Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AEM
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Invertebrate Microbiology

Susceptibility of a Field-Derived, Bacillus thuringiensis-Resistant Strain of Diamondback Moth to In Vitro-Activated Cry1Ac Toxin

Ali H. Sayyed, Roxani Gatsi, Thaleia Kouskoura, Denis J. Wright, Neil Crickmore
Ali H. Sayyed
Department of Biological Sciences, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Roxani Gatsi
School of Biological Sciences, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9QG, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Thaleia Kouskoura
School of Biological Sciences, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9QG, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Denis J. Wright
Department of Biological Sciences, Imperial College of Science, Technology, and Medicine, Silwood Park, Ascot, Berkshire SL5 7PY, and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Neil Crickmore
School of Biological Sciences, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, East Sussex BN1 9QG, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4372-4373.2001
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

Resistant and susceptible populations of the diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) were tested with crystalline, solubilized, and partially and fully activated forms of theBacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac δ-endotoxin. Fully activated toxin greatly reduced the resistance ratio (ratio of the 50% lethal concentration for the resistant population to that for the susceptible population) of the resistant population, suggesting that a defect in toxin activation is a major resistance mechanism.

Bacillus thuringiensiscrystalline (Cry) protoxins are solubilized and cleaved by proteinases in the insect midgut to form active toxins which then bind to specific sites on midgut brush border membranes, leading to pore formation and cell lysis (8). Changes that cause disruption of any of these steps could confer resistance. The diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) is the only insect in which resistance to B. thuringiensis has been selected in the field, and the only significant resistance mechanism described forP. xylostella involves the loss of toxin binding, although there is indirect evidence for alternative mechanisms of resistance in some field populations (3, 10, 11). One possible alternative mechanism has been described in a B. thuringiensis-resistant strain of Plodia interpunctella, where the loss of a specific proteinase was believed to be responsible for the observed resistance (6). Reduced production of active toxin has also been proposed as a mechanism of resistance in Heliothis virescens(1). Proteolytic activation of Cry1 protoxins involves the removal of peptide sequences from both N and C termini. The observations that a mutant toxin in which N-terminal cleavage is prevented has reduced toxicity (4) and that N-terminally truncated toxins are toxic to Escherichia coliexpression hosts (4, 9) suggest that N-terminal cleavage may be an important part of the toxic mechanism.

An N-terminally activated Cry1Ac was constructed by deleting the DNA encoding amino acids 2 to 29. This and full-length Cry1Ac were expressed in E. coli or B. thuringiensis and used to bioassay P. xylostella using a leaf dip assay as described previously (7). A Cry1Ac-resistant field population of P. xylostella from Serdang, Malaysia (SERD5; collected in August 1999), was divided into two subpopulations. One subpopulation was left unselected (UNSEL); the other (Cry1Ac-SEL) was reselected with in vitro-activated Cry1Ac from F2to F9. Compared with the susceptible strain (ROTH), UNSEL and Cry1Ac-SEL showed resistance ratios (ratio of the 50% lethal concentration for the resistant population to that for the susceptible population) of 44 and 1,170, respectively, towards crystalline Cry1Ac protoxin synthesized in E. coli (Table1) . To test whether the resistant strain might be defective in toxin solubilization or activation, bioassays were performed using Cry1Ac toxin which had been either solubilized or both solubilized and activated in vitro (Table2). For ROTH, the activity of both forms of the toxin was equivalent to that of the crystalline protoxin. For the SERD5 populations, the activated form of toxin was significantly (P < 0.01) more toxic than the solubilized, but nonactivated, form. In the case of Cry1Ac-SEL, the activated toxin was at least 100-fold more toxic than the solubilized toxin. Activation of Cry1Ac involves removal of peptide fragments from both N and C termini. To test whether removal of the N-terminal peptide is an important step, an engineered protein lacking the N-terminal peptide was used in bioassays. No significant difference was found between the N-terminally truncated and full-length protoxins for any of the insect populations (Table 1), suggesting that N-terminal activation is not a limiting step.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Toxicity of crystalline Cry1Ac for ROTH, UNSEL, and Cry1Ac-SEL populations of P. xylostella

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Toxicity of in vitro solubilized and activated Cry1Ac for ROTH, UNSEL, and Cry1Ac-SEL populations of P. xylostella

The results described above suggest that reduced availability of active toxin is a major factor explaining the increased resistance in the Cry1Ac-SEL subpopulation. The resistance phenotype could be due to a specific defect in the activation step, as has been proposed for a resistant strain of P. interpunctella(6). Alternatively, a mechanism not directly involved in this step could be responsible. Prevention of protoxin activation by degradation or precipitation of the solubilized toxin, for example, could result in the observed phenotype. Both of these possibilities have been observed in other insect larvae (1, 2, 5) and have been put forward as explanations for reduced susceptibility toB. thuringiensis toxins. The SERD5 strain is believed to have initially developed resistance through exposure toB. thuringiensis sprays; the reselected population was maintained through exposure to in vitro-activated Cry1Ac. The high levels of resistance generated through this reselection would argue against a specific defect in the conversion of protoxin to toxin. More likely is a mechanism that reduces the availability of protoxin or toxin for pore formation, the kinetics being such that protoxin is removed more rapidly than it is converted into toxin. The reduced toxicity of the solubilized toxin compared to that of the crystalline form with the SERD5 populations might be an effect of the leaf dip bioassay, with solubilized toxin not being presented to the larvae as efficiently as crystalline toxin is; this effect may not be so significant for the much more susceptible ROTH strain. Alternatively, it might represent the fact that crystalline protoxin is less of a target for resistance. Concomitant solubilization and activation may partially bypass the resistance mechanism.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank Dzolkhifli Omar and Angeliki Martinou for the supply of the field population of P. xylostella from Malaysia.

A.H.S. was supported by the Hundred Scholarship Scheme of the Government of Pakistan. This work was conducted under MAFF licenses PHL 17A/3057(5/1999) and PHL 17B/3479(06/2000) to culture and experiment with the insect populations.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 7 May 2001.
    • Accepted 19 June 2001.
  • Copyright © 2001 American Society for Microbiology

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Forcada C.,
    2. Alcácer E.,
    3. Garcerá M. D.,
    4. Tato A.,
    5. Martinez R.
    Differences in the midgut proteolytic activity of two Heliothis virescens strains, one susceptible and one resistant to Bacillus thuringiensis toxins. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 31 1996 257 272
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  2. 2.↵
    1. Lightwood D. L.,
    2. Ellar D. J.,
    3. Jarrett P.
    Role of proteolysis in determining potency of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac δ-endotoxin. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66 2000 5174 5181
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Liu Y.-B.,
    2. Tabashnik B. E.,
    3. Masson L.,
    4. Escriche B.,
    5. Ferré J.
    Binding and toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis protein Cry1C to susceptible and resistant diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 93 2000 1 6
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Martens J. W. M.,
    2. Visser B.,
    3. Vlak J. M.,
    4. Bosch D.
    Mapping and characterisation of the entomocidal domain of the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab protoxin. Mol. Gen. Genet. 247 1995 482 487
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Milne R. E.,
    2. Pang A. S. D.,
    3. Kaplan H.
    A protein complex from Choristoneura fumiferana gut-juice involved in the precipitation of delta-endotoxin from Bacillus thuringiensis. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 25 1995 1101 1114
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Oppert B.,
    2. Kramer K. J.,
    3. Beeman R. W.,
    4. Johnson D.,
    5. McGaughey W. H.
    Proteinase-mediated insect resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis toxins. J. Biol. Chem. 272 1997 23473 23476
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Sayyed A. H.,
    2. Haward R.,
    3. Herrero S.,
    4. Ferré J.,
    5. Wright D. J.
    Genetic and biochemical approach for characterization of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis toxin Cry1Ac in a field population of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66 2000 1509 1516
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Schnepf E.,
    2. Crickmore N.,
    3. Van Rie J.,
    4. Lereclus D.,
    5. Baum J.,
    6. Feitelson J.,
    7. Zeigler D. R.,
    8. Dean D. H.
    Bacillus thuringiensis and its pesticidal crystal proteins. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev. 62 1998 775 806
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Strizhov N.,
    2. Keller M.,
    3. Konez-Kalman Z.,
    4. Regev A.,
    5. Sneh B.,
    6. Schell J.,
    7. Koncz C.,
    8. Zilberstein A.
    Mapping of the entomocidal fragment of Spodoptera-specific Bacillus thuringiensis toxin Cry1C. Mol. Gen. Genet. 253 1996 11 19
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Wright D. J.,
    2. Iqbal M.,
    3. Granero F.,
    4. Ferré J.
    A change in a single midgut receptor in the diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella) is only in part responsible for field resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki and B. thuringiensis subsp. aizawai. Appl. Environ. Microbiol 63 1997 1814 1819
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Zhao J.-Z.,
    2. Collins H. L.,
    3. Tang J. D.,
    4. Cao J.,
    5. Earle E. D.,
    6. Roush R. T.,
    7. Herrero S.,
    8. Escriche B.,
    9. Ferré J.,
    10. Shelton A. M.
    Development and characterization of diamondback moth resistance to transgenic broccoli expressing high levels of Cry1C. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66 2000 3784 3789
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Susceptibility of a Field-Derived, Bacillus thuringiensis-Resistant Strain of Diamondback Moth to In Vitro-Activated Cry1Ac Toxin
Ali H. Sayyed, Roxani Gatsi, Thaleia Kouskoura, Denis J. Wright, Neil Crickmore
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Sep 2001, 67 (9) 4372-4373; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4372-4373.2001

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Applied and Environmental Microbiology article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Susceptibility of a Field-Derived, Bacillus thuringiensis-Resistant Strain of Diamondback Moth to In Vitro-Activated Cry1Ac Toxin
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Applied and Environmental Microbiology
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Applied and Environmental Microbiology.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Susceptibility of a Field-Derived, Bacillus thuringiensis-Resistant Strain of Diamondback Moth to In Vitro-Activated Cry1Ac Toxin
Ali H. Sayyed, Roxani Gatsi, Thaleia Kouskoura, Denis J. Wright, Neil Crickmore
Applied and Environmental Microbiology Sep 2001, 67 (9) 4372-4373; DOI: 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4372-4373.2001
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Bacillus thuringiensis
Bacterial Proteins
Bacterial Toxins
Endotoxins
Moths

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AEM
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AppEnvMicro

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

 

Print ISSN: 0099-2240; Online ISSN: 1098-5336