Populational survey of arthropods on transgenic common bean expressing the rep gene from Bean golden mosaic virus

Figures & data

Table 1. Abundance of specimens (Genus/species), by order and family, sampled in the plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM) by year (2004, 2005 and 2006) and respective trophic guilds

Taxon (order: family: Genus/species)	Primary guild	2004		2005		2006		Frequency of capture^1 (%)
INSECTA		GM	NGM	GM	NGM	GM	NGM
Hemiptera
Aleyrodidae: Bemisia tabaci (total)	Herbivore	905	976	1367	1388	1950	2285	29.53
Aleyrodidae: Bemisia tabaci (adults)	Herbivore	103	120	386	403	262	299	31.71
Aleyrodidae: Bemisia tabaci (nymphs)	Herbivore	73	99	367	443	215	205	40.66
Aleyrodidae: Bemisia tabaci (eggs)	Herbivore	729	757	614	542	1473	1781	17.83
Alydidae: Neomegalotomus parvus	Herbivore	0	0	1	5	10	4	3.08
Aphilididae: Aphis spp.	Herbivore	53	57	16	16	153	118	5.00
Cicadellidae: Empoasca kraemeri	Herbivore	7	12	115	93	209	337	12.71
Other Cicadellidae	Herbivore	68	64	18	16	139	164	27.82
Lygaeidae: Geocoris sp.	Predator	0	1	3	3	1	0	1.00
Pentatomidae: Acrosternum, Edessa, Euschistus, Nezara and Piezodorus	Herbivore	33	70	38	49	90	109	25.00
Nabidae: Tropiconabis sp.	Herbivore	2	5	1	1	0	0	1.88
Reduviidae: Zellus sp.	Predator	0	0	1	0	0	0	0.13
Coleoptera
Carabidae: Callida sp.	Predator	0	1	0	0	3	1	0.83
Carabidae: Lebia sp.	Predator	0	0	1	6	4	10	3.85
Chrysomelidae: Cerotoma arcuata	Herbivore	364	547	41	42	305	288	58.52
Chrysomelidae: Diabrotica speciosa	Herbivore	94	136	101	124	175	187	53.56
Chrysomelidae: Colaspis spp.	Herbivore	0	0	0	0	24	15	9.06
Other Chrysomelidae	Herbivore	0	0	19	13	24	15	3.13
Coccinelidae	Predator	2	3	3	7	0	0	1.88
Lagriidae: Lagria villosa	Detritivore	31	32	1	2	0	0	5.21
Lepidoptera
Crambidae, Noctuidae, Hesperiidae	Herbivore	35	50	34	17	37	17	3.54
Thysanoptera
Thripidae	Herbivore	130	106	588	449	1253	1140	32.53
Diptera
Agromyzidae: Liriomyza huidobrensis	Herbivore	43	47	156	121	72	74	8.36
Other Diptera	Herbivore	7	8	1	2	0	0	2.59
Hymenoptera
Microhimenoptera	Parasitoid	0	0	3	3	0	0	2.00
Vespidae	Flower-visiting	5	4	1	1	0	0	1.00
Neuroptera
Chrysopidae	Predator	0	0	2	0	0	0	0.83
ARACNIDA
Araneae	Predator	44	56	63	71	149	149	41.15
Acari	Herbivore	22	25	305	175	663	783	11.30
Total		1845	2200	2879	2604	5237	5681
Total per year		4045		5483		10918

1- Frequency of capture was determined by the formula: F(%) = number of samples with the species/ total number of samples x 100.

Table 2. Mean number of the most frequent species sampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM) in the three-year experiment

Genus/species	2004		2005		2006
	GM	NGM	GM	NGM	GM	NGM
Hemiptera
Aleyrodidae: Bemisia tabaci	14.33a	15.42a	19.63a	19.71a	12.18a	14.28a
Cicadellidae: Empoasca kraemeri	0.05a	0.08a	1.52a	1.25a	1.31a	2.11a
Other Cicadellidae	0.52a	0.49a	0.18a	0.16a	0.87a	1.02a
Pentatomidae: Piezodorus guildinii	0.25b	0.53a	0.35a	0.48a	0.56a	0.68a
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae: Cerotoma arcuata	2.60b	3.91a	0.41a	0.42a	1.90a	1.80a
Chrysomelidae: Diabrotica speciosa	0.67a	0.97a	1.01a	1.24a	1.09a	1.16a
Thysanoptera
Thripidae:	2.06a	1.65a	9.96a	7.48b	7.07a	6.53a
ARACNIDA
Araneae	0.34a	0.43a	0.63a	0.71a	0.93a	0.93a
Acari	0.36a	0.41a	5.08a	2.92a	8.28a	9.79a

Different letters indicate that treatments are significantly different per year (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Table 3. Stepwise selection summary for the ordination procedure to select arthropod species that would be included in the canonical variate analysis for maximum discrimination between treatments

Step	Variables entered	Variables removed	Partial R-Square	F Value	Pr > F	Wilks’ Lambda	Pr < Lambda	Average Squared Canonical Correlation	Pr > ASCC
1	Cerotoma arcuata	–	0.0070	5.61	0.0181	0.9930	0.0181	0.00698	0.0181
2	Pentatomidae	–	0.0043	3.41	0.0653	0.9888	0.0112	0.01121	0.0112
3	Bemisia tabaci (adults)	–	0.0033	2.67	0.1028	0.9855	0.0087	0.01451	0.0087
4	Empoasca kraemeri	–	0.0035	2.76	0.0973	0.9821	0.0061	0.01791	0.0061
5	Diabrotica speciosa	–	0.0038	3.06	0.0808	0.9783	0.0037	0.02168	0.0037

Table 4. Impact of the main treatments on arthropod assemblages in three years of experiments

Variables	CAN1
Cerotoma arcuata	0.58
Diabrotica speciosa	0.43
Bemisia tabaci (adults)	0.58
Empoasca kraemeri	-0.46
Pentatomidae	0.53
F [df (numerator; denominator) 5794]	3.52
P	0.0037
Squared canonical correlation	0.022

Canonical axes and their canonical loadings (total canonical structure) of genetically modified common bean for resistance to golden mosaic virus.

Figure 1. Mean number of adults of Cerotoma arcuata sampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM), in 2 m of row, in eight sampling dates in 2004 (A), 2005 (B), and 2006 (C). Asterisk in the specific sample date indicates that treatments are significantly different (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Figure 2. Mean number of adults of Bemisia tabacisampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM), in 2 m of row, in eight sampling dates in 2004 (A), 2005 (B), and 2006 (C). Asterisk in the specific sample date indicates that treatments are significantly different (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Figure 3. Mean number of nymphs and adults of Pentatomidae sampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM), in 2 m of row, in eight sampling dates in 2004 (A), 2005 (B), and 2006 (C). Asterisk in the specific sample date indicates that treatments are significantly different (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Figure 4. Mean number of nymphs and adults of Emposca kraemeri sampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM), in 2 m of row, in eight sampling dates in 2004 (A), 2005 (B), and 2006 (C). Asterisk in the specific sample date indicates that treatments are significantly different (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Figure 5. Mean number of adults of Diabrotica speciosa sampled in plant canopy of genetically modified (GM) and non-genetically modified common bean plants (NGM), in 2 m of row, in eight sampling dates in 2004 (A), 2005 (B), and 2006 (C). Asterisk in the specific sample date indicates that treatments are significantly different (Tukey’s test of transformed data using $\sqrt{x+1}$; P < 0.05).

Table 5. Summary of factorial analysis for Cerotoma arcuata, Diabrotica speciosa, Bemisia tabaci, Empoasca kraemeri, and Pentatomidae assemblages sampled in plant canopy of common bean lines (genetically modified and non-genetically modified) for three consecutive years (2004 to 2006) and through eight weekly sampling dates by year

Source	Cerotoma arcuata		Diabrotica speciosa		Bemisia tabaci		Empoasca kraemeri		Pentatomidae
	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p	F	p
Common bean line	7.53	0.0062	4.25	0.0396	0.74	0.3892	1.33	0.2500	7.41	0.0066
year	186.23	< 0.0001	10.91	< 0.0001	125.30	< 0.0001	41.21	< 0.0001	14.27	< 0.0001
Common bean line*year	11.88	< 0.0001	0.72	0.4890	0.07	0.9279	1.25	0.2859	1.06	0.3481
date	44.45	< 0.0001	22.21	< 0.0001	71.26	< 0.0001	15.04	< 0.0001	61.55	< 0.0001
Common bean line *date	1.45	0.1819	1.64	0.1202	0.77	0.6087	0.58	0.7703	2.29	0.0258
year*date	20.97	< 0.0001	10.22	< 0.0001	20.20	< 0.0001	12.60	< 0.0001	14.50	< 0.0001
Common bean line *year*date	1.60	0.0734	1.29	0.2083	0.59	0.8720	1.03	0.4208	1.16	0.3049
CV (%)	26.68		25.57		33.84		19.96		21.82

CV = Coefficient of variation of transformed data (%).

Table 6. Agrochemicals used in the field experiments

Date	Chemical product	Dose (g or mL/ha	Objective
02/04/04; 07/04/04; 07/03/05; 11/03/05; 18/03/05	Chlorpyrifos 480 BR	500	Chrysomelidae control
19/05/04	Monocrotophos	750	Stinkbug control
25/04/06	Imidacloprid + Betacyfluthrin	500	Stinkbug control
05/03/04	Trifloxistrobin + Cyproconazole	400	Disease control
04/08/05; 04/14/05	Carbendazim + Triphenyltin hydroxid	400 + 500	Disease control

Marshall A. Existing agbiotech traits continue global march. Nat Biotechnol 2012; 30:207; http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2154; PMID: 22398607

 PubMedGoogle Scholar