The growing world population is placing an increasing demand on food production. In addition, abuse and misuse of chemical insecticides has led to the evolution of resistance in insect pests as well as environmental damage. Together, these developments have created a demand for new insecticidal compounds to facilitate global food production. Arachnid venom peptides provide an environmentally-friendly alternative as potential bioinsecticides given their advantages of being fully biodegradable, highly potent, and phyletically selective. However, the use of arachnid venom peptides as bioinsecticides has been questioned due to their presumed lack of oral toxicity. Thus, the aim of this work was to develop screens for oral insecticidal activity. Based on the high susceptibility of dipterans to venom peptides, fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) and sheep blowflies (Lucilia cuprina) were selected for screening 56 arachnid venoms. 71.4% of these venoms caused 50% or higher mortality in Drosophila, whereas 30.4% were lethal to blowflies at oral doses of 1 or 30 μg/fly, respectively. We used these assays to compare the oral and injection activity of four well-known spider venom peptides (Hv1a, Hv1c, Dc1a and Ta1a). Hv1c and Ta1a only showed weak or no oral activity in both species, while Hv1a and Dc1a showed higher oral activity in blowflies than Drosophila. Overall, we have established screens for oral toxicity in two dipteran insects. Our results indicate that oral insecticidal activity is more widespread in arachnid venoms than expected, and that some arachnid venoms and venom peptides exhibit phyletic differences in oral toxicity.
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science
4
7%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine
2
4%
Immunology and Microbiology
2
4%
Other
2
4%
Unknown
23
43%
Attention Score in Context
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2021.
All research outputs
#18,334,238
of 26,852,251 outputs
Outputs from Toxicon
#2,529
of 3,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,811
of 344,764 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Toxicon
#23
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,852,251 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,764 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
