There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.
Abstract
The relationship between entomopathogenic fungi and their insect hosts is a classic
example of the co-evolutionary arms race between pathogen and target host. The present
review describes the entomopathogenic potential of
Chytridiomycota and
Blastocladiomycota fungi, and two groups of fungal allies:
Oomycota and
Microsporidia. The
Oomycota (water moulds) are considered as a model biological control agent of mosquito larvae.
Due to their shared ecological and morphological similarities, they had long been
considered a part of the fungal kingdom; however, phylogenetic studies have since
placed this group within the
Straminipila. The
Microsporidia are parasites of economically-important insects, including grasshoppers, lady beetles,
bumblebees, colorado potato beetles and honeybees. They have been found to display
some fungal characteristics, and phylogenetic studies suggest that they are related
to fungi, either as a basal branch or sister group. The
Blastocladiomycota and
Chytridiomycota, named the
lower fungi, historically were described together; however, molecular phylogenetic and ultrastructural
research has classified them in their own phylum. They are considered parasites of
ants, and of the larval stages of black flies, mosquitoes and scale insects.
Pesticides are used widely to control weeds and insect infestation in agricultural fields and various pests and disease carriers (e.g., mosquitoes, ticks, rats, and mice) in houses, offices, malls, and streets. As the modes of action for pesticides are not species-specific, concerns have been raised about environmental risks associated with their exposure through various routes (e.g., residues in food and drinking water). Although such hazards range from short-term (e.g., skin and eye irritation, headaches, dizziness, and nausea) to chronic impacts (e.g., cancer, asthma, and diabetes), their risks are difficult to elucidate due to the involvement of various factors (e.g., period and level of exposure, type of pesticide (regarding toxicity and persistence), and the environmental characteristics of the affected areas). There are no groups in the human population that are completely unexposed to pesticides while most diseases are multi-causal to add considerable complexity to public health assessments. Hence, development of eco-friendly pesticide alternatives (e.g., EcoSMART) and Integrated Pest Management (IPM) techniques is desirable to reduce the impacts of pesticides. This paper was hence organized to present a comprehensive review on pesticides with respect to their types, environmental distribution, routes of exposure, and health impacts.
The development and use of entomopathogens as classical, conservation and augmentative biological control agents have included a number of successes and some setbacks in the past 1years. In this forum paper we present current information on development, use and future directions of insect-specific viruses, bacteria, fungi and nematodes as components of integrated pest management strategies for control of arthropod pests of crops, forests, urban habitats, and insects of medical and veterinary importance. Insect pathogenic viruses are a fruitful source of microbial control agents (MCAs), particularly for the control of lepidopteran pests. Most research is focused on the baculoviruses, important pathogens of some globally important pests for which control has become difficult due to either pesticide resistance or pressure to reduce pesticide residues. Baculoviruses are accepted as safe, readily mass produced, highly pathogenic and easily formulated and applied control agents. New baculovirus products are appearing in many countries and gaining an increased market share. However, the absence of a practical in vitro mass production system, generally higher production costs, limited post application persistence, slow rate of kill and high host specificity currently contribute to restricted use in pest control. Overcoming these limitations are key research areas for which progress could open up use of insect viruses to much larger markets. A small number of entomopathogenic bacteria have been commercially developed for control of insect pests. These include several Bacillus thuringiensis sub-species, Lysinibacillus (Bacillus) sphaericus, Paenibacillus spp. and Serratia entomophila. B. thuringiensis sub-species kurstaki is the most widely used for control of pest insects of crops and forests, and B. thuringiensis sub-species israelensis and L. sphaericus are the primary pathogens used for control of medically important pests including dipteran vectors. These pathogens combine the advantages of chemical pesticides and MCAs: they are fast acting, easy to produce at a relatively low cost, easy to formulate, have a long shelf life and allow delivery using conventional application equipment and systemics (i.e. in transgenic plants). Unlike broad spectrum chemical pesticides, B. thuringiensis toxins are selective and negative environmental impact is very limited. Of the several commercially produced MCAs, B. thuringiensis (Bt) has more than 50% of market share. Extensive research, particularly on the molecular mode of action of Bt toxins, has been conducted over the past two decades. The Bt genes used in insect-resistant transgenic crops belong to the Cry and vegetative insecticidal protein families of toxins. Bt has been highly efficacious in pest management of corn and cotton, drastically reducing the amount of broad spectrum chemical insecticides used while being safe for consumers and non-target organisms. Despite successes, the adoption of Bt crops has not been without controversy. Although there is a lack of scientific evidence regarding their detrimental effects, this controversy has created the widespread perception in some quarters that Bt crops are dangerous for the environment. In addition to discovery of more efficacious isolates and toxins, an increase in the use of Bt products and transgenes will rely on innovations in formulation, better delivery systems and ultimately, wider public acceptance of transgenic plants expressing insect-specific Bt toxins. Fungi are ubiquitous natural entomopathogens that often cause epizootics in host insects and possess many desirable traits that favor their development as MCAs. Presently, commercialized microbial pesticides based on entomopathogenic fungi largely occupy niche markets. A variety of molecular tools and technologies have recently allowed reclassification of numerous species based on phylogeny, as well as matching anamorphs (asexual forms) and teleomorphs (sexual forms) of several entomopathogenic taxa in the Phylum Ascomycota. Although these fungi have been traditionally regarded exclusively as pathogens of arthropods, recent studies have demonstrated that they occupy a great diversity of ecological niches. Entomopathogenic fungi are now known to be plant endophytes, plant disease antagonists, rhizosphere colonizers, and plant growth promoters. These newly understood attributes provide possibilities to use fungi in multiple roles. In addition to arthropod pest control, some fungal species could simultaneously suppress plant pathogens and plant parasitic nematodes as well as promote plant growth. A greater understanding of fungal ecology is needed to define their roles in nature and evaluate their limitations in biological control. More efficient mass production, formulation and delivery systems must be devised to supply an ever increasing market. More testing under field conditions is required to identify effects of biotic and abiotic factors on efficacy and persistence. Lastly, greater attention must be paid to their use within integrated pest management programs; in particular, strategies that incorporate fungi in combination with arthropod predators and parasitoids need to be defined to ensure compatibility and maximize efficacy. Entomopathogenic nematodes (EPNs) in the genera Steinernema and Heterorhabditis are potent MCAs. Substantial progress in research and application of EPNs has been made in the past decade. The number of target pests shown to be susceptible to EPNs has continued to increase. Advancements in this regard primarily have been made in soil habitats where EPNs are shielded from environmental extremes, but progress has also been made in use of nematodes in above-ground habitats owing to the development of improved protective formulations. Progress has also resulted from advancements in nematode production technology using both in vivo and in vitro systems; novel application methods such as distribution of infected host cadavers; and nematode strain improvement via enhancement and stabilization of beneficial traits. Innovative research has also yielded insights into the fundamentals of EPN biology including major advances in genomics, nematode-bacterial symbiont interactions, ecological relationships, and foraging behavior. Additional research is needed to leverage these basic findings toward direct improvements in microbial control.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium
or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the
source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were
made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the
article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to
the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence
and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted
use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view
a copy of this licence, visit
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.
Smart Citations