New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Roach Reactions to Venom Point to Targeted Pesticides

Small changes in the protein sequence of sodium channels of American compared with German cockroaches leave the latter susceptible to a venom that has little effect on the former. Cynthia Graber reports 

 

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


An honest error has led to promising research into the development of species-specific insecticides. The account is in the journal Nature Communications. [Niraj S. Bende et al, A distinct sodium channel voltage-sensor locus determines insect selectivity of the spider toxin ​Dc1a]

A team of Johns Hopkins scientists study sodium channels responsible for electrical signaling in nerve cells from humans and from cockroaches. Spider venom protein messes with these sodium channels—that’s why venom is dangerous. So the researchers use spider venom protein to disrupt the channels and thus clarify exactly how the channels function. 

The researchers recently asked for venom protein samples from Australian collaborators. And the Aussies accidentally included a spider venom protein that has no effect on humans or American cockroaches.  

In their tests, the Hopkins researchers found when sodium channels from German cockroaches were exposed to the mistakenly included sample, their activity skyrocketed, enough to cause death-inducing seizures.

Intrigued that the American roach sodium channel laughed off the venom that would kill the German roach, the scientists found a key region on the two species’ channels that differed by only two amino acids. The scientists say the information could help with the creation of insecticides that target one harmful insect species without hurting beneficial ones, like bees. As the study authors note: “The more specific a toxin's target, the less dangerous it is for everything else."

—Cynthia Graber

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

Scientific American is part of the Nature Publishing Group

Cynthia Graber is a print and radio journalist who covers science, technology, agriculture, and any other stories in the U.S. or abroad that catch her fancy. She's won a number of national awards for her radio documentaries, including the AAAS Kavli Science Journalism Award, and is the co-host of the food science podcast Gastropod. She was a Knight Science Journalism fellow at MIT.

More by Cynthia Graber

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe