Bombardiers and assassins: mimetic interactions between unequally defended insects

In defensive mimicry, resemblance between unequally defended species can be parasitic; this phenomenon has been termed quasi-Batesian mimicry. Few studies have used real co-mimics and their predators to test whether the mimetic interactions were parasitic. Here, we investigated the mimetic interaction between two well-defended insect species, the bombardier beetle Pheropsophus occipitalis jessoensis (Coleoptera: Carabidae) and the assassin bug Sirthenea flavipes (Hemiptera: Reduviidae), using their potential predator, the pond frog Pelophylax nigromaculatus (Anura: Ranidae), which coexists with these insect species in the same habitat in Japan. We observed behavioural responses of this frog species (adults and juveniles) to adult Ph. occipitalis jessoensis and adult S. flavipes under laboratory conditions. Among the frogs, 100% and 75% rejected Ph. occipitalis jessoensis and S. flavipes, respectively, suggesting that, compared with the assassin bug S. flavipes, the bombardier beetle Ph. occipitalis jessoensis is more well-defended against frogs. An assassin bug or a bombardier beetle was provided to a frog that had encountered the other insect species. Frogs with a history of assassin bug encounter demonstrated a lower rate of attack toward bombardier beetles. Similarly, frogs with a history of bombardier beetle encounter demonstrated a lower rate of attack toward assassin bugs. Therefore, both the bombardier beetle Ph. occipitalis jessoensis and the assassin bug S. flavipes benefit from the mimetic interaction.

Bombardier beetles repel invasive bullfrogs

Invasive non-native predators negatively affect native species; however, some native species can survive the predation pressures of invasive species by using pre-existing antipredator strategies or evolving defenses against invasive predators. The American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus (Anura: Ranidae) has been intentionally introduced to many countries and regions, and has impacted native animals through direct predation. Bombardier beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Brachininae: Brachinini) discharge chemicals at a temperature of approximately 100 °C from the tip of the abdomen when they are attacked by predators. This "bombing" can successfully repel predators. However, adults of a native bombardier beetle Pheropsophus (Stenaptinus) occipitalis jessoensis have been reportedly found in the gut contents of the introduced bullfrog L. catesbeianus in Japan. These records suggest that the invasive bullfrog L. catesbeianus attacks the native bombardier beetle P. occipitalis jessoensis under field conditions in Japan; however, the effectiveness of the bombing defense against invasive bullfrogs is unclear. To test the effectiveness of the bombing defense against bullfrogs, we investigated the behavioral responses of L. catesbeianus juveniles to P. occipitalis jessoensis adults under laboratory conditions. Contrary to previous gut content results, almost all the bullfrogs (96.3%) rejected bombardier beetles before swallowing them; 88.9% rejected the beetles after being bombed, and 7.4% stopped attacking the beetles before being bombed. Only 3.7% successfully swallowed and digested the beetle. All of the beetles collected from non-bullfrog-invaded sites could deter bullfrogs, suggesting that the pre-existing defenses of bombardier beetles played an essential role in repelling bullfrogs. When treated beetles that were unable to discharge hot chemicals were provided, 77.8% of bullfrogs successfully swallowed and digested the treated beetles. These results indicate that bombing is important for the successful defense of P. occipitalis jessoensis against invasive bullfrogs. Although invasive bullfrogs have reportedly impacted native insect species, P. occipitalis jessoensis has an existing defense mechanism strong enough to repel the invasive predators.

Beetle bombing always deters praying mantises

Some animals have evolved chemical weapons to deter predators. Bombardier beetles (Coleoptera: Carabidae: Brachininae: Brachinini) can eject toxic chemicals at temperatures of 100 °C from the tips of their abdomens, ‘bombing’ the attackers. Although some bombardier beetles can reportedly deter predators, few studies have tested whether bombing is essential for successful defence. Praying mantises (Mantodea) are ambush predators that attack various arthropods. However, it is unclear whether bombardier beetles deter mantises. To test the defensive function of bombing against praying mantises, I observed three mantis species, Tenodera sinensis, Tenodera angustipennis, and Hierodula patellifera (Mantidae), attacking the bombardier beetle Pheropsophus jessoensis (Carabidae: Brachininae: Brachinini) under laboratory conditions. All mantises easily caught the beetles using their raptorial forelegs, but released them immediately after being bombed. All of the counterattacked mantises were observed to groom the body parts sprayed with hot chemicals after releasing the beetles. When treated P. jessoensis that were unable to eject hot chemicals were provided, all mantises successfully caught and devoured the treated beetles. Therefore, bombing is essential for the successful defence of P. jessoensis against praying mantises. Consequently, P. jessoensis can always deter mantises.

Biosynthetic origin of benzoquinones in the explosive discharge of the bombardier beetle Brachinus elongatulus

Bombardier beetles are well-known for their remarkable defensive mechanism. Their defensive apparatus consists of two compartments known as the reservoir and the reaction chamber. When challenged, muscles surrounding the reservoir contract sending chemical precursors into the reaction chamber where they mix with enzymes resulting in an explosive discharge of a hot noxious chemical spray containing two major quinones: 1,4-benzoquinone and 2-methyl-1,4-benzoquinone (toluquinone). Previously, it has been speculated that the biosynthesis of all benzoquinones originates from one core precursor, 1,4-hydroquinone. Careful ligation of the base of the reservoir chamber enabled us to prevent the explosive reaction and sample untransformed reservoir fluid, which showed that it accumulates significant quantities of 1,4-hydroquinone and 2-methyl-1,4-hydroquinone. We investigated the biosynthetic mechanisms leading to quinone formation by injecting or feeding Brachinus elongatulus beetles with stable-isotope-labeled precursors. Chemical analysis of defensive secretion samples obtained from 1,4-hydroquinone-d₆-administered beetles demonstrated that it underwent conversion specifically to 1,4-benzoquinone. Analogously, results from m-cresol-d₈ injected or fed beetles confirmed that m-cresol is metabolized to 2-methyl-1,4-hydroquinone, which is then oxidized to 2-methyl-1,4-benzoquinone in the hot spray. Our results refute the previous claim that 1,4-hydroquinone is the precursor of all substituted benzoquinones in bombardier beetles and reveal that they are biosynthetic products of two independent pathways. Most likely, the aforementioned biosynthetic channel of hydroxylation of appropriate phenolic precursors and subsequent oxidation is not restricted to bombardier beetles; it could well be a general pathway that leads to the formation of all congeners of benzoquinones, one of the most widely distributed groups of defensive compounds in arthropods. Graphical abstract.

Functional anatomy of the explosive defensive system of bombardier beetles (Coleoptera, Carabidae, Brachininae)

This paper provides the first comparative anatomical study of the explosive pygidial defensive system of bombardier beetles in species classified in three brachinine subtribes: Brachinus (Brachinina), Pheropsophus (Pheropsophina) and Aptinus (Aptinina). We investigated the morphology and ultrastructure of this system using optical, fluorescence, and focused ion beam (FIB/SEM) microscopy. In doing so, we characterized and comparatively discussed: (1) the ultrastructure of the gland tissues producing hydroquinones and hydrogen peroxide (secretory lobes), and those producing catalases and peroxidases (accessory glands); (2) the complex anatomy of the collecting duct; (3) the arrangement of the muscular bundles and the folding of the cuticle of the reservoir, suggesting a functional division of this chamber (dynamic part and storage part); (4) the great structural diversity of sculpticles inside the reaction chamber, where we could recognize six main types of microsculpture located in specific districts of the chamber. Additionally, using fluorescence microscopy, we highlighted the presence of resilin in two structures strongly subjected to mechanical stress during the discharge, the valve and the turrets of the reaction chamber. The results of this paper give a solid anatomic overview of the most popular beetle defensive system, contributing to the debate on its evolution within the Carabidae.