Find research datasets worth reusing

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2022View details →

Quality control traceability during the packing and release process of Ceratitis capitata for Sterile Insect Technique

Abstract In programs applying the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT), the quality of insects deployed in the field determines the success in preventing, suppressing, containing, or eradicating the pest population. In the fruit fly emergence and release facility (ERF) of the Moscamed Program in Mexico, irradiated pupae of Ceratitis capitata are packed in Mexico-type towers, and key adult quality parameters, such as emergence, fliers, and survival, are determined throughout the packing, handling and release process. However, different methodologies are used to estimate the percentage of fliers in the different stages of the process, raising doubts of whether observed differences are due to the effect of each stage or to the methodology used. With this in mind, we developed an alternative called “Adult Flier device” (= AF-device) to evaluate the adult flier parameter following a critical evaluation path of five steps: 1) upon arrival at ERF, 2) post-packing, 3) post-holding, 4) post-chilling, and 5) post-release, where adult fliers and survival under stress were evaluated. We also compared the current methodologies for the estimation of "absolute fliers" available in different operating manuals. Our results suggest that the AF-device allows reliable traceability of sterile insect quality parameters throughout the packing and release process, since no significant differences were observed with the control treatments. In the chilling stage, the five methodologies tested were equivalent, but the AF-device was less time-consuming and required less manpower and biological material than the other methodological options. Our results demonstrate that the use of the AF-device can be a feasible, versatile, innovative, and efficient alternative to evaluate quality control parameters throughout the process of packing and releasing sterile insects, providing reliable results in a timely manner with less hand labor using minimal biological material.

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0008 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0008 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0004 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0004 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0001 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0001 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0003 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0003 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0002 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0002 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0007 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0007 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0009 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0009 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0006 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0006 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hidAla5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

(10)-Strobl2022A-DS0005 – Ceratitis capitata TREhs43-hid^Ala5_F1m2 long-term live imaging dataset of embryonic development acquired with light sheet fluorescence microscopy

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →

Figure 3 in Spatial distribution of Ceratitis capitata in guava orchards and influences from orchard management

Figure 3. Estimates of the parameters of the regression analysis by the Taylor power model, adjusted by the F test to evaluate the spatial distribution and the t-test to compare the hypotheses of the aggregation index of Ceratitis capitata in guava orchards, Ivinhema-MS. Tests: ANOVA (F = 304.05; p <0.001; g.l = 20); t (5.17; p <0.001) for the Alpha hypothesis (h0: a = 1 vs h1 a ≠ 1, where: Alpha (a <0, a = 0 and a>0) and; t (17.44; p <0.001) for the Beta hypothesis (h0: b = 1 vs h1: b ≠ 1), where: Beta (b <1, b = 1 and b> 1).

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →

Figure 2 in Spatial distribution of Ceratitis capitata in guava orchards and influences from orchard management

Figure 2. Number of fruit fly/trap/day (FTD) of Ceratitis capitata and range of negative binomial thresholds (Bn) with other distributions, establishing the levels of safety and control activities for the Mediterranean fly in three guava orchards, Ivinhema, MS, Brazil.

opencc-by-4.0Dec 2022View details →

Figure 1 in Oviposition performance of tephritid polyphagous Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata during three periods of exposure to fruit

Figure 1. Oviposition behaviour of A. fraterculus and C. capitata during three infestation periods of fruit.

Fig. 1 in Oviposition of Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in citrus fruits, and development in relation to maturity of orange fruits

Fig. 1. Frequency of oviposition by females of Anastrepha fraterculus (A) and Ceratitis capitata (B) when provided with oranges as an oviposition substrate.

opencc-by-4.0Sep 2017View details →

Fig. 1 in Occurrence of Anastrepha fraterculus and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) in organically grown Rubus (Rosales: Rosaceae), in two contrasting environments of northwestern Argentina

Fig. 1. Precipitation (P), evapotranspiration (ET), and hydric balance (HB = P − ET) near Monte Grande (27.0000°S, 65.4000°W; 350 m altitude; Tucumán, Argentina) in 2013 (A) and 2014 (B).

Fig. 2 in Toxicity of malathion and spinosad to Bactrocera zonata and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 2. Mortality (± SE) of Ceratitis capitata (Medfly) and Bactrocera zonata (PFF) following 2 h of exposure to glass slides with 3 µL drops of Buminal bait containing various doses (ppm) of malathion 1,040 (A) and of hydrolyzed yeast bait containing various doses of malathion 50 (B).

Fig. 4 in Toxicity of malathion and spinosad to Bactrocera zonata and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 4. Mortality (± SE) and consumption (drops per fly; ± SE) of 3 µL drops of Success bait (1% GF-120 with 10% sucrose) containing various doses of spinosad on glass slides among Bactrocera zonata following 2 h of exposure.

Fig. 1 in Toxicity of malathion and spinosad to Bactrocera zonata and Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 1. Mean (± SE) consumption rate (drops per fly) of Bactrocera zonata exposed to drops of 10% sucrose with Buminal (A); GF-120 (B); and hydrolyzed yeast (C). The flies had access to the drops for 2 h and consumption was evaluated by observation. Statistical analysis was performed separately for each bait. Means labeled with different letters are significantly different from each an- other (Tukey HSD test, P = 0.05).

opencc-by-4.0Mar 2017View details →

Fig. 2. Chromatograph comparing original and redesigned primers for Ccmic3 in Inheritance of fifeen microsatellite loci in Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae)

Fig. 2. Chromatograph comparing original and redesigned primers for Ccmic3 on sample A1-F1-07, Family A1. Both reactions were run simultaneously on the same fragment analysis plate using the same PCR conditions, DNA concentrations, and dilution factor. a) Chromatograph of progeny exhibiting an allele call of 74/74. Parents are 74/76 and 76/76. The observed 76 bp peak was considered to be weak. Cloning and sequencing confirmed the existence of this 76 bp fragment. b) Chromatograph of the same progeny as in Fig. 2a now exhibiting an allele call of 72/74 afer primer modification. Parents are now 72/74 and 74/74. The observed 74 bp peak is more pronounced compared to the previous 76 bp call. The intensity of the 74 bp peak also increased while the other 3 visible peaks decreased. This suggests an increase in adenylation has occurred.