Natural refuge crops, buildup of resistance, and zero-refuge strategy for Bt cotton in China

Qiao, Fangbin; 黄, 季焜; Rozelle, Scott; Wilen, James E.

doi:10.1007/s11427-010-4076-3

Cited by 25 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Because H. armigera is polyphagous and highly mobile, it is often assumed that refuges of non-cotton host crops and wild host plants provide sufficient refuges to delay the evolution of resistance, thus reducing or even suppressing the need of non-Bt cotton refuges (Ravi et al 2005;Wu and Guo 2005;Liu et al 2010;Qiao et al 2010). However, movement of H. armigera from non-cotton hosts to cotton fields had never been quantified directly.…”

Section: Resistance To Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While some studies have evaluated the production of H. armigera by non-cotton host plants elsewhere (Green et al 2003;Wu et al 2004;Ravi et al 2005;Baker et al 2008), movement of moths from non-cotton hosts to cotton fields has never been quantified in space and time. Nevertheless, it is often assumed that cotton refuges are not required to delay H. armigera resistance to Cry1Ac/Cry2Ab cotton in agroecosystems where small fields of diversified crops and patches of non-cultivated hosts are close together (Ravi et al 2005;Wu and Guo 2005;Huang et al 2010;Liu et al 2010;Qiao et al 2010), such as in West Africa.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessing the role of non‐cotton refuges in delaying Helicoverpa armigera resistance to Bt cotton in West Africa

Brévault

Nibouche

Achaleke

et al. 2011

Evolutionary Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non-cotton host plants without Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxins can provide refuges that delay resistance to Bt cotton in polyphagous insect pests. It has proven difficult, however, to determine the effective contribution of such refuges and their role in delaying resistance evolution. Here, we used biogeochemical markers to quantify movement of Helicoverpa armigera moths from non-cotton hosts to cotton fields in three agricultural landscapes of the West African cotton belt (Cameroon) where Bt cotton was absent. We show that the contribution of non-cotton hosts as a source of moths was spatially and temporally variable, but at least equivalent to a 7.5% sprayed refuge of non-Bt cotton. Simulation models incorporating H. armigera biological parameters, however, indicate that planting non-Bt cotton refuges may be needed to significantly delay resistance to cotton producing the toxins Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab. Specifically, when the concentration of one toxin (here Cry1Ac) declined seasonally, resistance to Bt cotton often occurred rapidly in simulations where refuges of non-Bt cotton were rare and resistance to Cry2Ab was non-recessive, because resistance was essentially driven by one toxin (here Cry2Ab). The use of biogeochemical markers to quantify insect movement can provide a valuable tool to evaluate the role of non-cotton refuges in delaying the evolution of H. armigera resistance to Bt cotton.

show abstract

Section: Resistance To Bt Cottonmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the role of non‐cotton refuges in delaying Helicoverpa armigera resistance to Bt cotton in West Africa

Brévault

Nibouche

Achaleke

et al. 2011

Evolutionary Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In Bt cotton, resistance models predict faster evolution of resistance populations when larvae move between plants and do not discriminate based on plant genotype for host selection (Heuberger et al 2011). As an alternative to mandated refugia, non-transgenic crops and wild plant relatives have been used as viable refugia for Bt crops in China (Qiao et al 2010). However, recent reports suggest emergence of resistance to Bt cotton in Helicoverpa armigera populations in a region of Northern China with a history of high rate of Bt cotton adoption (Zhang et al 2011).…”

Section: Insect Resistance To Bt Cropsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bt Crops: Past and Future

Castagnola

Jurat-Fuentes

2012

Bacillus Thuringiensis Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The development and commercialization of transgenic plants expressing insecticidal toxin genes from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) has revolutionized agriculture in the past two decades. Development of this revolutionary insect pest control technology was facilitated by the identification and characterization of insecticidal Bt proteins and advancements in plant transformation and genetic engineering. While commercialization of this technology is currently limited to a number of countries, these transgenic "Bt crops" are replacing in most cases conventional crop varieties due to their insect resistance, lower spraying requirements, and higher yields. However, concerns related to the increasing adoption of this technology include gene flow to wild relatives, evolution of resistance in target pests, and unintended effects on the environment. In this chapter, we discuss key events in the history of Bt crop development and summarize current regulations aimed at reducing the risks associated with increased adoption of this technology. By analyzing the history of Bt transgenic crops and the current marketplace trends and issues, we aim to examine the outlook of current and impending Bt crops as well as potential issues that may emerge during their future use.

show abstract

“…One of the conditions for environmental release of Bt cotton is that each such field is to be surrounded by a belt of non Bt cotton of the same variety to serve as "refuge" for bollworm. Refuge is any host plant (non Bt cotton, alternate host) that does not produce Bt toxin and has not been treated with conventional Bt formulations (Qiao et al, 2010). Refuge crops enable mating between resistant and susceptible adults, resulting in production of susceptible offspring (Kranthi et al, 2002;Kranthi and Kranthi, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Built in refuge for the management of Pink Bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella Saunders (Gelichidae: Lepidoptera) in Bt cotton

Chowdary

Bheemanna

Hosamani

et al. 2014

JANS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Field experiment was conducted at the Main Agricultural Research Station, University of Agricultural Sciences, Raichur during 2012-13 to identify and evaluate the suitable refuge strategy systems for pink bollworm resistance management in Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) cultivation. The experiment was laid out in randomized complete block design with nine refuge systems : 0 % N-Bt (BIR), 5 % N-Bt (BIR), 10 % N-Bt (BIR), 15 % N-Bt (BIR), 20% N-Bt perimeter refuge, 100% Non Bt, 50% Non Bt, 10% structured refuge and 20% structured refuge as treatments with three replications in replacement series. Significantly lowest incidence (3.55 larvae/plant) and number of bolls with exit holes (11.22) due to pink bollworm was recorded in 0% BIR (41.25 q/ha) followed by 5 % N -Bt (BIR) with yield of 38.74 q/ha and this was on par with 10 % N-Bt (BIR) with yield of 37.79 is next best refuge systems with Bt cotton for higher production and greater economic benefits.

show abstract

Natural refuge crops, buildup of resistance, and zero-refuge strategy for Bt cotton in China

Cited by 25 publications

References 36 publications

Assessing the role of non‐cotton refuges in delaying Helicoverpa armigera resistance to Bt cotton in West Africa

Assessing the role of non‐cotton refuges in delaying Helicoverpa armigera resistance to Bt cotton in West Africa

Bt Crops: Past and Future

Built in refuge for the management of Pink Bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella Saunders (Gelichidae: Lepidoptera) in Bt cotton

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About