Monitoring and Characterization of Diamondback Moth (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) Resistance to Spinosad

• Published in: Journal of economic entomology 2002-04, Vol.95 (2), p.430-436
• Main Authors: Zhao, J-Z, Li, Y-X, Collins, H. L, Gusukuma-Minuto, L, Mau, R. F L, Thompson, G. D, Shelton, A. M
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Animals; Biological and medical sciences; Chemical control; Control; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Drug Combinations; Female; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; inheritance; Insecticide Resistance; INSECTICIDE RESISTANCE AND RESISANCE MANAGEMENT; Insecticides - pharmacology; Macrolides - pharmacology; Male; Moths - drug effects; Organothiophosphates - pharmacology; Phytopathology. Animal pests. Plant and forest protection; Piperonyl Butoxide - pharmacology; Plutella xylostella; Protozoa. Invertebrates; resistance; spinosad; synergism
• ISSN: 0022-0493; 1938-291X; 0022-0493
• DOI: 10.1603/0022-0493-95.2.430

Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad. Most populations were susceptible to spinosad and similar to earlier baseline values, but populations from Thailand and Hawaii showed high levels of tolerance. A statewide survey in Hawaii in 2000 and 2001 indicated resistance problems on several islands. One colony collected in October 2000 from Pearl City, HI, was subjected to further selection pressure, using spinosad in the laboratory, and then was used as the resistant strain (Pearl-Sel) for other tests. Spray tests using the recommended field rates of spinosad on potted broccoli plants in the greenhouse confirmed that field control failures due to resistance were possible in the areas of these collections. Analysis of probit lines from F1 reciprocal crosses between the Pearl-Sel and S strain indicated that resistance to spinosad was inherited autosomally and was incompletely recessive. A direct test of monogenic inheritance based on the F1 × Pearl-Sel backcrosses suggested that resistance to spinosad was probably controlled by one locus. The synergists S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate and piperonyl butoxide did not enhance the toxicity of spinosad to the resistant colony, indicating metabolic mediated detoxification was probably not responsible for the spinosad resistance. Two field colonies in Hawaii that were resistant to spinosad were not cross-resistant to emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb. Resistance developed in Hawaii due to the continuous cultivation of crucifers in which as many as 50 applications of spinosad per year may have been made to a common population of P. xylostella in sequential plantings, although each grower might have used the labeled restrictions for resistance management. Resistance management strategies will need to address such cropping and pest management practices.