Shams El-Dine, A., Desuky, W., Omar, R., Muhamed, A. (2008). COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN. Journal of Productivity and Development, 13(1), 39-49. doi: 10.21608/jpd.2008.44822
Aly Shams El-Dine; Waheed Desuky; Reda Omar; Asmaa Muhamed. "COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN". Journal of Productivity and Development, 13, 1, 2008, 39-49. doi: 10.21608/jpd.2008.44822
Shams El-Dine, A., Desuky, W., Omar, R., Muhamed, A. (2008). 'COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN', Journal of Productivity and Development, 13(1), pp. 39-49. doi: 10.21608/jpd.2008.44822
Shams El-Dine, A., Desuky, W., Omar, R., Muhamed, A. COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN. Journal of Productivity and Development, 2008; 13(1): 39-49. doi: 10.21608/jpd.2008.44822
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN
1Plant Protection Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Benha University, Egypt.
2Plant Protection Research Institute, A.R. C., Dokki, Giza, Egypt
Abstract
Development of resistance to malathion and pyriproxyfen in population of cowpea beetle, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) was evaluated under laboratory condition during twenty successive generations. Data cleared that the resistance ratio with malathion selection was fewer than pyriproxyfen, the resistance ratios were 11.54 and -131.25 fold, respectively after twenty successive generations. The resistance ratio was increased slowly in malathion population and became resistant after twenty selected generations, while with pyriproxyfen, the population became resistant after only ten generations. Development of resistance in pyriproxyfen populations was faster than malathion population. These results show that malathion is more active than pyriproxyfen in cowpea beetle control.
COMPARATIVE STUDY OF THE COWPEA BEETLE, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) RESISTANCE TO MALATHION AND PYRIPROXYFEN
A. M. Shams El-Dine *; W. M. H. Desuky**; R.E.M.Omar*; Asmaa M. M. Muhamed**
*Plant Protection Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Benha University, Egypt.
** Plant Protection Research Institute, A.R. C., Dokki, Giza, Egypt
ABSTRACT
Development of resistance to malathion and pyriproxyfen in population of cowpea beetle, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) was evaluated under laboratory condition during twenty successive generations. Data cleared that the resistance ratio with malathion selection was fewer than pyriproxyfen, the resistance ratios were 11.54 and -131.25 fold, respectively after twenty successive generations. The resistance ratio was increased slowly in malathion population and became resistant after twenty selected generations, while with pyriproxyfen, the population became resistant after only ten generations. Development of resistance in pyriproxyfen populations was faster than malathion population. These results show that malathion is more active than pyriproxyfen in cowpea beetle control.
Keywords: Development of resistance,C. chinensis, malathion, pyriproxyfen , generations.
INTRODUCTION
Cowpea beetle, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) considered a serious pest on stored products. So, it was controlled by many conventional pesticides, such as carbaryl and malathion (Gouhar et al., 1980). The intensive use of pesticides against this pest led to increase of level of resistance to many pesticides. So, alternative agents were used to control this pest called no conventional agents such as insect growth regulators (IGRs). Pyriproxyfen is one of the most active compounds against many pests used in this experiment. This compound belongs to juvenile hormone mimics and is considered a leader compound for controlling white flies (Ishaaya etal.,1994). In this work comparison between malathion resistance (conventional pesticide) and pyriproxyfen resistance (non conventional pesticide) was carried out. Unfortunately, there is no data in the literature on the development of resistance to pyriproxyfen with cowpea beetle. Pyriproxyfen affecting in the hormonal balance and in some cases suppression of embryogenesis, metamorphosis and adult formation (Aamirand ElFishawy, 1987) and (Koehler and Patterson, 1991).On the other hand, Haubruge and Arnaud (2001) recorded that developed specific resistance in Tribolium castenium to malathion.
Therefore, this study focused on the comparison between the development of resistance in C. chinensis to malathion and pyriproxyfen during twenty successive generations.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
1- Tested insects:
The original population of the cowpea beetle, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) which used in this study consists of 1000 adults, were collected from the infested cowpea seeds stored in local warehouses in Zagazig region. The collected insects were mixed and reared in laboratory conditions (30 ± 1C˚ and 70 ± 5 % R.H.). Cowpea seeds were used as a rearing host. Fresh cowpea seeds were firstly examined to insure that it is in a good case, then it was packaged in plastic bags, tied with thread and kept at 20 C˚in a deep-freezer for one week at least to kill any internal infestation. The first generation of the collected insects introduced into 2kg glass jars, half filled with sterilized cowpea seeds, variety Karem 7. The jars were covered with muslin cloth secured by rubber bands and kept in an incubation adjusted at 30 ± 1C˚ and 70 ± 5 % RH. when the adults started to emerge, the newly emerged ones (0-24 hours old) were used in the experiment. The adults were confined with sterilized cowpea seed in five pound glass jars for six hours, and then were transferred. The infested seeds cultures are prepared to expose to selection pressure with the pesticides used during successive generations.
2- Tested pesticides:
A - Malathion
Trade name: Malathion 57 %
Common name: Prentox
Basic product: BASF-Helena Company.
B - Pyriproxyfen
Trade Name : Admiral
Common name: Pyriproxyfen
Basic product: Sumitomo Company.
3-Determination of resistance of the cowpea beetle to the tested pesticides:
The infested seeds were divided to three batches, the first was sprayed by Malathion after 24 h. of laying and the second batch was sprayed with Pyriproxyfen after 24 h. of laying while, the third one was sprayed with acetone pure after 24 h. of laying. Both insecticides and juvenile hormone, mimic were dissolved in acetone unless otherwise indicated in the text. Most of the experiments were carried out using five concentrations and twenty gm. of seeds were used for each concentration. It was found that 2ml of acetone was completely enough to cover this amount of seeds. After spraying, the seeds were allowed to dry air, and then transferred to plastic container until hatching. Control eggs received either pure acetone. Each experiment contained four replicates, 25 seeds were used for each. Unhatchability percentages were assessed after 7 days and corrected according to Abbott's formula (1925). The regression lines were plotted on computer propane this method was carried out during 20 generations and the resistance ratios were calculated by dividing the LC50 values of the resistance strain on the LC50 values of the parent (susceptible strain).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
1- Development of resistance of the cowpea beetle to Malathion:
The strain of the cowpea beetle, Callosobrochus chinensis (L.) selected with malathion did not develop a high degree of resistance in spite of the successive direct exposure of eggs to selection pressure by successive concenterations of malathion (every generation). Insecticidal selection was contenued up to twenty generations at the selection pressure of mortality of adults. The obtained resultes are presentd in Table 1 and Figure 1. The dosage mortality response of C. chinensis (selected strain) to malathion selection pressure was relatevily slow during the whole period of selection.The LC50 values increased gradually from (29.11) ppm in the parent generation to (225.10) ppm in F20. The strain became ressistance in F20, the fold of resistance 11.54- Fold. Figure 1 show that the fold of resistance increase gradually and there are no fluctuation, this mean that the malathion-resistant strain was homogensous. The slope value also increase gradually from 2.76 ± 0.22 in the parent to 4.35 ± 0.44. The highest increasing in the resistance ratio was observed between F10 and F15 as mentioned in Table 1 and Figure 1. Resistance factor at level of LC50 indicated that the rate of resistance developement to malathion was ingraduall and slow untill F20 (11.54 – fold ) of this generation.
Development of resistance to malathion in most insect species of stored products was extensively studied whether in laboratory or in natural stores and many reports from different parts of the world were recorded. Kaiyoku and Tsukuda (1964) reported that resistance to malathion, DDT and Fenitrothion in C. chinensis as a result of laboratory selection pressure was increased to malathion but decreased to the other two insecticides, these changes in susceptibility of insects were attributed to ecological adaptation to insecticides. Zettler (1974), found that resistance ratio in T. castaneum, which
Table 1. Development of resistance in the cowpea beetle, C. chinensis eggs to malathion during 20 successive generations.
Generations
LC50 and
confidence limits
(Lower – Upper)
Slope ± SE
Resistance ratios
F0
29.15
(18.95 – 41.16)
2.76 ± 0.22
0.96
F5
41.78
(37.55 – 46.63)
2.72 ± 0.23
1.52
F10
80.29
(73.78 – 88.07)
3.06 ± 0.28
2.93
F15
198.12
(184.18 – 212.10)
3.97 ± 0.41
7.59
F20
225.11
(211.37 – 240.23)
4.35 ± 0.44
11.54
was collected from stored peanut in Georgia, to malathion ranged from 9.60 to 108.70 fold at LD50 level. The present results are in agreement with those obtained by Aamir (1975) stated that dvelopment of resistance to malathion in the cowpea beetle, C. maculatus was very low and weak reaching to 2.47 fold only in F19 in spite of the successive selection pressure (every generation) of adults at the concentration that kill 50-60 % of adults and the resistance factor was 0.33 - fold at LC90 level. Zettler and Arthur (1997), stated that strains of T. castanium and T. confusum collected from flour were resistant to malathion and dichlorfos and T. castanum were more resistant than T. confusum.
2- Development of resistance of the cowpea beetle to pyriproxyfen:
The selection was thus continued for 20 successive generations and the level of resistance was measured every 5 generations. Results obtained are presented in Table 2 and Figure 2. Data show that the cowpea beetle eggs developed sharp increase in resistance to pyriproxyfen during 20th successive generations. The LC50 values of the selected strain increased gradually as a result of selection. The rates of increasing were not sharp in the parent and F5; the folds of resistance were 0.17 and 0.16, respectively, then markedly increased to 23.55 and 122.33 fold in F15 and 131.25 fold in F20, respectively. The slope values were fluctuated from generation to other, the values were 0.51 ± 0.05, 0.47 ± 0.05, 2.37 ± 0.02, 3.00 ± 0.27, 2.47 ± 0.26 in F0, F5, F10, F15 and F20, respectively. Data confirmed that the development of resistance to pyriproxyfen in the tested insect (eggs) was very rapidly from F10 to F15.
The fluctuation in slope values indicate that the strain become heterogeneous (Table 2). The efficiency of pyriproxyfen against many species of insects was extensively studied by many investigators, but the literature about the development of resistance in insects against these J. H .mimic pyriproxyfen is very rare. The potential resistance in cowpea beetle to pyriproxyfen was developed rare rapidly in spite of the exposure of eggs for 2nd successive generation to selection pressure at the concentrations. Findings confirmed the results of Elbert and Nauen (2000), who reported that development of resistance in Bemesia tabaci more rapidly, has developed high degree of resistance against several chemical classes of insecticides, including organophosphates and/or insect growth regulators. Horowitz et al. (2002) also found that dynamic of pyriproxyfen resistance in B. tabaci have been studied intensively in cotton field and green houses in Israel. High resistance to pyriproxyfen evolved one year after its introduction for use one flower. In green houses ,a high level of resistance was observed after ten rears .But its rate of development different among localities due to the absence of applications of pyriproxyfen in some cotton fields. Horowitz andIshaaya (1995)collected white flies from three green houses andexposed
Table 2. Development of resistance in the cowpea beetle C. chinensis to pyriproxyfen during 20 successive generations.
Generations
LC50 and
confidence limits
(Lower – Upper)
Slope ± SE
Resistance Ratio
F0
0.04
(0.02 – 0.07)
0.51 ± 0.05
0.17
F5
0.02
(0.01 – 0.04)
0.47 ± 0.05
0.16
F10
2.59
(2.27 – 2.92)
2.37 ± 0.20
23.55
F15
3.67
(2.18 – 4.47)
3.00 ± 0.27
122.33
F20
5.25
(4.68 – 5.86)
2.47 ± 0.26
131.25
them to a series of conc. Insect growth regulators, buprofezin and pyriproxyfen assays. They indicated an-4-fold increase intolerance to buprofezin after 2 successive applications of that relatively high level of resistance to pyriproxyfen, after 3 successive applications of that compound at the LC50, the resistance ratio value for suppression of egg-hatch was 554-fold adult emergence failure. Li et al. (1997) reported that musca domestica strain highly resistant to pyriproxyfen, a Juvenil hormone analogue, was established by laboratory selection for flies. The strain developed 4900 - fold to pyriproxyfen in the 3rd instars larvae by the 17th generation of selection from a level of only 3-8 fold before selections (compared to susceptible strains ). Bioassays of synergism showed that the resistance ratio white pupae of M. domistica were depressed to 29 fold from 400 fold by acytochrome P450 inhibitor. These results indicate that P450 monooxygenase plays an important role in M. domistica resistance to pyriproxyfen. The present results are in agreement with those obtained by Aamir (1981) and Aamir & EL-Fishawy (1987) as discussed before in case of Malathion. To throw some light in the difference between malathion and pyriproxyfen in the rate of resistance (131.25-fold for pyriproxyfen and 11.54-fold for malathion). This means that, the cowpea beetle acquired resistance quickly against pyriproxyfen compared to malathion. Although, this pest acquired resistance to pyriproxyfen quickly, the parent generation in malathion selected strain was more resistance than the parent generation in pyriproxyfen (the LC50 for malathion parent was 29.15 ppm, while, in pyeiproxyfen was 0.04 ppm).The slope values in malathion selected strain was increased gradually, while, in pyriproxyfen selected strain the slope values were fluctuated from generation to another this mean that the malathion –selected strain was homogenous , on the other hand the pyriproxyfen – selected was heterogeneous as mentioned at in Table 3 and Figure 3.
In conclusion:
From these results, it could be concluded that
REFERENCES
Aamir, M. M. I. (1975): Toxicological studies on the cowpea weevil, callosobruchus maculatus (F.). M. Sc. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, Zagazig University.
Aamir, M. M. I. (1981): Study toxicologic asupra raselor de Tribolium confusum rezistante la insecticidele de contact . Ph D. Thesis, Faculty of Agriculture, IANB - Bucharest ).
Aamir M. M. I. and A. A. El Fishawy (1987): The effect of selection with deltamethrin on biology of Callosobruchus maculatus (F.). Bull. Ent. Society, Egypt, Econ. Ser., 16: 11-19.
Abbott, W. S. (1925): A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. Journal of Econ. Entomol., 18: 256-269.
Elbert, A. and R. Nauen (2000): Resistance of Bemisiatabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) to insecticides in southern Spain with special reference to neonicotinoids. Pest-Management Science, 56 (1): 60-64.
Gouhar, K. A.; M. M. Mansour; M. W. Guirguis and M . I. Amir (1980): Development of resistance to carbaryl, malathion and Lindane in a strain of Callosobruchusmaculatus (Fab.). Bull. Ent. Society, Egypt, 12: 5 - 10 .
Haubruge, E. and Arnaud, L. (2001): Fitness consequences of malathion-specific resistance in red flour beetle (Coleoptera: Tenebrionidae) and selection for resistance in the absence of malathion. Journal of Econ. Entomol., 94 (2): 552-557.
Horowitz, A.R.; S. Kontsedalov ; I. Denholm and I. Ishaaya (2002): Dynamics of insecticide resistance in Bemisiatabaci: a case study with the insect growth regulator pyriproxyfen. Pest Management Science, 58 (11): 1096-1100.
Horowitz,A. R. and I. Ishaaya (1995) : Managing resistance to insect growth regulators in the sweet potato whitefly (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Journal of Econ. Entomol., 87 (4): 866-871
Ishaaya, I.; A. De cock and D. Degheele (1994): Pyriprxoyfen potent Suppressor of egg hatch and adult formation of the Greenhouse whitefly ( Homoptrea :Aleyrodie). Journal of Econ. Entomol., 87: 1185 – 1189 .
Kaiyoku, M. and R. Tsukuda (1964): Considerations on the adaptive changes induced by the insecticidal selection in experimental populations of Callosobruchus chinensis (L.). Science Rep., Faculty of Agriculture, OkayamaUniv., 24: 9-18.
Koehler P. and R. Patterson (1991). Incorporation of pyriproxyfen in a German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) management program. Journal of Econ. Entomol., 84: 917 - 921.
Zhang, Li; K. Harada and T. Shono (1997): Genetic analysis of pyriproxyfen resistance in the house fly, Musca domestica L. Applied of Entomol. Zool., 32 (1): 217-226.
Zettler, J. I. (1974): Malathion resistance in Tribolium castaneum collected from stored peanuts. Journal of Econ. Entomol., 67 : 339 – 340.
دراسة مقارنة بین مقاومة حشرة خنفساء اللوبیا لکل من مبیدی
الملاثیون والبیروبروکسیفین
علی محمد شمس الدین1 ، وحید محمود حسین دسوقی2، رضا السید محمد عمر، أسماء مغاوری محمد محمد
قسم وقایة النبات- کلیة الزراعة بمشتهر- جامعة بنها- بنها- مصر.
معهد بحوث و قایة النباتات- مرکز البحوث الزراعیة- دقی – جیزة- مصر.
الهدف الرئیسی لهذه الدراسة هو معرفـة قدرة حشرة خنفساء اللوبیا علی اکـتساب مقاومـة لأحد منظمات النمو الحشریة عندما یستخدم هذا المبید فی مکافحة الحـشرات فترات طویلة، وذلک بالمقارنة بأحد المبیدات الفسفوریة المعروفة وهـو مبید الملاثیون و الذی یستخـــدم فی مکافحة حشرات المخازن علی نطاق واسع . ولقد تم تقییم تطور مقاومة حشرة خنفساء اللوبیا لکل من الملاثیون و البیروبروکسیفـین تحت الظروف المعملیة وذلک خلال عشرین جیلا وقد أظهرت النتائج أن مستوى مقاومة الحشرة للملاثیون کان أقـل بکثیر من المقاومة للبیروبروکسیفـین حیث کانت نسبة المقاومة 11.54 ، 131.25 ضعف على التوالی. فی حالة الملاثیون معدل المقاومة زاد زیادة بطیئة وتدریجیة حیث ظهرت المقاومة فی الجـیل العشریـن تقریبا ، بینما فی حالة البیروبروکسیفـین ظهرت المقاومة أسرع حیث ظهرت فی الجـیل العاشر وهذا یعنى أن مقاومة خنفساء اللوبیا للبیروبروکسیفـین یتطور بصورة أسرع فی مقاومتها للملاثیون ومن هنا فهذه النتائج تؤکد أن فاعلیة الملاثیون على هذه الحشرة أکبر عن فاعلیة البیروبروکسیفـین.