Table 1.

Comparison of volatile compounds (mean ± SE; n = 6) emitted from plants infested with TLH (TLH), treated with laminarin (Lam), the combination of both treatments (Lam + TLH), and controls (C).

No	Compound	C	Lam	TLH	Lam + TLH
1	(Z)-3-hexenala	0.02 ± 0.01 b	ND	0.51 ± 0.11a	0.43 ± 0.06 a
2	Unknown 1	ND	ND	0.49 ± 0.08 a	0.78 ± 0.18 a
3	(E)-2-hexenalb	ND	0.11 ± 0.03 a	ND	0.20 ± 0.07 a
4	(Z)-3-hexenolb	ND	0.31 ± 0.08 c	0.90 ± 0.17 b	3.23 ± 0.40 a
5	Unknown 2	ND	ND	0.38 ± 0.10 a	0.47 ± 0.12 a
6	Unknown 3	0.10 ± 0.04 b	ND	0.43 ± 0.11 a	0.61 ± 0.17 a
7	Unknown 4	ND	0.03 ± 0.01 b	0.05 ± 0.01 b	0.86 ± 0.22 a
8	Unknown 5	ND	ND	0.06 ± 0.02a	0.11 ± 0. 03 a
9	(Z)-3-hexenyl acetatea	ND	0.73 ± 0.15 c	2.87 ± 0.61 b	5.62 ± 0.85 a
10	(Z)-β-ocimeneb	ND	0.33 ± 0.08 b	0.55 ± 0.13 b	1.22 ± 0.28 a
11	Benzyl alcoholc	ND	ND	0.15 ± 0.04 a	0.22 ± 0.05 a
12	(E)-β-ocimeneb	ND	0.25 ± 0.06 c	1.16 ± 0.22 b	6.76 ± 1.02 a
13	Linaloold	0.11 ± 0.03 d	0.49 ± 0.09 c	1.37 ± 0.38 b	2.88 ± 0.61 a
14	Phenylethyl alcohold + DMNTe	ND	ND	3.63 ± 0.52 a	4.35 ± 0.82 a
15	Unknown 6	ND	ND	0.13 ± 0.05 a	0.20 ± 0.08 a
16	Benzyl nitriled	ND	ND	0.35 ± 0.08 a	0.41 ± 0.07 a
17	(Z)-3-hexenyl butyratea	ND	0.53 ± 0.12 a	ND	0.72 ± 0.16 a
18	(E)-2-hexenyl butyratea	ND	ND	0.51 ± 0.13 a	0.88 ± 0.19 a
19	Methyl salicylatea	ND	ND	0.22 ± 0.05 a	0.31 ± 0.08 a
20	(Z)-3-hexenyl-2-methyl butyratef	ND	ND	0.25 ± 0.07 a	0.35 ± 0.09 a
21	Unknown 7	ND	ND	0.26 ± 0.06 a	0.32 ± 0.07 a
22	Indolef	ND	0.28 ± 0.07 c	1.55 ± 0.29 b	2.62 ± 0.39 a
23	Phenyl ethane (1-nitro-2-)g	ND	ND	0.31 ± 0.07 a	0.41 ± 0.09 a
24	(Z)-3-hexenyl hexanoatef	ND	ND	0.60 ± 0.18 a	0.39 ± 0.12 a
25	Unknown 8	ND	ND	0.93 ± 0.30 a	1.11 ± 0.25 a
26	(E)-caryophyllenec	0.03 ± 0.01 c	0.16 ± 0.03 bc	0.28 ± 0.06 b	0.59 ± 0.17 a
27	(E,E)-α-farneseneh	ND	0.36 ± 0.07 b	0.79 ± 0.17 b	2.36 ± 0.53 a
28	Unknown 9	ND	ND	0.09 ± 0.03 a	0.11 ± 0.03 a
29	Unknown 10	ND	ND	0.15 ± 0.04 a	0.21 ± 0.06 a
30	(E)-nerolidolh	ND	0.39 ± 0.10 b	0.35 ± 0.08 b	0.79 ± 0. 22 a
Total		0.26 ± 0.06 d	3.97 ± 0.89 c	19.32 ± 3.81 b	39.52 ± 6.52 a

The amounts of individual volatile compounds were calculated by comparing their peak areas relative to those of the corresponding internal standards. Letters indicate the significant differences between treatments (P < 0.05; Duncan’s multiple-range test). The names of the compounds followed by different letters indicate different methods for confirming identities: a–g comparison of retention times and mass spectra with those of authentic standards as follows: ^aRoth; ^bFluka; ^cTCI; ^dAcros; ^egift from Taro Maeda; ^fSigma-Aldrich; ^gcomparison of Kovats Indices (KI) on DB-5; ^hPherotech. ND: not detected.