3.9 Article

Evaluation of the resistance of the mite Varroa destructor to the fluvalinate in colonies of honey bees (Apis mellifera) in Yucatan, Mexico

期刊

REVISTA MEXICANA DE CIENCIAS PECUARIAS
卷 2, 期 1, 页码 93-99

出版社

INIFAP-CENID PARASITOLOGIA VETERINARIA

关键词

Apis mellifera; Varroa destructor; Fluvalinate; Resistance

资金

  1. Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnologia (CONACyT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The constant application of pyrethroids for controlling the mite Varroa destructor has caused the appearance of populations of resistant mites to this product in several parts of the world. With the purpose of detecting the possible existence of populations of resistant mites to the fluvalinate in the State of Yucatan, one of the main honey producer states in Mexico, 12 samples were gathered from each apiary, selecting four apiaries where fluvalinate was used in constant way for the control of V. destructor during five years, and a similar quantity of samples coming from apiaries where methods of alternative control have been used during a. similar time. To determine from the mites the percentage of mortality to the fluvalinate, they were exposed to a piece of 2.5 x 1.0 cm from Apistan (R) at 10%, during 24 h. The percentage of mortality of varroas coming from apiaries treated in a constant way with fluvalinate was of 83.6 +/- 0.51 %, lower to the percentage of mortality obtained in apiaries that only received alternative treatment which was of 93.9 +/- 1.98 %, existing differences between both groups (t=-3.93, P=0.01, gl=46), This means a reduction in the percentage of mortality obtained with the fluvalinate. However, this reduction still does not reach the necessary levels that can define the presence of resistant mites, being important to change the practices that seem to reduce the levels of infestation of V. destructor. Then it is advisable the application of methods of alternative control which don't cause the resistance development in the populations of mites.

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

3.9
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