4.7 Article

Functional analysis of cytochrome P450 genes linked with acetamiprid resistance in melon aphid, Aphis gossypii

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2020.104687

关键词

Cytochrome P450 monooxygenase; Insecticide resistance; Laboratory selection; Resistance mechanism; Neonicotinoid

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFD0200500]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31272077]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cytochrome P450 monooxygenases (P450s) are highly conserved multifunctional enzymes that play crucial roles in insecticide resistance development. In this study, the molecular mechanisms of P450s in acetamiprid resistance development to melon aphid, Aphis gossypii was investigated. Acetamiprid resistant (32.64-fold resistance) population (Ace-R) of A. gossypii was established by continuous selection with acetamiprid for 24 generations. Quantitative Real Time PCR was carried out to analyze the expression of P450 genes in both acetamiprid resistant (Ace-R) and susceptible (Ace-S) strains. Result showed that nine genes (CYP6CY14, CYP6DC1, CYP6CZ1, CYP6DD1, CYP6CY5, CYP6CY9, CYP6DA1, CYP6CY18, and CYP6CY16) of CYP3 clade, four genes (CYP302A1, CYP315A1, CYP301A1, and CYP314A1) of CYP2 clade, two genes (CYP4CK1, CYP4G51) of CYP4 clade and three genes (CYP306A1, CYP305E1, CYP307A1) of mitochondrial clade (Mito clad) were significantly up-regulated, in Ace-R compared to Ace-S strain. Whilst CYP4CJ2 gene from (CYP4 clade) was significantly down-regulated in Ace-R strain. Furthermore, RNA interference-mediated knockdown of CYP6CY14, CYP6DC1, and CYP6CZ1 genes significantly increased the sensitivity of Ace-R strain to acetamiprid. Taken together, this study showed that P450 genes especially CYP6CY14, CYP6DC1 and CYP6CZ1 are potentially involved in acetamiprid resistance development in A. gossypii. This study could be useful to understand the molecular basis of acetamiprid resistance mechanism in A. gossypii.

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

4.7
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