The presence of the coffee berry borer, \u3ci\u3eHypothenemus hampei\u3c/i\u3e, in Puerto Rico: fact or fiction?

The coffee berry borer, Hypothenemus hampei Ferrari (Coleoptera: Scolytidae), is widely considered to be the most devastating pest of coffee. Endemic to Central Africa, the coffee berry borer can now be found in most coffee growing regions throughout the world (Le Pelley 1968). Annual losses caused by this insect have been estimated at over $500 million annually (P. Baker, CABI Bioscience, UK; personal communication). One of the most widely cited references on coffee berry borer presence in different countries is that of Le Pelley (1968), where more than 20 countries, including Puerto Rico, are listed as having the insect

Sex pheromone of the pink hibiscus mealybug, Maconellicoccus hirsutus, contains an unusual cyclobutanoid monoterpene

Two compounds that together constitute the female sex pheromone of the pink hibiscus mealybug (PHM), Maconellicoccus hirsutus, were isolated, identified, and synthesized. They are (R)-2-isopropenyl-5-methyl-4-hexenyl (S)-2-methylbutanoate [common name is (R)-lavandulyl (S)-2-methylbutanoate] and [(R)-2,2-dimethyl-3-(1-methylethylidene)cyclobutyl]methyl (S)-2-methylbutanoate [which we refer to as (R)-maconelliyl (S)-2-methylbutanoate]. Maconelliol is an unusual cyclobutanoid monoterpene, and its structure has been established by enantioselective synthesis from precursors of known structure and configuration. A 1:5 synthetic mixture of the two RS esters (1 μg per rubber septum) proved to be a potent attractant of males in field bioassays. The pheromone component, maconelliyl 2-methylbutanoate, represents a heretofore undescribed natural product

Cell-Type-Specific Regulation of the Two Foamy Virus Promoters

The foamy virus (FV) genome contains two promoters, the canonical long terminal repeat (LTR) promoter, containing three consensus AP-1 binding sites, and an internal promoter (IP) within the env gene. We investigated the regulation of the two promoters in lytic and persistent infections and found that in the presence of a constitutive source of the viral transactivator protein Tas, transactivation of the LTR promoter and that of the IP differ. In lytic infections, both the LTR promoter and the IP are efficiently transactivated by Tas, while in persistent infections, the IP is efficiently transactivated by Tas, but the LTR promoter is not. Analysis of proteins expressed from the LTR promoter and the IP during infection indicated that IP transcription is more robust than that of the LTR promoter in persistently infected cells, while the opposite is true for lytically infected cells. Coculture experiments also showed that LTR promoter transcription is greatest in cells which support lytic replication. Replacement of much of the LTR promoter with the IP leads to increased viral replication in persistent but not lytic infections. We also found that the induction of persistently infected cells with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (PMA) greatly enhanced viral replication and transcription from the SFVcpz(hu) (new name for human FV) LTR promoter. However, mutation of three consensus AP-1 binding sites in the FV LTR promoter did not affect viral replication in lytically or persistently infected cells, nor did the same mutations affect LTR promoter transactivation by Tas in PMA-treated cells. Our data indicate that differential regulation of transcription is important in the outcome of FV infection but is unlikely to depend on AP-1