Effects of mutations in Drosophila nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subunits on sensitivity to insecticides targeting nicotinic acetylcholine receptors

Several strains of Drosophila melanogaster possess mutant alleles in nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) subunits, Dα1 and Dβ2 that confer resistance to neonicotinoids such as imidacloprid and nitenpyram, and Dα6, that confers resistance to spinosyns. These mutant strains were bioassayed with a selected set of nAChR active insecticides including neonicotinoids, spinosad, and sulfoxaflor, a new sulfoximine insecticide. All of the neonicotinoids examined, except dinotefuran showed reduced insecticidal efficacy on larvae of the Dα1 mutant, suggesting that this subunit may be important in the action of these insecticides. All of the neonicotinoids, including dinotefuran, showed reduced insecticidal efficacy on larvae possessing the Dβ2 mutation. A similar pattern of broad neonicotinoid resistance to that of Dβ2 alone was also observed for larvae with both the mutations (Dα1 + Dβ2). The Dβ2 mutation exhibited a lower level of cross-resistance to sulfoxaflor (<3-fold) than to any of the neonicotinoids (>13-fold). In contrast, there was no cross-resistance for any of the neonicotinoids or sulfoxaflor in adult flies with the Dα6 mutation, which confers high levels of resistance to spinosad. Thus in the D. melanogaster strains studied, target site resistance observed for the neonicotinoids and the spinosyns does not translate directly to resistance towards sulfoxaflor.     

Resistance to spinosad in the western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande), in greenhouses of south-eastern Spain

Susceptibility to spinosad of western flower thrips (WFT), Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande), from south-eastern Spain was determined. LC(50) values of the field populations without previous exposure to spinosad collected in Murcia in 2001 and 2002 ranged from 0.005 to 0.077 mg L(-1). The populations collected in Almeria in 2003 in greenhouses were resistant to spinosad (LC(50) > 54 mg L(-1)) compared with the authors' highly susceptible laboratory strain. The highly sensitive laboratory strain leads to very high resistance ratios for the field populations (>13 500), but these ratios do not necessarily mean resistance problems and control failures (spinosad field rate 90-120 mg L(-1)). The populations collected in Murcia from some greenhouses in 2004 were also resistant to spinosad (RF > 3682). Spinosad overuse, with more than ten applications per crop, produced these resistant populations in some greenhouses. Spinosad showed no cross-resistance to acrinathrin, formetanate or methiocarb in laboratory strains selected for resistance towards each insecticide. Correlation analysis indicated no cross-resistance among spinosad and the other three insecticides in 13 field populations and in nine laboratory strains. The synergists piperonyl butoxide (PBO), S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate (DEF) and diethyl maleate (DEM) did not enhance the toxicity of spinosad to the resistant strains, indicating that metabolic-mediated detoxification was not responsible for the spinosad resistance. These findings suggest that rotation with spinosad may be an effective resistance management strategy.     

Resistance and cross-resistance to neonicotinoid insecticides and spinosad in the Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)

The Colorado potato beetle, Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say), has developed resistance to many insecticides used for its control, recently including imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid compound. Other neonicotinoids are now being deployed to control this pest. A key point in the strategies of resistance management is the monitoring of resistance and cross-resistance. In the summer of 2003, imidacloprid-resistant adult Colorado potato beetles collected from Long Island, New York, USA were bioassayed using topical applications of imidacloprid and nine other neonicotinoids. Compared to a standard susceptible strain, the Long Island beetles showed 309-fold resistance to imidacloprid, and lower levels of cross-resistance to all other neonicotinoids, despite these never having been used in the field, i.e., 59-fold to dinotefuran, 33-fold to clothianidin, 29-fold to acetamiprid, 28-fold to N-methylimidacloprid, 25-fold to thiacloprid, 15-fold to thiamethoxam, 10-fold to nitenpyram, but less than 2-fold to nicotine. In injection bioassays, high resistance to imidacloprid was also found (116-fold). Piperonyl butoxide partially suppressed resistance to imidacloprid, but the resistance level was still over 100-fold, indicating that other mechanisms were primarily responsible for resistance. Low levels of resistance (8- to 10-fold) were found to the nicotinic activator, spinosad, in an imidacloprid-resistant strain collected from the same field in 2004. The cross-resistance seen with all the neonicotinoids tested suggests that the rotation of imidacloprid with other neonicotinoids may not be an effective long-term resistance management strategy. Rotation with spinosad also carries some risk, but it is unlikely that spinosad resistance in this case is mechanistically related to that for the neonicotinoids.     

The non‐target impact of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods

Spinosyn‐based products, mostly spinosad, have been widely recommended by extension specialists and agribusiness companies; consequently, they have been used to control various pests in many different cropping systems. Following the worldwide adoption of spinosad‐based products for integrated and organic farming, an increasing number of ecotoxicological studies have been published in the past 10 years. These studies are primarily related to the risk assessment of spinosad towards beneficial arthropods. This review takes into account recent data with the aim of (i) highlighting potentially adverse effects of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods (and hence on ecosystem services that they provide in agroecosystems), (ii) clarifying the range of methods used to address spinosyn side effects on biocontrol agents and pollinators in order to provide new insights for the development of more accurate bioassays, (iii) identifying pitfalls when analysing laboratory results to assess field risks and (iv) gaining increasing knowledge on side effects when using spinosad for integrated pest management (IPM) programmes and organic farming. For the first time, a thorough review of possible risks of spinosad and novel spinosyns (such as spinetoram) to beneficial arthropods (notably natural enemies and pollinators) is provided. The acute lethal effect and multiple sublethal effects have been identified in almost all arthropod groups studied. This review will help to optimise the future use of spinosad and new spinosyns in IPM programmes and for organic farming, notably by preventing the possible side effects of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods. Copyright © 2012 Society of Chemical Industry     

Susceptibility to thiamethoxam of Musca domestica from Danish livestock farms

BACKGROUND: Neonicotinoid baits are currently replacing anticholinesterase baits for control of adult houseflies (Musca domestica L.). Introduction of new insecticides includes evaluation of their cross-resistance potential, which was assessed for thiamethoxam in field populations from Denmark. RESULTS: In feeding bioassay with a susceptible strain, thiamethoxam LC(50) at 72 h was 1.7 microg thiamethoxam g(-1) sugar, making it 19-fold, 11-fold and threefold more toxic to houseflies than azamethiphos, methomyl and spinosad respectively. The field populations were 6-76-fold resistant to thiamethoxam. There was no correlation between the toxicities of thiamethoxam and spinosad, dimethoate, methomyl, bioresmethrin or azamethiphos. The toxicity in feeding bioassay at 72 h of imidacloprid in a susceptible strain was 32 microg imidacloprid g(-1) sugar at LC(50), making it 19-fold less toxic to houseflies than thiamethoxam. There was a strong significant correlation between the toxicities of thiamethoxam and imidacloprid in field populations.CONCLUSION: Neonicotinoid-resistant houseflies were present at a detectable and noticeable level before thiamethoxam and imidacloprid were introduced for housefly control in Denmark. The toxicity of thiamethoxam is explained by other parameters than the toxicities of spinosad, dimethoate, methomyl, bioresmethrin or azamethiphos. The cross-resistance between thiamethoxam and imidacloprid indicates a coincidence of mechanism of the toxicity and resistance in the field populations.     

Thiamethoxam acts as a target‐site synergist of spinosad in resistant strains of Frankliniella occidentalis

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have suggested that the resistance mechanism towards spinosad in Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) is an altered target site. Like the neonicotinoids, the spinosyns act on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChRs) in insects, but at a distinct site. The changes in nAChRs related to spinosad resistance in thrips might involve interaction with neonicotinoids. In this study, the efficacy of spinosad and neonicotinoids, alone and in combination, was evaluated in susceptible and spinosad‐resistant thrips strains. RESULTS: The neonicotinoids tested were imidacloprid, thiacloprid, acetamiprid, thiamethoxam and clothianidin. No cross‐resistance was shown between spinosad and any of the neonicotinoids. However, an increased toxicity was observed when a mixture of spinosad with thiamethoxam or clothianidin was tested. No synergism was found in the susceptible strains. The more spinosad‐resistant the thrips strain, the stronger was the synergism. CONCLUSION: Data suggest that spinosad and thiamethoxam may interact at the nAChRs in spinosad‐resistant thrips, facilitating enhanced insecticidal action. Copyright © 2012 Society of Chemical Industry     

Spinosad resistance in female Musca domestica L. from a field-derived population

BACKGROUND: Bait-formulated spinosad is currently being introduced for housefly (Musca domestica L.) control around the world. Spinosad resistance was evaluated in a multiresistant field population and strains derived from this by selection with insecticides. Constitutive and spinosad-induced expression levels of three cytochrome P450 genes, CYP6A1, CYP6D1 and CYP6D3, previously reported to be involved in insecticide resistance, were examined. RESULTS: In 2004 a baseline for spinosad toxicity of Danish houseflies where all field populations were considered to be susceptible was established. In the present study, females of a multiresistant field population 791a were, however, 27-fold spinosad resistant at LC₅₀, whereas 791a male houseflies were susceptible. Strain 791a was selected with spinosad, thiamethoxam, fipronil and imidacloprid, resulting in four strains with individual characteristics. Selection of 791a with spinosad did not alter spinosad resistance in either males or females, but counterselected against resistance to the insecticides thiamethoxam and imidacloprid targeting nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. A synergist study with piperonyl butoxide, as well as gene expression studies of CYP6A1, CYP6D1 and CYP6D3, indicated a partial involvement of cytochrome P450 genes in spinosad resistance. CONCLUSION: This study reports female-linked spinosad resistance in Danish houseflies. Negative cross-resistance was observed between spinosad and neonicotinoids in one multiresistant housefly strain. Spinosad resistance involved alterations of cytochrome P450 gene expression. Copyright © 2011 Society of Chemical Industry     

Monitoring of beet armyworm resistance to spinosad and methoxyfenozide in Mexico

BACKGROUND: Resistance to spinosad and methoxyfenozide has been studied in several insect pests, but there is a lack of information on Spodoptera exigua (Hübner) in Mexico. Therefore, evidence for the development of resistance in this pest to both compounds was examined. The effects of methoxyfenozide on reproductive parameters of S. exigua adults were also determined.RESULTS: Third instars from a field population were exposed for 24 h to the LC(50) of spinosad or methoxyfenozide for over six generations (G(2)-G(7)). No significant reduction in susceptibility to either compound was detected for up to five generations. In G(7), LC(50) values for insects exposed to spinosad and methoxyfenozide were respectively 2.75-fold and 1.25-fold greater than for G(1) larvae. Oral treatment with methoxyfenozide reduced the fecundity and fertility of G(7) adults, confirming sublethal effects on reproduction. Finally, five populations (Se-La Floriza, Se-Lazareto, Se-Bachigualato, Se-Los Agustinos and Se-Villa de Arista) of S. exigua were collected from fields in three states of Mexico for resistance monitoring to spinosad and methoxyfenozide. With the exception of Se-Villa de Arista, the other populations showed significant resistance to spinosad, with resistance ratios between 16- and 37-fold, compared with a susceptible laboratory colony. In contrast, only one population (Se-Lazareto) showed significant resistance to methoxyfenozide (13-fold).CONCLUSION: Resistance management programmes should be established, particularly in areas where S. exigua has developed resistance to spinosad. Copyright (c) 2008 Society of Chemical Industry.     

草地贪夜蛾对杀虫剂的抗性研究进展

草地贪夜蛾Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) 是一种杂食性害虫，原产于美洲热带和亚热带地区，于2019年1月在中国云南省首次被发现后，已迅速向广西、贵州、广东及湖南等地蔓延。草地贪夜蛾寄主广泛，常用化学防治药剂为有机磷类、氨基甲酸酯类和拟除虫菊酯类，田间抗性监测数据显示，其对上述 3 类常用药剂已达中至高等抗性水平。此外，已有研究证明氯菊酯抗性草地贪夜蛾对二嗪类杀虫剂茚虫威无交互抗性；同时已有关于草地贪夜蛾对氟苯虫酰胺和氯虫苯甲酰胺田间和室内抗性的报道，表明其对上述 2 种药剂存在极高的交互抗性风险。草地贪夜蛾的抗药性机理主要涉及表皮穿透性降低、解毒作用增强和靶标敏感性下降等几方面，其中代谢解毒作用增强和靶标敏感性下降是导致草地贪夜蛾对杀虫剂产生抗性的主要机制。文章综述了草地贪夜蛾对传统杀虫剂和新型作用机制杀虫剂的抗性现状及抗性机理等方面的研究进展，以期对当前中国的草地贪夜蛾田间防治及抗性研究和防控提供参考。     

Lack of cross-resistance to indoxacarb in insecticide-resistant Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Yponomeutidae)

Two field strains of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith), collected from corn in north Florida showed high resistance to carbaryl (626- and 1159-fold) and moderate resistance to parathion-methyl (30- and 39-fold) as compared with a laboratory susceptible strain. A field strain of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.) collected from cabbage in north Florida and selected for 20 generations with permethrin showed high resistance to permethrin (987-fold) as compared with a susceptible strain. However, in all instances, no cross-resistance to indoxacarb, a novel oxidiazine insecticide, was observed in these two species. Biochemical studies revealed that, in S. frugiperda, activities of detoxification enzymes (microsomal oxidase, glutathione S-transferase and general esterase) were significantly higher in the field strains than in the susceptible strain, indicating that these detoxification enzymes were not actively involved in the resistance to indoxacarb. The lack of cross-resistance between indoxacarb and permethrin in P. xylostella further supports the notion that the mode of action of these insecticides on the insect sodium channel is different.