Evaluation of Lectin-Expressing Transgenic Sugarcane Against Stalkborers (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Effects on Life History Parameters

Sétamou, Mamoudou; Bernal, Julio S.; Legaspi, Jesusa C.; Mirkov, T. Erik; Legaspi, Benjamin C.

doi:10.1603/0022-0493-95.2.469

Cited by 95 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Transgenic plants that express snowdrop lectin offer partial resistance to homopteran pests, as has Altpeter et al, 1999 been observed in tobacco Yuan et al, 2001), potato Gatehouse et al, 1996), rice (Rao et al, 1998;Foissac et al, 2000;Sun et al, 2002), and wheat (Stoger et al, 1999). In addition to effects on sap-sucking pests, insecticidal effects of snowdrop lectin were also found to lepidopteran pests (Fitches et al, 1997;Gatehouse et al, 1997;Irvine & Mirkov, 1997;Legaspi et al, 1997;Fitches & Gatehouse, 1998;Setamou et al, 2002Setamou et al, , 2003 and a coleopteran herbivore (Nutt et al, 1999). The insecticidal mechanism of lectins is not clear at present.…”

Section: Lectinsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inducible direct plant defense against insect herbivores: A review

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plants respond to insect herbivory with responses broadly known as direct defenses, indirect defenses, and tolerance. Direct defenses include all plant traits that affect susceptibility of host plants by themselves. Overall categories of direct plant defenses against insect herbivores include limiting food supply, reducing nutrient value, reducing preference, disrupting physical structures, and inhibiting chemical pathways of the attacking insect. Major known defense chemicals include plant secondary metabolites, protein inhibitors of insect digestive enzymes, proteases, lectins, amino acid deaminases and oxidases. Multiple factors with additive or even synergistic impact are usually involved in defense against a specific insect species, and factors of major importance to one insect species may only be of secondary importance or not effective at all against another insect species. Extensive qualitative and quantitative high throughput analyses of temporal and spatial variations in gene expression, protein level and activity, and metabolite concentration will accelerate not only the understanding of the overall mechanisms of direct defense, but also accelerate the identification of specific targets for enhancement of plant resistance for agriculture.

show abstract

Section: Lectinsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inducible direct plant defense against insect herbivores: A review

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One vote-counting exercise showed negative impacts of Bt crops in w40% of published laboratory studies (57% of these studies specifically involved Bt crops; 32% involved non-Bt crops) (Lö vei and Arpaia, 2005). Specific studies reveal that the deleterious effects inflicted on parasitoids by GM crops occur as a result of reduced host quality Setamou et al, 2002aSetamou et al, , 2002bSetamou et al, , 2002cBaur and Boethel, 2003;Vojtech et al, 2005;Walker et al, 2007) rather than direct toxicity of contaminated hosts (Ramirez-Romero et al, 2007;Chen et al, 2008). Regardless of whether the population reductions incurred by some parasitoids stem from reduced host density or quality, the end result is that GM insect-resistant crops may pose certain hurdles to the adoption of parasitoid-based biological control of a susceptible host.…”

Section: Parasitoidsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecological compatibility of GM crops and biological control

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) crops pervade many modern cropping systems (especially field-cropping systems), and present challenges and opportunities for developing biologically based pest-management programs. Interactions between biological control agents (insect predators, parasitoids, and pathogens) and GM crops exceed simple toxicological relationships, a priority for assessing risk of GM crops to non-target species. To determine the compatibility of biological control and insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant GM crop traits within integrated pest-management programs, this synthesis prioritizes understanding the bi-trophic and prey/host-mediated ecological pathways through which natural enemies interact within cropland communities, and how GM crops alter the agroecosystems in which natural enemies live. Insect-resistant crops can affect the quantity and quality of non-prey foods for natural enemies, as well as the availability and quality of both target and non-target pests that serve as prey/hosts. When they are used to locally eradicate weeds, herbicide-tolerant crops alter the agricultural landscape by reducing or changing the remaining vegetational diversity. This vegetational diversity is fundamental to biological control when it serves as a source of habitat and nutritional resources. Some inherent qualities of both biological control and GM crops provide opportunities to improve upon sustainable IPM systems. For example, biological control agents may delay the evolution of pest resistance to GM crops, and suppress outbreaks of secondary pests not targeted by GM plants, while herbicide-tolerant crops facilitate within-field management of vegetational diversity that can enhance the efficacy of biological control agents. By examining the ecological compatibility of biological control and GM crops, and employing them within an IPM framework, the sustainability and profitability of farming may be improved. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. b s t r a c tInsect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) crops pervade many modern cropping systems (especially field-cropping systems), and present challenges and opportunities for developing biologically based pest-management programs. Interactions between biological control agents (insect predators, parasitoids, and pathogens) and GM crops exceed simple toxicological relationships, a priority for assessing risk of GM crops to non-target species. To determine the compatibility of biological control and insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant GM crop traits within integrated pest-management programs, this synthesis prioritizes understanding the bi-trophic and prey/host-mediated ecological pathways through which natural enemies interact within cropland communities, and how GM crops alter the agroecosystems in which natural enemies live. Insect-resistant crops can...

show abstract

“…GNA is also toxic to many kinds of nematode including Longidoridae, Trichodoridae, Anguinidae, Dolichodoridae, Belenolaimidae, Pratylenchidae, Hoplolaimidae, Heteroderidae, Crconematidae, etc., in total 13 genera (Geoghegan et al 1995). GNA gene was transferred into potato (Bell et al, 2001;Down et al 2001), rice (Rao et al 1998;Sudhakar et al 1998;Tang et al 1999), tomato (Wu et al 2000) and sugarcane (Setamou et al 2002;Tomov & Bernal 2003). GNA transgenic plants showed resistance to peach aphid (Myzus persicae), larvae of the tomato moth (Lacanobia oleracea), potato aphids (Aulacorthum solani) and rice brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens) (Gatehouse et al 1996;Fitches et al 1997;Foissac et al 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improved Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation of GNA transgenic sugarcane

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Six plasmids carrying a snowdrop lectin (Galanthus nivalis agglutinin, GNA) and one of three selection markers were successfully transferred into two sugarcane cultivars (FN81-745 and Badila) via Agrobacterium-mediated transformation. Agrobacterium strains LBA4404, EHA105 and A281 that harboured a super-binary vector were used for sugarcane transformation. The use of the hygromycin (Hyg) resistance gene (hpt II), phosphinothrincin (PPT) resistance gene (bar) or G418 resistance gene (npt II) as a screenable marker facilitated the initial selection of GNA transgenic sugarcane callus with different efficiencies and helped the rapid segregation of individual transformation events. All the three selective marker genes were controlled by CaMV 35S promoter, while GNA gene was controlled by promoter of RSs-1 (rice sucrose synthase-1) or Ubi (maize ubiquitin). Factors important to successful transformation mediated by Agrobacterium tumefaciens were optimized, which included concentration of A. tumefaciens, medium composition, co-cultivated methods with plant tissue, strain virulence and different selective marker genes. An efficient protocol for sugarcane transformation mediated by A. tumefaciens was established. The GNA gene has been integrated into sugarcane genome as demonstrated by PCR and Southern dot blotting detections. The preliminary results from bioassay demonstrated a significant resistance of the transgenic sugarcane plants to woolly aphid (Ceratovacuna lanigera Zehnther) indicating thus the possibility for obtaining a transgenic sugarcane cultivar with resistance to woolly aphid.

show abstract

Evaluation of Lectin-Expressing Transgenic Sugarcane Against Stalkborers (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): Effects on Life History Parameters

Cited by 95 publications

References 28 publications

Inducible direct plant defense against insect herbivores: A review

Inducible direct plant defense against insect herbivores: A review

Ecological compatibility of GM crops and biological control

Improved Agrobacterium-mediated genetic transformation of GNA transgenic sugarcane

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About