Delivery methods for peptide and protein toxins in insect control

Paul A. Whetstone, Bruce D. Hammock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s, arthropod pest control has relied heavily upon chemical insecticides. However, the development of insect resistance, an increased awareness of the real and perceived environmental and health impacts of these chemicals, and the need for systems with a smaller environmental footprint has stimulated the search for new insecticidal compounds, novel molecular targets, and alternative control methods. In recent decades a variety of biocontrol methods employing peptidic or proteinaceous insect-specific toxins derived from microbes, plants and animals have been examined in the laboratory and field with varying results. Among the many interdependent factors involved with the production of a cost-effective pesticide-production expense, kill efficiency, environmental persistence, pest-specificity, pest resistance-development, public perception and ease of delivery-sprayable biopesticides have not yet found equal competitive footing with chemical counterparts. However, while protein/peptide-based biopesticides continue to have limitations, advances in the technology, particularly of genetically modified organisms as biopesticidal delivery systems, has continually progressed. This review highlights the varieties of delivery methods currently practiced, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each method.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)576-596
Number of pages21
JournalToxicon
Volume49
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 15 2007

Fingerprint

Insect control
Insect Control
Biological Control Agents
Peptides
Biocontrol
Pest control
Insects
Proteins
DDT
Genetically Modified Organisms
Insecticides
Pesticides
Pest Control
Environmental Health
Arthropods
Animals
Health
Technology
Costs and Cost Analysis
Costs

Keywords

  • Arthropod
  • Delivery
  • Peptide
  • Pesticide
  • Toxin
  • Venom

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Toxicology

Cite this

Delivery methods for peptide and protein toxins in insect control. / Whetstone, Paul A.; Hammock, Bruce D.

In: Toxicon, Vol. 49, No. 4, 15.03.2007, p. 576-596.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Whetstone, Paul A. ; Hammock, Bruce D. / Delivery methods for peptide and protein toxins in insect control. In: Toxicon. 2007 ; Vol. 49, No. 4. pp. 576-596.
@article{e6257b6fca6d4536ba2193d3cbf910b2,
title = "Delivery methods for peptide and protein toxins in insect control",
abstract = "Since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s, arthropod pest control has relied heavily upon chemical insecticides. However, the development of insect resistance, an increased awareness of the real and perceived environmental and health impacts of these chemicals, and the need for systems with a smaller environmental footprint has stimulated the search for new insecticidal compounds, novel molecular targets, and alternative control methods. In recent decades a variety of biocontrol methods employing peptidic or proteinaceous insect-specific toxins derived from microbes, plants and animals have been examined in the laboratory and field with varying results. Among the many interdependent factors involved with the production of a cost-effective pesticide-production expense, kill efficiency, environmental persistence, pest-specificity, pest resistance-development, public perception and ease of delivery-sprayable biopesticides have not yet found equal competitive footing with chemical counterparts. However, while protein/peptide-based biopesticides continue to have limitations, advances in the technology, particularly of genetically modified organisms as biopesticidal delivery systems, has continually progressed. This review highlights the varieties of delivery methods currently practiced, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each method.",
keywords = "Arthropod, Delivery, Peptide, Pesticide, Toxin, Venom",
author = "Whetstone, {Paul A.} and Hammock, {Bruce D.}",
year = "2007",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.toxicon.2006.11.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "49",
pages = "576--596",
journal = "Toxicon",
issn = "0041-0101",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Delivery methods for peptide and protein toxins in insect control

AU - Whetstone, Paul A.

AU - Hammock, Bruce D.

PY - 2007/3/15

Y1 - 2007/3/15

N2 - Since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s, arthropod pest control has relied heavily upon chemical insecticides. However, the development of insect resistance, an increased awareness of the real and perceived environmental and health impacts of these chemicals, and the need for systems with a smaller environmental footprint has stimulated the search for new insecticidal compounds, novel molecular targets, and alternative control methods. In recent decades a variety of biocontrol methods employing peptidic or proteinaceous insect-specific toxins derived from microbes, plants and animals have been examined in the laboratory and field with varying results. Among the many interdependent factors involved with the production of a cost-effective pesticide-production expense, kill efficiency, environmental persistence, pest-specificity, pest resistance-development, public perception and ease of delivery-sprayable biopesticides have not yet found equal competitive footing with chemical counterparts. However, while protein/peptide-based biopesticides continue to have limitations, advances in the technology, particularly of genetically modified organisms as biopesticidal delivery systems, has continually progressed. This review highlights the varieties of delivery methods currently practiced, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each method.

AB - Since the introduction of DDT in the 1940s, arthropod pest control has relied heavily upon chemical insecticides. However, the development of insect resistance, an increased awareness of the real and perceived environmental and health impacts of these chemicals, and the need for systems with a smaller environmental footprint has stimulated the search for new insecticidal compounds, novel molecular targets, and alternative control methods. In recent decades a variety of biocontrol methods employing peptidic or proteinaceous insect-specific toxins derived from microbes, plants and animals have been examined in the laboratory and field with varying results. Among the many interdependent factors involved with the production of a cost-effective pesticide-production expense, kill efficiency, environmental persistence, pest-specificity, pest resistance-development, public perception and ease of delivery-sprayable biopesticides have not yet found equal competitive footing with chemical counterparts. However, while protein/peptide-based biopesticides continue to have limitations, advances in the technology, particularly of genetically modified organisms as biopesticidal delivery systems, has continually progressed. This review highlights the varieties of delivery methods currently practiced, examining the strengths and weaknesses of each method.

KW - Arthropod

KW - Delivery

KW - Peptide

KW - Pesticide

KW - Toxin

KW - Venom

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33847614299&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33847614299&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.toxicon.2006.11.009

DO - 10.1016/j.toxicon.2006.11.009

M3 - Article

C2 - 17196630

AN - SCOPUS:33847614299

VL - 49

SP - 576

EP - 596

JO - Toxicon

JF - Toxicon

SN - 0041-0101

IS - 4

ER -