Next Article in Journal
Seasonal Assessment of Supercooling Points for Two Introduced and One Native Laricobius spp. (Coleoptera: Derodontidae), Predators of Adelgidae
Previous Article in Journal
The Waggle Dance as an Intended Flight: A Cognitive Perspective
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 10
Issue 12
10.3390/insects10120425
insects-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Compatibility and Efficacy of the Parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the Entomopathogenic Fungus Cordyceps javanica for Biological Control of Whitefly Bemisia tabaci

by
Da Ou
1,
Li-Mei Ren
2,
Yuan -Liu
1,3,
Shaukat Ali
1,3,4,
Xing-Min Wang
1,3,4,
Muhammad Z. Ahmed
5 and
Bao-Li Qiu
1,3,4,6,*
1
Key Laboratory of Bio-Pesticide Innovation and Application, Guangdong province, Guangzhou 510640, China
2
School of Resources and Environment Sciences, Baoshan University, Baoshan 678000, China
3
Engineering Research Center of Biological Control, Ministry of Education, Guangzhou 510640, China
4
Department of Entomology, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510640, China
5
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry, 1911 SW 34th Street, Gainesville, FL 32614-7100, USA
6
Guangdong Laboratory of Lingnan Modern Agriculture, Guangzhou 510640, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2019, 10(12), 425; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10120425
Submission received: 11 October 2019 / Revised: 22 November 2019 / Accepted: 22 November 2019 / Published: 25 November 2019
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Biological control is an effective method for whitefly management compared to the potential problems caused by chemical control, including environmental pollution and the development of resistance. Combined use of insect parasitoids and entomopathogenic fungi has shown high efficiency in Bemisia tabaci control. Here, we assessed the impacts of an entomopathogenic fungus, Cordyceps javanica, on the parasitism rate of a dominant whitefly parasitoid, Eretmocerus hayati, and for the first time also compared their separate and combined potential in the suppression of B. tabaci under semi-field conditions. Six conidial concentrations of C. javanica (1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105, 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 conidia/mL) were used to assess its pathogenicity to the pupae and adults of E. hayati. Results showed that the mortality of E. hayati increased with higher concentrations of C. javanica, but these higher concentrations of fungus had low pathogenicity to both the E. hayati pupae (2.00–28.00% mortality) and adults (2.67–34.00% mortality) relative to their pathogenicity to B. tabaci nymphs (33.33–92.68%). Bioassay results indicated that C. javanica was harmless (LC50 = 3.91 × 1010) and slightly harmful (LC50 = 5.56 × 109) to the pupae and adults of E. hayati respectively on the basis of IOBC criteria, and that E. hayati could parasitize all nymphal instars of B. tabaci that were pretreated with C. javanica, with its rate of parasitism being highest on second-instar nymphs (62.03%). Interestingly, the parasitoids from second and third-instar B. tabaci nymphs infected with C. javanica had progeny with increased longevity and developmental periods. Moreover, experimental data from 15 day semi-field studies indicate that combined application of C. javanica and E. hayati suppresses B. tabaci with higher efficiency than individual applications of both agents. Therefore, combined applications of C. javanica (1 × 108 conidia/mL) and E. hayati is a more effective and compatible biological control strategy for management of B. tabaci than using either of them individually.

1. Introduction

The whitefly Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) is one of the most destructive insect pests of vegetables, ornamental plants and field crops worldwide [1]. Significant economic damage has been caused annually by this pest through its direct feeding damage to host plants, and indirectly by causing physiological disorders through honeydew secretion, leading to sooty mold accumulation on host plants. However, the most serious damage of this pest is that it can vector more than 110 species of plant viruses [1,2,3].
The silverleaf whitefly B. tabaci (also known as Middle East-Asia Minor 1 (MEAM1), formerly known as B biotype) initially invaded south China in the mid-1990s and successfully established its population due to its ability to reproduce quickly, develop resistance against commonly used chemicals and by having a wide host range [4]. The overuse of pesticides has increased selection pressure and expedited the development of resistance to multiple classes of chemical insecticides in different regions of the world [5,6,7,8]. Biological control methods are thus becoming a necessity for the control of B. tabaci to avoid the undesirable side effects of chemical control in the form of residues on crops, continuing chemical resistance development and pest resurgence [9,10,11,12,13,14].
Aphelinid parasitoids, such as the solitary Eretmocerus hayati (Rose and Zolnerowich) are some of the most important natural enemies of B. tabaci. Similar to other Eretmocerus parasitoids, E. hayati oviposits externally between the whitefly abdomen and the leaf surface of host plants [15]. After eclosion, the first instar penetrates the abdomen of the host whitefly nymph and develops internally [16]. It also feeds on the host haemolymph to obtain nutrients for living and egg development [17,18]. Eretmocerus hayati has shown high potential to be used as a biocontrol agent against B. tabaci. The original population of E. hayati was introduced into the USA from Pakistan in the 1980s and then brought to China by an Entomologist within the Chinese Academy of Sciences in 2008. In the following 10 years, its local populations increased and spread widely [9,18,19,20]. In the biological control of whitefly, Asad [21] suggested that when the average host densities of B. tabaci were about 10 nymphs/leaf in order to enhance whitefly suppression, alternative strategies may be required, for example, continuous low number release of parasitoids by banker plants to retain the parasitoids by non-host food, and that the release of E. hayati at 1:10 ratio (parasitoid/host) for three consecutive weeks could achieve efficient suppression of B. tabaci. Kuang et al. [22] demonstrated the potential for introducing E. hayati to control populations of B. tabaci on different host plants. At 26℃, the developmental period of E. hayati was 15.7, 16.1 and 15.2 d on B. tabaci infesting tomato, cucumber and collard plants, respectively; survivorship was 74.6%, 72.1% and 78.7%; longevity of a female adult was 7.4, 7.6 and 8.1 d; and the total numbers of eggs produced per female were 67.2, 62.3 and 74.7, respectively.
Entomopathogenic fungi have also been demonstrated to infect various types of insects [23,24,25,26,27] including B. tabaci [28,29,30]. Among the entomopathogenic fungi, Cordyceps javanica (Friederichs and Bally) (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae), formerly Isaria javanica (Friederichs and Bally) [31], is a widely used biological control agent of arthropod pests on vegetables, fruits, and ornamental plants [32,33,34,35], and several studies have demonstrated that B. tabaci is highly susceptible to this fungus [36,37]. For example, Xie et al. [38] reported that B. tabaci was susceptible to C. javanica by causing ≥90% mortality after 6 days by single-phase solid state fermentation on barley at 25 °C with 1 × 108 conidia/g of initial substrate concentrations.
Using a single biological product to suppress the population of whitefly may be difficult in practice. To this end, some previous studies have investigated the compatibility of entomopathogenic fungi and parasitoids and have evaluated the interactions between these two types of natural enemies as a potential biological control strategy for managing different types of insects, including coccids, aphids and whiteflies [39,40,41,42,43]. In order to improve the effectiveness of biological control of whitefly pests, it is imperative to know if a combination of two different biocontrol agents, such as an entomopathogenic fungus and an insect parasitoid, is more effective than their individual applications. This strategy may provide growers and landscape managers with an alternative option for whitefly management in agricultural ecosystems [42].
The objective of the current study was to evaluate the compatibility and efficacy of E. hayati and C. javanica in suppressing infestations of B. tabaci. The pathogenicity of C. javanica to the pupae and adults of E. hayati was analyzed through bioassays. Then E. hayati and C. javanica were released/applied simultaneously to observe their effect on B. tabaci populations under semi-field conditions.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Plants and Insects for Testing

Cotton plants (Gossypium hirsutum (Lumian 32)) at the 6–8 expanded leaf stage were cultured in plastic pots (15 cm diameter) containing a soil and sand mixture (10% sand, 5% clay and 85% peat) in a glasshouse at ambient temperature and photoperiod as described by Li et al. [44]. All experimental replications were performed on two symmetrical, fully expanded leaves with similar size.
The Bemisia tabaci used in this study was the silverleaf whitefly, B. tabaci Middle East-Asia Minor 1 (B. tabaci B biotype). It was identified by using the mitochondrial COI sequence as described by Ahmed et al. [45]. Specimens of the parasitoid E. hayati were initially collected from the Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in 2015. Both the whitefly and parasitoid populations were maintained under laboratory conditions (26 ± 1 °C, 60% RH, L:D = 14:10) on cotton plants at South China Agricultural University (SCAU), Guangzhou.

2.2. Entomopathogenic Fungus

An entomopathogenic fungal strain of C. javanica, GZQ-1, was isolated from an adult Asian citrus psyllid cadaver in a glasshouse at SCAU, and the purified strain was deposited at the Guangdong Microbial Culture Collection Center (GDMCC) with the deposition number GDMCC 60437 [33].

2.3. Pathogenicity of C. javanica to E. hayati Pupae

Approximately 60 couples (60 male and 60 female adults) of B. tabaci adults were released into a cage (d × h = 3.0 × 1.5 cm, with a 100 mesh/cm2 cover at the top) on a single cotton leaf. Following 24 h for oviposition they were recaptured. The B. tabaci eggs (around 150–200 eggs per leaf) were allowed to hatch and develop to 2nd instar nymphs, after which 30 couples of 3 day old E. hayati adults were released into the leaf cage for 24 h and allowed to parasitize the whitefly nymphs (around 100 nymphs per leaf). When the E. hayati wasps reached the pupal stage in the B. tabaci nymphs (about 7 days after oviposition), these parasitized B. tabaci nymphs were dipped into six concentrations of C. javanica conidial suspensions (1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105, 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 conidia/mL in 1% Tween-80 and ddH2O) for 15 s following the method of Cuthbertson et al. [46]. E. hayati nymphs sprayed with a solution of 1% Tween-80 in ddH2O acted as a negative control. Mortality rates of E. hayati pupae were investigated over the next 7 days (parasitoids that did not eclose 7 days after pupae stage were assumed to have died). All experiments were performed in an incubator (26 ± 1 °C, 90% RH and photoperiod 14:10 h L:D), and the bioassay for each concentration of C. javanica was replicated three times.

2.4. Pathogenicity of C. javanica to E. hayati Adults

Cotton leaves with 2nd instar nymphs of B. tabaci (approximately 100 nymphs/leaf) were prepared using the same protocol described above and the cotton leaves were again dipped into six concentrations of C. javanica conidial suspensions (1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105, 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 conidia/mL) for 15 s. Following this the leaves were allowed to air-dry and were then covered with leaf cages into which 30 pairs of 3 day old E. hayati adults were released in order to parasitize the nymphs. The mortality rates of E. hayati adults were investigated over the following 7 days. All experiments were performed in an incubator (26 ± 1 °C, 90% RH and photoperiod 14:10 h L:D). E. hayati adults sprayed with a 1% Tween-80 in ddH2O were used as control. The bioassay for each concentration of C. javanica was replicated three times.

2.5. Effects of C. javanica on the Parasitic Potential of E. hayati

2.5.1. No-Choice Test (Single Age of Whitefly Nymphs)

Cotton leaves were prepared as previously described. Approximately 40 pairs of B. tabaci adults were released into one leaf cage to oviposit for 24 h. Following the timings in the methods of Cuthbertson et al. [30] and Qiu et al. [47], 1st to 4th instar nymphs were made available in different separate leaf cages for the same treatment date. Following this, the leaves that carried B. tabaci nymphs were sprayed with a 1 × 108 conidia/mL suspension of C. javanica and subsequently air-dried. Then 30 pairs of E. hayati adults were released into each leaf cage and allowed to parasitize the nymphs for 24 h. The parasitism, emergence rate, developmental duration and longevity of the parasitoid were examined and recorded daily under a binocular microscope, after 7 days of parasitization until all the parasitoids or whiteflies had emerged. A 1% Tween-80 in ddH2O was used as a control and the experiment was replicated five times for all four instars of B. tabaci nymphs.

2.5.2. Choice Test (Different Ages of Whitefly Nymphs)

Cotton plants and clean leaves were again prepared as outlined above. Ten couples of whitefly adults were released into a single leaf cage at four different times (total of 40 whitefly couples) separated by intervals between exposures. The intervals were as follows: T0 day (for first instar), plus T2.5 days (second instar), plus T3 days (third instar) plus T2 days (fourth instar) [45]. As with the no choice experiment, the leaves with B. tabaci nymphs were sprayed with 1 × 108 conidia/mL suspension of C. javanica, and then air-dried after which 30 pairs of E. hayati adults were released into the leaf cage to parasitize for 24 h. The parasitism, emergence rate, developmental duration and longevity of parasitoid progeny were investigated as above. Parasitoids exposed to the silverleaf whitefly nymphs that were sprayed with 1% Tween-80 in ddH2O were used as controls. The experiments were replicated five times for all four instars of B. tabaci nymphs.

2.6. Compatibility of C. javanica and E. hayati against B. tabaci

The bioassay of C. javanica and E. hayati for the suppression of B. tabaci populations was carried out under semi-field conditions (cage in field) in April 2018 at SCAU (average temperature 24–30 °C, 50–60% RH). Cotton leaves with approximately 100 individuals/leaf of B. tabaci nymphs (with a mix of all four instars) were covered in leaf cages and treated by three methods: (1) Sprayed with 1 × 108 conidia/mL suspension of C. javanica; (2) Exposed to thirty pairs of 3 day old E. hayati adults for 24 h; (3) Sprayed with the 1 × 108 conidia/mL suspension of C. javanica, and then exposed to thirty pairs of 3 day old E. hayati adults for 24 h. Control leaves were sprayed with 1% Tween-80 in ddH2O. Each experimental treatment was repeated four times.

2.7. Statistical Analysis

The infected parasitoid pupae and adults by the six conidial concentrations of C. javanica were observed daily. The average mortalities of parasitoid pupae and adults caused by the tested fungi were calculated. The mathematical calculation of lethal concentrations LC50 and confidence limits were carried out by the method of probit analysis [41]. Data regarding the mortality of E. hayati and B. tabaci, the parasitism, developmental time, emergence rate and longevity of E. hayati in treated vs. control experiments were subjected to t-test at p < 0.05. In the no-choice experiments (and the choice experiments), the parasitism, developmental time, emergence rate and longevity of E. hayati in different treatments was analyzed using main effect (and simple effect) of two-way ANOVA (analysis of variance) at p < 0.05 with the concentration of C. javanica suspension or B. tabaci instars as fixed factors. Treatment means were compared by Tukey’s HSD test (p < 0.05) after being arcsine square root transformed. All statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 19.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

3. Results

3.1. Pathogenicity of C. javanica to E. hayati Pupae and Adults

Cordyceps javanica had low pathogenicity against the pupa and adults of E. hayati. After 7 days following application, the mortality rates of the E. hayati pupa were 2.00 ± 0.58%, 8.67 ± 0.66%, 14.33 ± 0.88%, 18.00 ± 0.58%, 18.33 ± 0.67% and 28.00 ± 1.00% for 1 × 103, 1 × 104, 1 × 105, 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 conidia/mL, respectively, whereas the adult mortalities were 2.67 ± 0.33%, 7.67 ± 0.33%, 15.33 ± 1.76%, 22.67 ± 1.33%, 26.33 ± 1.45% and 34.00 ± 1.00% for the same series of concentrations of C. javanica (Figure 1). The LC50 values for C. javanica against the pupae and adults of E. hayati were 3.91 × 1010 and 5.56 × 109 conidia/mL (Table 1). Meanwhile, the concentration of C. javanica was positively correlated to the pathogenicity against E. hayati.

3.2. Effects of C. javanica on E. hayati Wasp’s Parasitic Potential

Significant differences were observed in the rate of parasitism, emergence rate, longevity and developmental duration of E. hayati when parasitizing young nymphs of B. tabaci that were pretreated with C. javanica. In the no-choice experiment (single age of whitefly nymphs), the parasitism rate and emergence rate of E. hayati to pretreated B. tabaci nymphs was reduced, especially against the 1st and 2nd instar nymphs of B. tabaci (Figure 2a,b). This was particularly evident in the longevity and developmental duration of E. hayati on 2nd and 3rd instar nymphs, which were significantly higher than that in the control (Figure 2c,d).
In the choice experiment (different ages of whitefly nymphs), under the interaction of treatments and B. tabaci instar, the parasitism rate and emergence rate of E. hayati reared on 1st and 2nd instar nymphs were especially reduced when all four instars of whitefly nymphs were available (Figure 3a,b).

3.3. Compatibility of C. javanica and E. hayati against B. tabaci

The results of semi-field experiments provided evidence that the combination of C. javanica and E. hayati was more effective than individual separate applications for the suppression of B. tabaci populations (Figure 4). After 15 days of investigation, the whitefly mortality rates were significantly different among the three applications (F = 363.96, p < 0.05), 55.33%, 54.03% and 62% for C. javanica, E. hayati and C. javanica + E. hayati, respectively.

4. Discussion

The compatibility of two different types of biological control regents is very important for sustained and successful pest management. Our bioassay results indicated that C. javanica was harmless (1, IOBC category) and slightly harmful (2, IOBC category) to the pupae (2.0–28.0%) and adults (2.67–34%) respectively of E. hayati on the basis of IOBC criteria [48]. The results in the current study indicate that both biocontrol agents (C. javanica and E. hayati) are compatible when applied together for B. tabaci management and as a result provide better control than separate applications of the two agents. These results are consistent with other studies [49,50].
The entomopathogenic fungi may infect an insect natural enemy of the same pest. Our study demonstrated that C. javanica had low pathogenicity to E. hayati pupae and adults. Ibarra-Cortes et al. [51] reported that Diaphorina citri Kuwayama nymphs and their hymenopteran parasitoid, Tamarixia radiata (Waterston), were more susceptible to fungal isolates than D. citri adults. Moreover, multiple studies suggest that fungal sprays did not affect natural enemies and posed a negligible risk to their behaviour [52,53,54]. Indeed, Huang et al. [55] showed a non-significant effect of the fungus Isaria fumosoroseus on longevity and next offspring of females of the parasitoid E. furuhashii Rose and Zolnerowich. Although different pathogenic species or strains of fungi have different pathogenicities and virulences, the target effect of a fungus can be quite specific to one or two hosts [27]. As such, additional studies are necessary to identify interactions between microbes and insect natural enemies to further develop biological pest control programs.
It is important to assess the interactions between biological control agents in the field. Our study provides the data and basis for designing a biocontrol system that simultaneously utilizes two biocontrol agents, which may offer effective substitutes for chemical pesticides for the control of B. tabaci. However, the compatibility of the two agents and environmental effects on the efficacy of each agent alone and in combination for managing B. tabaci needs to be further evaluated. It is evident from our findings that there are positive interactions between the two different biocontrol agents, and these interactions could serve as an effective control tool.

5. Conclusions

Biological control is currently considered an effective alternative method for whitefly management. Joint application of different biocontrol regents together, such as parasitoids and entomopathogenic fungi, may have higher efficiency than using one agent individually. In the current study, we assessed the impacts of C. javanica on the biology of the parasitoid E. hayati, and compared their separate and combined potential for the suppression of B. tabaci under both laboratory and semi-field conditions. The findings of our study are expected to improve the efficiency of whitefly pest management in agricultural ecosystems.

Author Contributions

L.-M.R. and B.-L.Q. designed the study; D.O., L.-M.R. and Y.-L. performed the experiments and analyzed the data; S.A. and X.-M.W. participated in data analysis and photography; D.O., B.-L.Q., S.A. and M.Z.A. wrote the paper; B.-L.Q. supported the grants.

Funding

The work was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFD0200400), Guangdong Technological Innovation Strategy of Special Funds (2018B020205003), the Science and Technology Program of Guangzhou (201804020070, 201807010019) and the Earmarked Fund for Guangdong Modern Agro-Industry Technology Research System-Citrus and Mango Innovation Team (2019). The funders had no role in the study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Acknowledgments

We thank Andrew G.S. Cuthbertson (York, UK) for his critical review on an early manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. De Barro, P.J.; Liu, S.S.; Boykin, L.M.; Dinsdale, A.B. Bemisia tabaci: A statement of species status. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2011, 56, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Fortes, I.M.; Sanchez-Campos, S.; Fiallo-Olive, E.; Diaz-Pendon, J.A.; Navas-Castillo, J.; Moriones, E. A novel strain of tomato leaf curl New Delhi virus has spread to the mediterranean basin. Viruses 2016, 8, 307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Abrahamian, P.; Sobh, H.; Seblani, R.; Aboujawdah, Y. Co-infection of two criniviruses and a begomovirus enhances the disease severity in cucumber. Eur. J. Plant. Pathol. 2015, 142, 521–530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Qiu, B.L.; Ren, S.X.; Sun, T.X.; Lin, L.; Kuang, Z.B. Preliminary report on the host plants of Bemisia tabaci in Guangzhou. J. South China Agric. Univ. 2001, 22, 43–47. [Google Scholar]
  5. Cahill, M.; Denholm, I.; Ross, G.; Gorman, K. Relationship between bioassay data and the simulated field performance of insecticides against susceptible and resistant adult Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Bull. Entomol. Res. 1996, 86, 109–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Horowitz, A.R.; Kontsedalov, S.; Ishaaya, I. Dynamics of resistance to the neonicotinoids acetamiprid and thiamethoxam in Bemisia tabaci (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2004, 6, 2051–2056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Silva, L.D.; Omoto, C.; Bleicher, E.; Dourado, P.M. Monitoring the susceptibility to insecticides in bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) populations from Brazil. Neotrop. Entomol. 2009, 38, 862–871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Blackburn, L.F.; Eyre, D.P.; Cannon, R.J.C.; Miller, J.; Northing, P. Bemisia tabaci: The current situation in the UK and the prospect of developing strategies for eradication using entomopathogens. Insect Sci. 2011, 18, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Goolsby, J.A.; Ciomperlik, M.A.; Bcjr, L.; Legaspi, J.C.; Wendel, L.E. Laboratory and field evaluation of exotic parasitoids of Bemisia tabaci (gennadius) (biotype “B”) (Homoptera: Aleyrodidae) in the lower rio grande valley of Texas. Biol. Control 1998, 12, 127–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Horowitz, A.R.; Kontsedalov, S.; Khasdan, V.; Ishaaya, I. Biotypes B and Q of Bemisia tabaci and their relevance to neonicotinoid and pyriproxyfen resistance. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2005, 58, 216–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Wan, F.H.; Yang, N.W. Invasion and management of agricultural alien insects in China. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2016, 61, 77–98. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Lacey, L.A.; Frutos, R.; Kaya, H.K.; Vail, P. Insect pathogens as biological control agents: Do they have a future? Biol. Control 2001, 21, 230–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Naranjo, S.E.; Ellsworth, P.C.; Frisvold, G.B. Economic value of biological control in integrated pest management of managed plant systems. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2015, 60, 621–645. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Kumar, K.K.; Sridhar, J.; Murali-Baskaran, R.K.; Senthil-Nathan, S.; Kaushal, P.; Dara, S.K.; Arthurs, S. Microbial biopesticides for insect pest management in India: Current status and future prospects. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2018, 165, 74–81. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Lahey, Z.; Stansly, P. An updated list of parasitoid hymenoptera reared from the Bemisia tabaci species complex (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Fla. Entomol. 2015, 98, 456–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Yang, N.W.; Ji, L.L.; Lovei, G.L.; Wan, F.H. Shifting preference between oviposition vs. host-feeding under changing host densities in two aphelinid parasitoids. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e41189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Burger, W.; Reijnen, T.M.; Lenteren, J.C.; Vet, L.E.M. Host feeding in insect parasitoids: Why destructively feed upon a host that excretes an alternative? Entomol. Exp. Appl. 2010, 112, 207–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Yang, N.W.; Wan, F.H. Host suitability of different instars of Bemisia tabaci biotype B for the parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati. Biol. Control 2011, 59, 313–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Xu, H.Y.; Yang, N.W.; Chi, H.; Ren, G.D.; Wan, F.H. Comparison of demographic fitness and biocontrol effectiveness of two parasitoids, Encarsia sophia and Eretmocerus hayati (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), against Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 2018, 74, 2116–2124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. De Barro, P.J.; Coombs, M.T. Post-release evaluation of Eretmocerus hayati Zolnerowich and Rose in Australia. Bull. Entomol. Res. 2009, 99, 193–206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Asad, B.A. The Effects of Two Aphelinid Parasitoids at Low Bemisia Tabaci MEAM1 Densities and Optimizing Release Criteria in Greenhouse-Grown Tomatoes; Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences: Beijing, China, 2018; pp. 77–78. [Google Scholar]
  22. Kuang, W.; Yang, W.N.; Wan, F.H.; Yuan, Z.M. Effects of temperatures and Bemisia tabaci (gennadius) reared on different host plants on development and reproduction of parasitoid, Eretmocerus hayati (Zolnerowich and Rose). Chin. J. Biol. Control. 2011, 27, 152–156. [Google Scholar]
  23. Scholte, E.J.; Knols, B.G.J.; Samson, R.A.; Takken, W. Entomopathogenic fungi for mosquito control: A review. J. Insect Sci. 2004, 4, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Hyweljones, N.L. Torrubiella luteorostrata: A pathogen of scale insects and its association with Paecilomyces cinnamomeus with a note on Torrubiella tenuis. Mycol. Res. 1993, 97, 1126–1130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Zhang, C.; Shao, Z.F.; Han, Y.Y.; Wang, X.M.; Wang, Z.Q.; Musa, P.D.; Qiu, B.L.; Ali, S. Effects of Aschersonia aleyrodis on the life table and demographic parameters of Bemisia tabaci. J. Integr. Agric. 2018, 17, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Meng, X.; Hu, J.; Ouyang, G. The isolation and identification of pathogenic fungi from Tessaratoma papillosa Drury (Hemiptera: Tessaratomidae). PeerJ 2017, 5, e3888. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Roy, H.E.; Steinkraus, D.C.; Eilenberg, J.; Hajek, A.E.; Pell, J.K. Bizarre interactions and endgames: Entomopathogenic fungi and their arthropod hosts. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2006, 51, 331–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Walters, K.F.A. Pathogenicity of the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium against the sweetpotato whitefly Bemisia tabaci under laboratory and glasshouse conditions. Mycopathologia 2005, 160, 315–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Walters, K.F.A.; Northing, P. Susceptibility of Bemisia tabaci immature stages to the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium on tomato and verbena foliage. Mycopathologia 2005, 159, 23–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Blackburn, L.F.; Northing, P.; Luo, W.; Cannon, R.J.C.; Walters, K.F.A. Further chemical compatibility testing of the entomopathogenic fungus Lecanicillium muscarium to control Bemisia tabaci in glasshouses. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 7, 405–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kepler, R.M.; Luangsa-Ard, J.J.; Hywel-Jones, N.L.; Quandt, C.A.; Sung, G.H.; Rehner, S.A.; Aime, M.C.; Henkel, T.W.; Sanjuan, T.; Zare, R.; et al. A phylogenetically-based nomenclature for Cordycipitaceae (Hypocreales). IMA Fungus 2017, 8, 335–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Mascarin, G.M.; Alves Pereira-Junior, R.; Fernandes, E.K.K.; Quintela, E.D.; Dunlap, C.A.; Arthurs, S.P. Phenotype responses to abiotic stresses, asexual reproduction and virulence among isolates of the entomopathogenic fungus Cordyceps javanica (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae). Microbiol. Res. 2018, 216, 12–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Ou, D.; Zhang, L.H.; Guo, C.F.; Chen, X.S.; Ali, S.; Qiu, B.L. Identification of a new Cordyceps javanica fungus isolate and its toxicity evaluation against Asian citrus psyllid. Microbiologyopen 2018, 8, e760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Shimazu, M.; Takatsuka, J. Isaria javanica (anamorphic Cordycipitaceae) isolated from gypsy moth larvae, Lymantria dispar (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae), in Japan. Appl. Entomol. Zool. 2010, 45, 497–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  35. Gallou, A.; Serna-Dominguez, M.G.; Berlanga-Padilla, A.M.; Ayala-Zermeno, M.A.; Mellin-Rosas, M.A.; Montesinos-Matias, R.; Arredondo-Bernal, H.C. Species clarification of Isaria isolates used as biocontrol agents against Diaphorina citri (Hemiptera: Liviidae) in Mexico. Fungal Biol. 2016, 120, 414–423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Do Nascimento Silva, J.; Mascarin, G.M.; Dos Santos Gomes, I.C.; Tinoco, R.S.; Quintela, E.D.; Dos Reis Castilho, L.; Freire, D.M.G. New cost-effective bioconversion process of palm kernel cake into bioinsecticides based on Beauveria bassiana and Isaria javanica. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 102, 2595–2606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Dos Santos, T.; Quintela, E.; Mascarin, G.; Santana, M. Enhanced mortality of Bemisia tabaci nymphs by Isaria javanica combined with sublethal doses of chemical insecticides. J. Appl. Entomol. 2018, 142, 598–609. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Xie, L.; Han, J.H.; Kim, J.J.; Sang, Y.L. Effects of culture conditions on conidial production of the sweet potato whitefly pathogenic fungus Isaria javanica. Mycoscience 2016, 57, 64–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Poprawski, T.J.; Legaspi, J.C.; Parker, P.E. Influence of entomopathogenic fungi on Serangium parcesetosum (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), an important predator of whiteflies (homoptera: Aleyrodidae). Environ. Entomol. 1998, 27, 785–795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Pell, J.K.; Vandenberg, J.D. Interactions among the aphid diuraphis noxia, the entomopathogenic fungus Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and the coccinellid Hippodamia convergens. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2002, 12, 217–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Di, X.; Ali, S.; Huang, Z.; Zhou, F.C.; Afzal, M.; Bashir, M.H. Influence of the entomopathogenic fungus, Verticillium lecanii on the whitefly predator, Axinoscymnus cardilobus (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) under laboratory conditions. Pak. J. Zool. 2009, 41, 289–295. [Google Scholar]
  42. Barahona, C.F.S.; Threlkeld, B.S.; Avery, P.B.; Francis, A.W.; Cave, R.D. Compatibility and efficacy of the lady beetle Thalassa montezumae, and the entomopathogenic fungus Isaria fumosorosea, for biological control of the green croton scale: Laboratory and greenhouse investigations. Arthropod-Plant Interact. 2018, 12, 715–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Clara Scorsetti, A.; Pelizza, S.; Noelia Fogel, M.; Vianna, F.; Ines Schneider, M. Interactions between the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana and the neotropical predator Eriopis connexa (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae): Implications in biological control of pest. J. Plant Prot. Res. 2017, 57, 389–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Li, S.J.; Ahmed, M.Z.; Lv, N.; Shi, P.Q.; Wang, X.M.; Huang, J.L.; Qiu, B.L. Plant mediated horizontal transmission of Wolbachia between whiteflies. ISME J. 2017, 11, 1019–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  45. Ahmed, M.Z.; Ren, S.X.; Mandour, N.S.; Maruthi, M.N.; Naveed, M.; Qiu, B.-L. Phylogenetic analysis of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) populations from cotton plants in Pakistan, China, and Egypt. J. Pest Sci. 2009, 83, 135–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Cuthbertson, A.G.S.; Blackburn, L.F.; Northing, P.; Luo, W.; Cannon, R.J.C.; Walters, K.F.A. Leaf dipping as an environmental screening measure to test chemical efficacy against Bemisia tabaci on poinsettia plants. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 6, 347–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Qiu, B.L.; De Barro, P.J.; He, Y.R.; Ren, S.X. Suitability of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) instars for the parasitization by Encarsia bimaculata and Eretmocerus sp nr. furuhashii (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae) on glabrous and hirsute host plants. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2007, 17, 823–839. [Google Scholar]
  48. IOBC (International Organization for Biological Control). IOBC Pesticide Side Effect Database. Available online: http://www.iobc-wprs.org/restricted_member/toolbox.cfm (accessed on 3 March 2016).
  49. Mesquita, D.A.L.M.; Lacey, L.A.; Leclant, F. Individual and combined effects of the fungus, Paecilomyces fumosoroseus and parasitoid, Aphelinus asychis Walker (hym. aphelinidae) on confined populations of russian wheat aphid, Diuraphis noxia (mordvilko) (hom. aphididae) under field conditions. J. Appl. Entomol. 2010, 121, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Labbé, R.M.; Gillespie, D.R.; Cloutier, C.; Brodeur, J. Compatibility of an entomopathogenic fungus with a predator and a parasitoid in the biological control of greenhouse whitefly. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2009, 19, 429–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Ibarra-Cortes, K.H.; Guzman-Franco, A.W.; Gonzalez-Hernandez, H.; Ortega-Arenas, L.D.; Villanueva-Jimenez, J.A.; Robles-Bermudez, A. Susceptibility of Diaphorina citri (Hemiptera: Liviidae) and its parasitoid Tamarixia radiata (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae) to entomopathogenic fungi under laboratory conditions. Neotrop. Entomol. 2018, 47, 131–138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Goettel, M.S.; Hajek, A.E. Evaluation of non-target effects of pathogens used for management of arthropods. In Evaluating Indirect Ecological Effects of Biological Control; Wajnberg, E., Scott, J.K., Eds.; CABI Publishing: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2001; pp. 81–97. [Google Scholar]
  53. Ludwig, S.W.; Oetting, R.D. Susceptibility of natural enemies to infection by Beauveria bassiana and impact of insecticides on Ipheseius degenerans (Acari: Phytoseiidae). J. Agric. Urban Entomol. 2001, 18, 169–178. [Google Scholar]
  54. Seiedy, M.; Tork, M.; Deyhim, F. Effect of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana on the predatory mite Amblyseius swirskii (Acari: Phytoseiidae) as a non-target organism. Syst. Appl. Acarol. UK 2015, 20, 241–250. [Google Scholar]
  55. Huang, Z.; Sahar, F.; Ren, S.X.; Ali, S. Effect of Isaria fumosoroseus on Eretmocerus sp nr. furuhashii (Hymenoptera: Aphelinidae), a parasitoid of Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Pak. J. Zool. 2010, 42, 121–127. [Google Scholar]
Insects 10 00425 g001 550
Figure 1. The mortality of Eretmocerus hayati pupae and adults when treated with various concentrations of Cordyceps javanica (1 × 103 to 1 × 107 conidia/mL). Data are Mean ± SE of 3 replicates.
Figure 1. The mortality of Eretmocerus hayati pupae and adults when treated with various concentrations of Cordyceps javanica (1 × 103 to 1 × 107 conidia/mL). Data are Mean ± SE of 3 replicates.
Insects 10 00425 g001
Insects 10 00425 g002 550
Figure 2. The parasitic potential of Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci nymphs pretreated with Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia/mL) in the non-selective test. Error bars represent Mean ± SE. The * and ** indicate significant difference at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01 level; main effect of two-way ANOVA (analysis of variance).
Figure 2. The parasitic potential of Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci nymphs pretreated with Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia/mL) in the non-selective test. Error bars represent Mean ± SE. The * and ** indicate significant difference at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01 level; main effect of two-way ANOVA (analysis of variance).
Insects 10 00425 g002
Insects 10 00425 g003 550
Figure 3. The parasitic potential of Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci nymphs pretreated with Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia·ml−1) in the choice test (multi-age). The * and ** indicate significant difference at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01 level; simple effect of two-way ANOVA (analysis of variance).
Figure 3. The parasitic potential of Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci nymphs pretreated with Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia·ml−1) in the choice test (multi-age). The * and ** indicate significant difference at p < 0.05 and p < 0.01 level; simple effect of two-way ANOVA (analysis of variance).
Insects 10 00425 g003
Insects 10 00425 g004 550
Figure 4. Separate and combined applications of Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia/mL) and Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci. Dates are the Mean ± SE after 15 days of spray or release under semi-field conditions. The different letters over the bars indicate significant differences between the four treatments (p < 0.05).
Figure 4. Separate and combined applications of Cordyceps javanica (1 × 108 conidia/mL) and Eretmocerus hayati against Bemisia tabaci. Dates are the Mean ± SE after 15 days of spray or release under semi-field conditions. The different letters over the bars indicate significant differences between the four treatments (p < 0.05).
Insects 10 00425 g004
Table
Table 1. The pathogenicity evaluation of Cordyceps javanica (LC50) to the pupae and adults of Eretmocerus hayati in the first 7 days following application.
Table 1. The pathogenicity evaluation of Cordyceps javanica (LC50) to the pupae and adults of Eretmocerus hayati in the first 7 days following application.
Insect StagesRegression Virulence ModelLC50 and 95% CI
(conidia/mL)		R2
PupaY = 0.219X – 2.3163.91 (0.55~72.2) × 10100.931
AdultY = 0.241X – 2.3505.56 (1.27~44.6) × 1090.963

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Ou, D.; Ren, L.-M.; -Liu, Y.; Ali, S.; Wang, X.-M.; Ahmed, M.Z.; Qiu, B.-L. Compatibility and Efficacy of the Parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the Entomopathogenic Fungus Cordyceps javanica for Biological Control of Whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insects 2019, 10, 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10120425

AMA Style

Ou D, Ren L-M, -Liu Y, Ali S, Wang X-M, Ahmed MZ, Qiu B-L. Compatibility and Efficacy of the Parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the Entomopathogenic Fungus Cordyceps javanica for Biological Control of Whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insects. 2019; 10(12):425. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10120425

Chicago/Turabian Style

Ou, Da, Li-Mei Ren, Yuan -Liu, Shaukat Ali, Xing-Min Wang, Muhammad Z. Ahmed, and Bao-Li Qiu. 2019. "Compatibility and Efficacy of the Parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the Entomopathogenic Fungus Cordyceps javanica for Biological Control of Whitefly Bemisia tabaci" Insects 10, no. 12: 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10120425

APA Style

Ou, D., Ren, L.-M., -Liu, Y., Ali, S., Wang, X.-M., Ahmed, M. Z., & Qiu, B.-L. (2019). Compatibility and Efficacy of the Parasitoid Eretmocerus hayati and the Entomopathogenic Fungus Cordyceps javanica for Biological Control of Whitefly Bemisia tabaci. Insects, 10(12), 425. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10120425

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop