Potential for evolution of resistance to pheromones: Interindividual and interpopulational variation in chemical communication system of pink bollworm moth

1984 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. 1551-1565 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. F. Haynes ◽  
L. K. Gaston ◽  
M. Mistrot Pope ◽  
T. C. Baker
2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ally R. Harari ◽  
Russell A. Jurenka ◽  
Ada Rafaeli ◽  
Victoria Soroker

t The pink bollworm, Pectinophoragossypiellais a key pest of cotton world-wide. In Israel mating disruption sex pheromone is used in all cotton fields and recent repeated outbreaks of the pest populations has suggested a change in the population sex pheromone characteristics. The research goals were to (1) determine the change in pheromone characteristic of PBW females after long experience to Mating Disruption (MD), (2) to test the male’s antennae response (EAG) to pheromone characteristics of laboratory, naive females, and of field collected, MD experienced females, (3) to analyse the biosynthetic pathway for possible enzyme variations, (4) to determine the male behavioural response to the pheromone blend involved in the resistance to MD. The experiments revealed that (1) MD experienced females produced pheromone blend with higher ZZ ratio than lab reared (MD naive females) that typically produced ZZ:EE ratio of 1:1. (2) Male’s origin did not affect its response to pheromone characteristics of lab or field females. (3) A transcriptome study demonstrated many gene-encode enzymes in the biosynthetic pathway, but some of the transcripts were produced in differing levels in the MD resistant populations. (4) Male origin (field or lab) influenced males’ choice of mate with strong preference to females sharing the same origin. However, when MD was applied, males of both populations were more attracted to females originated form failed MD treated fields. We conclude that in MD failed fields a change in the population mean of the ratio of the pheromone components had occurred. Males in these fields had changed their search “image” accordingly while keeping the wide range of response to all pheromone characteristics. The change in the pheromone blend is due to different level of pheromone related enzyme production. 


2017 ◽  
Vol 114 (21) ◽  
pp. 5413-5418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peng Wan ◽  
Dong Xu ◽  
Shengbo Cong ◽  
Yuying Jiang ◽  
Yunxin Huang ◽  
...  

Extensive cultivation of crops genetically engineered to produce insecticidal proteins from the bacteriumBacillus thuringiensis(Bt) has suppressed some major pests, reduced insecticide sprays, enhanced pest control by natural enemies, and increased grower profits. However, these benefits are being eroded by evolution of resistance in pests. We report a strategy for combating resistance by crossing transgenic Bt plants with conventional non-Bt plants and then crossing the resulting first-generation (F1) hybrid progeny and sowing the second-generation (F2) seeds. This strategy yields a random mixture within fields of three-quarters of plants that produce Bt toxin and one-quarter that does not. We hypothesized that the non-Bt plants in this mixture promote survival of susceptible insects, thereby delaying evolution of resistance. To test this hypothesis, we compared predictions from computer modeling with data monitoring pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) resistance to Bt toxin Cry1Ac produced by transgenic cotton in an 11-y study at 17 field sites in six provinces of China. The frequency of resistant individuals in the field increased before this strategy was widely deployed and then declined after its widespread adoption boosted the percentage of non-Bt cotton plants in the region. The correspondence between the predicted and observed outcomes implies that this strategy countered evolution of resistance. Despite the increased percentage of non-Bt cotton, suppression of pink bollworm was sustained. Unlike other resistance management tactics that require regulatory intervention, growers adopted this strategy voluntarily, apparently because of advantages that may include better performance as well as lower costs for seeds and insecticides.


2006 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 469-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
CHANG-CHI CHU ◽  
ERIC T. NATWICK ◽  
RAUL LEÓN LÓPEZ ◽  
JOLENE R. DESSERT ◽  
THOMAS J. HENNEBERRY

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document