DOCSLIB.ORG

Status and Risk Assessment of the Use of Transgenic Arthropods in Plant Protection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Status and Risk Assessment of the Use of Transgenic Arthropods in Plant Protection IAEA-TECDOC-1483 Status and risk assessment of the use of transgenic arthropods in plant protection Proceedings of a technical meeting organized by the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture and the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, held in Rome, 8 to 12 April 2002 March 2006 IAEA-TECDOC-1483 Status and risk assessment of the use of transgenic arthropods in plant protection Proceedings of a technical meeting organized by the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture and the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention, held in Rome, 8 to 12 April 2002 March 2006 This publication has been prepared by the: FAO/IAEA Agriculture and Biotechnology Laboratory International Atomic Energy Agency Wagramer Strasse 5 P.O. Box 100 A-1400 Vienna, Austria STATUS AND RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE USE OF TRANSGENIC ARTHROPODS IN PLANT PROTECTION IAEA, VIENNA, 2006 IAEA-TECDOC-1483 ISBN 92–0–113005–8 ISSN 1011–4289 © IAEA, 2006 Printed by the IAEA in Austria March 2006 FOREWORD New developments in the modern biotechnology have opened up the possibility of introducing genes into the germline of many insect species, including those of agricultural importance. This technology offers the potential to improve current pest control strategies that incorporate the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT). Potential improvements include the development of strains that (1) produce only male insects for sterilization and release and (2) carry a marker that distinguishes them from wild insects. There are many institutions involved in the development of transgenic insect technology both for studies on basic gene regulation and for the creation of transgenic strains for use in a wide range of insect control programmes. It has been realized that the release into the environment of transgenic insects will not be an easy process considering the current public sensitivities in this area. The fact that insects are mobile and that once released cannot be recalled creates much concern. If fertile transgenic insects were to be released in any type of control programme, then the transgene would enter the wild population through mating. This strategy is fraught with, as yet, unknown risks and it is inconceivable that regulatory approval will be given for such a release in the near future. However, when transgenic strains are integrated into a sterile insect release then the concerns about transmission of the transgene to the wild population disappear as the matings between the released and the wild insects are sterile. This scenario is likely to be the first type of transgenic release. Insects that are currently released in SIT programmes experience no significant regulatory problems, but this will not be the case if the insects that are released are transgenic, even if they are sterile. The meeting Status and Risk Assessment of the Use of Transgenic Arthropods in Plant Protection held in FAO Headquarters, Rome, in April 2002 was the first effort to bring together scientists and regulators in order to discuss risk assessment and regulation of transgenic insect release. The event was organized by the Secretariat of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food and Agriculture is involved with the development of the transgenic technology and the IPPC would be involved with the regulation of any release of transgenic insects. The objective of the meeting was to: (1) review the current state of the art of transgenic technology; (2) review the current regulatory framework in different countries; and (3) develop a set of guidelines for risk assessment of transgenic insects. The Scientific Secretaries of the meeting were A. Robinson (IAEA) and C. Devorshak (IPPC). The IAEA officer responsible for this publication was A. Robinson of the FAO/IAEA Agriculture and Biotechnology Laboratory, Agency’s Laboratories, Seibersdorf. EDITORIAL NOTE The papers in these proceedings are reproduced as submitted by the authors and have not undergone rigorous editorial review by the IAEA. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the IAEA, the governments of the nominating Member States or the nominating organizations. The use of particular designations of countries or territories does not imply any judgement by the publisher, the IAEA, as to the legal status of such countries or territories, of their authorities and institutions or of the delimitation of their boundaries. The mention of names of specific companies or products (whether or not indicated as registered) does not imply any intention to infringe proprietary rights, nor should it be construed as an endorsement or recommendation on the part of the IAEA. The authors are responsible for having obtained the necessary permission for the IAEA to reproduce, translate or use material from sources already protected by copyrights. CONTENTS 1. SUMMARY......................................................................................................................1 2. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 2 3. THE MEETING................................................................................................................ 3 4. SUMMARIES OF WORKING PAPERS......................................................................... 4 4.1. Overview ................................................................................................................. 4 4.2. Arthropod transgenesis............................................................................................ 4 4.3. International regulation ........................................................................................... 5 4.4. National guidelines................................................................................................. 6 5. THE WORKING GROUP REPORTS ............................................................................. 7 5.1 Working Group 1: Status of transgenesis in pest arthropods .................................. 7 5.1.1. Overview ................................................................................................... 7 5.1.2. Scope......................................................................................................... 7 5.1.3. An overview of the current status of technology and tools....................... 8 5.1.4. Two examples for future release of transgenic arthropods ..................... 14 5.1.5. General conclusions................................................................................ 15 5.2. Working Group 2: Identification of risk associated with transgenic release.......................................................................................... 16 5.2.1. Overview ................................................................................................. 16 5.2.2. Risk analysis............................................................................................ 16 5.3 Working Group 3: Development of risk assessment protocols ................................ 19 5.3.1 Overview ................................................................................................. 19 5.3.2 Definitions............................................................................................... 21 5.3.3 Scope....................................................................................................... 21 5.3.4 Report...................................................................................................... 22 5.3.5 Conclusions............................................................................................. 24 6. OVERALL CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................... 25 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................... 26 WORKING PAPERS The international plant protection convention, living modified organisms and pest risk analysis ......................................................................................... 29 C. Devorshak Transgenic arthropods and the sterile insect technique............................................................ 37 G. Franz Areas of concern for the evaluation of transgenic arthropods ................................................. 45 A.M. Handler, P.W. Atkinson Can the technical issues related to risk assessment of transgenic arthropods be solved? .......................................................................................................... 57 P.W. Atkinson, A.M. Handler Pink bollworm: Trials and tribulations..................................................................................... 69 J.J. Peloquin, H. Schweizer The challenge of developing and utilizing transgenic arthropods in the Caribbean................................................................................................. 81 W. Hollingsworth Biosafety regulations and guidelines in Zimbabwe ................................................................. 87 S.Z. Sithole The interministerial commission on biosecurity and genetically modified organisms in Mexico............................................................................................ 91 V.M. Villalobos Proposed draft permit guidance for genetically
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Paratransgenic Control of Vector Borne Diseases Ivy Hurwitz, Annabeth Fieck, Amber Read, Heidi Hillesland*, Nichole Klein, Angray Kang1 and Ravi Dur- Vasula
    Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2011, 7 1334 Ivyspring International Publisher International Journal of Biological Sciences 2011; 7(9):1334-1344 Review Paratransgenic Control of Vector Borne Diseases Ivy Hurwitz, Annabeth Fieck, Amber Read, Heidi Hillesland*, Nichole Klein, Angray Kang1 and Ravi Dur- vasula Center for Global Health, Department of Internal Medicine, University of New Mexico and New Mexico VA Health Care System, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA. 1. Institute of Dentistry, Queen Mary, University of London, England. * Present address: Department of Internal Medicine, University of Washington Medical Center, Seattle, Washington, USA. Corresponding author: Ravi Durvasula (505)991 3812, [email protected]. © Ivyspring International Publisher. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/). Reproduction is permitted for personal, noncommercial use, provided that the article is in whole, unmodified, and properly cited. Received: 2011.09.01; Accepted: 2011.10.01; Published: 2011.11.01 Abstract Conventional methodologies to control vector borne diseases with chemical pesticides are often associated with environmental toxicity, adverse effects on human health and the emergence of insect resistance. In the paratransgenic strategy, symbiotic or commensal microbes of host insects are transformed to express gene products that interfere with pathogen transmission. These genetically altered microbes are re-introduced back to the insect where expression of the engineered molecules decreases the host’s ability to transmit the pathogen. We have successfully utilized this strategy to reduce carriage rates of Trypa- nosoma cruzi, the causative agent of Chagas disease, in the triatomine bug, Rhodnius prolixus, and are currently developing this methodology to control the transmission of Leishmania donovani by the sand fly Phlebotomus argentipes.
    [Show full text]
  • Alan Robert Templeton
    Alan Robert Templeton Charles Rebstock Professor of Biology Professor of Genetics & Biomedical Engineering Department of Biology, Campus Box 1137 Washington University St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899, USA (phone 314-935-6868; fax 314-935-4432; e-mail [email protected]) EDUCATION A.B. (Zoology) Washington University 1969 M.A. (Statistics) University of Michigan 1972 Ph.D. (Human Genetics) University of Michigan 1972 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 1972-1974. Junior Fellow, Society of Fellows of the University of Michigan. 1974. Visiting Scholar, Department of Genetics, University of Hawaii. 1974-1977. Assistant Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Texas at Austin. 1976. Visiting Assistant Professor, Dept. de Biologia, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil. 1977-1981. Associate Professor, Departments of Biology and Genetics, Washington University. 1981-present. Professor, Departments of Biology and Genetics, Washington University. 1983-1987. Genetics Study Section, NIH (also served as an ad hoc reviewer several times). 1984-1992: 1996-1997. Head, Evolutionary and Population Biology Program, Washington University. 1985. Visiting Professor, Department of Human Genetics, University of Michigan. 1986. Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan. 1986-present. Research Associate of the Missouri Botanical Garden. 1992. Elected Visiting Fellow, Merton College, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. 2000. Visiting Professor, Technion Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel 2001-present. Charles Rebstock Professor of Biology 2001-present. Professor of Biomedical Engineering, School of Engineering, Washington University 2002-present. Visiting Professor, Rappaport Institute, Medical School of the Technion, Israel. 2007-2010. Senior Research Associate, The Institute of Evolution, University of Haifa, Israel. 2009-present. Professor, Division of Statistical Genomics, Washington University 2010-present.
    [Show full text]
  • Another Way of Being Anisogamous in Drosophila Subgenus
    Proc. NatI. Acad. Sci. USA Vol. 91, pp. 10399-10402, October 1994 Evolution Another way of being anisogamous in Drosophila subgenus species: Giant sperm, one-to-one gamete ratio, and high zygote provisioning (evoludtion of sex/paternty asune/male-derived contrIbutIon/Drosophia liftorais/Drosopha hydei) CHRISTOPHE BRESSAC*t, ANNE FLEURYl, AND DANIEL LACHAISE* *Laboratoire Populations, Gen6tique et Evolution, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, F-91198 Gif-sur-Yvette Cedex, France; and *Laboratoire de Biologie Cellulaire 4, Unit6 Recherche Associ6e 1134, Universit6 Paris XI, F-91405 Orsay Cedex, France Communicated by Bruce Wallace, July 11, 1994 ABSSTRACT It is generally assume that sexes n animals within-ejaculate short sperm heteromorphism in the Dro- have arisen from a productivity versus provisioning conflict; sophila obscura species group (Sophophora subgenus) to males are those individuals producing gametes n ily giant sperm found solely within the Drosophila subgenus. small, in excess, and individually bereft of all paternity assur- The most extreme pairwise comparison of sperm length ance. A 1- to 2-cm sperm, 5-10 times as long as the male body, between these taxonomic groups represents a factor of might therefore appear an evolutionary paradox. As a matter growth of 300 (12). In all Drosophila species described so far of fact, species ofDrosophila of the Drosophila subgenus differ in this respect, sperm contain a short acrosome, a filiform from those of other subgenera by producing exclusively sperm haploid nucleus, and a flagellum composed of two inactive of that sort. We report counts of such giant costly sperm in mitochondrial derivatives (13, 14) flanking one axoneme Drosophila littondis and Drosophila hydei females, indicating along its overall length: the longer the sperm, the larger the that they are offered in exceedingly small amounts, tending to flagellum and hence the more mitochondrial material.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera Litura Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus Remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of Spodoptera Frugiperda
    insects Article Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera litura Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda Wanbin Chen , Yuyan Li , Mengqing Wang, Jianjun Mao and Lisheng Zhang * State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China; [email protected] (W.C.); [email protected] (Y.L.); [email protected] (M.W.); [email protected] (J.M.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-10-6281-5909 Simple Summary: Telenomus remus (Nixon) is an effective egg parasitoid for controlling Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith), which is a major destructive agricultural pest. Currently, this parasitoid is reared on Corcyra cephalonica (Stainton) eggs in several countries. However, previous studies carried out in China have reported that it cannot parasitize in C. cephalonica eggs. Meanwhile, those works have indicated that Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) can potentially be used as an alternative host. In order to evaluate this potential, our study compared the development and parasitism ability of T. remus on the eggs of S. frugiperda and S. litura at different temperatures in a laboratory. We found that S. litura eggs are more advantageous as an alternative host for the mass-rearing of parasitoid when compared with S. frugiperda eggs. Our results provide a more specific basis and reference for the large-scale Citation: Chen, W.; Li, Y.; Wang, M.; production and low temperature storage of T. remus. Mao, J.; Zhang, L. Evaluating the Potential of Using Spodoptera litura Abstract: Although Telenomus remus, a promising parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda, had been Eggs for Mass-Rearing Telenomus successfully reared on the eggs of Corcyra cephalonica in some countries, reports from China have remus, a Promising Egg Parasitoid of argued that it is infeasible.
    [Show full text]
  • Genome Features of Asaia Sp. W12 Isolated from the Mosquito Anopheles Stephensi Reveal Symbiotic Traits
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Article Genome Features of Asaia sp. W12 Isolated from the Mosquito Anopheles stephensi Reveal Symbiotic Traits Shicheng Chen 1,* , Ting Yu 2, Nicolas Terrapon 3,4 , Bernard Henrissat 3,4,5 and Edward D. Walker 6 1 Department of Clinical and Diagnostic Sciences, School of Health Sciences, Oakland University, 433 Meadowbrook Road, Rochester, MI 48309, USA 2 Agro-Biological Gene Research Center, Guangdong Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Guangzhou 510640, China; [email protected] 3 Architecture et Fonction des Macromolécules Biologiques, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), Aix-Marseille Université (AMU), UMR 7257, 13288 Marseille, France; [email protected] (N.T.); [email protected] (B.H.) 4 Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), USC AFMB, 1408 Marseille, France 5 Department of Biological Sciences, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21412, Saudi Arabia 6 Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-248-364-8662 Abstract: Asaia bacteria commonly comprise part of the microbiome of many mosquito species in the genera Anopheles and Aedes, including important vectors of infectious agents. Their close association with multiple organs and tissues of their mosquito hosts enhances the potential for paratransgenesis for the delivery of antimalaria or antivirus effectors. The molecular mechanisms involved in the interactions between Asaia and mosquito hosts, as well as Asaia and other bacterial members of the mosquito microbiome, remain underexplored. Here, we determined the genome sequence of Asaia strain W12 isolated from Anopheles stephensi mosquitoes, compared it to other Asaia species associated Citation: Chen, S.; Yu, T.; Terrapon, with plants or insects, and investigated the properties of the bacteria relevant to their symbiosis N.; Henrissat, B.; Walker, E.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecological Factors and Drosophila Speciation
    ECOLOGICAL FACTORS AND DROSOPHILA SPECIATION WARREN P. SPENCER, College of Wooster INTRODUCTION In 1927 there appeared H. J. Muller's announcement of the artificial transmutation of the gene. This discovery was received with enthusiasm throughout the scientific world. Ever since the days of Darwin biological alchemists had tried in vain to induce those seemingly rare alterations in genes which were coming to be known as "the building stones of evolution." In the same year Charles Elton published a short book on animal ecology. It was received with little acclaim. That is not sur- prising. To the modern biologist ecology has seemed a bit out-moded, rather beneath the dignity of a laboratory scientist. Without detracting from the importance of Muller's discovery, in the light of the develop- ments of the past 13 years we venture to say that Elton conies nearer to providing the key to the process of evolution than does radiation genetics. Here is a quotation from Elton's chapter on ecology and evolution. '' Many animals periodically undergo rapid increase with practically no checks at all. In fact the struggle for existence sometimes tends to disappear almost entirely. During the expansion in numbers from a minimum, almost every animal survives, or at any rate a very high proportion of them do so, and an immeasurably larger number survives than when the population remains constant. If therefore a heritable variation were to occur in the small nucleus of animals left at a min- imum of numbers, it would spread very quickly and automatically, so that a very large porportion of numbers of individuals would possess it when the species had regained its normal numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermal Sensitivity of the Spiroplasma-Drosophila Hydei Protective Symbiosis: the Best of 2 Climes, the Worst of Climes
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.070938; this version posted May 2, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 1 Thermal sensitivity of the Spiroplasma-Drosophila hydei protective symbiosis: The best of 2 climes, the worst of climes. 3 4 Chris Corbin, Jordan E. Jones, Ewa Chrostek, Andy Fenton & Gregory D. D. Hurst* 5 6 Institute of Infection, Veterinary and Ecological Sciences, University of Liverpool, Crown 7 Street, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK 8 9 * For correspondence: [email protected] 10 11 Short title: Thermal sensitivity of a protective symbiosis 12 13 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.30.070938; this version posted May 2, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license. 14 Abstract 15 16 The outcome of natural enemy attack in insects has commonly been found to be influenced 17 by the presence of protective symbionts in the host. The degree to which protection 18 functions in natural populations, however, will depend on the robustness of the phenotype 19 to variation in the abiotic environment. We studied the impact of a key environmental 20 parameter – temperature – on the efficacy of the protective effect of the symbiont 21 Spiroplasma on its host Drosophila hydei, against attack by the parasitoid wasp Leptopilina 22 heterotoma.
    [Show full text]
  • Genome Divergence and Gene Flow Between Drosophila Simulans And
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/024711; this version posted August 14, 2015. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. Genome divergence and gene flow between Drosophila simulans and D. mauritiana Sarah B. Kingan, Anthony J. Geneva, Jeffrey P. Vedanayagam, and Daniel Garrigan Department of Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 1 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/024711; this version posted August 14, 2015. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. Running title: Gene flow between allopatric Drosophila Key words: Drosophila; genome; introgression, speciation Corresponding author: Daniel Garrigan Department of Biology University of Rochester Rochester, New York 14627 Phone: +1-585-276-4816 Email: [email protected] 2 bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/024711; this version posted August 14, 2015. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY-ND 4.0 International license. ABSTRACT The fruit fly Drosophila simulans and its sister species D. mauritiana are a model system for studying the genetic basis of reproductive isolation, primarily because interspecific crosses produce sterile hybrid males and their phylogenetic proximity to D.
    [Show full text]
  • Factors Regulating the Population Dynamics and Damage Potential of Pollen Beetle (Meligethes Aeneus F.) on Crops of Oilseed Rape
    Factors regulating the population dynamics and damage potential of pollen beetle (Meligethes aeneus F.) on crops of oilseed rape Dissertation zur Erlangung des Doktorgrades der Fakultät für Agrarwissenschaften der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen vorgelegt von Marie-Luise Tölle geboren in Gifhorn Göttingen, Mai 2014 D 7 1. Referentin/Referent: Prof. Dr. Stefan Vidal 2. Korreferentin/Korreferent: Prof. Dr. Andreas von Tiedemann Tag der mündlichen Prüfung: 12.05.2011 Contents Table of contents page Chapter I General introduction ........................................................................................................... 1 The pest: Meligethes aeneus ............................................................................................. 2 Factors influencing the population dynamics of pollen beetle ............................................ 3 Possible effects of insecticides on population growth and damage of pollen beetle ........... 4 Parasitoids and parasitisation of pollen beetle ................................................................... 5 Trap cropping in oilseed rape ............................................................................................ 6 References ........................................................................................................................ 7 Chapter II Cultivar and phenology of winter oilseed rape affect the abundance and reproduction of Meligethes aeneus (Fabricius) ......................................................................................11
    [Show full text]
  • Fertility Table of an Exotic Parasitoid, Telenomus Remus Nixon (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) on Spodoptera Litura (Fabricius)
    J. Bioi. Control. 13: 25-31. 1999 Fertility table of an exotic parasitoid, Telenomus remus Nixon (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) on Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) CHANDISH R. BALLAL and S. RAMANI Project Directorate of Biological Control P. B. No. 2491, H. A. Farm Post, Bellary Road Hebbal, Bangalore 560024, Karnataka, India ABSTRA CT: Fecundity studies on Telenomus remus, an exotic parasitoid of Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) indicated that in individual rearing, net reproductive rate was higher (120.53) and the population increased with an infinitesimal rate of 0.399 and a finite rate of 1.491. In group rearing, the corresponding figures were lower, being 65.03, 0.348 and 1.416, respectively_ There was a preponderance of females in the individual rearing method, while a balanced sex ratio was obtained in group rearing. KEY WORDS: Fertility table, rearing, Spodoptera litura, Telenomus remus Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) cabbage (Krishnamoorthy and Mani, (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is an important 1985). The release of T. remus in the field polyphagous pest infesting 120 host plants has enhanced the biological control of and is a serious pest on cole crops, tobacco, Spodoptera species in Barbados (Alam, groundnut, taro and castor (Singh and 1974), India (Patel et ai., 1979) and Jalali, 1997). TelellOmus remus Nixon Venezuela (Hernandez et ai., 1989). (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) was recorded The construction of fertility tables to as an important parasitoid of S. litura in calculate certain vital statistics is an colocasia plantations in Western Samoa important component in the basic (Braune, 1982). This exotic parasitoid was understanding of the population dynamics introduced into India as one of the of a species (Southwood, 1978).
    [Show full text]
  • Pesticidal Plants
    Pesticidal Plants • Philip C. • Philip Stevenson, R. Steven Belmain and Murray B. Isman Pesticidal Plants From Smallholder Use to Commercialisation Edited by Philip C. Stevenson, Steven R. Belmain and Murray B. Isman Printed Edition of the Special Issue Published in Plants www.mdpi.com/journal/plants Pesticidal Plants Pesticidal Plants From Smallholder Use to Commercialisation Special Issue Editors Philip C. Stevenson Steven R. Belmain Murray B. Isman MDPI • Basel • Beijing • Wuhan • Barcelona • Belgrade Special Issue Editors Philip C. Stevenson Steven R. Belmain Murray B. Isman University of Greenwich University of Greenwich University of British Columbia UK UK Canada Editorial Office MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel, Switzerland This is a reprint of articles from the Special Issue published online in the open access journal Plants (ISSN 2223-7747) from 2019 to 2020 (available at: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/plants/special issues/Pesticidal). For citation purposes, cite each article independently as indicated on the article page online and as indicated below: LastName, A.A.; LastName, B.B.; LastName, C.C. Article Title. Journal Name Year, Article Number, Page Range. ISBN 978-3-03928-788-8 (Pbk) ISBN 978-3-03928-789-5 (PDF) Cover image courtesy of Philip C. Stevenson. c 2020 by the authors. Articles in this book are Open Access and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, which allows users to download, copy and build upon published articles, as long as the author and publisher are properly credited, which ensures maximum dissemination and a wider impact of our publications. The book as a whole is distributed by MDPI under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND.
    [Show full text]
  • Tsetse Fly Evolution, Genetics and the Trypanosomiases - a Review E
    Entomology Publications Entomology 10-2018 Tsetse fly evolution, genetics and the trypanosomiases - A review E. S. Krafsur Iowa State University, [email protected] Ian Maudlin The University of Edinburgh Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ent_pubs Part of the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Commons, Entomology Commons, Genetics Commons, and the Parasitic Diseases Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ ent_pubs/546. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Entomology Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Tsetse fly evolution, genetics and the trypanosomiases - A review Abstract This reviews work published since 2007. Relative efforts devoted to the agents of African trypanosomiasis and their tsetse fly vectors are given by the numbers of PubMed accessions. In the last 10 years PubMed citations number 3457 for Trypanosoma brucei and 769 for Glossina. The development of simple sequence repeats and single nucleotide polymorphisms afford much higher resolution of Glossina and Trypanosoma population structures than heretofore. Even greater resolution is offered by partial and whole genome sequencing. Reproduction in T. brucei sensu lato is principally clonal although genetic recombination in tsetse salivary glands has been demonstrated in T. b. brucei and T. b. rhodesiense but not in T. b.
    [Show full text]