cis-hydroxyl dimethylallyl diphosphate (4-hydroxy-3-methyl-2-(Z)-butenyl dipho-
sphate), has not been reported in any organism.

4.02.4.3.5 IPT in Physcomitrella patens

A moss, Physcomitrella patens, has at least one tRNA-IPT gene, PpIPT1, which complements a tRNA-IPT-deficient
mutant in yeast; however, the Physcomitrella genome does not contain canonical IPT genes.412 These results
suggest that cytokinins in P. patens are produced mainly through the tRNA degradation pathway. Study of
Physcomitrella will shed light again on tRNA-derived cytokinin synthesis and will yield important clues about
the molecular evolution of cytokinin metabolism.

4.02.4.3.6 Metabolic origins of isoprenoid side chains

DMAPP, a prenyl-donor substrate in cytokinin biosynthesis, is an intermediate of both the methylerythritol
phosphate (MEP) and mevalonate (MVA) pathways, whereas HMBDP, another substrate of Agrobacterium IPTs,
is synthesized via only the MEP pathway. In general, the MEP pathway is found in bacteria and plastids, and
the MVA pathway is found in the cytosol of eukaryotes.413–415
In Arabidopsis, AtIPT1, AtIPT3, AtIPT5, and AtIPT8 localize in the plastids416 and the relative expression
levels of AtIPT3 and AtIPT5 are higher than those of other IPTs.407,408 A selective labeling experiment revealed
that, in Arabidopsis seedlings, side chains of iP- and tZ-type cytokinins originate predominantly from the MEP
pathway (Figure 15).416 In contrast, AtIPT4 and AtIPT7 localize in the cytosol and mitochondria, respec-
tively.416 Application of lovastatin, an inhibitor of the MVA pathway, leads to a decrease in tZ-type cytokinin
accumulation in tobacco BY-2 cell cultures, suggesting that the MVA pathway is also the predominant origin of
tZ-type cytokinins at some specific developmental stages and conditions.417,418 The selective labeling experi-
ment showed that a majority of cZ-type cytokinin side chains are derived from the MVA pathway, although
significant amounts of MEP-derived side chains were also observed416 (Figure 15).

4.02.4.3.7 Activation step of cytokinin biosynthesis

The initial product of de novo cytokinin biosynthesis is cytokinin nucleotide. To become biologically active, the
nucleotide has to be converted to a nucleobase. The reactions of cytokinin biosynthesis pathway are partly
shared with a purine metabolic pathway, called the salvage pathway.362,363 Exogenously applied cytokinin
nucleobases are rapidly metabolized into the corresponding nucleoside and nucleotide.419 Some of the enzymes
in the purine salvage pathway have been characterized in Arabidopsis and tobacco. At least three members of the
adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APT) gene family in Arabidopsis catalyze the conversion from cytokinin
nucleobase to the corresponding nucleotide as well as adenine.419–421 In tobacco, ADK2S, an isoenzyme of
adenosine kinases (ADKs), showed a higher efficiency for phosphorylation of cytokinin nucleosides in vitro than
the other three ADK isoenzymes.422 Adenosine phosphorylase has also been reported to play a role in the
conversion of cytokinin nucleobase to its corresponding nucleoside.423
There are two pathways for producing active cytokinin species from the nucleotide: the two-step pathway
and the direct pathway (Figures 15 and 16). In the two-step pathway, cytokinin nucleotides are converted to
 Plant Hormones 43

MVA
pathway

MEP
pathway

MVA DMAPP + tRNA

pathway
IPT CYP735A
tRNA-IPT
ATP iPRTP tZRTP
MEP
pathway 1 1 Prenyl-tRNA

CYP735A 7
IPT
DMAPP + ADP iPRDP tZRDP
cis-Prenyl-tRNA
1 1

IPT CYP735A
AMP iPRMP tZRMP DZRMP cZRMP

ADK 2 ADK 2 ADK 2 ADK 2

LOG LOG LOG LOG

iPR tZR DZR cZR

6
4 3 4 3 4 3 4 3
APT APT APT APT

5
iP tZ DZ cZ

Figure 15 Current model of isoprenoid cytokinin biosynthesis pathway in higher plants. tZRDP, tZ riboside 59-diphosphate;
tZRTP, tZ riboside 59-triphosphate; DZRMP, DZ riboside 59-monophosphate; cZRMP, cZ riboside 59-monophosphate;
1, phosphatase; 2, adenosine monophosphate 5-nucleotidase; 3, adenosine nucleosidase; 4, adenosine phosphorylase;
5, zeatin reductase; 6, zeatin cis–trans isomerase; 7, cis-hydrolase. The thick arrows show the main pathways.

their corresponding nucleobases by nucleotidase and nucleosidase.362,363 These two enzymes were partially
purified from wheat germ,424,425 although the responsible genes have not been identified. The two enzymes use
not only cytokinin nucleotide or nucleoside, but also AMP or adenosine with a higher affinity.424,425 The direct
pathway mediates the release of cytokinin nucleobase from the corresponding nucleotide in a one-step reaction
(Figure 16). This enzyme, cytokinin riboside 59-monophosphate phosphoribohydrolase, called LOG, was
discovered through the analysis of rice lonely guy (log) mutants, which have defects in the maintenance of
shoot meristems.426 LOG catalyzes the formation of only cytokinin nucleotides (monophosphate) and not
AMP, suggesting that LOG is a specific enzyme for cytokinin metabolism.426 At present, it is not clear whether
there is a functional differentiation between these two activating pathways or not.

4.02.4.3.8 Modification of isoprenoid side chain

4.02.4.3.8(i)trans-Hydroxylation of iP nucleotide for tZ biosynthesis In higher plants, the major path-
way for tZ-type cytokinin synthesis is trans-hydroxylation of iP-type cytokinins.396 Microsomal fractions
prepared from cauliflower had an activity of trans-hydroxylation of iP and iPR, resulting in tZ and tZR,
44 Plant Hormones

Figure 16 Current model of cytokinin activation in higher plants.

respectively, in the presence of NADPH.427 In Arabidopsis, genes for CYP735A1 and CYP735A2, cyto-
chrome P450 monooxygenases that catalyze trans-hydroxylation of iP-type cytokinins, were identified.428
Contrary to the report from cauliflower microsomes, the CYP735As use iP nucleotides but not iP and
iPR as substrates, and are preferential to the mono- or diphosphate rather than the triphosphate
(Figures 15 and 17).428

Figure 17 Hydroxylation of cytokinin in Arabidopsis.

 Plant Hormones 45

4.02.4.3.8(ii)Dihydrozeatin formation The double bond of the tZ side chain could be enzymatically
reduced by zeatin reductase, an enzyme characterized from immature seeds of P. vulgaris, resulting in DZ.429
Zeatin reductase uses tZ as a substrate, but not cZ, tZR, iP, or tZ O-glucoside, and requires NADPH as a
cofactor (Figures 15 and 18).429 The responsible genes for this reaction have not yet been identified.

4.02.4.3.8(iii) Zeatin cis–trans isomerase In addition to degradation of tRNA, cZ-type cytokinins could be
formed by isomerization of tZ, catalyzed by zeatin cis–trans isomerase. The isomerase was partially purified
from immature seeds of P. vulgaris, and it catalyzes isomerization of zeatins in both directions in favor of cZ to
tZ and also utilizes cZR and tZR as substrates (Figures 15 and 19).430 In an Arabidopsis mutant that is deficient
in the expression of four AtIPTs, the accumulation of tZ-type cytokinins was greatly reduced compared with
that of the cZ-type cytokinins.409 This result suggests that the cis–trans isomerization is a minor pathway for
production of tZ-type cytokinins, at least in Arabidopsis.

4.02.4.3.8(iv) O-glucosylation and O-xylosylation tZ, cZ, and DZ and the corresponding nucleotides and
nucleosides could be modified by O-glucosylation or O-xylosylation at the hydroxyl group of the side chain
(Figure 20).374 Genes encoding the zeatin O-glucosyltransferase (ZOG) and O-xylosyltransferase (ZOX) have
been cloned and characterized in Phaseolus lunatus and P. vulgaris, respectively.431,432 The ZOG, partially
purified from immature embryos of P. lunatus, uses tZ as a substrate, but not cZ, DZ, or tZR.433 Recombinant
ZOG from P. lunatus uses tZ as a substrate more effectively than DZ.432 In contrast, recombinant ZOX uses tZ
and DZ as substrates, but not cZ and tZR.431 In maize, the substrate preference of the enzyme is different from
that of the Phaseolus enzymes; cisZOG1 and cisZOG2 predominantly utilize cZ over tZ (Figure 20).371,434,435
The ortho- and meta-topolins are also substrates of ZOG1 and cisZOG1.435 Although the role of O-glucosides in
metabolic homeostasis is not fully understood, these modified cytokinins might be stable storage forms of the
hormone because a maize -glucosidase, Zm60.1, is reported to release active cytokinins from O-glucosides as
well as N3-glucosides.436

Figure 18 Reduction of cytokinin in Phaseolus vulgaris.

Figure 19 cis–trans isomerization of cytokinin in Phaseolus vulgaris.

46 Plant Hormones

Figure 20 Current model of cytokinin O-glycosylation in higher plants. tZOG, tZ O-glucoside; tZOX, tZ O-xyloside; cZOG,
cZ O-glucoside. ZOG and ZOX also utilize DZ for production of DZ O-glucoside (DZOG) and DZ O-xyloside (DZOX),
respectively.

4.02.4.3.9 Modification of adenine moiety

In contrast to O-glycosylation, N-glucosylation at the N7 and N9 positions is thought to be an irreversible
reaction.436 In Arabidopsis, cytokinin N-glucosyltransferases, UGT76C1 and UGT76C2, conjugate glucose to all
cytokinin nucleobases at the N7 or N9 position of the adenine moiety (Figure 21).437 These enzymes could
also conjugate glucose at the N7 position of tZ O-glucoside.437 Enzymes catalyzing N-glucosylation at the N3
position have not yet been identified. Alanyltransferase, which converts zeatin to its alanyl derivative, lupinic
acid (3-(N6-(4-hydroxyisopentenyl)adeninyl)-L-alanine), was partially purified from lupin seeds but further
characterization has not been done.438

4.02.4.3.10 Degradation of cytokinins

In addition to biosynthesis and conjugation to other molecules, degradation is an important step that
controls active cytokinin levels. Cytokinin oxidase/dehydrogenase (CKX) mediates irreversible cytokinin
degradation (Figure 22). CKX utilizes cytokinins with an unsaturated isoprenoid side chain such as iP
and tZ and their nucleosides, nucleotides, and N9-glucosides with different affinities.439–443 Biochemical
and sequence analysis revealed that CKX is a flavoprotein, a member of an FAD-dependent oxidor-
eductase superfamily.444 CKX reacts more efficiently as a dehydrogenase with an electron donor other
than oxygen.440,445
In Arabidopsis, seven CKX genes, from AtCKX1 to AtCKX7, have been identified and characterized.443,446
Among AtCKXs, there are significant differences in the gene expression pattern, subcellular localization, pH
optimum, and substrate specificity.443,446 These results might be a reflection of functional differentiation among
AtCKXs. Overexpression of each CKX results in a decrease in cytokinin content in tobacco447 and
 Plant Hormones 47

Figure 21 N-glycosylation of cytokinin in Arabidopsis. iP7G, iP N7-glucoside; iP9G, iP N9-glucoside; tZ7G, tZ N7-
glucoside; tZ9G, tZ N9-glucoside; cZ7G, cZ N7-glucoside; cZ9G, cZ N9-glucoside; DZ7G, DZ N7-glucoside; DZ9G, DZ N9-
glucoside; tZOG7G, tZOG N7-glucoside.

Figure 22 Current model of cytokinin degradation in higher plants. CKX utilizes also iPR, iPRMP, iP9G, tZ, tZR, and tZ9G in
Arabidopsis. The second step of the reaction is likely nonenzymatic.

Arabidopsis,446 whereas reduction of OsCKX2 by natural variation results in increases in cytokinin levels in
rice,448 indicating the central role of CKX in the control of cytokinin levels in plants.

4.02.4.4 Translocation
Recent studies on purine and nucleoside transporters suggest that these proteins may function in cytokinin
transport. By using a heterologous expression system in budding yeast, Arabidopsis thaliana purine permease 1
(AtPUP1) was characterized as a purine permease that imports adenine, cytosine, hypoxanthine, caffeine, and
cytokinin nucleobases.449 The expression of AtPUP1 was observed in hydathodes and stigma, suggesting a role
in the retrieval of purines and cytokinins from xylem sap to prevent loss during guttation.450 On the other hand,
adenine transport by AtPUP2 in the same system was strongly inhibited by iP and BA,450 suggesting involve-
ment in cytokinin nucleobase transport. Expression of AtPUP2 in leaf phloem implies a potential role in phloem
loading and transport of adenine and cytokinins.450
Equilibrative-type nucleoside transporters (ENTs) were also characterized in rice451 and Arabidopsis370 in
reference to cytokinin nucleoside transport using the yeast system. One of the four rice ENT gene products,
OsENT2, mediates the uptake of cytokinin nucleoside as well as that of adenosine451 with higher affinity to iPR
48 Plant Hormones

than tZR. In Arabidopsis, AtENT6 and AtENT8 can potentially mediate the uptake of cytokinin nucleo-
side.370,452 AtENT6 also prefers iPR over tZR.370 However, these results were obtained by in vitro studies
using the heterologous yeast expression system. Further characterization using loss-of-function mutants should
provide definitive evidence for the physiological role of the cytokinin transport candidates.

4.02.4.5 Biological Activities

4.02.4.5.1 Delay of leaf senescence
Leaf senescence is characterized by loss of chlorophyll, leaf yellowing, degradation of proteins, membrane
lipids, and RNA, and recycling to young tissues.453 Delay of leaf senescence by exogenous application of
cytokinins has been confirmed by numerous studies,454 suggesting that cytokinins are key components in the
regulation of leaf senescence.
Various studies have been designed to modify cytokinin metabolism to elucidate the role of cytokinin in the
regulation of leaf senescence. In tobacco, introduction of an Agrobacterium cytokinin biosynthesis gene, IPT,
under the control of a senescence-associated gene promoter results in suppression of leaf senescence.455 Similar
effects are obtained in lettuce,456 petunia,457 tomato,458 and broccoli,459 but not in maize.460 Transgenic petunia
overexpressing its own IPT gene also results in delay of leaf senescence,404 whereas early leaf senescence was
not observed in cytokinin-deficient tobacco and Arabidopsis overexpressing CKX.446,447 Since the CKX-over-
expressing plants drastically enhanced root growth and reduced shoot growth,446 it is possible that alteration in
sink–source relations might also interfere with the normal mechanism of senescence.
By means of genetic approaches, an Arabidopsis cytokinin receptor, Arabidopsis histidine kinase 3 (AHK3; see
Section 4.02.4.6.2), was found to play a major role in the control of leaf senescence.461,462 Analyses of the effect of
exogenous cytokinin on chlorophyll retention by detached leaves of cytokinin receptor mutants showed that
AHK3 plays an important role in mediating cytokinin-dependent chlorophyll retention,462 although cytokinin
receptor mutants showed no phenotype in early leaf senescence similar to the result described above for the
CKX-overexpressing plants.462 A low cytokinin content or reduced cytokinin signaling may not be a triggering
factor for the onset of the senescence process. The molecular analyses of a gain-of-function mutant of AHK3,
which exhibits a delay in leaf senescence, revealed that AHK3 plays a major role in cytokinin-mediated control
of leaf longevity.461

4.02.4.5.2 Control of the cell cycle

Several studies have implicated a role for cytokinins in the regulation of both the G1–S cycle418,463 and the G2–
M phase transition417,464 of the cell cycle. Cytokinin activates Arabidopsis cell division through induction of D-
type cyclin, CycD3, at the G1–S cell cycle phase transition.463,465 A sharp increase in the levels of cytokinins
was reported in tobacco cell cultures at the G2–M phase.417 Roots of multiple mutants of cytokinin receptor
genes show delay of the transition in G2–M phase.466

4.02.4.5.3 Control of shoot meristem activity

Overexpression of CKX leads to reduced meristem activity in Arabidopsis shoots.438 Moreover, multiple mutants
of Arabidopsis genes related to cytokinin biosynthesis and signaling show a reduction in meristem activity in
shoots.409,466–468 Recent research reveals that modifying cytokinin metabolism improves crop yields. In rice,
reduced expression of a CKX, OsCKX2, results in increased levels of cytokinins in inflorescence meristems and
an increased number of reproductive organs, resulting in enhanced grain yield.448 Conversely, loss of function
of a gene for the cytokinin-activating enzyme, LOG, which is expressed in shoot apical meristems, leads to
premature termination of cell division in rice shoot meristems.426 This result suggests that meristem cells
autonomously produce active cytokinins for continuous cell division.
In shoot apical meristems, cytokinin and cytokinin-related regulatory networks are necessary for main-
tenance of stem cells.469,470 One of the network components is a transcription factor, Class I KNOTTED1-
like homeobox (KNOXI), that determines the identity of the shoot apical meristem, and it positively
regulates IPT genes in Arabidopsis and rice, but negatively regulates gibberellin biosynthesis.406,471,472
Another component of this network is a homeobox protein, WUSCHEL (WUS), that directly and
 Plant Hormones 49

negatively regulates a subset of genes related to cytokinin signaling, type-A Arabidopsis response regulators
(ARRs; see Section 4.02.4.6.4) in Arabidopsis.473

4.02.4.5.4 Control of root meristem activity

Similar to the patterns of activity in the shoot meristem, multiple mutants of Arabidopsis genes related to
cytokinin signaling display reduced cell division activity in the root meristem,466–468 whereas the phenotype is
not observed in adventitious roots.468,474 The reduced cell division activity in primary roots of these mutants
might be a side effect of a structural defect in roots and/or caused by a distinct signaling network for activation
of cell division between primary and adventitious roots. Transgenic plants with reduced cytokinin levels or
signaling lead to increases in root meristem size and activity.409,446,475 These results lead to the assumption that
cytokinins might have two opposing effects on root growth, one inhibitory and another stimulatory; a small
reduction in cytokinin level or signaling activity would result in increased activity of the root meristem, but a
reduction beyond a critical threshold would result in decreased activity.476 Exogenous application of cytokinin
and molecular analyses using cytokinin metabolism and signaling mutants revealed that cytokinins regulate
root meristem size in the elongation zone by controlling cell differentiation.475 This regulation appears to be
mediated by AHK3 and type-B ARRs, ARR1 and ARR12.475

4.02.4.5.5 Regulation of vascular development

Cytokinins have a crucial role in the continuous division of both procambial cells and vascular cambium cells,
processes that provide precursor cells for xylem and phloem.477,478 Mutation of cytokinin receptor gene,
ARABIDOPSIS HISTIDINE KINASE 4/CYTOKININ RESPONSE 1/WOODEN LEG (AHK4/CRE1/WOL), leads
to reductions in cell files and differentiation of all procambial cells into protoxylem.479 A similar phenotype is
also observed in multiple mutants of Arabidopsis genes related to cytokinin signaling,468,474,480 indicating that
genes involved in cytokinin signaling are important regulators of vascular development.
The double mutant of wol and fass, a mutation resulting in supernumerary cell layers, shows an increase in
the number of vascular cell layers with phloem markers.471 Furthermore, exogenous application of cytokinin
and postembryonic expression of CKX under the AHK4/CRE1/WOL promoter show phenocopy of the wol
mutant.473 These results indicate that cytokinin signaling through a phosphorelay-mediated pathway is
required to promote procambial cell division and is also required to promote and maintain cell identities
other than protoxylem. This signaling is negatively regulated by pseudo-histidine phosphotransfer protein
(pseudo-HPt; see Section 4.02.4.6.3) called AHP6.481 In the shoots of cytokinin-deficient plants that are
overexpressing cytokinin oxidase, the number of both xylem and phloem cells is reduced, indicating that the
changes are the result of an overall reduction of cambial activity without affecting cell differentiation
specifically.446,447 This result supports a role for cytokinins in the promotion and maintenance of cambial
cell division in addition to procambial cell division.

4.02.4.5.6 Release of buds from apical dominance

Auxin, cytokinin, and other unknown substances are thought to regulate apical dominance.482 Application of
cytokinin or overexpression of the IPT gene shows a phenotype with a reduction in apical dominance.404,483,484
Arabidopsis mutants with increased levels of cytokinin also show reduced apical dominance.485–487 These results
suggest that cytokinins play a role in the promotion of bud outgrowth.
Studies using pea have suggested that decapitation leads to increased levels of endogenous cytokinins in the
stem and/or xylem sap488,489 and increased delivery of cytokinins to axillary buds.490,491 Decapitation of pea
leads to increased cytokinin levels in axillary buds following an induction of IPT genes in the stem.491 These
lines of evidence suggest that cytokinins synthesized in the stem are transported to the axillary buds after
decapitation, resulting in promotion of bud outgrowth. Increases in cytokinin levels and pea IPT expression
after stem decapitation are partially repressed by auxin application.489,491 It is not clear whether an increased
cytokinin level in buds occurs prior to bud outgrowth, or is the cause of bud outgrowth.

4.02.4.5.7 Regulation of root formation

Plant hormones492,493 and various nutrients494 regulate the formation of postembryonic roots. It is well known
that cytokinin application inhibits the formation of lateral and adventitious roots, whereas auxin promotes root
50 Plant Hormones

formations in various plants.492 Transgenic tobacco447 and Arabidopsis446 plants with a reduced cytokinin
content due to the overexpression of a CKX showed an increase in lateral and adventitious root number. In
Arabidopsis, ahk2 ahk3 double knockout mutant showed enhanced lateral root formation.462 Multiple mutants of
Arabidopsis genes related to cytokinin signaling showed reduced sensitivity of lateral root formation to
cytokinin.468,495 These results indicate that cytokinins, through the signaling pathway in phosphorelay system,
negatively regulate lateral root formation.
Lateral roots in Arabidopsis originate from pericycle cells.493 A critical event in lateral root formation is
reentry of differentiated pericycle cells into the cell cycle and initiation of the root developmental program.
Paradoxically, cytokinins inhibit the initiation of lateral roots by blocking the pericycle founder cells cycling at
the G2-to-M transition phase,496 although the hormone is usually considered to be a positive regulator of the
cell cycle.463,464 Cytokinins might have two opposing effects on cell cycling at this phase, and lateral root
formation is associated with spatial and temporal regulation of the cytokinin level and/or signaling.476 With
exogenous application of cytokinin, there is a significant difference in growth between primary and lateral
roots.496
A root-derived suppressor negatively regulating the formation of roots has been hypothesized.497 This
proposed mechanism, termed ‘root apical dominance,’ is analogous to the means for apical dominance in shoots.
The cytokinin, tZR, in root xylem sap is hypothesized to play the role of the main suppressor, and tZR
transported from roots to shoots via the transpiration stream negatively regulates the formation of adventitious
roots.365

4.02.4.5.8 Regulation of nodule formation

Cytokinins play an important role in the nodule development of legumes. Transfer of cytokinin production
allows normally nonsymbiotic bacteria to activate nodule formation in alfalfa,498 suggesting that increased
levels of cytokinin could induce nodule formation. Moreover, overexpression of CKX results in decreased
numbers of nodules in Lotus japonicus,499 and suppression of cytokinin receptor expression by RNA interference
reduces nodulation in Medicago truncatula.500 Furthermore, genetic approaches using legumes revealed that
cytokinin alone is sufficient to activate nodule formation. Loss-of-function mutations in the Lhk1 (Lotus histidine
kinase 1) gene, a cytokinin receptor of L. japonicus, abolish nodule primordium formation, but do not affect
bacterial invasion of the root.501 Conversely, a gain-of-function mutation in Lhk1 results in spontaneous
formation of nodules in the absence of rhizobial bacteria.502 These observations suggest that activation of
Nod factor signaling at the epidermis in legumes leads to increased production of cytokinins, which are then
transported to the root cortex and perceived by LHK1. This signaling would lead to initiation of cell division,
resulting in the formation of nodule primordia.

4.02.4.5.9 Interactions between macronutrients and cytokinins

A close correlation between nitrogen nutrition and cytokinin content has been noted, and nitrate application
induces rapid accumulation of cytokinins in the roots of barley,503 maize,504 and Arabidopsis.408,505 In Arabidopsis
roots, application of nitrate initiates tZ synthesis through induction of cytokinin biosynthesis enzymes, IPT3408
and CYP735A2.428 This production of tZR plays a role in sending a long-distance signal from roots to shoots via
xylem vessels. Application of nitrate and cytokinin induces expression of variable genes involved in metabolism
and developmental programs, suggesting that cytokinins are secondary messengers in the regulation of these
genes.506 Alternatively, cytokinin application represses expression of some macronutrient transporters for ions
such as nitrate, ammonium, sulfate, and phosphate.506 In addition, some genes of nitrate transporters are
induced by nitrate, whereas genes of other macronutrient transporters such as ammonium, sulfate, and
phosphate are induced by substrate starvation.506 Repression of sulfate transporters, SULTR1;1 and
SULTR1;2, has been reported to be mediated by the cytokinin receptor, AHK4/CRE1/WOL,507 and the
phosphate transporter, PHT1;1, is reported to be repressed by AHK3 and AHK4/CRE1/WOL.508 These
results imply that cytokinins might act as messengers to communicate whether the nitrogen supply is sufficient
to upregulate the uptake systems for other macronutrients.
 Plant Hormones 51

4.02.4.6 Perception and Signaling

4.02.4.6.1 Cytokinin-binding proteins
To understand the mechanism of cytokinin perception, many investigators have searched for cytokinin-binding
proteins (CBPs);509 however, the biological function of CBPs as cytokinin receptors remains to be confirmed.
S-adenosyl-L-homocysteine hydrolase,510 endochitinase,511 and osmotin-like protein511 were isolated as CBPs
by purification of proteins having cytokinin-binding ability. Fujimoto et al.512 isolated a CBP from mung bean
by affinity chromatography using phenylurea as a probe. This protein, known as Vigna radiata cytokinin-specific
binding protein (VrCSBP), has sequence similarity to plant pathogenesis-related class 10 (PR-10) proteins.
VrCSBP was crystallized in a complex with tZ and the binding mode of VrCsBP to tZ was determined;513
however, the biological importance of VrCsBP as a receptor has not been elucidated. Thus, clear proof for the
function of soluble CBPs is still lacking.

4.02.4.6.2 Cytokinin receptor as a histidine protein kinase (His-kinase)

Advances in molecular genetics of model plants, especially Arabidopsis, have brought rapid progress in under-
standing the mechanisms of cytokinin signal transduction. The first candidate gene for a membrane-bound
cytokinin receptor was CYTOKININ INSENSITIVE 1 (CKI1).514 Overexpression of CKI1 showed typical
phenotypes of cytokinin response including shoot formation from calli independent of exogenous cytokinins.514
The CKI1 encodes a protein containing a putative input domain with two membrane-spanning regions, a His-
kinase domain, and a receiver domain. This report first implied that cytokinin signaling in plants is perceived
and transduced by a two-component system, a mechanism prevalent in bacteria with phosphotransfer between
His and Asp residues. However, no data further supporting that CKI1 is directly involved in cytokinin
perception have been provided. The His-kinase activity of CKI1 is constitutively active when the gene is
expressed in Escherichia coli despite the absence of exogenous cytokinins.515 Knockout mutants of CKI1 show a
lethal phenotype in female gametophytes, demonstrating the importance of this enzyme in plant
development.516
AHK4/CRE1/WOL, another His-kinase of Arabidopsis, was also identified as a cytokinin receptor.517–519
The ahk4/cre1/wol mutant conferred resistance to exogenous cytokinins.517,519 Introduction of AHK4/CRE1/
WOL into a His-kinase mutant of budding yeast,517 fission yeast,518 or E. coli518 complemented the mutation in a
cytokinin-dependent manner. Furthermore, the AHK4/CRE1/WOL protein, expressed in fission yeast or
E. coli, binds to iP with high affinity: Kd ¼ 4.5  109 mol l1 515 and 2.5  109 mol l1,520 respectively. These
lines of evidence prove that AHK4/CRE1/WOL functions as a cytokinin receptor. The extracellular domain at
the N-terminal region of AHK4/CRE1/WOL is designated as cyclase/histidine kinase-associated sensing
extracellular (CHASE) domain, which is found in prokaryotes, lower eukaryotes, and plants.521 Evolutionary
proteomics analyses using the CHASE domain proposed five amino acids to be involved in cytokinin
binding.522 AHK4/CRE1/WOL binds not only the nucleobase of isoprenoid cytokinins such as iP and tZ,
but also BA515,520 and diphenylurea.515
Two other His-kinases, AHK2 and AHK3, were also identified as cytokinin receptors in Arabidopsis
(Figure 23).515 AHK3 and AHK4/CRE1/WOL differ in the ligand specificity: AHK3 has a lower affinity to
iP, but a higher affinity to DZ, than AHK4/CRE1/WOL.523 In other species, maize His-kinase ZmHK1,
ZmHK2, and ZmHK3a524 and rice His-kinase OsHK1–4525 have been shown to function as cytokinin receptors.
The AHK4/CRE1/WOL gene was actually first identified as a causal gene of the wol mutant, which confers a
reduced number of root vascular cells;479 however, single mutants of AHK2 or AHK3 and the double mutant of
these receptors did not affect root morphology.466,467 Only AHK4/CRE1/WOL has strong phosphatase
activity in the phosphorelay network,526 and AHK4/CRE1/WOL is expressed more strongly than AHK2 or
AHK3 in the root procambium, which forms the primary xylem in vascular tissues.479 The differences in
expression patterns and biochemical nature might lead to the different root phenotypes of the mutants.
The ahk2 ahk3 ahk4/cre1/wol triple mutant displays a more severe phenotype in roots and shoots than any of
the other double mutant combinations, indicating that three cytokinin receptors have overlapping func-
tions.462,466,467 Although the triple mutant shows no cytokinin responses, this plant can germinate and
produce the basic plant organs,466 suggesting that either cytokinin is not required for gametogenesis and
embryogenesis, or there might be another cytokinin receptor for the early stages of plant development.
52 Plant Hormones

Cytokinin
Binding

Plasma membrane

H H P AHK4/CRE1/WOL
AHK2
AHK3
D D P

Induction of AHPs
translocation to H P
Cytoplasm
CRFs nucleus

AHPs
Nucleus
H P

Type-A Type-B
CRFs
ARRs ARRs
D P
D P

Transcription of primary
cytokinin-responsive genes

Figure 23 Regulatory network of growth and development mediated by cytokinin. Arrows and blunted lines indicate
positive and inhibitory interactions, respectively; solid lines show direct molecular interactions; and dashed lines show
interactions that are indirect. H, His residues; D, Asp residues; encircled P, phosphoryl group.

4.02.4.6.3 Phosphotransfer proteins

On ligand binding, the receptors are autophosphorylated at the conserved His residue within the receptor’s
kinase domain. The phosphoryl group is first transferred from His to a conserved Asp residue in the
receptor’s receiver domain,526,527 and then, the phosphoryl group is transferred to a His phosphotransfer
protein (HPt) that shuttles between the nucleus and cytosol (Figure 23).526–528 In Arabidopsis, five
Arabidopsis HPt (AHP) genes from a family of six AHP-related proteins, AHP1–5, were demonstrated to
be genuine phosphotransfer proteins by functional complementation of a yeast mutant and by in vitro
assays for phosphate perception and transfer abilities.529–531 Overexpression of AHP2 in Arabidopsis results in
a slight hypersensitivity to exogenous cytokinin treatment.532 Multiple variant of ahps (e.g., ahp1 ahp2 ahp3
ahp4 ahp5) shows reduced cytokinin sensitivity although single or double ahp mutants are indistinguishable
from wild type in cytokinin response assays, suggesting that the AHPs have a positive and redundant
function in cytokinin signal transduction.468 On the other hand, the His residue is not conserved in
AHP6.481 AHP6 is predicted to be a negative regulator of cytokinin signaling, likely via a dominant
negative mechanism.481
 Plant Hormones 53

4.02.4.6.4 Response regulators

In the two-component system, the final acceptor of the phosphoryl group is a response regulator, whose activity
is switched by the phosphorylation state of the conserved Asp residue. Plant response regulator genes were first
identified as cytokinin-inducible genes in Arabidopsis533 and maize.504 Twenty-four Arabidopsis response reg-
ulator (ARR) genes are found in the Arabidopsis genome and are basically divided into two classes, the A and B
types, based on their structure and expression properties.534,535
Type-A ARRs (ARR3–9, ARR15–17) have a conserved receiver domain and a short C-terminus and their
transcription is rapidly increased in response to exogenous cytokinin.534,536–538 The phosphorylation of the
receiver domain is required for type-A ARRs function.539 Overexpression of ARR4–7 in Arabidopsis protoplasts
inhibits the expression of the luciferase gene controlled by the ARR6 promoter.526 Overexpression of ARR15
decreases sensitivity to cytokinin treatment.540 In addition, multiple type-A arr loss-of-function mutants are
hypersensitive to cytokinin in various assays, although their single mutants have no detectable change in
cytokinin responsiveness.495 These results strongly suggest that type-A ARRs are negative regulators of
cytokinin responses, and that there are highly overlapping functions among members of this gene family in
Arabidopsis. This negative regulation of type-A response regulator is likely conserved in higher plants.541 In
maize, a single type-A mutation (abphyl1) causes an alteration of leaf phyllotaxy, suggesting a difference in the
level of genetic redundancy among species.542
Conversely, the 11 type-B ARRs (ARR1, ARR2, ARR10–14, ARR18–21) have a C-terminal output domain
that has a DNA-binding and transcriptional activation domain. Expressions of type-B ARRs are not appreciably
affected by cytokinin application.543 ARR1, ARR2, and ARR10 activate the transcription of a subset of type-A
ARRs.526 Overexpression of truncated forms of ARR1, which lack the receiver domain, causes an increase in
cytokinin sensitivity, suggesting that the receiver domain negatively regulates the output function of these
proteins in the absence of cytokinin.544 Although single loss-of-function mutants such as arr1, arr10, and arr12
do not confer visible phenotypes, the arr1 arr10 arr12 triple mutant displays almost complete insensitivity to
cytokinin.545 These results indicate that there is functional overlap among type-B ARRs and that they act as
positive regulators of cytokinin signal transduction.
There are three additional ARRs (ARR22–24) in the Arabidopsis genome. Overexpression of ARR22 shows a
similar phenotype to that of the wol mutant, a loss-of-function mutant of a cytokinin receptor, suggesting that
ARR22 might be an element in the cytokinin-responsive phosphorelay signal transduction pathway.537

4.02.4.6.5 Branch of the two-component pathway

Several members of Arabidopsis APETALA2 (AP2) transcription factors, cytokinin response factors (CRFs), are
transcriptionally upregulated by cytokinin.546 The CRF proteins rapidly accumulate in the nucleus in response
to cytokinin, and this translocation depends on AHKs and AHPs, but is independent of ARRs (Figure 23).546
Comparison of the cytokinin response in type-B arr mutants and crf mutants revealed substantial overlap
among the genes regulated by these two families of transcription factors.546 These results suggest that CRFs
function in tandem with type-B ARRs as a branch of an evolutionarily ancient two-component system for
cytokinin response.

4.02.5 Abscisic Acid

Since the publication of the previous edition of the book Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry in 1999,547
research on abscisic acid (ABA, 1) has progressed especially concerning its biosynthesis, catabolism, and signal
transduction using molecular biology techniques. In this chapter, descriptions of these subjects have been
extensively revised and the chemistry of ABA is described in brief although the essential information has been
retained.

4.02.5.1 Introduction
ABA was discovered by three independent lines of research.548 Carns and coworkers found that an auxin
inhibitor, ‘abscisin,’ was involved in the abscission of immature cotton fruits. However, Ohkuma and other
54 Plant Hormones

members of Addicott’s group failed to isolate the inhibitor from the hexane extracts of cotton burs, and later
isolated a new inhibitor, ‘abscisin II,’ that showed a high activity in the abscission test from the acetone extracts
of immature cotton fruits. The basic structure of ‘abscisin II’ was reported by Ohkuma et al.549 in 1965, and
Cornforth et al.550 soon confirmed its structure by synthesizing it. Van Steveninck suggested that an auxin
inhibitor that was produced in the basal immature seeds promoted the abortion of the apical flowers of
inflorescences in yellow lupine. This inhibitor was identified as the same compound as ‘abscisin II’ by
Koshimizu et al.551 in 1966. Phillips and Wareing suggested that the dormancy of terminal buds of sycamore
maple was regulated by a growth inhibitor, ‘dormin,’ that was formed in the leaves. The structure of ‘dormin’
was found to be the same as ‘abscisin II’ by Cornforth et al.552 in 1965. The two names ‘abscisin II’ and ‘dormin’
were unified to ‘abscisic acid’ and the abbreviation ‘ABA’ was agreed at the Sixth International Congress on the
Plant Growth Substances in 1967.553
ABA has an asymmetric carbon at the C-19, and natural ABA is a (þ)-isomer. Cornforth et al.554 applied
Mills’s rule to 19,49-cis-diol (2) and 19,49-trans-diol (3) of ABA converted from (þ)-ABA, and proposed that the
absolute configuration of (þ)-ABA is R. (The absolute configuration proposed by Cornforth et al. in 1967 was
S according to the old definition of R/S, but since the definition of R/S was changed in 1966,555 the new
definition is used to avoid confusion.) Doubt was cast on the absolute configuration by Taylor and Burden556 in
1972, who showed a conversion of violaxanthin (4) to (þ)-ABA via xanthoxin (5) and ABA-aldehyde (6) as
shown in Scheme 1. They suggested that the configuration of the C-19 of (þ)-ABA is S since the stereo-
chemistry of C-6 of violaxanthin had been elucidated by X-ray analysis to be S. The absolute configuration of
the C-19 of (þ)-ABA was finally concluded to be S by various methods.557–560
ABA occurs in all higher plants, ferns, mosses, liverworts, and algae. In early studies, ABA was not detected
in liverworts, and Pryce561 had proposed that lunularic acid, which is a derivative of stilbene, plays an ABA-like
physiological role in liverworts. However, subsequent work using a GC-SIM analysis showed that two species
of liverworts contained ABA.562 As a result of the universal distribution in the plant kingdom and many
physiological studies, ABA has been classified as a plant hormone.548,563 Interestingly, ABA occurs in other
organisms in addition to plants. More than 20 species of phytopathogenic fungi including Cercospora and Botrytis
are known to produce ABA in culture media.564,565 A strain of Botrytis cinerea that does not produce ABA is
virulent to tomato plants,566 but ABA may increase susceptibility of tomato to B. cinerea by suppressing salicylic
acid-dependent signaling mechanisms.567 There is still controversy on the pathological function of ABA in
fungi. Natural ABA produced by fermentation of B. cinerea is available at a low price, so the chemical synthesis
of ABA itself is not practical at present. It was reported by an Italian research group that ABA occurred in
marine sponges and hydroids, and that ABA was an endogenous cytokine in human granulocytes with cyclic
ADP-ribose as a second messenger.568 The presence of ABA in mammalian brains was also reported,569
suggesting that ABA may be a hormone in mammals; however, the occurrence of ABA in marine sponges,
hydroids, human granulocytes, and mammalian brains has not been elucidated, and more experiments are
needed to establish ABA as a real universal hormone.

4.02.5.2 Chemistry
4.02.5.2.1 Isolation and analysis
ABA is extracted from plants and other sources usually by methanol. Methanolysis of glucosyl ester of ABA
sometimes occurs to give its methyl ester as an artifact,570 and acetone is used for extraction to avoid the
methanolysis. The methyl ester of ABA is not always an artifact. Its occurrence in stigma of tobacco has been
confirmed by extraction using acetone.571 Ethyl acetate is used to extract ABA and its natural catabolites,

CrO3/
Zn(MnO4)2 C5H5N Ag2O
ABA
O O OH
CHO CHO
HO HO O
2 5 1
4 6
Scheme 1
 Plant Hormones 55

phaseic acid (7), and dihydrophaseic acid (8) and its epimer (9), from an aqueous solution after concentration of
a methanol solution. ABA is a weak acid with a pKa of 4.7, and the partition coefficient between ethyl acetate
and water at pH 2.5 is 10.572 Glucosyl ester (10) and other conjugated forms of ABA and the catabolites are
extracted from the aqueous solution by n-butyl alcohol saturated with water.
Isolation and chromatographic analysis of ABA are according to a method for a weak acid. Column packings
suitable for a rough separation of ABA are active charcoal, silica gel, and others. ABA is observed as a dark spot
on a thin-layer plate of silica gel containing fluorescent dye under UV irradiation at 254 nm. The colorless spot
of ABA on the plate becomes bright yellow after spraying with a 5% solution of sulfuric acid in ethanol
followed by heating, and the spot shows yellowish green fluorescence under UV irradiation at 365 nm.573
Octadecyl silica (ODS) gel columns are often used in HPLC analysis of ABA.572 The detection limit of ABA at
260 nm is about 1 ng. The methyl ester of ABA is detected by GC using OV-1, OV-17, SE-30, and XE-60
columns.574 A GC analysis with an electron capture detector (ECD) is one of the most convenient methods to
detect ABA with high selectivity and sensitivity. The detection limit of the methyl ester of ABA by ECD is 1–
10 pg.572 The optical resolution of ()-ABA, ()-phaseic acid, and methyl ester of ()-dihydrophaseic acid is
achieved by HPLC with columns packed with chiral materials.575–577
ABA is detected and quantified by enzyme immunoassay with a monoclonal antibody.578 The detection limit
of immunoassay with a monoclonal antibody is about 0.02 pmol; however, enzyme immunoassay cannot
exclude cross-reactivity with unknown substances, so GC- or LC-SIM analysis using the stable isotope dilution
method is recommended for correct quantitation. As internal standards labeled with the stable isotope,
deuterated derivatives of ABA such as [39,59,59,79,79,79-2H6]ABA (ABA-d6)579 and [79,79,79-2H3] derivatives
of phaseic and dihydrophaseic acids580 are used.

4.02.5.2.2 Physicochemical properties

The melting points of (þ)-ABA and its racemate are 160–161581 and 188–190  C,550 respectively. ABA is
converted to a -lactone (11) under a strong acidic condition.582 The 19-hydroxyl group is resistant to
acetylation, and the six-membered ring aromatizes with migration of the methyl groups upon treatment with
acetic anhydride and p-toluenesulfonic acid to give an aromatic derivative (12).583 Hydrogen and oxygen atoms
of ABA can be exchanged with hydrogen and oxygen atoms from a medium. Hydrogen atoms at C-39, C-59, and
C-79 are easily exchanged with deuterium of deuterated water under alkaline conditions via an enol form to
give ABA-d6.579 The order of ease of exchange is 59-Hpro-S, 59-Hpro-R, and 39-H and 79-H. Hydrogen atoms at the
C-2 and C-6 are also exchangeable in an alkaline solution although it takes longer than 2 months.584 49-
Carbonyl oxygen is exchanged with an oxygen of water under acidic and alkaline conditions.585 ABA has
electrophilicity derived from the side chain and the enone group. The methyl ester of ABA shows two
reduction voltages, Ep 1.3 and 1.75 V, because conjugation of the side chain and the enone groups is
precluded by the 19-hydroxyl group.586 The methyl ester of ABA is irreversibly reduced with two electrons
at a cathode to give a major product, the structure of which was revised to 13.587 This product spontaneously
isomerizes to compound 14 under alkaline conditions as shown in Scheme 2.
In the infrared (IR) spectrum, the methyl ester of ABA shows absorption bands at 3610 cm1 (the 19-
hydroxyl group), 1667 cm1 (the 49-carbonyl group), and 1710, 1637, and 1604 cm1 (the side chain).588 The
methyl ester of phaseic acid shows an absorption band at 1723 cm1 for the 49-carbonyl group. The methyl ester
of dihydrophaseic acid shows an absorption band at 3552 cm1, which is assigned to the 49-hydroxyl group
since its strength does not decrease even in a dilute solution due to a hydrogen bonding between the 49-
alcoholic hydrogen and the 89-ethereal oxygen.589 This assignment means that the C-49 of dihydrophaseic acid
is S and that the C-49 of epi-dihydrophaseic acid is R.

CO2Me
OH
2e, 2H+ OH– O
OH CO2Me
CO2Me
O O O
Methyl ester of ABA 13 14
Scheme 2
56 Plant Hormones

ABA absorbs ultraviolet with maxima at 240 nm (" 2.1  104, a shoulder peak), 260 nm (" 2.6  104), and
320 nm (" 50) in an acidic methanol solution.590 Irradiation with UV with a wavelength shorter than 305 nm
isomerizes the 2-(Z)-double bond to (E) to give an equilibrium mixture of ABA and its 2-(E)-isomer with a ratio
of 1:1, and also causes decomposition of ABA to unidentified compounds by the excitation of the – transition
of the side chain and the enone groups. ABA has a strong optical activity, and its specific optical rotation is
þ430 in an acidic methanol solution.591 In the optical rotatory dispersion (ORD)591 and the circular dichroism
(CD) spectra,558 ABA shows a positive Cotton effect from 300 to 200 nm. Phaseic acid and dihydrophaseic acid
and its epimer, which did not have the enone group, show a small specific optical rotation with a minus value
and also a negative plain curve in the ORD.
The 1H NMR signals of ABA are summarized in Table 2. In the 1H NMR spectrum of ABA, the chemical
shift  7.77 ppm of the 4-H is lower than that of usual protons bound to double bonds. This down field shift is
explained by the deshielding effect of the 1-carboxyl group. The same proton of 2-(E)-ABA is observed at 
6.5 ppm. A W-coupling is observed between the 59-H at a lower field than the other 59-H and the 89-H, and
between the 59-H at a higher field than the other 59-H and the 39-H. Since a half-chair conformation with the
pseudoaxial side chain (HC1) can allow such relationship (Figure 24), the signal can be assigned at a higher
field to the 59-Hpro-R having an equatorial orientation, and at a lower field to the 59-Hpro-S having an axial
orientation.579 However, strictly speaking, the NMR signals of ABA at room temperature are the average of the
signals of different conformers since the ring of ABA is not constrained. The representative conformations of
ABA are HC1 and a half-chair with the pseudoequatorial side chain (HC2) as shown in Figure 25, and other
conformations, the sofas, 1,3-diplanars, and boats, are probably transient, short-lived conformations in the
course of inversion between HC1 and HC2.592 The conformation analyses by a low-temperature 1H NMR
revealed that the 1H signals of ABA separated into two sets, HC1 and HC2, below 250 K, and that the ratio of
the two sets was 99.4:0.6 at 185 K.593,594 At 185 K, the free-energy barrier and the free-energy difference for the
ring inversion between HC1 and HC2 are 11 and 1.4 kcal mol1, respectively. A crystal of ABA has a conformer
different from that in solutions. The X-ray analysis of a crystal of ABA showed that the ring adopts a slightly
distorted sofa, similar to the sofa that has the nondistorted enone and the pseudoaxial side chain.595,596
The 1H NMR spectrum of phaseic acid shows two W-couplings between the 59-Hpro-S and the 89-Hpro-R, and
between the 59-Hpro-R and the 39-Hpro-S because the conformation of the ring is fixed to a chair with the side
chain axial (Figure 24).597 Eu(hfc)3 separates the signals of the 79- or 99-H of methyl esters of (þ)- and ()-
phaseic acids.598 In the 1H NMR spectrum of epi-dihydrophaseic acid, the signal of the 49-hydroxyl proton is

Table 2 Assignment of 1H and 13C NMR signals of ABA

1 13
H NMR (300 MHz, CD3OD) C NMR (24 MHz, CDCl3)

 (ppm) Multiplicity J (Hz) Assignment  (ppm) Assignment

1.03 s 99-H 19.1 C-79

a
1.06 s 89-H 21.4 C-6
1.93 d 1.3 79-H 23.1 C-89
2.03 d 1.3 6-H 24.3 C-99
2.18 dd 16.9 and 0.9 59-Hpro-R 41.7 C-69
2.53 d 16.9 59- Hpro-S 49.7 C-59
5.74 br s 2-H 79.9 C-19
5.92 m 39-H 118.1 C-2
6.23 dd 16.2 and 0.4 5-H 127.0 C-39
7.77 dd 16.2 and 0.6 4-H 128.3 C-4
136.8 C-5
151.4 C-3
163.0 C-29
170.9 C-1
198.3 C-49
a
The coupling constant between 89-H and 59-H is very small.
 Plant Hormones 57

Figure 24 Steric structure of ABA with a preferred conformation and its catabolites (R ¼ side chain).

Figure 25 Two stable conformations of the cyclohexanone ring in ABA (HC1, the half-chair conformation with the
pseudoaxial side chain; HC2, the half-chair conformation with the pseudoequatorial side chain).

observed as a doublet by coupling with the 49-H, meaning that the 49-hydroxyl group is relatively fixed by a
hydrogen bonding with the 89-oxygen (Figure 24).589 The 89-Hpro-S is shifted to a lower field by the 49-
hydroxyl group close to the 89-Hpro-S. The 49-hydroxyl proton of dihydrophaseic acid does not show the
deshielding effect on the 89-Hpro-S. The 13C NMR signals of ABA,579,599 assignment of which was confirmed by
HMQC and HMBC spectra, are summarized in Table 2.
In the electron impact (EI) mass spectrum, the methyl ester of ABA gives a molecular ion at m/z 278, a
dehydrated ion at m/z 260, and major fragment ions at m/z 246 [M-methanol]þ, 190, 162, 134, and 125. The
major fragmentation pathway of methyl ester of ABA, as shown in Scheme 3, was proposed by Gray et al.585
with labeled methyl esters of ABA. The cleavage of the bond between the C-49and C-59 of an ion radical (15)
followed by the elimination of isobutylene through a retro Diels–Alder reaction gives an intermediate ion
radical (16). The ion radical is cyclized, and a methanol is eliminated to give a bicyclic ion radical (17) at m/z
190, which is a base peak in the spectrum. By further elimination of the carbon monoxide, hydrogen radical, and
methyl radical, other fragment ions are formed. An ion (18) at m/z 125 with a second intensity is derived from
the side chain. The strong ions at m/z 190 and 125 are selected as characteristic ions of the methyl ester of ABA
for detection and quantitation by GC-SIM. The formation mechanism of the dehydrated ion at m/z 260 had
been unknown, but it was found that 66% of the dehydrated ion was formed by elimination of the 19-hydroxyl
group and the residual 34% by elimination of the oxygen atom at the 49-carbonyl group.600 ABA methyl esters
labeled with stable isotopes revealed that the 19-hydroxyl group was eliminated mainly with a hydrogen atom
at C-4, and that 49-carbonyl oxygen was eliminated mainly with hydrogen atoms at the 19-hydroxyl group and
at C-4. Involvement of a hydrogen atom at a double bond and of the 49-carbonyl oxygen in dehydration would
be an interesting case of fragmentation.
Negative chemical ionization (NCI) mass spectrometry detects ABA with a high sensitivity since the
negative molecular ion [M] of methyl ester of ABA is more stable than the positive molecular ion [M]þ
due to the high electrophilicity of ABA. The NCI mass spectrum shows [M] at m/z 278 as a base peak, and
other fragment ions at m/z 310, 260, 245, 141, and 152.601 The combination of SIM with NCI gives highly
selective and sensitive detection of ABA; the lowest detection limit is 0.3 pg, which is 200 times lower than that
58 Plant Hormones

Scheme 3

of EI-SIM.602 The detection limit can be decreased to 20 fg by using the pentafluorobenzyl ester of ABA, which
has higher electrophilicity than the methyl ester.603 This is the lowest detection limit among the several
detection methods of ABA.

4.02.5.2.3 Structure–activity relationship

4.02.5.2.3(i) Functional groups essential for the activities Many analogs of ABA have been synthesized to
investigate the structure–activity relationship and to develop a highly active analog for practical use in
agriculture. The analogs have revealed the essential groups for the activities of ABA although a practical
analog for agriculture has not been realized.
The 2-(Z)-pentadienoic acid moiety seems to be essential for the activity since modification of the side chain
decreases the activity of ABA. 2-(E)-ABA is inactive,604 and the elongation and the shortening of the length of
the side chain decrease the activity.605,606 An analog (19) where the geometry of the C-2 is fixed to (Z) by
introduction of a benzene ring shows low activity probably due to the bulkiness of the benzene ring.607 An
acetylenic acid (20) having a triple bond at the C-4 shows high activity,608 suggesting that the recognition of
this part by receptors is not strict. Another analog (21) having a phenyl group at the C-1 shows weak activity.609
1-Aldehyde610 and 1-alcohol608 of ABA are active derivatives and they may be converted to ABA by oxidation
in plants. The methyl ester of ABA is active in long-term assays551 and is not active in the stomatal assay,611
suggesting that the activity of the ester in long-term assays is expressed after hydrolysis. 1-Azido-ABA, which
was synthesized for photoaffinity labeling, is unstable, and 10% as active as ABA.612 The biological activity of
6-nor-ABA is much lower than that of ABA, indicating that the C-6 methyl group is necessary for activity.613 6-
Hydroxy-ABA has been reported along with an enantioselective synthesis of ABA, but its activity is
unknown.614
The 19-hydroxyl group is not essential for the activity of ABA. (þ)-19-Deoxy-ABA (22) retains activity
although it is lower than that of ABA.615 The biological activities of (þ)-19-deoxy-19-fluoro-ABA (23) are 0.1–
0.05 those of (þ)-ABA, and almost equal to those of (þ)-19-deoxy-ABA.615 The property of a monofluoro group
is similar to that of oxygen of a hydroxyl group except for lack of the ability to donate hydrogen. Thus the 19-
hydroxyl group of (þ)-ABA interacts with binding proteins as an uncharged hydrogen-bonding donor. 19-O-
Methyl-ABA (24) shows weak activities, indicating that the hydroxyl group should be free.616 This is coin-
cident with the result with (þ)-19-deoxy-19-fluoro-ABA.
 Plant Hormones 59

The activities of (þ)-79- and 89-nor-ABAs and of (þ)-89,99-dinor-ABA have shown that the C-79 is critical
for the activity while C-89 and C-99 are not.617 The C-79 must interact with binding sites. The activities of the
analogs alkylated at the C-79, C-89, and C-99 have shown that the decrease in activity by alkylating the C-89 of
(þ)-ABA is smaller than that by alkylating the C-79 and C-99 of (þ)-ABA, indicating that the activity is
relatively unaffected by the bulky group at the C-89 of (þ)-ABA.618 The space around the C-89 in (þ)-ABA
does not seem to be involved in the interaction with binding sites for exhibiting activity. The C-89 might be
essential only for metabolic inactivation by hydroxylation. 89,89,89-Trifluoro-ABA (25) is the most active
derivative of ABA, and shows long-lasting activity by resisting enzymatic hydroxylation at C-89 for catabo-
lism.619,620 89-Methylene and 89-methylidyne derivatives of ABA (26 and 27, respectively) show higher activity
than ABA,621 and it has been suggested that the latter derivative resists the 89-hydroxylation.622 99-Propargyl-
ABA (28) competitively inhibits 89-hydroxylase activity, but its activity is similar to that of ABA.623 79-
Difluoro-ABA (29) is as active as ABA.624
39-Thioether of ABA (30) for affinity chromatography,625 39-fluoro-ABA (31),626 and 39-azido-ABA (32)
as a photoaffinity reagent627 retain activity, showing that ABA is tolerant of the 39-modification. 39-Fluoro-
ABA is metabolized to 39-fluoro-89-hydroxy-ABA, which is more stable than 89-hydroxy-ABA. The 49-
carbonyl group is probably not essential since 49-deoxy-ABA628 and 19,49-diols of ABA (2) and (3)629 are
active. However, the receptors for ABA cannot perceive a bulky group at the C-49 since 49-p-aminobenzoyl
hydrazone of ABA lacks the activity.630 An anthracenone analog of ABA (33) shows one-third activity of
ABA.631 The activities of other analogs have been summarized in the earlier works.548,594 Identification of an
ABA receptor and the binding analysis are necessary to design a highly active and simple analog of ABA that
could be used for agriculture.

4.02.5.2.3(ii) Active conformation ABA can adopt many conformations in solutions as described above.
Considering the low barrier to interconversion and the thermodynamic stabilization in binding to the active site
of the receptor, in addition to the half-chairs the short-lived forms can be the active conformation of ABA. The
active conformation has been investigated by the activities of the analogs, which prefer different conforma-
tions.594 The (19S,29S)-29,39-dihydro-ABA (34) is active, whereas (19S,29R)-29,39-dihydro-ABA (35) is
inactive.632 The two dihydro-ABAs may adopt a chair form with axial and equatorial side chains, respectively,
due to the steric repulsion between the 1,3-diaxial methyl groups, 79 and 99, and 79 and 89, respectively. This
example suggests that the active conformation has an axial side chain, rather than an equatorial one. This
hypothesis has been further examined by the cyclopropane analogs synthesized by Todoroki et al.592 59,99-
Cyclo-ABA (36) in which the 69-substituent is constrained essentially to the axial-like orientation between
axial and bisectional orientation shows no activity, while 59,89-cyclo-ABA (37) and an achiral analog (38) with
no axial-like substituent at C-69 exhibit activity equivalent to ABA. The activities of the analogs suggest that
the active conformation of ABA is not the half-chair HC2 with the pseudoequatorial side chain and the
pseudoaxial methyl at C-69, but is close to the other half-chair HC1 with the pseudoaxial side chain and
the pseudoequatorial methyl at C-69. The computer-aided and 1H NMR analyses indicate that the bonding
between the C-1 and C-2 can rotate freely, but the rotation angles of the bondings between the C-3 and C-4 and
between the C-5 and C-19 are 20 and 180 , respectively.633 However, the active conformation of the side chain
is unclear.
Unnatural ()-ABA shows one-half to one-third of the activity of (þ)-ABA in many bioassays,634 and this
small difference in activity between the enantiomers has been explained by the pseudosymmetry of the
molecule, which is derived from the 2,6,6-trimethyl-cyclohex-2-en-4-one.635 Figure 26 shows the steric
structures of (þ)- and ()-ABAs with the preferable conformation, a half-chair with the pseudoaxial side
chain, viewed from the carbonyl group at C-49. In the molecule of ()-ABA, the C-79 corresponds to the C-99
of (þ)-ABA, the C-99 corresponds to the C-79 of (þ)-ABA, and the C-89 occupies the space facing the re-face of
the C-29 in (þ)-ABA, whereas a methyl group corresponding to the C-89 of (þ)-ABA is absent. This hypothesis
has been supported by the achiral analog (38), which shows activity intermediate between (þ)- and ()-
ABAs.592 The activity of ()-ABA is low in the assay of stomatal closure,618 which suggests that the receptor of
stomata is more specific to (þ)-ABA than to ()-ABA.
60 Plant Hormones

Figure 26 Pseudosymmetry of ABA.

4.02.5.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

4.02.5.3.1 Biosynthesis in plants
ABA has a sesquiterpene skeleton consisting of three isoprene units, which suggests that ABA is directly
synthesized from mevalonic acid via a biosynthetic pathway of sesquiterpenes; however, the incorporation
ratios of labeled mevalonic acid into ABA by plants were low,636,637 and the chemical conversion of violax-
anthin to (þ)-ABA by Taylor and Burden556 revealed that ABA might be indirectly biosynthesized via
carotenoids. In the 1990s, Arigoni et al. and Rohmer415 found that isopentenyl diphosphate (IDP) was
biosynthesized not only from mevalonic acid but also from 2-C-methyl-D-erythritol-4-phosphate (MEP),
derived from glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate and pyruvic acid. Furthermore, it was proven that carotenoids,
phytol, and plastoquinones, which were biosynthesized in chloroplasts, were products of the MEP pathway.638
If plant ABA is biosynthesized via carotenoids, ABA should not be a product of the mevalonic acid pathway, but
a product of the MEP pathway. Recent studies have solved this question and confirmed that ABA is
biosynthesized via carotenoids derived from the MEP pathway in plants.639
A convenient method to discriminate between the MEP and mevalonic acid pathways is to label the
terpenoids with 13C of [1-13C]-D-glucose. If ABA is biosynthesized by the MEP pathway or the mevalonic
acid pathway, ABA will be labeled at C-1, C-5, C-6, C-49, C-79, and C-99, or at C-2, C-4, C-6, C-19, C-39, C-59,
C-79, C-89, and C-99, respectively (Figure 27). ABA biosynthesized from [1-13C]-D-glucose by the tulip tree
showed labeled carbons at C-1, C-5, C-6, C-49, C-79, and C-99.640 This finding clearly confirmed that ABA was
biosynthesized by the MEP pathway.
The carotenoid pathway (Scheme 4) was investigated using ABA-deficient mutants lacking enzymes
involved in carotenoid biosynthesis.641 ABA-deficient aba mutants of Arabidopsis showed a low content of
violaxanthin (4) and 99-(Z)-neoxanthin (39), and a high content of zeaxanthin (40), suggesting that zeaxanthin
was involved in ABA biosynthesis.642,643 ABA-deficient aba2 mutant of tobacco was generated by the
transpozon-tagging technique, and the aba2 protein expressed in E. coli showed enzymatic activity converting
zeaxanthin to antheraxanthin (41) and violaxanthin.644 This meant that the aba2 protein was zeaxanthin
epoxidase. The zeaxanthin epoxidase gene of tobacco is expressed at a high level in leaves, but at a low level
in roots and seeds.645 Overexpression of zeaxanthin epoxidase mRNA delays seed germination.646 Introduction
of its antisense mRNA hastened seed germination, but did not affect the tolerance against water stress because
the transgenic plant still contained small amounts of violaxanthin and 99-Z-neoxanthin, which may be enough
to supply ABA.647 The neoxanthin synthase gene was identified in tomato648 and potato.649 Neoxanthin
synthase opens the epoxy ring of violaxanthin and takes a proton from C-7 to form allene compounds.
Violaxanthin and neoxanthin (42) have E double bonds at C-9 and C-99, and these E bonds should isomerize
to Z double bonds to form the Z double bond at C-2 of ABA. The isomerase of the double bond seems to be
essential, but has not been found so far.
The occurrence of xanthophyll dioxygenase, which releases xanthoxin from xanthophyll, was found using
the ABA-deficient mutant vp14 of Z. mays.650 Xanthophyll dioxygenase cleaves the double bond between C-11
(C-119) and C-12 (C-129) of 9-Z-violaxanthin (43) and 99-Z-neoxanthin to give xanthoxin (5).651 The mRNA
of xanthoxin dioxygenase in the leaves of P. vulgaris increased upon water stress and decreased upon
 Plant Hormones 61

Figure 27 Four possible pathways for ABA biosynthesis. Open and closed circles show the 13C label from [1-13C]-D-
glucose in the mevaloic acid pathway and the MEP pathway, respectively. DAP, dihydroxyacetone phosphate; DXP,
1-deoxy-xylulose-5-phosphate; FDP, farnesyl diphosphate; GAP, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate; GGDP, geranylgeranyl
diphosphate; HMG-CoA, 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl CoA; IDP, isopentenyl diphosphate; MEP, 2-C-methyl-D-erythritol-
4-phosphate.

watering,652 suggesting that xanthophyll dioxygenase is a rate-limiting enzyme for ABA biosynthesis. The
ABA-deficient mutant notabilis of tomato has a frame shift mutation of xanthophyll dioxygenase.653 Transgenic
plants, which overexpressed xanthophyll dioxygenase, showed higher ABA content than the wild type, and
decreased stomatal aperture and increased seed dormancy.654,655 An inhibitor of xanthophyll dioxygenase,
abamine (44), has been developed, and it inhibits dioxygenase at Ki 38.8 mmol l–1 to decrease the content of ABA
in Arabidopsis.656 Such an inhibitor could be used as a herbicide since it decreases the tolerance of plants to water
stress.
The genes of the biosynthetic enzymes from zeaxanthin to xanthoxin encode plastid-targeted proteins,
suggesting that biosynthesis from IDP to xanthoxin progresses in the plastid. In contrast, biosynthesis from
xanthoxin to ABA progresses in the cytosol, meaning that xanthoxin must be transported from the plastid to
cytosol, although the transportation process is unknown.
Xanthoxin is endogenous in many plants, and is metabolized to ABA in plant tissues and cell-free
systems.657,658 Although the higher content of 2-(E)-xanthoxin than that of xanthoxin casts doubt on the
hypothesis,659 it has been shown that xanthoxin is very unstable and easily isomerizes to 2-(E)-xanthoxin
during extraction.660 The exact quantitation revealed that the major xanthoxin is the 2-(Z) isomer, and the 2-(E)
isomer was not detected in tomato. Conversion of xanthoxin to ABA involves six theoretical reactions:
oxidation of the aldehyde group at C-1 to the carboxyl group, oxidation of the hydroxyl group at C-49 to
the carbonyl group, abstraction of a proton at C-39 and cleavage of the epoxide ring followed by formation of a
double bond at C-29 and a hydroxyl group at C-19. Oxidation at C-49 of xanthoxin spontaneously gives ABA-
aldehyde (6) via an intermediate with a carbonyl group at C-49.661 Studies on feeding experiments662 and
62 Plant Hormones

OH

HO 40 Zeaxanthin
OH
O

HO 41 Antheraxanthin
OH
O

O
HO 4 Violaxanthin

9 HO
O
11 O
HO
HO 42 Neoxanthin
OH
43 9-Z-Violaxanthin

9
O O
CHO 11
HO HO
5 Xanthoxin
39 9'-Z-Neoxanthin

OH OH
CHO CO2H
O O
6 ABA-aldehyde 1 ABA

Scheme 4

ABA-deficient mutants663 have confirmed that ABA-aldehyde is the immediate precursor of ABA. Arabidopsis
has four isozyme genes of aldehyde oxidase, and an AAO3 protein, which is one of the isozymes catalyzing the
conversion reaction of ABA-aldehyde to ABA.664 AAO3 could be the ABA-aldehyde oxidase gene.
At present, there is no doubt about the biosynthesis of ABA by the carotenoid pathway via the MEP pathway
in plants. If ABA is biosynthesized by the direct pathway, the first cyclized intermediate will be ionylide-
neethanol, having a hydroxyl group at C-1 derived from farnesol; however, ionylideneethanol has not been
found in plants, so the direct pathway is not involved in ABA biosynthesis. The mevalonic acid pathway may
also be excluded because almost no 13C label was incorporated into the carbons, which would be labeled in the
mevalonic acid pathway in a feeding experiment with [1-13C]-D-glucose.640

4.02.5.3.2 Biosynthesis in fungi

In contrast to plants, it has been shown that fungi biosynthesize ABA via direct pathways from IDP supplied by
the mevalonic acid pathway. B. cinerea and Cercospora pini-densiflorae fed with [1-13C]-D-glucose biosynthesized
ABA, C-2, C-4, C-6, C-19, C-39, C-59, C-79, C-89, and C-99 of which were labeled with 13C, being coincident
with the biosynthesis of IDP by the mevalonic acid pathway (Figure 27).640 Fungi produce ABA-related
compounds, which are converted to ABA in feeding experiments. 19,49-trans-Diol (3) of ABA was found
 Plant Hormones 63

in the culture broth of B. cinerea665 and C. pini-densiflorae,666 and it has been suggested that it is a precursor of
ABA in these fungi.566 Cercospora cruenta produces 49-hydroxy--ionylideneacetic acid and 19,49-dihydroxy--
ionylideneacetic acid,667 and converts these -acids to ABA.668 This fungus also produces small amounts of
some carotenoids, but does not produce xanthophylls.669 Cercospora rosicola produces -ionylideneethanol, -
ionylideneacetic acid, 49-hydroxy--ionyldeneacetic acid, and 19-deoxy-ABA, and these compounds also are
converted to ABA by this fungus.670 These findings suggested that fungal ABA was biosynthesized via the
direct pathway, but intermediates between farnesyl diphosphate (FDP) and 2Z,4E--ionylideneethanol (45)
had not been found for the direct pathway. The precise analysis of metabolites from B. cinerea showed that the
fungus produced 2E,4E,6E-allofarnesene (46), 2Z,4E,6E-allofarnesene (47), and 2Z,4E--ionylideneethane
(48).671 The feeding experiment with 13C-labeled compounds revealed that 46 was converted to 48 via
47, and further, 48 was metabolized to ABA via 19,49-t-diol-ABA (3). B. cinerea cultured under an 18O2
atmosphere incorporated 18O into all oxygen atoms at C-1, C-1, C-19, and C-49 of ABA, although the 18O
label at C-49 had easily been lost by exchange with 16O from water during culture. This finding meant that B.
cinerea reduced FDP to allofarnesene, and subsequently isomerized and cyclized allofarensene to form (48),
and oxidized (48) with molecular oxygen to give ABA as shown in Scheme 5. Oxidation of (48) seems to be
catalyzed by a cytochrome P450 enzyme, and the bcaba1 gene encoding P450 monooxygenase of B. cinerea was
identified as the ABA biosynthetic gene,672 supporting the direct pathway via ionylideneethane in B. cinerea.
C. cruenta also produced allofarnesenes and 2Z,4E--ionylideneethane, and converted these compounds to
ABA via 2Z,4E-19,49-dihydroxy--ionyldeneacetic acid.669 The direct pathway via ionylideneethane seems to
be common among ABA-producing fungi.
It had been suggested that plant genes for ABA biosynthesis might be transferred into phytopathogenic fungi
in a process of coevolution between host plants and parasites; however, these fungi would biosynthesize ABA
via the direct pathway from IDP supplied by the mevalonic acid pathway, so we conclude that the fungi
obtained the genes for ABA biosynthesis independently of the plant genes.

4.02.5.3.3 Metabolism
ABA is inactivated through the catabolic pathway after expression of its physiological function. The endogen-
ous level of ABA in plants is regulated not only by its biosynthesis but also by its catabolism. The catabolic
inactivation of (þ)-ABA in plants is classified into the modification of the ring moiety and the conjugation with
hydrophilic compounds as summarized in Scheme 6.639 The former pathway intrinsically inactivates ABA by
oxidation and reduction reactions, while the latter pathway increases the hydrophilicity of free catabolites by
conjugation with polar compounds for transportation from cytosol to vacuoles and other organs.

4.02.5.3.3(i) Modification of the ring moiety ABA has three ring-modification pathways, 79-, 89-, and 99-
hydroxylation pathways, but the 89-hydroxylation pathway is the major and common in many plants. In the 89-
hydroxylation pathway, ABA is hydroxylated at C-89 to give 89-hydroxy-ABA (49). ABA 89-hydroxylase of
Arabidopsis is encoded by CYP707A, which is a cytochrome P450 gene.673,674 Genes related to CYP707A exist in
rice, tomato, maize, and other plants. ABA 89-hydroxylase is a monooxygenase that requires molecular oxygen

OPP
OPP
IDP FDP
Classical 46 47
direct pathway

O2 O2
OH OH
CH2OH CO2H CO2H
HO O
48 45 3, 1′,4′-t-Diol-ABA 1 ABA
Scheme 5
64 Plant Hormones

OH
CO2H
O OH
53

OH

OH OH OH
CO2H CO2H O CO2H
O O O
1, ABA 54 55
HO

OH OH R1 OH
CO2H O CO2H O CO2H
O O
49 7 R2
8 R1 = OH, R2 = H
9 R1 = H, R2 = OH
HO CO2H

CO2– 1-O-Glucosyl ester 4′-O-Glucosides

and
OH OH 1′-O-Glucoside
CO2-β-D-Glc CO2H
O O
56
10, 1-O-Glucosyl ester
and
and
8′-O-Glucoside
1′-O-Glucoside
Scheme 6

and NADPH as essential factors, and the reaction is inhibited by carbon monoxide. For substrate recognition,
ABA 89-hydroxylase strictly requires C-89 and C-99, but does not require C-6 and 19-hydroxyl group.613 ABA
89-hydroxylase is induced by ABA itself and water stress probably due to maintaining the endogenous level of
ABA constant. Expression of OsABA8ox1 gene, which encodes ABA 89-hydroxylase in rice, is induced by
submergence.675 Inhibition of ABA 89-hydroxylase activity could increase the resistance of plants to water
stress by suppressing the decrease in the ABA level. Screening of triazole compounds for inhibitors of ABA 89-
hydroxylase showed that uniconazole-P (50),676 an inhibitor of gibberellin biosynthesis, and (þ)-diniconazole
(51),677 a fungicide, were effective inhibitors. Uniconazole-P inhibits ABA 89-hydroxylase at Ki 8.0 nmol l1,
and protects Arabidopsis seedlings from water stress through increases in the ABA level. A specific inhibitor of
ABA 89-hydroxylase may become a new agrochemical to protect plants from environmental stresses.678 Analogs
resistant to 89-hydroxylation such as 89,89,89-trifluoro-ABA (25) could also be useful for protecting plants from
environmental stress through the long-lasting effect of ABA; however, there is no analog that is practically used
in agriculture due to the high cost of its chemical synthesis.
89-Hydroxy-ABA is extremely labile, isomerizing spontaneously to phaseic acid (7). This isomerization is an
intramolecular Michael addition: the 89-hydroxyl group attacks C-29 from the -face to form an enol
intermediate (52), which is converted to phaseic acid. Involvement of an enzyme in this isomerization has
been suggested by analyses of the catabolites of ABA-d6597 and 39-fluoro-ABA.626 Isomerization is an equili-
brium reaction, and the ratio of phaseic acid and 89-hydroxy-ABA is 98:2 in a solution of pH 3 at 25  C, showing
that the difference in free energy between the two isomers is 2.3 kcal mol1.679
Phaseic acid is further converted to dihydrophaseic acid (8) and epi-dihydrophaseic acid (9) in plants. The
endogenous level of epi-dihydrophaseic acid in plants is about 10% of the level of dihydrophaseic acid. epi-
Dihydrophaseic acid is not an artifact that is formed during extraction since epi-dihydrophaseic acid converted
from [49-18O]-ABA by bean seedlings retains the label at C-49, as does dihydrophaseic acid.574 Enzymatic
activity reducing the 49-carbonyl group of phaseic acid has been found in a soluble fraction from liquid sperm of
Eastern wild cucumber.680 Dihydrophaseic acid might be further catabolized in plants since the presence of 59-
hydroxydihydrophaseic acid has been suggested in ferns.681 However, the catabolism of the ring moiety after
 Plant Hormones 65

dihydrophaseic acid has not been confirmed. It has been reported that ABA was metabolized to 89-hydro-
xyphaseic acid and 89-hydroxydihydrophaseic acid via 89-hydroxy-ABA in maize cell cultures,682 but this
catabolic pathway seems to be characteristic to the cell cultures.
The catabolic inactivation of ABA would be achieved in a stepwise manner. The biological activity of 89-
hydroxy-ABA cannot be tested due to its instability, but several studies have suggested that the activity of 89-
hydroxy-ABA is about 20% of that of ABA.626,683,684 The activity of phaseic acid is low, about 5% of that of
ABA, in many biological assays,548 and may be contributed by 89-hydroxy-ABA present in a sample of phaseic
acid. Dihydrophaseic acid and its epimer are almost inactive in assays tested, meaning that the catabolic
inactivation is completed in the step reducing phaseic acid to dihydrophaseic acid and its epimer.
79-Hydroxy-ABA (53) has been found in the leaves of Vicia faba685 and other plants. 99-Hydroxy-ABA (54)
has been found in Brassica napus siliques along with its isomerized catabolite neophaseic acid (55),686 which had
been formerly known as epi-phaseic acid.687 The occurrence of 79- and 99- hydroxy-ABAs is restricted to
several plants at present, suggesting that these hydroxy-ABAs are minor catabolites of ABA. ABA 79- and 99-
hydroxylases would be different from ABA 89-hydroxylase since 79- and 99-hydroxy-ABAs are not detected in
the products of ABA 89-hydroxylase reaction.

4.02.5.3.3(ii) Conjugation ABA is conjugated with -D-glucose at the 1-carboxyl and 19-hydroxyl groups to
form the glucosyl ester and the glucoside, respectively. The glucosyl ester is a major conjugate of ABA, and is
found in many plants.688 The ABA glucosyltransferase of adzuki bean, which synthesizes the glucosyl ester from
ABA and UDP-glucose, is encoded by the AOG gene.689 AOG recombinant protein shows broad substrate
specificity, but cannot catalyze the glucosylation of phaseic acid. The optimum pH of ABA glucosyltransferase
from Macleaya microcarpa is 5.0,690 suggesting that the glucosylation occurs in the vacuole. The major role of
conjugation would be excretion of ABA by compartmentation into the vacuole. It has been suggested that the
conjugate of ABA does not subsequently release ABA.691 Thus plants exposed to water deficiency supply ABA
by de novo synthesis. The 19-O-glucoside exists in tomato plants and apple seeds.692 The 19-O-glucoside not only
decomposes to methyl ester of ABA and glucose upon treatment with diazomethane but also isomerizes
spontaneously to the glucosyl ester in an acidic methanol solution, probably due to the steric repulsion. A
bound form of ABA that releases ABA and its methyl ester upon mild acid hydrolysis has been isolated from
peas and barley.693 This ‘adduct’ might be a conjugate of the 49-en-49-ol form of ABA.
Labile 89-hydroxy-ABA is conjugated with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaric acid to form a stable ester (56),694
which seems to be a characteristic catabolite of Robinia pseudacacia. The absolute configuration of 3-hydroxy-3-
methylglutaryl group has been revised to S, meaning that the ester is formed by acylation of 89-hydroxy-ABA
with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl CoA.695 89-O--D-Glucoside of 89-hydroxy-ABA has been found in avocado
seeds.696 The 19-O--D-glucoside of phaseic acid has been found in apple seeds and tomato leaves fed with ()-
[2-14C]-ABA.697 Exogenous phaseic acid is converted to its 1-O--D-glucosyl ester.698 The glucoside is an
endogenous catabolite in plants. The 49-O--D-glucoside of dihydrophaseic acid has been found in avocado
fruits699 and has been isolated from tomato seedlings fed with ()-[2-14C]-ABA.700 The 49-O--D-glucoside of
epi-dihydrophaseic acid has also been found in avocado seeds.696

4.02.5.4 Biological Activities

ABA regulates many physiological processes including germination, growth, flowering, seed maturation,
senescence, and adaptation to various environmental stresses such as water deficiency, low temperature, and
freezing.563,701 Exogenous ABA shows unique activities on plants, which reflect its physiological role as a
hormone.

4.02.5.4.1 Stomatal closure

One characteristic activity of ABA is its effect on stomata, which protects plants from water stress. At
107 mol l1, ABA given through a transpiration stream from cut ends of shoots causes stomatal closure.702
The activity is more effective in epidermal strips floated on a buffer solution than in shoots. At 1010 mol l1,
ABA closes stomata in epidermal strips at pH 5.5.703 The activity at pH 6.8 is 103 times lower than that at pH 5.5,
suggesting that the active form of ABA is not a dissociated acid but an undissociated acid. The simulation study
66 Plant Hormones

on the redistribution of ABA in plant tissues after pH changes of apoplasts and synplasts has suggested that ABA
accumulates in guard cell walls according to the anion-trap mechanism for weak acids. Hartung and Slovik704
have proposed that ABA may be an ideal ‘stress messenger’ for stomata.
A candidate for the ABA receptor in guard cells has been found, as described later. ABA activates
phospholipase C after binding to the receptor, and then the concentration of cytosolic Ca2þ ion is elevated
by stimulation of the production of inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate and cyclic ADP-ribose in guard cells preceding
stomatal closure.705 Elevation of Ca2þ concentration activates the anion channel in the plasma membrane
resulting in the promotion of efflux of the Kþ ion from cytosol. ABA also inhibits the influx of ABA into guard
cells. The decrease in the concentration of cytosolic Kþ induces guard cell turgor and, consequently, the
stomata close. ABA induces the production of hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) in the leaves of maize plants exposed
to water stress, suggesting that H2O2 acts as a second messenger of ABA.706

4.02.5.4.2 Inhibition of seed germination and other activities

ABA inhibits germination of many seeds at 105–107 mol l1. The suppression of -amylase induction would
be a cause of the inhibition by ABA in starch seeds. The induction of -amylase by gibberellin in barley half-
seeds without embryos is inhibited by ABA at 107 mol l1.707 Barley seeds have two isozymes of -amylase, and
ABA suppresses biosynthesis of the isozyme with a higher isoelectric point than that of the other isozyme.708 The
suppression is antagonized by gibberellin. Germination of photoblastic lettuce seeds is regulated by endogenous
levels of ABA and gibberellin.709 In lipid seeds, the target of ABA seems to be different from that in starch seeds
since ABA inhibits the increase of isocitrate lyase activity, which catalyzes -oxidation of fatty acids during
germination of bean seeds.710 Gibberellin antagonizes the inhibitory effect of ABA on the increase of isocitrate
lyase activity. It has been suggested that the inhibitory effect of ABA on the -amylase biosynthesis is mediated
by Ca2þ ion since ABA suppresses the increase of the cytosolic levels of Ca2þ ion by gibberellin.711 Cutler
et al.712 screened mutants of Arabidopsis that showed an enhanced response to exogenous ABA in the seed
germination tests, and found that the responsive gene encodes the -subunit of a protein farnesyl transferase.
Farnesyl transferase may act as a negative regulator of ABA in the signal transduction.
ABA inhibits the growth of seedlings and hypocotyls of many plants at 105–107 mol l1. In contrast to the
inhibitory effect, ABA promotes the growth of tomato and bean shoots at low concentrations,713 and increases
the volume of wheat protoplasts in the presence of Ca2þ.714 ABA also has both effects on root growth. The
growth of root tips of pea is promoted at a low concentration of ABA, and is inhibited at a high concentration of
ABA.715 Such properties of ABA suggest that growth at certain stages is regulated by endogenous levels of ABA,
that is, ABA is not only a brake but also an accelerator.
Diverse effects of exogenous ABA on organs and tissues have been known.716 ABA fed to one side of root tips
caused curvature of roots, suggesting involvement of ABA in gravitropism of the root. Since ABA induces the
morphogenesis of leaves of water plants from a submersed type to a floating type, ABA induced by water stress
might act as a morphogen in some water plants. ABA generally inhibits induction of flower buds although
flowering of some short-day plants is promoted by ABA. ABA may be involved in the storage of starch and
lipids during the development of embryos. Application of ABA before exposure to low temperature confers cold
or freezing tolerance on plants.

4.02.5.4.3 Receptors of ABA and ABA-related genes and proteins

ABA binds to its receptor to trigger the transduction of a signal for expression of physiological effects. Several
proteins with the properties of the ABA receptor have been reported so far, suggesting that ABA has multi-
receptors.717,718 Syntaxin is an ABA-binding protein of tobacco, and its expression at the plasma membrane is
important for the function.719 The ABAP1 protein is an ABA-binding protein of barley aleurone layers, and
binding of ABA to the ABAP1 protein is suppressed by H2O2.720 This suppression might be a feedback response
since ABA stimulates production of H2O2. The gene of the 42 kDa protein of broad bean, which is bound to ABA,
encodes the H subunit of the Mg-chelatase involved in both chlorophyll biosynthesis and plastid-to-nucleus
signaling.721 In Arabidopsis, leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinase1 has been identified as an AB-binding
protein bound to membrane.722 An RNA-binding protein involved in the signal transduction of flowering was
reported as a receptor of ABA in a research paper;723 however, this paper was retracted by the authors because of
errors in the calculations.724 A G protein-coupled receptor GCR2 has been identified as another receptor of
 Plant Hormones 67

ABA of Arabidopsis.725 However, other groups have argued that GCR2 is not a receptor of ABA but a plant
homolog of bacterial lanthionine synthetases.726,727 Further study is needed to find a real receptor of ABA.
In recent years, ABA-responsive genes have been intensively investigated using the microarray technology.
More than 300 genes of Arabidopsis were identified as those that respond to ABA.728–730 However, the number of
gene products the physiological function of which was characterized has been limited to about 50.731 The typical
proteins induced by ABA are dehydrin and Lea protein.732 Dehydrin is expressed during late embryogenesis of
corn seeds before the beginning of desiccation. Dehydrin protects embryos from desiccation since it apparently
retains water molecules in the domain containing lysine and serine residues. Lea proteins are involved in the
desiccation of cotton seeds. Expression of some kinase and phosphatase involved in the signal transduction is also
induced or repressed by ABA. The Rab16 gene of rice is induced by ABA and osmotic stress. Its expression is
regulated by a cis element, and the binding protein of the element was found to be a bZip protein. These
properties of proteins induced by ABA suggest that the proteins are involved in adaptation to stress.

4.02.6 Brassinosteroids
4.02.6.1 Introduction
Brassinosteroids (BRs) are steroidal plant hormones involved in a variety of physiological events of plants.733–744
In Japan, BRs were first investigated as auxin-like principles that induce rice lamina bending. In 1968,
Marumo et al.745 reported the partial purification of these compounds from leaves of Distylium racemosum.
However, no structural information was obtained, because analytical techniques at that time were not developed
enough. In the United States, BRs were investigated as growth-promoting factors contained in rape pollen that
induce growth promotion of bean seedlings. In 1970, Mitchell et al.746 reported the isolation of the active principles
named brassins. However, a minor constituent contained in brassins turned out to be responsible for growth
promotion, and, in 1979, this principle was isolated as crystals and named brassinolide by Grove et al.747 This
compound was determined to be a steroid by X-ray crystallography (Figure 28). In 1982, castasterone was
isolated by Yokota et al.748 from insect galls of chestnut and the structure indicated that castasterone is the direct

Figure 28 Structures of three brassinosteroids first isolated from plants. Numbers of carbon atoms are shown in the
structure of castasterone.
68 Plant Hormones

precursor of brassinolide (Figure 28). In the same year, Yokota et al.749 isolated dolicholide from immature seeds
of Dolichos lablab and determined its structure to be
24(28)-brassinolide (Figure 28). Later on, various analogs
related to these steroids were isolated from various plant sources and became collectively known as BRs.733

4.02.6.2 Chemistry
4.02.6.2.1 Distribution
Brassinosteroids have been identified from a wide range of higher plants including angiosperms and gymnos-
perms.735,739 Brassinosteroids have also been identified from lower plants such as a pteridophyte (Equisetum
arvense), a liverwort (Marchantia polymorpha),750 and an alga (Hydrodictyon reticulatum). At present, no fungus has
been found to produce BRs. Brassinosteroids have been detected in various plant organs including stem, leaf,
pollen, and seed.735,739 Especially, pollen/anther and seeds are rich sources of BRs.

4.02.6.2.2 Structure
To date, over 40 BRs have been isolated from natural sources. They have structural differences in the A ring, B
ring, or side chain, arising from modifications through biosynthesis and metabolism (Figure 29).734,735 BRs are
defined as steroids that have an oxygen moiety at C-2 and additional ones at one or more of the C-3, C-6, C-22,
and C-23 carbon atoms.741 Depending on the alkyl groups at C-24 in the side chain, BRs are divided into C27
(no alkyl), C28 (- or -methyl), or C29 (-ethyl). Among them, the most abundant in plants are C28 BRs such as
castasterone and brassinolide, followed by C27 BRs.738 Here, it should be noted that, in the steroid side chain,
groups in front of the plane are -oriented while those in back are -oriented.751 The occurrence of such BRs
with different carbon numbers suggests that BRs are synthesized from various plant sterols with different alkyl
groups at C-24.734,738 Figure 30 shows such plant sterols having C27 (cholesterol), C28 (campesterol, 22-
dihydrobrassicasterol, and 24-methylenecholesterol), and C29 (sitosterol, isofucosterol, and 25-
methylcampesterol).

4.02.6.2.3 Analysis
In order to analyze endogenous BRs from plant tissues in which the levels of BRs are usually lower than few
micrograms per kilogram fresh weight, BRs are first enriched by partitioning between n-hexane and 80%
methanol. Brassinosteroids partitioned into the latter are further purified by chromatography on silica gel,
Sephadex LH-20, or charcoal, which allows purification of BRs as a group.739 Respective BRs are frequently
separated by HPLC using ODS supports.739 The rice lamina inclination bioassay has been frequently used to
guide purification and isolation of BRs from various plants.752 Immunoassay for castasterone and brassinolide
has been developed, although this has only been used for partially purified extracts of stems and seeds of P.
vulgaris.753
GC-MS with or without SIM is the most reliable identification tool of BRs.739 Prior to GC-MS analysis,
vicinal hydroxyls in BRs are derivatized to methaneboronates, while isolated hydroxyl groups are converted to
trimethylsilyl ethers (Figure 31). Fragment ions derived from the side chains have been used as diagnostic ions
for mass spectrometric detection of BRs (Figure 31). Mass spectrometric data on methaneboronate derivatives
of BRs have been reviewed.754 For quantitation of the endogenous levels of BRs, deuterated BRs have been
frequently used as internal standards by adding to plant extracts.739
HPLC equipped with a fluorimetric detector can be used to detect BRs at subnanogram amounts when
derivatized to fluorescent boronates such as dansylaminophenylboronates and phenanthreneboronate, while
ferroceneboronates can be monitored by an electrochemical detector.755 LC/MS methods for the determina-
tion of BRs as their boronates have been developed using atmospheric pressure chemical ionization and
electron spray ionization (ESI).756 Fast atom bombardment has been used in LC/MS analysis of acyl-
conjugated teasterones from lily pollen.757 Recently, microanalysis of plant hormones has been developed by
means of LC-ESI-MS/MS where various plant hormones including castasterone and brassinolide were
subjected to analysis without any derivatization.758 1H NMR and 13C NMR data are also available.759,760
Figure 29 Structural varieties of naturally occurring brassinosteroids.
70 Plant Hormones

Figure 30 Various plant sterols that may be converted into brassinosteroids.

4.02.6.2.4 Synthesis
Various synthetic approaches of BRs have been reported.740,743,761–764 Among natural BRs, syntheses of
brassinolide and castasterone have been investigated by many workers. Methods of introduction of -oriented
vicinal glycol in the A ring and a lactone or ketone group in the B ring have been established. In many cases,
steroid rings were synthesized using a C-22 aldehyde obtained from stigmasterol. Construction of the side chain
containing four contiguous chiral centers has been extensively studied, but is still attracting synthetic chemists.
Efficient syntheses of brassinolide have been reported.763,764 Along with brassinolide, 24-epibrassinolide and
28-homobrassinolide are often used for large-scale application studies and these can now be effectively
synthesized from plant sterols such as ergosterol, brassicasterol, and stigmasterol.763,764 Nonsteroidal mimetics
of brassinolide were synthesized.765

4.02.6.2.5 Structure–activity relationship

Structure–activity relationships have already been reviewed.737,738,766 The structure–activity relationships of
BRs have been investigated using bean, rice, tomato, and radish with the first two being frequently used.766 The
bean bioassay to examine the elongation of the second internodes, used in the early stage of researches, is very
sensitive to structural changes.767 For example, loss of the methyl group at C24 nearly abolishes the biological
activity. Brassinolide is 100-fold more active than castasterone although both are known to be biologically
active on their own. The overall structural requirements of BRs with trans-A/B ring system are 2,3-vicinal
diol in A ring, 7-oxa-6-one (lactone) in B ring, as well as 22R,23R- or 22S,23S-diol and 24-methyl in the
side chain.
 m/z155 m/z153 m/z169
B-Me B-Me B-Me
O O O

O O O
H H H
O O O
Me-B H H Me-B H H Me-B H H
O O O
H H H
O O O
Castasterone Dolichosterone 28-Homocastasterone
bismethaneboronate bismethaneboronate bismethaneboronate

m/z141 m/z155 m/z187

B-Me B-Me TMSi
O O O

O O
H H H
O
MeB H H H H H H
O TMSi O TMSi O
H H H
O O
28-Norcastasterone Typhasterol methaneboronate 6-Deoxocathasterone
bismethaneboronate TMSi ether TMSi ether
Figure 31 Derivatives used for GC-MS analysis of brassinosteroids and their diagnostic ions for the side chain structures.
72 Plant Hormones

The rice bioassay to examine the promotive effect of BRs on the lamina inclination has been extensively
utilized.768,769 This bioassay is affected to a lesser extent by structural variations than the bean test is. For example,
castasterone is fourfold less active than brassinolide, this being in good correlation with their binding abilities to
the receptor BRI1. Favorable functionalities are 2,3-vicinal diol or 3,4-vicinal diol in A ring, 7-oxa-6-one or
6-ketone in B ring, as well as methyl, ethyl, methylene, or ethylidene at C-24, or an additional methyl group at C-
25 (terminal tertiary butyl group) in the side chain.766 Among naturally occurring BRs, brassinolide is the most
biologically active except that 25-methylbrassinolide found only in Phaseolus seeds shows higher activity.770 The
effects of substituents at C-14, C-25, C-26, and C-28 were further examined, revealing that introduction of
functional groups such as hydroxyl and halogen into these carbons reduced the biological activity771–773 although
the presence of a methoxy group at C-25 increased the biological activity.771 The requirement of the trans-A/B
ring system for the biological activity was rigorously confirmed by a new synthetic approach.774,775

4.02.6.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

Brassinolide and castasterone are biologically active C28 BRs widely distributed in plants.734,735,738 Available
evidence shows that the biosynthesis of BRs takes place in every organ or tissue and BRs are rarely transported
after their synthesis. It seems that BRs may be synthesized close to the site of action. Biosynthetic pathways of BRs
hitherto demonstrated to be operating in plants are shown in Figure 30. The first report on the biosynthesis of
BRs was made on the conversion of brassinolide from castasterone in C. roseus cells.776 The biosynthesis of
castasterone has also been studied using cultured crown gall cells of C. roseus and/or Arabidopsis seedlings to reveal
biosynthetic pathways from campesterol via campestanol.777,778 Such campestanol-dependent synthesis of cas-
tasterone was demonstrated to comprise the early C-6 oxidation pathway and the late C-6 oxidation pathway.
Later, a branch without the involvement of campestanol was found indicating that campesterol is directly oxidized
at C-22.779 Recent studies indicated that this branch is linked to the later part of the late C-6 oxidation pathway,
constituting campestanol-independent pathway believed to be a major biosynthetic pathway of C28 BRs.780
A number of genes and enzymes responsible for the biosynthesis and metabolism of BRs were isolated by
analyzing a variety of mutants including Arabidopsis, pea, tomato, and rice.781,782 It has been shown that genetic
modulation of BR biosynthesis and perception can give rise to profitable effects on the production of crop such
as barley783 and rice.784,785
Triazole inhibitors of BR biosynthesis such as brassinazole and Brz22012 (Figure 32) have been developed
and used to analyze the physiological function and signal transduction of BRs.786

4.02.6.3.1 Biosynthesis of castasterone

4.02.6.3.1(i) Campestanol-dependent pathway This pathway, demonstrated using cultured cells of
C. roseus crown gall, starts with hydrogenation of campestanol, followed by either early C-6 oxidation or late
C-6 oxidation to yield castasterone.777,778
In the early C-6 oxidation pathway, campestanol is first oxidized at C-6 to yield 6-oxocampestanol, which is
then hydroxylated at C-22 to give cathasterone (Figure 33). Further hydroxylation at C-23 yields teasterone,
which is converted to typhasterol through successive oxidation and reduction of 3-hydroxyl group.

Figure 32 Structures of triazole inhibitors of brassinosteroid biosynthesis.

 Plant Hormones 73

Figure 33 Biosynthetic pathways of brassinosteroids. The larger the arrows, the more principal the routes. Arabidopsis
enzymes involved in the biosynthetic reactions are indicated in bold letters.
74 Plant Hormones

Typhasterol is converted to castasterone by hydroxylation at C-2. The early C-6 oxidation pathway was first
thought to be the major biosynthetic pathway, because BRs having a 6-oxo group elicit higher biological
activities than 6-deoxo BRs. However, the occurrence of cathasterone was found only in C. roseus cells.787
Furthermore, recent biochemical studies showed that 6-oxocampestanol was not the substrate for steroid 22-
hydroxylases of Arabidopsis (CYP90B1)788 and tomato (CYP724B2 and CYP90B3),789 which belong to cyto-
chrome P450 monooxygenases. Therefore, it seems that the early C-6 oxidation pathway occurs only in limited
biological systems.
In the late C-6 oxidation pathway, campestanol is first hydroxylated at C-22 to give 6-deoxocathasterone,
which is further hydroxylated at C-23 to yield 6-deoxoteasterone (Figure 33). Successive oxidation and
reduction of the 3-hydroxyl group yield 6-deoxotyphasterol. 6-Deoxotyphasterol is then hydroxylated at C-2
to yield 6-deoxocastasterone, which is finally oxidized at C-6 by the CYP85A family enzymes to give
castasterone.790 It was found that C-6 oxidation occurs also at the stages of 6-deoxoteasterone, 3-dehydro-6-
deoxoteasterone, and 6-deoxotyphasterol.791,792 Brassinosteroids lacking a 6-oxo group, which is involved in the
late C-6 oxidation pathway, are all far more abundant in most plants than those having a 6-oxo group. Therefore,
it has been believed for years that the late C-6 oxidation pathway is predominant in the plant kingdom.779
However, it recently turned out that this may not be the case as described below.

4.02.6.3.1(ii) Campestanol-independent pathway Recent biochemical evidence revealed that campesta-

nol-independent pathway without intermediary of campestanol is the main biosynthesis stream of BR
(Figure 33). In 2002, Fujioka et al.779 demonstrated a biosynthetic branch named the early C-22 oxidation
pathway, where campesterol is first hydroxylated at C-22 to give rise to (22S)-22-hydroxylcampesterol. Use of
recombinant Arabidopsis CYP90B1,788 tomato CYP724B2, and tomato CYP90B3,789 which are steroid C-22
hydroxylases, revealed that campesterol is a far more favorable substrate than campestanol, indicating that the
early C-22 oxidation pathway is a predominant biosynthetic pathway of BRs. The resulting (22S)-22-hydro-
xycampesterol is oxidized into (22S, 24R)-22-hydroxy-ergost-4-en-3-one, where the identity of the enzyme
involved remains controversial.780 Succeeding hydrogenation of (22S,24R)-22-hydroxy-ergost-4-en-3-one is
effected by DET2 (Arabidopsis steroid 5-reductase) to give 3-dehydro-6-deoxocathasterone, namely
(22S,24R)-22-hydroxy-5-ergostan-3-one. 3-Dehydro-6-deoxocathasterone is converted to either 6-deoxo-
cathasterone or 3-epi-6-deoxocathasterone. These conversions deemed reversible so that 6-deoxocathasterone
and 3-epi-6-deoxocathasterone are interconvertible via 3-dehydro-6-deoxocathasterone. (22S,24R)-22-
Hydroxy-ergost-4-en-3-one, 3-dehydro-6-deoxocathasterone, and 3-epi-6-deoxocathasterone are favorable
substrates of CYP90C1 and CYP90D1 (Arabidopsis steroid 23-hydroxylases).780 So, it is most likely that, in
planta, these three steroids are hydroxylated at C-23 by CYP90C1 or CYP90D1 to give (22R,23R,24S)-22,23-
dihydroxy-ergost-4-en-3-one, 3-dehydro-6-deoxoteasterone and 6-deoxotyphasterol, respectively, linking the
early C-22 hydroxylation pathway to the late C-6 oxidation pathway. Although (22S,24R)-22-hydroxy-ergost-
4-en-3-one and its metabolite (22R,23R,24S)-22,23-dihydroxy-ergost-4-en-3-one were not detectable in
Arabidopsis plants, these compounds were assumed to be efficiently converted to downstream metabolites.780
6-Deoxocathasterone was a poor substrate of CYP90C1 and CYP90D1. However, the levels of 6-deoxocathas-
terone in the shoots of many plants are very high,793 suggesting that it may be utilized to control the
endogenous levels of 3-dehydro-6-deoxocathasterone and 3-epi-6-deoxocathasterone. This idea is supported
by the recent finding that 6-deoxocathasterone functions as a storage form in pea seeds.794

4.02.6.3.1(iii)Biosynthesis from 28-norcastasterone Surprisingly, tomato enzyme preparations were also

found to convert 28-norcastasterone, a C27 BR, to castasterone by methylation (Figure 33).795 This pathway
seems to be important, because 28-norcastasterone is widely distributed in plants.738 On the other hand, it was
assumed in the same enzyme system that 28-norcastasterone is synthesized from cholesterol via cholestanol
through late C-6 oxidation.795,796 However, it may be expected that cholestanol-independent pathway should
be operating in planta, because, as discussed above, castasterone has been demonstrated to be synthesized
through campestanol-independent pathway. It has also been found in some plants that deuterium-labeled
castasterone was demethylated to give 28-norcastasterone.797 However, this reaction seems to be an artifact due
to an isotopic effect of the deuterium atoms attached to C-28, because in liverwort and tomato, C-28
 Plant Hormones 75

demethylation occurred in deuterium-labeled castasterone and brassinolide but not in nonlabeled castasterone
and brassinolide.795,798

4.02.6.3.1(iv) Other biosynthetic pathways 2,3-Epoxybrassinosteroids were demonstrated to be synthe-

sized from either teasterone or typhasterol and further converted to castasterone in seedlings of Secale
cereale.799,800 It has not been known if this pathway is operating in other plants.

4.02.6.3.2 Biosynthesis of brassinolide from castasterone

The Baeyer–Villiger oxidation of castasterone to brassinolide has been demonstrated in C. roseus crown gall
cells in 1990.776 However, the enzyme involved in this reaction had not been identified until 2005 when steroid
6-oxidases, CYP85A2 of Arabidopsis and CYP85A3 of tomato, were demonstrated to be responsible for this
reaction by heterologously expressing in yeast (Figure 33).801,802

4.02.6.3.3 Regulation of biosynthesis

The biosynthesis of endogenous BRs is controlled so as to regulate the proper growth rate of plants. Microarray
analysis indicated that exogenous brassinolide suppresses the expression of Arabidopsis cytochrome P450 genes
such as CPD/CYP90A1, DWF4/CYP90B1, ROT3/CYP90C, CYP90D, and BR6ox/CYP85A1, suggesting that
P450-mediated BR synthesis reactions are all controlled by active BRs.803 The BR receptor mutants such as
Arabidopsis bri1, pea lka, and tomato cu-3 have defects in the BR receptors and, due to the loss of BRs signaling,
are forced to accumulate high levels of the active BRs, castasterone and/or brassinolide.777 Thus, feedback
controls of the expression of P450 genes by active BRs seem to play a central role in regulating the BR levels in
tissues. The Arabidopsis genes DWF7, DWF1, and DET2 are implicated in sterol synthesis, and mutations of these
genes result in dwarfism due to the deficit of BRs. However, these genes are not regulated by BR-based
feedback control.803

4.02.6.3.4 Metabolism and its regulation

Biologically active BRs such as brassinolide and castasterone, as well as their biosynthetic precursors, are
metabolized in various manners so as to control the levels of biologically active BRs. Metabolic reactions seen in
earlier reviews738,777,778 include (1) epimerization of the 2- and 3-hydroxyls followed by glucosylation or
esterification, (2) hydroxylation of C-20 and successive side chain cleavage, (3) glucosylation of C-23 hydroxyl
group, and (4) hydroxylation of C-25 or C-26 followed by glucosylation. Recently, removal of C-26 methyl
group was found to occur when brassinolide and castasterone were applied to liverwort cells798 and tomato cell-
free preparations,795 respectively. It seems that, prior to such demethylation, hydroxylation should occur at C-
26. Enzymes responsible for hydroxylation of C-26 were identified with the CYP734A subfamily including
CYP734A7 in tomato804 and CYP734A1/BAS1 (formerly CYP72B1) in Arabidopsis.805,806 In Arabidopsis, another
C-26 hydroxylase was isolated as CYP72C1/CHI2.807–809 The levels of CYP734A1 and CYP72C1 transcripts are
reduced by light irradiation, while the application of exogenous brassinolide elevates the transcript level of
CYP734A1,803 but does not affect that of CYP72C1. Glucosylation of 23-hydroxyl group was found to be
catalyzed by UGT73C5, a UDP-glucosyltransferase.810 Two sulfotransferases of BRs, AtST4a and AtST1,
have been characterized from Arabidopsis.811 AtST4a was suggested to be involved in the regulation of
biologically active BRs, while AtST1, with a strong preference for 24-epicathasterone, was regarded as a
more general detoxication enzyme.

4.02.6.4 Physiology and Signal Transduction

4.02.6.4.1 Physiology
Brassinosteroids are known to be involved in stem elongation, pollen tube growth, leaf bending, leaf unrolling,
inhibition of root growth, lateral root formation, proton pump activation, acceleration of 1-aminocyclopropane-
1-carboxylic acid production, increase of transverse-oriented microtubules, xylogenesis, and cotton fiber
synthesis.736,739,744 Furthermore, BRs have been known to increase the yield of crops739,740,761,812 although
their effects have been affected largely by environmental conditions or places (or countries) where the
76 Plant Hormones

experiments were done.812 Brassinosteroids can also alleviate or protect injuries caused by various stresses
including chilling, heat, salt, nutrition, and disease.739,740,761,812
Earlier, BRs were regarded as mimicry substances of plant hormones. However, various dwarf mutants with
defective biosynthesis or signal transduction of BRs were isolated and their shortened cells were elongated by
exogenous BR but never by auxin and gibberellin, revealing that BR is a prerequisite for cell elongation734 and
that co-occurrence of BR, auxin, and gibberellin is required for normal cell elongation. Distinct synergism has
been observed between BR and auxin in the elongation of pea and adzuki bean stems, bending of rice lamina,736
and gravitropism of maize root.813 In accord with this, BR promotes the expression of auxin-related genes,
especially early auxin-inducible genes.814,815 In addition, BR promotes the expression of cell wall synthesis
genes and affects the expression of P450 genes related to BR biosynthesis and metabolism.803
The dwarf mutants of Arabidopsis show, when grown in the dark, many of the characteristics of light-grown
plants, including cotyledon expansion, primary leaf initiation, anthocyanin accumulation, and depression of
light-regulated gene expression. Involvement of BR in de-etiolation has been discussed.816

4.02.6.4.2 Signal transduction

Various reviews on the BR receptor and signal transduction have appeared.744,816–819 The
(BRASSINOSTEROID-INSENSITIVE 1 BRI1) gene encoding a BR receptor has been cloned by analyzing
the BR-insensitive Arabidopsis mutant bri1. The receptor BRI1 is a plasma membrane-localized leucine-rich
repeat receptor-like kinase (LRR-RLK). The extracellular domain of BRI1 is mainly composed of 25 LRRs
interrupted by a 70-amino acid island domain between the 21st and the 22nd LRR. The extracellular
domain is connected through a single-pass transmembrane domain to the cytoplasmic domain where a
typical Ser/Thr kinase core is localized (Figure 34). The BRI1 orthologs such as CU3 in tomato, LKA in pea,
OsBRI1 in rice, and UZU in barley have been cloned by analyzing BR-insensitive dwarf mutants. The BRI1-
like genes, BRL1 and BRL3, having high similarities with BRI1, have been cloned from Arabidopsis. While BRI1
is ubiquitously expressed, BRL1 and BRL3 are predominantly expressed in the vascular tissues
(Figure 34).820 Mutation of BRL1 increases phloem and reduces xylem differentiation compared with the
wild type. It is most likely that BRL1 and BRL3 play distinct and overlapping roles with BRI1 in vascular
differentiation and growth promoted by BR.

Figure 34 Structures of brassinosteroid receptors and current model for brassinosteroid signaling.
 Plant Hormones 77

Extracellular BR binds to the domain consisting of the 70-amino acid island and the 22nd LRR. Such BR
binding leads to homodimerization of BRI1 along with heterodimerization of BRI1 to BRI1-ASSOCIATED
RECEPTOR KINASE 1 (BAK1) (Figure 34). Like BRI1, BAK1 is also an LRR-RLK although containing only
five LRRs and no BR-binding domain. Transphosphorylation between BRI1 and BAK1 seems to activate BRI1.
The phosphorylation of Ser/Thr residues in the catalytic domain of BRI1 activates Ser/Thr kinases, leading to
downstream intracellular signaling.
Inside the nucleus, two transcription factors BRI1-EMS-SUPPRESSOR 1 (BES1) and BRASSINAZOLE-
RESISTANT 1 (BZR1) are capable of directly binding to some BR-responsive genes (Figure 34). The binding
of BES1 to the CANNTG motif (E-box) of the SAUR-AC1 promoter, synergistically enhanced by three BES1-
interacting Myc-like proteins (BIMs), activates the gene expression, while the binding of BZR1 to the
CGTG(T/C)G motif (BR-responsive element (BRRE)) in the promoters of the BR biosynthesis genes, CPD
and DWF4, feedback-suppresses the gene expression (Figure 34). In the absence of BR, both BES1 and BZR1
are phosphorylated by BIN2 followed by proteasome-mediated degradation, blocking BR signaling. In the
presence of BR, both BES1 and BZR1 are activated by dephosphorylation due to BSU1, regulating the
expression of many BR-responsive genes. Rapid progress in this area should be anticipated to increase our
accurate understanding of the BR signaling processes.

4.02.7 Jasmonates and Oxylipins

4.02.7.1 Introduction
Jasmonic acid (JA) and methyl jasmonate (MeJA) (collectively termed JAs) are known to be ubiquitous plant
signaling compounds. In 1962, MeJA was primarily isolated from the essential oil of Jasminum grandiflorum.821
Because of its aromatic odor, this compound is known to be useful in cosmetics and perfume industries. In spite
of its usefulness in the industries, physiological activities of JAs in plants have long been undefined. Cucurbic
acid, a closely related compound of JA, was first identified as a growth inhibitor from seeds of Cucurbita pepo L.822
Then, MeJA was isolated from different plant species as an active substance to promote senescence.823 At the
same time, JA was also identified from several plants as a growth inhibitor of rice seedlings.824,825 After these
early findings on jasmonate function by Japanese researchers, Vick and Zimmerman826 established its biosyn-
thetic pathway from linolenic acid, a major polyunsaturated fatty acid in plant membranes. As for the
physiological function, a derivative of JA, tuberonic acid, was identified as a tuber-inducing substance in potato
at the end of the 1980s.827
In 1987, Weidhase et al.828 found that accumulation of several proteins was induced by JA treatment.
Interestingly, this dynamic change of protein pattern involves degradation of Rubisco protein in agreement
with the activity to promote senescence.829 Furthermore, in 1990, Farmer and Ryan830 showed that airborne
MeJA could induce wound-responsive proteinase inhibitor in tomato. Separately, Gundlach et al.831 found that
JA induces accumulation of secondary metabolites and de novo transcription of defense-related genes, such as
phenylalanine ammonia lyase, in plant cell cultures. Importantly, they also revealed that the endogenous level
of JA is raised in some cultured plant cells after treatment with a yeast elicitor. These results demonstrate the
integral role of JA in a general signal transduction system regulating inducible defense responses in plants.
As described above, the roles of JAs in the response to stress such as wounding and diseases were of major
interest for many researchers in the early 1990s. In 1994, however, positive action of this compound in
developmental processes was first proposed by Turner’s group832 using a coronatine, a bacterial toxin,
insensitive mutant that also lacks sensitivity to JAs. The mutant has a defect in fertility, and thus a role for
JAs in flower development was first suggested. Separately, McConn and Browse833 isolated a JA biosynthesis
mutant that totally lacked biosynthesis of trienoic fatty acids, precursors for JA synthesis.833 This mutant also
had a defect in fertility and the phenotype was complemented with the treatment of JA. After these findings,
several mutants for JA biosynthesis were identified, and some of these mutants have defects in both accumula-
tion of JA and fertility.834–836
Studies on JA signaling were substantially advanced with a series of research on the COI1, Coronatine
Insensitive 1. This protein has an F-box motif, which has been originally found in a component of the
ubiquitin–proteasome system.837 Another well-known mutant of jasmonate function is jar1, which is impaired
78 Plant Hormones

in the formation of an amino acid derivative of JA.838 Although the jar1 mutant is significantly impaired in JA-
mediated root growth inhibition, this mutant is not male sterile. These two mutants have been utilized as
effective tools for investigating JA-mediated signaling in plants. The finding of these mutants raises important
questions that remain to be clarified: What is the role of the COI1 protein? How is JA signal transduced? How is
the amino acid conjugate involved in JA signaling? Very recent work on JAZ family, COI1 target proteins, shed
light on these key issues in JA signaling.839–840 Research advances in chemistry, biology, and signaling
mechanism for JAs made in this decade are overviewed in this chapter. Because of space limitation, many
articles are not cited here. The readers are recommended to refer other well-documented reviews that cover
biology and signaling mechanism of these molecules in more detail.841

4.02.7.2 Chemistry
4.02.7.2.1 Chemical structure
Most of the major metabolites of linolenic acid, listed in Figure 35, contain the cyclopentane (or -ene) ring and
the two side chains arrayed in the cis fashion on the ring. Some of the metabolites, however, take the trans
arrangement. Although isomerization to the trans isomer during isolation/purification is a likely process, a

O O O
S S S

CO2H CO2H CO2H

S S S

12-oxo-PDA (or OPDA) OPC-8:0 OPC-6:0

O O O O
S S R S

CO2H CO2R CO2R CO2H

S R R S

OPC-4:0 epi-jasmonic acid, R = H Jasmonic acid, R = H Dehydrojasmonic acid

Methyl epi-jasmonate, R = Me Methyl jasmonate, R = Me

HO HO O
S R
S R R
O
CO2H CO2H
R R R O

Cucurbic acid 6-epi-7-isocucurbic acid 12-hydroxyjasmonic acid lactone

O
S
O O
S OR R OR
R R
CO2H CO2H S
R R
O N CO2H
H
Tuberonic acid (cis isomer), R = H Tuberonic acid (trans isomer), R = H
tuberonic acid glucoside, (12-hydroxyjasmonic acid) Amino acid conjugates of
R = β-D-Glucopyranosyl Tuberonic acid glucoside, epi-jasmonic acid
R = β-D-Glucopyranosyl

Figure 35 Structures of the linolenic acid metabolites with the notation of the absolute configurations.
 Plant Hormones 79

pathway directly producing the trans compounds is also possible. In addition, several products containing the
hydroxyl group on the (2Z)-pentenyl chain have been isolated.
The chiral centers are indicated in the structures in Figure 35. The chirality at the carbon possessing the
(CH2)nCO2H is dependent on the length of CH2 and the local structures. The R configuration is defined to the
compounds possessing the CH2CO2R and the saturated cyclopentane ring, while the S configuration is defined
to others and dehydrojasmonic acid possessing the cyclopentene ring.

4.02.7.2.2 Chemical stability

Since the pentenyl chain is located at the -position of the carbonyl group except for cucurbic acid, the -
position is susceptible to epimerization to the more stable trans isomer under basic and acidic conditions. The
equilibrium ratio of methyl epi-jasmonate (cis isomer) and jasmonate (trans isomer) calculated taking into
account the Boltzmann distribution of the conformers is 4:96 at 25  C,842 which is well consistent with the
observed ratio of 5:95.843 In an alkaline solution, the cis to trans isomerization takes place quickly at room
temperature. On the other hand, the isomerization under weakly acidic conditions is rather slow. The
autoisomerization by the acidic part in the acid metabolites is negligible in a neutral solution. For example,
no isomerization of 12-oxo-phytodienoic acid (OPDA) was observed by 1H NMR spectroscopy in untreated
CDCl3 (containing a trace amount of DCl produced by decomposition of CDCl3) and in DCl-free CDCl3 at
room temperature for 26 days.844,845 A similar stability was confirmed for OPC-8:0. Tuberonic acid in CD3OD
(MeOH-d4) was stable at room temperature for 21 days.846 However, the isomerization took place with a
catalytic HCl in MeOH at room temperature for 2 h. The isomers can be detected conveniently by 1H NMR
spectroscopy (cis isomer,  2.8–2.9; trans isomer,  2.6–2.8).

4.02.7.2.3 Chemical synthesis of the metabolites on the linolenic acid cascade

Since the metabolites are stable under neutral to slightly acidic conditions, oxidation of cyclopentanols (or
cyclopentenols) has been used in the last step of the syntheses. For example, oxidation of methyl cucurbate
and/or the epimeric alcohol of methyl cucurbate with PDC in CH2Cl2,847 H2CrO4 at 0  C for 7 min,848 and
with Dess–Martin periodinane at room temperature for 30 min849 afforded methyl epi-jasmonate without
epimerization, while oxidation with Na2Cr2O7/H2SO4 overnight850 and with PCC/NaOAc for 19 h851 resulted
in epimerization. epi-Jasmonic acid, OPDA, and OPC-8:0 have been synthesized from the corresponding diols
by Jones oxidation.844,845,852

4.02.7.2.3(i) Synthesis of methyl epi-jasmonate The syntheses of epi-jasmonate through Diels–Alder reac-
tion are summarized in Scheme 7. Diels–Alder adduct 1 from the fumarate of (S)-ethyl lactate and
cyclopentadiene was transformed to the bicyclic carboxylic acid 2, which possesses the handholds for stereo-
selective construction of the side chains.847 After one carbon elongation, Wittig reaction and Baeyer–Villiger
oxidation produced lactone 3, which was converted to alcohol 4. Finally, PDC oxidation of the alcohol afforded
methyl epi-jasmonate without epimerization. Oxidative cleavage of the Diels–Alder adduct from 2-cyclopen-
ten-1-one and butadiene followed by Wittig reaction was the key conversion of the previous racemic synthesis
of methyl epi-jasmonate (see Tanaka et al.;853 cf. Roth et al.854). Later, the chiral version of this approach was
realized using the chiral cyclopentenone 5 and diene 6.855 Diels–Alder reaction between the optically active
cyclopentadiene 8 and cyclopentenone 9 followed by elimination of AcO from the adduct afforded enone 10.851
Installation of the two side chains took place stereoselectively on the less-crowded side of the olefinic face to
produce 11. To prevent the unwanted epimerization during the subsequent retro Diels–Alder reaction, the
ketone group was reduced and submitted to the retro reaction to furnish the cyclopentenol, which upon
hydrogenation with Pd/CaCO3 followed by oxidation of the alcohol furnished methyl epi-jasmonate. The same
strategy was previously used in the synthesis of OPDA, in which retro Diels–Alder reaction of the ketone (29 in
Scheme 11) was successfully carried out at room temperature with EtAlCl2.856
The stereoselective constructions of the second side chain on the cyclopentane ring are shown in Scheme 8.
Ketone 13 derived from optically active lactone 12 was converted to ester 14 via Wittig reaction with
(MeO)2P(¼O)CH2CO2Me/NaH followed by hydrogenation of the resulting olefin from the convex face.848
Stereoselective epoxidation of olefin 15 with CF3CO3H and the subsequent 1,2-hydride migration in the
epoxide with BF3OEt2 produced epi-jasmonate without epimerization.857
80 Plant Hormones

CO2H 1) one carbon

CO2R* elongation HO
2) Wittig 1) OH–
Baeyer–Villiger O O 2) CH2N2 CO2Me
CO2R*
O
1 3 4
2
R* = (S)-O-CH(Me)CO2Et
PDC

1) O3
O O O
2) Wittig
+
O O CO2Me
OMe OMe
O O
methyl epi-jasmonate
5 6 7

1) retro Diels–Alder
2) H2, Pd/CaCO3
O H–
Ph Ph Ph OH
+ O
H

OAc Br
8 CO2Me
9 10 CO2Me
11
CO2CH2CH = CH2
Scheme 7 Synthesis of methyl epi-jasmonates using Diels–Alder reaction.

O OMe OMe
O O O Wittig with
Ph3P = CHEt
4
CO2Me
O
12 13 1) Wittig with 14
(MeO)2P(O) = CHCO2Me
2) H2, PtO2 Methyl epi-jasmonate

O
[O] BF3•OEt2
CO2Me CO2Me 1,2-H migration

15 16
Scheme 8 Miscellaneous syntheses of methyl epi-jasmonate.

Formation of the cyclopentane ring and concomitant arrangement of the two side chains in the cis fashion is
another efficient approach to methyl epi-jasmonate as delineated in Scheme 9. In the upper sequence, nickel-
catalyzed carbozincation of 17 with Et2Zn produced organozinc 18, which was converted to a copper reagent
for coupling with 1-bromoacetylene to produce 19 efficiently.849 The ene reaction of 20 and 23 has afforded 21
and 24, respectively.858,859 In the latter case, 23 was generated in situ by retro Diels–Alder reaction of 22.
 Plant Hormones 81

OBn OBn OBn

Et2Zn ZnI 1) CuCN•LiCl

Ni cat. CO2Me CO2Me

I 2) Br
CO2Me
19
17 18

Methyl epi-jasmonate
TBDPSO TMS TBDPSO
235 °C, 18 h TMS
CO2Me Ene reaction CO2Me

20 21

O O
O O
H
O
260 °C O Enantiomer of
H methyl epi-jasmonate
Retro Diels–Alder Ene reaction
TMS TMS
TMS
24
22 23
Scheme 9 Construction of the cyclopentane ring and the cis array of the side chains leading to the formation of methyl epi-
jasmonate.

4.02.7.2.3(ii) Synthesis of epi-jasmonic acid Although epi-jasmonic acid is the key intermediate in the
metabolic pathway leading to methyl epi-jasmonate and amino acid conjugates, synthesis of the acid in an
optically active form was only orally communicated.852 As shown in Scheme 10, the vinyl group was installed
regioselectively on the ring of acetate (R)-25 as a latent CH2CO2H via the copper-assisted reaction860–862 with
CH2¼CHMgBr in the presence of LiCl. The resulting alcohol 26 was transformed to lactone 27, which
produced the acid through Wittig reaction. Similarly, tuberonic acid (cis isomer) was synthesized.846

4.02.7.2.3(iii)Synthesis of OPDA, OPC-8:0, and related compounds In contrast to the high temperatures
for retro Diels–Alder reaction, EtAlCl2 promotes the reaction to be proceeded at room temperature. This
finding was applied successfully to 29 to produce OPDA without epimerization (Scheme 11).856
Regioselective allylic substitution of (R)-25 giving the SN2-type product 30, established with
R2Cu(CN)(MgCl)2 derived from RMgCl and CuCN,860–862 has been applied to the synthesis of OPDA and
OPC-8:0 as summarized in Scheme 12.844,845 Later,
2-OPC-8:0 and OPC-6:0 were synthesized as well.863 It
should be noted that the high regioselectivity in the copper-catalyzed reaction used in the first step is attainable
only with RMgCl (not RMgBr) and CuCN in THF.

O Wittig
epi-jasmonic acid
MgBr O
1) OH inversion
HO HO
OAc CuCN / LiCl 2) Claisen I
rearrangement
(R)-25 26 Tuberonic acid
3) Iodo-lactonization (cis isomer)
27 [O]
Scheme 10 Synthesis of epi-jasmonic acid starting with (R)-25.
82 Plant Hormones

O
O 1) Li2Cu-((CH2)8OTHP)2CN O EtAlCl2

2) rt, 2 h
I (CH2)7CO2H
Retro Diels–Alder
3) oxidation at C1 (CH2)7CO2H 12-oxo-PDA
28
29
Scheme 11 Retro Diels–Alder approach to 12-oxo-PDA.

O
HO2C
O
1) OH inversion
R-MgCl Iodo-lactonization
HO HO
CuCN 2) Claisen I
OAc R
rearrangement R R
(R)-25 30
31 32

O
Bu3SnH
O O O DBU

;
CO2H
(CH2)n–1CO2H R
O
33
OPC:8-0, n = 8 Δ2-OPC-8:0
O
OPC:6-0, n = 6
12-oxo-PDA

R
34
Scheme 12 Synthetic method using (R)-25 leading to linolenic acid metabolites.

Allylic substitution was utilized in another synthesis of OPDA.864 Elongation of the CH2CO2H chain of the
jasmonate to (CH2)7CO2H was reported.865

4.02.7.2.3(iv) Synthesis of tuberonic acid, 12-hydroxyjasmonic acid, and -glucopyranosyl

derivatives The presence of the hydroxyl group at the end of the pentenyl group severely limits reagents
and reaction conditions to be used at the final stage. The method shown in Scheme 8 (the upper sequence) was
applied successfully to the synthesis of the methyl esters of tuberonic acid and its glucopyranosyl derivative.866
The trans isomer of the latter was obtained by epimerization (NaOMe/MeOH, room temperature, 2 h) of the
tetraacetate derivative. However, hydrolysis without epimerization is uncertain.
Recently, the protected tuberonic acid was synthesized by using the method shown in Scheme 10 and
deprotection was studied with success to afford tuberonic acid for the first time (Scheme 13).846 Through the
synthesis it was revealed that tuberonic acid and its derivative are liable to epimerization more easily than epi-
jasmonic acid. In addition, exposure of tuberonic acid to NaOH in aqueous MeOH produced 12-hydroxyjas-
monic acid.

OTES O O
OTHP 1) PPTS OTHP MgBr2 OH

CO2H 2) Jones oxidation CO2H Et2O CO2H

–40 °C
Tuberonic acid
35 36
Scheme 13 Synthesis of tuberonic acid.
 Plant Hormones 83

4.02.7.3 Biosynthesis and Metabolism

4.02.7.3.1 Biosynthetic pathway in plants
JAs are derived from linolenic acid via an octadecanoid pathway consisting of several enzymatic steps
(Figure 36). Multiple compartments in plant cells participate in JA synthesis. The early steps of this pathway
occur in chloroplasts, where linolenic acid is converted to OPDA by means of the three enzymes lipoxygenase
(LOX), allene oxide synthase (AOS), and allene oxide cyclase (AOC).867–869 Linolenic acid is oxygenated by
13-LOX producing a peroxidized fatty acid 13-hydroperoxylinolenic acid. The product is subsequently
metabolized by AOS to an unstable compound allene oxide. Allene oxide is sequentially converted by AOC
to produce OPDA. An alternative pathway from another trienoic fatty acid, hexadecatrienoic acid (16:3), is
present in chloroplasts.870 In this pathway, dinor OPDA is produced instead of OPDA. OPDA and dinor OPDA
are transported into the peroxisome. An ABC transporter involved in this transport was identified in

Figure 36 Biosynthetic pathway of jasmonates.

84 Plant Hormones

Arabidopsis.871 However, it is still uncertain how OPDA is transported into the peroxisome by the transporters.
Transported OPDA is reduced by OPDA reductase (OPR3) in its double bond of the cyclopentenone ring.
The product OPC8:0 is converted into OPC8:0-CoA,872 and then processed by three rounds of -oxidation
generating JA (OPC6:0 produced from dinor OPDA undergoes two rounds of -oxidation).870,873,874
As for the modifications for JA, conjugation of isoleucine to JA is known to be catalyzed by JAR1 (jasmonate
resistant 1).838 The gene for JAR1 has been identified as a site of mutation for JA-mediated inhibition of root
elongation.875 Methylation of JA is catalyzed by a jasmonic acid methyltransferase. The corresponding gene was
isolated from Arabidopsis.876
The release of the substrate fatty acids (18:3 and 16:3) from membrane has long been believed to be a
primary step of JA biosynthesis. Arabidopsis dad1 mutant shows delayed anther dehiscence and shorter filament
length.877 Since the mutant is deficient in JA and a corresponding gene encodes a phospholipase A1 that
preferentially catalyzes the liberation of fatty acid from the sn-1 position of glycerophospholipids, this protein
DAD1 is thought to be involved in the supply of linolenic acid from membrane in flowers. Indeed, DAD1 is
located in plastids where JA synthesis occurs. A recent work, however, suggested that conversion of the trienoic
fatty acids to OPDA and dinor OPDA might occur in membrane-bound form.878 Stelmach et al.879 first found
that OPDA was attached in a glycerol backbone of a chloroplast galactolipid MGDG (MGDG-O) in wounded
leaves. Subsequently, various types of oxylipin-containing galactolipids (arabidopsides) were identified.880–882
Buseman et al.878 systematically identified the oxylipin-containing galactolipids in wounded plants. They found
that OPDA was esterified in both sn-1 and sn-2 positions of the glycerol backbone. In contrast, dinor OPDA was
esterified only in sn-2 position, reflecting the fact that the substrate 16:3 is a fatty acid solely esterified in the
sn-2 position of glycerol moiety. Since the esterified positions of these oxylipin-containing galactolipids are
basically the same as the positions where trienoic fatty acids, the oxylipin precursor, are attached, they assumed
that these oxylipins are mainly produced as membrane-attached forms. Although DAD1 participates in JA
biosynthesis in flowers, it should be clarified whether the enzyme catalyzes the release of linolenic acid or
OPDA attached to the membrane in vivo.

4.02.7.3.2 Lipid-derived reactive electrophile species and nonenzymatically formed

oxylipins
In addition to the enzymatically produced oxylipins, various types of nonenzymatically formed oxylipins were
found in plant tissues. Phytoprostanes are a large family derived from nonenzymatic oxidation of 18:3 or 18:2
fatty acids.883 These molecules are significantly accumulated in wounded and diseased plants. Even in healthy
plants, the levels of some phytoprostanes exceed those of OPDA. Some of the phytoprostanes show strong
activity to induce phytoalexin accumulation and gene expression.884 Oxidative modification of unsaturated
fatty acids upon various stresses produces another type of oxylipins, RES (reactive electrophile species).885 The
RES has , -unsaturated carbonyl groups that possess high reactivity to proteins and other lower molecular
weight compounds. Two particularly active RES, small vinyl ketones and 2(E)-alkenals, were shown to induce
gene expression in plant tissues.

4.02.7.4 Physiology
4.02.7.4.1 Responses to biotic and abiotic stresses
JAs are known to show a broad array of function in plants. There have been numerous physiological analyses of
the function of JAs. The role of JAs in the response to biotic stresses, such as insect or fungal attack,886,887 and
abiotic stresses, such as mechanical wounding,888–890 has been well documented. Indeed, exogenous application
of JAs induces the expression of a large number of stress-responsive genes.890–892 Several reports have shown
that a defect in JA biosynthesis or some component of the JA signaling is accompanied by an impairment in JRG
(jasmonate-responsive gene) expression,886,893,894 resulting in increased sensitivity to stresses such as pathogen
infection or herbivore attack. Levels of endogenous JAs increase after treatment with elicitors and following
wounding.895 Transgenic plants containing higher levels of MeJA than wild type cause constitutive expression
of JRGs and exhibit elevated resistance to virulent pathogen B. cineria.876 Thus, JRG expression appears to be
induced under these stress conditions and may contribute to stress tolerance in plants. JAs or some components
derived from JA biosynthetic pathway are proposed to participate not only in local response of gene expression
 Plant Hormones 85

but also in systemic induction in herbivore attack. In tomato, grafting studies with coi1 mutant revealed that
signal perception is required for recognition of the transmissible signal in distal responding leaves.896
Conversely, experiments with several JA biosynthetic mutants indicated that the production of the graft-
transmissible signal requires JA synthesis in wounded tissues. Particularly, the necessity of peroxisomal -
oxidation for production of the systemic wound signal is proved with acx1 mutant defective in an acyl-CoA
oxidase (ACX1A) that catalyzes the first step of the -oxidation in the octadecanoid pathway.897 This result
indicates that a downstream component in JA biosynthesis after -oxidation is a systemic signal in wound stress
response in tomato.
When plants undergo various stresses, certain secondary metabolites, including defense compounds, accu-
mulate. Several secondary metabolites such as terpenoid indole alkaloids, indole glucosinolate, nicotine
alkaloids, and polyamines are known to accumulate through the induction of biosynthetic genes by jasmo-
nates.898–900 MeJA also induces genes involved in the formation of tryptophan derivatives, terpenoid indole
alkaloids.901 These compounds are known to be involved in defense response to pathogen attack as
phytoalexins.
Another interesting feature of JAs in stress responses is their role in oxidative stresses. In particular, JAs have
been shown to have some role in ozone stress response.902 Accumulation of JA also occurs upon ozone exposure
in plants.903 Moreover, jar1 mutant shows impaired ozone response.904 Sasaki-Sekimoto et al.892 revealed that JA
induces gene expression related to antioxidant biosynthesis such as ascorbic acid and glutathione biosyntheses,
and thereby provides oxidative stress tolerance. In this report, they performed a comprehensive analysis of
jasmonate-regulated metabolic pathways using cDNA macroarrays. This approach identified nine metabolic
pathways belonging to two functionally related groups: (1) ascorbate and glutathione metabolic pathways,
which are important in defense responses to oxidative stress, and (2) biosynthetic enzymes for indole
glucosinolate, which is a defense compound in the Brassicaceae family. In jasmonate-deficient Arabidopsis opr3
mutants, the induction of antioxidant genes was abolished. Compared with the wild type, opr3 mutants were
more sensitive to O3 exposure. They suggest that the coordinated activation of the metabolic pathways
mediated by jasmonates provides resistance to environmental stresses.

4.02.7.4.2 Stress response in the absence of jasmonic acid

Among the various oxylipins having biological activity, JA and MeJA are the best characterized. As described
above, -oxidation-derived signal has a major role in wounding response in tomato.897 However, opr3 mutant,
which lacks these two oxylipins, is known to be resistant to the dipteran Bradysia impatiens, as are wild-type
plants.905 This suggests that OPDA present in the opr3 mutant may be the active signaling molecule and have a
role in the induction of defense response genes. Moreover, investigators have shown that OPDA upregulates
not only COI1-dependent genes induced by JA, but also several COI1-independent genes that do not respond
to JA. They also suggested that OPDA may function cooperatively with JAs to regulate the expression of
defense response genes. Taki et al.906 analyzed OPDA-dependent gene expression by comparing responses to
OPDA and JAs using DNA microarrays covering 80% of the A. thaliana genome. They identified a group of
genes designated ‘ORGs,’ which responded to OPDA but not to JAs. OPDA treatment of coi1 mutants
demonstrated that ORG expression is independent of the COI1-mediated JA signaling pathway. Using the
OPDA and JA biosynthetic mutants, aos and opr3, they showed that the response of the ORG expression to
wounding is impaired in aos but not in opr3 (see Figure 36). Thus, OPDA is a lipid signal mediator in vivo,
regulating ORGs that function in wounding response.

4.02.7.4.3 Effect of jasmonates on developmental processes

JAs are known to inhibit plant growth. This effect has been reported by Yamane et al.824,825 in the early 1980s
and frequently utilized for screening of their signaling mutants. Jar1 and jin1 have been isolated primarily as
mutants in which JA-dependent root growth inhibition is reduced.875,907 Coi1 also shows similar phenotype. By
contrast, mutants that exhibit constitutive expression of JA-responsive genes (cf. cev1) show reduced root
growth similar to JA-treated plants.908 The mutants generally have elevated levels of JAs.
JAs also play important roles in flower development.832,833,837 Particularly, the requirement of JA biosynth-
esis for anther development was clearly shown by JA biosynthesis mutants.834–836 AOS and OPR3, two enzymes
required for JA biosynthesis, are encoded as a single gene in Arabidopsis genome. An opr3 mutant in Arabidopsis,
86 Plant Hormones

which could not produce JA, exhibits delayed anther dehiscence, resulting in male sterility.834,835 Studies with
this mutant showed that JA, and not its precursors, is the active signaling molecule that regulates anther
development, since the application of JA, but not OPDA, restored fertility.835 As for the signaling components,
Arabidopsis coi1 also shows male sterility.832 However, a tomato mutant for COI1 homolog has a crucial defect in
female organs, and results in female sterility. This evidence shows that JA function in regeneration step is
diverse in plant species.909
Tuber formation is also known to be induced by a JA derivative called tuberonic acid.827 Tuberonic acid has
been primarily found in potato as a tuber-inducing substance, and named as tuberonic acid. This compound is
also shown as a substrate of a sulfotransferase in Arabidopsis.910
Promotion of senescence by JAs has also been reported in the early days of jasmonate study.823 Gene
expression for the enzyme chlorophyllase, which is involved in the early step of chlorophyll degradation, is
known to be strongly induced by exogenous treatment of MeJA.911 This enzyme might be a major player in JA-
mediated senescence. JA levels are known to be higher in senescing leaves than in nonsenescing leaves.912
Arabidopside A also shows senescence-promoting activity.913 This compound shows much stronger activity
than JAs.

4.02.7.4.4 OPDA on developmental processes

OPDA was shown to promote tendril coiling response in Bryonia.914 This compound was also shown to induce
stomatal opening.915 The stomatal opening activity of OPDA is higher than that of other phytohormones that
induce stomatal opening.

4.02.7.5 Signaling
Among several components that are identified in signaling via JAs, COI1 is regarded as a central component.
It has an F-box motif that shows similarity to proteins involved in specifically interacting proteins for its
proteolytic removal.837,916 A gene for COI1 was first identified from a mutant insensitive to coronatine.832
Coronatine is a bacterial toxin produced by Pseudomonas syringae. Since the toxin has a structural similarity to
JAs, a mutant for coi1 is insensitive to both coronatine and JA. COI1 is thought to be involved in ubiquitination
and subsequent degradation of proteins that repress JA signaling.
ORCA is one of the well-investigated downstream transcription factor in JA signaling.899 This factor was
identified as a key component in controlling alkaloid biosynthesis in periwinkle. Ethylene response factor 1
(ERF1) was identified as a master switch in the cross talk between ethylene and JA signaling.917 Another major
component in JA signaling is MYC2, a regulator in JA-mediated gene expression.918,919 There are two branches
in JA signaling pathway that are antagonistically regulated by MYC2 and ERF1. MYC2 positively regulates
expression of wound-inducible genes, and by contrast, it negatively regulates pathogen-responsive genes. For
ERF1, the effect is vice versa. This antagonistic action of MYC2 and ERF1 may cause the independence
between wound signaling and pathogen-defense signaling in Arabidopsis. Memelink et al.900 found Arabidopsis
homologs of ORCAs that are initially identified in C. roseus cell suspension cultures. Among them, ORA47 is a
COI1-dependent positive regulator of JA biosynthesis.
Although the target(s) of COI1 has long been unknown, the proteins were identified by two independent
approaches. Chini et al.839 found the COI1 target, JAZ family proteins, from the analysis of a jasmonate-
insensitive mutant, jai3-1. They showed that jai3-1 is a dominant mutant that lacks the C-terminal end of the
encoded protein. Since this mutant protein is resistant to proteolysis by 26S proteasome, it may block the COI1
function and thus exhibit insensitivity to JAs. Moreover, they proved that one of the JAZ proteins binds to COI1
in vivo. Another group, Thines et al.,840 globally analyzed JA-mediated gene expression in stamen. Among the
genes they identified, they noticed that many of the genes belong to the same gene family homologous to ZIM1,
a protein family having a zinc finger DNA-binding motif. However, none of the JAZ proteins has the DNA-
binding motif. Importantly, they showed binding of the JAZ1 protein to COI1 in vitro only in the presence of
isoleucine conjugate of JA. This result strongly suggests that COI1 or JAZ1 (or both) is a receptor of isoleucine
conjugate of JA (Figure 37). How does JAZ family control JA function? A gene corresponding to JAZ10 (JAS1)
produces two different transcripts.920 One of the transcripts encodes a truncated protein that lacks the C-
terminus of another gene product. This truncated protein may behave as an effective repressor in JA signaling
 Plant Hormones 87

JA

JA-Ile
SCFCOI1
Ub
SCFCOI1 Ub
Ub
Ub
SCFCOI1 Ub 26S
Ub JAZ
proteasome
JAZ JAZ

MYC2 MYC2
MYC2

Figure 37 Model for jasmonate signaling.

in vivo. Although the receptor(s) for the JA signaling is still unidentified, studies on JA signaling will be greatly
accelerated with these recent findings of JAZ family proteins.

4.02.8 Ethylene
4.02.8.1 Introduction
Ethylene is a simple gaseous molecule that plays important roles in plant growth and development, including
seed germination, leaf senescence, fruit ripening, abscission, and response to abiotic and biotic stresses.921
Ethylene is among the best-known plant hormones because of the extensive biochemical, molecular, and
genetic studies conducted on its biochemistry, signal transduction, and regulation. In this chapter, we will focus
on the progress made in the last decade.

4.02.8.2 Chemistry
In 1967, Burg and Burg922 examined various analogs of ethylene for biological activity to suppress elongation of
pea stems. No analogs of ethylene-like biological activity have been found as naturally occurring substances so
far.
Silver ions923 and 2,5-norbornadiene (NBD)924 are well known as effective inhibitors of ethylene action.
Silver, applied in the form of thiosulfate (silver thiosulfate (STS)), is a very effective inhibitor of ethylene
action. It has been used with much success on cut flowers and potted plants. But as it is a heavy metal it cannot
be used on food and feed, and is harmful to environment. As NBD requires continuous exposure and a high
concentration, and has a strong odor, it also cannot be used on cut flowers and food. Furthermore, both
compounds are toxic for plant growth in high concentration.
In the late 1990s, Sisler and Serek925 discovered 1-methylcylopropene (1-MCP) as the new inhibitor of
ethylene action. Now 1-MCP is the most useful compound among recently developed inhibitors of ethylene
responses. It is stable and active at a considerably lower concentration (0.5 nl l1). It binds almost irreversibly to
the receptors. Therefore, the effect continues until the receptors replace de novo synthesized ones. Now it is
available commercially.

4.02.8.3 Biosynthesis
Ethylene is produced not only by higher plants but also by microorganisms. Microorganisms produce ethylene
by two different pathways: 2-oxoglutarate-dependent pathway926 and 2-oxo-4-methylthiobutyrate-dependent
pathway.927 On the other hand, higher plants produce ethylene by ACC (1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylic
88 Plant Hormones

acid) pathway, which includes L-methionine, S-adenosylmethionine (AdoMet), and ACC as intermediates.928
These pathways have been established.

4.02.8.3.1 Transcriptional regulation of ACC synthase

In the ethylene biosynthesis pathway, the step in which AdoMet is converted to ACC by ACC synthases
(ACSs) is the rate-limiting one. ACS consists of a multigene family,929 and different genes show distinct
patterns of expression during growth and development, and in response to various external stimuli. Increases in
ACS activity in response to auxin and wounding are inhibited by inhibitors of protein synthesis and RNA
synthesis, suggesting that synthesis of ACS is transcriptionally regulated. In all tissues examined, mRNA is not
present at a detectable level in tissue producing no ethylene. Northern blot analyses show that the genes of ACS
isozymes are differentially regulated by different stimuli. The tomato ACS family consists of at least eight
genes, and among them five genes (LeASC1A, LeACS2, LeACS3, LeASC4, and LeACS6) are well studied with
respect to transcriptional regulation, especially in tomato fruit development.930 LeACS2 and LeACS4 are the
primary ACS genes expressed during tomato fruit ripening, and furthermore LeASC2 is remarkably induced by
wounding, but not LeACS4. LeACS4 is repressed by wounding and is expressed only during ripening. In
addition, LeACS2 is expressed either on or off the vein. LeACS4 is expressed only on the vein, not off the vein.
Therefore, in the transgenic tomato, in which LeACS2 is repressed by antisense gene, detached fruits do not
ripen. While attached fruits ripen due to expression of LeACS4 although LeASC2 is not expressed. LeACS6 is
the only ACS gene expressed in mature-green fruit, but it is not expressed during ripening.930 LeACS1A is
expressed transiently during the breaker stage, but it is not expressed after the breaker stage.930 LeASC2, but
not others, is autocatalytically induced by ethylene. Expression of LeACS6 is repressed by ethylene. In
addition, LeACS1A and LeACS6 are induced by only touch in seedling, leaf, and mature-green fruit.931 The
expressions of LeACS1A and LeACS6 increased within 10 min after touch, and mRNAs for both genes
disappeared by 2 h. Thus, their expressions are transient. These results propose the question whether the
stimuli to induction of LeACS1A and LeACS6 during fruit ripening are developmental or external cues.
LeACS2 expression induced by wounding in excised tissues is enhanced by auxin. Expression of LeACS3, but
not LeACS2, is rapidly induced in intact seedlings sprayed with auxin, indicating that LeACS3 is undoubtedly
an auxin-inducible gene.

4.02.8.3.2 Posttranslational regulation of ACC synthase

ACS is regulated not only at the transcriptional level but also at the posttranslational level. Tatsuki and Mori932
first reported that LeACS2 is phosphorylated at Ser-460 by a CDPK and the phosphorylation is involved in
protein turnover, stability, but not enzymatic activity. ACSs consist of seven conserved sequences and the C-
terminal region is not conserved. However, the phosphorylation site (RLSF/L) is found in the C-terminal
region and is conserved in many ACSs. In addition, the phosphorylation site of mitogen-activated protein
(MAP) kinase is also found in the C-terminal region.933 ACS proteins can be classified into three groups based
on their C-terminal sequences: (1) type 1 proteins have extended C-termini containing three conserved Ser
residues that are targets for phosphorylation by MAP kinase and a conserved Ser residue that is a target for
phosphorylation by CDPK; (2) type 2 proteins have shorter C-termini containing only the CDPK site; and (3)
type 3 proteins have short C-termini that lack both phosphorylation sites. The results of treatments of protein
kinase/phosphatase inhibitors showed that the half-life of phosphorylated LeACS2 was longer than that of
nonphosphorylated LeACS2. These results suggest that phosphorylation/dephosphorylation regulates the
turnover of LeACS2 protein in the cell and that dephosphorylation of LeACS2 causes degradation.
Regulation of ACS stability is also under the control of MAP kinase cascade.933 To examine the role of
MPK6, which is a homolog of SIPK (stress-induced MAP kinase) in Arabidopsis, in ethylene responses, the
activated form of NtMEK2 was expressed in wild-type and mpk6 mutant Arabidopsis plants under the control of a
DEX-inducible promoter. DEX application increased the amount of ethylene produced and ACS activity in
wild-type plants, but not in mpk6 plants, indicating that MPK6 is required for NtMEK2-induced ethylene
biosynthesis. MPK6 was shown to phosphorylate ACS2 and ACS6 in vitro, and transgenic plants, in which a
phosphomimic-activated mutant ACS6 was expressed, showed increased ethylene production. These results
indicate that MPK6 phosphorylates ACS proteins, thereby decreasing their turnover and increasing ethylene
biosynthesis after pathogen stress.
 Plant Hormones 89

On the other hand, ethylene-overproducing eto mutants in Arabidopsis provide very important information on
the mechanism underlying ACS stability.934 The eto mutants produce 10–40 times more ethylene in the dark
than wild-type seedlings and show a triple response morphology despite the absence of exogenous application
of ethylene.935 The eto2 and eto3 mutants are dominant mutations in the C-terminus of ACS5936 and ACS9,937
respectively. The eto2 mutation, a gain-of-function allele of the ACS5 gene, is the result of a single base-pair
insertion that is predicted to disrupt the C-terminal 12 amino acids. This region just includes the putative
phosphorylation site of CDPK. The eto2 mutation does not increase the steady-state level of ACS5 mRNA but
increases the stability of the ACS5 protein. In a similar manner, the eto3 mutation, a gain-of function allele of the
ACS9 gene, is the result of single amino acid change, V457D, at the C-terminus of ACS9, which is in the
neighborhood of the phosphorylation site. This single amino acid mutation gets a negative charge in the region,
suggesting that this mutation mimics the phosphorylation. The eto1 mutant is a recessive mutation that elevates
basal ethylene biosynthesis, especially in etiolated seedlings.935 Cloning of ETO1 revealed that it encodes a
BTB (Broad-complex, Tramtrack, Bric-à-brac) domain containing protein, a type of protein that has been
shown to link CUL3-based ubiquitin ligase to substrate protein.938 ETO1 also contains six predicted tetra-
tricopeptide repeat motifs, which are involved in diverse protein–protein interactions. Analysis of ETO1
reveals that it acts as a substrate-specific adaptor protein for ACS5 and other ACS isozymes, especially type
2 ACSs.939 The BTB domain of ETO1 interacts with CUL3/E3 ligase and the TPR domain of ETO1 interacts
with the C-terminus of ACS protein to bring the substrate into contact with the E2 enzyme. The ligase then
ubiquitinates the substrate ACS, thus targeting the protein for degradation by 26S proteasome.
The proposed model is that phosphorylation of type 1 and type 2 ACS proteins blocks the ability of ETO1/
EOL (ETO1 homolog ETO1-LIKE) proteins to bind, thus inhibiting the ubiquitination of these ACS proteins
and thus their degradation by 26S proteasome.

4.02.8.4 Perception and Signaling

The molecular analyses of ethylene signal transduction began with genetic screening of mutants based on the
triple response phenotype of etiolated Arabidopsis seedlings after treatment with ethylene.940 Initial studies
revealed a linear framework for the ethylene signal transduction pathway, leading from ethylene perception at
the membrane to transcriptional activation in the nucleus. That is, five ethylene receptors (ETR1, ERS1,
ETR2, EIN4, and ERS2)941–944 relay the ethylene signal to the CTR1 protein kinase, which is a negative
regulator of ethylene responses. CTR1 is similar to the Raf family of MAPKKKs,945 and is therefore presumed
to be the first component of an MAP kinase cascade. EIN2, which acts downstream of CTR1, has an integral
membrane domain with similarity to the Nramp family of metal ion transporters,946 but its biochemical
function is unknown. Downstream of EIN2 is EIN3,947 which is a transcription factor that promotes transcrip-
tion of ERF1. It also encodes a transcription factor that binds to the GCC-box promoter element to activate
transcription of specific ethylene response genes. Each component will be reviewed below.

4.02.8.4.1 Ethylene receptors

Ethylene receptors are similar to histidine protein kinase receptors of the bacterial two-component system.
This finding is the first to show that eukaryotes utilize bacterial two-component signaling system as a signal
transduction pathway.941 The ethylene receptors can be divided into two subfamilies. Subfamily I receptors
(ETR1 and ERS1) have three transmembrane domains in the N-terminus and a conserved histidine kinase
domain in the C-terminus, while subfamily II receptors (ETR2, ERS2, and EIN4) have four transmembrane
domains in the N-terminus but the histidine kinase domain is not conserved in the C-terminus. Furthermore, a
genetic study reveals that the receptors do not need the histidine kinase activity for signal transduction.948
The ethylene receptors localize to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) membrane and the N-terminus is on the
luminal side and the C-terminus is on the cytosolic side of the ER membrane.949 The transmembrane domains
are responsible for formation of disulfide-linked dimerization950 and bind to ethylene with a copper cofactor
that is provided by the RNA1 (Responsive to Antagonist 1),951 a putative copper transporter similar to human
Menkes Wilson disease protein.
The first mutant etr1-1 isolated in the ethylene receptor genes was dominant gain-of-function mutation
conferring ethylene insensitivity.952 Single receptor loss-of-function mutants essentially show no phenotype
90 Plant Hormones

owing to a high degree of functional redundancy among the receptors, but null mutant combinations exhibit
varying degrees of constitutive ethylene responses, demonstrating that the ethylene receptors are negative
regulators of ethylene responses.953
The degradation of ethylene receptors plays a pivotal role in enhancing sensitivity. Tomato LeETR4 and
LeETR6 receptors are degraded rapidly by 26S proteasome on ethylene binding.954 The degradation of these
receptors results in early fruit ripening, demonstrating how receptor levels can control the sensitization of plant
tissues to ethylene. This degradation helps to explain why the dramatic increase in ethylene receptor mRNA
during ripening does not result in the inhibition of ripening. Similarly, the binding of ethylene to Arabidopsis
ETR2 receptor leads to degradation by 26S proteasome.955

4.02.8.4.2 RTE1/GR
Arabidopsis Reversion-to-Ethylene Sensitivity 1 (RTE1) was identified on the basis of loss-of-function rte1 mutants
that suppress the ethylene-insensitive mutant etr1-2.956 rte1 mutant shows hypersensitivity to ethylene, similar
to the etr1 null mutant. RTE1 encodes a novel integral membrane protein involved in regulating ETR1 function.
RTE1 is highly conserved in plants, but its molecular function is unknown. The RTE1 protein colocalizes with
ETR1 in the Golgi and ER.957 While tomato dominant Green-ripe (Gr) mutant exhibits inhibition of fruit
ripening and floral senescence, inhibition of hypocotyl elongation and petiole epinasty remains normal.
Cloning reveals that GR is a tomato homolog of RTE1.958 The Gr mutant carries a deletion in the GR
promoter region that causes ectopic overexpression of GR, which leads to ripening inhibition, demonstrating
that RTE1/GR represses ethylene response.

4.02.8.4.3 CTR1
Genetic epistatic analyses reveal that CTR1 acts downstream of the ethylene receptors in the ethylene signal
pathway.945 Loss-of-function ctr1 (constitutive triple response1) mutants exhibit pleiotropic constitutive ethylene
response, and thus CTR1 is thought to be a negative regulator of ethylene responses.945 The CTR1 protein has
a kinase domain and high sequence similarity to the Raf family of MAPKKKs, suggesting that CTR1 may act in
an MAPK phosphorylation cascade. However, other than the sequence similarity of CTR1 to MAPKKK, there
is no conclusive evidence to support an MAPK cascade operating in the ethylene signal transduction so far.
CTR1 protein interacts with ethylene receptors physically, and thus is localized in the ER membrane although
it has no obvious transmembrane domain or membrane attachment motifs.959 The current belief is that, in the
absence of ethylene, the active receptors can interact with and recruit CTR1 to the ER membrane, which in
turn activates CTR1 and shuts down the ethylene pathway.

4.02.8.4.4 EIN2
Genetic epistatic analyses reveal that EIN2 acts downstream of CTR1.946 EIN2 functions as a pivotal positive
regulator of the ethylene signal transduction, because loss-of-function ein2 mutations result in complete
insensitivity to ethylene in all ethylene-related responses examined. The N-terminal portion of EIN2 protein
consists of 12 putative membrane-spanning domains, which are similar to the Nramp family of metal ion
carriers. But no ion carrier activity has been demonstrated so far, and thus biochemical functions are still
unknown. The subcellular localization of EIN2 is also unknown. Overexpression of the C-terminus of EIN2 can
constitutively activate a subset of ethylene response phenotypes, and ethylene-inducible transcripts are
increased. However, it cannot restore ethylene sensitivity in ein2 null mutants. These results suggest that the
N-terminus of EIN2 represents an input domain in sensing upstream signaling, while the C-terminus
represents an output domain interacting with downstream components.

4.02.8.4.5 EIN3
Genetic epistatic analyses reveal that EIN3 acts downstream of EIN2.960 EIN3 is a plant-specific transcription
factor involved in ethylene-regulated gene expression. EIN3-related proteins consist of a multigene family in
Arabidopsis, including EIN3, EIN3-like (EIL1), EIL2, EIL3, EIL4, and EIL5. Among these, EIN3 and EIL1 are
the most closely related homologs. Genetic studies presume that EIN3 and EIL1 are the major transcription
factors in mediating ethylene responses, while EIL2–5 might regulate ethylene responses in specific tissues or
certain developmental stages, or instead function in ethylene-unrelated pathway.
 Plant Hormones 91

Based on biochemical studies, EIN3 and EIL1 can directly bind to the promoter of ERF1 (ethylene response
factor 1), which belongs to the EREBP (ethylene response element binding protein)961 family of AP2 type
transcription factors. ERF1 in turn binds to a cis-acting sequence known as the GCC-box located in the
promoters of secondary target genes, such as those encoding basic chitinase and defensin PDF1.2. In addition,
four other transcription factors, EDF1–4 (ethylene-responsive DNA-binding factors), could also be potential
target genes of EIN3, because their mRNA levels are rapidly increased by ethylene treatment, and their
knockout mutants show partial ethylene insensitivity.962 Taken together, a transcriptional cascade from EIN3
and EIL1 to ERF1 and EDF1–4 is involved in the ethylene response pathway.
The stability of EIN3 is controlled through two MAPK phosphorylation sites, one required for stabilization of
EIN3 and the other involved in the degradation of EIN3.963 Two MAPKs, MPK3 and MPK6, phosphorylate EIN3
on Thr-174 to stabilize EIN3. MPK3/MPK6 can be activated by MAPKK, MKK9. That is, MKK9 cascade
promotes EIN3 stability. On the other hand, unidentified MAPK pathway mediated by CTR1 phosphorylates
EIN3 at Thr-592 to degrade EIN3. But whether CTR1 has direct control of an MAPK cascade is still unknown. In
summary, both the inhibition of CTR1 and the activation of MKK9 are required for ethylene signaling specificity.
Another mode of regulation of EIN3 is reported. In the absence of ethylene perception, two F-box proteins,
EBF1 and EBF2, in an SCF E3 ligase complex, target EIN3 and EIL1 for degradation via the 26S protea-
some.964,965 EBF1 degrades EIN3 and EIL1 before ethylene signaling, whereas EBF2 plays a major role in
degrading EIN3 and EIL1 after ethylene responses have been activated. The distinct but overlapping roles of
EBF1 and EBF2 provide fine-tuned posttranslational regulation of EIN3 and EIL1, which may be essential for
rapid responses to environmental stresses.966
Furthermore, EBF1 and EBF2 mRNAs are regulated by EIN5, which acts downstream of CTR1 and encodes
the 59!39 exoribonuclease XRN4.967 EIN5/XRN4 is localized in the cytoplasm and function in mRNA and
rRNA degradation. However, EIN5/XRN4 does not appear to directly degrade EBF1 and EBF2 mRNAs,
because the half-life of EBF1/EBF2 mRNAs in the ein5 mutant background is the same as that in the wild type.
Therefore, the accumulation of EBF1 and EBF2 mRNAs may be owing to increased transcription with EIN5/
XRN4 promoting a repressor of EBF1 and EBF2 transcription.968

4.02.9 Peptide Hormones in Plants

4.02.9.1 Introduction
While many peptides have been reported as signal compounds in mammals and microorganisms, the first peptide
signal compound, systemin, in higher plants was reported in 1991. In the last 15 years, several plant peptides have
been discovered, and their number is expected to increase even further.969 Some of these peptide signal compounds
have been shown to distribute among various plant species and some are species-specific, unlike conventional plant
hormones. Thus, the conventional definition of ‘plant hormone’ is not applicable to these peptides; however, the
term ‘peptide hormone’ has recently been adapted to describe this category of compounds and is used here. The
main peptide hormones described here were discovered as regulatory substances controlling physiological
phenomena in plants. Because most of these peptides were identified using biochemical approaches, the chemical
structures of the peptide hormones have also been elucidated. Additionally, a number of plant peptides have been
identified based on mutations in genes that showed typical phenotypes. However, the chemical structures of the
biologically active peptides encoded by these genes remain mostly unconfirmed. In this chapter, peptide hormones
with known chemical structures are discussed first, followed by a brief discussion of those with unknown chemical
structures. Because of the limited space, each peptide is described in this chapter including its background, history,
chemistry, and other things different from other plant hormones.

4.02.9.2 Systemins
Because plants cannot escape from insect injury, many plants protect themselves by producing defense proteins.
Protease inhibitors, which protect plants by inhibiting the feed digestion of insects, are well-studied defense
proteins. These protease inhibitors are induced in leaves distant from points of injury, indicating that signal
substances are involved in systemic resistance induction in plants.
92 Plant Hormones

a. TomSys: AVQSKPPSKRDPPKMQTD

b. TobSysI: RGANLPP*P*SP*ASSP*P*SKE, TobSysII: NRKPLSP*P*SP*KPADGQRP

c. TomHypSysI: RTP*YKTP*P*P*P*TSSSP*THQ, TomHypSysII: GRHDYVASP*P*P*P*KPQDEQRQ, TomHypSysIII: GRHDSVLPP*P*SP*KTD

d. RALF:ATKKYISYGALQKNSVPCSRRGASYYNCKPGAQANPYSRGCAITRCRS

e. AtPep: ATKVKAKQRGKEKVSSGRPGQHN

Figure 38 Amino acid sequences of systemines (a–c), RALF (d), and AtPep (e). P, hydroxyprolines with glycoside chain.

In 1991, Pearce et al.970 isolated a peptide from wounded tomato leaves, and designated this peptide systemin
(tomato systemin (TomSys)). TomSys shows protease inhibitor-inducing activity and comprises 18 amino acid
residues (Figure 38(a)) . The TomSys precursor gene encodes 200 amino acid residues, including the TomSys
sequence in the C-terminal region.971 Homologous genes to the systemin precursor are present in other
Solanaceae plants, such as potatoes and sweet peppers. A tomato strain in which systemin production is
suppressed was created using antisense DNA, and the strain was damaged by a type of moth larva to which
wild tomato plants are usually resistant.972
A protein with high binding activity to TomSys (SR160) was detected in tomato cell membranes. SR160 was
found to include a leucine-rich repeat receptor-like kinase (LRR-RLK), and was highly homologous to
brassinolide receptors (BRI1) in Arabidopsis.973 SR160 was later reported to be identical to the brassinolide
receptor in tomatoes (tBRI1).974 In a tBRI1 mutant strain, it was found that all leaves, except for apical buds,
were insensitive to TomSys. When SR160/tBRI1 was overexpressed in tobacco cells, TomSys photoaffinity
labels were specifically observed.975 These results suggest that the same receptor is utilized by both brassinolide
and systemin, but recently tBRI is reported to be not essential for wound signaling.976
Although tobacco belongs to Solanaceae and shows systemic resistance against wounding, there is no
ortholog of the TomSys precursor. When TomSys is added to liquid culture of tomato cells, the culture
solution is alkalinized. Two active peptides were isolated by application of this assay to tobacco,977 and because
these peptides also exhibit protease inhibitor-inducing activity, they were designated tobacco systemin I and II
(TobSys I and TobSys II, respectively). Although both comprise 18 amino acid residues like TomSys, the
sequences are completely different, and furthermore, these peptides contain hydroxyprolines to which carbo-
hydrate chains are attached (Figure 38(b)). The TobSys precursor gene encodes 165 amino acid residues,
including TobSys I sequence in the N-terminal region and TobSys II sequence in the C-terminal region. Three
types of hydroxyproline-rich glycopeptides, which are also encoded in the same gene, have been isolated from
tomatoes (Figure 38(c)).978 These peptides, TomHypSys I, TomHypSys II, and TomHypSys III, comprise 20,
18, and 15 amino acid residues, respectively, and their precursors are synthesized in phloem parenchyma cells
in response to wounding.
Using an alkalinization assay, a peptide called rapid alkalinization factor (RALF) was obtained from tobacco
leaves (Figure 38(d)).979 A gene coding a secretory peptide homologous to the C-terminal region of RALF was
discovered in Arabidopsis, and it was designated RALF-like (RALFL). To date, 34 such genes have been
identified, and their expression has been observed in various tissues; however, the physiological functions of
the gene products remain unknown.

4.02.9.3 AtPep1
AtPep1, which was isolated from Arabidopsis using alkalinization assay, activates genes specifically for defense
against pathogens.980 AtPep1 is a 23-amino acid peptide (Figure 38(e)) and is encoded at the C-terminus of the
92-amino acid precursor protein AtproPep1, which is inducible by wounding, MeJA, and ethylene. This
peptide activates transcription of defensin, the production of H2O2, and the expression of its own precursor
gene PROPEP1. Six paralogs of PROPEP1 are present in Arabidopsis, and orthologs are found in many plants,
including both dicots and monocots. Transgenic plants, which constitutively overexpress PROPEP1, exhibit
increased root development and enhanced resistance toward the root pathogen Pythium irregulare. The receptor
 Plant Hormones 93

of AtPep1 was isolated from Arabidopsis suspension-cultured cells using 125I-labeled azido-Cys-AtPep1 photo-
affinity labeling.981 The triptic fragments of purified protein were identified as being derived from At1g73080,
which encodes the precursor of AtPep1 receptor PEPR1. PEPR1 is a 1124-amino acid protein that includes a
signal peptide, 26 LRR motifs, a transmembrane region, and a kinase domain.

4.02.9.4 Phytosulfokine
In the case of a single-cell or a cell aggregate culture from a small number of cells, growth is usually slow. In
order to overcome this problem, a method known as nurse culture is used. In this method, the nurse cell, which
has a high proliferation ability at high density, is placed near the target cells, thus promoting the growth of the
target cells. A positive correlation between initial cell density and initial cell growth rate has been noted for
liquid culture, and cell growth in low cell density culture is promoted by the addition of conditioned medium
(CM), which is supernatant from cells that are actively growing. Such phenomena can be explained by the
hypothesis that individual cells secrete certain levels of growth factor(s), and as the concentration of growth
factor increases proportionally to the cell density, cells start to divide when the concentration reaches a
threshold level.
In 1996, Matsubayashi and Sakagami982 successfully isolated a peptide growth factor from Asparagus CM,
and successfully elucidated the chemical structure. The peptide was designated phytosulfokine (PSK), which
has five amino acid residues including two sulfated tyrosine residues (Figure 39(a)). PSK promotes cell division
at 1 nmol l1, and the three amino acid residues at the N-terminus are essential for expression of biological
activities, for which the sulfate groups are also required. PSK was also isolated from CM of monocots, rice, and
maize, as well as dicot plant, Zinnia elegans, and showed mitogenic activity to these cells.983,984 The Z. elegans cell
culture system has been known to form tracheary elements depending on the density of cultured cells. PSK was
also shown to exhibit this activity and promote embryogenesis in carrots.984,985
The PSK precursor gene was first cloned from a rice Oc strain and was shown to produce the highest levels
of PSK (OsPSK).986 This gene (OsPSK) encodes 89 amino acids, and the 22 amino acid residues of the N-
terminal region constitute a signal peptide that is frequently observed in secretory proteins, while the PSK
sequence is located in the C-terminal region. It was later revealed that there are five types of PSK precursor
genes in Arabidopsis (AtPSK1–5).987 Genes encoding prepro-PSK are widely distributed in the plant kingdom.988
A solubilized membrane protein with a molecular weight of 120 kDa was purified from the membrane
fraction of cultured carrot cells using the PSK derivative with a lysine residue in the C-terminal region in an
affinity column.989 This protein was finally shown to belong to the LRR-RLK family. This receptor kinase has
21 LRRs in its extracellular region, an island domain, which has a pattern similar to brassinolide receptor
(BRI1), a transmembrane domain, and serine/threonine kinase in the intracellular domain. When this protein is
overexpressed in cultured carrot cells, the number of binding sites for PSK is significantly increased, and callus
growth is promoted in the presence of PSK. Recently, the PSK-binding site was determined to be the island
domain of the receptor.990 Loss-of-function and gain-of-function mutations of the PSK receptor gene have
affected cell longevity and the potential for growth without morphological change in the Arabidopsis plant.991

a. PSK : Y(SO3H)IY(SO3H)TQ

C1 C2 C3 C4C5 C6C7 C8

b. SCR6 :NLKKNCVGKTRLPGPCGDSGASS-CRDLYNQTEKTMPVS-CRC---VPTGR-CFCSL-CK
c. SP11-8 :NLMKRCTRGFRKLGKCTTLEEEK-CKTLYPRGQ-------CTCSDSKMNTHSCDCKS-C

d. MCLV3 : RTVP*SGP*DPLHH
e. TDIF : HEVP*SGP*NPISN
Figure 39 Amino acid sequences of PSK (a), SCR (b), SP11 (c), MCLV3 (d), and TDIF (e). Y(SO3H), sulfated tyrosine residue;
C1–C8, conserved cysteine (b and c); P, hydroxyproline (d and e).
94 Plant Hormones

Although PSK was discovered as a growth factor in cell culture system, these findings indicate the range of
physiological roles of PSK in plants.

4.02.9.5 Regulatory Factors for Self-Incompatibility

Self-incompatibility992 is found in various plants, but is most extensively studied in Brassica plants. The
S multiple allele system determines self-incompatibility of Brassicaceae plants; incompatibility occurs when
the phenotype of the pollen S gene matches that of the stigma S gene. A distinct characteristic of this
incompatibility is that the recognition reaction occurs on the surface of the pollen and stigma. When the
stigma recognizes the pollen as self-pollen, water absorption, and germination and elongation of pollen tubes
are inhibited. In order to elucidate the molecular mechanism of this phenomenon, it is necessary to clarify the
factors in both the stigma and the pollen that are encoded in the S locus. In the stigma, a gene was found to
encode a protein that contains the extracellular region (S domain), transmembrane region, and serine–
threonine-type kinase region. This protein, S receptor kinase (SRK), is involved in transmitting signals into
cells by binding the extracellular S domain to the pollen factor, which activates the kinase.
Research groups in the United States and Japan independently succeeded in elucidating the pollen factor.
The American group obtained the gene for S locus cysteine-rich (SCR), which encodes a cysteine-rich anther-
specific protein.993 Introduction of this gene into a plant from a different strain produced pollen with a
phenotype that had incompatibility altered to that of the introduced gene. Thus, the peptide encoded by
SCR is the pollen factor. The Japanese group also identified genes that are specifically expressed in the anther
based on S locus analysis. It was demonstrated that SP11 gene product inhibits water absorption of compatible
pollen on stigma.994 Because SCR and SP11 are essentially identical, this factor is referred to as SCR/SP11 in
this chapter.
SCR/SP11 is a cysteine-rich peptide with a total length of 74–83 amino acids (Figure 39(b)). It has a signal
sequence comprising approximately 24 amino acid residues in the N-terminus. Takayama et al.995 successfully
obtained an active form of SP11 peptide by synthesizing a peptide without the signal peptide region and cross-
linking eight cysteine residues (C1–C8, C2–C5, C3–C6, and C5–C7). This peptide was shown to bind only to
the stigma membrane fraction with the same S genotype, and it specifically induces phosphorylation of the
corresponding SRK.
An SCRL (SCR-related) gene family has been discovered in Arabidopsis.996 This family comprises 28 genes
encoding 4.4–9.5 kDa basic and hydrophilic peptides that include a signal peptide region and eight highly
conserved cysteine residues. It is known that some SCRLs are expressed in a variety of regions in plant bodies;
however, their functions have not yet been elucidated.

4.02.9.6 MCLV3 and CLE Peptides

CLVATA (CLV1, 2, and 3) genes were cloned from A. thaliana as genes involved in a mutant with meristem
enlargement.997 CLV1 is a receptor-like protein including LRR and serine–threonine kinase regions. CLV2,
which has LRR but not the kinase region, is believed to form a heterodimer with CLV1. On the other hand,
CLV3 encodes 96 amino acids that include a signal peptide region comprising 18 amino acid residues in the N-
terminus. The phenotypes of clv1 and clv3 mutants are similar; thus, CLV3 appears to share a signal transduc-
tion pathway with CLV1. In other words, CLV3 is thought to be a peptide ligand that binds to the CLV1
receptor kinase. The signal of CLV1 receptor kinase inhibits expression of the transcription factor WUS. While
abnormal division of stem cells occurs upon overexpression of WUS, differentiation of stem cells is promoted
upon inhibition of this expression. On the other hand, WUS maintains growth balance of apical meristems by
promoting the expression of CLV3, which results in the formation of a feedback loop. The gene for embryo-
surrounding region (ESR) protein in maize, which is expressed in part of the endosperm, encodes a secretory
polypeptide. Although CLV3 and ESR are significantly different as a whole, high homology is observed in a 14-
amino acid sequence in the C-terminal region.998 This gene family was designated CLAVATA3/ESR related
(CLE). In Arabidopsis, many CLEs, in contrast to CLV3, are expressed in most tissues.
Analysis was performed on slices from a callus produced from CLV3-overexpressing Arabidopsis, by matrix-
assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS), and it showed a
 Plant Hormones 95

specific ion composition compared with a control prepared from a wild-type callus.7 The molecular weights of
peptide and fragment ions obtained by MS/MS analysis suggested that the mature CLV3 peptide (MCLV3) is a
dodecapeptide with two hydroxylated prolines (Figure 39(c)). This structure was confirmed by comparison
with synthetic peptides. The application of MCLV3 to wild-type Arabidopsis showed typical biological activities
expected from a plant in which CLV3 is overexpressed.
Xylogen, a unique arabinogalactan protein, was identified as a mediator of vascular development by
xylogenic culture system using Zinnia mesophyll cells.989 During isolation of xylogen, TDIF was identified.
TDIF was purified and its structure was determined as a dodecapeptide with two hydroxyprolines
(Figure 39(e)).6 The amino acid sequence of TDIF is identical to that of the C-terminal region of CLE41/
44. There are 31 CLE genes including CLV3 in Arabidopsis and they encode 26 kinds of dodecapeptide
sequences. All peptides were synthesized and bioassayed with the suppression of tracheary element differentia-
tion and root growth. Only TDIF (CLE41/44) and CLE42 peptides suppressed the tracheary element
differentiation and did not inhibit root growth. Most of the CLE peptides, as well as MCLV3, inhibited root
growth but some peptides did not show any activity in either assay. These results indicate that CLE peptides
may have various physiological roles in plants in addition to those of MCLV3 and TDIF. Because hydroxyla-
tion of proline residues did not affect the biological activities of MCLV3 and TDIF, it may serve other
functions. The identification of mature CLV3 peptide helps to explain the direct interaction between ligand
and receptor, CLV1 and/or CLV1/CLV2. Although receptors of TDIF and other CLE peptides remain
unknown, LRR-RKs are putative candidates for this role.

4.02.9.7 Other Peptides

As mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, a number of studies on genes that are supposed to encode
peptides have been reported. Here, representative examples are briefly described.
In POLARIS (PLS) mutant, the length of the main root is shorter and a decrease in branch veins among
rosette leaf veins is also observed.1000 Such phenotypes may arise from changes in sensitivity to hormones in the
mutant, as it is assumed that the PLS gene is required for the maintenance of homeostasis in the cytokinin–auxin
system.
The Arabidopsis inflorescence deficient in abscission (ida) was discovered from a mutant in which flowers do
not detach.1001 The IDA gene encodes a peptide comprising 77 amino acid residues, including a signal sequence.
A highly conserved sequence in the C-terminal region of the peptide encoded by five paralogs in Arabidopsis
suggests that this region is the mature peptide hormone. The HAESA gene, which encodes LRR-RLK in
Arabidopsis, is expressed in the flower detachment site.1001 When the expression of this gene is inhibited, flower
detachment is repressed. Based on comparisons of these phenotypes, HAESA may be a receptor for the peptide
encoded by the IDA.
The ROT4 (ROTUNDIFOLIA4) gene was discovered when screening for mutations related to leaf shape by
activation tagging.1002 A rot4-1D mutant plant has short and round leaves, and a short flower and flower stalk.
The DEL1 (DEVIL1) gene was identified at the same time as ROT4, and the phenotype of dvl1-1D mutant is
similar to that of rot4-1D mutant.1003,1004 ROT4 and Del1 encode peptides comprising 53- and 51- amino acid
residues, respectively. According to the Arabidopsis gene database, ROT4 and DEL1 belong to a family of 23
genes. It was confirmed that other members of this gene family have functions similar to those of ROT4 and
DEL1 in overexpression experiments.

4.02.9.8 Remarks
The number of reports suggesting that peptides in plants play an important role as hormone-like molecules has
been increasing in recent years. Most of the biologically active peptides are biosynthesized from precursors by
processing and/or specific modification, as was the case with PSK and CLE peptides. In order to develop
peptide hormone research, it is necessary to accurately determine the chemical structures of mature peptides.
Once the chemical structures of the peptides are determined, it is expected that research will further expand,
focusing on biosynthesis, receptors, and signal transduction.
96 Plant Hormones

By acquiring entire gene sequences of A. thaliana, plant research has also arrived at the so-called postgenome
era. It is thought that the genes of A. thaliana encode many secretory peptides and more than 400 receptor-like
proteins.1005,1006 While most of the receptors are orphan receptors, whose ligands are unknown, it is possible
that a large number of ligands for such orphan receptors are peptide hormones, the number of which will
continue to increase as discoveries continue.

4.02.10 Strigolactones
4.02.10.1 Introduction
4.02.10.1.1 Strigolactones as rhizosphere signaling molecules
Root parasitic plants of the Striga, Orobanche, and Alectra genera (Orobanchaceae) cause serious losses in crop
yields in many parts of the world. Control of these parasitic plants is extremely difficult, because they produce a
large number of seeds that remain viable in the soil for many years until they detect germination stimulants
released from host roots. A pure crystalline germination stimulant of Striga seeds was first isolated in 1966 from
cotton root exudates by Cook et al.1007 This stimulant, termed strigol, was determined to be a terpenoid lactone
carrying a unique four-ring structure1008 (Figure 40). Following this discovery, several strigol-related com-
pounds have been identified as germination stimulants of parasite seeds in root exudates of various plant
species. A group of these terpenoid lactones were named ‘strigolactones’.1009–1011
Until recently, the biological function of strigolactones for the host plants was unknown. In 2005, Akiyama
et al.1012 found that strigolactones are plant-derived signals that induce hyphal branching of arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi (AM fungi), a phenomenon that is observed at the initial stage of colonization. Since AM
fungi facilitate the uptake of water and mineral nutrients (such as phosphate and nitrate) by the host plants, it is
considered that plants have evolved to produce strigolactones in order to enable AM fungi to colonize their
roots.1010,1011,1013 Parasitic plants are thought to abuse these chemical signals to recognize the vicinity of a
potential host plant (Figure 41).
An extensive survey of strigolactones revealed their occurrence in root exudates of a wide variety of plant
species,1010 including nonhosts of AM fungi (e.g., Brassicaceae, of which Arabidopsis is a member).1014,1015 This
suggests that strigolactones may have as yet unidentified biological role(s) in plants. In 2008, two research
groups reported that strigolactones were not merely communication chemicals in the rhizosphere but endo-
genous hormones that regulate shoot branching in plants (Figure 41).2,3

Figure 40 Naturally occurring strigolactones and a synthetic strigolactone analog, GR24.

 Plant Hormones 97

(1) Stimulation of parasite seed germination

(2) Induction of hyphal branching of AM fungi
(3) Inhibition of shoot branching

(3)

(1) Parasitism

Root parasites

(2) Symbiosis

Symbiotic AM fungi

Figure 41 Biological functions of strigolactones.

4.02.10.1.2 A novel shoot branching inhibitor suggested by genetic studies

In many plant species, only a small proportion of axillary buds grow out to form branches, with both the timing
and the extent of bud activation being tightly regulated by endogenous and environmental factors. The
participation of two plant hormones, auxin and cytokinin, in the regulation of axillary bud activity has long
been known. Besides these two classical hormones, studies with enhanced shoot branching mutants suggested
the involvement of a novel hormone-like signal in inhibiting axillary bud outgrowth. These mutants include
ramosus (rms) of Pisum sativum (pea),1016–1019 decreased apical dominance (dad) of Petunia hybrida (petunia),1020,1021
more axillary growth (max) of Arabidopsis,1022–1026 and particular dwarf (d) mutants of O. sativa (rice).1027–1029
Grafting experiments suggested that some of these mutations affect genes required for the synthesis of a graft-
transmissible mobile signal, while others are required for the perception or transduction of the signal.1030
This idea was supported by the molecular identification of the Arabidopsis MAX genes and several RMS,
DAD, and D loci in pea, petunia, and rice, respectively.1030 MAX3, RMS5, and D17 encode carotenoid cleavage
dioxygenase 7 (CCD7),1019,1025,1028 while MAX4, RMS1, D10, and DAD1 encode another subclass of CCDs
designated CCD81020,1023,1029 (Figure 42). MAX1 encodes a protein in the cytochrome P450 monooxygenase
98 Plant Hormones

Carotenoid
RMS5, MAX3, D17
(CCD7)

RMS1, DAD1, MAX4, D10

(CCD8)

Carotenoid cleavage product

MAX1
(P450)

Novel hormone RMS: pea

DAD: petunia
MAX: Arabidopsis
RMS4, MAX2, D3 D: rice
(F-box protein)

Inhibition of shoot branching

Figure 42 A hypothetical pathway for the novel branching inhibitor. Carotenoid cleavage dioxygenases (CCDs) and a
cytochrome P450 monooxygenase (P450) are required for the synthesis of this novel hormone, whereas an F-box protein is
probably involved in the perception or transduction of the hormonal signal.

superfamily,1026 the members of which are typically involved in the metabolism of lipophilic small molecules.
All these findings are consistent with the idea that MAX1, MAX3, and MAX4 participate in the biosynthesis of
a carotenoid-derived compound (Figure 42). MAX2, RMS4, and D3 are orthologous members of the F-box
protein family, which are known to function as the substrate recognition subunit of SCF ubiquitin E3 ligase for
proteasome-mediated proteolysis.1019,1022,1027 Some members of this protein family include TIR1, GID2/
SLY1, and COI1, all of which are components of the perception or signal transduction of a hormone (e.g.,
see Section 4.02.2 for auxin), suggesting that max2, rms4, and d3 mutants are defective in the response to a novel
hormone (Figure 42).

4.02.10.2 Chemistry
Following the isolation of strigol from cotton root exudates, diverse strigol-related compounds (strigolactones)
with modifications on ring A and/or ring B were isolated in root exudates of various plants as germination
stimulants of parasite seeds or hyphal branching inducers of AM fungi.1010,1011,1013,1031 Strigolactones com-
monly possess a characteristic four-ring structure, two of them being lactones linked via an enol ether bridge
(Figure 40). Structure–activity studies using synthetic analogs of strigol have shown that the germination-
stimulating activity of strigolactones resides in the C/D ring portion of the molecule, including the enol ether
bridge.1009,1010 Strigol, 5-deoxystrigol, sorgolactone, and GR24 (a synthetic analog) exhibited biological activity
in inducing hyphal branching of AM fungi.1012 Strigol, 5-deoxystrigol, and GR24 have been shown to inhibit
shoot branching in rice and GR24 in pea and Arabidopsis.3 Detailed structural requirements of strigolactones for
the last two biological activities have yet to be determined.

4.02.10.3 Biological Activity

As described above, strigolactones are released from roots and act as communication chemicals with root
parasite seeds and symbiotic AM fungi (Figure 41). More recent investigations have shown that
strigolactones play a role in inhibiting shoot branching through the proposed genetic pathway2,3
(Figure 42). Two lines of evidence support this idea. First, strigolactone levels in root and root exudates
(determined by LC-MS) are significantly decreased in the ccd7 and ccd8 mutants of pea and rice. Second,
axillary bud outgrowth in ccd7 and ccd8 mutants of pea, rice, and Arabidopsis is inhibited by exogenous
 Plant Hormones 99

– +GR24 – +GR24 – +GR24

Wild type d3 d10
Figure 43 The branching (tillering) and semi-dwarf phenotypes of the rice d10 mutant are complemented by exogenous
GR24, a synthetic strigolactone analog (supplied at 1 mmol l 1 in the hydroponic culture media). In contrast, d3 mutant plants
are insensitive to GR24.

strigolactone. For the rice ccd8/d10 mutant, it was shown that the branching phenotype as well as the
plant height was nearly fully complemented by including GR24 in culture media (Figure 43). In contrast
to the ccd7 and ccd8 mutants, pea and rice branching mutants characterized as lacking a response to the
branching inhibition signal (rms4, max2, and d3; Figure 42) are insensitive to exogenous GR24, and are
not deficient in strigolactones. These results indicate that the inhibitory effect of strigolactones on shoot
branching is specific to the proposed RMS/D pathway. It is not known whether strigolactone itself is an
active form of this hormone class, because applied strigolactone (analog) might be metabolized in plants
and converted to an active compound. Together, current data indicate that strigolactones act as a new
class of branch-inhibiting hormones or their biosynthetic precursors.2,3

4.02.10.4 Biosynthesis and Its Regulation

Until recently, the biosynthetic origin of strigolactones was unknown. In recent studies using chemical
inhibitors and mutants of Z. mays (maize) and Solanum lycopersicum (tomato), strigolactones were shown to
be derived from carotenoids.1032,1033 This is consistent with the discovery that carotenoid cleavage
dioxygenases, CCD7 and CCD8, participate in strigolactone biosynthesis.2,3 Recombinant CCD7 and
CCD8 proteins from Arabidopsis and rice sequentially cleaved -carotene, forming a C18 apocarotenoid in
vitro and in bacteria cells1034,1035 (Figure 44). However, CCD7 could also use other carotenoid
substrates, and the exact catalytic reactions by these CCDs in planta have not been conclusive.1025,1036
It is crucial to determine whether any apocarotenoid produced by recombinant CCD7 and CCD8 in
vitro is converted to strigolactones in planta. MAX1 is a cytochrome P450 monooxygenase (CYP711A1),
which potentially catalyzes a later step of strigolactone biosynthesis,1026 although its substrate and
product are still unknown. Considering the chemical structure, more enzymes are likely to be required
for the biosynthesis of strigolactones from a carotenoid cleavage product, besides CCD7, CCD8, and
CYP711A1.
In pea, petunia, and rice, genes encoding CCD8 are highly upregulated in the strigolactone-deficient and
strigolactone-insensitive mutant backgrounds, suggesting a type of feedback regulation.1019,1029 Consistent with
this, CCD8/D10 gene expression is downregulated by strigolactone treatment in rice.3 Furthermore, strigolac-
tone levels are substantially increased in the strigolactone-insensitive d3 mutant in comparison with wild type.3
These results indicate that there is a link between strigolactone action and biosynthesis in these plant species, as
previously recognized for other plant hormones. However, there is no clear increase in the level of CCD8/
MAX4 gene expression in the max mutant background in Arabidopsis, suggesting a species-dependent difference
in the regulation of strigolactone levels in plants.1037
The amount of strigolactones released from roots is drastically increased under deficiency of phosphate or
nitrate in hosts of AM fungi.1015,1033,1038,1039 This is thought to be an adaptive response of plants under nutrient
deficiency in order to maximize the symbiotic interaction with AM fungi, which assist the uptake of mineral
nutrients by the host plant. In fact, Lupinus albus (white lupin, a Fabaceae plant), a nonhost of AM fungi, does not
100 Plant Hormones

CCD7 (MAX3/D17)

CCD8 (MAX4/D10)

Figure 44 Oxidative cleavage of -carotene by recombinant CCD7 and CCD8 proteins in vitro or in bacteria. Note that
CCD7 can use other carotenoid substrates and the exact reactions catalyzed by these CCDs in planta have not been
conclusive.

increase strigolactone production in response to phosphate deficiency, unlike the mycotrophic Fabaceae plant
Trifolium pratense.1015 These results indicate that strigolactone production is closely related to the strategy of
plants for mineral nutrient acquisition.

References
1. N. Murofushi, In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi, O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.; Pergamon Press:
Amsterdam, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed., Section 8.02.1, pp 21–23.
2. V. Gomez-Roldan; S. Fermas; P. B. Brewer; V. Puech-Pages; E. A. Dun; J.-P. Pillot; F. Letisse; R. Matusova; S. Danoun;
J.-C. Portais; H. Bouwmeester; G. Becard; C. A. Beveridge; C. Rameau; S. F. Rochange, Nature 2008, 455, 189–194.
3. M. Umehara; A. Hanada; S. Yoshida; K. Akiyama; T. Arite; N. Takeda-Kamiya; H. Magome; Y. Kamiya; K. Shirasu; K. Yoneyama;
J. Kyozuka; S. Yamaguchi. Nature 2008, 455, 194–201.
4. C. Darwin; F. Darwin, The Power of Movement in Plants; John Murray: London, 1880.
5. N. Murofushi; H. Yamane; Y. Sakagami; H. Imazeki; Y. Kamiya; H. Iwamura; N. Hirai; H. Tsuji; T. Yokota; J. Ueda, Plant
Hormones. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi, O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.; Pergamon Press:
Amsterdam, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed., Chapter 8.02, pp 19–136.
6. Y. Ito; I. Nakanomyo; H. Motose; K. Iwamoto; S. Sawa; N. Dohmae; H. Fukuda, Science 2006, 313, 842–845.
7. T. Kondo; S. Sawa; A. Kinoshita; S. Mizuno; T. Kinoshita; H. Fukuda; Y. Sakagami, Science 2006, 313, 845–848.
8. M. K. H. Chailakhyan, C. R. (Dokl.) Acad. Sci., USSR 1936, 3, 443–447.
9. Y. Kobayashi; H. Kaya; K. Goto; M. Iwabudhi; T. Araki, Science 1999, 286, 1960–1962.
10. I. Kardailsky; V. K. Shukla; J. H. Ahn; N. Dagenais; S. D. Christensen; J. T. Nguyen; J. Chory; M. H. Harrison; D. Weigel, Science
1999, 286, 1962–1965.
11. F. Parciv, Int. J. Dev. Biol. 2005, 49, 585–593.
12. Y. Komeda, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2004, 9, 454–459.
13. P. Benfey, Curr. Biol. 2002, 12, R389–R390.
14. T. Berleth; J. Mattsson; C. S. Hardtke, Trends Plant Sci. 2000, 5, 387–393.
15. P. Doerner, Curr. Biol. 2000, 10, R201–R203.
16. T. Hamann, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2001, 20, 292–299.
17. G. K. Muday, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2001, 20, 226–243.
18. A. Woodward; B. Bartel, Ann. Bot. 2005, 95, 707–735.
19. J. D. Cohen; W. M. Gray, In Plant Hormone Signaling, Vol. 24: Annual Plant Reviews; P. Hedden, S. Thomas, Eds.; Blackwell
Publishing: Oxford, 2006; pp 37–66.
20. J. Normanly; J. Slovin; J. Cohen, In Plant Hormones: Biosynthesis, Signal Transduction, Action!, 3rd ed.; ; 3rd ed., P. Davies, Ed.;
Kluwer: Dordrecht, 2005; pp 36–62.
 Plant Hormones 101

21. J. D. Cohen; J. P. Slovin; A. M. Hendrickson, Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8, 197–199.

22. M. D. Edgerton; A. Tropsha; A. M. Jones, Phytochemistry 1994, 35, 1111–1123.
23. V. Magnus; J. A. Ozga; D. M. Reinecke; G. L. Pierson; T. A. Laure; J. D. Cohne; M. L. Brenner, Phytochemistry 1997, 46,
675–681.
24. J. Ludwig-Müller; J. D. Cohen, Physiol. Plant. 2002, 115, 320–329.
25. K. Bialek; J. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1986, 80, 99–104.
26. A. Walz; S. Park; J. P. Solvin; J. Ludwig-Mueller; Y. S. Momonoki; J. D. Cohen, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99,
1718–1723.
27. A. Walz; C. Seidel; G. Rusak; S. Park; J. D. Cohen; J. Ludwig-Mueller, Planta 2008, 227, 1047–1061.
28. J. Dunlap; J. Slovin; J. D. Cohen, Plant Growth Regul. 1996, 19, 45–54.
29. L. Leverone; W. Kossenjans; K. Jayasimihulu; J. L. Cruso, Plant Physiol. 1991, 96, 1070–1075.
30. Y. Tam; E. Epstein; J. Normanly, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 589–595.
31. S. Park; J. D. Cohen; J. P. Slovin, Planta 2006, 224, 1015–1022.
32. A. D. Wright; M. B. Sampson; M. G. Neuffer; L. Michalczuk; J. P. Solvin; J. D. Cohen, Science 1991, 254, 998–1000.
33. J. D. Cohen; R. S. Bandurski, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1982, 33, 403–430.
34. M. A. Venis, Plant Physiol. 1972, 49, 24–27.
35. P. Staswick; B. Serban; M. Rowe; I. Tiryaki; M. T. Maldonado; M. C. Maldonado; W. Suza, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 616–627.
36. G. Hagen; T. Guilfoyle, Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 49, 373–385.
37. K. Ljung; A. K. Hul; M. Kowalczyk; A. Marchant; J. Celenza; J. D. Cohen; G. Sandberg, Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 50, 309–332.
38. J. Slovin; R. Bandurski; J. Cohen, In Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Plant Hormones; P. Hooykaas, M. Hall, K. Libbenga,
Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1999; pp 115–140.
39. K. Bialek; W. Meudt; J. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1983, 73, 130–139.
40. J. Ludwig-Müller; E. Epstein; W. Hilgenberg, Physiol. Plant. 1996, 97, 627–634.
41. V. Magnus et al., J. Plant Growth Regul. 1992, 11, 19–28.
42. B. Bartel, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 48, 51–66.
43. B. Bartel; G. Fink, Science 1995, 268, 1745–1748.
44. R. T. Davies; D. H. Goetz; J. Lasswell; M. N. Anderson; B. Bartel, Plant Cell 1999, 11, 365–376.
45. S. LeClere; R. Tellez; R. A. Rampey; S. P. Matsuda; B. Bartel, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 20446–20452.
46. R. Rampey; S. LeClere; M. Kowalczyk; K. Ljung; G. Sandberg; B. Bartel, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 978–988.
47. J.-C. Chou; G. A. Kuleck; J. D. Cohen; W. W. Mulbry, Plant Physiol. 1996, 112, 1281–1287.
48. J.-C. Chou; Y.-B. Huang, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2005, 24, 11–18.
49. J.-C. Chou; W. Mulbry; J. Cohen, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1998, 259, 172–178.
50. J.-C. Chou; W. Welch; J. Cohen, Plant Cell Physiol. 2004, 45, 1335–1341.
51. A. Leznicki; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1988, 88, 1474–1480.
52. A. Leznicki; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1988, 88, 1481–1485.
53. L. Michalczuk; R. Bandurski, Biochem. J. 1982, 207, 273–281.
54. R. S. Bandurski; M. F. Desrosiers; P. Jensen; M. Pawlak; A. Schulze, In Progress in Plant Growth Regulation; C. M. Karssen,
L. C. Van Loon, K. Verugdenhil, Eds.; Kluwer: Dordrecht, 1992; pp 1–12.
55. R. Bandurski; H. Nonhebel, In Advanced Plant Physiology; M. B. Wilkins, Ed.; Pitman: London, 1984; pp 1–20.
56. S. Kowalczyk; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1990, 94, 4–12.
57. S. Kowalczyk; R. Bandurski, Biochem. J. 1991, 279, 509–514.
58. J. Kesy; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1990, 94, 1598–1604.
59. J. Szerszen; K. Szczyglowski; R. Bandurski, Science 1994, 265, 1699–1701.
60. S. Kowalczyk; A. Jakubowska; R. Bandurski, Plant Growth Regul. 2002, 38, 127–134.
61. R. Jackson; E. K. Lim; Y. Li; M. Kowalczyk; G. Sandberg; J. Hoggett; D. A. Ashford; D. J. Bowles, J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276,
4350–4356.
62. A. Jakubowska; S. Kowalczyk, J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 791–801.
63. M. Iyer; J. P. Solvin; E. Epstein; J. D. Cohen, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2005, 24, 142–152.
64. A. Jakubowska; S. Kowalczyk, J. Plant Physiol. 2005, 162, 207–213.
65. S. Kowalczyk; A. Jakubowska; E. Zielinska; R. S. Bandurski, Physiol. Plant. 2003, 119, 165–174.
66. T. Cooke; D. Poli; J. Cohen, In The Evolution of Plant Physiology: From Whole Plants to Ecosystems; A. Hemsley, I. Poole, Eds.;
Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2004; pp 85–107.
67. L. Michalczuk; D. M. Ribnicky; T. J. Cooke; J. D. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1992, 100, 1346–1353.
68. K. Ljung; R. P. Bhalerao; G. Sandberg, Plant J. 2001, 28, 465–474.
69. J. Normanly; J. P. Slovin; J. D. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1995, 107, 323–329.
70. E. Glawischnig; A. Tomas; W. Wisenreich; P. Spiteller; A. Bacher; A. Gierl, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 1109–1120.
71. J. Normanly; J. D. Cohen; G. R. Fink, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90, 10355–10359.
72. A. Östin; N. Ilic; J. D. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1999, 119, 173–178.
73. J. Ouyang; X. Shao; J. Li, Plant J. 2000, 24, 327–334.
74. S. G. Wildman; M. G. Ferri; J. Bonner, Arch. Biochem. 1946, 13, 131–144.
75. B. G. Baldi; B. R. Maher; J. P. Solvin; J. D. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1991, 95, 1203–1208.
76. A. D. Wright; C. A. Moehlenkamp; G. H. Perrot; M. G. Neuffer; K. C. Cone, Plant Cell 1992, 4, 711–719.
77. T. J. Cooke; D. Poli; A. E. Sztein; J. D. Cohen, Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 49, 319–338.
78. B. Bartel; S. LeClere; M. Magidin; B. K. Zolman, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2001, 20, 198–216.
79. D. M. Ribnicky; J. D. Cohen; W. S. Hu; T. J. Cooke, Planta 2002, 214, 505–509.
80. A. E. Sztein; N. Ilic; J. D. Cohen; T. J. Cooke, Plant Growth Regul. 2002, 36, 201–207.
81. E. Epstein; J. D. Cohen; J. P. Slovin, Plant Growth Regul. 2002, 38, 15–20.
82. F. Rapparini; J. D. Cohen; J. P. Slovin, Plant Growth Regul. 1999, 27, 139–144.
83. N. Rekoslavskaya, Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 1995, 42, 143–151.
102 Plant Hormones

84. N. I. Rekoslavskaya; R. S. Bandurski, Phytochemistry 1994, 35, 905–909.

85. A. E. Sztein; J. D. Cohen; T. J. Cooke, Int. J. Plant Sci. 2000, 161, 849–859.
86. J. Ludwig-Müller; W. Hilgenberg, Physiol. Plant. 1990, 79, 311–318.
87. B. Bartel; G. R. Fink, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91, 6649–6653.
88. H. Hillebrand; D. Bartling; E. W. Weiler, Plant Mol. Biol. 1998, 36, 89–99.
89. S. Grsic-Rausch; P. Kobelt; J. M. Siemens; M. Bischoff; J. Ludwig-Mueller, Plant Physiol. 2000, 122, 369–378.
90. A. Müller; H. Hillebrand; E. Weiler, Planta 1998, 206, 362–369.
91. K. V. Thimann; S. Mahadevan, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1964, 105, 133–141.
92. H. Tsunoda; K. Yamaguchi, Plant Physiol. 1995, 109, 339.
93. S. Vorwerk; S. Biernacki; H. Hillebrand; I. Janzik; A. Mueller; E. W. Weiler; M. Piotrowski, Planta 2001, 212, 508–516.
94. R. C. Schmidt; A. Mueller; R. Hain; D. Bartling; E. W. Weiler, Plant J. 1996, 9, 683–691.
95. M. Piotrowski; S. Schonfelder; E. W. Weiler, J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 2616–2621.
96. W. J. Park; V. Kriechbaumer; A. Moeller; M. Piotrowski; R. B. Meeley; A. Gierl; E. Glawischnig, Plant Physiol. 2003, 133, 794–802.
97. P. Jensen; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1994, 106, 343–351.
98. W. K. Purves; H. M. Brown, Plant Physiol. 1978, 61, 104–106.
99. F. Wightman; D. Cohen, In Biochemistry and Physiology of Plant Growth Substances, Proceedings of the 6th International
Conference on Plant Growth Substances; F. Wightman, G. Setterfield, Eds.; The Runge Press: Ottawa, 1968; pp 273–288.
100. C. L. Patten; B. R. Glick, Can. J. Microbiol. 1996, 42, 207–220.
101. G. M. Rothe, Plant Cell Physiol. 1974, 15, 491–499.
102. R. Rajagopal, Physiol. Plant. 1971, 24, 272–281.
103. S. Miyata; Y. Suzuki; S. Kamisaka; Y. Masuda, Physiol. Plant. 1981, 51, 402–406.
104. J. Normanly; B. Bartel, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 1999, 2, 207–213.
105. M. Seo; S. Akaba; T. Oritani; M. Delarue; C. Bellini; M. Caboche; T. Koshiba, Plant Physiol. 1998, 116, 687–693.
106. J. J. King; D. P. Stimart; R. H. Fisher; A. B. Bleeker, Plant Cell 1995, 7, 2023–2037.
107. W. Boerjan; J. T. Cervera; M. Delarue; T. Beeekman; W. Dewitte; C. Bellini; M. Caboche; H. Van Onckelen; M. Van Montagu;
D. Inze, Plant Cell 1995, 7, 1405–1419.
108. H. Sekimoto; M. Seo; N. Kawakami; T. Komano; S. Desloire; S. Liotenberg; A. Marion-Poll; M. Caboche; Y. Kamiya; T. Koshiba,
Plant Cell Physiol. 1998, 39, 433–442.
109. M. Delarue; E. Prinsen; H. V. Onckelen; M. Caboche; C. Bellini, Plant J. 1998, 14, 603–611.
110. I. Barlier; M. Kowalczyk; A. Marchant; K. Ljung; R. Bhaleroao; M. Bennett; G. Sandberg; C. Bellini, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2000, 97, 14819–14824.
111. T. Koshiba; E. Sato; N. Ono; N. Yamamoto; M. Sato, Plant Physiol. 1996, 110, 781–789.
112. N. Ilic; A. Östin; J. Cohen, Plant Growth Regul. 1999, 27, 57–62.
113. K. Tsurusaki; K. Takeda; N. Sakurai, Plant Cell Physiol. 1997, 38, 268–273.
114. P. J. Bower; H. M. Brown; W. K. Purves, Plant Physiol. 1978, 61, 107–110.
115. T. Koshiba; H. Matsuyama, Plant Physiol. 1993, 102, 1319–1324.
116. S. Bak; R. Feyereisen, Plant Physiol. 2001, 127, 108–118.
117. S. Bak; F. E. Tax; K. A. Felmann; D. W. Galbraith; R. Feyereisen, Plant Cell 2001, 13, 101–111.
118. J. Normanly; P. Grisafi; G. R. Fink; B. Bartel, Plant Cell 1997, 9, 1781–1790.
119. Y. Zhao; A. K. Hull; N. R. Gupta; K. A. Goss; J. Alonso; J. R. Ecker; J. Normanly; J. Chory; J. L. Celenza, Genes Dev. 2002, 16,
3100–3112.
120. A. K. Hull; R. Vij; J. L. Celenza, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000, 97, 2379–2384.
121. C. Chapple, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1998, 49, 311–343.
122. K. V. Thimann; M. Grochowska, In Biochemistry and Physiology of Plant Growth Substances, Proceedings of the 6th
International Conference on Plant Growth Substances, F. Wightman, G. Setterfield, Eds.; Runge Press: Ottawa, 1968;
pp 231–242.
123. Y. Zhao; S. K. Chiristensen; C. Frankhauser; J. R. Cashman; J. D. Cohen; D. Weigel; J. Chory, Science 2001, 291, 306–309.
124. C. P. Romano; M. B. Hein; H. J. Klee, Genes Dev. 1991, 5, 438–446.
125. Y. Cheng; X. Dai; Y. Zhao, Genes Dev. 2006, 20, 1790–1799.
126. T. Ulmasov; J. Murfett; G. Hagen; T. J. Guifoyle, Plant Cell 1997, 9, 1963–1971.
127. H. J. Klee; R. B. Horsch; M. A. Hinchee; M. B. Hein; N. L. Hoffmann, Genes Dev. 1987, 1, 86–96.
128. C. P. Romano; P. R. Robson; H. Smith; M. Estelle; H. Klee, Plant Mol. Biol. 1995, 27, 1071–1083.
129. R. Tobena-Santamaria; M. Bliek; K. Ljung; G. Sandberg; J. N. Mol; E. Souer; R. Koes, Genes Dev. 2002, 16, 753–763.
130. Y. Yamamoto; N. Kamiya; Y. Morinaka; M. Matsuoka; T. Sazuka, Plant Physiol. 2007, 143, 1362–1371.
131. M. Expósito-Rodrı́guez; A. A. Borges; A. Borges-Perez; M. Hernandez; J. A. Perez, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2007, 26, 329–340.
132. T. P. Cooney; H. M. Nonhebel, Planta 1991, 184, 368–376.
133. V. DeLuca; C. Marineau; N. Brisson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1989, 86, 2582–2586.
134. Y. Y. Tam; J. Normanly, J. Chromatogr. A 1998, 800, 101–108.
135. J. Badenoch-Jones; R. E. Summons; B. G. Rolfe; D. S. Letham, J. Plant Growth Regul. 1984, 3, 23–39.
136. J. Chory; N. Geldner; S. Savaldi-Goldstein; X. Wang, In International Plant Growth Substances Association (IPGSA) 19th Annual
Meeting, Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, 2007.
137. M. Yamada; M. Estelle, In International Plant Growth Substances Association (IPGSA) 19th Annual Meeting, Puerto Vallarta,
Mexico, 2007.
138. J. Koga, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1995, 1249, 1–13.
139. M. Kawaguchi; K. Syono, Plant Cell Physiol. 1996, 37, 1043–1048.
140. S. Ye; J. D. Cohen, In Multinational Arabidopsis Steering Committee (MASC) 18th International Conference on Arabidopsis
Research, Beijing, China, 2007.
141. A. R. Magie; E. E. Wilson; T. Kosuge, Science 1963, 141, 1281–1282.
142. S. Pollmann; D. Neu; E. W. Weiler, Phytochemistry 2003, 62, 293–300.
 Plant Hormones 103

143. S. Pollmann; A. Mueller; M. Piotrowski; E. W. Weiler, Planta 2002, 216, 155–161.

144. Y. Isogai; T. Okamoto; T. Koizumi, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1967, 15, 151–158.
145. N. Takahashi; I. Yamaguchi; T. Kono; M. Igoshi; K. Hirose; K. Suzuki, Plant Cell Physiol. 1975, 16, 1101–1111.
146. S. Tamura; M. Nomomoto; M. Nagao, In Plant Growth Substances 1970; D. J. Carr, Ed., Springer: Berlin, 1972; pp 127–132.
147. T. Rausch; S. C. Minocha; W. Hilgenberg; G. Kahl, Physiol. Plant. 1985, 63, 335–344.
148. M. Saotome; K. Shirahata; R. Nishimura; M. Yahaba; M. Kawaguchi; K. Syono; T. Kitsuwa; Y. Ishii; T. Nakamura, Plant Cell
Physiol. 1993, 34, 157–159.
149. R. Rajagopal; K. Tsurusaki; G. Kannagra; S. Kuraishi; N. Sakurai, Plant Cell Physiol. 1994, 35, 329–339.
150. M. Kawaguchi; M. Kobayashi; A. Sakurai; K. Syono, Plant Cell Physiol. 1991, 32, 143–149.
151. Y. Arai; M. Kawagauchi; K. Syono; A. Ikuta, J. Plant Res. 2004, 117, 191–198.
152. A. Müller; E. Weiler, Planta 2000, 211, 855–863.
153. V. Kriechbaumer; W. J. Parkl; A. Gierl; E. Glawischnig, Plant Biol. 2006, 8, 334–339.
154. J. Normanly; J. Slovin; J. Cohen, In Plant Hormones: Biosynthesis, Signal Transduction, Action!, 3rd ed.; P. Davies, Ed.; Kluwer:
Dordrecht, 2004; pp 36–62.
155. H. Nonhebel, J. Exp. Bot. 1986, 37, 1691–1697.
156. D. Reinecke; R. Bandurski, Plant Physiol. 1983, 71, 211–213.
157. H. Tuominen; A. Ostin; G. Sandberg; B. Sundberg, Plant Physiol. 1994, 106, 1511–1520.
158. R. Plüss; J. Titus; H. Meier, Physiol. Plant. 1989, 75, 89–96.
159. K. Kai; J. Horita; K. Wakasa; H. Miyagawa, Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 1651–1663.
160. K. Kai; K. Wakasa; H. Miyagawa, Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 2512–2522.
161. N. Dharmasiri; S. Dharmasiri; M. Estelle, Nature 2005, 435, 441–445.
162. S. Kepinski; O. Leyser, Nature 2005, 435, 446–451.
163. N. Dharmasiri; S. Dharmasiri; D. Weijers; E. Lechner; M. Yamada; L. Hobbie; J. S. Ehrismann; G. Juergens; M. Estelle, Dev. Cell
2005, 9, 109–119.
164. J. C. Walker; J. L. Key, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1982, 79, 7185–7189.
165. G. Hagen; A. Kleinschmidt; T. Guilfoyle, Planta 1984, 162, 147–153.
166. A. Theologis; T. V. Huynh; R. W. Davis, J. Mol. Biol. 1985, 3, 53–68.
167. T. Ulmasov; B. Liu; G. Hagen; T. J. Gulfoyle, Plant Cell 1995, 7, 1611–1623.
168. T. Ulmasov; G. Hagen; T. J. Guilfoyle, Science 1997, 276, 1865–1868.
169. Y. Okushima; P. J. Overvoorde; K. Arima; J. M. Alonso; A. Chan; C. Chang; J. R. Ecker; B. Hughes; A. Lui; D. Nguen; C. Onodera;
H. Quach; A. Smith; G. Yu; A. Theologis, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 444–463.
170. E. Liscum; J. W. Reed, Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 49, 387–400.
171. P. J. Overvoorde; Y. Okushima; J. M. Alonso; A. Chan; C. Chang; J. R. Ecker; B. Hughes; A. Liu; C. Onodera; H. Quach; A. Smith;
G. Yu; A. Theologis, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 3282–3300.
172. S. B. Tiwari; G. Hagen; T. J. Guilfoyle, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 533–543.
173. C. K. Worley; N. Zenser; J. Ramos; D. Rouse; O. Leyser; A. Theologis; J. Callis, Plant J. 2000, 21, 553–562.
174. J. A. Ramos; N. Zenser; O. Leyser; J. Callis, Plant Cell 2001, 13, 2349–2360.
175. H. M. Leyser; C. A. Lincoln; C. Timpte; D. Lammer; J. Turner; M. Estelle, Nature 1993, 364, 161–164.
176. D. Rouse; P. Mackay; P. Stirnberg; M. Estelle; O. Leyser, Science 1998, 279, 1371–1373.
177. P. Nagpal; L. M. Walker; J. C. Young; A. Sonowala; C. Timpte; M. Estelle; J. W. Reed, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 563–574.
178. M. Ruegger; E. Dewey; W. M. Gray; L. Hobbie; J. Turner; M. Estelle, Genes Dev. 1998, 12, 198–207.
179. M. Ruegger; E. Dewey; L. Hobbie; D. Brown; P. Bernasconi; J. Turner; G. Muday; M. Estelle, Plant Cell 1997, 9, 745–757.
180. W. M. Gray; J. C. del Pozo; L. Walker; L. Hobbie; E. Risseeuw; T. Banks; W. L. Crosby; M. Yang; H. Ma; M. Estelle, Genes Dev.
1999, 13, 1678–1691.
181. W. M. Gray; H. Hellmann; S. Dharmasiri; M. Estelle, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 2137–2144.
182. H. Hellmann; L. Hobbie; A. Chapman; S. Dharmasiri; N. Dharmarsiri; C. del Pozo; D. Reinhardt; M. Estelle, EMBO J. 2003, 22,
3314–3325.
183. W. M. Gray; S. Kepinski; D. Rouse; O. Leyser; M. Estelle, Nature 2001, 414, 271–276.
184. R. Hertel; K.-S. Thomson; V. E. A. Russo, Planta 1972, 107, 325–340.
185. M. A. Venis, Nature 1977, 266, 268–269.
186. X. Tan; L. I. Calderon-Villalobos; M. Sharon; C. Zheng; C. V. Robinson; M. Estelle; N. Zheng, Nature 2007, 446, 640–645.
187. J. MacMillan; N. Takahashi, Nature 1968, 217, 170–171.
188. N. Murofushi; H. Yamane; Y. Kamiya, Gibberellins. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi,
O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.; Pergamon: Amsterdam, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed., pp 35–57.
189. S. Tamura, In Gibberellins; N. Takahashi, B. O. Phinney, J. MacMillan, Eds.; Springer: New York, 1991; pp 1–8.
190. B. O. Phinney, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins; A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol. 1, pp 19–52.
191. J. MacMillan, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1996, 47, 1–21.
192. A. Crozier; C. C. Kuo; R. C. Durely; R. P. Pharis, Can. J. Bot. 1970, 48, 867–877.
193. A. Crozier; R. C. Durley, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins; A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol. 1,
pp 503–508.
194. H. Yamane; I. Yamaguchi; T. Yokota; N. Murofushi; N. Takahoashi; K. Katsumi, Phytochemistry 1973, 12, 255–261.
195. M. Koorneef; J. H. van der Veen, Theor. Appl. Genet. 1980, 58, 257–263.
196. B. O. Phinney; C. R. Spray, In Plant Growth Substances 1988; R. P. Pharis, S. B. Rood, Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1988;
pp 65–73.
197. B. J. Reid, In Plant Growth Substances 1988; R. P. Pharis, S. B. Rood, Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1988; pp 74–83.
198. M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; M. Ahikari; M. Nakajima; H. Itoh; E. Katoh; M. Kobayashi; T.-Y. Chow; Y. C. Hsing; H. Kitano; I. Yamaguchi;
M. Matsuoka, Nature 2005, 437, 693–698.
199. J. R. Hanson, Biochem. Soc. Trans. 1983, 11, 522–528.
200. J. R. Bearder, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins; A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol.1, pp 251–387.
104 Plant Hormones

201. J. E. Graebe, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1987, 38, 419–465.

202. P. Hedden, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins, A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol. 1, pp 99–149.
203. P. Hedden; Y. Kamiya, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 48, 431–460.
204. J. J. Ross; I. C. Murfet; J. B. Reid, Physiol. Plant. 1997, 100, 550–560.
205. S. G. Thomas; T.-P. Sun, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 668–676.
206. H. Itoh; M. Matsuoka; C. M. Steber, Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8, 492–507.
207. T.-P. Sun; F. Gubler, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2004, 55, 197–223.
208. C. M. Fleet; T.-P. Sun, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2005, 8, 77–85.
209. T. M. Thornton; S. M. Swain; N. E. Olszewski, Trends Plant Sci. 1999, 4, 424–428.
210. S. M. Swain; N. E. Olszewski, Plant Physiol. 1996, 112, 11–17.
211. R. Hooley; M. H. Beale; S. J. Smith, Planta 1991, 183, 274–280.
212. R. Hooley, Plant Mol. Biol. 1994, 26, 1529–1556.
213. S. Gilroy; R. L. Jones, Plant Physiol. 1994, 104, 1185–1192.
214. M. Endo; K. Nakanishi; U. Naef; W. McKeon; R. Walker, Physiol. Plant. 1972, 26, 183–185.
215. E. J. Corey; A. G. Myers, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1985, 107, 5574–5576.
216. J. E. Nester; S. Veysey; R. C. Coolbaugh, Planta 1987, 170, 26–33.
217. M. Furber; L. N. Mander, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 4084–4085.
218. H. Yamane; Y. Sato; K. Nohara; M. Nakayama; M. Murofushi; N. Takahashi; K. Takeno; M. Furuya; M. Furber; L. N. Mander,
Tetrahedron Lett. 1988, 29, 3959–3962.
219. H. Yamane, Int. Rev. Cytol. 1998, 184, 1–32.
220. S. Hori, Mem. Agric. Res. Sta. (Tokyo) 1898, 12, 110–119.
221. E. Kurosawa, Trans. Natl. Hist. Soc. Formosa 1926, 16, 213–227.
222. T. Yabuta; Y. Sumiki, J. Agric. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1938, 14, 1526.
223. P. J. Curtis; B. E. Cross, Chem. Ind. 1954, 1066.
224. F. H. Stodola; K. B. Raper; D. I. Fennell; H. F. Conway; V. E. Sohns; C. T. Langford; R. W. Jackson, Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
1955, 54, 240–245.
225. J. MacMillan, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2002, 20, 387–442.
226. J. W. Mitchell; D. P. Skaggs; W. P. Anderson, Science 1951, 114, 159–161.
227. J. MacMillan; P. J. Suter, Naturwissenschaften 1958, 45, 46–47.
228. C. A. West; B. O. Phinney, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1959, 81, 2424.
229. A. Kawarada; Y. Sumiki, Bull. Agric. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1959, 23, 343–344.
230. N. Murofushi; S. Iriuchijima; N. Takahashi; S. Tamura; J. Kato; Y. Wada; E. Watanabe; T. Aoyama, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1966, 30,
317–324.
231. M. Nakayama; M. Koshioka; H. Matsui; H. Ohara; L. N. Mander; S. K. Leitch; B. Twitchin; P. Kraft-Klaunzer; R. P. Pharis;
T. Yokota, Phytochemistry 2001, 57, 749–758.
232. P. S. Blake; D. R. Taylor; C. M. Crisp; L. N. Mander; D. J. Owen, Phytochemistry 2000, 55, 887–890.
233. S. K. Leitch; P. S. Blake; L. N. Mander, ARKIVOC 2003, vii, 145–160.
234. J. R. Crow; R. J. Thomson; L. N. Mander, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2006, 4, 2532–2544.
235. T. Yokota; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi, Tetrahedron Lett. 1970, 1489–1491.
236. K. Schreiber; J. Weiland; G. Sembdner, Phytochemistry 1970, 9, 189–198.
237. T. Yokota; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi; S. Tamura, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1971, 35, 583–595.
238. H. Yamane; I. Yamaguchi; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1971, 35, 1144–1146.
239. T. Yokota; S. Kobayashi; H. Yamane; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1978, 42, 1811–1812.
240. M. Hasegawa; M. Nakajima; K. Takeda; I. Yamaguchi; N. Murofushi, Phytochemistry 1994, 37, 629–634.
241. G. Schneider; P. Fuchs; J. Schmidt, Physiol. Plant. 2002, 116, 144–147.
242. S. L. Maki; M. L. Brenner, Plant Physiol. 1991, 97, 1359–1366.
243. K. Hiraga; T. Yokota; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1972, 36, 345–347.
244. I. Yamaguchi; M. Kobayashi; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1980, 44, 1975–1977.
245. G. Schneider; E. Jensen; C. R. Spray; B. O. Phinney, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 8045–8048.
246. T. Yokota; H. Yamane; S. Kobayashi; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1978, 42, 1811–1812.
247. G. Sembdner; R. Atozorn; G. Schneider, Plant Mol. Biol. 1994, 26, 1459–1481.
248. G. Schneider, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins; A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol. 1, pp 389–456.
249. W. Waycott; V. A. Smith; P. Gaskin; J. MacMillan; L. Taiz, Plant Physiol. 1991, 95, 1169–1173.
250. M. Nakajima; I. Yamaguchi; S. Kizawa; N. Murofushi; M. Furuya; N. Takahashi, Plant Cell Physiol. 1991, 32, 515–522.
251. Y. Suzuki; S. Ito; K. Otsuka; E. Iwasawa; M. Nakajima; I. Yamaguchi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 610–619.
252. N. Takahashi; I. Yamaguchi; H. Yamane, In Chemistry of Plant Hormones; N. Takahashi, Ed.; CRC Press: Florida, 1986;
pp 56–151.
253. T. Yokota; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi, In Hormonal Regulation of Development; J. MacMillan, Ed.; Encyclopedia of Plant
Physiology, New Series; Springer: Berlin, 1980; Vol. 9, pp 113–202.
254. S. J. Croker; P. Gaskin; P. Hedden; J. MacMillan; K. A. G. MacNeil, Phytochem. Anal. 1994, 5, 74–80.
255. P. Hedden, In Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry; H. F. Liskens, J. F. Jackson, Eds.; Modern Methods of Plant Analysis,
New Series; Springer: Berlin, 1986; Vol. 3, pp 1–22.
256. P. Gaskin; J. MacMillan, Phytochemistry 1981, 20, 687–692.
257. M. Varbanova; S. Yamaguchi; Y. Yang; K. McKelvey; A. Hanada; R. Borochov; F. Yu; Y. Jikumaru; J. Ross; D. Cotes; C. J. Ma;
J. P. Noel; L. Mander; V. Shulaev; Y. Kamiya; S. Rodermel; D. Weiss; E. Pichersky, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 32–45.
258. N. Murofushi; Y.-E. Young; I. Yamaguchi; G. Schneider; Y. Kato, In Progress in Plant Growth Regulation; C. M. Karssen,
L. C. Van Loon, D. Vreugdenhil, Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 1992; pp 900–904.
259. G. Schneider; J. Schmidt; T. Moritz, J. Mass Spectrom. 2005, 30, 1489–1494.
260. A. Nakayama; S.-J. Park; Z.-J. Xu; M. Nakajima; I. Yamaguchi, Plant Physiol. 2002, 123, 1045–1053.
 Plant Hormones 105

261. P. Hedden; Y. Kamiya, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 48, 431–460.
262. P. Hedden; A. L. Phillips, Trends Plant Sci. 2000, 5, 523–530.
263. M. J. Pimenta Lange; T. Lange, Plant Biol. (Stuttg.) 2006, 8, 281–290.
264. V. M. Sponsel; P. Hedden, In Plant Hormones: Biosynthesis, Signal Transduction, Action! Gibberellin Biosynthesis and
Inactivation; P. J. Davies, Ed.; Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht, 2004; pp 63–94.
265. S. Yamaguchi, Phytochem. Rev. 2006, 5, 39–47.
266. S. Yamaguchi; Y. Kamiya, Plant Cell Physiol. 2000, 41, 251–257.
267. H. Kasahara; A. Hanada; T. Kuzuyama; M. Takagi; Y. Kamiya; S. Yamaguchi, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 45188–45194.
268. T. P. Sun; Y. Kamiya, Physiol. Plant. 1997, 101, 701–708.
269. C. A. Helliwell; J. A. Sullivan; R. M. Mould; J. C. Gray; W. J. Peacock; E. S. Dennis, Plant J. 2001, 28, 201–208.
270. D. R. Nelson; M. A. Schuler; S. M. Paquette; D. Werck-Reichhart; S. Bak, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 756–772.
271. S. G. Thomas; A. L. Phillips; P. Hedden, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 4698–4703.
272. F. M. Schomburg; C. M. Bizzell; D. J. Lee; J. A. Zeevaart; R. M. Amasino, Plant Cell 2003, 15, 151–163.
273. D. J. Lee; J. A. Zeevaart, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 243–254.
274. Y. Zhu; T. Nomura; Y. Xu; Y. Zhang; Y. Peng; B. Mao; A. Hanada; H. Zhou; R. Wang; P. Li; X. Zhu; L. N. Mander; Y. Kamiya;
S. Yamaguchi; Z. He, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 442–456.
275. G. Schneider; W. Schliemann, Plant Growth Regul. 1994, 15, 247–260.
276. J. Fukazawa; T. Sakai; S. Ishida; I. Yamaguchi; Y. Kamiya; Y. Takahashi, Plant Cell 2000, 12, 901–915.
277. J. Curaba; T. Moritz; R. Blervaque; F. Parcy; V. Raz; M. Herzog; G. Vachon, Plant Physiol. 2004, 136, 3660–3669.
278. T. Sakamoto; N. Kamiya; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; S. Iwahori; M. Matsuoka, Genes Dev. 2001, 15, 581–590.
279. H. Wang; L. V. Caruso; A. B. Downie; S. E. Perry, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 1206–1219.
280. N. Olszewski; T. P. Sun; F. Gubler, Plant Cell 2002, 14 (Suppl.) S61–S80.
281. S. G. Thomas; P. Hedden, Gibberellin Metabolism and Signal Transduction. In Plant Hormone Signaling; S. G. Thomas,
P. Hedden, Eds.; Annual Plant Reviews 24; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2006; pp 147–184.
282. C. M. Wolbang; P. M. Chandler; J. J. Smith; J. J. Ross, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 769–776.
283. J. J. Ross; D. P. O’Neill; J. J. Smith; L. H. Kerckhoffs; R. C. Elliott, Plant J. 2000, 21, 547–552.
284. T. Toyomasu; H. Kawaide; W. Mitsuhashi; Y. Inoue; Y. Kamiya, Plant Physiol. 1998, 118, 1517–1523.
285. S. Yamaguchi; M. W. Smith; R. G. Brown; Y. Kamiya; T. Sun, Plant Cell 1998, 10, 2115–2126.
286. Y. Yamauchi; M. Ogawa; A. Kuwahara; A. Hanada; Y. Kamiya; S. Yamaguchi, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 367–378.
287. S. D. Jackson; P. E. James; E. Carrera; S. Prat; B. Thomas, Plant Physiol. 2000, 124, 423–430.
288. T. Hisamatsu; R. W. King; C. A. Helliwell; M. Koshioka, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 1106–1116.
289. D. J. Lee; J. A. Zeevaart, Planta 2007, 226, 35–44.
290. H. Kawaide; R. Imai; T. Sassa; Y. Kamiya, J. Biol. Chem. 1997, 272, 21706–21712.
291. T. Toyomasu; H. Kawaide; A. Ishizaki; S. Shinoda; M. Otsuka; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Sassa, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2000, 64,
660–664.
292. B. Tudzynski; H. Kawaide; Y. Kamiya, Curr. Genet. 1998, 34, 234–240.
293. M. C. Rojas; P. Hedden; P. Gaskin; B. Tudzynski, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 5838–5843.
294. B. Tudzynski; M. C. Rojas; P. Gaskin; P. Hedden, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 21246–21253.
295. B. Tudzynski; M. Mihlan; M. C. Rojas; P. Linnemannstons; P. Gaskin; P. Hedden, J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278,
28635–28643.
296. P. Hedden; A. L. Phillips; M. C. Rojas; E. Carrera; B. Tudzynski, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2001, 20, 319–331.
297. H. Kawaide, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 583–590.
298. M. Nakajima; A. Shimada; Y. Takashi; Y. C. Kim; S. H. Park; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; H. Suzuki; E. Katoh; S. Iuchi; M. Kobayashi;
T. Maeda; M. Matsuoka; I. Yamaguchi, Plant J. 2006, 46, 880–889.
299. J. V. Jacobsen; F. Gubler; P. M. Chandler, In Plant Hormones: Physiology, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; P. J. Davis, Ed.;
Kluwer: Boston, 1995; pp 246–271.
300. T. G. Brock; P. B. Kaufmann, In Plant Physiology: A Treatise; F. C. Steward, Ed.; Vol. X: Growth and Development; R. G. S.
Bidwell, Ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, CA, 1991; pp 277–340.
301. L. G. Paleg; C. A. West, In Plant Physiology: A Treatise; F. C. Steward, Ed.; Vol. VIB: Physiology of Development: The Hormones;
Academic Press: New York, 1972; Academic Press: New York, 1972pp 146–181.
302. F. Dominguez; J. Moreno; F. J. Cejudo, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 11530–11536.
303. G. Ben-Nissan; J. Y. Lee; A. Borohov; D. Weiss, Plant J. 2004, 37, 229–238.
304. M. Cercos; C. Urbez; J. Carbonell, Plant Mol. Biol. 2003, 51, 165–174.
305. A. Jan; G. Young; H. Nakamura; H. Ichikawa; H. Kitano; M. Matsuoka; H. Masumoto; S. Komatsu, Plant Physiol. 2004, 136, 3670–3681.
306. A. Jan; H. Nakamura; H. Handa; H. Ichikawa; H. Matsumoto; S. Komatsu; Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 244–253.
307. H. Konishi; H. Yamane; M. Maeshima; S. Komatsu, Plant Mol. Biol. 2004, 56, 839–848.
308. J. A. D. Zeevaart, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1976, 27, 321–348.
309. J. A. D. Zeevaart, In The Biochemistry and Physiology of Gibberellins; A. Crozier, Ed.; Praeger: New York, 1983; Vol. 2,
pp 333–374.
310. S. Erikuson; H. Bohlenius; T. Moritz; O. Nilsson, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 2172–2181.
311. R. W. King; L. T. Evans, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2003, 54, 307–328.
312. C. P. MacMillan; C. A. Blundell; R. W. King, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 1794–1806.
313. P. Saunders, In Phytohormones and Related Compound: A Comprehensive Treatise, Vol. II: Phytohormones and the
Development of Higher Plants; D. S. Letham, P. B. Goodwin, T. J. V. Higgins, Eds.; Elsevier, North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1978;
pp 423–445.
314. T. Toyomasu; H. Yamane; I. Yamaguchi; N. Murofushi; N. Takahashi; Y. Inoue, Plant Cell Physiol. 1992, 33, C695–C701.
315. S. H. Witter, In Phytohormones and Related Compound: A Comprehensive Treatise, Vol. II: Phytohormones and the
Development of Higher Plants; D. S. Letham, P. B. Goodwin, T. J. V. Higgins, Eds.; Elsevier, North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1978;
pp 599–615.
106 Plant Hormones

316. B. Gorguet; A. W. van Heusden; P. Londhout, Plant Biol. (Stuttg.) 2005, 7, 131–139.
317. M. M. Johri; J. E. Varner, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1968, 59, 269–276.
318. K. A. Sechley; L. M. Srivastava, Physiol. Plant. 1991, 82, 543–550.
319. R. Hooley; S. J. Smith; M. H. Beale; R. P. Walker, Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1993, 20, 573–584.
320. R. P. Walker; W. M. Waterworth; M. H. Beale; R. Hooley, Plant Growth Regul. 1994, 15, 271–279.
321. A. Lovegrove; D. H. Barratt; M. H. Beale; R. Hooley, Plant J. 1998, 15, 311–320.
322. T. Osterlund, Eur. J. Biochem. 2001, 268, 1899–1907.
323. M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; M. Nakajima; E. Katoh; H. Ohmiya; K. Asano; S. Saji; X. Hongyu; M. Ashikari; H. Kitano; I. Yamaguchi;
M. Matsuoka, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 2140–2155.
324. J. Griffiths; K. Murase; I. Rieu; R. Zentella; Z. L. Zhang; S. J. Powers; F. Gong; A. L. Phillips; P. Hedden; T.-P. Sun; S. G. Thomas,
Plant Cell 2006, 18, 3399–3414.
325. B. C. Willige; S. Ghosh; C. Nill; M. Zourelidou; E. M. Dohmann; A. Maier; C. Schwechheimer, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 1209–1220.
326. S. Iuchi; H. Suzuki; Y.-C. Kim; A. Iuchi; T. Kuromori; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; T. Asami; I. Yamaguchi; M. Matsuoka; M. Kobayashi;
M. Nakajima, Plant J. 2007, 50, 958–966.
327. P. M. Chandler; C. A. Harding; A. R. Ashton; M. D. Mulcair; N. E. Dixon; L. N. Mander, Mol. Plant 2008, 1, 285–294.
328. A. Shimada; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; T. Nakatsu; M. Nakajima; Y. Naoe; H. Ohmiya; H. Kato; M. Matsuoka, Nature 2008, 456,
520–523.
329. K. Murase; Y. Hirano; T.-P. Sun; T. Hakoshima, Nature 2008, 456, 459–463.
330. L. D. Pysh; J. W. Wysocka-Diller; C. Camilleri; D. Bouchez; P. N. Benfey, Plant J. 1999, 18, 111–119.
331. J. Peng; P. Carol; D. E. Richards; K. E. King; R. J. Cowling; G. P. Murphy; N. P. Harberd, Genes Dev. 1997, 11, 3194–3205.
332. J. Peng; D. E. Richards; N. M. Hartley; G. P. Murphy; K. M. Devos; J. E. Flintham; J. Beales; L. J. Fish; A. J. Worland; F. Pelica;
D. Sudhakar; P. Christou; J. W. Snape; M. D. Gale; N. P. Harberd, Nature 1999, 400, 256–261.
333. H. Itoh; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; Y. Sato; M. Ashikari; M. Matsuoka, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 57–70.
334. A. Ikeda; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; Y. Sonoda; H. Kitano; M. Koshioka; Y. Futsuhara; M. Matsuoka; J. Yamaguchi, Plant Cell 2001,
13, 999–1010.
335. P. M. Chandler; A. Marion-Poll; M. Ellis; F. Bubler, Plant Physiol. 2002, 129, 181–190.
336. A. L. Silverstone; C. N. Ciampaglio; T.-P. Sun, Plant Cell 1998, 10, 155–169.
337. A. L. Silverstone; P. Y. A. Mak; E. C. Martineze; T.-P. Sun, Genetics 1997, 146, 1087–1099.
338. A. Dill; T.-P. Sun, Genetics 2001, 159, 777–785.
339. S. Lee; H. Cheng; K. E. King; W. Wang; Y. He; A. Hussain; J. Lo; N. P. Harberd; J. Peng, Genes Dev. 2002, 16, 646–658.
340. C. K. Wen; C. Chang, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 87–100.
341. K. E. King; T. Moritz; N. P. Harberd, Genetics 2001, 159, 767–776.
342. X. Fu; N. P. Harberd, Nature 2003, 421, 740–743.
343. L. Tyler; S. G. Thomas; J. Hu; A. Dill; J. M. Alonso; J. R. Ecker; T.-P. Sun, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 1008–1019.
344. D. Cao; A. Hussain; H. Cheng; J. Peng, Planta 2005, 223, 105–113.
345. J. G. Chen; S. Pandey; J. Huang; J. M. Alonso; J. R. Ecker; S. M. Assmann; A. M. Jones, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 907–915.
346. H. Yu; T. Ito; Y. Zhao; J. Peng; P. Kumar; E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 7827–7832.
347. X. Fu; D. E. Richards; T. Ait-ali; L. W. Hynes; H. Ougham; J. Peng; N. P. Harberd, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 3191–3200.
348. A. Sasaki; H. Itoh; K. Gomi; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; K. Ishiyama; M. Kobayashi; D. H. Jeong; G. An; H. Kitano; M. Ashikiari;
M. Matsuoka, Science 2003, 299, 1896–1898.
349. K. M. McGinnis; S. G. Thomas; J. D. Soule; L. C. Strader; J. M. Zale; T.-P. Sun; C. M. Steber, Plant Cell 2003, 15, 1120–1130.
350. J. M. Gagne; B. P. Downes; S. Shin-Han; A. M. Durski; R. D. Vierstra, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 11519–11524.
351. A. Dill; S. G. Thomas; J. Hu; C. M. Steber; T.-P. Sun, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 1392–1405.
352. C. O. Miller; F. Skoog; N. H. von Saltza; M. Strong, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1955, 77, 1392.
353. R. Amasino, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 1177–1184.
354. D. S. Letham, Life Sci. 1963, 8, 569–573.
355. F. Skoog; F. M. Strong; C. O. Miller, Science 1965, 148, 532–533.
356. F. Skoog; D. J. Armstrong, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1970, 21, 359–384.
357. F. Skoog; D. J. Armstrong; J. D. Cherayil; A. E. Hampel; R. M. Bock, Science 1966, 154, 1354–1356.
358. H. J. Vreman; F. Skoog; C. R. Frihart; N. J. Leonard, Plant Physiol. 1972, 49, 848–851.
359. H. J. Vreman; R. Thomas; J. Corse, Plant Physiol. 1978, 61, 296–306.
360. Y. Taya; Y. Tanaka; S. Nishimura, Nature 1978, 271, 545–547.
361. H. Iwamura; H. Tsuji, Cytokinins. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi, O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.;
Pergamon: Amsterdam, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed., pp 57–72.
362. D. W. Mok; M. C. Mok, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 2001, 52, 89–118.
363. H. Sakakibara, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2006, 57, 431–449.
364. G. R. Kudoyarova; L. B. Vysotskaya; A. Cherkozyanova; I. C. Dodd, J. Exp. Bot. 2007, 58, 161–168.
365. T. Kuroha; H. Kato; T. Asami; S. Yoshida; H. Kamada; S. Satoh, J. Exp. Bot. 2002, 53, 2193–2200.
366. S. E. Morris; C. G. Turnbull; I. C. Murfet; C. A. Beveridge, Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 1205–1213.
367. K. Takei; H. Sakakibara; M. Taniguchi; T. Sugiyama, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 85–93.
368. J. W. Yong; S. C. Wong; D. S. Letham; C. H. Hocart; G. D. Farquhar, Plant Physiol. 2000, 124, 767–780.
369. L. Corbesier; E. Prinsen; A. Jacqmard; P. Lejeune; H. Van Onckelen; C. Perilleux; G. Bernier, J. Exp. Bot. 2003, 54, 2511–2517.
370. N. Hirose; K. Takei; T. Kuroha; T. Kamada-Nobusada; H. Hayashi; H. Sakakibara, J. Exp. Bot. 2007, 59, 75–83.
371. Y. K. Veach; R. C. Martin; D. W. Mok; J. Malbeck; R. Vankova; M. C. Mok, Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 1374–1380.
372. K. Izumi; S. Nakagawa; M. Kobayashi; H. Oshio; A. Sakurai; N. Takahashi, Plant Cell Physiol. 1988, 29, 97–104.
373. R. J. Emery; L. Leport; J. E. Barton; N. C. Turner; C. A. Atkins, Plant Physiol. 1998, 117, 1515–1523.
374. P. E. Jameson, Cytokinin Metabolism and Compartmentation. In Cytokinins: Chemistry, Activity, and Function; D. W. S. Mok,
M. C. Mok, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1994; pp 113–128.
375. J. K. MacLeod; R. E. Summons; C. W. Parker; D. S. Letham, Chem. Commun. 1975, 41, 809–810.
 Plant Hormones 107

376. D. S. Letham; R. E. Summons; C. W. Parker; J. K. MacLeod, Planta 1979, 146, 71–74.

377. D. S. Letham; L. M. S. Palni; G.-Q. Tao; B. I. Gollnow; C. M. Bates, J. Plant Growth Regul. 1983, 2, 103–115.
378. H. Abe; M. Uchiyama; Y. Tanaka; H. Saito, Tetrahedron Lett. 1976, 42, 3807–3810.
379. R. Horgan, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1975, 65, 358–363.
380. M. Strnad; W. Peters; E. Beck; M. Kaminek, Plant Physiol. 1992, 99, 74–80.
381. D. Tarkowská; K. Doležal; P. Tarkowski; C. Åstot; J. Holub; K. Fuksová; T. Schmülling; G. Sandberg; M. Strnad, Physiol. Plant.
2003, 117, 579–590.
382. D. Ernst; W. Schafer; D. Oesterhelt, Planta 1983, 159, 222–225.
383. S. K. Nandi; D. S. Letham; L. M. S. Palni; O. C. Wong; R. E. Summons, Plant Sci. 1989, 61, 189–196.
384. L. Sáenz; L. H. Jones; C. Oropeza; D. Vlácil; M. Strnad, Plant Growth Regul. 2003, 39, 205–215.
385. M. Strnad, Physiol. Plant. 1997, 101, 674–688.
386. C. A. Auer; J. D. Cohen, Plant Physiol. 1993, 102, 541–545.
387. M. C. Mok; D. W. S. Mok; D. J. Armstrong; K. Shudo; Y. Isogai; T. Okamoto, Phytochemistry 1982, 21, 1509–1511.
388. K. Shudo, Chemistry of Phenylurea Cytokinins. In Cytokinins: Chemistry, Activity, and Function; D. W. S. Mok, M. C. Mok, Eds.;
CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1994; pp 35–42.
389. Y. Taya; Y. Tanaka; S. Nishimura, FEBS Lett. 1978, 89, 326–328.
390. M. Ihara; Y. Taya; S. Nishimura; Y. Tanaka, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1984, 230, 652–660.
391. T. Nomura; Y. Tanaka; H. Abe; M. Uchiyama, Phytochemistry 1977, 16, 1819–1820.
392. R. O. Morris, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1986, 37, 509–538.
393. N. Van Larebeke; G. Engler; M. Holsters; S. Van den Elsacker; I. Zaenen; R. A. Schilperoort; J. Schell, Nature 1974, 252,
169–170.
394. M. C. John; R. M. Amasino, J. Bacteriol. 1988, 170, 790–795.
395. G. K. Powell; N. G. Hommes; J. Kuo; L. A. Castle; R. O. Morris, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1988, 1, 235–242.
396. H. Sakakibara; H. Kasahara; N. Ueda; M. Kojima; K. Takei; S. Hishiyama; T. Asami; K. Okada; Y. Kamiya; T. Yamaya;
S. Yamaguchi, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102, 9972–9977.
397. L. Krall; M. Raschke; M. H. Zenk; C. Baron, FEBS Lett. 2002, 527, 315–318.
398. C. Åstot; K. Dolezal; T. Moritz; G. Sandberg, J. Mass Spectrom. 2000, 35, 13–22.
399. M. Faiss; J. Zalubı̀lová; M. Strnad; T. Schmülling, Plant J. 1997, 12, 401–415.
400. T. Stuchbury; M. L. S. Palni; R. Horgan; P. F. Wareing, Planta 1979, 147, 97–102.
401. T. Kakimoto, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 677–685.
402. K. Takei; H. Sakakibara; T. Sugiyama, J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 26405–26410.
403. J. Sun; Q. W. Niu; P. Tarkowski; B. Zheng; D. Tarkowska; G. Sandberg; N. H. Chua; J. Zuo, Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 167–176.
404. E. Zubko; C. J. Adams; I. Macháèková; J. Malbeck; C. Scollan; P. Meyer, Plant J. 2002, 29, 797–808.
405. Y. Sakano; Y. Okada; A. Matsunaga; T. Suwama; T. Kaneko; K. Ito; H. Noguchi; I. Abe, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 2439–2446.
406. T. Sakamoto; H. Sakakibara; M. Kojima; Y. Yamamoto; H. Nagasaki; Y. Inukai; Y. Sato; M. Matsuoka, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142,
54–62.
407. K. Miyawaki; M. Matsumoto-Kitano; T. Kakimoto, Plant J. 2004, 37, 128–138.
408. K. Takei; N. Ueda; K. Aoki; T. Kuromori; T. Hirayama; K. Shinozaki; T. Yamaya; H. Sakakibara, Plant Cell Physiol. 2004, 45,
1053–1062.
409. K. Miyawaki; P. Tarkowski; M. Matsumoto-Kitano; T. Kato; S. Sato; D. Tarkowska; S. Tabata; G. Sandberg; T. Kakimoto, Proc.
Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 16598–16603.
410. N. Murai, Cytokinin Biosynthesis in tRNA and Cytokinin Incorporation into Plant RNA. In Cytokinins: Chemistry, Activity, and
Function; D. W. S. Mok, M. C. Mok, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1994; pp 87–99.
411. A. Golovko; F. Sitbon; E. Tillberg; B. Nicander, Plant Mol. Biol. 2002, 49, 161–169.
412. N. A. Yevdakova; K. von Schwartzenberg, Planta 2007, 226, 683–695.
413. S. Hecht; J. Wungsintaweekul; F. Rohdich; K. Kis; T. Radykewicz; C. A. Schuhr; W. Eisenreich; G. Richter; A. Bacher, J. Org.
Chem. 2001, 66, 7770–7775.
414. H. K. Lichtenthaler, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1999, 50, 47–65.
415. M. Rohmer, Nat. Prod. Rep. 1999, 16, 565–574.
416. H. Kasahara; K. Takei; N. Ueda; S. Hishiyama; T. Yamaya; Y. Kamiya; S. Yamaguchi; H. Sakakibara, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279,
14049–14054.
417. F. Laureys; W. Dewitte; E. Witters; M. Van Montagu; D. Inzé; H. Van Onckelen, FEBS Lett. 1998, 426, 29–32.
418. F. Laureys; R. Smets; M. Lenjou; D. Van Bockstaele; D. Inzé; H. Van Onckelen, FEBS Lett. 1999, 460, 123–128.
419. B. Moffatt; C. Pethe; M. Laloue, Plant Physiol. 1991, 95, 900–908.
420. K. M. Schnorr; C. Gaillard; E. Biget; P. Nygaard; M. Laloue, Plant J. 1996, 9, 891–898.
421. M. Allen; W. S. Qin; F. Moreau; B. Moffatt, Physiol. Plant. 2002, 115, 56–68.
422. Z. Kwade; A. Swiatek; A. Azmi; A. Goossens; D. Inzé; H. Van Onckelen; L. Roef, J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 17512–17519.
423. C.-M. Chen; B. Petschow, Plant Physiol. 1978, 62, 871–874.
424. C.-M. Chen; S. M. Kristopeit, Plant Physiol. 1981, 67, 494–498.
425. C.-M. Chen; S. M. Kristopeit, Plant Physiol. 1981, 68, 1020–1023.
426. T. Kurakawa; N. Ueda; M. Maekawa; K. Kobayashi; M. Kojima; Y. Nagato; H. Sakakibara; J. Kyozuka, Nature 2007, 445,
652–655.
427. C.-M. Chen; S. M. Leisner, Plant Physiol. 1984, 75, 442–446.
428. K. Takei; T. Yamaya; H. Sakakibara, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 41866–41872.
429. R. C. Martin; M. C. Mok; G. Shaw; D. W. S. Mok, Plant Physiol. 1989, 90, 1630–1635.
430. N. V. Bassil; D. Mok; M. C. Mok, Plant Physiol. 1993, 102, 867–872.
431. R. C. Martin; M. C. Mok; D. W. Mok, Plant Physiol. 1999, 120, 553–558.
432. R. C. Martin; M. C. Mok; D. W. Mok, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 284–289.
433. S. C. Dixon; R. C. Martin; M. C. Mok; G. Shaw; D. W. Mok, Plant Physiol. 1989, 90, 1316–1321.
108 Plant Hormones

434. R. C. Martin; M. C. Mok; J. E. Habben; D. W. Mok, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 5922–5926.
435. M. C. Mok; R. C. Martin; P. I. Dobrev; R. Vankova; P. S. Ho; K. Yonekura-Sakakibara; H. Sakakibara; D. W. Mok, Plant Physiol.
2005, 137, 1057–1066.
436. B. Brzobohaty; I. Moore; P. Kristoffersen; L. Bako; N. Campos; J. Schell; K. Palme, Science 1993, 262, 1051–1054.
437. B. Hou; E. K. Lim; G. S. Higgins; D. J. Bowles, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 47822–47832.
438. B. Entsch; C. W. Parker; D. S. Letham, Phytochemistry 1983, 22, 375–381.
439. K. D. Bilyeu; J. L. Cole; J. G. Laskey; W. R. Riekhof; T. J. Esparza; M. D. Kramer; R. O. Morris, Plant Physiol. 2001, 125, 378–386.
440. P. Galuszka; I. Frébort; M. Sebela; P. Sauer; S. Jacobsen; P. Pec, Eur. J. Biochem. 2001, 268, 450–461.
441. I. Frébort; M. Sebela; P. Galuszka; T. Werner; T. Schmülling; P. Pec, Anal. Biochem. 2002, 306, 1–7.
442. P. Galuszka; J. Frébortová; T. Werner; M. Yamada; M. Strnad; T. Schmülling; I. Frébort, Eur. J. Biochem. 2004, 271, 3990–4002.
443. P. Galuszka; H. Popelková; T. Werner; J. Frébortová; H. Pospı́šilová; V. Mik; I. Köllmer; T. Schmülling; I. Frébort, J. Plant Growth
Regul. 2007, 26, 255–267.
444. M. W. Fraaije; A. Mattevi, Trends Biochem. Sci. 2000, 25, 126–132.
445. T. Werner; I. Köllmer; I. Bartrina; K. Holst; T. Schmülling, Plant Biol. (Stuttg.) 2006, 8, 371–381.
446. T. Werner; V. Motyka; V. Laucou; R. Smets; H. Van Onckelen; T. Schmülling, Plant Cell 2003, 15, 2532–2550.
447. T. Werner; V. Motyka; M. Strnad; T. Schmülling, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 10487–10492.
448. M. Ashikari; H. Sakakibara; S. Lin; T. Yamamoto; T. Takashi; A. Nishimura; E. R. Angeles; Q. Qian; H. Kitano; M. Matsuoka,
Science 2005, 309, 741–745.
449. B. Gillissen; L. Bürkle; B. André; C. Kühn; D. Rentsch; B. Brandl; W. B. Frommer, Plant Cell 2000, 12, 291–300.
450. L. Bürkle; A. Cedzich; C. Döpke; H. Stransky; S. Okumoto; B. Gillissen; C. Kuhn; W. B. Frommer, Plant J. 2003, 34, 13–26.
451. N. Hirose; N. Makita; T. Yamaya; H. Sakakibara, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 196–206.
452. J. P. Sun; N. Hirose; X. C. Wang; P. Wen; L. Xue; H. Sakakibara; J. R. Zuo, J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2005, 47, 588–603.
453. S. Gan; R. M. Amasino, Plant Physiol. 1997, 113, 313–319.
454. M. C. Mok, Cytokinins and Plant Development. In Cytokinins: Chemistry, Activity, and Function, D. W. S. Mok, M. C. Mok, Eds.;
CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1994; pp 155–166.
455. S. Gan; R. M. Amasino, Science 1995, 270, 1986–1988.
456. M. S. McCabe; L. C. Garratt; F. Schepers; W. J. Jordi; G. M. Stoopen; E. Davelaar; J. H. van Rhijn; J. B. Power; M. R. Davey,
Plant Physiol. 2001, 127, 505–516.
457. H. Chang; M. L. Jones; G. M. Banowetz; D. G. Clark, Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 2174–2183.
458. D. Swartzberg; N. Dai; S. Gan; R. Amasino; D. Granot, Plant Biol. (Stuttg.) 2006, 8, 579–586.
459. L. F. Chen; J. Y. Hwang; Y. Y. Charng; C. W. Sun; S. F. Yang, Mol. Breed. 2001, 7, 243–257.
460. T. E. Young; J. Giesler-Lee; D. R. Gallie, Plant J. 2004, 38, 910–922.
461. H. J. Kim; H. Ryu; S. H. Hong; H. R. Woo; P. O. Lim; I. C. Lee; J. Sheen; H. G. Nam; I. Hwang, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006,
103, 814–819.
462. M. Riefler; O. Novak; M. Strnad; T. Schmülling, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 40–54.
463. C. Riou-Khamlichi; R. Huntley; A. Jacqmard; J. A. Murray, Science 1999, 283, 1541–1544.
464. K. Zhang; D. S. Letham; P. C. John, Planta 1996, 200, 2–12.
465. W. Dewitte; S. Scofield; A. A. Alcasabas; S. C. Maughan; M. Menges; N. Braun; C. Collins; J. Nieuwland; E. Prinsen;
V. Sundaresan; J. A. Murray, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104, 14537–14542.
466. M. Higuchi; M. S. Pischke; A. P. Mahonen; K. Miyawaki; Y. Hashimoto; M. Seki; M. Kobayashi; K. Shinozaki; T. Kato; S. Tabata;
Y. Helariutta; M. R. Sussman; T. Kakimoto, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 8821–8826.
467. C. Nishimura; Y. Ohashi; S. Sato; T. Kato; S. Tabata; C. Ueguchi, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 1365–1377.
468. C. E. Hutchison; J. Li; C. Argueso; M. Gonzalez; E. Lee; M. W. Lewis; B. B. Maxwell; T. D. Perdue; G. E. Schaller; J. M. Alonso;
J. R. Ecker; J. J. Kieber, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 3073–3087.
469. P. Doerner, Curr. Biol. 2007, 17, R321–R323.
470. E. Shani; O. Yanai; N. Ori, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2006, 9, 484–489.
471. O. Yanai; E. Shani; K. Dolezal; P. Tarkowski; R. Sablowski; G. Sandberg; A. Samach; N. Ori, Curr. Biol. 2005, 15, 1566–1571.
472. S. Jasinski; P. Piazza; J. Craft; A. Hay; L. Woolley; I. Rieu; A. Phillips; P. Hedden; M. Tsiantis, Curr. Biol. 2005, 15, 1560–1565.
473. A. Leibfried; J. P. To; W. Busch; S. Stehling; A. Kehle; M. Demar; J. J. Kieber; J. U. Lohmann, Nature 2005, 438, 1172–1175.
474. T. Kuroha; C. Ueguchi; H. Sakakibara; S. Satoh, Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 234–243.
475. R. D. Ioio; F. S. Linhares; E. Scacchi; E. Casamitjana-Martinez; R. Heidstra; P. Costantino; S. Sabatini, Curr. Biol. 2007, 17,
678–682.
476. F. J. Ferreira; J. J. Kieber, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2005, 8, 518–525.
477. Z. H. Ye, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2002, 53, 183–202.
478. H. Fukuda, Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2004, 5, 379–391.
479. A. P. Mähönen; M. Bonke; L. Kauppinen; M. Riikonen; P. N. Benfey; Y. Helariutta, Genes Dev. 2000, 14, 2938–2943.
480. A. Yokoyama; T. Yamashino; Y. Amano; Y. Tajima; A. Imamura; H. Sakakibara; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2007, 48, 84–96.
481. A. P. Mähönen; A. Bishopp; M. Higuchi; K. M. Nieminen; K. Kinoshita; K. Törmäkangas; Y. Ikeda; A. Oka; T. Kakimoto;
Y. Helariutta, Science 2006, 311, 94–98.
482. E. A. Dun; B. J. Ferguson; C. A. Beveridge, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 812–819.
483. R. A. King; J. van Staden, Plant Physiol. Biochem. 1988, 26, 253–259.
484. J. I. Medford; R. Horgan; Z. El-Sawi; H. J. Klee, Plant Cell 1989, 1, 403–413.
485. A. M. Chaudhury; S. Letham; S. Craig; E. S. Dennis, Plant J. 1993, 4, 907–916.
486. T. Tantikanjana; J. W. H. Yong; D. S. Letham; M. Griffith; M. Hussain; K. Ljung; G. Sandberg; V. Sundaresan, Genes Dev. 2001,
15, 1577–1588.
487. M. Catterou; F. Dubois; R. Smets; S. Vaniet; T. Kichey; H. van Onckelen; B. S. Sangwan-Norreel; R. S. Sangwan, Plant J. 2002,
30, 273–287.
488. F. Bangerth, Planta 1994, 194, 439–442.
489. C. J. Li; E. Guevara; J. Herrera; F. Bangerth, Physiol. Plant. 1995, 94, 465–469.
 Plant Hormones 109

490. C. G. N. Turnbull; M. A. A. Raymond; I. C. Dodd; S. E. Morris, Planta 1997, 202, 271–276.

491. M. Tanaka; K. Takei; M. Kojima; H. Sakakibara; H. Mori, Plant J. 2006, 45, 1028–1036.
492. R. Aloni; E. Aloni; M. Langhans; C. I. Ullrich, Ann. Bot. (Lond) 2006, 97, 883–893.
493. I. Casimiro; T. Beeckman; N. Graham; R. Bhalerao; H. Zhang; P. Casero; G. Sandberg; M. J. Bennett, Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8,
165–171.
494. J. López-Bucio; A. Cruz-Ramirez; L. Herrera-Estrella, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2003, 6, 280–287.
495. J. P. To; G. Haberer; F. J. Ferreira; J. Deruère; M. G. Mason; G. E. Schaller; J. M. Alonso; J. R. Ecker; J. J. Kieber, Plant Cell
2004, 16, 658–671.
496. X. Li; X. Mo; H. Shou; P. Wu, Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 1112–1123.
497. R. Soekarjo, Acta Bot. Neerl. 1965, 14, 373–399.
498. J. B. Cooper; S. R. Long, Plant Cell 1994, 6, 215–225.
499. D. P. Lohar; J. E. Schaff; J. G. Laskey; J. J. Kieber; K. D. Bilyeu; D. M. Bird, Plant J. 2004, 38, 203–214.
500. S. Gonzalez-Rizzo; M. Crespi; F. Frugier, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 2680–2693.
501. J. D. Murray; B. J. Karas; S. Sato; S. Tabata; L. Amyot; K. Szczyglowski, Science 2007, 315, 101–104.
502. L. Tirichine; N. Sandal; L. H. Madsen; S. Radutoiu; A. S. Albrektsen; S. Sato; E. Asamizu; S. Tabata; J. Stougaard, Science 2007,
315, 104–107.
503. M. E. Samuelson; C. M. Larsson, Plant Sci. 1993, 93, 77–84.
504. H. Sakakibara; M. Suzuki; K. Takei; A. Deji; M. Taniguchi; T. Sugiyama, Plant J. 1998, 14, 337–344.
505. K. Takei; T. Takahashi; T. Sugiyama; T. Yamaya; H. Sakakibara, J. Exp. Bot. 2002, 53, 971–977.
506. H. Sakakibara; K. Takei; N. Hirose, Trends Plant Sci. 2006, 11, 440–448.
507. A. Maruyama-Nakashita; Y. Nakamura; T. Yamaya; H. Takahashi, Plant J. 2004, 38, 779–789.
508. J. M. Franco-Zorrilla; A. C. Martı́n; A. Leyva; J. Paz-Ares, Plant Physiol. 2005, 138, 847–857.
509. C. Brinegar, Cytokinin Binding Proteins and Receptors. In Cytokinins: Chemistry, Activity, and Function; D. W. S. Mok,
M. C. Mok, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1994; pp 217–232.
510. S. Mitsui; T. Wakasugi; M. Sugiura, Plant Cell Physiol. 1993, 34, 1089–1096.
511. K. Kobayashi; M. Fukuda; D. Igarashi; M. Sunaoshi, Plant Cell Physiol. 2000, 41, 148–157.
512. Y. Fujimoto; R. Nagata; H. Fukasawa; K. Yano; M. Azuma; A. Iida; S. Sugimoto; K. Shudo; Y. Hashimoto, Eur. J. Biochem. 1998,
258, 794–802.
513. O. Pasternak; G. D. Bujacz; Y. Fujimoto; Y. Hashimoto; F. Jelen; J. Otlewski; M. M. Sikorski; M. Jaskólski, Plant Cell 2006, 18,
2622–2634.
514. T. Kakimoto, Science 1996, 274, 982–985.
515. H. Yamada; T. Suzuki; K. Terada; K. Takei; K. Ishikawa; K. Miwa; T. Yamashino; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42,
1017–1023.
516. M. S. Pischke; L. G. Jones; D. Otsuga; D. E. Fernandez; G. N. Drews; M. R. Sussman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99,
15800–15805.
517. T. Inoue; M. Higuchi; Y. Hashimoto; M. Seki; M. Kobayashi; T. Kato; S. Tabata; K. Shinozaki; T. Kakimoto, Nature 2001, 409,
1060–1063.
518. T. Suzuki; K. Miwa; K. Ishikawa; H. Yamada; H. Aiba; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 107–113.
519. C. Ueguchi; S. Sato; T. Kato; S. Tabata, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 751–755.
520. G. A. Romanov; L. Spı́chal; S. N. Lomin; M. Strnad; T. Schmülling, Anal. Biochem. 2005, 347, 129–134.
521. C. Mougel; I. B. Zhulin, Trends Biochem. Sci. 2001, 26, 582–584.
522. A. Heyl; K. Wulfetange; B. Pils; N. Nielsen; G. A. Romanov; T. Schmülling, BMC Evol. Biol. 2007, 7, 62.
523. G. A. Romanov; S. N. Lomin; T. Schmülling, J. Exp. Bot. 2006, 57, 4051–4058.
524. K. Yonekura-Sakakibara; M. Kojima; T. Yamaya; H. Sakakibara, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1654–1661.
525. L. Du; F. Jiao; J. Chu; G. Jin; M. Chen; P. Wu, Genomics 2007, 89, 697–707.
526. I. Hwang; J. Sheen, Nature 2001, 413, 383–389.
527. T. Kakimoto, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2003, 54, 605–627.
528. H. Yamada; N. Koizumi; N. Nakamichi; T. Kiba; T. Yamashino; T. Mizuno, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68,
1966–1976.
529. T. Suzuki; A. Imamura; C. Ueguchi; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 1998, 39, 1258–1268.
530. T. Suzuki; K. Sakurai; A. Imamura; A. Nakamura; C. Ueguchi; T. Mizuno, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2000, 64, 2486–2489.
531. Y. Tanaka; T. Suzuki; T. Yamashino; T. Mizuno, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 462–465.
532. T. Suzuki; K. Ishikawa; T. Yamashino; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2002, 43, 123–129.
533. I. Brandstatter; J. J. Kieber, Plant Cell 1998, 10, 1009–1019.
534. A. Imamura; N. Hanaki; A. Nakamura; T. Suzuki; M. Taniguchi; T. Kiba; C. Ueguchi; T. Sugiyama; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol.
1999, 40, 733–742.
535. T. Kiba; K. Aoki; H. Sakakibara; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2004, 45, 1063–1077.
536. I. B. D’Agostino; J. Deruère; J. J. Kieber, Plant Physiol. 2000, 124, 1706–1717.
537. T. Kiba; H. Yamada; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2002, 43, 1059–1066.
538. A. M. Rashotte; S. D. Carson; J. P. To; J. J. Kieber, Plant Physiol. 2003, 132, 1998–2011.
539. J. P. To; J. Deruère; B. B. Maxwell; V. F. Morris; C. E. Hutchison; F. J. Ferreira; G. E. Schaller; J. J. Kieber, Plant Cell 2007, 19,
3901–3914.
540. T. Kiba; H. Yamada; S. Sato; T. Kato; S. Tabata; T. Yamashino; T. Mizuno, Plant Cell Physiol. 2003, 44, 868–874.
541. N. Hirose; N. Makita; M. Kojima; T. Kamada-Nobusada; H. Sakakibara, Plant Cell Physiol. 2007, 48, 523–539.
542. A. Giulini; J. Wang; D. Jackson, Nature 2004, 430, 1031–1034.
543. T. Kiba; M. Taniguchi; A. Imamura; C. Ueguchi; T. Mizuno; T. Sugiyama, Plant Cell Physiol. 1999, 40, 767–771.
544. H. Sakai; T. Honma; T. Aoyama; S. Sato; T. Kato; S. Tabata; A. Oka, Science 2001, 294, 1519–1521.
545. M. G. Mason; D. E. Mathews; D. A. Argyros; B. B. Maxwell; J. J. Kieber; J. M. Alonso; J. R. Ecker; G. E. Schaller, Plant Cell 2005,
17, 3007–3018.
110 Plant Hormones

546. A. M. Rashotte; M. G. Mason; C. E. Hutchison; F. J. Ferreira; G. E. Schaller; J. J. Kieber, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103,
11081–11085.
547. N. Hirai, Abscisic Acid. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi, O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.; Pergamon:
Amsterdam, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed., Section 8.02.5, pp 72–91.
548. F. T. Addicott, Ed., Abscisic Acid; Praeger: New York; 1983.
549. K. Ohkuma; F. T. Addicott; O. E. Smith; W. E. Thiessen, Tetrahedron Lett. 1965, 2529–2535.
550. J. W. Cornforth; B. V. Milborrow; G. Ryback, Nature 1965, 206, 715.
551. K. Koshimizu; H. Fukui; T. Mitsui; Y. Ogawa, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1966, 30, 941–943.
552. J. W. Cornforth; B. V. Milborrow; G. Ryback; P. F. Wareing, Nature 1965, 205, 1269–1270.
553. F. T. Addicott; J. L. Lyon; K. Ohkuma; W. E. Thiessen; H. R. Carns; O. E. Smith; J. W. Cornforth; B. V. Milborrow; G. Ryback;
P. F. Wareing, Science 1968, 159, 1493.
554. J. W. Cornforth; W. Draber; B. V. Milborrow; G. Ryback, Chem. Commun. 1967, 114–116.
555. R. S. Cahn; C. Inglod; V. Prelog, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1966, 5, 385–415.
556. H. F. Taylor; R. S. Burden, Proc. R. Soc. London B. 1972, 180, 317–346.
557. G. Ryback, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1972, 1190–1191.
558. N. Harada, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 240–242.
559. M. Koreeda; G. Weiss; K. Nakanishi, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1973, 95, 239–240.
560. K. Mori, Tetrahedron 1974, 30, 1065–1072.
561. R. J. Pryce, Phytochemistry 1972, 11, 1759–1761.
562. M. Nakayama; T. Takase; T. Yokota, In Abstract of the XV International Botanical Congress; Yokohama, Japan, 1993; p 388.
563. W. J. Davies; H. G. Jones, Eds., Abscisic Acid – Physiology and Biochemistry; Bios Scientific Publishers: Oxford, 1991.
564. G. Assante; L. Merlini; G. Nasini, Experientia 1977, 33, 1556–1557.
565. K. Dörffling; W. Petersen, Z. Naturforsch. 1984, 39, 683–684.
566. J. Kettner; K. Dörffling, Planta 1995, 196, 627–634.
567. K. Audenaert; G. B. De Meyer; M. M. Höfte, Plant Physiol. 2002, 128, 491–501.
568. S. Bruzzone; I. Moreschi; C. Usai; L. Guida; G. Damonte; A. Salis; S. Scarfi; E. Millo; A. De Flora; E. Socchi, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2007, 104, 5759–5764.
569. M. T. Le Page-Degivry; J. N. Bidard; E. Rouvier; C. Bulard; M. Lazdunski, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1986, 83, 1155–1158.
570. B. V. Milborrow; R. Mallaby, J. Exp. Bot. 1975, 26, 741–748.
571. T. Matsuzaki; A. Koiwai, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1986, 50, 2193–2199.
572. A. J. Ciha; L. Brenner; W. A. Brun, Plant Physiol. 1977, 59, 821–826.
573. R. Antoszewski; R. Rudnicki, Anal. Biochem. 1969, 32, 233–237.
574. J. A. D. Zeevaart; B. V. Milborrow, Phytochemistry 1976, 15, 493–500.
575. Y. Okamoto; R. Aburatani; K. Hatada, J. Chromatogr. 1988, 448, 454–455.
576. M. Okamoto; H. Nakazawa, J. Chromatogr. 1990, 508, 217–219.
577. M. Okamoto; H. Nakazawa, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1993, 57, 1768–1769.
578. P. Hedden, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1993, 44, 107–129.
579. B. V. Milborrow, Biochem. J. 1984, 220, 325–332.
580. N. Hirai; S. Kondo; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 2408–2415.
581. K. Ohkuma; J. L. Lyon; F. T. Addicott; O. E. Smith, Science 1963, 142, 1592–1593.
582. R. Mallaby; G. Ryback, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. II 1972, 919–921.
583. M. H. Beale; A. Chen; P. A. Harrison; C. L. Willis, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. I 1993, 3061–3064.
584. R. D. Willows; A. G. Netting; B. V. Milborrow, Phytochemistry 1991, 30, 1483–1485.
585. R. T. Gray; R. Mallaby; G. Ryback; V. P. Williams, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. II 1974, 919–924.
586. B. Terem; J. H. P. Utley, Electrochim. Acta 1979, 24, 1081–1084.
587. N. Hirai; K. Iwami; M. Horiuchi; K. Kano; Y. Todoroki; H. Ohigashi, In Conference Handbook of the 19th Annual Meeting of
International Plant Growth Substances, Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, July 21–24, 2007; p 106.
588. J. MacMillan; R. J. Pryce, Tetrahedron 1969, 25, 5893–5901.
589. B. V. Milborrow, Phytochemistry 1975, 14, 1045–1053.
590. M. H. M. Cornelussen; C. M. Karssen; L. C. van Loon, Phytochemistry 1995, 39, 959–968.
591. B. V. Milborrow, Planta 1967, 76, 93–113.
592. Y. Todoroki; S. Nakano; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 8081–8098.
593. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai, Tetrahedron 2000, 56, 8095–8100.
594. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai, Abscisic Analogs for Probing the Mechanism of Abscisic Acid Reception and Inactivation. In Studies in
Natural Product Chemistry; Ed. Atta-ur-Rahman, Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2002; Vol. 27, pp 321–360.
595. H. Ueda; J. Tanaka, Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 1977, 50, 1506–1509.
596. V. H. W. Schmalle; K. H. Klaska; O. Jarchow, Acta Crystallogr. 1977, 33, 2218–2224.
597. B. V. Milborrow; N. J. Carrington; G. T. Vaughan, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 757–759.
598. T. Kitahara; K. Touhara; H. Watanabe; K. Mori, Tetrahedron 1989, 45, 6387–6400.
599. R. D. Bennett; S. M. Norman; V. P. Maier, Phytochemistry 1990, 29, 3473–3477.
600. M. Inomata; N. Hirai; N. Takeda; H. Ohigashi, J. Mass Spectrom. 2005, 40, 1035–1043.
601. T. G. Heath; D. A. Gage; J. A. D. Zeevaart; J. T. Watson, Org. Mass Spectrom. 1990, 25, 655–663.
602. L. Rivier; M. Saugy, J. Plant Growth Regul. 1986, 5, 1–16.
603. A. G. Netting; B. V. Milborrow, Biomed. Environ. Mass Spectrom. 1988, 17, 281–286.
604. C. Hornberg; E. W. Weiler, Nature 1984, 310, 321–324.
605. T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1970, 34, 830–837.
606. T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1970, 34, 198–203.
607. S. C. Chen; J. M. MacTaggart, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1986, 50, 1097–1100.
608. P. J. Orton; T. A. Mansfield, Planta 1974, 121, 263–272.
 Plant Hormones 111

609. B.-T. Kim; T. Asami; K. Morita; C.-H. Soh; N. Murofushi; S. Yoshida, Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 1992, 56, 624–629.
610. K. Raschke; R. D. Firn; M. Pierce, Planta 1975, 125, 149–160.
611. P. E. Kriedemann; B. R. Loveys; G. L. Fuller; A. C. Leopold, Plant Physiol. 1972, 49, 842–847.
612. R. D. Willows; B. V. Milborrow, Phytochemistry 1993, 32, 869–873.
613. K. Ueno; Y. Araki; N. Hirai; S. Saito; M. Mizutani; K. Sakata; Y. Todoroki, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2005, 13, 3359–3370.
614. T. R. Smith; A. J. Clark; G. J. Clarkson; P. C. Taylor; A. Marsh, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2006, 4, 4186–4192.
615. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1995, 40, 633–641.
616. P. A. Rose; B. Lei; A. C. Shaw; D. L. Barton; M. K. Walker-Simmons; S. R. Abrams, Phytochemistry 1996, 41, 1251–1258.
617. M. K. Walker-Simmons; P. A. Rose; A. C. Shaw; S. R. Abrams, Plant Physiol. 1994, 106, 1279–1284.
618. S. Nakano; Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 1995, 59, 1699–1706.
619. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1995, 38, 561–568.
620. T. W. Balko; S. C. Fields; J. D. Webster, Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 40, 6347–6351.
621. Y. Todoroki; S. Nakano; S. Arai; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotehnol. Biochem. 1997, 61, 2043–2045.
622. S. R. Abrams; P. A. Rose; A. J. Cutler; J. J. Balsevich; B. Lei; M. K. Walker-Simmons, Plant Physiol. 1997, 114, 89–97.
623. A. J. Cutler; P. A. Rose; T. M. Squires; M. K. Lowen; A. C. Shaw; J. W. Quail; J. E. Krochko; S. R. Abrams, Biochemistry 2000, 39,
13614–13624.
624. P. A. Rose; S. R. Abrams; L. V. Gusta, Phytochemistry 1992, 31, 1105–1110.
625. J. J. Balsevich; G. G. Bishop; G. M. Banowetz, Phytochemistry 1996, 44, 215–220.
626. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Tetrahedron 1995, 51, 6911–6926.
627. Y. Todoroki; T. Tanaka; M. Kisamori; N. Hirai, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2001, 11, 2381–2384.
628. T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1974, 38, 801–808.
629. D. C. Walton; E. Sondheimer, Plant Physiol. 1972, 49, 290–292.
630. D. R. C. Hite; W. H. Outlaw, Jr.; M. A. Seavy, Physiol. Plant. 1994, 92, 79–84.
631. N. M. Irvine; P. A. Rose; A. J. Cutler; T. M. Squires; S. R. Abrams, Phytochemistry 2000, 53, 349–355.
632. M. K. Walker-Simmons; R. J. Anderberg; P. A. Rose; S. R. Abrams, Plant Physiol. 1992, 99, 501–507.
633. R. D. Willows; B. V. Milborrow, Phytochemistry 1993, 34, 233–237.
634. E. Sondheimer; E. C. Galson; Y. P. Chang; D. C. Walton, Science 1971, 174, 829–831.
635. B. V. Milborrow, In Plant Growth Substances 1985, Proceedings of the International Conference of Plant Growth Substances,
Heidelberg, Germany, 1985; M. Bopp, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1986; pp 108–119.
636. B. V. Milborrow; D. R. Robinson, J. Exp. Bot. 1973, 24, 537–548.
637. A. K. Cowan; I. D. Railton, J. Plant Physiol. 1987, 131, 423–431.
638. H. Lichtenthaler; J. Schwender; A. Disch; M. Rohmer, FEBS Lett. 1997, 400, 271–274.
639. E. Nambara; A. Maion-Poll, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2005, 56, 165–185.
640. N. Hirai; R. Yoshida; Y. Todoroki; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2000, 64, 1448–1458.
641. S. H. Schwartz; X. Qin; J. A. D. Zeevaart, Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 1591–1601.
642. S. C. Duckham; R. S. T. Linforth; I. B. Taylor, Plant Cell Environ. 1991, 14, 601–606.
643. C. D. Rock; J. A. D. Zeevaart, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1991, 88, 7496–7499.
644. E. Marin; L. Nussaume; A. Quesada; M. Gonneau; B. Sotta; P. Hugueney; A. Frey; A. Marion-Poll, EMBO J. 1996, 15,
2331–2342.
645. C. Audran; C. Borel; A. Frey; B. Sotta; C. Meyer; T. Simonneau; A. Marion-Poll, Plant Physiol. 1998, 118, 1021–1028.
646. A. Frey; C. Audren; E. Marin; B. Sotta; A. Marion-Poll, Plant Mol. Biol. 1999, 39, 1267–1274.
647. A. J. Thompson; A. C. Jackson; R. A. Parker; D. R. Morpeth; A. Burbidge; I. B. Taylor, Plant Mol. Biol. 2000, 42, 833–845.
648. F. Bouvier; A. D’Harlingue; R. A. Backhaus; M. H. Kumagai; B. Camara, Eur. J. Biochem. 2000, 267, 6346–6352.
649. S. Al-Babili; P. Hugueney; M. Schledz; R. Welsch; H. Frohnmeyer; O. Laule; P. Beyer, FEBS Lett. 2000, 485, 168–172.
650. B. C. Tan; S. H. Schwartz; J. A. D. Zeevaart; D. R. McCarty, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 12235–12240.
651. S. H. Schwartz; B. C. Tan; D. A. Gage; J. A. D. Zeevaart; D. R. McCarty, Science 1997, 276, 1872–1874.
652. X. Qin; J. A. D. Zeevaart, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 15354–15361.
653. A. Burbidge; T. M. Grieve; A. Jackson; A. Thompson; D. R. McCarty; I. B. Taylor, Plant J. 1999, 17, 427–431.
654. A. J. Thompson; A. C. Jackson; R. C. Symonds; B. J. Mulholland; A. R. Dadswell; P. S. Blake; A. Burbidge; I. B. Taylor,
Plant J. 2000, 23, 363–374.
655. X. Qin; J. A. D. Zeevaart, Plant Physiol. 2002, 128, 544–551.
656. H. Sun-Young; N. Kitahata; K. Sekimata; T. Saito; M. Kobayashi; K. Nakashima; K. Yamaguchi-Shinozaki; K. Shinozaki;
S. Yoshida; T. Asami, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 1574–1582.
657. A. D. Parry; S. J. Neill; R. Horgan, Planta 1988, 173, 397–404.
658. R. K. Sindhu; D. C. Walton, Plant Physiol. 1987, 85, 916–921.
659. R. D. Firn; R. S. Burden; H. F. Taylor, Planta 1972, 102, 115–126.
660. H. Yamamoto; T. Oritani, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1997, 61, 1142–1145.
661. R. S. Burden; H. F. Taylor, Tetrahedron Lett. 1970, 11, 4071–4074.
662. R. K. Sindhu; D. H. Griffin; D. C. Walton, Plant Physiol. 1990, 93, 689–694.
663. S. H. Schwartz; K. M. Leon-Kloosterziel; M. Koornneef; J. A. D. Zeevaart, Plant Physiol. 1997, 114, 161–166.
664. M. Seo; H. Aoki; H. Koiwai; Y. Kamiya; E. Nambara; T. Koshiba, Plant Cell Physiol. 2004, 45, 1694–1703.
665. N. Hirai; M. Okamoto; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1986, 25, 1865–1868.
666. M. Okamoto; N. Hirai; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 2099–2103.
667. T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1987, 51, 275–278.
668. T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1985, 49, 245–249.
669. M. Inomata; N. Hirai; R. Yoshida; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 2571–2580.
670. S. J. Neill; R. Horgan; D. C. Walton; C. A. M. Mercer, Phytochemistry 1987, 26, 2515–2519.
671. M. Inomata; N. Hirai; R. Yoshida; H. Ohigashi, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 2667–2678.
672. V. Siewers; J. Smedsgaard; P. Tudzynski, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 3868–3876.
112 Plant Hormones

673. T. Kushiro; M. Okamoto; K. Nakabayashi; K. Yamagishi; S. Kitamura; T. Asami; N. Hirai; T. Koshiba; Y. Kamiya; E. Nambara,
EMBO J. 2004, 23, 1647–1656.
674. S. Saito; N. Hirai; C. Matsumoto; H. Ohigashi; D. Ohta; K. Sakata; M. Mizutani, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1439–1449.
675. H. Sakai; M. Okamoto; K. Miyoshi; T. Kushiro; S. Shinoda; Y. Jikumaru; M. Fujimoto; T. Arikawa; H. Takahashi; M. Ando;
S. Arimura; A. Miyao; H. Hirochika; Y. Kamiya; N. Tsutsumi; E. Nambara; M. Nakazono, Plant Cell Physiol. 2007, 48, 287–298.
676. S. Saito; M. Okamoto; S. Shinoda; T. Kushiro; T. Koshiba; Y. Kamiya; N. Hirai; Y. Todoroki; K. Sakata; E. Nambara; M. Mizutani,
Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 1731–1739.
677. N. Kitahata; S. Saito; T. Umezawa; Y. Miyazawa; Y. Shimada; Y. K. Min; M. Mizutani; N. Hirai; K. Shinozaki; S. Yoshida; T. Asami,
Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2005, 13, 4491–4498.
678. M. Mizutani; Y. Todoroki, Phytochem. Rev. 2006, 5, 385–404.
679. Y. Todoroki; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Tetrahedron 2000, 56, 1649–1653.
680. D. F. Gillard; D. C. Walton, Plant Physiol. 1976, 58, 790–795.
681. H. Yamane; S. Fujioka; C. R. Spray; B. O. Phinney; J. MacMillan; P. Gaskin; N. Takahashi, Plant Physiol. 1988, 86, 857–862.
682. L. I. Zaharia; Y. G. Gai; K. M. Nelson; S. J. Ambrose; S. R. Abrams, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 3199–3209.
683. J. Zou; G. D. Abrams; D. L. Barton; D. C. Taylor; M. K. Pomeroy; S. R. Abrams, Plant Physiol. 1995, 108, 563–571.
684. S. Arai; Y. Todoroki; S. Ibaraki; Y. Naoe; N. Hirai; H. Ohigashi, Phytochemistry 1999, 52, 1185–1193.
685. H. Lehmann; L. Schwenen, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 677–678.
686. R. Zhou; A. J. Cutler; S. J. Ambrose; M. M. Galka; K. M. Nelson; T. M. Squires; M. K. Loewen; A. S. Jadhav; A. R. S. Ross;
D. C. Taylor; S. R. Abrams, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 361–369.
687. S. Takahashi; T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1986, 50, 1589–1595.
688. S. J. Neill; R. Horgan; J. K. Heald, Planta 1983, 157, 371–375.
689. Z.-J. Xu; M. Nakajima; Y. Suzuki; I. Yamaguchi, Plant Physiol. 2002, 129, 1285–1295.
690. H. Lehmann; H. R. Schütte, Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 1980, 96, 277–280.
691. B. V. Milborrow, J. Exp. Bot. 1978, 29, 1059–1066.
692. B. R. Loveys; B. V. Milborrow, Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1981, 8, 571–589.
693. A. G. Netting; R. D. Willows; B. V. Milborrow, Plant Growth Regul. 1992, 11, 327–334.
694. N. Hirai; H. Fukui; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1978, 17, 1625–1627.
695. T. Kamo; N. Hirai; C. Matsumoto; H. Ohigashi; M. Hirota, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 2517–2520.
696. M. del R. Ramos; G. Jerz; S. Villanueva; F. Lopez-Dellamary; R. Waibel; P. Winterhalter, Phytochemistry 2004, 65,
955–962.
697. B. V. Milborrow, In Plant Growth Substances 1979, Proceedings of the International Conference of Plant Growth Substances,
Madison, WI, USA, 1979; F. Skoog, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1980; pp 262–273.
698. J. A. D. Zeevaart; G. L. Boyer, In Plant Growth Substances 1982, Proceedings of the International Conference of Plant Growth
Substances, Aberystwyth, UK, 1982; P. F. Wareing, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1982; pp 335–342.
699. N. Hirai; K. Koshimizu, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1983, 47, 365–371.
700. B. V. Milborrow; G. T. Vaughan, Aust. J. Plant Physiol. 1982, 9, 361–372.
701. A. M. Hetherington; R. S. Quatrano, New Phytol. 1991, 119, 9–32.
702. A. K. Dhawan; D. M. Paton, Annu. Bot. 1980, 45, 493–495.
703. A. B. Ogunkanmi; D. J. Tucker; T. A. Mansfield, New Phytol. 1973, 72, 277–282.
704. W. Hartung; S. Slovik, New Phytol. 1991, 119, 361–382.
705. J. I. Schroeder; J. M. Kwak; G. J. Allen, Nature 2001, 410, 327–330.
706. X. Hu; A. Zhang; J. Zhang; M. Jiang, Plant Cell Physiol. 2006, 47, 1484–1495.
707. E. M. Sivori; V. Sonvico; N. O. Fernandez, Plant Cell Physiol. 1971, 12, 993–996.
708. R. C. Nolan; L.-S. Lin; T.-H. D. Ho, Plant Mol. Biol. 1987, 8, 13–22.
709. T. Toyomasu; H. Yamane; N. Murofushi; Y. Inoue, Plant Cell Physiol. 1994, 35, 127–129.
710. J. Dommes; D. H. Northcote, Planta 1985, 165, 513–521.
711. S. Gilroy; R. L. Jones, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 3591–3595.
712. S. Cutler; M. Ghassemian; D. Bonetta; S. Cooney; P. McCourt, Science 1996, 273, 1239–1241.
713. A. A. Abou-Mandour; W. Hartung, Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 1980, 100, 25–33.
714. M. E. Bossen; A. Tretyn; R. E. Kendrick; W. J. Vredenberg, J. Plant Physiol. 1991, 137, 706–710.
715. D. H. Gaither; D. H. Lutz; L. E. Forrence, Plant Physiol. 1975, 55, 948–949.
716. J. A. D. Zeevaart; R. A. Creelman, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1988, 39, 439–473.
717. T. Hirayama; K. Shinozaki, Trends Plant Sci. 2007, 12, 343–351.
718. E. Grill; A. Christmann, Science 2007, 315, 1676–1677.
719. B. Leyman; D. Geelen; M. R. Blatt, Plant J. 2000, 24, 369–381.
720. F. A. Razem; R. D. Hill, Cell Biol. 2007, 85, 628–637.
721. Y.-Y. Shen; X.-F. Wang; F.-Q. Wu; S.-Y. Du; Z. Cao; Y. Shang; X.-L. Wang; C.-C. Peng; X.-C. Yu; S.-Y. Zhu; R.-C. Fan; Y.-H. Xu;
D.-P. Zhang, Nature 2006, 443, 823–826.
722. Y. Osakabe; K. Maruyama; M. Seki; M. Satou; K. Shinozaki; K. Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 1105–1119.
723. F. A. Razem; A. El-Kereamy; S. R. Abrams; R. D. Hill, Nature 2006, 439, 290–294.
724. F. A. Razem; A. El-Kereamy; S. R. Abrams; R. D. Hill, Nature 2008, 456, E5.
725. X. Liu; Y. Yue; B. Lin; Y. Nie; W. Li; W.-H. Wu; L. Ma, Science 2007, 315, 1712–1716.
726. Y. Gao; Q. Zeng; J. Guo; J. Cheng; B. E. Ellis; J.-G. Chen, Plant J. 2007, published online 26 September 2007.
727. C. A. Johnson; B. R. Temple; J.-G. Chen; Y. Gao; E. N. Moriyama; A. M. Jones; D. P. Siderovski; F. S. Willard, Science 2007,
318, 914c.
728. RIKEN Plant Functional Research Group. RIKEN Arabidopsis Genome Encylopedia. http://rarge.psc.riken.jp/
729. N. Leonhardt; J. M. Kwak; N. Robert; D. Waner; G. Leonhardt; J. I. Shroeder, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 596–615.
730. S. Takahashi; M. Seki; J. Ishida; M. Satou; T. Sakurai; M. Narusaka; A. Kamiya; M. Nakajima; A. Enju; K. Akiyama, Plant Mol.
Biol. 2004, 56, 29–55.
 Plant Hormones 113

731. R. R. Finkelstein; C. D. Rock, Abscisic Acid Biosynthesis and Response. In The Arabidopsis Book; C. Somerville, E. Meyerowitz,
Eds.; American Society of Plant Biologists: Rockville, MD. doi/10.1199/tab.0058, http://www.aspb.org/publications/
arabidopsis/
732. P. M. Chandler; M. Robertson, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1994, 45, 113–141.
733. N. B. Mandava, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1988, 39, 23–52.
734. T. Yokota, Trends Plant Sci. 1997, 2, 137–143.
735. S. Fujioka; A. Sakurai, Nat. Prod. Rep. 1997, 14, 1–10.
736. S. D. Clouse; J. M. Sasse, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1998, 49, 427–451.
737. T. Yokota, Brassinosteroids. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; D. Barton, K. Nakanishi, O. Meth-Cohn, Eds.;
Elsevier: Oxford, 1999; Vol. 8; K. Mori, Ed. pp 99–107.
738. T. Yokota, Brassinosteroids. In Biochemistry and Molecular Biology of Plant Hormones; P. J. J. Hooykaas, K. R. Libbenga,
M. A. Hall, Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1999; pp 277–293.
739. A. Sakurai; T. Yokota; S. D. Clouse, Eds., Brassinosteroids: Steroidal Plant Hormones; Springer-Verlag: Tokyo, 1999.
740. K. Khripach; V. N. Zhabinskii; A. E. de Groot, Eds., Brassinosteroids: A New Class of Plant Hormones; Academic Press: San
Diego, CA, 1999.
741. G. J. Bishop; T. Yokota, Plant Cell Physiol. 2001, 42, 114–120.
742. A. Bajguz; A. Tretyn, Phytochemistry 2003, 62, 1027–1046.
743. S. Hyat; A. Ahmad, Eds., Brassinosteroids: Bioactivity and Crop Productivity; Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht, 2003.
744. T. Asami; T. Nakano; S. Fujioka, Vitam. Horm. 2005, 72, 479–504.
745. S. Marumo; H. Hattori; H. Abe; Y. Nonoyama; K. Munakata, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1968, 32, 528–529.
746. J. W. Mitchell; N. Mandava; J. F. Worley; J. R. Plimmer, Nature 1970, 225, 1065–1066.
747. M. D. Grove; G. F. Spencer; W. K. Rohwedder; N. Mandava; J. F. Worley; J. D. Warthen; G. L. Steffens; J. Flippen-Anderson;
J. C. Cook, Jr., Nature 1979, 281, 216–217.
748. T. Yokota; M. Arima; N. Takahashi, Tetrahedron Lett. 1982, 23, 1275–1278.
749. T. Yokota; J. Baba; N. Takahashi, Tetrahedron Lett. 1982, 23, 4965–4966.
750. Y.-S. Kim; Y. H. Sup; T.-W. Kim; S.-H. Joo; S.-K. Kim, Bull. Korean Chem. Soc. 2002, 23, 941–942.
751. W. R. Nes, Adv. Lipid Res. 1977, 15, 233–324.
752. K. Wada; S. Marumo; H. Abe; T. Morishita; K. Nakamura; M. Uchiyama; K. Mori, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1984, 48, 719–726.
753. T. Yokota; S. Watanabe; Y. Ogino; I. Yamaguchi; N. Takahashi, J. Plant Growth Regul. 1990, 9, 151–159.
754. N. Ikekawa; S. Takatsuto, Mass Spectrosc. 1984, 32, 55–70.
755. K. Gamoh; S. Takatsuto, J. Chromatogr. 1994, 658, 17–25.
756. K. Gamoh; M. C. Prescott; L. J. Goad; S. Takatsuto, Bunseki Kagaku 1996, 45, 523–527 (in Japanese).
757. S. Asakawa; H. Abe; N. Nishikawa; M. Natsume; M. Koshioka, Biosci. Biotech. Biochem. 1996, 58, 1416–1420.
758. Y. Jikumaru; A. Hanada; M. Sato; H. Kasahara; E. Nambara; S. Yamaguchi; Y. Kamiya, Regul. Plant Growth Dev. 2007, 42,
167–175 (in Japanese).
759. A. Porzel; V. Marquardt; G. Adam; G. Massiot; D. Zeigen, Magn. Reson. Chem. 1992, 30, 651–657.
760. T. Ando; M. Aburatani; N. Koseki; S. Asakawa; T. Mouri; H. Abe, Magn. Reson. Chem. 1993, 31, 94–99.
761. G. Adam; A. Porzel; J. Schmidt; B. Schneider; B. Voigt, New Developments in Brassinosteroid Research. In Studies in Natural
Products Chemistry; A. Rahman, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, 1996; Vol. 18, pp 495–549.
762. V. Marquardt; G. Adam, Recent Advances in Brassinosteroid Research. In Chemistry of Plant Protection; W. Ebing, Ed.;
Springer: Heidelberg, 1991; Vol. 7, pp 103–139.
763. M. Aburatani; T. Takeuchi; K. Mori, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1987, 51, 1909–1913.
764. T. C. McMorris, Lipids 1997, 32, 1303–1308.
765. D. L. Anderson; T. G. Back; L. Janzen; K. Michalak; R. P. Pharis; G. C. Y. Sung, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 7129–7141.
766. T. Yokota; K. Mori, Molecular Structure and Biological Activity of Brassinolide and Related Brassinosteroids. In Molecular
Structure and Biological Activity of Steroids; M. Bohl, W. L. Duax, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1992; pp 317–340.
767. M. J. Thompson; W. J. Meudt; N. B. Mandava; S. R. Dutky; W. R. Lusby; D. W. Spaulding, Steroids 1982, 39, 89–105.
768. K. Wada; S. Marumo, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1981, 45, 2579–2585.
769. S. Takatsuto; N. Ikekawa; T. Morishita; H. Abe, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1987, 35, 211–216.
770. K. Mori; T. Takeuchi, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1988, 815–818.
771. T. G. Back; L. Janzen; S. K. Nakajima; R. P. Pharis, J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64, 5494–5498.
772. H. Seto; S. Fujioka; H. Koshino; S. Yoshida; M. Tsubuki; T. Honda, Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 8341–8352.
773. R. P. Pharis; L. Janzen; S. K. Nakajima; J. Zhu; T. G. Back, Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 1043–1047.
774. H. Seto; S. Fujioka; H. Koshino; T. Suenaga; S. Yoshida; T. Watanabe; S. Takatsuto, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 1 1998,
3355–3358.
775. H. Seto; S. Fujioka; H. Koshino; T. Suenaga; S. Yoshida; T. Watanabe; S. Takatsuto, Phytochemistry 1999, 52, 815–818.
776. T. Yokota; Y. Ogino; N. Takahashi; H. Saimoto; S. Fujioka; A. Sakurai, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 1107–1108.
777. S. Fujioka; T. Yokota, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2003, 54, 137–164.
778. A. Crozier; Y. Kamiya; G. Bishop; T. Yokota, Biosynthesis of Hormones and Elicitor Molecules. In Biochemistry & Molecular
Biology of Plants; B. B. Buchanan, W. Gruissem, R. L. Jones, Eds.; American Society of Plant Physiologists: Rockville, IN, 2000;
pp 850–929.
779. S. Fujioka; S. Takatsuto; S. Yoshida, Plant Physiol. 2002, 130, 930–939.
780. T. Ohnishi; A.-M. Szatmari; B. Watanabe; S. Fujita; S. Bancos; C. Koncz; M. Lafos; K. Shibata; T. Yokota; K. Sakata;
M. Szekeres; M. Mizutani, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 3275–3288.
781. T. Altmann, Planta 1999, 208, 1–11.
782. G. J. Bishop, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2003, 22, 325–335.
783. M. Chono; I. Honda; H. Zeniya; K. Yoneyama; D. Saisho; K. Takeda; S. Takatsuto; T. Hoshino; Y. Watanabe, Plant Physiol. 2003,
133, 1209–1219.
784. A. Hong; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; M. Matsuoka, J. Pest. Sci. 2004, 29, 184–188.
114 Plant Hormones

785. T. Sakamoto; Y. Morinaka; T. Ohnishi; H. Sunohara; S. Fujioka; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; M. Mizutani; K. Sakata; S. Takatusto;
S. Yoshida; H. Tanaka; H. Kitano; M. Matsuoka, Nat. Biotechnol. 2006, 24, 105–109.
786. T. Asami; T. Nakano; H. Nakashita; K. Sekimata; Y. Shimada; S. Yoshida, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2003, 22, 336–349.
787. S. Fujioka; T. Inoue; S. Takatsuto; T. Yanagisawa; T. Yokota; A. Sakurai, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1995, 59, 1543–1547.
788. S. Fujita; T. Ohnishi; B. Watanabe; T. Yokota; S. Takatsuto; S. Fujioka; S. Yoshida; K. Sakata; M. Mizutani, Plant J. 2006, 45,
765–774.
789. T. Ohnishi; B. Watanabe; K. Sakata; M. Mizutani, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 2071–2080.
790. G. J. Bishop; T. Nomura; T. Yokota; K. Harrison; T. Noguchi; S. Fujioka; S. Takatsuto; J. D. Jones; Y. Kamiya, Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 1761–1766.
791. T. Noguchi; S. Fujioka; S. Choe; S. Takatsuto; F. E. Tax; S. Yoshida; K. A. Feldmann, Plant Physiol. 2000, 124, 201–209.
792. Y. Shimada; S. Fujioka; N. Miyauchi; M. Kushiro; S. Takatsuto; T. Nomura; T. Yokota; Y. Kamiya; G. J. Bishop; S. Yoshida, Plant
Physiol. 2001, 126, 770–779.
793. T. Nomura; T. Sato; G. J. Bishop; Y. Kamiya; S. Takatsuto; T. Yokota, Phytochemistry 2001, 57, 171–178.
794. T. Nomura; M. Ueno; Y. Yamada; S. Takatsuto; Y. Takeuchi; T. Yokota, Plant Physiol. 2007, 143, 1680–1688.
795. T.-W. Kim; S. C. Chang; J. S. Lee; S. Takatsuto; T. Yokota; S.-K. Kim, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 1231–1242.
796. T. Yokota; T. Sato; Y. Takeuchi; T. Nomura; K. Uno; T. Watanabe; S. Takatsuto, Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 233–238.
797. S. Fujioka; T. Noguchi; M. Sekimoto; S. Takatsuto; S. Yoshida, Phytochemistry 2000, 55, 97–101.
798. T. W. Kim; S. C. Chang; J. Choo; T. Watanabe; S. Takatsuto; T. Yokota; J. S. Lee; S. Y. Kim; S.-K. Kim, Plant Cell Physiol. 2000,
41, 1171–1174.
799. A. P. Antonchick; B. Schneider; V. N. Zhabinskii; O. V. Konstantinova; V. A. Khripach, Phytochemistry 2003, 63, 771–776.
800. A. P. Antonchick; A. Svatos; B. Schneider; O. V. Konstantinova; V. N. Zhabinskii; V. A. Khripach, Phytochemistry 2005, 66,
65–72.
801. T. Nomura; T. Kushiro; T. Yokota; Y. Kamiya; G. J. Bishop; S. Yamaguchi, J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 17873–17879.
802. T.-W. Kim; J.-Y. Hwang; Y.-S. Kim; S.-E. Joo; S. C. Chang; J. S. Lee; S. Takatsuto; S.-K. Kim, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 2397–2412.
803. H. Goda; Y. Shimada; T. Asami; S. Fujioka; S. Yoshida, Plant Physiol. 2002, 130, 1319–1334.
804. T. Ohnishi; T. Nomura; B. Watanabe; D. Ohta; T. Yokota; H. Miyagawa; K. Sakata; M. Mizutani, Phytochemistry 2006, 67,
1895–1906.
805. M. M. Neff; S. M. Nguyen; E. J. Malancharuvil; S. Fujioka; T. Noguchi; H. Seto; M. Tsubuki; T. Honda; S. Takatsuto; S. Yoshida;
J. Chory, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 15316–15323.
806. E. M. Turk; S. Fujioka; H. Seto; Y. Shimada; S. Takatsuto; S. Yoshida; M. A. Denzel; Q. I. Torresm; M. M. Neff, Plant Physiol.
2003, 133, 1643–1653.
807. M. Nakamura; T. Satoh; S. Tanaka; N. Mochizuki; T. Yokota; A. Nagatani, J. Exp. Bot. 2005, 56, 833–840.
808. N. Takahashi; M. Nakazawa; K. Shibata; T. Yokota; A. Ishikawa; K. Suzuki; M. Kawashima; T. Ichikawa; H. Shimada; M. Matsui,
Plant J. 2005, 42, 13–22.
809. M. Turk; S. Fujioka; H. Seto; Y. Shimada; S. Takatsuto; S. Yoshida; H. Wang; Q. I. Torres; J. M. Ward; G. Murthy; J. Zhang;
J. C. Walker; M. M. Neff, Plant J. 2005, 42, 23–34.
810. B. Poppenberger; S. Fujioka; K. Soeno; G. L. George; F. E. Vaistij; S. Hiranuma; H. Seto; S. Takatsuto; G. Adam; S. Yoshida;
D. Bowles, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102, 15253–15258.
811. F. Marsolais; J. Boyd; Y. Paredes; A.-M. Schinas; M. Garcia; W. Elzein; L. Varin, Planta 2007, 225, 1233–1244.
812. H. G. Cutler; T. Yokota; G. Adam, Eds., Brassinosteroids – Chemistry, Bioactivity and Applications; ACS Symposium Series No.
474; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1991.
813. S.-K. Kim; S. C. Chang; E. J. Lee; W.-S. Chung; Y.-S. Kim; S. Hwang; J. S. Lee, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 997–1004.
814. A. Nakamura; K. Higuchi; H. Goda; M. Fujiwara; S. Sawa; T. Koshiba; Y. Shimada; S. Yoshida, Plant Physiol. 2003, 133, 1843–1853.
815. H. Goda; S. Sawa; T. Asami; S. Fujioka; Y. Shimada; S. Yoshida, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1555–1573.
816. J. Nemhauser; J. Chory, J. Exp. Bot. 2004, 55, 265–270.
817. C. S. Thummel; J. Chory, Genes Dev. 2002, 16, 3113–3129.
818. G. J. Bishop; C. Koncz, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 97–110.
819. J. Li; H. Jin, Trends Plant Sci. 2006, 12, 37–41.
820. A. Cano-Delgado; Y. Yin; C. Yu; D. Vafeados; S. Mora-Garcia; J.-C. Cheng; K. H. Nam; J. Li; J. Chory, Development 2004, 131,
5341–5351.
821. E. Demole; E. Lederer; D. Mercier, Helv. Chim. Acta 1962, 45, 675–685.
822. H. Fukui; K. Koshimizu; S. Usuda; Y. Yamazaki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1977, 41, 175–180.
823. J. Ueda; J. Kato, Plant Physiol. 1980, 66, 2074.
824. H. Yamane; N. Murofushi; H. Osada; N. Takahashi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1980, 44, 2857–2864.
825. H. Yamane; H. Takagi; H. Abe; T. Yokota; N. Takahashi, Plant Cell Physiol. 1981, 22, 689–697.
826. B. A. Vick; D. C. Zimmerman, Plant Physiol. 1984, 75, 458–461.
827. T. Yoshihara; E. A. Omer; H. Koshino; S. Sakamura; Y. Kikuta; Y. Koda, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1989, 53, 2835–2837.
828. R. A. Weidhase; R. Kramell; J. Lehmann; H. W. Liebisch; W. Lerbs; B. Parthier, Plant Sci. 1987, 51, 177–186.
829. R. A. Weidhase; J. Lehmann; R. Kramell; G. Sembdner; B. Parthier, Physiol. Plant. 1987, 69, 161–166.
830. E. E. Farmer; C. A. Ryan, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1990, 87, 7713–7716.
831. H. Gundlach; M. J. Müller; T. M. Kutchan; M. H. Zenk, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 2389–2393.
832. B. J. F. Feys; C. E. Benedetti; C. N. Penfold; J. G. Turner, Plant Cell 1994, 6, 751–759.
833. M. McConn; J. Browse. Plant Cell 1996, 8, 403–416.
834. P. M. Sanders; P. Y. Lee; C. Biesgen; J. D. Boone; T. P. Beals; E. W. Weiler; R. B. Goldberg, Plant Cell 2000, 12,
1041–1061.
835. A. Stintzi; J. Browse, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000, 97, 10625–10630.
836. J. H. Park; R. Halitschke; H. B. Kim; I. T. Baldwin; K. A. Feldmann; R. Feyereisen, Plant J. 2002, 31, 1–12.
837. D. X. Xie; B. F. Feys; S. James; M. Nieto-Rostro; J. G. Turner, Science 1998, 280, 1091–1094.
838. P. E. Staswick; B. Serban; M. Rowe; I. Tiryaki; M. T. Maldonado; M. C. Maldonado; W. Suza, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 616–627.
 Plant Hormones 115

839. A. Chini; S. Fonseca; G. Fernandez; B. Adie; J. M. Chico; O. Lorenzo; G. Garcia-Casado; I. Lopez-Vidriero; F. M. Lozano;
M. R. Ponce; J. L. Micol; R. Solano, Nature 2007, 448, 661–665.
840. B. Thines; L. Katsir; M. Melotto; Y. Niu; A. Mandaokar; G. Liu; K. Nomura; S. Y. He; G. A. Howe; J. Browse, Nature 2007, 448,
666–671.
841. C. Wasternack, Ann. Bot. 2007, 1–17.
842. H. Seto; E. Nomura; S. Fujioka; H. Koshino; T. Suenaga; S. Yoshida, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1999, 63, 361–367.
843. H. Seto; S. Fujioka; H. Fujisawa; K. Goto; H. Nojiri; H. Yamane; S. Yoshida, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1996, 60, 1709–1711.
844. T. Ainai; M. Matsuumi; Y. Kobayashi, J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68, 7825–7832.
845. Y. Kobayashi; M. Matsuumi, Tetrahedron Lett. 2002, 43, 4361–4364.
846. H. Nonaka; Y.-G. Wang; Y. Kobayashi, Tetrahedron Lett. 2007, 48, 5601–5604.
847. G. Helmchen; A. Goeke; G. Lauer; M. Urmann; J. Fries, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1990, 29, 1024–1025.
848. T. Kitahara; T. Nishi; K. Mori, Tetrahedron 1991, 47, 6999–7006.
849. H. Stadtmüller; A. Vaupel; C. E. Tucker; T. Stüdemann; P. Knochel, Chem. Eur. J. 1996, 2, 1204–1220.
850. F.-P. Montforts; I. Gesing-Zibulak; W. Grammenos; M. Schneider; K. Laumen, Helv. Chim. Acta 1989, 72, 1852–1859.
851. C. Bolm; E. Winterfeldt, Liebigs Ann. 1996, 1209–1212.
852. H. Nonaka; Y.-G. Wang; Y. Kobayashi, epi-Jasmonic acid. IKCOC-10, PB-139; Kyoto, Japan, 2006, pp 13–17.
853. H. Tanaka; S. Torii, J. Org. Chem. 1975, 40, 462–465.
854. J. Takehara; T. Oritani; K. Yamashita, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1991, 55, 2939–2944.
855. G. J. Roth; S. Kirschbaum; H. J. Bestmann, Synlett 1997, 618–620.
856. P. A. Grieco; N. Abood, J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 6008–6010.
857. C. Fehr; J. Galindo, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 569–573.
858. T. K. Sarkar; B. Mukherjee; S. K. Ghosh, Tetrahedron 1998, 54, 3243–3254.
859. K. Suzuki; K. Inomata; Y. Endo, Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 409–411.
860. M. Ito; M. Matsuumi; M. G. Murugesh; Y. Kobayashi, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 5881–5889.
861. Y. Kobayashi; K. Nakata; T. Ainai, Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 183–186.
862. K. Nakata; Y. Kobayashi, Org. Lett. 2005, 7, 1319–1322.
863. K. Yagi; H. Nonaka; H. P. Acharya; K. Furukawa; T. Ainai; Y. Kobayashi, Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 4933–4940.
864. M. Ernst; G. Helmchen, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2002, 41, 4054–4056.
865. L. Crombie; K. M. Mistry, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. 1, 1991, 1981–1991.
866. M. Inoue; T. Kitahara, Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 4621–4630.
867. E. Bell; R. A. Creelman; J. E. Mullet, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 8675–8679.
868. D. Laudert; F. Schaller; E. W. Weiler, Planta 2000, 211, 163–165.
869. I. Stenzel; B. Hause; O. Miersch; R. Kramell; T. Kurz; H. Maucher; H. Weichert; J. Ziegler; I. Feussner; C. Wasternack, Plant Mol.
Biol. 2003, 51, 895–911.
870. H. Weber; B. A. Vick; E. E. Farmer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 10473–10478.
871. F. L. Theodoulou; K. Job; S. P. Slocombe; S. Footitt; M. Holdsworth; A. Baker; T. R. Larson; I. A. Graham, Plant Physiol. 2005,
137, 835–840.
872. A. J. Koo; H. S. Chung; Y. Kobayashi; G. A. Howe, J. Biol. Chem. 2006, 281, 333511–333520.
873. J. Strassner; F. Schaller; U. B. Frick; G. A. Howe; E. W. Weiler; N. Amrhein; P. Macheroux; A. Schaller, Plant J. 2002, 32, 585–601.
874. S. Reumann; C. Ma; S. Lemke; L. Babujee, Plant Physiol. 2004, 136, 2587–2608.
875. P. E. Staswick; W. Su; S. H. Howell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 6837–6840.
876. H. S. Seo; J. T. Song; J. J. Cheong; Y. H. Lee; Y. W. Lee; I. Hwang; J. S. Lee; Y. D. Choi, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98,
4788–4793.
877. S. Ishiguro; A. Kawai-Oda; J. Ueda; I. Nishida; K. Okada, Plant Cell 2001, 13, 2191–2209.
878. C. M. Buseman; P. Tamura; A. A. Sparks; E. J. Baughman; S. Maatta; J. Zhao; M. R. Roth; S. W. Esch; J. Shah; T. D. Williams;
R. Welti, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 28–39.
879. B. A. Stelmach; A. Müller; P. Hennig; S. Gebhardt; M. Schubert-Zsilavecz; E. W. Weiler, J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276,
12832–12838.
880. Y. Hisamatsu; N. Goto; K. Hasegawa; H. Shigemori, Tetrahedron Lett. 2003, 44, 5553–5556.
881. Y. Hisamatsu; N. Goto; M. Sekiguchi; K. Hasegawa; H. Shigemori, J. Nat. Prod. 2005, 68, 600–603.
882. M. X. Andersson; M. Hamberg; O. Kourtchenko; Å. Brunnström; K. L. McPhail; W. H. Gerwick; C. Göbel; I. Feussner; M.
Ellerström, J. Biol. Chem. 281, 31528–31537.
883. M. J. Mueller, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2004, 7, 441–448.
884. I. Thoma; C. Loeffler; A. K. Sinha; M. Gupta; B. Steffan; M. Krischke; T. Roitsch; M. J. Mueller, Plant J. 2003, 34, 363–375.
885. E. Almeras; S. Stolz; S. Vollenweider; P. Reymond; L. Mene-Saffrane; E. E. Farmer, Plant J. 2003, 34, 205–216.
886. M. McConn; R. A. Creelman; E. Bell; J. E. Mullet; J. Browse, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 5473–5477.
887. R. Ozawa; G. Arimura; J. Takabayashi; T. Shimoda; T. Nishioka, Plant Cell Physiol. 2000, 41, 391–398.
888. R. A. Creelman; J. E. Mullet, Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 48, 355–381.
889. I. T. Baldwin; Z. P. Zhang; N. Diab; T. E. Ohnmeiss; E. S. McCloud; G. Y. Lynds; E. A. Schmelz, Planta 1997, 201, 397–404.
890. P. Reymond; H. Weber; M. Damond; E. E. Farmer, Plant Cell 2000, 12, 707–720.
891. Y. Sasaki; E. Asamizu; D. Shibata; Y. Nakamura; T. Kaneko; K. Awai; M. Amagai; C. Kuwata; T. Tsugane; T. Masuda;
H. Shimada; K. Takamiya; H. Ohta; S. Tabata, DNA Res. 2001, 8, 153–161.
892. Y. Sasaki-Sekimoto; N. Taki; T. Obayashi; F. Matsumoto; M. Aono; N. Sakurai; H. Suzuki; M. Yokota-Hirai; M. Noji; K. Saito;
T. Masuda; K. Takamiya; D. Shibata; H. Ohta, Plant J. 2005, 44, 653–668.
893. P. E. Staswick; G. Y. Yuen; C. C. Lehman, Plant J. 1998, 15, 747–754.
894. P. H. J. Thomma; K. Eggermont; I. A. M. A. Penninckx; B. Mauch-Mani; R. Vogelsang; B. P. A. Cammue; W. F. B. Broekaert,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 15107–15111.
895. C. Wasternack; B. Hause, Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 2002, 72, 165–221.
896. L. Li; C. Li; G. I. Lee; G. A. Howe, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 6416–6421.
116 Plant Hormones

897. C. Li; A. L. Schilmiller; G. L. Liu; G. I. Lee; S. Jayanty; C. Sageman; J. J. Giovannoni; K. Yagi; Y. Kobayashi; G. A. Howe, Plant Cell
2005, 17, 987–999.
898. G. Brader; E. Tas; E. T. Palva, Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 849–860.
899. A. Goossens; S. T. Häkkinen; I. Seppänen-Laakso; S. Biondi; V. De Sutter; F. Lammertyn; A. M. Nuutila; H. Söderlund;
M. Zabeau; D. Inzé; K. M. Oksman-Caldentey, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 8595–8600.
900. J. Memelink; R. Verpoorte; J. W. Kijne, Trends Plant Sci. 2001, 6, 212–219.
901. L. van der Fits; J. Memelink, Science 2000, 289, 295–297.
902. K. Overmyer; M. Brosché; J. Kangasjärvi, Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8, 335–342.
903. M. V. Rao; K. R. Davis, Planta 2001, 213, 682–690.
904. K. Overmyer; H. Tuominen; R. Kettunen; C. Betz; C. Langebartels; H. Sandermann; J. Kangasjärvi, Plant Cell 2000, 12,
1849–1862.
905. A. Stintzi; H. Weber; P. Reymond; J. Browse; E. E. Farmer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 12837–12842.
906. N. Taki; Y. Sasaki-Sekimoto; T. Obayashi; A. Kikuta; K. Kobayashi; T. Ainai; K. Yagi; N. Sakurai; H. Suzuki; T. Masuda;
K. Takamiya; D. Shibata; Y. Kobayashi; H. Ohta, Plant Physiol. 2005, 139, 1268–1283.
907. S. Berger; E. Bell; J. E. Mullet, Plant Physiol. 1996, 111, 525–531.
908. C. Ellis; I. Karafyllidis; C. Wasternack; J. G. Turner, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 1557–1566.
909. L. Li; Y. Zhao; B. C. McCaig; B. A. Wingerd; J. Wang; M. E. Whalon; E. Pichersky; G. A. Howe, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 126–143.
910. K. S. Gidda; O. Miersch; J. Schmidt; C. Wasternack; L. Varin. J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 17895–17900.
911. T. Tsuchiya; H. Ohta; K. Okawa; A. Iwamatsu; H. Shimada; T. Masuda; K. Takamiya, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96,
15362–15367.
912. Y. He; H. Fukushige; D. F. Hildebrand; S. Gan, Plant Physiol. 2002, 128, 876–884.
913. Y. Hisamatsu; N. Goto; K. Hasegawa; H. Shigemori, Zeit. Naturforsch. 2006, 61, 363–366.
914. S. Blechert; C. Bockelmann; M. Füßlein; V. T. Schrader; B. Stelmach; U. Niesel; E. W. Weiler, Planta 1999, 207, 470–479.
915. T. Ohashi; Y. Ito; M. Okada; Y. Sakagami, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2005, 15, 263–265.
916. J. C. del Pozo; M. Estelle, Plant Mol. Biol. 2000, 44, 123–128.
917. O. Lorenzo; R. Piqueras; J. J. Sánchez-Serrano; R. Solano, Plant Cell 2003, 15, 165–178.
918. O. Lorenzo; J. M. Chico; J. J. Sanchez-Serrano; R. Solano, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 1938–1950.
919. M. Boter; O. Ruız-Rivero; A. Abdeen; S. Prat, Genes Dev. 2004, 18, 1577–1591.
920. Y. Yan; S. Stolz; A. Chételat; P. Reymond; M. Pagni; L. Dubugnon; E. E. Farmer, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 2470–2483.
921. F. B. Abels; P. G. Morgan; M. K. Saltveit, Jr., Ethylene in Plant Biology, 2nd ed.; Academic Press: New York, 1992.
922. S. P. Burg; E. A. Burg, Plant Physiol. 1967, 42, 144–152.
923. E. M. Beyer, Jr., Plant Physiol. 1976, 58, 268–271.
924. E. C. Sisler; A. Pian, Tob. Sci. 1972, 17, 68–72.
925. E. C. Sisler; M. Serek, Physiol. Plant. 1997, 100, 577–582.
926. T. W. Chou; S. F. Yang, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1973, 157, 73–82.
927. J. E. Ince; C. J. Knowles, Arch. Microbiol. 1986, 146, 151–158.
928. S. F. Yang; N. E. Hoffman, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. 1984, 35, 155–189.
929. H. Kende, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1993, 44, 283–307.
930. C. S. Barry; M. I. Llop-Tous; D. Grierson, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 979–989.
931. M. Tatsuki; H. Mori, Plant Cell Physiol. 1999, 40, 709–715.
932. M. Tatsuki; H. Mori, J. Biol. Chem. 2001, 276, 28051–28057.
933. Y. Liu; S. Zhang, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 3386–3399.
934. H. S. Chae; J. J. Kieber, Trend Plant Sci. 2005, 10, 291–296.
935. P. Guzman; J. R. Ecker, Plant Cell 1990, 2, 513–523.
936. J. P. Vogel; K. W. Woeste; A. Theologis; J. J. Kieber, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 4766–4771.
937. H. S. Chae; F. Faure; J. J. Kieber, Plant Cell 2003, 15, 545–559.
938. K. L.-C. Wang; H. Yoshida; C. Lurin; J. R. Ecker, Nature 2004, 428, 945–950.
939. H. Yoshida; K. L.-C. Wang; C. M. Chang; K. Mori; E. Uchida; J. R. Ecker, Plant Mol. Biol. 2006, 62, 427–437.
940. H. Guo; J. R. Ecker, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2004, 7, 40–49.
941. C. Chang; S. F. Kwok; A. B. Bleecker; E. M. Meyerowitz, Science 1993, 262, 539–544.
942. J. Hau; C. Chang; Q. Sun; E. M. Meyerowitz, Science 1995, 269, 1712–1714.
943. J. Hau; H. Sakai; S. Nourizadeh; Q. G. Chen; A. B. Bleecker; J. R. Ecker; E. M. Meyerowitz, Plant Cell 1998, 10, 1321–1332.
944. H. Sakai; J. Hau; Q. G. Chen; C. Chang; L. J. Medrano; A. B. Bleecker; E. M. Meyerowitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95,
5812–5817.
945. J. J. Kieber; M. Rothenberg; G. Roman; K. A. feldmann; J. R. Ecker, Cell 1993, 72, 427–441.
946. J. M. Alonso; T. Hirayama; G. Roman; S. Nourizadeh; J. R. Ecker, Science 1999, 284, 2148–2152.
947. R. Solano; A. Stepanova; Q. Chao; J. R. Ecker, Genes Dev. 1998, 12, 3703–3714.
948. W. Y. Wang; A. E. Hall; R. O’Malley; A. B. Bleecker, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 352–357.
949. B. Ma; M. L. Cui; H. J. Sun; K. Takada; H. Mori; H. Kamada; H. Ezura, Plant Physiol. 2006, 141, 587–597.
950. G. E. Schaller; A. B. Bleecker, Science 1995, 270, 1809–1811.
951. T. Hirayama; J. J. Kieber; N. Hirayama; M. Kogan; P. Guzman; S. Nourizadeh; J. M. Alonso; W. P. Dailey; A. Dancis; J. R. Ecker,
Cell 1999, 97, 383–393.
952. A. B. Bleecker; M. A. Estelle; C. Somerville; H. Kende, Science 1988, 241, 1086–1089.
953. J. Hua; E. M. Meyerowitz, Cell 1998, 94, 261–271.
954. B. M. Kevany; D. M. Tieman; M. G. Taylor; V. Dal Cin; H. J. Klee, Plant J. 2008, 51, 458–467.
955. Y.-F. Chen; S. M. Shakeel; J. Bowers; X.-C. Zhao; N. Etheridge; G. E. Schaller, J. Biol. Chem. 2007, 282, 24752–24758.
956. J. S. Resnick; C.-K. Wen; J. A. Shockey; C. Chang, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 7917–7922.
957. C.-H. Dong; M. Rivarola; J. S. Resnick; B. D. Maggin; C. Chang, Plant J. 2008, 53, 275–286.
958. C. S. Barry; J. J. Giovannoni, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 7923–7928.
 Plant Hormones 117

959. Z. Gao; Y. F. Chen; M. D. Randlett; X. C. Zhao; J. L. Findell; J. J. Kieber, J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 34725–34732.
960. Q. Chao; M. Rothenberg; R. Solano; G. Roman; W. Terzaghi; J. R. Ecker, Cell 1997, 89, 1133–1144.
961. M. Ohme-Takagi; H. Shinshi, Plant Cell 1995, 7, 173–182.
962. J. M. Alonso; A. N. Stepanova; T. J. Leisse; C. J. Kim; H. M. Chen; P. Shinn; D. K. Stevenson; J. Zimmerman; P. Barajas;
R. Cheuk; C. Gadrinab; C. Heller; A. Jeske; E. Koesema; C. C. Meyers; H. Parker; L. Prednis; Y. Ansari; N. Choy; H. Deen;
M. Geralt; N. Hazari; E. Hom; M. Karnes; C. Mulholland; R. Ndubaku; I. Schmidt; P. Guzman; L. Aguilar-Henonin; M. Schmid;
D. Weigel; D. E. Carter; T. Marchand; E. Risseeuw; D. Brogden; A. Zeko; W. L. Crosby; C. C. Berry; J. R. Ecker, Science 2003,
301, 653–657.
963. S. Yoo; Y. Cho; G. Tena; Y. Xiong; J. Sheen, Nature 2008, 451, 789–795.
964. H. Guo; J. R. Ecker, Cell 2003, 115, 667–677.
965. T. Potuschak; E. Lechner; Y. Parmentier; S. Yanagisawa; S. Grava; C. Koncz; P. Genschik, Cell 2003, 115, 679–689.
966. B. Binder; J. Walker; J. Gagne; T. Emborg; G. Hemmann; A. Bleecker; R. Viestra, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 509–523.
967. G. Olmedo; H. Guo; B. Gregory; S. Nourizadeh; L. Aguilar-Henonin; H. Li; F. An; P. Guzman; J. Ecker, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2006, 103, 13286–13293.
968. T. Potuschak; A. Vansiri; B. Binder; E. Lechner; R. Viestra; P. Genschik, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 3047–3057.
969. Y. Matsubayashi; Y. Sakagami, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2006, 57, 649–674.
970. G. Pearce; D. Strydom; S. Johnson; C. A. Ryan, Science 1991, 253, 895–897.
971. B. McGurl; C. A. Ryan, Plant Mol. Biol. 1992, 20, 405–409.
972. B. McGurl; G. Pearce; M. Orozco-Cardenas; C. A. Ryan, Science 1992, 255, 1570–1573.
973. J. M. Scheer; C. A. Ryan, Jr., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 9585–9590.
974. T. Montoya; T. Nomura; K. Farrar; T. Kaneta; T. Yokota; G. J. Bishop, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 3163–3176.
975. J. M. Scheer; G. Pearce; C. A. Ryan, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 10114–10117.
976. N. Holton; A. C. Delgado; K. Harrison; T. Montoya; J. Correy; G. J. Bishop, Plant Cell 2007, 19, 1709–1717.
977. G. Pearce; D. S. Moura; J. Stratmann; C. A. Ryan, Nature 2001, 411, 817–820.
978. G. Pearce; C. A. Ryan, J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 30044–30050.
979. G. Pearce; D. S. Moura; J. Stratmann; C. A. Ryan, Jr., Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 12843–12847.
980. A. Huffaker; G. Pearce; C. A. Ryan, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 10098–10103.
981. Y. Yamaguchi; G. Pearce; C. A. Ryan, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 10104–10109.
982. Y. Matsubayashi; Y. Sakagami, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 93, 7623–7627.
983. Y. Matsubayashi; L. Takagi; Y. Sakagami, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 13357–13362.
984. Y. Matsubayashi; L. Takagi; N. Omura; A. Morita; Y. Sakagami, Plant Physiol. 1999, 120, 1043–1048.
985. H. Hanai; T. Matsuno; M. Yamamoto; Y. Matsubayashi; T. Kobayashi; H. Kamada; Y. Sakagami, Plant Cell Physiol. 2000, 41,
27–32.
986. H. Yang; Y. Matsubayashi; K. Nakamura; Y. Sakagami, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 13560–13565.
987. H. Yang; Y. Matsubayashi; K. Nakamura; Y. Sakagami, Plant Physiol. 2001, 127, 842–851.
988. R. Lorbieck; M. Sauter, Plant Sci. 2002, 163, 321–332.
989. Y. Matsubayashi; M. Ogawa; A. Morita; Y. Sakagami, Science 2002, 296, 1470–1472.
990. H. Shinohara; M. Ogawa; Y. Sakagami; Y. Matsubayashi, J. Biol. Chem. 2007, 282, 124–131.
991. Y. Matsubayashi; M. Ogawa; H. Kihara; M. Niwa; Y. Sakagami, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 45–53.
992. S. Takayama; A. Isogai, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2005, 56, 467–489.
993. C. R. Schopfer; M. E. Nasrallah; J. B. Nasrallah, Science 1999, 286, 1697–1700.
994. S. Takayama; H. Shiba; M. Iwano; H. Shimosato; F. S. Che; N. Kai; M. Watanabe; G. Suzuki; A. Isogai, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2000, 97, 1920–1925.
995. S. Takayama; H. Shimosato; H. Shiba; M. Funato; F. S. Che; M. Watanabe; A. Isogai, Nature 2001, 413, 534–538.
996. V. Vanoosthuyse; C. Miege; C. Dumas; J. M. Cock, Plant Mol. Biol. 2001, 46, 17–34.
997. S. E. Clark, Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001, 2, 276–284.
998. J. M. Cock; S. McCormick, Plant Physiol. 2001, 126, 939–942.
999. H. Motose; M. Sugiyama; H. Fukuda, Nature 2004, 429, 873–878.
1000. S. A. Casson; P. M. Chilley; J. F. Topping; I. M. Evans, Plant Cell 2002, 14, 1705–1721.
1001. M. A. Butenko; S. E. Patterson; P. E. Grini; G. E. Stenvik; S. S. Amundsen; A. Mandal; R. B. Aalen, Plant Cell 2003, 15,
2296–2307.
1002. T. L. Jinn; J. M. Stone; J. C. Walker, Genes Dev. 2000, 14, 108–117.
1003. N. Narita; S. Moore; G. Horiguchi; M. Kubo; T. Demura; H. Fukuda; J. Goodrich; H. Tsukaya, Plant J. 2004, 38, 699–713.
1004. J. Wen; K. A. Lease; J. C. Walker, Plant J. 2004, 37, 668–677.
1005. K. A. Lease; J. C. Walker, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 831–838.
1006. S. H. Shiu; A. B. Bleecker, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 10763–10768.
1007. C. E. Cook; L. P. Whichard; B. Turner; M. E. Wall; G. H. Egley, Science 1966, 154, 1189–1190.
1008. C. E. Cook; L. P. Whichard; M. E. Wall; G. H. Egley; P. Coggon; P. A. Luhan; A. T. McPhail, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94,
6198–6199.
1009. A. J. Humphrey; M. H. Beale, Phytochemistry 2006, 67, 636–640.
1010. K. Rani; B. Zwanenburg; Y. Sugimoto; K. Yoneyama; H. Bouwmeester, Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2008, 46, 617–626.
1011. H. J. Bouwmeester; C. Roux; J. A. Lopez-Raez; G. Becard, Trends Plant Sci. 2007, 12, 224–230.
1012. K. Akiyama; K. Matsuzaki; H. Hayashi, Nature 2005, 435, 824–827.
1013. K. Akiyama; H. Hayashi, Ann. Bot. (Lond) 2006, 97, 925–931.
1014. Y. Goldwasser; K. Yoneyama; X. Xie; K. Yoneyama, Plant Growth Regul. 2008, 55, 21–28.
1015. K. Yoneyama; X. Xie; H. Sekimoto; Y. Takeuchi; S. Ogasawara; K. Akiyama; H. Hayashi; K. Yoneyama, New Phytol. 2008, 179,
484–494.
1016. C. A. Beveridge; J. J. Ross; I. C. Murfet, Plant Physiol. 1994, 104, 953–959.
1017. C. A. Beveridge; J. J. Ross; I. C. Murfet, Plant Physiol. 1996, 110, 859–865.
118 Plant Hormones

1018. C. A. Beveridge; G. M. Symons; C. G. Turnbull, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 689–698.

1019. X. Johnson; T. Brcich; E. A. Dun; M. Goussot; K. Haurogne; C. A. Beveridge; C. Rameau, Plant Physiol. 2006, 142, 1014–1026.
1020. K. C. Snowden; A. J. Simkin; B. J. Janssen; K. R. Templeton; H. M. Loucas; J. L. Simons; S. Karunairetnam; A. P. Gleave;
D. G. Clark; H. J. Klee, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 746–759.
1021. J. L. Simons; C. A. Napoli; B. J. Janssen; K. M. Plummer; K. C. Snowden, Plant Physiol. 2007, 143, 697–706.
1022. P. Stirnberg; K. van De Sande; H. M. Leyser, Development 2002, 129, 1131–1141.
1023. K. Sorefan; J. Booker; K. Haurogne; M. Goussot; K. Bainbridge; E. Foo; S. Chatfield; S. Ward; C. Beveridge; C. Rameau;
O. Leyser, Genes Dev. 2003, 17, 1469–1474.
1024. C. G. Turnbull; J. P. Booker; H. M. Leyser, Plant J. 2002, 32, 255–262.
1025. J. Booker; M. Auldridge; S. Wills; D. McCarty; H. Klee; O. Leyser, Curr. Biol. 2004, 14, 1232–1238.
1026. J. Booker; T. Sieberer; W. Wright; L. Williamson; B. Willett; P. Stirnberg; C. Turnbull; M. Srinivasan; P. Goddard; O. Leyser, Dev.
Cell 2005, 8, 443–449.
1027. S. Ishikawa; M. Maekawa; T. Arite; K. Onishi; I. Takamure; J. Kyozuka, Plant Cell Physiol. 2005, 46, 79–86.
1028. J. Zou; S. Zhang; W. Zhang; G. Li; Z. Chen; W. Zhai; X. Zhao; X. Pan; Q. Xie; L. Zhu, Plant J. 2006, 48, 687–698.
1029. T. Arite; H. Iwata; K. Ohshima; M. Maekawa; M. Nakajima; M. Kojima; H. Sakakibara; J. Kyozuka, Plant J. 2007, 51, 1019–1029.
1030. V. Ongaro; O. Leyser, J. Exp. Bot. 2008, 59, 67–74.
1031. H. J. Bouwmeester; R. Matusova; S. Zhongkui; M. H. Beale, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2003, 6, 358–364.
1032. R. Matusova; K. Rani; F. W. Verstappen; M. C. Franssen; M. H. Beale; H. J. Bouwmeester, Plant Physiol. 2005, 139, 920–934.
1033. J. A. Lopez-Raez; T. Charnikhova; V. Gomez-Roldan; R. Matusova; W. Kohlen; R. De Vos; F. Verstappen; V. Puech-Pages;
G. Becard; P. Mulder; H. Bouwmeester, New Phytol. 2008, 178, 863–874.
1034. A. Alder; I. Holdermann; P. Beyer; S. Al-Babili, Biochem. J. 2008, 416, 289–296.
1035. S. H. Schwartz; X. Qin; M. C. Loewen, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 46940–46945.
1036. M. E. Auldridge; A. Block; J. T. Vogel; C. Dabney-Smith; I. Mila; M. Bouzayen; M. Magallanes-Lundback; D. DellaPenna;
D. R. McCarty; H. J. Klee, Plant J. 2006, 45, 982–993.
1037. K. Bainbridge; K. Sorefan; S. Ward; O. Leyser, Plant J. 2005, 44, 569–580.
1038. K. Yoneyama; X. Xie; D. Kusumoto; H. Sekimoto; Y. Sugimoto; Y. Takeuchi, Planta 2007, 227, 125–132.
1039. K. Yoneyama; Y. Takeuchi; H. Sekimoto, Planta 2007, 225, 1031–1038.

Biographical Sketches

Isomaro Yamaguchi is Professor of Department of Biotechnology, Maebashi Institute of

Technology. He holds a Ph.D. degree in Agriculture from The University of Tokyo. He
has served as Associate Professor of Department of Agricultural Chemistry, The University
of Tokyo, Visiting Scientist of Institute for Biomedical Research, The University of Texas at
Austin, and Associate Professor and Professor of Department of Agricultural and Biological
Chemistry, The University of Tokyo. He has received young scientist award and senior
scientist award from the Japan Society for Bioscience, Biotechnology, and Agrochemistry.
 Plant Hormones 119

Jerry David Cohen is Gordon and Margaret Bailey Professor in the Department of
Horticultural Science, University of Minnesota. He obtained his MS degree in Plant
Physiology from San Diego State University and Ph.D. degree in Plant Biochemistry from
Michigan State University. Later, he worked as a postdoctoral research associate in the
Department of Botany and Plant Pathology, Michigan State University, research associate in
Plant Hormone and Growth Regulators Laboratory, University of Maryland and Beltsville
Agricultural Research Center, and plant physiologist/biochemist in the US Department of
Agriculture. He is the President of International Plant Growth Substances Association and
Director for Graduate Studies, Plant Biological Sciences Program, University of Minnesota.
He has served as Editor-in-Chief, Plant Growth Regulation. He has won many awards and
honors.

Angela Hendrickson Culler is a plant biochemist at Monsanto Company. She received her
Ph.D. degree in Plant Biological Sciences, University of Minnesota. She has worked as a
research assistant (Population Genetics, Hamline University), graduate research assistant
(Phytohormone Biochemistry Lab and Plant Cytoskeleton (tubulin) Lab, University of
Minnesota), visiting scientist (Plant Physiology Lab, Institut für Botanik, Technische
Universität), and postdoctoral associate (Phytohormone Biochemistry Lab, University of
Minnesota). She is a recipient of USDA National Needs Fellowship from University of
Minnesota and Alderman Award for Outstanding Graduate Student Research.
120 Plant Hormones

Marcel Quint is currently working at the Leibniz Institute of Plant Biochemistry as a

principal investigator. He received his Ph.D. degree in Agricultural Sciences (Plant
Genetics) from Universität Hohenheim. He has worked as a visiting scientist in the Danish
Institute of Agricultural Sciences and as DFG postdoctoral fellow and postdoc in the
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. He has been awarded Postdoctoral Fellowship from
the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).

Janet P. Slovin is a plant molecular biologist in Genetic Improvement of Fruit and Vegetables
Laboratory, USDA/ARS. She received her Ph.D. degree in Plant Sciences from Indiana
University. She has worked as a research associate (University of California), NIH post-
doctoral fellow (University of California), postdoctoral research associate (US Department of
Agriculture), faculty research associate (University of Maryland), and plant biochemist/
molecular biologist (USDA/ARS). She has received many honors and awards (Doctoral
Student Grant-in-Aid for Research, Floyd Fellowship, NIH Postdoctoral Fellowship,
Distinguished Service Award). She is a member of the Sigma Xi and a member in the
Editorial Board of Plant Growth Regulation.
 Plant Hormones 121

Masatoshi Nakajima is an Assistant Professor in the Graduate School of Agricultural and Life
Sciences, University of Tokyo, Japan. He received his Ph.D. degree in the field of applied
biological chemistry in 1996 from the University of Tokyo. He is a chemical biologist who
has studied (1) the localizations of some phytohormones in plants by using haptenic anti-
bodies specific for them, (2) the function of gibberellin, a phytohormone, during seed
development of morning glory and Arabidopsis, and (3) biological characterizations of the
gibberellin receptors and some proteins related with the gibberellin signaling. He and some
Japanese collaborators discovered GID1, a gibberellin receptor of rice, in 2005.

Shinjiro Yamaguchi is a team leader at RIKEN Plant Science Center, Japan. He

graduated from the Department of Agricultural Chemistry, Faculty of Agriculture,
University of Tokyo in 1991. He obtained his Ph.D. degree in 1996 from the
University of Tokyo. He then joined Frontier Research Program at RIKEN and con-
tributed to the identification of gibberellin biosynthesis genes from plants. He worked at
Duke University in the United States as a postdoctoral fellow from 1997 till 2000, and
studied the regulation of gibberellin biosynthesis in Arabidopsis seeds. His research group
has been working on the biosynthesis and metabolism pathways of terpenoid plant
hormones at RIKEN Plant Science Center since July 2000.
122 Plant Hormones

Hitoshi Sakakibara was born in 1965. He graduated from the School of Agricultural Sciences,
Nagoya University in 1988. He received his Ph.D. degree in agriculture from Nagoya
University in 1995. He has worked as a research associate (1992) and Assistant Professor
(1995) in the School of Agricultural Sciences, Nagoya University. He has served as the head
of the Laboratory for Communication Mechanisms in RIKEN Plant Science Center (PSC) in
2000. He was the team leader of Biodynamics Research Team (2005) and group director of
Plant Productivity Systems Research Group (2006). His major research interests concern
biochemical and molecular physiological studies on the regulation mechanism of expression
of nitrogen assimilatory genes, cytokinin-mediated nitrogen signaling, and cytokinin
biosynthesis.

Takeshi Kuroha was born in 1977. He graduated from the School of Biological Sciences,
University of Tsukuba in 1999. He obtained his Ph.D. degree from the University of Tsukuba
in 2005. He studied the mechanisms of adventitious and lateral root formation in graduate
school. In 2005, he joined the Biodynamics Research Team in RIKEN Plant Science Center
as research associate and is involved in the study of enzymes related to cytokinin activation.
His research interests concern genetic, biochemical, and molecular physiological studies on
development, local and long-distance communication, and cytokinin biosynthesis in plants.
 Plant Hormones 123

Nobuhiro Hirai is a Professor at the Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University,

Kyoto, Japan. He received his Ph.D. in Food Science and Technology from Kyoto University
in 1982. He was a research fellow at the Department of Chemistry, Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, USA, from 1981 to 1983. He was an Instructor in 1983, and
then an Associate Professor in 2002 at Kyoto University before being promoted to the present
position in 2004. His research interest concerns chemistry and biology of plant hormones,
allelochemicals, and phytoalexin. He has found novel metabolites of abscisic acid and was the
first to develop long-lasting analogs of abscisic acid that resist metabolic inactivation. For this
achievement, he received ‘The Japan Society for Chemical Regulation of Plants Award’
in 1995.

Takao Yokota is Professor of the Department of Biosciences, Teikyo University. He received

his Ph.D. degree from the University of Tokyo in 1971. He became an Assistant Professor in
the University of Tokyo in 1970, then a Lecturer in 1988. In 1990, he was assigned to the
present position. He has been involved in brassinosteroid research for nearly 30 years. His
major research interests concern the biosynthesis and physiological roles of brassinosteroids.
124 Plant Hormones

Hiroyuki Ohta was born in 1957. He obtained his Ph.D. degree in Agriculture from the
Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University in 1987. His doctoral study was on the
formation and degradation of lipid hydroperoxide in rice grains. In 1987, he joined Kyoto
University as Teaching Assistant. Later, he served in a postdoctoral position in Mitsui Plant
Biotechnology Research Institute (1988-89) and National Institute of Basic Biology (1989-
91). He worked in the Department of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of
Technology as an Assistant Professor from 1991 to 1996 and as an Associate Professor from
1997 to 2003. In 2004, he joined Graduate School of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo
Institute of Technology as an Associate Professor. Currently, he is a Professor in the Center
for Biological Resources and Informatics, Tokyo Institute of Technology.

Yuichi Kobayashi was born in 1953. He received his Ph.D. degree in Engineering from
Tokyo Institute of Technology in 1981. He joined Columbia University as a postdoctoral
fellow in 1981. In 1982, he joined the Tokyo Institute of Technology as an Assistant Professor
(1982–88) and was later promoted to Associate Professor (1988–present). He has won the CSJ
Award for Young Chemists.
 Plant Hormones 125

Hitoshi Mori received his Ph.D. degree in Agriculture from Nagoya University in 1990. He
was a researcher in the Meiji Institute of Health Science from 1987 to 1989. He worked in the
National Institute of Basic Biology, Okazaki as Assistant Professor from 1989 to 1993. In 1993,
he was appointed as Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Agricultural Sciences,
Nagoya. From 2005, he has been working as Professor in the Graduate School of
Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University.

Yoji Sakagami was born in 1948. He graduated from the Department of Agricultural Sciences,
University of Tokyo in 1972. In 1979, he obtained Ph.D. in Agriculture from the University
of Tokyo. In 1976, he was an Assistant Professor in the Department of Agricultural
Chemistry, University of Tokyo. From 1983 to 1985, he was a visiting scientist at W. Alton
Jones Cell Science Center, USA. He joined the School of Agricultural Sciences, Nagoya
University in 1987 as Associate Professor. From 1994, he has been working as a Professor in
the Graduate School of Bio-Agricultural Sciences, Nagoya University. He has been awarded
Nougeikagaku Shoureishou (1979) and Nougeikagakukaishou (2003).
 4.03 Insect Hormones
E. David Morgan, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.03.1 Introduction 127

4.03.2 Neuropeptides 127
4.03.3 Moulting Hormone 128
4.03.3.1 Biosynthesis 130
4.03.3.2 Storage Products 131
4.03.3.3 Inactivation 133
4.03.3.4 Crustaceans and Other Phyla 135
4.03.3.5 Phytoecdysteroids 136
4.03.3.6 Structure Determination 136
4.03.3.7 Ecdysteroids as Defensive Secretion 137
4.03.3.8 Ecdysteroids in Mammals 137
4.03.3.9 Mammalian Hormones in Arthropods 138
4.03.3.10 Ecdysteroids and Pest Control 139
4.03.4 Juvenile Hormone 139
4.03.4.1 Structures 139
4.03.4.2 Biosynthesis and Degradation 140
4.03.4.3 Transfer of Juvenile Hormone 143
4.03.4.4 JH in Arthropods 143
4.03.4.5 Structure Determination and Analysis 144
4.03.4.6 Phytojuvenoids 144
4.03.4.7 JH and Pest Control 145
4.03.5 Eicosanoids 145
4.03.6 Conclusion 147
References 148

4.03.1 Introduction

The extraordinary changes that occur in holometabolous insects as they pass from larva through pupa to adult have
long excited the curiosity of scientists, to learn what prompts and regulates these changes. The discovery that they
were hormone-regulated was the initiation of a fascinating pursuit of insect hormone chemistry. Vertebrate (and
human) hormones display a wide variety of chemical structures that have been a great challenge to chemists in
structure elucidation and synthesis. Insects, in contrast, at this time, have only revealed two classes of hormone
compounds. The first group are the true hormones, produced by epithelial glands, the moulting hormone and
juvenile hormone (JH), and the second are the neuropeptides produced by neurosecretory cells. The second half of
the twentieth century was an active period for the discovery of insect hormones, their structures and action. That
only two hormones were discovered gave a feeling of uniformity that was unwarranted. Recent work has
shown how it is not helpful to regard such a large and ancient phylum, the arthropoda, to which insects belong,
as a uniform group, either in terms of which compound or how it functions, when investigating hormones.
The two hormones regulate each step of development from embryo through larva or nymph to adult, and via
pupa, where this is formed. At each stage the moulting hormone is produced when the old cuticle is cast off and
a new one is formed. The presence of JH ensures that the new stage is also juvenile. A more complex action of
JH allows the larva to develop into a pupa, and the absence of JH permits the formation of the adult form. The
function of neither hormone ends there, for both are produced again in the adult insect, with other effects as
described in a later discussion.

127
128 Insect Hormones

4.03.2 Neuropeptides

In addition to the true hormones, there are a vast number of internal messengers, produced by groups of cells in the
brain and peripheral ganglia of the insect nervous system.1,2 In a recent review by Gäde and Marco,3 insect and
crustacean neuropeptides are classified into 17 groups. The first discovered neuropeptide was the prothoracico-
tropic hormone (PTTH), produced by the brain, and acting on the prothoracic glands, to stimulate them to produce
moulting hormone.4 It now appears that another substance, an autocrine factor (roughly, an internal messenger
within the cell) in the prothoracic gland, is also required.5 PTTH is a homodimer of two chains of 108 or 109 amino
acids with a chain of five sugar units attached. The structure varies with species. Another example is the
adipokinetic hormone, which regulates the release of diglycerides for the energy requirements of the flight
muscles.6 It has been isolated from many species. It can be an octapeptide to decapeptide, always with a
pyroglutamic acid at the N-terminus, and an amide function at the C-terminus. It provides an example of
neuropeptides with similar structure in different insects or crustaceans, often with different functions (Figure 1).
Of great interest in connection with pheromone production is the pheromone biosynthesis-activating neuropeptide
(PBAN) of Lepidoptera, containing 18–36 amino acids.7 Progress in neuropeptides has been most rapid, and several
hundred peptide hormones are now known. The possibility of an aging hormone in insect has been considered.
Kinetin, a plant hormone, which delays senescence in plants, prolongs the life of some insects, but at the cost of
decreased reproductive activity. Insulin-like peptides are found in insects, and among their functions in Drosophila,
they seem to control aging.8 There seems to be a great deal of similarity in these neuropeptides between phyla from
nematodes and arthropods to chordates.9 One interesting observation is emerging: that many peptide hormones
have been conserved during evolution, but that their structures are better conserved than their functions.
Advancing methods in mass spectrometry (MS) have made it easier to determine the amino acid sequence in
these peptides, and on ever smaller amounts of the compound. Direct tissue and single neuron analyses by
matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-MS are particularly successful (Chapter 9.10). By these methods
about 440 neuropeptides have been identified, and some 450 by electrospray ionization (ESI) techniques. Further
techniques hold promise for more peptides.10 The neuropeptides have great importance for the insect physiol-
ogist,11 but hold less interest for the structural chemist. Their three-dimensional folding is largely undetermined.
The possibility of using neuropeptides in pest control is a constant theme in research.12,13 Their cost,
stability, and the need to deliver them intact to the site of action are major problems with using neuropeptides.
They must be able to cross the cuticle barrier or the gut epithelium in an active form. However, some peptides
and proteins are able to pass the gut of insects intact, while others can be absorbed through the epithelium (e.g.,
PBAN14). Still others can be modified, as with allatostatins (which inhibit JH production), to which sterically
bulky groups can be added to give analogues that resist breakdown by gut enzymes.15 Such approaches are
actively studied in the search for new methods of pest management.

4.03.3 Moulting Hormone

Steroidal compounds, derived from cholesterol, known as ecdysteroids, control moulting or ecdysis in insects,
arachnids, and crustaceans. The same hormone regulates metamorphosis, reproduction, and diapause. The
structural characteristics of ecdysteroids are several hydroxy groups that render them water-soluble, a cis-fused
AB ring junction, 7-ene-6-one unsaturated ketone group, and usually the full carbon skeleton of cholesterol.
The most common example is 20-hydroxyecdysone (1), or a homologue with an additional side chain C-24
-methyl or ethyl group, as in makisterone A (2) and makisterone C (3), may be used. For half a century, part of
their biological function, and some of the chemical structures were known, but new aspects of their function and

Adipokinetic hormone Locusta migratoria pGlu–Leu–Asn–Phe–Ser–Ala–Gly–TrpNH2

Pigment-concentrating hormone Pandanus borealis pGlu–Leu–Asn–Phe–Ser–Pro–Gly–TrpNH2
Adipokinetic hormone Manduca sexta pGlu–Leu–Thr–Phe–Thr–Ser–Trp–GlyNH2
Hypertrehalosaemic hormone Tenebrio molitor pGlu–Leu–Asn–Phe–Ser–Pro–Asp–TrpNH2
Figure 1 Examples of insect and crustacean neuropeptides of similar structure with the same or different functions.
Pandanus borealis is a shrimp. pGlu, pyroglutamic acid.
 Insect Hormones 129

new, related compounds are as yet being discovered. Their identification in insects (Bombyx mori)16 was almost
synchronous with their identification in crustaceans (the crab Jasus lalandii)17 and in a plant (the tree Podocarpus
elatus).18 Today there are about 300 compounds known, most of them derived from plants (see Section 4.03.3.5).
Because of the ever-growing number of compounds identified in the group, the Ecdysone Handbook, which
formerly tried to list all ecdysteroids, with available spectroscopic information and other data, had to be replaced
by a website.19 Lafont et al.20 list 70 ecdysteroids found in insects and the species from which they were first
isolated. The list includes inactive biosynthetic precursors, metabolites, ester conjugates with organic and
inorganic acids, three adenosine monophosphates; 2-desoxyecdysone 22-adenosine monophosphate (4), ecdy-
sone 22-adenosine monophosphate, and ecdysone 22-N6-(isopentenyl) adenosine monophosphate (5), a
cytokinin, found in Locusta migratoria eggs, plus two compounds of structure related to ecdysteroids, bombycos-
terol, and bombycosterol 3-phosphate (6), both found in B. mori, but of no known hormonal effect.21,22
130 Insect Hormones

4.03.3.1 Biosynthesis
Ecdysteroids are produced in immature insects in the prothoracic glands, and in adults, in the gonads. The
corresponding organ in crustaceans is the Y-organ. In some lower arthropods, ecdysteroids are produced by
epidermal cells. In adult insects, the ecdysteroids control several reproductive processes. It is difficult to make
general statements that apply to all insects, but the prothoracic gland usually produces ecdysone (7) (or
2-desoxyecdysone (8), oxidized to ecdysone in the hemolymph), a prohormone that is oxidized to active
20-hydroxyecdysone (1) in the fat body and Malpighian tubules. As arthropods are unable to synthesize
sterols,23 the starting material, cholesterol, or a close relative, must come from the diet. Since plant- or
fungus-eating insects acquire phytosterols such as campesterol, -sitosterol, or ergosterol, many insects from
at least four orders (Coleoptera, Diptera, Hemiptera, and Hymenoptera) retain the extra methyl group and use
makisterone A (2) for their moulting hormone. The fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster, for example, has a mixed
diet of cholesterol and C29 phytosterols. It is unable to dealkylate the C29 sterols, so its moulting hormone is a
mixture of 20-hydroxyecdysone (1) and makisterone A (2), depending upon its food. This mixture functions
because the ecdysone receptors of Drosophila have very similar affinity for the two compounds.24 The situation
is similar in honeybees. Leaf-cutting ants raise fungus for food, and hence have an intake of 24-methyl fungal
sterols. Acromyrmex octospinosus therefore used 24-epi-makisterone A (9) as hormone.25 Some insects are
dependent on yeast-like symbionts to produce sterols. The symbionts of the beetles Lasioderma serricorne and
Stegobium paniceum (Coleoptera: Anobiidae) contain ergosterol, the beetle sterols are predominantly cholesterol
and 7-dehydrocholesterol.26

In spite of prodigious efforts in several laboratories, the full biosynthetic scheme from cholesterol to
20-hydroxyecdysone is as yet unknown, but the isolation of the enzymes catalyzing the various stages through
molecular genetics and enzyme recognition is progressing, and the final answer cannot be far off. The scheme
given earlier27 has little modification after 10 years. The pathway can vary over several steps with different
insect species (Scheme 1).22,28 The intermediate steps between 7-dehydrocholesterol and 5-ketodiol remain
unknown and are often referred to as ‘the black box’. The belief is held that either the intermediates are too
unstable for easy isolation or the products of each step converts rapidly on to the next intermediate.
The probable immediate precursor of the first recognizable compound in the pathway is the compound
called
4-diketol, which by the action of 5-reductase gives the 5-diketol. This is exchangeable with
2,22,25-tridesoxyecdysone, commonly known as 5-ketodiol.
The choice of which compound is used for the next stages of hydroxylation depends upon the evidence. An
enzyme, 3-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase, has been found in the crab Carcinus maenas, which can reversibly
 Insect Hormones 131

Scheme 1

catalyze the reduction of the next three suggested 3-keto-intermediates, but in one insect, L. migratoria, the 5-
ketodiol has definitely been shown to be present in the ovaries.29 There seems to be an easy oxidation–
reduction taking place that makes it difficult to know whether the 3-oxo- or 3-ol is being hydroxylated
(Scheme 2). The major step in hormone activation is the introduction of the 20-hydroxyl group, catalyzed by
ecdysone 20-mono-oxygenase, the best-investigated biosynthetic enzymes in this series. It, like all the other
hydroxylases in this sequence, is a cytochrome P-450 enzyme.

4.03.3.2 Storage Products

Ecdysteroids originate in the ovaries of adults, are converted into inactive conjugates, passed to the eggs and
embryos, and later released for the early developmental stages of the embryo and the larva. These inactive
conjugates usually have the 22-hydroxyl group converted into a phosphate, but no statement can cover all the
possibilities of storage compounds. The greatest diversity of compounds is found in the eggs and embryos of
Orthoptera and Lepidoptera. They contain unusually large amounts of ecdysteroids, up to 40 mg g1 fresh
weight of eggs. That is about 10–100 times more than the concentration in corresponding larvae or pupae. Fatty
acid esters of ecdysteroids are found in some orthopterans and in ticks. An extended study of the ovaries and
eggs of the silkworm B. mori has led to a long list of compounds (structures 10–19). In addition to the
2,22-didesoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (10), 2-desoxyecdysone (11), 2-desoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (12),
132 Insect Hormones

Scheme 2
 Insect Hormones 133

ecdysone (7), and 20-hydroxyecdysone (1) and their 22-phosphates, 22-desoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (13)
and its 3-phosphate, 3-epi-22-desoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (14) and its 2-phosphate, all found earlier,
and the two nonhormonal compounds bombycosterol and its 3-phosphate21 6 (Section 4.03.3), we must add
3-epi-22-desoxy-20,26-dihydroxyecdysone (15), 3-epi-22-desoxy-16,20-dihydroxyecdysone (16), their
2-phosphates (from diapausing eggs)30 and (23S)-2,22-didesoxy-23-dihydroxyecdysone (17) and its 3-phosphate,
(23R)- and (23S)-23,25-dihydroxycholesterol (18), and (19) (from mature ovaries).31 On the other hand, there are
many other insects in which no detectable maternal ecdysteroids are present in newly laid eggs.

4.03.3.3 Inactivation
There is little coherence or pattern in the way ecdysteroids are inactivated after they have served their purpose,
they may be additionally hydroxylated, oxidized to carboxylic acids, conjugated with a water-solubilizing
group, converted into water-insoluble fatty acid esters, or they may be excreted unchanged. Metabolic
reactions are shown in Figure 2. When looking at available evidence across the arthropods, it is seen that
the metabolic pathways differ strongly with the species investigated.22 A frequently used strategy is the
oxidation of 20-hydroxyecdysone to give 20,26-dihydroxyecdysone and further oxidation to ecdysonoic acid
134 Insect Hormones

Figure 2 Principal reaction paths of metabolism of ecdysone. The larger the print, the more common the reaction in known
examples. Modified from R. Lafont; C. Dauphin-Villemant; J. T. Warren; H. H. Rees, Insect Hormones. In Comprehensive
Molecular Insect Science; Elsevier: Oxford, 2005; Vol. 3, pp 125–195, Fig. 15, Copyright Elsevier, 2004, in turn Modified from
R. Lafont; J.-L. Connat, Pathways to Ecdysone Metabolism. In Ecdysone: From Chemistry to Mode of Action; J. Koolman,
Ed.; Georg Thieme: Stuttgart, 1989; Chapter 14, Fig. 14.1.

(20) (Scheme 3). A clone of cells from the midge Chironomus tentans was found to be resistant to the effects of
ecdysteroids because they metabolized 20-hydroxyecdysone rapidly. The initial oxidation product was 20,26-
dihydroxyecdysone, but this was oxidized further to 20-hydroxy-26-oxo-ecdysone (21). This aldehyde (21)
then formed a tautomeric equilibrium mixture of two cyclic hemiacetals (22) and (23), which were separable,
isolated, and their structures determined (Scheme 3) with the use of acetonides (Section 4.03.3.6).32 These are
the first examples of ecdysteroids with side-chain hemiacetals. Although 20,26-dihydroxyecdysterone still

Scheme 3
 Insect Hormones 135

retained some ecdysteroidal activity in the tests of Kayser et al.32 (about one-tenth to one-hundredth of that of
20-hydroxyecdysone), the hemiacetals were inactive.
The existence of polar and nonpolar conjugates or metabolites of ecdysteroids makes it very difficult to search for
them with chromatographic methods, even with linked MS. Many investigators resort to a mixture of radioimmu-
noassay and chromatographic methods, usually with antibodies that recognize different parts of the ecdysteroid
molecule, so that conjugates with either the 3-position or the side-chain hydroxyls is blocked, can be recognized.33

4.03.3.4 Crustaceans and Other Phyla

In evolutionary terms, endocrine glands are found in annelids onward. Ecdysteroids are known in other
invertebrate groups such as coelenterates (polyps, corals, sea anemones, and jellyfish), platyhelminthes
(flatworms), annelids (leeches), mollusks (snails, slugs, mussels, oysters, squid, octopus, and others), and
echinoderms (starfish, sea urchins, sea cucumbers), although their functions are not yet fully understood.
Ten known ecdysteroids (ponasterone A (24), 20-hydroxyecdysone 2-acetate (25), viticosterone E (26),
integristerone A 22-acetate (27), 2-desoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (12), ecdysone (7), ajugasterone C (28),
dacryhainansterone (29), inokosterone (30), and 20-hydroxyecdysone (1)) and the new compound zoanthus-
terone (31) have all been isolated from the marine zoanthid Zoanthus sp. (Coelenterata: Anthozoa).34
136 Insect Hormones

In Crustacea, ecdysteroids are the moulting hormones, as in other arthropods, and are produced in the
Y-organs. In most of the known cases, the Y-organs produce ecdysone, which is converted into
20-hydroxyecdysone in peripheral tissues, as in insects. However, in some cases (the crabs Cancer antennarius,
C. maenas, and Menippe mercenaria) the Y-organs produce 3-desoxyecdysone and 25-desoxyecdysone, the latter
gives active ponasterone A (24). In addition to ecdysone and 3-dehydroecdysone,35 inokosterone (30) has been
identified in the eggs and embryos of the giant freshwater prawn Macrobrachium rosenbergii.36 Subramoniam37
lists 15 species of crustaceans in which ecdysteroids and their conjugates have been identified. Both highly polar
and nonpolar conjugates are found as inactivation and metabolized products, as in insects.36 Although JH has
not been found in ticks (Section 4.03.4.4), ecdysteroids in ticks function much as in insects, controlling
production of sex pheromones, oogenesis, oviposition, and embryogenesis in females.38
In adult insects the prothoracic gland ceases to function, and the gonads take over ecdysteroid production. In
adult crustacea moulting continues and the Y-organs continue to function, so that there is limited evidence
about alternative sites of production. Lafont and Mathieu39 point out that there is no clear evidence that
crustacean ovaries produce ecdysteroids, and there is still less evidence that males produce them.
There are several reports of ecdysteroids isolated from sponges (phylum Porifera). For example, from the
Caribbean sponge Agelas dispar 20-hydroxyecdysone and ajugasterone C (28) was isolated,40 and from another
Caribbean sponge Iotrochota birotulate ponasterone A (24), its 22-glycolate, 20-hydroxyecdysone (1), its
22-acetate and its 22-glycolate (Section 4.03.3.7).41 In these sponges, there is no indication that they possess
the hormone function or that the ecdysteroids serve as protection from predators. Sponges are known as rich
sources of an array of sterols.42,43

4.03.3.5 Phytoecdysteroids
As plant-eating insects obtain their necessary sterols from plants to make moulting hormones, it is fitting that
some plants, in return, make ecdysteroids to upset the development of insects feeding upon them. Ecdysteroids
have been found in 5–6% of all the plants examined until now,44 but there is evidence that all plants may be
able to produce at least low levels of ecdysteroids.45 The concentration of ecdysteroids in plants ranges from
50 ng g1 to 30 mg g1 dry mass, that is, 3%.46 Plants usually contain one or a few major ecdysteroids, with a
larger number of closely related minor products of similar structure,46 which can be looked upon as metabolic
by-products. The phytoecdysteroids are concentrated in leaves and flowers.45,47 It is generally thought that
they protect the plant from nonadapted insects,23 and indeed this has been demonstrated in some examples.
Many insects, particularly polyphagous ones (or their gut bacteria) appear to have developed detoxifying
mechanisms that protect them from ingested ecdysteroids, even at high doses, by removing the C-14-OH
group. Ecdybase attempts to keep up with new discoveries of phytoecdysteroids, with their spectral
data and source.19 There are many reviews available on methods for the isolation and identification of
phytoecdysteroids.46

4.03.3.6 Structure Determination

There are many well-established methods for separation and structure determination of ecdysteroids.20,27 A
newly described method is two-dimensional thin-layer chromatography. It has been used to separate complex
mixtures of phytoecdysteroids. Silica plates were developed first with toluene–acetone–ethanol–25% aqueous
ammonia (100:140:32:9 v/v) and then developed in the other direction with chloroform–methanol–benzene
(25:5:3 v/v).48
The advance of the so-called hyphenated methods have compressed the time required for the simultaneous
separation and identification of ecdysteroids still further. Reversed phase high-performance liquid chromato-
graphy (HPLC) has been coupled to a diode array ultraviolet (UV) detector, with the effluent then passed to a
proton nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectrometer, Fourier transform infrared (IR) spectrometer, and a
time-of-flight mass spectrometer. In this way, almost complete structural identification is possible without
isolating any material.49 There was some difficulty in getting good separation of ecdysteroids from other
components of the crude extract. The process was improved by moving to normal phase HPLC and using
 Insect Hormones 137

superheated deuterium oxide as the mobile phase.50 The method still requires what are considered large
amounts of ecdysteroids (100–400 mg injected).
Perhaps the lowest level of detection using MS has been with atmospheric pressure chemical ionization with
selected ion monitoring. This technique gave a limit of detection (but not quantification) down to 10–100 pg per
analysis.51 This beats the mass spectral sensitivity achieved for ecdysteroids back in 1975,52 and avoids the very
difficult procedure of converting them into poly-(trimethylsilyl)ethers. Another development has been in
electrospray injection (HPLC/ESI–MS). In this way, ecdysteroids can be divided into three groups.
Those compounds with lower hydroxylation, including ecdysone (7), 2-desoxyecdysone (11), and
2,22-didesoxyecdysone, fit into the first category, with the [MþH–H2O]þ ion dominant. The second group,
including 20-hydroxyecdysterone (1) and makisterone A (2), have the [MþH]þ ion dominant, but with some
contribution from [MþH–H2O]þ, and the third group, including muristerone A (32) and ponasterone A (24),
have [MþH]þ dominant with no water loss evident.53
Large sample requirements have always been a drawback for 13C-NMR spectra, where about 10 mg were
required. These quantities have always been difficult to obtain from insects, but the introduction of 1H–13C
correlation spectra has reduced sample size. Correlated spectroscopy (COSY), also called heteronuclear
multiple-quantum correlation (HMQC), and long-range COSY, also called heteronuclear multiple-bond
correlation (HMBC), have reduced sample size to less than 500 mg for ecdysteroids.54 COSY spectra
make use of direct 1H–13C coupling, and long-range COSY detects long-range 1H–C–13C (two bond) and
1
H–C–C–13C (three bond) coupling.
A rapid method for making acetonides, coupled with liquid chromatography–MS (LC–MS) has been used to
study the structure of ecdysteroid metabolites. Information about the structure can be deduced from chromato-
graphic retention times. Mono-, di-, and tri-acetonides are well separated in HPLC.55

4.03.3.7 Ecdysteroids as Defensive Secretion

Beetles are always full of surprises for the investigator. We now know of a beetle (Chrysolina carnifex;
Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) that contains vast amounts of ecdysteroids in its defensive (elytral and prenotal)
glands.56 It has a concentration of 150 mmol l1 of 20-hydroxyecdysone 22-acetate in its glands, but there is no
evidence of its use in defense yet. Surprisingly, the Pycnogonida, an ancient branch of the Arthropoda that have
existed for at least 500 million years, have their candidate, the sea spider Pycnogonum litorale (Chelicerata:
Pycnonidae), which produces a range of eight ecdysteroids, including ecdysone 22-glycolate and
20-hydroxyecdysone 22-glycolate, with 20-hydroxyecdysone 22-acetate in greatest proportion (68–88%).57
The total mass of ecdysteroids reach 0.1% of the body dry weight. This is about 1000 times greater than in most
arthropods. The ecdysteroids accumulate in epidermal glands and are released on disturbance. Crabs
(C. maenas) are the main predators in the environment of the sea spider, but the crabs will not eat them.
Crabs also reject artificial food containing the P. litorale ecdysteroids.58 The crabs are quickly able to detect the
ecdysteroids if they bite the leg of a sea spider.

4.03.3.8 Ecdysteroids in Mammals

Although there is no suggestion that ecdysteroids occur in mammals, curiosity about possible effects of these
sterols have led to experiments, not all of which have been conducted under well-controlled conditions. It is
found that ecdysteroids have effects in mammals, and from available evidence, they influence or improve many
physiological functions. They have a significant anabolic effect, and some 300 ecdysteroid-containing com-
mercial products are available as a result.59 However, there is too little good evidence to justify many of the
claims. Injected or ingested ecdysteroids are quickly cleared from the blood, and our normal food plants are not
the ones that contain significant amounts of ecdysteroids, with the exception of spinach, Spinacia oleracea.60
Owing to the body-building craze, 20-hydroxyecdysone, the one ecdysteroid available in quantity, can be
purchased in bulk at low prices.61
138 Insect Hormones

4.03.3.9 Mammalian Hormones in Arthropods

Many mammalian sterols have been identified in insects, particularly as defensive secretions in water
beetles, but no hormonal function for mammalian sterols has yet been found. Estradiol was detected in
the ovaries of the silkworm, B. mori, but had no significant effect on development.62 A number of
mammalian steroids have been found as defensive secretions of some water beetles.63 Androgenic
hormones have been found in crustaceans. Both estradiol and progesterone have been found in the
hemolymph and ovaries of the giant tiger shrimp Penaeus monodon.64 They appear to stimulate vitello-
genin (egg protein) synthesis in the mole crab Emerita asiatica and the freshwater prawn Macrobrachium
rosenbergii.65 Figure 3 shows the structures of mammalian steroids found in crustaceans.37,66,67 There is
no evidence of these being sex hormones. Toxic effects of mammalian steroids in crustaceans are
discussed by LeBlanc.68
It has been proposed that insects do have sex hormones (ecdysone has been suggested69), but at
present, it is generally accepted that sex differentiation in insects is a strictly genetic process, not
requiring a hormone. However, an androgenic gland is present in some crustaceans and an isopod.
When the androgenic gland of young males of the common wood louse Armadillidium vulgare (Isopoda:
Armadillidiidae) is destroyed, it leads to complete feminization. The hormone responsible is a glycosy-
lated protein.70,71

Figure 3 Some mammalian hormonal sterols found in arthropods.

 Insect Hormones 139

4.03.3.10 Ecdysteroids and Pest Control

The possibility of using our knowledge of insect moulting and ecdysteroids to control pest species is a
recurrent subject of consideration.72,73 As yet no promising leads have followed from research. There
are some purely synthetic compounds that are ecdysone antagonists or agonists, such as tebufenozide
(RH 5992) (33), which causes premature moulting in lepidopteran species.74 The cost of steroids and
their possible effects on humans make them an unattractive starting point. It is possible that as our
knowledge of hormone receptors and biosynthesizing enzymes grows (particularly through the use of
mutant strains of Drosophila, which lack one or more of the enzymes necessary), we may learn the
structure of the receptor sites and be able to design small synthetic molecules that will block these sites.

4.03.4 Juvenile Hormone

The term juvenile hormone (JH) results from an early stage of its study, when it was found to be important in
each instar of larval or nymphal development, but it seemed to disappear at the pupal stage, hence the name.
Later it was discovered in adult forms, but the name juvenile hormone had been established. Perhaps it is more
accurate to say that it is the presence or absence of the hormone at critical periods that determines whether
the subsequent molt is to a larval or adult form. In holometabolous insects, absence of JH in the final larval
stage leads to pupal formation, and its absence in a pupa leads to adult development. There are two critical
periods in the last larval instar, first with no JH formation, leading to pupal development, followed by a
brief late peak of JH, causing the retention of imaginal discs, and preventing their development into adult
structures. A number of other functions for this group of compounds are known, it covers embryogenesis,
metamorphosis, and reproduction, including control of diapause, synthesis of egg proteins (vitellin), ovarian
development, color, polymorphism, determination of phase in locusts and aphids, and of caste in honeybees
and ants.75 It regulates the production of sexual pheromones (in Lepidoptera) and response to them. It
therefore has a dual function, in juvenile forms as a status quo hormone, and in adults, a number of
regulatory tactics.

4.03.4.1 Structures
Formerly, six compounds in the series were known. JH III (34) is the most widely distributed JH
homologue. It has been identified in most insect orders, particularly in Coleoptera, Hymenoptera, and
Orthoptera, whereas JH 0 (35), JH I (36), JH II (37), and 4-Me-JH I (38) are found only in Lepidoptera,
and JHB-3 (39) only in higher Diptera. Natural JHB-3 (39) has the configuration 2E,6S,7S,10R. JH III is
derived from farnesoic acid (41) (Scheme 4) via three molecules of mevalonic acid (41). For JH 0, I, II, and
4-Me-JH I, homomevalonate (42) is required, derived from propionyl CoA (in turn from isoleucine or
valine) and acetyl CoA. Since some insect embryos produce methyl farnesoate, and Diptera are considered
the most highly evolved insects, there seems to be an evolution in JH, from methyl farnesoate through JH
III to JHB-3 (39). JHs 0, I, II, and 4-methyl-JH I form a side branch that is peculiar to Lepidoptera. Other
insect orders are capable of making and using homomevalonate. Hydrocarbons and oxygenated derivatives
with the same carbon skeletons as JH 0, I, II, and 4-methyl-JH I are well known in ants,76 and
homomevalonate products are known in other Hymenoptera.77
140 Insect Hormones

Of the best-known insect orders, only the Hemiptera, the true bugs, stand out as a group without a clearly
recognized JH. An early report identified JH I as the principal hormone in the hemolymph of the adult female
bean beetle, Riptortus clavatus (Hemiptera: Alydidae) by gas chromatography–MS (GC–MS).78 It was reported
that, of the three compounds JH I, II, and III, JH I was the most effective for inducing yolk protein synthesis in
diapausing adults of this species.78 More recently, it has been reported that a compound close to JH III, but not
JH III, is the hormone in the two spotted stink bug Perillus bioculatus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Production of
this hormone is stimulated by farnesol, a known precursor of JH III.79

4.03.4.2 Biosynthesis and Degradation

JH is a product of the mevalonate biosynthetic pathway.80 Its formation has been thoroughly investigated.81
Farnesoic acid (40), a normal mevalonic acid product is converted by methylation and epoxidation in the pair of
glands called the corpora allata, by S-adenosyl methionine, to yield JH (Scheme 4). In some insects it appears that
JH acid is released by the corpora allata and converted by a methyltransferase in target tissues. In Lepidoptera,
there may be a reversal in the final stages of biosynthesis, compared with other orders, that is, farnesoic acid to
epoxyfarnesoic acid, then esterification to JH III. JHB-3 (39), likewise, is formed from farnesoic acid, epoxidation,
and then methylation in D. melanogaster.82 Higher homologues (35–38), with one or more extra methylene groups
are produced in the same way, replacing mevalonic acid (41) by one or more molecules of homomevalonic acid
(42), as building blocks. The enzymic aspects of the biosynthesis83 and the physiology84 have been reviewed. It is
interesting to note that, the oxidative enzymes of both the ecdysteroid and JH series belong to the cytochrome P-
450 group.85 Steadily, through cloning and identification of the genes, more knowledge is gained about the
enzymes catalyzing the various steps in the hormone synthesis.86,87 The enzyme catalyzing epoxidation of methyl
farnesoate in the corpora allata of the cockroach Diploptera punctata has been cloned and sequenced.87 It contains
493 amino acids, and has a specificity that produces 98% of the natural (10R)-epoxide enantiomer of JH III (34).
The final product of mevalonate biosynthesis in vertebrates is cholesterol, which for them is a key regulator. In
arthropods, that route is blocked,23,88 and the pathway ends with linear terpenes, such as JH.88 The JH hormone
does not accumulate in the gland, the rate of release depends upon the rate of production.89 In Lepidoptera, the JH
II acid (46) also seems to have some hormonal function.90 Unlike the moulting hormone, which is produced by
different tissues in immature and adult forms, the JH is biosynthesized in the corpora allata, throughout the life of
the insect (Scheme 4).
 Insect Hormones 141

Scheme 4
142 Insect Hormones

Scheme 5

JH can be inactivated by opening of the epoxide ring to a diol 45, or by hydrolysis to the free acid 47,
and sometimes further by phosphorylation of the diol (Scheme 5). As the isolation and identification of
enzymes involved in hormone synthesis and catabolism advances, a JH diol kinase has been isolated from the
tobacco hornworm Manduca sexta that converts JH I diol into the phosphate 48.91 This enzyme is probably
the first example of a phosphotransferase directly involved in the catabolism and inactivation of a lipid-
soluble hormone. It was much less active in catalysing the phosphorylation of JH II or JH III diols and was
inactive with the free JH acids.91
Juvenile hormone JH III 10,11-diol (49) is synthesized and released by the corpora allata of the
migratory locust L. migratoria.92 Identification was based on, first, similar ratio of labeled carbon and
tritium incorporated in the new compound as in JH III, similar chromatographic properties of it and its
acetate to the synthetic diol, and its acetate, and the mass spectrum of the new compound. It was
possible to show that it was not a degradation product of JH III in the corpora allata by incubating JH
III with corpora allata and no diol was produced. Then more recently, in a lepidopteran, the fall
armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda, it has been shown that adult females produce and release JH III diol
and JH II diol in the ratio 4:1. Only traces of JH III and JH II could be detected.93 Also, three new
compounds in the series, 49-OH-JH III (50), 89-OH-JH III (51), and 129-OH-JH III (52) have been
isolated from the corpora allata of L. migratoria.94,95 The (10R,11R) enantiomer of 129-OH-JH III had
already been synthesized in a labeled form en route to JH III,96 and was available for comparison, and
shown to be identical. The Mauchamp group suggested that different patterns, or ‘bouquets’, of JH
compounds may change with insect species or within the same species according to sex and growth
stage.95 There is no further evidence reported. In some insects, the corpora allata secrete JH acid 45,
which converts into the methyl ester in some target tissue. There is a similar situation with the
moulting hormone, where ecdysone is secreted by the postpharyngeal glands, to be further hydroxy-
lated in the hemolymph.
 Insect Hormones 143

A further complication arose when it was discovered that in the Mediterranean fruit fly Ceratitis capitata
(Diptera: Trypetidae) the corpora allata of adult virgin females produce, in addition to JHB-3, smaller
amounts of methyl palmitate and less of JH III.97 Mated females produced much less methyl palmitate. It is
suggested that methyl palmitate may be a default product of methylation, in the absence of JH, but it does
not rule out the possibility that it also participates in some way in reproductive maturation and control,
because its presence is correlated with the period of nonreceptivity toward mating in adult females of
C. capitata.98
Retinol (53), retinal, and retinoic acid appear to be present in insects, and these substances, particularly
retinoic acid, have been shown to have some JH effect.

4.03.4.3 Transfer of Juvenile Hormone

Insect chemists may be familiar with the work of Eisner and Meinwald99 on the accumulation of alkaloids by
certain male Lepidoptera, and that of Dettner100 on cantharidin-carrying beetles, and the transfer of these at
copulation to the female, followed by incorporation of the alkaloid into the eggs. It has been known for some
time that male abdomens contain more JH than those of females in about 13 species of Lepidoptera.
However, it now emerges that in some species, this JH is synthesized in the male accessory sex glands,
and transferred by the male to the female at copulation.101 In Heliothis virescens (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) the
male-produced JH stimulates the production of more JH in the female and egg development.102 JH I was the
compound transferred in large quantities, and which had the greatest effect in the females. JH in the males
decreased to very low level after copulation. In contrast, with Choristoneura fumiferana (Lepidoptera:
Tortricidae) and Choristoneura rosaceana, it was found that males had little or no capacity to produce JH in
their male accessory sex glands and did not transfer JH on copulation.103 Once again we seem to have an
example of retention of structure but not of function. These two species produced mostly JH II (37) in both
males and females.103

4.03.4.4 JH in Arthropods
Earlier work on arthropod hormones began with an observation of function and that led to identification of a
source and isolation of a substance. More recently, investigation has proceeded by observing a function of an
exogenous compound and then seeking the hormone. For example, JH was first found only in insects, but insect
JH and some analogues have been shown to produce precocious moulting in barnacle larvae.104 Later, methyl
farnesoate, which could fill the requirement of JH for crustaceans, was found to be present in several crustacean
species.105–107 It has been shown that methyl farnesoate is synthesized in the mandibular organs of a number of
144 Insect Hormones

crustaceans and has been found in the hemolymph of females and males. It is also found to be actively
synthesized by females during vitellogenesis.105 In males, higher titers of methyl farnesoate are associated
with reproduction and aggressive mating behavior.105 It stimulates general protein synthesis and promotes the
moult cycle.106 Methyl farnesoate has been identified in the cyprid (laval) forms of the barnacle Balanus
amphitrite by selective ion monitoring with GC–MS and shown to have a JH effect.108 As in insects, part of
the function of JH is to maintain juvenile morphology;109 however, the situation is more complicated in that
there are many more early stages in crustacea than in insects.
Methyl farnesoate is also found in some insect embryos. On the other hand, a thorough investigation of JH in
two species of tick, representing hard and soft ticks, the American dog tick Dermacentor variabilis (Acari:
Ixodidae) and the argasid tick Ornithodoros parkeri (Acari: Argasidae), using L-[methyl-3H]methionine, farnesoic
acid, and [1-14C]acetate, found no evidence of JH I, II, or II or methyl farnesoate, whereas JH III and farnesol
were found in three insect controls.110 It was concluded that these ticks do not have the ability to make the
common insect JHs, and these hormones do not regulate tick metamorphosis or reproduction as had been
suggested earlier.

4.03.4.5 Structure Determination and Analysis

Chromatographic and mass spectrometric methods (both GC–MS and LC–MS, frequently with selected
ion monitoring) are important in the study of JH; the cool, on-column injection method of Lefevere et al.111
remains probably the most sensitive method for quantification of the range of JHs, but radiolabeling,
radioimmunoassay, and bioassay methods still continue to be important tools for their study. The accuracy
of, and problems in, the radiochemical assay for JH synthesis have been discussed.112 At some concentra-
tions, there is a preferential incorporation of methyl-14C over methyl-3H from labeled methionine.112 A
comparison of HPLC and radioimmunoassay methods showed no significant difference in quantifying JH
III and minimal cross-reaction with JH precursors.113 Since some insects seem to produce JH diols and not
the epoxides (see above), a specific method, using reverse-phase HPLC and ESI–MS, has been described
for the quantification of the JHs, their diols, and their acids. The limit of detection was 6 pg for JHs and
8 pg for diols.114

4.03.4.6 Phytojuvenoids
It is a well-established observation that one of the defensive strategies of plants is to produce secondary
metabolites that interfere with the normal development of insects. Ecdysteroids in plants are a common
phenomenon (Section 4.03.3.5). Plants also make JH mimics, such as echinolone (54) from the American
coneflower Echinacea angustifolia, juvocimene-2 (55) from oil of sweet basil Ocimum basilicum, or juvabione
(56), from the balsam fir Abies balsamea,115 and antagonists to JH, such as the precocenes (57, 58) of Ageratum
houstonianum.115 JH has itself been discovered in a plant, along with farnesol and methyl farnesoate.116 JH III
(34) was discovered in the grasshopper’s sedge Cyperis iria and also C. aromaticus.116 The JH has the same
stereochemistry as insect JH III.109 Levels of 151 mg g1 fresh weight of tissue of JH III and 14 mg g1 of
methyl farnesoate were found,116 and still higher levels of 193 mg g1 fresh weight of JH III in 1-month-old
plants.117 Later it was discovered that most of the JH was in the roots (43.5 mg g1 fresh weight).118 For
comparison, insects typically have 0.1–100 ng g1 fresh weight. Five other species of Cyperus did not contain
detectable amounts of JH,117 and although this information has been available for nearly 20 years, there has
not been a rush of discoveries of JH in other plants. When a particular species of grasshoppers Melanoplus
sanguinipes were fed on the plant, 90% of them displayed abnormal effects on moulting to adults, and
ovaries of adult females were markedly underdeveloped.116 A series of studies by Bede et al.113,119–121
including tissue culture of C. iria119 demonstrate that the biosynthetic route was the same in plant as insect,
via mevalonate, and not by the alternative route of methylerythritol 4-phosphate, a route which is also
available to the plant.120
 Insect Hormones 145

4.03.4.7 JH and Pest Control

There is continuing interest in the use of knowledge gained from study of JH, its genes and biosynthesis, similar
to the studies conducted on ecdysteroids, to discover new ways to control insect pests.121 It might be thought
difficult to see how such knowledge of a universal hormone could be applied selectively to pest species, but
insects vary widely in their sensitivity to the phytojuvenoids. Interest in the precocenes 57 and 58 as tools in
studying JH effects in insects continues, but there is little activity in finding new natural compounds with
juvenilizing effects. There are numerous reports on the precocene content of the plant Ageratum conyzoides
(Asteraceae). The leaf oil of A. conyzoides from northern Brazil consists exclusively of precocene I (58; 95.4%)
and precocene II (57; 4.5%).122

4.03.5 Eicosanoids

The eicosanoids are a group of lipid compounds based on arachidonic (5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z)-eicosa-5,8,11,13-

tetraenoic acid (59) and (5Z,8Z,11Z,14Z,17Z)-eicosa-5,8,11,14,17-pentaenoic acid (60; Chapter 1.03). They
can be subdivided into three groups: prostaglandins, epoxyeicosatrienoic acids, and products of lipoxygenase
enzymes. The physiological effects of prostaglandins from humans were first recognized in the 1930s, and the
first chemical structure was identified in 1962. In subsequent years, owing to rapid advances, prostaglandins
have been recognized in vertebrates, invertebrates, and even in microbes. Research on insects has revealed that
they have several actions there, most notably concerned with the immune reaction and response to infection,
but they also have a hormonal role in some places, and therefore deserve consideration here.123,124
In the cricket Achaeta domestica, it was found that an enzyme was transferred from males to females at
copulation, and this enzyme was responsible for converting arachidonic acid into prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) (62),
which induced egg-laying, and could therefore be considered a primer pheromone.125 It was concluded that
egg-laying in the Australian field cricket Teleogryllus commodus, was released by PGE2 in a mode more like a
broadly circulating hormone.126 According to D. Stanley, this point can be extended to research on the mode of
action, at the whole-organism level, of eicosanoids in invertebrates.127 Prostaglandins release egg-laying
behavior in some, but not all, insects. More recently, prostaglandins have been found to control uptake of a
specific yolk protein, Rhodnius heme-binding protein.128 Prostaglandins are also detected in salivary glands,
endocrine glands, Malpighian tubules, testes, and ventral nerve cords.129
The early stages in the biosynthesis of prostaglandins and other eicosanoids in mammals are outlined in
Scheme 6. From what is known at this stage, the pathway is very similar in invertebrates.130
The substance that induces hatching of eggs in the barnacle Semibalanus (Balanus) balanoides is identified as
a prostaglandin.131 In the intertidal barnacle Balanus perforatus the compounds identified were
146 Insect Hormones

Scheme 6

8-hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid (63) and 8-hydroxyeicosapentaenoic acid (64), formed through the effect of an
8-lipoxygenase. Their production was linked to seawater temperature.132 It seems that arachidonic acid and
eicosa-8,11,14-trienoic acid act as juvenoids in annelid worms, and may also function in crustaceans and insects,
a parallel with methyl farnesoate and the JH compounds.109 8,13-Dihydroxyeicosapentaenoic acid (65) has
 Insect Hormones 147

been shown to control part of the post-copulation behavior of the subtidal barnacle Balanus balanus and causes
muscular contractions.133 It is suggested that new and different juvenoids await discovery.
Many of the studies on prostaglandins have been made using either a bioassay, immunoassay, sometimes
with the enzyme cyclooxygenase, or using injected or added arachidonic acid or an eicosanoid, so the evidence
for a prostaglandin is sometimes indirect. This has sometimes led to a mis-identification.130 Both GC–MS and
LC–MS have been used for direct identification. Typically identifications are based upon mass spectra, tandem
MS (MS/MS), UV spectra, and chromatographic behavior.134 Recent ESI–MS/MS linked to HPLC has
provided detection over the range 0.5–50 pg and quantification from 2 to 100 pg.135 Eicosanoids in inverte-
brates, other than insects, have been reviewed recently.133
Some interesting ideas have been presented by Schultz and Appel136 in an article on hormones shared by
plants and their insect herbivores. Proposing that signaling compounds have an early origin in evolution, such
compounds can therefore be shared by microbes, plants, and animals, and that both plants and animals can
manipulate these compounds to their advantages. This is particularly true of eicosanoids, which seem to be
present in primitive and advanced organisms. The authors point to diverse evolutionary and ecological
implications of shared signals and signal-stealing. It should now not be surprising that one eicosanoid
(PGF2 61) has been found in at least one flowering plant, the popular pot plant Kalanchoe blossfeldiana
(Crassulaceae).137 Several classes of prostaglandins have been identified in fresh vegetable oils by GC–MS138
and may act as growth regulators.139

4.03.6 Conclusion

Developments in the chemistry of hormones of insects and other arthropods have shown that the simple picture
of a few compounds and a few actions has become less simple. Advances in analytical methods and the
increasing number of species studied have thrown up more variations on the simple rules. We are learning
more about the interactions between plants and insects, and the conservation of biosynthetic routes between
them, and across the phyla. The subject of eicosanoids in insects and lower animals is going to demand further
investigation.

Glossary
androgenic development of male character
Annelid the phylum of ringed worms
corpus allatum (pl. corpora allata) endocrine gland behind the brain of insects that secretes juvenile hormone
diapause a period of delayed growth or development in unfavorable conditions such as drought or winter
elytra in beetles, the hardened, chitinous forewings, which act as wing covers
hemimetabolous insects that develop adult characteristics gradually, and do not go through a pupal stage (see
nymph)
hemolymph the blood-like fluid in insects
holometabolous insects that undergo complete metamorphosis, passing through a larval, pupal, and an adult
stage
imaginal disc a clump of tissue in an insect pupa that develops into an adult organ
midge tiny biting fly of the order Diptera
nymph the immature form of a hemimetabolous insect, corresponding to the larva of holometabolous insects
oogenesis the development of ova or eggs
Orthopteran insect order that includes locusts, grasshoppers, and crickets
phase locusts can exist either in solitary or gregarious phase, depending upon their behavior
polyphagous feeding on different kinds of food
prothoracic gland an endocrine gland in the prothorax of insects that secretes moulting hormone
vitellin protein of egg
148 Insect Hormones

vitellogenesis the production of egg protein in the mature female

Y-organ one of the pair of organs in crustaceans that secrete moulting hormone
zoanthid kind of marine coral

References
1. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Insect Neuropeptides. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford,
1999; Vol. 8, pp 294–302.
2. G. Gäde; K. H. Hoffmann, Physiol. Entomol. 2005, 30, 103–121.
3. G. Gäde; H. G. Marco, Structure, Function and Mode of Action of Selected Arthropod Neuropeptides. In Studies in Natural
Product Chemistry (Bioactive Natural Products); Atta-ur-Rahman, Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2006; Vol. 33, pp 69–139.
4. H. Nagasawa; H. Kataoka; Y. Hori; A. Isogai; S. Tamura; A. Suzuki; F. Guo; X. C. Zhaong; A. Mizoguchi; M. Fujishita;
S. Y. Takahashi; E. Ohnishi; H. Ishizaki, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1984, 53, 143–152.
5. T. Vandersmissen; A. de Loof; S. H. Gu, Peptides 2007, 28, 44–50.
6. G. Gäde, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2004, 49, 93–113.
7. M. Altstein, Peptides 2004, 25, 1491–1501.
8. Q. Wu; M. R. Brown, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 1–24.
9. V. Hartenstein, J. Endocrinol. 2006, 190, 555–570.
10. A. B. Hummon; A. Amare; J. V. Sweedler, Mass Spectrom. Rev. 2006, 25, 77–98.
11. G. Gäde, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2004, 49, 93–113.
12. G. Gäde; G. J. Goldsworthy, Pest Manage. Sci. 2003, 59, 1063–1075.
13. N. Audsley; R. J. Weaver, Peptides 2007, 28, 136–145.
14. A. K. Raina; A. Rafeli; T. G. Kingan, J. Insect Physiol. 1994, 40, 393–397.
15. R. J. Nachman; C. S. Garside; S. S. Tobe, Peptides 1999, 20, 23–29.
16. J. Koolman, Ed., Ecdysone: From Chemistry to Mode of Action; Georg Thieme: Stuttgart, 1989; p 482.
17. F. Hampshire; D. H. S. Horne, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1966, 37–38.
18. M. N. Galbraith; D. H. S. Horne, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1966, 905.
19. R. Lafont; J. Harmatha; F. Marion-Poll; L. Dinan; I. D. Wilson, Ecdybase 2002, http://ecdybase.org
20. R. Lafont; C. Dauphin-Villemant; J. T. Warren; H. H. Rees, Ecdysteroid Chemistry and Biochemistry. In Comprehensive
Molecular Insect Science; L. I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou, S. S. Gill, Eds.; Elsevier-Pergamon: Amsterdam, 2004; Vol. 3, pp 125–195.
21. Y. Fujimoto; S. Miyasaka; T. Ikeda; N. Ikekawa; E. Ohnishi; T. Mizuno; K. Watanabe, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1985,
10–12.
22. M. Hiramoto; Y. Fujimoto; K. Kakinuma; K. Ikekawa; E. Ohnishi, Experientia 1988, 44, 623–625.
23. A. J. Clark; K. Bloch, J. Biol. Chem. 1959, 234, 2578–2593.
24. L. Dinan; R. E. Hormann; T. Fujimoto, J. Comp. Aided Mol. Des. 1999, 13, 185–207.
25. P. Maurer; J.-P. Girault; M. Larcheveque; R. Lafont, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1993, 23, 29–35.
26. H. Nasir; H. Noda, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2003, 52, 175–182.
27. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Ecdysteroids. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, 1999,
Vol. 8, pp 279–294.
28. L. I. Gilbert; R. Rybczynski; J. T. Warren, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2002, 47, 883–916.
29. C. C. Hétru; C. Kappler; J. A. Hoffmann; R. Nearn; B. Luu; D. H. S. Horn, Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 1982, 26, 51–80.
30. M. Kamba; H. Sonobe; Y. Mamiya; N. Hara; Y. Fujimoto, Nat. Prod. Lett. 2000, 14, 349–356.
31. M. Kamba; H. Sonobe; Y. Mamiya; N. Hara; Y. Fujimoto, Nat. Prod. Lett. 2000, 14, 469–476.
32. H. Kayser; P. Ertl; P. Eilinger; M. Spindler-Barth; T. Winkler, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2002, 400, 180–187.
33. J. T. Warren; L. I. Gilbert, Insect Biochem. 1986, 16, 65–82.
34. A. Suksamrarn; A. Jankam; B. Tarnchompoo; S. Putchakarn, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65, 1194–1197.
35. T. Okumura; M. Kamba; H. Sonobe; K. Aida, Invertebr. Reprod. Dev. 2003, 44, 1–8.
36. T. Subramoniam, Curr. Sci. 1999, 76, 350–360.
37. T. Subramoniam, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C 2000, 125, 135–156.
38. H. H. Rees, Parasitology 2004, 129 (Suppl. S), S127–S143.
39. R. Lafont; M. Mathieu, Ecotoxicology 2007, 16, 109–130.
40. F. Cafieri; E. Fattorusso; O. Taglialatela-Scafati, J. Nat. Prod. 1998, 61, 122–125.
41. V. Costantino; C. Dell’ Aversano; E. Fattorusso; A. Mangoni, Steroids 2000, 65, 138–142.
42. A. Aiello; E. Fattorusso; M. Menna, Steroids 1999, 64, 687–714.
43. J. W. Blunt; B. R. Copp; W. P. Hu; M. G. H. Munro; P. T. Northcote; M. R. Prinsep, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2007, 24, 31–86.
44. L. Dinan, Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 1998, 45, 296–305.
45. L. Dinan; T. Savchenko; P. Whiting, Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2001, 58, 1121–1132.
46. L. Dinan; J. Harmatha; R. Lafont, J. Chromatogr. A 2001, 935, 105–123.
47. J. Preston-Mafham; L. Dinan, Z. Naturforsch. (C) 2002, 57, 144–152.
48. M. Báthori; G. Blunden; H. Kalász, Chromatographia 2000, 52, 815–817.
49. D. Louden; A. Handley; S. Taylor; E. Lenz; S. Miller; I. D. Wilson; A. Sage; R. Lafont, J. Chromatogr. A 2001, 910, 237–246.
50. D. Louden; A. Handley; R. Lafont; S. Taylor; I. Sinclair; E. Lenz; T. Orton; I. D. Wilson, Anal. Chem. 2002, 74, 288–294.
51. G. Wainwright; M. C. Prescott; L. O. Lomas; S. G. Webster; H. H. Rees, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1997, 35, 21–31.
52. C. F. Poole; E. D. Morgan; P. M. Bebbington, J. Chromatogr. 1975, 104, 172–175.
 Insect Hormones 149

53. Y. T. Li; J. T. Warren; G. Boysen; L. I. Gilbert; A. Gold; R. Sangaiah; L. M. Ball; J. A. Swenberg, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom.
2006, 20, 185–192.
54. J.-P. Girault, Russ. J. Plant Physiol. 1998, 45, 306–309.
55. H. Kayser; P. Eilinger, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1999, 41, 162–170.
56. P. Laurent; J.-C. Braekman; D. Daloze; J. M. Pasteels, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 109–111.
57. K.-H. Tomaschko; D. Büchmann, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1993, 90, 296–305.
58. K.-H. Tomaschko, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1999, 41, 89–98.
59. L. Dinan; R. Lafont, J. Endocrinol. 2006, 191, 1–8.
60. L. Dinan, Eur. J. Entomol. 1995, 92, 295–300.
61. R. Lafont; L. Dinan, Insect Sci. 2003, 3, 7 (http://www.insectscience.org/3.7/).
62. M. Ogiso; E. Ohnishi, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1986, 61, 82–86.
63. H. Schildknecht, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 1976, 15, 214–222.
64. E. T. Quinitio; A. Hara; K. Yamauchi; S. Nakao, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C 1994, 109, 21–26.
65. V. Gunamalai; R. Kirubagaram; T. Subramoniam, Curr. Sci. (India) 2006, 90, 119–123.
66. F. Novak; E. van Beek; J. Lambert; A. de Loof, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1990, 95, 565–569.
67. N. J. Fairs; P. T. Quinlan; L. J. Goad, Aquaculture 1990, 89, 83–99.
68. G. A. LeBlanc, Ecotoxicology 2007, 16, 61–81.
69. H. de Loof; R. Huybrechts, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1998, 111, 245–260.
70. G. Martin; O. Sorokine; M. Moniatte; P. Bulet; C. Hetru; A. Van Dorsselaer, Eur. J. Biochem. 1999, 262, 727–736.
71. A. Okuno; Y. Hasegawa; T. Ohira; Y. Katakura; H. Nagasawa, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1999, 264, 419–423.
72. B. Luu; F. Werner, Pest. Sci. 1996, 46, 49–53.
73. K. H. Hoffmann; M. W. Lorenz, Phytoparasitica 1998, 26, 323–330.
74. H. Oberlander; D. L. Silhacek; P. Porcheron, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1995, 28, 209–223.
75. W. G. Goodman; N. A. Granger, The Juvenile Hormones. In Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science; L. I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou,
S. S. Gill, Eds.; Elsevier-Pergamon: Amsterdam, 2004; Vol. 3, pp 319–408.
76. A. B. Attygalle; E. D. Morgan, Chem. Soc. Rev. 1984, 13, 245–278.
77. R. W. Howard; J. E. Baker; E. D. Morgan, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2003, 54, 95–109.
78. H. Numata; A. Numata; C. Takahashi; Y. Nakagawa; K. Iuratani; S. Takahashi; K. Miura; Y. Chinzei, Experientia 1992, 48,
606–610.
79. C. L. Goodman; R. M. Wagner; H. Nabi; M. K. Wright-Osment; T. Okuda; T. A. Coudron, In Vitro Cell Dev. Biol. 2005, 41, 71–76.
80. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Juvenile Hormone. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford,
1999; Vol. 8, pp 265–279.
81. S. E. Sen; J. R. Hitchcock; J. L. Jordan; T. Richard, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2006, 36, 827–834.
82. P. Moshitzky; S. W. Applebaum, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1995, 33, 225–237.
83. L. I. Gilbert; N. A. Granger; R. M. Roe, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2000, 30, 617–644.
84. R. Feyereisen, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 1999, 44, 507–533.
85. A. E. Sperry; S. E. Sen, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2001, 31, 171–178.
86. T. Shinoda; K. Itoyama, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 11986–11991.
87. C. Helvig; J. F. Koerner; G. C. Unnithan; R. Feyereisen, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 4024–4029.
88. X. Bellés; D. Martin; M. D. Puilachs, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2005, 50, 181–199.
89. H. F. Nijhout; M. C. Read, J. Insect Physiol. 2008, 54, 255–264.
90. S. M. Ismail; C. Goin; K. Muthumani; M. Kim; K. H. Dahm; G. Bhaskaran, J. Insect Physiol. 2000, 46, 59–68.
91. R. A. Maxwell; W. H. Welch; D. A. Schooley, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 21874–21881.
92. M. Gadot; A. Goldman; M. Cojocaru; S. W. Applebaum, Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 1987, 49, 99–107.
93. S. Range; U. Oeh; M. W. Lorenz; W. Etzel; R. Nauen; K. H. Hoffmann, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 2002, 132B, 191–202.
94. E. Darrouzet; B. Mauchamp; G. D. Prestwich; L. Kerhoas; I. Ujvary; F. Couillaud, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1997, 240,
752–758.
95. B. Mauchamp; E. Darrouzet; C. Malosse; F. Couillaud, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1999, 29, 475–480.
96. W.-S. Eng; G. D. Prestwich, J. Labelled Comp. Radiopharm. 1988, 25, 627–633.
97. P. Moshitzky; I. Miloslavski; Z. Aizenshtat; S. W. Applebaum, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2003, 33, 1299–1306.
98. T. Herman; I. Miloslavski; Z. Aisenshtat; S. W. Appplebaum, J. Insect Physiol. 2005, 51, 473–479.
99. T. Eisner; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 1995, 92, 50–55.
100. K. Dettner, Inter- and Intra-Specific Transfer of Toxic Insect Compound Cantharidin. In Ecological Studies. Vertical Food Web
Interactions: Evolutionary Patterns and Driving Forces; K. Dettner, G. Bauer, W. Völkl, Eds.; Springer: Heidelberg, 1997, Vol. 130,
pp 115–145.
101. Y. I. Park; S. Q. Shu; S. B. Ramaswamy; A. Srinivasan, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1998, 38, 100–106.
102. M. A. Pszczolkowski; A. Tucker; A. Srinivasan; S. B. Ramaswamy, J. Insect Physiol. 2006, 52, 786–794.
103. M. Cusson; J. Delisle; D. Miller, J. Insect Physiol. 1999, 45, 637–646.
104. D. J. Crisp, Overview of Research on Marine Invertebrate Larvae, 1940–1980. In Marine Biodeterioration: An Interdisciplinary
Study; J. D. Costlow, R. C. Tipper, Eds.; Naval Institute Press: Annapolis, MD, 1984; pp 103–126.
105. H. Laufer; A. Sagi; J. S. B. Ahl; E. Homola, Invertebrate Reprod. Dev. 1992, 22, 17–20.
106. E. Homola; E. S. Chang, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1997, 117B, 347–356.
107. E.-S. Chang; S. A. Chang; E. P. Mulder, Am. Zool. 2001, 41, 1090–1097.
108. P. A. Smith; A. S. Clare; H. H. Rees; M. C. Prescott; G. Wainwright; M. C. Thorndyke, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2000, 30,
885–890.
109. H. Laufer; W. J. Biggers, Am. Zool. 2001, 41, 442–457.
110. P. A. Neese; D. E. Sonenshine; V. L. Kallapur; C. S. Apperson; R. M. Roe, J. Insect Physiol. 2000, 46, 477–490.
111. K. S. Lefevere; M. J. Lacey; P. H. Smith; B. Roberts, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1993, 23, 713–720.
112. K. J. Yagi; S. S. Tobe, J. Insect Physiol. 2001, 47, 1227–1234.
150 Insect Hormones

113. J. C. Bede; W. G. Goodman; S. S. Tobe, Phytochem. Anal. 2000, 11, 21–28.

114. S. A. Westerlund; K. H. Hoffmann, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2004, 379, 540–543.
115. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Phytojuvenoids. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, 1999;
Vol. 8, pp 276–279.
116. Y. C. Toong; D. A. Schooley; F. C. Baker, Nature 1988, 333, 170–171.
117. A. M. Schwartz; S. M. Paskewitz; A. P. Orth; M. J. Tesch; Y. C. Toong; W. G. Goodman, J. Am. Mosq. Control Assoc.
1998, 14, 78–82.
118. J. C. Bede; W. G. Goodman; S. S. Tobe, Phytochemistry 1999, 52, 1269–1274.
119. J. C. Bede; P. Teal; S. S. Tobe, Plant Cell Rep. 1999, 19, 20–25.
120. J. C. Bede; P. E. A. Teal; W. G. Goodman; S. S. Tobe, Plant Physiol. 2001, 127, 584–593.
121. C. Minakuchi; L. M. Riddiford, J. Pestic. Sci. 2006, 31, 77–84.
122. M. A. S. Lima; M. C. P. Barros; S. M. Pinheiro; R. F. do Nascimento; F. J. D. Matos; E. R. Silveira, Flavour Frag. J. 2005, 20,
559–561.
123. D. W. Stanley, Eicosanoids in Invertebrate Signal Transduction Systems; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, 2000; p 277.
124. D. Stanley, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 25–44.
125. D. B. Destephano; U. E. Brady, J. Insect Physiol. 1977, 23, 905–911.
126. D. W. Stanley-Samuelson; W. Loher, Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1986, 79, 841–853.
127. D. W. Stanley-Samuelson, Biol. Bull. 1987, 173, 92–109.
128. M. N. Medeiros; D. M. P. Oliveira; G. O. Silva-Paiva; M. A. C. Silva-Neto; A. Romeiro; M. Bozza; H. Masuda; E. A. Machado,
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2002, 32, 537–545.
129. D. W. Stanley-Samuelson, Am. J. Physiol. 1991, 260, R849–R853.
130. A. F. Rowley; C. L. Vogan; G. W. Taylor; A. S. Clare, J. Exp. Biol. 2005, 208, 3–14.
131. A. S. Clare; G. Walker; D. L. Holland; D. J. Crisp, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 1985, B224, 131–147.
132. B. H. Maskrey; J. G. Bell; A. F. Rowley, J. Exp. Zool. Part A 2005, 303A, 904–916.
133. B. H. Maskrey; G. W. Taylor; A. F. Rowley, J. Exp. Biol. 2006, 209, 558–566.
134. S. Hong; E. Tjouahen; E. L. Morgan; Y. Lu; C. N. Serhan; A. F. Rowley, Prostaglandins Other Lipid Mediat. 2005, 78, 107–116.
135. M. Masoodi; A. Nicolaou, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 2006, 20, 3023–3029.
136. J. C. Schultz; H. M. Appel, Ecology 2004, 85, 70–77.
137. B. Janistyn, Planta 1982, 154, 485–487.
138. K. Karg; V. M. Dirsch; A. M. Vollmar; J. L. Cracowski; F. Laporte; M. J. Mueller, Free Radic. Res. 2007, 41, 25–37.
139. E. G. Groenewald; A. J. van der Westhuizen, S. Afr. J. Sci. 2005, 101, 67–74.

Biographical Sketch

David Morgan is a member of the Chemical Ecology Group at Keele University. He was
born in Newfoundland and had his university education there, at Dalhousie University and
University of King’s College in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and at Oxford. His doctorate thesis was
on the lipids of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. He then worked at the National Institute for
Medical Research in London, and for Shell Chemical Company and Shell Research under
the direction of Sir Robert Robinson, O.M., Nobel Laureate. From 1966 he has been at Keele
in Staffordshire as lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, and professor. He discovered the natural
pesticide azadirachtin and collaborated with S.V. Ley in its final structural elucidation. He
isolated and identified the moulting hormone in the first hemimetabolous insect and charted
the hormone titer throughout the embryonic, nymphal, and adult life cycle of the desert
locust, Schistocerca gregaria. He has collaborated with entomologists in the identification of
 Insect Hormones 151

numerous social insect secretions, including several ant trail pheromones. He has been an
invited lecturer and examiner at a number of institutions and in 1997 was president of a
Jacques Monod Conference on Chemical Communication in Vertebrates and Invertebrates. He is the
author of over 300 papers and reviews, mostly on insect chemistry, editor and contributor to
several volumes, and author of the book Biosynthesis in Insects. Recently, he developed an
interest in secretions of stingless bees, and has throughout maintained an interest in organic
archaeological chemistry.
 4.04 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates
Wittko Francke, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
Stefan Schulz, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.04.1 Introduction 154

4.04.2 Pheromone Biology 154
4.04.2.1 Endocrinology 154
4.04.2.2 Neurophysiology 155
4.04.2.3 Pest Management 156
4.04.3 Isolation and Structure Elucidation 156
4.04.4 Aromatic Compounds 159
4.04.4.1 Nitrogen-Containing Aromatic Compounds 161
4.04.5 Unbranched Aliphatic Compounds 163
4.04.5.1 Mixtures of Hydrocarbons Acting as Pheromones 163
4.04.5.2 Female Lepidopteran Sex Pheromones 164
4.04.5.3 Pheromones According to Carbon Chains 168
4.04.5.3.1 C1-units 168
4.04.5.3.2 C2-units 168
4.04.5.3.3 C4-units 168
4.04.5.3.4 C5-units 168
4.04.5.3.5 C6-units 169
4.04.5.3.6 C7-units 169
4.04.5.3.7 C8-units 169
4.04.5.3.8 C9-units 170
4.04.5.3.9 C10-units 170
4.04.5.3.10 C11-units 171
4.04.5.3.11 C12-units 172
4.04.5.3.12 C13-units 172
4.04.5.3.13 C14-units 173
4.04.5.3.14 C15-units 174
4.04.5.3.15 C16-units 174
4.04.5.3.16 C17-units 175
4.04.5.3.17 C18-units 176
4.04.5.3.18 C19-units 176
4.04.5.3.19 C20-units 178
4.04.5.3.20 C21-units 178
4.04.5.3.21 C22-units 180
4.04.5.3.22 C23-units 180
4.04.5.3.23 C24-units 181
4.04.5.3.24 C25-units 181
4.04.5.3.25 C26-units 181
4.04.5.3.26 C27-units 181
4.04.5.3.27 C29-units 182
4.04.5.3.28 C31-units 182
4.04.6 Terpenes 183
4.04.6.1 Monoterpenes 189
4.04.6.2 Sesquiterpenes 192
4.04.6.3 Norterpenes 194
4.04.6.4 Homoterpenes 195

153
154 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.7 Propanogenins and Related Compounds 196

4.04.8 Mixed Structures 200
4.04.9 Other Structures 205
References 207

4.04.1 Introduction

This chapter is a continuation and an updated version of our earlier discussion of pheromones.1 Covering the
literature of the past decade until the end of 2008, it predominantly deals with structures of new compounds
that have been identified to play a role as (components of) pheromones in systems of chemical communication
among arthropods. Structures are arranged and grouped in the same way as in the previous review, that is,
according to structures of carbon skeletons and (presumed) biosyntheses. Short essays provide a survey of
recent developments in the field of chemical ecology and some fringe areas as well as progress in analytical
techniques. Subsequently, semiochemicals showing ‘unbranched carbon chains’ followed by ‘terpenes’ (formally
made up of isoprene units), and ‘propanogenins and related compounds’ (made up of propanoate units) as well
as pheromones produced by ‘mixed biosyntheses’ are summarized, whereas some structures that do not fit this
scheme are summarized as ‘other structures’. To complete the survey that we are aiming at and to provide a
better overview over the state of the art, each of these sections starts with a discussion of selected structures and
corresponding references that have been discussed in our earlier review.1
Since the synthesis of pheromones has been extensively reviewed,2–8 corresponding aspects will not be the
subject of this chapter.
During the past 10 years, several monographs and reviews dealing with pheromones have been published.
They cover a broad spectrum9–16 or focus on pheromones and their functions in special orders, or families of
arthropods such as Hymenoptera,17–19 acridids,20 bark beetles,21 and crustaceans22 as well as pheromone-
mediated aggregation in nonsocial arthropods in general,23 or on the importance of chemical signals at different
hierarchic levels.24

4.04.2 Pheromone Biology

4.04.2.1 Endocrinology
The endocrinological background of the production of sex pheromones has been extensively studied in a
number of moth species.25 Neurosecretory cells located in the subesophageal ganglion release a pheromone
biosynthesis-activating neuropeptide (PBAN). After mating, the production of PBAN can be drastically
reduced, due to male-produced accessory gland factors that are transferred during copulation.26 A most
frequently found structural element in the PBAN family is the C-terminal pentapeptide sequence FXPR/
KL amide, which is the active core required for the stimulation of pheromone biosynthesis in female moths.27
In the silkworm, as in other moth species, diel changes in the firing activity of PBAN-producing cells suggest
that the neurosecretory system is under the control of a circadian pacemaker.28 A radio-receptor assay has been
developed to partially characterize the PBAN receptor in the pheromone gland of Heliothis species.29 The
identification of an age- and female-specific putative PBAN membrane-receptor protein in the pheromone
glands of the American bollworm Helicoverpa armigera and its possible upregulation by juvenile hormone have
been described,30 and similarities between H. armigera and the corn earworm Heliothis zea have been shown.31
A full-length cDNA encoding PBAN in the giant silkworm moth Samia cynthia ricini based on reverse
transcriptase-PCR and rapid amplification of cDNA end strategies was obtained.32 A gene encoding a
G-protein-coupled receptor was identified from the pheromone glands of females of H. zea. Subsequently,
the full-length PBAN receptor was cloned, expressed in Sf9 insect, and shown to mobilize calcium in response
to PBAN.33 Similar investigations suggested the PBAN receptor in Bombyx mori to be both structurally and
functionally distinct from that of H. zea.34 To help reveal the regulatory mechanisms of cell-specific expression
of PBAN and related hormones, a recombinant AcNPV-mediated gene transfer system and a gel-mobility
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 155

shift assay have been used. Results may give rise to speculations that functional conservation of Pitx family
members on neuropeptide gene expression occurs through a ‘combinatorial code mechanism’ in neuroendo-
crine systems of both vertebrates and invertebrates.35 Recently, the PBAN receptor from the tobacco budworm
Heliothis virescens has been identified, functionally expressed, and investigated with respect to structure–activity
relationships of ligand analogues.36 Using [2-14C]-acetate, the control of pheromone biosynthesis by PBAN was
followed up in H. virescens. Results indicate that PBAN controls an enzyme involved in the synthesis of fatty
acid precursors, probably acyl-CoA synthase, and another one, perhaps the reduction of acyl-CoA moieties.37
The biosynthesis of pheromones has been reviewed several times focusing on different aspects.38–42 A more
general overview over biosyntheses of natural products with special emphasis on semiochemicals has been
provided by Morgan.43

4.04.2.2 Neurophysiology
Perception of semiochemicals by insects is remarkably selective. Detection of target compounds involves highly
specialized, extremely sensitive sensilla that are situated along sensory hairs on the insect’s antenna. The
sensilla carry odorant receptor neurons (ORNs) whose odorant receptors (ORs) are isolated by an aqueous
sensillar fluid (lymph). Odorant- and pheromone-binding proteins (OBPs and PBPs) serve as mediators
between the external environment and ORs carrying semiochemicals through the antennal lymph to the
receptors. Earlier understanding on the insect olfactory system, its sensory function, morphology, and devel-
opment as well as the pheromone-specific/host-related detection and processing of odor information, has been
carefully discussed.44 Recent reviews deal with odor detection and central processing of natural odor mixtures
in insects.45–48 Several excellent reviews compiling current knowledge on OBPs, PBPs, and chemosensory-
specific proteins (CSPs) have been published.49–53 Specialized ORNs or OBPs mediating intra- and
interspecific chemical communication have been found in many insect species: ants,54 honeybees,55 termites,56
beetles57 (according to database search, the termite OBPs are homologues of the PBPs from scarab beetles
and antennal binding proteins from moths), fruit flies,58 and mosquitoes.59–61 A crystal structure of a PBP could
be obtained from cockroaches.62
Moths represent by far the most extensively investigated insects. Studied species include the sphinx moth
Manduca sexta,63 the gypsy moth Lymantria dispar,64 the wild silk moth Antheraea polyphemus,65,66 and above all,
the silk moth B. mori. In B. mori species, which served as a model in many investigations, female-biased ORNs,
which may detect odors that encode oviposition cues or male-produced courtship pheromones,67 could be
identified as well as male-specific PBPs, which may account for sex recognition.68 Two male-specific ORs have
been described, one being specifically tuned to bombykol, the sex pheromone, and the other to bombykal69
whereas in vitro competitive binding assays showed that both bombykol and bombykal bind to the B. mori PBP
with similar affinity.70 Similar to the B. mori PBP,68 the A. polyphemus PBP consists of six -helices, which are
arranged in a globular fold that encapsulates a central helix formed by the C-terminus. The three-dimensional
arrangement of these helices is anchored by three disulfide bonds.66 This suggests that the two PBPs use the
same mechanism of ligand binding and ejection: the polypeptide fold caused by the disulfide bridges encloses a
large hydrophobic cavity that accommodates the natural ligand, the pheromone. Disulfide connectivities were
also found in the two PBPs of the gypsy moth.64 Generally, PBPs can undergo striking pH-dependent
conformational changes that play a decisive role in the transport and release of the pheromone to the
membrane-standing pheromone receptor.71 Assignments for the B. mori PBP fragment BmPBP(1–128) at
pH 6.5 as well as the A. polyphemus PBP1 at pH 4.5 have been reported.72,73
In B. mori an aldehyde oxidase has been identified that may be involved in the degradation of bombykal.74
Esterases have been described from A. polyphemus,75 the cabbage moth Mamestra brassicae,76 as well as from the
Egyptian armyworm Spodoptera littoralis, and the Mediterranean corn borer Sesamia nonagrioides.77 All these
moth species use acetates of long-chain unsaturated alcohols as pheromones. In the Japanese beetle Popillia
japonica, antennae-specific esterases distinguish between the enantiomers of its pheromone. Inactivation of the
(R)-enantiomer is preferred over its antagonistically active enantiomer, which suggests that kinetics of
pheromone degradation may play a significant role in chiral discrimination.52
156 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.2.3 Pest Management

As an alternative or supplement to the exclusive application of broad-spectrum toxicants, interference
with insect semiochemicals may be favorably used in integrated pest management (IPM). At a physio-
logical level, targets may be at the early stages in the biosynthesis of semiochemicals such as switching
off pheromone production by the inhibition of PBAN-mediated physiological functions78 or by blocking
pheromone perception.79 At present, apart from biological control measurements, IPM frequently relies
on the use of pheromones for the manipulation of insect populations. In this context, the fact that
pheromone communication is highly species-specific is particularly advantageous. Basically, there are
three ways:

• Trapping: Pheromones are released to trap target insects or to attract them into devices where pathogens
(trap and affect) or insecticides (trap and kill) can be deployed.
• Monitoring: Trap catches are used to detect or monitor populations, to check for an optimal time to apply
pesticides or to control the efficacy of earlier treatments.
• Disruption: High dosages of pheromones in a selected area may reduce the population of the target species
because of mating disruption, probably due to disorientation.
Much has been learnt in this field during the past decade. It starts with the development of dispensers and
other release systems. Earlier controlled-release devices for pheromones have been summarized in several
reviews.80 More recent approaches in the formulation techniques use zeolites,81 microparticle dispensers,82
sol–gel formulations,83 or microencapsulation84 of pheromones. Trap devices and dispensers have to be
carefully optimized according to the target insect species. Spreading of the Swede midge Contarinia
nasturtii, a pest of cruciferous plants that has been recently introduced to the United States, could be
followed by monitoring with pheromone traps.85 Population dynamics in stored-product pests in food
processing plants has been successfully monitored.86 Similarly, flight periods and population densities of the
pine sawfly Diprion jingyuanensis could be monitored.87 In the case of sawflies – as in other cases – large-
scale applications are hampered by problems concerning bulk synthesis. This is in contrast to the
pheromones of several weevil species, which, consequently, have been very successfully used in mass
trapping.88–91 Refined approaches include host compounds to manipulate the behavior of phytophagous
insects as they often synergize or otherwise enhance insect responses to sex pheromones.92 On the
contrary, nonhost compounds may be used as repellents and applied in push–pull systems, where certain
stimuli act to make the protected resource unattractive or unsuitable to the pests whereas others lure them
to an attractive source.93 An interesting variant is opened by the fact that semiochemicals may exhibit
interspecific activities – it may be between closely related species (e.g., disruption of response to the
natural pheromone because of application of the ‘wrong’ enantiomeric composition of a chiral semiochem-
ical, which, in turn, is used by a competing species) or between very different taxa.94 Disruption is most
widespread in the control of lepidopteran pests for stored products95 and for pests in cotton fields,
orchards, vineyards, and so on. As important tools, analytical instrumentation has been developed to
measure pheromone concentrations in the field after treatment for mating disruption,96 whereas spatial
and temporal structures of pheromone plumes could be analytically followed up in fields and forests.97
Cheap large-scale syntheses of the compounds that will be applied and cheap devices for large-scale
deployment are prerequisite.98 During recent years, the oriental fruit moth Grapholita molesta, and the
codling moth Cydia pomonella have been successfully targeted.99,100 An exemplary review on codling moth
management has been recently published by Witzgall.101

4.04.3 Isolation and Structure Elucidation

Reliable bioassays are indispensible for a successful isolation and identification of semiochemicals,
especially pheromones. Recent improvements range from the construction of new olfactometers102 and
the development of a delivery system for laboratory bioassays103 to measurements of odor plume
structures in the wind tunnel104 and to a new method to improve olfactory responses to gas
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 157

chromatography (GC) effluents.105 Coupled GC/electroantennography (EAD) has become a standard

method in many laboratories. It detects those volatile compounds eluting from the GC that are perceived
by the antenna of the target insect – without saying anything about their biological significance (i.e., the
activity of the compound as a chemical signal). The method works well when a preparation of the
biological detector is feasible – and when the target compounds survive GC. Although an insect antenna
is most frequently used, it is also possible to prepare a whole head or even an intact insect.106
Rapid progress has been made in the collection and isolation of insect pheromones and other
volatiles.107 After the pioneering work of Pawliszyn108 and first steps in insect pheromone analyses,109,110
the application of solid-phase microextraction (SPME) is now widespread. Advantages are simple
handling and the fact that the method is noninvasive, that is, it does not harm the target organism,
which, therefore, can be analyzed several times, for example, when the production of certain compounds
(pheromones) is followed up over a certain period of time with the same individual. The tremendous
sensitivity of modern analytical instruments renders this solvent-free technique superior to many
conventional headspace techniques and over solvent extraction. Based on the type of fiber used, highly
volatile compounds may be trapped from headspace111 or high-boiling cuticular lipids may be obtained
after just touching the surface of an insect.112 SPME has been successfully applied to monitor allelo-
chemicals in plants.113,114 Loaded fibers can be easily transported from the field to the laboratory or
mailed from one laboratory to the other. Because of the selectivity of some commercially available fibers
toward certain chemical classes of compounds, quantitative analyses using SPME can be problematic.
Some improvements have been described.115 A further development is represented by membrane
extraction with sorbent interface (MESI), which can be used in the field to monitor very small amounts
of volatiles.116 Condensation of volatiles and subsequent thermal desorption GC117 or trapping of
volatiles with silicone rubber tubes118 are modern alternatives, whereas solid sample injection can also
be highly successful.119 A limitation of SPME and other solvent-free techniques is caused by the fact that
it is (almost) impossible to carry out derivatization of the target compounds. However, even simple
derivatization of double bonds (hydrogenation, addition of dimethyl disulfide), carbonyl groups (reduc-
tion, hydrazone formation), or hydroxyl functions (esterification, silylation) providing the most important
information about the chemical nature of unknown compounds can be most helpful in structure
elucidation.
Isolation and structure determination of minute amounts of volatile organic compounds, including
pheromones, have been reviewed.120,121 Systematic compilations of retention indices of selected target
compounds122–124 can be particularly helpful during GC investigations. General numerical methods for
the estimation of retention indices of (methyl)alkanes and their derivatives have been presented by
Schulz125 and Junkes et al.126 Derivatization techniques used in structure elucidation or quantitation of
volatiles have been summarized.127 Procedures range from single standard methylation or silylation of polar
compounds (which facilitates GC) to the transformation of naturally occurring methyl ethers and alcohols
to nitriles128 (which facilitates mass spectrometric (MS) investigations). Transformation of secondary
alcohols into the corresponding trifluoroacetates provides a reliable method for quantitative GC analyses.129
As the receptors of chemical messages at the receiver’s side are made up of proteins, it is quite under-
standable that the enantiomeric composition of chiral semiochemicals plays a decisive role. Several
comprehensive reviews, especially those written by Mori, emphasize the importance of chirality in
pheromone science.130–133 This is underlined by the fact that the two enantiomers of linalool induce
activity in different parts of the brain of the hawk moth M. sexta134 and that the esterase that accounts
for the degradation of the enantiomers of japonilure, the pheromone of the Japanese beetle P. japonica acts
enantioselectively.52 Techniques for the separation of enantiomers and the determination of the absolute
configuration of optically active compounds have been carefully compiled.
Investigation on the enantiomeric composition of chiral secondary alcohols will, however, require either
derivatization with an optically active reagent and separation on a conventional column or enantioselective
GC using an optically active stationary phase. Today, the latter approach most frequently involves
modified cyclodextrins.135 Enantioselective HPLC has also been successfully applied to separate enantio-
mers.136,137 Several reagents have been used in the transformation of chiral alcohols into diastereomers.
Among these, acetyllactic acid138 or chlorofluoroacetic acid139 furnish volatile derivatives of pheromone
158 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

Figure 1 Optically active reagents for the derivatization and separation of chiral compounds.

alcohols. Resolution of 1,3-diols could be achieved after reaction with chiral bidentate silyl reagents.140
Chiral resolving agents yielding nonvolatile derivatives that can be separated upon conventional HPLC
at low temperature have also been developed. The aromatic compounds (S)-2-methoxy-2-(9-phenan-
thryl) propionic acid A141 as well as the enantiomers of 2-(2,3-anthracenedicarboximido)cyclohexanol
B142 and 2-(2,3-anthracenedicarboximido)cyclohexanecarboxylic acid C proved to be highly efficient.143
(see Figure 1). The use of compounds B and C as chiral reagents has been particularly suitable for the
separation of chiral compounds with a stereogenic center remote from the functional group.144 Because
of their fluorescent activity, detection of the derivatives is possible with extremely small amounts.
Compound B has been used to determine the stereochemical composition of the copulation-releasing
pheromones of Callosobruchus weevils.145,146
During recent years, NMR techniques have been tremendously improved, and modern high-field instru-
ments, equipped with microcoil probes are extremely sensitive.147 A few insects (or glands), sometimes only a
single individual, may be enough for structure elucidation of new compounds even in crude mixtures obtained
from natural sources.148–150 New chiral silylation reagents have been developed to determine the absolute
configuration of chiral compounds through NMR spectroscopy.151–153 Online assignments of the absolute
configuration of natural products through HPLC–circular dichroism (CD) has been achieved with very small
amounts of material,154 and vibrational CD spectroscopy (VCD) has been successfully applied in pheromone
chemistry.155,156
Despite the enormous progress in the abovementioned techniques, the sensitivity of MS remains
unequalled. Apart from more conventional derivatization procedures,127 determination of double bond
positions in complex mixtures of alkenes has been achieved upon chemical ionization ion-trap MS using
acetonitrile as a reagent gas.157 Two-dimensional GC in combination with a time-of-flight (TOF)-MS
detector greatly facilitates the analyses of complex mixtures and may become a powerful tool in the
analysis of semiochemicals.158 Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization (MALDI)-TOF-MS has been
successfully used to analyze cuticular lipids of insects and revealed the presence of high-boiling com-
pounds with more than 70 carbon atoms.159 This makes an area of natural products accessible that had
previously been almost ignored or overlooked. Atmospheric pressure chemical ionization (APCI)–MS
allows real-time monitoring of volatiles released by single insects. Rapid changes in the emitted signal
can be followed with a minimal detection delay and high sensitivity.160,161 A similar approach is feasible
through techniques summarized as direct analysis in real time (DART)–MS.162 Unfortunately, compared to
NMR spectrometry, information about structural features of a given target compound, provided by the
obtained data, is less definite. As a consequence, thorough studies concerning the mass spectrometric
fragmentation pattern of pheromones and analogue compounds may largely facilitate structure elucidation
of hitherto unknown compounds.163–166
Remark: At the beginning of each of the following sections, a selected compilation of chemical
compounds is presented that have been treated in our earlier review.1 In this context, chemical
structures are shown, and the Latin names of the species and, where possible, common names are
given. If only genus, family, or order is provided, the occurrence of the questionable compound is not
restricted to one species. Corresponding references are cited for further information.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 159

4.04.4 Aromatic Compounds

In our earlier review,1 the compounds presented in the following figures were discussed in more detail.

Ar1: ants;167 Ar2: mites;168 Ar3: ticks;169 Ar4: Lasius

fuliginosus ant;170

Ar5: Camponotus Ar6: Camponotus Ar7: leaf-cutting

ants;171 ants;171 ants172

Phenol (Ar8) is the pheromone of the grass grub beetle Costelytra zealandica,173 while anisol (Ar9) is the
pheromone of two scarab beetles Holotrichia reynaudi174 and Holotrichia consanguinea.175 In the desert locust
Schistocerca gregaria, the aggregation pheromone of mature males consists of Ar8, benzyl cyanide (Ar27), guaiacol
(Ar10), and Ar18.176 Compounds Ar8 and Ar10 are synergists to aldehydes and acids acting as aggregation
pheromones of the fifth instar larvae of the species.177 Acetophenone (Ar26) and veratrole (Ar11) have been
identified as the two major behaviorally active components of the oviposition aggregation pheromone of
S. gregaria. Both compounds elicited aggregation of gravid females but did not act synergistically.178 The function
of Ar27 in S. gregaria is controversial. Recently, it has been found to be a courtship inhibition pheromone
of mature locusts.179,180 The same function is found for this compound in the butterfly Pieris brassicae.181
1,3-Dimethoxybenzene (Ar12) is an alarm pheromone component of the springtail Neanura muscorum.182
Hydroquinone (Ar13) is a food-marking pheromone used by Mastotermes darwiniensis termites. Interestingly,
it is active in many termite species from all over the world, obviously used as a general signal.183 o-Nitrophenol
(Ar14) is part of the aggregation-attachment pheromone of Amblyomma ticks.184,185 2,6-Dichlorophenol (Ar3) is
a female sex pheromone of the ticks Anocentor nitens186 and Amblyomma cajennense,187 as well as of other ticks.188,189
The American dog tick Dermacentor variabilis also contains this phenol, and 2,4-dichlorophenol (Ar15) is
another component of the pheromone.190
Benzaldehyde (Ar18), emitted by males of the bug Triatoma infestans during courtship and copula, attracted
female conspecifics. Highest response was observed in a mixture with hexanal (A68) (ratio 1:20).191 It also
recruits workers for defense in the stingless bee Trigona angustula.192 Together with benzyl alcohol (Ar16) it is
part of the aggregation pheromone of the common bedbug Cimex lectularius.193 Benzyl acetate (Ar17) occurs in
the stinging alarm pheromone of the honeybee Apis mellifera and induces flying.194 Anthranilic acid (Ar19) is the
pheromone of the black chafer Holotrichia loochooana,195 while a 100:1 mixture of methyl anthranilate (Ar20) and
Ar41 comprises the trail pheromone of an Aenictus sp.196 Methyl salicylate (Ar21) was identified as an
antiaphrodisiac of male Pieris napi197 and Pieris rapae butterflies.181 The binary blend of Ar21 and iridodial
(T128), an iridoid that may play a role in the context of chemical communication among aphids, seems to
attract the aphid predator Metasyrphus americanus, a hoverfly.198 Methyl 2-(methylthio)benzoate (Ar22) is a rare
sulfur-containing sex pheromone of the scarab beetle Phyllophaga crinita.199 Methyl 4-hydroxybenzoate (Ar23)
and 2-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)ethanol (Ar31) are constituents of the retinue response pheromone of the
honeybee A. mellifera.200 Vanillin (Ar24) is a pheromone component of the oil palm bunch moth Tirathaba
mundella.201
(R)-1-Phenylethanol (Ar25) is the trail pheromone of Aphaenogaster cockerelli.202 2-Ethylguaiacol (Ar28) is a
male sex pheromone component of the cockroach Nauphoeta cinerea.203 2-Phenylethanol (Ar29) is a component
of the aggregation pheromone of male Megacyllene caryae.204 The acetate (Ar30) was identified as part of a
male-produced attracting pheromone for both sexes in the bug Neacoryphus bicrucis.205 2-Hydroxy-6-
160 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

methylbenzaldehyde (Ar2) was proposed as the female sex pheromone of the house dust mite
Dermatophagoides farinae206 and has been identified as an alarm or sex pheromone in several other mite
species.207–212 Methyl 6-methylsalicylate (Ar1) (the methyl ester of the acid corresponding to Ar2), a
component of the poison gland secretion, elicited trail following in the ants Mayriella overbecki213 and
Tetramorium cf. impurum.214 In the slave-making ant Polyergus rufescens, it is a component of the male-
attracting pheromone of the queen,215 while it serves the same function in Polyergus breviceps, acting only in
combination with 3-ethyl-4-methylpentan-1-ol.216

Males of the oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (papayae) take up methyl eugenol (Ar32) pharmacopha-
gously and use it together with its hydroxylated analogue, 2-allyl-4,5-dimethoxyphenol (Ar33) as sex and
aggregation pheromones.217 Other pheromonally active components are (E)-3-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphe-
nyl)-2-propen-1-ol (Ar34) (coniferyl alcohol),218 which is also a synergistic component of the honeybee
retinue response signal of workers,219 and (Z)-3-(3,4-dimethoxyphenyl)-2-propen-1-ol (Ar35).220 Males of
the oriental fruit moth G. molesta use ethyl cinnamate (Ar36) as courtship pheromone, together with Ar4,
A45, or A46.221 Zingerone (Ar37) and zingerol (Ar38) are attractant pheromone components of males of the
melon fly Bactrocera cucurbitae, and potentially other Bactrocera species.222,223 The sex pheromone of the
German cockroach Blattella germanica has been characterized as gentisyl quinone isovalerate (blatellaquinone,
Ar39). Because of its surprising instability, this unique compound was particularly difficult to isolate and to
characterize.224
3,4-Dihydro-8-hydroxy-3-methylisocoumarin (Ar4) (mellein) is the trail pheromone of the ants Formica
rufa225 and Lasius (Dendrolasius) fuliginosus.226 It is also the male pheromone of the moth Aphomia sociella227 and a
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 161

male pheromone component of the moth G. molesta, enhancing the activity of Ar36.221 Several ants of the
genus Camponotus use 3,4-dihydro-8-hydroxy-3,7-dimethylisocoumarin (Ar5)228 or 3,4-dihydro-8-hydroxy-
3,5,7-trimethylisocoumarin (Ar6).228,229 The (R)-enantiomer is most active in the ant Lasius niger.230

4.04.4.1 Nitrogen-Containing Aromatic Compounds

Methyl 4-methylpyrrole-2-carboxylate (Ar7) was the first trail pheromone identified in ants. It is used by Atta
texana,231 Atta cephalotes,232 and Acromyrmex octospinosus.233 Two Metapone ant species use the unsubstituted
derivative Ar40 as the trail pheromone.234 Methyl nicotinate (Ar41) is the minor component of the trail
pheromone of an Aenictus sp.196
Various pyrazines act as trail pheromones of ants. 3-Ethyl-2,5-dimethylpyrazine (Ar47) has the same
function in Atta sexdens,235,236 Manica rubida,237 Myrmica incompleta,238 and Messor bouvieri,239 as well as in several
Myrmica spp.236 It is also the recruitment pheromone of Pogonomyrmex harvester ants.240 A 7:3 mixture of Ar47
and 2,5-dimethylpyrazine (Ar45) comprises the trail pheromone of Tetramorium caespitum.241 2,3-Dimethyl-5-
(2-methylpropyl)pyrazine (Ar48) is the trail pheromone of the ant Eutetramorium mocquerysi.242 2-Isopropyl-3-
methoxypyrazine (Ar42), a widespread warning odor of insects, acts as a pheromone in the seven-spotted
ladybird beetle Coccinella septempunctata.243
Indole (Ar53) is part of the antiaphrodisiac pheromone of male P. rapae butterflies.181 Together with
methylpyrazine (Ar44), Ar45, trimethylpyrazine (Ar46), and Ar47, it represents the trail pheromone of the
ant Tetramorium meridionale.244
The mixture of N-isopentyl-2-phenylethylamine (Ar49), anabasine (neonicotine, Ar58), anabaseine (nor-
nicotine, Ar59), and 2,39bipyridyl (Ar60) constitutes the trail pheromone of the ant Aphaenogaster rudis.245
Danaidone (Ar50), the male courtship pheromone of the queen butterfly Danaus gilippus, was one of the first
pheromones identified.246,247 Despite its presence in scent glands of many danaine butterflies, the pheromonal
function of Ar50 was shown in only one additional species Idea leuconoe.248 A more widespread dihydropyrro-
lizine pheromone is hydroxydanaidal (Ar51). It is used by many male danaine, ithomiine, and arctiine
butterflies, preferentially as part of a courtship pheromone.249–251 The absolute configuration of Ar51 was
determined in a few species only, but proved to be (R) in all cases.252–254 Sometimes, the related compound
danaidal (Ar52), lacking the hydroxy group, is used by arctiine moths too.253 The butterflies sequester
precursors of the dihydropyrrolizines Ar50–Ar52 from plants and convert them into the pheromones.254 It is
interesting to note that butterflies producing such compounds may differentiate between the precursor
alkaloids: Parantica sita is able to process the alkaloids intermedine or lycopsamine (monoesters that carry a
(7R)-OH group) in contrast to heliotrine (monoester with (7S)-OH group) and retrosine or monocrotaline
162 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

(diesters that carry a (7R)-OH group).255 Some other species do not distinguish. It is remarkable that caterpillars
of the arctiid moth Utetheisa ornatrix, monophagous on Crotolaria species, can taste the alkaloids contained in its
host plant.256 Whether consumed pyrrolizidine alkaloids are degraded upon saponification and further proces-
sing or via a transesterification step257,258 may need further investigations.
N,N-Dimethyluracil Ar43 is the trail pheromone of the ant Pachycondyla analis, whereas actinidine (Ar57)
serves as foraging stimulation signal.259
A unique pheromone structure is represented by the alkaloid 1,3-dimethyl-2,4-(1H,3H)-quinazolinedione
(Ar56), which is the sex pheromone of the pale-brown chafer Phyllopertha diversa.260 Its degradation with special
enzymes on the antennae leading to signal inactivation has been described.261
4-Methylquinazoline (Ar61) is a minor component of the male sex pheromone of the parasitoid Nasonia
vitripennis.262 It is also found in the feces of T. infestans, together with 2,4-dimethylquinazoline (Ar62),
attracting different stages of this hematophagous bug.263
Guanine (Ar54) and xanthine (Ar55) are components of the arrestment pheromone of the tick Ixodes
scapularis.264
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 163

4.04.5 Unbranched Aliphatic Compounds

4.04.5.1 Mixtures of Hydrocarbons Acting as Pheromones
Chemical communication in social insects is often more complex as compared to solitary species, using different
signals in a varying context. Signals in ants, bees, wasps, or termites may not only be represented by single
compounds or mixtures of a few components, but also comprise complex multicomponent bouquets. The obvious
place to present such bouquets is the epicuticle, allowing easy detection upon direct contact or short-range
olfaction.265 The insect cuticle is commonly covered by hydrocarbons, consisting most often of n-alkanes, methyl-
branched alkanes, and n-alkenes with various numbers of double bonds.266,267 Qualitatively and quantitatively
defined patterns of hydrocarbons make up specific chemical signals.268,269 Unusual compounds occur, as for
example, allenic structures like (R)-9,10-tricosadiene and similar components on the cuticle in Australian scarab
beetles,270 or oligoprenylsesquiterpenes on the cuticle of the collembola Podura aquatica.271 In addition, oxyge-
nated compounds derived from hydrocarbons have been frequently identified on insect surfaces,272–274 but their
attribution to the signature of complex bouquets used in chemical communication remains largely unclear.
Social interactions of insects are particularly well investigated in ants. Several aspects have been found to be
mediated through hydrocarbon profiles unique to certain colonies, castes within a colony, tasks of ants, or sex. A
sensillum that discriminates between nestmate and nonnestmate cuticular hydrocarbon patterns has been
described in the carpenter ant Camponotus japonicus.275 Some examples dealing with the importance of hydro-
carbons in social insects are given below. Harvester ants, Pogonomyrmex barbatus, use hydrocarbon profiles to
discriminate between nestmates and aliens,276 as does Cataglyphis niger.277 In the ant Formica japonica, nestmates
are detected by variations in n-alkanes and (Z)-9-alkenes. Artificial alteration of the colony bouquet by
changing relative proportions of selected components induces increased aggression in the ants.278 In contrast,
only the (Z)-9-alkenes were found to be responsible for nestmate recognition in Formica exsecta.279 In other ants,
various classes of hydrocarbons are involved,269 as seems to be also the case for honeybees.280 When added to
the extracts of host hydrocarbons, (Z)-9-tricosene (A190) induces aggression in the ant Camponotus floridanus.265
Furthermore, task decisions can be mediated by hydrocarbon profiles in the ant P. barbatus.281 In the termite
Macrotermes subhyalinus, complex regression analysis showed that primarily alkenes, present only in minor
amounts, seem to be crucial for colony detection.268
Aggression between members of different colonies was also observed in the eusocial wasp Ropalidia opifex.
They use different hydrocarbon patterns for recognition, consisting of straight-chain and methyl-branched
alkanes.282 In the European hornet Vespa crabro, alteration of the hydrocarbon profile by the application of
additional components changes the response from tolerance to aggression.283 Reproductive and nonreproduc-
tive individuals of the ant Myrmecia gulosa are differentiated by conspecifics using hydrocarbon profiles.284
Young females of the alfalfa leaf-cutter bee Megachile rotundata attract males by cuticular alkenes, while fatty
acids or alkanes that are also present on the cuticle proved to be inactive.285
In certain cases, compositions of hydrocarbon patterns are changed during interactions. The paper wasp
Polistes atrimandibularis, a social parasite of Polistes biglumis bimaculatus, controls the host nest by sequentially
changing the composition of its cuticular hydrocarbons during the colonial cycle. The parasite can switch on
and off alkene biosynthesis, thus becoming undetected by the host.286 Intercolonial aggression in the stingless
bee Scaptotrigona bipunctata was assigned to statistically significant quantitative differences in the composition of
hydrocarbon patterns isolated from the wings of guard bee workers. Unfortunately, no bioassays were carried
out to test the biological activity of the investigated extracts, and, similar to many other investigations, no
experiments using synthetic compounds were performed.287 Hydrocarbon profiles also play a role in nonsocial
species. Males of two hybridizing Chrysochus leaf beetles are influenced in their mate choice and sexual isolation
by hydrocarbon profiles of females.288 Several other pheromonal functions of cuticular hydrocarbon mixtures
have been described, for example, trail following by wasps.289
More detailed aspects of hydrocarbon bouquets acting as pheromones and various problematic aspects in
revealing their true biological function have been discussed.266,290 In many cases, however, only extracts of the
insect cuticle are used for bioassays, sometimes roughly separated by chromatography into different chemical
classes. Tests with synthetic blends have been less frequently performed; only such approaches would allow
unequivocal assignment of activity to the compounds tested. Actually, in whole extracts or fractions thereof
164 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

only a single or a few compounds might be active, and often it is still unclear whether certain compounds
included in a mixture or the whole bouquet are active and whether relative proportions really matter.
Nevertheless, the study on the hydrocarbon receptor in C. japonicus showed that patterns can indeed be
perceived and that the receptor is well suited to detect mixtures.275 Finally, many studies show qualitative
differences in hydrocarbon patterns depending on status, sex, age, physiological state, social group, or colony,
but experimental evidence for corresponding biological activities using defined (synthetic) mixtures in biotests
is often lacking. In the ant F. exsecta, it could be shown that profiles of cuticular hydrocarbons may not only be
colony-specific but also depend on the task of the individual (e.g., foraging vs. nonforaging) within the same
colony.291 Consequently, (sufficient numbers of collections of) homogenous samples and a careful evaluation of
analytical results as well as scrutinized application of statistical methods such as discriminant analyses or
principal component analyses are indispensible.292
Recently, very long hydrocarbons consisting of more than 70 carbon atoms have been described as constitu-
ents of the insect cuticle. These compounds cannot be analyzed by conventional GC/MS methods; instead
MALDI-TOF-MS is used.160 Whether these compounds are involved in pattern recognition of hydrocarbons is
unknown. Nevertheless, their sheer size may inhibit them from entry into the recognition size of proteins. Small
molecules like the secondary metabolites discussed in this chapter are detected usually at the recognition site
inside the protein, because otherwise their affinity to the protein would not be sufficient for complexation.

4.04.5.2 Female Lepidopteran Sex Pheromones

Sex pheromones of female moth constitute the best-investigated group of insect pheromones, primarily because
of their economic importance. Chemically they are very uniform, and their occurrence and biosynthesis have
been discussed in detail in our previous review.1 Recently, an excellent review has been published by Ando.40 A
complete searchable database on the pheromones of about 1800 species is found in the Pherobase database,
which is freely available via the Internet.293
About 75% of the known pheromones are represented by even-numbered straight-chain alcohols, alde-
hydes, or acetates. The chain length varying between C10 and C18, and one to three double bonds in specific
geometries are found along the chain. Apart from some few exceptions, these pheromones, which have been
termed Type I compounds,40 will not be covered in the following discussion. The reader should instead consult
the Pherobase293 for more information on Type I compounds.
The biosynthesis of Type I components has been recently reviewed.41 The high structural variability is
achieved by combinations of chain shortening steps and desaturation reactions of fatty acid coenzyme A esters.
These precursors are then reduced to alcohols, which can be converted into either aldehydes or acetates. Athough

11-desaturases are most prominent among Lepidoptera, enzymes that generate double bonds at positions 5, 9,
10, 12, 13, or 14 have been described too.41 Evolutionary aspects of the desaturases have been discussed,294,295 as
have been some mechanistic aspects. In all cases investigated so far, double bonds are formed upon abstraction of
the pro-R hydrogens from the methylene groups that are involved.296–298 The hydrogen closer to the carboxyl-
end of the chain is removed first, exhibiting a large isotope effect.299 Especially interesting is the finding of
multifunctional desaturases in the Lepidoptera. Bombykol ((10E,12Z)-10,12-hexadecadien-1-ol), the first insect
pheromone identified, is biosynthesized from palmitate. After transformation into (Z)-11-hexadecenoate, the
same enzyme induces 1,4-elimination of hydrogen, yielding (10E,12Z)-hexadecadienoate, the bombykol precur-
sor.300 A similar enzyme was described from S. littoralis.301Another bifunctional desaturase is involved in the
biosynthesis of (Z)-13-hexadec-13-en-11-ynyl acetate, the unique pheromone of the processionary moth
Thaumetopoea pityocampa. A single desaturase accounts for three desaturation reactions: Palmitate is first trans-
formed into (Z)-11-hexadecenoate, followed by additional dehydrogenation into 11-hexadecynoate. The third
dehydrogenation step at C13 yields (Z)-13-hexadecen-11-ynoate. Activities of other enzymes complete the
biosynthesis by reduction to the corresponding alcohol and final acetylation.302 Very recently, it was shown
that in the European corn borer Ostrinia nubilalis, male-produced pheromones that account for the acceptance by
females are structurally very similar to the female-produced sex pheromone of the species – which may give rise
to further speculations on evolutionary aspects of the Ostrinia phenomenon.303
The second largest group, called Type II compounds, is represented by odd-numbered unbranched
hydrocarbons with two to five double bonds, most of which being homoconjugated (skipped conjugated, two
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 165

double bonds being separated by one methylene group).42 The chain length varies between C17 and C25. One or
two of the double bonds can be stereospecifically epoxidized. In addition, a formal rearrangement of the
epoxide to a carbonyl group generates unsaturated ketones, which may also act as sex pheromones. Compounds
of this type identified during the past decade are listed in the following sections. Results of investigations
concerning their biosynthesis have been discussed.41 Type II compounds are derivatives of linolenic or linoleic
acid.304 During biosynthesis, carbon C1, bearing the carboxylic acid function, is lost, so that the even-numbered
fatty acid is converted into an odd-numbered hydrocarbon.305 Subsequently, one of the double bonds may
be regiospecifically and enantiospecifically attacked by a monooxygenase.306 In a few cases, an additional
-oxidation step converts an even-numbered fatty acid into an odd-numbered one, and, consequently, even-
numbered hydrocarbons, as for example, A155, are produced during the subsequent steps.307
Finally, a small part of the sex pheromones of female moth do not fit into this scheme. They show additional
methyl branches along the chain or functional groups at unusual positions. Examples can be found in the
following sections.
In our earlier review,1 the compounds presented in the following figures were discussed in more detail.
166 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates
Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 167
168 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3 Pheromones According to Carbon Chains

4.04.5.3.1 C 1 -units
Formic acid seems to be a recruitment signal of several Camponotus ants.229,365 In contrast, it has been described
as a signal to repel conspecifics in Camponotus obscuripes.366

4.04.5.3.2 C 2 -units
Acetic acid occurs in Brindley’s gland of male and female Rhodnius prolixus bugs, a vector of the Chagas disease.
Males and females are attracted to this compound in a dose-dependent manner.367

4.04.5.3.3 C 4 -units
Males of the scarab beetle Amphimallon solstitialis are attracted to the pheromone (R)-3-hydroxy-2-butanone (A62),
released by both males and females.368 Although the (S)-enantiomer and 2,3-butanediol (A4) are also produced, they
were not active in the field. 3-Hydroxy-2-butanone of unknown enantiomeric composition is the major sex
pheromone component of male cockroach Leucophaea maderae.203 The rhinoceros beetle Scapanes australis uses a
84:12:4 mixture of 2-butanol (A61) (R/S 67:33), 3-hydroxy-2-butanone (A62), and 2,3-butanediol (A4, (R,R/S,S/meso
43:17:40), whereas the pheromone of another rhinoceros beetle Strategus aloeus is a 95.5:4.0:0.5 mixture of 2-butanone
(A63), 3-pentanone (A66), and 1-methylpropyl acetate (A64). As mixtures of all components of the natural secretion
were used in this study, it is not clear whether all compounds really possess pheromonal activity.369

4.04.5.3.4 C 5 -units
(S)-2-Pentanol (A65) is the major component of the alarm pheromone of the giant hornet Vespa mandarinia. The
(R)-enantiomer occurs in minor amounts and is equally effective.370 3-Pentanone (A66) is part of the
pheromone of S. aloeus (see Section 4.04.5.3.3). Pentanoic acid (A67) was discussed as a compound stimulating
premating behavior in the desert locust S. gregaria.371
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 169

4.04.5.3.5 C 6 -units
Hexanal (A68), emitted during courtship and copula of the bug T. infestans, attracted female conspecifics.191 The
common bedbug C. lectularius, uses (E)-2-hexenal (A69) as part of its aggregation pheromone.193 Hexanoic acid
(A70) occurs in males and females of the bug R. prolixus. Males were attracted to this compound in a dose-
dependent manner.367 Hexyl acetate (A71) is a female pheromone component of several bugs of the genus
Phytocoris.372–374 (E)-2-Hexenyl acetate (A73) is a pheromone component of Phytocoris difficilis.374 (2E,4E)-2,4-
Hexadienyl acetate (A75) was identified as part of a male-produced attracting pheromone for both sexes in the
bug N. bicrucis (Lygaeidae).205 1-Methylethyl (R)-5-hydroxyhexanoate (A76), produced by adult male asparagus
flies Plioreocepta poeciloptera elicits arrestment in females and attracted conspecific males, but not females.375 Hexyl
butyrate (A72), (E)-2-hexenyl butyrate (A74), and (E)-4-oxo-2-hexenal (A6) constitute the female sex phero-
mone of the sorghum plant bug Stenotus rubrovittatus.376 Males of the long-horned beetle Neoclytus acuminatus and
M. caryae produce (2S,3S)-2,3-hexanediol (A78) as an aggregation pheromone,377 while the (2S,3R)- and (2R,3S)-
enantiomers are part of the aggregation pheromone of male M. caryae.204 The related (R)-3-hydroxy-2-hexanone
(A10) is the aggregation pheromone of the long-horned beetle Neoclytus mucronatus mucronatus.378 2,3-Dihydro-3,5-
dihydroxy-6-methylpyran-4-one (A77) shows trail pheromone activity in the ant Camponotus socius.365

4.04.5.3.6 C 7 -units
Heptanal (A79), emitted by the bug T. infestans during courtship and copula, attracted female conspecifics.191
(2E,4Z)-2,4-Heptadienal (A80) and the respective alcohol A81 are produced by males of the leaf beetle
Diorhabda elongata and are attractive to both sexes.379 (R)-2-Heptanol (A12) is a female sex pheromone
component of the caddis fly Molanna angustata.380

4.04.5.3.7 C 8 -units
Octanal (A82) and (E)-2-octenal (A83), a pheromone component of the insidious flower bug Orius insidiosus,381 are
aggregation pheromone components of the fifth instar larvae of the codling moth C. pomonella, along with additional
aldehydes and terpenes.382 Compound A83 and (2E,4E)-2,4-octadienal (A84) are components of the complex
aggregation pheromone of the common bedbug C. lectularius.193 A 1:10 mixture of (E)-2-octenyl acetate (A85) and
(E)-2,7-octadienyl acetate (A87) was identified as a pheromone attractive to both sexes of the lygaeid bug
Tropidothorax cruciger.383 The latter compound is also part of the pheromones of the bugs Oncopeltus fasciatus,384
Geocoris punctipes,385 Phytocoris spp.,373,374 and O. insidiosus.381 The respective butyrate, (E)-2-octenyl butyrate (A86),
is a female sex pheromone component of another bug Phytocoris relativus.372 1-Octen-3-ol (A14) is an attraction
pheromone of Amblyomma ticks.386 The sex pheromone of the female bagworm moth Megalophanes viciella is 1-
methylethyl octanoate (A88), an unusual lepidopteran sex pheromone because it represents an ester of a fatty acid
with a short-chain alcohol.387
170 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.8 C 9 -units
(R)-2-Nonanol (A93) is a female sex pheromone component of the caddis fly M. angustata.380 Nonanal
(A89), emitted during courtship and copula of T. infestans, attracted male conspecifics.191 It is also used
by another bug C. lectularius, as part of its aggregation pheromone.193 Both (E)-2-nonenal (A22) and A89
are constituents of the larval pheromone of C. pomonella (see Section 4.04.5.3.7).382 The eggplant flea
beetle Epitrix fuscula uses (2E,4E,6E)- and (2E,4E,6Z)-2,4,6-nonatrienal (A90 and A91) as male sex
pheromone.388 (þ)-exo-Brevicomin (A27) produced by males is part of the aggregation pheromone
complex of the bark beetle Dendroctonus jeffreyi.389 The unusual diester (2S,7S)-2,7-nonanediyl dibutyrate
(A94), a pheromone structure typical for midges, is the sex pheromone of the female orange wheat
blossom midge Sitodiplosis mosellana.390 9-Acetyloxynonanal (A92) is an attraction pheromone for the
wheat stem sawfly Cephus cinctus.391,392 Interestingly, it seems to be formed upon oxidative cleavage of
unsaturated cuticular lipids.

4.04.5.3.9 C 10 -units
Decane is an alarm pheromone of the ant C. obscuripes.366 Decanal (A95) is a pheromone component of
larvae of C. pomonella (see Section 4.04.5.3.7),382 and is used by the red bug C. lectularius as an aggregation
pheromone component.193 Males of a long-horned beetle, the coffee white stem borer Xylotrechus
quadripes, a serious coffee pest in India, produce (S)-2-hydroxy-3-decanone (A96) as sex pheromone to
attract female beetles.393 9-Oxo- (A97) and 9-hydroxydecanoic acid (A98) are the major sex pheromone
components of females of the scoliid wasp Campsoscolia ciliata. Interestingly, the orchid Ophrys speculum
also produces these compounds to attract males of Campsoscolia for pollination.394 (R)-4-Decanolide (A99)
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 171

is the male-produced pheromone of the scarab beetle Osmoderma eremita.395 Male jewel wasps,
N. vitripennis, release a sex pheromone consisting of a mixture of (4R,5R)- and (4R,5S)-5-hydroxy-4-
decanolide (A100) to attract juvenile females. These compounds become repellent to females after
copulation.396 The myrmicine ant Pristomyrmex pungens marks recruitment trails with the poison gland
constituent 2,4-decadien-5-olide (6-pentyl-2-pyrone) (A101) as the trail pheromone.397 Hexyl decanoate
(A107) is a trail pheromone of the stingless bee Trigona recursa.398 A structural deviation from typical
female lepidopteran pheromones is represented by the pheromone of female nettle caterpillars. Darna
pallivitta uses butyl (E)-7,9-decadienoate (A104) as female sex pheromone.399 Similarly, (S)-2-methylbu-
tyl (E)-7,9-decadienoate (A106) in combination with (E)-2-hexenyl (E)-7,9-decadienoate (A108) proved
to be attractive to males of Darna trima, while 2-methylpropyl (E)-7,9-decadienoate (A103) was attractive
to Darna bradleyi, enhanced in activity by methyl (E)-7,9-decadienoate (A102).400 Together with sesqui-
terpenes, the related trienoate methyl (2E,4Z,6Z)-2,4,6-decatrienoate (A105) forms the male-produced
sex pheromone of the red-shouldered stink bug Thyanta pallidovirens,401 while it is per se active as a male
sex pheromone of the red-shouldered stink bug Thyanta perditor.402

4.04.5.3.10 C 11 -units
Undecane is an alarm pheromone of the ant C. obscuripes.366 The sex pheromone of the Swede midge C. nasturtii
consists of a mixture of three components (2S,9S)-2,9-diacetoxyundecane (A111), (2S,10S)-2,10-diacetoxyun-
decane (A110), and (S)-1-methyldecyl acetate (A109). Only formulations that contain around 1% of A109 are
attractive in the field.403 A carbonyl derivative of A109, (S)-2-acetoxyundecan-5-one proved to be the sex
pheromone of the raspberry cane midge Resseliella theobaldi.404
172 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.11 C 12 -units
The trail pheromone of the myrmicine ant Crematogaster castanea has been identified as (R)-2-dodecanol (A113).405
Dodecanoic acid (A112) was identified as the oviposition pheromone of the sand fly Lutzomyia longipalpis.406
Although (Z)-7-dodecenyl acetate (A117) is used by many Lepidoptera as a pheromone component, it is
interesting to know that it has also been identified as the sex pheromone of female Asian elephant Elephas
maximus.407 (Z)-3-Dodecen-1-ol (A114) is a trail pheromone of the termite Macrotermes annandalei,408 whereas the
related (3Z,6Z)-3,6-dodecadien-1-ol (A116) serves this function in the termite Ancistrotermes pakistanicus.409
(3Z,6Z,8E)-3,6,8-Dodecatrien-1-ol (A38) has the same function in Reticulitermes lucifugus grassei and R. santonensis.
It also seems to function as sex pheromone in both sympatric species410 and is a trail pheromone of other termites
as well.411,412 (Z)-3-Dodecenyl acetate (A115), representing the structure of a typical moth pheromone, is a
female-attracting pheromone of males of the flour beetle Tenebrio molitor.413 (R)-1-Methylpropyl (Z)-7-dodeceno-
ate is a component of the female-produced sex pheromone of the zygaenid moth Illiberis rotundata.414

4.04.5.3.12 C 13 -units
1-Tridecene is the male sex pheromone of the tenebrionid beetle Parstizopus transgariepinus.415 A blend of the
three compounds 2-acetoxytridecane (A118), (2S,11S)-2,11-diacetoxytridecane (A122), and (2S,12S)-2,12-
diacetoxytridecane (A123) comprise the pheromone of the female pea midge Contarinia pisi.416 Interestingly,
only a 0.1:7:10 mixture proved to be fully attractive in the field, while omission of the minor component reduces
catches to almost zero.417 The sex pheromone of the Hessian fly Mayetiola destructor proved to be a mixture of
A48, small amounts of its Z-isomer and (2S,8Z,10E)-2-acetoxy-8,10-tridecadiene (A120) as well as its
(2S,8E,10E)-stereoisomer and the saturated compound.418 Females of the aphidophagous midge Aphidoletes
aphidimyza produce (2R,7S)-diacetoxytridecane (A121) as sex pheromone. The presence of the (2R,7R)- and
(2S,7R)-stereoisomers inhibit trap catches.419 (1S,3Z,6Z)-1-Methyl-3,6-dodecadienyl acetate (A119) is the sex
pheromone of the Douglas-fir cone gall midge Contarinia oregonensis.420
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 173

4.04.5.3.13 C 14 -units
2-Tetradecanone (A124) is the female sex pheromone of the scarab beetle Hoplia equina.421 The female sex
pheromone of the vine bud moth Theresimima ampellophaga (Zygaenidae), (R)-1-methylpropyl (Z)-7-tetrade-
cenoate (A127), initially erroneously designated to be (S)-configured, is unusual for a lepidopteran sex
pheromone because it comprises an ester of a long-chain fatty acid and a short unbranched alcohol,422,423 a
feature that is also found in A88 and A106. Tetradecanoic acid (A125) is part of the male hairpencil bouquet of
the moth H. virescens. This compound can induce behavioral changes and together with C16 and C18 (see
Sections 4.04.5.3.15 and 4.04.5.3.17) components, determines either accepting behavior or dispersal of the
females.424 (Z)-9-Tetradecenol (A126) is a male courtship pheromone component of the butterfly Bicyclus
anynana. (Z)-9,13-Tetradecadien-11-ynal (A128) is the unusual female-produced sex pheromone of
the avocado seed moth Stenoma catenifer. The corresponding alcohol serves as an antagonist.425
(R)-1-Methylpropyl (Z)-9-tetradecenoate is a second component of the female-produced sex pheromone of
the zygaenid moth I. rotundata.413
174 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.14 C 15 -units
Pentadecane is a pheromone of the ant C. obscuripes that seems to calm down ants after the more volatile alarm
signals decane and undecane have been evaporated.366 1-Heptyloctyl acetate (A129) is part of the trail
pheromone of the ant Leptogenys peuqueti.426

4.04.5.3.15 C 16 -units
1-Hexadecanol (A130) is a synergistic component of the honeybee retinue response signal of workers.219 Along
with its acetate (A131) and palmitic acid (A137), it is part of the male pheromone of H. virescens (see Section
4.04.5.3.13).424 The corresponding aldehyde, hexadecanal (A132) is part of the courtship pheromone of Bicyclus
anynana.427 The acid A137 was claimed to be an oviposition-deterring pheromone of the female cotton
bollworm moth H. armigera.428 (Z)-7,15-Hexadecadien-4-olide (A58) is the female sex pheromone of the
yellowish elongate chafer Heptophylla picea (Scarabaeidae). Its absolute configuration is unknown.429 Isopropyl
(Z)-9-hexadecenoate (A141) is the male attractant pheromone of the rove beetle Aleochara curtula.430 The grape
leaffolder moth Desmia funeralis uses the unusual triple bond-containing pheromone component 11-hexadecy-
nal (A135) together with more common compounds such as (Z)-11-hexadecenal (A134) and (11Z,13Z)-11,13-
hexadecadienal (A136).431 The corresponding acetate A139, ethyl palmitate (A138), and ethyl (11Z,13Z)-
11,13-hexadecadienoate (A140) are part of the sex pheromone of Amyelois transitella (see Section 4.04.5.3.22).432
(Z)-9-Hexadecenal (A133) is part of the trail pheromone of the ant Dolichoderus thoracicus.433
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 175

4.04.5.3.16 C 17 -units
9-Heptadecanone (A142) is the trail pheromone of the ant Pachycondyla (Paltothyreus) tarsata fabricius.434 The sex
pheromone of females of the red cedar cone midge Mayetiola thujae consists of a mixture of 2,12-, 2,13-, and 2,14-
diacetoxyheptadecane (A143–A145). Only the (S,S)-enantiomers are active.435 Following a related biogenesis,
the sex pheromone of the pistachio twig borer Kermania pistaciella is (2S,12Z)-2-acetoxy-12-heptadecene
(A146). The enantiomer inhibits trap catches.436 A similar structure is represented by (2S,8Z)-2-butyroxy-8-
heptadecene, the female sex pheromone of a Rhopalomyia gall midge.437
176 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.17 C 18 -units
1-Octadecanol (A147), its acetate (A148), and stearic acid (A149) are part of the male pheromone of H.
virescens (see Section 4.04.5.3.13).424 Methyl oleate (A151) and linolenic acid (A152) are synergistic
components in the honeybee retinue response signal of workers.438 (Z)-9-Octadecenal (A153) is part of
the trail pheromone of the ant D. thoracicus.433 (9Z,12Z)-9,12-Octadecadienal (A154) is a pheromone
component of the noctuid moth Achaea janata.439 (3Z,6Z,9Z)-3,6,9-Octadecatriene (A155) constitutes the
female sex pheromone of the winter moth Erannis bajaria together with A159.307 This compound is quite
unusual because it shows an even number of carbon atoms in the chain, just in contrast to common Type
II sex pheromones of moth. (þ)-Monachalure ((7R,8S)-7,8-epoxyoctadecane) (A156) is part of the
pheromone system of the nun moth Lymantria monacha.440 Oleic acid (A150) was claimed to act as an
oviposition-deterring pheromone of the female cotton bollworm moth H. armigera.99 The sex pheromone
of the Australian guava moth Coscinoptycha improbana comprises (Z)-11-octadecen-8-one (A157) and the
homologue ketones A167 and A194.441

4.04.5.3.18 C 19 -units
The pheromone of the geometrid moth Biston robustum consists of (6Z,9Z)-6,9-nonadecadiene (A158), (3Z,6Z,9Z)-
3,6,9-nonadecatriene (A159), (6S,7R,9Z)-6,7-epoxy-9-nonadecene (A161), and (3Z,6S,7R,9Z)-6,7-epoxy-3,9-
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 177

nonadecadiene (A163).442 (Z)-cis-9,10-Epoxy-6-nonadecene (A162) is a female sex pheromone component of the

common forest looper Pseudocoremia suavis.443 The northern winter moth Operophtera fagata uses a 10:1 mixture of
A158 and (3Z,6Z,9Z)-1,3,6,9-nonadecatetraene (A160) as sex pheromone.444 (6Z,9Z)-cis-3,4-Epoxy-6,9-nonade-
cadiene (A164) is the female sex pheromone of the Japanese giant looper Ascotis selenaria cretacea. It is produced in a
(3S,4R):(3R,4S) ratio of 53:47, although the pure latter enantiomer was most attractive in the field. In Israel, only the
(3S,4R)-epoxide was attractive. The epoxide is obviously formed by PBAN-regulated oxidation of (A159).445 The
geometrid moth Milionia basalis pryeri uses the (3S,4R)-enantiomer of A164 as female sex pheromone.446 Another
regioisomer, (3Z,6Z,9R,10S)-9,10-epoxy-3,6-nonadecadiene (A165), (þ)-mathuralure, and its ()-enantiomer in a
ratio of 4:1 comprise the pheromone of Lymantria mathura.447 Only this enantiomeric ratio is active, whereas pure
enantiomers proved to be inactive. In another study, only the ()-enantiomer was active in single-cell recordings,
while both the pure enantiomer and the racemate captured males.448 An unusual trans-configured vinyl epoxide is
represented by the pheromone of Bupalus piniarius, (4S,5S,6Z,9Z)-4,5-epoxy-6,9-nonadecadiene (A166).449 (Z)-12-
Nonadecen-9-one (A167) was identified as the female sex pheromone of the raspberry budmoth Heterocrossa
rubophaga450 and as part of the sex pheromone of the moth C. improbana.441
178 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.19 C 20 -units
(Z)-11-Icosenal (A168) is a component of the trail pheromone of D. thoracicus.433 (6Z,9Z)-6,9-Icosadien-11-ol
(A169) is a synergistic component of the female-produced sex pheromone component of the fir tussock moth
Orgyia detrita.451 (11Z,14Z,17Z)-11,14,17-Icosatrienyl 2-methylpropanoate (A170) and 3-methylbutyrate
(A171) compose the pheromone of the tussock moth Euproctis pulverea in a 1:1 ratio.452

4.04.5.3.20 C 21 -units
Henicosane is part of the female sex pheromone of the bee Andrena nigroaenea.453 (Z)-7-Henicosene
(A172) is the major alkene in the sex pheromone of the bee Colletes cunicularius inducing courtship in
males. Along with the bishomologues A189 and A195, it showed the highest activity among several
blends tested. Related alkanes exhibit synergistic effects, whereas alkenes with double bond positions
other than C7 seem to reduce activity.454 (6Z,9Z)-6,9-Henicosadiene (A173), (3Z,6Z,9Z)-3,6,9-henicosa-
triene (A174), and henicosane are sex pheromone components of the noctuid moth A. janata.439
Compound A174 is also the pheromone of the geometrid Mnesampela privata,455 whereas A173 is a
major sex pheromone component of the painted apple moth Teia anartoides.456 (3Z,6R,7S,9R,10S)-6,7-9,10-
Diepoxy-3-henicosene (A179) (leucomalure) is the major female-produced sex pheromone component of
the Satin moth Leucoma salicis (Lepidoptera), showing an unusual diepoxide structure.457,458 The related
monoepoxide, (3Z,6Z)-cis-9,10-epoxy-3,6-henicosadiene, is also present.457 (3Z,6Z,9S,10R)-9,10-Epoxy-
3,6-henicosadiene (A175) and (3Z,6Z,9S,10R)-9,10-epoxy-1,3,6-henicosatriene (A176) are sex pheromone
components of the fall webworm Hyphantria cunea in China.459 In the clear-winged tussock moth Perina
nuda, (3Z,6S,7R,9Z)-6,7-epoxy-3,9-henicosadiene (A177) is the main pheromone component, whereas its
activity can be enhanced by the addition of the minor components, (3R,4S,6S,7R,9Z)-3,4-6,7-diepoxy-9-
henicosene (A180), and/or its (3S,4R,6S,7R,9Z) diastereomer (A181).460 The rare vinyl epoxide structural
motif is found in (6Z,9Z,11S,12S)-11,12-epoxy-6,9-henicosadiene (posticlure, A178), the sex pheromone
of the tussock moth Orgyia postica461 (compared with the structures of the abovementioned Bupalus
pheromone449). Interestingly, ketone A183, produced by the Ishigaki strain, reduces attractivity in the
Okinawan strain when added to posticlure.462 The highly unstable (6Z,8E)-6,8-henicosadien-11-one
(A182) is a synergistic sex pheromone component of the Douglas-fir tussock moth Orgyia pseudotsugata.
It seems to add specificity to the major pheromone component, (Z)-6-henicosen-11-one (A183).463 A
100:5 mixture of the latter compound with (Z)-6-henicosen-9-one (A184) (thyellinone) is the pheromone
of Orgyia thyellina.447 The white-marked tussock moth Orgyia leucostigma uses (6Z,9Z)-6,9-henicosadien-
11-one (A185) as a single component female sex pheromone.464 The corresponding alcohol, (6Z,9Z)-6,9-
henicosadien-11-ol (A186), is the pheromone of another tussock moth O. detrita. Its racemate is more
attractive than the natural 1:3.5 R/S-mixture.451 Ketone A185 is a major component of the sex pher-
omone of Teia anartoides.456,465
Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 179
180 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.21 C 22 -units
Docosane is a component of the female sex pheromone of the bee Andrena nigroaenea.453 (Z)-13-Docosenal
(A187) is part of the trail pheromone of the ant D. thoracicus.433 (6Z,9Z)-6,9-Docosadien-11-ol (A188) is a
synergistic sex pheromone component of female O. detrita.451

4.04.5.3.22 C 23 -units
Tricosane and (Z)-9-tricosene (A190) are components of the female sex pheromone of the bee A. nigroaenea.453
The latter compound also occurs in the contact sex recognition pheromone of the Asian long-horned beetle
Anoplophora glabripennis.466 (Z)-7-Tricosene (A189) is a component of the sex pheromone of the bee
C. cunicularius (see Section 4.04.5.3.20)454 and the Australian guava moth C. improbana.441 (6Z,9Z)-6,9-
Tricosadiene (A191) is a component of the female-produced pheromone of the wasp Eurytoma amygdali,467
whereas (3Z,6Z,9Z)-3,6,9-tricosatriene (A192) is a synergistic pheromone component of the tomato fruit borer
Neoleucinodes elegantalis.468 It enhances the activity of the main pheromone component, (E)-11-hexadecen-1-ol.
This activity enhancement of a typical lepidopteran pheromone by a hydrocarbon is quite unusual. The highly
unsaturated polyene (3Z,6Z,9Z,12Z,15Z)-3,6,9,12,15-tricosatriene (A193) together with A199 and the three
C16 compounds A138, A140, and (11Z,13Z)-11,13-hexadecadienyl acetate comprise the female sex pheromone
of the navel orangeworm A. transitella.432 (Z)-7-Tricosen-11-one (A194) is a component of the sex pheromone
of the Australian guava moth C. improbana.441
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 181

4.04.5.3.23 C 24 -units
Tetracosane is another component of the female sex pheromone bouquet of the solitary bee A. nigroaenea.453

4.04.5.3.24 C 25 -units
Pentacosane is part of the female sex pheromone of the bee A. nigroaenea,453 and of females of the long-
horned beetle Xylotrechus colonus.469 (Z)-7- (A195) and (Z)-9-pentacosene (A196) are components of the
contact sex recognition pheromone of the Asian long-horned beetle Anoplophora glabripennis,466 while male
locust borer Megacyllene robiniae exclusively uses (A196).470 The alkene A195 is a component of the sex
pheromone of C. cunicularius (see Section 4.04.5.3.20).454 The isomer (Z)-12-pentacosene (A197) is an
oviposition-deterrent pheromone of the coccinellid beetle Cheilomenes sexmaculata.471 (6Z,9Z)-6,9-
Pentacosadiene (A198) is a female pheromone component of the wasp E. amygdali.467
(3Z,6Z,9Z,12Z,15Z)-3,6,9,12,15-Pentacosapentaene (A199) is a component of the sex pheromone of the
navel orangeworm A. transitella (see Section 4.04.5.3.22),432 and a sex pheromone component of the pyralid
moth Dioryctria abietivorella.472

4.04.5.3.25 C 26 -units
Hexacosane is part of the female sex pheromone of the bee A. nigroaenea.453

4.04.5.3.26 C 27 -units
Heptacosane and (Z)-9- (A201), (Z)-11- (A203), and (Z)-12-heptacosene (A202) are important components of
the female sex pheromone of the bee A. nigroaenea.453 (Z)-7-Heptacosene (A200) and A201 are part of the
contact sex recognition pheromone of the Asian long-horned beetle Anoplophora glabripennis.466
10-Heptacosanone (A204), (Z)-18-heptacosen-10-one (A205), (18Z,21Z)-18,21-heptacosadien-10-one
(A206), and (18Z,21Z,24Z)-18,21,24-heptacosatrien-10-one (A207) occur on the cuticle of females of the
white-spotted longicorn beetle Anoplophora malasiaca.473 They act as contact pheromone components and can
evoke precopulatory behavior in males.
182 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.5.3.27 C 29 -units
Nonacosane and (Z)-9- (A209), (Z)-11- (A211), and (Z)-12-nonacosene (A210) are parts of the female sex
pheromone of the bee A. nigroaenea.453 The alkene A209 is a contact pheromone of male cerambycid beetle M.
caryae.474

4.04.5.3.28 C 31 -units
(5Z,25Z)-Hentriaconta-5,25-diene (A211) as well as the less active (4Z,26Z)-4,26-hentriacontadiene (A212),
components of the mixture of cuticular hydrocarbons present in females of the fruit fly of Drosophila ananassae,
release courtship of males.475
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 183

4.04.6 Terpenes

Volatile isoprenoids that control insect behavior and development have been reviewed.476 Information on the
biosynthesis of terpenoids with special emphasis on beetle pheromones has been compiled by Seybold and
Vanderwel.477–479
The majority of newly assigned structures represent monoterpenes and sesquiterpenes.
A new component of the alarm pheromone of Africanized honeybee Apis mellifica contained in the
sting apparatus, was identified to be T117, 3-methyl-2-butenyl acetate.480 In workers of giant hornets,
Vespa mandariana, components of the alarm pheromone were shown to be 3-methyl-1-butanol, 2-penta-
nol, and its 3-methylbutanoate T118 (stereochemistry unknown).481 Whether the branched compounds
represent isoprenoids at all or they are produced from the amino acid leucine remains an open question.
The same holds true for structures T4–T6 and T8. Despite the fact that T7 and T9 are clearly not
terpenoids, we earlier listed them among the homoterpenes to point to certain structural relations
between biologically active C5-units.1 New results concerning the role of amino acid derivatives in
systems of chemical communication are given in Section 4.04.9. Actually, there are direct biogenetic links
between isovaleryl-CoA, derived from leucine, and the mevalonate pathway.482,483
A few diterpenes have been described from bumblebees484,485 and stingless social bees;486 however,
the biological significance of these compounds remained a speculation. Neocembrene T73 was found to
be a major component of the trail-following pheromone in the genus Prorhinotermes.487 A new diterpene,
(4R,7S,8R,11E,15S,16S)-trinervita-1(14)2,11-triene, has been found in the termite Nasutitermes ephratae;
however, conclusive bioassays assigning its biological function have not been reported.488
In our earlier review,1 the compounds presented in the following figures were discussed in more detail.
184 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates
Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 185
186 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates
Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 187
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 189

4.04.6.1 Monoterpenes
A compound consisting of a hemiterpene and a monoterpene is the female-produced sex pheromone of the vine
mealybug Planococcus ficus.639,640 Its structure, (S)-lavandulyl senecioate (T119), is somehow related to that of
the female-produced pheromone of the comstock mealybug Pseudococcus comstocki, T99, which is the acetate of
an (R)-configured nor-lavandulol. The structure of T119 is even closer to that of the pheromone of the passion
vine mealybug Planococcus kraunliae, T120,641 and that of Planococcus minor,642 T121, which are all esters of
lavandulyl derivatives and short-chain carboxylic acids.
Another unusual group of pheromones of mealybugs (Homoptera: Pseudococcidae) shows cyclopentanoid
structures: the sex pheromone of the obscure mealybug Pseudococcus viburni is (2,3,4,4-tetramethylcyclopen-
tyl)methyl acetate643 (T122) showing (1S,2S,3R)-configuration.156 A similar structure is found in (R,R)-trans-
(3,4,5,5-tetramethylcyclopent-2-enyl)-2-methylpropanoate (trans--necrodyl acetate) (T123) the female-pro-
duced sex pheromone of the grape mealybug Pseudococcus maritimus.644 A cyclobutane structure is represented
by the sex pheromone of Planococcus cryptus, T124,645 the alcohol part of which being identical to that of the
pheromone of Planococcus citri T32. The sex pheromone of the pink hibiscus mealybug Maconellicoccus hirsutus is
made up of esters of (S)-2-methylbutyric acid and [(R)-2,2-dimethyl-3-(1-methylethylidene)cyclobutyl]-
methanol (maconelliol) (T125) or (R)-lavandulol (T126), respectively.646,647 Reactions of the insects to
different stereoisomers of the pheromone have been investigated.648 The biosyntheses of such unusual terpenes
have been described.649 (1R,2S)-Grandisol (T30) and grandisal are components of the male-produced pher-
omone of the Brazilian papaya weevil Pseudopiazurus obesus,650 which also contains the interesting new bicyclic
ether T127. This compound, keeping (1R,2R,6R)-configuration, may be produced from grandisol upon
epoxidation of the double bond, followed by intramolecular ring closure.651 Grandisol, T30, along with
other typical boll weevil pheromone components and ochtodenol/ochtodenal (T28/T29) were found to be
attractive to both sexes of sugar beet weevils.652,653 A similar bouquet, additionally containing lavandulol, the
alcohol component of T119, was found to be male-specific in the strawberry blossom weevil Anthonomus rubi.654
Already, (1R,2S)-grandisoic acid has been identified as the sex pheromone of the plum weevil Conotrachelus
nenuphar.655 Investigations on the attractivity of lineatin (T31), the female-produced aggregation pheromone of
the ambrosia beetle Trypodendron lineatum, showed only the naturally occurring (þ)-enantiomers to be active.656
190 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

Much has been learnt about the chemical ecology and pheromone biology of aphids during the past years.
Earlier investigations on sex pheromones of aphids have been briefly summarized.657 Many species use the
(4aS,7S,7aR)-stereoisomer of nepetalactone (T51) and the corresponding lactol, which frequently keeps
(1R)-configuration.658–661 A very careful and most detailed study on the pheromones of Dysaphis plantaginea has
been carried out by Stewart-Jones et al.662 The influence of stereochemistry and purity of the compounds on field
catches may be explained by the fact that some species, for example, Phorodon humuli uses other stereoisomers such
as (1RS,4aR,7S,7aS)-nepetalactol.663 Interestingly, (1R,4S,4aR,7S,7aR)-dihydronepetalactol (T130) was found to
attract three different predatory lacewing species.664 It turned out that predatory lacewings are attracted to volatiles
produced by aphid prey and their host plants.665 In this context, (1R,2S,5R,8R)-iridodial (T128) has been reported to
attract males of several Chrysopa species.666,667 Methyl salicylate (Ar21) may act synergistically, and the binary
blend of T128 and Ar21 seemed to attract the predatory hoverfly M. americanus.198 Recently, (1S,2R,3S)-dolicho-
dial T129, released by D. plantaginea ovipare, has been identified to elicit behavioral response from males and
naive-mated female parasitoids, Aphidius ervi.668 While T51 and T128/129, and other iridoid pheromones that play
a role in the context of aphids, are cis-configured with respect to the two oxygen-carrying substituents, cephalic
secretions of the hyperparasitoid wasp Alloxysta victrix (a parasitoid on Aphidius spp. that in turn are parasitoids on
Aphid spp.) contain small amounts of (4R,4aS,7R,7aS)-dihydronepetalactone (T131) while (4S,4aR,7S,7aR)-irido-
myrmecin (T132) forms a major constituent669 and its (4S,4aS,7R,7aS)-diastereomer (T133) a minor one.670
Because of the structural relations to behaviorally active iridoids known so far, these trans-fused iridoids may
well play a role in the tetratrophic relations made up of plant – aphid – Aphidius – Alloxysta; however, the actual
biological significance of the compounds is yet unknown.
During the past decade, the literature dealing with the behavior-mediating capacity of monoterpenes has largely
been dominated by investigations on bark beetles. This includes response to host- and nonhost volatiles as well as
interspecific attraction and repellency. Since the subject has been comprehensively reviewed,671 only more recent
papers are cited here.672–675 It could be shown that the enantiomeric composition of chiral host monoterpenes, for
example, -pinene may influence feeding preference.676 The biosynthesis and enantiomeric composition of -
pinene (T30) and -pinene in loblolly pine Pinus taeda has been carefully studied.677 A mixture of ethanol and ()-
-pinene, a widespread constituent of the resin of coniferous trees, was shown to be attractive to a large number of
coleopterans including Buprestidae, Cerambycidae, Curculionidae, and Elateridae.678 Once again, the effect of
verbenone (T26) on the attraction/repellency of wood-boring beetles and their predators has been investi-
gated.679,680 Similarly, nonhost leaf and bark volatiles as well as verbenone have been described as disruptants/
repellents.681–683 The role of bark beetle pheromones and host volatiles as kairomonal attractants of long-horned
beetles, especially Monochamus, has been discussed.684,685 Investigations on the attraction of pine engravers and
associated bark beetles to ipsdienol (T20) and ipsenol (T21) are still hampered by high costs of pure enantio-
mers.686 Comprehensive investigations using pure enantiomers or defined mixtures thereof are still rare.687
The biosynthesis of ipsdienol (T20) has been intensively investigated during recent years. While in earlier
times, it was thought that bark beetles use the host monoterpene myrcene as the precursor, which is just oxidized to
the pheromone,688 following a breakthrough in 1995,689,690 the work of Blomquist, Seybold, and Tittiger proved a de
novo biosynthesis by the beetles.691 Their investigations revealed that the compound is definitely produced in the
midgut of the beetles,692,693 while juvenile hormone III stimulates its biosynthesis.694 A sex-specific and inducible
monoterpene synthase activity associated with the pine engraver Ips pini could be demonstrated695 as well as a full-
length cDNA encoding 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl CoA synthase could be isolated, and its genomic structure
was examined.696 It is now evident that the beetles do produce myrcene de novo, and the activitiy of a myrcene
hydroxylase could be detected; however, the mechanism determining the enantiomeric composition of ipsdienol in
Ips spp. will still need further investigations. Male Ips bark beetles, exposed to myrcene vapors, did not contain the
same enantiomeric composition of ipsdienol as during their activities in the host trees and myrcene hydroxylases do
not seem to control the final enantiomeric composition of ipsdienol.697 Following way A (see Figure 2) myrcene
could be nonenantioselectively hydroxylated at position 5, followed by oxidation to ipsdienone and a subsequent
stereoselective reduction to furnish the ‘correct’ enantiomeric composition. An alternative (way B, Figure 2) would
be a regio- and stereospecific hydroxylation of an activated geranyl precursor (e.g., geranyl diphosphate).
Subsequent 1,4-elimination of diphosphate could directly yield the ipsdienols in the naturally occurring propor-
tions. Maybe both ways exist – oxygenation of myrcene being the more archaic one because ‘ancient’ species could
certainly have used myrcene directly from the host tree. It should be noted that the bark beetle pheromone lineatin
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 191

Figure 2 Possible biosynthetic pathways leading to ipsdienol (T20).

(T31) shows a 5-hydroxygeranial structure (carrying an additional oxygen function at position 7). An antiaphro-
disiac, trans--ocimene (T134), that male Heliconius butterflies transfer to the females during copula is also
biosynthesized de novo.698
A formal hydroxylation product of myrcene/ocimene is (S)-linalool (T135) a volatile signal in the
communication system of the solitary bee C. cunicularius.699 The ocimene epoxide (T136) showing
(3S,5E)-configuration was identified among the headspace volatiles released by males of the coreid bug
Amblypelta nitida.700 The biological function of the compound remained unknown. The closely related
terpenol, T137, (E)-subaenol, is produced by males of the dung beetle Kheper subaeneus. It is active on the
antennae of both sexes, however, its behavior-mediating capacity is unknown.701 The female sex
pheromone of the mite Rhizoglyphus robini was identified to be -acaridial (T138), which stimulated
males.702 This was the first time that two pheromones, the alarm pheromone neryl formate (T139) and
the sex pheromone T137, have been demonstrated to be compounds of the same gland secretion in a
mite.702
A highly oxygenated monoterpene is (S)-3,7-dimethyl-2-oxooct-6-ene-1,3-diol (T140) the aggregation
pheromone of the Colorado potato beetle Leptinotarsa decemlineata.703 The identification of this male-
produced compound – the first male pheromone identified for a chrysomelid beetle – marked a true
breakthrough, as for a long time it was believed that the pheromone is produced by the females. Open
chain monoterpenes are also represented by close-range pheromones of Callosobruchus weevils. In the azuki
bean weevil Callosobruchus chinensis, the dicarboxylic acid T141, callosobruchusic acid, shows an enantio-
meric composition of R:S 3.5:1.704 The dihydro product of T141, forming a mixture of stereoisomers, acts
as a pheromone of the cowpea weevil Callosobruchus maculatus.145,146 The natural product is represented by a
blend of (2R,6S)-:(2S,6R)-:(2S,6S)-:(2R,3R)- ¼ 43:38:18:trace.146
Only one new structure of a bark beetle pheromone could be assigned during the past decade: the
aggregation pheromone of the ambrosia beetle Platypus quercivorus was shown to be (1S,4R)-1-methyl-4-(1-
methylethyl)cyclohex-2-en-1-ol (T142), quercivorol.705 Another oxygenated p-menthene is vesperal (T143)
(R)-3-methyl-6-(1-formylethenyl)-2-cyclohexen-1-one, 10-oxoisopiperitenone) and the corresponding alcohol
(vesperol). The two compounds constitute the female-produced sex pheromone of the long-horned beetle
Vesperus xatarti.706
Males of the palm bunch moth, T. mundella, contain (3S,6S)-6-ethenyl-2,2,6-trimethyl-tetrahydropyran-
3-ol (T144), a pyranoid form of linalool oxide.707 Apart from vanillin (A31), the bis-nor-diterpenoid
6,10,14-pentadecan-2-one and the corresponding secondary alcohol were found to be present. The stereo-
chemistry of the latter two compounds remained undetermined, and bioassays with mixtures of
stereoisomers failed.
192 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.6.2 Sesquiterpenes
Because of the development of highly sensitive instruments and advanced techniques, several new sesquiter-
penes could be identified that play a role in systems of chemical communication among insects. For some
known compounds, enantiomeric compositions could be determined.
(E,E)--Farnesene (T53) was identified as an alarm pheromone of the termite Prorhinotermes canalifrons.708
Once again, (E)--farnesene (T54) has been reported to be a widespread alarm pheromone of aphid
species.709–711 However, in some species other terpenes were found to be released in addition.710 Moreover,
(E)--farnesene was described as an insect behavior-mediating volatile released by stressed plants (e.g., upon
insect attack).711 The compound may also act as a kairomone for predators of (E)--farnesene-producing
insects.712,713 Interestingly, T53 and T54 were also detected in the urine of female African elephants. However,
no behavior releasing effects of the compounds on elephants have been reported so far.714 Along with geranyl
butyrate, (E,E)--farnesyl butyrate was identified as the female-produced pheromone of click beetle species
(Elateridae).715,716 Similar terpene esters were used to attract several click beetle species in the field.717 (E,E)--
Farnesyl acetate proved to be a component of a bouquet of volatiles predominantly made up of oxygenated
straight-chain compounds that are released by eggs of the apple moth C. pomonella and that appear to serve as a
kairomone in host location by the egg-larval parasitoid Ascogaster quadridentata.718 Apart from several straight-
chain aliphatics, secretions of the European beewolf Philanthus triangulum contain (S)-2,3-dihydrofarnsoic acid
(T145),719 the oxidation product of (S)-2,3-dihydrofarnesol (terrestrol), the typical marking substance of male
bumblebees. The biological significance of the acid is not quite clear. The methyl ester of racemic T145 is the
male-produced pheromone of the stink bug Chlorochroa sayi,720 whereas the (R)-enantiomer, along with methyl
farnesoate and the nor-sesquiterpene T165 (see below), constitutes the pheromone of Chlorochroa ligata.721
Hydroxylation of (E,E)-farnesoic acid at the !-position followed by ring closure would yield the interesting 13-
membered ring lactone T146. The compound was identified in males of the African butterfly Amauris niavius
and was called niaviolide.722 Along with its 10,11-epoxide, keeping (2E,6E,10S,11S)-configuration, it may play a
role in courtship. The sex pheromone of the yellow scale Aonidiella citrina, T102, was successfully used to
monitor population dynamics of the insect pest in the field.723 Pheromones of scale insects have been
reviewed.724
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 193

An unusual functionalized cyclobutane is T147, the female-produced pheromone of the oleander scale
Aspidiotus nerii. The structure represents the prenyl homologue of grandisol (T30), the sex pheromone of the boll
weevil.725 Several sesquiterpenes have been identified as components of bug sex pheromones.726 The male-
produced sex pheromone of the red-shouldered stink bug T. pallidovirens was shown to consist of a blend of methyl
(2E,4Z,6Z)-decatrienoate (A105), ()-zingiberene (T148), as well as -sesquiphellandrene (T149) and its aro-
matic derivative, -curcumene. The pure compounds were not attractive to females, but mixtures of A105 and any
of the sesquiterpenes proved to be attractive.727 Recently, (7R)-(þ)--sesquiphellandrene, the enantiomer of T149
has been identified as a male-produced sex pheromone of the red-banded stink bug Piezodorus guildinii.728 A
sesquiterpene showing the carbon skeleton of T148–T149 is zingiberenol (T150), a male-produced pheromone
component of the Brazilian rice stalk stink bug Tibaraca limbativentris. The attractive bouquet seems to be a mixture
of stereoisomers, among which at least one shows (19S)-configuration as indicated in structure T150.729 Similarly,
bisabolene as well as cis-Z-bisabolene epoxide (T151) and its trans-Z-isomer, showing the opposite configuration at
the epoxide moiety, are major pheromone components in several bug species of the genera Nezara and
Acrosternum.726 An even higher oxygenated derivative is represented by murganitol (T152), the male-specific
aggregation pheromone of the harlequin bug Murganita histrionica.730 As indicated by bioassays, the natural product
seems to show (19S)-configuration. A bicyclic relative of this group is the sesquiterpene T153 ((2Z,6R,19S,59S)-2-
methyl-6-(49-methylenebicyclo[3.1.0]hexyl)hept-2-en-1-ol, sesquisabinen-1-ol), the male aggregation pheromone
of the stink bug Eysarcoris lewisi.731,732 Male-produced pheromone candidates of flea beetles of the genera Phyllotreta
and Apthona are himachalene derivatives such as T154–T156. The stereochemical composition of the natural
products does not seem to be clear in all cases;733–735 in Phyllotreta crucifera, T154 keeps (5R,5aS)-configuration.736
The aromatic compound corresponding to T154–T156 has also been identified in some species.
194 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

The prenyl homologues of - and -pinene, - and -trans-bergamotene (T157), and its isomer with an
exocyclic double bond of unknown configuration have been described as a male-produced attractant of the parasitic
wasp Melittolia digitata.737 The aldehyde, (Z)-exo--bergamotenal (T158) was isolated from male Eysarcoris stink
bugs.738 The correct structure of the male-produced pheromone of the broad-horned flour beetle Gnathocerus cornutus
was shown to be (1S,4R,5R)--acoradiene (T159).739 The interesting novel sesquiterpene T160 has been reported to
be a putative sex pheromone of the stink bug Thynacantha marginata,740 and the structure of the compound has been
confirmed upon synthesis. Despite both enantiomers being prepared,741 no bioassays have been reported so far.
The ()-enantiomer of -caryophyllene (T161) is a female-specific volatile in the multicolored Asian lady
beetle Harmonia axyridis;742 however, no biological activity has been reported.

4.04.6.3 Norterpenes
The most widespread norterpene in insects and plants is 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one, sulcatone (T78); however,
not much is known about its biological significance. For some references see Francke and Schulz;1 recently,
sulcatone has been found in myrmecophilous rove beetles to avert attacks of their host ant L. fuliginosus by
mimicking the alarm pheromone of the ants.743 Recently, the same compound has been identified as an essential
component of the pheromone bouquet of the bedbug C. lectularius.744 It is generally accepted that sulcatone
represents a degradation product of an (activated) monoterpene precursor, which lost two carbon atoms upon
either degradative oxidation or retro-aldol reaction. However, a mixed biosynthesis from a prenyl unit and an
acetate unit may also be conceivable: acetoacetate could well be alkylated with 3,3-dimethylallyl diphosphate,
and the intermediate -ketoacid could form sulcatone upon decarboxylation (see Figure 3). In this context, it
should be noted that sulcatone may be found in relatively high concentrations in a certain organism while the
same individual does not seem to contain any (mono)terpenoid that could serve as a realistic precursor. On the
contrary, sulcatone can be rather rapidly formed (from an unknown stock?) by plants upon damage, which
indicates a short biosynthetic access.

Figure 3 Possible biosynthetic pathways leading to sulcatone (T78).

 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 195

The bark beetle pheromone frontalin (T83), which is widespread among Dendroctonus species, is easily
formed from the epoxide of 6-methyl-6-hepten-2-one, an isomer of sulcatone.745 Using radiolabeled
precursors, it could be shown that the beetles produce frontalin de novo.746 Male Asian elephants, E.
maximus, release frontalin from the temporal gland on the face. The enantiomeric composition of the
compound varies with the physiological state of the emitter, and conspecific males and females are able
to smell whether he is in musth. Specific enantiomeric compositions are particularly attractive to
ovulating females.747 The reduction product of sulcatone, the chiral secondary alcohol, sulcatol is also
frequently found in ambrosia bark beetles of the genus Gnathotrichus where it serves as an aggregation
pheromone.748 A biotransformation of sulcatol to the epoxide followed by ring closure would yield pityol
(T81), a pheromone of scolytid beetles of the genera Pityographus and Conophthorus,749 that has been
successfully used in pest management.750 Another C8 compound, possibly a bis-nor-terpenoid, is (R)-3-
ethyl-4-methylpentanol (T162), which along with methyl-6-methyl salicylate (Ar1) plays a decisive role
as a sex pheromone in slave-making ants of the genus Polyergus.215,216 The compounds per se were found
completely unattractive.
The prenyl homologue of sulcatol, (5E)-tangerinol (T163), and its (Z)-isomer were identified in Polistes
paper wasps;751,752 however, the biological significance of the compound is not clear. The corresponding
ketone, geranylacetone, is rather widespread in nature, and in some cases biological activity could be
assigned.753
A nor-terpenoid corresponding to the alcohol T84 is the acid T164, identified as an electrophysiolo-
gically active volatile in the dung beetle K. subaeneus.701 A prenyl homologue of this compound is the
methyl ester T165 of unknown configuration, which was identified as a minor component among the
volatiles released by stink bugs Chlorantha spp.721 The aldehyde and the alcohol corresponding to T165
(stereochemistry unknown) have been found to be involved in sex pairing or trail-laying in several termite
species.754,755

4.04.6.4 Homoterpenes
The homoterpenes T166 represent a mixture of the decanoate and dodecanoate of (S)-4-methylgeraniol. In
addition, esters of (E,E)-3,4,7-trimethyl, a bis-homogeraniol, showing a terminal ethyl group, were found to
be present.756 The compounds are trail pheromones of the ponerine ant Gnamptogenys striatula.757 With
respect to the biosynthesis of the compounds, it is not clear whether homomevalonate is involved or
whether the additional methyl group in T166 results from a methylation reaction. Methylation of
monoterpenes is known: in the myxobacterium Nannocystis exedens, the additional methyl group in
2-methylisoborneol is derived from (S)-adenosylmethionine.758 In Gnamptogenys, the structure of the bis-
homoterpene, however, indicates homomevalonate. This may also be true for the homofarnesal T167 and
its (5Z)-isomer, which are female-produced sex attractant pheromones of the southern cowpea weevil C.
chinensis.759 Earlier, the terpenedioic acid T37 had been identified as a close-range contact pheromone of
this beetle.760 The L. longipalpis complex comprises sand fly species that are the main vector of Chagas
disease caused by Leishmania spp. in South America. In these sand flies, male sex pheromones belonging to
different chemotypes may not only differ in quantitative composition of the attractive bouquet but also
show qualitative differences.761,762 Major homosesquiterpenes are (S)-9-methylgermacrene B, T168763,764
and (1R,3R,7S)-3-methyl--himachalene (T169).765,766 Ferrulactone (T107), a species-specific component
of the aggregation pheromone of the rusty grain beetle Cryptolestes ferrugineus,767 has been identified in
males of the butterfly P. rapae, where it contributes to success in courtship. Whether this is a true
norterpene (produced upon degradation of a higher terpene) or whether it originates from a mixed
biogenesis involving propionate and acetate remains an open question. However, it is interesting to note
that T170 (brassicalactone), a ‘prenyl homologue’ of T107, was found as a behaviorally active volatile in P.
brassicae males enhancing male courtship success.768,769
Tribolure (T109), 4,8-dimethyldecanal, an important pheromone component in Tribolium spp. shows the
same carbon skeleton as ferrulactone.770
196 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

4.04.7 Propanogenins and Related Compounds

The following section reviews structures of pheromones that are biosynthesized from propanoate or clearly
result from a mixed propanoate/acetate (methylmalonate/malonate) sequence. Several compounds showing
corresponding carbon skeletons are known from various insect taxa, especially from ants and beetles.1 As
some important stored-product pests use compounds like P7, P8, or P11 (see below), efforts have been
made to use such compounds in IPM. Consequently, investigations covered (flight)behavior of the insects
in the presence of pheromones and host odors771–773 as well as longevity, pheromone production, and
signaling.774,775
For compounds such as P1–P32, showing a distinct branching pattern, polyketide biosyntheses have
been postulated earlier;1 however, unequivocal proof has been shown only in a few cases (see below).
The ecological role of polyketides in insects and evolutionary aspects of their biogenesis have been
reviewed.776 It should be pointed out that structural features verified in this group of volatile signals
strongly resemble those of secondary metabolites that are typically found in microorganisms. This may
indicate biosyntheses involving hitherto unknown endosymbionts, while the stereotypic straight-chain
pheromones that are derived from fatty acids may be produced from any organism that uses an acetate
pool. A corresponding remark has also been made by Pankewitz and Hilker776 in their comprehensive
review. In this context, it should be noted that the lactone A39 known as a sex pheromone of scarab
beetles777,778 and 2-ethyl-3,6-dimethylpyrazine (Ar47), a component of the trail pheromone of myrmi-
cine ants779 – and other pyrazines known as insect volatiles – have also been identified in the headspace
of marine bacteria. The authors carefully discuss the coincidence of volatile compounds produced by
insects and microorganisms and point to possible consequences.780
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 197

In our earlier review,1 the compounds presented in the following figures were discussed in more detail.
198 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

Components of the aggregation pheromone of the ambrosia beetle Megaplatypus mutatus were shown to be
sulcatone (T78) and sulcatol (T80) as well as pentan-3-ol.842 The latter, which was already known as the
alcohol component of the polyketide ester P7, may well be formed from two propanoate units (after
decarboxylation and reduction of the corresponding intermediates). Using stable isotope-labeled probes, (S)-
4-methyl-3-heptanone (P13), a widespread pheromone of leaf-cutting ants,1 was shown to be biosynthesized
from three propanoate units following a polyketide/fatty acid-type route.843 Similarly, a start from acetate
followed by the incorporation of four propanoate units proved to form (4R,6R,8R)-4,6,8-trimethyldecan-2-one
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 199

(chortolure) (P33), a component of the aggregation pheromone of the storage mite Chortoglyphus arcuatus.844
The ketone P33 is the carbonyl analogue of the formate P19, the pheromone of another mite species. It is
accompanied by traces of the corresponding alcohol (2S,4R,6R,8R)-4,6,8-trimethyldecane-2-ol and by
(4R,6R,8R)-4,6,8-trimethylundecan-2-one as well as higher homologues. In another case, using labeling tech-
niques, a sequence of propanoate–acetate–propanoate–acetate could be shown to yield (R)-4-methylnonanol,
the female-produced sex pheromone of the yellow mealworm beetle T. molitor.845
The pheromone of the palm fruit stalk borer Oryctes elegans consists of a mixture of closely related
compounds, namely the methyl- and ethyl ester of 4-methyloctanoic acid, the corresponding alcohol, and its
acetate.846 The biosyntheses of the carbon skeleton of these compounds may start with butanoate (or two
acetate equivalents) followed by propanoate and another acetate equivalent. A male-produced pheromone of
the beetle Nicrophorus vespilloides (Silphidae), ethyl 4-methylheptanoate (P35),847 may be formed from two
propanoate units and acetate. Butanoate (or two acetate units) coupled to propanoate, followed by the reduction
of the acid intermediate would yield (S)-2-methyl-1-hexanol (P36), the almost-only volatile substance present
in the mandibular gland of several Cataglyphus ants.848 Trace amounts of some esters of this alcohol have been
found in Dufour glands.849 An acetate–propanoate–propanoate sequence is obvious in (2S,4R,5S)-trimethylte-
trahydropyran-2-one (P37),850 whereas in P4 an acetate starter appears to be linked to three propanoate units
(stereochemistry of the natural compound still unknown).851 Both of these tetrahydropyran-2-ones are reported
to be associated with trail following in Camponotus ants. Propanoate, accounting for the branched carbon
skeleton, may well be involved in the biosyntheses of (1R,3S,5S)-1,3,8-trimethyl-2,9-dioxabicyclo[3.3.1]no-
nan-7-ene P38. This bicyclic acetal acts as a male-produced pheromone in the hepialid moth Endoclita
excrescens.852,853 It is structurally close to P22, another hepialid pheromone. Both P22 and P38 occur in
Hepialus hecta.818 Apart from (S)-4-methyl-3-heptanone (P13) and a higher homologue (4S,6S)-4,6-dimethyl-
3-nonanone (P39) as well as (4S,6S)-4,6-dimethyl-3-octanone (present in minor amounts), are released by
caddis flies Potamophylax spp. and Glyphotaelius pellucidus.854 In Potamophylax, P39 (possibly derived from four
propanoate units) is accompanied by the new bicyclic acetal (1R,3S,5S,7S)-1-ethyl-3,5,7-trimethyl-2,8-dioxa-
bicyclo[3.2.1]octane (P40), whereas Glyphotaelius pellucidus contains the new (1S,3S,4R,6S)-1,3-diethyl-4,6-
dimethyl-2,8-dioxabicyclo[2.2.1]heptane (P41) or its (1R,3R,4S,6S)-stereoisomer.855 The ketones as well as
the bicyclic acetals proved to be electrophysiologically active; however, their biological significance remained
unknown. The bicyclic acetal (P41) may be produced from (E)-2,4-dimethyl-6-nonen-3-one, which was found
to be present in the caddis flies in small amounts.856 Epoxidation followed by intramolecular ring closure would
produce the target compound following a mechanism similar to that yielding the bark beetle pheromones
brevicomin (A27) and frontalin (T83) from unsaturated ketones (see Francke and Schulz1). However, the
formation of P40 from a 4,6-dimethyl-3-nonanone precursor is not immediately obvious. The compound is a
stereoisomer of sordidin (P32), the male-produced aggregation pheromone of the banana weevil Cosmopolites
sordidus.840,841 Both compounds may be produced from different stereoisomers of the same principal precursor.
According to the careful investigations of Bartelt and his group, using isotope labeling, the branched
polyenic pheromones of sap beetles (Nitidulidae) such as P1 and P2 were found to be made up of propano-
ate/methylmalonate units, and (in some cases) acetate and/or butyrate.856 The structures of these chemical
signals are rather stereotypic,857 and consequently cross attraction between species is not a rare case.858,859 A
certain specificity at the receptor site is, however, evident. Males of Colopterus truncatus produce a mixture of
four compounds, among which (2E,4E,6E,8E)-3,5,7-trimethyl-2,4,6,8-decatetraene (P42) is the main compo-
nent. Two additional compounds, (2E,4E,6E)-3,5-dimethyl-2,4,6-octatriene and its homologue (2E,4E,6E)-
2,4,6-nonatriene, add to the aggregation pheromone, while the fourth compound, (2E,4E,6E,8E)-4,6,8-tri-
methyl-2,4,6,8-undecatetraene, the homologue of the main component, was found to be not registered by the
beetles’ antennae.860 It may, however, have an interspecific function.
The final examples of polyketide structures in pheromone chemistry are represented by two -lactones that
are male-specific, electrophysiologically active volatiles released by feeding striped cucumber beetles,
Acalymma vittatum.861 The minor component, P43, appears to be made up of five propanoate units. The
substitutents at the oxetan-2-one ring were found to keep (3R,4R)-configuration while the stereochemistry
along the side chain remained undetermined. The major component carries an additional methyl group giving
rise to a dimethyl formation at the end of the side chain. The structure of the latter compound was verified by
independent syntheses of (3R,4R,19R,39R,59R)-3-methyl-4-(1,3,5,7-tetramethyloctyl)oxetan-2-one, which
200 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

perfectly matched the analytical data of the natural product.862 Because of the terminal branching, the starter of
the biosyntheses of the main compound cannot be propanoate; however, an amino acid precursor like valine
seems to be conceivable. The Acalymma compounds show the highest number of stereogenic centers found in
insect pheromone chemistry, so far. At this point it should be noted that (4R,6S,8S,10R,16R,18S)-4,6,8,10,16,18-
hexamethyldocosane, P44 (or its enantiomer), a cuticular hydrocarbon of the cane beetle Antirogus parvulus
shows even six stereogenic centers. This hydrocarbon is accompanied by smaller amounts of the 18-nor-
compound; however, both are not sex specific, and no behavior-mediating capacity has been reported.863

4.04.8 Mixed Structures

This section summarizes structures of pheromones showing methyl-branched carbon skeletons, whereas the extra-
methyl groups cannot be immediately associated with the incorporation of propanoate during biosynthesis. A
terminal branching (iso-branching) may be caused when the biosynthesis starts with an ‘isoprene unit’ or with a valine
or leucine precursor. After transamination and decarboxylation, valine may yield a branched C4 starter in which
leucine may be the precursor of a corresponding C5 unit. Finally, starting with a derivative of isoleucine, the
biosynthesis of the chain would result in ante-iso-branching. Methyl groups along the chain, for example, in
(mono)methylalkanes, may be introduced upon incorporation of propanoate (methylmalonate/succinate – see
Section 4.04.7) or upon ‘chain methylation’ with C1 units such as methionine or fragmented acetate864 or other
alkyl-transferring agents. Blomquist and Howard865 indicate that the biosynthesis of branched hydrocarbons,
showing several methylene groups between two methyl branchings, incorporate propanoate. It is obvious that
internally branched carbon skeletons of pheromones constantly show an uneven number of methylene groups
between the carbons that carry the methyl groups – which would perfectly fit a biogenesis involving propanoate.
Esters of fatty alcohols and 4-methyloctanoic acid (the acid part of M1 – possibly derived from a sequence
involving acetate–acetate–propanoate–acetate) are components of the Dufour gland secretion of the ant
Gnamptogenys moelleri.866
In our earlier review,1 the compounds presented in the following figures were discussed in more detail.
Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 201
202 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

A bunch of monomethylalkanes acts as a contact sex pheromone in the chrysomelid beetle Gastrophysa
atrocyanea. The compounds, methylheptacosanes and methylnonacosanes, are associated with the females’
cuticular surface lipids and release mating behavior in the males. Synthetic 9- and 11-methylheptacosane as
well as 9- and 11-methylnonacosane showed biological activities.896 Similarly, 9-methylpentacosane is the first
component of a contact pheromone identified in buprestid beetles. It is produced by females of the emerald ash
borer Agrilus planipennis.897 Hydrocarbons of slightly high volatility, 7-methylheptadecane and 7,11-dimethyl-
heptadecane, comprise the female-produced sex pheromones of both, the spring hemlock looper Lambdina
atarsia, and the pitch pine looper Lambdina pellucidaria.898 Bioassays using pure stereoisomers showed that only
(S)-7-methylheptadecane and meso-7,11-dimethylheptadecane (M23) are registered by the males’ antennae,
and only the binary mixture of the two compounds proved to be attractive in the field.899 The 7,11-substitution
pattern may suggest a propanoate–acetate–propanoate sequence to be involved in the formation of the C7–C12
part along the chain. A methyl-branched alkene (Z)-13-methyl-6-icosene (M24) is the female-produced sex
pheromone of the herald moth Scoliopteryx libatrix.900 Results of bioassays with synthetic stereoisomers suggest
the natural product to keep (S)-configuration.901
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 203

More chemical specificity is represented by the structure of the sex pheromone released by females of the
Korean population of the apple leaf miner Lyonetia prunifoliella. The main compound is 10,14-dimethyl-1-
octadecene (M25), which is accompanied by minor amounts of the saturated hydrocarbons, 5,9-dimethyloctade-
cane and 5,9-dimethylheptadecane.902 Earlier, the three compounds were reported to be components of the sex
pheromone for the North American population of the moth.903 During bioassays in Korea, all (S,S)-configured
isomers proved to be electrophysiologically active, whereas (10S,14S)-dimethyloctadec-1-ene elicited the stron-
gest response. In contrast to the North American insects, (10S,14S)-M25 was found to attract the moths as a single
compound. In the case of the Lyonetia compounds, the structure M25 suggests the incorporation of two propanoate
units interrupted by an acetate unit.

Arrangements involving the formation of two (or more) methyl groups and formal interruptions by acetate
will typically result in an uneven number of methylene groups between the methyl branchings – just as it is
shown by most of the branched-chain insect pheromones.
In the abovementioned hydrocarbons, acting as pheromones of certain moth species, the biologically active
stereoisomers could be identified because of the bioassays with pure compounds. Nevertheless, the stereoisomeric
composition of the natural products remains unknown. Very unfortunately, today there is no way to unambigu-
ously determine the enantiomeric composition of very small amounts of mono- or dimethylalkanes containing
more than 10 carbon atoms. Enantioselective GC, usually the method of choice, will not work in these cases, as
chiral discrimination of the known stationary phases is too small. As a result, enantiomers will not be separated.
Males of the palm weevil Rhabdoscelus obscurus release 2-methyl-4-octanol as a pheromone. Although the
Hawaiian strain of the species has only this compound, the Australian strain additionally contains 2-methyl-4-
heptanol and (E)-6-methyl-2-hepten-4-ol (M26, rhynchophorol).904 In the American palm weevil, rhynchophorol
keeps (S)-configuration.905 A similar bouquet, including 4-methyl-5-nonanol (possibly (4S,5S)-configuration), was
found in the West Indian sugarcane weevil Metamasius hemipterus.906 Attraction of palm weevils to pheromone
sources is quite often strongly enhanced by host odors that act as synergists.907 The sugarcane weevil Sphenophorus
levis, uses (S)-2-methyloctan-4-ol,908 that is, the configuration at the hydroxyl group is opposite to that in
rhynchophorol. Although it appears that palm weevils are not very sensitive to the stereochemistry of their
pheromones, the fact that different stereoisomers (enantiomers) may be found in different species indicates that
these insects may very well distinguish.
Involvement of an amino acid starter is even more obvious in 8-methylnonan-2-one (M27), the female sex
pheromone of the desert spider Agelenopsis aperta.909 A minor component, 6-methylheptan-3-one does not seem to
play a role in the spider’s communication system. The same starter may also account for the biosynthesis of (Z)-2-
methyl-7-octadecene, the sex pheromone of two allopatric moth species Lymantria lucescens and Lymantria serva.910
The closely related (11S,12R)-11,12-epoxy-17-methyl-1-octadecene, M28, ‘terminally’ unsaturated disparlure, is
a trace component in the secretion of the sex pheromone gland of the gypsy moth L. dispar.911 The female-
produced sex pheromone of the European click beetle Elater ferrugineus is a mixture of esters of 7-methyloctanol,
among which 7-methyloctyl 7-methyloctanoate (M29) and 7-methyloctyl (Z)-4-decenoate are the main compo-
nents, accompanied by minor amounts of 7-methyloctyl 5-methylhexanoate and 7-methyloctyl octanoate.912 The
terminal branching in those compounds may well be due to a biogenetic start from leucine. The isobutyrate of
10,14-dimethylpentadecan-1-ol (M30) has been identified in the pheromone gland of females of the tea tussock
moth Euproctis pseudoconspersa. During field tests, the (R)-enantiomer was found to be more attractive than the
204 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

(S)-enantiomer or the racemate.913 In the biosynthesis of M30, valine may act as a starter of the chain and at the
same time account for the formation of the isobutyric acid part. Compared with the common structures of
conventional moth pheromones, the structure of the Euproctis compound looks rather strange. An even more
unusual case is represented by M31, the pheromone of the Paulowina bagworm Clania variegata: an ester made up
of (S)-2-methyl-3-pentanol and 2,13-dimethylpentadecanoic acid (stereochemistry not assigned).914
The ante-iso branching found in M9 is a stereotypic feature of female sawfly pheromones. The compounds
are acetates or propanoates of methylcarbinols showing (S)-configuration at the oxygen moiety (the presence of
compounds with (R)-configuration could be shown in one case915). Apart from a methyl group at C3, there is at
least one additional methyl group along the saturated chain, which contains 11–15 carbon atoms. Analyses of
sawfly pheromones are extremely difficult due to small amounts available and problems in the separation of
stereoisomers of the target compounds. Bioassays are hampered by the sensitivity of the insects against
nonnatural stereoisomers of their pheromone.916 However, examining the pheromone composition released
by Dendrolimus pini, it could be shown that this sawfly species is not very specific with regard to the structure of
the functional group – as long as it is an ester.917 Pronounced geographic variation has been found between
strains: with respect to both the composition of the pheromones and the response at the receptor site.918
Nevertheless, several new structures could be identified during recent years: (1S,2R,7R)-1,2,7-trimethyldecyl
propanoate is the pheromone of Diprion nipponica;919 (1S,2R,6R)-1,2,6-trimethyldodecyl propanoate and the
identically substituted tridecyl ester are most important in Gilpinia pallida;920 (1S,2S,6S,10R)-1,2,6,10-tetra-
methyldodecyl propanoate (M32) is the pheromone of Microdiprion pallipes;921 and that of Macrodiprion nemoralis
is (1S,2R,6R,8S)-1,2,6,8-tetramethyldecyl acetate (M33).920 Interestingly, egg parasitoids may use sawfly pher-
omones as kairomones to locate their host.922
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 205

Another unusual pheromone blend comprising a female-produced moth pheromone is the mixture of 6-
methyloctadecan-2-one, 14-methyloctadecan-2-one, and 6,14-dimethyloctadecan-2-one (M34) (stereochemical
composition unknown) identified in the arctiid moth Lyclene dharma dharma.923 The compounds are reported to be
electrophysiologically active; however, no results of behavior experiments have been described. It should be noted
that M34 is structurally close to the pheromone of the corn rootworm, M5. A mixed biosynthesis is also shown by
4,6-dimethylnonanal (M35), sex pheromone of several termite species.754 The biogenetic scheme of this compound
may follow an acetate–acetate–acetate–propanoate–acetate–propanoate way; however, chain methylation cannot be
excluded. Major components of the male-produced pheromone of the stink bug Euschistus obscurus (Pentatomidae)
are reported to be a mixture of predominantly methyl 2,6,10-tridecanoate (M2) and methyl (2E,4Z)-dodecadieno-
ate.924 The same blend has also been described from closely related stink bugs including P. guildinii.925 The
identification of -sesquiphellandrene as a male-produced sex pheromone of the latter728 sheds, however, a new
light on problems concerning the communication system of this bug. Recently, M2 has been erroneously termed
‘methyl-2,4,6-trimethyl tridecanoate,’926 which may cause misunderstandings by the nonexperts.
The New World screwworm fly Cochliomyia hominivorax is a serious pest to livestock in Central and South
America. An attractive fraction containing seven acetates of methylnonacosanols carrying a secondary hydroxyl
group were isolated from mature females.927 A series of papers focusing on the syntheses of various positional
isomers and stereoisomers revealed the most active compound to be 6-acetoxy-19-methylnonacosane.928–931 Using
the method of Ohrui and Akasaka,145,146 the natural product exhibited (6R,19R)-configuration133 as shown in M36.
In addition to 3,11-dimethylnonacosan-2-one (M12) and 3,11-dimethylheptacosan-2-one, products of !-
oxidation, that is, 29-hydroxy-3,11-dimethylnonacosan-2-one and 19,27-dimethyl-28-oxononacosanal (M37)
as well as the two corresponding C27 compounds are components of a multicomponent contact pheromone
contained in the cuticula of sexually mature females of the German cockroach B. germanica.932

4.04.9 Other Structures

One of the few nonvolatile pheromones discussed in this chapter is a 14.5 kDa lysozyme protein identified as an
egg recognition pheromone of the termite Reticulitermes speratus.933
A complex mixture of oligosaccharides and phospholipids acts as a pheromonal phagostimulant, produced
by males of the German cockroach B. germanica. This secretion functions in the precopulatory behavior,
strongly eliciting feeding response in the females.934,935
206 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

During larval stage or as adults, males of some butterfly species sequester pyrrolizidine alkaloids from their
host trees. Subsequently, the nitrogen-containing part of the molecule, the so-called necine bases, are trans-
formed into the volatiles Ar50–Ar52 that play a role in courtship of the species (see Section 4.04.4.1). Although
the biological significance of these compounds has been well established, the metabolic fate and possible
biological role of the aliphatic acid part of the alkaloids remained largely unclear. In the giant danaid butterfly
I. leuconoe, it could be shown that the degradation products 2-hydroxy-2(1-methylethyl)-3-butanolide (viridi-
floric acid -lactone) (O1) and the corresponding nor-compound 2-hydroxy-2-ethyl-3-butanolide (O2) are
components of a complex mixture present in the hairpencil glands of the males.248 Viridifloric acid -lactone
elicited a strong electrophysiological reaction in the antennae of both males and females. A mixture containing
mellein (Ar8), phenol (Ar4), danaidone (Ar50), farnesol (T55), geranyl methyl sulfide, and viridifloric acid -
lactone proved to be highly attractive to females. The natural -lactones keep (S,S)-configuration as shown in
the depicted structures.936
Another small and unusual compound is the chiral citric acid dimethylester O3, named cupilure. The
natural product showing (S)-configuration is the female-produced sex pheromone of the wandering spider
Cupiennius salei.937,938

Female-produced pheromones of several scarab beetles (Phyllophaga spp.) have been shown to be derivatives
of amino acids. The sex pheromone of the cranberry white grub Phyllophaga anxia is a mixture of the methyl
esters of L-valine (O4) and L-isoleucine (O5).497 Recently, it became evident that at least three pheromone
races exist that respond differently to the two compounds or blends thereof.939 While valine methyl ester,
possibly its L-enantiomer O4, was identified to be the sex pheromone of Phyllophaga georgiana, P. anxia,
Phyllophaga gracilis, and Phyllophaga postrema were attracted to O5.940 The methyl ester of L-leucine (O6) proved
to be the sex pheromone of Phyllophaga lanceolata.941 Addition of O4 or O5 to O6 in 1:1 mixtures completely
inhibited attraction of males. The pheromone bouquet of Phyllophaga elenans adds a special feature: Apart from
the ester O5, the N-formyl- and N-acetyl-products O7 and O8 could be identified.942 Although O7 was shown
to attract males, O8 proved to be behaviorally inactive. In field tests, addition of either O7 or O8 to O5 in 1:1
mixtures did not increase the attractivity of O5.
Another unusual structure is represented by the male-produced pheromone of the chrysomelid beetles,
Galerucella calmariensis and Galerucella pusilla. The compound, 12,13-dimethyl-5,14-dioxabicyclo[9.2.1]tetra-
deca-1(13),11-dien-4-one, (O9) is a lactone including a 3,4-dimethylfuran substructure.943 Similar
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 207

compounds have been described as the so-called furan fatty acids (F-acids) occurring in plants944 and fish945 as
well as in marine and freshwater invertebrates.946 In the urine of cattle, dicarboxylic acids were identified
representing products of an !-oxidation at the alkyl chain of F-acids.947 Similarly, O9 may be formed from an
F-acid precursor upon oxidation to a corresponding !-hydroxy acid that would yield O9 after lactonization.
Plants and microorganisms produce F-acids from polyunsaturated fatty acids, while the two methyl groups at
positions 3 and 4 of the furan ring are introduced through methylation.948 It may well be that 2,5-dialkylfuran
components of the cuticular lipids of Lepidoptera272 are biogenetically related to O9 and, therefore, similar
unusual pheromone structures may be found in the future.

References
1. W. Francke; S. Schulz, Pheromones. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon Press: Oxford,
1999; Vol. 8, pp 197–264.
2. B. Koutek; L. Streinz; M. Romanuk, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun. 1998, 63, 899–954.
3. K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1998, 1479–1489.
4. K. Mori, Acc. Chem. Res. 2000, 33, 102–110.
5. K. Mori, Top. Curr. Chem. 2004, 239, 1–50.
6. M. J. Goundalkar; F. X. Webster, In Selected Topics in the Chemistry of Natural Products; R. Ikan, Ed.; World Scientific:
Singapore, 2008; pp 285–349.
7. P. H. G. Zarbin; J. A. F. P. Villar; I. Marchi; J. Bergmann; A. R. M. Oliveira, Curr. Org. Chem. 2009, 13, 299–338.
8. J. Bergmann; J. A. F. P. Villar; M. F. Flores; P. H. G. Zarbin, Curr. Org. Chem. 2009, 13, 683–719.
9. J. G. Millar; K. Haynes, Eds., Methods in Chemical Ecology; Kluwer: New York, 1998; Vol. 1.
10. J. G. Millar; K. Haynes, Eds., Methods in Chemical Ecology; Kluwer: New York, 1998; Vol. 2.
11. J. Hardie; A. K. Minks, Eds., Pheromones of Non-Lepidopteran Insects Associated with Agricultural Plants; CABI Publishing:
Wallingford, CT, 1999.
12. M. Hilker; T. Meiners, Eds., Chemoecology of Insect Eggs and Egg Deposition; Blackwell: Berlin, 2002.
13. T. D. Wyatt, Ed., Pheromones and Animal Behaviour; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003.
14. R. T. Cardé; J. G. Millar, Eds., Advances in Insect Chemical Ecology; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2004.
15. S. Schulz, Ed., The Chemistry of Pheromones and Other Semiochemicals I (Topics in Current Chemistry); Springer: Heidelberg,
2004; Vol. 239.
16. S. Schulz, Ed., The Chemistry of Pheromones and Other Semiochemicals II (Topics in Current Chemistry); Springer: Heidelberg,
2005; Vol. 240.
17. R. K. Vander Meer; M. D. Breed; K. E. Espelie; M. L. Winston, Eds., Pheromone Communication in Social Insects: Ants, Wasps,
Bees, and Termites; Westview: Boulder, CO, 1998.
18. M. Ayasse; R. J. Paxton; J. Tengö, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2001, 46, 31–78.
19. Y. Le Conte; A. Hefetz, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2008, 53, 523–542.
20. A. Hassanali; P. G. N. Njagi; M. O. Bashir, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2005, 50, 223–245.
21. S. J. Seybold; D. P. W. Huber; J. C. Lee; A. D. Graves; J. Bohlmann, Phytochem. Rev. 2006, 5, 143–178.
22. D. Rittschof; J. H. Cohen, Peptides 2004, 25, 1503–1516.
23. B. Wertheim; E.-J. A. Van Baalen; M. Dicke; L. E. M. Vet, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2005, 50, 321–346.
24. K. H. Hoffmann; K. Dettner; K.-H. Tomaschko, Physiol. Biochem. Zool. 2006, 79, 344–356.
25. A. Rafaeli, Int. Rev. Cytol. 2002, 213, 49–91.
26. V. K. Nagalakshmi; S. W. Appelbaum; A. Azrielli; A. Rafaeli, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2007, 64, 142–155.
27. M.-Y. Choi; A. Rafaeli; R. A. Jurenka, Cell Tissue Res. 2001, 306, 459–564.
28. M. Tawata; T. Ichikawa, Zool. Sci. 2001, 18, 645–649.
29. M. Altsein; O. Ben-Aziz; S. Daniel; I. Zeltser; C. Gilon, Peptides 2001, 22, 1379–1389.
30. A. Rafaeli; T. Zakhraova; Z. Lapsker; R. A. Jurenka, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2003, 33, 371–380.
31. A. Rafaeli; R. Bober; L. Becker; M.-Y. Choi; E.-J. Fuerst; R. Jurenka, Insect Mol. Biol. 2007, 16, 287–293.
32. Z.-J. Wei; T.-Y. Zhang; J.-S. Sun; A.-Y. Xu; W.-H. Xu; D. L. Denlinger, J. Insect Physiol. 2004, 50, 1151–1161.
33. M. Y. Choi; E.-J. Fuerst; A. Rafaeli; R. Jurenka, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 9721–9726.
34. J. J. Hull; A. Ohnishi; K. Moto; Y. Kawasaki; R. Kurata; M. G. Suzuki; S. Matsumoto, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279,
51500–51507.
35. K. Shiomi; Y. Fujiwara; Y. Yasukochi; Z. Kajiura; M. Nakagaki; T. Yaginuma, Mol. Cell Neurosci. 2007, 34, 209–218.
36. Y.-J. Kim; R. J. Nachman; K. Aimanova; S. Gill; M. E. Adams, Peptides 2008, 29, 268–275.
37. H. Eltahlawy; J. S. Buckner; S. P. Foster, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2007, 64, 120–130.
38. J. Tillmann; S. J. Seybold; R. A Jurenka; G. Blomquist, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1999, 29, 481–514.
39. G. Blomquist; R. Vogt, Eds., Insect Pheromone Biochemistry and Molecular Biology: The Biosynthesis and Detection of
Pheromones and Plant Volatiles; Elsevier: London, 2003.
40. T. Ando; S.-I. Inomata; M. Yamamoto, Top. Curr. Chem. 2004, 239, 51–96.
41. R. Jurenka, Top. Curr. Chem. 2004, 239, 97–132.
42. J. G. Millar, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2000, 45, 575–604.
43. E. D. Morgan, Biosynthesis in Insects; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2004.
44. B. S. Hansson, Ed., Insect Olfaction; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Heidelberg, 1999.
45. J. A. Rifelli; L. Abrell; J. G. Hildebrand, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 837–853.
208 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

46. M. De Bruyne; T. C. Baker, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 882–897.

47. H. Lei; N. Vickers, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 915–927.
48. R. T. Cardé; M. A Willis, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 854–866.
49. T. A. Christensen; J. G. Hildebrand, Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2002, 12, 393–399.
50. N. S. Honson; Y. Gong; E. Plettner, Recent Adv. Phytochem. 2005, 39, 227–268.
51. L. B. Vosshall; M. C. Stensmyr, Neuron 2005, 45, 179–181.
52. W. S. Leal, Semiochemicals in Pest and Weed Control; ACS Symposium Series; 2005; Vol. 906, pp 45–57.
53. E. A. Hallem; A. Dahanukar; J. R. Carlson, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 113–135.
54. N. Yamagata; H. Nishino; M. Mizunami, Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2006, 273, 2219–2225.
55. L. Briand; N. Swasdipan; C. Nespoulous; V. Bezirard; F. Blon; J.-C. Huet; P. Ebert; J.-C. Pernollet, Eur. J. Biochem. 2002, 269,
4586–4596.
56. Y. Ishida; V. P. Chiang; M. I. Haverty; W. S. Leal, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1887–1893.
57. A. A. Nikonov; G. Peng; G. Tsurupa; W. S. Leal, Chem. Senses 2002, 27, 495–504.
58. L. A. Graham; P. L. Davis, Gene 2002, 292, 43–55.
59. H. Biesmann; M. F. Walter; S. Dimitratos; D. Woods, Insect Mol. Biol. 2002, 11, 123–132.
60. R. G. Vogt; M. E. Rogers; M. D. Franco; M. Sun, J. Exp. Biol. 2002, 205, 719–744.
61. Y. Ishida; A. J. Cornel; W. Leal, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 867–871.
62. A. Lartigue; A. Gruez; S. Spinelli; S. Riviere; R. Brossut; M. Tegoni; C. Cambillau, J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 30213–30218.
63. C. Collmann; M. A. Carlsson; B. S. Hansson; A. Nighorn, J. Neurosci. 2004, 24, 6070–6077.
64. N. S. Honson; E. Plettner, Naturwissenschaften 2006, 93, 267–277.
65. S. Zubkov; A. M. Gronenborn; I.-J. L. Byeon; S. Mohanty, J. Mol. Biol. 2005, 354, 1081–1090.
66. F. F. Damberger; Y. Ishida; W. S. Leal; K. Wuethrich, J. Mol. Biol. 2007, 373, 811–819.
67. K. W. Wanner; A. R. Anderson; S. C. Trowell; D. A. Theilmann; H. M. Robertson; R. D. Newcomb, Insect Mol. Biol. 2007, 16,
107–119.
68. B. H. Sandler; L. Nikonova; W. S. Leal; J. Clardy, Chem. Biol. 2000, 7, 143–151.
69. T. Nakagawa; T. Sakurai; T. Nishioka; K. Touhara, Science 2005, 307, 1638–1642.
70. F. Graeter; W. Xu; W. Leal; H. Grubmueller, Structure 2006, 14, 1577–1586.
71. R. Horst; F. Damberger; P. Luginbuhl; P. Guntert; G. Peng; L. Nikonova; W. S. Leal; K. Wüthrich, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2001, 98, 14374–14379.
72. E. Michel; F. F. Damberger; A. M. Chen; Y. Ishida; W. S. Leal; K. Wüthrich, J. Biomol. NMR 2005, 31, 65.
73. F. F. Damberger; Y. Ishida; W. S. Leal; K. Wüthrich, J. Mol. Biol. 2007, 373, 811–819.
74. J. Pelletier; F. Bozzolan; M. Solvar; M.-C. Francois; E. Jacquin-Joly; M. Maibeche-Coisne, Gene 2007, 404, 31–40.
75. Y. Ishida; W. S. Leal, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2002, 32, 1775–1780.
76. M. Maibeche-Coisne; C. Merlin; M.-C. Francois; I. Queguiner; P. Porcheron; E. Jacquin-Joly, Chem. Senses 2004, 29, 381–390.
77. C. Merlin; G. Rosell; G. Carot-Sans; M.-C. Francois; F. Bozzolan; J. Pelletier; E. Jacquin-Joly; A. Guerrero; M. Maibeche-Coisne,
Insect Mol. Biol. 2007, 16, 73–81.
78. M. Altstein; O. Ben-Aziz; I. Zeltser; K. Bhargava; M. Davidovitch; A. Strey; N. Pryor; R. J. Nachman, Peptides 2007, 28, 574–584.
79. E. Plettner, Curr. Med. Chem. 2002, 9, 1075–1085.
80. C. C. Doane, Controlled-Release Devices for Pheromones. In Controlled-Release Delivery Systems for Pesticides; H. B. Scher,
Ed.; Dekker: New York, 1999.
81. J. Muknosz-Pallares; A. Corma; J. Primo; E. Primo-Yufera, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001, 49, 4801–4807.
82. A. J. Stipanovic; P. J. Hennessy; F. X. Webser; Y. Takahashi, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 2301–2308.
83. A. Zada; L. Fahach; J. A. Byers, Chemoecology 2009, 19, 13–47.
84. A. L. Il’ilchev; L. L. Stelinski; D. G. Williams; L. J. Gut, J. Econ. Entomol. 2006, 99, 2048–2054.
85. J. R. Kikkert; C. A. Hoepting; Q. Wu; P. Wang; R. Baur; A. M. Shelteon, J. Econ. Entomol. 2006, 99, 1310–1315.
86. J. F. Campbell; M. A. Mullen; A. K. Dowdy, J. Econ. Entomol. 2002, 95, 1089–1101.
87. Z. Zhang; H. Wang; G. Chen; O. Anderbrant; Y. Zhang; S. Zhou; E. Hedenstroem; H.-E. Hoegberg, J. Appl. Entomol. 2005, 129,
368–374.
88. A. C. Oehlschlager; L. Gonzalez; M. Gomez; C. Rodriguez; R. Andrade, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1653–1664.
89. J. R. Faleiro; V. R. Satarkar, Indian J. Plant Prot. 2003, 31, 84–87.
90. J. I. L. Moura; J. M. S. Jose; J. De Souza; E. F. Vilela, An. Soc. Entomol. Bras. 1997, 26, 69–73.
91. K. Allou; J.-P. Morin; P. Kouassi; F. H. N’klo; D. Rochat, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1743–1754.
92. P. J. Landolt; T. W. Phillips, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1997, 42, 371–391.
93. S. M. Cook; Z. R. Khan; J. A. Pickett, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2007, 52, 375–400.
94. J. Offenberg; M. G. Nielsen; D. J. MacIntosh; S. Havanon; S. Aksornkoe, Proc. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. 2004, 271 (Suppl. 6), S433–S435.
95. C. Ryne; G. P. Svensson; O. Anderbrant; C. Loefstedt, J. Econ. Entomol. 2007, 100, 1017–1025.
96. P. Farbert; U. T. Koch; A. Farbert; R. T. Staten; R. T. Carde, Environ. Entomol. 1997, 26, 1105.
97. J. Murlis; M. A. Willis; R. T. Carde, Physiol. Entomol. 2000, 25, 211–222.
98. L. L. Stelinski; J. R. Miller; R. Ledebuhr; L. J. Gut, J. Econ. Entomol. 2006, 99, 1705–1710.
99. G. Angeli; G. Anfora; M. Baldessari; G. S. Germinara; F. Rama; A. De Cristofaro; C. Ioriatti, J. Appl. Entomol. 2007, 131, 311–318.
100. A. L. Il’ichev; D. G. Williams; L. J. Gut, J. Appl. Entomol. 2007, 131, 368–376.
101. P. Witzgall; L. Stelinski; L. Gut; D. Thomson, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2008, 53, 503–522.
102. I. Said; R. A. de la Torre; J.-P. Morin; D. Rochat, Chemoecology 2006, 16, 9–16.
103. R. J. Bartelt; B. W. Zilkowski, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 535–558.
104. K. A. Justus; J. Murlis; C. Jones; R. T. Cardé, Environ. Fluid Mech. 2002, 2, 115–142.
105. S. Gouinguené; I. De Cruz; J. Van Der Pers; L. Wadhams; F. Marion-Poll, Chem. Senses 1998, 23, 647–652.
106. E. A. Malo; M. Renou; A. Guerrero, Talanta 2000, 52, 525–532.
107. J. G. Millar, J. Compr. Anal. Chem. 2002, 37, 669–697.
108. J. Pawliszyn, Solid Phase Microextraction: Theory and Practice; Wiley-VCH: New York, 1997.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 209

109. C. Malosse; P. Ramirez-Lucas; D. Rochat; J. Morin, J. High Resolut. Chromatogr. 1995, 18, 669.
110. A.-K. Borg-Karlson; R. Mozuraitis, Z. Naturforsch. C 1996, 51, 599.
111. D. Rochat; P. Ramirez-Lucas; C. Malosse; R. Aldana; T. Kakul; J.-P. Morin, J. Chromatogr. A 2000, 885, 433–444.
112. W. Francke, unpublished.
113. C. H. Deng; X. M. Zhang; W. M Zhu; J. Qian, Chromatographia 2004, 59, 263–268.
114. R. X. Loi; M. C. Solar; J. D. Weidenhammer, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 70–75.
115. D. Djozan; T. Baheri; R. Farshbaf; S. Azhari, Anal. Chim. Acta 2005, 554, 197–201.
116. A. Grigoriev; S. Nacson; W. Stott, Int. J. Ion Mobility Spectrom. 2004, 7, 8–14.
117. F. P. Drijfhout; T. A. Van Beek; J. H. Visser; A. De Groot, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1383–1392.
118. R. M Crewe; R. F. A. Moritz; H. M. G. Lattorff, Chemoecology 2004, 14, 77–79.
119. A. Di Tullio; F. De Angelis; S. Reale; D. A. Grasso; R. Visicchio; C. Castracani; A. Mori; F. Le Moli, Rapid Commun. Mass
Spectrom. 2003, 17, 2071–2074.
120. G. R. Jones; N. J. Oldham, J. Chromatogr. A 1999, 843, 199–236.
121. P. H. G. Zarbin; J. T. B. Ferreira; W. S. Leal, Quim. Nova 1999, 22, 263–268.
122. F. A. De Marques; J. S. McElfresh; J. G. Millar, J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2000, 11, 592–599.
123. R. P. Adams, Identification of Essential Oil Components by Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry, 4th ed.; Allured
Publishing Corporation: Carol Stream, IL, 2007.
124. D. Joulain; W. A König, The Atlas of Spectral Data of Sesquiterpene Hydrocarbons; E. B Verlag: Hamburg, 1998.
125. S. Schulz, Lipids 2001, 36, 637–647.
126. B. S. Junkes; R. D. M. C. Amboni; V. E. F. Heinzen; R. A. Yunes, Chromatographia 2002, 55, 707–713.
127. A. B. Attygalle, Microchemical Techniques. In Methods in Chemical Ecology; J. G. Millar, K. E. Haynes, Eds.; Kluwer: New York,
1998; Vol. 2, pp 207–294.
128. S. Schulz, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1997, 969–970.
129. A. Zada; V. C. Soroker; M. Harel; J. Nakahe; E. Dunkelblum, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2299–2306.
130. K. Mori, Chirality 1998, 10, 578–586.
131. K. Mori, Chirality in the Natural World: Chemical Communications. In Chirality in Natural and Applied Science; W. J. Lough,
I. W. Wainer, Eds.; Blackwell and CRC: Osney Mead and Boca Raton, 2002; pp 241–259.
132. P. Y. Hayes; M. T. Fletcher; S. Chow; M. McGrath; Y. Q. Tu; H. Zhang; N. L. Hungerford; C. S. P. Christopher; E. Jeannette;
C. J. Moore; J. DeVoss; W. Kitching, Chirality 2003, 15 (Suppl.), 116–127.
133. K. Mori, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 2007, 15, 7505–7523.
134. C. E. Reisenman; T. A. Christensen; W. Francke; J. G. Hildebrand, J. Neurosci. 2004, 24, 2602–2611.
135. W. A. König, Gas Chromatographic Enantiomer Separation with Modified Cyclodextrins; Hüthig: Heidelberg, 1992.
136. M. Yamamoto; Y. Takeuchi; Y. Ohmasa; H. Yamazawa; T. Ando, Biomed. Chromatogr. 1999, 13, 410–417.
137. G.-Q. Pu; M. Yamamoto; Y. Takeuchi; H. Yamazawa; T. Ando, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1151–1162.
138. K. N. Slessor; G. G. S. King; D. R. Miller; M. L. Winston; T. L. Cutforth, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 1659–1667.
139. J. Ruzicka; L. Streinz; D. Saman; Z. Havlas; Z. Wimmer; M. Zarevucka; B. Koutek; L. Leseticky, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun.
2000, 65, 695–707.
140. C. Arsene; S. Schulz, Org. Lett. 2002, 4, 2869–2871.
141. A. Ichikawa; H. Ono; N. Harada, Chirality 2004, 16, 559–567.
142. K. Akasaka; H. Ohrui, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 153–158.
143. K. Imaizumi; H. Terashita; K. Akasaka; H. Ohrui, Anal. Sci. 2003, 19, 1243–1249.
144. H. Ohrui, Proc. Japan. Acad. Ser. B. 2007, 83, 127–135.
145. S. Nojima; K. Shimomura; H. Honda; I. Yamamoto; K. Ohsawa, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 923–933.
146. A. Yajima; K. Akasaka; T. Nakai; H. Maehara; T. Nukada; H. Ohrui; G. Yabuta, Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 4590–4596.
147. F. C. Schroeder; M. Gronquist, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 7122–7131.
148. A. E. Taggi; J. Meinwald; F. C. Schroeder, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 10364–10369.
149. F. C. Schroeder; A. E. Taggi; M. Gronquist; R. U. Malik; J. B. Grant; T. Eisner; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008,
10, 14283–14287.
150. A. T. Dossey; S. S. Walse; J. R. Rocca; A. S. Edison, ACS Chem. Biol. 2006, 1, 511–514.
151. D. B. Weibel; T. R. Walker; F. C. Schroeder; J. Meinwald, Org. Lett. 2000, 2, 2381–2383.
152. R. T. Williamson; A. C. Barrios Sosa; A. Mitra; P. J. Seaton; D. B. Weibel; F. C. Schroeder; J. Meinwald; F. E. Koehn, Org. Lett.
2003, 5, 1745–1748.
153. F. C. Schroeder; D. B. Weibel; J. Meinwald, Org. Lett. 2004, 6, 3019–3022.
154. G. Bringmann; T. A. M. Gulder; M. Reichert; T. Gulder, Chirality 2008, 20, 628–642.
155. C. S Ashwar; P. J. Stephens; T. Eggimann; H. Wieser, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 1998, 9, 1107–1110.
156. B. Figadère; F. J. Develin; J. G. Millar; P. J. Stephens, Chem. Commun. 2008, 9, 1106–1108.
157. N. J. Oldham; A. Svatos, Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 1999, 13, 331–336.
158. B. Kalinova; P. Jiros; J. Zd’arek; X. Wen; L. M. Hosovec, Talanta 2006, 69, 542–547.
159. J. Cvacka; P. Jiros; J. Sobotnik; R. Hanus; A. Svatos, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 409–434.
160. A. J. Taylor; R. S. T. Linforth, Int. J. Mass Spectrom. 2003, 223–224, 179–191.
161. M. Goubault; T. P. Bachelor; R. S. T. Linforth; R. J. Taylor; I. C. W. Hardy, Proc. R. Soc. B. 2006, 273, 2853–2859.
162. Y. Y. Yew; R. B. Cody; E. A. Kravitz, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105, 7135–7140.
163. K. Lebedeva, Proc. Estonian Acad. Sci. 1997, 46, 31–65.
164. W. Francke; W. Schroeder, Curr. Org. Chem. 1999, 3, 407–443.
165. W. Francke; W. Kitching, Curr. Org. Chem. 2001, 5, 233–251.
166. V. Witte; S. Foitzik; R. Hashim; U. Maschwitz; S. Schulz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 355–367.
167. J. M. Brand; R. M. Duffield; J. G. MacConnell; M. S. Blum; H. M. Fales, Science 1973, 179, 388–389.
168. Y. Kuwahara, In Modern Acarology; F. Dusbabek; V. Bukva, Eds.; Academia: Prague, 1991; pp 43–52.
169. D. E. Sonenshine, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1985, 30, 1–28.
210 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

170. F. Kern; R. W. Klein; E. Janssen; H.-J. Bestmann; A. B. Attygalle; D. Schafer; U. Maschwitz, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 779–792.
171. E. Übler; F. Kern; H. J. Bestmann; B. Hölldobler; A. B. Attygalle, Naturwissenschaften 1995, 82, 523–525.
172. J. H. Tumlinson; R. M. Silverstein; J. C. Moser; R. G. Brownlee; J. M. Ruth, Nature (London) 1971, 234, 348–349.
173. R. F. Henzell; M. D. Lowe, Science 1970, 168, 1005–1006.
174. A. Ward; C. Moore; V. Anitha; J. Wightman; D. J. Rogers, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 515–522.
175. W. S. Leal; C. P. S. Yadava; J. N. Vijayvergia, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 1557–1566.
176. B. Torto; D. Obeng-Ofori; P. G. N. Njagi; A. Hassanali; H. Amiani, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1749–1762.
177. B. Torto; P. G. N. Njagi; A. Hassanali; H. Amiani, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 2273–2281.
178. M. M. Rai; A. Hassanali; R. K. Saini; H. Odongo; H. Kahoro, J. Insect Physiol. 1997, 43, 83–87.
179. K. Seidelmann; H. Weinert; H.-J. Ferenz, J. Insect Physiol. 2003, 49, 1125–1133.
180. H.-J. Ferenz; K. Seidelmann, Physiol. Entomol. 2003, 28, 11–18.
181. J. Andersson; A. K. Borg-Karlson; C. Wiklund, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1489–1499.
182. C. Messer; K. Dettner; S. Schulz; W. Francke, Pedobiologia 1999, 43, 174–182.
183. J. Reinhard; M. Lacey; F. Ibarra; F. Schroeder; M. Kaib; M. Lenz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1–14.
184. R. Schöni; E. Hess; W. Blun; K. Ramstein, J. Insect Physiol. 1984, 30, 613.
185. P. A. Diehl; P. Guerin; M. Vlimant; P. Steullet, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 833–847.
186. L. M. F. Borges; A. E. Eiras; P. H. Ferri; A. C. C. Lobo, Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2002, 27, 223–230.
187. C. C. B. Louly; D.d.N. Silveira; S. F. Soares; P. H. Ferri; A. C. de Campos Melo; L. M. F. Borges, Mem. Inst. Oswaldo Cruz 2008,
103, 60–65.
188. D. E. Sonenshine, Parasitology 2004, 129, S405–S425.
189. D. E. Sonenshine, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 557–580.
190. P. Hanson; J. Yoder; J. Pizzuli; C. Sanders, J. Med. Entomol. 2002, 39, 945–947.
191. A. Fontan; P. Audino; A. Martinez; R. Alzogaray; E. Zerba; F. Camps; A. Cork, J. Med. Entomol. 2002, 39, 191–197.
192. D. Wittmann; R. Radtke; J. Zeil; G. Lübke; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 631–641.
193. E. Siljander; R. Gries; G. Khaskin; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 708–718.
194. B. R. Wager; M. D. Breed, Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2000, 93, 1329–1332.
195. H. Yasui; S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; M. Kishita; Y. Sadoyama, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 75–80.
196. N. J. Oldham; E. D. Morgan; B. Gobin; J. Billen, Naturwissenschaften 1994, 81, 313–316.
197. J. Andersson; A. K. Borg-Karlson; C. Wiklund, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2000, 267, 1271–1275.
198. Q.-H. Zhang; R. G. Schneidmiller; D. R. Hoover; K. Young; D. O. Welshons; A. Margaryan; J. R. Aldrich; K. R. Chauhan, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2006, 32, 2163–2176.
199. P. S. Robbins; R. L. Crocker; S. Nojima; B. D. Morris; W. L. Roelofs; M. G. Villani, Naturwissenschaften 2003, 90, 517–520.
200. K. N. Slessor; L.-A. Kaminski; G. G. S. King; J. H. Borden; M. L. Winston, Nature 1988, 332, 354–356.
201. Y. Sasaerila; R. Gries; G. Gries; G. Khaskin; S. King; S. Takacs; Hardi, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 89–93.
202. B. Hölldobler; N. J. Oldham; E. D. Morgan; W. A. König, J. Insect Physiol. 1995, 41, 739–744.
203. D. Sirugue; O. Bonnard; J.-L. Quere; J.-P. Farine; R. Brossut, J. Chem. Ecol. 1992, 18, 2261–2276.
204. E. Lacey; J. Moreira; J. Millar; L. Hanks, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 408–417.
205. J. R. Aldrich; W. S. Leal; R. Nishida; A. P. Khrimian; C.-J. Lee; Y. Sakuratani, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1997, 84, 127–135.
206. K. Tatami; N. Mori; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, Med. Entomol. Zool. 2001, 52, 279–286.
207. G. Raspotnig, Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2006, 39, 177–194.
208. A. Ryono; N. Mori; K. Okabe; Y. Kuwahara, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2001, 36, 77–81.
209. S. Shibata; Y. Kuwahara; M. Sato; S. Matsuyama; T. Suzuki, J. Pestic. Sci. 1998, 23, 34–39.
210. Y. Kuwahara; M. Sato; T. Koshii; T. Suzuki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1992, 27, 253–260.
211. W. S. Leal; Y. Nakano; Y. Kuwahara; H. Nakao; T. Suzuki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1988, 23, 422–427.
212. M. Sato; Y. Kuwahara; S. Matsuyama; T. Suzuki; M. Okamoto; K. Matsumoto, Naturwissenschaften 1993, 80, 34–36.
213. E. Kohl; B. Hölldobler; H. J. Bestmann, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87, 320–322.
214. E. D. Morgan; D. G. Ollett, Naturwissenschaften 1987, 74, 596–597.
215. C. Castracani; V. Tamarri; D. Grasso; F. Le Moli; G. Palla; J. Millar; W. Francke; A. Mori, Insectes Soc. 2008, 55, 137–143.
216. L. Greenberg; A. Tröger; W. Francke; J. McElfresh; H. Topoff; A. Aliabadi; J. Millar, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 935–945.
217. R. Nishida; K.-H. Tan; S.-L. Wee; A. K.-W. Hee; Y.-C. Toong, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2004, 32, 245–252.
218. A. K.-W. Hee; K. H. Tan, Bull. Entomol. Res. 2005, 95, 615–620.
219. C. I. Keeling; K. N. Slessor; H. A. Higo; M. L. Winston, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 4486–4491.
220. T. K. Hong; R. Nishida, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1998, 89, 155–158.
221. R. Nishida; T. C. Baker; W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1982, 8, 947–959.
222. K. H. Tan; R. Nishida, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 533–546.
223. C. C.-H. Khoo; K. H. Tan, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2000, 97, 317–320.
224. S. Nojima; C. Schal; F. X. Webster; R. G. Santangelo; W. L. Roelofs, Science 2005, 307, 1104–1106.
225. H.-J. Bestmann; F. Kern; D. Schäfer; M. C. Witschel, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 1992, 31, 795–796.
226. F. Kern; R. W. Klein; E. Janssen; H.-J. Bestmann; A. B. Attygalle; D. Schaefer; U. Maschwitz, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 779–792.
227. G. Kunesch; P. Zagatti; A. Pouvreau; R. Cassini, Z. Naturforsch. C 1987, 42c, 657–659.
228. E. Übler; F. Kern; H.-J. Bestmann; B. Hölldobler; A. B. Attygalle, Naturwissenschaften 1995, 82, 523–525.
229. E. Kohl; B. Hölldobler; H.-J. Bestmann, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 113–122.
230. F. Kern; H.-J. Bestmann, Z. Naturforsch. C 1994, 49, 865–870.
231. J. H. Tumlinson; R. M. Silverstein; J. C. Moser; R. G. Brownlee; J. M. Ruth, Nature 1971, 234, 348–349.
232. R. G. Riley; R. M. Silverstein; B. Carroll; R. Carroll, J. Insect Physiol. 1974, 20, 651–654.
233. J. H. Cross; J. R. West; R. M. Silverstein; A. R. Jutsum; J. M. Cherrett, J. Chem. Ecol. 1982, 8, 1119–1124.
234. B. Hölldobler; N. J. Oldham; G. D. Alpert; J. Liebig, Chemoecology 2002, 12, 147–151.
235. J. H. Cross; R. C. Byler; U. Ravid; R. M; Silverstein; S. W. Robinson; P. M. Baker; J. S; Oliveira; A. R. Jutsum; J. M. Cherrett, J.
Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 187–203.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 211

236. R. P. Evershed; E. D. Morgan, Insect Biochem. 1983, 13, 469–474.

237. A. B. Attygalle; V. K. Lancaster; E. D. Morgan, Actes Coll. Insectes Soc. 1985, 2, 159–166.
238. A. Lenoir; C. Detrain; N. Barbazanges, Experientia 1992, 48, 94–97.
239. B. D. Jackson; P. J. Wright; E. D. Morgan, Experientia 1989, 45, 487–489.
240. B. Hölldobler; E. D. Morgan; N. J. Oldham; J. Liebig, J. Insect Physiol. 2001, 47, 369–374.
241. A. B. Attygalle; E. D. Morgan, J. Chem. Ecol. 1984, 10, 1453–1468.
242. J. Tentschert; H.-J. Bestmann; B. Hölldobler; J. Heinze, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87, 377–380.
243. S. Al Abassi; M. A. Birkett; J. Pettersson; J. A. Pickett; C. M. Woodcock, Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 1998, 54, 876–879.
244. B. D. Jackson; S. J. Keegans; E. D. Morgan; M.-C. Cammaerts; R. Cammaerts, Naturwissenschaften 1990, 77, 294–296, 452.
245. A. B. Attygalle; F. Kern; Q. Huang; J. Meinwald, Naturwissenschaften 1998, 85, 38–41.
246. J. Meinwald; Y. C. Meinwald; P. H. Mazzocchi, Science 1969, 164, 1174–1175.
247. T. E. Pliske; T. Eisner, Science 1969, 164, 1170–1172.
248. R. Nishida; S. Schulz; C. H. Kim; H. Fukami; Y. Kuwahara; K. Honda; N. Hayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 949–972.
249. S. Schulz, Alkaloid-Derived Male Courtship Pheromones. In Tiger Moth and Wholly Bears; W. E. Conner, Ed.; Oxford University
Press: Oxford, 2008; pp 145–153.
250. S. Schulz, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1998, 13–20.
251. T. Beuerle; C. Theuring; N. Klewer; S. Schulz; T. Hartmann, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2007, 37, 80–89.
252. T. W. Bell; J. Meinwald, J. Chem. Ecol. 1986, 12, 385–409.
253. S. B. Krasnoff; L. B. Bjostad; W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 807–822.
254. S. Schulz; W. Francke; M. Boppré; T. Eisner; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90, 6834–6838.
255. K. Honda; Y. Honda; S. Yamamoto; H. Omura, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 959–968.
256. E. A. Bernays; R. F. Chapman; C. W. Lamunyon; T. Hartmann, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1709–1722.
257. T. Hartmann; C. Theuring; T. Beuerle; N. Klewer; S. Schulz; M. S. Singer; E. A. Bernays, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2005, 35,
391–411.
258. T. Hartmann; C. Theuring; E. A. Bernays, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2603–2608.
259. E. Janssen; H.-J. Bestmann; B. Hölldobler; F. Kern, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1947–1955.
260. W. S. Leal; P. H. G. Zarbin; H. Wojtasek; S. Kuwahara; M. Hasegawa; Y. Ueda, Nature 1997, 385, 213.
261. H. Wojtasek; J.-F. Picimbon; W. S. Leal, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1999, 263, 832–837.
262. J. Ruther; S. Steiner; L.-A. Garbe, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 99–102.
263. R. A. Alzogaray; A. Fontan; F. Camps; H. Masuh; P. S. Orihuela; D. Fernandez; A. Cork; E. Zerba, Molecules 2005, 10,
1190–1196.
264. D. E. Sonenshine; T. Adams; S. A. Allan; J. McLaughlin; F. X. Webster, J. Med. Entomol. 2003, 40, 849–859.
265. A. S. Brandstaetter; A. Endler; C. J. Kleineidam, Naturwissenschaften 2008, 95, 601–608.
266. R. W. Howard; G. J. Blomquist, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2005, 50, 371–393.
267. T. L. Singer, Am. Zool. 1998, 38, 394–405.
268. M. Kaib; P. Jmhasly; L. Wilfert; W. Durka; S. Franke; W. Francke; R. H. Leuthold; R. Brandl, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 365–385.
269. M. J. Greene; D. M. Gordon, J. Exp. Biol. 2007, 210, 897–905.
270. M. J. McGrath; M. T. Fletcher; W. A. König; J. C. Moore; B. W. Cribb; P. G. Allsopp; W. Kitching, J. Org. Chem. 2003, 68,
3739–3748.
271. S. Schulz; C. Messer; K. Dettner, Tetrahedron Lett. 1997, 53, 2077–2080.
272. S. Schulz; G. Beccaloni; R. Nishida; Y. R. Roisin; I. Vane-Wright; J. N. McNeil, Z. Naturforsch. C 1998, 53c, 107–116.
273. J. S. Buckner, Cuticular Polar Lipids of Insects. In Insect Lipids: Chemistry, Biochemistry and Biology; D. W. Stanley-Samuelson,
D. R. Nelson, Eds.; Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1993.
274. D. R. Nelson; C. L. Fatland; J. S. Buckner; M. Renobales; G. J. Blomquist, Insect Biochem. 1990, 8, 809–819.
275. M. Ozaki; A. Wada-Katsumata; K. Fujikawa; M. Iwasaki; F. Yokohari; Y. Satoji; T. Nisimura; R. Yamaoka, Science 2005, 309,
311–314.
276. D. Wagner; M. Tissot; W. Cuevas; D. M. Gordon, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2245–2257.
277. S. Lahav; V. Soroker; A. Hefetz; R. K. Vander Meer, Naturwissenschaften 1999, 86, 246–249.
278. T. Akino; K. Yamamura; S. Wakamura; R. Yamaoka, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2004, 39, 381–387.
279. S. J. Martin; E. Vitikainen; H. Helantera; F. P. Drijfhout, Proc. R. Soc. B: Biol. Sci. 2008, 275, 1271–1278.
280. F. R. Dani; G. R. Jones; S. Corsi; R. Beard; D. Pradella; S. Turillazzi, Chem. Senses 2005, 30, 477–489.
281. M. J. Greene; D. M. Gordon, Nature 2003, 423, 32.
282. L. Dapporto; L. Fondelli; S. Turillazzi, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2006, 34, 617–625.
283. J. Ruther; S. Sieben; B. Schricker, Naturwissenschaften 2002, 89, 111–114.
284. V. Dietemann; C. Peeters; J. Liebig; V. Thivet; B. Hölldobler, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 10341–10346.
285. I. Paulmier; A.-G. Bagnères; C. M. M. Afonso; G. Dusticier; G. Rivière; J.-L. Clément, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 471–490.
286. A.-G. Bagnères; M. C. Lorenzi; G. Dusticier; S. Turillazzi; J.-L. Clément, Science 1996, 272, 889–892.
287. J. Jungnickel; A. J. S. Da Costa; J. Tentschert; L. E. Flávia; L. R. A. Patricio; V. L. Imperatriz-Fonseca; F. Drijfhout; E. D. Morgan,
J. Insect Physiol. 2004, 50, 761–766.
288. M. A. Peterson; S. Dobler; E. L. Larson; D. Juarez; T. Schlarbaum; K. J. Monsen; W. Francke, Chemoecology 2007, 17, 87–96.
289. I. Steinmetz; E. Schmolz; J. Ruther, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2003, 270, 385–391.
290. F. R. Dani, Ann. Zool. Fennici 2007, 43, 500–514.
291. S. J. Martin; F. P. Drijfhout, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 368–374.
292. S. J. Martin; F. P. Drijfhout, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 375–382.
293. A. L. El-Sayed, The Pherobase. http://www.pherobase.com (2008).
294. W. L. Roelofs; A. P. Rooney. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 9179–9184.
295. M. A. Liénard; M. Strandh; E. Hedenström; T. Johansson; C. Löfstedt. BMC Evol. Biol. 2008, 8, 270.
296. J. L. Abad; F. Camps; G. Fabrias, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2001, 31, 799–803.
297. J. L. Abad; G. Villorbina; G. Fabrias; F. Camps. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 69, 7108–7113.
212 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

298. S. Rodriguez; P. Clapes; F. Camps; G. Fabrias, J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67, 2228–2233.
299. S. Rodriguez; F. Camps; G. Fabrias, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 8052–8058.
300. K. Moto; M. G. Suzuki; J. J. Hull; R. Kurata; Takahashi; M. Yamamoto; K. Okano; K. Imai; T. Ando; S. Matsumoto, Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 8631–8636.
301. S. Rodriguez; F. Camps; G. Fabrias, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66, 8052–8058.
302. J.-L. Abad; F. Camps; G. Fabrias, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2007, 129, 15007–15012.
303. J. M. Lassance; C. Löfstedt, BCM Biol. 2009, 7, 10.
304. K. Matsuoka; M. Yamamoto; R. Yamakawa; M. Muramatsu; H. Naka; Y. Kondo; T. Ando, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1437–1445.
305. M.-Y. Choi; H. Lim; K. C. Park; R. Adlof; S. Wang; A. Zhang; R. Jurenka, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1336–1345.
306. T. Miyamoto; M. Yamamoto; A. Ono; K. Ohtani; T. Ando, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1999, 29, 63–69.
307. S. Goller; G. Szöcs; W. Francke; S. Schulz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1505–1509.
308. S. Schulz; S. Toft, Science 1993, 260, 1635–1637.
309. J.-P. Farine; J.-L. Le Queré; J. Duffy; C. Everaerts; R. Brossut, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 2291–2306.
310. J. R. Aldrich, Chemical Communication in the True Bugs and Parasitoid Exploitation. In Chemical Ecology of Insects
II; R. T. Cardé, W. J. Bell, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: New York, 1995; pp 318–363.
311. J. A. A. Renwick; J. P. Vité; R. F. Billings, Naturwissenschaften 1977, 64, 226.
312. W. S. Leal; A. R. Panizzi; C. C. Niva, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1209–1216.
313. W. S. Leal; H. Higuchi; N. Mizutani; H. Nakamori; T. Kadosawa; M. Ono, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 973–985.
314. U. Ravid; R. M. Silverstein; L. R. Smith, Tetrahedron 1978, 34, 1449–1452.
315. F. Schröder; R. Fettköther; U. Noldt; K. Dettner; W. A. König; W. Francke, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1994, 1211–1218.
316. W. S. Leal; X. Shi; K. Nakamuta; M. Ono; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 1038–1042.
317. C. Löfstedt; B. S. Hansson; E. Petersson; P. Valeur; A. Richards, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 153–170.
318. J. Zhu; M. V. Kozlov; P. Philipp; W. Francke; C. Löfstedt, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 29–43.
319. A. C. Oehlschlager; A. M. Pierce; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; J. H. Borden, J. Chem. Ecol. 1988, 14, 2071–2087.
320. K. Iwabuchi; J. Takahashi; T. Sakai, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1987, 22, 110–111.
321. E. B. Jang; D. M. Light; R. G. Binder; R. A. Flath; L. A. Carvalho, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 9–20.
322. W. S. Leal; X. Shi; K. Nakamuta; M. Ono; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 1038–1042.
323. I. Kubo; T. Matsumoto; D. L. Wagner; J. N. Shoolery, Tetrahedron Lett. 1985, 26, 563–566.
324. S. Schulz; W. Francke; W. A. König; V. Schurig; K. Mori; R. Kittmann; D. Schneider, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 3511–3521.
325. J. L. Nation, Environ. Entomol. 1975, 4, 27–30.
326. W. S. Leal; M. Hasegawa; M. Sawada; M. Ono; S. Tada, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 2001–2010.
327. Y. Kuwahara, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1970, 15, 478–485.
328. W. Francke; G. Hindorf; W. Reith, Naturwissenschaften 1979, 66, 618–619.
329. W. Francke; J. Bartels; H. Meyer; F. Schröder; U. Kohnle; E. Baader; J. P. Vité, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1043–1063.
330. W. Francke; V. Heemann; B. Gerken; J. A. A. Renwick; J. P. Vité, Naturwissenschaften 1977, 64, 590–591.
331. J. G. Pomonis; B. E. Mazomenos, Int. J. Invertebr. Reprod. Dev. 1986, 10, 169–177.
332. J. H. Borden, Aggregation Pheromones. In Comprehensive Insect Physiology, Biochemistry, and Pharmacology; G. A. Kerkut,
L. I. Gilbert, Eds.; Pergamon: New York, 1985; Vol. 6, pp 257–285.
333. M. Tóth; G. Szöcs; E. J. van Nieukerken; P. Philipp; F. Schmidt; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 13–27.
334. H. Fukui; F. Matsumura; M. C. Ma; W. E. Burkholder, Tetrahedron Lett. 1974, 40, 3563–3566.
335. H. Sugie; M. Yoshida; K. Kawasaki; H. Noguchi; S. Moriya; K. Takagi; H. Fukuda; A. Fujiie; M. Yamanaka; Y. Ohira; T. Tsutsumi;
K. Tsuda; K. Fukumoto; M. Yamashita; H. Suzuki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1996, 31, 427–431.
336. J. A Byers; G. Birgersson; J. Löfqvist; G. Bergström, Naturwissenschaften 1988, 75, 153–155.
337. J. R. Rocca; J. H. Tumlinson; B. M. Glancey; C. S. Lofgren, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 1889–1892.
338. D. A. Shearer; R. Boch; R. A. Morse; F. M. Latigo, J. Insect Physiol. 1970, 16, 1437–1441.
339. K. N. Slessor; L.-A. Kaminski; G. G. S. King; M. L. Winston, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 851–860.
340. B. P. Moore; W. V. Brown, Aust. J. Chem. 1976, 29, 1365–1374.
341. H. J. Veith; J. Weiss; N. Koeniger, Experientia 1978, 34, 423–424.
342. W. Francke; W. Reith; G. Bergström; J. Tengö, Naturwissenschaften 1980, 67, 149–150.
343. Y. Kuwahara; S. Nakamura, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1985, 20, 354–356.
344. A. Tai; F. Matsumura; H. C. Coppel, J. Org. Chem. 1969, 34, 2180–2182.
345. C. Bordereau; A. Robert; O. Bonnard; J. L. Le Quere, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 2177–2191.
346. R. Nishida; S. Schulz; C. S. Kim; H. Fukami; Y. Kuwahara; K. Honda; N. Hayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 949–972.
347. A. C. Oehlschlager; G. G. S. King; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. M. Pierce; K. N. Slessor; J. G. Millar; J. H. Borden, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13,
1543–1554.
348. D. Vanderwel; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. C. Oehlschlager; J. H. Borden; A. M. Pierce, Insect Biochem. 1990, 20, 567–572.
349. R. Nishida; T. C Baker; W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1982, 8, 947–959.
350. K. Mori; M. Amaike; H. Watanabe, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1993, 1287–1294.
351. S. P. Foster; M. O. Harris; J. G. Millar, Naturwissenschaften 1991, 78, 130–131.
352. B. D. Jackson; E. D. Morgan, Chemoecology 1993, 4, 125–144.
353. J. H. Tumlinson; M. G. Klein; R. E. Doolittle; T. L. Ladd; A. T. Proveaux, Science 1977, 197, 789–792.
354. W. S. Leal; M. Hasegawa; M. Sawada; M. Ono; Y. Ueda, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1643–1655.
355. A. Zhang; H. T. Facundo; P. S. Robbins; C. E. Linn, Jr.; J. L. Hanula; M. G. Villani; W. L Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 2415–2427.
356. H. Fukui; F. Matsumura; A. V. Barak; W. E. Burkholder, J. Chem. Ecol. 1977, 3, 539–548.
357. Y. Tamaki; H. Sugie; H. Noguchi, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1985, 20, 359–361.
358. D. F. Horler, J. Chem. Soc. C 1970, 859–862.
359. T. Ikan; R. Gottlieb; E. D. Bergmann; J. Ishay, J. Insect Physiol. 1969, 15, 1709–1712.
360. W. S. Leal; S. Kuwahara; M. Ono; S. Kubota, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 315–321.
361. A. M. Schaner; R. J. Bartelt; L. L. Jackson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 1777–1786.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 213

362. K. Hedlund; R. J. Bartelt; M. Dicke; L. E. M. Vet, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 1835–1844.
363. S. Schulz; S. Yildizhan; K. Stritzke; C. Estrada; L. E. Gilbert, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2007, 5, 3434–3441.
364. M. Miyakado; J. Meinwald; L. E. Gilbert, Experientia 1989, 45, 1006–1008.
365. E. Kohl; B. Hölldobler; H.-J. Bestmann, Chemoecology 2001, 11, 67–73.
366. N. Fujiwara-Tsujii; N. Yamagata; T. Takeda; M. Mizunami; R. Yamaoka, Zool. Sci. 2006, 23, 353–358.
367. J. C. Rojas; E. Rios-Candelaria; L. Cruz-Lopez; A. Santiesteban; J. G. Bond-Compean; Y. Brindis; E. A. Malo, J. Med. Entomol.
2002, 39, 256–265.
368. T. Tolasch; S. R. Sölter; M. Tóth; J. Ruther; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1045–1050.
369. D. Rochat; P. Ramirez-Lucas; C. Malosse; R. Aldana; T. Kakul; J.-P. Morin, J. Chromatogr. A 2000, 885, 433–444.
370. M. Ono; H. Terabe; H. Hori; M. Sasaki, Nature 2003, 424, 637–638.
371. P. G. N. Njagi; B. Torto, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1065–1074.
372. J. G. Millar; R. E. Rice; Q. Wang, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1743–1754.
373. J. G. Millar; R. E. Rice, J. Econ. Entomol. 1998, 91, 132–137.
374. Q.-H. Zhang; J. R. Aldrich, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1835–1851.
375. E. Thibout; I. Arnault; J. Auger; K. S. Petersen; J. E. Oliver, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 893–909.
376. T. Yasuda; S. Shigehisa; K. Yuasa; Y. Okutani-Akamatsu; N. Teramoto; T. Watanabe; F. Mochizuki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2008,
43, 219–226.
377. E. S. Lacey; M. D. Ginzel; J. G. Millar; L. M. Hanks, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 1493–1507.
378. E. S. Lacey; J. A. Moreira; J. G. Millar; A. M. Ray; L. M. Hanks, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2007, 122, 171–179.
379. A. A. Cossé; R. J. Bartelt; B. W. Zilkowski; D. W. Bean; R. J. Petroski, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 657–670.
380. C. Löfstedt; J. Bergmann; W. Francke; E. Jirle; B. S. Hansson; V. D. Ivanov, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 220–228.
381. J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; T. Shifflet; C. L. Smith; G. P. Dively, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1477–1493.
382. Z. Jumean; R. Gries; T. Unruh; E. Rowland; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 911–924.
383. J. G. Millar; R. E. Rice; Q. Wang, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1743–1754.
384. J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; T. Taghizadeh; J. T. B. Ferreira; D. Liewehr, Chemoecology 1999, 9, 63–71.
385. F. De Assis Marques; J. S. McElfresh; J. G. Millar, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2843–2855.
386. C. McMahon; P. M. Guerin; Z. Syed, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 471–486.
387. M. Subchev; T. Toshova; L. Stanimirova; G. Stan; G. Embacher; W. Francke; A. Reckziegel; J. T. Ferreira; E. Priesner, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2000, 26, 487–495.
388. B. W. Zilkowski; R. J. Bartelt; A. A. Cossé; R. J. Petroski, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2543–2558.
389. T. D. Paine; J. G. Millar; C. C. Hanlon; J. S. Hwang, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 433–453.
390. R. Gries; G. Gries; G. Khaskin; S. King; O. Olfert; L.-A. Kaminski; R. Lamb; R. Bennett, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87, 450–454.
391. A. A. Cossé; R. Bartelt; B. Zilkowski, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65, 1156–1160.
392. A. A. Cossé; R. J. Bartelt; D. K. Weaver; W. B. Zilkowski, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 407–423.
393. D. R. Hall; A. Cork; S. J. Phythian; S. Chittamuru; B. K. Jayarama; M. G. Venkatesha; K. Sreedharan; P. K. Vinod Kumar;
H. G. Seetharama; R. Naidu, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 195–219.
394. M. Ayasse; F. P. Schiestl; H. F. Paulus; F. Ibarra; W. Francke, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 2003, 270, 517–522.
395. M. C. Larsson; J. Hedin; G. P. Svensson; T. Tolasch; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 575–587.
396. J. Ruther; L. M. Stahl; S. Steiner; L. A. Garbe; T. Tolasch, J. Exp. Biol. 2007, 210, 2163–2169.
397. E. Janssen; B. Hölldobler; F. Kern; H.-J. Bestmann; K. Tsuji, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1025–1034.
398. S. Jarau; C. M. Schulz; M. Hrncir; W. Francke; R. Zucchi; F. G. Barth; M. Ayasse, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1555–1564.
399. M. S. Siderhurst; E. B. Jang; A. H. Hara; P. Conant, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2007, 125, 63–69.
400. Y. Sasaerila; R. Gries; G. Gries; G. Khaskin; S. King; T. C. Boo, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1969–1981.
401. H. L. McBrien; J. G. Millar; R. E. Rice; J. S. McElfresh; E. Cullen; F. G. Zalom, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1797–1818.
402. M. C. B. Moraes; J. G. Millar; R. A. Laumann; E. R. Sujii; C. S. S. Pires; M. Borges, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1415–1427.
403. Y. Hillbur; M. Celander; R. Baur; S. Rauscher; J. Haftmann; S. Franke; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1807–1828.
404. D R. Hall; D. I. Farman; J. V. Cross; T. W. Pope; T. Ando; M. Yamamoto, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 230–242.
405. E. D. Morgan; J. M. Brand; K. Mori; S. J. Keegans, Chemoecology 2004, 14, 119–120.
406. M. Dougherty; G. Hamilton, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2657–2671.
407. L. E. L. Rasmussen; T. D. Lee; A. Zhang; W. L. Roelofs; J. Daves; G. Doyle, Chem. Senses 1997, 22, 417–437.
408. A. Peppuy; A. Robert; E. Semon; C. Ginies; M. Lettere; O. Bonnard; C. Bordereau, J. Insect Physiol. 2001, 47, 445–453.
409. A. Robert; A. Peppuy; E. Semon; F. D. Boyer; M. J. Lacey; C. Bordereau, Naturwissenschaften 2004, 91, 34–39.
410. B. Wobst; J.-P. Farine; C. Ginies; E. Semon; A. Robert; O. Bonnard; S. Connetable; C. Bordereau, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1305–1318.
411. C. Bordereau; E. M. Cancello; E. Semon; A. Courrent; B. Quennedey, Insectes Soc. 2002, 49, 209–215.
412. L. G. Batista-Pereira; M. G. dos Santos; A. G. Correa; J. B. Fernandes; C. R. R. C. Dietrich; D. A. Pereira; O. C. Bueno;
A. M. Costa-Leonardo, J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2004, 15, 372–377.
413. G. P. Bryning; J. Chambers; M. E. Wakefield, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2721–2730.
414. M. Subchev; T. Toshova; C. Koshio; S. Francke; A. Tröger; R. Twele; W. Francke; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcook,
Chemoecology 2009, 19, 47–54.
415. S. Geiselhardt; P. Ockenfels; K. Peschke, Naturwissenschaften 2008, 95, 247–251.
416. Y. Hillbur; P. Anderson; H. Arn; M. Bengtsson; J. Löfqvist; A. J. Biddle; O. Smitt; H.-E. Högberg; E. Plass; S. Franke; W. Francke,
Naturwissenschaften 1999, 86, 292–294.
417. Y. Hillbur; A. El-Sayed; M. Bengtsson; J. Löfqvist; A. Biddle; E. Plass; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1941–1952.
418. M. N. Andersson; J. Haftmann; J. J. Stuart; S. E. Cambron; M. O. Harris; S. P. Foster; S. Franke; W. Francke; Y. Hilbur, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2009. 35, 81–95.
419. M.-Y. Choi; G. Khaskin; R. Gries; G. Gries; B. D. Roitberg; D. A. Raworth; D.-H. Kim; R. G. Bennett, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 659–670.
420. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; G. Gries; R. Bennett; G. King; G. Skip; P. Morewood; K. Slessor; W. D. Morewood, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28,
2283–2297.
421. A. Zhang; P. S. Robbins; A. L. Averill; D. C. Weber; C. E. Linn; W. L. Roelofs; M. G. Villani, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1635–1642.
214 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

422. M. Subchev; A. Harizanov; W. Francke; S. Franke; E. Plass; A. Reckziegel; F. Schroeder; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams;
C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1141–1151.
423. M. Subchev; A. Harizanov; W. Francke; S. Franke; E. Plass; A. Reckziegel; F. Schroeder; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams;
C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1203.
424. N. K. Hillier; N. J. Vickers, Chem. Senses 2004, 29, 499–511.
425. J. G. Millar; M. Hoddle; J. S. McElfresh; Y. Zou; C. Hoddle, Tetrahedron Lett. 2008, 49, 4820–4823.
426. E. Janssen; E. Übler; L. Bauriegel; F. Kern; H. J. Bestmann; A. B. Attygalle; S. Steghaus-Kovac; U. Maschwitz,
Naturwissenschaften 1997, 84, 122–125.
427. C. M. Nieberding; H. Vos; M. V. Schneider; J.-M. Lassance; N. Estramil; J. Andersson; J. Bâng; E. Hedenström; C. Löfstedt;
P. M. Brakefield, PLoS ONE 2008, 3, e2751.
428. G. Li; Z. Han; L. Mu; X. Qin; C. Chen; Y. Wang, J. Insect Physiol. 2001, 47, 951–956.
429. M. Kakizaki; H. Sugie; K. Honma; T. Fukumoto; K. Kawasaki; H. Noguchi; M. Ohtaishi; H. Suzuki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1998, 33,
5–10.
430. K. Peschke; P. Friedrich; U. Kaiser; S. Franke; W. Francke, Chemoecology 1999, 9, 47–54.
431. J. Millar; J. S. McElfresh; F. De Assis-Marques, J. Econ. Entomol. 2002, 95, 692–698.
432. W. S. Leal; A. L. Parra-Pedrazzoli; K. E. Kaissling; T. I. Morgan; F. G. Zalom; D. J. Pesak; E. A. Dundulis; C. S. Burks;
B. S. Higbee, Naturwissenschaften 2005, 92, 139–146.
433. A. B. Attygalle; A. Mutti; W. Rohe; U. Maschwitz; W. Garbe; H.-J. Bestmann, Naturwissenschaften 1998, 85, 275–277.
434. E. Janssen; B. Hölldobler; H.-J. Bestmann, Chemoecology 1999, 9, 9–11.
435. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; R. G. Bennett; A. Miroshnychenko; K. Burden; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2933–2946.
436. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; H. Daroogheh; C. Mart; S. Karadag; M. K. Er; R. Britton; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2667–2677.
437. Y.-J. Liu; D. Hall; J. Cross; D. Farman; L. Amarawardana; Y.-R. Liu; X.-K. He, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 715–723.
438. I. Keeling; K. N. Slessor; H. A. Higo; L. M. L. Winston, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci U.S.A. 2003, 100, 4486–4491.
439. B. Krishnakumari; A. L. Prasuna; K. N. Jyothi; M. Y. Valli; S. Sighamony; A. R. Prasad; J. S. Yadav, J. Entomol. Res. 1998, 22,
197–202.
440. G. Gries; R. Gries; G. Khaskin; K. N. Slessor; G. G. Grant; J. Liska; P. Kapitola, Naturwissenschaften 1996, 83, 382–385.
441. A. R. Gibb; D. M. Suckling; B. D. Morris; T. E. Dawson; B. Bunn; D. Comeskey; J. J. Dymock, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 221–237.
442. M. Yamamoto; M. Kiso; H. Yamazawa; J. Takeuchi; T. Ando, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2579–2590.
443. A. R. Gibb; D. Comeskey; L. Berndt; E. G. Brockerhoff; A. M. El-Sayed; H. Jactel; D. M. Suckling, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32,
865–879.
444. G. Szöcs; M. Tóth; Z. Karpati; J. Zhu; C. Löfstedt; E. Plass; W. Francke, Chemoecology 2004, 14, 53–58.
445. T. Ando; K. Ohtani; M. Yamamoto; T. Miyamoto; X.-R. Qin; K. Witjaksono, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2413–2423.
446. H. Yasui; S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; H. Irei; C. Kiyuna; H. Ono; H. Yamazawa; T. Ando, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 647–656.
447. G. Gries; J. Clearwater; R. Gries; G. Khaskin; S. King; P. Schaefer, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1091–1104.
448. J. E. Oliver; J. C. Dickens; M. Zlotina; V. C. Mastro; G. I. Yurchenko, Z. Naturforsch. C 1999, 54, 387–394.
449. W. Francke; G. Gries; R. Gries; D. Häussler; K. Möller; E. Plass, Kohlenwasserstoffe und Gemische von Kohlenwasserstoffen zur
Bekämpfung von Insekten. German patent DE 19814330A1, March 31, 1998.
450. S. P. Foster; W. P. Thomas, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2549–2555.
451. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; E. Khaskin; J. L. Foltz; P. W. Schaefer; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2201–2212.
452. S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; H. Ono; H. Yasui, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2001, 100, 109–117.
453. F. P. Schiestl; M. Ayasse; H. F. Paulus; C. Löfstedt; B. S. Hansson; F. Ibarra; W. Francke, J. Comp. Physiol. A 2000, 186,
567–574.
454. J. Mant; C. Braendli; N. J. Vereecken; C. M. Schulz; W. Francke; F. P. Schiestl, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1765–1787.
455. M. J. Steinbauer; F. Ostrand; T. E. Bellas; A. Nilsson; F. Andersson; E. Hedenstrom; M. J. Lacey; F. P. Schiestl, Chemoecology
2004, 14, 217–223.
456. A. M. El-Sayed; A. R. Gibb; D. M. Suckling; B. Bunn; S. Fielder; D. Comeskey; L. A. Manning; S. P. Foster; B. D. Morris; T. Ando;
K. Mori, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 621–646.
457. R. Gries; D. Holden; G. Gries; P. D. C. Wimalaratne; K. N. Slessor; C. Saunders, Naturwissenschaften 1997, 84, 219–221.
458. G. Szöcs; M. Tóth; K. Mori, Chemoecology 2005, 15, 127–128.
459. M. Su; Y. Fang; W. Tao; G. Yan; W. Ma; Z. Zhang, Chin. Sci. Bull. 2008, 53, 555–560.
460. S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; H. Yamazawa; N. Nakajima; M. Yamamoto; T. Ando, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 449–467.
461. S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; M. Yamamoto; S. Hiradate; H. Yasui; T. Yasuda; T. Ando, Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 687–689.
462. S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki; M. Yamamoto; S. Hiradate; H. Yasui; K. Kinjo; T. Yasuda; H. Yamazawa; T. Ando, Biosci. Biotechnol.
Biochem. 2005, 69, 957–965.
463. R. Gries; G. Gries; G. G. S. King; C. T. Maier, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1119–1129.
464. G. G. Grant; K. N. Slessor; W. Liu; M. M. Abou-Zaid, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 589–601.
465. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; J. Clearwater; D. Hasman; P. W. Schaefer; E. Khaskin; O. Miroshnychenko; G. Hosking; G. Gries, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2005, 31, 603–620.
466. A. Zhang; J. E. Oliver; K. Chauhan; B. Zhao; L. Xia; Z. Xu, Naturwissenschaften 2003, 90, 410–413.
467. F. D. Krokos; M. A. Konstantopoulou; B. E. Mazomenos, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2169–2181.
468. A. Cabrera; A. E. Eiras; G. Gries; R. Gries; N. Urdaneta; B. Miras; C. Badji; K. Jaffe, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2097–2107.
469. M. D. Ginzel; G. J. Blomquist; J. G. Millar; M. L. Hanks, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 533–545.
470. M. D. Ginzel; J. G. Millar; L. M. Hanks, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 135–141.
471. N. Klewer; Z. Ruzicka; S. Schulz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 2167–2170.
472. W. B. Strong; J. G. Millar; G. G. Grant; J. A. Moreira; J. M. Chong; C. Rudolph, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2008, 126, 67–77.
473. H. Yasui; T. Akino; T. Yasuda; M. Fukaya; H. Ono; S. Wakamura, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2003, 107, 167–176.
474. M. D. Ginzel; J. A. Moreira; A. M. Ray; J. G. Millar; L. M. Hanks, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 435–451.
475. M. Doi; T. Nemoto; H. Nakanishi; Y. Kuwahara; Y. Oguma, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2067–2078.
476. A. J. Alastair; M. C. Luszniak; J. A. Pickett, Nat. Prod. Rep. 1999, 16, 39–54.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 215

477. S. J. Seybold; D. Vanderwel, Peptides 2008, 29, 137–200.

478. S. J. Seybold; C. Tittiger, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2003, 48, 425–453.
479. C. Tittiger, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2007, 64, 201–230.
480. G. J. Hunt; K. V. Wood; E. Guzman-Novoa; H. D. Lee; A. P. Rothwell; C. C. Bonham, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 354–463.
481. M. Ono; H. Terabe; H. Hori; M. Sasaki, Nature 2003, 424, 637–638.
482. T. Mahmud; S. C. Wenzel; E. Wan; K. W. Wen; H. B. Bode; N. Gaitatzis; R. Müller, ChemBioChem 2005, 6, 322–330.
483. J. S. Dickschat; H. B. Bode; T. Mahmud; R. Müller; S. Schulz, J. Org. Chem. 2005, 70, 5174–5182.
484. K. Urbanova; L. Cahlikova; O. Hovorka; V. Placek; I. Valerova, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 458–466.
485. A. Bertsch; H. Schweer; A. Titze, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1268–1274.
486. L. Cruz-López; L. E. Flávia; L. R. A. Patricio; L. E. D. Morgan, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 69–80.
487. D. Sillam-Dussès; E. Semon; C. Moreau; I. Valterova; J. Sobotnik; A. Robert; C. Bordereau, Chemoecology 2005, 15, 1–6.
488. M. Budesinsky; I. Valerova; E. Semon; E. Cancello; C. Bordereau, Tetrahedron 2005, 61, 10699–10704.
489. A. Bakke; P. Frøyen; L. Skattebøl, Naturwissenschaften 1977, 64, 98–99.
490. H. J. Veith; N. Koeniger; U. Maschwitz, Naturwissenschaften 1984, 71, 328–329.
491. J. T. Stoakley; A. Bakke; J. A. A. Renwick; J. P. Vité, J. Appl. Entomol. 1978, 86, 174–177.
492. J. W. Wheeler; M. T. Shamin; P. Brown; R. M. Duffield, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 5811–5814.
493. N. Koeniger; J. Weiss; U. Maschwitz; J. Insect Physiol. 1979, 25, 467–476.
494. P. J. Landolt; R. R. Heath; H. C. Reed; K. Manning, Fla. Entomol. 1995, 78, 101–108.
495. W. Francke; V. Heemann; K. Heyns, Z. Naturforsch. C 1974, 29, 243–245.
496. N. W. Davies; J. L. Madden, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 1115–1127.
497. A. Zhang; P. S. Robbins; W. S. Leal; C. E. Linn, Jr.; M. G. Villani; W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 231–245.
498. D. G. James; C. J. Moore; J. R. Aldrich; J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 3281–3295.
499. W. S. Leal; J. M. S. Bento; E. F. Vilela; T. M. C. Della Lucia, Experientia 1994, 50, 853–856.
500. B. S. Lanne; F. Schlyter; J. A. Byers; J. Löfqvist; A. Leufvén; G. Bergström; J. N. C. van der Pers; R. Unelius; P. Baeckström;
T. Norin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 1045–1067.
501. J. W. Wheeler; R. M. Duffield, Pheromones of Hymenoptera and Isoptera. In CRC Handbook of Natural Pesticides; E. D. Morgan,
N. B. Mandava, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1988; part B, pp 59–206.
502. C. Gnanasunderam; H. Young; R. F. N. Hutchins, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 889–894.
503. M. Kaib; H. Dittebrand, Chemoecology 1990, 1, 3–11.
504. S. Regev; W. W. Cone, Environ. Entomol. 1970, 9, 50–52.
505. J. H. Cane; J. O. Tengö, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 427–436.
506. D. C. Robacker; L. B. Hendry, J. Chem. Ecol. 1977, 3, 563–577.
507. R. J. Anderson; M. J. Gieselmann; H. R. Chinn; K. G. Adams; C. A. Henrick; R. E. Rice; W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7,
695–706.
508. W. Francke; J. Bartels; S. Krohn; S. Schulz; E. Baader; J. Tengö; D. Schneider, Pure Appl. Chem. 1989, 61, 539–542.
509. A. B. Attygalle; S. Steghaus-Kovac; V. U. Ahmad; U. Maschwitz; O. Vostrowsky; H. J. Bestmann, Naturwissenschaften 1991, 78,
90–92.
510. S. Schulz; R. Nishida, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 341–349.
511. R. M. Silverstein; J. O. Rodin; D. L. Wood, Science 1966, 154, 509–510.
512. S. J. Seybold, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 1809–1831.
513. D. R. Miller; J. H. Borden; K. N. Slessor, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 2157–2172.
514. S. J. Seybold; T. Ohtsuka; D. L. Wood; I. Kubo, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 995–1016.
515. J. A. A. Renwick; P. R. Hughes; I. S. Krull, Science 1976, 191, 199–201.
516. J. M. Brand; J. W. Bracke; L. N. Britton; A. J. Markovetz; S. J. Barras, J. Chem. Ecol. 1976, 2, 195–199.
517. J. C. Grégoire; D. Couillin; R. Krebber; W. A. König; H. Meyer; W. Francke, Chemoecology 1992, 3, 14–18.
518. J. H. Tumlinson; R. C. Gueldner; D. D. Hardee; A. C. Thompson; P. A. Hedin; J. P. Minyard, J. Org. Chem. 1971, 36, 2616–2621.
519. J. C. Dickens; K. Mori, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15, 517–528.
520. P. A. Hedin; D. A. Dollar; J. K. Collins; J. G. Dubois; P. G. Muldner; G. H. Hedger; M. W. Smith; R. D. Eikenbary, J. Chem. Ecol.
1997, 23, 965–977.
521. P. A. Hedin; V. A. Philips; R. J. Dysart, J. Miss. Acad. Sci. 1988, 33, 59–66.
522. J. H. Borden; J. R. Handley; B. D. Johnston; J. G. MacConnell; R. M. Silverstein; K. N. Slessor; A. A. Swigar; D. T. W. Wong, J.
Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 681–689.
523. V. Schurig; R. Weber; D. Klimetzek; U. Kohnle; K. Mori, Naturwissenschaften 1982, 69, 602–603.
524. B. A. Bierl-Leonhardt; D. S. Moreno; M. Schwarz; J. A. Fargerlund; J. A. Plimmer, Tetrahedron Lett. 1981, 22, 389–392.
525. J. R. Aldrich; W. R. Lusby; J. P. Kochansky, Experientia 1986, 42, 583–585.
526. U. Kohnle; W. Francke; A. Bakke, Z. Angew. Entomol. 1985, 100, 5–8.
527. Y. Kuwahara; A. Akimoto; W. S. Leal; H. Nakao; T. Suzuki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1987, 51, 3441–3442.
528. J. Meinwald; W. T. Thompson; T. Eisner, Tetrahedron Lett. 1971, 3485–3488.
529. J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; G. K. Waite; C. Moore; R. M. Waters, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 729–738.
530. K. Tanaka; K. Ohsawa; H. Honda; I. Yamamoto, J. Pestic. Sci. 1981, 6, 75–82.
531. M. Jefson; J. Meinwald; S. Nowicki; K. Hicks; T. Eisner, J. Chem. Ecol. 1983, 9, 159–180.
532. S. Schulz; J. Gross; M. Hilker, Tetrahedron 1997, 53, 9203–9212.
533. N. Mori; Y. Kuwahara; K. Kurosa, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 289–295.
534. W. S. Leal; Y. Kuwahara; T. Suzuki; K. Kurosa, Naturwissenschaften 1989, 76, 332–333.
535. T. O. Olagbemiro; B. W. Staddon, J. Chem. Ecol. 1983, 9, 1397–1412.
536. P. Baeckström; G. Bergström; F. Björkling; H.-Z. He; H.-E. Högberg; U. Jacobsson; G.-Q. Lin; J. Löfqvist; T. Norin; A.-
B. Wassgren, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15, 61–80.
537. G. Vidari; M. de Bernardi; M. Pavan; L. Ragozzino, Tetrahedron Lett. 1973, 4065–4068.
538. W. Francke; C. M. Schulz; G. Bergström; J. Tengö, unpublished results.
216 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

539. S. Schulz; W. Francke; J. Edgar; D. Schneider, Z. Naturforsch. C 1988, 43, 99–104.

540. R. Bernardi; C. Cardani; D. Ghiringhelli; A. Selva; M. Baggini; A. Pavan, Tetrahedron Lett. 1967, 40, 3893–3896.
541. G. Ahlgren; G. Bergström; J. Löfqvist; A. Jansson; T. Norin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 309–319.
542. S. Schulz; M. Steffensky; Y. Rosin, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1996, 941–946.
543. J. P. Vigneron; R. Méric; M. Larchevêque; A. Debal; J. Y. Lallemand; G. Kunesch; P. Zagatti; M. Gallois, Tetrahedron 1984, 40,
3521–3529.
544. J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock; J. Hardie, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1992, 37, 67–90.
545. G. W. Dawson; J. A. Pickett; D. W. M. Smiley, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 351–361.
546. J. Smolanoff; A. F. Kluge; J. Meinwald; A. McPhail; R. W. Miller; K. Hicks; T. Eisner, Science 1975, 188, 734–736.
547. K. Mori; Y. Takagi, Tetrahedron Lett. 2000, 41, 6623–6625.
548. Y. Takagi; K. Mori, J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2000, 11, 578–583.
549. R. Baker; R. H. Herbert; G. G. Grant, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1985, 824–825.
550. W. S. Bowers; L. R. Nault; R. E. Webb; S. R. Dutky, Science 1972, 177, 1121–1122.
551. G. Bergström; J. Tengö, Chem. Scr. 1974, 5, 28–38.
552. D. H. Calam, Nature 1969, 221, 856–857.
553. B. G. Svensson; G. Bergström, Insectes Soc. 1977, 24, 213–224.
554. H. Schildknecht, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1976, 15, 214–222.
555. B. V. Burger; Z. Munro; M. Röth; H. S. C. Spies; V. Truter; G. D. Tribe; R. M. Crewe, Z. Naturforsch. C 1983, 38, 848–855.
556. S. Regev; W. W. Cone, Environ. Entomol. 1975, 4, 307–311.
557. B. Kullenberg; G. Bergström; S. Ställberg-Stenhagen, Acta Chem. Scand. 1970, 24, 1481–1483.
558. W. Francke; S. Krohn; J. Tengö, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 557–566.
559. C. Nishino; W. Bowers; M. E. Montgomery; L. R. Nault; M. W. Nielson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1977, 3, 349–357.
560. R. Baker; H. R. Coles; M. Edwards; D. A. Evans; P. E. Howse; S. Walmsley, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 135–145.
561. K. Honda, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 1089–1113.
562. C. J. Persoons; F. J. Ritter; P. E. J. Verwiel; H. Hauptmann; K. Mori, Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 1747–1750.
563. S. Takahashi; K. Watanabe; S. Saito; Y. Nomura, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1995, 30, 357–360.
564. J. W. Wheeler; R. M. Duffield, Pheromones of Hymenoptera and Isoptera. In CRC Handbook of Natural Pesticides; E. D. Morgan,
N. B. Mandava, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1988; part B, pp 59–206.
565. G. D. Prestwich, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1979, 7, 211–221.
566. L. Lundgren; G. Bergström, J. Chem. Ecol. 1975, 1, 399–412.
567. R. Baker; M. Borges; N. G. Cooke; R. H. Herbert, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1987, 414–416.
568. G. K. Waite; W. R. Lusby, Z. Naturforsch. C 1993, 48, 73–79.
569. M. A. Ryan; C. J. Moore; G. H. Walter, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B 1995, 111, 189–193.
570. A. Quilico; F. Piozzi; M. Pavan, Tetrahedron 1957, 1, 177–185.
571. D. E. Evans; R. Baker; P. E. Howse, The Chemical Ecology of Termite Defence Behaviour. In Chemical Ecology: Odor
Communication in Animals; F. Ritter, Ed.; Elsevier, North-Holland: Amsterdam, 1979; pp 213–223.
572. R. Baker; A. H. Parton; P. E. Howse, Experientia 1982, 38, 297–298.
573. G. Bergström; J. Löfqvist, J. Insect Physiol. 1973, 19, 877–907.
574. P. L. Phelan; P. J. Silk; C. J. Northcott; S. H. Tan; T. C. Baker, J. Chem. Ecol. 1986, 12, 135–146.
575. P. G. McDowell; G. W. Oloo, J. Chem. Ecol. 1984, 10, 835–851.
576. G. D. Prestwich; D. F. Wiemer; J. Meinwald; J. Clardy, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1978, 100, 2560–2561.
577. J. P. Edwards; J. Chambers, J. Chem. Ecol. 1984, 10, 1731–1747.
578. J. G. C. Hamilton; D. E. Sonenshine; W. R. Lusby, J. Insect Physiol. 1989, 35, 873–879.
579. T. D. Fitzgerald; F. X. Webster, Can. J. Zool. 1993, 71, 1511–1515.
580. H. Schildknecht; R. Siewerdt; U. Maschwitz, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1967, 703, 182–189.
581. H. Schildknecht; W. Körnig, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1968, 7, 62–63.
582. H. Schildknecht; H. Birringer; D. Krauss, Z. Naturforsch. B 1969, 24, 38–47.
583. E. D. Morgan; N. B. Mandava, Eds., Handbook of Natural Pesticides: Pheromones; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1985;
Vol. IV,part B.
584. D. Klimetzek; J. Bartels; W. Francke, J. Appl. Entomol. 1979, 107, 518–523.
585. K. Dettner; G. Schwinger, Experientia 1987, 43, 458–460.
586. P. Ivarsson; B.-I. Henrikson; A. E. Stenson, Chemoecology 1996, 7, 191–193.
587. G. Bergström; L. Lundgren, Zoon Suppl. 1973, 1, 67–75.
588. M. C. Birch; A. Hefetz, Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1987, 33, 222–229.
589. R. A. Allan; M. A. Elgar; R. J. Capon, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 1996, 263, 69–73.
590. S. G. Micha; J. Stammel; C. Hoeller, Eur. J. Entomol. 1993, 90, 439–442.
591. A. Quiroz; J. Pettersson; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; H. M. Niemeyer, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2599–2607.
592. D. Wittmann; R. Radtke; J. Zeil; G. Lübke; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 631–641.
593. N. J. Oldham; E. D. Morgan; B. Gobin; E. Schoeters; J. Billen, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 3297–3305.
594. J. H. Borden; L. Chong; J. A. McLean; K. N. Slessor; K. Mori, Science 1976, 192, 894–896.
595. J. H. Borden; J. A. McLean, J. Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 79–88.
596. W. Francke; M. L. Pan; W. A. König; K. Mori; P. Puapoomchareon; H. Heuer; J. P. Vité, Naturwissenschaften 1987, 74, 343–345.
597. G. Birgersson; G. L. Debarr; P. DeGroot; M. J. Dalusky; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; J. H. Borden; H. Meyer; W. Francke; L. E. Espelie;
C. W. Berisford, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 143–146.
598. H. D. Pierce, Jr.; P. DeGroot; J. H. Borden; S. Ramaswamy; A. C. Oehlschlager, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 169–185.
599. D. L. Wood, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1982, 27, 411–446.
600. K. Mori; H. Harada; P. Zagatti; A. Cork; D. R. Hall, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1991, 259–267.
601. H. Schildknecht; H. Neumaier; B. Rauscher, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1972, 756, 155–161.
602. J. Meinwald; K. Opheim; T. Eisner, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1972, 69, 1208–1210.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 217

603. J. Wheeler; S. Oh; E. F. Benfield; S. E. Neff, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1972, 94, 7589–7590.
604. R. Baker; P. H. Briner; D. A. Evan, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1978, 981–983.
605. G. Birgersson; F. Schlyter; J. Löfqvist; G. Bergström, J. Chem. Ecol. 1984, 10, 1029–1055.
606. S. A. Teale; F. X. Webster; A. Zhang; G. N. Lanier, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 1159–1176.
607. J. R. Rocca; J. H. Tumlinson; B. M. Glancey; C. S. Lofgren, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 1889–1892.
608. J. Meinwald; K. Erickson; M. Hartshorn; Y. C. Meinwald; T. Eisner, Tetrahedron Lett. 1968, 2959–2962.
609. W. Francke; S. Schulz; V. Sinnwell; W. A. König; Y. Roisin; M. Boppré; D. Schneider, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1989, 1195–1201.
610. J. R. Sierra; W. D. Woggon; H. Schmid, Experientia 1976, 32, 142–144.
611. M. Frenzel; K. Dettner; D. Wirth; J. Waibel; W. Boland, Experientia 1992, 48, 106–111.
612. B. Roach; T. Eisner; J. Meinwald, J. Org. Chem. 1990, 55, 4047–4051.
613. R. T. Jacobs; G. I. Feutrill; J. Meinwald, J. Org. Chem. 1990, 55, 4051–4062.
614. H. A. Lloyd; T. H. Jones; A. Hefetz; J. Tengö, Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 5559–5562.
615. T. Kasai; H. Watanabe; K. Mori, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1993, 1, 67–70.
616. T. Negishi; M. Uchida; Y. Tamaki; K. Mori; T. Ishiwatari; S. Asano; K. Nakagawa, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1980, 15, 328–333.
617. K. Mori; H. Ueda, Tetrahedron 1981, 37, 2581–2581.
618. W. Francke; F. Schröder; U. Kohnle; M. Simon, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1996, 1523–1527.
619. R. R. Heath; J. R. McLaughlin; J. H. Tumlinson; T. R. Ashley; R. E. Doolittle, J. Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 941–953.
620. W. L. Roelofs; M. J. Gieselmann; K. Mori; D. S. Moreno, Naturwissenschaften 1982, 69, 348.
621. W. L. Roelofs; M. Gieselmann; A. Cardé; H. Tashiro; D. S. Moreno; C. A. Henrick; R. J. Anderson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1978, 4,
211–224.
622. R. J. Anderson; K. G. Adams; H. R. Chinn; C. A. Henrick, J. Org. Chem. 1980, 45, 2229–2236.
623. J. Meinwald; W. R. Thompson; T. Eisner; D. F. Owen, Tetrahedron Lett. 1971, 3485–3488.
624. M. A. Battiste; L. Strekowski; D. P. Vanderbilt; M. Visnick; R. W. King; J. Nation, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 2611–2614.
625. T. Chuman; J. Sivinski; R. R. Heath; C. O. Calkins; J. H. Tumlinson; M. A. Battiste; R. L. Wydra; L. Strekowski; J. L. Nation,
Tetrahedron Lett. 1988, 29, 6561–6564.
626. J. W. Wong; V. Verigin; A. C. Oehlschlager; J. H. Borden; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. M. Pierce; L. Chong, J. Chem. Ecol. 1983, 9,
451–474.
627. T. Suzuki; K. Mori, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1983, 18, 134–136.
628. H. Z. Levinson; K. Mori, Naturwissenschaften 1983, 70, 190–192.
629. P. Baeckström; G. Bergström; F. Björkling; H. Hui-Zhu; H. E. Högberg; U. Jacobsson; L. Guo-Qiang; J. Löfquist; T. Norin; A.-
B. Wassgren, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15, 61–80.
630. S. J. Keegans; J. Billen; E. D. Morgan; O. A. Gökcen, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 2705.
631. B. W. Staddon; A. Abdollahi; J. Parry; M. Rossiter; D. W. Knight, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 2721–2731.
632. A. B. Attygalle; M. C. Cammaerts; E. D. Morgan, J. Insect Physiol. 1983, 29, 27–32.
633. E. D. Morgan, In Insect Communication; T. Lewis, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1984; pp 169–194.
634. B. D. Jackson; M.-C. Cammaerts; E. D. Morgan; A. B. Attygalle, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 827–840.
635. B. D. Jackson; E. D. Morgan, Chemoecology 1993, 4, 125–144.
636. M. Kobayashi; T. Koyama; K. Ogura; S. Seto; F. J. Ritter; I. E. M. Brüggemann-Rotgans, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1980, 102,
6602–6604.
637. F. M. Alvarez; R. K. Vander Meer; C. S Lofgren, Tetrahedron 1987, 43, 2897–2900.
638. J. G. C. Hamilton; G. W. Dawson; J. A. Pickett, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 1477–1491.
639. J. G. Millar; K. M. Daane; J. S. McElfresh; J. A. Moreira; R. Malakar-Kuenen; M. Buillen; W. J. Bentley, J. Econ. Entomol. 2002,
95, 706–714.
640. J. G. Millar; K. M. Daane; J. S. McElfresh; J. A. Moreira; W. J. Bentley, Chemistry and Applications of Mealybug Sex Pheromone.
In Semiochemicals in Pest and Weed Control; R. J. Petroski, M. R. Tellez, R. W. Behle, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 906; 2005;
pp 11–27.
641. J. Sugie; M. Teshiba; Y. Narai; T. Tsutsumi; N. Sawamura; J. Tabata; S. Hiradate, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2008, 43, 369–375.
642. H.-Y. Ho; C.-C. Hung; T.-H. Chuang; W.-L. Wang, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1986–1996.
643. J. G. Millar; S. L. Sharon; J. S. McElfresh; K. M. Daane, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2999–3005.
644. B. A. Figadère; J. S. Mc Elfresh; D. Borchardt; K. M. Daane; W. Bentley; J. G. Millar, Tetrahedron Lett. 2007, 48, 8434–8437.
645. T. Arai; H. Sugie; S. Hiradate; S. Kuwahara; N. Itagaki; T. Nakahata, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2213–2223.
646. A. Zhang; D. Amalin; S. Shirali; M. S. Serrano; R. A. Franquin; J. E. Oliver; J. A. Klun; J. R. Aldrich; D. E. Meyerdirk; S. L. Lapointé,
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 9601–9606.
647. A. Zhang; J. Nie, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 2451–2455.
648. A. Zhang; S. Wang; J. Kitullo; A. Roda; C. Mannion; J. C. Berg, Chem. Senses 2006, 31, 621–626.
649. H. V. Thulasiram; H. K. Erickson; C. D. Poulter, Science 2007, 316, 73–76.
650. P. H. G. Zarbin; M. A. B. Moreira; J. Haftmann; W. Francke; A. R. M. Oliveira, J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2007, 18, 1048–1053.
651. P. H. G. Zarbin; W. Francke, unpublished.
652. M. Tóth; I. Ujváry; I. Sivcev; Z. Imrei; I. Szarukán; O. Farkas; Á. Gömöry; E. Gács-Baitz; W. Francke, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2007,
122, 125–132.
653. M. Tóth; L. Furlan; G. Campagna, J. Appl. Entomol. 2007, 131, 569–572.
654. P. J. Innocenzi; D. R. Hall; J. V. Cross, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 1203–1218.
655. F. J. Eller; R. J. Bartelt, J. Nat. Prod. 1996, 59, 451–453.
656. S. E. R. Hoover; B. S. Lindgren; C. I. Keeling; K. N. Slessor, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 667–677.
657. M. A. Birkett; J. A. Pickett, Phytochemistry 2003, 62, 651–656.
658. R. T. Glinwood; D. W. M. Smiley; J. Hardie; J. A. Pockett; W. Powell; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock, Pestic. Sci. 1999, 55,
208–209.
659. J. Zhu; A. Zhang; K.-C. Park; T. Baker; B. Lang; R. Jurenka; J. J. Obrycki; W. R. Graves; J. A. Pickett; D. Smiley; K. R. Chauhan;
J. A. Klun, Environ. Entomol. 2006, 35, 249–257.
218 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

660. J. Hardie; L. Peace; J. A. Pickett; D. W. M. Smiley; J. R. Storer; L. J. Wadhams, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2547–2554.
661. S. H. Goldansaz; S. Dewhirst; M. Birkett; A. M. Hooper; D. W. M. Smiley; A. Pickett; L. Wadhams; J. McNeil, J. Chem. Ecol.
2004, 30, 819–834.
662. A. Stewart-Jones; S. Y. Dewhirst; L. Durrant; J. D. Fitzerald; J. Hardie; A. M. Antony; J. A. Pickett; G. M. Poppy, J. Exp. Biol.
2007, 210, 4335–4344.
663. C. A. M. Campbell; F. J. Cook; J. A. Pickett; T. W. Pope; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2225–2234.
664. A. M. Hooper; B. Donato; C. M. Woodcock; J. H. Park; R. L. Paul; K. S. Boo; J. Hardie; J. A. Pickett, J. Chem.. Ecol. 2002, 28,
849–864.
665. J. Zhu; J. J. Obrycki; S. A. Ochieng; T. C. Baker; J. A. Pickett; D. Smiley, Naturwissenschaften 2005, 92, 277–281.
666. Q.-H. Zhang; M. Sheng; G. Chen; J. R. Aldrich; K. R. Chauhan; R. Kamlesh, Naturwissenschaften 2006, 93, 461–465.
667. K. R. Chauhan; V. Levi; Q.-H. Zhang; J. R. Aldrich, J. Econ. Entomol. 2007, 100, 1751–1755.
668. S. Y. Dewhirst; M. A. Birkett; J. D. Fitzgerald; A. Stewart-Jones; L. J Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock; J. Hardie; J. A. Pickett, J.
Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1575–1583.
669. N. Zimmermann; R. Hilgraf; L. Lehmann; D. Ibarra; W. Francke, submitted.
670. R. Hilgraf; N. Zimmermann; L. Lehmann; W. Francke, submitted.
671. S. J. Seybold; D. P. W. Huber; J. C. Lee; A. D. Graves; J. Bohlmann, Phytochemistry Rev. 2006, 5, 143–178.
672. N. Erbilgin; S. R. Mori; J. H. Sun; J. D. Stein; D. R. Owen; L. D. Merrill; R. C. Bolanos; K. F. Raffa; T. M. Montiel; D. L. Wood;
N. E. Gillette, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 131–146.
673. D. R. Miller; J. Econ. Entomol. 2007, 100, 815–822.
674. W. Shepherd; D. P. W. Huber; S. J. Seybold; C. J. Fettig, Chemoecology 2007, 17, 209–221.
675. Q.-H. Zhang; N. Erbilgin; S. J. Seybold, Chemoecology 2008, 18, 243–254.
676. N. Erbilgin; A. Szele; K. D. Klepzig; K. F. Raffa, J. Econ. Entomol. 2001, 94, 1113–1121.
677. M. A. Phillips; M. R. Wildung; D. C. Williams; D. C. Hyatt; R. Croteau, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2003, 411, 267–276.
678. D. R. Miller, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 779–794.
679. B. S. Lindgren; D. R. Miller, Environ. Entomol. 2002, 31, 766–773.
680. N. G. Rappaprot; D. R. Owen; J. D. Stein, Environ. Entomol. 2001, 30, 837–841.
681. J. A. Byers; Q.-H. Zhang; G. Birgersson, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87, 503–507.
682. F. Schlyter; Q.-H. Zhang; P. Anderson; J. A. Byers; L. J. Wadhams; J. Löfqvist; G. Birgersson, Can. Entomol. 2000, 132,
965–981.
683. C. J. Fettig; S. R. McKelvey; D. P. W. Huber, J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 2041–2048.
684. J. D. Allison; J. H. Borden; R. L. McIntosh; P. De Groot; R. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 633–646.
685. D. R Miller; C. Asaro, J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 2033–2040.
686. D. R. Miller; C. Asarao; C. W. Berisford, J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 2058–2066.
687. D. L. Dahlsten; D. L. Six; N. Erbilgin; K. F. Raffa; A. B. Lawson; D. L. Rowney, Environ. Entomol. 2003, 32, 1115–1122.
688. P. R. Hughes, J. Insect Physiol. 1974, 20, 1271–1275.
689. P. Ivarsson; G. Birgersson, J. Insect Physiol. 1995, 41, 843–849.
690. J. J. Seybold; D. R. Quilici; J. A. Tilman; D. Vanderwel; D. L. Wood; G. J. Blomquist, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92,
8393–8397.
691. S. J. Seybold; C. Tittiger, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2003, 48, 425–453.
692. C. Tittiger; C. I. Keeling; G. J. Blomquist, Recent Adv. Phytochem. 2005, 39, 57–78.
693. G. M. Hall; C. Tittiger; G. Andrews; G. Mastick; G. Kuenzli; X. Luo; S. J. Seybold; G. J. Blomquist, Naturwissenschaften 2002, 89,
79–83.
694. C. I. Keeling; J. C. Bearfield; S. Young; G. J. Blomquist; C. Tittiger, Insect Mol. Biol. 2006, 15, 207–216.
695. D. Martin; J. Bohlmann; J. Gershenzon; W. Francke; S. J. Seybold, Naturwissenschaften 2003, 90, 173–179.
696. J. C. Bearfield; C. I. Keeling; S. Young; G. J. Blomquist; C. Tittiger, Insect Mol. Biol. 2006, 15, 187–195.
697. P. Sandstrom; M. D. Ginzel; J. C. Bearfield; W. H. Welch; G. J. Blomquist; C. Tittiger, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1584–1592.
698. S. Schulz; C. Estrada; S. Yildizhan; M. Boppré; L. E. Gilbert, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 82–93.
699. A.-K. Borg-Karlson; J. Tengö; I. Valterová; C. R. Unelius; T. Taghizadeh; T. Tolasch; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1–14.
700. C. J. Moore; S. Possner; P. Hayes; G. C. Paddon-Jones; W. Kitching, J. Org. Chem. 1999, 64, 9742–9744.
701. B. V. Burger; W. G. B. Petersen; W. G. Weber, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2527–2539.
702. A. Mizoguchi; N. Mori; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1681–1690.
703. J. C. Dickens; J. E. Oliver; B. Holister; J. C. Davis; J. A. Klun, J. Exp. Biol. 2002, 205, 1925–1933.
704. A. Yajima; K. Akasaka; M. Yamamoto; S. Ohmori; T. Nukada; G. Yabata, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1328–1335.
705. T. Kashiwagi; T. Nakashima; S.-I. Tebayashi; C.-S. Kim, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 2544–2546.
706. F.-D. Boyer; C. Malosse; P. Zagatti; J. Einhorn, Bull. Soc. Chim. Fr. 1997, 134, 757–764.
707. Y. Sasaerila; R. Gries; G. Gries; G. Khaskin; S. King; S. Takacs; Hardi, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 89–93.
708. J. Šobotnik; R. Hanus; B. Kalinová; R. Piskorski; J. Cvačka; T. Bourguignon; Y. Roisin, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 478–486.
709. E. B. Mondor; D. S. Baird; K. N. Slessor; B. D. Roitberg, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2875–2882.
710. F. Francis; S. Vandermoteen; F. Verheggen; G. Lognay; E. Haubruge, J. Appl. Entomol. 2005, 129, 6–11.
711. M. L. Bernasconi; T. C. J. Turlings; L. Ambrosetti; P. Bassetti; S. Dorn, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1998, 87, 133–142.
712. J. L. Hemptinne; M. Gaudin; A. F. G. Dixon; G. Lognay, Chemoecology 2000, 10, 149–152.
713. F. Francis; G. Lognay; E. Haubruge, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 741–755.
714. T. E. Goodwin; M. S. Eggert; S. J. House; M. E. Weddell; B. A. Schulte; L. E. L. Rasmussen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1849–1853.
715. M. Tóth; L. Furlan; V. G. Yatsynin; I. Ujvary; I. Szarukan; Z. Imrei; M. Subchev; T. Tolasch; W. Francke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28,
1641–1652.
716. M. Tóth; L. Furlan; V. G. Yatsynin; I. Ujvary; I. Szarukan; Z. Imrei; T. Tolasch; W. Francke; W. Jossi, Pest Manag. Sci. 2003, 59,
417–425.
717. M. Tóth; L. Furlan; A. Xavier; J. Vuts; T. Toshova; M. Subchev; I. Szarukan; V. Yatsynin, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 107–111.
718. N. C. DeLury; R. Gries; G. Gries; G. J. R. Judd; L. G. Khaskin, Can. J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 2419–2431.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 219

719. T. Schmitt; E. Strohm; G. Herzner; C. Bicchi; G. Krammer; F. Heckel; P. Schreier, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2469–2479.
720. H. Y. Ho; J. G. Millar, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 1177–1201.
721. H. Y. Ho; J. G. Millar, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2067–2095.
722. K. Stritzke; S. Schulz; M. Boppré, Eur. J Org. Chem. 2003, 1337–1342.
723. E. E. Grafton-Cardwell; J. G. Millar; N. V. O’Connell; L. M. Hanks, J. Agric. Urban Entomol. 2000, 17, 75–88.
724. E. Dunkelblum, Scale Insects. In Pheromones of Non-Lepidopteran Insects Associated with Agricultural Plants; J. Hardie,
A. K. Minks, Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, CT, 1999.
725. J. Einhorn; A. Guerrero; P. H. Ducrot; F.-D. Boyer; M. Gieselmann; W. Roelofs, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95,
9867–9872.
726. J. G. Millar, Top. Curr. Chem. 2004, 240, 37–84.
727. H. L. McBrien; J. G. Millar; R. E. Rice; J. S. McElfresh; E. Cullen; F. G. Zalom, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1797–1818.
728. M. Borges; J. C. Millar; R. A. Laumann; M. C. B. Moraes, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1235–1248.
729. M. Borges; M. Birkett; J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; M. Chiba; Y. Murata; R. A. Laumann; J. A. Barrigossi; J. A. Pickett;
M. C. B. Moraes, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2749–2761.
730. D. K. Zahn; J. A. Moreira; J. G. Millar, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 238–251.
731. K. Mori; T. Tashiro; T. Yoshimura; M. Takita; J. Tabata; S. Hiradate; H. Sugie, Tetrahedron Lett. 2008, 49, 354–357.
732. M. Takita; H, Sugie; J. Tabata; S. Ishi; S. Hiradate, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2008, 43, 11–17.
733. R. J. Bartelt; A. A. Cossé; B. W. Zilkowski; D. Weisleder; F. A. Momany, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2397–2423.
734. S. Muto; M. Bando; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 9, 1946–1952.
735. K. Mori, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2005, 16, 685–692; Erratum 16, 1721.
736. M. Tóth; E. Csonka; R. J. Bartelt; A. A. Cossé; B. W. Zilkowski; S. Muto; K. Mori, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2705–2720.
737. F. L. Consoli; H. J. Williams; S. B. Vinson; R. W. Mathews; M. F. Copperband, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1675–1689.
738. B. H. Alizadeh; S. Kuwahara; W. S. Leal; H.-C. Men, Biosci. Biotechol. Biochem. 2002, 66, 1415–1418.
739. T. Tashiro; S. Kurosawa; K. Mori, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 663–670.
740. S. Kuwahara; J. Ishikawa; W. S. Leal; S. Hamade; O. Kodama, Synthesis 2000, 1930–1935.
741. S. Kuwahara; J. Ishikawa; W. S. Leal; S. Hamade; O. Kodama, Synthesis 2000, 1930–1935.
742. A. E. Brown; E. W. Riddick; J. R. Aldrich; W. E. Holmes, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2489–2499.
743. M. Stoeffler; T. S. Maier; T. Tolasch; J. L. M. Steidle, J. Chem.. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1382–1392.
744. E. Siljander; R. Gries; G. Khaskin; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 708–718.
745. A. L. Perez; R. Gries; G. Gries; A. C. Oehlschlager, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 445–450.
746. L. S Barkawi; W. Francke; G. J. Blomquist; S. J. Seybold, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2003, 33, 773–788.
747. D. R Greenwood; D. Comesky; M. B. Hunt; L. E. L. Rasmussen, Nature 2005, 438, 1097–1098.
748. J. H. Borden; L. Chang; J. A. McLean; K. N. Slessor; K. Mori, Science 1986, 192, 894–896.
749. P. L. Dallara; S. J. Seybold; H. Meyer; T. Tolasch; W. Francke; D. L. Wood, Can. Entomol. 2000, 132, 889–906.
750. R. Trudel; C. Guertin; P. De Groot, J. Appl. Entomol. 2004, 128, 403–406.
751. C. Bruschini; R. Cervo; F. R. Dani; S. Turillazzi, J. Zoolog. Syst. Evol. Res. 2007, 45, 202–205.
752. C. Bruschini; F. R. Dani; G. Pieraccini; F. Guarna; S. Turillazzi, Toxicon 2006, 47, 812–825.
753. G. Petersen; C. Matthiesen; N. Stolzenberg; N. Zimmermann; R. Hilgraf; L. Lehmann; W. Francke; U. Wyss, Mitt. Dtsch. Ges.
Allg. Angew. Entomol. 2001, 13, 51–55.
754. C. Bordereau; M. Lacey; J. C. Ghostin; J. C. Brackman; D. Sillom-Dussès; A. Robert; J. S. Shellman; J. S. Sémon, In Sex
Pheromones and Trail-Following Pheromones in Zootermopsis nevadensis and Z. angusticollis (Isoptera, Termpsidae),
Proceedings of the XV Congress of IUSSI, Washington, DC, USA, 2006.
755. D. Sillom-Dussès; E. Sémon; M. J. Lacey; A. Robert; M. Lenz; C. Bordereau, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1960–1977.
756. C. M. Schulz; L. Lehmann; R. Blatrix; P. Jaisson; A. Hefetz; W. Francke; J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2541–2555.
757. R. Blatrix; C. Schulz; P. Jaisson; W. Francke; A. Hefetz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2557–2567.
758. J. S. Dickschat; T. Nawrath; V. Thiel; B. Kunz; R. Miller; S. Schulz, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2007, 46, 8287–8290.
759. K. Shimomura; S. Nojima; S. Yajima; K. Ohsawa, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 467–477.
760. K. Tanaka; K. Ohsawa; H. Honda; I. Yamamoto, J. Pestic. Sci. 1981, 6, 75–82.
761. J. G. C. Hamilton; R. D. C. Maingon; B. Alexander; R. D. Ward; R. P. Brazil, Med. Vet. Entomol. 2005, 19, 480–488.
762. P. C. Watts; J. G. C. Hamilton; R. D. Ward; H. A. Noyes; N. A. Souza; S. J. Kemp; M. D. Feliciangeli, Am. J. Trop. Med. 2005, 73,
734–743.
763. J. G. C. Hamilton; H. C. Ibbotson; A. M. Hooper; J. A. Pickett, Chem. Commun. 1999, 23, 2335–2336.
764. S. Kurosawa; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 955–962.
765. J. G. C. Hamilton; A. M. Hooper; J. A. Pickett; K. Mori; S. Sano, Chem. Commun. 1999, 4, 355–356.
766. O. N. Spiegel; P. Jeanbourquin; P. Guerin; A. M. Hooper; S. Claude; R. Tabacchi; S. Sano; K. Mori, J. Insect Physiol. 2005, 51,
1366–1375.
767. J. W. Wong; V. Verigin; C. Oehlschlager; J. H. Borden; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. M. Pierce; L. Chong, J. Chem. Soc. 1983, 9, 451.
768. S. Yildizhan; J. van Loon; A. Sramkova; M. Ayasse; C. Arsene; C. ten Broeke; S. Schulz, ChemBioChem 2009, 10,
1666–1677.
769. S.Schulz, personal communication.
770. L. Arnaud; G. Lognay; M. Verscheure; L. Leenaers; C. Gaspar; E. Haubruge, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 523–532.
771. J. Y. Fadamiro; I. Gudrups; R. J. Hodges, J. Stored Prod. Res. 1998, 34, 151–158.
772. R. J. Hodges; D. R. Hall; J. N. Mbugua; P. W. Likhayo, Bull. Entomol. Res. 1988, 88, 131–139.
773. M. E. Wakefield; G. P. Bryning; J. Chambers, J. Stored Prod. Res. 2005, 41, 145–161.
774. P. A. Edde; T. W. Phillips, Bull. Entomol. Res. 2006, 96, 547–554.
775. T. Bashir; R. J. Hodges; L. A. Birkinshaw; D. R. Hall; D. I. Farman, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 945–959.
776. F. Pankewitz; M. Hilker, Biol. Rev. Camb. Philos. Soc. 2008, 83, 209–226.
777. W. S. Leal, Naturwissenschaften 1991, 78, 521–523.
778. M. Tóth; M. Subchev; I. Sredkov; I. Szarukan; W. S. Leal, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1643–1649.
220 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

779. R. P. Evershed; E. D. Morgan; M.-C. Commaerts, Insect Biochem 1982, 12, 383–391.
780. J. Dickschat; I. Wagner-Doebler; S. Schulz, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 925–947.
781. P. Juárez; J. Chase; G. J. Blomquist, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1992, 293, 333–341.
782. R. J. Bartelt; D. G. James, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 3207–3219.
783. R. J. Bartelt; D. K. Weaver; R. T. Arbogast, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1763–1779.
784. H. J. Bestmann; E. Übler; B. Hölldobler, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1997, 36, 395–397.
785. H. J. Bestmann; U. Haak; F. Kern; B. Hölldobler, Naturwissenschaften 1995, 82, 142–144.
786. J. R. Rocca; J. H. Tumlinson; B. M. Glancey; C. S. Lofgren, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 1889–1892.
787. J. R. Rocca; J. H. Tumlinson; B. M. Glancey; C. S. Lofgren, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 1893–1896.
788. K. Mori; Y. Nakazono, Tetrahedron 1986, 42, 6459–6464.
789. J. W. Wheeler; S. L. Evans; M. S. Blum; H. H. V. Velthuis; J. M. F. de Camargo, Tetrahedron Lett. 1976, 4029–4032.
790. P. D. Swedenborg; R. L. Jones; H.-Q. Zhou; I. Shin; H.-W. Liu, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 3373–3380.
791. J. K. Phillips; J. M. Chong; J. F. Andersen; W. E. Burkholder, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1989, 51, 149–153.
792. K. Mori; M. Ishikura, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1989, 1263–1265.
793. H. J. Williams; R. M. Silverstein; W. E. Burkholder; A. Khorramshahi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 759–780.
794. A. Cork; D. R. Hall; R. J. Hodges; J. A. Pickett, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 789–803.
795. R. E. Charlton; F. X. Webster; A. Zhang; C. Schal; D. Liang; L. Sreng; W. L. Roelofs, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90,
10202–10205.
796. K. Mori; Y. Takeuchi, Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. B. 1994, 70, 143–145.
797. W. S. Leal; X. Shi; D. Liang; C. Schal; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 1033–1037.
798. J. K. Phillips; C. A. Walgenbach; J. A. Klein; W. E. Burkholder; N. R. Schmuff; H. M. Fales, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 1263–1274.
799. C. A. Walgenbach; J. K. Phillips; W. E. Burkholder; G. G. S. King; K. N. Slessor; K. Mori, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 2159–2169.
800. M. M. Blight; L. J. Wadhams, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 733–739.
801. R. G. Riley; R. M. Silverstein; J. C. Moser, Science 1974, 183, 760–762.
802. M. S. Blum, Chemical Defenses in Arthropods; Academic Press: New York, 1981; pp 152–162.
803. R. R. Do Nascimento; E. D. Morgan; W. A. König; T. M. C. Della Lucia, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1569–1575.
804. B. Hölldobler; N. J. Oldham; E. D. Morgan; W. A. König, J. Insect Physiol. 1995, 41, 739–744.
805. J. Meinwald; A. F. Kluge; J. E. Carrel; T. Eisner, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1971, 68, 1467–1468.
806. H. M. Fales; T. M. Jaouni; J. O. Schmidt; M. S. Blum, J. Chem. Ecol. 1980, 6, 895–903.
807. H. J. Bestmann; A. B. Attygalle; J. Glasbrenner; R. Riemer; O. Vostrowsky; M. G. Constantino; G. Melikyan; E. D. Morgan,
Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1988, 1, 55–60.
808. T. Chuman; K. Mochizuki; M. Mori; M. Kohno; K. Kato; M. Noguchi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 417–434.
809. T. Ebata; K. Mori, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1987, 51, 2925–2928.
810. T. Imai; H. Kodama; T. Chuman; M. Kohno, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 1237–1247.
811. H. Kodama; M. Ono; M. Kohno; A. Ohnishi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 1871–1879.
812. K. Mori; T. Ebata, Tetrahedron 1986, 42, 4685–4689.
813. P. R. White; M. C. Birch, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 1695–1706.
814. Y. Kuwahara; L. T. M. Yen; Y. Tominaga; K. Matsumoto; Y. Wada, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1982, 46, 2283–2291.
815. K. Mori; S. Kuwahara, Tetrahedron 1986, 42, 5545–5550.
816. G. T. Pearce; W. E. Gore; R. M: Silverstein, J. Org. Chem. 1976, 41, 2797–2803.
817. K. Mori, Tetrahedron 1976, 32, 1979–1981.
818. S. Schulz; W. Francke; W. A. König; V. Schurig; K. Mori; R. Kittmann; D. Schneider, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 3511–3521.
819. E. Dunkelblum; Z. Mendel; G. Gries; R. Gries; L. Hegelman; A. Hassner; K. Mori, Bioorg. Med. Chem. 1996, 4, 489–494.
820. J. Einhorm; P. Menassieu; C. Malosse; P.-H. Ducrot, Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 6633–6636.
821. K. Mori; T. Furuuchi; H. Kiyota, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1994, 971–974.
822. B. E. Hibbard; G. N. Lanier; S. C. Parks; Y. T. Qi; F. X. Webster; R. M. Silverstein, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 89–102.
823. K. Mori; T. Furuuchi; K. Matsuyama, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1995, 2093–2099.
824. X. Shi; F. X. Webster; J. Meinwald, Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 7201–7204.
825. J. L. LeQueré; R. Brossut; C. A. Nalepa; O. Bonnard, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 811–821.
826. K. Mori; M. Itou, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1992, 87–93.
827. A. L. Perez; G. Gries; R. Gries; R. M. Giblin-Davis; A. C. Oehlschlager, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 2653–2671.
828. K. Mori; N. Murata, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1995, 697–698.
829. K. Mori; H. Kiyota; D. Rochat, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1993, 865–870.
830. D. Rochat; F. Akamou; A. Sangare; D. Mariau; K. Mori, C. R. Acad. Sci. III 1995, 318, 183–190.
831. A. L. Perez; R. H. Hallet; R. Gries; G. Gries; A. C. Oehlschlager; J. H. Borden, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 357–368.
832. R. M. Giblin-Davis; R. Gries; G. Gries; E. Peña-Rojas; J. Pinzón; J. E. Peña; A. L. Perez; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. C. Oehschlager, J.
Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2287–2297.
833. K. Mori; H. Kiyota; C. Malosse; D. Rochat, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1993, 1201–1204.
834. C. Malosse; P. Ramirez-Lucas; D. Rochat, J. High. Resolut. Chromatogr. 1995, 18, 669–670.
835. A. L. Perez; Y. Campos; C. M. Chinchilla; A. C. Oehlschlager; G. Gries; R. Gries; R. M. Giblin-Davies; G. Castrillo; J. E. Peña;
R. E. Duncan; L. M. Gonzales; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; R. C. McDonald; R. Andradé, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 869–888.
836. A. C. Oehlschlager; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; B. Morgan; P. D. C. Wimalaratne; K. N. Slessor; G. G. S. King; G. Gries; R. Gries; J. Borden;
C. M. Chinchilla; R. G. Mexzan, Naturwissenschaften 1992, 79, 134–135.
837. K. Mori; K. Ishigami, Liebigs Ann. Chem. 1992, 11, 1195–1198.
838. D. Rochat; C. Malosse; M. Letteré; P.-H. Ducrot; P. Zagatti; M. Renou; C. Descoins, J. Chem. Ecol. 1991, 17, 2127–2141.
839. D. S. Dodd; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; A. C. Oehlschlager, J. Org. Chem. 1992, 57, 5250–5253.
840. J. Beauhaire; P.-H. Ducrot; C. Malosse; D. Rochat; I. O. Ndiege; D. O. Otieno, Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 1043–1046.
841. K. Mori; T. Nakayama; H. Takikawa, Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 3741–3744.
842. P. G. Liguori; E. Zerba; R. A. Alzogaray; P. G. Audino, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1446–1451.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 221

843. A. P. Jarvis; J. Liebig; B. Hoelldobler; N. J. Oldham, Chem. Commun. 2004, 1196–1197.

844. S. Schulz; J. Fuhlendorf; J. L. M. Steidle; J. Collatz; J.-T. Franz, ChemBioChem. 2004, 5, 1400–1507.
845. N. Islam; R. Bacala; A. Moore; D. Vanderwel, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1999, 29, 201–208.
846. D. Rochat; K. Mohammadpoor; C. Malosse; A. Avand-Faghih; M. Lettere; J. Beauhire; J. P. Morin; A. Pezier; M. Renou;
G. A. Abdollahi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 387–407.
847. W. Haberer; T. Schmitt; K. Peschke; P. Schreier; J. K. Müller, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 94–98.
848. D. Agosti; C. Austin; O. A. Gökçen; W. A. König; E. D. Morgan; E. D. Scott; R. Wehner, Chemoecology 1996, 7, 57–60.
849. O. A. Gökçen; E. D. Morgan; F. R. Dani; D. Agosti; R. Wehner, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 71–87.
850. E. Kohl; B. Hölldobler; H. J. Bestmann, Chemoecology 2001, 11, 67–73.
851. E. Kohl; B. Hölldobler; H. J. Bestmann, Chemoecology 2003, 13, 113–122.
852. K. Marukawa; K. Mori, Chem. Lett. 2002, 1, 40–41.
853. K. Marukawa; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 3974–3978.
854. J. Bergmann; C. Löfstedt; V. D. Ivanov; W. Francke, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2001, 3175–3179.
855. J. Bergmann; C. Löfstedt; V. D. Ivanov; W. Francke, Tetrahedron Lett. 2004, 45, 3669–3672.
856. R. J. Petroski; R. J. Barelt; D. Weisleder, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 1994, 24, 69–78.
857. W. Francke; K. Dettner, Top. Curr. Chem. 2005, 240, 85–166.
858. B. W. Zilkowski; R. J. Bartelt, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1759–1770.
859. J. E. Pena; A. Castineiras; R. Bartelt; R. Duncan, Fla. Entomol. 1999, 82, 475–480.
860. A. A. Cossé; R. J. Bartelt, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1735–1748.
861. D. B. Morris; R. R. Smyth; S. P. Foster; M. P. Hoffmann; W. L. Roelofs; S. Franke; W. Francke, J. Nat. Prod. 2005, 68,
26–30.
862. W. Francke; J. Titze, unpublished.
863. S. Chow; M. T. Fletcher; L. K. Lambert; O. P. Gallagher; C. J. Moore; B. W. Cribb; P. G. Allsop; W. Kitching, J. Org. Chem. 2005,
70, 1808–1827.
864. J. L. C. Wright; T. Hu; J. L. Lachlan; J. Needham; A. J. Walter, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 8757–8758.
865. G. J. Blomquist; R. W. Howard, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2007, 64, 323–340.
866. W. Francke; C. M. Schulz; A. Hefetz, unpublished.
867. R. H. Hallett; A. L. Perez; G. Gries; R. Gries; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; J. Yue; A. C. Oehlschlager; L. M. Gonzales; J. H. Borden, J. Chem.
Ecol. 1995, 21, 1549–1570.
868. J. P. Morin; D. Rochat; C. Malosse; M. Letteré; R. Desmier de Chenin; H. Wibwo; C. Descoins, C. R. Acad. Sci. III 1996, 319,
595–602.
869. J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; W. R. Lusby; J. P. Kochansky; M. Borges, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1103–1311.
870. J. Kochansky; J. R. Aldrich; W. R. Lusby, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15, 1717–1728.
871. A. Ichikawa; T. Yasuda; S. Wakamura, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 627–634.
872. T. Chuman; P. L. Guss; R. E. Doolittle; J. R. McLaughlin; J. L. Krysan; J. M. Schalk; J. H. Tumlinson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13,
1601–1616.
873. J. R. McLaughlin; J. H. Tumlinson; K. Mori, J. Econ. Entomol. 1991, 84, 99–102.
874. T. Suzuki; J. Kozaki; R. Sugawara; K. Mori, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1984, 19, 15–20.
875. P. L. Guss; P. E. Sonnet; R. L. Carney; J. H. Tumlinson; P. J. Wilkin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 21–26.
876. Y. Tamaki; H. Noguchi; H. Sugie; A. Kariya; S. Arai; M. Ohba; T. Terada; T. Suguro; K. Mori, Jpn. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1980,
24, 221–228.
877. A.-B. Wassgren; O. Anderbrant; J. Löfqvist; B. Hansson; G. Bergström; E. Hedenström; H. E. Högberg, J. Insect Physiol. 1992,
38, 885–893.
878. G. Bergström; A.-B. Wassgren; O. Anderbrant; S. Ochieng; F. Östrand; B. Hansson; E. Hedenström; H.-E. Högberg,
Naturwissenschaften 1998, 85, 244–248.
879. R. M. Silverstein; R. F. Cassidy; W. E. Burkholder; T. J. Shapas; H. Z. Levinson; A. R. Levinson; K. Mori, J. Chem. Ecol. 1980, 6,
911–917.
880. H. Z. Levinson; A. R. Levinson; K. Mori, Naturwissenschaften 1981, 68, 480–481.
881. J. Chase; K. Touhara; G. D. Prestwich; C. Schal; G. J. Blomquist, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 6050–6054.
882. K. Mori; T. Suguro; S. Masuda, Tetrahedron 1981, 37, 1329–1340.
883. C. Schal; X. Gu; E. L. Burns; G. J. Blomquist, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1994, 25, 375–391.
884. W. Francke; U. Brunnemann; G. Schmidt, unpublished results.
885. R. Sato; N. Abe; H. Sugie; M. Kato; K. Mori; Y. Tamaki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1986, 21, 478–480.
886. R. Gries; G. Gries; G. G. S. King; C. T. Maier, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1119–1129.
887. W. Francke; S. Franke; M. Tóth; G. Szöcs; P. Guerin; H. Arn, Naturwissenschaften 1987, 74, 143–144.
888. M. Tóth; G. Helmchen; U. Leikauf; Gy. Sziráki; G. Szöcs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15, 1535–1543.
889. J. Li; R. Gries; G. Gries; K. N. Slessor; G. G. S. King; W. W. Bowers; R. J. West, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 1057–1062.
890. G. G. S. King; R. Gries; G. Gries; K. N. Slessor, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 2027–2045.
891. R. Gries; G. Gries; J. Li; C. T. Maier; C. R. Lemmon; K. N. Slessor, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 2501–2511.
892. R. E. Charlton; W. L. Roelofs, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1991, 18, 81–97.
893. B. A. Bierl; M. Beroza; W. Collier, J. Econ. Entomol. 1972, 65, 659–664.
894. J. Li; G. Gries; R. Gries; J. Bikič; K. N. Slessor, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 2547–2561.
895. T. Yasuda; S. Wakamura; N. Arakaki, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1813–1822.
896. W. Sugeno; M. Hori; K. Matsuda, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2006, 41, 269–276.
897. P. J. Silk; K. Ryall; D. B. Lyons; J. Sweeney; J. Wu, Naturwissenschaften 2009, 96, 601–608.
898. C. M. Duff; G. Gries; K. Mori; Y. Shirai; M. Seki; H. Takikawa; T. Sheng; K. N. Slessor; R. Gries; C. T. Maier; D. C. Ferguson, J.
Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 431–442.
899. Q.-H. Zhang; R. G. Schneidmiller; D. R. Hoover; K. Young; D. O. Welshons; A. Margaryan; J. R. Aldrich; K. R. Chauhan, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2006, 32, 2163–2176.
222 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates

900. W. Francke; E. Plass; N. Zimmermann; H. Tietgen; T. Tolasch; S. Franke; M. Suchev; T. Toshova; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams;
C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1135–1149.
901. T. Toshova; M. Subchev; E. Plass; W. Francke; J. Appl. Entomol. 2003, 127, 195–199.
902. R. Gries; G. Gries; G. S. King; C. T. Maier, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1119–1130.
903. J. H. Park; K. S. Han; K. Mori; K. S. Boo, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2514–2525.
904. R. M. Giblin-Davis; R. Gries; B. Crespi; L. N. Robertson; A. H. Hara; G. Gries; C. W. O’Brien; H. D. Pierce, Jr., J. Chem. Ecol.
2000 26, 2763–2780.
905. A. C. Oehlschlager; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; B. Morgan; P. D. C. Wimalaratne; K. N. Slessor; G. G. S. King; G. Gries; R. Gries; J. Jorden;
C. M. Chinchilla; R. G. Mexzan, Naturwissenschaften 1992, 79, 134–135.
906. A. L. Perez; Y. Campos; C. M. Chinchilla; A. C. Oehschlager; G. Gries; R. Gries; R. M. Giblin-Davis; G. Castrillo; J. E. Pena;
R. E. Duncan; L. M. Gonzales; H. D. Pierce, Jr.; R. McDonald; R. Andrade, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 869–888.
907. D. Rochat; P. Nagnan-Le Meillour; J. R. Esteban-Duran; C. Malosse; B. Perthuis; J.-P. Morin; C. Descoins, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000,
26, 155–187.
908. P. H. G. Zarbin; E. de Beni Arrigoni; A. Reckziegel; J. A. Moreira; P. T. Baraldi; P. C. Viera, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 377–386.
909. M. D. Papke; S. E. Richert; S. Schulz, Anim. Behav. 2001, 61, 877–886.
910. G. Gries; P. W. Schaefer; R. Gries; Y.-B. Fan; Y. Higashiura; B. Tanaka, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 469–478.
911. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; P. W. Schaefer; R. Hahn; T. Gotoh; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 49–62.
912. T. Tolasch; M. Fragstein; J. L. M. Steidle, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 2156–2166.
913. R.-S. Tsai; E.-C. Yang; C.-Y. Wu; H.-K. Tseng; Y.-S. Chow, Zool. Stud. 1999, 38, 301–306.
914. R. Gries; G. Khaskin; Z. X. Tan; B. G. Zhao; G. G. King; A. Miroshnychenko; G. Q. Lin; M. Rhainds; G. Gries, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006,
32, 1673–1685.
915. E. Hedenström; H. Edlund; A. B. Wassgren; G. Bergström; O. Anderbrant; F. Östrand; A. Sierpinkski; M. A. Auger-Rozenberg;
A. Herz; W. Heitland; M. Varama, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2525–2541.
916. F. Östrand; O. Anderbrant; P. Jonsson, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2000, 95, 119–128.
917. O. Anderbrant; F. Östrand; G. Bergström; A.-B. Wassgreen; M.-A. Auger-Rozenberg; C. Geri; E. Hedenström; H.-E. Högberg;
A. Herz; W. Heitland, Chemoecology 2005, 15, 147–151.
918. O. Anderbrant; J. Löfqvist; Z.-E. Högberg; E. Hedenström; N. Baldassari; P. Baronio; G. Kolmakova; B. Lyons; T. Naito;
V. Odinokov; J. Simandl; A. Supatashvili; A. Tai; R. Tourianov, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2000, 95, 229–239.
919. A. Tai; Y. Higashiura; M. Kakizaki; T. Naito; K. Tanaka; M. Fujita; T. Sugimura; H. Hara; N. Hayashi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem.
1998, 62, 607–608.
920. A.-B. Wassgren; G. Bergström; A. Sierpinski; O. Anderbrant; H.-E. Högberg; E. Hedenström, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87,
24–29.
921. F. Östrand; O. Anderbrant; A.-B. Wassgren; G. Bergström; E. Hedenström; H.-E. Högberg; B.-V. Nguyen; M. Larsson,
Chemoecology 2003, 13, 155–162.
922. M. Hilker; V. Blaske; C. Kobs; C. Dippel, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 2591–2601.
923. M. Yamamoto; T. Kamata; N. D. Do; Y. Adachi; M. Kinjo; T. Ando, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 2860–2863.
924. J. R. Aldrich; J. E. Oliver; W. R. Lusby; J. P. Kochansky; M. Borges, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 29, 1103–1111.
925. M. Borges; P. H. G. Zarbin; J. T. B. Ferreira; M. L. M. Colsta, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 629–634.
926. M. C. B. Moraes; M. Borges; M. Pareja; H. G. Vieira; F. T. P. De Souza Sereno; R. A. Laumann, Physiol. Entomol. 2008, 33,
43–50.
927. J. G. Pomonis; L. Hammack; H. Hakk, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 985–1007.
928. A. Furukawa; C. Shibata; K. Mori, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2002, 66, 1164–1169.
929. K. Mori, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 2224–2231.
930. K. Mori; T. Ohtaki; H. Ohrui; D. R. Berkebile; D. A. Carlson, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 1768–1778.
931. K. Mori; T. Ohtaki; H. Ohrui; D. R. Berkebile; D. A. Carlson, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 1089–1096.
932. D. Eliyahu; S. Nojima; K. Mori; C. Schal, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 229–237.
933. K. Matsuura; T. Tamura; N. Kobayashi; T. Yashiro; S. Tatsumi, PLoS ONE 2007, 2, e813.
934. S. Nojima; S. Kogimiya; R. Nishida; M. Sakuma; Y. Kuwahara, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1483–1494.
935. S. Kogimiya; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2183–2187.
936. K. Stritzke; S. Schulz; R. Nishida, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 3884–3892.
937. M. Papke; S. Schulz; H. Tichy; E. Gingl; R. Ehn, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 2000, 39, 4339–4341.
938. H. Tichy; E. Gingl; R. Ehn; M. Papke; S. Schulz, J. Comp. Physiol. 2001, A187, 75–78.
939. P. S. Robbins; D. B. Cash; C. E. Linn, Jr.; W. E. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 205–214.
940. P. S. Robbins; S. Nojima; S. Polavarapu; A. M. Koppenhöfer; C. Rodriguez-Saona; T. J. Holdcraft; N. H. Consolie; D. C. Peck;
W. L. Roelofs, J. Chem. Ecol. 2009, 35, 336–341.
941. S. Nojima; P. S. Robbins; G. A. Salsbury; B. D. Morris; W. L. Roelofs; M. G. Villani, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2439–2446.
942. W. S. Leal; A. C. Oehlschlager; P. H. G. Zarbin; E. Hidalgo; P. S. Shannon; Y. Murata; L. Gonzales; R. Andrade; M. Ono, J. Chem.
Ecol. 2003, 29, 15–25.
943. R. J. Bartelt; A: Cossé; B. W. Zilkowski; D. Weisleder; S. H. Grode; R. N. Wiedenmann; S. L. Post, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32,
693–712.
944. K. Hannemann; V. Puchta; E. Simon; H. Ziegler; G. Ziegler; G. Spiteller, Lipids 1989, 24, 296–298.
945. D. M. Sand; H. Schlenk; H. Thoma; G. Spiteller, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1983, 751, 455–461.
946. V. M. Dembitzky; T. Rezanka, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B 1996, 114, 317–320.
947. S. Bauer; G. Spiteller, Helv. Chim. Acta 1985, 68, 1635–1638.
948. S. Scheinkönig; K. Hannemann; G. Spiteller, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1995, 1254, 73–76.
 Pheromones of Terrestrial Invertebrates 223

Biographical Sketches

Professor Wittko Francke, retired professor of organic chemistry at the Universität Hamburg
started his chemistry-oriented investigations in chemical ecology as early as 1969. His main
research activities cover structure elucidation and synthesis of semiochemicals from insects
and (their host) plants. Investigations are carried out in close cooperation with biologists all
over the world. Honorary doctoral degrees of Gothenburg University (1997) and Lund
University (2005), the honorary medal of the International Society of Chemical Ecology
(1995) as well as the Otto-Wallach-Medal of the German Society of Chemistry (GDCh
1996), and the Karl-Escherich-Medal of the German Society of General and Applied
Entomology (GDaaE 2005) reflect his scientific standing.

Professor Stefan Schulz studied chemistry at the Universität Hamburg where he got his Ph.D.
degree in 1987 under the guidance of Professor W. Francke. After a postdoctoral work with
Professor J. Meinwald at the Cornell University, he returned to Hamburg, where he founded
his independent research group. In 1994, he received a habilitation degree and venia legendi,
and in 1997, he was appointed as a full professor of organic chemistry at the Technische
Universität Braunschweig. His main research areas are the identification, synthesis, and
biosynthesis of extracellular signal compounds in arthropods, bacteria, and vertebrates.
 4.05 Pheromones in Vertebrates
Peter W. Sorensen and Thomas R. Hoye, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.05.1 Introduction 226

4.05.1.1 Definition of a Pheromone 226
4.05.1.2 Biological Activity of Pheromones: Defining Principles 226
4.05.1.3 Biological Activity of Pheromones: Neural Basis of Detection 228
4.05.1.4 Primer on Chemistry Issues 228
4.05.1.5 Identifying a Pheromone 229
4.05.1.6 The Aims and Organization of This Chapter 230
4.05.2 Pheromones in Ancient Vertebrates 230
4.05.2.1 Sea Lamprey 231
4.05.2.1.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology 231
4.05.2.1.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry 231
4.05.2.1.3 Migratory pheromone: Biology 232
4.05.2.1.4 Migratory pheromone: Chemistry 233
4.05.3 Pheromones in Advanced (Teleost) Fishes 234
4.05.3.1 Masu Salmon, a Pacific Salmon 235
4.05.3.1.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology 235
4.05.3.1.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry 235
4.05.3.2 Atlantic Salmon and a Relative, the Brown Trout 236
4.05.3.2.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology 236
4.05.3.2.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry 236
4.05.3.3 African Catfish 237
4.05.3.3.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology 237
4.05.3.3.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry 237
4.05.3.4 Goldfish 238
4.05.3.4.1 Male and female sex pheromones: Biology 238
4.05.3.4.2 Male and female sex pheromones: Chemistry 239
4.05.4 Pheromones in Amphibians 240
4.05.4.1 Asian Red-Bellied Newt and Its Relative the Sword-Tailed Newt 240
4.05.4.1.1 Male sex pheromones: Biology 240
4.05.4.1.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry 241
4.05.4.2 Jordan’s Salamander 242
4.05.4.2.1 Courtship pheromone: Biology 242
4.05.4.2.2 Courtship pheromone: Chemistry 242
4.05.4.3 Australian Tree Frog 242
4.05.4.3.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology 242
4.05.4.3.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry 242
4.05.5 Pheromones in Reptiles 244
4.05.5.1 Red-Sided Garter Snake 244
4.05.5.1.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology 244
4.05.5.1.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry 244
4.05.6 Pheromones in Birds 245
4.05.6.1 Crested Auklet 246
4.05.6.1.1 Ornamental pheromone: Biology 246
4.05.6.1.2 Ornamental pheromone: Chemistry 246
4.05.7 Pheromones in Mammals 246
4.05.7.1 European Rabbit 248

225
226 Pheromones in Vertebrates

4.05.7.1.1 Nipple search pheromone: Biology 248

4.05.7.1.2 Nipple search pheromone: Chemistry 248
4.05.7.2 Golden Hamster 248
4.05.7.2.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology 248
4.05.7.2.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry 249
4.05.7.3 House Mouse 249
4.05.7.3.1 Male-derived priming pheromone: Biology 249
4.05.7.3.2 Male-derived priming pheromone: Chemistry 251
4.05.7.3.3 Female-derived puberty inhibiting pheromone: Biology 252
4.05.7.3.4 Female-derived puberty inhibiting pheromone: Chemistry 252
4.05.7.4 Domestic Pig 253
4.05.7.4.1 Male pig (boar) pheromone: Biology 253
4.05.7.4.2 Male pig (boar) pheromone: Chemistry 253
4.05.7.5 Asian Elephant 254
4.05.7.5.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology 255
4.05.7.5.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry 255
4.05.7.5.3 Male sex pheromone: Biology 255
4.05.7.5.4 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry 256
4.05.7.6 Humans 256
4.05.8 Overview 257
References 258

4.05.1 Introduction
4.05.1.1 Definition of a Pheromone
About 50 years ago, Karlson and Lüscher coined the term ‘pheromone’ to describe chemicals that are ‘excreted
to the outside by an individual and received by a second individual of the same species in which they release a
specific reaction.’1 They created this term in conjunction with the then recent structure elucidation of 10E,
12Z-hexadecadien-1-ol (bombykol), a long-chain 16-carbon alcohol that female silkmoths (Bombyx mori)
produce to attract mates. Notably, the concept is a biological one. Since that discovery many hundreds of
structures with similar types of activity on conspecifics (members of the same species) have been identified, and
it is now commonly accepted that most animals use chemicals to mediate a wide variety of intraspecific social
interactions. Many hundreds of invertebrate pheromones have been identified. However, in spite of compelling
evidence that with the possible exception of birds, vertebrates commonly use chemical cues to communicate
(exchange information) with conspecifics, only a handful of vertebrate pheromones have been identified. The
complication seems to be related to the biological complexity of vertebrates whose large brains and complex
sensory systems allow them to process more complex cues and use them in complex and subtle manners that are
difficult for biologists to measure. Indeed, many mammalian pheromones might best be considered as subtle
modulators, rather than drivers, of behaviors. Thus, the original definition of a pheromone has been frequently
revisited and many revisions suggested;2–4 however, no new definition has gained acceptance and the term,
pheromone, is now commonly used to describe almost any chemical cue that mediates information transfer
between members of the same species and to which organisms are in some manner predisposed to respond. We
use this broad definition here.

4.05.1.2 Biological Activity of Pheromones: Defining Principles

Pheromones are typically defined by the biological actions they induce, which may be either behavioral and/or
physiological and need not always be immediate. To understand pheromones, one must understand their
biological function. These functions are as diverse as the life histories of the species that use them. Generally,
the actions of pheromones are species specific, although there are exceptions because the ecology of animals
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 227

does not always mandate that they be so. This point is sometimes misunderstood because most insect
pheromones are species specific (see Chapter 4.04). Generally, pheromones are quite potent, although there
are exceptions in cases where animals do not have to communicate over large distances. Another complex and
at times confusing issue is that roles of pheromones can be subtle; cognitive function, including memory and
perception of ecological context, play important roles in the behavior of ‘higher’ vertebrates and thus may
modulate their responsiveness to pheromones. The latter attribute complicates our ability to determine
whether and how species use pheromonal compounds. Additionally, most vertebrates have evolved to use
mixtures of compounds as pheromonal cues, the meaning of which may even change with composition, further
complicating isolation, identification, and understanding. Although vertebrates use mixtures in many ways, we
focus on two proposed by Johnston:2,5 ‘blends’ in which ratios of two or more pheromonal compounds
determine overall activity, and ‘mosaics’ in which a variety of components need to be present in order to
convey the message, such as tiles in mosaic painting. These terms are not mutually exclusive; there is a
continuum of ways in which multicomponent pheromones are used and full understanding is often difficult to
reach because odor perception is complex and, consequently, poorly understood. Here, we will not restrict the
requirement that the components of blends need to be present in highly specific ratios to be pheromonally
active or that all components of a mosaic need be present to convey a message. Rather, we subscribe to the
simple notion that pheromones are odors, and, as such, represent perceptual entities that originate from
numerous stimuli but that the brain integrates as one. Notably, it is clear that the vertebrate nervous system
is elegantly suited for discriminating complex odor mixtures. Moreover, more complex vertebrates tend to
perceive and use more complex mixtures.
Pheromones that elicit behavioral responses are often termed ‘releasers,’ whereas those with largely
physiological effects are often called ‘primers.’6 However, pheromones often induce both short-term behavioral
and long-term physiological effects,3,4 and it may not always be appropriate to separate the two, so here we do
not emphasize these differences. Further, behavioral activity driven by pheromones is often relatively subtle
and seems to require cognitive recognition and processing, leading many to employ the term ‘signaler’ instead
of releaser,7 a term we favor and use here. Behaviorally active pheromones are best known and include sex
pheromones, cues that facilitate or drive reproductive behaviors. Aggregation pheromones, cues that stimulate
aggregation independent of mating activity, are common, especially in fishes. Many mammals use complex
scent marks that serve as identifying and territorial cues. Components of these scent marks can also be
pheromonal.3 Many vertebrate species appear to use alarm pheromones, chemical cues that injured or alarmed
animals release and, once perceived by conspecifics, alert them to danger. Here, pheromonal function can be
intertwined with self-defense. Priming pheromones are employed by a wide variety of vertebrate species, and
their actions may be dramatic. For example, urinary odors of male mice advance puberty in juvenile females
(the ‘Vandenbergh effect’),8,9 whereas female urinary odors have the opposite effect. Similarly, male goldfish
synchronize their endocrine/reproductive cycles with those of ovulatory females by detecting hormonal sex
pheromones released by the latter.10,11 Not surprisingly, evolution apparently has favored social organisms that
can achieve behavioral and physiological coordination through the use of pheromones.
Studies of mammalian pheromones increasingly highlight the roles that conspecific odors, including
pheromones, can play in mediating social awareness and that often seem to go beyond the classical definition
of a pheromone.2,4 For example, among rodents it is now clear that individuals are readily discerned by their
odors and that kin-related odors are part of this process. Evidence suggests that peptides associated with the
major histocompatibility complex (MHC) have a role(s) in these complex cues, but small volatile compounds
have also been identified. Modulator pheromones have also been suggested to affect mood and thought
processes in humans, although these have not yet been identified or gained wide acceptance.4
Because olfactory receptors can detect a wide array of structural types (in principle, any), the evolution of
pheromones has been influenced primarily by ecological factors. First, certain types of chemical compounds can
travel great distances and convey information in complex environments, including those that lack light. These
compounds can be adapted, through evolution, to the medium within which the animal functions (e.g., water or
air). Second, other types of chemicals are sufficiently stable that they can convey information for extended
periods; terrestrial species benefit most from these. Third, complex structures and/or mixtures of smaller
structures can be information-rich and highly specific (i.e., immune to eavesdropping by other species because
of the selective nature of olfactory receptors). Finally, products that are readily and naturally produced by
228 Pheromones in Vertebrates

organisms (perhaps to serve metabolic functions) are favored for use in pheromones because the biosynthetic
pathways that produce them would already be in place.11 Indeed, evolution of pheromone systems is complex
because they ultimately require simultaneous production and detection of cues; structurally complex com-
pounds are thus not favored and are rarely seen.

4.05.1.3 Biological Activity of Pheromones: Neural Basis of Detection

To have function, pheromones must be produced, detected, and discerned and they must drive a biological
response. This requires a specialized nervous system that is highly sensitive to sensory cues. Vertebrates possess
multiple, sophisticated chemosensory systems that have become increasingly complex with evolution, giving
them the ability to discern complex chemical compounds and mixtures with considerable precision. Because
multiple components are often involved and olfactory receptors are not perfectly specific, a type of neural
pattern recognition is required.5,12
Vertebrates possess three primary chemosensory systems: gustation (‘taste’), trigeminal, and olfaction
(‘smell’); but only one of these, the olfactory system, mediates responses to pheromones. Chemicals that
stimulate the olfactory system are known as odorants and comprise one type of biological cue (any entity
that stimulates a sensory system). Bouquets of odorants that can be discriminated as specific entities are termed
odors. The olfactory system contains olfactory receptor neurons (ORNs) that comprise cranial nerve I and
project directly to the forebrain. ORNs are now known to express only one to a few olfactory receptor proteins
(‘receptors’), which means that the chemoreceptive range of each neuron can be very narrow. The olfactory
system also has several subcomponents including the vomeronasal organ, which is described below.
Neurons expressing the same receptors project to brain areas where they both amplify each other’s activity
and discern complex mixtures of odorants. Nevertheless, the primary unit of discrimination are the olfactory
receptors. Fish have only about 100 olfactory receptors whereas mammals have hundreds. Although the
specificities of these several classes of receptors are not well-studied, it is clear that they range from being
highly specific to rather promiscuous. Small chemical structures can be discriminated by several ORNs/
receptors, although single-neuron studies suggest that pheromone receptors are narrowly tuned. ORNs then
project to the olfactory bulb where odor processing occurs. In fish, pheromone mapping appears to occur in
medial regions of the olfactory bulb. However, in tetrapods (vertebrates with legs), the situation is more
complex, because they have a multicomponent olfactory system comprised of the main olfactory epithelium,
several small ancillary systems, and the vomeronasal system (VNO or Jacobsen’s organ). The last is located in
the roof of their mouths.4,13 Both the main olfactory system and the VNO can mediate responses to social odors
(pheromones),4 especially in experienced animals (e.g., pigs and rabbits). In some species, a single pheromone
odor may be perceived in two different brain regions, perhaps as two different but related entities. The VNO
appears to be an important system for discriminating pheromones and is required for naive rodents to respond
to priming cues. The VNO possesses only microvillar receptor neurons that project to a specific set of mitral
(output) cells of the accessory olfactory bulb (AOB). It also has a specialized duct system with a pumping
mechanism that links directly with the oral cavity, allowing VNO-equipped animals to sample nonvolatile
compounds by physical contact (odorants are pumped through the duct in mucus). The behavior animals
exhibit when activating their VNO pump is known as a ‘flehmen’ and is often associated with a distinctive
curling of the lips as they strive to bring nonvolatiles into this organ. Flehmening behavior is commonly
measured to quantify the possible presence of a pheromone. Human beings have a VNO in utero, but it typically
fails to develop after birth and appears nonfunctional.13

4.05.1.4 Primer on Chemistry Issues

Most chemists ‘grow up’ with the notion that a pheromone is a chemical compound. As we have discussed
above, the more broadly held view is that a pheromone is a meaningful chemical stimulus, which means that it
can comprise more than one compound. Thus, we have attempted to draw clear distinction here between
‘pheromone’ and ‘pheromonal component(s)’ (or constituents), the latter being the individual compound(s) that
are the causative agent(s) of the behavioral response associated with the pheromone’s activity. To be clear, a
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 229

pheromone may be single- or multicomponent. Because vertebrates are complex organisms, it is common for
their pheromones to be multicomponent mixtures of chemical compounds.
Several issues related to the isolation and structure determination of pheromonal components are the same
as those for isolation of any natural product. There are some notable exceptions. Because pheromones often
operate with exquisite sensitivity, the pheromonal components are often present at very low concentrations. As
with other natural products whose concentrations are very low in the producing organism, it is usually essential
that a biological assay be used to guide the fractionation and purification at nearly all stages (see the following
Section 4.05.1.5). In the case of pheromones, these assays are often quite time consuming because they require
measurement of behavioral changes in whole animals. Thus, the feedback loop for guiding isolation often has a
long timeline. The importance of objectivity and sound statistical analysis here cannot be overstated – ‘how
meaningful was the observation’ is a question to which the answer must be clear and must be supported by
‘error-barred’ measurements. It is common for the pheromonal components to be observable only after they
have been emitted from the animal into its environment; when so, the accompanying dilution adds to the
challenge of isolation and stands in stark contrast to nearly all other natural product isolation work. A corollary
is that the task of isolation usually is made considerably easier in cases where the organ, tissue, or specific body
fluid of origin can be identified (at least in the cases of organisms that can be sacrificed). In many instances, mass
spectrometry plays a more important role in guiding the intermediate phases of the isolation work.
Additionally, while invertebrate pheromones nearly operate in the vapor phase and, therefore, comprise
volatile chemicals, because of the frequent use of the VNO by vertebrates, there is, in principle, no limit on
the vapor pressure of the compounds vertebrates can use. Of course, when higher molecular weight pheromonal
components are used, they must be emitted to the aqueous or terrestrial environment through various
excretions.
Pheromonal components tend to belong to well-established structural classes of compounds. This is reason-
able from an evolutionary viewpoint. Organisms presumably have evolved to utilize ways to use compounds
already available to them through their basic biosynthetic and metabolic machinery (e.g., hormones or bile
acids) to gain further advantage through pheromone development and use. These compounds can be used in
either unmodified (e.g., see discussion of hormonal pheromones in goldfish) or modified/derivatized (e.g., see
discussion of sex and migratory pheromones in sea lamprey) form. Since pheromonal components tend to
belong to known structural families, the task of determining the structure once appropriate spectroscopic data
for sufficiently pure compounds are at hand is often simpler than for other classes of natural products, where the
metabolic structural space that needs to be considered is much greater. Thus, the structural complexity of
pheromonal compounds parallels that dictated by the organism’s basic biochemical pathways.
Finally, pheromonal compounds tend to have relatively high chemical stability. This is because they must
survive, sometimes for long period, in an exposed state in the environment; evolution would disfavor the use of
labile compounds. In particular, it is interesting to note that few have a significant chromophore. This is
reasonable at a fundamental level because light absorption in an aerobic environment inherently renders a
molecule vulnerable to decomposition. A speculative corollary is that there are likely vertebrate pheromones
that make use of compounds that have undergone spontaneous chemical modification (e.g., photochemically,
oxidatively, and/or hydrolytically) once they have been released to their surroundings by the originating
animal as a ‘propheromone.’

4.05.1.5 Identifying a Pheromone

Pheromones are defined by the biological actions they induce. To identify a pheromone one must be able to
identify and quantify odor-driven behavioral activity. As such, efforts to establish pheromone existence require
an interdisciplinary approach that relies heavily on both biology and chemistry. To understand the relevance of
the chemistry described in this chapter, the reader must appreciate some biology. The first step in identifying a
pheromone is to recognize, often through ethological (or natural behavioral) description of species, that one
might exist. A protocol for systematically measuring biological responses that are pheromonally driven then
needs to be developed. Bioassays need to be tightly controlled and reproducible, especially for higher
vertebrates whose behavior is complicated by cognitive function. Generally, behavioral responses serve as
the focus of bioassays, but sometimes physiological (neural and endocrinological) measures are deployed as
230 Pheromones in Vertebrates

well; these are often advantageous because they can be more easily interpreted in an objective fashion. All types
of bioassays exist (many are represented in the case studies below). In general, the more meaningful bioassays
will examine both laboratory and wild animals to confirm relevance and will use several different but
complementary measurements. Unfortunately, instances of falsely identified pheromones attributable to
artifacts of domestic animals and/or unnatural laboratory scenarios are not rare. Additionally, because of the
vagaries of behavior, a powerful and useful approach commonly used to complement behavioral assay using an
endocrinological measure and/or to measure the chemosensitivity of the subject’s nervous system. The latter
approach can provide considerable insight because olfactory receptor systems are extremely specific and
sensitive. This permits screens of putative pheromonal compounds and confirmation of their likely function
by testing to see if sensitivity is restricted to neural pathways known to convey social information (e.g., medial
olfactory tracts of fish or VNO of mammals).
Often electrophysiological recording from various levels of the subject’s nervous system is made to help
assess pheromonal activity/presence. The use of electro-olfactogram recording (EOG), which measures voltage
changes thought to reflect olfactory receptor activity, is an especially popular screen for aquatic organisms
because it works well under water. Neural recording is often employed in combination with various behavioral
(or endocrinological) assays to identify biologically relevant fractions resulting from various rounds of
purification of the chemicals emitted by the species being studied. This approach is known as bioassay-guided
fractionation. It is usually necessary to isolate each individual pheromonal component with a sufficient level of
purity to simplify its identification. This is nearly always considerably easier for cases where the active
compound is already known and structurally characterized. Mass spectrometric and comparative chromato-
graphic analyses are often sufficient in these instances. For the case of new compounds, it is nearly always
necessary to isolate a sufficient quantity (of sufficiently pure) material to permit characterization by nuclear
magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy (e.g., 0.1–1 mg, depending on molecular complexity and size). This
can be a daunting task since the high sensitivity of the receiving animal often means that pheromone chemicals
are present in very low concentration, especially so once they have been emitted to the donor animal’s
environment. In the most comprehensive studies, new compound identification and structure proof is com-
plemented with chemical synthesis of isolated pheromonal components. Isolation of multicomponent
pheromones in complex organisms is challenging, especially so when they are present in their natural
environment in low concentrations and operate synergistically so that more than one component needs to be
present to elicit full response.

4.05.1.6 The Aims and Organization of This Chapter

In this chapter we review the handful of vertebrate pheromonal cues for which both biological activity and
chemical structures are relatively well-established, emphasizing those identified cues for which there is clear
behavioral evidence that animals are genetically predisposed to respond to them. For nearly all of the cases
discussed, the chemicals that comprise the pheromone were identified either in fluids being released by the
research subject or from the environment itself (studies of biological incubates are not addressed). The
organization of the discussion for each pheromone consists of a brief introduction to the organism, an overview
of important biological aspects of the pheromone, and a summary of the (largely structural) chemical facts
associated with each. Only well-understood systems are reviewed for which both behavior and chemistry are
established; this is not a comprehensive review of the chemistry of the plethora of compounds proposed to have
pheromonal function but for which association with specific behavioral evidence is scant (e.g., many of the
constituents of scent glands).

4.05.2 Pheromones in Ancient Vertebrates

Vertebrates (animals with a vertebral spinal column) evolved from a group of ancestral cartilaginous craniates
(animals with a cranium or head) approximately 500 million years ago. Only one true group of cartilaginous
craniates survived to the present day – the hagfish. This unusual group of jawless, boneless craniates persists in
the deep oceans where they probably rely on pheromones because of the lack of light and their possession of a
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 231

well-developed olfactory organ. The identity of the putative cues used by hagfish remains totally unknown.
The first ‘true’ vertebrates were the Ostracoderms, a group of jawless cartilaginous fishes from which modern
jawed vertebrates evolved. Lampreys are the only surviving members of this group and approximately 40
species exist today. One of these, the sea lamprey, has been studied for pheromonal function. This species relies
heavily upon unique, sulfated steroids, as reviewed next.

4.05.2.1 Sea Lamprey

The sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) has a fascinating migratory life history.14 It breeds in coastal
freshwater streams where its males build simple nests, which females locate using pheromones. Both die
a few days after mating. Surviving eggs hatch into filter-feeding, blind larvae that burrow in stream
bottoms and grow at varying rates for 3–20 years before eventually metamorphosing into a parasitic form
having eyes, a very developed nose, and a sucker-like rasping mouth. Parasitic phase lampreys leave
their streams and enter the ocean (or large lakes in the case of landlocked populations) where they locate
and prey on other fishes. Sea lampreys grow rapidly and mature within 1–2 years, before returning in
the spring to streams to spawn (and die). The tasks of finding suitable spawning streams and then mates
are essential and demanding processes. Both of these activities are mediated by potent, now
well-understood, pheromones. Both the gender-specific sex pheromone and gender-neutral migratory
pheromone systems have been the subject of considerable study because the sea lamprey is an invasive
species in the North American Great Lakes. The sea lamprey invaded the Great Lakes about a century
ago and the fisheries there have become severely threatened by this species.15

4.05.2.1.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology

During upstream migration, male and female sea lamprey undergo final maturation and develop behavioral
responsiveness to the odor of mature conspecifics of the opposite sex during which time these cease responding
to larvae and their odor.16–19 Males build simple nests and females follow with spawning lasting only a few days.
French lamprey fishermen, originally caught females by placing males into traps, a response that has recently
been duplicated and attributed to pheromonal odors.18 While male sea lamprey release attractants in their
urine,18 more recent work has focused on components released through the gill.16 Using a fractionation scheme
based upon EOG recording and Y-mazes, Li and coworkers discovered that male sea lamprey release a
substance that is attractive to females. That new compound was shown to be a ketone and was named
3-ketopetromyzonol sulfate (3K-PS, 1). EOG recording has shown that this steroid is detected by adult lamprey
at approximately 1012 mol l1 and that it is attractive to ovulated females in laboratory mazes and in
streams.20–22
Behavioral studies suggest that 3K-PS is synergized by the presence of other steroidal odorants, perhaps
including another ketone, 3-keto-allocholic acid. Immunoassay shows that nonspermiated males (whose odor
does not attract ovulated females in the maze) do not release appreciable quantities of 3K-PS, whereas
spermiated males release large quantities of immunoreactive 3K-PS. It is estimated that the quantity produced
is sufficient to create a large active space (the volume of water that contains detectable concentrations of
pheromone) of greater than 106 l h1.16,23 Not surprisingly, this cue is being explored for use in lamprey control
in the Great Lakes.24 Presently, the lamprey is the only vertebrate for which identified pheromones are being
actively considered for managing wild animals.

4.05.2.1.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry

To isolate the putative male sex pheromone, the organic content of water conditioned by spermiating male sea
lampreys was concentrated by passage through a C18 resin. Chromatographic purification, guided by EOG
recording and mass spectrometry, provided a sufficient quantity of material for NMR analysis. Thereby the
structure of 3K-PS, 1 was deduced. This was confirmed by preparation of an authentic sample of 1 through the
action of 3-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase on petromyzonol sulfate (PS, 2) (Equation 1). The latter was
identified over 40 years ago as a major constituent of the larval sea lamprey bile.25 It is interesting that, like
many higher organisms, the sea lamprey uses a bile acid family consisting of allocholic rather than cholic acid
(i.e., having a 5- rather than 5-hydrogen substituent) derivatives. PS (2) is the probable biosynthetic
232 Pheromones in Vertebrates

precursor to the male sex pheromone component 3K-PS (1), and it is also noteworthy that PS has been found
nowhere else in nature other than in this group of ancient vertebrates.
Me Me
HO HO
Me Me
OSO3Na OSO3Na
3α -Hydroxysteroid
Me H Me H
dehydrogenase (in vitro)

5 H H [sea] lamprey biosynthesis 5 H H

O 3 OH (in vivo) HO 3 OH
H H

1 3-Ketopetromyzonol sulfate (3K-PS) 2 Petromyzonol sulfate (PS)

ð1Þ

4.05.2.1.3 Migratory pheromone: Biology

Migratory adult lampreys are now known to locate suitable riverine spawning habitat using a pheromone
released by stream-dwelling larval lampreys. So important is this cue that lampreys cannot find suitable streams
if their olfactory systems are ablated (blocked). Indeed, the vast majority of adult lacustrine lampreys select and
then spawn in only a few streams, all of which have very high densities of larvae.26 This ecological strategy
makes good evolutionary sense for a species whose juveniles may become widely distributed and whose adults
need to quickly locate suitable spawning/nursery habitat because the presence of such habitat correlates
strongly with the presence (odor) of larval conspecifics living in it.15 Although the presence of a migratory
pheromone system in sea lamprey was first suggested by historical fisheries records in the Great Lakes, which
showed that eradication of larvae from streams using poisons resulted in reduced adult migration, direct
evidence has come from behavioral laboratory studies. These key studies have used mazes and natural waters
into which larval odors have been added (Figure 1).19 First, low but realistic concentrations of larval lamprey

Lake Huron water

Lamprey
upstream
Holding release
area
Test odor(s) Cages
(~5 m)
(or control)
introduction

down-
L R stream
preference
area
(~5 m)

~2 m
Figure 1 Schematic of the behavior maze used to guide isolation and identification of the sea lamprey pheromone.19,27,28
Lake water mixed with a small amount of nonlamprey river water flows slowly from top to bottom at a depth of c.10 cm in
this two-choice maze, where preference of adult lamprey is assessed by measuring the ratio of time in the right channel
to time in the left (tR/tL), while odor is into one side or the other.
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 233

Relative attraction (%)

20

10

0
Lake 10–14 10–13 10–12 Larval Larval
water mol l–1 mol l–1 mol l–1 holding holding
PADS PADS PADS water water vs.
10–12 mol l–1
PADS
Figure 2 Behavioral responses of migratory sea lamprey tested in the maze to various concentrations of PADS, a
concentration of larval holding water known to contain approximately picomolar PADS (the concentration thought to be
present in many spawning streams), and an extract of larval holding water versus PADS alone (showing that PADS does
not account for all activity).19,29

holding water (1 g of larva in 1000 l of water per hour) is attractive to migratory adult lamprey (Figure 2).
Second, water from streams containing larvae is more attractive to adults than water from streams without
larvae, and the addition of larval odor from larval holding water to the stream water increases its attractiveness.
This migratory pheromone appears to function within a matrix of natural stream odor(s) and does not appear to
be species specific, which perhaps is not surprising given that all North American lampreys use similar
spawning and nursery habitats.15,27
A bioassay-guided fractionation scheme, based on results from the behavioral maze and electrophy-
siological recording from the surface of the lamprey olfactory organ (EOG), was used to isolate and then
identify three key components of the sea lamprey larval pheromone.28 These components account for the
majority of the activity of the larval pheromone when tested as a mixture at a concentration of
1013 mol l1 in behavioral mazes (i.e., adult lamprey do not distinguish between the synthetic and
natural cue) (Figure 2). All three components are sulfated steroid derivatives (see below) and each is
detected by an independent olfactory receptor.29 Together, the components function as a synergistic
mixture; that is, individual components are not as behaviorally active as the natural mixture even at
higher than normal concentrations.28,30 Because pheromone component ratios do not appear to be critical
to activity but the presence of most, if not all, components is, this pheromone mixture might be
considered a mosaic. While all three of the migratory pheromone components are biosynthesized by
larvae, there is no evidence that any is produced in the parasitic or adult phases30,31 various components
of the pheromone have also been measured in natural waters.30,32 Finally, behavioral studies have shown
that mixtures of the migratory pheromone introduced into the wild attract adults, suggesting that these
pheromonal constituents have considerable potential for use in trapping and controlling adults.24

4.05.2.1.4 Migratory pheromone: Chemistry

Lamprey larvae were captured and placed in holding tanks, where they can be maintained indefinitely.
Larval holding water was passed through an XAD7HP resin to sequester the organic contents. Subsequent
methanol elution brought down material that accounted for essentially all pheromonal activity. Repeated
chromatographic fractionations, finally with a shallow gradient on a C18 high-pressure liquid chromato-
graphy (HPLC) support allowed identification of three principal components, each of which was both
behaviorally active and able to elicit an EOG response. Early mass spectrometry studies suggested that the
compounds were probably sulfated steroids, and the first was shown to be petromyzonol sulfate (PS, 2).
The isolation was then scaled up in order to obtain sufficient quantities for NMR analysis. Given the very
low quantities present in the larval holding water and the fact that it was not possible to identify the
presence of either of the two remaining components in any part of larval tissue, it was necessary to process
234 Pheromones in Vertebrates

8000 l of the holding water. This yielded approximately 600–800 mg of each of the two unknowns.
Extensive spectroscopic studies33 led to the identification of two unique structures: petromyzonamine
disulfate (PADS, 3) and petromyzonol disulfate (PSDS, 4).

Me OSO3Na Me OSO3Na
HO
Me Me

Me H Me H
N
H H H H
O N OSO3Na NaO3SO
H H

3 Petromyzonamine disulfate (PADS) 4 Petromyzonol disulfate (PSDS)

Me OSO3Na
Me

Me H
N
H H H
N OH
H H
NH2

5 Squalamine

PADS (3) is an aminosterol that is detected by the lamprey olfactory system at concentrations ranging down
to 1013 mol l1 (1 g in approximately 70 billion liters of water) and appears to be the single-most important
component; the second-most important one is PSDS (4). Although PSDS has a similar level of olfactory activity
as that of PADS, it only attracts lampreys down to a concentration of 1011 mol l1, while PADS is attractive to
1013 mol l1.28 The third component, the lamprey-specific bile acid petromyzonol sulfate (PS, 2), is detected
with less sensitivity and is the least important of the three. Intriguingly, PADS (3) is closely related in structure
to squalamine (5), a unique aminosterol originally isolated from dogfish sharks.34 The N-(3-aminopropyl)pyr-
rolidinone sidechain in PADS (3) is a unique substructural unit in natural products. It is probable that PADS is
derived from squalamine biosynthetically; oxidation of the spermidine side chain in 5 (perhaps, by a primary
amine oxidase) and sulfation of the C7-hydroxyl group is all that is necessary. In this light, it is particularly
interesting that the shark family is also ancient, with origins dating back over 300 million years. Squalamine has
antimicrobial (and antiangiogenic) properties and may well have provided chemical protection against
microbes, a feature essential for evolution of higher organisms. Indeed, squalamine has recently been identified
in sea lamprey, lending support to this hypothesis of biosynthetic linkage.35 Thus, it is tempting to speculate
that PADS is a metabolite that evolved in lamprey larvae from a self-defense agent and that adults have evolved
to discern because it correlates with abundance of larval and spawning habitat.

4.05.3 Pheromones in Advanced (Teleost) Fishes

Fish, here defined as vertebrates with fins and gills that live in water, dominate the waters of the world. Fish are
the ancestral group of all vertebrates, and they represent the majority of vertebrate biodiversity. Half a dozen
major groups of fishes survive, including the Chondrichthyes (sharks and rays), Sacropterygii (coelacanths,
lungfishes), Chondrostei (sturgeons and bichirs), and Holostei (gars, bowfins). Although the species found in
these groups possess extremely well-developed olfactory systems and probably use pheromonal signaling
systems, we know nothing of their chemistry. Understanding of fish pheromones is largely restricted to a few
species of boney fishes (the teleosts), which dominate modern waters and comprise over 23 000 species.11,36 It is
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 235

difficult to provide generalities about this enormous, highly diverse group, which comprises over 400 families.
Nevertheless, most fish probably use pheromones to influence many aspects of their behavior, and these can be
broadly categorized according to three biological functions:
1. Signaling pheromones. Boney fishes commonly use pheromones to mediate many behaviors, including species
and mate selection or recognition. Often the pheromonal aromas are complex and may simultaneously
convey multiple pieces of information. However, with the exception of cues associated with reproduction,
none has been clearly identified. Reproduction is, arguably, the most important moment in an animal’s life,
and there is strong evidence that many species of fish (perhaps all) use sex pheromones to mediate it. These
cues are used to locate mates (releasers), identify their reproductive status (signalers), and recognize
competitors. Half a dozen relatively well-described structures have been identified, most of which are
hormonal metabolites. Indeed, it is probable that hormonal products are commonly used as sex pheromones
by fish.37 Several hormone-based pheromones are reviewed below along with one nonhormonal example
(the sex pheromone of the masu salmon). Although it is clear that many of these cues are discerned as a
matrix, only for the goldfish has the chemical identity been partially defined (see below).
2. Reproductive priming pheromones. Many species of fish are external fertilizers, and they spawn only a few times,
which means that it is essential that male and female gamete outputs coincide. There is strong evidence that
synchronization is mediated by sensory cues, including pheromones, most of which appear to be hormonally
derived.
3. Alarm cues. Recognition of danger is fundamental to survival. Frisch38 noted that, upon injury, minnows
release chemical stimuli that cause others located downstream to startle. Presumably, fish evolved to
recognize compounds in each other’s skin as an indicator of danger. This phenomenon has been noted in
dozens of descriptive behavioral studies, and, while it has been suggested that nitric oxides are involved,
definitive establishment of the pheromonal component(s) has yet to be established using bioassay-guided
fractionation so this story is not reviewed.

4.05.3.1 Masu Salmon, a Pacific Salmon

Fishes from the genus Oncorhynchus, often termed Pacific Salmon, are distributed across the northern Pacific.
While some of the dozen or so species are now landlocked (e.g., rainbow trout), all are/were once (or still are)
anadromous; that is, they reproduce in freshwater but spend the majority of adult lives feeding in the oceans,
feeding only to return to freshwater to spawn and die. Unlike sea lamprey, Pacific salmon return to their
streams of birth to reproduce, a feat that is attributed to odor recognition. While conspecific pheromones have
been suggested to play a role in this process, the evidence is not compelling. Nevertheless, after returning to
home streams salmon, like lamprey (see above), must find mates and reproduce. One of the most-studied
examples is the masu salmon, O. masou, of Japan.

4.05.3.1.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology

During their reproductive season, female masu salmon build simple nests (redds) and males fight to gain access
to them. Using a series of behavioral tests (Y-mazes), Yambe et al.39 have demonstrated that ovulated female
masu salmon, release an attractant in their urine. Urine was fractionated and the fractions tested both by EOG
recording, followed by and behavioral assays, leading to the identification of a novel amino acid, L-kynurenine
(6). Although this amino acid is active at a concentration adequate to explain activity in the laboratory, it seems
probable that this cue is supplemented by other factors which might give it greater specificity.

4.05.3.1.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry

The urine (20 ml) of anadromous, ovulated females was collected by catheterization. Repeated fractionation,
guided by male behavioral response, over complementary chromatographic supports led to the isolation of a
sufficient quantity of pure substance for full spectroscopic characterization. The active pheromonal compound
was shown to be L-kynurenine (6). It was estimated to be present at a concentration of 1.1 mg 100 ml1 of urine.
Interestingly, that is a hundred or more times higher than the concentration in the ovulated female urine of
rainbow or brown trout. The absolute configuration of 6 was determined by Marfey’s analysis,40 which involves
236 Pheromones in Vertebrates

characterization of the chromatographic behavior of the L,L- versus the D,L-diastereomers of 7 (Equation 2)
vis-a-vis authentic samples.
O2N NO2

O NH2 O2N NO2 O H2N NH

CO2H CO2H Me CO2H ð2Þ

F NH
NH2 NH2
Me CO2H

6 L-Kynurenine 7 (L,L-diasteromer)

L-Kynurenine (6) is a known oxidative metabolite of L-tryptophan. This study for the first time appears to
represent this amino acid metabolite that has been identified as a pheromone in a vertebrate. Although
additional minor constituents present in the active fraction were identified (N-formylkynurenine, tyrosine,
cystathionine, and prostaglandin F2), none was observed to synergize the sex pheromonal activity of
L-kynurenine (6).

4.05.3.2 Atlantic Salmon and a Relative, the Brown Trout

Salmonid fishes from genus Salmo, originated in the Atlantic Oceans approximately 60 million years ago and
although they share many ecological and morphological features with Pacific salmon, their pheromones appear
to be quite different. Five salmonine species are found in this genus (Salmo) with the brown trout (Salmo trutta)
and Atlantic salmon (S. salar) being the best understood.

4.05.3.2.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology

Both Atlantic salmon and brown trout probably use pheromones to mediate many aspects of their biology,
including migration (the Atlantic salmon is anadromous), but none has been clearly identified. Interestingly,
brown trout and Atlantic salmon will hybridize, suggesting they employ very similar sex pheromones, a fact
also supported by electrophysiological recordings41 and behavior (below). Females of both species construct
nests when spawning (like Pacific salmon) and males fight for access to females, which they seem to recognize
largely by odor. EOG recording has established that the mature male Atlantic salmon is sensitive (1011 mol l1
threshold) to both prostaglandin F1 (PGF1) and PGF2.42 Further, when exposed to female urine or either of
these compounds, mature male salmon experience increased hormone levels and sperm production, leading to
the suggestion that F prostaglandins serve as priming pheromones, an hypothesis that immunological measure-
ment of female holding water seems to confirm (see below). It makes sense that fishes should use a PGF-based
sex pheromone system because, as originally shown in the goldfish (see below),43 these fatty acids have
prominent endocrine roles mediating ovulation and sexual receptivity. Evidence using EOG recording and a
hormone/sperm production bioassay also suggests that the closely related brown trout employs a similar
F prostaglandin-derived sex pheromone system.41,44–46 In one report using precociously mature Atlantic
salmon, it was reported that 17,20-dihydroxy-4-pregnen-3-one 20 sulfate (12) was detected by the olfactory
system.47

4.05.3.2.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry

To test the possibility that PGF1 (8) and PGF2 (9) might have pheromonal relevance in Atlantic salmon and
brown trout, as they do in goldfish (below), ovulatory fluid and urine from both species were collected and the
possible presence of these products tested using radio-immunoassays directed against PGF2. These assays had
notable affinity for both PGF2 and PGF1 (the latter being slightly lower) but very little affinity for a half
dozen other prostaglandin metabolites. Several tens of nanograms of immunoreactive prostaglandin F (IR-
PGF) was measured per milliliter of urine in the Atlantic salmon,48 and IR-PGF was detected in both the urine
and ovulatory fluid of brown trout.44 Olsén et al.45 also measured IR-PGFs in brown trout using different
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 237

immunoassays, which included a chemical reduction step to evaluate the presence of E series prostaglandins. In
conclusion, it seems clear that F-series prostaglandins function as pheromones in this species, but their precise
identities and functions await further characterization and confirmation.

CO2H
HO HO
CO2H

HO OH HO OH

8 Prostaglandin F1α 9 Prostaglandin F2α

4.05.3.3 African Catfish

The African catfish (Clarias gariepinus) is native to subtropical Africa but is now cultured across the planet.
Males and females of this species spawn as pairs in flooded vegetation in turbid waters and appear to use
pheromones to locate and identify each other.

4.05.3.3.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology

Various laboratory behavioral studies suggest that both males and females release sex pheromones, but most of
the attention has focused on the males, which have enormously developed seminal vesicles and whose fluid is
attractive to ovulated females in mazes. In vitro incubation demonstrates that these glands possess the ability to
produce numerous steroids, many of which are conjugated with glucuronic acid, and, thus, highly water
soluble.49 EOG recording shows that many of these conjugates are detected at subpicomolar concentrations,50
and a mixture of them attracted females in a laboratory maze.51 One of these compounds, 3,17-dihydroxy-
5-pregnan-20-one-3-glucuronide (10), is of special interest because it has high olfactory activity and also was
found in African catfish holding water. Studies also suggest that this catfish possesses a maturation inducing
pheromone that accelerates the onset of puberty.52

4.05.3.3.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry

Holding water from the adult conspecifics was collected, freeze-dried, and further concentrated through a C18-
resin. The concentrate was then partitioned between methylene chloride and water to provide separate free
steroid and glucuronidated steroid fractions, respectively. The latter was treated with -glucuronidase to
release the steroidal aglycones. Both fractions of parent steroids were derivatized (through oxime formation and
exhaustive trimethylsilyl etherification) and subjected to GC–MS analysis, which relied substantially on
comparison with authentic standards. Numerous hormonal steroids and steroidal glucuronides, previously
known to be present in seminal vesicle incubates,49 were identified. The most potent of these from an olfactory
perspective (EOG measurement) was 3,17-dihydroxy-5-pregnan-20-one-3-glucuronide (10).

OH OH
H
HO OH
H H
HO
O O
H
O
10 3α,17α-Dihydroxy-5β-pregnan-20-one-3-glucuronide
238 Pheromones in Vertebrates

4.05.3.4 Goldfish
Goldfish (Carassius auratus) and its immediate relatives, the crucian carp (C. carassius), and the common
carp (Cyprinus carpio) are three closely related species that will hybridize and appear to use very similar
hormonally derived pheromones. The goldfish, a temperate East Asian species, is the best understood of
these species (and perhaps all bony fishes) and thus serves as a model for understanding hormonal
pheromones more generally. The carps live in turbid, temperature waters. Because they spawn one to
several times a year and because their gametes are short-lived, reproductive synchrony between and
within genders is of paramount importance to their reproductive success. For example, pheromones are
so important that male goldfish do not spawn if their olfactory system is blocked.53 Female goldfish live
in unstructured groups and spawn infrequently. Males actively seek and then compete for access to
ovulated females, a process that has favored a heightened awareness of body odors and hormonal
products in particular. Male goldfish discriminate between priming cues, which allows their hormone
systems to cycle with that of the females so that they produce maximum amounts of fertile sperm, and
signaling cues, which they use to locate females. Several of the sex pheromones used by goldfish are
unmodified hormones, which are naturally released at times that correlate directly with the female’s
reproductive state and, therefore, have intrinsic biological relevance. The same chemicals are thus used
twice, first hormonally as internal synchronizers and then pheromonally as external synchronizers. This
elegant parsimony is an example of how two signaling systems can co-evolve. Other species also appear
to use hormonal metabolites as sex pheromones, presumably for similar reasons, but the most compre-
hensive evidence for this has been obtained in goldfish. This discovery serves as an important model of
‘hormonal sex pheromones,’ a topic of other reviews.10,11

4.05.3.4.1 Male and female sex pheromones: Biology

Both male- and female-derived cues have been extensively characterized in the goldfish. These cues
represent a now well-understood hormone-based system that synchronizes female and male behaviors
and physiologies. We discuss both sets of cues together because they comprise closely related and
overlapping hormonal systems that function as priming cues (i.e., they stimulate hormone production).
Interestingly, one of the female priming pheromone components (17,20-dihydoxy-4-pregnen-3-one) is
an unmodified hormone, which is excreted through the gill during final maturation. In effect, this
hormonal pheromone stimulates its own production in conspecifics, resulting in massive synchronization
of entire populations. In other words, some goldfish hormones and pheromones are comprised of one and
the same set of components. Understanding of the goldfish system is of added importance because the
goldfish and its relative, the carp, are commercially important. More in depth understanding of this
pheromone was made possible, in part, from the fact that the endocrinology of goldfish was well
understood. This allowed adoption of techniques developed in endocrinological studies for use in the
subsequent investigations of hormonal pheromones. Indeed, internal (hormonal) and external (phero-
mone) chemical signaling systems are tightly linked in this species resulting in positive feedback
loops.11,37 As its internal hormonal composition changes so does the externally released pheromonal
blend, and different messages are produced and perceived over the cycle. Specifically, 17,20-dihydroxy-
4-pregnen-3-one; (17,20P, 11) mediates final gamete maturation and is found in high levels in the
blood for just a few hours,54 and PGF2a (9) mediates follicular rupture and drives female sexual
behavior.43 Both structures and their metabolites are then cleared to the outside to function as pher-
omones. Immunoassays have shown that ovulatory female goldfish rapidly clear dozens of steroid
hormones and metabolites to the water (below),55,56 where three of them [17,20P (11), 17,20-dihy-
droxy-4-pregen-3-one-20-sulfate (17,20P-S, 12) and androstenedione (AD, 13)] are discerned with
sensitivities ranging between 1011 and 1012 mol l1 (Figure 357).55,58 Depending on context and timing
these steroids can function as pheromones in their own right or as components of more complex
multicomponent cues with various meanings.59 Species identity seems to be portrayed by the nonhor-
monal components of this mixture.60
Bioassays using either ovulatory female holding water or the steroids they contain have demonstrated
that 17,20P (11) functions as a priming pheromone that triggers hormonal surges in exposed males and
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 239

17α, 20β-Dihydroxy-4-pregen-3-one-20-sulfate (12) 2 mV

EOG recording
1 mV
0 mV

10–12 10–11 10–10 10–9 10–8 Molar

17α, 20β-Dihydroxy-4-pregen-3-one (11) 3 mV

EOG recording
2 mV
1 mV
0 mV

10–13 10–12 10–11 10–10 10–9 10–8 Molar

Figure 3 An example of electro-olfactogram (EOG) data; chart recordings of responses of male common carp whose
sensitivity to hormonal compounds 12 and 11 is very similar to that of goldfish.57

females, thereby driving synchronized gamete maturation and spawning.54,61 The other two gonadal
steroids serve as modulatory components, with 17,20P-S (12) enhancing behavioral responses, and AD
(13) suppressing responses at different times in the female cycle.10 Ratios determine function and change
during the reproductive cycle. Later at the time of ovulation, which coincides with spawning, females
stop releasing steroids and instead produce and release prostaglandin F2 (9) and its metabolites. The
male goldfish nose is extremely and specifically sensitive to one of these, 15keto-prostaglandin F2 (15K-
PGF2, 14).62 The latter, postovulatory cue elicits strong behavioral responses and allows males to locate
females, which release it, exclusively, in their urine. Behavioral studies confirm that 15K-PGF2 (14)
elicits similar responses as those of ovulated female holding water, at least when presented in a matrix of
body odor.11,43
Finally, immunoassay shows that male goldfish release AD (13) and other androgens in the absence
of pregnane (21 carbon) gonadal steroids. Together this specific mixture (i.e., blend) signals gender
identity.55 There is no evidence that hormonal metabolism is highly specialized in the goldfish,56 but
mixture recognition is very important.59 Since the discovery of this sophisticated chemical signaling
system in the goldfish, EOG recording has shown that many (perhaps most) fishes detect hormonal
cues (cf. Atlantic salmon and brown trout, above) and probably use them as hormonal pheromones, but
only for goldfish has production, release, detection, and biological responsiveness been established
fully.37 Carps are of economic importance and their pheromones are being considered for various
applications.57

4.05.3.4.2 Male and female sex pheromones: Chemistry

Sex pheromone identification in the goldfish is based on the coordinated use of over a dozen highly
specific antisera developed against a variety of fish gonadal steroids and prostaglandins. Characterization
of all components of the cue using mass spectrometry has not been achieved (except for PGF2 and
15K-PGF2, (P.W. Sorensen, unpublished)), but characterization using immunoassays has been completed
and correlates with olfactory sensitivity and specificity. For steroid analysis, water samples were
collected at appropriate times during the goldfish reproductive cycle, extracted using reversed-phase
C18 resins, and then deconjugated (or not) using either acid hydrolysis (sulfates) or treatment with
appropriate enzymes (glucuronidase).55,61 With few exceptions, the antisera used in these studies were
very specific (e.g., they were sensitive to single changes in side chain structure or orientation).63,64 The
prostaglandin assays were also specific; separate antisera were used to assay for PGF2 and 15K-
PGF2.65,62 Further, goldfish injected with radiolabeled PGF2 (9), excreted labeled 15K-PGF2 (14)
in their urine thereby establishing that the former is oxidatively metabolized into the latter and that it
240 Pheromones in Vertebrates

has pheromonal function.66 Finally, unlike Salmo, the goldfish olfactory system has been extensively
characterized and shown to discriminate among 17,20P (11), 17,20P-S (12), AD (13), PGF2 (9), and
PGF1 (8). Thus, data from electrophysiological, behavioral, endocrinological, and immunological assays
all are in agreement that these five hormonal compounds serve as a pheromonal mixture in the goldfish.

X O CO2H
HO
OH
H H

H H H H
O O HO X

11 17, 20β -Dihydroxy-4-pregnen-3-one, X = OH 13 Androstenedione 9 Prostaglandin F2α , = α H, β OH

12 17,20β -Dihydroxy-4-pregnen-3-one- 14 15-Ketoprostaglandin F2α , X = O
20-sulfate, X = OSO3Na

4.05.4 Pheromones in Amphibians

The amphibians (Amphibia) evolved from the ancient fishes approximately 400 million years ago. There are
about 6000 species of amphibians in five groups comprising the frogs, toads, salamanders, newts, and gymno-
phiona. Amphibians possess four legs, and most have a life history that includes a juvenile water breathing form
that eventually metamorphoses, mandating an aquatic pheromone system. Several aquatic sex pheromones
have been fully identified in the newts and frogs and a few protein cues have been characterized in terrestrial
salamanders.

4.05.4.1 Asian Red-Bellied Newt and Its Relative the Sword-Tailed Newt
There are seven species of fire belly newts (Cynops), all of which are found in semi-tropical regions of Japan
and China and spend most of their lives in water.

4.05.4.1.1 Male sex pheromones: Biology

Mating in Cynops newts occurs in the water during which time males actively court females, blocking their
passage and using their tails to then fan water toward the females’ snouts. Interested females respond by
following a male and touch their snouts to his cloaca. The male eventually releases a sticky spermatophore in
the females’ path, which can stick to the lips of their cloaca and be absorbed. A few weeks later the female will
deposit eggs. Although salamanders have long been suspected to employ pheromones, Kikuyama et al.67 were
the first to test this possibility by extracting newt holding waters and their cloacal glands. Activity was
monitored by observing the snout position of sexually receptive females in 3-l aquaria containing sponges
soaked with glandular extracts, pheromonal candidates, or various controls. A decapeptide, termed sodefrin
(15), was eventually isolated from red-bellied newt water and found to have behavioral activity in the
picomolar range. This represents the first example of a peptide used by any organism as a component of a
pheromone. Later, EOG recording from the vomeronasal system of mature female newts confirmed their
sensitivity to this novel peptide.68 Tests using the congeneric species, the sword-tailed newt, subsequently led
to the discovery that this species is behaviorally insensitive to sodefrin and that it uses a different but
related peptide, silefrin (16).69 Most recently, a population-specific variant of sodefrin [(Val8)-sodefrin] has
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 241

been isolated from two specific red-bellied newt populations,70 demonstrating how flexible yet specific a
peptide-based pheromone system can be.

4.05.4.1.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry

Sodefrin (15) is the first peptide pheromone to be discovered in a vertebrate.67 An aqueous extract of
male abdominal cloacal glands was shown to be behaviorally attractive to female red-bellied newts when
presented on a sponge block in a 3-l holding tank. Approximately 0.1% of the extracts of one male gland
was sufficient to elicit response. Partitioning the extract with organic solvent left the active fraction in
the water phase and pronase digestion destroyed activity. Thus it was hypothesized that the active
component(s) was peptidic. Fractionation of the water-soluble portion by gel permeation chromatography
showed that activity remained with material of size <5 kDa. Regimens of reversed-phase chromato-
graphic separation led to isolation of a behaviorally active peptide of nominal mass 1071 (FAB-MS) that
could be sequenced directly. The resulting structure was new, so, to pay homage to its activity, the
peptide was named sodefrin (15), a derivative of the ancient Japanese word ‘sodefuri,’ which means
‘soliciting.’ An authentic sample of sodefrin was prepared by synthesis. In an elegantly simple and
effective experiment, a sponge block doped with 10 ng of sodefrin (15) was placed in a tank holding
3 l of 0.1 pmol l1 background level of sodefrin (15) and females were attracted to the source; however, at
background concentrations above 1 pmol l1, females could no longer distinguish the concentration
gradient emitted from the sponge block.

NH3+

O
+H O OH CO2–
3N N O O O O
H H H H
N N N N
HO N N N N CO2–
H H H H
O O Me O

NH3+

15 Sodefrin (Ser-Ile-Pro-Ser-Lys-Asp-Ala-Leu-Leu-Lys)

NH3+

CONH2
OH CO2–
O O O O O
+H
H H H H
3N N N N N
N N N N N CO2–
H H H H H
O O O Me O
HO
NH3 +

16 Silefrin (Ser-Ile-Leu-Ser-Lys-Asp-Ala-Gln-Leu-Lys)

A related species, the sword-tailed newt, was studied leading to the isolation and sequencing of the
homologous peptide silefrin (16).69 Peptides 15 and 16, each produced in the abdominal gland of male
red-bellied or sword-tailed newts, respectively, differ in only two of their ten amino acid residues
(positions 3 and 8), yet neither attracts females of the other species. Furthermore, none of the ‘foreign’
peptide could be observed by cross radioimmunoassay experiments with the abdominal gland from each
species of male. The specificity of these otherwise closely related systems is elegant.
242 Pheromones in Vertebrates

4.05.4.2 Jordan’s Salamander

Woodland and slimy (Plethodon) salamanders are lung-less and lack an aquatic phase, reproducing in moist
regions of the forest. They have evolved to employ large peptide contact pheromones, which are best
understood in the Jordan’s salamander and partially described in the Ocoee salamander.71

4.05.4.2.1 Courtship pheromone: Biology

During the courtship season males of the terrestrial Jordan’s salamander, which is native to the Pacific
Northwest, develop a gland under their chins that they rub on a female’s nares (nostrils) while
performing a courtship behavior known as the straddling walk. This chin gland contains two peptides,
a 22-kDa protein called plethodontid receptivity factor (PRF)72 and a smaller 7-kDa protein called
plethodon modulatory factor (PMF).73 Assays using purified peptides placed on the female nares have
shown that the former shortens female receptivity while the latter lengthens female courtship behavior,
one counterbalancing the effect of the other. Application of a neural label (agmatine) to the vomeronasal
organ has confirmed the presence of ORNs that are specifically sensitive to either PRF or PMF in this
species.74

4.05.4.2.2 Courtship pheromone: Chemistry

Both PRF and PMF were isolated by a similar protocol.72 The proteinaceous material from excised mental
(submandibular) glands from male P. jordani was extracted with acetylcholine chloride and purified by
NaCl gradient HPLC on a MonoQ HR 5/5 anion exchange column. Further purification of the PRF-rich
fractions was performed on a Sephadex G-75 gel filtration column. SDS–PAGE and HPLC analyses
confirmed the presence of several isoforms of 22 kDa PRF. The DNA sequences corresponding to four
of these were determined, and sequence homology with members of the interleukin-6 (IL-6) cytokine
family was noted. More recently, the behavioral properties of the purified 7 kDa protein component (PMF)
were reported.73 Together, PRF and PMF comprise approximately 85% of the total protein composition of
the chin (mental hedonic) gland extract. The ratio of PRF:PMF (1:2) was constant in collections from
different years.

4.05.4.3 Australian Tree Frog

The Australian tree frog (Litoria splendida) is native to Western Australia and spends much of its day in caves.
The first anuran (frog or toad) pheromone was identified in this species.

4.05.4.3.1 Male sex pheromone: Biology

The Australian magnificent tree frog breeds in the water, where males court females. A peptide, now called
splendipherin, has been extracted from the male parotid and rostral glands and found to attract females in glass
tanks at concentrations of approximately 1013 mol l1.75 This pheromone attracts females from distances of up
to a meter within minutes.

4.05.4.3.2 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry

Because anurans, including L. splendida, often breed in water, the peptide components of the secretions
of the paratoid and rostral glands were purified directly by HPLC. The active component was
sequenced with the aid of electrospray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS) and given the name
splendipherin (17).76 The structure of this 25-amino acid peptide subsequently was confirmed by
comparison with a synthetically prepared sample, which further established that all amino acids were
of the L-configuration.
 NH3+

H
OH CO2– O N CO2–
O O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O
+H N
H
3 N N N N N N N N N N
N N N N N N N N N N N
H O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O H O
OH CONH2

NH3+
17 Splendiferin (GLVSSIGKALGGLLADVVKSKGQPA)
244 Pheromones in Vertebrates

4.05.5 Pheromones in Reptiles

The reptiles (Reptilia) evolved from the early vertebrates about 300 million years ago. Reptiles have four legs
and are air-breathing, cold-blooded vertebrates that have skin covered with scales. Most are exclusively
terrestrial. Modern reptiles inhabit every continent except Antarctica and are represented by four living
groups: the crocodiles and alligators, lizards and snakes, turtles and tortoises, and the Sephondontia (New
Zealand only). Except for the last group there is compelling behavioral data that suggest that all groups use
pheromones to mediate sexual interactions. However, few have been studied at the chemical level. All members
of this group have a vomeronasal organ and appear to use nonvolative cues. Only in one species of snake, the
Canadian red-sided garter snake, is the chemical identity of the pheromones well-established. Reptilian
pheromones have been reviewed.77

4.05.5.1 Red-Sided Garter Snake

Although it is quite possible that most, if not all, reptiles employ pheromones to mediate sexual interactions,
only for the red-sided garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis parietalis) have both the identities of the cues and their
functions been established.78 This species is one of the most northern living reptiles in the Northern
Hemisphere and has evolved an unusual life history; it hibernates in large underground hibernacula for most
of the year, emerging in the spring to mate and then feed. Males emerge first from hibernacula and aggregate in
thousands waiting for females, which they recognize using mixtures of ketones found in the skin of the female.
Males sample other snakes by traversing the lengths of their bodies while rubbing them with their chins and
flicking their tongues, thereby bringing samples to the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Thus, this is a nonvolatile
contact pheromone.

4.05.5.1.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology

Hundreds of males may aggregate around females during the mating process, forming ‘mating balls,’ but
ultimately only one male will mate with any given female. Analyses of the snake skin lipid components showed
the presence of a series of nonvolatile, nonpolar long-chained methyl ketones (see 18–30 below).79,80 Several
were synthesized. Males specifically respond to individual ketones but more strongly to artificial mixtures of
these ketones, suggesting that mixture composition is important.79 Pheromone blends are probably discerned
with considerable sophistication because males are known to be able to distinguish the trails of larger females
and even females from different locations, all of which have slightly different skin lipid compositions.81,82
Interestingly, while most males are ignored by other males because their skin lipids are distinguished by the
presence of squalene,83 certain males known as ‘she-males’ function as female mimics, attracting other males
giving them certain advantages.84 She-males lack squalene, and it is speculated that they possess a unique blend
of the lipid ketones, although this has yet to be documented. Neurophysiological recording has also not been
reported so it is unclear how sensitive the nervous systems of snakes are. This interesting system, variations of
which are probably operative in other snakes, has considerable potential for further development.

4.05.5.1.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry

The red-sided garter snake pheromone components were isolated by hexane extraction of the skin lipids of
sacrificed snakes. Female snakes yielded more total lipid than males (38.4 versus 8.4 mg snake1).80 Initial
fractionation on an activity III alumina column gave a fraction (eluted with 98:2, hexanes:ethyl ether) that was
attractive to courting males. NMR and infrared (IR) spectra of this fraction were suggestive of the presence of
methyl ketones, straight chain alkyl lipid subunits, and Z-alkenes. GC–MS analysis, including extensive
consideration of the fragmentation of the electron impact MS data, led to the identification of a family of
relatively nonvolatile (C29–C37) lipid methyl ketones. Specifically, the individual components of a mixture of
saturated and monounsaturated methyl ketones 18–30 were identified.
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 245

O O

m n

Saturated Mono unsaturated

methyl ketones methyl ketones

Str m Tot C# Str n Tot C#

18 24 27 21 19 33
19 26 29 24 21 33
20 27 30 26 22 34
22 28 31 27 23 35
23 29 32 29 24 36
25 30 33 30 25 37
28 32 35

To deduce the location of the double bond within the lipid backbone, the mixture (500 ng) was subjected to
consecutive bisthiomethylation of the alkene85 and O-methyloxime formation (Equation 3). GC–MS study of
the fragmentation of these derivatives (e.g., see 31, derived from 24) allowed simultaneous determination of the
cleavage site (between C24 and C25) and of which portion contained the original ketone (i.e., the odd versus
even mass fragments of 173 and 426 for 31). All of the monounsaturated lipid ketones had the alkene in the same
‘downstream’ location; in other words, they varied in the number of methylene units between the ketone and
alkene functional groups but were constant in their n-octyl terminal alkyl moiety. The four most major
components (24, 25, 27, and 28) were prepared by chemical synthesis and used to confirm their identity in
the natural pheromone and their pheromonal activity both alone and in admixtures.

M+•
m/z 426 m/z 87 m/z
(1) (MeS)2,I2 599
(2) MeONH2 • HCl NOMe
MeS SMe ð3Þ
18–30
(3) GC–MS analysis
15

m/z 173 m/z 100

31 (from 24)

4.05.6 Pheromones in Birds

Birds (class Aves) evolved from the therapsid dinosaurs (lizards) approximately 200 million years ago. Birds are
warm-blooded and bipedal (two legs) and lay eggs. Most modern birds have feathers and fly, sometimes
migrating enormous distances. There are about 10 000 species of birds, making them the second largest group of
vertebrates after the fishes. They are extremely mobile and have excellent visual and auditory systems suited to
aerial communication. Not surprisingly, with only a few exceptions (water/sea birds and flightless birds), birds
have poorly developed olfactory systems and chemical signaling systems. Although there is good evidence for
the existence of pheromones in several species of ducks, only in the communal nesting auklet is the associated
chemistry well-developed. The use of body odors by birds may nevertheless be more common than has been
shown to date.86 Birds produce many chemicals for the purposes of defense from insects, and it is possible that
some of these have become secondarily specialized for chemical signaling, although evidence to support that
hypothesis is, as yet, correlational. This hypothesis and the bird pheromone field have been reviewed
recently.86
246 Pheromones in Vertebrates

4.05.6.1 Crested Auklet

The crested auklet (Aethia cristatella) is a small seabird from the Sea of Okhotsk and the Bering Sea in the
western and northern Pacific. It nests in huge (>1 million) colonies that are often co-occupied with their
congeners, the least auklets. During its mating season, the highly social crested auklet develops a characteristic
group of bristled feathers on its head and it emits an odor that has been described as tangerine-like.

4.05.6.1.1 Ornamental pheromone: Biology

Crested auklets produce large quantities of various volatile odorants in their plumage, which gives them a
tangerine-like odor. This mixture is comprised mainly of octanal and cis-4-decanal and is not gender specific. It
is associated with seasonal display and courtship behavior when birds place their bills under the nape of their
partner’s plumage.87 Bioassays using models of birds show that birds of both sexes approach models of males for
longer periods of times and more closely when the models are scented with natural or synthetic plumage odors;
female models, similarly scented, elicit little response.87,88 Scents did not increase courtship behaviors, which
suggests that this odor serves as a social ‘ornament’ facilitating social aggregation, perhaps akin to scent marks in
mammals. Questions about the true function of this odor remain as does the neural basis of its detection, and it
can be debated whether it has been shown to be a ‘true’ pheromone. Nevertheless, we include it here because it
is the best example of possible pheromone usage amongst the birds.

4.05.6.1.2 Ornamental pheromone: Chemistry

Plumage from test (breeding season) and control (off-breeding season) auklets were collected and placed in a
closed vessel. Headspace was collected, concentrated with solid-phase microextraction, and subjected to GC–
MS analysis. Correlation with library MS data and, ultimately, authentic samples led to compound identifica-
tion. Twenty volatile compounds (generally, fatty acids and aldehydes) were present in sufficient concentration
for reliable quantification (>0.1 mg g1 feathers). Meaningful seasonal variation was observed for ten of them. Of
the compounds present only in the feathers collected during breeding season, cis-4-decenal (32) was the most
prevalent (1.1 mg g1 feathers), and octanal (33), while present in samples from both seasons, was present in the
highest concentration overall (3.0 mg g1 feathers).

CHO
CHO

32 33

4.05.7 Pheromones in Mammals

The mammals (Mammalia) evolved from the amniotes, a sister group of the sauropsids (from which the reptiles
and birds evolved), approximately 300 million years ago. This group contains >5000 species in a few dozen
orders. Mammals are homeothermic (warm blooded) and are characterized by the presence of hair, sweat glands
(some of which are modified for milk production), three middle ear bones, and a well-developed brain with a
neocortex. The latter is responsible for their complex cognitive function and the ability to process and
remember a wide variety of sensory stimuli to effect a broad array of sophisticated behaviors. With the
exception of the monotremes (platypus), all mammals give birth to live young and have well-developed family
structures, a feature that also requires behavioral sophistication and the ability to recognize kin. Mammals have
keenly developed chemosensory systems that often include a vomeronasal system. Accordingly, it should be no
surprise that odors, including pheromones, play important and complex roles in the everyday lives of most
mammals. These roles generally defy simple definition. The odors often function as subtle signaling cues and
often are context dependent. Mixtures play important and varying roles. Pheromones are especially important
in small burrowing nocturnal creatures (e.g., rodents). Many have evolved various skin glands that either
produce various compounds themselves (sometimes by providing a haven for microbes) and/or shuttle
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 247

products of various excretory pathways to their surrounds, where they then adopt the role of scent marker.
Although some of these products can be considered pheromones because there appears to be specific disposi-
tion to respond to them (e.g., frontalin in the elephants), others have less-defined functions related to individual
identification. Other mammalian pheromones are found in urinary or fecal excretions. The combinations are
complex, and context (odor and other cues) is often important to pheromone function in mammals.2,5
Recent reviews of mammalian semiochemicals89 and of mammalian pheromones8,90,91 have appeared.
Vandenbergh groups mammalian pheromones into various categories,8 which we have used here as a basis
for organization into three main and four subcategories:
1. Signaling pheromones. Communication of individual identity and status is of enormous importance to most
mammals, and they have evolved a variety of chemical cues and chemosensory systems to accomplish this
task. Although in many instances the message conveyed is multifaceted, complicating its study, several
subtypes can be identified, some of which can have overlapping pheromone function.
(1) Individuality signals. Information of precise genetic identity and relationship is especially important to
mammals that live in tight family groups (often in dark burrows) and need to outbreed and recognize
young and mates. In many mammals, including mice and humans, unknown components of body odor
identify genetic identity. These distinctive odors (which some also term ‘signature cues’), may, depend-
ing on context, mediate maternal relationships between mothers and their young, mate selection by
females seeking unrelated fathers, or recognition of the fathers of young by pregnant females (the ‘Bruce
Effect’).92 Although the identity of this odor has not yet been identified, its production is now known to
be strongly correlated with the MHC, a set of genes that encodes for self-recognition and is associated
with immunity. This conclusion is rooted in the observation that mice, which select mates based on odor,
can distinguish between urine of mice that differ at one gene position in their MHC.93 Recent
discoveries have shown that the vomeronasal system is sensitive to peptide fragments of proteins
encoded by the MHC.94 It is possible that other components, including microbial breakdown products,
also contribute to MHC-associated individuality signals, which may, in fact, be learned.4
(2) Territoriality pheromones. Many mammals maintain feeding and/or reproductive territories, which they
mark with excretions derived from specialized scent glands. These scent gland excretions contain a rich
array of phenolics, fatty acids, lipids, and small alcohols; territoriality odors are used by beavers, dogs,
rats, hamsters, deer, and perhaps half a dozen other species.3 Often these chemicals are bound to and
transported by special carrier proteins and can be long-lived, permitting rodents to engage in compe-
titive ‘over-marking.’2,95 Some systems simultaneously convey information on social dominance, but no
compound with clear direct relevance has been identified.91
(3) Sex attractants. As in most animals, mating in mammals is typically highly competitive and its duration
short-lived. Males of many (most) species of mammals have evolved acute abilities to detect and identify
ovulating or recently ovulated (fertile) females using special types of signaling pheromones. A good
example of such a female cue is found in the Asian elephants (below). Additionally, in a few instances,
female mammals have evolved the ability to discern males so that they perform appropriate submissive
or receptive behaviors. One of these cues has been identified in the pig (below).
(4) Alarm pheromones. Many mammals live in family groups that are prone to attack. Some of these species
have evolved chemical signaling systems that are triggered when danger is perceived. This is best
described perhaps in deer, which release a series of odorants from their tarsal glands when startled,
although the active component(s) have not yet been definitively isolated and identified.96
2. Priming pheromones. Many species of mammals live in small social groups that stand to benefit if they can
synchronize their reproductive cycles so that optimal numbers of females come into reproductive condition
at the same times. Examples of such benefit is so that they give birth when food is available or that they might
care for each other’s young. Accordingly, many mammalian pheromonal systems serve to either accelerate or
inhibit the onset of puberty, mediate synchronous ovulation in groups of females, or block pregnancy.91
These cues appear to use complex suites of inter-related compounds (somewhat akin to goldfish priming
pheromones). Although such systems have been described in at least half a dozen mammals, chemical
components have only been identified for the house mouse (below).
248 Pheromones in Vertebrates

3. ‘Nipple search’ pheromones. Females of many mammals give birth to poorly developed young, which
often are blind and have difficulty finding the mother’s teats. In at least one of these instances, the rabbit is an
example (below), where the mother releases chemicals to guide this process.

4.05.7.1 European Rabbit

Rabbits are small, rather unusual, herbivorous mammals found in the order Lagomorpha. They live in burrows
and lead nocturnal existences. Rabbits breed young numerous times, giving birth to litters of half a dozen,
poorly developed young called ‘kits.’ In addition to having an excellent sense of hearing, rabbits have a superb
sense of smell. They appear to mark territories with odors that they use (in conjunction with sound) to
recognize each other, although none of the chemicals in these cues has been clearly identified. However, a
pheromone released by nursing mothers that attracts their newborn young has been identified.

4.05.7.1.1 Nipple search pheromone: Biology

Female European rabbits (Oryctolagus cuniculus) give birth in burrows but quickly leave to continue foraging.
They only visit their young for 4–5 min each day, when they return to the nest to allow the young to feed on
their rich milk. During these brief intervals, young blind rabbits need to quickly find the mother’s teats in the
face of competition from their littermates in the darkness of the den. A pheromone released in the female’s milk
guides this process. It was identified by passing milk through a gas chromatograph and directing fractions onto
the noses of young rabbits whose head movements and tendencies to grab the odor port with their mouths were
quantified.97

4.05.7.1.2 Nipple search pheromone: Chemistry

A stream of nitrogen gas was passed through freshly collected mother’s milk and the effluent collected by
adsorption on a Tenax TA resin (2,6-diphenylene oxide based). Subsequent desorption into a GC–MS
instrument led to the identification of 21 volatile components (low-molecular-weight aldehydes, ketones,
alcohols, and lactone) in the milk headspace. When each was screened for behavioral activity, one, 2-
methylbut-2-enal (34), was clearly the main compound responsible for eliciting searching–grasping responses
in the rabbit pup test subjects.
CHO 34
Me
2-methylbut-2-enal (2MB2)
Me

4.05.7.2 Golden Hamster

Rodents comprise a large order of mammals (over 2000 species or 40% of all mammals). The golden hamster
(Mesocricetus auratus), which comes from the steppe region of central Asia, is a rather typical rodent; it is not to
be confused with the golden gopher, which resides in the homeland of the authors. It relies heavily on
pheromones.98 Hamsters are solitary animals, which spend the day in their burrows and most of the night
gathering food across large feeding territories (up to 12 km across). It marks and maintains these areas using
scent marks. Although scent marking behavior is extremely sophisticated and well-documented,98 the identities
of the key compounds are not understood. Conversely, information is available on some female sexual
attractants. The hamster is now globally distributed and is used as a laboratory model for studying chemical
signaling.

4.05.7.2.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology

Female hamsters, like the males, are solitary, and they only allow males to approach when they are ovulating.
This species has evolved to use vaginal odors to signal receptivity. These odors appear to be very complex and
context dependent, although a single component, dimethyldisulfide (DMDS, 35), has been isolated and
identified during the course of three decades of study. Briefly, experienced male hamsters prefer the odor of
estrus females over that of pregnant or lactating females, and, in the presence of the bedding of such females,
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 249

males exhibit increased levels of scent-marking activity.98 Further, when nerves of the vomeronasal system of
males are severed, they show reduced courtship behavior.99 The chemical underlying this behavior appears to
be largely associated with female hamster vaginal discharge. Application of this discharge to males (but not to
inanimate objects) causes them to be inspected by females, without necessarily promoting attraction.100 DMDS
is a volatile component of the discharge, and it has been shown to promote male investigation behavior at
femtomolar concentrations.101,102 However, it appears to be only one component of a mosaic because, when
tested on its own, it is relatively inactive, causing some to question its true function.103 Interestingly, male rats
also find DMDS attractive, although here it is clear that it is only one component of many released by females.
Following the discovery of this role of DMDS, many other complex odors that convey individual identity were
described in various rodent species, further suggesting that these pheromone signaling systems are very
complex.91,104

4.05.7.2.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry

In one of the earliest studies focused on identifying a specific chemical perhaps responsible for a pheromonal
activity in a vertebrate,105 vaginal secretions from estrus hamsters was collected on a filter paper. To isolate
volatile components, the paper was immersed in water, nitrogen gas was passed through the water, and the
effluent was adsorbed on a Tenax resin. Behavioral response of male hamsters to the volatiles fractionated by
gas chromatographic separation and analysis of the active fraction by mass spectrometry led to the identifica-
tion of DMDS 35. An authentic sample was then used to assess that this agent elicited behavioral response at
least similar in nature to that of the intact vaginal odor set.105 Later studies have led to the suggestion that
DMDS may largely serve simply to stimulate investigation.2,103

S Me 35
Me S Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS)

4.05.7.3 House Mouse

The most well-known species of mouse is the common house mouse (Mus musculus). Its ecology and behavior
have been carefully documented. Because it is easily cultured and its genome has been sequenced, the mouse
serves as an important biomedical model. It also serves as a good model to understand mammalian pheromone
systems. Unlike the golden hamster, the house mouse is a highly social rodent that lives in large colonies where
individuals live in close contact with each other. The social and reproductive structure of these colonies is
controlled by complex mixtures of signaling and priming pheromones that mediate individual recognition, the
timing of puberty, reproductive cycling, mate selection, and sexual attraction. Two complex male-derived and
female-derived priming cues with complex functions are now relatively well understood and are described
below. One incompletely identified pheromone, which will not be reviewed further, is responsible for
pregnancy block (the ‘Bruce effect’). In pregnancy block pregnant females spontaneously abort after they are
exposed to the odor of alien males that are not the father of their young.4,92 It is possible that small peptides
produced by the MHC complex have a role in this system, and electrophysiological recording has shown both
the main olfactory system and the vomeronasal system to be acutely sensitive to MHC (nona)peptides.94 Most
of the other pheromone used by mice are released in the urine, even though they may be produced in any of
several specialized glands. They also are transported by carrier proteins, which may have pheromonal proper-
ties of their own. Scent glands are also important to mice, although their role appears associated with
recognition of individuals, and they are not further discussed here. Mice also appear to be using male and
female signaling pheromones, although understanding of these is not well-developed.106 Female mice prefer
the odor of males, and both the male urine and preputial glands have been implicated.107 It is probable that the
types of pheromonal cues employed by mice are typical of those used by many rodent species.

4.05.7.3.1 Male-derived priming pheromone: Biology

Social mammals that live in colonies, such as mice, must orchestrate complex series of physiological and
behavioral events to ensure reproductive success of the unit. Of special importance is the timing of puberty in
250 Pheromones in Vertebrates

females and the subsequent cycling of their estrus cycles. This can both divert the attention of males and
determine the need for maternal care. In many mice, these phenomena are linked and driven by a common set
of pheromonal cues released by mature males and females. These have opposing stimulatory and inhibitory
functions and act as a coupled oscillator.9 Only in mice have the identities of these cues been partially
deciphered. Four decades ago, Vandenbergh discovered that the onset of puberty in colonies of female mice
is accelerated by as much as 10 days if they are exposed to trace amounts of mature male urine.108 Odorous cues
coming from dominant males are the most effective. Even earlier, Whitten had demonstrated that urine of male
mice can stimulate the onset of estrus in mature females (the ‘Whitten effect’), thereby inducing cycling within
the colony.109 From a systematic set of studies conducted by Novotny and colleagues, we now know that both
phenomena are driven by a common set of chemical cues.
As detailed below, early studies of volatiles found in male mouse urine led to the isolation of two unique
compounds: 2-(sec-butyl)-4,5-dihydrothiazole (36) and 3,4-dehydro-exo-brevicomin (37). These compounds
were found to attract females and stimulate aggression in males when added to a matrix of castrated male urine;
thus they have mixed priming and signaling functions.110 Next, it was discovered that when these components
were introduced into cages of grouped females (no effect was seen in single females), they shortened the
duration and increased the number of estrus cycles, resulting in an effect similar to the Whitten effect.111
Examining male odor even more closely, Novotny and colleagues later identified two terpene compounds from
the male preputial gland (an exocrine gland associated with the genitalia).112 These were E,E--farnesene (38)
and E--farnesene (39), which also stimulate estrus synchronization on their own. More recently, examining
uterine weights of groups of prepubescent female mice exposed to these stimuli, the same group established that
all four compounds advance the time puberty (uterine growth) and cycling in females (Figure 4).113 A fifth
compound, as well as the fifth male urinary bladder component, 6-hydroxy-6-methyl-3-heptanone (40) was
later identified in male urine. It was also found to have priming effects on uterine development.114 All five of
these components are now known to be detected with extreme sensitivity by the mouse vomeronasal system.115
Exactly why and how the house mouse uses these complex matrices of cues, and whether more components
exist, remains an open question.
The function of many of the five identified male-derived pheromonal components requires the presence of
male urinary protein (MUP), a conglomerate of highly variable polypeptides found in male urine that bind 36
and 37.116 Although the role of MUP has been not fully elucidated (e.g., there is evidence that MUPs have
pheromonal activity in their own right95 but this interpretation is not universally held113), Novotny et al.113
established that recombinant MUPs selectively complex with the five male pheromones, subsequently releasing
them to elicit priming activity on females. It makes sense for a terrestrial vertebrate that engages in scent
marking to possess a sophisticated system for tailoring the release of the individual chemicals, the suite of which
comprise a fundamental priming cue. Presumably, subtly different messages can be sent by variation of the
composition of the suite.

80
**
Uterine weight (mg)

70
* *
60

50

40

30
Water Geraniol β-Farne- 3,4-Dehydro- Male Female
control control sene exo-brevicomin MUP MUP
(39) (37)

Figure 4 Uterine growth rates of female mice exposed to various pheromones and MUPs (p < 0.05, p < 0.01).113
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 251

4.05.7.3.2 Male-derived priming pheromone: Chemistry

Thiazoline 36 was first isolated from mouse urine in 1977 by a protocol that was similar to that used (and discussed
above) for volatile compounds 34 and 35.117,118 Namely, the contents of headspace from 15 ml of mouse urine was
purged with nitrogen through a Tenax column, concentrated onto a cold trap precolumn, and injected for GC and
mass spectrometric analysis. Bioassay-guided fractionation was not used; instead attention was focused on two
components that were absent or present in only trace amounts in female but predominant in male urine samples.
Since differential detection by flame ionization versus ‘sulfur-specific’ detection was used, it was certain that each of
the two compounds contained sulfur. Detailed analyses of the accurate masses (10 millimass units) of the nine and
seven most major (parent and fragment) ions led to the conclusion that the compounds were 2-(sec-butyl)-4,5-
dihydrothiazole (36) and its lower homologue, 2-isopropyl-4,5-dihydrothiazole. Neither had previously been
reported as a constituent of any animal’s urine. Behavioral responses directly associated with 36 were first described
in 1985.119 While a natural sample of nonracemic 36 was characterized by retention on a chiral gas chromatographic
column, a number of early attempts to synthesize an enantioenriched sample failed because of the configurational
lability of the stereogenic center in synthetic precursors and/or 36 itself under conditions used to close the
heterocyclic ring. It was not until 1999 that an enantioselective synthesis was achieved.120 During that study, it
was observed that a neat sample of 36 racemized within days at ambient temperature, but that storage in the cold or
in dilute solution slowed that process, which presumably occurred through the exocyclic enamine tautomer of 36.
Finally, in 2003 the absolute configuration of the 36 produced in male mice was reported,121 having been
determined through study of the retention times of the synthetic sample of known configuration120 versus the
natural sample on an enantioselective capillary GC column.
In 1984, Novotny and coworkers reported the first of their series of studies describing mouse pheromones.117,122
Specifically, they described the isolation and structure determination of 3,4-dehydro-exo-brevicomin (37) and the
synthesis of a racemic sample for structure confirmation. Volatiles were isolated in much the same manner as
described for 36. As with thiazoline, a direct bioassay was not used to focus attention on the component of greatest
interest; rather the presence of what eventually proved to be 37 in male but not female urine, established by
comparative chromatographic analysis, guided that decision. Precise mass measurement of the active component
pointed to a molecular formula of C9H14O2. Interestingly, GC-FTIR (Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy)
was then used to show the absence of carbonyl or hydroxyl functionality, implicating a ketal. This further informed
analysis of the electron-impact mass spectrometry (EIMS) fragmentation pattern, leading to the tentative assign-
ment of the constitution of 37, which was then confirmed by synthesis of the ()-37.117,122 The levels of 37 in urine
from castrated male mice was substantially lower, but could be restored by subsequent administration of testoster-
one to those castrates. Thus, the testes are not the location of biosynthesis of 37. Subsequently, numerous research
groups reported syntheses of 37, both in racemic and nonracemic120,123–125 forms. Comparison of synthetic samples
of known absolute configuration with the natural material established the latter as the (1R, 5S,7R)-isomer shown in
37.126 Curiously, females showed a preference for urine samples from castrated male mice that had been spiked with
racemic 37 but not when spiked with either individual enantiomer when compared with the unspiked urine
alone.127

OH
Me
O O
Et N
38 E,E-α -Farnesene 40a 6-Hydroxy-6-methyl-
O
3-heptanone
Me S
Et H

36 (S)-2-(sec-Butyl)- 37 3,4-Dehydro-
4,5-dihydrothiazole exo-brevicomin
Et Me
HO O Me

39 E-β -Farnesene 40b 2-Ethyl-2-hydroxy-5,5-

dimethyltetrahydrofuran
252 Pheromones in Vertebrates

In subsequent studies the simple terpenes E,E-- and E--farnesene (38 and 39, respectively) were identified in
dominant male urine.128 These odoriferous terpenes had long been recognized as components of cues released by a
variety of other organisms (red fire ants, aphids, wild potato plants, fruit flies, and springbok). Because neither was
detected in male bladder urine, attention was focused on the preputial glands as the source. Volatile components
from dissected, fat-free preputial glands of dominant male mice were, again, preconcentrated on Tenax.
Subsequent GC analysis readily allowed identification of known 37 and 38. None of the earlier two components
36 or 37 was observed in the preputial volatiles, but both were present in the bladder urine of the same animals.
More recently, a fifth principle component, the spontaneously equilibrating mixture of ketoalcohol 40a and
hemiketal 40b, also was isolated from male mouse urine.114 In this instance, frozen urine sample was lyophilized and
the residue reconstituted in aqueous buffer and subjected to size-exclusion chromatography on Sephadex G-10.
Each resulting fraction was then subjected headspace analysis (Tenax/GC/MS protocol). A uterine weight
response assay was used to focus attention on a fraction that contained 40a/b. The tentative structural assignment
was confirmed by synthesis of an authentic sample.114 Ketone/hemiketal 40a/40b was found to accelerate puberty
in female mice. It was proposed that the ability of 40a/40b to bind to urinary protein and peptide constituents that
have very low volatility would explain the long-standing confusion over whether all constituents of the male-
derived priming pheromone are volatile.

4.05.7.3.3 Female-derived puberty inhibiting pheromone: Biology

Although the presence of male mice in the colony accelerates puberty onset in juvenile females, the presence of
mature females has the opposite effect – it inhibits the onset of puberty in juvenile females in the colony. Urinary
cues detected by the vomeronasal organ of females were found to be the cause.129,130 Presumably, this system has
evolved to prevent excessive numbers of females from breeding at the same time, thereby increasing the chances of
other females in the colony to raise young. Once again, the chemical basis of this effect is most clearly understood in
the mouse. After earlier surprise discoveries that adrenalectomy but not ovariectomy had affected the production of
the female cue, Novotny and colleagues focused on identifying adrenal metabolites in female mouse urine, some of
which were shown to inhibit puberty in female mice.131 It was established that one of these, 2,5-dimethylpyarzine
(46), was especially active and suppressed both ovarian and testicular growth in young grouped mice.132
Vomeronasal recording was used to confirm that 46 is detected at a concentration of 108 mol l1.115

4.05.7.3.4 Female-derived puberty inhibiting pheromone: Chemistry

The volatile components from the urine of normal and adrenalectomized female mice were compared and chemical
differences identified through gas chromatographic analysis.131 Six simple compounds accounted for the majority of
the difference, at least from the perspective of concentration. These were 2-heptanone (41), (E)-hept-5-en-2-one
(42), (E)-hept-4-en-2-one (43), n-pentyl acetate (44), (Z)-pent-2-enyl acetate (45), and 2,5-dimethylpyrazine (46).
When authentic samples of 41–46 were added to urine from adrenalectomized animals and their concentrations
restored to the levels of normal urine, full recovery of biological activity (delay of first estrus) was observed.131
Subsequent studies have confirmed the biological responses to pyrazine 46.132
O O O O

41 42 43 44
2-Heptanone (E )-Hept-5-en-2-one (E )-Hept-4-en-2-one n-Pentyl acetate

O Me
N
O N
Me

45 46
(Z )-Pent-2-enyl acetate 2,5-Dimethylpyrazine
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 253

4.05.7.4 Domestic Pig

Pigs (genus Sus) are among a group of approximately a dozen ungulates (mammals that walk on two digits); they
are from subtropical Eurasia and have tusks. One pig species (Sus scrofa) has a long history of domestication,
although the wild form is common and often invasive. The domestic pig/wild boar species is known for its large
head, high fecundity, large snout, and intelligence. Adult males (boars) are large, solitary, and aggressive.
Receptive females (‘sows’) have developed an acute ability to identify appropriate mates, allowing them to
approach and mate. Through early ethological studies it was shown that sows recognize mature males using a
variety of visual, tactile, auditory, and odor cues.133 They then assume a stationary vertical position (‘stand’) and
allow the male to mount. Given the importance of artificial breeding and insemination in the domesticated
species and the brevity of the sow’s reproductive cycle, it has become important for farmers to be able to predict
sow receptivity and then induce standing behavior. A series of studies in the early 1970s led to the discovery of a
steroidal pheromone released by boars, which is now used for this purpose.3 This cue may be the first example
of a bona fide vertebrate pheromone to have been identified; it is also the first to be used in a commercial
setting.

4.05.7.4.1 Male pig (boar) pheromone: Biology

Dominant boars are large and loud and drool continuously. They have a preputial diverticulum, an invagina-
tion of the skin where the penis emerges, where urine, seminal fluid, and sweat accumulate. They look and
smell obnoxious. Nevertheless, receptive females of their species show a great deal of interest in preputial fluid,
as well as the boar’s breath, which has a strong musky odor to the human nose.134 Interestingly, even the muscle
(meat) of these animals has a strong musky aroma (‘boar taint’), making it of little commercial value. In the
1960s it was established that boar odor alone could effectively stimulate standing behavior in females and that
stimulated males often ‘clamp’ their jaws causing saliva to be released.133,134 Subsequently, it was discovered
that the distinctive, permeating odor of boars is largely attributable to a variety of odorous 16-androstene
steroids related to testosterone.135,136 These accumulate in the muscle, fat, and sweat glands after biosynthesis
in the testis.137
Assuming these odorous steroids might be the causative agents in the boar pheromone, Melrose et al.138
tested the ability of 5-androst-16-en-3-one (47, a prominent fat steroid absent in castrates and females) and
3-hydroxy-5–androst-16-ene (48, a prominent salivary steroid) to elicit a standing response in sows that
were otherwise unresponsive to sexual cues. These steroids were administered in aerosol. Artificial insemina-
tion was attempted in those sows that responded positively. Both steroids were effective at identifying fertile
sows. These results were later confirmed and extended by Reed et al.,139 who tested another five steroids, either
alone or as mixtures. They found that while most were active, androsta-4,16-dien-3-one (49) and 5-androst-
16-en-3-one (50) were particularly so. Interestingly, 49 and 50 were tested not because they were known to be
present in boars but, rather, because of their similar structure and, especially, their similar odor to the human
nose as that of 48 and 47. Although detailed studies linking biological production and behavioral activity of
these steroids have not been reported, 5-androst-16-en-3-one (47) is now in commercial use (Boar-Mate). It
is notable that single steroids have activity in this species. Further, Dorries et al.140,141 have used operant
conditioning to demonstrate that sows are more sensitive than boars to androstenone 47 and that both the
vomeronasal and olfactory systems discriminate this steroid. Interestingly, sows are commonly used to hunt
truffles in Europe, the odor of which they probably are able to learn easily because this delectable fungus also
produces large quantities of 3-hydroxy-5-androst-16-ene (48).142

4.05.7.4.2 Male pig (boar) pheromone: Chemistry

The isolation of 5-androst-16-en-3-one (47) from boar fat was first reported in 1968, following a search for the
agent responsible for the tainted odor of that source.135 It had long been recognized that a foul odor of
perspiration (boar taint) was associated with large male pigs, but not with hogs or gilts (immature males or
females). Boar fat from several tissues was frozen, minced, thawed, filtered (‘through layers of butter muslin
supported on a warmed Büchner funnel’135), dried over sodium sulfate, and refiltered. The colorless oily
residue was passed through a fat stripper, which allowed removal and cold trapping of volatiles from a thin film
of fat (c.150 ml) that was slowly dripped through a vertical tube at 90  C and c.104 torr. GC analysis of those
volatiles was guided by the nose of the investigator:
254 Pheromones in Vertebrates

‘‘The odor of each compound (or coincident compounds) producing a chromatographic peak was evaluated as it was
eluted from the column by extinguishing the flame of the detector after the apex of the peak had been recorded and
smelling the effluent. Continuous olfactory examination of the effluent of the chromatograph during duplicate
analyses provided an important supplementary means of detecting odorous compounds which were not present in
sufficient quantity to produce a response in the flame detector and hence a peak on the chromatogram. The odor
recognized in the fat as boar taint was first located in the effluent of the gas chromatograph in this way although no
peak was observed on the recorder chart.’’135

Collection of the GC effluent and subsequent MS analysis allowed assignment of a possible molecular
formula as C19H28O. Since boar taint can be eliminated by castration of male pigs, attention was focused on the
testosterone and androsterone family of compounds as possible candidates. When the crude volatiles were
treated with 2,4-dinitrophenylhydrazine, the boar taint odor was completely removed, implicating a ketone
functionality for the lone oxygen atom. Anecdotal information implicated several androstene derivatives,
including 47, which was described as having an ‘intense, urine-like odor.’143 An authentic sample of 47 was
prepared, and comparison of the GC and MS properties allowed the definitive structural identification of the
boar taint compound.
Me Me Me

Me H Me H Me H

5 H H H H H H
O HO O
H H

47 5α -Androst-16-en-3-one (H5-down) 48 3α -Hydroxy-5α and rost-16-ene 49 Androsta-4,16-dien-3-one

50 5β -Androst-16-en-3-one (H5-up)

Patterson136 also examined the odorous salivary glands of boars, a source of an unpleasant smell referred to
as ‘sex odor’ in reports from the 1930s.144–147 Soxhlet extraction of minced submaxillary glands with diethyl
ether provided a solution that contained an unpleasant odor. The contents were tested for relative volatility by
a simple experiment.
‘‘A glass rod, dipped in the solution, acquired and retained the musk odor for an hour or more after the solvent and
other volatile compounds had evaporated.’’136

Again, GC and MS analyses led to the identification of the compound responsible for the odor, alcohol 48, the
likely precursor to the 3-keto compound 47, which accumulates in the fat and should be less easily excreted
compared to 48.

4.05.7.5 Asian Elephant

The elephants are very large land mammals that have trunks and well-developed chemosensory systems.
Today only two species are commonly recognized, the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus) and the African
elephant (Loxodonta africana) although the latter is often further subdivided. The two species have very similar
behaviors and ecologies; the Asian elephant better studied, probably because it is both smaller and more
tranquil. Female elephants live in tightly knit family groups made up of mothers and their young, sisters, and
aunts and these groups are led by the eldest female, or matriarch. In contrast, adult male elephants live solitary
lives, occasionally living in loosely knit bachelor herds and fighting amongst each other for dominance and
access to females. They can be very dangerous, especially during reproductive season when their hormone
levels are extremely high. Female elephants have a several-month long estrus cycle that is punctuated by a brief
period of fertility. Gestation lasts nearly 2 years and typically produces a single calf. Mate selection and
conception is thus of great importance and is known to be strongly influenced by a variety of male and female
pheromonal cues released in the urine and well-developed glands in both species.148,149 However, only for the
Asian elephant is there strong biological data to support the chemistry. Here both a male and female signaling
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 255

pheromone have been identified. Studies of elephant biology have been complicated by the fact that elephants
are highly intelligent and acutely aware of their own identities as well as those of other elephants, who they
remember for many years.

4.05.7.5.1 Female sex pheromone: Biology

As a consequence of their solitary lifestyle, male Asian elephants are under substantial evolutionary pressure to
develop the means to locate fertile females whose period of fertility is quite brief. Conversely, female elephants
are under pressure to be able to identify the most fertile male amongst many (violent and dangerous) suitors.
The process by which females signal their reproductive condition to males is mediated by both sound and
chemical cues. Specifically, Rasmussen and Krishnamurthy148 have discovered that female elephants release
distinctive blends of volatile odorous compounds in their urine (45–65 l day1) and that these suites change
during the estrus cycle. Initial tests involved exposing lone male elephants in zoos to various urine samples and
controls. Reproductive males in musth (see Section 4.05.7.5.3) responded by exhibiting olfactory sampling and
then flehmening at which time they placed the tips of their trunks, first, on or above the odor source and, then,
into their mouth over their vomeronasal duct.150 In later work using fractioned female urine, the key chemical
components were identified and then used in sophisticated flehmen assays that carefully controlled simple
olfactory inspection behavior. Through these studies the active component was found to be (Z)-7-dodecen-1-yl
acetate (51).151,152 It is interesting that this is the same pheromonal compound used by many lepidopteran
moths, although, of course, context plays a role; there is little likelihood that an elephant would confuse a moth
for another of its own kind.3,151 It is likely that 51 is complemented by other urinary cue components because,
when tested alone, it is not as active as whole female urine. Interestingly, the mucous of the male trunk contains
an 18.5 kDa olfactory binding protein that appears to further regulate the availability of 51.153

4.05.7.5.2 Female sex pheromone: Chemistry

Fresh urine was collected from Asian elephant females that were at the height of estrus.150 Urine was extracted
with an immiscible organic solvent and concentrated. Bioassay involved reconstitution of the extract concen-
trate in acetone, addition of the acetone solution to (in active) urine samples from females that were not in
estrus, and application to concrete slabs or logs. Observers, who were unaware of the sites where samples had
been placed, recorded the flehmening responses of test bull elephants. These studies convincingly demon-
strated that ‘in Asian elephants the estrous state, and probably the receptivity of the female, is revealed by a
substance or substances that can be extracted from the urine’150 of females in estrus.
This bioassay was used to monitor fractionation, which mostly involving normal-phase separations on silica
gel. Eventually both 1H NMR and Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) analyses, the latter
supported by bisthiomethylation methodology of Buser (cf., Equation 3),85 were used to secure the structure of
Z-7-dodecen-1-yl acetate (51).152 The ability of this acetate ester to induce overt flehmening was established in
a large number of test animals. Varying levels of 51 in urine collected from females at different times during the
estrus cycle were measured using a solid-phase microextraction and gas chromatographic protocol. These
varied from being nondetectable in the luteal phase through 0.48 and 13 mg ml1 in the early and mid-follicular
stages to a high of 33 mg ml1 just before ovulation.152
O

51 Z-7-Dodecen-1-yl acetate

4.05.7.5.3 Male sex pheromone: Biology

Mature male elephants (bulls) have active endocrine systems and experience huge increases in circulating
testosterone as they mature. Levels peak dramatically during the reproductive season, a condition known as
‘musth.’ Bulls in musth are very aggressive and they develop a number of glandular secretions, amongst which
that of the facial temporal gland (scent glands located near their eyes) is well studied. Rasmussen et al.154 have
256 Pheromones in Vertebrates

Olfactory response
Luteal phase females Zero
Preflehmen response
Zero
Flehmen response

Follicular phase females

Adult males
Zero

Subadult males

0 2 4 6 8 10
Median # responses per hour
Figure 5 Chemosensory inspection behaviors by male and female elephants to frontalin (52), demonstrating specific and
varying responses to this male pheromone during different life history stages.155

discovered that subordinate females and young males will strongly avoid these excretions. Bioassay-driven
fractionation studies by this group led to the eventual isolation and structure determination of frontalin, 1,5-
dimethyl-6,8-dioxabicyclol[3.2.1]octane (52). More specifically, 52 will elicit strong, prolonged flehmening
responses in both subadult males and females that are either in the follicular (preovulatory) phase of estrus or
pregnant; dominant males and ovulating females do not respond in notable ways (Figure 5).155 The activity of
this structure, which also serves as an aggregation pheromone in the bark beetle, is probably complemented by
other compounds and could have other effects that have not yet been studied.

4.05.7.5.4 Male sex pheromone: Chemistry

First identified in Asian elephants during a headspace analysis of volatiles collected from secretions of the
musth temporal gland of adult males,156 frontalin (52) is a bicyclic ketal, which is structurally reminiscent of the
male mouse priming pheromone component 3,4-dehydro-exo-brevicomin (37). Frontalin (52), Z-7-dodecen-1-
yl acetate (51), was already known because of its chemosensory role in the insect world; it is an aggregation
pheromone in bark beetles.157 Interestingly, the ratio of the two enantiomers of frontalin (52) changes with age
and stage of musth and elicits different behavioral responses.158

52 1,8-Dimethyl-6,8-dioxabicyclo[3.2.1]octane (frontalin)

4.05.7.6 Humans
Human beings, Homo sapiens, are highly intelligent primates whose behavior is complex and strongly influenced
by experience (learning) as opposed to instinctual mechanisms. Additionally, humans do not appear to possess a
functional vomeronasal system and express few, if any, of the olfactory receptor genes (the V1Rs) that have
been associated with pheromone detection in other mammals.4 Nevertheless, there is good evidence that
humans subtly use a variety of pheromones whose identities have not yet been established in the peer-reviewed
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 257

literature. We mention here cues for which biological responses have been repeatedly observed. A recent
review of human pheromonal cues has appeared.159
Family relationships are important to humans, and numerous studies have now shown that we can discern
familial odors.159 Perhaps of special interest is the observation that women tend to chose mates whose MHC
complex is dissimilar to their own;160,161 whether MHC-associated peptides are involved remains to be tested.
Similarly, the odor of breast milk has been shown to attract babies, much like the nipple search pheromone used
by rabbits as discussed above.162 Although the chemistry of human underarm (axillary gland) odor and its
signaling pheromone-like effects is the subject of a multibillion dollar industry, and sex-specific differences in
the production of dozens of volatiles have been noted, individual cues with specific activity have yet to be
identified.159 Nevertheless, it is interesting that similar to many rodent pheromones, some human axillary gland
odorants bind to apolipoproteins.163 Also intriguing, is the recent observation that high concentrations of the
aromatic axillary gland steroid 4,16-androstadioen-3-one (androstenone, 44) causes subtle, seemingly subcon-
scious, changes in human mood and brain glucose levels.164,165 Human sensitivity to certain odors is also known
to vary with endocrine state.166 Mood-altering effects of underarm odor also have been noted,167 and have
tentatively been referred to as ‘modulator pheromones;’164 however, this term is not commonly used.
In contrast to the incomplete state of the evidence for putative human signaling pheromones just discussed,
evidence for human priming pheromone that influences estrus cycling is strong. The similarities to cues with
similar function used by mice and goldfish are noteworthy. Numerous studies have shown that women who
share the same environment (e.g., roommates, mothers, and daughters), experience a shortening and synchro-
nization of their estrus cycles.168,169 Further, women simply exposed to axillary odor from donor females will,
over the course of just a few cycles, develop estrus cycles that match that of the donor female.169,170 There is
evidence for both cycle accelerators and inhibitors (blends). Other studies appear to demonstrate that, as in
mice, male odors may accelerate female cycles as well.171 Finally, this effect has been confirmed by studies in
which hospital-bound women have been exposed to axillary gland odor and their circulating luteinizing
hormone (LH) then monitored.172 None of these priming cues has been identified at the chemical level.
Some speculate that they may have evolved in early humans whose tightly knit family groups would function
better if women shared common reproductive cycles.173

4.05.8 Overview

Understanding of vertebrate pheromones has increased dramatically since the first cue was identified in the pig
over 40 years ago. Nevertheless, pheromonal cues have only been definitively identified in just over a dozen of
the approximately 58 000 species of vertebrates – much fundamental work remains. Perhaps the most sig-
nificant advance in our understanding of vertebrate pheromones is the realization that most comprise multiple
components and that these are found in complex mixtures that vertebrate chemosensory systems discern with
precision. Further, it is now clear that the neural basis for pheromone function is mediated by multiple nervous
systems (e.g., different ORNs and even organs, as in the vomeronasal system); we should expect the relatively
sophisticated vertebrate brain to be employing pheromones in sophisticated and diverse manners. Indeed, the
examples of both goldfish and mice show that mixture composition and context both contribute to the
determination of function.
Although with a few exceptions (e.g., PADS (3) in sea lamprey or splendipherin (17) in frogs) most of the
individual compounds that comprise vertebrate pheromones are relatively simple, the variety is impressive.
Alcohols, ketones, lipids, peptides, and steroids are of special importance. Interestingly, the majority of these
structures are found in various excretions and secretions whose production often appears to be specialized (e.g.,
prostaglandin pheromones in goldfish, frontalin (52) in the Asian elephant). How this specialization occurred
from an evolutionary perspective and its biochemical basis are largely unknown. However, as these facts
become better understood, future researchers will be better informed of where/what to look for and how to
assess new vertebrate pheromones and be able to isolate and identify their components with greater ease. Here,
the importance of peptide cues (e.g., sodefrin (15) in the salamander or MHC-derived peptides (MUPs) in the
mouse) may prove to play special roles and are promising lines of investigation because of the relative ease with
which the tools of molecular biology can be used once the peptide has been identified. There also appears to be
258 Pheromones in Vertebrates

a need for additional work on steroid biochemistry (e.g., PADS in the lamprey), because novel unexpected
products are being isolated. Protein binding transport systems now have been described in the mouse and
elephant. How these systems work is not yet well understood, but is clearly a fascinating aspect of pheromone
function.
Our knowledge of vertebrate pheromonal communication systems is in its infancy. Certainly, many
significant and fascinating questions about the basic nature of the evolutionary and biochemical mechanisms
that underlie pheromone evolution and function await answers.

References
1. P. Karlson; M. Lüscher, Nature 1959, 183, 55–56.
2. R. E. Johnston, Chemical Communication and Pheromones: The Types of Chemical Signals and the Role of the Vomeronasal
System. In The Neurobiology of Taste and Smell, 2nd ed.; T. E. Finger, W. L. Silver, D. Restrepo, Eds.; Wiley-Liss: New York,
2002; pp 101–127.
3. T. D. Wyatt, Pheromones and Animal Behaviour; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2003.
4. P. B. Brennan; F. Zufall, Nature 2006, 444, 308–315.
5. R. E. Johnston, Communication by Mosaic Signals: Individual Recognition and Underlying Neural Mechanisms. In Chemical
Signals in Vertebrates 10; R. T. Mason, M. P. Lemaster, D. Muller-Schwarze, Eds.; Springer: New York, 2005; pp 269–283.
6. E. O. Wilson; W. H. Bossert, Recent Prog. Horm. Res. 1963, 19, 673–713.
7. F. H. Bronson, Pheromonal Influences on Mammalian Reproduction. In Perspectives in Reproductive and Sexual Behaviour;
M. Diamond, Ed.; Indiana Press: Bloomington, IN, 1968; pp 341–361.
8. J. R. Lombardi; J. G. Vandenbergh, Science 1977, 196, 545–546.
9. J. G. Vandenbergh, Pheromones and Mammalian Reproduction. In Knobil and Neill’s Physiology of Reproduction, 3rd ed.;
J. Neill, Ed.; Academic Press: New York, 2006; pp 2047–2057.
10. M. Kobayashi; P. W. Sorensen; N. E. Stacey, Fish Physiol. Biochem. 2002, 26, 71–84.
11. N. E. Stacey; P. W. Sorensen, Hormones, Pheromones, and Reproductive Behaviors. In Behaviour: Interactions with Fish
Physiology; K. A. Sloman, S. Balshine, R. W. Wilson, Eds.; Academic Press: New York, 2005; pp 359–412.
12. C. D. Derby; P. W. Sorensen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 898–914.
13. M. Halpern; A. Martinez-Marco, Prog. Neurobiol. 2003, 70, 245–318.
14. A. V. Applegate, U.S. Fish Wildl. Serv. Spec. Sci. Rep. Fish. Serv. 1950, 55.
15. P. W. Sorensen; T. R. Hoye, J. Fish Biol. 2007, 71 (Suppl. D), 100–114.
16. W. Li; A. P. Scott; M. J. Siefkes; H. Yan; Q. Liu; S.-S. Yun; D. A. Gage, Science 2002, 296, 138–141.
17. R. Bjerselius; W. Li; J. H. Teeter; J. G. Seelye; P. J. Maniak; G. C. Grant; C. N. Polkinghorne; P. W. Sorensen, Can. J. Fish. Aquat.
Sci. 2000, 57, 557–569.
18. J. Teeter, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 1980, 37, 2123–2132.
19. L. A. Vrieze; P. W. Sorensen, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2001, 58, 2374–2385.
20. N. S. Johnson; M. J. Siefkes; W. Li, N. Am. J. Fish. Manage. 2005, 25, 67–72.
21. C. M. Wagner; M. L. Jones; M. B. Twohey; P. W. Sorensen, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2006, 63, 475–479.
22. M. J. Seifkes; S. R. Winterstein; W. Li, Anim. Behav. 2005, 70, 1036–1045.
23. S. Yun; A. P. Scott; M. J. Siefkes; W. Li, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 2002, 129, 163–170.
24. M. B. Twohey; P. W. Sorensen; W. Li, J. Great Lakes Res. 2003, 29 (Suppl. 1), 794–800.
25. G. A. D. Haslewood; L. Tokes, J. Biochem. 1969, 114, 179–184.
26. P. W. Sorensen; L. A. Vrieze, J. Great Lakes Res. 2003, 29 (Suppl. 1), 66–84.
27. J. M. Fine; L. A. Vrieze; P. W. Sorensen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 2091–2110.
28. P. W. Sorensen; J. M. Fine; V. Dvornikovs; C. S. Jeffrey; F. Shao; J. Wang; L. A. Vrieze; K. R. Anderson; T. R. Hoye, Nat. Chem.
Biol. 2005, 1, 324–328.
29. J. M. Fine; P. W. Sorensen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1259–1267.
30. J. M. Fine, Isolation, Identification and Biological Characterization of the Sea Lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) Migratory
Pheromone. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, 2006.
31. C. A. Polkinghorne; J. M. Olson; D. G. Gallaher; P. W. Sorensen, Fish Physiol. Biochem. 2001, 24, 15–30.
32. J. M. Fine; P. W. Sorensen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2205–2210.
33. T. R. Hoye; V. Dvornikovs; J. M. Fine; K. R. Anderson; C. S. Jeffrey; D. C. Muddiman; F. Shao; P. W. Sorensen; J. Wang, J. Org.
Chem. 2007, 72, 7544–7550.
34. K. S. Moore; S. Wehrli; H. Roder; M. Rogers; J. N. Forrest, Jr.; D. McCrimmon; M. Zasloff, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90,
1354–1358.
35. S. Sun; W. Li, J. Lipid Res. 2007, 47, 2579–2586.
36. P. B. Moyle; J. J. Cech, Fishes: An Introduction to Ichthyology, 5th ed.; Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2004.
37. N. E. Stacey; P. W. Sorensen, Hormonal Pheromones in Fish. In Hormones, Brain and Behavior; D. Pfaff, A. A. Etgen,
S. Fahrbach, R. Rubin, Eds.; Elsevier Press: New York, 2008.
38. K. von Frisch, Z. Vgl. Physiol. 1941, 29, 46–145.
39. Y. Yambe; S. Kitamura; M. Kamio; M. Yamada; M. Matsunaga; N. Fusetani; F. Yamazaki, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007,
103, 15370–15374.
40. P. Marfey, Carlsberg Res. Commun. 1984, 49, 591–596.
41. T. E. Essington; P. W. Sorensen, J. Fish Biol. 1996, 48, 1027–1029.
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 259

42. A. Moore; C. P. Waring, J. Exp. Biol. 1996, 199, 2307–2316.

43. P. W. Sorensen; F. W. Goetz, J. Lipid Mediators 1993, 6, 385–393.
44. A. Moore; K. L. Olsén; N. Lower; H. Kindahl, J. Fish Biol. 2002, 60, 313–320.
45. K. H. Olsén; R. Bjerselius; I. Mayer; H. Kindahl, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2337–2349.
46. K. H. Olsén; R. Bjerselius; I. Mayer; H. Kindahl, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 29–40.
47. A. Moore; A. P. Scott, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 1993, 249, 205–209.
48. A. Moore; C. P. Waring, J. Exp. Biol. 1996, 199, 2307–2316.
49. W. G. E. J. Schoonen; J. G. D. Lambert; P. G. W. J. Van Oordt, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1988, 85, 91–100.
50. J. W. Resink; P. K. Voorthius; R. Van Den Hurk; R. C. Peters; P. G. W. J. Van Oordt, Aquaculture 1989, 83, 153–166.
51. J. W. Resink; W. G. E. J. Schoonen; P. C. H. Albers; D. M. Filé; C. D. Notenboom; R. van den Hurk; P. G. W. J. van Oordt,
Aquaculture 1989, 83, 137–151.
52. J. H. van Weerd; M. Sukkel; J. G. D. Lambert; C. J. J. Richter, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1991, 98, 303–311.
53. M. Kobayashi; P. W. Sorensen; N. E. Stacey, Fish Physiol. Biochem. 2002, 26, 71–84.
54. N. E. Stacey; P. W. Sorensen; G. J. Van Der Kraak; J. G. Dulka, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1989, 75, 62–71.
55. P. W. Sorensen; M. Pinillos; A. P. Scott, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 2005, 140, 164–175.
56. A. P. Scott; P. W. Sorensen, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1994, 96, 309–323.
57. I. A. S. Irvine; P. W. Sorensen, Can. J. Zool. 1993, 71, 2199–2210.
58. P. W. Sorensen; T. J. Hara; N. E. Stacey; J. G. Dulka, J. Comp. Physiol. A 1990, 166, 373–385.
59. K. R. Poling; E. J. Fraser; P. W. Sorensen, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 2001, 129B, 645–651.
60. S. P. Sisler; P. W. Sorensen, Behaviour 2008, 145, 1409–1425.
61. J. G. Dulka; N. E. Stacey; P. W. Sorensen; J. G. van Der Kraak, Nature 1987, 325, 251–253.
62. P. W. Sorensen; T. J. Hara; N. E. Stacey; F. W. F. Goetz, Biol. Reprod. 1988, 39, 1039–1050.
63. A. P. Scott; D. Mackenzie; N. E. Stacey, Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 1984, 56, 349–359.
64. A. P. Scott; E. L. M. Vermeirssen, Production of Conjugated Steroids by Teleost Gonads and their Role as Pheromones. In
Perspectives in Comparative Endocrinology; K. G. Davey, R. E. Peter, S. S. Tobe, Eds.; National Research Council of Canada:
Ottawa, ON, 1994; pp 645–651.
65. F. Cetta; F. W. Goetz, Biol. Reprod. 1982, 27, 1216–1221.
66. P. W. Sorensen; A. R. Brash; F. W. Goetz; R. G. Kellner; L. Bowdin; L. A. Vrieze. In Origins and functions of F prostaglandins as
hormones and pheromones in the goldfish. Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on the Reproductive Physiology of
Fish; F. W. Goetz, P. Thomas, Eds.; Fish Symposium 95, Austin, TX, 1995; pp 252–254.
67. S. Kikuyama; F. Toyda; Y. Ohimiya; K. Matsuda; S. Tanaka; H. Hayashi, Science 1995, 267, 1643–1645.
68. F. Toyoda; Y. Hayakawa; M. Ichikawa; S. Kikuyama, Olfactory Responses to a Female Attracting Pheromone in the Newt,
Cynops pyrrhogaster. In Advances in Chemical Signals in Vertebrates; R. E. Johnston, D. Muller-Schwarze, P. W. Sorensen,
Eds.; Kluwer Press, Plenum: New York, 1999; pp 607–615.
69. K. Yamamoto; Y. Kawai; T. Hayashi; Y. Ohe; H. Hayashi; F. Toyoda; G. Kawahara; T. Iwata; S. Kikuyama, FEBS Lett. 2000, 472,
267–270.
70. T. Iwata; Y. Ishizuka; T. Nakada; F. Toyoda; K. Yamamoto; J. M. Conlon; S. Kikuyama, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2005, 1040,
351–353.
71. C. A. Palmer; R. A. Watts; L. D. Houck; A. L. Picard; S. J. Arnold, Evol. Int. J. Org. Evol. 2001, 61, 202–215.
72. S. M. Rollmann; L. D. Houck; R. C. Feldhoff, Science 1999, 285, 1907–1909.
73. L. D. Houck; C. A. Palmer; R. A. Watts; S. J. Arnold; P. W. Feldhoff; R. C. Feldhoff, Anim. Behav. 2007, 73, 315–320.
74. C. R. Wirsig-Wiechmann; L. D. Houck; J. M. Wood; P. W. Feldhoff; R. C. Feldhoff, BMC Neurosci. 2006, 7, 26.
75. P. A. Wabnitz; J. H. Bowie; M. J. Tyler; J. C. Wallace; B. P. Smith, Nature 1999, 401, 444–445.
76. P. A. Wabnitz; H. Walter; M. J. Tyler; J. C. Wallace; J. H. J. Bowie, Pept. Res. 1998, 52, 477–481.
77. R. T. Mason, Reptilian Pheromones. In Biology of Reptilia; C. Grans, D. Crews, Eds.; University of Chicago Press: Chicago,
1992; Vol. 18, pp 114–228.
78. R. T. Mason, Brain Behav. Evol. 1993, 41, 261–268.
79. R. T. Mason; H. M. Fales; T. H. Jones; L. K. Pannell; D. Crews, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 2353–2369.
80. R. T. Mason; H. M. Fales; T. H. Jones; L. K. Pannell; J. W. Chinn; D. Crews, Science 1989, 245, 290–293.
81. M. P. LeMaster; R. T. Mason, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1269–1285.
82. M. P. LeMaster; R. T. Mason, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1027–1043.
83. R. T. Mason; H. M. Fales; T. H. Jons; L. K. Pannell; J. W. Chinn; D. Crews, Science 1989, 245, 290–293.
84. R. T. Mason; D. Crews, Nature 1985, 316, 59–60.
85. H.-R. Buser; H. Arn; P. Guerin; S. Rawscher, Anal. Chem. 1983, 55, 818–822.
86. J. C. Hagelin; I. L. Jones, The Auk 2007, 124, 741–761.
87. J. C. Hagelin; I. L. Jones; L. E. L. Rasmussen, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., B, Biol. Sci. 2003, 270, 1323–1329.
88. L. L. Jones; J. C. Hagelin; H. L. Major; L. E. L. Rasmussen, Condor 2004, 106, 71–78.
89. B. Burger, Top. Curr. Chem. 2005, 240, 231–278.
90. R. L. Doty, Mammalian Pheromones: Fact or Fantasy? In Handbook of Olfaction and Gustation, 2nd ed.; R. L. Doty, Ed.; Informa
HealthCare: London, 2003; Chapter 17, pp 571–630.
91. J. G. Vandenbergh, Pheromones and Mammalian Reproduction, In Knobil and Neill’s Physiology of Reproduction, 3rd ed.;
J. Neill, Ed.; Academic Press: New York, 2006; pp 2047–2057.
92. H. M. Bruce, Nature 1959, 184, 105.
93. D. J. Penn, Ethology 2002, 108, 1–21.
94. T. Leinders-Zufall; P. Brennan; P. Widmayer; P. Chandarami; A. Maul-Pavicic; M. Jager; X. H. Li; H. Breer; F. Zufall; T. Boehm,
Science 2004, 306, 1033–1037.
95. J. L. Hurst; N. E. Payne; M. Nevison; A. D. Marie; R. E. Humpheries; D. H. L. Robertson; A. Cavaggioni; R. J. Beynon, Nature
2001, 414, 631–634.
96. D. Muller-Schwarze, Anim. Behav. 1969, 19, 141–152.
260 Pheromones in Vertebrates

97. B. Schaal; G. Coureaud; D. Langlois; C. Giniés; E. Sémon; G. Perrier, Nature 2003, 424, 68–72.
98. R. E. Johnston, Chemical Communication. Scent Signals and Scent Marking. In Hamster; H. Seigel, Ed.; Plenum Press: New
York, 1985; pp 133–155.
99. J. B. Powers; S. S. Winans, Science 1975, 187, 961–963.
100. E. M. Darby; M. Devore; S. L. Chorover, Behav. Neural Biol. 1975, 88, 496–502.
101. R. J. O’Connell; A. G. Singer; C. Pfaffmann; W. C. Agosta, J. Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 575–585.
102. A. G. Singer; A. N. Clancy; F. Macrides; W. C. Agosta, Physiol. Behav. 1984, 33, 639–643.
103. A. Petrulis; R. E. Johnston, Physiol. Behav. 1995, 57, 779–784.
104. R. E. Johnston, J. Mammal. 2003, 84, 1141–1162.
105. A. G. Singer; W. C. Agosta; R. J. O’Connell; C. Pfaffmann; D. V. Bowen; F. H. Field, Science 1976, 191, 948–950.
106. K. Ninomiya; T. Kimura, Physiol. Behav. 1989, 44, 791–795.
107. S. Hayashi; T. Kimura, Physiol. Behav. 1974, 13, 563–567.
108. J. G. Vandenbergh, Endocrinology 1969, 84, 658–660.
109. W. K. Whitten, J. Endocinol. 1958, 17, 307–313.
110. B. Jemiolo; J. Alberts; S. Sochinski-Wiggins; S. Harvey; M. Novotny, Anim. Behav. 1985, 33, 1114–1118.
111. B. Jemiolo; S. Harvey; M. Novotny, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1986, 83, 4576–4579.
112. W. Ma; Z. Miao; M. V. Novotny, Chem. Senses 1999, 24, 289–293.
113. M. V. Novotny; W. Ma; D. Wiesler; L. Zidek, Proc. R. Soc. Lond., B 1999, 266, 2017–2022.
114. M. V. Novotny; B. Jemiolo; D. Wiesler; W. Ma; S. Harvey; F. Xu; T. Xie; M. Carmack, Chem. Biol. 1999, 6, 377–383.
115. T. Leinders-Zufall; A. P. Lane; A. C. Puche; W. D. Ma; M. V. Novotny; M. T. Shipley; F. Zufall, Nature 2000, 405, 792–796.
116. A. Bacchini; E. Gaetini; A. Cavaggioni, Experientia 1992, 48, 419–421.
117. M. Novotny; F. J. Schwende; D. Wiesler; J. W. Jorgenson; M. Carmack, Experientia 1984, 40, 217–219.
118. H. M. Liebich; A. Zlatkis; W. Berstch; Van R. Dahm; W. K. Whitten, Biomed. Mass Spectrom. 1977, 4, 69–72.
119. M. V. Novotny; S. Harvey; B. Jemiolo; J. R. Alberts, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1985, 82, 2059–2061.
120. T. Tashiro; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1999, 2167–2173.
121. A. Cavaggioni; C. Mucignat-Caretta; G. Zagotto, Chem. Senses 2003, 28, 791–797.
122. D. P. Wiesler; F. J. Schwende; M. Carmack; M. Novotny, J. Org. Chem. 1984, 49, 882–884.
123. K. Mori; Y. Seu, Tetrahedron 1986, 42, 5901–5904.
124. H. H. Wasserman; T. Oku, Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 4909–4912.
125. Y. Masaki; I. Iwata; T. Imaeda; H. Oda; H. Nagashima, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1988, 36, 1241–1244.
126. M. V. Novotny; T. Xie; S. Harvey; B. Wiesler; B. Jemiolo; M. Carmack, Experientia 1995, 51, 738–743.
127. K. Ninomiya; T. Kimura, Naturwissenschaften 1990, 77, 586–588.
128. M. Novotny; S. Harvey; B. Jemiolo, Experientia 1990, 46, 109–113.
129. L. C. Drickhamer, J. Reprod. Fertil. 1984, 71, 475–477.
130. J. J. Lepri; C. J. Wysoki; J. G. Vandenbergh, Physiol. Behav. 1985, 35, 809–814.
131. M. V. Novotny; B. Jemiolo; S. Harvey; D. Wiesler; A. Marchlewska-Koj, Science 1986, 231, 722–725.
132. B. Jemiolo; M. V. Novotny, Physiol. Behav. 1994, 55, 519–522.
133. J. P. Signoret, J. Reprod. Fertil. Suppl. 1970, 11, 105–117.
134. W. D. Booth, Symp. Zool. Soc. Lond. 1980, 45, 427–436.
135. R. L. S. Patterson, J. Sci. Food Agric. 1968, 18, 8–31.
136. R. L. S. Patterson, J. Sci. Fd. Agric. 1968, 19, 434–438.
137. P. A. Sinclair; E. J. Squires; J. I. Raisede; R. Renaud, J. Steroid Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2005, 96, 217–228.
138. D. R. Melrose; H. C. B. Reed; R. L. Patterson, Br. Vet. J. 1971, 127, 497–502.
139. H. C. B. Reed; D. R. Melrose; R. L. S. Patterson, Br. Vet. J. 1974, 130, 61–67.
140. K. M. Dorries; E. Adkins-Regan; B. P. Halpern, Physiol. Behav. 1995, 57, 255–259.
141. K. M. Dorries; E. Adkins-Regan; B. P. Halpern, Brain Behav. Evol. 1997, 49, 53–62.
142. R. Claus; H. O. Hoppen; H. Karg, Experientia 1981, 37, 1178–1179.
143. F. Radt, Ed., Elsevier’s Encyclopedia of Organic Chemistry; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, Gottingen, Heidelberg, 1959; Series 111,
Vol. 14, Suppl. 2395s.
144. H. Gereke, Dissertation, Hanover: Germany, 1935.
145. D. Lerche, Z. Fleisch- Milchhygiene 1936, 46, 417.
146. H. Kunze, Z. Fleisch- Milchhygiene 1936, 46, 457.
147. H. Keller, Z. Fleisch- Milchhygiene 1937, 47, 174.
148. L. E. L. Rasmussen; V. Krishnamurthy, Zoo Biol. 2000, 19, 405–423.
149. T. E. Goodwin; M. S. Eggert; S. J. House; M. E. Wededell; B. A. Schulte; L. L. E. Rasmussen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32,
1849–1853.
150. L. E. Rasmussen; M. J. Schmidt; R. Henneous; D. Groves; G. D. Daves, Science 1982, 217, 159–162.
151. L. E. L. Rasmussen; T. D. Lee; W. L. Roelofs; A. Zhang; G. D. Daves, Jr., Nature 1996, 379, 684..
152. L. E. L. Rasmussen; T. D. Lee; A. Zhang; W. L. Roelofs; G. D. Daves, Jr., Chem. Senses 1997, 28, 433–446.
153. J. Lazar; D. R. Greenwood; L. E. L. Rasmussen; G. Prestwich, Biochemistry 2002, 41, 11786–11794.
154. L. E. L. Rasmussen; H. S. Riddle; V. Krishnamurthy, Nature 2002, 415, 975–976.
155. L. E. L. Rasmussen; D. R. Greenwood, Chem. Senses 2003, 22, 417–437.
156. T. E. Perrin; L. E. L. Rasmussen; R. Gunawardena; R. A. Rasmussen, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 207–221.
157. G. W. Kinzeer; A. F. Fentiman; T. F. Page; R. L. Foltz; J. P. Vite; G. B. Pitman, Nature 1969, 221, 477–478.
158. D. R. Greenwood; D. Comeskey; M. B. Hunt; L. E. L. Rasmussen, Nature 2005, 438, 1097–1098.
159. C. J. Wysoki; G. Preti, Anat. Rec. 2004, 281A, 1201–1211.
160. C. Ober; L. R. Wetkamp; N. Cox; H. Dytch; D. Kosyu; S. Elias, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 1997, 61, 497–504.
161. S. Jacob; M. K. McClintock; B. Zerlano; C. Ober, Nat. Gen. 2002, 30, 175–179.
162. H. Varendi; R. H. Porter, Acta Paediatr. 2001, 90, 372–375.
 Pheromones in Vertebrates 261

163. C. Zeng; A. I. Speilman; V. R. Vowels; J. J. Leyden; K. Beimen; G. Preti, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 93, 6626–6630.
164. S. Jacob; M. K. McClintock, Horm. Behav. 2000, 37, 57–78.
165. S. Jacob; L. H. Kinnunen; J. Metz; M. Cooper; M. K. McClintock, Neuroreport 2001, 12, 2391–2394.
166. R. L. Doty; M. Ford; G. Preti; G. R. Huggins, Science 1975, 190, 1316–1318.
167. G. Preti; C. J. Wysoki; K. T. Barnhart; S. J. Sondheimer; J. J. Leyden, Biol. Reprod. 2003, 68, 2107–2113.
168. M. K. McClintock, Nature 1971, 229, 244–245.
169. K. Stern; M. K. McClintock, Nature 1998, 392, 177–179.
170. G. Preti; W. B. Cutler; C. R. Garcia; G. R. Huggins; H. G. Lawley, Horm. Behav. 1986, 20, 463–473.
171. W. B. Cutler; G. Preti; A. M. Krieger; G. R. Huggins; C. R. Garcia; H. J. Lawley, Horm. Behav. 1986, 20, 474–482.
172. G. Preti; C. J. Wysoki; K. T. Barnhart; S. J. Sondheimer; J. J. Leyden, Biol. Reprod. 2003, 68, 2107–2113.
173. D. M. Stoddart, The Scented Ape; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1990; p 286.

Biographical Sketches

Peter W. Sorensen was born in Billings, Montana, USA but spent his childhood outside of
New York City before moving to Europe for high school. He received a B.A. in biology from
Bates College in 1976 where he was introduced to fish sensory biology. In 1984, Peter
received a Ph.D. in biological oceanography from the University of Rhode Island, where
he studied the use of olfactory cues (including pheromones) by the American eel under the
guidance of Howard Winn, Yuzuru Shimizu, and Saul Saila. In 1984, Peter was awarded a
postdoctoral fellowship by the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research to study
links between hormones and pheromones at the University of Alberta with Norm Stacey.
Together, they discovered that hormones serve as substrates for sex pheromones in goldfish.
Peter assumed a faculty position at the University of Minnesota in 1988 where he since has
been working with its fisheries, ecology, and neuroscience programs. His interests are broad
but revolve around chemical mechanisms that drive fish behavior. Tom Hoye and he
collaborated to identify lamprey migratory pheromones. Presently, Peter’s group focuses
on the chemical ecology and physiology of common carp while addressing whether pher-
omones might be used to control invasive fishes.
262 Pheromones in Vertebrates

Thomas R. Hoye was born in New Wilmington, PA, USA. He earned B.S. and M.S. degrees
in 1972 at Bucknell University and the Ph.D. in 1976 from Harvard University, studying in
the laboratories of Professors Harold W. Heine and Robert B. Woodward, respectively. That
fall he joined the faculty at the University of Minnesota. His teaching interests span synthetic
and mechanistic organic chemistry as well as the continuing evolution of advanced and
honors undergraduate organic chemistry laboratory courses. He was recognized as a
University of Minnesota Distinguished Graduate Teaching Professor in 1999, the inaugural
year of that award. In 2007, he received the Horace T. Morse-University of Minnesota
Alumni Association Award for Outstanding Contributions to Undergraduate Education. His
research interests are broad. They include the total synthesis and structure determination of
natural products, the discovery of new synthetic methods, the advancement of new strategies
in organic synthesis, the development of new methods in NMR spectroscopy, organometallic
chemistry, peptides and peptidomimetics as antiangiogenic and antibacterial agents, polymer
synthesis, polymeric materials from renewable resources, the design of functional block
copolymers and nanoparticles useful in drug and vaccine delivery, and the study of fish
pheromones and odorants.
 4.06 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae
Masaki Kita, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
Makoto Kitamura and Daisuke Uemura, Keio University, Yokohama, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.06.1 Introduction 263

4.06.2 Algal Sex Pheromones 263
4.06.2.1 Brown Algae 263
4.06.2.2 Green Algae 266
4.06.3 Sperm Chemotaxis in Marine Invertebrates 268
4.06.3.1 Sea Urchin 268
4.06.3.2 Starfish 269
4.06.3.3 Coral 269
4.06.3.4 Ascidian 271
4.06.3.5 Abalone 271
4.06.4 Sex Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates 273
4.06.4.1 Polychaete Worm 273
4.06.4.2 Sea Hare 274
4.06.4.3 Crab 275
4.06.5 Alarm Pheromones 276
4.06.5.1 Sea Anemone 276
4.06.5.2 Sea Slug 277
4.06.6 Summary and Future Prospects 277
References 278

4.06.1 Introduction

This chapter focuses on the study of pheromones of marine invertebrates and algae. The term ‘pheromone’
refers to an intraspecific chemical signal, and includes alarm pheromones, food trail pheromones, sex pher-
omones, and many others that affect behavior or physiology. Up to the present moment, various pheromones
have been identified in marine invertebrate and algae communication systems, particularly sex pheromones.1
Researchers in marine chemical ecology have been attracted to reproductive systems as well as predator–prey
and competitive interactions, settlement cues, and defense substances against infection by microorganisms.2–7
To sustain precious marine natural resources, it is important to have a broad understanding of systematic
biology and marine ecology. To achieve this, clarification of the function and role of chemical cues that
significantly influence biological and physiological phenomena in marine creatures are becoming increasingly
essential.
Several books and reviews dealing with general or specialized subjects in pheromones of marine inverte-
brates and algae have been published.8–13 Here we describe the recent progress regarding such pheromones,
with a special focus on their structural and functional diversity.

4.06.2 Algal Sex Pheromones

4.06.2.1 Brown Algae
The presence of spermatozoid-releasing and spermatozoid-attracting substances released from the eggs of
marine brown algae was first suggested for the Fucus species in the first half of the twentieth century.14 In 1971,
Müller et al.15 reported the isolation of ectocarpene (1) from fertile female gametophytes of the cosmopolitan

263
264 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

brown alga Ectocarpus siliculosus. They observed that culture dishes of mature gynogametes of E. siliculosus
released a faint aromatic fragrance, which was not perceived by the male culture. This isolation technique
exploits the volatility of the compounds by collecting them in a closed system with a stream of air continuously
being circulated, and the collection done on a filter of activated carbon. After desorption with dichloromethane,
the volatile substances are analyzed by glass capillary gas chromatography. Müller also devised a quantitative
assay for testing chemotaxis. Volatile substances to be tested are dissolved in an inert fluorocarbon which is
insoluble in, and more dense than, water. When samples were injected with a syringe, male gametes immedi-
ately congregated around the outlet of the syringe. When this phenomenon was used as a biological test in
Ectocarpus, c.1 kg of cultured mature gynogametes gave 92 mg of the active attractive substance, which was
named as ectocarpene (1). The chemical structure of 1 was established to be (þ)-(6S,19Z)-6-(19-butenyl)-
1,4-cycloheptadiene, thereby making it the first sex pheromone from algae whose chemical structure was
introduced.
The structure of the sex pheromone for the Fucus species, fucoserratene (11), was elucidated in 1973.16 The
positions and geometries of alkenes were revealed by comparison of the gas chromatographic behavior with
those of the isomeric conjugated 1,3,5- and 2,4,6-octatrienes. To date, a series of hydrocarbons and epoxides
1–11 and their stereoisomers have been identified within the pheromone bouquets of more than 100 different
species of brown algae.17–23 Identification of these compounds was based on a combination of gas chromato-
graphy–mass spectrometry (GC–MS) analysis and by comparison with authentic synthetic compounds. These
sex pheromones were all lipophilic, volatile compounds that consisted of C8 or C11 linear or monocyclic
hydrocarbons or their epoxides. The monocyclic compounds have a cyclopropane, cyclopentene, or cyclo-
heptadiene structure. Interestingly, the relationships between the chemical structures of pheromones and the
taxonomical classifications of algae are unclear (Table 1).

Mature female gametophytes of brown algae of the order Laminariales, which includes the large kelps used
as food, such as tangle, secrete a highly volatile material that induces an explosive discharge of antheridia and
spermatozoids. The active substance was investigated using mass cultures of female gametotypes of Laminaria
digitata and was identified as lamoxirene (4) in 1978.24 Lamoxirene (4) induced the mass release of male gametes
of L. digitata within 8–12 s at a threshold of c.50 pmol. Lamoxirene (4) is also active against five species of brown
algae of the order Laminariales. The culture suspensions of mature female gametophytes of eight species of
Japanese brown algae, belonging to the order Laminariales, induced the release of spermatozoids from
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 265

Table 1 C11 and C8 pheromones from marine brown algae

Release (R)/ Release (R)/

Pheromone attraction (A) Algal species Pheromone attraction (A) Algal species

Ectocarpene (1) A Ectocarpus spp. Viridiene (6) A Syringoderma

phinneyi
A Adenocystis R/A Desmarestia
utricularis virdis
A Sphacelaria Caudoxirene (7) R Perithalia
rigidula caudata
Desmarestene (2) R/A Desmarestia spp. Sporochnus
radciformis
A Cladostephus Hormosirene (8) A Hormosira
spongiosus banksiii
Dictyotene (3) A Dictyota A Durvillea spp.
dichotoma
A Dictyota A Xiphophora spp.
diemensis
Lamoxirene (4) R/A Laminaria spp. A Scytosiphon
lomentaria
R/A Alaria spp. A Colpomenia
perergrina
R/A Undaria Finavarrene (9) A Ascophyllum
pinnatifida nodosum
R/A Macrocystis A Sphaerottichia
pyrifera divaricata
R/A Nereocystfs Cystophorene (10) A Cystophora
luetkeana siliquosa
Multifidene (5) A Cutleria mulffida Fucoserratene (11) A Fucus serratus
R/A Chorda
tomentosa
A Zonana angustata

antheridia of all eight species.13 Thus, this sex pheromone proved to be a common spermatozoid-releasing and
spermatozoid-attracting substance in brown algae of the order Laminariales.
Recent advances in the gas chromatographic separation of enantiomers have allowed precise determination
of the enantiomeric purity of algal pheromones.17 The cis-disubstituted cyclopentenes, such as multifidene (5),
viridiene (6), and caudoxirene (7), are of high optical purity (>95% enantiomeric excess (e.e.)) whenever they
have been identified.18,19 However, the situation is different with the cyclopropanes and cycloheptadienes. For
example, the enantiomeric composition of hormosirene [()-(1R,2R)-8 and (þ)-(1S,2S)-8] from female
gametes or thalli of brown algae varied with the species (among the genera Dictyopteris, Analipus, Durvillaea,
Haplospora, Hormosira, and Xiphophora) and even depended on the locality. It is assumed that for brown algae the
production of characteristic enantiomeric mixtures represents a simple means for individualization of the signal
blends, although this is not supported by any experimental results.
To date, it has been shown that these algae pheromones have at least three well-defined biological functions:
(1) synchronization of the mating of male and female cells by the controlled release of male spermatozoids, (2)
enhancement of mating efficiency by attraction, and (3) chemical defense of the plant due to the presence of
high amounts of pheromones within and released into the environment. Interestingly, the occurrence of C11
hydrocarbons is not limited to marine brown algae. The same compounds are also found in cultures of diatoms
and among the volatile compounds released during blooms of microalgae in freshwater lakes. C11 hydrocarbons
have also been identified in roots, leaves, blossoms, and fruit of higher plants, although their specific biological
functions have not been characterized.
The biosynthesis of these marine algal pheromones has been well investigated. In marine algae, it is shown
that C11 hydrocarbons are derived from polyunsaturated C20 fatty acids. Exogenously supplied [2H8]-
arachidonic acid (12) was efficiently converted into labeled [2H4]-dictyotene (13), which indicated that the
C11H18 hydrocarbons are formed from the C-10 to C-20 positions of arachidonic acid (Scheme 1).25 Thus,
266 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

Scheme 1

C11H16 hydrocarbons with one additional degree of unsaturation, such as (S)-ectocarpene (1), hormsirene (8),
and finavarrene (9), are expected to be formed from eicosapentaenoic acid (14).
The first functionalization of the eicosanoid (14) has been assumed to involve 9-lipoxygenase to yield
9-hydroperoxyicosa-(5Z,7E,11Z,14Z,17Z)-pentaenoic acid (9-HPEPE) (Scheme 2). If we consider the 6S
configuration of ectocarpene (1), a homolytic cleavage of 9-HPEPE with hydroperoxide lyase gives an allyl
radical intermediate, which cyclizes to the 1R,2S-cis-disubstituted cyclopropane (15) with some amount of
hormsirene (8).26 The sequence is terminated by transfer of a hydrogen atom from C16 to the enzyme -X-O
function. In addition to the C10–C20 cyclopropane fragments, the C1–C9 dicarbonyl fragment 16 would be
released.
Furthermore, the cis-cyclopropane 15 is thermolabile, and thus a subsequent spontaneous [3.3]-sigmatropic
rearrangement (Cope rearrangement) is assumed to proceed via a cis–endo transition state to give
(S)-ectocarpene (1). This hypothesis was verified by the synthesis and rearrangement reactions of thermally
labile cis-divinylcyclopropane 15 and its analogues. For instance, the Cope rearrangement of 15 occurred
spontaneously at ambient temperatures to afford 1. The half-life of 15 for these transformations was 56 min at
8  C and 21 min at 18  C.27 These results suggested that other 6-substituted cyclohepta-1,4-dienes such as
desmarestene (2), dictyotene (3), and lamoxirene (4) are also biosynthesized via similar rearrangements of cis-
cyclopropane derivatives. Surprisingly, comparative biological assays using male gametes of E. siliculosus
revealed that the unstable cis-cyclopropane 15 was much more active than the stable cycloheptadiene 1. The
threshold concentration of 1 was estimated to be 10 nmol l1 in seawater, whereas that of 15 was significantly
lower, 5 pmol l1. The release of pheromones by female gametes, chemotactic orientation of male gametes,
and fertilization all occur within a few minutes. Consequently, it is possible that thermally labile
cis-divinylcyclopropyl precursors may be the actual pheromones even when the cycloheptadienes were
identified as active pheromones.

4.06.2.2 Green Algae

The volvocine algae range in complexity from unicellular Chlamydomonas through colonial genera (such as
Gonium, Pandorina, and Eudorina) to multicellular organisms and are capable of both asexual and sexual
reproduction.28 Volvox carteri reproduces asexually most of the time in nature, but would die in minutes once
their pond dried up in the heat of late summer. However, V. carteri can survive by switching to a sexual life cycle
shortly before the water disappears, to produce dormant zygotes that survive the drought. When rain fills the
pond again in spring, the zygotes hatch out to establish a new generation of asexually reproducing individuals.
In the early 1970s, sexual development in V. carteri was found to be initiated by a sex-inducing pheromone, a
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 267

Scheme 2

32-kDa glycoprotein.29,30 On the basis of the results of cDNA cloning and sequence analysis, its primary
structure was deduced to contain 208 amino acids including a signal sequence and six putative N-glycosylation
sites.31,32 It has been shown that this sex-inducing pheromone leads to gamete production at a concentration of
about 10–16 mol l1. Thus, this pheromone is one of the most potent biological effector molecules known.
Although it is still unknown why this sex-inducing pheromone is active at such a low concentration in
V. carteri, it has been demonstrated that the sexual cycle is initiated by heat shock that causes the somatic cells of
the asexual Volvox spheroid to produce the sex-inducing pheromone.33 The first biochemical response to this
pheromone was shown to be the synthesis of specific extracellular matrix glycoproteins, which have been
designated pherophorins.34,35 Since pherophorins contain a domain that is homologous to the sex-inducing
glycoprotein pheromone, the level of pheromone may be further amplified by the ability of sperm cells to
produce more sex-inducing pheromone.
The sexuality and genetics of the freshwater green flagellate, Chlamydomonas eugametos, C. moewusii, and
C. reinhardtii, have also been extensively studied since the 1930s. Early studies mentioned that a 3:1 mixture of
(8Z)-crocetin dimethyl ester (17) and its (8E)-isomer activated and attracted the female gametes of C. eugametos,
whereas a 1:3 mixture was effective for its male gametes.36,37 However, these observations have not been shown
in a reproducible manner, and their sex pheromones were still unclear. In 1995, the attractant of male gametes
268 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

produced by female gametes of the green flagellate, Chlamydomonas allensworthii, was successfully isolated. Its
structure was elucidated as (4E,8E,12E)-14-[29-hydroxy-39,49-dimethyl-59-(10--D-xylo-pyranosyloxy)phe-
nyl]-4,8,12-tri-methyltetradeca-4,8,12-trienoic acid (lurlenic acid) (18).38,39 Additionally, the primary alcohol
19, lurlenol, was identified to be a sex pheromone from another strain of Chlamydomonas.40 Both lurlenic acid
(18) and lurlenol (19) showed significant attractant activity at concentrations as low as 1 pmol l1. The
threshold concentrations of synthesized 18 and 19, which show the attractant activity were similar to natural
compounds.41 Furthermore, structure–activity relationship studies on lurlenic acid (18) revealed that the
important structural features for attractant activity were the sugar moiety, the phenolic hydroxy group,
the appropriate length, and the unsaturation of the side-chain group, and the presence of a polar group at
the terminal position of the side chain.42,43 Notably, analogues of 18 with a different sugar moiety, including
L-xylose, D-glucose, D-galactose, and D-arabinose, were almost inactive, which strongly suggested that the male
gametes of C. allensworthii are highly specific to the D-xyloside.

4.06.3 Sperm Chemotaxis in Marine Invertebrates

Sperm are attracted by chemical substances, which are released by eggs. This process is called chemotaxis and is
a well-known phenomenon in most animals and lower plants.44 The attraction of sperm to eggs should
counteract the effects of dilution and increase the probability of fertilization in free-swimming invertebrates.
Since the fertilization rate may be low under natural conditions, the presence of such chemoattractants is
believed to be important. Sperm-attractant substances have been identified in several marine invertebrates,
including hydrozoans, mollusks, ascidians, starfish, sea urchins, and urochordates.

4.06.3.1 Sea Urchin

It has been known for nearly a century that soluble factors associated with the eggs of certain species of sea
urchins enhance the respiration and motility of their spermatozoa.45 These factors have been shown to be
diffusible in dialysis, heat-stable, alcohol-stable, and nonvolatile.46 The sea urchin egg is surrounded by an
extracellular investment known as the jelly layer, the major components of which are high-molecular-weight
fucose sulfate-rich glycoconjugates. Kopf et al.47 found that the egg jelly of the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus has a
factor that elevates the respiratory rate and cAMP and cGMP levels of homologous spermatozoa. Thus,
constituents of their egg jelly, especially relatively low-molecular-weight peptides, have been well investigated.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 269

To date, about 80 peptides that affect sperm motility have been identified from two different phyla,
Echinodermata and Cnidaria, and these have been referred to as sperm-activating peptides.48,49 For example,
speract (20), or sperm-activating factor H2, is a decapeptide that was isolated from the jelly layer of
Strongylocentrotus purpuratus and Lytechinus pictus.47,50–52 Treatment of S. purpuratus with 17 significantly
increases sperm respiration and motility. Meanwhile, resact (21), which was isolated from the jelly layer of
Arbacia punctulata eggs, is one of the rare sperm-activating peptides whose chemotactic function has been
unequivocally demonstrated.53,54 Resact (21) is a 14-amino acid peptide with an intramolecular disulfide bond
between Cys1 and Cys8, and the carbonyl-terminal leucine is amidated.55 Resact (21) stimulates sperm
respiration rates by 5–10-fold, and increases the cGMP levels of A. punctulata spermatozoa at 0.5 nmol l1.56
It has also been shown that resact (21) induces a change in the phosphorylation state and enzymatic activity of
sperm guanylate cyclase, which is highly enriched in the sperm flagella.57,58

4.06.3.2 Starfish
Various sperm-activating peptides of starfish have also been identified. Among them, however, asterosap (P15)
(22), which was isolated from the egg jelly coat of the starfish Asterias amurensis, is the only example for which
the chemotactic function has been unequivocally demonstrated.59,60 Asterosap is a glutamine-rich tetratria-
contapeptide with an intramolecular disulfide linkage between Cys8 and Cys32. Sperm respond with high
sensitivity to picomolar concentrations of asterosap (22).61

On the basis of the cloning of cDNA and chemical cross-linking analysis, the receptors for both asterosap
(22) and resact (21) in the sperm flagellum were elucidated to be guanylyl cyclases that synthesize cGMP from
GTP after binding to the receptor peptide.62,63 Meanwhile, stimulation of the sea urchin A. punctulata and the
starfish A. amurensis by the chemoattractant or by an intracellular cGMP evokes Ca2þ spikes in the flagellum,
which elicits a turn in the trajectory followed by a period of straight swimming.64 Notably, when sperm swim in
a concentration gradient of the attractant, the Ca2þ spikes and the stimulus function are synchronized, which
suggests that Ca2þ spikes in the flagellum control navigation.

4.06.3.3 Coral
Sexual reproduction with eventual larval dispersion in corals plays an important role in the recruitment of new
genets to other reefs and ensures genetic vitality.65,66 As for coral, the chemical structure of sperm chemoat-
tractants in the scleractinian coral Montipora digitata has been identified. M. digitata is a hermaphroditic coral,
which reproduces bi-annually, releasing egg–sperm bundles during mass spawning in late spring–early summer
and autumn each year. The buoyant egg–sperm bundles float to the surface where they break apart, releasing
eggs and sperm into the ocean. From the dichloromethane extracts of lyophilized unfertilized eggs, an
270 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

unsaturated fatty alcohol, dodeca-2,4-diyn-1-ol (23), was identified as the chemoattractant of M. digitata
sperm.67 Notably, a natural mixture of 23, tetradec-13-ene-2,4-diyn-1-ol (24), and (Z)-heptadeca-14,16-
diene-2,4-diyn-1-ol (25) in a ratio of 1:4:9 was more effective at attracting sperm from M. digitata than those
from other Montipora species. Consequently, it is believed that sperm attractants act to reduce the incidence of
hybridization between different species of Montipora.

As structurally related compounds for the sperm chemoattractants 23–25, several cytotoxic and antibacterial
unsaturated fatty acids, such as montiporic acids, have been isolated from the eggs of Montipora sp., in which
they have been suggested to serve as defense materials. However, it was recently found that sodium salts of
montiporic acids A (26) and C (27) isolated from the breeding seawater of Montipora sp., showed potent feeding-
attractant activity toward Drupella cornus at doses of 1 and 0.1 mg 20 ml1 agar, respectively.68 Among several
coral-feeding marine creatures, the crown-of-thorns starfish Acanthaster planci and the muricid gastropods genus
Drupella are well known to be voracious coral predators. Interestingly, the structures of the coral sperm
chemoattractants are similar to those of the feeding attractants for their predators.

Soft corals (Cnidaria, Octocorallia, and Alcyonacea) are important contributors to the attached benthic
communities on shallow Indo-Pacific reefs. The eggs of Lobophytum crassum contain significant amounts (6% dry
weight) of ()-epi-thunbergol (28), which has been shown to attract the sperm of L. crassum at concentrations as
low as 3.25 mg ml1.69 This is the first evidence for sperm chemotaxis in the Alcyonacea. Interestingly, ()-
thunbergol (29) from the eggs of Lobophytum compactum and (þ)-thunbergol from a Douglas fir tree both showed
levels of attraction similar to ()-epi-thunbergol (28) against L. crassum sperm. These results suggest that
L. crassum sperm are neither stereo- nor enantio-specific in their sensitivity toward the attractants. While the
sperm attractant in the scleractinian coral M. digitata was a series of unsaturated fatty alcohols, the sperm-
attracting agent for L. crassum was cembranoid diterpenes.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 271

4.06.3.4 Ascidian
The chemotactic behavior of ascidians is also interesting, and extensive investigations have been carried out. It
has been shown that spermatozoa of the ascidians Ciona intestinalis and Ciona savignyi near an unfertilized egg are
intensely activated and begin to show chemotactic behavior toward the egg.70–72 The eggs release a sperm-
activating and sperm-attracting factor (SAAF) from their vegetal pole. SAAF induces Ca2þ-influx and
membrane hyperpolarization, which causes a transient increase in intracellular cAMP in the sperm, and
induces the activation of sperm motility.
In 2002, through the use of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) and mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry
(MS/MS) analysis, the planar and partial stereostructure of a SAAF from the egg-conditioning medium of
C. intestinalis was elucidated to be a previously uncharacterized sulfated steroid: 3,4,7,26-tetrahydroxycholestane-
3,26-disulfate (30).73 Its structure was deduced from only 4 mg (6 nmol) of sample. Thus, SAAF may represent
the smallest amount of sample used in the structure elucidation of novel nonpeptidic or nonoligosaccharide
natural products.74

To confirm the stereochemistry of SAAF, both 25S- and 25R-stereoisomers were synthesized (Scheme 3).75,76
Chenodeoxycholic acid (31) was converted into a 3-keto-4-enol derivative 32 in five steps via selective
oxidation at C-4 carbon as a key step. A solid-phase reduction of 32 with NaBH3CN on silica gel afforded
the desired diol 33 in a regio- and stereo-selective manner. Reaction with thionyl chloride followed by
ruthenium oxidation gave cyclic sulfate 34, whose C-5b epimer was separated by silica gel column chromato-
graphy. Regioselective opening of the cyclic sulfate in 34 and a benzyloxymethyl (BOM) protection afforded
benzoate 35. Selective hydrolysis using potassium tert-butoxide followed by decarboxylation and dimethyl
sulfoxide oxidation (DMSO) yielded 36. Wittig reaction of the aldehyde 36 with an ylide generated from
(R)-phosphonium salt 37 afforded olefin 38 in moderate yield. Finally, removal of the benzoyl group, conversion
into the corresponding sodium bis-sulfate, and successive olefin hydrogenation and concomitant removal of the
BOM groups afforded 25S-isomer 30. Similarly, the 25R-isomer was synthesized by using (S)-phosphonium salt.
A comparison of the structure of synthetic and natural compounds confirmed that the stereochemistry of
SAAF was (3R, 4R, 7R, 25S)-3,4,7,26-tetrahydroxycholestane-3,26-disulfate. The synthetic pure sample was
also used to confirm that a single compound possesses both sperm-activation and sperm-attraction properties.
Synthetic SAAF (30) activated C. intestinalis sperm at 3.7 nmol l1 and concurrently exhibited attracting activity
at a concentration less than 10 nmol l1.
From the viewpoint of the steroid structure, SAAF (30) has several unique features. The hydroxylation pattern
at the 3, 4, 7, and 26 positions of a cholestane skeleton has not been reported in any other natural products.73 The
positions of the C-3 and C-26 sulfate esters are also unique among sulfated polyhydroxysterols of marine origin.
In general, steroid hormones act on nuclear receptors and activate gene expression. However, the chemotactic
behavior of sperm occurs within a few seconds, and the sperm nucleus is condensed, indicating that genes could
not be expressed in the sperm. Furthermore, since SAAF has a hydrophilic nature due to the presence of two
hydroxyl and two sulfated esters, it may bind to receptors located on the sperm plasma membrane.

4.06.3.5 Abalone
More recently, an abalone sperm attractant has been identified. Sperm of the red abalone Haliotis rufescens
responds to soluble factors released into the seawater by conspecific eggs. Bioassay-guided purification revealed
272 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

Scheme 3

that the free amino acid L-tryptophan (39) was a natural sperm attractant in H. rufescens.77 L-Tryptophan
released from eggs triggered both significant activation and chemotaxis in sperm at a concentration of
10 nmol l1. The D-isomer of tryptophan was inactive, which shows that the sperm response was stereospecific.
Furthermore, with the addition of tryptophanase, an enzyme that selectively digests tryptophan, the sperm
failed to navigate toward live eggs. Thus, a natural gradient of L-tryptophan is considered to be essential.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 273

4.06.4 Sex Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates

Sex pheromones attract a sexual partner and ensure the coordinated release of gametes by both sexual partners.
The function of sex pheromones in a variety of marine invertebrates and their role in the timing of reproduc-
tion has fascinated many researchers. However, studies on courtship and mating pheromones between
individual adult organisms have been limited by the unreliability of the bioassays used and the difficulty of
securing materials.8 Remarkably, few attempts have been made to characterize the structures of sex phero-
mones other than sperm attractants. Although, outstanding progress has been made toward elucidating the
structures of sex pheromones in the Polychaeta, Gastropoda, and Crustacea.

4.06.4.1 Polychaete Worm

Most nereidid polychaetes undergo a metamorphosis to a sexually mature heteronereis stage. This specialized
heteronereis usually reproduces by performing a typical behavior, the ‘nuptial dance’, at the water surface.78,79
This spawning behavior is characterized by the sexual partners swimming around each other in circles of
decreasing size prior to the release of gametes. It was found that this ‘nuptial dance’ swimming behavior in
Platynereis dumerilii was triggered by the release of an attractant pheromone which is secreted from the coelomic
fluid of gravid specimens.80–82 Gas chromatographic analysis revealed that the sex pheromone of P. dumerilii is
the volatile 5-methyl-3-heptanone (40).83,84 This is the first water-borne sex pheromone to be identified in a
marine invertebrate. Interestingly, the S-isomer (þ)-40 was produced only by males and was attractive only for
females, while the R-isomer ()-40 was produced by females and acted only on males.85 The pheromone is
released in nanogram quantities, and the biological activity threshold was 3.5 pmol l1. The ‘nuptial dance’ was
induced in animals separated by up to 50 cm upon the addition of 5-methyl-3-heptanone (40). Interestingly, the
structure of 40 is very similar to those of alarm pheromones found in ants and many insects.86

Meanwhile, Pacific species Nereis japonica did not show the spawning behavior when exposed to 41. In this
species, the induction of swarming behavior was controlled by 3,5-octadiene-2-one (41), which was previously
detected as a major volatile constituent of the eggs in P. dumerilii.87
It has been shown that the reproduction process is controlled by the coelomic fluid derived from the
opposite sex, even after mate recognition. At the moment of recognition, the male discharges the egg-release
pheromone. The female is then stimulated to swim quickly in narrow circles surrounded by swarming males
followed by spawns. The discharged egg contains the sperm-release pheromone. Finally, males achieve
fertilization by circling the eggs and emitting the sperm clouds. It has been demonstrated that these gamete-
release pheromones of both males and females are nonvolatile and water soluble.88,89 In the case of P. dumerilii,
uric acid (42) was identified as the sperm-release pheromone.90,91 This pheromone is effective at a threshold
concentration of 0.6 mmol l1. It is surprising to detect microgram levels of uric acid (42) in mature marine
invertebrates since most of them, including the Nereididae, are strictly ammoniotelic, and release nitrogenous
waste from purine metabolism in the form of ammonia.88
274 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

In the case of Nersis succinea, the earliest studies showed that pig liver or any sample containing glutathione
could induce the release of gametes in spawning N. succinea males, consequently the natural pheromone was
hypothesized to be ‘glutathione-like’.80 Indeed, the structure of the sperm-release pheromone derived from the
female N. succinea has been elucidated to be cysteine–glutathione disulfide (43).92
Purification of the egg-release pheromone from the male heteronereid has been attempted. In previous
work, L-glutamic acid (44) and inosine (45) were detected as the main components of the coelomic fluid of
sexually mature N. succinea males.90 Recently, however, the egg-release pheromone was identified to be
93
L-ovothiol A (L-1-methyl-4-mercaptohistidine) (46). This compound was first isolated in an inactive form,
L-ovothiol A disulfide (47). Notably, however, after 47 was treated with sodium borohydride, the highly active
reduced form of the amino acid 46 was recovered, which suggests that the active form was a thiol. Ovothiols are
thiohistidine compounds that were previously isolated from sea urchin eggs, and which confer NAD(P)H-O2
oxidoreductase activity on ovoperoxidase by rapidly reacting with H2O2.94 Notably, pheromones in nereidids
include a series of diverse molecules, from volatile lipophilic compounds to water-soluble acids and peptides,
although their roles and mode of action remain unclear.

4.06.4.2 Sea Hare

The marine mollusk Aplysia, found in ocean waters in many areas of the world, is a simultaneous hermaphrodite
that does not normally fertilize its own eggs. It is a solitary animal during most of the year, but moves into
breeding aggregations during the reproductive season.95 Most of the egg-laying animals mate simultaneously as
females, which suggests the presence of some chemical mediators that establish and maintain the aggregation.
Recently, attractin was identified as a potent sex pheromone from the eluates of Aplysia californica egg cordons
that stimulates sexually mature animals to approach egg cordons.96,97 Attractin is the first water-borne peptide
pheromone to be characterized in mollusks. Attractin from A. californica is a 58-residue N-glycosylated protein
with three intramolecular disulfide bonds (Figure 1).98 The NMR solution structure of A. californica attractin
demonstrates that it has two helices, and the latter contains the IEECKTS motif.99 To date, a family of attractins
has been characterized in five species of the genus Aplysia. The six cysteines, three charged residues (Asp5, Asp/
Glu22, and Glu39), and the sequence of I30EECKTS36 are conserved in all five Aplysia attractins. Interestingly, a
synthetic constrained cyclic peptide that contains the conserved heptapeptide sequence also showed significant
attractive activity, which suggests that the IEECKTS sequence is important for this property.

1 10 20 30 40 50 58

Aplysia californica D Q N C D IG NITSQ C Q M Q H K N C E DA N G C D TIIEEC K TSM V ER C Q N Q E FE S AAG ST T LG P Q

A. brasiliana D Q N C D IG NITSQ C Q M Q H Q N C D DA N G C D TIIEEC K TSM V ER C Q N Q E FE S ASG ST T LG P Q
A. fasciata D Q N C D IG NITSQ C E M Q H Q N C D DA N G C N TIIEEC K TSM V ER C Q N Q E FE S ASG ST T LG P Q
A. vaccaria N N K C D IE FATS E C E M R Y Q D C G EA S S C T ALIEEC K TS L Q EEC N – –Q AS SDES ST T VR P E
A. depilans N N K C D LE FASS E C Q M R Y Q D C G EA S N C T ALIEEC K TS L Q EEC D – –Q AS SESS ST T IR P E
∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗ ∗∗∗ ∗
Figure 1 Sequence alignment of attractins.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 275

Individual Aplysia have been shown to be attracted to the pheromone attractin in the presence of a nonlaying
conspecific, but not to attractin alone.100 In contrast, Aplysia brasiliana are attracted to egg cordons alone,
suggesting that additional pheromonal factors may work synergistically with attractin to attract Aplysia to
reproductive aggregates. Consistent with the prediction, three albumen gland proteins (enticin, temptin, and
seductin) have recently been identified.101 They are mature proteins that consist of 69, 103, and 192 amino acid
residues, respectively. Through the use of their recombinant proteins or glutathione S-transferase fusion
proteins, it has been shown that binary blends of attractin (1 nmol) and either enticin, temptin, or seductin
(1 nmol each) stimulated mate attraction, as in the case of egg cordons. The N-terminal region of enticin aligns
well with the conserved epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like domain of mammalian reproductive proteins
known as fertilins, which may mediate intercellular adhesion interactions between eggs and sperm. Although
the biological functions or roles of these additional proteins have not been well characterized, they may act in
concert with attractin.

4.06.4.3 Crab
Some crustacean females have been shown to emit sex pheromones that elicit precopulatory behavior in
conspecific males, including mate searching, courtship display, and guarding. This phenomenon has been
observed in detail, especially in many marine brachyuran crabs.102 Once the male detects the premolt female, it
grasps and guards her under his abdomen until molting. Mating takes place shortly after ecdysis. Moreover, it
has been shown that sex pheromones are released into the female urine. To date, various crustaceans have been
demonstrated to show sexual behaviors, such as the lobster Homarus americanus,103 Pachygrapsus crassipes,104
Macropipus holsatus,105 Portunus sanguinolentus,106 the snow crab Chionoecetes opilio,107 the shore crab Carcinus
maenas,108,109 and the helmet crab Telmessus cheiragonus.110–112
Early studies reported that the crustacean molting hormone, 20-hydroxyecdysone (48), was a sex pher-
omone in the shore crab C. maenas and was also found in several other crab species.104 However, many authors
have provided convincing evidence that this is not the case for most crab species. Despite their intriguing
reproductive behavior, crustacean sex pheromones have rarely been elucidated.

Recently, a sexual pheromone of the hair crab Erimacrus isenbeckii has been identified from the feeding seawater
of pre- and postmolt females.113 The purified sample elicited guard behavior in male hair crabs at a dose of 2.0 mg
per sponge and was composed of 13 ceramides. On the basis of detailed NMR and fast atom bombardment tandem
mass spectrometry (FAB-MS/MS) analysis, the structure of one of the major ceramides, ceramide A (49), was
determined to be (2S,3S,4R)-2-[(R)-2-hydroxy-21-methyldocosanoylamino]-1,3,4-pentadecane-triol.114 Similarly,
276 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

Table 2 Structures of ceramide components in Erimacrus isenbeckii sexual

pheromone

Ceramidesa Sphingosines/fatty acids combination Relative abundance (%)

A (49) n-C15/i-C23 18
B n-C15/n-C23 2
n-C16/n-C22 2
C n-C15/i-C23 12
n-C16/i-C23 16
D n-C15/n-C25 1
n-C16/n-C25 2
E n-C15/i-C25 6
n-C16/i-C24 15
F n-C16/n-C25 2
G n-C16/i-C25 19
H n-C16/i-C26 2
n-C17/i-C25 4
a
Ceramides B, C, D, E, and H were inseparable mixtures of two components.

the structures of ceramides B–H were also elucidated to be a combination of C15–C17 sphingosine and C22–C26
branched fatty acid (Table 2). These structures are supported by comparison with those of synthetic
compounds.

4.06.5 Alarm Pheromones

In aquatic environments, chemical cues serve as an important source of information for the detection of
predation risk. Chemical signals released by disturbed or injured conspecifics may provide prey animals with
an early warning of danger.2,115 We now discuss two kinds of well-established alarm pheromones from sea
anemone and sea slug.

4.06.5.1 Sea Anemone

The colonial sea anemone Anthopleura elegantissima responds with characteristic contraction to a pheromone
released by wounded conspecifics. This alarm response is highly characteristic, includes rapid bending and
shortening of the tentacles and depression of the oral disk. In 1975, by extensive ion exchange column
chromatography, (3-carboxy-2,3-dihydroxy-N,N,N-trimethyl)-1-propanaminium chloride (50) was isolated
as a pure crystalline substance.116 It showed alarm pheromone activity with a median concentration of
0.35 nmol l1 and was named anthopleurine. Comparison of spectral data between natural and synthetic
compounds revealed that anthopleurine had a structure of 4-amino-4-deoxy-L-threonic acid betaine
hydrochloride.117

A. elegantissima is a preferred prey of the aeolid nudibranch Aeolidia papillosa. Interestingly, anthopleurine (50)
remains in the tissue of nudibranch, and leakage of the pheromone causes the alarm response in other anemone
individuals for several days.118,119 Consequently, the predator may help in transmission of the alarm pher-
omone, which can reduce the severity of predation on Anthopleura.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 277

4.06.5.2 Sea Slug

Opisthobranch are marine mollusks that are scarcely protected by a shell, which suggests that they possess
defensive substances.120,121 For instance, when the Pacific aglajid Navanax inermis is damaged by enemies, it
secretes a bright-yellow water-insoluble mixture into its slime trail. From the extracts, three major compounds
have been isolated and identified as polyenic compounds 51–53, navenones A–C.122,123 It has been demon-
strated that these secreted constituents induce an avoidance-alarm response in a trail-following Navanax species
at a concentration of 10 mmol l1.124

More recently, structurally related metabolites have been found in Mediterranean cephalaspideans, that is,
phenyl conjugated trienones, lignarenones A (54) and B (55) in the Cylichnidae Scaphander lignarius,125 and
polyenic pyridines in the Haminoeidae: haminols A (56) and B (57) in Haminoea navicula, haminol C (58) in
H. orteai.126,127 Haminols A (56) and B (57) also induce alarm response at concentrations of 0.3 and 0.1 mg,
respectively. Thus, navenones and their structural congeners may serve as a communication tool to indicate the
presence of predators.

4.06.6 Summary and Future Prospects

Recent technological advancements including spectroscopic analyses and genetic approaches have provided
outstanding opportunities for new discoveries in marine natural products chemistry, thus allowing the
quantification of interactions between hydrodynamic, chemical, and biological factors at numerous spatial
and temporal scales. However, a prominent question in chemical signaling that remains unresolved is the
species-specificity of chemical cues including pheromones and the scale of their distribution in the vast marine
environment. Further studies on the mode of action of such physiologically active substances as well as the
interaction with their target molecules are becoming essential.
278 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

References
1. W. C. Agosta, Chemical Communication – The Language of Pheromones; W. H. Freeman and Company: New York, 1992.
2. R. K. Zimmer; C. A. Butman, Biol. Bull. 2000, 198, 168–187.
3. V. J. Paul; M. P. Puglisi; R. Ritson-Williams, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2006, 23, 153–180.
4. P. J. Scheuer, Bioscience 1977, 27, 664–668.
5. V. J. Paul; M. P. Puglisi, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2004, 21, 189–209.
6. M. K. Harper; T. S. Bugni; B. R. Copp; R. D. James; B. S. Lindsay; A. D. Richardson; P. C. Schnabel; D. Tasdemir;
R. M. VanWagoner; S. M. Verbitski; C. M. Ireland, In Marine Chemical Ecology; J. B. McClintock, B. J. Baker, Eds.; CRC Press
LLC: Boca Raton, FL, 2001; pp 3–70.
7. P. J. Scheuer, Ed., Bioorganic Marine Chemistry; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1987–1992; Vols. 1–6.
8. A. Dittman, Nat. Chem. Biol. 2005, 1, 316–317.
9. M. Ishibashi; J. Kobayashi, In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon: Oxford, 1999; Vol. 8,
pp 416–426.
10. R. J. Rowbury, Sci. Prog. 2004, 87, 131–136.
11. N. Fusetani, In Kaiyou Seibutsu no Kemikaru Siginaru; I. Kitagawa, N. Fusetani, Eds.; Kodansha: Tokyo, 1989; pp 126–146
(in Japanese).
12. T. Kajiwara, In Kagaku de Saguru Kaiyou Seibutsu no Nazo; T. Yasumoto, Ed.; Kagakudojin: Kyoto, 1992; pp 71–78
(in Japanese).
13. T. Kajiwara, In Kaiyou Tennenbutsu Kagaku; I. Kiatagawa, Ed.; Kagakudojin: Kyoto, 1987; pp 52–55 (in Japanese).
14. A. Cook; J. A. Elvidge; I. Geukbribm, Proc. R. Soc. 1948, 135, 293–301.
15. D. G. Müller; I. Jaenicke; M. Donike; T. Akitoni, Science 1971, 171, 815–817.
16. D. G. Müller; L. Jaenicke, FEBS Lett. 1973, 30, 137–139.
17. W. Boland, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 37–43.
18. W. Boland; W. A. König; D. G. Müller, Helv. Chim. Acta. 1989, 72, 1288–1292.
19. D. Wirth; W. Boland; D. G. Müller, Helv. Chim. Acta. 1992, 75, 751–758.
20. L. Jaenicke; W. Boland, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1982, 21, 643–653.
21. P. Fink, Mar. Freshw. Behav. Physiol. 2007, 40, 155–168.
22. C. D. Amsler; V. A. Fairhead, Adv. Bot. Res. 2006, 43, 1–91.
23. I. Maier; D. G. Müller, Biol. Bull. 1986, 170, 145–175.
24. K. Lüning; D. G. Müller, Z. Pflanzenphysiol. 1978, 89, 333–341.
25. K. Stratrnann; W. Boland; D. G. Müller, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1992, 31, 1246–1248.
26. K. Stratmann; W. Boland; D. G. Müller, Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 3755–3766.
27. W. Boland; G. Phonert; I. Maier, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1995, 34, 1602–1604.
28. A. Hallmann; K. Godl; S. Wenzl; M. Sumper, Trends Microbiol. 1998, 6, 185–189.
29. R. C. Starr, Dev. Biol. 1970, S4, 59.
30. R. C. Starr; L. Jaenicke, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1974, 71, 1050–1054.
31. H. Tschochner; F. Lottspeich; M. Sumper, EMBO J. 1987, 6, 2203–2207.
32. H. W. Mages; H. Tschochner; M. Sumper, FEBS Lett. 1988, 234, 407–410.
33. D. L. Kirk; M. M. Kirk, Science 1986, 231, 51–54.
34. M. Sumper; E. Berg; S. Wenzl; K. Godl, EMBO J. 1993, 12, 831–836.
35. K. Godl; A. Hallmann; S. Wenzl; M. Sumper, EMBO J. 1997, 16, 25–34.
36. R. Kuhn, Angew. Chem. 1940, 53, 1–11.
37. F. Moewus, Angew. Chem. 1950, 62, 496–502.
38. R. C. Starr; F. J. Marner; L. Jaenicke, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 92, 641–645.
39. L. Jaenicke; F. J. Marner, Liebigs Ann. 1995, 1343–1345.
40. L. Jaenicke; R. C. Starr, Eur. J. Biochem. 1996, 241, 581–585.
41. S. Takanashi; K. Mori, Liebigs Ann. 1997, 825–838.
42. S. Takanashi; K. Mori, Liebigs Ann. 1997, 1081–1084.
43. S. Takanashi; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 1998, 43–55.
44. U. B. Kaupp; E. Hildebrand; I. Weyand, J. Cell. Physiol. 2006, 208, 487–494.
45. F. R. Little, J. Exp. Zool. 1913, 14, 515–574.
46. R. R. Hathaway, Biol. Bull. 1963, 125, 486–498.
47. G. S. Kopf; D. J. Tubb; D. L. Garbers, J. Biol. Chem. 1979, 254, 8554–8560.
48. N. Suzuki, In Bioorganic Medicinal Chemistry; P. J. Scheuer, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1989; Vol. 3, pp 47–70.
49. N. Suzuki, Zool. Sci. 1995, 12, 13–27.
50. J. R. Hansbrough; D. L. Garbers, J. Biol. Chem. 1981, 256, 1447–1452.
51. N. Suzuki; K. Nomura; H. Ohtake; S. Isaka, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1981, 99, 1238–1244.
52. D. L. Garbers, J. Biol. Chem. 1982, 257, 2734–2737.
53. G. E. Ward; C. J. Brokaw; D. L. Garbers; V. D. Vacquier, J. Cell. Biol. 1985, 101, 2324–2329.
54. U. B. Kaupp; J. Solzin; E. Hildebrand; J. E. Brown; A. Helbig; V. Hagen; M. Beyermann; F. Pampaloni; I. Weyand, Nat. Cell Biol.
2003, 5, 109–117.
55. N. Suzuki; H. Shimomura; E. W. Radany; C. S. Ramarao; G. E. Ward; J. K. Bentley; D. L. Garbers, J. Biol. Chem. 1984, 259,
14874–14879.
56. D. L. Garbers; J. G. Hardman, Nature 1975, 257, 677–678.
57. G. E. Ward; V. D. Vacquier, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1983, 80, 5578–5582.
58. G. E. Ward; D. L. Garbers; V. D. Vacquier, Science 1985, 227, 768–770.
59. T. Matsui; I. Nishiyama; A. Hino; M. Hoshi, Dev. Growth Differ. 1986, 28, 339–348.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 279

60. T. Nishigaki; K. Chiba; W. Miki; M. Hoshi, Zygote 1996, 4, 237–245.

61. K. Shiba; T. Tagata; J. Ohmuro; Y. Mogami; M. Matsumoto; M. Hoshi; S. A. Baba, Zygote 2006, 14, 23–32.
62. M. Matsumoto; A. V. Briones; T. Nishigaki; M. Hoshi, Dev. Genet. 1999, 25, 130–136.
63. M. Böhmer; Q. Van; I. Weyand; V. Hagen; M. Beyermann; M. Matsumoto; M. Hoshi; E. Hildebrand; U. B. Kaupp, EMBO J. 2005,
24, 2741–2752.
64. C. D. Wood; T. Nishigaki; T. Furuta; S. A. Baba; A. Darszon, J. Cell. Biol. 2005, 169, 725–731.
65. P. L. Harrison; R. C. Babcock; G. D. Bull; J. K. Oliver; C. C. Wallace; B. L. Willis, Science 1984, 223, 1186–1189.
66. R. C. Babcock; A. J. Hayward, Coral Reefs 1986, 5, 111–116.
67. J. C. Coll; B. F. Bowden; G. V. Meehan; G. M. König; A. R. Carroll; D. M. Tapiolas; P. M. Aliño; A. Heaton; R. Nys; P. A. Leone;
M. Maida; T. L. Aceret; R. H. Willis; R. C. Babcock; B. L. Willis; Z. Florian; M. N. Clayton; R. L. Miller, Mar. Biol. 1994, 118,
177–182.
68. M. Kita; M. Kitamura; T. Koyama; T. Teruya; H. Matsumoto; Y. Nakano; D. Uemura, Tetrahedron Lett. 2005, 46, 8583–8585.
69. J. C. Coll; P. A. Leone; B. F. Bowden; A. R. Carroll; G. M. König; A. Heaton; R. Nys; M. Maida; P. M. Aliño; R. H. Willis;
R. C. Babcock; Z. Florian; M. N. Clayton; R. L. Miller; P. N. Alderslade, Mar. Biol. 1995, 123, 137–143.
70. R. L. Miller, Nature 1975, 254, 244–245.
71. M. Yoshida; K. Inaba; M. Morisawa, Dev. Biol. 1993, 157, 497–506.
72. M. Yoshida; K. Inaba; K. Ishida; M. Morisawa, Dev. Growth Differ. 1994, 36, 589–595.
73. M. Yoshida; M. Murata; K. Inaba; M. Morisawa, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 14831–14836.
74. M. Murata; T. Oishi; M. Yoshida, Prog. Mol. Subcell. Biol. 2006, 42, 203–220.
75. T. Oishi; H. Tsuchikawa; M. Murata; M. Yoshida; M. Morisawa, Tetrahedron Lett. 2003, 44, 6387–6389.
76. T. Oishi; H. Tsuchikawa; M. Murata; M. Yoshida; M. Morisawa, Tetrahedron 2004, 60, 6971–6980.
77. J. A. Riffell; P. J. Krug; R. K. Zimmer, J. Exp. Biol. 2005, 205, 1439–1450.
78. F. R. Lillie; E. F. Just, Biol. Bull. 1913, 24, 147–158.
79. Y. Boilly-Marer; B. Lassalle, J. Exp. Zool. 1980, 213, 33–39.
80. G. Townsend, Biol. Bull. 1939, 77, 306–307.
81. Y. Boilly-Marer; B. Lassalle, J. Exp. Zool. 1978, 205, 119–124.
82. Y. Boilly-Marer, Mar. Biol. 1974, 24, 167–169.
83. E. Zeeck; J. Hardege; H. Bartels-Hardege; J. Wesselmann, J. Exp. Zool. 1988, 246, 285–292.
84. E. Zeeck; J. D. Hardege; H. Bartels-Hardege, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1990, 67, 183–188.
85. E. Zeeck; J. D. Hardege; A. Willig; R. Krebber; W. A. König, Naturwissenschaften 1992, 79, 182–183.
86. Y. Boilly-Marer, Oceanis 1981, 7, 749–754.
87. E. Zeeck; J. D. Hardege; H. D. Bartels-Hardege; A. Willig; G. Wesselmann, J. Exp. Zool. 1991, 260, 93–98.
88. J. D. Hardege, Hydrobiologia 1999, 402, 145–161.
89. G. J. Watson; M. G. Bentley; S. M. Gaudron; J. D. Hardege, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2003, 294, 169–187.
90. E. Zeeck; T. Harder; M. Beckmann; C. T. Müller, Nature 1996, 382, 214.
91. E. Zeeck; T. Harder; M. Beckmann, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 13–22.
92. E. Zeeck; C. T. Müller; M. Beckmann; J. D. Hardege; U. Papke; V. Sinnwell; F. C. Schröder; W. Francke, Chemoecology 1998, 8,
33–38.
93. I. Röhl; B. Schneider; B. Schmidt; E. Zeeck, Z. Naturforsch. 1999, 54c, 1145–1147.
94. E. Turner; R. Klevit; P. B. Hopkins; B. M. Shapiro, J. Biol. Chem. 1986, 261, 13056–13063.
95. S. D. Painter; B. Clough; R. W. Garden; J. V. Sweedler; G. T. Nagle, Biol. Bull. 1998, 194, 120–131.
96. C. H. Schein; G. T. Nagle; J. S. Page; J. V. Sweedler; Y. Xu; S. D. Painter; W. Braun, Biophys. J. 2001, 81, 463–472.
97. S. F. Cummins; C. H. Schein; Y. Xu; W. Braun; G. T. Nagle, Peptides 2005, 26, 121–129.
98. S. D. Painter; S. F. Cummins; A. E. Nichols; D.-B. G. Akalal; C. H. Schein; W. Braun; J. S. Smith; A. J. Susswein; M. Levy;
P. A. C. M. de Boer; A. ter Maat; M. W. Miller; C. Scanlan; R. M. Milberg; J. V. Sweedler; G. T. Nagle, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
2004, 101, 6929–6933.
99. R. Garimella; Y. Xu; C. H. Schein; K. Rajarathnam; G. T. Nagle; S. D. Painter; W. Braun, Biochemistry 2003, 42, 9970–9979.
100. S. F. Cummins; A. E. Nichols; C. H. Schein; G. T. Nagle, Peptides 2006, 27, 597–606.
101. S. F. Cummins; A. E. Nichols; A. Amare; A. B. Hummon; J. V. Sweedler; G. T. Nagle, J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279, 25614–25622.
102. E. P. Ryan, Science 1966, 151, 340–341.
103. D. Cowan; J. Atema, Anim. Behav. 1990, 39, 1199–1206.
104. J. S. Kittredge; M. Terry; F. T. Takahashi, Fish. Bull. 1971, 69, 337–343.
105. A. J. Eales, Mar. Behav. Physiol. 1974, 2, 345–355.
106. T. A. Christensen; H. Mustaparta; J. G. Hildebrand, Chem. Senses 1989, 14, 463–472.
107. S. Bouchard; B. Sainte-Marie; J. N. McNeil, Chemoecology 1996, 7, 39–44.
108. J. D. Hardege; A. Jennings; D. Hayden; C. T. Müller; D. Pascoe; M. G. Bentley; A. S. Clare, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2002, 244,
179–189.
109. D. Hayden; A. Jennings; C. Müller; D. Pascoe; R. Bublitz; H. Webb; T. Breithaupt; L. Watkins; J. Hardege, Horm. Behav. 2007,
52, 162–168.
110. M. Kamio; S. Matsunaga; N. Fusetani, Zool. Sci. 2000, 17, 731–733.
111. M. Kamio; S. Matsunaga; N. Fusetani, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2002, 234, 183–190.
112. M. Kamio; M. Araki; T. Nagayama; S. Matsunaga; N. Fusetani, Biol. Bull. 2005, 208, 12–19.
113. N. Asai; N. Fusetani; S. Matsunaga; J. Sasaki, Tetrahedron 2000, 58, 9895–9899.
114. N. Asai; N. Fusetani; S. Matsunaga, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 1210–1215.
115. D. P. Chivers; R. F. Smith, Ecoscience 1998, 5, 338–352.
116. N. R. Howe; Y. M. Sheikh, Science 1975, 189, 386–388.
117. J. A. Musich; H. Rapoport, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1978, 100, 4865–4870.
118. N. R. Howe; L. G. Harris, J. Chem. Ecol. 1978, 4, 551–561.
119. L. G. Harris; N. R. Howe, Biol. Bull. 1979, 157, 138–152.
280 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae

120. G. Cimino; G. Sodano, Chem. Ser. 1989, 29, 389–394.

121. P. Karuso, In Bioorganic Marine Chemistry; P. J. Scheuer, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Heidelberg, 1987; Vol. 1, pp 31–60.
122. H. L. Sleeper; W. Fenical, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99, 2367–2368.
123. W. Fenical; H. L. Sleeper; V. J. Paul; M. O. Stallard; H. H. Sun, Pure Appl. Chem. 1979, 51, 1865–1874.
124. H. L. Sleeper; V. J. Paul; W. Fenical, J. Chem. Ecol. 1980, 6, 57–70.
125. G. Cimino; A. Spinella; G. Sodano, Tetrahedron Lett. 1989, 30, 5003–5004.
126. G. Cimino; A. Passeggio; G. Sodano; A. Spinella, Experientia 1991, 47, 61–63.
127. A. Spinella; L. A. Alvarez; A. Passeggio; G. Cinimo, Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 1307–1314.

Biographical Sketches

Masaki Kita was born in Nagoya in 1976, and received his Ph.D. in 2005 from Nagoya
University under the supervision of Professor Daisuke Uemura. He joined the Graduate
School of Science, Nagoya University as an Assistant Professor in 2001. He moved to the
Department of Chemistry, University of Tsukuba in 2007, where he is currently an Assistant
Professor of Chemistry. He received Inoue Research Award for Young Scientists in 2005 and
Young Scientist’s Research Award in Natural Products Chemistry in 2006. His research
interest is in natural products, which regulate biologically and physiologically intriguing
phenomena.

Makoto Kitamura was born in Osaka in 1968, and received his Ph.D. in 2006 from Nagoya
University under the supervision of Professor Daisuke Uemura. He is currently working at
the Department of Biosciences and Informatics, Keio University as a postdoctoral fellow. His
research interest is in bioactive natural products in the marine field.
 Pheromones of Marine Invertebrates and Algae 281

Daisuke Uemura was born in Gifu in 1945 and received his Ph.D. in 1975 from Nagoya
University under the supervision of Professor Yoshimasa Hirata. He was an assistant pro-
fessor at Nagoya University (1973–79), associate professor at Shizuoka University (1979–91),
professor of chemistry at Shizuoka University (1991–97), and professor of chemistry at
Nagoya University (1997–2008). Since 2008, he has been a professor of Biosciences and
Informatics, Keio University. He is a Professor Emeritus of Nagoya University. His research
interest is in the diverse chemical structures and bioactivities of marine natural products. He
received The Chemical Society of Japan Award for Young Chemist in 1977, and The
Chemical Society of Japan Award in 2006.
 4.07 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms
Sueharu Horinouchi, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Kenji Ueda, Nihon University, Kanagawa, Japan
Jiro Nakayama, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan
Tsukasa Ikeda, Utsunomiya University, Tochigi, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.07.1 Introduction 284

4.07.2 -Butyrolactones in Streptomyces 285
4.07.2.1 Introduction 285
4.07.2.2 General Properties of -Butyrolactones in Streptomyces 286
4.07.2.2.1 A-factor homologues in Actinomycetes 288
4.07.2.3 Biosynthesis of -Butyrolactones 289
4.07.2.3.1 AfsA as the key enzyme for A-factor biosynthesis 289
4.07.2.3.2 Structural variety of -butyrolactones 291
4.07.2.3.3 Regulation of A-factor biosynthesis 291
4.07.2.4 Receptors of -Butyrolactones 291
4.07.2.4.1 Properties of ArpA 291
4.07.2.4.2 Crystallography of CprB, an ArpA homologue 292
4.07.2.4.3 How A-factor dissociates ArpA from DNA 293
4.07.2.5 AdpA Regulon 293
4.07.2.5.1 Properties of AdpA 293
4.07.2.5.2 Autoregulation of adpA 294
4.07.2.5.3 AdpA regulon 294
4.07.2.6 The A-Factor Signal Relay Leading to Streptomycin Biosynthesis 295
4.07.3 Signaling Molecules in High-GC Gram-Positive Bacteria 295
4.07.3.1 Introduction 295
4.07.3.2 Gräfe’s Factors 296
4.07.3.3 Antibiotics as Signal Molecules 296
4.07.3.4 Wide Occurrence of Interspecific Cross-Talking in the Streptomyces Community 297
4.07.3.5 Role of Ferrioxamines 297
4.07.3.6 Other Factors 298
4.07.4 Signaling Molecules in Low-GC Gram-Positive Bacteria 298
4.07.4.1 Introduction 298
4.07.4.2 Nonmodified Small Oligopeptides 299
4.07.4.2.1 Sex pheromones of E. faecalis 299
4.07.4.2.2 Competence- and sporulation-stimulating factors of Bacillus subtilis 301
4.07.4.3 Inducer Peptide Pheromones of Class II Bacteriocins and Competence-Stimulating
Peptides 302
4.07.4.3.1 Inducer peptide pheromones of class II bacteriocins 302
4.07.4.3.2 Competence-stimulating peptides of streptococci 303
4.07.4.3.3 Bacteriocin-like peptides encoded by streptococcal genomes 306
4.07.4.4 Lanthionine-Containing Peptides 307
4.07.4.4.1 Nisin and subtilin 307
4.07.4.4.2 Cytolysin 308
4.07.4.5 Cyclic Thiolactone and Lactone Peptides 309
4.07.4.5.1 Autoinducer peptides in staphylococci 309
4.07.4.5.2 Gelatinase biosynthesis-activating pheromone in E. faecalis 311
4.07.4.5.3 Cyclic AIPs in other Gram-positive bacteria 313

283
284 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

4.07.4.6 Isoprenylated Peptide as a Competence Pheromone of B. subtilis 314

4.07.4.7 Autoinducer-2 315
4.07.5 Signaling Molecules in Gram-Negative Bacteria 315
4.07.5.1 Introduction 315
4.07.5.2 N-Acylhomoserine Lactones as Autoinducers of Quorum Sensing 315
4.07.5.2.1 Vibrio fischeri and Vibrio harveyi 317
4.07.5.2.2 Pseudomonas aeruginosa 320
4.07.5.2.3 Erwinia species 321
4.07.5.2.4 Serratia species 321
4.07.5.2.5 Burkholderia species 322
4.07.5.2.6 Agrobacterium tumefaciens and Chromobacterium violaceum 323
4.07.5.3 Other Types of Autoinducers 324
4.07.5.3.1 Autoinducer-2 325
4.07.5.3.2 PQS 326
4.07.5.3.3 Indole 327
4.07.5.3.4 3-OH PAME 327
4.07.5.3.5 Cholerae autoinducer-1 327
4.07.5.3.6 Stigmolone 328
4.07.5.3.7 Extracellular death factor in E. coli 329
4.07.5.3.8 Aryl-HSL in Rhodopseudomonas palustris 329
References 330

4.07.1 Introduction

Sociomicrobiology of bacteria is a recent field of research and it involves the study of communication and
cooperative behavior of bacteria. Cell-to-cell communication between bacteria, usually referred to as quorum
sensing, was initially described as a means by which bacteria achieve signaling in microbial communities to
coordinate gene expression within a population.1 Quorum sensing involves small molecules produced by
bacteria. The first experimental observation of quorum sensing, or autoinduction, was for the bioluminescent
system of a luminous marine bacterium, Vibrio harveyi, in which an extracellularly produced autoinducer acted
as the specific inducer. The definitive involvement of the autoinducer at a very low concentration was proved
by using a weakly luminescent variant of Vibrio fischeri as an indicator for the assay of the autoinducer. The
progress in molecular biological techniques for microorganisms led to the isolation and expression of the lux
genes of V. fischeri, which was eventually used for establishment of the bioluminescent system as an autoinduc-
tion or a quorum sensing system that involves a small molecule having an acylhomoserine lactone structure.
This class of molecules is now known to function in a wide range of microbial processes carried out by Gram-
negative bacteria (see Section 4.07.5).
In the 1960s and 1970s, in addition to the luminescent marine bacteria, the Gram-positive cocci and the
Myxobacteria were studied for extracellular signaling systems, by which these unicellular microorganisms
coordinate the activities of individuals within a population. The enterococcal sex pheromones were the first
peptide signals identified, and peptides are now known to function as signaling molecules in a variety of Gram-
positive bacteria (see Section 4.07.4). Subsequently, the identification of extracellular signaling mechanisms in a
wide variety of bacteria has made the signaling systems one of the most important areas of current micro-
biology. There has been an explosion of new information on phenomena controlled by quorum sensing, the
expression of target genes, signal receptors, and mechanisms of signal transduction. Recent information on
bacterial genomes and DNA microarray analysis of the whole open reading frames of a bacterium has
accelerated the study of quorum sensing. We can expect that there is a remarkable diversity among different
microorganisms with regard to molecular structures of the signals, the networks connecting a quorum sensing
system with other regulatory systems, and the target phenotypes controlled.2
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 285

Recent evidence shows that quorum sensing signaling is not restricted to bacterial cell-to-cell communica-
tion, but also allows communication between microorganisms and their hosts.3 In addition, the topic of
multicellular cooperative behaviors among bacteria has been increasingly considered in the context of evolu-
tionary biology.4 Further comprehensive study of these new topics will establish ‘interkingdom’ signaling.4 In
this chapter, signal molecules involved in quorum sensing in microorganisms are listed, with emphasis on the
chemistry of the signal molecules.

4.07.2 -Butyrolactones in Streptomyces

4.07.2.1 Introduction
The Gram-positive, soil-inhabiting, filamentous bacterial genus Streptomyces shows characteristic morphological
differentiation resembling that of filamentous fungi (Figure 1). Early in the life cycle on solid medium, Streptomyces
grows as a branching, multinucleoid substrate mycelium mainly by cell wall extension at the hyphal tips. As older
parts of the substrate mycelium produce aerial mycelium, most cells of the substrate mycelium die because of
apoptotic lysis of proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates to supply materials for the generation of aerial hyphae. Septa
are subsequently formed at regular intervals along the hyphae to produce uninucleoid compartments, each of which
develops into a spore, thus resulting in the formation of spore chains. The complex morphogenesis of Streptomyces
has made this genus one of the model organisms to study the molecular mechanisms of multicellular differentiation
in prokaryotes. In addition to this characteristic morphogenesis, Streptomyces is also characterized by its ability to
produce a wide variety of secondary metabolites, such as antibiotics, immunosuppressants, and other biologically
active substances. For example, a single species of Streptomyces griseus is known to produce not only streptomycin but
also about 180 other secondary metabolites. Streptomyces is thus one of the most important resources for compounds
useful in medicinal, agricultural, and industrial applications.
The two characteristics, morphological differentiation and secondary metabolism, of Streptomyces are con-
trolled by environmental conditions including nutritional conditions, such as carbon energy, nitrogen and
phosphorus nutrients, and trace elements. The two biological aspects are also controlled by diffusible low-
molecular-weight -butyrolactones called autoregulators, in addition to the environmental conditions. These

10 h 18 h

Germination Substrate hyphae

30 h
Free spore

Spore chain Aerial mycelium

Septation A-factor

Sm
4–10 days 2 days GX
Other secondary
metabolites

3 days

Figure 1 Life cycle of Streptomyces. The life cycle of S. griseus, a representative of Streptomyces, is shown. A-factor is
essentially required for the progression of the step from substrate mycelium to aerial mycelium. Sm, streptomycin; GX,
grixazone. Reproduced from Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, Biofilms 2004, 1, 319–328.
286 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

autoregulators are effective at extremely low concentrations and are essentially required as intrinsic factors for
triggering morphogenesis and/or secondary metabolism. Such properties of autoregulators are akin to those of
hormones in eukaryotic organisms, rather than N-acylhomoserine-type quorum sensors seen in a variety of
Gram-negative bacteria (see below).
A-factor (2-isocapryloyl-3R-hydroxymethyl- -butyrolactone; for the structure, see Figure 1) is represen-
tative of substances that trigger secondary metabolism or aerial mycelium formation, or both, in Streptomyces.
A-factor was originally discovered by Khokhlov in the 1960s as a diffusible self-regulatory substance in
S. griseus, which simultaneously induces sporulation and streptomycin production in the same organism.5
Although the pioneer work of Khokhlov had long been neglected, Hara and Beppu6,7 confirmed his study
through genetic study of an industrial streptomycin-producing strain of S. griseus. Many of the streptomycin-
nonproducing and nonsporulating mutants they isolated actually responded to exogenously supplemented
A-factor; chemically synthesized (3R)-A-factor, provided by Mori,8 at a concentration of 1 nmol l 1 simulta-
neously restored the defects in streptomycin production and sporulation. A subsequent study established the
molecular mechanisms of the A-factor regulatory cascade for secondary metabolism and morphological
differentiation in S. griseus (Figure 2).9,10
A-factor homologues with a -butyrolactone ring have been found to act as similar autoregulatory factors,
and this has opened a new window to a characteristic regulatory system for physiological and morphological
differentiation in Streptomyces.9,10 On the other hand, similar diffusible factors, N-acylhomoserine lactones also
having a -butyrolactone ring, have been found to act as signaling molecules in many Gram-negative bacteria
and are involved in the so-called quorum sensing to induce diverged cellular functions, such as biolumines-
cence and toxin production, depending on the cell density.11,12 Because the biosynthesis of N-acylhomoserine
lactones as quorum sensors in Gram-negative bacteria and -butyrolactones as self-regulatory factors in
Streptomyces (see below) and the gene regulation by the respective receptors are totally different, these two
regulatory systems have evolved from different ancestors. It is evident that various bacterial species have
characteristic chemical signaling systems, which enable their cells to communicate and cross talk with one
another to control their functions in response to the environment.
In this section, an overall picture of the -butyrolactone regulatory systems in Streptomyces, focusing on
A-factor in S. griseus, is described, because the A-factor regulatory system has been most intensively studied and
because the regulatory mechanism by A-factor can be applied to all the -butyrolactone regulatory systems in
various Streptomyces spp. Major regulatory steps in the A-factor regulatory cascade involve the following: AfsA, a
key enzyme for A-factor biosynthesis; ArpA, the A-factor-specific receptor protein; and AdpA, a key transcrip-
tional activator in the cascade. The regulatory cascade clearly shows how A-factor determines the timing of the
onset of secondary metabolite formation and morphological differentiation and how A-factor triggers simulta-
neous expression of a number of genes of various functions. As an example of the phenotypes controlled by
A-factor, a signal relay from A-factor to the streptomycin biosynthesis genes is described.

4.07.2.2 General Properties of -Butyrolactones in Streptomyces

The genetic study of A-factor biosynthesis in S. griseus by Hara and Beppu6,7 showed that the (3R)-form of A-
factor at a concentration as low as 10 9 mol l 1 restores all the phenotypic defects in streptomycin production
and sporulation of an A-factor-deficient mutant strain HH1. A-factor-deficient mutants, like mutant HH1, were
readily obtained by treatment of the wild-type strain with UV irradiation or on incubation at 32  C.6 The
extreme instability of the A-factor productivity was later explained in terms of the location of afsA, a gene
encoding a key A-factor biosynthesis enzyme, AfsA,13,14 which is located in the vicinity of one end of the linear
chromosome.15 The ends of the Streptomyces chromosomes are deleted at high frequency due to homologous
recombination between long repeat sequences on both ends of the linear chromosome. The genome sequence of
S. griseus with a total of 8 545 929 bp16 shows that afsA is located at a distance of 272 kb from one end of the
chromosome. The location of afsA near one end of the linear chromosome of S. griseus is the molecular basis of
the simultaneous loss of streptomycin production and sporulation that has long been empirically observed by
those who are engaged in streptomycin fermentation. The extreme instability of A-factor production appears to
be specific to S. griseus, because afsA orthologues in other Streptomyces species are present in the core region of
the chromosome and because some Streptomyces strains contain multiple afsA homologues.
 AfsA
A-factor ArpA
Biosynthesis ArpA RNA polymerase

A-factor receptor adpA

A-factor

Autorepression
adpA
AdpA mRNA

SgiA
SSI
SprA SgmA σ AdsA StrR Orf1 GriR
SprB SprC AmfR SsgA
SprT SprU Sm GX
AmfS biosynthesis biosynthesis
Secreted serine proteases genes genes
PK
biosynthesis
Aerial mycelium formation genes

Septum Sm PK GX
formation production production production

Spore formation

Sm

Morphological differentiation Secondary metabolism

GX
Figure 2 The A-factor regulatory cascade. The A-factor signal, starting with the A-factor biosynthesis gene afsA, is transferred to the receptor ArpA, to the transcriptional
activator AdpA, and finally to a variety of genes required for morphological development and secondary metabolite formation. See the text for details of the target genes of AdpA.
Through this cascade, morphological and physiological differentiation occurs at a specific time of growth, when the intracellular concentration of A-factor reaches a critical level
at or near the middle of the exponential growth. Reproduced from S. Horinouchi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 283–299.
288 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

A-factor and its homologues produced at a portion of a hypha can move freely within the individual hypha
and spread into neighboring hyphae. Owing to filamentous growth, Streptomyces might have developed diffusible
-butyrolactone regulatory systems that facilitate communication between the cells at a distance within an
individual hypha and between different hyphae, as a consequence of convergent evolution. The filamentous
mycelia of Streptomyces are close enough to communicate with one another. The signaling system between
physically separate individual cells in the same mycelium can be termed hormonal regulation, rather than
quorum sensing regulation found in Gram-negative single-cell bacteria growing in liquid culture.11,12 On the
other hand, A-factor is also important in cell–cell communication between neighboring mycelia, similar to the
quorum sensing system. This system also facilitates discrimination of signals originating from neighboring
living things, thus allowing the cell to recognize the neighbor as a member of the same species or not, since a
given Streptomyces strain contains its own -butyrolactone and its receptor with strict ligand specificity. In
addition, the regulatory system employing chemicals is also advantageous for survival in the ecosystem;
A-factor produced at an extremely low concentration by a cell is accepted by several hyphae and causes
rapid sporulation of the whole population, which is advantageous compared with piecemeal sporulation of
individual hyphae induced by environmental stimuli such as nutritional limitation.

4.07.2.2.1 A-factor homologues in Actinomycetes

A-factor homologues having a -butyrolactone structure have been found in various Streptomyces species, such as S.
bikiniensis, S. coelicolor A3(2), S. cyaneofuscatus, S. lavendulae, S. virginiae, and S. viridochromogenes (reviewed in the works
of Horinouchi17,18 and Yamada and Nihira19). Examples include virginiae butanolides (VBs), controlling virginia-
mycin production in S. virginiae;20 inducing material (IM)-2, controlling pigment production in S. lavendulae;21 and
S. coelicolor A3(2) butyrolactone (SCB1), controlling actinorhodin and undecylprodigiosin production in S. coelicolor
A3(2).22 Their chemical structures are shown in Figure 3 and the chemistry will be discussed below in relation to
the key enzyme AfsA for biosynthesis of -butyrolactones. These strains contain homologues of afsA and arpA,
encoding the A-factor receptor, which implies that the mechanism of regulation by these -butyrolactones is the
same as that for the A-factor regulatory system including afsA and arpA in S. griseus (see below). As described above,
afsA is located near one end of the linear chromosome in S. griseus, and arpA is located in the middle of the
chromosome. Some afsA homologues are located near arpA homologues, but others are not. The former includes, for
example, the afsA/arpA homologous system for the production of virginiamycin by S. virginiae,23,24 a pigment by
S. venezuelae,25 jadomycin B by S. venezuelae,26 and methylenomycin by S. coelicolor A3(2) (accession number

Figure 3 -Butyrolactones in Streptomyces. The differences in chemical structure among the -butyrolactones are the
length and branching of the acyl chain and the reduction state, either a keto or a hydroxyl group, at position 6.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 289

AJ276673), and the latter includes the system for the production of pristinamycin by S. pristinaespiralis27 and tylosin
by S. fradiae.28 Apparently, the afsA/arpA system in the former case is specific for the adjacent gene cluster for
production of a certain secondary metabolite, and the system in the latter case exerts pleiotropic effects on both
secondary metabolism and morphological differentiation.
The A-factor and receptor system in S. griseus acts as an all-or-nothing switch (i.e., a crucial switch) for both
morphological and physiological differentiation. On the other hand, CprA and CprB, both of which are A-factor
receptor homologues, act as tuners for these processes in S. coelicolor A3(2); a cprA or cprB mutant still produces a
small amount of antibiotics and forms less abundant spores.29 As described above, some -butyrolactone
regulatory systems control the timing of antibiotic production, but not morphological development, and others
control both antibiotic production and morphological differentiation. These observations imply that
Streptomyces has evolved the -butyrolactone regulatory system to control different steps in the regulatory
hierarchy for healthy growth, as an all-or-nothing switch for some phenotypes and as just a tuner for other
phenotypes. This may be the reason why a Streptomyces strain contains redundant -butyrolactone regulatory
systems.
afsA encoding an A-factor biosynthesis enzyme has been found only in Streptomyces and its closely related
genera,30 which is consistent with the idea that the -butyrolactone regulatory cascades are confined to
Streptomyces. In contrast, the receptor protein ArpA and its homologues, especially proteins having high
similarity in DNA-binding domains, are distributed rather widely among various bacteria. In addition, some
Streptomyces strains contain multiple afsA–arpA pairs. Phylogenetic analysis of the -butyrolactone synthases and
receptors suggests that the ancestral ArpA protein had existed as a DNA-binding protein, not as a
-butyrolactone receptor, before the appearance of a -butyrolactone receptor in the course of the bacterial
evolution.30 Once a Streptomyces strain acquired a -butyrolactone as a chemical signaling molecule during the
evolution, the preexisting ArpA ancestor employed it as a ligand to modulate its own DNA-binding activity.
Because the combination of afsA and arpA in a given Streptomyces strain is greatly different in the topology of the
phylogenetic tree,30 Streptomyces has changed the combination of afsA and arpA when it acquired a new pair of
afsA–arpA, during which it has selected the best-fit pair by trial and error. This is in clear contrast to the
luxI–luxR systems that mediate quorum sensing via N-acylhomoserine lactones.11,12 The inducer–receptor
elements in a quorum sensing system in various Gram-negative bacteria have evolved concomitantly, as
revealed by phylogenetic analysis.26

4.07.2.3 Biosynthesis of -Butyrolactones

4.07.2.3.1 AfsA as the key enzyme for A-factor biosynthesis
afsA was cloned as a gene that restored streptomycin production by an A-factor-deficient mutant strain HH1.32
This gene appeared to encode an A-factor biosynthesis enzyme because (1) afsA mutants lost A-factor
productivity, (2) introduction of afsA into A-factor-nonproducing Streptomyces species caused overproduction
of A-factor with a gene dosage effect, and (3) introduction of afsA into Escherichia coli caused the host to produce
a substance having A-factor activity.13 Structure modeling of AfsA by S. Nakamura (unpublished data) showed
that, like -hydroxyacyl acyl carrier protein (ACP) dehydratase, AfsA has a tunnel that can accept an acyl chain
of acyl-ACP. The presence of such a tunnel led to the prediction that AfsA might be involved in the
condensation of a three-carbon (C3) compound and a C10 fatty acid derivative containing a -ketoacyl chain,
as suggested by Sakuda et al.33
Consistent with the prediction, in vitro A-factor synthesis with a purified AfsA protein showed that it
catalyzes acyl transfer between 8-methyl-3-oxononanoyl-ACP (Figure 4; 3) and the hydroxyl group of
dihydroxyacetone phosphate (2), forming a fatty acid ester (4).14 The ester (4) is nonenzymatically converted
to a butenolide phosphate (5) by intramolecular aldol condensation. The butenolide phosphate (5) is then
reduced by the bprA product, which is encoded just downstream of afsA. The bprA product was tested as a
candidate of the reductase of 5, based on the assumption that functionally related genes are, in many cases,
encoded as neighbors on the bacterial chromosome. The stereoselectivity, the R-form, at position 3 is
determined by this reduction step. The phosphate group on the resulting butanolide (6) is finally removed
by a phosphatase, resulting in the formation of A-factor (1). The fatty acid ester (4) is also converted into
A-factor in an alternative way. The phosphate group on the ester is first removed by a phosphatase and the
Figure 4 The whole A-factor biosynthesis pathway. The major pathway, highlighted by hatching, and an alternative pathway are shown.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 291

dephosphorylated ester (7) is converted nonenzymatically to a butenolide (8), which is then reduced by a
reductase different from BprA, resulting in A-factor (1). The phosphatase and reductase in the latter route are
not specific to A-factor biosynthesis but are generally present in bacteria. This may be the reason why afsA
alone causes E. coli to produce substances having A-factor activity (see below). Because of the operon structure
of afsA–bprA, we assume that the former route is important.
Escherichia coli carrying afsA alone produces substances having A-factor activity.13 Mass spectrometry
suggested that the active substances are A-factor homologues with a C10 straight side chain (m/z 241) and a
C8 straight side chain (m/z 213).14 The straight side chains of the A-factor homologues reflect the fact that E. coli
produces no branched fatty acids.

4.07.2.3.2 Structural variety of -butyrolactones

Figure 3 lists several A-factor homologues in Streptomyces.16,17 There are two structural differences in the -
butyrolactone signal molecules: one is the length and branching of the fatty acid side chain and the other is the
reduction state of the 6-oxo group. On the basis of the A-factor biosynthesis pathway, we can ascribe the
difference in side chain to the variety of the -ketoacyl-ACPs, one of the substrates used by AfsA and its
homologues. The branching of the side chain reflects the fact that the fatty acids of Streptomyces consist primarily
of branched-chain fatty acids that are synthesized from isobutyryl- and methylbutyryl-CoA. The difference at
position 6, either a keto or a hydroxyl group, can be ascribed to the existence and stereoselectivity of the 6-keto
reductase that reduces this position. VBs in S. virginiae and SCBs in S. coelicolor A3(2) are reduced by BarS1-type
reductases.34 Owing to the absence of such reductases in S. griseus, position 6 of A-factor remains as a keto group.

4.07.2.3.3 Regulation of A-factor biosynthesis

A-factor is accumulated in a growth-dependent manner and reaches its maximum, 25–30 ng ml 1 (about
100 nmol l 1), at or near the middle of exponential growth.14,35 An interesting question is why A-factor is
produced in such an extremely small amount? Because the transcription of afsA is almost constant throughout
growth,14 it is most likely that the extremely small amount of A-factor is due to the availability of the substrates.
8-Methyl-3-oxononanoyl-ACP (3), which is synthesized by condensation of three acetate units with the starter
substrate isobutyryl-CoA, is an intermediate in the fatty acid biosynthesis, and is leaked from the pathway.
Therefore, the intracellular pool of the acyl-ACP (3) must be extremely small, therefore serving as a bottleneck.
Dihydroxyacetone phosphate (2), another substrate of AfsA, is derived from glycolysis. Thus, the A-factor
biosynthesis by AfsA reflects the growth period and determines the timing of secondary metabolism and
morphological differentiation. The biosynthesis of -butyrolactones reflective of the amounts of the inter-
mediates of primary metabolism is analogous to that of N-acylhomoserine lactone quorum sensors in Gram-
negative bacteria; N-acylhomoserine lactones are synthesized from S-adenosylmethionine derived from amino
acid biosynthesis and the diverse intermediates in fatty acid biosynthesis.36

4.07.2.4 Receptors of -Butyrolactones

4.07.2.4.1 Properties of ArpA
Miyake et al.37 detected A-factor-binding activity in the cytoplasmic fraction of S. griseus by using [3H]A-factor.
The A-factor-binding protein was found to serve as a repressor of streptomycin production and aerial
mycelium formation, since mutants deficient in the binding protein produced streptomycin in a larger amount
and formed spores more abundantly than the wild-type strain, even in the absence of A-factor.38 The gene for
the A-factor-binding protein, named arpA, was then cloned,39 and the DNA-binding activity of ArpA and a
consensus ArpA-binding sequence were determined.38 The consensus ArpA-binding sequence was a 22 bp
palindromic site with the sequence 59-GG(T/C)CGGT(A/T)(T/C)G(T/G)-39 as one half of the palin-
drome.40 ArpA binds this site in the absence of A-factor, and the exogenous addition of A-factor to the
ArpA–DNA complex induces immediate release of ArpA from the DNA. These observations were in
agreement with the idea that ArpA acts as a repressor-type regulator of secondary metabolism and morpho-
logical differentiation by preventing the expression of a certain key gene(s) during the early growth phase.
A-factor, produced in a growth-dependent manner, releases ArpA from the DNA, thus switching on the
292 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

expression of the key genes, leading to the simultaneous onset of secondary metabolism and morphogenesis at a
certain timing during growth. adpA was later identified as the sole target of ArpA.41
The domain structure of ArpA was predicted by site-directed mutagenesis of the helix–turn–helix DNA-
binding motif of ArpA and by analysis of arpA mutations. A mutant ArpA protein (Val41Ala) lacked
DNA-binding ability but still retained A-factor-binding ability.42 Conversely, mutant Pro115Ser lacked
A-factor-binding ability but retained DNA-binding ability.43 Mutant Trp119Ala also lacked A-factor-binding
ability but retained DNA-binding ability, indicating that Trp-119 is essential for A-factor binding.42 These
observations predict that ArpA contains two independently functional domains, a DNA-binding domain and an
A-factor-binding domain.

4.07.2.4.2 Crystallography of CprB, an ArpA homologue

CprB, an ArpA homologue in S. coelicolor A3(2),29 was crystallized and its structure was solved.44 CprB,
consisting of 215 amino acids, shows about 30% identity in amino acid sequence to ArpA. It recognizes and
binds the same nucleotide sequence as ArpA,42 although its ligand still remains unknown. In addition, CprB
serves as a negative regulator of both morphological differentiation and secondary metabolism in S. coelicolor
A3(2), as ArpA does in S. griseus. The crystal structures of three different forms, Ia, Ib, and II, were determined at
2.4 Å resolution,44 and they turned out to be a dimer with an ‘
’ shape (Figure 5). The two subunits are bound
via six hydrogen bonds and three water-mediated hydrogen bonds. In addition, a disulfide bond via Cys-159
links the subunits. This disulfide bridge is specific to CprB because typical -butyrolactone receptors contain
no Cys residue at this position. The DNA-binding domain is composed of three N-terminal helices, 1, 2, and
3. Of the three, 2 and 3 form a typical helix–turn–helix motif. The amino acid residues on helix 3 are

Helix-4 Helix-4

DBD

Figure 5 Overall structure of CprB, an ArpA homologue. CprB constitutes a dimer, each subunit of which contains a
ligand-binding pocket in the C-terminal portion and a helix–turn–helix DNA-binding domain in the N-terminal portion. The
receptor dimer binds the same face of the DNA by inserting the DNA-binding helices in the major groove. The A-factor
molecule in the pocket is illustrated with a ball model. The binding of A-factor so that it is embedded completely in the pocket
relocates the DNA-binding domains (DBD) outside the molecule via the long helix-4, thus dissociating ArpA from the DNA.
This computer-modeled structure was provided by R. Natsume.44 Reproduced from S. Horinouchi, Biosci. Biotechnol.
Biochem. 2007, 71, 283–299.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 293

completely conserved among the receptors, in agreement with the observation that -butyrolactone receptors
recognize the same nucleotide sequence.
A large cavity is present in the regulatory domain, which we assume is a ligand-binding pocket 5 Å in
diameter and 20 Å long. Trp-127, corresponding to Trp-119 of ArpA, which has been found to be essential for
A-factor binding by site-directed mutagenesis,42 participates in forming the pocket. This pocket is completely
embedded in the molecule, and a flexible loop covers the entrance to it, serving as a lid for the pocket. The
docking study suggests that a -butyrolactone molecule binds to the pocket in an extended manner and Trp-
127 causes a hydrophobic interaction with the alkyl chain of the -butyrolactone molecule. The hydrophobic
interaction between Trp-127 and the alkyl chain of the ligand stabilizes the ligand binding.

4.07.2.4.3 How A-factor dissociates ArpA from DNA

A database search for structural comparison revealed that the overall structure of CprB is similar to that of the
TetR family proteins, TetR and QacR. One of the crystal structures of CprB, form Ib, is closely related to that
of QacR in complex with its target DNA.45 We can hence predict how -butyrolactones dissociate their
cognate receptors from DNA upon binding the ligands, on the basis of the mechanism of the conformational
changes of TetR upon tetracycline binding.45,46 Ligand binding induces relocation of a long helix 4 that links
the ligand-binding pocket with the DNA-binding domain. As a result of the relocation of the DNA-binding
domain, ArpA dissociates from the DNA (Figure 5).

4.07.2.5 AdpA Regulon

4.07.2.5.1 Properties of AdpA
The transcription of streptomycin biosynthetic genes is presumably controlled by A-factor because A-factor
switches on streptomycin production. The data from our laboratory47 and a detailed study by Distler et al.48 on
the transcriptional organization of part of the streptomycin biosynthetic gene cluster showed that one mRNA
species covering a regulatory gene (strR) and the streptomycin-6-phosphotransferase (aphD) gene was depen-
dent on A-factor, as determined by S1 nuclease mapping. We then tried to detect and purify a protein that
might bind the promoter region of strR–aphD, based on the assumption that the A-factor signal is transmitted via
ArpA and some other regulatory proteins to the A-factor-dependent promoter. As a result, an A-factor-
responsive protein (AdpA) able to bind the upstream activation sequence, about 270 bp upstream of the
transcriptional start point of strR, was detected by gel mobility shift assay.49 StrR was later found to be a
pathway-specific transcriptional activator for all streptomycin biosynthetic genes.50,51 AdpA was detected only
in the presence of A-factor. After purification of AdpA and partial amino acid sequence determination, the adpA
gene was cloned by PCR.52 AdpA encoding a 405-amino acid protein with a helix–turn–helix DNA-binding
motif at the central portion showed sequence similarity to transcriptional regulators belonging to AraC/XylS
family.
The 35 and 10 regions of adpA contained a 22 bp palindrome, caggcAGGAACGGACC GCGCGG
TACGCt (the underlines indicate the 35 and 10 promoter elements;  indicates a dyad axis), which showed
similarity to the consensus sequence of the ArpA-binding site, (A/C)C(A/G)(T/A)ACCC(A/G)CCGG(T/
C)CGGT(A/T)(T/C)G(T/G).52 As expected, ArpA bound the promoter region of adpA in the absence of
A-factor but did not bind in the presence of A-factor. In addition, the exogenous addition of A-factor to the
ArpA–DNA complex induced immediate release of ArpA from the DNA. Thus, the promoter of adpA turned
out to be a target of ArpA. Consistent with this, S1 nuclease mapping showed that adpA was transcribed only in
the presence of A-factor and strR was transcribed only in the presence of intact adpA. Furthermore, adpA
disruptants produced no streptomycin and overexpression of adpA caused the wild-type S. griseus strain to
produce streptomycin at an earlier growth stage in a larger amount.
Our next question was whether ArpA targets only adpA. Because ArpA acts as a repressor of aerial mycelium
formation and secondary metabolism, an arpA disruptant forms aerial hyphae and spores earlier than the wild-
type strain and overproduces streptomycin and other secondary metabolites. On the other hand, mutant KM2,
expressing a mutant ArpA (Trp119Ala), neither produces secondary metabolites nor forms aerial hyphae, since
this A-factor-insensitive mutant ArpA always binds to and represses the adpA promoter. Trp-119 of ArpA is
essential for A-factor binding, and replacement of this Trp residue with Ala abolishes its A-factor-binding
294 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

ability, resulting in the formation of a mutant ArpA that binds the target DNA irrespective of the presence of
A-factor.42 When adpA under the control of a foreign, constitutively expressed promoter is introduced into
mutant KM2, all the phenotypes that we can observe are restored.41 These results show that the only significant
target of ArpA is adpA.

4.07.2.5.2 Autoregulation of adpA

Because adpA targets many genes, the intracellular concentration of AdpA must be important for ordered gene
expression at a specific timing. We found that adpA acts as a repressor of its own transcription by binding to
three sites within its promoter and forming a DNA loop via two molecules of AdpA dimer.53 The cooperative
binding of AdpA to two sites allows effective regulation to result from small alterations in the AdpA
concentration and serves as a fine sensor of the AdpA concentration.

4.07.2.5.3 AdpA regulon

adpA disruptants failed to produce streptomycin and a yellow pigment, suggesting that the biosynthetic genes
for the pigment were under the control of AdpA.52 Furthermore, disruption of adpA caused the host to show a
bald phenotype. These observations implied that AdpA controls multiple, unlinked genes necessary for
physiological and morphological differentiation. We started isolating multiple genes as DNA fragments
bound by AdpA by a combination of gel mobility shift assay, immunoprecipitation with the anti-AdpA
antibody, and PCR. Repeated experiments yielded more than 60 DNA fragments that were specifically
bound by AdpA.54 The presence of many genes, all of which are simultaneously activated by AdpA at a
specific point in the growth phase, means that the signal from A-factor is greatly amplified at this regulatory
step via AdpA as an amplifier. We have so far analyzed several of these isolated fragments, which are essential or
important for secondary metabolite formation and morphological differentiation (Figure 2).
The targets of AdpA required for morphological differentiation are the following: adsA, encoding an
extracytoplasmic function (ECF)  factor;54 amfR, encoding a transcriptional activator that activates the amf
operon;55,56 extracellular proteases, including a metalloendopeptidase,57 two trypsin-type proteases,58 and
three chymotrypsin-type proteases;59 a Streptomyces subtilisin inhibitor (SSI) gene;60 and ssgA, which is essential
for spore septum formation.61 These AdpA-dependent proteases, which are produced at the time of aerial
mycelium formation, may be involved in hydrolysis or apoptosis of proteins in substrate mycelium for reuse
during aerial hyphae formation. The SSI is supposed to modulate the activities of the proteases. The amf operon
is for the production of a hydrophobin, AmfS, that is essential for the erection of aerial hyphae into the air.62
The AdsA presumably transcribes specific genes, which suggests the presence of an additional regulatory step
downstream of this  factor.
The targets of AdpA for secondary metabolism are the following: strR, the pathway-specific transcriptional
activator for streptomycin biosynthesis (see below);51 and a gene encoding a transcriptional factor probably for
biosynthesis of a polyketide compound.63 griR, the pathway-specific transcriptional activator, is also indirectly
activated by AdpA.64 In addition to these genes, almost all gene clusters for biosynthesis of a certain secondary
metabolite in S. griseus are activated by AdpA, as revealed by our DNA microarray analysis on the basis of the
whole genome sequence of S. griseus.16,65
The AdpA target genes contain one or more AdpA-binding sites upstream of their promoters, and some
genes require simultaneous binding of a dimer of AdpA to multiple sites. All the target sites contain a consensus
AdpA-binding sequence, 59-TGGCSNGWWY-39 (S: G or C; W: A or T; Y: T or C; N: any nucleotide). The
binding sites are, for example, 200 bp upstream and 25 bp downstream from the transcriptional start points.
Despite the differences in binding position with respect to the promoter and in the number of binding sites,
AdpA recruits RNA polymerase to the promoter of the target genes and facilitates isomerization of the RNA
polymerase–DNA complex into an open complex competent for transcriptional initiation.44,57
The genome of S. griseus consists of 8 545 929 bp containing about 8000 open reading frames.16 Preliminary
DNA microarray analysis has shown that more than 600 genes are activated by AdpA and about 200 genes are
relatively downregulated in the
adpA background. The number of genes whose expression is switched-on or
affected by adpA (actually, A-factor itself) is amazing, indicating that A-factor is a true microbial hormone.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 295

4.07.2.6 The A-Factor Signal Relay Leading to Streptomycin Biosynthesis

The streptomycin biosynthesis gene cluster, consisting of 27 genes, is transcribed by 9 polycistronic mRNA
species (Figure 6).51 As described above, the A-factor signal, starting with afsA encoding an A-factor biosynth-
esis enzyme, is transferred first to ArpA, the A-factor receptor protein, and then to AdpA, a key transcriptional
activator. The pathway-specific transcriptional activator, strR, for streptomycin biosynthesis is a member of the
AdpA regulon and is induced by AdpA. Two AdpA dimers bind the upstream activation sequences of strR,
approximately at nucleotide positions 270 and 50 with respect to the transcriptional start point of strR, and
activate its transcription. For transcriptional activation, the two AdpA-binding sites should be occupied by an
AdpA dimer, speculatively because the two AdpA dimers form a complex, as a result of which a DNA loop via
the AdpA complex is formed. The DNA-bound AdpA molecules assist RNA polymerase in forming an open
complex competent for transcriptional initiation.44 StrR thus induced binds and activates the nine promoters
that cover all the streptomycin biosynthesis genes, triggering biosynthesis of streptomycin from glucose. The
signal relay for streptomycin biosynthesis has thus been elucidated: from AfsA to A-factor to ArpA to AdpA to
StrR, and finally to the streptomycin biosynthesis genes.
The major streptomycin resistance determinant, aphD, encoding streptomycin-6-phosphotransferase is
encoded just downstream of strR and cotranscribed with strR by read-through from the AdpA-dependent strR
promoter.47 The cotranscription of strR and aphD accounts for the prompt induction of streptomycin resistance
by A-factor and achieves a rapid increase in self-resistance just before induction of streptomycin biosynthesis.

4.07.3 Signaling Molecules in High-GC Gram-Positive Bacteria

4.07.3.1 Introduction
The high-GC Gram-positive bacterial taxon Actinomycetes includes a number of industrially important
organisms. The best characterized genus is Streptomyces, which consists of the largest number of species
including several model organisms whose genome has been completely sequenced. Streptomyces and related
bacteria are renowned for their ability to produce a wide variety of secondary metabolites, which have many
industrial applications.66 This group of bacteria are also characterized by their ability to perform complex
cellular differentiation resembling that of filamentous fungi. In the initial stages of life cycle, the organism
grows as a branching multinucleoid substrate mycelium on solid media.67 The substrate hypha then produces

A-factor

strU strVW stsC stsBA strNB2M strLED strR strB1FGHIKST

stsGFED strO aphD

–270 –50
strR aphD

Figure 6 The A-factor signal relay to the streptomycin biosynthesis genes. The streptomycin biosynthesis genes, in a total
of 27 genes, including the pathway-specific transcriptional activator strR, are shown. The A-factor signal relay starts with
A-factor and is then transmitted to ArpA to AdpA to StrR, and finally to the nine transcriptional units covering the whole
gene cluster.
296 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

aerial mycelium, which culminates in a long spore chain by forming septa at regular intervals. The complex
metamorphosis activity programmed in prokaryotic genetic background is an attractive research target in terms
of cellular development.
Both morphological differentiation and secondary metabolite formation in this group of bacteria take place
in response to environmental stimuli such as nutritional limitation and desiccation. To date, many genes that
regulate morphogenesis and secondary metabolism have been identified and their physiological roles have been
characterized in several model organisms. The lines of evidence have demonstrated that the genetic control of
morphological development and that of secondary metabolism are linked to each other and comprise a complex
regulatory network. It is probable that various environmental stimuli are sensed by signaling systems that have
connections to the complex regulatory network, but the details of such signaling mechanisms have not yet been
well characterized.
In contrast to the relatively poor understanding of environmental signal sensing, the molecular mechanism
of hormonal sensing has been well studied in some model organisms.68 As described in the previous section, the
general autoinducer functioning in this group of bacteria retains a -butyrolactone structure. The best studied
autoinducer, A-factor (2-isocapryloyl-3R-hydroxymethy- -butyrolactone), controls the onset of both morpho-
logical differentiation and secondary metabolite formation in S. griseus. The studies by Horinouchi and
coworkers18,69 have identified the A-factor-dependent transcriptional regulators and characterized their precise
roles and functions. Accumulating evidence has shown that similar hormonal control of secondary metabolite
formation occurs widely in Streptomyces.70
This section reviews the current understanding of interspecific signal transfer mediated by small molecules
that stimulate the initiation of secondary metabolism and cell differentiation in Streptomyces and related bacteria.
In contrast to the deep understanding of intraspecific hormonal sensing, this research field is yet under
development; however, several new approaches have started to unveil the unseen nature of cross-talking in
this group of bacteria.

4.07.3.2 Gräfe’s Factors

It is generally understood that the above-mentioned -butyrolactone sensing occurs in a species-specific
manner. This is supported by the fact that A-factor of S. griseus and VBs of S. virginiae do not exhibit cross-
reaction: A-factor does not induce virginiamycin production in S. virginiae, and none of the VBs stimulates
aerial mycelium formation or streptomycin production in S. griseus.69 This is explained by the diversity of side
chain structure of these factors and ligand selectivity of the corresponding receptor proteins (see Sections
4.07.2.2 and 4.07.2.4).
On the other hand, the extensive study by Gräfe et al.71 on the structural and functional diversity of
-butyrolactones in the early 1980s showed the presence of not only intraspecific but also interspecific factors.
For example, they showed that anthracycline production by a mutant strain of S. griseus was induced by
-butyrolactone factors produced by several other Stretomyces spp.71 Hara and Beppu6 also suggested that
A-factor or an alternative factor is produced by several Streptomyces species other than S. griseus. Recently, Choi
et al.72,73 reported that known types of -butyrolactones function in several non-Streptomyces Actinomycetes,
including Amycolatopsis, Actinoplanes, and Kitasatospora. Lines of evidence strongly suggest that -butyrolactones
serve as a communication factor that functions widely in Actinomycetes.

4.07.3.3 Antibiotics as Signal Molecules

A long-lasting open question in the study of Actinomycetes is why this group of bacteria produce such highly
diverged compounds as secondary metabolites. It is well known that some of the compounds exhibit anti-
microbial activities, which leads to a plausible argument that the defensive function of these compounds is
essential for the life of this kind of bacteria in the natural environment, although this simple idea does not fully
explain the marked diversity of structure and activity of the secondary metabolites.
On the other hand, another attractive idea for the role of secondary metabolites has been propounded by
Davies and coworkers.74 They demonstrated that some antibiotics at low concentrations alter global bacterial
transcription patterns.74 The precedent discovery was done by Murakami et al.75 on the binary activity of
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 297

thiostrepton, a cyclic peptide produced by Streptomyces azureus. Thiostrepton not only exhibits an antibiotic
activity by inhibiting the function of prokaryotic ribosomes but also induces the activity of a specific promoter
in Streptomyces lividans.76 Similarly, antibiotics including erythromycin, rifampicin, and the so-called macrolide–
lincosamide–streptogramin (MLS) antibiotics have been shown to act as global regulators that modulate
transcription of bacterial cells.77 Furthermore, it has been shown recently that -lactam antibiotics stimulate
transcription in eukaryotic cells.78 Lines of evidence strongly suggest that the unseen functional diversity of
secondary metabolites constitutes an unexpectedly wide and complex signaling network in the natural
environment, although the details still largely remain unknown.

4.07.3.4 Wide Occurrence of Interspecific Cross-Talking in the Streptomyces Community

To assess the occurrence of interspecific cross talk in the Streptomyces community, Kawai at Nihon University
performed comprehensive cross-feeding experiments using a number of culture collection strains and fresh
environmental isolates.79 The result showed unexpectedly wide occurrence of interspecific stimulation of
antibiotic production and/or morphological differentiation. The especially high frequencies were observed
with environmental isolates; more than 90% of the strains examined exhibited a stimulatory activity(ies)
against other strain(s), and more than 30 and 50% of the strains were promoted for antibiotic production and
cell differentiation, respectively, when they were grown in close proximity of other strains.73 The evidence
strongly supports the idea that cross-talking generally takes place in the community of this group of soil
bacteria.

4.07.3.5 Role of Ferrioxamines

As had been observed with some -butyrolactones and antibiotic substances, it appeared likely that the above
interspecific stimulation events are mediated by some diffusible metabolites produced by stimulator strains. To
study the details of the interspecific stimulation events, Yamanaka et al.80 isolated the activity principle that
stimulated growth and development of Streptomyces tanashiensis from culture supernatant of S. griseus. As a result
of structural analysis of the purified preparation, the substance was determined to be desferrioxamine
E (synonym, nocardamine; Figure 7).
Desferrioxamine E and its analogues are siderophores widely produced by Streptomyces and related
bacteria.81 Their major role is ferric transportation; cells secrete these cage compounds to their environment
and then uptake their ferric-bound form (ferrioxamines) by the activity of a specific transporter to utilize ferric.
Probably, the organisms had developed this complex retrieval system due to the insolubility and low avail-
ability of ferric in the natural environment.
Notably, the effect of exogenous supply of ferrioxamine in Streptomyces is diverse: it promotes growth in some
strains, while it does not affect growth but stimulates cellular differentiation and/or secondary metabolism in

Figure 7 Structures of representative ferrioxamines (ferric-containing desferrioxamines) produced by Streptomyces.

298 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

other strains.80 This fact suggests that the ferric uptake system plays different roles in this group of bacteria.
Desferrioxamines are known to promote growth of some fungi82–84 and bacteria85,86 that do not have the ability
to produce the siderophore. Hence, it is likely that desferrioxamines produced by Streptomyces and several other
bacteria are utilized by a wide variety of microorganisms, constituting a basis of commensalism in microbial
community. The diverse effect also implies that the substance has additional function other than ferric
transportation.

4.07.3.6 Other Factors

In addition to the above factors, several substances have potential to be signal molecules that mediate cell–cell
communication in Actinomycetes. Onaka et al.87 isolated an activity principle that stimulated secondary
metabolite formation and/or cell differentiation in various Streptomyces strains from the cell extract of a
Streptomyces sp. The substance, named goadsporin, was a peptidic molecule consisting of 19 amino acids.88
Although evidence is not yet available for its secretion, the multifunctional or pleiotropic effect of the
exogenous supply of goadsporin suggests its unique and general function as a signal substance.
It has been known that a secreted hydrophobic peptide called SapB induces the cellular development of the
model organism S. coelicolor A3(2). SapB probably reduces surface tension of substrate mycelium and induces the
erection of aerial mycelium. Recently, Kodani et al.89 revealed the chemical structure of SapB to be a lantibiotic-
like cyclic peptide that contains two unusual amino acids, dehydroalanine and lanthionine (for a detailed
description of lantibiotics, see the following section). Since an activity alternative to SapB has been observed
with other surface-active agents including hydrophobins produced by some kind of fungi,90 it is possible that
some kind of secreted hydrophibic molecules are also involved in cell–cell interaction in microbial community.
Like other organisms, it is likely that cyclic AMP (cAMP) functions as a second messenger in Streptomyces.
Evidence has suggested that cAMP acts as an extracellular signal for the onset of morphological development
and antibiotic production in S. coelicolor A3(2)91 and S. griseus.92 Although little genetic and biochemical
information is available on the secretion of cAMP, it is possible that this general signal substance plays some
role in microbial community structuring in Streptomyces.
Actinomycetes include unicellular organisms that comprise industrially and clinically important genera
such as Corynebacterium, Rhodococcus, and Mycobacterium. To date, little information is available with regard to the
social behavior of these kinds of bacteria. The genome sequencing studies on the representative species did not
discover any known autoinducer systems. Hence, it is possible that a different signaling system controls the
community structuring of these organisms. An unknown diversity of communication mechanism may exist
within this group of bacteria.

4.07.4 Signaling Molecules in Low-GC Gram-Positive Bacteria

4.07.4.1 Introduction
The first example of chemical communication in low-GC Gram-positive bacteria was discovered in 1978 by
Dunny, Clewell and their colleagues.93 It was found that conjugative plasmid transfer of Enterococcus faecalis was
induced by a chemical substance, termed sex pheromone, which is secreted from plasmid-free recipient cells.
Several years later, the structure of the sex pheromone was elucidated to be an oligopeptide by Suzuki et al.94
Since this discovery, a variety of cell-to-cell communication events in Gram-positive bacteria have been found
to be mediated by peptidic substances.95–97
While Gram-negative bacteria use nonpeptidic small compounds represented by N-acylhomoserine lactone
for cell-to-cell communication, Gram-positive bacteria mainly use peptidic compounds for this purpose with
the exception of butyrolactones in Streptomyces (see Section 4.07.2) and furanosyl borate diester, autoinducer-2
(AI-2), which is the universal signal molecule common in both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.98
Although peptides are ubiquitous compounds in the living organism, their structures can be diverse not only at
the primary structure level but also at the higher order structure level. This means that it is relatively easy for
peptides to gain diversity in their structure during the course of molecular evolution. Probably, this has allowed
to accomplish specific interaction between signal and receptor and may provide considerable advantage to
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 299

achieve specific and selective cell-to-cell communication in natural biosphere comprising complex biota. The
diversity in peptide structure can also be created by posttranslational modification. The peptides involved in
cell–cell communication of Gram-positive bacteria are often posttranslationally modified to form lanthionine,
thiolactone, isoprenylated tryptophan, and so on. Those posttranslational modifications indeed seem to allow
stable interaction of peptide signal molecules with their receptors.
Peptide signal molecules are mainly classified into two categories based on their mode of action. The first
category includes nonmodified small oligopeptides that are reimported into the cells and directly trigger the
signal transduction pathway by binding to intracellular target molecules. The other category includes a variety
of peptides but the signals of all peptides are commonly transduced through a two-component regulatory
system consisting of membrane histidine kinase and intracellular response regulator. The latter category is
classified into four different types in terms of chemical structure as follows: (1) bacteriocin-inducer pheromone
and competence-stimulating peptides (CSPs); (2) lantionine-containing peptides; (3) cyclic thiolactone and
lactone peptides; and (4) prenylated peptides. In addition to these peptide signal molecules, a recent topical
compound, AI-2, will be reviewed in Sections 4.07.4.7 and 4.07.5.3.1.

4.07.4.2 Nonmodified Small Oligopeptides

Nonmodified small oligopeptides are reimported into responder cells after the secretion. The imported
peptides directly bind to intracellular receptors that regulate transcription of target genes directly or indirectly.

4.07.4.2.1 Sex pheromones of E. faecalis

Recent outbreak of drug-resistant enterococci is outstanding. It is well known that enterococci are like a
reservoir of drug-resistant genes and sometimes also play a pivotal role as a spreader of resistant genes not only
in the clinical area but also in the natural environment including animal gastrointestinal tract.99,100 In
enterococci, drug-resistant genes are often encoded by mobile genetic elements.101 Pheromone-responsive
plasmids are one of the mobile genetic elements carrying drug-resistant genes and some other pathogenicity-
related genes such as hemolysin.102 Host cell harboring a pheromone-responsive plasmid expresses a series of
genes required for conjugative plasmid transfer in response to subnanomolar concentrations of the sex
pheromone, that is, the concentrations surrounding the pheromone-producing recipient cells in nature. As a
result of the pheromone response, cell clumps are formed between plasmid donor and recipient cells, which
enable high-frequency plasmid transfer in a liquid culture.
Thus far, five peptide sex pheromones have been identified (Figure 8(a)).94,103–106 It is interesting to note
that each plasmid specifically responds to only the corresponding pheromone. Each peptide sex pheromone is
named ‘cX’, which induces plasmid ‘pX’. For example, cAD1 induces conjugative transfer of pAD1. The initial
letter of cX is named after the initial letter of ‘clumping’ because these peptide sex pheromones drastically
induce cell clumping between donor and recipient cells.

(a) (b)
cPD1: FLVMFLSG PhrA: ARNQT
iPD1: ALILTLVS PhrC: ERGMT
cAD1: LFSLVLAG PhrE: SRNVT
iAD1: LFVVTLVG PhrF: QRGMI
cCF10: LVTLVFV PhrG: EKMIG
iCF10: AITLIFI PhrH: DRNTT
cAM373: AIFILAS PhrK: ERPVG
iAM373: SIFTLVA
cOB1: VAVLVLGA
iOB1: SLTLILSA
Figure 8 Structures of nonmodified oligopeptide signal molecules mediating intraspecies cell-to-cell communication in
Gram-positive bacteria. (a) Peptide sex pheromones and their inhibitors involved in the regulation of conjugative
plasmid transfer in Enterococcus faecalis. (b) Competence- and sporulation-stimulating factors of Bacillus subtilis.
300 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

Once the host cell acquires the pheromone-responsive plasmid, it apparently shuts off the production of the
corresponding pheromone. It has been revealed that two systems are involved in this phenotypic change. One is
the production of pheromone inhibitor; each pheromone-responsive plasmid encodes a pheromone inhibitor,
termed ‘iX’, which is an antagonist peptide of sex pheromone. The other one is shutdown of pheromone
production, which is accomplished by a plasmid-encoded protein (TraB for pAD1 and pPD1 and PrgY for
pCF10).107–110
As shown in Figure 8(a), sex pheromones and their inhibitors are hepta- or octapeptides. All are rich in
hydrophobic amino acid residues and no charged amino acid residues are contained in these peptides. It has
been found that these peptide sex pheromones are encoded in the N-terminal leader moiety of lipoproteins.
The leader peptides (about 20 amino acids) are cleaved off after the translocation of lipoproteins, further
processed to generate the pheromones, and eventually they are excreted.110,111 The secreted pheromones are
reimported into the plasmid-donor cells and bound to their receptors, as shown in Figure 9.
The pheromones and their inhibitors are suggested to be imported through an oligopeptide permease (Opp).
Leonard et al.112 demonstrated that an insertional inactivation of the chromosomal opp operon reduced the
sensitivity of the host cell to cCF10 by about one order of magnitude, suggesting that the Opp contributes to sex
pheromone uptake. Pheromone-responsive plasmids encode accessory proteins, pheromone-binding proteins
(TraC for cAD1 and cPD1, and PrgZ for pCF10), involved in pheromone uptake. These pheromone-binding
proteins showed high similarity to oligopeptide-binding proteins encoded by chromosomal opp gene cluster.
This similarity suggested the model that sex pheromone is initially bound to the pheromone-binding protein,
transferred to Opp complex located in the membrane, and eventually internalized into the cell. However, it
should be noted that the opp-knockout mutant still has partial ability to respond to sex pheromone. Considering
that a series of peptide sex pheromones commonly show highly hydrophobic profile, it is likely that they are
somehow permeable through the cytoplasmic membrane and can be internalized without any transporter.
Indeed, Nakayama et al.113 have demonstrated that opp-knockout mutant of E. coli is still able to import a tritium-
labeled cPD1 as does wild-type E. coli.

Lipoprotein

cX Chromosome
cX

Plasmid recipeint

TraC
iX
Opp
Aggregation
substance
TraA
traC traB traA iX asx

pX
Plasmid donor

Figure 9 Sex pheromone signaling leading to conjugative plasmid transfer in Enterococcus faecalis. Sex pheromone (cX) is
encoded in the N-terminal leader moiety of lipoprotein. The leader peptide is cleaved off after the translocation of lipoprotein
and further processed to generate the pheromone, which is eventually excreted. The secreted pheromone is reimported into
the plasmid-donor cell and bound to TraA, which is a transcriptional regulator. Eventually, aggregation substance is induced
on the donor cell surface, which leads to plasmid transfer to recipient cell.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 301

After the pheromone is imported into the plasmid-donor cells, it directly binds to an intracellular receptor.
The receptor is designated as PrgX for cCF10114 and TraA for cAD1115 and cPD1.116,117 Nakayama et al.116
have proved, in an in vivo experiment using tritium-labeled cPD1, that cPD1 binds to TraA. It was also
demonstrated that TraA of pPD1 shows affinity only to cPD1 and iPD1 but not to other pheromones and
inhibitors, by in vitro competitive binding assay with recombinant TraA and the tritium-labeled cPD1.116 This
indicated that TraA recognizes the corresponding pheromone cPD1 and that iPD1 is a receptor antagonist of
TraA. It is known that each sex pheromone induces specifically the conjugative transfer of the corresponding
plasmid. These experiments showed that the pheromone receptor, that is one of the plasmid determinants, is
responsible for the specific signal transduction of sex pheromone. Recently, crystal structures of PrgX and
PrgX–cCF10 complex have been determined.118 Comparison of their structures suggests that pheromone
binding destabilizes PrgX tetramers, opening a 70-bp pCF10 DNA loop required for conjugation repression.
As for the cases of cAD1 and cPD1, it was also demonstrated that pheromone binding modulates the interactive
property of TraA to the operator site.115,119 As a consequence of signal transduction of those pheromones,
transcription of the aggregation substance gene, designated asa1 for pAD1, asp1 for pPD1, and asc10 for pCF10,
is induced, resulting in cell aggregation between donor and recipient cells.

4.07.4.2.2 Competence- and sporulation-stimulating factors of Bacillus subtilis

Bacillus subtilis also uses oligopeptide signal molecules for intraspecies cell–cell communication, which is
occasionally called quorum sensing. It is well known that B. subtilis forms spore and also develops genetic
competence in the stationary phase.120 The finding that mutation of an oligopeptide permease gene, spo0K,
abolished those phenotypic changes clearly indicated that those changes are mediated by oligopeptides
imported into the cells.121,122 Later, a series of Phr pentapeptides were identified as inducers of sporulation
or competence development.123–129 Thus far, it has been found that PhrA and PhrE are involved in sporula-
tion;130,131 PhrC, PhrF, PhrG, and PhrK are involved in competence development;123,129,132 and PhrH is
involved in both phenotypes (Figure 8(b)).133
Figure 10 shows a schematic of signal transduction of Phr peptides together with a competence pheromone,
ComX, which is described in Section 4.07.4.6. Each Phr peptide is encoded in an operon with a Rap protein and
inhibits the activity of its cotranscribed Rap. PhrA, PhrC, PhrF, and PhrG comprise the five C-terminal
residues of the precursors, whereas PhrE and PhrH are derived from internal five-residue fragment of their
precursors. The secreted Phr pentapeptides are reimported via the oligopeptide permease (Opp) and bind to
the corresponding Rap. PhrA and PhrE peptides bind to RapA and RapE, respectively, and interfere with the
function of these Rap proteins to promote dephosphorylation of phosphorylated Spo0F, which is an inter-
mediate response regulator of the phosphorelay signal transduction system involved in sporulation
initiation.125,126,134 Consequently, the phosphorelay cascade among a subset of Spo0 proteins is triggered and,
eventually, the resulting phosphorylated Spo0A induces the expression of a series of genes involved in
sporulation.126
The other series of Rap–Phr system is associated with com signal transduction pathway. Thus far, it has been
demonstrated that PhrC, PhrF, PhrG, and PhrK pentapeptides interfere with the function of the corresponding
Rap proteins, each inhibiting the DNA-binding activity of ComA.121,122 Furthermore, it was recently found that
RapH/PhrH system is involved in both signaling pathways by dephosphorylating the Spo0F-P and inhibiting
the DNA-binding activity of ComA.127 ComA is a response regulator constituting a two-component regulatory
system with a histidine kinase ComP, which is the main signaling pathway from ComX pheromone to
competence development. ComA free from Rap proteins induces transcription of srfA operon, which leads to
the development of genetic competence.125 This signal transduction pathway is described in detail in Section
4.07.4.6.
It is noticeable that some bacteria of the Bacillus cereus group also use the pentapeptide as a quorum sensing
signal.135 The pentapeptide is a processed product corresponding to the C-terminal five-residue peptide of a
48-residue propeptide, PapR. Similar to Phr peptide family, the PapR pentapeptide is imported into the cell
and interacts with a transcriptional regulator, PlcR, and regulates its activity. This type of small oligopeptide-
mediated quorum sensing may be commonly used among bacilli.
302 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

CSFs
ComX PhrA, PhrC, PhrE, PhrF, PhrG, PhrH

ComQ ComP Opp

ComA
PhrC PhrF rapA,C,F,G phrA,C,F,G
PhrG PhrK
PhrH PhrA
PhrE rapE,H phrE,H
RapC,F,G,K
comQ X P A
RapH
RapA,E

srfA operon comS

P Spo0F Spo0F

ComS
P Spo0A
Genes required
Genes required
ComK ComK for sporulation
for competence

Figure 10 Signal transduction pathways of Phr peptides and competence pheromone (ComX) in Bacillus subtilis. After
secretion, Phr pentapeptides are reimported by the oligopeptide permease (Opp). The imported PhrA and PhrE peptides bind
to RapA and RapE, respectively, which promote dephosphorylation of phosphorylated Spo0F. As a result of Phr binding, the
dephosphorylation of Spo0F-P is inhibited and the phosphorelay cascade among a subset of Spo0 proteins is triggered.
Phosphorylated Spo0A is resulted at the end of this cascade and eventually induces the expression of a series of genes
involved in the sporulation. The imported PhrC, PhrF, PhrG, and PhrK pentapeptides bind to the corresponding Rap proteins
and inhibit their interaction with ComA. ComA free from these Rap proteins induces transcription of srfA operon containing
comS. ComS prevents the degradation of the competence transcription factor ComK, which regulates the expression of gene
set encoding the transformation machinery. PapH–PhrH system is involved in both signaling pathway by dephosphorylating
the Spo0F-P and inhibiting the DNA-binding activity of ComA.

4.07.4.3 Inducer Peptide Pheromones of Class II Bacteriocins and Competence-Stimulating

Peptides
Although these two types of peptide signals are involved in the regulation of different phenotypes, that is
bacteriocin biosynthesis and development of genetic competence, they can be categorized in the same group in
terms of structure and mode of action. These peptides are about 2–3 kDa and presumably form amphiphilic
-helical structure in the middle region. These peptides are commonly translated as propeptides containing
double glycine leader at their N-terminal side, which is processed concomitantly with export.

4.07.4.3.1 Inducer peptide pheromones of class II bacteriocins

Bacteriocins are antimicrobial peptides ribosomally synthesized in bacteria. These are classified into four or
five classes.136 Class II bacteriocins are heat-stable nonlantibiotic peptides. Unlike lantibiotics described in the
next section, class II bacteriocins are less modified; disulfide bridge and some N-terminal modifications are
known in some class II bacteriocins. It is well known that the biosynthesis of some of the class II bacteriocins is
regulated by quorum sensing mediated by inducer peptide pheromones.95,137–140
In 1996, Eijsink et al.140 found that a certain level of inoculum size (more than 0.05% (v/v) of final volume)
was necessary for the production of bacteriocin in a liquid culture of Lactobacillus sake LTH673, which is a
producer of sakacin P. When the conditioned medium was added to the culture medium to reach a final
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 303

concentration of 0.1–1.0%, the bacteriocin biosynthesis was recovered. This suggested that the producer strain
secreted an inducer triggering bacteriocin biosynthesis. The inducer, the so-called ‘inducer pheromone’, was
purified and identified to be a 19-amino acid residue peptide. Its synthetic peptide induced sakacin P
production at subnanomolar concentrations.
Thus far, a number of inducer pheromones of class II bacteriocin have been identified as shown in
Figure 11(a). These peptides are simulated to form amphiphilic -helical structure.140,141 In some peptides,
there are two conserved cysteine residues, which probably form a disulfide bridge. These structural features
resemble the N-terminal parts of class II bacteriocins, although the sizes of inducer pheromones (19- to 30-
amino acid residues) are considerably smaller than those of class II bacteriocin peptides (mostly ranging from
35- to 70-amino acid residues). The biosynthetic feature of this type of inducer pheromones also resembles that
of class II bacteriocins; in both cases, peptides are translated as propeptides with an N-terminal leader and
maturated by cleaving off the leader moiety.95,137–139 It is known that some of this type of inducer peptides show
antibacterial activity.95,142 It is likely that the inducer peptides achieve antibacterial activity with the amphi-
philic feature allowing pore formation in the bacterial cytoplasmic membrane.141,143 It is interesting to note that
the D-enantiomeric form of an inducer pheromone, plantaricin A, consisting of D-amino acids for all residues
showed the same level of antibacterial activity as the native form and also antagonistic activity to native
plantaricin A.141 This suggests that an initial nonchiral interaction with membrane lipids induces -helical
structure, allowing it to be properly positioned in the membrane interface, thus enabling it to engage in a chiral
interaction with its receptor in or near the membrane–water interface. This membrane-interacting mode of
action explains why some peptide pheromones sometimes display antimicrobial activity in addition to their
pheromone activity.
Figure 12 shows a schematic of signal transduction pathway of the inducer pheromone (IP-673) in L. sake
LTH673, as a representative of quorum sensing involved in class II bacteriocin biosynthesis. The receptor of this
type of inducer pheromone belongs to the protein family of histidine protein kinase. The histidine kinase is
located in the cytoplasmic membrane and transduces the inducer signal from outside to inside the cell by
transferring phosphate group from histidine residue of the histidine kinase to aspartate residue of the response
regulator. The set of receptor kinase and response regulator is the so-called two-component regulatory system.
By using the inducer pheromone and the two-component regulatory system, the bacteriocin-producing cell can
sense the density of cells carrying the same bacteriocin gene, and when the cell density reaches a certain
threshold level, the producer cells living in the same niche can start to produce bacteriocin concomitantly.137 In
most cases, genes for inducer pheromone and the two-component regulatory system are encoded adjacently and
the quorum sensing gene cluster is located adjacent to the bacteriocin biosynthesis gene cluster encoding
bacteriocin structural gene, its transporter, and immunity proteins, as in the case of sakacin P in Figure 12.95
Also in most cases, some sets of bacteriocin biosynthetic genes are encoded as operons and are transcriptionally
regulated by the same promoter and operator controlled by the two-component regulatory system. This system
allows the concerted control of expression of genes involved in bacteriocin biosynthesis and autoimmunity.95,137

4.07.4.3.2 Competence-stimulating peptides of streptococci

In 1928, Griffith144 discovered genetic transformation in Streptococcus pneumoniae. In the 1960s, it was suggested
that this phenomenon depends upon cell density and the inducer peptide named CSP mediates this quorum
sensing.145,146 Thirty years later, CSP was found to be a linear peptide consisting of 17-amino acid residues.147
Gene analysis revealed that CSP is translated as a 40-amino acid propeptide containing the double glycine
leader in the N-terminal part as found in the inducer peptide pheromones of class II bacteriocins
(Figure 11(b)).147
Figure 13 shows a schematic of the signal transduction system, the so-called ‘com system’, which is involved
in competence development in S. pneumoniae. CSP is encoded by comC and the translated precursor is secreted
and processed by an ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter composed of ComA and ComB.147,148 The
secreted CSP triggers the ComD–ComE two-component regulatory system.149 The phosphorylated ComE
induces transcription of early genes, including comAB and comCDE; this positive feedback causes increased signal
production and sensing, which enables rapid response to a certain cell density.149 The early gene subset also
includes comX and comW. ComX plays a central role in the com signal transduction pathway as a competent-
specific alternative sigma factor that controls the transcription of a series of genes involved in DNA uptake
 (a) Leader peptide Mature inducer pheromone

EntF (enterocin A): MEEKNRLNAKQCSDQELKKIKGG AGTK PQGKPASNLVE CVFSLFKKCN

PisN (piscicolin 126): MNDKKYLKLKECSEKKLKQIQGG NK SV I K GNPASNLAQCVFSFFKKC
CbaX (carnobacteriocin A): MKIKYITRKQLIQIKGG S I NS Q I G KA T S S I S K C V F S F F K K C
CbnS (carnobacteriocin B2): MKIKTITKKQLIQIKGG S K NS Q I G KS T S S I S K C V F S F F K K C
Sap-Ph (sakacin A): MKLNYIEKKQLTNKQLKLIIGG TNRNYGKPNKDIGTCIWSGFRHC
AbpIP (ABP 118): MKFEVLTEKKLQKIAGG ATKKGGFKRWQCIFTFFGVCK
Plantaricin A (plantaricin EF/JK): MKIQIKGMKQLSNKEMQKIVGG KSSAYSLQMGATAIKQVKKLFKKWGW
PLNC8IF (plantaricin NC8): MKNINKYTELNDQKLQSLIGG KTKTISLMSGLQVPHAFTKLLKALGGHH
IP-673 (sakacin P): MMIFKKLSEKELQKINGG MAGNSSNFIHKIKQIFTHR
IP-TX (sakacin TX): MTNRKTLPKEELKKIKGG TPGGFDIISGGPHVAQDVLNAIKDFFK
BlpC*St (StBac): M A N NT I N N F E T L D N H A L E Q V V G G SGWMDYINGFLKGFGGQRTLPTKDYNIPQA
BlpC (BlpMN): M D K KQN L T S F Q E L T T T E L N Q I T G G GLWEDLLYNINRYAHYIT

(b)
S. pneumoniae Type 1: MKNTVKLEQFVALKEKDLQKIKGG EMRLSKFFRDFILQRKK
S. pneumoniae Type 2: MKNTVKLEQFVALKEKDLQKIKGG EMRISRIILDFLFLRKK
S. mutans UA159: M K K T L S L K N D FK E I K T D E L E I I I G G SGSLSTFFRLFNRSFTQALGK
S. infantis SK348: MEKTVKLEQFKKLTEKELQEIQGG DWRFLNSIRDLIFPKRK
S. mitis SF100: MKNTVKLEQFKEVTEAELQEIRGG DWRISETIRNLIFPRRK
S. gordonii M99: M K K K N K Q N L L P K E L Q Q F E I L T D N K L Q T V I G G SQKGVYASQRSFVPSWFRKIFRN
S. oralis COL19: MKNTVKLEQFVALKEKDLQEIKGG EMRLPKILRDFIFPRKK
Figure 11 Sequences of inducer pheromones of class II bacteriocin (a) and competence-stimulating peptides of streptococci (b) and their leader peptides. Cysteine residues
putatively formed disulfide bridge are boxed. The name in parentheses represents the bacteriocin induced by the pheromone.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 305

Peptide pheromone (IP-673)

SppT
SppK
SppE
P
SppR P
GG

sppIP K R A iA T E

GG

SppT
SppE

Bacteriocin (sakacin P)
Figure 12 Signal transduction pathway of the inducer pheromone (IP-673) for the control of sakacin P production in
Lactobacillus sake LTH673. sppIP encodes the precursor of IP-673. After translation, the precursor is processed and secreted
via the ABC-transporter complex of SppT and SppE. The secreted IP-673 binds to SppK and triggers the phosphorelay to
SppR. The phosphorylated SppR induces the transcription of three operons, sppIP-K-R encoding the pheromone and two-
component regulatory proteins, sppA-iA encoding sakacin P and the immunity protein, and sppT-E encoding the ABC
transporter for the pheromone and bacteriocin. As a consequence, production of sakacin P is started concomitantly.

together with the core enzyme of RNA polymerase.150 ComW also functions as a key protein that may act in
the stabilization as well as activation of ComX, allowing a high level of competence.151,152 The subset of CSP-
responsive genes includes a few encoding proteins involved in killing noncompetent cells. This mechanism is
called fratricide and is considered to be used by competent cells to acquire DNA from noncompetent cells.153
The cognate com gene cluster was also found in other streptococci, including S. mutans, S. gordonii, S. mitis, and
S. oralis.154–158 Figure 11(b) shows the sequences of some CSPs found in these com-like gene clusters. The
sequences of these CSPs are varied at the strain level. Each strain specifically responds to the corresponding
CSP, suggesting coevolution of comC and comD. Structure–activity analysis of S. mutans CSP identified two
functionally important structural motifs in this peptide: one is the core amphiphilic -helical structure
extending from residue 5 to the end of the peptide, which is important for binding to the receptor, and the
other is the C-terminal structural motif consisting of a sequence of polar–hydrophobic–charged residues, which
is crucial for the activation of the signal transduction pathway.159 It is interesting to note that these important
motifs are well conserved among the streptococcal CSPs.
In the past decade, new aspects of com quorum sensing system have been explored in S. mutans. Besides
development of genetic competence, com signaling system has been found to play a regulatory role in biofilm
formation,160,161 stress responses,162 and bacteriocin production,163 which are key virulence factors in S. mutans
pathogenesis. Biofilm formation is a marked phenotype of S. mutans. Knockout mutants defective in com genes
were remarkably attenuated in biofilm formation, and addition of CSP restored the wild-type biofilm formation
of comC mutants, indicating that biofilm formation is regulated by the com quorum sensing system.160,161 It is
known that most clinical isolates of S. mutans produce one or few kinds of bacteriocins called mutacins.
Currently, two classes of mutacins have been characterized, the lantibiotics and the nonlantibiotics. It was
demonstrated that expression of two sets of bacteriocin gene clusters, nlmAB encoding mutacin IV and
306 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

Competence-stimulating peptide
(CSP)

ComD
ComAB
ComE

comC comD comE

comX comW
comA comB

RNAP ComX ComW

Genes required
for DNA uptake
Figure 13 Signal transduction pathway of com system in Streptococcus pneumoniae. Competence-stimulating peptide
(CSP) is encoded by comC and the translated precursor is secreted and processed by an ABC transporter composed of
ComA and ComB. The secreted CSP triggers the ComD–ComE two-component regulatory system. The phosphorylated
ComE induces the transcription of early genes, such as comAB and comCDE; this positive feedback causes increased signal
production and sensing. The early gene subset also includes comX and comW. ComX plays a central role in the com signal
transduction pathway as a competent-specific alternative sigma factor that controls the transcription of a series of genes
involved in DNA uptake together with the core enzyme of RNA polymerase. ComW also functions as a key protein that may
act in the stabilization as well as activation of ComX, allowing a high level of competence.

bsmA–immA encoding other class IIb bacteriocins and its immunity protein, is induced upon addition of CSP and
that inactivation of the com two-component regulatory system abolishes the production of these bacteriocins.163
It is quite interesting that development of genetic competence, bacteriocin production, and biofilm formation
are under the same control. As described in Section 4.07.4.7, it is also known that AI-2 is related to the
regulation of biofilm formation and bacteriocin production in S. mutans.

4.07.4.3.3 Bacteriocin-like peptides encoded by streptococcal genomes

The genome sequence of S. pneumoniae revealed the existence of 13 sets of two-component regulatory
systems.164 An analysis of these two-component regulatory gene mutants in a mouse model suggested that
eight of these 2CSs were involved in respiratory tract infection.165 Among them, TCS13 is best studied. TCS13
is encoded in blp locus including a number of bacteriocin-like genes. Downstream of TCS13 genes, blpR
(response regulator gene) and blpH (histidine kinase gene), there are blpC (encoding ComC-like peptide)
(Figure 11(a)) and blpAB (encoding a putative protein complex of ABC transporter). This organization is
similar to the streptococcal com gene cluster, suggesting that this blp gene cluster is involved in quorum sensing
other than com system. DNA microarray experiment demonstrated that 16 genes in 8 operons including blpABC
and blpRH themselves were induced by this blp regulatory system.166 Three of these operons code seven open
reading frames encoding bacteriocin-like peptides carrying putative double glycine leader. Recently, it was
demonstrated that blpM and blpN, both encoding class II bacteriocin-like peptides, are responsible for bacter-
iocin activity against a heterologous strain.167 A mutant in the blpMN operon was unable to compete with its
parent as well as a different serotype strain during cocolonization in a mouse model experiment. These results
suggest that the blp peptides mediate intraspecies competition in nature.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 307

A blp gene cluster orthologue, designated blpSt, was also identified in the genome sequence of Streptococcus
thermophilus. The blpSt cluster of strain LMD-9 contains all the genetic information required for the production
of bacteriocin, and is regulated at the transcriptional level by a quorum sensing mechanism in which the mature
form(s) of the induction factor BlpCSt (Figure 11(a)) triggers the expression of bacteriocin and immunity
genes through the BlpHSt/BlpRSt TCS.168

4.07.4.4 Lanthionine-Containing Peptides

Lanthionine is 3,39-thiodialanine, which is composed of two alanine residues that are crosslinked on their
-carbon atoms by a thioether linkage as the monosulfide analogue of cystine. This structure occasionally gives
rise to not only highly stable properties but also unique biological activity to the peptides. Lantibiotics are
lanthionine-containing peptide antibiotics. They are classified as class I bacteriocin. Production of some
lantibiotics is known to be regulated by quorum sensing in which the lantibiotics function as autoinducers as
well as antimicrobial peptides.

4.07.4.4.1 Nisin and subtilin

Nisin is the most famous and best studied lantibiotic and it has high antibactericidal activity against a wide
range of Gram-positive bacteria. Thus far, three nisin variants, nisin A,169 nisin Z,170 and nisin Q,171 have been
found from Lactococcus lactis (Figure 14). It is known that the production of these nisins is controlled by quorum

Nisin A Leu
Ala Met S
Dha
S
Ile Leu Gly Gly Ala Abu Ala Ser
H2N Ile Dhb Ala Ala Abu Ala Lys Abu Ala Asn Met Lys Abu Ala His Ile His Val Dha Lys COOH

Pro Gly
S S S

Nisin Z Leu
Ala Met S
Dha
S
Ile Leu Gly Gly Ala Abu Ala Ser

H2N Ile Dhb Ala Ala Abu Ala Lys Abu Ala Asn Met Lys Abu Ala Asn Ile His Val Dha Lys COOH

Pro Gly
S S S

Nisin Q Leu
Val Met S
Dha
S
Ile Leu Gly Gly Ala Abu Ala Ser

H2N Ile Dhb Ala Ala Abu Ala Lys Abu Ala Asn Leu Lys Abu Ala Asn Val His Val Dha Lys COOH

Pro Gly
S S S

Subtilin Leu
Ala Gln S
Dha
S
Glu Leu Gly Dhb Leu Abu Ala Lys

H2N Trp Lys Ala Ala Abu Ala Val Abu Ala Phe Leu Gln Abu Ala Asn Ile Dha Lys COOH
Pro Gly
S S S

Figure 14 Structures of nisins and subtilin. Dha, dehydroalanine; Dhb, dehydrobutyrine; Ala-S-Ala, lanthionine; Abu-S-Ala,
-methyllanthionine. Filled circles are substituted amino acids from the corresponding residues of nisin A.
308 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

Attack other bacteria

Nisin
S
S S

S Im
S S (p mu
ro ni
NisK te ty
isT ct co
B, N fro m
Nis , NisI NisR m ple
C
Nis nis x
P
Nis in)

nisA B T C I P R K F E G

Figure 15 Quorum sensing system involved in the regulation of nisin A. After translated from nisA, prepropeptide of nisin is
modified, processed, and secreted via NisB, NisC, NisT, and NisP. The mature nisin A binds to NisK and triggers the
phosphorelay to NisR. The phosphorylated NisR induces transcriptions of two operons: nisABTCIP and nisFEG encoding
immunity protein complex.

sensing.172–174 Unlike the case of quorum sensing for class II bacteriocin biosynthesis, nisins themselves
function as inducers (Figure 15). But like the inducer pheromones of class II bacteriocins, the signal is
transduced through the two-component regulatory system encoded by nisR and nisK genes. The phosphory-
lated NisR induces transcriptions of two operons: nisABTCIP operon, encoding nisin propeptide (NisA),
biosynthetic enzymes (NisB, NisC), transporter (NisT), immunity protein (NisI), and processing enzyme
(NisP), and nisFEG operon, encoding immunity protein complex. As a consequence of this concerted control,
the positive feedback loop was established to allow efficient biosynthesis concomitantly with the quorum
sensing. The genetic organization was common among the three nisin variants. The three variants were cross-
active with each other, suggesting that NisK sensor kinases do not discriminate but commonly recognize these
variants.
The production of subtilin (Figure 14) in B. subtilis is also controlled by the same system. The gene
organization of subtilin gene cluster is highly similar to that of nisins.95,175 Also at the amino acid sequence
level, NisR and NisK exhibit marked similarities to SpaR and SpaK, respectively.176 NisK and SpaK belong to
EnvZ-type histidine kinase subfamily having two transmembrane segments in the N-terminal sensor domain,
whereas the histidine kinases involved in the regulation of class II bacteriocins belong to HPK10 having
multiple transmembrane segments in the sensor domain.177

4.07.4.4.2 Cytolysin
Cytolysin of E. faecalis is also a lantibiotic and it shows cytotoxic activity against both bacterial and mammalian
cells and is considered as a virulence factor. Cytolysin consists of two different peptide chains, CylLL, which is
the large subunit, and CylLS, which is the small subunit, and both contain lanthionine.178 CylLS functions as an
autoinducer triggering the two-component regulatory system of CylR1 and CylR2, but the complex of CylLL
and CylLS does not show the inducer activity (Figure 16).179 The CylR1–CylR2 two-component regulatory
system is unusual in that it does not seem to use a recognizable, highly conserved two-component signal
transduction system consisting of a histidine kinase and a response regulator. Instead, an apparently small helix–
turn–helix DNA-binding protein, CylR2, and an apparent transmembrane protein of unknown function,
CylR1, work together to repress the cytolysin operon. This system has another interesting property.180 CyLL
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 309

Animal cell

CylLL Cytolysin
CylLS
CylA

CylR1

CylB CylR2 CylI

CylM

cylR2 R1 LLLS M B A I

Figure 16 Regulatory mechanism of cytolysin biosynthesis. Cytolysin consists of two different peptide chains, CylLL and
CylLS. When animal cells approach an Enterococcus faecalis cell, CylLL specifically binds to the animal cells and CylLS
becomes a free form, which is able to trigger the two-component regulatory system of CylR1 and CylR2. Consequently, CylR2
activates the expression of operon encoding cytolysin biosynthesis.

and CylLS usually form complex but in the presence of animal cells, CylLL is specifically bound to the animal
cells and CylLS becomes a free form and consequently activates the expression of operon encoding cytolycin
biosynthesis. It seems that E. faecalis cells use this mechanism to control the biosynthesis of cytolysin in response
to the approach of target animal cells.

4.07.4.5 Cyclic Thiolactone and Lactone Peptides

It is well known that the expression of virulence factors in staphylococci is regulated by quorum sensing
mediated by cyclic thiolactone peptide as an autoinducing peptide (AIP). This type of AIP had been known
only in staphylococci before a cyclic lactone AIP, gelatinase biosynthesis-activating pheromone (GBAP), was
found from E. faecalis. The components necessary for this quorum sensing are encoded in a gene cluster
encoding propeptide of AIP, its biosynthetic enzyme, and two-component regulatory proteins. Recently
determined genome sequences have revealed the four-component gene cluster orthologues in some low-GC
Gram-positive bacteria, suggesting widespread presence of this type of cyclic peptide-mediated quorum
sensing. Figure 17 shows the structures of known cyclic thiolactone and lactone AIPs.

4.07.4.5.1 Autoinducer peptides in staphylococci

In in vitro culture of Staphylococcus aureus, the production of different exoproteins follows a quorum sensing
program in which adhesins are made before hemolysins or proteases and other degradative enzymes. A
thiolactone peptide functions as an AIP in this system.97,181 The quorum sensing system is encoded by agr
(accessory gene regulator) gene cluster, which is found not only in S. aureus but also in other species of this
310 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

genus.97,181,182 The AIPs are seven- to nine-amino acid residue cyclic peptides as shown in Figure 17.97,181 In
all AIPs except for a few cases carrying lactone instead of thiolactone,183 C-terminal five-amino acid residues
form thiolactone ring in which the -carboxyl group of the C-terminal amino acid is linked to the sulfhydryl
group of cysteine residue, which is always located at the fifth position from C-terminus.97,181
In S. aureus, the sequences of AIPs are diverse depending on strains and these are classified into four groups
in terms of their cross-activity.97,181,182,184 Antagonism among different AIP groups is also known: For example,
AIP-I inhibits the agr system of strains belonging to AIP-II and AIP-III, while AIP-III inhibits the agr system of
strains belonging to AIP-I and AIP-II.184,185 It is also known that AIPs of Staphylococcus epidermidis and
Staphylococcus lugdunensis (Figure 17) show antagonistic activity against AIPs of S. aureus.181 These cross-
inhibition among different AIP groups may correlate with a competition at infection or colonization sites, or
both, called bacterial interference.
The structure–function relationship studies with synthetic AIP analogues suggested that the ring moiety of
AIPs is important for binding to the receptor and tail moieties are important for its activity.186 Based on this
knowledge, a truncate peptide that had only the ring moiety of AIP-II was designed and synthesized as a global
inhibitor and was proved to show inhibitory activity against all four classes of AIPs.186
Figure 18 shows the molecular mechanism of agr regulatory circuit in S. aureus. AIP propeptide is translated
from agrD and processed and cyclized to the mature form. Thus far, it has been demonstrated that at least
processing at C-terminal side is performed by AgrB and processing at N-terminal side is performed by Type I
signal peptidase.187,188 It is in question what molecules are involved in the secretion and cyclization of AIP. The
secreted AIP triggers a two-component regulatory system consisting of AgrC and AgrA. The phosphorylated
AgrA induces the expression of two transcripts, RNA II encoding the operon of agrBDCA and RNA III encoding
-hemolysin. In addition to the mRNA function, RNA III acts as a regulatory RNA molecule that controls the
translation of a series of target genes called virulon.182 It is known that RNA III acts reciprocally upregulating
transcription of most of the extracellular protein genes and downregulating transcription of many surface
protein genes. As the translational control, RNA III is known to anneal to the transcriptional start region of hla
encoding -hemolysin, causing a conformational change that unmasks the ribosomal binding site and

H2N Y S T C H2N G V N A C S H2N I N C D

D
F S F
S S S
I L L
M F L
O O O

Staphylococcus aureus AIP-I Staphylococcus aureus AIP-II Staphylococcus aureus AIP-III

H2N Y S T C Y H2N D S V C A H2N D I C N

F S A
S S S
I Y Y
M F F
O O O

Staphylococcus aureus AIP-IV Staphylococcus epidermidis AIP Staphylococcus lugdunensis AIP

H2N C V H2N Q N S P N I
G F
S O
I G
W O M W Q
O
Lactobacillus plantarum LamD558 Enterococcus faecalis GBAP
Figure 17 Structures of cyclic AIPs.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 311

AIP
S
S
O Other group of
O
S
staphylococci
S S
O O S O
O S
S S O
O O

RAP
AgrC
AgrB
AgrA
TRAP

RNA II
hld

agrA agrC agrD agrB RNA III

Extracellular proteins

Surface proteins

Enterotoxins Protein A
Hemolysins Fibronectin-binding protein
etc. etc.
Figure 18 agr quorum sensing system in Staphylococcus aureus. AIP propeptide is translated from agrD and processed
and cyclized to the mature form via AgrB and some other processing enzyme(s). The secreted AIP binds to AgrC and triggers
the phosphorelay to AgrA. The phosphorylated AgrA induces the transcription of RNA II (agrBDCA) and RNA III encoding
-hemolysin. In addition to the mRNA function, RNA III reciprocally upregulates transcription of most of the extracellular
protein genes including -hemolysin and downregulates transcription of many surface protein genes including protein A. RAP
also activates the AgrC–AgrA two-component regulatory system via TRAP. Cross-inhibition by other group AIPs is also
known and is recognized as bacterial interference.

upregulates its translation. It is also known that RNA III downregulates spa encoding protein A and a
pleiotropic transcription factor rot, which is a repressor of toxins, by binding to their mRNAs.
RNA III-activating protein (RAP) activates the AgrC–AgrA two-component regulatory system via TRAP,
which is a target of RAP.189 It has been demonstrated that RNA III-inhibiting peptide (RIP), which is a
heptapeptide originally isolated from culture supernatant of Staphylococcus xylosus, efficiently inhibits RNA III
transcription by targeting TRAP.189,190 It was also demonstrated that RIP prevents biofilm formation both
in vitro and in vivo.191 Furthermore, a recent paper has demonstrated that RIP injected systemically into rats has
strong activity in preventing methicillin-resistant S. aureus graft infections, suggesting that RIP is useful as a
therapeutic agent.192

4.07.4.5.2 Gelatinase biosynthesis-activating pheromone in E. faecalis

Gelatinase is one of the virulence factors in E. faecalis. The production of gelatinase is active only in late-log to
early-stationary phase. Addition of conditioned medium shifts the onset of the production to mid-log phase,
suggesting the presence of an induction factor. Nakayama et al.193 purified this induction factor and identified it
as an 11-residue cyclic lactone peptide named GBAP. This structure was confirmed by chemical synthesis.194
As shown in Figure 17, GBAP consists of an N-terminal two-amino-acid tail moiety and a nine-amino acid
ring moiety. The ring moiety is constructed by ester linkage instead of thioester linkage in staphylococcal AIPs.
The ester linkage is constructed between C-terminal -carboxyl group and hydroxyl group of the third serine
312 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

O GBAP
O O
O
O O
O O

O
O

FsrC
FsrB
FsrA

fsrA fsrBD fsrC gelE sprE

Gelatinase
Serine protease
Figure 19 fsr quorum sensing system in Enterococcus faecalis. After translation, FsrD is processed, cyclized, and secreted
via FsrB and some other enzymes and transporters. Eventually, mature form of GBAP is secreted and accumulated outside
the cells. GBAP binds to FsrC and triggers the phosphorelay to FsrA. The phosphorylated FsrA induces the transcription of
fsrBDC and gelE–sprE encoding two pathogenicity-related extracellular proteases.

residue. A study indicated that two aromatic residues in the ring region, Phe-7 and Trp-10, are important for
the induction activity (K. Nishiguchi and J. Nakayama et al., unpublished data).
As shown in Figure 19, the GBAP-mediated quorum sensing system is encoded by fsr gene cluster.193,195,196
The nucleotide sequence of fsr gene cluster identified three open reading frames designated fsrA, fsrB, and fsrC;
fsrA and fsrC encode the two-component regulatory proteins and fsrB encodes a protein showing high similarity
to staphylococcal AgrB.195 However, small open reading frame encoding AIP propeptide, corresponding to
AgrD of staphylococci, was missing in the predicted open reading frame organization of fsr gene cluster. Amino
acid sequence alignment between AgrB and FsrB indicates about 50-residue C-terminal extension of FsrB,
which is not present in AgrB but shows some similarities to AgrD. The 11-amino acid sequence of GBAP was
found in the C-terminal region of FsrB. Recently, it was demonstrated that the C-terminal region is translated
independent of FsrB even though it was encoded in-frame of FsrB.197 Thus, the newly found small open
reading frame, designated fsrD, encodes GBAP propeptide as staphylococcal agrD encodes the AIP propeptide.
The presence of two-component regulatory genes in the fsr gene cluster suggested that GBAP signal is
transduced through the FsrC–FsrA two-component regulatory system. The two-component regulatory system
controls the transcription of an operon encoding a serine protease in addition to gelatinase, which is located
immediately downstream of fsr gene cluster.193,195,196 These two extracellular proteases appear to function
synergistically to efficiently digest a wide range of protein substrates.
Gelatinase-negative E. faecalis is frequently isolated from nature including patients with enterococcal
infection and also healthy volunteers. Nakayama et al.198 investigated the presence of fsr gene cluster and
gelE–sprE gene cluster in gelatinase-negative urine isolates. Most of the gelatinase-negative isolates possess
intact gelE–sprE gene cluster but carry a 23.9-kb deletion covering the whole region of fsrA, fsrB, and fsrD and a
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 313

59-end part of fsrC. Seventy-nine percent of gelatinase-negative isolates tested had the 23.9-kb deletion. In
addition to urine isolates, the 23.9-kb-like deletion was also a main determinant of gelatinase-negative
phenotype in endocarditis, blood, and healthy stool isolates.199 These results imply that gelatinase-negative
phenotype is mainly determined not by lack of gelatinase gene but by lack of quorum sensing gene. A known
fungal secondary metabolite, ambuic acid, has been also found to be an inhibitor of GABA biosynthesis
(Nakayama et al.)200
Some recent studies have indicated the involvement of the fsr system in virulence, which includes not only
the effect of the induced extracellular proteases but also the effect of expression of other genes controlled by fsr
system.195,201–203 It was also demonstrated that fsr system is involved in biofilm formation of E. faecalis
cells.204,205
Inhibitors targeting bacterial quorum sensing offer a novel means of treating virulent and/or antibiotic-
resistant infections. This would be the case of enterococci. Nakayama et al.206 performed screening of targeting
natural compounds for the inhibitor of fsr quorum sensing and found that a known peptide antibiotic, siamycin,
produced by Streptomyces sp., efficiently inhibits fsr quorum sensing at sublethal concentrations of around 0.1–
1 mmol l 1. Siamycin appeared to inhibit signal transduction of the FsrC–FsrA two-component regulatory
system; however, the mode of action was not in a competitive manner, suggesting that siamycin is not an
antagonist of FsrC but modulates the FsrC–FsrA two-component regulatory system.

4.07.4.5.3 Cyclic AIPs in other Gram-positive bacteria

Recent bacterial genome sequencing studies have revealed a number of agr-like loci in the genomes of low-GC
Gram-positive bacteria other than staphylococci and E. faecalis, for example, Clostridium acetobutylicum,
Clostridium thermocellum, Listeria innocua, Listeria monocytogenes, Lactobacillus plantarum, Bacillus cereus, and
Roseburia inulinivorans. The presence of gene cassette of agrB and agrD homologues suggests the potential to
produce cyclic peptide, and the presence of two-component regulatory gene orthologue suggests the potential
to sense the produced cyclic peptide autoinducer. In the case of B. cereus, the agr-like gene cluster is found only
in a highly pathogenic strain, G9241. It is interesting that the gene cluster is located adjacent to a putative
lantibiotic gene cluster, suggesting that the encoded agr-like quorum sensing system might regulate the
production of lantibiotics in this highly pathogenic B. cereus strain.
The agr-like gene cluster of L. plantarum was termed lam (L. plantarum agr-like module). lam consists of four
genes: lamB encoding biosynthetic enzyme involved in the biosynthesis of cyclic AIP like agrB, lamD encoding
propeptide of cyclic AIP like agrD, lamC encoding histidine kinase like agrC, and lamA encoding response
regulator like agrA. Sturme et al.207 constructed lamBD-overexpressing L. plantarum and analyzed its culture
supernatant by liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. As a result, three peptides, named LamD558,
LamD558B, and LamD677, were found to be produced from lamBD. The structure of LamD558, which was
the main product, was determined to be a five-amino acid residue thiolactone peptide (Figure 17).207 Similar to
staphylococcal AIPs, LamD558 has a ring structure consisting of five amino acids in which the thiolactone
linkage is formed between C-terminal -carboxyl group and sulfhydryl group of N-terminal cysteine residue;
however, it lacks the two- or three-amino acid tail moiety found in staphylococcal AIPs and E. faecalis
GBAP.181,193 Microarray analysis of lamA-knockout strain suggested a number of genes regulated by lam
system, including a subset of putative capsular polysaccharide biosynthetic genes.207 It should be noted that
the lamA-knockout mutant displayed less adherent phenotype compared to wild type, suggesting correlation
between the quorum sensing-regulated capsular polysaccharide biosynthesis and biofilm formation.
In L. monocytogenes, a knockout mutant of agrA-like gene was created.208 The production of several secreted
proteins was modified in the agrA mutant, indicating that the agr-like locus influenced protein secretion. The
inactivation of agrA did not affect the ability of the pathogen to invade and multiply in mammalian cells in vitro.
However, the virulence of the agrA mutant was attenuated in the mouse (a 10-fold increase in the 50% lethal
dose by the intravenous route), demonstrating a role for the agr-like locus in the virulence of L. monocytogenes.
Also, a recent paper reported that in-frame deletion of agrA and agrD resulted in an altered adherence and
biofilm formation on abiotic surfaces, suggesting the involvement of the agr system of L. monocytogenes during the
early stages of biofilm formation.209 The production of thiolactone peptide was also confirmed in the culture
supernatant of L. innocua and L. monocytogenes (N. Sujaku, J. Nakayama et al., unpublished data).
314 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

4.07.4.6 Isoprenylated Peptide as a Competence Pheromone of B. subtilis

Thus far in bacteria, prenylation to peptide signal molecule is known only in the competent pheromone
(ComX) of B. subtilis, although prenylated peptides are well known in fungal mating hormones. The structure of
prenylated moiety is quite different from that of eukaryotes (Figure 20).210
As described in Section 4.07.4.2.2 (Figure 10), development of genetic competence is controlled by two
quorum sensing pathways: one is the Phr–Rap signaling pathway and the other is the com signaling pathway.
The former is triggered by the small oligopeptide imported via oligopeptide permease. The latter consists of
the ComP–ComA two-component regulatory system that is triggered by the ComX pheromone. The phos-
phorylated ComA appears to directly activate transcriptions of more than 20 genes.131 srfA operon including
comS is a well-studied target regulated by ComA.212,213 Once produced, ComS prevents the degradation of the
competence transcription factor ComK, thereby affecting expression of more than 100 genes, including those
encoding the transformation machinery.131,214,215
The competence pheromone ComX was purified from a culture medium of B. subtilis growing to high cell
density.216 As a result, two peptides having pheromone activity were isolated. The amino acid sequence of these
two peptides suggested that they are 9- and 10-amino acid residue peptides that differed only in their
N-terminal residue. These N-terminal amino acid sequences were found in the C-terminus of a 55-codon
open reading frame, designated comX. Masses of these two peptide pheromones were 206 Da greater than those
expected based on the sequence of comX, suggesting some posttranslational modification on these two peptides.
Besides comX, comQ, the gene immediately upstream of comX, is required for the production of the pheromone.
ComQ shows an amino acid sequence similarity to isoprenyl diphosphate synthases found in Methanobacterium
thermoautotrophicum and some other bacteria, suggesting that ComX is isoprenylated.
The comQXP loci of a set of natural Bacillus isolates have been sequenced and shown to possess a striking
polymorphism that determines specific patterns of both activation and inhibition of the quorum sensing
response.217 Genetic and biochemical evidence demonstrate that all the ComX variants are isoprenylated by
the posttranslational modification of a conserved tryptophan residue and that the modifications on the ComX
peptide backbones vary in mass among the various phenotypes.
The exact structure of modification had been unclear for a long time. Okada et al.210 recently reported the
precise structure of competence pheromone of B. subtilis RO-E-2, which contains a geranylated tryptophan
with an unusual tricyclic architecture. The structure reported was somewhat surprising, involving an
apparent cyclization reaction followed by transfer of the geranyl moiety to the modified tryptophan. This
finding has an intriguing parallel in the discovery of the prenylated peptide mating pheromones of yeast
variants, which were shown to contain an isoprenoid modification of a cysteine residue over two decades
ago.211 Okada et al.218 also synthesized various ComX(RO-E-2) analogues and examined their biological
activities to investigate structure–activity relationships. Surprisingly, the minimal active unit was the
tripeptide [3-5]ComX(RO-E-2) and all residues except the modified tryptophan residue were replaceable
by alanine without total loss of activity.

Figure 20 Structure of ComX pheromone. Bold part shows modified tryptophan residue with a geranyl group in the
ComXRO-E-2.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 315

4.07.4.7 Autoinducer-2
Autoinducer-2 is suggested to be a global communication signal because luxS presumably encoding an enzyme
involved in the biosynthesis of AI-2 is widespread among Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.219 The
chemical structure of AI-2 of V. harveyi was elucidated to be furanosyl borate diester,220 as described in Section
4.07.5.3.1. Although the existence of luxS is found in the genomes of a variety of bacteria including a number of
Gram-positive species, the production and chemical structure of AI-2 have not been confirmed in many Gram-
positive species. In most cases, the production of AI-2 was examined by using a reporter strain of V. harveyi
BB170.221 Indeed, AI-2 activity has been confirmed in some species of streptococci including S. pneumoniae222
and oral streptococci,223 lactobacilli,224 clostridia,225 and listeria.226
In S. mutans, it has been reported that AI-2 is involved in the regulation of bacteriocin production and biofilm
formation.227 In Streptococcus anginosus228 and L. monocytogenes,229 it was also reported that AI-2 is involved in the
regulation of biofilm formation, while virulence of S. pneumoniae222 and Streptococcus pyogenes229,230 and toxin
production in Clostridium perfringens225 were reported to be regulated by AI-2-mediated quorum sensing. It
should also be noted that the biofilm defect of the S. mutans luxS mutant was complemented by other oral strains
of S. gordonii, Streptococcus sobrinus, S. anginosus, Porphyromonas gingivalis, and Aggregatibacter (Actinobacillus)
actinomycetemcomitans.223 Furthermore, while luxS is dispensable for monospecies biofilm formation in
P. gingivalis and S. gordonii, its expression is required in one of the two species for mixed biofilm formation.231
These results suggested AI-2-mediated interspecies communication in oral biofilm.

4.07.5 Signaling Molecules in Gram-Negative Bacteria

4.07.5.1 Introduction
For cell–cell communication in Gram-negative bacteria, many host-associated bacteria use chemical signals to
monitor the population density of their own species and to control expression of specific genes in response to
their population density. This type of bacterial cell–cell communication and gene regulation was initially found
in the luminescence bacterium V. fischeri in the early 1970s and was termed quorum sensing in the 1990s.232 In
V. fischeri and also V. harveyi, another luminescence bacterium, the signal compound, named autoinducer, is
synthesized inside the cell and diffuses out of the cell. Bacteria accumulate the autoinducer and can recognize
their population density as the concentration of the autoinducer. The autoinducers of quorum sensing in Gram-
negative bacteria were identified as a series of N-acyl-L-homoserine lactones (AHLs) and regarded as species-
specific molecules in the beginning. But, until now, it has been found that the same kind of AHL is synthesized
by several kinds of bacteria to regulate their own different quorum sensing systems and some bacteria produce
several kinds of AHLs to regulate their own same or different gene expressions. Quorum sensing system is a cell
population density-dependent system. But every study about mutants of quorum sensing-related genes showed
that quorum sensing system did not affect the bacterial growth itself. AHLs have an effect not only on the gene
expression of bacteria but also on the modulation of immune system of the host cell.233,234 Moreover, other
autoinducers, AI-2 and other compounds, and the related systems were found.235,236 In this section, the
structures and functions of autoinducers in Gram-negative bacteria are described.

4.07.5.2 N-Acylhomoserine Lactones as Autoinducers of Quorum Sensing

It has been reported that several dozen species of bacteria produce AHLs.237 Until now, AHLs containing 4–14
carbon acyl chains with or without modification have been identified. Some of the reported AHLs and related
regulatory proteins are shown in Figure 21.238–245 The general concept of quorum sensing system is illustrated in
Figure 22. AHL is synthesized in the cell by the AHL synthase called the I-protein family, such as LuxI of V.
fischeri. AHL diffuses out of the cell through the membrane by passive diffusion or is exported by efflux pumps and
also accumulated by the cell. When the concentration of AHL in the cell exceeds the threshold level, AHL binds to
receptor protein such as LuxR protein (R-protein) family. Then, AHL–R-protein complex induces the target gene
expression. R-protein mainly acts as a positive regulator for the gene expression, but in some cases, acts as a
negative regulator. In general, the diffused AHL is at nanomolar or lower concentrations. As the concentration
 Vibrio fischeri
Pseudomonas aeruginosa
AinS/AinR
RhlI/RhlR
Burkholderia cepacia
Aeromonas salmonicida CepI/CepR
AsaI/AsaR
N-butanoyl-L-HSL N-octanoyl-L-HSL Ralstonia solanacearum
(C4-HSL) Serratia liquifaciens (C8-HSL) SolI/SolR
SwrI/SwrR

Vibrio harveyi Agrobacterium tumefaciens

LuxM/LuxN–LuxO–LuxR TraI/TraR

N-(3-β -hydroxy-butanoyl)-L-HSL N-(3-oxooctanoyl)-L-HSL

(3-β -OH-C4-HSL) (3-oxo-C8-HSL)

Pseudomonas aeruginosa
Vibrio fischeri
LasI/LasR
LuxI/LuxR
N-(3-oxododecanoyl)-L-HSL
(3-oxo-C12-HSL)
Erwinia carotovora
ExpI/ExpoR
CarI/CarR
N-(3-oxohexanoyl)-L-HSL
(3-oxo-C6-HSL)
Enterobacter agglomerans
EagI/EagR Rhizobium leguminosarum
RhiI/RhiR

N-(3R-hydroxy-7-cis-tetradecanoyl)-L-HSL
(3-R-hydroxy-7-cis-C14-HSL)
Figure 21 The structures of AHLs isolated from Gram-negative bacteria and their regulatory proteins.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 317

AHL
AHL
AHL

AHL Diffusion AHL

Complexation
R-protein
AHL Activation
AHL
R gene
Target gene
AHL I gene
Synthesis
Diffusion

I-protein
AHL Cell

AHL

Figure 22 AHL-mediated quorum sensing in Gram-negative bacteria. I-protein encoded by the I gene is an AHL synthase
and R-protein encoded by the R gene is a receptor of AHL. The AHL–R-protein complex activates the expression of target
genes.

of AHL in the cell reaches the threshold level at the late logarithmic and early stationary phases of growth, the
target gene expression regulated by quorum sensing usually occurs during or after the late logarithmic and early
stationary phase of growth.
Natural degradation of AHLs was first reported as hydrolysis of the lactone ring by the lactonase AiiA
identified in Bacillus species (Figure 23(a)).246,247 Another AHL-degrading enzyme was also isolated from
Ralstonia species as AiiD, which is an acylase and hydrolyzed the amide bond of AHL to remove the acyl chain
from the lactone ring (Figure 23(b)).248 These AHL-degrading enzymes have been isolated from a wide range
of bacterial species including AHL-producing Gram-negative bacteria such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa and
Agrobacterium tumefaciens.249 These AHL-degrading enzymes may act as one of the control factors of quorum
sensing intra- and interspecies in the several environments.

4.07.5.2.1 Vibrio fischeri and Vibrio harveyi

Vibrio fischeri is a symbiotic bacterium isolated from a light organ of a squid (Euprymna scolopes).250 In V. fischeri,
several kinds of quorum sensing system were identified.251–258 At first, lux system was found. The lux system
regulates the luciferase operon and light production. LuxI was isolated as an AHL synthase and directs the
synthesis of N-(3-oxohexanoyl)-L-homoserine lactone (3-oxo-C6-HSL). A biosynthetic scheme of 3-oxo-C6-HSL
in V. fischeri is shown in Figure 24.259,260 LuxI binds an acylated ACP and S-adenosylmethionine. The acyl chain
is transferred from ACP to LuxI and forms an amide bond with S-adenosylmethionine. Then, AHL is

Figure 23 Degradation of AHL by (a) AHL lactonase (AiiA) and (b) AHL acylase (AiiD).
318 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

Figure 24 The synthetic pathway of AHL (3-oxo-C6-HSL in this case).

formed with the formation of lactone ring and release of 59-methylthioadenosine. LuxI consists of 193 amino
acids including an active site for amide bond formation and a binding site of acylated-ACP. LuxR was isolated
as a transcriptional activator of the luciferase operon. 3-Oxo-C6-HSL synthesized by LuxI binds to LuxR and
the 3-oxo-C6-HSL–LuxR complex binds to DNA at the region named lux box and activates the transcription
of the luminescence operon luxICDABEG. LuxR consists of 250 amino acids and has two domains. The N-
terminal region is an AHL-binding site and the C-terminal region is a DNA-binding site with a helix–turn–
helix motif. The Lux system also has effects on colonization factors.
AinS was also isolated as another AHL synthase in V. fischeri. AinS directs the synthesis of C8-HSL.
While the Lux system regulates the bioluminescence at high cell density, the Ain system effects at lower
cell density. These two quorum sensing systems are connected and regulate sequential induction
(Figure 25). At low cell density, LuxO represses LitR, which is a positive regulator of the expression of
LuxR. During the cell growth, even at the lower cell density, C8-HSL produced by AinS binds to AinR,
which is a homologue of LuxN, and C8-HSL–AinR complex inactivates LuxO. Increased expression of
LitR results in increased expression of LuxR. C8-HSL also binds to LuxR directly and slightly activates
bioluminescence. At high cell density, Lux system mainly regulates bioluminescence as described
previously.
The third system of quorum sensing in V. fischeri using AI-2 was also reported. AI-2 system in V. fischeri is
described in Section 4.07.4.3.1.
Vibrio harveyi is a marine bioluminescent bacterium and regulates bioluminescence, production of side-
rophore, polysaccharide and metalloprotease, and type III secretion through quorum sensing.261–265 3--OH-
C4-HSL is synthesized by LuxM. LuxN is identified as a receptor of 3--OH-C4-HSL. Without 3--OH-C4-
HSL, that is, at low cell density, through LuxU and LuxO, LuxN leads to inactivation of LuxR, which is
required for transcription of genes for bioluminescence, production of siderophore, polysaccharide and
metalloprotease, and type III secretion. At high cell density, 3--OH-C4-HSL binds to LuxN and such
3--OH-C4-HSL–LuxN complex leads to inactivation of LuxO through LuxU and then LuxR is activated
to promote transcription of genes (Figure 26). AI-2-mediated quorum sensing system was first found in
V. harveyi. AI-2 quorum sensing system in V. harveyi is described in Section 4.07.5.3.1.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 319

AinS

C8-HSL LuxR

LuxN

LuxR

LuxO

C6-HSL

Bioluminescence
LuxR

LitR
LuxI

luxR luxICDABEG
Figure 25 The relation of Lux and Ain quorum sensing systems in Vibrio fischeri for bioluminescence.

(a) (b)

LuxM
LuxM

3-β -OH-C4-HSL

LuxN LuxN

Phosphorylation Unphosphorylation

LuxU LuxU

Phosphorylation Unphosphorylation

LuxO LuxO

LuxR LuxR

Bioluminescence

Figure 26 Regulation for bioluminescence in Vibrio harveyi (a) at low cell density and (b) at high cell density.
320 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

4.07.5.2.2 Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an opportunistic pathogen and infects especially immunocompromised patients.266–270
Many clinical isolates of P. aeruginosa are identified not only from the inside of the body but also from the
biofilm formed on indwelling catheter or medical devices. Quorum sensing system of P. aeruginosa has been
extensively studied and several kinds of systems have been reported.271–292
The first found system is the Las quorum sensing system, which consists of LasI and LasR, the homologues
of LuxI and LuxR of V. fischeri. LasI is a synthase of 3-oxo-C12, which binds to LasR. 3-Oxo-C12–LasR
complex regulates the expression of many virulence genes such as lasB, lasA, aprA, and toxA, and also lasI
(Figure 27). On the contrary, 3-oxo-C12–LasR complex also regulates the expression of rsaL, which inhibits
the expression of lasI.
The second system consists of RhlI and RhlR, which are also the homologues of LuxI and LuxR. The
synthase RhlI directs the synthesis of C4-HSL. C4-HSL–RhlR complex regulates expression of rhlAB, aprA, the
stationary-phase sigma factor RpoS, and the production of pyocyanin and cyanide (Figure 27).
In general, it is thought that AHLs freely diffuse out of the cell. In P. aeruginosa, C4-HSL diffuses rapidly
across the cell membranes. But it was discovered that 3-oxo-C12-HSL was actively pumped out by the
MexAB-oprM pump, which is one of the multidrug efflux pumps in P. aeruginosa to export a wide range of
antimicrobial agents.293–297 According to the difference in the length of the acyl chain, 3-oxo-C12-HSL is more
hydrophobic and hard to pass through the cytoplasmic membrane than C-4-HSL. Therefore, the active export
of 3-oxo-C12-HSL by the pump is needed.
The relationship between these two quorum sensing systems, Las and Rhl, is very interesting. C4-HSL does
not activate LasR, but 3-oxo-C12–LasR complex showed a low level activation of RhlR. The Las system

lasR lasI
lasB
lasA
aprA
toxA
LasR LasI
Biofilm

3-Oxo-C12-HSL etc.

LasR

C4-HSL
RhlR

rhlAB
aprA

RhlI RhlR RpoS

Pyocyanin
Cyanide
Pyocyanin
etc.
rhlI rhlR

Figure 27 Quorum sensing in Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 321

positively regulates the expression of both RhlI and RhlR. Moreover, 3-oxo-C12 acts as an antagonist of
C4-HSL, because 3-oxo-C12 competes with C4-HSL for binding to RhlR. A lasR mutant of P. aeruginosa
showed decreased virulence compared with the parent strain. A lasI mutant, an rhlI mutant, and a lasI rhlI double
mutant also showed decreased virulence, and a double mutation was the most effective in the reduction of the
virulence factor.
P. aeruginosa produces not only 3-oxo-C12-HSL and C4-HSL but also 3-oxo-C10-HSL, 3-oxo-C8-HSL,
and 3-oxo-C6-HSL as minor products. As two genes encoding LuxR type proteins with high homology have
been identified in P. aeruginosa, these minor AHLs may activate such LuxR-type proteins. However, the
function of such minor AHLs in P. aeruginosa is unclear.
The third system is also related to both Las and Rhl systems, but not to the AHL-mediated one. The signal
molecule is 2-heptyl-3-hydroxy-4-quinolone (PQS). PQS quorum sensing system is described in Section
4.07.5.3.2.

4.07.5.2.3 Erwinia species

Erwinia species, Erwinia carotovora subspecies carotovora (Ecc), Erwinia carotovora subspecies atroseptica (Eca),
Erwinia chrysanthemi (Echr), and Erwinia amylovora (Ea), are phytopathogens and regulate the production of
carbapenem antibiotic and exoenzymes, such as pectate lyases, cellulase, and proteases, through quorum
sensing.298–304 Each strain normally synthesizes one or two major AHLs and also minor AHLs. Ea strain
produces 3-OH-C6-HSL or 3-oxo-C6-HSL by the synthase LuxI homologue EamI. In the case of Echr strain,
ExpI directs the synthesis of 3-oxo-C6-HSL and C6-HSL. C10-HSL is also synthesized by an uncharacterized
LuxI homologue in Echr strain. Ecc and Eca strains are classified into two groups depending on the kind of AHLs
produced. One group of strains synthesize mainly 3-oxo-C8-HSL and also smaller amounts of 3-oxo-C6-HSL.
On the other hand, another group of strains produce 3-oxo-C6-HSL with little or no 3-oxo-C8-HSL. One AHL
synthase, which is a LuxI homologue, produces all kinds of AHLs in these Ecc and Eca strains. The LuxI
homologues identified from each strain are different from strain to strain, such as CarI, AhlI, and HslI.
Ecc strains produce the -lactam antibiotic, carbapenem, through quorum sensing. 3-Oxo-C6 produced by
CarI binds to CarR, which is a LuxR homologue, and such 3-oxo-C6–CarR complex activates the transcription
of the carA-H operon to produce carbapenem. The second LuxR homologue in Ecc strain was identified and
named VirR or ExpR. 3-Oxo-C6–VirR or 3-oxo-C6–ExpR complex activates the production of virulence
factors, such as pectate lyases, cellulases, and proteases. There is a big difference between the action mechanism
of CarR and that of VirR or ExpR. The deletion mutants of the AHL synthase in Ecc strains reduce the
production of carbapenem and virulence factors. CarR mutants also show the reduction of carbapenem
production. But VirR or ExpR mutants show no effect on the production of virulence factors. These
phenomena reveal that CarR acts as a transcriptional activator of the production of carbapenem like other
luxR homologues, but VirR or ExpR acts as a repressor of the production of virulence factors. This repression
by VirR or ExpR is reduced by complexation with 3-oxo-C6. Moreover, it was revealed that VirR or ExpR did
not directly repress the expression of the virulence factors, but activated the transcription of rsmA. RsmA is a
direct repressor of the production of virulence factors. At low cell population density, that is, at low
concentrations of 3-oxo-C6, free VirR or ExpR activates the transcription of rsmA, resulting in the reduction
of virulence factors production. At high cell population density, that is, at high concentrations of 3-oxo-C6,
VirR or ExpR forms a complex with 3-oxo-C6 and this complex does not activate the transcription of rsmA, and
hence the production of the virulence factors is activated (Figure 28). These R-proteins as repressors were also
found in Serratia species as described in Section 4.07.5.2.4.

4.07.5.2.4 Serratia species

Serratia species, Serratia marcescens, Serratia liquefaciens, Serratia plymuthica, Serratia rubidaea, Serratia fonticola,
Serratia marnorubra, Serratia proteamaculans, and Serratia odorifera, are opportunistic pathogens and can be isolated
from water, soil, plants, and air. Serratia species secrete several virulence factors, such as DNase, lipase,
gelatinase, hemolysin, proteases, chitinase, chloroperoxidase, and multiple isozymes of alkaline phosphatase,
and also produce carbapenem antibiotics, a red pigment named prodigiosin (Figure 29), and biosurfactants.
Besides these phenotypes, biofilm formation and swarming motility are also regulated by quorum sensing.
LuxR and LuxI homologues have been identified from each species, such as SmaI and SmaR in Serratia sp.
322 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

VirR (ExoR)

3-Oxo-C6-HSL

RsmA CarR

Pectate lyase
Cellulase Carbapenem
Protease

etc.

Figure 28 3-Oxo-C6-HSL-mediated quorum sensing in Erwinia species. The 3-oxo-C6-HSL–CarR complex activates the
production of carbapenem. On the contrary, complexation of 3-oxo-C6-HSL and VirR (or ExoR) reduces the activity of RsmA
and then the production of the virulence factors is activated.

Figure 29 The structure of the red pigment prodigiosin.

ATCC39006, SpnI and SpnR in S. marcescens, SprI and SprR in S. proteamaculans, and SwrI and SwrR in
S. liquefaciens. SmaI and SwrI produce C4-HSL and C6-HSL. SpnI produces C6-HSL, C7-HSL, C8-HSL, and
3-oxo-C6-HSL. C7-HSL, borne with odd number of acyl chain, is very rare among natural products. SprI
produces only 3-oxo-C6-HSL. SwrR in S. liquefaciens acts as an activator like LuxR, but SamR, SpnR, and SprR
act as a repressor like VirR or ExpR in Erwinia species.305
AI-2-mediated quorum sensing system in Serratia species was also found and is described in Section
4.07.5.3.1.

4.07.5.2.5 Burkholderia species

The genus Burkholderia contains more than 30 species isolated from many places such as water, soil, plants,
insects, animals, and also human beings. Burkholderia mallei and Burkholderia pseudomallei are revealed as patho-
gens of glanders and meliodosis. Several other Burkholderia species have emerged also as a pathogen of cystic
fibrosis. These Burkholderia strains called Burkholderia cepacia complex (BCC) consist of at least nine species and
show high sequence similarity of 16S rDNA. Burkholderia cepacia was isolated as one of the BCC strains. As cystic
fibrosis patients are infected with B. cepacia and P. aeruginosa together in many cases and the supernatant of
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 323

P. aeruginosa culture medium has an effect on the protease activity and siderophore production of B. cepacia, it
was expected that there was interspecies cell–cell communication between B. cepacia and P. aeruginosa. Actually,
CepI and CepR have been identified from BCC strains as LuxI and LuxR homologues. CepI directs the
synthesis of C8-HSL as a major product and also C6-HSL as a minor product. The amounts of AHLs produced
by BCC strains vary largely from micromolar level to below nanomolar level depending on the strain. For
instance, the amount of C8-HSL produced by B. cepacia is 1000-fold less than that of 3-oxo-C12-HSL and
C4-HSL produced by P. aeruginosa.306,307
The quorum sensing of BCC strains shows both positive and negative regulatory role, increasing protease
and chitinase production, activating swarming motility, and biofilm formation, while simultaneously decreasing
siderophore production. The quorum sensing in BCC strains is illustrated in Figure 30. C8-HSL binds to the
receptor protein CepR and C8-HSL–CepR complex induces or represses the target genes including cepI.
Burkholderia vietnamiensis, one of the BCC strains, also produces C10-HSL for another quorum sensing system
consisting of BviI and BviR. Studies on chronic coinfection showed that BCC strain could use exogenous AHLs
produced by other bacteria, such as P. aeruginosa. But P. aeruginosa did not respond to AHLs produced by BCC
strain. These results revealed that this interspecies cell–cell communication was unidirectional.308,309

4.07.5.2.6 Agrobacterium tumefaciens and Chromobacterium violaceum

Agrobacterium tumefaciens is a pathogen of plants using tumor-inducing Ti plasmid to transfer oncogenic DNA.
The copy number and conjugal transfer of Ti plasmid are regulated by quorum sensing in A. tumefaciens. TraI,
which is a LuxI homologue, is a synthase of 3-oxo-C8-HSL. TraR, which is a LuxR homologue, is an AHL
receptor and a transcriptional regulator. Interestingly, the TraR genes are expressed only in the presence of
specific opines called conjugal opines produced by plants. The 3-oxo-C8-HSL–TraR complex regulates
expression of the tra regulon as well as the traI gene. The tra genes are required for conjugal transfer of Ti
plasmid.310–314

cepI cepR

CepI CepR

C8-HSL
CepR

RpoS
Protease
Chitinase
Siderophore

Biofilm
Swarming

etc.

Figure 30 Quorum sensing in Burkholderia cepacia complex.

324 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

The crystal structure of TraR was the first reported structure among AHL receptor protein. 3-Oxo-C8-
HSL–TraR complex forms a homodimer, which binds to DNA (tra box). TraR consists of two domains as
LuxR. The N-terminal domain is an AHL-binding site and the C-terminal domain is a DNA-binding site with
a helix–turn–helix motif (Figure 31).315
Chromobacterium violaceum is commonly found in soil and water and produces a purple pigment named
violacein (Figure 32), which is water insoluble and has an antibacterial activity. Violacein production is
regulated by CviI–CviR quorum sensing system with C6-HSL in C. violaceum.316
The mutants of A. tumefaciens and C. violaceum are well known as AHL reporter strains for screening
AHLs.317,318 A. tumefaciens NTL4 (pZLR4) cannot produce its own AHL (3-oxo-C8-HSL), but can induce
traG::lacZ by exogenous AHLs. It is very interesting that A. tumefaciens NTL4 (pZLR4) can respond to not only
3-oxo-C8-HSL but also to other kinds of AHLs. C. violaceum CV026 is a mini-Tn5 mutant and cannot produce
its own AHL (C6-HSL). C. violaceum CV026 can produce violacein when exogenous AHLs are supplied.
Different from A. tumefaciens NTL4 (pZLR4), C. violaceum CV026 can respond to short acyl chain AHLs only
(shorter than C8) and cannot respond to longer acyl chain AHLs (longer than C10). Moreover, such longer acyl
chain AHLs inhibit violacein production of C. violaceum CV026. These results suggest that many kinds of AHLs
can be detected by the combination of A. tumefaciens NTL4 (pZLR4) and C. violaceum CV026.

4.07.5.3 Other Types of Autoinducers

Until now, it has been reported that several dozens of Gram-negative bacteria produce AHLs. But it has also
been reported that many Gram-negative bacteria including E. coli and Salmonella species did not produce AHLs.
The analysis of genome showed the presence of lux homologues even in non-AHL-producing bacteria and
several kinds of quorum sensing system with autoinducers except AHLs have been reported.

N-terminal N-terminal

: 3-Oxo-C8-HSL
TraR

DNA

C-terminal C-terminal
Figure 31 The image of TraR–DNA complex. A homodimer of 3-oxo-C8-HSL–TraR binds to DNA at its C-terminal domain.

Figure 32 The structure of the purple pigment violacein.

 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 325

4.07.5.3.1 Autoinducer-2
As already described in Section 4.07.4.7, AI-2 is thought to be a global communication signal among both Gram-
positive and Gram-negative bacteria. AI-2-mediated quorum sensing system was first found in V. harveyi as the
third system as mentioned in Section 4.07.5.2.1. AI-2 was identified from the X-ray analysis of the crystal-
lographic structure of LuxP, which was a periplasmic protein of V. harveyi.319 The crystallogram showed the
complex of LuxP and AI-2. The structure of AI-2 was identified as (2S,4S)-2-methyl-2,3,3,4-
tetrahydroxtetrahydrofuran-borate (furanosyl borate diester) (Figure 33). It was also a first report about a
borated compound identified from bacteria. AI-2 is synthesized by LuxS from (4S)-4,5-dihydroxy-2,3-
pentanedione (DPD) derived from (S)-adenosyl methionine and the proposed synthetic pathway is shown in
Figure 33. AI-2–LuxP complex interacts with the sensor kinase LuxQ. Then through a dephosphorylation
cascade with LuxU and LuxO, bioluminescence is activated.265
In V. fischeri, LuxS, LuxP, and LuxQ were also identified and AI-2 was produced by LuxS. In contrast to V.
harveyi, the effects of AI-2 on the bioluminescence in V. fischeri are smaller than that of AHL (Figure 34).258,320
LuxS homologue was also found in Ecc and Eca strains. luxS mutants in each of these strains showed reduced
production of some exoenzymes and some virulence factors. But the complete function of AI-2-mediated
quorum sensing in Erwinia species is not known in detail.304
In S. marcescens, AI-2-mediated quorum sensing also regulates the production of carbapenem antibiotic,
prodigiosin, hemolysin, and other virulence factors. But such AI-2-mediated regulation is not for all Serratia
strains, that is, it is a strain-dependent phenotype.305,321
Salmonella species and E. coli do not produce AHLs, but produce AI-2 by LuxS.322,323 In Salmonella
typhimurium, the periplasmic protein LsrB was identified as a receptor protein of AI-2. Although of low sequence
homology with LuxP, the X-ray analysis of the crystallographic structure of LsrB showed that the overall
protein structure of LsrB was similar to that of LuxP. But the X-ray analysis also showed a big difference
between LuxP and LsrB. LuxP bound furanosyl borate diester, but LsrB bound the molecule without borate.

Figure 33 The pathway of AI-2 synthesis.

326 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

LuxS AinS

C8-HSL
AI-2
C8-HSL
LuxI
LuxO

3-Oxo-C6-HSL

LitR LuxR

Bioluminescence

Figure 34 Quorum sensing in Vibrio fischeri for bioluminescence included AI-2. The effect of AI-2 is smaller than that of
AHLs.

Figure 35 The synthetic pathway of the molecule bound by LsrB.

Moreover, the configuration of the molecule bound by LsrB was different from that of the precursor of
furanosyl borate diester. The structure and proposed synthetic pathways of these ligands are shown in
Figure 35. It is uncertain whether this unborated compound also acts as AI-2, but many phenotypes in
S. typhimurium seemed to be regulated by AI-2 activities.324
To screen AI-2 production, a reporter strain based on V. harveyi is used not only for Gram-negative bacteria,
but also for Gram-positive bacteria.325 At present, AI-2 is thought to be a group of compounds synthesized by
LuxS from DPD with or without boron. More detailed studies will show the world of AI-2 in more depth.

4.07.5.3.2 PQS
The autoinducer of the third quorum sensing system in P. aeruginosa is PQS. (Figure 36) PQS is involved in lasB
expression, and RhlR is required for PQS activity. The structure of PQS is similar to that of antimicrobial
quinolones, but PQS shows no antimicrobial activity. PQS is converted from 2-heptyl-4(1H)-quinolone (HHQ)
by PqsH, which is activated by 3-oxo-C12-HSL–LasR. PQS regulates the expression of elastase, rhamnolipid,
pyocyanin, and LecA. As PQS regulates LasB expression and the synthesis of PQS is regulated by LasR and
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 327

Figure 36 The structure of PQS.

RhlR, PQS-mediated regulation is not independent but linked to both las and rhl quorum sensing systems.326–329
Until now, PQS quorum sensing has been reported only in P. aeruginosa, but PQS gene homologues were found
in Burkholderia species. PQS-mediated quorum sensing may be extended to other bacterial species in future.

4.07.5.3.3 Indole
Escherichia coli produces indole (Figure 37) from tryptophan by tryptophanase and exports it by AcrEF pump.
Indole acts as an autoinducer to regulate transcription of tnaAB, astD, and gabT in E. coli.330 As tnaA encodes
tryptophanase, indole signaling enhances the production of indole itself. astD and gabT involve the production
of pyruvate and succinate from the amino acid. Indole signaling also has an effect on the multidrug exporters
and biofilm formation in E. coli.331–333 Moreover, it was also reported that indole enhanced biofilm formation of
P. aeruginosa, in which indole is not produced.333 Indole may act as an interspecies signaling compound.

4.07.5.3.4 3-OH PAME

Ralstonia solanacearum is a phytopathogen and regulates virulence factors, extracellular polysaccharide (EPS),
and endoglucanase, by quorum sensing.334 The autoinducer in R. solanacearum was identified as
3-hydroxypalmitic acid methyl ester (3-OH PAME) (Figure 38). Proposed 3-OH PAME regulation is
shown in Figure 38. At low concentrations of 3-OH PAME, PhcR is phosphorylated by PhcS and represses
PhcA, which regulates virulence factors. At high concentrations of 3-OH PAME, phosphorylation of PhcR is
reduced and PhcA is activated to produce EPS and endoglucanase. The degradation of 3-OH PAME by
esterase identified from Ideonella species reduced EPS production of R. solanacearum.335 It is very interesting that
such a simple fatty acid derivative as 3-OH PAME acts as an autoinducer.

4.07.5.3.5 Cholerae autoinducer-1

Vibrio cholerae is a pathogen of the human disease cholera and regulates virulence factors and biofilm formation
by quorum sensing.336–338 Vibrio cholerae uses two quorum sensing systems. One system is AI-2-dependent
system with LuxS, LuxP, and LuxQ and the other system uses CAI-1 (cholerae autoinducer-1) as a signaling
molecule (Figure 39). CAI-1 is produced by CqsA and identified as 3-hydroxytridecan-4-one.339 In V. cholerae,
the CAI-1 system is more effective than the AI-2 system. At low cell density, that is, at low concentrations of
CAI-1 and AI-2, V. cholerae enhances virulence factors and biofilm formation but no bioluminescence. At high
cell density, that is, at high concentrations of CAI-1 and AI-2, LuxO is inactivated and then HapR is activated.
HapR represses the gene expressions of virulence factors and biofilm formation and expresses bioluminescence
(Figure 39). Using these quorum sensing systems, V. cholerae can leave from the host to infect other new hosts in
large numbers and start a new infection cycle.

Figure 37 The structure of indole.

328 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

3-OH PAME

Phosphorylation
PhcS PhcR

PhcA

EPS, endoglucanase

Figure 38 Quorum sensing in Ralstonia solanacearum mediated by 3-OH PAME.

AI-2
CAI-1 LuxS

CqsS LuxP
CqsA

LuxO

HapR Virulence factor

Bioluminescence
Biofilm

Figure 39 Quorum sensing in Vibrio cholerae mediated by CAI-1 and AI-2.

4.07.5.3.6 Stigmolone
Myxobacteria are Gram-negative slime molds that are on the borderline between unicellular and multicellular
organisms.340 Upon nutrient starvation, cells cooperate to build up multicellular fruiting bodies comprising
several sporangioles that contain myxospores. When nutrients are available again, the myxospores germinate to
build up a new swarm of vegetative cells. In the early 1980s, a pheromone activity of a myxobacterium,
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 329

Figure 40 Stigmolone, an inducer of fruiting bodies of myxobacteria. Equilibrium between the hydroxy ketone stigmolone
(a) and dihydropyran (b) is shown.

Stigmatella aurantiaca, was detected and was shown to be involved in the formation of fruiting bodies.341 The
existence of a secreted low-molecular-weight substance(s) was suggested by a dialysis experiment, which showed
that Stigmatella cells cannot aggregate if an extracellular substance(s) is removed by dialysis.342 Thus, the
pheromone was found to be required for the aggregation of the cells at the beginning of fruiting body formation.
The pheromone was purified and its chemical structure was determined as a hydroxy ketone,
2,5,8-trimethyl-8-hydroxy-nonan-4-one, which was named stigmolone (Figure 40).342,343 The equilibrium
between stigmolone and the dihydropyran (Figure 40) has impeded the structural elucidation for a long time.
However, the equilibrium seems to be relevant only in dry organic solvents; in an aqueous environment, that is,
under the physiological conditions, the hydroxy ketone stigmolone is by far the predominant compound.
Chemical synthesis of stigmolone and the dihydropyran showed that stigmolone is active at a concentration of
1 nmol l 1 and the dihydroxypyran is inactive even at a concentration of 10 nmol l 1.342,343

4.07.5.3.7 Extracellular death factor in E. coli

Programmed cell death (PCD) is known as a system in eukaryotic multicellular organisms,344,345 but PCD has
also been observed in bacteria.346,347 The toxin–antitoxin module (mazEF) in E. coli is one of the PCD systems. It
was observed that mazEF-mediated cell death in E. coli was dependent on the cell population density and
required a signal compound named extracellular death factor (EDF).348,349 EDF was identified as a linear
pentapeptide with a sequence Asn-Asn-Trp-Asn-Asn (Figure 41). EDF is one of the autoinducers of quorum
sensing in E. coli. As already described in Section 4.07.4.2, peptides are known as autoinducers in Gram-positive
bacteria, but EDF was the first peptide that was identified as an autoinducer in Gram-negative bacteria.

4.07.5.3.8 Aryl-HSL in Rhodopseudomonas palustris

Rhodopseudomonas palustris is an anoxigenic phototrophic soil bacterium. Rhodopseudomonas palustris has luxI and
luxR homologues, rpaI and rpaR,350 and the expression of rpaI is activated by adding p-coumarate into the
growth medium.351 It was found that R. palustris produced p-coumaroyl-HSL (Figure 42) by RpaI using

Figure 41 The structure of EDF required for mazEF-mediated cell death in Escherichia coli.

Figure 42 The structure of p-coumaroyl-HSL produced by Rhodopseudomonas palustris.

330 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

environmental p-coumaric acid.352 Several kinds of aryl-HSLs have been chemically synthesized as the
artificial analogues of AHLs, but this was the first report of a natural aryl-HSL. Even RpaI and RpaR are the
homologues of the synthase and the receptor of AHL (fatty acyl-HSL), and RpaI and RpaR produce and
respond to such a new type of quorum sensing signal (non-fatty acyl-HSL).352 As not only R. palustris but also
other bacterial species, such as Bradyrhizobium sp. and Silicibacter pomeroyi, seem to produce p-coumaroyl-HSL,
p-coumaroyl-HSL does not seem to be unique to R. palustris.352 Because the synthesis of p-coumaroyl-HSL
needs p-coumarate and p-coumarate is usually produced by plants in the environment, p-coumaroyl-HSL-
mediated quorum sensing may play a role not only in bacterial interspecies signaling but also in signaling
between bacteria and plants.

References
1. G. M. Dunny; S. C. Winans, Cell–Cell Signaling in Bacteria; American Society for Microbiology: Washington, DC, 1999; p 367.
2. S. C. Winans; B. L. Bassler, Chemical Communication among Bacteria; American Society for Microbiology: Washington, DC,
2008; p 483.
3. D. T. Hughes; V. Sperandio, Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2008, 6, 111–120.
4. G. M. Dunny; T. J. Brickman; M. Dworkin, BioEssays 2008, 30, 296–298.
5. A. S. Khokhlov; I. I. Tovarova; L. N. Borisova; S. A. Pliner; L. A. Schevchenko; E. Y. Kornitskaya; N. S. Ivkina; I. A. Rapoport, Dokl.
Akad. Nauk SSSR 1967, 177, 232–235.
6. O. Hara; T. Beppu, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 1982, 35, 349–358.
7. O. Hara; S. Horinouchi; T. Uozumi; T. Beppu, J. Gen. Microbiol. 1983, 129, 2939–2944.
8. K. Mori, Tetrahedron 1983, 39, 3107–3109.
9. Y. Ohnishi; H. Yamazaki; J. Kato; A. Tomono; S. Horinouchi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 431–439.
10. S. Horinouchi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 283–299.
11. W. C. Fuqua; S. C. Winans; E. P. Greenberg, J. Bacteriol. 1994, 176, 269–275.
12. B. L. Bassler; R. Losick, Cell 2006, 125, 237–246.
13. N. Ando; N. Matsumori; S. Sakuda; T. Beppu; S. Horinouchi, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 1997, 50, 847–852.
14. J. Kato; N. Funa; H. Watanabe; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007, 104, 2378–2383.
15. A. Lezhava; D. Kameoka; H. Sugino; K. Goshi; H. Shinkawa; O. Nimi; S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu; H. Kinashi, Mol. Gen. Genet.
1997, 253, 478–483.
16. Y. Ohnishi; J. Ishikawa; H. Hara; H. Suzuki; M. Ikenoya; H. Ikeda; A. Yamashita; M. Hattori; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2008, 190,
4050–4060.
17. S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, Mol. Microbiol. 1994, 12, 859–864.
18. S. Horinouchi, Front. Biosci. 2002, 7, d2045–d2057.
19. Y. Yamada; T. Nihira, Microbial Hormones and Microbial Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products
Chemistry; D. H. R. Barton, K. Nakanishi, Eds.; Elsevier Science: Heidelberg, 1998; Vol. 8, pp 377–413.
20. Y. Yamada; K. Sugamura; K. Kondo; M. Yanagimoto; H. Okada, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 1987, 40, 496–504.
21. K. Hashimoto; T. Nihira; S. Sakuda; Y. Yamada, J. Ferment. Bioeng. 1992, 73, 449–455.
22. E. Takano; T. Nihira; Y. Hara; J. J. Jones; C. J. L. Gershater; Y. Yamada; M. Bibb, J. Biol. Chem. 2000, 275, 11010–11016.
23. S. Okamoto; K. Nakamura; T. Nihira; Y. Yamada, J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 12319–12326.
24. H. Kinoshita; H. Ipposi; S. Okamoto; H. Nakano; T. Nihira; Y. Yamada, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 6986–6993.
25. M. Waki; T. Nihira; Y. Yamada, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 5131–5137.
26. K. Yang; L. Han; L. C. Vining, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 6111–6117.
27. M. Folcher; H. Gaillard; L. T. Nguyen; K. T. Nguyen; P. Lacroix; N. Bamas-Jacques; M. Rinkel; C. J. Thompson, J. Biol. Chem.
2001, 276, 44297–44306.
28. G. Stratigopoulos; A. R. Gandecha; E. Cundliffe, Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 45, 735–744.
29. H. Onaka; T. Nakagawa; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 28, 743–753.
30. H. Nishida; Y. Ohnishi; T. Beppu; S. Horinouchi, Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 9, 1986–1994.
31. E. Lerat; N. A. Moran, Mol. Biol. Evol. 2004, 21, 903–913.
32. S. Horinouchi; Y. Kumada; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 1984, 158, 481–487.
33. S. Sakuda; S. Tanaka; K. Mizuno; O. Sukcharoen; T. Nihira; Y. Yamada, J. Chem. Soc., Perkin Trans. 1 1993, 2309–2315.
34. N. Shikura; J. Yamamura; T. Nihira, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 5151–5157.
35. N. Ando; K. Ueda; S. Horinouchi, Microbiology 1997, 143, 2715–2723.
36. M. I. Moré; L. D. Finger; J. L. Stryker; C. Fuqua; A. Eberhard; S. C. Winans, Science 1996, 272, 1655–1658.
37. K. Miyake; S. Horinouchi; M. Yoshida; N. Chiba; K. Mori; N. Nogawa; N. Morikawa; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 1989, 171,
4298–4302.
38. K. Miyake; T. Kuzuyama; S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 1990, 172, 3003–3008.
39. H. Onaka; N. Ando; T. Nihira; Y. Yamada; T. Beppu; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 6083–6092.
40. H. Onaka; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 24, 991–1000.
41. J. Kato; I. Miyahisa; M. Mashiko; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 2206–2211.
42. M. Sugiyama; H. Onaka; T. Nakagawa; S. Horinouchi, Gene 1998, 222, 133–144.
43. H. Onaka; M. Sugiyama; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 2748–2752.
44. R. Natsume; Y. Ohnishi; T. Senda; S. Horinouchi, J. Mol. Biol. 2004, 336, 409–419.
45. M. A. Schumacher; M. C. Miller; S. Grkovic; M. H. Brown; R. A. Skurray; R. G. Brennan, Science 2001, 294, 2158–2163.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 331

46. P. Orth; D. Schnappinger; W. Hillen; W. Saenger; W. Hinrichs, Nat. Struct. Biol. 2000, 7, 215–219.
47. D. Vujaklija; K. Ueda; S.-K. Hong; T. Beppu; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1991, 229, 119–128.
48. J. Distler; K. Mansouri; G. Mayer; M. Stockmann; W. Piepersberg, Gene 1992, 115, 105–111.
49. D. Vujaklija; S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 1993, 175, 2652–2661.
50. L. Retzlaff; J. Distler, Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 18, 151–162.
51. A. Tomono; Y. Tsai; H. Yamazaki; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 5595–5604.
52. Y. Ohnishi; S. Kameyama; H. Onaka; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Microbiol. 1999, 34, 102–111.
53. J. Kato; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Mol. Biol. 2005, 350, 12–26.
54. H. Yamazaki; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 4596–4605.
55. K. Ueda; K. Miyake; S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 1993, 175, 2006–2016.
56. H. Yamazaki; Y. Takano; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 50, 1173–1187.
57. J. Kato; A. Suzuki; H. Yamazaki; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 6016–6025.
58. J. Kato; W.-J. Chi; Y. Ohnishi; S.-K. Hong; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 286–295.
59. A. Tomono; Y. Tsai; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 6341–6353.
60. S. Hirano; J. Kato; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 6207–6216.
61. H. Yamazaki; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2003, 185, 1273–1283.
62. K. Ueda; K. Oinuma; G. Ikeda; K. Hosono; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 1488–1492.
63. H. Yamazaki; A. Tomono; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, Mol. Microbiol. 2004, 53, 555–572.
64. T. Higashi; Y. Iwasaki; Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189, 3515–3524.
65. Y. Ohnishi; S. Horinouchi, Biofilms 2004, 1, 319–328.
66. S. Miyadoh, Actinomycetologica 1993, 7, 100–106.
67. K. F. Chater, Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1993, 47, 685–713.
68. S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1992, 46, 377–398.
69. S. Horinouchi; T. Beppu, Proc. Jpn. Acad. Ser. B 2007, 83, 277–295.
70. E. Takano, Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 2006, 9, 287–294.
71. U. Gräfe; G. Reinhardt; W. Schade; I. Eritt; W. F. Fleck; L. Radics, Biotechnol. Lett. 1983, 5, 591–596.
72. S. U. Choi; C. K. Lee; Y. I. Hwang; H. Kinosita; T. Nihira, Arch. Microbiol. 2003, 180, 303–307.
73. S. U. Choi; C. K. Lee; Y. I. Hwang; H. Kinoshita; T. Nihira, J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 3423–3430.
74. E. B. Goh; G. Yim; W. Tsui; J. McClure; M. G. Surette; J. Davies, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 17025–17030.
75. T. Murakami; T. G. Holt; C. J. Thompson, J. Bacteriol. 1989, 171, 1459–1466.
76. D. J. Holmes; J. L. Caso; C. J. Thompson, EMBO J. 1993, 12, 3183–3191.
77. W. H. Tsui; G. Yim; H. H. Wang; J. E. McClure; M. G. Surette; J. Davies, Chem. Biol. 2004, 11, 1307–1316.
78. J. D. Rothstein; S. Patel; M. R. Regan; C. Haenggeli; Y. H. Huang; D. E. Bergles; L. Jin; M. D. Hoberg; S. Vidensky; D. S. Chung;
S. V. Toan; L. I. Bruijn; Z. Z. Su; P. Gupta; P. B. Fisher, Nature 2005, 433, 73–77.
79. K. Ueda; S. Kawai; H. Ogawa; A. Kiyama; T. Kubota; H. Kawanobe; T. Beppu, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 2000, 53, 979–982.
80. K. Yamanaka; H. Oikawa; H. O. Ogawa; K. Hosono; F. Shinmachi; H. Takano; S. Sakuda; T. Beppu; K. Ueda, Microbiology 2005,
151, 2899–2905.
81. H. Zähner; E. Bachmann; R. Hutter; J. Nuesch, Pathol. Microbiol. 1962, 25, 708–736.
82. V. Prelog, Pure Appl. Chem. 1963, 6, 327–338.
83. C. W. Yun; T. Ferea; J. Rashford; O. Ardon; P. O. Brown; D. Botstein; J. Kaplan; C. C. Philpott, J. Biol. Chem. 2000, 275,
10709–10715.
84. E. Lesuisse; P. L. Blaiseau; A. Dancis; J. M. Camadro, Microbiology 2001, 147, 289–298.
85. R. A. Kingsley; R. Reissbrodt; W. Rabsch; J. M. Ketley; R. M. Tsolis; P. Everest; G. Dougan; A. J. Baumler; M. Roberts;
P. H. Williams, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1999, 65, 1610–1618.
86. A. B. Schryvers; I. Stojiljkovic, Mol. Microbiol. 1999, 32, 1117–1123.
87. H. Onaka; H. Tabata; Y. Igarashi; Y. Sato; T. Furumai, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 2001, 54, 1036–1044.
88. Y. Igarashi; Y. Kan; K. Fujii; T. Fujita; K. Harada; H. Naoki; H. Tabata; H. Onaka; T. Furumai, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 2001, 54,
1045–1053.
89. S. Kodani; M. E. Hudson; M. C. Durrant; M. J. Buttner; J. R. Nodwell; J. M. Willey, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101,
11448–11453.
90. R. D. Tillotson; H. A. Wosten; M. Richter; J. M. Willey, Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 30, 595–602.
91. U. Süsstrunk; J. Pidoux; S. Taubert; A. Ullmann; C. J. Thompson, Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 30, 33–46.
92. D.-K. Kang; X.-M. Li; K. Ochi; S. Horinouchi, Microbiology 1999, 145, 1161–1172.
93. G. M. Dunny; B. L. Brown; D. B. Clewell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1978, 75, 3470–3483.
94. A. Suzuki; M. Mori; Y. Sakagami; A. Isogai; M. Fujino; C. Kitada; R. A. Craig; D. B. Clewell, Science 1984, 226, 849–850.
95. M. Kleerebezem; L. E. Quadri; O. P. Kuipers; W. M. de Vos, Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 24, 895–904.
96. M. H. Sturme; M. Kleerebezem; J. Nakayama; A. D. Akkermans; E. E. Vaugha; W. M. de Vos, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2002,
81, 233–243.
97. G. J. Lyon; R. P. Novick, Peptides 2004, 25, 1389–1403.
98. C. M. Waters; B. L. Bassler, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2005, 21, 319–346.
99. S. K. Lim; K. Tanimoto; H. Tomita; Y. Ike, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 6544–6553.
100. W. Witte, Science 1998, 279, 996–997.
101. D. B. Clewell, Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 1990, 9, 90–102.
102. D. B. Clewell, Sex Pheromones and the Plasmid-Encoded Mating Response in Enterococcus Faecalis. In Bacterial Conjugation;
D. B. Clewell, Ed.; Plenum Press: New York, 1993; pp 349–367.
103. M. Mori; Y. Sakagami; Y. Ishii; A. Isogai; C. Kitada; M. Fujino; J. C. Adsit; G. M. Dunny; D. B. Clewell, J. Biol. Chem. 1988, 263,
14574–14578.
104. M. Mori; Y. Sakagami; M. Narita; A. Isogai; M. Fujino; C. Kitada; R. A. Craig; D. B. Clewell; A. Suzuki, FEBS Lett. 1984, 178,
97–100.
332 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

105. M. Mori; H. Tanaka; Y. Sakagami; A. Isogai; M. Fijino; C. Kitada; B. A. White; F. Y. An; D. B. Clewell; A. Suzuki, FEBS Lett. 1986,
206, 69–72.
106. J. Nakayama; Y. Abe; A. Isogai; A. Suzuki, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1995, 59, 703–705.
107. J. Nakayama; K. Yoshida; A. Isogai; D. B. Clewell; A. Suzuki, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 5567–5573.
108. F. Y. An; D. B. Clewell, Plasmid 1994, 31, 215–221.
109. J. R. Chandler; A. R. Flynn; E. M. Bryan; G. M. Dunny, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 4830–4843.
110. M. H. Antiporta; G. M. Dunny, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 1155–1162.
111. F. Y. An; D. B. Clewell, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 1880–1887.
112. B. A. Leonard; A. Podbielski; P. J. Hedberg; G. M. Dunny, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 93, 260–264.
113. J. Nakayama; T. Horii; A. Suzuki, In 1st International Peptide Symposium; Y. Shimonishi, Ed.; Kluwer Academic Publishers:
Kyoto, 1999; pp 215–217.
114. B. K. Kozlowicz; T. Bae; G. M. Dunny, Mol. Microbiol. 2004, 54, 520–532.
115. S. Fujimoto; D. B. Clewell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 6430–6435.
116. J. Nakayama; Y. Takanami; T. Horii; S. Sakuda; A. Suzuki, J. Bacteriol. 1998, 180, 449–456.
117. J. Nakayama; A. Suzuki, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1997, 61, 1796–1799.
118. K. Shi; C. K. Brown; Z. Y. Gu; B. K. Kozlowicz; G. M. Dunny; D. H. Ohlendorf; C. A. Earhart, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005,
102, 18596–18601.
119. T. Horii; H. Nagasawa; J. Nakayama, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 6343–6350.
120. A. D. Grossman; R. Losick, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1988, 85, 4369–4373.
121. D. Z. Rudner; J. R. LeDeaux; K. Ireton; A. D. Grossman, J. Bacteriol. 1991, 173, 1388–1398.
122. M. Perego; C. F. Higgins; S. R. Pearce; M. P. Gallagher; J. A. Hoch, Mol. Microbiol. 1991, 5, 173–185.
123. J. M. Solomon; B. A. Lazazzera; A. D. Grossman, Genes Dev. 1996, 10, 2014–2024.
124. B. A. Lazazzera; J. M. Solomon; A. D. Grossman, Cell 1997, 89, 917–925.
125. M. Perego, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94, 8612–8617.
126. M. Jiang; R. Grau; M. Perego, J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 303–310.
127. C. Bongiorni; S. Ishikawa; S. Stephenson; N. Ogasawara; M. Perego, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 4353–4361.
128. M. Ogura; K. Shimane; K. Asai; N. Ogasawara; T. Tanaka, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 49, 1685–1697.
129. J. M. Auchtung; C. A. Lee; A. D. Grossman, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 5273–5285.
130. L. Core; M. Perego, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 49, 1509–1522.
131. N. Comella; A. D. Grossman, Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 57, 1159–1174.
132. K. Hayashi; K. Tsukahara; K. Kobayashi; N. Ogasawara; M. Ogura, Mol. Microbiol. 2006, 59, 1714–1729.
133. W. K. Smits; C. Bongiorni; J.-W. Veening; L. W. Hamoen; O. P. Kuipers; M. Perego, Mol. Microbiol. 2007, 65, 103–120.
134. S. Ishikawa; L. Core; M. Perego, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 20483–20489.
135. L. Slamti; D. Lereclus, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 1182–1187.
136. T. R. Klaenhammer, FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 1993, 12, 39–85.
137. I. F. Nes; D. B. Diep; L. S. Havarstein; M. B. Brurberg; V. Eijsink; H. Holo, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 1996, 70, 113–128.
138. V. G. Eijsink; L. Axelsson; D. B. Diep; L. S. Havarstein; H. Holo; I. F. Nes, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2002, 81, 639–654.
139. M. Kleerebezem; L. E. Quadri, Peptides 2001, 22, 1579–1596.
140. V. G. Eijsink; M. B. Brurberg; P. H. Middelhoven; I. F. Nes, J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 2232–2237.
141. P. E. Kristiansen; G. Fimland; D. Mantzilas; J. Nissen-Meyer, J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 22945–22950.
142. D. B. Diep; L. S. Havarstein; I. F. Nes, Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 18, 631–639.
143. H. H. Hauge; D. Mantzilas; G. N. Moll; W. N. Konings; A. J. Driessen; V. G. Eijsink; J. Nissen-Meyer, Biochemistry 1998, 37,
16026–16032.
144. F. Griffith, J. Hyg. 1928, 27, 113–159.
145. R. Pakula; W. Walczak, J. Gen. Microbiol. 1963, 31, 125–133.
146. A. Tomasz; R. D. Hotchkiss, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1964, 51, 480–487.
147. L. S. Havarstein; G. Coomaraswamy; D. A. Morrison, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 11140–11144.
148. F. M. Hui; L. Zhou; D. A. Morrison, Gene 1995, 153, 25–31.
149. E. V. Pestova; L. S. Havarstein; D. A. Morrison, Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 21, 853–862.
150. M. S. Lee; D. A. Morrison, J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181, 5004–5016.
151. P. Luo; H. Li; D. A. Morrison, Mol. Microbiol. 2004, 54, 172–183.
152. C. K. Sung; D. A. Morrison, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 3052–3061.
153. L. S. Havarstein; B. Martin; O. Johnsborg; C. Granadel; J. P. Claverys, Mol. Microbiol. 2006, 59, 1297–1307.
154. L. S. Havarstein; R. Hakenbeck; P. Gaustad, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 6589–6594.
155. A. M. Whatmore; V. A. Barcus; C. G. Dowson, J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181, 3144–3154.
156. B. A. Bensing; C. E. Rubens; P. M. Sullam, Infect. Immun. 2001, 69, 1373–1380.
157. O. Ween; S. Teigen; P. Gaustad; M. Kilian; L. S. Havarstein, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 3426–3432.
158. D. Ajdic; W. M. McShan; R. E. McLaughlin; G. Savic; J. Chang; M. B. Carson; C. Primeaux; R. Tian; S. Kenton; H. Jia;
S. Lin; Y. Qian; S. Li; H. Zhu; F. Najar; H. Lai; J. White; B. A. Roe; J. J. Ferretti, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99,
14434–14439.
159. R. T. Syvitski; X. L. Tian; K. Sampara; A. Salman; S. F. Lee; D. L. Jakeman; Y. H. Li, J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189, 1441–1450.
160. Y. H. Li; N. Tang; M. B. Aspiras; P. C. Lau; J. H. Lee; R. P. Ellen; D. G. Cvitkovitch, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 2699–2708.
161. A. Yoshida; H. K. Kuramitsu, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 6283–6291.
162. Y. H. Li; M. N. Hanna; G. Svensater; R. P. Ellen; D. G. Cvitkovitch, J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 6875–6884.
163. J. R. van der Ploeg, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 3980–3989.
164. R. Lange; C. Wagner; A. de Saizieu; N. Flint; J. Molnos; M. Stieger; P. Caspers; M. Kamber; W. Keck; K. E. Amrein, Gene 1999,
237, 223–234.
165. J. P. Throup; K. K. Koretke; A. P. Bryant; K. A. Ingraham; A. F. Chalker; Y. Ge; A. Marra; N. G. Wallis; J. R. Brown; D. J. Holmes;
M. Rosenberg; M. K. Burnham, Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 35, 566–576.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 333

166. A. de Saizieu; C. Gardes; N. Flint; C. Wagner; M. Kamber; T. J. Mitchell; W. Keck; K. E. Amrein; R. Lange, J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182,
4696–4703.
167. S. Dawid; A. M. Roche; J. N. Weiser, Infect. Immun. 2007, 75, 443–451.
168. L. Fontaine; C. Boutry; E. Guedon; A. Guillot; M. Ibrahim; B. Grossiord; P. Hols, J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189, 7195–7205.
169. G. C. Cheeseman; N. J. Berridge, Biochem. J. 1959, 71, 185–194.
170. J. W. Mulders; I. J. Boerrigter; H. S. Rollema; R. J. Siezen; W. M. de Vos, Eur. J. Biochem. 1991, 201, 581–584.
171. T. Zendo; M. Fukao; K. Ueda; T. Higuchi; J. Nakayama; K. Sonomoto, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 1616–1619.
172. P. G. de Ruyter; O. P. Kuipers; M. M. Beerthuyzen; I. van Alen-Boerrigter; W. M. de Vos, J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 3434–3439.
173. K. D. Entian; W. M. de Vos, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 1996, 69, 109–117.
174. M. Kleerebezem, Peptides 2004, 25, 1405–1414.
175. Z. Gutowski-Eckel; C. Klein; K. Siegers; K. Bohm; M. Hammelmann; K. D. Entian, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1994, 60, 1–11.
176. G. Engelke; Z. Gutowski-Eckel; P. Kiesau; K. Siegers; M. Hammelmann; K. D. Entian, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1994, 60,
814–825.
177. J. Nakayama; A. D. Akkermans; W. M. De Vos, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 480–489.
178. M. C. Booth; C. P. Bogie; H. G. Sahl; R. J. Siezen; K. L. Hatter; M. S. Gilmore, Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 21, 1175–1184.
179. W. Haas; B. D. Shepard; M. S. Gilmore, Nature 2002, 415, 84–87.
180. P. S. Coburn; C. M. Pillar; B. D. Jett; W. Haas; M. S. Gilmore, Science 2004, 306, 2270–2272.
181. M. Otto, Peptides 2001, 22, 1603–1608.
182. R. P. Novick, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 48, 1429–1449.
183. M. Kalkum; G. J. Lyon; B. T. Chait, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100, 2795–2800.
184. G. J. Lyon; J. S. Wright; T. W. Muir; R. P. Novick, Biochemistry 2002, 41, 10095–10104.
185. G. Ji; R. Beavis; R. P. Novick, Science 1997, 276, 2027–2030.
186. G. J. Lyon; P. Mayville; T. W. Muir; R. P. Novick, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000, 97, 13330–13335.
187. R. Qiu; W. Pei; L. Zhang; J. Lin; G. Ji, J. Biol. Chem. 2005, 280, 16695–16704.
188. J. S. Kavanaugh; M. Thoendel; A. R. Horswill, Mol. Microbiol. 2007, 65, 780–798.
189. N. Balaban; T. Goldkorn; Y. Gov; M. Hirshberg; N. Koyfman; H. R. Matthews; R. T. Nhan; B. Singh; O. Uziel, J. Biol. Chem. 2001,
276, 2658–2667.
190. N. Balaban; T. Goldkorn; R. T. Nhan; L. B. Dang; S. Scott; R. M. Ridgley; A. Rasooly; S. C. Wright; J. W. Larrick; R. Rasooly;
J. R. Carlson, Science 1998, 280, 438–440.
191. N. Balaban; A. Giacometti; O. Cirioni; Y. Gov; R. Ghiselli; F. Mocchegiani; C. Viticchi; M. S. Del Prete; V. Saba; G. Scalise;
G. Dell’Acqua, J. Infect. Dis. 2003, 187, 625–630.
192. N. Balaban; O. Cirioni; A. Giacometti; R. Ghiselli; J. B. Braunstein; C. Silvestri; F. Mocchegiani; V. Saba; G. Scalise, Antimicrob.
Agents Chemother. 2007, 51, 2226–2229.
193. J. Nakayama; Y. Cao; T. Horii; S. Sakuda; A. D. Akkermans; W. M. de Vos; H. Nagasawa, Mol. Microbiol. 2001, 41, 145–154.
194. J. Nakayama; Y. Cao; T. Horii; S. Sakuda; H. Nagasawa, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2001, 65, 2322–2325.
195. X. Qin; K. V. Singh; G. M. Weinstock; B. E. Murray, Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 2579–2586.
196. X. Qin; K. V. Singh; G. M. Weinstock; B. E. Murray, J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 3372–3382.
197. J. Nakayama; S. Chen; N. Oyama; K. Nishiguchi; E. A. Azab; E. Tanaka; R. Kariyama; K. Sonomoto, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188,
8321–8326.
198. J. Nakayama; R. Kariyama; H. Kumon, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 3152–3155.
199. J. C. Roberts; K. V. Singh; P. C. Okhuysen; B. E. Murray, J. Clin. Microbiol. 2004, 42, 2317–2320.
200. J. Nakayama; Y. Uemura; K. Nishiguchi; N. Yoshimura; Y. Igarashi; K. Sonomoto, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2009, 53,
580–586.
201. M. Engelbert; E. Mylonakis; F. M. Ausubel; S. B. Calderwood; M. S. Gilmore, Infect. Immun. 2004, 72, 3628–3633.
202. C. D. Sifri; E. Mylonakis; K. V. Singh; X. Qin; D. A. Garsin; B. E. Murray; F. M. Ausubel; S. B. Calderwood, Infect. Immun. 2002,
70, 5647–5650.
203. A. Bourgogne; S. G. Hilsenbeck; G. M. Dunny; B. E. Murray, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 2875–2884.
204. L. E. Hancock; M. Perego, J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 5629–5639.
205. S. K. Pillai; G. Sakoulas; G. M. Eliopoulos; R. C. Moellering, Jr.; B. E. Murray; R. T. Inouye, J. Infect. Dis. 2004, 190, 967–970.
206. J. Nakayama; E. Tanaka; R. Kariyama; K. Nagata; K. Nishiguchi; R. Mitsuhata; Y. Uemura; M. Tanokura; H. Kumon;
K. Sonomoto, J. Bacteriol. 2007, 189, 1358–1365.
207. M. H. Sturme; J. Nakayama; D. Molenaar; Y. Murakami; R. Kunugi; T. Fujii; E. E. Vaughan; M. Kleerebezem; W. M. de Vos, J.
Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 5224–5235.
208. N. Autret; C. Raynaud; I. Dubail; P. Berche; A. Charbit, Infect. Immun. 2003, 71, 4463–4471.
209. A. Rieu; S. Weidmann; D. Garmyn; P. Piveteau; J. Guzzo, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 73, 6125–6133.
210. M. Okada; I. Sato; S. J. Cho; H. Iwata; T. Nishio; D. Dubnau; Y. Sakagami, Nat. Chem. Biol. 2005, 1, 23–24.
211. R. A. Gibbs, Nat. Chem. Biol. 2005, 1, 7–8.
212. M. Roggiani; D. Dubnau, J. Bacteriol. 1993, 175, 3182–3187.
213. M. M. Nakano; P. Zuber, J. Bacteriol. 1991, 173, 7269–7274.
214. M. Ogura; H. Yamaguchi; K. Kobayashi; N. Ogasawara; Y. Fujita; T. Tanaka, J. Bacteriol. 2002, 184, 2344–2351.
215. R. M. Berka; J. Hahn; M. Albano; I. Draskovic; M. Persuh; X. Cui; A. Sloma; W. Widner; D. Dubnau, Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 43,
1331–1345.
216. R. Magnuson; J. Solomon; A. D. Grossman, Cell 1994, 77, 207–216.
217. M. Ansaldi; D. Marolt; T. Stebe; I. Mandic-Mulec; D. Dubnau, Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 44, 1561–1573.
218. M. Okada; H. Yamaguchi; I. Sato; S. J. Cho; D. Dubnau; Y. Sakagami, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2007, 17, 1705–1707.
219. M. J. Federle; B. L. Bassler, J. Clin. Invest. 2003, 112, 1291–1299.
220. X. Chen; S. Schauder; N. Potier; A. Van Dorsselaer; I. Pelczer; B. L. Bassler; F. M. Hughson, Nature 2002, 415, 545–549.
221. M. G. Surette; B. L. Bassler, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 7046–7050.
222. U. H. Stroeher; A. W. Paton; A. D. Ogunniyi; J. C. Paton, Infect. Immun. 2003, 71, 3206–3212.
334 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

223. A. Yoshida; T. Ansai; T. Takehara; H. K. Kuramitsu, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 2372–2380.
224. S. C. DeKeersmaecker; J. Vanderleyden, Microbiology 2003, 149, 1953–1956.
225. K. Ohtani; H. Hayashi; T. Shimizu, Mol. Microbiol. 2002, 44, 171–179.
226. S. Sela; S. Frank; E. Belausov; R. Pinto, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 5653–5658.
227. J. Merritt; J. Kreth; W. Shi; F. Qi, Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 57, 960–969.
228. F. C. Petersen; N. A. Ahmed; A. Naemi; A. A. Scheie, Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2006, 90, 109–121.
229. M. J. Marouni; S. Sela, Infect. Immun. 2003, 71, 5633–5639.
230. W. R. Lyon; J. C. Madden; J. C. Levin; J. L. Stein; M. G. Caparon, Mol. Microbiol. 2001, 42, 145–157.
231. R. McNab; S. K. Ford; A. El-Sabaeny; B. Barbieri; G. S. Cook; R. J. Lamont, J. Bacteriol. 2003, 185, 274–284.
232. E. P. Greenberg, ASM News 1997, 63, 371–377.
233. K. Tateda; Y. Ishii; M. Horikawa; T. Matsumoto; S. Miyairi; J. C. Pechere; T. J. Standiford; M. Ishiguro; K. Yamaguchi, Infect.
Immun. 2003, 71, 5785–5793.
234. L. Li; D. Hooi; S. R. Chhabra; D. Pritchard; P. E. Shaw, Oncogene 2004, 23, 4894–4902.
235. M. J. Federle; B. L. Bassler, J. Clin. Invest. 2003, 112, 1291–1299.
236. J. M. Henke; B. L. Bassler, Trends Cell Biol. 2004, 14, 648–656.
237. T. R. de Kievit; B. H. Iglewski, Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 4839–4849.
238. M. T. Cubo; A. Economou; G. Murphy; A. W. B. Johnston; J. A. Downie, J. Bacteriol. 1992, 174, 4026–4035.
239. S. Swift; M. K. Winson; P. F. Chan; N. J. Bainton; M. Birdsall; P. J. Reeves; C. E. D. Rees; S. R. Chhabra; P. J. Hill; J. P. Throup;
B. W. Bycroft; G. P. C. Salmond; P. Williams; G. S. A. B. Stewart, Mol. Microbiol. 1993, 10, 511–520.
240. K. M. Gray; J. P. Pearson; J. A. Downie; B. E. A. Boboye; E. P. Greenberg, J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 372–376.
241. L. Eberl; M. K. Winson; C. Sternberg; G. S. A. B. Stewart; G. Christiansen; S. R. Chhabra; B. W. Bycroft; P. Williams; S. Molin;
M. Givskov, Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 20, 127–136.
242. M. L. Givskov; M. L. Eberl; S. Molin, FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1997, 148, 115–122.
243. S. A. Swift; V. Karlyshev; E. L. Durant; M. K. Winson; S. R. Chhabra; P. Williams; S. Macintyre; G. S. A. B. Stewart, J. Bacteriol.
1997, 179, 5271–5281.
244. A. B. Flavier; L. M. Ganova-Raeva; M. A. Schell; T. P. Denny, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 7089–7097.
245. B. Rodelas; J. K. Lithgow; F. Wisniewski-Dye; A. Hardman; A. Wilkinson; A. Economou; P. Williams; J. A. Downie, J. Bacteriol.
1999, 181, 3816–3823.
246. Y.-H. Dong; J.-L. Xu; X.-Z. Li; L.-H. Zhang, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000, 97, 3526–3531.
247. Y.-H. Dong; L.-H. Wang; J.-L. Xu; H.-B. Zhang; X.-F. Zhang; L.-H. Zhang, Nature 2001, 411, 813–817.
248. Y.-H. Li; J.-L. Xu; L.-H. Wang; S. L. Ong; J. R. Leadbetter; L.-H. Zhang, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 47, 849–860.
249. H.-B. Zhang; L.-H. Wang; L.-H. Zhang, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 4638–4643.
250. K. H. Nealson; J. W. Hastings, Microbiol. Rev. 1979, 43, 496–518.
251. A. Eberhard; A. L. Burlingame; C. Eberhard; G. L. Kenyon; K. H. Nealson; J. Oppenheimer, Biochemistry 1981, 20, 2444–2449.
252. J. Engebrecht; K. H. Nealson; M. Silverman, Cell 1983, 32, 773–781.
253. W. C. Fuqua; S. C. Winans; E. P. Greenberg, J. Bacteriol. 1994, 176, 269–275.
254. D. M. Sitnikov; J. B. Schineller; T. O. Baldwin, Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 17, 801–812.
255. A. Kuo; N. S. M. Callahan; P. V. Dunlap, J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 971–976.
256. E. G. Ruby, Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1996, 50, 591–624.
257. W. C. Fuqua; S. C. Winans; E. P. Greenberg, Annu. Rev. Microbiol. 1996, 50, 727–751.
258. C. Lupp; E. G. Ruby, J. Bacteriol. 2005, 187, 3620–3629.
259. B. L. Hanzelka; E. P. Greenberg, J. Bacteriol. 1996, 178, 5291–5294.
260. A. L. Schaefer; D. L. Val; B. L. Hanzelka; J. E. Cronan; E. P. Greenberg, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 93, 9505–9509.
261. J. Cao; E. A. Meighen, J. Biol. Chem. 1989, 264, 21670–21676.
262. R. E. Showalter; M. O. Martin; M. R. Silverman, J. Bacteriol. 1990, 172, 2946–2954.
263. B. L. Bassler; M. Wright; R. E. Showalter; M. R. Silverman, Mol. Microbiol. 1993, 9, 773–786.
264. B. L. Bassler; M. Wright; M. R. Silverman, Mol. Microbiol. 1994, 13, 273–286.
265. J. M. Henke; B. L. Bassler, J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 6902–6914.
266. M. A. Whooley; A. McLoughlin, J. Gen. Microbiol. 1983, 29, 981–988.
267. M. A. Whooley; J. A. O. Callaghan; A. J. McLoughlin, J. Gen. Microbiol. 1983, 129, 989–996.
268. J. E. Fergie; S. J. Shema; L. Lott; R. Crawford; C. C. Patrick, Clin. Infect. Dis. 1994, 18, 390–394.
269. M. Dunn; R. G. Wunderink, Clin. Chest Med. 1995, 16, 95–109.
270. S. C. Brewer; R. G. Wunderink; C. B. Jones; K. V. J. Leeper, Chest 1996, 109, 1019–1029.
271. M. J. Gambello; B. H. Iglewski, J. Bacteriol. 1991, 73, 3000–3009.
272. D. S. Toder; M. J. Gambello; B. H. Iglewski, Mol. Microbiol. 1991, 5, 2003–2010.
273. M. J. Gambello; S. Kaye; B. H. Iglewski, Infect. Immun. 1993, 61, 1180–1184.
274. L. Passador; J. M. Cook; M. J. Gambello; L. Rust; B. H. Iglewski, Science 1993, 260, 1127–1130.
275. U. A. Ochsner; A. K. Koch; A. Fiechter; J. Reiser, J. Bacteriol. 1994, 176, 2044–2054.
276. J. P. Pearson; K. M. Gray; L. Passador; K. D. Tucker; A. Eberhard; B. H. Iglewski; E. P. Greenberg, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1994, 91, 197–201.
277. J. M. Brint; D. E. Ohman, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 77, 7155–7163.
278. A. Latifi; M. K. Winson; M. Foglino; B. W. Bycroft; G. S. A. B. Stewart; L. Lazdunski; P. Williams, Mol. Microbiol. 1995, 17,
333–343.
279. U. A. Ochsner; J. Reiser, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 6424–6428.
280. J. P. Pearson; L. Passador; B. H. Iglewski; E. P. Greenberg, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 1490–1494.
281. P. C. Seed; L. Passador; B. H. Iglewski, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 654–659.
282. M. K. Winson; M. Camara; A. Latifi; M. Foglino; S. R. Chhabra; M. Daykin; M. Bally; V. Chapon; G. P. C. Salmond; B. W. Bycroft;
A. Lazdunski; G. S. A. B. Stewart; P. Williams, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 9427–9431.
283. A. Latifi; M. Foglino; K. Tanaka; P. Williams; A. Lazdunski, Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 21, 1137–1146.
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 335

284. J. P. Pearson; E. C. Pesci; B. H. Iglewski, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 5756–5767.

285. E. C. Pesci; J. P. Pearson; P. C. Seed; B. H. Iglewski, J. Bacteriol. 1997, 179, 3127–3132.
286. C. Reimmann; M. Beyeler; A. Latifi; H. Winteler; M. Foglino; A. Lazdunski; D. Haas, Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 24, 309–319.
287. Y. Jiang; M. Camara; S. R. Chhabra; K. R. Hardie; B. W. Bycroft; A. Lazdunski; G. P. C. Salmond; G. S. A. B. Stewart; P. Williams,
Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 28, 193–204.
288. D. G. Storey; E. E. Ujack; H. R. Rabin; I. Mitchell, Infect. Immun. 1998, 66, 2521–2528.
289. G. Telford; D. Wheeler; P. Williams; P. T. Tomkins; P. Appleby; H. Sewell; G. S. A. B. Stewart; B. W. Bycroft; D. I. Pritchard,
Infect. Immun. 1998, 66, 36–42.
290. C. Van Delden; E. C. Pesci; J. P. Pearson; B. H. Iglewski, Infect. Immun. 1998, 66, 4499–4502.
291. J. P. Pearson; M. Feldman; B. H. Iglewski; A. Prince, Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 4331–4334.
292. T. R. de Kievit; B. H. Iglewski, Infect. Immun. 2000, 68, 4839–4849.
293. K. Poole; K. Krebes; C. McNally; S. Neshat, J. Bacteriol. 1993, 175, 7363–7372.
294. K. Poole; N. Gotoh; H. Tsujimoto; Q. Zhao; A. Wada; T. Yamasaki; S. Neshat; J. Yamagishi; X. Z. Li; T. Nishino, Mol. Microbiol.
1996, 21, 713–724.
295. T. Kohler; M. Michea-Hamzehpour; U. Henze; N. Gotoh; L. K. Curty; J. C. Pechere, Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 23, 345–354.
296. J. P. Pearson; C. Van Delden; B. H. Iglewski, J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181, 1203–1210.
297. H. Maseda; I. Sawada; K. Saito; H. Uchiyama; T. Nakae; N. Nomura, Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2004, 48, 1320–1328.
298. N. J. Bainton; P. Stead; S. R. Chhabra; B. W. Bycroft; G. P. C. Salmond; G. S. A. B. Steward; P. Williams, Biochem. J. 1992, 288,
997–1004.
299. S. R. Chhabra; P. Stead; N. J. Bainton; G. P. C. Salmond; G. S. A. B. Stewart; P. Williams; B. W. Bycroft, J. Antibiot. (Tokyo)
1993, 46, 441–454.
300. S. Beck von Bodman; S. K. Farrand, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 5000–5008.
301. S. McGowan; M. Sebaihia; S. Jones; S. Yu; N. Bainton; P. F. Chan; B. W. Bycroft; G. S. A. B. Stewart; G. P. C. Salmond;
P. Williams, Microbiology 1995, 141, 541–550.
302. S. Reverchon; M. L. Bouillant; G. P. C. lmond; W. Nasser, Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 29, 1407–1418.
303. W. Nasser; M. L. Bouillant; G. P. C. Salmond; S. Reverchon, Mol. Microbiol. 1998, 29, 1391–1405.
304. A. M. L. Barnard; G. P. C. Salmond, Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2007, 387, 413–423.
305. J.-R. Wei; H.-C. Lai, Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 296, 117–124.
306. J. R. W. Govan; J. E. Hughes; P. Vandamme, J. Med. Microbiol. 1996, 45, 395–407.
307. S. Lewenza; B. Conway; E. P. Greenberg; P. A. Sokol, J. Bacteriol. 1999, 181, 748–756.
308. D. McKenney; K. E. Brown; D. G. Allison, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 6989–6992.
309. L. Eberl, Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 296, 103–110.
310. L. Zhang; P. J. Murphy; A. Kerr; M. E. Tate, Nature 1993, 362, 446–448.
311. K. R. Piper; S. Beck von Bodman; S. K. Farrand, Nature 1993, 362, 448–450.
312. I. Hwang; L. Pei-Li; L. Zhang; K. R. Piper; D. M. Cook; M. E. Tate; S. K. Farrand, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91,
4639–4643.
313. I. Hwang; D. M. Cook; S. K. Farrand, J. Bacteriol. 1995, 177, 449–458.
314. C. Fuqua; S. C. Winans, Mol. Microbiol. 1996, 20, 1199–1210.
315. R.-G. Zhang; T. Pappas; J. L. Brace; P. C. Miller; T. Oulmassov; J. M. Molyneaux; J. C. Anderson; J. K. Bashkin; S. C. Winans;
A. Joachimiak, Nature 2002, 417, 971–974.
316. K. H. McLean; M. K. Winson; L. Fish; A. Taylor; S. R. Chhabra; M. Camara; M. Daykin; J. H. Lamb; S. Swift; B. W. Bycroft;
G. S. A. B. Stewart; P. Williams, Microbiology 1997, 143, 3703–3711.
317. P. D. Shaw; G. Ping; S. L. Daly; C. Cha; J. E. Cronan, Jr.; K. L. Rinehart; S. K. Farrand, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1997, 94,
6036–6041.
318. K. H. McClean; M. K. Winson; L. Fish; A. Taylor; S. R. Chhabra; M. Camara; M. Daykin; J. H. Lamb; S. Swift; B. W. Bycroft;
G. S. A. B. Stewart; P. Williams, Microbiology 1997, 143, 3703–3711.
319. X. Chen; S. Schauder; N. Potier; A. van Dorsselaer; I. Pelczer; B. L. Bassler; F. M. Hughson, Nature 2002, 415, 545–549.
320. C. Lupp; E. G. Ruby, J. Bacteriol. 2004, 186, 3873–3881.
321. S. J. Coulthhurst; C. L. Kurz; G. P. C. Salmond, Microbiology, 2004, 150, 1901–1910.
322. M. G. Surette; M. B. Miller; B. L. Bassler, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 1639–1644.
323. M. Walters; V. Sperandio, Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 296, 125–131.
324. S. T. Miller; K. B. Xavier; S. R. Campagna; M. E. Taga; M. F. Semmelhack; B. L. Basseler; F. M. Hughson, Mol. Cell 2004, 15,
677–687.
325. S. Schauder; K. Shokat; M. G. Surette; B. L. Bassler, Mol. Microbiol. 2001, 41, 463–476.
326. E. C. Pesci; J. B. Milbank; J. P. Pearson; S. McKnight; A. S. Kende; E. P. Greenberg; B. H. Iglewski, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1999, 96, 11229–11234.
327. S. L. Mcknight; B. H. Iglewski; E. C. Pesci, J. Bacteriol. 2000, 182, 2702–2708.
328. S. P. Diggle; P. Cornelis; P. Williams; M. Camara, Int. J. Med. Microbiol. 2006, 296, 83–91.
329. S. P. Diggle; A. Matthijs; V. J. Wright; M. P. Fletcher; S. R. Chhabra; I. L. Lamont; X. Kong; R. C. Hider; P. Cornelle; M. Camara;
P. Williams, Chem. Biol. 2007, 14, 87–96.
330. D. Wang; X. Ding; P. N. Rather, J. Bacteriol. 2001, 183, 4210–4216.
331. H. Hirakawa; Y. Inazumi; T. Masaki; T. Hirata; A. Yamaguchi, Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 55, 1113–1126.
332. A. Kobayashi; H. Hirakawa; T. Hirata; K. Nishino; A. Yamaguchi, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 5693–5703.
333. J. Lee; A. Jayaraman; T. K. Wood, BMC Microbiol. 2007, 7, 1–15.
334. A. B. Flavier; S. J. Clough; M. A. Schell; T. P. Denny, Mol. Microbiol. 1997, 26, 251–259.
335. M. Shinohara; N. Nakajima; Y. Uehara, J. Appl. Microbiol. 2007, 103, 152–162.
336. M. B. Miller; K. Skorupski; D. H. Lenz; R. K. Taylor; B. L. Bassler, Cell 2002, 110, 303–314.
337. B. K. Hammer; B. L. Bassler, Mol. Microbiol. 2003, 50, 101–104.
338. J. Zhu; J. J. Mekalanos, Dev. Cell 2003, 5, 647–656.
336 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms

339. D. A. Higgins; M. E. Pomianek; C. M. Kraml; R. K. Taylor; M. F. Semmelhack; B. L. Basseler, Nature 2007, 450, 883–886.
340. M. Dworkin, Microbiol. Rev. 1996, 60, 70–102.
341. K. Stephens; G. D. Hegeman; D. White, J. Bacteriol. 1982, 149, 739–747.
342. W. Plaga; I. Stamm; H. U. Schairer, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 11263–11267.
343. W. E. Hull; A. Berkessel; W. Plaga, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 11268–11273.
344. M. O. Hengartner, Nature 2000, 407, 770–776.
345. N. Danial; S. J. Korsmeyer, Cell 2004, 116, 205–219.
346. F. Hayes, Science 2003, 301, 1496–1499.
347. C. D. Ellermeier; E. C. Hobbs; J. E. Gonzalez-Pator; R. Losick, Cell 2006, 124, 549–559.
348. H. Engelberg-Kulka; S. Amitai; I. Kolodkin-gal; R. Hazan, PLoS Genet. 2006, 2, 1518–1526.
349. I. Kolodkin-gal; R. Hazan; A. Gaathon; S. Carmeli; H. Engelberg-Kulka, Science 2007, 318, 652–655.
350. F. W. Lariner; P. Chain; L. Hauser; J. Lamerdin; S. Malfatti; L. Do; M. L. Land; D. A. Pelletier; J. T. Beatty; A. S. Lang; F. R. Tabita;
J. L. Gibson; T. E. Hanson; C. Bobst; J. L. Torres; C. Peres; F. H. Harrison; J. Gibson; C. S. Harwood, Nat. Biotechnol. 2004, 22, 55–61.
351. C. Pan; Y. Oda; P. K. Lankford; B. Zhang; N. F. Samatova; D. A. Pelletier; C. S. Harwood; R. L. Hettich, Mol. Cell. Proteomics
2008, 7, 938–948.
352. A. L. Schaefer; E. P. Greenberg; C. M. Oliver; Y. Oda; J. J. Huang; G. Bittan-Banin; C. M. Peres; S. Schmidt; K. Juhaszova;
J. R. Sufrin; C. S. Harwood, Nature 2008, 454, 595–599.

Biographical Sketches

Sueharu Horinouchi graduated from the Department of Agricultural Chemistry, University

of Tokyo in 1974. He received his Ph.D. in 1979 from the University of Tokyo. He spent 2
years from 1979 to 1981 as project associate in Bernard Weisblum’s laboratory,
Pharmacology Department, University of Wisconsin, where he revealed a posttranslational
regulation of the macrolide resistance genes in pathogenic bacteria. He became an assistant
professor in 1981, associate professor (1987), and professor (1994) in the Department of
Biotechnology, University of Tokyo. He was the Director of Biotechnology Research Center,
University of Tokyo from 2003 to 2005. His research field is basic and applied microbiology.

Kenji Ueda graduated from the Department of Agricultural Chemistry, University of Tokyo
in 1990. He received his Ph.D. in 1995 from the University of Tokyo. He was a JSPS Research
 Cell-to-Cell Communications among Microorganisms 337

Fellow from 1992 to 1995. He became an assistant professor in 1995 and associate professor in
2004 in the College of Bioresource Sciences, Nihon University. His research field is basic and
applied microbiology.

Jiro Nakayama graduated from the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tokyo in 1987. He
joined Master’s Course of the Graduate School of Agriculture, University of Tokyo and
started the study of enterococcal pheromone. After his M.Sc. from the Graduate School of
Agriculture, University of Tokyo in 1989, he became an assistant professor in the
Department of Agricultural Chemistry, University of Tokyo, and continued the study on
enterococcal pheromone. He got his Ph.D. from the same university in 1994. When he was an
assistant professor in the University of Tokyo, he worked in the Laboratory of Microbiology
(Dr. Antoon D. L. Akkermans and Professor Willem M. de Vos), Wageningen University in
The Netherlands from 1998 to 1999 and studied ‘Cell–cell communication in GI-tract
bacteria’. In 2001, he moved to Kyushu University as associate professor in the
Department of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Faculty of Agriculture, and is engaged in
the study of cell–cell communication in bacteria at present.

Tsukasa Ikeda graduated from the University of Tokyo in 1981. He received his Ph.D. in
1990 from Tokyo Institute of Technology. After working as a technical officer at Tokyo
Institute of Technology from 1982, he became an assistant professor at Tokyo Institute of
Technology in 1988 and associate professor at Hiroshima University in 1997. He has been a
professor at Utsunomiya University since 2002. His research fields involve bioorganic
chemistry, microbiology, bioengineering, host–guest chemistry, supramolecular chemistry,
and organic synthetic chemistry.
 4.08 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants
Hisakazu Yamane, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Kotaro Konno, National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, Japan
Maurice Sabelis, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Junji Takabayashi, Kyoto University, Otsu, Shiga, Japan
Takeshi Sassa, Yamagata University, Tsuruoka, Japan
Hideaki Oikawa, Hokkaido University, Sapporo, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.08.1 Chemical Defense against Herbivores 339

4.08.1.1 Introduction 339
4.08.1.2 Direct Defense of Plants against Herbivores 340
4.08.1.2.1 Secondary metabolites 340
4.08.1.2.2 Defense proteins 350
4.08.1.2.3 Temporally and spatially restricted distribution of defense substances 352
4.08.1.3 Indirect Defense of Plants against Herbivores 355
4.08.1.3.1 Offering food to carnivores 355
4.08.1.3.2 Attracting carnivorous natural enemies by using herbivore-induced plant volatiles 355
4.08.1.3.3 Mechanisms involved in the production of herbivore-induced plant volatiles 358
4.08.1.4 Coordination of Direct and Indirect Defense Responses 361
4.08.2 Antimicrobial Chemical Defense 361
4.08.2.1 Introduction 361
4.08.2.2 Constitutive Chemical Defense 362
4.08.2.3 Phytoalexins 365
4.08.2.4 Chemical Defenses of Plants 370
4.08.3 Phytotoxins 371
4.08.3.1 Introduction 371
4.08.3.2 Polyketides 371
4.08.3.3 Nonribosomal Peptides 373
4.08.3.4 Terpenoids 374
4.08.3.5 Macromolecular Phytotoxins 376
4.08.3.6 Perspectives 376
References 376

4.08.1 Chemical Defense against Herbivores

4.08.1.1 Introduction
An important component determining plant growth and reproduction is the defense against herbivores. Direct
lines of defense against herbivores have been well documented. In addition, several methods of indirect defense
have been noted in which the herbivores’ natural enemies are exploited.1–5 Initially, it was thought that both
direct and indirect defenses were constitutive in nature. However, evidence is accumulating that both direct
and indirect defenses can be either constitutive or inducible by herbivores. Furthermore, exposure to volatiles
emitted by neighboring plants also induces plant defense against herbivores (priming). Here, direct chemical
defense and indirect chemical defense of plants against herbivores are reviewed. A complete review is not
provided, but rather the processes of some examples are outlined.

339
340 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

4.08.1.2 Direct Defense of Plants against Herbivores

Plants contain a large variety of secondary metabolites that are not involved in primary metabolisms necessary for
maintaining life activities and survival. Over the last several decades, a number of studies, including the pioneering
study by Feeny6 on the ecological roles of plant tannins, have reported that many of the plant secondary
metabolites play important roles in plant defense activities against herbivores, including insects, mammals, and
snails. By 1980s, major groups of defense chemicals such as alkaloids, nonprotein amino acids, cyanogenic glyco-
sides, glucosinolates, terpenoids, coumarins, cardenolides, iridoid glycosides, tannins, phenolics, flavonoids, and
phytoecdysteroids became well known, and their defensive roles against insects have been well established.4,5,7,8
Since then, the discovery of totally new groups of secondary metabolites is rare; however, there is considerable
progress in our understanding of the modes of action of toxicity, target sites in herbivores, precursors of toxic
molecular species and enzymatic activation, plant tissues specialized in defense and localization of secondary
metabolites, inducible defense and induction of secondary metabolites in plants, evolution of the synthetic pathway
of defense chemicals, synergism of defense chemicals, and molecular-level adaptive mechanisms in specialist
herbivores. The progress made is mainly due to new experimental methods, especially molecular biology
techniques. Furthermore, it has become more apparent that plant defense does not depend fully on secondary
metabolites and that various defense proteins are also important. Such recent progresses as well as important basic
knowledge on plant defense based on plant ingredients both chemicals and proteins are discussed in this section.

4.08.1.2.1 Secondary metabolites

4.08.1.2.1(i) Alkaloids Alkaloids are a diverse group of secondary metabolites and more than 12 000
alkaloids have been reported from 150 families of plants and more than 20% of all plant species contain
alkaloids.9–11 According to Pelletier an alkaloid is ‘‘a cyclic compound containing nitrogen in a negative
oxidation state’’;12 however, recently other nitrogen-containing compounds not classified into other groups
of compounds, such as amino acids, amines, and cyanogenic glycoside, are sometimes classified as alkaloids.10
Alkaloids are quite diverse in structure and are classified into several groups: tropane alkaloids (e.g., atropine),
quinolizidine alkaloids (e.g., lupinine), pyridine alkaloids (PAs) (e.g., nicotine), indole alkaloids (e.g., harman),
pyrrolizidine alkaloids (e.g., senecionine-N-oxide), isoquinoline alkaloids (e.g., morphine), purine alkaloids
(e.g., caffeine), and polyhydroxy alkaloids (e.g., 1-deoxynojirimycin (DNJ), 1,4-dideoxy-1,4-imino-D-arabinitol,
and castanospermine), and other groups (Figure 1). Most alkaloids are derived from amino acids (predomi-
nantly ornithine, lysine, tyrosine, phenylalanine, and tryptophan), apart from those that involve insertion of
nitrogen into preformed skeletons, notably diterpene and steroidal alkaloids.13 This is also the case for sugar-
mimic alkaloids such as DNJ, at least in bacteria.14
The modes of action of different alkaloids are diverse. For example, nicotine binds to and affects nicotinic
acetylcholine receptors and shows toxicity. A recent molecular 3D model suggests that both acetylcholine and
nicotine bind to the same pocket formed in a nicotinic acetylcholine receptor.15 Morphine binds to and
activates opioid receptors, transmembrane-spanning G protein-coupled receptors, in the central nervous
system of humans.16 Caffeine, which is structurally similar to adenine, inhibits cyclic AMP phosphodiesterase
activity and inhibits the degradation of cAMP, thus exerting a toxic effect on insects;17 in human beings, binding
of caffeine to the adenosine A2A receptor induces wakefulness.18 Atropine binds to muscarinic acetylcholine
receptors, competing with acetylcholine, and blocks neurotransmission.19
Although many alkaloids exert their toxic effects by affecting the nervous system, there are other alkaloids
that show toxicity in completely different ways. Colchicine binds to tubulin and inhibits its polymerization, and
thus inhibits the formation of microtubules in cells.
A new and interesting group of alkaloids is polyhydroxy alkaloids, such as DNJ and 1,4-dideoxy-1,4-imino-
D-arabinitol (Figure 1), which are also called sugar-mimic alkaloids or iminosugars. Because polyhydroxy
alkaloids resemble the structures of sugars, they are very potent inhibitors of sugar-metabolizing enzymes.20
The IC50 values (the concentration necessary for inhibiting 50% of enzyme activities) of polyhydroxy alkaloids
for disaccharidases such as amylase, sucrase, and trehalase from human beings and many insects are as low as
104–106 mol l1.20,21 However, some plants contain polyhydroxy alkaloids in very high concentrations. For
example, the seeds of Castanospermum australe contain 0.06% of castanospermine,20,21 and the latex of mulberry
trees (Morus spp.) contains up to 2.5% (0.2 mol l1) of 1,4-dideoxy-1,4-imino-D-arabinitol and DNJ in
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 341

Figure 1 Alkaloids.

combination.22 The sugar-mimic alkaloids in mulberry latex inhibit both sucrase in the midgut, thereby
inhibiting sugar digestion, and trehalase in various tissues, thereby inhibiting the utilization of trehalose, the
major blood sugar in many insects, and thus mulberry trees are well protected from herbivores.23 However, the
silkworm Bombyx mori, a specialist of mulberry leaves, is tolerant to sugar-mimic alkaloid because they have
developed sucrase and trehalase that is insensitive to sugar-mimic alkaloids.23
Pyrrolizidine alkaloids are unique among alkaloids in that evolution of synthetic process, toxicology,
ecological impacts on herbivorous insects, adaptation, detoxification, sequestration, and utilization as defense
chemicals by insects are all well studied (Figure 2).11,24–26 The synthesis of necine base, the characteristic
structure of PA, starts from the synthesis of homospermidine, catalyzed by homospermidine synthase (HSS),
using primary metabolites spermidine and putrescine.24 Sequence data indicated that HSSs from Boraginaceae,
Asteraceae, and Orchidaceae have high homologies with deoxyhypusine synthase (DHS), an enzyme involved
in the post-transcriptional activation of eukaryotic initiation factor 5A (elF5A), and have evolved several times
independently from elF5A.24,25 Thus in this case, the key enzyme involved in the synthesis of a secondary
metabolite has evolved from an enzyme necessary for a basic biological function by change of function. After
several steps, necine base is synthesized. PA has two molecular forms: the protoxic free base and the nontoxic
N-oxide.26 In most plants, PA is stored as N-oxide produced by oxidation of free base. When herbivores feed on
a PA-containing plant, N-oxide is reduced into free base automatically and is then converted by cytochrome
P-450 monooxygenase of herbivores into an unstable toxic pyrrolic intermediate that alkylates cellular
nucleophiles (i.e., –OH, –NH2, –SH residues of proteins and nucleic acids); therefore, PAs show toxicity to
herbivores.26 Insects specialized in feeding on PA-containing plants have developed physiological mechanisms
to avoid the toxicities of PAs.26 For example, PAs absorbed in the form of the protoxic free base in the larvae of
the arctiid moth Tyria jacobaeae feeding on the host plant Senecio jacobaea (Asteraceae) were converted in
hemolymph by a specific NADPH-dependent monooxygenase into N-oxide form and then stored in the larval
342 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 2 Synthetic pathway and activation process of pyrrolizidine alkaloid.24–26

body, with about 75% in the integument. A chrysomelid leaf beetle, Oreina cacaliae, feeding on the PA-
containing plant Adenostyles alliariae (Asteraceae) is able to suppress the autoreduction of N-oxide in the gut
lumen and then absorb and store it in the body. The stored N-oxide functions as a reservoir for exocrine defense
glands. Any absorbed PAs in free base form are efficiently detoxified by glucosylation. A neotropical beetle,
Platyphora boucardi, has developed a completely different strategy to cope with and sequester PAs. The beetle
absorbs PAs in protoxic free base. Different from T. jacobaeae, the beetle does not have the ability to convert free
base into N-oxide; however, in P. boucardi, the protoxic free base is efficiently pumped into the exocrine defense
gland and the concentration of the free base in hemolymph is always low. Furthermore, females of Utethesia
ornatrix transmit PAs that have been transmitted by males during copulation to eggs for protection of eggs.27
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 343

4.08.1.2.1(ii) Nonprotein amino acids Nonprotein amino acids are amino acids other than the 20 amino
acids incorporated in protein (Figure 3). More than 900 nonprotein amino acids have been reported from a
wide variety of plants including Leguminosae, Liliaceae, Sapindaceae, Cycadaceae, Compositae, Rubiaceae,
and Lecythidaceae.28–30 However, nonprotein amino acids are most often found in legumes and are mainly
abundant in seeds.
The typical toxic mechanism of nonprotein amino acids is that they function as mimics of 20 protein amino
acids and are mistakenly incorporated in protein in the place of the corresponding protein amino acids similar
in structure, thereby leading to the production of unnatural proteins that cannot function properly. It is the case
with azetidine-2-carboxylic acid found in Convallaria majalis (Liliaceae), which is a mimic of proline, and a
legume toxin canavanine that occurs in the seeds of jackbean, Canavalia ensiformis, and Dioclea megacarpa in very
high concentrations (up to 6 and 10%, respectively), which is a mimic of arginine.8
Other nonprotein amino acids exert toxicity in different ways. For example, 3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
(L-DOPA), which is found in high concentrations (6–9%) in Mucuna seeds, shows strong toxicity to insects, but
not to mammals, presumably by affecting tyrosinase activity, which is important in the hardening of insect
cuticle.8 Mimosine, which was first isolated from Mimosa pudica and which exists in the seeds and leaves of
Leucaena leucocephala in high concentrations (8–10% dry weight in leaves), causes loss of hair in mammals when
fed.30 This phenomenon is explained by the fact that mimosine prevents initiation of DNA replication.31 The
fruit of Blighia sapida is consumed especially in Jamaica. The unripe fruits, however, are toxic, because
hypoglycine, which exists in unripe fruit arils in relatively high concentrations (0.1% dry weight), induces
severe hypoglycemia or very low blood sugar concentrations.29,30 In mammals, hypoglycine is degraded into
-methylenecyclopropylacetic acid and this compound completely blocks fatty acid oxidation; thus, sugar is
consumed intensively as the sole energy source and as a result all glycogen in the liver is exhausted, leading to
hypoglycemia.29,30,32
The above toxic nonprotein amino acids serve as defense against mammals and insects in general; however,
the herbivorous insects specialized in feeding on plants containing nonprotein amino acids have developed
physiological adaptation to nonprotein amino acids. For example, the larvae of the bruchid beetle Caryedes
brasiliensis, a specialist feeder of D. megacarpa seeds rich in canavanine, are able to avoid misincorporation of
canavanine into proteins, because the arginyl-tRNA synthetase of the beetle can discriminate between arginine
and canavanine.30,33

4.08.1.2.1(iii) Cyanogenic glycosides Cyanogenic glycosides are nitrogen-containing secondary metabo-

lites that have an ability to produce highly toxic hydrogen cyanide when degraded by plant enzymes. More
than 75 different cyanogenic glycosides have been reported from at least 2650 plants from 130 families,
including Euphorbiaceae, Rosaceae, Asteraceae, Passifloraceae, Fabaceae, and Poaceae.34–36 These compounds
are typically O--glycoside of -hydroxynitriles (cyanohydrins) and are kept in plant tissues. Linamarin and

Figure 3 Nonprotein amino acids.

344 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 4 Cyanogenic glycosides and release of cyanide.

lotaustralin are the two most commonly found cyanide glycosides and are reported from many plant families,
whereas other cyanide glycosides such as amygdalin common in Rosaceae plants and dhurrin often found in
Poaceae plants are more confined in distribution (Figure 4). Cyanide glycosides are synthesized from amino
acids.
Cyanide glycosides function as defense chemicals because they produce hydrogen cyanide, which is highly
toxic to most living organisms because of its ability to inhibit the electron transport system by binding to
cytochromes. When plant tissues are damaged by herbivory, -glycosidases that are kept in other tissues
separate from cyanogenic glycosides come in contact with and cleave sugars from cyanide glycoside and, as a
result, cyanohydrins (hydroxynitriles) are formed (Figure 4).34–36 Then, the cyanohydrins are degraded by a
second enzyme, hydroxynitrile lyase, into hydrogen cyanide and ketones (or aldehydes) (Figure 4), although
the last degradation occurs spontaneously but slowly.34–36 The details of compartmentation differ among plant
species. In the shoot of sorghum, Sorghum bicolor, dhurrin is contained in the vacuoles of epidermal cells, whereas
-glucosidase is kept in the chloroplasts of mesophyll cells and hydroxynitrile lyase is kept in the cytosol of
mesophyll cells.37 In cassava, Manihot esculenta, linamarin and lotaustralin are widely distributed among
tissues,38 whereas linamarase is concentrated in laticifer and latex39 and hydroxynitrile lyase is concentrated
in the cell wall of leaf tissues but absent in the root.40 As hydrogen cyanide is highly toxic to most animals
and insects, cyanide glycoside-borne defense systems are effective against most herbivores. Nonadapted insects
and mammals have limited ability to detoxify hydrogen cyanide by means of the enzyme rhodanese or
-cyanoalanine synthase, which converts cyanide ion into less toxic thiocyanate. Moreover, insects specialized
in feeding on plants with cyanide glycoside-borne defense systems can tolerate the toxicity, and some highly
specialized insects such as Heliconius butterflies can even sequester cyanide glycosides for their own defense
from predators. For example, the larvae of Heliconius sara sequester up to 1.5 mg CN dwg1 of cyanide glyco-
side, mostly epivolkenin, from their host plant Passiflora auriculata.41 The same larvae can further convert a
substantial amount of epivolkenin into the corresponding thiol compound sarauriculatin by enzymatic replace-
ment of the nitrile group by a thiol group.42

4.08.1.2.1(iv) Glucosinolates Glucosinolates are reported from a few plant families including Brassicaceae,
Capparaceae, Tovariaceae, and Caricaceae, most of which belong to the order Brassicales in APG II system of
plant taxonomy. In spite of their rather limited distribution, glucosinolates have been studied intensively
because Brassicaceae includes many important crops such as cabbage and rapeseed and an important model
plant species, Arabidopsis thaliana.
Glucosinolates such as sinigrin are molecules that consist of a -thioglucose moiety, a sulfonated oxime, and
a variable side chain derived from various amino acids (Figure 5).43,44 Glucosinolates themselves are not toxic
to herbivores and are widely distributed in plant tissues. On the contrary, the enzyme called myrosinase or
thioglucosidase is distributed in myrosin cells that do not contain glucosinolates. In the flower stalk of
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 345

Figure 5 Enzymatic activation of glucosinolates (a) and adaptation of specialist herbivores (b).

A. thaliana, sulfur-rich cells (S-cells) that exist between the phloem and the endodermis contain high concen-
trations of glucosinolates, and myrosinase exists in adjacent phloem parenchyma cells.45 When plant tissues are
broken by herbivory, myrosinase cleaves the -thioglucose moiety. The aglycones are unstable and further
degrade in most cases into either isothiocyanates or nitriles depending on pH and other conditions
(Figure 5(a)), although in rarer cases depending on R groups, thiocyanates and epithionitriles are formed.43,44
Isothiocyanates, which are also called mustard oils, are highly toxic and even lethal to most unadapted
generalist herbivores, especially to herbivorous insects,46,47 whereas nitriles are less toxic.46 Chemical condi-
tions have been shown to be important in determining whether isothiocyanates or nitriles are formed: acidic
conditions and existence of Fe2þ favor nitrile formation and alkaline conditions favor isothiocyanate
formation (Figure 5(a)).43,44 Recently, however, particular plant proteins associated to myrosinase are found
to determine the final product, nitriles or isothiocyanates. The epithiospecifier protein (ESP) found in a
certain line of A. thaliana promotes the production of nitriles, whereas another myrosinase-associated protein
EPITHIOSPECIFIER MODIFIER1 (ESM1) recently found in certain A. thaliana lines represses nitrile
formation and favors isothiocyanate production (Figure 5(a)).48 The herbivory by the larvae of generalist
lepidopteran species Trichoplusia ni or Spodoptera littoralis is greater on A. thaliana lines expressing ESP than on
those not expressing ESP, and is greater on lines not expressing ESM1 than on those expressing ESM1.48 It is
interesting that the larvae of small white butterfly, Pieris rapae, a specialist on Brassicaceae plants, adapt
themselves to glucosinolate-borne defense by modifying the final product to nitriles and inhibiting the
production of isothiocyanates by the activity of nitrile specifier protein (NSP) in the larval gut, and as a result
isothiocyanates are not formed and less toxic nitriles are excreted in feces (Figure 5(b)).49 The larvae of
diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella, another specialist species, adapt themselves with gut glucosinolate
sulfatase (GSS), which cleaves the sulfate moiety (sulfonated oxime) of glucosinolates and forms desulfoglu-
cosinolates (Figure 5(b)). The plant myrosinase cannot cleave the glucose moiety any more from
desulfoglucosinolates, and thus mustard oils (isothiocyanates) are not formed (Figure 5(b)).50
346 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

4.08.1.2.1(v) Coumarins Coumarins are chemicals that have a 2H-1-benzopyran-2-one structure.

Coumarins are grouped into simple coumarins, which have only two rings, such as coumarin, and those with
an additional ring on benzopyran-2-one ring. Those with an additional furan ring attached at the 6,7 positions
are called linear furanocoumarins, such as xanthotoxin, and those with an additional furan ring attached at the
7,8 positions are called angular furanocoumarins, such as angelicin (Figure 6).
Simple coumarins are toxic or deterrent to insects and are widely distributed among plant families, being
found in more than 79 families of angiosperms, whereas furanocoumarins are more restricted to a few plant
families such as Rutaceae and Umbelliferae.51 Furanocoumarins have a unique phototoxicity, which occur
under UV radiation. Under UV radiation, furanocoumarins crosslink both strands of DNA by binding to
pyrimidine bases. The crosslinking inhibits DNA replication and transcription, and thus furanocoumarins are
toxic to generalist insects under UV radiation.51 To avoid phototoxicity, some insects roll the leaves and feed on
the inside of the leaves, thereby avoiding UV radiation.52 Specialist insects feeding on furanocoumarin-
containing plants (Umbelliferae and Rutaceae) such as swallowtail butterflies detoxify them by P-450 oxyge-
nases. Angular furanocoumarins are more difficult to detoxify than linear ones,53 and some specialists can feed
only on linear furanocoumarin-containing plants. Further, in Umbelliferae plants, chemicals that inhibit the
detoxification of furanocoumarins and enhance the toxicity of furanocoumarin by inhibiting P-450 activity
coexist with furanocoumarin.53

4.08.1.2.1(vi) Phenolics and tannins Phenolics, including tannins, are found in plant tissues in very large
amounts. The concentration of tannin in oak reaches 5% dry weight in late summer and autumn.6,8 Tannins
bind to proteins noncovalently, precipitate dietary proteins, and inhibit many digestive enzymes, and therefore
inhibit the digestive processes and growth of herbivorous mammals and insects.8 Herbivorous mammals
adapted to tannin-rich diets secrete several kinds of tannin-binding proteins, such as proline-rich proteins
that precipitate with tannin as an adaptation to tannin.54
Phenolics not only exert negative growth effects by noncovalent interactions, but also by covalent interactions.
Oxidative enzymes such as polyphenol oxidases (PPO) and peroxidases (POD) oxidize phenolics, monophenols,
and diphenols into reactive molecular species such as quinones and quinone methides, which covalently bind to
nucleophilic residues in dietary proteins such as –SH, –NH2 residues of nutritionally important amino acids such
as cysteine and lysine, thereby decreasing the nutritive values of dietary proteins (Figure 7).55

4.08.1.2.1(vii) Terpenoids Terpenoids are chemicals that basically consist of isoprene (C5) units. Despite this
similarity in basic units, terpenoids are extremely diverse in their structures and biological activities and include a
large number of chemicals; at least 15 000 terpenoids are found in plants. Because of this diversity, terpenoids are
divided into several groups according to their structures and biological functions. For example, monoterpenoids
(C10) include volatile terpenoids rich in conifer resins, essential oil, and exudates of glandular trichome such as
-pinene, -pinene, limonene, and menthol (Figure 8), and confer defense on plants.56,57 Iridoids are also
included in monoterpenoids. Sesquiterpenoids (C15) include sesquiterpene lactones, phytojuvenile hormones,
and others; diterpenoids (C20) include clerodanes, tiglianes, daphnanes, and others; and triterpenoids (C30)
include cardenolides, cucurbitacins, limonoids, phytoecdysteroids, saponins, and others. As it is not possible to
describe all these diverse terpenoids, some characteristic groups of terpenoids are briefly described here.

4.08.1.2.1(vii)(a)Hormone analogues: Phytojuvenile hormones and phytoecdysteroids Insect develop-

ment is controlled by several hormones, for example, juvenile hormone (JH) and two closely related steroid

Figure 6 Coumarins.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 347

Figure 7 Activation of phenolics by oxidative enzymes such as polyphenol oxidases (PPO) and peroxidases (POD) and
reaction of activated phenolics with protein.

Figure 8 Volatile monoterpenoids often found in conifer resins, essential oils, and glandular trichomes that function as
defense chemicals of plants against insect herbivores.

molting hormones, ecdysone and 20-hydroxyecdysone (commonest in insects). JH III is important for main-
taining juvenile forms during molting and 20-hydroxyecdysone is important in molting and metamorphosis
(Figure 9).
From the balsam fir tree Abies balsamea, a sesquiterpenoid, juvabione (Figure 9), was isolated as a compound
that has a JH activity that causes the last instar larvae of European linden bug, Pyrrhocoris apterus, to molt into
nymphal-adultoid forms.58,59 Since then, a number of phytojuvenile hormones have been detected56 such as
juvocimene I and II from the sweet basil Ocimum basilicum.60,61
A compound that closely resembles the structure of molting hormone 20-hydroxyecdysone was first
reported from the leaves of Podocarpus nakaii in large quantities and was called ponasterone A (Figure 9).62
Starting from this discovery, more than 200 ecdysteroids have been found, most of which are from plants, most
often in ferns and conifers.59,63 These phytoecdysteroids have molting hormone activity and disturb the normal
development of insects and in many cases the insects die. In the flowers of Serratura inermis,
20-hydroxyecdysone is found in very high concentrations of up to 2%.64 In spinach, the amount of phytoec-
dysteroids increases in response to herbivory.63,65 Both the induction of phytoecdysteroids in response to insect
herbivory and the insect-specific toxicity of phytoecdysteroids support the idea that phytoecdysteroids are
defense chemicals against insect herbivory.

4.08.1.2.1(vii)(b) Cardenolides Cardenolides are a group of cardiac-active steroids that have a five- or
six-membered lactone ring and, in most cases, a sugar moiety, and are found mainly in plants belonging to
Asclepidaceae and Apocynaceae, such as ouabain (Figure 10) from an African plant, Acokanthera ouabaio
348 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 9 Insect hormones and plant analogues.

Figure 10 Ouabain, a cardenolide found in Acokanthera ouabaio (Apocynaceae).

(Apocynaceae), but also in plants belonging to Moraceae and other families.66 The latex of several plants
belonging to Asclepidaceae and Apocynaceae often contains very high concentrations of cardenolides.66,67 The
toxicity of cardenolides resides in their inhibitory activity against Naþ  Kþ ATPase (or Naþ  Kþ pump)
involved in maintenance of ion concentrations in cells and neurotransmission, and thus cardenolides are
generally toxic to animals, including insects.66,68 Cardenolides bind specifically to membrane extruding part
of Naþ  Kþ ATPase; however, several insect species specialized in feeding on cardenolide-containing plants
have developed cardenolide-insensitive Naþ  Kþ ATPase, which commonly have single amino acid substitu-
tions in target sites (cardenolide-binding sites).69
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 349

4.08.1.2.1(vii)(c) Iridoid glycosides Iridoid glycosides are a group of compounds that have a structure
related to iridodial (Figure 11).70 Almost 600 iridoid glycosides have been described from 57 families of
plants.70 Iridoids have been regarded as defense chemicals against herbivores and pathogens, since iridoid
glycosides generally have bitter taste and have antifeedant and growth inhibitory activities against insects.70
The observation of induction of iridoid glycosides in Lonicera implexa leaves bearing naturally laid eggs of the
specialist herbivore Euphydryas aurinia and the observation that iridoid glycosides such as secologanic acid are
present in these leaves in high concentrations (15-fold the total concentration, which is 15% of dry weight)
compared to other leaves71 support the idea that iridoid glycosides play a role in plant defense.
Iridoids are ecologically very interesting, because several insect herbivores from different families
specialized in feeding on iridoid glycoside-containing plants sequester iridoid glycosides in higher concen-
trations. The adults of checkspot butterflies, Euphydrias spp., feeding on iridoid glycoside-containing plants
contain as much as 9% dry weight of iridoid glycosides and are unpalatable to birds, and the larvae and
pupae are warning colored and gregarious,70 which are the typical characteristics of unpalatable insects. The
molecular mechanism of sequestration has recently been studied in leaf beetles (Chrysomelidae) by
feeding the larvae with structurally different artificial thioglucosides resembling natural iridoid glucosides
(O-glucosides).72
In spite of the above biological phenomena, the reason why iridoid glycosides show such effects are not
explained at the molecular level. Several studies have shown that at least some defense activities of iridoid
glycosides could be attributed to their unstable aglycones that have glutaraldehyde-like structures and have
alkylating activity against nucleophilic residues in biomolecules, in particular, amino residues in amino
acids, proteins, and nucleic acids (Figure 12).73,74 For example, two iridoid glycosides, aucubin and
catalpol, in Plantago lanceolata showed growth inhibitory activity on specialist fungus Diaporthe adunca
only in aglycone form and not in glycoside form.74 Oleuropein, a secoiridoid glycoside with a diphenolic
moiety, exists in high concentrations (3% of leaf dry weight) in Ligustrum obtusifolium and shows a strong
growth inhibitory activity against herbivorous insects after being activated by an oleuropein-specific
-glucosidase and by a polyphenol oxidase (Figure 12).73 Since the aglycone of oleuropein is a very
strong electrophile due to its glutaraldehyde and ,-unsaturated aldehyde structures, and covalently binds
to amino residues of side chains of lysine, which is an essential amino acid, lysine becomes unavailable and
privet leaves become nonnutritive to generalist insects (Figure 12).73 The specialist caterpillars that feed
on privet tree, such as Brahmeae wallichii, secrete high concentrations of free glycine, which also has amino
residues, in the digestive juice as neutralizer to prevent the loss of lysine by competing with the amino
residues in the side chain of lysine (Figure 12).75,76

Figure 11 Iridoid glycosides.

350 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 12 Enzymatic activation of oleuropein in the defense system of the privet tree Ligustrum obtusifolium and
adaptation of privet specialist insects.

4.08.1.2.2 Defense proteins

Recently, the importance of defense proteins in plant defenses against herbivores has become more recognized.
Although there have been some well-known defense proteins such as proteinase inhibitors (PIs), the progress in
studies on defense proteins had been slow until recently compared with those on secondary metabolites
involved in defense, probably because methodologies used in protein sciences and organic chemistry are
very different. For example, before performing bioassays of defense substances, the chemist often performs
leaf extraction with an organic solvent such as methanol; however, the same extraction may denature and
inactivate defense proteins irreversibly. Recently, DNA technology and gene expression analyses showed that
many genes are induced when plants are damaged by herbivores, and that quite a few of these genes code
defense proteins.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 351

4.08.1.2.2(i) Proteinase inhibitors Among defense proteins, the best known and widely distributed are PIs,
which are also called protease inhibitors.55,77,78 Serine proteinase inhibitors inhibit serine proteinases such as
trypsin and chymotrypsin, the major digestive proteinases in lepidopteran and a part of coleopteran insects, and
many of which are classified into Bowman–Birk inhibitors and Kunitz inhibitors according to the structures, but
some, such as potato inhibitors, are not included in these classes.77 Serine proteinase inhibitors are most
abundant in storage tissues such as seeds and tubers, and their concentrations reach a few percent of the total
protein. Legume seeds are a rich source of various serine proteinase inhibitors.
In foliage, the concentrations of serine proteinase inhibitors are lower than that in seeds; however, the
induction of serine proteinase inhibitors has been reported in many plants including tobacco and tomato, and
the inhibitors have been proven to function as a plant defense system.79–81 Leaf damage by the tobacco
hornworm Manduca sexta was much bigger in tomato plant line deficient in proteinase inhibitor induction
than in those that can induce proteinase inhibitor on herbivory.82
Some lepidopteran larvae such as Helicoverpa zea and P. xylostella adapt themselves to plant PIs by changing
digestive midgut proteinases from PI-sensitive ones to PI-insensitive ones when they are fed PI-containing
diets.83

4.08.1.2.2(ii) Amylase inhibitors Amylase inhibitors are found in the seeds of plants such as cereal grains
(wheat, maize, rice, barley) and legumes (kidney beans, cowpea, adzuki beans). Amylase inhibitors inhibit
amylases of insects in general and inhibit the growth of insects, and thus serve as defense proteins in both cereal
grains and bean seeds.77 Seed weevils not specialized in feeding on the kidney bean cannot grow on this bean
because their amylase is inhibited by amylase inhibitor in kidney bean, but seed weevils specialized in feeding
on kidney bean can feed on this bean because their digestive proteinase can digest and inactivate amylase
inhibitor in kidney bean.84 Seed weevils utilize cysteine proteinases (CPs) instead of serine proteinases as their
digestive proteinase, which enables seed weevils to feed on beans rich in serine proteinase inhibitors.55

4.08.1.2.2(iii)Proteinase Recently, proteinases have become recognized as plant defense proteins. In a

maize line resistant to a lepidopteran pest, Spodoptera frugiperda, a unique 33-kDa cysteine proteinase,
Mir1-CP, with chitin binding activity was found to accumulate in damaged foliage sites, move through vascular
tissues, and confer defense on maize, Zea mays.85,86 In addition to Mir1-CP in maize, it has been directly
demonstrated that CPs such as papain and ficin in the latex of papaya and fig latex, respectively, inhibit the
growth and are responsible for the strong lethal toxicity and defense activities of these plants against
herbivorous insects.87

4.08.1.2.2(iv) Polyphenol oxidases and peroxidase Polyphenol oxidases (PPO), which occur in many
plants together with phenolics, catalyze the oxidation of mono-, di-, and polyhydric phenols to quinones.55
Quinones formed by these reactions are active and covalently bind to nucleophilic side chains (–SH, –NH2,
TNH) of proteins and, as a result, lysine, histidine, cysteine, and methionine are lost from dietary proteins and
the nutritive value of the protein is significantly reduced (Figure 7).55,88 POD also catalyze the oxidation of
phenolics and, as a result, oxidation products such as quinone and quinone methides are formed. These
oxidation products also covalently bind to side chains of amino acids such as lysine and cysteine52 (Figure 7).55

4.08.1.2.2(v) Lipoxygenase Lipoxygenases (LOX), which are widely distributed in plant species and abun-
dant in legume seeds such as soybean, oxidize polyunsaturated fatty acid containing a cis, cis-1,4-pentadiene
moiety into conjugated dienoic hydroperoxides, which are further oxidized into epoxides, C6 aldehydes,
malondialdehyde, hydroxynonenal (an ,-unsaturated aldehyde), and jasmonic acid (JA), an important
elicitor of plant defense genes (see Section 4.08.1.3.3(ii)).55,81,89 These products bind covalently to amino acid
side chains (–SH, –NH2,TNH) and exert toxicity to insects including caterpillars and planthoppers.55,89–92

4.08.1.2.2(vi) Lectins Lectins are proteins that bind to specific sugars and are found in a wide variety of plant
species, but are abundant in legume seeds.93–96 Typical lectins have multiple binding sites in each molecule, and
thus they have cell agglutinating property, but some lectins have single binding site. Lectins from kidney
bean seeds (Phaseolus hemagglutinin (PHA)),97 lectin from wheat germ (wheat germ agglutinin (WGA)),98
352 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

and lectin from snowdrop, Galanthus nivalis (snowdrop lectin, GNA),92 are the three lectins whose chemical
characters and toxicity against insects have been intensively studied.93,95,96 PHAs specifically bind to -GalNAc
and GNA specifically binds to mannose. WGA specifically binds to GlcNAc (1,4) GlcNAc and chitin.93,96
Expression of GNA in a transgenic tobacco plant resulted in added protection against aphids, which suggested
that plant lectins could be useful in the development of crops tolerant to pests.99 PHAs and GNA bind to midgut
epithelia and the binding is supposed to be the cause of toxicity of lectin against insects; however, the detailed
mechanisms of toxicities are not clear.93,95,96 WGA is supposed to exert its toxicity by binding to or by
preventing the formation of peritrophic membrane in midgut lumen rich in chitin;100 however, the detailed
mechanism of toxicity is unknown.

4.08.1.2.2(vii) Jasmonic acid-inducible proteins: Arginase, threonine deaminase, and vegetative storage
proteins Recently, several proteins induced by JA, a plant hormone that plays important roles in the
induction of many plant defense responses and defense genes81 (see Section 4.08.1.3.3(ii)), namely arginase,
threonine deaminase,101 and vegetative storage protein (VSP),102 were proven to be plant defense proteins
against insect herbivores. In tomato, Solanum lycopersicum, JA-inducible arginase and threonine deaminase
degraded arginine and threonine, both of which are necessary for insect growth, and the tomato plant that
overexpresses arginase was more resistant to M. sexta larvae101 (Figure 13). VSPs, which are widely distributed
in plants such as soybean and A. thaliana, and are shown to be induced by JA, are found to have an acidic
phosphatase activity and have toxic effects to insects such as bruchid beetles and dipteran insects that have acid
gut lumen.102

4.08.1.2.3 Temporally and spatially restricted distribution of defense substances

When we attempt to extract defense substances, sometimes we assume that the substances are ubiquitously
present in plant tissues. However, recent studies show that quite often this is not the case. Without being aware
of this fact, we might fail to detect and extract defense substances. Here, three types of such defense systems are
introduced.

4.08.1.2.3(i) Enzymatic activation of precursors, compartmentation, and synergism of defense

factors Some defense substances are kept in plants as precursors that do not have biological activities
(or defense activities). The defense substances that are even hazardous and toxic to plants themselves are
often kept in plant tissues as stable and safe precursors. The enzymes that convert or activate the precursors are

Figure 13 Degradation of amino acids by arginase and threonine deaminase, defense proteins induced in tomato leaves
after insect herbivory.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 353

kept in compartments separate from precursors. When plant tissues are damaged and the compartments are
broken, activating enzymes come in contact with the precursors and activate them to bioactive forms.
Such compartmentation and enzymatic activation of precursors are commonly observed in several different
groups of secondary metabolites,103 which includes the activation of cyanide glycosides by -glucosidase and
hydroxynitrile lyase that produce toxic hydrogen cyanide in many plants such as sorghum, clover, and
almond34,35,37–40 (Figure 4), the activation of glucosinolates by thioglucosidase that produce toxic isothiocya-
nates or nitriles in plants belonging to the order Brassicales43–45 (Figure 5), the activation of O-coumaric acid
by -glucosidase that produces coumarin in white melilot (Meliotus alba),103 the activation of phenolics by PPO
that produce highly reactive quinones in many plants55 (Figure 7), and the activation of an iridoid glycoside,
oleuropein, by -glucosidase73 (Figure 12).
Not only defense secondary metabolites but also defense proteins may exist as precursors. For example,
papain, a cysteine proteinase that exists in papaya latex and recently found to have strong defense activity, is
kept in laticifer as an inactive precursor and within 2 min after wounding, it becomes active.104,105
To obtain precursors in stable form, preheating leaves in steam before extraction is essential to inactivate the
activating enzyme; however, in order to detect or reproduce bioactivity, activation of precursor by activating
enzyme is needed.73,106
In compartmentation systems (or precursor activation systems), precursors and activating enzymes work
synergistically to exert plant defense; however, other kinds of synergism were observed. For example,
chemicals that enhance the toxicity of furanocoumarin by inhibiting detoxifying enzyme of insects (i.e.,
cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase) coexist with furanocoumarin in plants.53

4.08.1.2.3(ii) Plant tissues specialized in defense and localization of defensive substances Defense
substances are not always distributed evenly throughout plant tissues. In practice, there are some tissues
specialized in defense against insects in which the defense substances are very abundant, whereas in other
tissues the defense substances are almost absent. Glandular trichomes and latex (laticifer) are examples of such
defense-specialized tissues.
Glandular trichomes are typically hair-shaped glands (some are peltate) on plant surface that exude solution
containing defense substances.103,107,108 Some glandular trichomes constantly exude solution, whereas others
contain solution and rupture when insects contact. The glandular trichomes are common in families such as
Solanaceae, Labiatae, and Asteraceae. The exudates from trichomes on tobacco leaves contain alkaloids such as
nicotine and anabasine, and are toxic to aphids and tobacco hornworm M. sexta.108,109 The resistance of wild
tomato, Lycopersicum hirsutum, to lepidopteran larvae is due to 2-tridecanone and 2-undecanone, both of which
are contact toxins to lepidopteran larvae and which are contained in the exudates of glandular
trichomes.107,108,110,111 Similarly, the exudates of peltate glandular trichomes in mint, Mentha  piperita, contain
essential oil consisting primarily of p-menthane-rich monoterpenes such as menthol, which are toxic to
insects.45,112 In both tomato and mint cases, the localization, characterization, and/or genes of synthetic
enzymes in trichomes have been studied in detail.111,112
Plant latex is a sap that is exuded from damaged vein. It is kept in a tissue specialized in exuding latex
called laticifer and is kept inside laticifer cells. It works as an efficient defense system against herbivorous
insects.113–115 Resin, which is kept outside the cells, and exudate, which is transparent, and the contents of oil
duct exudates are similar to latex in appearance and biological functions. Latex, exudates, and resin are found in
more than 35 000 species of plants.116 Latex has been shown to contain a wide variety of bioactive substances,
both secondary metabolites and proteins, in condensed form.113,116 Some of the latex substances have been
shown to be toxic to insects, such as cardenolides in milkweed latex,66 but the toxicities of latex ingredients
against insects have not been tested in most latex-exuding plants. However, recently, more and more latex
ingredients have been proven to have toxicity against insects and serve as defense against insect herbivores. The
ingredients of plant latex shown to have defense activities are as follows.113,116 Cardenolides or cardiac
glycosides, a group of glycosylated steroids that are inhibitors of Naþ  Kþ ATPase of animals, exist in high
concentrations in the latex of Asclepidaceae and Apocynaceae66,67 and are highly toxic to animals including
insects and serve as plant defense. Morphine and other alkaloids in the latex of poppy (Papaver somniferum) and
plants of poppy families, whose synthetic mechanism and localization have been recently elucidated in
detail,117 are toxic to animals. Furanocoumarins such as xanthotoxin abundant in oil duct exudates of wild
354 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

parsnip Pastinaca sativa118 are toxic to insects in general. Recently, high titer of CPs such as papain and ficin in
papaya and fig latex, respectively, are experimentally proven to be defense proteins that are highly toxic to
herbivorous insects.87 As CP and other types of proteinases are often found in plant latex such as latex of
Asclepidaceae species,119 those proteinases could also function as plant defense. Latex that exudes from
mulberry leaves, which have been used as a suitable host plant of the silkworm Bombyx mori, is recently found
to function as effective defense to nonadapted insects because of latex ingredients toxic to nonadapted insects,
namely high concentrations of sugar-mimic alkaloids such as 1,4-dideoxy-1,4-imino-D-arabinitol (D-AB1) and
DNJ (Figure 1), which altogether make up 2.5% of wet latex and 18% of dried latex, and a novel unidentified
defense protein.22 Latex-borne defense is unique in that even though the total amount of toxin that a latex-
exuding plant individual contains is small, and thus the average concentration of toxin is low, for herbivorous
insects small in size, a large amount of condensed toxin that moved through the laticifer rushes out at the very
point of insect damage immediately after the damage. This means that the amount of toxin that the insects
encounter and the defense effect of toxins in latex on insects would be much greater than those estimated from
average concentration. For example, the average concentrations of sugar-mimic alkaloids in mulberry leaves
are as low as 0.1–0.01% of leaf dry weight; however, herbivores feeding on mulberry latex would encounter
latex containing 2.5% wet weight and 18% dry weight of sugar-mimic alkaloids.22 Similarly, the average titer of
papain in papaya leaves is much lower than the lethal dose, and the titer of papain in latex that insects encounter
is much higher than the lethal dose.87
It is clear from the above discussion that if we do not know about the localization of defense substances in
specialized tissues like latex and glandular trichomes, adopt extraction methods disregarding the localization,
and rely on average concentration, we may underestimate or may even overlook the biological effects and the
existence of defense substances in defense tissues. On the contrary, the plant substances found in such defense-
specialized tissues are very likely to have roles as defense substances.

4.08.1.2.3(iii) Induction of defense substance The induction of defense substance (i.e., increase in the
amount of defense substance in response to herbivory) was first reported in 1970s, where PIs were found to be
induced in plant leaves after wounding and herbivory.79 At present, induction of defense substances has been
reported in more than 100 plant species belonging to 34 families,81 and the substances reported to be induced
include defense proteins such as PIs,79 cysteine proteinases (Mir1-CP),85,86 lipoxygenase,91,120 and secondary
metabolites involved in defense such as tannins,121 phenolics,121 tobacco alkaloids (nicotines),122,123 glucosino-
lates,124 and phytoecdysteroids.65 Now, induction of defense substances is considered a common phenomenon.
The extent of induction differs among each plant species and even within the same species. For example,
nicotine in tobacco leaves increases after herbivory only twofold the original concentration before herbivory123
and PIs are practically absent from undamaged tobacco leaves and increase to high titer after induction.82
It is generally believed that in condition where herbivory is regularly expected, constitutive defense is more
adaptive, whereas in condition where herbivory is expected only once in a while, it is better for plants to
produce defense substances when plants are damaged by herbivory, and when there are no herbivores, it is
better to invest resource to plant growth rather than defense. This idea is supported by field experiments using
plant disabled to induce defense substance by gene modification techniques, and comparing seed production
between plant deficient in induction and the control type.123
Induced defense reaction is also triggered by oviposition. When rice hoppers lay eggs on rice blades,
exudates containing benzyl benzoate exude around the eggs and kill them.125 Induction of defense substances
triggered by insect herbivory is partly reproduced by mechanical damage126 or application of insect saliva to
the leaves.127 Even though a single artificial damage using razor blade or pattern wheel may induce defense
substance, it was recently found that continuous multiple damages better mimic the damage of insects and cause
responses that are very close to real herbivory, and such continuous multiple damages and other types of
damage, different in magnitude, speed, and patterns, can be made using a mechanical caterpillar, MecWorm
that has been designed in a computer-programmed manner to very closely resemble the herbivore in damages
caused to leaves.128 In many plant species, insect damages induce a plant hormone, JA, that mediate the defense
responses in plants, including induction of many defense substances (see Section 4.08.1.3.3(ii)).81,126 Spraying JA
on plants can induce defense substances that are induced by insect feeding.65,81,126
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 355

Recently, using model plants such as A. thaliana, tobacco, tomato, and maize, the profiles of gene induction
after treatment such as insect feeding, JA application, and mechanical damage were intensively analyzed using
gene technologies such as microarray techniques.129–131 Some of the induced gene products (proteins) may be
involved in signal transduction, others in the synthesis of secondary metabolites involved in defense, and the
rest may work as defense proteins. In practice, gene products of two genes that had been known to be induced
by JA in tomato, namely arginase and threonine deaminase, were recently proven to function as defense
proteins by degrading amino acids in diets and by decreasing the nutritive value101 (Figure 13). Similarly, it is
likely in future that more novel defense proteins or proteins involved in the synthesis of secondary metabolites
involved in defense would be found among the products of such genes induced by herbivory, mechanical
damages, saliva treatment, or JA treatment.

4.08.1.3 Indirect Defense of Plants against Herbivores

Indirect defense of plants against herbivores is another type of defense that involves all the ways by which
plants enhance the effectiveness of natural enemies of the herbivores. There are three types of indirect defense
of plants against herbivores: (1) offering shelters to carnivores, (2) offering alternative foods to carnivores, and
(3) attracting carnivores by emitting the so-called ‘herbivore-induced plant volatiles (HIPVs)’. Because the
focus of this chapter is on the role of chemicals in plant defense, the second and the third type of indirect
defense will be discussed here.

4.08.1.3.1 Offering food to carnivores

Secretion of extrafloral nectar (EFN) is shown to act as an indirect defense against herbivores. EFN is used by
carnivorous natural enemies such as ants. Some plant species, including lima bean plants, increase EFN in
response to herbivory.132–135 Further, Heil135 reported that the production of EFN by lima bean plants
increased after the exogenous application of JA, which is an important plant hormone regulating a defense
signaling pathway against herbivores and pathogens. The components of EFN have been reported in several
plant species. For example, Choh et al.136 reported EFN of lima bean plants contained fructose, glucose, and
sucrose as major sugars. Interestingly, T. urticae-infested lima bean plants contained smaller amounts of sucrose
and larger amounts of fructose in EFN than uninfested plants. Whereas EFN provides fuel for survival and
search, plants can also provide predatory arthropods with alternative food containing nutrients (amino acids
and lipids) required for development and reproduction. Central American Acacia trees stand out as a landmark
example.137 Apart from providing nesting sites (in enlarged, hollow stipular thorns) to certain ants and nectar
from large foliar nectaries, they also produce protein- and lipid-rich organs called Beltian bodies on the leaf
pinnules. These food bodies are eagerly harvested by foraging ants and fed to their larvae. The ants in turn kill
insect herbivores, repel mammalian herbivores, and destroy plants interfering with the Acacia tree. A major
question is how plants benefit from producing such nutritive foods, even when they cannot prevent organisms
harmful to the plant from using it. For example, protein-rich pollen of several plants can be utilized by many
predatory mites (e.g., Iphiseius degenerans), but also by the herbivorous arthropods they prey on (e.g., Western
flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis). Despite the danger of herbivores reaping the benefits, plants still profit
because any surplus prey boosts predator populations and because pollen are usually provided locally, which
allows predators to occupy the site and repel herbivores. Thus, by the distribution of pollen over the plant,
plants influence the degree to which predatory mites can monopolize pollen as an alternative food source at the
expense of the herbivore. It is an entirely open question how plant-provided foods affect the motivation of
predators to capture herbivores. Nutritive deficiencies in the alternative foods could stimulate the predators to
maintain a predatory lifestyle.

4.08.1.3.2 Attracting carnivorous natural enemies by using herbivore-induced plant

volatiles
Plants respond to herbivory by producing volatiles that in turn attract carnivorous natural enemies of the
herbivores. These volatiles are produced by the plants as a specific response to herbivore damage or mainly as a
result of mechanical damage. These so-called HIPVs attract carnivores, which in turn reduce the damage
caused by herbivorous arthropods. These chemical alarm calls thus represent an example of induced indirect
356 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

defense of the plant against herbivores. HIPVs may vary quantitatively and/or qualitatively depending on
herbivore species, plant species, and growth conditions of plants and attacking herbivores,1,2,138 suggesting that
HIPVs may convey information on the status of damage of plants.

4.08.1.3.2(i) Tritrophic interactions of plant–spider mite–carnivorous natural enemy Spider mites

(Tetranychidae) are polyphagous herbivores that have a severe impact on plants due to their explosive
population dynamics in the absence of their carnivorous natural enemies such as predatory mites and
predatory insects. In many plant–spider mite–carnivorous natural enemy interactions, infested plants attract
natural enemies by producing a blend of volatiles – several terpenoids, phenolics, green leaf volatiles – that
differ from the volatiles emitted from intact plants. A well-studied example is a tritrophic system consisting of
lima bean plants (Phaseolus lunatus), herbivorous two-spotted spider mites (Tetranychus urticae), and
predatory mites (Phytoseiulus persimilis).139 In this system, infested lima bean leaves emitted more than 100
T. urticae-induced volatiles. Among them, linalool, (E)--ocimene, (E)-4,8-dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene
(DMNT), and methyl salicylate attract the specialist predatory mite P. persimilis140 (Figure 14). The
generalist predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus also preferred volatiles from lima bean leaves infested with
T. urticae than from intact lima bean leaves, but this predator was attracted by other volatiles such as linalool,
methyl salicylate, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (E)-2-hexenal, and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate141 (Figure 14). The predatory
mite N. womersleyi is attracted only to previously experienced plant volatiles and not to volatiles they have not
experienced.142 The predatory mites reared on Tetranychus kanzawai-infested tea leaves showed significant
preference for a mixture of three synthetic compounds (mimics of the T. kanzawai-induced tea leaves
volatiles: (E)--ocimene, DMNT, and (E,E)--farnesene)142 (Figure 14). However, mixtures lacking any of
these compounds did not attract the predatory mites. Likewise, N. womersleyi reared on T. urticae-infested
kidney bean plants showed a significant preference for a mixture of four synthetic compounds (mimic of the
T. urticae-induced kidney bean plant volatiles: DMNT, methyl salicylate, -caryophyllene, and (E,E)-4,8,12-
trimethyl-1,3,7,11-tridecatetraene)142 (Figure 14). The lack of any of the four compounds resulted in no
attraction.

Figure 14 Volatile compounds that attract carnivorous natural enemies of herbivores.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 357

4.08.1.3.2(ii) Tritrophic interaction of plant–herbivorous insects–parasitoid The volatiles emitted from

plants infested with caterpillars and aphids can also attract parasitic wasps of the herbivore. For example, maize
plants infested with the noctuid larvae Mythimna separata emit volatiles that attract a specialist parasitic wasp
Cotesia kariyai when volatiles from intact plants or artificially damaged plants are the alternative. These
attractive volatiles include terpenoids, green leaf volatiles, indole, oxime, and nitriles.143 The composition of
the volatiles is specific for the larval stage damaging the plant. Among them, a blend of four chemicals, geranyl
acetate, -caryophyllene, (E)--farnesene, and indole, elicited a response in naive C. kariyai, but making them
to learn to associate these volatiles with a reward did not enhance this response.144 A blend of five chemicals,
(E)-2-hexenal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, -myrcene, and linalool, which are known to be
released not only from plants infested with the host larvae, but also from artificially damaged plants or
undamaged ones, elicited little response in naive wasps, but making them to learn to associate these volatiles
and a reward significantly enhanced the wasp’s response.144 Both the host-induced and nonspecific volatile
compounds appear to be important for C. kariyai females in host location. A tritrophic system of the parasitoids
Cotesia marginiventris, host larvae Spodoptera spp. and maize plants is also a well-studied system (see D’Alessandro
et al.145 and citation therein).
Cabbage plants infested with cabbage white butterfly larvae P. rapae emit volatiles that attract a parasitic
wasp Cotesia glomerata.146 In this system, the attraction is not specific; the wasp is also attracted to either
artificially damaged cabbage plants or cabbage plants infested with nonhost larvae (P. xylostella).146 In fact,
Cotesia glomerata is attracted to products of the lipoxygenase pathway, that is, to green leaf volatiles such as
(E)-2-hexenal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate (Figure 14), that are induced in response to
mechanical damage of leaf tissue.147
Psylla-infested pear trees attract anthocorid predators by release of at least two volatiles, (E,E)--farnesene
and methyl salicylate.148 A similar example exists for whiteflies (Trialeurodes vaporariorum). They induce four
de novo emitted volatiles in beans and three of these elicit oriented flight and landing of Encarsia formosa when
offered in pure form, most effective being a mixture of (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol and 3-octanone.149 Plants infested with
aphids also emit induced volatiles that attract parasitic wasps. For example, Aphidius ervi females were attracted
to volatiles emitted from broad bean plants infested with host aphid Acyrthosiphon pisum, but not to those from
plants infested with nonhost aphid Aphis fabaei.150 6-Methyl-5-hepten-2-one, linalool, (Z)-3-hexenyla acetate,
(Z)-3-hexenol, (E)--ocimene, and (E)--farnesene separately attract the wasps151 (Figure 14). 6-Methyl-5-
hepten-2-one is most attractive and is found in the headspace of host-infested plants but not in that of
nonhost-infested plants.151 An aphid parasitoid Diaeretiella parae female is attracted to 3-benzyl isothiocyanate
of host plant origin.152 Some parasitic flies are also attracted to plant volatiles. Borneol attracts a tachinid fly
Cyzenis albicans in the field153 (Figure 14). A parasitic fly Exorista japonica is attracted to maize plants infested
with common armyworms (Mythimna separata),154 but the chemical nature of the attractants is now under
investigation.

4.08.1.3.2(iii) HIPVs affect neighboring plant’s indirect defense In response to volatiles emitted from
herbivore-infested plants (HIPVs), neighboring intact plants enhance either their direct defense (i.e., becoming
a less suitable resource for herbivores155–158) or their indirect defense (i.e., attracting carnivorous natural
enemies of herbivores159–162). Such responses of plants prior to biotic stress are called priming. A well-
studied example of the latter case is a tritrophic system consisting of lima bean plants (Phaseolus lunatus),
herbivorous two-spotted spider mites (Tetranychus urticae), and predatory mites (Phytoseiulus persimilis). Lima
bean plants infested with T. urticae emit HIPVs that in turn attract P. persimilis.159 When intact lima bean plants
are exposed to volatiles from conspecific plants infested with T. urticae, they become more attractive to
P. persimilis.159 This increased attractiveness was explained by the fact that uninfested lima bean leaves that
were exposed to volatiles from infested conspecific leaves could adsorb the volatiles and re-emit them.161 Choh
et al.136 further reported that HIPV-exposed intact plants produced more EFN compared to control plants
(plants exposed to volatiles from intact plants). It remains unanswered how the mechanisms involved in the
production of components of EFN differ between infested plants and HIPV-exposed plants.
Bate and Rothstein163 showed that (E)-2-hexenal induced several defense-related genes such as chalcone
synthase, AOS, and lipoxygenase 2 (LOX2) in A. thaliana. Arimura et al.164 also showed that (E)-2-hexenal or
358 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

(Z)-3-hexenol induced genes encoding basic pathogenesis-related proteins (PRs), LOX, or phenylalanine
ammonia lyase in lima beans. In addition, it has been reported that (E)-2-hexenal induced phytoalexin
accumulation in cotton plants (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Recently, Gomi et al.165 reported that (E)-2-hexenal
induced genes encoding AOS, LOX, and HPL, and (E)-2-hexenal enhanced resistance of citrus tree (Citrus
jambhiri) against Alternaria alternata. Vancanneyt et al.166 also reported that antisense-mediated deletion of HPL
in transgenic potato (Solanum tuberosum cv. Desiree) led to an increase in aphid performance. These findings
suggest that C6-aldehydes function as signals to initiate defense responses of undamaged plants.

4.08.1.3.2(iv) Do entomopathogens and non-arthropod insectivores use HIPVs as a signal? Predatory

arthropods (phytoseiid mites and heteropteran bugs) and parasitoid wasps have been best explored for their
responses to HIPVs, whereas other classes of natural enemies have received little attention. Some major
advances have been achieved recently with respect to entomopathogens. Van Tol et al.167 were the first to
show that indirect plant defenses also operate underground. They found that the roots of a coniferous plant
(Thuja occidentalis) release chemicals upon attack by vine weevil larvae (Otiorhynchus sulcatus) and that these
chemicals attract nematodes that parasitize weevils (Heterorhabditis megidis). Hountondji et al.168 were the first to
show that volatiles emanating from cassava plants infested with green mites (Mononychellus tanajoa) trigger
production of conidia, the infectious stage, in different isolates of a mite-pathogenic fungus (Neozygites tanajoae),
whereas volatiles from clean plants suppress conidiation. These opposing effects make sense in that the
entomopathogenic fungus tunes the release of conidia, the stage most vulnerable to environmental conditions,
to herbivore-induced plant chemicals that signal the presence of hosts.

4.08.1.3.3 Mechanisms involved in the production of herbivore-induced plant volatiles

There are several lines of evidence for an active role of the plant in releasing HIPVs: (1) whereas many natural
enemies are attracted to plants harboring herbivores as prey, herbivorous arthropods and some of the products
they deposit on the plant (e.g., feces, silk) can be eliminated as the source of volatiles found in blends of
HIPV;169 (2) the compounds identified in blends of HIPV have been reported to occur in plants;140,148,151,170 (3)
pathways for biosynthesis of compounds in blends of HIPV exist in plants and are shown to be inducible by
herbivory;170–172 (4) blends of HIPV are not only emanated from the leaf under attack by the herbivore, but are
also systemically induced by the plant;173–175 (5) application of the phytohormone JA to wild-type plants or
defense-signaling mutants (e.g., JA) leads to induction of volatiles similar to HIPV;176–181 (6) herbivore-induced
gene expression patterns in plants are similar to those mediated by jasmonates;181–184 (7) elicitors of HIPV
synthesis in plants have been found in the regurgitate/saliva of herbivores (N-(17-hydroxylinolenoyl)-L-
glutamine or volicitin) (Figure 15),185,186 -glucosidase,127,177 and inceptin (þICDINGVCVDA).187

4.08.1.3.3(i) Insect factors affecting the production of HIPVs One of the striking features of HIPV as a
means to attract natural enemies is that there are usually several compounds involved and that these mixtures of
volatiles contain a great deal of specific information: the plant provides predators with information that is
sufficiently specific to allow discrimination by olfaction. This hypothesis was confirmed by several stu-
dies.146,174,188–190 For example, De Moraes et al.189 carried out a study on olfactory responses of the
parasitoid Cardiochiles nigriceps to three species of host plants (tobacco, maize, and cotton) that were attacked
by two closely related herbivore species, the tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens) and the corn earworm
(H. zea). These authors found that tobacco, cotton, and maize plants each released distinct volatile blends in
response to damage by the two herbivore species, and that the parasitoid exploits these differences in odor
blends to distinguish infestation by its host H. virescens from that by the nonhost H. zea.

Figure 15 Volicitin from the oral secretion of Spodoptera exigua larvae.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 359

How do plants manage to respond differently to different herbivore species? One of the possible cues is in the oral
secretion of herbivores. In fact, several classes of elicitors of insect origin have been isolated. For example, volicitin
(N-(17-hydroxylinolenoyl)-L-glutamine) (Figure 15) has been shown to induce the production of HIPVs in maize
when applied to wounded parts.185 Volicitin is, however, not generally active. Leaves of lima bean, for example, do
not respond to volicitin with the induction of volatile emission.190 Other fatty acid conjugates have been isolated
from the regurgitate of several caterpillars.191,192 For example, N-linolenoyl-glutamine in the regurgitate of the
tobacco hornworm M. sexta was characterized as a potential elicitor of volatile emission in tobacco plants.189
The other elicitor of insect origin that induces the production of HIPVs is -glucosidase present in the oral
secretion of cabbage white butterfly larvae Pieris brassicae.127 Cabbage plants infested with P. brassicae larvae
attract a parasitic wasp C. glomerata. Although this plant emits the same volatiles as those emitted when damaged
mechanically, it does so in larger quantities and for a longer time. In this system, major volatiles involved are
fatty acid derivatives. The elicitor -glucosidase also induces the production of homoterpenes ((E)-4,8-
dimethyl-1,3,7-nonatriene and (E,E)-4,8,12-trimethyl-1,3,7,11-tridecatetraene) in lima bean plants and
maize.176 Recently, a disulfide-bridged peptide called inceptin (þICDINGVCVDA) was isolated from the
oral secretion of Spodoptera flugiperda larvae.187 Inceptin promotes ethylene production by cowpea and triggers
an increase in the defense-related phytohormone salicylic acid and JA.
Although elicitors from insect oral secretions have received special attention, the quality and quantity of
HIPVs may also be affected by insect feeding behavior such as continuous or interrupted leaf chewing, phloem
sucking, and even egg deposition.193,194 Recently, it was shown that continuous mechanical wounding was
sufficient to induce local as well as systemic emission of volatiles that are emitted as HIPVs.195 Thus, the role of
insect elicitors in HIPV production still remains largely an open question.

4.08.1.3.3(ii) Signaling pathways involved in the production of HIPVs in plants The oxylipin pathway in
plants (Figure 16) is known to be involved in the production of HIPVs. In the oxylipin pathway, an LOX
generates either 9- or 13-hydroperoxide from unsaturated fatty acids such as linoleic and linolenic acids.196 It
serves as a substrate for two main pathways in the oxylipin metabolism. One is the allene oxide synthase (AOS)
pathway, which leads to the formation of JA and methyl jasmonate (MeJA) (Figure 16). JA and MeJA play
essential roles both in the responses against biotic/abiotic stresses and in plant development.197 Further, JA and
MeJA are involved in the production of compounds regarded as HIPVs. Hopke et al.176 reported that most of
T. urticae-induced volatiles could be triggered by treatment of lima bean plants with solutions of JA.
Dicke et al.198 also reported that damage by T. urticae and application of JA had similar, although not identical,
effects on the composition of induced volatiles in lima bean leaves and the attraction of a carnivore (Phytoseiulus
persimilis). Ozawa et al.177 reported that in lima bean leaves, the JA-related signaling pathway is involved in the
production of volatiles induced by armyworms (M. separata and S. exigua). Furthermore, in corn plants (Z. mays),
JA triggers the emission of all volatiles that are known to be emitted in response to damage by S. exigua.176
JA and ethylene act synergistically in response to wounding.199 Arimura et al.200 found that lima bean plants
infested with two-spotted spider mites (T. urticae) showed emission of ethylene. Synergistic effects of ethylene
on JA-induced volatile production in lima bean leaves are reported.201
Another pathway is the fatty acid hydroperoxidase lyase (HPL) pathway. This pathway produces
C6-aldehydes and C12-oxo acids.202 C6-volatiles, including (E)-2-hexenal, (Z)-3-hexenal, hexanal, as well as
their corresponding alcohols or esters, are produced from mechanically wounded plant tissue.197,203
C6-aldehydes are also formed during hypersensitive response to infection by bacterial pathogens, after insect
feeding, and after exogenous application of JA.204,205 As already shown in this chapter, some of C6-volatiles are
known to be attractants of parasitoids and predators.
Salicylic acid (SA) is an endogenous signal implicated in eliciting plant resistance. SA is known to act as a
signal for systemic acquired resistance (SAR) in pathogen-infected plants.206 SA levels in resistant tobacco
increased in both the tobacco mosaic virus (TMV)-inoculated and uninoculated leaves of the same plant; the
rise in SA levels preceded the induction of PR (Pathogenesis Related) genes in the uninoculated leaves.
Exogenously supplied SA also induces the same genes as those that are activated systemically upon TMV
infection.207 Ozawa et al.177 showed that gaseous treatment of MeSA induces some of HIPVs in lima bean leaves.
They suggested that both SA signaling pathway and JA signaling pathway are involved in the production of
T. urticae-induced volatiles.
Figure 16 Phytooxylipin pathway.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 361

4.08.1.3.3(iii) Cross talks Ozawa et al.177 observed that the T. urticae-specific blend of HIPV from lima bean
plants is different from that induced by exogenous JA. They discussed the possibility that this specificity arises
from the interaction between JA and SA signaling pathways in T. urticae-infested leaves. In general, the
upregulation of SA biosynthesis suppresses the production of JA, which is required for the general stimulation
of induced volatile biosynthesis. Thus, the intensity of upregulation of SA biosynthesis might cause the blend of
HIPVs in T. urticae-infested lima bean leaves to be unique. The cross talk between JA biosynthesis and SA
biosynthesis caused by herbivory could be one of the important mechanisms for the production of herbivore-
specific blend of HIPV. Specificity of HIPV blends arises especially from cross talk and feedback between
different signaling pathways.

4.08.1.4 Coordination of Direct and Indirect Defense Responses

Effective plant defense requires coordination of direct and indirect defenses such that they do not interfere or
even act synergistically. A relevant example comes from studies by Baldwin,208 who wondered why the nicotine
defense of wild tobacco is downregulated by an ethylene burst following attack by young tobacco hornworm
larvae. He formulated three – as yet untested – hypotheses to explain this.
First, the hornworm larvae may suppress the plant’s nicotine response or they may reduce their food intake
and therefore run less risk to alert the plant’s nicotine response.
Second, the tobacco plant may improve the impact of its indirect plant defenses by reducing possibilities for
hornworm larvae to sequester nicotine as a defense against predators and parasitoids, and by slowing down
hornworm growth (through production of digestion inhibitors), thereby causing prolonged exposure of horn-
worm larvae to their predators. In this way, the plant saves fitness costs from investment in nicotine defense and
gains more protection from indirect defense.209
Third, the plant may suppress the nicotine response until the hornworm larvae reach a size (i.e., fourth or
fifth instar) where they impose a serious death risk to the tobacco plant and then switch to produce nicotine to
make these large larvae move to their neighboring competitors.210
These three hypotheses – herbivore stealth, indirect defense optimization, and herbivores as allies in
plant competition – do not necessarily exclude each other. If the plant first chooses to optimize indirect
defense against young hornworm larvae, it may switch to direct defense by the time the hornworm larvae
are large enough, thereby deterring the larvae and imposing immediate and present danger to neighboring
(Tcompeting) plants. This defense scenario is not likely to be general because the best scenario depends
on the efficacy of alternative defenses. There are examples of plants switching on direct defenses in
response to feeding by caterpillars even though this reduces the suitability of the caterpillars as hosts for
parasitic wasps.211,212

4.08.2 Antimicrobial Chemical Defense

4.08.2.1 Introduction
Higher plants produce a remarkably diverse array of secondary metabolites that are involved in defense against
pathogens,4 although antimicrobial proteins such as PRs213 are also involved in defense. Antimicrobial
secondary metabolites can be preformed in the plant, the so-called ‘constitutive antimicrobial compounds’,
or they are induced after infection through de novo enzyme synthesis, the ‘phytoalexins’.214 It is often difficult to
determine whether compounds are phytoalexins or constitutive antimicrobial compounds, as the distinction
between them is not always clear. In addition, some compounds are phytoalexins in one organ and constitutive
in another organ of the same plant species. Some of these secondary metabolites are implicated in defense
against not only microbial attack, but also herbivore/animal predation. Several books and reviews on consti-
tutive antimicrobial compounds and/or phytoalexins have been published.4,214–219 This section will focus
mainly on the chemical structures and distribution of constitutive antimicrobial compounds and phytoalexins
in higher plants. In addition, recent findings from biosynthetic studies of antimicrobial compounds will be
summarized.
362 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

4.08.2.2 Constitutive Chemical Defense

The first chemical barrier to microbial infection is the constitutive presence of antimicrobial substances that
occur in sufficient concentrations to represent a barrier to infection. The constitutive antimicrobial compounds
are largely divided into two groups, preinfection plant metabolites, which are normally present in concentra-
tions high enough to inhibit the growth of pathogens, and antimicrobial metabolites produced by plants in
response to infection, but whose formation does not involve de novo biosynthetic enzyme synthesis. The latter
metabolites are normally present in plants in an inactive, bound form, but are converted into the active form
after infection by means of a short and simple biochemical reaction such as enzymatic hydrolysis. VanEtten et al.220
suggested that all these constitutive antimicrobial compounds be called ‘phytoanticipins’, which can be defined as
low-molecular-weight antimicrobial compounds that are present in plants before challenge by microorganisms or
are produced after infection solely from pre-existing constituents. The structurally diverse array of constitutive
antimicrobial compounds can be classified into several groups such as terpenoids, nitrogen-containing com-
pounds, and aromatics.
Terpenoids: In Nicotiana spp. (Solanaceae), the diterpenoids sclareol, episclareol, and 2-ketoepimanool
(Figure 17) on the leaf surface have been identified as constitutive antimicrobial compounds.221 Another series
of diterpenoids, - and -4,8,13-duvatriene-1,3-diol (Figure 17), have been identified from N. tabacum leaves,
where they appear to play a role in resistance to blue mold.214,222 Diterpenoid resin acids such as
7-ketodehydroabietic acid and 7-hydroxyabietic acid have been identified from the needles of Pinus radiata
(Pinaceae) (Figure 17). These compounds inhibit both spore germination and mycelial growth of a pine
pathogen.214 The diterpenoid momilactones A and B accumulate in rice seeds,223 although they are induced in rice
leaves as phytoalexins,224 as described in Section 4.08.2.3. In rice, the antimicrobial diterpenoid oryzalide A
(Figure 17) and related compounds have been identified in healthy rice leaves, but were found to further increase
after inoculation with the pathogen Xanthomonas campestris pv. oryzae.225 The constitutive antimicrobial triterpe-
noids cucurbitacin I (Figure 17) and meliacins have been identified in Ecballium elaterium (Cucurbitaceae) and
Chisocheton paniculatus (Meliaceae), respectively.214

Figure 17 Structures of some constitutive antimicrobial terpenoids.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 363

Saponins are an important source of constitutive antimicrobial triterpenoids. The antimicrobial activity is
generally correlated with the sugar moiety glycosylated to the 3-hydroxyl of the triterpenoids. The ivy Hedera
helix (Araliaceae) produces two related saponins, hederasaponins B and C, which are stored in the cell vacuoles.
When ivy leaves are damaged by pathogen infection, these two saponins undergo partial hydrolysis, with loss of
the sugars attached to the 26-carboxylic acid group, to yield - and -hedrins, which are highly toxic to
pathogens. Further loss of sugar at the three positions of - and -hedrin results in sapogenins, which are
completely inactive (Figure 18).214 In addition to the ivy saponins, triterpenoid saponins have been identified
from many species, including oat (Avena sativa), Dolichos kilimandscharicus (Leguminosae), Rapanea melanophloeos
(Myrsinaceae), Primula sieboldii (Primulaceae), and Camellia japonica (Theaceae).214
Nitrogen-containing compounds: Many alkaloids showing activity against human pathogens have been
identified. Although it remains almost unknown whether these alkaloids play a role in defense of the
host plant against pathogens, some show activity against plant pathogens: for example, the indole alkaloid
gramine in barley leaves (Hordeum vulgare) (Figure 19) and quinolizidine alkaloids in Leguminosae
species.214

Figure 18 Release of sugars by hydrolysis from the hederasaponins B and C.

364 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 19 Structures of some N-containing, constitutive antimicrobial compounds.

The cyclic hydroxamic acid 2,4-Dihydroxy-7-methoxy-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one (DIMBOA) and its precursor

2,4-dihydroxy-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one (DIBOA) (Figure 19) form part of the defense against microbial patho-
gens and insects in the Gramineae. DIBOA is the main hydroxamic acid in rye (Secale cereale), whereas
DIMBOA is the predominant form in wheat (Triticum aestivum) and maize (Z. mays).226 The hydroxamic
acids, while not present in the seeds of cereals, appear upon germination in maize, wheat, and rye. Their levels
increase with age to reach a maximum a few days after germination in maize and wheat, and are higher in the
stem than in the leaf tissue.227 Five genes, Bx1–Bx5, that are involved in DIBOA biosynthesis are localized to a
6-cM region on the short arm of chromosome 4 in maize (Figure 20).226
Glucosinolates (Figure 19) are nitrogen- and sulfur-containing anionic natural products that have been
reported almost exclusively from the order Brassicales, containing Brassicaceae. They produce toxic products
such as isothiocyanates, thiocyanates, and nitriles upon hydrolysis by endogenous myrosinases, as described in
Section 4.08.1.2. In some cases, resistance to pathogens is associated with glucosinolate content, but some
pathogens do not cause enough cell damage to activate the glucosinolate–myrosinase system.228 Glucosinolates
are biosynthesized from aliphatic or aromatic amino acids. In A. thaliana, indole glucosinolates are biosynthe-
sized from tryptophan via indole-3-acetaldoxime, which is also a biosynthetic intermediate of the phytoalexin
camalexin.229
Cyanogenic glycosides, which are widely distributed in higher plants, are a bound form of toxic hydrogen
cyanide, which is released from the glucoside following enzyme hydrolysis.214
Aromatics: Several flavonoids, including pinocembrin in Populus deltoides, sakuranetin in black currant bushes
(Ribes nigrum, Grossulariaceae),230 and 6-isopentenylnaringenin in the hop plant (Humulus lupulus), are present
on the leaf surface and exhibit antimicrobial activity (Figure 21). The flavanone sakuranetin occurs constitu-
tively in the leaves of black currant, but is induced as a phytoalexin in rice leaves (Oryza sativa, Gramineae), as
described in Section 4.08.2.3. Flavan-4-ols occur in grains and leaves of Sorghum, and a positive correlation
has been found between flavan-4-ols and disease resistance.214 The isopentenyl isoflavonoids luteone and
wighteone (Figure 21) occur on the leaf surface of Lupinus species (Leguminosae).214 Stilbene glucosides such
as astringin (5,39,49-trihydroxystilbene-3-D-glucoside) and rhaponticin (5,39-dihydroxy-49-methoxystilbene-
3-D-glucoside) occur in the bark of sitka spruce (Picea sitchensis, Pinaceae) and are antimicrobial themselves,

Figure 20 Biosynthetic pathway of DIMBOA in Zea mays.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 365

Figure 21 Structures of some constitutive antimicrobial flavonoids.

while their aglycones have much higher activity.231 In the Rosaceae, the majority of plants are devoid of
phytoalexins; instead, many contain catechin-like phenolic compounds with antimicrobial activity.214
Others: Alkadienals and a number of epoxy and hydroxyl linoleic and linolenic acids have been identified
from wheat and rice leaves, respectively.214
Acetylenic compounds such as safynol are constitutive in some species of Compositae and Umbelliferae, and
are phytoalexins in other species (see Section 4.08.2.3). Antimicrobial long-chain alcohols, some of which are
acetylenic, have been identified in the skin of immature avocado fruits (Persea americana, Lauraceae).214

4.08.2.3 Phytoalexins
The term ‘phytoalexin’ was originally coined by K. O. Muller for plant-formed antibiotics that are synthesized
de novo after the plant tissue is exposed to microbial infection.232 A more recent consensus definition has gained
general acceptance: phytoalexins are low-molecular-weight antimicrobial compounds that are synthesized by
and accumulated in plants after exposure to microorganisms.220,233 Production of phytoalexins is also induced
by abiotic elicitors, including heavy metals and biosurfactants, biotic elicitors such as pathogen-derived
constituents (the so-called pathogen-associated molecular patterns), and ultraviolet (UV) light.
The pterocarpan pisatin was first isolated and characterized as a phytoalexin in Pisum sativum in the early
1960s.234,235 Since then, structurally diverse phytoalexins have been reported from more than 30 families of
higher plants. Much progress is also being made in studies on phytoalexin biosynthesis based on genomic
information.
Terpenoids: The sesquiterpenoid capsidiol has been identified as a major phytoalexin from several Solanaceae
species, including Nicotiana tabacum and Capsicum annuum236,237 (Figure 22). The sesquiterpene hydrocarbon
5-epi-aristolophene, a biosynthetic precursor of capsidiol, is biosynthesized from farnesyl diphosphate by the
action of 5-epi-aristolophene synthase (EAS) and is sequentially hydroxylated at C1 and C3 to form capsidiol.238
Two EAS genes (EAS1 and EAS2) and a P-450 gene encoding 5-epi-aristolophene-1,3-dihydroxylase (CYP71D)
were functionally identified from cDNA libraries prepared from elicitor-induced tobacco cells, with both EAS
and CYP71D being elicitor-inducible.237,239 In potato (S. tuberosum), production of sesquiterpenoid phytoalexins,
including rishitin, is induced in response to elicitor treatments and pathogen infection.236 In pathogen-infected
sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas) root tissue, various furanosesquiterpene phytoalexins, including ipomeamarone,
have been identified240 (Figure 22). The sesquiterpenoid phytoalexin lettucenin A was reported from lettuce,
Lactuca sativa (Compositae) (Figure 22).214
366 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 22 Structures of some sesquiterpenoid phytoalexins.

In Gossypium spp. (Malvaceae), sesquiterpenoid phytoalexins identified so far are cadinene derivatives that
are biosynthesized from -cadinene.241 CAD1-A and CAD1-C were functionally identified as sesquiterpene
cyclases that catalyze the conversion of farnesyl diphosphate into -cadinene242,243 (Figure 23). GaWRKY1 is a
transcription factor involved in elicitor-inducible CAD1-A expression.241 Gossypol, a major phytoalexin
in G. arboreum, is likely to be biosynthesized via 8-hydroxy--cadinene (Figure 23).244 CYP706B1 was
functionally identified as a cytochrome P-450 enzyme that catalyzes the conversion of -cadinene into
8-hydroxy--cadinene, with CYP706B1 being highly elicitor-inducible in suspension-cultured cotton cells.244
In rice (Oryza sativa), 15 compounds have been identified as phytoalexins in leaves infected with the blast
fungus Magnaporthe grisea or on UV irradiation. Except for the flavanone sakuranetin (Figure 21), they are
all diterpenoids. The rice diterpenoid phytoalexins are classified into four groups based on their basic
carbon frameworks: phytocassanes A–E,245–247 oryzalexins A–F,248–250 momilactones A and B,223,224 and
oryzalexin S (Figure 24).251 By analogy with known biosynthetic pathways of polycyclic diterpenes such as

Figure 23 Putative biosynthetic pathway of a sesquiterpenoid phytoalexin, gossypol.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 367

Figure 24 Structures of rice diterpenoid phytoalexins.

gibberellins,252 the common precursor of these molecules, geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGDP), is postulated
to be sequentially cyclized via ent-copalyl diphosphate (ent-CDP) to ent-cassa-12,15-diene and ent-
sandaracopimaradiene, leading to phytocassanes AE and oryzalexins AF. GGDP is also cyclized via syn-
CDP to 9H-pimara-7, 15-diene and stemar-13-ene, leading to momilactones A and B and oryzalexin S. By
utilizing the information from the rice genome database that was recently opened to the public, six diterpene
cyclases have been demonstrated to be involved in the conversion of GGDP into the four diterpene hydro-
carbon precursors via ent- or syn-CDP. OsCPS2 (OsCyc2) and OsCPS4 (OsCyc1) catalyze the conversion of
GGDP into ent-CDP and syn-CDP,253,254 and OsKSL7 (OsDTC1), OsKSL10 (OsKS10), OsKSL4 (OsKS4), and
OsKSL8 (OsDTC2) catalyze the conversion of ent-CDP or syn-CDP into the four diterpene hydrocarbons ent-
cassa-12,15-diene, ent-sandaracopimaradiene, 9H-pimara-7,15-diene, and stemar-13-ene, respectively
(Figure 25).255–258 These diterpene cyclase genes have also been shown to be induced by irradiation of rice
leaves with UV light and by treatment of suspension-cultured rice cells with a chitin oligosaccharide elicitor,
with the accumulation of all of their mRNAs peaking at 4–8 h after elicitor treatment.255,257,259 It should be
noted that OsCPS1 encodes an ent-CDP synthase involved in the biosynthesis of GAs, and that expression of the
OsCPS1 transcript was not induced either by UV light in the rice leaves253 or by a chitin oligosaccharide elicitor
in suspension-cultured rice cells.254
It has been suggested that cytochrome P-450s are involved in the downstream oxidation of diterpene
hydrocarbons, leading to the bioactive phytoalexins, by analogy to known biosynthetic pathways for the
diterpenoid gibberellins.258 On chromosome 2 of the rice genome, OsCPS2 and OsKSL7 are closely located.
Similarly, on chromosome 4, OsKSL4 is located near OsCPS4. In addition, several chitin oligosaccharide-inducible
P-450s have been found near the cyclase genes on chromosomes 2 and 4.256 In fact, it was shown that a 168-kb
gene cluster on chromosome 4 encodes, in addition to OsCPS4 and OsKSL4, momilactone A synthase
(a dehydrogenase named OsMAS) and two cytochrome P-450s, either or both of which are involved in
momilactone biosynthesis.260 These results suggest that phytocassane and momilactone biosynthesis genes are
clustered on chromosomes 2 and 4, respectively. Phytocassanes and momilactones are major representatives of
four distinct types of diterpenoid phytoalexins in rice. Although the biological significance of gene clusters in the
synthesis of secondary metabolites is not clear, such gene clusters might contribute to efficient
coordinated expression of the genes after elicitation, followed by production of high levels of diterpenoid
phytoalexins.
368 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 25 Biosynthetic pathways of gibberellins and diterpenoid phytoallexins in rice.

Figure 26 Structures of some N-containing phytoalexins.

Nitrogen-containing compounds: Anthranilate derivatives, such as avenanthramides, and avenalmin I, II, and III
have been reported in A. sativa (Gramineae) (Figure 26).261,262
In the Brassicaceae, sulfur-containing indole phytoalexins such as brassinin, camalexin, and their derivatives
have been identified (Figure 26).214 Within this family, A. thaliana is a useful plant to investigate biological roles
and regulatory mechanisms of phytoalexins, because the plant appears to produce only camalexin. In addition,
the Arabidopsis genome database is open to the public, and useful genetic tools such as mutant lines and gene
chips are readily available for A. thaliana.
Camalexin was originally isolated from the leaves of the crucifer Camelina sativa infected with Alternaria
brassicae.263 Infection of A. thaliana leaves with both biotrophic and necrotrophic pathogens induces
camalexin production.229 Camalexin originates from tryptophan via indole-3-acetaldoxime (IAOx) and
(S)-dihydrocamalexic acid (Figure 27). IAOx is also an intermediate of the indole glucosinolates that are
constitutively formed in A. thaliana and the auxin indole-3-acetic acid (IAA). Synthesis of IAOx from
tryptophan is catalyzed by P-450 enzymes CYP79B2 and CYP79B3.264 Expression of the CYP79B2 transcript
was elicitor (silver nitrate)-inducible, but that of the CYP79B3 transcript was not elicitor-inducible. A cyp79B2/
cyp79B3 double knockout mutant was shown to be devoid of both camalexin and indole glucosinolates, and
could only synthesize reduced levels of IAA.265 The camalexin-deficient mutants pad1–pad5 were isolated266,267
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 369

Figure 27 Biosynthetic pathway of camalexin.

and PAD3 was shown to encode the P-450 enzyme CYP71B15, which catalyzes the last step in camalexin
biosynthesis, the conversion of (S)-dihydrocamalexic acid into camalexin.268 PAD2 was shown to encode
-glutamylcysteine synthetase 1 involved in glutathione biosynthesis,269 suggesting the involvement of glu-
tathione in camalexin biosynthesis, either as a regulatory component or as a biosynthetic precursor of the
thiazole ring moiety of camalexin. PAD4 encodes a lipase-like protein270 that acts upstream from SA to affect
expression of the pathogenesis-related protein gene PR-1 and camalexin synthesis.271 The cytochrome P-450
genes CYP79B2 and CYP79B15 (PAD3) involved in camalexin biosynthesis and the tryptophan biosynthetic
gene ASA1 (anthranilate synthase) are transcriptionally induced by P. syringe infection. Camalexin synthesis and
the induction of CYP79B2, PAD3, and ASA1 were strictly colocalized with the infection site of Alternaria alternata,
a potent camalexin inducer.272
Aromatics: In the Leguminosae, most phytoalexins are isoflavonoids. These phytoalexins have been identified
mainly in the leaves of herbaceous members of the Leguminosae, and include pisatin, kievitone, and glyceollin I
in Pisum sativum, Phaseolus vulgaris, and Glycine max, respectively (Figure 28). Pisatin is biosynthesized from
6a-hydroxymaackian by 6a-hydroxymaackian 3-O-methyltransferase (HMM). Wu et al.273 reported isolation
and characterization of two HMM cDNA clones (pHMM1 and pHMM2) created from RNA obtained from
pathogen-infected pea tissue; the deduced amino acid sequences of HMM1 and HMM2 were highly homo-
logous to each other.
Gramineae species also produce flavonoid phytoalexins. The flavanone sakuranetin (Figure 21) is a major
phytoalexin in rice leaves,274 although this compound is constitutive in black currant leaves, as described in
Section 4.08.2.2. S. bicolor produces 3-deoxyanthocyanidins such as luteolinidin and apigeninidin (Figure 29) in
response to fungal infection.275
In carrot, Daucus carota (Umbelliferae), 6-methoxymellein was identified as a phytoalexin (Figure 29). It is
biosynthesized by 6-hydroxymellein-O-methyltransferase from 6-hydroxymellein, which is biosynthesized
from 1 mol of acetyl coenzyme A (CoA) and 4 mol of malonyl-CoA by a polyketide biosynthetic enzyme,
6-hydroxymellein hydroxylase.276,277
Hydroxystilbenes such as resveratrol (Figure 29) have been identified in several unrelated families,
including the grapevine Vitis vinifera (Vitaceae), peanut Arachis hypogaea (Leguminosae), Veratrum grandifolia

Figure 28 Structures of some isoflavonoid phytoalexins.

370 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 29 Structures of some typical aromatic phytoalexins.

(Liliaceae), and Festuca versuta (Gramineae). Constitutive overexpression of a grapevine stilbene synthase gene
in tobacco and alfalfa resulted in increased resistance to pathogens.219,278
In the banana Musa acuminata (Musaceae), a series of novel phenalenone-type compounds, including irenolone
and 2-(49-hydroxyphenyl)-1,8-naphthalenedicarboxylic anhydride, have been identified (Figure 29).279,280 In the
Compositae, acetophenone derivatives in yacon (Polymnia sonchifolia)214 and the coumarins scopoletin and ayapin in
sunflower (Helianthus annuus)281 have been reported (Figure 29).
Others: In the Compositae, acetylenic compounds such as safynol and dehydrosafynol in safflower (Carthamus
tinctorius)282 and (E)- and (Z)-mycosinol in corn marigold (Coleostephus myconis)283 have been reported
(Figure 30).

4.08.2.4 Chemical Defenses of Plants

Antimicrobial plant metabolites that function as chemical barriers against pathogens are divided into consti-
tutive compounds and phytoalexins. These two types of chemical barriers are likely to cooperatively function
as defense systems against pathogens, together with other defenses. Although induction of phytoalexin
production under stressed conditions, including pathogen infection, is general within the flowering plants,
and a variety of compounds have been identified as phytoalexins from over 30 families, there are also many
plants in which phytoalexin production is not induced. For example, a survey of Rosaceae leaf tissue indicated a
relatively low frequency of phytoalexins, with no more than 15% of species forming phytoalexins. Constitutive
barriers might be well developed in such leaves.214 In the Cucurbitaceae, phytoalexins have not been reported,
but these plants appear to respond to pathogen infection by SAR, in which the resistance is provided by
antimicrobial proteins, including PRs,216 although SAR is also a general defense mechanism throughout the
higher plants.

Figure 30 Structures of some acetylenic phytoalexins.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 371

Several model plants, including O. sativa, A. thaliana, Z. mays, G. max, and Medicago truncatula, for which
genome information is currently available,219 are a rich source of antimicrobial metabolites. Genetic and
reverse genetic approaches are providing evidence for the biological importance of antimicrobial compounds
in host defense mechanisms.

4.08.3 Phytotoxins
4.08.3.1 Introduction
Microbial pathogenesis in plants is an intricate developmental process requiring biological components found
in most microorganisms, as well as factors that are unique to microbial species that participate in particular
microorganism–plant interactions. Toxic substances isolated from plant pathogens are often called phytotoxins.
In many cases, it is known that phytotoxins play an important role in disease development causing chlorosis,
necrosis, or wilting.4,284 Because of agricultural importance, crop–phytopathogenic microbe interaction is
studied extensively and is one of the well-studied examples of plant–microbe relationship. In some cases,
phytotoxins also participate in particular microorganism–plant interactions. This type of phytotoxin is called
host-specific or host-selective toxin (HST)285 to distinguish from host nonselective toxin. HST reproduces the
symptom of disease and the ability to produce phytotoxins is strongly related to virulence. The phytotoxins are
usually isolated from fermentation media with the guidance of appropriate bioassay using host plants. In the last
decade, significant progress has been made in elucidating phytotoxin biosynthetic genes, which are usually
clustered on chromosomes. The study on biosynthetic gene cluster of phytotoxins provides information on
transcriptional regulation of gene expression, transport of pathway products, and self-resistance mechanism.
Similar to other natural products, phytotoxins are classified on the basis of their structural types considering
their biosynthetic pathways. Among various phytotoxin families, polyketides including aromatic and reduced
polyketides, peptides including diketopiperazines, and terpenes are most frequently described in the literature.
In this section, representative phytotoxins that are well-characterized biosynthetically and physiologically will
be introduced.

4.08.3.2 Polyketides
Fungal polyketide synthase (PKS)286 is a large protein and consists of a single set of module containing a keto
synthase (KS), an acyltransferase (AT), a thioesterase/Claisen cyclase (TE/CYC), and two acyl carrier protein
(ACP) domains. This enzyme catalyzes the condensation of malonyl CoA and enzyme-bound acyl group to
afford complex fatty acid possessing methyl substituent and various functional groups. Interestingly, fungal
type-I PKS produces both aromatic and reduced polyketides contrary to bacterial PKSs, which are divided into
type-I and type-II for reduced and aromatic ones.
Cochliobolus heterostrophus (Helminthosporium maydis) race T, the causal agent of southern corn leaf blight,
produces polyketol of a long carbon chain polyketide (C41) T-toxin (or HMT-toxin).287 High virulence of this
fungus on T-cytoplasm maize is responsible for the production of host-selective toxin T-toxin. Production of
T-toxin requires PKS1 and a decarboxylase DEC1.288 Recently, the second PKS gene (PKS2) has been
identified. It is speculated that rather long backbone of T-toxin is constructed by two separate PKSs using
one of the products as a starter unit of the second PKS (Figure 31).
Cercosporin289 is a light-activated, nonhost-selective toxin produced by many Cercospora fungal species. The
dimeric perylenequinone structure indicates that cercosporin is a typical aromatic polyketide biosynthesized by
iterative type-I PKS.290 This toxin acts as a photosensitizer that activates molecular oxygen in the presence of
light,289 and the resultant reactive oxygen species causes oxidative damage to cells. Studies on toxin-deficient
mutants and on the involvement of light in symptom development have demonstrated the importance of this
toxin in diseases by Cercospora pathogen. Interestingly, light is the primary signal to trigger cercosporin
biosynthesis.
Another fungal pathogen Alternaria produces a variety of nonhost-selective phytotoxins291 such as aromatic
polyketides (alternariol, zinniol) and reduced polyketides (alternaric acid, solanapyrones). Alternaric acid292
isolated from Alternaria solani shows unique physiological effects on the hypersensitive cell death of potato
372 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 31 Structures of polyketide

cells.293 The causal fungi of potato early blight Alternaria solani produce solanapyrones,294 which are also known
as specific inhibitors of DNA polymerase .295 Solanapyrone is the first demonstrated example biosynthesized
via enzymatic Diels–Alder reaction.296 Recently, a biosynthetic gene cluster of solanapyrones has been
identified297(Figure 32).
In addition to those host nonselective toxins, Alternaria pathogens produce a number of host-selective toxins
such as AK-toxin, AF-toxin, and ACT-toxin.298 9,10-Epoxy-8-hydroxy-9-methyldecatrienoic acid, the com-
mon backbone of these toxins, was biosynthesized via the polyketide pathway. Genetic approach has allowed
the identification of a gene cluster for AF-toxin biosynthesis.299

Figure 32 Structures of polyketide phytotoxins (continued).

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 373

Host-selective sphinganine-like phytotoxin AAL-toxin298 produced by Alternaria alternata f. sp. lycopersici, a causal
fungus of tomato stem canker disease, reproduces symptoms similar to those of the disease for susceptible genotype of
tomato leaf in concentrations less than 10 ng ml1.300 Interestingly, AAL-toxin and its structural analogue fumonisin,
which is known as a mycotoxin, are phytotoxic to tomato and are cytotoxic to cultured mammalian cells due to
apoptosis induced by inhibition of ceramide synthase.301 Similar overlapping toxicity between plants and animals has
been reported in the case of phytotoxins (and also mycotoxin) such as tricothecenes302 and cytochalasins.303
Nonhost-selective toxin coronatine was originally isolated as a chlorosis-inducing factor from Italian
ryegrass infected with Pseudomonas syringae pv. atropurpurea304 and contributes to virulence in several host–
pathogen interactions.305 Later, it was found that coronatine showed very similar, but stronger, activities to that
of the phytohormone JA.306 Its potency of biological activities is attributed to fixing the cis configuration of
cyclopentane ring, which is easy to isomerize trans in the case of JA.
The biosynthetic pathway of coronatine has been extensively studied. The coronafacic acid moiety is
proposed to be constructed by bacterial modular type-I PKS via 5-oxocyclopentene carboxylic acid. A recent
study clarified the detailed mechanism of the formation of highly unusual cyclopropane amino acid via
307
D-3-chloroalloisoleucine (enzyme-bound form).

4.08.3.3 Nonribosomal Peptides

Fungi and bacteria produce various phytotoxic cyclic peptides using nonribosomal peptide synthetase
(NRPS).308 Similar to modular organization of PKS, NRPS consists of several modules containing condensation
(C), adenylation (A), and thiolation (T) domains.
Alternaria alternata apple pathotype (previously described as A. mali Roberts) causes Alternaria blotch of
susceptible apple cultivars through production of a cyclic peptide host-selective toxin, AM-toxin, whose
complete structure has been determined for the first time among host-specific toxins.298 Disruption of
AM-toxin synthetase (AMT) gene resulted in toxin-minus mutants, which were also unable to cause disease
symptoms in susceptible apple cultivars, indicating that AMT is a primary determinant of virulence and
specificity in the A. alternata apple pathotype309 (Figure 33).

Figure 33 Structures of nonribosomal peptide phytotoxins.

374 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Maize Helminthosporium leaf spot is caused by Cochliobolus carbonum race 1, a fungal pathogen whose infection
is dependent on the production of a cyclic depsipeptide HC-toxin. HC-toxin consists of a family of four related
compounds the most abundant of which is a cyclic depsitetrapeptide. In the backbone biosynthesis of HC-toxin,
NRPS (HTS1), encoding a large peptide synthetase of about 574 kDa, and PKS (TOXC) are required, which
are responsible for depsipeptide formation and biosynthesis of unusual amino acid, respectively.310
Nontoxigenic mutants that are avirulent for maize lines susceptible to the wild type are obtained only if
both copies are disrupted.311
Pseudomonas syringae parasitizes a wide variety of plant species and is divided into more than 50 different
pathovars (pv.) based on host preference.312 In many P. syringae pv., nonhost-selective phytotoxins are
produced, which induce chlorotic and necrotic symptoms in various host plants. For example, strain B301D
(a pathogen of pear) of P. syringae pv. syringae produced cyclic depsipeptide syringomycin,313 whereas strain
SY12 (lilac blights) produced structurally related analogue syringostatin.314 Their roles in disease development
are extensively studied. Halogenation at the aliphatic carbon is a rare transformation in the biosynthesis of
natural products. The detailed mechanism of halogenation with syrB1 and syrB2 in the biosynthetic gene cluster
of syringomycin E has been elucidated.315
Streptomyces pathogens are quite rare in plant diseases. Thaxtomin A from Streptomyces scabies causes scab
disease of potato, which is characterized by conspicuous corky lesions on tubers. Molecular genetic investiga-
tion has revealed that thaxtomins are biosynthesized by nonribosomal peptide synthetases (txtAB) that condense
modified L-phenylalanyl and L-4-nitrotryptophanyl units to form a 2,5-dioxopiperazine skeleton.316 Disruption
of txtA results in the formation of nonpathogenic strain. This toxin is shown to affect the movement of calcium
ions and protons across the plasma membrane and also inhibit cellulose biosynthesis.317

4.08.3.4 Terpenoids
Terpenoid phytotoxins, including diverse fungal diterpenoids and sesquiterpenoids, are produced by many
phytopathogenic fungi. In general, the biosynthesis of terpenes starts with the formation of the molecular
skeleton with terpene cyclase to afford cyclic hydrocarbon, which is usually hydroxylated and subsequently
modified by alkylation, acylation, and glycosylation. Some of these phytotoxins show useful biological activity,
and are used as plant growth regulators in agriculture and as biochemical agents for plant and cell physiology
(Figure 34).
Diterpene glucoside fusicoccin is produced by Phomopsis (Fusicoccum) amygdali as a principal toxin implicated
in the wilting disease of almond and peach in Italy, and a fusicoccin-producing P. amygdali Niigata 2 is newly
found in a peach Fusicoccum canker fungus in Japan. Fusicoccin A shows potent phytohormone-like activities
and is used as a biochemical agent for plant physiology. It permanently activates plasma membrane
Hþ-ATPase in all higher plants and its mode of action is investigated by X-ray crystallographic analysis of
the ternary complex of a plant 14-3-3 adapter protein, fusicoccin, and a synthetic phosphopeptide of the
C-terminus of Hþ-ATPase.318 Current biosynthetic studies of fusicoccin aglycone indicate the presence of the
genuine biosynthetic tricyclic hydrocarbon intermediate (þ)-fusicocca-2,10(14)-diene in the mycelia of

Figure 34 Structures of terpenoid phytotoxins.

 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 375

P. amygdali Niigata 2.319 Cloning of fusicoccadiene synthase gene and its expression allowed elucidation of the
highly unusual multistep conversion of C5 isoprene units into fusicoccadiene, showing that fusicoccadiene
synthase possesses both prenyltransferase and terpene cyclase activities.320 Fusicoccin biosynthetic gene cluster
has been identified by chromosomal walking. In connection with structure and bioactivities of fusicoccin, its
sole congener cotylenin A, a plant growth regulator isolated from a fungus Cladosporium sp. 501-7W, is originally
characterized as a potent differentiation-inducing substance in mammalian cells and an antitumor agent against
human lung carcinoma cells.321
The plant hormones gibberellins GA1/3 and GA4 are produced by Gibberella fujikuroi, a Bakanae disease
fungus of rice, and Sphaceloma manihoticola, a super-elongation disease fungus of cassava, respectively. Fungal
gibberellins GA3 and GA4 are used as plant growth regulators for horticultural production. The biosynthesis of
gibberellins in G. fujikuroi is determined at the molecular level; biosynthetic enzymes responsible for GA1
formation include only ent-kaurene synthase and four cytochrome P-450 enzymes.322 This pathway is totally
different from the corresponding plant counterpart. Another gibberellin-producing fungus Phaeosphaeria sp.
L487, known as one of the phytopathogenic fungi, produces GA1 in plant-like gibberellin biosynthetic pathway
through GA9 and GA4/20. Its ent-kaurene synthase in the GA1 biosynthesis catalyzes the formation of
ent-kaurene from GGDP through ent-copalyl diphosphate323 (Figure 35).
Aphidicolin, a well-known biochemical agent that functions as a specific inhibitor of DNA polymerase ,
is produced by Phoma betae, a fungal pathogen of beet. Its biosynthetic precursors, including aphidicolan-16-
ol, were elucidated by treatment of P. betae with cytochrome P-450 inhibitors.324 From this fungus, a cDNA
encoding aphidicolan-16-ol synthase was cloned, and its recombinant fusion protein was found to catalyze
the direct formation of 16-ol from GGDP through syn-copalyl diphosphate.325 Furthermore, chromosomal
walking adjacent to the aphidicolol synthase gene allowed to identify the aphidicolin biosynthetic gene
cluster.
Diterpene phytotoxins sphaeropsidins AF, tri- and tetracyclic unrearranged pimarane skeleton, are
isolated from Sphaeropsis sapinea, a fungus that causes a canker disease of Italian cypress. Sphaeropsidin A is
the major toxic substance showing nonhost-selective phytotoxic activity326 (Figure 36).
Trichothecene phytotoxins such as deoxynivaenol are produced by some phytopathogenic species of
Fusarium. Biosynthetic studies on this phytotoxin show that a bicyclic hydrocarbon intermediate trichodiene,
formed from FDP, and the subsequent oxidations with a series of cytochrome P-450s such as Tri4 give
isotrichodiol, isotrichotriol, and deoxynivaenol.302 The gene cluster responsible for trichothecene biosynthesis
was found in Fusarium and Myrothecium fungi.
Another phytohormone abscisic acid is produced by phytopathogenic fungi Cercospora cruenta, C. cruenta, and
Botrytis cinerea. These fungi biosynthesize abscisic acid by oxidation of ionylideneethane with molecular oxygen
following cyclization of allofarnesene.327 This direct pathway via ionylideneethane and subsequent ionylide-
neethanol is common among abscisic acid-producing fungi.
Sorokinianin, an unusual sesquiterpenoid, is isolated from Bipolaris sorokiniana, a fungal phytopathogen that
causes spot blotch or foot and root rot diseases in wheat, barley, and oat. It is biosynthesized from phytotoxic
prehelminthosporol and C3 unit derived from oxaloacetic acid.328 Prehelminthosporol itself was isolated as a
phytotoxin of Helminthosporium sativum. Sorokinianin is more phytotoxic than prehelminthosporol in inhibiting
the germination of barley seeds.

Figure 35 Structures of terpenoid phytotoxins (continued).

376 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Figure 36 Structures of terpenoid phytotoxins (continued).

4.08.3.5 Macromolecular Phytotoxins

Various phytopathogenic microorganisms produce glycoproteins and polysaccharides that have been impli-
cated as phytotoxic agents. For example, Pseudomonas syringae pv. glycinea produces exopolysaccharide alginate,
a copolymer of D-mannuronic acid and L-glucuronic acid, which is strongly correlated with virulence in host
plants.329 In the case of Verticillium wilt, it is suggested that protein–lipopolysaccharide and glycoprotein are
involved in the production of disease symptoms in susceptible host plants.330
Stereum purpureum, the causal fungus of apple silver leaf disease, produces three endopolygalacturonases
(EndoPG Ia, Ib, and Ic), which are fully characterized. EndoPGs, present at a concentration of about 50 ng in
an infected leaf, degrade the pectin in leaves and cause the silver leaf symptoms. EndoPG Ia contains 379
amino acid residues in the amino acid sequence excluding the signal peptide and has two N-binding sugar
chains with Man5GlacNAc2. Its glycosylated asparagines are Asn92 and 161, and three disulfide bridges are at
Cys3–Cys17, Cys175–Cys191, and Cys300–Cys303.331 Three crystal structures of EndoPG Ia (the unli-
ganded EndoPG Ia and the binary and ternary complexes of EndoPG Ia with galacturonate) are determined
in native and two galacturonic acid complex states by X-ray crystallography and, consequently, the catalytic
mechanism of EndoPG Ia is elucidated.332

4.08.3.6 Perspectives
Completion of genomic analysis of several plant pathogens Magnaporthe grisea (rice blast), Gibberella zeae (head
blight in wheat and barley), and Streptomyces scabies, causing potato scab, allowed us to identify genes for
phytotoxin biosynthesis and to study disease development in detail at molecular level. It has been found that
rice blast fungus produces some polyketide–nonribosomal peptide hybrid molecules during infection. The
dynamic action and role of phytotoxins will be elucidated by transcriptome and metabolome analysis.
Comparative genetic study in usual and pathogenic strains will provide information on how pathogenicity is
acquired and developed. These studies on various types of diseases give a general idea on the strategy of
microorganisms in disease development, and also the solution to prevent their infection.

References
1. J. Takabayashi; M. Dicke, Trend Plant Sci. 1996, 1, 109–113.
2. M. Dicke, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1999, 91, 131–142.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 377

3. M. W. Sabelis; A. Janssen; A. Pallini; M. Venzon; J. Bruin; B. Drukker; P. Scutareanu, Behavioural Responses of Predatory and
Herbivorous Arthropods to Induced Plant Volatiles: From Evolutionary Ecology to Agricultural Applications. In Induced Plant
Defenses against Pathogens and Herbivores; A. Agrawal, S. Tuzun, E. Bent, Eds.; APS Press, The American Phytopathological
Society: St. Paul, MN, 1999; pp 269–298.
4. J. B. Harborne, Plant Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry, Vol. 8: Miscellaneous Natural Products
Including Marine Natural Products, Pheromones, Plant Hormones, and Aspects of Ecology; K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon, Elsevier:
Oxford, 1999; pp 137–196.
5. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Insect Hormones and Insect Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry,
Vol. 8: Miscellaneous Natural Products Including Marine Natural Products, Pheromones, Plant Hormones, and Aspects of
Ecology; K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon, Elsevier: Oxford, 1999; pp 263–376.
6. P. Feeny, Ecology 1970, 51, 565–581.
7. G. A. Rosenthal; M. R. Berenbaum, Eds., Herbivores, 2nd ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1991; Vol. 1.
8. J. B. Harborne, Ecological Biochemistry, 4th ed.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1993; Chapters 3–5, 7, pp 71–161, 186–210.
9. R. H. Manske; A. Brossi; G. A. Cordell, Eds., The Alkaloids; Multi Volume Series; Academic Press: New York, 1950–2007;
Vol. 1–64.
10. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 8,
pp 196–246.
11. T. Hartmann, Alkaloids. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1991;
pp 79–121.
12. S. W. Pelletier, Chem. Biol. Perspect. 1983, 1, 1–31.
13. E. Heftman, Phytochemistry 1983, 22, 1843–1860.
14. D. J. Hardick; D. W. Hutchinson; S. J. Trew; E. M. H. Wellington, Chem. Commun. 1991, 10, 729–730.
15. M. Schapira; R. Abagyan; M. Totrov, BMC Struct. Biol. 2002, 2, 1.
16. M. Waldhoer; S. E. Bartlett; J. L. Whistler, Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2004, 73, 953–990.
17. J. A. Nathanson, Science 1984, 226, 184–186.
18. Z.-L. Huang; W.-M. Qu; N. Eguchi; J.-F. Chen; M. A. Schwalzschield; B. B. Fredholm; Y. Urade; O. Hayashi, Nat. Neurosci. 2005,
8, 858–859.
19. E. C. Hulme; N. J. M. Birdsall; N. J. Buckley, Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 1990, 30, 633–673.
20. N. Asano; R. J. Nash; R. J. Molyneux; G. W. J. Fleet, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2000, 11, 1545–1680.
21. B. C. Campbell; R. J. Molyneux; K. C. Jones, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 1759–1770.
22. K. Konno; H. Ono; M. Nakamura; K. Tateishi; C. Hirayama; Y. Tamura; M. Hattori; A. Koyama; K. Kohno, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2006, 103, 1337–1341.
23. C. Hirayama; K. Konno; N. Wasano; M. Nakamura, Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 2007, 37, 1348–1358.
24. D. Ober; R. Harms; L. Witte; T. Hartmann, J. Biol. Chem. 2003, 278, 12805–12812.
25. A. Reimann; N. Nurhayati; A. Backenköhler; D. Ober, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 2772–2784.
26. T. Hartmann, Planta 2004, 219, 1–4.
27. A. Bezzerides; T.-H. Yong; J. Bezzerides; J. Husseini; J. Ladau; M. Eisner; T. Eisner, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101,
9029–9032.
28. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 3,
pp 39–60.
29. E. A. Bell, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 2854–2865.
30. G. A. Rosenthal, Nonprotein Amino Acids as Protective Allelochemicals. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal,
M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1991; pp 1–34.
31. D. M. Gilbert; A. Nielson; H. Miyazawa; M. L. DePamphilis; W. C. Burhans, J. Biol. Chem. 1995, 270, 9597–9606.
32. C. von Holt; M. von Holt; H. Bohm, Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 1966, 125, 11–21.
33. G. A. Rosenthal; D. L. Dahlman; D. H. Janzen, Science 1976, 192, 256–257.
34. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 6,
pp 132–163.
35. D. S. Seigler, Cyanide and Cyanogenic Glycosides. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic
Press: San Diego, 1991; pp 35–77.
36. J. E. Poulton, Plant Physiol. 1990, 94, 401–405.
37. M. Kojima; J. E. Poulton; S. S. Thayer; E. E. Conn, Plant Physiol. 1979, 63, 1022–1028.
38. K. Jørgensen; S. Bak; P. K. Busk; C. Sørensen; C. E. Olsen; J. Puonti-Kaerlas; B. L. Møller, Plant Physiol. 2005, 139,
363–374.
39. B. Nambisan, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 372–373.
40. W. L. B. White; D. I. Arias-Garzon; J. M. McMahon; R. T. Sayre, Plant Physiol. 1998, 116, 1219–1225.
41. H. S. Engler-Chouat; L. E. Gilbert, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 25–42.
42. H. S. Engeler; K. C. Spencer; L. E. Gilbert, Nature 2000, 406, 144.
43. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 7,
pp 164–195.
44. S. Louda; S. Mole, Glucosinolates: Chemistry and Ecology. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.;
Academic Press: San Diego, 1991; pp 123–164.
45. U. Wittstock; J. Gershenzon, Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 2002, 5, 300–307.
46. U. Wittstock; D. Kliebenstein; V. Lambrix; M. Reichelt; J. Gershenzon, Recent Adv. Phytochem. 2003, 37, 101–125.
47. A. A. Agrawal; N. S. Kurashige, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1403–1415.
48. Z. Zhang; J. A. Ober; D. J. Kliebenstein, Plant Cell 2006, 18, 1524–1536.
49. U. Wittstock; N. Agerbirk; E. J. Stauber; C. E. Olsen; M. Hippler; T. Mitchell-Olds; J. Gershenzon; H. Vogel, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2004, 101, 4859–4864.
50. A. Ratzka; H. Vogel; D. J. Kliebenstein; T. Mitchell-Old; J. Kroymann, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 11223–11228.
378 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

51. M. R. Coumarins. Berenbaum, In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego,
1991; pp 221–249.
52. M. Berenbaum, Science 1978, 201, 532–534.
53. Z. Wen; M. R. Berenbaum; M. A. Schuler J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 507–522.
54. T. Shimada, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1149–1163.
55. G. W. Felton; J. A. Gatehouse, Antinutritive Plant Defence Mechanisms. In Biology of the Insects Midgut; M. J. Lehane,
P. F. Billingsley, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: London, 1996; pp 373–416.
56. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 10,
pp 287–348.
57. J. Gershenzon; R. Croteau, Terpenoid. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press:
San Diego, 1991; pp 165–219.
58. W. S. Bowers; C. C. Blickenstaff, Science 1966, 154, 1673–1674.
59. W. S. Bowers, Insect Hormones and Antihormones in Plants. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.;
Academic Press: San Diego, 1991; pp 431–456.
60. W. S. Bowers; R. Nishida, Science 1980, 209, 1030–1032.
61. R. Nishida; W. S. Bowers; P. H. Evans, J. Chem. Ecol. 1984, 10, 1435–1451.
62. K. Nakanishi; M. Koreeda; S. Sasaki; M. L. Chang; H. Y. Hsu, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1966, 915–917.
63. F. Marion-Poll; L. Dinan; R. Lafont, The Role of Phytoecdysteroids in the Control of Phytophagous Insects. In Biopesticides of
Plant Origin, 1st ed.; C. Regnault-Rogers, B. J. R. Philogène, C. Vincent, Eds.; Lavoisier: Paris, 2005; pp 87–103.
64. J. K. Yatsyuk; G. M. Segel, Khim. Prir. Sopedin. 1970, 6, 281.
65. E. A. Schemelz; R. J. Grebenok; D. W. Galbraith; W. S. Bowers, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1739–1757.
66. S. B. Malcolm, Cardenolide-Mediated Interactions between Plants and Herbivores. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal,
M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1991; pp 251–296.
67. C. J. Nelson; J. N. Seiber; L. P. Brower, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 981–1010.
68. M. P. Blaustein, Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 1985, 6, 289–292.
69. F. Holzinger; M. Wink, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 1561–1573.
70. M. D. Bowers, Iridoid Glycoside. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego,
1991; pp 297–325.
71. J. Peñuelas; J. Sardans; C. Stefanescu; T. Parella; I. Filella, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1925–1933.
72. J. Kuhn; E. M. Petterson; B. K. Feld; A. Burse; A. Termonia; J. M. Pasteels; W. Boland, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101,
13808–13813.
73. K. Konno; C. Hirayama; H. Yasui; M. Nakamura, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 9159–9164.
74. H. Marak; A. Biere; J. M. M. van Damme, Chemoecology 2002, 12, 185–192.
75. K. Konno; C. Hirayama; H. Shinbo, J. Insect Physiol. 1997, 43, 217–224.
76. K. Konno; S. Okada; C. Hirayama, J. Insect Physiol. 2001, 47, 1451–1457.
77. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 5,
pp 84–131.
78. P. K. Lawrence; K. R. Koundal, Electron. J. Biotechnol. 2002, 5, 93–104.
79. T. R. Green; C. A. Ryan, Science 1972, 175, 776–777.
80. M. A. Jongsma; P. L. Bakker; B. Visser; W. J. Stiekema, Planta 1994, 195, 29–35.
81. R. Karban; I. T. Baldwin, Induced Responses to Herbivory; The University of Chicago Press: Chicago, 1997; Chapter 3,
pp 47–103.
82. M. Orozco-Cardenas; B. McGurl; C. A. Ryan, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1993, 90, 8273–8276.
83. R. M. Broadway, J. Insect Physiol. 1995, 41, 107–116.
84. M. Ishimoto; M. Chrispeels, Plant Physiol. 1996, 111, 393–401.
85. T. Pechan; L. Ye; Y.-m. Chang; A. Mitra; L. Lin; F. M. Davis; W. P. Williams; D. S. Luthe, Plant Cell 2000, 12, 1031–1040.
86. L. Lopez; A. Camas; R. Shivaji; A. Ankala; P. Williams; D. Luth, Planta 2007, 226, 517–527.
87. K. Konno; C. Hirayama; M. Nakamura; K. Tateishi; Y. Tamura; M. Hattori; K. Kohno, Plant J. 2004, 37, 370–378.
88. G. W. Felton; K. K. Donato; R. M. Broadway; S. S. Duffey, J. Insect Physiol. 1992, 38, 277–285.
89. H. W. Gardner, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1991, 1084, 221–239.
90. H. W. Gardner, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1979, 27, 220–228.
91. G. W. Felton; J. L. Bi; C. B. Summers; A. J. Mueller; S. S. Duffey, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 651–666.
92. K. S. Powell; A. M. K. Gatehouse; V. A. Hilder; J. A. Gatehouse, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1993, 66, 119–126.
93. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 4,
pp 61–83.
94. N. Sharon; H. Lis, Lectins, 2nd ed.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, Netherland, 2003.
95. W. I. Peumans; E. J. M. Van Dame, Plant Physiol. 1995, 109, 347–352.
96. I. E. Liener, Lectins. In Herbivores, 2nd ed.; G. A. Rosenthal, M. R. Berenbaum, Eds.; Academic Press: San Diego, 1991;
pp 327–353.
97. A. M. R. Gatehouse; F. M. Dewey; J. Dove; K. A. Fenton; A. Puszai, J. Sci. Food Agric. 1984, 35, 373–380.
98. T. H. Czapla; B. A. Lang, J. Econ. Entomol. 1990, 83, 2480–2485.
99. V. A. Hilder; K. S. Powell; A. M. R. Gatehouse; J. A. Gatehouse; L. N. Gatehouse; Y. Shi; W. D. O. Hamilton; A. Merryweather;
C. A. Newell; J. C. Timans; W. J. Peumans; E. van Damme; D. Boulter, Transgenic Res. 1995, 4, 18–25.
100. T. L. Hopkins; M. C. Harper, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2001, 47, 100–109.
101. H. Chen; C. G. Wilkerson; J. A. Kuchar; B. S. Phinney; G. A. Howe, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102, 19237–19242.
102. Y. Liu; J.-E. Ahn; S. Datta; R. A. Salzman; J. Moon; B. Huyghues-Despointes; B. Pittendrigh; L. L. Murdock; H. Koiwa; K. Zhu-
Salzman, Plant Physiol. 2005, 139, 1545–1556.
103. L. M. Schoonhoven; J. J. A. van Loon; M. Dicke, Insect-Plant Biology, 2nd ed.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2005;
Chapter 4, pp 48–98.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 379

104. M. Moutim; L. G. Silva; M. T. P. Lopes; G. W. Fernandes; C. E. Sales, Plant Sci. 1999, 142, 115–121.
105. M. Azarkan; A. E. Moussaoui; D. van Wuytswinkel; G. Dehon; Y. Looze, J. Chromatogr. B 2003, 790, 229–238.
106. K. Konno; H. Yasui; C. Hirayama; H. Shinbo, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 735–751.
107. C. M. Smith, Plant Resistance to Arthropods: Molecular and Conventional Approaches; Springer: Dordrecht, Netherland,
2005; Chapters 3, 4, pp 65–122.
108. S. Sadasivam; B. Thayumanavan, Molecular Host Plant Resistance to Pests; Marcel Dekker Inc.: New York, 2003; Chapter 2,
pp 8–38.
109. R. Thurston; W. T. Smith; B. Cooper, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1966, 9, 428–432.
110. S. Y. H. Lin; J. T. Trumble; J. Kumamoto, J. Chem. Ecol. 1987, 13, 837–850.
111. E. Friedman; J. Wang; Y. Iijima; J. E. Froehlich; D. R. Gang; J. Ohlrogge; E. Pichersky, Plant Cell 2005, 17, 1252–1267.
112. G. W. Turner; R. Croteau, Plant Physiol. 2004, 136, 4216–4227.
113. D. E. Dussourd, Foraging in Finesse: Caterpillar Adaptations for Circumventing Plant Defenses. In Caterpillars: Ecological and
Evolutionary Constraints on Foraging; N. E. Stamp, T. M. Casey, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: New York, 1993; pp 92–131.
114. D. E. Dussourd; R. F. Denno, Ecology 1994, 75, 69–78.
115. D. E. Dussourd; T. Eisner, Science 1987, 237, 898–901.
116. B. D. Farrell; D. E. Dussourd; C. Mitter, Am. Nat. 1991, 138, 881–900.
117. D. A. Bird; V. R. Franceschi; P. J. Facchini, Plant J. 2003, 15, 2626–2635.
118. E. L. Camm; C. Watt; G. H. N. Towers, Can. J. Bot. 1976, 54, 2562–2566.
119. M. C. Arribere; A. A. Cortadi; M. A. Gattuso; M. P. Bettiol; N. S. Priolo; N. O. Caffini, Phytochem. Anal. 1998, 9, 267–273.
120. D. F. Hildebrand; J. G. Rodriguez; G. C. Brown; K. T. Luu; C. S. Volden, J. Econ. Entomol. 1986, 79, 1459–1465.
121. J. C. Schultz; I. T. Baldwin, Science 1982, 217, 149–151.
122. I. T. Baldwin, Oecologia 1988, 77, 378–381.
123. I. T. Baldwin, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1998, 95, 8113–8118.
124. E. Bartlet; G. Kiddle; I. Williams; R. Wallsgrove, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1999, 91, 163–167.
125. Y. Seino; Y. Suzuki; K. Sogawa, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1996, 31, 467–473.
126. G. A. Howe; J. Lightner; J. Browse; C. A. Ryan, Plant Cell 1996, 8, 2067–2077.
127. L. Mattiacci; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 2036–2040.
128. A. Mithöfer; G. Wanner; W. Boland, Plant Physiol. 2005, 137, 1160–1168.
129. P. Raymond; H. Webber; M. Damond; E. E. Farmer, Plant Cell 2000, 12, 707–719.
130. D. Hermemeier; U. Scittko; I. T. Baldwin, Plant Physiol. 2001, 125, 683–700.
131. S. D. Lawrence; N. Novac, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 2543–2557.
132. M. Heil; T. Koch; A. Hilpert; B. Fiala; W. Boland; K. E. Linsenmair, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 1083–1088.
133. F. L. Wäckers; D.d. Zuber; R. Wunderlin; F. Keller, Ann. Bot. 2001, 87, 365–370.
134. E. B. Mondor; J. F. Addicott, Ecol. Lett. 2003, 6, 495–497.
135. M. Heil, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 527–536.
136. Y. Choh; S. Kugimiya; J. Takabayashi, Oecologia 2006, 147, 455–460.
137. D. Janzen, Evolution 1966, 20, 249.
138. J. Takabayashi; M. Dicke, Herbivore-Induced Plant Volatiles with Multifunctional Effects in Ecosystems: A Complex Patter
of Biotic Interactions. In Biodiversity. An Ecological Perspective; T. Abe, S. A. Levin, M. Higashi, Eds.; Springer, 1996;
pp 131–145.
139. J. G. de Boer; M. Dicke, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2005, 40, 1–12.
140. M. Dicke; T. A. van Beek; M. A. Posthumus; N. Ben Dom; H. van Bokhoven; Æ. de Groot, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 381–396.
141. T. Shimoda; R. Ozawa; K. Sano; E. Yano; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2019–2032.
142. H. Ishiwari; T. Suzuki; T. Maeda, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1670–1681.
143. J. Takabayashi; S. Takahashi; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 273–287.
144. J. Fukushima; Y. Kainoh; H. Honda; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 563–567.
145. M. D’Alessandro; M. Heid; Y. Triponez; T. C. T. Turlings, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2733–2748.
146. K. Shiojiri; J. Takabayashi; S. Yano; A. Takafuji, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2000, 35, 87–92.
147. K. Shiojiri; R. Ozawa; K. Matsui; K. Kishimoto; S. Kugimiya; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 969–979.
148. P. Scutareanu; B. Drukker; J. Bruin; M. A. Posthumus; M. W. Sabelis, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2241–2260.
149. M. A. Birkett; K. Chamberlain; E. Guerrieri; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; T. Yasuda, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1589–1600.
150. Y. J. Du; G. M. Poppy; W. Powell, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 1591–1605.
151. Y. J. Du; G. M. Poppy; W. Powell; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1355–1368.
152. J. D. Brande; J. A. Pickett; D. M. Poppy, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 767–799.
153. J. Roland; K. E. Denford; L. Jimenez, Can. Entomol. 1995, 127, 413–421.
154. Y. Kainoh; C. Tanaka; S. Nakamura, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1999, 34, 463–467.
155. J. Bruin; M. Dicke; M. W. Sabelis, Experientia 1992, 48, 525–529.
156. G. Arimura; R. Ozawa; T. Shimida; T. Nishioka; W. Boland; J. Takabayashi, Nature 2000, 6795, 512–515.
157. R. Dolch; T. Tscharntke, Oecologia 2000, 125, 504–511.
158. R. Karban; I. T. Baldwin; K. J. Baxter; G. Laie; G. W. Felton, Oecologia 2000, 125, 66–71.
159. M. Dicke; M. W. Sabelis; J. Takabayashi; J. Bruin; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 3091–3118.
160. J. Horiuchi; G. Arimura; R. Ozawa; T. Shimoda; J. Takabayashi; T. Nishioka, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2003, 38, 109–116.
161. Y. Choh; T. Shimoda; R. Ozawa; M. Dicke; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 1797–1808.
162. J. Engelberth; H. T. Alborn; E. A. Schmelz; J. H. Tumlinson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 1781–1785.
163. N. J. Bate; S. J. Rothstein, Plant J. 1998, 16, 561–569.
164. G. Arimura; R. Ozawa; J. Horiuchi; T. Nishioka; J. Takabayashi, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2001, 29, 1049–1061.
165. K. Gomi; Y. Yamasaki; H. Yamamoto; K. Akimitsu, J. Plant Physiol. 2003, 160, 1219–1231.
166. G. Vancanneyt; C. Sanz; T. Farmaki; M. Paneque; F. Ortego; P. Castannera; J. J. Sanchez–Serrano, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2001, 98, 8139–8144.
380 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

167. R. W. H. M. Van Tol; A. T. C. van der Sommen; M. I. C. Boff; J. van Bezooijen; M. W. Sabelis; P. H. Smits, Ecol. Lett. 2001,
4: 292–294.
168. F. C. C. Hountondji; M. W. Sabelis; R. Hanna; A. Janssen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1003–1021.
169. M. W. Sabelis; B. P. Afman; P. J. Slim, Location of Distant Spider Mite Colonies by Phytoseiulus persimilis: Localization and
Extraction of a Kairomone. In Acarology VI; D. A. Griffiths, C. E. Bowman, Eds.; Halsted Press: New York, 1984; Vol. 1,
pp 431–440.
170. T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Tumlinson; W. J. Lewis, Science 1990, 250, 1251–1253.
171. P. W. Paré; W. J. Lewis
; J. H. Tumlinson, Induced Plant Volatiles: Biochemistry and Effects on Parasitoids. In Induced
Defenses against Pathogens and Herbivores; A. A. Agrawal, S. Tuzun, E. Bent, Eds.; APS Press: St. Paul, MN, USA, 1999;
pp 167–180.
172. H. J. Bouwmeester; F. W. A. Verstappen; M. A. Posthumus; M. Dicke, Plant Physiol. 1999, 121, 173–180.
173. T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Tumlinson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 8399–8402.
174. M. Dicke, J. Plant Physiol. 1994, 143, 465–472.
175. E. Guerrieri; G. M. Poppy; W. Powell; E. Tremblay; F. Pennacchio, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1247–1261.
176. J. Hopke; J. Donath; S. Blechert; W. Boland, FEBS Lett. 1994, 352, 146–150.
177. R. Ozawa; G. T. H. Alborn; P. E. A. Teal, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 8894–8899.
178. R. Gols; M. Roosjen; H. Dijkman; M. Dicke, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2651–2666.
179. J. S. Thaler; M. J. Stout; R. Karban; S. S. Duffey, Ecol. Entomol. 2001, 26, 312–324.
180. R. M. P. Van Poecke; M. Dicke, Plant Cell Environ. 2003, 26, 1541–1548.
181. K. Ament; M. R. Kant; M. W. Sabelis; M. A. Haring; R. C. Schuurink, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 1–13.
182. M. R. Kant; K. Ament; M. W. Sabelis; M. Haring; R. Schuurink, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 483–495.
183. P. Mercke; I. F. Kappers; F. W. A. Verstappen; O. Vorst; M. Dicke; H. J. Bouwmeester, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135,
2012–2024.
184. P. Reymond; N. Bodenhausen; R. M. P. van Poecke; V. Krishnamurthy; M. Dicke; E. E. Farmer, Plant Cell 2004, 16, 3132–3147.
185. T. Alborn; T. C. J. Turlings; T. H. Jones; G. Stenhagen; J. H. Loughrin; J. H. Tumlinson, Science 1997, 276, 945–949.
186. T. Alborn; T. H. Jones; G. S. Stenhagen; J. H. Tumlinson, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 203–220.
187. E. A. Schmelz; M. J. Carroll; S. LeClere; S. M. Shipps; J. Meredith; P. S. Chourey; T. H. Alborn; P. E. A. Teal, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.
U.S.A. 2006, 103, 8894–8899.
188. M. W. Sabelis; H. E. van de Baan, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1983, 33, 303–314.
189. C. M. De Moraes; W. J. Lewis; P. W. Paré; H. T. Alborn; J. H. Tumlinson, Nature 1998, 393, 570–573.
190. D. Spiteller; G. Pohnert; W. Boland, Tetrahedron Lett. 2001, 42, 1483–1485.
191. D. Spiteller; W. Boland, Tetrahedron 2003, 59, 135–139.
192. R. Halitschke; U. Schittko; G. Pohnert; W. Boland; I. T. Baldwin, Plant Physiol. 2001, 125, 711–717.
193. L. L. Walling, J. Plant Growth Regul. 2000, 19, 195–216.
194. M. Hilker; T. Meiners, Chemoecology of Insect Eggs and Egg Deposition; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2002.
195. A. Mithofer; G. Wanner; W. Boland, Plant Physiol. 2005, 137, 1160–1168.
196. A. Hatanaka, Phytochemistry 1993, 40, 1201–1218.
197. S. Ishiguro; A. Kawai-Oda; J. Ueda; I. Nishida; K. Okada, Plant Cell 2001, 13, 2191–2209.
198. M. Dicke; R. Gols; D. Ludeking; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1907–1922.
199. T. Genoud; J. P. Métraux, Trend Plant Sci. 1999, 4, 503–507.
200. G. Arimura; R. Ozawa; J. Horiuchi; T. Nishioka; J. Takabayashi, Plant J. 2002, 29, 87–98.
201. J. Horiuchi; G. Arimura; R. Ozawa; T. Shimoda; J. Takabayashi; T. Nishioka, FEBS Lett. 2002, 509, 332–336.
202. A. Hatanaka; T. Kajiwara; J. Sekiya, Chem. Phys. Lipids 1987, 44, 341–361.
203. K. Matsui; S. Kurishita; A. Hisamitsu; T. Kajiwara, Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2000, 28, 857–860.
204. K. P. C. Croft; F. Juttner; A. J. Slusarenko, Plant Physiol. 1993, 101, 13–24.
205. S. Avdiushko; K. P. C. Croft; G. C. Brown; D. M. Jackson; T. R. Hamiltonkemp; D. Hildebrand, Plant Physiol. 1995, 109,
1227–1230.
206. J. A. Ryals; U. H. Neuenschwander; M. G. Willits; A. Molina; H. Y. Sterner; M. D. Hunt, Plant Cell 1996, 8, 1809–1819.
207. J. Durner; J. Shah; D. F. Klessig, Trends Plant Sci. 1997, 2, 266–274.
208. I. T. Baldwin, Plant Physiol. 2001, 127, 1449–1458.
209. J. Kahl; D. H. Siemens; R. J. Aerts; R. Gabler; F. Kuhnemann; C. A. Preston; I. T. Baldwin, Planta 2000, 210, 333–342.
210. N. M. Van Dam; K. Hadwich; I. T. Baldwin, Oecologia 2000, 122, 371–379.
211. N. P. Havill; K. F. Raffa, Ecol. Entomol. 2000, 25, 171–179.
212. J. S. Thaler, J. Anim. Ecol. 2002, 71, 141–150.
213. B. Fritig; T. Heitz; M. Legrand, Curr. Opin. Immunol. 1998, 10, 16–22.
214. R. J. Glayer; J. B. Harborne, Phytochemistry 1994, 37, 19–42.
215. J. A. Bailey; J. W. Mansfield, Eds., Phytoalexins; Blackie: Glasgow, 1982.
216. J. Kuc, Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 1995, 33, 275–297.
217. R. Hammerschmidt, Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 1995, 33, 275–297.
218. J. B. Harborne, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2001, 18, 361–379.
219. R. A. Dixon, Nature 2001, 411, 843–847.
220. H. D. VanEtten; J. W. Masfield; J. A. Balley; E. E. Farmer, Plant Cell 1994, 6, 1191–1192.
221. Y. Cohen; H. Eyal; Z. Goldschmidt; B. Sklarz, Physiol. Plant. Pathol. 1983, 22, 143–150.
222. M. Reuveni; S. Tuzun; J. S. Cole; M. R. Siegel; W. C. Nesmith; J. Kuc, Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1988, 30, 441–451.
223. T. Kato; C. Kabuto; N. Sasaki; M. Tsunagawa; H. Aizawa; K. Fujita; Y. Kato; Y. Kitahara; N. Takahashi, Tetrahedron Lett. 1973,
14, 3861–3864.
224. D. W. Cartwright; P. W. Langcake; R. J. Pryce; D. P. Leworthy; J. P. Ride, Phytochemistry 1981, 20, 535–537.
225. Y. Kono; A. Kojima; R. Nagai; M. Watanabe; T. Kawashima; T. Onizawa; T. Teraoka; M. Watanabe; H. Koshino; J. Uzawa;
Y. Suzuki; A. Sakurai, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 1291–1298.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 381

226. M. Frey; P. Chomet; E. Glawischnig; C. Stettner; S. Grun; A. Winklmair; W. Eisenreich; A. Bacher; R. B. Meeley; S. P. Briggs;
K. Simcox; A. Gierl, Science 1997, 277, 696–699.
227. H. M. Niemeyer, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 3349–3358.
228. B. A. Halkier; J. Gershenzon, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2006, 57, 303–333.
229. E. Glawischnig, Phytochemistry 2007, 164, 636–644.
230. P. Atkinson; J. P. Blakeman, New Phytologist 1982, 92, 63–74.
231. S. Woodward; R. B. Pearce, Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1988, 33, 151–162.
232. O. Muller; H. Borger, Arb. Biol. Reichsasnstalt. Landw. Forstw. Berlin 1940, 23, 189–231.
233. J. D. Paxton, Phytopathol. Z. 1981, 101, 106–209.
234. I. A. M. Cruickshank; D. R. Perrin, Nature 1960, 187, 799–800.
235. D. R. Perrin; W. Bottomley, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1962, 84, 1919–1922.
236. A. Stoessl; J. B. Stothers; E. W. B. Ward, Phytochemistry 1976, 15, 855–872.
237. L. Ralston; S. T. Kwon; M. Schoenbeck; J. Ralston; D. J. Schenk; R. M. Coates; J. Chappell, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2001, 393,
222–235.
238. I. M. Whitehead; D. R. Threlfall; D. F. Ewing, Phytochemistry 1989, 28, 775–779.
239. P. J. Facchini; J. Chappell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 11088–11092.
240. I. Uritani; K. Oba; A. Takeuchi; K. Sato; H. Inoue; R. Ito; I. Ito, Biochemistry of Furano-Terpenes Produced in Mold-Damaged
Sweet Potatoes. In Antinutrients and Natural Toxicants in Food. R. L. Ory, Ed.; Food and Nutrition Press Inc.: CT, USA, 1981;
pp 1–16.
241. Y.-H. Xu; J.-W. Wang; S. Wang; J.-Y. Wang; X.-Y. Chen, Plant Physiol. 2004, 135, 507–515.
242. X.-Y. Chen; Y. Chen; P. Heinstein; V. J. Davisson, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1995, 324, 255–266.
243. X.-Y. Chen; M. Wang; Y. Chen; V. J. Davisson; P. Heinstein, J. Nat. Prod. 1996, 59, 944–951.
244. P. Luo; Y.-H. Wang; G.-D. Wang; M. Essenberg; X.-Y. Chen, Plant J. 2001, 28, 95–104.
245. J. Koga; M. Shimura; K. Oshima; N. Ogawa; T. Yamauchi; N. Ogasawara, Tetrahedron 1995, 51, 7907–7918.
246. J. Koga; N. Ogawa; T. Yamauchi; N. Kikuchi; N. Ogasawara; M. Shimura, Phytochemistry 1997, 44, 249–253.
247. A. Yajima; K. Mori, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2000, 2000, 4079–4091.
248. T. Akatsuka; N. Takahashi; O. Kodama; H. Sekido; Y. Kono; S. Takeuchi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1985, 49, 1689–1694.
249. H. Kato; O. Kodama; T. Akatsuka, Phytochemistry 1993, 33, 79–81.
250. H. Kato; O. Kodama; T. Akatsuka, Phytochemistry 1994, 36, 299–301.
251. S. Tamogami; M. Mitani; O. Kodama; T. Akatsuka, Tetrahedron 1993, 49, 2025–2032.
252. P. Hedden; Y. Kamiya, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 48, 431–460.
253. K. Otomo; H. Kenmoku; H. Oikawa; W. A. Konig; H. Toshima; W. Mitsuhashi; H. Yamane; T. Sassa; T. Toyomasu, Plant J. 2004,
39, 886–893.
254. T. Sakamoto; K. Miura; H. Itoh; T. Tatsumi; M. Ueguchi-Tanaka; K. Ishiyama; M. Kobayashi; G. K. Agrawal; S. Takeda; K. Abe;
A. Miyao; H. Hirochika; H. Kitano; M. Ashikari; M. Matsuoka, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1642–1653.
255. E.-M. Cho; A. Okada; H. Kenmoku; K. Otomo; T. Toyomasu; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Sassa; A. Yajima; G. Yabuta; K. Mori; H. Oikawa;
H. Toshima; N. Shibuya; H. Nojiri; T. Omori; M. Nishiyama; H. Yamane, Plant J. 2004, 37, 1–8.
256. K. Otomo; Y. Kanno; A. Motegi; H. Kenmoku; H. Yamane; W. Mitsuhashi; H. Oikawa; H. Toshima; H. Itoh; M. Matsuoka;
T. Sassa; T. Toyomasu, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 2001–2006.
257. T. Nemoto; E. M. Cho; A. Okada; K. Okada; K. Otomo; Y. Kanno; T. Toyomasu; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Sassa; E. Minami; N. Shibuya;
M. Nishiyama; H. Nojiri; H. Yamane, FEBS Lett. 2004, 571, 182–186.
258. R. J. Peters, Phytochemistry 2006, 67, 2307–2317.
259. A. Okada; T. Shimizu; K. Okada; T. Kuzuyama; J. Koga; N. Shibuya; H. Nojiri; H. Yamane, Plant Mol. Biol. 2007, 65, 177–187.
260. K. Shimura; A. Okada; K. Okada; Y. Jikumaru; K.-W. Ko; T. Toyomasu; T. Sassa; M. Hasegawa; O. Kodama; N. Shibuya;
J. Koga; H. Nojiri; H. Yamane, J. Biol. Chem. 2007, 282, 34013–34018.
261. S. Mayama; T. Tani; Y. Matsuura; T. Ueno; H. Fukami, Physiol. Plant Pathol. 1981, 19, 217–226.
262. L. Crombie; J. Mistry, Tetrahedron Lett. 1990, 31, 2647–2648.
263. L. M. Browne; K. L. Conn; W. A. Ayer; J. P. Tewari, Tetrahedron 1991, 47, 3909–3914.
264. A. K. Hull; R. Vij; J. L. Celenza, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2000, 97, 2379–2384.
265. E. Glawischnig; B. G. Hansen; C. E. Olsen; B. A. Halkier, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2004, 101, 8245–8250.
266. J. Glazebrook; F. M. Ausubel, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91, 8955–8959.
267. J. Glazebrook; M. Zook; F. Mert; I. Kagan; E. E. Rogers; I. R. Crute; E. B. Hilub; R. Hammerschmidt; F. M. Ausbel, Genetics 1997,
146, 381–392.
268. R. Schuhegger; M. Nafici; M. Mansourova; B. L. Petersen; C. E. Olsen; A. Svtos; B. A. Halkier, Plant Physiol. 2006, 141,
1248–1254.
269. V. Parisy; B. Poinssot; L. Oisianoski; A. Buchala; J. Glazebrook; F. Mauch, Plant J. 2007, 49, 159–172.
270. D. Jirage; T. L. Tootle; T. L. Reuber; L. N. Frost; B. J. Feys; J. E. Parker; F. M. Ausbel; J. Glazebrook, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.
1999, 96, 13583–13588.
271. N. Zhou; T. L. Tootle; F. Tsui; D. F. Klessig; J. Glazebrook, Plant Cell 1998, 10, 1021–1030.
272. R. Schuhegger; T. Rauhut; E. Glawischnig, J. Plant Physiol. 2007, 164, 636–644.
273. Q. Wu; C. L. Presig; H. D. VanEtten, Plant Mol. Biol. 1997, 35, 551–560.
274. O. Kodama; J. Miyakawa; T. Akatsuka; S. Kiyosawa, Phytochemistry 1992, 31, 3807–3809.
275. M. E. Aguero; A. Gevens; R. L. Nicholson, Physiol. Mol. Plant Path. 2002, 61, 267–271.
276. F. Kurosaki; M. Itoh; Y. Kizawa; A. Nishi, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1993, 300, 157–163.
277. F. Kurosaki; M. Itoh; Y. Kizawa; A. Nishi, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1993, 328, 213–217.
278. R. Hain; R.-J. Reif; E. Klause; R. Langebartels; H. Kindlþ; B. Vornam; W. Wiese; E. Schmelzer; P. H. Schreier; R. H. Stocker;
K. Stenzel, Nature 1993, 361, 153–156.
279. J. G. Luis; F. Echeverri; W. Quinones; I. Brito; M. Lopez; F. Torres; G. Cardono; Z. Aguiar; C. Pelaez; M. Rojas, J. Org. Chem.
1993, 58, 4306–4308.
382 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

280. N. Hirai; H. Ishida; K. Koshimizu, Phytochemistry 1994, 37, 383–385.

281. B. Tal; D. Robeson, Phytochemistry 1986, 25, 77–79.
282. K. G. Tietjen; U. Matern, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1984, 229, 136–144.
283. P. S. Marshall; J. B. Harborne; G. S. King, Phytochemistry 1987, 26, 2493–2494.
284. R. D. Durbin, Toxins in Plant Diseases; Academic Press: New York, 1981.
285. K. Kohmoto; H. Otani, Experientia 1991, 47, 755–764.
286. I. Fujii, Polyketide Biosynthesis in Filamentous Fungi. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry; U. Sankawa, Ed.; Elsevier:
Oxford, 1999; Vol. 1, pp 409–441.
287. Y. Kono, Structural Studies on Host-Specific Pathotoxins in Corn Blight and Citrus Brown Spot Diseases. In Phytotoxins
and Plant Pathogenesis, A. Graniti, R. D. Durbin, A. Ballio, Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1989; pp 7–18.
288. S. E. Baker; S. Kroken; P. Inderbitzin; T. Asvarak; B. Y. Li; L. Shi; O. C. Yoder; B. G. Turgeon, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2006,
19, 139–149.
289. S. Yamazaki; A. Okubo; Y. Akiyama; K. Fuwa, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1975, 39, 287–288.
290. M. Choquer; K. L. Dekkers; H. Q. Chen; L. H. Cao; P. P. Ueng; M. E. Daub; K. R. Chung, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2005, 18,
468–476.
291. W. B. Turner; D. C. Aldridge, Fungal Metabolites II; Academic Press: London, 1983.
292. A. Stoessl; J. B. Stothers, Can. J. Chem. 1984, 62, 549–553.
293. G. Langsdorf; N. Furuichi; N. Doke; S. Nishimura, J. Phytopathol. 1990, 128, 271–282.
294. A. Ichihara; H. Tazaki; S. Sakamura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 5373–5376.
295. Y. Mizushina; S. Kamisuki; N. Kasai; N. Shimazaki; M. Takemura; H. Asahara; S. Linn; S. Yoshida; A. Matsukage; O. Koiwai;
F. Sugawara; H. Yoshida; K. Sakaguchi, J. Biol. Chem. 2002, 277, 630–638.
296. H. Oikawa; Y. Suzuki; A. Naya; K. Katayama; A. Ichihara, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1994, 116, 3605–3606.
297. K. Kasahara; T. Miyamoto; T. Fujimoto; H. Oguri; T. Tokiwano; H. Oikawa; Y. Ebizuka; I. Fujii, Unpublished results.
298. H. Otani; A. Kohnobe; M. Kodama; K. Kohmoto, Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1998, 52, 285–295.
299. K. Ito; T. Tanaka; R. Hatta; M. Yamamoto; K. Akimitsu; T. Tsuge, Mol. Microbiol. 2004, 52, 399–411.
300. D. J. Siler; D. G. Gilchrist, Physiol. Plant Pathol. 1983, 23, 263–274.
301. W. Wang; C. Jones; J. Ciacci-Zanella; T. Holt; D. G. Gilchrist; M. B. Dickman, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1996, 93, 3461–3465.
302. T. Tokai; H. Koshino; N. Takahashi-Ando; M. Sato; M. Fujimura; M. Kimura, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2007, 353,
412–417.
303. A. Ichihara; K. Katayama; H. Teshima; H. Oikawa; S. Sakamura, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1996, 60, 360–361.
304. A. Ichihara; K. Shiraishi; H. Sato; S. Sakamura; K. Nishiyama; R. Sakai; A. Furusaki; T. Matsumoto, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1977, 99,
636–637.
305. S. V. Elizabeth; C. L. Bender, Mol. Plant Pathol. 2007, 8, 83–92.
306. R. Lauchli; W. Boland, Chem. Rec. 2003, 3, 12–21.
307. F. H. Vaillancourt; E. Yeh; D. A. Vosburg; S. E. O’Connor; C. T. Walsh, Nature 2005, 436, 1191–1194.
308. M. A. Fischbach; C. T. Walsh, Chem. Rev. 2006, 106, 3468–3496.
309. R. D. Johnson; L. Johnson; K. Kohmoto; H. Otani; C. R. Lane; M. Kodama, Phytopathology 2000, 90, 973–976.
310. W. D. Walton, Phytochemistry 2006, 67, 1406–1413.
311. J. W. Pitkin; A. Nikolskaya; J. H. Ahn; J. D. Walton, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2000, 13, 80–87.
312. S. S. Hirano; C. D. Upper, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2000, 64, 624–653.
313. A. Segre; R. C. Bachmann; A. Ballio; F. Bossa; I. Grgurina; N. S. Iacobellis; G. Marino; P. Pucci; M. Simmaco; J. Y. Takemoto,
FEBS Lett. 1989, 255, 27–31.
314. A. Isogai; N. Fukuchi; S. Yamashita; K. Suyama; A. Suzuki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1989, 53, 3117–3119.
315. F. H. Vaillancourt; J. Yin; C. T. Walsh, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102, 10111–10116.
316. R. S. Tegg; L. Melian; C. R. Wilson; S. Shabala, Plant Cell Physiol. 2005, 46, 638–648.
317. F. G. Healy; M. Wach; S. B. Krasnoff; D. M. Gibson; R. Loria, Mol. Microbiol. 2000, 38, 794–804.
318. M. Würtele; C. Jelich-Ottmann; A. Wittighofer; C. Oecking, EMBO J. 2003, 22, 987–994.
319. N. Kato; C.-S. Zhang; N. Tajima; A. Mori; A. Graniti; T. Sassa, J. Chem. Soc., Chem. Commun. 1999, 367–368.
320. T. Toyomasu; M. Tsukahara; A. Kaneko; R. Niida; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Dairi; N. Kato; T. Sassa, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2007,
104, 3084–3088.
321. Y. Honma; Y. Ishii; Y. Yamamoto-Yamaguchi; T. Sassa; K. Asahi, Cancer Res. 2003, 63, 3659–3666.
322. B. Tudzynski, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2005, 66, 597–611.
323. H. Kawaide, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 583–590.
324. H. Oikawa; S. Ohashi; A. Ichihara; S. Sakamura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1999, 55, 7541–7554.
325. H. Oikawa; T. Toyomasu; H. Toshima; S. Ohashi; H. Kawaide; Y. Kamiya; M. Ohtsuka; S. Shinoda; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Sassa,
J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 5154–5155.
326. L. Sparapano; G. Bruno; O. Fierro; A. Evidente, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 189–198.
327. M. Inomata; N. Hirai; R. Yoshida; H. Ohigashi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 2571–2580.
328. H. Nakajima; Y. Toratsu; Y. Fujii; M. Ichinoe; T. Hamasaki, Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 1013–1016.
329. A. Schenk; M. Berger; L. M. Keith; C. L. Bender; G. Muskhelishvili; M. S. Ullrich, J. Bacteriol. 2006, 188, 8013–8021.
330. E. F. Fradin; B. Thomma, Mol. Plant Pathol. 2006, 7, 71–86.
331. T. Shimizu; K. Miyairi; T. Okuno, Eur. J. Biochem. 2000, 267, 2380–2388.
332. T. Shimizu; T. Nakatsu; K. Miyairi; T. Okuno; H. Kato, J. Appl. Glycosci. 2004, 51, 161–167.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 383

Biographical Sketches

Hisakazu Yamane is a Professor at Biotechnology Research Center, University of Tokyo. He

received his Ph.D. in 1975 in agricultural chemistry from the University of Tokyo. He joined
the Department of Agricultural Chemistry at the University of Tokyo as an Assistant
Professor in 1974 and then moved to Biotechnology Research Center, the University of
Tokyo as an Associate Professor in 1993 and was promoted as Professor in 1998. His present
research focuses on elucidation of molecular mechanisms to activate disease resistance in
higher plants.

Kotaro Konno is a chief researcher at Division of Insect Sciences in the National Institute of
Agrobiological Sciences, Tsukuba, Japan. He received M.Sci. from the University of Tokyo
in 1991. He joined the National Institute of Sericultural and Entomological Science,
Tsukuba, Japan as a researcher in 1994 and was promoted to the present position in 2001.
He received his Ph.D. in agricultural and life sciences from the University of Tokyo in 2002.
He is a chemical ecologist who has worked mainly on plant–herbivore interactions mediated
by plant secondary metabolites and defense proteins, and on the physiological and molecular
adaptation of specialist insect herbivores against plant defenses. He has discovered novel
antiherbivore defense mechanisms of privet trees, mulberry trees, papaya trees, and fig trees,
and the physiological adaptation mechanisms of specialists feeding on these plants, thereby
elucidated an intimate coevolutionary relationship between plants and insects at the mole-
cular level. He is currently interested in studying plant latex as a plant defense system against
insect herbivores and has recently identified several defense chemicals and proteins from the
latex of several plant species.
384 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants

Maurice W. Sabelis is a Professor at the Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics,
University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. He received his Ph.D. degree in theoretical
production ecology and entomology in 1981 from the Agricultural University of
Wageningen. After his Ph.D., he was an Associate Professor for 4 years in the department
of Animal Ecology of Agricultural University of Wageningen and also held that position for
4 years at the University of Leiden. Starting from 1988 he held a chair in population biology
at the University of Amsterdam. In 2006, he was selected to be a KNAW professor in the
service of the Dutch Academy of Sciences. His current research interest concerns the
evolutionary and ecological dynamics of tritrophic systems.

Junji Takabayashi is a Professor at the Center for Ecological Research, Kyoto University. He
received his Ph.D. in 1986 in agricultural biology from Kyoto University. He joined Pesticide
Research Institute, Kyoto University as an instructor in 1987 and then moved to Graduate
School of Agriculture, Kyoto University as an Associate Professor in 1995. In 2000, he was
promoted as Professor. His present research focuses on insect–plant interactions mediated by
chemical information.
 Chemical Defence and Toxins of Plants 385

Takeshi Sassa is a Professor Emeritus at the Faculty of Agriculture, Yamagata University. He

received his Ph.D. (1969) in agricultural chemistry from Nagoya University. He spent 3 years
at Nagoya University, working on bioactive fungal metabolites from 1967, and moved as an
Associate Professor to Faculty of Agriculture, Yamagata University in 1970. He worked as a
Visiting Researcher with Professor R. P. Pharis at Calgary University in 1975. He received an
award for encouragement of young scientists for the study of plant growth substances
produced by fungi from the Japan Society of Bioscience, Biotechnology, and
Agrochemistry in 1975, and the Japanese Society for Chemical Regulation of Plants Award
in 1993. In 1977, he was promoted as Professor at the same faculty. He retired in 2005, and
then spent 2 years as a Visiting Professor at the same faculty to study the biosynthesis,
including cyclases, of fungal diterpenoids. His present research focuses on creation of a
differentiation-inducing anticancer substance by chemical modification of fungal diterpene
glucosides, cotylenin, and fusicoccin.

Hideaki Oikawa is a Professor at the Division of Chemistry and the Graduate School of
Science, Hokkaido University. He received his Ph.D. in 1984 in organic chemistry from
Hokkaido University. He worked as a postdoctoral fellow with Professor D. E. Cane at Brown
University from 1984 and with Dr. K. Isono at RIKEN in Japan from 1985. He joined the
Department of Agriculture, Hokkaido University as an Assistant Professor in 1986 and was
promoted as Associate Professor in 1999. He attained the present position in 2003. He
received an award for encouragement of young scientists for the study of biosynthesis of
natural products involving Diels–Alder reaction from the Japan Society of Bioscience,
Biotechnology, and Agrochemistry in 1993, and the Chemical Society of Japan Award for
Creative Work in 2004. His present research focuses on engineering of biosynthesis of natural
products, combinatorial biochemistry, and reaction mechanism of C–C bond forming
enzymes.
 4.09 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial
and Freshwater Animals
Konrad Dettner, University of Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.09.1 Introduction 387

4.09.2 Alveolata 388
4.09.3 Porifera 390
4.09.4 Cnidaria 390
4.09.5 Platyhelminthes (Flatworms) 391
4.09.6 Nemathelminthes: Nematoda 391
4.09.7 Rotatoria (Rotifers) 391
4.09.8 Nemertini 391
4.09.9 Mollusca 392
4.09.10 Annelida: Clitellata: Oligochaeta 393
4.09.11 Annelida: Clitellata: Hirudinea 394
4.09.12 Arthropoda: Onychophora 394
4.09.13 Arthropoda: Tardigrada 395
4.09.14 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Ostracoda 395
4.09.15 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Decapoda 395
4.09.16 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Amphipoda 395
4.09.17 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Isopoda 395
4.09.18 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Scorpiones 396
4.09.19 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Pseudoscorpiones 396
4.09.20 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Acari (Mites) 396
4.09.21 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Opiliones 398
4.09.22 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Pedipalpi 400
4.09.23 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Araneae 401
4.09.24 Arthropoda: Myriapoda: Opisthogoneata (Centipedes) 402
4.09.25 Arthropoda: Myriapoda: Progoneata: Diplopoda (Millipedes) and Symphyla 403
References 407

4.09.1 Introduction

Terrestrial and freshwater animals possess various mechanisms for defense against predatory or patho-
genic organisms.1,2 In all animals, defensive substances may be present in tissues, the blood (nonglandular
secretion), and exocrine eversible or noneversible glands. Occasionally, such compounds are found in
regurgitants or enteric discharges and defecations.3 Certainly, all developmental stages from eggs to
adults,4 and also from monocellular to multicellular organisms, that is, from protozoans to vertebrates,
may be chemically protected. Many of these natural products represent simple, widely distributed
chemicals; however, there are also various unique products,5 frequently restricted to special taxa. The
glands may represent oozing, spraying, reactor, or tracheal glands.3 It is also of interest to investigate
whether animals manufacture their own toxic or distasteful compounds (intrinsic origin) or whether
behavior-modifying chemicals are acquired from host plants, other animals, bacteria, or fungi (extrinsic

387
388 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

origin). Considerable biosynthetic knowledge is especially available in insects,6 while data from other
animals are less available or missing. Usually, defensive compounds may exert their effect via foul smell
(repellents) or bad taste (deterrent). Very often, defensive compounds may induce cleaning behavior in
the aggressor, giving the prey time to escape. There are a number of irritant compounds that may also
induce pain. Examples include nonspecific toxicants, or hot secretions. Especially, urticating hairs and
delivery of venom by injectable means, for example, stings or fangs, are widely observed. Venoms are
usually complex aqueous mixtures of proteins (enzymes), peptides, carbohydrates, nucleosides, biogenic
amines, amino acids, lipids, and metallic cations. Many of these toxins represent presynaptic and
postsynaptic neurotoxins, cytotoxins, myotoxins, and cardiotoxins. These poisons may act immediately
or may show delayed effects (e.g., emetics, vesicants). Certain animals may secrete sticky components
that harden like glues and incapacitate attackers.3 The chemistry of these sticky, slimy, or resinous fluids
is often not well known.
This chapter focuses on low molecular defensive compounds, typical products of secondary metabolism;
however, it also covers principal data on high-molecular, behavior-modifying chemicals. Taxonomically,
this compilation covers all protozoan and metazoan taxa apart from Deuterostomia (especially vertebrates)
and Insecta. Allelochemicals of insects and vertebrates are not included as these have been recently
reviewed,7,8 and the actual data will be published elsewhere. Whenever possible, actual reviews are cited
and updated. Chemical structures of chiral compounds depicted here reflect the relative or absolute
configurations of the substances as far as they are known today. Concerning a wide array of organisms,
there exist actual surveys of chemical defenses of insects,3,11–15 arthropods,2,3,4–7,9,10–16 or animals in
general.13–15 However, until now, many taxonomically lower animal taxa have never been reviewed with
respect to chemical defense. Therefore, here such phenomena are cited in selected taxa even if no or
scarce chemical data on the relevant natural compounds are available. Various reviews approach venoms
and toxins of animals more generally,15–21 and sometimes may include low molecular defensive com-
pounds.16 Taxonomic data are especially taken from Dettner and Peters,22 Storch and Welsch,23 Westheide
and Rieger,24 and Resh and Cardé.25 Chemicals of extrinsic origin are not dealt with in detail; however,
they may be of special interest if they are chemically modified during metabolic processes.

4.09.2 Alveolata

Alveolata include the former unicellular Dinoflagellata, Ciliophora (Ciliata), and Apicomplexa (Sporozoa). It is
interesting to note that toxic species within unicellular eukaryotes seem to be restricted to representatives of
Alveolata. Among 2500 species of Dinoflagellata, several mostly photosynthetic and marine species produce or
accumulate toxins.26 Only representatives of the freshwater and marine genus Gymnodinium are known to
produce the pentacyclic imine gymnodimine (1),27 which is moderately toxic (LD50: intraperitoneal injection,
mouse, 96 mg kg1).
Some heterotrich ciliates possess specialized exocytotic organelles, the extrusomes. Upon molestation, these
structures may discharge material to the cell surface. Especially in ciliates, there are haptocysts (with toxic
enzymes), mucocysts (with a protective coat), trichocysts (spindle-shaped bodies with paracrystalline matrix),
and toxicysts (tubular structures).28 Recently, it was discovered that the blue and red pigments stentorin (2) and
blepharismin (3), two polyketides from the exocytotic organelles of Stentor and Blepharisma, primarily act as
chemical defense of these Ciliophora against small predators.29 The same function was ascribed to climacostol
(4, 5-(Z)-non-2-enylresorcinol) and the two congeners of climacostol (5, 5-(Z,Z)-undeca-2,5-dienylresorcinol;
6, 5-(Z,Z,Z)-undeca-2,5,8-trienylresorcinol), three colorless lipids isolated from the heterotrich ciliate
Climacostomum.30
In addition, spirostomin, spiro[(2.5-dimethyl-5,6,7,8-tetrahydronaphthalene-1,4-dione)-8,69-(pyrane-29,59-
dione)], was identified from the ciliate Spirostomum teres.31 It exhibits toxic activities against predatory ciliates.
As shown by bioassays, the karyorelictid ciliate Loxodes striatus may release toxin-containing yellow-brown
extrusomes, which repel predators such as Dileptus (Ciliata) and Stenostomum (Turbellaria).32
Other high molecular toxins were recorded from the Apicomplexa (Sporozoa). A protein–hyaluronic acid
complex (toxotoxin) was described from peritoneal exudates of mice, which is probably produced by hosts in
 OH O OH OH O OH
H OH
O
O HO
O HO OH OH
HO
HO OH OH
HO
N
OH [1]
[2] [3]
OH O OH OH O OH

HO
[4]
OH OH

HO HO
[5] [6]
390 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

response to coccid infections.33 Moreover, there are known toxic Toxoplasma lysates, such as toxoplasmine,
extracts from the cysts of Sarcocystis (Sarcocystin), or an Eimeria toxin.34 A further toxofactor, a glycoprotein
(molecular mass (MM) 50 000–100 000), was found to be associated with Toxoplasma gondii.35

[8] HOOC

N
[9]
[13] HOOC
N

[10] HOOC
OH CO
HN
O O O
HO S [11] HOOC
OH
O O OH
[12] HOOC
[7]

4.09.3 Porifera

The sessile sponges (10 000 species), especially marine species36 and also dry powders of freshwater species,37
may contain a large array of bioactive molecules and may be even used as pharmaceuticals. Also freshwater
species of the family Spongillidae contain more than 100 novel unusual and rare fatty acids, lipids, and sterols.38
From the freshwater species Ephydatia syriaca, syriacin (7) was isolated. It is a novel unusual sulfated ceramide
glycoside containing a branched long-chain fatty acid, that is, (all Z)-34S-methylhexatriaconta-5,9,12,15,18,21-
hexaenoic acid.39 Syriacin showed a distinct antifeeding activity against goldfish. Other freshwater species of
the genera Ephydatia, Nudospongilla, and Cortispongilla produce multibranched polyunsaturated and long-chain
fatty acids (8–12) that are active against Gram-positive bacteria and have been proved to be toxic against the
shrimp Artemia salina.40 Among these compounds, 9 shows an unusual carbon skeleton as the 6,9-methyl
branching includes two unsubstituted carbons, which is not in line with a typical biosynthetic scheme involving
acetate and propanoate. Finally, a Lubomirskia species from the Lake Baikal and its symbiotic dinoflagellates,
which are related to Gymnodinium sanguineum (see gymnodimine (1)), contain the polyether toxin okadaic acid.
In the sponge, this strong protein phosphatase 2A inhibitor is present in the free form as well as in a protein-
bound state. The authors suppose that the toxin may contribute to the cold resistance of the sponge.41

4.09.4 Cnidaria

Just as Porifera, the sessile, predatory, and often soft-bodied Cnidaria (9200 species) depend on offensive and
defensive allomones for prey capture and survival. This is also true for the small group of freshwater species
belonging to Hydrina (Capitata). The nematocyst venom of Hydra vulgaris has been reported to exhibit strong
neurotoxic and hemolytic activities and a phospholipatic activity similar to snake venoms.42 Venom fractionation
revealed the presence of a high-molecular-weight (100–200 kDa) toxic cytolysin (a pore-forming substance), a
toxic phospholipase, and a 30–100 kDa neurotoxin causing paralysis and death in Drosophila. By a bioinformatic
approach in Hydra magnipapillata, orthologues of cnidarian phospholipase A2 (PLA2) toxins and cytolysins were
found, which belong to the actinoporin family. Hydra magnipapillata also expresses proteins similar to elapid-like
(elapid PLA2s) and Conus-like phospholipases (Conus PLA2, conodipine-M), CRISP proteins (cysteine-rich
secretory protein: wasp venom antigen 5), prokineticin-like polypeptides, and toxic deoxyribonucleases.42 In
contrast, short-chain neurotoxins affecting sodium and potassium conductance were found to be absent in
H. magnipapillata.42 From noncnidocystic origin, a paralysis-inducing neurotoxin was isolated from Chlorohydra
viridissima.43 The compound showed cytotoxic activities against insect cells but not against mammalian tissue.
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 391

It was also reported that polyps of the freshwater jelly-fish Craspedacusta produce toxins which may damage larvae
of freshwater fishes and amphibians.

4.09.5 Platyhelminthes (Flatworms)

Flatworms with a total of about 22 500 species distributed worldwide (75% of the marine, limnic, or terrestrial
species are parasitic) are chemically poorly studied but use interesting means for chemical defense. Many species
show active and passive toxicities, and planarian extracts usually cause severe reactions when they are applied
intraperitoneally into vertebrates.44 Epidermal and subepidermal gland cells of flatworms produce various types of
ovoid solid gland secretions (rhabdoids), which are especially typical for representatives of Rhabditophora. These
solid proteinaceous secretions are characterized by an enormous swelling and sorption capacity.45 The material
protects against bacteria and fungi, may close wounds, and represents a deterrent against fish.46 In addition, the
multiciliar epidermis of many species together with frontal glands may produce large amounts of mucus (for
planarian locomotion or fixation of prey) or may generate mucus, which is formed from rhabdites.47 Few species
may penetrate with their male sexual organs into prey and paralyze them with secretions produced by associated
toxin glands.44 From predatory planarians (e.g., Mesostoma), both ‘mucus-trapping’ of prey48 and release of a
chemically unknown neurotoxin into the water for catching prey are known.49 Finally, Microstomum species may
take up toxic nematocysts from Hydra polyps, which are subsequently used as defense against aggressors.44

4.09.6 Nemathelminthes: Nematoda

This large group of economically important animals includes more than 15 000 species found in different environ-
ments such as freshwater and soil. Basic data on the bionomy or chemical ecology of this group are rare; however,
there are predatory species (e.g., Aphelenchoides) that may kill their prey by injecting unknown toxic and proteolytic
secretions from esophageal glands with the help of stylets or teeth.50 In addition, Ascaris species rely on an internal
peptide-based antibacterial system to destroy Gram-negative (linear peptide cecropin P1) or Gram-positive
(cysteine-rich ASABF peptides) bacteria.51 As was shown in Caenorhabditis elegans with the presence of p38 mito-
gen-activated protein (MAP) kinase pathway, a conserved innate immune defense system against pathogens exists.52
Because of the increased internal pressure (‘Hydroskelett’), dissected mawworms emit malodorous com-
pounds, which are present in both perienteric fluid and tissues of these nematodes. During dissection, these
volatiles may evoke pruritus, inflammation of the eye, and vomiting in humans. In Ascaris lumbricoides, and also
in other species such as Parascaris equorum, formic, acetic, propionic, n-butyric, 2-methylbutanoic, and caproic
acids (C5- and C6-acids: main compounds) were found along with unidentified C5-, unsaturated acids.53
These acids are probably derived from mawworm metabolism and are not formed by microbial activity.

4.09.7 Rotatoria (Rotifers)

Very small-sized rotifers dominate in various freshwater habitats. As a defense against predators, many species
possess an intrasyncytial covering that may be either flexible or rigid and hard. Uniquely, colonies of the
freshwater colonial rotifer Sinantherina socialis (Monogononta, Flosculariidae) have been shown to be unpala-
table to various zooplantivorous fish54 and aquatic invertebrates (dragonfly and damselfly larvae, notonectids,
Hydra).55 Actually, the origin and chemistry of these deterrents are unknown.

4.09.8 Nemertini

Nemertini worms, which are mainly found in the sea and also occur on land and in freshwater habitats, comprise
about 1100 mostly predatory species. Various toxins are found in integumentary tissues (especially pseudocnidia
and rhabdoids) and glandular epithelia that are associated with the stylet and proboscis. Known toxins
are neurotoxic pyridyl toxins such as anabaseine (17), 2,39-bipyridyl, and nemertelline, the last of which is
392 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

made up of four pyridine subunits.56 However, toxic peptides such as Cerebratulus toxins A II, A III, B II, B IV as
well as cytolysins, amphiporine, and nemertine have also been found. It is suggested that protein toxins serve as
chemical defense against predators, whereas pyridine alkaloid toxins represent both offensive and defensive
toxins.

4.09.9 Mollusca

In order to defend against invertebrate or vertebrate predators, land and freshwater snails usually produce large
quantities of viscous mucus. The solids in the mucus are slightly more concentrated than the blood. In
Oxcychilus alliarius the mucus consisted of 6.8% solids composed of inorganics (8%), proteins (77%), and
carbohydrates (15%; e.g., fructose, glucose, galactose, glucosamine, galactosamine).57 The viscosity of the
mucus is variable and is highly dependent on divalent-ion content of the slime, which is important on
molestation. If an enemy pierces the body wall of certain slug species, crystal-laden integumental cells void
their white contents into the slime, which coagulates.3 Specific 15 kDa glue proteins may cross-link other
proteins in the gel, resulting in rapid precipitation as soon as substantial quantities of zinc (46–189 ppm) and/or
lower amounts of iron, copper, and manganese are added.58 On repeating the experiment by adding a chelator,
the viscosity of the secretion was found to be very low. It is also remarkable that layers of mucus that were
originally deposited as trails may be incorporated into a new thinner slime trail by another trail-following slug
individual, which represents an effective mechanism of energy saving.59
As compared to marine snails where toxins and defensive compounds are abundant, chemical defence in
terrestrial snails seems to be rare. The eggs of terrestrial Arion snails were found to contain the first-characterized
more complex diterpene miriamin (14).60 This polyoxygenated geranylgeraniol derivative was shown to be an
antifeedant against beetles. Few other similar miriamin analogues were identified from Asteraceae, where
analogues occur as free alcohols. The authors suggest these compounds to be biosynthesized de novo by the slugs.
Chemically unknown tissue toxins from internal organs that may kill Pterostichus carabids are uniquely
known from the milacid slug Tandonia budapestensis,61 which shows an aposematic coloration (orange dorsal
line). Moreover, Balea, Chondrina, and Helicigona species sequester the anthraquinone parietin (15) and the
depside atranorin (16) (and degradation products; 17) from lichens they feed upon and may transfer these
compounds into eggs and neonates.62 Other lichen metabolites such as (þ)-usnic acid (18) and -collatolic acid
(19) were not found in the snails’ body but appeared in their feces. These data, along with feeding experiments
with Arion lusitanicum and various alkaloids such as sparteine, lupanine, quinidine, and atropine indicated that
slugs can manage very well with toxic compounds and have a higher tolerance against such alkaloids than
vertebrates.63
Obviously, further species of the genera Pomacea (freshwater) and Theba (terrestrial, Mediterranean, bitter-
tasting61) contain unknown toxic compounds or deplete luminant slime as was observed in the freshwater snail
Latia neritoides (Lymnaeidae, Basommatophora) from New Zealand.64 When touched, the latter species secretes
the sticky luminescent slime, which repels predators and releases cleaning behavior.65 The bioluminescence
involves a 178 kDa luciferase, the formiate of the enol of a nor-sesquiterpene aldehyde (20, (E)-2-methyl-4-
(2,6,6-trimethylcyclohexenyl)but-1-enylformate) and a protein. A catalytic role was suggested for this purple
protein, which has to be confirmed. The emitter was suggested to be a protein-bound flavin.66 Dyakia striata
represents the only land mollusk known to be luminescent. The chemically unknown secretions are produced
from gland cells situated below the mucous gland in the anterior part of the foot. However, the luminous
reaction does not take place upon disturbance.65
Aposematically colored eggs of Pomacea are rejected by various predators from fish to birds.67 Finally, it is
known that southern African carnivorous slugs of Chlamydephoridae (hunter slugs) killed or immobilized
earthworms, other snails, or diplopods by transferring a chemically unknown toxin from the anterior pedal
mucous gland.68 Upon molestation, the garlic snail Oxychilus alliarius produces a distinct garlic-like odor, which
is due to 1-propanethiol (21), and deters hedgehogs.69 The compounds are produced at the right side of the
mantle close to the pneumostome. The secretions represent proteinaceous material enriched with sulfur
compounds. During isotope-labeling experiments, 35S was incorporated into the tissue of the odor gland (two
cell types), which discharges its secretion into a groove of the pneumostome. The related species, Hyalinia
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 393

cheliella, was also described as odorous. Furthermore, mantle glands, which possibly secrete defensive secretions,
are found in representatives of the genera Cassidula, Oncidielle, and Carychium tridentatum.
O OH O
OH O OH
O O O O

O O
O
O O [14] [15] [16]
O O HO OH
O
CHO

OH O

O
O
O OCHO
HO O OH
[17]
O OH
[20]
O O O
O O
HO OH SH
[19]
[21]
O
OH O
[18]

4.09.10 Annelida: Clitellata: Oligochaeta

Several species of earthworms (4000 species) are unpalatable or exhibit an unpleasant smell. In these species,
between segments 5 and 15, dorsal pores are found through which worms such as Eisenia foetida may actively
deplete malodorous coelomic fluid to defend against aggressors. Coelomic fluid together with coelomocytes
can also be experimentally obtained through these pores by electric stimulation of the worms.70 In certain
species such as Pheretima ophiodes, Megascolides australis, and Didymogaster sylvaticus, this fluid can be maximally
shot up to 1 m or more.71 It has been shown that the coelomic fluid especially of E. foetida is toxic to vertebrates
but not to invertebrates.72 This toxicity is partly due to a 41 kDa protein called lysenin, which binds specifically
to sphingomyelin.73 Apart from lysenin, a lysenin-related protein and the cytolytic eiseniapore (38 kDa74) and
two other related 40 and 45 kDa hemolytic and antibacterial hemolysins called fetidins could be recorded from
E. foetida.75,76 Moreover, this species contains an antibacterial peptide, OEP3121, with an MM of 510.8 Da
(sequence: ACSAG) in its hemolymph.77
It is remarkable that various representatives of 5 families (terrestrial species: Acanthodrilidae
Magascolecidae, Lumbricidae, Octochaetidae; freshwater species: Enchytraeidae) out of 32 families include
luminescent species. In response to a mechanical stimulation, most of these species become luminous during
exuding coelomic fluid and its free cells through dorsal pores.78,79 In Diplocardia earthworms, a copper-
dependent oligomeric luciferase of 300 kDa acts as a catalyst in a bioluminescent reaction involving the
degradation of 3-(isovalerylamino)-1-hydroxy-1-propyl hydroperoxide (23). This substrate is formed sponta-
neously on addition of hydrogen peroxide to Diplocardia luciferin (3-(isovalerylamino)propanal) (22).79 Both in
Fridericia heliota and in the genus Henlea there was detected a luciferin-luciferase reaction which is not
H2O2–dependent and does neither cross react with Diplocardia luciferin nor with reaction components from
the firefly Photinus pyralis.79 In Fridericia luciferin is a stable compound (0.5–0.7 kDa) whereas it is unstable in
Henlea. The Fridericia- luciferase is a dimer of about 60 kDa (requiring O2, ATP and Mg2þ), the Henlea-
luciferase is a homodimer of 72 kDa, which requires O2 and Ca2þ as activators.79
394 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

H H
N H + H2O2 N O OH

O O O OH
[22] [23]

Whether carnivorous earthworms such as Agastrodrilus dominicae use toxins to kill other species or conspecifics is
yet to be determined.71 As a whole, chemical defense mechanisms of terrestrial and freshwater earthworms have
been poorly studied.

4.09.11 Annelida: Clitellata: Hirudinea

Most of the 600 species of leeches are predatory or ectoparasites; few of them are used in medicine and
veterinary medicine.80,81 In order to paralyze or consume an invertebrate or vertebrate prey, leeches inject
various gland constituents from salivary glands into their victims but they are also able to conserve ingested
vertebrate blood by antibiotics and may concentrate it. From Hirudo medicinalis and H. verbena, about 40 different
salivary gland constituents are known.
Hirudin, a peptide consisting of 65 amino acids from H. medicinalis, is known to inhibit blood coagulation by
binding to thrombin just as hementin from Haementaria ghilianii, which decomposes fibrinogen and fibrin.81,82 In
contrast, factor Xa inhibitor inhibits the activity of coagulation factor IXa and forms equimolar complexes.
Calin, another peptide, inhibits both collagen-mediated platelet aggregation and binding of Willebrand factor
to collagen. Moreover, destabilase may dissolve fibrin and show thrombolytic effects, whereas hirustasin
inhibits kallikrein, trypsin, chymotrypsin, and neutropholic cathepsin G. Bdellins and eglins, among other
inhibitory functions, are anti-inflammatory. Hyaluronidase increases interstitial viscosity, acts as a ‘spreading
factor’ and tryptase inhibitor, and inhibits proteolytic decomposition of host mast cells. In addition, salivary
secretions of H. medicinalis contain complement and carboxypeptidase inhibitors, histamine-like substances, and
acetylcholine as vasodilators and anesthetic substances.
Interestingly, the slime of Glossiphonia and other leeches may evoke a remarkable defensive behavior in fresh-
water snails of the genus Physa.83 It is remarkable that salivary glands in Gnathobdelliformes open at the teeth
surface, whereas in Rhynchobdelliformes salivary glands are associated with the base of the extrusible proboscis.

4.09.12 Arthropoda: Onychophora

Onychophoran species (180 species) produce a sticky secretion in their large paired slime glands for entangling
of prey and also for self-defense. The fluid material is rapidly ejected (maximally 30 cm distance) from a pair of
oral papillae, is denatured by the air, and develops increasingly sticky whitish threads.84 In the laboratory,
Peripatopsis may deplete its secretion 10 times per 2 min and afterward needs about 20 min in order to
regenerate.84 Only after 5–6 weeks, young onychophorids are capable of ejecting secretion.
The onychophorid secretion consists of threads of varying diameter and represents a composite material
containing protein, sugar, lipid, and a surfactant.85 On the hydrofuge tuberculate surface of onychophorids, the
secretion quickly decomposes and is eliminated. In a Peripatopsis species,86 the secretion is stored in a watery
glycine/glutaminic acid buffer and consists of 84% water and 16% proteine. Mainly glycine (41%), glutamic
acid (11%), aspartic acid (2.7%), and lysine (1.3%) could be recorded as free amino acids. In an Euperipatoides
species, the amino acid composition (mainly glycine: 27.25%; proline: 13%; lysine: 6.9%) of the slime (90%
water) suggests the presence of collagen or collagen-like compounds. About 1.3% of the dry weight of the slime
gland contains sugars, which is due to the O-glycosylation proteins especially as N-galactosamine.85 Moreover,
the slime contains small amounts of C18 fatty acids and several isomers of nonylphenol as surfactants with
2-nonylphenol (24) as the main constituent.85 As nonylphenols are widespread environmental pollutants, it
remains to be checked whether the identified group of isomers represent true natural products. Probably, lipids
prevent the slime gland secretions from adhering to the interior wall of the gland tissue.
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 395

[24]
OH

4.09.13 Arthropoda: Tardigrada

The very small aquatic and terrestrial tardigrades with about 700 species possess stylets behind their mound
opening, which are associated with a large gland. It is not exactly known whether those predatory species
feeding on Rotatoria, nematodes, enchytraeids, or other tardigrades secrete either digestion enzymes or toxins
that may immobilize the prey.24

4.09.14 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Ostracoda

Ostracoda represent small, often planktonic, crustaceans from marine, brackish, and freshwaters and comprise
62 000 fossil and recent species. Despite the fact that apparently no toxic species exist, some of them show
unusual abilities in that they may survive the gut passage of predatory fish. Among the freshwater species, 26%
of experimental specimens belonging to the ostracod Cypriodopsis vidua traversed the gut of bluegill sunfish
apparently unharmed,87 which might be due to mechanical defense. Vargula (Cypridina) hilgendorfii and also
other mainly marine species from the genera Cypridina and Pyrocypris may produce luminescent signals to
surprise and deter predators. The Cypridina luciferin, 2-[3-[2-[(2S)-but-2-yl]-6-(1H-indol-3-yl)-3-oxo-7H-
imidazo[2,1-c]pyrazin-8-yl]propyl]guanidine, comprises moieties of tryptophan, arginine, and isoleucine, and
is enzymatically oxidized to an oxyluciferin. Both enzyme and substrate are ejected into the water from a gland
localized in the upper lip. In contrast to fireflies, there is no need for ATP or other substances.88 The same
luciferin is also trophically transferred into certain fish species.88

4.09.15 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Decapoda

Among this large crustacean group, comprising 18 000 species, various defense mechanisms exist ranging from
autotomy of legs or pincers, to mechanical defense such as hard carapaces and spines. Chemical defense seems
very rare. In Japan (Lake Suwa) and India (Chilka Lake), the freshwater shrimp Xiphocaridina (Paratya) compressa
and the brackish water species Pennaeus indicus produce bioluminescence due to infection by bacteria.88

4.09.16 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Amphipoda

The more than 6000 species show various mechanisms of defense against predators. In marine species,
amphipod luminescence always seems to be a defensive response.88 In the freshwater species Hyalella azteca, a
bioluminescence caused by bacteria was reported.89

4.09.17 Arthropoda: Crustacea, Isopoda

Upon molestation, many woodlice (Isopoda; more than 10 000 species) may discharge a malodorous sticky fluid
(in Oniscus asellus: amount 48–54 mg per individual) from the uropods, where the material is produced by
internal gland cells. The fluid material is collected within the uropod grooves and forms a small droplet at the
uropod tips, which may be pulled into long threads.90,91 The proteinaceous secretion is unusually rich in
glycine (21%) and proline (14%) and coagulates because of a polymerization process. The maximal molecular
weight of the protein amounts to 13 500. The low level of hydroxyproline (0.5–1%), cysteine (0.5%), and
396 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

valine (3%) indicates that the isopod material is not related to collagen-like, mollusk adhesive-like, or elastin-
like proteins.90 The secretion although not toxic evidently represents a deterrent to various ants and is also
directed against spiders.92
Additional glands, opening laterally of tergal plates, also discharge upon molestation. The chemically
unknown secretion is said to have deterrent activities against spiders.90

4.09.18 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Scorpiones

Toxins of scorpions (about 1300 species worldwide) are produced by a pair of glands that are covered by muscles and
are found in the telson (bulbous vesicle and needle-like oculeus), that is, the abdominal tip. Both exit ducts of the
venom glands open via two apertures before the tip of the oculeus.93,94 Scorpions use their venoms either when
hunting and seizing prey or when they are threatened. Envenomation by scorpions can be usually effected by stinging
and in a few cases (species with large tail segments and large venom vesicles such as Hadrurus and Parabuthus,
respectively) by squirting (emission of a fine spray for distances of up to 1 m is possible). If these venoms enter the eye
or open lesions, the consequences might be similar to those caused by cobra envenomation by spitting.95 The milky
secretions of these selected species may act as allergens and smell like mustard.94
Scorpionid secretions represent a mixture of neurotoxic polypeptide toxins, proteolytic and hemolytic
enzymes (phospholipases A, acetylcholinesterases, ribonucleases, hyaluronidases), and biogenic amines
(serotonin, tryptamine, histamine). The polypeptide toxins (the so-called scorpamines) contain fewer than 40
or 60–76 mostly alkaline and aromatic amino acids stabilized by four disulfide bridges.20,96
Neurotoxins of scorpions especially represent ion channel toxins that mainly affect sodium and potassium
channels. Several compounds represent neurotoxins that are directed selectively against insects.97 Naþ channel-
specific -, -, and -toxins are composed of 58–76 amino acids and contain four stabilizing disulfide bridges.98 The
well-studied Kþ channel-specific toxins (divided into at least nine distinct peptide subfamilies) bind to the extra-
cellular face of the channel and comprise 29–39 amino acids stabilized by 3–4 disulfide bridges.99 Various Ca2þ
channel scorpion toxins, antimicrobial peptides, and short insectotoxins active on Cl channels have been found.96

4.09.19 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Pseudoscorpiones

Members of most families of predaceous Pseudoscorpiones (more than 3000 species) possess poison glands located in
one or both chelal fingers.100 The secretion, which is present in most members of Chelonethi, is used for anesthetizing
or killing larger prey organisms such as arachnids or insects. It acts very fast, and also in humans painful effects may be
observed.101 No detailed chemical data exist on the secretions; however, components of the venom of Paratemnus
elongates have been found to act in the binding and dynamics of transmitters L-glutamate and GABA, which was
investigated at synaptosomal membranes of rat cerebral cortex.102 Therefore, these venoms can serve as tools and new
drug models for understanding neurotransmissions.

4.09.20 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Acari (Mites)

With about 400 families and 50 000 species (probably more than 100 000), Acari represent economically and
medically the most important Chelicerata, which are found in almost all habitats.
As can be expected by their varying biology, mites show manifold mechanisms to avoid predation, such as
jumping away, shedding of legs (autotomy), curling legs against body (thanatosis), armored cuticles (e.g., beetle
and armored mites), withdrawal of legs under armored cuticle shields (e.g., box mites), erection of spiny long
setae, and covering of integuments with wax, soil particles, or detritus.103 In addition, many mite species are
aposematically colored or possess exocrine glands with allomones, alarm pheromones,103 and may also contain
aggregation or sex pheromones or compounds with antifungal or bactericidal activities.
Obviously, chemical defense is widespread in Acari; however, due to their small size, chemistry and
biological significance of the secretions are poorly known.
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 397

Acari are divided into Anactinotrichida (Parasitiformes in a wider sense) and Actinotrichida (Acariformes).
Among Anactinotrichida, defensive compounds, toxins, and antibacterial agents are found in representatives of
Holothyrida, Ixodida, and Gamasida. In Holothyrida (Tetrastigmata), nymphs of Allothyrus mites produce
defensive droplets from gland openings when molested.104 In Ixodida (Metastigmata; ticks), certain species are
known to transmit pathogens, but in addition it is found that during blood meals neurotoxins from salivary glands
of more than 80 (of 870) ixodid species worldwide may be transferred into vertebrates (e.g., humans, cows, sheep,
birds) and cause tick paralysis. Worldwide, thousands of animals (cows and sheep) are killed, and interference with
neuromuscular transmission seems to represent the primary target of these toxins. At first a 40–80 kDa protein
fraction from Ixodes holocyclus seemed to contain the toxin called holocyclotoxin.105 Later, a 6 kDa toxin with 50
amino acids was isolated from the same species and was found to be homologous to scorpion and spider toxins. It is
suggested that one of several closely related toxins alone may cause the paralysis syndrome. According to Jones,106
another red-colored, water-soluble toxin from the tick’s cuticle may cause respiratory paralysis in mice. Recently,
further low-molecular-mass paralysis toxins could be isolated such as an 11 kDa toxin from Argas107 or four tick
salivary gland proteins (TSGPs) from Ornithodoros, which were assigned to the protein family of lipocalins.108

OH O CHO CHO OH O
OH CHO OH
O
OH
[25] [26] [27] [28] [29] [30]
OH O
O O O O
H3C
O O O H
O
O
OH O [31] CH3 [32] [33] [34] [35] [36]

H OH H OH
H [41]
[42]
N N N

[37] [43]

H [39] [40] [44]

N O
[45]
H H
[38]

It was furthermore suggested that some metastriate ticks produce gland secretions that protect them from
ants.103
In Ornithodoros ticks, the peptide defensin A and three isoforms of defensin were recorded to be secreted into
the midgut lumen and, therefore, provide midgut defense.109
With respect to chemical defense, most species of the Gamasida or Mesostigmata seem to be nonsecreting.
However, Sakata et al. 110 could identify the two hydroxymethyl naphthoquinones plumbagin (30) (5-hydroxy-
2-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone) and 7-methyljuglone (31) (5-hydroxy-7-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone) in
Uroactinia hirschmanni, which has several exocrine glands.
Among Actinotrichida (Acariformes), defensive compounds and growth regulators were recorded from
Actinedida, Oribatida, and Acaridida.
Eriophyoid mites from Actinedida (Trombidiformes) are reported to produce unknown chemicals in their
salivary glands with plant growth regulatory effects. These activities were tested by using a wheat coleoptile and an
excised cotyledon growth test, which are used for recording indole-3-acetic acid (IAA)-like and cytokinin-like
398 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

activities.111 In certain dytiscid water beetles, IAA and other growth-promoting substances with weak fungicidal
and bactericidal activities are present in typical defensive glands such as the pygidial glands.112
Many mite species are aposematically colored but especially in water mites (Hydrachnidia), which are
usually avoided by fish (only occasionally found in fish stomachs) and many invertebrate predators, a foul taste
(secretion probably from dorsal skin glands) may be correlated with bright colors especially red.103
Apart from some primitive oribatid groups (Palaeosomata, Enarthronota), all the remaining (the so-called
glandulate oribatids) representatives of Oribatida (Cryptostigmata: Parhyposomata, Mixonomata, Desmonomata,
Brachypylina) and Acaridida (Astigmata) are characterized by opisthonotal or oil glands, which represent cuticle-
lined exocrine glands that open laterally through pores on the opisthonotum.113 It is remarkable that the secretions
of these mites, which are used for defense or as alarm pheromones, have only recently been investigated. The
following were identified: several alkanes such as tridecane (41), pentadecane (42), heptadecane, alkenes and
alkadienes such as 1-tridecene, pentadecene, (Z)-8-heptadecene, (Z,Z)-6,9-heptadecadiene (43),114 and also 3-
ethylphenol (28),115 1-methyl-2-naphthol (29),115 -acaridial (2-formyl-3-hydroxybenzaldehyde) (27), neral
(33), geranial (34),115 (E,E) (45)- and (Z,E)-farnesal, geranial,116 9,17-octadecadienal117 (tentatively), geranyl
formate (35),118 neryl formate, 1,8-cineole,119 (3S,8S)-chrysomelidial (32),117 the diterpene -springene (44)
(tentatively),117 and 2-hydroxy-6-methylbenzaldehyde (26).120
It is remarkable that the oribatid mite Scheloribates azumaensis was found to contain several alkaloids that are also
present in the skins of dendrobatid poison frogs.121 Pumiliotoxin 237A (8-hydroxy-8-methyl-6-(29-methylpenty-
lidene)-1-azabicyclo [4.3.0] nonane, 39), pumiliotoxin 251D (8-hydroxy-8-methyl-6-(29-methylhexylidene)-1-
azabicyclo [4.3.0] nonane, 40), deoxypumiliotoxin 193H (37), a 6,8-diethyl-5-propenylindolizidine, and a
1-ethyl-4-pentenylquinolizidine could be identified. Moreover, precoccinelline 193C (38) and another
coccinelline-type alkaloid were found.
Apart from laterally discharged aggressive compounds from opisthonotal glands, some oribatid mites
produce a sticky substance that deters ant attacks.103
As in most species of Oribatida, all representatives of Acaridida (Astigmata) apart from some parasitic groups are
characterized by opisthonotal glands. Here they produce a number of natural compounds that may function as
alarm, aggregation, or sex pheromones or as allomones.122 In addition to many oribatid compounds, a new salicyl
lactone was detected from an Oulenzia species and was assigned to be 7-hydroxyphthalide (7-hydroxy-3H-
isobenzofuran-1-one, 25).123 From the genera Schwiebea and Rhizoglyphus, 3-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-2-(5H)-furanone
(36; ,-acariolide) and 4-(4-methyl-3-pentenyl)-2-5H-furanone (,-acariolide) could be identified,124 whereas
the opisthonotal secretion of the genus Dermatophagoides contained 2-formyl-3-hydroxybenzyl formate.125
Because of the enormous biomass of mites such as oribatids, their peculiar natural products might be more
abundant in unrelated animals of terrestrial ecosystems.126 So, the chemistry of skin alkaloids in poisonous frogs
often reflects their recent arthropod diet such as oribatids and ants.126 Moreover, several ants might be
specialized on certain oribatid mites,127 whereas certain mites often prefer food such as pigmented fungal
hyphae.126 Since alkaloids in scheloribatid mites are not present in larvae but found only in adults,121 the
compounds might be either biosynthesized by adult mites or sequestered by adult mites from their fungal food.

4.09.21 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Opiliones

Opilionids or harvestmen represent more than 7000 species and are divided into Cyphophthalmi, Laniatores,
and Palpatores (Dyspnoi þ Eupnoi). They are characterized by various defense mechanisms such as cryptic and
aposematic coloration (e.g., certain Gonyleptidae), death-feigning (thanatosis), body vibrating (bobbing),
painful pinching, autotomy of a leg (which may then twitch rhythmically) between trochanter and femur
when disturbed, gregariousness, or running for escape.128 Remarkably, autotomized legs cannot be regenerated.
When all these evasive mechanisms fail, all species may utilize chemical defenses and, therefore, possess paired
homologous defensive glands (scent, odoriferous, repugnatory, stink glands). These so-called ozopores open
anterolaterally of the prosoma and may emit various more or less volatile compounds. It is interesting to note
that a Parampheles species shows orange markings at the defensive gland openings and in contrast emits a
translucent defensive secretion devoid of quinones.129 Reviews on chemical defenses of opilionids are published
by Eisner et al.128 and Gnaspini and Hara.129
 O O O O O O O O
O

[46] [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53]

O O O O Cl O O

OH OH OH OH [58] [60] [62]

O O O

H5C2 H5C2
[54] [55] [56] [57] [59] [61] [63]
OH O O O
O
OH OH O
[64] [65] [66] [67] [68]
OH H

H
N 71: R = CH3
CH2CH2N(CH3)2 72: R = CH2CH3
[69] N [70] [73] [74]
OCOR CH2
400 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

After molestation, harvestmen deplete a clear aqueous droplet from their ventrally situated mouth and
secretion droplets from gland openings or ozopores of their dorsally situated paired defensive glands.128–130
These represent compressible sacs that are associated with various opening muscles. By characteristic grooves
located on the body surface and by movements of legs, the secretions are mixed and subsequently distributed
over the whole body surface. During this process, the droplets accumulate at other body areas, and the mixture
becomes odorous and darkens continuously,131 which is due to the mixing of enteric phenols with quinones
from the glands. Representatives of Cyphophthalmi and Laniatores can further dab their secretions on
aggressors; however, it is also known that secretion can be ejected as a spray.130 The defensive secretions of
opilionids, which often show antimicrobial activities, are directed against parasitoids and predators such as ants,
other opilionids, and various vertebrates.128,132 Also microarthropods such as spiders and isopods immediately
die after contamination with the secretion.133
The Cyphophthalmi of the genera Cyphophthalmus and Siro revealed more than 20 compounds including
saturated and unsaturated C11–C15-methyl ketones, for example, tridecan-2-one (67), four naphthoquinones
(especially 1,4-naphthoquinone (53), 6-methyl-1,4-naphthoquinone (52), 4-chloro-1,2-naphthoquinone (51)
and its 6-methyl analogue), and acetophenone (50).133 Chlorinated exocrine compounds of arthropods seem to
be particularly unusual, apart from chlorophenol, a sex pheromone of ticks.133 As a whole, Cyphophthalmi are
chemically more similar to Palpatores than to Laniatores.
In Palpatores128 (e.g., Phalangiinae134), various volatile, primarily acyclic, often branched compounds (e.g.,
hydrocarbons, ketones, alcohols, aldehydes) are found along with 1,4-naphthoquinones such as 52 and 53. For
example, 4-methylhexan-3-one (58), 4-methylheptan-3-one (59), E-4-methylhex-4-en-3-one (60), E-4-
methylhept-4-en-3-one (62), E-4,6-dimethyloct-6-en-3-one (61), E-4,6-dimethylnon-6-en-3-one (63),
4-methylhexan-3-ol (64), E,E,-2,4-dimethylhexa-2,4-dien-1-ol (65), E,E-2,4-dimethylhepta-2,4-dien-1-ol
(66), and E,E-2,4-dimethylhexadienal (68) were recorded. Most of these volatiles have been found in the
genera Leiobunum, Hadrobunus, and Phalangium.128
In Laniatores,128 the defensive secretions are characterized by alkylated 1,4-benzoquinones and phenols. Some
of these unusually alkylated quinones occur more restrictedly. In Gonyleptidae, the defensive secretions were
comparatively characterized.135 Important defensive compounds in this and related families are
2-ethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (49), 2,3-dimethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (46), 2,5-dimethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (47), and
2,3,5-trimethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (48), 2,3-dimethylphenol (54), 2-methyl-5-ethylphenol (55), 2,3-dimethyl-5-
ethylphenol (56), and 2,3,5-trimethyl-1,4-hydroquinone (57).135,136 Some laniatorids belonging to Travunioidea
of the genus Sclerobunus secrete unusual terpenes such as bornyl acetate (71) and bornyl propionate (72),
camphene (73), limonene (74) together with N-containing compounds (nicotine (70)), and N,N-dimethyl--
phenylethylamine (69).137 Few Laniatores quinones have a limited distribution in insects; in contrast, ketones and
naphthoquinones are absent in Laniatores and probably have been lost during evolution.133

4.09.22 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Pedipalpi

Pedipalpi with more than 470 species worldwide are nonpoisonous. Representatives of Amblypygi are devoid of
anal defensive glands, whereas Thelyphonida and Schizomida (both groups formerly called Uropygi) possess a
pair of large anal glands in the posterior opisthosoma, which open at the end of a postabdominal knob that usually
forms the base of the flagellum. Upon contact stimulation, a defensive spray may be discharged (up to 80 cm) by
many subsequent ejections (maximal number of discharges: 19) and exactly aimed toward aggressors. Typically,
acetic acid (75) represents the main constituent (45–98%) of all six species from three thelyphonid genera
(Mastigoproctus, Typopeltis, Thelyphonus) hitherto analyzed. The watery secretion (11–26% water) may also contain
minor amounts of further saturated C6- to C10-acids (76–80) and monounsaturated (E)- and (Z)-5-octenoic acids
(81,82). Further constituents such as 1-octanol, hexyl and octyl acetate (83,84; Telyphonus linganus),138 and C7–C9
2-ketones (85–87; Typopeltis guangxiensis)139 are restricted to certain species.140 In other species with aberrant
odors, probably additional compounds may be detected.141 The concentrations of the constituents of the defensive
secretions vary individually; however, there are no age or sex differences between individuals. Only first-stage
larvae of Thelyphonus caudatus seem to be devoid of functional defensive glands,142 whereas first instars of
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 401

Mastigoproctus produce considerable amounts of secretion.141

75: R = CH3 O
O 76: R = CH3(CH2)4 83: R = CH3 85: R = CH3
R 77: R = CH3(CH2)5 [81] O OH 84: R = CH3(CH2)2 O 86: R = CH3CH2
OH 78: R = CH3(CH2)6 87: R = CH3(CH2)2 O
79: R = CH3(CH2)7 OH R O
80: R = CH3(CH2)8 [82] R

Obviously, also the small-sized and blind microwhip scorpions (Schizomida) are able to secrete an acidic
spray from their abdominal tip. The defensive secretion of Thelyphonida is maximally effective on sensitive
respiratory, visual, and sensory systems of arthropod and vertebrate predators.140 In Mastigoproctus, the presence
of caprylic acid promotes the acetic acid-containing spray over the cuticle and increases its permeability
through the cuticular barriers of target organisms.142 Similar effects are probably achieved by the addition of
acetic acid with other wetting agents such as 2-ketones,139 and hexyl and octyl acetates.140 In humans, natural
sprays of Typopeltis crucifer evoked both a painful sensation (lasting for a short time) and a corneal opacity, which
disappeared after 4 days.143

4.09.23 Arthropoda: Chelicerata, Araneae

Apart from representatives of Mesothelae (90 species), the remaining Opisthothelae (about 40 000 species)
altogether possess hollow fangs with associated openings of efferent ducts from venom glands and can inject
venoms to paralyze and kill their prey, to preingest the intended meals by digestive fluids, or to protect
themselves. The venom glands, which are located in chelicerae (the fang bases) and cephalothorax, were
secondarily reduced in Uloboridae and certain Liphistiidae.144 In addition, the abdomen of many species of
Araneae contains different kinds of silk glands, each producing a different kind of silk for different purposes
(e.g., to modify habitats, catch prey, protect adults and their young). Sometimes, webs are constructed that bear
droplets of adhesive. To maintain certain characteristics of webs, spiders impregnate their webs with KNO3
(against denaturation), KH2PO4 (bactericidal), and 2-pyrrolidone (hygroscopical to prevent dry out).145
Because of the adhesiveness of spider silk, many insects evolved as defense detachable hairs, scales, or waxy
powder and, therefore, are protected against entrapment.146
In a few species, additional defense strategies are known. Representatives of Mastophora and Cyrtarachne emit
a distinct odor, probably from regurgitant, when they are molested.147 In bird spiders (Theraphosidae),
urticating hairs are located at the hind body. These hairs or setae obviously act mechanically and can be lost
and shot toward aggressors where they may irritate skin, conjunctivae, and other mucous membranes.16,18–20
Other species may even show leg autotomy, which is effective against scorpions. Representatives of ‘spitting
spiders’ (Scytodidae) are unusual in ejecting two streams of sticky silk over their prey, which is glued to the
substrate.144 Obviously, the enlarged venom gland produces both silk and poisonous components. Whereas
scytodids spit to capture their prey, especially females of Peucetia viridans (Oxyopidae) spray their bitter-tasting,
eye-irritating, and cooling secretions from their venomous glands as a kind of defensive behavior.148
Until now, spider venoms have been studied in only 0.1% of the known species. Apart from Ulloboridae, all
spiders are, strictly speaking, poisonous. However, concerning humans, only few spider species (e.g., from the
genera Atrax, Cheiracanthium, Harpactirella, Latrodectus, Loxosceles, Mastophora, Phoneutria, and Trechona) can
penetrate the human skin and may cause medically significant envenomations. Medical aspects of spider
bites are discussed by Vetter and Isbister,149 while many publications deal with poisonous spiders.16,20,93
Spider venoms represent complex mixtures of biologically active and inactive substances and contain proteins,
polypeptides (more than 3000 Da), polyamine neurotoxins (under 1000 Da), enzymes, nucleotides, amino acids,
monoamines, and inorganic salts.150,151 To paralyze the prey, many spider toxins affect the nervous system.
Consequently, toxins can be classified according to their mode of action affecting glutamatergic transmission
(glutamate receptor antagonists and inhibitors of glutamate uptake into synaptosomes) and calcium, sodium,
potassium, and chloride channels, or as toxins that either stimulate transmitter release or block postsynaptic
cholinergic receptors. It is interesting that these venoms represent an important source of molecules for the
design of novel pharmaceutical drugs152 or compounds used for insect control.153
402 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

O O
H H
N N NH2
N N N
H H H
O
HO OH CONH2
CON
[88]
O O NH
H
N
N N N N N NH2
H H H H H
O NH2
HO OH CONH2
[89]

NH

H2N N N N NH2
H H H
NH2
[90]

OH
OH
H H H
N N N N
N NH2
H
N O
H
[91]

The polyamine toxins,154,155 some of which are also found in Philanthus wasps, possess a linear ,!-diamino
polyazaalkane backbone, modified at one end mostly with an aromatic acyl group (see 88,89), which is
separated from the polyamine backbone by one or several -amino acid moieties. Many polyamine toxins
are further modified at the tail of the polyamine backbone with an additional basic amino acid fragment
(see 89). There are known structures of argiopine (or ARG 636) (89) from the Araneidae genus Argiope, JSTX-3
(88) from Araneidae (Nephila), AG 505 (or HO 505, or AGEL 505) (91) from the Agelenidae genera Agelenopsis
and Hololena, and FTX-3.3 (90) from the genus Agelenopsis.
Spider venoms may also contain various peptides that do not represent neurotoxins but are insecticides and
bactericides. Venomous secretions of spiders also contain various enzymes such as hyaluronidase, phospho-
diesterase, alkaline phosphatase, esterase, ATPase, sphingomyelinase D, kininase (endopeptidase), collagenase,
peptide isomerase, phospholipase A, and proteases. Finally, spider toxins may contain various low-molecular-
weight compounds such as biogenic amines (5-hydroxytryptamine (142) or 5-methoxytryptamine, histamine,
noradrenaline), free amino acids (especially -aminobutyric, glutamic, and aspartic acids, taurine), and
inorganic salts. Furthermore, there may be found nucleotides ATP, ADP, AMP, purine derivatives adenosine,
guanosine, 2,4,6-trihydroxypurine, citric acid, free polyamines spermine, spermidine, cadaverine, putrescine,
glucose, lactic and phosphoric acid, glycerol, and urea.

4.09.24 Arthropoda: Myriapoda: Opisthogoneata (Centipedes)

Representatives of centipedes (Chilopoda: Scutigeromorpha þ Pleurostigmophora; about 3000 species) show

various defense mechanisms ranging from stridulation, autotomy of legs, thanatosis to mechanical defense via
hind legs. Also there have reports of chemical defenses through forcipular glands and various glands that are
situated on different parts of the body surface.
Typically, venom glands are situated within each forcipule but may also extend far into the body cavity (e.g.,
Chaetechelyne). The duct of each gland opens at the inner side of the apical segment of each forcipule. The
secretions primarily serve for immobilizing and killing the prey (arthropods to small vertebrates) or for self-
defense upon attack.156 There are several records of human bite and envenomation by centipedes.156,158
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 403

Only few data are available on the chemistry of the centipede venom from the large forcipular glands
because it is difficult to obtain significant amounts of secretion. Various enzymes such as an esterase, acid and
alkaline phosphatases, and amino acid naphthylamidase (Scolopendra morsitans) have been reported.157,158 In
addition, a 60 kDa acidic and heat-labile protein called toxin-S was isolated from Scolopendra subspinipes.158 In
S. morsitans, lipoproteins, phospholipids, cholesterol, fatty acids, triglycerides, cholesterol esters, and squalene
were detected.157 Obviously, the Scolopendra toxins act against both the insect nervous system and the vertebrate
autonomic nervous system.12 Apart from coagulant and anticoagulant venoms, in centipedes there are pain-
producing biogenic amines 5-hydroxytryptamine and histamine.158 However, the secretions of Scutigera species
(Scutigeromorpha) causing painful bites have not yet been analyzed.12
Apart from forcipular glands, true defensive glands are located on the sternites of representatives of
Geophilomorpha.156 These unicellular glands open through porous plates and produce a sticky, proteinaceous
secretion with an often characteristic smell.12,156 In Geophilus vittatus and Orphnaeus brasilianus,12 production of the
cyanogenic compounds mandelonitrile and benzoyl cyanide was shown. When the secretion is ejected, both
precursors break down into benzaldehyde and benzoic acid by liberating hydrogen cyanide.159 Hydrogen cyanide
was also detected in the genera Pachymerium160 and Strigamia.159 The secretion is used against ants and spiders but
females also deplete secretion upon molestation or when they guard their eggs.12 In Henia vesuviana, another
geophilomorph, the proteinaceous glue hardens within a few seconds of exposure to air161 and contains 12 and
130 kDa proteins162 (no cyanide), which may physically immobilize the attacking predators such as Staphylinus beetles.
Probably homologous glands are also present in the Scolopendromorpha; however, they are not only
localized on sternites but also occur on pleurites, tergites, and legs. In Asanada species from Sri Lanka, the
defensive secretion contained hydrogen cyanide, a protein, and an unknown carbonyl compound.163 Also the
secretion of another scolopendromorph Cormocephalus nitidus is characterized by a fetid odor.156
Further types of defensive glands located in the last two pairs of legs are recorded from stone centipedes
(Lithobius). The secretion contains a sticky material of unknown chemistry, which serves to entangle enemies.12
Several representatives of Geophilomorpha (e.g., Orya, Geophilus Scolioplanes) and Scolopendromorpha (e.g.,
Otostigmus) produce sticky secretions that are characterized by strong fetid and/or pleasant odors156 and some-
times are luminescent too. In Orphnaeus, the ventral gland secretion emits a faint blue-green glow for some
seconds after emission.12 In Orphnaeus bioluminescent slime, maxima were found at 510 and 480 nm. Moreover,
the reaction required a luciferin, a luciferase, unusual low pH, and it was shown that oxygen interacted with only
one of the components allowing for anaerobic light emission.164 Since the vesicant secretions of these centipedes
deter both mammals and predatory arthropods, they may represent a true defensive secretion.156

4.09.25 Arthropoda: Myriapoda: Progoneata: Diplopoda (Millipedes)

and Symphyla

Together with Pauropoda and Diplopoda, representatives of Symphyla comprise the taxon Progoneata. The
soil-dwelling predatory Symphyla (160 species) resemble centipedes and possess large spinnerets at the
posterior body parts. Upon molestation, ducts of spinning glands emit sticky threads, which may entangle
the mouth parts of all kinds of aggressors.
Herbivorous to saprophagous millipedes, which comprise about 13 000 species worldwide (probably 80 000
Myriapoda), lack poisonous fangs and do not bite. Usually, they roll into a defensive ball or spiral, and many
species emit highly toxic or foul-smelling compounds. With the exception of five orders Polyxenida,
Sphaerotherida, Glomeridesmida, Chordeumatida, and Siphoniulida, representatives of the remaining some-
times even aposematically colored 10 Diplopoda taxa produce defensive secretion in serially arranged
defensive glands.165,166
The basally arranged noncalcareous Polyxenida (Penicillata; bristle millipedes) lack defensive glands and
instead project hooked bristles against attackers such as ants.12 Similar to modified larval hairs of dermestid
beetles, predators are thus effectively entangled.
Among Pentazonia, which can coil into a sphere or ‘pill’, Sphaerotherida and Glomeridesmida lack defensive
glands, whereas Glomerida (Glomeris, Loboglomeris) have eight pairs of mid-dorsally evacuating defensive glands,
which contain a bitter-tasting, sticky, proteinaceous and colorless secretion. The glandular material contained
404 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

the quinazolinone alkaloids 1,2-dimethyl-4-quinazolone (glomerin, 139) and 1-methyl-2-ethyl-4-quinazolone

(homoglomerin, 140), which are unusual for animals12,167 and may deter and paralyze spiders, ants, carabid
beetles, and vertebrates such as mice, birds, and toads. This contrasts with the large armored pill millipedes of
the genus Sphaerotherium, which are devoid of defensive secretions. Mungos hurl these millipedes against a rock
and subsequently smash them.168 These Glomerida alkaloids resemble quinazoline alkaloids such as arborine
(2-benzyl-1-methylquinazol-4-one), recorded from Indian medicinal plants. Both 139 and 140 are produced
from anthranilic acid as was shown by feeding glomerids with labeled precursors.165
Colobognatha, the neighbor group of Pentazonia, include chemically defended taxa with paired laterally arranged
defensive glands in the order Polyzoniida. Polyzonium rosalbum emits a sticky whitish defensive fluid with a strong odor.
The fluid consists of two spirocyclic terpene alkaloids, (þ)-polyzonimine (6,6-dimethyl-2-azaspiro[4.4]non-1-ene,
145) and the related tricyclic (þ)-nitropolyzonamine (29,29-dimethyl-6-nitrospiro-{1-azabicyclo[3.3.0]octane-4,19-
cyclopentane}, 146). Both compounds, which contain a 2-azaspiro[4.4]nonane system, represent ant deterrents and
repellents.12 Enantiomerically pure 145 and 146 were synthesized by asymmetrical Michael addition of the enamine
derived from 2,2-dimethylcyclopentanecarboxaldehyde and (S)-prolinol methyl ether to nitroethylene.169 Another
polyzoniid species of the genus Buzonium secretes the interesting tetracyclic alkaloid buzonamine (143), an epoxy
group, and a tertiary nitrogen.170 Apart from this ant repellent, the secretion contains limonene (74) and -pinene
(137). From a further polyzoniid species Rhinotus purpureus, the spiropyrrolizidine O-methyloxime was isolated
(147).171 Because traces of this compound were also detected in skin extracts of sympatric poison frog Dendrobates
pumilio, a dietary source of this alkaloid was supposed.
In Abacion magnum, a representative of the neighbor group Nematophora (Callipodida), the defensive
secretion contained p-cresol (127).165

O O OH
[92] [93]
OH H OH
O [100]
[94]
HO R O
O
[95] 101: R = CH3(CH2)10
O
HO 102: R = CH3(CH2)11
O 103: R = CH3(CH2)13
[96] 104: R = CH3(CH2)14
O 105: R = CH3(CH2)16
106: R = CH3(CH2)18
O
[97] R OH
O
107: R = CH3CH(CH3)(CH2)6
O 108: R = CH3(CH2)10
[98]
109: R = CH3(CH2)8
O 110: R = CH3(CH2)7
O 111: R = CH3(CH2)6
[99]
[112] H C N
H

Several papers concerning the defensive secretions of Polydesmida (another neighbor group, also called
Merocheta) have been published. Polydesmida possess segmentally arranged special reactor glands characterized
by a reservoir, a smaller vestibule, and an opening valve between both compartments.165 Leonardesmus injucundus
secretes p-cresol (127)172 and represents a primitive polydesmid, closely related to the callipodid Abacion. Most other
representatives of polydesmid taxa165,173,174 produce mandelonitrile (133), the precursor of benzaldehyde (123), and
hydrogen cyanide (112). Other polydesmid defensive compounds are benzoyl cyanide (134), mandelonitrile
benzoate (135), 2-methoxyphenol (guaiacol, 131), phenol, benzoic acid (124), ethyl benzoate, formic acid (93), acetic
acid (75), 3-methylbutanoic acid (92), 2-methylbutanoic acid, myristic acid (94), and stearic acid (95). Erratically
distributed polydesmid compounds are benzaldehyde dimethyl acetal (132) and 2-methoxy-4-methylphenol (creo-
sol, 125) in Chamberlinius175 and Oxidus;176 1-octen-3-ol (100) and geosmin (136) in Niponia;177 and (1E)- (138) and
(1Z)-2-nitroethenylbenzene (E/Z ratio: 56:1; 2–3 mg per millipede) in Eucondylodesmus.178
O O O O O O O O
OMe OMe OMe MeO MeO

MeO MeO MeO

[113] [114] [115] [116] [117] [118] [119] [120]
O O O O O O O O

O O CHO COOH O
OH OH OH OH
OMe OH OMe HO O

O
[121] [122] [123] [124] [125] [126] [127] [128] [129]
O O OH

CN
O CN NC O
OH OH OMe HC OH O
OH
OMe
OMe

OMe
OH [130] [131] [132] [133] [134] [135] [136]
NH2 [137]
O O O
NO2 HO
N 139: R = CH3 HO
N
NH
[138] 140: R = CH2CH3
[141] N [142]
N R H N N NH2 H
H OMe
N H NO2 N
O O N N H H
O N
H
H
N N
[143] [144] [145] [146] [147]
406 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

The polydesmid secretions represent effective repellents against ants, lizards, and birds but compounds such
as 124, 134, and 138 also inhibit mycelial growth and spore germination.179 In addition, 138 has antibacterial
and insecticidal properties.178 Quantitative differences were recorded in developing female polydesmids, when
titers of methyl benzoate and 131 were compared, which indicates that the compounds may also have certain
physiological functions related to reproduction and development.175 Moreover, in another species, males
contained twice as much 123 and 133 compounds as females.180 Finally, Ômura et al.177 suggested that
1-octen-3-ol, which is a typical mushroom volatile, might also act as an alarm pheromone. It is interesting to
note that L-phenylalanine is used as a precursor for both 2-nitroethenylbenzene178 and mandelonitrile,165 which
was proved by using the labeled precursor [2-14C]phenylalanine and ,,,2,3,4,5,6-d8-L-phenylalanine,
respectively. Moreover, by using 14C-labeled precursors it was shown that phenol and guaiacol (131) are
derived from tyrosine, whereas H14CN is detoxified and converted primarily to thiocyanate by rhodanase with
minor conversion to -cyanoalanine and asparagine.181
Most chemically studied millipedes belong to the Juliformia with Julida, Spirobola, and Spirostreptida.165
Segmentally arranged glands represent spherical sacs with efferent ducts and opening muscles near the outer
orifice.165 The secretions of the three orders are characterized primarily by p-benzoquinones such as 2-methyl-1,4-
benzoquinone (114), 2-methyl-3-methoxy-1,4-benzoquinone (115), 1,4-benzoquinone (113), 2,3-dimethoxy-1,4-
benzoquinone (119), 5-methyl-2,3-dimethoxy-1,4-benzoquinone (120), 2-methyl-1,4-hydroquinone (128), and
2-methyl-3-methoxy-1,4-hydroquinone (130). In a few species, o-cresol (126), hexadecyl acetate (96), 9-hexadecenyl
acetate (97), 9-octadecenyl acetate (98), and (E2)-dodecenal (99) could be detected. Further defensive compounds
that are erratically distributed in Spirobolida are 2-ethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (49), 2-hydroxy-3-methyl-1,4-benzo-
quinone (122), hydroquinone, 2-methoxy-3,6-dimethyl-1,4-benzoquinone (121), 2,3-dimethoxyhydroquinone,
2-methyl-3,4-methylenedioxyphenol (129), 2,3-dimethoxy-5-methylhydroquinone in Acladocricus182 and some
Floridobolus species.183 The neotropical spirobolid Rhinocricus padbergi is unusual in secreting the alkaloid 3,3a,4,5-
tetrahydro-1H-pyrrolo-[2,3-b]pyridine-2,6-dione (144), together with 114 and linear hydrocarbons from C21
(heneicosane) to C29 (nonacosane).184 New constituents in the spirostreptid Telodeinopus aoutii are 2-methoxy-
1,4-benzoquinone (118) and naphthoquinone (53). In a harpagophorid species, the presence of 2-methoxyhydro-
quinone is worth mentioning.185 Apart from stereotypic quinones and hydroquinones, several julid species of the
genera Julus, Leptoiulus, Ommatoiulus, Tachypodoiulus, Enantiulus, and Cylindroiulus contained 2-methoxy-5-methyl-1,4-
benzoquinone (116), 2-methoxy-6-methyl-1,4-benzoquinone (117), a homologous series of hexyl esters ranging
from dodecanoic acid hexyl ester (101), tridecanoic acid hexyl ester (102), tetradecanoic acid hexyl ester, pentade-
canoic acid hexyl ester (103), hexadecanoic acid hexyl ester (104), octadecanoic acid hexyl ester (105) to eicosanoic
acid hexyl ester (106).186 Cylindroiulus caeruleocinctus exclusively shows n-alkanols comprising 1-octanol (111),
1-nonanol (110), 1-decanol (109), 1-dodecanol (108), and 8-methyl-1-nonanol (107).186
Various data exist on the biological significance of diplopod defensive chemicals. Compounds such as 114, 115,
123, 124, 134, and 135 are toxic to fungi,187 nematodes, and bacteria.188 It was also suggested that, similar to
opilionid defensive secretions, minor components such as 47 and 48 contribute much more to the antibiotic activity
of the whole secretion than the main constituent 46.186 As demonstrated in Ommatoiulus sabulosus, its defensive
secretions are repulsive to vertebrates, which exhibit an avoidance behavior.189 Quinazolinones from Glomeris can
induce a significant spider sedation.190 In addition, certain vertebrates such as capuchin monkeys frequently use
diplopods and their secretions to deter mosquitoes and ticks.191 Moreover, diplopod defensive compounds such as
114 and 115 attract certain necrophagous dung beetles, which normally feed on freshly dead millipedes.192
Millipedes may show bioluminescence after molestation. The luminescent system of Luminodesmus sequoiae
(now Motyxia sequoiae) is activated by ATP, magnesium, and molecular oxygen and involves a 104 kDa
luciferase.193 Although the details of the mechanisms are unknown, it was concluded that 7,8-dihydropterin-
6-carboxylic acid (141) is the light emitter.141,194

Acknowledgments

I am highly thankful to Professor Dr. K. Mori (Tokyo) and Professor Dr. Dr. W. Francke (Hamburg) for their
generous help in improving the manuscript. I also acknowledge E. Helldörfer (Bayreuth), A. Kirpal (Bayreuth),
S. Wagner (Bayreuth), and M. Wenzel (Hamburg) for their help in literature search and preparation of the drawings
and the manuscript.
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 407

References
1. M. Edmunds, Defense in Animals, Longman: Harlow, UK, 1974.
2. D. L. Evans; J. O. Schmidt, Insect Defenses, State University of New York Press: New York, 1990.
3. T. Eisner, Chemical Defense against Predation in Arthropods. In Chemical Ecology; E. Sondheimer, J. B. Simeone, Eds.;
Academic Press: New York, 1970; pp 157–217.
4. M. Hilker; T. Meiners, Eds., Chemoecology of Insect Eggs and Egg Deposition; Blackwell: Berlin, 2002.
5. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Insect Hormones and Insect Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry;
K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon: Oxford, 1999; Vol. 8, pp 263–375.
6. E. D. Morgan, Biosynthesis in Insects, Graham House: Cambridge, 2004.
7. P. Laurent; J.-C. Braekman; D. Daloze, 2005; pp 167–230.
8. M. Gronquist; F. C. Schroeder, Arthropod Natural Products 2010, Vol. 2, Chapter 2.04.
9. T. Eisner, For Love of Insects, Belknap Press: Cambridge, 2003.
10. E. D. Morgan; N. B. Mandava, Handbook of Natural Insecticides, Pheromones/A, CRC: Boca Raton, 1988; Vol. IV.
11. M. S. Blum, Chemical Defenses of Arthropods, Academic Press: New York, 1981.
12. T. Eisner; M. Eisner; M. Siegler, Secret weapons, 2nd ed., Belknap Press: Cambridge, 2005.
13. S. Schulz Ed., The Chemistry of Pheromones and other Semiochemicals I; Topics in Current Chemistry; Springer: Berlin, 2004; p 239.
14. S. Schulz Ed., The Chemistry of Pheromones and other Semiochemicals II; Topics in Current Chemistry; Springer: Berlin, 2005;
p 240.
15. M. Florkin; B. T. Scheer, Chemical Zoology, Academic Press: New York, 1970/1971; Vol. V–VI.
16. S. Bettini, Arthropod Venoms, Springer: Berlin, 1978.
17. W. Bücherl, E. E. Buckley, V. Deulofeo, Eds., Venomous Animals and their Venoms; Academic Press: New York, 1971; Vol. I–III.
18. G. G. Habermehl, Gift-Tiere und ihre Waffen, 4th ed., Springer: Berlin, 1987.
19. D. Mebs, Gifttiere; WVG: Stuttgart, 2000.
20. A. Tu, In Handbook of Natural Toxins; M. Dekker, Ed.; New York, 1984; Vol. 2.
21. A. Tu, Handbook of Natural Toxins, Chapman & Hall: London, 1991; Vol. 5.
22. K. Dettner; W. Peters, Lehrbuch der Entomologie, 2nd ed.; Spektrum: Heidelberg, 2003.
23. V. Storch; U. Welsch, Systematische Zoology, 6th ed.; Spektrum: Heidelberg, 2004.
24. W. Westheide; R. Rieger, Spezielle Zoologie Teil 1, 2nd ed.; Elsevier: München, 2007.
25. V. H. Resh; R. T. Cardé, Encyclopedia of Insects; Academic Press: Amsterdam, 2003.
26. M. J. Holmes; R. Lewis, Toxin-producing Dinoflagellates, John Wiley & Sons: Chichester,In Perspectives in Molecular
Toxinology; John Wiley & Sons: Chichester, 2002; pp 39–65.
27. T. Seki; M. Satake; L. Mackenzie; H. F. Kaspar; T. Yasumoto, Tetrahedron Lett. 1995, 36, 7093–7096.
28. K. Hausmann; P. C. Bradbury, Ciliates-Cells as Organisms, Fischer: Stuttgart, 1996, pp 26–30.
29. M. E. Masaki; S. Hiro; Y. Usuki; T. Harumoto; M. N. Terazima; F. Buonanno; A. Miyake; H. Iio, Tetrahedron 2004, 60, 7041–7048.
30. A. Miyake; F. Buonanno; P. Saltalamacchia; M. E. Masaki; H. Iio, Eur. J. Protistol. 2003, 39, 25–36.
31. S. Yoshihiko; U. Yoshinosuke; I. Hideo, Nippon Kagakki Koen Yokoshu 2006, 86, 1382.
32. F. Buonanno; P. Saltalamacchia; A. Miyake, J. Euk. Microbiology 2003, 50 (An. 123), 35A.
33. J. F. Ryley, Cytochemistry, physiology and biochemistry. In The Coccidia; D. M. Hammond, P. L. Long, Eds.; Univ. Park Press:
Baltimore, 1973; pp 173, 175.
34. M. N. Lunde; L. Jacobs, J. Parasitol. 1964, 50, 49–51.
35. B. Grimwood; G. O. O’Connor; H. A. Gaafar, Infect. Immunol. 1983, 42, 1126–1135.
36. W. E. G. Müller, Ed., Sponges (Porifera). Progress in Molecular and Subcellular Biology, Springer: Berlin, 2004; Vol. 37.
37. D. Sipkema; C. R. Franssen; R. Osinga; J. Tramper; R. H. Wijffels, Mar. Biotechnol. 2005, 7, 142–162.
38. V. M. Dembitzky; T. Řezanka; M. Srebnik, Chem. Phys. Lipids 2003, 123, 117–155.
39. T. Řezanka; K. Sigler; V. M. Dembitsky, Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 5937–5943.
40. T. Řezanka; V. M. Dembitzky, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65, 709–713.
41. W. G. Müller; S. I. Belikov; O. V. Kaluzhnaya; S. Perović-Ottstadt; E. Fattorusso; H. Ushijima; A. Krasko; H. C. Schröder, FEBS J.
2007, 274, 23–36.
42. D. Sher; A. Knebel; T. Bsor; N. Neher; T. Tal; D. Morgenstern; E. Cohen; Y. Fishman; E. Zlotkin, Toxicon 2005, 45, 865–897.
43. M. Zhang; Y. Fishman; D. Sher; E. Zlotkin, Biochemistry 2003, 42, 8939–8944.
44. W. Arndt; P. Manteufel, Z. Morphol. Ökol. Tiere 1925, 3, 344–357.
45. E. Reisinger; S. Kelbetz, Z. Wiss. Mikrosk. Mikrosk. Techn. 1964, 65, 472–508.
46. F. Göltenboth; U. Heitkamp, Mesostoma ehrenbergi (Fock 1836). In Grosses Zoologisches Praktikum Heft 6a; G. Fischer, Ed.;
Stuttgart, 1977; pp 19–22.
47. G. G. Martin, 1978, Zoomorph 91, 235–248.
48. L. Blaustein; H. J. Dumont, Hydrobiologica 1990, 198, 61–77.
49. H. J. Dumont; I. Carels, Oceanogr. 1987, 32, 699–702.
50. R. Gaugler; A. L. Bilgrami, Nematode Behaviour, CABI-Publishing: Wallingford, 2004; p 285.
51. M. Andersson; A. Boman; H. G. Boman, Cell. Mol. Life Sciences 2003, 60, 599–606.
52. H. R. Nicholas; J. Hodgkin, Current Biology 2002, 12, R731–R732.
53. V. Moyle; E. Baldwin, Biochem. J. 1952, 51, 504–510.
54. A. Felix; M. E. Stevens; R. L. Wallace, Invertebr. Biol. 1995, 114, 139–144.
55. E. J. Walsh; M. Salazar; J. Remirez; O. Moldes; R. L. Wallace, Invertebr. Biol. 2006, 124, 325–335.
56. W. R. Kem, Amer. Zool. 1985, 25, 99–111.
57. N. W. Runham; P. J. Hunter, Terrestrial slugs, Hutchinson University Library: London, 1970; p 101.
58. S. W. Werneke; C. Swann; L. A. Farquharsonb; K. S. Hamilton; A. M. Smith, Exp. Biol. 2007, 210, 2137–2145.
59. M. S. Davies; J. Blackwell, Proc. R. Soc. B 2007, 274, 1233–1236.
408 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

60. F. C. Schroeder; A. Gonzalez; T. Eisner; J. Meinwald, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 13620–13625.
61. W. O. C. Symondson, J. Moll. Stud. 1997, 63, 541–545.
62. S. Hesbacher; B. Baur; A. Baur; P. Proksch, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 233–246.
63. R. Aguiar; M. Wink, Chemoecology 2005, 15, 167–177.
64. B. J. Bowden, Biol. Bull. 1950, 99, 373–380.
65. V. B. Meyer-Rochow; S. Moore, Int. Rev. Hydrobiol. 1988, 73, 21–42.
66. V. R. Viviani, Terrestrial Bioluminescence: Its Biological and Biochemical Diversity (http://www.photobiology.info/
prev_mod32.htm), 2004.
67. M. Halwart, Int. J. Pest Man. 1994, 40, 199–206.
68. D. G. Herbert, J. Zool. London 2000, 152, 1–5.
69. D. C. Lloyd, Proc. Malac. Soc. Lond. 1970, 39, 169–174.
70. B. Koziol; M. Markowicz; J. Kruk; B. Plytycz, Photochem. Photobiol. 2006, 82, 570–573.
71. C. A. Edwards; P. J. Bohlen, Biology and Ecology of Earthworms, Chapman & Hall: London, 1996; p 127.
72. H. Kobayashi; M. Ohtomi; Y. Sekizawa; N. Ohta, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. C. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2001, 128, 401–411.
73. A. Yamaji; Y. Sekizawa; K. Emoto; H. Sakuraba; K. Inoue; H. Kobayashi; M. Umeda, J. Biol. Chem. 1998, 273, 5300–5306.
74. S. Lange; E. Kauschke; W. Mohrig; E. L. Cooper, Eur. J. Biochem. 1999, 262, 547–556.
75. S. König; F. Wagner; E. Kauschke; I. Eue, Spectroscopy 2004, 18, 347–353.
76. M. Lassegues; A. Milochau; F. Doignon; L. Du Pasquier; P. Valembois, Eur. J. Biochem. 1997, 246, 756–762.
77. Y. -Q. Liu; Z. -J. Sun; C. Wang; S. -J. Li; Y. -Z. Liu, Acta Biochim. Biophys. Sinica 2004, 36, 297–302.
78. E. Rota; N. T. Zalesskaja; N. S. Rodionova; V. N. Petushkov, J. Zool., London 2003, 260, 291–299.
79. E. Rota, Lights on the Ground: A Historical Survey of Light Production in the Oligochaeta. In Bioluminescence in Focus – A
Collection of Illuminating Essays; V. B. Meyer-Rochow, Ed.; Research Signpost: Kerala, 2009; pp 105–138.
80. K. Herter, Der medizinische Blutegel. Neue Brehm-Bücherei; Wittenberg Press: Wittenberg, 1968.
81. A. Michalsen; M. Roth, In Blutegeltherapie; F. Karl, Ed.; Haug-Verlag: Stuttgart, 2006; p 146.
82. K. Jauker; W. Clauss, Biol. Unserer Zeit 2003, 33, 29–35.
83. E. Frömming, Biologie der Mitteleuropäischen Süßwasserschnecken; Duncker & Humboldt: Berlin, 1956; pp 135–137.
84. H. Ruhberg; V. Storch, Zool. Anz. Jena 1977, 1/2, 9–19.
85. K. Benkendorff; K. Beardmore; A. A. Gooley; N. H. Packer; N. N. Tait, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B 1999, 124, 456–457.
86. H. Röper, Z. Naturforsch 1977, 32 c, 57–60.
87. G. Vinyard, Americ. Midl. Nat. 1979, 102, 188–189.
88. P. J. Herring, J. of Crustac. Biol. 1985, 5, 557–573.
89. T. E. Bowman; F. Phillips, Proc. Biol. Soc. Wash. 1984, 97, 526–528.
90. R. J. Deslippe; L. Jelinskii; T. Eisner, Zoology 1996, 99, 205–210.
91. H. Gorvett, Proc. Zool. Soc. Lond.Ser. B 1956, 126, 291–314.
92. S. Sutton, Woodlice; Pergamon Press: Oxford, 1980; pp 46, 47.
93. G. Schmidt, Giftige und gefährliche Spinnentiere, Hohenwarsleben: Westarp, 2000.
94. D. Mahsberg; R. Lippe; R. Kallas, Skorpione; NTV: Münster, 1999.
95. J. M. Simard; D. D. Watt, Venoms and Toxins. In The Biology of Scorpions; G. Polis, Ed.; Stanford University Press: Stanford,
1990; pp 414–444.
96. L. H. Plessis; D. Elgar; J. L. Plessis, Toxicon 2008, 51, 1–9.
97. E. Zlotkin, Scorpion venoms. In Comprehensive Molecular Insect Science; L. I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou, S. S. Gill, Eds.; Elsevier:
Amsterdam, 2005; Vol. 5, pp 173–220.
98. L. D. Possani; B. Becerril; M. Delepierre; J. Tytgat, Eur. J. Biochem. 1999a, 264, 287–300.
99. L. D. Possani; B. Selisko; G. B. Gurrola, Perspectives in Drug Discovery and design 15/1 1999b, 6, 15–40.
100. P. Weygoldt, The Biology of Pseudoscorpions; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, 1969; pp 15–17.
101. C. Roewer, Fr., Dr. Bronns Klassen und Ordnungen des Tierreichs; Akad. Verlagsges, 1936; pp 127–129.
102. W. Ferreira dos Santos; J. Coutinho-Netto, J. Biochem. Mol. Toxicol. 2006, 20, 27–34.
103. D. E. Walter; H. C. Proctor, Mites, Ecology, Evolution and Behaviour; CABI Publishing: New York, 1999.
104. D. E. Walter; H. C. Proctor, Exper. Appl. Acar. 1998, 22, 39–50.
105. B. F. Stone; K. C. Bennington; M. Gauci; J. H. Aylward, Exp. Appl. Acar. 1989, 7, 59–69.
106. D. K. Jones, In Tick Paralysis, J. D. Steward Memorial Course for Veteriarians, Proceeding of 149 Emergency Medicine and
Critical Care; University of Sydney: Sydney, 1991.
107. C. Maritz; A. I. Louw; R. Gothe; A. W. H. Neitz, Exper. Appl. Acarol. 2000, 24, 615–630.
108. B. J. Mans; A. I. Louw; A. W. H. Neitz, Mol. Biol. Evol. 2003, 20, 1158–1167.
109. Y. Nakajima; H. Saido-Sakanaka; K. Ogihara; D. Taylor; M. Yamakawa, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2005, 40, 391–397.
110. T. Sakata; N. Hiramatsu; K. Ishikawa; Y. Kuwahara, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1997, 32, 57–61.
111. E. Lillo; R. de Monfreda, Exper. Appl. Acarol 2004, 34, 291–306.
112. K. Dettner, Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. (Philadelphia). 1985, 137, 156–171.
113. G. Raspoting; R. Schuster; G. Krisper, 2002, 122, 105–112.
114. Y. Kuwahara; M. Ohshima; M. Sato; K. Kurosa; S. Matsuyama; T. Suzuki, App. Entomol. Zool. 1995, 30, 177–184.
115. T. Sakata; R. A. Norton, Internat. J. Acraol. 2001, 27, 281–291.
116. S. Shimanu; T. Sakata; Y. Mizutani; Y. Kuwahara; J. I. Aoki, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1831–1837.
117. G. Raspotnig; R. Kaiser; E. Stabentheiner; H. J. Leis, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1081–1088.
118. T. Sakata; S. Shimano; Y. Kuwahara, Exper. Appl. Acarol. 2003, 28, 279–291.
119. G. Raspoting; G. Krisper; R. Schuster, Exper. Appl. Acarol. 2005, 35, 47–58.
120. T. Sakata; R. A. Norton, Internat. J. Acarol. 2003, 29, 345–350.
121. W. Takada; T. Sakata; S. Shimano; Y. Enami; N. Mori; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2403–2515.
122. Y. Kuwahara, Chemical ecology of astigmatid Mites. In Advances in Insect Chemical Ecology; R. T. Cardé, J. G. Millar, Eds.;
Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2004; pp 76–109.
 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals 409

123. N. Shimizu; Y. Kuwahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2001, 65, 990–992.

124. H. Tarui; N. Mori; R. Nishida; K. Okabe; Y. Kuwahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2002, 66, 135–140.
125. M. Sato; Y. Kuwahara; S. Matsuyama; T. Suzuki, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1993, 57, 1299–1301.
126. K. Dettner, Entomologie heute 2007, 19, 3–28.
127. K. Masuko, Psyche 1993, 101, 159–174.
128. T. Eisner; D. Alsop; J. Meinwald, Arthropod venoms; Springer: Berlin, 1978; pp 87–99.
129. P. Gnaspini; M. R. Hara, In Harvestmen: The Biology of Opiliones; R. Pinto-da-Rocha, G. Machado, G. Giribet, Eds., Harvard
University Press: Cambridge, 2007; pp 374–399.
130. P. Gnaspini; A. J. Cavalheiro, J. Arachnol. 1998, 26, 81–90.
131. G. Machado; A. M. Pomini, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2008, 36, 369–376.
132. T. Eisner; C. Rossini; A. Gonzalez; M. Eisner, J. Exper. Biol. 2004, 207, 1313–1321.
133. G. Raspotnig; G. Fauler; M. Leis; H. -J. Leis, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1353–1368.
134. D. F. Wiemer; K. Hicks; J. Meinwald; T. Eisner, Experientia 1978, 34, 969–970.
135. M. R. Hara; A. J. Cavalheiro; P. Gnaspini; D. Y. A. C. Santos, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2005, 33, 1210–1225.
136. R. M. Duffield; O. Olubajo; J. W. Wheeler, J. Chem. Ecol. 1981, 7, 445–452.
137. O. Ekpa; J. W. Wheeler; J. C. Cokendolpher; R. M. Duffield, Tetrahedron Lett. 1984, 25, 1315–1318.
138. J. Haupt; G. Höhne; T. Weiske, Boll. Acc. Gioenia Sci. Nat. 1993, 26, 175–180.
139. J. Haupt; G. Höhne; H. Schwarz; B. Chen; W. Zhao; Y. Zhang, J. Comp. Physiol. B 1988, 157, 883–885.
140. J. O. Schmidt; F. R. Dani; G. R. Jones; E. D. Morgan, J. Insect Physiol. 2000, 46, 443–450.
141. T. Eisner; D. Alsop; J. Meinwald, Secretions of Opilionids, Whip Scorpions and Pseudoscorpions. In Arthropod Venoms;
S. Bettini, Ed.; Springer: Berlin, 1978; pp 87–99.
142. T. Eisner; J. Meinwald; A. Monro; R. Ghent, J. Insect Physiol. 1961, 6, 272–298.
143. H. Itokawa; R. Kano; S. Kaneko; T. Nakajima; T. Yasuhara; S. Yonabaru, Jap. J. Sanit. Zool. 1981, 32, 67–71.
144. R. F. Foelix, Biologie der Spinnen; Thieme: Stuttgart, 1992.
145. H. Schildknecht; P. Kunzelmann; D. Krauß; C. Kuhn, Naturwissenschaften 1972, 59, 98–99.
146. T. Eisner; R. Alsop; G. Ettershank, Science 1964, 146, 1058–1061.
147. S. Schulz, Semiochemistry of spiders. In Advances in Insect Chemical Ecology; R. T. Cardé, J. G. Millar, Eds.; Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge, 2004; pp 110–149.
148. L. S. Fink, J. Arachnol. 1984, 12, 372–373.
149. R. S. Vetter; G. K. Isbister, Ann. Rev. Entomol. 2008, 53, 409–429.
150. L. D. Rash; W. C. Hodgson, Toxicon 2002, 40, 225–254.
151. P. Escoubas; S. Diochot; G. Corzo, Biochimie 2000, 82, 893–907.
152. G. Estrada; E. Villegas; G. Corzo, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2007, 24, 145–161.
153. F. Maggio; B. L. Sollod; H. W. Tedford; G. F. King, Spider Toxins and their Potential for Insect Control. In Comprehensive
Molecular Insect Science; L. I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou, S. S. Gill, Eds.; Elsevier: Oxford, 2005; Vol. 5, pp 221–238.
154. A. Schäfer; H. Benz; W. Fiedler; A. Guggisbeerg; S. Bienz; M. Hesse, The Alkaloids; Academic Press: New York, 1994; Vol. 45,
pp 1–125.
155. K. D. McCormick; J. Meinwald, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 2411–2451.
156. A. Minelli, Secretions of Centipedes, In Arthropod venoms; S. Bettini, Ed.; Springer: Berlin, 1978; pp 73–85.
157. A. H. Mohamed; G. Abu-Sinna; H. El-Shabaka; A. AbD El-Aal, Toxicon 1983, 21, 371–377.
158. B. S. Jangi, Centipede Venoms and Poisoning, In Handbook of natural toxins: Insect poisons and allergens and other
invertebrate venoms; A. T. Tu, Ed.; Dekker: New York, 1984; Vol. 2, pp 333–368.
159. T. H. Jones; W. E. Conner; J. Meinwald; H. E. Eisner; T. Eisner, J. Chem. Ecol. 1976, 2, 421–429.
160. H. Schildknecht; U. Maschwitz; D. Krauss, Naturwissenschaften 1968, 55, 230.
161. S. P. Hopkin; H. S. Anger, Ber. Nat.-med. Verein Innsbruck 1992, 10, 71–79.
162. S. P. Hopkin; M. J. Gaywood, Proceedings of the 7th. International Congress of Myriapodology, Leiden, 1990; pp 175–181.
163. U. Maschwitz; U. Lauschke; M. Würmli, J. Chem. Ecol. 1979, 5, 901–907.
164. J. M. Anderson, Photochem Photobiol. 1980, 31, 179–181.
165. T. Eisner; D. Alsop; K. Hicks; J. Meinwald, Defensive secretions of millipedes. In Arthropods Venoms; S. Bettini, Ed.; Springer:
Berlin, 1978; pp 41–72.
166. P. Sierwald; J. E. Bond, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2007, 52, 401–420.
167. H. Schildknecht; U. Maschwitz; W. F. Wenneis, Naturwissenschaften 1967, 8, 196–197.
168. T. Eisner; J. A. Davis, Science 1967, 155, 577–579.
169. K. Mori; Y. Takagi, Tetrahedron Lett. 2000, 41, 6623–6625.
170. W. F. Wood; F. J. Hanke; I. Kubo; J. A. Carroll; P. Crews, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2000, 28, 305–312.
171. R. A. Saporito; M. A. Donnelly; H. M. Hoffmann; H. M. Garraffo; J. W. Daly, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2781–2786.
172. W. A. Shear; T. H. Jones; H. M. Miras, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2007, 35, 838–842.
173. S. S. Duffey; M. S. Blum; H. M. Fales; S. L. Evans; R. W. Roncadori; D. L. Tiemann; Y. Nakagawa, J. Chem. Ecol. 1977, 3,
101–113.
174. W. F. Wood; P. W. Sorensen, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2005, 33, 1077–1079.
175. J. Taira; K. Arakaki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2002, 37, 621–624.
176. J. Taira; K. Nakamura; Y. Higa, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2003, 38, 401–404.
177. H. Ômura; Y. Kuwahara; T. Tanabe, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2601–2612.
178. Y. Kuwahara; H. Omura; T. Tanabe, Naturwissenschaften 2002, 89, 308–310.
179. H. Ômura; Y. Kuwahara; T. Tanabe, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2002, 37, 73–78.
180. N. Mori; Y. Kuwahara; T. Yoshida; R. Nishida, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1995, 30, 197–202.
181. S. S. Duffey; M. S. Blum, 1997, 7, 57–65.
182. X. Wu; D. W. Buden; A. B. Attygalle, Chemoecology 2007, 17, 131–138.
183. A. B. Attygalle; S. -C. Xu; J. Meinwald; T. Eisner, J. Nat. Prod. 1993, 56, 1700–1706.
410 Chemical Defense and Toxins of Lower Terrestrial and Freshwater Animals

184. A. Arab; G. G. Zacarini; C. S. Fontanetti; M. I. Camargo-Mathias; M. G. dos Santos; A. C. Cabrera, Entomotropica 2003, 18,
79–82.
185. R. Deml; A. Huth, Naturwissenschaften 2000, 87, 80–82.
186. A. Huth, Fragmenta Faunistica 2000, 43, 191–200.
187. R. W. Roncadori; S. S. Duffey; M. S. Blum, Mycologia 1985, 77, 185–191.
188. L. A. D. Williams; P. D. A. Singh; L. S. Caleb-Williams, Naturwissenschaften 1997, 84, 143–144.
189. N. Olivieri; F. Capone; M. Puopolo; D. Santucci; E. Alleva, Physiology Behavior 2001, 74, 304–311.
190. J. E. Carrel; T. Eisner, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1984, 81, 806–810.
191. P. J. Weldon; J. R. Aldrich; J. A. Klun; J. E. Oliver; M. Debboun, Naturwissenschaften 2003, 90, 301–304.
192. T. Schmitt; F. -T. Krell; K. E. Linsenmair, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 731–740.
193. J. Rosenberg; V. B. Meyer-Rochow, Luminescent Myriapoda: A Brief Review. In Bioluminescence in Focus – A Collection of
Illuminating Essays; V. B. Meyer-Rochow, Ed.; Research Signpost: Kerala, 2009; pp 139–146.
194. M. Kuse; A. Kanakubo; S. Suwan; K. Koga; M. Isobe; O. Shimomura, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 2001, 11, 1037–1040.

Biographical Sketch

Professor Dr. Konrad Dettner studied biology and chemistry at the universities of Stuttgart
and Stuttgart-Hohenheim where he got his Ph.D. degree in 1977. After a postdoctoral time at
RWTH Aachen in 1985, he received a habilitation degree and venia legendi, and in 1986 he
was appointed as full professor of animal ecology at the University of Bayreuth. His main
research areas are the chemical ecology, especially the investigation of defensive compounds,
of insects, the role of endosymbiotic bacteria of arthropods, and the biology of freshwater
beetles.
 4.10 Toxins of Microorganisms
Shohei Sakuda, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Makoto Kimura, RIKEN, Saitama, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.10.1 Introduction 411

4.10.2 Insecticides from Microorganisms 412
4.10.2.1 Insecticidal Metabolites of Bacteria 412
4.10.2.2 Insecticidal Metabolites of Fungi 414
4.10.3 Mycotoxins 419
4.10.3.1 Ochratoxins, Fumonisins, Zearalenone, and Ergot Alkaloids 421
4.10.3.2 Miscellaneous Mycotoxins 424
4.10.3.3 Aflatoxins 428
4.10.3.3.1 Biosynthesis of aflatoxins 430
4.10.3.3.2 Regulatory mechanism of aflatoxin production 434
4.10.3.3.3 Regulation of aflatoxin production and contamination 435
4.10.3.4 Trichothecenes 437
4.10.3.4.1 A common pathway of trichothecene biosynthesis: From FPP to ITdiol 440
4.10.3.4.2 Biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes 441
4.10.3.4.3 Biosynthesis of non-Fusarium trichothecenes 445
4.10.3.4.4 Clustering and nonclustering of trichothecene biosynthesis genes in Fusarium species 445
4.10.3.4.5 Summary and perspectives 448
References 449

4.10.1 Introduction

Microorganisms produce a variety of secondary metabolites with toxicity. This chapter focuses on such
microbial toxins with low molecular weight. Definition of the term ‘toxicity’ is a little difficult. On the one
hand, it means the biological activity that causes disease in mammals, especially in human beings. In this sense,
toxicity is shown to be absolutely poisonous to human beings. On the other hand, in a broader sense, toxicity is
used as the growth-inhibiting activity targeting any organisms. In this sense, toxicity coupled with selectivity is
sometimes useful for us to develop medicines or pesticides. For example, novel compounds with selective
toxicity toward insects, plants, and microbes are good lead compounds for developing effective insecticides,
herbicides, and antibiotics, respectively. As we have obtained many antibiotics and other biologically active
compounds from microorganisms, a vast number of microbial secondary metabolites belong to toxins in the
broad sense of the latter. It is very difficult to know the physiological role of a bioactive secondary metabolite
produced by a microorganism.1 For example, the role of antibiotic production is presumable but has not been
proved. As a rare case, pathogenic fungi, which infect host organisms such as plants or insects, may produce
secondary metabolites with selective toxicity toward their hosts.
Microbial toxic secondary metabolites have been studied mainly from the following three viewpoints: (1)
they contain very useful lead compounds for developing medicines and pesticides; (2) insect or plant
pathogenic fungi produce compounds toxic to their hosts for their infection; and (3) some fungal secondary
metabolites are toxic to humans and livestock, and their contamination with food and feed is a serious problem
for human and animal health. In the first case, many screening works search for bioactive compounds among
secondary metabolites of fungi and bacteria that have afforded many useful compounds including antibiotics
and pesticides. In the second case, many toxins produced by insect or plant pathogenic fungi have been
identified. They are important as key compounds in the physiological study on pathogens and hosts.2 Finally,
mycotoxin contamination in agricultural products and mushroom poisoning are found to be severe problems.

411
412 Toxins of Microorganisms

Since a detailed review of antibiotics is beyond the scope of this chapter, we focus on the recent works on
microbial secondary metabolites toxic to animals. In addition, there are many reviews on herbicides produced
by microbes3–5 and toxins of plant pathogenic fungi.6,7
In the first part of this chapter, we deal with insecticides including miticides and nematocides, which include
very useful compounds such as avermectins and milbemycins, produced by bacteria and fungi. We list out
microbial insecticides of importance and review the works mainly on the mode of action and biosynthesis of
each metabolite. In the next part, major mycotoxins are listed and recent topics on them, especially on their
biosynthesis, are described. Since contamination of two major mycotoxin groups, aflatoxins (AFs) and
trichothecenes, in food and feed is a worldwide problem, they are treated in detail in the last part of this
chapter. Recent studies on their biosynthesis, regulatory mechanism for their production, and inhibitors of their
production are described.

4.10.2 Insecticides from Microorganisms

Many insecticidal compounds have been found in bacterial and fungal metabolites. It is notable that screening
works search for insecticidal compounds among microbial metabolites succeeded in the discovery of several
practically useful compounds. Especially, avermectin and its derivatives are greatly contributing to human and
animal lives.8 Entomopathogenic fungi produce specific toxins for their infection into the host insects. Some of
the fungal toxins or their producers are practically useful for control of crop pests.9 In this section, insecticidal
metabolites of bacteria and fungi are described.

4.10.2.1 Insecticidal Metabolites of Bacteria

Piericidins are the first compounds obtained by the screening search for insecticidal natural products among
microbial metabolites.10 They were isolated from Streptomyces mobaraensis in 1963,11 and many piericidin
derivatives have been found in microbial metabolites until now.12 Piericidins are not used as insecticides
practically, but are important biological reagents because they have specific inhibitory activity toward the
mitochondrial electron transport chain protein nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NADH)-ubiquinone
reductase (complex I).13 Piericidin A1 (1 in Figure 1) is biosynthesized as a polyketide,14 but genes
responsible for its biosynthesis are not yet identified. Total synthesis of piericidins A1 (1) was reported
recently.15
Aureothin (2 in Figure 1), a nitro compound from Streptomyces thioluteus,16 was shown to have pesticidal
activity against the bean weevil17 by inhibiting mitochondrial respiratory complex II.18 Biosynthetic pathway of
aureothin (2) has been clarified as shown in Figure 2 by analyzing its biosynthetic genes. p-Nitrobenzoate is
formed from p-aminobenzoate by an N-oxygenase encoded by aurF.19 The type I polyketide synthase (PKS)
encoded by aurABC produces a polyketide chain by using p-nitrobenzoate as the starter unit.20 Interestingly,
iteration in which one module catalyzes two successive cycles of chain extension occurs in the PKS reaction.21
After O-methylation by a methyltransferase encoded by aurl, the tetrahydrofuran ring is formed by a mono-
oxygenase encoded by aurH to produce aureothin (2).22
From 1970s, screening studies to obtain pesticides among microbial metabolites were actively carried out,
which led to the discovery of useful compounds including tetranactin, avermectins, milbemycins, and spinosyn.
Tetranactin (3 in Figure 1) was isolated from Streptomyces aureus23 as an ionophore antibiotic and has been used
as an effective miticide. Biosynthetic gene cluster of nonactin (4), a congener of tetranactin, was recently
characterized, which showed that type II PKS was involved in its biosynthesis24 and that a resistant gene
encoding a hydrolase that hydrolyzes nonactin stereospecifically was present in the gene cluster.25
Many excellent reviews on avermectins26–28 and milbemycins29,30 have been already published.31,32
Avermectins and milbemycins are metabolites of Streptomyces species. It was a great success that useful
avermectin derivatives with selective biological activity were obtained. Abamectin (5 in Figure 1), emamectin
(6), eprinomectin (7), and ivermectin (8) have been used as miticide, insecticide, endectocide, and parasiticide,
respectively.33 In the case of milbemycins, milbemycin D (9 in Figure 3), milbemycin oxime (10), and
moxidectin (11) are used for animal health. Glutamate-gated chloride channels are accepted as the molecular
 Toxins of Microorganisms 413

Figure 1 Insecticidal metabolites of bacteria (I).

targets of avermectins and milbemycins.34 Biosynthetic studies on avermectin afforded not only a lot of basic
information on biosynthesis of typical macrolide compound but also practically useful derivatives obtained by
biosynthetic engineering technology.35,36
Spinosyns were isolated by screening using a mosquito larvicide bioassay from a new actinomycetes species,
Saccharospora spinosa.37,38 Spinosyns A (12 in Figure 3) and D (13) with a tetracyclic lactone structure are main
active components39 and are now used as practical insecticides. They activated nicotinic acetylcholine
receptors and disrupted the function of -aminobutyric acid (GABA) receptors, but they did not interact
directly with known nicotinic or GABA receptor binding sites.40,41 Biosynthetic genes of spinosyn, which are
located in a cluster of 74 kb, involved type I PKS.42 Biosynthetic engineering study on the spinosyn PKS has
been attempted to produce new derivatives.43
Macrolide compounds with a hygrolide skeleton such as L-681,110 B1 (14 in Figure 3),44 leucanicidin
(15),45 and bafilomycin A1 (16)46 produced by Streptomyces species were shown to have insecticidal activity by
inhibiting H+-ATPase.47 They are useful as biological reagents.
414 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 2 Biosynthesis of aureothin.

Chitin is a main constituent of insect cuticle and its turnover is necessary for insect growth. Since chitin is
not present in mammals, disruptants of chitin metabolism are ideal insect growth regulators with high
selectivity. Nikkomycin Z (17 in Figure 4), an inhibitor of chitin synthase, which is a key enzyme for chitin
synthesis, shows insecticidal activity and is practically used as a miticide.48 Nikkomycin Z is also effective as a
fungicide similar to the cases of other chitin synthase inhibitors such as polyoxins.49,50 It is known that
nikkomycin Z inhibits insect chitin synthase more strongly than other inhibitors.51 Nikkomycin biosynthetic
genes have been cloned and some of them were analyzed by gene disruption experiments to clarify their roles in
the biosynthetic pathway.52–54 On the other hand, allosamidin (18), an inhibitor of chitinase, which is a key
enzyme for chitin degradation,55 also shows insecticidal and miticidal activity.56,57 Chitinases are present not
only in chitin-containing organisms but also in non-chitin-containing ones including mammals. Since it was
recently shown that allosamidin is effective for decreasing asthmatic Th2 inflammation by inhibiting a
mammalian chitinase,58 side effects of a chitinase inhibitor toward non-chitin-containing organisms should
be considered. The cyclopentane ring of allosamidin is biosynthesized by the C–C bond formation between C-1
and C-5 of glucosamine.59

4.10.2.2 Insecticidal Metabolites of Fungi

Studies on insecticidal secondary metabolites produced by entomopathogenic fungi were actively carried out
from 1960s, and several peptide compounds, such as destruxins, beauvericins, bassinolide, and efrapeptins, were
isolated. Destruxins were the first toxins and have been well characterized. Destruxins A (19 in Figure 5) and B
(20) were found in the metabolites of the silkworm pathogenic fungus Oospora destructor, later renamed
Metarrhizium anisopliae,60 and their structures were determined as cyclic hexadepsipeptides composed of an
-hydroxy acid and five amino acid residues.61 Until now, many destruxin congeners were isolated from
M. anisopliae and several other fungi.62 Destruxins disrupted calcium balance in insect cells63 and inhibited
 Toxins of Microorganisms 415

Figure 3 Insecticidal metabolites of bacteria (II).

vascular-type ATPase.64,65 A gene encoding a nonribosomal peptide synthase was obtained from M. anisopliae,66
but it is not confirmed that the enzyme is involved in destruxin biosynthesis. Destruxins are not used as
insecticides, but its producer, M. anisopliae, is practically useful to control pest as a biological control agent.
Beauvericin (21 in Figure 5), a cyclic hexadepsipeptide, was isolated from Bauveria bassiana as a toxic
ionophore.67 Bassianolide (22), a cyclic octadepsipeptide, was also isolated from the same entomopathogenic
fungi as an insecticidal compound.68 Bauveria bassiana is now used as an important fungal biological control
agent in agriculture widely.69,70 Expressed sequence tag (EST) libraries from B. bassiana were analyzed, but
biosynthetic genes responsible for insecticidal secondary metabolites such as beauvericin (21), bassianolide
(22), or oosporein (23) have not been identified.71
Efrapeptins such as efrapeptin D (24 in Figure 5) were isolated from the entomopathogenic fungus
Tolypocladium niveum. They have a unique linear peptide structure with a bicyclic amine moiety at their
C-terminus and show insect toxicity by inhibiting mitochondrial ATPase.72

Figure 4 Nikkomycin Z and allosamidin.

Figure 5 Insecticidal metabolites of entomopathogenic fungi.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 417

Some nematocidal compounds were found in metabolites of the nematophagous fungi. Oligosporon (25 in
Figure 5) was obtained from the culture of the nematode-trapping fungus Arthrobotrys oligospora and exhibits
nematocidal activity toward Haemonchus controtus.73 Phomalactone (26) was first isolated as a bioactivity-
unknown metabolite from a fungus. Its nematocidal activity toward Meloidogyne incognita and production by a
plant nematode egg-parasitic fungus, Pochonia chlamydospora, were recently found.74
Many other insecticidal compounds have been found in metabolites of a variety of fungi.75–78 They can be
tentatively classified into three groups, peptides, alkaloids, and others, according to their structural features.
Shearamide A (27 in Figure 6), omphalotin A (28), and PF1022A (29) have cyclic peptide structures similar to
that of toxins from entomopathogenic fungi mentioned above, which may be biosynthesized by a nonribosomal
peptide synthetase. Shearamide A (27) was isolated from Eupenicillium shearii as a metabolite with insecticidal
activity toward the corn earworm Helicoverpa zea79 and showed that it was mainly present in the ascostromata of
the fungus. Omphalotin A (28), a cyclododecapeptide, was isolated from the mycelia of Omphalotus olearius80 and
exhibited strong nematocidal activity against M. incognita.81 PF1022A (29) was isolated from the filamentous
fungus Rosellinia sp. as a nematocide.82 It is a cyclic octadepsipeptide whose structure is similar to that of
bassianolide (22). Its semisynthetic derivative, emodepside (30), with a morpholine ring at each of the para
position of two phenyl groups is known as a very useful anthelmintic agent.83 The target of PF1022A was

Figure 6 Insecticidal peptides from fungi.

418 Toxins of Microorganisms

identified as HC-110R, which is a transmembrane receptor concerning Ca2+ influx.84 Genes encoding a
nonribosomal peptide synthetase for PF1022A biosynthesis have been obtained.85 Excellent work to prepare
useful PF1022A derivatives (PF1022-220 (31), PF1022-260 (32)) with nitro or amino groups at the para
position of the benzene rings was carried out by using biosynthetic engineering method.86
Many insecticidal alkaloids were isolated from fungal metabolites. Asperparaline A (aspergillimide; 33 in
Figure 7) was isolated from Aspergillus sp. as a metabolite exhibiting paralytic activity against silkworm87 and
anthelmintic activity.88 Biosynthesis of asperparaline A was studied by feeding experiments with labeled
precursors, demonstrating that it was biosynthesized from tryptophan, isoleucine, and isoprene derivative
molecules.89 Okaramines were isolated by a screening search for an insecticidal compound among fungal
metabolites. They were produced by Penicillium simplicissimum AK-40 when the fungus was cultured in a solid
medium with bean curd lees ‘okara’.90 Okaramine A (34) exhibited strong insecticidal activity toward silkworm
larva. Alantrypinone (35) and serantrypinone (36) were first isolated as fungal alkaloids produced by Penicillium
thymicola.91,92 They were later shown to have binding activity with the GABA receptor of housefly head
membrane and insecticidal activity toward Myzus persicae.93 Loline alkaloids are insecticidal metabolites
produced by the grass-endophytic fungus Neotyphodium uncinatum. Biosynthesis of loline alkaloids was studied
by feeding experiments of a variety of synthetic labeled precursors in the N-formylloline (37 in Figure 8)
producing fungus, and the biosynthetic pathway, in which N-(3-amino-3-carboxypropyl)proline (38) is
involved as an intermediate (Figure 8), was clarified.94 Genes responsible for biosynthesis of loline alkaloids
have been obtained as a cluster from N. uncinatum.95
Figure 9 lists other fungal insecticidal metabolites with miscellaneous structural types. Nodulisporic acid A
(39) was found in the metabolites of Nodulisporium sp. and exhibited potent insecticidal activity by modulating
an invertebrate-specific glutamate-gated ion channel.96,97 It has a complicated indole terpene structure and
studies on its biosynthesis with labeled precursors showed that its biosynthetic pathway is different from other
structurally related compounds since anthranilic acid was incorporated into the compound instead of trypto-
phan.98 Cochlioquinone A (40), a metabolite of Helminthosporium sativum, was shown to have a nematocidal
activity.99 Chaetochalasin A (41) was isolated as an antiinsectan from Chaetomium brasiliense.100 Benzofuran
derivative (42)101 and compound 43102 were isolated from an unidentified endophytic fungus and a conifer
endophyte strain of Canoplea elegantula, respectively. They exhibited toxicity to the larvae of spruce budworm
Christoneura fumiferana. NK374200 (44) was isolated from the culture broth of Talaromyces sp. as a bioactive

Figure 7 Insecticidal alkaloids from fungi.

 Toxins of Microorganisms 419

Figure 8 Biosynthesis of loline.

metabolite showing mosquito larvicidal activity.103 Arisugacin (45), a metabolite of Penicillium sp. FO-4259,
showed insecticidal activity by selective acetylcholinesterase inhibition.104 Xanthonol (46) was recently iso-
lated from a nonsporulating fungus and showed insecticidal and anthelmintic activities.105 Brevioxime (47) was
isolated from Penicillium brevicompactum as a metabolite with anti-JH hormone activity.106 It was active against
Oncopeltus fasciatus nymphs probably by inhibiting JH biosynthesis.107

4.10.3 Mycotoxins

The term ‘mycotoxicosis’ means a disease caused by a fungal toxin.108 The word ‘mycotoxin’ was derived from
the term.109 Mycotoxins are fungal secondary metabolites with a low molecular weight that cause mycotox-
icosis. High-molecular-weight toxins such as toxic proteins produced by fungi are not included in mycotoxins.
Usually, mycotoxicosis does not include mushroom poisoning, because mycotoxicosis is a disease passively
caused by mycotoxins contaminated in food and feed, whereas mushroom poisoning results from intentional
consumption of fungal fruiting bodies as food. Therefore, mushroom toxins are not called as mycotoxins. In this
chapter, we do not deal with mushroom toxins in detail. There are many recent reviews concerning overall
mushroom toxins,110–112 psilocybin (48 in Figure 10, the major psychoactive alkaloid),113 agaritine (49, a toxic
aryldiazonium ion-producing compound)114 and its biosynthesis,115 -amanitin (50, an inhibitor of RNA
polymerase),116–118 ibotenic acid, (51) and muscimol (52) (active compounds connected with mysticism),119
illudin S (53, DNA-interactive agent)120 and its derivative useful as an anticancer drug.121
Approximately 1200 secondary fungal metabolites were known in 1978,122 and the number at present has
reached to more than 6000.109 Approximately 10% of the 6000 metabolites are classified as mycotoxins. The
number of secondary metabolites yet to be discovered may be quite large since it is estimated that we know
around 5% fungal species out of the world’s total fungal species.123,109 Therefore, the number of mycotoxins
will probably increase in future.
420 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 9 Insecticidal metabolites of fungi.

The mycotoxins with the greatest potential risk to human and animal health as food and feed contaminants
are AFs, trichothecenes, fumonisins, zearalenone, ochratoxin A, and ergot alkaloids.109 Other mycotoxins such
as cyclopiazonic acid, sterigmatocystin, gliotoxin, citrinin, penitrems, patulin, fusarin C, penicillic acid, and PR
toxin have also high potential risk because of their frequency of occurrence in commodities. In this section, we
describe recent topics mainly on the mode of action and biosynthesis of these mycotoxins. Since contamination
of AFs and trichothecenes in agricultural products are worldwide serious problems from the viewpoints of food
safety and economic loss, the two mycotoxin groups are described in detail.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 421

Figure 10 Mushroom toxins.

4.10.3.1 Ochratoxins, Fumonisins, Zearalenone, and Ergot Alkaloids

Ochratoxins are metabolites produced by Aspergillus ochraceus and some Penicillium species such as P. verruco-
sum.124 It exhibits nephrotoxic effects and potent carcinogenic activity in rodents.109 DNA adduct formation by
ochratoxin A (54 in Figure 11) has been suggested to be involved in a mechanism of ochratoxin A-induced
tumor formation, and it was recently shown that C8-ochratoxin A–deoxyguanosine adduct (55) was produced
when ochratoxin A reacted with deoxyguanosine in the presence of Fe(II) or HRP/H2O2.125 However, this
DNA–ochratoxin A adduct formation has not been confirmed in other in vivo experimental systems.126 With
respect to ochratoxin A biosynthesis, ochratoxin  (56 in Figure 11) was shown as its biosynthetic precursor,
but labeled mellein (57) was not incorporated into ochratoxin A.127 Genes encoding PKS responsible for
ochratoxin A biosynthesis in A. ochraceus128 and Penicillium nordicum129 have been cloned. Genes encoding a
nonribosomal peptide synthase for the coupling of ochratoxin  and phenylalanine moiety and a chloroper-
oxidase for chlorination have also been obtained from P. nordicum.130
Fumonisins are mycotoxins produced by Fusarium verticillioides. Fumonisin B1 (58 in Figure 12) is toxic and
carcinogenic to rodents and suggested to cause esophageal cancer. It has cancer-promoting activity in rats and is
categorized as a factor possibly carcinogenic to humans.131 Fumonisin B1 is a strong inhibitor of ceramide
synthase (sphinganine N-acyltransferase).132,133 Inhibition of the enzyme causes blockades in ceramide
422 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 11 Structures of ochratoxin A and C8-ochratoxin A–deoxyguanosine adduct (a) and biosynthesis of ochratoxin A (b).

synthesis, leading to accumulation of ceramide substrates, sphinganine and sphingosine, and decrease of
sphingolipids. This disruption of sphingolipid metabolism by fumonisin B1 may affect apoptosis, cell cycle,
and other cell functions, causing a variety of diseases in animals.130 It was recently shown that fumonisin B1 is a
possible risk factor for birth defects, especially human neural tube defects.134 Biosynthesis of fumonisin B1 has
been studied actively.135,136 Fifteen genes responsible for fumonisin biosynthesis are present in a cluster form in
F. verticillioides.137 Roles of most of the biosynthetic enzymes encoded by the genes have been clarified as shown
in Figure 12.138 The nonaketide (59) with two methyl groups is first produced by PKS (FUM1) and
condensation of the CoA derivative of the polyketide (60) and L-alanine produces the amine (61). Oxidation
and reduction of the ketone, followed by two times oxidation, affords the triol (62). The hydroxyl groups of the
triol (62) are esterified with the CoA derivative of the tricarboxylic acid to afford compound 63, and final
oxidation produces fumonisin B1. The tricarboxylic acid precursor for the esterification is suggested to be
biosynthesized by reduction of citrate.
Zearalenone (64 in Figure 13) is produced by Fusarium species such as F. graminearum. It is implicated in
reproductive disorders of farm animals and occasionally in hyperestrogenic syndromes in humans.139,140
Zearalenone is an estrogen antagonist causing estrogenic responses in mammals by binding to estrogen
receptors.141 Zearalenone also shows carcinogenicity, genotoxicity, and immunotoxicity, but molecular
mechanism of these toxicity derived from zearalenone has not been clarified. PKS genes responsible for
zearalenone biosynthesis have been identified in F. graminearum by gene disruption experiments.142 Two PKS
genes (zea1 and zea2) are necessary for the production of zearalenone. Interestingly, ZEA2 possesses the
domains of -ketoacyl reductase, dehydrotase, and enoyl reductase as observed normally in PKSs, but ZEA1
lacks them, indicating that the keto groups of the polyketide chain produced by ZEA1 remains intact.
Biosynthesis of zearalenone is speculated as shown in Figure 13. A hexaketide is first biosynthesized by
Figure 12 Biosynthesis of fumonisin B1.
424 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 13 Biosynthesis of zearalenone.

ZEA2. ZEA1 produces a nonaketide by using the hexaketide as a starter unit. The nonaketide is easily
converted into zearalenone by aromatization and lactonization.
Ergot alkaloids are produced by several species of Claviceps. They are derivatives of the tetracyclic ergoline
skeleton and structurally divided into two main groups, the clavines such as agroclavine (65 in Figure 14) and
lysergic acid derivatives such as ergotamine (66). Their structures are homologous to neurotransmitters such as
dopamine, noradrenaline, or serotonine and they can interact with receptor sites of such biogenic amines.
Therefore, ergot alkaloids exhibit a broad spectrum of toxicological and pharmacological actions on central,
neurohumoral, and peripheral nervous systems.143 Ergotism is the oldest recognized mycotoxicoses of humans.
The disease became epidemic in the Middle Ages, where it was known as St. Anthony’s fire, but occurrence of
the disease has declined now.109 Ergotism results from consumption of products made with grains contaminated
with ergot alkaloids. The two manifestations of ergotism that are known are gangrenous and convulsive forms..
The former form of ergotism is caused by the action of ergotamine group alkaloids associated with wheat and
rye. The clavine group alkaloids involved in the ergot of pearl millet are suggested to be responsible for the
latter form of ergotism. Gene cluster for ergot alkaloid biosynthesis has been clarified in each of Claviceps
fusiformis144 and Claviceps purpurea,145 and the biosynthetic pathway of ergotamine has been confirmed as shown
in Figure 14. Dimethylallyltryptophan (67) formed by a coupling of dimethylallyl pyrophosphate and
tryptophan, which is catalyzed by a dimethylallyltryptophan synthase, is the first product in the pathway. N-
methylation of the intermediate and subsequent conversion reactions form agroclavine (65). The two-step
oxidation of agroclavine produces paspallic acid (69), which isomerizes to D-lysergic acid (70). Two non-
ribosomal peptide synthases catalyze the formation of D-lysergyl tripeptide lactam (71), and subsequent
oxidation and cyclization afford ergotamine (66). The gene encoding a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase,
which may catalyze the two successive steps from agroclavine to elymoclavine (68) and from elymoclavine to
paspallic acid, has been identified.146

4.10.3.2 Miscellaneous Mycotoxins

Patulin (72 in Figure 15) is produced by a number of species of Penicillium and Aspergillus. Among the patulin-
producing Penicillium species, Penicillium expansum is most important because it associates with spoilage and
mycotoxin production in apples and apple juices. Contamination of patulin in apple juices is now a significant
problem.147 Patulin shows cytotoxic activity, which is suggested to be caused by forming covalent adducts
between patulin and cellular thiols.148 The complicated biosynthetic pathway of patulin has been confirmed as
shown in Figure 15,149 but there is still little information on the genes encoding the patulin biosynthetic
enzymes. Only two genes encoding 6-methylsalicylic acid synthase and isoepoxydone dehydrogenase have
been identified in Penicillium urticae and P. expansum.150 The former enzyme is a Type I PKS that produces
 Toxins of Microorganisms 425

Figure 14 Biosynthesis of ergotamine.

6-methylsalicylic acid (73) from four acetate molecules. The latter one catalyzes the reaction from isoepox-
ydone (74) to phyllostine (75). Two putative cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase genes, which may be
connected with the patulin biosynthesis, were also obtained from P. expansum.150
Gliotoxin (76 in Figure 16) is a highly immunosuppressive compound produced by a variety of fungi.151
Aspergillus fumigatus, a producer of gliotoxin, is a pathogenic fungus causing the respiratory disease known as
aspergillosis. Since gliotoxin production is detected in infected animal tissues, it is thought that there is a
relationship between gliotoxin production by the fungus and pathogenesis of aspergillosis. The gliotoxin
biosynthetic gene cluster was found in the genome of A. fumigatus.152 Among the biosynthetic genes, the gene
encoding a nonribosomal peptide synthase was shown to be necessary for gliotoxin biosynthesis by a gene
disruption experiment.153,154 A nuclear protein, LaeA, is known as a regulator for the production of various
secondary metabolites including gliotoxin in A. fumigatus. It is thought that LaeA is a key factor for the virulence
of the fungus.155
Cyclopiazonic acid (77 in Figure 16) is produced by several species of Aspergillus and Penicillium, and its
contamination has been found in a variety of agricultural products. Since Aspergillus flavus often produces AF
and cyclopiazonic acid concurrently, it is speculated that mycotoxicosis caused by cyclopiazonic acid may be
426 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 15 Biosynthesis of patulin.

disguised in the presence of aflatoxicosis.156 Cyclopiazonic acid is known as a potent inhibitor of sarcoplasmic
and endoplasmic reticulum Ca2+-activated ATPase. The indole-tetramic acid skeleton of cyclopiazonic acid is
biosynthesized from tryptophan, mevalonate, and two molecules of acetate, but its biosynthetic genes are not
obtained yet. VeA, a global regulatory protein controlling AF production and sclerotial formation in A. flavus,
was also shown to regulate cyclopiazonic acid production by the fungus.157
Citrinin contamination in food is caused mainly by the infection of Penicillium citrinum and P. verrucosum
although a variety of fungi can produce citrinin.158,159 Citrinin (78 in Figure 16) is known as a nephro-
toxin.160,161 Since P. verrucosum often produces ochratoxin A, which also has a nephrotoxic effect, concurrently,
citrinin may interact synergistically with ochratoxin A.162 Monascus purpureus, a producer of a useful red
pigment, produces citrinin as an undesired side product. The gene encoding PKS for citirinin biosynthesis in
M. purpureus has been clarified.163
Citreoviridin (79), luteoskyrin (80), and cyclochlorotine (81) are historical mycotoxins studied in Japan.
Citreoviridin was isolated as a toxin from Penicillium citreoviride associated with a disease called cardiac beriberi
or ‘shoshin kakke’.164 Luteoskyrin and cyclochlorotine were isolated from Penicillium islandicum, which was
infected into toxic yellowed rice.165 Genes responsible for biosynthesis of these compounds are not obtained.
Penicillic acid (82 in Figure 17) is a toxic compound produced by many Penicillum and some Aspergillus
species.166 It is biosynthesized from orsellinic acid through the pathway shown in Figure 17.167 A candidate of a
gene encoding a PKS for penicillic acid biosynthesis was obtained from A. ochraceus.168
 Toxins of Microorganisms 427

Figure 16 Structures of gliotoxin, cyclopiazonic acid, citrinin, citreoviridin, luteoskyrin, and cyclochlorotine.

Figure 17 Biosynthesis of penicillic acid.

Phomopsin A (83 in Figure 18) was isolated from Phomopsis leptostromiformis as the hepatotoxic metabolite
responsible for lupinosis, which is a disease in animals caused by ingestion of Lupinus species infected with the
fungus.169 Penicillium species produce other significant mycotoxins such as penitrem A (84), PR toxin (85), and
rubratoxin B (86).170 Fusarin C (87) and fusaproliferin (88) are known as mycotoxins produced by Fusarium
428 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 18 Structures of phomopsin A, penitrem A, PR toxin, rubratoxin B, fusarin C, and fusaproliferin.

species. A gene encoding a PKS fused with an unusual nonribosomal peptide synthase module responsible for
biosynthesis of fusarin C was obtained.171 Fusaproliferin was discovered as a toxic metabolite of Penicillium
proliferatum in 1995,172 but it has become an important mycotoxin because its contamination in corn samples has
been detected in many countries.173

4.10.3.3 Aflatoxins
AFs are produced primarily by A. flavus and Aspergillus parasiticus. Two other Aspergillus species, A. nomius and A.
pseudotamarii,174 can also produce AFs. Aspergillus oryzae and Aspergillus sojae, important strains used in the
fermentation industry, are known as ancestors of A. flavus and A. parasiticus, respectively. It has been clearly
proved that they never produce AFs by analysis of their AF biosynthetic genes.175,176 Aflatoxins B1 (89 in
Figure 19) and B2 (90) (AFB1 and AFB2, B series AFs), and G1 (91) and G2 (92) (AFG1 and AFG2, G series
AFs) are known as natural products. A. parasiticus produces both series AFs, while A. flavus produces only B
series AFs due to lack of the biosynthetic enzymes for production of G series AFs. Aflatoxins M1 (93) and M2
(94) (AFM1 and AFM2) are metabolic products of AFB1 and AFB2, respectively, which were first isolated from
the milk of lactating animals fed AF-contaminated feeds.177 Contamination of these six AFs in foods and feeds is
observed.
Aflatoxins show strong acute toxicity, that has caused serious acute hepatitis in humans.178 Recent outbreaks
of acute aflatoxicosis in Kenya in 2004, 2005, and 2006, which were caused by AF contamination in maize,
affected 317, 75, and 51 persons and approximately 41% of those died.179 The strength for the acute toxicity of
 Toxins of Microorganisms 429

Figure 19 Structures of aflatoxins.

natural AFs is given in the following order: AFB1 > AFG1 > AFB2 > AFG2.177 AFB1 has the strongest carcino-
genic activity in known natural products. The strength of the carcinogenicity toward rainbow trout or rats has
been determined in the order: AFB1 > AFM1 > AFG1.180 AFB2 and AFG2 did not show carcinogenic activity
toward such organisms.179 Several epidemiological studies in localities with a high incidence of liver cancer
have strongly suggested the association of AF with hepatocellular carcinoma.181 The molecular mechanism of
the carcinogenic activity of AFB1 has been proposed as shown in Figure 20. The stereospecific oxidation of the
C8–C9 double bond of AFB1 occurs by the action of a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase in liver to afford the
epoxide (95). The epoxide can bind to a guanine residue of DNA, forming a DNA–AF adduct.182 The DNA
adduct may mutate an important gene such as p53, a tumor suppressor gene, which leads to cancer.183 This
mechanism matches the fact that AFB2 or AFG2 showed no carcinogenic activity, but such AFs without a
double bond at C8–C9 still have strong mutagenicity in addition to the above-mentioned acute toxicity.180
Therefore, other unknown mechanisms to explain biological activities of AFs may be present.
It is very difficult to answer the question why an AF-producing fungus produces AF or what is the
physiological role of AF in its producer. AF production may not be necessary for the fungal growth and
infection into host plants because A. parasiticus or A. flavus without the ability of AF production can do them
normally. A hypothesis that AFs act as an antifeedant toward animals for protecting host plants from their attack
does not fit with the fact that animals cannot discriminate between feeds contaminated with and without AFs.
Antibiotic activity of AFs is not so strong, but AFs shows relatively strong insecticidal activity,184 which might
be a clue to clarify a physiological role of AFs.
Aflatoxin-producing fungi are cosmopolitan organisms that are able to contaminate a wide range of natural
substrates including cereal grains, oil seeds, cottonseed, etc. Owing to their airborne propagules, they can be easily
distributed from their natural ecological niches to susceptible plants and crops all over the world. This AF
contamination in crops is a serious problem from the viewpoint of not only public health but also economic
430 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 20 Formation of aflatoxin–DNA adduct.

loss.185,186 However, it is difficult to resolve the problem due to lack of an effective method to control AF
production. Since studies on mechanism of AF biosynthesis and its regulation are very important as a basic
research to develop a useful method to protect food and feed from AF contamination, we review recent information
on them. Practical methods and new attempts to regulate AF production and contamination are also described.

4.10.3.3.1 Biosynthesis of aflatoxins

Biosynthesis of AFs has been extensively studied and many excellent reviews on it have been written
constantly.187,188 Although a few ambiguous steps still remain, intermediates involved in the biosynthetic
pathway and genes encoding biosynthetic enzymes have been clarified as shown in Figures 21 and 22.
Biosynthetic genes are clustered in a 70 kDa DNA region in A. parasiticus or A. flavus.187 The names with the
three-letter code ‘afl ’ are used to represent the 25 genes (aflA–Y) in the figures. The renaming was proposed in
2004 by Yu et al.187 The AF biosynthetic pathway is one of the most complicated ones observed in the
biosynthesis of natural products. Aflatoxin is a polyketide compound derived from ten acetate molecules.
A PKS encoded by aflC (original name: pksA) may form hexanoyltetrahydroxyanthrone (96 in Figure 21) by
using hexanoyl CoA as a starter unit. The hexanoyl CoA itself is biosynthesized by fatty acid synthases  and 
subunits encoded by aflA (fas-1) and aflB (fas-2). Hexanoyltetrahydroxyanthrone (96) has not been isolated as an
intermediate, but it is oxidized spontaneously or by an unknown enzyme to produce norsolorinic acid (97) with
an anthraquinone skeleton. Norsolorinic acid (97) is then reduced stereospecifically to afford averantin (98).
This reaction is catalyzed by a reductase encoded by aflD (nor-1). But, another reductase encoded by aflE (norA)
can also catalyze the conversion. Furthermore, a gene, aflF (norB), encoding a protein homologous to AflE is also
present in the gene cluster. Although the reductase encoded by aflD seems to be mainly responsible for this
reaction, further studies may be necessary to clarify the function of each of the three genes (aflD, aflE, and aflF).
It is unknown why these three genes are present for the simple reductive step. Hydroxylation of averantin (98)
by a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase encoded by aflG (avnA) produces 59-hydroxyaverantin (99). Since this
reaction is not stereospecific, diastereomers are produced. Both the diastereomers produced are oxidized to 59-
oxoaverantin (100) by an alcohol dehydrogenase encoded by aflH (adhA). 59-Oxoaverantin (100) is next
converted into averufin (101) by a cyclase encoded by aflK (vbs). Averufin (101) is oxidized by a cytochrome
Figure 21 Aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway from hexanoyl CoA to versicolorin B.
Figure 22 Aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway from versicolorin B to aflatoxins B1 and G1.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 433

P-450 monooxygenase encoded by aflV (cypX) to produce hydroxyversicolorone (102), which is further
oxidized to versiconal hemiacetal acetate (103) by a monooxygenase encoded by aflW (moxY). The latter
conversion from hydroxyversicolorone (102) into versiconal hemiacetal acetate (103) is a Baeyer–Villiger
reaction.189 Versiconal hemiacetal acetate (103) is hydrolyzed by an esterase encoded by aflJ (estA) to afford
versiconal (104),190 which is converted into versicolorin B (105) by a cyclase. It is very interesting that the
cyclase catalyzing the conversion from versiconal (104) into versicolorin B (105) is the same enzyme encoded
by aflK as that catalyzing the above mentioned reaction from 59-oxoaverantin (100) to averufin (101).191
Versicolorin B (105) is converted by a desaturase encoded by aflL (verb) to produce versicolorin A (106 in
Figure 22). AFB1 and AFG1 are biosynthesized from versicolorin A (106), whereas this desaturase reaction is
not involved in the biosynthesis of AFB2 and AFG2. The next reaction from versicolorin A (106) to
demethylsterigmatocystin (107) is complicated, with which at least four proteins encoded by aflM (ver-1),
aflN (verA), aflY (hypA), and aflX (ordB) are involved.192,193 The reaction mechanism has not been clarified, but
oxidation–reduction–oxidation mechanism is proposed as shown in Figure 23.194 Versicolorin A (106) is
oxidized by a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase encoded by aflN to produce an epoxide (110 in Figure 23),
which is converted by an oxidoreductase encoded by aflX to compound 111. Compound 111 is reduced by a
dehydrogenase encoded by aflM to compound 112, which is converted into demethylsterigmatocystin (107) by
a protein encoded by aflY through a Baeyer–Villiger reaction. Demethylsterigmatocystin (107) is methylated
twice by methyltransferases encoded by aflO (dmtA) and aflP (omtA), successively, to produce sterigmatocystin
(108) and O-methylsterigmatocystin (109). O-Methylsterigmatocystin is converted into AFB1 by an oxidor-
eductase encoded by aflQ (ordA). AFG1 is also produced from O-methylsterigmatocystin (109), but at least three
proteins, the same oxidoreductase encoded aflQ, a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase encoded by aflU (cypA),
and an unknown membrane-bound protein, are necessary for the conversion from O-methylsterigmatocystin
(109) to AFG1.195 The molecular mechanism for the production of AFB1 and AFG1 from
O-methylsterigmatocystin (109) is not clear. AFB2 and AFG2 are biosynthesized from versicolorin B (105)
through dihydrodemethylsterigmatocystin (113 in Figure 24), dihydrostigmatocystin (114), and dihydro-O-
methylsterigmatocystin (115) by the same enzymes involved in the biosynthesis of AFB1 and AFG1.

Figure 23 Putative biosynthetic mechanism from versicolorin A to demethylsterigmatocystin.

434 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 24 Aflatoxin biosynthetic pathway from versicolorin B to aflatoxins B2 and G2.

Among the 25 genes involved in the AF biosynthetic cluster, studies on 21 genes are described above.
Functions of the remaining four genes, aflR (aflR), aflS (aflJ), aflI (avfA), and aflT (aflT), also have been studied.
An oxidase encoded by aflI is suggested to be concerned with the steps from averufin (101) to versiconal
hemiacetal acetate (103),196 but its role is not still clear. The gene aflT encodes a transporter, suggesting that it
has a role in the AF secretion, but its role is not confirmed.197 Two proteins encoded by aflR and aflS are
important for regulation of the expression of AF biosynthetic enzymes, which are described in detail in the next
section.

4.10.3.3.2 Regulatory mechanism of aflatoxin production

Aflatoxins are produced as secondary metabolites by fungi. Secondary metabolism is regulated by a signal from
primary metabolism, but it is not easy to clarify a regulatory mechanism of the change from primary
metabolism to secondary one. In the case of AF production, there are the following three important clues to
investigate the regulatory mechanism leading to the start of AF biosynthesis198,199: (1) regulatory proteins
which control expression of AF biosynthetic enzymes are present in the gene cluster of AF biosynthesis,
(2) some environmental and nutritional factors strongly affect AF productivity, and (3) fungal development
such as conidiation often links with AF production.
First, a protein encoded by aflR is known as the key regulator for AF biosynthesis.190,198 AflR protein is a
positive-acting transcription factor, which binds to a specific recognition site in the promoter regions of most of
afl genes encoding AF biosynthetic enzymes, and can provoke their expression. Loss of AflR protein causes
complete inhibition of transcription of afl genes, indicating that expression of AflR is the initial switch that can
start the secondary metabolism. The signaling pathway or regulatory system in the primary metabolite, which
leads to aflR expression has not been clarified well. The presence of putative binding sites of PacC and AreA,
 Toxins of Microorganisms 435

transcriptional factors for pH control and nitrogen utilization, respectively, in the promoter region of aflR may
coincide with the facts of regulation of AF production by pH and nitrogen source later mentioned. On the other
hand, aflS is known as another regulatory gene present in the AF biosynthetic gene cluster. It is suggested that
AflS protein binds to the C-terminal region of AflR and acts as a transcriptional enhancer or a coactivator
of AflR.198
Second, carbon and nitrogen sources, pH, temperature, and water activity are important nutritional and
environmental factors for AF production.199 It is known that AF production is induced by glucose or sucrose,
but not induced by peptone or lactose, suggesting that a catabolite repression is involved in AF production. AF
production is strongly suppressed by the presence of nitrate or under an alkaline condition. AF contamination
in crops is observed only in tropical and semitropical areas with optimal environmental conditions for AF
production by fungi.
It is known that there is a relationship between conidiation and mycotoxin production in Aspergillus
species.200 For example, many of the fluffy mutant strains of Aspergillus nidulans that are unable to form conidia
cannot produce sterigmatocystin, an intermediate involved in the late steps of AF biosynthetic pathway
(Figure 22).201 Since genes responsible for sterigmatocystin biosynthesis in A. nidulans are homologs of the
corresponding ones for AF biosynthesis in A. flavus or A. parasiticus, production mechanism of sterigmatocystin
by A. nidulans has been studied as a model system. From the analysis of a mutant defective in both conidiation
and sterigmatocystin production, a G-protein/cAMP/protein kinase A signaling cascade, which regulates both
asexual sporulation and sterigmatocystin production, was found in A. nidulans.202 In the cascade, hydrolysis of
GTP bound to the FadA protein, the -subunit of the G-protein, is stimulated by a signal of FlbA, a regulator
of G-protein signaling-type protein, leading to an increase in the cAMP levels. The cAMP may act as a second
messenger to activate a protein kinase A that may modulate the activity of AflR protein to start sterigmatocystin
production. It was shown that a similar cascade present in A. flavus and A. parasiticus regulates AF production.203
The veA gene encoding a transcriptional regulator controls both sterigmatocystin production and sexual
development of A. nidulans.204 In A. parasiticus, the veA gene is required for both AF production and sclerotia
formation.205 LaeA protein is present in Aspergillus species broadly and may regulate production of a variety of
secondary metabolites such as sterigmatocystin or lovastatin,206 but it is not clear if LaeA regulates AF
production.
Regulatory mechanism for AF production described above is summarized in Figure 25. It is the key point
how the expression of AflR protein is regulated. AflR protein expressed induces expression of genes responsible
for AF biosynthesis present in the AF gene cluster to start AF production. Some environmental and nutritional
factors may affect AflR expression, but the signaling pathway from an outside signal for the gene expression is
still a black box. A G-protein cascade and a regulation by VeA protein also affect AflR expression, but they are
not specific for AF production and only a small part of the cascade or regulation is known. To clarify the whole
regulatory mechanism for AF production, it may be necessary to obtain more information on many molecules
that are involved in the regulation by using a new method such as a microarray technology.207

4.10.3.3.3 Regulation of aflatoxin production and contamination

Several decontamination and detoxification strategies for AFs have been attempted to resolve the AF con-
tamination problem. Among them, nontoxigenic strains and AF-binding agents are practically used.
Nontoxigenic strains that do not produce AFs can decrease AFs in crops by competing with toxic strains.208
Some binding agents such as calcium montmorillonite clay can decrease the AF uptake by animals involved in
the diet.109 Chemical detoxification methods by ammoniation or ozonization are also known, but they are not
useful because they strongly reduce food quality.109
Use of antifungal agents may be one of the effective methods to prevent AF contamination. However, strong
fungicides are sometimes toxic to mammals, and resistant strains may spread rapidly as known in the case of use
of antibiotics. Since AF production is not necessary for its producing fungus, specific inhibitors of AF
production with no fungicidal activity may be useful to prevent foods and feeds from AF contamination
without incurring rapid spread of resistant strains.
Until now, many substances including pesticides, extracts of plants, and microbial metabolites have been
bioassayed to find inhibitory activity on AF production. Organophosphorus insecticides with cholinesterase
inhibitory activity, such as dichlorvos (116 in Figure 26), can inhibit AF production by inhibiting the esterase
436 Toxins of Microorganisms

Environmental and nutritional factors: carbon and nitrogen sources, temperature, pH, etc.

Development: conidiation, etc.

Fungal cell G-protein cascade VeA protein

Unknown mechanism

Outside
Acetic acid
Primary metabolism Inside
Regulation of aflR expression
Secondary metabolism AFLC OH O OH O

HO OH
O O OH O OH

AFLR O O

O O OCH3 AFLT O O OCH3

O O
aflC aflR aflT
O

70 kbp
Gene cluster for aflatoxin biosynthesis O O OCH3

Aflatoxin B1

Figure 25 Regulatory systems for aflatoxin production.

Figure 26 Aflatoxin production inhibitors from pesticides and plants.

 Toxins of Microorganisms 437

catalyzing the biosynthetic step of conversion from versiconal hemiacetal acetate (103) into versiconal (104)
(Figure 21).209 Some inhibitors of pentaketide-derived melanin biosynthesis in fungi, such as tricyclazole
(117), show AF production–inhibitory activity.210 They can inhibit the reductase encoded by aflM involved in
the conversion step from versicolorin A (106) into demethylsterigmatocystin (107) (Figure 22). As constituents
of plants, anthocyanins,211 gallic acid,212 diferuloylputrescine (118), and p-coumaroylferuloylputrescine
(119),213 are known as AF production inhibitors. Dillapiol (120) and apiol (121) exhibit specific inhibition
toward AFG1 production of A. parasiticus without inhibiting AFB1 production and fungal growth.214 They may
probably inhibit the cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase encoded by aflU (Figure 22).
Aflastatins, blasticidin A, and dioctatin A are known as specific AF production inhibitors of microbial origin.
They are all Streptomyces metabolites. Aflastatin A (122 in Figure 27) is the first compound found by screening
search for useful AF production inhibitors among microbial metabolites.215 It is a unique tetramic acid
derivative with a highly oxygenated long alkyl side chain.216 The absolute stereochemistry of aflastatin A
proposed previously217 was recently revised partly.218 It strongly inhibits production of not only AF but also
other polyketide compounds including patulin or pentaketide-derived melanin.215,219 Since aflastatin A reduces
the mRNA levels of aflR and affects carbon metabolism of the fungi, its molecular target may be present in the
early regulatory system before AflR expression for AF production.220,221 Blasticidin A (123) was found as an
antibiotic222 and recently rediscovered as an AF production inhibitor.223 Its structure including the absolute
stereochemistry is very similar to that of aflastatin A.218 Since biological activities of blasticidin A on AF
production, aflR expression, and carbon metabolism are the same as those of aflastatin A, the target molecule of
blasticidin A may be identical with that of aflastatin A.220 Both aflastatin A and blasticidin A do not affect
conidiation of A. parasiticus. Dioctatin A (124) was isolated as an inhibitor of human dipeptidyl peptidase II and
recently shown to have a specific AF production–inhibitory activity.224 Dioctatin A reduces the aflR mRNA
level and inhibits not only AF production but also conidiation of A. parasiticus. On the other hand, it strongly
activates the production of kojic acid by the fungus. Therefore, dioctatin A may have pleiotropic effects on
regulatory mechanisms of fungal secondary metabolite production and differentiation. Studies on the mode of
actions of specific AF production inhibitors including aflastatin A, blasticidin A, and dioctatin A are very
important not only for developing new effective AF inhibitors but also to better characterize regulatory
mechanisms of secondary metabolite production in fungi.

4.10.3.4 Trichothecenes
Trichothecenes are toxic secondary metabolites of Fusarium, Trichothecium, Myrothecium, and other fungal
genera.225,226 They have a common trichothecene skeleton, 12,13-epoxytrichothec-9-ene (EPT), comprising
of A-ring, B-ring, and C-ring (see Figure 28). Their structural diversity arises by combinations of functional
groups attached to the skeleton. Typical examples of major known trichothecenes include deoxynivalenol
(DON), 15-acetyldeoxynivalenol (15-ADON), nivalenol (NIV), 4,15-diacetylnivalenol (4,15-diANIV), and
T-2 toxin, whose structures are illustrated in Figure 28. However, substitutions with arbitrary combinations
of functional groups are not allowed in constructing the structures of naturally occurring trichothecenes, and
the producing fungal strains show selective structural diversity. For example, there are five positions for the
attachment of substituents in Fusarium trichothecenes (i.e., 2  3  3  2  4 = 144 possible combinations; see
Figure 28), but only less than 10 chemotypes are known as naturally occurring end products of extant Fusarium
species.
Trichothecenes inhibit protein translation in eukaryotes and pose serious threats to animal health and food
safety.227 Among this group of mycotoxin, DON (also known as vomitoxin) is the most major compound that
frequently occurs in cereals. It causes vomiting in exposed animals literally, and also other toxicoses including
diarrhea, dermatitis, immunosuppression, and hemorrhagic septicemia, with extremely high dose ultimately
resulting in death.228 For detoxification of DON and other trichothecenes in feeds, Biomin GmbH commer-
cialized a ruminal bacterial strain as feed additives for irreversible de-epoxidation of the toxic 12,13-epoxy ring
although the responsible detoxification system remains to be characterized in detail.229
In addition to their impacts as mycotoxins, trichothecenes are also known as phytotoxins for the toxin-
producing phytopathogenic fungi.230 Above all, Fusarium species, such as F. graminearum and F. culmorum, are the
problematic fungal species producing trichothecenes because they are the causal pathogens of Fusarium head
Figure 27 Aflatoxin production inhibitors from microorganisms.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 439

Type A trichothecenes
(1) B (1) Non-Fusarium trichothecenes
H H
(2) A
HO O C R1
3 (2) OH
O R5 O (3) OAc
8
(3) 7
15 4
O
R2
R4
(4)
(1)
O (1) R3 H
(2)
Type B trichothecenes OH
H (1)
H (3)
OAc
(2) (2)
HO
(3)
OH AcO

R1 R2 R3 R4 R5

DON (deoxynivalenol) (2) (1) (2) (2) (4)

3-ADON (3-acetyldeoxynivalenol) (3) (1) (2) (2) (4)

15-ADON (15-acetyldeoxynivalenol) (2) (1) (3) (2) (4)

NIV (nivalenol) (2) (2) (2) (2) (4)

4-ANIV (4-acetylnivalenol) (2) (3) (2) (2) (4)

4,15-diANIV (4,15-diacetylnivalenol) (2) (3) (3) (2) (4)

T-2 toxin (2) (3) (3) (1) (3)

NEO (neosolaniol) (2) (3) (3) (1) (2)

4,15-DAS (4,15-diacetoxynivalenol) (2) (3) (3) (1) (1)

CAL (calonectrin) (3) (1) (3) (1) (1)

ITD (isotrichodermin) (3) (1) (1) (1) (1)

Figure 28 Structures of Fusarium trichothecenes (including trichothecene intermediates isolated as natural products). The
side chains (e.g., hydroxyl, acetyl, keto) are added to the trichothecene skeleton at C-3 (R1), C-4 (R2), C-15 (R3), C-7 (R4), and
C-8 (R5), which are shaded in colors. While type A trichothecene has a single bond at C-8, type B trichothecene has a keto at
C-8. Three rings that constitute the trichothecene skeleton [EPT; R1 = (1), R2 = (1), R3 = (1), R4 = (1), R5 = (1)] are labeled A, B,
and C in bold. It should be noted that EPT is not a Fusarium trichothecene.

blight, a devastating disease of wheat, barley, and other important cereal crops.231 For this reason, Fusarium
trichothecenes have been used to examine their roles during infection of the toxin-producing fungal pathogen
to host plants,232,233 where they seem to provoke different biochemical reactions depending on their
chemotypes.234
Evolutionary analyses of the trichothecene biosynthesis genes (Tri genes) in the Tri5 gene cluster suggested
that selectively optimal trichothecene chemotype varies by environment or changes overtime due to spatial or
temporal heterogeneity in selective pressure.235 Indeed, analyses of virulence of F. graminearum strains demon-
strated that the chemotype differences affect host range or fitness to host plants.236 In view of the ecological
significance of the chemotypes, Fusarium trichothecenes are an attractive model to study the genetic and
biochemical mechanisms that generated the selective structural diversity for a group of secondary metabolites.
Classified into the chemical group sesquiterpenes, trichothecene skeleton is constructed from farnesyl
pyrophosphate (FPP) with two rounds of cyclization.237–239 Isotrichodiol (ITdiol)240 is a branching-point
intermediate of Fusarium trichothecenes and non-Fusarium trichothecenes that precedes the second cyclization.
In this section, we summarize outlines of trichothecene biosynthesis focusing on those of Fusarium species.
440 Toxins of Microorganisms

4.10.3.4.1 A common pathway of trichothecene biosynthesis: From FPP to ITdiol

Trichodiene (TDN) (125; Figure 29) is the first stable biosynthetic intermediate identified as a natural
metabolite of trichothecin-producing fungus, Trichothecium roseum.241–243 Using this fungal species, Cane
et al.244,245 elegantly elucidated enzymatic cyclization of all-trans-FPP to TDN. The enzyme TDN synthase
responsible for this cyclization was purified from Fusarium sporotrichioides246 and the encoding gene Tri5
(formerly Tox5) was subsequently isolated.247
In both Fusarium and non-Fusarium species that produce trichothecenes, the resulting alicyclic hydrocarbon
TDN undergoes sequential oxygenations as follows (Figure 29): C-2 hydroxylation [2-hydroxytrichodiene

Figure 29 A common pathway of trichothecene biosynthesis. FPP is cyclized to TDN (125) by a cyclase encoded by Tri5. In
the biosynthesis of both Fusarium trichothecenes and non-Fusarium trichothecenes, three oxygenations catalyzed by a CYP
encoded by Tri4 follow to yield ITdiol (128).
 Toxins of Microorganisms 441

(126)]248 ! C-12,13 epoxidation [12,13-epoxy-9,10-trichoene-2-ol (127)]249 ! C-11 hydroxylation [ITdiol

(128)].240,250 This common trichothecene pathway is catalyzed by a cytochrome P-450 monooxygenase (CYP)
encoded by Tri4.251–254 Trichothecene biosynthesis is known to be inhibited by some CYP inhibitors, such as
xanthotoxin and flavones.255 These plant shikimate aromatics proved to inhibit oxygenation of trichodiene-11-
one,256 a TDN (125) analogue, by Saccharomyces cerevisiae expressing FgTri4 (our unpublished results). Since the
trichothecene skeleton is not formed without these oxygenation steps, TRI4 could be a good target with which
one can develop more specific inhibitors of the toxin biosynthesis.
A multifunctional CYP that participates in secondary metabolism is also known in other fungal species. For
example, Fusarium fujikuroi possesses P450-1 that codes an enzyme with broad substrate specificity acting on
separate carbons of precursors in gibberellin biosynthesis:257 Phoma betae also appears to use a similar type of a
CYP gene in aphidicolin biosynthesis.258 In the case of Fusarium Tri4, the encoded enzyme can catalyze an
additional oxygenation at C-3 (see Section 4.10.3.4.2). To date, no known multifunctional CYP acts on greater
than three different carbons of precursors other than that encoded by Fusarium Tri4.

4.10.3.4.2 Biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes

In the biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes, isotrichotriol (129)259 is the final product of oxygenation
reactions by TRI4 enzyme (Figure 30). This tetraoxygenated biosynthetic intermediate undergoes acid-
catalyzed spontaneous cyclization to give isotrichodermol (130), the first intermediate with a toxic trichothe-
cene skeleton, by intramolecular attack of the C-2 hydroxyl to C-11.261 So far, enzymes that catalyze this
second cyclization have not been identified. Rather, it seems plausible that a locally high concentration of
isotrichotriol (129) on the ER membrane significantly accelerates this nonenzymatic cyclization in the
biosynthesis of trichothecenes by Fusarium species. Taken together, this implies that only two genes, Tri5
and Tri4, are needed to build up the trichothecene skeleton with an additional hydroxyl at C-3.254
Trichothecene 3-O-acetyltransferase encoded by a noncluster gene, Tri101, readily converts isotrichoder-
mol (130) into isotrichodermin (ITD, 131) (Figure 30).262,263 This acetylation step is important for the self-
protection of trichothecene-producing Fusarium species. The C-3 acetyl is also essential for subsequent
biosynthetic steps to proceed. Indeed, the Tri101–-targeted gene disruption mutant of F. sporotrichioides could
not metabolize 3-hydroxytrichothecenes, but efficiently converted exogenously added ITD (131) and other
C-3 acetylated intermediates into T-2 toxin.264 After ITD (131), the biosynthetic pathways are different
between type A and type B trichothecenes.

4.10.3.4.2(i) Type A trichothecenes T-2 toxin is an extensively studied model type A trichothecene with
maximum number of biosynthetic steps among this group of trichothecenes. In the biosynthetic pathway to T-2
toxin (see Figure 31), C-15 of ITD (131) is oxygenated to 15-deacetylcalonectrin (15-deCAL; 132a) by a CYP
encoded by Tri11.265 The FsTri11–-targeted gene disruption mutant of F. sporotrichioides mainly accumulates
ITD (131), but also produces small amounts of 8-hydroxyisotrichodermin (8-HIT; 132b) and
8-hydroxyisotrichodermol.266 8-Hydroxyisotrichodermin (132b) and 8-hydroxyisotrichodermol were not con-
verted into T-2 toxin when fed to a FsTri4– mutant of F. sporotrichioides although the later compound was
completely converted into the former (132b).266 This indicates that these 8-hydroxytrichothecenes are shunt
metabolites and the C-15 oxygenation step must follow immediately after the formation of ITD (131) in the
biosynthesis of type A trichothecenes (Figure 31).
After formation of 15-deCAL (132a), the C-15 hydroxyl is acetylated by an acetyltransferase encoded
by FsTri3.267 The resulting intermediate, calonectrin (CAL, 133), serves as a substrate of a CYP respon-
sible for C-8 hydroxylation (encoded by FsTri1)268 or C-4 hydroxylation (encoded by FsTri13)269 in the
biosynthesis of T-2 toxin. Owing to the broad substrate specificities of FsTRI1 and FsTR13 enzymes,
several biosynthetic routes operate after CAL (133) along the metabolic grids rather than a single pathway
(Figure 31). On the biosynthetic grids, two transferases encoded by FsTri7270 and FsTri16271 participate in
the transfer of C-4 acetyl and C-8 isovaleroxy groups to the T-2 toxin intermediates. Finally, the resulting
product of the biosynthetic grids, 3-acetylT-2 toxin, is subject to deacetylation at C-3 by an esterase
encoded by FsTri8.272
442 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 30 Biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes. In trichothecene-producing Fusarium species, one additional oxygen
is added to ITdiol (128) to give isotrichotriol (129). Cyclization of isotrichotriol (129) to isotrichodermol (130) under acidic
condition assumes a transient intermediate, which can also undergo isomerization to trichotriol260 and its 9-epimer.261
Acetylation at C-3 of isotrichodermol (130) to ITD (131) is an essential step for the biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes.

4.10.3.4.2(ii) Type B trichothecenes In the biosynthesis of type B trichothecenes, three biosynthetic routes
to the next oxygenation step operate after ITD (131) (see Figure 32). This pathway diversification is attributed
to the function of a key hydroxylase encoded by FgTri1,273 which is similar to but distinct from its homologue
FsTri1. FgTRI1 enzyme is a multifunctional CYP that oxygenates both C-7 and C-8 of ITD (131) and CAL
 Toxins of Microorganisms 443

Figure 31 Biosynthesis of type A trichothecenes. ITD (131) is metabolized to T-2 toxin along the biosynthetic grids. Either
C-8 hydroxylation or C-4 hydroxylation of CAL (133) may occur.
444 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 32 Biosynthesis of type B trichothecenes. ITD (131) is metabolized to 3-ADON (3-ADON-producing strain) or 4-ANIV
(4-ANIV-producing strain) along the biosynthetic grids. In this tentative model, C-7/C-8 hydroxylation of CAL (133) must
precede C-4 hydroxylation.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 445

(133).274 In contrast to T-2 toxin biosynthesis, 8-HIT (132b) is not a shunt metabolite of type B trichothecenes;
both 8-HIT (132b) and 7-hydroxyisotrichodermin (7-HIT; 132c) were efficiently converted into
3-acetyldeoxynivalenol (3-ADON) along the metabolic grids in a 3-ADON-producing strain (Figure 32).275
Nevertheless, a major pathway from ITD (131) to 3-ADON should involve 15-deCAL (132a) and CAL (133),
because these intermediates showed significant incorporation characteristics of their [14C] label into 3-ADON
than those of 8-HIT (132b) and 7-HIT (132c). On the biosynthetic grids to 7,8-dihydroxycalonectrin (DHC,
134), enzymes encoded by FgTri11 and FgTri3 catalyze C-15 oxygenation and C-15 acetylation, respectively.
This C-15 acetylation step is essential for the biosynthesis of trichothecenes with a hydroxyl at C-15
(e.g., DON, NIV, 3-ADON), suggesting the occurrence of a later deacetylation step in the biosynthesis.
The biosynthetic pathways after DHC (134) are not currently well understood. For the study of type B
trichothecene biosynthesis, 4-acetylnivalenol (4-ANIV)-producing strains are an attractive model because other
chemotype strains could have arisen (e.g., DON, 3-ADON, 15-ADON, NIV) via the inactivation of appropriate
pathway Tri genes in evolution. A series of our preliminary investigations suggested that oxygenations of A-ring by
FgTRI1 enzyme must precede oxygenation at C-4 and that C-3 deacetylation must precede C-15 deacetylation in
the biosynthesis of 4-ANIV. A tentative biosynthetic pathway of 4-ANIV is proposed as illustrated in Figure 32.

4.10.3.4.3 Biosynthesis of non-Fusarium trichothecenes

In fungal species such as Myrothecium roridum and T. roseum, ITdiol (128) is subsequently cyclized to EPT, a
minimum trichothecene skeleton also given a specific compound name ‘trichothecene’ (Figure 33). EPT is a
precursor specific to non-Fusarium trichothecenes because it is not metabolized to Fusarium trichothecenes (that
have an acetyl or a hydroxyl at C-3) by trichothecene-producing Fusarium species.276 This implies that the
determinant of Fusarium trichothecene and non-Fusarium trichothecene is the functional difference of Tri4 that
functions between the first and second cyclizations in the biosynthetic pathways.
In contrast to the Fusarium species, the biosynthesis mechanisms after the formation of the trichothecene
skeleton are poorly understood for the toxin-producing non-Fusarium species. So far, only four genes have been
isolated and characterized from non-Fusarium fungal species that produce trichothecenes, T. roseum TrTri4254
and M. roridum MrTri4, MrTri5, and MrTri6.252 Among these genes, functions were demonstrated for TrTri4
and MrTri4 by heterologous expression of the genes in S. cerevisiae254 and F. sporotrichioides (FsTri4– mutant),252
respectively.

4.10.3.4.4 Clustering and nonclustering of trichothecene biosynthesis genes

in Fusarium species
Similar to the bacterial antibiotic biosynthesis genes, genes that specifically contribute to fungal secondary
metabolism are often found in gene clusters. Examples include the gibberellin biosynthesis gene cluster of
F. fujikuroi,257 the T-toxin biosynthesis gene cluster of Cochliobolus heterostrophus,277 the HC-toxin biosynthesis
gene cluster of Cochliobolus carbonum,278 and the aphidicolin biosynthesis gene cluster of P. betae.258 In the case of
trichothecene-producing Fusarium species, most but not all of the Tri genes are found in the Tri5 gene
cluster.279 Two additional Tri genes are found in the Tri1–Tri16 two-gene cluster,268 and Tri101 is separated
alone from all other Tri genes.263 Tri genes encoding trichothecene C-15 deacetylase and DHC C-8 oxidor-
eductase are necessary for the biosynthesis of some type B trichothecenes such as 3-ADON and 4-ANIV, but
yet remain to be cloned and characterized. These genes also appear to exist separated from other Tri genes in
the fungal genome.

4.10.3.4.4(i) Pathway, transport, and regulatory genes for the biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes in
the Tri5 gene cluster In the Tri5 gene cluster of T-2 toxin- and 4-ANIV-producing strains, there are 12 Tri
genes, Tri8, Tri7, Tri3, Tri4, Tri6, Tri5, Tri10, Tri9, Tri11, Tri12, Tri13, and Tri14, which are upregulated with
the onset of trichothecene biosynthesis (Figure 34). Among these cluster genes, Tri9 (encoding a peptide of 43
amino acid residues) was identified by comparative analysis of F. graminearum and F. sporotrichioides cDNAs,270
but the contribution of Tri9 to the biosynthesis is not clear. Although designated as a Tri gene, this gene may
not meet the criteria of functional trichothecene genes. Tri14 is not needed for the production of trichothecenes
on media, but the gene was reportedly needed for high virulence and for the toxin production during
pathogenesis in wheat tissues.280
446 Toxins of Microorganisms

Figure 33 Biosynthesis of non-Fusarium trichothecenes. Cyclization of ITdiol (128) to EPT under acidic condition assumes
a transient intermediate, as is the case with the cyclization of isotrichotriol (129).

Among the remaining 10 Tri genes, seven genes are pathway genes whose functions were determined by
targeted gene disruption experiments. These include Tri8 (encoding trichothecene C-3 deacetylase),272 Tri7
(encoding 3-acetyltrichothecene 4-O-acetyltransferase),270 Tri3 (encoding 3-acetyltrichothecene 15-O-
acetyltransferase),267 Tri4 (encoding a multifunctional oxygenase responsible for the conversion of TDN
into isotrichotriol; CYP),251,253,254 Tri5 (encoding TDN synthase),247 Tri11 (encoding ITD C-15 hydroxylase;
CYP),265 and Tri13 (3-acetyltrichothecene C-4 hydroxylase; CYP)269,281 as mentioned in Sections 4.10.3.4.1
and 4.10.3.4.2. In addition to these pathway Tri genes, the Tri5 gene cluster contains two regulatory genes, Tri6
and Tri10, and a transporter gene Tri12.
Tri6 encodes a zinc-finger transcription factor with an acidic activation domain in the N-terminal half of the
protein and three regions showing some similarity to known Cys2His2 zinc-finger motifs at the C-terminus.282 This
positive regulator of Tri gene expression is essential for the production of trichothecenes. TRI6 binds to the
consensus sequences of YNAGGCC,283 which is found in the promoter regions of Tri genes, basically except that
of Tri6 and Tri10. Tri10 encodes a novel type of regulatory protein essential for production of trichothecenes.284
Tri10 is involved not only in the Tri6-mediated activation of Tri genes, but also in the activation of genes encoding
enzymes for FPP synthesis (in the isoprenoid primary metabolic pathway) and unrelated genes designated Ibt
(influenced by Tri10; ten).285 Tri12 encodes a trichothecene efflux pump showing high similarity to the major
 Toxins of Microorganisms 447

The Tri5 gene cluster

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
kb

1 2 3 4 5 6
F15 (3-ADON)

F. graminearum PH-1 (15-ADON)

MAFF 111233 (4-ANIV)

Tri8 Tri3 Tri6 Tri10 Tri11 Tri13
Tri7 Tri4 Tri5 Tri9 Tri12 Tri14
F. sporotrichioides NRRL 3299
1 2 3 4 5 6

The Tri1–Tr16 two-gene cluster

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
kb

7 8 9 10
F. graminearum PH-1 (15-ADON)
pseudo-Tri16
Tri1
Tri16
F. sporotrichioides NRRL 3299
11 12 13
Figure 34 Trichothecene biosynthesis gene clusters of F. sporotrichioides and different chemotype strains of F.
graminearum. Tri genes with transcribed directions are illustrated in colored pointed boxes. ‘X’ in the boxes denotes
inactivation of the genes. Gene 1, -1,3-glucosidase precursor; gene 2, putative esterase; gene 3, putative tyrosinase; gene 4,
putative polysaccharide deacetylase; gene 5, 3-hydroxyacyl CoA dehydrogenase; gene 6, NADH-cytochrome b5 reductase;
gene 7, orfA (GAL4-like transcription factor); gene 8, orfB (putative sugar transporter); gene 9, orfC (unknown); gene 10, orfD
(WW domain-containing oxidoreductase); gene 11, orf2 (putative membrane protein); gene 12, GAL4-like protein; gene 13,
orf1 (unknown).

facilitator superfamily transporters.286 Disruption of F. sporotrichioides FsTri12 results in significantly reduced

production of T-2 toxin and increased sensitivity to trichothecenes added to the medium.
The Tri5 gene cluster is found in a region of synteny (or colinearity) between F. sporotrichioides and
F. graminearum (Figure 34).279,287 However, when comparison was made between trichothecene-producing
and nonproducing Gibberella species, nonbiosynthesis genes (e.g., house-keeping genes) surrounding the Tri5
gene cluster are not syntenic to each other.

4.10.3.4.4(ii) Pathway genes for the biosynthesis of Fusarium trichothecenes in the Tri1–Tri16 two-gene
cluster Tri1268,273,288 and Tri16271 are located in the Tri1–Tri16 two-gene cluster (Figure 34) although the
latter gene is inactivated in the genome of the type B trichothecene producers. As mentioned in Section 4.10.3.4.2,
the function and substrate specificity of a CYP encoded by Tri1 differ significantly between F. sporotrichioides and
F. graminearum; while FsTri1 encodes 3-acetyltrichothecene C-8 hydroxylase, FgTri1 codes for CAL C-7/C-8
hydroxylase. FgTRI1 appears to be unable to act on trichothecenes with a hydroxyl or an acetyl at C-4. FsTri16
encodes an acyltransferase that catalyzes addition of isovaleroxyl at C-8 of 8-hydroxytrichothecenes.271
In contrast to the Tri5 gene cluster, the regions surrounding the Tri1–Tri16 two-gene cluster are not
syntenic between F. sporotrichioides and F. graminearum.273,288 Indeed, Tri1 is much more divergent between these
Fusarium species (e.g., 59% identity between FsTRI1 and FgTRI1) compared to the diversity between the same
Tri genes in the Tri5 gene cluster (e.g., 90% total protein sequence identity between FsTRI11 and FgTRI11).
This suggests that Tri1 and Tri16 have a longer evolutionary history than the Tri genes in the Tri5 gene cluster
448 Toxins of Microorganisms

or experienced more robust evolutionary events. During the evolutionary process, these two-gene cluster genes
appear to have evolved in different ways to type A and type B trichothecene producers: perhaps under
unknown selective pressures, FgTri1 evolved to code for a CYP with limited substrate specificity and additional
function, which in turn resulted in altered (i.e., limited) substrate specificity of FgTRI13 in order not to
compete with FgTRI1 for CAL (133) in the biosynthetic pathway. Alternatively, limited substrate specificity of
FgTRI13 may have altered enzymatic properties of FgTRI1 (i.e., evolved new function), but this possibility
seems less likely than the former.

4.10.3.4.4(iii) Pathway and self-protection gene Tri101 that resides outside of the Tri gene clusters As
mentioned in Section 4.10.3.4.2, all the clustered Tri genes (in the Tri5 gene cluster and the Tri1–Tri16
two-gene cluster) are not sufficient for the biosynthesis of trichothecenes other than isotrichodermol (130).
A key pathway gene missing from the gene clusters, Tri101 encoding trichothecene 3-O-
acetyltransferase,262 is essential for pathway Tri genes (except Tri4 and Tri5) to participate in trichothe-
cene biosynthesis.264 This gene, also known as a gene for self-protection, is located between the phosphate
permease (pho5) and UTP-ammonia ligase (ura7) genes.263 Despite the isolated occurrence of Tri101 in the
genome, a TRI6-binding sequence is found in the promoter region of Tri101 in both F. graminearum and
F. sporotrichioides. Consistent with this structural feature, the expression of Tri101 is under the regulatory
control of Tri10 and Tri6.284
Interestingly, trichothecene-non-producing Gibberella species carry a dysfunctional copy of Tri101 between
pho5 and ura7,289 and a functional homologue of Tri101, designated Tri201 (70% nucleotide sequence identical
with Tri101 of trichothecene-producing fusaria), between a putative -galactosidase gene and a homologue of a
Drosophila hypothetical protein gene. These genes are directly flanking each other in the genome of
F. graminearum,290 suggesting that Tri201 is a paralogue of Tri101 generated by gene duplication during
evolutionary process. Further studies resulted in the functional identification of trichothecene 3-O-
acetyltransferase genes in Fusarium decemcellulare (teleomorph genus; Albonectria), Fusarium solani (teleomorph
genus; Neocosmospora), Magnaporthe grisea, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, designated TAT (Fusarium and
Magnaporthe)290 or AYT1 (S. cerevisiae).291 The phylogeny of the 3-O-acetyltransferase (TRI101, TRI201,
TAT) was mostly concordant with the rDNA phylogeny of these ascomycetous fungi.290 This indicates a
different evolutionary origin of Tri101 from other Tri genes in the Tri5 gene cluster, which were grouped into
phylogenetically distinct lineages according to the chemotypes.235

4.10.3.4.5 Summary and perspectives

Outlines of trichothecene biosynthetic pathways were determined with Fusarium trichothecenes and most of the
Tri genes needed for the biosynthesis were isolated. Briefly, first cyclization, four consecutive oxygenations,
and second cyclization build up the skeleton of Fusarium trichothecenes and subsequent systematic acetylations,
oxygenations, esterification, and/or deacetylations determine their chemotypes. Regardless of the chemotypes
at C-3 and C-15, these two positions must once be acetylated along the biosynthetic pathways to the final
product of trichothecenes.
For the biosynthesis of a model type A trichothecene T-2 toxin, all the necessary Tri genes were already
identified.226 However, there still remain two Tri genes as-yet-unidentified for the biosynthesis of 4-ANIV, a
model type B trichothecene. These include genes encoding DHC C-8 oxidoreductase, whose activity was also
detected from F. verticillioides (teleomorph genus; Gibberella), which does not produce trichothecenes,274 and
trichothecene C-15 deacetylase,292 whose distribution and substrate specificity are not well examined.
The relative toxicity of Fusarium trichothecenes is determined by the pattern of oxygenation, acetyla-
tion, and/or esterification, which also affects host range or fitness of the producing strains to host plants.
Hence, it is important to understand the genetic and biochemical mechanisms that generate the different
substitution patterns of trichothecene side chains at the late stages of the biosynthesis. Detailed study of
the late steps differentiating the type B trichothecene chemotypes is further needed to understand
the mechanisms generating the selective structural diversity for this group of important secondary
metabolites.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 449

References
1. J. Davies, J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2006, 33, 496–499.
2. A. E. Osbourn, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2001, 98, 14187–14188.
3. S. O. Duke; F. E. Dayan; J. G. Romagni; A. M. Rimando, Weed Res. 2000, 40, 99–111.
4. G. Donn; H. Koecher, Inhibitors of Glutamine Synthetase. In Herbicide Classes in Development; P. Boeger, K. Wakabayashi,
K. Hirai, Eds.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2002; pp 87–101.
5. H. G. Cutler, Potentially Useful Natural Product Herbicides from Microorganisms. In Principles and Practices in Plant
Ecology; Inderjit, K. M. M. Dakshini, C. L. Foy, Eds.; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, 1999; pp 497–516.
6. J. D. Walton, Plant Cell 1996, 8, 1723–1733.
7. A. Idnurm; B. J. Howlett, Mol. Plant Pathol. 2001, 2, 241–255.
8. S. Omura; A. Crump, Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2004, 2, 984–989.
9. X. Liu; S. Li, Handbook of Industrial Mycology; Mycology Series; Marcel Dekker: New York, 2005; Vol. 22, pp 723–747.
10. N. Takahashi; A. Suzuki; S. Tamura, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1965, 87, 2066.
11. S. Tamura; N. Takahashi; S. Miyamoto; R. Mori; A. Suzuki; J. Nagatsu, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1963, 27, 576–582.
12. Y. Hayakawa; S. Shirasaki; T. Kawasaki; Y. Matsuo; K. Adachi; Y. Shizuri, J. Antibiot. 2007, 60, 201–203.
13. M. D. Esposti, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1998, 1364, 222–235.
14. N. Takahashi; Y. Kimura; S. Tamura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1968, 9, 4659–4662.
15. M. J. Schnermann; F. A. Romero; I. Hwang; E. Makamatsu-Ogiso; T. Yagi; D. L. Boger, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128,
11799–11807.
16. Y. Hirata; H. Nakata; K. Yamada; K. Okuhara; T. Naito, Tetrahedron 1961, 14, 252–257.
17. H. Oishi; T. Hosokawa; T. Okutomi; K. Suzuki; K. Ando, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1969, 33, 1790–1791.
18. T. Friedrich; P. van Heek; H. Leif; T. Ohnishi; E. K. B. Forche; R. Jansen; W. Trowitzsch-Kienast; G. Hoefle, Eur. J. Biochem.
1994, 219, 691–698.
19. J. He; C. Hertweck, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 3694–3695.
20. J. He; C. Hertweck, ChemBioChem 2005, 6, 908–912.
21. J. He; C. Hertweck, Chem. Biol. 2003, 10, 1225–1232.
22. M. Muller; J. He; C. Hertweck, ChemBioChem 2006, 7, 37–39.
23. K. Ando; H. Oishi; S. Hirano; T. Okutori; K. Suzuki; H. Okazaki; M. Sawada; T. Sagawa, J. Antibiot. 1971, 24, 347–352.
24. B. Shen; H.-J. Kwon, Chem. Rec. 2002, 2, 389–396.
25. J. E. Cox; N. D. Priestley, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 7976–7977.
26. A. L. Dourmishev; L. A. Dourmishev; R. A. Schwartz, Int. J. Dermatol. 2005, 44, 981–988.
27. P. L. Chamberlain, WHO Food Additives Series 2002, 49, 3–10.
28. R. K. Jansson; R. A. Dybas, Avermectins: Biochemical Mode of Action, Biological Activity and Agricultural Importance. In
Insecticides with Novel Mode of Action; I. Ishaaya, D. Degheele, Eds.; Springer: Berlin, 1998; pp 152–170.
29. M. Jung; A. Saito; G. Buescher; M. Maurer; J.-F. Graf, Chemistry, Phamacology and Safety: Milbemycic Oxim. In Macrocyclic
Lactones in Antiparasitic Therapy; J. Vercruysse, R. S. Rew, Eds.; CABI Publishing: Wallingford, 2002; pp 51–74.
30. J. Ide; T. Okazaki; M. Ono; A. Saito; K. Nakagawa; S. Naito; K. Sato; K. Tanaka; H. Ando, Sankyo Kenkyusho Nenpo 1993, 45,
1–98.
31. D. Rugg; S. D. Buckingham; D. B. Sattelle, The Insecticidal Macrocyclic Lactons. In Comprehensive Molecular Insect
Science; L. I. Gilbert, K. Iatrou, S. S. Gill, Eds.; Elsevier: Oxford, 2005; Vol. 5, pp 25–52.
32. Q. A. Mckellar; H. A. Benchaoui, J. Vet. Pharmacol. Ther. 1996, 19, 331–351.
33. T. A. Blizzard, Chemistry and Biology of Semisynthetic Avermectins. In Biology-Chemistry Interface; R. Cooper, J. K. Snyder,
Eds.; Dekker: New York, 1999; pp 257–269.
34. A. J. Wolsternholme; A. T. Rogers, Parasitology 2005, 131, S85–S95.
35. H. Ikeda, Actinomycetologica 1999, 13, 94–112.
36. H. Ikeda; J. Ishikawa; A. Hanamoto; M. Shinose; H. Kikuchi; T. Shiba; Y. Sakaki; M. Hattori; S. Omura, Nat. Biotechnol. 2003, 21,
526–531.
37. G. D. Thompson; R. Dutton; T. C. Sparks, Pest Manag. Sci. 2000, 56, 696–702.
38. T. C. Sparks; G. D. Crouse; G. Durst, Pest Manag. Sci. 2001, 57, 896–905.
39. H. A. Kirst; K. H. Michel; J. W. Martin; L. C. Creemer; E. H. Chio; R. C. Yao; W. M. Nakatsukasa; L. D. Boeck; J. L. Occolowitz;
J. W. Pashal; J. B. Deeter; N. D. Jones; G. D. Thompson, Tetrahedron Lett. 1991, 32, 4839–4842.
40. V. L. Salgado, Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1998, 60, 91–102.
41. V. L. Salagado; J. J. Sheets; G. B. Watson; A. L. Schmidt, Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1998, 60, 103–110.
42. K. Madduri; C. Waldron; P. Matsushima; M. C. Broughton; K. Crawford; D. J. Merio; R. H. Baltz, J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol.
2001, 27, 399–402.
43. L. S. Sheehan; R. E. Rachel; B. Wilkinson; R. M. Sheridan; W. A. Vousden; A. L. Kaja; G. D. Crouse; J. Gifford; P. R. Graupne;
L. Karr; P. Lewer; T. C. Sparks; P. F. Leadlay; C. Waldron; C. J. Martin, J. Nat. Prod. 2006, 69, 1702–1710.
44. L. Huang; G. Albers-Shonberg; R. L. Monagjan; K. Jakubas; S. S. Pong; O. D. Hensens; R. W. Burg; D. A. Ostlind; J. Conroy;
O. Stapley, J. Antibiot. 1984, 37, 970–975.
45. A. Isogai; S. Sakuda; S. Matsumoto; M. Ogura; K. Furihata; H. Seto; A. Suzuki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1984, 48, 1379–1381.
46. G. Werner; H. Hagenmaier; K. Albert; H. Kohlshorn; H. Drautz, Tetrahedron Lett. 1983, 24, 5193–5196.
47. J. A. Beutler; T. C. Mckee, Curr. Med. Chem. 2003, 10, 787–796.
48. H. P. Fiedler; T. Schuez; H. Decker, Clin. Dermatol. 1993, 7, 325–352.
49. J.-B. Behr, Curr. Med. Chem. Anti-infective Agents 2003, 2, 173–189.
50. N. H. Georgopapadakou, Curr. Opin. Anti-infective Invest. Drugs 1999, 1, 346–352.
51. E. Cohen; J. E. Casida, Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1982, 17, 301–306.
52. H. Zeng; H. Tan; J. Li, Curr. Microbiol. 2002, 45, 175–179.
450 Toxins of Microorganisms

53. W. Li; H. Tan, Curr. Microbiol. 2003, 46, 403–407.

54. J. Xu; G. Liu; H. Tan, Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2003, 36, 234–238.
55. S. Sakuda; A. Isogai; S. Matsumoto; A. Suzuki; K. Koseki, Tetrahedron Lett. 1986, 27, 2475–2478.
56. S. Sakuda; A. Isogai; S. Matsumoto; A. Suzuki, J. Antibiot. 1987, 40, 296–300.
57. P. J. B. Somers; R. C. Yao; L. E. Doolin; M. J. McGowan; D. S. Fukuda; J. S. Mynderse, J. Antibiot. 1987, 40, 1751–1756.
58. Z. Zhu; T. Zheng; R. J. Homer; Y. K. Kim; N. Y. Chen; L. Cohn; Q. Hamid; J. A. Elias, Science 2004, 304, 1678–1682.
59. S. Sakuda; Y. Sugiyama; Z.-Y. Zhou; H. Takao; H. Ikeda; K. Kakinuma; Y. Yamada; H. Nagasawa, J. Org. Chem. 2001, 66,
3356–3361.
60. Y. Kodaira, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1961, 25, 261–262.
61. A. Suzuki; S. Kuyama; Y. Kodaira; S. Tamura, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1966, 30, 517–518.
62. M. S. C. Pedras; L. I. Zaharia; D. E. Ward, Phytochemistry 2002, 59, 579–596.
63. C. Dumas; V. Matha; J. M. Quiot; A. Vey, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1994, 108, 195–203.
64. M. Muroi; N. Shiragami; A. Takatsuki, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1994, 205, 1358–1365.
65. A. R. Bandani; B. Amiri; T. M. Butt; R. Gordon-Weekes, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2001, 1510, 367–377.
66. A. M. Bailey; M. J. Kershaw; B. A. Hunt; I. C. Paterson; A. K. Charnley; S. E. Reynolds; J. M. Clarkson, Gene 1996, 173,
195–197.
67. R. L. Hamill; C. E. Higgens; H. E. Boaz; M. Gorman, Tetrahedron Lett. 1969, 4255–4258.
68. A. Suzuki; M. Kanaoka; A. Isogai; S. Murakoshi; M. Ichinoe; S. Tamura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1977, 2167–2170.
69. A. Logrieco; A. Moretti; A. Ritieni; M. F. Caiaffa; L. Macchia, Beauvericin: Chemistry, Biology and Significance. In Advances in
Microbial Toxin and Its Biotechnological Exploitation; R. K. Upadhyay, Ed.; Kluwer Academic, Plenum Publishers: New York,
2002; pp 23–30.
70. D. G. Panaccione; S. L. Annis, Appl. Mycol. Biotechnol. 2001, 1, 115–143.
71. E.-M. Cho; D. Boucias; N. O. Keyhani, Microbiol. 2006, 152, 2855–2864.
72. S. Gupta; S. B. Krasnoff; D. W. Roberts; J. A. A. Renwick; L. S. Brinen; J. Clardy, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1991, 113, 707–709.
73. M. G. Anderson; T. B. Jarman; R. W. Rickards, J. Antibiot. 1995, 48, 391–398.
74. B. P. S. Khambay; J. M. Bourne; S. Cameron; B. R. Kerry; M. J. Zaki, Pest Manag. Sci. 2000, 56, 1098–1099.
75. H. Anke; O. Sterner, Mycota 2002, 10, 109–127.
76. H. Anke; O. Sterner, Curr. Org. Chem. 1997, 1, 361–374.
77. H. Hayashi, Rec. Res. Dev. Agric. Biol. Chem. 1998, 2, 511–525.
78. J. B. Gloer, Acc. Chem. Res. 1995, 28, 343–350.
79. G. N. Belofsky; J. B. Gloer; D. T. Wicklow; P. F. Dowd, Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 5497–5500.
80. O. Sterner; W. Etzel; A. Mayer; H. Anke, Nat. Prod. Lett. 1997, 10, 33–38.
81. A. Mayer; M. Kilian; B. Hoster; O. Sterner; H. Anke, Pestic. Sci. 1999, 55, 27–30.
82. T. Sasaki; M. Takagi; T. Yaguchi; S. Miyadoh; T. Okada; M. Koyama, J. Antibiot. 1992, 45, 692–697.
83. J. Schrkenbeck; P. Jeschke; A. Harder, Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2002, 2, 759–777.
84. B. Saeger; H.-P. Schmitt-Wrede; M. Dehnhardt; W. P. M. Benten; J. Krucken; A. Harder; G. von Samson-Himmelstjerna;
H. Wiegand; F. Wunderlich, FASEB J. 2001, 15, 1332–1334.
85. W. Weckwerth; K. Miyamoto; K. Iinuma; M. Krause; M. Glinski; T. Storm; G. Bonse; H. Kleinkauf; R. Zocher, J. Biol. Chem. 2000,
275, 17909–17915.
86. K. Yanai; N. Sumida; K. Okakura; T. Moriya; M. Watanabe; T. Murakami, Nat. Biotechnol. 2004, 22, 848–855.
87. H. Hayashi; Y. Nishimoto; K. Akiyama; H. Nozaki, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2000, 64, 111–115.
88. R. M. Banks; S. E. Blanchflower; J. R. Everett; B. R. Manger; C. Reading, J. Antibiot. 1997, 50, 840–846.
89. C. R. Gray; J. F. Sanz-Cervera; L. A. Silks; R. M. Williams, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14692–14693.
90. H. Hayashi; K. Takiuchi; S. Murao; M. Arai, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1989, 53, 461–469.
91. T. O. Larsen; K. Frydenvang; J. C. Frisvad; C. Christophersen, J. Nat. Prod. 1998, 61, 1154–1157.
92. M. R. Ariza; T. O. Larsen; B. O. Petersen; J. O. Duus; C. Christophersen; A. F. Barrero, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64,
1590–1592.
93. T. Kuriyama; E. Kamemoto; N. Takahashi; K. Imamura; K. Okaya; E. Suzuki; K. Hariyama; T. Yaguchi; Y. Ozoe, J. Agric. Food
Chem. 2004, 52, 3884–3887.
94. J. R. Faulkner; S. R. Hussaini; J. D. Blankenship; S. Pal; B. M. Branan; R. B. Grossman; C. L. Schardl, ChemBioChem 2006, 7,
1078–1088.
95. M. J. Spiering; C. D. Christina; H. H. Wilkinson; C. L. Schardl, Genetics 2005, 169, 1403–1414.
96. T. Meinke; M. M. Smith; W. L. Shoop, Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2002, 2, 655–674.
97. S. W. Ludmerer; V. A. Warren; B. S. Williams; Y. Zheng; D. C. Hunt; M. B. Ayer; M. A. Wallace; A. G. Chaudhary; M. A. Egan;
P. T. Meinke; D. C. Dean; M. L. Garcia; D. F. Cully; M. M. Smith, Biochemistry 2002, 41, 6548–6560.
98. K. M. Byrne; S. K. Smith; J. G. Ondeyka, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 7055–7060.
99. J. M. Schaeffer; E. G. Frazier; A. R. Bergstrom; J. M. Williamson; J. M. Liesch; M. A. Goetz, J. Antibiot. 1990, 43,
1179–1182.
100. H. Oh; D. C. Swenson; J. B. Gloer, Tetrahedron Lett. 1998, 39, 7633–7636.
101. J. A. Findlay; S. Buthelezi; G. Li; M. Seveck; J. D. Miller, J. Nat. Prod. 1997, 60, 1214–1215.
102. J. A. Findlay; S. Buthelezi; R. Lavoie; L. Pena-Rodriguez; J. D. Miller, J. Nat. Prod. 1995, 58, 1759–1766.
103. T. Morino; M. Nishimoto; A. Masuda; S. Fujita; T. Nishikiori; S. Saito, J. Antibiot. 1995, 48, 1509–1510.
104. S. Omura; F. Kuno; K. Otoguro; T. Sunazuka; K. Shiomi; R. Masuma; Y. Iwai, J. Antibiot. 1995, 48, 745–746.
105. J. G. Ondeyka; A. W. Dombrowski; J. P. Polishook; T. Felcetto; W. L. Shoop; Z. Guan; S. B. Singh, J. Antibiot. 2006, 59,
288–292.
106. P. Moya; M. Castillo; E. Primo-Yufera; F. Couillaud; R. Martinez-Manez; M. D. Garcera; M. A. Miranda; J. Primo; R. Martinez-
Pardo, J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 8544–8545.
107. M. Castillo; P. Moya; F. Couillaud; M. D. Garcera; R. Marinez-Pardo, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1998, 37, 287–294.
108. J. Forgacs; W. T. Carll, Vet. Med. 1955, 50, 172pp.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 451

109. J. L. Richard; G. A. Payne, Eds.; Mycotoxins: Risks in Plant, Animal, and Human Systems. Task Force Report No. 139; Council
for Agricultural Science and Technoplogy: Ames, IA, USA, 2003.
110. H. Faulstich, Mushroom Toxins. In Toxins in Food; W. M. Dabrowski, Z. E. Sikorski, Eds.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, 2005;
pp 65–83.
111. C. Karlson-Stiber; H. Persson, Toxicon 2003, 42, 339–349.
112. K. J. Berger; D. A. Guss, J. Emerg. Med. 2005, 28, 175–183.
113. T. Passie; J. Seifert; U. Schneider; H. M. Emrich, Addict. Biol. 2002, 7, 357–364.
114. J. Hajslova, Toxins: Part J-Mushroom Toxins. In Natural Toxic Compounds in Foods; J. Davidek, Ed.; CRC: Boca Raton, FL,
1995; pp 137–143.
115. S. Jolivet; H. Mooibroek; H. J. Wichers, FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 1998, 163, 263–267.
116. Y. Pommier; C. Marchand, Curr. Med. Chem. Anticancer Agents 2005, 5, 421–429.
117. H. Faulstich; T. Wieland, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 1996, 391 (Natural Toxins 2), 309–314.
118. T. Wieland; H. Faulstich, Experientia 1991, 47, 1186–1193.
119. D. Michelot; L. M. Melendez-Howell, Mycol. Res. 2003, 107, 131–146.
120. V. K. B. Lehmann; A. Huang; S. Ibanez-Calero; G. R. Wilson; K. L. Rinehart, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 1257–1258.
121. P. Dent; S. Grant, Cancer Biol. Ther. 2004, 3, 1143–1144.
122. W. B. Turner, Fungal Metabolites; Academic Press: London, 1978.
123. D. L. Hawksworth, Mycol. Res. 1991, 95, 641–655.
124. D. Hohler, Z. Ernahrungswiss 1998, 37, 2–12.
125. J. Dai; M. W. Wright; R. A. Manderville, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 3716–3717.
126. A. Mally; W. Dekant, Food Addit. Contam. 2005, 22 (Suppl. 1), 65–74.
127. J. P. Harris; P. G. Mantle, Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 709–716.
128. J. O’Callaghan; M. X. Caddick; A. D. W. Dobson, Microbiology 2003, 149, 3485–3491.
129. A. Karolewiez; R. Geisen, Syst. Appl. Microbiol. 2005, 28, 588–595.
130. R. Geisen; M. Schmidt-Heydt; A. Karolewiez, Mycotoxin Res. 2006, 22, 134–141.
131. K. A. Voss; J. B. Gelineau-van Waes; R. T. Riley, Mycotoxin Res. 2006, 22, 61–69.
132. E. Wang; W. P. Norred; C. W. Bacon; R. T. Riley; A. H. Merrill, Jr., J. Biol. Chem. 1991, 266, 14486–14490.
133. A. H. Merrill, Jr.; M. C. Sullards; E. Wang; K. A. Voss; R. T. Riley, Environ. Health Perspect. 2001, 109, 283–289.
134. W. F. O. Marasas; R. T. Riley; K. A. Hendricks; V. L. Stevens; T. W. Sadler; J. G. Waes; S. A. Missmer; J. Cabrera; O. Torres;
W. C. A. Gelserblom; J. Allegood; C. Martinez; J. Maddox; J. D. Miller; L. Starr; M. C. Sullards; A. V. Roman; K. A. Voss; E. Wang;
A. H. Merill, Jr., J. Nutr. 2003, 134, 711–716.
135. R. H. Proctor; A. E. Desjardins; D. W. Brown; S. P. McCormick; R. A. E. Butchko; N. Alexander; M. Bushman, Mycotoxin Res.
2006, 22, 75–78.
136. Q. Wang; J. Wang; F. Yu; X. Zhu; Z.-R. Kathia; L. Du, Progr. Nat. Sci. 2006, 16, 7–15.
137. R. H. Proctor; D. W. Brown; R. D. Plattner; A. E. Desjardins, Fungal Genet. Biol. 2003, 38, 237–249.
138. R. A. E. Butchko; R. D. Plattner; R. H. Proctor, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 9398–9404.
139. A. Zinedine; J. M. Soriano; J. C. Molto; J. Manes, Food Chem. Toxicol. 2007, 45, 1–18.
140. U. Tiemann; S. Daenicke, Food Addit. Contam. 2007, 24, 306–314.
141. G. G. J. M. Kuiper; J. G. Lemmen; B. Carlsson; J. C. Corton; S. H. Safe; P. T. Van der Saag; B. Van der Burg; J. A. G. Gustafsson,
Endocrinol. 1998, 139, 4245–4263.
142. I. Gaffor; F. Trail, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 1793–1799.
143. S. Mantegani; E. Brambilla; M. Varasi, Farmaco 1999, 54, 288–296.
144. P. Tudzynski; K. Holter; T. Correia; C. Arntz; N. Grammel; U. Keller, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1999, 261, 133–141.
145. T. Haarmann; C. Machado; Y. Lubbe; T. Correia; C. L. Schardl; D. G. Panaccione; P. Tudzynski, Phytochemistry 2005, 66,
1312–1320.
146. T. Haarmann; I. Ortel; P. Tudzynski; U. Keller, ChemBioChem 2006, 7, 645–652.
147. M. M. Moake; O. Padilla-Zakour; R. W. Worobo, Compr. Rev. Food Sci. Food Saf. 2005, 4, 8–21.
148. R. T. Riley; J. L. Showker, Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 1991, 109, 108–126.
149. J. Sekiguchi; T. Shimamoto; Y. Yamada; G. M. Gaucher, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1983, 45, 1939–1942.
150. S. White; J. O’Callaghan; A. D. W. Dobson, FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2006, 255, 17–26.
151. P. Waring; J. Beaver, Gen. Pharmacol. 1996, 27, 1311–1316.
152. D. M. Gardiner; B. J. Howlee, FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2005, 248, 241–248.
153. R. A. Cramer, Jr.; M. P. Gamcsik; R. M. Brooking; L. K. Najvar; W. R. Kirkpatrick; T. F. Patterson; C. J. Balibar; J. R. Graybill;
J. R. Perfect; S. N. Abraham; W. J. Steinbach, Eukaryot. Cell 2006, 5, 972–980.
154. D. Stack; C. Neville; S. Doyle, Microbiology 2007, 153, 1297–1306.
155. N. Keller; J. Bok; D. Chung; R. M. Perrin; E. K. Shwab, Med. Mycol. 2006, 44, S83–S85.
156. G. A. Burdock; W. G. Flamm, Int. J. Toxicol. 2000, 19, 195–218.
157. R. M. Duran; J. W. Cary; A. M. Calvo, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2007, 73, 1158–1168.
158. B.-J. Xu; X.-Q. Jia; Li.-J. Gu; C.-K. Sung, Food Control 2006, 17, 271–285.
159. D. M. Wilson, Biodeterior. Res. 1994, 4, 65–73.
160. C. Hanika; W. W. Carlton, Biodeterior. Res. 1994, 4, 41–63.
161. R. C. Braunberg, Biodeterior. Res. 1994, 4, 11–25.
162. G. J. A. Speijers; M. H. M. Speijers, Toxicol. Lett. 2004, 153, 91–98.
163. T. Shimizu; H. Kinoshita; S. Ishihara; K. Sakai; S. Nagai; T. Nihira, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 3453–3457.
164. Y. Ueno, Mycotoxins 1974, 283–302.
165. M. Saito; M. Enomoto; T. Tatsuno; K. Uraguchi, Microb. Toxins 1971, 6, 299–367.
166. D. Tejedor; F. Garcia-Tellado, Org. Prep. Proc. Int. 2004, 36, 35–39.
167. J. Sekiguchi; S. Katayama; Y. Yamada, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1987, 53, 1531–1535.
168. A. Atoui; H. P. Dao; F. Mathieu; A. Lebrihi, Mol. Nutr. Food Res. 2006, 50, 488–493.
452 Toxins of Microorganisms

169. J. A. Edgar; J. L. Frahn; P. A. Cockrum; C. C. J. Culvenor, Bioact. Mol. 1986, 1, 169–184.

170. J. I. Pitt, Toxigenic Penicillium Species. In Food Microbiology, 3rd ed.; M. P. Doyle, L. R. Beuchat, Eds.; American Society for
Microbiology: Washington, DC, 2007; pp 551–562.
171. Z. Song; R. J. Cox; C. M. Lazarus; T. J. Simpson, ChemBioCem 2004, 5, 1196–1203.
172. C. Manetti; V. Fogliano; A. Ritieni; A. Santini; G. Randazzo; A. Logrieco; L. Mannina; A. L. Segre, Struct. Chem. 1995, 6,
183–189.
173. A. Logrieco; G. Mule; A. Moretti; A. Bottalico, Eur. J. Plant Pathol. 2002, 108, 597–609.
174. Y. Ito; S. W. Peterson; D. T. Wicklow; T. Goto, Mycol. Res. 2001, 105, 233–239.
175. K. Matsushima; P.-K. Chang; J. Yu; K. Abe; D. Bhatnagar; T. E. Cleveland, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2001, 55, 585–589.
176. M. Tominaga; Y.-H. Lee; R. Hayashi; Y. Suzuki; O. Yamada; K. Sakamoto; K. Gotoh; O. Akita, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72,
484–490.
177. C. W. Holzapfel; P. S. Steyn, Tetrahedron Lett. 1966, 2799–2803.
178. J. F. Robens; J. L. Richard, Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 1992, 127, 69–94.
179. C. Probst; H. Njapau; P. J. Cotty, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2007, 73, 2762–2764.
180. J. J. Wong; D. P. H. Hsieh, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1976, 73, 2241–2244.
181. S. H. Henry; G. X. Bosch; T. C. Troxell; P. M. Bolger, Science 1999, 286, 2453–2454.
182. D. S. Johnston; M. P. Stone, Biochem. 1995, 34, 14037–14050.
183. P. Scholl; J. D. Groopman, Epidemiology of Human Aflatoxin Exposures and its Relationship to Liver Cancer. In Molecular
Approaches to Food Safety: Issues Involving Toxic Microorganisms; M. Eklund, J. L. Richard, K. Mise, Eds.; Alaken, Inc.: Fort
Collins, CO, 1995; pp 169–182.
184. J. H. Moore; A. M. Hammond; G. C. Llewellyn, J. Inverteb. Pathol. 1978, 31, 365–367.
185. G. A. Payne, Process of Contamination by Aflatoxin-Producing Fungi and Their Impact on Crops. In Mycotoxins in Agriculture
and Food Safety; K. K. Sinha, D. Bhatnagar, Eds.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1998; pp 279–306.
186. J. W. Bennett; M. Klich, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 2003, 16, 497–516.
187. J. Yu; P.-K. Chang; K. C. Ehrlich; J. W. Cary; D. Bhatnagar; T. E. Cleveland; G. A. Payne; J. E. Linz; C. P. Woloshuk;
J. W. Bennett, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 1253–1262.
188. K. Yabe; H. Nakajima, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2004, 64, 745–755.
189. Y. Wen; H. Hatabayashi; H. Arai; K. Kitamoto; K. Yabe, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 3192–3198.
190. P.-K. Chang; K. Yabe; J. Yu, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 3593–3599.
191. E. Sakuno; Y. Wen; H. Hatabayashi; H. Arai; C. Aoki; K. Yabe; H. Nakajima, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 2999–3006.
192. K. C. Kenneth; B. Montalbano; S. M. Boue; D. Bhatnagar, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2005, 71, 8963–8965.
193. J. W. Cary; K. C. Ehrlich; J. M. Bland; B. G. Montalbano, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 1096–1101.
194. K. M. Henry; C. A. Townsend, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 3724–3733.
195. K. C. Ehrlich; P.-K. Chang; J. Yu; P. J. Cotty, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 6518–6524.
196. J. Yu; C. P. Woloshuk; D. Bhatnagar; T. E. Cleveland, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2000, 66, 157–167.
197. P.-K. Chang; J. Yu; J.-H. Yu, Fungal Genet. Biol. 2004, 41, 911–920.
198. D. Bhatnagar; J. W. Cary; K. Ehrlich; J. Yu; T. E. Cleveland, Mycopathologia 2006, 162, 155–166.
199. J. W. Cary; K. C. Ehrlich; S. P. Kale; A. M. Calvo; D. Bhatnagar; T. E. Cleveland, Mycotoxin Res. 2006, 22, 105–109.
200. A. M. Calvo; R. A. Wilson; J. W. Bok; N. P. Keller, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2002, 66, 447–459.
201. J. Wieser; J. H. Yu; T. H. Adams, Curr. Genet. 1997, 32, 218–224.
202. J. K. Hicks; J. H. Yu; N. P. Keller; T. H. Adams, EMBO J. 1997, 16, 4916–4923.
203. L. V. Roze; R. M. Beaudry; N. P. Keller; J. E. Linz, Mycopathologia 2004, 158, 219–232.
204. N. Kato; W. Brooks; A. M. Calvo, Eukaryot. Cell 2003, 2, 1178–1186.
205. A. M. Calvo; J. W. Bok; W. Brooks; N. P. Keller, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004, 70, 4733–4739.
206. J. W. Bok; N. P. Keller, Eukaryot. Cell 2004, 3, 527–535.
207. J. Yu; T. E. Cleveland; J. R. Wilkinson; B. C. Campbell; J. H. Kim; H. S. Kim; D. Bhatnager; G. A. Payne; W. C. Nierman,
Mycotoxin Res. 2006, 22, 16–21.
208. J. W. Dorner; M. C. Lamb, Mycotoxin Res. 2006, 22, 33–38.
209. L. L. Zaika; R. L. Buchanan, J. Food. Prot. 1987, 50, 691–708.
210. M. F. Wheeler; D. Bhatnagar, Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1995, 52, 109–115.
211. R. A. Norton, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 1230–1235.
212. N. Mahoney; R. J. Molyneus, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 1882–1889.
213. J. E. Mellon; R. A. Moreau, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 6660–6663.
214. M. Razzaghi-Abyaneh; T. Yoshinari; M. Shams-Ghahfarokhi; M. B. Rezaee; H. Nagasawa; S. Sakuda, Biosci. Biotechnol.
Biochem. 2007, 71, 2329–2332.
215. M. Ono; S. Sakuda; A. Suzuki; A. Isogai, J. Antibiot. 1997, 50, 111–118.
216. S. Sakuda; M. Ono; K. Furihata; J. Nakayama; A. Suzuki; A. Isogai, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1996, 118, 7855–7856.
217. H. Ikeda; N. Matsumori; M. Ono; A. Suzuki; A. Isogai; S. Sakuda, J. Org. Chem. 2000, 65, 438–444.
218. S. Sakuda; N. Matsumori; K. Furihata; H. Nagasawa, Tetrahedron Lett. 2007, 48, 2527–2531.
219. S. Okamoto; M. Sakurada; Y. Kubo; G. Tsuji; I. Fujii; Y. Ebizuka; M. Ono; H. Nagasawa; S. Sakuda, Microbiology 2001, 147,
2623–2628.
220. T. Kondo; M. Sakurada; S. Okamoto; M. Ono; H. Tsukigi; A. Suzuki; H. Nagasawa; S. Sakuda, J. Antibiot. 2001, 54, 650–657.
221. S. Sakuda, Mycotoxins 2002, 52, 153–158.
222. Y. Kono; S. Takeuchi; H. Yonehara, J. Antibiot. 1968, 21, 433–438.
223. S. Sakuda; M. Ono; H. Ikeda; T. Nakamura; Y. Inagaki; R. Kawachi; J. Nakayama; A. Suzuki; A. Isogai; H. Nagasawa, J. Antibiot.
2000, 53, 1265–1271.
224. T. Yoshinari; T. Akiyama; K. Nakamura; T. Kondo; Y. Takahashi; Y. Muraoka; Y. Nonomura; H. Nagasawa; S. Sakuda,
Microbiology 2007, 153, 2774–2780.
225. Y. Ueno, CRC Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 1985, 14, 99–132.
 Toxins of Microorganisms 453

226. M. Kimura; T. Tokai; N. Takahashi-Ando; S. Ohsato; M. Fujimura, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 2105–2123.
227. J. J. Pestka; H. R. Zhou; Y. Moon; Y. J. Chung, Toxicol. Lett. 2004, 153, 61–73.
228. J. J. Pestka; A. T. Smolinski, J. Toxicol. Environ. Health B Crit. Rev. 2005, 8, 39–69.
229. E. Fuchs; E. M. Binder; D. Heidler; R. Krska, Food Addit. Contam. 2002, 19, 379–386.
230. A. E. Desjardins; T. M. Hohn; S. P. McCormick, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1992, 5, 214–222.
231. R. S. Goswami; H. C. Kistler, Mol. Plant Pathol. 2004, 5, 515–525.
232. R. H. Proctor; T. M. Hohn; S. P. McCormick, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1995, 8, 593–601.
233. A. E. Desjardins; R. H. Proctor; G. Bai; S. P. McCormick; G. Shaner; G. Buechley; T. M. Hohn, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1996,
9, 775–781.
234. T. Nishiuchi; D. Masuda; H. Nakashita; K. Ichimura; K. Shinozaki; S. Yoshida; M. Kimura; I. Yamaguchi; K. Yamaguchi, Mol.
Plant Microbe Interact. 2006, 19, 512–520.
235. T. J. Ward; J. P. Bielawski; H. C. Kistler; E. Sullivan; K. O’Donnell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2002, 99, 9278–9283.
236. A. E. Desjardins; A. M. Jarosz; R. D. Plattner; N. J. Alexander; D. W. Brown; J. E. Jurgenson, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52,
6341–6346.
237. B. Achilladelis; J. R. Hanson, Phytochemistry 1968, 7, 589–594.
238. Y. Machida; S. Nozoe, Tetrahedron 1972, 28, 5113–5117.
239. B. Dockerill; J. R. Hanson; M. Siverns, Phytochemistry 1978, 17, 427–430.
240. A. R. Hesketh; L. Gledhill; D. C. Marsh; B. W. Bycroft; P. M. Dewick; J. Gilbert, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1990,
1184–1186.
241. S. Nozoe; Y. Machida, Tetrahedron Lett. 1970, 11, 2671–2674.
242. Y. Machida; S. Nozoe, Tetrahedron Lett. 1972, 13, 1969–1971.
243. L. O. Zamir; M. J. Gauthier; K. A. Devor; Y. Nadeau; F. Sauriol, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1989, 598–600.
244. D. E. Cane; H.-J. Ha; C. Pargellis; F. Waldmeier; S. Swanson; P. P. N. Murthy, Bioorg. Chem. 1985, 13, 246–265.
245. D. E. Cane; H. J. Ha, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1988, 110, 6865–6870.
246. T. M. Hohn; F. Vanmiddlesworth, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1986, 251, 756–761.
247. T. M. Hohn; P. D. Beremand, Gene 1989, 79, 131–138.
248. L. O. Zamir; A. Nikolakakis; L. Huang; P. St-Pierre; F. Sauriol; S. Sparace; O. Mamer, J. Biol. Chem. 1999, 274, 12269–12277.
249. L. O. Zamir; K. A. Devor; N. Morin; F. Sauriol, J. Chem. Soc. Chem. Commun. 1991, 1033–1034.
250. A. R. Hesketh; L. Gledhill; D. C. Marsh; B. W. Bycroft; P. M. Dewick; J. Gilbert, Phytochemistry 1991, 30, 2237–2243.
251. T. M. Hohn; A. E. Desjardins; S. P. McCormick, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1995, 248, 95–102.
252. S. C. Trapp; T. M. Hohn; S. McCormick; B. B. Jarvis, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1998, 257, 421–432.
253. S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander; R. H. Proctor, Can. J. Microbiol. 2006, 52, 636–642.
254. T. Tokai; H. Koshino; N. Takahashi-Ando; M. Sato; M. Fujimura; M. Kimura, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2007, 353,
412–417.
255. A. E. Desjardins; R. D. Plattner; G. F. Spencer, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 767–771.
256. T. Tokai; H. Koshino; T. Kawasaki; T. Igawa; Y. Suzuki; M. Sato; M. Fujimura; T. Eizuka; H. Watanabe; T. Kitahara; K. Ohta;
T. Shibata; T. Kudo; H. Inoue; I. Yamaguchi; M. Kimura, FEMS Microbiol. Lett. 2005, 251, 193–201.
257. B. Tudzynski, Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2005, 66, 597–611.
258. T. Toyomasu; K. Nakaminami; H. Toshima; T. Mie; K. Watanabe; H. Ito; H. Matsui; W. Mitsuhashi; T. Sassa; H. Oikawa, Biosci.
Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 146–152.
259. S. P. McCormick; S. L. Taylor; R. D. Plattner; M. N. Beremand, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1989, 55, 2195–2199.
260. D. G. Corley; G. E. Rottinghaus; M. S. Tempesta, J. Org. Chem. 1987, 52, 4405–4408.
261. A. R. Hesketh; B. W. Bycroft; P. M. Dewick; J. Gilbert, Phytochemistry 1993, 32, 105–116.
262. M. Kimura; I. Kaneko; M. Komiyama; A. Takatsuki; H. Koshino; K. Yoneyama; I. Yamaguchi, J. Biol. Chem. 1998, 273, 1654–1661.
263. M. Kimura; G. Matsumoto; Y. Shingu; K. Yoneyama; I. Yamaguchi, FEBS Lett. 1998, 435, 163–168.
264. S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander; S. E. Trapp; T. M. Hohn, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1999, 65, 5252–5256.
265. N. J. Alexander; T. M. Hohn; S. P. McCormick, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1998, 64, 221–225.
266. S. P. McCormick; T. M. Hohn, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1997, 63, 1685–1688.
267. S. P. McCormick; T. M. Hohn; A. E. Desjardins, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1996, 62, 353–359.
268. I. B. Meek; A. W. Peplow; C. Ake, Jr.; T. D. Phillips; M. N. Beremand, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 1607–1613.
269. D. W. Brown; S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander; R. H. Proctor; A. E. Desjardins, Fungal Genet. Biol. 2002, 36, 224–233.
270. D. W. Brown; S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander; R. H. Proctor; A. E. Desjardins, Fungal Genet. Biol. 2001, 32, 121–133.
271. A. W. Peplow; I. B. Meek; M. C. Wiles; T. D. Phillips; M. N. Beremand, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 5935–5940.
272. S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 2959–2964.
273. S. P. McCormick; L. J. Harris; N. J. Alexander; T. Ouellet; A. Saparno; S. Allard; A. E. Desjardins, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2004,
70, 2044–2051.
274. S. P. McCormick; N. J. Alexander; R. H. Proctor, Can. J. Microbiol. 2006, 52, 220–226.
275. L. O. Zamir; K. A. Devor; F. Sauriol, J. Biol. Chem. 1991, 266, 14992–15000.
276. L. O. Zamir; K. A. Devor; A. Nikolakakis; F. Sauriol, J. Biol. Chem. 1990, 265, 6713–6725.
277. G. Yang; M. S. Rose; B. G. Turgeon; O. C. Yoder, Plant Cell 1996, 8, 2139–2150.
278. J. H. Ahn; J. D. Walton, Plant Cell 1996, 8, 887–897.
279. M. Kimura; T. Tokai; K. O’Donnell; T. J. Ward; M. Fujimura; H. Hamamoto; T. Shibata; I. Yamaguchi, FEBS Lett. 2003, 539,
105–110.
280. R. B. Dyer; R. D. Plattner; D. F. Kendra; D. W. Brown, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 9281–9287.
281. T. Lee; Y. K. Han; K. H. Kim; S. H. Yun; Y. W. Lee, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2002, 68, 2148–2154.
282. R. H. Proctor; T. M. Hohn; S. P. McCormick; A. E. Desjardins, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1995, 61, 1923–1930.
283. T. M. Hohn; R. Krishna; R. H. Proctor, Fungal Genet. Biol. 1999, 26, 224–235.
284. A. G. Tag; G. F. Garifullina; A. W. Peplow; C. Ake, Jr.; T. D. Phillips; T. M. Hohn; M. N. Beremand, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001,
67, 5294–5302.
454 Toxins of Microorganisms

285. A. W. Peplow; A. G. Tag; G. F. Garifullina; M. N. Beremand, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2003, 69, 2731–2736.
286. N. J. Alexander; S. P. McCormick; T. M. Hohn, Mol. Gen. Genet. 1999, 261, 977–984.
287. D. W. Brown; R. B. Dyer; S. P. McCormick; D. F. Kendra; R. D. Plattner, Fungal Genet. Biol. 2004, 41, 454–462.
288. D. W. Brown; R. H. Proctor; R. B. Dyer; R. D. Plattner, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 7936–7944.
289. M. Kimura; T. Tokai; G. Matsumoto; M. Fujimura; H. Hamamoto; K. Yoneyama; T. Shibata; I. Yamaguchi, Genetics 2003, 163,
677–684.
290. T. Tokai; M. Fujimura; H. Inoue; T. Aoki; K. Ohta; T. Shibata; I. Yamaguchi; M. Kimura, Microbiology 2005, 151, 509–519.
291. N. J. Alexander; S. P. McCormick; T. M. Hohn, Yeast 2002, 19, 1425–1430.
292. T. Yoshizawa; N. Morooka, Appl. Microbiol. 1975, 29, 54–58.

Biographical Sketches

Shohei Sakuda was born at Kochi city, Japan, in 1958. He graduated from the Department of
Agricultural Chemistry, University of Tokyo, in 1982. He finished the master’s course from
the Graduate School of Agriculture, University of Tokyo in 1984 and thereafter continued
his doctoral studies. He obtained a position as an assistant professor in the Department of
Fermentation Technology, Osaka University, in 1986, and his Ph.D. in agriculture from the
University of Tokyo in 1988. He moved to the Department of Applied Biological Chemistry,
University of Tokyo, in 1994 as an associate professor. He studied insecticidal metabolites of
Streptomyces as the theme of his bachelor’s thesis and is continuing to study bioactive
secondary metabolites of microbes and plants in the research fields of bioorganic chemistry
and natural products chemistry. Chitinase inhibitors, allosamidins, and aflatoxin production
inhibitors, aflastatins, and blasticidin A are main topics in his recent research.

Makoto Kimura was born in Sakai, Osaka, Japan, in 1965. He graduated from the Department
of Agricultural Chemistry, The University of Tokyo, in 1989, and finished the master’s
course from the Graduate School of Agriculture, The University of Tokyo, in 1991. In the
same year, he obtained a position as a research associate in RIKEN and studied the function,
 Toxins of Microorganisms 455

evolution, and application of fungal antibiotic resistance genes. In 1995, he obtained his Ph.D.
in agriculture from The University of Tokyo. His thesis entitled ‘Studies on Blasticidin S
Deaminase (BSD) from Aspergillus terreus’ was under the supervision of Professor Haruo Seto.
From September 1998 to March 2000, he visited UC Berkeley as a research fellow and
studied the rice blast fungus (rice pathogen) Magnaporthe. In April 2000, he joined the
Laboratory for Remediation Research, Environmental Plant Research Group, Plant
Science Center (PSC1), RIKEN Yokohama Institute, as a research scientist, and in 2003,
he was appointed as a deputy team leader. In 2005, he was promoted to research unit leader
of Plant & Microbial Metabolic Engineering Research Unit, DRI, RIKEN. He has been
studying the interaction between wheat and fungal pathogen Fusarium graminearum, and
recently, his major research interests are on metabolic engineering of plants and
microorganisms.
 4.11 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants
Falko P. Drijfhout and E. David Morgan, Keele University, Staffordshire, UK
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.11.1 Introduction 457

4.11.2 Bioassays 458
4.11.2.1 Choice or No-Choice Bioassays 459
4.11.2.2 Leaf Disk Bioassay 459
4.11.2.3 Microassay 459
4.11.2.4 Twig Bioassays 460
4.11.3 Plant Terpenes and Derivatives 460
4.11.3.1 Monoterpenes 460
4.11.3.2 Sesquiterpenes 461
4.11.3.2.1 Sesquiterpene lactones 464
4.11.3.2.2 Eremophilanolides 466
4.11.3.3 Diterpenes 467
4.11.3.3.1 Clerodanes 467
4.11.3.3.2 Ryanoids 473
4.11.3.3.3 Diterpenoid alkaloids 474
4.11.3.3.4 Abietanes 476
4.11.3.4 Triterpenes 476
4.11.3.4.1 Pentacyclic triterpenes 476
4.11.3.4.2 Limonoids 478
4.11.3.4.3 Phragmalins 484
4.11.3.4.4 Quassinoids 488
4.11.3.4.5 Cucurbitacins 488
4.11.3.5 Saponins 489
4.11.4 Alkaloids 489
4.11.4.1 Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids 489
4.11.4.2 Glycoalkaloids 489
4.11.5 Phenylpropanoids 490
4.11.5.1 Lignans 490
4.11.5.2 Furanocoumarins 492
4.11.5.3 Coumarins and Quinones 492
4.11.5.4 Flavonoids 493
4.11.6 Miscellaneous 495
4.11.6.1 Celastroidines 495
4.11.6.2 Cerebrosides 495
4.11.6.3 Cardenolides 495
4.11.6.4 Alkyl Derivatives 496
4.11.6.5 Cyclohexyl Derivatives 496
4.11.7 Feeding Deterrence in Higher Animals 496
4.11.8 Conclusion 497
References 497

4.11.1 Introduction

The use of plant extracts to treat sickness or control pests dates back at least two millennia in the records of ancient
China, Egypt, and Greece.1 These were crude extracts of unknown activity. In the nineteenth and the early twentieth
centuries, through advances in chemistry, these became better defined plant extracts such as derris, pyrethrum or

457
458 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

nicotine.2 In the 1940s there was an abrupt change of direction with the introduction of new synthetic pesticides.
Interest in natural products temporarily ceased, until overuse of synthetics led to unforeseen problems. In order to
reduce these problems, government agencies set rules for which compounds could be licensed for use and the
concentrations and conditions in which pesticides could be used (see Chapter 2.02). These, often strict, regulations
drove chemists back to natural materials to seek again for more acceptable and less persistent substances to control
agricultural and other pests.
Plants have, in the two-and-a-half million years they have coexisted with arthropods, evolved their own
defenses against pests that attack them. It is only logical that we should look to them for compounds and
structures that will deter pests. The search for feeding deterrents, commonly called antifeedants, is currently a
rich source of new compounds potentially useful against pests of agriculture, forestry, and horticulture.
One of the lessons learned by mistakes of the synthetic pesticides period is that we must not destroy useful
insects along with the pests. A major advantage of some of these natural products is that they may be group- or
species-specific. On the one hand, the drimane sesquiterpenoid (–)-polygodial (1) is a very effective antifeedant
for aphids,3 while many coleopterans are not affected by this compound. On the other, the ajugarins (e.g.,
ajugarin I, 2) are very effective against coleopteran pests in northern Europe,3 but are ineffective against the
diamondback moth Plutella xylostella and have virtually no effect on aphids. The high selectivity of some natural
products makes them ideal for use in modern pest management.

In spite of the many studies on isolation, activity, and synthesis of natural antifeedants, the number of compounds
commercially available remains low, often due to their cost of isolation, availability of the plant source, or low
persistence in field conditions. To overcome these drawbacks, much research is conducted on structure–activity
relationships (SAR). The rationale behind these studies is to discover the correlation between biological activity and
chemical structure and to draw from that optimum structures having both the activity, stability, and selectivity for
maximum feeding deterrence.4,5 SAR are much used in drug design6 and have been applied to insecticides.7
While the greatest emphasis is on insects and other arthropods and mollusks because of the enormous commercial
damage they do, and the difficulties in controlling them, studies of antifeedants is not confined to them only, and a
considerable body of effort has been expended in seeking ways to control the feeding of higher animals and birds.

4.11.2 Bioassays

In all studies related to the isolation and identification of biologically active compounds, suitable bioassays are
essential. Without a proper bioassay, no meaningful conclusions are possible from any chemical isolation study. In
the isolation of active compounds bio-guided fractionation is often used, which means that each fraction is tested for
its biological activity. If the activity is lost within a fraction that fraction can be discarded, or if all activity is lost,
synergism is more likely. Therefore, it is essential to design the bioassay with care, before starting the study. Several
bioassays are used in the investigation of extracts for antifeedants.8 The observed feeding deterrence can be
measured in different ways. In one method, the percentage feeding deterrence is calculated as (1–T/C)  100%
where T and C are the amounts consumed on the treated and control leaves.9 Other studies use the term antifeeding
inhibition (% AFI) or feeding inhibition (% FI), which is calculated as [(C – T)/(C þ T)]  100%, where C and T
are again the amounts of control and treated leaves consumed, and has an advantage that it does not assume a
function of deterrency or feeding stimulation.10 A positive value indicates an antifeedant (with an AFI ¼ 100%
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 459

equals maximum protection), while a negative value is the result of a phagostimulant.10 Some researchers prefer to
give an index value, in which case the final value is not multiplied by 100% and values vary between 1 and 1, with
1 corresponding to maximum antifeeding and 0 with no effect. In order to determine the concentration where 50%
FI is reached, the AI50 (Antifeedant Index) or FI50 (Feeding Index) is calculated. This involves a dose–response
experiment, where a series of different concentrations are used and the concentration that will result in 50% FI is
calculated. The lower is the concentration, the more active is the antifeedant. Instead of using AI50/FI50, the term
ED5011 or EC50 12 (effective dose or effective concentration for 50% inhibition) is often used.
Important aspects bioassays as well as their types are discussed below. One of the main drawbacks with the
bioassays is that some of them have long durations, which can delay the results. Hence, researches on new and
faster bioassays are carried out. An interesting new possible bioassay involves the use of olfactory -waves; that
is, bursts of c.20 Hz fast waves that are elicited in the olfactory bulb and pyriform cortex in rats are observed.13
These fast waves are also observed in voles.14 These studies indicate that these -waves may provide an easy
means of identifying new antifeedants in small herbivores.

4.11.2.1 Choice or No-Choice Bioassays

These are two different bioassays, each revealing different information. In a choice experiment, the insects are
given the option to choose between two different treatments, either the control or the extract (or pure
compound), or between two different compounds. Information obtained via this type of bioassay shows that
one of the treatments is preferred to the other. Or in case of the difference between control and compound, that
if the control is preferred, the compound could be an antifeedant.
In a no-choice bioassay, the insect cannot choose from different treatments. Only one treatment is given. A
strong antifeedant will result in no consumption of the treatment, whereas a weak antifeedant will lead to some
consumption of the treatment, as the insect needs to gain nutrition.
Both these methods have their advantages and disadvantages. To compensate for this difference in choice
and no-choice bioassays, the activity of compounds are expressed by three coefficients, namely, the absolute
coefficient of deterrence (A) determined by the no-choice test, the relative coefficient of deterrence (R)
determined via the choice test, and the total coefficient of deterrence (T), which is calculated by combining
A and R.15,16 Values of A and R are from 0 to 100. The maximum total coefficient is therefore 200. Strong
antifeedants had values of 151–200.

4.11.2.2 Leaf Disk Bioassay

The leaf disk method is a conventional type of bioassay in which disks of constant area are cut from leaves of a
certain plant and are coated with the extract or pure compound (in solution). These are then presented to
insects in a petri dish. After a certain amount of time, the percentage of the leaf that has been consumed is
estimated, visually17 or photographically with or without software.18 A leaf that is coated with the solvent only
is used as the control. This bioassay can be used with small variations, for example, instead of leaves, an artificial
diet containing sucrose, flour, or even calcium alginate19 can be mixed with the compound.

4.11.2.3 Microassay
Small quantities of compounds in natural extracts are often a problem when these need to be evaluated in
bioassays. Sometimes there is just not enough of the compound isolated to carry out the usual bioassay.20
Microassays have been developed10,21 to overcome this problem. Typically, a microassay is carried out on a
thin-layer chromatography plate with a cellulose layer. A small droplet (1.5 ml) of the tested compound in a
solvent (1–102 nmol cm2) is then added on the plate. After the solvent has evaporated a small amount (5 ml) of
sucrose solution 1 mol l1 is added to the place where the compound was added. In the control the same
procedure was followed on a different plate, but with the solvent alone, with no compound added. These two
plates are then placed in a petri dish with the test insect species. In the past, when paper chromatography was
widely used, a crude plant extract was placed on the origin of the paper and then eluted into bands. The paper
was freed of solvent, sprayed with sugar solution, and used directly in a bioassay to see which parts of the paper
were not eaten, and therefore of interest for further examination.
460 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.2.4 Twig Bioassays

This bioassay is a variation of the leaf disk method, as not all insects will eat leaves. Insects such as the pine
weevil Hylobius abietis feed on barks.22 Sticks from a specific tree are wrapped in aluminum foil to prevent them
from drying out. In each test twig two metal rings (5 mm diameter) are punched through the foil and into the
bark. After the foil inside the ring is removed a certain amount (e.g., 100 ml) of the extract or compound to be
tested is applied in one of the rings. The control (solvent) is applied to the second ring. The metal rings are
removed as soon as all the solvent has evaporated.5,22 The amount consumed by the insect can then be
calculated, either by the amount of consumed bark5 or by counting the number of feeding scars.22

4.11.3 Plant Terpenes and Derivatives

4.11.3.1 Monoterpenes
Monoterpenes are widely distributed in plants, and certainly act to deter predators. The vapor of several
monoterpenes are effective in deterring biting flies, but generally C-10 compounds are too volatile for practical
use. Part of the research therefore is to find compounds that are suitably modified to make them more persistent
and show strong feeding deterrence. Earlier work on monoterpenes has been reviewed.2
The abundant natural compound linalool (3) is an attractant for the Colorado potato beetle (CPB),
Leptinotarsa decemlineata. Two isomeric derivatives of linalool, (Z)-5-(1.5-dimethylhex-4-enyldiene)-
dihydrofuran-2-one (4) and (E)-5-(1.5-dimethylhex-4-enyldiene)-dihydrofuran-2-one (5), were synthesized
and were found to be moderate antifeedants against the CPB. A lactone derived from linalool strongly affected
the properties of the original compound linalool, which is an attractant to the CPB. A similar effect is seen with
the activity of either linalool (3) or 4-isobutyl-5-isopropyl-5-methyl-dihydrofuran-2-one (6) to aphids.
Compared to linalool, the lactone reduced the total time the aphid spent on the leaf.16
Carvone (7), abundantly present in many essential oils23 and present in trace amounts in conifer plants
(Pinaceae), has antifeedant properties against the pales weevil, Hylobius pales,24 and the large pine weevil,
H. abietis,25 as well as lepidopteran species.26 Although various studies have confirmed the antifeedant or
repellent properties of carvone, long-term protection of seedlings in the field has not been successful, probably
due to the high volatility of carvone. In order to address this problem, less volatile analogues of the compound
were synthesized. Twelve carvone analogues were tested, both in microassays and in twig bioassays. Although
several were very active in the microassay, the results did not always correlate with the twig bioassay.21 Of the
compounds with very low volatility, the sulfoxide 8 and 9-butyl-8-hydroxy-p-menth-6-en-2-one (9) had AFI
values comparable to carvone (1.00 and 0.82, respectively) and ED50 values of 0.15 and 0.06%, respectively, less
than that of carvone (ED50 ¼ 2.6%).21 The more volatile carvone-8-epoxide (10) induced 100% antifeeding
activity at high doses (100 nmol cm2), but had an ED50 value of 0.52%.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 461

4.11.3.2 Sesquiterpenes
Their lower volatility makes sesquiterpenes more possible as antifeedants. A number of known sesquiterpenes,
such as warburganal (11) and polygodial (1), have notable antifeedant effects on insects.2 The sesquiterpene
germacranolides, neurolenin A (12), neurolenin B (13), neurolenin C (14), neurolenin D (15), and lobatin A (16),
and the furanoheliangolide lobatin B (17)27 were isolated from the aerial parts of Neurolaena lobata (Asteraceae), a
plant of the sunflower family from Guatemala and have been tested as antifeedants against Spodoptera litura. All had
moderate antifeedant activity, with AFI values ranging from 41 to 52%. In the same test, buddlein A (18), a
furanoheliangolide isolated from the herbaceous Mediterranean plant Viguera buddleiformis (Cannaceae),27 and
parthenolide (19), an epoxy-containing germacranolide from Tanacetum parthenium (feverfew, Asteraceae) were
tested. Overall, the latter exhibited the highest antifeedant activity (77%), followed by neurolenin B (13) and
lobatin A (16); both had a feeding deterrence of 52%. Strychnine (20), a known -aminobutyric acid (GABA)
antagonist, had the same antifeedant activity as the most potent antifeedants, indicating that neurolenin B (13) and
lobatin A (16) both act on GABA receptors, as suggested by Mullin et al.28

Investigation of the hexane extract of aerial parts of Santolina rosmarinifolia (Asteraceae) growing in southern
Spain and used in folk medicine afforded several new antifeedants. The germacrenes shiromool (21)
and 4,5-epoxy-7H-germacr-10(14)-ene-1,6-diol (22) and the polyacetylene (Z)-4-acetoxy-7-(2,4-
hexadiynylidiene)-1,6-dioxaspiro[4,4]nona-2,8-diene (23) all exhibited antifeedant indices of 45–46% when
tested against the final stadium larvae of Spodoptera littoralis. Comparing the structures isolated but not found
active showed that the presence of the epoxy group in 21 increased the activity, as 24, which lacks the epoxy
group, was not active. In addition, it was concluded that geometric isomerism also influenced the feeding
deterrence, for 23 was active while the E-isomer (25) was not active.29 Although compound (E)-4,5-epoxy-
7H-germacr-1(10)-ene-2,6-diol (26) was tested, no antifeedants index value was given.
462 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

Sesquiterpenes from essential oils were suggested to have antifeedant activity as well. Geijerene (27) and
pregeijerene (28), newly isolated from the essential oil of the leaves of the Ceylon satinwood tree, Chloroxylon
swietenia (Rutaceae), exhibited a feeding deterrence effect when tested against the tobacco cutworm, S. litura.30
There seem to be no synergistic effect between these compounds as the pure compounds were as active as the
total oil itself. Although these compounds are able to deter feeding to 100% at concentrations of 200 mg cm2, it
is still four times less effective than azadirachtin (213).
In recent years, research on antifeedants has focused more on natural antifeedants as starting points to
synthesize new (non)-natural, but more effective, antifeedants. Messchendorp et al.31 studied the effect of 11
synthetic drimanes on feeding inhibition. In a no-choice bioassay, only the drimanes with a lactone group 29–33
inhibited feeding by the larvae of the large white butterfly, Pieris brassicae. The two well-known sesquiterpene
antifeedants, warburganal (11) and polygodial (1), did not have any antifeedant effect on P. brassicae.
Compounds from guayule resin, Parthenium argentatum, were found to be more effective as antifeedants than
azadirachtin. Among the sesquiterpenes isolated, argentone (34) exhibited the strongest activity in choice tests,
followed by partheniol (35), which had an activity similar to azadirachtin. Although the sesquiterpene ester,
guayulin B (36), did inhibit feeding, it was only a weak antifeedant.32

Investigation on antifeedants against a snail species that is a worldwide pest of many vegetables and several other
crops, Acusta despesta, focused on the crude methanol extract from the Japanese cedar or Sugi, Cryptomeria japonica
(Taxodiaceae). Two active compounds were isolated from the hexane extract (fractionated from the crude
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 463

methanol extract) and they were identified as (–)-cubebol (37) and (þ)-2,7(14),10-bisabolatrien-1-ol-4-one (38).
Both exhibited high antifeeding activities against A. despesta at 120 and 80 mg cm2, respectively.33 The sesquiterpe-
nol 38 was later33 further identified as (1S,6R)-2,7(14),10-bisabolatrien-1-ol-4-one (39) and isolated together with
40 from C. japonica. However, only in combination did they elicit antifeeding activity against Locusta migratoria.34
None of these were active when tested alone, indicating a synergistic effect when tested against L. migratoria,
although this is not the case if it was tested against a snail as 38 alone was found to be active against A. despesta.33

Silphinene sesquiterpenes, isolated from Senecio palmensis (Asteraceae), exhibited antifeedant activity to
a range of insects, such as aphids,35 CPB (L. decemlineata),36 and S. littoralis.35 The silphene 11-acetoxy-
5-angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one (41), isolated from S. palmensis, as well as two synthetic silphinenes, 11-
hydroxy-5-angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one (44) and 11,5-dihydroxysilphinen-3-one (45), both generated
via chemical hydrolysis of the natural 11-acetoxy-5-angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one (41), were active as
antifeedants against CPB36, yet in choice bioassays they were less effective than the natural compound.
In no-choice bioassays, a similar effect was observed against L. decemlineata. The fact that the natural
compound was more active suggests that the acetoxy substituent on C-11 is an important feature to
increase feeding inhibition. In a follow-up study, six natural silphinene sesquiterpenes 41–44, 49, and 50
and four semisynthetic ones 45–48 (generated from the natural silphinene 11-acetoxy-5-
angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one, 41) were tested for their feeding inhibition against aphids and two lepi-
dopteran species.35 The CPB was sensitive to all the natural silphinenes and semisynthetic silphinene
analogues, as well as to two GABA antagonists, thymol (51) and picrotoxinin (52), which further
supports the theory that there is a shared molecular antifeedant taste chemoreception in divergent
species.37 The aphids that were tested reacted variably, with all aphids sensitive to thymol (51) (a
GABA antagonist) and farnesol, but only the silphene 1-acetoxy-5-isobutyryloxysilphinen-3-one (43)
was active against all aphid species. The aphid Diuraphis noxia, with the most restricted host range
(wheat and barley), was the most sensitive aphid to the silphinene derivatives 1-acetoxy-5-
angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one (41), 11-acetoxy-5-isobutyryloxysilphinen-3-one (43), and 11-hydroxy-
5-angeloyloxysilphinen-3-one (44).35
464 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

Aphids are also sensitive to precocenes I (53) and II (54) isolated from Ageratinae species.15 Precocenes also
exhibited antifeeding activity when given to neonate larvae of the earworm, Heliothis zea,38 and Rhodnius
prolixus.39 Several derivatives of precocenes I and II were synthesized and tested against a wide variety of
insects.40 From this study, it became clear that precocenes exhibited a strong antifeedant effect against all
storage pests and aphids with precocene II (54) (with two methoxy groups) being the more active compound.
Although all derivatives exhibited antifeedant activity, the natural precocenes were more active than the
derivatives. The introduction of a lactone moiety in the derivatives, as in 55, reduced the antifeedant effect.
The only derivatives exhibiting a strong antifeedant effect were the iodolactones 56 and 57, which were more
active than 53 and 54 when tested against adults of the CPB. However, when tested against the larvae the effect
was similar.40
Nootkatone (58), a sesquiterpene ketone found in the oil of Alaskan yellow cedar, Chamaecyparis nootkatensis,41
also was isolated from vetiver oil extracted from vetiver grass, Vetiveria (Chrysopogon) zizanioides (Poaceae), 42–44
and proved to be a very effective antifeedant at 100 mg g1 of sand against the Formosan subterranean termite,
Coptotermes formosanus. It caused a high reduction in tunnelling activity, wood consumption, and survival.43,44

4.11.3.2.1 Sesquiterpene lactones

Many sesquiterpene lactones exhibited high antifeedant activity against storage pests.45–47 Rhaponticum
pulchrum (Asteraceae) grows in the Caucasus region, 9001200 m above sea level. Eight different sesquiter-
pene lactones (guaianolides) and syringin (61) were isolated from it and identified.48 Of these nine, three were
found to inhibit feeding in three different coleopteran pests, Sitophilus granarius, Trogoderma granarium, and
Tribolium confusum. These were aguerin B (59), chlorojanerin (60), and syringin (61). Two additional
sesquiterpenes, janerin 62 and cynaropicrin (63), were active antifeedants specifically against T. confusum.
However, the extract of the plant abundant in sesquiterpene lactones still inhibits feeding more than any of
the pure compounds does,48 indicating that either compounds are acting synergistically or other compounds
not yet identified are stronger antifeedants than those isolated and identified. Guaianolides were also isolated
from the acetone extract of the aerial parts of Centaurea babylonica49 and C. hololeuca50 (Asteraceae), The
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 465

antifeedant activities of these natural compounds and of the four chloro derivatives, synthesized from repin
(64) and janerin (62), were tested against the larvae of S. littoralis.50 The natural product cebellin J 65 and the
chloro derivative chlorojanerin (60) exhibited significant antifeedant activity at 100 ppm, whereas at this
concentration cebellin G (66) and 15-dechloro-15-hydroxychlorojanerin (67) stimulated feeding. Cebellin G
(66) stimulated the larvae of S. littoralis to feed at low concentration, but deterred feeding at high concentra-
tions. The addition of chlorine to repin (64) resulted in an increase in antifeedant activity.50
The crude extract of the achenes, leaves, and fruits of Coriaria sinica (Coriaceae) displayed antifeedant effects
on the forest pests Stilpnotia candida and Arge captive.51 Further investigation on the contents of the achenes of
this plant led to the isolation of the sesquiterpene lactone tutin (68), which had low antifeedant activity, 28%
feeding inhibition at 2 mg ml1.52 However, one of the derivatives of tutin, 2-(3-methyl-2-butenoyl) tutin (69),
was highly active when tested against the fourth instar larvae of Mythimna separata, giving 74.9–84.8% feeding
inhibition at the same concentration. Other derivatives also exhibited higher antifeedant activity than the
parent compound, but lower compared to that of 69.

Owing to the large numbers of sesquiterpene lactones with antifeedant activity, Paruch et al.53,54 synthesized
more than 50 mono-, bi-, and tricyclic terpenoid lactones. The lactones obtained were all tested for antifeeding
activity toward grain storage pests: the granary weevil beetle (S. granarius), the khapra beetle (T. granarium), and
the confused flour beetle (T. confusum). Starting from (þ)- and (–)-perillyl alcohols, via Claisen rearrangement
and iodolactonization, four enantiomeric pairs of -lactones were obtained. Two of these semisynthetic
466 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

compounds, (1R,4R,6R)-(–)-4-(1-methylethenyl)-9-oxabicyclo[4.3.0]nonan-8-one 70 and its enantiomer 71, are

very active antifeedants against all of the above tested species.53 The lactone 71 is also active against the peach
potato aphid (Myzus persicae).53 The fragrance of 70 was reported to be a moderately intense, agreeable,
herbaceous odor with lupine flower and parsley root notes, whereas that of the isomer 71 is faint, mushroomy,
and moldy with a floral note. Two iodolactones 72 and 73 were active against adults of S. granarius but not
against any other storage pests. Iodolactone 72 had a total coefficient of deterrence of 161.0, which is quite close
to that of azadirachtin (174.3).53
In a second attempt, a whole range of bicyclic -spirolactones (synthesized from (þ)- and (–)-limonene) as
well as tricyclic -lactones with a pinane system (from (R)-(–)-myrtenol and (–)--pinene) were synthesized.
In total, 13 semisynthetic compounds 74–86 were tested for their antifeedant activity against the three storage
pests. Antifeedant activities of the semisynthetic compounds were generally not very high when tested against
S. granarius, except for 84 and 86, and T. granarium, but several were strongly antifeedant against the larvae of
T. confusum. The iodolactones were found to be weaker antifeedants, unlike the iodolactones of precocenes,
which were the only semisynthetic compounds having a strong antifeedant effect. An excellent antifeedant
against T. confusum is compound 81, which had an activity that is comparable to that of azadirachtin (213). Its
enantiomer 82 was only slightly less active.54
A further set of terpenoid lactones of the carane type were synthesized starting from (þ)-3-carene (87). Three
of the semisynthetic lactones 88–90 were active as antifeedants, although full data are not yet published.55

4.11.3.2.2 Eremophilanolides
Eremophilanolides are commonly found in Senecio species.56 Two new eremophilanolides were isolated from the
methanolic extract of the aerial parts of Senecio miser (Asteraceae). The more nonpolar fraction of this methanolic
extract (Fr-1 and Fr-2) contained two sesquiterpene lactones of the eremophilanolide type and was identified as 1-
acetoxy-8-methoxy-10H-eremophil-7(11)-en-8,12-olide (91) and 1-angeloyloxy-6-hydroxy-8-methoxy-
10H-eremophil-7(11)-en-8,12-olide (92).57 Eremophilanolide (91) proved to be a strong aphid repellent, while
92 was the most active deterrent to the CPB. None of these sesquiterpene lactones was active in no-choice tests,
while fractions Fr-1 and Fr-2 were, suggesting a possible synergistic effect of these compounds, either with
themselves or with 1-angeloyloxy-8H,10H-eremophil-7(11)-en-8,12-olide (93), which is not active alone.57
Joseph-Nathan and co-workers isolated several eremophilanolides from Senecio toluccanus, as well as several
cacalolides (strictly speaking no sesquiterpenes) from S. madagascariensis and Senecio barba-johannis.58–62 Several
derivatives were also synthesized. The naturally occurring eremophilanolides from S. toluccanus,
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 467

6-hydroxyeuryopsin (94) and 1(10)-epoxy-6-hydroxyeuryopsin (95) were strong antifeedants against the CPB,
L. decemlineata. Feeding was reduced by 85.5% and 71.6%, respectively, at 50 mg cm2. The best antifeedant
however was one of the derivatives, 6-acetyloxyeuryopsin (96), with 93.3% feeding inhibition, followed by
toluccanolide A acetate (97), which inhibited feeding by 83.9%. Of the naturally occurring cacalolides, only 14-
isovaleryloxy-1,2-dehydrocacalalol methyl ether (98) was an effective antifeedant. Of the derivatives, cacalol
acetate (99) had a strong inhibition effect (73.4% feeding inhibition at 50 mg cm2). Though most of the tested
compounds had an antifeedant effect on the larvae of S. littoralis, the effect was moderate.56

4.11.3.3 Diterpenes
Diterpenes are more restricted in their distribution in plants, but they contain some well-known examples of
antifeedants, and deserve close examination for further examples.

4.11.3.3.1 Clerodanes
The clerodanes are a notable example of feeding deterrents2 and further examples have been discovered
recently. The natural insect antifeedant clerodin (100) forms the basis of the name of this type of diterpenes
called the neo-clerodane diterpenes. Neo-clerodanes are compounds with a clerodane skeleton and exactly the
same absolute configuration as clerodin. Those that have the opposite absolute configuration are referred to as
ent-neo-clerodanes.
Clerodane-type secondary metabolites have been found in several hundreds of plant species from various
families and in organisms from other taxonomic groups, such as fungi, bacteria, and marine sponges.8 Especially,
various genera from the plant families Labiatae and Verbenaceae have been identified as rich sources of
clerodanes with antifeedant activity.63 Species of the genus Scutellaria (Labiatae) produces some of the most
potent clerodane antifeedants known so far.
The antifeedant activities of all clerodanes (of natural and semisynthetic origin) have been reported in an
extensive review8 covering all literature until December 2001. This review covers a total of 382 clerodanes, all
tested on a variety of insect species, yet most tests are with Spodoptera species, of which S. littoralis is most often
used. Other species frequently used are the CPB (L. decemlineata), Helicoverpa armigera, P. brassicae, and Ostrinia
furnacalis.
Scutecyprol A (101) has been isolated from the aerial parts of Scutellaria sieberti 64 as well as from Scutellaria
rubicunda subsp. ribucunda (skullcaps, placed in the Labiatae or Lamiaceae) but had no antifeeding activity
against a range of insects.65 However, in a later study,64 15-oxo-derivative 102 as well as several halohydrins of
101 and 102, 103–108, were found to be all effective antifeedants with 100% feeding inhibition at 100 ppm for
S. littoralis. Yet all the halogenated derivatives (opening up the C-4C-18 epoxy ring) had lower FI50 values
468 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

(between 33 and 48 ppm instead of 21.5 ppm for 101 and 22.5 ppm for 102), indicating that opening of the epoxy
ring decreases the activity of 100, although they still remained potent antifeedants.
Scutecyprol B (109) was isolated from the aerial parts of S. rubicunda and found to be a strong antifeedant against
several insect species,65,66 that is, S. littoralis, Spodoptera frugiperda, Mamestra brassicae, and P. brassicae, inhibiting
feeding from 75% (in P. brassicae) to 100% in S. littoralis at 100 ppm. It inhibited feeding up to 65% in H. armigera
also at 100 ppm. Scutalbin A (110), from the same plant was a moderate antifeedant against these insects.65
Ajuga reptans, or bugle (Lamiaceae), a common herb found throughout Europe, contains several neo-
clerodanes, yet for those isolated earlier no feeding inhibition was observed.67 Further examination of the
ethanol extracts led to the isolation of three new neo-clerodanes, of which 14,15-dehydroajugareptansin (111)
had significant antifeeding activity against S. littoralis at 100 ppm when 92% feeding inhibition was observed.68
It was more effective than clerodin (74% FI), but not as effective as jodrellin B (112), which had 100% feeding
inhibition. Three new clerodanes, named hativenes A, B, and C (113–115), were isolated via bio-guided
fractionation from the acetone extract of Ajuga pseudoiva leaves.69 All three were active antifeedants against
S. littoralis at 10 mg ml1, causing 100% feeding inhibition. Even at 1 mg ml1, about 65% feeding inhibition was
observed. Lupulin A (116), present in A. pseudoiva leaves as well as in Ajuga lupulina, was also an effective
antifeedant with 75% feeding inhibition at 1 mg ml1.69
Two epimers, ivain IV (117) and 14,15-dihydroajugapitin (118), were isolated together for the first time
from Ajuga iva, a traditional medicinal plant from Algeria locally known as ‘chendgoura’. Both the diterpenoids
were effective antifeedants against two Spodoptera species, S. littoralis67,70 and S. frugiperda,70 at 100 ppm with
14,15-dihydroajugapitin (118) slightly more active against S. frugiperda. 14,15-Dihydroajugapitin (118) was
isolated also from A. pseudoiva leaves.69
An extract of the aerial parts of Ajuga nipponensis was examined by using high pressure liquid chromato-
graphy (HPLC), resulting in the isolation of several known and two new neo-clerodanes, called ajuganipponin A
(119) and ajuganipponin B (120). Although these and the other isolated neo-clerodanes did exhibit antifeedant
activity against S. littoralis,71 the activity was only moderate to low.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 469

Plants of the Teucrium genus (Lamiaceae), known as germander, are also a rich source of diterpenoids. More
than 200 diterpenoids having the neo-clerodane skeleton have been isolated from the aerial parts of about 80
species or subspecies.72
One of the major components of the acetone extracts of the aerial parts of Teucrium massiliense,
deacetylajugarin II (121), a known antifeedant to several insects, was used as a starting point to create
possible new antifeedants. Surprisingly, deacetylajugarin II (121) in itself is not active against either
Spodoptera exigua or L. decemlineata, but when the 4,18-epoxide group was replaced by a chlorohydrin as
in 122 or when a carbonyl group was introduced at C-4 123, both compounds were active in choice
antifeedant bioassays, giving data similar to that from opening of the epoxy ring in scutecyprol A;64 larvae
will however feed on it in a no-choice situation.73 Two furoneoclerodanes, teumassilenins A and C (124
and 125), also isolated from T. massiliense were active only when tested against the CPB in both choice and
no-choice bioassays. Ajugarin I (126) was however not active against CPB, yet it did inhibit feeding in
S. exigua by 70% at 100 ppm.
Investigation of the contents of the acetone extract of T. tomentosum yielded in total six clerodanes. Although
there were some slight differences, all six clerodanes 127–132 were active antifeedants against both S. litura and
Plutella xylostella with feeding inhibition values between 60 and 85% at 10 mg cm2 and 55–75% at 5 mg cm2.
Teuflin (128) was the most effective. However, compared with azadirachtin, the effectiveness is still about 10
times less.74
Treatment of potato leaf disks with 10 neo-clerodanes isolated from Teucrium and with 10 of their synthetic
derivatives resulted in a significant antifeedant activity against L. decemlineata, although in choice and no-choice
bioassay concentrations of 1000 ppm were used. For the most active compounds, effective concentration to
inhibit 50% of the feeding (EC50) ranged from 53 to 394 ppm.75 Of the 12 most active antifeedants 128–139,
470 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

nine are natural products (128–132 and 136–139), suggesting that the whole molecular structure is important
for a more effective biological action. Montanin D (130) and 6-hydroxytuescordin (132) were also found in
the acetone extract of the above-ground parts of T. arduini and were active antifeedants against S. littoralis at
100 ppm. Transformation of the hydroxy group at C-6 in 130 into a carbonyl group decreased the antifeedant
activity slightly.76
Auropolin (140) was isolated from the aerial parts of Teucrium polium (Lamiaceae).77 Although the naturally
occurring compound 140 did not reduce feeding by final stadium larvae of S. littoralis, the semisynthetic
acetylated compound, acetyl-auropolin (141), reduced feeding by 57.8% at 100 ppm with an EC50 value
(calculated via dose-dependent experiments) of 90 ppm.77 This result shows the importance of the esterification
of the hydroxy group at C-20 in auropolin.
Scutalpin B (142) was isolated from Scutellaria alpina subsp. lambrensis (Lamiaceae) together with scutalpin C
(143). In choice antifeedant bioassays against S. littoralis, 143 was only slightly less active than jodrellin B (112)
(97% versus 100%). Acetylation of the 11-hydroxyl group of 143 resulted in the formation of 142 and caused
a significant decrease in antifeedant activity (from 97 to 27% inhibition).78
Scutegalin B (144), a naturally occurring neo-clerodane in Scutellaria galericulata, is a known phagostimulant
for the larvae of the Egyptian cotton leafworm, S. littoralis. Transformation of this compound into 145 led to
high antifeedant activity, which could be due to the nonesterified 19,2-hemiacetal. When this 19,2-
hemiacetal function was changed into a 19-O-methyl-19,2-acetal, as in 146, the result was a phagostimulant.79
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 471

Clerodane-type diterpenoids are also found in species of Salvia (Labiatae), growing in Mexico. Compounds
147 and 148, isolated from Salvia melissodora, 149 from Salvia semiatrata, 150 from Salvia keerlii, 151 and 152
both from Salvia rhyacophilla, 153 from S. lineata, and 154 from Salvia tiliaefolia all proved to be potent
antifeedants against S. littoralis, with antifeeding index values of more than 50% at 100 ppm and all had an
AI50 value of less than 100 mg l1.63
Although most studies have been performed on Spodoptera species,69,80 neo-clerodanes are also effective
antifeedants against the spotted bollworm, Earias vitella. Clerodendrin B (155), 3-epicaryoptin (156), 15-
hydroxyepicaryoptin (157) were all isolated from Clerodendron inerme, a wild, as well as a hedge plant, from
India. All exhibited good feeding inhibition (>78%) toward S. litura and >70% toward E. vitella.81 Caryoptin
(158), the stereoisomer of 3-epicaryoptin (156), was an effective antifeedant against Henosepilachna vigintiocto-
punctata, yet unlike in the case of E. vitella, 3-epicaryoptin and its analogues were not active, indicating that the
stereochemistry at C-3 is important for antifeedant activity.82
Several natural neo-clerodanes isolated from Linaria saxatilis (placed in Scrophulariaceae or Plantaginaceae)
were tested alongside some semisynthetic compounds (all derived from the natural compounds) and tested against
insects with divergent feeding adaptations. Of the natural compounds, E-isolinaridial (159), an ,-unsaturated-
1,4-dialdehyde, was the most active in reducing feeding by 90% in both choice and no-choice bioassays. Research
has confirmed that the 4,18-epoxy group is important for activity, as the semisynthetic compounds 160 and 161
were more effective than their corresponding natural parent compound 162 and 163 against CPB. Creating a 4,18-
diol group resulted in similar bioactivity.83 All compounds tested had only moderate antifeedant activity against the
aphid M. persicae; this suggests a different mode of action in these insects.
472 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 473

4.11.3.3.2 Ryanoids
Ryanodine is a diterpene derivative toxic to insects that has been known for some 60 years.2 It is classified as an
alkaloid although the nitrogen atom is held in a nonbasic pyrrole ring. Ryanoid diterpenes can be classified into two
groups: alkaloid type (ryanodine and spiganthine types) and nonalkaloid type (ryanodol and isoryanodol types).
The nonalkaloid ryanoids are isolated from Persea indica (Lauraceae) whereas the alkaloid-type ryanoids are
isolated from Spigelia anthelmia (Strychnaceae).84 When ryanoids from the nonalkaloid type were tested against
S. littoralis and L. decemlineata, several exhibited antifeedant effects that were species-dependent, with
epi-cinnzeylanol (164) and cinnzeylanol 1-acetate (165) as the most powerful antifeedants against S. littoralis
(<0.5 nmol cm2), although still not as potent as azadirachtin (0.7  106 nmol cm2). Other compounds that
exhibited good feeding inhibition were ryanodol 14-acetate (166), cinnzeylanone (167), and perseanol (168).
Leptinotarsa decemlineata exhibited an overall lower response to the tested compounds. Compound 165 exhibited the
strongest antifeeding effect with 100% feeding inhibition and an EC50 value of 0.01 nmol cm2. From the alkaloid
type, only ryanodine (169), 2-hydroxyryanodine (170), and 2,3-epoxy-2-epi-ryanodine (171), had some anti-
feeding effect, yet concentrations were 0.9–2.7 nmol cm2. In both the insects the nonalkaloid-type ryanoids had a
stronger effect. Two of these compounds, 165 and 169, exhibited a knockdown effect and led to paralyzed beetles.84
Ryanodol (172), cinnzeylanol (173), and epi-cinnzeylanol (164) isolated from P. indica also had antifeedant
effects on S. litura.85 Continuous research on the extract of aerial parts of P. indica led to the isolation of three
additional rare isoryanodanes, indicol (174), vignaticol (175), and perseanol (168), all of them having anti-
feedant activity against S. litura, with perseanol being the most active.86 Cinnzeylanine (176), also isolated from
the aerial parts of P. indica and very similar to 173, was the least effective ryanoid against S. litura.85
474 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.3.3.3 Diterpenoid alkaloids

Cardiopetamine (177) and 15-acetylcardiopetamine (178) were isolated from Delphinium cardiopetalum
(Ranunculaceae). Hydrolysis of 177 led to the amino alcohol 179. Together with two additional seminatural products,
180 and 181, both synthesized from cardiopetamine, they were all tested for antifeedant activity against the CPB and
S. littoralis. Cardiopetamine (177) was a strong antifeedant against S. littoralis while 15-acetylcardiopetamine (178)
inhibited feeding by CPB.87 Hydroxy groups on both C-13 and C-15 are essential for antifeedant activity in S. littoralis.
As for antifeeding activity toward CPB a C-13-hydroxyl or C-15-acetate group enhances the activity. Although a
benzoate group on C-11 is not essential it enhances the biological effect on both species.

Extracts of several plants from the genera Aconitum, Consolida, and Delphinium (all Ranunculaceae) were obtained
and led to the isolation of 40 natural norditerpenoid alkaloids. Three additional semisynthetic alkaloids were prepared
as well.88 All 43 alkaloids were tested for their antifeedant activity against S. littoralis and the CPB, L. decemlineata, to
establish SAR. None of these were strong antifeedants against S. littoralis, but several strongly inhibited feeding by the
CPB at concentrations below 1 mg cm2. 1,14-Diacetylcardiopetaline (182) and 18-hydroxy-14-O-methylgadesine
(183) were the most potent, followed by 8-O-methylconsolarine (184), 14-O-acetyldelectinine (185), karakoline
(186), cardiopetaline (187), 18-O-demethylpubescenine (188), 14-O-acetyldeltatsine (189), takaosamine (190),
ajadine (191), and 8-O-methylcolumbianine (192).88 SAR studies indicated that in order to be strong antifeedants
against the CPB, compounds should lack a benzoyl group at C-14, as well as have oxygenated substituents at C-16.
Hydroxylation at C-14 seems to increase the antifeeding activity.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 475

Twenty-one diterpene alkaloids (16 were natural products isolated from these plants, while five were
semisynthetic compounds) were also tested to establish SAR. 19-Oxodihydroatisine (193) was a strong
antifeedant against S. littoralis, yet it did not affect feeding behavior in the CPB. However, the CPB
responded to a larger number of compounds than S. littoralis, both results confirming the species
dependency of these antifeedants. The rearranged form of hetisine (194) showed the strongest response
for CPB.89 Additionally, the norditerpenoid alkaloids had higher antifeedant effects on CPB (ranging
from 0.1 to 12 mg cm2) compared with the effects of the diterpenoid alkaloids (ranging from 2 to
28 mg cm2).
Akhdarenol (195), -amyrin (196), and the semisynthetic isopimaric acid methyl ester 197 exhibited
antifeedant properties against L. decemlineata, with the natural compounds more active than the semisynthetic
ones. None of these exhibited any antifeedant activity against S. littoralis.90
476 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.3.3.4 Abietanes
From the hairy roots of Salvia broussonetia (Lamiaceae), 14-deoxycoleon U (198) and demethylsalvicanol (199)
were isolated together with other diterpenes. Of all the diterpenes isolated, 14-deoxycoleon U was a strong
antifeedant against L. decemlineata,12 whereas 199 exhibited only moderate activity. Several compounds similar
to 198 were not active, suggesting a possible role for the unsaturation of ring B, a feature missing in 6-
hydroxydemethylcryptojaponol (200), which was not active. None of the isolated abietanes exhibited any
antifeedant activity against S. littoralis.

4.11.3.4 Triterpenes
From the point of interest of antifeedants, triterpenoids can be divided into three classes, depending on the
number of carbon atoms in the skeleton; there are full C-30 triterpenes, C-26 limonoids, and C-20 quassins. In
addition, there are saponins, which can have either a triterpenoid or a steroid skeleton. Interesting and powerful
antifeedants are found in each class.

4.11.3.4.1 Pentacyclic triterpenes

Two pentacyclic triterpenoids were isolated from Vitex negundo, an Indian medicinal plant of the Verbenaceae.
They were identified as the known ursolic acid (201) and betulinic acid (202). After 48 h, the reduction in
feeding by the larvae of the castor semilooper, Achoea janata, was 84.75% for 202 and 94.79% for 201,
respectively, at a dose of 10 mg cm2.91
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 477

The organic extract from the aerial part of Junellia aspera (also Verbenaceae) yielded several oleananes, of which
daucosterol (203) was a strong antifeedant against adults of the rice weevil, Sitophilus oryzae. Oleanolic acid (204),
which was the main secondary metabolite, was used as the starting material to prepare a series of derivatives, none
of these were however active in feeding inhibition, although some were acutely toxic on ingestion.92
The rice weevil was also used in antifeedant bioassays testing the antifeedant activity of several triterpenoids from
tropical species of the Rutales. Of the compounds isolated from Lansium domesticum (Meliaceae), iso-onoceratriene
(205), 3-keto-21-hydroxyonoceradiene (206), onoceradienedione (207), lansiolic acid (208), and lansiolic acid A
(209) exhibited significant antifeeding activities at 0.5% (w/w of wheat flour) using a flour disk bioassay.93 However,
crude extracts were more active than the pure compounds, which could be the results of either synergistic effects or
the presence of other unidentified compounds. Three spirocaracolitones B, D, and E (210–212) isolated from
Ruptiliocarpon carocolito93 were however much more active at a concentration of 0.25% (w/w). The antifeeding
properties of these spirocaracolitones were also found against the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis.94
478 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.3.4.2 Limonoids
Limonoids are highly oxygenated triterpenes, which have lost the terminal four carbon atoms of the side chain,
with the remaining side chain cyclized into a furan ring;2 they are therefore tetranortriterpenoids. The name
limonoids is derived from the first of these isolated, the bitter compound limonin, from citrus fruits and was first
isolated in 1841.2,95 Limonoids are found in leaves, bark, fruits, seeds, or kernels widely throughout the
Meliaceae and Rutaceae, and less frequently in the small family Cneoraceae and Harrisonia sp. of the
Simaroubaceae. Limonoids can be further classified by intact ring systems and those in which one of the four
rings (A, B, C, or D) has been ring-opened.
The powerful antifeedant and insecticide azadirachtin (213), from the neem tree (Azadirachta indica,
Meliaceae), is a highly oxidized limonoid with rings A, B, and D intact.2 It is used as a benchmark
against which all other antifeedants can be compared (vide infra). The total synthesis of azadirachtin
has recently been achieved in 64 steps.96 This is very unlikely to provide a synthetic source of the
compound, but it does allow SAR studies to find maximum activity, and opens up the field to possible
simpler synthetics modelled on it. As yet, even slight modifications of the structure tend to decrease
activity. Azadirachtin (213) has been available commercially, particularly in the United States, but at
present the cost of the seeds and the isolation procedure inhibit its wider use.
A derivative of gedunin (214), 6-hydroxygedunin (215), previously only a synthetic compound, was
recently also isolated from the Indian neem tree, A. indica, and was found to be an antifeedant toward the
gram pod borer, H. armigera as well as against the Asian armyworm, with an EC50 of 24.1 ppm, and against
S. litura at 21.5 ppm.97 Although not as active an antifeedant as azadirachtin it was more powerful than
gedunin (214). Other non-azadirachtin limonoids from the Indian neem tree such as nimbocinol, salannin
(216), and azadiradione (217) also seem to have antifeedant activity against these lepidopteran pests,98 but with
an FI50 value at least 150 times higher than that of azadirachtin and five times more than that of
6-hydroxygedunin (215).
Several derivatives of havanensin-type limonoids were also synthesized99 and tested for their antifeedant
activity against S. littoralis and S. frugiperda as well as against L. migratoria. The racemic -epoxide derivative (3a-
methyl-3-phenyl-hexahydro-1-oxa-cyclopropa[c]inden-4-one, 218) was slightly more active than the -
epoxide 219. Both were however less active than the trimethyl derivative 220. Of all the derivatives
synthesized, the deoxo -epoxide 221 (3a-methyl-3-phenyl-octahydro-1-oxacyclopropa[c]indene) was most
active toward S. littoralis and S. frugiperda with an antifeedant index of 43 and 23%, respectively at 100 ppm.
Compound 220 was also a very potent antifeedant against Locusta migratoria, an insect for which azadirachtin is
not a very potent antifeedant.
In order to find new compounds with antifeedant activity, much research is now shifted toward making
simple compounds derived from natural antifeedants. Simple analogues of azadiradione and epoxyazadiradione
(222) were made100 and the keto-epoxide 223 was found to have a strong antifeedant activity against S.
littoralis.100,101 In a similar study, two racemic indenones, 224 and 225, were found to be active as a feeding
deterrent against S. frugiperda with an AFI of 40% at 100 ppm.101 Keto epoxides synthesized from the
indenones, 226 and 227, also exhibited moderate antifeedant activity when tested as racemic mixtures on S.
frugiperda. Replacing the E-ring with a phenyl substituent had the surprising effect of creating the phagosti-
mulant 228, rather than an antifeedant.101
From the root bark of Melia toosendan, closely related to Melia azedarach, three different C-seco limonoids
were isolated, all three having antifeedant activity against the larvae of S. eridania. Of these three, nimbolidin
F (229) was the most active at 500 ppm while 3-O-acetylohchinolal (230) and ohchinolide C (231) were only
active at 1000 ppm.102
Three neoazedarachins, neoazedarachin A, B, and D, 232–234, were also isolated from the same
tree together with 1-O-acetyltrichilin (235) and all exhibited antifeedant activity at 400 ppm when
tested on the third-instar larvae of S. littoralis.103 Spirosendan (236) was the first spiro-limonoid
isolated from the root bark of M. toosendan, but had only very weak antifeedant activity (active at
1000 ppm).104
Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 479
480 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

Three humilinolides, humilinolides A–C (237–239) were isolated from Swietenia humilis.93 Only 238 and 239
exhibited a strong feeding inhibition, with 75 and 35%, respectively, inhibition at 0.50% (w/w). Several novel A-
seco limonoids were isolated from the root bark of Croton jatrophoides Euphorbiaceae, an east African medicinal plant
locally known as ‘msinduzi’. These were dumsin (240), zumsin (241),105 dumnin (242), dumsenin (243),106 zumketol
(244),20 musidunin (245), and musiduol (246).107 All these compounds exhibited potent antifeedants activity against
two lepidopteran larvae, the pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella, and the fall armyworm, S. frugiperda, with EC50
values varying from 0.5 to 4 mg ml1. Although two additional limonoids, zumsenin (247) and zumsenol (248), were
isolated from C. jatrophoides, they could not be tested due to the limited amount available.20
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 481

Other plants of the Meliaceae family are richly endowed with many other limonoids. Prieurianin (249) and
epoxyprieurianin (250) were isolated from the bark of Entandrophragma candolei and were active as antifeedants
against larvae of the gram pod borer, H. armigera.108 The epoxy derivative of prieurianin (249) was more
effective at reducing feeding by 69% at 100 ppm versus 58% feeding inhibition for the non-epoxy compound.
Acetylation of these two natural products slightly increased the antifeedant activity. However, azadirachtin is
about 12-fold more active than epoxyprieurianin (250).
Limonoids of the salannin group has also been shown to be an antifeedant against lepidopteran larvae. 3-O-
acetyl salannol (251), salannol (252), and salannin (216) were all isolated from the seeds of the neem tree and tested
against the gram pod borer H. armigera and the larvae of the tobacco armyworm, S. litura.97 Although each of these
three compounds exhibits antifeeding activity, 3-O-acetylsalannol was the most active at 64.2 ppm. There was no
synergistic effect with either insect when these three salannin compounds were combined together.109
Extracts from Argentinian M. azedarach trees also exhibited antifeedants activity against the elm leaf beetle.
Bio-guided fractionation of these extracts led to the isolation of a limonoid called meliartenin (253). It is an
equilibration mixture of two tautomers, the minor tautomer can be described as 12-hydroxyamoorastatin (254).
The name meliartenin has been given to the major tautomer 253, which can be confusing.110 When the
tautomeric mixture was tested against Epilachna paenulata larvae and compared with azadirachtin and toosen-
danin, it was found to be as effective as these two well-known antifeedants. When tested against S. eridania
larvae, it was slightly more effective.111
Five compounds similar to the tetranortriterpenoid limonin were isolated from the roots of Trichilia
pallida (Meliaceae) with acetone. These compounds were identified as hirtin (255), deacetylhirtin (256), methyl 6-
hydroxy-11-acetoxy-12-(2-methylpropanoyloxy)-3,7-dioxo-14,15-epoxy-1,5-meliacadien-29-oate (257),
methyl 6,11-dihydroxy-12-(2-methylpropanoyloxy)-3,7-dioxo-14,15-epoxy-1,5-meliacadien-29-oate (258),
and methyl 6-hydroxy-11-acetoxy-12-(2-methylbutanoyloxy)-3,7-dioxo-14,15-epoxy-1,5-meliacadien-29-
oate (259).112 These five were tested against four species of Lepidoptera (S. littoralis, S. exigua, Heliothis virescens,
and H. armigera). Only 258 was active against all these four lepidopteran species at 100 ppm. Compound 256, which
also has a hydroxyl moiety rather than an acetyl moiety at C-11, exhibited antifeedant activity against H. virescens
and H. armigera, but not against the Spodoptera species.112 These data support earlier findings that a small change in
the structure of the molecule (especially to the C-11 side chain) could drastically change bioactivity of the
compound.
The root bark of Severinia buxifolia (Rutaceae) yielded two new limonoids called severinolide (260) and
cycloseverinolide (261) as colorless plates. Of these only severinolide (260) was active as antifeedants against
Plutella xylostella at a concentration of 0.0625%, reducing feeding between 21 and 40%. Also isolated from the
root bark was atalantin (262) and cycloepiatalantin (263). Of these two compounds, 262 was as active as 260.
Compound 263 did reduce feeding, but only at 0.25% (Table 1).113

Table 1 Limonoids as insect antifeedants

Insect tested Feeding Concentration EC50

Structure (Plant) source against inhibition (%) (ppm) (ppm)

214 A. indica H. armigera 50.8

S. litura 40.4
215 A. indica H. armigera 24.2
S. litura 21.5
216 A. indica H. armigera 72.2
S. litura 70.2
217 A. indica H. armigera 109.6
S. litura 102.1
218 Synthetic S. littoralis 22 100
S. frugiperda 22 100
219 Synthetic S. littoralis 20 100
S. frugiperda 14 100

(Continued )
482 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

Table 1 (Continued)

Insect tested Feeding Concentration EC50

Structure (Plant) source against inhibition (%) (ppm) (ppm)

220 Synthetic S. littoralis 43 100

S. frugiperda 23 100
L. migratoria Not given
221 Synthetic S. littoralis 30 100
S. frugiperda 21 100
222 Synthetic S. littoralis 22 100
223 Synthetic S. littoralis 55 100
224 Synthetic S. frugiperda 42 100
225 Synthetic S. frugiperda 40 100
226 Synthetic S. frugiperda 36 100
227 Synthetic S. frugiperda 29 100
228 Synthetic S. frugiperda 12a 100
229 M. azedarach S. eridania 500
230 M. azedarach S. eridania 1000
231 M. azedarach S. eridania 1000
232 M. azedarach S. littoralis 400
233 M. azedarach S. littoralis 400
234 M. azedarach S. littoralis 400
235 M. azedarach S. littoralis 400
236 M. toosendan S. exigua 1000
237 S. humilis S. oryzae Not active 0.50%b
238 S. humilis S. oryzae 75.2 0.50%b
239 S. humilis S. oryzae 34.8 0.50%b
240 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 1c
S. frugiperda Not tested
241 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 1c
S. frugiperda 2c
242 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 1c
S. frugiperda Not tested
243 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 2c
S. frugiperda 1c
244 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 0.5c
S. frugiperda 3c
245 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 3c
S. frugiperda Not tested
246 C. jatrophoides P. gossypiella 4c
S. frugiperda 2c
247 C. jatrophoides Not tested
248 C. jatrophoides Not tested
249 E. candolei H. armigera 57.7 100 92.2
250 E. candolei H. armigera 69.1 100 62.7
251 H. armigera 64.2
S. litura 65.6
252 H. armigera 79.7
S. litura 77.4
253d M. azedarach E. paenulata 52.1 1c 0.8c
254d S. erdania 91.2 1c
255 T. pallida S. littoralis 4 100
S. exigua 10 100
H. virescens 9 100
H. armigera 12 100
256 T. pallida S. littoralis 14a 100
S. exigua 12 100
H. virescens 29 100
H. armigera 32 100
257 T. pallida S. littoralis 5 100

(Continued )
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 483

Table 1 (Continued)

Insect tested Feeding Concentration EC50

Structure (Plant) source against inhibition (%) (ppm) (ppm)

S. exigua 7 100
H. virescens 8 100
H. armigera 16 100
258 T. pallida S. littoralis 46 100
S. exigua 40 100
H. virescens 49 100
H. armigera 42 100
259 S. buxifolia P. xylostella 60–80 0.0625b
260 S. buxifolia P. xylostella Not active
261 S. buxifolia P. xylostella 60–80 0.0625b
262 S. buxifolia P. xylostella 60–80 0.25
a
Phagostimulant
b
Concentration in % (w/w)
c
Concentration in mg cm2
d
Tested as tautomeric mixture
484 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.3.4.3 Phragmalins
Khaya senegalensis, also from the Meliaceae, is used as a popular traditional medicine in Africa. From the
bark of this tree, several phragmalins, B,D-seco-limonoids, have been isolated and identified as antifeedants
against S. littoralis. The phragmalin khayanolides A–E (264–268) were all tested114–117 against S. littoralis in
a leaf disk bioassay. Among the khayanolides, khayanolide E (268) was the most potent, active at
100 ppm,116 with 50 ppm corresponding to 1 mg leaf cm2 followed by khayanolide A (264), which was
active at 300 ppm. Khayanolide C (266) exhibited moderate activity at 500 ppm.102 Khayanolides B (265)
and D (267) were active only at a concentration of 1000 ppm. Two other B,D-seco-limonoids, khayalactol
(269) and 1-O-acetylkhayanolide B (270), were also isolated from K. senegalensis and were potent anti-
feedants against S. littoralis at 300 ppm.118
Also isolated from the Egyptian K. senegalensis was a limonoid glucoside named khayanoside (271), yet
this compound exhibited only weak antifeedant activity.116 From the ether extract of the bark of the same
tree, two mexicanolide-type limonoids, seneganolide (272) and khayalactol (269), were isolated.
Seneganolide was active in bioassays at 300 ppm against S. littoralis.119 Further investigation of the acetone
extract of the stem bark of K. senegalensis yielded two additional mexicanolides, khayanone (273) and
2-hydroxyseneganolide 274 as well as 1-O-acetylkhayanolide A (275).120 In bioassays against S. littoralis,
1-O-acetylkhayanolide A was the most potent at 100 ppm,117 with the other two active at 300 and 200 ppm,
respectively, making them still weaker than azadirachtin and other meliacarpinins with activities in the
10–50 ppm range.
Extraction of the leaves of Cedrela odorata with methanol yielded four mexicanolides, cedrodorin (276),
6-acetoxycedrodorin (277), 6-deoxy-9-hydroxycedrodorin (278), and 9-hydroxycedrodorin (279).
Rejection of C. odorata leaves by the weevil Exopthalmus jekelianus was found to be correlated with the
presence of cedrodorin (276), 6-acetoxycedrodorin (277) and 6-deoxy-9-hydroxycedrodorin (278) but not
9-hydroxycedrodorin (279).121 The concentration of these four mexicanolides varied with genotype, but
the active compounds were always more abundant than the inactive ones.
The diethyl ether extract from the root bark of Chukrasia tabularis (Meliaceae) yielded six new phragmalins
named tabulalin (280) possessing an ,-unsaturated lactone structure and tabulalides A–E (281–285), having
novel 19-oxygenated structures. These tabulalides can be further divided into two groups, namely, tabulalides
A (281) and B (282) with a C-7/C-19 lactone bridge and the tabulalides C–E 283–285 with a 19-acetoxy
function. These new phragmalins all have comparable antifeedant activity against the third-instar larvae of
S. littoralis similar to the khayanolides, with tabulalin (280) and tabulalide D (284) active at 500 ppm,
corresponding to 10 mg leaf cm2. Tabulalides A, B, and E were active at only 1000 ppm, while no activity
was observed for tabulalide C (283).122
Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 485
486 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 487

The first isolation of phragmalins from Swietenia mahogany (Meliaceae) revealed five new phragmalins called
swietenialides A–E (286–290). All these are ring-D-opened phragmalin-type limonoids, yet all are only weak
antifeedants against the third-instar larvae of S. littoralis.123
The Chinese mangrove, Xylocarpus granatum (Meliaceae), contains a large number of 8,9,30-
phragmalin orthoesters, called xyloccensins.124 These were isolated from either the seeds or the stem
bark of the Chinese mangrove. In total 25 xyloccensins have been isolated, xyloccensins A–V, Y, Z1, and
Z2.124,125 Tested with a conventional leaf disk method against the third-instar larvae of M. separata
(Walker), only two (xyloccensins P (291) and Q (292)) were active as antifeedants at a concentration of
500 ppm.124
The acetone extract of the seeds of Trichillia havanensis contains large quantities of azadirone. Further
research126 showed that the azadirone fraction contains an additional compound in minute quantities. This
compound was identified as 1,2;21,23-diepoxy-7-hydroxy-24,25,26,27-tetranor-apotirucalla-14,20,22-
trien-3-one (293) and was found to be equally active against the fourth-instar larvae of the CPB, L. decemlineata,
as azadirone and both reduced feeding at 300 and 500 ppm.
488 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.3.4.4 Quassinoids
For a century, powdered quassin wood of Quassia amara from South America or Acrasma excelsa from Jamaica (both
Simaroubaceae) was a commercial insecticide. Both contain quassin (294) and related compounds.2 The quassi-
noid glaucarubolone glucoside (295), previously reported as a potential fungicide,127 was isolated from the
crucifixion thorn Castela emoryi (Simaroubaceae) and found to have the same level of feeding deterrence toward
the eastern subterranean termite, Reticulitermes flavipes, ED50 of 540 ppm, as azadirachtin with 587 ppm.32
From the seeds and bark of Samadera indica (Simaroubaceae), indaquassin C (296) was isolated together with
three additional quassinoids. Only 296, present in 0.006% in seed kernels, exhibited moderate antifeedant
activity toward S. litura, with 1 mg leaf cm2, resulting in 48.9% feeding inhibition.128

4.11.3.4.5 Cucurbitacins
The cucurbitacins are the bitter principles of Cucurbitaceae, but are also found in five other plant families.
Momordicine II (297), a mono-glucoside, was isolated from the leaves of bitter gourd, Momordica charantia
(Cucurbitaceae), together with a di-glucoside and was identified as the 7-O--glucopyranoside of momordicine II
(298). Momordicine II was a strong antifeedant against the armyworm Pseudoletia separata, causing a 45–60% reduction
in feeding at concentrations of 0.1 and 0.5%. Momordicine II only exhibited a strong feeding inhibition at 2.5% when
tested against S. litura. Overall, the di-glucoside 298 was a weak antifeedant against both the armyworms.129,130
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 489

4.11.3.5 Saponins
Barringtonia asiatica (Lecythidaceae) grows extensively in coastal regions of tropical Asia and the Pacific, and it
is also known as the ‘fish killer tree’, since ground seeds caused piscicidal activity when thrown into the water.
Two major triterpenoid saponins have been isolated from the methanol extract of the seeds and these were
identified as 3-O-{[-D-galactopyranosyl(1!3)--D-glucopyranosyl(1!2)]--D-glucurono-pyranosyloxy}-
22-O-(2-methylbutyroyloxy)-15,16,28-trihydroxy-(3,15,16,22)-olean-12-ene (299) and 3-O-{[-D-
galactopyranosyl(1!3)--D-glucopyranosyl(1!2)]--D-glucuronopyranosyloxy}-22-O-[2(E)-methyl-2-
butenyloyloxy]-15,16,28-trihydroxy-(3,15,16,22)-olean-12-ene (300). Both exhibited antifeedant activ-
ity toward Epilachna larvae131 with 100% feeding inhibition at 1000 ppm. The saponin containing the tiglate
moiety (300) was more active than the saponin containing 2-methylbutyrate (299) at 500 ppm, with 63%
inhibition compared with 54%. At 100 ppm only 300 was active.

4.11.4 Alkaloids

The enormous number and structural variety of plant alkaloids would lead one to expect them to be a rich
hunting ground for antifeedants. Nevertheless, they seem to be relatively neglected compared to other groups.
Their often high mammalian toxicity may be the reason.
The alkaloid dihydropinidine (301) is found in the needles of Picea pungens and the bark of P. sitchensis,132
although the absolute configuration was not reported. After synthesis of two of the possible configurations
(2S,6R)-dihydropinidine (302) and (2R,6S)-dihydropinidine (303), both the compounds were tested for anti-
feedant activity as their hydrochlorides133 and both were strong antifeedants against H. abietis.

4.11.4.1 Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids

The more polar fraction of the methanolic extract of the aerial parts of Senecio miser deterred feeding of the CPB.
Two pyrrolizidine alkaloids, 304 and 305, were isolated and both had the same level of antifeeding activity
against CPB.57

4.11.4.2 Glycoalkaloids
-Solanine (306) from the potato, Solanum tuberosum, and the tomato Lycopersicon esculentum (both Solanaceae)
and -chaconine (307), also from the potato and other Solanum species, are known antifeedants toward snails,
but recent tests showed that these two glycoalkaloids act synergistically. Tested alone, both compounds
deterred feeding of the test snail, Helix aspersa, with chaconine (307) being more effective than solanine
490 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

(306). But when they were tested as a mixture, the inhibition increased significantly more than that of each
compound on its own.134 At 0.2 mmol l–1, chaconine inhibited feeding by 30% whereas 0.2 mmol l1 of solanine
did not affect feeding at all. Yet a mixture of solanine and chaconine, both at 0.2 m mol l1 inhibited feeding by
60%. It is worth noticing that when the mixture was diluted and tested against the extract of the peel of the
potato variety Home Guard, the 10 times diluted peel extract was still active as antifeedant, while the authentic
glycoalkaloid mixture was not active at this dilution. This gives rise to the question whether other glycoalk-
aloids maybe present and also working synergistically.

4.11.5 Phenylpropanoids

Phenylpropanoids have an aromatic ring with a three-carbon substituent. Caffeic acid (308) and eugenol (309)
are known examples of this class of compounds. Phenylpropanoids are formed via the shikimic acid biosyn-
thetic pathway via phenylalanine or tyrosine with cinnamic acid as an important intermediate.
Phenylpropanoids are a diverse group of secondary plant compounds and include the flavonoids (plant-
derived dyes), lignin, coumarins, and many small phenolic molecules. They are known to act as feeding
deterrents, contributing bitter or astringent properties to plants such as lemons and tea.
The pine weevil H. abietis is a serious pest of conifer seedlings. It has been observed that the pine weevil feeds
less on the bark of Pinus contorta and more on Pinus sylvestris. This led to investigation of the bark of P. contorta for
the presence of antifeedants. The ethyl acetate fraction of the methanol extract contained ethyl trans-cinnamate
(310) as well as ethyl 2,3-dibromo-3-phenylpropanoate (311). Both the compounds exhibited high antifeedant
activity at 50 mmol l1 level; even after 24 h, the feeding inhibition for 310 and 311 was still 68 and 39%,
respectively.22 Ethyl cinnamate, which was absent from the extracts of P. sylvestris, is also found in plants from
the Zingiberaceae135 as well as in Artemisia pallens,136 yet has not been identified as an antifeedant. Safrol (312), a
presumed biogenetic precursor of lignans, was an active antifeedant against several storage pests, except for
T. confusum adults.137

4.11.5.1 Lignans
It was found that root bark, containing egg cavities with feces, were avoided by the pine weevil H. abietis, so its
feces were investigated in an attempt to find ways to control the weevil. After fractionation by medium-
pressure liquid chromatography (MPLC) and analysis with gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy (GC–MS)
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 491

and pyrolysis GC–MS, several compounds originating from lignin were identified as potent antifeedants,
including trans-Anethole (313), 1,4-dimethoxybenzene (314), 1-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-3-
methoxypropane (315), 1,4-dihydroxybenzene (316), and eugenol (309).138 All of these lignans had strong
antifeeding properties even after 24 h with AFI values of >31%. 1-(4-Hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-3-
methoxypropane (315) exhibited a feeding inhibition of 76% at 24 h after application. Trans-anethole (313)
is also found in the anise plant Pimpinella anisum (Umbelliferae) and is toxic to S. litura139 as well as to several
beetles,140 weevils,141 mosquitoes, and moths.142
In order to find the best candidate for practical applications to protect conifer seedling against the pine
weevil, a set of 55 benzoic acid derivatives were tested for their antifeedant activity.5 This study centered on
natural oxygenated aromatic compounds found in the bark of some conifers. It yielded five new highly effective
antifeedants, methyl 2,4-dimethoxybenzoate (317), isopropyl 2,4-dimethoxybenzoate (318), methyl 2-
hydroxy-3-methoxybenzoate (319), methyl (3,5-dimethoxyphenyl)acetate (320), methyl (2,5-
dimethoxyphenyl)acetate (321), and methyl 3,5-dimethoxybenzoate (322). All these compounds reduced
feeding by more than 77% at the application of 100 ml of a 50 mmol l–1 solution.
Yatein (323), isolated from the heartwood of the endangered Pacific island tree, Libocedrus yateensis
(Cupressaceae), and cubebin (324), isolated from seeds of Piper cubeba (Piperaceae), were found to be strong
antifeedants against several storage pests, S. granarius, T. confusum, and Trigoderam granarium. The semisynthetic
hinokinin (325), synthesized from cubebin, was also a strong antifeedant against all the three storage pests.137
Two norlignans were isolated from the ethyl acetate fraction and found to be even more active. Sequirin-C
(326) and agatharesinol (327) were very strong antifeedants against a snail species, A. despesta, deterring feeding
by 91% at 30 mg cm2 and by 90% at 40 mg cm2, respectively.143
492 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.5.2 Furanocoumarins
Earlier research had shown that the fruits of Tetradium daniellii (Rutaceae) contain several furanocoumarins. In the
search for compounds with antiinsect properties, the chemistry of the fruits were investigated further to show that
at least four of the compounds were insect feeding inhibitors. The compounds xanthotoxin (8-methoxypsoralen;
328), bergapten (5-methoxypsoralen; 329), also found in the aerial parts of Pilocarpus goudotianus (Rutaceae)144 and
isopimpinellin (5,8-dimethoxypsoralen; 330) and bergamottin (5-geranyloxypsoralen; 331), isolated from the
fruits of T. danielli,145 inhibited feeding by 92–100% at 1 mmol l–1 when tested against S. littoralis and H. virescens.
Xanthotoxin (328) was also very effective against Trichoplusia ni.146 Imperatorin (332), isolated from P. goudotianus,
as well as angelicin (333) and psoralen (334), from Psoralea glandulosa (Leguminosae), all inhibited feeding of
S. littoralis, yet were not as effective as xanthotoxin and bergapten.144 Testing several of these compounds as binary
mixtures indicated that there is synergism when at least 40–75% imperatorin (332) or 20–80% angelicin (333) is
present.144

4.11.5.3 Coumarins and Quinones

Plants of the genus Cyperus or sedges (Cyperaceae) include some common weeds found in upland and paddy
fields in temperate to tropical regions. Two of these species, Cyperus rotundus and Cyperus scariosus, are used in
traditional folk medicine. In addition, the fact that pests in these areas do not affect Cyperaceae suggests that
they contain antifeedants. A study by Morimoto et al.147 showed that several extracts of plants from the genus
Cyperus were feeding inhibitors. The hexane extract from the basal stem of Cyperus nipponicus afforded large
amounts of cyperaquinone (335) and its precursor remirol (336). Both exhibited good antifeedant properties
against S. litura. Scabequinone (337) isolated from C. distans was an even stronger antifeedant with an ED50 100
times lower.147
Coumaran (2,3-dihydrobenzofuran; 338), a secondary metabolite also from C. nipponicus, inhibits feeding of
phytophagous insects.11 In the quest for finding additional antifeedants against S. litura, benzofuran derivatives
were tested in a feeding bioassay. Natural remirol (336) and euparin (339), the latter isolated from the roots of
Eupatorium chinese, inhibited feeding significantly, but the synthetic derivative, 7-acetyl-2-isopropenyl-4,6-
dimethoxy-2,3-dihydrobenzofuran (340), had an ED50 value of 1.3 mg cm2 against S. litura, that is among the
most active antifeedants yet recorded.11 Aurone (341), a pigment isolated from the heartwood of Pterocarpus
marsupium (Fabaceae),148 was found to be a strong antifeedant against the common cutworm, S. litura, with an
ED50 of 0.12 mmol cm2.149 Several derivatives of aurone exhibited antifeedant activity as well.149
The major constituent in the extract of madder, Rubia tinctorum (Rubiaceae), was identified as lucidin-3-O-
primeveroside (342), a commonly used food pigment. It exhibited antifeedant activity against the carpet beetle,
Attagenus japonicus.150 This opens the window for using dyes from either R. akane or R. tinctorum to protect textile
against these textile pests.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 493

4.11.5.4 Flavonoids
Flavonoids are widely distributed in plants, and it is assumed that they are related to the resistance toward
attacks by insects and fungi in several plant species. Timber from the large deciduous tree, Pterocarpus
macrocarpus (Fabaceae), is used in making furniture and in construction of buildings, because it is resistant to
termite attack. The dichloromethane extract from the heartwood of this tree yielded three pterocarpans, (–)-
homopterocarpin 343, (–)-pterocarpin 344, and (–)-hydroxyhomopterocarpin (345). These three natural
compounds as well as four additional semisynthetic compounds (346–349) were all found to be good
antifeedants against the subterranean termite Reticulitermes speratus.151 However, only the natural flavonoids
inhibited feeding of the larvae of S. litura.
Several flavonoids were isolated from either the wood of the Japanese larch Larix leptolepis (Pinaceae) or from
the wood of Prunus species.152 In total, 14 flavonoids were tested for antifeedant activity against C. formosanus.
Although all flavonoids did exhibit antifeeding behavior, there were large variations. Three compounds,
494 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

quercetin (350), taxifolin (351), and naringenin (352), were strong antifeedants, whereas others exhibited
moderate antifeedant activity. Some conclusions could be drawn from these results in that the hydroxyl groups
at C-5 and C-7 in ring A are important, as well as the presence for a carbonyl group at C-4 in the pyran ring. In
addition, 39,49-dihydroxylated B-rings exhibited higher activity than those with 49-hydroxylated B-rings.
The polymethylated flavonoids 5-hydroxy-3,6,7,8,49-pentamethoxyflavone (353), 5-hydroxy-3,6,7,8,-
tetramethoxyflavone (354), and 5,6-dihydroxy-3,7-dimethoxyflavone (355) and a chalcone, 4,49,69-trihydroxy-
29-methoxychalcone 356, have all been isolated from cudweed, Gnaphalium affine (Compositae).153 Although
the flavonoids were present in small amount in the plant, they all exhibit high antifeedant activity against the
common cutworm (S. litura) with ED50 values of 1.1  107 mol cm2 for 353, 2.0  108 mol cm2 for 354, and
2.5  108 mol cm2 for 355. The chalcone 356 was present in higher amounts, but had less activity
(3.8  107 mol cm2).153
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 495

4.11.6 Miscellaneous
4.11.6.1 Celastroidines
Although two novel celastroidines were isolated from the roots of Hippocratea celastroides (Celastraceae), only
celastroidine A (357) strongly inhibited feeding by Sitophillus zeamais. Celastroidine A (357) is described as
Diels–Alder adduct of a triterpene on a diterpene. It was isolated as a white powder.154

4.11.6.2 Cerebrosides
The cerebroside 1-O--D-glucopranosyl-(2S,3S,4R,8Z)-2-N-(29hydroxytetracosanoyl)-heptadecasphinga-8-ene
(358) was isolated from the methanolic extract of the whole bodies of Munronia henryi (Meliaceae) and exhibited
significant antifeedant activity against the larvae of P. brassicae, reducing feeding by 62 and 50% mortality.155
Although two additional ceramides were isolated as well, neither of them exhibited antifeeding activity. A new
weakly active antifeedant, the A,B-seco-tetranortriterpenoid lactam munroniamide (359), was also isolated.155

4.11.6.3 Cardenolides
Digitoxin (360) and cymarin (361) found in Erysimum cheiranthoides (Cruciferae) was previously found to be an
active oviposition deterrent for two Pieris species.156 Tested against the cabbage looper, T. ni, both were active
antifeedants, reducing feeding by 50% at a concentration of 18.8 and 10.8 mg cm2, respectively.146
496 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

4.11.6.4 Alkyl Derivatives

Nonanoic acid (362) isolated from the bark of linden Tilia cordata (Tiliaceae) possessed strong antifeedant
activity against the pine weevil, H. abietis.157 Several other long-chain acids were also tested for their antifeedant
activity.158 However, high activities were restricted to the smaller chain length, C-6–C-10, acids with nonanoic
acid still the most active. Similarly, only the shorter 2-methyl branched alkanoic acids (up to C-10 chain length)
were active as antifeedants. The C-9 alcohol, 1-nonanol (363), was also active.158
1-Hentriacontanol (364), a long-chain alcohol, was found in the leaf extracts of V. negundo (Verbenaceae) and
deterred feeding by the larvae of the castor looper, A. janata,91 with 78% feeding reduction after 24 h when
tested at 10 mg cm2.
The gaur, Bos frontalis, a wild ox in India and other Asian countries, is known not to be troubled by biting
arthropods, such as mosquitoes. Bovidic acids occur naturally only in the Bovidea family. 5-(1-Hydroxynonyl)-
2-tetrahydrofuranpentanoic acid (an 18-carbon bovidic acid; 365) was isolated from the gaur and tests showed
that this compound acts as a feeding deterrent for the blood-sucking insect, Aedes aegypti.159 Other bovidic acid
analogues, 16-carbon and methyl esters, and enantiomers were all effective antifeedants, and as effective as the
positive control N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide (DEET), indicating that the absolute configuration of the furanoid
ring is less important.

4.11.6.5 Cyclohexyl Derivatives

Kaempferia rotunda belongs to the Zingiberaceae family, perennial rhizomatous herbs important for their spices
such as ginger and turmeric. Two polyoxygenated cyclohexane derivatives, (–)-zeylenol 366 and
2-acetylrotepoxide B 367, were isolated among several others from K. rotunda. Both exhibited moderate
antifeeding activity with a feeding inhibition of 50.8 and 42.8%, respectively, at 100 ppm against S. littoralis.160

4.11.7 Feeding Deterrence in Higher Animals

The search for effective feeding deterrents is not confined to arthropods and mollusks. There is also a search for
deterrents against browsing animals and fruit-eating birds. Much damage to seedlings and saplings can be done
by deer and elk. Deterring deer, moose, and caribou from grazing near roads to prevent accidents has been
considered. The gray squirrel, Sciurus caroliniensis, can cause enormous damage to young trees of beech Fagus
sylvatica (Fagaceae) and hornbeam Carpinus betulus (Corylaceae) in Europe. Many of these studies as yet have
been made with crude products, such as feline urine.
Terpenes from Eucalyptus are thought to be involved in feeding deterrence of Australian possums, the
common ringtail possum (Pseudocheirus peregrinus) and the common brushtail possum (Trochosurus vulpecula). 1,8-
Cineole (368) was identified as one of the active terpenes.161 Diet with added jensenone (369), a diformylph-
loroglucinol compound (DFPC), was consumed less than the control diet.161,162 Derivatives of jensenone (369)
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 497

resulted in different feeding inhibition, leading to the conclusion that the aldehyde groups attached to the
aromatic ring of jensenone were important for the activity, while the phenol groups (hydroxy groups attached
to the ring) only play a minor role.162 The dry matter intake by the common ringtail possum was also
significantly reduced when sideroxylonal (370) was added.163 Macrocarpal G (371) was the first compound
isolated from Eucalyptus that exhibited feeding inhibition of any marsupial folivore. Macrocarpal G is an adduct
of a DFPC and a bicyclogermacrene164 and resulted in a 90% reduction of food intake at 2.1% of dry matter.

4.11.8 Conclusion

The many differently conceived bioassays, and the different ways of expressing results, makes comparison
between compounds difficult. While some SAR have been established among groups of similar compounds,
there is no general understanding of what affects palatability for phytophagous insects. No truly effective
antifeedants for birds or higher animals have yet been found that might stimulate greater activity in this field of
investigation.

References
1. M. B. Isman, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 45–66.
2. E. D. Morgan; I. D. Wilson, Insect Hormones and Insect Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry,
Vol. 8: Miscellaneous Natural Products Including Marine Natural Products, Pheromones, Plant Hormones, and Aspects of
Ecology; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier, 1999; pp 302–375.
3. J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 1997, 64, 149–156.
4. R. D. Enriz; H. A. Baldoni; M. A. Zamora; E. A. Jauregui; M. E. Sosa; C. E. Tonn; J. M. Luco; M. Gordaliza, J. Agric. Food Chem.
2000, 48, 1384–1392.
5. C. R. Unelius; G. Nordlander; H. Nordenhem; C. Hellqvist; S. Legrand; A. K. Borg-Karlson, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2191–2203.
6. J. G. Topliss, J. Med. Chem. 1972, 15, 1006–1011.
7. C. Hansch; T. Fujita, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1964, 86, 1616–1626.
8. E. A. Klein Gebbinck; B. J. M. Jansen; A. de Groot, Phytochemistry (Amsterdam) 2002, 61, 737–770.
9. E. Valencia; E. Barros; E. Valenzuela; A. G. Gonzales; J. Bermejo; C. Gutierrez; A. Gonzales-Coloma, Fitoterapia 1997, 68,
556–558.
10. F. Schlyter; E. Marling; J. Lofqvist, J. Pest Sci. 2004, 77, 191–195.
11. M. Morimoto; M. Urakawa; T. Fujitaka; K. Komai, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1999, 63, 840–846.
12. B. M. Fraga; C. E. Diaz; A. Guadano; A. Gonzalez-Coloma, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 5200–5206.
13. E. M. Zibrowski; T. E. Hoh; C. H. Vanderwolf, Brain Res. 1998, 800, 207–215.
14. C. H. Vanderwolf; E. M. Zibrowski; D. Wakarchuk, Brain Res. 2002, 924, 151–158.
15. B. Gabrys; A. Halarewicz-Pacan; J. Nawrot; A. Pradzynska; M. Aniol; A. Szumny; C. Wawrzenczyk, J. Plant Prot. Res. 2001, 41,
229–239.
16. B. Gabrys; M. Szczepanik; K. Dancewicz; A. Szumny; C. Wawrzenczyk, Pol. J. Environ. Stud. 2006, 15, 549–556.
17. E. H. Koschier; K. A. Sedy; J. Novak, Crop Prot. 2002, 21, 419–425.
18. H. Susurluk; Z. Caliskan; O. Gurkan; S. Kirmizigul; N. Goren, Ind. Crop Prod. 2007, 26, 220–228.
19. M. Morimoto; K. Matsuda; Y. Ohta; T. Ihara; K. Komai, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 4737–4739.
20. K. Nihei; Y. Asaka; Y. Mine; I. Kubo, J. Nat. Prod. 2005, 68, 244–247.
21. F. Schlyter; O. Smitt; K. Sjodin; H. E. Hogberg; J. Lofqvist, J. Appl. Entomol. 2004, 128, 610–619.
22. K. Bratt; K. Sunnerheim; H. Nordenhem; G. Nordlander; B. Langstrom, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2253–2262.
23. S. Kokkini; R. Karousou; T. Lanaras, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1995, 23, 425–430.
24. S. M. Salom; J. A. Carlson; B. N. Ang; D. M. Grosman; E. R. Day, J. Entomol. Sci. 1994, 29, 407–419.
498 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

25. K. D. Klepzig; F. Schlyter, J. Econ. Entomol. 1999, 92, 644–650.

26. J. Meisner; A. Fleischer; C. Eizick, J. Econ. Entomol. 1982, 75, 462–466.
27. C. M. Passreiter; M. B. Isman, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1997, 25, 371–377.
28. C. A. Mullin; C. H. Mason; J.-C. Chou; J. R. Linderman, Phytochemical Antagonism of -Aminobutyric Acid Based Resistances
in Diabrotica.In Molecular Mechanisms of Insecticide Resistance: Diversity among Insects; C. A. Mullin, J. G. Scott, Eds.; ACS
Symposium Series No. 505; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1992; pp 288–308.
29. A. F. Barrero; M. M. Herrador; J. F. Quilez; R. Alvarez-Manzaneda; D. Portal; J. A. Gavin; D. G. Gravalos; M. S. J. Simmonds;
W. M. Blaney, Phytochemistry 1999, 51, 529–541.
30. S. R. Kiran; A. S. Reddy; P. S. Devi; K. J. Reddy, Pest Manag. Sci. 2006, 62, 1116–1121.
31. L. Messchendorp; G. J. Z. Gols; J. J. A. van Loon, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2000, 95, 217–227.
32. C. Gutierrez; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; J. J. Hoffmann, Ind. Crop Prod. 1999, 10, 35–40.
33. X. H. Chen; C. S. Kim; T. Kashiwagi; S. Tebayashi; M. Horiike, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2001, 65, 1434–1437.
34. T. Kashiwagi; B. Wu; K. Iyota; X. H. Chen; S. Tebayashi; C. S. Kim, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 966–970.
35. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; F. Valencia; N. Martin; J. J. Hoffmann; L. Hutter; J. A. Marco; M. Reina, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 117–129.
36. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; R. Cabrera; M. Reina, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997, 45, 946–950.
37. C. A. Mullin; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; M. Reina; H. Eichenseer; B. Hollister; S. Chyb, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23,
1851–1866.
38. C. S. Wisdom; J. T. Smiley; E. Rodriguez, J. Econ. Entomol. 1983, 76, 993–998.
39. P. D. Azambuja; W. S. Bowers; J. M. C. Ribeiro; E. S. Garcia, Experientia 1982, 38, 1054–1055.
40. M. Szczepanik; R. Obara; A. Szumny; B. Gabrys; A. Halarewicz-Pacan; J. Nawrot; C. Wawrzenczyk, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005,
53, 5905–5910.
41. H. Erdtman; Y. Hirose, Acta Chem. Scand. 1962, 16, 1311–1314.
42. L. Maistrello; G. Henderson; R. A. Laine, Pest Manag. Sci. 2003, 59, 58–68.
43. L. Maistrello; G. Henderson; R. A. Laine, J. Econ. Entomol. 2001, 94, 1532–1537.
44. B. C. R. Zhu; G. Henderson; F. Chen; L. Maistrello; R. A. Laine, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 523–531.
45. M. Streibl; J. Nawrot; V. Herout, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1983, 11, 381–382.
46. J. Harmatha; J. Nawrot, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1984, 12, 95–98.
47. J. Nawrot; E. Bloszyk; J. Harmatha; L. Novotny; B. Drozdz, Acta Entomol. Bohemoslov. 1986, 83, 327–335.
48. J. Cis; G. Nowak; W. Kisiel, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2006, 34, 862–867.
49. M. Bruno; S. Rosselli; A. Maggio; R. A. Raccuglia; N. A. Arnold, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2005, 33, 817–825.
50. S. Rosselli; A. M. Maggio; R. A. Raceuglia; M. S. J. Simmonds; N. A. Arnold; M. Bruno, Nat. Prod. Commun. 2006, 1, 281–285.
51. M. L. Li; Q. Wang; G. H. Tang, Acta Agric. Bor. Sin. 1998, 7, 48.
52. M. L. Li; J. Cui; R. H. Qin; J. M. Gao; Y. B. Zhang; X. R. Guo; W. Zhang, Heterocycles 2007, 71, 1155–1162.
53. E. Paruch; Z. Ciunik; J. Nawrot; C. Wawrzenczyk, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 4973–4977.
54. E. Paruch; J. Nawrot; C. Wawrzenczyk, Pest Manag. Sci. 2001, 57, 776–780.
55. S. Lochynski; B. Frackowiak; T. Olejniczak; Z. Ciunik; C. Wawrzenczyk, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2002, 13, 1761–1767.
56. F. Bohlmann; K. H. Knoll; C. Zdero; P. K. Mahanta; M. Grenz; A. Suwita; D. Ehlers; N. L. Van; W. R. Abraham; A. A. Natu,
Phytochemistry 1977, 16, 965–985.
57. M. Reina; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; R. Cabrera; M. L. Rodriguez; V. Fajardo; L. Villarroel, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 6–11.
58. E. Burgueño-Tapia; P. Joseph-Nathan, Magn. Reson. Chem. 2003, 41, 386–390.
59. E. Burgueño-Tapia; M. A. Bucio; A. Rivera; P. Joseph-Nathan, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 518–521.
60. E. Burgueño-Tapia; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; D. Martin-Benito; P. Joseph-Nathan, Z. Naturforsch., C:J. Biosci. 2007, 62, 362–366.
61. E. Burgueño-Tapia; L. R. Hernandez; A. Y. Resendiz-Villalobos; P. Joseph-Nathan, Magn. Reson. Chem. 2004, 42,
887–892.
62. J. Romo; P. Joseph-Nathan, Tetrahedron 1964, 20, 2331–2337.
63. M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney; B. Esquivel; L. Rodriguez-Hahn, Pestic. Sci. 1996, 47, 17–23.
64. S. Rosselli; A. Maggio; F. Piozzi; M. S. J. Simmonds; M. Bruno, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 7867–7871.
65. M. Bruno; F. Piozzi; A. M. Maggio; M. S. J. Simmonds, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2002, 30, 793–799.
66. M. Bruno; N. Vassallo; M. S. J. Simmonds, Phytochemistry 1999, 50, 973–976.
67. X. Belles; F. Camps; J. Coll; M. D. Piulachs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1985, 11, 1439–1445.
68. P. D. Bremner; M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney; N. C. Veitch, Phytochemistry 1998, 47, 1227–1232.
69. H. Ben Jannet; F. H-Skhiri; Z. Mighri; M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney, Fitoterapia 2000, 71, 105–112.
70. M. L. Bondi; M. R. Y. Al-Hillo; K. Lamara; S. Ladjel; M. Bruno; F. Piozzi; M. S. J. Simmonds, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2000, 28,
1023–1025.
71. J. Coll; Y. A. Tandron, Nat. Prod. Commun. 2006, 1, 183–189.
72. F. Piozzi; M. Bruno; S. Rosselli, Heterocycles 1998, 48, 2185–2203.
73. C. Caballero; P. Castanera; F. Ortego; G. Fontana; P. Pierro; G. Savona; B. Rodriguez, Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 249–256.
74. G. N. K. Kumari; S. Aravind; J. Balachandran; M. R. Ganesh; S. S. Devi; S. S. Rajan; R. Malathi; K. Ravikumar, Phytochemistry
2003, 64, 1119–1123.
75. J. Lopez-Olguin; M. C. de la Torre; F. Ortego; P. Castanera; B. Rodriguez, Phytochemistry 1999, 50, 749–753.
76. M. Bruno; F. Piozzi; A. M. Maggio; S. Rosselli; M. S. J. Simmonds; O. Servettaz, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2002, 30, 595–599.
77. M. Bruno; A. M. Maggio; F. Piozzi; S. Puech; S. Rosselli; M. S. J. Simmonds, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2003, 31, 1051–1056.
78. D. M. Munoz; M. C. de laTorre; B. Rodriguez; M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney, Phytochemistry 1997, 44, 593–597.
79. B. Rodriguez; B. Rodriguez; M. C. de la Torre; M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney, J. Nat. Prod. 1999, 62, 594–600.
80. M. Bruno; F. Piozzi; S. Rosselli, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2002, 19, 357–378.
81. G. N. K. Kumari; J. Balachandran; S. Aravind; M. R. Ganesh, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 1555–1559.
82. T. R. Govindachari; G. Suresh; G. Gopalakrishan; S. D. Wesley; N. D. P. Singh, Fitoterapia 1999, 70, 269–274.
83. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; J. M. M. del Corral; M. Gordaliza; M. L. de la Puente; A. San Feliciano, J. Agric. Food Chem.
2000, 48, 3677–3681.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 499

84. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; H. Hubner; H. Achenbach; D. Terrero; B. M. Fraga, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47,
4419–4424.
85. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; D. Terrero; A. Perales; P. Escoubas; B. M. Fraga, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1996, 44, 296–300.
86. B. M. Fraga; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; C. Gutierrez; D. Terrero, J. Nat. Prod. 1997, 60, 880–883.
87. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; A. Guadano; C. Gutierrez; R. Cabrera; E. de la Pena; G. de la Fuente; M. Reina, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1998,
46, 286–290.
88. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; M. Reina; A. Medinaveitia; A. Guadano; O. Santana; R. Martinez-Diaz; L. Ruiz-Mesia; A. Alva; M. Grandez;
R. Diaz; J. A. Gavin; G. de la Fuente, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 1393–1408.
89. A. Gonzalez-Coloma; M. Reina; A. Guadano; R. Martinez-Diaz; J. G. Diaz; J. Garcia-Rodriguez; A. Alva; M. Grandez, Chem.
Biodivers. 2004, 1, 1327–1335.
90. A. L. Anaya; R. Mata; J. J. Sims; A. Gonzalez-Coloma; R. Cruz-Ortega; A. Guadano; B. E. Hernandez-Bautista; S. L. Midland;
G. Rios; A. Gomez-Pompa, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 2761–2776.
91. C. Chandramu; R. D. Manohar; D. G. L. Krupadanam; R. V. Dashavantha, Phytother. Res. 2003, 17, 129–134.
92. C. R. Pungitore; M. Garcia; J. C. Gianello; M. E. Sosa; C. E. Tonn, J. Stored Prod. Res. 2005, 41, 433–443.
93. S. Omar; M. Marcotte; P. Fields; P. E. Sanchez; L. Poveda; R. Mata; A. Jimenez; T. Durst; J. Zhang; S. MacKinnon; D. Leaman;
J. T. Arnason; B. J. R. Philogene, J. Stored Prod. Res. 2007, 43, 92–96.
94. S. MacKinnon, Bioactive Triterpenoids of the Rutales. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ottawa, ON, 1995.
95. V. P. Maier; S. Hasegawa; R. D. Bennet; L. C. Echols, Limonin and Limonoids – Chemistry, Biochemistry and Juice Bitterness. In
Citrus Nutrition and Quality; S. Nagy, J. A. Attaway, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series No. 143; American Chemical Society:
Washington, DC, 1980; pp 63–82.
96. G. M. Veitch; E. Beckman; B. J. Burke; A. Boyer; S. L. Malsen; S. V. Ley, Angew. Chem. 2007, 119, 1–5.
97. O. Koul; J. S. Multani; G. Singh; W. M. Daniewski; S. Berlozecki, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 2937–2942.
98. O. Koul; J. S. Multani; S. Goomber; W. M. Daniewski; S. Berlozecki, Aust. J. Entomol. 2004, 43, 189–195.
99. A. Fernandez-Mateos; A. I. R. Silvo; R. R. Gonzalez; A. S. J. Simmonds, Tetrahedron 2006, 62, 7809–7816.
100. J. A. De La Fuente; J. J. Marugan; S. S. Cross; A. F. Mateos; S. Garcia; A. Menendez, Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 1995, 5,
1471–1474.
101. A. Fernandez-Mateos; G. P. Coca; J. J. P. Alonso; R. R. Gonzalez; M. S. J. Simmonds; W. M. Blaney, Tetrahedron 1998, 54,
14989–14998.
102. J. B. Zhou; Y. Minami; F. Yagi; K. Tadera; M. Nakatani, Phytochemistry 1997, 46, 911–914.
103. J. B. Zhou; K. Tadera; Y. Minami; F. Yagi; J. Kurawaki; K. Takezaki; M. Nakatani, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1998, 62,
496–500.
104. M. Nakatani; J. B. Zhou; K. Tadera; H. Naoki, Chem. Lett. 1998, 1279–1280.
105. K. I. Nihei; F. J. Hanke; Y. Asaka; T. Matsumoto; I. Kubo, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 5048–5052.
106. K. I. Nihei; Y. Asaka; Y. Mine; C. Ito; H. Furukawa; J. I. Motoharu; I. Kubo, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 3325–3328.
107. K. Nihei; Y. Asaka; Y. Mine; Y. Yamada; M. Iigo; T. Yanagisawa; I. Kubo, J. Nat. Prod. 2006, 69, 975–977.
108. O. Koul; W. M. Daniewski; J. S. Multani; M. Gumulka; G. Singh, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 7271–7275.
109. O. Koul; G. Singh; R. Singh; J. Singh; W. M. Daniewski; S. Berlozecki, J. Biosci. 2004, 29, 409–416.
110. M. C. Carpinella; M. T. Defago; G. Valladares; S. M. Palacios, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 369–374.
111. C. Carpinella; C. Ferrayoli; G. Valladares; M. Defago; S. Palacios, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2002, 66, 1731–1736.
112. M. S. J. Simmonds; P. C. Stevenson; E. A. Porter; N. C. Veitch, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 1117–1120.
113. T. S. Wu; Y. L. Leu; Y. Y. Chan; P. L. Wu; C. S. Kuoh; S. J. Wu; Y. Wang, Phytochemistry 1997, 45, 1393–1398.
114. M. Nakatani; S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; H. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; A. Sato; M. Doe, Tetrahedron Lett. 2000, 41, 6473–6477.
115. S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; H. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; A. Sato; I. Miyahara; M. Doe; M. Nakatani, Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 119–126.
116. M. Nakatani; S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; S. M. I. Kassem; K. Takezaki; H. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; M. Doe, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65,
1219–1221.
117. S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; M. Nakatani, J. Appl. Entomol. – Z. Angew. Entomol. 2003, 127, 236–239.
118. S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; H. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; M. Doe; M. Nakatani, Heterocycles 2000, 53, 2233–2240.
119. M. Nakatani; S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; K. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; M. Doe, Chem. Lett. 2000, 876–877.
120. M. Nakatani; S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; J. Kurawaki; H. Okamura; T. Iwagawa; M. Doe, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 1261–1265.
121. N. C. Veitch; G. A. Wright; P. C. Stevenson, J. Nat. Prod. 1999, 62, 1260–1263.
122. M. Nakatani; S. A. M. Abdelgaleil; M. M. G. Saad; R. C. Huang; M. Doe; T. Iwagawa, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 2833–2841.
123. M. M. G. Saad; T. Iwagawa; M. Doe; M. Nakatani, Tetrahedron 2003, 59, 8027–8033.
124. J. Wu; Q. Xiao; S. Zhang; X. Li; Z. H. Xiao; H. X. Ding; Q. X. Li, Tetrahedron 2005, 61, 8382–8389.
125. Y. Zhou; F. Cheng; J. Wu; K. Zou, J. Nat. Prod. 2006, 69, 1083–1085.
126. B. Rodriguez; C. Caballero; F. Ortego; P. Castanera, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 452–454.
127. J. J. Hoffmann; S. D. Jolad; L. K. Hutter; S. P. McLaughlin; S. D. Savage; S. D. Cunningham; J. L. Genet; G. R. Ramsey, J. Agric.
Food Chem. 1992, 40, 1056–1057.
128. T. R. Govindachari; G. N. K. Kumari; G. Gopalakrishnan; G. Suresh; S. D. Wesley; T. Sreelatha, Fitoterapia 2001, 72, 568–571.
129. H. Yasui, Jarq – Jpn. Agric. Res. Q. 2002, 36, 25–30.
130. H. Yasui; A. Kato; M. Yazawa, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 803–813.
131. A. J. Herlt; L. N. Mander; E. Pongoh; R. J. Rumampuk; P. Tarigan, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65, 115–120.
132. E. A. Gerson; R. G. Kelsey, J. Econ. Entomol. 2002, 95, 608–613.
133. C. Eriksson; K. Sjodin; F. Schlyter; H. E. Högberg, Tetrahedron: Asymmetry 2006, 17, 1074–1080.
134. D. B. Smith; J. G. Roddick; J. L. Jones, Phytochemistry 2001, 57, 229–234.
135. C. Pandji; C. Grimm; V. Wray; L. Witte; P. Proksch, Phytochemistry 1993, 34, 415–419.
136. G. R. Mallavarapu; R. N. Kulkarni; K. Baskaran; L. M. Rao; S. Ramesh, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 254–258.
137. J. Harmatha; J. Nawrot, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 104, 51–60.
138. A. K. Borg-Karlson; R. Nordlander; A. Mudalige; H. Nordenhem; C. R. Unelius, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 943–957.
139. L. A. Hummelbrunner; M. B. Isman, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2001, 49, 715–720.
500 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants

140. A. Sarac; I. Tunc, Z. PflKrankh. PflSchutz. 1995, 102, 69–74.

141. S. H. Ho; Y. Ma; Y. Huang, Int. Pest Control 1997, 39, 50–51.
142. M. A. Kelm; M. G. Nair; R. A. Schutzki, Int. J. Pharmacog. 1997, 35, 84–90.
143. X. H. Chen; C. S. Kim; T. Kashiwagi; S. Tebayashi; M. Horiike, Z. Naturforsch. C: J. Biosci. 2001, 56, 249–252.
144. P. C. Stevenson; M. S. J. Simmonds; M. A. Yule; N. C. Veitch; G. C. Kite; D. Irwin; M. Legg, Phytochemistry 2003, 63, 41–46.
145. Y. Akhtar; M. B. Isman, J. Appl. Entomol. 2004, 128, 32–38.
146. M. P. Calcagno; J. Coll; J. Lloria; F. Faini; M. E. Alonso-Amelot, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 175–191.
147. M. Morimoto; Y. Fujii; K. Komai, Phytochemistry 1999, 51, 605–608.
148. M. Morimoto; K. Tanimoto; S. Nakano; T. Ozaki; A. Nakano; K. Komai, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 389–393.
149. M. Morimoto; H. Fukumoto; T. Nozoe; A. Hagiwara; K. Komai, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 700–705.
150. M. Morimoto; K. Tanimoto; A. Sakatani; K. Komai, Phytochemistry 2002, 60, 163–166.
151. M. Morimoto; H. Fukumoto; M. Hiratani; W. Chavasiri; K. Komai, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 1864–1868.
152. W. Ohmura; S. Doi; M. Aoyama; S. Ohara, J. Wood Sci. 2000, 46, 149–153.
153. M. Morimoto; S. Kumeda; K. Komai, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2000, 48, 1888–1891.
154. M. Jimenez-Estrada; R. Reyes-Chilpa; S. Hernandez-Ortega; E. Cristobal-Telesforo; L. Torres-Colin; C. K. Jankowski;
A. Aumelas; M. R. Van Calsteren, Can. J. Chem. 2000, 78, 248–254.
155. S. H. Qi; D. G. Wu; L. Chen; Y. B. Ma; X. D. Luo, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 6949–6952.
156. X. P. Huang; J. A. A. Renwick, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1039–1051.
157. P. E. Mansson; C. Eriksson; K. Sjodin, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 989–1001.
158. P. E. Mansson; F. Schlyter; C. Eriksson; K. Sjodin, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2006, 121, 191–201.
159. K. Tran; K. R. Chauhan, Biopestic. Int. 2007, 3, 53–57.
160. P. C. Stevenson; N. C. Veitch; M. S. J. Simmonds, Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 1579–1586.
161. I. R. Lawler; J. Stapley; W. J. Foley; B. M. Eschler, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 401–415.
162. I. R. Lawler; B. M. Eschler; D. M. Schliebs; W. J. Foley, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 2561–2573.
163. I. R. Lawler; W. J. Foley; B. M. Eschler, Ecology 2000, 81, 1327–1338.
164. D. M. Pass; W. J. Foley; B. Bowden, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1513–1527.

Biographical Sketches

Dr. Falko P. Drijfhout (1971) studied organic and analytical chemistry at Wageningen
University (1991–1996), and obtained his Ph.D. degree in analytical chemistry and chemical
ecology in 2001 with Professor Ae de Groot and Dr. T.A. van Beek, also at Wageningen
University. After his successful Ph.D. on the identification of pheromones, he held a post-
doctoral appointment for 2 years at Cornell University in the United States working on the
identification of chemical cues used by Varroa mites in honeybee colonies. He has more than
10 years experience in the analysis of semiochemicals in insects, using a wide variety of
instruments in analytical chemistry. His key interest is in understanding cuticular hydro-
carbon recognition systems within social insects, from the analysis and synthesis of the
compounds themselves through to their perception and effect on behavior. In 2005 he was
appointed lecturer in the School of Physical and Geographical Sciences at Keele University,
and since 2006 he heads the Chemical Ecology group in Keele where he is responsible for the
chemical analysis, identification and synthesis of insect compounds. In 2006 he was awarded
the JWT Jones Fellowship from the Royal Society of Chemistry to continue his research in
semiochemicals in honeybee colonies at Cornell University, during the summer of 2006.
 Terrestrial Natural Products as Antifeedants 501

David Morgan is a member of the Chemical Ecology Group at Keele University. He was
born in Newfoundland and had his university education there, at Dalhousie University and
University of King’s College in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and at Oxford. His doctorate thesis was
on the lipids of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. He later worked at the National Institute for
Medical Research in London, and for Shell Chemical Company and Shell Research under
the direction of Sir Robert Robinson, O.M., Nobel Laureate. From 1966 he has been at Keele
in Staffordshire as lecturer, senior lecturer, reader, and professor. He discovered the natural
pesticide azadirachtin and collaborated with S. V. Ley for its final structure elucidation. He is
the author of over 300 papers and reviews, mostly on insect chemistry, editor, and con-
tributor to several volumes and author of the book ‘Biosynthesis in Insects.’
 4.12 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants
Mary J. Garson, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.12.1 Introduction 503

4.12.1.1 Experimental Methodology 504
4.12.2 Microorganisms 505
4.12.2.1 Cyanobacteria 505
4.12.3 Algae 507
4.12.3.1 Terpenes 507
4.12.3.2 Other Acetate-Derived Metabolites 509
4.12.3.3 Other Algal Metabolites 510
4.12.4 Sponges 510
4.12.4.1 Alkaloids 511
4.12.4.2 Terpenes 515
4.12.4.3 Other Sponge Metabolites 517
4.12.5 Coelenterates 517
4.12.5.1 Soft Corals 517
4.12.5.2 Gorgonians 519
4.12.5.3 Hydroids 519
4.12.6 Ascidians 521
4.12.7 Bryozoans 523
4.12.8 Mollusks 524
4.12.8.1 Sea Hares 524
4.12.8.2 Sacoglossans 525
4.12.8.3 Nudibranchs 527
4.12.8.4 Other Mollusks 531
4.12.9 Other Marine Organisms 532
4.12.9.1 Worms 532
4.12.10 Conclusions 533
References 533

4.12.1 Introduction

The structural diversity and stereochemistry of secondary metabolites isolated from marine sources, together
with issues of biosynthesis and ecology, has commanded the attention of the natural products community for
close to 50 years. A good body of information has accumulated that marine organisms, particularly when soft-
bodied and not well physically defended, may accumulate these metabolites to protect themselves from
predation in the competitive environment underwater. The topic of antifeedants was summarized by
Kobayashi and Ishibashi1 in the earlier series of Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry in a chapter on marine
chemical ecology. This chapter updates the chemical strategies used by marine plants and animals to prevent
predation by other species, and is based on published literature from 1999 onwards. The examples selected are
representative of ecological interactions for which the chemical basis has been well defined; for this reason,
reports that survey the feeding deterrency of crude extracts alone are not considered unless the data illustrate
major ecological trends. Some well-understood examples of predator–prey interactions from the pre-1999
literature that were not described by Kobayashi and Ishibashi are also included.
The biosynthetic origin of marine natural products is a complex topic that has gained more clarity through
application of molecular biological study; microbial symbionts may represent the true source in many sponges,
ascidians, and bryozoans, even in cases in which localization studies have suggested an invertebrate source for

503
504 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

the compound. There are many documented examples where marine metabolites have accumulated in
mollusks through predation or through complex food webs. In this review, individual topics that cross
phylogenetic boundaries are cross-referenced to other sections.
Some of the metabolites described in this chapter have undergone structural or stereochemical revision since
the ecological study was published. The chemical structures used have been derived from a recent compendium
of marine natural product structures,2 and so in some cases differ from the structures provided in the original
article. The ongoing review series on ‘Marine Natural Products’ in Natural Product Reports should be consulted for
definitive coverage of marine natural products; there were 18 reviews written between 1984 and 2002 by the late
D. John Faulkner3 and more recent coverage from 2003 onwards is provided by Blunt et al.4 A number of major
reviews on marine chemical ecology have appeared that discuss the topic of marine antifeedants.5–9

4.12.1.1 Experimental Methodology

Field observations underwater give rapid qualitative insights into predator–prey interactions. For quantitative
work, crude extracts or purified metabolites are incorporated into suitable food at ecologically sound concen-
trations and provided to the test consumer in either field or laboratory (aquarium) assays. Measuring the
concentrations of selected metabolites by HPLC is a convenient quantification method, and should be carried
out prior to ecological study.10 The choice of concentration is important since studies have revealed that
deterrency can vary with concentration.11 Where possible, assays should be conducted at volumetric concen-
trations rather than gravimetric concentrations since the assay food then more closely models natural
tissue.12–14 Deterrency outcomes can differ depending on whether the assays are conducted on a tissue mass
or tissue volume basis.14 Compounds should be freshly isolated since chemical changes during isolation or
storage may affect deterrency properties.15–19 Sample decomposition during artificial food preparation has also
been reported.20
Metabolites may be incorporated into agar, alginate, or carrageenan blocks or strips that contain additives for
nutritional and palatability requirements. The artificial food must have a similar nutritional value and color to
the natural food; higher quality foods may be preferred even if an antifeedant is present, while some consumers,
particularly fish, may use visual cues to determine food choices.21
Flavoring agents for algal work are often freeze-dried ground seaweeds. Ulva spp. are commonly used since
this seaweed is known to lack chemical or structural defenses that might interfere with the assay. The seaweed
is soaked in a diethyl ether solution containing the compound at the selected concentration, and solvents then
removed in vacuo. Control foods contain seaweed soaked in solvent alone. Food strips are prepared by adding
control or treated seaweed to hot agar, and pouring the mixture onto a plastic screen mesh. After cooling, the
mesh can be cut into pieces. The amount of food eaten is assessed by counting the number of mesh squares that
have been cleared of food.11,22,23 An alternative protocol involves pouring food mixture into cube-shaped
molds, then attaching the food cubes onto ropes for underwater studies.24
For assays that involve carnivorous consumers, freeze-dried brine shrimp, squid, tuna, urchin roe, and krill
are typical flavoring and nutritional additives while agar, carrageenan, or calcium alginate have all been used as
support matrix. Strips are prepared by heating, for example, carrageenan with deionized water and brine
shrimp, adding the chemical of interest dissolved in an appropriate solvent, and then pouring the mixture into a
plastic mold containing lengths of cotton string. After cooling, the strips are cut to size with a scalpel, and
attached to ropes for deployment in the field or in large aquaria.10,12 In assays involving consumers such as sea
hares that require high levels of protein in their diet, catfish food can be incorporated into the cubes to provide
sufficient protein.11,25 The significance, if any, of a physical defense can be assessed by incorporating spicules or
sclerites into the food cubes or strips; these are obtained prior to the ecological study by soaking sponge or
coelenterate tissue in bleach followed by thorough rinsing.12,26
Assays may be of short-term exposure, usually a few hours duration, or involve extended or repeated
exposure to the compound of interest that assesses learning/avoidance behavior in consumers. Assays con-
ducted underwater should be monitored by observers or by video recording;27 it can be valuable to record the
fish species involved in feeding experiments with natural populations of reef fish.
In some palatability (choice) assays, fish are first trained to consume food particles; in the assay, pieces of
dried brine shrimp or food pellets coated with extract are offered alternately to controls and fish behavior
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 505

(consumption, regurgitation, avoidance) is then monitored.12,28,29 A convenient method of making pellets

involves loading an alginic acid mixture containing the metabolite into a syringe, then extruding it into a
0.25 mol l1 solution of CaCl2 to harden into ‘spaghetti’ strands, which can be cut to the desired length.13,29 A
review article provides complete detail of feeding deterrency assay methods.22

4.12.2 Microorganisms

The antifeedant roles of marine microbial products have not been extensively explored. The best documented
cases involve cyanobacterial metabolites.
Phytoplanktonic microalgae, which are important sources of food in both oceans and fresh water habitats,
use an activated form of chemical defense to reduce grazing by predators. Damaged microalgal cells convert
unsaturated fatty acids into unsaturated aldehydes which affect reproductive outcomes in herbivorous cope-
pods and other planktonic grazers.30 Representative products of these biotransformations include the C10
aldehydes 1 and 2 in the diatom Thalassiosira rotula, and C8 diene hydrocarbons and the trienoic acid aldehyde 3
in Asterionella formosa.31

4.12.2.1 Cyanobacteria
Cyanobacterial blooms pose a public health risk and may have adverse effects on marine life (fish, turtles) that
accidentally consumes them. The production of toxins or of antifeedant compounds, particularly in cyano-
bacterial strains that are slow growing can lead to rapid bloom production in areas of high herbivory, for
example on tropical coral reefs.8
The cyanobacterial strain Lyngbya majuscula is a rich source of bioactive compounds that are often nitrogen
functionalized. The presence of toxic compounds in L. majuscula combined with low palatability deters predation,
however sea hares, notably Stylocheilus spp., are specialized feeders that sequester deterrent compounds from
Lyngbya spp. although it is not clear whether this provides them an ecological advantage (see Section 4.12.8.1).
The cyanobacterial metabolites malyngamides A 4 and B 5, majusculamides A 6 and B 7, and malyngolide 8
all deter feeding by reef fishes.32–34 Malyngamide A, malyngamide B, a mixture of majusculamides A and B all
deter feeding by the pufferfish Canthigaster solandri and by the crab Leptodius spp. Although there were no
significant differences in palatability of the cyanobacterial metabolites, malyngamide A was found to be more
toxic than malyngamide B in assays using sea urchin embryos or brine shrimp nauplii, while the majusculamide
mixture was less toxic than either malyngamide metabolite.33 In Guam, the sea hare Stylocheilus longicauda is
frequently found feeding on mats of L. majuscula that contain the majusculamides and malyngamides. When 13
different cyanobacterial metabolites were tested in feeding assays using an artificial diet, it was found that
microcolin B 9 at 0.022%, ypaoamide 10 at 0.5%, and malyngolide 8 at 0.4% all deterred feeding by
S. longicauda; these are close to natural concentrations. In contrast, the metabolites curacin A 11 and debro-
moaplysiatoxin 12 did not show significant feeding deterrency, while barbamide 13 stimulated sea hare feeding
at the very low concentration of 0.007%. The malyngamides and majusculamides were attractants at low
concentrations (0.5%) but deterred feeding at 4.0%, a concentration that may be above natural. The concen-
trations of the malyngamide and majusculamide metabolites in L. majuscula are highly variable, generally
ranging up to 2% of the dry extracted mass. The feeding preferences of the sea hare S. longicauda may be
concentration- and cue-dependent.11 In aquarium assays, when tested at the natural concentration of 0.7%,
ypaoamide 10 was deterrent to juvenile rabbitfish (Siganus spinus and S. argenteus), and to the parrotfish Scarus
schlegeli and the sea urchin Echinometra mathaei.35
Crude extracts were prepared from an Australian strain of L. majuscula containing lyngbyatoxin A 14 and
debromoaplysiatoxin 12 and used in laboratory assays in Guam to assess their palatability. The extracts were
deterrent to a range of generalist predators (amphipods, sea urchins, crabs) and to natural populations of reef fish
that would not have been previously exposed to these compounds since 12 and 14 are not detected in Guam
samples. Extracts stimulated feeding by Stylocheilus striatus.19 The cyclic peptide pitipeptolide A 15 isolated from
a specific strain of L. majuscula deterred feeding in the sea urchin E. mathaei, in an algal-dwelling crab, and in two
species of amphipods. However, the sea hare S. striatus consumed artificial food containing the peptide.23
 2 Me O
R1 R
R O O N NH2
N
HO2C O O Me O
1 R = C4H9 OMe
2 R = C4H7 3 6 R1 = Me; R2 = H
7 R1 = H; R2 = Me
O N O
OMe O OMe
O Me OH
N O
Me OMe Me
4 Cl
OH
8
O
OMe O
O N
OMe O N
O N
H
N O
Me OMe 10
5 Cl
HO
Me Me
Me
O O Me
H
N N O O OH
N N OH
N
Me O Me O O O O
OAc O
O Me Me
9 O
Me OH OH
12

S
H H
OMe N Me N O Me
N OH
O N
11 H H O
O
Me Me N O O O O O
H MeO
H 14 HN
N N
CCl3 NH
O H
O
N S H
13 15
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 507

4.12.3 Algae

Marine algae contain a structural diversity of metabolites and may play a variety of ecological roles, including
as feeding deterrents against fish, sea urchins, mollusks, sea stars and crabs, and as antifouling agents. The high
energetic cost of producing and maintaining novel biosynthetic capability, plus the need to compartmentalize
the bioactive products, is compensated for by a defensive benefit to the host plant. Algal chemical defenses are
often localized in key plant parts such as reproductive or actively growing tissue. The topic of algal chemical
defenses has often been reviewed.5,6,36
In some seaweeds, levels of an existing deterrent molecule increase in response to an environmental cue or
external stress; this is described as an ‘induced’ defense. A number of seaweeds use ‘activated’ chemical defenses,
in which damage to the seaweed leads to rapid production of a more deterrent compound from a precursor
molecule. A general introduction to activated chemical defense in seaweeds has been provided by Cetrulo and
Hay.18 They screened chemical extracts from algae collected from tropical and temperate waters for their
deterrency against sea urchin and fish predators. Assay results were compared with data from algae whose
tissues were ground prior to extraction. Of the 42 species tested, 7 species became less palatable on injury while
4 species became more palatable. Algae from both tropical and temperate regions showed activated chemical
defenses; no taxonomic pattern was apparent since examples of both green algae (family Halimedaceae) and
brown algae (Dictyotaceae) were deterrent, yet other species from these families were not deterrent. The rapid
change in chemistry that can occur on cutting or crushing seaweeds has many implications, not least in
quantitative studies of metabolite composition.
Tropical seaweeds are often well defended owing to high levels of predation by fishes on tropical reefs;18,37
however, coldwater seaweeds also use chemical protection, mainly against sea urchins and crabs. A number of
macroalgae from the Antarctic subcontinent possess chemical extracts that are deterrent to sea stars,38,39
amphipods,39,40 or fish,39 while Arctic algae have been screened for deterrency toward sea urchins and
amphipods.41 Chemical defenses have also been detected in seagrasses, notably in the Mediterranean
Posidonia oceanica whose extracts deter feeding by sea urchins and fish.42
As discussed in Section 4.12.8.1, sea hares are specialist feeders that have adapted to eat a range of
macroalgae; their feeding behavior is often not influenced by the specific composition or concentration of
metabolites.43,44
The following sections describe a selection of algal metabolites whose antifeedant effects have been
investigated in some detail.

4.12.3.1 Terpenes
A survey of algae that are deterrent has identified chemical defenses based on terpenoid compounds.37 Halimeda
spp. are calcified green algae, commonly found on coral reefs, which produce diterpenoids that function as
effective feeding deterrents against natural populations of reef fish.36,45 Halimedatetraacetate 16, whose enol
acetate groups are masked aldehyde groups, is enzymatically converted into the trialdehyde halimedatrial 17
on plant damage. Halimedatrial is present in newly produced uncalcified tissue while the less deterrent
halimedatetraacetate is present in older, more calcified tissue. The precursor 16 and the esterase enzymes
involved may be separately compartmentalized in intact tissue in order to prevent self-toxicity.46 There is
evidence that the alga adjusts its metabolite composition in response to levels of herbivory in different
habitats.47 The 1,4-diacetoxybutadiene unit is found in the diterpene chlorodesmin 18, which is an effective
feeding deterrent in Chlorodesmis spp.,37,48 and in udoteal 19 that may be transformed into petiodial 20 in Udotea
flabellum.45
The sesquiterpene caulerpenyne 21 from Caulerpa spp., which also contains enol acetate functionality, is
ineffective as a deterrent against fish despite being concentrated in plant parts prone to herbivory,49,50 but is
effective against the gastropod mollusk Dolabella auricularia51 and the sea urchin Echinometra lucunter.50 When
Caulerpa tissue is damaged, rapid conversion of caulerpenyne into the unstable dialdehyde oxytoxin-2 22 occurs
through the action of esterases.52,53 Both 22 and the related oxytoxin-1 23 have also been isolated from
mollusks, in which their chemical defense role has been further evaluated (see Section 4.12.8.2). In Caulerpa
508 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

spp., dialdehyde 22 crosslinks with the nucleophilic groups of proteins to form a polymeric plug that seals
wounded tissue. Externally added nucleophiles compete with the algal proteins for 22 and suppress polymer
formation.54
The calcified green alga Neomeris annulata manufactures a range of brominated sesquiterpenes 24–26, which
are concentrated in the fleshy tips of this algae,55 and which are individually deterrent to parrotfishes and the
sea urchin, although a mixture of the three metabolites does not increase deterrency.56
These various examples all demonstrate that green algae use both chemical and physical defenses against
predators.24,51,55

R CHO CHO CHO

AcO
CHO
H
16 R = OAc 17
19 R = H R
OAc

OAc
CHO CHO

AcO
H OAc
O
AcO AcO
18 20

AcO O AcO

OAc OAc
OAc 22 O O
21 23

Br
Me Me Me
Br

Br
OH OH HO H
Me Me Me
24 25 26

In brown algae, variable patterns of deterrency against herbivores are apparent even for closely related
diterpenoid metabolites such as the metabolites pachydictyol-A 27, and dictyol B acetate 28 from Dictyota
ciliolata57 and dictyol-E 29 from D. menstrualis.58,59 The terpenes acutilol A 30, acutilol A acetate 31, and acutilol
B 32 from Dictyota acutiloba showed contrasting effects in feeding studies using tropical and temperate fishes or
sea urchins.60 Small sedentary grazers such as amphipods often select chemically defended seaweeds as host
plants to avoid predation by reef fishes. In the brown algae D. menstrualis, grazing by amphipods induces
increased concentrations of dictyol metabolites and makes the seaweed less susceptible to attack by other
predators.59
Recent examples of novel terpenes whose isolation was bioassay guided include the diterpenes dictyol H 33
and epoxypachydictyol A 34 from different collections of the Brazilian Dictyota mertensii, the meroterpenoid
atomaric acid 35 from Stypopodium zonale. All these compounds deterred feeding by the crab Pachygrapsus
transversus.61,62 The major diterpene 36 from Dictyota pfaffii deters the sea urchin Lytechinus variegatus and reef
fishes, but not P. transversus.63 The two hydroxylated dictyodial metabolites 37 and 38 from D. menstrualis were
identified following bioassay-guided fractionation using the amphipod Amphithoe longimana.64 Menzoquinone 39
from the Antarctic brown alga Desmarestia menziesii deters feeding by sea stars.38
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 509

H R2

O
O
H H H
OH H OR H OH H
R1
27 R1 = R2 = H 30 R = H 32
28 R1 = H; R2 = OAc 31 R = Ac
29 R1 = OH; R2 = H

H OH
H
H
O OMe
H H
H O O
OH H
H
OH H
HO
OAc
33 34 35
O
O R
H
OH
AcO H
H
O HO
AcO OH
H O
37 R = CHO
36 39
38 R = CH2OAc

Br Br
Cl O
HO Br Cl
Cl Br
Br Cl Br Br Cl Br

40 41 42 43

Elatol 40 isolated from several species of the red algal genus Laurencia deters feeding by reef fish, the crab
P. transversus, and the sea urchin L. variegatus.65 In red alga such as Ochtodes secundiramea and Desmia hornemanni,
halogenated monoterpenes including ochtodene 41 act as effective feeding deterrents against various fishes,
and against natural populations of herbivorous fish, however the structurally related chondrocole C 42 is not
deterrent against reef fish. The individual terpenes 41 and 42 are not effective deterrents of amphipod feeding,
whereas an unresolved monoterpene mixture from this alga is deterrent.37,66 Halogenated terpenes, including
anverene 43, from Plocamium cartilagineum collected in Antarctica deter feeding by sea stars or amphipods.38

4.12.3.2 Other Acetate-Derived Metabolites

The temperate red alga Delisea pulchra produces a number of halogenated furanones known as the fimbrolides
44–47 that collectively defend it from a range of predators including sea urchins, gastropods, some amphipods,67
and sea stars.38 Metabolite 44 is a pronounced fish feeding deterrent at natural concentrations,68 but does not deter
feeding by the amphipod Ampithoe ngana,67 while 45 has no deterrent effect when tested above natural
concentration.68 Although there is little variation in secondary metabolite levels in different plants of this algae,
there can be large variations in individual metabolite levels; metabolites are also concentrated in the plant tips.68
510 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

R1
R O
Br

R2 O
O O
Br 48 R = (CH2)3CH3 49 50

44 R1 = OAc; R2 = H
45 R1 = OH; R2 = H
46 R1 = H; R2 = Br
HO NH2
47 R1 = R2 = H Me
S
R H Me CO2H
HO 55
H 54
S S
CH3(CH2)3 R
52 R =
56 R = CHO
51 53 R = HO 57 R = OMe
O

In many brown algae, long-chain fatty acids are converted into C8 or C11 acyclic or cyclic hydrocarbons
which act as pheromones in sexual reproduction; some of these hydrocarbons, and their decomposition
products, also provide some protection from predation. Dictyotene 48 and its oxidative degradation products
49 and 50 deter feeding by the amphipod A. longimana, but not by the sea urchin Arbacia punctulata.69 The sulfur-
functionalized C11 compound 51 of Dictyopteris membranacea strongly deters feeding by the mesograzer
A. longimana, but does not affect grazing by the sea urchin A. punctulata.70 A 1:2 ratio of the hydrocarbons
dictyopterene A 52 and -B 53 from Dictyopteris delicatula has been shown to deter grazing by reef fishes but has
no effect on grazing by amphipods.71

4.12.3.3 Other Algal Metabolites

Activated chemical defenses based on dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP) 54 are widely distributed among
many species of green, brown, and red algae. However feeding deterrency trials have given inconsistent results;
neither DMSP nor the two conversion products dimethyl sulfide and acrylic acid deter feeding by the sea
urchin E. lucunter,50 although artificial foods containing dimethyl sulfide or acrylic acid are avoided by the sea
urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis.72 DMS, acrylic acid and triethylamine are not deterrent to the amphipod
A. longimana when tested individually, yet in combination are deterrent at natural concentrations.73
The Northeastern Pacific green algae Ulvaria obscura uses dopamine 55 as a feeding deterrent.74 Two simple
aromatic compounds p-hydroxybenzaldehyde 56 and p-methoxyphenol 57 from the red algae Myriogramme
smithii deter feeding by the sea stars Perknaster fuscus and Odontaster validus.38
Brown algae are rich in phlorotannin components that play an important role as a structural support and as
photoprotective agents. A range of herbivore responses to phlorotannins has been described,75 most recently in
Fucus vesiculosus76 in which a bioassay-guided fractionation revealed that a polar galactolipid contributed to
feeding deterrency.77 Increased phlorotannin levels may be induced by environmental cues and by injury or
predation. Several reviews cover this specialized topic in considerable detail.7,9,78,79 Some brown algae are
chemically defended by the presence of sulfuric acid within cell vacuoles.80

4.12.4 Sponges

Marine sponges are conspicuous sessile members of the benthic fauna, and often brightly colored or soft bodied.
Field observations suggest that they are avoided by fishes, crabs, and other generalist predators, although
certain groups of mollusks, in particular the nudibranchs, are specialized sponge eaters. There is a considerable
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 511

body of experimental evidence that marine sponges are protected by the presence of deterrent chemicals, and
this has been well summarized in recent literature.6,9,81,82
The most detailed field studies have been carried out on Caribbean sponges. Pawlik et al.83 surveyed the
deterrency of sponges collected from a range of habitats toward Thalassoma bifasciatum; the study found no
correlation between sponge color and deterrency, indicating that the conspicuous color of many sponges is not
a warning signal to predatory fish on Caribbean reefs. In this study, 69% of the 71 sponges screened were
deterrent.83 In later surveys, out of 30 Caribbean sponges screened against the hermit crab Paguristes punticeps,
26 samples (87%) were deterrent;84 some extracts were also deterrent to sea stars.85
A number of studies highlight the critical relationship between predator density and deterrency, a topic that
was first addressed by Bakus and Green,86 who considered that tropical marine invertebrates should show a
higher incidence of deterrency. When compared to Caribbean data, a survey of 16 Bermudan sponges found a
lower incidence of deterrency against fish, ascribed to lower levels of predation in these waters.87 A collection of
40 sponges from near San Diego yielded only 11 extracts that were strongly bioactive, although it should be
noted that this study did not include deterrency data.88 Numerous sponge extracts showing very high levels of
bioactivity have been documented from the oceans around Southern Australian and New Zealand,4 although
only a few sound ecological studies have been conducted. For example, in South East Australia, habitats in which
sea urchin density is high have been found to contain more deterrent sponges than habitats with lower numbers
of sea urchin predators.89 The most recent data on tropical versus temperate sponge defenses is from a survey of
20 sponges from 14 different genera that were collected from either Guam or from North East Spain. In assays
against different types of reef fish, 35% of the sponges were deterrent in at least one assay, and defenses from
tropical and temperate sponges were equally effective.90 Perhaps the best evidence that cold water sponges have
deterrent extracts is provided by studies on Antarctic sponges that involve sea stars and other predators.91,92
The deterrency of sponge extracts may be affected by their nutritional content and by whether the sponge
has additional physical defenses such as spicules or a tough body. Extracts of high nutritional value may be
eaten even when chemically defended.93 There is limited evidence that spicules protect sponges from preda-
tion;84,85,94–96 however, a combination of chemical and physical defenses may protect the North American
sponge Microciona prolifera from predation by the hermit crab Pagurus longicarpus.97

4.12.4.1 Alkaloids
A number of studies illustrate that alkaloids isolated from sponges are potent feeding deterrents; two recent
examples involve activated chemical defenses in which precursor compounds are converted into deterrent
compounds when the sponge tissue is damaged.
The best documented example involves sponges of the order Verongida, which contain complex bromi-
nated metabolites, known to derive from tyrosine.98 The isoxazoline alkaloids isofistularin-3 58 and
aerophobin-2 59 are converted into aeroplysinin 60 and the dienone 61 following tissue damage in the
Mediterranean sponge Aplysina aerophoba (Scheme 1). These conversions, which were demonstrated in cell-
free extracts of several Aplysina sponges, are proposed to provide a chemical defense. A mixture of 60 and 61
was more deterrent to T. bifasciatum than a mixture of precursor alkaloids that included 58 and 59,99 but in
testing against the fish species Bennius sphinx, the precursor alkaloids were more deterrent.100 The ecological
advantage of the biotransformation is however evident from additional experiments in which the gastropod
Littorina littorea was repelled when exposed to seawater containing either of the conversion products; these
compounds also inhibited the growth of marine bacteria and microalgae,101 and so may provide protection
against pathogens in wounded tissue.102 Subsequent experiments on species of Aplysina from both the
Mediterranean and from the Caribbean showed that the different chemical outcomes result from the
wounding methods used. Mechanical damage involving grinding of sponge tissue is required; cutting or
coring of tissue does not increase levels of 60.102,103 The biotransformation can be detected within 1 min of
tissue damage.102
Evidence that supports an enzymatic basis to these biotransformations includes (1) cell free extracts from
other sponges were unable to transform isoxazoline alkaloids; (2) when tissue from the sponge Crambe crambe or
from the mollusk Tylodina perversa (see Section 4.12.8.4) that feeds on Aplysina spp. was spiked with 58, no
biotransformation was detected; (3) in contrast to the increased concentrations of 60 and 61, the concentration
512 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

O
Br
OMe OMe NH
O H
Br Br Br Br HN
O O
O
H
HO Br OH Br
O OH OH O
H 62
N NH O N N

O O OMe
Br O
Br Br Br Br
58

HO
HO HO
OMe CN CONH2
Br Br
60 61

HO H
N
O
NH2
N NH N
O
59
Scheme 1 Wound-induced conversion of brominated isoxazoline alkaloids in Aplysina aerophoba.99,102

of precursors 58 and 59 is decreased in tissue-damaged sponge;102 (4) the bisoxazolidinone 62 could be

detected during the biotransformation of 58.99
A second example of an activated chemical defense concerns the Indo Pacific sponge Aplysinella rhax, in
which tissue damage results in the rapid enzymatic transformation of psammaplin A sulfate 63 into psammaplin
A 64; exposure of 63 to tissue from other sponges does not result in any conversion. Compound 63 deters
feeding by reef fish, but when offered a choice between psammaplin A and its sulfate, both foods were avoided.
In aquarium assays with C. solandri, extracts of damaged tissue were more deterrent than extracts from intact
tissue, but both treatments were less palatable than control foods. In choice experiments, C. solandri preferred
food treated with 63 over 64.104
These results highlight the need to consider extraction methods in marine chemical ecology. Freeze-dried
Aplysina spp. when extracted in methanol yields isoxazoline alkaloids, but when extracted in water or in aqueous
methanol the major alkaloids recovered are 60 and 61.102 Freeze-dried A. rex provides 63 on extraction with
methanol, but addition of water prior to extraction results in a high yield of 64.104

NH2
N
OH OR Br
N X
Br Br Br Br H
N O
Br H
O O Br HN
S S 66 X = OH
N N N O
H H R1 74 X = NH2
N N R2
HO OH
63 R = SO3 65 R1 = Br; R2 = H
64 R = H 76 R1 = Br; R2 = Me
77 R1 = R2 = H
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 513

R1 NH2 NH
R1 NH2
O O NH
HN HN
R2 HN N R2 N
N H HN N O
H HN

Br HN
O N H HN
NH R4 N
HN N N O
N NH2 Br
H O H
R3 NH R3 NH2 71

R4
67 R1 = R2 = R3 = Br; R4 = H 68 R1 = R3 = Br; R2 = R4 = H Br
70 R1 = R2 = R3 = R4 = Br 69 R1 = R2 = R3 = R4 = Br O
80 R1 = R3 = Br; R2 = R4 = H
O Br N
NH
Me
N HO
Br HN HN
N N O
Me 75
N O
H NH2 Br HN
72
N O
Br
Br CH3 H 2N N
Br
73 HN
H H N R
N
Br
H2N
N N O NH
78 R = Me Br N 81
79 R = H H O

A number of surveys have shown that the sponge Agelas clathrodes is not consumed by spongivorous fishes on
Caribbean reefs; its crude extracts are deterrent to reef fish in both field and laboratory assays.83 Assay-guided
fractionation provided oroidin 65 that was deterrent at natural volumetric concentrations (0.5–4.0 mg ml1 of
food) to T. bifasciatum in aquarium assays. Also isolated was 4,5-dibromopyrrole-2-carboxylic acid 66 which was
deterrent at 1.0 and 2.0 mg ml1 of food, but not at 0.5 mg ml1. A mixture of 65 and 66 was deterrent at 1.0 and
2.0 mg ml1.105 Bromopyrrole chemicals have been detected in crude extracts of four other Agelas sponges
(A. conifera, A. dispar, A. sceptrum, and A. wiedenmayeri ).105,106 Agelas wiedenmayeri contains the deterrent chemical
bromoageliferin 67 in addition to 65 and 66, while A. conifera is characterized by a series of dimeric
bromopyrrole alkaloids including sceptrin 68, dibromosceptrin 69, dibromoageliferin 70 as well as bromoage-
liferin 67. Sceptrin (the major metabolite with a mean natural concentration of 5.3 mg ml1) and
bromoageliferin 67 were both deterrent to T. bifasciatum at concentrations of 1, 5, and 10 mg ml1, but
bromoageliferin 67 was not deterrent at 0.24 mg ml1. Dibromosceptrin 69 and dibromoageliferin 70 were
deterrent at 5 and 10 mg ml1, but not at 1.0 mg ml1. Sceptrin 68 was not significantly deterrent when tested at
lower concentrations, while a recombined mixture of 67–70 was deterrent in the field at 1.5 mg ml1. A mixture
of 65–67 had similar activity to 66 alone.105 Extracts of A. conifera containing oroidin 65 and sceptrin 68 are
reported deterrent to the reef fish Stegastis partitus. Cell separation on Ficoll confirmed a sponge cell origin,
possibly in spherulous cells, for the bromopyrroles in A. conifera. The concentrations of sceptrin and of oroidin
in A. conifera increase up to fourfold within 6 days of tissue wounding, suggestive of an induced chemical defense
in the sponge.106
A series of 14 synthetic pyrroles, furans, thiophenes, and prolines were assayed using T. bifasciatum; the
presence of bromine was important for activity, replacement of the pyrrolic N by either O or S did not affect
activity, while the prolines tested were inactive.107 A later study compared the feeding deterrency of 65 and 66
514 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

with a suite of other pyrrolic natural products including dispacamide A 71, keramadine 72, midpacamide 73,
4,5-dibromopyrrole-2-carboxamide 74, and racemic longamide A 75, some of which were obtained by synth-
esis rather than from their Agelas sponges. The pyrrole nucleus was essential while addition of an imidazole
group enhanced deterrency.108
A number of studies on Caribbean sponges have used deterrency-guided fractionation to locate antifeedant
metabolites. The butanol extract of Agelas sventres contained sventrin 76 and hymenidin 77 each of which
deterred feeding of T. bifasciatum at 3 mg ml1 or above. The assays results agree with previous structure–
activity data; hymenidin is less active than more highly brominated metabolites such as oroidin 65 while
N-methylation, as in sventrin 76, lowers activity.109 The potent deterrent N-methyldibromoisophakellin 78,
active at 0.9 mg ml1, was isolated from Stylissa caribica along with the two known metabolites dibromoisopha-
kellin 79 and ageliferin 80 that were isolated in trace quantities.110 Axinella corrugata (¼ Teichaxinella morchella)
provided the bromopyrrole stevensine 81, which deterred feeding at concentrations above 2.2 mg ml1 in
aquarium assays with T. bifasciatum, and at 12 mg ml1 in field assays.111
Within a sponge, the location of sponge metabolites is often consistent with their proposed antifeedant role.
The Micronesian sponge Oceanapia sp. is a conspicuous red-colored sponge that is only partially exposed to
predation. Although fistules capped by a small fragile capitum protrude into the water column, the base of the
sponge is buried in sandy substrate. A methanolic extract from sponge tissue was highly deterrent at base
concentration (7.4% of dry mass) to reef fish in field assays and to the sponge-feeding angelfish Pomacanthus
imperator in aquarium assays. The major secondary metabolites kuanoniamine C 82, also known as dercitamide,
and kuanoniamine D 83 were present in higher concentration in exposed sponge parts and deterred feeding by
reef fish at fistule concentrations (cited as 0.4–1.0%). A synthetic sample of the minor sponge metabolite,
N-deacetyl kuanoniamine-D 84 also deterred feeding in field assays.112

N O
H H
N CO2H
N N NH
9
S N N
H
N O O
9
Br N
NHR O H N
82 R = –COEt 85 NH2 87
83 R = –COMe
84 R = H OH 86

Hax
Hax
N
13 X X
N N N N
N 5 5 N
Heq
Hax
N
13 13
or (~1:1)
X=
88 89 90

The Antarctic sponge Latrunculia apicalis, which has a distinctive spherical shape, concentrates discorhabdin
G 85 in its surface tissues, optimally positioned as a chemical defense. Sponge extracts and purified 85 prevent
predation by sea stars by eliciting a tubefoot retraction.91 In the Antarctic sponge Isodictya erinacea, whose
extract is rich in nitrogenous metabolites, the metabolite that triggered tubefoot retraction in sea star predators
was identified as p-hydroxybenzaldehyde 56,113 also found in red algae.38 The pigment erebusinone 86 reduces
amphipod molting and leads to increased mortality when fed to the spongivorous amphipod Orchomene plebs.114
Extracts from the Arctic sponge Haliclona viscosa that are unpalatable to amphipods contain the
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 515

3-alkylpyridinium alkaloids viscosaline 87115 and viscosamine 88,116 which both resemble amphitoxin 89, a
known fish antifeedant from the Caribbean Amphimedon compressa.117 Other 3-alkylpyridine sponge metabolites
reported to show antifeedant activity against reef fish include haliclonacyclamine A 90, an antifungal metabo-
lite from the soft-bodied sponge Haliclona sp. 628118 that inhibits larval settlement.119

4.12.4.2 Terpenes
Erylus formosus contains formoside 91 together with other deterrent triterpene glycosides that are more
deterrent when tested as mixtures rather than individually. Structural features that enhance activity include
glycosylation, and/or side chain methylation or hydroxylation.120–122 The active metabolites are more con-
centrated in the inner layers of E. formosus, and are not detected in seawater collected near the sponge.122 In
Ectyoplasia ferox, hydroxylated triterpene glycosides possessing two different carbon skeletons (the ectyoplasides
A and B 92–93 and the feroxosides A and B 94–95, and which are potent feeding deterrents in both field and
laboratory assays, are instead concentrated in the top layer of the sponge. The triterpene metabolites also play a
role in the antimicrobial and antifouling defenses of these two Caribbean sponges.122
Pawlik et al.123 have studied a group of Caribbean Ircinia species that have a characteristic garlic odor
resulting from the presence of volatiles such as dimethyl sulfide and methyl isocyanide. Despite this, some fish
and sea stars feed on these sponges. Crude extracts from Ircinia campana, I. felix, and I. strobilina all deter
T. bifasciatum at natural volumetric concentration,123 with linear furanosesterterpenoid metabolites such as
variabilin 96 responsible for this activity. Volatile components such as dimethyl sulfide (refer Section 4.12.3.3)
did not deter fish feeding. Extracts of Brazilian I. strobilina at natural concentrations deter feeding by tropical
fish in field assays; variabilin 96 at 0.23% of dry mass was deterrent when incorporated into an alginate matrix,
but was not deterrent when incorporated into a carrageenan matrix owing to decomposition during pellet
preparation.20 Mediterranean species of Ircinia gave the ircinins I 97 and II 98 that were deterrent to
T. bifasciatum.124 The lintenolides C–E 99–101 are a group of novel sesterterpenes isolated from Cacospongia
cf. linteiformis; these and other terpenoid metabolites from the sponge show feeding deterrency to the freshwater
Carassius auratus.125 The Antarctic sponge Suberites sp. contains the sesterterpene suberitenone A 102, and other
similar metabolites, that deter feeding by the sea star P. fuscus.126
Sponge terpenes are not always effective as feeding deterrents. Sesterterpenes such as luffariolide 103 lack
deterrency,93 while manoalide 104 is reported active, but only when incorporated into a low-quality artificial
food.127 In Aplysilla glacialis, a dendroceratid (i.e., nonspiculated) sponge from the Caribbean that is rarely eaten
by fish despite its fleshy nature, 7-dehydrocholesterol endoperoxide 105 and the diterpene manoöl 106 are
both active against reef fish, but neither metabolite was active when tested against Thalassoma lunare in
aquarium assays. Other diterpene metabolites were not deterrent.128
The sponge quinone avarol 107 from Dysidea avara deters feeding by a range of consumers including the sea
urchin Paracentrotus lividus,129 and the pufferfish C. solandri.93 Reef fish and crabs consumed foods containing
avarol; reef fish were only deterred when the metabolite was incorporated into artificial food of low quality.93
The larvae of D. avara are known to be defended, but the chemical basis is not yet clear.129 The deterrent effects
of sesquiterpene metabolites from some other Dysidea spp. and of the scalaranes, a group of cyclic sesterpenoids
from the sponge genera Cacospongia, and that show variable predator deterrency are covered in Section 4.12.8.3
since these sponges are the preferred foods of glossodorid nudibranchs.
Certain groups of sponges such as the Indo-Pacific Acanthella cavernosa are avoided in the field by generalist
predators and are the preferred food of phyllidid nudibranchs (Section 4.12.8.3). These sponges contain terpene
isocyanides that have a characteristic odor,130 however, the isocyanide metabolites are not confirmed feeding
deterrents.8,131 Sponge crude extracts are deterrent at half natural concentrations when tested against reef fish,21
but individual terpene isocyanides lack deterrent effects in field trials. For example, axisonitrile-1 108 from a
Mediterranean sponge fails to deter feeding by marine and freshwater fishes, however, the compound is
ichthyotoxic,132 while axisonitrile-3 109 is not active.133
In general, there is no clear trend on the antifeedant effects of sponge terpene metabolites, or on the
contributions of individual functional groups to activity. Many terpenes contain functional groups that may be
sensitive to oxidation or the effects of UV light, resulting in chemical changes or decomposition during
bioassays.
 OH

OH OH OH OH CO2H
O O O
HO O O O
H OH OH
OH OH OH O CO2H
OH O
91 OH OH HO O
O
HO
O HO CHH R
O 2
OH HO O
OH
HO O 92 R = H
R 93 R = OH
OH
OH
OH

OH OH O O
O O 96 O
O
H
HO CH O
HO O O 2OH
HO
O
HO O
HO O
94 R = C(Me) = CH2
HO O 95 R = CHMe2 97 E isomer
OH 98 Z isomer
O O OH O
HO
HO OH
OH
OH O OH
OH
O 16
O H
H H O OH
H H O H
H
O
100
H 99 H
101 epimer at C-16 OAc 102
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 517

O
OH
O
HO
H H
103
HO O
O

O 105
HO H

104 HO O O 106

OH Br
HO
O

H OH CN
H Br Br Br
CN

107 108 109 110

CO2Me
O
H
O O
O
MeO (CH2)15CH3
HO H
HN
111 112
S
O

4.12.4.3 Other Sponge Metabolites

The brominated diphenyl ether (BDE) metabolite 110 first isolated from Lamellodysidea (¼Dysidea) herbacea deters
feeding by the crab Leptodius sp.93 and by reef fish,127 and is frequently used as a positive control in feeding studies.
A flow cytometry study showed that BDEs were localized in the cyanobacterial symbiont Oscillatoria spongeliae
present within sponge tissue, and consequently it was inferred that the BDE production took place in the symbiont
cells, with BDEs then excreted into the sponge tissue and stored in crystalline form.134 However in Dysidea granulosa,
high quantities of BDEs are found in sponge internal (endosomal) tissue, along with bacteria, whereas cyanobacterial
symbionts are localized in outer (ectosomal) tissue by electron microscopy. Exposure of the host sponge to light
impacts on the production of these compounds in sponge tissue.135 A microbial study identified BDEs in a culture of
the bacterium Vibrio sp. isolated from D. herbacea.136 Chondrillin 111 from the sponge genus Plakortis has variable
effects on feeding by C. solandri and by the sea hare S. longicauda,93 Latrunculin-A 112 from Negombata magnifica is
described as an ineffective deterrent,81 although the sponge is avoided by fish and its crude extracts are deterrent.137

4.12.5 Coelenterates
4.12.5.1 Soft Corals
The typical secondary metabolites of soft corals are diterpenoids, although some species also produce
sesquiterpenoids. Despite the fleshy nature of soft corals relative to other invertebrates, predation is rare
because the diterpene metabolites produced are believed to be potent feeding deterrents.138
518 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

A study of predator deterrency in Australian soft corals has compared the effects of flexibilide 113,
sinulariolide 114, and dihydroflexibilide 115 from Sinularia flexibilis. In feeding trials with the mosquitofish
Gambusia affinis food containing dihydroflexibilide at 1% of dry weight was rejected while foods containing
sinulariolide and dihydroflexibilide were only rejected at 10% dry weight.139 In Guam, Sinularia corals contain
pukalide 116 and 11-acetoxypukalide 117,26 each metabolite showing antifeedant activity.140–142 A study of
Sinularia maxima reveals that the content of the major deterrent metabolite 116 is reduced in bleached corals,
and that bleached corals are subject to predation by C. solandri. Feeding assays conducted with 116 at
concentrations found in bleached and unbleached corals confirm that C. solandri is not deterred by ‘bleached’
levels of 116.142 In Sinularia flexibilis from Australia, temporary bleaching results in an increase and decrease in
flexibilide 113 and sinulariolide 114 levels respectively.143

CO2Me
O O
OH O OH
O O O
O

OH

O
O O O
O
O
113 114 115 116

CO2Me CO2Me

H OMe H
O O
O O O
OAc H O O
O
H H
O O R
OH
O O
117 118 R = H 119 120
121 R = OAc

Butterfly fish feed exclusively on chemically protected soft corals such as Sinularia spp., generally from the
tips where the terpene concentration is maximal, and may have evolved mechanisms to detoxify the metabo-
lites.140,144 The structural defenses provided by sclerites, that are involved in defense against generalist reef
fishes,26 are ineffective against these specialized predators.140 Although extracts from Sinularia soft corals are
deterrent against reef fishes at 3–7%, much higher concentrations (19–20%) are required to deter feeding by
Chaetodon unimaculatus, which selectively feeds on the corals. In this study, the major terpene isolated from
S. maxima was 11-acetoxypukalide 117 rather than pukalide 116;140 temporal differences in concentrations of
116 and 117 in Sinularia spp. have been noted.145 The nudibranch Phyllodesmium guamensis also eats Sinularia
spp. (see Section 4.12.8.3).
Soft corals eggs contain terpenes such as 116, 117, and epoxypukalide 118 that are believed to play a
defensive role.146,147 Extracts of Sinularia polydactyla larvae containing 116 and 117 are deterrent in assays with
C. solandri which has been observed feeding on soft coral polyps in the field.147
Some species of algae, including the chemically protected Halimeda spp. (Section 4.12.3.1), and sea grasses
grow in abundance at the base of Sinularia colonies, but rather surprisingly the soft coral chemical defense is not
responsible for maintaining this association. Instead, the shape of the Sinularia colonies appears to influence fish
grazing, thereby affording protection to the algal or sea grass colonies.148
Other soft coral metabolites reported to show antifeedant effects against fish include heterogorgiolide 119
and the eunicellane 120 from Heterogorgia uatumani,149 and furanocembrenoid diterpenes, for example,
13-acetoxy-11, 12-epoxypukalide 121, from Lophogorgia violacea.150
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 519

4.12.5.2 Gorgonians
Secondary chemicals are commonly used as a defense mechanism in sea fans and sea pens, but structural
defenses are also important. Biogeographic studies have surveyed the chemical and structural defense mechan-
isms of 32 species of gorgonian corals from the Caribbean,14 of 7 species from Pacific151,152 regions, and of 8
species from Singaporean17 waters. Crude extracts from all of the Indo-Pacific species studied, except Viminella sp.
from Guam,152 are deterrent to natural populations of reef fish, while all of the Caribbean extracts are deterrent to
T. bifasciatum when tested at natural volumetric concentration. In most gorgonians, the deterrent chemicals are
concentrated near the tips,12,151 which are polyp-bearing regions and more prone to predation in coral reef
environments than is basal tissue. Considered together, these studies emphasize the importance of gorgonian
chemicals in deterring generalist predators.
A number of studies have investigated Caribbean Pseudopterogorgia spp. whose extracts are deterrent.14 In
Pseudopterogorgia americana, an aquarium assay with T. bifasciatum identified a fraction containing
9,11-secogorgosterol 122 and 9,11,-secodinosterol 123 that was deterrent, although the purified metabolites
were only deterrent when tested as a mixture.153 Biosynthetic data support the involvement of zooxanthellar
symbionts in the production of secosterols.154 The sesquiterpenoids curcuquinone 124 and curcuhydroquinone
125 from Pseudopterogorgia rigida are deterrent at below natural concentrations.12
The gorgonian Pseudopterogorgia elisabethae, whose crude extracts deter feeding by T. bifasciatum in aquarium
assays,14 contain pharmacologically important pseudopterosins A–D 126–129. A fish feeding deterrency role
has been suggested for these diterpene glycosides. Increased production of the pseudopterosins has been
detected in response to feeding by the mollusk Cyphoma gibbosum, a specialist feeder on gorgonians, but not
after grazing by the butterfly fish Chaetodon capistratus. Terpene formation in P. elisabethae is also induced by
decreased levels of UV/Vis radiation.155 Symbionts within the gorgonian are involved in the biosynthesis of
these terpenes, a topic that has been studied in some detail.156
Chemical extracts of the Caribbean gorgonian Briareum asbestinum are strongly deterrent,14 owing to the
production of both asbestinane, for example 130, and briarane, for example briathein Y 131 diterpenes for their
chemical defense. There is considerable variation in the chemistry of individual colonies according to the
collection site. At two sites in the Bahamas, briarane metabolites predominated while a collection from the
Virgin islands contained more of the asbestinane metabolites. Although unexpectedly high levels of chemicals
were found in deep water collections compared to shallow water collections, shallow water colonies trans-
planted to deeper waters retained their shallow water chemistry, suggesting that the chemistry shown by adult
colonies is genetically determined rather than inducible.157 The chlorinated briarane diterpenes erythrolide B
132 and -D 133 from Erythropodium caribaeorum are deterrent in field assays.158
Extracts of Pterogorgia anceps contain a fraction enriched in ancepsenolide metabolites of the polyketide class,
one of which (134) is individually deterrent in shipboard assays with T. bifasciatum.10 This last study illustrates
that chemical defense mechanisms in gorgonians do not solely rely on the terpenoid biosynthetic pathway.
Antarctic gorgonians use chemical defense against predatory seastars.159 In the gorgonian Ainigmaptilon
antarcticus, the antibacterial sesquiterpene ainigmaptilone A 135 deters predation by the seastar O. validus.160
The predator deterrent effects of Gorgonia ventalina and its nudibranch predator Tritonia hamnerorum are
described in Section 4.12.8.3.

4.12.5.3 Hydroids
There have been few chemical studies on marine hydroids and consequently their use of chemical defense is
poorly understood. Many hydroids have the physical protection of nematocysts that discharge proteins when in
contact with predator tissue. The pinfish Lagodon rhomboides avoids eating hydroids compared to palatable control
foods. When their nematocysts are discharged by KCl treatment, two species of hydroid become palatable while
four other species including Tridentata marginata all remain unpalatable owing to the presence of deterrent
extracts. Tridentata marginata contains tridentatol A 136 that deters feeding by pinfish and filefish, and other
nondeterrent tridentatol metabolites while Corydendrium parasiticum contains 2-methyl-6-alkenyl-3-piperidinol
alkaloids. The physical defense afforded by nematocysts is metabolically expensive and, since each nematocyst is
a single weapon, deterrent chemicals may be more effective particularly in periods of intense predation. The
 H
HO HO

O O R
H H
O O OR3
H H R 1O
OH R OR2
HO HO
H 126 R1 = R2 = R3 = H
122 123 124 R = O 127 R2 = R3 = H; R1 = Ac
125 R = H, OH 128 R1 = R3 = H; R2 = Ac
129 R1 = R2 = H; R3 = Ac
O
O
O OAc
H O
O O
OAc H H
O OH OH
H O
OH O Cl Cl
H AcO RO
H AcO Cl AcO AcO
OH AcO O O
O O
HO
O O
130 131 O 132 133 R = –COCH2OAc

OR

H
O O
O
CO2H
OAc
OH
AcO MeS N 136 R = H
134 135 +
137 R = SO3 Na
SMe
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 521

pattern of nematocyst morphology vs. bioactive chemicals has been contrasted with that found in soft and hard
corals.161 A comparison of the tridentatol composition of hydroids crushed just prior to extraction with that of
uncrushed tissue has established that an activated chemical defense operates in T. marginata. In damaged tissue,
the sulfate group of the nondeterrent tridentatol E 137 is cleaved enzymatically producing 136. This experi-
ment simulates the effect of a grazer and the resulting production of the more effective deterrent 137 is
ecologically advantageous.162

4.12.6 Ascidians

Ascidians are conspicuous marine animals that are generally soft-bodied and which lack obvious physical
defenses against predation. Calcareous spicules found in some species have been proposed to play a role in
chemical defense, as are tissue toughness and nutritional value. Ascidians show remarkable chemistry and
accumulate both inorganic acids in bladder cells and high levels of vanadium salts, whose ecological functions
may include deterrency and antifouling roles.163,164 A study on vanadium chemistry and chemical defense in
the Caribbean tunicate Phallusia nigra has shown vanadium to be concentrated in internal tissues and blood over
the tunic surface. Food pellets into which acidic solutions of VCl3 or VOSO4 had been incorporated are
unpalatable to T. bifasciatum in aquarium assays; however, the nonacidic vanadium complex V(Acac)3 is
ineffective in deterring predation.164 In field and laboratory experiments involving Cystodytes spp., artificial
foods containing spicules or sulfuric acid do not deter fish feeding.165 A study of the palability of ascidian
species from the Western Atlantic has revealed that 16 of 17 species tested showed deterrency to T. bifasciatum,
while 9 species secrete inorganic acid in their tunics that leads to a lower incidence of predation.13 Lipophilic
crude extracts from the Antarctic ascidian Distaplia cylindrica deter feeding by seastars.166 These studies are
from diverse biogeographic regions and so support the general importance of secondary metabolite defense in
ascidians.
The Mediterranean ascidians Cystodytes spp., which generally lack epibionts and show few signs of predation,
are physically defended by the presence of spicules and occur in a range of color morphs. A blue color morph of
the ascidian Cystodytes sp. contains ascididemin 138 with antipredatory effects against pufferfish, damselfish, but
not against sea urchins.165 Studies using energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis167 or by MALDI-TOF168 have
shown that both shermilamine B 139 and kuanoniamine D 83 are present in pigmented granular cells in the
tunic of a purple morph with their deacetylated forms present in both tunic and zooids. In blue and green
morphs, ascididemin and 11-hydroxyascididemin 140 are present in both tunic and zooids, while in a brown
morph ascididemnin alone is detected in these tissues. The seasonal variation in pyridoacridine alkaloid content
in purple and blue morphs of this species, and its relationship to reproduction and energy budget, has also been
investigated.169,170 The co-occurrence of the same pyridoacridine alkaloids in both sponges (Section 4.12.4.2)
and these ascidians may suggest a microbial-based biosynthesis, although the possibility of convergent evolu-
tion cannot be excluded. Studies using confocal microscopy have shown that in sponges these metabolites are
localized in specialized cells containing inclusions rather than in intercellular microbial symbionts.171
The chemical basis of didemnid ascidian defense has been investigated with some compounds showing quite
potent antifeedant effects. In Didemnum conchyliatum, the same cyclic peptides, didemnimides A–D 141–144,
have been noted for both adults and larvae.28 In laboratory assays using T. bifasciatum, didemnimides C 143 and
D 144 deter feeding, while didemnimide C also deters feeding in field-based assay, but didemnimides A 141
and B 142 are ineffective in both laboratory and field assays.29 The ascidian Didemnum granulatum, which may
also be chemically protected, stores granulatamide 145 and isogranulatamide 146 in tunic bladder cells.172 All
of these metabolites show some structural similarity to the bromopyrrole-imidazoles that are responsible for the
lack of palatability of Agelas sponges (Section 4.12.4.1).
The Caribbean tunicate Trididemnum solidum and its larvae contain a complex mixture of didemnin/
nordidemnin metabolites that act as feeding deterrents in field-based assays at below natural concentrations.
The most potent metabolite is nordidemnin B 147.28 Crude extract mixtures enriched in didemnin B 148
induce vomiting in the spotted pinfish L. rhomboides, causing these fish to avoid feeding.173 The larvae of other
didemnid ascidians are also protected by the presence of deterrent chemicals.28,174
 H H
O N O O N O

N N R2
H
N O N N NH

N N N
N S N R1 N
H H
H
R O
141 R1 = R2 = H 145
H
138 R = H 139 142 R1 = Br; R2 = H O N O
NHCOMe
140 R = OH 143 R1 = H; R2 = Me
144 R1 = Br; R2 = Me

R N N
OH O N
H H H 146
O O
O NH O NH
Me O Y OMe
H
OH O O O E or Z
N X
N N O
L
H N N N
O H NHR
N N O
O
Me H H2N HN CH2
149 X = Y = R = H n
147 R = H 150 X = Y = H; R = CH2CHMe2
148 R = Me NH
151 X = Y = H; R = Et
OCH3 152 X = Y = H; R = (CH2)2Ph 153 Z; n = 4
154 E; n = 4
155 Z; n = 3
156 E; n = 3
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 523

Other ascidian compounds whose antifeedant properties have been confirmed include tambjamine meta-
bolites 149–152 from Atapozoa sp. and its nudibranch predator Nembrotha spp.175 In field assays, the crude
ascidian extract and tambjamines C 150 and F 152 show significant feeding deterrency at or below natural
concentration. Although tambjamines A 149 and E 151 are not individually deterrent at natural concentration,
a 1:1 mixture of tambjamines E and F is deterrent at below natural concentration.175 Lindquist et al.28 also report
that the larvae of the Indo-Pacific ascidian Sigillina cf. signifera (¼ Atapozoa sp.) are protected by the presence of
tamjamine C 150 (and refer to Section 4.12.7).
A mixture of polyandrocarpidine metabolites 153–156 from the ascidian Polyandrocarpa sp. deters feeding by
hermit crabs and two species of snails.28 Nitrogenous ascidian compounds that are reported to lack antifeedant
effects include patellamide C (Lissoclinum patella),28 and eudistomins G and H.176

4.12.7 Bryozoans

Two recent reviews emphasize the ecological significance of bryozoan metabolites.8,177

H HO H HO
MeO OAc MeO O
H H O
O O O O O O
H H H H
O O
OH H OH O OH H OH O
O O
O

O HO HO
157 OMe 158 OMe

O O

H HO
MeO O OMe
Y
H O
O O O X
H H N N
O H NHR
OH H OH O
O
160 X = Br; Y = R = H
161 X = H; Y = Br; R = CH2CHMe2
O
H OH
159
O

The global fouling organism Bugula neritina produces the complex polyketide bryostatin group of metabo-
lites that are of clinical significance owing to their potent antitumor activity. The compounds are in fact
products of the symbiotic -proteobacterium ‘Candidatus Endobugula sertula’ present in bryozoan tissues. In
feeding assays crude extracts from larvae and juvenile stages of B. neritina are unpalatable, but crude extracts
from adults and from larvae obtained without their bacterial symbionts following antibiotic treatment are
palatable.178,179 The chemical basis of the deterrency has been traced to bryostatins 1 (157), 10 (158), and 20
(159), which protect the larvae of B. neritina from predation.180 The absence of bryostatins in the treated larvae
confirms symbiont production of the metabolites.178,181 This is the first reported example of a symbiont
producing chemicals that function as the antipredator defense for the vulnerable larvae of their host.
Energy-dispersive X-ray microanalysis has shown that the brominated alkaloids present in the Australian
bryozoan Amathia wilsoni may be associated with a surface bacterium,182 consistent with a role in chemical defense.
Tambjamines A–D 149, 150, 160, and 161, from the bryozoan Sessibugula translucens and nudibranch predators
524 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

Tambja spp. and Roboastra tigris deter feeding by the spotted kelpfish Gibbonsia elegans in laboratory-based assays. This
study also investigated the pheromonal role of tambjamine compounds in the Tambja slime trails, their role in
deterring attack by Roboastra tigris, and reveals that S. translucens is a favored food of Tambja spp.183

4.12.8 Mollusks

A comprehensive review published in 1995 lists the chemicals isolated from opistobranch mollusks, and
catalogues their anatomical locations and biological activities, providing useful background information on a
wide range of antifeedant compounds.184 Other review articles include descriptions of recent mollusk antifeedant
studies.7,9,185,186 Despite an extensive literature on mollusk chemistry, there is little experimental evidence that
rigorously confirms the antifeedant properties of mollusk metabolites at ecologically relevant concentrations. The
small amounts of compound that are typically isolated from individual sources limit broad scale ecological
investigations.21 The best understood examples involve mollusks that sequester antifeedant chemicals from their
diet, since this enables a supply of compounds for ecological study to be obtained from the dietary source.

4.12.8.1 Sea Hares

Chemical studies have shown that sea hares sequester metabolites from dietary algae and cyanobacteria. An
example of pharmaceutical significance concerns the anticancer compound dolastatin 10 (162) that, along with
related metabolites, was first isolated from the sea hare D. auricularia. These compounds have now been shown
to originate from the cyanobacterial species L. majuscula and Symploca spp.,187–189 and are therefore of dietary
origin.

Br
HO Br O
O S OH
H H H O
N N N N
Me2N N O
O Me OMe O OMe O O
Ph Cl Cl
Br Br
162 163 164

Cl
H Cl Cl

Cl Cl
H Br Cl
Br Br Cl Br Cl
HO Cl
165 166 167 168

R1 Br
O O O
Br

H X
Br Br
O O H H
R2
170 X = H2 171
169 R1 = OAc; R2 = I 172 X = O

Sea hares of the genus Stylocheilus prefer the cyanobacteria L. majuscula over other foods, and often contain
cyanobacterial metabolites. It was mentioned before (Section 4.12.2.1) that S. longicauda concentrates the
deterrent metabolites malyngamides A 4 and B 5; it further converts malyngamide B into an acetate derivative,
which is a feeding stimulant rather than a deterrent.32 Given the dietary selection of the chemically rich
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 525

Lyngbya, it is perhaps unsurprising that this sea hare can accumulate a chemically diverse range of algal and
sponge metabolites when these are provided in an artificial diet;190 S. striatus also accumulates cyanobacterial
compounds and may convert lyngbyatoxin A 14 into a less harmful acetate derivative.191 The sea hare
D. auricularia sequesters a range of algal compounds including the feeding deterrents johnstonol 163 and
prepacifinol epoxide 164,192 caulerpenyne 21, pachydictyol A 27, and cyanobacterial metabolites such as
malyngamide B 5 if these are provided as part of its diet.190 However, anatomical studies have shown that the
sequestered metabolites are stored in the digestive glands rather than in exposed body parts or ink.190,192 In the
ink of D. auricularia, the pigment aplysioviolin has been implicated in unpalatability, while the skin extracts
appear to be rendered unpalatable by the presence of 7-dehydrocholesterol 165 rather than by algal
compounds, which are only found in low concentrations in the skin. The unpalatability of mollusk egg extracts
could not be traced to any dietary-derived compounds. Consequently, D. auricularia may not utilize dietary-
derived algal or cyanobacterial compounds to protect itself from predation.192 Sea hares may protect them-
selves from predation by choosing to inhabit host plants that are chemically defended, and may not have a
dietary need for their preferred algal food.15,43,193
In Guam, Aplysia californica has been reported to sequester sesquiterpenes and halogenated monoterpenes
(e.g., 166) from its algal diet of Laurencia pacifica and P. cartilagineum, and concentrates metabolites in its
digestive system.190 Aplysia parvula from Guam grazes on Portieria hornemannii that contains the fish-feeding
deterrents apakaochtodenes A 167 and B 168 and accumulates these metabolites in its digestive glands. The
choice of diet confers some protection to the mollusk since body parts of A. parvula were unpalatable to reef fish;
in contrast, body parts from animals that had been feeding on the chemically unprotected red alga Acanthophora
spicifera were consumed. This study also provided some insight into the effect of dietary concentration on
feeding behavior by sea hares. Low concentrations (<2.0% algal wet mass) of P. hornemannii crude extract did
not deter feeding by A. parvula, however, testing at higher concentrations (4 or 6%) significantly deterred
feeding. The purified metabolites 167 or 168 were deterrent at all concentrations tested, but this unexpected
result may have been a consequence of the feeding protocol used.43 In Southern Australia (NSW), sea hares of
the genus Aplysia feed on red algae such as Laurencia obtusa and D. pulchra. In its natural habitat, A. parvula
consumes larger quantities of L. obtusa than D. pulchra, yet this sea hare typically contains halogenated
metabolites that are characteristic of Delisea plants rather than of Laurencia plants.44 Halogenated furanones
can be detected in high concentrations, on average 12–13% of the dry mass of an animal, and with the yield of
metabolite 44 exceeding 30% of the dry mass in some animals. Furanone 44 is an effective fish antifeedant in
contrast to the sequestered furanone 45, which is present in lower concentrations to that present in the plant.
Compound uptake is specific since some plant compounds, notably the acetylated 169, are not detected in the
sea hare. The sequestered metabolites are accumulated in the digestive glands of the mollusks.44,68 A. parvula
also ingests metabolites diagnostic of L. obtusa including palisadin A 170 and palisadin B 171 but these
metabolites are not stored and can be detected in mucous and opaline secretions. Aplysia dactylomela also
acquires 170 and may convert this into 171 and 172 prior to excretion.44
Recent studies have examined the chemical basis of sea hare response to attack and have identified amino
acid constituents in the opaline glands and ink secretions of A. californica that stimulate a false feeding response
(‘phagomimicry’) as well as confused behavior in the shiny lobster (Panulirus interruptus).194,195 Both ink and
opaline secretions are acidic, believed to enhance behavioral responses.196 The importance of inking as a
deterrent mechanism is revealed by feeding assays in which reef fish consumed frozen mollusks but did not eat
live specimens.43

4.12.8.2 Sacoglossans
Sacoglossans are a group of mollusks with a specialized diet of green algae from which they sequester
metabolites that may play a role in their chemical defense. Chloroplasts, also of algal origin, are functional
symbionts in many species of sacoglossans and convert bicarbonate into sugar products that are ultimately used
for the synthesis of ‘polypropionate’ metabolites. Experimental evidence in support of the proposed defensive
role of either acquired or de novo metabolites in sacoglossans has been limited by metabolite instability or by the
small amounts available for bioassays.
 CHO CO2Me
OH
OAc NH
AcO OAc
NH
174
173 MeO2C
O 175
OAc
OAc
O
CH2OH
OAc
Br OAc
177

Br OH OH O

OH O AcO 179
176
178
H2N
O
O
O HN HN
O H O
O OMe O NH
4 O
N O
MeO O
HN HN
O O
180 181 O
HN O NH
HN H
O N
O O O OMe O
HN O O
O Ph
H
N N
HO H
OMe O 184 O
182 183
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 527

In a classic study, Elysiella pusilla (¼ Elysia halimedae) was shown to acquire the diterpenoid metabolite
halimedatetraacetate 16 from its algal diet of Halimeda macroloba and to convert this metabolite into the alcohol
173 that is stored in high concentrations in its body, mucus, and egg masses. Both 16 and 173 deterred feeding
by reef fish at natural concentrations, yet the alcohol is the single major metabolite in the mollusk, which does
not sequester the more potent feeding deterrent halimedatrial 17.197 Oxynoid mollusks of the genera Ascobulla
(¼ Cylindrobulla), Oxynoe, and Lobiger show an activated chemical defense strategy based on caulerpenyne 21 that
is present in their C. prolifera diet (see Section 4.12.3.1). The Mediterranean species Oxynoe olivacea, Ascobulla
fragilis, and Lobiger serradifalci contain the monoaldehyde oxytoxin-1 23 in external parts. An anatomical study
revealed that oxytoxin-1 is stored in the body parts of O. olivacea (tail) and L. serradifalci (parapodia) that detach
when the mollusks are molested. In O. olivacea and A. fragilis, further modification to the dialdehyde oxytoxin-2
22 also occurs.198 The enzymatic processes involved in the biotransformation of the conjugated enol acetate to
aldehyde functionality have been studied in a cell-free system from O. olivacea, from which the unstable
metabolite pre-oxytoxin-2 174 was characterized.199 The mucus secretions of all three mollusk species,
which are deterrent to marine fish, contain high concentration of oxytoxin-1, while A. fragilis alone retains
the less deterrent caulerpenyne in its internal body parts. Oxytoxin-1 deterred feeding by the marine fish
Thalassoma pavo when incorporated into an artificial diet at 4%; the chemical instability of oxytoxin-2
prevented its assay.198 In a chemical study of Caribbean sacoglossans, six species contained halimedatetraace-
tate 16, caulerpin 175, or avrainvilleol 176, all acquired from their algal diet, while five species were found to
acquire and modify caulerpenyne, including Ascobulla ulla, which in contrast to A. fragilis contains ascobullin-A
177 and -B 178 in which the 1,4-dialdehyde has been further modified into a -lactone ring.200 In contrast,
Elysia crispata contained crispatenine 179, likely derived from algal sources, in addition to the polypropionates
tridachiahydropyrone 180 (for which revised stereochemistry is shown at C-4201) and crispatene 181.202,203
The Indo-Pacific sacoglossan Cyerce nigricans sequesters small amounts of the deterrent terpene chlorodesmin
18 from its dietary alga Chlorodesmis fastigiata. Although crude organic extracts of the mollusk strongly deter
feeding in aquarium assays, neither chlorodesmin nor the two polypropionate metabolites 182 and 183 that
were also isolated provide an effective chemical defense at the concentrations found in this mollusk
species.48,204 The chemical strategies of Mediterranean205 and Caribbean sacoglossans have been compared
and placed in an evolutionary perspective. The more primitive shelled species sequester or biotransform
Caulerpa metabolites, while shell-less species of the Elysiodea frequently contain polypropionate metabolites.200
Sacoglossan polypropionate compounds are biosynthesized de novo,206 and various ecological roles have been
proposed for them.206,207
The Hawaiian sacoglossan Elysia rufescens sequesters the depsipeptide metabolite kahalalide F 184 from its
algal diet Bryopsis sp. Both algal and mollusk extracts were deterrent when tested against natural populations of
reef fish, as was the peptide metabolite.208 Kahalalide F shows potent cytotoxicity against a range of tumor cell
lines.209

4.12.8.3 Nudibranchs
Nudibranchs are soft-bodied mollusks that feed on sponges, ascidians, or soft corals, or on other mollusks. They
often exhibit a range of chemical types and structures that reflect their choices of food. Many of the sequestered
metabolites are toxic, and they are often localized in specialized spherical dorsal glands called mantle dermal
formations (MDFs), or in the mantle border or in the gills, parts of the animals that may be expected to be prone
to predation. Given the complex life cycle, communication, and reproductive needs of nudibranchs, the
sequestered metabolites may play multiple ecological roles. Some nudibranchs manufacture their own meta-
bolites, thereby reducing their dependence on an external food source; this strategy may have ecological
benefits during reproduction.210–212
Chemically defended nudibranchs are often highly colored as a warning to predators. One of the first
comprehensive studies on sponge–nudibranch chemistry involved the conspicuous Spanish dancer nudibranch
Hexabranchus sanguineus and its dietary sponge Halichondria spp., which both contain macrolide metabolites.
Halichondramide 185 was found only in sponge tissue, but its dihydro- and tetrahydro- analogues 186 and 187
were present in various body parts including the mantle, in the brightly colored egg masses, and in the mucus
extract of the mollusk, suggesting that the mollusk had modified dietary 185. Two other macrolides of sponge
528 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

origin, the kabiramides B 188 and C 189, were also found in H. sanguineus and its egg ribbons. Each macrolide
deterred feeding by the reef fish T. lunare.213

H
OHC O O
N
Me OMe O OMe O O N
H
OH O SCN
N 191
185 X = O
186 5,6-dihydro; X = O 5 O
187 5,6-dihydro; X = H, OH 190
N O

X
OMe 192

OHC O
N
OMe O OR
Me OMe O O N O

OCONH2 O
N
188 R = H O
189 R = Me
193 194 O
N O

OH
OMe

Although a link between deterrency and color was not confirmed in a study on sponge extracts,83 it appears
that color, taste, and olfactory cues together provide phyllidid nudibranchs with an effective antipredator
defense against reef fish.21 There are many reports of sponge-derived isocyano compounds in phyllidid
nudibranchs, yet their ecological role in nudibranchs is unclear. Although some of these sponge and nudibranch
crude extracts show deterrency in feeding assays, studies using purified sponge-derived isocyanide metabolites
have given inconclusive results (Section 4.12.4.2). In a study that confirms dietary transfer, specimens of
Phyllidiella pustulosa consumed 14C-cyanide or thiocyanate-labeled specimens of the sponge A. cavernosa, from
which they acquired radioactive axisonitrile-3 109 and axisothiocyanate-3 190.214
In a second study on dietary transfer, the MDFs of Hypselodoris picta (¼ webbi) assimilate ent-furodysinin 191
or the spiniferins-1 and -2 192 and 193 in addition to their ‘regular’ metabolite longifolin 194 when the
mollusks feed on sponges (Dysidea fragilis; Pleraplysilla spinifera) known to produce these terpenes.215
ent-Furodysinin, whose absolute configuration is inconsistently drawn in some literature,216,217 deters feeding
by the goldfish C. auratus216 and by T. pavo at 4%217 in aquarium assays. Longifolin was active at 300 mg cm–2 in
feeding trials with Carassius carassius and with the marine fish Chromis chromis.132 Two chromodorid
nudibranchs, Ceratosoma trilobatum and C. gracillimum, also sequester 191 and concentrate this metabolite in
their dorsal horn, where it may act as a lure to protect other parts of the mollusk.218
Nudibranchs may selectively concentrate certain allelochemicals alone from their sponge diet, or they may
chemically modify the ingested compounds. The Mediterranean Hypselodoris orsini transforms the dietary dialde-
hyde metabolite scalaradial 195 into deoxoscalarin 196, concentrated in the viscera, and into 6-keto-deoxoscalarin
197 found in MDFs.219 In Guam, the nudibranch Glossodoris pallida converts scalaradial 195 from its sponge diet of
Cacospongia sp. (a sponge previously described as Hyrtios erecta) into deoxoscalarin 196. G. pallida also contains
dietary desacetylscalaradial 198, but does not sequester the major sponge metabolite scalarin 199.131,220 Other
glossodorid nudibranchs feed on sponges that contain heteronemin 200.131 Collections of G. pallida from China, and
of glossodorid mollusks from Australia contain a series of 12-oxo scalaranes that may also be formed by dietary
modification.221
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 529

HO HO AcO
OR CHO OAc O OAc O O
OH
CHO O

H H H H H H OAc
H H

H H H H
X
195 R = Ac 196 X = H2 199 200
198 R = H 197 X = O

The ecological significance of the metabolite patterns in these mollusk species is not yet fully understood,
although it is proposed that the oxidative transformations may provide detoxification mechanisms.
Deoxoscalarin 196 is found in the reproductive system, eggs, and mantle border of G. pallida, while desace-
tylscalaradial 198 and scalaradial 195 are predominantly present in the mantle border. Although removal of the
nudibranch mantle increases susceptibility to predation by reef fish, the specific location of the diet-derived
terpenes in the mollusk was not considered significant.220 Nor does the presence of deoxoscalarin 196 provide
protection to the egg masses of G. pallida since these are eaten by a variety of fishes.131 When tested for their
deterrent effects against a range of predators, Cacospongia and Glossodoris extracts and metabolites have given
variable results. Crude extracts from glossodorid nudibranchs do not deter feeding by the pufferfish C. solandri
at ecologically relevant concentrations, but some host sponge extracts are deterrent.131 Laboratory experiments
first revealed that freshwater and marine fish rejected food after tasting pellets containing scalaradial 195 at
60 mg cm2 or deoxoscalarin 196 at 250 mg cm2.132 A later study established that scalaradial 195 and hetero-
nemin 200 lack deterrency, while scalarin 199 was a feeding attractant when tested against C. solandri.93,131 In
laboratory assays using the crab Leptodius sp., scalaradial (195) was deterrent when incorporated into squid
pieces at 2.5% dry mass.220 In the field, scalaradial 195 and heteronemin 200 deterred feeding by reef fishes at
one location (Haps Reef) when tested at 2.5 and 1.5% respectively, but scalaradial 195 was not deterrent when
tested at 1.5% at a second site (Fingers Reef). A 1:1 mixture of scalaradial 195 and scalarin 199 was deterrent
when tested at a combined concentration of 1% at Haps Reef.131 Glossodorid nudibranchs may live on
chemically defended sponges to avoid accidental predation rather than to acquire an antipredator chemi-
cal.131,222 The glossodorid nudibranchs typically prefer to feed on basal pieces of sponge tissue where they are
better protected from potential predators, even though these locations are less concentrated in defensive
chemicals than are the tips. In contrast, C. solandri or reef fishes did not express any preference for foods
containing low rather than high concentrations of the sponge extracts.222 These studies highlight the impor-
tance of testing marine metabolites at varying concentrations against a range of potential predators.
Some nudibranchs species feed on coelenterates, ascidians, or bryozoans rather than on sponges. In Guam
the aeolid nudibranch Phyllodesmium guamensis is a cryptic, nocturnal species that lacks the nematocyst-based
defense of other aeolid nudibranchs, and grazes on soft coral species including S. maxima and S. polydactyla. Intact
nudibranchs or their cerata are rejected, in contrast to mantle or viscera, when provided to C. solandri in
laboratory assays. Field assays give variable results; some reef fishes consume body parts while other fishes
including the butterfly fish Chaetodon auriga, reject them. The mollusk bioaccumulates the diterpene
11-acetoxypukalide 117 from S. maxima and stores this metabolite in its cerata. Mantle tissue contains lesser
amounts of 117 while traces are also evident in mucus and egg masses of the nudibranchs. Metabolite uptake is
selective since the related soft coral metabolite pukalide 116 was not sequestered. In the laboratory,
11-acetoxypukalide deters feeding by C. solandri when mixed into an artificial food diet at 0.5% of dry
mass; this concentration is an order of magnitude less than that found in the cerata, but similar to that found in
the viscera. However, 117 was not found to be an effective defense when tested at 5 and 9% of dry mass in field
assays that involved omnivorous reef fishes, a result which may explain the nocturnal behavioral pattern of this
nudibranch.223 In an earlier study, extracts from Sinularia soft corals at 3–7%, and terpene 117 at 2%, were
deterrent against reef fishes, while much higher concentrations (19–20%) were required to deter feeding by
C. unimaculatus, which selectively feeds on the corals.140
530 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

Dense colonies of the dendronotid nudibranch T. hamnerorum have been observed feeding on the sea fan G.
ventalina from which the mollusks sequester defensive chemicals. In both field and laboratory assays, fishes
rejected nudibranch tissue, while squid pellets containing natural volumetric concentrations of nudibranch
extract deterred feeding by T. bifasciatum in laboratory assays. Feeding assay-guided fractionation of both
nudibranch and gorgonian extracts led to the isolation of the sesquiterpene julieannafuran 201, present in higher
concentrations in nudibranch tissue compared to gorgonian tissue, and which was responsible for the deterrency.
None of the other chemicals isolated from the nudibranch or the gorgonian showed any significant deterrency.224
The shelled gastropod Cyphoma gibbosum that also inhabits G. ventalina did not contain any gorgonian metabo-
lites.224 In an earlier study, extracts of G. ventalina deterred feeding by C. gibbosum and by reef fishes when
incorporated into an artificial diet at 12%. Sclerites afforded an additional defense; in contrast to the gorgonians
described in Section 4.12.5.2, deterrent chemicals are uniformly distributed throughout the colony.225
Some groups of nudibranchs, typically those from temperate waters, manufacture their own defensive
terpenoid chemicals; this may be a response to the lack of terpenes in the preferred sponge diet.210,211 The
ability to synthesize defensive metabolites confers an ecological advantage over sequestration, and is regarded
as an evolutionary advance.226
De novo biosynthesis in nudibranchs was first demonstrated when Cimino et al.227 incorporated radiolabeled
mevalonate into polygodial 202, a sesquiterpene metabolite of Dendrodoris limbata and of Dendrodoris grandiflora.
Polygodial, first isolated from plants, is a well-established antifeedant against insects and worms. The hot taste
of 202 may be linked to interaction of the aldehyde groups with the amino groups of taste receptors. In
nudibranchs, 202 is concentrated in mantle tissue (up to 3.9 mg per animal), and shows potent antifeedant
effects against the marine fish C. chromis and the freshwater fish C. carassius, consistent with a deterrent role
in situ. Treated food particles were ‘mouthed but immediately rejected by the fish, the minimum inhibitory
concentration being 30 mg cm2’, while a series of related sesquiterpene esters were inactive and may represent
detoxification products.132 A more recent study also highlights the repugnant effects of polygodial. Two species
of fish offered food containing extracts from the nudibranch Doriopsilla pharpa learnt to reject the food; the
antifeedant effect was then traced to the presence of 202.228
7-Deacetoxyolepupuane 203 has been found in the hermaphrodite gland and in egg masses in several
species of nudibranch. Even though 203 is also found in sponges of the genus Dysidea, its de novo origin from
mevalonate was recently established in two nudibranch species, D. limbata and Dendrodoris arborescens. Time-
course studies suggest that this metabolite may be a biosynthetic precursor for drimane metabolites such as 202
in these mollusks.229 Although 203 has been described as less deterrent than 202,229 it significantly deterred
feeding when incorporated into agar strips and provided to the spongivorous fish Pomacanthus imperator in
laboratory assays. Further, the compound caused necrosis in adjoining sponges, including Cacospongia sp.230 The
related olepupuane 204 from Doriopsilla spp. represents a protected form of 202231 and inhibits feeding of the
Pacific damsel fish Dascyllus aruanus at 15–20 mg mg1 of pellet, and is considered as effective as 202.232

AcO OAc
OAc CHO O
OH
CHO H
O OAc

O R O
H H H
203 R = H 206
201 202 205
204 R = OAc
OH
OAc
O O OH H Cl
O
Br
N 211
209
H
CHO O
H
208 Br 210
207
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 531

Other deterrent nudibranch metabolites that are shown to be biosynthesized de novo include the antifee-
dant233 albicanyl acetate 205 in Cadlina luteomarginata,234 the ichthyotoxic diterpenoic acid glyceride verrucosin
A 206 from Doris verrucosa,235 and the sesquiterpene-derived 207 from Archidoris montereyensis,236,237 which was
active in an assay using the tidepool sculpin Ologocottus maculosus.236 2,6-Dimethylheptenal 208, whose meva-
lonate origin has been established, may be responsible for the repellent nature of gland extracts from Melibe
leonina238 although this could not be demonstrated by fish-feeding assay.236

4.12.8.4 Other Mollusks

The haminol metabolites are found in parapodia and other external parts of Haminoea spp. and their mollusk
predators, and they act primarily as alarm pheromones rather than antifeedants.239 Haminol-2 209 has been
shown to derive de novo in Haminoea orbignyana from nicotinic acid via the polyketide pathway.240,241 Unusually,
the related species Haminoea cyanomarginata contains the bromopyran metabolite 210, a typical sponge meta-
bolite, even though the mollusk is a herbivore. Compound 210 was unpalatable to the marine shrimp Palaemon
elegans when provided in artificial food at a natural volumetric concentration.242 In field assays, the related
compound 211 of H. cymbalum from Guam deters feeding by carnivorous fishes.243
The opisthobranch mollusk Bulla striata contains aglajne 1–3 212–214 for which a polypropionate origin has
been established by radiochemical labeling;244 these metabolites, which are deterrent in laboratory assays with
the freshwater fish C. auratus, are localized in glands along the margin of the mantle and in mollusk secretions,
consistent with a defensive role.239 Carnivorous Aglajide mollusks feed on Bulla species from which they
acquire the aglajne metabolites.245 Vallartanone B 215 for which the C-8 configuration has been revised by total
synthesis246 is a metabolite of the pulmonate limpet Siphonaria maura that shows some fish-feeding deterrency in
laboratory assays.247 Experimental evidence supporting an antifeedant role for other siphonariid polypropio-
nate metabolites is lacking, although the compounds are localized in the foot tissue and in the mucus trails of
these mollusks.206 Antifeedant activity has been suggested for membrenone A 216 from the notaspidean
mollusk Pleurobranchus membranaceus on the basis of a preliminary bioassay against C. auratus and the localization
of this polypropionate in the skin of this mollusk.248 The Antarctic shell-less mollusk Clione antarctica contains
the polyketide pteroenone 217 that is deterrent to fish. The amphipod Hyperiella dilatata attaches individuals of
C. antarctica to its back, thereby taking advantage of this chemical defense to avoid predation.249

O
HO
O O O O
212 O 213

H O
O O O O
8
O O O O
O
O
214 H
OH O

(215) 216
OMe OMe
Br Br Br Br R
O OH

HO OH O CO2Na
O O
N NH (CH2)4 NH N 219 R = CH2 = CH
217
220 R = CH3CH2
O O
218
532 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

The cryptic gastropterid mollusk Sagaminopteron nigropunctatum and the brightly colored Sagaminopteron
psychedelicum both feed on the sponge D. granulosa from which they sequester polybrominated diphenyl
ethers.250 In addition to cryptic coloration, the chemical deterrency of these mollusks provides a defense
against predators. The major metabolite 110 which is concentrated in mantle tissue, mucus, and parapodia of
both species, and in the egg masses of S. nigropunctatum,250 deters feeding by pufferfish, crabs, and sea hares at
concentrations below those found in these two mollusks.93,127 In aquarium assays, pufferfish avoid eating
S. nigropunctatum. This mollusk prefers to feed on sponge ectosomal tissue250 where cyanobacterial symbionts
responsible for bromoether synthesis are localized.134 The same dietary strategy is shared by the gastropod
mollusk T. perversa, which selects the ectosomal tissue of A. aerophoba from which it acquires bromotyrosine
metabolites including aerophobin-2 59.251 In the sponge, these compounds are localized in specialized surface
(spherulous) cells that are known to have a defensive function. The mollusk stores the sequestered alkaloids in
mantle, mucus, and egg masses.252 At natural concentrations, crude extracts of T. perversa and from their egg
masses were more deterrent to damselfish than were sponge extracts; individual alkaloids were not tested in
these assays. The presence of aerothionin 218, a metabolite of Aplysina cavernicola but not of A. aerophoba, in the
mollusk may be due to biotransformation of sequestered alkaloids.251
The majority of mollusks search out food by as yet unknown mechanisms that may be related to the
chemical composition of their diet. A recent report of interest is that the muricid gastropod Drupella cornus
which is a voracious predator of coral tissue locates its food source Montipora sp. through the presence of water-
soluble sodium salts of montiporic acids C and D, 219 and 220, that are released in the mucus of this hard coral
species.253

4.12.9 Other Marine Organisms

4.12.9.1 Worms
Bioassay-guided fractionation of the marine annelid worm Cirriformia tentaculata has led to the isolation of three
2-alkylpyrrole sulfamates 221–223. Feeding deterrency studies using food pellets that nutritionally mimicked
the worm revealed that mixtures of the three metabolites reduced feeding by T. bifasciatum by 80%. 254,255
The marine worm Saccoglossus kowalevskii is unpalatable to fishes, and this has been traced to the presence of
2,3,4-tribromopyrrole 224. Other marine worms that are known to produce brominated metabolites failed to
deter predation, as did a range of brominated aromatic compounds, previously reported as natural products,
when tested at natural concentrations.256,257 Like nudibranchs, marine worms are often brightly colored and this
may be an important component of their survival strategy. A correlation between bright colors and unpalat-
ability was found when testing marine worm extracts for antipredator effects;258 an earlier study in sponges had
found no such correlation.83

–
O
Br Br
+
O
H2 N HO O
N NH
n N Br NH
SO3 – H HO
R
+ 221 n = 1 OH
Na 222 n = 2 224 225 R = CH2OH
223 n = 3 226 R = H

A polyclad flatworm (planocerid sp. 1) collected in Guam was found to contain the neurotoxin tetrodotoxin
(TTX; 225 and 11-nortetrodotoxin-6(S)-ol 226 which it uses to kill mobile prey such as gastropod mollusks.
Consistent with a role in prey capture, levels of TTX in the flatworm decreased after they were fed on cowries.
Although an antipredation role has been implied for TTX in some terrestrial species, its presence does not
prevent flatworms from being consumed by reef fish.259
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 533

4.12.10 Conclusions

The studies described above show that many factors, both acquired and environmental, determine the fitness of
an organism in the marine environment. Many organisms have adapted to the competitive marine environment
by production of chemical defenses that help ensure their survival; in some cases, a mixture of chemicals may
act synergistically to provide an optimal defense. The complexity of marine food chains can result in the same
molecule playing a deterrent role in a suite of organisms, and against a range of predators. Specialized chemical
defenses may be required at certain stages of the organism’s life cycle, notably during reproduction processes, or
in egg masses. Many sponges and mollusks defend exposed tissues; even fast-growing algae protect their most
vulnerable tissues. Most significant is that chemical defense does not reside in a single class of marine natural
product; this survey has revealed the potency of all the main classes of marine natural product, including
terpenes and other acetate or propionate-derived compounds, alkaloids, sterols, as well as aromatic products of
shikimate metabolism or of mixed biosynthetic origin. It has also highlighted the need for careful chemical
study to correctly analyze the deterrent molecules, and in particular to identify activated chemical defenses in
which rapid chemical changes may occur on tissue treatment. In conclusion, ecological observations and studies
on antifeedants provide detailed information about the intended biological effects of marine compounds
(see Chapter 4.06), and increasingly also about their likely pharmacological profiles. This knowledge con-
tributes to the development of novel therapeutic and agrochemical agents from marine sources.

References
1. J. Kobayashi; M. Ishibashi, Marine Natural Products and Marine Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products
Chemistry; K. Mori, Ed.; Elsevier: Oxford, 1999; Vol. 8, pp 415–649.
2. J. W. Blunt; M. H. G. Munro, Dictionary of Marine Natural Products; Chapman & Hall: London, 2007.
3. D. J. Faulkner, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2002, 19, 1–49.
4. J. W. Blunt; B. R. Copp; W.-P. Hu; M. H. G. Munro; P. T. Northcote; M. R. Prinsep, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2008, 25, 35–94.
5. V. J. Paul, Ecological Roles of Marine Natural Products; Cornell University Press: Ithaca, 1992.
6. V. J. Paul; M. P. Puglisi, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2004, 21, 189–209.
7. V. J. Paul; M. P. Puglisi; R. Ritson-Williams, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2006, 23, 153–180.
8. V. J. Paul; K. E. Arthur; R. Ritson-Williams; C. Ross; K. Sharp, Biol. Bull. 2007, 213, 226–251.
9. V. J. Paul; R. Ritson-Williams, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2008, 25, 662–695.
10. J. R. Pawlik; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1992, 87, 183–188.
11. D. G. Nagle; F. T. Camacho; V. J. Paul, Mar. Biol. 1998, 132, 267–273.
12. C. D. Harvell; W. Fenical; C. H. Greene, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1988, 49, 287–294.
13. D. P. Pisut; J. R. Pawlik, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2002, 270, 203–214.
14. W. O’Neal; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2002, 240, 117–126.
15. M. E. Hay; W. Fenical, Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 1988, 19, 111–145.
16. G. Cronin; N. Lindquist; M. E. Hay; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1995, 119, 265–273.
17. L. L. Koh; N. K. C. Goh; L. M. Chou; Y. W. Tan, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2000, 251, 103–115.
18. G. L. Cetrulo; M. E. Hay, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 207, 243–253.
19. A. Capper; E. Cruz-Rivera; V. J. Paul; I. R. Tibbetts, Hydrobiologia 2006, 553, 319–326.
20. R.d.A. Epifanio; R. Gabriel; D. L. Martins; G. Muricy, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 2247–2254.
21. R. Ritson-Williams; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2007, 340, 29–39.
22. M. E. Hay; E. Stachowicz; E. Cruz-Rivera; S. Bullard; M. S. Deal; N. Lindquist, Bioassay with Marine and Freshwater
Macroorganisms. In Bioassay Methods: Methods in Chemical Ecology; K. F. Haynes, J. G. Millar, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: New
York, 1998; Vol. 2, pp 39–141.
23. E. Cruz-Rivera; V. J. Paul, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 213–217.
24. P. J. Schupp; V. J. Paul, Ecology 1994, 75, 1172–1185.
25. S. C. Pennings; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1993, 174, 97–113.
26. K. L. Van Alstyne; C. R. Wylie; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1994, 178, 17–34.
27. M. Dunlap; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Biol. 1996, 126, 117–123.
28. N. Lindquist; M. E. Hay; W. Fenical, Ecol. Monogr. 1992, 62, 547–568.
29. H. C. Vervoort; J. R. Pawlik; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1998, 164, 221–228.
30. G. Pohnert, ChemBioChem 2005, 6, 946–959.
31. G. Pohnert, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 4352–4354.
32. V. J. Paul; S. C. Pennings, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1991, 151, 227–243.
33. S. C. Pennings; A. M. Weiss; V. J. Paul, Mar. Biol. 1996, 126, 735–743.
34. R. W. Thacker; D. G. Nagle; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1997, 147, 21–29.
35. D. G. Nagle; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1998, 225, 29–38.
36. M. E. Hay, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1996, 200, 103–134.
534 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

37. C. R. Wylie; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1988, 45, 23–32.
38. S. Ankisetty; S. Nandiraju; H. Win; Y. C. Park; C. D. Amsler; J. B. McClintock; J. A. Baker; T. K. Diyabalanage; A. Pasaribu;
M. P. Singh; W. M. Maiese; R. D. Walsh; M. J. Zaworotko; B. J. Baker, J. Nat. Prod. 2004, 67, 1295–1302.
39. C. D. Amsler; K. Iken; J. B. McClintock; M. O. Amsler; K. J. Peters; J. M. Hubbard; F. B. Furrow; B. J. Baker, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser.
2005, 294, 141–159.
40. Y. M. Huang; J. B. McClintock; C. D. Amsler; K. J. Peters; B. J. Baker, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2006, 329, 55–65.
41. H. Wessels; W. Hagen; M. Molis; C. Wiencke; U. Karsten, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2006, 329, 20–33.
42. A. Vérges; M. A. Becerro; T. Alcoverro; J. Romero, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2007, 343, 107–114.
43. D. W. Ginsburg; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2001, 215, 261–274.
44. C. N. Rogers; R. de Nys; T. S. Charlton; P. D. Steinberg, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 721–744.
45. V. J. Paul, Seaweed Chemical Defenses on Coral Reefs. In Ecological Roles of Marine Natural Products; V. J. Paul, Ed.; Cornell
University Press: Ithaca, 1992; pp 24–92.
46. V. J. Paul; K. L. Van Alstyne, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1992, 160, 191–203.
47. M. E. Hay; V. J. Paul; S. M. Lewis; K. Gustafson; J. Tucker; R. N. Trindell, Oecologia 1988, 75, 233–245.
48. M. E. Hay; J. R. Pawlik; J. E. Duffy; W. Fenical, Oecologia 1989, 81, 418–427.
49. K. D. Meyer; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1992, 82, 249–257.
50. A. A. Erickson; V. J. Paul; K. L. Van Alstyne; L. M. Kwiatkowski, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1883–1895.
51. S. C. Pennings; V. J. Paul, Ecology 1992, 73, 1606–1619.
52. V. Jung; G. Pohnert, Tetrahedron 2001, 57, 7169–7172.
53. V. Jung; T. Thibaut; A. Meinesz; G. Pohnert, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2091–2105.
54. S. Adolph; V. Jung; J. Rattke; G. Pohnert, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2005, 44, 2806–2808.
55. K. D. Meyer; V. J. Paul, Mar. Biol. 1995, 122, 537–545.
56. W. A. Lumbang; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1996, 201, 185–195.
57. G. Cronin; M. E. Hay, Ecology 1996, 77, 1531–1543.
58. J. E. Duffy; M. E. Hay, Ecology 1994, 75, 1304–1319.
59. G. Cronin; M. E. Hay, Ecology 1996, 77, 2287–2301.
60. G. Cronin; V. J. Paul; M. E. Hay; W. Fenical, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 289–302.
61. R. C. Pereira; A. R. Soares; V. L. Teixeira; R. Villaça; B. A. P. da Gama, Bot. Mar. 2004, 47, 202–208.
62. M. A. Vallim; V. L. Teixeira; R. C. Pereira, Braz. J. Oceanogr. 2007, 55, 223–229.
63. J. P. Barbosa; V. L. Teixeira; R. C. Pereira, Bot. Mar. 2004, 47, 147–151.
64. R. B. Taylor; N. Lindquist; J. Kubanek; M. E. Hay, Oecologia 2003, 136, 412–423.
65. R. C. Pereira; B. A. P. da Gama; V. L. Teixeira; Y. Yoneshigue-Valentin, Braz. J. Biol. 2003, 63, 665–672.
66. V. J. Paul; M. E. Hay; J. E. Duffy; W. Fenical; K. Gustafson, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1987, 114, 249–260.
67. J. T. Wright; R. de Nys; A. G. B. Poore; P. D. Steinberg, Ecology 2004, 85, 2946–2959.
68. R. de Nys; P. D. Steinberg; C. N. Rogers; T. S. Charlton; M. W. Duncan, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1996, 130, 135–146.
69. M. E. Hay; J. Piel; W. Boland; I. Schnitzler, Chemoecology 1998, 8, 91–98.
70. I. Schnitzler; W. Boland; M. E. Hay, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1715–1732.
71. M. E. Hay; J. E. Duffy; W. Fenical; K. Gustafson, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1988, 48, 185–192.
72. K. L. Van Alstyne; L. T. Houser, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2003, 250, 175–181.
73. T. Wiesemeier; M. Hay; G. Pohnert, Aquat. Sci. 2007, 69, 403–412.
74. K. L. Van Alstyne; A. V. Nelson; J. R. Vyvyan; D. A. Cancilla, Oecologia 2006, 148, 304–311.
75. K. L. Van Alstyne; S. L. Whitman; J. M. Ehlig, Mar. Biol. 2001, 139, 201–210.
76. J. Kubanek; S. E. Lester; W. Fenical; M. E. Hay, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2004, 277, 79–93.
77. M. S. Deal; M. E. Hay; D. Wilson; W. Fenical, Oecologia 2003, 136, 107–114.
78. P. D. Steinberg, Geographical Variation in the Interaction Between Marine Herbivores and Brown Algal Secondary Metabolites.
In Ecological Roles of Marine Natural Products; V. J. Paul, Ed.; Cornell University Press: Ithaca, 1992; pp 51–92.
79. K. L. Van Alstyne; M. N. Dethier; D. O. Duggins, Spatial Patterns in Macroalgal Chemical Defenses. In Marine Chemical
Ecology; J. B. McClintock, B. J. Baker, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2001; pp 301–324.
80. C. D. Amsler; V. A. Fairhead, Adv. Bot. Res. 2005, 43, 1–91.
81. V. J. Paul, Chemical Defenses of Benthic Marine Invertebrates. In Ecological Roles of Marine Natural Products; V. J. Paul, Ed.;
Cornell University Press: Ithaca, 1992; pp 164–187.
82. J. R. Pawlik, Chem. Rev. 1993, 93, 1911–1922.
83. J. R. Pawlik; B. Chanas; R. J. Toonen; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1995, 127, 183–194.
84. B. Waddell; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 195, 125–132.
85. B. Waddell; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 195, 133–144.
86. G. J. Bakus; G. Green, Science 1974, 185, 951–953.
87. B. McClintock; D. Swenson; H. Trapido-Rosenthal; L. Banghart, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1607–1620.
88. J. E. Thompson; R. P. Walker; D. J. Faulkner, Mar. Biol. 1985, 88, 11–21.
89. J. T. Wright; K. Benkendorff; A. R. Davis, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1997, 213, 199–213.
90. M. A. Becerro; R. W. Thacker; X. Turon; M. J. Uriz; V. J. Paul, Oecologia 2003, 135, 91–101.
91. F. B. Furrow; C. D. Amsler; J. B. McClintock; B. J. Baker, Mar. Biol. 2003, 143, 443–449.
92. J. B. McClintock; C. D. Amsler; B. J. Baker; R. W. M. Van Soest, Integr. Comp. Biol. 2005, 45, 359–368.
93. S. C. Pennings; S. R. Pablo; V. J. Paul; J. E. Duffy, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1994, 180, 137–149.
94. B. Chanas; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1995, 127, 195–211.
95. B. Chanas; J. R. Pawlik, Oecologia 1996, 107, 225–231.
96. A. C. Jones; J. E. Blum; J. R. Pawlik, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2005, 322, 67–81.
97. M. S. Hill; N. A. Lopez; K. A. Young, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2005, 291, 93–102.
98. J. R. Carney; K. L. Rinehart, J. Nat. Prod. 1995, 58, 971–985.
99. R. Ebel; M. Brenzinger; A. Kunze; H. J. Gross; P. Proksch, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1451–1462.
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 535

100. C. Thoms; M. Wolff; K. Padmakumar; R. Ebel; P. Proksch, Z. Natursforsch 2004, 59C, 113–122.
101. B. Weiss; R. Ebel; M. Elbrächter; M. Kirchner; P. Proksch, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1996, 24, 1–12.
102. C. Thoms; R. Ebel; P. Proksch, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 97–123.
103. M. Puyana; W. Fenical; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2003, 246, 127–135.
104. C. Thoms; P. J. Schupp, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 1242–1252.
105. B. Chanas; J. R. Pawlik; T. Lindel; W. Fenical, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1996, 208, 185–196.
106. E. Richelle-Maurer; M. J. De Kluijver; S. Feio; S. Gaudêncio; H. Gaspar; R. Gomez; R. Tavares; G. Van de Vyver; R. W. M. Van
Soest, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2003, 31, 1073–1091.
107. M. Assmann; E. Lichte; J. R. Pawlik; M. Köck, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 207, 255–262.
108. T. Lindel; H. Hoffmann; M. Hochgurtel; J. R. Pawlik, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1477–1496.
109. M. Assmann; S. Zea; M. Köck, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 1593–1595.
110. M. Assmann; R. W. M. Van Soest; M. Köck, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 1345–1347.
111. D. M. Wilson; M. Puyana; W. Fenical; J. R. Pawlik, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 2811–2823.
112. P. J. Schupp; C. Eder; V. J. Paul; P. Proksch, Mar. Biol. 1999, 135, 573–580.
113. B. Moon; B. J. Baker; J. B. McClintock, J. Nat. Prod. 1998, 61, 116–118.
114. B. Moon; Y. C. Park; J. B. McClintock; B. J. Baker, Tetrahedron 2000, 56, 9057–9062.
115. C. A. Volk; M. Köck, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2004, 2, 1827–1830.
116. C. A. Volk; M. Köck, Org. Lett. 2003, 3, 3567–3569.
117. S. Albrizio; P. Ciminiello; E. Fattorusso; S. Magno; J. R. Pawlik, J. Nat. Prod. 1995, 58, 647–652.
118. M. J. Garson; R. J. Clark; R. I. Webb; K. L. Field; R. D. Charan; E. J. McCaffrey, Mem. Qld. Mus. 1999, 44, 205–213.
119. K. M. Green; B. M. Russell; R. J. Clark; M. K. Jones; M. J. Garson; G. A. Skilleter; B. M. Degnan, Mar. Biol. 2002, 140, 355–363.
120. J. Kubanek; W. Fenical; J. R. Pawlik, Nat. Prod. Lett. 2001, 15, 275–285.
121. J. Kubanek; J. R. Pawlik; T. M. Eve; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 207, 69–77.
122. J. Kubanek; K. E. Whalen; S. Engel; S. R. Kelly; T. P. Henkel; W. Fenical; J. R. Pawlik, Oecologia 2002, 131, 125–136.
123. J. R. Pawlik; G. McFall; S. Zea, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1103–1115.
124. M. Tsoukatou; C. Hellio; C. Vagias; C. Harvala; V. Roussis, Z. Naturforsch. 2002, 57C, 161–171.
125. A. Carotenuto; E. Fattorusso; V. Lanzotti; S. Magno; L. Mayol, Liebigs Ann. 1996, 77–81.
126. C. D. Amsler; K. B. Iken; J. B. McClintock; B. J. Baker, Secondary Metabolites from Antarctic Marine Organisms and Their Ecological
Implications. In Marine Chemical Ecology; J. B. McClintock, B. J. Baker, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2001; pp 267–300.
127. J. E. Duffy; V. J. Paul, Oecologia 1992, 90, 333–339.
128. S. C. Bobzin; D. J. Faulkner, J. Chem. Ecol. 1992, 18, 309–332.
129. M. J. Uriz; X. Turon; M. A. Becerro; J. Galera, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1996, 205, 187–204.
130. B. J. Burreson; P. J. Scheuer; J. Finer; J. Clardy, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1975, 97, 4763–4764.
131. S. D. Rogers; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1991, 77, 221–232.
132. G. Cimino; S. De Rosa; S. De Stefano; G. Sodano, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1982, 73B, 471–474.
133. M. J. Garson; J. S. Simpson, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2004, 21, 164–179.
134. M. D. Unson; N. D. Holland; D. J. Faulkner, Mar. Biol. 1994, 119, 1–11.
135. M. A. Becerro; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2004, 280, 115–128.
136. G. B. Elyakov; T. Kuznetsova; V. V. Mikhailov; I. I. Maltsev; V. G. Voinov; S. A. Fedoreyev, Experientia 1991, 47, 632–633.
137. O. Gillor; S. Carmeli; Y. Rahamim; Z. Fishelson; M. Ilan, Mar. Biotech. 2000, 2, 213–223.
138. J. C. Coll, Chem. Rev. 1992, 90, 613–631.
139. T. L. Aceret; P. W. Sammarco; J. C. Coll; Y. Uchio, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 2001, 128C, 55–63.
140. C. R. Wylie; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1989, 129, 141–160.
141. D. J. Gerhart; J. C. Coll, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 2697–2704.
142. M. Slattery; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2008, 354, 169–179.
143. K. Michalek-Wagner; B. F. Bowden, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1543–1562.
144. P. M. Alino; P. W. Sammarco; J. C. Coll, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1992, 164, 209–220.
145. M. Slattery; J. Starmer; V. J. Paul, Mar. Biol. 2001, 138, 1183–1193.
146. J. C. Coll; B. F. Bowden; A. Heaton; P. J. Scheuer; M. K. W. Li; J. Clardy; G. K. Schulte; J. Finer-Moore, J. Chem. Ecol. 1989, 15,
1177–1191.
147. M. Slattery; G. A. Hines; J. Starmer; V. J. Paul, Coral Reefs 1999, 18, 75–84.
148. J. N. Q. Kerr; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1995, 186, 183–205.
149. L. F. Maia; R.d.A. Epifanio; T. Eve; W. Fenical, J. Nat. Prod. 1999, 62, 1322–1324.
150. R.d.A. Epifanio; L. F. Maia; W. Fenical, J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2000, 11, 584–591.
151. M. P. Puglisi; V. J. Paul; M. Slattery, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2000, 207, 263–272.
152. M. P. Puglisi; V. J. Paul; J. Biggs; M. Slattery, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2002, 239, 105–114.
153. R.d.A. Epifanio; L. F. Maia; J. R. Pawlik; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2007, 329, 307–310.
154. R. G. Kerr; L. C. Rodrigues; J. Kellman, Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 8301–8304.
155. R. S. Thornton; R. G. Kerr, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 2083–2090.
156. R. G. Kerr; A. C. Kohl; T. A. Ferns, J. Ind. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2006, 33, 532–538.
157. C. D. Harvell; W. Fenical; V. Roussis; J. L. Ruesink; C. C. Griggs; C. H. Greene, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1993, 93, 165–173.
158. W. Fenical; J. R. Pawlik, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1991, 75, 1–8.
159. M. Slattery; J. B. McClintock, Mar. Biol. 1995, 122, 461–470.
160. K. B. Iken; B. J. Baker, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 888–890.
161. J. J. Stachowicz; N. Lindquist, Oecologia 2000, 124, 280–288.
162. N. Lindquist, J. Nat. Prod. 2002, 65, 681–684.
163. D. Stoecker, Biol. Bull. 1978, 155, 615–626.
164. S. Odate; J. R. Pawlik, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 643–654.
165. S. López-Legentil; X. Turon; P. J. Schupp, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 2006, 332, 27–36.
536 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants

166. J. B. McClintock; M. O. Amsler; C. D. Amsler; K. J. Southworth; C. Petrie; B. J. Baker, Mar. Biol. 2004, 145, 885–894.
167. X. Turon; S. López-Legentil; B. Banaigs, Invert. Biol. 2005, 124, 355–369.
168. S. López-Legentil; R. Dieckmann; N. Bontemps-Subielos; X. Turon; B. Banaigs, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2005, 33, 1107–1119.
169. S. López-Legentil; N. Bontemps-Subielos; X. Turon; B. Banaigs, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2079–2084.
170. S. López-Legentil; N. Bontemps-Subielos; X. Turon; B. Banaigs, Mar. Biol. 2007, 151, 293–299.
171. D. J. Faulkner; M. K. Harper; M. G. Haygood; C. E. Salomon; E. W. Schmidt, Symbiotic Bacteria in Sponges: Sources of
Bioactive Substances. In Drugs from the Sea; N. Fusetani, Ed.; Karger: Basel, 2000; pp 107–119.
172. M. H. R. Seleghim; de S. P. Lira; P. T. Campana; R. G. S. Berlinck; M. R. Custódio, Mar. Biol. 2007, 150, 967–975.
173. N. Lindquist; M. E. Hay, Ecology 1995, 76, 1347–1358.
174. N. Lindquist, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1987–2000.
175. V. J. Paul; N. Lindquist; W. Fenical, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1990, 59, 109–118.
176. A. R. Davis, Mar. Biol. 1991, 111, 375–379.
177. J. Sharp; M. K. Winson; J. S. Porter, Nat. Prod. Rep. 2007, 24, 659–673.
178. N. Lopanik; N. Lindquist; N. Targett, Oecologia 2004, 139, 131–139.
179. N. Lopanik; N. M. Targett; N. Lindquist, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2006, 327, 183–191.
180. N. Lopanik; K. R. Gustafson; N. Lindquist, J. Nat. Prod. 2004, 67, 1412–1414.
181. S. K. Davidson; S. W. Allen; G. E. Lim; C. M. Anderson; M. G. Haygood, Appl. Env. Microbiol. 2001, 67, 4531–4537.
182. J. T. Walls; A. J. Blackman; D. A. Ritz, Hydrobiologia 1995, 297, 163–172.
183. B. K. Carté; D. J. Faulkner, J. Chem. Ecol. 1986, 12, 795–804.
184. C. Avila, Oceanogr. Mar. Biol. 1995, 33, 487–559.
185. D. J. Faulkner, Chemical Defenses of Marine Molluscs. In Ecological Roles of Marine Natural Products; V. J. Paul, Ed.; Cornell
University Press: Ithaca, 1992; pp 119–163.
186. J. J. Stachowicz, Chemical Ecology of Mobile Benthic Invertebrates. In Marine Chemical Ecology; J. B. McClintock, B. J. Baker,
Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2001; pp 157–194.
187. S. S. Mitchell; D. J. Faulkner; K. Rubins; F. D. Bushman, J. Nat. Prod. 2000, 63, 279–282.
188. H. Luesch; R. E. Moore; V. J. Paul; S. L. Mooberry; T. H. Corbett, J. Nat. Prod. 2001, 64, 907–910.
189. V. J. Paul; E. Cruz-Rivera; R. W. Thacker, Chemical Mediation of Macroalgal-Herbivore Interactions: Ecological and Evolutionary
Perspectives. In Marine Chemical Ecology; J. B. McClintock, B. J. Baker, Eds.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, 2001; pp 227–265.
190. S. C. Pennings; V. J. Paul, Mar. Biol. 1993, 117, 535–546.
191. W. A. Gallimore; D. L. Galario; C. Lacy; Y. Zhu; P. J. Scheuer, J. Nat. Prod. 2000, 63, 1022–1026.
192. S. C. Pennings; V. J. Paul; D. C. Dunbar; M. T. Hamann; W. A. Lumbang; B. Novack; R. S. Jacobs, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 735–755.
193. J. E. Duffy; M. E. Hay, Ecology 1991, 72, 1286–1298.
194. C. E. Kicklighter; S. Shabani; P. M. Johnson; C. D. Derby, Curr. Biol. 2005, 15, 549–554.
195. C. D. Derby; C. E. Kicklighter; P. M. Johnson; X. Zhang, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1105–1113.
196. S. Shabani; S. Yaldiz; L. Vu; C. D. Derby, J. Comp. Physiol. 2007, 193A, 1195–1204.
197. V. J. Paul; K. L. Van Alstyne, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1988, 119, 15–29.
198. M. Gavagnin; A. Marin; F. Castelluccio; G. Villani; G. Cimino, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1994, 175, 197–210.
199. A. Cutignano; V. Notti; G. d’Ippolito; A. D. Coll; G. Cimino; A. Fontana, Org. Biomol. Chem. 2004, 2, 3167–3171.
200. M. Gavagnin; E. Mollo; D. Montanaro; J. Ortea; G. Cimino, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 1563–1578.
201. P. Sharma; N. Griffiths; J. E. Moses, Org. Lett. 2008, 10, 4025–4027.
202. M. Gavagnin; E. Mollo; G. Cimino; J. Ortea, Tetrahedron Lett. 1996, 37, 4259–4262.
203. M. Gavagnin; E. Mollo; F. Castelluccio; D. Montanaro; J. Ortea; G. Cimino, Nat. Prod. Lett. 1997, 10, 151–156.
204. V. Roussis; J. R. Pawlik; M. E. Hay; W. Fenical, Experientia 1990, 46, 327–329.
205. M. Gavagnin; A. Marin; E. Mollo; A. Crispino; G. Villani; G. Cimino, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1994, 108B, 107–115.
206. M. T. Davies-Coleman; M. J. Garson, Nat. Prod. Rep. 1998, 15, 477–493.
207. V. Di Marzo; A. Marin; R. R. Vardaro; L. De Petrocellis; G. Villani; G. Cimino, Mar. Biol. 1993, 117, 367–380.
208. M. A. Becerro; G. Goetz; V. J. Paul; P. J. Scheuer, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 2287–2299.
209. M. T. Hamann; P. J. Scheuer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1993, 115, 5825–5826.
210. D. J. Faulkner; T. F. Molinski; R. J. Andersen; E. J. Dumdei; E. D. D. Silva, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1990, 97C, 233–240.
211. J. Kubanek; D. J. Faulkner; R. J. Andersen, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 377–389.
212. E. J. Dumdei; J. Kubanek; J. E. Coleman; J. Pika; R. J. Andersen; J. R. Steiner; J. Clardy, Can. J. Chem. 1997, 75, 773–789.
213. J. R. Pawlik; M. R. Kernan; T. F. Molinski; M. K. Harper; D. J. Faulkner, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1988, 119, 99–109.
214. E. J. Dumdei; A. E. Flowers; M. J. Garson; C. J. Moore, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 1997, 118A, 1385–1392.
215. A. Fontana; F. Gimenez; A. Marin; E. Mollo; G. Cimino, Experientia 1994, 50, 510–516.
216. A. Fontana; C. Avila; E. Martinez; J. Ortea; E. Trivellone; G. Cimino, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 339–356.
217. A. Marin; M. D. Lopez; M. A. Esteban; J. Meseguer; J. Munoz; A. Fontana, Mar. Biol. 1998, 131, 639–645.
218. E. Mollo; M. Gavagnin; M. Carbone; Y.-W. Guo; G. Cimino, Chemoecology 2005, 15, 31–36.
219. G. Cimino; A. Fontana; F. Gimenez; A. Marin; E. Mollo; E. Trivellone; E. Zubia, Experientia 1993, 49, 582–586.
220. C. Avila; V. J. Paul, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1997, 150, 171–180.
221. E. Manzo; M. Gavagnin; M. J. Somerville; S.-C. Mao; M. L. Ciavatta; E. Mollo; P. J. Schupp; M. J. Garson; Y.-w. Guo; G. Cimino,
J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 2325–2336.
222. M. A. Becerro; V. J. Paul; J. Starmer, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1998, 77, 221–232.
223. M. Slattery; C. Avila; J. Starmer; V. J. Paul, J. Exp. Mar. Biol. Ecol. 1998, 226, 33–49.
224. G. Cronin; M. E. Hay; W. Fenical; N. Lindquist, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1995, 119, 177–189.
225. K. L. Van Alstyne; V. J. Paul, Coral Reefs 1992, 11, 155–159.
226. D. J. Faulkner; M. T. Ghiselin, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1983, 13, 295–301.
227. G. Cimino; S. De Rosa; S. De Stefano; G. Sodano; G. Villani, Science 1983, 219, 1237–1238.
228. J. D. Long; M. E. Hay, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2006, 307, 199–208.
229. A. Fontana; M. L. Ciavatta; T. Miyamoto; A. Spinella; G. Cimino, Tetrahedron 1999, 55, 5937–5946.
 Marine Natural Products as Antifeedants 537

230. R. W. Thacker; M. A. Becerro; W. A. Lumbang; V. J. Paul, Ecology 1998, 79, 1740–1750.

231. G. Cimino; G. Sodano; A. Spinella, J. Nat. Prod. 1988, 51, 1010–1011.
232. R. K. Okuda; P. J. Scheuer; J. E. Hochlowski; R. P. Walker; D. J. Faulkner, J. Org. Chem. 1983, 48, 1866–1869.
233. J. Hellou; R. J. Andersen; J. T. Thompson, Tetrahedron 1982, 38, 1875–1879.
234. J. Kubanek; E. I. Graziani; R. J. Andersen, J. Org. Chem. 1997, 62, 7239–7246.
235. A. Fontana; A. Tramice; A. Cutignano; G. d’Ippolito; L. Renzulli; G. Cimino, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2003, 3104–3108.
236. K. R. Gustafson; R. J. Andersen, Tetrahedron 1985, 41, 1101–1108.
237. E. I. Graziani; R. J. Andersen; P. J. Krug; D. J. Faulkner, Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 6869–6878.
238. T. Barsby; R. G. Linington; R. J. Andersen, Chemoecology 2002, 12, 199–202.
239. A. Marin; L. A. Alvarez; G. Cimino; A. Spinella, J. Moll. Stud. 1999, 65, 121–131.
240. A. Cutignano; A. Tramice; S. De Caro; G. Villani; G. Cimino; A. Fontana, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2003, 42, 2633–2636.
241. A. Cutignano; G. Cimino; A. Giordano; G. d’Ippolito; A. Fontana, Tetrahedron Lett. 2004, 45, 2627–2629.
242. E. Mollo; M. Gavagnin; M. Carbone; F. Castellucio; F. Pozone; V. Roussis; J. Templado; M. T. Ghiselin; G. Cimino, Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2008, 105, 4582–4586.
243. A. Poiner; V. J. Paul; P. J. Scheuer, Tetrahedron 1989, 45, 617–622.
244. A. Fontana; A. Cutignano; A. Giordano; A. D. Coll; G. Cimino, Tetrahedron Lett. 2004, 45, 6847–6850.
245. G. Cimino; G. Sodano; A. Spinella, J. Org. Chem. 1987, 52, 5326–5331.
246. H. Arimoto; R. Yokoyama; K. Nakamura; Y. Okumura; D. Uemura, Tetrahedron 1996, 52, 13901–13908.
247. D. C. Manker; D. J. Faulkner, J. Org. Chem. 1989, 54, 5374–5377.
248. M. L. Ciavatta; E. Trivellone; G. Villani; G. Cimino, Tetrahedron Lett. 1993, 34, 6791–6794.
249. W. Y. Yoshida; P. J. Bryan; B. J. Baker; J. B. McClintock, J. Org. Chem. 1995, 60, 780–782.
250. M. A. Becerro; J. Starmer; V. J. Paul, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1491–1500.
251. M. A. Becerro; X. Turon; M. J. Uriz; J. Templado, Biol. J. Linn. Soc. 2003, 78, 429–438.
252. R. Ebel; A. Marin; P. Proksch, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 1999, 27, 769–777.
253. M. Kita; M. Kitamura; T. Koyama; T. Teruya; H. Matsumoto; Y. Nakano; D. Uemura, Tetrahedron Lett. 2005, 46, 8583–8585.
254. T. Barsby; C. E. Kicklighter; M. E. Hay; M. C. Sullards; J. Kubanek, J. Nat. Prod. 2003, 66, 1110–1112.
255. C. E. Kicklighter; J. Kubanek; T. Barsby; M. E. Hay, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2003, 263, 299–306.
256. C. E. Kicklighter; J. Kubanek; M. E. Hay, Limnol. Oceanogr. 2004, 49, 430–441.
257. J. D. Cowart; K. T. Fielman; S. A. Woodin; D. E. Lincoln, Mar. Biol. 2000, 136, 993–1002.
258. C. E. Kicklighter; M. E. Hay, Ecol. Monogr. 2006, 76, 195–215.
259. R. Ritson-Williams; M. Yotsu-Yamashita; V. J. Paul, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 3176–3179.

Biographical Sketch

Mary Garson obtained a Ph.D. in organic chemistry under Professor Jim Staunton at the
University of Cambridge, UK in 1977. After postdoctoral work at the Universita Cattolica del
Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy, followed by 2 years in the pharmaceutical industry, she migrated to
Australia in 1983 as a Queen Elizabeth II Research Fellow at James Cook University of North
Queensland where she began to study isocyanide biosynthesis in marine sponges. She has held
academic positions at The University of Wollongong and The University of Queensland, where
she is now a Professor of Chemistry and Deputy Head of the School of Chemistry and Molecular
Biosciences. Her research interests are in determining how the structures of marine natural
products relate to their biological functions, and therefore encompass biosynthesis and ecology.
Additionally she runs a research program exploring the chemistry of medicinal plants from South
East Asia. She is a keen scuba diver, especially in the warm waters of Queensland. From 2003 to
2005, she was chair of the Australian Science Olympiads, and she is currently secretary of
Division III (Organic and Biomolecular) of IUPAC.
 4.13 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe
Interactions
Koichi Yoneyama, Utsunomiya University, Utsunomiya, Japan
Masahiro Natsume, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, Tokyo, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.13.1 Allelochemicals in Plant–Plant Interactions 539

4.13.1.1 Introduction 539
4.13.1.2 Allelochemicals 540
4.13.1.2.1 Alkaloids 540
4.13.1.2.2 Terpenoids 540
4.13.1.2.3 Phenolic compounds 543
4.13.1.2.4 Benzoxazinoids 545
4.13.1.2.5 Glucosinolates and isothiocyanates 546
4.13.1.2.6 Other allelochemicals 546
4.13.1.2.7 Allelochemicals and allelopathy 547
4.13.2 Allelochemicals in Plant–Microbe Interactions 547
4.13.2.1 Introduction 547
4.13.2.2 Symbiosis between Plants and Microbes 548
4.13.2.2.1 Root nodules 548
4.13.2.2.2 Mycorrhizae 552
4.13.2.3 Utilization of Plant Products by Microbes 552
4.13.2.3.1 Host-specific zoospore attractants 552
4.13.2.3.2 Germination inducers of phytopathogens 552
4.13.2.3.3 Other plant chemicals affecting microbial activity 554
4.13.2.4 Self-Defensive Allelochemicals in Plants 554
4.13.2.5 Phytoactive Substances Produced by Microbes 557
4.13.2.6 Allelochemicals in Aquatic Ecosystems 557
References 558

4.13.1 Allelochemicals in Plant–Plant Interactions

4.13.1.1 Introduction
Allelochemicals are chemicals that are released from donor organisms into the environment and affect the
growth and development of receiver organisms. In this section, the chemistries and functions of allelochemicals
involved in plant–plant interactions are reviewed. However, it is likely that some of the compounds active in
plant–plant interactions also participate in the interactions between plants and microorganisms, insects, and
other animals. Although simple inorganic compounds and primary metabolites released from plants and their
decaying residues often have pronounced effects on the growth and development of plants in the vicinity, these
will not be considered as allelochemicals here.
Plants release allelochemicals as volatiles, leaf leachates, and root exudates. In addition, all the constituents
of plant residues are eventually released into the environment through microbial decomposition. During this
process, most allelochemicals lose their activity but some compounds, for example, benzoxazinoids (cyclic
hydroxamic acids), can be activated after hydrolysis.1–3

539
540 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

4.13.1.2 Allelochemicals
4.13.1.2.1 Alkaloids
Although diverse plant alkaloids are active as defensive compounds against invertebrate and vertebrate herbivores,
only a few appear to be involved in plant–plant interactions. For example, it is well known that the purine alkaloid
caffeine (1) causes autotoxicity in coffee and tea plantations.4 Most plant alkaloids including gramine (2) and nicotine
(3) affect seed germination and shoot growth, but at relatively high concentrations (>0.1%). This is higher than the
active concentrations of other allelochemicals, for example, phenolic compounds, that are active at 10–200 ppm.

4.13.1.2.2 Terpenoids
There are a number of allelochemicals among the mono-, sesqui-, and diterpenoids. In particular, plants in arid and
semiarid regions produce diverse volatile terpenoids with allelopathic activity.5 Among the volatile monoterpenes, 1,8-
cineole (4) and camphor (5) exhibit strong growth inhibitory effects on plants and are considered to be involved in plant
competition. 1,4-Cineole (6), a minor isomer of 1,8-cineole, is a potent inhibitor of asparagine synthetase.6 p-Menthane-
3,8-diols (cis 7 and trans 8), p-menth-2-en-1-ols (cis 9 and trans 10), thymol (11), carvacrol (12), 1,8-cineole, -pinene
(13), and -pinene (14) were isolated as allelopathic monoterpenes from Eucalyptus species.7 Eucalyptus trees also
produce allelopathic sesquiterpenes including spathulenol (15), and -, -, and -eudesmols (16–18).7
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 541

Plants belonging to the family Asteraceae, including asters, daisies, and sunflowers, are rich sources of
allelopathic sesquiterpenes and sesquiterpene lactones. Heliannuol A (19) and its related compounds heliannanes,
found in sunflower leaves, are thought to be involved in the allelopathic effects displayed by the plants.8 Some
sesquiterpene lactones such as dehydrocostuslactone (20), santamarine (21), and reynosin (22) have been shown
to induce seed germination of root parasitic plants,9 especially of sunflower broomrape Orobanche cumana.10

Artemisinin (23), isolated from a Chinese medicinal plant, annual wormwood (Artemisia annua L.), is a
unique sesquiterpene lactone bearing an endoperoxide moiety. This compound displays a strong antimalarial
activity and inhibits seed germination and plant growth.11
Rice plants produce various diterpene phytotoxins when elicited by biotic and abiotic stresses. Among these
phytotoxins, momilactones12 (momilactone B, 24) and oryzalexins13 (oryzalexin C, 25) exhibit strong growth
inhibitory effects on cress and other plant species. In particular, momilactone B (24) is a highly potent growth
inhibitor; its concentration in rice tissues and the amounts released from rice plants into the environment are
high enough to suppress the growth of susceptible plant species in the vicinity.14

Quassinoids are bitter components produced by members of the Simaroubaceae. They exhibit diverse
biological activities including anticancer, antimalarial, insecticidal, and phytotoxic activities. Ailanthone (26),
chaparrinone (27), and other quassinoids, along with indole alkaloids, contribute to the invasiveness of the
Chinese tree tree-of-heaven (Alianthus altissima Swingle), in Europe.15

Durantanins I (28), II (29), and III (30), the triterpenoid-type saponins, are allelochemicals from Duranta repens L.16
542 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

There are two important classes of allelochemicals synthesized by oxidative cleavages of tetraterpene carotenoids.
One is the plant hormone abscisic acid (ABA, 31) that plays important roles in growth and development of plants,
especially in seed development and dormancy.17 Dry dormant seeds contain relatively large amounts of ABA,
particularly in the seed coats. ABA and phenolic allelochemicals in the seed coats are easily released into the environment
when the seeds are imbibed, resulting in inhibition of seed germination and seedling growth of plants in the vicinity. Both
ABA and the phenolic compounds are rapidly broken down in the soil, and therefore the inhibition is short-lived.
The other important apo-carotenoids are strigolactones, which induce seed germination of root parasitic plants18
and hyphal branching in symbiotic arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi.19 Strigol (32) and strigyl acetate (33), the first
strigolactones, were isolated from root exudates of a nonhost plant, cotton, as germination stimulants for Striga lutea
(Striga asiatica).20 Later, strigol was identified in root exudates of Striga hosts, including sorghum, maize, and proso
millet.21 Sorgolactone (34) was isolated from sorghum.22 Orobanchol (35) was isolated as the first Orobanche
germination stimulant from red clover root exudates.23 Although alectrol was first purified from cowpea root exudates
as a germination stimulant for Alectra and Striga gesnerioides,24 it was recently identified as orobanchyl acetate (36).25
Orobanchol and orobanchyl acetate were found in root exudates of various plant species including red clover,
soybean, and cowpea. 5-Deoxystrigol (37), isolated from root exudates of Lotus japonicus as the first branching factor for
AM fungi19 and later as a germination stimulant,26 is one of the major strigolactones in both monocotyledonous27 and
dicotyledonous plants.28 5-Deoxystrigol is a key precursor of strigolactones; the allylic hydroxylation yields strigol or
orobanchol. The oxidation of one of the gem-dimethyl groups affords sorgomol (38) and the subsequent decarbox-
ylation leads to sorgolactone.29,30 Tobacco plants were found to produce at least five different germination stimulants,
three of which were identified as solanacol (39), 29-epi-orobanchol (40), and orobanchol.31 Solanacol and 29-epi-
orobanchol are the first strigolactones to be identified having a benzene ring and a 29-epi stereochemistry, respec-
tively. In addition to these strigolactones, there are several novel strigolactones with structures that are yet to be
determined. Since plants exude a mixture of strigolactones, qualitative and quantitative differences may contribute to
the host recognition by both root parasitic plants and AM fungi. Strigolactones on their metabolites are novel class of
plant hormones inhibiting shoot branching.32,33
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 543

4.13.1.2.3 Phenolic compounds

Phenolic compounds constitute a major group of allelochemicals including simple benzoic and cinnamic
acid derivatives, quinones, and flavonoids. Benzoic and cinnamic acid derivatives are the most
common plant-originated allelochemicals. Some examples of these substances are benzoic acid (41),
p-hydroxybenzoic acid (42), salicylic acid (43), gallic acid (44), vanillic acid (45), syringic acid (46),
trans-cinnamic acid (47), p-coumaric acid (48), caffeic acid (49), ferulic acid (50), and chlorogenic acid
(51). These simple phenolics are thought to influence forest ecosystems, successions, and autotoxicity
phenomena.2 Glucosides of these phenolic compounds also exhibit plant growth inhibitory effects; for
example, two glucosides of cis-cinnamic acid, 1-O-cis-cinnamoyl--D-glucopyranose (CG) (52) and 6-O-
(49-hydroxy-29-methylenebutyroyl)-1-O-cis-cinnamoyl--D-glucopyranose (BG) (53), isolated from the
leaves of Spiraea thunbergii Sieb.34 Although these compounds are abundant in plant tissues, leaf leachates,
root exudates, and plant litters, their inhibitory activities on seed germination and seedling growth are
rather weak. In addition, their concentrations in the soil may not be high enough to exhibit inhibitory
effects due to the losses by rapid degradation, strong binding to humic acids, and adsorption to soil
particles. These phenolics have diverse biological activities; salicylic acid, for example, is an inducer of
systemic acquired resistance (SAR) against pathogen attack.35

Coumarins and their glucosides are ubiquitous and widely distributed secondary metabolites in the plant
kingdom. Among them, scopoletin (54), umbelliferone (55), and esculetin (56) are representative allelochem-
icals. They exhibit various biological activities. In general, these compounds inhibit growth of plants but some
display growth promotion at lower concentrations.36
5-Hydroxy-1,4-naphthoquinone, juglone (57), is a potent allelochemical produced by black walnut
(Juglans nigra L.). Juglone is a strong inhibitor of hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD), the key
enzyme in plastoquinone biosynthesis.37 Since plastoquinone is a cofactor for phytoene desaturase in the
carotenoid biosynthetic pathway, the inhibition of HPPD results in the depletion of carotenoids that protects
chlorophylls from photooxidation. Therefore, rapid photobleaching occurs in plants treated with HPPD
544 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

inhibitors such as juglone. Juglone also inhibits photosynthetic and respiratory electron transport systems,
and the latter appears to contribute to the strong allelopathic effect of juglone.38

Sorgoleone (58) and related compounds are responsible for the allelopathic effect displayed by sorghum.
Sorgoleone, as expected from its structural resemblance to plastoquinones and ubiquinones, is a potent inhibitor
of both photosynthetic electron transport in chloroplasts and oxidative electron transport in mitochondria.39 In
addition, sorgoleone strongly inhibits HPPD.37 Dihydrosorgoleone or SXSg (59), the reduced form of sorgo-
leone, was identified as the first Striga germination stimulant from a natural host, sorghum.40 This
hydroquinone is exuded as oily droplets from sorghum root hairs and is rapidly oxidized to the quinone
sorgoleone. Therefore, the hydroquinone is a nonphytotoxic precursor and its contribution as a germination
stimulant of root parasites would be limited as compared to other germination stimulants such as strigolactones.
The haustorium is the attachment organ of parasitic plants, through which the parasites gain water and nutrients
from their hosts. In the case of the root parasitic plants Striga spp., host root–derived chemicals have been shown to
induce haustoria formation in the radicles of germinating seeds. Some quinones including 2,6-dimethoxy-2,4-
benzoquinone (DMBQ, 60) and 5,7-dihydroxynaphthoquinone (61) have been identified as haustorium inducers.41
Xenognosins A (62) and B (63),42,43 and the flavonoid peonidin (64) also induce haustoria formation.44

Two naphthoquinones, emodin (65) and physcion (66), and their glucosides were identified as allelochem-
icals from the rhizomes, aerial parts, and fallen leaves of giant knotweed (Polygonum sachalinense Fr. Schm.).7 In
addition, the concentrations of emodin and physcion in the soil samples collected from the weed community
were high enough to suppress seedling growth of susceptible plant species.
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 545

Flavonoids are important secondary metabolites involved in pigmentation of flowers, disease resistance, and
so on. Among the flavonoids, kaempferol (67), quercetin (68), and naringenin (69) are most often cited as
allelochemicals. ()-Catechin was identified in the root exudates from spotted knapweed (Centaurea maculosa) as
the compound responsible for its invasive behavior.45 The plant uses (–)-catechin (70) as an allelochemical
facilitating its invasion and (+)-catechin (71) as a defense compound against pathogens.

Leptospermone (72) is an allelochemical produced by the bottlebrush plant (Calispermon spp.).46 This
compound is herbicidal, causing bleaching symptoms, and is a potent inhibitor of HPPD. The triketone-type
HPPD-inhibiting herbicides such as sulcotrione (73) were developed based on the structure of
leptospermone.47
Among phytotoxic compounds produced by lichens, usnic acid (74) is one that is unique and relatively
abundant.48 Usnic acid also effectively inhibits HPPD.37

4.13.1.2.4 Benzoxazinoids
Benzoxazinoids or cyclic hydroxamic acids are typical examples of allelochemicals that have been recognized
as natural herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides. They are produced by and released from plants belonging to
the family Poaceae. These compounds are also found in plants belonging to the Acanthaceae, Ranunculaceae,
and Scrophulariaceae. They are produced by enzymatic degradation of their inactive forms (glucosides) and
subsequent chemical degradation.49 For example, benzoxazoline-2(3H)-one (BOA, 75) is formed by the
chemical degradation of 2,4-dihydroxy-2H-1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-one (DIBOA, 76), which is produced by
the enzymatic cleavage of the corresponding 2--D-glucoside (DIBOA-Glc, 77). Glucosides stored in the
vacuole are released into the environment by root exudation or by mechanical or insect wounding, where
enzymatic and/or microbial degradation to benzoxazinoids occurs. Decomposition of plant residues also
releases these glucosides and benzoxazinoids.
546 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

4.13.1.2.5 Glucosinolates and isothiocyanates

Glucosinolates are precursors of biologically active isothiocyanates that play defensive roles against attacks by
insects and microorganisms. They are found in plants belonging to the Brassicaceae, Resedaceae, and
Capparidaceae.50 These isothiocyanates and related compounds also inhibit seed germination and seedling
growth. Hirsutin (78), arabin (79), camelinin (80), and related !-methylsulfonylalkyl isothiocyanates 81–83 are
allelopathic chemicals produced by Rorippa indica (L.) Hiern.51

4.13.1.2.6 Other allelochemicals

cis-Dehydromatricaria ester (cis-DME, 84), cis-matricaria ester (cis-ME, 85), trans-matricaria ester (trans-ME,
86), and cis-lachnophyllum ester (cis-LE, 87) are C10-polyacetylenes with strong growth inhibitory activities.52
cis-DME is a major allelochemical produced by Solidago altissima L. It was found with its trans-isomer, being
formed by cis–trans isomerization, in the soil at the border of S. altissima communities at concentrations high
enough to suppress the growth of other plant species. cis- and trans-MEs and cis-LE are allelochemicals
produced by Erigeron species. These polyacetylenes are thought to contribute to the competitiveness of these
plant species in early stages of secondary succession in urban wastelands or abandoned fields. In addition,
accumulation of phytotoxic polyacetylenes in soil results in autotoxicity, and therefore the occupation by these
plant species is relatively short.

L-Canavanine (88), a nonprotein amino acid in legumes such as jack bean (Canavalia ensiformis (L.) DC.), has
been shown to inhibit growth of susceptible plant species.53 L-3,4-Dihydroxyphenylalanine (L-DOPA, 89) has
been isolated as an allelochemical from a cover crop, velvet bean (Mucuna pruriens (L.) DC. var. utilis).54
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 547

Three rooting inhibitors, G1–G3 (90–92), were isolated from Eucalyptus grandis.55 In addition, grandinol (93)
and homograndinol (94), were isolated as inhibitors of seed germination and photosynthesis.56,57

Simple fatty acids (C6–C22) commonly found in plant tissues exhibit moderate to strong growth inhibitory
activity against plants.58 In particular, nonanoic acid (95) is a commercial herbicide. Cyanamide (96), which has
been produced industrially and used as a fertilizer and herbicide, was recently identified as a major plant growth
inhibitor in the leaves and stems of a winter cover crop, hairy vetch (Vicia villosa Roth).59 Smoke from the
combustion of plant material has been found to stimulate germination of a wide range of plant species from
Australia, North America, and South Africa.60 A butenolide (karrikinolide, 97) was isolated as one of the potent
germination stimulants from the less complex cellulose-derived smoke, and its presence in plant-derived smoke
was confirmed by gas chromatography–mass spectrometry (GC–MS).61 This compound also promotes seedling
growth in some plant species. Although karrikinolide and related compounds, karrikins, are not plant secondary
metabolites, they may be considered as allelochemicals in a broad sense as they are derived from plant material.

4.13.1.2.7 Allelochemicals and allelopathy

Allelochemicals involved in plant–plant interactions are diverse in their structures. Some are unstable and their
activities are short-lived. In addition, some are highly hydrophobic and thus are barely soluble in water.
Therefore, there are arguments that only stable and water-soluble compounds contribute to plant–plant
interactions in the field. However, in the case of strigolactones, for example, seeds of root parasitic plants
and also AM fungi use these unstable short-lived rather lipophilic compounds as host recognition signals.
Therefore, unstable short-lived allelochemicals should be further explored to identify unknown signaling
chemicals involved in plant–plant interactions.

4.13.2 Allelochemicals in Plant–Microbe Interactions

4.13.2.1 Introduction
Allelochemicals involved in plant–microbe interactions are reviewed in this section. Many microbial metabolites that
exhibit biological activity toward plants are known, and vice versa. However, allelochemicals, that is, bioactive
metabolites that were proven to be secreted from plants or microbes and to show activity in the ecosystem, are not many.
548 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

Allelochemicals that operate between plants and microbes exhibit a variety of different activities. In some cases,
chemically different types of compounds affect the same enzyme or pathway, and in other cases, a compound attacks
various enzymes. In this section, allelochemicals are summarized based on their relevant biological phenomena.

4.13.2.2 Symbiosis between Plants and Microbes

4.13.2.2.1 Root nodules
The root nodule is the selective symbiont between legumes and leguminous bacteria. Nodule formation is
regulated by chemical signals between plants and microbes, and is one of the most well-studied chemical
communications. The first step of nodule formation starts with the leguminous bacterium receiving a signal
from the host plant. The signal molecules are mostly flavonoids and their glycosides 67–69 and 98–116, and
their biosynthetic precursors, chalcones 117, 118. The betains stachydrine (120) and trigonelline (121), and
aldonic acids, erythronic acid (122) and tetronic acid (123), were also identified as signal molecules exuded
from alfalfa (Medicago sativa) and lupin (Lupinus albus), respectively. These signal molecules trigger the
expression of the bacterial genes required for nodulation. Nodulation gene inducers classified by skeletal
structure and their plant of origin are summarized in Table 1.62
Legumes also secrete antagonists that inhibit the flavonoid-mediated activation of nodulation genes
(Table 2).63,64 Some act as inducers in another symbiotic system. Antagonists generally have structures similar
to those of inducers and inhibition can be overcome by increasing the concentration of inducers, hence they are
considered as competitive inhibitors.63

Table 1 Nodulation gene inducers secreted by leguminous plants61

Compound Plant of origin

Flavone
49,7-Dihydroxyflavone 98 Clover (Trifolium repens)
Alfalfa (Medicago sativa)
49-Hydroxy-7-methoxyflavone 99 Clover (T. repens)
49,7-Dihydroxy-39-methoxyflavone (geraldone) 100 Clover (T. repens)
49,5,7-Trihydroxyflavone (apigenin) 101 Pea (Pisum sativum)
49,5,7-Trihydroxy-39-methoxyflavone (chrysoeriol) 102 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
3,49,5,7-Tetrahydroxyflavone (kaempferol) 67 Common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)
39,49,5,7-Tetrahydroxyflavone (luteolin) 103 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
39,49,5,7-Tetrahydroxyflavone (eriodictyol) 104 Common bean (P. vulgaris)
Pea (P. sativum)
3,39,49,5,7-Pentahydroxyflavone (quercetin) 68 Common bean (P. vulgaris)
3,39,49,5,59,7-Hexahydroxyflavone (myricetin) 105 Common bean (P. vulgaris)
Flavanone
49,7-Dihydroxyflavanone (liquiritigenin) 106 Alfalfa (M. sativa) and
vetch (Vicia sativa subsp. Nigra)
39,7-Dihydroxy-49-methoxyflavanone 107 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
49,7-Dihydroxy-39-methoxyflavanone 108 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
49,5,7-Trihydroxyflavanone (naringenin) 69 Common bean (P. vulgaris) and
vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
39,5,7-Trihydroxy-49-methoxyflavanone 109 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
49,5,7-Trihydroxy-39-methoxyflavanone 110 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
3,39,5,7-Tetrahydroxy-49-methoxyflavanone 111 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. Nigra)
Isoflavone
49,7-Dihydroxyisoflavone (daidzein) 112 Soy bean (Glycine max)
49,5,7-Trihydroxyisoflavone (genistein) 113 Common bean (P. vulgaris) and
soy bean (G. max)
Flavylium
3,49,5,7-Tetrahydroxy-39,59-dimethoxyflavylium (malvidin) 114 Common bean (P. vulgaris)
3,49,5,59,7-Pentahydroxy-39-methoxyflavylium (petunidin) 115 Common bean (P. vulgaris)
3,39,49,5,59,7-Hexahydroxyflavylium (delphinidin) 116 Common bean (P. vulgaris)

(Continued )
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 549

Table 1 (Continued)

Compound Plant of origin

Chalcone
4,49-Dihydroxy-29-methoxychalcone 117 Alfalfa (M. sativa),
Vetch (V. sativa subsp. nigra)
29,4,49-Trihydroxychalcone (isoliquiritigenin) 118 Vetch (V. sativa subsp. nigra) and
soy bean (G. max)
Others
Coumestrol 119 Soy bean (G. max)
Stachydrine 120 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
Trigonelline 121 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
Erythronic acid 122 Lupin (Lupinus luteus)
Tetronic acid 123 Lupin (L. luteus)

Skeletal structures and numbering of flavone (98–105), flavanone (106–111), isoflavone (112, 113), flavylium (114–116), and chalcone (117,
118) are as follows. Other structures are mentioned before.

Table 2 Antagonists of Nod gene inducers62

Compound Plant of origin

Flavone
Flavone 124 Soy bean (Glycine max)
7-Hydroxy-5-methylflavone 125 Soy bean (G. max)
5,7-Dihydroxyflavone (chrysin) 126 Soy bean (G. max)
3,49,5,7-Tetrahydroxyflavone (kaempferol) 67 Pea (Pisum sativum) and
soy bean (G. max)
3,39,49,5,7-Pentahydroxyflavone (quercetin) 68 Alfalfa (Medicago sativa)
29,3,49,5,7-Pentahydroxyflavone (morin) 127 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
Isoflavone
49,7-Dihydroxyisoflavone (daidzein) 112 Pea (P. sativum)
49,5,7-Trihydroxyisoflavone (genistein) 113 Pea (P. sativum)
7-Hydroxy-49-methoxyisoflavone (formonetin) 128 Clover (T. repens)
Miscellaneous
7-Hydroxycoumarin (umbelliferone) 55 Alfalfa (M. sativa),
clover (T. repens), and
common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris)

(Continued )
550 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

Table 2 (Continued)

Compound Plant of origin

Coumestrol63 119 Alfalfa (M. sativa)

Medicarpin63 129 Alfalfa (M. sativa)
4-Acetyl-2-methoxyphenol (acetovanillone) 130 Pea (P. sativum)
4-Hydroxy-3,5-dimethoxybenzaldehyde (syringaldehyde) 131 Pea (P. sativum)
4-Acetyl-2,6-dimethoxyphenol (acetosyringone) 132 Common bean (P. vulgaris)

When induced, nodulation genes cause leguminous bacteria to produce the Nod factor (133), which is an N-
acetylglucosamine oligomer that is highly modified by fatty acid, sugar, and methyl, acetyl, carbamoyl, and
sulfonyl groups.65–67 Representative structures of Nod factors, their producing bacteria, and target plants are
summarized in Table 3. Most species produce several Nod factors with distinctive substituent(s) and diversi-
fied part(s). The range and quantity of the Nod factor varies with inducing materials and among strains in the
same species. The skeletal structure of the Nod factor is biosynthesized by common enzymes in leguminous
bacteria and then modified by specific enzymes for each individual modification.65 Nod factors secreted from
leguminous bacteria induce expression of nodulin genes and morphological differentiation of the host plant to
accept bacterial cells. Specificity between host plant and bacterial species depends on the specific recognition of
the nod gene inducer by bacteria, and recognition of the nod factor by host plants.
The symbiosis between the host plant and leguminous bacteria is tightly controlled; the host plant uses the
phytohormone ethylene to control the nodule number and the nodulation zone (autoregulation), because
excessive nodule formation causes exploitation of photosynthetic products by bacteria. The leguminous
bacterium Bradyrhizobium elkanii produces rhizobitoxine (134), which was isolated as a chlorosis-inducing
phytotoxin, and is now known to be an inhibitor of 1-aminocyclopropane-1-carboxylate synthase, a key
enzyme in ethylene biosynthesis. Bradyrhizobium elkanii is thought to gain a competitive advantage over species
that do not produce rhizobitoxine by suppressing the ethylene level of the host plant and reducing the plant’s
regulation of nodulation.68
Table 3 Representative Nod factors

n R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 Acyl Producer Target plant

0, 1, 2 H H H H, Ac SO3H H C16:2(
E2,9), Sinorhizobium meliloti Alfalfa (Medicago

C16:3(
E2,E4,Z9), sativa)
1, 2 H H H Ac H H C18:1(
Z11), Rhizobium Pea (Pisum sativum)
C18:4(
E2,E4,E6,Z11) leguminosarum bv. and Vetch (Vicia
viciae sativa)
0, 1, 2 H H H Ac H H C16:0, C16:1, C18:0, R. leguminosarum bv. Clover (Trifolium
C18:1, C18:3, C20:2, C20:3, trifolii repens)
C20:4
2 Me, H CONH2, H CONH2, H H 4-O-Ac-Fuc, Fuc, H C18:0, C18:1, C20:1 Mesorhizobium loti Lotus japonicus
Fuc
2 H H H H, Ac 2-O-Me-Fuc H C16:0, C18:1(
Z9) Bradyrhizobium Soy bean (Glycine
japonicum max)
2 Me CONH2 (R3 or R3) H 4-O-Ac-Fuc, H C18:1(
Z11) Rhizobium etli Common bean
SO3H, H (Phaseolus vulgaris)

Nod factors having substituent(s) at R in the structure are produced by other leguminous bacteria (see the works of Zuanazzi et al.,64 Downie et al.,65 and Spaink66 and the original papers
cited therein).
552 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

4.13.2.2.2 Mycorrhizae
Mycorrhizae are more widely distributed than root nodules throughout plant–microbe symbiotic systems; more
than 80% of terrestrial plants are able to establish mutualistic symbiotic associations with AM fungi. Hyphal
branching of germinated spores of AM fungi is the crucial step for contact with plant roots.
Effects of flavonoids on spore germination, hyphal growth, and branching in AM fungi were extensively
studied,69 since flavonoids were known to be plants’ signaling compounds in root nodule formation. Flavonoids,
although they certainly exhibited some activities, were eventually found not to be indispensable plant signal
compounds in AM symbiosis; maize plants deficient in chalcone synthase activity, which is necessary for
flavonoid biosynthesis, were equally colonized with AM fungi as wild-type maize.70
A sesquiterpene that triggers hyphal branching in an AM fungus Gigaspora margarita was isolated from the
root exudates of L. japonicus, and was identified as 5-deoxystrigol (37).19,71 Strigol (32), sorgolactone (34), and
orobanchol (35) were previously isolated as germination stimulants of root parasitic plants (see Section
4.13.1.2.2), and also displayed hyphal branching activity.
There is evidence that hyphae from germinating spores of AM fungi secrete an ‘Myc factor’ that enables
plants to accept AM fungi. The factor can diffuse across a dialysis membrane and its molecular weight is
estimated to be less than 3.5 kDa, but its chemical nature has not yet been revealed.72

4.13.2.3 Utilization of Plant Products by Microbes

Flavonoids exuded from plants play an important role in the symbiosis between legumes and leguminous
bacteria. At the same time, they attract zoospores and induce spore germination of phytopathogenic fungi.

4.13.2.3.1 Host-specific zoospore attractants

Zoospores of the phytopathogenic fungi Pythium and Phytophthora are attracted to plant roots and root exudates. The
first description of attractants other than nutrients such as amino acids and sugars was an extensive investigation on
chemical products including alcohols, aldehydes, and organic acids with 1–9 carbon atoms. In that study,
isovaleraldehyde was shown to attract zoospores of Phytophthora palmivora.73 Two plant-derived structurally
irrelevant attractants, 3-indolecarbaldehyde (135) and isoflavone prunetin (136), were isolated from cabbage and
pea, and attracted Aphanomyces raphani and Aphanomyces euteiches zoospores, respectively. Host specificity was shown
by these substances (Table 4).74,75 Since then, the isoflavones daidzein (112) and genistein (113), cochliophilin A
(137), and N-trans-feruloyl-4-O-methyldopamine (138) have been isolated from the host plants.76–78 The relation-
ships between the structures of compounds and their biological activities have been reported: isoflavones and their
attraction for A. euteiches zoospores;79,80 flavonoids and their related compounds and the chemotactic behavior of
Phytophthora sojae zoospores;81 and effects of 137 and 138 and their analogues on Aphanomyces cochlioides zoospores.82
Substances resulting in repellent 140 and attractant 139 zoospore chemotaxis were isolated from the root extract of
the nonhost plant Portulaca oleracea.83 The signaling and communication between phytopathogenic fungal zoospores
and host and nonhost plants have been reviewed with special reference to A. cochlioides.84

4.13.2.3.2 Germination inducers of phytopathogens

Flavonoids stimulate spore germination in the soilborne phytopathogenic fungus Fusarium solani. Spore
germination of F. solani f. sp. pisi, which causes disease in pea, is stimulated by flavanone hesperetin (141),
flavone apigenin (101), the pterocarpan phytoalexin pisatin (142), and so on. In contrast, germination of the
bean pathogen F. solani f. sp. phaseoli is stimulated by the pterocarpans maackiain (143) and medicarpin (129),
and isoflavones biochanin A (144), and so on but not by pisatin.85
It was reported that there is a factor stimulating the germination of the resting spores of the clubroot
pathogen Plasmodiophora brassicae in the root exudates of turnip (Brassica campestris subsp. rapa rapifera group)
and lettuce (Lactuca sativa).86 The leaf extract of a seagrass, Posidonia australis, was found to stimulate
germination of resting spores, and it was known to contain phenolic compounds such as chicoric acid
(145). The stimulatory activities of caffeic acid (49), one of the final metabolites of chicoric acid, coumalic
acid (146) and corilagin (147) were examined, and they were shown to stimulate germination of resting spores
of P. brassicae.87
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 553

Table 4 Zoospore attractants and repellent

Compound Affected microorganism Secreting plant

Host-specific attractant
3-Indolecarbaldehyde (135) Aphanomyces raphani Cabbage (Brassica oleracea)
49,5-Dihydroxy-7-methoxyisoflavone (prunetin, 136) Aphanomyces euteiches Pea (Pisum sativum)
49,7-Dihydroxyisoflavone (daidzein, 112) Phytophthora sojae Soy bean (Glycine max)
49,5,7-Trihydroxyisoflavone (genistein, 113) P. sojae Soy bean (G. max)
5-Hydroxy-6,7-methylenedioxyflavone Aphanomyces cochlioides Spinach (Spinacia oleracea)
(cochliophilin A, 137)
N-trans-feruloyl-4-O-methyldopamine (138) A. cochlioides Pigweed (Chenopodium album)
N-trans-feruloyltyramine (139) A. cochlioides Protulaca oleracea
Repellent
1-Linoleoyl-2-lysophosphatidic acid monomethyl A. cochlioides P. oleracea
ester (140)

Volatile thiols and sulfides, such as di-n-propyl disulfide (148) and diallyl disulfide (149), trigger germina-
tion of sclerotia of Sclerotium cepivorum, the causal pathogen of white rot in Allium. These compounds are
metabolites of thiosulfinates such as allicin and their precursors alk(en)yl cysteine sulfoxides, which are exuded
from alliaceous plants and metabolized by the soil microflora. Allicin exhibits strong antimicrobial activity as
described later. The sclerotium is a dormant organ of fungi that can survive for more than 10 years, and thus
germination stimulants are expected to be a new agent to reduce disease.88,89
554 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

4.13.2.3.3 Other plant chemicals affecting microbial activity

Agrobacterium tumefaciens, a phytopathogenic bacterium in soil, transforms dicotyledonous plant cells to cause
the neoplastic disease crown gall, and is used as a tool for genetic transformation of plant cells. This
bacterium initiates the expression of virulence genes in response to phenolic signals acetosyringone (132)
and -hydroxyacetosyringone (150), which are released from wounded and metabolically active plant
cells.90

4.13.2.4 Self-Defensive Allelochemicals in Plants

Phytoalexins are antimicrobial substances produced by plants in response to infection by the pathogen or
elicitation by abiotic agents. Since isolation of the pterocarpan pisatins (142),91 chemically diverse com-
pounds have been isolated from the plant families Leguminosae, Gramineae, Rosaceae, Cruciferae,
Compositae, and so on, structures of these phytoalexins are summarized in the earlier edition of this
book92 and also in this volume (Section 4.08.2.3). There are, however, some cases where an elicitor induces
secretion of antimicrobial substances from the plant body. Rosmarinic acid (151) was secreted in the root
exudates of hairy root cultures of sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum) in response to a fungal cell wall elicitor, and
it exhibited antimicrobial activity against a range of soilborne microorganisms.93 Secondary metabolites in
the root exudates of Arabidopsis thaliana were profiled after the roots had been treated with fungal cell wall
elicitor, and vanillic acid (45), trans-cinnamic acid (47), ferulic acid (50), butanoic acid (152), o-coumaric
acid (153), p-hydroxybenzamide (154), methyl p-hydroxybenzoate (155), 3-indolepropanoic acid (156), and
syringic acid (46) were shown to have antimicrobial activity against soilborne fungi and/or bacteria at the
concentration detected.94
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 555

Rotation of crops is a long-established practice that reduces disease damage; a certain crop reduces disease
damage to the succeeding crop, which indicates that the former excretes some antimicrobial substances.
2-(39,59-Dihydroxyphenyl)-5,6-dihydroxybenzofuran (157) was isolated from the root exudates of alfalfa
(M. sativa) as an antifungal substance against Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. phaseoli, after observing that soilborne
disease of kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) was less in fields where alfalfa was cultivated as the preceding crop.95
This compound also increased the solubility of ferric phosphate, which is only slightly soluble. Screening for
antimicrobial substances has also been conducted with the root exudates of species used as mating sources in
breeding resistant cultivars, and as rootstock; the sesquiterpenoids solavetivone (158), lubimin (159), lubimi-
noic acid (160), and aethione (161) were isolated from the root exudates recovered from Solanum aethiopicum.96
They exhibited antifungal activity against F. oxysporum and/or Verticillium dahliae. Maize (Zea mays) is commonly
used in the control of soilborne disease caused by tomato Fusarium wilt by F. oxysporum, and in the control of
brown stem rot of adzuki bean (Vigna angularis) by Cepharosporium gregatum. (6R)-7,8-dihydro-3-oxo--ionone
(162) and (6R,9R)-7,8-dihydro-3-oxo--ionol (163) were isolated from the root exudates of maize.97 They
exhibited antifungal activity against F. oxysporum and inhibited germination of C. gregatum. It is also worth noting
that 6-methoxybenzoxazolinone (MBOA, 164) and 6,7-dimethoxybenzoxazolinone (DMBOA) (165) were
isolated from the root extract. These compounds were identified as phytoalexins in several gramineous plants.
556 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

Disease control by green manure is an artificial application of allelopathy. Isothiocyanates released from
cruciferous plants are an example of this; allyl isothiocyanate (166), which is derived from the glucosinolate
sinigrin (167), is the most popular example.98 Application of Geranium carolinianum for the control of Ralstonia
solanacearum, the cause of bacterial wilt of potato, and potato scab, which is induced by some Streptomyces spp.,
was reported.99,100 One of the antibacterial constituents was shown to be ethyl gallate (168).101

Alliaceous plants release characteristic volatile compounds. The most well-known compound is the allylthio-
sulfinate allicin (169), which is produced from alliin (170) by alliinase and exhibits strong antibacterial and
antifungal activities. For this reason, alliaceous plants are used as companion plants of tomato, cucumber,
strawberry, and so on.
Plant volatiles have been surveyed to find safe and environmentally friendly postharvest fumigants. Hexanal
(171), 1-hexanol (172), (E)-2-hexen-1-ol (173), (Z)-6-nonenal (174), (E)-3-nonen-2-one (175), methyl
salicylate (176), and methyl benzoate (177) exhibit potential to control the gray mold, Botrytis cinerea.102
(E)-2-hexenal (178), carvacrol (179), (E)-cinnamaldehyde (180), and citral (181) exhibited consistent fungici-
dal activities against Penicillium expansum, the cause of blue mould of pear.103 (E)-2-hexenal (178), carvacrol
(179), and citral (181) were also effective against Monilinia laxa, the cause of brown rot in stone fruit.104

Some antimicrobial metabolites leached from the surface of leaves are known, namely, sclareol (182) and
isosclareol (183) from Nicotiana glutinosa,105 parthenolide (184) from Chrysanthemum parthenium,106 and rugosal A
(185) from Rosa rugosa,107 and so on. The possible roles of these compounds in host–pathogen interactions are
discussed in the original papers.
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 557

4.13.2.5 Phytoactive Substances Produced by Microbes

Phytohormones and phytotoxins are two major classes of compounds produced and secreted by micro-
organisms that act on plants. These will be discussed in another chapter (4.10). Recently, production of
2,3-butanediol (186) and acetoin (187) by two strains of plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR)
was reported. These compounds promote growth of A. thaliana and trigger induced systemic resistance
(ISR) in the plant.108,109

4.13.2.6 Allelochemicals in Aquatic Ecosystems

Many antimicrobial substances have been isolated from algae and were thought to be potential
chemical defense substances against pathogenic bacteria. However, it is difficult to examine whether they are
secreted from the alga, or whether they are present at concentrations high enough to exhibit antimicrobial
activity. Only a few have been proven to be allelochemicals in the aquatic ecosystem. Halogenated furanones
188–191, which were isolated from the red alga Delisea pulchra, are rare compounds that have been shown to act
as allelochemicals.110 Halogenated sesquiterpenes elatol (192), iso-obtusol (193), and lembyne-A (194) isolated
from the red alga Laurencia sp. exhibit antibacterial activity against marine bacteria isolated from the algal
habitats.111
Halogenated furanones 188–191 deterred the settlement and growth of a range of ecologically relevant fouling
organisms.112 These compounds also exhibited inhibitory activity toward the quorum sensing system mediated by
acylated homoserine lactones (AHLs) in Gram-negative bacteria.113 The quorum sensing system, a mechanism to
induce gene expression when increasing bacterial population density, results in increased concentrations of signal
compounds, for example, AHLs. This system provides a collective response of bacteria in bioluminescence,
biofilm formation, virulence factor expression, antibiotic production, etc. Zoospores of a green alga Ulva intestinalis
respond to AHLs such as N-(3-oxododecanoyl)-homoserine lactone (195) and identify bacterial biofilms for
preferential settlement.114 Higher plants, including pea, rice, soybean, tomato, and crown vetch, secrete com-
pounds that affect the quorum sensing system in bacteria, although their principles have not been clarified.115
Many green algae lose their normal foliose morphology when they are grown under aseptic conditions.
Many bacteria were isolated from marine algae, and screened for their ability to induce normal growth of
unicellular Monostroma oxyspermum. A morphogenetic factor was isolated from an epiphytic marine bacterium on
a green alga and named thallusin (196).116 Absolute stereochemistry was revised later by total synthesis.117
558 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

References
1. J. R. Vyvyan, Tetrahedron 2002, 58, 1631–1646.
2. F. A. Macı́as; J. M. G. Molinillo; R. M. Varela; J. C. G. Galindo, Pest Manag. Sci. 2007, 63, 327–348.
3. F. A. Macı́as; A. Oliveros-Bstidas; D. Marı́n; C. Carrera; N. Chinchilla; J. M. G. Molinillo, Phytochem. Rev. 2008, 7, 179–194.
4. J. Friedman; G. R. Waller, Trends Biochem. Sci. 1985, 10, 47–50.
5. N. H. Fischer; G. B. Williamson; J. D. Weidenhamer; D. R. Richardson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1994, 20, 1355–1380.
6. J. G. Romagni; S. O. Duke; F. E. Dayan, Plant Physiol. 2000, 123, 725–732.
7. H. Nishimura; J. Mizutani, Identification of Allelochemicals in Eucalyptus citriodora and Polygonum sachalinense. In Allelopathy:
Organisms, Processes, and Applications; Inderjit, K. M. M. Dakishini, F. A. Einhellig, Eds.; American Chemical Society:
Washington, DC, 1995; pp 74–85.
8. F. A. Macı́as; A. Torres; J. M. G. Molinillo; R. M. Varela; D. Castellano, Phytochemistry 1996, 43, 1205–1215.
9. N. H. Fischer; J. D. Weidenhamer; J. L. Riopel; L. Quijano; M. A. Menelaou, Phytochemistry 1990, 29, 2479–2483.
10. A. P. de Luque; J. C. G. Galindo; F. A. Macı́as; J. Jorrı́n, Phytochemistry 2000, 53, 45–50.
11. S. O. Duke; K. C. Vaughn; E. M. J. Croom; H. N. Elsohly, Weed Sci. 1987, 35, 499–505.
12. T. Kato; M. Tsunakawa; N. Sasaki; H. Aizawa; K. Fujita; Y. Kitahara; N. Takahashi, Phytochemistry 1977, 16, 45–48.
13. T. Akatsuka; N. Takahashi; O. Kodama; H. Sekido; Y. Kono; S. Takeuchi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1985, 49, 1689–1694.
14. H. Kato-Noguchi; T. Ino, Phytochemistry 2003, 63, 551–554.
15. V. De Feo; L. De Martino; E. Quaranta; C. Pizza, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 1177–1180.
16. S. Hiradate; H. Yada; T. Ishii; N. Nakajima; M. Ohnishi-Kameyama; H. Sugie; S. Zungsontiporn; Y. Fujii, Phytochemistry 1999,
51, 1223–1228.
17. E. Nambara; A. Marion-Poll, Annu. Rev. Plant Biol. 2005, 56, 165–185.
18. R. Matusova; K. Rani; F. W. A. Verstappen; M. C. R. Franssen; M. H. Beale; H. J. Bouwmeester, Plant Physiol. 2005, 139,
920–934.
19. K. Akiyama; K. Matsuzaki; H. Hayashi, Nature 2005, 435, 824–827.
20. C. E. Cook; L. P. Whichard; B. Turner; M. E. Wall; G. H. Egley, Science 1966, 154, 1189–1190.
21. B. P. Siame; Y. Weerasuriya; K. Wood; G. Ejeta; L. G. Butler, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1993, 41, 1486–1491.
22. C. Hauck; S. Müller; H. Schildknecht, J. Plant Physiol. 1992, 139, 474–478.
23. T. Yokota; H. Sakai; K. Okuno; K. Yoneyama; Y. Takeuchi, Phytochemistry 1998, 49, 1967–1973.
24. S. Müller; C. Hauck; H. Schildknecht, J. Plant Growth Regul. 1992, 11, 77–84.
25. X. Xie; K. Yoneyama; D. Kusumoto; Y. Yamada; T. Yokota; Y. Takeuchi; K. Yoneyama, Phytochemistry 2008, 69, 427–431.
26. Y. Sugimoto; T. Ueyama, Phytochemistry 2007, 69, 212–217.
27. A. A. Awad; D. Sato; D. Kusumoto; H. Kamioka; Y. Takeuchi; K. Yoneyama, Plant Growth Regul. 2006, 48, 221–227.
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 559

28. K. Yoneyama; X. Xie; H. Sekimoto; Y. Takeuchi; S. Ogasawara; K. Akiyama; H. Hayashi; K. Yoneyama, New Phytol. 2008, 179,
484–492.
29. H. Matsuura; K. Ohashi; H. Sasako; N. Tagawa; Y. Takano; Y. Ioka; K. Nebuta; T. Yoshihara, Plant Growth Regul. 2008, 54,
31–36.
30. X. Xie; K. Yoneyama; D. Kusumoto; Y. Yamada; Y. Takeuchi; Y. Sugimoto; K. Yoneyama, Tetrahedron Lett. 2008, 49,
2066–2068.
31. X. Xie; D. Kusumoto; Y. Takeuchi; K. Yoneyama; Y. Yamada; K. Yoneyama, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 8067–8072.
32. V. Gomex-Roldan; S. Fermas; P. B. Brewer; V. Puech-Pagès; E. A. Dun; J.-P. Pillot; F. Letisse; R. Matusova; S. Danoun;
J.-C. Portais; H. Bouwmeester; G. Bécard; C. A. Beveridge; C. Rameau; S. F. Rochange, Nature 2008, 455, 189–194.
33. M. Umehara; A. Hanada; S. Yoshida; K. Akiyama; T. Arite; N. Takeda-Kamiya; H. Magome; Y. Kamiya; K. Shirasu; K. Yoneyama;
J. Kyozuka; S. Yamaguchi, Nature 2008, 455, 195–200.
34. S. Hiradate; S. Morita; H. Sugie; Y. Fujii; J. Harada, Phytochemistry 2004, 65, 731–739.
35. D. F. Klessig; J. Malamy, Plant Mol. Biol. 1994, 26, 1439–1458.
36. Y. Yamamoto, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1365–1373.
37. G. Meazza; B. E. Scheffler; M. R. Tellez; A. M. Rimando; J. G. Romagni; S. O. Duke; D. Nanayakkara; I. A. Khan;
E. A. Abourashed; F. E. Dayan, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 59, 281–288.
38. Inderjit; S. O. Duke, Planta 2003, 217, 529–539.
39. C. I. Nimbal; C. N. Yerkes; L. A. Weston; S. C. Weller, Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 1996, 54, 73–83.
40. D. H. Netzly; J. L. Riopel; G. Ejeta; L. G. Butler, Weed Sci. 1988, 36, 441–446.
41. M. Chang; D. G. Lynn, J. Chem. Ecol. 1986, 12, 561–579.
42. D. G. Lynn; J. C. Steffens; V. S. Kamut; D. W. Graden; J. Shabanowitz; J. L. Riopel, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1981, 103, 1868–1870.
43. D. G. Lynn; J. E. Rahe, Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol. 1992, 41, 497–526.
44. H. Albrecht; J. I. Yoder; D. A. Phillips, Plant Physiol. 1999, 119, 585–591.
45. H. P. Bias; T. S. Walker; F. R. Stermitz; R. A. Hufbauer; J. M. Vivanco, Plant Physiol. 2002, 128, 1173–1179.
46. R. O. Hellyer, Aust. J. Chem. 1968, 21, 2825–2828.
47. D. L. Lee; M. P. Prisbylla; T. H. Cromartie; D. P. Dagarin; S. W. Howard; W. M. Provan; M. K. Ellis; T. Fraser; L. C. Mutter, Weed
Sci. 1997, 45, 601–609.
48. K. Ingolfsdottir, Phytochemistry 2002, 61, 729–736.
49. D. Sicker; H. Hao; M. Schulz, Benzoxazolin-2(3H)-ones – Generation, Effects and Detoxification in the Competition among
Plants. In Allelopathy: Chemistry and Mode of Action of Allelochemicals; F. A. Macı́as, J. C. G. Galindo, J. M. G. Molinillo,
H. G. Cutler, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2004; pp 77–102.
50. J. W. Fahey; A. T. Zalcmann; P. Talalay, Phytochemistry 2001, 56, 5–51.
51. A. Yamane; J. Fujikura; H. Ogawa; J. Mizutani, J. Chem. Ecol. 1992, 18, 1941–1954.
52. A. Kobayashi; S. Morimoto; Y. Shibata; K. Yamashita; M. Numata, J. Chem. Ecol. 1980, 6, 119–131.
53. N. Nakajima; S. Hiradate; Y. Fujii, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 19–31.
54. Y. Fujii; T. Shibuya; T. Yasuda, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1991, 55, 617–618.
55. W. D. Crow; W. Nicholls; M. Sterns, Tetrahedron Lett. 1971, 12, 1353–1356.
56. W. D. Crow; T. Osawa; D. M. Paton; R. R. Willing, Tetrahedron Lett. 1977, 18, 1073–1074.
57. S. Yoshida; T. Asami; T. Kawano; K. Yoneyama; W. D. Crow; D. M. Paton; N. Takahashi, Phytochemistry 1988, 27, 1943–1946.
58. E. Tsuzuki; Y. Yamamoto; T. Shimizu, Ann. Bot. 1987, 60, 69–70.
59. T. Kamo; S. Hiradate; Y. Fujii, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 275–283.
60. K. W. Dixon; S. Roche; J. S. Pate, Oecologia 1995, 101, 185–192.
61. G. R. Flematti; E. L. Ghisalberti; K. W. Dixon; R. D. Trengrove, Science 2004, 305, 977.
62. H. R. M. Schlaman; D. A. Philip; E. Kondorosi, Genetic Organization and Transcriptional Regulation of the Rhizobial Nodulation
Genes. In The Rhizobiaceae; H. P. Spaink, A. Kondorosi, P. J. J. Dordrecht, Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 1998;
pp 361–386.
63. V. Jain; H. S. Nainawatee, J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 2002, 11, 1–10.
64. J. A. S. Zuanazzi; P. H. Clergeot; J.-C. Quirion; H.-P. Husson; A. Kondorosi; O. Ratet, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1998, 11, 784–794.
65. J. A. Downie, Functions of Rhizobial Nodulation Genes. In The Rhizobiaceae; H. P. Spaink, A. Kondorosi, P. J. J. Dordrecht,
Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Dordrecht, 1998; pp 387–402.
66. H. P. Spaink, Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 2000, 54, 257–288.
67. X. Perret; C. Staehelin; W. J. Broughton, Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 2000, 64, 180–201.
68. K. Yuhashi; N. Ichikawa; H. Ezura; S. Akao; Y. Minakawa; N. Nukui; T. Yasuta; K. Minamizawa, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2000,
66, 2658–2663.
69. H. Vierheilig; B. Bago; C. Albrecht; M.-J. Poulin; Y. Pich, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 1998, 439, 9–33.
70. G. Béard; L. P. Taylor; J. David; D. Douds; P. E. Pfeffer; L. W. Doner, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1995, 8, 252–258.
71. K. Akiyama; H. Hayashi, Ann. Bot. 2006, 97, 925–931.
72. S. Kosuta; M. Chabaud; G. Lougnon; C. Gough; J. Dénbarié; D. G. Barker; G. Bécard, Plant Physiol. 2003, 131, 952–962.
73. J. N. Cameron; M. J. Carlile, Nature 1978, 271, 448–449.
74. R. Yokosawa; S. Kuninaga, Ann. Phytopathol. Soc. Jpn. 1979, 45, 339–343 (in Japanese with English summary).
75. R. Yokosawa; S. Kuninaga; H. Sekizaki, Ann. Phytopathol. Soc. Jpn. 1986, 52, 809–816.
76. P. F. Morris; E. W. B. Ward, Physiol. Mol. Plant Pathol. 1992, 40, 17–22.
77. T. Horio; Y. Kawabata; T. Takayama; S. Tahara; J. Kawabata; Y. Fukushi; H. Nishimura; J. Mizutani, Experientia 1992, 48, 410–414.
78. T. Horio; K. Yoshida; H. Kikuchi; J. Kawabata; J. Mizutani, Phytochemistry 1993, 33, 807–808.
79. H. Sekizaki; R. Yokosawa, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1988, 36, 4876–4880.
80. H. Sekizaki; R. Yokosawa; C. Chinen; H. Adachi; Y. Yamane, Biol. Pharm. Bull. 1993, 11, 698–701.
81. B. M. Tyler; M.-H. Wu; J.-M. Wang; W. Cheung; P. F. Morris, Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1996, 62, 2811–2817.
82. H. Kikuchi; T. Horio; J. Kawabata; N. Koyama; Y. Fukushi; J. Mizutani; S. Tahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1995, 59,
2033–2035.
560 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions

83. M. Mizutani; Y. Hashidoko; S. Tahara, FEBS Lett. 1998, 438, 236–240.

84. M. T. Islam; S. Tahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2001, 65, 1933–1948.
85. Y. Ruan; V. Kotraiah; D. C. Straney, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 1995, 8, 929–938.
86. K. Suzuki; E. Matsuyama; Y. Ueno; J. Mizutani, Ann. Phytopathol. Soc. Jpn. 1992, 58, 699–705.
87. M. Ohi; T. Kitamura; S. Hata, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 170–173.
88. J. R. Coley-Smith; J. E. King, Ann. Appl. Biol. 1969, 64, 289–301.
89. J. R. Coley-Smith; D. Parfitt, Pestic. Sci. 1986, 17, 587–594.
90. S. E. Stachel; E. Messens; M. V. Montagu; P. Zambryski, Nature 1985, 318, 624–629.
91. I. A. M. Cruickshank; D. R. Perrin, Nature 1960, 187, 799–800.
92. J. B. Harborne, Plant Chemical Ecology. In Comprehensive Natural Products Chemistry, Miscellaneous Natural Products
Including Marine Natural Products, Pheromones, Plant Hormones, and Aspects of Ecology; K. Mori, Ed.; Pergamon, Elsevier:
Oxford, 1999, Vol. 8, pp 137–196.
93. H. P. Bais; T. S. Walker; H. P. Schweizer; J. M. Vivanco, Plant Physiol. Biochem. 2002, 40, 983–995.
94. T. S. Walker; H. P. Bais; L. M. Halligan; F. R. Stermits; J. M. Vivanco, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 2548–2554.
95. Y. Masaoka; M. Kojima; S. Sugihara; T. Yoshihara; M. Koshino; A. Ichihara, Plant Soil 1993, 155/156, 75–78.
96. T. Nagaoka; K. Goto; A. Watanabe; Y. Sakata; T. Yoshihara, Z. Naturforsch. 2001, 56c, 703–713.
97. S. Park; Y. Takano; H. Matsuura; T. Yoshihara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 1366–1368.
98. J. A. Kirkegaard; M. Sarwar, Plant Soil 1998, 201, 71–89.
99. A. Ooshiro; K. Takaesu; M. Natsume; S. Taba; K. Nasu; M. Uehara; Y. Muramoto, Weed Biol. Manag. 2004, 4, 187–194.
100. A. Ooshiro; M. Natsume, Weed Biol. Manag. 2007, 7, 124–127.
101. A. Ooshiro; S. Hiradate; S. Kawano; T. Takushi; R. Teruya; Y. Fujii; M. Natsume; H. Abe, Weed Biol. Manag. 2009, 9, 169–172.
102. D. D. Archbold; T. R. Hamilton-Kemp; M. M. Barth; B. E. Langlois, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997, 45, 4032–4037.
103. F. Neri; M. Mari; S. Brigati, Plant Pathol. 2006, 55, 100–105.
104. F. Neri; M. Mari; S. Brigati; P. Bertolini, Plant Dis. 2007, 91, 30–35.
105. J. A. Bailey; G. G. Vincent; R. S. Burden, J. Gen. Microbiol. 1974, 85, 57–64.
106. J. P. Blakeman; P. Atkinson, Physiol. Plant Pathol. 1979, 15, 183–192.
107. Y. Hashidoko; S. Tahara; J. Mizutani, Phytochemistry 1992, 31, 779–782.
108. C.-M. Ryu; M. A. Farag; C.-H. Hu; M. S. Reddy; H.-X. Wei; P. W. Paré; J. W. Kloepper, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2003, 100,
4927–4932.
109. C.-M. Ryu; M. A. Farag; C.-H. Hu; M. S. Reddy; J. W. Kloepper; P. W. Par, Plant Physiol. 2004, 134, 1017–1026.
110. R. de Nys; S. A. Dworjanyn; P. D. Steinberg, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1998, 162, 79–87.
111. C. S. Vairappan; M. Daitoh; M. Suzuki; T. Abe; M. Masuda, Phytochemistry 2001, 58, 291–297.
112. S. A. Doworjanyn; R. de Nys; P. D. Steinberg, Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2006, 318, 153–163.
113. M. Givskov; R. de Nys; M. Manefield; L. Gram; R. Maximilien; L. Eberl; S. Molin; P. D. Steinberg; S. Kjelleberg, J. Bacteriol. 1996,
178, 6618–6622.
114. G. L. Wheeler; K. Tait; A. Taylor; C. Brownlee; I. Joint, Plant Cell Environ. 2006, 29, 608–618.
115. M. Teplitski; J. B. Robinson; W. D. Bauer, Mol. Plant Microbe Interact. 2000, 13, 637–648.
116. Y. Matsuo; H. Imagawa; M. Nishizawa; Y. Shizuri, Science 2005, 307, 1598.
117. X. Gao; Y. Matsuo; B. B. Snider, Org. Lett. 2006, 8, 2123–2126; Org. Lett. 2007, 9, 379 (erratum).

Biographical Sketches

Koichi Yoneyama was born in a rural mountainous city, Matsumoto, Japan, and graduated from
the University of Tokyo with an M.S. degree in Agricultural Chemistry in 1978. He immediately
joined as an assistant professor at Utsunomiya University and is currently a professor in the Weed
Science Center. He received a Ph.D. degree in Agriculture from the University of Tokyo in 1984.
His research interests are mainly directed toward biologically active natural compounds of plant
origin and their synthetic modifications. His current research focuses on the chemistry of
strigolactones, host-recognition signals for both symbiotic AM fungi and root parasitic plants.
 Allelochemicals for Plant–Plant and Plant–Microbe Interactions 561

Masahiro Natsume was born in Tokyo, Japan, in 1956. He graduated from Nagoya
University with an M.S. degree in Agricultural Chemistry in 1981. In 1987, he was appointed
assistant professor in Agriculture at Nagoya University. He was transferred to Tokyo
University of Agriculture and Technology in 1991 and currently works as a professor. He
obtained a Ph.D. degree in Agriculture from Nagoya University in 1991 entitled ‘‘Study on
Bio-organic Chemistry of Aerial Mycelium-differentiation in Actinomycetes.’’ His research
interests focus on search for the regulatory substances of morphological differentiation and
secondary metabolism in microorganisms and of plant–microbe interactions, and elucidation
of their mode of action.
 4.14 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions
Keiichi Honda and Hisashi Ômura, Hiroshima University, Higashihiroshima, Japan
Masatoshi Hori, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan
Yooichi Kainoh, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.14.1 Introduction 563

4.14.2 Host Selection 563
4.14.2.1 Phytochemicals Involved in Oviposition 563
4.14.2.2 Feeding Attractants and Stimulants 570
4.14.3 Flower-Visiting and Foraging 580
4.14.3.1 Floral Volatiles 580
4.14.3.1.1 Attractants in nursery pollination 580
4.14.3.1.2 Attractants in sexual mimicry 581
4.14.3.1.3 Attractants in abiotic mimicry 582
4.14.3.1.4 Repellent volatiles in floral scents 583
4.14.3.1.5 Transfer of volatiles from flowers to insects 583
4.14.3.2 Food Constituents Affecting Foraging 584
4.14.3.2.1 Sugars 584
4.14.3.2.2 Amino acids 584
4.14.3.2.3 Toxic components 584
4.14.4 Insect–Plant Interface in Multitrophic Interactions 585
4.14.4.1 Parasitic Wasps 585
4.14.4.2 Parasitic Flies 588
4.14.4.3 Predators 588
4.14.4.4 Elicitors 589
References 590

4.14.1 Introduction

The majority of insects are herbivores that depend on plants for their nutrients. The chemicals produced by plants
and insects can have significant effects on their lives, and insect–plant interactions have therefore been of long-
standing interest in chemical ecology. Biological and chemical analyses of the interplay between insect pests and
crops are of great importance from the perspective of future agriculture as the need to develop environmentally
benign pest control agents for practical use continues to grow.1 Phytochemicals, particularly secondary
metabolites, play important and often crucial roles in many types of insect behaviors, and can even regulate
their growth and reproduction in various ways, thus ultimately exerting considerable influence on their fitness.
The abilities of insects to counteract the plants’ chemical barriers, which might have developed through
coevolutionary interactions between insects and plants, allow them to make use of certain phytochemicals as
cues to locate and recognize suitable food or host plants. Various attractants, stimulants, repellents, and deterrents
are usually involved in this process. Some insects even sequester and store noxious phytochemicals to use for their
own chemical defenses. Owing to the complexity of insect–plant relationships, the allelochemicals mediating
these interactions include a wide array of chemical compounds with a variety of ecological functions.
In this chapter, we have focused our attention on selected topics in which significant progress has been made
during the last decade, and have not discussed those chemicals of little or no ecological relevance. Since
antifeedants are covered in another chapter, plant chemicals that deter food ingestion have also been omitted.
This chapter initially deals with plant constituents involved in host selection: those affecting oviposition by
females and those stimulating feeding by both larvae and adults. Later, pollination strategies of plants involving

563
564 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

manipulation of their floral scents to lure or repel insects are reviewed, along with the gustatory responses of
foragers to a few groups of nutrients and other chemicals in the nectar. Finally, we have addressed the
multitrophic interactions among plants, insects, and their parasitoids, which have aroused increasing interest
in recent years, and further commented on induced plant volatiles that mediate the attraction of predators to
prey-infested plants.

4.14.2 Host Selection

Host selection by phytophagous insects usually consists of two phases: food choice through preimaginal feeding
(also feeding by adults in certain insect taxa) and host-plant seeking and assessment by ovipositing females.
Among the most important factors influencing host selection by insects are the chemical constituents present in
the plants, although other factors such as visual and/or mechanical stimuli also act concurrently on deciding
whether to accept potential host plants or not.

4.14.2.1 Phytochemicals Involved in Oviposition

Behavioral, sensory, and phytochemical bases for egg-laying by moths and butterflies have previously been
fully reviewed.2,3 Subsequently a number of newly identified plant chemicals serving as oviposition stimulants
or deterrents have been reported for many lepidopterans and other insects.
The majority of swallowtail butterflies of the genus Papilio (family Papilionidae) exclusively utilize plants of
the family Rutaceae as hosts, with a few species exploiting limited plant species of the families Apiaceae or
Lauraceae. The North American black swallowtail butterfly, Papilio polyxenes, a specialist on members of carrot
family (Apiaceae), has already been shown to lay eggs in response to a mixture of two chemotactile stimulants,
luteolin 7-O-(699-O-malonyl)--D-glucoside and trans-chlorogenic acid, identified from one of its major host
plants, Daucus carota (wild carrot). Further study revealed that the oviposition response by the butterfly to
another host plant, Pastinaca sativa (wild parsnip), was evoked by a combination of tyramine (1), trans-
chlorogenic acid, and a neutral fraction from the plant.4
The zebra swallowtail butterfly, Eurytides marcellus, is an Annonaceae-feeding specialist. One of three
hydroxycinnamoyl derivatives of 1,3,4,5-tetrahydroxycyclohexane-1-carboxylic acid, that is, 3-caffeoyl-muco-
quinic acid (2), isolated from the foliage of its primary host plant, Asimina triloba, was active alone in stimulating
oviposition.5 The action of compound 2 is unique because other papilionid butterflies for which oviposition
stimulants have been reported are induced to oviposit by the synergistic action of multiple components.3
However, E. marcellus females were deterred from egg-laying by flavonoids (rutin and nicotiflorine)
co-occurring in the host plant, thus using both qualitative and quantitative information about these compounds
to assess host quality.6 Interestingly, the same compound (2), also identified from Sassafras albidum (Lauraceae),
was found to act as an oviposition stimulant for the spicebush swallowtail, Papilio troilus, which feeds exclusively
on plants of the family Lauraceae. This compound was inactive alone, but increased the oviposition activity of
the females when combined with other as yet uncharacterized stimulant(s).7
Two oviposition stimulants, ()-4-(E)-caffeoyl-L-threonic acid (3) and ()-2-C-methyl-D-erythrono-1,4-
lactone (4), have been reported8,9 for a Rutaceae-feeding swallowtail butterfly, Papilio bianor, which preferen-
tially utilizes Orixa japonica as its principal host in the western districts of Japan. The former compound singly
stimulated egg-laying by the females to a certain extent, while the latter on its own evoked no oviposition
response, but turned out to be active when assayed in combination with other fractions derived from a
methanolic extract of the plant. However, no synergistic action of the two compounds in stimulation of
oviposition was shown. Papilio macilentus also feeds specifically on O. japonica, which ovipositing females
chemically recognize as a host, partly by foretarsal detection of a benzofuran derivative, cnidioside A (5).
Although a few species of Japanese swallowtail butterflies exploit O. japonica as larval food, the plant is rejected
by many other swallowtails. Papilio xuthus, a typical Citrus feeder, never accepts O. japonica. The inhibition of
colonization of this plant by the butterfly has been attributed to the presence of at least two
compounds, 3,4-O-disyringoylaldaric acid (6) and 5-{[2-O-(-D-apiofuranosyl)--D-glucopyranosyl]oxy}-2-
hydroxybenzoic acid (7), which potently deter both larval feeding and female oviposition.10
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 565

Papilio polytes is a tropical swallowtail butterfly specializing on only a few rutaceous plants in Japan, such as
Toddalia asiatica and Citrus depressa, while another sympatric potential host, Murraya paniculata (Rutaceae),
remains entirely unexploited by the butterfly in its natural habitat. Strong oviposition responses to T. asiatica
were found to be elicited by synergism between trans-4-hydroxy-N-methyl-L-proline (weakly active alone) (8)
and 2-C-methyl-D-erythronic acid (9).11 On the contrary, trigonelline (10) present in M. paniculata was partly
responsible for the avoidance of the plant by ovipositing females.12 Glycosmis citrifolia, a relatively rare rutaceous
plant occurring in sympatry with the above plants, is occasionally infested by P. polytes in nature. Oviposition on
this plant also proved to be due to the presence of compounds 8 and 9.12

Pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs) are a typical class of plant secondary metabolites, which certain butterflies and
moths in particular groups, that is, Danainae, Ithomiinae (Nymphalidae), and Arctiidae, sequester as larvae or
adults and utilize as chemical defensive substances against predatory enemies, probably due to their bitter taste
and hepatotoxicity.13 PAs also serve as precursors of male pheromones of PA-storing lepidopterans.
The primitive danaine butterfly, Idea leuconoe (occurring in the Old World tropics), is a specialist on plants of
the genus Parsonsia (Apocynaceae), which contain PAs, and uses the alkaloids as crucial cues in host recognition.
The females were induced to oviposit by host-plant-specific macrocyclic PAs, including parsonsianine,
parsonsianidine, and 17-methylparsonsianidine (Figure 1), each of which individually showed significant
566 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Figure 1 Oviposition stimulants for Idea leuconoe (danaine butterfly; upper) and Tyria jacobaeae (arctiid moth; lower)
feeding on pyrrolizidine alkaloid-containing plants.

stimulatory activity.14 The cinnabar moth, Tyria jacobaeae (Arctiidae), also depends exclusively on the PA-
containing plant, Senecio jacobaea (Asteraceae), for larval growth. Two PAs of host-plant origin, senecionine and
seneciphylline (Figure 1), and monocrotaline of nonhost origin stimulated oviposition by the females,15
although they strongly preferred to oviposit on substrates treated with a PA mixture derived from S. jacobaea
over single PA, suggesting the involvement of multiple PAs in oviposition preference.
A different group of alkaloids has been shown to mediate egg-laying by another danaine butterfly, Ideopsis
similis, which exclusively exploits Tylophora plants as hosts (Asclepiadaceae), known to contain
various phenanthroindolizidine alkaloids. Of 12 tested alkaloids isolated from one of its host plants,
Tylophora tanakae, at least five components, that is, isotylocrebrine, its N-oxide, 3-demethyisotylocrebrine,
6-demethyltylocrebrine, and 7-demethyltylophorine (Figure 2), individually stimulated oviposition,16
although an equivalent blend of these five compounds was much preferred by ovipositing females to any one
of them alone. This clearly indicates that synergism in stimulation of oviposition occurs not only among
structurally unrelated compounds (papilionid butterflies) but also among those with structural similarities.
The chestnut tiger, Parantica sita, is also an Asclepiadaceae-feeding danaine butterfly, which, along with the
monarch butterfly, is known to migrate northwards in spring and southwards in late autumn in Japan. From one
of its major host plants, Marsdenia tomentosa, three unsaturated cyclitols have been identified as oviposition
stimulants:17 conduritol A, conduritol F, and conduritol F 2-O--D-glucoside (Figure 3). Of these, conduritol F
2-O--D-glucoside (trace component) was most active by itself, conduritol A (predominant cyclitol) showed
moderate activity, while conduritol F was inactive alone. However, a combination of these cyclitols evoked the
highest oviposition responses from females.
Plants of the Crucifer family (Brassicaceae) are characterized by the presence of peculiar secondary
metabolites called glucosinolates, which are thought to be defensive chemicals against herbivores.18 The
diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (Plutellidae), a notorious worldwide pest of cruciferous crops, has
previously been shown to lay eggs in response to diverse glucosinolates (sinigrin, etc.) present in crucifers,
synergized by leaf epicuticular waxes. A recent study has reported new oviposition stimulants for the moth from
cabbage (Brassica oleracea), which fall into the chemical group of isothiocyanates. Among others, those with a
sulfur atom in the side chain, such as iberin, iberverin, and sulforaphane (Figure 4), elicited significant
behavioral and electroantennographic responses.19 Females of other pests on crucifers, Hellula undalis
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 567

Figure 2 Oviposition stimulants for Ideopsis similis from Tylophora tanakae.

Figure 3 Oviposition stimulants for Parantica sita from Marsdenia tomentosa.

Figure 4 Oviposition stimulants for crucifer pests, Plutella xylostella (upper) and Hellula undalis (lower).
568 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

(Pyralidae) and Mamestra brassicae (Noctuidae, polyphagous moth), were attracted to substrates treated with
allyl isothiocyanate (breakdown product of allylglucosinolate) through upwind orientation flight, while benzyl-
and allyl-glucosinolates (Figure 4) exerted potent stimulatory activity on egg-laying by H. undalis.20
(E)-Capsaicin (11) has been identified from the fruits of red pepper, Capsicum annuum (Solanaceae), as a
principal oviposition stimulant for the oriental tobacco budworm, Helicoverpa assulta (Noctuidae), an oligopha-
gous moth infesting primarily solanaceous plants.21 Another related moth, Heliothis armigera, is a polyphagous
pest utilizing a wide variety of plants as hosts, such as pigeon pea, cotton, tobacco, maize, and sunflower.
A sesquiterpene hydrocarbon, -bulnesene (12),22 green leaf volatiles (GLVs) ((E)-2-hexenal and esters of
(Z)-3-hexen-1-ol), and monoterpenes including -pinene, -myrcene, limonene, and linalool, were found to be
electrophysiologically active to gravid females of H. armigera.
The European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Crambidae), is also a highly polyphagous moth, which attacks
several major crops including maize, tomato, and cotton. Each of the n-alkanes (C26–C29) and tritriacontane
(C33) present in the leaf epicuticular wax of corn, Zea mays, was shown to be responsible for eliciting oviposition
on the plant.23 In the oligophagous Ostrinia moth, Ostrinia latipennis, feeding on knotweeds (Fallopia spp.) in
Japan, females were stimulated to oviposit by a mixture of leaf epicuticular wax chemicals present in Fallopia
japonica (Polygonaceae) consisting of n-alkanes of C16–C33 (nonacosane (C29) being dominant) and free fatty
acids of C9–C22 (hexadecanoic acid (C16) being dominant).24
The spotted stem borer, Chilo partellus (Pyralidae), and Sesamia nonagrioides (Noctuidae) are serious pests of
maize and sorghum. Their oviposition responses to maize, however, have been reported to differ greatly in
different cultivars; some compounds that deter female oviposition have been suggested to occur in resistant
cultivars. Oviposition deterrence evoked by resistant cultivars of Z. mays was attributed partly to larger
quantities of specific components: 1-nonadecanol and 1-heptadecanol for C. partellus, and aldehydes of
C9–C14, for S. nonagrioides.25,26
The host orientation of the codling moth, Cydia pomonella (Tortricidae), a major pest of apple (Malus
domestica; Rosaceae) and stone fruit, is thought to be guided by volatiles emitted from larval host fruit.
Although some fruit odors (-farnesenes, (E)--farnesene, acetic acid, ethyl (2E,4Z)-deca-2,4-dienoate),
which may act as larval feeding attractants, have been demonstrated to attract adult males and/or females,
little information is available on the phytochemicals involved in host finding and oviposition by females.
Recently, a female-specific attractant from apple fruit was identified as butyl hexanoate (13).27 In addition,
certain sugars and sugar alcohols detected from the surfaces of apple fruits and foliage, particularly fructose,
sorbitol, and myo-inositol, were shown to stimulate egg-laying by the moth.28 A more recent investigation has
revealed that gravid females of the oriental fruit moth, Cydia molesta, which also causes severe damage to stone
fruit and pome fruit, were attracted to a mixture of three GLVs ((Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (E)-2-hexenal, and (Z)-3-
hexenyl acetate), benzaldehyde, and benzonitrile29 identified from peach shoot extract. The synthetic mixture
was as attractive as the natural peach shoot volatiles. The antennae of mated females of the European grapevine
moth, Lobesia botrana (Tortricidae), sensitively responded to many components of host-plant (grape; Vitis
vinifera) odor, including (E)-4,8-dimethylnona-1,3,7-triene (DMNT), -caryophyllene, (E,E)--farnesene,
(E)--farnesene, 1-octen-3-ol, 2-ethyl-1-hexanol, linalool, (E)- and (Z)-linalool oxide furanoside, methyl
salicylate, and they were actually attracted to a synthetic 10-component blend in flight tunnel experiments.
However, ternary, but not binary, mixtures of these compounds were sufficient to release upwind flight of
females, suggesting synergism and redundancy in host-plant volatiles that lure females.30 L. botrana females
make use of sugars as cues for oviposition site choice, that is, fructose and glucose (much less active), which are
perceived not by tarsal sensilla but by ovipositor sensilla.
The banded sunflower moth, Cochylis hospes (Cochylidae), is an important pest of cultivated sunflower
(Helianthus annuus, Asteraceae) and the larvae are restricted to feeding on several sunflower species. Two
diterpenoid alcohols, ent-kauran-16-ol (14) and ent-atisan-16-ol (15), isolated from prebloom sunflower
heads, were identified as oviposition stimulants for the moth.31 These compounds individually induced egg-
laying, with linear dose responses. The former was more stimulative than the latter and they had no synergistic
effect on oviposition. Females of the pyralid moth, Ephestia kuehniella (Mediterranean flour moth), which infests
cereal products, were stimulated to lay eggs by each of three electrophysiologically active (antennae used)
volatile components from chocolate products, namely, benzyl alcohol, nonanal, and phenylacetaldehyde.
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 569

Certain species of Diptera have been shown to be of considerable importance in terms of agricultural
damage and their indirect impacts on other herbivores. The cabbage root fly, Delia radicum (Anthomyiidae),
attacks crucifers, with the larvae feeding on the roots and stems of the plant and often causing serious damage.
To locate potential hosts, gravid females of the fly use visual and olfactory (isothiocyanates, etc.) cues, while the
final decision on host acceptance is mediated by chemotactile stimuli, evoked by specific phytochemicals
detected by taste receptors located on the tarsi during walking on the leaf surface and stem after alighting on the
plant. Apart from glucosinolates, which have long been known to be important cues allowing females to
recognize suitable host plants, two new and more powerful oviposition stimulants have been identified from
cabbage leaves, B. oleracea (Brassicaceae): 1,2-dihydro-3-thia-4,10,10b-triazacyclopenta[.a.]fluorene-1-
carboxylic acid (major) and its glycine amide32 (Figure 5). The major component occurs at a very low
concentration (1 ng per leaf) on the leaf surface. Subsequently, another structurally related and very active
stimulant, 1,2-dihydro-6-methoxy-3-thia-4,10,10b-triazacyclopenta[.a.]fluorene-1-carboxylic acid (Figure 5),
was found from the roots of Brassica napus, together with the above two compounds.33 The turnip root fly, Delia
floralis, a close relative of D. radicum, has also been reported to positively respond to glucosinolates and thia-
triaza-fluorenes in host assessment.34
The Hessian fly, Mayetiola destructor (Cecidomyiidae), is a major pest of wheat, Triticum aestivum, but
occasionally infests rye, barley, and a number of wild grasses in the genera Elymus, Aegilops (Poaceae), and
others. Two oviposition stimulants, octacosanal and 6-methoxy-2-benzoxazolinone (Figure 5), have been
identified from wheat leaves upon which females deposit eggs. These compounds exert a synergistic effect
on elicitation of oviposition.35
The American serpentine leafminer, Liriomyza trifolii (Agromyzidae), is a worldwide generalist pest attack-
ing plants of more than 21 families, including Solanaceae and Cucurbitaceae. The sweet pepper, C. annuum
(Solanaceae), is fiercely infested in its young stages by L. trifolii, but becomes resistant to the insect at more
mature stages. One apolar component, (E)-phytol, three water-soluble components, namely, 4-aminobutanoic
acid, trans-4-hydroxy-N-methyl-L-proline, and cytidine, and a flavonoid, luteolin 7-O--D-apiofuranosyl-
(1!2)--D-glucopyranoside (Figure 6), have been identified as oviposition deterrents from the foliage of
mature C. annuum, accounting for the chemical defense of the plant from L. trifolii.36,37 Interestingly, 4-hydroxy-
N-methyl-L-proline serves as an oviposition stimulant for the Rutaceae-feeding swallowtail butterfly, P. polytes
(see Section 4.14.2.1), whereas it acts as an oviposition deterrent to this polyphagous fly. Bitter gourd, Momordica
charantia, belonging to the Cucurbitaceae family, is widely cultivated in tropical Africa and Asia, but rarely
infested by L. trifolii. Several key substances that deter oviposition by L. trifolii on this plant were identified as
cucurbitane triterpenoids and their glucosides, including 7,23-dihydroxy-3-O-malonylcucurbita-5,24-dien-19-
al, momordicine I, momordicine II, momordicine IV, and momordicine V38,39 (Figure 6).
The cerambycid beetle, Monochamus alternates, is a vector of the pine wood nematode, Bursaphelenchus
xylophilus. Mortality of pines is caused by the combination of beetles and nematodes. The following 10
570 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Figure 5 Oviposition stimulants for the cabbage root fly (Delia radicum) and the Hessian fly (Mayetiola destructor).

compounds have been isolated from Pinus densiflora and identified as oviposition stimulants for M. alternates
(Figure 7): (þ)-catechin,40 ()-2,3-(E)-dihydroquercetin-39-O--D-glucopyranoside, polymeric proanthocya-
nidins, procyanidin B-1, procyanidin B-3,41 dihydroconiferyl alcohol-9-O--D-glucopyranoside,
cedrusin-49-O--D-glucopyranoside, cedrusin-49--L-rhamnopyranoside, 7-O-methylcedrusin-49-O--L-
rhamnopyranoside, and 1-(49-hydroxy-39-methoxyphenyl)-2-[40-(3-hydroxypropyl)-20-hydroxyphenoxy]-
1,3-propanediol-49-O--D-xylopyranoside.42 These individual compounds do not stimulate oviposition, but
some combinations of them are active.

4.14.2.2 Feeding Attractants and Stimulants

Many coleopteran beetles use host-plant volatiles for host location. Strawberry leaf beetle, Galerucella vittati-
collis, feeds on polygonaceous plant leaves and also on strawberry leaves. The main component of both
polygonaceous plant and strawberry leaf volatiles is the compound, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate.43 (Z)-3-Hexenyl
acetate attracts G. vittaticollis at concentrations of 0.01–0.05%. Quercetin glycosides are also characteristic
components of polygonaceous plants, as well as organic acids, and are also found in strawberry leaves. The
quercetin glycosides, quercitrin, rutin, avicularin, hyperoside, and isoquercetin, stimulate G. vittaticollis feeding
(Figure 8).44 Thus, both (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate as the feeding attractant and quercetin glycosides as feeding
stimulants play important roles in the host selection of G. vittaticollis for polygonaceous plants and strawberry.
The Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata, is one of the most serious pests of potato. Two-
component blends of three chemicals, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, ()-linalool, and methyl salicylate, are attractive
to L. decemlineata when (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate is one of the components of the blend,45 but individual
compounds are inactive. Low levels of (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol and (E)-2-hexen-1-ol can substitute for (Z)-3-hexenyl
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 571

Figure 6 Oviposition deterrents to the American serpentine leafminer (Liriomyza trifolii).

acetate when combined with ()-linalool. However, blends containing relatively high amounts of (E)-2-
hexen-1-ol and (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol are unattractive. Emission of these compounds is greatly increased by the
feeding L. decemlineata larvae, which may alert predators or parasitoids to the presence of potential prey.
Many specific plant odors are achieved by combinations of widely distributed constituent components in
specific ratios characteristic to particular plant species.46 Therefore, many insects that use general compounds
as feeding attractants, such as L. decemlineata, are attracted to blends of several components, but not to the
individual compounds. Fifteen compounds, (Z)-3-hexenal, (E)-2-hexenal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (E)-2-hexen-1-ol,
572 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Figure 7 Oviposition stimulants for Monochamus alternatus contained in Pinus densiflora.

 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 573

Figure 8 Quercetin glycosides as feeding stimulants for Galerucella vittaticollis.

1-hexanol, heptanal, (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, octanal, (E,E)-2,4-heptadienal, benzyl alcohol, nonanal, decanal,
(2E,6Z)-2,6-nonadienal, indole, and (E,E)--farnesene, from saltcedar, Tamarix spp., which is the host of the leaf
beetle, Diorhabda elongate, induce antennal response in this beetle.47 A natural ratio blend of four GLVs, (E)-2-
hexenal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (Z)-3-hexenal, and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, strongly attracts the beetles. The Fuller’s
rose weevil, Pantomorus cervinus, which is a polyphagous weevil, is also attracted to the blend of general
compounds.48 The headspace of clover, which is one of the weevil’s hosts, contains two GLVs, (Z)-3-hexen-
1-ol and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate. The weevils are attracted to a synthetic blend of these GLVs over a range of
concentrations (0.01, 0.1, and 1 mg ml1), as strongly as to clover leaves. The Japanese beetle, Popillia japonica, is
a polyphagous insect feeding on the fruit, flowers, or foliage of about 300 species of plants. It is attracted to
many naturally occurring plant volatiles, including phenylacetonitrile, (Z)-3-hexenyl benzoate, nerolidol,
(Z)-3-hexenyl hexanoate, (Z)-3-hexenyl 2-methylbutyrate, (þ)-limonene, and (þ)--pinene, with the attrac-
tion increasing as the number of components in a volatile blend increases49 (see Chapter 2.02).
Some plant volatiles, however, are highly specific and composed of compounds not found in unrelated plant
species.46 Allyl isothiocyanate, a specific odor component, is a breakdown product of glucosinolates in oilseed
rape, B. napus. This compound attracts the crucifer flea beetle, Phyllotreta cruciferae, which is consistently found
feeding in oilseed rape or canola fields.50
The blossoms of Cucurbitaceae are well known to be highly attractive to many species of Diabrotica
beetles. However, the volatile compounds that act as attractants differ in different Diabrotica species.
Cinnamaldehyde strongly attracts the spotted cucumber beetle, Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi, whereas
4-methoxycinnamaldehyde is a specific attractant for the western corn rootworm, Diabrotica virgifera virgifera.51
The northern corn rootworm, Diabrotica barberi, and Diabrotica cristata are attracted to eugenol, cinnamyl
alcohol, and 2-(4-methoxyphenyl)ethanol. Volatiles of maize, one of the host plants, also attract D. v. virgifera
574 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

and D. barberi. Diabrotica barberi is strongly attracted to the maize volatiles geranylacetone52 and syn-
benzaldoxime,53 while D. v. virgifera is attracted to (þ)--terpineol, linalool,52 and -caryophyllene.53
Attraction of D. v. virgifera to ()-linalool, (þ)--terpineol, or -ionone is enhanced by methyl salicylate.53
Dendroctonus beetles are one of the most serious pests of coniferous trees. Dendroctonus valens is attracted to
()--pinene, (þ)--pinene, and (þ)-3-carene from the resin volatiles of its hosts, Pinus ponderosa and Pinus
lambertiana.54 Three sympatric coniferous nonhost species have the same attractive monoterpenes, but produce
less resin. Dendroctonus pseudotsugae is attracted to the synthetic bole volatile of its coniferous host, Pseudotsuga
menziesii (a blend of ()--pinene, (þ)--pinene, and ()--pinene).55 On the other hand, Dendroctonus
rufipennis is attracted to the synthetic bole and/or foliage volatiles of its coniferous host, Picea glauca (bole: a
blend of ()--pinene, (þ)--pinene, ()--pinene, and (þ)-3-carene; foliage: a blend of (þ)--pinene,
(þ)-camphene, myrcene, ()-limonene, and ()-bornyl acetate). Dendroctonus pseudotsugae can discriminate
among volatiles of sympatric host and nonhost conifers. The attraction of this beetle to aggregation pheromone
traps is increased by coniferous host volatiles, but decreased by nonhost volatiles. These results indicate that
pioneers of some Dendroctonus beetles can locate their coniferous hosts by attraction to the host volatiles, even
without the aggregation pheromone, and followers can quickly locate the hosts by using pheromones and by
discriminating between sympatric host and nonhost conifers.
Constituents of plant volatiles change according to plant age and developmental stage, sometimes causing
changes in the behavioral responses of the insects to the host plants. The concentration of (E)-2-hexenal in the
volatile component of 1.5-year-old red clover roots is higher than that in 2.5-year-old roots.56 Conversely, the
limonene content of 1.5-year-old plants is lower than that of 2.5-year-old plants. (E)-2-Hexenal attracts the root
borer, Hylastinus obscurus, which feeds on the clover roots, whereas limonene repels it and H. obscurus therefore
shows different behavioral responses to red clover, depending on plant age:57 an increase in limonene content
and a decrease in (E)-2-hexenal content correlate with reduced attractiveness of 2.5-year-old clover roots.
The balance of attractants and repellents is also important in the orientation of insects to the plants. Volatile
extracts from storage roots and aerial plant parts of sweet potato are attractive to female sweet potato weevils,
Cylas formicarius.58 Three oxygenated monoterpenes from storage roots, nerol, (Z)-citral, and methyl geranate,
are responsible for attracting the female weevils, while sesquiterpenes, such as -gurjunene, -humulene, and
ylangene, from storage roots and aerial plant parts repel them. Differences in the relative attractiveness of sweet
potato cultivars are inversely correlated with the composite concentration of headspace sesquiterpenes. Host-
finding behavior in the granary weevil, Sitophilus granarius, also depends on the balance of positive and negative
volatile stimuli from grain.59 Sitophilus granarius adults have the ability to respond behaviorally to a wide range
of cereal volatiles. However, 1-hexanol, butanal, hexanal, heptanal, (E)-2-hexenal, (E,E)-2,4-nonadienal, (E,E)-
2,4-decadienal, 2-pentanone, 2-hexanone, 2-heptanone, 2,3-butanedione, and furfural repel the weevils, while
1-butanol, 1-pentanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, pentanal, (E,E)-2,4-heptadienal, maltol, phenylacetaldehyde, and
vanillin attract them. Among the latter components, 1-pentanol, (E,E)-2,4-heptadienal, and phenylacetaldehyde
also repel them at relatively high concentrations. The response of weevils to the cereal odor may change
according to storage period because relative concentrations of individual cereal volatiles change during storage.
Some plant volatiles act synergistically with aggregation pheromones. Aggregation of the American palm
weevil, Rhynchophorus palmarum, on host plants is mediated by host-plant volatiles and a male pheromone
(rhynchophorol).60 Acetoin, one of the major volatile components of the host plants Cocos nucifera, Saccharum
officinarum, Jacaratia spp., and Elaeis spp., plays an important role in the aggregation of weevils on these plants.
Although the pheromone alone is weakly attractive, its attraction is enhanced by acetoin.
Several reports have revealed that host-plant volatiles show synergistic attraction with host visual cues:61
cinnamyl alcohol and (E)-anethole, common flower scent components, attract Epicometis hirta (which damages
the reproductive parts of flowers of several orchard trees and many ornamental bushes62) and enhance the
attractiveness of light blue color.63
Leaf surface compounds provide important information about host-plant acceptability to coleopteran
insects. Although the tortoise beetle, Cassida canaliculata, is only weakly attracted to odors from host plants, it
shows strong preferences for host plants when additional contact cues are provided.64 The cottonwood leaf
beetle, Chrysomela scripta, which is a pest of cottonwood, poplar, and willow, is stimulated to feed by leaf
surface chemicals produced by a beetle-preferred poplar clone.65 The feeding stimulants have been isolated
and identified as 1-docosanol, 1-tetracosanol, 1-hexacosanol, 1-octacosanol, 1-triacontanol, and
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 575

-tocopherylquinone (-TQ) (16). Beetle feeding is not stimulated by fatty alcohols and -TQ alone, but is
synergistically stimulated by a mixture of alcohols and -TQ. The beetles prefer to feed on Populus clones with
-TQ, rather than clones without -TQ.66 As the amount of -TQ increases, the feeding preference increases,
but it then decreases again as the amount of -TQ increases further. The potato leaf surface contains kunzeaol
(17),67 which acts as a feeding stimulant for L. decemlineata. Large aggregations of L. decemlineata have been
observed on potato varieties that produce relatively high amounts of kunzeaol.

It is well known that cucurbitacins act as feeding stimulants for cucurbitaceous-feeding beetles (Figure 9).
Aulacophora indica and Aulacophora lewisii are strongly stimulated to feed by cucurbitacin B, E, I, and E-glucoside,
at concentrations ranging from 0.001 to 0.5 mg ml1, while Aulacophora nigripennis is weakly stimulated to feed
only by 0.01 mg ml1 of cucurbitacin B.68 Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi, whose adults feed on leaves of
many crops such as cucumber, soybean, cotton, and bean, is stimulated to feed by cucurbitacin E-glucoside.69
Epilachna admirabilis and Henosepilachna boisduvali are cucurbitaceous-feeding lady beetles, and cucurbitacin B
stimulates feeding of both adults and larvae of both species. Cucurbitacin E, I, and E-glucoside do not stimulate
feeding of adult H. boisduvali although these three cucurbitacins stimulate larvae of both species and adults of
E. admirabilis.70 Henosepilachna vigintioctomaculata and Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata, which attack both sola-
naceous and cucurbitaceous plants, also are stimulated to feed by cucurbitacin B, E, I, and E-glucoside.
Although cucurbitacins play an important role in the host selection of many cucurbitaceous-feeding beetles,
their activities differ among species, or between adults and larvae within species. The differences in host ranges
among the beetle species may be related to the differences in responses to cucurbitacins. The striped cucumber

Figure 9 Structures of cucurbitacins that act as feeding stimulants.

576 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

beetle, Acalymma vittatum, sequesters cucurbitacins from cucurbitaceous plants. However, the response of
A. vittatum to cucurbitacin diminishes with continued sequestration.71 The beetles ingest cucurbitacins until
they have sequestered enough to make them sufficiently bitter to repel enemies, but sequestration of additional
cucurbitacins entails a fitness cost.
Lignans and neolignans are a widely distributed and structurally diverse class of phytochemicals. Most of
them and their intermediate products exhibit various biological activities such as fungal-growth and insect-
growth inhibitory activities, as well as insecticidal and antifeeding activities. Lignan biosynthesis plays
important roles in the host-plant defense system. However, two minor lignans, 1-acetoxypinoresinol and
()-olivil (Figure 10) from olive trees, act as feeding stimulants for the olive weevil, Dyscerus perforates,
which feeds on the leaf and bark of the olive tree.72 This weevil uses the compounds, which inhibit many
herbivores from attacking the plants, as key stimulants for feeding. A secoiridoid glucoside, oleuropein
(Figure 10), has also been known to stimulate feeding of this weevil on olive trees.73
Mixtures of dominant amino acids, such as proline, alanine, asparagine, and -aminobutyric acid, contained in
pollens from plants such as sweet corn, winter squash, sunflower, and Canada goldenrod, stimulate feeding in the
pollen-feeding beetle, D. v. virgifera.74 The beetle’s feeding is stimulated by three major sugars, fructose, glucose, and
sucrose.75 In pollen, the flavonoids, isorhamnetin 3-O-neohesperidoside from maize pollen75 and isoquercetin from
sunflower pollen,76 have been identified as feeding stimulants for D. v. virgifera (Figure 11). Isorhamnetin 3-O-
neohesperidoside interacts additively with the mixture of three sugars and 21 amino acids. From sunflower pollen,
N1,N5,N10-tri[(E)-p-coumaroyl]spermidine, -linolenic acid, phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidic acid, phos-
phatidylcholine, and 1,2-dilinolenoyl-3-palmitoylglycerol also have been identified as feeding stimulants
(Figure 11).76 -Linolenic acids are essential nutrients for almost all insects, including Diabrotica. Linolenoyl-rich
lipids could serve as appropriate pollen-selective taste cues for pollen-feeding specialists.

Figure 10 Structure of feeding stimulants identified from olive tree.

 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 577

Figure 11 (Continued)
578 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Figure 11 Feeding stimulants for Diabrotica virgifera virgifera identified from maize and sunflower pollen.

Some compounds show feeding stimulatory activity when mixed, even though they show no, or weak,
activity alone. Methanol extract of one of the asteraceous plants, ragweed, Ambrosia artemisiifolia, stimulates
feeding in the asteraceous-feeding leaf beetle, Ophraella communa. -Amyrin acetate, -amyrin acetate, chloro-
genic acid, and 3,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid have been isolated as feeding stimulants from this extract (Figure 12).
Both triterpenoid derivatives, -amyrin acetate and -amyrin acetate, show feeding stimulatory activities when
combined with chlorogenic acid or 3,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid, even though the activities of individual triterpe-
noid derivatives are weak.77 Methyl linolenate from potato leaves has been identified as the feeding stimulant
for H. vigintioctomaculata.78 Although methyl linolenate alone is inactive, it acts synergistically with sugars. The
feeding activity stimulated by methyl linolenate combined with sugars is maximal at the concentration found
naturally in potato leaves. Feeding stimulation of the mustard leaf beetle, Phaedon cochleariae, is also based on a
combination of biosynthetically distinct metabolites.79 The glucosinolate and flavonoid fractions from Sinapis
alba, which is a host of this leaf beetle, stimulate it to feed, while the combination of both fractions evokes higher
feeding stimulatory activity than the individual fractions. The flavonoid fraction has only weak stimulatory
activity, while sinalbin (18), the most abundant glucosinolate in S. alba, induces approximately 50% of the
beetles to feed. Hence, sinalbin might be the active stimulant in the glucosinolate fraction, and flavonoids might
act synergistically with sinalbin.

The balance of feeding stimulants and deterrents is important for host selection by insects. Salix integra
leaves contain both feeding stimulants and deterrents for the willow beetle, Plagiodera versicolora, which feeds on
several species of willow, including S. integra. 1,2-Di[(9Z,12Z,15Z)-octadeca-9,12,15-trienoyl]-3--D-
galactopyranosyl-sn-glycerol (MGDG) (19) acts as a feeding stimulant and 3,5-dicaffeoylquinic acid acts as a
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 579

Figure 12 Feeding stimulants for Ophraella communa identified from Ambrosia artemisiifolia.

deterrent.80 In Japan, chlorogenic acid from S. integra stimulates feeding in P. versicolora on the island of Honshu,
but deters them on the island of Hokkaido. The balance between feeding deterrence and stimulation by these
compounds plays an important role in the acceptance of S. integra by P. versicolora. Luteolin 7-O-glucoside (20)
contained in the leaves of Physalis alkekengi acts as a feeding stimulant for the two related lady beetle species,
H. vigintioctopunctata and H. vigintioctomaculata.81 However, H. vigintioctopunctata feeds on P. alkekengi, while
H. vigintioctomaculata cannot feed on this plant at all. Feeding deterrents contained in P. alkekengi cause its
rejection by H. vigintioctomaculata; for H. vigintioctomaculata, the activities of feeding deterrents in P. alkekengi
overcome the activities of feeding stimulants, such as luteolin 7-O-glucoside (see Chapter 1.25 for feeding
deterrents).
580 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

4.14.3 Flower-Visiting and Foraging

4.14.3.1 Floral Volatiles
Many species of insects visit angiosperm flowers to acquire nutrition or reproductive reward and coincidentally
contribute to pollination. The scents, as well as the colors, of angiosperm flowers serve as primary cues for
mediating the long-range attraction of insects.82 In general, floral scents are composed of a number of
compounds belonging to different chemical classes, and the chemical composition of floral scents varies greatly
among plant species. To understand the ecological significance of these variations, characterization of floral
scents and their relationships with different types of insect pollinators has been attempted for many years
(Table 1).83
Thus far, more than 1700 compounds from around 1000 plant species have been identified as floral volatiles.84
Twelve compounds in particular, namely, limonene, (E)--ocimene, -myrcene, -pinene, -pinene, linalool,
6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one, -caryophyllene, benzyl alcohol, 2-phenylethanol, benzaldehyde, and methyl salicylate,
have been found to occur in more than 50% of the plant families investigated, and these are regarded as the most
common floral volatiles. Various insects use these ubiquitous volatiles for flower selection, for example, honeybee,
butterfly, and moth commonly show preferential responses to linalool, benzaldehyde, and/or phenylacetaldehyde
contained in the floral scents of various plants.85–87 These volatiles not only serve as important floral cues by
themselves but also contribute to the floral scents unique to each plant species, which are distinguishable for flower
visitors. On the other hand, it has recently been revealed that several plant species are pollinated exclusively by
particular insect species, and that the floral scents play important roles in such pollination.

4.14.3.1.1 Attractants in nursery pollination

Nursery pollination systems are examples of reciprocal mutualism between pollinators and plants, in which the
female pollinators oviposit on the ovaries of plants and the hatched larvae feed on pollinated fruits and seeds. At
least 13 nursery pollination systems have been identified.88 Floral volatiles significantly contribute to attracting
specific pollinators in several systems.
Fig–fig wasp interactions are an example of highly specialized and diversified mutualism. Approximately
900 species of Ficus (Moraceae), when receptive, release floral scents that attract specific wasps (Agaonidae) for
pollination. The chemical compositions of the floral scents differ considerably among different Ficus species,
and several volatiles such as (E)--ocimene, -pinene, linalool, trans-linalool oxide furanoside (21), 1,8-cineol,
-caryophyllene, germacrene D, -copaene, and benzyl alcohol have been identified as the dominant compo-
nents of these scents.89 Such differences in composition of the floral scents of figs induce species specificity in
the attraction of fig wasps.90 In addition, in fig flowers, the scent composition differs between the receptive and

Table 1 Characteristics of floral volatiles of general-, coleopteran-, dipteran-, hymenopteran-, and lepidopteran-
pollinated plants

Types of insect pollinators Traits of floral volatiles

Generalist (diverse insects) Fatty acid derivatives, terpenoids, and benzenoids

Coleoptera
Tropical scarab beetles Methoxylated benzenoids
Other tropical beetles Fatty acid esters, benzenoid esters, and terpenoids
Temperate beetles Variable, with N-compounds frequently
Diptera
Typical flies and hoverflies Fatty acid derivatives (acids and alcohols) and N-compounds
Hymenoptera
Bees Variable, with terpenoids commonly abundant
Wasps Variable
Lepidoptera
Butterflies Benzenoids and terpenoids, with N-compounds occasionally
Settling moths Benzenoids and terpenoids, with fatty acid esters and N-compounds occasionally
Hovering moths Benzenoids, terpenoids, and N-compounds
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 581

the postpollinated states, for example, in Ficus hispida, the amounts of several dominant components, such as
linalool and linalool oxide, decrease and disappear after pollination by wasps, while that of 1-hydroxylinalool
increases.91
Yucca plants (Agavaceae) are distributed in the arid areas of North and Central America and rely exclusively
on Tegeticula and Parategeticula yucca moths for pollination. The floral scent of Yucca filamentosa consists mainly
of homoterpenes and long-chain aliphatic hydrocarbons, among which DMNT (22) has been identified as the
dominant component, and two dioxygenated compounds with unknown structures have also been found. Since
no compositional differences in floral scents have been observed among various yucca populations pollinated
by different Tegeticula moths, a stable combination of unique compounds may contribute to the highly selective
attraction of yucca moths.92
Hadena moths use Silene flowers (Caryophyllaceae) as both nectar sources and as host plants for depositing
larvae. The floral scent of Silene latifolia is characterized by the presence of several fatty acid derivatives,
benzenoids, and monoterpenoids, while the most abundant compounds are the lilac aldehyde isomers ((2S, 29S,
59S), (2R, 29S, 59S), (2S, 29R, 59S), and (2R, 29R, 59S)) (23), veratrole, and benzyl acetate.93 However, several
chemotypes of these dominant components are found in S. latifolia, suggesting variability in attracting pollina-
tors. Wind tunnel experiments have revealed that Hadena bicruris is strongly attracted by lilac aldehyde isomers;
although the moths respond electrophysiologically to all eight stereoisomers of lilac aldehyde, only four are
present in the floral scent.94
More than 300 species of Glochidion trees (Phyllanthaceae) are pollinated at night exclusively by local
species-specific moths of the genus Epicephala. The floral scents of the five Glochidion species contain mainly
(R)-()- and (S)-(þ)-linalools, (E)- and (Z)--ocimenes, as well as another 6–20 minor components. The
compositions of the scents are species specific, especially in terms of their minor components, and two-choice
bioassays indicated that Epicephala moths selected their host on the basis of floral scent.95

4.14.3.1.2 Attractants in sexual mimicry

Several orchids have remarkably characteristic pollination systems employing sexual deception; in this system,
the flowers mimic the visual, tactile, and olfactory traits of the females of particular hymenopteran species and
so deceive conspecific males into attempting to mate with the flowers. In particular, the floral scent, which has a
composition identical to that of female sex pheromones, is a key mediator of this exclusive and species-specific
mode of pollination.
The flowers of Ophrys sphegodes produce the same compounds as those found in the female sex pheromone of
the solitary bee Andrena nigroaenea (Table 2).96 The floral scent triggers copulation behavior and significant
electrophysiological responses in male bees.97 Ophrys fusca and Ophrys bilunulata are specifically pollinated by
A. nigroaenea and Andrena flavipes, respectively. The two sympatric and closely related orchids differ in the
relative amounts of alkenes present in their floral scents, which are responsible for the selective attraction of
pollinators.98 After pollination, O. sphegodes shows a significant change in the chemical composition of the floral
scent and an increase in the amount of (E,E)-farnesyl hexanoate (24), which serves as a repellent volatile for the
bee pollinators.99
Male adults of the scoliid wasp Campsoscolia ciliate are strongly attracted to the flowers of Ophrys speculum, and
attempt to copulate with the flower labellum. The floral scent contains many volatiles, including trace amounts
of (!-1)-hydroxy and (!-1)-oxo acids, especially 9-hydroxydecanoic acid (R:S ¼ 6:4) (25). These characteristic
substances are the major components of the female sex pheromone in the scoliid wasp and induce copulatory
behavior by male wasps.100
The Australian orchid Chiloglottis trapeziformis relies on exclusive pollination by the thynnine wasp
Neozeleboria cryptoides. The flowers have been found to release 2-ethyl-5-propylcyclohexane-1,3-dione, called
chiloglottone (26), which is responsible for attracting male wasps and is also produced by female wasps as a sex
582 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Table 2 Chemical compositions of extracts of virgin Andrena

nigroaenea females and Ophrys sphegodes flower labellum

Abundance (%)

Compounds Andrena bee Ophrys flower

Heneicosane 1.6 1.8

Docosane 0.6 0.5
Tricosane 28.7 30.6
Tetracosane 2.0 3.1
(Z)-9-Pentacosene 3.4 0.6
Pentacosane 34.9 20.2
Hexacosane 1.6 2.1
(Z)-12þ(Z)-11-Heptacosenes 0.7 6.0
(Z)-9-Heptacosene 5.1 7.6
Heptacosane 11.2 11.5
(Z)-12þ(Z)-11-Nonacosenes 3.7 6.7
(Z)-9-Nonacosene 6.6 9.4

pheromone.101 Interestingly, the closely related orchid Chiloglottis valida also uses the same compound for
attracting the specific wasp Neozeleboria monticola. Although both wasps are attracted to dummies scented with
chiloglottone, N. cryptoides preferentially attempted copulation with dummies a few centimeters above the
ground, while N. monticola preferred those closer to the ground. Since the two orchids differ with regard to
flower height, that is, C. trapeziformis is nearly twice the height of C. valida, these behavioral differences between
two thynnine wasps are responsible for the reproductive isolation of the orchids.102

4.14.3.1.3 Attractants in abiotic mimicry

Not all floral scents consist of fragrant volatiles. Unpleasant odors associated with dung, carrion, urine, rotting
fungi, and decaying cabbage and onion have been found in abiotic mimicry in many plant families such as
Araceae, Aristolochiaceae, Orchidaceae, and Apocynaceae.103 Several saprophagous insects are attracted to
these flowers and act as selective pollinators.
The inflorescence of the dead horse arum Helicodiceros muscivorus (Araceae), distributed in the western
Mediterranean regions, mimics a dead mammal and emits an oligosulfide odor, which includes dimethyl
sulfide, dimethyl disulfide, and dimethyl trisulfide.104 The flower odor is crucial for attracting blowflies,
which serve as important pollinators for this flower. In addition, the thermogenesis and respiration of the
inflorescence reinforce the stimulation for fly pollination.105
The stapeliad flowers (Apocynaceae) that inhabit the regions from the African continent to India are known
as ‘carrion flowers’ due to their strong fetid scents and their exclusive pollination by flies. However, the floral
scents of 15 stapeliad species are highly diverse in their compositions, and on this basis, the species can be
divided into four groups that appear to reflect different types of mimicry: species with p-cresol (27) as the
dominant component of their scent (herbivore feces mimicry); species with dimethyl oligosulfides as the major
scent components (carnivore/omnivore feces or carcass mimicry); species with large amounts of heptanal and
octanal (carnivore/omnivore feces or carcass mimicry); species with scents in which hexanoic acid is the major
component (urine mimicry).106
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 583

The genus Amorphophallus (Araceae) is well known for large-sized flowers in some of its species and for very
strong and obnoxious floral scents. The floral scents of 12 Amorphophallus species have gaseous or carrion-like
odors with a simple chemical composition consisting mainly of dimethyl oligosulfides. Floral scents containing
dimethyl oligosulfides are also found in the closely related genus Pseudodracontium (Araceae). Several
Amorphophallus species produce different floral scents: the strong fried fish odor of Amorphophallus brachyphyllus
in which trimethylamine is the dominant component; the strong cheesy odor of Amorphophallus elatus in which 4-
methylpentanoic acid (28) is the main component; an unusual banana-like odor of Amorphophallus haematospadix,
which contains large amounts of isoamyl acetate and ethyl acetate; and the anise-like odor of Amorphophallus
albispathus containing 2-(4-methoxyphenyl)ethanol (29).107

4.14.3.1.4 Repellent volatiles in floral scents

Several insects exert negative effects on plant fitness by behaving as nectar robbers, opportunistic flower
visitors, and flower-tissue feeders. Recently, it has been revealed that floral scents can act not only as attractants
but also as repellents to specific flower visitors. The flowers of the sweet olive Osmanthus fragrans (Oleaceae)
attract few species of lepidopteran adults despite their strong scents. The major floral volatiles, namely,
-decalactone (30) and linalool oxide isomers (furanoside (21) and pyranoside), discourage flower visiting by
the cabbage butterfly, Pieris rapae.108 Wild tobacco, Nicotiana attenuate (Solanaceae), produces flower nectar that
is rich in nicotine (31), which comprises 1% of the floral headspace and acts as a deterrent for the hawkmoth,
Manduca sexta, so reducing nectar removal.109

4.14.3.1.5 Transfer of volatiles from flowers to insects

Several insects collect floral oils (scent components) as rewards for pollination and utilize them for their
intraspecific communications.
For pollination, the flowers of several Bulbophyllum orchids (Orchidaceae) attract males of Bactrocera fruit flies
with characteristic fragrances rich in several phenylpropanoids. Although these orchid species never produce
nectar, the fruit flies are rewarded by the uptake of floral phenylpropanoids from the orchids, and these
compounds are the raw materials of their pheromones. The fruit flies can be classified into two groups based
on their sensitivities to the two phenylpropanoids, methyl eugenol (ME) (32) and raspberry ketone
(4-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-2-butanone; RK) (33). The ME-sensitive fruit fly species convert the ingested ME
into male sex pheromonal components, such as trans-coniferyl alcohol and 2-allyl-4,5-dimethoxyphenol,
while the RK-sensitive species directly sequester and use the ingested RK as a component of male phero-
mones.110 Both the ME- and RK-sensitive species are attracted by zingerone (4-(4-hydroxy-3-
methoxyphenyl)-2-butanone) (34), which is responsible for the pungent odor produced by the ginger orchid
Bulbophyllum patens. Further, Bactrocera papayae takes up zingerone, a precursor of sex pheromones.111 In addition,
other phenylpropanoids analogous to sex pheromones, for example, rhododendrol (4-(4-hydroxyphenyl)-2-
butanol), trans-3,4-dimethoxycinnamyl alcohol, and euasarone (5-allyl-1,2,4-trimethoxybenzene), have been
detected in floral scents.112 The differential compositions of the floral scents of orchids mediate species-specific
pollination by fruit flies.
584 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Males of neotropical euglossine bees (Apidae), called orchid bees, collect odoriferous substances from
flowers of orchids and other plants. The floral scents of these species display relatively simple chemical
compositions dominated by one or two major components, mostly terpenoids and aromatic compounds
such as -pinene, 1,8-cineol, eugenol, p-dimethoxybenzene (35), 2,3-epoxygeranyl acetate (36), nerolidol,
4-methoxycinnamaldehyde (37), and benzyl benzoate.113 Since the orchid bees have odor preferences, their
collection of fragrances leads to specialized pollination of particular plant species. Male bees absorb the floral
volatiles with their tarsal hairs, form species-specific bouquets, and finally accumulate them in their hind tibial
pouches. These bouquets have potential roles in courtship displays and marking territories.114,115

4.14.3.2 Food Constituents Affecting Foraging

Floral nectar and pollen have ecological significance as food resources for various insects. There is quantitative
and qualitative variability in the nutrients (including sugars, amino acids, sterols, lipids, and vitamins) found in
the floral nectar and pollen of different plant species. In addition, other minor components, including organic
acids, terpenes, alkaloids, flavonoids, and glycosides, are also present. Most flower-visiting insects assess the
nutritional values of foods and demonstrate food selection by gustatory perception of these constituents.

4.14.3.2.1 Sugars
Sugars are the main floral nectar solutes and represent the major energy source for flower-visiting insects.
Sucrose, glucose, and fructose are the most frequent nectar sugars. However, the sugar composition of floral
nectars varies greatly among plant species and the concentrations of each sugar and the sucrose/hexose ratio
are strongly related to pollinator type.116,117 Recently, xylose has been identified as the fourth major nectar
sugar, but honeybees and beetles show weak preference for this pentose sugar.118 In sweet corn (Z. mays) pollen,
sucrose is the predominant sugar, comprising 98% of the total sugars.

4.14.3.2.2 Amino acids

Amino acids, as well as sugars, have received considerable attention in terms of their role in flower–insect
interactions. All 20 of the normal amino acids found in proteins have been identified in various floral nectars,
where alanine, arginine, serine, proline, glycine, isoleucine, threonine, and valine are the most prevalent.119,120
Despite their low levels in floral nectar, several amino acids significantly affect flower selection by insects.
Honeybees prefer proline-rich nectar because they are thought to utilize this amino acid as fuel for the initial
stages of flight.121 Butterflies also display a foraging preference for floral nectar containing large amounts of
amino acids, and the uptake of amino acids enhances fecundity in several butterfly species.122 In sweet corn
pollen, proline has been identified as the most abundant free amino acid, followed by serine and alanine.123

4.14.3.2.3 Toxic components

Many plants produce floral nectar-containing components that are toxic or repellent to some visitors. Particular
minor components, including alkaloids, phenolics, glycosides, and sometimes sugars and amino acids, have been
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 585

described as being responsible for this toxicity and repellency. Several hypotheses have been proposed for the
possible roles of these components, including encouraging specialist pollinators, deterring nectar robbers,
preventing microbial degradation of nectar, and altering pollinator behavior.124 Alkaloids in nectar are typically
toxic or repellent to several flower-visiting insects. Nicotine (31) is contained at variable concentrations in the
floral nectar of Nicotiana spp. and the floral nectar with a high concentration of nicotine discourages visiting or
nectaring by moths and ants.109 In the toxic nectar of Carolina jessamine, Gelsemium sempervirens (Loganiaceae),
gelsemine (38) has been identified as the major repellent, not only for nectar robbers but also for most potential
pollinators.125 Triptolide (39) found in the nectar of the perennial vine, Tripterygium hypoglaucum (Celastraceae),
negatively affects visiting frequency and nectaring time of honeybees126 (see Chapter 4.08).

4.14.4 Insect–Plant Interface in Multitrophic Interactions

As a response to feeding damage or egg-laying by herbivores such as insects and mites, plants emit various
volatiles called herbivore-induced plant volatiles (HIPVs).127–129 The composition changes in HIPVs can be
exploited by the natural enemies of these herbivores, that is, parasitoids and predators, to locate the plant on
which the hosts or prey are feeding. Therefore, plants indirectly attract natural enemies to defend them-
selves.127,129 Release of HIPVs occurs a few hours after the initial damage. Emission of HIPVs is not limited to
the site of feeding but can systemically occur from the whole plant,130,131 so even undamaged leaves of a
damaged plant release volatiles.130,132–134
The timing and location of the emission of HIPVs from corn plants have been studied by chemical analysis.135–137
Immediately after leaf damage, the corn plant releases several typical octadecanoid-derived GLVs from
the damaged leaf. Additionally, elicitors in the herbivore’s oral secretions induce a systemic release of volatiles
that are mainly composed of terpenoids but also include some phenolics, such as indole and methyl salicylate.

4.14.4.1 Parasitic Wasps

A number of hymenopteran parasitoids are attracted to herbivore-infested plants that emit HIPVs.127
In several species of Cotesia spp. (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), the damaged plant volatiles attractive for these
wasps are emitted when the plant is damaged by the host herbivores. Among these species, it was first
demonstrated that Cotesia marginiventris is responsive to HIPVs from corn seedlings damaged by Spodoptera
exigua.138 Artificially damaged seedlings did not release these volatiles in significant amounts, but HIPVs were
released in significant enough amounts to become attractive to the wasps if oral secretions from the caterpillars
were applied to the damaged site.
Cotesia kariyai is the dominant braconid parasitoid of the common armyworm Mythimna separata
(Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). The female wasp uses chemical cues from the host and host–plant complex to find
their hosts.139,140 A wind tunnel was used with conditioning method to evaluate the learning of different
synthetic blends such as host-infested and unspecific blends.141 A blend of four chemicals, geranyl acetate,
-caryophyllene, (E)--farnesene, and indole (Figure 13), known to be specifically released from corn plants
infested with host larvae (host-infested blend) (Figure 14) elicited a flight response in naı̈ve C. kariyai, but did
not enhance the response after conditioning. Another blend of five chemicals, (E)-2-hexenal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol,
(Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, -myrcene, and linalool (Figure 15), known to be released not only from plants infested
by host larvae but also from artificially damaged or undamaged plants (unspecific blend) (Figure 16), elicited
 Figure 14 Volatile compounds identified from headspace of infested corn leaves but not (or in trace amount) in uninfested
e
Figure 13 Volatiles selected as ‘host-infested blends’ specifically released from corn plants infested with host larvae.

m
xi

leaves. UD: undamaged leaves; ADL: artificially damaged leaves; 1st/2nd, 3rd, 6th: host instars infesting corn leaves.
lo e e
hy im en
et lox
-m y tra

Reproduced from J. Takabayashi; S. Takahashi; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 273–287.
h te
l O et
35

ca
30

na -m e
25

de
20

15

pa l O im tri
10

ro a ox 1-
5 le lp tan hyl itrile ,1

0
do h y u t e ,7
In et ylb -me enn itril -1
,3
M h yl
2- et l O utan nen d th
M a i
2- tan ylb opa no ime
h r e r
Bu et ylp erp 2-T ene
M h t r
2- et n ,8,1 nd
M w a
2- kno )-4 hell ne
E
un , 7 ip se ne
E squ rne ene ne rie e
(3 l at
Se -Fa hyl ote n
β- on r i e
)-β yop gam -n n a t
(E ar r ,7
C Be id
e ,3 -no
β- )-α- l ox l-1 ,7
o e hy 1,3
(E lo en met yl- e
na a i th tat
Li op 8-D me
C , i ce
α- -4 -D l a
) 8 y
Z , h
(3 )-4 ylet tate
E e te te
(3 en ac te ta ta
P h yl ta ce ce
2- ran ace yl a l a
586 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

e yl -1- 1 -y a te
G
nz en en- cet
Be -2- 3- la
ex x- ty e te
H -He lbu at ta
) y et ace ne
(E e th l ac o l o
M nty -3- an l
2- e e ut
op en -b a no
Is ent xy-2 op
P o pr
1- ydr l-1- l
3-
H hy no
et e xe
M
2- -H a l al l
)-2 t e n an na
(E n b ut ope
P e hyl -p
r
2- et l-2
3-
M hy
et
M
2-

h
6t
t/2 3rd
AD d
n
UD L

1s
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 587

Figure 15 Volatiles selected as ‘unspecific blend’ released from artificially damaged or undamaged corn plants.

40.0

35.0

30.0

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
M alo ne
et
Li

hy l
n ne
Li rce e

ls
m
M ne

al
o
o

ic
y
β- ine eta l ac

yl
Pi

at
α- yl a xen

ne

e
P
H

n
ex
(Z

ne
)-3 ce
Bu ana one pte

c
-
ty

H
O

e
ct

te
2-
N
6- ente one nta

y
on

a
l

t
M

e
an
1-

et

et
P

hy
3-

at
l
Pe h y l -

-5

e
4-

-h
n-
nt
M

e
1-

an - p e

3-
et
O

on
1-

ct

n-
e
H

an

2-
1-

ex

ol

on
Pe

an
(Z

e
AD D

nt

o
)-3
U

l
a
H

no
no
ep

-
L

ne
2-

l
ta

ex
H

na
nd

en
H

ex

l
ex
t/2

-
d

en

1-
2-
3r

an
1s

ol
al
Pe
h

al

s
Pe
6t

nt

(E
nt

en

/Z
an

al

)
al

Figure 16 Volatile compounds identified from headspace of uninfested, artificially damaged, and infested corn leaves.
Reproduced from J. Takabayashi; S. Takahashi; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 273–287.

little response in naı̈ve wasps, but significantly enhanced the responses of wasps after conditioning. Wasps could
learn a blend of the above nine chemicals at lower concentrations than they did the nonspecific blend.141 These
results indicate that both the host-induced and unspecific volatile compounds are important for the female
C. kariyai to learn the necessary chemical cues for host location.
588 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

Aphidius ervi (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae), a parasitoid of the pea aphid, responded more to aphid-infested
plants than to an uninfested plant. The gas chromatography–electroantennographic detection (GC-EAD) active
compounds were identified and candidate compounds were further tested by electroantennography (EAG) and
wind tunnel assays. For A. ervi females, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-one (40) was most attractive with linalool, (Z)-3-
hexenyl acetate, (E)--ocimene (41), (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, and (E)--farnesene, all eliciting oriented flight
behavior.142

Deposition of insect eggs induces plant volatiles that attract egg parasitoids in elm,143,144 pine,145 and beans.146
In Brassica, Pieris, and Trichogramma, egg deposition appears to induce changes in plant surface chemicals and
arrest the egg parasitoids by contact chemical cues near the host eggs.147 An egg parasitoid Oomyzus gallerucae
(Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) attacks the elm leaf beetle Xanthogaleruca luteola (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) that
feeds on the field elm (Ulmus minor). Before laying eggs, the female elm leaf beetles gnaw a groove into the
undersurface of the leaf, and then glue an egg mass into this groove with oviduct secretions. The leaf begins to
emit volatiles that attract O. gallerucae, caused by egg deposition not by feeding.143

4.14.4.2 Parasitic Flies

Compared to parasitoid wasps, only a few species of dipteran parasitoids are reported to respond to HIPVs.148–153
Host-habitat location remains largely unknown in parasitoid flies.
The parasitic fly, Exorista japonica (Diptera: Tachinidae), is a gregarious and polyphagous parasitoid that
attacks a number of lepidopteran pests, particularly noctuid larvae. Females of E. japonica lay heavy-shelled
macrotype eggs on last instar host larvae. The first instar larvae emerge and penetrate the host integument after
incubating for approximately 4 days. A previous study showed that E. japonica females were attracted to odors
from corn plants infested with final instar larvae of M. separata.151,153 When corn plants are infested with final
instar larvae of M. separata, the plants release a nonspecific blend ((Z)-3-hexenyl acetate, (E)-2-hexenal,
hexanal, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, and linalool) (Figure 16) and a host-induced blend that includes the homoterpene
DMNT (22), indole, 3-hydroxy-2-butanone (42), and 2-methyl-1-propanol (43) (Figure 14). E. japonica
females show a high response to a synthetic mixture of the nonspecific and host-induced blends, but not to
the nonspecific blend or the synthetic host-induced blend separately.153 This suggests that the fly uses a
mixture of nonspecific and host-induced blends as an olfactory cue for locating host-infested plants and may
well explain the situation in nature.

4.14.4.3 Predators
Compared to parasitoid wasps, relatively fewer studies have been reported on the attraction of predators to
prey-infested plants. Among those predator species, the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis was first reported
to be attracted to volatiles from lima bean leaves infested with the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus
urticae.154 Those prey-induced volatiles were identified as linalool, methyl salicylate (44), (E)--ocimene (41),
and DMNT, all attractive to P. persimilis.155 Similar attraction was demonstrated in the predatory mite
Amblyseius womersleyi156 and insect predators Scolothrips takahasii (Thysanoptera: Thripidae)157 and Oligota
kashmirika benefica (Coleoptera: Staphylinidae).158 In a generalist predator mite, Neoseiulus californicus, among
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 589

the chemicals identified from T. urticae-infested and artificially damaged lima bean leaves, linalool, methyl
salicylate, (Z)-3-hexen-1-ol, (E)-2-hexenal, and (Z)-3-hexenyl acetate were active in Y-tube olfactometer
bioassays.159

4.14.4.4 Elicitors
Feeding by herbivorous insects results in mechanical damage and adhesion of regurgitant to the wounded
leaves, which cause the emission of HIPVs from the plant. The regurgitant is called an elicitor.
First, -glucosidase was isolated and identified as an elicitor from Pieris brassicae larvae that causes the
release of volatiles from Brassica plants.160 Volicitin (N-[(S)-17-hydroxylinolenoyl]-L-glutamine) (45) was
identified as the active substance from the larval regurgitant of S. exigua.161 Application of this elicitor to
mechanically damaged maize plants activated the same biochemical response in the plant as crude larval
regurgitant, causing the plant to release the attractant volatiles.162

Another elicitor called inceptin was identified from Spodoptera frugiperda larval secretions.163 Inceptin
promotes cowpea ethylene production and triggers increases in the defense-related phytohormones, salicylic
acid (SA), and jasmonic acid (JA) (Figure 17), then elicits the release of HIPVs. Inceptin is a peptide derived
from the proteolytic cleavage of chloroplastic ATP synthase -subunits (cATPC) that elicits a plant defense
response in cowpea leaves during herbivory by sixth-instar fall armyworms.163 If the larvae contact
damaged cowpea leaves, inceptin elicits increased production of JA, ethylene, SA, and HIPVs commonly
associated with attracting predators and parasitoids. Those HIPVs are methyl salicylate (44) and
DMNT.163,164 Interestingly, the neonate fall armyworm exploits inceptin-treated plant volatiles as host-
plant location and recognition cues.165
Studies on induced resistance against insects and pathogens have clarified the roles of SA and JA, revealing
that SA regulates resistance to pathogens and JA resistance to herbivory. Treatment of plants with SA, JA, and
synthetic mimics elicits the same metabolic changes that lead to resistance induced by pathogens and insects.127
Under field conditions, treatment of tomato plants with JA increased parasitism of caterpillars (S. exigua) by
Hyposoter exiguae (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae). This may be due to JA-induced increase in odor emissions166
(see Chapter 1.20).

Figure 17 Phytohormones closely related to the production of HIPVs.

590 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

References
1. L. M. Schoonhoven; T. Jermy; J. J. A. van Loon, Insect-Plant Biology, 1st ed.; Chapman & Hall: London, 1998.
2. J. A. A. Renwick; F. S. Chew, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1994, 39, 377–400.
3. K. Honda, Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 1995, 30, 1–23.
4. M. Carter; K. Sachdev-Gupta; P. Feeny, Physiol. Entomol. 1998, 23, 303–312.
5. M. Haribal; P. Feeny, Chemoecology 1998, 8, 99–110.
6. M. Haribal; P. Feeny, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 653–670.
7. M. Carter; P. Feeny; M. Haribal, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1233–1245.
8. H. Ono; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2000, 35, 119–123.
9. H. Ono; R. Nishida; Y. Kuwahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2000, 64, 1970–1973.
10. H. Ono; Y. Kuwahara; R. Nishida, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 287–301.
11. T. Nakayama; K. Honda; H. Ômura; N. Hayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1621–1634.
12. T. Nakayama; K. Honda, Chemoecology 2004, 14, 199–205.
13. K. Honda, Addiction to Pyrrolizidine Alkaloids in Male Danaine Butterflies: A Quest for the Evolutionary Origin of
Pharmacophagy. In Insect Physiology: New Research, 1st ed.; R. P. Maes, Ed.; Nova Science Publisher: New York, 2008;
pp 73–118.
14. K. Honda; N. Hayashi; F. Abe; T. Yamauchi, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1703–1713.
15. M. Macel; K. Vrieling, J. Chem. Ecol. 2003, 29, 1435–1446.
16. K. Honda; H. Ômura; N. Hayashi; F. Abe; T. Yamauchi, Physiol. Entomol. 2001, 26, 6–10.
17. K. Honda; H. Ômura; N. Hayashi; F. Abe; T. Yamauchi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 2285–2296.
18. J. A. A. Renwick, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 104, 35–42.
19. J. A. A. Renwick; M. Haribal; S. Gouinguené; E. Städler, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 755–766.
20. I. Mewis; C. Ulrich; W. H. Schnitzler, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 105, 129–139.
21. H. S. Lee; T. T. Hieu; Y. J. Ahn, Chemoecology 2006, 16, 153–157.
22. E. Hartlieb; H. Rembold, J. Chem. Ecol. 1996, 22, 821–837.
23. S. Udayagiri; C. E. Mason, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 1675–1687.
24. G. Li; Y. Ishikawa, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 595–604.
25. A. K. Varshney; B. R. Babu; A. K. Singh; H. C. Agarwal; S. C. Jain, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 4008–4012.
26. M. A. Konstantopoulou; F. D. Krokos; B. E. Mazomenos, J. Chem. Ecol. 2004, 30, 2243–2256.
27. A. Hern; S. Dorn, Naturwissenschaften 2004, 91, 77–80.
28. N. Lombarkia; S. Derridj, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 104, 79–87.
29. J. C. Piñero; S. Dorn, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2007, 125, 185–194.
30. M. Tasin; A.-C. Bäckman; M. Coracini; D. Casado; C. Ioriatti; P. Witzgall, Phytochemistry 2007, 68, 203–209.
31. B. D. Morris; S. P. Foster; S. Grugel; L. D. Charlet, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 89–102.
32. J. Hurter; T. Ramp; B. Patrian; E. Städler; P. Roessingh; R. Baur; R. de Jong; J. K. Nielsen; T. Winkler; W. J. Richter; D. Müller;
B. Ernst, Phytochemistry 1999, 51, 377–382.
33. R. de Jong; N. Maher; B. Patrian; E. Städler; T. Winkler, Chemoecology 2000, 10, 205–209.
34. S. P. D. Gouinguené; E. Städler, Physiol. Entomol. 2006, 31, 382–389.
35. B. D. Morris; S. P. Foster; M. O. Harris, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 859–873.
36. T. Kashiwagi; E. Mikagi; D. B. Mekuria; A. D. Boru; S. Tebayashi; C. Kim, Z. Naturforsch. 2005, 60c, 739–742.
37. A. Dekebo; T. Kashiwagi; S. Tebayashi; C. Kim, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2007, 71, 421–426.
38. D. B. Mekuria; T. Kashiwagi; S. Tebayashi; C. Kim, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 1706–1710.
39. T. Kashiwagi; D. B. Mekuria; A. Dekebo; K. Sato; S. Tebayashi; C. Kim, Z. Naturforsch. 2007, 62c, 603–607.
40. S. Q. Islam; J. Ichiryu; M. Sato; T. Yamasaki, J. Pesticide Sci. 1997, 22, 338–341.
41. M. Sato; S. Q. Islam; S. Awata; T. Yamasaki, J. Pesticide Sci. 1999, 24, 123–129.
42. M. Sato; S. Q. Islam; T. Yamasaki, J. Pesticide Sci. 1999, 24, 397–400.
43. M. Hori; K. Ohuchi; K. Matsuda, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2006, 41, 357–363.
44. I. Ohta; K. Matsuda; Y. Matsumoto, Jpn. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1998, 42, 45–49.
45. J. C. Dickens, Agric. Forest Entomol. 2000, 2, 167–172.
46. J. H. Visser, Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1986, 31, 121–144.
47. A. A. Cossé; R. J. Bartelt; B. W. Zilkowski; D. W. Bean; E. R. Andress, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2695–2708.
48. S.-L. Wee; A. M. El-Sayed; A. R. Gibb; V. Mitchell; D. M. Suckling, Aust. J. Entomol. 2008, 47, 24–31.
49. J. H. Loughrin; D. A. Potter; T. R. Hamilton-Kemp, Environ. Entomol. 1998, 27, 395–400.
50. J. J. Soroka; R. J. Bartelt; B. W. Zilkowski; A. A. Cossé, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1829–1843.
51. R. L. Metcalf; R. L. Lampman; P. A. Lewis, J. Econ. Entomol. 1998, 91, 881–890.
52. L. Hammack, Environ. Entomol. 1997, 26, 311–317.
53. L. Hammack, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 1373–1390.
54. K. R. Hobson; D. L. Wood; L. G. Cool; P. R. White; T. Ohtsuka; I. Kubo; E. Zavarin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 1837–1846.
55. D. S. Pureswaran; J. H. Borden, Agric. Forest Entomol. 2005, 7, 219–230.
56. T. Tapia; F. Perich; F. Pardo; G. Palma; A. Quiroz, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2007, 35, 61–67.
57. A. Quiroz; F. Ortega; C. C. Ramı́rez; L. J. Wadhams; K. Pinilla, Environ. Entomol. 2005, 34, 690–695.
58. Y. Wang; S. J. Kays, J. Am. Soc. Hort. Sci. 2002, 127, 656–662.
59. G. S. Germinara; A. De Cristofaro; G. Rotundo, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 429–523.
60. I. Saı̈d; M. Renou; J.-P. Morin; J. M. S. Ferreira; D. Rochat, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 1789–1805.
61. N. Björklund; G. Nordlander; H. Bylund, Physiol. Entomol. 2005, 30, 225–231.
62. M. Tóth; M. G. Klein; Z. Imrei, Acta Phytopath. Entomol. Hung. 2003, 38, 323–331.
63. D. Schmera; M. Tóth; M. Subchev; I. Sredkov; I. Szarukán; T. Jermy; Á. Szentesi, Crop Prot. 2004, 23, 939–944.
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 591

64. A. Heisswolf; D. Gabler; E. Obermaier; C. Müller, J. Insect Behav. 2007, 20, 247–266.
65. S. Lin; B. F. Binder; E. R. Hart, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1781–1790.
66. S. Lin; B. F. Binder; E. R. Hart, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1791–1802.
67. B. Szafranek; K. Chrapkowska; D. Waligóra; R. Palavinskas; A. Banach; J. Szafranek, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54,
7729–7734.
68. M. Abe; K. Matsuda; Y. Tamaki, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2000, 35, 137–142.
69. A. B. DeMilo; C. J. Lee; R. F. W. Schroder; W. F. Schmidt; D. J. Harrison, J. Entomol. Sci. 1998, 34, 343–354.
70. M. Abe; K. Matsuda, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2000, 35, 257–264.
71. R. R. Smyth; D. W. Tallamy; J. A. A. Renwick; M. P. Hoffmann, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 104, 69–78.
72. E. Kadowaki; Y. Yoshida; T. Nitoda; N. Baba; S. Nakajima, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 415–419.
73. S. Nakajima; T. Kitamura; N. Baba; J. Iwasa; T. Ichikawa, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1995, 59, 769–770.
74. B. Hollister; C. A. Mullin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1263–1280.
75. J. H. Kim; C. A. Mullin, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 501–512.
76. S. Lin; C. A. Mullin, J. Agric. Food. Chem. 1999, 47, 1223–1229.
77. Y. Tamura; M. Hattori; K. Konno; Y. Kono; H. Honda; H. Ono; M. Yoshida, Chemoecology, 2004, 14, 113–118.
78. N. Endo; M. Abe; T. Sekine; K. Matsuda, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2004, 39, 411–416.
79. K. Reifenrath; C. Müller, Chemoecology, 2008, 18, 19–27.
80. A. R. Jassbi, Z. Naturforsch. 2003, 58c, 573–579.
81. M. Hori; Y. Araki; W. Sugeno; Y. Usui; K. Matsuda, Jpn. J. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2005, 49, 251–254.
82. R. A. Raguso, Behavioral Responses to Floral Scent: Experimental Manipulations and the Interplay of Sensory Modalities. In
Biology of Floral Scent; N. Dudareva, E. Pichersky, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2006; pp 297–318.
83. H. E. M. Dobson, Relationship between Floral Fragrance Composition and Type of Pollinator. In Biology of Floral
Scent; N. Dudareva, E. Pichersky, Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, 2006; pp 147–198.
84. J. T. Knudsen; R. Eriksson; J. Gershenzon; B. Ståhl, Bot. Rev. 2006, 72, 1–120.
85. G. A. Wright; A. Lutmerding; N. Dudareva; B. H. Smith, J. Comp. Physiol. A 2005, 191, 105–114.
86. H. Ômura; K. Honda, Oecologia 2005, 142, 588–596.
87. J. P. Cunningham; C. J. Moore; M. P. Zalucki; B. W. Cribb, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. B 2006, 273, 2035–2040.
88. M. Dufaÿ; M.-C. Anstett, Oikos 2003, 100, 3–14.
89. L. Grison-Pigé; J.-M. Bessière; J. M. Greeff; M. M. Hossaert-McKey, Phytochemistry 2002, 61, 61–71.
90. L. Grison-Pigé; J.-M. Bessière; T. C. J. Turlings; F. Kjellberg; J. Roy; M. M. Hossaert-McKey, Func. Ecol. 2001, 15, 551–558.
91. Q. Song; D. Yang; G. Zhang; C. Yang, J. Chem. Ecol. 2001, 27, 1929–1942.
92. G. P. Svensson; M. O. Hickman, Jr.; S. Bartram; W. Boland; O. Pellmyr; R. A. Raguso, Am. J. Bot. 2005, 92, 1624–1631.
93. A. Jürgens; T. Witt; G. Gottsberger, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2002, 30, 383–397.
94. S. Dötterl; A. Jürgens; K. Seifert; T. Laube; B. Weißbecker; S. Schütz, New Phytol. 2006, 169, 707–718.
95. T. Okamoto; A. Kawakita; M. Kato, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 1065–1081.
96. F. P. Schiestl; M. Ayasse; H. F. Paulus; C. Löfstedt; B. S. Hansson; F. Ibarra; W. Francke, Nature 1999, 399, 421–422.
97. J. Stökl; R. Twele; D. H. Erdmann; W. Francke; M. Ayasse, Chemoecology 2008, 17, 231–233.
98. F. P. Schiestl; M. Ayasse, Plant Syst. Evol. 2002, 234, 111–119.
99. F. P. Schiestl; M. Ayasse, Oecologia 2001, 126, 531–534.
100. M. Ayasse; F. P. Schiestl; H. F. Paulus; F. Ibarra; W. Francke, Proc. R. Soc. London. Ser. B 2003, 270, 517–522.
101. F. P. Schiestl; R. Peakall; J. G. Mant; F. Ibarra; C. Schulz; S. Franke; W. Francke, Science 2003, 302, 437–438.
102. F. P. Schiestl; R. Peakall, Func. Ecol. 2005, 19, 674–680.
103. J. Ollerton; R. A. Raguso, New Phytol. 2006, 172, 382–385.
104. M. C. Stensmyr; I. Urru; I. Collu; M. Celander; B. S. Hansson; A.-M. Angioy, Nature 2002, 420, 625–626.
105. R. S. Seymour; M. Gibernau; K. Ito, Func. Ecol. 2003, 17, 886–894.
106. A. Jürgens; S. Dötterl; U. Meve, New Phytol. 2006, 172, 452–468.
107. G. C. Kite; W. L. A. Hetterschield, Phytochemsitry 1997, 46, 71–75.
108. H. Ômura; K. Honda; N. Hayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 655–666.
109. D. Kessler; I. T. Baldwin, Plant J. 2006, 49, 840–854.
110. K.-H. Tan; R. Nishida, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 533–546.
111. K. H. Tan; R. Nishida, Biochem. Syst. Ecol. 2007, 35, 334–341.
112. K. H. Tan; L. T. Tan; R. Nishida, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 2429–2441.
113. T. Eltz; D. W. Roubik; K. Lunau, Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2005, 59, 149–156.
114. Y. Zimmermann; D. W. Roubik; T. Eltz, Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2006, 60, 833–843.
115. T. Eltz; A. Sager; K. Lunau, J. Comp. Physiol. A 2005, 191, 575–581.
116. L. Galett; G. Bernardello, Plant Syst. Evol. 2003, 238, 69–86.
117. T. Krömer; M. Kessler; G. Lohaus; A. N. Schmidt-Lebuhn, Plant Biol. 2008, 10, 502–511.
118. S. Jackson; S. W. Nicolson, Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B 2002, 131, 613–620.
119. N. Blüthgen; G. Gottsberger; K. Fiedler, Aust. Ecol. 2004, 29, 418–429.
120. T. Petanidou; A. Van Laere; W. N. Ellis; E. Smets, Oikos 2006, 115, 155–169.
121. C. Carter; S. Shafir; L. Yehonatan; R. G. Palmer; R. Thornburg, Naturwissenschaften 2006, 93, 72–79.
122. J. Mevi-Schütz; A. Erhardt, Am. Nat. 2005, 165, 411–419.
123. B. Hollister; C. A. Mullin, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1263–1280.
124. L. S. Adler, Oikos 2000, 91, 409–420.
125. L. S. Adler; R. E. Irwin, Ecology 2005, 86, 2968–2978.
126. K. Tan; Y. H. Guo; S. W. Nicolson; S. E. Radloff; Q. S. Song; H. R. Hepburn, J. Chem. Ecol. 2007, 33, 2209–2217.
127. T. C. J. Turlings; F. Wäckers, Recruitment of Predators and Parasitoids by Herbivore-Induced Plants. In Advances in Insect
Chemical Ecology; R. T. Cardé, J. G. Millar, Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2004; pp 21–75.
128. M. Hilker, T. Meiners, Eds., Chemoecology of Insect Eggs and Egg Deposition. Blackwell Verlag: Berlin, 2002; p 410pp.
592 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

129. M. Hilker; T. Meiners, J. Chem. Ecol. 2006, 32, 1379–1397.

130. T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Tumlinson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1992, 89, 8399–8402.
131. U. S. R. Röse; W. J. Lewis; J. H. Tumlinson, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 303–319.
132. E. Guerrieri; G. M. Poppy; W. Powell; E. Tremblay; F. Pennachio, J. Chem. Ecol. 1999, 25, 1247–1261.
133. U. S. R. Röse; A. Manukian; R. R. Heath; J. H. Tumlinson, Plant Physiol. 1996, 111, 487–495.
134. U. S. R. Röse; J. H. Tumlinson, Planta 2005, 222, 327–335.
135. J. H. Loughrin; A. Manukian; R. R. Heath; T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Tumlinson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1994, 91, 11836–11840.
136. T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Loughrin; U. S. R. Röse; P. J. McCall; W. J. Lewis; J. H. Tumlinson, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 9,
4169–4174.
137. T. C. J. Turlings; U. B. Lengwiler; M. L. Bernasconi; D. Wechsler, Planta 1998, 207, 146–152.
138. T. C. J. Turlings; J. H. Tumlinson; W. J. Lewis, Science 1990, 250, 1251–1253.
139. J. Takabayashi; S. Takahashi, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1986, 21, 114–118.
140. J. Takabayashi; S. Takahashi; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 273–287.
141. J. Fukushima; Y. Kainoh; H. Honda; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 579–586.
142. Y. J. Du; G. M. Poppy; W. Powell; J. A. Pickett; L. J. Wadhams; C. M. Woodcock, J. Chem. Ecol. 1998, 24, 1355–1368.
143. T. Meiners; M. Hilker, Oecologia 1997, 112, 87–93.
144. T. Meiners; M. Hilker, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 221–232.
145. S. Colazza; A. Fucarino; E. Peri; G. Salerno; E. Conti; F. Bin, J. Exp. Biol. 2004, 207, 47–53.
146. M. Hilker; C. Kobs; M. Varama; K. Schrank, J. Exp. Biol. 2002, 205, 455–461.
147. N. E. Fatouros; G. Bukovinszkine Kiss; L. A. Kalkers; R. Soler Gamborena; M. Dicke; M. Hilker, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2005, 115,
207–215.
148. J. P. Roth; E. G. King; S. D. Hensley, Environ. Entomol. 1982, 11, 273–277.
149. J. Roland; W. G. Evans; J. H. Myers, J. Insect Behav. 1989, 2, 487–503.
150. E. B. Mondor; J. Roland, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1997, 85, 161–168.
151. Y. Kainoh; C. Tanaka; S. Nakamura, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1999, 34, 463–467.
152. J. O. Stireman, III, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2002, 103, 23–34.
153. R. Ichiki; Y. Kainoh; S. Kugimiya; J. Takabayashi; S. Nakamara, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 614–621.
154. M. W. Sabelis; H. E. van de Baan, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 1983, 33, 303–314.
155. M. Dicke; T. A. Beek; M. A. van Posthumus; N. Ben Dom; H. van Bokhoven; Ae. de Groot, J. Chem. Ecol. 1990, 16, 381–396.
156. T. Maeda; J. Takabayashi; S. Yano; A. Takafuji, Appl. Entomol. Zool. 1999, 34, 449–454.
157. T. Shimoda; J. Takabayashi; W. Ashihara; A. Takafuji, J. Chem. Ecol. 1997, 23, 2033–2048.
158. T. Shimoda; J. Takabayashi, Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2001, 101, 41–47.
159. T. Shimoda; R. Ozawa; K. Sano; E. Yano; J. Takabayashi, J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 2019–2032.
160. L. Mattiacci; M. Dicke; M. A. Posthumus, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1995, 92, 2036–2040.
161. H. T. Alborn; T. C. J. Turlings; T. H. Jones; G. Stenhagen; J. H. Loughrin; J. H. Tumlinson, Science 1997, 276, 945–948.
162. T. C. J. Turlings; H. T. Alborn; J. H. Loughrin; J. H. Tumlinson, J. Chem. Ecol. 2000, 26, 189–202.
163. E. A. Schmelz; M. J. Carroll; S. LeClere; S. M. Phipps; J. Meredith; P. S. Chourey; H. T. Alborn; P. E. A. Teal, Proc. Natl. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103, 8894–8899.
164. I. F. Kappers; A. Aharoni; T. van Herpen; L. L. P. Luckerhoff; M. Dicke; H. J. Bouwmeester, Science 2005, 309, 2070–2072.
165. M. J. Carroll; E. A. Schmelz; P. E. Teal, J. Chem. Ecol. 2008, 34, 291–300.
166. J. S. Thaler, Nature 1999, 399, 686–688.

Biographical Sketches

Dr. Keiichi Honda is a professor of ecological biochemistry in the Department of Biofunctional

Science and Technology, Hiroshima University, where he has been since 1991. He received his
B.S. and M.S. degrees in hydrocarbon chemistry from Kyoto University in 1971 and 1973,
respectively. His research has consistently focused on the chemical ecology of butterflies,
especially on larval defensive strategy, phytochemical mediators in host selection, the role of
 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions 593

floral scents in foraging, and alkaloid-derived sex pheromones. He obtained his Ph.D. in
zoology at Kyoto University in 1983, while working at Kanebo Ltd., where he engaged in
the identification and synthesis of bioactive natural products for 18 years before moving to
Hiroshima University. He served as a councillor of the International Society of Chemical
Ecology for 4 years (1999–2002) and is currently serving as a councillor of the Japanese Society
of Applied Entomology and Zoology and on the editorial board for Applied Entomology and
Zoology. He has edited two books entitled Environmental Entomology and Biology of Butterflies, and
received an AEZ-Award in 2007 for his pioneering work on chemical ecology of butterfly host
selection. His current research interests include the evolution of host-plant selection, male sex
pheromones, and flower-visiting behavior in butterflies.

Dr. Hisashi Ômura is assistant professor of ecological biochemistry in the Department of

Biofunctional Science and Technology, Graduate School of Biosphere Sciences, Hiroshima
University. He graduated from Hiroshima University in 1993 and received his M.S. degree
from the Graduate School of Biosphere Sciences, Hiroshima University in 1995. He worked
at Kunimine Industries Co., Ltd. from 1995 to 1997. Then, he joined the doctorate course of
Hiroshima University and investigated on flower scent and sap odor, which mediate foraging
behavior of adult butterflies under the supervision of Professor Keiichi Honda. After receiv-
ing his Ph.D. in 2000, he served as a postdoctoral researcher at Kyoto University (2000) and
research assistant in the Faculty of Integrated Arts and Sciences (2000–2006) and in the
Graduated School of Biosphere Sciences (2006–07) at Hiroshima University. His research
interests are chemical ecology of plant–insect interactions and neurophysiology of chemical
sense of insects. His current works include a series of behavioral and electrophysiological
studies on gustatory adaptation of sap-feeding butterflies to utilize rotting foods.

Dr. Masatoshi Hori is assistant professor of insect science and bioregulation in the
Department of Applied Life Science, Graduate School of Agricultural Science at Tohoku
594 Allelochemicals in Plant–Insect Interactions

University. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees in chemical ecology of Henosepilachna from
Tohoku University in 1990 and 1992, respectively. He worked at the Leaf Tobacco Research
Center of Japan Tobacco Inc. from 1992 to 2003 and his research focused on the chemical
ecology of aphids and stored product insects, especially on their olfactory behaviors to the
host-plant odors. He received his Ph.D. from the Graduate School of Agricultural and Life
Sciences, Tokyo University in 2001 working on the aphid repellents from nonhost-plant
volatiles. In the autumn of 2003, he moved to Tohoku University from Japan Tobacco Inc.
He is currently serving on the editorial boards of Applied Entomology and Zoology, House and
Household Insect Pests, and Annual Report of The Society of Plant Protection of North Japan. His
current research interests are phytochemicals involved in the host-plant selections of various
insect species, for example, the rice bugs, the phytophagous coleopteran insects, and the
stored product insects.

Dr. Yooichi Kainoh is associate professor of Applied Entomology and Zoology Laboratory in
the Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, where he
has been since 1983. He received his B.S. and M.S. degrees from Tokyo University of
Agriculture and Technology (TUAT) in 1979 and 1981, respectively. During these years,
he did intensive work on the host location behavior of a parasitic wasp (Ascogaster reticulata)
and chemical analysis of kairomones. He obtained his Ph.D. from the University of Tsukuba
in 1986, where he worked as a research associate after a one year postdoctoral fellowship. He
has served as a councillor of the Japanese Society of Applied Entomology and Zoology for 8
years (2001-till date) and is currently an editor of Applied Entomology and Zoology. He received
an AEZ-Award in 2005 for his work on parasitoid behavior and chemical signals in tritrophic
interactions. His present research interests include the manipulation of parasitoid behavior
with semiochemicals, and how to use associative learning for biological control.
 4.15 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor
and Fragrance
Masashi Ishikawa, Yasuhiro Warita, Eisuke Takahisa, and Yasutaka Ohkubo,
T. Hasegawa Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.15.1 Introduction 596

4.15.2 Outline of the Flavor and Fragrance Industry 596
4.15.2.1 Brief History of Flavor and Fragrance Industry 597
4.15.2.2 Outline of a Typical Flavor and Fragrance Company Operation 597
4.15.2.2.1 Materials used in flavor and fragrance production 597
4.15.2.2.2 Aroma creation and odor perception characteristics 599
4.15.2.2.3 Financial aspects of flavor and fragrance industry 600
4.15.2.3 Application of Flavor and Fragrance Products 600
4.15.2.4 Safety and Regulations 601
4.15.3 Analytical Techniques 601
4.15.3.1 Common Analytical Methods 601
4.15.3.2 Analyzing Methods in Flavor and Fragrance Art 602
4.15.3.2.1 Gas chromatography–olfactometry 602
4.15.3.2.2 AEDA, CHARM, and odor unit determination 602
4.15.3.2.3 Multidimensional GC (MDGC, GC  GC) 603
4.15.3.2.4 Chiral stationary phase application 603
4.15.3.2.5 Quantification and stable isotope dilution assay 603
4.15.3.3 Sample Preparation Method 603
4.15.3.4 An Example of Aroma Analysis – Spotted Shrimp 604
4.15.3.5 Quality Control 604
4.15.4 Flavor and Fragrance of Natural Origin 605
4.15.4.1 Aroma Products from Flowers 605
4.15.4.2 Aroma Products from Leaves and Allied Plant Materials 605
4.15.4.3 Aroma Products from Seeds 606
4.15.4.4 Aroma Products from Roots 607
4.15.4.5 Essential Oils from Peel (Citrus Oil) 607
4.15.4.6 Aroma Materials from Wood 608
4.15.4.7 Aroma Products from Resin 608
4.15.4.8 Aroma Material from Other Botanical Sources 608
4.15.4.9 Aroma-Active Material from Animals 609
4.15.5 Perfumery (Fragrances) 612
4.15.5.1 Fragrance as Natural Products Chemistry 612
4.15.5.2 Fragrance Creation 612
4.15.5.3 Artificial Fragrance Materials 612
4.15.6 Flavor of Foodstuffs 613
4.15.6.1 Fruits 613
4.15.6.2 Cereals 615
4.15.6.3 Nonalcoholic Beverages 615
4.15.6.4 Alcoholic Beverages 615
4.15.6.5 Condiments 616
4.15.6.6 Vegetables 617
4.15.6.7 Dairy Products 617
4.15.6.8 Meat and Seafood 618
4.15.7 Human Interactions 618

595
596 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

4.15.7.1 Olfactory System 620

4.15.7.2 Biological Background of Olfactory Perception 620
4.15.7.3 Aromatherapy as Human Interaction 622
4.15.8 Outlook 622
References 623

4.15.1 Introduction

Odor perception, along with that of taste, has been one of the fundamental interactions between life and its
environment ever since the early stages of evolution. It has a critical role in spotting and evaluating food,
reproduction, and avoiding life-threatening hazards. In the case of humans, odorous compounds are restricted
to a molecular weight of less than 300; despite this regulation, an estimated 400 000 odorous compounds are
giving our lives a tremendous perspective. The fascinating nature, therefore, has been a target of sparking
curiosity. A low threshold of 1-octen-3-one is a good example.1 As a key compound of the metallic musty smell
when human skin contacts metal objects, it at the same time exhibits the smell of blood and is actually its odor
component. This presumably reflects the situation that seeking or avoiding blood smell had a close relationship
with survival in the evolutionary struggle, leaving 1-octen-3-one a potent odorant for humans even after such
ability has remained dormant for a long time.
In this chapter, chemistry related to odor in terms of aroma use, in other words, flavors and fragrances (F&F),
is focused on as human–environment interactions. The following subsections deal with analytical methods,
extraction of various aroma products, perfumery use, and flavor chemistry. In conclusion, the olfactory system
is explained from the aspect of human interaction.
Considering the vast history of perfuming and the inevitable destiny to feed ourselves, written history of
aroma naturally dates back to the beginning of human civilization (Table 1).2,3 Along with the industrial
revolution, the F&F use had also gained a greater leap powered by the emerging knowledge of chemistry,
establishing the F&F industry.

4.15.2 Outline of the Flavor and Fragrance Industry

Taking advantage of the major role of odor perception in our daily lives, the F&F industry is now fully involved
in this phenomenon. In other words, the use of F&F industry as an axis and a viewpoint of this science will
facilitate the process of grasping the outline. In the following parts, the history and function of a typical
company and the application of its products are described.

Table 1 Aroma usage before the industrial revolution period

Period/year Topics

c. 35 C BC Apparatus presumably used for distillation in Mesopotamia

25 C BC Myrrh obtained by Pharaoh Sahure from Punt (oldest written record of aroma material trade)
12–10 C BC Ayurveda compiled in India
1 C AD The divine farmer’s herb-root classic compiled in China
c. 12 C AD Enrichment of ethyl alcohol content by distillation
c. 12 C AD Essential oil production by steam distillation
1370 Hungary water (first alcoholic perfume)
15 C AD Koh-doh established in Japan
1533 Marriage of Henri II with Catherine de’ Medici (introduction of fragrance production in Grasse, France)
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 597

4.15.2.1 Brief History of Flavor and Fragrance Industry

The dawn of this field recognizable as industry can be traced back to the sixteenth century when commercial
production of essential oil was initiated in Italy.2,3 This attainment was then brought into France as a result of
the marriage of Catherine de Médicis and Henri II, leading to the establishment of many fragrance companies
in Grasse. The rise of organic chemistry in the nineteenth century led the industry to integrate the scientific
aspects. As a result of the progress in natural product chemistry, isolation, characterization, structure elucida-
tion, and synthesis of aroma-active substances were made possible. The strategy established was effectively
practiced by engagement with synthetic organic chemistry, making production more affordable than ever
before (Table 2). Nowadays, many important aroma materials are economically and stably supplied with the
help of chemistry, making synthetic materials a reliable and indispensable player of the industry.

4.15.2.2 Outline of a Typical Flavor and Fragrance Company Operation

As is clear from the name, F&F company operation4,5 can be categorized into two fields. Flavor is used toward
any product that has interaction with the oral system and, besides conventional foodstuffs, includes applications
like chewing gum, toothpaste, tobacco, and so on.6,7 On the other hand, anything employed toward products
that are appreciated through direct nasal interaction is considered as fragrance, and its field includes products
like perfume, shampoo, detergent, deodorizers, and so forth.8–10 Products of both fields consist of numerous
materials from natural and/or synthetic sources combined together.
Flavorists and perfumers, who are experts in the respective art, design this combination. Generally, at least
5–10 years of training is a prerequisite to attain sufficient ability. Analytical data and supply of synthetic
compounds as well as processed natural material will aid these specialists. Thus, a modern F&F product is an
interesting collaborative work of creative artists supported by technology pursued by scientists and engineers.
These products are in many cases further processed to accommodate the customer’s preferences. Such
processing may include dilution in various solvents, replacement of solvent media, balancing specific gravity,
emulsion/powder preparation,6,11,12 microencapsulation,13 precursor synthesis,14 controlled-release designing,
and so forth.

4.15.2.2.1 Materials used in flavor and fragrance production

Ingredients used in the industry typically fall into three categories: natural aroma material, synthetic
compounds, and isolated aroma chemicals.

Table 2 Major events influencing the flavor and fragrance industry

Year Event/topics Discoverer/inventor

1709 Launch of the first eau de cologne J. M. Farina

1818–19 Isolation of benzaldehyde from bitter almond Vogel, Martres
c. 1830 Major advancement in elemental analysis J. von Liebig
1851 Appearance of artificial flavoring in World Expo (London) W. J. Bush & Co.
1868 First synthesis of coumarin W. Perkin
1887 Proposal of isoprene rule in terpene chemistry O. Wallach
1888 Nitro musk (first artificial fragrance compound) A. Baur
1900 Presentation of solvent extracts in World Expo (Paris) Antoine de Chiris, Roure Bertrand Fils
1926 Structure of muscone and civetone determined L. Ruzicka
1928 Concept of aromatherapy proposed R. M. Gattefosse
1934 X-ray structure analysis by Patterson function A. L. Patterson
1941 Theory of gas chromatography (GC) A. J. P. Martin, R. L. M. Synge
1946 Observation of nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) of paraffin E. M. Purcell
1959 First demonstration of GC–MS R. S. Gohlke
1964 GC-olfactometry (GC–O) brought into practice G. H. Fuller et al.
1983 Asymmetrical synthesis of ()-menthol and development of R. Noyori et al., Takasago International Corp.
industrial production thereof
1991 Molecular genetic research of the olfactory receptor R. Axel, L. Buck
598 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

In the dawn of F&F industry, ingredients were of natural origin. Natural extracts are prepared mainly by
steam distillation, cold press method, and organic solvent extraction.15–17 Supercritical CO2 extraction
(Figure 1) is widening its application in recent years.18 A free-flowing oil obtained by steam distillation or
cold press method is referred to as an essential oil while others are generally called extracts. Residual waxy mass
left after evaporation of extraction solvents is called concrete and resinoid (oleoresin), the former from flowers
and the latter from other sources.15 Concrete and resinoid can be reextracted with ethanol to remove this waxy
mass and concentrated to furnish absolute.15 Historically, before industrial production of petrochemical
solvents, deodorized animal fat and alcohol were used to extract raw materials, mainly flowers. The alcohol
extract thus acquired is referred to as tincture.15 Although vanilla tincture is still popular, massive production of
tinctures has almost ceased nowadays. Animal fat extraction is accomplished by immersing raw materials into
hot melted fat (maceration).15 Alternatively, the scent of raw material is transferred simply by laying it upon fat
at room temperature (enfleurage; Figure 1).15 Aromatic fat thus obtained is called pomade and can be further
processed in the same manner as concrete to furnish absolute. Maceration and enfleurage are labor-intensive
and therefore nearly obsolete. These essential oils and extracts are discussed in Section 4.15.4. In flavorings,
seasoning oil is another basic material used especially in savory flavorings. Seasoning oil is usually prepared by
heating raw materials (e.g., onion, leek, sugar, amino acids, etc.) in edible oil, thereby scenting the oil with the
odor of the cooked material.19 Maillard reaction and degradation of sugars and amino acids are commonly the
vital parts in the aroma formation of this sort.20,21 Concentrated fruit juice production gives rise to another
material called recovered aroma, which is stripped off during raw juice concentration.22 Smoke flavor (liquid
smoke) obtained by pyrolysis of botanical mass is additionally important.23 Various other processed food
materials are incorporated and increasingly recognized as flavoring ingredients (for instance, extracts from
meat, seafood, fermented food – especially dairy products, enzymatically processed foodstuff, etc.). Spinning
cone column24 (SCC) and membrane filter concentration25,26 find application because of their useful concen-
tration characteristics. Seasoning oil, recovered juice aroma, smoke flavor, and other food-oriented flavoring
materials are essential ingredients nowadays, but are usually not regarded as conventional aroma materials.
Products are quality controlled by various analytical methods and finally certified by flavorists and perfumers
through sensory evaluation.
Aroma-active molecules of natural origin are mainly formed via well-known biosynthetic pathways.17,27–29
The major class is the terpenoids followed by phenylpropanoid compounds (see Chapters 1.15, 1.16, and 1.24).
Enzymatic and biosynthetic transformation and cleavage of fatty acid is another important source of aroma-
active compounds (see Chapter 8.07). Transformation of amino acids and carbohydrates by fermentation is also

Figure 1 Coexistence of the past and present techniques in F&F industry: classical enfleurage process (photo on the left)
and a supercritical carbon dioxide extraction facility as modern factory equipment (on the right). The photo on the left shows a
stock of jasmine flowers in the basket (center) that are spread upon a wooden frame (chassis) that secures a glass plate
coated with fat. The chassis is then piled to allow diffusion of fragrant components (note that the fat is applied on both sides of
the glass plate to gain access to the headspace volume made by the chassis underneath). Enfleurage process photo
reproduced from E. Guenther, The Essential Oils; with permission from Krieger Publishing Company: Melbourne, FL, USA,
1948 (reprinted 2006); Vol. 1, p 192.
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 599

well known21,30 (see Chapters 3.22 and 3.26). Some of these molecules are stored as glucoside precursors and are
released through various cleavage pathways (see Chapter 8.11). There are still many other molecules the
formation pathway of which is not understood fully.
Synthetic compounds are advantageous in terms of price range, production capacity, and stable quality.
They are further classified into two categories: nature identical and artificial.31 Nature-identical compounds are
substances found in nature that are prepared by means of synthetic chemistry. Artificial compounds are
substances not found in nature but offer interesting aromatic profiles. They are not necessarily confined to
the expectation that they should resemble a certain aroma of natural source. They may or may not have a
similar chemical structure when compared with aroma compounds in nature. Artificial compounds are used
extensively in fragrances, while nature-identical compounds are generally preferred in flavorings, mainly due
to the consumer’s demand for food additives of more of a so-called natural character.32 Both nature-identical
and artificial compounds are marketed as chemicals and are called aroma chemicals when emphasis is put on
their odor properties. These synthetic chemicals are prepared by standard organic chemistry, and this will not
be discussed in this chapter.
Isolated aroma chemicals are aroma-active substances isolated from natural sources mainly by means of
crystallization, distillation, and adduct formation/decomposition. Although synthetic materials are in many cases
convenient to use, isolated aroma chemicals continue to be advantageous, especially when chirality is the issue.
Even if chirality is not a problem, in some cases (e.g., 1,8-cineole (1), eugenol (2), and limonene (3)), isolated natural
chemicals serve better than their synthetic counterpart (Table 3).33 Isolated aroma chemicals can be useful as such
for the industry, and they are also utilized as starting materials for further synthetic manipulations.34,35

4.15.2.2.2 Aroma creation and odor perception characteristics

In F&F creation,36–39 balance between ingredients of different odor characteristics – taking into account
volatility, tenacity, and intensity – is of great significance. Especially in fragrance design, a smooth and
harmonious transfer of scent as ingredients eventually evaporate is deemed a fundamental requirement
(see Section 4.15.4). Synergic effect – either positive or negative – also has to be taken into consideration.

Table 3 Example of isolated aroma chemicals

Substance Source (Enantiomer) Substance Source (Enantiomer)

Limonene (3) Sweet orange (R) Citronellol (9) Geranium (S)

/-Pinene (4, 5) Pine wood ((þ)-a, ()- a) Citronellal (10) Eucalyptus (E. citriodora, ), citronella (R)
Linalool (6) Ho (R), rosewood () 1,8-Cineole (1) Eucalyptus (E. globulus)
Menthol (7) Japanese mint () Citral (11) Lemongrass, Litsea cubeba
Geraniol (8) Palmarosa Eugenol (2) Clove
a
The major enantiomer depends on the species.
600 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

The relationship between concentration and odor quality is yet another interesting argument. A good example
is the odor quality of indole.40 Indole at high concentration and in certain combinations with other malodorous
compounds has an unpleasant fecal smell and is actually one of the compounds found in excrement. At the same
time, indole is present in many flower extracts (in relatively small amounts) and when blended at lower
concentration with other flowery aroma, it exhibits a dramatic lifting effect in odor quality, making it an
invaluable ingredient in fragrance creation. Sotolone (12) is another example of such compounds.41 It smells
rather offensive with fenugreek-like smell accompanying a character of hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP) in
high concentration, whereas in low concentration it offers a typical pleasant smell of burnt sugar. Depending on
concentration and circumstances, aroma-active compounds can be either off-flavor or key aroma compounds:
thiols like 3-methyl-2-butene-1-thiol (an important ingredient of coffee flavorings but an off-flavor component
in beer42) and 1-alken-3-one like 1-nonen-3-one (found in yogurt43) are such examples. Many F&F ingredients
have these characteristics, which deserves attention in product design.
Enantiomeric property is another important issue, since some enantiomer sets differ in intensity and odor
quality (Figure 2).44,45 For example, (R)-carvone (13) (a predominant component of spearmint oil) has a
spearmint-like smell with an odor threshold being 1/14 of its antipode while (S)-carvone (found in dill and
caraway oil) is known to have a caraway-like scent.44 In the case of ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, the (S)-isomer
found in nature shows a threshold of 1/150 against its antipode, a stranger in natural product chemistry.44 It is
worth noting, however, that the presence in nature is not necessarily a prerequisite to be superior in terms of
threshold level. Considering 2-(1-methylpropyl)-3-methoxypyrazine (14) as an example, the (S)-isomer found
abundant in nature shows 10 times higher threshold compared with its counterpart, which is not yet found in
nature as a dominant enantiomer.44 There are other examples like 2-decen-5-olide46 (15) and sotolone47 (12),
in which both odor quality and threshold show little difference between the enantiomers. Furthermore, many
cases are known in which the enantiomeric purity of a certain compound in natural source is moderate in the
first place. As an example, filbertone (16) in hazelnut differs between enantiomers in terms of both odor quality
and threshold (dominant (S)-isomer showing 1/10 threshold of its antipode), but the enantiomeric excess (e.e.)
found in hazelnut is only around 65% e.e.48

4.15.2.2.3 Financial aspects of flavor and fragrance industry

From the financial point of view, the size of the F&F market is relatively small with global size being around
18 billion US dollars (year 2006).49 The proportion thereof is as follows: fragrance 36%, flavor 34%, cosmetic
ingredients 16%, and aroma chemicals 14%. The top five players are Givaudan, International Flavors &
Fragrances (IFF), Firmenich, Symrise, and Takasago, which together claim around 60% of the market. Thus,
the market is generally considered fragmented.

4.15.2.3 Application of Flavor and Fragrance Products

F&F products find extremely wide diversity in terms of their application. Flavorings are used is beverages,
confectionary (candy, cookie, cake, etc.), chocolate, ice cream, sherbet, snacks, soup, frozen food, chewing gum,
toothpaste, and tobacco to name just a few.7 Other food materials such as sauces, dressings, seasoning powder,
and oil used in fast-food production, restaurants, and bars may also be flavored. The primary objective of
flavorings is to supplement, add, or strengthen the aroma of foodstuff, but this can be extended to keeping the

Figure 2 Representative examples of chiral odor-active molecules exhibiting interesting odor profiles influenced by
enantiomeric purity.
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 601

aroma quality consistent in industrial manufacturing. Recent trends in appreciation of diets low in calories, fat,
and salt demand flavorings to compensate the less appealing nature of these foods. Masking (disguising) an
unpleasant flavor (for instance, in barium meals in X-ray diagnosis and syrup-type medication for children) is
another function. Off-flavor50–53 formed as a result of food processing may also be improved in the same
manner. Animal feed can be yet another example of flavoring application.54,55 Turning to fragrances, they find
application in perfume, cosmetics, shampoo, soap, detergent, fabric softener, deodorant, and many other
household chemicals.8–10 In peculiar applications, they find use in scratch and sniff stickers, toys, scented
erasers, and so on. Unlike flavorings, masking of unpleasant odors in, for instance, shampoo compounds, body
odor, bleach, and rubber products (latex gloves, dental dam, condom, etc.) is the primary function of fragrances.
Actually, the use of fragrance in tannery is one of the most classical applications. Industrial fragrance use
includes stench gas odorizers (e.g., 2-methylpropane-2-thiol, tetrahydrothiophene) added to fuel gas for swift
detection of leakage.56
Functions further sophisticating F&F products are the controlled release of aroma compounds by employing
encapsulation technology13 and precursors.14 In recent applications, these technologies are combined together
with the function of sensual stimulating agents57 conveying hot,58 cold,59,60 tingling, stimulating, and various
other sensations along with flavor or fragrance acceptance. Extension of additional functionality and safety is
expected to continue as consumer demands become more and more intense, diverse, and complicated.

4.15.2.4 Safety and Regulations

Safety is an important issue in F&F products.3,61–63 Considering their immense presence in daily life and
diverse biological functionality, F&F products are subject to potential health hazards. Therefore, appropriate
measures are implemented in many countries, although differing in details. Typically, flavorings are classified
as natural, nature identical (molecules found in nature that are prepared synthetically), and artificial, and
evaluated and regulated accordingly. The most well-known regulation of this sort is the generally recognized as
safe (GRAS) designation by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Organizations such as International
Organization of the Flavor Industry (IOFI) and UN committees like Codex Alimentarius (CODEX) and Joint
Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) cooperatively maintain, update, and harmonize internationally
these regulations. In the fragrance field, similar organizations like International Fragrance Association (IFRA)
and the Research Institute for Fragrance Materials (RIFM) are in operation to secure safety. Flavoring
regulation may also arise from religious aspects. Certified standards such as Halal in Islam and Kashrut in
Judaism are effective toward certain classes of F&F products.

4.15.3 Analytical Techniques

The content of aroma compounds is, in general, low, and compositions of these compounds are often complex.
Therefore, at the dawn of analytical chemistry, aroma compounds were extracted from a huge mass of raw
material. Fractionation was carried out by means of distillation, and various other classical procedures (e.g.,
crystallization, pH control in extraction, derivatization) were employed. Quite obviously, compounds revealed
using these procedures were inevitably restricted to a set of major constituents, if any. Occasionally, before the
1950s, additional techniques like UV–IR spectroscopy and open-column chromatography were employed and
were helpful to some extent.

4.15.3.1 Common Analytical Methods

In general, any analytical equipment or procedure used in the field of natural products chemistry and
environmental engineering is also helpful in aroma analysis.64,65 The history and principles of such art are
described in detail elsewhere and will not be featured here. Gas chromatography (GC), GC–mass spectrometry
(MS), and nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) are the most frequently used techniques along with rather
specialized setups such as proton transfer reaction–mass spectrometry66 (PTR–MS) used in retronasal aroma
analysis (see Chapters 9.02, 9.06, 9.10–9.11).
602 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

In modern art, analytical techniques are of increased importance in flavor design. Sense of flavor is in general
conservative and the use of artificial substances in this field is far less encouraged compared with fragrances.
Consequently, reproduction of natural aroma is favored, and therefore analysis of foodstuff is the dominating force
in innovation. However, naturally, techniques used in flavor analysis are applicable to fragrance analysis as well.

4.15.3.2 Analyzing Methods in Flavor and Fragrance Art

Since the F&F industry incorporates a sensation of odor, some analytical methods used in this field are more or
less specialized to handle this field of subjective and enigmatic sense. Representative analytical techniques
considered important in this field are described in the following sections.

4.15.3.2.1 Gas chromatography–olfactometry

In aroma analysis, odor profile of an unknown compound is also helpful in its determination. Therefore, a
human nose as an organoleptic sensor is employed in the detection of GC effluents. This technique is referred
to as GC–olfactometry (GC–O) or GC-sniffing.67–69 The procedure can be applied to discover key aroma
components that actually reflect and constitute the aroma of a target material. It is by nature a qualitative
analysis, but may also be quasi-quantitative by incorporating supplemental measures (see Section 4.15.3.2.2). An
interesting extension of GC–O called OASIS method (original aroma simultaneous input to the sniffing port
method) is known in which GC effluents are combined with a flow of other odorous compounds.70 This can
realize detection of trace compounds (not necessarily an impact aromatic substance by itself) that exhibit
remarkable synergic/interactive effects with other components.

4.15.3.2.2 AEDA, CHARM, and odor unit determination

These methods were developed to quantify and visualize the intensity of aroma as a chromatogram. A specific
system named combined hedonic and response measurement (CHARM) was initially developed. Later on,
aroma extract dilution analysis (AEDA) (Figure 3), a new method using a conventional GC–O system, was
proposed. They share the same strategy; aroma extract is diluted to a certain extent and then GC–O
methodology is applied. In an AEDA procedure, if such a maximum extent of a dilution that allows the
detection of a certain component is n times diluted from the original sample, this component is referred to
have a flavor dilution (FD) factor of n. CHARM value corresponds to FD factor in a CHARM procedure. These
values represent the contribution of the volatile; the larger these values are, the more important they are
considered as key components.

n-fold dilution repeated

Aromagram
Extraction 37
Food 36
1/n 2 35
1/n
FD-factor

1/n 3 1/n 4
34
GC-O applied to each sample 33
32
31

FD 500 1000 1500

*
Retention index

Aroma active peaks marked on

conventional chromatogram

Olfactometry port Detection limit of effluents summarized along with its Retention Index

Figure 3 Aroma extract dilution analysis: concept scheme.

 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 603

The intensity of aroma compounds found by AEDA and CHARM may be determined with further accuracy
by subjecting them to odor unit (also called odor activity value) measurement.71,72 This is done by first
measuring the odor threshold of a compound while the concentration of this compound in the specimen is
determined using internal standards (for instance, isotopic samples in contemporary approach). Dividing the
latter concentration with the odor threshold will give the odor unit value, naturally being higher when a
compound better contributes to the total aroma.

4.15.3.2.3 Multidimensional GC (MDGC, GC  GC)

Aroma composition is usually very complex and thus on many occasions coelution of components may take
place. Utilizing GC columns with different separation characteristics in a tandem manner may allow resolution
of such peaks. In a typical setup, a certain portion of an effluent from the first column is concentrated using a
cold trap (named cryofocus) and then sent into the second column for further separation. This analyzing
technique combining multiple GC columns is referred to as multidimensional GC (MDGC).73,74 Cryofocus
repeated in short intervals in combination with a short second column will furnish a whole two-dimensional
chromatogram useful in complex aroma analysis (comprehensive GC  GC).

4.15.3.2.4 Chiral stationary phase application

Aroma compounds originate from biosynthetic pathways inside an animal, a botanical body, and other life-
forms as well as enzymes and thus frequently carry chiral components within the molecule. Determination of
such enantiomeric properties can, in many cases, be accomplished using a GC column with a chiral stationary
phase (CSP) application.75–79 These columns, usually called chiral GC column, will provide diastereometric
interaction that could lead to resolution of enantiomers. Commercially available chiral GC columns predomi-
nantly utilize cyclodextrin derivatives as CSPs. Chiral columns consisting of multiple cyclodextrin derivatives
intending synergic effect in resolution property80 are also successful in the market. In practice, these columns
are mainly operated as secondary columns in MDGC technique.

4.15.3.2.5 Quantification and stable isotope dilution assay

Quantification of aroma compounds using GC and internal reference has long been a problematic issue.81
Detection response factor, peak shape, discrimination phenomenon at the injector port, and, of course,
disproportion during sample preparation were more or less unavoidable. Stable isotopes used as internal
standards combined with an MS detector have realized reproducible and far more accurate quantification.
The major drawback of this method is the tedious process of preparing the isotope-labeled standards.

4.15.3.3 Sample Preparation Method

Aroma analysis is most often performed utilizing GC–MS. This demands separation of volatile constituents
from nonvolatile matrices. Additionally, higher concentrations of analytes are favorable to allow detection of
trace key compounds.16,64,65,82 Therefore, various preparation methods derived from aroma extract production
were developed. The composition of the concentrate may differ depending on the method used and thus
selected to accommodate the aim.
Direct extraction and subsequent concentration of the extract (extraction method) along with direct distilla-
tion and steam distillation are the most classical procedures. Techniques like solvent distillation extraction
(SDE),83 solvent-assisted flavor extraction (SAFE),82 vacuum headspace sampling (VHS),84,85 direct thermal
desorption (DTD),86 and lyophilization16 fall into this distillation category. Adsorption method can be
tracked back to the enfleurage procedure. Nowadays, polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) and poly-2,6-diphenyl-
p-phenylene oxide (Tenax) are used extensively as adsorbents. Adsorption method is applied mostly toward
analysis of the headspace gas, and two modifications exist.84 In a static headspace procedure, the specimen is left
standing still in a sealed chamber and the headspace is sampled under equilibrium. On the other hand, in a
dynamic procedure, headspace gas is constantly purged to enhance vaporization and then put through the
adsorbent. Solid-phase microextraction (SPME)87 and its advanced form, solid-phase aroma concentrate
extraction (SPACE),88 are classified as static methods. Aquaspace is a modified form of dynamic headspace
procedure, which makes use of water-saturated air as dynamic gas media.89 Adsorption performed in aqueous
604 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

media is in practice as well. Stirrer bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) is one such procedure, which employs a
magnetic stirring bar coated with adsorbents allowing concentration of aroma compounds as it stirs the aqueous
media.82 In any case, aroma-active compounds concentrated using the above adsorptive methods are released
using solvents or by subjecting them to thermal desorption. Cryofocus apparatus also finds application by
concentration of trace materials that are otherwise difficult to be characterized by a conventional GC–MS setup.

4.15.3.4 An Example of Aroma Analysis – Spotted Shrimp

Determination of aroma-active substances is carried out by a combination of aroma concentrate preparation
and analyzing methods described above.90 As a specific example, analysis of roasted spotted shrimp (Sergia lucens)
– consumed as an ingredient of Kakiage (a sort of Tempura), Sushi, and rice snacks – will be shown here
(Figure 4). Sun-dried spotted shrimp was heated to 160  C in an electric cooking plate and the resulting aroma
compounds were drawn into a Tenax TA adsorbent using an aspiration pump. The adsorbed aroma
constituents were stripped off by repeated extraction using diethyl ether. Careful evaporation of diethyl ether
furnished the aroma concentrate, which was further analyzed by GC, GC–MS, and AEDA procedures. AEDA
method has revealed 31 aroma constituents with an FD factor of 3 or more. Among these compounds, six
potent aroma constituents exhibiting an FD factor of 37 (2187), namely methanethiol (17), 1-pyrroline (18),
N-(2-methylbutyl)pyrrolidine (19), N-(3-methylbutyl)pyrrolidine (20), isopropyl methyl disulfide (21), and
3-methylpyrazine (22), were found.

4.15.3.5 Quality Control

Materials of natural origin are prone to adulteration, especially when production costs are high and when
quality and supply are unstable. In natural extracts, detection of adulteration can be accomplished by profiling

GC, GC–MS, AEDA

Pump

Extraction,
Tenax TA resin
concentration

Electric cooking plate

Aroma

Contributive compounds

MeSH N
17 18 19

N
SMe
S N
20 21 22

Figure 4 Aroma analysis of roasted spotted shrimp.

 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 605

the proportion of complex substances by principal component analysis combined with GC, GC  GC, and
LC–GC. Since many substances of natural origin are chiral and in many cases are enriched with a specific
enantiomer, enantiomeric excess determination on chiral columns may also provide indication.75 However,
effectiveness of chiral analysis in authentication is under discussion in some cases.91,92 A complementary way
is isotopic ratio analysis taking the advantage of these ratios being different among location, species,
elevation, and source material (either natural or petrochemical origin).75 Genetically modified organism
(GMO) in the food sector is also an issue.93,94 The above-mentioned methods as well as biological measures
can be applied in this case.

4.15.4 Flavor and Fragrance of Natural Origin

Although limited in quantity, natural extracts still enjoy an irreplaceable status in smoothing and integrating the
aroma of products.33,95,96 Raw materials used for F&F can be categorized depending on the part of the plant
used. In the following subsections, several representative raw materials from flower, leaves, root, grass, seed,
wood, resin, the miscellaneous botanical mass as well as those from animal sources are described.

4.15.4.1 Aroma Products from Flowers

Flower scent is considered as the most fundamental and classical component in fragrance design and still
deserves a first place in description (Table 4).97 The rose has many cultivars of which two species are
important, offering its invaluable function even in minute amounts. Jasmine98 is cultivated in Egypt,
Turkey, and India. Jasmine used to flavor Chinese tea is a different type of jasmine (Jasminum sambac).99
Neroli oil is a steam distillate of freshly picked bitter orange flowers, and it offers a peculiar sweet-
terpeny note. Ylang-ylang, meaning ‘the flower of flowers,’ is produced in Madagascar and Reunion.
Narcissus absolute is known as one of the truly rare extracts with annual production being less than
200 lb (91 kg).

4.15.4.2 Aroma Products from Leaves and Allied Plant Materials

Essential oils from plant leaves are main ingredients in many products.100 Geranium oil serves as a source of
(S)-citronellol (9), obtained by saponification and subsequent fractional distillation. Eucalyptus is classified into
two groups – the globulus type and citriodora type – which differ considerably in terms of their composition.
Peppermint is cultivated mainly in the United States and also in China and India. Another species usually
referred to as Japanese mint is grown in China, Brazil, India, and Japan and is used for l-menthol (7) isolation.
Spearmint oil is a good modifier of peppermint and two species (Native and Scotch) are recognized as
important. The main producer is the United States while India and China have also emerged in recent years.
Citronella also has two separate species in cultivation (Sri Lanka and Java type), of which Java type is
particularly important as an industrial source of (R)-citronellal (10). Likewise, lemongrass continues to be
important as a citral (11) source, but to a less degree due to the advent of synthetic citral. Patchouli is cultivated
in Sumatra, Seychelles, Madagascar, etc., and it is used in many men’s fragrances. Lavender is grown in
southern France while Lavandin, a hybrid developed by crossing Lavandula officinalis with spike or aspic
lavender (Lavandula latifolia), is cultivated in France and northern Africa. Lavandin was once regarded as a less
expensive substitute of lavender oil but now has attained a firm position in its own right. It is inexpensive and
reliable with consistent quality. Basil is one of the representative cooking herbs (especially in Italy and
Thailand) and also an important F&F product source. Thyme is well known for its antibacterial and antifungal
properties. Three species (two from Europe and one from Mexico) are known as oregano even though each of
them belongs to a different genus, naturally exhibiting discrete odor profiles. Rosemary is cultivated in Spain,
France, and Croatia, and besides being a cooking herb it also has a long history as a deodorant and pesticide, and
nowadays its extract is used as an antioxidant agent in processed food (Table 5).
606 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Table 4 Aroma extract from flowers

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Rose (Morocco) Rosa centiofolia (S)-Citronellol, geraniol, nerol (23), 95,96

2-phenylethanol,
(4R)-rose oxide (24),
-damascone (25),
-damascenone (26)
Rose (Bulgaria, Turkey) Rosa damascena
Jasmine Jasminum grandiflorum Benzyl acetate, (S)-linalool, 95,96,98
indole, (Z)-jasmone (27),
(R,Z)-7-decen-5-olide (28),
methyl (þ)-epi-jasmonate (29)
Neroli Citrus aurantium (R)-Linalool, (R)-linalyl acetate, 95,96
(S,E)-nerolidol (30), (R)--terpineol (31)
Tuberose Polyanthes tuberosa Methyl benzoate, 1,8-cineole, 95
methyl salicylate (32)
Ylang–ylang Cananga odorata Benzyl acetate, (R)-linalool, 95
p-cresyl methyl ether (33),
methyl benzoate
Narcissus Narcissus tazetta Linalool, methyl anthranilate (34), 95
benzyl acetate, -terpineol
Narcissus poeticus

4.15.4.3 Aroma Products from Seeds

Many kinds of seeds are known to have fragrance properties.100,101 Some are simply crushed and steam distilled,
and others are dried, fermented, or cured prior to such processes. Among them, pepper was well recognized as
one of the most precious trading goods. Black pepper102 is prepared from whole unripe berries, while white
pepper solely consists of pepper seeds. Piperine (44) is known to contribute to its hot taste. Vanilla103,104 has two
major sources (Madagascar/Reunion type and Tahiti type). In the case of vanilla, the pods that house the tiny
seeds are important as an aroma source. Furthermore, raw pods are virtually odorless and need a process (called
curing) that includes enzymatic cleavage of glucosides to give the key component vanillin along with other
fairly complex aroma constituents. Coriander seed, when unripe, gives off an unpleasant smell mainly due to
decanal. Therefore, ripe fruit is harvested and processed while the full part of the plant is occasionally used for
herb oil production. Cumin is famous as a fundamental spice ingredient of curry. Anise is used for candy and
baked confectionery. (E)-Anethole (45) is the dominant substance in its oil with content reaching 95%. Seeds of
fennel and star anise are also known to have high (E)-anethole content. Fennel is used for fish dishes while star
anise is used extensively in Chinese cuisine (Table 6).
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 607

Table 5 Aroma extract from leaves

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Geranium Pelargonium graveolens (S)-Citronellol, geraniol, (4S)-rose oxide 95,96

Eucalyptus Eucalyptus globulus 1,8-Cineole 95
Eucalyptus citriodora ()-Citronellal, ()-citronellol 95
Peppermint Mentha piperita ()-Menthol, ()-menthone (35), ()-menthyl acetate (36) 95,100
Japanese mint Mentha arvensis ()-Menthol 95
Spearmint Mentha spicata (R)-Carvone 95,100
Citronella Cymbopogon winterianus (R)-Citronellal, geraniol, (R)-citronellol 95
Lemongrass Cymbopogon flexuosis Citral 95
Cymbopogon citratus
Patchouli Pogostemon patchouli ()-Patchoulol (37) 95,96
Lavender Lavandula officinalis (R)-Linalool, (R)-linalyl acetate, (R)-lavandulyl acetate (38) 95,96
Basil Ocimum basilicum (R)-Linalool, estragole (39) 95,100
Thyme Thymus vulgaris Thymol (40), carvacrol (41) 95,100
Oregano Origanum vulgare Carvacrol, thymol 95,100
Coridothymus capitatus Carvacrol, thymol 95,100
Lippa graveolens Thymol, carvacrol, 1,8-cineole 95,100
Rosemary Rosmarinus officinalis 1,8-Cineole, (þ)-camphor (42), ()-borneol (43) 95,100

4.15.4.4 Aroma Products from Roots

Vetiver is cultivated in southern India, Indonesia, and the Philippines.101 While functioning as a fixative, at the same
time it is a contributor in various perfumery applications. It is also recognized as a source of a synthetic material
named vetiver acetate used in perfumes. Iris extract is obtained from rhizomes. The rhizome is peeled and dried
under sunlight. Freshly harvested rhizomes bear a green note like peeled potato, but when further aged for 2–3 years
they give rise to a characteristic scent of iris. Valerian105 is used for personal care and as insect repellent (Table 7).

4.15.4.5 Essential Oils from Peel (Citrus Oil)

Citrus oil dominates this class of essential oil. It is obtained by the cold press method with the exception of lime
oil, which is also prepared by steam distillation of essential oil separated during the production of juice.106,107
Aside from bergamot, these oils are primarily monoterpene hydrocarbon mixtures of which (R)-limonene (3) is
usually the dominant compound. Since odor contribution of this monoterpene compound is low, it is often
removed by distillation or repeated solvent extraction. The resulting oil rich in odor-active compounds is called
terpeneless oil and is used extensively. In the case of bergamot and lemon oils, psoralen derivates like bergaptene
(64) causing photosensitivity are problematic, and those for fragrance use are rectified to remove it (Table 8).
608 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Table 6 Aroma extract from seeds and surrounding sections

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Pepper Piper nigrum ()--Pinene, ()-limonene, (S)--phellandrene (46), ()-linalool 95,101,102
Vanilla Vanillia planifolia Vanillin (47) 103,104
Vanillia tahitensis Vanillin, p-anisalcohol (48)
Coriander Coriandrum sativum (S)-Linalool, ()-camphor, geraniol 95,100
Cumin Cuminum cyminum Cuminaldehyde (49), p-mentha-1,4-dien-7-al (50) 95,100
Cardamom Elettaria cardamomum -Terpinyl acetate (51), 1,8-cineole 95,101
Nutmeg Myristica fragrance (S)-Terpinen-4-ol (52), myristicin (53) 95,101
Anise Pimpinella anisum (E)-Anethole (45) 95,100
Fennel Foeniculum vulgare (E)-Anethole, (þ)-fenchone (54) 95,100
Star anise Ilicium verum (E)-Anethole 95

4.15.4.6 Aroma Materials from Wood

Sandalwood has been highly appreciated since prehistoric ages. The oil serves as base note, offers fixative
properties, and harmonizes with various other materials, making it one of the most fundamental ingredients.
The essential oil of cedarwood is steam distilled from the sawdust and other waste wood from the lumber mills
while essential oil from its leaves is also produced. Camphor, native to Japan and Taiwan, was considered as a
precious wood having high concentration of (1R)-camphor (42), which is used in medicine, although synthetic
camphor introduced in the 1920s rapidly replaced the natural oil (Table 9).

4.15.4.7 Aroma Products from Resin

Peru balsam108 has a typical balsamic odor. Galbanum, like labdanum and myrrh, is used primarily in oriental
blends. Myrrh resinoid109,110 refers to heerabol myrrh, while that with different amounts of -bisabolene (76) is
called opopanax109 nowadays. The two raw materials have distinctly different odor characteristics. In
perfumery, it serves as a fixative and an ingredient of oriental type. Olibanum111 is the frankincense in the
Bible and is used heavily in oriental-type perfumes (Table 10). In perfumery, these aroma materials from resin
serve as a fixative and, in many cases, as ingredient of oriental type products.

4.15.4.8 Aroma Material from Other Botanical Sources

Oakmoss is a sort of lichen that grows on oak trees, and its extract has an important role in fragrance design.101
Cinnamon oil is obtained from the bark of the cinnamon tree, although small-scale production of leaf oil is also
known. Cassia oil is obtained from the bark, small branches, and leaves of the Cassia tree. Clove oil is prepared
by steam distillation of clove buds, while clove leaf oil is made from leaves (Table 11).
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 609

Table 7 Aroma extract from roots

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Vetiver Vetiveria zizanoides ()-Vetiselinenol (55), (þ)--vetivone (56), 96

()--vetivone (57), (þ)-khusimol (58), ()-khusimone (59)
Iris (orris) Iris pallida (þ)-cis- -lrone (60), (þ)-cis--irone (61) 96
Angelica root Angelica archangelica ()--Pinene, 15-pentadecanolide 95
Valerian Valeriana officinalis ()-Bornyl acetate (62), 3-methylbutanoic acid 95,105
Ginger Zingiber officinale Citral, geranyl acetate, geraniol 95,101
Costus Saussurea lappa Linalool, (R)--ionone (63) 95

Table 8 Aroma extract from peel (citrus oil)

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents References

Sweet orange Citrus sinensis (S)-Linalool, octanal, decanal, /-sinensal (65, 66) 95,96
Grapefruit Citrus paradisi (R)-1-p-Menthen-8-thiol (67), (þ)-nootkatone (68) 95,96
Mandarin Citrus reticulata Methyl N-methylanthranilate (69) 95,96
Lemon Citrus limone Citral, (R)-linalool 95,96
Lime Citrus aurantifolia Citral, ()--terpineola 95,96
Bergamot Citrus bergamia (R)-Linalool, (R)-linalyl acetate 95,96
a
In distilled oil.

4.15.4.9 Aroma-Active Material from Animals

There are mainly four aroma products from animal sources.112 In terms of extensive commercial use, all of them
are substituted by synthetic materials. Musk113 is a material obtained from an abdominal gland (called musk
pods) of the male musk deer. Civet113 extract is prepared from the perianal secretion of civet cat and exhibits a
610 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Table 9 Aroma extract from wood

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Sandalwood Santalum album (þ)--Santalol (70), ()--Santalol (71) 95,96,111
Cedarwood Juniperus virginiana (þ)-Cedrol (72), (þ)--cedrene (73), 95,96
()-thujopsene (74)
Camphor Cinnamomum camphora (þ)-Camphor, safrole (75), 1,8-cineole 95
Rosewood (Bois de Rose) Aniba rosaeodora ()-Linalool 95

Table 10 Aroma extract from resin

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Styrax Liquidambar orientalis Cinnamyl alcohol, 3-phenyl-1-propanol, styrene 95

Peru balsam Myroxylon pereirae (S,E)-Nerolidol, methyl cinnamate 108
Galbanum Ferula gummosa ()--Pinene, (3E,5Z)-1,3,5-undecatriene (77), 95,96
2-methoxy-3-isopropyl-5-methylpyrazine(78)
Myrrh Commiphora myrrha (þ)-Furanoeudesma-1,3-diene (79), curzerene (80), 96,109,110
lindestrene (81)
Opopanax Commiphora guidottii -Ocimene (82), (S,Z)--bisabolene (76), -santalene (83) 109
Olibanum Boswellia carterii 1-Octyl acetate, 1-octanol 95,96,109,111
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 611

Table 11 Aroma extract from other botanical sources

Oil Source plant Aroma-active constituents References

Oakmoss Evernia prunastri Ethyl everninate (84), methyl -orcinolcarboxylate (85) 95,97
Cinnamon Cinnamomum zeylanicum Cinnamaldehyde, cinnamyl acetate, (R)-linalool, eugenola 95,101
Cassia Cinnamomum cassia Cinnamaldehyde, coumarin (86), cinnamyl acetate 95,101
Clove Eugenia caryophyllata Eugenol, ()-caryophyllene (87), eugenyl acetate (88) 95,101
Saffron Crocus sativus Safranal (89), 3,5,5-trimethyl-2-cyclohexen-1-one (90) 95,101
a
Major constituents in leaf oil.

musky animalic note. Sperm whale is the source of ambergris114,115 prepared from the biliary secretion of its
intestines. Castoreum116,117 is produced from the glandular secretion of beaver, and its unique leather note
differentiates it from other aroma materials of animal source (Table 12).

Table 12 Aroma-active material from animals

Oil Animal of origin Aroma-active constituents References

Musk Moschidae moschus (R)-Muscone (91), (R)-muscopyridine (92), 112,113

7-methyl-1,5-epoxy-1-cyclopentadecene (93)
Civet Viverridae civetta Civetone (94), cycloheptadecanone 112,113
Ambergris Physeter macrocephalus ()-Ambrox (95), ()--ambrinol (96), (S)-dihydro- -ionone (97) 112,114,115
Castoreum Castoridae castor Borneol, 4-ethylguaiacol (98), trimethylpyrazine 112,116,117
612 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

4.15.5 Perfumery (Fragrances)

4.15.5.1 Fragrance as Natural Products Chemistry
Until the rise of modern chemical industries, the art of extraction and essential oil preparation was mainly
targeting fragrance use, and that for flavorings (e.g., vanilla essence) was much more limited. Flavorings
continue to put emphasis on the use of natural or nature-identical synthetic materials. On the other hand,
fragrance nowadays is heavily dependent on artificial substances. In modern practice, the use of artificial
materials is so extensive that even the basic odor description in the training course of perfumers is in many cases
referenced by such substances. Thus, fragrance production from the point of view of natural products chemistry
has faded away, although some exceptions apply in the field of citrus oil use.

4.15.5.2 Fragrance Creation

The fundamental idea in the design of fragrances is the classification and combination of materials according to
volatility: top note, middle note, and base note.118,119 A harmonized alternation of odor intensity and quality
upon time is considered the heart of creation. Thus, highly volatile materials provide top note (first impression),
which is gradually succeeded by middle note (modifier) of moderate intensity and tenacity, which makes up the
main body. In the very last stage, the base note (last note) will offer the concluding theme in the design. Base
note materials also work as fixatives, but fixatives solely for its function are also employed. Altogether, a
complete fragrance creation can be compared to a work of a composer or a novelist, incorporating a consistent
theme into a flow of dynamic changes.
Fragrance creation is not necessarily confined to natural aroma substances and many rely heavily on
artificial compounds. Therefore, classical perfumes categorized into fundamental types along with the repre-
sentative natural products are covered here (Table 13).

4.15.5.3 Artificial Fragrance Materials

Artificial substances are employed in flavorings as well but to a relatively less extent and most of them are
analogues of natural products.120 On the other hand, artificial compound use in fragrance is popular, and these
compounds are not necessarily similar to substances found in nature. This is partially due to the scarcity of
natural raw material used in fragrances. At the same time, the fact that fragrance design is less confined
compared with flavorings – a conservative sense – has to be taken into account. This allows more freedom
enjoyed by perfumers, leading to considerable use of artificial chemicals.
The most classical artificial substances used in perfumery are as follows (Figure 5). Hydroxycitronellal (99)
was found to exhibit the odor of lily of the valley, the essential oil of which is not possible to prepare in the first
place. Other classics include -amylcinnamaldehyde (100) and musk ketone (101), which were discovered to
be good substitutes for jasmine and musk, respectively. Furthermore, perfume No. 5 (Chanel, launched 1921)
contained 2-methylundecanal,121 with so unique an aroma character that it established No. 5 as the pioneer of a
new fragrance class – floral aldehydic.
Further development in synthetic chemistry in the second half of the twentieth century brought bloom to
another tide of artificial fragrance materials. In terms of musk substitutes,113,122 mainly three new categories

Table 13 Classic perfumes and their contributing natural products

Type Representative materials Representative perfume (manufacturer) Year

Floral Jasmine, rose Joy (Jean Patou) 1930

Oriental Myrrh, opopanax, vanilla Shalimar (Guerlain) 1925
Chypre Bergamot, oakmoss, patchouli Chypre de Coty (Coty) 1917
Citrus Bergamot, neroli, lemon, lime 4711 (Mulhens) 1792
Jean Marie Farina (Roger & Gallet) 1806
Fougere Lavender, geranium, oakmoss Fougere Royale (Houbigant) 1882
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 613

Figure 5 Typical molecules regarded as important fragrance materials.

were developed: the polycyclic aromatic musk123 compounds led by Galaxolide (102), macrocyclic com-
pounds124 resembling muscone such as ethylene brassylate (103), and alicyclic musk compounds represented
by Helvetolide (104).120 Diversity in structure offering amber note is even more pronounced than musk.114,120
Thus, amber note is now realized by many substitutes on the market and Iso E Super (105) and Karanal (106)
can be given as typical examples. Bacdanol (107) and allied compounds that bear 2,2,3-trimethylcyclopent-
3-en-1-yl group are known to have a sandalwood note.125 Phenylpropanal derivatives such as cyclamen
aldehyde (108) exhibit lily of the valley odor126 and have given rise to compounds like Helional (109), a
typical marine-ozone note material. The merge of Helional and the related material proved successful, making
it a milestone in fragrance design – the ozone note. Rhubafuran (110), a substance with a rhubarb-like odor, is a
similar example of peculiar modifiers established as important fragrance materials.120

4.15.6 Flavor of Foodstuffs

Along with taste, texture, color, and temperature, the flavor that accompanies food has great influence toward
acceptance and appreciation of food.127 Therefore, flavor analysis has attracted the interest of many scientists, now
also known as food chemists. In this section, a brief description of flavor compounds of various foodstuffs is given.
Biosynthetic pathways of aroma material in food are naturally identical with those found in nature. On the
other hand, Maillard reaction that takes place especially when food is thermally processed is a formation
pathway of aroma-active compounds that are characteristic to cooking art.

4.15.6.1 Fruits
Aroma components of citrus fruit juice128–132 are different from that of essential oils (see Section 4.15.4.5 for
composition of the latter).133–135 Other familiar fruits like apples,136 grapes,137 strawberries,129,138 bananas,139 and
pineapples140 were analyzed as well. Place of origin (e.g., grapes) and ripeness of the obtained fruit (e.g., pineapples),
in many cases, bring substantial difference in its composition and enantiomeric properties (Table 14).141
Table 14 Flavor compounds from fruits

Sample Source plant Aroma-active constituents References

Valencia orange (juice) Citrus sinensis Ethyl butanoate, 2-methyl-3-buten-2-ol (111), ethyl acetate, ethyl 3-hydroxyhexanoate (112), 106,107,113
1-propanol, ethyl butanoate, wine lactone (113), (Z)-3-hexenal
Apple Malus domestica Hexyl acetate, ethyl butanoate, butyl acetate, 2-methylbutyl acetate, hexanal 128,131,136
Grape (European) Vitis vinifera Ethyl acetate, nerol, (S)-linalool, neryl acetate 128,131,137
Grape (American) Vitis labrusca Methyl anthranilate, (E)-2-hexenal, ethyl 3-hydroxybutanoate 128,131,137
Strawberry Fragaria ananassa ()-Furaneol (114), ()-mesifuran (115), ethyl hexanoate, (E)-2-hexenal 129,131,138
Banana (Philippines) Musa sapienturn 2-Pentanone, 2-methylbutyl butanoate, 2-pentyl acetate, 3-methylbutyl acetate 128,132,139
Banana (Cuba) Musa sapientum 2-Heptyl acetate, 2-heptyl hexanoate, 3-methylbutyl acetate, 2-methylbutyl acetate, elemicin (116) 128,132,139
Pineapple Ananas comosus Furaneol, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, ethyl 2-methylpropanoate, methyl 2-methylbutanoate, 128,132,140
(3E,5Z)-1,3,5-undecatriene, -damascenone, (R)--decalactone (117), ethyl 3-(methylsulfanyl)propionate (118)
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 615

4.15.6.2 Cereals
Rice is an important calorie source mainly in Asia and also throughout the world. Some rice cultivars are
especially rich in 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline (119) content and are referred to as Kaori-mai (fragrant rice).142 Bread is
also recognized to play a major role in the human diet. The aroma of bread differs substantially between the
crust and the crumb, and both of them have been analyzed by AEDA method.143,144 Maize145 is respected as the
staple food in Mexico and southern Africa and is also consumed in various forms throughout the world (for
instance, popcorn) (Table 15).

4.15.6.3 Nonalcoholic Beverages

The composition of the aroma of coffee is extremely complex with more than 900 compounds determined146,147
(see Chapter 3.25). The aroma of tea is greatly influenced by the degree of fermentation (green tea148 and black
tea149 to mention a representative example) (see Chapter 3.23). Research of cacao mass volatiles using AEDA
was also conducted (Table 16).150

4.15.6.4 Alcoholic Beverages

Nihonshu (commonly known as Sake) is an alcoholic beverage drunk in Japan.151,152 Notable characteristics are
the simultaneous fermentation allowing high alcohol concentration and the use of Koji-kabi (Aspergillus oryzae)
for saccharification of starch. The fruity scent that accompanies high-quality sake is a contribution of esters like
3-methylbutyl butanoate and ethyl hexanoate153 In terms of wine, varieties of cultivars of grape as well as
differing production areas influence the character154–159 (see Chapter 3.26). Some types of wine (e.g., Sauvignon
Blanc) are characterized by trace amounts of sulfur-containing compounds. Beer aroma is quite complex in
aroma composition (Table 17) 42,160 (see Chapter 3.22).

Table 15 Important flavor compounds in cereals161

Sample Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Rice (cooked) 2-Acetyl-1-pyrroline (119), (E,E)-2,4-decadienal, nonanal, hexanal, octanal, 142

(E)-2-nonenal
Bread (crust) 2-Acetyl-1-pyrroline, (E)-2-nonenal, 3-methylbutanal 143,144
Bread (crumb) (E)-2-Nonenal, (E,E)-2,4-nonadienal, (2E,4R,5R)-4,5-epoxy-2-decenal (120) 143,144
Rye bread (crust) Methional (121), 3-methylbutanal, (E)-2-nonenal, (E,E)-2,4-nonadienal 143,144
Rye bread (crumb) Phenylacetaldehyde, (E)-2-nonenal, (E,E)-2,4-nonadienal 143,144
Maize (cooked) Dimethyl sulfide, dimethyl trisulfide (122), acetaldehyde, 4-vinylguaiacol (123), 145
2-acetyl-1-pyrroline
Maize (as popcorn) 2-Acetyl-1-pyrroline, (E,E)-2,4-decadienal, 2-furylmethanethiol (124), 161
4-vinylguaiacol, 2-acetyltetrahydropyridine (125a, 125b)
616 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Table 16 Flavor compounds in nonalcoholic beverages

Sample Aroma-active constituents Reference

Coffee (Arabica) -Damascenone, 2-furylmethanethiol, 3-sulfanyl-3-methylbutyl formate (126), 147

homofuronol (127), furaneol, guaiacol, 4-vinylguaiacol, methional, sotolone,
2-ethyl-3,5-dimethylpyrazine, 2,3-diethyl-5-methylpyrazine, vanillin,
4-ethylguaiacol, homosotolone (128)
Green tea (Sencha) (Z)-1,5-Octadien-3-one (129), 4-methyl-4-sulfanyl-2-pentanone (130), methional, 148
(2E,6Z)-2,6-nonadienal, 3-methyl-2,4-nonanedione (131), methyl epi-jasmonate,
indole
Black tea (Darjeeling) (R)-Linalool, geraniol, (2E,4E,6Z)-2,4,6-nonatrienal, -damascenone, 149
2-methylbutanal, 2-methylpropanal, 3-methylbutanal, 3-methyl-2,4-
nonanedione, (2E,6Z)-2,6-nonadienal
Cacao mass 2-/3-Methylbutanoic acid, 3-methylbutanal, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, 150
hexanal, 2-methoxy-3-isopropylpyrazine (132), (E)-2-octenal,
2-methyl-3-(methyldisulfanyl)furan (133)

Table 17 Flavor compounds in alcoholic beverages

Sample Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Nihonshu (Sake) Ethyl hexanoate, 3-methylbutyl acetate 153

White wine (Riesling) Ethyl 2-butenoate, ethyl hexanoate, butanoic acid, 3-methylbutanoic acid, 156
methionol (134), -undecalactone (135), 4-vinylguaiacol
Red wine (Cabernet Ethyl 2-methylpropanoate, ethyl butanoate, ethyl 2-methylbutanoate, 157
Sauvignon) 3-methyl-1-butanol, -nonalactone (136), eugenol
Rose wine (Grenache) 3-Sulfanyl-1-hexanol (137), -damascenone, 3-methylbutyl acetate, 158
ethyl octanoate, ethyl hexanoate
Beer (Pale lager) -Damascenone, ethyl butanoate, 3-methylbutanol, ethyl hexanoate, 42,160
2-phenylethanol, 4-vinylguaiacol, furaneol

4.15.6.5 Condiments
The pungent aroma of wasabi is a result of allyl isothiocyanate162 (138), the enzymatically cleaved component
of its precursor sinigrin (139).163 Sansho (Zanthoxylum piperitum) is used in Japan, and its Chinese counterpart –
Sichuan pepper (Zanthoxylum simulans) – is consumed in some parts of China.164 Shiso (Perilla frutescens) is a herb
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 617

Table 18 Flavor compounds in condiments

Sample Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference

Wasabi Wasabia japonia Allyl isothiocyanate (138) 162

Sansho Zanthoxylum piperitum Citronellol, -sanshool (140), 164
-hydroxysanshool (141)
Sichuan pepper Zanthoxylum simulans Linalool, -hydroxysanshool 164
Shiso Perilla frutescens var. crispa (S)-Perillaldehyde (142), 165
2-methyl-6-methylene-2,7-octadienal (143),
trans-shisool (144)
Egoma Perilla frutescens var. Perillaketone (145), isoegomaketone (146) 166
frutescens
Yuzu Citrus junos Dimethyl trisulfide, 6-methyl-5-hepten-2-ol(147), 167
(Z)-9-dodecen-12-olide (148), 8-methylnonanal,
8-methyldecanal

of the Lamiaceae family of Chinese origin and many variants and chemotypes coexist. In Japan, P. frutescens var.
crispa is known,165 while another major variant of this plant, P. frutescens var. frutescens (known as beefsteak
plant), is used extensively in Korea.166 Yuzu (Citrus junos), a citrus fruit of Chinese origin, has a unique
freshening flavor and is used as a condiment in Japanese cuisine (Table 18).167

4.15.6.6 Vegetables
Representative examples of vegetables along with their characteristic aromatic compounds are listed in
Table 19.131,168 Usually, the aromatic composition of vegetable aroma is influenced by food processing (see
for instance, tomato169 and onions170–172). Naturally, the cultivated varieties of vegetables will also result in
different aroma profiles.173–179

4.15.6.7 Dairy Products

The scent of raw milk180,181 is generally considered faint and delicate. This aroma composition may be greatly
altered by transformation of milk to various dairy products such as butter,182 cheese,183 and yogurt43
(Table 20).
618 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Table 19 Flavor compounds in vegetables

Sample Source plant Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Potato Solanum tuberosum (2E,4R,5R)-4,5-Epoxy-2-decenal, methional, 131,173

2-acetyl-1-pyrroline, dimethyl trisulfide,
2,3-diethyl-5-methylpyrazine
Tomato (fresh) Solanum (Z)-3-Hexenal, hexenal, 1-octen-3-one, methional 131,169
lycopersicum
Bell pepper (green) Capsicum annuum 2-lsobutyl-3-methoxypyrazine (149), 2,3-butanedione, 174
var. grossum octanal, dimethyl trisulfide
Bell pepper (red) 2-lsobutyl-3-methoxypyrazine, (þ)-3-carene (150), 174
dimethyl trisulfide
Garlic Allium sativum Allicin (151), di(2-propenyl) disulfide (152), dimethyl 131,171
trisulfide
Onion (raw) Allium cepa Propanethial S-oxide (153), dipropyl disulfide (154), 131,170,171,172
1-propenyl propyl disulfide (155)
Celery Apium graveolens (3S,3aR)-Sedanolide (156), (3S)-sedanenolide (157) 131,175
White truffle Tuber magnatum Dimethyl sulfide, bis(methylsulfanyl)methane, 176
1-octen-3-ol
Pfifferling Cantharellus cibarius 1-Octen-3-ol, 3-octanol, 2-heptanol, benzaldehyde 177
Matsutake Tricholoma (R)-1-Octen-3-ol, methyl cinnamate 178
mushroom matsutake
Shiitake mushroom Lentinula edodes Lenthionine (158), 1,2,4,5-tetrathiane (159) 179

4.15.6.8 Meat and Seafood

The aroma of meat products184–186 and seafood90,187,188 is mainly a result of Maillard reaction in cooking.
See Table 21 for representative aroma compounds of this class.

4.15.7 Human Interactions

As shown in the case of 1-octen-3-one in the beginning of this chapter, aroma-active compounds show an
interesting indication as media in human–environment interactions; the role of this often disliked compound has
some similarity to alarm pheromones. Flavor or smell of food can be categorized into food attractant molecules
from this point of view. Infants are able to recognize the body odor of their mother and are attracted to it.189 An
opposite example is represented by the notorious ability of skunks to spray, in which thiol compounds
such as (E)-2-butene-1-thiol and 3-methyl-1-butanethiol are used as potent repellents190(see Chapter 4.09).
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 619

Table 20 Flavor compounds in dairy products

Sample Aroma-active constituents Reference(s)

Cow’s milk (raw) Ethyl hexanoate, ethyl butanoate, dimethyl sulfone, nonanal 180,181
Butter (Irish sour cream) 2,3-Butanedione, (R)--decalactone, butanoic acid, 182
(Z)- -6-dodecenolactone (160)
Cheddar cheese Butanoic acid, 2,3-butanedione, methional, homofuronol, 183
(R)--decalactone, furaneol, (Z)- -6-dodecenolactone
Yogurt 2,3-Butanedione, acetaldehyde, hexanoic acid, dimethyl sulfide, 43
2,3-pentanedione

Table 21 Flavor compounds in meat and seafood

Sample Aroma-active constituents Reference

Beef 12-Methyltridecanal, 2-methylfuran-3-thiol (161), 2-furylmethanethiol 185

Pork Methanethiol, 2-methylfuran-3-thiol, 2-furylmethanethiol 185
Chicken Methanethiol, nonanal, acetaldehyde 185
Salmon (boiled) (Z)-1,5-Octadien-3-one, (2E,6Z)-2,6-nonadienal, propanal, acetaldehyde, methional, 187
(E,E)-2,4-decadienal
Lobster Trimethylamine, 2,3-butanedione, (Z)-4-heptenal, 1-octen-3-one, 2-acetyl-1-pyrroline, 188
2-acetyl-3-methylpyrazine (162)
Spotted shrimp Methanethiol, 1-pyrroline, N-(2-methylbutyl)pyrrolidine, N-(3-methylbutyl)pyrrolidine, 90
(roasted) isopropyl methyl disulfide, 3-methylpyrazine

The bad odor of rotten food is also an example of chemicals recognized as repellents. The extremely unpleasant
feature of thiol smell, on the other hand, can contribute to modern life as a safety measure due to the odorizing fuel
gas used to detect gas leaks at an early stage.56 An application of sex attractant in human culinary culture is observed
in the classical method to seek out truffles. The constituent of truffles, an androstenol(163)-related molecule
(Figure 6), is known to be coincidentally identical to the sex pheromone of truffle hogs, making them keenly
attracted to them.191 On the other hand, an unintended ecological interaction of human culture toward hornets is
suggested. In this case found in Japan, a combination of 2-pentanol, 3-methyl-1-butanol, and 1-methylbutyl
3-methylbutanoate, a formula often present among F&F materials, in a certain ratio could provoke attacks by the
world’s largest hornet (Vespa mandarinia), which claims dozens of fatalities annually in the island state.192
One has to take into account that in human society, the function of the above-mentioned volatiles is
substantially influenced by the cultural background of the person who perceives it, for instance, when the
scent of fermented food is under discussion. Just to mention a few, cheese, fish sauce, stinky tofu, surströmming,
takuan193 (pickled daikon raddish), kusaya,194 and natto195 (fermented soybeans) are notable examples. Many
other fermented foodstuffs around the world are famous for their characteristic smell, which renders them
repellent or attractant depending on the person who perceives it. Similarly, the amine odor of fish markets and
the smell of roasting fish are generally more tolerated (or even appreciated) by consumers who are used to
620 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Figure 6 Ecological aspects of aroma-active molecules in relation with our daily lives.

fish-eating tradition whereas for those not familiar with it, they are considered as an unpleasant smell of marine
animals deteriorating by bacterial activity (however, this can also occur regardless of hygienic environment, due
to endogenous enzymatic activity).196 Herbs and condiments like coriander and celery are sometimes disliked
since they carry a distinctive characteristic odor. Those who avoid coriander leaves frequently argue that its scent
resembles that of shield bugs, also known as stink bugs of the Hemiptera family, which indeed reflects the fact that
coriander leaves contain (E)-2-decenal, a constituent of stink bug defensive spray.197 Thus, the evaluation of odor
is substantially influenced by the individual experience and memory that accumulate as a result of it.
So far, human pheromones are not clearly identified198 (see Chapter 4.05). However, menstrual synchrony
observed among women with a higher ability to sense 3-androstenol (163) can be presented as an indica-
tion.199 Body odor, which is major histocompatibility complex (MHC) dependent, is known to modulate mating
behavior in mice while reports show a comparable result in humans in terms of preference of body odor
accumulated on worn T-shirts.200 The emotional effect of fragrant materials is considered as taken-for-granted
knowledge in human history; the art and culture of perfumery, aromatherapy, use of incense in religious rituals
worldwide, and Koh-doh (incense ceremony), for example, are based upon it. Subsequently, there are several
types of odor that are recognized as sexy, of which musk, civet, and jasmine (methyl epi-jasmonate (29)) are
included but without common objective effectiveness. Olfactory receptors are present in human sperm cells and
an interesting effect of a fragrance chemical like bourgeonal (164) and lyral (165) (Figure 6) toward olfactory
receptors of sperm cells is known – an analogous microscopic counterpart of the attractant/repellent role of
chemical mediators in the reproduction scene.201
In this section, aroma science in terms of human interaction will be highlighted. In the first part, the human
olfactory system from the biological aspect is summarized. Genetic background in the perception of odor molecules
is briefly summarized. Human interaction in terms of aromatherapy is briefly described to end the section.

4.15.7.1 Olfactory System

Odor perception is perhaps one of the most enigmatic senses, still not well understood. Compared to other
senses, the physical aspect of olfaction is complex. Typical stimuli perceived by humans and animals, namely,
light, sound, pressure, balance, temperature, electric and magnetic fields, and so forth, can be recorded,
reproduced, or analyzed relatively easily, owing to the fact that they are combinations of comparatively simple
physical characteristics. On the other hand, odor perception is an integrated result of a large number of
interactions caused by various molecules. Furthermore, the sense of odor is more experience- and memory
oriented. Probably many people share the experience of recalling very old or irrelevant memories, triggered by
a certain scent, which would otherwise never come to mind. Odor perception is subjective and is reliant upon
the function of the brain, which processes the signals provided by the receptors. Odor fatigue is a good example
of such characteristics. Although adaptation is found in other senses, a substantial decrease in the sensitivity of a
specific adapted odor while allowing detection of newly incoming odorants is an interesting phenomenon.

4.15.7.2 Biological Background of Olfactory Perception

A biogenetic approach toward the mechanism of the olfactory system led to a major breakthrough in 1991, when
Buck and Axel discovered that the G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) were the essential components of
odor receptors.202 In mammals, there are as many as 1000 genes that represent the receptors and they amount
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 621

to 2–4% of the genome, making them the largest family of genes. Specifically, in the human olfactory system,
about 350 of them are functional receptor genes.203 Having gained knowledge concerning other types of
GPCRs, the methodology employed in the receptor function research of these systems may also be applied to
odor receptors. The odorant receptors are not necessarily strictly specific: a certain odorant receptor can
bind different kinds of odorants and, conversely, one odor-active molecule may interact with several odor
receptors.204 Odorant receptor genes in mammals are categorized into class I (fish-type) and class II (terrestrial
animal-type), suggesting possible gene duplication during evolution from fish to terrestrial animals.
What happens at the instant when an odor-active molecule comes in touch with our nasal cavity?205 The first
interaction of odorant molecules takes place in the olfactory receptor neurons, which are embedded in the
pseudostratified columnar epithelium (or simply, olfactory epithelium), which is located in the posterior nasal
cavity in the case of mammals. Olfactory sensory neurons express receptor proteins on the surface membrane of
the cilia, which gain access to the extracellular region covered with mucus. The airborne odorants are dissolved
into the mucus, bind with the receptors, and then the receptor protein triggers a signal transduction cascade.
This results in the opening of the cation channel that would depolarize the sensory neuron and eventually elicit
a train of action potentials in the axon. The olfactory axon leads to the olfactory bulb through basal lamina and
lamina propria.
To properly recognize the smell of a particular molecule, each sensory neuron should express a single odorant
receptor and respond to an appropriate range of odorants with similar molecular characteristics. This presump-
tion (one receptor–one olfactory neuron rule) was deemed acceptable for quite some time but did not have a firm
experimental basis until recently when it was demonstrated in the olfactory system of mice.206
Following the detection of odorant molecules, the sensory neurons send signals through their axons and
these stimulation signals are gathered at the olfactory bulb, which is a primary processing site of olfactory
information in the brain. There are thousands of glomeruli, which are the convergent site of axons distributed
on the surface of the mouse olfactory bulb, and the connection of the axon, which represents 1000 different
types of receptors, made so that a certain kind of olfactory neurons project their signals to a small number of
corresponding fixed glomeruli. This relation between the axons and the glomeruli, combined with the one
receptor–one olfactory neuron rule, elucidates the one glomerulus–one receptor rule (Figure 7).207 In other
words, the brain only needs to know which glomeruli are activated to know which receptor was activated by the
inhaled odorants. Therefore, the glomerular sheet at the surface of the olfactory bulb by itself is a map of
odorant receptors.

Olfactory bulb Zone I

Zone II NC

Olfactory epithelium
AOB

Zone I

Zone II

Zone III Glomerulus

Zone IV Zone III

Zone IV
Odor molecules Olfactory sensory neuron
Figure 7 Schematic diagram demonstrating the connection system between the nasal odor receptors and the (main)
olfactory bulb. Sensory neurons expressing identical odorant receptors converge their axons to a limited number of defined
glomeruli. AOB, accessory olfactory bulb; NC, neocortex. Reproduced from K. Mori; H. Nagao; Y. Yoshihara, Science 1999,
286, 711–715, with permission from AAAS.
622 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

Mapping the odorant-induced glomerular activity revealed the following three characters of its spatial organi-
zation: (a) individual glomeruli typically respond to a range of odorants that share a specific combination of
molecular features; (b) each glomerulus appears to be unique in its odorant selectivity; and (c) glomeruli with
similar odorant selectivity situate themselves in proximity and form molecular-feature clusters. These molecular-
feature clusters might be a structural unit in the spatial organization of a glomerular sensory map.208 A number of
studies have demonstrated a close relationship between molecular features of odorants and their perceived odor;
functional groups like carboxyl and hydroxy groups remarkably influence the quality of odor. Accordingly, if
clusters reflecting molecular features are identified along with their specific subsets of odorant receptors, they may
lead to an interesting indication of such clusters being related to submodality of subjectively perceived odor.
Mitral and tufted cells in the olfactory bulb project their axons to the olfactory cortex, the site thought to
integrate the signals from distinct glomeruli. The olfactory signals processed in the olfactory cortex are sent to a
variety of higher centers of the brain, which include insular cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, amygdale, hippocam-
pus, and the nucleus accumbens.205
Considering the fact that humans are able to distinguish far more varieties of odor than the types of receptors
present, these higher centers of the brain must be responsible for recognizing and processing the complex patterns of
reactions given by the receptor–olfactory bulb system. Although preprocessing of signals including lateral suppres-
sion mechanism in the olfactory bulb is a known function, an upstream research from the nasal receptors toward the
brain has indicated that the remaining part – the higher center of the brain – is the essential part of the olfactory
mechanism. Interaction (either enhancing or suppressive) between multiple aroma compounds including pattern
recognition, as well as stimulation of memorized matter, adaptation, and habituation of odor can be deemed to be a
function of the higher centers of the brain, although details are yet to be uncovered. In other words, excluding a small
number of basic chemicals that possess instinctive and seemingly absolute characters, evaluation of odorous
compounds is in nature an acquired sense. Mind-only perception is pronounced when compared to other senses,
making olfaction a good example of impersonality in the context of annata (nonself). Hence, research of the olfactory
system is likely to become even more challenging as this aspect becomes more notable – the fundamental and
eemotionally influential senses being dependent upon the relational environment with the consciousness or essence
of personality vaguely blurred therein. This is in agreement with recent studies concerning the olfactory perception
and cultural background differences together with the evaluation of odor in relationship with familiarity.209

4.15.7.3 Aromatherapy as Human Interaction

Aromatherapy, a concept established in the first half of the twentieth century, originates from herbalism
practiced since prehistoric ages, and therefore is one of the oldest human–environment interactions (see
Chapter 3.14). The word aromatherapy was proposed by the French chemist R. M. Gattefossé in the 1920s,
who coincidentally noticed the fact that lavender oil effects rapid healing of burns.210 The term can be defined
as therapeutic use of essential oils by inhalation, topical application, and ingestion to improve a person’s health
or to balance the psychological condition. Although there are criticisms that scientific evidence with regard to
the merit of aromatherapy is not sufficient, it is widely practiced and appreciated as a complementary or
alternative medicine nowadays.211,212 As an example, chemical substances that belong to a class of aldehydes (in
particular, ,-unsaturated aldehydes) and phenols are often known for their antibacterial functions.213
Representative essential oils and extracts employed in aromatherapy as well as their typical use are listed in
Table 22.210 Owing to the lack of full scientific insight into aromatherapy, bioactivity and the synergic effects of
these materials toward human health are not fully understood. Adverse effect and toxicity as potential hazards
have to be always taken into account in their use, especially when they are taken into the body by ingestion.

4.15.8 Outlook

Development history of F&F industry represents the eagerness of mankind toward discovering the enigma
shrouding the science of odor. This was, and will continue to be, one of the major driving forces in this field
of chemistry and biology. Nowadays, aroma science, like the mechanism of odor perception (discussed in
Section 4.15.7) and fine aroma chemistry taking into account the concept of chirality, for instance, continues
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 623

Table 22 Typical essential oils used in aromatherapy

Oil General usage/target symptoms

Basil Nerve corroborant, expectorant, febrifuge, insect bite

Bergamot Disinfectant, eczema, psoriasis, bronchitis, antidepressant
Chamomile Anti-inflammatory, analgesic, gynopathy, sedation
Eucalyptus Febrifuge, expectorant, disinfectant
Geranium Neuralgia, perimenopausal symptom, insecticide, gallstone, urinary stone, skin problems
Lavender Sedation, anti-inflammatory, skin infection, sunburn prevention, insect bite
Marjoram Sedation, warming, contusion, sprain, purgative
Peppermint Analgesic, sedation, coolant, expectorant, dermatitis, insect repellent
Rosemary Neuropathy, bronchitis, rheumatism, myalgia

to be at the leading front of chemistry as it expands further to interdisciplinary areas. Genetics, molecular
biology, neuroscience, and integration of taste and smell will most probably be the next phase of challenge in the
F&F research (see Chapter 4.16).

Abbreviations
CODEX Codex Alimentarius
F&F Flavor(s) and Fragrances
FDA Food and Drug Administration
GC Gas Chromatography
GRAS Generally Recognized as Safe
IOFI International Organization of the Flavor Industry
IR Infrared
JECFA Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives
MHC major histocompatibility complex
MS Mass Spectrometry
NMR Nuclear Magnetic Resonance
PTR-MS Proton Transfer Reaction Mass Spectrometry
RIFM Research Institute for Fragrance Materials
UN United Nations
UV Ultraviolet

Nomenclature
% e.e. % enantiomeric excess
lb(s) pound(s) ¼ 0.454 kg

References
1. D. Glindemann; A. Dietrich; H.-J. Staerk; P. Kuschk, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2006, 45, 7006–7009.
2. D. H. Pybus, The History of Aroma Chemistry and Perfume. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer, 2nd
ed.; C. Sell, Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 3–23.
3. D. J. Rowe, Introduction. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford,
2005; pp 1–11.
4. D. H. Pybus, The Structure of an International Fragrance Company. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to
Consumer, 2nd ed.; C. Sell, Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 132–137.
5. H. B. Heath, Source Book of Flavors; Source Book and Handbook Series; Van Nostrand Reinhold: New York, 1981; Vol. 2,
pp 17–31.
624 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

6. D. Baines; J. Knights, Applications I: Flavors. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell
Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 274–304.
7. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 391–418.
8. S. J. Herman, Applications II: Fragrance. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell
Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 305–329.
9. J. Beerling, The Application of Fragrance. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer, 2nd ed.; C. Sell, Ed.;
The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 168–183.
10. J. K. Funesti, Perfumery Applications: Functional Products. In Perfumes: Art, Science and Technology; P. M. Müller,
D. Lamparsky, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: London, 1994; pp 363–382.
11. R. Barnekow; S. Muche; J. Ley; C. Sabater; J.-M. Hilmer; G. Krammer, Creation and Production of Liquid and Dry Flavours. In
Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007;
pp 457–488.
12. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 351–390.
13. J. J. G. van Soest, Encapsulation of Fragrances and Flavours: A Way to Control Odour and Aroma in Consumer Products. In
Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007;
pp 439–455.
14. A. Herrmann, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 5836–5863.
15. S. Arctander, Perfume and Flavor Materials of Natural Origin; Allured Publishing: New Jersey, 1960; pp 1–46.
16. G. A. Reineccius, Flavour-Isolation Techniques. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability;
R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 409–426.
17. C. Sell, Perfumery Materials of Natural Origin. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer, 2nd ed.; C. Sell,
Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 24–51.
18. M. Mukhopadhyay, Natural Extracts Using Supercritical Carbon Dioxide; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 2000.
19. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 263–274.
20. C. Fisher; T. R. Scott, Food Flavours: Biology and Chemistry; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 1997; pp 42–51.
21. L. O’Hare; J. Grigor, Flavor Generation in Food. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.;
Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 35–55.
22. C. M. Hendrix; J. B. Redd, Chemistry and Technology of Citrus Juices and By-products. In Production and Packaging of
Non-Carbonated Fruit Juices and Fruit Beverages; P. R. Ashurst, Ed.; Aspen Publishers: Gaithersburg, 1994; pp 53–83.
23. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 285–287.
24. H. Menzi; F. Emch, Lebensm.-Wiss. u.-Technol. 1989, 22, 324–328.
25. T. Schäfer; J. G. Crespo, Aroma Recovery by Organophilic Pervaporation. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry,
Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 427–438.
26. M. Cheryan; J. R. Alvarez, Food and Beverage Industry Applications. In Membrane Separations Technology: Principles and
Applications; R. D. Noble, S. A. Stern, Eds.; Elsevier Science: Amsterdam, 1995; pp 415–465.
27. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 73–102.
28. T. H. Parliament; R. Croteau, Eds., Biogeneration of Aromas; ACS Symposium 317; American Chemical Society: Washington,
DC, 1986.
29. C. Fisher; T. R. Scott, Food Flavours: Biology and Chemistry; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 1997; pp 25–42.
30. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 123–137.
31. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; p 204.
32. J. Margetts, Aroma Chemicals V: Natural Aroma Chemicals. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances;
D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 169–198.
33. S. Arctander, Perfume and Flavor Materials of Natural Origin; Allured Publishing: New Jersey, 1960; pp 47–674.
34. P. H. van der Schaft, Chemical Conversions of Natural Precursors. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and
Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 285–301.
35. G. Ohloff, Scent and Fragrances: The Fascination of Odors and Their Chemical Perspectives; Spinger-Verlag: Berlin, 1994; pp
75–105.
36. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 337–349.
37. L. Small, Perfume Creation: The Role of the Perfumer. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer, 2nd ed.;
C. Sell, Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 143–150.
38. E. Roudnitska, The Art of Perfumery. In Perfumes: Art, Science and Technology; P. M. Müller, D. Lamparsky, Eds.; Chapman &
Hall: London, 1994; pp 3–48.
39. J.-C. Ellena, Creative Perfumery: Composition Techniques. In Perfumes: Art, Science and Technology; P. M. Müller,
D. Lamparsky, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: London, 1994; pp 333–345.
40. R. Gross-Isseroff; D. Lancet, Chem. Senses 1988, 13, 191–204.
41. Y. Tokitomo; A. Kobayashi; T. Yamanishi; S. Muraki, Proc. Jpn. Acad. 1980, 56B, 457–462.
42. S. A. G. F. Angelino, Beer. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 581–616.
43. A. Ott; L. B. Fay; A. Chaintreau, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997, 45, 850–858.
44. Leffingwell & Associates, Chirality & Odour Perception; http://www.leffingwell.com (accessed March 13, 2009).
45. M. H. Boelens; H. Boelens; L. J. van Gemert, Perfum. Flavor. 1993, 18 (11/12), 1–16.
46. M. Ishikawa; M. Amaike; M. Itoh; Y. Warita; T. Kitahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2003, 67, 2210–2214.
47. K. Okada; A. Kobayashi; K. Mori, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1983, 47, 1071–1074.
48. M. Güntert; R. Emberger; R. Hopp; M. Köpsel; W. Silberzahn; P. Werkhoff, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1991, 192, 108–110.
49. D. de Guzman, ICIS Chem. Bus. Am. 2007, 271 (7), 26.
50. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 161–200.
51. R. Marsili, Off-Flavors and Malodors in Foods: Mechanisms of Formation and Analytical Techniques. In Techniques for
Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 237–264.
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 625

52. B. Nijssen, Off-Flavors. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; Maarse, H. Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 689–735.
53. G. Charalambous, Ed., Off-Flavors in Foods and Beverages; Elsevier Science Publishers: Amsterdam, 1992.
54. G. Fenaroli, Handbook of Flavor Ingredients, 2nd ed.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, 1975, Vol. II, pp 868–869.
55. W. G. Pond; D. C. Church; K. R. Pond; P. A. Schoknecht, Basic Animal Nutrition and Feeding, 5th ed.; John Wiley & Sons:
Hoboken, 2005; pp 292–294.
56. F. S. Manning; R. E. Thompson, Oilfield Processing of Petroleum, Volume One: Natural Gas; PennWell Publishing: Tulsa, 1991;
pp 259–260.
57. M. L. Dewis, Molecules of Taste and Sensation. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.;
Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 199–243.
58. K. Hirasa; M. Takemasa, Spice Science and Technology; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1998; pp 9–11.
59. R. Eccles, J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 1994, 46, 618–630.
60. J. C. Leffingwell, Cool without Menthol & Cooler than Menthol and Cooling Compounds as Insect Repellents;
http://www.leffingwell.com (accessed March 13, 2009).
61. D. A. Müller, Flavours: The Legal Framework. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability;
R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 15–24.
62. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 419–431.
63. S. Meakins, The Safety and Toxicology of Fragrances. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer, 2nd ed.;
C. Sell, Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 184–198.
64. G. Reineccius, Flavor Chemistry and Technology; Taylor & Francis Group: Boca Raton, FL, 2006; pp 33–72.
65. R. Clery, Natural Product Analysis in the Fragrance Industry. In The Chemistry of Fragrances: From Perfumer to Consumer,
2nd ed.; C. Sell, Ed.; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 2006; pp 214–228.
66. L. B. Fay; C. Yeretzian; I. Blank, Chimia 2001, 55, 429–434.
67. W. Grosch, Gas Chromatography-Olfactometry of Aroma Compounds. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing
and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 363–378.
68. B. S. Mistry; T. Reineccius; L. K. Olson, Gas Chromatography–Olfactometry for the Determination of Key Odorants in Foods. In
Techniques for Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 265–292.
69. I. Blank, Gas Chromatography–Olfactometry in Food Aroma Analysis. In Flavor, Fragrance, and Odor Analysis; R. Marsili, Ed.;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 2002; pp 297–331.
70. S. Hattori; H. Takagaki; T. Fujimori, Food Sci. Technol. Res. 2003, 9, 350–352.
71. W. Grosch, Chem. Senses 2001, 26, 533–545.
72. S. M. van Ruth, Biomol. Eng. 2001, 17, 121–128.
73. D. W. Wright, Application of Multidimensional Gas Chromatography Techniques to Aroma Analysis. In Techniques for Analyzing
Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 113–141.
74. S. Nitz; H. Kollmannsberger; F. Drawert, Analysis of Flavours by Means of Combined Cryogenic Headspace Enrichment and
Multidimensional GC. In Bioflavour ’87: Analysis, Biochemistry, Biotechnology, Proceedings of the International Conference,
Würzburg, Germany, 29–30 September 1987; P. Schreier, Ed.; de Gruyter: New York, 1988; pp 123–135.
75. A. Mosandl, Enantioselective and Isotope Analysis – Key Steps to Flavour Authentication. In Flavours and Fragrances:
Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 379–407.
76. A. Bernreuther; U. Epperlein; B. Koppenhoefer, Enantiomers: Why They are Important and How to Resolve Them. In Techniques
for Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 143–207.
77. S. G. Allenmark, Chromatographic Enantioseparation: Methods and Applications; Wiley: New York, 1988.
78. W. A. König, The Practice of Enantiomer Separation by Capillary Gas Chromatography; Hüthig: Heidelberg, 1987.
79. Y. I. Chang, Resolution, Quantitation, and Reactions of Chiral Flavor Compounds; University Microfilms: Ann Arbor, 1986.
80. S. Tamogami; K. Awano; M. Amaike; Y. Takagi; T. Kitahara, Flavour Fragr. J. 2004, 19, 1–5.
81. P. Schieberle, New Developments on Methods for Analysis of Volatile Flavor Compounds and Their Precursors. In
Characterization of Food: Emerging Methods; A. G. Gaonkar, Ed.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1995; pp 403–433.
82. N. C. D. Costa; S. Eri, Identification of Aroma Chemicals. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances;
D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 12–34.
83. T. H. Parliment, Solvent Extraction and Distillation Techniques. In Techniques for Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel
Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 1–26.
84. T. P. Wampler, Analysis of Food Volatiles Using Headspace-Gas Chromatographic Techniques. In Techniques for Analyzing
Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 27–58.
85. R. Kaiser, Trapping, Investigation and Reconstitution of Flower Scents. In Perfumes: Art, Science and Technology; P. M. Müller,
D. Lamparsky, Eds.; Chapman & Hall: London, 1994; pp 213–250.
86. C. C. Grimm; S. W. Lloyd; J. A. Miller; A. M. Spanier, The Analysis of Food Volatiles Using Direct Thermal Desorption. In
Techniques for Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 59–79.
87. A. D. Harmon, Solid-Phase Microextraction for the Analysis of Flavors. In Techniques for Analyzing Food Aroma; R. Marsili, Ed.;
Marcel Dekker: New York, 1997; pp 81–112.
88. M. Ishikawa; O. Ito; S. Ishizaki; Y. Kurobayashi; A. Fujita, Flavour Fragr. J. 2004, 19, 183–187.
89. M. Ishikawa; T. Honda; A. Fujita; Y. Kurobayashi; T. Kitahara, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 454–457.
90. S. Ishizaki; T. Tachihara; H. Tamura; T. Yanai; T. Kitahara, Flavour Fragr. J. 2005, 20, 562–566.
91. W. A. König; C. Fricke; Y. Saritas; B. Momeni; G. Hohenfeld, J. High Resolut. Chromatogr. 1997, 20, 55–61.
92. M. Dregus; H.-G. Schmarr; E. Takahisa; K.-H. Engel, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2003, 51, 7086–7091.
93. A. R. Bridge; K. M. Magin; J. W. Stave, Agricultural Biotechnology (GMO. Methods of Analysis. In Food Analysis; 3rd ed.;
S. S. Nielsen, Ed.; Springer Science and Business Media: New York, 2003; pp 301–314.
94. H.-D. Beritz; W. Grosch; P. Schieberle, Food Chemistry, 3rd ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2004; pp 142–144.
95. Boelens Aroma Chemical Information Service, ESO 00 Database of Essential Oils; Boelens Aroma Chemical Information Service:
Huizen, 1999.
626 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

96. G. Ohloff, Scent and Fragrances: The Fascination of Odors and Their Chemical Perspectives; Spinger-Verlag: Berlin, 1994;
pp 127–197.
97. B. D. Mookherjee; R. W. Trenkle; R. A. Wilson, Pure Appl. Chem. 1990, 62, 1357–1364.
98. S. Tamogami; K. Awano; T. Kitahara, Flavour Fragr. J. 2001, 16, 161–163.
99. R. Kaiser, New Volatile Constituents of Jasminum sambac (L.) Aiton. In Flavors and Fragrances: A World Perspective,
Proceedings of the 10th International Congress of Essential Oils, Fragrances and Flavors, Washington, DC, 16–20 November
1986. B. M. Lawrence, B. D. Mookherjee, B. J. Willis, Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, 1988; pp 669–684.
100. M. H. Boelens, Spices and Condiments II. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker:
New York, 1991; pp 449–482.
101. H. M. J. Richard, Spices and Condiments I. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker:
New York, 1991; pp 411–447.
102. T. Jagella; W. Grosch, Eur. Food Res. Technol. 1999, 209, 22–26.
103. H. Korthou; R. Verpoorte, Vanilla. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.;
Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 203–217.
104. D. Ehlers; M. Pfister; S. Bartholomae, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1994, 199, 38–42.
105. W. Letchamo; W. Ward; B. Heard; D. Heard, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52, 3915–3919.
106. P. E. Shaw, Fruits II. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 305–327.
107. R. Rouseff; P. R. Perez-Cacho, Citrus Flavour. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability;
R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 117–134.
108. A. M. Api, Contact Derm. 2006, 54, 179.
109. K. H. C. Baser; B. Demirci; A. Dekebo; E. Dagne, Flavour Fragr. J. 2003, 18, 153–156.
110. B. Marongiu; A. Piras; S. Porcedda; A. Scorciapino, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 7939–7943.
111. B. Marongiu; A. Piras; S. Porcedda; E. Tuveri, Flavour Fragr. J. 2006, 21, 718–724.
112. G. Ohloff, Scent and Fragrances: The Fascination of Odors and their Chemical Perspectives; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 1994;
pp 199–223.
113. B. D. Mookherjee; R. A. Wilson, The Chemistry and Fragrance of Natural Musk Compounds. In Fragrance Chemistry: The
Science of the Sense of Smell; E. T. Theimer, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1982; pp 433–494.
114. G. Ohloff, The Fragrance of Ambergris. In Fragrance Chemistry: The Science of the Sense of Smell; E. T. Theimer, Ed.; Academic
Press: London, 1982; pp 535–573.
115. K. Awano; S. Ishizaki; O. Takazawa; T. Kitahara, Flavour Fragr. J. 2005, 20, 18–21.
116. R. Tang; F. X. Webster; D. Müller-Schwarze, J. Chem. Ecol. 1993, 19, 1491–1500.
117. R. Tang; F. X. Webster; D. Müller-Schwarze, J. Chem. Ecol. 1995, 21, 1745–1762.
118. R. R. Calkin; J. S. Jellinek, Perfumery: Practice and Principles; John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1994.
119. Haarmann & Reimer, Fragrance Guide: Duftatlas, Atlas Olfactif; Glöss Verlag: Hamburg, 1997.
120. P. Kraft; J. A. Bajgrowicz; C. Denis; G. Frater, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2000, 39, 2980–3010.
121. J. Gibka; M. Glinski, Flavour Fragr. J. 2006, 21, 480–483.
122. P. Kraft, Aroma Chemicals IV: Musks. In Chemistry and Technology of Flavors and Fragrances; D. J. Rowe, Ed.; Blackwell
Publishing: Oxford, 2005; pp 143–168.
123. T. F. Wood, Chemistry of Synthetic Musks II. Benzenoid Musks. In Fragrance Chemistry: The Science of the Sense of Smell;
E. T. Theimer, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1982; pp 509–534.
124. T. F. Wood, Chemistry of Synthetic Musks I. Nonbenzenoid Musks. In Fragrance Chemistry: The Science of the Sense of Smell;
E. T. Theimer, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1982; pp 495–507.
125. E.-J. Brunke; E. Klein, Chemistry of Sandalwood Fragrance. In Fragrance Chemistry: The Science of the Sense of Smell;
E. T. Theimer, Ed.; Academic Press: London, 1982; pp 397–431.
126. K. J. Rossiter, The Design and Synthesis of Novel Muguet Materials. In Flavours and Fragrances, Proceedings of the 1997 RSC/
SCI International Conference on Flavours and Fragrances, Warwick, UK, 30 April–2 May 1997; K. A. D. Swift, Ed.; The Royal
Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 1997; pp 21–35.
127. Boelens Aroma Chemical Information Service, VCF 00 Database of Volatile Compounds in Food, Boelens Aroma Chemical
Information Service: Huizen, 1999.
128. R. G. Berger, Fruits I. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 283–304.
129. A. Latrasse, Fruits III. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 329–387.
130. P. Winterhalter, Fruits IV. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 389–409.
131. L. P. Christensen; M. Edelenbos; S. Kreutzmann, Fruits and Vegetables of Moderate Climate. In Flavours and Fragrances:
Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 135–187.
132. M. R. Marostica Jr.; G. M. Pastore, Tropical Fruit Flavour. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and
Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 189–201.
133. A. Hinterholzer; P. Schieberle, Flavour Fragr. J. 1998, 13, 49–55.
134. A. Buettner; P. Schieberle, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 5189–5193.
135. J. Lin; R. L. Rouseff, Flavour Fragr. J. 2001, 16, 457–463.
136. P. Komthong; N. Igura; M. Shimoda, Food Chem. 2007, 100, 1342–1349.
137. K. B. Shure; T. E. Acree, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1994, 42, 350–353.
138. I. Zabetakis; M. A. Holden, J. Sci. Food Agric. 1997, 74, 421–434.
139. E. J. F. Miranda; R. I. Nogueira; S. M. Pontes; C. M. Rezende, Flavour Fragr. J. 2001, 16, 281–285.
140. Y. Tokitomo; M. Steinhaus; A. Büttner; P. Schieberle, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 1323–1330.
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 627

141. K.-H. Engel, Stereodifferentiation of Chiral Flavor and Aroma Compounds. In Capillary Gas Chromatography in Food Control and
Research; R. Wittkowski, R. Matissek, Eds.; Behr’s Verlag: Hamburg, 1992; pp 149–175.
142. H. Maarse, Ed., Rice. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991; pp 79–89.
143. W. Grosch; P. Schieberle, Bread. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York,
1991; pp 41–77.
144. P. Schieberle; W. Grosch, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1994, 198, 292–296.
145. R. G. Buttery; D. J. Stern; L. C. Ling, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1994, 42, 791–795.
146. I. Flament, Coffee, Cocoa, and Tea. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York,
1991; pp 617–669.
147. R. A. Buffo; C. Cardelli-Freire, Flavour Fragr. J. 2004, 19, 99–104.
148. K. Kumazawa; H. Masuda, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 5660–5663.
149. C. Schuh; P. Schieberle, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 916–924.
150. P. Schnermann; P. Schieberle, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1997, 45, 867–872.
151. L. Nykänen; I. Nykänen, Distilled Beverages. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker:
New York, 1991; pp 547–580.
152. N. Christoph; C. Bauer-Christoph, Flavour of Spirit Drinks: Raw Materials, Fermentation, Distillation, and Ageing. In Flavours and
Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 219–239.
153. A. Isogai; H. Utsunomiya; R. Kanda; H. Iwata, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 4118–4123.
154. P. X. Etievant, Wine. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 483–546.
155. S. E. Ebeler, Food Rev. Int. 2001, 17, 45–65.
156. D. Komes; D. Ulrich; T. Lovric, Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2006, 222, 1–7.
157. R. Lopez; V. Ferreira; P. Hernandez; J. F. Cacho, J. Sci. Food Agric. 1999, 79, 1461–1467.
158. V. Ferreira; N. Ortin; A. Escudero; R. Lopez; J. Cacho, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 4048–4054.
159. U. Fischer, Wine Aroma. In Flavours and Fragrances: Chemistry, Bioprocessing and Sustainability; R. G. Berger, Ed.; Springer-
Verlag: Berlin, 2007; pp 241–267.
160. P. Schieberle, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1991, 193, 558–565.
161. W. Grosch; P. Schieberle, Cereal Chem. 1997, 74, 91–97.
162. H. Etoh; A. Nishimura; R. Takasawa; A. Yagi; K. Saito; K. Sakata; I. Kishima; K. Ina, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 1587–1589.
163. R. F. Mithen; M. Dekker; R. Verkerk; S. Rabot; I. Johnson, J. Sci. Food Agric. 2000, 80, 967–984.
164. E. Sugai; Y. Morimitsu; K. Kubota, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 1958–1962.
165. N. Ishizuka; H. Tateba; O. Nishimura; Y. Machii; Y. Okamoto, Proceedings of the 37th Symposium on the Chemistry of
Terpenes, Essential Oils, and Aromatics, Okinawa, Japan, 27–28 November 1993; Organizing Committee of 37th TEAC:
Okinawa, pp 221–222
166. K. H. C. Baser; B. Demirci; A. A. Dönmez, Flavour Fragr. J. 2003, 18, 122–123.
167. H. S. Song; M. Sawamura; T. Ito; K. Kawashimo; H. Ukeda, Flavour Fragr. J. 2000, 15, 245–250.
168. F. B. Whitfield; J. H. Last, Vegetables. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New
York, 1991; pp 203–281.
169. A. Krumbein; H. Auerswald, Nahrung 1998, 42, 395–399.
170. E. P. Järvenpää; Z. Zhang; R. Huopalahti; J. W. King, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. A. 1998, 207, 39–43.
171. E. Block; S. Naganathan; D. Putman; S.-H. Zhao, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1992, 40, 2418–2430.
172. E. Block; D. Putman; S.-H. Zhao, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1992, 40, 2431–2438.
173. B. Mutti; W. Grosch, Nahrung 1999, 43, 302–306.
174. P. A. Luning; T. de Rijk; H. J. Wichers; J. P. Roozen, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1994, 42, 977–983.
175. Y. Kurobayashi; E. Kouno; A. Fujita; Y. Morimitsu; K. Kubota, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2006, 70, 958–965.
176. F. Pelusio; T. Nilsson; L. Montanarella; R. Tilio; B. Larsen; S. Facchetti; J.Ø. Madsen, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1995, 43, 2138–2143.
177. G. Buchbauer; L. Jirovetz; M. Wasicky; A. Nikiforov, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1993, 197, 429–433.
178. I. H. Cho; S. Y. Kim; H.-K. Choi; Y.-S. Kim, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2006, 54, 6332–6335.
179. C.-C. Chen; C.-T. Ho, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1986, 34, 830–833.
180. J. E. Friedrich; T. E. Acree, Int. Dairy J. 1998, 8, 235–241.
181. H. T. Badings, Milk. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991; pp 91–106.
182. P. Schieberle; K. Gassenmeier; H. Guth; A. Sen; W. Grosch, Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 1993, 26, 347–356.
183. P. M. G. Curioni; J. O. Bosset, Int. Dairy J. 2002, 12, 959–984.
184. D. S. Mottram, Meat. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 107–177.
185. R. Kerscher; W. Grosch, Comparison of the Aromas of Cooked Beef, Pork, and Chicken. In Frontiers of Flavour Science, The
Proceedings of the 9th Weurman Flavour Research Symposium, Freising, Germany, 22–25 June 1999; P. Schieberle,
K. -H. Engel, Eds.; Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Lebensmittelchemie: Garching, 2000; pp 17–20.
186. D. B. Josephson, Seafood. In Volatile Compounds in Foods and Beverages; H. Maarse, Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1991;
pp 179–202.
187. C. Milo; W. Grosch, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1996, 44, 2366–2371.
188. K. R. Cadwallader; Q. Tan; F. Chen; S. P. Meyers, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1995, 43, 2432–2437.
189. R. H. Porter; J. Winberg, Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 1999, 23, 439–449.
190. W. F. Wood; B. G. Sollers; G. A. Dragoo; J. W. Dragoo, J. Chem. Ecol. 2002, 28, 1865–1870.
191. R. Claus; H. O. Hoppen; H. Karg, Experientia 1981, 37, 1178–1179.
192. M. Ono; H. Terabe; H. Hori; M. Sasaki, Nature 2003, 424, 637–638.
193. K. Kubota; S. Kobayashi; A. Kobayashi, Nippon Shokuhin Kogyo Gakkai Shi 1984, 31, 520–524.
194. K. Kasahara; K. Nishibori, Nippon Suisan Gakkai Shi 1978, 44, 385–387.
195. T. Tanaka; T. Yamauchi; R. Katsumata; K. Kiuchi, Nippon Shokuhin Kagaku Kogaku Kaishi 2003, 50, 278–285.
628 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance

196. E. L. Barrett; H. S. Kwan, Ann. Rev. Microbiol. 1985, 39, 131–149.

197. K. Kohara; Y. Sakamoto; H. Hasegawa; H. Kozuka; K. Sakamoto; Y. Hayata, J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 2006, 75, 267–269.
198. C. J. Wysocki; G. Preti, Anat. Rec. 2004, 281A, 1201–1211.
199. M. Morofushi; K. Shinohara; T. Funabashi; F. Kimura, Chem. Senses 2000, 25, 407–411.
200. K. Yamazaki; G. K. Beauchamp, Adv. Genet. 2007, 59, 129–145.
201. L. Doszczak; P. Kraft; H.-P. Weber; R. Bertermann; A. Triller; H. Hatt; R. Tacke, Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 3367–3371.
202. L. Buck; R. Axel, Cell 1991, 65, 175–187.
203. S. Zozulya; F. Echeverri; T. Nguyen, Genome Biol. 2001, 2, research0018.1–0018.12.
204. B. Malnic; J. Hirono; T. Sato; L. B. Buck, Cell 1999, 96, 713–723.
205. C. Fisher; T. R. Scott, Food Flavours: Biology and Chemistry; The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, 1997; pp 56–98.
206. B. M. Shykind, Hum. Mol. Genet. 2005, 14, R33–R39.
207. P. Mombaerts; F. Wang; C. Dulac; S. K. Chao; A. Nemes; M. Mendelsohn; J. Edmondson; R. Axel, Cell 1996, 87, 675–686.
208. N. Uchida; Y. K. Takahashi; M. Tanifuji; K. Mori, Nat. Neurosci. 2000, 3, 1035–1043.
209. H. Distel; S. Ayabe-Kanamura; M. Martinez-Gomez; I. Schicker; T. Kobayakawa; S. Saito; R. Hudson, Chem. Senses 1999, 24,
191–199.
210. R. Tisserand, The Art of Aromatherapy: The Healing and Beautifying Properties of the Essential Oils of Flowers and Herbs;
C. W. Daniel Company: Saffron Walden, 1977.
211. G. Buchbauer; L. Jirovetz, Flavour Fragr. J. 1994, 9, 217–222.
212. J. Kusmirek, Perspectives in Aromatherapy. In Fragrance: The Psycology and Biology of Perfume; S. van Toller,
G. H. Dodd, Eds.; Elsevier Applied Science: Barking, 1992; pp 277–285.
213. D. Kalemba; A. Kunicka, Curr. Med. Chem. 2003, 10, 813–829.

Biographical Sketches

Masashi Ishikawa was born in 1937 in Morioka City, Iwate, Japan. He majored in biological
chemistry from Iwate University. He joined T. Hasegawa Co., Ltd. in 1959 as a flavor chemist
and is now the Director and Senior Deputy President. He received his Ph.D. in 2003 from
The Graduate School of Agriculture and Life Sciences, University of Tokyo, under the
supervision of Professor Takeshi Kitahara.

Yasuhiro Warita was born in 1951 in Tokyo, Japan. After graduating from the University of
Tokyo, he joined T. Hasegawa Co., Ltd. in 1976. He received his Ph.D. in 1989 for his work
 Human–Environment Interactions (1): Flavor and Fragrance 629

on the synthesis of aroma chemicals from the Faculty of Agriculture, University of Tokyo,
under the supervision of Professor Kenji Mori. He was the head of the synthetic aroma
division of its technical research center and is now the general manager of the research
management division.

Eisuke Takahisa was born in 1974 in Tokyo, Japan. He majored in organic chemistry and
received his M.Eng. degree from the Tokyo Institute of Technology in 1999. He joined
T. Hasegawa Co., Ltd. the same year. He received his Ph.D. (Dr. rer. nat.) from the Technical
University of Munich in 2005 under the supervision of Professor Karl-Heinz Engel. He is
currently a member of the synthetic aroma division of the technical research center of the
company.

Yasutaka Ohkubo was born in 1975 in Kounosu City, Saitama, Japan. He received his M.Eng.
degree from Tokyo Institute of Technology in 2000. He joined T. Hasegawa Co., Ltd. the
same year. He is now a researcher at the synthetic aroma division of the technical research
center of the company.
 4.16 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste
Kunisuke Izawa, Yusuke Amino, Masanori Kohmura, Yoichi Ueda, and Motonaka Kuroda,
Ajinomoto Co., Inc., Kawasaki, Japan
ª 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

4.16.1 Introduction 632

4.16.2 Natural Products Associated with Sweetness 633
4.16.2.1 Low-Molecular-Weight Sweet Substances 634
4.16.2.1.1 Glycyrrhizin 634
4.16.2.1.2 Stevioside 634
4.16.2.1.3 Mogroside 635
4.16.2.1.4 Baiyunoside and gaudichaudioside A 636
4.16.2.1.5 Steroidal saponins 636
4.16.2.1.6 Pterocaryosides A and B 636
4.16.2.1.7 Phyllodulcin 637
4.16.2.1.8 Hernandulcin 637
4.16.2.1.9 Perillartine 637
4.16.2.1.10 Amino acids 637
4.16.2.1.11 Sugars 638
4.16.2.2 Sweet Proteins 638
4.16.2.2.1 Thaumatin 638
4.16.2.2.2 Monellin 639
4.16.2.2.3 Mabinlin 640
4.16.2.2.4 Brazzein 640
4.16.2.2.5 Pentadin 641
4.16.2.3 Sweetness-Inducing Proteins and Substances 641
4.16.2.3.1 Miraculin 641
4.16.2.3.2 Curculin and neoculin 641
4.16.2.3.3 Strogin 642
4.16.2.4 Antisweet Substances 642
4.16.2.4.1 Gymnemic acid 642
4.16.2.4.2 Ziziphin 643
4.16.2.4.3 Hodulcin 643
4.16.3 Bitter-Tasting Natural Products 644
4.16.3.1 Bitter-Tasting Alkaloids 644
4.16.3.1.1 Strychnine 644
4.16.3.1.2 Brucine 644
4.16.3.1.3 Quinine 645
4.16.3.1.4 Caffeine 645
4.16.3.1.5 Theobromine and theophyllin 645
4.16.3.1.6 Nicotine 646
4.16.3.1.7 Cocaine 646
4.16.3.1.8 Solanine 646
4.16.3.1.9 Matrine and berberine 647
4.16.3.2 Bitter-Tasting Terpenoids 647
4.16.3.2.1 Limonoids 647
4.16.3.2.2 Cucurbitacin and momordicine 648
4.16.3.2.3 Lactucin and cynaropicrin 648
4.16.3.2.4 Humulone 649
4.16.3.2.5 Quassin 649
4.16.3.2.6 Absinthin 650

631
632 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.3.2.7 Ursodiol 650

4.16.3.3 Bitter-Tasting Saponins 650
4.16.3.3.1 Secoiridoid saponins 650
4.16.3.3.2 Flavonoid glycoside 651
4.16.3.4 Bitter-Tasting Amino Acids and Peptides 651
4.16.3.4.1 Amino acids 651
4.16.3.4.2 Peptides 652
4.16.3.5 Masking the Bitter Taste 652
4.16.4 Pungent Natural Products 652
4.16.4.1 Capsaicin 652
4.16.4.2 Piperine 653
4.16.4.3 Sanshool and Gingerol 654
4.16.4.4 Isothiocyanates 654
4.16.4.5 Disulfides 655
4.16.5 Astringent Natural Products 656
4.16.5.1 Tannin 656
4.16.5.2 Catechins in Green Tea 656
4.16.5.3 Theaflavins and Thearubigins in Black Tea 657
4.16.5.4 Chlorogenic Acid in Coffee 658
4.16.5.5 Anthocyanins in Red Wine 658
4.16.6 Umami and Kokumi 659
4.16.6.1 Umami-Tasting Natural Products 659
4.16.6.1.1 Monosodium glutamate 659
4.16.6.1.2 Other proteinogenic amino acids 660
4.16.6.1.3 L-Theanine 660
4.16.6.1.4 Tricholomic acid and ibotenic acid 660
4.16.6.1.5 Organic acids 660
4.16.6.1.6 Nucleotides 660
4.16.6.1.7 Peptides 661
4.16.6.2 Kokumi 661
4.16.6.2.1 Kokumi-inducing natural products 661
4.16.7 Sour and Salty Tastes 662
4.16.7.1 Sour Taste Receptors 662
4.16.7.2 Sour-Tasting Natural Products 663
4.16.7.2.1 Citric acid 663
4.16.7.2.2 Malic acid 663
4.16.7.2.3 Tartaric acid 663
4.16.7.2.4 Lactic acid 663
4.16.7.2.5 Succinic acid 663
4.16.7.2.6 Fumaric acid 664
4.16.7.3 Salty Taste 664
4.16.8 Conclusion 664
References 664

4.16.1 Introduction

Humans have evolved to consume plants and animals in their environment and have acquired a sense of taste. It has
been suggested that our ability to taste bitter and sour evolved to identify potentially dangerous food. On the
contrary, our ability to recognize a sweet taste developed to identify an energy source, while salty and umami tastes
are a signal of minerals and proteins, respectively. As time progressed, humans began to use bitter, pungent, and
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 633

even astringent tastes that were initially considered to be unpleasant. This may have been because we became aware
that such substances were effective at improving health or even treating disease. Human food culture progressed
further with the development of cooking methods that use spices and more dramatically through the enjoyment of
fermentation products such as cheese, beer, wine, soy sauce, and miso (fermented soybean paste).
Henning1 proposed, along the lines of a concept that was first introduced by the ancient Greeks, that the four
tastes, that is, sweet, sour, salty, and bitter, constitute a psychological continuum, and mixed tastes can be placed
on the surface of a psychological continuum in which each of the four tastes is placed at one of the apexes of a
regular tetrahedron. Prior to Henning’s tetrahedron theory, Ikeda2 had discovered that monosodium glutamate
(MSG) was a savory-tasting substance and named it umami in 1909. Since the umami taste sensation could not
be explained by the four basic tastes theory, the umami taste was recognized as a fifth taste modality in Japan.
However, until recent molecular-biological findings, only sweet, sour, salty, and bitter have been regarded as
the basic taste qualities in the rest of the world. Although umami has previously been referred to as flavor and
not taste, recently the term ‘umami’ has become accepted worldwide as one of the five basic tastes.3–5
Recently, a series of major discoveries on taste receptors have been reported. Specifically, the receptors that
corresponded to sweet,6 bitter,7 and umami8 were identified and characterized. These receptors are distributed in
taste buds, which are flower-bud-shaped organs containing taste receptor cells in taste papillae on the tongue. On the
apical surface of taste receptor cells, taste receptor proteins provide molecular specificity to taste receptor cells,
which are innervated by afferent nerve endings that transmit information to the taste centers of the cortex through
synapses in the brain stem and thalamus. More recently, it was revealed independently by two groups that the
receptor for sour taste consisted of polycystic-kidney-disease-like ion channel (PKD2L1) molecule.9,10 The receptor
for salty taste is also a subject of intense scrutiny, with particular focus on epithelial Naþ channels (ENaCs).11
Taste intensity changes in proportion to the level of the stimulus. The recognition threshold is defined as the
minimum concentration of a substance at which a particular taste can be recognized by a significant number of taste
panels. The threshold value cannot be used to determine the relative taste intensity, since the relative taste intensity
and spectrum of a substance change with concentration. Generally, the bitter taste is the most sensitive to
concentration, followed by salty, sour, and sweet. Bitter and salty sensations have a wide range of responses to
the concentration of the substance. However, the perception of sweet and sour occurs within a much narrower
concentration range and can become saturated, for example, by a high concentration of sugar. In addition, quinine
and caffeine have different thresholds even though they offer the same kind of taste sensation. On the contrary, a
taste may actually change with the concentration. For example, saccharin tastes sweet at low concentration, but is
bitter at high concentration. It is also well known that a salty-tasting compound can sometimes enhance sweet
sensation. Taste-modifying substances are also known, and both gymnemic acid and miraculin are typical
compounds that exhibit such activity. It has been reported that gymnemic acid suppresses sweet sensation probably
by competitive binding with the receptor, while miraculin can modify the sour taste of citrate to a sweet taste.12
On the contrary, somatosensory stimuli such as pungency, astringency, tingling, and cooling sensations are
believed to be transmitted directly to the brain through trigeminal nerve endings in the mouth, although this
notion is still controversial.
Several review articles have described the chemistry of taste and structure–activity relationships.13,14 Two
comprehensive reviews have been published in Japan (in Japanese), with particular focus on taste compounds.15,16
However, there has been no recent comprehensive review written from the perspective of natural products
chemistry. In this chapter, several taste sensations found in natural products are described along with their
structures. Unfortunately, however, it is still very difficult to anticipate the taste quality and intensity from the
structure of an organic compound, even for the thoroughly studied sweet and bitter sensations, although some
regularity has been observed. It is expected that recent progress in the study of receptors will contribute to a full
understanding of the relationship between taste sensation and chemical structure.

4.16.2 Natural Products Associated with Sweetness

Sweet substances are the most desirable taste for humans, who have enjoyed them in fruits and honey since
ancient times. It is believed that the derivation of sugar from sugarcane and sugar beet is a fairly recent practice
and was started only 500–600 years ago. Initially, purified sugar was very expensive and could be enjoyed only
634 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

by the rich. However, the volume of sugar produced is currently enormous due to an increase in the cultivated
area of sugarcane and sugar beet, and therefore the price is not so high. In addition, the discovery of new low-
calorie artificial sweeteners such as aspartame, acesulfame K, and sucralose has expanded the sweetener market.
Meanwhile, intensive studies have been performed on the structure–sweetness relationship and many
hypotheses have been proposed.17,18 Based on these hypotheses, new, highly intense sweeteners are currently
being designed. As a result, several compounds that are hundreds of thousands of times sweeter than sugar have
been synthesized.19
Very recently, intensive studies on the receptor for sweet molecules using gene technology and knockout
mice have been performed to clarify the mechanism of the perception of a sweet taste. For instance, the
recognition of sugars is the function of specialized G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) in the gustatory
system. Recently, three members of a novel subfamily of GPCRs (T1R1, T1R2, T1R3) have been proposed to
function as taste receptors based on their expression in taste cells. The subfamily found in human and mouse
contains a long extracellular region composed of a highly conserved amino acid sequence with about 570
residues and is called the T1R family. Notably, while each receptor expressed by cultured cells does not react at
all with sweet substances by itself, cells that coexpress T1R2 and T1R3 show this reactivity. Based on these
results, it is believed that a heterodimer of T1R2 and T1R3 acts as a sweet receptor.20
This section describes sweet-tasting natural products that have been found to date. Taste-modifying
compounds and antisweet substances are also discussed.

4.16.2.1 Low-Molecular-Weight Sweet Substances

4.16.2.1.1 Glycyrrhizin
Liquorice (licorice) is the root of Glycyrrhiza glabra and Glycyrrhiza uralensis, from which a sweet substance can
be extracted. The licorice plant is a legume (related to beans and peas) and is native to southern Europe and
parts of Asia. Licorice extract (derived from the ancient Greek words for ‘sweet root’) is traded in both solid and
syrup forms. Its major active component is an oleanane-type triterpene glycoside, glycyrrhizin, which is used as
a sweetener and is more than 50 times sweeter than sugar (sucrose).21 Glycyrrhizin and its ammonium salt also
have a variety of pharmaceutical effects and are used particularly for the treatment of peptic ulcers and as
expectorants. Although glycyrrhizin is sweet, its taste is different from that of sugar. The sweetness of
glycyrrhizin has a slower onset than sugar and lingers in the mouth for sometime. In the United States,
glycyrrhizin is ‘generally recognized as safe’ (GRAS) as a flavoring agent, but not as a sweetener. Glycyrrhizin
is used as a flavoring in some candies, pharmaceuticals, and tobacco products.
Monoglucuronide of glycyrrhetinic acid (MGGR) was found to be 941 times sweeter than sucrose.22
MGGR is produced from glycyrrhizin by selective removal of the terminal glucuronide unit of glycyrrhizin
by an enzyme from Cryptococcus magnus MG-27 (yeast).

4.16.2.1.2 Stevioside
Several ent-kaurenoid diterpene glycosides with steviol as a common aglycon have been isolated from Stevia
rebaudiana, which is native to subtropical and tropical South America and Central America.23–27 Among the
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 635

glycosides, stevioside is the most abundant followed by rebaudioside A. Stevioside is 140 times sweeter than
sucrose, while rebaudioside is 240 times sweeter. Rebaudioside A has a better quality of sweetness. In Japan,
stevia sweeteners have been produced commercially and are widely used in food products such as soy sauce,
pickles, and boiled fish paste. Steviol glycosides are stable enough to remain sweet in processed foods.
The leaves of Rubus suavissimus S. Lee (Rosaceae), which is found wild in Guang Xi province in China, show
potent sweetness and are used as a drink (sweet tea; tian-cha). Rubusoside has been isolated as a major sweet
component from the leaves.28 This compound has the same aglycon structure as stevioside but with one glucose
less and can be obtained from stevioside by enzymatic transformation. Rubusoside is 130 times sweeter than
sucrose. A comprehensive review of stevioside has been published.29

4.16.2.1.3 Mogroside
Siraitia grosvenorii is an herbaceous perennial vine that is native to southern China and is best known for its fruit, the
lo han kuo (luo han guo). The fruit extract is nearly 300 times sweeter than sucrose and has been used as a natural
sweetener in China for nearly a millennium due to its flavor. It has also been used in traditional Chinese medicine
for the treatment of cold and sore throat. It is also used as an additive for drinks and candies in Japan and the United
States. Two cucurbitane-type triterpene glycosides, mogrosides IV and V, were isolated as major sweet components
of this fruit, and have been found to be 233–392 and 250–425 times sweeter than sucrose, respectively.30,31
Mogrosides are classified by the US Food Drug Administration (FDA) as a GRAS product. There are no
restrictions on consuming the fruit or its extracts. Mogroside V has been reported to be nonmutagenic.
636 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.2.1.4 Baiyunoside and gaudichaudioside A

Baiyunoside, a labdane-type diterpene glycoside, was isolated from the root of Phlomis betonicoides, which is
native to southern China and Tibet and which has been used as a traditional Chinese medicine.32 Baiyunoside is
500 times sweeter than sucrose and has a long-lasting taste. Nishizawa and Yamada.33 reported the synthesis of
the aglycon, (þ)-baiyunol, as well as its isomer, ent-baiyunol, and the structure–activity relationship in a series
of glycosides. In addition, gaudichaudiosides A–F were isolated as other labdane-type diterpene glycosides
from the stem of Baccharis gaudichaudiana DC. (Compositae), which is native to Paraguay. Among them,
gaudichaudioside A was found to be 55 times sweeter than sucrose.34,35

4.16.2.1.5 Steroidal saponins

Osladin, a steroidal saponin, was isolated as a sweet principle of the fern Polypodium vulgare L. (Polypodiaceae).
Later, Nishizawa and Yamada.36 reinvestigated the structure of osladin and revised the stereochemistry at C-22,
C-25, and C-26. Although osladin has been reported to be 3000 times sweeter than sucrose, this value was also
revised to 500 times.
Three steroidal saponins, polypodosides, were isolated from the rhizomes of Polypodium glycyrrhiza DC.
Eaton (Polypodiaceae).37,38 According to the corrected structure of osladin, the structure of polypodoside was
also revised.39 Polypodoside A was shown to be highly sweet (600 times sweeter than sucrose).

4.16.2.1.6 Pterocaryosides A and B

Secodammarane saponins, pterocaryosides A and B, were isolated from Pterocarya paliurus Batal. (Juglandaceae),
which is native to China.40 Pterocaryosides A and B differ only in the structure of the sugar moiety bound to
aglycon. Pterocaryosides A and B have been reported to be nontoxic in terms of mutagenicity and an acute
toxicity test. Pterocaryoside A is 50 times sweeter than sucrose (2% solution) while pterocaryoside B is 100
times sweeter. In addition, dammarane glycoside, cyclocaryoside A, which is 200 times sweeter than sucrose,
was isolated from the leaves of Pterocarpa (Cyclocarya) paliurus, which is native to China.41
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 637

4.16.2.1.7 Phyllodulcin
Phyllodulcin-8-O--D-glucoside, which is found in the leaves of Hydrangea macrophylla Seringe var. thunbergii
Makino (Saxifragaceae), does not show any sweet taste. However, its aglycon, D-(þ)-phyllodulcin, produced by
enzymatic hydrolysis, is intensely sweet.42 This compound is called ‘amacha (sweet tea)’ and is used for the
sweet flavor of ceremonial tea. Phyllodulcin is structurally dihydroisocoumarin and was found to be a
3R-stereoisomer in 1959. In subsequent studies, it was revealed that unprocessed leaves contained a mixture
of R and S isomers in a ratio of 5:1.43 Phyllodulcin is reported to be 600–800 times sweeter than sucrose. Purified
phyllodulcin has no mutagenicity and its acute oral toxicity in mouse is greater than 2 g per kg body weight.
One drawback for its use as a sweetener is its very low solubility in water.

4.16.2.1.8 Hernandulcin
Hernandulcin is a bisabolane sesquiterpene isolated from the herb Lippia dulcis Trev. (Verbenaceae), which is
native to Mexico, and has been reported to be 1500 times sweeter than sucrose.44,45 The natural product has a
6S, 19S configuration, and of the four possible stereoisomers, only this one has intense sweetness.46,47 Another
sweet substance, 4-hydroxyhernandulcin, was isolated from a sample native to Panama.46 The sweetness and
bitterness of hernandulcin have been reported to linger in the mouth for sometime. This compound is rather
thermolabile.

4.16.2.1.9 Perillartine
Perillartine, -syn-oxime of perillaldehyde, is reported to be 2000 times sweeter than sucrose.48,49
Perillaldehyde is a principal volatile oil of Perilla frutescens (L.) Britton (Labiatae) and is reported to be only
slightly sweet. Perillartine is used as a replacement for maple syrup and licorice for the sweetening of tobacco in
Japan. However, due to its low solubility in water as well as a menthol-licorice off-taste, there is some limitation
to its use.

4.16.2.1.10 Amino acids

4.16.2.1.10(i) Proteinogenic amino acids The taste of proteinogenic amino acids involving a D-isomer was
reviewed by Birch and Kemp,50 Haefeli and Glaser,51 and Wieser et al.52 Among L-amino acids, alanine, serine,
and glycine are sweet, while most of the D-amino acids are sweet. D-Tryptophan is the most intensely sweet
amino acid and is 35 times sweeter than sucrose. Studies on the structure and sweetness–activity relationship
have been reported by Shallenberger et al.17 and Kier.18
638 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.2.1.10(ii) Monatin Monatin is an amino acid-type sweetener isolated from the bark of the roots of a
spiny-leafed hardwood shrub, Schlerochiton ilicifolius, which is native to the northwestern Transvaal in South
Africa.53 From 160 kg of roots, 1.73 g of a crude mixture of monatin salts was obtained. Recrystallization of
the salts from water–acetic acid–ethanol gave free amino acid. After this amino acid was transformed
into the lactone derivative (methyl-(2S,4S)-2-(indol-3-ylmethyl)-4-(2,4-dinitroanilino)-5-oxo-2,3,4,5-
tetrahydrofuran-2-carboxylate) and examined by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), the relative
stereochemistry of the 2- and 4-positions was determined. Its absolute stereochemistry was further
determined to be (2S,4S) by applying the observed optical rotation value to the Clough–Lutz–
Jirgenson rule. Monatin is reported to be 800 times sweeter than sucrose at its threshold concentration
and 1200–1400 times sweeter in a sucrose solution of 5–10%. It has a slight licorice aftertaste. In the patent
literature, it was reported that all four stereoisomers of monatin have a sweet taste, and among them the
(2R,4R) isomer is the most intense, while (2S,4R) is the weakest.54 It has also been reported that monatin has
no toxicity in the Ames test and no mutagenicity.55

4.16.2.1.11 Sugars
Sugars are the simplest form of carbohydrates, and sugars such as monosaccharides, oligosaccharides,
acyclic polyhydroxy alcohols, and cyclic sugar alcohols are well-known sweeteners. Shallenberger56 has
written a good review on the structure–sweetness relationship of sugars.

4.16.2.2 Sweet Proteins

4.16.2.2.1 Thaumatin
Thaumatin is a 22 kDa sweet protein that was isolated from the arils of the katemfe fruit of
Thaumatococcus daniellii Benth, which is native to West Africa, by van der Wel and Loeve. It is a
basic protein with an isoelectric point of approximately 12 and is 1600 times sweeter than sucrose. It
also gives a cooling sensation and a slight licorice aftertaste. A water–sweet aftertaste was also
reported.57 Thaumatin is cultivated on a commercial scale and used as a sweetener, flavor enhancer,
and flavor modifier. An aqueous solution of commercially available thaumatin is stable under the
conditions of pH 2–10. There may be several related proteins in the plant, but there are two main
forms: thaumatins I and II. Thaumatins I and II are each composed of 207 amino acids with eight
intramolecular disulfide bonds shown in the figure. Thaumatins I and II differ in the amino acid
sequence at 46, 63, 67, 76, and 113, which suggests that the two proteins are 98% identical.58,59 Since
the results of amino acid sequencing of the proteins were inconsistent with those of cDNA,59 Lee et al.
reinvestigated and isolated two proteins named thaumatins A and B, and found that they differ in only
one amino acid at position 46, that is, Asn for A and Lys for B. The residue at 113 in thaumatin I is
Asn, whereas it is Asp in thaumatins II, A, and B. Furthermore, thaumatin I did not make a refolding
product, while thaumatins A and B expressed in yeast showed intense sweetness after refolding.
Therefore, it has been suggested that there might have been an error in the determination of the
residue at 113.60 The tertiary structure of thaumatin I was analyzed by X-ray at resolutions of 3.161 and
1.65 Å.62 It has been reported that thaumatin elicits a sweet taste in humans, and caused a significant
electrophysiological response in the chorda tympani and glossopharyngeal nerves in the Old World
monkey, but not the guinea pig or rat.63 However, it was revealed that in Slc:ICR mice, chorda tympani
and taste receptor cell response profiles and the behavioral results for monellin and thaumatin are
similar to the response profiles for sucrose.64 Thaumatin has been approved as a sweetener in Israel and
Japan. In the United Nations, it is listed in Table III of the Codex General Standard for Food Additives
(GSFA), which means that it is permitted for use in food in general.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 639

4.16.2.2.2 Monellin
Monellin is a sweet protein that was isolated from the fruit of Dioscoreophyllum cumminsii (Stapf) Diels, which is
known as the serendipity berry and is native to West Africa. It is a basic protein with an isoelectric point of
approximately 9.3 and is 3000 times sweeter than sucrose.65,66 Perception lasts for more than 1 h and leaves an
aftertaste. Heat denatures monellin proteins; they lose their sweetness when heated over 50  C at low pH.
Monellin has a molecular mass of 10.7 kDa. Monellin has two noncovalently associated polypeptide chains:
chain A contains 44 amino acid residues and chain B has 50 residues. In 1976, the primary structure of monellin
was proposed independently by three groups but their results all differed somewhat.67–69
Recently, the amino acid sequence was reinvestigated70 and it was revealed that chain A was consistent with
that of Frank and Zuber,68 while chain B coincided with the results of Bohak and Li (see figure).67 The
enzymatic hydrolysis product of monellin does not exhibit sweetness.71 Since chains A and B are not sweet
individually,67,72 it is considered that expression of the sweet taste requires a natural three-dimensional
structure. X-ray structural analysis of monellin was carried out at resolutions of 373 and 2.75 Å.74 A struc-
ture–sweetness relationship study of monellin analogues strongly suggested that the Asp residue at the
7-position of chain B (AspB7) plays an important role in eliciting a sweet taste.75–77 Meanwhile, a single-
chain monellin was expressed by combining the C-terminus of chain B and the N-terminus of chain A. This
compound was reported to be stable at higher temperature and over a wide range of pH,78 and its tertiary
structure was analyzed by X-ray at a resolution of 1.7 Å.74 The main issue regarding its use as a sweetener is that
monellin has no legal status in the European Union or the United States.
640 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.2.2.3 Mabinlin
Mabinlins are sweet-tasting proteins extracted from the seed of Mabinlang (Capparis masaikai Levl.), a Chinese
plant that grows in Yunnan province. They have long-lasting but weak sweetness of 0.1% threshold.79 There
are at least five homologues. Mabinlin-I, Mabinlin-III, and Mabinlin-IV have molecular masses of 12.3, 12.3,
and 11.9 kDa, respectively. Mabinlin-II is a 10.4 kDa protein and the most abundant homologue in nature.80 It is
also a basic protein with an isoelectric point of approximately 11.3 and is a heterodimer consisting of two
different chains, A and B, like monellin. Chain A is composed of 33 amino acid residues and chain B is
composed of 72 amino acid residues. Chain B contains two intramolecular disulfide bonds and is connected to
chain A through two intermolecular disulfide bridges shown in the figure.81 Mabinlin-II was estimated to be
about 400 times sweeter than sucrose on a weight basis, which makes it less sweet than thaumatin (3000 times),
although it elicits a similar sweetness profile. (Mabinlin-II is 375 times sweeter than sucrose on a molar basis
and 10 times sweeter on a weight basis, and therefore mabinlin is not as sweet as other sweet proteins.) It has
also been suggested that the difference in the heat stability of the different mabinlin homologues is due to the
presence of an arginine residue (heat-stable homologue) or glutamine (heat-unstable homologue) at position
47 in chain B.82 It has been reported that the precursor of mabinlin-II is a single-chain protein composed of
155 amino acid residues.83

4.16.2.2.4 Brazzein
Brazzein is a sweet protein that was isolated from the fruit of the West African climbing plant Oubli
(Pentadiplandra brazzeana Baillon). Along with pentadin, which was discovered in 1989, brazzein is the second
sweet protein that was discovered in this fruit. Like other natural sweet proteins such as monellin and
thaumatin, it is highly sweet. On a weight basis, brazzein is 500 times sweeter than sucrose when compared
to 10% sucrose solution and 2000 times sweeter when compared to 2% sucrose solution. Its sweet perception is
more similar to that of sucrose than that of thaumatin, and it presents a clean sweet taste with a lingering
aftertaste. Brazzein is stable over a broad pH range from 2.5 to 8 and is heat stable at 80  C for 4 h.84
The monomer protein, consisting of 54 amino acid residues with eight disulfide bonds shown in the
figure,84,85 is the smallest among the sweet proteins, with a molecular mass of 6.4 kDa. Chemical synthesis86
of brazzein was performed and recombinant proteins were successfully produced by Escherichia coli.87 Based on
X-ray analysis88 and NMR studies,89 residues 29–33 and 39–43, plus residue 36, as well as the C-terminus were
found to be involved in the sweet taste of the protein. The charge of Arg-43 in the protein also plays an
important role in its interaction with the sweet taste receptor.90
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 641

4.16.2.2.5 Pentadin
Pentadin is a sweet-tasting protein that was isolated from the fruit of Oubli (P. brazzeana Baillon), a climbing
shrub that is native to West African countries. Pentadin’s molecular mass is estimated to be 12 kDa. It is
reported to be 500 times sweeter than sucrose on a weight basis. The primary structure has not yet been
determined, although amino acid analyses were carried out.91

4.16.2.3 Sweetness-Inducing Proteins and Substances

4.16.2.3.1 Miraculin
Miraculin is a basic glycoprotein that was extracted from the miracle fruit plant, a shrub that is native to West
Africa (Synsepalum dulcificum or Richadella dulcifica). Miraculin itself is not sweet, but the human tongue, once
exposed to miraculin, perceives ordinarily sour foods, such as citrus, as sweet for up to 2 h afterward. This small
red berry has been used in West Africa to improve the taste of acidic foods. Since the miracle fruit itself has no
distinct taste, this taste-modifying function of the fruit had been regarded as a miracle. The active substance,
isolated by Kurihara, was named miraculin after the miracle fruit.92 Miraculin was first sequenced in 1989 and
was found to be a glycoprotein consisting of 191 amino acids and some carbohydrate chains.93 The molecular
mass of the glycoprotein is 24.6 kDa, including 3.4 kDa (13.9% of the weight) of sugar consisting (on a molar
basis) of glucosamine (31%), mannose (30%), fucose (22%), xylose (10%), and galactose (7%). The sugar is
linked with Asp-42 and Asp-186.
Miraculin occurs as a tetramer (98.4 kDa), a combination of four monomers grouped into dimers. Within
each dimer, two miraculin glycoproteins are linked by an intramolecular disulfide bridge.92–94 The formation of
three intrachain disulfide bridges at Cys-47–Cys-92, Cys-148–Cys-159, and Cys-152–Cys-155, and one
interchain disulfide bridge at Cys-138 was determined by amino acid sequencing and a composition analysis
of cystine-containing peptides isolated by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). It was concluded
that native miraculin in pure form is a tetramer of a 25 kDa peptide and native miraculin in a crude state or
denatured, nonreduced miraculin in pure form is a dimer of the peptide. Both tetramer miraculin and native
dimer miraculin in a crude state have taste-modifying activity.
A cDNA clone encoding miraculin was isolated and sequenced. The encoded precursor of miraculin was
composed of 220 amino acid residues, including a possible signal sequence of 29 amino acids.95,96 Attempts have
been made to express these proteins in E. coli, yeast, and tobacco. While it was confirmed that these proteins
were expressed in these organisms, miraculin expressed in E. coli and yeast showed no activity.97 The
perception of 0.1 mol l1 of citrate after taking 1 mmol l1 of miraculin corresponds to the sweetness of 0.4 mol
l1 of sucrose, which means that it is 400 000 times sweeter than sucrose on a molar basis. Interestingly, a
mixture of miraculin with citrate did not elicit sweetness.97 Miraculin was denied approval for this purpose by
the FDA. Miraculin also has no legal status in the European Union.

4.16.2.3.2 Curculin and neoculin

Curculin is a sweet protein that was isolated in 1990 from the fruit of Curculigo latifolia (Hypoxidaceae), which
grows in Malaysia. Like miraculin, curculin exhibits taste-modifying activity. However, unlike miraculin, it also
elicits a sweet taste by itself. After the consumption of curculin, water and sour solutions taste sweet. Curculin
was reported to be a homodimer of two proteins connected through two disulfide bridges.98 The molecular
mass of curculin monomer is reported to be 12 kDa. It contains a sequence of 114 amino acids with an isoelectric
point of 7.1. Curculin was crystallized and an X-ray structural analysis was performed.99 Although both curculin
and miraculin elicit a sweet taste, the two proteins are not homologous. However, based on an enzyme
immunoassay and immunoblot analysis of curculin, curculin and miraculin showed cross-reactivity to both
antibodies, and therefore it is considered that a common structure elicits sweet activity for both proteins.100
Curculin is rather stable in acidic solution, and heating at 55  C for 1 h does not reduce its potency.
A 10 mmol l1 curculin solution is as sweet as a 0.35 mol l1 solution of sucrose. Thus, curculin is 35 000 times
sweeter than sucrose. After curculin is held in the mouth for a short time, the sweet taste diminishes. However,
the sweet taste is elicited again upon exposure to clear water. This can be explained as follows.101 The sweet
taste is suppressed by the reaction of curculin with divalent cations (Ca2þ and Mg2þ) in saliva. Upon exposure to
water, the sweet taste is induced again since water washes the cations away. It is believed that the taste-modifying
642 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

protein strongly binds to the membrane surfaces of the taste cells in the presence of an acid such as citric acid.102
In 1997, curculin was expressed in E. coli and yeast, but recombinant curculin did not exhibit ‘sweet-tasting’ or
‘taste-modifying’ activity.103 Recently, neoculin, which is composed of an acidic glycoprotein subunit with 113
amino acid residues and a basic curculin subunit, was isolated from the same fruit as a heterodimer.104 Another
group successfully cloned curculin-2, which is highly homologous to curculin, and demonstrated that the
heterodimer of curculin and curculin-2 elicits intense sweetness.105 These results suggest that curculin itself
may also be a heterodimer.

4.16.2.3.3 Strogin
Five new oleanane-type triterpene glycosides, strogins I–V, were isolated by Kurihara and coworkers106
from the leaves of Staurogyne merguensis Kuntze, which is native to Malaysia. Strogin itself has a sweet
taste. In addition, after strogins I, II, and IV are held in the mouth, the sweet taste can be recovered with
exposure to water, as with curculin. In contrast, strogins III and V had no such activity. A 1.0 mmol l1
strogin solution is as sweet as a 0.15 mol l1 solution of sucrose. Furthermore, sweetness corresponding to
300 mmol l1 sucrose is induced by holding 1.0 mmol l1 strogin followed by water. Strogin’s sweetness
induction was temperature-dependent107 while curculin’s sweetness induction was independent of tem-
perature. While Ca2þ and Mg2þ suppressed curculin’s induction, strogin’s induction was not suppressed
by divalent cation. Thus, the mechanism of sweetness induction by strogin is different from that of
curculin.

4.16.2.4 Antisweet Substances

4.16.2.4.1 Gymnemic acid
Gymnemic acids were isolated from the leaves of Gymnema sylvestre (Asclepiadaceae), which is native to India
and southern China.108,109 Gymnemic acids are glycosides of triterpene that suppress sweetness in humans.
After the leaves are chewed, solutions that have been sweetened with sucrose taste like water. It is thought that
gymnemic acid inhibits the binding of a sweet substance to the sweet receptor. Several gymnemic acid
homologues with different acyl groups were purified from the leaves of G. sylvestre and their structures were
determined. Interestingly, deletion of the acyl group diminishes the antisweet activity.110 It suppresses the
sweetness of most of sweeteners, including intense artificial sweeteners such as aspartame and natural sweet-
eners such as thaumatin, a sweet protein. The herb is traditionally used for the treatment of diabetes in India
and Gymnema extracts are sold in Japan for the control of obesity.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 643

4.16.2.4.2 Ziziphin
The sweetness-inhibiting substance ziziphin was isolated from the leaves of the plant Zizyphus jujuba
(Rhamnaceae), which is native to China, by Kurihara et al.111,112 Like gymnemic acids, ziziphin is a glycoside
of triterpene that suppresses sweetness in humans. Removal of the acyl group under mild hydrolytic conditions
led to complete abolishment of its antisweet activity.

4.16.2.4.3 Hodulcin
Hodulcin was extracted from the leaves of Hovenia dulcis (Rhamnaceae), which is native to China and Japan, and
has been shown to selectively reduce sweetness perception in humans.113 Hodulcin appears to be a triterpene
glycoside, as are the gymnemic acids and ziziphins. NMR spectra indicated that the aglycon structure of
hodulcin is different from that of gymnemic acid and similar to but not the same as that of ziziphin. Later,
Arihara and coworkers114 isolated five new dammarane glycosides named hodulosides I–V (e.g., hoduloside I)
from the fresh leaves of H. dulcis. Their structures were determined on the basis of chemical and spectral
evidence. All the compounds showed antisweet activity.
644 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.3 Bitter-Tasting Natural Products

There are many bitter-tasting compounds in nature.115,116 Many of them are alkaloids, terpenoids and their
glycosides (saponins) as well as amino acids and peptides. The threshold values of bitter compounds, as
represented by alkaloids such as quinine, are extremely low (as low as ppm concentration) compared with
compounds that elicit other basic tastes. It is considered that many bitter compounds possess some toxicity and
therefore animals have become highly sensitive at tasting such bitter compounds. In many cases, an appropriate
amount of a bitter-tasting compound can have a useful pharmacological effect. For example, it has long been
known that the bitter-tasting component extracted from Gentiana lutea (Gentianaceae) can directly stimulate
acid production by the gastric mucosa.117
The bitter taste in foods is not always disliked by people. There are unexpectedly many cases in which a
bitter taste has a positive effect of adding richness to food such as beer, coffee, and green tea. In these cases, if the
bitter taste is eliminated or replaced by other compounds, the intrinsic value of the food might be completely
lost. Therefore, the bitter taste is essential for these foods. On the contrary, however, methods to eliminate the
unpleasant bitterness of cheese and grapefruit have also been investigated. These efforts also contribute to the
progress in research on the bitter taste.118
Intensive studies on the bitter taste receptor are also in progress, as with the sweet taste receptor.119 In fact, it
has been reported that T2R receptors are necessary and sufficient for the detection and perception of bitter
compounds.

4.16.3.1 Bitter-Tasting Alkaloids

4.16.3.1.1 Strychnine
Strychnine is a highly toxic (LD50 i.v. in rats: 0.96 mg kg1) alkaloid that was isolated from the seeds of Strychnos
nux-vomica, which is native to India and East Asia, and named after the tree. The structure of strychnine was
determined by Woodward in 1948.120 The total synthesis was also achieved by many chemists including
Woodward. While it is barely soluble in water, its hydrochloride and nitric acid salts are water soluble.
Strychnine elicits an intense bitter taste with a threshold of 0.000 001 6.115 In India, China, and Japan, the
seeds have long been used as a bitter-tasting gastric medicine, Vomica. Strychnine has also been used as a
pesticide, particularly for killing small vertebrates such as rodents. Strychnine causes muscular convulsions and
eventually death through asphyxia or sheer exhaustion.121 At present, it is not used for clinical treatment, but is
used in a pharmacological test as an analeptic. In nature, strychnine is produced by biosynthesis from
tryptophan.

4.16.3.1.2 Brucine
Brucine was also extracted as a principle, along with strychnine,122 from the seeds of S. nux-vomica. Brucine is
thought to be the most bitter-tasting alkaloid with a threshold of 0.000 000 7.115 It is used for the chiral
resolution of optically active carboxylic acids by diastereomeric salt formation. Brucine is isostructural to
strychnine with methoxy groups, rather than hydrogen, at the 9- and 10-positions of the aromatic ring. Brucine
is reported to be less toxic than strychnine. Nevertheless, a human consuming more than 2 mg of pure brucine
will almost certainly suffer symptoms similar to strychnine poisoning.123
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 645

4.16.3.1.3 Quinine
Quinine was first extracted from the bark of the South American cinchona tree and isolated. In 1944, the total
synthesis of quinine was achieved by Woodward and Doering.124 Quinine exhibits specific toxicity against
Plasmodium and has antipyretic (fever-reducing) activity. Therefore, it has long been used as an antimalarial
drug. Although many other antimalarial drugs such as chloroquine have been developed based on the structure
of quinine, it is still widely used since it is the sole compound to which Plasmodium has no resistance. Before
1820, the bark was first dried, ground to a fine powder, and then mixed into a liquid (commonly wine), which
was then drunk. Quinine is a flavor component of tonic water, bitter lemon, vermouth, and cocktails. In the
United States, the FDA limits quinine in tonic water to 83 ppm. Quinine is used as a standard substance for a
bitter taste (threshold of sulfate salt: 0.000 008) in gustatory physiology.125 It is also useful as an optical
resolution agent and as an asymmetric catalyst.126,127 Quinidine, a diastereomer of quinine, is also extracted
from the bark and elicits a bitter taste. It is reported to have an antiarrhythmic effect.128

4.16.3.1.4 Caffeine
Caffeine is a bitter-tasting purine alkaloid.129 Its threshold (0.000 7) indicates that the bitter intensity of caffeine
is weaker than quinine and brucine. Caffeine was extracted from coffee and named after it. Caffeine is also
contained in cola, black tea, green tea, cocoa, chocolate, and so on. It is well known that caffeine has
antihypnotic, antipyretic, and diuretic effects.130 Caffeine is a central nervous system and metabolic stimulant
and is also used medically to reduce physical fatigue and restore mental alertness when unusual weakness or
drowsiness occurs. Sometimes, caffeine is incompatible with other drugs. For example, it has been reported that
cimetidine decreased the systemic clearance of caffeine. Overdosing of caffeine may lead to a condition known
as caffeinism.131 Caffeinism usually combines caffeine dependency with a wide range of unpleasant physical
and mental conditions including nervousness, irritability, anxiety, tremulousness, muscle twitching (hyperre-
flexia), insomnia, headaches, respiratory alkalosis, and heart palpitations. Today, the global annual consumption
of caffeine has been estimated at 120 000 tons. The US FDA lists caffeine as a Multiple Purpose GRAS Food
Substance.

4.16.3.1.5 Theobromine and theophyllin

Theobromine was isolated from the seeds of the cacao tree and then shortly afterward was synthesized from
xanthine by Fischer.132 Theobromine is the primary bitter-tasting alkaloid found in cocoa and chocolate;
chocolate contains 0.5–2.7% theobromine. Theobromine is water insoluble and is an isomer of theophylline as
well as paraxanthine. Theobromine is categorized as 3,7-dimethylxanthine while theophylline is 1,3-dimethyl-
7H-purine-2,6-dione and paraxanthine is 1,7-dimethylxanthine. Theophylline is known to be a bitter-tasting
principle of green tea. Theobromine is used as a vasodilator (a blood vessel widener), as an aid in urination, and
646 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

as a heart stimulant. Although the theobromine content in chocolate is small enough to be safely consumed by
humans, it is reported that animals such as dogs metabolize theobromine more slowly and may succumb to
theobromine poisoning.133

4.16.3.1.6 Nicotine
Nicotine is a bitter-tasting alkaloid found in the nightshade family of plants (Solanaceae), predominantly in
tobacco. At low doses (an average cigarette yields about 1 mg of absorbed nicotine), nicotine acts as a stimulant
in mammals and is one of the main factors responsible for the dependence-forming properties of tobacco
smoking.134 The biosynthesis is carried out from tryptophan via nicotinic acid. Nicotinic acid reacts with a
piperidine compound derived from lysine to give anabasine as a homologue of nicotine. Nicotine exists in
tobacco leaves as salts with malic acid or citric acid. There are more than 30 analogues of nicotine. Nicotine is
essential for the synthesis of a water-soluble vitamin, nicotinic acid (niacin). Nicotine has an addictive nature
and has been found to activate reward pathways – the circuitry within the brain that regulates feelings of
pleasure and euphoria. The LD50 of nicotine is 3 mg kg1 for mice, and 40–60 mg (0.5–1.0 mg kg1) for adult
humans can be a lethal dosage.135 This means it is deadly poisonous. It is more toxic than many other alkaloids
such as cocaine, which has an LD50 of 95.1 mg kg1 when administered to mice.

4.16.3.1.7 Cocaine
Cocaine is a bitter-tasting alkaloid extracted from the leaves of the coca plant (Erythroxylon coca Lam.).136 It has a
tropane skeleton and is synthesized from ornithine in nature. In medicine, cocaine is used in a limited manner as
a topical anesthetic for nasal and lacrimal duct surgery. Cocaine is a potent central nervous system stimulant. Its
effects can last from 20 min to several hours, depending upon the dosage. The initial signs of stimulation are
hyperactivity, restlessness, increased blood pressure, increased heart rate, and euphoria. The euphoria is
sometimes followed by feelings of discomfort and depression and a craving to experience the drug again.
Side effects include twitching, paranoia, and impotence. Cocaine addiction is reported to be physical and
psychological dependence may develop with regular use. It may result in physiological damage, lethargy,
depression, or a potentially fatal overdose.137 Therefore, its possession, cultivation, and distribution are
illegal for nonmedicinal and non-government-sanctioned purposes in virtually all parts of the world. On the
contrary, coca herbal infusion (referred to as Coca tea) is used in coca-leaf-producing countries much as any
herbal medicinal infusion would be elsewhere in the world. The free and legal commercialization of dried coca
leaves in the form of tea bags to be used as ‘coca tea’, as a drink with medicinal powers,138 has been
actively promoted in Peru and Bolivia. It is also used to help visitors overcome the malaise of high-altitude
sickness.

4.16.3.1.8 Solanine
Solanine is a bitter-tasting steroidal alkaloid saponin that has been isolated from all nightshades, including
tomatoes, capsicum, tobacco, and eggplant.139 However, the most widely ingested solanine is from the
consumption of potatoes. Potato leaves, stems, and shoots are naturally high in this saponin. When potato
tubers are exposed to light, they turn green and increase saponin production. This is a natural defense
mechanism to prevent the uncovered tuber from being eaten. It is very toxic even in small quantities. The
poisoning is primarily manifested by gastrointestinal and neurological disorders.140 Symptoms include nausea,
diarrhea, vomiting, stomach cramps, burning of the throat, heart arrhythmia, headache, and dizziness.
Hallucinations, loss of sensation, paralysis, fever, jaundice, dilated pupils, and hypothermia have been
reported in more severe cases. It is suggested that doses of 200–400 mg for adult humans can cause toxic
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 647

symptoms (20–40 mg for children). Most commercial potatoes have a solanine content of less than 0.2 mg g1.141
However, potatoes that have been exposed to light and have started to turn green can show higher
concentrations.

4.16.3.1.9 Matrine and berberine

An herbal medicine, kushen, is obtained from the roots of Sophora japonica (Sophora flavescens) and is used as an
anti-inflammatory and bitter-tasting stomachic. The principal component of kushen is the piperidine alkaloid
matrine.142 Berberine, which is isolated from the bark of Phellodendron amurense (Rutaceae) as well as Coptis
japonica Makino (Ranunculaceae), is also an intensely bitter-tasting alkaloid that is named after Berberis.143
There are a variety of known derivatives such as berberine hydrochloride, hydrosulfate, and tannic acid salt
according to the kind of counteranion, and all are used as stegnotic agents. There is some controversy regarding
the antibiotic activity of berberine. In Japan, berberine hydrochloride is available commercially. It is contra-
indicated for use in hemorrhagic colitis and bacteriogeneous diarrhea, since it might make the symptoms worse
and prolong the duration of treatment.

4.16.3.2 Bitter-Tasting Terpenoids

There are many bitter-tasting terpenoids in the plant kingdom. Among them, limonoids in citrus fruits, the
cucurbitacin in members of the family Cucurbitaceae, and humulon analogues in hop have been intensively
investigated. The structure–activity relationships of bitter-tasting terpenes have been studied for many years,
and Kubota144 and Beets145 have proposed hypotheses.

4.16.3.2.1 Limonoids
Several limonoids are known to be bitter principles of citrus (Rutaceae). A typical example is limonin. Although
fresh juice does not elicit a bitter taste, sometimes it becomes bitter after heating or storage. This is explained by
the formation of bitter-tasting limonin by deglycosylation and further cyclization from limonin glucoside,
which is present in citrus fruit tissue and seeds and does not exhibit bitterness.146 Recently, it was reported that
limonin had antitumor activity.147 Besides limonin, nomilin and obakunone, which are considered to be
648 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

biosynthetic intermediates of limonin, have also been isolated as bitter-tasting components.148 These three
limonoids are formed from squalene via cyclization and oxidation.

4.16.3.2.2 Cucurbitacin and momordicine

Cucurbitacin is a bitter-tasting principle that can be isolated from members of the family Cucurbitaceae, such as
cucumber (Cucumis sativus) and melon (Cucumis melo L.). In particular, cucurbitacin149 and momordicine,150
which have an intensely bitter taste, are contained abundantly in Momordica charantia (bitter melon in English,
go-yaa in Okinawa, Japan), which people enjoy due to its bitterness. There are more than 18 kinds of
cucurbitacin, and among them cucurbitacin B is a typical component. It has been reported that cucurbitacin
exhibits anticancer activity.151 In addition, it is used for the treatment of hepatic disease in traditional Chinese
medicine. It is also found in some herbal teas.

4.16.3.2.3 Lactucin and cynaropicrin

Lactucin is a bitter principle of the leaf vegetable chicory (Cichorium endivia), which is cooked or used for salads
in western Europe.152 It is also contained in the form of p-hydroxyphenyl acetate as lactucopicrin, which is
known to have a sedative effect on the central nervous system.153 On the contrary, a bitter-tasting sesquiterpene
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 649

lactone, cynaropicrin, can be isolated from artichoke (Cynara scolymus). Cynaropicrin has been reported to
exhibit immunomodulatory effects.154

4.16.3.2.4 Humulone
Humulone is a well-known bitter principle of beer. At least 32 derivatives of humulone such as luplone,
cohumulone, and adhumulone have been isolated, many of which are not contained in hop (Humulus lupulus) but
rather are formed during fermentation and preservation.155 For example, humulone is transformed into
isohumulone to elicit a bitter taste in beer. Hop (Humulus) is a small genus of flowering plants, native to the
temperate Northern Hemisphere. The female flowers, commonly called hops, are used as flavoring and
stabilizers during beer brewing. Hop is part of the family Cannabaceae, which also includes the genus
Cannabis (also known as hemp). Beer has been used as folk medicine in Europe for a long time due to its
diuretic and stomachic effect. Recently, new medicinal uses and properties of humulone derivatives are being
explored.

4.16.3.2.5 Quassin
Quassin is a bitter-tasting substance that can be extracted from the quassia tree (bitter tree, Picrasma quassioides
Benn).156 It is said to be the most bitter substance found in nature. Quassin is used in traditional Chinese
medicine. Besides quassin, modified triterpenes, the so-called quassinoid, are the principal component of the
bitter taste.
650 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.3.2.6 Absinthin
Absinthin is one of the most bitter substances known and is extracted from various plants of the genus Artemisia,
but most commonly absinth wormwood.157 The simple maceration of wormwood in alcohol without distillation
produces an extremely bitter drink because of the presence of water-soluble absinthin. Wormwood extract can
cause renal failure and death due to excessive amounts of thujone, which in large quantities acts as a convulsive
neurotoxin. Absinthe was once portrayed as a dangerously addictive, psychoactive drug; thujone was blamed for
most of its deleterious effects. Therefore, it was prohibited in several European countries and the United States.
However, it has since been verified that no evidence shows it to be anymore dangerous or psychoactive than
ordinary alcohol. An absinthe revival began in the 1990s, as countries in the European Union began to
reauthorize its manufacture and sale.

4.16.3.2.7 Ursodiol
Ursodeoxycholic acid (ursodiol), which is found in large quantities in bear bile, and which elicits an intense
bitter taste, has long been used in traditional Chinese medicine not only as a stomachic but also as a universal
drug for the alimentary system.158 Currently, the drug is generally derived by chemical synthesis rather than
from animals.

4.16.3.3 Bitter-Tasting Saponins

4.16.3.3.1 Secoiridoid saponins
Senburi is a biennial herb, Swertia japonica (Ophelia japonica), Gentianaceae, that is native to Japan.159 Senburi is
considered as one of the most popular medicinal herbs in Japan and is the most bitter Japanese herb. Senburi,
also called ‘touyaku’ in traditional medicine, literally means ‘still bitter after one thousand times infusion’. It is
used for the treatment of gastrointestinal disease, diarrhea, and bellyache, and also as a digestive stimulant. The
principal components of Senburi are bitter-tasting saponins such as swertiamarin, sweroside, amarogentin,
amaroswerin, and gentiopicroside. Among them, amaroswerin is one of the most bitter-tasting natural
products.160
Gentiopicroside is also contained in the herbal medicine Gentiana (Ryutan), which is the extract of the root
of Gentiana lutea and has gastroprotective effects.117 It has a secoiridoid structure, which is a common constituent
in members of the family Gentianaceae.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 651

4.16.3.3.2 Flavonoid glycoside

Naringin is a flavonoid glycoside that is abundantly contained in the skin of grapefruit and orange and is the
origin of their bitterness.161,162 Its aglycon is naringenin, which is synthesized by a shikimic acid pathway and
occurs naturally in citrus fruits. To remove the bitterness of naringin in the production of canned citrus juice, an
enzymatic hydrolysis process using naringinase is sometimes employed.163 It has been reported that naringin
exerts a variety of pharmacological effects such as antioxidant activity, anticarcinogenic activity, and inhibition
of selected cytochrome P450 enzymes, which may result in several drug interactions in vitro. However, this
notion is still controversial.164

4.16.3.4 Bitter-Tasting Amino Acids and Peptides

4.16.3.4.1 Amino acids
Ever since Fischer, many chemists have focused their attention on the taste of amino acids. Generally, natural
L-amino acids exert either no taste or a bitter taste while unnatural D-amino acids elicit a sweet taste almost
without exception. Proteinogenic L-amino acids that exhibit a bitter taste include Trp (0.133%), Phe (0.069%),
Tyr (0.017%), Leu (0.011%), Arg, Val, Ile, and Pro, and the remaining amino acids exert either no taste or a
sour taste. The values in parentheses show the caffeine concentration that provides the same bitterness as a
0.3% amino acid solution.165 However, different authors have reported different values for the strength of their
652 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

bitterness. A basic amino acid, arginine, exhibits bitterness along with a sweet taste. Glycine and alanine elicit a
sweet taste. The bitter taste of an amino acid will be enhanced with an increase in the bulkiness of any
substituent.

4.16.3.4.2 Peptides
Studies of bitter-tasting peptides arose from interest in the bitter constituent of cheese. Murray reported that
the bitter taste accumulated after casein was hydrolyzed by various proteases and the principal component of its
bitterness was peptides.166 Afterward, several groups successfully isolated the bitter peptides from the hydro-
lyzate of casein. For example, formation of the bitter peptide QNKIHPFAQTQSLVYPFPGPIP was identified
during the maturation of cheddar cheese.167 Furthermore, hydrolysis of the constituent with peptidase makes
the bitter taste worse. On the contrary, Fujimaki and coworkers168 successfully eliminated the bitter taste of
soybean peptides using a plastein reaction. These peptides characteristically contain mainly hydrophobic
amino acids as constituents. Interestingly, a diketopiperazine, cyclo (Trp-Leu),169 exhibits a bitter taste
regardless of the optical isomer and cyclo (Val-Phe) and cyclo (Pro-Phe) have been reported to be bitter
substances formed from cacao beans during roasting.170

4.16.3.5 Masking the Bitter Taste

As described above, many natural products elicit a bitter taste. Thus, it is an important issue in the formulation
of pharmaceuticals to determine how to mask this bitterness. Although this issue has been somewhat overcome
by coating technology in the manufacture of tablets, pills, and granules, the method used in liquid medicines is
still unsatisfactory, though some approaches that involve the addition of high concentrations of sugars and acids
have been developed. Kurihara and coworkers171 reported that the bitter taste in response to quinine could be
selectively suppressed with phosphatidyl acid in phospholipids of soybean.

4.16.4 Pungent Natural Products

Pungency is generally associated with fiery stimuli and is sometimes an intolerable sensation for humans.
However, it is effective at increasing appetite in many cases and is used in the cuisine of several cultures.
Pungency is not one of the five basic tastes, but rather is characterized by trigeminal sensation in the mouth
through the sensory modalities of touch, thermal sensation, and pain. There are several subtypes of pungency
that basically depend on the chemical properties of the pungent constituents. In addition to pungency (hot
sensation), a tingling effect and a cooling sensation on the tongue are important for cuisine. As a measure of the
‘hotness’, or more correctly, piquancy, of a chili pepper, the Scoville scale has been proposed.172,173 Fruits of the
Capsicum genus contain capsaicin, which stimulates chemoreceptor nerve endings in the skin, especially the
mucus membranes. The number of Scoville heat units (SHU) indicates the amount of capsaicin present;
however, it cannot be used as a measure of piquancy in foods without capsaicin.

4.16.4.1 Capsaicin
Normally, spices used for cooking provide a pungent sensation. A typical pungent spice is red pepper (hot chili
pepper), which contains amide derivatives, including capsaicin, as pungent constituents.174 It elicits intense
pungency and is an interesting compound from the viewpoint of its pharmacological action. Thus, it has been
reported that capsaicin exhibits hypermetabolism as well as sweating by promoting the secretion of adrena-
line.175 In addition, it also has strong antibacterial activity along with an antisepsis function.176 Capsinoids are
amides of vanillylamine with a variety of aliphatic acids. Capsaicin is the main capsinoid in chili peppers,
followed by dihydrocapsaicin. These two compounds have almost the same potency and other compounds such
as nordihydrocapsaicin, homodihydrocapsaicin, and homocapsaicin have been isolated as minor capsinoids.
Dilute solutions of pure capsinoids produce different types of pungency; however, these differences were not
noted using more concentrated solutions. Nakatani and Masuda.177 isolated capsaicinol with only one hydroxy
group in capsaicin. Intriguingly, they reported that capsaicinol did not exhibit pungency. Very recently, Yazawa
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 653

et al.178 found that a nonpungent red pepper, CH-19 Sweet, contained only a trace amount of capsaicin. Instead,
capsiate and dihydrocapsiate, which have an ester bond with vanillyl alcohol, were the major constituents of
CH-19 Sweet.179 Interestingly, the pungency disappeared when the amide was changed to an ester and this
finding has attracted considerable attention to solve the mechanism of pungency perception, and intensive
studies on the vanilloid receptor subtype 1 (VR1) are in progress.180 Recently, it has also been shown that the
glucosylation of capsaicin diminished its pungency.181 Therefore, studies on glucosylation are ongoing. Studies
on the prevention of obesity by capsinoid and capsaicin glucoside are also in progress.182

4.16.4.2 Piperine
Piperine is the alkaloid responsible for the pungency of black pepper, Piper nigrum (Piperaceae), and Piper
longum L., commonly known as long pepper.183 Three geometrical isomers of piperine (chavicine, isochavicine,
and isopiperine) and piperanine (dihydro- form of piperine) are other constituents of these plants. Previously,
chavicine was believed to cause the particular taste of pepper. However, it was reported later that only piperine
has a strong pungent taste.184 Although an increment in the three isomers in ground pepper after exposure to
sunlight was observed by monitoring the MHþ ion on liquid chromatography/atmospheric pressure chemical
ionization mass spectrometer (LC/APCIMS), the degree of increase varied very little. Therefore, it is
questionable whether the disappearance of the pungency in older ground pepper is derived from the formation
of tasteless isomers by photochemical changes in piperine.185 Piperine is a solid substance that is essentially
insoluble in water. It is initially tasteless, but leaves a burning aftertaste. Piperine belongs to the vanilloid family
of compounds, which also includes capsaicin, the pungent substance in hot chili peppers. Piperine may have
bioavailability-enhancing activity for some nutritional substances and for some drugs.186 It has putative anti-
inflammatory activity and may be active at promoting digestive processes. Recently, with advances in analytical
methods, many piperine derivatives have been isolated and their structures have been determined by Tsuda
and coworkers.187
654 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.4.3 Sanshool and Gingerol

Sanshool is the pungent constituent in Sichuan pepper (Sansho in Japan).188 It is contained in the outer
pod of the tiny fruit of several species of the genus Zanthoxylum (most commonly Zanthoxylum piperitum,
Zanthoxylum simulans, Z. piperitum sansho, and Zanthoxylum schinifolium), which are widely grown and
consumed in Asia as a spice. Despite the name, it is not related to black pepper or chili peppers. It is
widely used in the cuisine of Japan. Several sanshools have been isolated, such as - and -sanshool, both
of which have an amide structure.189 Sanshools exhibit several biological activities such as an insecticidal
effect. A similar amide, spilanthol, is also found in the aerial part of Spilanthes acmella and S. acmella var.
oleracea.190
Gingerols are the pungent constituents of the rhizome of ginger, which is often used as a folk medicine and
food.191 Each gingerol has a phenol group as a substituent. The major constituent is 6-gingerol, which has
vanillyl ketone (gingerone or zingerone) as a framework, similar to vanillylamine of capsaicin, but without an
amide bond. Gingerone itself is also found in ginger root.192 (6)-Shogaol is also found as a pungent component
of ginger and is contained in semidried ginger but is rarely found in fresh ginger.193

4.16.4.4 Isothiocyanates
Wasabi (Wasabia japonica, Cochlearia wasabi, or Eutrema japonica) is a member of the Brassicaceae family and is also
known as Japanese horseradish. The rhizomes are used as a spice. Wasabi is enjoyed with sushi and sashimi,
usually accompanied by soy sauce. It has an extremely strong and stimulating flavor with burning sensations. Its
hotness is more akin to that of hot mustard than capsaicin in chili pepper, in that it produces vapors that irritate
the nasal passages more than the tongue. Allyl isothiocyanate (AITC) and several other isothiocyanates are
known to be the pungent constituents, and among them AITC is the main constituent (reported to be
2.0 g kg1).194 It is thought to be beneficial to eat raw fish with wasabi because it has a sterilizing effect.
AITC itself does not exist in wasabi, but it is formed immediately upon grating the root very finely. Thus, a
glucosinolate (known as sinigrin) present in wasabi reacts with the enzyme myrosinase upon grating, and this
leads to the production of AITC.195 This suggests that sinigrin and myrosinase are present in different parts of
the plant tissue. There are almost 30 known glucosinolates other than sinigrin, the biosynthetic pathway of
which has also been clarified.196 Based on its sterilizing effect, AITC is used in Japan to maintain freshness in
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 655

refrigerators. The pungent constituent of the horseradish root is also AITC, and methyl-3-butenyl isothiocya-
nate is the constituent in the Japanese radish.197

Mustard is prepared from the ground seeds of mustard plants (white or yellow mustard, Sinapis hirta; brown
or Indian mustard, Brassica juncea; or black mustard, Brassica nigra) by mixing them with water and adding
ingredients such as flour. Mustard sensation can cause the eyes to water, burn the palate, and inflame the nasal
passages. The pungent constituent of black mustard is sinigrin, as in wasabi, whereas that of white mustard is
sinalbin.198 In this case, p-hydroxybenzyl isothiocyanate is formed in the reaction with the enzyme myrosinase.
The pungency of these spices is represented as hot in red (chili) and black pepper, and as sharp for the
isothiocyanate family.

4.16.4.5 Disulfides
Garlic, Allium sativum L., is a species in the onion family, Alliaceae. Onion, shallot, and leek are close relatives.
Garlic has been used throughout history for both culinary and medicinal purposes. It has a pungent ‘hot’
sensation that mellows and sweetens considerably with cooking. A large number of sulfur compounds
contribute to the smell and taste of members of the onion family. Diallyl disulfide and diallyl sulfide are
656 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

believed to be important odor and flavor components. Allicin has been found to be the constituent that is most
responsible for the spiciness of raw garlic.199 However, alliin, rather than allicin, is present in the plant before
the cells are damaged. When a cell is broken, allicinase triggers the breakdown of alliin to give allicin, which has
a strong smell and is converted to diallyl disulfide by reduction.200
The pungent constituents of onion are somewhat different from those of garlic and this accounts for their
different odors and pungency. It has been reported that the major pungent constituents of onion are di-n-propyl
disulfide and methyl-n-propyl disulfide.201

4.16.5 Astringent Natural Products

4.16.5.1 Tannin
Tannins are astringent-tasting polyphenols found in plants that can bind and precipitate proteins. While the
term tannin was originally derived from the use of tannins in tanning animal skins to make leather, the term is
widely applied to any polyphenolic compound that forms strong complexes with proteins. The molecular
weight of tannins ranges from 500 to more than 3000. There are two types of tannins, hydrolyzable tannins and
condensed tannins.202 At the center of a hydrolyzable tannin, there is a carbohydrate such as D-glucose. The
hydroxyl groups of the carbohydrate are partially or totally esterified with phenolic acids such as gallic acid (in
gallotannins). Hydrolyzable tannins can be hydrolyzed by weak acids or weak bases to produce carbohydrate
and phenolic acids. Condensed tannins, known as proanthocyanidins, are widely distributed in plants and
strongly affect the quality of foods. They are polymers of 2–50 (or more) flavonoid units, which are not
susceptible to hydrolysis. Some very large condensed tannins are insoluble, while hydrolyzable tannins and
most condensed tannins are soluble in water. All phenolic compounds are highly unstable and are rapidly
transformed into various reaction products when the plant cells are damaged (for instance, during food
processing), thus adding to the complexity of dietary polyphenol compounds. This accounts for the complexity
of polyphenols in food.
Holding tannins in the mouth produces a strong sensation of astringency. It is believed that tannins bind
to proteins in the tongue and mucous membrane in the oral cavity and then induce their denaturation.203
This type of denaturation of proteins in the oral mucosa by tannins is called a shrinking effect. Strictly, it
is considered that astringency is closely related to the pain and tactile sensation generated by protein
denaturation. To feel the astringent effect of tannins, they must be dissolved in saliva. Accordingly, an
increase in the molecular weight by polymerization causes a lack of astringency due to the insolubility of
tannins. Some persimmons are highly astringent and therefore inedible due to the presence of soluble
tannins. However, when they are dried or ripened, the astringency disappears due to the insolubility of
tannins.204 These condensed tannins consist of a high-molecular-weight- (15 000) polymer formed from
catechins. They exhibit strong protein coagulation activity and therefore are used to clarify Japanese sake
as well as a preservative.

4.16.5.2 Catechins in Green Tea

Astringency in green tea (Japanese tea) is due to catechins, which are a kind of condensed tannins. The largest
source is various teas derived from the tea plant Camellia sinensis. Catechins have various biological activities,
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 657

such as antibacterial and antiviral activities. The health benefits of catechins have been studied extensively
in humans and in animal models. A reduction of carcinogenesis has been observed in vitro. The catechin content
in the tea plant, and therefore its astringency, increases with an increase in exposure to sunlight. Although green
tea contains several constituents, such as proteins, amino acids, vitamins, and caffeine, catechins are the major
constituents and have attracted attention due to their health benefits. The catechins in green tea include
epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), epigallocatechin (EGC), epicatechin gallate (ECG), epicatechin (EC), and
catechin.205 The most abundant (50%) of these is EGCG, which exhibits strong antioxidant activity.206
Recently, an air filtration system against virus was developed in Japan using tea catechins.

4.16.5.3 Theaflavins and Thearubigins in Black Tea

Tannin constituents such as thearubigins and theaflavins present in black tea are formed by the
enzymatic oxidation of EC and EGC followed by condensation, and this causes the characteristic
astringency.207 Theaflavins have benzotropolone structures and therefore give a red color in a black
tea fusion. It has been reported that the relative proportions of theaflavins in black tea are theaflavin
(18%), theaflavin-3-gallate (18%), theaflavin-39-gallate (20%), theaflavin-3,39-digallate (40%), and minor
derivatives such as theaflavic acids.208 These compounds are contained in oolong tea (a traditional
Chinese tea), but are not as abundant as in green tea. It has been reported that theaflavins have various
biological activities, such as antioxidant and anticancer activities. Thearubigins comprise 10–20 % of the
dry weight of black tea. However, due to their high solubility in water, they account for 30–60% of the
solids in black tea infusion. They are polymeric catechins that are formed during the enzymatic
oxidation (called fermentation in the tea trade) of tea leaves. In contrast to theaflavins, thearubigins
contain polysaccharides and proteins in the polymer. Gallic acid, cyanidins, and delphinidin are formed
by acid hydrolysis and catechins are produced by reductive hydrolysis. These results indicate that
thearubigins are a mixture of proanthocynidins containing flavonoid residues.209
658 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.5.4 Chlorogenic Acid in Coffee

Chlorogenic acid was isolated from green coffee beans.210 It has also been found in the seeds and leaves of many
dicotyledonous plants. It is thermally unstable and is readily decomposed to quinic acid and caffeic acid.
Chlorogenic acid accounts for 5–10% of coffee beans, which is a much larger amount than caffeine (1–2%).
Chlorogenic acid strongly influences the taste of coffee, such as astringent, sweet, and sour tastes, which change
with the concentration. It is also considered to be the origin of the unpleasant complex taste found after
prolonged brewing. It forms greenish-black compounds in the presence of Fe(III) ion. Due to its radical-
capturing ability, an antioxidant activity is expected.211

4.16.5.5 Anthocyanins in Red Wine

Anthocyanins (red pigments) and tannins are particularly important components of red wine. The changes in
color and taste observed during the aging of red wine have been ascribed to anthocyanin–tannin reactions. The
structures and properties of the tannins and pigmented tannins from these reactions are often misunderstood.
Current research on phenolic compounds in wine has revealed that (1) reactions of tannins yield both larger
polymers and smaller species, (2) anthocyanin reactions can generate colorless species as well as polymeric and
various small pigments, (3) some polymeric pigments undergo sulfite bleaching while some low-molecular-
weight pigments do not, (4) polymers are both soluble and astringent, so the loss of astringency during aging
may involve cleavage rather than polymerization, and (5) sensory properties of anthocyanins and tannins are
modulated by interactions with other wine components.212 However, while great advances have been made in
the field of red wine chemistry in recent years, a better understanding of the effect of wine polyphenol–salivary
protein interaction is needed to gain a comprehensive understanding of red wine astringency.
Anthocyanins are known to have antioxidant activity. Recently, they were also reported to have potential
effects against cancer, aging and neurological diseases, inflammation, diabetes, and bacterial infections.213
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 659

4.16.6 Umami and Kokumi

4.16.6.1 Umami-Tasting Natural Products
The postulate that umami is a basic taste quality was not generally accepted for a very long time. As a result of
mounting research evidence obtained not only by Japanese but also by Western researchers from North
America and Europe, the umami taste was finally recognized as the fifth basic gustatory quality at the first
International Symposium on Umami held in Hawaii in 1985. Today, the Japanese word ‘umami’ has been
established as the worldwide technical term for this savory taste quality.4 The analysis of sensory evaluation
data carried out by the multidimensional scaling method has provided numerical validation to substantiate the
notion that the umami taste of substances such as sodium glutamate lies outside the gustatory space formed by
the traditional four basic gustatory qualities. It has been established that (1) taste cells have receptors that bind
with umami substances and produce an electrophysiological response to umami substances, (2) there are taste
nerves that transmit umami stimuli, and (3) there are sites in the brain that respond to umami stimuli in the
same manner as they respond to the other four basic tastes. Recent research has progressed to the point of
cloning potential umami taste receptors. Currently, two types of receptors for the umami taste have been
proposed: mGluR4214 and T1R1/T1R3 heterodimer.215,216

4.16.6.1.1 Monosodium glutamate

In 1908, Ikeda isolated MSG as the principal component of the savory taste contained in soup stock of kelp and
named the sensation umami (delicious taste in Japanese).2 MSG is now widely used as a flavor enhancer and
seasoning, and current annual consumption worldwide is estimated to be 1.8 million tons. The present
production method relies on fermentation, mainly of glucose. Arai et al.217 reported that the intensity of the
umami taste of free glutamic acid and its disodium salt is weak, and the taste was further diminished by
esterification or amide formation. Homocysteinic acid with -sulfonate in place of -carboxylate of glutamic
acid also exhibits a strong umami taste. While it has been suggested that the sensitivity to MSG shows racial
differences, the threshold for Japanese is 0.015%, which is lower than that for sucrose (0.16%) and closer to that
for table salt (0.0086%).218 In general, the threshold value is lower for bitter- and sour-tasting compounds
because of their warning nature, and higher for sweet compounds like sugar, which are taken in large quantities.
Glutamic acid is the most abundant among the amino acids that constitute proteins in natural food. It is also
contained in a free form in natural food and mother’s milk and therefore can be considered a sign of proteins.
The sensitivity of glutamate is reinforced tremendously by its 1:1 combination with 59-mononucleotides such as
inosine 59-monophosphate (IMP) and guanosine 59-monophosphate (GMP).219,220 The synergistic action
between MSG and nucleotides has been explained in terms of an allosteric effect by Kurihara et al.221
660 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

Monosodium aspartate also elicits an umami taste, although its intensity is not as high. It has also been reported
to have a synergistic effect with IMP.222

4.16.6.1.2 Other proteinogenic amino acids

As described in Section 4.16.6.1.1, L--amino acids with an acidic side chain, glutamate and aspartate among
proteinogenic amino acids, elicit umami taste. Several other proteinogenic amino acids without an acidic side
chain, such as glycine, alanine, serine, threonine, asparagine, and glutamine, have umami taste as a side taste
though their dominant taste is sweet (see Section 4.16.2.1.10(i)).223 Their umami intensities are enhanced
synergistically by adding 59-mononucleotide similar to acidic amino acids.8,224 It has been reported that amino
acids such as glutamic acid, glycine, alanine, and arginine as well as guanylic acid, sodium cation, calcium
cation, and chlorine anion are essential constituents that form the taste of scallops.225

4.16.6.1.3 L -Theanine
L-Theanine is abundantly contained in green tea (C. sinensis and Thea sinensis) and is an umami-tasting
constituent along with glutamic acid.226 Theanine was named after T. sinensis. The theanine content in dry
leaves is 1–2% and is much higher in high-grade tea. It has been approved as a food additive in Japan, and
theanine produced by fermentation is now commercially available. Besides theanine, green tea also contains
many amino acids such as glutamic acid, aspartic acid, arginine, and serine.

4.16.6.1.4 Tricholomic acid and ibotenic acid

L-Tricholomic acid and L-ibotenic acid were isolated as umami taste principles from Japanese mushrooms,
Tricholoma muscarium and Amanita strobiliformis, respectively.227,228 Their umami intensities are much stronger
than that of L-glutamic acid. These nonproteinogenic amino acids were found during the screening of
insecticides. Although they have a very strong umami intensity, they are not used as seasonings.

4.16.6.1.5 Organic acids

In the sixteenth century, succinic acid was isolated as colorless crystals by the dry distillation of amber.
Takahashi found that a large amount of succinic acid was accumulated during the cultivation of a microorgan-
ism, and it had a delicious flavor.229 Later, Aoki230 reported that the umami-tasting constituent of shellfish such
as Corbicula japonica (Asian clams) was succinic acid. Succinic acid is widely distributed in plants and animals and
is used as a seasoning as well as a pharmaceutical ingredient. The threshold value is 0.02% and there is no
synergistic effect with MSG or IMP.

4.16.6.1.6 Nucleotides
Five years after the discovery of MSG as an umami taste, Kodama, who was a senior pupil of Ikeda, found that
inosine 59-monophosphate (IMP) was an umami-tasting constituent of dried bonito, which has also been used
for soup stock in Japan and East Asia.231 Kuninaka.232 further studied umami-tasting substances and found that
guanosine 59-monophosphate (GMP) obtained by the enzymatic hydrolysis of yeast RNA had an intense
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 661

umami taste. GMP was also found as a constituent of dried mushrooms (Cortinellus shiitake) cultivated in
Japan.233 Among natural nucleotides, umami-tasting compounds are 59-nucleotides with purine as a nucleic
acid base, such as IMP, GMP, and AMP. Mononucleotides with phosphate at the 29- or 39-position do not elicit
an umami taste. Nucleosides and purine bases also do not give a savory taste. The relationship between the
nucleotide structure and the intensity of umami was extensively studied.234,235 As described in Section
4.16.6.1.1, it was confirmed that IMP and GMP have synergistic action with MSG and therefore these
nucleotides are used with MSG as seasonings. Both IMP and GMP are industrially produced by enzymatic
transformation and fermentation technology. Interestingly, the umami taste increases in stored meat and fish
compared to very fresh food. It is thought that ATP present in the meat is transformed to IMP through AMP.

4.16.6.1.7 Peptides
It was reported that -glutamyl peptides, particularly peptides with hydrophilic amino acids, such as Glu–Asp,
Glu–Thr, Glu–Ser, and Glu–Glu, elicited an umami flavor.236 These peptides were isolated from the umami
constituents in the enzymatically hydrolyzed products of soybean proteins. The same author also reported that
tripeptides such as Glu–Gly–Ser also elicited the umami taste. The threshold value (0.15%) of these peptides is
greater than that of MSG. The flavor of meat extract can be reproduced using these peptides with MSG and
IMP. Recently, N-lactoyl glutamic acid, which is a condensation product of lactic acid with glutamic acid, was
shown to elicit a weak umami taste, similar to MSG.237

4.16.6.2 Kokumi
In Japan, ‘koku’ or ‘kokumi’ refers to the delicious taste of food. In particular, it is used when the flavor cannot
be represented by any of the five basic taste qualities. It has been reported that ‘kokumi’ can be classified more
concretely into thickness, continuity, mouthfullness of flavor, and harmony of taste.238 Previously, there have
been many reports on the constituents or fractions that enhance the flavor relevant to kokumi. In this section,
examples of the constituents that provide kokumi are described by illustrating their structures.

4.16.6.2.1 Kokumi-inducing natural products

Ueda et al.239 studied the kokumi-inducing effect of garlic and attempted to isolate the kokumi-inducing
compound. Through repeated ion exchange chromatographic purification of garlic extracts, they obtained
kokumi-inducing fractions as determined by sensory tests. As a result, sulfur-containing amino acids and
peptides were characterized as kokumi-inducing constituents of garlic. These compounds are alliin (S-allyl-L-
cysteine sulfoxide), S-methyl-L-cysteine sulfoxide, glutathione ( -glutamyl-cysteinylglycine), and -glutamyl-
S-allyl-L-cysteine. Ueda et al.240 further investigated the kokumi-inducing constituents of onion using the
same methodology and identified them as sulfur-containing amino acids, S-(1-propenyl)-L-cysteine sulfoxide
and S-methyl-L-cysteine sulfoxide, and peptides such as glutathione ( -glutamyl-cysteinylglycine) and
-glutamyl-S-(1-propenyl)-L-cysteine sulfoxide. By themselves, these compounds exhibit only slight flavor
in water solution. However, when they are added to an umami solution or various kind of foods, they
substantially enhance the thickness, continuity, and mouthfullness of the taste.
662 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

Shima et al. noted that the taste of beef bouillon could not be reproduced with combinations of the
compounds known to be contained and sought to identify the unknown compound that gives bouillon its
brothy taste.241,242 Broth prepared from beef was analyzed successively by dialysis, electrodialysis, gel filtration
chromatography, chelate affinity chromatography, and carbon partition chromatography, and finally three
fractions that gave the ‘brothy taste’ were obtained. One fraction contained the component responsible for this
taste in the highest purity. A structural analysis was carried out using positive fast atom bombardment tandem
mass spectrometry (FAB-MS) and various NMR methods and the main compound of the fraction was
elucidated to be the novel compound N-(4-methyl-5-oxo-1-imidazolin-2-yl)sarcosine. The structure was
also confirmed by X-ray structural analysis.243 This compound is estimated to be synthesized by the reaction
of creatine in meat extract with methylglyoxal generated from sugar. This compound does not exhibit a brothy
taste by itself in water solution. However, when added to soup stock, it substantially enhances kokumi, such as
the thickness, continuity, and mouthfullness of the taste as well as a thick sour taste. It was also reported that
glutathione, which is a kokumi-inducing constituent, enhanced the umami flavor response, particularly for
IMP, by a neurophysiological approach in which the response of tympani chord in mouse was observed.244 Very
recently, it was found that the addition of a nearly tasteless aqueous extract isolated from edible beans (Phaseolus
vulgaris L.) to a model chicken broth enhanced the savory taste sensation.245 The key molecules inducing the
kokumi were identified as -L-glutamyl-L-valine, -L-glutamyl-L-leucine, and -L-glutamyl-L-cysteinyl--
-alanine (homoglutathione). It is expected that further progress in understanding the neurophysiology and
molecular biology of the kokumi receptor may clarify this phenomenon at a molecular level.

4.16.7 Sour and Salty Tastes

4.16.7.1 Sour Taste Receptors
The sour taste is one of the five basic tastes and is elicited by acids. However, it is unclear how taste cells
transduce a sour taste because acids (specifically protons) have diverse effects on cell membranes. It has been
shown that acids in a single receptor cell may block ion channels, permeate ion channels, change intracellular
pH, and alter transporter function. Although the variety of effects and potential targets are well recognized,
until recently there has been little success in characterizing the molecular species involved in the transduction
machinery. Very recently, two groups independently revealed that the acid receptor consisted of the molecule
PKD2L1. Zuker et al.9 investigated the acid receptor using bioinformatics based on the genome data of mice and
found that PKD2L1 was expressed in the taste bud. This molecule belongs to the TRP family (transient
receptor potential). It was revealed that a transmembrane ion channel protein encoded by the gene PKD2L1 is a
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 663

taste receptor protein of the sour taste receptor system. At almost the same time, Matsunami et al.10 showed that
two TRP channel members, PKD1L3 and PKD2L1, are coexpressed in a subset of taste receptor cells in specific
taste areas, and the PKD1L3 and PKD2L1 heterodimer may function as a sour taste receptor.

4.16.7.2 Sour-Tasting Natural Products

Sour-tasting compounds are called as acidulants giving a sharp taste to foods. They also act as preservatives.
Many natural foods are acidic. For example, oranges, lemons, apples, and yogurt contain natural acids, such as
citric acid, that give them their characteristic taste. Acids have been used for centuries as important contributors
to flavor and the acid environment they produce prevents the growth of many microorganisms. Organic acids
employed as food additives are listed below.13

4.16.7.2.1 Citric acid

Citric acid is a sour principle of citrus fruits such as orange and lemon and exhibits a mild and refreshing sour
taste. It is widely used to add an acidic (sour) taste to soft drinks, jams, candies, and so on. It is also used as a
natural preservative. By taking advantage of the buffer action of citric acid, sodium citrate is used in seasonings,
and as a pH controller and emulsifier for processed cheese. In biochemistry, it is important as an intermediate in
the citric acid cycle and therefore occurs in the metabolism of almost all living things. It also serves as an
environmentally benign cleaning agent and acts as an antioxidant. Citric acid is produced by the fermentation
of glucose. Approximately, 35 000 tons are consumed annually in Japan.

4.16.7.2.2 Malic acid

In nature, malic acid is found in the L-form in many fruits such as apple, and indeed it is sometimes called apple
acid, and contributes to the sour taste of green apples. The chemically synthesized product is racemic, but there
appears to be no difference in the quality of taste or sour intensity. Racemic malic acid has been approved as a
food additive in Japan. While it is almost as sour as citric acid, it gives a slightly stimulating and continuous sour
taste quality. It is used as a single dose, normally along with other organic acids in soft drinks, lactobacillus
beverages, sherbet, jams, and pickles. It is produced industrially from maleic acid by hydration.

4.16.7.2.3 Tartaric acid

L-Tartaric acid is an abundant constituent of many fruits such as grapes and bananas and exhibits a slightly
astringent and refreshing sour taste. It is one of the main acids found in wine. It is added to other foods to give a
sour taste and is normally used with other acids such as citric acid and malic acid as an additive in soft drinks,
candies, and so on. It is produced by acid hydrolysis of calcium tartrate, which is prepared from potassium
tartrate obtained as a by-product during wine production. Optically active tartaric acid is used for the chiral
resolution of amines and also as an asymmetric catalyst.

4.16.7.2.4 Lactic acid

Lactic acid is a sour principle of yogurt and lactobacillus beverages. It exhibits a soft and thick sour taste quality
with slight astringency. It is a syrupy liquid produced by fermentation with a lactobacillus and is formed in the
body by the metabolism of sugars. Due to its pH-controlling effect, it is used in soft drinks, pickles, Japanese
sakes, sherbets, and so on. It is industrially produced by the fermentation of glucose and chemical synthesis.
Approximately 12 000 tons are consumed annually as a food additive in Japan.

4.16.7.2.5 Succinic acid

Succinic acid is an umami-tasting constituent of shellfish, as well as a kokumi-tasting substance in Japanese
sake. It is sometimes added to Japanese sake and soy sauce to improve the taste quality. It is industrially
produced from maleic acid by hydrogenation and subsequent purification. It is also approved as a food additive
in Japan. Recently, an efficient fermentation method has also been studied.246
664 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

4.16.7.2.6 Fumaric acid

Fumaric acid is a naturally occurring sour-tasting compound found in many plants such as Fumaria officinalis L.
(Fumariaceae), Boletus scaber Bull. (Boletaceae), and Fomes igniaries (Fries) Kickx. (Pluporaceae). It is an essential
component for respiration in plant and animal tissues. It is produced by fermentation with mold, such as
Rhizopus nigricans, or by chemical synthesis. It is also used in soft drinks and ice cream and as an acidulant along
with citric acid.

4.16.7.3 Salty Taste

It is believed that saltiness is induced by compounds passing directly through ion channels in the tongue, which
leads to an action potential. Recently, it was reported247 that both amiloride-sensitive and amiloride-insensitive
mechanisms contribute to NaCl taste transduction. The amiloride-sensitive mechanism relies on the ENaC,
which is widely expressed on the apical membrane of fungiform taste cells. The amiloride-insensitive
mechanism, which predominates in circumvallated and foliate taste buds, was also reported to involve a variant
of the nonselective cation channel transient receptor potential vanilloid receptor subtype 1 (TRPV1).248 It has
been suggested that additional mechanisms must contribute to the amiloride-insensitive NaCl response.
Unfortunately, no naturally occurring product is known to exhibit a salty taste, despite several attempts to
identify or synthesize one.

4.16.8 Conclusion

As reflected in this chapter, nature creates great diversity in plants and animals, even in terms of taste quality.
However, we still do not have a thorough understanding of taste sensation. Recently, there are accumulated
evidences for fatty substance receptors using rodents.249 It is speculated that humans may also have the same
receptors. Fat has occasionally been proposed as a possible basic taste. It is highly expected that recent progress
in our understanding of neurophysiology with molecular-biological tools will help to clarify the nature of all of
the taste sensations and the results should be useful for addressing several issues that bear on human health,
such as low-calorie sweeteners for obesity, salt substitutes for patients with hypertension, and novel taste-
modifying compounds for drug delivery systems.

References
1. H. Henning, Z. Psychol. Physiol. Sinnesorgane 1915, 74, 203–219.
2. K. Ikeda, J. Tokyo Chem. Soc. 1909, 30, 820–836.
3. L. J. Filer, Jr.; S. Garattini; M. R. Kare; W. A. Reynolds; R. J. Wurtman, Eds., Glutamic Acid: Advances in Biochemistry and
Physiology; Raven Press: New York, 1979; 400pp.
4. Y. Kawamura; M. R. Kare, Eds., Umami: A Basic Taste; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 1987; 649pp.
5. S. Yamaguchi; K. Ninomiya, Food Rev. Int. 1998, 14, 123–138.
6. G. Nelson; M. A. Hoon; J. Chandrashekar; Y. Zhang; N. J. Ryba; C. S. Zuker, Cell 2001, 106, 381–390.
7. K. L. Mueller; M. A. Hoon; I. Erlenbach; J. Chandrashekar; C. S. Zuker; N. J. P. Ryba, Nature 2005, 434, 225–229.
8. J. G. Brand, J. Nutr. 2000, 130, 942S–945S.
9. A. L. Huang; X. Chen; M. A. Hoon; J. Chandrashekar; W. Guo; D. Traenkner; N. J. P. Ryba; C. S. Zuker, Nature 2006, 442,
934–938.
10. Y. Ishimaru; H. Inada; M. Kubota; H. Zhuang; M. Tominaga; H. Matsunami, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2006, 103,
12569–12574.
11. M.-R. Kim; Y. Kusakabe; H. Miura; Y. Shindo; Y. Ninomiya; A. Hino, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 2002, 9, 659–660.
12. Y. Kurihara, Kikan Kagaku Sosetsu 1999, 40, 61–69.
13. R. S. Shallenberger, Taste Chemistry; Blackie Academic & Professional, an imprint of Chapman & Hall: Glasgow, UK, 1993;
613pp.
14. T. Hofmann; C.-T. Ho; W. Pickenhagen, Challenges in Taste Research: Present Knowledge and Future Implications. In
Challenges in Taste Chemistry and Biology; T. Hofmann, C.-T. Ho, W. Pickenhagen, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 867;
American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2004; pp 1–24.
15. Y. Ariyoshi; S. Ito; Y. Izumi; T. Shiba; S. Suzuki; I. Chibata; M. Fujimaki, Kagaku Sosetsu 1976, 14, 217.
16. Y. Kurihara; A. Kobayashi, Kikan Kagaku Sosetsu 1999, 40, 230.
17. R. S. Shallenberger; T. E. Acree; C. Y. Lee, Nature 1969, 221, 555–556.
18. L. B. Kier, J. Pharm. Sci. 1972, 61, 1394–1397.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 665

19. J. M. Tinti; C. Nofre, Design of Sweeteners. A Rational Approach. In Sweeteners; D. E. Walters, F. T. Orthoefer, G. E. DuBois,
Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 450; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 1991; pp 88–99.
20. G. Morini; A. Bassoli; P. A. Temussi, J. Med. Chem. 2005, 48, 5520–5529.
21. B. Lythgoe; S. Trippett, J. Chem. Soc. 1950, 1983–1990.
22. K. Mizutani; T. Kuramoto; Y. Tamura; N. Ohtake; S. Doi; M. Nakamura; O. Tanaka, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1994, 58,
554–555.
23. E. Mosettig; U. Beglinger; F. Dolder; H. Lichiti; P. Quitt; J. A. Waters, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1963, 85, 2305–2309.
24. H. Kohda; R. Kasai; K. Yamasaki; O. Tanaka, Phytochemistry 1976, 15, 981–983.
25. I. Sakamoto; K. Yamasaki; O. Tanaka, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1977, 25, 844–846.
26. I. Sakamoto; K. Yamasaki; O. Tanaka, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1977, 25, 3437–3439.
27. M. Kobayashi; S. Horikawa; I. H. Degrandi; J. Ueno; H. Mitsuhashi, Phytochemistry 1977, 16, 1405–1408.
28. T. Tanaka; H. Kohda; O. Tanaka; F. H. Chen; W. H. Chou; J. L. Leu, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1981, 45, 2165–2166.
29. A. D. Kinghorn; C. D. Wu; D. D. Soejarto; C. M. Compadre, Stevioside. In Alternative Sweeteners, 3rd ed.; L. O. Nabors, Ed.;
Marcel Dekker, Inc: New York, USA, 2001; pp 167–183.
30. T. Takemoto; S. Arihara; T. Nakajima; M. Okuhira, Yakugaku Zasshi 1983, 103, 1167–1173.
31. K. Matsumoto; R. Kasai; K. Ohtani; O. Tanaka, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1990, 38, 2030–2032.
32. T. Tanaka; O. Tanaka; Z. Lin; J. Zhou, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1985, 33, 4275–4280.
33. H. Yamada; M. Nishizawa, Tetrahedron 1992, 48, 3021–3044.
34. F. Fullas; R. A. Fusain; E. Bordas; J. M. Pezzuto; D. D. Soejarto; A. D. Kinghorn, Tetrahedron 1991, 47, 8515–8522.
35. F. Fullus; D. D. Soejarto; A. D. Kinghorn, Phytochemistry 1992, 31, 2543–2545.
36. H. Yamada; M. Nishizawa, J. Org. Chem. 1995, 60, 386–397.
37. J. Kim; J. M. Pezzuto; D. D. Soejarto; F. A. Lang; A. D. Kinghorn, J. Nat. Prod. 1988, 51, 1166–1172.
38. J. Kim; A. D. Kinghorn, Phytochemistry 1989, 28, 1225–1228.
39. M. Nishizawa; H. Yamada; Y. Yamaguchi; S. Hatakeyama; I. S. Lee; E. J. Kennelly; J. Kim; A. D. Kinghorn, Chem. Lett. 1994,
1555–1558.
40. E. J. Kennelly; L. Cai; L. Long; L. Shamon; K. Zaw; B. Zhou; J. M. Pezzuto; A. D. Kinghorn, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1995, 43,
2602–2607.
41. D. J. Yang; Z. C. Zhong; Z. M. Xie, Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 1992, 27, 841–844.
42. H. Arakawa; M. Nakazaki, Chem. Ind. 1959, 671.
43. M. Yoshikawa; T. Murakami; T. Ueda; H. Shimoda; J. Yamahara; H. Matsuda, Heterocycles 1999, 50, 411–418.
44. A. D. Kinghorn; D. D. Soejarto, CRC Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 1986, 4, 79–120.
45. A. D. Kinghorn; D. D. Soejarto, Med. Res. Rev. 1989, 9, 91–115.
46. N. Kaneda; I.-S. Lee; M. P. Gupta; D. D. Soejarrto; A. D. Kinghorn, J. Nat. Prod. 1992, 55, 1136–1141.
47. K. Mori; M. Kato, Tetrahedron 1986, 42, 5895–5900.
48. L. O. Nabors; G. E. Inglett, A Review of Various Other Alternative Sweeteners. In Alternative Sweeteners; L. O. Nabors,
R. C. Gelardi, Eds.; Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 1986; pp 309–323.
49. A. D. Kinghorn; C. M. Compadre, Less Common High-Potency Sweeteners. In Alternative Sweeteners, 3rd ed. Revised and
Expanded; L. O. Nabors, Ed., Marcel Dekker, Inc.: New York, 2001; pp 209–233.
50. G. G. Birch; S. E. Kemp, Chem. Senses 1989, 14, 249–258.
51. R. J. Haefeli; D. Glaser, Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 1990, 23, 523–527.
52. H. Wieser; H. Jugel; H.-D. Belitz, Z. Lebensm. Unters. Forsch. 1977, 164, 277–282.
53. R. Vleggaar; L. G. J. Ackerman; P. S. Steyn, J. Chem. Soc. Perkin Trans. I 1992, 3095–3098.
54. Y. Amino; K. Yuzawa; K. Mori; T. Takemoto, Crystals of Non-Natural Stereoisomer Salt of Monatin as Sweeteners. PCT Int. Appl.
WO 2003045914, 5 June 2003.
55. P. J. Van Wyk; L. G. J. Ackerman, 3-(1-Amino-1,3-dicarboxy-3-hydroxybut-4-yl)-Indole Compounds. U.S. Patent 4,975,298,
4 December 1990.
56. R. S. Shallenberger, Taste Chemistry; Blackie Academic & Professional, an imprint of Chapman & Hall: Glasgow, UK, 1993;
Chapters 4–6, pp 141–212.
57. H. van der Wel; K. Loeve, Eur. J. Biochem. 1972, 31, 221–225.
58. R. B. Iyengar; P. Smits; F. van der Ouderaa; H. van der Wel; J. van Brouwershaven; P. Raves-tein; G. Richters; P. D. van
Wassenaar, Eur. J. Biochem. 1979, 96, 193–204.
59. L. Edens; L. Heslinga; R. Klok; A. M. Ledeboer; J. Maat; M. Y. Toonen; C. Visser; C. T. Verrips, Gene 1982, 18, 1–12.
60. J.-H. Lee; J. L. Weickmann; R. K. Koduri; P. Ghosh-Dastidar; K. Saito; L. C. Blair; T. Date; J. S. Lai; S. M. Hollenberg;
R. L. Kendall, Biochemistry 1988, 27, 5101–5107.
61. A. M. de Vos; M. Hatada; H. van der Wel; H. Krabbendam; A. F. Peerdeman; S.-H. Kim, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1985, 82,
1406–1409.
62. C. M. Ogata; P. F. Cordon; A. M. de Vos; S.-H. Kim, J. Mol. Biol. 1992, 228, 893–908.
63. H. van der Wel, Trends Biochem. Sci. 1980, 5, 122–123.
64. K. Tonosaki; K. Miwa; F. Kanemura, Brain Res. 1997, 748, 234–236.
65. J. A. Morris; R. H. Cagan, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1972, 261, 114–122.
66. H. van der Wel, FEBS Lett. 1972, 21, 88–90.
67. Z. Bohak; S.-L. Li, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1976, 427, 153–170.
68. G. Frank; H. Zuber, Hoppe-Seyler’s Z. Physiol. Chem. 1976, 357, 585–592.
69. G. Hudson; K. Biemann, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1976, 71, 212–220.
70. M. Kohmura; N. Nio; Y. Ariyoshi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 2219–2224.
71. J. A. Morris; R. H. Cagan, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1976, 24, 1075–1077.
72. M. Kohmura; N. Nio; Y. Ariyoshi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 1521–1530.
73. C. Ogata; M. Hatada; G. Tomlinson; W. C. Shin; S.-H. Kim, Nature 1987, 328, 739–742.
74. J. R. Somoza; F. Jiang; L. Tong; C.-H. Rang; J. M. Cho; S.-H. Kim, J. Mol. Biol. 1993, 234, 390–404.
666 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

75. M. Kohmura; N. Nio; Y. Ariyoshi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 3157–3162.
76. M. Kohmura; N. Nio; Y. Ariyoshi, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1991, 55, 1831–1838.
77. M. Kohmura; T. Mizukoshi; N. Nio; E. Suzuki; Y. Ariyoshi, Pure Appl. Chem. 2002, 74, 1235–1242.
78. S.-H. Kim; C.-H. Kang; R. Kim; J. M. Cho; Y. B. Lee; T.-K. Lee, Protein Eng. 1989, 2, 571–575.
79. Z. Hu; M. He, Yunnan Zhi Wu Yan Jiu 1983, 5, 207–212.
80. X. Liu; S. Maeda; Z. Hu; T. Aiuchi; K. Nakaya; Y. Kurihara, Eur. J. Biochem. 1993, 211, 281–287.
81. S. Nirasawa; X. Liu; T. Nishino; Y. Kurihara, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1993, 1202, 277–280.
82. S. Nirasawa; T. Nishino; M. Katahira; S. Uesugi; Z. Hu; Y. Kurihara, Eur. J. Biochem. 1994, 223, 989–995.
83. S. Nirasawa; Y. Masuda; K. Nakaya; Y. Kurihara, Gene 1996, 181, 225–227.
84. D. Ming; G. Hellekant, FEBS Lett. 1994, 355, 106–108.
85. M. Kohmura; M. Ota; H. Izawa; D. Ming; G. Hellekant; Y. Ariyoshi, Biopolymers 1996, 38, 553–556.
86. H. Izawa; M. Ota; M. Kohmura; Y. Ariyoshi, Biopolymers 1996, 39, 95–101.
87. F. M. Assadi-Porter; D. J. Aceti; H. Cheng; J. L. Markley, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2000, 376, 252–258.
88. K. Ishikawa; M. Ota; Y. Ariyoshi; H. Sasaki; M. Tanokura; D. Ming; J. Caldwell; F. Abildgaad, Acta Crystallogr. D Biol. Crystallogr.
1996, 52, 577–578.
89. J. E. Caldwell; F. Abildgaard; Z. Dzakula; D. Ming; G. Hellekant; J. L. Markley, Nat. Struct. Biol. 1998, 5, 427–431.
90. F. M. Assadi-Porter; D. J. Aceti; J. L. Markley, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 2000, 376, 259–265.
91. H. van der Wel; G. Larson; A. Hladik; C. M. Hladik; G. Hellekant; D. Glaser, Chem. Senses 1989, 14, 75–79.
92. S. Theerasilp; Y. Kurihara, J. Biol. Chem. 1988, 263, 11536–11539.
93. S. Theerasilp; H. Hitotsuya; S. Nakajo; K. Nakaya; Y. Nakamura; Y. Kurihara, J. Biol. Chem. 1989, 264, 6655–6659.
94. H. Igeta; Y. Tamura; K. Nakaya; Y. Nakamura; Y. Kurihara, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1991, 1079, 303–307.
95. N. Takahashi; H. Hitotsuya; H. Hanzawa; Y. Kurihara, J. Biol. Chem. 1990, 265, 7793–7798.
96. Y. Masuda; S. Nirasawa; K. Nakaya; Y. Kurihara, Gene 1995, 161, 175–177.
97. Y. Kurihara; S. Nirasawa, Trends Food Sci. Technol. 1994, 5, 37–42.
98. H. Yamashita; S. Theerasilp; T. Aiuchi; K. Nakaya; Y. Nakamura; Y. Kurihara, J. Biol. Chem. 1990, 265, 15770–15775.
99. S. Harada; H. Ohtani; S. Maeda; Y. Kai; N. Kasai; Y. Kurihara, J. Mol. Biol. 1994, 238, 286–287.
100. S. Nakajo; T. Akabane; K. Nakaya; Y. Nakamura; Y. Kurihara, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1992, 1118, 293–297.
101. H. Yamashita; T. Akabane; Y. Kurihara, Chem. Senses 1995, 20, 239–243.
102. K. Kurihara; L. M. Beidler, Nature, 1969, 222, 1176–1179.
103. K. Abe; H. Yamashita; S. Arai; Y. Kurihara, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1992, 1130, 232–234.
104. Y. Shirasuka; K. Nakajima; T. Asakura; H. Yamashita; A. Yamamoto; S. Hata; S. Nagata; M. Abo; H. Sorimachi; K. Abe, Biosci.
Biotechnol. Biochem. 2004, 68, 1403–1407.
105. M. Suzuki; E. Kurimoto; S. Nirasawa; Y. Masuda; K. Hori; Y. Kurihara; N. Shimba; M. Kawai; E. Suzuki; K. Kato, FEBS Lett. 2004,
573, 135–138.
106. A. Hiura; T. Akabane; K. Ohtani; R. Kasai; K. Yamasaki; Y. Kurihara, Phytochemistry 1996, 43, 1023.
107. D. Sugita; R. Inoue; Y. Kurihara, Chem. Senses 1998, 23, 93–97.
108. K. Yoshikawa; K. Amimoto; S. Arihara; K. Matsuura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1989, 30, 1103–1106.
109. K. Yoshikawa; K. Amimoto; S. Arihara; K. Matsuura, Chem. Pharm Bull. 1989, 37, 852–854.
110. M. Maeda; T. Iwashita; Y. Kurihara, Tetrahedron Lett. 1989, 30, 1547–1550.
111. Y. Kurihara; K. Ookubo; H. Tasaki; H. Kodama; Y. Akiyama; A. Yagi; B. Halpern, Tetrahedron 1988, 44, 61–66.
112. K. Yoshikawa; N. Shimono; S. Arihara, Tetrahedron Lett. 1991, 32, 7059–7062.
113. L. M. Kennedy; L. R. Saul; R. Sefecka; D. A. Stevens, Chem. Senses 1988, 13, 529–543.
114. K. Yoshikawa; S. Tumura; K. Yamada; S. Arihara, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1992, 40, 2287–2291.
115. T. Shiba, Kagaku Sosetsu 1976, 14, 129–156.
116. Y. Yamada; N. Nakatani, Kikan Kagaku Sosetsu 1999, 40, 72–83.
117. Y. Niiho; T. Yamazaki; Y. Nakajima; T. Yamamoto; H. Ando; Y. Hirai; K. Toriizuka; Y. Ida, J. Nat. Med. 2006, 60, 82–88.
118. M. Asao; H. Iwamura; M. Akamatsu; T. Fujita, J. Med. Chem. 1987, 30, 1873–1879.
119. K. L. Mueller; M. A. Hoon; I. Erlenbach; J. Chandrashekar; C. S. Zuker; N. J. P. Ryba, Nature 2005, 434, 225–229.
120. R. B. Woodward; W. J. Brehm, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1948, 70, 2107–2115.
121. R. M. Harris, Strychnine. In Molecules of Death; R. H. Waring, G. B. Steventon, S. C. Mitchell, Eds.; Imperial College Press:
London, UK, 2002; pp 259–275.
122. H. L. Holmes, The Strychnos Alkaloids. In The Alkaloids; R. H. F. Manske, H. L. Holmes, Eds.; Academic Press: New York, 1950;
Vol. I, pp 375–496.
123. M. H. Malone; K. M. St. John-Allan; E. Bejar, J. Ethnopharmacol. 1992, 35, 295–297.
124. R. B. Woodward; W. E. Doering, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1944, 66, 849; 1945, 67, 860–874.
125. M. H. Ibrahim; M. I. Elbashir; A. Naser; I. A. Aelbasit; M. M. Kheir; I. Adam, Ann. Trop. Med. Parasitol. 2004, 98, 441–445.
126. S. Hatakeyama, Kagaku to Kogyo (Tokyo, Japan) 2004, 57, 716–719.
127. H. M. R. Hoffmann; J. Frackenpohl, Eur. J. Org. Chem. 2004, 21, 4293–4312.
128. J. W. Mason; L. M. Hondeghem, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1984, 432, 162–176.
129. A. Smith, Caffeine. In Nutritional Neuroscience; H. R. Lieberman, R. B. Kanarek, C. Prasad, Eds.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton,
FL, 2005; pp 341–361.
130. T. K. Leonard; R. R. Watson; M. E. Mohs, J. Am. Diet. Assoc. 1987, 87, 1048–1053.
131. I. Iancu; A. Olmer; R. D. Strous, Caffeinism: History, Clinical Features, Diagnosis, and Treatment. In Caffeine and Activation
Theory; B. D. Smith, U. Gupta, B. S. Gupta, Eds.; CRC Press LLC: Boca Raton, FL, 2007; pp 331–347.
132. E. Fischer, Ber. Dtsch. Chem. Ges. 1897, 30, 1839–1845. From: J. Chem. Soc. Abstr. 1897, 72, I, 641–642.
133. M. F. Stidworthy; J. S. Bleakley; M. T. Cheeseman; D. F. Kelly, Vet. Rec. 1997, 141, 28.
134. N. L. Benowitz, Annu. Rev. Med. 1986, 37, 21–32.
135. F. A. Lazutka; A. Vasilauskiene; Sh.G. Gefen, Gig. Sanit. 1969, 34, 30–33.
136. L. Grinspoon; J. B. Bakalar, J. Ethnopharmacol. 1981, 3, 149–159.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 667

137. J. L. Christie, J. Forensic Sci. 1976, 21, 671–679.

138. A. J. Jenkins; T. Llosa; I. Montoya; E. J. Cone, Forensic Sci. Int. 1996, 77, 179–189.
139. R. Kuhn; I. Low, Angew. Chem. 1954, 66, 639–640.
140. S. C. Morris; T. H. Lee, Food Technol. Aust. 1984, 36, 118–124.
141. R. M. D. Machado; M. C. F. Toledo; L. C. Garcia, Food Control 2006, 18, 503–508.
142. S. Okuda; M. Yoshimoto; K. Tsuda; N. Utzugi, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1966, 14, 314–318.
143. W. H. Perkin, Jr.; R. Robinson, J. Chem. Soc. Trans. 1910, 97, 305–323.
144. T. Kubota; I. Kubo, Nature (London, UK) 1969, 223, 97–99.
145. M. G. J. Beets, The Sweet and Bitter Modalities: Carbohydrtates, Analogues and Derivatives.In Structure–Activity Relationships
in Human Chemoreception; Applied Science Publishers: Barking, UK, 1978; pp 259–303.
146. S. Hasegawa, Biochemistry of Limonoids in Citrus. In Citrus Limonoids, Functional Chemicals in Agriculture and
Food; M. A. Berhow, S. Hasegawa, G. D. Manners, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 758; Oxford University Press, American
Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2000; pp 9–30.
147. E. G. Miller; S. E. Taylor; C. W. Berry; J. A. Zimmerman; S. Hasegawa, Citrus Limonoids: Increasing Importance as Anticancer
Agents. In Citrus Limonoids, Functional Chemicals in Agriculture and Food, M. A. Berhow, S. Hasegawa, G. D. Manners, Eds.;
ACS Symposium Series 758; Oxford University Press, American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2000; pp 132–144.
148. S. Hasegawa; M. Miyake, Food Rev. Int. 1996, 12, 413–435.
149. Y. Kano, Acta Hortic. 2000, 517, 369–374.
150. M. Yasuda; M. Iwamoto; H. Okabe; T. Yamauchi, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1984, 32, 2044–2047.
151. B. Jayaprakasam; N. P. Seeram; M. G. Nair, Cancer Lett. 2003, 189, 11–16.
152. F. W. Bachelor; S. Ito, Can. J. Chem. 1973, 51, 3626–3630.
153. A. Wesolowska; A. Nikiforuk; K. Michalska; W. Kisiel; E. Chojnacka-Wojcik, J. Ethnopharmacol. 2006, 107, 254–258.
154. J. Fritsche; C. M. Beindorff; M. Dachtler; H. Zhang; J. G. Lammers, Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2002, 215, 149–157.
155. L. O. Spetsig, Acta Chem. Scand. 1958, 12, 592–593.
156. Z. Valenta; A. H. Gray; D. E. Orr; S. Papadopoulos; C. Podesva, Tetrahedron 1962, 18, 1433–1441.
157. L. Novotny; V. Herout; F. Sorm, Collect. Czech. Chem. Commun. 1960, 25, 1492–1499.
158. K. Ishizaki; T. Imada; M. Tsurufuji, Hepatology Res. 2005, 33, 174–177.
159. H. Hikino; Y. Kiso; M. Kubota; M. Hattori; T. Namba, Shoyakugaku Zasshi 1984, 38, 359–360.
160. H. Inouye; Y. Nakamura, Tetrahedron Lett. 1968, 4919–4924.
161. Y. Asahina; M. Inubuse, Yakugaku Zasshi 1929, 49, 128–134.
162. R. M. Horowitz; B. Gentili, Tetrahedron 1963, 19, 773–782.
163. D. W. Thomas; C. V. Smythe; M. D. Labbee, Food Res. 1958, 23, 591–598.
164. M. S. Arayne; N. Sultana; Z. Bibi, Pak. J. Pharm. Sci. 2005, 18, 45–57.
165. A. Petritschek; F. Lynen; H. D. Belitz, Lebensm. Wiss. Technol. 1972, 5, 47–50.
166. T. K. Murray; B. E. Baker, J. Sci. Food Agric. 1952, 3, 470–475.
167. B. C. Richardson; L. K. Creamer, NZ J. Dairy Sci. Technol. 1973, 8, 46–51.
168. M. Yamashita; S. Arai; J. Matsuyama; M. Gonda; H. Kato; M. Fujimaki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1970, 34, 1484–1491.
169. T. Shiba; K. Nunami, Tetrahedron Lett. 1974, 509–512.
170. W. Pickenhagen; P. Dietrich; B. Keil; J. Polonsky; F. Nouaille; E. Lederer, Helv. Chim. Acta 1975, 58, 1078–1086.
171. Y. Katsuragi; Y. Mitsui; T. Umeda; K. Otsuji; S. Yamasawa; K. Kurihara, Pharm. Res. 1997, 14, 720–724.
172. W. L. Scoville, J. Am. Pharm. Assoc. 1912, 1, 453–454.
173. F. Korel; N. Bagdatlioglu; M. O. Balaban; Y. Hisil, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50, 3257–3261.
174. S. Kosuge; M. Furuta, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1970, 34, 248–256.
175. S. Kati-Coulibaly; V. Coxam; J.-P. Barlet, Med. Nutr. 1998, 34, 236–245.
176. L. Guo; Q. Wang; L. Zhu, Hefei Gongye Daxue Xuebao: Ziran Kexue Ban 2006, 29, 117–121.
177. T. Masuda; N. Nakatani, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1991, 55, 2337–2340.
178. S. Yazawa; N. Suetome; K. Okamoto; T. Namiki, J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1989, 58, 601–607.
179. K. Kobata; T. Todo; S. Yazawa; K. Iwai; T. Watanabe, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1998, 46, 1695–1697.
180. M. L. Lopez-Rodriguez; A. Viso; S. Ortega-Gutierrez, Mini Rev. Med. Chem. 2003, 3, 729–748.
181. H. Hamada; S. Ohiwa; T. Nishida; H. Katsuragi; T. Takeda; H. Hamada; N. Nakajima; K. Ishihara, Plant Biotechnol. (Tokyo,
Japan) 2003, 20, 253–255.
182. Y. Tani; T. Fujioka; M. Sumioka; Y. Furuichi; H. Hamada; T. Watanabe, J. Nutr. Sci. Vitaminol. 2004, 50, 351–355.
183. R. De Cleyn; M. Verzele, Bull. Soc. Chim. Belg. 1975, 84, 435–438.
184. R. De Cleyn; M. Verzele, Chromatographia 1975, 8, 342–344.
185. K. Hashimoto; T. Yaoi; H. Koshiba; T. Yoshida; T. Maoka; Y. Fujiwara; Y. Yamamoto; K. Mori, Food Sci. Technol. Int. (Tsukuba,
Japan) 1996, 2, 24–29.
186. G. Sharma; B. Mishra, J. Pharm. Res. 2007, 6, 129–133.
187. F. Kiuchi; N. Nakamura; Y. Tsuda; K. Kondo; H. Yoshimura, Chem. Pharm. Bull. 1988, 36, 2452–2465.
188. T. Aihara, Yakugaku Zasshi 1950, 70, 405–409.
189. E. Sugai; Y. Morimitsu; K. Kubota, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 2005, 69, 1958–1962.
190. M. Jacobson, Chem. Ind. (London, UK) 1957, 50–51.
191. D. W. Connell; M. D. Sutherland, Aust. J. Chem. 1969, 22, 1033–1043.
192. E. Steinegger; K. Stucki, Pharm. Acta Helv. 1982, 57, 66–71.
193. S. Lee; C. Khoo; C. W. Halstead; T. Huynh; A. Bensoussan, J. AOAC Int. 2007, 90, 1219–1226.
194. K. Ina; J. S. Wu; H. Etoh; A. Yagi; I. Kishima, Nippon Shokuhin Kogyo Gakkai Shi 1993, 40, 859–862.
195. M. Hara; T. Kuboi; H. Etoh, Aroma Res. 2001, 2, 265–269.
196. M. Matsuo; M. Yamazaki, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1966, 25, 269–274.
197. K. Okano; J. Asano; G. Ishii, J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1990, 59, 551–558.
198. M. G. Ettlinger; A. J. Lundeen, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1956, 78, 4172–4173.
668 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

199. H. P. Koch; W. Jaeger, Dtsch. Apoth. Ztg. 1989, 129, 273–276.

200. A. Stoll; E. Seebeck, Helv. Chim. Acta 1949, 32, 197–205.
201. H. Schulz; H. Krueger; J. Liebmann; H. Peterka, Lebensmittelchem. 1999, 53, 2–3.
202. S. Taniguchi; T. Hatano; K. Yazaki, Mokuzai Gakkaishi 2006, 52, 67–76.
203. J. F. Prinz; P. W. Lucas, J. Oral Rehabil. 2000, 27, 991–994.
204. M. Kusumoto; F. Yoshimura, J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1976, 45, 46–80.
205. R. Saijo; Y. Takeda, Nippon Shokuhin Kagaku Kogaku Kaishi 1999, 46, 138–147.
206. D. G. Nagle; D. Ferreira; Y.-D. Zhou, Phytochemistry 2006, 67, 1849–1855.
207. N. Subramanian; P. Venkatesh; S. Ganguli; V. P. Sinkar, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1999, 47, 2571–2578.
208. C.-T. Ho; S. Sang; J. W. Jhoo, Chemistry of Theaflavins: The Astringent Taste Compounds of Black Tea. In Challenges in Taste
Chemistry and Biology, T. Hofmann, C.-T. Ho, W. Pickenhagen, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 867; American Chemical Society;
Washington, DC, USA, 2004; pp 125–138.
209. T. Ozawa; M. Kataoka; K. Morikawa; O. Negishi, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1996, 60, 2023–2027.
210. E. Sondheimer, Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1958, 74, 131–138.
211. J. Cheel; G. Schmeda-Hirschmann; M. Jordan; C. Theoduloz; J. A. Rodriguez; A. Gerth; D. Wilken, Z. Naturforsch. C: J. Biosci.
2007, 62, 555–562.
212. V. Cheynier; M. Duenas-Paton; E. Salas; C. Maury; J.-M. Souquet; P. Sarni-Manchado; H. Fulcrand, Am. J. Enol. Vitic. 2006, 57,
298–305.
213. K. Igarashi, Foods & Food Ingred. J. Jpn. 2000, 187, 17–29.
214. S. D. Roper, Forum Nutr. 2003, 56, 87–89.
215. G. Nelson; J. Chandrashekar; M. A. Hoon; L. Feng; G. Zhao; N. J. P. Ryba; C. S. Zuker, Nature 2002, 416, 199–202.
216. M. Ozeck; P. Brust; H. Xu; G. Servant, Eur. J. Pharmacol. 2004, 489, 139–149.
217. S. Arai; M. Yamashita; M. Noguchi; M. Fujimaki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1973, 37, 151–156.
218. S. Yamaguchi; S. Kanno; T. Haga, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 1995, 2, 467–470.
219. A. Kuninaka, Adv. Chem. Ser. 1966, 56, 261–274.
220. S. Yamaguchi, J. Food Sci. 1967, 32, 473–487.
221. K. Kurihara; M. Kashiwayanagi, Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1998, 855, 393–397.
222. H. Furukawa, Nippon Nogeikagaku Kaishi 1991, 65, 163–169.
223. Y. Hayakawa; M. Kawai, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 2003, 10, 463–466.
224. M. Kawai; A. Okiyama; Y. Ueda, Chem. Senses 2002, 27, 739–745.
225. S. Otsuka; H. Eguchi, Seasonings Containing Amino Acids, Nucleotides, Inorganic Salts, and Glycogen or Amylopectin with
Similar Taste with Adductor Muscle of Scallops (Patinopecten yessoensis). JP Patent Appl. 63,063,362, 1988.
226. T. Saigo; K. Watanabe; M. Morita; T. Nakano, Chagyo Kenkyu Hokoku 1979, 50, 31–41.
227. T. Takemoto; T. Nakajima, Yakugaku Zasshi 1964, 84, 1183–1186.
228. T. Takemoto; T. Nakajima; T. Yokobe, Yakugaku Zasshi 1964, 84, 1232–1233.
229. T. Takahashi; T. Asai, Proc. Imp. Acad. (Japan) 1927, 3, 86–89.
230. K. Aoki, Nippon Nogeikagaku Kaishi 1932, 8, 867–868.
231. S. Kodama, J. Tokyo Chem. Soc. 1913, 34, 751–757.
232. A. Kuninaka, Nippon Nogeikagaku Kaishi 1960, 34, 489–492.
233. N. Nakajima; K. Ichikawa; M. Kamada; E. Fujita, Nippon Nogeikagaku Kaishi 1961, 35, 797–803.
234. M. Honjo; K. Imai; Y. Furukawa; Y. Kanai; R. Marumoto; H. Honda; H. Aoki; T. Hirata, Takeda Kenkyusho Nenpo 1966, 25, 74–81.
235. S. Yamaguchi; T. Yoshikawa; S. Ikeda; T. Ninomiya, J. Food Sci. 1971, 36, 846–849.
236. S. Arai; M. Yamashita; M. Fujimaki, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1972, 36, 1253–1256.
237. E. Frerot; S. D. Escher, Flavored Products and Method for Preparing Same. PCT Int. Appl. WO 97/04667,1997.
238. M. Kuroda; T. Yamanaka; N. Miyamura, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 2004, 11, 175–180.
239. Y. Ueda; M. Sakaguchi; K. Hirayama; R. Miyajimai; A. Kimizuka, Agric. Biol. Chem. 1990, 54, 163–169.
240. Y. Ueda; T. Tsubuku; R. Miyajima, Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 1994, 58, 108–110.
241. K. Shima; N. Yamada; E. Suzuki; T. Harada, J. Agric. Food Chem. 1998, 46, 1465–1468.
242. K. Shima, Meat Sci. 2002, 43, 3–9.
243. K. Shima; K. Ishikawa; K. Izawa; E. Suzuki, Anal. Sci. 1998, 14, 1185–1186.
244. U. Watanabe; T. Yamamoto, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 2003, 10, 523–526.
245. A. Dunkel; J. Koester; T. Hofmann, J. Agric. Food Chem. 2007, 55, 6712–6719.
246. R. Aoyama; M. Murase; K. Yamagishi; K. Nishi; H. Kojima, Development of Fermentation Method for Producing Non-Amino
Organic Acids by Using Recombinant Coryneform Bacteria. PCT Int. Appl. WO 2005026349, 25 March 2005.
247. T. Miyamoto, Jpn. J. Taste Smell Res. 2004, 11, 17–28.
248. C. Ruiz; S. Gutknecht; E. Delay; S. Kinnamon, Chem. Senses 2006, 31, 813–820.
249. T. A. Gilbertson; I. Kim, Chemoreception of Fat. In Chemistry of Taste: Mechanisms, Behaviors, and Mimics, P. Given,
D. Paredes, Eds.; ACS Symposium Series 825; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; pp 180–191.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 669

Biographical Sketches

Kunisuke Izawa was born in Hyogo, Japan, in 1945, and received his B.A. in 1968 and Ph.D. in
1973 from Osaka University under the direction of Professor Takayuki Fueno. He then
joined the Central Research Laboratories of Ajinomoto Co., Inc., where he studied the cobalt-
catalyzed amidocarbonylation (Wakamatsu) reaction. After studying a natural product
synthesis as a postdoctoral fellow at MIT (with Professor George H. Buchi) for 2 years, he
returned in 1981 to Basic Research Laboratories in the same company aiming at the
discovery of new methodology for pharmaceuticals. In 1990, he moved to the Process
Research Laboratories as a general manager. Since then, he has been engaged in the process
development of pharmaceutical fine chemicals in Ajinomoto. In 2006, he became an advisor
at AminoScience Laboratories in the same company, after serving as a corporate executive
fellow for 7 years. He is also serving as regional president in the Society of Synthetic Organic
Chemistry, Japan, from 2007. His research interest is in the field of organic synthesis utilizing
amino acids, nucleosides, and carbohydrates.

Yusuke Amino was born in Japan in 1958. He received his master degree in 1983 and Ph.D. in
1991 from Kyoto University under the direction of Professor Takeo Saegusa and Professor
Yoshihiko Ito. In 1983, he joined the Central Research Laboratories of Ajinomoto Co., Inc.
He studied a natural product synthesis at Colorado State University (with Professor R. M.
Williams) from 1991 to 1993. After studying the chemistry of sweet peptides at UCSD (with
Professor M. Goodman) in 1994, he returned to Ajinomoto Co., Inc. Since then, he has been
working on the structure–activity relationships of taste compounds.
670 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste

Masanori Kohmura was born in Tokyo, Japan, in 1962. He received Bachelor of Agriculture
in 1985 from the University of Tsukuba, Japan. Then he joined the Central Research
Laboratories of Ajinomoto Co., Inc., where he studied peptide synthesis and structure–taste
relationships of sweet protein. He received Ph.D. from the University of Tsukuba in 1994. In
1996, he moved to the Food Research and Development Laboratories in the same company
and studied processed flavor and its precursor compound analysis. In 2001, he moved to the
Life Science Institute of the same company. In 2004, he moved to the Quality Assurance &
External Scientific Affairs Department of the Corporate Headquarters as a Manager. In 2007,
he was promoted as Associate General Manager, and then moved to the ASEAN Regional
Headquarters in Bangkok as a director. From 2002 to 2007, he served as the editorial board
member of an academic journal Food Science and Technology Research published by the Japanese
Society for Food Science and Technology.

Yoichi Ueda was born in Hokkaido, Japan, in 1956, and received his B.A. in 1979 and M.D. in
1981 from the University of Tokyo under the direction of Professor Kanehisa Hashimoto. He
joined the Central Research Laboratories of Ajinomoto Co., Inc., where he engaged in the
investigation of novel flavor-active natural compounds in foodstuffs such as garlic and meat.
He received Ph.D. in 1998 from the University of Tokyo under the direction of Professor
Shugo Watabe. After the research on enrichment of glutathione in yeast extract, he worked
for the Seasoning Products Development Center of the company. In 2003, he moved to the
Quality Assurance & External Scientific Affairs Department for working to improve the
quality assurance system of Ajinomoto group companies. His research interest includes flavor
interaction among constituents in delicious food materials and their application to new food
products.
 Human–Environment Interactions – Taste 671

Motonaka Kuroda was born in Tokyo, Japan, in 1964, and received his B.A. in 1986 and Ph.D.
in 2003 from Tsukuba University under the direction of Professor Hiroshi Imagawa and
Professor Tetsuo Ozawa. In 1988, he joined the Central Research Laboratories of Ajinomoto
Co., Inc., where he studied the flavor components of various soup stock materials such as
dried-bonito broth (katsuo-bushi dashi), beef soup stock, and chicken broth. In 2002, he
moved to the Food Research Institute as a general manager. In 2007, he moved to the
Research Institute for Health Fundamentals. His research interest is in the field of flavor
components of food and the health function of traditional food.