Effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the development and reproduction of the soybean aphid Aphis glycines

Aonan Zhang; Lin Zhu; Zhenghao Shi; Tianying Liu; Lanlan Han; Kuijun Zhao

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250311

Abstract

The soybean aphid Aphis glycines Matsumura (Hemiptera: Aphididae) is a primary pest of soybeans and poses a serious threat to soybean production. Our studies were conducted to understand the effects of different concentrations of insecticides (imidacloprid and thiamethoxam) on A. glycines and provided critical information for its effective management. Here, we found that the mean generation time and adult and total pre-nymphiposition periods of the LC₅₀ imidacloprid- and thiamethoxam-treatment groups were significantly longer than those of the control group, although the adult pre-nymphiposition period in LC₃₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam treatment groups was significantly shorter than that of the control group. Additionally, the mean fecundity per female adult, net reproductive rate, intrinsic rate of increase, and finite rate of increase of the LC₃₀ imidacloprid-treatment group were significantly lower than those of the control group and higher than those of the LC₅₀ imidacloprid-treatment group (P < 0.05). Moreover, both insecticides exerted stress effects on A. glycines, and specimens treated with the two insecticides at the LC₅₀ showed a significant decrease in their growth rates relative to those treated with the insecticides at LC₃₀. These results provide a reference for exploring the effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on A. glycines population dynamics in the field and offer insight to agricultural producers on the potential of low-lethal concentrations of insecticides to stimulate insect reproduction during insecticide application.

Citation: Zhang A, Zhu L, Shi Z, Liu T, Han L, Zhao K (2021) Effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the development and reproduction of the soybean aphid Aphis glycines. PLoS ONE 16(9): e0250311. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311

Editor: Nicolas Desneux, Institut Sophia Agrobiotech, FRANCE

Received: April 2, 2021; Accepted: August 24, 2021; Published: September 16, 2021

Copyright: © 2021 Zhang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: All relevant data are within the manuscript and its Supporting Information files.

Funding: This work was supported by the Heilongjiang Science Foundation Project (grant number C2018011), Special Fund for Construction of Modern Agricultural Industry Technology System (grant number CARS-04), and Research and Development of Technology and Products on Nature Enemy Insects Prevent and Control (No: 2017YFD0201000).

Competing interests: This manuscript has not been published or presented elsewhere in part or in entirety and is not under consideration by another journal. We have read and understood your journal’s policies, and we believe that neither the manuscript nor the study violates any of these. There are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Introduction

The soybean aphid Aphis glycines Matsumura (Hemiptera: Aphididae) is native to Asia and mainly distributed in soybean-growing areas in the Far East [1]. It is a common pest of soybeans in North China, as well as in Northeast, North, South, Southwest, Inner Mongolia, and the Ningxia autonomous regions in China [2]. The soybean aphid was first detected in North America in 2000 and has rapidly spread to the north-central and northeastern United States, with recent reports of soybean aphids also in Canada [3]. As a potentially harmful agricultural pest in soybean production, the distribution area and damage scope of soybean aphids have increased annually. Although damage from A. glycines to soybeans is rarely devastating in Asia, it is considered a primary pest in North America [3,4].

Neonicotinoids exert an excellent control effect on A. glycines [5,6]. Farmers typically treat soybean seeds prophylactically with neonicotinoids, such as thiamethoxam, and later with foliar sprays, such as imidacloprid and pyrethroids, for aphid control [7,8]. By the late 1990s, neonicotinoids were introduced worldwide owing to their high efficacy against target pests, low toxicity to mammals and other non-target organisms, and wide application range [9].

Neonicotinoid concentrations have gradually decreased from their initial application level due to the interaction of plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria. As a result, some aphids are exposed to low or sublethal concentrations of neonicotinoids below the recommended concentration [10]. Different concentrations of neonicotinoids have different hormesis effects on pests [11]. Ullah et al. [12] used different concentrations of thiamethoxam to induce stress in Aphis gossypii, finding that the LC₅₀ of thiamethoxam was highly toxic to adults. Treatment of the F0 population of A. gossypii with LC₁₅ thiamethoxam affected the pre-adult stage, longevity, and fertility of the F1 population; however, no significant response was observed at LC₅, revealing that low-concentration stimulation after exposure to insecticides was the key to pest resurgence [12]. Therefore, it is important to study the hormesis effects of low concentrations of insecticides and their physiological and behavioral effects on pests [13–15], as these effects might drive habitat changes in pest populations, induce the development of resistance, and lead to secondary pest outbreaks and rapid deterioration of the ecological environment [16–19].

In this study, we used the age-stage, two-sex life table to assess the effects of insecticides on pest-population characteristics. By analyzing the survival, development, and reproduction of populations, this allows a comprehensive assessment of the effects of insecticides on the biological fitness of pests and the timing of their progeny resurgence [20–22]. Moreover, it enables improved modeling of the effects of stage-specific mortality, with a greater focus on population-stage-specific differentiation, overlap, and pre-adult mortality relative to traditional approaches [23,24]. It is important to analyze population dynamics and develop effective control programs, and this study provides a reference for the effective application of these two insecticides to control soybean aphids [24].

Materials and methods

Laboratory aphid population

The laboratory strain of A. glycines used in this study was originally collected from a soybean field in Harbin, Heilongjiang Province, China. This strain had been cultured in the laboratory for several years and never exposed to any insecticides. Dongnong 52 soybean plants were used to maintain the A. glycines strain at Northeast Agricultural University, China. Soybean plants were grown in pots (15 cm diameter × 17 cm depth), with six plants per pot, at 25 ± 1°C with 65% to 70% relative humidity and a 14-:10-h light:dark photoperiod. The laboratory aphid colony was maintained under the same environmental conditions as in the chamber used for plant germination. Twelve pots with soybean plants were placed in a large tray (70cm × 60 cm; L × W) and twice weekly, one-third of the old aphid-infested soybean plants (i.e., the four oldest pots with an aphid infestation) were removed and replaced with new aphid-free plants. Aphids were transferred by placing infested leaves on uninfested plants in order to prevent the accumulation of excessive honeydew and sooty mold and ensure the provision of a homogeneous soybean plant on which the aphids could feed [25].

Chemical agents

Water-dispersible granules of insecticides [70% imidacloprid (trade name Yashijing) and 50% thiamethoxam (trade name Aketai)] were purchased from North China Pharmaceutical Group Corporation (Hebei, China) and Shaanxi Thompson Biotechnology Co., Ltd. (Shaanxi, China), respectively. Calcium nitrate, potassium nitrate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, magnesium sulfate, disodium ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA), and streptomycin sulfate were purchased from Shanghai Alighting Biochemical Technology Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China).

Preparation of culture medium

Non-toxic, transparent plastic Petri dishes (6 cm diameter × 1.5 cm height) were used to perform the bioassay on the first instar nymphs of A. glycines for the life table study. The components of the plant-nutrient solution concentrate used to prepare the medium were as follows: calcium nitrate (4.1 g), potassium nitrate (2.5 g), potassium dihydrogen phosphate (0.7 g), magnesium sulfate (0.6 g), 1.54% disodium EDTA aqueous solution (5.0 mL), 1×10⁶ U streptomycin sulfate (0.05 g), and distilled water (5.0 L). The diluent was obtained by mixing the plant-nutrient solution concentrate with distilled water (1:3, v/v). The preliminary experiment showed that medium mixed with the diluent of plant-nutrient solution and agar had a better effect on the leaves than that of a solution of distilled water and agar only. Agar was prepared by mixing 1% (w/w) agar powder with diluent and boiling while constantly mixing. After cooling for ~10 min, the warm agar was poured into Petri dishes to a depth of at least 3 mm to 4 mm. At least a 10-mm distance was allowed between the top of the agar and the rim of the Petri dishes. A sharpened metal tube was used to cut leaf discs from clean, untreated leaves, with the diameter of the leaf discs 2-mm less than that of the Petri dishes. The leaf discs were attached to the agar medium with the top-side facing down. The metal tube was sharpened and cleaned regularly to ensure the clean cutting of the leaf discs. A. glycines on the leaf discs fed on the bottom surface, and each Petri dish was then placed upside down to maintain A. glycines in a natural feeding state. The incision was maintained to avoid excessive crushing of the tissue at the edge of the leaves while cutting in order to prevent the leaves from rapidly developing mildew.

Concentration-response bioassay

Concentration-response bioassays were conducted with the first instar A. glycines nymphs using the leaf-dip method recommended by the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (http://www.irac-online.org/resources/methods.asp). Insecticidal stock solutions were prepared in 1% acetone and further diluted to different concentrations using distilled water containing 0.05% (v/v) Triton X-100 before use in the concentration-response bioassay. According to preliminary bioassay results, we prepared seven concentrations of imidacloprid (19.95, 13.70, 9.10, 6.10, 3.47, 2.35, and 1.88 mg a.i./L) and thiamethoxam (29.95, 24.98, 14.97, 10.05, 4.94, 3.64, and 1.98 mg a.i./L). Fresh soybean-leaf discs were immersed in the insecticide solutions, with each leaf disc immersed for 10 s, removed from the solution, and placed on paper towels (abaxial surface facing up) to air dry. The control leaf disc was immersed in a solution of distilled water containing 0.05% (v/v) Triton X-100 and 1% acetone. A small drop of distilled water was placed on the surface of the agar prior to laying the leaf on the surface to help the leaf stick to the agar surface. The air-dried leaf discs were attached to the agar medium with the top-side facing down, and the first instar nymphs were then placed on the discs. Treatment details (insecticide, concentration, and date) were recorded for each Petri dish. Sixty first instar nymphs were used for the concentration-response bioassays with insecticides at each concentration, with three replicates used for each concentration and each replicate involving 20 first instar nymphs. Mortality was determined after 24 h of exposure. The first instar nymphs were considered dead if they were found upside down and not moving or if they did not move when prodded with a small paint brush [26]. The toxicity of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam to nymphs was statistically analyzed using the concentration–mortality regression line and the log-probit model of SPSS (v.23.0; IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA), and LC₅₀ and LC₃₀ values were obtained.

Life table study

Apterous adults (n = 150) were transferred onto 15 leaf discs using a small paint brush, and 10 apterous adults were placed on each leaf disc. Each Petri dish containing a leaf disc was sealed with a close-fitting, ventilated lid. The first instar nymphs were selected 24 h after emergence and placed on a leaf disc pre-impregnated with LC₃₀ and LC₅₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam or a leaf disc pre-impregnated with distilled water containing 0.05% (v/v) Triton X-100 and 1% acetone, with one first instar nymph placed on each leaf disc. Each treated individual was cultured separately as one replicate from the first instar nymph stage to death. Each treatment comprised 100 replicates. The growth, survival, and mortality of individuals were observed and recorded every 24 h. New first instar nymphs were removed after recording to avoid duplicate recording.

Life table analysis

The age-stage-specific survival rate (s_xj, x = age, j = stage), age-specific survival rate (l_x), age-stage-specific fecundity (f_xj), and age-specific fecundity (m_x) were calculated as previously described [23] and using the following equations: (1) (2) (3) where n₀₁ represents the number of first instar nymphs, and k is the number of stages. The net reproductive rate (R₀), intrinsic rate of increase (r), finite rate of increase (λ), and mean generation time (T) were calculated as previously described [27] and using the following equations: (4) (5) (6) (7)

The life expectancy (e_xj; i.e., the time that an individual of age x and stage j is expected to live) was calculated as previously described [28] as: (8) where, s′_iy is the probability that an individual of age x and stage j would survive to age i and stage y. Tuan [29] defined the reproductive value (v_xj) as the contribution of individuals of age x and stage j to the future population, with this calculated as: (9)

The bootstrap technique of TWOSEX-MSChart software [30] was used to replicate samples 100,000 times to estimate the mean value and standard error of the population parameters, mean longevity of the first to fourth instar nymphs and adults, adult and total pre-nymphiposition period, and mean fecundity per female adult. A paired bootstrap test, which is based on the percentile of differences and the 95% confidence interval of a normalized distribution of differences, was used to compare differences among treatments [30]. All curve graphs were generated using SigmaPlot (v.12.0; Systat Software, Inc., San Jose, CA, USA).

Results

Concentration-response bioassay with the first instar nymphs of A. glycines

The LC₅₀ and LC₃₀ values for imidacloprid and thiamethoxam are listed in Table 1.

Download:

Table 1. Toxic effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the first instar nymphs of A. glycines.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.t001

Life history traits

Imidacloprid and thiamethoxam affected the development time, longevity, and fecundity of A. glycines (Table 2). The development time of the first instar under LC₅₀ imidacloprid (F = 38.188, df = 144.337, P = 0.000) and thiamethoxam (F = 23.955, df = 151.319, P = 0.000) treatments was 0.53-fold and 0.28-fold higher than that of the control, respectively. Additionally, the adult pre-nymphiposition period (APNP) was 4.55- (F = 52.047, df = 122.217, P = 0.000) and 4.35-fold (F = 48.657, df = 130.359, P = 0.000) higher than that of the control, and the total pre-nymphiposition period (TPNP) was 0.43- (F = 12.446, df = 177.133, P = 0.000) and 0.27-fold (F = 6.584, df = 186.558, P = 0.000) higher than that of the control under LC₅₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam treatments, respectively. The fecundity of soybean aphids treated with LC₅₀ imidacloprid (F = 1.021, df = 198, P = 0.000) and thiamethoxam (F = 0.330, df = 198, P = 0.000) decreased by 67.33% and 62.30% relative to the control, whereas adult longevity decreased by 23.05% (F = 51.311, df = 129.068, P = 0.000) and 21.78% (F = 38.331, df = 146.438, P = 0.000) relative to that of the control, respectively. The development time of the second instar nymphs significantly increased by 19.17% when exposed to LC₅₀ imidacloprid (F = 2.169, df = 198, P = 0.000), although no significant change was observed in nymphs exposed to LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (F = 0.030, df = 198, P = 0.055) relative to the control group. However, the APNP in the LC₃₀ imidacloprid (F = 9.852, df = 182.661, P = 0.000) and thiamethoxam (F = 4.484, df = 191.829, P = 0.000) -treatment groups significantly decreased by 75% and 90% relative to the control group, respectively, whereas the fecundity decreased by 50.79% (F = 4.755, df = 188.783, P = 0.000) and 46.67% (F = 1.007, df = 198, P = 0.000) relative to the control group, respectively. The longevity of adults exposed to LC₃₀ imidacloprid (F = 13.707, df = 177.105, P = 0.212) and thiamethoxam (F = 0.057, df = 198, P = 0.000) significantly decreased by 18.78% and 15.52% relative to that of the control group, respectively. Furthermore, the TPNP of A. glycines exposed to LC₃₀ imidacloprid (F = 18.341, df = 156.090, P = 0.000) showed no significant difference relative to that of the control group, whereas those exposed to LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (F = 2.789, df = 198, P = 0.000) significantly decreased by 7.94%.

Download:

Table 2. Mean value (± SE) of life history parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.t002

Life table and fertility parameters

The R₀, r, and λ of soybean aphids under LC₅₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam treatments were significantly lower than those of aphids under LC₃₀ treatment and controls. In the LC₅₀ imidacloprid- and thiamethoxam-treatment groups, the R₀ decreased by 84.81% (F = 98.181, df = 117.620, P = 0.000) and 78.95% (F = 4.728, df = 191.503, P = 0.000), r decreased by 58.88% (F = 34.796, df = 145.910, P = 0.000) and 49.24% (F = 13.577, df = 169.040, P = 0.000), and λ decreased by 22.76% (F = 42.607, df = 137.806, P = 0.000) and 19.42% (F = 43.867, df = 136.917, P = 0.000) compared with those in the control group, respectively (P < 0.05) (Table 3). Additionally, the T in the LC₅₀ imidacloprid (F = 43.867, df = 136.917, P = 0.000) and thiamethoxam (F = 6.873, df = 181.206, P = 0.000) -treatment groups was 0.16- and 0.12-fold higher than that of the control group, respectively. By contrast, the T in the LC₃₀ thiamethoxam group (F = 0.118, df = 198, P = 0.000) significantly decreased by 5.98% relative to that in the control group (P < 0.05), whereas that in the LC₃₀ imidacloprid group (F = 0.638, df = 198, P = 0.000) showed no significant change (P > 0.05) (Table 3).

Download:

Table 3. Mean value (± SE) of fertility parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.t003

Due to the different developmental rates of individuals, the age-stage-specific survival-rate curves showed obvious overlaps (Fig 1). The age-specific survival rate shows the probability that a first instar nymph will reach age x, and the curve of the age-specific survival rate is a simplified form of the curve of the age-stage survival rate, disregarding developmental stages. After treatment with imidacloprid and thiamethoxam, the l_x curve decreased significantly (Fig 2). The highest peak of m_x in the control group appeared on day 8 (Fig 2), whereas that in the LC₃₀ imidacloprid group appeared on day 7 (1 day earlier than that in the control group). The highest peak of m_x in the LC₃₀ thiamethoxam group appeared on day 6 (2 days earlier than that in the control group). Notably, the highest peak of m_x in the LC₅₀ imidacloprid group appeared on day 10 (2 days later than that in the control group), whereas the highest peak of m_x in the LC₅₀ thiamethoxam group appeared on day 9 (1 day later than that in the control group) (Fig 2). Furthermore, the values of age-specific maternity (l_xm_x) were significantly dependent on the l_x and m_x, and the maximum l_xm_x values were 8, 8, 9, 7, and 6 days for the control, LC₅₀ imidacloprid, LC₅₀ thiamethoxam, LC₃₀ imidacloprid, and LC₃₀ thiamethoxam treatment groups, respectively. The female reproductive values in the LC₃₀ imidacloprid (F = 0.095, df = 28, P = 0.860) and thiamethoxam (F = 0.379, df = 29, P = 0.830) -treatment groups were higher than those in the LC₅₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam groups, respectively (Fig 3). The age-stage life-expectancy curve (e_xj) is shown in Fig 4. In the curve, the highest peak values of the first to fourth instar nymphs and female adults were lower in the treatment groups than in the control group.

Download:

Fig 1. Age-stage specific survival rate (s_xj) of A. glycines.

The s_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = s_xj of the first instar nymphs; L2 = s_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = s_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = s_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.g001

Download:

Fig 2. Age-specific survival rate (l_x), fecundity (m_x), and maternity (l_xm_x) of A. glycines.

The l_x, m_x, and l_xm_x of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.g002

Download:

Fig 3. Age-stage-specific reproductive values (v_xj) of A. glycines.

The v_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = v_xj of first the instar nymphs; L2 = v_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = v_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = v_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.g003

Download:

Fig 4. Life expectancy (e_xj) of A. glycines.

The e_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = e_xj of the first instar nymphs; L2 = e_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = e_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = e_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.g004

Discussion

We found that imidacloprid and thiamethoxam at LC₅₀ significantly increased the APNP and TPNP and significantly decreased the mean fecundity per female adult as compared with those of the control, whereas the LC₃₀ imidacloprid and thiamethoxam groups presented significantly shorter APNPs than the control group. This might be because different concentrations of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam exert different hormesis on soybean aphids [31]. The results showed that low-concentration insecticide stimulated growth, and high-concentration insecticide inhibited reproduction. One explanation might be that the lethal or sublethal concentrations of insecticide caused the immediate death of pests with weak resistance, whereas physiology and behavior changes occured in survivors [32,33]. These results indicated that different concentrations insecticides led to different coping strategies of soybean aphids. In the present study, both imidacloprid and thiamethoxam at LC₅₀ and LC₃₀ decreased the biological fitness of the F0 generation, which agreed with a previous study showing that clothianidin and acetamiprid at low-lethal concentrations adversely affected the biological fitness of melon aphids (A. gossypii) [34]. Another study reported that sublethal concentrations of spinetoram significantly decreased the biological fitness of the F1 generation of Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) [35]. These results suggest that sublethal concentrations of insecticides can affect the biological fitness of pest populations. In this study, we found that LC₃₀ imidacloprid and thiamthoxam significantly shortened the APNP, which might be related to the adaptation of soybean aphids to stress from low-concentration insecticides. By shortening the generation time, soybean aphids entered the reproduction period earlier and produced progeny faster, enabling the population to continue under pressure [36].

The effect on reproduction by different concentrations of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam was also reflected in the timing of the reproductive peak. The reproductive peak associated with imidacloprid and thiamethoxam treatment arrived earlier in the LC₃₀ groups and later in the LC₅₀ groups relative to that observed in the control group of soybean aphids. Additionally, we observed that LC₃₀ treatment moved the reproductive peak 1 day earlier in the imidacloprid-treatment group and 2 days earlier in thiamethoxam-treatment group relative to the control. By contrast, the peaks observed in LC₅₀ treatment groups were 2 days later (imidacloprid) and 1 day later (thiamethoxam) than that of the control. So, it had different biological and ecological effects on soybean aphids which dealed with different concentrations of the same agent or different agents of the same concentration [36]. Previous studies suggested that this might be related to differential expression of reproduction-related proteins. Ge et al. [37] found that protein content in male accessory glands of brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugen) treated with triazophos was significantly higher than that in untreated controls, and that could be transmitted to female planthoppers during mating and then further promoted reproduction. Moreover, Zhou et al. [38] found that insecticide treatment significantly increases Vg content and promotes ovarian development, leading to mass reproduction of the white-backed planthopper (Sogatella furcifera) under triazophos stress. The findings of the present study offer insight into the mechanisms associated with the effects of low-lethal concentrations of insecticides on the reproduction of soybean aphids.

In the field, soybean aphids are usually exposed to insecticides at low-lethal or sublethal concentrations [39]. Subsequent generations of soybean aphids have developed low-level resistance to insecticides through the accumulation of mutations, leading to gradual increases in the extent of their resistance and eventual resurgence of soybean aphid populations [40]. Additionally, transgenerational hormesis can also lead to pest resurgence [11,41]. A previous study demonstrated that this process could lead to a significant increase in multigenerational reproduction of Myzus persicae following prolonged exposure to sublethal concentrations of imidacloprid in a greenhouse [36]. Therefore, these findings suggested the necessity to alternate insecticides with different modes of action in order to delay the development of resistance and transgenerational hormesis.

Conclusion

The results showed that the biological fitness of soybean aphids was reduced following treatment with imidacloprid and thiamthoxam at LC₃₀ and LC₅₀. Moreover, low-concentration insecticide stress reduced the generation time and pre-reproductive periods while promoting the reproduction of progeny. These results support the view that insecticides at low-lethal or sublethal concentrations exert hormesis effects on pest populations. Furthermore, these findings demonstrated that the reproductive peak was advanced under stress associated with low-lethal concentrations of insecticides, which provided insight into the occurrence period of soybean aphids. Our future work will focus on determining the effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the physiology and behavior of soybean aphids after multiple generations of insecticide stress in an effort to provide a reference for the improved use of neonicotinoids.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Age-stage-specific survival rate (s_xj) of A. glycines.

The s_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = s_xj of the first instar nymphs; L2 = s_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = s_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = s_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s001

(XLS)

S2 Fig. Age-specific survival rate (l_x), fecundity (m_x), and maternity (l_xm_x) of A. glycines.

The l_x, m_x, and l_xm_x of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s002

(XLS)

S3 Fig. Age-stage-specific reproductive values (v_xj) of A. glycines.

The v_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = v_xj of first the instar nymphs; L2 = v_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = v_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = v_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s003

(XLS)

S4 Fig. Life expectancy (e_xj) of A. glycines.

The e_xj of A. glycines in the control (A), LC₃₀ imidacloprid (B), LC₅₀ imidacloprid (C), LC₃₀ thiamethoxam (D), and LC₅₀ thiamethoxam (E) groups. L1 = e_xj of the first instar nymphs; L2 = e_xj of the second instar nymphs; L3 = e_xj of the third instar nymphs; and L4 = e_xj of the fourth instar nymphs.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s004

(XLS)

S1 Table. Toxic effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the first instar nymphs of A. glycines.

SE = standard error.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s005

(XLS)

S2 Table. Mean value (± SE) of life history parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

Means (±SE) followed by different letters in the same row are significantly different as calculated using the paired bootstrap test at the P < 0.05 level. Leaves treated with distilled water were used as the control. SE = standard error; L1 = mean longevity of the first instar nymphs; L2 = mean longevity of the second instar nymphs; L3 = mean longevity of the third instar nymphs; L4 = mean longevity of the fourth instar nymphs; Fecundity = mean fecundity per female adult.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s006

(DOC)

S3 Table. Mean value (± SE) of fertility parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

Means (±SE) followed by different letters in the same row are significantly different as calculated using the paired bootstrap test at the P < 0.05 level. Leaves treated with distilled water were used as the control. SE = standard error.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0250311.s007

(DOC)

References

1. Hullé M, Chaubet B, Turpeau E, Simon J. Encyclop’Aphid: a website on aphids and their natural enemies. Entomol General. 2020; 40: 97–101.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
2. Wang C, Xiang N, Chang G, Zhu H. Studies on the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines matsumura. Acta Entomologica Sinica. 1962; 11: 31–44
- View Article
- Google Scholar
3. Ragsdale DW, Landis DA, Brodeur J, Heimpel GE, Desneux N. Ecology and management of the soybean aphid in North America. Annu Rev Entomol. 2011; 56: 375–399. pmid:20868277
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
4. Hopper KR, Lanier K, Rhoades JH, Hoelmer KA, Meikle WG, Heimpel GE, et al. Host specificity of Aphelinus species collected from soybean aphid in Asia. Biol Control. 2017; 115: 55–73.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
5. Krupke CH, Alford AM, Cullen EM, Hodgson EW, Knodel JJ, McCornack B, et al. Assessing the value and pest management window provided by neonicotinoid seed treatments for management of soybean aphid (Aphis glycines Matsumura) in the Upper Midwestern United States. Pest Manag Sci. 2017; 73: 2184–2193. pmid:28459234
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
6. Bora A, Takahiro S, Simona FT. Neonicotinoid insecticide design: molecular docking, multiple chemometric approaches, and toxicity relationship with Cowpea aphids. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019; 26: 14547–14561. pmid:30877540
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
7. Hurley T, Mitchell P. Value of neonicotinoid seed treatments to US soybean farmers. Pest Manag Sci. 2017; 73: 102e112. pmid:27577180
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
8. Hesler LS, Beckendorf EA. Soybean aphid infestation and crop yield in relation to cultivar, foliar insecticide, and insecticidal seed treatment in South Dakota. Phytoparasitica. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-021-00914-y.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
9. Ihara M, Matsuda K. Neonicotinoids: molecular mechanisms of action, insights into resistance and impact on pollinators. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2018; 30. pmid:30553491
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
10. Fenner K, Canonica S, Wackett LP, Elsner M. Evaluating pesticide degradation in the environment: blind spots and emerging opportunities. Science. 2013; 341: 752–758. pmid:23950532
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
11. Desneux N, Decourtye A, Delpuech JM. The sublethal effects of pesticides on beneficial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol. 2007; 52: 81–106. pmid:16842032
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
12. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Thiamethoxam induces transgenerational hormesis effects and alteration of genes expression in Aphis gossypii. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2020; 165: 104557. pmid:32359559
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
13. Ullah F, Gul H, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Imidacloprid-induced hormesis effects on demographic traits of the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Entomol General. 2019; 39: 325–337.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
14. Cui L, Yuan H, Wang Q, Wang Q, Rui C. Sublethal effects of the novel cisnitromethylene neonicotinoid cycloxaprid on the cotton aphid Aphis gossypii glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 8915. pmid:29891984
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
15. Somar RO, Zamani AA, Alizadeh M. Joint action toxicity of imidacloprid and pymetrozine on the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Crop Prot. 2019; 124: 104850.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
16. Guedes R, Smagghe G, Stark J, Desneux N. Pesticide-induced stress in arthropod pests for optimized integrated pest management programs. Annu Rev Entomol. 2016; 61: 43–62. pmid:26473315
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
17. Liang HY, Yang XM, Sun LJ, Zhao CD, Chi H, Zheng CY. Sublethal effect of spirotetramat on the life table and population growth of Frankliniella occidentalis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Entomol Gen. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1127/entomologia/2020/0902.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
18. Qu Y, Ullah F, Luo C, Monticelli LS, Lavoir AV, Gao X, et al. Sublethal effects of beta-cypermethrin modulate interspecific interactions between the specialist and generalist aphid species of soybean crops. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020; 206.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
19. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Functional analysis of cytochrome P450 genes linked with acetamiprid resistance in melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2020; 175: 104687. pmid:32980055
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
20. Zheng XM, Chi H, Chu D. A simplified recording method for insect life table studies: a case study based on Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) data. Acta Entomol Sin. 2016; 59: 663–668.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
21. Liang PZ, Ma KS, Chen XW, Tang CY, Xia J, Chi H, et al. Toxicity and sublethal effects of flupyradifurone, a novel butenolide insecticide, on the development and fecundity of Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2018; 112: 852–858. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toy381.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
22. Zhang Y, Guo L, Atlihan R, Chi H, Chu D. Demographic analysis of progeny fitness and timing of resurgence of Laodelphax striatellus after insecticides exposure. Entomol Gen. 2019; 39: 221–230.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
23. Chi H, Liu H. Two new methods for the study of insect population ecology. B I Zool Acad. 1985; 24: 225–240.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
24. Chi H, You M, Atlıhan R, Smith CL, Kavousi A, Özgökçe MS, et al. Age- Stage, two-sex life table: an introduction to theory, data analysis, and application. Entomologia Generalis. 2020; 40: 102–123.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
25. Menger J, Beauzay P, Chirumamilla A, Dierks C, Gavloski J, Glogoza P, et al. Implementation of a diagnostic-concentration bioassay for detection of susceptibility to pyrethroids in soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2020; 113: 932–939. pmid:31961438
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
26. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Acetamiprid resistance and fitness costs of melon aphid, Aphis gossypii: An age-stage, two-sex life table study. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2020; 104729. pmid:33357551
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
27. Goodman D. Optimal life histories, optimal notation, and the value of reproductive value. Am Nat. 1982; 119: 803–823.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
28. Chi H, Su HY. Age-stage, two-sex life tables of Aphidius gifuensis (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and its host Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Homoptera: Aphididae) with mathematical proof of the relationship between female fecundity and the net reproductive rate. Environ Entomol. 2006; 35: 10–21.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
29. Tuan SJ, Li NJ, Yeh CC, Tang LC, Chi H. Effects of green manure cover crops on Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) populations. J Econ Entomol. 2014; 107: 897–905. pmid:25026645
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
30. Chi H. TWOSEX-MSChart: a computer program for age stage, two-sex life table analysis. National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan; 2020. Available from http://140.120.197.173/ Ecology/Download/TWOSEX-MSChart.rar.
31. Qu Y, Xiao D, Li J, Chen Z, Biondi A, Desneux N, et al. Sublethal and hormesis effects of imidacloprid on the soybean aphid Aphis glycines. Ecotoxicology. 2014; 24: 479–487. pmid:25492586
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
32. Khan HAA. Pyriproxyfen induces lethal and sublethal effects on biological traits and demographic growth parameters in musca domestica. Ecotoxicology. 2021; 30: 610–621. pmid:33761024
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
33. Sial MU, Zhao Z, Zhang L, Zhang Y, Mao L, Jiang H. Evaluation of insecticides induced hormesis on the demographic parameters of Myzus persicae and expression changes of metabolic resistance detoxification genes. Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 1–8. pmid:29311619
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
34. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Acetamiprid resistance and fitness costs of melon aphid, Aphis gossypii: An age-stage, two-sex life table study. Pestic Biochem Phys. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2020.104729.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
35. Tamilselvan R, Kennedy JS, Suganthi A. Sublethal and transgenerational effects of spinetoram on the biological traits of Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Ecotoxicology. 2021; 30: 667–677. pmid:33779935
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
36. Rix RR, Ayyanath MM, Cutler GC. Sublethal concentrations of imidacloprid increase reproduction, alter expression of detoxification genes, and prime Myzus persicae for subsequent stress. J Pest Sci. 2016; 89: 581–589.
- View Article
- Google Scholar
37. Ge LQ, Xia T, Huang B, Song QS, Zhang HW, Stanley D, et al. Suppressing male spermatogenesis-associated protein 5-like gene expression reduces vitellogenin gene expression and fecundity in Nilaparvata lugens Stål. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 28111. pmid:27305948
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
38. Zhou C, Yang X, Yang H, Long G, Jin D, Bendena B. Effects of sublethal concentrations of insecticides on the fecundity of Sogatella furcifera (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) via the regulation of vitellogenin and its receptor. J Insect Sci. 2020; 20: 14. pmid:33009912
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
39. Deng D, Duan W, Wang H, Zhang K, Guo J, Yuan L, et al. Assessment of the effects of lethal and sublethal exposure to dinotefuran on the wheat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi (Linnaeus). Ecotoxicology. 2019; 28: 825–833. pmid:31325006
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
40. Guedes RNC, Walse SS, Throne JE. Sublethal exposure, insecticide resistance, and community stress. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2017; 21:47–53. pmid:28822488
- View Article
- PubMed/NCBI
- Google Scholar
41. Tuelher ES, da Silva ÉH, Freitas HL, Namorato FA, Serrão JE, Guedes RNC, et al. Chlorantraniliprole-mediated toxicity and changes in sexual fitness of the neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros. J Pest Sci. 2017; 90: 397–405.
- View Article
- Google Scholar

[ref1] 1. Hullé M, Chaubet B, Turpeau E, Simon J. Encyclop’Aphid: a website on aphids and their natural enemies. Entomol General. 2020; 40: 97–101.
View Article
Google Scholar

[2] View Article

[3] Google Scholar

[ref2] 2. Wang C, Xiang N, Chang G, Zhu H. Studies on the soybean aphid, Aphis glycines matsumura. Acta Entomologica Sinica. 1962; 11: 31–44
View Article
Google Scholar

[5] View Article

[6] Google Scholar

[ref3] 3. Ragsdale DW, Landis DA, Brodeur J, Heimpel GE, Desneux N. Ecology and management of the soybean aphid in North America. Annu Rev Entomol. 2011; 56: 375–399. pmid:20868277
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[8] View Article

[9] PubMed/NCBI

[10] Google Scholar

[ref4] 4. Hopper KR, Lanier K, Rhoades JH, Hoelmer KA, Meikle WG, Heimpel GE, et al. Host specificity of Aphelinus species collected from soybean aphid in Asia. Biol Control. 2017; 115: 55–73.
View Article
Google Scholar

[12] View Article

[13] Google Scholar

[ref5] 5. Krupke CH, Alford AM, Cullen EM, Hodgson EW, Knodel JJ, McCornack B, et al. Assessing the value and pest management window provided by neonicotinoid seed treatments for management of soybean aphid (Aphis glycines Matsumura) in the Upper Midwestern United States. Pest Manag Sci. 2017; 73: 2184–2193. pmid:28459234
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[15] View Article

[16] PubMed/NCBI

[17] Google Scholar

[ref6] 6. Bora A, Takahiro S, Simona FT. Neonicotinoid insecticide design: molecular docking, multiple chemometric approaches, and toxicity relationship with Cowpea aphids. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019; 26: 14547–14561. pmid:30877540
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[19] View Article

[20] PubMed/NCBI

[21] Google Scholar

[ref7] 7. Hurley T, Mitchell P. Value of neonicotinoid seed treatments to US soybean farmers. Pest Manag Sci. 2017; 73: 102e112. pmid:27577180
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[23] View Article

[24] PubMed/NCBI

[25] Google Scholar

[ref8] 8. Hesler LS, Beckendorf EA. Soybean aphid infestation and crop yield in relation to cultivar, foliar insecticide, and insecticidal seed treatment in South Dakota. Phytoparasitica. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12600-021-00914-y.
View Article
Google Scholar

[27] View Article

[28] Google Scholar

[ref9] 9. Ihara M, Matsuda K. Neonicotinoids: molecular mechanisms of action, insights into resistance and impact on pollinators. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2018; 30. pmid:30553491
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[30] View Article

[31] PubMed/NCBI

[32] Google Scholar

[ref10] 10. Fenner K, Canonica S, Wackett LP, Elsner M. Evaluating pesticide degradation in the environment: blind spots and emerging opportunities. Science. 2013; 341: 752–758. pmid:23950532
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[34] View Article

[35] PubMed/NCBI

[36] Google Scholar

[ref11] 11. Desneux N, Decourtye A, Delpuech JM. The sublethal effects of pesticides on beneficial arthropods. Annu Rev Entomol. 2007; 52: 81–106. pmid:16842032
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[38] View Article

[39] PubMed/NCBI

[40] Google Scholar

[ref12] 12. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Thiamethoxam induces transgenerational hormesis effects and alteration of genes expression in Aphis gossypii. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2020; 165: 104557. pmid:32359559
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[42] View Article

[43] PubMed/NCBI

[44] Google Scholar

[ref13] 13. Ullah F, Gul H, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Imidacloprid-induced hormesis effects on demographic traits of the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Entomol General. 2019; 39: 325–337.
View Article
Google Scholar

[46] View Article

[47] Google Scholar

[ref14] 14. Cui L, Yuan H, Wang Q, Wang Q, Rui C. Sublethal effects of the novel cisnitromethylene neonicotinoid cycloxaprid on the cotton aphid Aphis gossypii glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 8915. pmid:29891984
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[49] View Article

[50] PubMed/NCBI

[51] Google Scholar

[ref15] 15. Somar RO, Zamani AA, Alizadeh M. Joint action toxicity of imidacloprid and pymetrozine on the melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Crop Prot. 2019; 124: 104850.
View Article
Google Scholar

[53] View Article

[54] Google Scholar

[ref16] 16. Guedes R, Smagghe G, Stark J, Desneux N. Pesticide-induced stress in arthropod pests for optimized integrated pest management programs. Annu Rev Entomol. 2016; 61: 43–62. pmid:26473315
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[56] View Article

[57] PubMed/NCBI

[58] Google Scholar

[ref17] 17. Liang HY, Yang XM, Sun LJ, Zhao CD, Chi H, Zheng CY. Sublethal effect of spirotetramat on the life table and population growth of Frankliniella occidentalis (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Entomol Gen. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1127/entomologia/2020/0902.
View Article
Google Scholar

[60] View Article

[61] Google Scholar

[ref18] 18. Qu Y, Ullah F, Luo C, Monticelli LS, Lavoir AV, Gao X, et al. Sublethal effects of beta-cypermethrin modulate interspecific interactions between the specialist and generalist aphid species of soybean crops. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020; 206.
View Article
Google Scholar

[63] View Article

[64] Google Scholar

[ref19] 19. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Functional analysis of cytochrome P450 genes linked with acetamiprid resistance in melon aphid, Aphis gossypii. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2020; 175: 104687. pmid:32980055
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[66] View Article

[67] PubMed/NCBI

[68] Google Scholar

[ref20] 20. Zheng XM, Chi H, Chu D. A simplified recording method for insect life table studies: a case study based on Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) data. Acta Entomol Sin. 2016; 59: 663–668.
View Article
Google Scholar

[70] View Article

[71] Google Scholar

[ref21] 21. Liang PZ, Ma KS, Chen XW, Tang CY, Xia J, Chi H, et al. Toxicity and sublethal effects of flupyradifurone, a novel butenolide insecticide, on the development and fecundity of Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2018; 112: 852–858. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toy381.
View Article
Google Scholar

[73] View Article

[74] Google Scholar

[ref22] 22. Zhang Y, Guo L, Atlihan R, Chi H, Chu D. Demographic analysis of progeny fitness and timing of resurgence of Laodelphax striatellus after insecticides exposure. Entomol Gen. 2019; 39: 221–230.
View Article
Google Scholar

[76] View Article

[77] Google Scholar

[ref23] 23. Chi H, Liu H. Two new methods for the study of insect population ecology. B I Zool Acad. 1985; 24: 225–240.
View Article
Google Scholar

[79] View Article

[80] Google Scholar

[ref24] 24. Chi H, You M, Atlıhan R, Smith CL, Kavousi A, Özgökçe MS, et al. Age- Stage, two-sex life table: an introduction to theory, data analysis, and application. Entomologia Generalis. 2020; 40: 102–123.
View Article
Google Scholar

[82] View Article

[83] Google Scholar

[ref25] 25. Menger J, Beauzay P, Chirumamilla A, Dierks C, Gavloski J, Glogoza P, et al. Implementation of a diagnostic-concentration bioassay for detection of susceptibility to pyrethroids in soybean aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Econ Entomol. 2020; 113: 932–939. pmid:31961438
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[85] View Article

[86] PubMed/NCBI

[87] Google Scholar

[ref26] 26. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Acetamiprid resistance and fitness costs of melon aphid, Aphis gossypii: An age-stage, two-sex life table study. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2020; 104729. pmid:33357551
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[89] View Article

[90] PubMed/NCBI

[91] Google Scholar

[ref27] 27. Goodman D. Optimal life histories, optimal notation, and the value of reproductive value. Am Nat. 1982; 119: 803–823.
View Article
Google Scholar

[93] View Article

[94] Google Scholar

[ref28] 28. Chi H, Su HY. Age-stage, two-sex life tables of Aphidius gifuensis (Ashmead) (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) and its host Myzus persicae (Sulzer) (Homoptera: Aphididae) with mathematical proof of the relationship between female fecundity and the net reproductive rate. Environ Entomol. 2006; 35: 10–21.
View Article
Google Scholar

[96] View Article

[97] Google Scholar

[ref29] 29. Tuan SJ, Li NJ, Yeh CC, Tang LC, Chi H. Effects of green manure cover crops on Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) populations. J Econ Entomol. 2014; 107: 897–905. pmid:25026645
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[99] View Article

[100] PubMed/NCBI

[101] Google Scholar

[ref30] 30. Chi H. TWOSEX-MSChart: a computer program for age stage, two-sex life table analysis. National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan; 2020. Available from http://140.120.197.173/ Ecology/Download/TWOSEX-MSChart.rar.

[ref31] 31. Qu Y, Xiao D, Li J, Chen Z, Biondi A, Desneux N, et al. Sublethal and hormesis effects of imidacloprid on the soybean aphid Aphis glycines. Ecotoxicology. 2014; 24: 479–487. pmid:25492586
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[104] View Article

[105] PubMed/NCBI

[106] Google Scholar

[ref32] 32. Khan HAA. Pyriproxyfen induces lethal and sublethal effects on biological traits and demographic growth parameters in musca domestica. Ecotoxicology. 2021; 30: 610–621. pmid:33761024
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[108] View Article

[109] PubMed/NCBI

[110] Google Scholar

[ref33] 33. Sial MU, Zhao Z, Zhang L, Zhang Y, Mao L, Jiang H. Evaluation of insecticides induced hormesis on the demographic parameters of Myzus persicae and expression changes of metabolic resistance detoxification genes. Sci Rep. 2018; 8: 1–8. pmid:29311619
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[112] View Article

[113] PubMed/NCBI

[114] Google Scholar

[ref34] 34. Ullah F, Gul H, Tariq K, Desneux N, Gao X, Song D. Acetamiprid resistance and fitness costs of melon aphid, Aphis gossypii: An age-stage, two-sex life table study. Pestic Biochem Phys. 2019; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2020.104729.
View Article
Google Scholar

[116] View Article

[117] Google Scholar

[ref35] 35. Tamilselvan R, Kennedy JS, Suganthi A. Sublethal and transgenerational effects of spinetoram on the biological traits of Plutella xylostella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). Ecotoxicology. 2021; 30: 667–677. pmid:33779935
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[119] View Article

[120] PubMed/NCBI

[121] Google Scholar

[ref36] 36. Rix RR, Ayyanath MM, Cutler GC. Sublethal concentrations of imidacloprid increase reproduction, alter expression of detoxification genes, and prime Myzus persicae for subsequent stress. J Pest Sci. 2016; 89: 581–589.
View Article
Google Scholar

[123] View Article

[124] Google Scholar

[ref37] 37. Ge LQ, Xia T, Huang B, Song QS, Zhang HW, Stanley D, et al. Suppressing male spermatogenesis-associated protein 5-like gene expression reduces vitellogenin gene expression and fecundity in Nilaparvata lugens Stål. Sci Rep. 2016; 6: 28111. pmid:27305948
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[126] View Article

[127] PubMed/NCBI

[128] Google Scholar

[ref38] 38. Zhou C, Yang X, Yang H, Long G, Jin D, Bendena B. Effects of sublethal concentrations of insecticides on the fecundity of Sogatella furcifera (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) via the regulation of vitellogenin and its receptor. J Insect Sci. 2020; 20: 14. pmid:33009912
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[130] View Article

[131] PubMed/NCBI

[132] Google Scholar

[ref39] 39. Deng D, Duan W, Wang H, Zhang K, Guo J, Yuan L, et al. Assessment of the effects of lethal and sublethal exposure to dinotefuran on the wheat aphid Rhopalosiphum padi (Linnaeus). Ecotoxicology. 2019; 28: 825–833. pmid:31325006
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[134] View Article

[135] PubMed/NCBI

[136] Google Scholar

[ref40] 40. Guedes RNC, Walse SS, Throne JE. Sublethal exposure, insecticide resistance, and community stress. Curr Opin Insect Sci. 2017; 21:47–53. pmid:28822488
View Article
PubMed/NCBI
Google Scholar

[138] View Article

[139] PubMed/NCBI

[140] Google Scholar

[ref41] 41. Tuelher ES, da Silva ÉH, Freitas HL, Namorato FA, Serrão JE, Guedes RNC, et al. Chlorantraniliprole-mediated toxicity and changes in sexual fitness of the neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros. J Pest Sci. 2017; 90: 397–405.
View Article
Google Scholar

[142] View Article

[143] Google Scholar

Figures

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Laboratory aphid population

Chemical agents

Preparation of culture medium

Concentration-response bioassay

Life table study

Life table analysis

Results

Concentration-response bioassay with the first instar nymphs of A. glycines

Life history traits

Life table and fertility parameters

Discussion

Conclusion

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Age-stage-specific survival rate (sxj) of A. glycines.

S2 Fig. Age-specific survival rate (lx), fecundity (mx), and maternity (lxmx) of A. glycines.

S3 Fig. Age-stage-specific reproductive values (vxj) of A. glycines.

S4 Fig. Life expectancy (exj) of A. glycines.

S1 Table. Toxic effects of imidacloprid and thiamethoxam on the first instar nymphs of A. glycines.

S2 Table. Mean value (± SE) of life history parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

S3 Table. Mean value (± SE) of fertility parameters of A. glycines exposed to imidacloprid and thiamethoxam.

References

S1 Fig. Age-stage-specific survival rate (s_xj) of A. glycines.

S2 Fig. Age-specific survival rate (l_x), fecundity (m_x), and maternity (l_xm_x) of A. glycines.

S3 Fig. Age-stage-specific reproductive values (v_xj) of A. glycines.

S4 Fig. Life expectancy (e_xj) of A. glycines.