4.5 Article

Bacteria-derived pesticidal proteins active against hemipteran pests

期刊

JOURNAL OF INVERTEBRATE PATHOLOGY
卷 195, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jip.2022.107834

关键词

Hemiptera; Bacillus thuringiensis; Pesticidal protein; Midgut; Filter chamber; Proteases

类别

资金

  1. Emergency Citrus Diseases Research and Extension grants program from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture [2017-70016-26755, 2020-70029-33177]
  2. National Science Foundation I/UCRC
  3. Center for Arthropod Management Technologies [IIP-1821914]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hemipteran pests pose a significant threat to agricultural production due to their feeding damage and transmission of plant pathogens. However, the identification and development of pesticidal proteins specific to hemipteran species have been limited. This comprehensive review examines the unique physiological features of Hemiptera, provides an overview of pesticidal proteins active against hemipteran pests, and summarizes biotechnological strategies to enhance their toxicity.
Hemipteran pests are among the most important threats to agricultural production. Losses associated with these insects result from both feeding-associated damage and the transmission of plant pathogens by some species. Key among hemipteran pests of agricultural importance are stink bugs, whitefly, aphids and psyllids. While bacteria provide an excellent resource for identification of environmentally benign pesticidal proteins for use against pest insects, relatively few with activity against hemipteran species have been identified. In this comprehensive re-view including the patent literature, we describe physiological features unique to Hemiptera that may restrict the toxicity of bacterial pesticidal proteins, provide an overview of Hemiptera-active pesticidal proteins and asso-ciated structural classes, and summarize biotechnological strategies used for optimization of toxicity against target hemipteran species.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据