Anders S Huseth1, Thomas M Chappell1, Kevin Langdon2, Shannon C Morsello3, Scott Martin4, Jeremy K Greene5, Ames Herbert6, Alana L Jacobson7, Francis Pf Reay-Jones8, Timothy Reed9, Dominic D Reisig10, Phillip M Roberts11, Ron Smith12, George G Kennedy1. 1. Department of Entomology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA. 2. Syngenta Crop Protection, Vero Beach, FL, USA. 3. Sygenta Crop Protection, Greensboro, NC, USA. 4. Syngenta Crop Protection, Ruston, LA, USA. 5. Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Edisto Research and Education Center, Clemson University, Blackville, SC, USA. 6. Department of Entomology, Tidewater Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Suffolk, VA, USA. 7. Department of Entomology, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA. 8. Department of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Pee Dee Research and Education Center, Clemson University, Florence, SC, USA. 9. Auburn University, Tennessee Valley Regional Research and Extension Center, Belle Mina, AL, USA. 10. Department of Entomology, North Carolina State University, Vernon G James Research and Extension Center, Plymouth, NC, USA. 11. Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA, USA. 12. 205 Extension Hall, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, neonicotinoid seed treatments have become the primary method to manage tobacco thrips, Frankliniella fusca Hinds, on seedling cotton. Because this insect is highly polyphagous and the window of insecticide exposure is short, neonicotinoid resistance was expected to pose a minimal risk. However, reports of higher than expected F. fusca seedling damage in seed-treated cotton fields throughout the Mid-South and Southeast US production regions suggested neonicotinoid resistance had developed. To document this change, F. fusca populations from 86 different locations in the eastern United States were assayed in 2014 and 2015 for imidacloprid and thiamethoxam resistance to determine the extent of the issue in the region. RESULTS: Approximately 57 and 65% of the F. fusca populations surveyed had reduced imidacloprid and thiamethoxam sensitivity respectively. Survivorship in diagnostic bioassays was significantly different at both the state and regional scales. Multiple-dose bioassays conducted on 37 of the populations documented up to 55- and 39-fold resistance ratios for imidacloprid and thiamethoxam respectively. CONCLUSION: Estimates of neonicotinoid resistance indicate an emerging issue for management of F. fusca in the eastern United States. Significant variation in survivorship within states and regions indicated that finer-scale surveys were needed to determine factors (genetic, insecticide use) driving resistance evolution.
BACKGROUND: Over the past two decades, neonicotinoid seed treatments have become the primary method to manage tobacco thrips, Frankliniella fusca Hinds, on seedling cotton. Because this insect is highly polyphagous and the window of insecticide exposure is short, neonicotinoid resistance was expected to pose a minimal risk. However, reports of higher than expected F. fusca seedling damage in seed-treated cotton fields throughout the Mid-South and Southeast US production regions suggested neonicotinoid resistance had developed. To document this change, F. fusca populations from 86 different locations in the eastern United States were assayed in 2014 and 2015 for imidacloprid and thiamethoxam resistance to determine the extent of the issue in the region. RESULTS: Approximately 57 and 65% of the F. fusca populations surveyed had reduced imidacloprid and thiamethoxam sensitivity respectively. Survivorship in diagnostic bioassays was significantly different at both the state and regional scales. Multiple-dose bioassays conducted on 37 of the populations documented up to 55- and 39-fold resistance ratios for imidacloprid and thiamethoxam respectively. CONCLUSION: Estimates of neonicotinoid resistance indicate an emerging issue for management of F. fusca in the eastern United States. Significant variation in survivorship within states and regions indicated that finer-scale surveys were needed to determine factors (genetic, insecticide use) driving resistance evolution.
Authors: Waseem Akbar; Anilkumar Gowda; Jeffrey E Ahrens; Jason W Stelzer; Robert S Brown; Scott L Bollman; John T Greenplate; Jeffrey Gore; Angus L Catchot; Gus Lorenz; Scott D Stewart; David L Kerns; Jeremy K Greene; Michael D Toews; David A Herbert; Dominic D Reisig; Gregory A Sword; Peter C Ellsworth; Larry D Godfrey; Thomas L Clark Journal: Pest Manag Sci Date: 2018-12-18 Impact factor: 4.845
Authors: Scott H Graham; Fred M Musser; Alana L Jacobson; Anitha Chitturi; Beverly Catchot; Scott D Stewart Journal: J Econ Entomol Date: 2019-08-03 Impact factor: 2.381
Authors: Jessica L Krob; Scott D Stewart; Sebe A Brown; Dawson Kerns; Scott H Graham; Clay Perkins; Anders S Huseth; George G Kennedy; Dominic D Reisig; Sally V Taylor; Tyler B Towles; David L Kerns; Benjamin C Thrash; Gus M Lorenz; Nick R Bateman; Don R Cook; Whitney D Crow; Jeffrey Gore; Angus L Catchot; Fred R Musser; Beverly Catchot Journal: J Econ Entomol Date: 2022-10-12 Impact factor: 2.447
Authors: Rajagopalbabu Srinivasan; Mark R Abney; Pin-Chu Lai; Albert K Culbreath; Shyam Tallury; Soraya C M Leal-Bertioli Journal: Front Plant Sci Date: 2018-11-06 Impact factor: 5.753