4.6 Article

Selection for Resistance to Imidacloprid in the House Fly (Diptera: Muscidae)

Journal

JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC ENTOMOLOGY
Volume 103, Issue 5, Pages 1937-1942

Publisher

ENTOMOLOGICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1603/EC10165

Keywords

Musca domestica; insecticide bait; integrated pest management; dairy pest management; insecticide resistance

Categories

Funding

  1. Southeast Milk, Inc
  2. Milk Check-Off
  3. University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station Federal Formula Funds (Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture) [FLA-ENY-04598]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The house fly, Musca domestic:a L. (Diptera: Muscidae), continues to be a primary pest of livestock facilities worldwide. This pest also has shown a propensity for pesticide resistance development when under high selection pressures. In this study the house fly strain FDm was created by a 20% contribution from each of five colonies collected from dairies in Florida with known imidacloprid resistance. The Fan strain was used to evaluate the level of imidacloprid resistance after five selections near the LC(70) value of each selected generation. Overall, the mean selection mortality was 72.7, with males being considerably more susceptible than females. The unselected (F(0)) FDm strain showed considerable susceptibility to imidacloprid after its creation, compared with the five parental strains. Between 9,500 and 14,000 virgin house flies were used in each selection. After the fifth and final selection, a 331-fold increase in imidacloprid resistance at the LC(70) was observed over the parental FDm strain. In parallel studies, the FDm strain showed increasing tolerance of the commercial imidacloprid product QuickBayt. These results suggest that livestock producers should use caution when choosing pesticides and consider rotating fly baits, as is encouraged with other pesticide treatment regimes on farms.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available