You are on page 1of 3

Web address:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/
130919140742.htm

African Caterpillars Resistant to GM Maize


Sep. 19, 2013 Like many other transgenic crops, Bt maize synthesises its own pesticide: a toxic protein
produced in its leaves and stems, which kills pests in a matter of days. Perfect Except when insect
populations develop resistance to the toxin! To date, management strategies implemented to delay the
evolution of resistance have been successful. Notwithstanding the success of these strategies, IRD scientists
and their South African partners have now revealed that a major pest of maize, the moth Busseola fusca, has
developed an unusual defense mechanism against Bt toxin in South Africa. By contrast with the usual
expectations, this resistance is inherited as a dominant trait, a characteristic that may have contributed to its
rapid geographical expansion. This result recently published in the journal PLoS ONE, suggests that insect
resistance management should be more finely tuned to local pests and should go beyond the simple
implementation of refuges for Bt-susceptible moths.
Bt maize and resistance development
Genetically engineered maize is created by introducing a gene into the plant genome that expresses a toxic
protein from a bacterium, i.e. Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). Both the leaves and stems of Bt maize produce this
toxin which destroys the gut of any moth larvae eating the plant. The technique is effective and unlike wide
spectrum pesticides, it only targets larvae of moths. However, sooner or later, insect species may be able to
develop a mechanism of resistance against any pesticides. Bt maize is not fundamentally different in this
regard and in order to delay the evolution of resistance in pest populations, the concept of maintaining
refuges for Bt susceptible moths was developed.
Non-Bt maize fields are protecting Bt maize fields
The refuge strategy consists of planting a small proportion of land with non-Bt maize; the aim being to
maintain pockets of insects that remain susceptible to the toxin. In line with other known cases of Btresistance, resistance in Busseola fusca was expected to involve modification of the cells in the gut wall,
which prevents the toxin from binding. Crucially, this type of adaptation is inherited recessively: both parents
must be resistant to produce fully resistant offspring. Since the probability of resistant individuals arising in
the field is low, any resistant insects surviving on Bt maize will mate with one of the many Bt-susceptible
individuals originating from the refuge area and their progeny will not survive in the Bt-maize field. This
tactic has been successful, especially in North America where the first Bt maize has been planted since 1995
with resistance yet to develop among lepidopteran pests.
The exception to the rule
However, about seven years after Bt maize was introduced to South Africa in the late 1990's, scientists
observed resistant Busseola fusca caterpillars and, more importantly, these resistant insects seemed to
reproduce and spread rapidly. To explain this phenomenon, scientists in South Africa, together with IRD
researchers, crossed resistant South African moths with susceptible moths imported from Kenya, where Bt
maize is not yet commercialized. The offspring developed perfectly on Bt maize and were as resistant as the
South African resistant parents. Unlike everything known so far, this resistance evolved in the field was

inherited as a dominant trait.


A likely new resistance mechanism
This result shows for the first time that resistance to Bt maize can be inherited in a dominant rather than
recessive way. It also explains why resistance has spread rapidly. The moth does not seem to have followed
the expected pattern of adaptation. At this stage, there are several hypotheses as to the nature of the
mechanism, but it is very likely that Busseola fusca has developed an unconventional resistance mechanism
yet to be identified.
Implications
In South Africa, most farmers are still cultivating single-toxin Bt maize. In many cases they need to apply at
least one pesticide spray, which makes planting of Bt varieties less attractive. As a result of the study, the
planting of refuges needs to be reconsidered in South Africa, and a possibility exists that the refuge strategy
may totally change in the future. However these are very short term solutions. In the medium term, singletoxin Bt maize is being progressively replaced by a stacked variety producing two different toxins but, in a
worst case scenario, one cannot exclude that Busseola fusca could also quickly adapt to varieties expressing
more than one toxin. In the long term, new Insect Resistance Management strategies, likely more complex,
should be developed against Busseola fusca. Such perspectives could include a more diverse array of toxins
for the control of pest populations, possibly supplemented with a biological component such as pathogenic
fungi or parasitic wasps.
Share this story on Facebook, Twitter, and Google:
Like
Tweet

137
82

Other social bookmarking and sharing tools:


Share on stumbleupon Share on linkedin Share on
pinterest_share Share on blogger Share on digg Share
on delicious Share on newsvine | 1
Story Source:
The above story is based on materials provided by Institut de Recherche pour le
Dveloppement (IRD), via AlphaGalileo.
Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the
source cited above.
Journal Reference:
1. Pascal Campagne, Marlene Kruger, Rmy Pasquet, Bruno Le Ru, Johnnie Van den Berg. Dominant
Inheritance of Field-Evolved Resistance to Bt Corn in Busseola fusca. PLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (7): e69675
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069675

Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA
MLA
Institut de Recherche pour le Dveloppement (IRD) (2013, September 19). African caterpillars resistant to
GM maize. ScienceDaily. Retrieved September 24, 2013, from http://www.sciencedaily.com!
/releases/2013/09/130919140742.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.

You might also like