Effectiveness of Spinosad (Naturalytes) in Controlling the Cowpea Storage Pest, &lt;I&gt;Callosobruchus maculatus&lt;/I&gt; (Coleoptera: Bruchidae)

Sanon, Antoine; Ba, Niango Malick; Binso-Dabire, Clementine L.; Pittendrigh, Barry R.

doi:10.1603/ec09093

Cited by 35 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…No seed infestation was recorded when seeds were treated with 1000 ppm of spinosad resulting in maximum inhibition rate (100.00%) ( Table 4). The present research is supported by Sanon et al (2010) observed that less than 20% of the seeds were perforated in the spinosad treatment and controlled C. maculatus throughout the 6 months of cowpea storage. Bonjour et al (2006), Islam et al (2007) and Athanassiou et al (2008) reported similar effects of spinosad.…”

Section: Effect Of Spinosad On Seed Infestation (%)supporting

confidence: 79%

Determination of toxicity of spinosad against the pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L

Mondal

Uddin

Howlader

2018

J Bangladesh Agric Univ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pulses serve as one of the main sources of protein and minerals as well as play a vital socio-economic role in the diet of common people of Bangladesh but these pulses suffer enormous losses due to infestation of a serious insect pest pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L. As a part of eco-friendly management of this detrimental pest, an experiment was conducted at the laboratory to determine the toxicity of spinosad against the pulse beetle, C. chinensis L. directly by using dry film contact toxicity method and indirectly by treating chickpea seeds. In the direct method spinosad showed contact toxicity and the lethal concentration of spinosad was 117.46, 76.05 and 37.45 ppm at 24, 48 and 72 hours after treatment, respectively. On the other hand, the LC50 values were 990.34, 301.35 and 95.08 ppm after 24, 48 and 72 HAT, respectively as per indirect method. A dose-dependent relation with the mortality was observed by both methods. Spinosad was also significantly effective in reducing the number of eggs (68.00 to 98.60% inhibition over control), adult emergence (56.70 to 100% inhibition over control), percent seed infestation (62.79 to 100% inhibition over control) and seed weight loss (50.81 to 100% inhibition over control). The present results indicated that spinosad could be suggested for the efficient management of C. chinensis in storage.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Spinosad On Seed Infestation (%)supporting

confidence: 79%

Determination of toxicity of spinosad against the pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L

Mondal

Uddin

Howlader

2018

J Bangladesh Agric Univ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A summary of ecotoxicology data for spinosad (SPI) is provided in Table 8 . This insecticide is used for the control of caterpillars [272-274,317], thrips [275], beetle and fly pests in a range of fruit and vegetable crops [276-278], ornamentals, turf [279], and stored grains [280-282]. SPI is also used against mosquitos [283-285] and flies [286] as well as tsetse fly [287] control.…”

Section: Ecotoxicity Of Spinosynsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Review on the Toxicity and Non-Target Effects of Macrocyclic Lactones in Terrestrial and Aquatic Environments

Lumaret

Errouissi²,

Floate³

et al. 2012

CPB

297

215

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The avermectins, milbemycins and spinosyns are collectively referred to as macrocyclic lactones (MLs) which comprise several classes of chemicals derived from cultures of soil micro-organisms. These compounds are extensively and increasingly used in veterinary medicine and agriculture. Due to their potential effects on non-target organisms, large amounts of information on their impact in the environment has been compiled in recent years, mainly caused by legal requirements related to their marketing authorization or registration. The main objective of this paper is to critically review the present knowledge about the acute and chronic ecotoxicological effects of MLs on organisms, mainly invertebrates, in the terrestrial and aquatic environment. Detailed information is presented on the mode-of-action as well as the ecotoxicity of the most important compounds representing the three groups of MLs. This information, based on more than 360 references, is mainly provided in nine tables, presenting the effects of abamectin, ivermectin, eprinomectin, doramectin, emamectin, moxidectin, and spinosad on individual species of terrestrial and aquatic invertebrates as well as plants and algae. Since dung dwelling organisms are particularly important non-targets, as they are exposed via dung from treated animals over their whole life-cycle, the information on the effects of MLs on dung communities is compiled in an additional table. The results of this review clearly demonstrate that regarding environmental impacts many macrocyclic lactones are substances of high concern particularly with larval instars of invertebrates. Recent studies have also shown that susceptibility varies with life cycle stage and impacts can be mitigated by using MLs when these stages are not present. However information on the environmental impact of the MLs is scattered across a wide range of specialised scientific journals with research focusing mainly on ivermectin and to a lesser extent on abamectin doramectin and moxidectin. By comparison, information on compounds such as eprinomectin, emamectin and selamectin is still relatively scarce.

show abstract

“…Chemical pesticides, mostly belonging to four chemical groups – organochlorines, organophosphates, carbamates and pyrethroids, have been used in fields and storage for over five decades for the management of insect pests, including bruchids (Dent, ; Megerssa, ). The use of spinosad, a natural biopesticide component has appeared to be effective for the management of these storage pests either in laboratory or in field conditions (Sanon et al ., ). The application of spinosads reduced the emergence of C. maculatus and perforation of seeds after 6 months of storage in cowpea.…”

Section: Conventional Approachesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Bruchid pest management in pulses: past practices, present status and use of modern breeding tools for development of resistant varieties

Mishra

Macedo

Panda

et al. 2017

Annals of Applied Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Bruchids (Callosobruchus spp.) are recognised as the most detrimental storage pest of pulses, especially in the tropics and subtropics. They invade matured pods as well as seeds during storage and, to some extent, farming fields, in turn reducing the net yield of the crops. Several approaches including cultural, biological, physical and chemical control measures have been implemented with the aim of managing these pests, but none of these have been successful across time and space. Recently, transgenic-and marker-assisted breeding approaches have appeared as promising tools for the successful management of these pests. Although some efforts have been made on the development of bruchid-resistant transgenic crops, the cultivars developed are yet to be commercialised worldwide because of various limitations. In contrast, marker-assisted breeding involving the identification of DNA-based markers linked to host resistance against bruchids, have shown some success in the quest for the development of bruchid-resistant cultivar(s). DNA markers linked to bruchid resistance have been identified in various grain legumes, particularly in the genus Vigna, and include mung bean (Vigna radiata), azuki bean (Vigna angularis), rice bean (Vigna umbellata), cowpea (Vigna unguiculata) and black gram (Vigna mungo). After their validation in different genetic backgrounds, these markers could be utilised for marker-assisted selection and breeding ventures to protect pulse crops. The present study discusses the pros and cons of different approaches for the successful management of the bruchid pests in pulses. The review also highlights about the integrative approach aided with molecular interventions to improve productivity by avoiding losses incurred due to bruchids, and to attain sustainable yields for major pulse crops.

show abstract

Effectiveness of Spinosad (Naturalytes) in Controlling the Cowpea Storage Pest, <I>Callosobruchus maculatus</I> (Coleoptera: Bruchidae)

Cited by 35 publications

References 19 publications

Determination of toxicity of spinosad against the pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L

Determination of toxicity of spinosad against the pulse beetle, Callosobruchus chinensis L

A Review on the Toxicity and Non-Target Effects of Macrocyclic Lactones in Terrestrial and Aquatic Environments

Bruchid pest management in pulses: past practices, present status and use of modern breeding tools for development of resistant varieties

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About