من هو إسرائيل ومن هم بنو إسرائيل 1

Who will be the president of the United Ststes:Tramp Or Biden ?

https://god-presence-evidences.blogspot.com/2020/11/who-will-be-president-of-united.html

المفاجأه الكبرى - وسر الأسرار - نعم الحياه سينما ثلاثية الأبعاد فى العلم...والقرآن الكريم

https://sciencetimeline.blogspot.com/2020/10/blog-post.html

المفاجأه الكبرى - وسر الأسرار - نعم الحياه سينما ثلاثية الأبعاد فى العلم وفى القرآن الكريم

شرح برنامج الباحث القرآنى " الذكر الحكيم "

شرح برنامج الباحث القرآنى " الذكر الحكيم "

الذى عملت به كل أبحاثى القرآنيه

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjiA6N9Qn9Q&t=1713s

Pheromone Technology : History And Applications

In Cotton Fields In Egypt

Abdallah M. Albeltagy

Plant Protection Research Institute

Albeltagy515@gmail.com

Abstract

        Only 20 years altered the discovery and identification of the first insect pheromone, Bombykol, the silk worm Bombyx mori  sex – pheromone by Adolf Friedrich Johann Butenandt in 1959 ( The Noble Prize in Chemistry 1939, discovery of human female sex – hormones, estrone and other primary female sex hormones, received in 1949) after the discovery of the insecticidal efficacy of DDT , the first chemical insecticide in 1939 by Paul Hermann Muller in 1939 (Noble Prize in medicine  1948 ).

Pheromone technology could be used in many different tactics throughout the integrated pest management ( IPM ) strategy for the monitoring and control actions of the insect pest complex in the cotton fields.

Since the identification and clarification of gossyplure, the sex pheromone of pink bollworm ( PBW ) Pectinophora gossypiella ( Sandures ) by Hummel ( 1973 ) , it has been used in proud spectrum uses all around the world especially in USA and Egypt. In Egypt , since the first use of gossyplure in 1978 , it has been used in so many techniques and tactics in the laboratories and in cotton fields for both monitoring and control actions  of PBW.

This article emphasizes on the pheromone technology history , tactics, and applications, especially gossyplure in Egypt concerning its advantages and benefits in the modern cotton industry.

Introduction :-

Insecticides are used in agriculture, medicine, industry and the household. The use of insecticides is believed to be one of the major factors behind the increase in agricultural productivity in the 20th century. Nearly all insecticides have the potential to significantly alter ecosystems; many are toxic to humans; and others are concentrated in the food chain.

Although the first chemical insecticide ( DDT ) was discovered it biological activity( insecticidal activity ) in 1939, the first pheromone was ( Bombykol ) was characterized in 1959, it’s only 20 years that altered the pheromones use after the insecticides use.

I)            DDT Discovery[1] :-

Fig.( 1 ) : DDT Chemistry

DDT the first of the chlorinated organic insecticides, was originally prepared in 1873, but it was not until 1939 that Paul Muller of Geigy Pharmaceutical in Switzerland discovered the effectiveness of DDT as an insecticide he was awarded the Nobel Prize in medicine and physiology in 1948 for this discover.

The use of DDT increased enormously on a worldwide basis after World War II, primarily because of its effectiveness against the mosquito that spreads malaria and lice that carry typhus. The World Health Organization estimates that during the period of its use approximately 25 million lives were saved. DDT seemed to be the ideal insecticide, it is cheap and of relatively low toxicity to mammals (oral LD50 is 300 to 500 mg/kg). However, problems related to extensive use of DDT began to appear in the late 1940s. Many species of insects developed resistance to DDT, and DDT was also discovered to have a high toxicity toward fish.

The chemical stability of DDT and its fat solubility compounded the problem. DDT is not metabolized very rapidly by animals; instead, it is deposited and stored in the fatty tissues. The biological half-life of DDT is about eight years; that is, it takes about eight years for an animal to metabolize half of the amount it assimilates. If ingestion continues at a steady rate, DDT builds up within the animal over time.

1)      Insecticide Problems[2] :-

The heavy use of insecticides almost causes one or more of these problems :-

1-       It acts as environmental pollutants.

2-      It has many risks to human health.

3-      It has many side effects on beneficial insects especially natural enemies.

4-       It causes the outbreak of secondary pests.

5-      It causes the problems of what so-called “ insecticide resistance “.

6-         It has a side effects on the treated crops and causes what so-called “ Phytotoxicity “.

7-      It affects the soil fertility.

2)      Costs of Insecticide problems :-

Although , the above mentioned pesticide problems, we have to pay a huge amount of money to overcome some of its side effects . The return on pesticide-intensive agricultural practices has proved unrealized, considering billions of dollars in secondary or externalized costs — from $2.2 billion in annual pesticide poisonings, water treatment and pollination, according to two Iowa State University economists, to $10 billion, according to the research of Cornell University professor David Pimentel.

II)-Bombykol  Discovery and the beginning of the pheromone Era ( 1959 )[3] .

Bombykol is a pheromone released by the female  silkworm moth to attract mates. Discovered by  Adolf Butenandt in 1959, it was the first pheromone to be characterized chemically. Minute quantities of this pheromone can be used per acre of land to confuse male insects about the location of their female partners, it can thus serve as a lure in traps to effectively remove insects without spraying crops with large amounts of chemicals. Butenandt named the substance after the moth's Latin name Bombyx mori.

Fig.( 2) Bombykol chemistry

1)  Pheromones[4] :-

A pheromone (from Greek phero "to bear" + hormone from Greek - "impetus") is a secreted or excreted chemical factor that triggers a social response in members of the same species. Pheromones are chemicals capable of acting outside the body of the secreting individual to impact the behavior of the receiving individual. There are alarm pheromones, food trail pheromones, sex pheromones, and many others that affect behavior or physiology. Their use among insects has been particularly well documented. In addition, some vertebrates and plants communicate by using pheromones.

The term "pheromone" was introduced by Peter Karlson and Martin Lüscher in 1959, based on the Greek word pherein (to transport) and hormone (to stimulate). They are also sometimes classified as ecto-hormones. German Biochemist Adolf Butenandt characterized the first such chemical, Bombykol (a chemically well-characterized pheromone released by the female silkworm to attract mates).

Pheromone Time line ( 1870 - 1990 ) .
1870	In the 1870s, New York entomologist Joseph A. Lintner suggests the chemical scents emitted by insects could be used to control insect pests.
1870	In the 1870s, French naturalist Jean-Henri Fabre notices a female peacock moth is able to attract 150 male peacock moths from miles away.
1957	German biologist Dietrich Schneider develops the electroantennogram (EAG), a method for using the antenna of a moth to detect pheromones electrically.
1959	German chemist Adolf Butenandt isolates and characterizes the first insect pheromone, that of the domestic silkworm moth.
1959	German biochemist Peter Karlson and Swiss entomologist Martin Lüscher coin the term “pheromone” to describe a compound an animal gives off that triggers a specific behavioral or developmental reaction in a member of the same species.
1960	U.S. Department of Agriculture chemist Morton Beroza reports his idea of using sex pheromones to disrupt insect mating.
1960	In the 1960s, pheromone researchers begin to use gas chromatography, mass spectometry, and nuclear magnetic resonance to identify insect pheromones.
1961	Colin G. Butler identifies the pheromone of the honey bee, the first pheromone that regulates the development of an insect.
1966	Chemist Robert Silverstein and entomologist David Wood demonstrate that all three components of the bark beetle’s pheromone blend are required to attract the beetles—a phenomenon known as synergism.
1967	Entomologist Harry Shorey shows that pheromones can be used to disrupt the mating of cabbage looper moths in the field.
1970	In the 1970s, British biologist John Kennedy develops the wind tunnel assay.
1970	In the 1970s, farmers begin to use pheromones for monitoring insect pests in order to reduce insecticide use.
1971	Wendell Roelofs uses EAG as an analytical tool to identify the codling moth pheromone.
1978	First pheromone is registered in the United States for commercial use in mating disruption—against the pink bollworm on cotton.
1980	Pheromones are used in more than a million traps to capture more than four billion beetles, curbing an epidemic of bark beetles in the forests of Norway and Sweden.
1990	In the 1990s, pheromones used for mating disruption effectively help curb insect damage in stone-pitted fruit orchards, and tomato, rice, cotton, and grape fields.

Table ( 1 )[5] : pheromone time-line .

2)Pheromones  applications[6] :-

The concept of  IPM is based on the recognition that no single approach to pest control offers a universal solution, and that the best crop protection can be provided by a fusion of various tactics and practices based on sound ecological principles. Pheromones are a commonly used component of many insect IPM programs.

The existence of pheromones has been known for centuries, apparently originating in observations of mass bee stinging in response to a chemical released by the sting of a single bee. The first isolation and identification of an insect pheromone (silkworm moth) occurred in 1959 by German scientists. Since then, hundreds, perhaps thousands of insect pheromones have been identified by increasingly sophisticated equipment. Today we have a much clearer view of the limitations and possibilities associated with insect pheromones in IPM programs. The two primary uses of insect pheromones are for detection and monitoring of populations and for mating disruption. These uses take advantage of sex pheromones on which a vast majority of insect pests rely to mediate reproduction.

2-1- Uses of Pheromones in IPM :-

a-                  Detection and Monitoring. The principle use of insect sex pheromones is to attract insects to traps for detection and determination of temporal distribution. In most instances, it is the males who are responders to female-produced sex pheromones. Trap baits, therefore, are designed to closely reproduce the ratio of chemical components and emission rate of calling females. Ideally, a trap bait should uniformly dissipate its pheromone content over time and not permanently retain or degrade the pheromone in the process. Trap baits of many designs have been tested over the years, but the hollow polyvinyl plastic fiber (emit from open ends), closed hollow fiber and bag (emit through walls) and laminated plastic flake (emit through walls and exposed edges) are commonly used today. Trap design is also critical to effective use of traps for monitoring insect populations. Traps vary in design and size dependent on the behavior of the target insects. Consistent trapping protocols are essential for population evaluations, spray thresholds, and year to year comparisons. The information from trap catches can be very useful for decision making on insecticide applications or other control measures. For example, trap catches may indicate a loss of effect of pheromone on mating disruption and the need to reapply a pheromone treatment. Careful monitoring and experience in interpreting collected data are important for success. Traps may also be placed with the objective of destroying males for population control.

Male annihilation is trapping carried to a seemingly logical conclusion. Place enough traps, catch enough males, and leave the females of the species without mates. This approach has been used against pink bollworms in an isolated area of Arizona with low numbers of overwintering moths. A rate of 5 traps per acre was used and the traps were composed of Styrofoam cups containing oil to provide larger capacity for dead moths. These traps were placed on row centers to avoid the cultivator and never serviced again. The grower community paid for this program for a few years, but results were difficult to prove because a control area was not available. Calculations by Dr. Edward Knipling (USDA retired) indicated that almost all (95%+) male pink bollworms would have to be destroyed before they could mate in order to exert significant population control. Any untrapped males simply mate more frequently. Mating disruption does not depend on traps for control, although traps are frequently used to monitor the extent of mating disruption in the population. Failure to trap males is taken as an indication that males are unable to find females which may or may not be true. Thus, trap data must always be related to actual levels of crop infestation.

b-                 Mating Disruption. With the commercial availability of insect sex pheromones for several agricultural pests in the 1970's, scientists and entrepreneurs turned their attention to mating disruption as a "biorational" approach to insect control. In theory, mating disruption may be accomplished in two principle ways: false trail following or confusion. False trail following results from placing many more point sources of pheromone (hollow fibers, flakes or other point sources) per acre than the anticipated numbers of females in the crop. The odds of males finding females at the end of the pheromone trail must be greatly reduced. Emission of pheromone is relatively low from each source such that a downwind trail is created and not lost in a background of released pheromone. Males following these trails are thought to spend their mating energies in pursuit of artificial pheromone sources. Pink bollworm males were early observed trying to mate with hollow fiber pheromone sources in treated fields. Thereafter, commercial pink bollworm pheromone products were applied in stickem containing small amounts of a contact insecticide. The resulting attract-and-kill formulations (another form of male annihilation) were viewed as a subversion of the pheromone by purists, but in practice the damage was limited to the target species. However, the effectiveness of the added insecticide is largely unknown under field conditions. Growers endorsed the idea that a dead male is better than a confused one. A further combination of pheromones and insecticides is occasionally encountered. Dual applications of pheromone and full strength insecticides (either separately or in tank mixes) are applied with the idea of increasing insect flight activity and thus increasing the chance of insecticide exposure. Full strength applications of pheromone are generally used for this method. The greater the amount of pheromone applied and the greater the release rate, the more likely males are to be confused in the fog of ambient pheromone.

Male confusion is thought to be the result of ambient pheromone concentrations sufficient to hide the trails of calling females (large doses from diffuse sources such as microcapsules or larger doses of pheromone in point source dispensers such as tie-on polyethylene ropes). Added to the effect, or indeed the effect, is the adaptation of antennal receptor sites and/or habituation of the insect's central nervous system. Specific receptor sites on the antennae respond to only the pheromone molecules (individual component molecules appear to have individual receptor sites on antennae). When a receptor site is continually activated by high ambient concentrations of pheromones, the resulting electrical signal diminishes (measured by an electroantennogram). The receptor site becomes unresponsive and the insect becomes navigationally blind. When the insect's central nervous system is inundated with signals from the receptor sites it becomes habituated: no longer able to provide the directed behavior. All of the above are, to some degree, based on known neurophysiology, but exactly what proportion of each occurs in a given situation can only be guessed. The net result of confusion is that the male is unable to orient to any pheromone source and follow the upwind trail to a mate. For a current summary of theory and application of pheromones for control of Lepidopterous pests. Present commercial formulations of pheromones for both trap baits and mating disruption mimic the natural chemical blends of females as clearly as possible. Most insect sex pheromones are multicomponent with precise ratios of components which may be expensive to manufacture. Thus, insect sex pheromones and products containing pheromones, are commercially available primarily for insects of economic importance. Fortunately, there is hardly an insect species of agricultural importance, among the Lepidoptera at least, for which there are not some pheromone products available.

Fig .( 3 ) : Hexalure Chemistry .

IUPAC:	1:1 mixture of (7Z,11E)- and (7Z,11Z)-hexadeca-7,11-dien-1-yl acetate
	or
	1:1 mixture of (Z,E)- and (Z,Z)-hexadeca-7,11-dien-1-yl acetate
CAS:	(7Z)-7,11-hexadecadienyl acetate
Reg. No.:	50933-33-0
Formula:	C18H32O2

Fig.( 4 ) : gossyplure chemistry

3)    History of gossyplure applications :-

1-      In USA :-

Conventional insecticides have not provided a long-term solution to the pink bollworm problem (Henneberry 1986). Considerable amounts of basic biological and ecological information have been accumulated and applied in developing PBW control programs. No single control method is completely satisfactory. The possibility of combining a number of methods into a single control system appears to be the most promising approach (Henneberry et al. 1980).

Fig. ( 5  ) : Pink bollworm. Pectinophora gossypiella and twist-on spiral mating disruptant pheromone dispenser.
Efforts to control the pink bollworm, Pectinophora gossypiella (Saunders), by mating disruption began with the sex attractant "hexalure" in the early 1970's. The discovery of the pink bollworm sex pheromone in 1973 led to the first successful commercial formulation in 1978 (see review by Baker et al. 1991). The pheromone, a two component mixture of Z, Z- and Z, E-7,11- hexadecadienyl acetate (called gossyplure in commercial products), has appeared in a variety of aerially applied formulations including hollow fibers, flakes, microcapsules, and in hand-applied twist-tie ropes and twist-on spirals. Original applications utilized 0.75 to 1.5 g AI/acre in several thousand point sources and were applied several times during early to mid-season while recent hand-applied formulations utilized ca. 30 g AI/acre and were applied once. These are known as false-trail following and confusion methods, respectively. All formulations are to be applied at first flower bud ("pin-square" or about 8 true leaf stage cotton) which is the earliest fruiting form in which the pink bollworm can reproduce. Applications at first flower bud are made against the lowest seasonal (over-wintered) populations, an aid to efficacy.

Commercial use of pheromone in IPM programs for control of the pink bollworm is widely used in Arizona. The current and perhaps most successful demonstration of the value of this approach is the Parker, AZ, program on ca. 25,000 acres of cotton along the Colorado river in the northwest corner of the state. Deemed to be a somewhat isolated area of the northern extreme of pink bollworm overwintering, the area growers have supported a systematic approach fashioned after the successful boll weevil eradication program. The area-wide program has used selected commercial formulations (including dual applications with insecticide) to reduce pink bollworm populations each year during the past 5 seasons. The results have been so satisfactory that very little control for pink bollworm is presently needed in the program areas.

Systematic IPM programs using pheromone to control pink bollworm are also in use in India and Pakistan, but attain the greatest acreage in Egypt. Pheromone treatments totaling a hundred thousand acres or more were used in Egypt during the 1995 season. Published reports indicate the program of several years is expanding and has produced control of pink bollworm comparable to conventional insecticides. The use of pheromone in Egypt is under state control and is applied to selected large areas of cotton. An overall view of cotton pest management is provided by Luttrell et al. (1994).

1-1-  Mating Disruption with PBW Sex Pheromone (gossyplure) [7]:-

Behavioral insect control by mating disruption with sex pheromone was suggested by Knipling and McGuire (1966).              Hummel et al., (1973) identified a mixture of the Z,Z- and Z,E-isomers of 7,11-hexadecadienyl acetate as the pink bollworm sex pheromone and proposed the name “gossyplure.” Shorey et al., (1976) initiated studies to evaluate the mating disruption method, in which the atmosphere of the cotton field was permeated with gossyplure, for PBW control.

Albany International Co., Needham, Massachusetts, developed NoMate-PBW®, a slow release formulation of gossyplure and hexane contained in 1.5 cm lengths of about 200 I.D. hollow fibers, sealed near one end (Brooks and Kitterman 1977). The results of extensive testing in Arizona and southern California indicated substantial reduction in boll infestations and in the need for chemical insecticides for PBW in the NoMate-PBW treated fields (Doane and Brooks 1980).

Areawide applications with PBW pheromone in the Imperial Valley of California resulted in curtailing insecticide use and significant yield increases (Staten et al. 1983). Additional evaluations of the effectiveness of control of PBW using pheromones in commercial cotton conditions were made in 1981 and in 1982. The gossyplure combination used in these studies included the addition of 0.004 kg of permethrin or fenvalerate (AI) per hectare to the polybutene sticker, Bio-Tac, used to adhere fibers to leaves (NoMate-PBW Attact’n Kill). The addition of this small amount of insecticide was shown to enhance the effectiveness of the pheromone by killing male moths that encountered the fiber (Staten and Conlee, U.S. Patent No. 4671010). The small amount of insecticide, in sources that were attractive only to the pink bollworm and widely scattered (one per 2 m²) through the top of the cotton canopy, did not appear to be a threat to insect predators.

Hercon Group of Herculite Products, Inc., New York, developed Disrupt®, a slow release system for gossyplure, consisting of three-layer plastic dispensers (0.05 cm²) with gossyplure concentrated in the center reservoir and the outer layers regulating the release of the pheromone. The results of field tests of this product in Arizona indicated substantial reduction in boll infestations (Henneberry et al., 1981).

Shin-Etsu Chemical Co., Ltd, Tokyo, Japan, developed the PB-Rope®, a high-rate, slow release system consisting of a wire-based, sealed polyethylene tube (8") filled with gossyplure. Extensive field trials conducted in the Imperial Valley of California and the Mexicali Valley of Mexico indicated a substantial reduction in boll infestations and insecticide applications in the PB-Rope treated fields, compared with that in conventional insecticide-treated fields (Staten et al. 1987). Community-wide application of the PB-Rope in the Coachella Valley of California, at the pinhead square growth stage, provided a highly effective level of control of PBW for approximately sixty days, and insecticide usage was drastically reduced or even eliminated in some fields (Staten et al. 1988).

Area-wide, timely application of commercial formulations of gossyplure in the Parker Valley of Arizona, demonstrated the feasibility of suppressing PBW infestations to a near zero level in four years, and conceptualized the prospect of eradication (El-Lissy et al. 1993, Staten et al. 1995, and Antilla et al. 1996 and Grefenstette et al. 2009).

1-2- Combining gossyplure and insecticides :-

Gossyplure. the pink bollworm sex pheromone, has been used commercially since 1977 to suppress pest populations by disrupting mating in cotton crops. Two slow-release systems for gossyplure are commercially available: No- Mate PBW fibers and Disrupt flakes,

suspended in the sticker Bio-Tac or Phero-Tac, respectively, and applied aerially with special equipment. The addition of small amounts of pyrethroid insecticide to the sticker has been

suggested to kill male pink bollworm moths attracted to and contacting the pheromone-sticker combination (point source). To determine the effectiveness of such treatments, we conducted tests in cooperation with growers and pest control advisors in southeastern California's Palo Verde Valley. Catches of male pink bollworm moths (Pectinophora gossypiella [Saunders]) in gossyplure baited traps, rosetted blooms and boll infestations, and numbers of beneficial

predators were compared in fields treated with: (1) Disrupt with and without the pyrethroid insecticide permethrin in Phero-Tac; (2) NoMate PBW with and without permethrin in Bio-Tac; and (3) insecticides only (trichlorfon). Some decisions to treat or not to treat were made jointly by the chemical representatives, grower, and pest control advisors. Others were made routinely by grower's pest control advisor. This is a report of the 1982 studies ( Beasley and Henneberry 1984 ) .

2-     In Egypt :-

In 1999, in the Governorate of Fayum, Egypt, an organically managed area of 66 ha (33 ha of cotton) was subjected to pheromone mating disruption (MD) in order to control Pectinophora gossypiella (PBW). Tripherone-PecGos dispensers (Trifolio-M Comp., Lahnau, Germany), evaporating 0.7 mg pheromone per day, were applied, at a density of 300 dispensers per hectare, in mid-June when the first bolls were forming. In a neighbouring area of conventional agriculture, no PBW-MD was used. Instead, two insecticides were sprayed in the cotton fields: Profenophos in early July, and Esfenvalerate in early August. Two cotton fields (0.5–1 ha each) were studied in each area. Boll infestation by PBW was low in the area with mating disruption, and significantly higher in the conventionally managed cotton, prior to insecticide use (June) and in August 1999. Bemisia tabaci, Aphis gossypii and Empoasca lybica infested conventional cotton in significantly higher numbers than organic cotton. Spiders proved to be more common in organically grown cotton (with PBW-MD) than in conventionally managed cotton (with mineral fertilizers and insecticides). The reasons of these differences are discussed. In 1998, the cotton yield had shown no differences between organically and conventionally managed farms (both used insufficient PBW-MD). However, in 1999, the yield from the organically grown cotton (with MD) was significantly (52%) more than that from conventionally managed cotton (with insecticides). In this study, PBW-MD proved to be superior to insecticides in several aspects ( Boguslawski and Basedow 2001 )..

2-1-           Different Pheromone tactics applied in Egypt :-

Pheromones strategy differs completely in its tactics than the insecticide strategy (because of their different aims and targets). In Egypt, pheromone strategy was used widely with many different tactics as an important part of the IPM program conducted then. Some of these tactics are:-

a-      Pheromone traps for monitoring and detection technique :-

1-      The use of pheromone traps, of different types and shapes, for monitoring insect pest field population density and dynamics over place (village, district, Governorate, region, countrywide), ( Campion et.al., 1978, Campion et.al., 1980, Doane and Brooks 1980, Nasr, El-Sayed et.al., 1984, El- Deeb et. Al., 1987, Albeltagy et. al. 1991a, Hosny et.al., 1991, Khider et. al., 1991 and Albeltagy 2012 a).

2-      The use of pheromone traps, of different types and shapes, for monitoring insect pest field population density and dynamics over time (day, week, month, season, year),           ( Albeltagy et. al. 1993a ).

3-      The use of pheromone traps, especially delta traps, as a control indicator to differentiate between different kinds of control actions as a mean of IPM (Albeltagy et. Al.1996a).

4-      The use of pheromone traps, especially delta traps, as a control trigger for insect pest control decision for different kinds of control actions as a mean of IPM, (Albeltagy1999).

5-      The use of pheromone traps, especially delta traps ,  to evaluate the pheromone release rates and its corresponding effect on crop infestations ( Albeltagy et. al. 1993 c ) .

6-      The use of pheromone traps, especially delta traps, to indicate the relationship between trap catches and crop infestation (Albeltagy et. Al. 1995 a).

7-      The use of pheromone traps, especially delta traps, to build up computer simulation models for different insect pest control strategies and tactics (Albeltagy et. Al. 1995b ) .

b-     Pheromone traps for mass trapping technique :-

1-   The use of many different pheromone trap types ( delta, funnel and / or water ) as a mass trapping technique against many different insect pest field strains (Campion and Nesbitt 1981, Crithley and El-Deeb 1981, Albeltagy et. al. 1991b and  Hamid and Albeltagy 1995,  khidr 1997  and Albeltagy 2012a) .   

c-      Pheromone disruption technique:-

1-         Pink bollworm (PBW) rope  gossyplure ( the sex pheromone of PBW )  formulation was used against pink bollworm on  large scale  applications ( thousands of acres )  in cotton fields for many years ( Albeltagy 1993 and Albeltagy et.al. 1993 b ) .

2-      The use of pheromone disruption technique as a part of IPM program against cotton insect complex pests ( Albeltagy et. al. 1993d ) .

3-      The use of pheromone disruption technique as a part of IPM program to enhance the role of biological control agents in cotton fields ( Mostafa  et. al. 1994 ) .

4-      The use of different pheromone confusion techniques, disruption – lure and kill, in different formulation types (dispensers, rubbers, microencapsulated), (Brooks et. al., 1979, Kydonieus 1981, Hall et.al. 1982, Campion 1983, Critchley et. al. 1983, Critchley et. al. 1985, El-Adel and Gaston 1985,  Khider et al., 1986, Gadallah et. al. 1990, Abdo et. al. 1991 , Moawad et. al., 1991 ,  Albeltagy and Haroun 1996, and Albeltagy 2012a ) .

d-     Attracticide resistance monitoring technique( ARMT ) :-

1-      The use of pheromone traps  in the attracticide resistance monitoring technique as a simple, easy , effective, accurate, and quick tool for monitoring and detecting insecticide resistance in insect pest field populations ( Albeltagy et. al. 1996 b , Albeltagy et. al. 2000 , Khider et. al. 2002, Albeltagy et. al. 2010, and Albeltagy 2012b) .

Table ( 2  )[8] : Pheromone treated area in Egypt
#	year	Cotton area	Pheromone area	%
		( Feddan )	( Feddan )
1	1982	1,065,841.00	500.00	0.05
2	1983	998,277.00	1,250.00	0.13
3	1984	983,560.00	13,000.00	1.32
4	1985	1,081,009.00	37,000.00	3.42
5	1986	1,054,860.00	61,000.00	5.78
6	1987	969,793.00	6,000.00	0.62
7	1988	1,013,960.00	30,000.00	2.96
8	1989	1,005,533.00	40,000.00	3.98
9	1990	993,047.00	0.00	0.00
10	1991	851,283.00	7,500.00	0.88
11	1992	840,296.00	40,000.00	4.76
12	1993	884,310.00	100,000.00	11.31
13	1994	721,443.00	360,000.00	49.90
14	1995	710,207.00	500,000.00	70.40
15	1996	920,911.00	550,000.00	59.72
16	1997	859,255.00	590,000.00	68.66

Table (  3 )[9] : Gossyplure formulations used In disruption technique In Egypt
Campany	Product	Formulation	Concentration	Application rte	a.i. ( gm)
			a.i.(gm)/L. or Kgm	/ feddan	/ Feddan
ICI	Pectone	Microencapsulated	20	200 ml	4
Sandoz	Nomate	Hollow Fiber	76	15 gm	1.14
Bassif	Hircon	micro flakes	28	60 gm	1.68
Feromone	Stirrup	Concentrated liqued	6.32 gm	240 ml	1.52
Somotomo	Pb-Rope	Long tube	1 = 144 mgm	150 tube	21.6
Ecogen	Nomate	Gelatin Ring	1 = 155 mgm	200 ring	31
Agrisence	Sellibete	Rubber ring	1 = 254 mgm	104 ring	26.4
Feromone	Lastfight	Poly- metric  Paste	1 = 73 mgm	300 drop	22

III)Advantages of pheromone applications :-

1-      Decreases number of insecticide applications.

2-      Rationalizes insecticides usages.

3-      Keeps the susceptibility of insect pest field populations.

4-      Keeps the efficiency of insecticides.

5-      Increases pollinators.

6-      Increases crop productions.

7-      Decreases environmental pollutions.

8-      Enhances biological control agents.

9-      Increases honey- bee populations and honey productions.

10-  Increases farmer benefits.

IV)Recommendations :-

We must expand in using pheromone technology tactics for insect pest management ( ipm ) in different agricultural crops ( especially cotton ) and horticultures, and also against medical and livestock insect pests as mentioned previously to obtain these results :-

1-      To overcome the above mentioned pesticide problems.

2-      To gain the advantages of pheromone technology use.

3-      For farmers to gain good profits of their cultivations, instead of their annual losses .

References :-

Abdo, M.Z.; H.A. Awad; A.M. Albeltagy; A.K. Mourad and H.A. Mesbah (1991). The efficiency of four new pheromone formulations in reducing the population density of the pink bollworm in El-Bohira Governorate. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 6 (12): 37-47. 

Albeltagy, A.M. ( 1990 ) : Integrated pest management ( IPM ) of bollworms as a means for pesticides rationalization and increasing cotton production. Symposium of IPM and Pesticides Rationalization and Environmental protection, 7-8 Nov. 1990,  Fac. Of Agric., Alex. Univ., Egypt., : 56 - 59.

Albeltagy, A.M. (1993) . Pheromone application for pink bollworm, Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saunders), control reduces number of insecticide applications. Abstract, Entomol. Soc. of Amer. (ESA), Annual Meeting, 12-16 Dec., Indianapolis, IN., USA.

Albeltagy; A.M (1999) Plant and insect triggers for sequential use of gossyplure and insecticides for pink bollworm control actions . Egypt J. Agric. Res., 77(4) : 1633 - 1643 . 

Albeltagy, A.M. ( 2012a) :Pheromone Traps for the assessment of Insecticides Efficiency and Monitoring Insecticides resistance in Insect Field Strains . Proc. Of Minia Int. Conf. for Aric. And Irrig. In the Nile Basin Countries, 26th - 29 th March2012, El-Minia, Egypt, :213 - 222 .

Albeltagy, A.M. ( 2012b) :Semiochemicals :  The Future Of Pest Management . Proc. Of Minia Int. Conf. for Aric. And Irrig. In the Nile Basin Countries, 26th - 29 th March2012, El-Minia, Egypt, : 257 - 270.

Albeltagy, A.M.; A.M. Hamid and A.A. Salem (1995a). Efficacy of nine different control techniques (pheromone and/or insecticides) on pink bollworm trap catches and boll infestation. Proc. of 1st Int. Conf. of Pest Control, Mansoura, Egypt, 3-5 Sept.: 197-204. 

Albeltagy, A.M. and N.S. Haroun (1996). A new technique for pink bollworm suppression: "Sirene" attract and kill technique. Alex. Sci. Exch., 17 (4): 343-350. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; N. Shaker; F.A. Taman and S.A. El-Khishen (1991b). The efficiency of funnel and delta pheromone traps for bollworms. Proc. of the 4th Arab Congress of Plant Prot., Cairo, 1-5 Dec., Vol. 111 (Pesticides and Toxicology): 485-489. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; A.M. Hamid and G.M. Moawad (1995b). Different models of pink bollworm Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saunders) trap catches and boll infestation under different conditions.  Egypt. J. Agric. Res., 73 (4): 1019-1034. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; A.S. El-Deeb and H.A. Barania (1996a). Bollworm  infestation indicator for comparing the efficiency of different control tactics. Alex. J. Agric. Res., 41 (3): 85-92. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; M.M. El-Mourshedy and A.K. Mourad (1996b). Pheromone traps for monitoring insecticide tolerance in three different lepidopterous insects, as an effective tool for insecticide resistance management. Egypt. J. Agric. Res., 74 (1): 29-37.

Albeltagy, A.M.; M.M. El-Mourshedy; A.S. El-Deeb and A.K. Mourad (1993a). The role of light and sex-pheromone traps in monitoring the populations of certain lepidopterous cotton insects. Egypt. J. Appl. Sci., 8 (4): 287-302. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; M.S. Shawir; M.A. Mourad and G.M. Moawad (1993c). Preliminary evaluation of pheromone release in relation to pink bollworm infestation in cotton fields. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control, 3 (1): 13-19. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; N. Shaker; F.A. Taman and S.A. El-Khishen (1991a). The influence of pheromone traps on the infestation percentages and population density of bollworms in Alexandria and Al-Behera Governorates. Proc. of the 4th Arab Congress of Plant Prot.,Cairo, 1-5 Dec., VII.111 (Pesticides and Toxicology): 477-487. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; R.M. Salem; M.A. El-Hamaky; R. Abu-Aiana and M.E. Omar (1993d). Cotton aphid, Jassid and whitefly population dynamics under pheromone and insecticide applications against pink bollworm. J. Biol. Pest Control, 33 (1): 63-70. 

Albeltagy, A.M.; S.S. El-Tabakh; M.A. Mourad; M.S. Shawir and G.M. Moawad (1993b). Effect of pheromone and conventional insecticides on cotton bollworms infestation, plant and yield properties. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control, 3 (1): 1-12.

Albeltagy; A.M , H. S. Radwan, Z. A. El- Bermawy, M. E. Nassar, A. G. Yousef and M.M. Shekeban ( 2000) . Attracticide resistance monitoring technique for assaying insecticide resistance in pink bollworm, Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saunders) field populations. Egypt J. Agric. Res., 79(3) : 949 - 962 .

Albeltagy; A.M.I., M. M.K. SHEKEBAN, M.M.ABO EL-AMAYEM,S. M. I. KASSEM, A.H.MANCEE AND S.A.EL-ARAMI ( 2010 ) . Monitoring for Pyrethroid resistance in pink bollworm Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saunders) field strains . Pest Management Newsletter , 19(2) : 46-52 .

Anonymous , Beyond Discovery, The National Academes - National academy of Sciences

  http://www.beyonddiscovery.org/content/view.txt.asp?a=2702#Timeline

Anonymous, DDT @ 3DChem.com  - Banned Insecticide.

 (www.3dchem.com/molecules.asp?ID=90 ) .

Anonymous, Wikipedia, Bombykol . http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombykol

Anonymous, Wkipedia, Pheromones. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pheromone

Antilla, L., M. Whitlow, R. T. Staten, O. El-Lissy, and F. Myers. 1996. An integrated approach to areawide pink bollworm management in Arizona. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production and Research Conf., National Cotton Council of America, 1083-1085 pp.

Baker, T. C., R. T. Staten, and H. M. Flint. 1991. Use of pink bollworm pheromone in the southwestern United States. pp. 417-436. In Behavior Modifying Chemicals for Insect Management. Ridgeway, R. L., R. M. Silverstein, and M. N. Inscoe [eds.]. Marcel Dekker, New York, NY.

Beasley, C.A. and T.J. Henneberry( 1984) : Combining gossyplure and insecticides in pink bollworm control. CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE, JULY-AUGUST 1984 : 22 - 23

Boguslawski , C.V. and T. Basedow( 2001 ) :  Studies in cotton fields in Egypt on the effects of pheromone mating disruption on Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saund.) (Lep., Gelechiidae), on the occurrence of other arthropods, and on yields . Journal of Applied Entomology,  125( 6) : 327-331.

Brooks, T. W., and R. L. Kitterman. 1977. Gossyplure H. F. - pink bollworm population suppression with male sex attractant pheromone released from hollow fibers, 1976 experiments. Proc. 1977 Beltwide Cotton Production-Mechanization Conf. National Cotton Council of America, 79-82 pp.

Campion, D. G.; P. Hunter- Jones; L.J. McVeigh; D.R. Hall; R. Lester and B.F. Nesbitt ( 1980 ) : Modification of the attractiveness of the primary pheromone components of the Egyptian cotton leafworm, , Spodoptera littoralis ( Boisd.) ( Lepidoptera : Noctudae ), by secondary pheromone components and related chemicals. Bull. Ent. Res., 70 : 417 - 434 .

Campion, D.G. (1983) :Pheromone for the control of insect pests in Mediterranean countries. Crop Protection, 2 :3-16 .

Campion, D.G. and F. Nesbitt ( 1981 ) : Recent adances in the use of pheromone in developing countries with particular reference to mass - trapping the control of Egyptian cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis and mating disruption for the control of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gosspiella .In Les M'ediaterus  chimiques Agissant Sur Le Comporment des, Institute National de la Researche Agronmique, Paris, PP: 335 - 342 .

Campion, D.G.;  R. Lester and B.F. Nesbitt ( 1978 ) : Controlled realse of pheromones. Pestic. Sci., 9: 434 - 440.

Critchley, B.R. and Y.A. El - Deeb ( 1981 ) : An improved pheromone trap for mass trapping of cotton moths in Egypt. Appropriate Technology for Egyptian Agriculture, 4: 6- 10.

Critchley, B.R.; D.G. Campion; L.J. McVeigh; E.M. McVeigh; G.G. Cavangh; M.M. Hosny; El-Sayed A. Nasr; A.A. Khider and M. Naguib ( 1985 ) : Control of pink bollworm, , Pectinophora gosspiella ( Saund.) ( Lepidoptera : Gelechiidae ) , in Egypt by mating disruption using hollow fiber, laminate - flakes and microencapsulated formulations of synthetic pheromone. Bull. Ent. Res., 75 : 329- 345.

Critchley, B.R.; D.G. Campion; L.J. McVeigh;P.Hunter-Jones; D.R. Hall; A. Cork; B.F. Nesbitt; D.J. Marss; A.R. Justum; M.M. Hosny  and  El-Sayed A. Nasr ( 1983 ) : Control of  pink bollworm,  Pectinophora gosspiella ( Saund.) ( Lepidoptera : Gelechiidae ) , in Egypt by mating disruption using an aerially applied microencapsulated  pheromone formulation. Bull. Ent. Res.,73: 289 - 299.

Doane, C. C., and T. W. Brooks. 1980. Research and development of pheromone for insect control with emphasis on the pink bollworm, p. 285-303. In E. Mitchell (edit.), Management of insect pests with semiochemicals. Plenum Press, New York and London. 514 p.

El - Deeb, M.A.; A.H. Hegab; Z.A. Mohamed and A.A. Khider ( 1987 ) : Population dynamics and testis development of male bollworm moths captured in sex pheromone traps  sited in cotton fields at Sharrkia Governorate. Egypt Bull. Ent. Soc. Econ. Ser., 16 : 181 - 190 .

El-Lissy, O., R.T. Staten, and L. Antilla. 1993. Control of pink bollworm, Pectinophora gosspiella  (Saunders) (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) in Parker Valley, Arizona, by mating disruption using commercial formulations of gossyplure. Proceedings of the International Cotton Pest Work Committee, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramento, CA., 114-117 pp.

Flint , Hollis M.  and Charles C. Doane, Understanding Semiochemicals with Emphasis on Insect Sex Pheromones in Integrated Pest Management Programs, Radcliffe's IPM TextBook, http://ipmworld.umn.edu/chapters/flint.htm

Gadallah, A.I.; A.A. Khider; M.A. M. Ali and M.A. Morsey ( 1990) : New approach for the  Control of  pink bollworm, , Pectinophora gosspiella ( Saund.). J. Pest Control & Environ. Sci., 2: 189 - 199.

Grefenstette, B. ; O. El- lissy; and R. T. Staten.  (2009): Pink bollworm Eradication Plan In The U.S. PBW Eradication Plan in the U.S. ( 2-25-09 ) , doc.:1-9.

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/plant_pest_info/cotton_pests/downloads/pbw-erad-plan2-09.pdf

Hall, D.R. ; B.F. Nesbitt;  G.J. mars; A. st. J. Green; D.G. Campion; and B.R. Critchley ( 1982 ) :  Development of  microencapsulated  pheromone formulations. In insect Pheromone Technology : ( Eds .), Chemistry and Applications, B. A. Leonhardt and M. Berosa, ( Eds. ) , American Chemical Society, Symposium Series No., 190, Washington, DC, August 1981, pp: 131 - 143 .

Henneberry, T. J. 1986. Pink bollworm management in cotton in the southwestern United States. U.S. Dep. Agric. Agric. Res. Serv. ARS-51.

Henneberry, T. J., J. M. Gillespie, and L. A. Bariola. 1981. Gossyplure in laminated plastic formulations for mating disruption and pink bollworm control. J. Econ. Entomol. 74:376-380.

Henneberry, T. J., T. J. Bariola, L. A. and D. L. Kittock. 1980. Integrating methods for control of the pink bollworm and other cotton insects in the southwestern United States. USDA, Tech. Bull. No. 1610. 45 pp.

Hosny, M.M.; A.A. Khider and S. A. O. Abdeen ( 1991 ) : sex pheromone  and population dynamics  of the spiny bollworm, Earis insulana ( Boisd. ). Zagazig J. Agric. Res., 18 L5) : 1599 - 1603 .

Hummel, H. E., Gaston, L. K., Shorey, H. H., Kaae, R. S., Byrne, K. J., and Silverstein, R. M. 1973. Clarification of the chemical status of the pink bollworm sex pheromone. Science 181:873-875.

Khider, A.A. ( 1997 ) : Effect of mass trapping of the pink bollworm  Pectinophora  gosspiella ( Saund.) on the green boll infestation rates caused by pink bollworm. ( Unpublished data ).

Khider, A.A. ( 2007 ) : Scientific Programs  And Strategic Applications In   Integrated Cotton Pest Management. ( Arabic Text Book ) , 366pp.

Khider, A.A., M.Z. Abdo; S.N. Kostandy and E. A. El-Feel ( 1991 ) : Seasonal population dynamics of the pink bollworm  Pectinophora  gosspiella ( Saund.) as monitored by gossyplure traps. Egypt J. Agric. Res., 69 (1) : 83 - 87 .

Khider, A.A.; H. E. Abd El-Karim ; E.G. Abo El-Ghar; A.M. Matar and A. Abd El- Halim ( 2002 ) : Development of discriminating monitoring techniques for moths insecticide resistance in Pectinophora gosspiella ( Saund.) ( Lepidoptera : Gelechiidae ) in cotton . 2nd Int. Conf. Plant protect. Res. Inst., Cairo, Egypt, 21 - 24 Dec., pp: 472 - 476.

Khider, A.A.; S.A.O.Abdeen and N .M. Ahmed ( 1986 ) : Effect of pheromones as a new approach on inceasing honey production. Zagazig J. Agric. Res., 64( 1) : 169 - 182 .

Knipling ,E.F., and J.U.  McGuire Jr (1966) Population models to test theoretical effects of sex attractants used for insect control. Agric. Info. Bull.308:1-20

Kydonieus, A.F. and M. Beroza ( 1981 ) ; The hercon dispenser formulation and recent test results. In  Management of Insect Pest with Semiochemicals : Concept and Practice, E.R. Mitchell ( Ed.), Plenum Press, New York, pp: 435- 445 .

Luttrell, R. G., G. P. Fitt, F. S. Ramalho, and E. S. Sugonyaev. 1994. Cotton pest management: Part 1. A Worldwide Perspective. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 39: 517-526.

Moawad, G.M.; A.A. Khider; M. Zaki; B.R. Critchley; L.J. McVeigh and D.G. Campion ( 1991 ) : Large - scale use of hollow fiber and microencapsulated pink bollworm pheromone  formulations integrated with convential insecticides for the control of the cotton pest complex in Egypt. Tropical Pest Management, 37 (1) : 10- 16.

Nasr, El-Sayed, A.: M.R. tucker and D.G. Campion ( 1984 ) : Distribution of moths of the Egyptian cotton leafworm, , Spodoptera littoralis ( Boisd.) ( Lepidoptera : Noctudae ) in the Nile Delta interpreted from catches in pheromone traps network in relation to meteorological factors. Bull. Ent. Res., 74: 487 - 494 .

Shorey, H. H., Gaston, L. K., and Kaae, R. S. 1976. Air-permeation with gossyplure for control of the pink bollworm. In Pest Management with Insect Sex Attractants. Beroza, M. (ed.) ACS Symposium Series 23, American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 67-74 pp.

Staten R. T., Finnel, C., and L. Jensen. 1983. Monitoring of the Imperial Valley pheromone program. Imperial County Agricultural Commissioner's Office, 14 pp.

Staten, R. T., H. M. Flint, R. C. Weddle, E. Quintero, R. E. Zariti, C. M. Finnel, M. Hernandez, and A. Yamamoto. 1987. Pink bollworm (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae): Large scale field tests with a high rate gossyplure formulation. J. Econ. Entomol. 80: 1267-1271.

Staten, R. T., L. Antilla, and M. Walters. 1995. Pink bollworm management: prospects for the future. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production and Research Conf., National Cotton Council of America, 153-156 pp.

Staten, R. T., Miller, E., Grunnet, M., and Andress, E. 1988. The use of pheromones for pink bollworm management in western cotton. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Production and Research Conf., National Cotton Council of America, 206-209 pp.

---

[1] - Anonymous, DDT. 

[2] - Albeltagy 1990.

[3] -Anonymous, Wikipedia, Bombykol .

[4] - Anonymous, Wkipedia, Pheromones.

[5] - Anonymous, Beyond Discovery.

[6] - Flint   and  Doane.

[7] -  Grefenstette et. al. 2009.

[8] - Khider 2007.

[9] - Khider 2007.