Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Oct 2017View details →

Figure 1 in Testing the Temporal Limits of Lures and Toxicants for Trapping Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae): Additional Weathering Studies of Solid Bactrocera and Zeugodacus Male Lures and Associated Insecticidal Strips

Figure 1. Captures of Zeugodacus cucurbitae males in Jackson traps containing toxicants of variable age deployed at Aloun Farm, Oahu, Hawaii. The lures were fresh in all traps and were prepared in Hawaii at the start of the test. Two fresh toxicants were included: naled in liquid CL (bar labelled L) and a DDVP strip with a CL plug (bar labelled P). The DDVP strips weathered in Arizona and Florida were tested during the same 1-day period (December 9–10, 2015). Values represent means (+ 1 SE); 12 traps were deployed per treatment. Bars marked by different letters were significantly different (Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparisons test).

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2018View details →

Fig. 1 in First detection of Bactrocera tsuneonis (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Guangdong Province of China

Fig. 1. Map indicating the trapping location (▲) in Guangdong Province in 2016. The photograph above shows an orchard in Huaiji County, where Bactrocera tsuneonis was detected. Solid circles (●) in the orchard denote the lure trap locations.

Fig. 5 in Female remating inhibition and fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) associated with male accessory glands

Fig. 5. Fecundities of Bactrocera dorsalis females of various mating statuses. A. Lifetime mean number (± S.E.) of eggs laid per female, and B. Mean oviposition rates per week of Bactrocera dorsalis females of various mating statuses. G1, virgin females housed alone (n = 30); G2, females mated once (n = 26); G3, females mated twice with different virgin males (n = 32); G4, females mated with males that had mated on the previous day (n = 29); G5, females housed with males at a sex ratio of 1: 1 (n = 23); G6, females housed with males at a sex ratio of 1♀: 23 (n = 24). Different letters indicate significant differences.

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2015View details →

Fig. 2 in Morphometry of compound eyes of three Bactrocera (Diptera: Tephritidae) species

Fig. 2. SEM micrographs of the compound eye of 3 Bactrocera species showing the shapes of the ommatidia (square and hexagonal), central region (A, C, E) and dorsal region (B, D, F). Scale bar = 20 µm A, B: B. cucurbitae C, D: B. tau E, F: B. dorsalis.

Fig. 1 in Female remating inhibition and fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) associated with male accessory glands

Fig. 1. Male accessory glands of Bactrocera dorsalis. One pair of long tube mesodermal accessory glands (MAG) and 3 pairs of long, convoluted, complex and fragile ectodermal accessory glands (EAG).

opencc-by-4.0Jun 2015View details →

Fig. 1 in Morphometry of compound eyes of three Bactrocera (Diptera: Tephritidae) species

Fig. 1. Light micrographs of the compound eyes of the 3 Bactrocera species. Scale bar = 100 µm. A: Female B. cucurbitae B: Male B. cucurbitae C: Female B. tau D: Male B. tau E: Female B. dorsalis F: Male B. dorsalis.

Fig. 6 in Female remating inhibition and fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) associated with male accessory glands

Fig. 6. Fertilities of Bactrocera dorsalis females of various mating statuses. A. Lifetime mean percent hatch of eggs laid by females of G2 – G6 mating statuses, B. Mean percent hatch of eggs laid each week by females of G2 – G6 mating statuses. G2, females mated once (n = 18); G3, females mated twice with virgin males (n= 20); G4, females mated with non-virgin males (n = 18); G5, females housed with males with a sex ratio of 1: 1 (n = 18); G6, females housed with males with a sex ratio of 1♀: 23 (n = 19). Data for the unfertilized eggs laid by virgin females in group G1 and for females that produced fewer than 5 eggs in total were not analyzed. Different letters indicate significant differences.

Fig. 3 in Female remating inhibition and fitness of Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) associated with male accessory glands

Fig. 3. Mean percentage of successful matings among Bactrocera dorsalis of different mating statuses. M1, matings of 8-day old virgin females with of 8-day old virgin males on day 1; M2, matings of 9-day old virgin females with 9-day old virgin males on day 2; M3, matings of 10-day old virgin females with 10-day old males on day 3; M4, matings on day 2 of virgin females with males that had mated on day 1; M5, both first and second matings with virgin males; M6, first mating to non-virgin male and remating to virgin male. Different letters indicate significantly different proportions.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2015View details →

Fig. 1 in Antixenotic and allelochemical resistance traits of watermelon against Bactrocera cucurbitae in a hot arid region of India

Fig. 1. Associations of major antixenotic and allelochemical fruit traits of watermelon with resistance to the melon fly evaluated by percentage fruit infestation under different infestation categories.

Fig. 6 in Identification and characterization of three juvenile hormone genes from Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 6. Effects of starvation on the expression of BdJHEH2, BdJHEH3, and BdJH- DK in Bactrocera dorsalis. The 2-d-old 3rd instars were fed or starved for 24 and 48 h before collection. The re-fed larvae were initially starved for 24 h, then refed for an additional 24 h prior to collection. F24: feeding 24 h; F48: feeding 48 h; S24: starvation 24 h; S48: starvation 48 h; RF: re-fed. Different letters indicate significant differences based on 1-way ANOVA followed by an LSD test (P <0.05).

Fig. 3 in Identification and characterization of three juvenile hormone genes from Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 3. Relative expression levels of BdJHEH2, BdJHEH3, and BdJHDK in developmental stages of Bactrocera dorsalis. Expression levels at 19 time points in (A) 3rd instar larvae and pupae and (B) adults were detected by qPCR. 3L1: 1-d-old 3rd instar larvae; P1: 1-d-old pupae. Females or males were collected for qPCR analysis at 1, 4, 7, and 10 d afer eclosion. Different letters indicate significant differences among females or males based on 1-way ANOVA followed by an LSD test (P <0.05). Significant differences between the females and males determined with a t-test are indicated by * (P <0.05).

Fig. 4 in Identification and characterization of three juvenile hormone genes from Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 4. Relative expression levels of BdJHEH2, BdJHEH3, and BdJHDK in tissues of Bactrocera dorsalis. Expression levels in the head (HD), thorax (TH), midgut (MG), Malpighian tubules (MT), and fat body (FB) were detected by qPCR. Different letters indicate significant differences among tissues based on 1-way ANOVA followed by an LSD test (P <0.05).

Fig. 2 in Identification and characterization of three juvenile hormone genes from Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 2. Multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis of JHDK from Bactrocera dorsalis and other insects. (A) Sequence alignment. The sequence of B. dorsalis JHDK is compared to SCP2 from Drosophila melanogaster (Dm), and JHDK from Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Ld), Manduca sexta (Ms), Plutella xylostella (Px), and Spodoptera litura (Sl). The α-helices (H1-8) and EF hands are indicated above the alignment according to results from B. mori (Li et al. 2005).Three predicted GTP-binding motifs (Σ1–3) are labeled with an arrow. (B) Phylogenetic analysis of JHDK homologs. The tree was generated with MEGA 5 using the neighbor-joining method. Nodes with>50% bootstrap values (1,000 replicates) are indicated on branches. GenBank accession numbers of all sequences are listed in the tree.

Fig. 1 in Identification and characterization of three juvenile hormone genes from Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 1. Multiple sequence alignment and phylogenetic analysis of JHEHs from Bactrocera dorsalis and other insects. (A) Sequence alignment. The sequences of B. dorsalis JHEHs are compared with JHEH from Drosophila melanogaster (Dm), Bombyx mori (Bm), Manduca sexta (Ms), and Apis mellifera (Am). The catalytic triad (Asp232, Glu409, and His436), 2 tyrosine residues (Tyr 304 and Tyr380), and HGXP motif are labeled with asterisks. The HGXP motif is underlined. (B) Phylogenetic analysis of JHEH homologs. The tree was generated with MEGA 5 using the neighbor-joining method. Nodes with>50% bootstrap values (1,000 replicates) are indicated on branches. GenBank accession numbers of all sequences are listed in the tree.

Fig. 6 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 6. Four examples of the tissue expression profiling of unknown distinct unigenes (>500 bp) expressed highly in male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis. Relative expression levels were determined as described in Fig. 5.

Fig. 4 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 4. Kyoto encyclopedia of gene and genomes (KEGG) analysis of unigenes expressed highly in male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis. Each category contains more than 1 unigene sequences.

Fig. 2 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 2. Clusters of orthologous groups (COG) functional classification of unigenes expressed highly and specifically in male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis.

Fig. 1 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 1. Statistics of sequences expressed specifically in each analyzed tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis.

Fig. 5 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 5. Six examples of the tissue expression profiling of predicted distinct unigenes (>500 bp) expressed highly in male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis. Relative expression levels were determined by qRT-PCR in head (HE), thorax (TH), abdomen (AB), midgut (MG), fat body (FB), Malpighian tubules (MT), testes (TE), and male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct (MAG) samples from B. dorsalis males. Relative expression levels were calculated based on the value in head, which was ascribed an arbitrary value of 1. Different letters above the bars indicate significant differences based on Tukey's test (P ≤ 0.05).

Fig. 3 in Comparative transcriptome analysis of three Bactrocera dorsalis (Diptera: Tephritidae) organs to identify functional genes in the male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct

Fig. 3. Gene ontology (GO) classification of unigenes expressed highly in male accessory glands and ejaculatory duct tissue of Bactrocera dorsalis.