Next Article in Journal
Expression Patterns of Three Important Hormone Genes and Respiratory Metabolism in Antheraea pernyi during Pupal Diapause under a Long Photoperiod
Previous Article in Journal
Using Chemical Ecology to Enhance Weed Biological Control
Previous Article in Special Issue
Development of Monitoring and Mating Disruption against the Chilean Leafroller Proeulia auraria (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Orchards
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Editorial

From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice

Department of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Pisa, Via del Borghetto 80, 56124 Pisa, Italy
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2021, 12(8), 698; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080698
Submission received: 28 July 2021 / Accepted: 29 July 2021 / Published: 3 August 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice)

1. Introduction

Insects perceive and integrate a hierarchy of visual, chemical and tactile cues for feeding and reproductive purposes, as well as for predator and parasitoid avoidance. Among semiochemicals routing insect’s decisions, pheromones play a key role in mediating intraspecific communication [1,2]. The study of insect chemical ecology with special reference to their pheromones is a fascinating research field. Pheromone-mediated mating disruption represents an effective and eco-friendly biocontrol technique to manage insect pests of agricultural importance. Worldwide, agricultural pests affecting more than 800,000 hectares of crops are managed by mating disruption [3]. This technique relies on the release of synthetic sex pheromones from dispensers in crops, interfering with mate finding and reproduction of the pest through both competitive and non-competitive mechanisms [4,5]. Unfortunately, the use of mating disruption is still restricted to a rather limited number of crop pests, with special efforts being directed toward moths [3]. However, the mating disruption potential is huge and urgently needs to be explored further.

2. Insect Chemical Ecology: From the Laboratory to the Field

In this framework, the Special Issue “From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice” includes both laboratory and field studies on insect pheromones, as well as on mating disruption efficacy against insect pests of economic importance.
Herein, the following topics have been covered:
(a) 
Pheromone biology, with special reference to the various factors, often overlooked, affecting pheromone production in species of economic importance, including wood boring beetles, e.g., Lyctus africanus Lesne (Coleoptera: Bostrichidae) [6]; a further focus has been provided on the citrophilous mealybug, Pseudococcus calceolariae (Maskell) (Hemiptera, Pseudococcidae), assessing the potential negative impact of male multiple matings on mass trapping and mating disruption [7].
(b) 
Development of novel mating disruption tools and approaches. Several novel mating disruption approaches have been developed and/or optimized to manage a broadly diverse number of insect pests. A major focus has been devoted to moth pests, showing carefully conducted mating disruption experiments on grape (Cryptoblabes gnidiella (Millière, 1867) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)) [8], plum (Grapholita funebrana Treitschke (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae)) [9], almond (Amyelois transitella (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)) [10], and tomato (Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)) [11], as well as on polyphagous leafrollers, such as Proeulia auraria (Clarke) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) [12]. Concerning mealybugs, further research efforts have been directed to evaluating the potential of P. calceolariae mating disruption in apple and tangerine orchards [13].
(c) 
Reviews on insect chemical ecology. The Special Issue ends with two broad reviews. The first summarizes current knowledge on insect sex pheromone research and its application in Integrated Pest Management [14]. The second review offers an updated analysis of what we really know on tephritid fruit fly semiochemicals, their real-world applications and the related research challenges [15].

3. The Future

Overall, we enjoyed organizing the Special Issue “From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice” greatly, and sincerely thank all the authors for their fine contributions. On the other hand, we are very aware that the present Special Issue cannot reflect the wide diversity of topics and challenges currently characterizing the pheromone and MD research. In particular, further research efforts are still needed to develop novel approaches to combat emerging pests, with special reference to invasive species, to fully clarify the mechanisms of action of MD-based control tools, to shed light on potential non-target effects, as well as to boost the efficacy of MD programs through the optimization of release geometries.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.B. and A.L.; writing—original draft preparation, G.B. and A.L.; writing—review and editing, G.B. and A.L. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This manuscript received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Insects Editorial Office for their kind assistance in the preparation on the present Special Issue.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Stökl, J.; Steiger, S. Evolutionary origin of insect pheromones. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2017, 24, 36–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Henneken, J.; Jones, T.M. Pheromones-based sexual selection in a rapidly changing world. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2017, 24, 84–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Benelli, G.; Lucchi, A.; Thomson, D.; Ioriatti, C. Sex Pheromone Aerosol Devices for Mating Disruption: Challenges for a Brighter Future. Insects 2019, 10, 308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. McGhee, P.S.; Gut, L.J.; Miller, J.R. Aerosol emitters disrupt codling moth, Cydia pomonella, competitively. Pest Manag. Sci. 2014, 70, 1859–1862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Miller, J.R.; Gut, L.J. Mating Disruption for the 21st Century: Matching Technology with Mechanism. Environ. Entomol. 2015, 44, 427–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Kartika, T.; Shimizu, N.; Himmi, S.K.; Guswenrivo, I.; Tarmadi, D.; Yusuf, S.; Yoshimura, T. Influence of Age and Mating Status on Pheromone Production in a Powderpost Beetle Lyctus africanus (Coleoptera: Lyctinae). Insects 2020, 12, 8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ricciardi, R.; Lucchi, A.; Benelli, G.; Suckling, D.M. Multiple Mating in the Citrophilous Mealybug Pseudococcus calceolariae: Implications for Mating Disruption. Insects 2019, 10, 285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  8. Ricciardi, R.; Di Giovanni, F.; Cosci, F.; Ladurner, E.; Savino, F.; Iodice, A.; Benelli, G.; Lucchi, A. Mating Disruption for Managing the Honeydew Moth, Cryptoblabes gnidiella (Millière), in Mediterranean Vineyards. Insects 2021, 12, 390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Verde, G.L.; Guarino, S.; Barone, S.; Rizzo, R. Can Mating Disruption Be a Possible Route to Control Plum Fruit Moth in Mediterranean Environments? Insects 2020, 11, 589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Higbee, B.; Burks, C. Individual and Additive Effects of Insecticide and Mating Disruption in Integrated Management of Navel Orangeworm in Almonds. Insects 2021, 12, 188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Burgio, G.; Ravaglia, F.; Maini, S.; Bazzocchi, G.G.; Masetti, A.; Lanzoni, A. Mating Disruption of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Processing Tomato: First Applications in Northern Italy. Insects 2020, 11, 206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Flores, M.; Bergmann, J.; Ballesteros, C.; Arraztio, D.; Curkovic, T. Development of Monitoring and Mating Disruption against the Chilean Leafroller Proeulia auraria (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Orchards. Insects 2021, 12, 625. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ballesteros, C.; Romero, A.; Castro, M.; Miranda, S.; Bergmann, J.; Zaviezo, T. Mating Disruption of Pseudococcus calceolariae (Maskell) (Hemiptera, Pseudococcidae) in Fruit Crops. Insects 2021, 12, 343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Rizvi, S.; George, J.; Reddy, G.; Zeng, X.; Guerrero, A. Latest Developments in Insect Sex Pheromone Research and Its Application in Agricultural Pest Management. Insects 2021, 12, 484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Scolari, F.; Valerio, F.; Benelli, G.; Papadopoulos, N.; Vaníčková, L. Tephritid Fruit Fly Semiochemicals: Current Knowledge and Future Perspectives. Insects 2021, 12, 408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Benelli, G.; Lucchi, A. From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice. Insects 2021, 12, 698. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080698

AMA Style

Benelli G, Lucchi A. From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice. Insects. 2021; 12(8):698. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080698

Chicago/Turabian Style

Benelli, Giovanni, and Andrea Lucchi. 2021. "From Insect Pheromones to Mating Disruption: Theory and Practice" Insects 12, no. 8: 698. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080698

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop