, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 448–456 | Cite as

Sublethal effects of insecticides used in soybean on the parasitoid Trichogramma pretiosum

  • Ana Clara Ribeiro de Paiva
  • Vitor Hugo Beloti
  • Pedro Takao Yamamoto


To control crop pests, parasitoid wasps of the genus Trichogramma are one alternative to the use of insecticides. Since a wide variety of agrochemicals may be applied to the same crops, it is essential to assess the selectivity of insecticides used for pest control on Trichogramma pretiosum. Information on which insecticides are less harmful to T. pretiosum can improve biological control using this insect, an important tactic in IPM programs for field crops. This study aimed to determine the effects of insecticides on the pupal stage and on the parasitism capacity of T. pretiosum. Lambda-cyhalothrin + thiamethoxam were slightly harmful and chlorpyriphos was moderately harmful to the pupal stage, while acephate, chlorfenapyr and flubendiamide, although considered innocuous, affected the succeeding generations of wasps, with low emergence of F1. Chlorfenapyr, chlorpyriphos and lambda-cyhalothrin + thiamethoxam reduced the parasitism, and acephate had a deleterious effect on the generation that contacted the insecticide residue. For an effective IPM program, it is important to apply selective insecticides. Further studies are needed to determine the selectivity of these insecticides under field conditions.


Selectivity Biological control IPM Egg parasitoid 



The authors thank the CAPES Foundation (Brazilian Ministry of Education), the São Paulo State Foundation for Research Aid (FAPESP) and the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq grant 305828/2014-2) for the financial support and scholarships granted. The authors also thank Janet W. Reid for revising the English text.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. The authors agree with the publication of the manuscript in this form.


  1. Antigo MR, de Oliveira HN, Carvalho G, Pereira FF (2013) Repelência de produtos fitossanitários usados na cana-de-açúcar e seus efeitos na emergência de Trichogramma galloi. Rev Ciênc Agron 44(4):910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Botelho PM (1997) Eficiência de Trichogramma em campo. In: Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (eds) Trichogramma e o Controle Biológico Aplicado, FEALQ, Piracicaba, pp 303–318Google Scholar
  3. Bowen WR, Stern VM (1996) Effect of temperature on the production of males and sexual mosaics in a uniparental race of Trichogramma semifumatum (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Ann Entomol Soc Am 59:822–834Google Scholar
  4. Bueno AF, Bueno RCOF, Parra JRP, Vieira SS (2008) Effects of pesticides used in soybean crops to the egg parasitoid Trichogramma pretiosum. Ciênc Rural 38:1495–1503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bueno RC, Raetano CG, Junior JD, Carvalho FK (2017) Integrated management of soybean pests: the example of Brazil. Outlooks Pest Manag 28:149–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Carvalho GA, Parra JRP, Batista CG (1999) Seletividade de alguns produtos fitossanitários a duas linhagens de Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidade). Ciênc Agrotec 25:83–591Google Scholar
  7. Carvalho GA, Parra JRP, Batista CG (2001) Impacto de produtos fitossanitários utilizados na cultura do tomateiro na fase adulta de duas linhagens de Trichogramma pretiosum Riley (1879) (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Ciênc Agrotec 25:560–568Google Scholar
  8. Carvalho GA, Reis PR, Moraes JC, Fuini LC, Rocha LCD, Goussain MM (2002) Efeitos de alguns inseticidas utilizados na cultura do tomateiro (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) a Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Ciênc Agrotec 26:1160–1166Google Scholar
  9. Carvalho GA, Parra JRP, Batista CG (2003) Bioatividade de produtos fitossanitários utilizados na cultura do tomateiro (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) a Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) nas gerações F1 e F2. Ciênc Agrotec, Lavras 26:261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cônsoli FL, Botelho PSM, Parra JRP (2001) Selectivity of insecticides to egg parasitoid Trichogramma galloi Zucchi, 1988, (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). J Appl Entomol 125:37–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cônsoli FL, Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (2010) Egg parasitoids in agroecosystems with emphasis on Trichogramma. Springer, New York, NYCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Croft BA (1990) Arthropod biological control agents and pesticides. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  13. Degrande PE, Gomez DRS (1990) Seletividade de produtos químicos no controle de pragas. Agrotécnica 7:8–13Google Scholar
  14. Desneux N, Decourtye A, Delpuech JM (2007) The sublethal effects of pesticides on beneficial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol 52:81–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fathipour Y, Sedaratian A (2013) Integrated management of Helicoverpa armigera in soybean cropping systems. In: ElShemy HA (ed) Soybean: Pest Resistance. InTeOpP, Cairo, pp 231–280Google Scholar
  16. Fitt GP (1989) The ecology of Heliothis species in relation to agroecosystems. Annu Rev Entomol 34:17–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Foerster LA (2002) Seletividade de inseticidas a predadores e parasitoides. In: Parra JRP, Botelho PSM, Corrêa-Ferreira BS, Bento JMS (eds) Controle biológico no Brasil: parasitóides e predadores. Manole, São Paulo, pp 95–114Google Scholar
  18. Giolo FP, Grützmacher AD, Manzoni CG, Härter WR, Müller C, Castilhos RV (2009) Toxicidade de pesticidas utilizados na cultura do pessegueiro para estágios imaturos de Trichogramma pretiosum Riley (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). BioAssay 1:1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goulart RM, Volpe HX, Vacari AM, Thuler RT, De Bortoli SA (2012) Insecticide selectivity to two species of Trichogramma in three different hosts, as determined by IOBC/WPRS methodology. Pest Manag Sci 68:240–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Granett J, Weseloh M (1975) Dimilin toxicity to the gypsy moth larval parasitoid, Apanteles melanoscelus. J Econ Entomol 68:577–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Guifen Z, Hirai K (1997) Effects of insecticides on developmental stages of Trichogramma japonicum in the laboratory. Proceedings of the Kanto Tosan Plant Protection Society 44:197–200Google Scholar
  22. Hassan, SA (1997) Métodos padronizados para testes de seletividade com ênfase em Trichogramma. In: Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (eds) Trichogramma e o controle biológico aplicado. FEALQ, Piracicaba, pp 207–233Google Scholar
  23. Hou M, Wang F, Wan F, Zhang F (2006) Parasitism of Helicoverpa assulta Guenée (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) eggs by Trichogramma spp. (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae): implications for inundative release on tobacco plants. Appl Entomol Zool 41:577–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Khan MA, Khan H, Ruberson JR (2015) Lethal and behavioral effects of selected novel pesticides on adults of Trichogramma pretiosum (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Pest Manag Sci 71:1640–1648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McCullagh P, Nelder JA (1989) Generalized linear models, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Moura AP, Carvalho GA, Rigitano RLO (2004) Efeito residual de novos inseticidas utilizados na cultura do tomateiro sobre Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae). Acta, Agron 26:231–237Google Scholar
  27. Moura AP, Carvalho GA, Rigitano RLO (2005) Toxicidade de inseticidas utilizados na cultura do tomateiro a Trichogramma pretiosum. Pesq Agropec Bras 40:203–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Oliveira NC, Wilcken CF, Matos CAO (2004) Ciclo biológico e predação de três espécies de coccinelídeos (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) sobre o pulgão-gigante-do-pinus Cinara atlantica (Wilson) (Hemiptera, Aphididae). Revi Bras Entomol 48:529–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Oomen PA, Wiergers GL (1984) Selective effects of chitin synthesis inhibiting insecticide (CME 134-01) on the parasite Encarsia formosa and its white fly host Trialeurodes vaporariorum. Meded Van De Fac Landbouwwet Rijksuniv Gent 49:745–750Google Scholar
  30. Parra JRP (1997) Técnicas de criação de Anagasta kuehniella, hospedeiro alternativo para produção de Trichogramma. In: Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (eds) Trichogramma e o controle biológico aplicado. FEALQ, Piracicaba, pp 207–233Google Scholar
  31. Parra JRP (2000) O controle biológico e o manejo de pragas: passado, presente e futuro. In: Guedes JC, Costa ID, Castiglioni E (eds) Bases e técnicas do manejo de insetos. UFSM, Santa Maria, pp 59–70Google Scholar
  32. Parra JRP (2010) Mass rearing of egg parasitoids for biological control programs. In: Cônsoli FL, Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (eds) Egg parasitoids in agroecosystems with emphasis on Trichogramma. Springer, New York, NY, pp 267–292Google Scholar
  33. Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (1997) Trichogramma e o controle biológico aplicado. FEALQ, PiracicabaGoogle Scholar
  34. Pazini JDB, Grützmacher AD, Martins JFDS, Pasini RA, Rakes M (2016) Selectivity of pesticides used in rice crop on Telenomus podisi and Trichogramma pretiosum. Pesq Agropec Trop 46:327–335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rocha LCD, Carvalho GA (2004) Adaptação da metodologia padrão da IOBC para estudos de seletividade com Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) em condições de laboratório. Acta Sci, Agron 26:315–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rugno GR, Zanardi OZ, Yamamoto PT (2015) Are the Pupae and Eggs of the Lacewing Ceraeochrysa cubana (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) Tolerant to Insecticides? J Econ Entomol 108:2630–2639CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. SAS Institute (2003) SAS system: SAS/STAT version 9.1. Cary, NCGoogle Scholar
  38. Schuld M, Schmuck R (2000) Effects of thiacloprid, a new chloronicotinil insecticide, on the egg parasitoid Trichogramma cacoeciae. Ecotoxicol 9:197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stein CO, Parra JRP (1987) Uso da radiação ultra-violeta para inviabilizar ovos de Anagasta kuehniella (Zelle, 1879) visando estudos com Trichogramma sp. An Soc Entomol Bras 16:229–231Google Scholar
  40. Sudhanan EM, Krishnamoorthy SV, Kuttalam S (2014) Toxicity of flubendiamide 20 WG against egg parasitoid, Trichogramma chilonis (Ishii) (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) under laboratory conditions. J Biol Control 28:147–150Google Scholar
  41. Theiling KM, Croft BA (1988) Pesticide side-effects on arthropod natural enemies: a database summary. Agric Ecosyst Environ 21:191–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. van Lenteren JC (2008) Current situation of biological control (including region/country reviews). In: van Lenteren JC (ed) IOBC Internet Book of Biological Control. IOBC, Wageningen, pp 41–51Google Scholar
  43. Vinson SB (1997) Comportamento de seleção hospedeira de parasitóides de ovos, com ênfase na família Trichogrammatidae. In: Parra JRP, Zucchi RA (eds) Trichogramma e o controle biológico aplicado. FEALQ, Piracicaba, pp 67–119Google Scholar
  44. Wajnberg E, Hassan SA (1994) Biological control with egg parasitoids. CABI, WallingfordGoogle Scholar
  45. Wang Y, Yu R, Zhao X, Chen L, Wu C, Cang T, Wang Q, Yanhua et al. (2012) Susceptibility of adult Trichogramma nubilale (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) to selected insecticides with different modes of action. Crop Prot 34:76–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Yu SJ (1998) Selectivity of insecticides to the spined soldier bug (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) and its lepidopterous prey. J Econ Entomol 81:119–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ana Clara Ribeiro de Paiva
    • 1
  • Vitor Hugo Beloti
    • 1
  • Pedro Takao Yamamoto
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Entomology and Acarology, “Luiz de Queiroz” College of AgricultureUniversity of São Paulo (ESALQ/USP)PiracicabaBrazil

Personalised recommendations