Triin Kallavus
Jonathan Willow
Kristof De Schutter
Clauvis Nji Tizi Taning2†
Eve Veromann- 1Chair of Plant Health, Institute of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Estonian University of Life Sciences, Tartu, Estonia
- 2Molecular Entomology Lab, Department of Plants and Crops, Faculty of Bioscience Engineering, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
- 3Pheasants Forever and Quail Forever, St. James, MN, United States
Polymer-based delivery systems for double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) have gained attention as a promising strategy for RNA interference (RNAi)-mediated insect pest control. Despite encouraging in vitro results, their practical application remains limited by methodological inconsistencies and species-specific challenges. Variability in experimental parameters, such as nitrogen/phosphorous (N/P) ratios, dsRNA lengths, and buffer systems, complicates reproducibility and cross-study comparisons. Moreover, in vitro stability and transfection efficiency often fail to predict in vivo RNAi outcomes, highlighting the need for more physiologically relevant models. Variation in RNAi efficiency across insect orders, such as Lepidoptera and Hemiptera, continues to challenge the generalizability of polymer-based delivery systems. To advance the field, future research should focus on species-tailored polymer design, improved predictive assays, and comprehensive environmental safety evaluations. Interdisciplinary collaboration will be essential to develop RNAi delivery platforms that are efficient, scalable, and ecologically sustainable.
1 Introduction
RNA interference (RNAi) has emerged as a powerful and highly specific tool for insect pest control. By silencing essential genes through the delivery of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA), RNAi provides a sustainable alternative to conventional insecticides, which frequently drive resistance evolution, threaten non-target organisms and contribute to environmental contamination (1–4). The species-specific mode of action and capacity to target pests previously considered untreatable make RNAi an attractive component of integrated pest management (IPM) strategies (5). However, the practical implementation of RNAi-based strategies in insect pest management is hindered by multiple biological and technical challenges. One of the major limitations is the rapid degradation of dsRNA in insect gut, particularly in species with highly alkaline midgut environments and abundant nucleases, such as Lepidoptera (6–8). In addition to cellular uptake limitations, the endosomal escape of internalized dsRNA represents a critical barrier for achieving efficient RNA interference (4). Even when uptake occurs, dsRNA may be retained and degraded within endosomes, and the systemic spread of the RNAi signal often remains inefficient, restricting gene silencing to localized tissues (9). To overcome these obstacles, researchers have explored various delivery systems, among which polycationic polymers have shown considerable promise. These complexes are formed by electrostatic complexation between cationic polymers and dsRNA, resulting in nanoparticles that can protect dsRNA from enzymatic degradation, facilitate cellular uptake, and enhance delivery efficiency (6, 9).
The physicochemical properties of polyplexes, such as particle size, polydispersity index (PDI), and zeta potential, are strongly influenced by the polymer type and the nitrogen-to-phosphate (N/P) ratio used during complexation. These parameters determine the structural integrity, cellular uptake efficiency, and biological activity of the polyplexes (10). For example, near the isoelectric point, polyplexes tend to aggregate and form larger particles, while at optimal N/P ratios, they remain small and stable (11). Polymers with cationic and hydrophobic properties generally enhance dsRNA stability and cellular uptake (11). In particular, guanidine-containing polymers, whose hydrophobicity contributes to improved interaction with insect midgut cells, have demonstrated enhanced protection of dsRNA against nucleolytic degradation and more efficient internalization (6). Optimizing these parameters is therefore crucial for achieving stable and effective delivery systems in insect pest control (12).
Recent studies have demonstrated that polyplexes formed at optimized N/P ratios can exhibit favorable characteristics, such as small particle size, reduced surface charge, and improved RNA protection and transfection efficiency (13, 14). These physicochemical properties are critical to ensure efficient cellular uptake and minimize premature degradation. However, increasing polymer concentration beyond optimal levels may lead to non-specific toxicity, primarily due to the high density of positive charges in polycationic carriers, which can destabilize cellular membranes (6, 12). To mitigate this, chemical modifications such as the incorporation of guanidine groups—known for their ability to distribute charge more evenly—have been shown to reduce membrane disruption and improve biocompatibility.
While polymer-based RNAi delivery has demonstrated promising outcomes in certain some insect taxa, like coleoptera, numerous studies report limited or inconsistent gene knockdown in other taxa, like lepidopteran pests (6, 15, 16). These variable results underscore that delivery success is highly context-dependent and that polymer design and administration strategies must be carefully tailored to the physiological and cellular characteristics of each target species. Recognizing and addressing these limitations is critical for developing broadly effective RNAi platforms for pest management.
This review focuses on the complexation of dsRNA with polycationic polymers, the stability of resulting polyplexes, and the criteria for selecting suitable nanocarriers for RNAi delivery in insect systems. By synthesizing current knowledge, we aim to provide a conceptual framework for the rational design of RNAi-based pest control strategies that are tailored to the unique physiological barriers of insect pests.
2 Design and evaluation of polymeric nanocarriers for insect RNAi delivery
2.1 Polymeric nanocarriers in insect RNAi
Polymers can play a pivotal role in the delivery of dsRNA, the primary active molecule used in RNAi-based pest control strategies. By forming protective complexes with dsRNA, polymers shield it from enzymatic degradation in both environmental and biological contexts, while also promoting cellular uptake and intracellular trafficking (17, 18). The inherent instability of unformulated (‘naked’) dsRNA – arising from factors such as ultraviolet (UV) radiation, microbial activity, and nuclease degradation, has driven the development of polymer-based nanocarriers designed to enhance its stability and bioavailability (9, 18).
Both synthetic and natural polymers have been explored for dsRNA delivery. Synthetic polymers, such as poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI), poly(2-aminoethyl methacrylate) (PAEMA), and poly(glycidyl methacrylate) (PGUMA), offer tunable chemical properties, including adjustable charge density and molecular weight, which are critical for optimizing dsRNA binding and cellular uptake (9, 19, 20). Natural polymers like chitosan are valued for their biocompatibility, biodegradability, and low toxicity, making them attractive for environmentally friendly applications (21–23).
Poly(ethyleneimine) (PEI) is one of the most extensively studied synthetic polymers for nucleic acid delivery, including dsRNA. Its high cationic charge density, stemming from abundant primary, secondary, and tertiary amine groups, enables strong electrostatic interactions with the negatively charged phosphate backbone of nucleic acids (24–26). This property allows PEI to condense dsRNA into stable polyplexes that protect it from enzymatic degradation and facilitate cellular uptake via endocytosis (27). PEI is available in both linear and branched forms, with molecular weights ranging from a few hundred Daltons (Da) to several hundred kilodaltons (kDa) (28, 29). Among these, branched PEI with a molecular weight of 25 kDa is commonly used due to its high transfection efficiency (30). However, this efficiency comes at the cost of increased cytotoxicity, which is directly correlated with molecular weight and charge density (24, 31). Lower molecular weight variants (e.g., 1.8 kDa) offer improved biocompatibility but reduced delivery efficiency (32). This limitation can be addressed by blending strategies, which involve mixing different polymers to combine their advantageous properties, or by chemical modifications that enhance cellular uptake or stability. The effects of polymer properties on dsRNA binding and uptake are detailed in Table 1.
Table 1. The effectiveness of polymers in dsRNA delivery is primarily governed by three key chemical properties.
To address the cytotoxicity and improve biocompatibility, PEI can be chemically modified. One common approach is PEGylation, where polyethylene glycol (PEG) chains are grafted onto the PEI backbone (33–35). This reduces surface charge, minimizes non-specific interactions, and enhances solubility and circulation time in biological systems (33, 35). Other modifications include acetylation, carboxylation, and hydroxylation, all aimed at shielding the positive charges and reducing membrane destabilization (35). PEI’s “proton sponge” effect, its ability to buffer endosomal pH, also contributes to efficient endosomal escape, a critical step in intracellular delivery of dsRNA (27). This mechanism allows PEI-based complexes to release their cargo into the cytoplasm, enhancing gene silencing efficacy. Despite its limitations, PEI remains a cornerstone material in non-viral gene and RNA delivery systems due to its tunability, strong nucleic acid binding, and versatile chemical reactivity (24, 35).
Poly(2-aminoethyl methacrylate) (PAEMA) and Poly(glycidyl methacrylate) (PGUMA) are methacrylate-based polymers that also offer highly tunable chemical properties, making them attractive candidates for nucleic acid delivery systems, including dsRNA (9, 36). PAEMA is a cationic polymer formed from the monomer 2-aminoethyl methacrylate, and its structure includes primary amine groups, which confer a high positive charge density. This enables strong electrostatic interactions with the negatively charged phosphate backbone of dsRNA, facilitating efficient complexation and protection against enzymatic degradation. PGUMA, on the other hand, contains reactive epoxide side chains, which allow for post-polymerization functionalization through nucleophilic ring-opening reactions (37). These reactions enable the incorporation of various functional groups, such as amines, thiols, azides, and acids, allowing for the addition of targeting ligands, stabilizing agents, or responsive moieties (38). This versatility makes PGUMA a highly adaptable scaffold for designing delivery systems tailored to specific biological environments or therapeutic goals. Both PAEMA and PGUMA are hydrophilic, which enhances their solubility and biocompatibility (39). Moreover, they can be synthesized with controlled molecular weights, allowing researchers to fine-tune their physical properties, such as particle size, charge density, and degradation rate, to optimize delivery performance (36). Recent studies have demonstrated that PAEMA derivatives, such as phenylboronic acid-functionalized PAEMA, can effectively bind siRNA due to their high-density positive charges, and facilitate cellular uptake and gene silencing (40, 41). Similarly, PGUMA-based systems have been used to create multifunctional nanoparticles for drug and gene delivery, benefiting from the polymer’s chemical reactivity and structural stability (42).
Chitosan, a natural cationic polysaccharide derived from chitin—the second most abundant biopolymer, is biodegradable, biocompatible, and low in toxicity, making it attractive for field applications. Its charge density, influenced by the degree of deacetylation, enhances interactions with negatively charged molecules such as dsRNA and siRNA. Chitosan is typically obtained from crustacean shells, a by-product of seafood processing, adding to its sustainability (43, 44). The property significantly improves its ability to form stable complexes for gene silencing purposes. Chitosan is also highly hydrophilic, which supports its solubility in aqueous environments and facilitates interactions with biological membranes (45). These characteristics make chitosan suitable for both mucosal and systemic delivery routes, as it can traverse epithelial barriers and maintain bioactivity under a range of physiological conditions.
In addition to widely studied carriers such as chitosan and guanidine-modified polymers, recent advances have introduced a broader spectrum of polymeric and nanoparticle-based systems for RNAi delivery in insect models. Notably, Layered Double Hydroxide (LDH) nanoparticles, also known as Bioclay, are promising carriers for dsRNA delivery due to their positively charged layered structure, which enables strong electrostatic interaction with negatively charged nucleic acids what have shown significant promise in enhancing dsRNA stability and systemic transport in plants (46–48). These carriers facilitate adhesion to leaf surfaces, internalization into plant cells, and translocation through vascular tissues, ultimately improving RNAi efficacy against piercing-sucking pests such as Aphis gossypii Glover (48).
Another innovative class includes Star Polycations (SPc), which are highly branched polycationic nanocarriers capable of forming stable complexes with dsRNA through electrostatic and hydrogen bonding interactions (9, 49). SPc-based systems have demonstrated enhanced protection of dsRNA against degradation by RNases and gut fluids, improved translocation across insect cuticle, and increased uptake in both plant and insect tissues. An overview of the polymers investigated for dsRNA delivery is provided in Table 2.
Table 2. Comparative overview of polymers used for dsRNA protection and delivery in RNAi-based pest control.
Previous studies have demonstrated the successful application of synthetic polymer-based nanocarriers for RNAi delivery in various insect species, underscoring the versatility and adaptability of these materials in entomological biotechnology. For example, Locusta migratoria L. was effectively treated using poly(ethylene glycol)-polylysine(thiol) [PEG-PLys(SH)], a block copolymer with thiol functionalities that facilitate conjugation and cellular uptake (50). In another case, the lepidopteran pest Spodoptera frugiperda J. E. Smith responded positively to treatment with the cationic polymer poly-[N-(3-guanidinopropyl)methacrylamide] (pGPMA), which exploits guanidinium groups to enhance membrane penetration and nucleic acid binding (51). Similarly, in Tribolium castaneum Herbst, researchers successfully employed polyamidoamine dendrimer-functionalized carbon nanotubes (PAMAM-CNTs), leveraging the high surface area and multivalent binding capacity of dendrimers to improve RNAi efficacy (52). The Star Polycations carriers have been successfully applied in pests such as Apolygus lucorum Meyer-Dür (49) and S. frugiperda (53) showing improved gene silencing and pest control outcomes.
These examples collectively illustrate how the structural design and chemical functionality of polymeric carriers, such as charge density, hydrophilicity, and the presence of reactive groups, can significantly influence their performance in terms of delivery efficiency, cellular uptake, and target specificity. The observed species-specific responses further suggest that tailoring polymer architecture to the physiological and cellular characteristics of the target insect is essential. Consequently, the rational selection and engineering of polymeric nanocarriers represent a critical step in optimizing RNAi-based pest control strategies across diverse insect taxa.
2.2 Mechanisms and parameters of polyplex formation
The formation of stable complexes between dsRNA and cationic polymers is primarily driven by electrostatic interactions, where the positively charged polymer binds to the negatively charged phosphate backbone of dsRNA (54, 55). This electrostatic attraction facilitates the condensation of dsRNA into nanoscale polyplexes, which not only protect the RNA from enzymatic degradation but also enhance cellular uptake by promoting endocytosis (9, 56). The strength and stability of these complexes are influenced by several factors, including the polymer’s charge density, molecular weight, and architecture. A well-balanced interaction ensures efficient complexation without inducing excessive cytotoxicity, which is critical for the development of safe and effective RNAi-based delivery systems.
A critical parameter in this process is the N/P ratio, which reflects the balance between the cationic groups of the polymer and the anionic phosphate groups of the nucleic acid (9, 21). Optimizing the N/P ratio is essential for achieving efficient complexation: low N/P ratios may result in incomplete binding between the cationic polymer and the negatively charged RNA molecules, leading to unstable complexes that are prone to degradation by nucleases and inefficient cellular uptake (54, 57). This is because insufficient polymer content fails to fully neutralize and condense the RNA, leaving portions exposed and unprotected. On the other hand, excessively high N/P ratios can introduce several adverse effects. The surplus of cationic polymer increases the overall positive charge of the complexes, which can disrupt cellular membranes and induce cytotoxicity. Moreover, high polymer content may promote aggregation of the complexes, reducing their colloidal stability and hindering uniform distribution. These aggregates are less likely to be internalized efficiently by cells and may also interfere with endosomal escape, ultimately lowering transfection efficiency. Therefore, optimizing the N/P ratio is crucial to balance RNA protection, cellular compatibility, and delivery performance (54, 57). This balance is crucial for ensuring both the stability of the polyplex and the biocompatibility of the delivery system (54, 55).
The efficiency of complex formation between dsRNA and cationic polymers is commonly assessed using gel electrophoresis-based techniques, particularly gel retardation assays, zeta potential measurements and electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSA) (25, 56). These methods exploit the principle that nucleic acid–polymer complexes exhibit reduced electrophoretic mobility compared to free dsRNA due to changes in charge and size. In a gel retardation assay, increasing amounts of polymer are incubated with a fixed amount of dsRNA, and the resulting complexes are analyzed on an agarose gel. A retarded or absent migration band indicates successful complexation. Similarly, EMSA is used to detect shifts in nucleic acid mobility upon binding to proteins or polymers, providing insights into binding affinity, stoichiometry, and complex stability (58). Although EMSA is useful for visualizing complex formation, it has limitations such as low quantitative precision, potential disruption of weak interactions during electrophoresis, and inability to reflect intracellular behavior.
Additionally, the architecture of the polymer, whether linear, branched, or dendritic, plays a significant role in complexation efficiency and biological performance. The structural configuration directly influences the polymer’s ability to condense nucleic acids, form stable complexes, and facilitate cellular uptake (24, 29). Branched and dendritic polymers, such as branched polyethylenimine (bPEI) and dendrimers, typically exhibit higher charge density and a greater number of multivalent binding sites compared to their linear counterparts (59). This multivalency enhances electrostatic interactions with negatively charged nucleic acids, resulting in more compact and stable complexes that are better protected from enzymatic degradation. Moreover, the increased surface functionality of branched and dendritic architectures allows for improved interaction with cellular membranes, promoting endocytosis and intracellular delivery (24, 29, 30). These features contribute to higher transfection efficiency, especially in hard-to-transfect cell types (60). However, the same properties that enhance delivery can also increase cytotoxicity, necessitating careful optimization of polymer size, branching degree, and surface modifications. Recent studies have systematically compared the performance of linear and branched PEI in siRNA delivery systems. For instance, Bansal et al. (61) demonstrated that branched PEI-functionalized silica nanoparticles significantly improved siRNA retention and cellular uptake in glioblastoma models. Lungu et al. (29) provided a comparative analysis of the physicochemical properties of linear versus branched PEI, highlighting differences in complex stability and gene silencing efficiency. Ismail and Chou (24) further emphasized the role of dendritic structures in enhancing multivalent interactions and intracellular trafficking. Mohammadi et al. (30) reviewed the implications of PEI architecture on therapeutic outcomes, noting that dendritic and branched forms often outperform linear PEI in terms of delivery efficiency, albeit with higher toxicity risks.
To evaluate the physical and structural characteristics of dsRNA–polymer polyplexes, a diverse array of analytical tools is employed. Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS) is widely used to determine particle size distribution and zeta potential, which provide insights into colloidal stability, surface charge, and aggregation behavior of polyplexes (62). These parameters are crucial for predicting cellular uptake and biodistribution. Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) enables direct visualization of polyplex morphology at the nanoscale, revealing shape, compactness, and structural uniformity (63, 64). This method is particularly valuable for confirming successful complexation and assessing physical integrity. Gel-based methods, such as agarose gel electrophoresis, are commonly used to assess dsRNA integrity and binding efficiency (56). In addition, Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) is a sensitive technique used to study RNA–polymer interactions by detecting shifts in electrophoretic mobility when complexes form. EMSA can be applied to RNA–RNA, RNA–protein, or RNA–polymer complexes, and is particularly useful for evaluating binding specificity and affinity (58). Non-radioactive EMSA variants using fluorescent or biotin-labeled probes have become increasingly popular due to safety and sensitivity advantages.
Complementary techniques further enhance polyplex characterization:
● Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) provides high-resolution topographical maps of polyplex surfaces, useful for evaluating surface roughness and mechanical properties (20, 65, 66).
● Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) identifies chemical interactions between dsRNA and polymer functional groups, such as hydrogen bonding or electrostatic interactions (6, 67).
● UV–Visible Spectroscopy (UV–Vis) is used to quantify dsRNA concentration and monitor complex formation through absorbance shifts, especially in systems involving chromophoric polymers or dyes (68, 69).
Together, these factors must be carefully tuned to develop effective and safe dsRNA delivery systems tailored to specific biological applications, as the interplay between polymer architecture, charge density, and multivalency directly influences the stability, cellular uptake, and gene silencing efficiency of the resulting complexes. Optimizing these parameters is essential not only for maximizing delivery efficacy but also for minimizing cytotoxicity and off-target effects, thereby ensuring compatibility with the physiological environment of the target organism.
2.3 Stability of dsRNA–polymer polyplexes
The effectiveness of polymer-based dsRNA delivery systems is closely tied to the stability of polyplexes within biological environments. Insect midgut conditions, particularly pH and enzymatic activity, pose significant challenges to dsRNA integrity. For instance, dsRNA degradation is accelerated at pH levels between 6 and 10, while lower pH values (3–5) slow down this process (7, 62, 70). The midgut pH varies across insect orders: Coleoptera and Hemiptera typically exhibit mildly acidic conditions, whereas Orthoptera, Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Hymenoptera tend to have more alkaline environments (71–73). These physiological differences directly impact RNAi efficiency and necessitate the tuning of polymer properties to match the target organism’s internal conditions.
Published studies illustrate the diversity in polyplex stability, which significantly influences RNAi outcomes. Guanidinium-functionalized polymers, such as poly(oxanorbornene)imide (PONI-Guan), have demonstrated exceptional stability and functionality (74, 75). These polymers protect siRNA from degradation and facilitate direct cytosolic delivery, bypassing endosomal entrapment. Notably, PONI-Guan polyplexes retain gene knockdown efficacy even after lyophilization and reconstitution, achieving up to 80% signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) knockdown and 70% inhibition of cell proliferation in vitro (74). In contrast, polyplexes formed with certain diblock copolymers or carriers with low charge density often exhibit poor stability under physiological or high-salt conditions, which compromises their in vivo applicability due to premature disassembly or insufficient cellular uptake (74). Comparative studies using fluorescence-based techniques, such as Förster Resonance Energy Transfer (FRET) and microscale thermophoresis (MST), have revealed that polyplexes with intermediate binding strength strike the optimal balance between extracellular protection and intracellular release. This balance is critical for effective RNAi, as overly strong binding can hinder cytosolic release, while weak binding may lead to premature degradation (74).
Polyplex stability is also highly sensitive to environmental factors such as pH, temperature, and ionic strength, which can significantly impact RNAi delivery efficiency. This is particularly evident in lepidopteran systems, where PAEMA-based polyplexes have shown poor stability, likely due to weak electrostatic interactions and lack of structural reinforcement (20). To overcome such limitations, chemical modifications can be introduced to enhance environmental resilience. For example, PGUMA, a guanidinium-functionalized polymer, has demonstrated improved stability at high pH due to its strong ionic interactions and ability to maintain compact polyplex structure even in basic conditions (76). Additionally, chemical crosslinking strategies, such as reducible click-linkages, can significantly improve polyplex stability under physiological conditions and reduce toxicity, offering a promising route for polymer modification (77).
In summary, ensuring the stability of dsRNA–polymer polyplexes is a critical step in developing effective RNAi delivery systems. This requires an integrated approach that considers environmental conditions, polymer architecture, and robust analytical characterization to support safe and targeted applications in insect pest management.
2.4 Biological performance and delivery efficiency
The efficacy of RNAi in insect pest management is strongly influenced by the chosen delivery method, the physiological barriers of the target species, and the design of the dsRNA–polymer complex. It is important to note that, despite advances in delivery technologies, RNAi effectiveness can vary widely across species and contexts, and successful gene knockdown is not always guaranteed. Delivery approaches such as oral feeding, injection, and topical application each offer distinct advantages and limitations depending on the biological and environmental context (20, 78–80). Oral delivery is particularly attractive for large-scale applications due to its non-invasive nature, but its success hinges on the stability of dsRNA in the insect gut and its ability to traverse the midgut epithelium. Injection bypasses digestive barriers and ensures direct access to the hemolymph, yet remains impractical for field deployment. Topical application, often enhanced by nanocarriers or surfactants, provides a compromise by enabling dsRNA absorption through the cuticle or ingestion during grooming.
A major challenge in oral and topical dsRNA delivery is its uptake across the insect midgut epithelium, which varies widely among insect orders. Coleopteran species, particularly members of the Chrysomelidae family such as the Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say) and the western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte) exhibit high RNAi responsiveness, whereas many Lepidoptera, Diptera, and Hemiptera species often show limited or inconsistent sensitivity due to factors such as gut nucleases (dsRNases), reduced cellular uptake, and inefficient systemic spread of the RNAi signal (74, 79, 80). The midgut epithelium functions as a selective barrier, and successful RNAi requires dsRNA to resist enzymatic degradation and be internalized via endocytosis or channel-mediated transport. Environmental stressors, including UV radiation and microbial degradation, further compromise dsRNA integrity prior to ingestion (81, 82).
To overcome these barriers, polyplex-based delivery systems have been developed, wherein dsRNA is complexed with cationic polymers or nanoparticles to enhance stability, protect against nucleases, and facilitate cellular uptake (54, 55). The physicochemical properties of these polyplexes, particularly particle size, charge density, and surface chemistry, play a critical role in determining RNAi efficacy across insect species (9, 21, 29). Polyplexes with intermediate binding strength often achieve an optimal balance between extracellular protection and intracellular release, ensuring that dsRNA remains intact during transit but is still accessible to the RNAi machinery once inside the cell. For instance, a comparative study in Aedes aegypti L. evaluated chitosan, carbon quantum dots, and silica nanoparticles for dsRNA delivery, showing that each system offered distinct advantages in stability, cellular uptake, and RNAi efficiency (83). This highlights the importance of tailoring nano-delivery strategies to the target species and biological context. Similarly, studies in orthopteran pests such as Schistocerca gregaria Forsskål and Melanoplus sanguinipes Fabricius demonstrated that nanoparticle-mediated dsRNA delivery improved stability and cellular uptake, but RNAi efficiency remained species-specific, highlighting the need to tailor delivery strategies to target insect physiology (84, 85).
However, even with optimized polyplexes, some species such as S. frugiperda and other lepidopterans or hemipterans may fail to show effective gene knockdown due to rapid dsRNA degradation, low endocytic activity, or other physiological barriers (16, 86–89). These outcomes illustrate that stability and delivery alone do not guarantee functional RNAi across all insect taxa.
In conclusion, the success of RNAi-based pest control strategies depends on a nuanced understanding of delivery routes, epithelial uptake mechanisms, and polyplex design. Integrating species-specific physiological data with polymer chemistry is essential for developing robust and scalable RNAi platforms suitable for diverse insect taxa and environmental conditions. It is important to note that even with optimized delivery systems, physiological and environmental barriers can limit RNAi effectiveness, indicating that stability and cellular uptake alone may not always ensure successful gene knockdown.
2.5 Design criteria for polymer selection
The development of effective polymer-based dsRNA delivery systems for insect pest management hinges on a careful balance of multiple design parameters. Prior studies have consistently emphasized four core criteria:
● Stability: Polymers must protect dsRNA from enzymatic degradation in the insect midgut and from environmental stressors such as UV radiation and microbial activity (21).
● Complexation Efficiency: Strong electrostatic interactions between cationic polymers and the negatively charged dsRNA backbone are essential for forming stable polyplexes that facilitate cellular uptake (9, 90).
● Toxicity: While high charge density improves delivery, it often correlates with increased cytotoxicity. Thus, polymer architecture and molecular weight must be optimized to minimize adverse effects to nontarget organisms (9, 21, 78).
● Biodegradability: Environmentally sustainable pest control requires polymers that degrade safely without accumulating in ecosystems or harming non-target organisms (78).
Despite these advances, several critical gaps remain in current research. One major limitation is the lack of standardized protocols for assessing polyplex stability, particularly under biologically relevant conditions such as insect midgut fluids or field environments (78). Additionally, comparative data across insect species are scarce, making it difficult to generalize findings or predict RNAi efficacy in non-model organisms (21). Finally, environmental safety assessments of polymer carriers are often underdeveloped, despite their importance for regulatory approval and ecological sustainability (78).
Addressing these gaps will be essential for advancing RNAi-based pest control technologies. Future research should prioritize cross-species comparative studies, harmonized testing protocols, and comprehensive environmental risk assessments to ensure safe and scalable deployment of polymer-based dsRNA delivery systems.
3 Discussion
Polymer-based dsRNA delivery systems have emerged as a promising tool in insect pest management, yet their practical implementation remains constrained by several unresolved challenges. While numerous studies have demonstrated the potential of cationic polymers to stabilize dsRNA and enhance cellular uptake, the current body of knowledge is fragmented and lacks methodological coherence, limiting reproducibility and field applicability (11, 91).
A key consideration in current research is the variation in experimental parameters, which can influence the interpretation and comparability of results. For example, studies differ in their use of N/P ratios, ranging from 1:1 to over 30:1, depending on the polymer type and target organism (91). These ratios affect both complexation efficiency and cytotoxicity, yet are rarely standardized across studies. dsRNA lengths vary widely—from short siRNA fragments (~21 bp) to long dsRNA molecules (>500 bp)—with intermediate-length strands (e.g., 100–300 bp) often offering a balance between silencing potency and stability. While longer dsRNAs can enhance RNAi efficacy by serving as Dicer substrates, they are also more susceptible to degradation, particularly in insect systems with high nuclease activity (92). Buffer systems such as phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid (HEPES), or tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (Tris) differ in ionic strength and pH, which can influence polyplex formation and stability, yet few studies compare their effects systematically (50). While these differences reflect the diversity of biological models and experimental goals, they also underscore the need for more harmonized approaches to support reproducibility and facilitate cross-study comparisons in polymer-based RNAi delivery research.
Moreover, while many studies report promising in vitro stability and transfection efficiency, these results do not always translate into comparable in vivo efficacy. For instance, Bai et al. (93) showed that dsRNA remained stable under various in vitro conditions, including freeze-thaw cycles, but RNAi efficiency in T. castaneum did not consistently reflect this stability. This suggests that current in vitro models may not fully capture the physiological complexity of insect systems, particularly the midgut environment and immune responses (94). Several studies in both lepidopteran and hemipteran insects have been demonstrate that even when dsRNA is efficiently protected and forms stable complexes with polymeric carriers, it often still fails to produce measurable gene knockdown. This limited RNAi responsiveness has been attributed to several potent physiological barriers, including high gut dsRNase activity, which rapidly degrades dsRNA before uptake (87, 89), low or inefficient endocytic pathways that restrict internalization into midgut epithelial cells (86), and rapid gut transit, which shortens the time window for dsRNA absorption (16, 95). Taken together, these studies clearly show that dsRNA stability, whether achieved through polymeric carriers or other nanomaterials, is not in itself sufficient to ensure functional RNA interference, highlighting the importance of accounting for strong species-specific physiological constraints when designing delivery systems.
Another limitation is the species bias in RNAi research, where early studies focused heavily on two highly responsive coleopteran species—L. decemlineata and D. virgifera virgifera. This led to a misleading perception that Coleoptera are broadly RNAi-sensitive, although most examined species show low responsiveness, especially at realistic dsRNA doses (80). As a result, delivery systems have often been optimized for these beetle models, while many RNAi-sensitive lepidopteran and hemipteran species remain underrepresented in delivery-focused studies (42, 96). In contrast, many other economically and ecologically important insects remain underrepresented in delivery-focused studies. These include lepidopteran pests such as S. frugiperda, Helicoverpa armigera Hübner, Plutella xylostella L, and Trichoplusia ni Hübner, as well as hemipteran pests like aphids (Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris, Myzus persicae Sulzer), whiteflies (Bemisia tabaci Gennadius), and planthoppers (Nilaparvata lugens Stål), which are known for their challenging gut environments and low RNAi responsiveness (15, 16, 97, 98). Without comparative data spanning these taxa, it remains difficult to generalize polymer performance or accurately predict RNAi outcomes in non-model insects. To move the field forward, future research must address several critical needs:
● Tailored polymer design that considers taxon-specific factors such as gut physiology, dsRNase activity, and epithelial uptake mechanisms, which vary significantly across insect taxa (75, 79).
● Stronger correlation between in vitro and in vivo performance, supported by predictive assays that better simulate insect midgut conditions and biological complexity (50, 79).
● Comprehensive environmental safety assessments, including studies on degradation kinetics, non-target organism effects, and ecological persistence, which are essential for regulatory approval and sustainable field application (6, 78, 99).
Finally, the continued advancement of RNAi delivery systems will rely on interdisciplinary collaboration. By integrating expertise from polymer chemistry, entomology, molecular biology, and environmental science, researchers can develop delivery platforms that are not only efficient and species-specific, but also safe, scalable, and environmentally sustainable (11, 99).
4 Conclusions
Polymer-based dsRNA delivery systems hold significant promise for advancing insect pest management through RNAi, yet their practical deployment is hindered by methodological inconsistencies, species-specific limitations, and gaps in translational efficacy. The current literature reveals a fragmented landscape, where variations in N/P ratios, dsRNA lengths, buffer systems, and model organisms complicate cross-study comparisons and reproducibility. Bridging the gap between in vitro success and in vivo performance requires more physiologically relevant testing models and predictive assays that reflect the complexity of insect biology. Expanding research to include a broader range of insect taxa is essential for developing delivery platforms that are effective across diverse orders, particularly those with variable RNAi responsiveness.
To move the field forward, future efforts must prioritize tailored polymer design, standardized methodologies, and robust environmental safety assessments. Interdisciplinary collaboration will be key to developing RNAi delivery systems that are not only effective and species-specific but also scalable and ecologically responsible. By addressing these challenges, polymer-based RNAi technologies can evolve into reliable tools for sustainable pest control in agricultural ecosystems.
Author contributions
TK: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization. JW: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. KS: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing. CT: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. EV: Conceptualization, Funding acquisition, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for this work and/or its publication. This work was supported by the Estonian Research Council grant (PRG1056), the Special Research Fund (BOF GOA, 01G01022) of Ghent University and Research Foundation Flanders (FWO-Vlaanderen).
Conflict of interest
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declared that generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Microsoft Copilot was used for linguistic support.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Fletcher SJ, Reeves PT, Hoang BT, and Mitter N. A perspective on RNAi-based biopesticides. Front Plant Sci. (2020) 11. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2020.00051, PMID: 32117388
2. Mehlhorn S, Ulrich J, Baden CU, Buer B, Maiwald F, Lueke B, et al. The mustard leaf beetle, Phaedon cochleariae, as a screening model for exogenous RNAi-based control of coleopteran pests. Pesticide Biochem Physiol. (2021) 176:104870. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2021.104870, PMID: 34119215
3. Mendoza-Alatorre M, Julian-Chávez B, Solano-Ornelas S, Siqueiros-Cendón TS, Torres-Castillo JA, Sinagawa-García SR, et al. RNAi in pest control: critical factors affecting dsRNA efficacy. Insects. (2025) 16:737. doi: 10.3390/insects16070737, PMID: 40725367
4. Palli SR. RNAi turns 25:contributions and challenges in insect science. Front Insect Sci. (2023) 3:1209478. doi: 10.3389/finsc.2023.1209478, PMID: 38469536
5. Willow J, Taning CNT, Cook SM, Sulg S, Silva AI, Smagghe G, et al. RNAi targets in agricultural pest insects: advancements, knowledge gaps, and IPM. Front Agron. (2021) 3:794312. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2021.794312
6. Christiaens O, Tardajos MG, Martinez Reyna ZL, Dash M, Dubruel P, and Smagghe G. Increased RNAi Efficacy in Spodoptera exigua via the Formulation of dsRNA With Guanylated Polymers. Front Physiol. (2018) 9:316. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00316, PMID: 29670535
7. Guan R, Li H, and Miao X. RNAi in Lepidoptera: Current Status, Impact of Enzymatic Degradation, and Future Perspectives. In: Smagghe G, Palli SR, and Swevers L, editors. RNA Interference in Agriculture: Basic Science to Applications: From Bioinformatics and Laboratory Assays Over Regulatory Issues to Field Uses. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham (2025). p. 515–49. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-81549-2_20
8. Peng Y, Wang K, Fu W, Sheng C, and Han Z. Biochemical comparison of dsRNA degrading nucleases in four different insects. Front Physiol. (2018) 9:624. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2018.00624, PMID: 29892232
9. Pugsley CE, Isaac RE, Warren NJ, and Cayre OJ. Recent advances in engineered nanoparticles for RNAi-mediated crop protection against insect pests. Front Agron. (2021) 3:652981. doi: 10.3389/fagro.2021.652981
10. Whitehead KA, Langer R, and Anderson DG. Knocking down barriers: advances in siRNA delivery. Nat Rev Drug Discov. (2009) 8:129–38. doi: 10.1038/nrd2742, PMID: 19180106
11. Dosta P, Ramos V, and Borrós S. Stable and efficient generation of poly(β-amino ester)s for RNAi delivery. Mol Syst Design Eng. (2018) 3:677–89. doi: 10.1039/C8ME00006A
12. Zhang X, Mysore K, Flannery E, Michel K, Severson DW, Zhu KY, et al. Chitosan/interfering RNA nanoparticle mediated gene silencing in disease vector mosquito larvae. J Vis Exp. (2015) 97:1–11. doi: 10.3791/52523, PMID: 25867635
13. Anderluzzi G, Mohamed T, Moschetti G, Favero ED, Rizzello L, Magnaghi V, et al. The impact of using different cationic polymers on the formation of efficient lipopolyplexes for pDNA delivery. IJN. (2025) 20:10021–41. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S513568, PMID: 40859951
14. Karimi Dastgerdi N, Gumus N, Bayraktutan H, Jackson D, Polra K, F. McKay P, et al. Charge neutralized poly(β-amino ester) polyplex nanoparticles for delivery of self-amplifying RNA. Nanoscale Adv. (2024) 6:1409–22. doi: 10.1039/D3NA00794D, PMID: 38419881
15. Garbatti Factor B, de Moura Manoel Bento F, and Figueira A. Methods for delivery of dsRNAs for agricultural pest control: the case of lepidopteran pests. Methods Mol Biol. (2022) 2360:317–45. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1633-8_23, PMID: 34495524
16. Terenius O, Papanicolaou A, Garbutt JS, Eleftherianos I, Huvenne H, Kanginakudru S, et al. RNA interference in Lepidoptera: an overview of successful and unsuccessful studies and implications for experimental design. J Insect Physiol. (2011) 57:231–45. doi: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2010.11.006, PMID: 21078327
17. Pal G, Ingole KD, Yavvari PS, Verma P, Kumari A, Chauhan C, et al. Exogenous application of nanocarrier-mediated double-stranded RNA manipulates physiological traits and defence response against bacterial diseases. Mol Plant Pathol. (2024) 25:e13417. doi: 10.1111/mpp.13417, PMID: 38279851
18. Yang W, Wang B, Lei G, Chen G, and Liu D. Advances in nanocarriers to improve the stability of dsRNA in the environment. Front Bioeng. Biotechnol. (2022) 10. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.974646, PMID: 36051593
19. Auth T. Polymeric and polymer-functionalized drug delivery vectors: from molecular architecture and elasticity to cellular uptake. Polymers. (2025) 17:2243. doi: 10.3390/polym17162243, PMID: 40871191
20. Quilez-Molina AI, Niño Sanchez J, and Merino D. The role of polymers in enabling RNAi-based technology for sustainable pest management. Nat Commun. (2024) 15:9158. doi: 10.1038/s41467-024-53468-y, PMID: 39443470
21. Arjunan N, Thiruvengadam V, and Sushil S. Nanoparticle-mediated dsRNA delivery for precision insect pest control: a comprehensive review. Mol Biol Rep. (2024) 51:355. doi: 10.1007/s11033-023-09187-6, PMID: 38400844
22. Bahavarnia F, Hasanzadeh M, Bahavarnia P, and Shadjou N. Advancements in application of chitosan and cyclodextrins in biomedicine and pharmaceutics: recent progress and future trends. RSC Adv. (2024) 14:13384–412. doi: 10.1039/D4RA01370K, PMID: 38660530
23. Scarpin D, Nerva L, Chitarra W, Moffa L, D’Este F, Vuerich M, et al. Characterisation and functionalisation of chitosan nanoparticles as carriers for double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) molecules towards sustainable crop protection. Biosci Rep. (2023) 43:BSR20230817. doi: 10.1042/BSR20230817, PMID: 37881894
24. Ismail A and Chou S-F. Polyethylenimine carriers for drug and gene delivery. Polymers. (2025) 17:2150. doi: 10.3390/polym17152150, PMID: 40808198
25. Richards Grayson AC, Doody AM, and Putnam D. Biophysical and structural characterization of polyethylenimine-mediated siRNA delivery in vitro. Pharm Res. (2006) 23:1868–76. doi: 10.1007/s11095-006-9009-2, PMID: 16845585
26. Utsuno K, Kono H, Tanaka E, Jouna N, Kojima Y, and Uludağ H. Low molecular weight branched PEI binding to linear DNA. Chem Pharm Bull. (2016) 64:1484–91. doi: 10.1248/cpb.c16-00454, PMID: 27725501
27. Wightman L, Kircheis R, Rössler V, Carotta S, Ruzicka R, Kursa M, et al. Different behavior of branched and linear polyethylenimine for gene delivery in vitro and in vivo. J Gene Med. (2001) 3:362–72. doi: 10.1002/jgm.187, PMID: 11529666
28. Flynn DFB, Gogol-Prokurat M, Nogeire T, Molinari N, Richers BT, Lin BB, et al. Loss of functional diversity under land use intensification across multiple taxa. Ecol Lett. (2009) 12:22–33. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01255.x, PMID: 19087109
29. Lungu CN, Diudea MV, Putz MV, and Grudziński IP. Linear and branched PEIs (Polyethylenimines) and their property space. Int J Mol Sci. (2016) 17:555. doi: 10.3390/ijms17040555, PMID: 27089324
30. Mohammadi N, Fayazi Hosseini N, Nemati H, Moradi-Sardareh H, Nabi-Afjadi M, and Kardar GA. Revisiting of properties and modified polyethylenimine-based cancer gene delivery systems. Biochem Genet. (2024) 62:18–39. doi: 10.1007/s10528-023-10416-7, PMID: 37394575
31. Liang W, Gong H, Yin D, Lu S, and Fu Q. High-molecular-weight polyethyleneimine conjuncted pluronic for gene transfer agents. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo). (2011) 59:1094–101. doi: 10.1248/cpb.59.1094, PMID: 21881251
32. Zhang H, Chen Z, Du M, Li Y, and Chen Y. Enhanced gene transfection efficiency by low-dose 25 kDa polyethylenimine by the assistance of 1.8 kDa polyethylenimine. Drug Delivery. (2018) 25:1740–5. doi: 10.1080/10717544.2018.1510065, PMID: 30241446
33. Uddin N, Dinar MAM, Pack D, and DeRouchey J. Impact of acetylation, succinylation, and pH on PEI-based polyplex structure and function. Biomacromolecules. (2024) 26(1):178–89. doi: 10.26434/chemrxiv-2024-8qd2g
34. Wen S, Zheng F, Shen M, and Shi X. Surface modification and PEGylation of branched polyethyleneimine for improved biocompatibility. J Appl Polymer Sci. (2013) 128:3807–13. doi: 10.1002/app.38444
35. Zhao C and Zhou B. Polyethyleneimine-based drug delivery systems for cancer theranostics. J Funct Biomaterials. (2023) 14:12. doi: 10.3390/jfb14010012, PMID: 36662059
36. Li Y, Chang L, Xu K, Zhang S, Gao F, and Fan Y. Research progresses on the function and detection methods of insect gut microbes. Microorganisms. (2023) 11:1208. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms11051208, PMID: 37317182
37. Muzammil EM, Khan A, and Stuparu MC. Post-polymerization modification reactions of poly(glycidyl methacrylate)s. RSC Adv. (2017) 7:55874–84. doi: 10.1039/C7RA11093F
38. Benaglia M, Alberti A, Giorgini L, Magnoni F, and Tozzi S. Poly(glycidyl methacrylate): a highly versatile polymeric building block for post-polymerization modifications. Polym. Chem. (2012) 4:124–32. doi: 10.1039/C2PY20646C
39. Geszke-Moritz M and Moritz M. Biodegradable polymeric nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems: comprehensive overview, perspectives and challenges. Polymers. (2024) 16:2536. doi: 10.3390/polym16172536, PMID: 39274168
40. Muripiti V, Ravula V, Batthula S, Banothu J, and Gondru R. Phenylboronic acid-derived nanovectors for gene/drug delivery by targeting cell surface glycans. RSC Pharmaceutics. (2024) 1:403–11. doi: 10.1039/D4PM00005F
41. Qi Y, Xu C, Nizam MN, Li Y, Yu B, and Xu F-J. Functionalized PGMA nanoparticles with aggregation-induced emission characteristics for gene delivery systems. Polym. Chem. (2016) 7:5630–40. doi: 10.1039/C6PY00998K
42. Singh M, Tokola T, Hou Z, and Notarnicola C. Remote sensing-based landscape indicators for the evaluation of threatened-bird habitats in a tropical forest. Ecol AND Evol. (2017) 7:4552–67. doi: 10.1002/ece3.2970, PMID: 28690786
43. Raja MAG, Katas H, and Wen TJ. Stability, intracellular delivery, and release of siRNA from chitosan nanoparticles using different cross-linkers. PloS One. (2015) 10:e0128963. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0128963, PMID: 26068222
44. Rinaudo M. Chitin and chitosan: Properties and applications. Prog Polymer Sci. (2006) 31:603–32. doi: 10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2006.06.001
45. Kumar MNVR, Muzzarelli RAA, Muzzarelli C, Sashiwa H, and Domb AJ. Chitosan chemistry and pharmaceutical perspectives. Chem Rev. (2004) 104:6017–84. doi: 10.1021/cr030441b, PMID: 15584695
46. Cheng X, Zhou Q, Xiao J, Qin X, Zhang Y, Li X, et al. Nanoparticle LDH enhances RNAi efficiency of dsRNA in piercing-sucking pests by promoting dsRNA stability and transport in plants. J Nanobiotechnol. (2024) 22:544. doi: 10.1186/s12951-024-02819-4, PMID: 39237945
47. Karmakar AK, Hasan M, Sreemani A, Das Jayanta A, Hasan M, Tithe NA, et al. A review on the current progress of layered double hydroxide application in biomedical sectors. Eur Phys J Plus. (2022) 137:801. doi: 10.1140/epjp/s13360-022-02993-0
48. Santos-Ortega Y and Flynt A. Double-Strand RNA (dsRNA) Delivery Methods in Insects: Diaphorina citri. In: Vaschetto LM, editor. RNAi Strategies for Pest Management: Methods and Protocols. Springer US, New York, NY (2022). p. 253–77. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1633-8_19, PMID: 34495520
49. Qiao H, Jiang Q, Zhao J, Xiao L, Zhu-Salzman K, Xu D, et al. Nano-delivery platform with strong protection and efficient delivery: preparation of self-assembled RNA pesticide with dual RNAi targets against Apolygus lucorum. J Nanobiotechnol. (2025) 23:93. doi: 10.1186/s12951-025-03155-x, PMID: 39920702
50. Lu Y, Deng X, Zhu Q, Wu D, Zhong J, Wen L, et al. The dsRNA delivery, targeting and application in pest control. Agronomy. (2023) 13:714. doi: 10.3390/agronomy13030714
51. Parsons KH, Mondal MH, McCormick CL, and Flynt AS. Guanidinium-functionalized interpolyelectrolyte complexes enabling RNAi in resistant insect pests. Biomacromolecules. (2018) 19:1111–7. doi: 10.1021/acs.biomac.7b01717, PMID: 29446934
52. Edwards CH, Christie CR, Masotti A, Celluzzi A, Caporali A, and Campbell EM. Dendrimer-coated carbon nanotubes deliver dsRNA and increase the efficacy of gene knockdown in the red flour beetle Tribolium castaneum. Sci Rep. (2020) 10:12422. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-69068-x, PMID: 32709999
53. Chao Z, Ma Z, Zhang Y, Yan S, and Shen J. Establishment of star polycation-based RNA interference system in all developmental stages of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda. Entomologia Generalis. (2023) 43:127–37. doi: 10.1127/entomologia/2023/1906
54. Akinc A, Thomas M, Klibanov AM, and Langer R. Exploring polyethylenimine-mediated DNA transfection and the proton sponge hypothesis. J Gene Med. (2005) 7:657–63. doi: 10.1002/jgm.696, PMID: 15543529
55. Pack DW, Hoffman AS, Pun S, and Stayton PS. Design and development of polymers for gene delivery. Nat Rev Drug Discov. (2005) 4:581–93. doi: 10.1038/nrd1775, PMID: 16052241
56. Katas H and Alpar HO. Development and characterisation of chitosan nanoparticles for siRNA delivery. J Controlled Release. (2006) 115:216–25. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.07.021, PMID: 16959358
57. Lv H, Zhang S, Wang B, Cui S, and Yan J. Toxicity of cationic lipids and cationic polymers in gene delivery. J Controlled Release. (2006) 114:100–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2006.04.014, PMID: 16831482
58. Hellman LM and Fried MG. Electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA) for detecting protein–nucleic acid interactions. Nat Protoc. (2007) 2:1849–61. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.249, PMID: 17703195
59. Baker A, Saltik M, Lehrmann H, Kilisch I, Mautner V, Lamm G, et al. Polyethylenimine (PEI) is a simple, inexpensive and effective reagent for condensing and linking plasmid DNA to adenovirus for gene delivery. Gene Ther. (1997) 4:773–82. doi: 10.1038/sj.gt.3300471, PMID: 9338005
60. Wang M, Liu H, Li L, and Cheng Y. A fluorinated dendrimer achieves excellent gene transfection efficacy at extremely low nitrogen to phosphorus ratios. Nat Commun. (2014) 5:3053. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4053, PMID: 24407172
61. Bansal R, Tayal S, Gupta KC, and Kumar P. Bioreducible polyethylenimine nanoparticles for the efficient delivery of nucleic acids. Org Biomol Chem. (2015) 13:3128–35. doi: 10.1039/C4OB02614D, PMID: 25633362
62. Krieg B, Hirsch M, Scholz E, Nuhn L, Tabujew I, Bauer H, et al. New techniques to assess in vitro release of siRNA from nanoscale polyplexes. Pharm Res. (2015) 32:1957–74. doi: 10.1007/s11095-014-1589-7, PMID: 25488263
63. Alcorn FM, Jain PK, and van der Veen RM. Time-resolved transmission electron microscopy for nanoscale chemical dynamics. Nat Rev Chem. (2023) 7:256–72. doi: 10.1038/s41570-023-00469-y, PMID: 37117417
64. Nomoto T, Fukushima S, Kumagai M, Machitani K, Matsumoto Y, Oba M, et al. Three-layered polyplex micelle as a multifunctional nanocarrier platform for light-induced systemic gene transfer. Nat Commun. (2014) 5:3545. doi: 10.1038/ncomms4545, PMID: 24694458
65. Miatmoko A, Mianing E, Sari R, and Hendradi E. Nanoparticles use for delivering ursolic acid in cancer therapy: A scoping review. Front Pharmacol. (2021) 12:787226. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.787226, PMID: 35002719
66. Passeri D, Rossi M, Tamburri E, and Terranova ML. Mechanical characterization of polymeric thin films by atomic force microscopy based techniques. Anal Bioanal. Chem. (2013) 405:1463–78. doi: 10.1007/s00216-012-6419-3, PMID: 23052864
67. Zuo F, Wang B, Wang L, He J, and Qiu X. UV-triggered drug release from mesoporous titanium nanoparticles loaded with berberine hydrochloride: enhanced antibacterial activity. Molecules. (2024) 29:1607. doi: 10.3390/molecules29071607, PMID: 38611885
68. Dhandapani RK, Gurusamy D, Howell JL, and Palli SR. Development of CS-TPP-dsRNA nanoparticles to enhance RNAi efficiency in the yellow fever mosquito, Aedes aEgypti. Sci Rep. (2019) 9:8775. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-45019-z, PMID: 31217512
69. Moorlach BW, Sede AR, Hermann KM, Levanova AA, Poranen MM, Westphal M, et al. Interpolyelectrolyte complexes of in vivo produced dsRNA with chitosan and alginate for enhanced plant protection against tobacco mosaic virus. Int J Biol Macromolecules. (2025) 306:141579. doi: 10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2025.141579, PMID: 40023414
70. Ahmad S, Jamil M, Jaworski CC, and Luo Y. Double-stranded RNA degrading nuclease affects RNAi efficiency in the melon fly, Zeugodacus cucurbitae. J Pest Sci. (2024) 97:397–409. doi: 10.1007/s10340-023-01637-1
71. Holtof M, Lenaerts C, Cullen D, and Vanden Broeck J. Extracellular nutrient digestion and absorption in the insect gut. Cell Tissue Res. (2019) 377:397–414. doi: 10.1007/s00441-019-03031-9, PMID: 31037358
72. Onken H and Moffett DF. Acid–Base Loops in Insect Larvae with Extremely Alkaline Midgut Regions. In: Weihrauch D and O’Donnell M, editors. Acid-Base Balance and Nitrogen Excretion in Invertebrates: Mechanisms and Strategies in Various Invertebrate Groups with Considerations of Challenges Caused by Ocean Acidification. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2017). p. 239–60. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-39617-0_9
73. Terra WR, Ferreira C, and Silva CP. Overview of Insect Midgut Function. In: Terra WR, Ferreira C, and Silva CP, editors. Molecular Physiology and Evolution of Insect Digestive Systems. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2023). p. 13–26. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-39233-7_2
74. Mudo LMD, Queiroz AFS, de Melo NF, Barbosa MAG, de Andrade EC, and de Britto D. Stability evaluation of dsRNA and DNA encapsulated in chitosan nanoparticles. BioNanoSci. (2022) 12:774–84. doi: 10.1007/s12668-022-01003-y
75. Qian G, Chen J, Yu T, Liu J, Luo L, and Yin S. Three-phase heterojunction niMo-based nano-needle for water splitting at industrial alkaline condition. Nano-Micro Lett. (2021) 14:20. doi: 10.1007/s40820-021-00744-x, PMID: 34882293
76. Yusa S. Development and application of pH-responsive polymers. Polym. J. (2022) 54:235–42. doi: 10.1038/s41428-021-00576-x
77. Maze D, Pichon C, and Midoux P. Reversible stabilization of DNA/PEI complexes by reducible click-linkage between DNA and polymer. A new polyplex concept for lowering polymer quantity. Gene Ther. (2023) 30:783–91. doi: 10.1038/s41434-023-00386-1, PMID: 36755129
78. Christiaens O, Sweet J, Dzhambazova T, Urru I, Smagghe G, Kostov K, et al. Implementation of RNAi-based arthropod pest control: environmental risks, potential for resistance and regulatory considerations. J Pest Sci. (2021) 95:1–15. doi: 10.1007/s10340-021-01439-3
79. Mahanta DK, Komal J, Bhoi TK, Samal I, Dash S, and Jangra S. RNA interference (RNAi) for insect pest management: understanding mechanisms, strategies, challenges and future prospects. Biol FUTURA. (2025) 76:465–77. doi: 10.1007/s42977-025-00281-3, PMID: 40830542
80. Willow J and Veromann E. Highly variable dietary RNAi sensitivity among coleoptera. Front Plant Sci. (2021) 12:790816. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.790816, PMID: 34950174
81. Girard M, Berthaud V, Martin E, Vallon L, Rebollo R, Vallier A, et al. Evaluation of non-invasive dsRNA delivery methods for the development of RNA interference in the Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus. J Pest Sci. (2025) 98:581–96. doi: 10.1007/s10340-024-01779-w
82. Siddique AB, Rahman M, Gain N, Rahman M, and Rahman J. Harnessing double-stranded RNA (dsRNA): a sustainable approach to pest management. Physiol Mol Biol Plants. (2025) 98:581–96. doi: 10.1007/s12298-025-01564-8, PMID: 41080511
83. Das S, Debnath N, Cui Y, Unrine J, and Palli SR. Chitosan, Carbon Quantum Dot, and Silica Nanoparticle Mediated dsRNA Delivery for Gene Silencing in Aedes aEgypti: A Comparative Analysis. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. (2015) 7:19530–5. doi: 10.1021/acsami.5b05232, PMID: 26291176
84. Rana S, Kang C, Ryu S, Woller DA, Kim D, and Song H. Assessing nanoparticle-enabled dsRNA delivery for oral RNAi in two orthopteran pests: Schistocerca gregaria and Melanoplus sanguinipes. J Insect Physiol. (2025) 163:104825. doi: 10.1016/j.jinsphys.2025.104825, PMID: 40412647
85. Rana S, Kang C, Allred J, Medina-Duran JH, Canova A, Sherry D, et al. Differential responses to double-stranded RNA injection and feeding in Mormon cricket (Orthoptera: Tettigoniidae). J Insect Sci. (2023) 23:10. doi: 10.1093/jisesa/iead063, PMID: 37527468
86. Christiaens O, Swevers L, and Smagghe G. DsRNA degradation in the pea aphid (Acyrthosiphon pisum) associated with lack of response in RNAi feeding and injection assay. Peptides. (2014) 53:307–14. doi: 10.1016/j.peptides.2013.12.014, PMID: 24394433
87. Garbutt JS and Reynolds SE. Induction of RNA interference genes by double-stranded RNA; implications for susceptibility to RNA interference. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. (2012) 42:621–8. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2012.05.001, PMID: 22634162
88. Mishra S, Dee J, Moar W, Dufner-Beattie J, Baum J, Dias NP, et al. Selection for high levels of resistance to double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) in Colorado potato beetle (Leptinotarsa decemlineata Say) using non-transgenic foliar delivery. Sci Rep. (2021) 11:6523. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-85876-1, PMID: 33753776
89. Shukla JN, Kalsi M, Sethi A, Narva KE, Fishilevich E, Singh S, et al. Reduced stability and intracellular transport of dsRNA contribute to poor RNAi response in lepidopteran insects. RNA Biol. (2016) 13:656–69. doi: 10.1080/15476286.2016.1191728, PMID: 27245473
90. Germing K, Navarrete CAD, Schiermeyer A, Hommen U, Zühl L, Eilebrecht S, et al. Crop protection by RNA interference: a review of recent approaches, current state of developments and use as of 2013. Environ Sci Europe. (2025) 37:15. doi: 10.1186/s12302-025-01052-6
91. Aydin O, Kanarya D, Yilmaz U, and Tunç C.Ü. Determination of Optimum Ratio of Cationic Polymers and Small Interfering RNA with Agarose Gel Retardation Assay. In: Arechavala-Gomeza V and Garanto A, editors. Antisense RNA Design, Delivery, and Analysis. Springer US, New York, NY (2022). p. 117–28. doi: 10.1007/978-1-0716-2010-6_7, PMID: 35213013
92. Wang X, Xie H, Wang Z, He K, and Jing D. Graphene oxide as a multifunctional synergist of insecticides against lepidopteran insect. Environ Sci.: Nano. (2019) 6:75–84. doi: 10.1039/C8EN00902C
93. Bai M, Liu Z-L, Zhou Y-Y, Xu Q-X, Liu T-X, and Tian H-G. Influence of diverse storage conditions of double-stranded RNA in vitro on the RNA interference efficiency in vivo insect Tribolium castaneum. Pest Manag. Sci. (2023) 79:45–54. doi: 10.1002/ps.7171, PMID: 36086883
94. Friesen JJ and Blakney AK. Trends in the synthetic polymer delivery of RNA. J Gene Med. (2024) 26:e3672. doi: 10.1002/jgm.3672, PMID: 38380796
95. Prentice K, Christiaens O, Pertry I, Bailey A, Niblett C, Ghislain M, et al. RNAi-based gene silencing through dsRNA injection or ingestion against the African sweet potato weevil Cylas puncticollis (Coleoptera: Brentidae). Pest Manag. Sci. (2017) 73:44–52. doi: 10.1002/ps.4337, PMID: 27299308
96. Piotrowski-Daspit AS, Kauffman AC, Bracaglia LG, and Saltzman WM. Polymeric vehicles for nucleic acid delivery. Adv Drug Delivery Rev. (2020) 156:119–32. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2020.06.014, PMID: 32585159
97. Ghodke AB, Good RT, Golz JF, Russell DA, Edwards O, and Robin C. Extracellular endonucleases in the midgut of Myzus persicae may limit the efficacy of orally delivered RNAi. Sci Rep. (2019) 9:11898. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-47357-4, PMID: 31417162
98. Luo Y, Chen Q, Luan J, Chung SH, Van Eck J, Turgeon R, et al. Towards an understanding of the molecular basis of effective RNAi against a global insect pest, the whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. (2017) 88:21–9. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2017.07.005, PMID: 28736300
Keywords: insect, nanoparticle, pest management, polymeric polyplexes, RNAi
Citation: Kallavus T, Willow J, De Schutter K, Taning CNT and Veromann E (2026) Overview of polymeric polyplexes for dsRNA delivery in insects: complexation, stability, and design considerations. Front. Insect Sci. 6:1750429. doi: 10.3389/finsc.2026.1750429
Received: 20 November 2025; Accepted: 02 January 2026; Revised: 10 December 2025;
Published: 21 January 2026.
Edited by:
Ibrahim El-Shesheny, University of Tennessee, United StatesReviewed by:
Seema Rana, Texas A and M University, United StatesCopyright © 2026 Kallavus, Willow, De Schutter, Taning and Veromann. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Triin Kallavus, dHJpaW4ua2FsbGF2dXNAZW11LmVl
†ORCID: Jonathan Willow, orcid.org.0000-0003-2377-4917
Kristof De
Schutter, orcid.org.0000-0003-2366-0557
Clauvis Nji Tizi Taning, orcid.org.0000-0002-7597-1261
Eve Veromann, orcid.org.0000-0002-0977-5270