Seed treatment for managing fall armyworm as a defoliator and cutworm on maize: plant protection, residuality, and the insect life history.

BACKGROUND: The highly polyphagous and invasive fall armyworm (FAW, Spodoptera frugiperda) can feed on different plant parts of host crops, damaging whorls and stalks in early maize growth stages. Systemic insecticide seed treatment (IST) could minimize this damage, although the residual efficacy may vary with the plant tissue damaged. Using damage rating scales and artificial infestation in controlled conditions, we determined the potential of IST against FAW attacking maize whorl leaves or the stalk base. RESULTS: Chlorantraniliprole, cyantraniliprole, or thiodicarb + imidacloprid IST similarly killed > 80% FAWs for 1 or 2 weeks after plant emergence depending on the plant tissue attacked. The residual efficacy (i.e. time after plant emergence sustaining > 80% larval mortality) lasted from the first to the eleventh day (VE-V3 maize growth stages), while for cutworm on the maize stalk base, it lasted 3-7 days after plant emergence (V1-V2 stages). In terms of damage, the ISTs lasted 15 days after emergence (V4 stage) for FAW on whorl leaves and 10 days (V3 stage) for FAW feeding on the stalk base. The larvae surviving on the seed-treated plants underwent sublethal effects in growth and development, reducing insect fitness. CONCLUSION: Diamide or carbamate + neonicotinoid seed treatments kill FAW larvae on maize whorls or stalks in favorable edaphoclimatic and insecticide-susceptibility conditions. The cumulative impacts of systemic IST on aboveground insect pests go beyond mortality. The ISTs studied can be valuable against FAW in maize, for instance, to help protect varieties that may not express sufficient insect resistance in maize early growth stages.

Insecticide seed treatment against corn leafhopper: helping protect grain yield in critical plant growth stages.

BACKGROUND: The corn leafhopper, Dalbulus maidis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), spreads maize stunt pathogens and requires timely and effective crop protection. We determined the interaction between maize phenology and the vector feeding/infection period by stunt pathogens with the residual efficacy of neonicotinoid insecticidal seed treatments. Greenhouse- and field-grown maize plants, seed-treated with clothianidin or imidacloprid insecticides, were infested during seven growth stages with corn leafhoppers reared under controlled conditions on maize plants displaying infection symptoms by both spiroplasma (corn stunt spiroplasma, Spiroplasma kunkelii) and phytoplasma (maize bushy phytoplasma) pathogens. RESULTS: In the greenhouse and field settings, seed treatment reduced the stunt disease symptoms and corn yield loss during the VE-V4 maize growth stages and caused no phytotoxicity. The neonicotinoid seed treatment reduced 20-60% of the yield losses from the corn stunt disease until the V4 growth stage. Infestation by infective corn leafhoppers in the V12 maize growth stage caused a 25-30% yield loss irrespective of seed treatment, yet no stunt disease symptom was evident. Nonetheless, corn yield losses and visual stunt symptoms as rated by a nine-category ordinal scale were strongly correlated (r = 0.79, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results reinforce that maize plants are more susceptible to leafhopper stunt disease during the VE-V4 growth stages (emergence to the fourth-leaf stage). Seed treatment helps reduce the damage in the early growth stages (VE-V2), although supplemental control measures depending on leafhopper population density may be needed from VE-V12 to protect yield losses from the maize stunt condition. © 2021 Society of Chemical Industry.

Rethinking biorational insecticides for pest management: unintended effects and consequences.

Biorational insecticides are composed of natural products, including animals, plants, microbes, and minerals, or are their derivates. The use of biorational products for the management of insect pests has grown intensively in recent years, which has increased their popularity and share on the insecticide global market. Much of these recent increases in the use of biorational insecticides has been derived from the generalized perception that conventional insecticides have undesirable ecological and human health impacts. However, the idea of simply replacing synthetic compounds with biorational insecticides without considering their potential unintended effects can mislead their use and reduce the market life of such pest management tools. A systematic literature survey encompassing over 15 000 scientific manuscripts published between 1945 and 2019 reinforces the bias of focusing on studying the targeted effects while overlooking the potential detrimental effects of biorational products on human health and the environment (e.g. death and negative sublethal effects on pollinators and beneficial arthropods such as parasitoids and predators). Thus, the risks associated with biorational compounds (e.g. control failures, the evolution of resistance, shift in dominance, and outbreaks of secondary or primary pests) need to be revisited and the outcomes of such inquiry could be decisive for their future use in pest management programs. The shortcomings of regulatory processes, knowledge gaps, and the outlook for the use of the biorational products in pest management are discussed. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry.