Search This Blog

Sunday, May 19, 2019

Biological pest control

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Syrphus hoverfly larva (below) feed on aphids (above), making them natural biological control agents.
 
A parasitoid wasp (Cotesia congregata) adult with pupal cocoons on its host, a tobacco hornworm (Manduca sexta, green background), an example of a hymenopteran biological control agent
 
Biological control or biocontrol is a method of controlling pests such as insects, mites, weeds and plant diseases using other organisms. It relies on predation, parasitism, herbivory, or other natural mechanisms, but typically also involves an active human management role. It can be an important component of integrated pest management (IPM) programs. 

There are three basic strategies for biological pest control: classical (importation), where a natural enemy of a pest is introduced in the hope of achieving control; inductive (augmentation), in which a large population of natural enemies are administered for quick pest control; and inoculative (conservation), in which measures are taken to maintain natural enemies through regular reestablishment.

Natural enemies of insect pests, also known as biological control agents, include predators, parasitoids, pathogens, and competitors. Biological control agents of plant diseases are most often referred to as antagonists. Biological control agents of weeds include seed predators, herbivores and plant pathogens. 

Biological control can have side-effects on biodiversity through attacks on non-target species by any of the same mechanisms, especially when a species is introduced without thorough understanding of the possible consequences.

History

The term "biological control" was first used by Harry Scott Smith at the 1919 meeting of the Pacific Slope Branch of the American Association of Economic Entomologists, in Riverside, California. It was brought into more widespread use by the entomologist Paul H. DeBach (1914–1993) who worked on citrus crop pests throughout his life. However, the practice has previously been used for centuries. The first report of the use of an insect species to control an insect pest comes from "Nanfang Caomu Zhuang" (南方草木狀 Plants of the Southern Regions) (ca. 304 AD), attributed to Western Jin dynasty botanist Ji Han (嵇含, 263–307), in which it is mentioned that "Jiaozhi people sell ants and their nests attached to twigs looking like thin cotton envelopes, the reddish-yellow ant being larger than normal. Without such ants, southern citrus fruits will be severely insect-damaged". The ants used are known as huang gan (huang = yellow, gan = citrus) ants (Oecophylla smaragdina). The practice was later reported by Ling Biao Lu Yi (late Tang Dynasty or Early Five Dynasties), in Ji Le Pian by Zhuang Jisu (Southern Song Dynasty), in the Book of Tree Planting by Yu Zhen Mu (Ming Dynasty), in the book Guangdong Xing Yu (17th century), Lingnan by Wu Zhen Fang (Qing Dynasty), in Nanyue Miscellanies by Li Diao Yuan, and others.

Biological control techniques as we know them today started to emerge in the 1870s. During this decade, in the US, the Missouri State Entomologist C. V. Riley and the Illinois State Entomologist W. LeBaron began within-state redistribution of parasitoids to control crop pests. The first international shipment of an insect as biological control agent was made by Charles V. Riley in 1873, shipping to France the predatory mites Tyroglyphus phylloxera to help fight the grapevine phylloxera (Daktulosphaira vitifoliae) that was destroying grapevines in France. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) initiated research in classical biological control following the establishment of the Division of Entomology in 1881, with C. V. Riley as Chief. The first importation of a parasitoidal wasp into the United States was that of the braconid Cotesia glomerata in 1883–1884, imported from Europe to control the invasive cabbage white butterfly, Pieris rapae. In 1888–1889 the vedalia beetle, Rodolia cardinalis, a lady beetle, was introduced from Australia to California to control the cottony cushion scale, Icerya purchasi. This had become a major problem for the newly developed citrus industry in California, but by the end of 1889 the cottony cushion scale population had already declined. This great success led to further introductions of beneficial insects into the USA.

In 1905 the USDA initiated its first large-scale biological control program, sending entomologists to Europe and Japan to look for natural enemies of the gypsy moth, Lymantria dispar dispar, and brown-tail moth, Euproctis chrysorrhoea, invasive pests of trees and shrubs. As a result, nine parasitoids (solitary wasps) of gypsy moth, seven of brown-tail moth, and two predators of both moths became established in the USA. Although the gypsy moth was not fully controlled by these natural enemies, the frequency, duration, and severity of its outbreaks were reduced and the program was regarded as successful. This program also led to the development of many concepts, principles, and procedures for the implementation of biological control programs.

Cactoblastis cactorum larvae feeding on Opuntia prickly pear cacti
 
Prickly pear cacti were introduced into Queensland, Australia as ornamental plants, starting in 1788. They quickly spread to cover over 25 million hectares of Australia by 1920, increasing by 1 million hectares per year. Digging, burning and crushing all proved ineffective. Two control agents were introduced to help control the spread of the plant, the cactus moth Cactoblastis cactorum, and the scale insect Dactylopius. Between 1926 and 1931, tens of millions of cactus moth eggs were distributed around Queensland with great success, and by 1932, most areas of prickly pear had been destroyed.

The first reported case of a classical biological control attempt in Canada involves the parasitoidal wasp Trichogramma minutum. Individuals were caught in New York State and released in Ontario gardens in 1882 by William Saunders, trained chemist and first Director of the Dominion Experimental Farms, for controlling the invasive currantworm Nematus ribesii. Between 1884 and 1908, the first Dominion Entomologist, James Fletcher, continued introductions of other parasitoids and pathogens for the control of pests in Canada.

Types of biological pest control

There are three basic biological pest control strategies: importation (classical biological control), augmentation and conservation.

Importation

Rodolia cardinalis, the vedalia beetle, was imported from Australia to California in the 19th century, successfully controlling cottony cushion scale.
 
Importation or classical biological control involves the introduction of a pest's natural enemies to a new locale where they do not occur naturally. Early instances were often unofficial and not based on research, and some introduced species became serious pests themselves.

To be most effective at controlling a pest, a biological control agent requires a colonizing ability which allows it to keep pace with changes to the habitat in space and time. Control is greatest if the agent has temporal persistence, so that it can maintain its population even in the temporary absence of the target species, and if it is an opportunistic forager, enabling it to rapidly exploit a pest population.

Joseph Needham noted a Chinese text dating from 304 AD, Records of the Plants and Trees of the Southern Regions, by Hsi Han, which describes mandarin oranges protected by large reddish-yellow citrus ants which attack and kill insect pests of the orange trees. The citrus ant (Oecophylla smaragdina) was rediscovered in the 20th century, and since 1958 has been used in China to protect orange groves.

One of the earliest successes in the west was in controlling Icerya purchasi (cottony cushion scale) in Australia, using a predatory insect Rodolia cardinalis (the vedalia beetle). This success was repeated in California using the beetle and a parasitoidal fly, Cryptochaetum iceryae. Other successful cases include the control of Antonina graminis in Texas by Neodusmetia sangwani in the 1960s.

Damage from Hypera postica, the alfalfa weevil, a serious introduced pest of forage, was substantially reduced by the introduction of natural enemies. 20 years after their introduction the population of weevils in the alfalfa area treated for alfalfa weevil in the Northeastern United States remained 75 percent down.

The invasive species Alternanthera philoxeroides (alligator weed) was controlled in Florida (U.S.) by introducing alligator weed flea beetle.
 
Alligator weed was introduced to the United States from South America. It takes root in shallow water, interfering with navigation, irrigation, and flood control. The alligator weed flea beetle and two other biological controls were released in Florida, greatly reducing the amount of land covered by the plant. Another aquatic weed, the giant salvinia (Salvinia molesta) is a serious pest, covering waterways, reducing water flow and harming native species. Control with the salvinia weevil (Cyrtobagous salviniae) and the salvinia stem-borer moth (Samea multiplicalis) is effective in warm climates, and in Zimbabwe, a 99% control of the weed was obtained over a two-year period.

Small commercially reared parasitoidal wasps, Trichogramma ostriniae, provide limited and erratic control of the European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis), a serious pest. Careful formulations of the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis are more effective.

The population of Levuana iridescens, the Levuana moth, a serious coconut pest in Fiji, was brought under control by a classical biological control program in the 1920s.

Augmentation

Hippodamia convergens, the convergent lady beetle, is commonly sold for biological control of aphids.
 
Augmentation involves the supplemental release of natural enemies that occur in a particular area, boosting the naturally occurring populations there. In inoculative release, small numbers of the control agents are released at intervals to allow them to reproduce, in the hope of setting up longer-term control, and thus keeping the pest down to a low level, constituting prevention rather than cure. In inundative release, in contrast, large numbers are released in the hope of rapidly reducing a damaging pest population, correcting a problem that has already arisen. Augmentation can be effective, but is not guaranteed to work, and depends on the precise details of the interactions between each pest and control agent.

An example of inoculative release occurs in the horticultural production of several crops in greenhouses. Periodic releases of the parasitoidal wasp, Encarsia formosa, are used to control greenhouse whitefly, while the predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis is used for control of the two-spotted spider mite.

The egg parasite Trichogramma is frequently released inundatively to control harmful moths. Similarly, Bacillus thuringiensis and other microbial insecticides are used in large enough quantities for a rapid effect. Recommended release rates for Trichogramma in vegetable or field crops range from 5,000 to 200,000 per acre (1 to 50 per square metre) per week according to the level of pest infestation. Similarly, nematodes that kill insects (that are entomopathogenic) are released at rates of millions and even billions per acre for control of certain soil-dwelling insect pests.

Conservation

The conservation of existing natural enemies in an environment is the third method of biological pest control. Natural enemies are already adapted to the habitat and to the target pest, and their conservation can be simple and cost-effective, as when nectar-producing crop plants are grown in the borders of rice fields. These provide nectar to support parasitoids and predators of planthopper pests and have been demonstrated to be so effective (reducing pest densities by 10- or even 100-fold) that farmers sprayed 70% less insecticides and enjoyed yields boosted by 5%. Predators of aphids were similarly found to be present in tussock grasses by field boundary hedges in England, but they spread too slowly to reach the centres of fields. Control was improved by planting a metre-wide strip of tussock grasses in field centres, enabling aphid predators to overwinter there.

An inverted flowerpot filled with straw to attract earwigs
 
Cropping systems can be modified to favor natural enemies, a practice sometimes referred to as habitat manipulation. Providing a suitable habitat, such as a shelterbelt, hedgerow, or beetle bank where beneficial insects such as parasitoidal wasps can live and reproduce, can help ensure the survival of populations of natural enemies. Things as simple as leaving a layer of fallen leaves or mulch in place provides a suitable food source for worms and provides a shelter for insects, in turn being a food source for such beneficial mammals as hedgehogs and shrews. Compost piles and stacks of wood can provide shelter for invertebrates and small mammals. Long grass and ponds support amphibians. Not removing dead annuals and non-hardy plants in the autumn allows insects to make use of their hollow stems during winter. In California, prune trees are sometimes planted in grape vineyards to provide an improved overwintering habitat or refuge for a key grape pest parasitoid. The providing of artificial shelters in the form of wooden caskets, boxes or flowerpots is also sometimes undertaken, particularly in gardens, to make a cropped area more attractive to natural enemies. For example, earwigs are natural predators which can be encouraged in gardens by hanging upside-down flowerpots filled with straw or wood wool. Green lacewings can be encouraged by using plastic bottles with an open bottom and a roll of cardboard inside. Birdhouses enable insectivorous birds to nest; the most useful birds can be attracted by choosing an opening just large enough for the desired species.

In cotton production, the replacement of broad-spectrum insecticides with selective control measures such as Bt cotton can create a more favorable environment for natural enemies of cotton pests due to reduced insecticide exposure risk. Such predators or parasitoids can control pests not affected by the Bt protein. Reduced prey quality and abundance associated increased control from Bt cotton can also indirectly decrease natural enemy populations in some cases, but the percentage of pests eaten or parasitized in Bt and non-Bt cotton are often similar.

Biological control agents

Predators

Predatory lacewings are available from biocontrol dealers.
 
Predators are mainly free-living species that directly consume a large number of prey during their whole lifetime. Given that many major crop pests are insects, many of the predators used in biological control are insectivorous species. Lady beetles, and in particular their larvae which are active between May and July in the northern hemisphere, are voracious predators of aphids, and also consume mites, scale insects and small caterpillars. The spotted lady beetle (Coleomegilla maculata) is also able to feed on the eggs and larvae of the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata).

The larvae of many hoverfly species principally feed upon aphids, one larva devouring up to 400 in its lifetime. Their effectiveness in commercial crops has not been studied.

Predatory Polistes wasp searching for bollworms or other caterpillars on a cotton plant
 
Several species of entomopathogenic nematode are important predators of insect and other invertebrate pests. Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita is a microscopic nematode that kills slugs. Its complex life cycle includes a free-living, infective stage in the soil where it becomes associated with a pathogenic bacteria such as Moraxella osloensis. The nematode enters the slug through the posterior mantle region, thereafter feeding and reproducing inside, but it is the bacteria that kill the slug. The nematode is available commercially in Europe and is applied by watering onto moist soil.

Species used to control spider mites include the predatory mites Phytoseiulus persimilis, Neoseilus californicus, and Amblyseius cucumeris, the predatory midge Feltiella acarisuga, and a ladybird Stethorus punctillum. The bug Orius insidiosus has been successfully used against the two-spotted spider mite and the western flower thrips (Frankliniella occidentalis).

Predators including Cactoblastis cactorum (mentioned above) can also be used to destroy invasive plant species. As another example, the poison hemlock moth (Agonopterix alstroemeriana) can be used to control poison hemlock (Conium maculatum). During its larval stage, the moth strictly consumes its host plant, poison hemlock, and can exist at hundreds of larvae per individual host plant, destroying large swathes of the hemlock.

The parasitoid wasp Aleiodes indiscretus parasitizing a gypsy moth caterpillar, a serious pest of forestry
 
For rodent pests, cats are effective biological control when used in conjunction with reduction of "harborage"/hiding locations. While cats are effective at preventing rodent "population explosions", they are not effective for eliminating pre-existing severe infestations. Barn owls are also sometimes used as biological rodent control. Although there are no quantitative studies of the effectiveness of barn owls for this purpose, they are known rodent predators that can be used in addition to or instead of cats; they can be encouraged into an area with nest boxes.

Parasitoids

Parasitoids lay their eggs on or in the body of an insect host, which is then used as a food for developing larvae. The host is ultimately killed. Most insect parasitoids are wasps or flies, and many have a very narrow host range. The most important groups are the ichneumonid wasps, which mainly use caterpillars as hosts; braconid wasps, which attack caterpillars and a wide range of other insects including aphids; chalcid wasps, which parasitize eggs and larvae of many insect species; and tachinid flies, which parasitize a wide range of insects including caterpillars, beetle adults and larvae, and true bugs. Parasitoids are most effective at reducing pest populations when their host organisms have limited refuges to hide from them.

Encarsia formosa, widely used in greenhouse horticulture, was one of the first biological control agents developed.
 
Life cycles of greenhouse whitefly and its parasitoid wasp Encarsia formosa
 
Parasitoids are among the most widely used biological control agents. Commercially, there are two types of rearing systems: short-term daily output with high production of parasitoids per day, and long-term, low daily output systems. In most instances, production will need to be matched with the appropriate release dates when susceptible host species at a suitable phase of development will be available. Larger production facilities produce on a yearlong basis, whereas some facilities produce only seasonally. Rearing facilities are usually a significant distance from where the agents are to be used in the field, and transporting the parasitoids from the point of production to the point of use can pose problems. Shipping conditions can be too hot, and even vibrations from planes or trucks can adversely affect parasitoids.

Encarsia formosa is a small predatory chalcid wasp which is a parasitoid of whitefly, a sap-feeding insect which can cause wilting and black sooty moulds in glasshouse vegetable and ornamental crops. It is most effective when dealing with low level infestations, giving protection over a long period of time. The wasp lays its eggs in young whitefly 'scales', turning them black as the parasite larvae pupate. Gonatocerus ashmeadi (Hymenoptera: Mymaridae) has been introduced to control the glassy-winged sharpshooter Homalodisca vitripennis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) in French Polynesia and has successfully controlled ~95% of the pest density.

The eastern spruce budworm is an example of a destructive insect in fir and spruce forests. Birds are a natural form of biological control, but the Trichogramma minutum, a species of parasitic wasp, has been investigated as an alternative to more controversial chemical controls.

There are a number of recent studies pursuing sustainable methods for controlling urban cockroaches using parasitic wasps. Since most cockroaches remain in the sewer system and sheltered areas which are inaccessible to insecticides, employing active-hunter wasps is a strategy to try and reduce their populations.

Pathogens

Pathogenic micro-organisms include bacteria, fungi, and viruses. They kill or debilitate their host and are relatively host-specific. Various microbial insect diseases occur naturally, but may also be used as biological pesticides. When naturally occurring, these outbreaks are density-dependent in that they generally only occur as insect populations become denser.

Bacteria

Bacteria used for biological control infect insects via their digestive tracts, so they offer only limited options for controlling insects with sucking mouth parts such as aphids and scale insects. Bacillus thuringiensis, a soil-dwelling bacterium, is the most widely applied species of bacteria used for biological control, with at least four sub-species used against Lepidopteran (moth, butterfly), Coleopteran (beetle) and Dipteran (true fly) insect pests. The bacterium is available to organic farmers in sachets of dried spores which are mixed with water and sprayed onto vulnerable plants such as brassicas and fruit trees. Genes from B. thuringiensis have also been incorporated into transgenic crops, making the plants express some of the bacterium's toxins, which are proteins. These confer resistance to insect pests and thus reduce the necessity for pesticide use. If pests develop resistance to the toxins in these crops, B. thuringiensis will become useless in organic farming also. The bacterium Paenibacillus popilliae which causes milky spore disease has been found useful in the control of Japanese beetle, killing the larvae. It is very specific to its host species and is harmless to vertebrates and other invertebrates.

Fungi

Green peach aphid, a pest in its own right and a vector of plant viruses, killed by the fungus Pandora neoaphidis (Zygomycota: Entomophthorales) Scale bar = 0.3 mm.
 
Entomopathogenic fungi, which cause disease in insects, include at least 14 species that attack aphids. Beauveria bassiana is mass-produced and used to manage a wide variety of insect pests including whiteflies, thrips, aphids and weevils. Lecanicillium spp. are deployed against white flies, thrips and aphids. Metarhizium spp. are used against pests including beetles, locusts and other grasshoppers, Hemiptera, and spider mites. Paecilomyces fumosoroseus is effective against white flies, thrips and aphids; Purpureocillium lilacinus is used against root-knot nematodes, and 89 Trichoderma species against certain plant pathogens. Trichoderma viride has been used against Dutch elm disease, and has shown some effect in suppressing silver leaf, a disease of stone fruits caused by the pathogenic fungus Chondrostereum purpureum.

The fungi Cordyceps and Metacordyceps are deployed against a wide spectrum of arthropods. Entomophaga is effective against pests such as the green peach aphid.

Several members of Chytridiomycota and Blastocladiomycota have been explored as agents of biological control. From Chytridiomycota, Synchytrium solstitiale is being considered as a control agent of the yellow star thistle (Centaurea solstitialis) in the United States.

Viruses

Baculoviruses are specific to individual insect host species and have been shown to be useful in biological pest control. For example, the Lymantria dispar multicapsid nuclear polyhedrosis virus has been used to spray large areas of forest in North America where larvae of the gypsy moth are causing serious defoliation. The moth larvae are killed by the virus they have eaten and die, the disintegrating cadavers leaving virus particles on the foliage to infect other larvae.

A mammalian virus, the rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus was introduced to Australia to attempt to control the European rabbit populations there. It escaped from quarantine and spread across the country, killing large numbers of rabbits. Very young animals survived, passing immunity to their offspring in due course and eventually producing a virus-resistant population. Introduction into New Zealand in the 1990s was similarly successful at first, but a decade later, immunity had developed and populations had returned to pre-RHD levels.

Oomycota

Lagenidium giganteum is a water-borne mould that parasitizes the larval stage of mosquitoes. When applied to water, the motile spores avoid unsuitable host species and search out suitable mosquito larval hosts. This mould has the advantages of a dormant phase, resistant to desiccation, with slow-release characteristics over several years. Unfortunately, it is susceptible to many chemicals used in mosquito abatement programmes.

Competitors

The legume vine Mucuna pruriens is used in the countries of Benin and Vietnam as a biological control for problematic Imperata cylindrica grass: the vine is extremely vigorous and suppresses neighbouring plants by out-competing them for space and light. Mucuna pruriens is said not to be invasive outside its cultivated area. Desmodium uncinatum can be used in push-pull farming to stop the parasitic plant, witchweed (Striga).

The Australian bush fly, Musca vetustissima, is a major nuisance pest in Australia, but native decomposers found in Australia are not adapted to feeding on cow dung, which is where bush flies breed. Therefore, the Australian Dung Beetle Project (1965–1985), led by George Bornemissza of the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, released forty-nine species of dung beetle, to reduce the amount of dung and therefore also the potential breeding sites of the fly.

Combined use of parasitoids and pathogens

In cases of massive and severe infection of invasive pests, techniques of pest control are often used in combination. An example is the emerald ash borer, Agrilus planipennis, an invasive beetle from China, which has destroyed tens of millions of ash trees in its introduced range in North America. As part of the campaign against it, from 2003 American scientists and the Chinese Academy of Forestry searched for its natural enemies in the wild, leading to the discovery of several parasitoid wasps, namely Tetrastichus planipennisi, a gregarious larval endoparasitoid, Oobius agrili, a solitary, parthenogenic egg parasitoid, and Spathius agrili, a gregarious larval ectoparasitoid. These have been introduced and released into the United States of America as a possible biological control of the emerald ash borer. Initial results for Tetrastichus planipennisi have shown promise, and it is now being released along with Beauveria bassiana, a fungal pathogen with known insecticidal properties.

Difficulties

Many of the most important pests are exotic, invasive species that severely impact agriculture, horticulture, forestry and urban environments. They tend to arrive without their co-evolved parasites, pathogens and predators, and by escaping from these, populations may soar. Importing the natural enemies of these pests may seem a logical move but this may have unintended consequences; regulations may be ineffective and there may be unanticipated effects on biodiversity, and the adoption of the techniques may prove challenging because of a lack of knowledge among farmers and growers.

Side effects

Biological control can affect biodiversity through predation, parasitism, pathogenicity, competition, or other attacks on non-target species. An introduced control does not always target only the intended pest species; it can also target native species. In Hawaii during the 1940s parasitic wasps were introduced to control a lepidopteran pest and the wasps are still found there today. This may have a negative impact on the native ecosystem; however, host range and impacts need to be studied before declaring their impact on the environment.

Cane toad (introduced into Australia 1935) spread from 1940 to 1980: it was ineffective as a control agent. Its distribution has continued to widen since 1980.
 
Vertebrate animals tend to be generalist feeders, and seldom make good biological control agents; many of the classic cases of "biocontrol gone awry" involve vertebrates. For example, the cane toad (Rhinella marina) was intentionally introduced to Australia to control the greyback cane beetle (Dermolepida albohirtum), and other pests of sugar cane. 102 toads were obtained from Hawaii and bred in captivity to increase their numbers until they were released into the sugar cane fields of the tropic north in 1935. It was later discovered that the toads could not jump very high and so were unable to eat the cane beetles which stayed on the upper stalks of the cane plants. However, the toad thrived by feeding on other insects and soon spread very rapidly; it took over native amphibian habitat and brought foreign disease to native toads and frogs, dramatically reducing their populations. Also, when it is threatened or handled, the cane toad releases poison from parotoid glands on its shoulders; native Australian species such as goannas, tiger snakes, dingos and northern quolls that attempted to eat the toad were harmed or killed. However, there has been some recent evidence that native predators are adapting, both physiologically and through changing their behaviour, so in the long run, their populations may recover.

Rhinocyllus conicus, a seed-feeding weevil, was introduced to North America to control exotic musk thistle (Carduus nutans) and Canadian thistle (Cirsium arvense). However, the weevil also attacks native thistles, harming such species as the endemic Platte thistle (Cirsium neomexicanum) by selecting larger plants (which reduced the gene pool), reducing seed production and ultimately threatening the species' survival. Similarly, the weevil Larinus planus was also used to try to control the Canadian thistle, but it damaged other thistles as well. This included one species classified as threatened.

The small Asian mongoose (Herpestus javanicus) was introduced to Hawaii in order to control the rat population. However, the mongoose was diurnal, and the rats emerged at night; the mongoose therefore preyed on the endemic birds of Hawaii, especially their eggs, more often than it ate the rats, and now both rats and mongooses threaten the birds. This introduction was undertaken without understanding the consequences of such an action. No regulations existed at the time, and more careful evaluation should prevent such releases now.

The sturdy and prolific eastern mosquitofish (Gambusia holbrooki) is a native of the southeastern United States and was introduced around the world in the 1930s and '40s to feed on mosquito larvae and thus combat malaria. However, it has thrived at the expense of local species, causing a decline of endemic fish and frogs through competition for food resources, as well as through eating their eggs and larvae. In Australia, control of the mosquitofish is the subject of discussion; in 1989 researchers A. H. Arthington and L. L. Lloyd stated that "biological population control is well beyond present capabilities".

Grower education

A potential obstacle to the adoption of biological pest control measures is that growers may prefer to stay with the familiar use of pesticides. However, pesticides have undesired effects, including the development of resistance among pests, and the destruction of natural enemies; these may in turn enable outbreaks of pests of other species than the ones originally targeted, and on crops at a distance from those treated with pesticides. One method of increasing grower adoption of biocontrol methods involves letting them learn by doing, for example showing them simple field experiments, enabling them to observe the live predation of pests, or demonstrations of parasitised pests. In the Philippines, early season sprays against leaf folder caterpillars were common practice, but growers were asked to follow a 'rule of thumb' of not spraying against leaf folders for the first 30 days after transplanting; participation in this resulted in a reduction of insecticide use by 1/3 and a change in grower perception of insecticide use.

Paul Ehrlich

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Paul Ehrlich

Paul Ehrlich 1915.jpg
Born14 March 1854
Died20 August 1915 (aged 61)
Bad Homburg, Hesse, Germany
CitizenshipGerman
Known forChemotherapy, Immunology
Spouse(s)Hedwig Pinkus (1864–1948) (m. 1883; 2 children)
ChildrenStephanie and Marianne
AwardsNobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine (1908)
Scientific career
FieldsImmunology
Notable studentsHans Schlossberger
Signature
Paul Ehrlich signature.png

Paul Ehrlich was a Nobel prize-winning German-Jewish physician and scientist who worked in the fields of hematology, immunology, and antimicrobial chemotherapy. He is credited with finding a cure for syphilis in 1909. He invented the precursor technique to Gram staining bacteria. The methods he developed for staining tissue made it possible to distinguish between different types of blood cells, which led to the capability to diagnose numerous blood diseases.

His laboratory discovered arsphenamine (Salvarsan), the first effective medicinal treatment for syphilis, thereby initiating and also naming the concept of chemotherapy. Ehrlich popularized the concept of a magic bullet. He also made a decisive contribution to the development of an antiserum to combat diphtheria and conceived a method for standardizing therapeutic serums.

In 1908, he received the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his contributions to immunology. He was the founder and first director of what is now known as the Paul Ehrlich Institute.

Life and career

Born 14 March 1854 in Strehlen in Silesia in what is now south-west Poland.

Paul Ehrlich was the second child of Rosa (Weigert) and Ismar Ehrlich. His father was an innkeeper and distiller of liqueurs and the royal lottery collector in Strehelen, a town of some 5,000 inhabitants in the province of Lower Silesia, now in Poland. His grandfather, Heymann Ehrlich, had been a fairly successful distiller and tavern manager. Ismar Ehrlich was the leader of the local Jewish community.

After elementary school, Paul attended the time-honored secondary school Maria-Magdalenen-Gymnasium in Breslau, where he met Albert Neisser, who later became a professional colleague. As a schoolboy (inspired by his cousin Karl Weigert who owned one of the first microtomes), he became fascinated by the process of staining microscopic tissue substances. He retained that interest during his subsequent medical studies at the universities of Breslau, Strasbourg, Freiburg im Breisgau and Leipzig. After obtaining his doctorate in 1882, he worked at the Charité in Berlin as an assistant medical director under Theodor Frerichs, the founder of experimental clinical medicine, focusing on histology, hematology and color chemistry (dyes).

He married Hedwig Pinkus (1864–1948) in 1883 in the synagogue in Neustadt. The couple had two daughters, Stephanie and Marianne. Hedwig was a sister of Max Pinkus, who was an owner of the textile factory in Neustadt (later known as ZPB "Frotex"). 

Commemorative plaque at Bergstraße 96 in Berlin-Steglitz, where Ehrlich lived and worked from 1890 to 1899
 
After completing his clinical education and habilitation at the prominent Charité medical school and teaching hospital in Berlin in 1886, Ehrlich traveled to Egypt and other countries in 1888 and 1889, in part to cure a case of tuberculosis which he had contracted in the laboratory. Upon his return he established a private medical practice and small laboratory in Berlin-Steglitz. In 1891, Robert Koch invited Ehrlich to join the staff at his Berlin Institute of Infectious Diseases, where in 1896 a new branch, the Institute for Serum Research and Testing (Institut für Serumforschung und Serumprüfung), was established for Ehrlich's specialization. Ehrlich was named its founding director.

Ehrlich's grave in the Jewish cemetery on Rat-Beil-Straße in Frankfurt am Main
 
In 1899 his institute moved to Frankfurt am Main and was renamed the Institute of Experimental Therapy (Institut für experimentelle Therapie). One of his important collaborators there was Max Neisser. In 1904, Ehrlich received a full position of honorary professor from the University of Göttingen. In 1906 Ehrlich became the director of the Georg Speyer House in Frankfurt, a private research foundation affiliated with his institute. Here he discovered in 1909 the first drug to be targeted against a specific pathogen: Salvarsan, a treatment for syphilis, which was at that time one of the most lethal and infectious diseases in Europe. Among the foreign guest scientists working with Ehrlich were two Nobel Prize winners, Henry Hallett Dale and Paul Karrer. The institute was renamed Paul Ehrlich Institute in Ehrlich's honour in 1947. 

In 1914 Ehrlich signed the controversial Manifesto of the Ninety-Three which was a defense of Germany's World War I politics and militarism. On 17 August 1915 Ehrlich suffered a heart attack and died on 20 August in Bad Homburg vor der Höhe. Wilhelm II the German emperor, wrote in a telegram of condolence, “I, along with the entire civilized world, mourn the death of this meritorious researcher for his great service to medical science and suffering humanity; his life’s work ensures undying fame and the gratitude of both his contemporaries and posterity”.

Paul Ehrlich was buried at the Old Jewish Cemetery, Frankfurt (Block 114 N).

Research

Hematological staining

In the early 1870s, Ehrlich's cousin Karl Weigert was the first person to stain bacteria with dyes and to introduce aniline pigments for histological studies and bacterial diagnostics. During his studies in Strassburg under the anatomist Heinrich Wilhelm Waldeyer, Ehrlich continued the research started by his cousin in pigments and staining tissues for microscopic study. He spent his eighth university semester in Freiburg im Breisgau investigating primarily the red dye dahlia (monophenylrosanilin), giving rise to his first publication.

In 1878 he followed his dissertation supervisor Julius Friedrich Cohnheim to Leipzig, and that year obtained a doctorate with a dissertation entitled "Contributions to the Theory and Practice of Histological Staining" (Beiträge zur Theorie und Praxis der histologischen Färbung).

Photo of cultured mast cells at 100X stained with Tol Blue
 
One of the most outstanding results of his dissertation investigations was the discovery of a new cell type. Ehrlich discovered in the protoplasm of supposed plasma cells a granulate which could be made visible with the help of an alkaline dye. He thought this granulate was a sign of good nourishment, and accordingly named these cells mast cells, (from the German word for an animal-fattening feed, Mast). This focus on chemistry was unusual for a medical dissertation. In it, Ehrlich presented the entire spectrum of known staining techniques and the chemistry of the pigments employed. While he was at the Charité, Ehrlich elaborated upon the differentiation of white blood cells according to their different granules. A precondition was a dry specimen technique, which he also developed. A drop of blood placed between two glass slides and heated over a Bunsen burner fixed the blood cells while still allowing them to be stained. Ehrlich used both alkaline and acid dyes, and also created new “neutral” dyes. For the first time this made it possible to differentiate the lymphocytes among the leucocytes (white blood cells). By studying their granulation he could distinguish between nongranular lymphocytes, mono- and poly-nuclear leucocytes, eosinophil granulocytes, and mast cells. 

Starting in 1880, Ehrlich also studied red blood cells. He demonstrated the existence of nucleated red blood cells, which he subdivided into normoblasts, megaloblasts, microblasts and poikiloblasts; he had discovered the precursors of erythrocytes. Ehrlich thus also laid the basis for the analysis of anemias, after he had created the basis for systematizing leukemias with his investigation of white blood cells. 

His duties at the Charité included analyzing patients’ blood and urine specimens. In 1881 he published a new urine test which could be used to distinguish various types of typhoid from simple cases of diarrhea. The intensity of staining made possible a disease prognosis. The pigment solution he used is known today as Ehrlich's reagent. Ehrlich's great achievement, but also a source of problems during his further career, was that he had initiated a new field of study interrelating chemistry, biology and medicine. Much of his work was rejected by the medical profession, which lacked the requisite chemical knowledge. It also meant that there was no suitable professorship in sight for Ehrlich.

Serum research

Friendship with Robert Koch

Robert Koch, around 1900
 
When a student in Breslau, Ehrlich was given an opportunity by the pathologist Julius Friedrich Cohnheim to conduct extensive research and was also introduced to Robert Koch, who was at the time a district physician in Wollstein, Posen Province. In his spare time, Koch had clarified the life cycle of the anthrax pathogen and had contacted Ferdinand Cohn, who was quickly convinced by Koch's work and introduced him to his Breslau colleagues. From 30 April to 2 May 1876, Koch presented his investigations in Breslau, which the student Paul Ehrlich was able to attend. 

On 24 March 1882, Ehrlich was present when Robert Koch, working since 1880 at the Imperial Public Health Office (Kaiserliches Gesundheitsamt) in Berlin, presented the lecture in which he reported how he was able to identify the tuberculosis pathogen. Ehrlich later described this lecture as his “greatest experience in science.” The day after Koch's lecture, Ehrlich had already made an improvement to Koch's staining method, which Koch unreservedly welcomed. From this date on, the two men were bound in friendship. 

In 1887 Ehrlich became an unsalaried lecturer in internal medicine (Privatdozent für Innere Medizin) at Berlin University, and in 1890 took over the tuberculosis station at a public hospital in Berlin-Moabit at Koch's request. This was where Koch's hoped-for tuberculosis therapeutic agent tuberculin was under study; and Ehrlich had even injected himself with it. In the ensuing tuberculin scandal, Ehrlich tried to support Koch and stressed the value of tuberculin for diagnostic purposes. In 1891 Koch invited Ehrlich to work at the newly founded Institute of Infectious Diseases (Institut für Infektionskrankheiten – now the Robert Koch Institute) at Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität (now Humboldt University) in Berlin. Koch was unable to give him any remuneration, but did offer him full access to laboratory staff, patients, chemicals and laboratory animals, which Ehrlich always remembered with gratitude.

First work on immunity

Ehrlich had started his first experiments on immunization already in his private laboratory. He accustomed mice to the poisons ricin and abrin. After feeding them with small but increasing dosages of ricin he ascertained that they had become "ricin-proof." Ehrlich interpreted this as immunization and observed that it was abruptly initiated after a few days and was still in existence after several months, but mice immunized against ricin were just as sensitive to abrin as untreated animals.

This was followed by investigations on the "inheritance" of acquired immunity. It was already known that in some cases after a smallpox or syphilis infection, specific immunity was transmitted from the parents to their offspring. Ehrlich rejected inheritance in the genetic sense because the offspring of a male mouse immunized against abrin and an untreated female mouse were not immune to abrin. He concluded that the fetus was supplied with antibodies via the pulmonary circulation of the mother. This idea was supported by the fact that this “inherited immunity” decreased after a few months. In another experiment he exchanged the offspring of treated and untreated female mice. The mice which were nursed by the treated females were protected from the poison, providing the proof that antibodies can also be conveyed in milk. 

Ehrlich also researched autoimmunity, but he specifically rejected the possibility that an organism's immune system could attack the organism's own tissue calling it "horror autotoxicus." Ironically it was Ehrlich's student, Ernest Witebsky, who demonstrated that autoimmunity could cause disease in humans.

Work with Behring on a diphtheria serum

Emil Behring had worked at the Berlin Institute of Infectious Diseases until 1893 on developing an antiserum for treating diphtheria and tetanus but with inconsistent results. Koch suggested that Behring and Ehrlich cooperate on the project. This joint work was successful to the extent that Ehrlich was quickly able to increase the level of immunity of the laboratory animals based on his experience with mice. Clinical tests with diphtheria serum early in 1894 were successful and in August the chemical company Hoechst started to market Behring's “Diphtheria Remedy synthesized by Behring-Ehrlich.” The two discoverers had originally agreed to share any profits after the Hoechst share had been subtracted. Their contract was changed several times and finally Ehrlich was eventually pressured into accepting a profit share of only eight percent. Ehrlich resented what he considered as unfair treatment, and his relationship with Behring was thereafter problematic, a situation which later escalated over the issue of the valency of tetanus serum. Ehrlich recognized that the principle of serum therapy had been developed by Behring and Kitasato. But he was of the opinion that he had been the first to develop a serum which could also be used on humans, and that his role in developing the diphtheria serum had been insufficiently acknowledged. Behring, for his part, schemed against Ehrlich at the Prussian Ministry of Culture, and from 1900 on Ehrlich refused to collaborate with him. von Behring was the sole recipient of the first Nobel Prize in Medicine, in 1901, for contributions to research on diphtheria.

The valency of serums

Commemorative plaque at the entrance of the anatomy institute of Freiburg Univeristy where Paul Ehrlich, as a medical student in the winter semester 1875/76, discovered the mast cells.
 
Since antiserums were an entirely new type of medicine whose quality was highly variable, a government system was established to guarantee their safety and effectiveness. Beginning 1 April 1895, only government-approved serum could be sold in the German Reich. The testing station for diphtheria serum was provisionally housed at the Institute of Infectious Diseases. At the initiative of Friedrich Althoff, an Institute of Serum Research and Testing (Institut für Serumforschung und Serumprüfung) was established in 1896 in Berlin-Steglitz, with Paul Ehrlich as director (which required him to cancel all his contracts with Hoechst). In this function and as honorary professor at Berliner University he had annual earnings of 6,000 marks, approximately the salary of a university professor. In addition to a testing department the institute also had a research department.

In order to determine the effectiveness of diphtheria antiserum, a stable concentration of diphtheria toxin was required. Ehrlich discovered that the toxin being used was perishable, in contrast to what had been assumed, which for him led to two consequences: He did not use the toxin as a standard, but instead a serum powder developed by Behring, which had to be dissolved in liquid shortly before use. The strength of a test toxin was first determined in comparison with this standard. The test toxin could then be used as a reference for testing other serums. For the test itself, toxin and serum were mixed in a ratio so that their effects just cancelled each other when injected into a guinea pig. But since there was a large margin in determining whether symptoms of illness were present, Ehrlich established an unambiguous target: the death of the animal. The mixture was to be such that the test animal would die after four days. If it died earlier, the serum was too weak and was rejected. Ehrlich claimed to have made the determination of the valency of serum as accurate as it would be with chemical titration. This again demonstrates his tendency to quantify the life sciences. 

Influenced by the mayor of Frankfurt am Main, Franz Adickes, who endeavored to establish science institutions in Frankfurt in preparation of the founding of a university, Ehrlich's institute moved to Frankfurt In 1899 and was renamed the Royal Prussian Institute of Experimental Therapy (Königlich Preußisches Institut für Experimentelle Therapie). The German quality-control methodology was copied by government serum institutes all over the world, and they also obtained the standard serum from Frankfurt. After diphtheria antiserum, tetanus serum and various bactericide serums for use in veterinary medicine were developed in rapid sequence. These were also evaluated at the institute, as was tuberculin and later on various vaccines. Ehrlich's most important colleague at the institute was the Jewish doctor and biologist Julius Morgenroth.

Ehrlich’s side-chain theory

Paul Ehrlich around 1900 in his Frankfurt office
 
He postulated that cell protoplasm contains special structures which have chemical side chains (today's term is macromolecules) to which the toxin binds, affecting function. If the organism survives the effects of the toxin, the blocked side-chains are replaced by new ones. This regeneration can be trained, the name for this phenomenon being immunization. If the cell produces a surplus of side chains, these might also be released into the blood as antibodies. 

In the following years Ehrlich expanded his side chain theory using concepts (“amboceptors,” “receptors of the first, second and third order,” etc.) which are no longer customary. Between the antigen and the antibody he assumed there was an additional immune molecule, which he called an “additive” or a “complement.” For him, the side chain contained at least two functional groups.

For providing a theoretical basis for immunology as well as for his work on serum valency, Ehrlich was awarded the Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine in 1908 together with Élie Metchnikoff. Metchnikoff, who had researched the cellular branch of immunity, Phagocytosis, at the Pasteur Institute had previously sharply attacked Ehrlich.

Cancer research

In 1901, the Prussian Ministry of Finance criticized Ehrlich for exceeding his budget and as a consequence reduced his income. In this situation Althoff arranged a contact with Georg Speyer, a Jewish philanthropist and joint owner of the bank house Lazard Speyer-Ellissen. The cancerous disease of Princess Victoria, the widow of the German Emperor Friedrich II, had received much public attention and prompted a collection among wealthy Frankfurt citizens, including Speyer, in support of cancer research. Ehrlich had also received from the German Emperor Wilhelm II a personal request to devote all his energy to cancer research. Such efforts led to the founding of a department for cancer research affiliated with the Institute of Experimental Therapy. The chemist Gustav Embden, among others, worked there. Ehrlich informed his sponsors that cancer research meant basic research, and that a cure could not be expected soon.

Among the results achieved by Ehrlich and his research colleagues was the insight that when tumors are cultivated by transplanting tumor cells, their malignancy increases from generation to generation. If the primary tumor is removed, then metastasis precipitously increases. Ehrlich applied bacteriological methods to cancer research. In analogy to vaccination, he attempted to generate immunity to cancer by injecting weakened cancer cells. Both in cancer research and chemotherapy research (see below) he introduced the methodologies of Big Science.

Chemotherapy

In vivo staining

In 1885 Ehrlich‘s monograph "The Need of the Organism for Oxygen," (Das Sauerstoffbedürfnis des Organismus- Eine farbenanalytische Studie) appeared, which he also submitted as a habilitation thesis. In it he introduced the new technology of in vivo staining. One of his findings was that pigments can only be easily assimilated by living organisms if they are in granular form. He injected the dyes alizarin blue and indophenol blue into laboratory animals and established after their death that various organs had been colored to different degrees. In organs with high oxygen saturation, indophenol was retained; in organs with medium saturation, indophenol was reduced, but not alizarin blue. And in areas with low oxygen saturation, both pigments were reduced. With this work, Ehrlich also formulated the conviction which guided his research: that all life processes can be traced to processes of physical chemistry occurring in the cell.

Methylene blue

Staining in vivo with methylene blue of a cell from the mucous membrane of a human mouth
 
In the course of his investigations Ehrlich came across methylene blue, which he regarded as particularly suitable for staining bacteria. Later, Robert Koch also used methylene blue as a dye in his research on the tuberculosis pathogen. In Ehrlich's view, an added benefit was that methylene blue also stained the long appendages of nerve cells, the axons. He initiated a doctoral dissertation on the subject, but did not follow up the topic himself. It was the opinion of the neurologist Ludwig Edinger that Ehrlich had thereby opened up a major new topic in the field of neurology

After mid-1889, when Ehrlich was unemployed, he privately continued his research on methylene blue. His work on in vivo staining gave him the idea of using it therapeutically. Since the parasite family of Plasmodiidae – which includes the malaria pathogen – can be stained with methylene blue, he thought it could possibly be used in the treatment of malaria. In the case of two patients so treated at the city hospital in Berlin-Moabit, their fever indeed subsided and the malaria plasmodia disappeared from their blood. Ehrlich obtained methylene blue from the company Meister Lucius & Brüning AG (later renamed Hoechst AG), which started a long collaboration with this company.

The search for a chemotherapia specifica

Before the Institute of Experimental Therapy had moved to Frankfurt, Ehrlich had already resumed work on methylene blue. After the death of Georg Speyer, his widow Franziska Speyer endowed the Georg-Speyer House in his memory which was erected next door to Ehrlich's institute. As director of the Georg-Speyer House, Ehrlich transferred his chemotherapeutic research there. He was looking for an agent which was as effective as methylene blue, but without its side effects. His model was on the one hand the impact of quinine on malaria, and on the other hand, in analogy to serum therapy, he thought there must also be chemical pharmaceuticals which would have just as specific an effect on individual diseases. His goal was to find a "Therapia sterilisans magna," in other words a treatment that could kill all disease pathogens. 

Dr. Paul Ehrlich and Dr. Sahachiro Hata
 
As a model for experimental therapy Ehrlich used a guinea pig disease trypanosoma and tested out various chemical substances on laboratory animals. The trypanosomes could indeed be successfully killed with the dye trypan red. Beginning in 1906, he intensively investigated atoxyl and had it tested by Robert Koch along with other arsenic compounds during Koch's sleeping sickness expedition of 1906/07. Although the name literally means “nonpoisonous,” atoxyl does cause damage, especially to the optic nerve. Ehrlich elaborated the systematic testing of chemical compounds in the sense of screening as now practiced in the pharmaceutical industry. He discovered that Compound 418 - Arsenophenylglycine - had an impressive therapeutic effect and had it tested in Africa.

With the support of his assistant Sahachiro Hata Ehrlich discovered in 1909 that Compound 606, Arsphenamine, effectively combatted "spirillum" spirochaetes bacteria, one of whose subspecies causes syphilis. The compound proved to have few side effects in human trials, and the spirochetes disappeared in seven syphilis patients after this treatment. 

After extensive clinical testing (all the research participants had the negative example of tuberculin in mind) the Hoechst company began to market the compound toward the end of 1910 under the name Salvarsan. This was the first agent with a specific therapeutic effect to be created on the basis of theoretical considerations. Salvarsan proved to be amazingly effective, particularly when compared with the conventional therapy of mercury salts. Manufactured by Hoechst AG, Salvarsan became the most widely prescribed drug in the world. It was the most effective drug for treating syphilis until penicillin became available in the 1940s. Salvarsan required improvement as to side effects and solubility and was replaced in 1911 with Neosalvarsan. Ehrlich's work illuminated the existence of the blood-brain barrier, although he himself never believed in such a barrier, with Professor Lina Stern later coining the phrase. 

The medication triggered the so-called "Salvarsan war." On one side there was hostility on the part of those who feared a resulting moral breakdown of sexual inhibitions. Ehrlich was also accused, with clearly anti-Semitic undertones, of excessively enriching himself. In addition, Ehrlich's associate, Paul Uhlenhuth claimed priority in discovering the drug. 

Because some people died during the clinical testing, Ehrlich was accused of "stopping at nothing." In 1914, one of the most prominent accusers was convicted of criminal libel at a trial for which Ehrlich was called to testify. Though Ehrlich was thereby exonerated, the ordeal threw him into a depression from which he never fully recovered.

Magic bullet

Ehrlich reasoned that if a compound could be made that selectively targeted a disease-causing organism, then a toxin for that organism could be delivered along with the agent of selectivity. Hence, a "magic bullet" (magische Kugel, his term for an ideal therapeutic agent) would be created that killed only the organism targeted. The concept of a "magic bullet" has to some extent been realized by the development of antibody-drug conjugates (a monoclonal antibody linked to a cytotoxic biologically active drug), as they enable cytotoxic drugs to be selectively delivered to their designated targets (e.g. cancer cells).

Legacy

West German postage stamp (1954) commemorating Paul Ehrlich and Emil von Behring
 
In 1910, a street was named after Ehrlich in Frankfurt-Sachsenhausen. During the Third Reich, Ehrlich's achievements were ignored while Emil Adolf von Behring was stylized as the ideal Aryan scientist, and the street named after Ehrlich was given another name. Shortly after the end of the war the name Paul-Ehrlich-Strasse was reinstated, and today numerous German cities have streets named after Paul Ehrlich. 

West Germany issued a postage stamp in 1954 on the 100th anniversary of the births of Paul Ehrlich (14 March 1854) and Emil von Behring (15 March 1854). 

A 200 Deutsche Mark bank note featured Paul Ehrlich.

The German Paul Ehrlich Institute, the successor to the Steglitz Institute for Serum Research and Serum Testing and the Frankfurt Royal Institute for Experimental Therapy, was named in 1947 after its first director, Paul Ehrlich.

1996 series 200 Deutsche Mark banknote
 
His name is also borne by many schools and pharmacies, by the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e. V. (PEG) in Frankfurt am Main, and the Paul-Ehrlich-Klinik in Bad Homburg vor der Höhe. The Paul Ehrlich and Ludwig Darmstaedter Prize is the most distinguished German award for biomedical research. A European network of PhD studies in Medicinal Chemistry has been named after him (Paul Ehrlich MedChem Euro PhD Network).

The Anti-Defamation League awards a Paul Ehrlich–Günther K. Schwerin Human Rights Prize.
A crater of the moon was named after Paul Ehrlich in 1970.

Ehrlich's life and work was featured in the 1940 U.S. film Dr. Ehrlich's Magic Bullet with Edward G. Robinson in the title role. It focused on Salvarsan (arsphenamine, "compound 606"), his cure for syphilis. Since the Nazi government was opposed to this tribute to a Jewish scientist, attempts were made to keep the film a secret in Germany.

Honors and titles

  • 1882 Awarded the title of Professor
  • 1890 Appointed Extraordinary Professor at the Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität (now Humboldt University)
  • 1896 Given the nonacademic Prussian title of a Medical Councillor (Geheimer Medizinalrat)
  • 1903 Awarded Prussia's highest distinction in science, the Great Golden Medal of Science (which had previously been awarded only to Rudolf Virchow)
  • 1904 Honorary professorship in Göttingen; honorary doctorate from the University of Chicago
  • 1907 Granted the seldom-awarded title Senior Medical Councillor (Geheimer Obermedizinalrat); granted an honorary doctorate from Oxford University
  • 1908 Awarded The Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his “work on immunity"
  • 1911 Granted Prussia's highest civilian award, Privy Councillor (Wirklicher Geheimer Rat with the predicate “Excellency”)
  • 1912 Made an honorary citizen of the city of Frankfurt a.M. and of his birthplace Strehlen
  • 1914 Appointed full Professor of Pharmacology at the newly established Frankfurt University.

Hydrogen-like atom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen-like_atom ...