02351nas a2200181   4500008004500000020001400045245017300059210006900232260001300301300001400314490000800328520159600336653003101932100002101963700002701984700002302011856013502034       2008                        Engldsh    a0022-049300aGenetic profiling to determine potential origins of boll weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) captured in a Texas eradication zone: endemicity, immigration, or sabotage?0 aGenetic profiling to determine potential origins of boll weevils  cDecember  a1729-17360 v1013 aThirty-seven boll weevils, Anthonomus grandis grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), were captured in pheromone traps near Lubbock, TX, in the Southern High Plains/Caprock eradication zone during August-October 2006. No boll weevils had been captured in this zone or neighboring zones to the north earlier in the year, and only very low numbers had been captured in neighboring zones to the south and east. Therefore, the captures near Lubbock were unexpected. Five of the weevils captured the last week of August were preserved and genotyped at 10 microsatellite loci for comparison with a database of genotypes for 22 boll weevil populations sampled from eight U.S. states and four locations in Mexico. The Lubbock population itself is an unlikely source, suggesting that the captured weevils probably did not originate from a low-level endemic population. Populations from eastern states, Mexico, and Big Spring, TX, can be confidently excluded as potential source regions. Although the Weslaco and Kingsville, TX, areas cannot be statistically excluded, they are unlikely sources. The most likely sources are nearby areas inNewMexico, TX, or southwest Oklahoma, or from areas of eastern Texas represented by Waxahachie and El Campo populations. Together, genetic and circumstantial evidence suggest either that the trapped boll weevils are the offspring of a lone mated female that immigrated from eastern Texas earlier in thesummeror that weevils originally captured near Waxahachie but now long-dead were planted in the traps by a disgruntled employee of the eradication program.10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aKim, Kyung, Seok1 aSappington, Thomas, W.1 aAllen, Charles, T.  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/genetic-profiling-determine-potential-origins-boll-weevils-coleoptera-curculionidae-captured-texas-e02594nas a2200205   4500008004100000020001400041245013400055210006900189260001000258300001200268490000800280520181500288653003102103100002102134700002002155700002702175700002402202700002702226856013502253       2009                        eng d  a0022-049300aMolecular diagnostic for boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) based on amplification of three species-specific microsatellites0 aMolecular diagnostic for boll weevil Coleoptera Curculionidae ba  cApril  a759-7660 v1023 aThe boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), is a serious pest of cultivated cotton, Gossypium hirsutum, L., in the Americas, and reinfestation of zones from which they have been eradicated is of perpetual concerti. Extensive arrays of pheromone traps monitor for reintroductions, but occasionally the traps collect nontarget weevils that can be misidentified by scouts. For example, the congeneric pepper weevil, Anthonomus eugenii Cano, and other superficially similar weevils are attracted to components of the boll weevil lure or trap color. Although morphologically distinguish able by trained personnel, the potential for misidentification is compounded when captured weevils are dismembered or partially consumed by ants or ground beetles that sometimes feed on them in the traps. Because misidentification can have expensive consequences, a molecular diagnostic tool would be of great value to eradication managers. We demonstrate that a cocktail of three primer pairs in a single polymerase chain reaction (PCR) amplify species-specific microsatellites that unambiguously distinguish the boll weevil from three other weevil species tested, including pepper we evil; cranberry weevil, Anthonomus eugenii musculus Say; and pecan weevil, Curculio caryae Horn. However, it does not distinguish the boll weevil from the subspecific "thurberia" weevil. A universal internal transcribed spacer primer pair included in the cocktail cross-amplifies DNA from all species, serving as a positive control. Furthermore, the diagnostic primers amplified the target microsatellites from various boll weevil adult body parts, indicating that the PCR technology using the primer cocktail is sensitive enough to positively identify a boll weevil even when the body is partly degraded.10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aKim, Kyung, Seok1 aSzendre, Zsofia1 aRodriguez-Saona, Cesar1 aMulder, Phillip, C.1 aSappington, Thomas, W.  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/molecular-diagnostic-boll-weevil-coleoptera-curculionidae-based-amplification-three-species-specific02699nas a2200229   4500008004100000020001400041245010900055210006900164260001300233300001200246490000700258520189500265653003102160100002502191700002402216700001902240700002302259700002102282700001902303700002202322856012502344       2007                        eng d  a1672-960900aSurvival of boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) adults after feeding on pollens from various sources0 aSurvival of boll weevil Coleoptera Curculionidae adults after fe  cDecember  a503-5100 v143 aThe survival of overwintering boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis grandis (Boheman), adults on non-cotton hosts in the Lower Rio Grande Valley (LRGV) of Texas was examined from 2001 to 2006. The success of the Boll Weevil Eradication Program, which was re-introduced into the LRGV in 2005, depends on controlling overwintering boll weevil populations. Laboratory studies were conducted using boll weevil adults that were captured in pheromone traps from September through March. The number of adults captured per trap declined significantly in the field from fall to the beginning of spring (3.5-7.0-fold). The proportion of trapped males and females did not differ significantly. The mean weight of boll weevil adults captured in September was 13.3 mg, while those of captured adults from November to February were significantly lower and ranged from 6.7 to 7.8 mg. Our results show that boll weevil adults can feed on different plant pollens. The highest longevity occurred when adults were fed almond pollen or mixed pollens (72.6 days and 69.2 days, respectively) and the lowest when they fed on citrus pollen or a non-food source (9.7 days or 7.4 days, respectively). The highest adult survival occurred on almond and mixed pollens [88.0%-97. 6% after 1st feeding period (10 days), 78.0%-90.8% after 3rd feeding period (10 days), 55. 0%-83.6% after 5th feeding period (10 days), and 15.2%-32.4% after 10th feeding period (10 days)). The lowest adult survival occurred on citrus pollen [52.0%-56.0% after 1st feeding period (10 days), 13.3% after 3rd and 5th feeding periods (10 days), and 0 after 6th feeding period (10 days)]. Pollen feeding is not a behavior restricted to adult boll weevils of a specific sex or physiological state. Understanding how boll weevil adults survive in the absence of cotton is important to ensure ultimate success of eradicating this pest in the subtropics.10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aGreenberg, Shoil, M.1 aJones, Gretchen, D.1 aEischen, Frank1 aColeman, Randy, J.1 aAdamczyk, J., J.1 aLiu, Tong-Xian1 aSetamou, Mamoudou  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/survival-boll-weevil-coleoptera-curculionidae-adults-after-feeding-pollens-various-sources02371nas a2200217   4500008004500000020001400045245011000059210006900169260001300238300001400251490000700265520160000272653002301872653003101895100002201926700002301948700002101971700001601992700001602008856012902024       2008                        Engldsh    a0046-225X00aEffects of photoperiod on boll weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) development, survival, and reproduction0 aEffects of photoperiod on boll weevil Coleoptera Curculionidae d  cDecember  a1396-14020 v373 aEffects of photoperiod on development, survival, feeding and oviposition of boll weevils, Anthonomus grandis grandis Boheman, were assessed under five different photophases (24, 14,12, 10, and 0 h) at a constant 27 [degree]C temperature and 65% RH in the laboratory. Analyses of our results detected positive relationships between photoperiod and puncturing (mean numbers of oviposition and feeding punctures per day), and oviposition (oviposition punctures/oviposition+feeding punctures) activities, and the proportion of squares attacked by boll weevil females. When boll weevil females developed in light: darkness cycles, they produced a significantly higher percentage of eggs developing to adulthood than those developed in 24-h light or dark conditions. In long photoperiod (24:0 and 14:10 h), the number of female progeny),vas significantly higher and their development time was significantly shorter than those developed in short photoperiod (0:24 and 10:14 h). Lifetime oviposition was significantly highest at 12- and 14-h photophase, lowest at 0- and 10-h photophase, and intermediate at 24 h of light. Life table calculations indicated that boll weevil populations developed in a photoperiod of 14:10 and 12:12 (L: D) h will increase an average of two-fold each generation (Ro) compared with boll weevils developed in 24:0- and 10:14-h photoperiods and 15-fold compared with those at 0:24 h. Knowledge of the photoperiod-dependent population growth potential is critical for understanding population dynamics to better develop sampling protocols and timing insecticide applications.10aAnthonomus grandis10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aGreenberg, S., M.1 aSappington, T., W.1 aAdamczyk, J., J.1 aLiu, T., X.1 aSetamou, M.  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/effects-photoperiod-boll-weevil-coleoptera-curculionidae-development-survival-and-reproduction02782nas a2200241   4500008004100000020001400041245013300055210006900188260001100257300001200268490000700280520193300287653003102220100002202251700001802273700002102291700001602312700002202328700002002350700001602370700001902386856013502405       2009                        eng d  a1672-960900aReproductive potential of field-collected overwintering boll weevils (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) fed on pollen in the laboratory0 aReproductive potential of fieldcollected overwintering boll weev  cAugust  a321-3270 v163 aThe reproductive potential of overwintering boll weevil, Anthonomus grandis grandis (Boheman), females collected from pheromone traps in September, November and January, fed for 1, 3, and 5 weeks on plant pollens, and then provided cotton squares, was determined in the laboratory at 27 [plus or minus] 1[degree]C, 65% RH, and a photoperiod 13 : 11 (L : D) h. Duration of pollen feeding by overwintering boll weevils did not significantly influence egg and feeding punctures, or puncture ratios (egg to total punctures) for any of the three months of parent weevil collections when provided cotton squares on a daily basis. However, punctures and puncture ratios are significantly different when comparing mean data between months of boll weevil collections. When boll weevils were provided with cotton squares daily, the pre-ovipositional periods of female parents captured in September, November and January were 5, 9 and 14 days, respectively. The rate of eggs by females was significantly lower during November and January than September. Female parents collected in September produced a significantly higher percentage of eggs yielding adult progeny than those collected in November and January. Life table parameters indicated that net reproductive rate (Ro) of boll weevil females collected in September was 1.2-fold higher than those collected in November and 10.7-fold higher than those collected in January. Except for testes size, no differences in male reproductive parameters were observed during the cotton-free period compared with males captured during mid-cotton (June). The number of oocytes in the ovarioles and the number of oocytes containing yolk were significantly lower during September, November and January compared with June. The reproductive potential of overwintering boll weevil females collected in different months is an important consideration in determining the success of any control strategy.10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aGreenberg, S., M.1 aJones, G., D.1 aAdamczyk, J., J.1 aEischen, F.1 aArmstrong, J., S.1 aColeman, R., J.1 aSetamou, M.1 aLiu, Tong-Xian  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/reproductive-potential-field-collected-overwintering-boll-weevils-coleoptera-curculionidae-fed-polle02622nas a2200229   4500008004100000020002500041245016200066210006900228260000800297300001200305490000800317520174400325653003102069100002302100700002102123700001402144700002302158700002502181700002402206700002702230856013502257       2011                        eng d  a0013-8746; 1938-290100aTemporal Changes in Genetic Variation of Boll Weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Populations, and Implications for Population Assignment in Eradication Zones0 aTemporal Changes in Genetic Variation of Boll Weevil Coleoptera   cJul  a816-8250 v1043 aAn existing microsatellite genotype database has been used for several years in population genetic assignment analyses of boll weevils, Anthonomus grandis grandis Boheman (Coleoptera: Curculionidae), captured in eradication zones. It is important to update it in case of changes in genotype frequency at any of the locations over time. Such changes at neutral loci could be caused by drift, immigration, or population bottlenecks. We examined allele frequency distribution for 10 microsatellite loci to determine genetic differentiation among 10 boll weevil populations sampled from Texas and Mexico in 2009. In addition, temporal changes in genetic composition were examined in the eight populations for which samples were available from previous years. Substantial levels of spatial genetic structure were observed, with the 10 populations clustering as four major groups. Pairwise FST estimates in 2009 samples ranged from 0.001 (College Station-Cameron) to 0.492 (College Station-Ojinaga). There was little change in genetic profiles over time at four of the eight locations. Thus, for those four locations, genotype and allele frequency data can be pooled over the two sample dates, which will provide greater statistical power in future population assignment tests. However, genetic profiles changed substantially at Ojinaga, and to a lesser extent at Uvalde, Cameron, and Rosales, so the 2009 genotype data should be substituted in future analyses. Finally, populations from two new locations, Brownsville and Lockhart, TX, were sampled, genotyped, and added to the database. The addition of Lockhart is particularly important given its surprisingly high differentiation from the relatively nearby populations of Cameron and Uvalde.10aAnthonomus grandis grandis1 aChoi, Sung, Kyoung1 aKim, Kyung, Seok1 aLee, Hang1 aAdamczyk, John, J.1 aGreenberg, Shoil, M.1 aWestbrook, John, K.1 aSappington, Thomas, W.  uhttps://weevil.myspecies.info/temporal-changes-genetic-variation-boll-weevil-coleoptera-curculionidae-populations-and-implications