Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly

Three resistance monitoring methods were tested to evaluate their relative reliability, discriminating ability, convenience, and practicality for monitoring insecticide resistance in Arizona whiteflies. Adult whiteflies were collected from the field and tested in the laboratory with three methods: l...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Simmons, A. L., Dennehy, T. J.
Other Authors: Silvertooth, Jeff
Language:en_US
Published: College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) 1996
Subjects:
Online Access:http://hdl.handle.net/10150/210913
id ndltd-arizona.edu-oai-arizona.openrepository.com-10150-210913
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-arizona.edu-oai-arizona.openrepository.com-10150-2109132015-10-23T04:50:17Z Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly Simmons, A. L. Dennehy, T. J. Silvertooth, Jeff Agriculture -- Arizona Cotton -- Arizona Cotton -- Insect investigations Three resistance monitoring methods were tested to evaluate their relative reliability, discriminating ability, convenience, and practicality for monitoring insecticide resistance in Arizona whiteflies. Adult whiteflies were collected from the field and tested in the laboratory with three methods: leaf disk, sticky trap, and vial. Each method was evaluated against two populations divergent in susceptibility using a mixture of Danitol® + Orthene® and two single chemicals, Thiodan® and Danitol®. The Yuma population was relatively susceptible and the Gila River Basin population highly resistant. Correlations of field efficacy and leaf disk bioassays were conducted with the Yuma population and a comparatively resistant Maricopa population. At each location egg, immature, and adult whitefly densities were monitored before and after Danitol® + Orthene® treatments and resistance estimates were also monitored in the populations using leaf disk bioassays. Our results illustrated that the leaf disk method had the greatest discriminating ability between susceptible and resistant populations. The results also indicated that the vial method was the most practical, and that the sticky trap method was good at discriminating between populations that have large differences in susceptibility. The field efficacy trials indicated results from leaf disk assays reflected what had occurred in the field. 1996-03 text Article http://hdl.handle.net/10150/210913 Cotton: A College of Agriculture Report en_US Series P-103 370103 College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)
collection NDLTD
language en_US
sources NDLTD
topic Agriculture -- Arizona
Cotton -- Arizona
Cotton -- Insect investigations
spellingShingle Agriculture -- Arizona
Cotton -- Arizona
Cotton -- Insect investigations
Simmons, A. L.
Dennehy, T. J.
Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
description Three resistance monitoring methods were tested to evaluate their relative reliability, discriminating ability, convenience, and practicality for monitoring insecticide resistance in Arizona whiteflies. Adult whiteflies were collected from the field and tested in the laboratory with three methods: leaf disk, sticky trap, and vial. Each method was evaluated against two populations divergent in susceptibility using a mixture of Danitol® + Orthene® and two single chemicals, Thiodan® and Danitol®. The Yuma population was relatively susceptible and the Gila River Basin population highly resistant. Correlations of field efficacy and leaf disk bioassays were conducted with the Yuma population and a comparatively resistant Maricopa population. At each location egg, immature, and adult whitefly densities were monitored before and after Danitol® + Orthene® treatments and resistance estimates were also monitored in the populations using leaf disk bioassays. Our results illustrated that the leaf disk method had the greatest discriminating ability between susceptible and resistant populations. The results also indicated that the vial method was the most practical, and that the sticky trap method was good at discriminating between populations that have large differences in susceptibility. The field efficacy trials indicated results from leaf disk assays reflected what had occurred in the field.
author2 Silvertooth, Jeff
author_facet Silvertooth, Jeff
Simmons, A. L.
Dennehy, T. J.
author Simmons, A. L.
Dennehy, T. J.
author_sort Simmons, A. L.
title Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
title_short Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
title_full Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
title_fullStr Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
title_full_unstemmed Contrasts of Three Insecticides Resistance Monitoring Methods for Whitefly
title_sort contrasts of three insecticides resistance monitoring methods for whitefly
publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ)
publishDate 1996
url http://hdl.handle.net/10150/210913
work_keys_str_mv AT simmonsal contrastsofthreeinsecticidesresistancemonitoringmethodsforwhitefly
AT dennehytj contrastsofthreeinsecticidesresistancemonitoringmethodsforwhitefly
_version_ 1718100628710883328