Figure 3个  Table 3个
    • Viruses LD50×103 OBs (95% CI) Potency ratioa (95% CI)
      vHaBac-egfp-ph9.2 (6.7, 12.5)-
      vHaBac-Δvfgf-egfp-ph16.9 (12.4, 22.7)1.8* (1.2, 2.9)
      vHaBac-REPvfgf-egfp-ph8.7 (6.4, 12.0)0.9 (0.6, 1.5)
      Note: a Potency ratio was calculated by dividing the LD50 of the vfgf-deleted or -repaired variants by that of vHaBac-egfp-ph. * Indicates significant difference based on the 95% CI of the potency ratio, including the value 1.0 (Robertson et al., 2007). CI, confidence interval.

      Table 1.  Dose-mortality responses of vHaBac-egfp-ph, vHaBac-Δvfgf-egfp-ph, and vHaBac-REPvfgf-egfp-ph in third-instar H. armigera larvae

    • Tests Viruses ST50 (95% CI) (h) χ2 P
      1 vHaBac-egfp-ph 95 (93.2, 96.7) - -
      vHaBac-Δvfgf-egfp-ph 107.5 (103.1, 111.9) 27.834 1×10-6 *
      vHaBac-REPvfgf-egfp-ph 94.5 (93.1, 95.9) 3.568 0.059
      2 vHaBac-egfp-ph 95 (93.1, 96.9) - -
      vHaBac-Δvfgf-egfp-ph 107.5 (104.5, 110.5) 19.915 8×10-6*
      vHaBac-REPvfgf-egfp-ph 94.5 (93.6, 95.4) 3.327 0.068
      Note: * Indicates significant difference between the vfgf-deleted variant and vHaBac-egfp-ph based on log-rank test. CI, confidence interval.

      Table 2.  Time-mortality responses of vHaBac-egfp-ph, vHaBac-Δvfgf-egfp-ph, and vHaBac-REPvfgf-egfp-ph in third-instar H. armigera larvae.

    • PrimerPrimer sequence (5′-3′)
      anti-vFGF-fGCGGGATCCAGACCGGGCGGACGAAAC
      anti-vFGF-rGCGAAGCTTCATGTACGTTACAACAACAG
      vFGF trans-fCGTGCCGTTATATTTGCGTTAACCAATGC
      vFGF trans-rCAGAGGTAACATGGATGATGTCTGTGG
      del-F1fCGGGGTACCATACAAATTCAACCTGCGAACTC
      del-F1rCCGCTCGAGATCATCCATGTTACCTCTGAC
      del-F2fCCGGATATCGTGCGAGTCAGTAGAATTTGTT
      del-F2rCTAGTCTAGAATTTCTAACACATTCTATGCGATTG
      vfgf-fGCGCTCGAGTGGAGCAGATTCAAGATTCGCC
      vfgf-rGCGGGTACCCATGTACGTTACAACAACAG

      Table S1.  Sequences of primers used for PCR amplification