Resolving cryptic species complexes of major tephritid pests

An FAO/IAEA Co-ordinated Research Project (CRP) on “Resolution of Cryptic Species Complexes of Tephritid Pests to Overcome Constraints to SIT Application and International Trade” was conducted from 2010 to 2015. As captured in the CRP title, the objective was to undertake targeted research into the systematics and diagnostics of taxonomically challenging fruit fly groups of economic importance. The scientific output was the accurate alignment of biological species with taxonomic names; which led to the applied outcome of assisting FAO and IAEA Member States in overcoming technical constraints to the application of the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) against pest fruit flies and the facilitation of international agricultural trade. Close to 50 researchers from over 20 countries participated in the CRP, using coordinated, multidisciplinary research to address, within an integrative taxonomic framework, cryptic species complexes of major tephritid pests. The following progress was made for the four complexes selected and studied: Anastrepha fraterculus complex – Eight morphotypes and their geographic and ecological distributions in Latin America were defined. The morphotypes can be considered as distinct biological species on the basis of differences in karyotype, sexual incompatibility, post-mating isolation, cuticular hydrocarbon, pheromone, and molecular analyses. Discriminative taxonomic tools using linear and geometric morphometrics of both adult and larval morphology were developed for this complex. Bactrocera dorsalis complex – Based on genetic, cytogenetic, pheromonal, morphometric, and behavioural data, which showed no or only minor variation between the Asian/African pest fruit flies Bactrocera dorsalis, B. papayae, B. philippinensis and B. invadens, the latter three species were synonymized with B. dorsalis. Of the five target pest taxa studied, only B. dorsalis and B. carambolae remain as scientifically valid names. Molecular and pheromone markers are now available to distinguish B. dorsalis from B. carambolae. Ceratitis FAR Complex (C. fasciventris, C. anonae, C. rosa) – Morphology, morphometry, genetic, genomic, pheromone, cuticular hydrocarbon, ecology, behaviour, and developmental physiology data provide evidence for the existence of five different entities within this fruit fly complex from the African region. These are currently recognised as Ceratitis anonae, C. fasciventris (F1 and F2), C. rosa and a new species related to C. rosa (R2). The biological limits within C. fasciventris (i.e. F1 and F2) are not fully resolved. Microsatellites markers and morphological identification tools for the adult males of the five different FAR entities were developed based on male leg structures. Zeugodacus cucurbitae (formerly Bactrocera (Zeugodacus) cucurbitae) – Genetic variability was studied among melon fly populations throughout its geographic range in Africa and the Asia/Pacific region and found to be limited. Cross-mating studies indicated no incompatibility or sexual isolation. Host preference and genetic studies showed no evidence for the existence of host races. It was concluded that the melon fly does not represent a cryptic species complex, neither with regard to geographic distribution nor to host range. Nevertheless, the higher taxonomic classification under which this species had been placed, by the time the CRP was started, was found to be paraphyletic; as a result the subgenus Zeugodacus was elevated to genus level.

Review of Diagnostic Screening Instruments for Alcohol and Other Drug Use and Other Psychiatric Disorders

In recent years there has been a growing recognition that many people with drug or alcohol problems are also experiencing a range of other psychiatric and psychological problems. The presence of concurrent psychiatric or psychological problems is likely to impact on the success of treatment services. These problems vary greatly, from undetected major psychiatric illnesses that meet internationally accepted diagnostic criteria such as those outlined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-IV) of the American Psychiatric Association (1994), to less defined feelings of low mood and anxiety that do not meet diagnostic criteria but nevertheless impact on an individual’s sense of wellbeing and affect their quality of life. Similarly, the presence of a substance misuse problem among those suffering from a major psychiatric illness, often goes undetected. For example, the use of illicit drugs such as cannabis and amphetamine is higher among those individuals suffering from schizophrenia (Hall, 1992) and the misuse of alcohol in people suffering from schizophrenia is well documented (e.g., Gorelick et al., 1990; Searles et al., 1990; Soyka et al., 1993). High rates of alcohol misuse have also been reported in a number of groups including women presenting for treatment with a primary eating disorder (Holderness, Brooks Gunn, & Warren, 1994), individuals suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (Seidel, Gusman and Aubueg, 1994), and those suffering from anxiety and depression. Despite considerable evidence of high levels of co-morbidity, drug and alcohol treatment agencies and mainstream psychiatric services often fail to identify and respond to concurrent psychiatric or drug and alcohol problems, respectively. The original review was conducted as a first step in providing clinicians with information on screening and diagnostic instruments that may be used to assess previously unidentified co-morbidity. The current revision was conducted to extend the original review by updating psychometric findings on measures in the original review, and incorporating other frequently used measures that were not previously included. The current revision has included information regarding special populations, specifically Indigenous Australians, older persons and adolescents. The objectives were to: ● update the original review of AOD and psychiatric screening/diagnostic instruments, ● recommend when these instruments should be used, by whom and how they should be interpreted, ● identify limitations and provide recommendations for further research, ● refer the reader to pertinent Internet sites for further information and/or purchasing of assessment instruments.