U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.


Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Main content area

Feeding behavior of soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) biotype 2 on resistant and susceptible soybean

Jane C. Todd, M. A. Rouf Mian, Elaine A. Backus, John J. Finer, Margaret G. Redinbaugh
Journal of economic entomology 2016 v.109 no.1 pp. 426-433
Aphis glycines, antibiosis, antixenosis, biotypes, cultivars, epidermis (plant), feeding behavior, genes, germplasm, host plants, insect resistance, introduced species, leaves, mesophyll, phloem, salivation, scanning electron microscopy, soybeans, trichomes, United States
Host plant resistance to the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura, is an effective means of controlling populations of this introduced pest species in the United States. Rag (R esistance to A phis g lycines) genes identified in soybean germplasm have been incorporated into commercial cultivars, but differential responses by soybean aphid biotypes to the Rag genes have made understanding mechanisms underlying resistance associated with Rag genes increasingly important. We compared the behavior of biotype 2 aphids on the resistant soybean line PI243540, which is a source of Rag2 , and the susceptible cultivar Wyandot. Scanning electron microscopy revealed that the abaxial surface of leaves from resistant plants had a higher density of both long and glandular trichomes, which might repel aphids, on veins. Time-lapse animation also suggested a repellent effect of resistant plants on aphids. However, electropenatography (EPG) indicated that the time to first probe did not differ between aphids feeding on the resistant and susceptible lines. EPG also indicated that fewer aphids feeding on resistant plants reached the phloem, and the time before reaching the phloem was much longer relative to susceptible soybean. For aphids that reached the phloem, there was no difference in either number of feedings or their duration in phloem. However, aphids feeding on resistant soybean had fewer prolonged phases of active salivation (E1) and many more pathway activities and non-probing intervals. Together, the feeding behavior of aphids suggested that Rag2 resistance has strong antixenosis effects, in addition to previously reported antibiosis, and was associated with epidermal and mesophyll tissues.