%*#26'4 $6%166104'5+56#0%'/#0#)'/'06

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "%*#26'4 $6%166104'5+56#0%'/#0#)'/'06"

Transcription

1 %*#26'4 $6%166104'5+56#0%'/#0#)'/'06 (TGF)QWNFCPF$TWEG6CDCUJPKM 2TGHCEG Conventional insecticide use in cotton is significantly higher than the average use on other agricultural crops (Gianessi and Anderson 1995), and cotton is often cited as a prime example of the pesticide treadmill (National Research Council 1996). Any change in cotton production that decreases the negative impacts of these insecticides would have significant environmental benefits. Integrated pest management (IPM) has reduced the use of conventional, broad-spectrum insecticides in cotton (National Research Council 1996), but further reduction is needed. Genetically engineered cotton that produces a single toxin derived from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) could make a substantial contribution toward such a reduction. Although this toxin from Bt is certainly an insecticide, in that it kills specific insect pests, it lacks most of the negative properties of conventional, broad-spectrum insecticides. The Bt toxin in engineered cotton is currently used by organic farmers and is considered safe for humans and wildlife (Entwistle et al. 1993). The spectrum of insects that this toxin affects is so narrow that it only kills some caterpillar pests of cotton, and there are only a couple of exceptional cases where this toxin has had negative effects on beneficial insects (Hillbeck et al., in press). One of the general factors leading to the pesticide treadmill has been death of beneficial insects that naturally control pests. Bt-toxin-producing plants rarely kill beneficial insects. These beneficial insects could therefore coexist with Bt cotton and could control cotton pests that are unaffected by the Bt toxin. Because Bt cotton can reduce use of broad-spectrum insecticides, anything that interferes with the effectiveness of this technology presents a serious problem. The most serious threat to the efficacy of Bt cotton is evolution of resistance to the toxins by pests. More than 500 species of insects have become resistant to conventional insecticides, and there is empirical evidence that they can also adapt to Bt toxins (Tabashnik 1994a). If resistance develops to the Bt toxin in cotton, other environmentally benign replacement toxins might be found, but this is far from assured. Thus, the loss of this Bt toxin to pest resistance could have significant environmental consequences.

2 During the past 20 years, scientists have developed approaches for using knowledge about insect ecology and genetics to decrease the rate at which insects become resistant to insecticides (Forrester et al. 1993; Roush and Tabashnik 1990). These general techniques could be used for preserving the long-term benefits of Bt cotton, but success will require detailed knowledge about the insect pests and cotton production. Success will also require the commitment and cooperation of industry, government, farmers, and academic scientists. In this chapter, we describe resistance management plans for Bt cotton that conservatively match our level of confidence in available data and theory. Our goal is to avoid early misuse of the technology that could seriously damage the future efficacy of Bt cotton. Some groups (e.g., Greenpeace) have advocated a complete moratorium on the use of Bt cotton until we have more precise data and resistance management plans. We think that such an approach would unnecessarily sacrifice the environmental and economic benefits that can be gained by conservative use of this technology. In the main body of this chapter, we discuss the current strengths and weaknesses of the data and theory pertinent to resistance management for major pests of cotton in the United States. We end this report with a proposed action plan for the 1998 season. We are not convinced that this is the best 1998 plan for all regions of the United States, but we are convinced that it is an improvement over the current Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)- approved resistance management plan. We hope that rigorous, targeted discussions involving all stakeholders will lead to improvements in our 1998 plan regarding both short- and long-term benefits that can be derived from Bt cotton. Some of the restrictions in our plan are necessitated by the current lack of detailed survey and experimental evidence from the field. Therefore, as we scramble to put forth an acceptable plan for 1998 based on the limited data available today, we must concentrate efforts and resources to obtain the sorely needed data on the ecology and genetics of target pests. Monitoring and evaluation of strategies in place, and large-scale field tests of alternative strategies must be performed. Gathering of critical data will make it possible to devise resistance management plans that are more robust and may be less conservative. Development of Bt-cotton cultivars better suited to long-term suppression of pests may also facilitate relaxation of restrictions. Thus, we hope that our plan will provide incentives for improving cultivars and for collecting data to support more robust and potentially less restrictive resistance management plans.

3 +PVTQFWEVKQP The Crop Cotton Eight countries accounted for approximately 82 percent of worldwide cotton production as of In rank order of metric tons per year, these countries were China, the United States, the former USSR, Pakistan, India, Brazil, Turkey, and Australia (Luttrell et al. 1994). In the United States and other developed countries, cotton is grown primarily in large monocultures on highly mechanized farms. In some other areas, it is grown in small plots with little mechanization. This review will emphasize resistance management strategies for Bt cotton in the United States, but strategies developed for US cotton will influence practices in other countries (Persley 1996; Hruska and Pavon 1997). Transgenic cotton that is approved for commercial planting in the United States produces only one Bt toxin, which is called Cry1Ac (Hofte and Whitely 1989; Perlak et al. 1991). This toxin is extremely effective against certain caterpillar pests. It has low to moderate effectiveness against other caterpillars and essentially no toxicity to most other insects (but see Hilbeck et al. in press). In developing resistance management plans for the 1998 growing season, we focus on Bt cotton that produces only Cry1Ac. Other Bt toxins that are introduced into transgenic cotton in the next five to ten years are also likely to kill only caterpillar pests, but their spectrum of activity among caterpillars may differ somewhat from Cry1Ac. An example of such a toxin is Cry2A, which is under development by Monsanto. Pests at Risk for Developing Resistance Laboratory selection experiments with some caterpillar pests of cotton that are killed by Cry1Ac have proven that these pests can evolve resistance to Cry1Ac and other Bt toxins. Cotton pests selected for resistance to one or more Bt toxins include Heliothis virescens, often referred to as the budworm or the tobacco budworm (Stone et al. 1989; Gould et al. 1992, 1995); Pectinophora gossypiella, the pink bollworm (Bartlett et al. 1996); Spodoptera exigua, the beet armyworm (Moar et al. 1995); and Helicoverpa zea, the cotton bollworm (Luttrell, unpublished data). Based on these results, we assume that most, or perhaps all, caterpillar pests could evolve such resistance. The presence and importance of specific caterpillar pests vary within and among countries. In the United States, the most important caterpillar pests are the budworm in the Mississippi Delta, the cotton bollworm in some parts of the Southeast and Texas, and the pink bollworm in the West. Other caterpillar pests also cause problems in US cotton in some years, in some places. For example, beet armyworm can cause major problems in the Southeast and Delta areas when insecticides decimate their natural enemies. Beet armyworm is not controlled by Cry1Ac-producing cotton.

4 The moths, H. virescens and H. zea, do not occur in the Eastern Hemisphere. However, cotton grown in the Eastern Hemisphere is often attacked by two pests (i.e., Helicoverpa armigera in most of the Eastern Hemisphere and Helicoverpa punctigera in Australia) that are closely related to their Western Hemisphere counterparts. After the Heliothis/Helicoverpa species, Spodoptera species (the armyworms) are the next most important group of caterpillar pests of cotton outside of the United States. Insects other than caterpillars are also important pests of cotton. Examples include the boll weevil, cotton aphid, lygus bug, and whitefly. Because these pests are not killed by Cry1Ac, they are not at risk for evolution of resistance to it. However, broad-spectrum insecticides used by farmers to kill these noncaterpillar pests often affect the caterpillars and their natural enemies. Therefore, any resistance management plans for Bt cotton must consider pests that are not killed by Bt. Many ecological and genetic factors affect the rate at which an insect pest will evolve resistance to Bt crops. These factors can be summarized as follows: 1. Number of generations per year exposed to Bt in transgenic crops or sprays. 2. Percentage of the insect pest population exposed to Bt in transgenic crops or sprays in each generation. 3. Mortality of heterozygous individuals caused by the toxin. 4. Adult movement and mating patterns. 5. Larval movement. 6. Initial frequency of resistance alleles in the population. 7. Fitness of individuals carrying resistance alleles in both the presence and absence of toxin. Most, but not all, of these factors are expected to have qualitatively consistent effects on the rate of evolution of resistance (Georghiou and Taylor 1977; Tabashnik and Croft 1982; Tabashnik 1990). For example, resistance is expected to occur faster as the percentage of the pest population exposed to Bt in transgenic crops or sprays increases. However, in theory, the relative importance and effect of some factors can be altered by other factors. For example, the importance of mortality of heterozygous individuals depends on adult mating patterns. Thus, one cannot combine the information on each of these factors in any simple way to come up with a risk assessment for a given

5 pest. Instead, values for each of these factors can be used as input to computer models that account for multiple interactions between factors. The better our estimates are for each of these factors, the more reliable are the outputs from the computer models. Table 1 shows that accurate quantitative estimates of most of these key factors are not available for major cotton pests. Table 1 also shows that the most problematic risk factor for one species may not be an important risk factor for a second species. For example, in the Mississippi Delta, a high percentage of the individuals in tobacco budworm populations feed on cotton for three to four generations each year, which increases the risk of resistance for this pest in that area. In contrast, a substantial percentage of individuals in cotton bollworm populations in the Mississippi Delta feed on non-bt corn during early summer generations, thereby lowering the risk of resistance for this pest. The Current EPA-Approved Resistance Management Plan Overview. The current EPA-approved resistance management plan for Bt cotton offers farmers two options (unless cotton is grown to produce seed): 1. For every 100 acres of cotton with the Bollgard R gene planted, plant 25 acres of cotton without the Bollgard gene that can be treated with insecticides [other than foliar B. thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki (Btk) products] that control tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, and pink bollworm. 2. For every 100 acres of cotton with the Bollgard gene planted, plant four acres of cotton without the Bollgard gene. This non-bt-cotton refuge cannot be treated with amitraz, endosulfan, methomyl, profenofos, sulprofos, synthetic pyrethroids, Helicoverpa zea nuclear polyhedrosis virus, pyrrole, spinosad, thiodicarb, pepper spray, garlic spray, and/or foliar Btk insecticides labeled for control of tobacco budworm, cotton bollworm, and pink bollworm. These four acres can be treated with acephate but not to exceed 1/2 lb. active ingredient per acre on a single application. This cotton must be managed (fertility, weed control, and management of other pests) in a manner similar to the management of the Bollgard cotton. These two options are similar in terms of the total number of susceptible insects produced per acre if use of non-bt insecticides in option 1 kills 80 percent of the insects in the non-bt cotton (i.e., only 20 percent survive). If the non-bt cotton is 20 percent of the total acreage (25 acres non-bt cotton per 125 acres of Bt plus non-bt cotton) and 20 percent of the insects in the non-bt cotton survive, this is roughly equivalent to an unsprayed refuge of 4 percent (i.e., 20 percent of 20 percent is equal to 4 percent). Based on these assumptions, both options have a target refuge size of about 4 percent.

6

7 In addition to these requirements for each farm, there are special limitations for exceptional cases where more than 75 percent of the cotton in a county or parish was planted to Bollgard cotton in the previous year. In these areas, the non-bollgard cotton must be planted within one mile of the Bollgard cotton. It is unofficially recommended that the Bollgard cotton and non-bollgard cotton should not be planted as a seed mixture in the same field. Basis for the high-dose/refuge strategy. The current EPA-approved Btcotton resistance management plan is based on the high-dose/refuge strategy (EPA 1997). The high-dose/refuge strategy is derived from population genetics theory and has been examined with computer simulation models (e.g., Comins 1977; Curtis et al. 1978; Taylor and Georghiou 1979; Tabashnik and Croft 1982; Roush 1989; Gould 1998). The high-dose/refuge strategy has not been tested in long-term field experiments, but a number of short-term field experiments have evaluated some of the assumptions upon which the strategy is based (reviewed in Gould 1998). Furthermore, results from laboratory (Liu and Tabashnik 1997) and greenhouse experiments (Roush, Tang, and Shelton, unpublished data) conducted for several pest generations support the theory. The essential elements of the theory are as follows. When a Bt crop is first introduced, the frequency of Bt-resistance alleles (i.e., forms of the gene that allow insects to survive exposure to the Bt toxin) is expected to be low (approximately one in a thousand in some cases, see Tabashnik 1994a; Gould et al. 1997). Under these circumstances, nearly all individuals are susceptible homozygotes who carry no alleles for resistance and the odds of an individual insect having two resistance alleles at a genetic locus is extremely low. Basic population genetics theory predicts that such resistant homozygotes will occur at about the square of the frequency of the resistance allele. So, if the frequency of the resistance allele is one in a thousand (10-3 ), the expected frequency of resistant homozygotes is one in a million (10-6 ). Refuges composed of plants that do not produce Bt (e.g., non-bt cotton) enable susceptible insect pests to survive. This helps to maintain resistance at a low frequency because most of the survivors from the refuges have no Btresistance alleles. Thus, refuges reduce the intensity of selection and are expected to delay evolution of resistance. If homozygous susceptible individuals from the non-bt refuges mate with the extremely rare homozygous resistant individuals surviving exposure to the Bt crop, their hybrid offspring will be heterozygotes, carrying one allele for resistance and one for susceptibility to Bt. If such heterozygotes are killed by Bt plants, resistance can be delayed substantially. Plants that produce a sufficiently high dose of Bt toxin to kill heterozygotes are considered high-dose plants. In

8 many, but not all cases of resistance to Bt studied so far, resistance is partially to completely recessive, which means that heterozygotes are not highly resistant (Tabashnik 1994a; Ferre et al. 1995; Tabashnik et al. 1997a, b; but see Gould et al. 1992). Of particular importance for cotton, resistance to the Bt toxin, Cry1Ac, in one highly resistant strain of tobacco budworm is inherited as a partially recessive trait (Gould et al. 1995, 1997). It is difficult to predict the exact concentration of toxin that is needed to achieve a high dose. One proposed operational definition is 25 times the concentration needed to kill 99 percent of the most vulnerable stage of totally susceptible insects (Gould et al. 1994). Overall suitability of the current resistance management plan for Bt cotton. Although the current EPA plan contains positive elements and was an important step in the right direction, we see six major weaknesses that can and should be remedied in plans for 1998: 1. The non-bt cotton in option 1 can be sprayed intensively, thereby resulting in little or no refuge. 2. A 4 percent unsprayed refuge in option 2 is too small for success of the high-dose/refuge strategy. 3. Proximity of refuges to Bt cotton should be required in all cases, not just in exceptional circumstances. 4. Because of differences among pests in different areas of the United States, no single plan can suit all of the major cotton-growing regions. 5. Current cultivars of Bt cotton do not provide a high dose for cotton bollworm, so a high-dose/refuge strategy cannot be implemented for this pest. 6. Plans for responses to suspected outbreaks of resistance are not sufficient. Before we move on to specific assessments of the current plan relative to the biology of each insect pest, it is important to explain comments 1, 2, and 3 in somewhat more detail. 1. The 20 percent option (1) allows sprays of insecticides that kill caterpillars and can, if abused, result in almost no refuge. This option is based on the assumption that cotton managed with insecticides would reduce season-long larval survival to 20 percent of that in untreated non- Bt cotton. If growers spray intensively on a calendar basis, or if they use very low pest densities as spraying thresholds, nearly all of the caterpillars in the non-bt acreage may be killed. If this happens, there is

9 no refuge. Instead of a refuge strategy, we are left with a mosaic strategy in which all insects are exposed to at least one insecticide. In this case, a portion of the population would be exposed to the insecticidal toxin in the Bt cotton and the remainder of the population would be exposed to one or more conventional insecticides. Based on results from computer simulations and small-scale experiments, mosaics are thought to be the worst way to deploy two or more insecticides (Roush 1989, 1993; Tabashnik 1989). Thus, use of Bt cotton and simultaneous, intense use of other insecticides in an adjacent non-bt cotton refuge may promote rapid resistance to Bt as well as to the insecticides used in the refuge. Although the primary focus of the current resistance management plan is to preserve the efficacy of Bt, it is unwise to ignore the cost of resistance to other insecticides. If the 20 percent non-bt cotton is managed carefully using a conservative IPM approach, the non-bt cotton would be sprayed only when densities of the caterpillar pests are so high that they would cause substantial crop loss. If this kind of IPM approach is used, the 20 percent refuge could be partially effective if other assumptions about the highdose/refuge approach were met (e.g., the crop consistently a truly high dose and insects from Bt and non-bt fields mated randomly, see below). If overall population densities of beneficial insects increase in the infrequently sprayed Bt-cotton acres, they, combined with the Btinduced mortality of H. virescens larvae, could result in significant decreases in regional densities of Tobacco budworm (Roush 1996; Riggin-Bucci and Gould 1997). This could lead to less spraying in the refuge, thereby increasing the effectiveness of the refuge (Gould 1998). 2. A 4 percent unsprayed refuge might work well under ideal conditions, but in practice, a 4 percent refuge is too small because minor deviations from the ideal in one or more key factors could render the 4 percent refuge virtually useless. For example, if mortality of heterozygotes is not high, either because of unexpectedly low expression of Bt toxin by the plant (Forrester and Pyke 1997) or because of more dominant inheritance of the resistance trait than expected (Tabashnik 1994b; Gould 1994; Heckel 1994; Tabashnik et al. 1997b), the ability of the 4 percent refuge to delay resistance would be seriously jeopardized. Another potential problem is asynchronous emergence of susceptible moths from refuges and resistant moths from Bt cotton (Tabashnik 1994b; Klepetka and Gould 1996). This would occur if the resistant insects survived but developed more slowly on Bt cotton than did susceptible insects on non-bt cotton. If this happened, most of the susceptible moths might mate with each other before the resistant moths

10 emerged, which would greatly decrease the ability of the refuge to delay resistance. 3. The use of refuges in options 1 and 2 is based on the idea that the susceptible homozygotes from the refuge will mate with the resistant homozygotes from the Bt cotton. As the distance between the refuges and the Bt cotton increases, such matings become less likely and the effectiveness of the refuges is greatly diminished. Therefore, spatial proximity of refuges to Bt cotton is always a priority. Suitability of the current EPA plan for tobacco budworm. Available data suggest that, under most circumstances, current cultivars of Bt cotton produce concentrations of Cry1Ac toxin high enough to kill heterozygous tobacco budworm. This conclusion is based on results with heterozygous larvae generated by crossing a laboratory-selected resistant strain and a susceptible strain of this pest (Gould et al. 1995). In laboratory tests using field-grown Bt cotton, heterozygous larvae had high mortality when fed on the young leaves, buds, or bolls of this cotton (Gould et al. 1997; Gould et al., unpublished data). Furthermore, a strain of tobacco budworm with greater than 100-fold resistance to Cry1Ac toxin had 100 percent mortality on Bt cotton (Gould et al., unpublished data). Unless certain growing conditions lead to unusually low-bt toxin production (see Forrester and Pyke 1997), current Bollgard cotton is expected to produce a high dose for tobacco budworm. According to the EPA-approved plan, a farmer can plant the refuge cotton more than a mile from the Bt cotton unless the county had greater than 75 percent Bt cotton in the previous year. Based on our limited knowledge about movement of tobacco budworm, even a distance of one mile between the refuge and Bt cotton would be too great. Data on adult movement in the spring (Schneider et al. 1989) indicate that males and females can move more than 7.5 kilometers in their lifetimes and that about half as many adults moved about five kilometers as the number that moved about two kilometers. Data on how far these adults move before mating are not available. Because most of this early spring generation emerges from diapause before cotton is a preferred host, their movement and host searching may differ from that of later generations. Recent data collected by Mike Caprio (personal communication) indicate that midsummer adult movement is very localized, so there would not be random mating between insects emerging from the Bt cotton and distant refuge cotton. Spatially explicit genetic modeling (Peck 1997), which uses conservative estimates of movement, indicates that spatial pockets with a high percentage of Bt cotton, smaller than the scale of a county, could lead to more rapid resistance development. The regulation concerning a maximum distance between Bt cotton and refuge cotton should therefore apply even in counties with less than 75 percent

11 Bt cotton. This maximum distance should be less than one mile (see the Conclusions and Recommendations section for details). Suitability of the current EPA plan for pink bollworm. Like tobacco budworm, pink bollworm is highly susceptible to the Cry1Ac toxin produced by Bt cotton. Therefore, we suspect that the concentration of toxin in Bt cotton is usually high enough to kill heterozygotes of pink bollworm, but this assumption has never been tested directly. Extensive and intensive recapture studies with pink bollworm indicate that adults typically move less than one mile, particularly when suitable cotton is available (Henneberry and Keaveny 1985 and references therein). For example, in one study, 98 percent of the 2,779 males recaptured were trapped within a half mile from the point of release (Henneberry and Keaveny 1985). This tendency was confirmed in a 1997 study of pink bollworm movement in Bt and non-bt cotton in Arizona (Simmons, Dennehy, Staten, Tabashnik et al., unpublished data). Given the limited movement of this pest, the distance between refuges and Bt cotton should be much less than a mile. In theory, extensive movement of larvae between Bt and non-bt cotton plants can reduce the ability of a refuge to delay resistance (Mallet and Porter 1992, but also see Tabashnik 1994b). Therefore, in some cases, growing non-bt cotton very close to Bt cotton might cause a tradeoff between the benefits of increased hybrid matings (which should delay resistance) and the increased movement of larvae between non-bt cotton and Bt cotton (which could accelerate resistance). For pink bollworm larvae, movement between plants is limited, especially in reproductive cotton (Brazzel and Martin 1955). Therefore, for this pest, refuges within fields are the best approach because they reduce or eliminate the isolation by distance that could reduce hybrid matings between susceptible adults from refuges and resistant adults from Bt cotton. Suitability of the current EPA plan for cotton bollworm. The cotton bollworm has a high natural tolerance for Cry1Ac. For example, in one study, the concentration of Cry1Ac required to kill 50 percent of the caterpillars tested was generally about 25 times higher for cotton bollworm compared with tobacco budworm (Stone and Sims 1993). Although anecdotal field observations have led some to the conclusion that this tolerance is due to behavioral avoidance of the toxin, laboratory tests that do not enable larvae to actively avoid the toxin still find high tolerance (Stone and Sims 1993; Greenplate 1997). These tests show that much of cotton bollworm s tolerance is of a physiological nature. Field data indicate that survival to the late larval stage on Bt cotton is reduced by 60 to 90 percent when compared with survival on non-bt cotton (Mahaffey et al. 1995; Lambert et al. 1996; Ron Smith, personal communication

12 and see section below on lessons from widescale plantings). Cotton bollworm larvae heterozygous for resistance alleles have not yet been found. However, even if such heterozygotes had only a minor increased tolerance for Bt toxin, their survival could be significantly higher than that of susceptible larvae, so a major assumption for the high-dose/refuge approach is not valid. When the Bt cotton kills only 60 to 90 percent of the insects, it is likely that inheritance of resistance will not be totally recessive (Gould et al. 1992; Gould 1998). Under such circumstances, even alleles that only slightly increase survival on Bt cotton will be favored, so resistance could evolve based on single major genes or a number of minor genes (Tabashnik 1995). Until Bt-cotton cultivars are available that produce a high dose for cotton bollworm, we must base resistance management plans on assumptions appropriate to a crop with a moderate dose of toxin. Assuming 20 percent survival (i.e., approximate fitness) of homozygote susceptible larvae relative to survival of homozygote resistant larvae, which seems reasonable for cotton bollworm, modeling results indicate almost no delay in the appearance of resistance when a 4 percent refuge is used (Figure 1). These modeling results suggest that refuges must be very large (30 to 50 percent) to substantially delay evolution of resistance when survival of heterozygotes is between 28 percent and 60 percent (i.e., degree of dominance is between 0.1 and 0.5). We must, therefore, carefully evaluate what the effective size of the current cotton and noncotton refuges (crops and native vegetation) really are, and what they are likely to be in the future. In some areas of the southeastern United States, cotton bollworm is likely to have many alternate hosts (John VanDuyn, personal communication). However, information from large areas in Texas (Brazos River Valley, Lower Rio Grande Valley) indicates that in July and August, cotton is virtually the only host for cotton bollworm (Juan Lopez, personal communication). In areas of the Texas High Plains, south of Lubbock, where there is little corn or soybean, cotton seems to be the major cotton bollworm host for most of the season (Jim Leser, personal communication). Although these areas of Texas currently grow mostly non-bt cotton, this may change as new cultivars (e.g., stripper cotton) become available and/or the technology fees for Bt cotton are lowered. Until we have a better understanding of effective sizes of noncotton refuges for cotton bollworm in diverse cotton-growing areas of the United States, we take the conservative approach of using non-bt cotton, soybean, and corn acreage in computing refuge size. With soybean and corn, more research is needed to determine how many useful adult insects are produced per acre at different locations during several years (Mike Caprio, personal communication; Nick Storer, personal communication). Some crops that could serve as refuges for cotton bollworm have been engineered to express Bt toxins (e.g., soybean,

13 peanut, alfalfa, tobacco), but have not been marketed in the United States. Without careful planning, alternate crop refuges could disappear in the future when these cultivars reach the market. EPA has been careful to control the use of Bt corn in cotton-growing areas for just this reason. In Australia, where the two major pests are approximately as susceptible to Bt toxin as cotton bollworm and where noncotton refuges are limited, the cotton growers and the government have limited Bt cotton acreage to below 20 percent of all cotton grown. There may be a lesson in this for managing cotton bollworm in the United States. Lessons from widescale commercial plantings of Bt cotton. Experience with Bt cotton over the past two years in the United States and Australia has taught us some important lessons. In the United States, the summer of 1996 with 1.8 million acres planted to Bt cotton demonstrated that moving rapidly from Bt cotton grown on small plots to large acreage can produce unanticipated results. The first lesson learned was that small plot trials conducted over a few years can be misleading in terms of insect densities and insect fitness. Most of these small plot tests indicated that Bt cotton offered high levels of protection from cotton bollworm, but in some cases it was difficult to determine how much damage was caused by cotton bollworm and how much by tobacco budworm (e.g., Benedict et al. 1996). The small plot tests were sometimes infested with laboratory-reared insects that had not fed on cotton for a number of generations. One set of data (Mahaffey et al. 1995), based on natural infestations in North Carolina, indicated that there was only moderate cotton bollworm control, but these data were treated as outliers or artifacts of artificially induced high densities (Bradley 1996; Deaton 1996) and were not typically referred to in the literature (e.g., Benedict et al. 1996). Monsanto s Grower s Guide for 1996 (Monsanto 1997) made no distinction between the level of control that a farmer should expect for cotton bollworm and tobacco budworm, and company advertisements reinforced the idea that Bollgard cotton would offer excellent control of cotton bollworm (Tim Dennehy, personal communication). Unfortunately, the North Carolina field plot data turned out to reflect survival levels in the 1996 large-scale commercial plantings. An investigation by Monsanto personnel indicated that levels of Bt toxin in the affected plants were no lower than expected, and the cotton bollworm larvae in the affected areas were as susceptible to the Bt toxin as control larvae (Greenplatt 1997). A second lesson from the 1996 US field season was that monitoring 1.8 million acres for compliance is not easy. Although Monsanto staff visited about 40 percent of Bollgard growers (Monsanto 1997), their visits were not detailed enough to assess whether growers were truly in compliance. For example, the Monsanto staff did not rigorously assess whether or not growers had treated

14 their 4 percent refuge with lepidopteran-active insecticides. They did not report doing residue analysis on any plant samples and did not report checking levels of damage to the refuge cotton plants caused by caterpillars. No data seem to be available (based on lack of response to our requests) on the growth and productivity characteristics of the refuge cotton, so one cannot assess whether the plants were attractive to egg-laying moths. Comments from consultants and extension personnel at November 1997 meetings held by Monsanto indicated concern about lack of compliance (Peter Ellsworth, personal communication). More rigorous checking (probably by EPA rather than Monsanto) is needed to verify compliance. The Australian experience with commercial use of Bt cotton in the summer of added one more lesson for the future: Bt expression can vary based on the genetic material planted, environmental factors, or both. A significant number of growers had fields of Bt cotton in which the damage due to H. armigera was similar to that in untreated non-bt cotton (Forrester and Pyke 1997). A general explanation for the control failures has not been reported. If, indeed, Bt-cotton plants sometimes express lower than expected levels of toxin for unknown reasons, it is possible for this to occur in the United States. Lower toxin production would lead to poor control of cotton bollworm and could ruin the high-dose/refuge strategy for tobacco budworm. 5WDUVCPVKCNN[&GNC[KPI4GUKUVCPEG What Can Resistance Management Plans Accomplish? No matter how resistance is inherited and how high the concentration of toxin is, the greater the acreage of Bt cotton planted, the faster pests will adapt. There are financial and environmental benefits to the immediate planting of large acreages of Bt cotton, for the most part due to decreased use of broad-spectrum, conventional insecticides. On the other hand, there is the long-term cost to conventional and organic farmers who could lose a pest-management tool. No single best resistance management plan exists because sellers of Bt cotton seed, growers, consumers, and environmentalists do not agree on the criteria for measuring costs and benefits. Bt cotton expressing only Cry1Ac might be effective in a particular region with substantial acreage for 3 to 20 years without any purposeful resistance management. Implementation of an effective resistance management plan might change this life span to 5 to 100 years, depending on the pest, the level of toxin, and the distribution of crops and wild host plants in the region. The extent of the delay in evolution of resistance is highly uncertain and likely to vary tremendously among regions and pests. For example, if Bt cotton were planted on 100 percent of the acreage over a wide area, a pest such as pink bollworm, feeding almost solely on cotton, might evolve resistance in one to a few years. In such a case, an effective resistance management plan might extend the life span of Bt to 20 years or more. If, however, market factors promote low use of

15 Bt cotton in a region, resistance might evolve slowly, even without any resistance management plan. Conversely, elements of certain resistance management plans might actually do little to slow resistance or might even accelerate resistance in certain pests. For example, use of what satisfies requirements of a high-dose/refuge strategy against tobacco budworm may speed resistance in cotton bollworm because these concentrations of toxin are likely to cause 60 to 90 percent reduction in cotton bollworm survival (Mahaffey et al. 1995; Lambert et al. 1996; Ron Smith, personal communication). Even if we assume that only 50 percent of cotton bollworm are produced on cotton, we could still see a rapid decline in the effectiveness of Bt cotton if there is quantitative genetic variation for Bt tolerance (Falconer 1981; Tabashnik 1995). If this is the case, there would be a decline in the effectiveness of the Bt cotton each year. The change may not be perceived immediately because, instead of a small fraction of the population being very resistant to Bt, the tolerance of the entire population will slowly increase. The change may not be noticed by the farmer if cotton bollworm populations are generally less dense due to effects of the Bt cotton in previous years. Furthermore, there could be many single genes that could confer significant levels of resistance to moderately toxic plants (Tabashnik 1994a, 1995). Figure 1 shows the rate of pest population adaptation to such cultivars when the refuge size varies from 4 percent to 50 percent and the inheritance of resistance is either partially recessive (H = 0.10) or additive (H = 0.50). Are We Correct in Assuming That the High-Dose/Refuge Strategy Is the Only Currently Feasible Approach? Computer simulations (Gould 1986, 1991, 1994; Roush 1994, 1996; Peck 1997; Taylor and Georghiou 1979) and small-scale laboratory (Liu and Tabashnik 1997) and greenhouse tests (Roush, Tang and Shelton, unpublished data) provide support for using the high-dose/refuge strategy with transgenic crops, but no field data are available. Such data will be difficult to obtain on a scale larger than a few hundred acres, but small-scale field experiments can be conducted with less mobile pest species such as pink bollworm (Simmons, Dennehy, Staten, Tabashnik et al., unpublished data). For cotton bollworm (and possibly tobacco budworm), long-term field experiments are not feasible because the insects are unlikely to remain in the small area where a test can be performed for more than one to three generations. More detailed data on natural movement and mating behavior of all major cotton pests would certainly bolster confidence in this approach. The high-dose/refuge approach promises the possibility of increasing the durability of Bt crops 10- to 100-fold, whereas the potential of most other strategies is generally only 2- to 4--fold (Gould, 1994). Therefore, the high-

16 dose/refuge strategy is attractive. The approach, however, carries high risk because it can greatly accelerate resistance if certain assumptions are not valid. Unlike some other strategies, the high-dose/refuge approach relies heavily on mating between Bt-susceptible insects and insects carrying one or more resistance alleles. Current understanding of movement and mating patterns is not adequate to determine the extent to which such mating will occur. Further, this strategy fails if the plants do not produce a dose sufficiently high to kill most heterozygotes. We can measure the concentration of toxin produced by plants, but it is harder to estimate the frequency of rare dominant resistance genes in insect populations. Such genes could result in a significant percentage of heterozygotes surviving on what might seem to be a high concentration of toxin (Heckel 1994). There are alternatives to the high-dose/refuge approach. Novartis has shown that tissue-specific expression is possible in corn (event 176). However, no companies have developed plants with the kind of tissue-specific expression that would be expected to slow the evolution of resistance (Gould 1988; Roush 1996). Moderate expression with large effective refuge size (i.e., 50 percent) could slow the evolution of resistance (Figure 1). Such large refuges might be realistic if regional pest densities decreased due to Bt-induced insect pest mortality as well as insect pest mortality caused by high densities of natural enemies (a result from less spraying of broad-spectrum insecticides). The low-dose approach, in which natural enemies augment the mild negative effects of the Bt crops, is still a theoretical possibility. Such an approach, however, is unlikely to appeal to most US farmers. Furthermore, in many situations, low doses may not achieve the goal of managing resistance (Gould et al. 1992; Johnson et al. 1997). The multiple-toxin approach is usually considered as an adjunct to the highdose approach. Instead of having a high dose of one toxin, plants express high concentrations of two or more toxins. The multiple-toxin approach coupled with a refuge can provide benefits even if a high dose (i.e., 25 times the LD 99 of susceptible insect genotypes, Gould et al. 1994) is not reached. However, if the two toxins are each expressed at levels that only kill 50 to 80 percent of the insects, this tactic may not be highly effective in slowing the evolution of resistance (Gould 1991, 1994). Limiting the number of years during which Bt crops could be grown consecutively on each farm or in each county could be an effective component for resistance management, especially if spatial refuges were also present every year (Tabashnik 1994a). For example, growers might allot one year of not growing Bt crops for every two years during which they grow Bt crops on more

17 than 50 percent of their acreage. As discussed in the IPM section below, reduction in densities of cotton caterpillar pests achieved during seasons when Bt cotton is grown could decrease the need for and value of Bt cotton in subsequent years. If Bt cotton kills more than 99 percent of pink bollworm in Bt cotton fields for two consecutive years, the value of the Bt to the grower in the third year may be low. An important issue is whether this type of temporal refuge should and could be mandated, given the technical problems involved in its implementation. For example, even if seed companies complied with this restriction, it would be tempting for farmers to save Bt cotton seed for personal use in the off-years. The Problems of Multiple Pests/Multiple Crops Multiple pests in one crop. Cotton has more than one caterpillar pest in most growing regions. Because of the unique biology of each pest, it is sometimes difficult to design a resistance management program that is appropriate for all of the caterpillar pests. As discussed above, the scale of refuge that is acceptable for tobacco budworm is not optimal for pink bollworm, and both of these pests occur in some areas. Monsanto and EPA agreed to use the same refuge scale for cotton throughout the United States, and chose a scale that may be small enough for tobacco budworm and was considered to be most easily adopted by seed companies and farmers. This scale is likely to be too large for pink bollworm. Several caterpillar pests that are not considered target pests could be affected by Cry1Ac-producing cotton. For example, the soybean looper (Pseudoplusia includens) is often found in Mississippi cotton and is affected by Cry1Ac (Randy Luttrell, personal communication). However, no research has been reported that deals with resistance management for this pest. Therefore, we do not know how exposure to Cry1Ac in cotton may affect this insect s ecology and evolution in other crops. Beet armyworm is not significantly controlled by Cry1Ac-producing cotton, but it is susceptible to other Bt toxins. Because beet armyworm can develop cross-resistance to unrelated Bt toxins (Moar et al. 1995), it will be important to assess whether Cry1Ac cotton may be selecting beet armyworm for resistance, based on exposure to sublethal doses. One pest in multiple crops. Some caterpillar pests of cotton, such as tobacco budworm and cotton bollworm, feed on a number of other crops. Tobacco budworm feeds on tobacco, tomato and, to some extent, soybean (Sheck and Gould 1996 and references within). Cotton bollworm feeds on all of the crops attacked by tobacco budworm, plus corn, sorghum, alfalfa, peanuts, and many vegetables (Metcalf et al. 1951). The number of adult moths produced by these other crops depends on crop attractiveness to females and nutritional suitability of the crop for larval growth over the season. Insecticide use and natural enemies in the alternative crops also affect the number of moths produced.

18 Of all the alternative crops mentioned above, corn is regarded as the most important alternative host for cotton bollworm in the early part of the summer. In some areas, corn may produce more than 90 percent of the moths during the single cotton bollworm generation when tender corn ears are being produced (e. g., Stinner et al. 1977; Juan Lopez and Jim Raulston, personal communications). Once the corn plant matures, moths move into other crops such as cotton for the remaining one to three generations of the season. In cotton-growing areas, current EPA regulations limit the total acreage of Bt corn in the cotton belt and do not allow more than 10 percent of the corn acreage in any county to be planted in Bt cultivars that are toxic to cotton bollworm during the ear-forming stage of the crop (EPA 1997). This stringent regulation was developed to ensure that the refuge for cotton bollworm was not eroded. Presumably, due to the history of applications for permits (cotton applications were submitted before those for corn), and because Bt cotton is likely to provide more environmental benefits than Bt corn (conventional cotton is sprayed for caterpillar pests much more than is corn), farmers were not given the option of limiting the percentage of Bt cotton and increasing the percentage of Bt corn on their farms. Field data indicate that cotton bollworm larvae rarely, if ever, develop on leaf tissue of currently available Bt-corn varieties during the vegetative plant stage (John VanDuyn, personal communication). Once these plants start producing ears, the larvae of cotton bollworm feed almost exclusively on silk and ear tissue, which kills approximately 60 to 90 percent of the larvae and slows the growth of surviving larvae (G. Dively and N. Storer, personal communications). In areas where most of the cotton bollworm population feeds on this ear-stage corn, resistance may evolve rapidly because there is likely to be a large fitness difference between totally susceptible cotton bollworm larvae and those with moderately increased tolerance for Bt toxins. In areas where most of the cotton bollworm move from ear-stage corn onto Bt cotton that also causes intermediate levels of mortality, the risk of resistance is intensified. This intensification of risk is kept in check by limiting Bt-corn acreage in cotton-growing regions. However, it is reasonable to ask whether the risk of resistance developing would be higher or lower if it were the Bt-cotton acreage that was limited instead of the corn acreage. If a large proportion of the cotton bollworm population in an area fed on the vegetative (whorl) stage of corn which has a potentially high dose of Bt toxin, a small refuge of non-bt corn would be adequate for resistance management, and the density of cotton bollworm might be severely decreased. This could lead to reduced need to spray the non-bt cotton. Such a scenario makes it important to reevaluate the environmental benefits of planting Bt corn versus Bt cotton. Until we have more

19 data on percentages of cotton bollworm produced in the two crops over the entire season, it will be difficult to determine which transgenic crop to limit or whether some formula should be developed that allows each farmer to plant a specific combined percentage of the two crops in Bt-producing cultivars. There are currently no commercialized Bt soybeans or Bt peanuts, but these crops have been transformed with Bt-toxin genes. Peanuts support cotton bollworm growth but the intensity of spraying in peanuts may limit this crop as a refuge for cotton bollworm. There has been debate about the degree to which soybean contributes to the noncotton refuge for cotton bollworm (R. Roush and M. Caprio, personal communications; see also Lopez et al. 1978). Soybean has a high threshold for cotton bollworm larvae before spraying is recommended, but soybean does not seem to consistently attract a large fraction of egg-laying cotton bollworm females in Mississippi, even in the later portion of the season. In the early part of the summer, vegetative soybean supports few cotton bollworm larvae (Stinner et al. 1977). Nevertheless, soybean makes a contribution to the overall cotton bollworm refuge in some regions of the United States. So when Bt soybean is commercialized, it will be important to reassess permitted corn and cotton acreage on the basis of how many acres of Bt soybean are planted. Cotton bollworm is a mobile insect (e.g., Sparks et al. 1975). Data from Texas indicate that this pest may feed on corn and cotton in southern Texas early in summer. It then may move into more northern areas (e.g., Texas High Plains, Oklahoma, Kansas) where suitable corn is available. Trap-capture data indicate that this pest then seems to return to Texas and Mexico in late summer (Juan Lopez and Jimmy Raulston, personal communications). Other studies point to similar long-range movement, but the effects of such movement on local populations are unclear (Phillips 1979; Lingren et al. 1993, 1994). Current regulations severely limit the planting of Bt corn only in states where cotton is grown. If cotton bollworm populations are truly migratory, these state-by-state or county-by-county limits may not limit selection pressure on the regional cotton bollworm population. Furthermore, field observations and moth-trap data indicate that cotton bollworm populations that feed on early season corn in Mexico move across the border into the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas when the Mexican corn matures and reproductive cotton becomes available in Texas (Jim Raulston, personal communication). Transgenic Bt-corn cultivars will soon be planted in Mexico (Hruska and Pavon 1997). Therefore, regional pest-population dynamics and international regulations on transgenic crops must be considered in this system. Similar issues pertain to the European corn borer, which also feeds on corn and cotton. There is a need to determine how large a fraction of the corn borer

Plant Biotechnology: Current and Potential Impact For Improving Pest Management In U.S. Agriculture An Analysis of 40 Case Studies June 2002

Plant Biotechnology: Current and Potential Impact For Improving Pest Management In U.S. Agriculture An Analysis of 40 Case Studies June 2002 Plant Biotechnology: Current and Potential Impact For Improving Pest Management In U.S. Agriculture An Analysis of 40 Case Studies June 2002 Insect Resistant Cotton (2) Leonard P. Gianessi Cressida S.

More information

B Bt Cotton Technology in Texas: A Practical View

B Bt Cotton Technology in Texas: A Practical View B-6107 02-01 Bt Cotton Technology in Texas: A Practical View Glen C. Moore, Thomas W. Fuchs, Mark A. Muegge, Allen E. Knutson* Since their introduction in 1996, transgenic cottons expressing the Bollgard

More information

Cotton Insect Control in Arizona

Cotton Insect Control in Arizona Cotton Insect Control in Arizona Item Type Article Authors Watson, T. F.; Moore, Leon Publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Journal Progressive Agriculture in Arizona Rights

More information

The common soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) produces

The common soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) produces Frequency of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in field populations of pink bollworm Bruce E. Tabashnik*, Amanda L. Patin*, Timothy J. Dennehy*, Yong-Biao Liu*, Yves Carrière*, Maria A. Sims*, and Larry

More information

Mortality and Development Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Pink Bollworm Larvae

Mortality and Development Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Pink Bollworm Larvae Mortality and Development Effects of Transgenic Cotton on Pink Bollworm Larvae T. J. Henneberry, L. Forlow Jech, and T. de la Torre USDA-ARS, PWA, Western Cotton Research Laboratory, Phoenix, AZ 85040-8803

More information

Characterization of resistance to all bollworms and Spodoptera litura (Fab.) in different Bt transgenic events of cotton

Characterization of resistance to all bollworms and Spodoptera litura (Fab.) in different Bt transgenic events of cotton ISSN: 2319-7706 Volume 3 Number 3 (2014) pp. 594-600 http://www.ijcmas.com Original Research Article Characterization of resistance to all bollworms and Spodoptera litura (Fab.) in different Bt transgenic

More information

Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) and Heliothis virescens ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT

Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) and Heliothis virescens ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT The Journal of Cotton Science 1:155 16 (26) http://journal.cotton.org, The Cotton Foundation 26 155 ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT Changes in Populations of Heliothis virescens (F.) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and

More information

Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695

Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695 INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE AND RESISTANCE MANAGEMENT Comparative Production of Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from Transgenic Cotton Expressing Either One or Two Bacillus thuringiensis Proteins with

More information

Cotton Comments OSU Southwest Oklahoma Research and Extension Center Altus, OK 2018 Current Situation

Cotton Comments OSU Southwest Oklahoma Research and Extension Center Altus, OK 2018 Current Situation Cotton Comments OSU Southwest Oklahoma Research and Extension Center Altus, OK July 26, 2018 Volume 8 No.7 2018 Current Situation The 2018 drought continues with 87.62 percent of the state in drought,

More information

Midsouth Entomologist 4: 1 13 ISSN:

Midsouth Entomologist 4: 1 13 ISSN: Midsouth Entomologist 4: 1 13 ISSN: 1936-6019 www.midsouthentomologist.org.msstate.edu Research Article Efficacy of Cotton Expressing Pyramided Bacillus thuringiensis Insecticidal Proteins Against Lepidopteran

More information

Insecticide Resistance Questions to answer: What is resistance?

Insecticide Resistance Questions to answer: What is resistance? Insecticide Resistance Questions to answer: What is resistance? How prevalent is resistance; what are some important examples? How is resistance identified and measured? What biological mechanisms confer

More information

Exclusion, suppression, and eradication of pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders)) from the southwestern US and northern Mexico

Exclusion, suppression, and eradication of pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders)) from the southwestern US and northern Mexico Exclusion, suppression, and eradication of pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders)) from the southwestern US and northern Mexico Eoin Davis, Pink Bollworm Rearing Facility Director USDA-APHIS

More information

Control of Resistant Pink Bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) by Transgenic Cotton That Produces Bacillus thuringiensis Toxin Cry2Ab

Control of Resistant Pink Bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) by Transgenic Cotton That Produces Bacillus thuringiensis Toxin Cry2Ab APPLIED AND ENVIRONMENTAL MICROBIOLOGY, Aug. 2002, p. 3790 3794 Vol. 68, No. 8 0099-2240/02/$04.00 0 DOI: 10.1128/AEM.68.8.3790 3794.2002 Copyright 2002, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

More information

PARASITISM OF SOYBEAN LOOPERS, PSEUDOPLUSIA INCLUDENS, BY COPIDOSOMA FLORIDANUM IN BOLLGARD AND NON-BT COTTON

PARASITISM OF SOYBEAN LOOPERS, PSEUDOPLUSIA INCLUDENS, BY COPIDOSOMA FLORIDANUM IN BOLLGARD AND NON-BT COTTON PARASITISM OF SOYBEAN LOOPERS, PSEUDOPLUSIA INCLUDENS, BY COPIDOSOMA FLORIDANUM IN BOLLGARD AND NON-BT COTTON John R. Ruberson, Melissa D. Thompson, Russell J. Ottens, J. David Griffin Dept. of Entomology,

More information

The bollworm [Helicoverpa zea (Boddie)] and ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT

The bollworm [Helicoverpa zea (Boddie)] and ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT The Journal of Cotton Science 8:223 229 (2004) http://journal.cotton.org, The Cotton Foundation 2004 223 ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT Impact of Bollworms [Helicoverpa ea (Boddie)] on Maturity and Yield of Bollgard

More information

Asymmetrical cross-resistance between Bacillus thuringiensis toxins Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab in pink bollworm

Asymmetrical cross-resistance between Bacillus thuringiensis toxins Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab in pink bollworm Asymmetrical cross-resistance between Bacillus thuringiensis toxins Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab in pink bollworm Bruce E. Tabashnik a,1, Gopalan C. Unnithan a, Luke Masson b, David W. Crowder a, Xianchun Li a, and

More information

INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS

INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS Russell J. Ottens, John R. Ruberson, Robert E. Harbin, and Phillip M. Roberts Dept. of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA Introduction

More information

The Halo Effect: Suppression of Pink Bollworm on Non-Bt Cotton by Bt Cotton in China

The Halo Effect: Suppression of Pink Bollworm on Non-Bt Cotton by Bt Cotton in China The Halo Effect: Suppression of Pink Bollworm on Non-Bt Cotton by Bt Cotton in China Peng Wan 1,2., Yunxin Huang 3., Bruce E. Tabashnik 4, Minsong Huang 2, Kongming Wu 1 * 1 State Key Laboratory for Biology

More information

Making codling moth mating disruption work in Michigan: Adopting an area-wide approach to managing codling moth in Michigan apple production

Making codling moth mating disruption work in Michigan: Adopting an area-wide approach to managing codling moth in Michigan apple production Fruit Crop Advisory Team Alert Vol. 20, No. 17, September 6, 2005 Making codling moth mating disruption work in Michigan: Adopting an area-wide approach to managing codling moth in Michigan apple production

More information

INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS

INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE MONITORING IN LEPIDOPTERAN COTTON PESTS Russell J. Ottens, John R. Ruberson, and Phillip M. Roberts Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton Abstract In 2005, larvae

More information

UPDATE ON PINK BOLLWORM RESISTANCE TO BT COTTON IN THE SOUTHWEST

UPDATE ON PINK BOLLWORM RESISTANCE TO BT COTTON IN THE SOUTHWEST UPDATE ON PINK BOLLWORM RESISTANCE TO BT COTTON IN THE SOUTHWEST Timothy J. Dennehy, Gopalan C. Unnithan, Sarah A. Brink, Brook D. Wood, Yves Carrière and Bruce E. Tabashnik University of Arizona, Tucson,

More information

Spatial and temporal variability in host use by Helicoverpa zea as measured by analyses of stable carbon isotope ratios and gossypol residues

Spatial and temporal variability in host use by Helicoverpa zea as measured by analyses of stable carbon isotope ratios and gossypol residues Journal of Applied Ecology 2010, 47, 583 592 doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2010.01796.x Spatial and temporal variability in host use by Helicoverpa zea as measured by analyses of stable carbon isotope ratios

More information

Ohio Vegetable & Small Fruit Research & Development Program 2007 Report on Research

Ohio Vegetable & Small Fruit Research & Development Program 2007 Report on Research Ohio Vegetable & Small Fruit Research & Development Program 2007 Report on Research Project Title: New Corn Earworm Management for Fresh Market Sweet Corn Principal Investigator(s): Jim Jasinski, Celeste

More information

Control of the European pepper moth using biological control

Control of the European pepper moth using biological control Control of the European pepper moth using biological control Biological Control in Ornamental Plant Production Symposium San Marcos. CA, January 18, 2012 Graeme Murphy, Greenhouse Floriculture IPM Specialist,

More information

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION Cabbage is an important cruciferous vegetable. Insect pests are one of the major biotic factors which contribute to major economic losses both quantitatively and qualitatively. These

More information

Dr. Charles N Waturu Centre Director KARI-Thika P.O. Box 220, Thika, Kenya

Dr. Charles N Waturu Centre Director KARI-Thika P.O. Box 220, Thika, Kenya Dr. Charles N Waturu Centre Director KARI-Thika P.O. Box 220, Thika, Kenya (email:karithika@africaonline.co.ke) Title of Presentation The Status of the Bt-cotton Confined Field Trials in Kenya Bt-cotton

More information

Evaluation of Assail for the Control of Early Season Cotton Aphids in Upland Cotton COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT 2001

Evaluation of Assail for the Control of Early Season Cotton Aphids in Upland Cotton COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT 2001 of Early Season Cotton Aphids in Upland Cotton COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT 2001 Donald J. Reid, Agronomist Texas A & M University-Commerce James S. Swart, Entomologist Texas Agricultural Extension Service

More information

Cotton/Soybean Insect Newsletter

Cotton/Soybean Insect Newsletter Cotton/Soybean Insect Newsletter Volume 13, Issue #12 Edisto Research & Education Center in Blackville, SC 20 July 2018 Pest Patrol Alerts The information contained herein each week is available via text

More information

Insecticides Labeled for Control of Bean Leaf Beetle, Mexican Bean Beetle, and Green Cloverworm. Amount product per acre

Insecticides Labeled for Control of Bean Leaf Beetle, Mexican Bean Beetle, and Green Cloverworm. Amount product per acre Insect Management in Soybeans 2016 Joanne Whalen Extension IPM Specialist and Bill Cissel, Extension IPM Agent University of Delaware ( adapted from VA Pest Management Guide, section written by D Ames

More information

GAINES COUNTY IPM NEWSLETTER Manda G. Cattaneo, Extension Agent - IPM 101 S. Main RM B-8. Seminole, TX 79360

GAINES COUNTY IPM NEWSLETTER Manda G. Cattaneo, Extension Agent - IPM 101 S. Main RM B-8.  Seminole, TX 79360 GAINES COUNTY IPM NEWSLETTER Manda G. Cattaneo, Extension Agent - IPM 101 S. Main RM B-8 http://gaines-co.tamu.edu Seminole, TX 79360 http://www.tpma.org (432)758-6669 office http://ipm.tamu.edu (432)758-6662

More information

Flea Beetle Field Scouting Guide

Flea Beetle Field Scouting Guide Flea Beetle Field Scouting Guide INTRODUCTION Flea beetles are the most significant insect pest affecting canola production on the Prairies. Every year, they cost growers millions of dollars in yield,

More information

The Mediterranean Fruit Fly in Central America

The Mediterranean Fruit Fly in Central America The Mediterranean Fruit Fly in Central America P.V. Vail, I. Moore and D. Nadel Dr. Vail is Section Head, Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Atomic Energy in Food and Agriculture. Dr. Moore is Assistant to the

More information

EffectivenessofDifferentSpayTimingMethodsfortheControlofLepidopteronPestsinCotton

EffectivenessofDifferentSpayTimingMethodsfortheControlofLepidopteronPestsinCotton Global Journal of Science Frontier Research: D Agriculture and Veterinary Volume 16 Issue 8 Version 1.0 Year 2016 Type : Double Blind Peer Reviewed International Research Journal Publisher: Global Journals

More information

An IPM 1 Approach to Managing Herbicide Resistant Ryegrass in Northeast Texas. October, 2014 J. Swart, A. Braley, R. Sutton, S. Stewart, D.

An IPM 1 Approach to Managing Herbicide Resistant Ryegrass in Northeast Texas. October, 2014 J. Swart, A. Braley, R. Sutton, S. Stewart, D. An IPM 1 Approach to Managing Herbicide Resistant Ryegrass in Northeast Texas. October, 2014 J. Swart, A. Braley, R. Sutton, S. Stewart, D. Reid 2 BACKGROUND Annual ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) is the

More information

Ecology and management of stink bugs & Lygus on cotton in the SE and Mid-south

Ecology and management of stink bugs & Lygus on cotton in the SE and Mid-south Ecology and management of stink bugs & Lygus on cotton in the SE and Mid-south ENT 762 Jack Bacheler Prof. Emeritus Stink bugs (Pentatomidae) are a large and sometimes colorful family of both predacious

More information

Arkansas Fruit and Nut News Volume 5, Issue 6, 13 July 2015

Arkansas Fruit and Nut News Volume 5, Issue 6, 13 July 2015 Arkansas Fruit and Nut News Volume 5, Issue 6, 13 July 2015 Upcoming Events Texas Pecan Growers Association Annual Conference online registration (Link): July 12-15, 2015, Frisco, TX; Contact (979) 846-3285

More information

Kansas State University Extension Entomology Newsletter

Kansas State University Extension Entomology Newsletter Kansas State University Extension Entomology Newsletter For Agribusinesses, Applicators, Consultants, Extension Personnel & Homeowners Department of Entomology 123 West Waters Hall K-State Research and

More information

Biological Control of Two Avocado Pests Amorbia cuneana and omnivorous looper on avocado can be controlled by parasite

Biological Control of Two Avocado Pests Amorbia cuneana and omnivorous looper on avocado can be controlled by parasite California Agriculture. 1985. 39(11-12):21-23. Biological Control of Two Avocado Pests Amorbia cuneana and omnivorous looper on avocado can be controlled by parasite Earl R. Oatman and Gary R. Platner

More information

BMSB impact on vegetable and field crops in the Mid- Atlantic and research plans for 2011

BMSB impact on vegetable and field crops in the Mid- Atlantic and research plans for 2011 BMSB impact on vegetable and field crops in the Mid- Atlantic and research plans for 2011 Galen P. Dively Department of Entomology DE - Joanne Whalen, Bill Cissel VA - Ames Herbert, Tom Kuhar, Kathy Kamminga,

More information

HERE ARE SOME ANSWERS TO OUR CUSTOMERS MOST OFTEN ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT Calcium-25

HERE ARE SOME ANSWERS TO OUR CUSTOMERS MOST OFTEN ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT Calcium-25 HERE ARE SOME ANSWERS TO OUR CUSTOMERS MOST OFTEN ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT Calcium-25 1. What is Calcium-25? See also Table of Contents pages (2013) Calcium-25 is a unique crop yield-enhancing supplement

More information

Management Considerations: Squaring to First Flower

Management Considerations: Squaring to First Flower Management Considerations: Squaring to First Flower Gus Lorenz and Glenn Studebaker, U of A Div. of Ag. Scott Stewart, UT Roger Leonard, LSU Angus Catchot, MSU Jeff Gore, USDA- ARS Chuck Farr and Bobby

More information

LYGUS BUG MANAGEMENT IN SEED ALFALFA. Eric T. Natwick and M. Lopez 1 ABSTRACT

LYGUS BUG MANAGEMENT IN SEED ALFALFA. Eric T. Natwick and M. Lopez 1 ABSTRACT LYGUS BUG MANAGEMENT IN SEED ALFALFA Eric T. Natwick and M. Lopez 1 ABSTRACT Lygus bugs, Lygus spp., are a common pest of alfalfa grown for seed in California. Alfalfa seed producers and their pest control

More information

NEW YORK'S FOOD AND LIFE SCIENCES BULLETIN NO. 57, AUGUST 1975

NEW YORK'S FOOD AND LIFE SCIENCES BULLETIN NO. 57, AUGUST 1975 NEW YORK'S FOOD AND LIFE SCIENCES BULLETIN NO. 57, AUGUST 1975 NEW YORK STATE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION. GENEVA, A DIVISION OF THE NEW YORK STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND LIFE SCIENCES, A STATUTORY

More information

Fitness Costs Associated with Cry1Ac-Resistant Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): A Factor Countering Selection for Resistance to Bt Cotton?

Fitness Costs Associated with Cry1Ac-Resistant Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): A Factor Countering Selection for Resistance to Bt Cotton? INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE AND RESISTANCE MANAGEMENT Fitness Costs Associated with Cry1Ac-Resistant Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): A Factor Countering Selection for Resistance to Bt Cotton? KONASALE

More information

Pink Bollworm Control Act

Pink Bollworm Control Act Pink Bollworm Control Act The Pink Bollworm Control Act provides for the establishment of pink bollworm control districts and committees, organic cotton regulations, collection of assessments and abolishment

More information

SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SOUTHWESTERN PINK BOLLWORM TO Bt TOXINS CRY1AC AND CRY2Ab2:

SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SOUTHWESTERN PINK BOLLWORM TO Bt TOXINS CRY1AC AND CRY2Ab2: Cooperative Extension 2004 The University of Arizona Extension Arthropod Resistance Management Laboratory SUSCEPTIBILITY OF SOUTHWESTERN PINK BOLLWORM TO Bt TOXINS CRY1AC AND CRY2Ab2: FINAL RESULTS OF

More information

Brief on Introduction and Evaluation of Transgenic Bt-cotton for Efficacy against Cotton Bollworms in Kenya

Brief on Introduction and Evaluation of Transgenic Bt-cotton for Efficacy against Cotton Bollworms in Kenya Brief on Introduction and Evaluation of Transgenic Bt-cotton for Efficacy against Cotton Bollworms in Kenya Dr. Charles N Waturu KARI-Thika P.O. Box 220, Thika, Kenya E-mail: karithika@africaonline.co.ke

More information

Kongming WU 1. Contacting Information 2. Present Ranks Professor, President, Academician, 3. Academic Qualifications 4. Scientific Researches

Kongming WU 1. Contacting Information 2. Present Ranks Professor, President, Academician, 3. Academic Qualifications 4. Scientific Researches Kongming WU 1. Contacting Information Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), No. 2 Yuanmingyuan West Road, Beijing, 100193, China. Phone: 86-010-62815906, E-mail:

More information

The efficacy of new insecticides and Dipel for Soybean Looper control in soybeans and effects on beneficial insects and arthropods.

The efficacy of new insecticides and Dipel for Soybean Looper control in soybeans and effects on beneficial insects and arthropods. The efficacy of new insecticides and Dipel for Soybean Looper control in soybeans and effects on beneficial insects and arthropods. ABSTRACT Kristen Knight and Hugh Brier QDPI/FSI, Kingaroy. Four trials

More information

Pheromone Based Mating Disruption

Pheromone Based Mating Disruption TM Thaumatotibia leucotreta Reg No: L10320, Act 36 of 1947 Pheromone Based Mating Disruption Pest specific Easy to apply Season long control Manufactured by Hinders chemical resistance Rain fast and no

More information

Managing Soybean Cyst Nematode

Managing Soybean Cyst Nematode MANAGEMENT MATTERS SERIES Tips to help North Carolina soybean growers increase yield & profits Managing Soybean Cyst Nematode The Invisible Yield Robber MANAGEMENT MATTERS SERIES > How can you test for

More information

Final Report Aphid monitoring and virus testing in strawberries

Final Report Aphid monitoring and virus testing in strawberries Final Report Aphid monitoring and virus testing in strawberries 15 February 2017 Prepared for: Horticulture Nova Scotia 32 Main St Kentville, NS B4N 1J5 Prepared by: Jennifer Haverstock Small Fruit Specialist

More information

Efficacy of CpGV on Oriental Fruit Moth (Cydia molesta): myth or reality?

Efficacy of CpGV on Oriental Fruit Moth (Cydia molesta): myth or reality? Efficacy of CpGV on Oriental Fruit Moth (Cydia molesta): myth or reality? Antoine Bonhomme 1,2 Samantha Besse 1, Ludovic Crabos 2, François Martinez 2 1 Natural Plant Protection, 35 avenue Léon Blum 64

More information

ONGOING PROJECT REPORT YEAR 1/3 WTFRC Project # CH

ONGOING PROJECT REPORT YEAR 1/3 WTFRC Project # CH ONGOING PROJECT REPORT YEAR 1/3 WTFRC Project # CH-6-63 Project title: Cherry Fruit Fly Control Options PI: Timothy J. Smith Organization: WSU Extension, North Central Washington Address, phone, e-mail:

More information

Insect Pests of Canola DALE WHALEY WSU REGIONAL EXTENSION SPECIALIST WATERVILLE, WA

Insect Pests of Canola DALE WHALEY WSU REGIONAL EXTENSION SPECIALIST WATERVILLE, WA Insect Pests of Canola DALE WHALEY WSU REGIONAL EXTENSION SPECIALIST WATERVILLE, WA What We Want! Insect Pests of Canola Several Others How do you know when to treat the field? Calendar Approach IPM 101

More information

Hybridization and Genetic Extinction. Can and do we preserve the genetic integrity of species, and if so, how?

Hybridization and Genetic Extinction. Can and do we preserve the genetic integrity of species, and if so, how? Hybridization and Genetic Extinction Can and do we preserve the genetic integrity of species, and if so, how? Hybridization Hybridization: mating between different species or two genetically distinct populations

More information

Impact of Lygus lineolaris Management on Biodiversity in Cotton IPM

Impact of Lygus lineolaris Management on Biodiversity in Cotton IPM Impact of Lygus lineolaris Management on Biodiversity in Cotton IPM Jeff Gore, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS Don Cook Angus Catchot Fred Musser Roger Leonard Gus Lorenz Scott Stewart Mid-South

More information

B. Required Codling Moth Damage Pre-Packing Fruit Evaluation: On-Tree Sequential Field Sampling Protocol:

B. Required Codling Moth Damage Pre-Packing Fruit Evaluation: On-Tree Sequential Field Sampling Protocol: Summary of the Taiwan Protocol for Evaluating the Efficacy of Codling Moth Control Programs in Apple Orchards with Fruit for Export to Taiwan (2006 revised) A. Voluntary Initial Screening Guidelines: If

More information

The tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens

The tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens The Journal of Cotton Science 1:15 113 (26) http://journal.cotton.org, The Cotton Foundation 25 15 ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT Mating Incidence of Feral Heliothis virescens (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Males Confined

More information

Codling moth (CM) is becoming an increasing problem

Codling moth (CM) is becoming an increasing problem Testing the PETE Insect Development Prediction Model to Limit the Resurgence of Codling Moth in Apples 7 Deborah Breth Cornell Cooperative Extension- Lake Ontario Fruit Program Albion, NY This project

More information

Insect Pests of Canola. Dale Whaley

Insect Pests of Canola. Dale Whaley Insect Pests of Canola Dale Whaley dwhaley@wsu.edu What We Want! (2) Groups of Canola Pests 1) Insects Pests: - Cabbage Seedpod Weevil - Flea Beetle - Aphids - Cabbage Aphid - Turnip Aphid - Lygus Bug

More information

Making Forage Analysis Work for You in Balancing Livestock Rations and Marketing Hay

Making Forage Analysis Work for You in Balancing Livestock Rations and Marketing Hay A3325 Making Forage Analysis Work for You in Balancing Livestock Rations and Marketing Hay Dan Undersander, W. Terry Howard, and Randy Shaver Forage and grain samples differ in their chemical composition

More information

ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT

ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT The Journal of Cotton Science 3:92-11 (1999) http://journal.cotton.org, The Cotton Foundation 1999 92 ARTHROPOD MANAGEMENT Laboratory and Field Evaluations of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner Insecticides

More information

The suppression of the False Codling Moth, Thaumatotibia leucotreta in South Africa using an AW-IPM approach with a SIT component

The suppression of the False Codling Moth, Thaumatotibia leucotreta in South Africa using an AW-IPM approach with a SIT component The suppression of the False Codling Moth, Thaumatotibia leucotreta in South Africa using an AW-IPM approach with a SIT component Nevill Boersma Program Manager XSIT South Africa Background FCM sub-saharan

More information

Gypsy Moth Background Information

Gypsy Moth Background Information Gypsy Moth Background Information The Gypsy Moth, Lymantria Dispar, is the most notorious insect pest of hardwoods in the eastern United States and is becoming a major pest in other parts of North America.

More information

Evaluation of JH Biotech, Inc. Products under Egyptian environment

Evaluation of JH Biotech, Inc. Products under Egyptian environment 1 Product Name: 5- Biorepel (Natural Insect Repellent) Supervisor: Dr. Mohamad Ibrahim Plant Protection Res. Institute, Sharkia Research Station. INTRODUCTION Evaluation of JH Biotech, Inc. Products under

More information

Status Report: Insects Associated with Hemp

Status Report: Insects Associated with Hemp Status Report: Insects Associated with Hemp Whitney Cranshaw Colorado State University What type of crop is hemp? Cannabis sativa Cultivated Cannabis involves the use of two species (subspecies?) that

More information

The Evaluation of Population Suppression by Irradiated Lepidoptera and their Progeny

The Evaluation of Population Suppression by Irradiated Lepidoptera and their Progeny CRP Title: The Evaluation of Population Suppression by Irradiated Lepidoptera and their Progeny Section/Division: Insect Pest Control / Joint FAO/IAEA Division (NAFA) Project Officer: Jorge Hendrichs Period

More information

Diagnostics & Identification A Key to Pest Management

Diagnostics & Identification A Key to Pest Management Diagnostics & Identification A Key to Pest Management Carl A. Olson Associate Curator Department of Entomology University of Arizona The Art of Identification Insect Identification Clinic Carl Olson bugman@ag.arizona.edu

More information

Apple Pest Management in the West: Strategies to Deal with Inevitable Change

Apple Pest Management in the West: Strategies to Deal with Inevitable Change Apple Pest Management in the West: Strategies to Deal with Inevitable Change Background 1960s: Resistance to chlorinated hydrocarbons in many pests Spider mites elevated to key pest status - resistance

More information

Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show

Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show Proceedings of the 2007 CPM Short Course and MCPR Trade Show December 4 6, 2007 Minneapolis Convention Center Do not Reproduce or Redistribute Without Written Consent of the Author(s) The Application and

More information

THE PEST NAGEME NT GUIDE

THE PEST NAGEME NT GUIDE THE PEST MANAGEMENT The Canola Pest Management GUIDE Guide Introduction Canola pest control starts here In this small but mighty guide, you ll find everything you need to correctly identify, scout and

More information

In-depth studies initiated: Results:

In-depth studies initiated: Results: Exploring the Relationship Between Nitrogen, Plant Spacing and Bacterial Diseases of Onion in New York: Reduced Nitrogen and Closer Spacing Could Result in Less Rot Christy Hoepting, Cornell Cooperative

More information

INVESTIGATIONS ON SECOND GENERATION Bt COTTON GENOTYPES AGAINST INSECT PEST COMPLEX

INVESTIGATIONS ON SECOND GENERATION Bt COTTON GENOTYPES AGAINST INSECT PEST COMPLEX INVESTIGATIONS ON SECOND GENERATION Bt COTTON GENOTYPES AGAINST INSECT PEST COMPLEX Thesis submitted to the University of Agricultural Sciences, Dharwad in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

More information

Copyright The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display. Chapter 6 Patterns of Inheritance

Copyright The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. Permission required for reproduction or display. Chapter 6 Patterns of Inheritance Chapter 6 Patterns of Inheritance Genetics Explains and Predicts Inheritance Patterns Genetics can explain how these poodles look different. Section 10.1 Genetics Explains and Predicts Inheritance Patterns

More information

2011 Lygus Bug Management Trial in Blackeyes Kearney Research and Extension Center, Parlier, CA C.A. Frate 1, S.C. Mueller and P.B.

2011 Lygus Bug Management Trial in Blackeyes Kearney Research and Extension Center, Parlier, CA C.A. Frate 1, S.C. Mueller and P.B. 2011 Bug Management Trial in Blackeyes Kearney Research and Extension Center, Parlier, CA C.A. Frate 1, S.C. Mueller and P.B. Goodell Introduction bugs are the primary insect pest of blackeye cowpeas (Vigna

More information

Fitness Cost of Resistance to Bt Cotton Linked with Increased Gossypol Content in Pink Bollworm Larvae

Fitness Cost of Resistance to Bt Cotton Linked with Increased Gossypol Content in Pink Bollworm Larvae Entomology Publications Entomology 2011 Fitness Cost of Resistance to Bt Cotton Linked with Increased Gossypol Content in Pink Bollworm Larvae Jennifer L. Williams University of Arizona Christa Ellers-Kirk

More information

DECISION DOCUMENT. Food and Feed Safety Assessment of Soybean Event MON x MON (OECD: MON-877Ø1-2 x MON )

DECISION DOCUMENT. Food and Feed Safety Assessment of Soybean Event MON x MON (OECD: MON-877Ø1-2 x MON ) DECISION DOCUMENT Food and Feed Safety Assessment of Soybean Event MON 87701 x MON 89788 (OECD: MON-877Ø1-2 x MON- 89788-1) Directorate of Agrifood Quality Office of Biotechnology and Industrialized Agrifood

More information

Roadmap. Inbreeding How inbred is a population? What are the consequences of inbreeding?

Roadmap. Inbreeding How inbred is a population? What are the consequences of inbreeding? 1 Roadmap Quantitative traits What kinds of variation can selection work on? How much will a population respond to selection? Heritability How can response be restored? Inbreeding How inbred is a population?

More information

Efficacy of Genetically Modified Bt Toxins Against Insects with Different Genetic. Mexico. Address correspondence to B.E.T.

Efficacy of Genetically Modified Bt Toxins Against Insects with Different Genetic. Mexico. Address correspondence to B.E.T. Supplementary Information Efficacy of Genetically Modified Bt Toxins Against Insects with Different Genetic Mechanisms of Resistance Bruce E. Tabashnik 1, Fangneng Huang 2, Mukti N. Ghimire 2, B. Rogers

More information

GENETIC ADEQUACY of GREATER YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS

GENETIC ADEQUACY of GREATER YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS GENETIC ADEQUACY of GREATER YELLOWSTONE GRIZZLY BEARS (The Introduction to Endangered Genes of Yellowstone should be read before this section.) Yellowstone grizzly bears, now the southernmost on the continent,

More information

Article begins on next page

Article begins on next page Public Perceptions of Labeling Genetically Modified Foods Rutgers University has made this article freely available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. [https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/46835/story/]

More information

Cannabis Aphid (Phorodon cannabis)

Cannabis Aphid (Phorodon cannabis) Pest Management of Hemp in Enclosed Production Cannabis Aphid (Phorodon cannabis) Damage and Diagnosis. Cannabis aphid is a pale-colored insect that occurs on leaves and stems. Pale yellow forms predominate;

More information

Hassan Farag Dahi. Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Dokki, Giza, Egypt.

Hassan Farag Dahi. Plant Protection Research Institute, Agricultural Research Center, Dokki, Giza, Egypt. Field Performance for Genetically Modified Egyptian Cotton Varieties (Bt Cotton) Expressing an Insecticidal- Proteins Cry 1Ac and Cry 2Ab Against Cotton Bollworms Hassan Farag Dahi Plant Protection Research

More information

Delivering the Proven Performance of Three Industry-leading Technologies

Delivering the Proven Performance of Three Industry-leading Technologies Delivering the Proven Performance of Three Industry-leading Technologies With two highly effective modes of action plus a Zeon Concentrate formulation, Endigo ZC insecticide provides more robust and complete

More information

SHASHIKANT S. UDIKERI DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, DHARWAD

SHASHIKANT S. UDIKERI DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ENTOMOLOGY COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE, DHARWAD UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, DHARWAD EVALUATION OF NEW GENERATION Bt GENOTYPES, SUSTAINABILITY OF Cry PROTEIN EXPRESSION, COMPUTATION OF ETL, EFFECT ON APHID PREDATORS AND DEVELOPMENT OF IPM MODULE FOR Bt COTTON UNDER RAINFED CONDITIONS SHASHIKANT

More information

Self-limiting Mosquitoes as a Tool for Vector Control

Self-limiting Mosquitoes as a Tool for Vector Control Self-limiting Mosquitoes as a Tool for Vector Control Jennina Taylor-Wells, PhD 8 th February 2018 Page 1 Who is Oxitec? We provide insect control through novel technology that improves human health and

More information

The Benefits of Insecticide Use: Walnuts

The Benefits of Insecticide Use: Walnuts Crop Protection Research Institute The Benefits of Insecticide Use: Walnuts Codling Moth Codling Moth Damage Spraying Walnut Trees Trichogramma Wasp Laying Egg in Codling Moth Egg March 2009 Leonard Gianessi

More information

LISTING OF NEW CHEMICALS UNDER THE ROTTERDAM AND STOCKHOLM CONVENTIONS

LISTING OF NEW CHEMICALS UNDER THE ROTTERDAM AND STOCKHOLM CONVENTIONS LISTING OF NEW CHEMICALS UNDER THE ROTTERDAM AND STOCKHOLM CONVENTIONS Learning centre on Overcoming new challenges in chemicals and hazardous wastes management CSD-19 NLB Conference Room B 6 May, 3-6

More information

USING AEROSOL PHEROMONE PUFFERS FOR AREA-WIDE SUPPRESSION OF CODLING MOTH IN WALNUTS: YEAR FOUR

USING AEROSOL PHEROMONE PUFFERS FOR AREA-WIDE SUPPRESSION OF CODLING MOTH IN WALNUTS: YEAR FOUR USING AEROSOL PHEROMONE PUFFERS FOR AREA-WIDE SUPPRESSION OF CODLING MOTH IN WALNUTS: YEAR FOUR C. Pickel, J. Grant, S. Welter, R. Buchner, C. DeBuse, and S. Goldman Smith ABSTRACT The Walnut Pest Management

More information

PLUM CURCULIO: MANAGEMENT ASSUMPTIONS

PLUM CURCULIO: MANAGEMENT ASSUMPTIONS Eastern NY IPM Training Orchard Pests Review: Biology, Monitoring, Management TREE FRUIT SYSTEMS ECOLOGY Factors contributing to the complexity of host/pest interactions in tree fruit systems: Fruit trees

More information

New pesticides for bugs in soybeans or Weighing up the buggy options

New pesticides for bugs in soybeans or Weighing up the buggy options New pesticides for bugs in soybeans or Weighing up the buggy options ABSTRACT: Hugh Brier, Kristen Knight and Joe Wessels, QDPI/FSI, Kingaroy Recent entomological events have major implications for soybean

More information

Safer s. BTK Biological Insecticide

Safer s. BTK Biological Insecticide 2015-0709 2015-03-02 Safer s BTK Biological Insecticide Controls caterpillars, including cabbage worm, tomato hornworm, tent caterpillars, gypsy moth, leafrollers and other listed insects on vegetables,

More information

abcdefghijklmnopqrstu

abcdefghijklmnopqrstu abcdefghijklmnopqrstu Swine Flu UK Planning Assumptions Issued 3 September 2009 Planning Assumptions for the current A(H1N1) Influenza Pandemic 3 September 2009 Purpose These planning assumptions relate

More information

TOBACCO INSECT CONTROL Francis P. F. Reay Jones, Extension Entomologist

TOBACCO INSECT CONTROL Francis P. F. Reay Jones, Extension Entomologist TOBACCO INSECT CONTROL Francis P. F. Reay Jones, Extension Entomologist Integrated pest management (IPM) is the ecological approach to pest control. It uses ALL suitable techniques to reduce pests below

More information

CHAPTER 16 POPULATION GENETICS AND SPECIATION

CHAPTER 16 POPULATION GENETICS AND SPECIATION CHAPTER 16 POPULATION GENETICS AND SPECIATION MULTIPLE CHOICE 1. Which of the following describes a population? a. dogs and cats living in Austin, Texas b. four species of fish living in a pond c. dogwood

More information

Pheromone-Based Tools for Management of the Invasive Brown Marmorated Stink Bug in Specialty Crops

Pheromone-Based Tools for Management of the Invasive Brown Marmorated Stink Bug in Specialty Crops Pheromone-Based Tools for Management of the Invasive Brown Marmorated Stink Bug in Specialty Crops Tracy C. Leskey Research Entomologist USDA-ARS Appalachian Fruit Research Station Kearneysville, WV 25430

More information

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Iron Chelates in Managing Iron Deficiency Chlorosis in Grain Sorghum

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Iron Chelates in Managing Iron Deficiency Chlorosis in Grain Sorghum Kansas Agricultural Experiment Station Research Reports Volume 2 Issue 6 Kansas Fertilizer Research Article 2 January 2016 Evaluating the Effectiveness of Iron Chelates in Managing Iron Deficiency Chlorosis

More information

Management of apple pests: codling moth, leafrollers, lacanobia, and stink bugs

Management of apple pests: codling moth, leafrollers, lacanobia, and stink bugs Milton-Freewater Horticulture Society Annual Meeting - 2008 Management of apple pests: codling moth, leafrollers, lacanobia, and stink bugs Jay Brunner, Mike Doerr and Keith Granger WSU-TFREC, Wenatchee

More information

Tree Fruit IPM Advisory: June 20 th, 2006

Tree Fruit IPM Advisory: June 20 th, 2006 Tree Fruit IPM Advisory: June 20 th, 2006 Past IPM advisories are archived at: http://extension.usu.edu/cooperative/ipm/index.cfm/cid.610/ **********News Alert!********** It is now time to put out pheromone

More information