Brazilian free‐tailed bats (Tadarida brasiliensis) form enormous summer breeding colonies, mostly in caves and under bridges, in south‐central Texas and northern Mexico. Their prey includes several species of adult insects whose larvae are known to be important agricultural pests, including the corn earworm or cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa zea). We estimate the bats' value as pest control for cotton production in an eight‐county region in south‐central Texas. Our calculations show an annual value of $741 000 per year, with a range of $121 000–$1 725 000, compared to a $4.6–$6.4 million per year annual cotton harvest.
The risk of rapid pest adaptation to an insecticide is highly dependent on the initial frequency of resistance alleles in field populations. Because we have lacked empirical estimates of these frequencies, population-genetic models of resistance evolution have relied on a wide range of theoretical estimates. The recent commercialization of genetically engineered cotton that constitutively produces an insecticidal protein derived from the biocontrol agent, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) has raised concern that we lack data needed to quantify the risk of insect pests such as Heliothis virescens rapidly adapting to this ecologically valuable class of toxins. By individually mating over 2,000 male H. virescens moths collected in four states to females of a Bt toxin-resistant laboratory strain, and screening F 1 and F 2 offspring for tolerance of the toxic protein, we were able to directly estimate the field frequency of alleles for resistance as 1.5 ؋ 10 ؊3 . This high initial frequency underscores the need for caution in deploying transgenic cotton to control insect pests. Our single-pair mating technique greatly increases the efficiency of detecting recessive resistance alleles. Because alleles that decrease target site sensitivity to Bt toxins and other insecticides are often recessive, this technique could be useful in estimating resistance allele frequencies in other insects exposed to transgenic insecticidal crops or conventional insecticides.
Data have been lacking on the proportion of Helicovera zea larvae that develop on noncotton host plants that can serve as a refuge from selection pressure for adaptation to transgenic cotton varieties that produce a toxin from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis. We found that individual H. zea moths that develop as larvae on cotton and other plants with C3 physiology have a different ratio of 13 C to 12 C than moths that develop on plants with C4 physiology, such as corn. We used this finding in determining the minimum percentage of moths that developed on noncotton hosts in two cotton-growing areas. Our results indicate that local corn can serve as a refuge for H. zea in midsummer. Our results contrast dramatically with the prevailing hypothesis that the large majority of late-season moths are produced from larvae feeding on cotton, soybean, and other C3 plants. Typically, <50% of moths captured in August through October have isotope ratios indicative of larval feeding on C3 plants. In one October sample, 100% of the moths originated from C4 hosts even though C4 crops were harvested at least 1 mo earlier, and no common wild C4 hosts were available. These findings support other research indicating that many lateseason H. zea moths captured in Louisiana and Texas are migrants whose larvae developed on corn in more northern locations. Our isotope data on moths collected in Texas early in the season indicate that the majority of overwintering H. zea do not originate from cotton-feeding larvae and may be migrants from Mexico. Non-Bt corn in Mexico and the U.S. corn belt appears to serve as an important refuge for H. zea. stable carbon isotopes ͉ cotton ͉ corn
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.