Ecology

Experimental design and crop managementField experiments were conducted at Chengyang Agricultural Experimental Station, Qingdao, China (36°18′ 11″/N, 120°21′ 13″/E) in 2019 and 2020. The soil type in the field was brown loam that contained 22.76 g kg−1 organic matter, 82.39 mg kg−1 alkali-hydrolysable N, 25.10 mg kg−1 Olsen-P and 94.89 mg kg−1 exchangeable K. The test cultivars of maize were Jinhai5 with strong lodging resistance and Xundan20 with weak lodging resistance, which were repeated four times in plots laying out in randomized block designs. Plant density was 7.5 plants / m2 with the row spacing of 60 cm. the plot consisted of 8 rows length of 15 m. Two–three seeds per hole were manually sowed at 5 cm on 20 April 2019 and 24 April 2020, and the seedlings were thinned to the target planting density at V2, and harvested on 10 September and 14 September, respectively. Fertilization and irrigation management followed local production practices in maize.Sampling and measurementPlant samples were taken at V8, V12, R1, R2 and R6. Ten typical plants of each tested cultivars were selected to be subjected to mechanical and above-ground morphological measurements at each sampling. The other three maize plants were used to measure morphological traits of roots. Xundan20 was seriously damaged due to the storm in the late stage of maize growth in 2020, resulting in the missing data for physiological maturity.Determination of leaf area vertical distributionLeaf area of expanded leaves each was computed by the coefficient method: Single leaf area = length * width * 0.75. Leaf area for unexpanded leaves was estimated by the leaf weight method. Leaf area per plant was the sum of all individual green leaf areas. Leaf height is the height from the ground to the leaf collar position of maize.Determination of max root side-pulling resistanceSample plants were surrounded with water-proof steel devices inserted into underground, and watered to soil moisture over saturation at one day before mechanical testing. When measured, due to the limited space, all leaves of sample plants are removed in order to improve the measurement accuracy. The defoliated stalks were immobilized by a pair of lengthwise steel clamps to prevent stalks from bending (Fig. 7). After the digital pole dynamometer18 with a 1.5 m long slider and a main unit was linked to the stalks at a height of 80 cm away from the ground, the operator by hand pulled at a slow and uniform speed until the roots were pulled out. Records of load force, declination angle and sensor position were automatically stored in main unit during this operation. The peak value of forces, extracted from records, was taken as the max root side-pulling resistance.Figure 7Schematic diagram for measuring max root side-pulling resistance.Full size imageRoot anti-lodging indexBased on the method of Cui et al.6, the force value comparison is changed to the moment value comparison to calculate root anti-lodging index:$${text{AL}}_{root} = M_{root} / , M_{wind} = F_{root} / , F_{wind}$$
(1)
where M root is the root failure moment, M wind is the wind resultant moment. Root anti-lodging index indicates the ability of plants to resist root lodging. The larger its value is, the stronger the resistance is, and vice versa.$${text{M}}_{root} = F , *d$$
(2)
where F is the max root side-pulling resistance, d is moment arm, i.e., the length of force arm. As a component of root anti-lodging index, the root failure moment represents the ability of the root system to resist lateral pulling. The greater its value is, the better the resistance is, and vice versa.With the base of the stem as the fulcrum,$${text{M}}_{wind} = sum 0.{5}CA_{i} rho V^{2} h_{i}$$
(3)
where C is coefficient of air resistance, ρ is air mass density ,V is the wind speed , Ai is the area of a single leaf , hi is the height of leaf, ∑ represents to sum up over all leaves. C value is set to be 0.219. When encountering wind speed at grade 6 or higher, maize is more prone to lodging. Unless stated explicitly, the following analysis was limited to the upper wind speed for grade 6 wind20.Root morphological traitsThe number and length of all primary nodal roots were measured. Root-soil balls each of two or three tested plants were obtained after lateral root-pulling testing. The images of the three frontal sides, 120 degrees apart from each other, of the root-soil balls were taken using a digital camera. Ball volumes were then evaluated by considering them to be rotationally symmetric. Average volumes were used for further analysis.Single root tensile resistanceRoots after counting the number of nodal roots were used to measure the single root tensile resistance. First, clean the dust off roots. Then, diameters of roots were determined with a vernier caliper. Single root tensile resistance was measured by HF-500 digital push–pull apparatus. Fixed the upper and lower ends of the root, then one end moved slowly and uniformly, the other end was still until the root breaks. The peak tension force displayed by the instrument was taken as the single root tensile resistance.Statistical analysisBased on variance analysis, the Tukey method was used to compare the differences among means. The logarithmic transformation of variables was carried out to improve the homogeneity of error variance if appropriate.The substantive effect or influence of various factors on the response variable can be expressed by effect size of factors, which can be calculated under the framework of variance analysis. Effect size is the proportion of the effect of a certain factor in the total effect, which is a dimensionless number21,22,23.The formula for calculating effect size of factors is:$$omega^{2} = frac{{df_{effect} times left( {MS_{effect} – MS_{error} } right)}}{{SS_{total} + MS_{error} }}$$
(4)
where df is the degree of freedom, MS represents mean square.Two conceptual models were used when dealing with effect size. One model was of components, i.e., taking the logarithm of both sides of Eq. (1):$${text{LOG}}left( {{text{AL}}_{{{text{root}}}} } right) , = {text{ LOG}}left( {{text{M}}_{{{text{root}}}} } right) , + {text{ LOG}}left( {{text{M}}_{{{text{wind}}}} } right)$$
(5)
where LOG denotes logarithmic transformation.The other was the factorial model, i.e.,$${text{factors affecting AL}}_{{{text{root}}}} = {text{ wind grade }} + {text{ cultivar }} + {text{ growth stage}}$$
(6)
Experimental research and field studies on plants including the collection of plant materialThe authors declare that the cultivation of plants and carrying out study in Chengyang Agricultural Experimental Station complies with all relevant institutional, national and international guidelines and treaties.Statement of permissions and/or licenses for collection of plant or seed specimensThe authors declare that the seed specimens used in this study are publicly accessible seed materials and we were given explicit written permission to use them for this research. More

Shah, S. et al. Ethno botanical study of medicinal plants of district charsadda, Khyber Pakhtoonkhwa, Pakistan. Int. J. Herb. Med. 8, 67–75 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Hu, R., Lin, C., Xu, W., Liu, Y. & Long, C. Ethnobotanical study on medicinal plants used by Mulam people in Guangxi, China. J. Ethnobiol. Ethnomed. 16, 1–50 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Kooti, W. et al. Effective medicinal plant in cancer treatment, part 2: Review study. J. Evid. Based Complem. Altern. Med. 22, 982–995 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mazalovska, M. & Kouokam, J. C. Transiently expressed mistletoe lectin ii in nicotiana benthamiana demonstrates anticancer activity in vitro. Molecules 25, 2562 (2020).CAS 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shukla, S. & Mehta, A. Anticancer potential of medicinal plants and their phytochemicals: A review. Rev. Bras. Bot. 38, 199–210 (2015).Article 

Google Scholar 
Shaikh, A. M., Shrivastava, B., Apte, K. G. & Navale, S. D. Medicinal plants as potential source of anticancer agents: A review. J. Pharmacogn. Phytochem. APT Res. Found. 5, 291–295 (2016).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Iqbal, J. et al. Plant-derived anticancer agents: A green anticancer approach. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Biomed. 7, 1129–1150 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zuber, D. Biological flora of Central Europe: Viscum album L. Flora 199, 181–203 (2004).Article 

Google Scholar 
Bar-Sela, G. White-Berry Mistletoe (Viscum album L.) as complementary treatment in cancer: Does it help?. Eur. J. Integr. Med. 3, e55–e62 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vicaş, S. I., Ruginǎ, D. & Socaciu, C. Comparative study about antioxidant activities of viscum album from different host trees, harvested in different seasons. J. Med. Plants Res. 5, 2237–2244 (2011).
Google Scholar 
Gastauer, M. & Meira-Neto, J. A. A. Updated angiosperm family tree for analyzing phylogenetic diversity and community structure. Acta Bot. Brasilica 31, 191–198 (2017).Article 

Google Scholar 
Varga, I. et al. Changes in the distribution of European mistletoe (Viscum album) in hungary during the last hundred years. Folia Geobot. 49, 559–577 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Lech, P., Żółciak, A. & Hildebrand, R. Occurrence of european mistletoe (Viscum album l.) On forest trees in poland and its dynamics of spread in the period 2008–2018. Forests 11, 83 (2020).Article 

Google Scholar 
Büssing, A., Suzart, K. & Schweizer, K. Differences in the apoptosis-inducing properties of Viscum album L. extracts. Anticancer. Drugs 8, S9–S14 (1997).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Maier, G. & Fiebig, H. H. Absence of tumor growth stimulation in a panel of 16 human tumor cell lines by mistletoe extracts in vitro. Anticancer. Drugs 13, 373–379 (2002).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Orhan, D. D., Aslan, M., Sendogdu, N., Ergun, F. & Yesilada, E. Evaluation of the hypoglycemic effect and antioxidant activity of three Viscum album subspecies (European mistletoe) in streptozotocin-diabetic rats. J. Ethnopharmacol. 98, 95–102 (2005).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ofem, O. E. et al. Effect of crude aqueous leaf extract of Viscum album (mistletoe) in hypertensive rats. Indian J. Pharmacol. 39, 15–19 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gupta, G. et al. Sedative, antiepileptic and antipsychotic effects of Viscum album L. (Loranthaceae) in mice and rats. J. Ethnopharmacol. 141, 810–816 (2012).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Orhue, P. O., Edomwande, E. C., Igbinosa, E. & Al, E. Antibacterial activity of extracts of mistletoe (Tapinanthus dodoneifollus (dc) dancer) from Cocoa tree (Theobrama cacao). Int. J. Herbs Pharmacol. Res. 3, 24–29 (2014).
Google Scholar 
Karagöz, A., Önay, E., Arda, N. & Kuru, A. Antiviral potency of mistletoe (Viscum album ssp. album) extracts against human parainfluenza virus type 2 in Vero cells. Phyther. Res. 17, 560–562 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Thronicke, A., Schad, F., Debus, M., Grabowski, J. & Soldner, G. Viscum album L. therapy in oncology—An update on current evidence. Complement. Med. Res. https://doi.org/10.1159/000524184 (2022).Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Lavastre, V., Cavalli, H., Ratthe, C. & Girard, D. Anti-inflammatory effect of Viscum album agglutinin-I (VAA-I): Induction of apoptosis in activated neutrophils and inhibition of lipopolysaccharide-induced neutrophilic inflammation in vivo. Clin. Exp. Immunol. 137, 272–278 (2004).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ćebović, T., Spasić, S. & Popović, M. Cytotoxic effects of the Viscum album L. extract on ehrlich tumour cells in vivo. Phyther. Res. 22, 1097–1103 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tröger, W. et al. Viscum album [L.] extract therapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: A randomised clinical trial on overall survival. Eur. J. Cancer 49, 3788–3797 (2013).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ostermann, T. et al. A Systematic review and meta-analysis on the survival of cancer patients treated with a fermented Viscum album L. extract (Iscador): An update of findings. Complement. Med. Res. 27(260), 271 (2020).
Google Scholar 
Loef, M. & Walach, H. Quality of life in cancer patients treated with mistletoe: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 20, 227 (2020).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Szurpnicka, A., Kowalczuk, A. & Szterk, A. Biological activity of mistletoe: In vitro and in vivo studies and mechanisms of action. Arch. Pharm. Res. 43, 593–629 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kim, S., Kim, K.-C. & Lee, C. Mistletoe (Viscum album) extract targets Axl to suppress cell proliferation and overcome cisplatin- and erlotinib-resistance in non-small cell lung cancer cells. Phytomedicine 36, 183–193 (2017).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Urech, K. & Baumgartner, S. Chemical constituents of Viscum album L.: Implications for the pharmaceutical preparation of mistletoe. Transl. Res. Biomed. 4(11), 23 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Franz, H., Ziska, P. & Kindt, A. Isolation and properties of three lectins from mistletoe (Viscum album L.). Biochem. J. 195, 481–484 (1981).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ochocka, J. R. & Piotrowski, A. Biologically active compounds from European mistletoe (Viscum album L.). Can. J. Plant Pathol. 24, 21–28 (2002).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hajtó, T. et al. Oncopharmacological perspectives of a plant lectin (Viscum album agglutinin-I): Overview of recent results from in vitro experiments and in vivo animal models, and their possible relevance for clinical applications. Evid. Based Complement. Altern. Med. 2, 59–67 (2005).Article 

Google Scholar 
Nazaruk, J. & Orlikowski, P. Phytochemical profile and therapeutic potential of Viscum album L. Nat. Prod. Res. 30, 373–385 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Samuelsson, G. Mistletoe toxins. Syst. Zool. 22, 566–569 (1973).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Debreczeni, J. É., Girmann, B., Zeeck, A., Krätzner, R. & Sheldrick, G. M. Structure of viscotoxin A3: Disulfide location from weak SAD data. Acta Crystallogr. Sect. D Biol. Crystallogr. 59, 2125–2132 (2003).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Parsakhoo, A. & Jalilvand, H. Effects of ironwood (Parrotia persica c A Meyer ) leaf litter on forest soil nutrients content. Am. J. Agric. Environ. Sci. 5, 244–249 (2009).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hosseini, S. M. Inscription of the Hyrcanian forests on the UNESCO world heritage list nomination file, UNESCO, 492. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1584/documents/ (2019).Hosseini, S. M. et al. The effects of Viscum album L. on foliar weight and nutrients content of host trees in Caspian forests (Iran). Polish J. Ecol. 55, 579–583 (2007).MathSciNet 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sefidi, K., Marvie Mohadjer, M. R., Etemad, V. & Copenheaver, C. A. Stand characteristics and distribution of a relict population of persian ironwood (Parrotia persica CA Meyer) in northern Iran. Flora Morphol. Distrib. Funct. Ecol. Plants 206, 418–422 (2011).Article 

Google Scholar 
Cărăbuş, M. C., Leinemann, L., Curtu, A. L. & Şofletea, N. Preliminary results on the genetic diversity of Carpinus betulus in Carpathian populations. Bull. Transilv. Univ. Brasov, Ser. II For Wood Ind. Agric. Food Eng. 8, 1–6 (2015).
Google Scholar 
Barbasz, A., Kreczmer, B., Rudolphi-Skorska, E. & Sieprawska, A. Biologically active substances in plant extracts from mistletoe Viscum album and trees: fir (Abies alba Mill.), pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) and yew (Taxus baccata L.). Herba Pol. 58, 16–26 (2012).
Google Scholar 
Wójciak-Kosior, M. et al. Evaluation of seasonal changes of triterpenic acid contents in viscum album from different host trees. Pharm. Biol. 55, 1–4 (2017).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Stefanucci, A. et al. Viscum album L. homogenizer-assisted and ultrasound-assisted extracts as potential sources of bioactive compounds. J. Food Biochem. 44, 1–12 (2020).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Urech, K., Schaller, G. & Jäggy, C. Viscotoxins, mistletoe lectins and their isoforms in mistletoe (Viscum album L.) extracts Iscador: Analytical results on pharmaceutical processing of mistletoe. Drug Res. 56, 428–434 (2006).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Soursouri, A., Hosseini, S. M. & Fattahi, F. Biochemical analysis of European mistletoe (Viscum album L.) foliage and fruit settled on Persian ironwood (Parrotia persica C. A. Mey) and hornbeam (Carpinus betulus L.). Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 22, 101360 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Önay-Uçar, E., Karagöz, A. & Arda, N. Antioxidant activity of Viscum album ssp. album. Fitoterapia 77, 556–560 (2006).PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Simona, V., Rugina, D. & Socaciu, C. Antioxidant activities of Viscum album’s leaves from various host trees. Bull. Univ Agric. Sci. Vet. Med. Cluj Napoca Agric. 65, 327–332 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Schaller, G., Urech, K., Grazi, G. & Giannattasio, M. Viscotoxin composition of the three European subspecies of Viscum album. Planta Med. 64, 677–678 (1998).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Holandino, C. et al. Phytochemical analysis and in vitro anti-proliferative activity of Viscum album ethanolic extracts. BMC Complement. Med. Ther. 20, 215 (2020).CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zuber, D. & Widmer, A. Phylogeography and host race differentiation in the European mistletoe (Viscum album L.). Mol. Ecol. 18, 1946–1962 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schaller, G., Urech, K. & Giannattasio, M. Cytotoxicity of different viscotoxins and extracts from the European subspecies of Viscum album L. Phyther. Res. 10, 473–477 (1996).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Eggenschwiler, J. et al. Mistletoe lectin is not the only cytotoxic component in fermented preparations of Viscum album from white fir (Abies pectinata). BMC Complement. Altern. Med. 7, 14 (2007).PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Jaggy, C., Musielski, H., Urech, K. & Schaller, G. Quantitative determination of lectins in mistletoe preparations. Arzneimittel-Forschung/Drug Res. 45, 905–909 (1995).CAS 

Google Scholar  More

Dolezal AG, Toth AL. Feedbacks between nutrition and disease in honey bee health. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2018;26:114–9.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Scofield HN, Mattila HR. Honey bee workers that are pollen stressed as larvae become poor foragers and waggle dancers as adults. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0121731.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
McFall-Ngai M, Hadfield MG, Bosch TCG, Carey HV, Domazet-Lošo T, Douglas AE, et al. Animals in a bacterial world, a new imperative for the life sciences. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:3229–36.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Akman Gündüz E, Douglas AE. Symbiotic bacteria enable insect to use a nutritionally inadequate diet. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2009;276:987–91.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Wu D, Daugherty SC, Van Aken SE, Pai GH, Watkins KL, Khouri H, et al. Metabolic Complementarity and Genomics of the Dual Bacterial Symbiosis of Sharpshooters. PLoS Biol 2006;4:e188.Bing X, Attardo GM, Vigneron A, Aksoy E, Scolari F, Malacrida A, et al. Unravelling the relationship between the tsetse fly and its obligate symbiont Wigglesworthia: transcriptomic and metabolomic landscapes reveal highly integrated physiological networks. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2017; 284:20170360.Itoh H, Jang S, Takeshita K, Ohbayashi T, Ohnishi N, Meng X-Y, et al. Host–symbiont specificity determined by microbe–microbe competition in an insect gut. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:22673–82.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Flórez LV, Scherlach K, Miller IJ, Rodrigues A, Kwan JC, Hertweck C, et al. An antifungal polyketide associated with horizontally acquired genes supports symbiont-mediated defense in Lagria villosa beetles. Nat Commun. 2018;9:2478.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kaltenpoth M, Göttler W, Herzner G, Strohm E. Symbiotic bacteria protect wasp larvae from fungal infestation. Curr Biol. 2005;15:475–9.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Oliver KM, Degnan PH, Hunter MS, Moran NA. Bacteriophages encode factors required for protection in a symbiotic mutualism. Science 2009;325:992–4.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shin SC, Kim SH, You H, Kim B, Kim AC, Lee KA, et al. Drosophila microbiome modulates host developmental and metabolic homeostasis via insulin signaling. Science 2011;334:670–4.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dedeine F, Vavre F, Fleury F, Loppin B, Hochberg ME, Boulétreau M. Removing symbiotic Wolbachia bacteria specifically inhibits oogenesis in a parasitic wasp. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:6247–52.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Koropatnick TA, Engle JT, Apicella MA, Stabb EV, Goldman WE, McFall-Ngai MJ. Microbial factor-mediated development in a host-bacterial mutualism. Science 2004;306:1186–8.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chun CK, Troll JV, Koroleva I, Brown B, Manzella L, Snir E, et al. Effects of colonization, luminescence, and autoinducer on host transcription during development of the squid-vibrio association. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:11323–8.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shikuma NJ, Pilhofer M, Weiss GL, Hadfield MG, Jensen GJ, Newman DK. Marine tubeworm metamorphosis induced by arrays of bacterial phage tail-like structures. Science 2014;343:529–33.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Freiberg C, Fellay R, Bairoch A, Broughton WJ, Rosenthal A, Perret X. Molecular basis of symbiosis between Rhizobium and legumes. Nature 1997;387:394–401.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Médigue C, Masson-Boivin C, Gilbert LB, Cruveiller S, Gris C, Batut J, et al. Experimental evolution of a plant pathogen into a legume symbiont. PLoS Biol. 2010;8:e1000280.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Brucker RM, Bordenstein SR. Speciation by symbiosis. Trends Ecol Evol. 2012;27:443–51.PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Moran NA, McCutcheon JP, Nakabachi A. Genomics and evolution of heritable bacterial symbionts. Annu Rev Genet. 2008;42:165–90.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Moran NA, Tran P, Gerardo NM. Symbiosis and insect diversification: an ancient symbiont of sap-feeding insects from the bacterial phylum Bacteroidetes. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2005;71:8802–10.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee FJ, Miller KI, McKinlay JB, Newton ILG. Differential carbohydrate utilization and organic acid production by honey bee symbionts. FEMS Microbiol Ecol. 2018;94:fiy113.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lee FJ, Rusch DB, Stewart FJ, Mattila HR, Newton ILG. Saccharide breakdown and fermentation by the honey bee gut microbiome. Environ Microbiol. 2015;17:796–815.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zheng H, Nishida A, Kwong WK, Koch H, Engel P, Steele MI, et al. Metabolism of toxic sugars by strains of the bee gut symbiont Gilliamella apicola. MBio 2016;7:e01326–16.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kešnerová L, Mars RAT, Ellegaard KM, Troilo M, Sauer U, Engel P. Disentangling metabolic functions of bacteria in the honey bee gut. PLoS Biol. 2017;15:e2003467.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gallai N, Salles JM, Settele J, Vaissière BE. Economic valuation of the vulnerability of world agriculture confronted with pollinator decline. Ecol Econ. 2009;68:810–21.Article 

Google Scholar 
Brodschneider R, Gray A, Adjlane N, Ballis A, Brusbardis V, Charrière JD, et al. Multi-country loss rates of honey bee colonies during winter 2016/2017 from the COLOSS survey. J Apic Res. 2018;57:452–7.Article 

Google Scholar 
Kulhanek K, Steinhauer N, Rennich K, Caron DM, Sagili RR, Pettis JS, et al. A national survey of managed honey bee 2015-6 annual colony losses in the USA. J Apic Res. 2017;56:328–40.Article 

Google Scholar 
Goulson D, Nicholls E, Botías C, Rotheray EL. Bee declines driven by combined stress from parasites, pesticides, and lack of flowers. Science 2015;347:1255957.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Dolezal AG, Carrillo-Tripp J, Judd TM, Allen Miller W, Bonning BC, Toth AL. Interacting stressors matter: Diet quality and virus infection in honeybee health. R Soc Open Sci. 2019;6:81803.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
St Clair AL, Zhang G, Dolezal AG, O’Neal ME, Toth AL, et al. Diversified farming in a monoculture landscape: effects on honey bee health and wild bee communities. Environ Entomol. 2020;49:753–64.Article 

Google Scholar 
Naug D. Nutritional stress due to habitat loss may explain recent honeybee colony collapses. Biol Conserv. 2009;142:2369–72.Article 

Google Scholar 
Taha EKA, Al-Kahtani S, Taha R. Protein content and amino acids composition of bee-pollens from major floral sources in Al-Ahsa, eastern Saudi Arabia. Saudi J Biol Sci. 2019;26:232–7.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
de Groot AP. Amino acid requirements for growth of the honeybee (Apis mellifica L.). Experientia 1952;8:192–4.Article 

Google Scholar 
Brodschneider R, Crailsheim K. Nutrition and health in honey bees. Apidologie 2010;41:278–94.Article 

Google Scholar 
Keller I, Fluri P, Imdorf A. Pollen nutrition and colony development in honey bees – Part II. Bee World. 2005;86:27–34.Article 

Google Scholar 
Huang Z. Pollen nutrition affects honey bee stress resistance. Terr Arthropod Rev. 2012;5:175–89.Article 

Google Scholar 
van Dooremalen C, Stam E, Gerritsen L, Cornelissen B, van der Steen J, van Langevelde F, et al. Interactive effect of reduced pollen availability and Varroa destructor infestation limits growth and protein content of young honey bees. J Insect Physiol. 2013;59:487–93.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Feldhaar H, Straka J, Krischke M, Berthold K, Stoll S, Mueller MJ, et al. Nutritional upgrading for omnivorous carpenter ants by the endosymbiont Blochmannia. BMC Biol. 2007;5:48.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Sannino DR, Dobson AJ, Edwards K, Angert ER, Buchon N. The Drosophila melanogaster gut microbiota provisions thiamine to its host. MBio 2018;9:e00155–18.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hammer TJ, Moran NA. Links between metamorphosis and symbiosis in holometabolous insects. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2019;374:20190068.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kowallik V, Mikheyev AS. Honey bee larval and adult microbime life stages are effectively decoupled with vertical transmisson overcoming early life perturbations. mBio 2021;12:e02966–21.CAS 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Storelli G, Defaye A, Erkosar B, Hols P, Royet J, Leulier F. Lactobacillus plantarum promotes Drosophila systemic growth by modulating hormonal signals through TOR-dependent nutrient sensing. Cell Metab. 2011;14:403–14.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wright GA, Nicolson SW, Shafir S. Nutritional physiology and ecology of honey bees. Annu Rev Entomol. 2017;63:327–44.PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Tarpy DR, Mattila HR, Newton ILG. Development of the honey bee gut microbiome throughout the queen-rearing process. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:3182–91.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Corby-Harris V, Snyder LA, Schwan MR, Maes P, McFrederick QS, Anderson KE. Origin and effect of Alpha 2.2 Acetobacteraceae in honey bee larvae and description of Parasaccharibacter apium gen. nov., sp. nov. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2014;80:7460–72.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Vojvodic S, Rehan SM, Anderson KE. Microbial gut diversity of Africanized and European honey bee larval instars. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:72106.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kwong WK, Medina LA, Koch H, Sing KW, Soh EJY, Ascher JS, et al. Dynamic microbiome evolution in social bees. Sci Adv. 2017;3:e1600513.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cohen O, Ashkenazy H, Belinky F, Huchon D, Pupko T. GLOOME: Gain loss mapping engine. Bioinformatics 2010;26:2914–5.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Price MN, Deutschbauer AM, Arkin AP. GapMind: Automated annotation of amino acid biosynthesis. mSystems 2020;5:e00291–20.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Schmehl DR, Tomé HVV, Mortensen AN, Martins GF, Ellis JD. Protocol for the in vitro rearing of honey bee (Apis mellifera L.) workers. J Apic Res. 2016;55:113–29.Article 

Google Scholar 
Li H, Tennessen JM. Preparation of Drosophila larval samples for gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS)-based metabolomics. J Vis Exp. 2018;136:e57847.
Google Scholar 
Rortais A, Arnold G, Halm MP, Touffet-Briens F. Modes of honeybees exposure to systemic insecticides: Estimated amounts of contaminated pollen and nectar consumed by different categories of bees. Apidologie 2005;36:71–83.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Buttstedt A, Mureşan CI, Lilie H, Hause G, Ihling CH, Schulze SH, et al. How honeybees defy gravity with royal jelly to raise queens. Curr Biol. 2018;28:1095–1100.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fratini F, Cilia G, Mancini S, Felicioli A. Royal jelly: An ancient remedy with remarkable antibacterial properties. Microbiol Res. 2016;192:130–41.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Fontana R, Mendes MA, De Souza BM, Konno K, César LMM, Malaspina O, et al. Jelleines: A family of antimicrobial peptides from the royal jelly of honeybees (Apis mellifera). Peptides 2004;25:919–28.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rokop ZP, Horton MA, Newton ILG. Interactions between cooccurring lactic acid bacteria in honey bee hives. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2015;81:7261–70.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Crailsheim K, Brodschneider R, Aupinel P, Behrens D, Genersch E, Vollmann J, et al. Standard methods for artificial rearing of Apis mellifera larvae. J Apic Res. 2013;52:1–16.Article 

Google Scholar 
Smith EA, Newton ILG. Genomic signatures of honey bee association in an acetic acid symbiont. Genome Biol Evol. 2020;12:1882–94.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kaftanoglu O, Linksvayer TA, Page RE. Rearing honey bees, Apis mellifera, in vitro 1: Effects of sugar concentrations on survival and development. J Insect Sci. 2011;11:96.PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Aupinel P, Fortini D, Dufour H, Tasei J-N, Michaud B, Odoux J-F, et al. Improvement of artificial feeding in a standard in vitro method for rearing Apis mellifera larvae. Bull Insectol. 2005;58:107–11.
Google Scholar 
Hansen AK, Moran NA. Aphid genome expression reveals host-symbiont cooperation in the production of amino acids. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:2849–54.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McCutcheon JP, McDonald BR, Moran NA. Convergent evolution of metabolic roles in bacterial co-symbionts of insects. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:15394–9.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Shigenobu S, Watanabe H, Hattori M, Sakaki Y, Ishikawa H. Genome sequence of the endocellular bacterial symbiont of aphids Buchnera sp. Aps Nat. 2000;407:81–86.CAS 

Google Scholar 
Gil R, Silva FJ, Zientz E, Delmotte F, González-Candelas F, Latorre A, et al. The genome sequence of Blochmannia floridanus: Comparative analysis of reduced genomes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:9388–93.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McCutcheon JP, Moran NA. Extreme genome reduction in symbiotic bacteria. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2012;10:13–26.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wernegreen JJ, Lazarus AB, Degnan PH. Small genome of Candidatus Blochmannia, the bacterial endosymbiont of Camponotus, implies irreversible specialization to an intracellular lifestyle. Microbiology 2002;148:2551–6.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
McCutcheon JP, Moran NA. Parallel genomic evolution and metabolic interdependence in an ancient symbiosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:19392–7.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bennett GM, Mccutcheon JP, Macdonald BR, Romanovicz D, Moran NA. Differential genome evolution between companion symbionts in an insect-bacterial symbiosis. mBio 2014;5:e01697–14.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Husnik F, Nikoh N, Koga R, Ross L, Duncan RP, Fujie M, et al. Horizontal gene transfer from diverse bacteria to an insect genome enables a tripartite nested mealybug symbiosis. Cell 2013;153:1567.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bao XY, Yan JY, Yao YL, Wang Y, Bin, Visendi P, Seal S, et al. Lysine provisioning by horizontally acquired genes promotes mutual dependence between whitefly and two intracellular symbionts. PLOS Pathog. 2021;17:e1010120.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cotte JF, Casabianca H, Giroud B, Albert M, Lheritier J, Grenier-Loustalot MF. Characterization of honey amino acid profiles using high-pressure liquid chromatography to control authenticity. Anal Bioanal Chem. 2004;378:1342–50.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Baker HG. Non-sugar chemical constituents of nectar. Apidologie 1977;8:349–56.Article 

Google Scholar 
Nyholm SV, McFall-Ngai MJ. The winnowing: Establishing the squid – Vibrios symbiosis. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2:632–42.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kikuchi Y, Hosokawa T, Fukatsu T. Insect-microbe mutualism without vertical transmission: a stinkbug acquires a beneficial gut symbiont from the environment every generation. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2007;73:4308–16.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Itoh H, Jang S, Takeshita K, Ohbayashi T, Ohnishi N, Meng XY, et al. Host–symbiont specificity determined by microbe–microbe competition in an insect gut. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:22673–82.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Oono R, Anderson CG, Denison RF. Failure to fix nitrogen by non-reproductive symbiotic rhizobia triggers host sanctions that reduce fitness of their reproductive clonemates. Proc R Soc B Biol Sci. 2011;278:2698–703.Article 

Google Scholar 
Brown BP, Wernegreen JJ. Genomic erosion and extensive horizontal gene transfer in gut-associated Acetobacteraceae. BMC Genom. 2019;20:1–15.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vitreschak AG, Rodionov DA, Mironov AA, Gelfand MS. Riboswitches: the oldest mechanism for the regulation of gene expression? Trends Genet. 2004;20:44–50.CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Meijuan X, Rao Z, Yang J, Dou W, Xu Z. The effect of a LYSE exporter overexpression on L-arginine production in Corynebacterium crenatum. Curr Microbiol. 2013;67:271–8.Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Indurthi SM, Chou H-T, Lu C-D. Molecular characterization of lysR-lysXE, gcdR-gcdHG and amaR-amaAB operons for lysine export and catabolism: a comprehensive lysine catabolic network in Pseudomonas aeruginosa PAO1. Microbiology 2016;162:876–88.CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pathania A, Sardesai AA. Distinct paths for basic amino acid export in Escherichia coli: YbjE (LysO) mediates export of L-lysine. J Bacteriol. 2015;197:2036–47.CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Miller DL, Smith EA, Newton ILG. A bacterial symbiont protects honey bees from fungal disease. mBio 2021;12:e00503–21.CAS 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

More than three billion people rely on the ocean to make a living, most of whom are in developing countries. For some 17% of the world’s population, fisheries and aquaculture provide the main source of animal protein. For the least-developed countries, fish contributes about 29% of animal protein intake; in other developing countries, it accounts for 19%1.As the global population increases, the demand for seafood is expected to rise, too. Already, Africa and Asia have seen fish production double over the past few decades. Globally, fish consumption is set to rise by around 15% by 20302.Although ocean ecosystems are strained by climate change, overfishing and more, studies nevertheless suggest that seafood can be expanded sustainably to meet future food demands3. Last year, international efforts promoting this approach included the Blue Food Assessment (a joint initiative of 25 research institutions) and the United Nations Food Systems Summit.Success will depend on small-scale fisheries. Small operations tend to deliver both food and income directly to the people who need them most, and locals have a strong incentive to make their practices sustainable. What’s more, these fisheries can be remarkably efficient. Almost everything that hand-to-mouth fisheries catch is consumed. By contrast, around 20% of the fish caught by industrial fleets is estimated to be wasted, mainly because of unwanted by-catch4. So, whereas large-scale operators land more fish, small-scale fisheries provide a larger share of the fish that is actually consumed.Small fishers rarely have the right resources to expand their operations, or even to survive. If they do scale up, they might lose some of their current advantages or engage in the same harmful practices as do large commercial fisheries. Managed with care, however, small fisheries could provide win–wins for livelihoods and the environment. Making this happen should be high on the agenda at the UN Ocean Conference in Lisbon this month.As someone who has studied food security and policymaking for decades, here I suggest ways to support and strengthen artisanal fishing operations.Small reformsThe potential and importance of small-scale fisheries has been increasingly recognized over the past decade. In 2014, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) provided voluntary guidelines to support sustainable small-scale fisheries, aimed at improving food security and eradicating poverty. A forthcoming report by the FAO, Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, and the non-profit organization WorldFish, headquartered in Penang, Malaysia, will conclude a remarkable initiative to collate case studies, questionnaire results and data sets to help get fishers a seat at policymakers’ tables. The UN General Assembly has declared 2022 the International Year of Artisanal Fisheries and Aquaculture.Most nations already have management policies for marine ecosystems that provide for small-scale fisheries. In India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Sri Lanka, for example, there is a ban on trawling within about 8 kilometres of the coastline to prevent industrial fishers from scooping up large catches, which protects those regions for local fishers. Countries such as Costa Rica ease access by exempting small-scale fisheries from licences, and Angola exempts subsistence and artisanal fishers from paying licensing fees5.But this is not enough. Small-scale fishers’ rights to access are often poorly defined, ineffectively enforced or unfairly distributed4. The boundaries of exclusive economic zones (EEZs) — the parts of the coast belonging to a given nation — are often poorly policed, and large-scale vessels regularly swoop in and take sea life through bottom trawling, something that small fishers seldom practice. Large-scale bottom-trawlers account for 26% of the global fisheries catch, with more than 99% of that occurring in the EEZs of coastal countries6. Even when there are well-meaning policies to protect local fishers, foreign vessels can take advantage. For instance, a 2018 investigation by the Environmental Justice Foundation in London found that around 90% of Ghana’s industrial fishing fleet was linked to Chinese ownership, despite Ghanaian laws expressly forbidding foreign ownership or control of its boats. Clearer definitions of the terms fisher, fishing and fishing vessel to make provisions for small-scale operators could help, in part, to avoid such abuse.Government subsidies also require reform. One estimate found that large-scale fishers receive about three-and-a-half times more subsidies than small-scale fishers do7. This widens the existing advantages of large operations in terms of vessels and gear, infrastructure (including cold storage), processing capacity and access to cheap fuel. By giving large-scale fishers the capacity to catch even more, it can have the perverse effect of encouraging overfishing8. Instead, subsidies and other funds should be directed towards small-scale fishers to let them expand their access to markets, while keeping them from adopting the negative practices of large-scale operations.More for consumptionThe total global loss and waste from fisheries is estimated at between 30% and 35% annually1. This could increase as smaller operations broaden their markets. A 2015 estimate of the Volta Basin coast in West Africa attributed 65% of fish-production losses to a lack of technology and good manufacturing practices, and to a lack of infrastructure such as decent roads and cold storage9. The study found that fish were rarely lost to physical damage during the process; most waste resulted from spoilage. Such losses limit the sale of fish locally and to distant markets.Public and private investment in cold-storage facilities and processing equipment (such as for drying, fermentation, pickling or smoking) could help. Current funding for fishery conservation projects comes from development partners, regional banks, the World Bank, private foundations and other agencies — with some entities also providing microloans to small-scale fisheries — but these efforts are uncoordinated and inadequate.One promising strategy is to pair international or national funding with direct contracts for feeding programmes linked to schools, hospitals and similar facilities. Such arrangements would provide small fisheries with large, consistent markets and storage infrastructure that boosts local consumption and does not incentivize overfishing.

Artisanal fishers at a fish-processing cooperative in Santa Rosa de Salinas, Ecuador.Credit: Camilo Pareja/AFP/Getty

Other strategies pair local fishers with conservation efforts. As fishing operations scale up, fish entrails and other waste cannot simply be thrown into the sea: care must be taken not to contaminate the environment. One option is to fund ecosystem-restoration projects that also benefit local fisheries. For example, the Mikoko Pamoja (Mangroves Together) project in Gazi Bay, Kenya, restores and conserves degraded mangrove forests, which act as nurseries for young fish. The restoration thus earns saleable carbon credits while enhancing nearby fishery grounds for the local community.Consumers could support small fisheries by buying local, because shorter supply chains mean more income for the fishers. The use of ecolabels — which seek to promote sustainably managed fisheries by certifying that a product has a reduced environmental impact — could also encourage consumer adoption, and help consumers to make informed choices.However, such certification is costly to obtain and maintain, and requires compliance, monitoring and reporting. Certification can distort market opportunities, effectively excluding small enterprises from entering international markets. These programmes can also have unintended consequences: most certification programmes focus on environmental sustainability and pay less attention to social responsibility elements, such as fairness in access to resources, markets and wages.Instead, simple incentive programmes could be implemented by funders, managers and local governments trying to promote sustainable fisheries. For example, local markets could display a rating system for individual fishers or small entrepreneurs. This could include various elements of sustainability other than environmental ones — such as providing information on the type of fishing gear, location of the catch and freshness. Promoting the rating as a social responsibility concept would inform consumers of the need to support sustainable fisheries. The rating system could be conducted by community members trained in inspection and enforcement.Local controlDiverse efforts are needed to protect small fisheries’ access and to boost local consumption and reduce waste, and must be tailored to local community conditions. The 2021 UN Food Systems Summit was a ‘people’s summit’ that elevated roles for Indigenous peoples and civil-society groups, yet the voice of fishing communities was notably absent.Few governments take an integrated approach to the development, implementation and enforcement of policies. For example, policies governing urban development tend not to consider the implications on the ocean, fish and fishers. In the late 2000s, for instance, fishers were initially denied access to traditional public fishing zones along the beach front in Durban, South Africa, following upgrades to the port and the development of a private marina and hotel. (Fishers later reclaimed some of the zones after protests and engagement with the authorities10.)Cooperatives can help on several fronts: by coordinating fishing activities, sharing information (about weather, sea conditions or fish movement) and advocating effectively for human and social rights. For instance, CoopeSoliDar, a small-scale fisheries management cooperative in San José, Costa Rica, has helped to strengthen collective action to sustainably use molluscs, alleviate poverty and strengthen the representation of women and young people in community decision-making. Governments can help by creating a legal framework to establish cooperatives and include them in decisions to manage marine resources.Local communities can also stand up for themselves. For example, a class action by a group of 5,000 artisanal fishers in South Africa in 2004 argued against a policy they said did not give them recognition or access to food and fishing rights that were established in the country’s constitution. The court ruled in the group’s favour in 2007, and the resulting legal framework granted small-scale fishers collective community fishing rights, recognizing community members as bona fide fishers11.Integrated inputsSmall fisheries do not operate in isolation. Unlike terrestrial resources, the ocean is an extensive, global commons without clear territorial boundaries. Issues as diverse as climate change, ocean acidification, overfishing and pollution by nutrients and plastics and other chemicals all affect local fishers. But such system interactions get scant attention when fisheries policies focus on a single seafood stock or individual fishing area.Whereas the concept of integrated land management has been part of the development agenda for a few decades, integrated marine management is only now emerging. To work, it must involve all relevant stakeholders, including small-scale fishers.A context-specific strategy in the Seychelles is a leading example of such integration. Communities, financing partners and the government worked together to create the Seychelles Marine Spatial Plan Initiative, which protects 30% of the archipelago’s waters and boosts climate resilience. The Seychelles faces significant threats from rising sea levels and warmer air and water temperatures that put fisheries, infrastructure, tourism and its rich biodiversity at risk.In an example in the Coral Triangle region (encompassing Indonesia, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, the Philippines, the Solomon Islands and East Timor), local communities gave their input to a marine protection plan. This led to a greater understanding of how practices such as overfishing and taking undersized stock sustains marine and coastal resources, and how managing these helps to address food security, climate change and threats to marine biodiversity. Such cooperation between fishing communities and governments in managing marine protected areas is essential to the preservation of future fish stocks (see go.nature.com/3xvkqxj).Fishers should be actively engaged in relevant meetings held by the UN and national and local councils, so that they can weigh in on matters that affect fishing access, their livelihoods and environmental concerns. Both fishers and organizers must help to build empowerment mechanisms to make sure their voices are heard, such as providing translation services and scheduling meetings at accessible locations. This is important not just for the fishers’ human rights, but also because much can be learnt from artisanal fishers’ local knowledge.Moves that would, for instance, restrict the fishing season or areas so that stocks or biodiversity can recover should include compensation mechanisms that will secure fishers’ cooperation and livelihoods. Social-protection measures such as food and income assistance can also help to tide fishers over.When fish swim in schools, they move more efficiently, forage better and are protected from predators. The same might be said for small-scale fishers, but those networks should extend to local and international communities, too. Collaborative problem-solving and an integrated food system can deliver seafood protein, sustainably, to a world that increasingly needs it. More

Aissi A, Beghami Y, Heuertz M (2019) Le chêne faginé (Quercus faginea, Fagaceae) en Algérie: potentiel germinatif et variabilité morphologique des glands et des semis. Plant Ecol Evol 152:437–449Article 

Google Scholar 
Aissi A, Beghami Y, Lepais O, Véla E (2021) Morphological and taxonomic analysis of Quercus faginea (Fagaceae) complex in Algeria. Botany 99:99–113Article 

Google Scholar 
Alberto F, Niort J, Derory J, Lepais O, Vitalis R, Galop D et al. (2010) Population differentiation of sessile oak at the altitudinal front of migration in the French Pyrenees. Mol Ecol 19:2626–2639CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Allendorf FW, Luikart G (2007) Conservation and the genetics of populations. Blackwell PubDe Barba M, Miquel C, Lobréaux S, Quenette PY, Swenson JE, Taberlet P (2016) High-throughput microsatellite genotyping in ecology: Improved accuracy, efficiency, standardization and success with low-quantity and degraded DNA. Mol Ecol Resour 17:492–507PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Barthe S, Gugerli F, Barkley NA, Maggia L, Cardi C, Scotti I (2012) Always look on both sides: phylogenetic information conveyed by simple sequence repeat allele sequences. PLoS One 7:e40699CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Beaumont MA, Zhang W, Balding DJ (2002) Approximate Bayesian computation in population genetics. Genetics 162:2025–35PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Belkhir K, Borsa P, Chikhi L, Raufaste N, Bonhomme F (2004) GENETIX 4.05, logiciel sous Windows TM pour la génétique des populations. Laboratoire Génome, Populations, Interactions, CNRS UMR 5171, Université de Montpellier II, Montpellier (France)
Google Scholar 
Bradbury IR, Wringe BF, Watson B, Paterson I, Horne J, Beiko R et al. (2018) Genotyping-by-sequencing of genome-wide microsatellite loci reveals fine-scale harvest composition in a coastal Atlantic salmon fishery. Evol Appl 11:918–930CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Buschbom J, Yanbaev Y, Degen B (2011) Efficient long-distance gene flow into an isolated relict oak stand. J Hered 102:464–472PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Chapuis M, Raynal L, Plantamp C, Meynard CN, Blondin L, Marin J et al. (2020) A young age of subspecific divergence in the desert locust inferred by ABC Random Forest. Mol Ecol 29:4542–4558PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Cornuet J-M, Ravigné V, Estoup A (2010) Inference on population history and model checking using DNA sequence and microsatellite data with the software DIYABC (v1.0). BMC Bioinforma 11:401Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Crow JF, Aoki K (1984) Group selection for a polygenic behavioral trait: Estimating the degree of population subdivision. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 81:6073–6077CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Curto M, Winter S, Seiter A, Schmid L, Scheicher K, Barthel LMF et al. (2019) Application of a SSR-GBS marker system on investigation of European Hedgehog species and their hybrid zone dynamics. Ecol Evol 9:2814–2832PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Darby BJ, Erickson SF, Hervey SD, Ellis-Felege SN (2016) Digital fragment analysis of short tandem repeats by high-throughput amplicon sequencing. Ecol Evol 6:4502–4512PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Dickey AM, Hall PM, Shatters RG, Mckenzie CL (2013) Evolution and homoplasy at the Bem6 microsatellite locus in three sweetpotato whitefly (Bemisia tabaci) cryptic species. BMC Res Notes 6:249PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Do C, Waples RS, Peel D, Macbeth GM, Tillett BJ, Ovenden JR (2013) NeEstimator v2: re-implementation of software for the estimation of contemporary effective population size (Ne) from genetic data. Mol Ecol Resour 14:209–214PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Durand J, Bodenes C, Chancerel E, Frigerio JM, Vendramin G, Sebastiani F et al. (2010) A fast and cost-effective approach to develop and map EST-SSR markers: oak as a case study. BMC Genomics 11:570PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Earl DA, vonHoldt BM (2012) STRUCTURE HARVESTER: a website and program for visualizing STRUCTURE output and implementing the Evanno method. Conserv Genet Resour 4:359–361Article 

Google Scholar 
Estoup A, Jarne P, Cornuet J-M (2002) Homoplasy and mutation model at microsatellite loci and their consequences for population genetics analysis. Mol Ecol 11:1591–1604CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Estoup A, Raynal L, Verdu P, Marin J-M (2018) Model choice using Approximate Bayesian Computation and Random Forests: analyses based on model grouping to make inferences about the genetic history of Pygmy human populations. J la Société Fr Stat 159:167–190
Google Scholar 
Excoffier L, Dupanloup I, Huerta-Sánchez E, Sousa VC, Foll M (2013) Robust demographic inference from genomic and SNP data. PLoS Genet 9:e1003905PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Excoffier L, Lischer HEL (2010) Arlequin suite ver 3.5: a new series of programs to perform population genetics analyses under Linux and Windows. Mol Ecol Resour 10:564–567PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Falush D, Stephens M, Pritchard JK (2003) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data: linked loci and correlated allele frequencies. Genetics 164:1567–87CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Feliner GN (2014) Patterns and processes in plant phylogeography in the Mediterranean Basin. A review. Perspect Plant Ecol, Evol Syst 16:265–278Article 

Google Scholar 
Flagel L, Brandvain Y, Schrider DR (2019) The unreasonable effectiveness of convolutional neural networks in population genetic inference. Mol Biol Evol 36:220–238CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Foll M, Gaggiotti O (2008) A genome-scan method to identify selected loci appropriate for both dominant and codominant markers: A Bayesian perspective. Genetics 180:977–993PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gaggiotti OE, Chao A, Peres-Neto P, Chiu CH, Edwards C, Fortin MJ et al. (2018) Diversity from genes to ecosystems: A unifying framework to study variation across biological metrics and scales. Evol Appl 11:1176–1193PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
García Murillo P., Harvey-Brown Y (2017) Quercus canariensis. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species,, p e.T78809256A80570536GBIF Secratariat (2021a) Quercus faginea Lam. In: GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/39omeiaccessed via GBIF.org on 2022-05-10GBIF Secratariat (2021b). Quercus canariensis Willd. In: GBIF Backbone Taxonomy. Checklist dataset https://doi.org/10.15468/39omeiaccessed via GBIF.org on 2022-05-10Gómez A, Lunt DH (2007) Refugia within refugia: Patterns of phylogeographic concordance in the Iberian peninsula. In: Weiss S, Ferrand N (eds) Phylogeography of Southern European Refugia. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, p 155–188Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Gorener V, Harvey-Brown Y, Barstow M (2017) Quercus canariensis. IUCN red List Threat species e.T7880925Goudet J (1995) FSTAT (Version 1.2): A computer program to calculate F-statistics. J Hered 86:485–486Article 

Google Scholar 
Hampe A, Petit RJ (2005) Conserving biodiversity under climate change: the rear edge matters. Ecol Lett 8:461–7PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hardy OJ, Charbonnel N, Fréville H, Heuertz M (2003) Microsatellite allele sizes: a simple test to assess their significance on genetic differentiation. Genetics 163:1467–82CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hardy OJ, Vekemans X (2002) SPAGeDi: a versatile computer program to analyse spatial genetic structure at the individual or population levels. Mol Ecol Notes 2:618–620Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Harvey-Brown Y, García Murillo PG, Buira A (2017) Quercus faginea. IUCN Red List Threat Species: e.T78916251A80570540.Henriques R, von der Heyden S, Matthee CA (2016) When homoplasy mimics hybridization: a case study of Cape hakes (Merluccius capensis and M. paradoxus). PeerJ 4:e1827PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hewitt GM (1999) Post-glacial re-colonization of European biota. Biol J Linn Soc 68:87–112Article 

Google Scholar 
Hey J, Won YJ, Sivasundar A, Nielsen R, Markert JA (2004) Using nuclear haplotypes with microsatellites to study gene flow between recently separated Cichlid species. Mol Ecol 13:909–919CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoban S, Bruford M, D’Urban Jackson J, Lopes-Fernandes M, Heuertz M, Hohenlohe PA et al. (2020) Genetic diversity targets and indicators in the CBD post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework must be improved. Biol Conserv 248:108654Article 

Google Scholar 
Hoogenboom J, de Knijff P, Laros JFJ, de Leeuw RH, van der Gaag KJ, Sijen T (2016) FDSTools: A software package for analysis of massively parallel sequencing data with the ability to recognise and correct STR stutter and other PCR or sequencing noise. Forensic Sci Int Genet 27:27–40PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hothorn T, Hornik K, van de Wiel MA, Zeileis A (2008) Implementing a class of permutation tests: the coin package. J Stat Softw 28:1–23Article 

Google Scholar 
Jamieson IG, Allendorf FW (2012) How does the 50/500 rule apply to MVPs? Trends Ecol Evol 27:578–584PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jerome D, Vasquez F (2018) Quercus faginea. IUCN Red List Threat Species e.T7891625Kalinowski ST (2005) HP-RARE 1.0: A computer program for performing rarefaction on measures of allelic richness. Mol Ecol Notes 5:187–189CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kampfer S, Lexer C, Glössl J, Steinkellner H (1998) Characterization of (GA)n microsatellite loci from Quercus robur. Hereditas 129:183–186CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kivelä M, Arnaud-Haond S, Saramäki J (2015) EDENetworks: A user-friendly software to build and analyse networks in biogeography, ecology and population genetics. Mol Ecol Resour 15:117–122PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Kopelman NM, Mayzel J, Jakobsson M, Rosenberg NA, Mayrose I (2015) Clumpak: A program for identifying clustering modes and packaging population structure inferences across K. Mol Ecol Resour 15:1179–1191CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Layton KKS, Dempson B, Snelgrove PVR, Duffy SJ, Messmer AM, Paterson IG et al. (2020) Resolving fine‐scale population structure and fishery exploitation using sequenced microsatellites in a northern fish. Evol Appl: eva.12922.Lepais O, Chancerel E, Boury C, Salin F, Manicki A, Taillebois L et al. (2020) Fast sequence-based microsatellite genotyping development workflow. PeerJ 8:e9085PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lepais O, Leger V, Gerber S (2006) Short note: high throughput microsatellite genotyping in oak species. Silvae Genet 55:238Article 

Google Scholar 
Lepais O, Muller SD, Ben Saad-Limam S, Benslama M, Rhazi L, Belouahem-Abed D et al. (2013) High genetic diversity and distinctiveness of rear-edge climate relicts maintained by ancient tetraploidisation for Alnus glutinosa. PLoS One 8:e75029CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Leroy T, Roux C, Villate L, Bodénès C, Romiguier J, Paiva JAP et al. (2017) Extensive recent secondary contacts between four European white oak species. N. Phytol 214:865–878CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Lye GC, Lepais O, Goulson D (2011) Reconstructing demographic events from population genetic data: the introduction of bumblebees to New Zealand. Mol Ecol 20:2888–900CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Magri D, Fineschi S, Bellarosa R, Buonamici A, Sebastiani F, Schirone B et al. (2007) The distribution of Quercus suber chloroplast haplotypes matches the palaeogeographical history of the western Mediterranean. Mol Ecol 16:5259–66CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Marin J, Pudlo P, Estoup A, Robert C (2018) Likelihood-free model choice. In: Sisson S A, Fan Y, Beaumont M (eds) Handbook of Approximate Bayesian Computation, CRC Press, pp. 153.Médail F, Diadema K (2009) Glacial refugia influence plant diversity patterns in the Mediterranean Basin. J Biogeogr 36:1333–1345Article 

Google Scholar 
Moracho E, Moreno G, Jordano P, Hampe A (2016) Unusually limited pollen dispersal and connectivity of Pedunculate oak (Quercus robur) refugial populations at the species’ southern range margin. Mol Ecol 25:3319–3331CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mountain JL, Knight A, Jobin M, Gignoux C, Miller A, Lin AA et al. (2002) SNPSTRs: Empirically derived, rapidly typed, autosomal haplotypes for inference of population history and mutational processes. Genome Res 12:1766–1772CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Muir G, Lowe AJ, Fleming CC, Vogl C (2004) High nuclear genetic diversity, high levels of outcrossing and low differentiation among remnant populations of Quercus petraea at the margin of its range in Ireland. Ann Bot 93:691–697CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Neophytou C, Gärtner SM, Vargas-Gaete R, Michiels H-G (2015) Genetic variation of Central European oaks: shaped by evolutionary factors and human intervention? Tree Genet Genomes 11:1–15Article 

Google Scholar 
Payseur BA, Cutter AD (2006) Integrating patterns of polymorphism at SNPs and STRs. Trends Genet 22:424–429CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Petit RJ, Brewer S, Bordács S, Burg K, Cheddadi R, Coart E et al. (2002) Identification of refugia and post-glacial colonisation routes of European white oaks based on chloroplast DNA and fossil pollen evidence. Ecol Manag 156:49–74Article 

Google Scholar 
Petit RJ, Hampe A, Cheddadi R (2005) Climate changes and tree phylogeography in the Mediterranean. Taxon 54:877–885Article 

Google Scholar 
Press MO, Hall AN, Morton EA, Queitsch C (2019) Substitutions are boring: Some arguments about parallel mutations and high mutation rates. Trends Genet 35:253–264CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Press MO, Mccoy RC, Hall AN, Akey JM, Queitsch C (2018) Massive variation of short tandem repeats with functional consequences across strains of Arabidopsis thaliana. Genome Res 28:1169–1178CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pritchard JK, Stephens M, Donnelly P (2000) Inference of population structure using multilocus genotype data. Genetics 155:945–59CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Pudlo P, Marin J-M, Estoup A, Cornuet J-M, Gautier M, Robert CP (2016) Reliable ABC model choice via random forests. Bioinformatics 32:859–866CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Ramakrishnan U, Mountain JL (2004) Precision and accuracy of divergence time estimates from STR and SNPSTR variation. Mol Biol Evol 21:1960–1971CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Raynal L, Marin J-M, Pudlo P, Ribatet M, Robert CP, Estoup A (2019) ABC random forests for Bayesian parameter inference. Bioinformatics 35:1720–1728CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Rodríguez-Sánchez F, Hampe A, Jordano P, Arroyo J (2010) Past tree range dynamics in the Iberian Peninsula inferred through phylogeography and palaeodistribution modelling: A review. Rev Palaeobot Palynol 162:507–521Article 

Google Scholar 
Šarhanová P, Pfanzelt S, Brandt R, Himmelbach A, Blattner FR (2018) SSR-seq: Genotyping of microsatellites using next-generation sequencing reveals higher level of polymorphism as compared to traditional fragment size scoring. Ecol Evol 8:10817–10833PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Scotti-Saintagne C, Mariette S, Porth I, Goicoechea PG, Barreneche T, Bodénès C et al. (2004) Genome scanning for interspecific differentiation between two closely related oak species [Quercus robur L. and Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl.]. Genetics 168:1615–26CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Vartia S, Villanueva-Cañas JL, Finarelli J, Farrell ED, Collins PC, Hughes GM et al. (2016) A novel method of microsatellite genotyping-by-sequencing using individual combinatorial barcoding. R Soc Open Sci 3:150565PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Viruel J, Haguenauer A, Juin M, Mirleau F, Bouteiller D, Boudagher-Kharrat M et al. (2018) Advances in genotyping microsatellite markers through sequencing and consequences of scoring methods for Ceratonia siliqua (Leguminosae). Appl Plant Sci 6:e01201PubMed 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang J (2016) Individual identification from genetic marker data: developments and accuracy comparisons of methods. Mol Ecol Resour 16:163–175CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Waples RS, Do C (2010) Linkage disequilibrium estimates of contemporary Ne using highly variable genetic markers: A largely untapped resource for applied conservation and evolution. Evol Appl 3:244–262PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Xie KT, Wang G, Thompson AC, Wucherpfennig JI, Reimchen TE, MacColl ADC et al. (2019) DNA fragility in the parallel evolution of pelvic reduction in stickleback fish. Science (80-) 363:81–84CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar  More

In our simulations for the autotrophs, we varied two of the three trade-off properties (level of defence, plasticity costs and defence costs; see Fig. 1b) at a time and kept the third one constant. This results in three constellations reflecting three different trade-offs between these properties (Table 1):

parallel: trade-off between defence and plasticity costs;

crossing: trade-off between defence costs and plasticity costs;

angle: trade-off between defence and defence costs.

Table 1 Description of the three constellations parallel, crossing, and angle defining the position of the four phenotypes in the trait space of defence and growth rate.Full size tableIn all three constellations, the autotrophic species B spanned the entire defence range, i.e. it had a completely undefended phenotype Bu and a maximally defended phenotype Bd. A either had a more limited defence range (in constellations parallel and angle) or spanned the entire range as well (in constellation crossing), representing three distinct ways that the trade-off between defence, growth rate, and plasticity range may play out. For each constellation, we varied the maximum switching rate χmax over 5 orders of magnitude to investigate the effect of plasticity (Table 1, middle row). This parameter determines how rapidly a species can switch between phenotypes (see “Methods”, “Exchange rates”); higher values indicate faster adaptation. These results were also compared with a non-plastic baseline scenario where both phenotypes of each species are presented but χmax = 0 (Table 1, upper row), as well as a rigid scenario where the species have only a single phenotype (Table 1, bottom row). All parameters and their values can be found in Supplementary Table S1.In the following, we give a detailed description of the results for constellation parallel, where the autotroph species A and B have the same defence costs resulting in parallel trade-off lines between defence and growth rate, while varying the level of defence for A and varying the plasticity costs for B (Table 1, left column). We start with examining patterns for the phenotype biomasses, coexistence and community stability in the non-plastic baseline scenario “parallel 0”, and then compare the corresponding scenarios with a low exchange rate (“parallel 0.01”) and a high exchange rate (“parallel 1”). We next discuss the other two constellations (crossing and angle, Table 1) more briefly. Finally, we generalize across all scenarios and focus on the coexistence, the degree of maladaptive switching, and the consumer and total autotroph biomasses.Non-plastic baseline dynamics: scenario parallel 0
In this scenario, four single phenotypes unconnected by exchange compete with each other. Thus, species coexistence here depends entirely on phenotype coexistence: the trade-offs have to be such that for each species, at least one phenotype is a good enough competitor to survive. Which phenotypes survive depend on the two trade-off parameters, defence of the defended phenotype of species A (dAu) and plasticity costs for species B (pcB), which thus determine whether coexistence is possible.The defence costs were kept constant at an intermediate value of 0.3 for both species, resulting in parallel trade-off lines (Table 1, scenario “parallel 0”). The undefended phenotype of A, Au, is a growth-specialist with the highest growth rate of all phenotypes. The defended phenotype of the same species, Ad, has a defence between 0 and 0.9 and a relatively high growth rate, and can be viewed as a generalist. Species B has variable plasticity costs that lower the growth rate of both phenotypes. The defended phenotype of species B, Bd, has the lowest growth rate of all phenotypes but is very well-defended, and thus a defence-specialist. Its undefended phenotype, Bu, is as undefended as Au but has a lower growth rate; it is thus always an inferior competitor and inevitably goes extinct (Fig. 2c).Figure 2Biomasses, coexistence and trait space for scenario parallel 0. Biomasses of the four autotrophic phenotypes (a–d), their coexistence patterns (e), the consumer biomass (f) and the autotrophs’ trait values (g–j) (higher biomasses are shown by darker colours). Lines in (a–f) separate the regions I–III of different coexistence patterns. Note that in (a–f), the y-axis is reversed to show increasing fitness along all axes. An exemplary trait combination for every region is shown in (g–j); larger symbols indicate the surviving phenotypes. Shaded areas in (e) depict oscillating systems (quarter-lag predator–prey cycles in dense shading, antiphase cycles in loose shading).Full size imageAs Bu never survives, coexistence of the autotroph species requires the survival of defence-specialist Bd. Bd can only survive if Ad is not too defended, because Ad has a higher growth rate than Bd and will outcompete Bd in the “defended” niche otherwise (region Ib; Fig. 2d,h). A second criterion is that the plasticity costs for B must not be too high, because then the benefits of the defence of Bd no longer outweigh the costs, and it will go extinct even if there are no other highly defended phenotypes around (region Ia; Fig. 2d,g). In the regions where Bd goes extinct, species coexistence is not possible (Fig. 2e). The generalist Ad either survives by itself (region Ia in Fig. 2b,g) if its defence is low to intermediate, or together with the growth-specialist Au if its defence is high (region Ib in Fig. 2a,b,h). In the regions II and III where Bd survives, it never survives on its own, but always together with one of the phenotypes of A. It coexists with the growth-specialist Au if the plasticity costs are very low (region II in Fig. 2,i), and together with Ad if they are low to intermediate (region III in Fig. 2,j). These two regions do support species coexistence (Fig. 2e).In three of the four regions (Ib, II and III in Fig. 2f), consumer biomass is low, because the final community always contains a well-defended phenotype (Ad in region Ib, and Bd in regions II and III); the overall level of defence of the community is relatively high in these regions (Supplementary Figure S1). Conversely, consumer biomass is relatively high in region Ia, because the only surviving autotroph phenotype is relatively fast-growing and fairly undefended (Fig. 2f,g). The regions where a well-defended phenotype survives often show antiphase cycles (Ib, II and III in Fig. 2e). These cycles do not occur in the region where only Ad survives (Ia in Fig. 2e); but regular quarter-lag predator–prey cycles can be found here if Ad is almost entirely undefended.While the community defence (i.e. mean defence of the autotroph community) depends strongly on the coexisting phenotypes, the community growth rate is roughly constant because over the entire trait space, at least one phenotype with a high growth rate always survives (Supplementary Figure S1). The standing variance of the community defence was high when two phenotypes coexist as they occupy different niches along the defence axis (Fig. 2h–j). In contrast, the variance of the community growth rate was very low and almost constant across all regions.Effect of phenotypic plasticityEven a little bit of plasticity in the scenario parallel 0.01 (χmax = 0.01) can change the above patterns for coexistence, stability, and average consumer biomass (Fig. 3a–d). While the autotrophs are intuitively expected to benefit from being plastic, the effect of plasticity on consumer biomass always turned out to be positive (Fig. 3a). This may be explained by the fact that switching was always, on average, maladaptive (Fig. 3c,d), measured by the adaptation index Φ (see Eqs. (11–13) in “Methods”). This index combines information on the net “flow” of individuals due to switching (i.e. whether more undefended individuals switch to defended or vice versa) with the fitness difference between the two phenotypes, and thus measures whether overall, more individuals switch from a low-fitness to a high-fitness phenotype (adaptive) or the reverse (maladaptive). This index can approach zero, but is always negative at equilibrium (see Appendix B), indicating maladaptive switching.Figure 3Consumer biomass, autotroph coexistence and maladaptive switching for the scenarios parallel 0.01 (a–d) and parallel 1 (e–h). Consumer biomass (a,e), the autotroph coexistence patterns (b,f), and the autotrophs’ maladaptive switching Φ (c,d,g,h) (higher biomasses or more intensive maladaptive switching are shown by darker colours). Lines separate the regions I–III of different autotroph coexistence. The y-axis is reversed to follow the pattern of increasing fitness. Grey areas in (c,d,g,h) depict areas where the species was extinct. Shaded areas in b and f depict oscillating systems (quarter-lag predator–prey cycles in dense shading, antiphase cycles in loose shading).Full size imageThe most striking effect of plasticity was on coexistence, which was affected both positively and negatively by plasticity in different regions of the parameter space (Fig. 3b, Supplementary Figure S4a–d). A negative effect on coexistence is seen in region II, where the autotroph species previously coexisted (Fig. 2e), while with plasticity, B outcompeted A (Fig. 3b). Without plasticity, coexistence was possible in this region because Au and Bd survived; importantly, Au outcompeted Bu due to its higher growth rate, even though the difference between their growth rates is very small in this region (Fig. 2i). Plasticity reverses the competitive exclusion pattern between the two undefended phenotypes: Bu receives a constant flow of biomass from the well-defended Bd, which compensates for its slightly lower growth rate and allows it to outcompete Au. Thus, coexistence is reduced as a direct consequence of maladaptive switching.Plasticity can also promote coexistence, as the coexistence region now extends into former region Ib where the generalist Ad is highly defended (Fig. 2b, Supplementary Figure S1a). This is also an effect of maladaptive switching, though in this case the effect is indirect, mediated through the effect of plasticity on consumer biomass. Without plasticity, coexistence was impossible in region Ib because Bd was always outcompeted by Ad: even though the latter had a slightly lower level of defence, this was outweighed by its higher growth rate, making Ad the superior competitor over Bd. However, plasticity changes this because maladaptive switching increases the consumer biomass, which in turn alters the cost/ benefit balance of defence: Bd derives a stronger benefit from its high level of defence, which now outweighs the cost and allows it to survive. Coexistence through this mechanism is not possible when the plasticity costs for B are too high or when Ad is too well-defended, explaining the narrowing of the coexistence “tail” for high defence of Ad (Fig. 3b).While the patterns of coexistence changed when allowing for plasticity, the patterns in the trait values were nearly indistinguishable from the previous scenario (Supplementary Figure S1, S2). Finally, plasticity had a strong impact on the community dynamics, as most of the antiphase cycles were stabilized (Ib, II, III in Fig. 3b). Their area decreased sharply as these cycles were characterized by asynchronous dynamics between the two prey phenotypes, which were reduced by plasticity. In contrast, the area of the quarter-lag predator–prey cycles remained unaffected by plasticity.All the above patterns were found to a far stronger degree with a higher amount of plasticity (χmax = 1; Fig. 3e–h, Supplementary Figure S4e–h). Consumer biomass increased strongly everywhere (cf. Fig. 3a,e), reflecting the strong increase in the degree of maladaptive switching (cf. Fig. 3c,d,g,h). The higher exchange rates led to more synchronization between the phenotypes, extinguishing the antiphase cycles completely (Fig. 3f). It also decreased the biomass of both defended phenotypes (cf. Supplementary Figure S4b,d,f,h). This in turn led to a lower community defence and a higher community growth rate (Supplementary Figure S3) both contributing to a higher consumer biomass. Finally, there was a sharp decrease in the coexistence region for high plasticity (Fig. 3e). Region II, where B outcompetes A through maladaptive switching, doubled in size due to the much higher degree of maladaptive switching (Fig. 3g,h). Region I, where A outcompetes B, now also increased, when the level of defence of Ad is relatively low (Fig. 3e). This is again an indirect effect of maladaptive switching causing a strong increase in consumer biomass, affecting the cost/ benefit balance of defence: while Bd derives a strong benefit from its high level of defence, Bu is completely undefended, and is at an extra disadvantage because of its low growth rate. Thus, while Bd would have been able to survive by itself, the high exchange rate causes a strong source-sink dynamic that drives B extinct.Effect of plasticity in constellations crossing and angle
In constellation crossing the trade-off lines of both species cross in the trait space, as the level of defence is the same for both defended phenotypes; species B has a lower growth rate for its undefended phenotype than species A due to plasticity costs, while its defence costs are low and thus the growth rate of its defended phenotype is higher than for species A (Table 1, Supplementary Figure S5). Without plasticity the crossing trade-off lines lead to coexistence of both species in all simulations as Au and Bd were always the only survivors, mostly showing antiphase oscillations (Supplementary Figure S5).Allowing for phenotypic plasticity has the same results as were observed for constellation parallel: consumer biomass sharply increases (Fig. 4a,e); antiphase cycles are dampened or absent; and the area of coexistence decreases (Fig. 4b,f). All these changes are more pronounced for higher exchange rates (cf. Fig. 4a,b,e,f). Again, the biomass of the defended phenotypes decreased for high exchange rates (Supplementary Figure S6). Switching was always maladaptive for high exchange rates (Fig. 4g,h), and mostly maladaptive for low exchange rates (Fig. 4c,d). As was seen for constellation parallel, maladaptive switching was the reason for the decrease in coexistence. B can outcompete A when B has low plasticity costs. Bd has a much higher growth rate than Ad, while the undefended phenotypes have similar growth rates. The direction of competitive exclusion between Au and Bu is thus easily reversed by Bd donating biomass to the sink Bu, allowing B to occupy both niches and outcompete A (region II in Fig. 4b,f). The same mechanism happens in reverse for high plasticity and defence costs of B: the differences in growth rate for the undefended phenotypes are high, while the defended phenotypes have very similar growth rates. Au can support Ad, and A outcompetes B (region III in Fig. 4b,f).Figure 4Coexistence and maladaptive switching for scenario crossing 0.01 (a-d) and crossing 1 (e–h). Consumer biomass (a,e), the autotroph coexistence patterns (b,f), and the autotrophs’ maladaptive switching Φ (c,d,g,h) (higher biomasses or more intensive maladaptive switching are shown by darker colours). Lines separate the regions I–III of different autotroph coexistence. The x- and y-axis are reversed to follow the pattern of increasing fitness. Shaded areas in (b) depict antiphase cycles. Grey areas in (c,d,g,h) depict areas where the species was extinct. Shaded grey areas depict areas without simulations (cf. “Methods”). Note that (c,d,g,h) have each a different colour scale.Full size imageIn constellation angle there are no plasticity costs, and thus the undefended phenotypes Au and Bu have identical growth rates. The defended phenotypes take the same places in trait space as in the parallel constellation: Ad is a generalist, with a lower level of defence and a relatively high growth rate due to low defence costs, whereas Bd is a defence-specialist with a high level of defence but a low growth rate. This leads to the trade-off lines forming an angle (see Table 1). Without phenotypic plasticity, the coexistence patterns are the same as in constellation parallel, except that no competitive exclusion occurs between the undefended phenotypes; instead, they (neutrally) coexist in regions Ib, II and III (Supplementary Figure S7; cf. Fig. 2).With plasticity, neutral coexistence vanished: the defended phenotype that survived (Ad in region Ib, Bd in region III) could support the undefended phenotype of its own species, driving the other species extinct (Fig. 5b,f). As in the other constellations, the area of coexistence and the biomasses of the defended phenotypes decreased and antiphase cycles vanished with increasing χmax (Fig. 5b,f, Supplementary Figure S8), while maladaptive switching and the consumer biomass increased (Fig. 5).Figure 5Coexistence and maladaptive switching for scenario angle 0.01 (a–d) and angle 1 (e–h). Consumer biomass (a,e), the autotroph coexistence patterns (b,f), and the autotrophs’ maladaptive switching Φ (c,d,g,h) (higher biomasses or more intensive maladaptive switching are shown by darker colours). Lines separate the regions I–III of different autotroph coexistence. The y-axis is reversed to follow the pattern of increasing fitness. Shaded areas in (b) depict antiphase cycles. Grey areas in (c,d,g,h) depict areas where the species was extinct. Note that (c,d,g,h) have each a different colour scale.Full size imageGeneral resultsAs plasticity had very similar effects across all three constellations, we here generalize our results: we compare the three constellations for exchange rates over 5 orders of magnitude, as well as the non-plastic scenario and the rigid scenario (Table 1). That is, all simulations from one scenario (e.g. parallel 0) were summarized into one bar respective point in Fig. 6.Figure 6General patterns for coexistence, maladapative switching and biomasses. Share of surviving species in percent (A, B, coexistence or neutral coexistence) (a–c), median absolute value of maladaptive switching Φ (d–f) and median of total autotroph biomass (A + B), median consumer biomass C and share of defended phenotypes ((Ad + Bd)/(A + B)) (g–i) for the three constellations and increasing maximum exchange rates χmax. χmax = 0 denotes the non-plastic scenarios; *denotes the rigid scenarios. Maladaptive switching and the share of defended phenotypes do not apply for the rigid scenarios.Full size imageFor all constellations, the fraction of simulation runs leading to coexistence was highest in the non-plastic scenario and decreased with increasing χmax (Fig. 6a–c). In constellation parallel the share of coexistence for increasing χmax continuously decreased from 51 to 3% (Fig. 6a). In crossing, the share decreased from full to no coexistence (Fig. 6b). In angle, the share of coexistence was 88% in the non-plastic scenario when taking also neutral coexistence into account (Fig. 6c). Its share decreased to 9% for a χmax of 10 and increased again to 25% for the rigid scenario. Maladaptive switching increased for both species and all constellations for increasing χmax (Fig. 6d–f). The increased plasticity led to a lower total autotroph biomass and a lower share of defended phenotypes (Fig. 6g–i), which resulted in higher consumer biomass (Fig. 6g–i).Interestingly, and counterintuitively, the above patterns show that increasing the speed of plasticity (by increasing χmax) makes the system behave more like the rigid system. The coexistence patterns in scenarios with high χmax approach those of the rigid scenarios in two of the constellations (Fig. 6a,b). Similarly, the total autotroph and consumer biomasses approach the ones in the rigid scenarios (Fig. 6g–i). Thus, we found the higher χmax make the autotrophs not more adaptive, but behave more like non-adaptive species. More

Insects and plantsLarvae of fall armyworm (FAW, Spodoptera frugiperda) were cultured at the Department of Entomology at the Max Planck Institute for Chemical Ecology, and reared on a semi-artificial diet based on pinto bean59, and maintained under controlled light and temperature conditions (12:12 h light/dark, 21 °C).Feeding experiments3rd–4th instar FAW larvae were utilized for all experiments. Insects were starved overnight prior to feeding experiments. The following day insects were fed with a semi-artificial, pinto bean-based diet or put on maize leaves in small plastic cups and allowed to feed on the respective diets for a day. Insects were dissected in cold phosphate buffered saline (PBS, pH = 7.4) to harvest larval tissues (guts, Malphigian tubules, fat bodies, cuticle), which were stored at − 80 °C until further use. For droplet feeding, 12.5 mM DIMBOA was prepared by dissolving the compound in DMSO. This DIMBOA solution was further diluted in 10% aqueous sucrose solution. The larvae were stimulated with forceps to encourage regurgitation, and 2 μL DIMBOA-sucrose solution was administered directly to the larval mouthparts. Insects were then fed on semi-artificial diet for up to 6 h; following which gut tissue was dissected using cold phosphate buffer and the tissue samples were stored at − 80 °C until further use.Insect cell culturesSpodoptera frugiperda Sf9 cells and Trichoplusia ni Hi5 cells were cultured in Sf-900 II serum-free medium (Gibco) and ExpressFive serum-free medium (Gibco), respectively. Adherent cultures were maintained at 27 °C, and sub-cultured every 3–4 days.Cell treatmentsInsect cells were seeded in 6 well culture plates (Corning) and left at 27 °C overnight. For transcript stability tests, a fresh cycloheximide (CHX) stock (50 mg/mL) was prepared in ethanol and added to the cultured cells at a concentration of 50 µg/mL. Incubations with CHX were performed up to 6 h. For testing substrate specificity, cells were then treated with the following compounds for 1 h—DIMBOA (25–100 μM), indole (50–100 μM), quercetin (50–100 μM), and esculetin (50–100 μM). All the stocks were prepared in DMSO and cells treated with the corresponding volume of pure DMSO served as a control. The range of concentrations used for the substrates was based on previous work38.RNA extraction, reverse transcription and real time-PCR analysisTissue samples from the larvae were homogenized and total RNA extracted using the innuPREP RNA Mini Kit (Analytik Jena). Cell cultures used for RNA extraction were obtained during sub-culturing at full confluency, and centrifuged at 500×g for 5 min. The culture medium was discarded, and the fresh pellets were directly used for RNA extraction. RNA concentrations were measured with the NanoDrop 2000 UV–Vis Spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific). First strand cDNA was synthesized from 1 μg total RNA using SuperScript III Reverse Transcriptase and OligodT primers from Invitrogen. Sequences were successfully amplified using Phusion High Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs) (PCR protocol: 30 s at 98 °C; 35 cycles of 10 s at 98 °C, 20 s at 55 °C, 45 s at 72 °C; and 5 min at 72 °C). The PCR products were purified with a PCR cleanup kit (Qiagen) and cloned into pCR-Blunt II-TOPO vector (Life Technologies) and transformed into NEB cells (Life Technologies), which were plated on selective LB agar medium containing 100 μg/mL ampicillin and incubated overnight at 37 °C. Positive colonies were identified by PCR using vector-specific M13 primers. Positive clones were confirmed by sequencing. Real time PCR analyses were carried out using Brilliant III SYBR Master Mix, employing SYBR Green chemistry. Relative quantification of the transcript levels was done using the 2−∆∆Ct method60. SfRPL10 was used as reference gene for all analyses. The primer pairs used for distinguishing between the variants are listed in Supplementary Table 1. As the expression of full-length and variants of SfUGT33F28 differed according to the strains, tissues, and treatments being analyzed, variant expression is reported as ratios relative to the canonical transcript to facilitate comparisons.Preparation of minigenes for alternative splicing studiesGenomic DNA was isolated from S. frugiperda larvae using the cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol61. DNA concentration was measured with the NanoDrop 2000 UV–Vis Spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific). The minigene was amplified using Phusion High Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs) (PCR protocol: 30 s at 98 °C; 35 cycles of 10 s at 98 °C, 30 s at 55–60 °C, 1 min 30 s at 72 °C; and 10 min at 72 °C), cloned into a pCR-Blunt II-TOPO vector (Life Technologies) and sequenced using M13 primers. The confirmed sequence was eventually cloned into a pIB/V5-His-TOPOvector (Life Technologies) and transformed into NEB cells (Life Technologies). Positive colonies were identified by colony PCR using vector-specific OpIE2 primers, sub-cultured overnight at 37 °C in liquid LB medium containing 100 μg/mL ampicillin and used for plasmid DNA purification with the NucleoSpin Plasmid kit (Macherey-Nagel). Concentration and purity of the obtained construct was assessed by the NanoDrop 2000 UV–Vis Spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific) and the correct orientation of the PCR products was confirmed by DNA sequencing.Nuclear protein isolationNuclear proteins were isolated from insect cells62 using the protocol originally described with few modifications. Cells grown to concentrations of up to 1 × 106 cells/well were harvested and washed with PBS (pH 7.4). The extracts were centrifuged at 12,000×g for 10 min and pellets were re-suspended in 400 μL cell lysis buffer (10 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 10 mM KCl, 0.1 mM EDTA pH 8.0, 1 mM DTT, 0.5% Nonidet-40 and 10 μL protease inhibitor cocktail). Cells were allowed to swell on ice for 20 min with intermittent mixing. Suspensions were vortexed to disrupt the cell membranes and then centrifuged at 12,000×g for 10 min at 4 °C. Pelleted nuclei were washed thrice with cell lysis buffer, re-suspended in 50 μL nuclear extraction buffer (20 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 400 mM KCl, 1 mM EDTA pH 8.0, 1 mM DTT, 10% glycerol and protease inhibitor) and incubated on ice for 30 min. Nuclear fractions were collected by centrifugation at 12,000g for 15 min at 4 °C. Protein concentrations were measured by Bradford and extracts were stored at − 80 °C until further use.Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA)EMSA was performed using the LightShift Chemiluminescent EMSA kit (Thermo Scientific) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Genomic DNA fragments of 20–25 bp corresponding to the 5′ flanking region of UGT33F28 exon 1 (with and without AhR-ARNT motif deletion) were synthesized with covalently linked biotin (Sigma). The DNA probes used in the experiment are listed in Supplementary Table 6. EMSA was performed in 20 µL reactions containing 20 fmol biotinylated DNA probe with 3.5–4 µg nuclear protein extracted from insect cells, according to manufacturer’s instructions. A reaction comprising the above along with the excess of unlabeled canonical DNA probe (200 molar excess) was further employed as a control. The reaction was assembled at room temperature and incubated for 30 min. The reactions were separated on a 5% TBE gel in 0.5X TBE at 100 V for 60 min. The samples were then transferred to a positively charged nylon membrane (Hybond N+, Amersham Bioscience) using semi-dry transfer at 15 V for 30 min. The membrane was cross-linked for 1 min using the auto cross-link function on the UV cross-linker (Stratagene). The biotinylated DNA–protein complex was detected by the streptavidin–horseradish peroxidase conjugated antibody provided in the kit. The membrane was washed and incubated with the chemiluminescence substrate for 5 min and the signals were developed by exposing the membrane to an X-ray film for 1 min.Streptavidin affinity purificationStreptavidin agarose (Sigma-Aldrich) was employed for protein purification. Briefly, 50–100 μL of agarose was packed into a 1.5 mL Eppendorf tube for each sample. The agarose was allowed to settle with a short centrifugation (500×g, 5 min) and the supernatant was discarded. The agarose was washed 4–5 times with binding buffer (PBS containing 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 4 µg poly dI. dC as non-specific competitor DNA and protease inhibitor). Simultaneously, the binding reaction with the nuclear protein fraction and the DNA probe was assembled as described above. A 100 μg amount of total nuclear protein was incubated with 4 μg of biotinylated DNA probe at room temperature for 20 min. The reaction was loaded onto the streptavidin column equilibrated with the binding buffer and incubated for another 1 h at room temperature with gentle shaking. Subsequently, the agarose was washed 4–5 times with the binding buffer. After the final wash, the supernatant was aspirated and 10 μL was left above the beads. For protein separation, 20–30 μL pf the SDS loading buffer was added onto the agarose, boiled at 95 °C for 5 min and the sample thus obtained was utilized for electrophoresis.Deletion mutagenesisFor deletion mutagenesis, a pair of primers flanking the sequence to be deleted (non-overlapping) was designed. The pCR-Blunt II-TOPO vector (Life Technologies) clone for the SfUGT33F28 exon 1–2 minigene was utilized as a template. Sequence was successfully amplified using Phusion High Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs) (PCR protocol: 30 s at 98 °C; 20 cycles of 10 s at 98 °C, 30 s at 55–60 °C, 4 min at 72 °C; and 10 min at 72 °C). A DpnI digest was performed to remove the background DNA, followed by ligation and transformation into fresh cells. The sequence of the mutant TOPO clone was then confirmed and utilized as a template for cloning into pIB/V5-His-TOPO vector (Life Technologies) for transfection into insect cells.Cloning and heterologous expression of SfUGTsSequences were amplified from S. frugiperda gut cDNA samples using Phusion High Fidelity DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs) (PCR protocol: 30 s at 98 °C; 35 cycles of 10 s at 98 °C, 20 s at 55–60 °C, 45 s at 72 °C; and 5 min at 72 °C). The resulting amplified products were purified with a PCR cleanup kit (Qiagen) and incubated with GoTaq DNA polymerase (Promega) for 15 min at 72 °C in order to add A overhangs. The products were cloned into the pIB/V5-His-TOPO vector (Life Technologies) and transformed into NEB cells (Life Technologies), which were plated on selective LB agar medium containing 100 μg/mL ampicillin and incubated overnight at 37 °C. Positive colonies were identified by PCR using vector-specific OpIE2 primers, sub-cultured overnight at 37 °C in liquid LB medium containing 100 μg/mL ampicillin and used for plasmid DNA purification with the NucleoSpin Plasmid kit (Macherey-Nagel). Concentration and purity of the obtained constructs were assessed by NanoDrop 2000 UV–Vis Spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific) and the correct orientation of the PCR products was confirmed by DNA sequencing.Insect cell transfectionFor transfection, Sf9 cells and Hi5 cells were sub-cultured at full confluency in a 6-well plate in a 1:3 dilution and left overnight to adhere to the flask surface. The medium was replaced, and transfections were carried out using FuGENE HD Transfection Reagent (Promega) in a 1:3 plasmid/lipid ratio (1.7 μg plasmid and 5.0 μL lipid for 3 mL medium). Cells were incubated for 48–72 h at 27 °C and re-suspended in fresh medium containing 50 μg/mL blasticidin for 2 weeks. Stable cell cultures were subsequently maintained at 10 μg/mL blasticidin.Cell lysate preparationCells were obtained from cultures 2 weeks post transfection growing stably on 50 μg/mL blasticidin. A 1 mL quantity of cells was harvested for each construct and re-suspended into 100 µL buffer. Protein concentrations were measured using the Bradford reagent, and 1–2 μg of the cell lysate was used for enzyme assays.Microsome preparationFor microsome extraction, confluent, stably transfected cells from five T-75 flasks (10 mL culture) per recombinant plasmid were harvested by scraping the cells off the bottom using a sterile cell scraper (Sarstedt AG, Nuembrecht, Germany). The obtained cell suspensions were combined into a 50 mL falcon tube and centrifuged at 1000×g for 15 min at 4 °C (AvantiTM J-20 XP Centrifuge, Beckman Coulter, Krefeld, Germany). The supernatant was discarded, the cells were washed twice with ice-cold PBS buffer (pH 7.4) and centrifuged at 1000×g for 15 min. The resulting cell pellet was re-suspended in 10 mL hypotonic buffer (20 mM Tris, 5 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 20% glycerol, pH 7.5), containing 0.1% BenzonaseR nuclease and 100 μL Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Serva) followed by incubation on ice for 30 min. After cell lysis, the cells were homogenized by 20–30 strokes in a Potter–Elvehjem tissue grinder (Kontes Glass Co., Vineland, USA) and were subsequently mixed with an equal volume of sucrose buffer (20 mM Tris, 5 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 500 mM sucrose, 20% glycerol, pH 7.5). The homogenate was centrifuged at 1200×g and 4 °C for 10 min (AvantiTM J-20 XP Centrifuge, Beckman Coulter), and the supernatant was transferred into Beckman polycarbonate ultracentrifugation bottles (25 × 89 mm) (Beckman Coulter) and centrifuged at 100,000×g and 4 °C for 1.5 h in a fixed angle Type 70 Ti rotor (OptimaTM L-90K Ultracentrifuge, Beckman Coulter). After ultracentrifugation, the clear supernatant, containing the cytosolic fraction, was aliquoted into 1.5 mL Eppendorf tubes. The pellet, containing the microsomal fractions, was re-suspended in 1 mL of phosphate buffer (100 mM K2HPO4, pH 7.0), containing 10 μL Protease Inhibitor Cocktail (Serva) and stored at − 80 °C until further use. Typically, 5–10 μg of the microsome fraction so obtained was utilized for the enzyme assays.Cross-linking assaysCross-linking assays were performed using dimethyl suberimidate (DMS) as the cross-linking agent. A fresh stock of DMS (5 mg/mL) was prepared in 0.2 M triethanolamine (pH 8.0) at the start of each assay. DMS was added to a final concentration of 2.5 mg/mL to insect cell microsomes with gentle shaking up to 3 h, and samples were subsequently stored at − 20 °C until further use. All protein samples were electrophoresed using a 12% Mini-PROTEAN tris glycine gel, blotted onto PVDF membrane using wet transfer at 70 V for 30–45 min, followed by detection using the V5-HRP conjugate.V5-based affinity purificationAnti-V5 agarose affinity gel (Sigma-Aldrich) was employed for protein purification. Briefly, 50–75 μL of the agarose was packed into a 1.5 mL Eppendorf tube for each sample. The agarose was allowed to settle with a short centrifugation and the supernatant was discarded. The agarose was washed 4–5 times with PBS (pH 7.4). Samples to be purified were incubated with 5% digitonin on ice for 20 min and subject to centrifugation at 16,000×g for 30 min. Clarified cell lysate or microsomal extract was added onto the resin (up to 200 μL, volume adjusted by addition of PBS) and incubated for 1.5 h on a shaker. Subsequently, the agarose was washed 4–5 times with PBS. After the final wash, the supernatant was aspirated and 10 μL was left above the beads. This fraction was used for both protein electrophoresis and enzyme assays (separate purifications). For SDS-PAGE, 20–30 μL pf the SDS loading buffer was added onto the agarose, boiled at 95 °C for 5 min and sample thus obtained was utilized for electrophoresis.LC–MS/MS peptide analysisProtein bands of Coomassie Brilliant blue R250 stained gels were cut from the gel matrix and tryptic digestion was carried out63. For LC–MS/MS analysis of the resulting peptides, samples were reconstituted in 20 μL aqueous 1% formic acid, and 1 μL was injected onto an UPLC M-class system (Waters, Manchester, UK) coupled to a Synapt G2-si mass spectrometer (Waters, Manchester, UK). Samples were first pre-concentrated and desalted using a Symmetry C18 trap column (100 Å, 180 µm × 20 mm, 5 µm particle size) at a flow rate of 15 µL/min (0.1% aqueous formic acid). Peptides were eluted onto a ACQUITY UPLC HSS T3 analytical column (100 Å, 75 µm × 200 mm, 1.8 µm particle size) at a flow rate of 350 nL/min with the following gradient: 3–15% over 3 min, 15–20% B over 7 min, 20–40% B over 30 min, 40–50% B over 5 min, 50–70% B over 5 min, 70–95% B over 3 min, isocratic at 95% B for 1 min, and a return to 1% B over 1 min. Phases A and B were composed of 0.1% formic acid and 100% acetonitrile in 0.1% formic acid, respectively). The analytical column was re-equilibrated for 10 min prior to the next injection. The eluted peptides were transferred into the mass spectrometer operated in V-mode with a resolving power of at least 20,000 full width at half height FWHM. All analyses were performed in a positive ESI mode. A 100 fmol/μL sample of human Glu-Fibrinopeptide B in 0.1% formic acid/acetonitrile (1:1 v/v) was infused at a flow rate of 1 μL/min through the reference sprayer every 45 s to compensate for mass shifts in MS and MS/MS fragmentation mode. Data were acquired using data-dependent acquisition (DDA). The acquisition cycle for DDA analysis consisted of a survey scan covering the range of m/z 400–1800 Da followed by MS/MS fragmentation of the ten most intense precursor ions collected at 0.5 s intervals in the range of 50–2000 m/z. Dynamic exclusion was applied to minimize multiple fragmentations for the same precursor ions. MS data were collected using MassLynx v4.1 software (Waters, Manchester, UK).Data processing and protein identificationDDA raw data were processed and searched against a sub-database containing common contaminants (human keratins and trypsin) using ProteinLynx Global Server (PLGS) version 2.5.2 (Waters, Manchester, UK). Spectra remaining unmatched by database searching were interpreted de novo to yield peptide sequences and subjected to homology-based searching using the MS BLAST program64 installed on a local server. MS BLAST searches were performed against a Spodoptera frugiperda database obtained by in silico translation of the S. frugiperda transcriptome37 and against arthropoda database (NCBI). PKL-files of MS/MS spectra were generated and searched against Spodoptera frugiperda database combined with NCBI nr (downloaded on May 24, 2020) using MASCOT software version 2.6.2. The following searching parameters were applied: fixed precursor ion mass tolerance of 15 ppm for the survey peptide, fragment ion mass tolerance of 0.1 Da, 1 missed cleavage, fixed carbamidomethylation of cysteines and possible oxidation of methionine.Enzymatic assaysFor UGT assays, samples from insect cell cultures (transient or stable) were prepared in phosphate buffer (pH 7.0, 100 mM). Typical enzyme reactions included 5–10 µg cell microsomal extracts, 2 μL of 12.5 mM DIMBOA in DMSO (25 nmol), 4 μL of 12.5 mM UDP-glucose in water (50 nmol), and phosphate buffer (pH 7.0, 100 mM) to give an assay volume of 50 μL. Controls containing either boiled enzymatic preparation, or only the protein suspension and buffer were included. After incubation at 30 °C for 60 min, the enzyme reactions were interrupted by adding 50 μL of 1:1 (v:v) methanol/formic acid solution. For enzyme assays involving resin purified microsomal extracts, equal amounts of extracts were employed for resin purification and the enzyme assay (buffer + substrate) was pipetted directly onto the resin. Post incubation, samples were centrifuged, supernatant was collected, and reaction was stopped by addition of methanol/formic acid solution. Assays were centrifuged at 5000g for 5 min and the obtained supernatant was collected and analyzed by LC–MS/MS.Chromatographic methodsFor all analytical chromatography procedures, formic acid (0.05%) in water and acetonitrile were used as mobile phases A and B, respectively, and the column temperature was maintained at 25 °C. Analyses of enzymatic assays and plant samples used a Zorbax Eclipse XDB-C18 column (50 × 4.6 mm, 1.8 μm, Agilent Technologies) with a flow rate of 1.1 mL/min and with the following elution profile: 0–0.5 min, 95% A; 0.5–6 min, 95–67.5% A; 6.02–7 min, 100% B; 7.1–9.5 min, 95% A. LC–MS/MS analyses were performed on an Agilent 1200 HPLC system (Agilent Technologies) coupled to an API 6500 tandem spectrometer (AB Sciex) equipped with a turbospray ion source operating in negative ionization mode. Multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) was used to monitor analyte parent ion to product ion conversion with parameters from the literature for DIMBOA65 and DIMBOA-Glc16. Analyst (version 1.6.3, Applied Biosystems) software was used for data acquisition and processing.Statistical analysisAll statistical analyses were carried out using SigmaPlot 12.0 and R studio (version 3.6.3). Data were tested for homogeneity of variance and normality and were appropriately transformed to meet these criteria where required. The specific statistical method used for each data set is described in the figure legends. More

Wink, M. Evolution of secondary metabolites from an ecological and molecular phylogenetic perspective. Phytochemistry 64, 3–19 (2003).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Khare, S. et al. Plant secondary metabolites synthesis and their regulations under biotic and abiotic constraints. J. Plant Biol. 63, 203–216 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Gajger, I. T. & Dar, S. A. Plant allelochemicals as sources of insecticides. Insects 12, 189 (2021).Article 

Google Scholar 
Vig, A. P., Rampal, G., Thind, T. S. & Arora, S. Bio-protective effects of glucosinolates: A review. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 42, 1561–1572 (2009).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Sikorska-Zimny, K. & Beneduce, L. The glucosinolates and their bioactive derivatives in Brassica: A review on classification, biosynthesis and content in plant tissues, fate during and after processing, effect on the human organism and interaction with the gut microbiota. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 61, 2544–2571. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408398.2020.1780193 (2020).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Radojčić Redovniković, I., Glivetić, T., Delonga, K. & Vorkapić-Furač, J. Glucosinolates and their potential role in plant. Period. Biol. 110, 297–309 (2008).
Google Scholar 
Wittstock, U., Kliebenstein, D. J., Lambrix, V., Reichelt, M. & Gershenzon, J. Chapter five glucosinolate hydrolysis and its impact on generalist and specialist insect herbivores. Recent Adv. Phytochem. 37, 101–125 (2003).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Noret, N. et al. Palatability of Thlaspi caerulescens for snails: Influence of zinc and glucosinolates. New Phytol. 165, 763–772 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Hopkins, R. J., Van Dam, N. M. & Van Loon, J. J. A. Role of glucosinolates in Insect-plant relationships and multitrophic interactions. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 54, 57–83 (2008).Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Guleria, S. & Tiku, A. K. Botanicals in pest management: Current status and future perspectives. Integr. Pest Manag. 1, 317–329 (2009).
Google Scholar 
Clay, N. K., Adio, A. M., Denoux, C., Jander, G. & Ausubel, F. M. Glucosinolate metabolites required for an Arabidopsis innate immune response. Science 323, 95–101 (2009).ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Yang, B. et al. Inhibitory effect of allyl and benzyl isothiocyanates on ochratoxin a producing fungi in grape and maize. Food Microbiol. 100, 103865 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Agrawal, A. A. & Kurashige, N. S. A role for isothiocyanates in plant resistance against the specialist herbivore Pieris rapae. J. Chem. Ecol. 296(29), 1403–1415 (2003).Article 

Google Scholar 
Müller, C. et al. The role of the glucosinolate-myrosinase system in mediating greater resistance of Barbarea verna than B. vulgaris to Mamestra brassicae Larvae. J. Chem. Ecol. 44, 1190–1205 (2018).PubMed 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Kegley, S. E., Hill, B. R., Orme, S. & Choi, A. H. PAN Pesticide Database (Pesticide Action Network, 2000).
Google Scholar 
Worfel, R. C., Schneider, K. S. & Yang, T. C. S. Suppressive effect of allyl isothiocyanate on populations of stored grain insect pests. J. Food Process. Preserv. 21, 9–19 (1997).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu, H., Zhang, G. A., Zeng, S. & Lin, K. C. Extraction of allyl isothiocyanate from horseradish (Armoracia rusticana) and its fumigant insecticidal activity on four stored-product pests of paddy. Pest Manag. Sci. 65, 1003–1008 (2009).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Bhushan, S., Gupta, S., Kaur Sohal, S., Arora, S. & Saroj Arora, C. Assessment of insecticidal action of 3-Isothiocyanato-1-propene on the growth and development of Spodoptera litura (Fab.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 4, 1068–1073 (2016).
Google Scholar 
Dhillon, M. K., Naresh, J. S., Singh, R. & Sharma, N. K. Reaction of different bitter gourd (Momordica charantia L.) genotypes to melon fruit fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett). Int. J. Plant Prot. 33, 55–59 (2005).
Google Scholar 
Ekesi, S., Nderitu, P. W. & Chang, C. L. Adaptation to and small-scale rearing of invasive fruit fly Bactrocera invadens (Diptera: Tephritidae) on artificial diet. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 100, 562–567 (2007).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jakhar, S. et al. Estimation losses due to fruit fly, Bactrocera cucurbitae (Coquillett) on long melon in semi-arid region of Rajasthan. J. Entomol. Zool. Stud. 8, 632–635 (2020).MathSciNet 

Google Scholar 
Ladania, M. S. Physiological Disorders and Their Management. Citrus Fruit: Biology, Technology and Evaluation 451–463 (Academic press, 2008).
Google Scholar 
Du, Y., Grodowitz, M. J. & Chen, J. Insecticidal and enzyme inhibitory activities of isothiocyanates against red imported fire ants, Solenopsis invicta. Biomolecules 10, 716 (2020).CAS 
PubMed Central 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Tsao, R., Reuber, M., Johnson, L. & Coats, J. R. Insecticidal toxicities of glucosinolate· containing extracts from crambe seeds. J. Agric. Urban Entomol. 13, 109–120 (1996).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Li, Q., Eigenbrode, S. D., Stringam, G. R. & Thiagarajah, M. R. Feeding and growth of Plutella xylostella and Spodoptera eridania on Brassica juncea with varying glucosinolate concentrations and myrosinase activities. J. Chem. Ecol. 26, 2401–2419 (2000).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Noble, R. R., Harvey, S. G. & Sams, C. E. Toxicity of Indian mustard and allyl isothiocyanate to masked chafer beetle larvae. Plant Health Prog. 3, 9 (2002).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sousa, A. H., Faroni, L. R. A., Pimentel, M. A. G. & Freitas, R. S. Relative toxicity of mustard essential oil to insect-pests of stored products. Rev. Caatinga 27, 222–226 (2014).
Google Scholar 
de Souza, L. P., Faroni, L. R. D. A., Lopes, L. M., de Sousa, A. H. & Prates, L. H. F. Toxicity and sublethal effects of allyl isothiocyanate to Sitophilus zeamais on population development and walking behavior. J. Pest Sci. 91, 761–770 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Freitas, R. C. P., Faroni, L. R. D. A., Haddi, K., Jumbo, L. O. V. & Oliveira, E. E. Allyl isothiocyanate actions on populations of Sitophilus zeamais resistant to phosphine: Toxicity, emergence inhibition and repellency. J. Stored Prod. Res. 69, 257–264 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Jabeen, A., Zaitoon, A., Lim, L. T. & Scott-Dupree, C. Toxicity of five plant volatiles to adult and egg stages of Drosophila suzukii matsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae), the spotted-wing Drosophila. J. Agric. Food Chem. 69, 9511–9519 (2021).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wu, H., Liu, X. R., Yu, D. D., Zhang, X. & Feng, J. T. Effect of allyl isothiocyanate on ultra-structure and the activities of four enzymes in adult Sitophilus zeamais. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 109, 12–17 (2014).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, C., Wu, H., Zhao, Y., Ma, Z. & Zhang, X. Comparative studies on mitochondrial electron transport chain complexes of Sitophilus zeamais treated with allyl isothiocyanate and calcium phosphide. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 126, 70–75 (2016).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Jeschke, V. et al. How glucosinolates affect generalist lepidopteran larvae: Growth, development and glucosinolate metabolism. Front Plant Sci. 8, 1995. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2017.01995 (2017).Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Agnihotri, A. R., Hulagabali, C. V., Adhav, A. S. & Joshi, R. S. Mechanistic insight in potential dual role of sinigrin against Helicoverpa armigera. Phytochemistry 145, 121–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phytochem.2017.10.014 (2018).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Jeschke, V. et al. So much for glucosinolates: A generalist does survive and develop on Brassicas, but at what cost?. Plants 10, 962. https://doi.org/10.3390/plants10050962 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Benrey, B. & Denno, R. F. The slow-growth-high-mortality hypothesis: A test using the cabbage butterfly. Ecology 78, 987–999 (1997).
Google Scholar 
Shroff, R., Vergara, F., Muck, A., Svatoš, A. & Gershenzon, J. Nonuniform distribution of glucosinolates in Arabidopsis thaliana leaves has important consequences for plant defense. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 05, 6196–6201 (2008).ADS 
Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar 
Bai, P. P. et al. Inhibition of phenoloxidase activity delays development in Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae). Fla. Entomol. 97, 477–485. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.097.0218 (2014).Article 

Google Scholar 
Datta, R., Kaur, A., Saraf, I., Singh, I. P. & Kaur, S. Effect of ethyl acetate extract and purified compounds of Alpinia galanga (L.) on Immune Response of a Polyphagous Lepidopteran pest, Spodoptera litura (Fabricius). Asian J. Adv. Basic Sci. 6, 16–21 (2018).CAS 

Google Scholar 
Hartzer, K. L., Zhu, K. Y. & Baker, J. E. Phenoloxidase in larvae of Plodia interpunctella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Molecular cloning of the proenzyme cDNA and enzyme activity in larvae paralyzed and parasitized by Habrobracon hebetor (Hymenoptera: Braconidae). Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 59, 67–79 (2005).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Silva, C. J. M. et al. Immune response triggered by the ingestion of polyethylene microplastics in the dipteran larvae Chironomus riparius. J. Hazard. Mater. 414, 125401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2021.125401 (2021).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Aucoin, R. R., Philogène, B. J. R. & Arnason, J. T. Antioxidant enzymes as biochemical defenses against phototoxin induced oxidative stress in three species of herbivorous Lepidoptera. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 16, 139–152 (1991).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Wang, Y., Branicky, R., Noë, A. & Hekimi, S. Superoxide dismutases: Dual roles in controlling ROS damage and regulating ROS signaling. Int. J. Cell Biol. 217, 1915–1928. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201708007 (2018).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Zhang, C., Ma, Z., Zhang, X. & Wu, H. Transcriptomic alterations in Sitophilus zeamais in response to allyl isothiocyanate fumigation. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 137, 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2016.10.001 (2017).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Felton, G. W. & Summers, C. B. Antioxidant systems in insects. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 29, 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1002/arch.940290208 (1995).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Cadenas, E. Mechanisms of oxygen activation and reactive oxygen species detoxification. In Oxidative Stress and Antioxidant Defenses in Biology (ed. Ahmad, S.) 1–46 (Chapman & Hall, 1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-9689-9_1.Chapter 

Google Scholar 
Schramm, K., Vassão, D. G., Reichelt, M., Gershenzon, J. & Wittstock, U. Metabolism of glucosinolate- derived isothiocyanates to glutathione conjugates in generalist lepidopteran herbivores. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 42, 174–182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibmb.2011.12.002 (2012).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Falk, K. L. et al. The role of glucosinolates and the jasmonic acid pathway in resistance of Arabidopsis thaliana against molluscan herbivores. Mol. Ecol. 23, 1188–1203. https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.12610 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Gloss, A. D. et al. Evolution in an ancient detoxification pathway is coupled with a transition to herbivory in the Drosophilidae. Mol. Biol. Evol. 31, 2441–3245. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msu201 (2014).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar 
Bhatt, P., Zhou, X., Huang, Y., Zhang, W. & Chen, S. Characterization of the role of esterases in the biodegradation of organophosphate, carbamate, and pyrethroid pesticides. J. Hazard. Mater. 1, 125026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2020.125026 (2021).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Murfadunnisa, S. et al. Larvicidal and enzyme inhibition of essential oil from Spheranthus amaranthroids (Burm.) against lepidopteran pest Spodoptera litura (Fab.) and their impact on non-target earthworms. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 21, 101324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101324 (2019).Article 

Google Scholar 
Sengottayan, S. N. Physiological and biochemical effect of neem and other Meliaceae plants secondary metabolites against Lepidopteran insects. Front. Physiol. 4, 359. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2013.00359 (2013).Article 

Google Scholar 
Augustyniak, M., Gladysz, M. & Dziewięcka, M. The Comet assay in insects: Status, prospects and benefits for science. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 767, 67–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mrrev.2015.09.001Get (2016).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Foster, E. R. & Downs, J. A. Histone H2A phosphorylation in DNA double strand break repair. FEBS J. 272, 3231–3240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1742-4658.2005.04741.x (2005).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Porichha, S. K., Sarangi, P. K. & Prasad, R. Genotoxic effect of chlorpyrifosin Channa punctatus. Cytol. Genet. 9, 631–638 (1998).
Google Scholar 
Kalita, M. K., Haloi, K. & Devi, D. Larval exposure to chlorpyrifos affects nutritional physiology and induces genotoxicity in silkworm Philosamia ricini (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). Front. physiol. 7, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2016.00535 (2016).Article 

Google Scholar 
Datta, R. et al. Assessment of genotoxic and biochemical effects of purified compounds of Alpinia galanga on a polyphagous lepidopteran pest Spodoptera litura (Fabricius). Phytoparasitica 48, 501–511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-020-00813-8 (2020).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Afify, A. & Negm, A. A. K. H. Genotoxic effect of insect growth regulators on different stages of peach fruit fly, Bactrocera zonata (Saunders)(Diptera: Tephritidae). Afr. Entomol. 26, 154–161 (2018).Article 

Google Scholar 
Gupta, J. N., Verma, A. N. & Kashyap, R. K. An improved method for mass rearing for melon fruit fly Dacus cucurbitae Coquillett. Indian J. Entomol. 40, 470–471 (1978).
Google Scholar 
Srivastava, B. G. A chemically defined diet for Dacus cucurbitae (Coq.) larvae under aseptic conditions. Entomol. News Lett. 5, 24 (1975).
Google Scholar 
Kumar, A., Sood, S., Mehta, V., Nadda, G. & Shanker, A. Biology of Thysanoplusia orichalcea (Fab.) in relation to host preference and suitability for insect culture and bioefficacy. Indian J. Appl. Entomol. 18, 16–21 (2004).
Google Scholar 
Martinez, S. S. & Emden, H. F. V. Growth disruption, abnormalities and mortality of Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) caused by azadirachtin. Neotrop. Entomol. 30, 113–125 (2001).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Khan, Z. R. & Saxena, R. C. Behavioural and physiological responses of Sogatella furcifera (Homoptera: Delphacidae) to selected resistant and susceptible rice cultivars. J. Econ. Entomol. 78, 1280–1286 (1985).Article 

Google Scholar 
Zimmer, M. Phenol oxidation. In Methods to Study Litter Decomposition (eds Graça, M. A. et al.) (Springer, 2005).
Google Scholar 
Kono, Y. Generation of superoxide radical during auto-oxidation of hydroxylamine and an assay for superoxide dismutase. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 186, 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-9861(78)90479-4 (1978).CAS 
Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar 
Bergmeyer, H. U. Reagents for enzymatic analysis. In Methods of Enzymatic Analysis (eds Bergmeyer, H. U. & Gawehn, K.) 438 (Verlag Chemie, 1974).
Google Scholar 
Chien, C. & Dauterman, W. C. Studies on glutathione S-transferases in Helicoverpa (=Heliothis) zea. Insect Biochem. 21, 857–864. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-1790(91)90092-S (1991).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Katzenellenbogen, B. & Kafatos, F. C. General esterases of silk worm moth moulting fluid: Preliminary characterization. J. Insect Physiol. 17, 1139–1151. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1910(71)90016-3 (1971).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Mac Intyre, R. J. A method for measuring activities of acid phosphatases separated by acrylamide gel electrophoresis. Biochem. Genet. 5, 45–56 (1971).CAS 
Article 

Google Scholar 
Singh, N. P., McCoy, M. T., Tice, R. R. & Schneider, E. L. A simple technique for quantitation of low levels of DNA damage in individual cells. Exp. Cell Res. 175, 184–191 (1988).CAS 
PubMed 
Article 

Google Scholar  More