Toxicity of insecticides to predatory mite Phytoseuilus persimilis in ...

Toxicity of insecticides to predatory mite Phytoseuilus persimilis in ...

NeemAzal-T/S (a. i. 1 % azadirachtin A) at the rate of 0.5 % and algae extracts Agri-50(a. i. 28 % see weeds) at the rate of 0.3 % water spraying solution was applied. Theplot size for tests was 5 m 2 . Four replications were made in a randomized block design.20 leaves per plot were observed to determine the number of P. persimilis for evaluationthe efficiency of tested products. Phytoseiulus persimilis adults were obtainedfrom Biobest (Belgium). Six predators per square meter were released after arrival.The cucumber plants were naturally infected by Tetranychus urticae. Insecticide wasapplied 10 days after P. persimilis introduction. Predators were recorded as follows:24 h before and 3, 7 and 14 days after treatment. The counts of mortality of adultsand larvae were corrected by Abbott’s formula (1925). We used quantitative toxicitycategories from International Organization for Biological Control for assessment ofpesticide toxicity to predatory and phytophagous mites in field trials: nontoxic (< 25 %mortality), slightly toxic (25–50 %), moderately toxic (51–75 %), very toxic (> 75 %)(Hassan et al., 1985).The number of predatory mites among treatments was compared with a singlefactor analysis of variance (ANOVA). Specific differences were identified withDuncan’s multiple range test.Results. Predatory mites were numerous in 2004 comparing with 2005. Decreaseof P. persimilis number from exposure to residues of Envidor 240 SC was mostlysignificantly greater as observed in control comparing with NeemAzal-T/S andAgri-50 (especially Envidor 240 SC at the rate of 0.05 %) after application (Table1).Table 1. Number of predatory mites Phytoseiulus persimilis after application ofinsecticides1 lentelė. Grobuoniškų erkių Phytoseiulus persimilis gausumas po purškimo insekticidaisBabtai, 2004–2005Mean number of Phytoseiulus persimilis, unit/ leafVidutinis Phytoseiulus persimilis skaičius ant lapoTreatmentsbeforedays after applicationVariantaiapplicationdienos po purškimoprieš purškimą 3 7 141 2 3 4 52004Untreated4.4 ab 5.1 c 5.6 b 3.2 aNepurkštaEnvidor 240 SC 0.05 % 5.6 ab 2.3 a 4.2 ab 2.7 aEnvidor 240 SC 0.03 % 5.2 ab 2.5 a 3.8 ab 3.1 aNeemAzal-T/S 1 % EC 0.5 % 4.2 ab 4.1 abc 5.4 ab 6.2 bAGRI-50 0.3 % 5.7 b 4.8 bc 5.0 ab 4.1 a42

Table 1 continued1 lentelės tęsinys1 2 3 4 52005Untreated3.0 abc 4.5 c 8.0 c 3.4 abcNepurkštaEnvidor 240 SC 0.05 % 2.0 a 1.5 a 4.1 a 2.6 aEnvidor 240 SC 0.03 % 2.5 abc 2.0 ab 4.7 a 3.3 abcNeemAzal-T/S 1 % EC 0.5 % 3.2 bc 3.0 bcd 7.2 bc 4.4 bcAGRI-50 0.3 % 3.5 c 3.2 bcd 6.3 abc 4.8 cNote: Means followed by the same letter are not different significantly (P = 0.05) according toDuncan’s multiple range testPastaba: Reikšmės, pažymėtos tomis pačiomis raidėmis, pagal Dunkano kriterijų (P = 0,05) išesmės nesiskiria.There were not found statistical differences of number of predatory mites treatedwith Envidor 240 SC 0.03 and 0.05 %. The number of P. persimilis treated with Agri-50did not differ significantly comparing with NeemAzal-T/S. Decrease of P. persimiliswas insignificant after treatment with Agri-50, NeemAzal-T/S and in untreated plots.Small decrease of predatory mites comparing with untreated plots was observed only3 days after spraying. A number of mites began to increase after 7 days, but after 14days in all the treatments number of P. persimilis decreased.Envidor 240 SC (0.05 % and 0.03 %) was from moderately toxic (mortality rangedfrom 50.98–66.67 %) to slightly toxic (25.0–48.75 % mortality) (Table 2).Table 2. Residue toxicity to Phytoseiulus persimilis after application of insecticides2 lentelė. Išliekamasis toksiškumas Phytoseiulus persimilis po purškimo insekticidaisTreamentsVariantai43Babtai, 2004–2005Mortality of Phytoseiulus persimilisPhytoseiulus persimilis žuvimas (%)after applicationpo purškimo3 d. 7 d. 14 d.2004 2005 2004 2005 2004 2005Envidor 240 SC 0.05 54.90 66.67 25.00 48.75 15.62 23.53Envidor 240 SC 0.03 50.98 55.55 32.14 41.25 3.12 2.94NeemAzal-T/S 1% EC 0.5% 19.61 33.33 3.57 10.00 -93.75 -29.41AGRI-50 5.88 28.89 10.71 21.25 -28.75 -41.18Envidor 240 SC was non-toxic only 14 days after treatment. Three days after sprayingAgri-50 and NeemAzal-T/S were only slightly toxic (28.89–33.33 %) in 2005.Discussion. Numerous field studies using P. persimilis alone and P. persimiliscombined with compatible acaricides demonstrate that adequate control can beachieved with correct combination of acaricides and this predatory mite (Osborne,

Patitt, 1985, Cashion et al., 1994). The level of compatibility will usually depend onthe post application interval (Cote et al., 2002). We measured toxicity of acaricidesto commercially available P. persimilis. We did not consider side effects, which canoccur from acaricide residues like other authors (Oomen et al., 1991).Decrease of P. persimilis number from exposure to residues of Envidor 240 SCwas significantly greater than this observed in untreated plots 3 days and 7 days afterspraying in 2005. There were not found statistical differences of number of predatorymites treated with different rates of Envidor 240 SC and mortality of P. persimiliswas similar. The toxic effect of pesticides on mites depends on the chemistry of pesticides,their rates, microclimatic conditions and development stages of mites (Prattand Croft, 2000; Papaioannou-Souliotis et al., 2000; Stenseth, 1979). It was found thatEnvidor 240 SC was non-toxic to predatory mites in strawberry under field conditions(Raudonis, 2006). In our treatment Envidor 240 SC (0.05 and 0.03 %) was frommoderately toxic (after 3 days) to slightly toxic (after 7 days) to P. persimilis. Themortality ranged from 25.0–66.67 %. Envidor 240 SC (both rates) was non-toxic andhad not long-lasting effect 14 days after spraying.It was found that Neem products are active for only a short period, but all neemproducts may not be equally compatible with P. persimilis (Cote et al., 2002). Directapplication of neem formulation containing 80 % neem oil at a rate of 3 % was highlytoxic to P. persimilis (Papaioannou-Souliotis et al., 2000). NeemAzal-T/S containingtriterpenoid azadirachtin has a number of useful properties for insect control due to itsrepellency, feeding and oviposition deterrence, insect growth regulator. This productis considered as safe to the environment and reduces the rate of pest development(Schmutterer, 1990; Pavela, Holy, 2003). On the other hand, Azadirachtin was theleast toxic from tested insecticides to other predatory mite Neoseiulus californicus(Castagnoli et al., 2005). Nevertheless, in our treatment NeemAzal-T/S was onlyslightly toxic 3 days after treatment. Neem products may be a useful part of IntegratedPest Management (IPM) programs, however, its short residual toxicity may not suppresslarge population of two spotted spider mite (Cote et al., 2002). The number ofP. persimilis on leaves treated with Agri-50 did not essentially differ comparing withNeemAzal-T/S and both products did not statistically reduce the number of P. persimiliscomparing with unsprayed plots. Proper insecticide selection may create favorableconditions for combination predator release and the use of chemical products.Conclusions. Envidor 240 SC (0.05 and 0.03 %) was moderately toxic (mortalityof P. persimilis ranged from 50.98 to 66.67 %) three days after treatment and slightlytoxic (mortality 25.0–48.75 %) seven days after treatment. Only fourteen days aftertreatment Envidor 240 SC was non-toxic.NeemAzal-T/S and Agri-50 were slightly toxic (mortality of P. persimilis rangedfrom 28.89 to 33.33 %) only three days after treatment. Based on the results, NeemAzal-T/S and Agri-50 could be a used for Integrated Pest Management (IPM) programs.Gauta 2009 06 30Parengta spausdinti 2009 08 0344

References1. Abbott W. S. 1925. A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide.Journal of Economic Entomology, 18: 265–267.2. Anon. EPPO Standards. 1997. Guidelines for the efficacy evaluation of plant protectionproducts. Insecticides & Acaricides. Editor European and MediterraneanPl. Prot. Org. Paris, 3: 231.3. Carbonaro M. A., Moreland D. E., Edg V. E., Matoyama N., Rock G. C.,Dauterman W.C. 1986. Studies of the mechanisms of cyhexatin resistance in thetwo-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae). Journal ofEconomic Entomology, 79: 579–580.4. Cashion G. J., Bixler H., Price J. F. 1994. Nursery IPM trials using predatorymites. Proceedings of the Florida State Horticultural Society, 107: 220–222.5. Cote K. W., Lewis E. E., Schultz P. 2002. Compatibility of acaricide residues withPhytoseiulus persimilis and their effect on Tetranychus urticae. HortScience,37(6): 906–909.6. Castagnoli M., Liguori M., Simoni S., Duco C. 2005. Toxicity of some insecticidesto Tetranychus urticae, Neoseiulus californicus and Tydeus californicus.BioControl, 50: 611–622.7. Hassan E., Oomen, P. A., Overmeer W. P. J., Plevoets P., Reboulet J. N.,Rieckmann W., Samsoe-Petersen L., Shires S. W., Staubli A., Stevensen J.,Tuset J. J., Vanwetswinkel G., Zon A. Q. 1985. Standard methods to the test ofside effects of pesticides on natural enemies of insects and mites developed bythe IOBC/WPRS. Bulletin OEPP/EPPO, 15: 214–255.8. Helle W., Sabelis M. W. 1985. Spider Mites. Their Biology, natural Enemies andControl. Elsevier, Amsterdam, Oxford, New York, Tokio, 1 A: 391–395.9. Kim S. S., Yoo S. S. 2002. Comparative toxicity of some acaricides to the predatorymite, Phytoseiulus persimilis and the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychusurticae. BioControl, 47 (5): 563–573.10. Oomen P. A., Romeijn G., Wiegers G. L. 1991. Side effects of 100 acaricides onthe predatory mite Phytoseiulus persimilis, collected and evaluated accordingto the EPPO guideline. Bulletin European and Mediterranean Plant Protectionorganization (OEPP/EPPO), 21: 701–712.11. Osborne L. S., Petitt F. L. 1985. Insecticidal soap and the predatory mitePhytoseiulus persimilis (Acari: Phytoseiidae), used in management of the twospottedspider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) on greenhouse grown foliage plants.Journal of Economic Entomology, 78: 687–691.12. Papaioannou-Souliotis P., Markouiannaki-Printziou D., Zoaki-Malissiova D.2000. Side effects of Neemark (Azadirachta indica A. Juss) and two new vegetableoil formulations on Tetranychus urticae Koch. and its predator Phytoseiuluspersimilis Athias-Henriot. Bollettino di Zoologia Agraria e di Bachicoltura,32: 25.45

13. Pavela R., Holy K. 2003. Effect of azadirachtin on larvae of Lymantria dispar,Spodoptera litoralis and Mamestra brassicae. Sodininkystė ir daržininkystė,22(3): 434–441.14. Pratt P. D., Croft B. A. 2000. Toxicity of pesticides registered for use in landscapenurseries to the acarine biological control agent, Neoseiulus fallacis. Journalof Environmental Horticulture, 18: 197–201.15. Raudonis L. 2006. Comparative toxicity of spirodiclofen and lambdacihalotrinto Tetranychus urticae, Tarsonemus pallidus and predatory mite Amblyseiusandersoni in a strawberry site under field conditions. Agronomy Research, 4:317–326.16. Schmutterer H. 1990. Properties and potential of natural pesticides from neemtree, Azadirachta indica. Annual Review of Entomology, 35: 271–297.17. Stenseth C. 1979. Effect of temperature and humidity on the development ofPhytoseiulus persimilis and its ability to regulate populations of Tetranychusurticae (Acarina: Phytoseiidae, Tetrancyhidae). Entomophaga, 249: 311–317.18. Trumble J. T., Morse J. P. 1993. Economics of integrating the predaceous mitePhytoseuilus persimilis (Acarina: Phytoseiidae) with pesticides in strawberries.Journal of Economic Entomology, 86: 879–885.SODININKYSTĖ IR DARŽININKYSTĖ. MOKSLO DARBAI. 2009. 28(3).Insekticidų toksiškumas grobuoniškoms erkėmsPhytoseuilus persimilis agurkuoseL. Duchovskienė, L. Raudonis, R. Karklelienė, R. StarkutėSantraukaTyrimai atlikti Lietuvos sodininkystės ir daržininkystės institute 2004–2005 metais šiltnamyjeaugintuose agurkuose. Tirtas trijų insekticidų: Envidor 240 SC (v. m. spirodiklofenas 240 g l -1 )0,03 ir 0,05 %, Nimazal-T/S (v. m. 1% azadirachtinas A) 0,5 % ir Agri-50 (v. m. 28 % jūros žolė)0,3 % poveikis grobuoniškoms erkėms Phytoseiulus persimilis. Buvo rasti esminiai skirtumaitarp grobuoniškų erkių skaičiaus po purškimo Envidor 240 SC, Nimazal T/S ir nepurkštų augalų.Envidor 240 SC (0,05 % ir 0,03 %) buvo nuo vidutiniškai toksiško (P. persimilis mirtingumaskito nuo 50,98 iki 66,67 %) praėjus 3 dienoms po purškimo iki silpnai toksiško (P. persimilismirtingumas kito nuo 25,0 iki 48,75 %) praėjus 7 dienoms po purškimo. Envidor 240 SC (0,05 %ir 0,03 %) po 14 dienų buvo netoksiškas. Agri-50 ir Nimazal T/S 2005 metais buvo silpnaitoksiški (28,89–33,33 %) praėjus 3 dienoms po purškimo. Remiantis tyrimų rezultatais, Nimazal-T/S ir Agri-50 gali būti sėkmingai naudojami integruotos augalų apsaugos (IAA) programose.Reikšminiai žodžiai: Agri-50, agurkai, Envidor, Nimazal-T/S, Phytoseiulus persimilis.46

More magazines by this user
Similar magazines