Short and long-term effects of three neurotoxic insecticides on biological and behavioural attributes of the orb-web spider Alpaida veniliae (Araneae, Araneidae): implications for IPM programs
- 445 Downloads
Soybean pest control in Argentina is done just by chemical control using broad-spectrum pesticides. Alpaida veniliae (Araneae, Araneidae) is one of the most abundant spider species of the orb web weaver guild in soybean, and it is considered a very important polyphagous predator, attacking different insects’ families. The objective of this study was to determine if neurotoxic insecticides commonly used in soybean crops and a new active ingredient registered in Argentina (spinosad) adversely affected survival, prey consumption, mating behaviour, web building and reproductive capacity of A. veniliae females, under standard laboratory conditions. Spinosad was the most harmful insecticide due to high acute toxicity, even at lower concentrations than those registered for its field use and for its sublethal effects also. Cypermethrin caused several sublethal effects although its acute toxicity on spider was lower than other insecticides. It reduced prey consumption, affected web building, caused abnormalities in eggs sacs and decreased drastically the fecundity and fertility at sublethal concentrations. Endosulfan did not reduce prey consumption but it affected web building, caused abnormalities in eggs sacs and egg masses, and decreased the fecundity and fertility. Spinosad was also the compound with the most drastic effect on web building, it did not reduce prey consumption and fecundity, but fertility was reduced and abnormalities in egg sacs and egg masses were observed. The use of these insecticides in IPM programs according to their potential toxicity on spider communities is discussed.
KeywordsSpiders Neurotoxic insecticides Cypermethrin Endosulfan Spinosad
This research was funded by a PICT 0115150 BID 1728 OCAR project from the Argentine National Agency for the Promotion of Science and Technology (ANPCyT). The authors thank to Gleba SA and DowAgrosciences SA for the donation of Glexthrin®, Endosulfan 25® and Tracer® samples, respectively. We thank also to R. Sosa and A. Cabrera for their valuable assistance in the field and laboratory work. We are also indebted to two anonymous reviewers for constructive criticism.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- Agrawal N, Brar DS (2006) Effects of different neem preparations in comparison to synthetic insecticides on the whitefly parasitoid Encarsia sophia (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) and the predator Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) on cotton under laboratory conditions. J Pest Sci 79:201–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Benamú MA (2010) Composición y estructura de la comunidad de arañas en el sistema de cultivo de soja transgénica. PhD thesis, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo (UNLP), ArgentinaGoogle Scholar
- Bindraban PS, Franke AC, Ferraro DO, Ghersa CM, Lotz LAP, Nepomuceno A, Smulders MJM, van de Wei CCM (2009) GM-related sustainability: agro-ecological impacts, risks and opportunities of soy production in Argentina and Brazil. Plant Research International B.V, WageningenGoogle Scholar
- CASAFE (2011) Guía de productos fitosanitarios para la República Argentina, 16th edn. Buenos Aires, ArgentinaGoogle Scholar
- Chi H (1997) Computer program for the Probit analysis. National Chung Hsing University, TaichungGoogle Scholar
- EJF (2002) End of the road for endosulfan: a call for action against a dangerous pesticide. Environmental Justice Foundation, LondonGoogle Scholar
- Foelix R (1996) Biology of spiders, Second edn. Oxford University Press, New York, p 330Google Scholar
- MAGyP (2012), Ministerio de Agricultura, Ganadería y Pesca. Presidencia de la Nación Argentina, www.minagri.gob.ar. Accessed 24 Feb 2012
- Minervino E (1996) Estudio biológico y ecobiológico de arañas depredadoras de plagas de la soja. PhD Thesis, Facultad de Ciencias Naturales y Museo (UNLP), ArgentinaGoogle Scholar
- Nation JL (2002a) Reproduction. In: Nation JL (ed) Insect physiology and biochemistry. CRC publisher, New York, pp 425–454Google Scholar
- Nation JL (2002b) Hormones and Development. In: Nation JL (ed) Insect physiology and biochemistry. CRC publisher, New York, pp 119–156Google Scholar
- Pekár S (1998) Effect os selective insecticidas on the beneficial spider community of a pear orchard in the Czech Republic. In: P.A. Selden (ed) Proceedings of the 17th European Colloquium of Arachnology, Edinburgh 1997, pp. 338–342Google Scholar
- Scheiner S, Gurevitch J (2001) Design and analysis of ecological experiments. Oxford University Press. Oxford, New York, p 415Google Scholar
- Schneider M, Smagghe G, Gobbi A, Viñuela E (2003) Toxicity and pharmacokinetics of insect growth regulators and other novel insecticides on pupae of Hyposoter didymator (Hymenoptera: Ichneumonidae), a parasitoid of early larval instars of lepidopteran pests. J Econ Entomol 96:1054–1065CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- SENASA (2013) Endosulfan: nuevas medidas para la importación, elaboración y uso en Argentina. http://www.senasa.gov.ar. Accessed 20 Feb 2013
- Zar H (1996) Biostatistical analysis. Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey 718 ppGoogle Scholar