Many people hear “Sterile Insect Technique,” or SIT, and wonder what it is. It’s a good question—the name itself doesn’t explain what SIT is or its purpose. So allow me to explain…
But before I explain, some background on me: I am an entomologist and have spent my career conducting research on both biological control for agricultural pests and the SIT. I’ve worked on programs for several pest species of insects, including the silverleaf whitefly, pink bollworm moth, screwworm fly, glassy-winged sharpshooter and light brown apple moth.
Now, back to the Sterile Insect Technique. The SIT involves the colonization and mass-rearing of the target pest species; sterilization of the insects using radiation treatment methods (gamma or x-ray radiation) similar to those used in medical, dental and food processing applications; and the release of sterile insects into the field on a sustained basis and with sufficient numbers to achieve a high enough ratio of sterile to wild insects to “over-flood” the wild population. Because there are many more sterile than fertile insects in the population, the pest insect will most often mate with a sterile insect, resulting in no offspring being produced. Due to the absence of offspring, the pest population will decrease.
The use of the sterile insect technique, as a component of area-wide integrated pest management, has many advantages, including species specificity (e.g., only pink bollworm moths will mate with pink bollworm moths, so no other species are affected) and compatibility with the use of other control tactics such as biological control, cultural control, mating disruption, and the use of softer and pest species-specific pesticides. It can greatly assist in efforts to address many of the world’s most severe and difficult-to-control pests. It is an environment-friendly technology that can greatly assist in efforts to address many of the world’s most severe and difficult-to-control pests.
The SIT can be used on its own and in combination with other pest control measures in three ways: pest suppression, to reduce the severity and damage caused by an established pest; preventive release, to prevent the establishment of a new pest in an area at risk to invasion; and eradication, to remove an established pest entirely.
The Sterile Insect Technique has been used successfully with a variety of pests. The most well-known success of SIT is its use to control the screwworm fly, a pest that feeds in open wounds of cattle and other animals. In conjunction with other methods, the release of millions of sterile flies resulted in total eradication of this pest in the United States, Mexico and Central America. The SIT has also been used against the pink bollworm moth, codling moth, false codling moth, painted apple moth, cactus moth and several pest species of fruit flies. Many countries have used the SIT, including Argentina, Canada, Japan, Mexico, several countries in Central America and the Middle East, New Zealand, North Africa, South Africa and the United States.
I’ll share more information about the SIT, including the implementation process, in upcoming blog posts.
Gregory S. Simmons, Ph.D.
APHIS-PPQ-CPHST Light Brown Apple Moth Coordinator
United States Department of Agriculture
Author: Dr. Gregory Simmons, Light Brown Apple Moth Coordinator, USDA | Tags:
SIT and LBAM ERADICATION IS A FRAUD FOR MONEY.
Sterile Insect Technology (SIT) is a great concept, but so far SIT only has practical application for a tiny fraction of the thousands of insects that some humans would like to control. No moth has ever been eradicated by SIT. To pretend that SIT can therefore be the main tool to eradicate LBAM is simply a way to keep the LBAM eradication program alive and fraud the public for $100s of millions each year and ultimately $Billions over the life of the program.
Some moths and insects have behavior and biology that is more conducive to SIT than others. LBAM is the least likely and least effective candidate for SIT. Female LBAM mate multiple times and continue to mate until they receive an effective sperm package. LBAM is a tiny micro-moth, barely ¼ inch long. The radiation sterilization process on this tiny moth significantly affects the lab-raised moth’s behavior and capability after the sterilization, so it does not mimic nor compete well with the wild moth in mating. Over time it gets even worse as the wild females recognize the lab-raised moths and avoid them just as they avoid other species. Also, LBAM is already widespread across much of the state, and sterile release is only suited to an extremely limited condition when the insect is found living in only a single small area or crop type, the exact opposite condition of LBAM.
So why is SIT being used for LBAM?
Because the entire LBAM eradication program is a fraud for money. The LBAM eradication program is simply a fake program to access and channel public funds. Initially, CDFA publicized that only aerial spray would eradicate LBAM and $100 million per year was the approximate price tag. After the public and elected representatives and even the courts made aerial spray over heavily populated areas nearly impossible and unacceptable, this glamorous but devious and false SIT for LBAM has taken aerial spray’s place simply to continue to access the funds.
If CDFA and USDA are successful in getting this fraudulent program off the ground, then you will see the pesticides move back heavily into the program because privileged insider corporate chemical company contracts is where they intended the $$$ to go in the first place. Though expanding their own budgets dramatically through SIT using fraudulently motivated public funds is still better for CDFA and USDA than nothing. So if you think CDFA and USDA will simply back down and walk away from the $$$ due to the realities and science of LBAM, then that is a nice thought, but that is not the world that we are currently living in with CDFA and USDA.
LBAM has been confirmed NOT to be a threat to crops. After all the false claims of damage delivered to the media by CDFA, CDFA’s own 2009 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (Chapter #3, page 3-20, 3-21) states that: NO DAMAGE HAS OCCURRED FROM LBAM IN CALIFORNIA. LBAM also cannot be eradicated from California just as ants, earwigs, spiders, flies and cockroaches cannot be eradicated. If they could, we wouldn’t have them.
Between late 2007 and the present, qualified scientists, 33 cities & counties and 90 other organizations have stood up and spoke against the fraudulent logic and fake science of the LBAM program. So CDFA and USDA went back on the offensive with the recent Hungry Pest propaganda campaign. The Hungry Pest propaganda campaign costing taxpayers $3 million and counting is to put fear of bugs into the general public. CDFA and USDA team to falsify the danger of LBAM and other pests so that if CDFA and USDA get stopped on LBAM, they will have other pests to generate the $$$ funds they so desire. If you check the data closely, you will find that CDFA has been “Eradicating” the same 9 insects about 30 times each. Rather than admit their failures, they treat each application as a separate eradication. It is similar to someone claiming they have quit smoking 30 times and they are taking your money to quit again, after taking your money to quit the first 30.
Finally: “Controlling” LBAM is mostly done by other insects that eat LBAM and parasitoid LBAM eggs so they never hatch. Any additional control is easily done by farmers as they control thousands of other insects. To date, no additional controls for LBAM have been required and LBAM has been in California for between four and 50+ years. LBAM was first noticed by an entomologist in his back yard four years ago, but the non-CDFA scientists calculate its time here at many decades.
The reason that “Eradication” is so important to CDFA and USDA is because “Control” comes out of CDFA’s general fund budget of about $80 million. If CDFA and USDA can sell the “Eradication,” then that will trigger the approximate $100 million per year ADDITIONAL! So for one additional insect that is nearly insignificant, CDFA can more than double their entire annual budget. And they only have to find some look-like-we-are-doing-something, fake scenario to substantiate those funds. And that is what the LBAM Eradication Program is.
nice post. thanks.
I somehow dont agree with a few things, but its great anyways.
Nice!, discovered your site on digg.Happy I finally tested it out. Not sure if its my Opera browser,but sometimes when I visit your site, the fonts are really tiny? However, love your webpage and will check back.See Ya