Abstract
Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad. Most populations were susceptible to spinosad and similar to earlier baseline values, but populations from Thailand and Hawaii showed high levels of tolerance. A statewide survey in Hawaii in 2000 and 2001 indicated resistance problems on several islands. One colony collected in October 2000 from Pearl City, HI, was subjected to further selection pressure, using spinosad in the laboratory, and then was used as the resistant strain (Pearl-Sel) for other tests. Spray tests using the recommended field rates of spinosad on potted broccoli plants in the greenhouse confirmed that field control failures due to resistance were possible in the areas of these collections. Analysis of probit lines from F1 reciprocal crosses between the Pearl-Sel and S strain indicated that resistance to spinosad was inherited autosomally and was incompletely recessive. A direct test of monogenic inheritance based on the F1 x Pearl-Sel backcrosses suggested that resistance to spinosad was probably controlled by one locus. The synergists S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate and piperonyl butoxide did not enhance the toxicity of spinosad to the resistant colony, indicating metabolic mediated detoxification was probably not responsible for the spinosad resistance. Two field colonies in Hawaii that were resistant to spinosad were not cross-resistant to emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb. Resistance developed in Hawaii due to the continuous cultivation of crucifers in which as many as 50 applications of spinosad per year may have been made to a common population of P. xylostella in sequential plantings, although each grower might have used the labeled restrictions for resistance management. Resistance management strategies will need to address such cropping and pest management practices.
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 11
Claim · model-written summary
Most Plutella xylostella populations were susceptible to spinosad, similar to earlier baseline values.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostella
Plutella xylostellae1pest - Outcome
- susceptible to spinosade2
- Comparator
- earlier baseline valuese2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e2“Most populations were susceptible to spinosad and similar to earlier baseline values, but populations from Thailand and Hawaii showed high levels of tolerance”
Claim · model-written summary
Diamondback moth populations from Thailand and Hawaii showed high levels of tolerance to spinosad.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- tolerancee2
- Setting
- Thailand and Hawaiie2
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e2“Most populations were susceptible to spinosad and similar to earlier baseline values, but populations from Thailand and Hawaii showed high levels of tolerance”
Claim · model-written summary
A statewide survey in Hawaii indicated resistance problems to spinosad on several islands.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- resistance problemse3
- Setting
- Hawaiie3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e3“A statewide survey in Hawaii in 2000 and 2001 indicated resistance problems on several islands”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad at recommended field rates on potted broccoli plants in the greenhouse confirmed that field control failures due to resistance were possible.
- Taxon
- broccoli
Brassica oleracea var. italicae4 - Treatment
- recommended field rates of spinosade4
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- field control failurese4
- Qualifier
- due to resistance were possiblee4
- Setting
- greenhousee4
Not reportedComparatorDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e4“Spray tests using the recommended field rates of spinosad on potted broccoli plants in the greenhouse confirmed that field control failures due to resistance were possible in the areas of these collections”
Claim · model-written summary
Resistance to spinosad in Plutella xylostella is inherited autosomally and is incompletely recessive.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- resistance to spinosade5
- Qualifier
- incompletely recessivee5
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e5“resistance to spinosad was inherited autosomally and was incompletely recessive”
Claim · model-written summary
Resistance to spinosad is suggested to be controlled by one locus.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e6“suggested that resistance to spinosad was probably controlled by one locus”
Claim · model-written summary
The synergists S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate and piperonyl butoxide did not enhance spinosad toxicity to the resistant colony.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Treatment
- S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate and piperonyl butoxidee7
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Outcome
- toxicity of spinosad to the resistant colonye7
- Direction
- did not enhancee7
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e7“The synergists S,S,S-tributyl phosphorotrithioate and piperonyl butoxide did not enhance the toxicity of spinosad to the resistant colony”
Claim · model-written summary
Metabolic detoxification is suggested to be probably not responsible for spinosad resistance.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e0“indicating metabolic mediated detoxification was probably not responsible for the spinosad resistance”
Claim · model-written summary
Two field colonies in Hawaii resistant to spinosad were not cross-resistant to emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb.
- Taxon
- crucifer vegetablese1
- Interactor
- Plutella xylostellaPlutella xylostellae1pest
- Compound
- emamectin benzoatee0
- Outcome
- cross-resistante0
- Direction
- not cross-resistante0
- Setting
- Hawaiie0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e0“Two field colonies in Hawaii that were resistant to spinosad were not cross-resistant to emamectin benzoate or indoxacarb”
Claim · model-written summary
Resistance developed in Hawaii is concluded to be due to continuous cultivation of crucifers with up to 50 spinosad applications per year.
Verbatim
e0“Resistance developed in Hawaii due to the continuous cultivation of crucifers in which as many as 50 applications of spinosad per year may have been made to a common population of P. xylostella in sequential plantings”
Claim · model-written summary
Resistance management strategies need to address cropping and pest management practices.
Verbatim
e1“Fourteen populations of the diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.), were collected from fields of crucifer vegetables in the United States, Mexico, and Thailand in 1999 and 2000 for susceptibility tests with spinosad”
e0“Resistance management strategies will need to address such cropping and pest management practices”
The same questions in other papers
spinosad · Plutella xylostella · Brassica oleracea (wild cabbage)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 31 in the opposite direction
- positive
- positive
- positive
29 papers more in this group
See all 33 papers →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.