Advertisement

Entomophaga

, Volume 31, Issue 3, pp 225–236 | Cite as

Detecting variability and selecting for pesticide resistance in two species of phytoseiid mites

  • N. P. Markwick
Article

Abstract

Methods used for evaluating the effects of pesticides and selecting for pesticide resistance in phytoseiid mites are reviewed from recent literature. In particular slide dip, leaf dip, and leaf disc spray methods are compared. The selection of predatory mites (Typhlodromus pyri Scheuten andPhytoseiulus persimilis Athias-Henriot) for resistance to 3 synthetic pyrethroids (SP-cypermethrin, deltamethrin, and fenvalerate) is described. Tolerance of field populations to all 3 SP was low inP. persimilis but moderate inT. pyri. Field samples of both mite species on leaf discs were sprayed and the survivors were reared in laboratory and/or glasshouse cultures. These cultures were sprayed with repeated doses of SP; initiallyT. pyri was selected with cypermethrin andP. persimilis with fenvalerate. The survival rate ofT. pyri increased at each selection. After 6 selections the survival rate of the laboratory culture was 10 times that of the original field samples. Tests indicated crossresistance inT. pyri to fenvalerate and deltamethrin. Selection with cypermethrin is continuing. In the first 12 months repeated selections ofP. persimilis with fenvalerate gave no significant change in survival rate.

Key-words

Typhlodromus pyri Phytoseiulus persimilis synthetic pyrethroids variability selection LC50 IPM 

Résumé

Les méthodes utilisées pour évaluer les effets des pesticides et pour sélectionner la résistance à ces mêmes produits, des acariens phytoseiides sont analysées d'après la littérature récente. La sélection des acariens prédateurs (Typhlodromus pyri S{upcheuten} etPhytoseiulus persimilis A{upthias}-H{upenriot}) pour leur résistance aux 3 pyréthrinoides de synthèse (cyperméthrine, deltaméthrine et fenvalerate) est décrite. La tolérance des populations naturelles aux 3 pyréthrinoides de synthèse était basse pourP. persimilis, mais modérée pourT. pyri. Les échantillons des 2 espèces d'acariens prélevés à l'extérieur furent traitès sur des disques de feuilles et les survivants furent élevés au laboratoire et/ou dans des cultures en serre. Ces élevages furent traités avec des doses répétées d'un pyréthrinoide, cyperméthrine initialement pourT. pyri et fenvalerate pourP. persimilis. Le taux de survie deT. pyri augmentait à chaque sélection. Après 6 sélections, le taux de survie de l'élevage de laboratoire était 10 fois celui des échantillons d'origine. Les essais révélaient une résistance croisée deT. pyri à la fenvalerate et à la deltaméthrine. La sélection avec la cyperméthrine se poursuit. Au cours des 12 premiers mois, les sélections répétées deP. persimilis avec la fenvalerate ne donnait pas de changement significatif dans le taux de survie.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anon. — 1968. First conference on test methods for resistance in insects of agricultural importance. —Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am., 14, 31–37.Google Scholar
  2. Anon. — 1974. Recommended methods for the detection and measurement of resistance of agricultural pests to pesticides. Tentative methods for spider mites and their eggs,Tetranychus spp. andPanonychus ulmi (Koch) FAO Method No. 10. —F.A.O. Pl. Protect. Bull., 22, 103–107.Google Scholar
  3. Croft, B. A., Brown, A. N. A. &Hoying, S. A. — 1976. Organophosphate resistance and its inheritance in the predacious mite,Amblyseius fallacis. —J. Econ. Entomol., 69, 64–68.Google Scholar
  4. Croft, B. A. &Wagner, S. W. — 1981. Selectivity of acaricidal pyrethroids to permethrin-resistant strains ofAmblyseius fallacis. —J. Econ. Entomol., 74, 703–706.Google Scholar
  5. Dennehy, T. J., Granett, J. &Leigh, T. F. — 1983. Relevance of slide-dip and residual bioassay comparisons to detection of resistance in spider mites. —J. Econ. Entomol., 76, 1225–1230.Google Scholar
  6. Finney, D. J. — 1964. “Probit Analysis: a statistical treatment of the sigmoid response curve”. 2nd Edn. —Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  7. Hassan, S. A., Bigler, F., Bogenschutz, H., Brown, J. U., Firth, S. I., Huang, P., Ledieu, M. S., Naton, E., Oomen, P. A., Overmeer, W. P. J., Rieckmann, W., Samsoe-Petersen, L., Viggiani, G. &Van Zon, A. Q. — 1983. Results of the second joint pesticide testing programme. by the IOBC/WPRS — Working Group “Pesticides and Beneficial Arthropods.” —Z. Angew. Entomol., 95, 151–158.Google Scholar
  8. Hoy, M. A., Flaherty, D., Peacock, W. &Culver, D. — 1979. Vineyard and laboratory evaluations of methomyl, dimethoate, and permethrin for a grape pest management program in the San Joaquin Valley of California. —J. Econ. Entomol., 72, 250–255.Google Scholar
  9. Hoy, M. A. & Knop, N. F. — 1979. Studies on pesticide resistance in the phytoseiidMetaseiulus occidentalis in California. —Recent Adv. Acar., 89–94.Google Scholar
  10. Hoy, M. A., Knop, N. F. &Joos, J. L. — 1980. Pyrethroid resistance persists in spider mite predator. —Calif. Agric., 34, 11–12.Google Scholar
  11. Hoy, M. A., Westigard, P. H. &Hoyt, S. C. — 1983. Release and evaluation of a laboratory-selected, pyrethroid-resistant strain of the predaceous miteMetaseiulus occidentalis [Acari: Phytoseiidae] in Southern Oregan pear orchards and a Washington apple orchard. —J. Econ. Entomol., 76, 383–388.Google Scholar
  12. Jeppson, L. R., McMurtry, J. A., Mead, D. W., Jesser, M. H. J. &Johnson, H. G. — 1975. Toxicity of citrus pesticides to some predaceous phytoseiid mites. —J Econ. Entomol., 68, 707–710.Google Scholar
  13. McMurtry, J. A. &Scriven, G. I. — 1965. Insectary production of phytoseiid mites. —J. Econ. Entomol., 58, 292–294.Google Scholar
  14. Morse, J. G. &Croft, B. A. — 1981. Developed resistance to azinphosmethyl in a predator-prey mite system in greenhouse experiments. —Entomophaga, 26, 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Overmeer, W. P. J. — 1981. Notes on breeding phytoseiid mites from orchards [Acarina: Phytoseiidae] in the laboratory. —Med. Fac. Landbouw. Rijksuniv. Gent. 46/2 1981.Google Scholar
  16. Overmeer, W. P. J. &Van Zon, A. W. — 1981. A comparative study of the effect of some pesticides on three predacious mites species:Typhlodromus pyri, Amblyseius potentillae andA. bibens [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Entomophaga, 26, 3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Penman, D. R., Ferro, D. N. &Wearing, C. H. — 1976. Integrated control of apple pests in New Zealnd. VII. Azinphosmethyl resistance in strains ofTyphlodromus pyri from Nelson. —N. Z. Jl. exp. Agric., 4, 377–380.Google Scholar
  18. Ross, G. J. S. — 1980. MLP Maximum likelihood program. —Rothamsted Experimental Station, Harpenden U.K..Google Scholar
  19. Roush, R. T. &Hoy, M. A. — 1978. Relative toxicity of permethrin to a predator,Metaseiulus occidentalis, and its prey,Tetranychus urticae. —Environ. Entomol., 7, 287–288.Google Scholar
  20. Samsoë-Petersen, L. — 1983. Laboratory method for testing side effects of pesticides on juvenile stages of the predatory mite,Phytoseiulus persimilis [Acarina, Phytoseiidae] based on detached bean leaves. —Entomophaga, 28, 167–178.Google Scholar
  21. Van Zon, A. Q. &Wysoki, M. — 1978. The effect of some fungicides onPhytoseiulus persimilis [Acarina: Phytoseiidae]. —Entomophaga, 23, 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Walker, J. T. S., Wearing, C. H., Proffitt, C. &Charles, J. G. — 1981. Predator for two-spotted spider mite establishes in orchards. —The Orchardist of New Zealand, 54, 340.Google Scholar
  23. Wearing, C. H., Collyer, E., Thomas, W. P. &Cook, C. — 1978 Integrated control of apple pests in New Zealand. 12. Commercial implementation of integrated control of European red mite in Nelson. —Proc. N.Z. Weed and Pest Control Conf., 31, 214–220.Google Scholar
  24. Wong, S. W. &Chapman, R. B. — 1979. Toxicity of synthetic pyrethroid insecticides to predaceous phytoseiid mites and their prey. —Aust. J. Agric. Res., 30, 497–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Lavoisier Abonnements 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • N. P. Markwick
    • 1
  1. 1.Entomology DivisionDepartment of Scientific and Industrial ResearchAuckland

Personalised recommendations