Effective control of Frankliniella occidentalis by Metarhizium anisopliae CQMa421 under field conditions

Li, Jun; Xie, Jiaqin; Zeng, Deyu; Xia, Yuxian; Peng, Guoxiong

doi:10.1007/s10340-020-01223-9

Cited by 17 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These pesticides are not only environment friendly, but also safe to honeybee populations foraging for nectar collection in agricultural and forestry landscapes, and hence are considered as alternatives to chemical pesticides in combatting arthropod pests 4–6 . Field populations of various pests have been controlled effectively by pest management programs integrated with fungal formulations at competitive application rates, including cowpea aphids, 7 greenhouse whiteflies, 8 tea leafhoppers, 9, 10 rice planthoppers, 11 western flower thrips, 12, 13 citrus psyllids, 14 citrus and cotton spider mites, 15, 16 wheat and oat wireworms, 17, 18 rice leafrollers, 19 apply sawfly 20 and fruit fly 21 . Of particular note, long‐term sustainable control of major rice insect pests, including Nilaparvata lugens , Cnaphalocrocis medinalis and Chilo suppressalis , with minimal impact on natural enemies, has been achieved successfully by the application of a Metarhizium anisopliae formulation across >6000 ha in the rice‐growing regions of China during 2011–2018 22 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular basis and regulatory mechanisms underlying fungal insecticides' resistance to solar ultraviolet irradiation

Tong

Feng

2021

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resistance to solar ultraviolet (UV) irradiation is crucial for field‐persistent control efficacies of fungal formulations against arthropod pests, because their active ingredients are formulated conidia very sensitive to solar UV wavelengths. This review seeks to summarize advances in studies aiming to quantify, understand and improve conidial UV resistance. One focus of studies has been on the many sets of genes that have been revealed in the postgenomic era to contribute to or mediate UV resistance in the insect pathogens serving as main sources of fungal insecticides. Such genetic studies have unveiled the broad basis of UV‐resistant molecules including cytosolic solutes, cell wall components, various antioxidant enzymes, and numerous effectors and signaling proteins, that function in developmental, biosynthetic and stress‐responsive pathways. Another focus has been on the molecular basis and regulatory mechanisms underlying photorepair of UV‐induced DNA lesions and photoreactivation of UV‐impaired conidia. Studies have shed light upon a photoprotective mechanism depending on not only one or two photorepair‐required photolyases, but also two white collar proteins and other partners that play similar or more important roles in photorepair via interactions with photolyases. Research hotspots are suggested to explore a regulatory network of fungal photoprotection and to improve the development and application strategies of UV‐resistant fungal insecticides. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molecular basis and regulatory mechanisms underlying fungal insecticides' resistance to solar ultraviolet irradiation

Tong

Feng

2021

Pest Management Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The evaluation of EPF efficacy in vitro and in vivo can be achieved using different application techniques, such as dipping insects in a spore suspension [ 46 , 47 ], using topical micro-applications [ 48 – 51 ], or spraying EPF formulations directly to the insects or plants [ 52 , 53 ]. In this study, EPF pathogenicity across different stages of L. botrana was tested using a micro-application technique, which ensures a higher level of precision, accuracy, and reliability of the pest susceptibility [ 54 ], and is useful to compare insect susceptibility to EPF among different developmental stages.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dual effects of entomopathogenic fungi on control of the pest Lobesia botrana and the pathogenic fungus Eutypella microtheca on grapevine

Sammaritano

Deymié

et al. 2021

Biol Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Entomopathogenic fungi (EPF) are the natural enemies of insect pests. Nevertheless, research on the use of EPF for simultaneous prevention of pest and disease agents on the same crop is limited. In this study, we explored the potential dual effects of three strains of the EPF Metarhizium anisopliae on the control of detrimental agents of Vitis vinifera L., including different developmental stages (larvae, pupae, and adult) of the insect pest Lobesia botrana and the phytopathogenic fungus Eutypella microtheca. Methods Laboratory pathogenicity trials were performed to examine the effects of the three M. anisopliae strains on the mortality rate of L. botrana. In addition, field trials were conducted to assess the biocontrol potential of one selected M. anisopliae strain on the larval stage of L. botrana. Moreover, inhibitory effects of the three EPF strains on E. microtheca growth were examined in vitro. Results All the M. anisopliae strains were highly effective, killing all stages of L. botrana as well as inhibiting the growth of E. microtheca. The in vitro mortality of larvae treated with the strains was over 75%, whereas that of treated pupae and adults was over 85%. The three EPF strains showed similar efficacy against larvae and adult stages; nevertheless, pupal mortality was observed to be strain dependent. Mortality of L. botrana larvae ranged from 64 to 91% at field conditions. Inhibition of E. microtheca growth reached 50% in comparison to the control. Conclusions Our study showed that M. anisopliae strains were highly effective in ensuring control of two different detrimental agents of V. vinifera L., providing new evidence to support the dual effects of entomopathogenic fungi.

show abstract

“…The broad lifestyle of M. anisopliae is due to its extremely versatile metabolism, which enables it to grow under environmental conditions with sparse nutrients or the presence of compounds lethal to other fungi 2 . The acridid‐specific strain M. acridum CQMa102 exists as a model pathogenic fungus against oriental migratory locusts, whereas the generalist M. anisopliae CQMa421 is used as a model to study the mycotoxic control of a wide range of insect pests, including Nilaparvata lugens , Sogatella furcifera and Frankliniella occidentalis 12,13 . However, the mechanistic bases underlying the differences in virulence and host–insect selectivity between M. acridum and M. anisopliae remain unclear.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pathogenicity analysis and comparative genomics reveal the different infection strategies between the generalist Metarhizium anisopliae and the specialist Metarhizium acridum

Du,

Li,

Chen

et al. 2023

Pest Management Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe fungal genera Metarhizium contain many important spp. that are used as biocontrol agents and as model organisms for exploring insect‐fungal interactions. Metarhizium spp. exhibit different traits of pathogenicity, suggesting that the pathogenesis can be quite distinctive. However, the underlying differences in their pathogenesis remain poorly understood.ResultsPathogenicity analysis showed that Metarhizium anisopliae (strain CQMa421) displayed higher virulence against oriental migratory locusts, Locusta migratoria manilensis (Meyen), than the acridid‐specific specie Metarhizium acridum (strain CQMa102). Relative to M. acridum, M. anisopliae possessed a higher conidial hydrophobicity, increased ability to penetrate the host, accelerated growth under hypoxia and enhanced ability for the utilization of different carbon sources. Different distributions of carbohydrate epitopes at cell wall surface of M. anisopliae might also contribute to successful evasion of host immune defenses. Comparative genomics showed that M. anisopliae has 98 more virulence‐related secreted proteins (133) than M. acridum (35), which can be functionally classified as hydrolases, virulence effectors, cell wall degradation and stress tolerance‐related proteins, and helpful to the cuticle penetration and host internal environment adaption. In addition, differences in genomic clusters specifically related to secondary metabolites, including the clusters of Indole‐NRPS hybrid, T1PKS‐NRPS like hybrid, Betalactone, Fungal‐Ripp and NRPS‐Terpene hybrid, may lead to differences in core virulence‐related secondary metabolite genes in M. acridum (18) and M. anisopliae (36).ConclusionThe comparative study provided new insights into the different infection strategies between M. anisopliae and M. acridum, and further facilitate the identification of virulence‐related genes for the improvement of mycoinsecticides.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

show abstract

Effective control of Frankliniella occidentalis by Metarhizium anisopliae CQMa421 under field conditions

Cited by 17 publications

References 23 publications

Molecular basis and regulatory mechanisms underlying fungal insecticides' resistance to solar ultraviolet irradiation

Molecular basis and regulatory mechanisms underlying fungal insecticides' resistance to solar ultraviolet irradiation

Dual effects of entomopathogenic fungi on control of the pest Lobesia botrana and the pathogenic fungus Eutypella microtheca on grapevine

Pathogenicity analysis and comparative genomics reveal the different infection strategies between the generalist Metarhizium anisopliae and the specialist Metarhizium acridum

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About