实验条件下spinosad对大黄蜂的急性和慢性影响

G. Abdu-Allah, V. Mommaerts, G. Smagghe
{"title":"实验条件下spinosad对大黄蜂的急性和慢性影响","authors":"G. Abdu-Allah, V. Mommaerts, G. Smagghe","doi":"10.21608/JPPP.2011.86515","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under laboratory conditions, the acute toxicity of spinosad on adult workers of bumble bee Bombus terrestris L.was investigated through 96 hrs post-treatment by using three different exposure methods; orally, wet and dry contact. The results indicated that within 24 hrs, the 1/1 and 1/10 of maximum field recommended concentration (MFRC) of spinosad caused 100 % and 12-65 % mortality, respectively the three methods. While, the mortality in the control insects did not exceed 5 %. The highest LC50 value was detected in dry contact method at 6 hrs, the LC50=1046.15 ppm (2.62 MFRC). However, the lowest one in oral method was detected after 96 hrs, the LC50 values was 5.03 ppm (0.01 MFRC). At concentration 0.01 MFRC with dry contact,LT50 was 73 days but in the oral method had 14 days. The chronic effects of 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10000 of MFRC using the same three exposure methods were evaluated. The 1/100 of MFRC in oral method caused significant mortality in worker through 8 weeks. Moreover, reduction in survival of workers, drones produced, male delay emergency, and numbers of dead larvae. However, no significant differences were found between the control and the other treatment 1/1000 and 1/10000 MFRC using oral assay. In dry contact method, the concentrations from 1/1000 to 1/10 of MFRC spinosad had no negative effects. In wet contact method the concentrations 1/100 and 1/1000 had no negative effect, but the concentration 1/10 caused decreasing survival workers. Our results suggested that spinosad was highly toxic in wet contact method, although more safe in dry contact method to bumble bees under worse case laboratory condition with MFRC.","PeriodicalId":16965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Plant Protection","volume":"137 1","pages":"677-690"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Acute and chronic effects of spinosad on bumble bees, Bombus terrestris L. under laboratory conditions\",\"authors\":\"G. Abdu-Allah, V. Mommaerts, G. Smagghe\",\"doi\":\"10.21608/JPPP.2011.86515\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Under laboratory conditions, the acute toxicity of spinosad on adult workers of bumble bee Bombus terrestris L.was investigated through 96 hrs post-treatment by using three different exposure methods; orally, wet and dry contact. The results indicated that within 24 hrs, the 1/1 and 1/10 of maximum field recommended concentration (MFRC) of spinosad caused 100 % and 12-65 % mortality, respectively the three methods. While, the mortality in the control insects did not exceed 5 %. The highest LC50 value was detected in dry contact method at 6 hrs, the LC50=1046.15 ppm (2.62 MFRC). However, the lowest one in oral method was detected after 96 hrs, the LC50 values was 5.03 ppm (0.01 MFRC). At concentration 0.01 MFRC with dry contact,LT50 was 73 days but in the oral method had 14 days. The chronic effects of 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10000 of MFRC using the same three exposure methods were evaluated. The 1/100 of MFRC in oral method caused significant mortality in worker through 8 weeks. Moreover, reduction in survival of workers, drones produced, male delay emergency, and numbers of dead larvae. However, no significant differences were found between the control and the other treatment 1/1000 and 1/10000 MFRC using oral assay. In dry contact method, the concentrations from 1/1000 to 1/10 of MFRC spinosad had no negative effects. In wet contact method the concentrations 1/100 and 1/1000 had no negative effect, but the concentration 1/10 caused decreasing survival workers. Our results suggested that spinosad was highly toxic in wet contact method, although more safe in dry contact method to bumble bees under worse case laboratory condition with MFRC.\",\"PeriodicalId\":16965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Plant Protection\",\"volume\":\"137 1\",\"pages\":\"677-690\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Plant Protection\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1091\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21608/JPPP.2011.86515\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Plant Protection","FirstCategoryId":"1091","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21608/JPPP.2011.86515","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在实验室条件下,通过三种不同的暴露方式,研究了spinosad对大黄蜂(Bombus terrestris l .)成虫处理96 h后的急性毒性;口服,湿接触和干接触。结果表明,3种处理方法在24 h内,以1/1和1/10最大田间推荐浓度(MFRC)处理的死亡率分别为100%和12 ~ 65%。而对照虫的死亡率不超过5%。干接触法检测到的LC50值最高,为1046.15 ppm (2.62 MFRC)。而口服法的LC50值在96 h后最低,为5.03 ppm (0.01 MFRC)。干接触浓度为0.01 MFRC时,LT50为73 d,口服法为14 d。采用相同的三种暴露方式,分别对1/100、1/1000、1/10000 MFRC的慢性效应进行了评价。口服法MFRC的1/100在8周内造成了显著的死亡率。此外,工蜂成活率降低,雄蜂产生,雄蜂延迟紧急情况,幼虫死亡数量减少。然而,口服检测的1/1000和1/10000 MFRC治疗组与对照组之间没有显著差异。干接触法中,1/1000 ~ 1/10的MFRC spinosad浓度对其无不良影响。在湿接触法中,浓度为1/100和1/1000对存活工人没有负面影响,但浓度为1/10会导致存活工人减少。结果表明,在MFRC环境下,湿接触法对大黄蜂具有高毒性,而干接触法对大黄蜂更安全。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Acute and chronic effects of spinosad on bumble bees, Bombus terrestris L. under laboratory conditions
Under laboratory conditions, the acute toxicity of spinosad on adult workers of bumble bee Bombus terrestris L.was investigated through 96 hrs post-treatment by using three different exposure methods; orally, wet and dry contact. The results indicated that within 24 hrs, the 1/1 and 1/10 of maximum field recommended concentration (MFRC) of spinosad caused 100 % and 12-65 % mortality, respectively the three methods. While, the mortality in the control insects did not exceed 5 %. The highest LC50 value was detected in dry contact method at 6 hrs, the LC50=1046.15 ppm (2.62 MFRC). However, the lowest one in oral method was detected after 96 hrs, the LC50 values was 5.03 ppm (0.01 MFRC). At concentration 0.01 MFRC with dry contact,LT50 was 73 days but in the oral method had 14 days. The chronic effects of 1/100, 1/1000, 1/10000 of MFRC using the same three exposure methods were evaluated. The 1/100 of MFRC in oral method caused significant mortality in worker through 8 weeks. Moreover, reduction in survival of workers, drones produced, male delay emergency, and numbers of dead larvae. However, no significant differences were found between the control and the other treatment 1/1000 and 1/10000 MFRC using oral assay. In dry contact method, the concentrations from 1/1000 to 1/10 of MFRC spinosad had no negative effects. In wet contact method the concentrations 1/100 and 1/1000 had no negative effect, but the concentration 1/10 caused decreasing survival workers. Our results suggested that spinosad was highly toxic in wet contact method, although more safe in dry contact method to bumble bees under worse case laboratory condition with MFRC.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
بررسی عوامل باکتریایی دخیل در ایجاد عارضه لکه برگی کیوی در ایران ارزیابی مزرعهای مقاومت تدریجی (Slow rusting) نسبت به بیماری زنگ زرد در برخی از ارقام گندم دیم مقایسه نانوفرمولاسیون با فرمولاسیون متداول هگزی تیازوکس و دیافنتیوران در کنترل کنه تارتن دولکهای Tetranychus urticae Koch تأثیر پارامترهای هواشناسی بر سن گندم (Eurygaster integriceps Put.) در منطقه خرمدره زنجان بهبود تعلیقپذیری، ماندگاری و زهرآگینی فرآوردههای تجاری باکتری Bacillus thuringiensis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1