Dataset Information

How much is a pheromone worth?

ABSTRACT: Pheromone-baited traps have been widely used in integrated pest management programs, but their economic value for growers has never been reported. We analyzed the economic benefits of long-term use of traps baited with the citrus fruit borer Gymnandrosoma aurantianum sex pheromone in Central-Southern Brazil. Our analysis show that from 2001 to 2013 citrus growers avoided accumulated pest losses of 132.7 million to 1.32 billion USD in gross revenues, considering potential crop losses in the range of 5 to 50%. The area analyzed, 56,600 to 79,100 hectares of citrus (20.4 to 29.4 million trees), corresponds to 9.7 to 13.5% of the total area planted with citrus in the state of São Paulo. The data show a benefit-to-cost ratio of US$ 2,655 to US$ 26,548 per dollar spent on research with estimated yield loss prevented in the range of 5-50%, respectively. This study demonstrates that, in addition to the priceless benefits for the environment, sex pheromones are invaluable tools for growers as their use for monitoring populations allows rational and reduced use of insecticides, a win-win situation.

SUBMITTER: Bento JM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4972084 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How much is a pheromone worth?

Bento Jose Mauricio S JM Parra Jose Roberto P JR de Miranda Silvia H G SH Adami Andrea C O AC Vilela Evaldo F EF Leal Walter S WS

F1000Research 20160720

Pheromone-baited traps have been widely used in integrated pest management programs, but their economic value for growers has never been reported. We analyzed the economic benefits of long-term use of traps baited with the citrus fruit borer Gymnandrosoma aurantianum sex pheromone in Central-Southern Brazil. Our analysis show that from 2001 to 2013 citrus growers avoided accumulated pest losses of 132.7 million to 1.32 billion USD in gross revenues, considering potential crop losses in the rang ...[more]

PMID: 27583133

Similar Datasets

Project description:Infertility treatments remain expensive and in many countries are covered by little, if any, insurance, raising critical questions concerning how patients and providers view and make decisions regarding these challenges. In-depth semi-structured interviews of approximately 1 hour were conducted with 37 IVF providers and 10 patients (17 physicians, 10 other providers and 10 patients), and were systematically analyzed. These data suggest current insurance policies and legislation pose critical ethical and logistical challenges for both patients and providers. These individuals face multiple uncertainties about costs and insurance, related to unclear causes of fertility, treatment length, costs and outcomes, and odds that insurers will cover expenses. Insurers frequently decline to agree to reimbursement beforehand, and decide only afterwards, case-by-case, generating stress. Patients and providers thus may not be able to predict how best to allocate limited resources. Providers may advocate for patients, but are usually unsuccessful. Patients may adopt several strategies: e.g., moving/seeking treatment elsewhere, switching or feeling "stuck" in jobs because of insurance, seeking "free" medications, going into debt, or using funds intended for other purposes. Patients do not perceive and respond to resource limitations as fixed phenomena-i.e., patients do not see treatment simply as "affordable" or not. Rather, patients face quandaries of how much to keep spending-how much a child is worth-and are forced to make complex risk/benefit calculations. Couples can disagree, straining relationships. In sum, these data, the first to explore how providers and patients struggle, view, and make decisions regarding limited insurance and resources for infertility, raise several critical ethical and policy issues. These data suggest that individuals have difficulty translating profoundly life-altering, deeply personal quests for meaning and fulfillment into purely economic terms. These findings thus have important implications for future policy, practice, research, and patient and provider education.

Project description:The majority of musculoskeletal modelling studies investigating healthy populations use generic models linearly scaled to roughly match an individual's anthropometry. Generic models disregard the considerable variation in musculoskeletal geometry and tissue properties between individuals. This study investigated the physiological implications of personalizing musculoskeletal model geometry (body segment mass, inertia, joint center, and maximum isometric muscle force). Nine healthy athletes performed ten repetitions of 15 meter sprints at 75-95% of their maximum sprinting speed and ten repetitions of unanticipated sidestep cut trials with a 4.5-5.5 m/s approach running speed. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was collected on the lower extremities, from which subject-specific musculoskeletal models were developed. A one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping paired t-test was used to compare generic and subject-specific musculoskeletal models for: lower-limb kinematics, kinetics, torque matching, as well as hamstrings, adductors, and quadriceps muscle activations and fiber dynamics. Percentage change of geometric parameters between generic and subject-specific models were determined. Compared to generic models, subject-specific models showed significantly lower ankle dorsi/plantar flexion angle during sprinting and several significantly different net joint moments during sprint and cut tasks. Additionally, subject-specific models demonstrated better torque matching, more physiologically plausible fiber lengths, higher fiber velocities, lower muscle forces, and lower simulated activations in a subset of investigated muscles and motor tasks. Furthermore, subject-specific models identified between-limb differences that were not identified with generic models. Use of subject-specific modeling, even in healthy populations, may result in more physiologically plausible muscle fiber mechanics. Implementing subject-specific models may be especially beneficial when investigating populations with substantial geometric between-limb differences, or unilateral musculoskeletal pathologies, as these are not captured by a generic model.

Dataset Information

How much is a pheromone worth?

Publications

How much is a pheromone worth?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets