Abstract
Abstract In a glasshouse trial with potted cotton plants grown from thiamethoxam‐treated seed, neither 2.76 g a.i./kg seed (Cruiser ® ) nor 5.52 g a.i./kg seed ( C ruiser E xtreme ® ) protected plants from neonicotinoid‐resistant A phis gossypii Glover, 1877. Against susceptible A . gossypii each treatment was highly effective, providing control of >90% for 42 days. Continued use of either thiamethoxam treatment against resistant A . gossypii will select for resistant phenotypes and probably restrict the useful life of the neonicotinoid insecticides against this pest. In a separate trial, side‐dressing of cotton seed with phorate 200 g/kg ( T himet ® ) effectively provided plants with protection from susceptible A . gossypii . The insecticidal activity of phorate‐treated plants against pirimicarb‐resistant A . gossypii was not statistically different to untreated plants ( P > 0.05). To maintain the effectiveness of pirimicarb in the A ustralian cotton integrated pest management strategy, the use of phorate as an alternative pre‐germination treatment to thiamethoxam for aphid control must be managed. We recommend that the first foliar spray applied to cotton treated with phorate at planting should not be pirimicarb or any other insecticide affected by insensitive cholinesterase ( ACE 1) type resistance.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Thiamethoxam seed treatments controlled susceptible A. gossypii on cotton by more than 90% for 42 days.
- Taxon
- cotton
Gossypium hirsutume0 - Material
- susceptiblee1
- Treatment
- thiamethoxame0
- Interactor
- A . gossypii
Aphis gossypiie1pest - Outcome
- controle1
- Direction
- increaseinferrede1
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“potted cotton plants grown from thiamethoxam”
e1“Against susceptible A . gossypii each treatment was highly effective, providing control of >90% for 42 days”
Claim · model-written summary
Thiamethoxam seed treatments did not protect cotton plants from neonicotinoid-resistant A. gossypii.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Material
- resistante3
- Treatment
- thiamethoxame0
- Interactor
- A . gossypiiAphis gossypiie3pest
- Outcome
- protected plantse2
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“potted cotton plants grown from thiamethoxam”
e2“neither 2.76 g a.i./kg seed (Cruiser ® ) nor 5.52 g a.i./kg seed ( C ruiser E xtreme ® ) protected plants”
e3“Continued use of either thiamethoxam treatment against resistant A . gossypii will select for resistant phenotypes”
Claim · model-written summary
Phorate side-dressing of cotton seed effectively protected plants from susceptible A. gossypii.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume6
- Material
- susceptiblee5
- Treatment
- phoratee6
- Interactor
- A . gossypiiAphis gossypiie5pest
- Outcome
- protectione5
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e5“effectively provided plants with protection from susceptible A . gossypii”
e6“cotton seed with phorate 200 g/kg”
Claim · model-written summary
The insecticidal activity of phorate-treated cotton against pirimicarb-resistant A. gossypii was not statistically different from untreated plants.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume0
- Treatment
- phoratee6
- Outcome
- insecticidal activitye6
- Comparator
- untreated plantse7
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“potted cotton plants grown from thiamethoxam”
e6“The insecticidal activity of phorate”
e7“was not statistically different to untreated plants”
Claim · model-written summary
Cotton treated with phorate at planting should not receive pirimicarb as the first foliar spray.
- Taxon
- cottonGossypium hirsutume4
- Treatment
- phoratee4
- Outcome
- first foliar spraye4
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“potted cotton plants grown from thiamethoxam”
e4“We recommend that the first foliar spray applied to cotton treated with phorate at planting should not be pirimicarb”
The same questions in other papers
phorate · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results
2 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
thiamethoxam · Aphis gossypii · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
phorate · Aphis gossypii · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.