4.7 Article

Responses of striped stem borer, Chilo suppressalis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), from Taiwan to a range of insecticides

Journal

PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE
Volume 66, Issue 7, Pages 762-766

Publisher

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/ps.1939

Keywords

susceptibility; resistance; striped stem borer; Chilo suppressalis; pest management; cross-resistance

Funding

  1. Bureau of Animal and Plant Health Inspection and Quarantine, Council of Agriculture, Republic of China [95AS-13.2.1-BQ-B6]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

BACKGROUND: Information on the insecticide susceptibility of striped stem borer, Chilo suppressalis (Walker), is essential for an effective pest management programme. An early detection of resistance development can prompt the modification of current control methods and increase the lifespan of insecticides through the rotation of chemicals with different modes of action. In this study, the susceptibility of this pest in Taiwan to four classes of insecticides has been examined. RESULTS: Over 1000-fold resistance to carbofuran was detected in C. suppressalis collected from Chiayi and Changhua prefectures, with estimated LC50 values of >3 mg cm(-2). In addition, 61-fold resistance to cartap was found in the Chiayi population. On the other hand, all tested populations of rice stem borer were still relatively susceptible to chlorpyrifos, fipronil and permethrin, with LC50 values ranging from 30 to 553 ng cm(-2). Chilo suppressalis populations collected from the central parts of Taiwan have a higher degree of resistance to the tested insecticides than those from northern areas. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of high resistance to carbofuran in the Chiayi and Changhua areas suggests that this compound should be replaced with chemicals having a different mode of action, such as chlorpyrifos, fipronil and permethrin, to which low cross-resistance has been detected. (C) 2010 Society of Chemical Industry

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available