Predatory arthropods can be important for preventing insect pests from reaching damaging levels in soybean. However, the predator community can be compromised when pest control strategies include the application of broad-spectrum insecticides. The use of selective insecticides such as diamides could conserve predators while still providing necessary pest control. We evaluated two selective diamide insecticides, chlorantraniliprole and flubendiamide, and a broad-spectrum insecticide, lambda-cyhalothrin in combination with chlorantraniliprole, for impact on predators in soybean. We applied insecticides to field plots and documented predator abundance prior to and up to 3 wk postapplication using sticky card, beat sheet, and sweep net sampling methods. In sweep net samples, total predator abundance in plots treated with the selective insecticides was not significantly different from untreated control plots. For beat sheet samples, there were no significant differences in the abundance of total predators on any day postapplication between the selective diamide insecticides or the untreated control, but abundance decreased after application of lambda-cyhalothrin + chlorantraniliprole and did not recover. For sticky cards, there were no differences in predator abundance among treatments on any day postapplication. Over all, results showed that there were no significant differences in the abundance of total predators, Anthocoridae, Araneae, or Geocoridae after application of flubendiamide or chlorantraniliprole compared with the untreated control for up to 3 wk after application. All insecticides significantly decreased populations of lepidopteran pests compared with the untreated control, but only lambda-cyhalothrin + chlorantraniliprole reduced predatory arthropod abundance.

Herbivorous insects often move and distribute according to the quality of the plant they are on, and this behavior could influence interactions with plants bred for herbivore resistance. However, when an insect is normally considered sedentary, less is known about the potential importance of movement. We performed experiments to determine if a resistant soybean variety alters the movement and distribution, both within and between plants, of the soybean aphid Aphis glycines Matsumura. We did this by counting apterous aphids on leaves of resistant and susceptible soybean plants across several days. In individual plant tests aphid distribution was different between susceptible and resistant soybeans. Most notably aphids on resistant plants were quickly found off the original leaf on which they were placed and were ultimately distributed throughout the resistant soybean. Aphids on susceptible plants, however, tended to stay on their initial leaf of placement. Follow up experiments indicated this was primarily because of the movement of individuals and not differential demography on various plant parts. In experiments where aphids were able to walk to an adjacent plant there appeared to be a net movement of aphids off resistant plants and on to susceptible plants. Aphid populations on susceptible plants were higher when the plant was adjacent to a resistant plant than when adjacent to another susceptible plant. The effect of resistant plants on aphid movement and distribution could lead to unintended side-effects such as greater spread of plant viruses or altered effectiveness of biological control agents.

Temperature and other environmental factors can strongly influence arthropods and their interactions with host plants. However, such effects are usually studied while keeping the suitability of host plants as constant as possible, thereby removing the possibility of interactions between temperature and host plant resistance. We performed experiments to determine whether temperature interacts with plant resistance to alter the density, movement, and distribution of wingless soybean aphids on resistant and susceptible soybeans. In individual plant tests, temperature influenced aphids differently depending on the plant they were on; aphids in the warmer temperature did better than aphids in the cooler temperature when on susceptible plants, but when on resistant plants aphids did worse in the warmer temperature. This pattern was, in part, due to markedly increased aphid fecundity on susceptible plants in warmer temperatures which was not the case on resistant plants. A follow-up experiment showed that higher temperature meant lower adult survival for aphids on a nutrient-poor diet, further suggesting how higher temperatures may be difficult for aphids when on resistant host plants. We also saw that both higher temperature and resistance increased within-plant movement in an additive fashion. Altering temperature and host plant resistance can each influence the demographic and movement responses of herbivores; however, this study indicates that the two factors may interact to influence herbivores in potentially unexpected ways.

No abstract