Insect Control: Biological and Synthetic Agents - Index of

More documents

Recommendations

Info

6: The Spinosyns: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Mode of Action, and Resistance 233 basis for the observed resistance. In the case of the NC-spinosad-R H. virescens larvae, studies also showed that the resistance to spinosad did not appear to be associated with enhanced metabolism, decreased penetration, or excretion (Young et al., 2000, 2001). At low concentrations, a decreased neural sensitivity was observed in the resistant strain (Young et al., 2001). Thus, available data for both these spinosad resistant strains is most consistent with an altered target site resistance mechanism. In addition to the laboratory selection studies, there are now a couple of studies indicating the presence of resistance to spinosad in field-collected insects. Surveys of beet armyworm (Spodoptera exigua) populations from the US and Thailand showed that there was a wide range in the biological response to spinosad when compared to a US Department of Agriculture (USDA) susceptible reference colony (Moulton et al., 1999, 2000). Compared to the USDA larvae, toxicity ratios for an Arizona strain ranged from 14-fold to 20-fold, depending on assay method, while those of the Thailand strain ranged from 58-fold to 85-fold. Interestingly, the F1 hybrids from the Thailand colony possessed toxicity ratios of 22-fold compared to the USDA strain, suggesting that the reduced susceptibility was incompletely dominant (Moulton et al., 2000). Subsequent studies with the Thailand strain showed that susceptibility was returning after some time in laboratory culture (toxicity ratio declined to 15-fold) and that synergists (Piperonyl butoxide, DEF, and DEM) did not alter spinosad activity (Moulton et al., 1999). In mid-1998, spinosad was registered in Hawaii, for use on crucifers, for the control of P. xylostella larvae that had become resistant to all other then available insect control agents (Zhao et al., 2002). Unfortunately, resistance management strategies incorporated into the spinosad label by the manufacturer did not foresee the particular cultural practices used in Hawaii. In many cases, the practices then in use resulted in nearly exclusive, almost continuous, year-round, weekly applications of spinosad to sequential crop plantings involving the same P. xylostella population, a situation that went on for more than 2 years. In 2000, field failures were observed with spinosad in Hawaii. Subsequent laboratory testing of the P. xylostella populations around the growing regions of the Hawaiian Islands demonstrated the presence of high levels of resistance to spinosad in several locations (Zhao et al., 2002). Further laboratory selection, for nine generations, of one of the most resistant colonies (Pearl City, Oahu) with spinosad, increased resistance towards spinosad to an even larger degree (Zhao et al., 2002). As noted above for the laboratory-selected spinosad-resistant strains of H. virescens and M. domestica, resistance to spinosad in this spinosad-selected strain of P. xylostella was also an autosomal, incompletely recessive trait (Zhao et al., 2002), which has led to the rapid dissipation of resistance. Likewise, the synergists piperonyl butoxide and DEF did not alter the level of resistance to spinosad, and there was no cross-resistance to either emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb. While these data are of a limited nature, like those above, they are most consistent with an altered target site as the resistance mechanism. 6.6.3. Resistance Management The development of any new insect control agent is a very expensive proposition. For a company to derive full value, a new molecule must remain in the marketplace for many years. Thus, the development of resistance has become an increasingly important consideration in the development of any new insect control agent. In light of spinosad’s uniqueness, as well as the expense and effort that led to its development, insecticide resistance management (IRM) was a consideration at an early stage in the development of spinosad, (Thompson et al., 2000). The goal of this effort was to increase the likelihood of spinosad’s long-term efficacy and utility in the marketplace. One aspect of the IRM program was the incorporation of use patterns on the product label that reduced the likelihood of selecting back-to-back generations of insect pests. The IRM recommendation from the manufacturer included limiting use to three or fewer applications within a 30-day period, followed by another 30-day period during which spinosad was not to be used (Zhao et al., 2002). For most lepidopterous pests, this spinosad-free period would allow at least one complete generation that had not been selected. A total of only six applications was allowed per crop (Zhao et al., 2002). Another aspect of the spinosad IRM plan was implementation of a program to monitor the susceptibility of key insect pests. As demonstrated repeatedly over the past 50 years, given time and very heavy selection pressure, resistance can develop to any insect control agent (Sparks et al., 1993; Clark and Yamaguchi, 2002). Likewise, as demonstrated by the development of spinosad resistance in P. xylostella in Hawaii, not every use pattern or scenario can be foreseen. The practice of having multiple ‘‘crops’’ at different stages in adjacent fields effectively negated IRM recommendations for spinosad. However, the monitoring program that was in place was able to quickly provide needed susceptibility data for a number of sites in the Hawaiian Islands. While the initial data showed most sites to be free of problems, several
234 6: The Spinosyns: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Mode of Action, and Resistance Table 9 Resistance and cross-resistance to spinosad Species Strain Select Compound Method Toxicity ratio Reference Spinosad resistant strains Heliothis virescens NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Spinosad Larval dip >1000 Young et al. (2001) NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Permethrin Larval dip 0.65 NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Profenofos Larval dip 1.70 NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Emamectin Larval 1.91 benzoate dip NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Indoxacarb Larval dip 1.45 NC spinosad-R Lab G17 Acetamiprid Larval dip 0.41 Plutella xylostella Pearl City Field Spinosad Leaf dip 1080 Zhao et al. (2002) Pearl City Field Emamectin benzoate Leaf dip 4 Pearl City Field Indoxacarb Leaf dip 1.28 Musca domestica rspin Laboratory Spinosad Topical >150 Shono and Scott (2002) rspin Laboratory Indoxacarb Topical 0.11 rspin Laboratory Abamectin Topical 1.2 rspin Laboratory Fipronil Topical 0.34 rspin Laboratory Cyfluthrin Topical 0.42 rspin Laboratory Dimethoate Topical 0.31 rspin Laboratory Chlorfenapyr Topical 0.77 rspin Laboratory Methomyl Topical 0.61 Spodoptera exigua Arizona Field Spinosad Leaf dip 14–20 Moulton et al. (2000) Thailand Field Spinosad Leaf dip 58–85 Moulton et al. (2000) Spinosad cross-resistance Plutella xylostella Fenvalerate-R Laboratory Cypermethrin Topical 1520 Sun (1991), cited in Fenvalerate-R Laboratory Spinosad Topical 3.2 Sparks et al. (1995) Tebufenozide-R Cypermethrin Topical 27 Sun (1991), cited in Tebufenozide-R Spinosad Topical 0.9 Sparks et al. (1995) Abamectin-R Laboratory Cypermethrin Topical 64 Sun (1991), cited in Abamectin-R Laboratory Spinosad Topical 2.4 Sparks et al. (1995) Plutella xylostella Ocean Cliff Field Permethrin Leaf dip 126 Shelton et al. (2000) Ocean Cliff Field Spinosad Leaf dip 14.5 Ocean Cliff Field Emamectin benzoate Leaf dip 13.0 Ocean Cliff Field Chlorfenapyr Leaf dip 1.0 Ocean Cliff Field Methomyl Leaf dip 7.1 Oxnard Field Permethrin Leaf dip 206 Shelton et al. (2000) Oxnard Field Spinosad Leaf dip 12.8 Oxnard Field Emamectin benzoate Leaf dip 6.0 Oxnard Field Chlorfenapyr Leaf dip 1.7 Oxnard Field Methomyl Leaf dip 6.5 Plutella xylostella His-hu 2001 Field Abamectin Leaf dip 2497 Kao and Cheng (2001) His-hu 2001 Field Emamectin benzoate Leaf dip 305 His-hu 2001 Field Fipronil Leaf dip 65 His-hu 2001 Field Chlorfeapyr Leaf dip 9 His-hu 2001 Field Spinosad Leaf dip 65 His-hu 2001 Field Azadirachtin Leaf dip >1000 Lu-chu 2001 Field Abamectin Leaf dip 4988 Kao and Cheng (2001) Lu-chu 2001 Field Emamectin benzoate Leaf dip 153 Lu-chu 2001 Field Fipronil Leaf dip 104 Lu-chu 2001 Field Chlorfeapyr Leaf dip 10 Lu-chu 2001 Field Spinosad Leaf dip 59 Continued
Page 2 and 3:
INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTH
Page 4 and 5:
INSECT CONTROL BIOLOGICAL AND SYNTH
Page 6 and 7:
CONTENTS Preface vii Contributors i
Page 8 and 9:
PREFACE When Elsevier published the
Page 10 and 11:
J T Andaloro E. I. Du Pont de Nemou
Page 12 and 13:
1 Pyrethroids B P S Khambay and P J
Page 14 and 15:
activity. In contrast to most other
Page 16 and 17:
Figure 1 Commercial and novel pyret
Page 18 and 19:
Figure 2 Pyrethroids referred to in
Page 20 and 21:
4-position result in almost complet
Page 22 and 23:
and their primary site of action is
Page 24 and 25:
Figure 4 Folded and extended confor
Page 26 and 27:
aromatic rings or methyl groups by
Page 28 and 29:
pyrethroids) and consequently a sec
Page 30 and 31:
1998), although the precise mechani
Page 32 and 33:
polymorphisms in the protein. Of th
Page 34 and 35:
observed resistance to pyrethroids,
Page 36 and 37:
propoxur against Culex quinquefasci
Page 38 and 39:
esistance in house fly. Insect Bioc
Page 40 and 41:
Shan, G.M., Hammock, B.D., 2001. De
Page 42 and 43:
A1.4. Resistance The increasing num
Page 44 and 45:
B A IIS4-S5 linker, IIS5 helix and
Page 46 and 47:
2 Indoxacarb and the Sodium Channel
Page 48 and 49:
Figure 2 Structures of pyrazoline-l
Page 50 and 51:
observed that both indoxacarb and i
Page 52 and 53:
deflections resulting from stresses
Page 54 and 55:
Figure 8 Dihydropyrazole block appe
Page 56 and 57:
potential conduction in the CNS of
Page 58 and 59:
known to affect blocker affinity, w
Page 60 and 61:
Figure 13 Diagrammatic representati
Page 62 and 63:
that the probable mechanism of ovil
Page 64 and 65:
conventional chemistries and spinos
Page 66 and 67:
Clare, J.J., Tate, S.N., Nobbs, M.,
Page 68 and 69:
Tsurubuchi, Y., Karasawa, A., Nagat
Page 70 and 71:
R1 N N O N H indoxacarb. Thus, whil
Page 72 and 73:
3 Neonicotinoid Insecticides P Jesc
Page 74 and 75:
esidues, like the pyrid-3-ylmethyl
Page 76 and 77:
containing neonicotinoids, and neon
Page 78 and 79:
Studies were also done using compar
Page 80 and 81:
Becke, 1988; Klamt, 1995) level of
Page 82 and 83:
sampling using forcefield methods (
Page 84 and 85:
Figure 9 Stable conformations and p
Page 86 and 87:
Figure 13 Binding to putative catio
Page 88 and 89:
Figure 14 Systemicity of neonicotin
Page 90 and 91:
site (Kayser et al., 2002). Clothia
Page 92 and 93:
Figure 20 Important pest insects ta
Page 94 and 95:
Barley yellow dwarf virus vectors s
Page 96 and 97:
investigate the mode of action of n
Page 98 and 99:
within the desensitized state over
Page 100 and 101:
the accumulation of this acid in th
Page 102 and 103:
3.8.1. Safety Profile The introduct
Page 104 and 105:
Table 7 Environmental profile of co
Page 106 and 107:
substance is bound irreversibly to
Page 108 and 109:
imidacloprid conferring a high leve
Page 110 and 111:
nAChR are comparable to the efficac
Page 112 and 113:
Figure 25 Flea control achieved wit
Page 114 and 115:
and the resolution of FAD was teste
Page 116 and 117:
Brown, J.K., Perring, T.M., Cooper,
Page 118 and 119:
In: Ishaaya, I. (Ed.), Biochemical
Page 120 and 121:
Léna, C., Changeux, J.-P., 1993. A
Page 122 and 123:
patterns in Colorado potato beetle
Page 124 and 125:
nach Saatgutbeizung. Pflanzenschutz
Page 126 and 127:
Today, photoaffinity labeling (e.g.
Page 128 and 129:
for control of stinkbugs in soybean
Page 130 and 131:
Biochem. Physiol., doi: 10.1016/j.p
Page 132 and 133:
4 Insect Growth- and Development-Di
Page 134 and 135:
The molting process is initiated by
Page 136 and 137:
Table 1 Bisacylhydrazine insecticid
Page 138 and 139:
4.2.2. Bisacylhydrazines as Tools o
Page 140 and 141:
to the three EcRs with either muris
Page 142 and 143:
of action of ecdysone agonists was
Page 144 and 145:
thus inducing effects and symptomol
Page 146 and 147:
and microsomes. Subsequently, Willi
Page 148 and 149:
dipteran insects, like the midge, C
Page 150 and 151:
eetle (Exomala orientalis) when app
Page 152 and 153:
metabolic fate studies showed the i
Page 154 and 155:
y specific proteins in signaling pa
Page 156 and 157:
their reduced risk for the environm
Page 158 and 159:
can be reversed by applying JH. JH
Page 160 and 161:
door for a more rational approach t
Page 162 and 163:
apparent that it was a bHLH-PAS and
Page 164 and 165:
Table 9 Continued Bemisia tabaci (s
Page 166 and 167:
Table 11 Insect control with some a
Page 168 and 169:
Table 13 Ecotoxicological profile o
Page 170 and 171:
Flucycloxuron Nonsystemic acaricide
Page 172 and 173:
The discovery of diflubenzuron spaw
Page 174 and 175:
Table 15 Environmental effects of s
Page 176 and 177:
ecessive (R male S female) manner,
Page 178 and 179:
esistance management programs due t
Page 180 and 181:
IPS Paraconfusus lanier (Coleoptera
Page 182 and 183:
larvae parasitized by Microplitis r
Page 184 and 185:
Kostyukovsky, M., Chen, B., Atsmi,
Page 186 and 187:
Three-dimensional quantitative stru
Page 188 and 189:
Riddiford, L.M., 1994. Cellular and
Page 190 and 191:
characterization of resistant clone
Page 192 and 193:
Biological Approaches to Pest Contr
Page 194 and 195: M389 L308 M272 T304 T393 V404 L420
Page 196 and 197: 5 Azadirachtin, a Natural Product i
Page 198 and 199: and Hemiptera and was related to ef
Page 200 and 201: eported, but this is rather nonspec
Page 202 and 203: important source of pest control at
Page 204 and 205: effects with physiological effects
Page 206 and 207: eing associated with an accumulatio
Page 208 and 209: et al., 1992). Salehzadeh et al. (2
Page 210 and 211: ehavior of Spodoptera littoralis (p
Page 212 and 213: indica A. Juss. IBH Publishing Comp
Page 214 and 215: Smith, S.L., Mitchell, M.J., 1988.
Page 216 and 217: which interact directly with azadir
Page 218 and 219: 6 The Spinosyns: Chemistry, Biochem
Page 220 and 221: Table 1 Structures of the spinosyns
Page 222 and 223: Table 2 Biological activity of spin
Page 224: A large synthetic effort has gone i
Page 227 and 228: 216 6: The Spinosyns: Chemistry, Bi
Page 229 and 230: Figure 4 Spinosad metabolism in avi
Page 243: 232 6: The Spinosyns: Chemistry, Bi
Page 255 and 256: A6 Addendum: The Spinosyns T C Spar
Page 257 and 258: 246 A6: Addendum Scott, 2008) and i
Page 259 and 260: 248 7: Bacillus thuringiensis: Mech
Page 289 and 290: A7 Addendum: Bacillus thuringiensis
Page 291 and 292: 280 A7: Addendum toxins is magnitud
Page 293 and 294: This page intentionally left blank
Page 295 and 296:
Table 1 Comparative properties of s
Page 297 and 298:
286 8: Mosquitocidal B. sphaericus:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Table 4 Characteristics of various
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
A8 Addendum: Bacillus sphaericus Ta
Page 321 and 322:
310 A8: Addendum essential to devel
Page 323 and 324:
This page intentionally left blank
Page 325 and 326:
314 9: Insecticidal Toxins from Pho
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331 and 332:
Page 333 and 334:
Page 335 and 336:
Page 337 and 338:
Page 339 and 340:
A9 Addendum: Recent Advances in Pho
Page 341 and 342:
330 A9: Addendum Lee, S.C., Stoilov
Page 343 and 344:
332 10: Genetically Modified Baculo
Page 345 and 346:
Page 347 and 348:
Page 349 and 350:
Page 351 and 352:
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
384 A10: Addendum cysteine protease
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
388 11: Entomopathogenic Fungi and
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
Page 423 and 424:
Page 425 and 426:
Page 427 and 428:
Page 429 and 430:
Page 431 and 432:
Page 433 and 434:
Page 435 and 436:
Page 437 and 438:
Page 439 and 440:
Page 441 and 442:
Page 443 and 444:
Zare, R., Gams, W., Culham, A., 200
Page 445 and 446:
434 A11: Addendum although a number
Page 447 and 448:
436 A11: Addendum Examination of ge
Page 449 and 450:
Page 451 and 452:
440 12: Insect Transformation for U
Page 453 and 454:
Page 455 and 456:
Page 457 and 458:
Page 459 and 460:
448 A12: Addendum genetic transform
Page 461 and 462:
Page 463 and 464:
452 Subject Index Aphis gossypii (c
Page 465 and 466:
454 Subject Index Bisacylhydrazine
Page 467 and 468:
456 Subject Index Cry toxins (conti
Page 469 and 470:
458 Subject Index Entomopathogenic
Page 471 and 472:
460 Subject Index Homoptera molting
Page 473 and 474:
462 Subject Index Kinoprene (ENSTAR
Page 475 and 476:
464 Subject Index Muscle(s) sodium
Page 477 and 478:
466 Subject Index Photorhabdus (con
Page 479 and 480:
468 Subject Index Sodium channel bl
Page 481:
470 Subject Index Toxocara cati, im
show all

Insect Control: Biological and Synthetic Agents - Index of

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?