Literature DB >> 23455995

Impacts of spinosad and λ-cyhalothrin on spider communities in cabbage fields in south Texas.

T-X Liu1, R W Irungu, D A Dean, M K Harris.   

Abstract

Spiders are a principal arthropod group that preys on numerous pests of vegetables and other crops. In this study, we determined the effects of the two most commonly used insecticides, spinosad and λ-cyhalothrin, on diversity of spiders on cabbage in south Texas. In two seasons (fall 2008 and spring 2009), we collected a total of 588 spiders belonging to 53 species in 11 families from spinosad and λ-cyhalothrin-treated cabbages and the untreated control plants. A great majority of spiders were collected from the pitfall traps (554) where only a few (34) were collected from the blower/vacuum sampling. In the insecticide-treated plots, there were significantly fewer spider individuals, species and families than in untreated fields. Spinosad had significantly less effect on spiders in total individuals, number of species and families than λ-cyhalothrin. The effects of the two insecticides were further demonstrated by the Shannon-Weiner index (H') and the hierarchical richness index (HRI). Spider diversity in the spinosad-treated plots were not significantly different from that in the untreated fields but were greater than those in λ-cyhalothrin-treated plots in both seasons when measured by H' values. In contrast, the H' values of spider's diversity in the λ-cyhalothrin-treated plots were significantly lower than spinosad-treated and untreated plots. High values of HRI for spider richness in the spinosad-treated plots suggested that spinosad had less effect on spiders than λ-cyhalothrin. We concluded that spinosad was more compatible with spiders on cabbage compared to λ-cyhalothrin and that this information should be used when developing insecticide resistance management strategies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23455995     DOI: 10.1007/s10646-013-1045-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecotoxicology        ISSN: 0963-9292            Impact factor:   2.823


  6 in total

1.  Can agrobiont spiders (Araneae) avoid a surface with pesticide residues?

Authors:  Stano Pekár; Charles R Haddad
Journal:  Pest Manag Sci       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 4.845

2.  Further development for testing the effects of pesticides on wolf spiders.

Authors:  A Hof; D Heimann; J Römbke
Journal:  Ecotoxicol Environ Saf       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 6.291

3.  Effect of selected insecticides on the natural enemies Coleomegilla maculata and Hippodamia convergens (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), Geocoris punctipes (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae), and Bracon mellitor, Cardiochiles nigriceps, and Cotesia marginiventris (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in cotton.

Authors:  P G Tillman; J E Mulrooney
Journal:  J Econ Entomol       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 2.381

4.  Biodiversity and structure of spider communities along a metal pollution gradient.

Authors:  Sebatian Zmudzki; Ryszard Laskowski
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2012-04-28       Impact factor: 2.823

5.  Nontarget impact of spinosad GF-120 bait sprays for control of the Mexican fruit fly (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Texas citrus.

Authors:  Donald B Thomas; Robert L Mangan
Journal:  J Econ Entomol       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 2.381

6.  Comparative susceptibilities of diamondback moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) and cabbage looper (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from Minnesota and south Texas to lambda-cyhalothrin and indoxacarb.

Authors:  T X Liu; W D Hutchison; W Chen; E C Burkness
Journal:  J Econ Entomol       Date:  2003-08       Impact factor: 2.381

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.