Premium
Biological characterization of sulfoxaflor, a novel insecticide
Author(s) -
Babcock Jonathan M,
Gerwick Clifford B,
Huang Jim X,
Loso Michael R,
Nakamura Genta,
Nolting Steven P,
Rogers Richard B,
Sparks Thomas C,
Thomas James,
Watson Gerald B,
Zhu Yuanming
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
pest management science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.296
H-Index - 125
eISSN - 1526-4998
pISSN - 1526-498X
DOI - 10.1002/ps.2069
Subject(s) - imidacloprid , acetamiprid , biology , thiamethoxam , toxicology , neonicotinoid , whitefly , aphis gossypii , homoptera , pesticide , agronomy , aphididae , botany , pest analysis
BACKGROUND: The commercialization of new insecticides is important for ensuring that multiple effective product choices are available. In particular, new insecticides that exhibit high potency and lack insecticidal cross‐resistance are particularly useful in insecticide resistance management (IRM) programs. Sulfoxaflor possesses these characteristics and is the first compound under development from the novel sulfoxamine class of insecticides. RESULTS: In the laboratory, sulfoxaflor demonstrated high levels of insecticidal potency against a broad range of sap‐feeding insect species. The potency of sulfoxaflor was comparable with that of commercial products, including neonicotinoids, for the control of a wide range of aphids, whiteflies (Homoptera) and true bugs (Heteroptera). Sulfoxaflor performed equally well in the laboratory against both insecticide‐susceptible and insecticide‐resistant populations of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci Gennadius, and brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Stål), including populations resistant to the neonicotinoid insecticide imidacloprid. These laboratory efficacy trends were confirmed in field trials from multiple geographies and crops, and in populations of insects with histories of repeated exposure to insecticides. In particular, a sulfoxaflor use rate of 25 g ha −1 against cotton aphid ( Aphis gossypii Glover) outperformed acetamiprid (25 g ha −1 ) and dicrotophos (560 g ha −1 ). Sulfoxaflor (50 g ha −1 ) provided a control of sweetpotato whitefly equivalent to that of acetamiprid (75 g ha −1 ) and imidacloprid (50 g ha −1 ) and better than that of thiamethoxam (50 g ha −1 ). CONCLUSION: The novel chemistry of sulfoxaflor, its unique biological spectrum of activity and its lack of cross‐resistance highlight the potential of sulfoxaflor as an important new tool for the control of sap‐feeding insect pests. Copyright © 2010 Society of Chemical Industry