Impact of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor mutation R81T on the response of European Myzus persicae populations to imidacloprid and sulfoxaflor in laboratory and in the field

Sulfoxaflor (Isoclast™ active) is a sulfoximine insecticide that is active on a broad range of sap-feeding insects, including species that exhibit reduced susceptibility to currently available insecticides. Colonies of Myzus persicae (green peach aphid) were established from aphids collected in the field from peach (Prunus persica) and nectarine (Prunus persica var. nucipersica) orchards in France, Italy and Spain. The presence of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) point mutation R81T was determined for all the colonies. Eight of the 35 colonies collected were susceptible relative to R81T (i.e., R81T absent), three of the colonies were found to be homozygous for R81T while 24 colonies had R81T present in some proportion (heterozygous). Sulfoxaflor and imidacloprid were tested in the laboratory against these M. persicae field colonies, which exhibited a wide range of susceptibilities (sulfoxaflor RR = 0.6 to 61, imidacloprid RR = 0.7 to 986) (resistance ratios, RR) to both insecticides. Although sulfoxaflor was consistently more active than imidacloprid against these field collected M. persicae, there was a statistically significant correlation across all colonies between the RRs for imidacloprid and sulfoxaflor (Pearson's r = 0.939, p < 0.0001). However, when a larger group of the colonies from Spain possessing R81T were analyzed, there was no correlation observed for the RRs between imidacloprid and sulfoxaflor (r = 0.2901, p = 0.3604). Thus, consistent with prior studies, the presence of R81T by itself is not well correlated with altered susceptibility to sulfoxaflor. In field trials, sulfoxaflor (24 and 36 gai/ha) was highly effective (~avg. 88–96% control) against M. persicae, demonstrating similar levels of efficacy as flonicamid (60–70 gai/ha) and spirotetramat (100–180 gai/ha) at 13–15 days after application, in contrast to imidacloprid (110–190 gai/ha) and acetamiprid (50–75 gai/ha) with lower levels of efficacy (~avg. 62–67% control). Consequently, sulfoxaflor is an effective tool for use in insect pest management programs for M. persicae. However, it is recommended that sulfoxaflor be used in the context of an insecticide resistance management program as advocated by the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee involving rotation with insecticides possessing other modes of action (i.e., avoiding rotation with other Group 4 insecticides) to minimize the chances for resistance development and to extend its future utility.

Peer reviewed