Toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to Gypsy Moth, Lymantria dispar, Fed with Alder or Douglas-Fir

Moldenke, Alison F.; Berry, Ralph E.; Miller, Jeffrey C.; Wernz, J. G.; Li, X.-H.

doi:10.1006/jipa.1994.1083

Cited by 17 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite several reports demonstrating that midgut microenvironmental factors can greatly affect toxin activity (Pang and Gringorten, 1998;Shao et al, 1998;Tran et al, 2001;Fortier et al, 2005Fortier et al, , 2007Vachon et al, 2006), this aspect of their mode of action has been largely overlooked. Nevertheless, because at least some of these factors are likely to vary in function of the physiological state of the insect, they could contribute to the still poorly understood mechanisms by which the efficacy of B. thuringiensis crystal toxins often depends on biological factors such as larval instar (Wierenga et al, 1996;van Frankenhuyzen et al, 1997) and nutrition (Bauer, 1992;Meade and Hare, 1993;Appel and Schultz, 1994;Moldenke et al, 1994;Farrar et al, 1996;Beveridge and Elek, 2001;Kouassi et al, 2001).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Midgut juice components affect pore formation by the Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal toxin Cry9Ca

Brunet¹,

Vachon²,

Marsolais³

et al. 2010

Journal of Invertebrate Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Midgut juice components affect pore formation by the Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal toxin Cry9Ca

Brunet¹,

Vachon²,

Marsolais³

et al. 2010

Journal of Invertebrate Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Host plant-mediated effects on the efÞcacy of B. thuringiensis have been investigated in only a few instances, but this question has gained momentum in the applied literature in the recent years (Meade and Hare 1993, Appel and Schultz 1994, Moldenke et al 1994, Farrar et al 1996, Harcourt et al 1996, Kleiner et al 1998). However, a knowledge of host plant-mediated effects on the efÞcacy of B. thuringiensis is essential for logistic and economic purposes, for the success of spraying operations, and for the elaboration of sound intervention strategies that will minimize the development of resistance in the species targeted for control.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

Variation in the Susceptibility of the Forest Tent Caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) to <I>Bacillus thuringiensis</I> variety kurstaki HD-1: Effect of the Host Plant

Kouassi¹,

Lorenzetti²,

Guertin³

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Host-mediated effect on the efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner against larvae of the forest tent caterpillar. Malacosoma disstria Hübner, was investigated under controlled conditions. Host plants used in this study were quaking aspen, Populus tremuloides Michx., a preferred host, and sugar maple, Acer saccharum Marsh., a secondary host. Larvae were reared in the laboratory on leaves of these hosts, and upon reaching the third, fourth, and fifth instar, they were fed leaves treated with one of a range of concentrations of B. thuringiensis variety kurstaki HD-1 suspensions. Larvae were tested on the host on which they were feeding before the 4-d bioassays. The estimated LC50s were 100-fold greater on quaking aspen than on sugar maple. Also, there was a decrease in efficacy over the whole ranges of concentrations with larval age on both hosts. LC50s varied approximately two-fold between third and fifth instar. These results indicate that host-mediated effects on B. thuringiensis efficacy warrant more interest. In particular, they strongly indicate that the host plant modifies the interaction between B. thuringiensis and a target insect, and offer the opportunity to investigate the mechanism(s) that may be involved in the enhancement of B. thuringiensis toxicity.

show abstract

“…Gypsy moth larvae fed on alder are less susceptible to B. thuringiensis than the larvae fed on Douglas fir (Moldenke et al, 1994). Meade and Hare (1993) also observed high efficacy of B. thuringiensis sp.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 74%

Crop hosts and genotypic resistance influence the biological activity of Bacillus thuringiensis towards Helicoverpa armigera

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tStudies on the influence of genotypic resistance on biological activity of a commercial formulation of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and pure Bt toxin Cry1Ac were carried out to develop appropriate strategies for pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera management in chickpea, sorghum, pigeonpea and cotton. The interaction effects of host plant resistance and biological activity of commercial Bt/Cry1Ac were studied by incorporating the lyophilized tissues of chickpea leaves, milk stage sorghum grain, pigeonpea pods and cotton squares into the artificial diet with and without Bt formulation or Cry1Ac. The H. armigera larval weights were significantly lower in insects reared on diets with square powder of the insect -resistant Bt-cotton RCH 2 þ Bt/Cry1Ac and pod powder of insect -resistant pigeonpea genotype, ICPL 332WR þ Bt/ Cry1Ac as compared to the larvae reared on diets with leaf powder of H. armigera susceptible chickpea genotype, ICCC 37 and the standard artificial diet. Pupation and adult emergence were significantly lower in insects reared on diets with tissues of pod borer-resistant genotypes þ Bt/Cry1Ac as compared to insects reared on diets with tissues of the insect susceptible genotypes þ Bt/Cry1Ac. Insects reared on diets containing insect-resistant and -susceptible genotypes of sorghum, pigeonpea and cotton and pod borer-resistant genotype of chickpea (ICC 506EB) þ Bt/Cry1Ac did not lay any eggs. However, eggs were laid by the insects reared on diets containing pod borer-susceptible genotype of chickpea, ICCC 37 and on the standard artificial diet þ Bt/Cry1Ac. The insects reared on diets with sorghum genotype, ICSV 745, and Bt-cotton, RCH 2 without Bt/Cry1Ac also did not lay eggs. The results suggested that Bt/Cry1Ac is more effective for management of H. armigera when deployed in combination with insect-resistant genotypes of cotton, chickpea, pigeonpea and sorghum.

show abstract

Toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki to Gypsy Moth, Lymantria dispar, Fed with Alder or Douglas-Fir

Cited by 17 publications

References 10 publications

Midgut juice components affect pore formation by the Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal toxin Cry9Ca

Midgut juice components affect pore formation by the Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal toxin Cry9Ca

Variation in the Susceptibility of the Forest Tent Caterpillar (Lepidoptera: Lasiocampidae) to <I>Bacillus thuringiensis</I> variety kurstaki HD-1: Effect of the Host Plant

Crop hosts and genotypic resistance influence the biological activity of Bacillus thuringiensis towards Helicoverpa armigera

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About