Stop Insect Sex

Lauren Admire

Rawrchiteuthis
Aug 8, 2008
685
0
0
Stop Insect Sex

No, it's not some bizarre insect-themed rally slogan, but a new way to stop bugs from breeding.

Scientists at Kansas State University have identified a neuropeptide, natalisin, that controls insects ability to mate. It's found in arthropods and insects and is used to chemically relay messages throughout the body. "Natalisin is unique to insects and arthropods and has evolved with them," said Yoonseong Park, one of the researchers in the study. "It appears to be related to a neuropeptide called tachykinin that is in mammals and invertebrates. While tachykinin is involved with various biological processes, including the control of blood flow in mammals, natalisin is linked to reproductive function and mating behavior in insects and arthropods."

The study consisted of scientists from the Institute of Science and Technology in South Korea; the Slovak Academy of Sciences in Slovakia; Korea University in South Korea; and Kansas State University. The international team studied fruit flies, red flour beetles and silk moths in all four stages of their life development to see what natalisin controlled. Using a process called RNA interference, scientists blocked or silenced natalisin, which reduced the insects' interest in mating and interfered with their ability to physically reproduce.

"For example, we saw that knocking out the natalisin in the fruit fly makes them unable to mate," said Park. "The female is too busy grooming her body for the male to approach her. The male doesn't send a strong enough signal to the female to get her attention. We're not sure if that's because the male can't really smell her or because he is not developed enough to signal her."

Identification of the neuropeptide will hopefully lead to new sources of pest control that are environmentally-safe. Since natalisin is only found insects, it wouldn't be harmful to humans or other animals. Hm, I wonder what bees would have to say about that.

Source: Kansas State [http://www.k-state.edu/media/newsreleases/aug13/natalisin82613.html]

Permalink
 

Voulan

New member
Jul 18, 2011
1,258
0
0
Hey, as long as they develop some way of doing the same thing to spiders, I'm all for it.
 

s_h_a_d_o

Mr Propellerhead
Jun 15, 2010
134
0
0
Lauren Admire said:
Identification of the neuropeptide will hopefully lead to new sources of pest control that are environmentally-safe. Since natalisin is only found insects, it wouldn't be harmful to humans or other animals.
Environmentally-safe? Debatable.
Ecologically-safe? Not in the slightest.
 

lacktheknack

Je suis joined jewels.
Jan 19, 2009
19,316
0
0
Well, that's not even remotely terrifying. I guess it won't affect bees (the drones and queen never even leave the hive, if I remember right), but still, there's no way this can go wrong, right?
 

Charli

New member
Nov 23, 2008
3,445
0
0
Yeee no. Unless a race of flesh eating zombie bugs are next up on our list of world pandemics, I don't advocate screwing about with this.

Good to have on hand incase of flesh eating zombie bugs. But not ...so great for much else.
 

Veloxe

New member
Oct 5, 2010
491
0
0
I don't see how this could possibly go wrong. Except, you know, in the obvious ways.
 

Deathfish15

New member
Nov 7, 2006
579
0
0
I see a few issues with this. The first issue is highlighted by the last sentence in the article: "what about the bees?". To image that this chemical exists in all insects, bees included, would mean that spraying it near a crop field could cause severe issues with bee populations within the area. Bees are a major source of cross pollination for flowers, plants, and tress alike. To harm their breeding methods is to essentially destroy a whole ecosystem within an area. Are we prepared for such cataclysmic results?


The additional thing to consider would be evolution. I'm a religious person and yet I cannot dispute that evolution exists; it's a proven fact of life here on Earth. Right now there are roughly 2-5 different virus types/breeds in the US that are highly resistant against many of our current vaccines.....because they have evolved to a point to be immune to effects of such.

Now let's apply this same viral evolution concept mentioned above to insects (some having mere day length life spans). Also apply the known that "nothing is 100%" to the hypothesis that not all insects will be effected by this chemical induction. In as little as a few weeks we could see entire species of insect immune to the chemicals. But, what if this is insect that gets eaten, is considered a "pest", and isn't the one that eats the other insects. What if -as another theory- the predator insects are hit more heavily than the prey insects, causing a complete imbalance to the system in which they reside? The prey insects becoming top-dog in their area, also causing devastation to crops, plants, property, and the like.


Call me paranoid. Call me crazy. But.... also call me a sound mind, as those who don't contemplate the implications of their actions are truly the crazy ones.



Captcha: MGM Grand Las Vegas
 

CardinalPiggles

New member
Jun 24, 2010
3,226
0
0
Man I wish we could get rid of the flies and moths alike, but as mentioned it's not a good idea to fuck with nature.

Then again, this seems like it reduces, not stops their reproduction. So if we could regulate their breeding it might work out ok.
 

GenGenners

New member
Jul 25, 2012
344
0
0
CardinalPiggles said:
Man I wish we could get rid of the flies and moths alike, but as mentioned it's not a good idea to fuck with nature.

Then again, this seems like it reduces, not stops their reproduction. So if we could regulate their breeding it might work out ok.
Am I the only one here thinking of the Genophage from Mass Effect after reading this post?
 

Daaaah Whoosh

New member
Jun 23, 2010
1,041
0
0
GenGenners said:
CardinalPiggles said:
Man I wish we could get rid of the flies and moths alike, but as mentioned it's not a good idea to fuck with nature.

Then again, this seems like it reduces, not stops their reproduction. So if we could regulate their breeding it might work out ok.
Am I the only one here thinking of the Genophage from Mass Effect after reading this post?
I thought of the genophage too, but this way is a lot better, since it doesn't lead to millions of stillbirths. It also reminds me of the reproduction blockers in Half-Life 2.
 

Camaranth

New member
Feb 4, 2011
395
0
0
Okay I really am all for scientific advancement and knowledge for the sake of knowledge. but guys please step away from the science.

If one small area test goes wrong then a whole lotta manure is gonna hit the wind turbine.

The protests to this line of study aren't remote possibilities like the LHC creating a black-hole or the atom bomb burning the atmosphere.

GenGenners said:
CardinalPiggles said:
Man I wish we could get rid of the flies and moths alike, but as mentioned it's not a good idea to fuck with nature.

Then again, this seems like it reduces, not stops their reproduction. So if we could regulate their breeding it might work out ok.
Am I the only one here thinking of the Genophage from Mass Effect after reading this post?
Nope.
 

SadisticFire

New member
Oct 1, 2012
338
0
0
Ah yes. Because if we remove something from the food web it'll just rehook itself? Not a mass die out right? Okay mr. scientist.(Or Mrs.)
I don't think this should've been made. It seems ecologically damaging beyond a scale the average citizen is aware of. And assuming stereotypes are correct, farmers definitely wouldn't know it.(But I'd imagine they'd be the first to say "NOPE" having education in agriculture..maybe?). Dunno, don't introduce it to the private sector please.
 

Skops

New member
Mar 9, 2010
820
0
0
I want to say "Don't fuck with Nature" but for the 3rd time this week I've been freaked out by an earwig in my bathroom. Genocide earwigs, I would love it.
 

emeraldrafael

New member
Jul 17, 2010
8,589
0
0
Honestly... I think we as humans are going too far wth this one. I know flies can be an annoyance, I know misquitos kill with malaria and all that, but these things have been here for years and are here to serve a purpose and we're just getting in the way of it. I can see why this would be good, but ultimately, I dont think its a good idea. Even if it doesnt hurt bees, they're ot the only ones that pollinate, and insects like flies are ultimately good for waste keeping.
 

Tanakh

New member
Jul 8, 2011
1,512
0
0
Red X said:
Well, that's not even remotely terrifying. I guess it won't affect bees (the drones and queen never even leave the hive, if I remember right), but still, there's no way this can go wrong, right?
Several things:

- They do leave the hive, the drones do it everyday (depending on which part of it's life cycle they are in) and the queen at least once in her life, but quite more in the wildness.

- It's a common mistake to think bees are the only pollinator insect, most of the flying insects pollinate in some degree. Even if the others didn't, eliminating them from the ecosystem wouldn't be desirable.

OT: Funny enough we actually know how to do something similar in humans, just increase the ratio of Serotonin to Dopamine in a subject's brain. Curiously enough it seems it's not common knowledge...
 

Weaver

Overcaffeinated
Apr 28, 2008
8,977
0
0
This is kind of stupid. We already have experience mass extincting creatures from the ecosystem and, guess what? It doesn't lead to good things.