Electropenetrography of spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii) on pesticide-treated strawberry
- 159 Downloads
Many behaviors are associated with host selection by arthropod pests. The treatment of a host, such as with a pesticide, may impact behaviors involved in this selection whose understanding yields opportunities for pest management. AC–DC electropenetrography (EPG) allows real-time monitoring of insect behaviors, but its use has emphasized feeding activities of hemipteroid insects. Recent improvement in electropenetrography (AC–DC) has made it amenable for use with non-hemipteroid species, such as the invasive spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii). Therefore, AC–DC EPG was used for the first quantitative study of a non-hemipteroid insect to monitor behaviors of spotted wing drosophila on strawberry fruits treated with either the fungicide fenhexamid or the insecticide spinetoram, in addition to a non-treated control. EPG was used to characterize three behavioral phases of the insect: non-probing (i.e., resting, grooming, and walking), feeding, and egg-laying. The first two phases were affected by sublethal pesticide exposure, but egg-laying was not. Both pesticides decreased the number of non-probing events, but increased their overall durations, while the opposite took place with feeding, especially in spinetoram-treated strawberry. Regarding feeding activity, both pesticides compromised insect dabbing and ingestion with particularly strong impairment by spinetoram, which also compromised how long the females survived (i.e., longevity). EPG revealed valuable insights regarding the behavioral assessment of pesticide-treated hosts by an insect pest. Specifically, the feeding of female of spotted wing drosophila was significantly impaired on strawberries treated with spinetoram compromising female longevity. Though deserving further attention, the fungicide fenhexamid exhibited a relatively mild effect on feeding, but did not affect adult longevity.
KeywordsFruit fly Feeding behavior Electrical penetration graph Spynosins Spinetoram Fenhexamid
Financial support was provided by the CAPES Foundation (Brazilian Ministry of Education; Finance Code 001) and USDA-ARS, which was greatly appreciated. The research was also supported in part by an appointment to the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) Research Participation Program administered by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) through an interagency agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). ORISE is managed by Oak Ridge Associated Universities (ORAU) under DOE contract number DE-SC0014664. All opinions expressed in this paper are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect the policies and views of CAPES, USDA, ARS, DOE, or ORAU/ORISE. Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were considered in the present study.
The authors of this manuscript accept that the paper is submitted for publication in the Journal of Pest Science, and report that this paper has not been published or accepted for publication in another journal, nor is under consider at another journal.
- Backus EA (2000) Our own jabberwocky: clarifying the terminology of certain piercing-sucking behaviors of homopterans. In: Walker GP, Backus EA (eds) Principles and applications of electronic monitoring and other techniques in the study of homopteran feeding behavior. Entomological Soceity of America, Annapolis, pp 1–13Google Scholar
- Boina DR, Youn Y, Folimonova S, Stelinski LL (2011) Effects of pymetrozine, an antifeedant of Hemiptera, on Asian citrus psyllid, Diaphorina citri, feeding behavior, survival and transmission of Candidatus Liberibacter asiaticus. Pest Manag Sci 67:146–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.2042 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Casida JE, Durkin KA (2013) Neuroactive insecticides: targets, selectivity, resistance, and secondary effects. Annu Rev Entomol 58:99–117. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153645 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cervantes FA, Backus EA, Godfrey L et al (2017a) Ecology and behavior correlation of electropenetrography waveforms from Lygus lineolaris (Hemiptera: Miridae) feeding on cotton squares with chemical evidence of inducible tannins. J Econ Entomol 110:2068–2075. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/tox198 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Cini A, Ioriatti C, Anfora G (2012) A review of the invasion of Drosophila suzukii in Europe and a draft research agenda for integrated pest management. Bull Insectol 65:149–160Google Scholar
- Daniels M, Bale JS, Newbury HJ et al (2009) A sublethal dose of thiamethoxam causes a reduction in xylem feeding by the bird cherry-oat aphid (Rhopalosiphum padi), which is associated with dehydration and reduced performance. J Insect Conserv 55:758–765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinsphys.2009.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Desneux N, Decourtye A, Delpuech J-M (2007) The sublethal effects of pesticides on benefitial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol 52:81–206. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091440 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Guedes RNC, Smagghe G, Stark JD, Desneux N (2016) Pesticide-induced stress in arthropod pests for optimized integrated pest management programs. Annu Rev Entomol 61:43–62. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-010715-023646 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Labandeira CC (1997) Insect mouthparts: ascertaining the paleobiology of insect feeding strategies. Annu Rev Entomol 28:153–193Google Scholar
- Salgado VL, Sparks TC (2010) The spinosyns: chemistry, biochemistry, mode of action, and resistance. In: Gilbert LI, Latrou K, Gill SS (eds) Comprehensive molecular insect science. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 137–173Google Scholar
- Simpson SJ, Clissold FJ, Lihoreau M et al (2015) Recent advances in the integrative nutrition of arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol 60:293–311. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-010814-020917 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Smith TB, Kinnison MT, Strauss SY et al (2014) Prescriptive evolution to conserve and manage biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 45:1–22. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091747 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Stoffolano JG Jr, Haselton AT (2013) The adult dipteran crop: a unique and overlooked organ. Annu Rev Entomol 58:205–228. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-120811-153653 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Walker GP (2000) A Beginner’s guide to electronic monitoring. In: Walker GP, Backus EA (eds) Principles and applications of electronic monitoring and other techniques in the study of homopteran feeding behavior. Entomological Soceity of America, Annapolis, pp 14–40Google Scholar
- Yang C, Hamel C, Vujanovic V, Gan Y (2011) Fungicide : modes of action and possible impact on nontarget microorganisms. ISRN Ecol ID 130289. https://doi.org/10.5402/2011/130289