Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T00:00:03.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

GENETIC INSECT CONTROL METHODS INVOLVING THE RELEASE OF RELATIVELY FEW LABORATORY-REARED INSECTS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

C. F. Wehrhahn  and
W. Klassen
C. F. Wehrhahn
Affiliation:
Institute of Animal Resource Ecology and Department of Zoology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver
W. Klassen
Affiliation:
Metabolism and Radiation Research Laboratory, ARS-USDA, State University Station, Fargo, North Dakota
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Several genetic insect control methods are currently available, but they are practicable only when population densities are low.In this paper we describe ways of increasing the frequencies of dominant conditional lethal genes in populations. The proposed methods should be particularly valuable for the eradication of major agricultural pests controlled at present by frequent applications of insecticide.Eradication of boll weevil populations could be accomplished by the release of relatively small numbers of artificially reared insects. The number required can be less than it is for other proposed methods by a factor of 100 or more¡¡

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 103 , Issue 10 , October 1971 , pp. 1387 - 1396
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1971

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brown, A. W. A. 1967. Genetics of insecticide resistance in insect vectors. In Wright, J. W. and Pal, R. (Eds.), Genetics of insect vectors of disease. Elservier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Brown, A. W. A. 1968. Insecticide resistance comes of age. Bull. ent. Soc. Am. 14(1): 3–9.Google Scholar
Curtis, C. F. 1968. A possible genetic method for the control of insect pests, with special reference to tsetse flies (Glossina spp.). Bull. ent. Res. 57: 509–523.Google Scholar
Hickey, W. A. and Craig, G. B. Jr. 1966. Distortion of sex ratio on population of Aedes aegypti. Can. J. Genet. Cytol. 8: 260–278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, T. W. 1966. Physiological differences between races of Teleogryllus commodus (Walker) (Orthoptera: Gryllidae) related to a proposed genetic approach to control. Aust. J. Zool. 13: 455–459.Google Scholar
Klassen, W., Knipling, E. F. and McGuire, J. U. Jr. 1970 a. The potential for insect-population suppression by dominant conditional lethal traits. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63(1): 238–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klassen, W., Creech, J. F., and Bell, R. A.. 1970 b. The potential for genetic suppression of insect populations by their adaptations to climate. U.S. Dep. Agric. misc. Publs 1173.Google Scholar
LaChance, L. E. and Knipling, E. F.. 1962. Control of insect populations through genetic manipulations. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 55(5): 515–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LaChance, L. E., Schmidt, C. H., and Bushland, R. C.. 1967. Radiation-induced sterilization, pp. 147–196. In Kilgore, and Doutt, (Eds.), Pest control: Biological, physical and selected chemical methods. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
Laven, H. 1968. Genetic methods for fighting pests. Sonderabdruck aus Anzeiger für Schadlingskunde, XLI. Heft I, seit 1–7. (Translated by Braun, B. A.: pbj 2/27/68.)Google Scholar
Masaki, S. 1968. Geographic adaptation in the seasonal life cycle of Mamestra brassicae (Linné) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Bull. Fac. Agric. Hirosaki Univ. 14: 16–26.Google Scholar
McDonald, I. C. 1970. Population cage studies with wild-type and mutant strains of the house fly. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 63(1): 187–191.Google Scholar
North, D. T. and Holt, G.. 1968. Inherited sterility in progeny of irradiated male cabbage loopers. J. econ. Ent. 61(4): 928–931.Google Scholar
Proverbs, M. D. and Newton, J. R.. 1963. Some effects of gamma radiation on the reproductive potential of the codling moth, Carpocapsa pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Olethreutidae). Can. Ent. 94: 1162–1170.Google Scholar
Sandler, L. and Novitskii, E.. 1957. Meiotic drive as an evolutionary force. Am. Nat. 91: 105–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Serebrovskii, A. S. 1940. On the possibility of a new method for the control of insect pests. Zool. Zh. 19: 618–630.Google Scholar
Suzuki, D. T., Piternick, L. K., Hayashi, S., Tarasoff, M., Baillie, D., and Erasmus, U.. 1967. Temperature sensitive mutations in Drosophila melanogaster. I: Relative frequences among X-ray and chemically induced sex-linked recessive lethals and semilethals. PANS.Google Scholar
Wagoner, D. E. 1968. Theoretical application of meiotic drive factors to insect-population control. Proc. North Central Br. ent. Soc. Am., p. 27. (Abstr. only.)Google Scholar