4.6 Article

Insecticide Resistance Monitoring of the Diamondback Moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) Populations in China

期刊

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY
卷 114, 期 3, 页码 1282-1290

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jee/toab027

关键词

Plutella xylostella; resistance monitoring; integrated pest management

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFD0200300]
  2. Beijing Leafy Vegetables Innovation Team of Modern Agro-industry Technology Research System [BAIC072020]
  3. Beijing Key laboratory for Pest Control and Sustainable Cultivation of Vegetables
  4. Science and Technology Innovation Program of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAASASTIP-IVFCAAS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study revealed that the diamondback moth has developed varying degrees of resistance to multiple insecticides, with the highest resistance observed against beta-cypermethrin. The resistance levels were highest in Midu region.
The diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella L., is a worldwide crop pest that is difficult to control because of its ability to develop resistance to many insecticides. To provide a reference for resistance management of P. xylostella in China, the present study used a leaf-dip bioassay to monitor the resistance of P. xylostella to nine insecticides in eight regions of China. The results showed that P. xylostella had developed a high level of resistance to beta-cypermethrin (resistance ratio [RR] > 112), and moderate (RR < 40) to high levels of resistance to indoxacarb, abamectin, and chlorfluazuron. For chlorantraniliprole, RRs > 100 were found in Midu (Yunnan Province) and Jinghai (Tianjin). In most regions, the resistance to spinetoram and chlorfenapyr and Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) was low. No resistance was detected to diafenthiuron. Overall, P. xylostella resistance to insecticides was higher in Midu than in other regions. The data in this study should help guide the selection of insecticides for management of P. xylostella in China.

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