2018
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-25491-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mutational disruption of the ABCC2 gene in fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, confers resistance to the Cry1Fa and Cry1A.105 insecticidal proteins

Abstract: The use of Bt proteins in crops has revolutionized insect pest management by offering effective season-long control. However, field-evolved resistance to Bt proteins threatens their utility and durability. A recent example is field-evolved resistance to Cry1Fa and Cry1A.105 in fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda). This resistance has been detected in Puerto Rico, mainland USA, and Brazil. A S. frugiperda population with suspected resistance to Cry1Fa was sampled from a maize field in Puerto Rico and used to d… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

6
102
1
3

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 85 publications
(113 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
6
102
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…The characterization of the inheritance of Bt resistance will provide important information for evaluating the risks of evolution of resistance and will make it possible to formulate effective resistance management strategies. Based on previous reports, resistance to Cry1-type toxins mediated by ABCC2 mutations was recessive or incompletely recessive [22][23][24]27,28,30,32,33]. Consistent with these results, both the high-level resistance to Cry1Fa (>300-fold) and low-level resistance to Cry1Ac (~8-fold) were inherited as a recessive mode in the knockout OfC2-KO strain of O. furnacalis.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The characterization of the inheritance of Bt resistance will provide important information for evaluating the risks of evolution of resistance and will make it possible to formulate effective resistance management strategies. Based on previous reports, resistance to Cry1-type toxins mediated by ABCC2 mutations was recessive or incompletely recessive [22][23][24]27,28,30,32,33]. Consistent with these results, both the high-level resistance to Cry1Fa (>300-fold) and low-level resistance to Cry1Ac (~8-fold) were inherited as a recessive mode in the knockout OfC2-KO strain of O. furnacalis.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…One of the major mechanisms of resistance to Cry toxin is reduced toxin binding to their specific larval midgut receptors through the disruption of the receptor genes [21]. Since the disruption of the ABC transporter subfamily C2 (ABCC2) gene was first identified to confer Cry1Ac resistance in Heliothis virescens [22], mutations of the homologous ABCC2 genes associated with Cry1A and/or Cry1F resistance have been found in several lepidopteran insects, including Plutella xylostella, Trichoplusia ni [23], Bombyx mori [24], Helicoverpa armigera [25], Spodoptera exigua [26], and Spodoptera frugiperda [27][28][29]. Recently, the CRISPR/Cas9 system has been applied to investigate the in vivo role of insect ABCC2 in the mode of action and resistance mechanisms of Bt toxins.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Further, the use of highly hazardous pesticides is not considered a sustainable long term control measure for any pest (FAO 2018). In addition, S. frugiperda is known to readily develop resistance to most chemical insecticides (e.g., pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates) and to transgenic maize that are used to control it (Yu 1991; Jakka et al 2016; Banerjee et al 2017; Flagel et al 2018; Botha et al 2019). In light of this, there is a great need for alternative, cost-effective control strategies for S. frugiperda (FAO 2018).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, S. frugiperda have been reported to evolve resistance to most chemical insecticides (e.g. pyrethroids, organophosphates and carbamates) (Yu 1991) and to transgenic maize that are used in its control (Jakka et al 2016;Banerjee et al 2017;Flagel et al 2018;Botha et al 2019). As a consequence, there is a great need for alternative, cost-effective control strategies for S. frugiperda (FAO, 2018).…”
Section: Manuscript To Be Reviewedmentioning
confidence: 99%