4.6 Article

Field resistance of Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to organophosphates, pyrethroids, carbamates and four newer chemistry insecticides in Hunan, China

期刊

JOURNAL OF PEST SCIENCE
卷 86, 期 3, 页码 599-609

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s10340-013-0505-y

关键词

Cutworm; Emamectin benzoate; Abamectin; Indoxacarb; Chlorfenapyr; Resistance evolution; Cross-resistance

资金

  1. Special Agricultural Research Projects for Public Welfare, China [201203038]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31071716]
  3. Program for New Century Excellent Talents in University [NCET-10-0163]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present studies were carried out to evaluate resistance in the populations of Spodoptera litura Fab. (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae) from five districts of Hunan Province in China to various insecticides from 2010 to 2012 using a standard leaf dip bioassay method. For organophosphates and pyrethroids, resistance ratios compared with a susceptible Lab-BJ strain were in the range of 14-229-fold for organophosphates and 12-227-fold for pyrethroids. Similarly, relative low levels of resistance to emamectin, indoxacarb, and chlorfenapyr were observed in all five populations. In contrast, the resistance to carbamates (thiodicarb or methomyl) was significantly higher than that of organophosphates, pyrethroids and newer chemistry insecticides. The pairwise correlation coefficients of LC50 values indicated that the newer chemistry insecticides and old generation insecticides were not significant except abamectin, which was negatively significantly correlated with methomyl. A significant correlation was observed between thiodicarb, methomyl, and deltamethrin, whereas resistance to bifenthrin showed no correlations with resistance to other insecticides except deltamethrin. The results are discussed in relation to integrated pest management for S. litura with special reference to management of field evolved resistance to insecticides.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据