Next Article in Journal
Effects of the Entomopathogenic Fungus Mucor hiemalis BO-1 on the Physical Functions and Transcriptional Signatures of Bradysia odoriphaga Larvae
Next Article in Special Issue
Managing Practical Resistance of Lepidopteran Pests to Bt Cotton in China
Previous Article in Journal
Negative Effects of Phthorimaea absoluta-Resistant Tomato Genotypes on the Zoophytophagous Biocontrol Agent, Orius laevigatus (Fieber) (Hemiptera: Anthocoridae)
Previous Article in Special Issue
Involvement of an Enhanced Immunity Mechanism in the Resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis in Lepidopteran Pests
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Insects
Volume 14
Issue 2
10.3390/insects14020161
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

Resistance Allele Frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa Bacillus thuringiensis Protein in the Southeastern U.S.

by
José C. Santiago-González
,
David L. Kerns
and
Fei Yang
*
Department of Entomology, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-2475, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Insects 2023, 14(2), 161; https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14020161
Submission received: 29 December 2022 / Revised: 23 January 2023 / Accepted: 3 February 2023 / Published: 7 February 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Resistance of Pests to Insecticidal Proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt))
Versions Notes

Abstract

Simple Summary

Evolution of insect resistance is the main threat to the sustainability of the Bt technology. Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is a major target pest of Bt corn and cotton. The purpose of this study is to determine the frequency of alleles conferring resistance to Vip3Aa in H. zea in the mid-south region of the U.S. Using a modified F2 screen method, we found the major resistance allele frequency for Vip3Aa in H. zea collected from four southern states during 2019–2020 was 0.0155, suggesting that the frequency of Vip3Aa resistance alleles in H. zea is not rare in the field.

Abstract

Helicoverpa zea is a major target pest of Bt crops expressing Cry and/or Vip3Aa proteins in the U.S.A. Widespread practical resistance of H. zea to the Cry1 and Cry2 proteins makes Vip3Aa the only effective Bt protein against this pest. Understanding the frequency of resistance alleles against Vip3Aa in field populations of H. zea is crucial for resistance management and the sustainability of Vip3Aa technology. Using a modified F2 screen method by crossing susceptible laboratory female moth with feral male moth of H. zea, we successfully screened a total of 24,576 neonates from 192 F2 families of H. zea collected from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee during 2019–2020. We found five F2 families containing ≥3rd instar survivors on the diagnostic concentration of 3.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa39. Dose-response bioassays confirmed the high levels of Vip3Aa resistance in these F2 families, with an estimated resistance ratio of >909.1-fold relative to the susceptible strain. The estimated resistance allele frequency against Vip3Aa in H. zea for these four southern states is 0.0155 with a 95% CI of 0.0057–0.0297. These data should provide critical information for understanding the risks of Vip3Aa resistance in H. zea and help design appropriate resistance management strategies for the sustainability of the Vip3Aa technology.

1. Introduction

Crops genetically engineered to produce the Cry and Vip insecticidal proteins from the soil-inhabiting bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) have been widely adopted for control of some pestiferous insect pests. Relative to the conventional insecticides, the Bt technology has greatly increased pest control efficacy due to its continuous and constitutive expression in genetically modified crops as disruptors of insect midgut membranes [1,2,3,4,5]. Large-scale adoption of Bt crops in the U.S. has resulted in significant reductions in insecticide use, high profits for growers [6,7], and reduced risks for human health and the environment [8]. However, extensive and continuous use of Bt crops has placed high selection pressure for Bt resistance on several insect species, diminishing their efficacy [9]. To prolong the lifespan of these Bt technologies, government agencies in the U.S. have adopted two main insect resistance management (IRM) strategies, known as the high-dose/refuge and pyramid/refuge, to delay the evolution of insect resistance.
Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) is a detrimental pest of many economically important crops and a major target species of Bt technologies. In the U.S., the Bt proteins used in corn and cotton plants for managing H. zea include Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac, Cry1F, Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab, Cry2Ae, and Vip3Aa. Many previous studies have reported that H. zea has developed widespread practical resistance to the Cry1 and Cry2 proteins produced in Bt cotton and Bt corn in the U.S. [10,11,12,13]. By contrast, no practical resistance has been reported to the Vip3Aa corn and cotton for H. zea. Field efficacy data also showed that Vip3Aa technology could provide exceptional protection against H. zea damage [14]. However, purified protein bioassays from 2016–2020 in the southern U.S. showed a small but significant decrease in susceptibility to Vip3Aa, suggesting an early warning of resistance [15]. In addition, unexpected occurrence and damage of H. zea on Bt corn and cotton expressing Vip3Aa protein has been reported in some fields in the southern U.S. [13,14]. For example, H. zea larvae damaged approximately 67.5% Bt corn producing Cry1Ab, Cry1Fa, and Vip3Aa in a field trial in Snook, TX in 2018 [13]. Brown et al. [16] reported unexpected damage of H. zea to Bt cotton expressing Cry and Vip3Aa Bt proteins in two locations in Louisiana in 2018. Of greater concern, F2 screens with H. zea collected in Texas indicated that the frequency of major resistance alleles against Vip3Aa was not rare, with a value of 0.0065 during 2019 [17]. Moreover, corn and cotton producing Vip3Aa has recently gained increasing popularity among growers for control of H. zea because the efficacy of Cry proteins against H. zea has been largely compromised by the practical resistance in the field [14,18]. All these results suggest the risks of resistance to Vip3Aa in H. zea are increasing in the U.S. To ensure the success of the high-dose refuge strategy, the frequency of resistance allele in field insect populations is required to be low, ideally <0.001. Therefore, understanding the frequency of resistance alleles against Vip3Aa in H. zea populations is crucial for resistance management and the sustainability of Vip3Aa technology.
The traditional F2 screening method does not work well in determining resistance allele frequency for H. zea because the success of single-pair mating is very low [19,20,21]. To improve the efficiency of F2 screening for this pest, we recently developed a modified method by crossing three laboratory susceptible females with one feral male moth of H. zea to estimate its resistance allele frequency [22]. Using this method, we successfully screened 192 F2 families of H. zea against Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2 Bt proteins with populations sampled from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee during 2019–2020 in a previous study [22]. We found the resistance allele frequency of H. zea in these four southern states for Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab was 0.217 and 0.722, respectively [22]. Here, we extended our study to report the resistance allele frequency against Vip3Aa of these 192 F2 families of H. zea collected from Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee during 2019–2020. Among these 192 F2 families of H. zea, we found five families carrying major Vip3Aa resistance alleles. The estimated resistance allele frequency against Vip3Aa in H. zea for these four southern states is 0.0155, which is 15.5-fold relative to the desired value (<0.001) underlying the assumptions of the high-dose refuge strategy. These data should provide critical information for understanding the risks of Vip3Aa resistance in H. zea and help design appropriate resistance management strategies to increase the sustainability of the Vip3Aa technology for control of H. zea in the U.S.

2. Material and Methods

2.1. Insect Source and Establishment of H. zea F2 Families

A susceptible H. zea strain (SS) was obtained from Benzon Research Inc., Carlisle, PA in 2018. The SS strain was susceptible to Cry1Ac, Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab, and Vip3Aa proteins [23,24]. Feral larvae of H. zea were sampled from the fields in four southern states, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee, and the fresh larvae were shipped overnight to the Entomology Research Laboratory at Texas A&M University, College Station, TX during 2019–2020. Detailed collection data were listed in Table 1 as described in Santiago-González, et al. [22]. In addition, the percentage of corn acres planted containing Vip3Aa was 10.3–13.2% in Arkansas, 3.2–3.3% in Louisiana, 2.8–4.9% in Mississippi, and 7.7–11.3% in Tennessee during 2019–2020 [15]. The percentage of cotton acres planted containing Vip3Aa was 14.4–29.8% in Arkansas, 28.7–34.1% in Louisiana, 19.4–30.5% in Mississippi, and 25.4–33.9% in Tennessee during 2019–2020 [15]. The field larvae of H. zea were reared individually on meridic diet until the adult stage was reached as previously described in Yang et al. [13]. Each feral male H. zea was allowed to mate with three susceptible females (1 feral ♂ × 3 SS ♀) in a mating container to create F1 families. The containers were maintained at 26 ± 1 °C, ∼60% relative humidity (RH), and a photoperiod of 16:8 h (L:D) for 7 days. Offspring from the crossing of 1 feral ♂ × 3 SS ♀ was designated as an F1 family. Similarly, F1 insects were reared until the adult stage as previously described for those feral larvae. Sixty H. zea moths of each F1 family were sib-mated to produce the F2 generations. In general, a total of 52 and 140 F2 families of H. zea were established in 2019 and 2020, respectively.

2.2. Discriminating Concentration of F2 Screens

Neonates of H. zea from each F2 family were exposed to a discriminating concentration of 3.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 Bt protein in diet overlay bioassays as described before [17]. This discriminating concentration of 3.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 can kill 100% SS and Vip3Aa heterozygous H. zea insects, whereas the homozygous Vip3Aa resistant H. zea could survive well [25]. The Vip3Aa39 protein with concentrations of 0.9–2.9 mg/mL was provided by Dr. Juan Luis Jurat-Fuentes, University of Tennessee [17]. The bioassays were conducted using 128-well trays and each well was filled with 800 µL of liquid meridic corn earworm diet (Southland Product Inc., Lake Village, AR, USA). When the diet was solidified, a constant volume of 40 µL Vip3Aa39 protein solution (3.0 µg/cm2) suspended in 0.1% triton was overlaid onto the surface of each well of the bioassay trays. The solutions were allowed to air dry at room temperature, and then one neonate of H. zea (<24 h) was placed into each well using a damped fine painting brush. Wells were covered with air-vented lids, and the trays were maintained in the insectary for 7 days as described before [17]. The experiment consisted of 4 replicates with 32 neonates per replication (n = 4 × 32 = 128) for each F2 family and SS. The number of live larvae (molting to 2nd instar or above) was recorded after 7 days. In addition, insect survival and development on the control diet consisting of 40 µL 0.1% triton were also evaluated, and each field population of H. zea had a separate treatment of control in the bioassay.

2.3. Dose-Response Bioassays for Resistance Confirmation

In a total of 192 F2 families of H. zea evaluated in 2019–2020, the F2 bioassay identified five potential resistant families with 3rd and 4th instar survivors on the discriminatory concentration of 3.0 μg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 after 7 days. The survivors of each family were reared on the meridic diet and sib-mated to produce the F3 generation for resistance confirmation. Susceptibility to Vip3Aa39 protein of potential Vip3Aa resistant families and SS of H. zea was tested using a full range diet-overlay bioassay as described in Yang et al. [17]. The concentration of Vip3Aa39 used in the bioassay ranged from 0, 0.0316, 0.1, 0.316, 1.0, 3.16, 10.0, and 31.6 to 100 μg/cm2. Each combination of insect population and Vip3Aa39 concentration was replicated four times with 16 insects per replication. Bioassay trays were maintained at 26 ± 1 °C, 50% RH, and a 16:8 (L:D) h photoperiod. Larval mortality and development were recorded after 7 days of infestation.

2.4. Data Analysis

Survivorship for each H. zea F2 family at the discriminating Vip3Aa39 concentration was computed as 100 * number of surviving larvae at 2nd instar or above divided by the total insects assayed and the survivorship was then corrected according to the survival on the control treatment [26]. In this study, the resistant alleles identified in the F2 screen should originate from the feral males because the females were susceptible homozygotes. Theoretically in the F2 screen, the expected survival for F2 progeny in a family is 6.25% if the F0 feral male possesses a single recessive allele conferring the resistance and 25.0% if the F0 feral male possesses two recessive alleles conferring the resistance [27]. On the control diet, most larvae could develop to the 3rd or 4th instar. In this study, we defined a potential positive Vip3Aa resistant family as an F2 family that had survivors at least reaching the 3rd or 4th instar after 7 days on the discriminating concentration of Vip3Aa39 as described in Yang et al. [17].
Larval mortality in the full-range bioassays was calculated as the number of dead larvae plus those that were at the first instar divided by the total number of insects assayed. The mortality was also corrected based on the mortality of the control treatment [26]. Probit analysis was used to determine the median lethal concentration (LC50) and corresponding 95% fiducial limits (FL) using PROC PROBIT in SAS [28]. The LC50 of an H. zea population was considered greater than the highest Vip3Aa protein concentration used in the bioassay if larval mortality was <50% at the highest concentration. Resistance ratio was calculated using the LC50 value of an H. zea population divided by the LC50 of SS.
In a previous study, we used the high probability option of formula #3 in Andow et. al, [29] to calculate the frequency of alleles conferring resistance to Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab in H. zea, because the expected allele frequency of Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab is high in the field [22]. In this study, the Vip3A resistance allele frequency is expected to be low in the field [30]. Therefore, we calculated the frequency of alleles conferring resistance to Vip3Aa39 based on the small probability option of formula #3 in Andow et al. [29] with modifications for only a male F2 screen:
E p R = S + u 2 N + u + v
where E   p R is the expected resistance allele frequency, S is the number of F2 families scored as resistant to Vip3Aa39 in the diagnostic screening, N is the total number of families screened, u   and v are parameters of the Beta probability distribution which varies from 0 to 1 [29]. The corresponding 95% credibility intervals were estimated according to Andow and Alstad [31]. The detection power of the F2 screen which is the efficacy that a resistance allele can be detected if it is present in a family line was calculated according to Stodola and Andow [32].

3. Results

3.1. Establishment of F2 Families and Survival in the Discriminating Concentration of Vip3Aa39

Similarly as described in Santiago-González et al. [22], 52 F1 families were established from a total of 212 crossings between feral H. zea males and SS females in 2019, and 140 F1 families were generated out of 411 crossings between feral H. zea males and SS females in 2020 (Table 1). All 192 F1 families were successfully sib-mated to produce sufficient F2 neonates for the F2 screening.
Survivorship of SS on the control diet was 93.7 ± 5.1%. However, 100% SS were killed at 3.0 μg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 protein, indicating again this discriminating concentration was high enough to identify Vip3Aa resistant insects in the F2 bioassays. In 2019, larval survival of the F2 insects on the control ranged from 87.5 to 96.1%, with a mean of 91.6 ± 1.7% (n = 5). A total of 6,656 insects from 52 families were assayed against Vip3Aa39, and three F2 families had survivors on 3.0 μg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 protein (Table 2). Two of them contained only 2nd instar larvae (Table 2). One family (LA-M1) from Alexandria, LA had four 3rd and seventeen 4th instar larvae (Table 3).
In 2020, the survivorship of the F2 insects on the control diet ranged from 71.1 to 97.7%, with a mean of 88.6 ± 2.2% (n = 12). About 17,920 neonates from 140 F2 families were assayed against the discriminating concentration of Vip3Aa39, and ten families contained survivors on the 3.0 μg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 protein (Table 2). Six of them contained only 2nd instar larvae (Table 2). One family (LA-AC4) from Winnsboro, LA had six 3rd and fourteen 4th instar larvae (Table 3). The remaining three families were from Stoneville, MS, with one family (MS-R21) containing one 4th instar, one family (MS-R2) containing one 2nd and one 4th instar, and one family (MS-R15) having three 2nd and nineteen 3rd instar larvae (Table 3). Based on the criteria of potential positive resistant families, we found five out of 192 F2 families of H. zea probably carrying at least one major Vip3Aa resistance allele during 2019–2020 (Table 3).

3.2. Dose-Response Bioassays for Resistance Confirmation

We successfully established four different populations out of the five potential Vip3Aa resistant families of H. zea identified in the F2 screen. The first population was LA-M1 which was established from collections of Cry1Ac+Cry2Ab2 cotton in Alexandria, LA in 2019. The second population was LA-AC4 that was originated from the collection of non-Bt corn in Winnsboro, LA in 2020. The remaining two populations were MS-R2 and MS-R15, both were from the collections of Cry1Ab corn in Stoneville, MS in 2020. All these four potential Vip3Aa resistant populations along with SS of H. zea were tested for susceptibility against Vip3Aa39 protein using the full range dose-response bioassays for resistance confirmation.
The LC50 of SS against Vip3Aa39 was estimated as 0.11 μg/cm2 with a 95% CL of 0.09–0.13 μg/cm2 (Table 4). Larvae from the four resistant populations were highly resistant to Vip3Aa39 protein and showed no differences (p > 0.05) in mortality (0–8.2%) across the populations and the tested concentrations. LC50 values for these four resistant populations could not be determined because the mortality at the highest tested concentration of 100.0 μg/cm2 was only 1.2–7.4%. Thus, the LC50 values for LA-M1, LA-AC4, MS-R2, and MS-R15 were all considered >100.0 μg/cm2, with an estimated resistance ratio >909.1-fold relative to SS (Table 4). These results suggested that all these four populations of H. zea are highly resistant to the Vip3Aa39 protein.
Based on the results of the F2 screen and dose-response confirmation bioassays, each of MS-R2 and MS-R21 collected from Stoneville, MS was presumed to carry one major resistance allele against Vip3Aa39 protein. LA-M1, LA-AC4, and MS-R15 contained 21, 20, and 22 survivors in the F2 screen, respectively (Table 3). Based on the average survival on the control diet, the corrected survivorship on Vip3Aa39 F2 screen for LA-M1, LA-AC4, and MS-R15 was 17.9, 17.6, and 19.4%, respectively. Moreover, inheritance studies showed the resistance to Vip3Aa39 protein in these three resistant Vip3Aa populations was recessive and controlled by a single gene (Yang et al., Unpublished data). The Chi-square (χ2) tests showed that the observed survival was not different (p > 0.05) from the expected survival at Vip3Aa39 concentration of 3.0 μg/cm2 if the F0 feral male possesses two recessive alleles conferring the resistance (Table 5). These results indicated that each of LA-M1, LA-AC4, and MS-R15 probably carried two major resistance alleles against Vip3Aa39 protein (Table 5).
Detailed expected frequency of Vip3Aa resistance alleles in H. zea by year and state are presented in Table 6. According to the overlapping of the 95% credibility intervals, the estimated resistance allele frequencies for Vip3Aa39 were not significantly different among states and years (Table 6). In 2019, two resistance alleles from 52 males were identified and the expected Vip3Aa resistance allele frequency was estimated as 0.0185 (CI 95%: 0.0023–0.0504) (Table 6). In 2020, six resistance alleles out of 140 male insects were found and the expected Vip3Aa resistance allele frequency was calculated as 0.0176 (CI 95%: 0.0058–0.0355) (Table 6). The pooled resistance allele frequency for Vip3Aa in H. zea collected from four southern states during 2019–2020 was estimated as 0.0155 with a 95% CI of 0.0057–0.0297) (Table 6). The detection power of the F2 screen in this study was estimated as 98.2%.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this study is to determine the frequency of alleles conferring resistance to Vip3Aa in H. zea in the mid-south region of the U.S. Using the modified F2 screen method by crossing susceptible laboratory female moths with a feral male moth of H. zea, we successfully screened a total of 24,576 neonates from 192 F2 families of H. zea collected in Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Tennessee during 2019–2020. We found 2.6% F2 families contained ≥3rd instar survivors on the diagnostic concentration of Vip3Aa39. However, one limitation of this modified F2 screen method is that it only represents the genetics of male insects of the field population. In a previous study, Yang et al. [17] used female moths of H. zea collected from light traps to conduct the F2 screen against Vip3Aa39, and they observed 1.8% of 114 F2 families had ≥3rd instar survivors on the diagnostic concentration. In contrast, the light trap F2 screen method used only female insects of the field population, and these female moths could be fertilized by multiple male moths in the field. Considering the imperfection of each method, we recommend using both methods simultaneously for future Bt resistance monitoring of a field population of H. zea so that both male and female genetics can be fully understood.
In this study, we found five Vip3Aa resistant families through F2 screen and confirmed four of them possessed high levels of resistance using full range dose-response bioassays. Because we used the male insects collected from the field to mate with the laboratory susceptible female insects for the F2 screen, any resistant alleles identified in the study were from the feral male larvae. Based on the survival of F2 neonates in the bioassays and recessive inheritance data (Yang et al., Unpublished data), surprisingly, F0 feral larvae of LA-M1, LA-AC4, and MS-R15 were presumed to possess two recessive resistance alleles to Vip3Aa39, suggesting these H. zea larvae were homozygous resistant insects in the field. The first homozygous resistant larva (LA-M1) was collected from Cry1Ac+Cry2Ab2 cotton in Alexandria, LA in 2019; the second one (LA-AC4) was sampled from non-Bt corn in Winnsboro, LA in 2020; and the last one (MS-R15) was obtained from Cry1Ab sweet corn in Mississippi in 2020. Moreover, the other two families, MS-R2 and MS-R21 that were considered to have one recessive resistance allele to Vip3Aa39 were collected from the same field as MS-R15 in 2020. Thus three out of 16 larvae of H. zea tested from the Cry1Ab sweet corn field in Mississippi in 2020 contained Vip3Aa resistance alleles. On the contrary, no insects possessed Vip3Aa resistance alleles for the 89 F2 families of H. zea collected from Arkansas and Tennessee during 2019–2020. We did not observe any positive relationship between Vip3Aa resistance allele frequency and the percentage of corn and cotton containing Vip3Aa protein planted in these states during 2019–2020. For example, the percentage of corn planted containing Vip3Aa was 13.2% in Arkansas, 3.3% in Louisiana, 4.9% in Mississippi, and 11.3% in Tennessee in 2020. [15] The percentage of cotton planted containing Vip3Aa was 29.8% in Arkansas, 34.1% in Louisiana, 30.5% in Mississippi, and 33.9% in Tennessee in 2020. [15] The data showed more percentage of Vip3Aa corn and an equivalent percentage of Vip3Aa cotton were planted in Arkansas and Tennessee compared to that in Louisiana and Mississippi in 2020. On the contrary, more Vip3Aa resistance alleles were detected in Louisiana and Mississippi than that in Arkansas and Tennessee during 2020. In general, these results suggest that the resistance allele frequency of Vip3Aa in H. zea is high in Louisiana and Mississippi, which could explain the observation of unexpected occurrence and damage of H. zea on Bt corn and cotton expressing Vip3Aa proteins in these two states [15,16]. For example, 16 out of 200 randomly sampled Leptra corn ears (expressing Cry1Ab, Cry1F, and Vip3Aa) were damaged by H. zea larvae with an average of 5.5 damaged kernels per year in a field trial in Stoneville, MS in 2019 [15]. Brown et al. [16] showed unexpected occurrence and damage of H. zea to Bt cotton expressing Cry and Vip3Aa in two locations in Louisiana.
Yang et al. [17] reported that the frequency of major alleles conferring resistance to Vip3Aa39 in H. zea was 0.0065 (CI 95%: 0.0014–0.0157) in Texas in 2019. In the current study, we found the major resistance allele frequency for Vip3Aa in H. zea collected from four southern states during 2019–2020 was 0.0155 (CI 95%: 0.0057–0.0297). Based on the overlapping of the 95% confidence intervals, the estimated Vip3Aa resistance allele frequency was not significantly different between Texas and the four southern states. Contrary to the documentation of major Vip3Aa resistance alleles in these two studies, Lin et al. [33] found that none of the 101 F2 families of H. zea sampled from Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia, and South Carolina possessed major alleles conferring resistance to Vip3Aa20. Lin et al. [33] used a group mating method by mixing multiple feral male and female moths of H. zea in a container to conduct F2 screens using a discriminating concentration of 5.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa20 during 2018–2019. Because H. zea females are polyandrous [34] and fitness costs are sometimes associated with Bt homozygous and/or heterozygous resistant insects, it is possible that H. zea without resistant alleles had a higher propensity to mate compared to those containing resistant alleles, which would result in underestimating the resistant allele frequencies in the population.
Data from the present study and previous studies suggest that resistance allele frequency for Vip3Aa in H. zea is not rare (<0.001) in Texas and the southeastern states [17,33]. However, field efficacy data indicated that Bt crops expressing Vip3Aa protein are still very effective for the management of H. zea in the field [30,35,36]. Currently, Vip3Aa protein is pyramided with Cry1 and/or Cry2 proteins in the commercialized Bt corn and Bt cotton products in the U.S. Many previous studies have indicated that strong cross-resistance was not present among Cry and Vip3Aa proteins [24,37,38,39]. In this study, we observed that all Vip3Aa resistant families of H. zea established in the F2 screen showed some levels of resistance to Cry1A with 2–13 3rd instar survivors (Table 7). However, all these Vip3Aa resistant families were susceptible to Cry2Ab2 with no 3rd instar survivors in the F2 screen (Table 7). In addition, full range diet-overlay bioassays of these Vip3Aa resistant families indicate that all these Vip3Aa resistant families show some low levels of resistance to Cry1Ac (resistance ratio <10) but are very susceptible to Cry2Ab2 based on the LC50 values relative to the SS, although Cry resistance in H. zea is extremely high in the field (Yang et al., Unpublished data). Additionally, previous studies have suggested that synergistic effects could be present in combinations of Cry and Vip3Aa proteins for some species. For example, Bergamasco et al. [40] found synergistic interaction between Cry1Ia and Vip3Aa proteins for Spodoptera frugiperda and Spodoptera albula. Soares Figueiredo et al. [41] also observed strong synergistic action for the combinations of Vip3Aa and Cry proteins against S. frugiperda. Baranek et al. [42] documented synergistic interactions between Cry1 and Vip3Aa proteins for S. exigua. All these factors could contribute to the high efficacy of Bt crops expressing both Cry and Vip3Aa proteins for control of H. zea in the field.
In a recent study, Dively et al. [43] used sentinel plots to monitor the susceptibility of H. zea against Cry and Vip3Aa proteins, and they found that field populations of H. zea not only showed high levels of resistance to Cry proteins but also decreased susceptibility against Vip3Aa. Although sweet corn expressing Vip3Aa could provide excellent control efficacy for H. zea, the number of living larvae and the proportion of larvae reaching the fourth instar on Vip3Aa expressing corn was significantly more than before [43]. In addition, protein bioassay data in the southern U.S. during 2016–2020 suggested an early warning of resistance to Vip3Aa in H. zea [15]. Furthermore, several studies have indicated that once the resistance allele frequency exceeds 0.005 in the field, the entire population can rapidly develop resistance [44,45]. Considering the frequency of Vip3Aa resistance alleles in H. zea in Texas and the southern states has surpassed this threshold, effective resistance management strategies, such as adopting incentives to promote refuge compliance and increasing refuge size, are strongly warranted to preserve the efficacy of Vip3Aa technology.
In a previous study, Yang et al. [25] characterized the Vip3A resistance in H. zea collected in Texas. In this study, we successfully established four different Vip3Aa-resistant populations of H. zea sampled from Louisiana and Mississippi. The availability of these resistant populations enables future research to understand the inheritance of Vip3Aa resistance, fitness costs, cross-resistance, and molecular mechanisms of Vip3Aa resistance among these different populations of H. zea. These types of information are essential for Bt resistance monitoring and developing effective resistance management programs to ensure the sustainability of Vip3Aa technology.

Author Contributions

D.L.K. and F.Y. designed the study. J.C.S.-G. and F.Y. performed the lab bioassays. J.C.S.-G., D.L.K. and F.Y. analyzed the data and wrote the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported by Biotechnology Risk Assessment grant No. 2017-33522-27090/project accession No. 1013740, Biotechnology Risk Assessment award No. 2020-33522-32318/project accession No. 2003504, and Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Foundational Program competitive grant No. 2021-67013-33567, all from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Sebe A. Brown, Scott D. Stewart, Angus L. Catchot, Donald R. Cook, Jeffrey Gore, Whitney D. Crow, Gustav M. Lorenz, and Tyler Towles for providing us with H. zea larvae they collected from the field. We thank Juan Luis Jurat-Fuentes for providing Vip3Aa39 protein.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Banerjee, R.; Hasler, J.; Meagher, R.; Nagoshi, R.; Hietala, L.; Huang, F.; Narva, K.; Jurat-Fuentes, J.L. Mechanism and DNA-based detection of field-evolved resistance to transgenic Bt corn in fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda). Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 10877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Ferré, J.; Van Rie, J. Biochemistry and Genetics of Insect Resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2002, 47, 501–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Chakroun, M.; Banyuls, N.; Bel, Y.; Escriche, B.; Ferré, J. Bacterial Vegetative Insecticidal Proteins (Vip) from Entomopathogenic Bacteria. MMBR 2016, 80, 329–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Jurat-Fuentes, J.L.; Heckel, D.G.; Ferré, J. Mechanisms of Resistance to Insecticidal Proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2021, 66, 121–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Bravo, A.; Pacheco, S.; Gómez, I.; Garcia-Gómez, B.; Onofre, J.; Soberón, M. Insecticidal proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis and their mechanism of action. In Bacillus thuringiensis and Lysinibacillus sphaericus; Fiuza, L., Polanczyk, R., Crickmore, N., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 53–66. [Google Scholar]
  6. Fernandez-Cornejo, J.; Wechsler, S.; Livingston, M.; Mitchell, L. Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States; ERR-162; United States Department of Agriculture: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; p. 54. [Google Scholar]
  7. Fleming, D.; Musser, F.; Reisig, D.; Greene, J.; Taylor, S.; Parajulee, M.; Lorenz, G.; Catchot, A.; Gore, J.; Kerns, D.; et al. Effects of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis cotton on insecticide use, heliothine counts, plant damage, and cotton yield: A meta-analysis, 1996–2015. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. US-EPA. EPA Needs Better Data, Plans and Tools to Manage Insect Resistance to Genetically Engineered Corn; 16-P-0194; US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of the Inspector General: Washington, DC, USA, 2016; p. 22. [Google Scholar]
  9. Tabashnik, B.E.; Carrière, Y. Surge in insect resistance to transgenic crops and prospects for sustainability. Nat. Biotechnol. 2017, 35, 926–935. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dively, G.P.; Venugopal, P.D.; Finkenbinder, C. Field-evolved resistance in corn earworm to Cry proteins expressed by transgenic sweet corn. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0169115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Kaur, G.; Guo, J.G.; Brown, S.; Head, G.P.; Price, P.A.; Paula-Moraes, S.; Ni, X.Z.; Dimase, M.; Huang, F. Field-evolved resistance of Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) to transgenic maize expressing pyramided Cry1A.105/Cry2Ab2 proteins in northeast Louisiana, the United States. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2019, 163, 11–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Reisig, D.D.; Huseth, A.S.; Bacheler, J.S.; Aghaee, M.-A.; Braswell, L.; Burrack, H.J.; Flanders, K.; Greene, J.K.; Herbert, D.A.; Jacobson, A.; et al. Long-Term Empirical and Observational Evidence of Practical Helicoverpa zea Resistance to Cotton with Pyramided Bt Toxins. J. Econ. Entomol. 2018, 111, 1824–1833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Yang, F.; Santiago González, J.C.; Williams, J.; Cook, D.C.; Gilreath, R.T.; Kerns, D.L. Occurrence and Ear Damage of Helicoverpa zea on Transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis Maize in the Field in Texas, U.S. and Its Susceptibility to Vip3A Protein. Toxins 2019, 11, 102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yang, F.; Kerns, D.L.; Little, N.; Brown, S.A.; Stewart, S.D.; Catchot, A.L.; Cook, D.R.; Gore, J.; Crow, W.D.; Lorenz, G.M.; et al. Practical resistance to Cry toxins and efficacy of Vip3Aa in Bt cotton against Helicoverpa zea. Pest Manag. Sci. 2022, 78, 5234–5242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Yang, F.; Kerns, D.L.; Little, N.S.; Santiago González, J.C.; Tabashnik, B.E. Early Warning of Resistance to Bt Toxin Vip3Aa in Helicoverpa zea. Toxins 2021, 13, 618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Brown, S.A.; Walker, W.; Cole, C.L.; Kerns, D.L. Efficacy and Field Performance of Bt Cotton in Louisiana. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, New Orleans, LA, USA, 8–10 January 2019; pp. 477–480. [Google Scholar]
  17. Yang, F.; Santiago González, J.C.; Little, N.; Reisig, D.; Payne, G.; Dos Santos, R.F.; Jurat-Fuentes, J.L.; Kurtz, R.; Kerns, D.L. First documentation of major Vip3Aa resistance alleles in field populations of Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Texas, USA. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 5867. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. USDA-AMS-CTP. Cotton Varieties Planted, United States 2020 Crop; mp_cn833; U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service—Cotton and Tobacco Program: Memphis, TN, USA, 2020; p. 11. [Google Scholar]
  19. Carpenter, J.; Sparks, A.; Pair, S.; Cromroy, H. Heliothis zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae): Effects of radiation and inherited sterility on mating competitiveness. J. Econ. Entomol. 1989, 82, 109–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jones, R.L.; Perkins, W.; Sparks, A. Effect of sex ratios on reproduction by the corn earworm in the laboratory. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 1979, 72, 35–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Blanco, C.A.; Sumerford, D.V.; López, J.D., Jr.; Hernández, G.; Abel, C.A. Mating Behavior of Wild Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Males with Laboratory Females. J. Cotton Sci. 2010, 14, 191–198. [Google Scholar]
  22. Santiago-González, J.C.; Kerns, D.L.; Head, G.P.; Yang, F. A modified F2 screen for estimating Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab resistance allele frequencies in Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2023, XX, toac181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Kerns, D.L.; Yang, F.; Cook, D.R.; Gore, J.; Stewart, S.D.; Jurat-Fuentes, J.L.; Lorenz, G.M.; Catchot, A.L.; Brown, S.A. Bt resistance and Bt technology performance for Texas and the Mid-South in 2019. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, Austin, TX, USA, 8–10 January 2020; pp. 479–489. [Google Scholar]
  24. Yang, F.; Santiago González, J.C.; Head, G.P.; Price, P.A.; Kerns, D.L. Multiple and non-recessive resistance to Bt proteins in a Cry2Ab2-resistant population of Helicoverpa zea. Crop Prot. 2021, 145, 105650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Yang, F.; Santiago González, J.C.; Sword, G.A.; Kerns, D.L. Genetic basis of resistance to the Vip3Aa Bt protein in Helicoverpa zea. Pest Manag. Sci. 2021, 77, 1530–1535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Abbott, W.S. A method of computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J. Econ. Entomol. 1925, 18, 265–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Andow, D.; Alstad, D. F2 screen for rare resistance alleles. J. Econ. Entomol. 1998, 91, 572–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. SAS Institute. SAS 9.4®: Statistical Procedures; SAS Institute: Cary, NC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  29. Andow, D.; Olson, D.; Hellmich, R.L.; Alstad, D.; Hutchison, W. Frequency of resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis toxin Cry1Ab in an Iowa population of European corn borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 2000, 93, 26–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Niu, Y.; Oyediran, I.; Yu, W.; Lin, S.; Dimase, M.; Brown, S.; Reay-Jones, F.P.F.; Cook, D.; Reisig, D.; Thrash, B.; et al. Populations of Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) in the Southeastern United States are Commonly Resistant to Cry1Ab, but Still Susceptible to Vip3Aa20 Expressed in MIR 162 Corn. Toxins 2021, 13, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Andow, D.; Alstad, D. Credibility Interval for Rare Resistance Allele Frequencies. J. Econ. Entomol. 1999, 92, 755–758. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Stodola, T.; Andow, D. F2 screen variations and associated statistics. J. Econ. Entomol. 2004, 97, 1756–1764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Lin, S.; Oyediran, I.; Niu, Y.; Brown, S.; Cook, D.; Ni, X.; Zhang, Y.; Reay-Jones, F.P.F.; Chen, J.S.; Wen, Z.; et al. Resistance Allele Frequency to Cry1Ab and Vip3Aa20 in Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Louisiana and Three Other Southeastern U.S. States. Toxins 2022, 14, 270. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Hardwick, D.F. The Corn Earworm Complex. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can. 1965, 97 (Suppl. S40), 5–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Yang, F.; Kerns, D.; Gore, J.; Catchot, A.; Lorenz, G.; Stewart, S. Susceptibility of field populations of the cotton bollworm in the southern U.S. to four individual Bt proteins. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, Dallas, TX, USA, 4–6 January 2017; pp. 786–797. [Google Scholar]
  36. Kerns, D.L.; Yang, F.; Lorenz, G.M.; Gore, J.; Catchot, A.L.; Stewart, S.D.; Brown, S.A.; Cook, D.R.; Seiter, N. Value of Bt technology for bollworm management. In Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, San Antonio, TX, USA, 3–5 January 2018; pp. 805–809. [Google Scholar]
  37. Welch, K.L.; Unnithan, G.C.; Degain, B.A.; Wei, J.; Zhang, J.; Li, X.; Tabashnik, B.E.; Carrière, Y. Cross-resistance to toxins used in pyramided Bt crops and resistance to Bt sprays in Helicoverpa zea. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2015, 132, 149–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Gilreath, R.T.; Kerns, D.L.; Huang, F.; Yang, F. No positive cross-resistance to Cry1 and Cry2 proteins favors pyramiding strategy for management of Vip3Aa resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda. Pest Manag. Sci. 2021, 77, 1963–1970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Tabashnik, B.E.; Carrière, Y. Evaluating Cross-resistance between Vip and Cry Toxins of Bacillus thuringiensis. J. Econ. Entomol. 2020, 113, 553–561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Bergamasco, V.B.; Mendes, D.R.P.; Fernandes, O.A.; Desidério, J.A.; Lemos, M.V.F. Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ia10 and Vip3Aa protein interactions and their toxicity in Spodoptera spp. (Lepidoptera). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2013, 112, 152–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Soares Figueiredo, C.; Nunes Lemes, A.R.; Sebastião, I.; Desidério, J.A. Synergism of the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1, Cry2, and Vip3 Proteins in Spodoptera frugiperda Control. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2019, 188, 798–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Baranek, J.; Banaszak, M.; Lorent, D.; Kaznowski, A.; Konecka, E. Insecticidal activity of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1, Cry2 and Vip3 toxin combinations in Spodoptera exigua control: Highlights on synergism and data scoring. Entomol. Gen. 2021, 41, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Dively, G.; Kuhar, T.; Taylor, S.; Doughty, H.; Holmstrom, K.; Gilrein, D.; Nault, B.; Ingerson-Mahar, J.; Whalen, J.; Reisig, D.; et al. Sweet Corn Sentinel Monitoring for Lepidopteran Field-Evolved Resistance to Bt Toxins. J. Econ. Entomol. 2021, 114, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Xu, Z.; Liu, F.; Chen, J.; Huang, F.; Andow, D.A.; Wang, Y.; Zhu, Y.C.; Shen, J. Using an F2 screen to monitor frequency of resistance alleles to Bt cotton in field populations of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 2009, 65, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gould, F. Sustainability of transgenic insecticidal cultivars: Integrating pest genetics and ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1998, 43, 701–726. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Table 1. Success of establishing F2 families of Helicoverpa zea using a feral male moth mating with susceptible female moths.
Table 1. Success of establishing F2 families of Helicoverpa zea using a feral male moth mating with susceptible female moths.
YearCollection Site HostFeral H. zea Males (♂) Collected for the Parental CrossNumber of Established F2 Families
2019Alexandria, LACry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn287
Cry1Ac + Cry2Ab2 cotton3314
Stoneville, MSCry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn305
Leland, MSNon-Bt host: soybean3210
Jackson, TNNon-Bt host: soybean316
Non-Bt host: sorghum236
Cry1Ab + Cry1F corn354
Sub-total21252
2020Stoneville, MSNon-Bt host: corn4117
Cry1Ab sweet corn3516
Cry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn111
Winnsboro, LACry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn4317
Non-Bt host: corn332
Avoyelles, LANon-Bt host: soybean378
Alexandria, LACry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn326
Jackson, TNCry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn3113
Mississippi, ARCry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn6328
Non-Bt host: corn4216
Pine Bluff, ARCry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn181
Marianna, ARCry1A.105 + Cry2Ab2 corn2515
Sub-total411140
Total623192
Table 2. Survival of F2 families of Helicoverpa zea on the discriminating concentration of 3.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 after 7 days.
Table 2. Survival of F2 families of Helicoverpa zea on the discriminating concentration of 3.0 µg/cm2 Vip3Aa39 after 7 days.
YearCollection Site
of the Feral Parental 		No. Tested F2 FamiliesNo. Surviving FamiliesNo. 2nd InstarNo. 3rd InstarNo. 4th Instar
2019Alexandria, LA70000
1410417
Stoneville, MS50000
Leland, MS102200
Jackson, TN 60000
60000
40000
Sub-total5232417
2020Stoneville, MS170000
1634192
11100
Winnsboro, LA171100
210614
Avoyelles, LA81100
Alexandria, LA61100
Jackson, TN130000
Mississippi, AR281100
161100
Pine Bluff, AR10000
Marianna, AR150000
Sub-total14010102516
Total19213122933
Table 3. Potential resistant families containing survivors of Helicoverpa zea in the F2 screen on 3.0 μg/cm2 of Vip3Aa39 protein.
Table 3. Potential resistant families containing survivors of Helicoverpa zea in the F2 screen on 3.0 μg/cm2 of Vip3Aa39 protein.
Family No.No. Insects ScreenedNo. SurvivorsNo. Insect within Instar
2nd3rd4th
LA-M1128210417
LA-AC4128200614
MS-R21282101
MS-R15128223190
MS-R211281001
Table 4. Dose-response bioassays of different Helicoverpa zea populations against Vip3Aa39 Bt protein.
Table 4. Dose-response bioassays of different Helicoverpa zea populations against Vip3Aa39 Bt protein.
Insect StrainN aLC50 (95% CL) (µg/cm2) bSlope ± SEχ2dfResistance Ratio c
SS5120.11 (0.09, 0.13)3.23 ± 0.3512.926-
LA-M1512>100///>909.1 *
LA-AC4512>100///>909.1 *
MS-R2512>100///>909.1 *
MS-R15512>100///>909.1 *
a Total number of neonates assayed. b Larval mortality was calculated based on the number of dead larvae plus first instar survivors (mortality = dead + L1) divided by the total number of insects assayed. c Resistance ratio for a Bt protein was calculated by dividing the LC50 value of an insect population by that of the reference susceptible strain (SS). * Indicates highly significant resistance ratios (>10-fold).
Table 5. Test for feral male moths of Helicovepa zea containing two recessive resistance alleles in the F2 screen.
Table 5. Test for feral male moths of Helicovepa zea containing two recessive resistance alleles in the F2 screen.
Insect FamilyN #Observed SurvivalExpected Survival *χ2p-Value
LA-M112822.9323.4410.064
LA-AC412822.5323.7380.054
MS-R1512824.8322.1410.143
# Total number of neonates assayed. * Indicates the expected number of survivors in the F2 screen when the feral male moth of H. zea containing two recessive resistance alleles mating with the SS insects.
Table 6. Expected resistance allele frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa39.
Table 6. Expected resistance allele frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa39.
YearCollection Site
of the Feral Parental		No. F2 Families ScreenedNo. Surviving FamiliesNo. Resistance AllelesExpected Resistance Allele FrequencyCredibility Interval (95%)
2019Louisiana21120.0435(0.0056–0.1142)
Mississippi15000.0294(0.0000–0.0854)
Tennessee16000.0278(0.0000–0.0808)
Sub-total52120.0185(0.0023–0.0504)
2020Louisiana33120.0286(0.0036–0.0766)
Mississippi34340.0556(0.0160–0.1153)
Tennessee13000.0333(0.0000–0.0963)
Arkansas60000.0081(0.0000–0.0240)
Sub-total140460.0176(0.0058–0.0355)
Total in two consecutive years192580.0155(0.0057–0.0297)
Table 7. Survivors of Vip3Aa resistant families of Helicoverpa zea on Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2 proteins in the F2 screen.
Table 7. Survivors of Vip3Aa resistant families of Helicoverpa zea on Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2 proteins in the F2 screen.
Insect FamilyCry1Ac ProteinCry2Ab2 Protein
No. Insects ScreenedNo. SurvivorsNo. Insects ScreenedNo. Survivors
2nd 3rd 4th2nd 3rd 4th
LA-M11281830128000
LA-AC41287100128000
MS-R212830110128800
MS-R1512818130128200
MS-R211282120128100
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Santiago-González, J.C.; Kerns, D.L.; Yang, F. Resistance Allele Frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa Bacillus thuringiensis Protein in the Southeastern U.S. Insects 2023, 14, 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14020161

AMA Style

Santiago-González JC, Kerns DL, Yang F. Resistance Allele Frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa Bacillus thuringiensis Protein in the Southeastern U.S. Insects. 2023; 14(2):161. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14020161

Chicago/Turabian Style

Santiago-González, José C., David L. Kerns, and Fei Yang. 2023. "Resistance Allele Frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa Bacillus thuringiensis Protein in the Southeastern U.S." Insects 14, no. 2: 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14020161

APA Style

Santiago-González, J. C., Kerns, D. L., & Yang, F. (2023). Resistance Allele Frequency of Helicoverpa zea to Vip3Aa Bacillus thuringiensis Protein in the Southeastern U.S. Insects, 14(2), 161. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects14020161

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