Spinosad resistance in the housefly, Musca domestica, is due to a recessive factor on autosome 1

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-3575(03)00011-7Get rights and content

Abstract

Spinosad is a new and highly promising insecticide with efficacy against a wide range of insects, including houseflies. Selection of the field collected houseflies produced a highly spinosad resistant (>150-fold) strain of housefly following 10 generations of selection. Spinosad resistance was a recessive trait linked to autosome 1 which could not be overcome with the insecticide synergists piperonyl butoxide, S,S,S-tributylphosphorotrithioate nor diethyl maleate. Selection for resistance to spinosad did not result in cross-resistance to other insecticides. These results suggest spinosad resistance in the housefly is due to a unique resistance mechanism.

Introduction

Houseflies are the probable carriers of more than 65 human and animal intestinal diseases [1], [2], [3], including bacterial infections such as salmonellosis, shigellosis, and cholera; protozoan infections such as amebic dysentery; helminthic infections such as pinworms, roundworms, hookworms, and tapeworms; as well as viral and rickettsial infections. Recently houseflies were shown to spread a deadly strain of Escherichia coli in Japan [4]. Flies also transmit eye diseases such as trachoma and epidemic conjunctivitis, and infect wounds or skin with diseases such as cutaneous diphtheria, mycoses, yaws, and leprosy [2]. Considering houseflies are highly mobile, come into contact with excreta, carcasses, garbage, and other filthy matter and that they are intimately associated with humans, our food and utensils, it is not surprising that abatement of fly populations is essential for controlling many serious and widespread diseases [1], [2].

Spinosad is a new and highly promising insecticide, derived from the bacteria Saccharopolyspora spinosa, with efficacy against a wide range of insects, including houseflies [5], [6]. The mechanism of action of spinosad appears to be unique, with a primary site of attack being the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor and a secondary site of attack being GABA receptors [7], [8]. This unique mechanism(s) of action suggests that resistance due to changes in the target sites of other insecticides (i.e., kdr or Rdl) would not result in cross-resistance to spinosad.

With any new insecticide there are several questions to be addressed: how rapidly could resistance develop and to what level, how many genes are involved, is the resistance gene(s) dominant or recessive and is there cross-resistance to other insecticides? To investigate these questions we selected field collected houseflies for resistance to spinosad. We also examined the linkage, inheritance of, cross-resistance patterns of and effects of synergists at overcoming the resistance.

Section snippets

Chemicals

Spinosad was from DowAgroSciences. Methomyl, DPX-MPO62, and DCJW were from DuPont. Fipronil was from Rhone Poulenc. Dimethoate and chlorphenapyr were from American Cyanamid. Nicotine, dieldrin, piperonyl butoxide (PBO), and diethyl maleate (DEM) were from Aldrich. Tetrachlorvinphos and S,S,S-tributylphosphorotrithioate (DEF) were from Chem Service (West Chester, PA) and cyfluthrin was from Bayer.

Housefly strains

Two laboratory strains were used: CS, an insecticide susceptible (wild type) strain [9]; and aabys,

Results and discussion

Selection of the field collected houseflies (Table 1) produced a highly spinosad resistant strain of housefly within just 10 generations of selection. The selections resulted in a strain >150-fold resistant to spinosad (Table 1, Table 2). The NYSPINR strain showed cross-resistance to all insecticides tested, ranging from 1.5-fold for dieldrin to 43-fold for cyfluthrin. However, since the NYSPINR strain was established from multi-resistant field collected flies [10] it is not clear if these

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Paul for technical assistance, J. Bloomquist for valuable discussion, and K. Wing for the samples of DCJW and DPX-MP062. This work was supported by DowAgroSciences, Elanco Animal Health, and Hatch project 414.

References (27)

  • V.L. Salgado

    The modes of action of spinosad and other insect control products

    Down to Earth

    (1997)
  • J.G. Scott et al.

    Adult specific expression and induction of cytochrome P450lpr in houseflies

    Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol.

    (1996)
  • P.E. Kaufman et al.

    Monitoring insecticide resistance in houseflies (Diptera: Muscidae) from New York dairies

    Pest Manag. Sci.

    (2001)
  • Cited by (145)

    • Inheritance, stability, cross-resistance, and life history parameters of a clothianidin-selected strain of house fly, Musca domestica Linnaeus

      2021, Environmental Pollution
      Citation Excerpt :

      Mota-Sanchez et al. (2006) reported low to moderate levels (10-59-fold) of cross resistance to different neonicotinoids, including clothianidin (33-fold), and a low level of resistance to spinosad (8-10-fold) in imidacloprid resistant (309-fold) Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say). A possible reason for non-significant cross resistance in this case could be a unique mechanism of resistance to different classes of insecticides (Shono and Scott, 2003). Synergists have potential to suppress resistance driven by detoxification enzymes (Ninsin and Tanaka, 2005; Shah et al., 2015b, 2018).

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text