The negative effect of some selective insecticides on the functional response of a potential biological control agent, the spider Philodromus cespitum

Řezáč, Milan; Pekár, Stanislav; Stará, Jitka

doi:10.1007/s10526-010-9272-3

Cited by 60 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 49 publications

(59 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Acute mortality from spinosad in laboratory assessments on arachnid predators gave diverging results. Řezáč et al 51 found no significant mortality when the spider Philodromus cespitum (Walckenaer) was exposed to dried spinosad residues on filter paper (104 mg AI L −1 ), whereas 100% mortality was observed for Hibana futilis (Banks) when exposed to very low spinosad residues (5 × 10 −20 µg AI L −1 ) on filter paper for 24 h 52. High Araneus pretensis (Emerton) mortality was observed owing to the ingestion of prey treated with low spinosad rates (2.5–25% of the maximum recommended field rates) 53.…”

Section: Side Effects Of Spinosyns On Non Target Organisms Reported mentioning

confidence: 99%

The non‐target impact of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods

Biondi¹,

Mommaerts²,

Smagghe³

et al. 2012

Pest Management Science

348

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spinosyn-based products, mostly spinosad, have been widely recommended by extension specialists and agribusiness companies; consequently, they have been used to control various pests in many different cropping systems. Following the worldwide adoption of spinosad-based products for integrated and organic farming, an increasing number of ecotoxicological studies have been published in the past 10 years. These studies are primarily related to the risk assessment of spinosad towards beneficial arthropods. This review takes into account recent data with the aim of (i) highlighting potentially adverse effects of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods (and hence on ecosystem services that they provide in agroecosystems), (ii) clarifying the range of methods used to address spinosyn side effects on biocontrol agents and pollinators in order to provide new insights for the development of more accurate bioassays, (iii) identifying pitfalls when analysing laboratory results to assess field risks and (iv) gaining increasing knowledge on side effects when using spinosad for integrated pest management (IPM) programmes and organic farming. For the first time, a thorough review of possible risks of spinosad and novel spinosyns (such as spinetoram) to beneficial arthropods (notably natural enemies and pollinators) is provided. The acute lethal effect and multiple sublethal effects have been identified in almost all arthropod groups studied. This review will help to optimise the future use of spinosad and new spinosyns in IPM programmes and for organic farming, notably by preventing the possible side effects of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods.

show abstract

Section: Side Effects Of Spinosyns On Non Target Organisms Reported mentioning

confidence: 99%

The non‐target impact of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods

Biondi¹,

Mommaerts²,

Smagghe³

et al. 2012

Pest Management Science

348

169

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pesticides were found to decrease prey capture efficiency in a number of different species: in the linyphiid Hylyphantes graminicola (Sundevall, 1830) after application of methamidophis;59 in the lycosid Pirata piratoides (Bösenberg & Strand, 1906) and the linyphiid U. insecticeps after buprofezin application;89, 90 in the araneid Alpaida veniliae (Keyserling, 1865) after glyphosate application;91 in the lycosid P. pseudoannulata after imidacloprid application;68 in another lycosid P. amentata following application of cypermethrin;82 in the philodromid P. cespitum after exposure to diflubenzuron, neem, spinosad and acetamiprid;92 in the two linyphiids Erigone atra Blackwall, 1833 and O. apicatus after fenvalerate spray;80 in the araneid Neoscona pratensis (Hentz, 1847) after spinosad application;93 and in the lycosid Pardosa sp. after λ‐cyhalothrin spray 56.…”

Section: Direct Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spiders (Araneae) in the pesticide world: an ecotoxicological review

Pekár

2012

Pest Management Science

Self Cite

136

101

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Being one of the most abundant and species-rich groups of natural enemies occurring in all agroecosystems, spiders are variably affected by pesticide applications. Here, a review is given of research on spider ecotoxicology. More than 40 species of spiders and almost 130 pesticides (acaricides, insecticides, fungicides and herbicides) have been tested so far in the field or under laboratory conditions. Field studies show that the degree of population reduction following pesticide application is a function of a number of factors inherent to pesticides, crops and spider species (guilds). These studies also revealed indirect effects via habitat and prey disruption. Among laboratory studies, a number of papers have investigated only the direct lethal effect. A meta-analysis of these data reveals that spiders are mainly affected by acaricides and insecticides, particularly neurotoxic substances. Currently, ecotoxicological research on spiders is focused more on direct sublethal effects on a variety of behavioural traits (locomotion, predation, web-building, reproduction, development) and physiology. Yet a standardised approach to the evaluation of sublethal effects is lacking. A few studies have provided some evidence for hormesis in spiders. Future research should be more concentrated on sublethal effects and the estimation of long-term changes in spider populations as a result of pesticide treatment.

show abstract

“…Insecticides may cause the death of the natural enemies (lethal effects) or change several other features of their physiology and behaviour without killing the individuals (sublethal effects) (Desneux et al 2007;Řezáč et al 2010).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of buprofezin and imidacloprid on the functional response of Eretmocerus mundus Mercet

Sohrabi¹,

Shishehbor²,

Saber³

et al. 2014

Plant Prot. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sohrabi F.,Shishehbor P., Saber M., Mosaddegh M.S. (2014): Effects of buprofezin and imidacloprid on the functional response of Eretmocerus mundus Mercet. Plant Protect. Sci., 50: 145-150.Eretmocerus mundus Mercet is one of the key natural enemies of bemisia tabaci (Gennadius). In this study, the sublethal effects of LC 25 of imidacloprid and field-recommended concentration of buprofezin on the functional response of E. mundus to different densities of second instar b. tabaci nymphs were evaluated. The results revealed a type III functional response in the control and imidacloprid treatment. The type III functional response was altered into a type II by buprofezin. Although imidacloprid did not alter the type of functional response of E. mundus compared to the control, it negatively affected the handling time and maximum attack rate of the parasitoid. Therefore, the use of this insecticide should be evaluated carefully in IPM programs.

show abstract

The negative effect of some selective insecticides on the functional response of a potential biological control agent, the spider Philodromus cespitum

Cited by 60 publications

References 49 publications

The non‐target impact of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods

The non‐target impact of spinosyns on beneficial arthropods

Spiders (Araneae) in the pesticide world: an ecotoxicological review

Effects of buprofezin and imidacloprid on the functional response of Eretmocerus mundus Mercet

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About