Toxicity and sublethal effects of two plant allelochemicals on the demographical traits of cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii Glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
Authors:
Kangsheng Ma aff001; Qiuling Tang aff001; Pingzhuo Liang aff001; Jin Xia aff001; Baizhong Zhang aff002; Xiwu Gao aff001
Authors place of work:
Department of Entomology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, China
aff001; College of Resources and Environment, Henan Institute of Science and Technology, Xinxiang, China
aff002
Published in the journal:
PLoS ONE 14(11)
Category:
Research Article
doi:
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0221646
Summary
Plant allelochemicals are a group of secondary metabolites produced by plants to defend against herbivore. The mortality of two plant allelochemicals (tannic acid and gossypol) on the cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii Glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae), were investigated using feeding assays and the sublethal effects were evaluated using the age-stage, two-sex life table approach. Tannic acid and gossypol have deleterious effects on A. gossypii, and as the concentrations increased, the mortality of cotton aphid increased. The life history traits of A. gossypii including the developmental duration of each nymph stage, the longevity, oviposition days, total preadult survival rate and adult pre-oviposition period were not significantly affected by sublethal concentration of tannic acid (20 mg/L) and gossypol (50 mg/L), while the population parameters (r, λ and R0) were significantly affected by these two plant allelochemicals. Furthermore, tannic acid can increase the pre-adult duration time and TPOP but reduce the fecundity of A. gossypii significantly compared to the control and gossypol treatment groups. These results are helpful for comprehensively understanding the effects of plant allelochemicals on A. gossypii.
Keywords:
Diet – Cotton – Nymphs – Fecundity – Plant-herbivore interactions – Aphids – Insect pests – Herbivory
Introduction
Plant allelochemicals, sometimes called secondary plant compounds because they are produced as by-products of intermediary metabolism by plant, which may play important roles in defense against insect herbivore [1–3]. Many kinds of plant allelochemicals were deleterious to herbivorous insects [4–7]. For example, isoflavonoids isolated from Cicer arietinum can affect the development of Helicoverpa armigera larvae [8]. Golawska et al. found that naringenin and quercetin have detrimental effects on the pea aphid, Acyrthosiphon pisum Harris [4]. Similarly, Zhang et al. found that the development of H. armigera was retarded significantly when the 6th instar larvae fed on a sublethal dosage of 2-tridecanone [9].
Tannic acid and gossypol from cotton plants participated in the cotton’s defense system against pathogens and herbivorous insects [10, 11]. Some studies showed that high-gossypol cultivars of cotton plant can negatively affect the development and reproduction of insects, such as Aphis gossypii and Bemisia tabaci [12, 13]. Moreover, feeding assays with gossypol mixed with artificial diet showed that gossypol has hormetic and detrimental effects on the growth of insects in different concentrations [14, 15]. For example, gossypol was found to have a hormetic effect on the larval growth of H. armigera at low concentrations, which has otherwise deleterious effect at higher concentrations [14]. Similarly, tannic acid was highly toxic to Malacosoma disstria larvae [16] and caused significantly inhibition in the development of herbivorous insects [10, 16, 17]. Although, the effects of tannic acid and gossypol on the growth of several insects have been reported, knowledge about the toxicity and impact of these two plant allelochemicals on A. gossypii, a destructive insect pest in the cotton fields [18], is still limited.
It is well known that exposure to sublethal concentrations of insecticides could affect insect population dynamics through changed biological and behavioral traits on individuals [19–21]. For plant allelochemicals, although most of these metabolites are high toxic to phytophagous insect [3], the insect pests contact these chemicals with sublethal concentrations in natural environment. Therefore, in this study, we aimed at assessing the potential effects of tannic acid and gossypol on the main life history traits of A. gossypii.
Life tables is a reliable tool for the prediction of the stage structure and growth of pest populations [22], which can offer a comprehensive description of population dynamics and help illuminate multiple effects of insecticides on insects [23–26]. In our study, the age-stage, two-sex life table was employed for investigating the effects of tannic acid and gossypol on both the life history traits of A. gossypii individuals and their demographic parameters. The results should be meaningful for understanding the effects of plant allelochemicals on A. gossypii, and helpful for developing integrated pest management programs for cotton aphid control.
Materials and methods
Insects
The strain of A. gossypii used in this study was collected from cotton fields in the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region of China, was maintained without any insecticide exposure. The aphids were reared on the cotton seedlings, Gossypium hirsutum (L.), in controlled conditions of 22 ± 1°C, 65 ± 5% relative humidity, and a photoperiod of 16:8 h (L: D) as described previously [27].
Ethics approval No ethics approval was required for this research.
Chemicals
Tannic acid and gossypol were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, USA). Triton X-100 was obtained from Amresco Inc. (Solon, OH, USA). All other chemicals and solvents used were analytical reagent.
Feeding assays
The tests were conducted in controlled conditions of 22 ± 1°C, 65 ± 5% relative humidity, and a photoperiod of 16:8 h (L: D). The 0.5 mol/L sterile sucrose solution was used as a liquid artificial diet for the oral delivery of studied plant allelochemicals to A. gossypii [28]. The tannic acid and gossypol were incorporated into the diet at five concentrations, which were 5, 10, 20, 40, 80 mg/L for tannic acid, and 12.5, 25, 50, 100, 200, 400 mg/L for gossypol. Control diets (without plant allelochemicals) were also included. Sterilized glass tubes that open at both ends were used for in vitro feeding assays, and the details were described in the previous publication [28]. One end of each tube was covered with two layers of parafilm, and 100 μL of the artificial diet containing either tannic acid or gossypol was sandwiched between the two parafilm layers. Thirty healthy apterous adults were gently placed into the tube with a brush and the tube was sealed with a piece of Chinese art paper using solid glue. The aphids were allowed feeding on artificial diet for 72 h and the mortality rate of the aphids was recorded. Each treatment had three replicates.
Sublethal effects of tannic acid and gossypol on the cotton aphids
To assess the effects of tannic acid and gossypol on the development of A. gossypii, the sublethal effects on various life history traits and demographic parameters of A. gossypii were evaluated in this study. Based on the results of preliminary bioassays, 20 mg/L tannic acid and 50 mg/L gossypol were used as a sublethal concentration, respectively. For sublethal assays, apterous adult aphids were placed on artificial diet that containing 20 mg/L of tannic acid or 50 mg/L of gossypol for 24 h. Adults were then removed, and the newborn nymphs were maintained on the diet for a further 24 h. And then, the survival nymphs were placed onto the 20 mm diameter leaf discs, which were placed upside down on agar beds (1.5 mL of 2% agar) in wells of 12-well cell-culture plates and covered with filter paper to prevent escape. At least 35 nymphs were observed individually in each group. The life history traits of aphids, including development time, fecundity, mortality, and longevity were monitored daily. During the reproductive period, the newborn nymphs were counted and removed daily. New cotton leaf discs were replaced every 4 days until the death of the adult.
Data analysis
For feeding assays, the LC25 and LC50 values were calculated using a log-probit model by PoLoPlus 2.0 software (LeOra Software, Petaluma, CA). The concentration-mortality relationship (data corrected for control mortality) was considered valid, when there was absence of significant deviation between the observed and the expected data (P > 0.05). Mortalities between the treatment and control were compared by ?2 using SPSS 19.0 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA). The life table data for all A. gossypii individuals in this study were analyzed according to the age-stage, two-sex life table theory [29, 30]. The population parameters, including the intrinsic rate of increase (r), finite rate of increase (λ), net reproductive rate (R0), the mean generation time (T), age-stage specific survival rates (sxj, where x is age and j is stage), age-specific survival rate (lx), age-specific fecundity (mx), adult pre-oviposition period (APOP), total preoviposition period (TPOP), reproductive days (Rd) (i.e., the number of days that adult produced offspring), age-specific maternity (lxmx), age-stage specific life expectancy (exj), reproductive value (vxj), were calculated according to Chi and Liu [30] and Chi [29] by using the computer program TWOSEX-MSChart [31]. The variances and standard errors of the population parameters were estimated using the bootstrap procedure [32] with 100,000 random resampling and the difference of population parameters between control and plant allelochemical treatment groups were compared by using the paired bootstrap test based on the confidence intervals of differences implemented in TWOSEX-MSChart [31, 33, 34]. All graphics were constructed using SigmaPlot 12.0 (Systat Software Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).
Results
Toxicities of tannic acid and gossypol against A. gossypii adults
Acute toxicity of tannic acid and gossypol against the adult cotton aphids was determined via the liquid artificial diet incorporation method. Log-probit regression analysis of concentration-mortality data after 72 h treatment revealed that LC50 and LC25 values for tannic acid were 41.04 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 27.91–50.69 mg/L) and 23.70 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 10.42–32.76 mg/L) with a regression equation of Y = 0.436 + 2.829X (χ2 = 7.54, df = 13, P = 0.872) and for gossypol were 314.51 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 126.07–1007.96 mg/L) and 51.49 mg/L (95% confidence interval: 4.00–127.98 mg/L) with a regression equation of Y = 2.875 + 0.858X (χ2 = 12.38, df = 16, P = 0.718), respectively.
To ensure low mortality, bioassays to examine sublethal effects of tannic acid and gossypol exposure were then conducted at a LC25 value of 20 mg/L tannic acid and 50 mg/L gossypol in the artificial diet for 24 h. As expected, the mortalities of adults of the cotton aphid were 15.00% and 16.67% for tannic acid and gossypol at 24 h, respectively, and they were not significantly different to 11.67% and 13.33% of the controls (tannic acid: χ2 = 0.130, df = 1, P = 0.718; gossypol: χ2 = 0.131, df = 1, P = 0.718). The 20 mg/L tannic acid and 50 mg/L gossypol were classified as sublethal concentrations and fitted for subsequent sublethal assays.
Effects of sublethal concentration of tannic acid and gossypol on A. gossypii
The effects of both tannic acid and gossypol on the development time, longevity, oviposition days, total preadult survival rate and fecundity of cotton aphids were presented in Table 1. No significant differences among tannic acid treatment, gossypol treatment and the control groups were observed in the developmental duration of each nymph stage, the longevity, oviposition days, total preadult survival rate, and adult pre-oviposition period (APOP). Similarly, no significant differences of pre-adult duration time, total pre-oviposition period (TPOP) and fecundity were found between the control and gossypol treatment groups. However, tannic acid treatment significantly increased the pre-adult duration time (P = 0.047) and TPOP (P = 0.011) of A. gossypii compared to the control. When compared to the control, the fecundity of A. gossypii was significantly reduced after tannic acid treatment (P = 0.003), but not significantly affected by gossypol treatment (P = 0.526). In addition, a significant difference of fecundity was also observed between tannic acid and gossypol treatment groups (P = 0.041) (Table 1).
The effects of tannic acid and gossypol on the population growth parameters were estimated with bootstrap methods based on the life table, and the results are presented in Table 2. When compared to the control group, the intrinsic rate of increase (r), the finite rate of increase (λ) and the net reproductive rate (R0) were significantly reduced by tannic acid (P = 0.041, 0.042 and 0.044 for r, λ and R0, respectively) and gossypol (P = 0.041, 0.049 and 0.045 for r, λ and R0, respectively) treatments, while no significant differences of r, λ and R0 were found between tannic acid and gossypol treatments (P = 0.955, 0.956 and 0.887 for r, λ and R0, respectively). Among tannic acid treatment, gossypol treatment and control groups, no significant differences of mean generation time (T) were found (P > 0.05). Minimal value for the gross reproduction rate (GRR) of A. gossypii was observed in tannic acid treatment (33.66 ± 2.01 offspring/individual), which was significantly different from the control (42.25 ± 1.45 offspring/individual; P < 0.001) and gossypol (41.38 ± 2.62 offspring/individual; P = 0.020), while no significant difference of GRR was found between the control and gossypol treatment (P = 0.768).
The age-stage specific survival rate (sxj) is the probability a newborn individual will survive to age x and stage j (Fig 1). Owing to the variable developmental rates among individuals, significantly overlaps between different life stages were observed for both the control group and the plant allelochemicals treatment groups (Fig 1). The age-specific survival rate (lx) is a simplification of sxj without accounting for the stage differentiation. In this study, the curve of lx significantly decreased in the plant allelochemicals-treated groups compared to the control group (Fig 2). The highest unique age-specific fecundity peak of the control group (3.007 offspring) occurred at the age of day 11 in the fecundity curve of mx, while the highest fecundity peak of the gossypol (2.688 offspring) and tannic acid (2.431 offspring) treatment groups were observed at the age of day 12 (Fig 2). These results showed that the probability that a newborn nymph would survive to the adult stage decreased in plant allelochemicals treatment groups in comparison with the control group. In addition, we found that gossypol has a lower survival rate of lx than that of tannic acid (Fig 2), as contrary, tannic acid has a lower fecundity of cotton aphids than that of gossypol (Fig 2).
The reproductive value (vxj) is the contribution an individual of age x and stage j will make to the future population of A. gossypii (Fig 3). The maximum vxj noted in tannic acid (8.74/day) and gossypol (10.22/day) treatments both occurred at age 9 day, which were lower than that noted in the control occurred later at age 11 day (10.90/day) (Fig 3).
Discussion
Tannic acid and gossypol are two kinds of secondary metabolites (allelochemical) produced by cotton plants, which involve in the defense system of cotton plants against pathogens and insect herbivores [6, 11, 15, 35]. Both tannic acid and gossypol are toxic to many organisms and feeding of these two chemicals can adversely affect the development of insects [14–16, 36]. For example, when fed on gossypol contained diets the larval pupal weights and survival of Helicoverpa zea were significantly reduced compared with the control diets groups [6]. Furthermore, our previous study demonstrated that the developmental periods of A. gossypii were significantly prolonged and the mean relative growth rates were markedly reduced when cotton aphids fed on spider mites infested cotton plants that contained high levels gossypol and condensed tannins [37]. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effects of these two plant allelochemicals on A. gossypii systemically.
Gossypol is a polyphenolic secondary metabolite and is toxic to many organisms [7, 11]. Stipanovic et al. found that gossypol can adversely affect the survival of H. zea [6]. In addition, high concentrations of all forms of gossypol reduced the survival and pupal weights for larvae of Helicoverpa virescens [35]. In this study, the results of toxicity tests demonstrated that gossypol are toxic to A. gossypii and fed on high concentration of gossypol led to a higher mortality, similar results were obtained by Peng et al. that the mortality of adults of cotton aphids increased with increasing gossypol concentrations [15]. Du et al found that the aphids fed on the high gossypol cultivar displayed significantly shorter adult longevity and lower fecundity than that of low and medium gossypol cultivars [12]. In the present study, although no significantly difference was observed, we also observed a reduction of longevity and fecundity in gossypol feeding group compared with the control (Table 1).
It is well known that tannins, including tannic acid, can defend plants against insect herbivores by deterrence and/or toxicity [38]. For example, as little as 0.5% tannic acid could cause a significantly reduction in relative growth rate of Malacosoma disstria [16]. Our results indicated that tannic acid could cause the death of cotton aphids, and high concentration of tannic acid resulted in significant increase of the mortality, this is in accordance with the fact that negative effects of tannins on both insect and vertebrate herbivores depend on high concentration [39].
The data in life table exhibited that both tannic acid and gossypol had negative effects on cotton aphids, the values of r, λ and R0 were significantly reduced and the development time was prolonged at some extent in tannic acid and gossypol treatment groups compared to the control group (Table 1 and Table 2). Similar results were observed in pea aphid that high concentrations of flavonoids increased the developmental time and reduced the intrinsic rate (r) [4]. However, this is inconsistent with the results of Yousaf et al. [40], which showed that exposure of F0 generation of A. gossypii to 25 ppm cucurbitacin B only significantly decreased the net reproductive rate (R0) of F1 generation, while other demographic traits of F1 (r, T, and λ) were not significantly reduced. Moreover, from the life table we found that tannic acid had a greater effect on cotton aphids than gossypol (Table 1 and Table 2). For instance, the cotton aphid adults that fed on tannic acid exhibited a significantly reduction of fecundity than that of gossypol and control groups (Table 1). Combining the toxicity bioassay results that cotton aphids are more susceptible to tannic acid than gossypol, the cause of this difference may be due to the difference of the toxicity of these two plant allelochemicals to A. gossypii.
Cotton aphid is one of the most destructive sucking pests on cotton and numerous agriculture crops that causes damage through direct feeding and virus transmission [18, 41]. The control of this pest mainly relies on the application of chemical insecticides in China [42]. However, our previous studies demonstrated that A. gossypii has evolved very high levels resistance to many types of insecticides [43–48]. Therefore, it is necessary to develop more environmentally friendly control strategies, such as biological control [49–52], biopesticides [53–56], and plant resistance [57, 58]. Our results demonstrate that tannic acid and gossypol have detrimental effect on cotton aphids and these two plant allelochemicals have potential for this pest control. These results are meaningful for understanding the potential plant-aphid interactions, and helpful for developing integrated pest management programs of cotton aphids.
Zdroje
1. Després L, David JP, Gallet C. The evolutionary ecology of insect resistance to plant chemicals. Trends Ecol Evol. 2007; 22(6): 298–307. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2007.02.010 17324485
2. Li XC, Berenbaum MR, Schuler MA. Plant allelochemicals differentially regulate Helicoverpa zea cytochrome P450 genes. Insect Mol Biol. 2002; 11(4): 343–351. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2583.2002.00341.x 12144700
3. Nishida R. Chemical ecology of insect-plant interactions: ecological significance of plant secondary metabolites. Biosci Biotech Bioch. 2014; 78(1): 1–13.
4. Golawska S, Sprawka I, Lukasik I, Golawski A. Are naringenin and quercetin useful chemicals in pest-management strategies? J Pest Sci. 2014; 87: 173–180.
5. Selin-Rani S, Senthil-Nathan S, Thanigaivel A, Vasantha-Srinivasan P, Edwin ES, Ponsankar A, et al. Toxicity and physiological effect of quercetin on generalist herbivore, Spodoptera litura Fab. and a non-target earthworm Eisenia fetida Savigny. Chemosphere. 2016; 165: 257–267. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2016.08.136 27657818
6. Stipanovic RD, Lopez JD Jr., Dowd MK, Puckhaber LS, Duke SE. Effect of racemic and (+)- and (-)-gossypol on the survival and development of Helicoverpa zea larvae. J Chem Ecol. 2006; 32(5): 959–968. doi: 10.1007/s10886-006-9052-9 16739016
7. Wang Q, Eneji AE, Kong X, Wang K, Dong H. Salt stress effects on secondary metabolites of cotton in relation to gene expression responsible for aphid development. PLoS One. 2015; 10(6): e0129541. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129541 26061875
8. Simmonds MS, Stevenson PC. Effects of isoflavonoids from Cicer on larvae of Heliocoverpa armigera. J Chem Ecol. 2001; 27(5): 965–977. doi: 10.1023/a:1010339104206 11471948
9. Zhang L, Lu Y, Xiang M, Shang QL, Gao XW. The retardant effect of 2-tridecanone, mediated by cytochrome P450, on the development of cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera. BMC Genomics. 2016; 17(1): 954. doi: 10.1186/s12864-016-3277-y 27875986
10. Klocke JA, Chan BG. Effects of cotton condensed tannin on feeding and digestion in the cotton pest, Heliothis zea. J Insect Physiol. 1982; 28: 911–915.
11. Krempl C, Heidel-Fischer HM, Jimenez-Aleman GH, Reichelt M, Menezes RC, Boland W, et al. Gossypol toxicity and detoxification in Helicoverpa armigera and Heliothis virescens. Insect Biochem Mol Biol. 2016; 78: 69–77. doi: 10.1016/j.ibmb.2016.09.003 27687846
12. Du L, Ge F, Zhu S, Parajulee MN. Effect of cotton cultivar on development and reproduction of Aphis gossypii (Homoptera: Aphididae) and its predator Propylaea japonica (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). J Econ Entomol. 2004; 97: 1278–1283. doi: 10.1093/jee/97.4.1278 15384338
13. Guo JY, Wu G, Wan FH. Effects of high-gossypol cotton on the development and reproduction of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) MEAM1 cryptic species. J Econ Entomol. 2013; 106(3): 1379–1385. doi: 10.1603/ec12401 23865205
14. Celorio-Mancera MdlP, Ahn SJ, Vogel H, Heckel DG. Transcriptional responses underlying the hormetic and detrimental effects of the plant secondary metabolite gossypol on the generalist herbivore Helicoverpa armigera. BMC Genomics. 2011; 12: 575. doi: 10.1186/1471-2164-12-575 22111916
15. Peng TF, Pan YO, Gao XW, Xi JH, Zhang L, Yang C, et al. Cytochrome P450 CYP6DA2 regulated by cap 'n'collar isoform C (CncC) is associated with gossypol tolerance in Aphis gossypii Glover. Insect Mol Biol. 2016; 25(4): 450–459. doi: 10.1111/imb.12230 27005728
16. Karowe DN. Differential effect of tannic acid on two tree-feeding Lepidoptera: implications for theories of plant anti-herbivore chemistry. Oecologia. 1989; 80: 507–512. doi: 10.1007/BF00380074 28312836
17. War AR, Paulraj MG, Ahmad T, Buhroo AA, Hussain B, Ignacimuthu S, et al. Mechanisms of plant defense against insect herbivores. Plant Signal Behav. 2012; 7(10): 1306–1320. doi: 10.4161/psb.21663 22895106
18. Blackman RL, Eastop VF. Aphids on the world's crops: An identification guide. John Wiley and Sons, NY. 1984.
19. Qu YY, Xiao D, Li J, Chen Z, Biondi A, Desneux N, et al. Sublethal and hormesis effects of imidacloprid on the soybean aphid Aphis glycines. Ecotoxicology. 2015; 24(3): 479–487. doi: 10.1007/s10646-014-1396-2 25492586
20. Desneux N, Decourtye A, Delpuech JM. The sublethal effects of pesticides on beneficial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol. 2007; 52: 81–106. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091440 16842032
21. Stark JD, Banks JE. Population-level effects of pesticides and other toxicants on arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol. 2003; 48: 505–519. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.48.091801.112621 12221038
22. Akca I, Ayvaz T, Yazici E, Smith CL, Chi H. Demography and population projection of Aphis fabae (Hemiptera: Aphididae): with additional comments on life table research criteria. J Econ Entomol. 2015; 108(4): 1466–1478. doi: 10.1093/jee/tov187 26470285
23. Chi H, Getz WM. Mass rearing and harvesting based on an age-stage, wwo-sex life table: a potato tuberworm (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) case study. Environ Entomol. 1988; 17(1): 18–25.
24. Tang QL, Xiang M, Hu HM, An CJ, Gao XW. Evaluation of sublethal effects of sulfoxaflor on the green peach aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae) using life table parameters. J Econ Entomol. 2015; 108(6): 2720–2728. doi: 10.1093/jee/tov221 26470367
25. Xiao D, Zhao J, Guo X, Chen H, Qu M, Zhai W, et al. Sublethal effects of imidacloprid on the predatory seven-spot ladybird beetle Coccinella septempunctata. Ecotoxicology. 2016; 25(10): 1782–1793. doi: 10.1007/s10646-016-1721-z 27670666
26. Zhang P, Liu F, Mu W, Wang Q, Li H, Chen C. Life table study of the effects of sublethal concentrations of thiamethoxam on Bradysia odoriphaga Yang and Zhang. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2014; 111: 31–37. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2014.04.003 24861931
27. Ma KS, Li F, Liang PZ, Chen XW, Liu Y, Gao XW. Identification and validation of reference genes for the normalization of gene expression data in qRT-PCR analysis in Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Insect Sci. 2016; 16(1): 1–9.
28. Ma KS, Li F, Liang PZ, Chen XW, Liu Y, Tang QL, et al. RNA interference of Dicer-1 and Argonaute-1 increasing the sensitivity of Aphis gossypii Glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae) to plant allelochemical. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2017; 138: 71–75. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2017.03.003 28456307
29. Chi H. Life-table analysis incorporating both sexes and variable development rates among individuals. Environ Entomol. 1988; 17(1): 26–34.
30. Chi H, Liu H. Two new methods for the study of insect population ecology. Bull Inst Zool Academia Sinica. 1985; 24(2): 225–240.
31. Chi H. TWOSEX-MS Chart: A computer program for the age-stage, two-sex life table analysis. http://140.120.197.173/Ecology/Download/Twosex-MSChart-exe-B200000.rar. (accessed 30 June 2018).
32. Efron B, Tibshirani RJ. An introduction to the bootstrap. J Great Lakes Res. 1993; 20(1): 1–6.
33. Huang HW, Chi H, Smith CL. Linking demography and consumption of Henosepilachna vigintioctopunctata (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) fed on Solanum photeinocarpum (Solanales: Solanaceae): with a new method to project the uncertainty of population growth and consumption. J Econ Entomol. 2018; 111(1): 1–9. doi: 10.1093/jee/tox330 29281063
34. Huang YB, Chi H. Life tables of Bactrocera cucurbitae (Diptera: Tephritidae): with an invalidation of the jackknife technique. J Appl Entomol. 2013; 137(5): 327–339.
35. Stipanovic RD, López JD, Dowd MK, Puckhaber LS, Duke SE. Effect of racemic, (+)- and (−)-gossypol on survival and development of Heliothis virescens larvae. Environ Entomol. 2008; 37(5): 1081–1085. doi: 10.1603/0046-225X(2008)37[1081:EORAGO]2.0.CO;2 19036185
36. Martemyanov VV, Bakhvalov SA, Dubovskiy IM, Glupov VV, Salakhutdinov NF, Tolstikov GA. Effect of tannic acid on the development and resistance of the gypsy moth Lymantria dispar L. to viral infection. Dokl Biochem Biophys. 2006; 409(1): 219–222.
37. Ma GM, Shi XY, Kang ZJ, Gao XW. The influence of Tetranychus cinnabarinus-induced plant defense responses on Aphis gossypii development. J Integr Agr. 2018; 17(1): 164–172.
38. Barbehenn RV, Peter Constabel C. Tannins in plant-herbivore interactions. Phytochemistry. 2011; 72(13): 1551–1565. doi: 10.1016/j.phytochem.2011.01.040 21354580
39. Aerts RJ, Barry TN, McNabb WC. Polyphenols and agriculture: beneficial effects of proanthocyanidins in forages. Agr Ecosyst Environ. 1999; 72: 1–12.
40. Yousaf HK, Shan TS, Chen XW, Ma KS, Shi XY, Desneux N, et al. Impact of the secondary plant metabolite Cucurbitacin B on the demographical traits of the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Scientific reports. 2018;8(1):16473. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34821-w 30405179
41. Ma KS, Li F, Liu Y, Liang PZ, Chen XW, Gao XW. Identification of microRNAs and their response to the stress of plant allelochemicals in Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). BMC Mol Biol. 2017; 18(1): 5. doi: 10.1186/s12867-017-0080-5 28202045
42. Wu KM, Guo YY. The evolution of cotton pest management practices in China. Annu Rev Entomol. 2005; 50: 31–52. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ento.50.071803.130349 15355239
43. Ma KS, Tang QL, Zhang BZ, Liang PZ, Wang BM, Gao XW. Overexpression of multiple cytochrome P450 genes associated with sulfoxaflor resistance in Aphis gossypii Glover. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2019; 157: 204–210. doi: 10.1016/j.pestbp.2019.03.021 31153470
44. Chen XW, Tie MY, Chen AQ, Ma KS, Li F, Liang PZ, et al. Pyrethroid resistance associated with M918 L mutation and detoxifying metabolism in Aphis gossypii from Bt cotton growing regions of China. Pest Manag Sci. 2017; 73(11): 2353–2359. doi: 10.1002/ps.4622 28544677
45. Sun LJ, Zhou XG, Zhang J, Gao XW. Polymorphisms in a carboxylesterase gene between organophosphate-resistant and -susceptible Aphis gossypii (Homoptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2005; 98(4): 1325–1332. doi: 10.1603/0022-0493-98.4.1325 16156587
46. Wang KY, Liu TX, Yu CH, Jiang XY, Yi MQ. Resistance of Aphis gossypii (Homoptera: Aphididae) to fenvalerate and imidacloprid and activities of detoxification enzymes on cotton and cucumber. J Econ Entomol. 2002; 95(2): 407–413. doi: 10.1603/0022-0493-95.2.407 12020021
47. Zheng BZ, Gao XW, Wang ZG, Liang TT, Cao BJ, Gao H. Resistant mechanism of organophosphorous and carbamate insecticides in Aphis gossypii Glov. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica. 1989; 16(2): 131–138.
48. Zheng BZ, Gao XW, Wang ZG, Cao BJ. Preliminary studies of pyrethroid resistance in melon-cotton aphid (Aphis gossypii Glov.) in Beijing suburbs and northern region of Hebei Province. Acta Phytophylacica Sinica. 1988; 15(1): 55–61.
49. Desneux N, Barta RJ, Hoelmer KA, Hopper KR, Heimpel GE. Multifaceted determinants of host specificity in an aphid parasitoid. Oecologia. 2009; 160(2): 387–398. doi: 10.1007/s00442-009-1289-x 19219460
50. Desneux N, O’Neil RJ, Yoo HJS. Suppression of population growth of the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines Matsumura, by predators: the identification of a key predator and the effects of prey dispersion, predator abundance, and temperature. Environ Entomol. 2006; 35(5): 1342–1349.
51. Shrestha RB, Parajulee MN. Potential cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii, population suppression by arthropod predators in upland cotton. Insect Sci. 2013; 20(6): 778–788. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-7917.2012.01583.x 23956125
52. Madadi H, Mohajeri Parizi E, Allahyari H, Enkegaard A. Assessment of the biological control capability of Hippodamia variegata (Col.: Coccinellidae) using functional response experiments. J Pest Sci. 2011; 84(4): 447–455.
53. Ebadollahi A, Davari M, Razmjou J, Naseri B. Separate and combined effects of Mentha piperata and Mentha pulegium essential oils and a pathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium against Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2017; 110(3): 1025–1030. doi: 10.1093/jee/tox065 28334238
54. Wang D, Xie N, Yi S, Liu C, Jiang H, Ma Z, et al. Bioassay-guided isolation of potent aphicidal Erythrina alkaloids against Aphis gossypii from the seed of Erythrina crista-galli L. Pest Manag Sci. 2018; 74(1): 210–218. doi: 10.1002/ps.4698 28799721
55. Chaieb I, Zarrad K, Sellam R, Tayeb W, Hammouda AB, Laarif A, et al. Chemical composition and aphicidal potential of Citrus aurantium peel essential oils. Entomol Gen. 2017; 37(1): 63–75.
56. Roh HS, Kim J, Shin E-S, Lee DW, Choo HY, Park CG. Bioactivity of sandalwood oil (Santalum austrocaledonicum) and its main components against the cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii. J Pest Sci. 2014; 88(3): 621–627.
57. Boissot N, Schoeny A, Vanlerberghe-Masutti F. Vat, an amazing gene conferring resistance to aphids and viruses they carry: from molecular structure to field effects. Front Plant Sci. 2016; 7: 1420. doi: 10.3389/fpls.2016.01420 27725823
58. Garzo E, Soria C, Gomez-Guillamon ML, Fereres A. Feeding behavior of Aphis gossypii on resistant accessions of different melon genotypes (Cucumis melo). Phytoparasitica. 2002; 30(2): 129–140.
Článek vyšel v časopise
PLOS One
2019 Číslo 11
- Tisícileté topoly, mokří psi, stárnoucí kočky a ospalé octomilky – „jednohubky“ z výzkumu 2024/41
- Jaké jsou aktuální trendy v léčbě karcinomu slinivky?
- Může hubnutí souviset s vyšším rizikem nádorových onemocnění?
- Menstruační krev má značný diagnostický potenciál, mimo jiné u diabetu
- Metamizol jako analgetikum první volby: kdy, pro koho, jak a proč?
Nejčtenější v tomto čísle
- A daily diary study on maladaptive daydreaming, mind wandering, and sleep disturbances: Examining within-person and between-persons relations
- A 3’ UTR SNP rs885863, a cis-eQTL for the circadian gene VIPR2 and lincRNA 689, is associated with opioid addiction
- A substitution mutation in a conserved domain of mammalian acetate-dependent acetyl CoA synthetase 2 results in destabilized protein and impaired HIF-2 signaling
- Molecular validation of clinical Pantoea isolates identified by MALDI-TOF