The study of herbivorous arthropod vectors of plant pathogens has been a subdiscipline within entomology for more than a century. It was recognized as a unique field with the establishment of a Subsection (Cc) in the Entomological Society of America (ESA) from 1953 through 2007. During that period, work in the field expanded from an initial emphasis on management of vector-borne plant pathogens to include biology of the pathosystems. Since 2007, when ESA reorganized the subsections within the society, work on herbivorous vectors of plant pathogens has continued to grow. This article briefly summarizes the work in this field prior to, during, and after the ESA Subsection Cc era. We identify and describe 4 research areas that have characterized the field since 2007: Molecular mechanisms of vector–plant interactions, managing vectors and pathogen transmission in agriculture, illuminating the ecology of vectors and pathogens outside of crops, and pathogen manipulation of host phenotypes and vector behavior. We then identify 10 frontiers and prospects for the field in the coming years that build on these 4 research areas, ranging from molecular and cellular aspects to ramifications for managed and natural ecosystems. We also examine trends in funding and professional opportunities for scientists working on herbivorous vectors and pathogens. Finally, we renew the call for greater integration of work addressing vector-borne plant, animal, and human pathogens due to fundamental similarities in their biology and importance for human well-being within an expanded understanding of the “One Health” paradigm, which currently emphasizes human and animal health.

The number of public-sector biological control scientists and practitioners in the United States was determined by a survey conducted in 2019. A total of 344 personnel were identified in 49 states and Washington DC; 218 employed by universities, 86 by the federal government and 36 by state departments of agriculture. There were 10-34 personnel in eight states, 6-9 in 11, and 0-5 in 31, overall averaging less than 50% of their combined effort on biological control. Applications for biological control agents included about 30% for row crops and vegetables; 12% each for orchards, urban landscapes, outdoor ornamentals, and forests; and 22% for the remainder. The federal government provided an average of 42% of the funding for university, federal, and state biological control research and extension.The states contributed 29-35%, commodity groups supplied 19-24%, and the remaining funds were from private sources. Of 54 universities in the United States, 18 conducted in-person classroom education and training in biological control, with seven offering courses via distance. However, another 18 universities had discontinued their comprehensive courses. Biological control instruction was incorporated into courses and workshops on integrated pest management and sustainable agriculture at 50 universities. Correspondingly, during the past 24 years, biological control has gradually developed from primarily an independent discipline to increasingly being part of integrated pest management. Classical, augmentative and conservation biological control have nevertheless remained distinguishable high priority subdisciplines. Funding continues to be essential for advancing biological control, requiring societal understanding and acceptance. Advancement of biological control in the United States will require increased investment in personnel and their education and training, along with delivery of effective pest management technologies.

Host–plant resistance (HPR) is a subdiscipline in entomology that aims to understand, develop, and deploy crop varieties resistant to arthropod herbivores.The seminal figure in HPR was Reginald Painter, whose 1951 monograph Insect Resistance in Crop Plants established a conceptual framework and methodological approach for applied research on plant resistance. In the 75 years since the publication of this book, the empirical and multidisciplinary approach established by Painter has led to the development and use of hundreds of arthropod-resistant crop varieties. Much of the success of HPR research has been, and will continue to be, tied to advances in scientific disciplines related to HPR, such as plant breeding and genetics, analytical chemistry, and plant–insect interactions. However, given the challenges facing agriculture and pest management over the coming decades, increased attention will need to be given to the deployment of resistant varieties and the integration of resistant varieties into integrated pest management (IPM) programs. Recent advances in our understanding of fundamental aspects of the interactions between plants and herbivores provide insights that can facilitate the increased use of plant resistance in IPM programs, and the diverse membership of the Entomological Society of America can play a critical role by increasing communication between scientists interested in applied and fundamental aspects of plant resistance to insects.

We examine the recent history and future trends in the field of insect behavior in North America. This project stemmed from participation in a section symposium at a Joint Meeting of the Entomological Societies of America (ESA), Canada (ESC), and British Columbia (ESBC) in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, in 2022. Each participating team in the symposium was asked to address 3 questions about their subdiscipline: (i) How has your subdiscipline changed in the last 15 yr? (ii) How will your subdiscipline change as a discipline over the next 15 yr? (iii) What can ESA and the Plant-Insect Ecosystem section (P-IE) do to help members who study your subdiscipline and improve the understanding of the subdiscipline? To address the first question, we used data from 2008 to 2022 on presentations given at ESA meetings, literature searches, and funding databases. To predict changes in the discipline of insect behavior in the future, we examined data pertaining to student participation in the field and educational opportunities in insect behavior. Our main findings are that insect behavior is an integral part of entomological research with an important future role to play in understanding insect biology under climate change. We provide multiple lines of evidence illustrating the importance of insect behavior in multidisciplinary research across a variety of scientific fields. We conclude by answering the third question with suggestions for the promotion of insect behavior research at annual ESA meetings and for gathering more information to further understand the importance of the subdiscipline of insect behavior.

Bark beetles are a principal source of tree mortality in conifer forests, with beetle distribution and beetle-associated tree mortality increasing in frequency and extent. While bark beetles are associated with large-scale outbreaks that affect landscape structure, function, and wood quality, they are also drivers of important ecological processes that modify forest ecosystems. Bark beetle activity may affect biogeochemistry and forest decomposition processes by mediating microbial and detrital communities and by facilitating the turnover of deadwood. The turnover of deadwood in bark beetle-attacked forests has important implications for forest biogeochemical cycling, as dead wood releases CO₂ into the atmosphere and carbon, nitrogen, and other nutrients into surrounding soils. However, our understanding of how initial physical, chemical, and biotic changes to bark beetle-attacked trees affect the succession of detrital organisms and decomposition of beetle-generated deadwood remains poor. Furthermore, the relationship between woody decomposition and landscape-level changes in biogeochemical processes in forest ecosystems following bark beetle activity is not well unified. This review article bridges this divide and provides an interdisciplinary perspective on tree mortality, ecological succession, and woody decomposition mediated by bark beetles.

Corn earworm (Helicoverpa zea) and fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) are major migratory pests of maize (Zea mays) in the United States and Mexico. They are primarily controlled in the United States with genetically engineered (GE) maize, while the 25-yr moratorium on cultivating GE maize in Mexico has forced growers to control these pests with insecticides, where maize productivity remains 35% below the world's average.The United States annually exports 5% of its maize grain to Mexico, where it provides human food and animal feed.This seed is often sown by smallholder growers, leading to plantings of GE transgene-expressing maize and potential hybridization with local landraces. As a result, transgenes are now present in Mexican maize products and landraces. In this study, we examined the F₁ offspring of GE maize to better understand the frequency of different transgenes expressed in maize seeds exported to Mexico. We show that exported seed contains numerous transgenes, including an estimated ∼68% epsps expressing resistance to the herbicide glyphosate; ∼80% pat and bar expressing resistance to the herbicide glufosinate; and ∼82% Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) genes that effectively protect maize plants from several insect pests. We tested 134 samples, including landraces from 10 Mexican states, and found that 35% expressed resistance to glyphosate and 33% to glufosinate. Many samples containing herbicide resistance also expressed 11%–100% functional Bt transgenes, which can effectively reduce the refuge area provided by Mexican maize and increase the Bt-resistant allele frequency. We discuss ways that the introgression of transgenes could provide pest management benefits to Mexican growers but, at the same time, accelerate the development of Bt-resistance in corn earworm and fall armyworm. Our cost-effective screening methods can be used to determine the introgression of functional herbicide resistance and Bt transgenes in maize.

El gusano elotero (Helicoverpa zea) y el gusano cogollero (Spodoptera frugiperda) son plagas migratorias del maíz (Zea mays) en Estados Unidos y México. En Estados Unidos se les controla principalmente con maíz genéticamente modificado (GM), mientras que en México, la moratoria de más de 25 años ha obligado a los agricultores a controlarlas con insecticidas, manteniendo la producción de este grano 35% por debajo del promedio mundial. Estados Unidos exporta anualmente 5% de su maíz a México, donde se usa como alimento, pero algunos pequeños agricultores también lo siembran, lo que significa una fuente de transgenes y su hibridación con el maíz local. Debido a ello, se han detectado transgenes en productos derivados de maíz en México. En este estudio examinamos la primera generación (F₁) del maíz GM para entender la frecuencia con la que los transgenes se exportan en el maíz de Estados Unidos a México. Encontramos que ∼68% de este grano expresa el gen epsps que lo hace resistence al herbicida glifosato, ∼80% expresa los genes pat and bar que le imparten resistencia al herbicida glufosinato, y ∼82% expresa proteínas de Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) que lo protege contra varias plagas. Hicimos pruebas con 134 maíces criollos obtenidos en 10 estados de México y encontramos que 35% expresaron resistencia a glifosato, y 33% a glufosinato. Muchas de estos criollos también produjeron proteínas de Bt en proporciones que variaron de 11 a 100%, lo que reduce el área que México solía proveer para mantener la susceptibilidad a Bt en numerosas plagas. Lo anterior incrementa la frecuencia de genes resistentes a Bt. Discutimos la manera de cómo la introgresión de transgenes puede proveer beneficios para los maiceros mexicanos, pero al mismo tiempo acelerar el desarrollo de resistencia a Bt en los gusanos eloteros y cogolleros. La manera como hicimos esta investigación provee un método confiable y de bajo costo y tecnología para la determinación de la introgresión de transgenes en maíz.

The endemic North American praying mantid, Brunneria borealis Scudder (1896), is obligatorily parthenogenic and wingless. The species is both geographically widespread, distributed over an essentially continuous pericoastal range of more than 2,400 km from eastern Texas to central North Carolina, and abundant in early-stage successional old fields. We used mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI) analysis to examine the genetic similarities among specimens of this insect and collected from 7 states along this range of distribution. We found no variations in the mitochondrial COI gene, which suggests that this wide geographic distribution of the species is surprisingly recent. We hypothesize that its obligatory parthenogenic status may be an accident of colonization of North America by a single facultative parthenogenic female, and the subsequent distribution was most likely achieved by inadvertent human transport.

Accurate sampling of pests is the foundation of pest management. Choosing the best trap for pest monitoring can be complex, however, because trap performance is affected by pest preferences and behaviors. Moreover, preservation of DNA in traps is a consideration when insect specimens are used in molecular assays, such as the detection of insect-borne pathogens. We assessed the efficiency of 2 trap designs and 2 trap placements on the capture of beet leafhopper, Circulifer tenellus (Baker) (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), vector of “Candidatus Phytoplasma trifolii” and Beet curly top virus. Trap designs included standard yellow sticky cards and 3D-printed traps that capture insects directly in a DNA preservative. We found that yellow sticky cards captured more adults than did 3D-printed traps during summer months but captured fewer adults during autumn when leafhoppers move to overwintering sites. 3D-printed traps captured more nymphs than sticky cards, regardless of season, and traps hung at ground level captured more nymphs and adults compared to traps at 1-m height. Contrary to predictions, we did not find differences between trap types in the molecular detection of Ca. P. trifolii or Beet curly top virus, perhaps because 3D-printed traps captured few leafhoppers during summer when the pathogen rates were highest. Our results suggest behavioral differences in C. tenellus trap preference based on seasonality and life stage and underscore the importance of understanding insect behaviors when choosing trap designs for pest monitoring as well as for properly interpreting trap capture data.