4.5 Article

Field evaluation of potato plants transgenic for a cry1Ac gene conferring resistance to potato tuber moth, Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae)

期刊

CROP PROTECTION
卷 25, 期 3, 页码 216-224

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.cropro.2005.04.010

关键词

Phthorimaea operculella; Cry1Ac; resistance; transgenic potato; field trials

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cryl Ac-transgenic potato plants derived from Russet Burbank and Red Rascal cultivars were evaluated in field trials at Lincoln, Canterbury, New Zealand. Foliage of transgenic plants had fewer potato tuber moth (Phthorimaea operculella (Zeller)) mines, of which the majority were < 200 mm(2), than the non-transgenic control plants. Of the 800 transgenic tubers examined 5 months after harvesting the first field trial (1999/2000), 0.5% had potato tuber moth mine damage compared with 9% of non-transgenic tubers. After the second field trial (2000/2001) 0.06% of 5307 transgenic tubers had mine damage compared with damage to 25% of non-transgenic tubers. Mined foliage was collected during the first field trial, resulting in a total of 45 larvae from transgenic foliage and 269 from non-transgenic foliage. Two pupae and nine parasitoids emerged from larvae collected from and reared on transgenic foliage. Between 86% and 88% (Red Rascal or Russet Burbank cultivar, respectively) of larvae collected and reared on non-transgenic foliage either pupated or were parasitised. In the second field trial, three of the four transgenic lines evaluated produced yields comparable with their non-transgenic parent cultivar. These results Suggest transgenic potato plants resistant to potato tuber moth could augment integrated pest management programmes. However, the potential of the target pest to develop resistance to such plants and effects on non-target insects must be evaluated before such plants can be recommended for potato tuber moth management. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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