Monarch butterflies do not place all of their eggs in one basket: oviposition on nine Midwestern milkweed species

Over the past two decades, the population of monarch butterflies east of the Rocky Mountains has experienced a significant decline in overwintering numbers. Habitat restoration that includes planting milkweeds is essential to boost monarch numbers within the breeding range. Milkweeds are the only host plants for larval monarch butterflies, but female oviposition preference for different milkweed species, especially those with overlapping ranges, is not well documented. We examined the relative inclination to lay eggs on nine milkweed species native to Iowa (no choice), and oviposition preference (choice) among the four most commonly occurring Iowa species (Asclepias incarnata, Asclepias syriaca, Asclepias tuberosa, and Asclepias verticillata). In both experiments, eggs were counted daily for four days. The milkweeds tested were Asclepias exaltata (poke milkweed), Asclepias hirtella (tall green milkweed), A. incarnata (swamp milkweed), Asclepias speciosa (showy milkweed), Asclepias sullivantii (prairie milkweed), A. syriaca (common milkweed), A. tuberosa (butterfly milkweed), A. verticillata (whorled milkweed), and Cynanchum laeve (honeyvine milkweed). When females were given only a single species on which to lay eggs, there were significant differences among milkweed species in the average number of eggs laid; A. incarnata had the highest average egg count. When females were given a choice among A. incarnata, A. syriaca, A. tuberosa, and A. verticillata, there were also differences among milkweed species in the number of eggs laid; again, A. incarnata had the highest average number of eggs laid. Additionally, females laid more total eggs when four plants of different milkweed species were available than when there were four plants of a single milkweed species. Our results show that monarch butterflies will lay eggs on all nine milkweeds, but that there are clear preferences for some milkweed species over others

GMOs: Non-Health Issues

The controversy over genetically modified [GM] organisms is often framed in terms of possible hazards for human health. Articles in a previous volume of this *Encyclopedia* give a general overview of GM crops [@Mulvaney2014] and specifically examine human health [@Nordgard2014] and labeling [@Bruton2014] issues surrounding GM organisms. This article explores several other aspects of the controversy: environmental concerns, political and legal disputes, and the aim of "feeding the world" and promoting food security. Rather than discussing abstract, hypothetical GM organisms, this article explores the consequences of the GM organisms that have actually been deployed in the particular contexts that they have been deployed, on the belief that there is little point in discussing GM organisms in an idealized or context-independent way

Intron variants of the p53 gene are associated with increased risk for ovarian cancer but not in carriers of BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutations

Two biallelic polymorphisms in introns 3 and 6 of the p53 gene were analysed for a possible risk-modifying effect for ovarian cancer. Germline DNA was genotyped from 310 German Caucasian ovarian cancer patients and 364 healthy controls. We also typed 124 affected and 276 unaffected female carriers with known deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 germline mutation from high-risk breast-ovarian cancer families. Genotyping was based on PCR and high-resolution gel electrophoresis. German ovarian cancer patients who carried the rare allele of the MspI restriction fragment length polymorphism (RELP) in intron 6 were found to have an overall 1.93-fold increased risk (95% confidence internal (CI) 1.27–2.91) which further increased with the age at diagnosis of 41–60 years (odds ratio (OR) 2.71, 95% CI 1.10–6.71 for 41–50 and OR 2.44, 95% CI 1.12–5.28 for 51–60). The 16 bp duplication polymorphism in intron 3 was in a strong linkage to the MspI RFLP. In BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers, no difference in allele frequency was observed for carriers affected or unaffected with ovarian cancer. Our data suggest that intronic polymorphisms of the p53 gene modify the risk for ovarian cancer patients but not in carriers with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. © 1999 Cancer Research Campaig

Different molecular patterns in glioblastoma multiforme subtypes upon recurrence

One of the hallmarks of glioblastoma is its inherent tendency to recur. At this point patients with relapsed GBM show a survival time of only few months. The molecular basis of the recurrence process in GBM is still poorly understood. The aim of the present study was to investigate the genetic profile of relapsed GBM compared to their respective primary tumors. We have included 20 paired GBMs. In all tumor samples, we have analyzed p53 and PTEN status by sequencing analysis, EGFR amplification by semiquantitative PCR and a wide-genome fingerprinting was performed by microsatellite analysis. Among primary GBM, we observed twelve type 2 GBM, four type 1 GBM and four further GBM showing neither p53 mutations nor EGFR amplification (non-type 1–non-type 2 GBM). Upon recurrence, we have detected two molecular patterns of tumor progression: GBM initially showing either type 1 or type 2 profiles conserved them at the time of relapse. In contrast, non-type 1–non-type 2 GBM acquired the typical pattern of type 2 GBM and harbor EGFR amplification without p53 mutation. New PTEN mutations upon relapse were only detected in type 2 GBM. Additional LOH were more frequently identified in relapses of type 2 GBM than in those showing the type 1 signature. Taken together, our results strongly suggest that recurrences of GBM may display two distinct pattern of accumulation of molecular alterations depending on the profile of the original tumor

Microgeographical, inter-individual, and intra-individual variation in the flower characters of Iberian pear Pyrus bourgaeana (Rosaceae)

Flower characteristics have been traditionally considered relatively constant within species. However, there are an increasing number of examples of variation in flower characteristics. In this study, we examined the variation in attracting and rewarding flower characters at several ecological levels in a metapopulation of Pyrus bourgaeana in the Doñana area (SW Spain). We answered the following questions: what are the variances of morphological and nectar characters of flowers? How important are intra-individual and inter-individual variance in flower characters? Are there microgeographical differences in flower characters? And if so, are they consistent between years? In 2008 and 2009, we sampled flowers of 72 trees from five localities. For six flower morphological and two nectar characteristics, we calculated coefficients of variation (CV). The partitioning of total variation among-localities, among-individuals, and within-individuals was estimated. To analyze differences among localities and their consistency between years, we conducted generalized linear mixed models. The CVs of nectar characters were always higher than those of morphological characters. As expected, inter-individual variation was the main source of variation of flower morphology, but nectar characters had significant variation at both intra- and inter-individual levels. For most floral traits, there were no differences among localities. Our study documents that variation is a scale-dependent phenomenon and that it is essential to consider intra- and inter-individual variance when investigating the causes and consequences of variation. It also shows that single year studies of floral characters should be viewed with caution

Slavery and the Revival of Anti-slavery Activism

This chapter sets out the volumes critical approach to the dominant discourse on modern slavery and its impulse to question the assumptions and the politics behind that discourse. It explores the limits of the modern slavery rhetoric for understanding the complicated logics of agency, freedom and belonging, and of past, present and future, for those who are constituted as slaves. Document type: Part of book or chapter of boo

The Present and Future Role of Insect-Resistant Genetically Modified Maize in IPM

Commercial, genetically-modified (GM) maize was first planted in the United States (USA, 1996) and Canada (1997) but now is grown in 13 countries on a total of over 35 million hectares (\u3e24% of area worldwide). The first GM maize plants produced a Cry protein derived from the soil bacteriumBacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which made them resistant to European corn borer and other lepidopteran maize pests. New GM maize hybrids not only have resistance to lepidopteran pests but some have resistance to coleopteran pests and tolerance to specific herbicides. Growers are attracted to the Btmaize hybrids for their convenience and because of yield protection, reduced need for chemical insecticides, and improved grain quality. Yet, most growers worldwide still rely on traditional integrated pest management (IPM) methods to control maize pests. They must weigh the appeal of buying insect protection “in the bag” against questions regarding economics, environmental safety, and insect resistance management (IRM). Traditional management of maize insects and the opportunities and challenges presented by GM maize are considered as they relate to current and future insect-resistant products. Four countries, two that currently have commercialize Bt maize (USA and Spain) and two that do not (China and Kenya), are highlighted. As with other insect management tactics (e.g., insecticide use or tillage), GM maize should not be considered inherently compatible or incompatible with IPM. Rather, the effect of GM insect-resistance on maize IPM likely depends on how the technology is developed and used