Instead of killing weevils we should have taken the time to learn fertility lessons from them. Dr. Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan provide much insight.
Meet the Beetles: Heddi’s Weevils
The weevil, the scourge of neolithic man as his grain gardens began to expand, is with us today. This tiny beetle, and there are many kinds, lives entirely in Gramineae or Poaceae (members of the grass family). The latter are the seeds of the global expansion of our species: wheat, rice, corn, barley, and oats. The best-studied of these insects is Sitophilus oryzae, called the rice weevil but perfectly able to destroy stored grain of other kinds as well. It completes its entire life history inside a grain of rice or berry of wheat. Some feel these beetles evolve with us. Apparently this is because they discard the genes they no longer need as we provide them with the gene products they no longer have to make for themselves.
For seventy years the presence in these weevils of bacterial tissue (once called the mycetome as it was thought to be fungal) has been under investigation. A specialized larval organ called the bacteriome at the apex of the female’s ovary is packed with bacteriocytes. These swollen beetle cells harbor an enterobacterium that shares 95 percent genetic similarity with the common colon bacterium, E. coli. Found only in three locations in the insect—as the larval bacteriome in both males and females, as the female ovary bacteriome, and the eggs (the female germ cells)—this bacterium, like our mitochondria, is maternally inherited. This implies that both male and female infant weevils inherit the cells that will make up the bacteriome from their mothers. The sperm make no contribution. What do the bacteria provide? At least part of the answer, wrested from nature through painstaking work by many investigators, is: B vitamins. The bacterial genome is replete with genes that code for these crucial nutritional supplements, which include riboflavin, pantothenic acid, and biotin. When the bacteria are eliminated from the tissues by antibiotic or other treatment, the weevils’ growth rate is markedly diminished. Bacteria-deprived weevils mature later than symbiont-packed ones. Most importantly, because their supply of mitochondrial energy is impaired, the weevils that lack their normal bacteria cannot fly—an apt metaphor for the importance, in nature of symbiogenesis.
Weevil experts like Abdelazziz Heddi and his mentor, Professor Paul Nardon, at the Institute National des Sciences Appliquees in Lyon, France, call the highly integrated bacterium SOPE (Sitophilus oryzae Primary Endosymbiont). From China to Guadalupe to their own Lyonnaise backyard, to Italy where Umberto Pierantoni (1876-1959) first discovered it, all strains of S. oryzae weevils bear the same population of this bacterium in the same pattern. Perhaps the acquisition and integration of the symbiotic bacterium into the weevil’s metabolism coincided with the origin of the species oryzae.
The plot thickens: Heddi and his colleagues in the late 1990’s found a different kind of bacterial associate in weevils. Of some two dozen strains worldwide, representing three species of Sitophilus (oryzae, granarius, and zeamais), 57 percent harbored an additional bacterium in their tissues. Unlike SOPE, when the weevils were “cured” (by antibiotics) of the second bacterium, no effect was seen on the beetles’ physiology, nitrogen nutrition, or flight. Rather the new bacterium, which resembles the Wolbachia strain, was far less regular in its habits. The new bacterial symbiont is found in variable numbers all over the insect’s body with one notable exception: It is rampant in the germinal (sexual) tissues, especially where it can interact with developing sperm nuclei. Some investigators suspect that the new bacterium adheres to the peculiar chromatin-binding proteins of the sperm-producing tissue. Whatever the details of its action, this bacterium impacts the fertility of these prolific grain eaters. When males that carried the Wolbachia-like bacteria in their spermy tissues were mated with females that lacked it in any tissues, fertility was dramatically decreased. The reciprocal cross, females replete with these bacteria in many tissues with males that lacked it, also depressed fertility but less so. The number of progeny was maximal—to the great advantage of the opportunistic bacterium—when the Wolbachia-like bacterial symbionts were present in both genders of the mating pair. The effect of the symbiosis is thus to promote reproductive isolation. Matings of uninfected weevils are of course female, matings where both partners are infected are fertile, but mixed matings are less so. Reproductive isolation is of course one of the key elements of speciation.
The concept that reproductive isolation, and therefore incipient speciation, might be induced by the presence of microbial symbionts is not new to the biological literature. The idea was well articulated by Theodore Dobzhansky and his colleagues, who studied Drosophila in population cages. They mated fruit flies that had not been separated and subjected them to differing temperatures, cold and hot, for some two years. The matings had been fully fertile but now crosses between hot-raised flies and cold-raised ones were less than fully fertile. The probable cause of the decrease in fertility was the presence of mycoplasmas, wall-less bacteria, in cold conditions and the loss of that tissue invader at the higher temperatures of the warm-incubated population cage. Nardon, Heddi, and many other authors have documented this observation: If male and female of the same species of insect both carry the same bacterium in their tissues, their coupling produced normal offspring. Trouble begins, as with the rice weevil, when one gender carries microbes that the other lacks.
Dobzhansky and the others, though correct, were never explicit. They noted the presence and absence of bacteria and the effects on fertility, but they never raised this observation to the level of a general mechanism promoting speciation. When mycoplasmas or proteobacteria were acquired by one gender of insects and prevented fertile sexual outcomes unless the mate also carried the new microbe, “reproductive isolation” ensued and speciation followed. The attraction of bacteria to reproductive tissue in both females and males, especially in insects, was well documented by Paul Buchner (1886 – 1978) and his successors.
We again define species as follows:
Two live beings belong to the same species when the content and the number of integrated, formerly independent genomes that constitute them are the same. E. Mayr’s species concept of 1948, which states that organisms may be assigned to the same species if, in nature, they mate and produce fertile offspring, becomes one example of our general rule. Mayr’s concept is especially applicable to animals, who daily eat bacteria that may pass from the intestines to take up lodging in the gonads and other fatty reproductive tissue. The tiny strangers may swim through their tissue, find a niche, stay, and influence the future of what may become a new species with a whole new set of useful genes (the foreign genome from the talented but now lazy bacterium). – Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origin of Species by Lynn Margulis and Dorion Sagan (Portions from pages 91- 95)
Then you can better understand the significance of this.
“A 1975 company memo disclosed that Rely tampons contained known cancer-causing agents and that the product altered the natural organisms found in the vagina. Rely tampons were taken off the shelves in 1980, but many women claim they left a legacy of hysterectomies and loss of fertility… Among health-conscious women, the toxicity of mainstream tampons has long been an issue of concern. “Just as I say heck no to Cottonseed oil, it is for the same reason I say heck no to sticking toxic cotton up into my nethers,” writes Meghan Telpner. “Did ya know that 84 million pounds of pesticides are sprayed on 14.4 million acres of conventional cotton grown each year in the US…
Now Monsanto’s toxic herbicide has been found in 80% of feminine hygiene products
Fast forward to 2015. Now glyphosate, the chemical found in Monsanto’s “RoundUp” herbicide used on genetically modified cotton crops, is being discovered in the vast majority of feminine hygiene products.” – Are you putting Monsanto in your vagina? 85% of tampons and feminine hygiene products contaminated with cancer-causing glyphosate herbicide by Mike Adams
https://www.naturalnews.com/051669_tampons_glyphosate_gmo_cotton.html
We’ve allowed “The Council of Gods” (IG Farben Directors) to advance their technologies that destroy us all. If working class citizens had fully understood the significance of their plans then we should have made certain Otto Ambros hanged instead of only served 3 years for his mass murder slavery conviction at Nuremberg. The ruling class have no problem exterminating all working class citizens of the world now right along with our weevil. Their destruction will be the cause of the destruction of our own species. It all started below.
“Dr. Schrader had been working at an insecticide lab for IG Farben in Leverkusen, north of Cologne, for several years. By the fall of 1936, he had an important job on his hands. Weevils and leaf lice were destroying grain across Germany, and Schrader was tasked with creating a synthetic pesticide that could eradicate these tiny pests. The government had been spending thirty million reichsmarks a year on pesticides made by Farben as well as other companies. IG Farben wanted to develop an insect killer that could save money for the Reich and earn the company a monopoly on pesticides…. Dr. Schrader sent a sample of this lethal new fumigant to Farben’s director of industrial hygiene, a man named Professor Eberhard Gross (not to be confused with Dr Karl Gross, the Waffen-SS bacteriologist connected with the Geraberg discovery). Gross tested the substance on an ape in inside the inhalation chamber. He watched this healthy ape die in sixteen minutes. Professor Gross told Dr. Schrader that his Preparation 9/91 was being sent to Berlin and that he should wait for further instruction on what action to take next.
At Dustin, Schrader told Major Tilley that when he learned his compound could kill a healthy ape through airborne contact in minutes, he became upset. His discovery was never going to be used as an insecticide, Schrader lamented. It was simply too dangerous for any warm-blooded animal or human to come into contact with. Schrader said his goal was to save money for the Reich….
“Everyone was astounded, ” Schrader told Tilley. This was the most promising chemical killer since the Germans invented mustard gas. Preparation 9/91 was classified as top secret and given a code name: tabun gas. It came from the English word “taboo,” something prohibited or forbidden… At the Dustbin interrogation center, Major Tilley asked Schrader about full-scale production. Based on the Allies’ discovery of thousands of tons of tabun bombs in the forests outside Raubkammer, Farben must have had an enormous secret production facility somewhere. Dr. Schrader said that he was not involved in full-scale production. That was the job of his colleague, Dr. Otto Ambros…. From Krauch, Major Tilley learned quite a bit more about Ambros. That he had been in charge of technical development of chemical weapons production at Gendorf and at Dyhernfurth. That Gendorf produced mustard gas on the industrial scale, and that Dyhernfurth produced tabun. Krauch also revealed a new piece of evidence. Dyhernfurth produced a second nerve agent, one that was even more potent than tabun, called sarin. Sarin was an acronym pieced together from the names of four key persons involved in its development: Schrader and Ambros from IG Farben and from the German Army, two officers named Rudiger and Linde.”- Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America by Annie Jacobsen (Pages 146 -149)
The working class citizens of the world pay a heavy price for not understanding the consequences of the technologies they subsidize nor their biological impacts.