Susceptibility monitoring and comparative gene expression of susceptible and resistant strains of Spodoptera frugiperda to lambda‐cyhalothrin and chlorpyrifos

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) is a widespread agricultural pest with several records of resistance to different insecticides and Bt proteins, including the neurotoxic insecticides chlorpyrifos (organophosphate) and lambda-cyhalothrin (pyrethroid). Here, we (i) characterized and monitored the susceptibility of field populations of S. frugiperda to chlorpyrifos (194 populations) and lambda-cyhalothrin (197 populations) collected from major maize-growing regions of Brazil from 2003 to 2016, and (ii) compared gene expression levels of laboratory-selected, chlorpyrifos-and lambda-cyhalothrin-resistant strains to a susceptible reference strain (Sf-ss) of S. frugiperda. RESULTS:The susceptibility monitoring detected average survival ranging from 29.3% to 36.0% for chlorpyrifos, and 23.1% to 68.0% for lambda-cyhalothrin. The resistance ratio of the chlorpyrifos-resistant strain (Clo-rr) was 25.4-fold and of the lambdacyhalothrin-resistant strain (Lam-rr) was 21.5-fold. We identified 1098 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) between Clo-rr and Sf-ss, and 303 DEGs between Lam-rr and Sf-ss. Functional analyses of the DEGs revealed the up-regulation of several detoxification enzymes, mainly cytochrome P450 belonging to CYP3 and CYP6 clans. Genes associated with regulatory processes, such as the forkhead box class O (FoxO) transcription factor were also up-regulated. Variant analysis of target-site mutations for both pesticides identified the A201S and F290V mutations in acetylcholinesterase-1, both occurring in heterozigosis in the Clo-rr S. frugiperda strain. CONCLUSION: Our data show that the overexpression of the enzymatic detoxification machinery is the main difference to explain the resistance of Clo-rr and Lam-rr strains of S. frugiperda to chlorpyrifos and lambda-cyhalothrin, although a target-site mutation also contributes to the Clo-rr resistance to chlorpyrifos.

Chlorantraniliprole Resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda: Resistance Monitoring, Resistance Risk, and Resistance Mechanisms

“…1,2 Application of insecticide remains a crucial and efficient management tool for suppressing S. frugiperda populations. 3 However, prolonged excessive and unreasonable use of insecticides has resulted in varying levels of resistance in S. frugiperda to numerous insecticides. 4−6 Chlorantraniliprole (CAP) is an anthranilic diamide insecticide that activates the ryanodine receptors (RyRs), leading to the excessive release of calcium ions from the calcium pool and ultimately causing paralysis in pest muscles, resulting in their death.…”

“…This pest has a wide host range and can feed on over 350 plants, including main crops such as corn, cotton, and rice, causing severe economic loss if improperly controlled. , Application of insecticide remains a crucial and efficient management tool for suppressing S. frugiperda populations . However, prolonged excessive and unreasonable use of insecticides has resulted in varying levels of resistance in S.…”

Synergism in Two-Component Insecticides with Dillapiole against Fall Armyworm

“…Although S. frugiperda feeds on more than 350 plant species, it has a preference for maize (Zea mays L.) [13,14]. Pesticides, pyrethroids, and organophosphorus derivatives, mainly, as well as genetic modified plants expressing Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxins, have been used as control strategies, but resistance to both has developed [15][16][17]. It is a highly migratory pest and, since its first outbreak in sub-Saharan Africa in 2016, it has already infested several Asian countries and, more recently, reached Australia [14].…”

Multi-omics approaches for understanding spinetoram resistance in >i<Spodoptera frugiperda>/i< (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

“…Furthermore, proteins as ABC transporter C and G, responsible to transportation and elimination of products of metabolization of xenobiotics (phase III) were overexpressed in resistant strains (SEL strain). In S. frugiperda, several studies have shown the involvement of these enzymes in the detoxification process of insecticides and plant allelochemicals (Bai-Zhong et al, 2020;Carvalho et al, 2013;Giraudo et al, 2015;Hafeez et al, 2021;Israni et al, 2020;Nascimento et al, 2023Nascimento et al, , 2015Silva-Brandão et al, 2021;Yu et al, 2003). For spinosyn resistance, some studies have associated the presence of detoxification enzymes with spinosad resistance in S. litura (Rehan and Freed, 2014), S. exigura (Wang et al, 2006),…”