Journal of Integrative Agriculture ›› 2024, Vol. 23 ›› Issue (7): 2332-2345.DOI: 10.1016/j.jia.2023.07.029

• • 上一篇    下一篇

不同地域棉蚜对氟啶虫胺腈及啶虫脒抗性发展、交互抗性及适合度成本

  

  • 收稿日期:2023-04-28 接受日期:2023-06-19 出版日期:2024-07-20 发布日期:2024-07-02

Resistance development, cross-resistance, and fitness costs associated with Aphis gossypii resistance towards sulfoxaflor and acetamiprid in different geographical regions

Wei Wang1, 2, Renfu Zhang1, Haiyang Liu1, Ruifeng Ding1, Qiushi Huang2, Ju Yao1#, Gemei Liang2#   

  1. 1 Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management on Crop in Northwestern Oasis of Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Institute of Plant Protection, Xinjiang Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Urumqi 830091, China
    2 State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
  • Received:2023-04-28 Accepted:2023-06-19 Online:2024-07-20 Published:2024-07-02
  • About author:Wei Wang, Tel: +86-991-4524641, E-mail: wlzforever2004@sina. com; #Correspondence Ju Yao, Tel: +86-991-4524641, E-mail: yaoju500@sohu.com; Gemei Liang, Tel: +86-10-62815929, E-mail: gmliang@ippcaas.cn
  • Supported by:
    This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (2022YFD1400300), the Open Fund of Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management on Crops in Northwestern Oasis, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs of China (KFJJ202204) and the China Agriculture Research System (CARS-15-20).

摘要:

棉蚜抗药性日益严重,使其变得越来越难以防治。室内,在两个不同基础抗性的棉蚜种群中分别建立了抗氟啶虫胺腈品系和抗啶虫脒品系,并评估了基础抗性对棉蚜抗药性发展、交互抗性和适合度的的影响。在相同的选择压力下,基础抗性低的莎车棉蚜对氟啶虫胺腈和啶虫脒抗性发展快于基础抗性高的精河棉蚜,并且莎车和精河棉蚜对氟啶虫胺腈的抗性发展快于啶虫脒。从莎车和精河中筛选的抗氟啶虫胺腈品系均对啶虫脒、吡虫啉、噻虫嗪和吡蚜酮产生了明显的交互抗性,筛选的抗啶虫脒品系均对氟啶虫胺腈、吡虫啉、噻虫嗪、吡蚜酮和毒死蜱产生了明显的交互抗性。随着棉蚜对氟啶虫胺腈和啶虫脒抗性发展,棉蚜的相对适合度下降,其中抗氟啶虫胺腈品系(Yarkant-SulR and Jinghe-SulR)相对适合度低于抗啶虫脒品系(Yarkant-AceRJinghe-AceR)。此外,精河的抗氟啶虫胺腈品系和抗啶虫脒品系的相对适合度低于莎车两个抗性品系。棉蚜基础抗性和杀虫剂类型影响棉蚜对杀虫剂的抗性发展对其他杀虫剂的交互抗性。棉蚜抗氟啶虫胺腈品系和抗啶虫脒品系存在明显适合度成本。本研究结果将有助于棉蚜抗药性管理及其综合防控

Abstract:

Aphis gossypii has become increasingly difficult to manage due to its strong insecticide resistance.  In the laboratory, we established sulfoxaflor-resistant and acetamiprid-resistant strains in two A. gossypii populations with different basal insecticide resistance levels, and evaluated the effects of basal insecticide resistance on the resistance development and cross-resistance, as well as differences in fitness.  Under the same selection pressure, Yarkant A. gossypii (with low basal insecticide resistance) evolved resistance to sulfoxaflor and acetamiprid more quickly than Jinghe A. gossypii (with high basal insecticide resistance), and the evolution of A. gossypii resistance to sulfoxaflor developed faster than acetamiprid in both Yarkant and Jinghe, Xingjiang, China.  The sulfoxaflor-resistant strains selected from Yarkant and Jinghe developed significant cross-resistance to acetamiprid, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam and pymetrozine; while the acetamiprid-resistant strains developed significant cross-resistance to sulfoxaflor, imidacloprid, thiamethoxam, pymetrozine, and chlorpyrifos.  The relative fitness of A. gossypii decreased as the resistance to sulfoxaflor and acetamiprid developed.  The relative fitness levels of the sulfoxaflor-resistant strains (Yarkant-SulR and Jinghe-SulR) were lower than those of the acetamiprid-resistant strains (Yarkant-AceR and Jinghe-AceR).  In addition, the relative fitness levels of sulfoxaflor- and acetamiprid-resistant strains were lower in Jinghe than in Yarkant.  In summary, basal insecticide resistance of A. gossypii and insecticide type affected the evolution of resistance to insecticides in A. gossypii, as well as cross-resistance to other insecticides.  The sulfoxaflor- and acetamiprid-resistant A. gossypii strains had obvious fitness costs.  The results of this work will contribute to the insecticide resistance management and integrated management of A. gossypii.

Key words: Aphis gossypii ,  sulfoxaflor ,  acetamiprid ,  cross-resistance ,  fitness costs ,  different sensitivities