PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Roger A Downer

Publications and source records attributed to Roger A Downer.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Impact of spray application methodology on the development of resistance to cypermethrin and spinosad by fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith).

The development of resistance to an insecticide under various types of application method has yet to be reported in the literature. Five fall armyworm Spodoptera armigera (JE Smith) colonies were reared in a chamber for ten generations before starting topical application bioassays. From each colony, 200-500 third-fourth-instar larvae were fed for 72 h on corn plants sprayed with cypermethrin or spinosad at minimum application rate (20 g ha(-1)) using a small droplet size nozzle XR8001VS (volume median diameter D(v0.5) = 163 microm) or a large droplet size nozzle XR8008VS (D(v0.5) = 519 microm). Surviving larvae were transferred to untreated corn leaves to complete their life cycle. Next-generation third-instar larvae of each colony were topically dosed with technical cypermethrin or spinosad at 1 microL per larva, and mortality was recorded 24 h post-treatment. The results indicated that cypermethrin demonstrated an insecticidal activity greater than that of spinosad, and the cypermethrin regression lines moved to the right faster than those for spinosad, indicating an increased tolerance of cypermethrin. Generally, larvae from all generations (F1-F7) under the XR8008VS treatments were less susceptible to cypermethrin and developed resistance faster and to higher levels than larvae from the XR8001VS treatments. The confidence limits (95%) of LD(50) for all spinosad treatments indicated that there was no significant difference from the LD(50) value of the susceptible reference strain. The results are a first indication that application technology/insecticide reaction may affect the rapidity of resistance development in certain pest/plant scenarios, but field studies are needed to confirm this conclusion.

Animals↗

Comparing greenhouse sprayers: the dose-transfer process.

Three sprayers were evaluated for their affect on retention and efficacy: a carbon dioxide powered high-volume sprayer, a DRAMM coldfogger, and an Electrostatic Spraying Systems (ESS) sprayer with air-assistance. The active ingredients used were spinosad and azadirachtin. The plant canopy was constructed in the greenhouse using potted soybeans (Glycine max (L) Merrill cr Pioneer 9392). Application efficacy with spinosad was assessed using thrips [Western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande)] and mite (two-spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae Koch) abundance on shoots and leaves. Application efficacy with azadirachtin was assessed using thrips and aphid (soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura) abundance on shoots and leaves. The atomization characteristics of each sprayer were measured using an Aerometrics phase/Doppler particle analyzer (PDPA) 100-1D. The results of four tests are presented. Two tests used each sprayer according to manufacturer recommendations. These are 'recommended volume' tests that confound differences in toxicant distribution caused by the sprayer with differences caused by changes in application volume. The other two tests were 'constant volume' tests in which all three sprayers were used to deliver the same application volume. Both types of test gave differences between sprayers in retention of toxicant, but only the recommended volume tests showed significant effects of the sprayers on pest abundance. We attribute this difference to the role played by changing application volumes in the dose-transfer process. The constant-volume tests showed that application equipment influences efficacy.

Aerosols↗