The DOI matches its Crossref record.
One gene in diamondback moth confers resistance to four Bacillus thuringiensis toxins
Open accessAbstract
Environmentally benign insecticides derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis(Bt) are the most widely used biopesticides, but their success will be short-lived if pests quickly adapt to them. The risk of evolution of resistance by pests has increased, because transgenic crops producing insecticidal proteins from Bt are being grown commercially. Efforts to delay resistance with two or more Bt toxins assume that independent mutations are required to counter each toxin. Moreover, it generally is assumed that resistance alleles are rare in susceptible populations. We tested these assumptions by conducting single-pair crosses with diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella), the first insect known to have evolved resistance to Bt in open field populations. An autosomal recessive gene conferred extremely high resistance to four Bt toxins (Cry1Aa, Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac, and Cry1F). The finding that 21% of the individuals from a susceptible strain were heterozygous for the multiple-toxin resistance gene implies that the resistance allele frequency was 10 times higher than the most widely cited estimate of the upper limit for the initial frequency of resistance alleles in susceptible populations. These findings suggest that pests may evolve resistance to some groups of toxins much faster than previously expected.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sustainability of Transgenic Insecticidal Cultivars: Integrating Pest Genetics and Ecology
Gould, F. (1998) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.43.1.701 · Cited by 1,392
Humans as the World's Greatest Evolutionary Force
Palumbi, S. R. (2001) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.293.5536.1786 · Cited by 1,290
Biochemistry and Genetics of Insect Resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis
Ferré, J., & Van Rie, J. (2002) · Annual Review of Entomology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145234 · Cited by 889
Insecticide Resistance and Vector Control
Brogdon, W. G., & McAllister, J. C. (1998) · Emerging Infectious Diseases · doi:10.3201/eid0404.980410 · Cited by 617
Roush, R. T. (1998) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.1998.0330 · Cited by 444
Metadata
- Authors
- Tabashnik, B. E., Liu, Y.-B., Finson, N., Masson, L., & Heckel, D. G.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 1997-03-04
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1640-1644
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2156114416
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: One gene in diamondback moth confers resistance to four Bacillus thuringiensis toxins. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.94.5.1640
- The paper
- Tabashnik, B. E., Liu, Y.-B., Finson, N., Masson, L., & Heckel, D. G. (1997). One gene in diamondback moth confers resistance to four Bacillus thuringiensis toxins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.5.1640
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.