RNA interference of ace1 and ace2 in Chilo suppressalis reveals their different contributions to motor ability and larval growth
Article first published online: 26 APR 2011
© 2011 The Authors. Insect Molecular Biology © 2011 The Royal Entomological Society
Insect Molecular Biology
Volume 20, Issue 4, pages 507–518, August 2011
How to Cite
Hui, X.-M., Yang, L.-W., He, G.-L., Yang, Q.-P., Han, Z.-J. and Li, F. (2011), RNA interference of ace1 and ace2 in Chilo suppressalis reveals their different contributions to motor ability and larval growth. Insect Molecular Biology, 20: 507–518. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2583.2011.01081.x
- Issue published online: 18 JUL 2011
- Article first published online: 26 APR 2011
Figure S1. The RNA interference efficacy and potential off-target were examined at 72 h. Chace1 or Chace2 was knocked down specifically with a negligible effect on another ace gene.
Figure S2. Remained enzyme activities measured at 96 h after small interfering RNA (siRNA) injection.
Figure S3. The mortalities of siRNA-treated rice stem borers at 24, 48, 72 and 96 h.
Figure S4. Average larvae weight of siRNA-treated rice stem borer at 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days.
Figure S5. Average larvae body lengths of siRNA-treated rice stem borer at 7 days, 14 days, and 21 days.
Video S1. Movement of siRNA-treated rice stem borers. The Csace1-silenced and Csace1& Csace2- silenced rice stem borers moved more slowly than the controls.
Video S2. Feeding test of siRNA-treated rice stem borers. The Csace1- silenced and Csace1& Csace2- silenced rice stem borers failed to reach the germinated rice seed.
|IMB_1081_sm_FS1-5.doc||218K||Supporting info item|
|IMB_1081_sm_VideoS1.wmv||3552K||Supporting info item|
|IMB_1081_sm_VideoS2.wmv||5092K||Supporting info item|
Please note: Neither the Editors nor Wiley Blackwell are responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting materials supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing material) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.