Premium
Genetics of spinosad resistance in a multi‐resistant field‐selected population of Plutella xylostella
Author(s) -
Sayyed Ali H,
Omar Dzolkhifli,
Wright Denis J
Publication year - 2004
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.869
Subject(s) - spinosad , plutella , cry1ac , bacillus thuringiensis , abamectin , biology , biopesticide , population , bioassay , fipronil , toxicology , genetics , microbiology and biotechnology , botany , lepidoptera genitalia , agronomy , pesticide , genetically modified crops , gene , bacteria , medicine , transgene , environmental health
Resistance to the bacteria‐derived insecticides spinosad (Conserve), abamectin (Vertimec), Bacillus thuringiensis var kurstaki ( Btk ) (Dipel), B thuringiensis var aizawai ( Bta ) (Xentari), B thuringiensis crystal endotoxins Cry1Ac and Cry1Ca, and to the synthetic insecticide fipronil was estimated in a freshly‐collected field population (CH 1 strain) of Plutella xylostella (L) from the Cameron Highlands, Malaysia. Laboratory bioassays at G 1 indicated significant levels of resistance to spinosad, abamectin, Cry1Ac, Btk , Cry1Ca, fipronil and Bta when compared with a laboratory insecticide‐susceptible population. Logit regression analysis of F 1 reciprocal crosses indicated that resistance to spinosad in the CH 1 population was inherited as a co‐dominant trait. At the highest dose of spinosad tested, resistance was close to completely recessive, while at the lowest dose it was incompletely dominant. A direct test of monogenic inheritance based on a back‐cross of F 1 progeny with CH 1 suggested that resistance to spinosad was controlled by a single locus. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry