It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The screwworm fly, Cochliomyia hominivorax (Coquerel), was successfully eradicated from the United States by the sterile insect technique (SIT). However, recent detection of these flies in the Florida Keys, and increased risk of introductions to the other areas warrant novel tools for management of the flies. Surveillance, a key component of screwworm control programs, utilizes traps baited with rotting liver or a blend of synthetic chemicals such as swormlure-4. In this work, we evaluated the olfactory physiology of the screwworm fly and compared it with the non-obligate ectoparasitic secondary screwworm flies, C. macellaria, that invade necrotic wound and feed on dead tissue. These two species occur in geographically overlapping regions. C. macellaria, along with other blowflies such as the exotic C. megacephala, greatly outnumber C. hominivorax in the existing monitoring traps. Olfactory responses to swormlure-4 constituents between sex and mating status (mated vs unmated) in both species were recorded and compared. Overall, responses measured by the antennograms offered insights into the comparative olfactory physiology of the two fly species. We also present detailed analyses of the antennal transcriptome by RNA-Sequencing that reveal significant differences between male and female screwworm flies. The differential expression patterns were confirmed by quantitative PCR. Taken together, this integrated study provides insights into the physiological and molecular correlates of the screwworm’s attraction to wounds, and identifies molecular targets that will aid in the development of odorant-based fly management strategies.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details


1 University of Kentucky, Department of Entomology, Lexington, USA (GRID:grid.266539.d) (ISNI:0000 0004 1936 8438)
2 USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory and Veterinary Pest Genomics Center, Screwworm Research Site, Pacora, Panama (GRID:grid.266539.d)
3 North Carolina State University, Department of Entomology and Plant Pathology, Raleigh, USA (GRID:grid.40803.3f) (ISNI:0000 0001 2173 6074)
4 USDA, Agricultural Research Service, Knipling-Bushland U.S. Livestock Insects Research Laboratory and Veterinary Pest Genomics Center, Kerrville, USA (GRID:grid.463419.d) (ISNI:0000 0001 0946 3608)