Occurrence Dynamics and Chemical Control of Mycterothrips glycines in Soybean Field in Northeast China
Simple Summary
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Insect
2.2. Methods for Investigating the Occurrence Dynamics in Soybean Field
2.3. Insecticides
2.4. Methods of Laboratory Bioassay
2.5. Methods of Pot Trials
2.6. Field Spraying Experiment
2.7. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Occurrence Dynamics in Soybean Field
3.2. Laboratory Bioassay
3.3. Pot Trials
3.4. Field Efficacy Experiment
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
| M. glycines | Mycterothrips glycines Okamoto |
| F. fusca | Frankliniella fusca (Hinds) |
| F. schultzei | Frankliniella schultzei (Trybom) |
| F. intonsa | Frankliniella intonsa (Trybom) |
| T. flavus | Thrips flavus Schrank |
| T. tabaci | Thrips tabaci Lindeman |
| M. usitatus | Megalurothrips usitatus (Bagnall) |
| g ai/ha | g active ingredient/ha |
References
- Mound, L.A.; Wang, Z.; Lima, É.F.B.; Marullo, R. Problems with the concept of ‘pest’ among the diversity of pestiferous thrips. Insects 2022, 13, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- dos Santos, J.L.; Sarmento, R.A.; Silvestre, P.P.; Noleto, L.R.; Reis, K.H.B.; Pires, W.S.; Peluzio, J.M.; Medeiros, J.G.; Santos, A.A.; Picanco, M.C. Assessing the temporal dynamics of Frankliniella schultzei (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in commercial soybean crops in North Brazil. Agric. For. Entomol. 2022, 24, 97–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warpechowski, L.F.; Steinhaus, E.A.; Moreira, R.P.; Godoy, D.N.; Preto, V.E.; Braga, L.E.; Wendt, A.d.F.; Reis, A.C.; Lima, E.F.B.; Farias, J.R.; et al. Why does identification matter? Thrips species (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) found in soybean in southern Brazil show great geographical and interspecific variation in susceptibility to insecticides. Crop Prot. 2024, 178, 106592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Keough, S.; Han, J.; Shuman, T.; Wise, K.; Nachappa, P. Effects of soybean vein necrosis virus on life history and host preference of its vector, Neohydatothrips variabilis, and evaluation of vector status of Frankliniella tritici and Frankliniella fusca. J. Econ. Entomol. 2016, 109, 1979–1987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hameed, A.; Rosa, C.; Rajotte, E.G. The effect of species soybean vein necrosis orthotospovirus (SVNV) on life table parameters of its vector, soybean thrips (Neohydatothrips variabilis Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Insects 2022, 13, 632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thekke-Veetil, T.; Lagos-Kutz, D.; McCoppin, N.K.; Hartman, G.L.; Ju, H.-K.; Lim, H.-S.; Domier, L.L. Soybean thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) harbor highly diverse populations of arthropod, fungal and plant viruses. Viruses 2020, 12, 1376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- dos Santos, R.C.; Lopes, M.C.; de Almeida Sarmento, R.; Pereira, P.S.; Picanço, M.M.; dos Santos Pires, W.; Noleto, L.R.; de Araújo, T.A.; Picanço, M.C. Conventional sampling plan for thrips in tropical soybean fields. Crop Prot. 2021, 148, 105740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Shi, S.S.; Xu, M.L.; Cui, J. Current research on soybean pest management in China. Oil Crop Sci. 2018, 3, 215–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pei, T.; Wang, L.; Zhao, Y.; Shi, S.; Gao, Y. Toxicity and efficacy of thirty insecticides against Thrips flavus in Northeast China: Laboratory, semifield, and field trials. Insects 2025, 16, 405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, D.; Yang, J.; Ding, N.; Shi, S. Effect of different plants on the growth and reproduction of Thrips flavus (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Insects 2021, 12, 502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Feng, J.; Zhang, S.; Hu, Q. Fauna Sinica: Insecta, Volume 69: Thysanoptera; Science Press: Beijing, China, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Gao, Y.; Hou, X.; Wang, D.; Li, X.; Xu, Z.; Shi, S. Identification of thrips and population dynamics of Thrips flavus in Changchun soybean fields. Chin. J. Oil Crop Sci. 2019, 41, 261–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Pei, T.; Wang, H.; Sun, C.; Wang, L.; Shi, S.; Gao, Y. Efficiency of four survey methods for thrips at flowering stage in soybean fields. Soybean Sci. 2024, 43, 326–331. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, J.W.; Kim, S.; Lee, S.; Lee, D.H. Seasonal Occurrence and Insecticide Susceptibility by Thrips on Apple Orchards in Gyeongbuk Area. Kor. J. Pestic. Sci. 2018, 22, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masumoto, M.; Okajima, S. A revision of and key to the world species of Mycterothrips Trybom (Thysanoptera, Thripidae). Zootaxa 2006, 1261, 3–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogino, T.; Uehara, T.; Muraji, M.; Yamaguchi, T.; Ichihashi, T.; Suzuki, T.; Kainoh, Y.; Shimoda, M. Violet LED light enhances the recruitment of a thrip predator in open fields. Sci. Rep. 2016, 10, 32302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mochizuki, M. Seasonal occurrence and species composition of phytoseiid mites and phytophagous thrips on forage soybean with a view to conservation of phytoseiid mites in vineyards. J. Acarol. Soc. Jpn. 2014, 23, 79–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, D.; Zhao, Y.J.; Ding, N.; Gao, B.S.; Gao, Y.; Shi, S.S. Biological activity tests and field trials of eight kinds of insecticides to Thrips flavus. Agrochemicals 2021, 60, 220–222. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xu, S.B.; Zhang, X.Z.; Wang, Y.N.; Han, R.; Miao, X.X.; Li, H.C.; Guan, R.B. Targets selection and field evaluation of an RNA biopesticide to control Phyllotreta striolata. Pest. Biochem. Physiol. 2025, 209, 106330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tang, Q.Y.; Zhang, C.X. Data Processing System (DPS) software with experimental design, statistical analysis and data mining developed for use in entomological research. Insect Sci. 2013, 20, 254–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mandal, A.H.; Sadhu, A.; Ghosh, S.; Saha, N.C.; Mossotto, C.; Pastorino, P.; Saha, S.; Faggio, C. Evaluating the impact of neonicotinoids on aquatic non-target species: A comprehensive review. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2025, 113, 104606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, F.; Xiong, W.P.; Zhang, C.; Wang, D.B.; Zhou, C.Y.; Li, W.B.; Zeng, G.M.; Song, B.; Zeng, Z.T. Neonicotinoid insecticides in non-target organisms: Occurrence, exposure, toxicity, and human health risks. J. Environ. Manag. 2025, 383, 125432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karar, H.; Javed, M.U.; Yaseen, M.; Bashir, M.A.; Sajjad, A.; Essa, M.; Wajid, M.; Mubashir, M.; Mustafa, G.; Zubair, M.; et al. Comparative efficacy of conventional vs new chemistry insecticides against mango thrips, Scirtothrips dorsalis Hood (Thripidae: Thysanoptera). J. King Saud Univ. Sci. 2022, 34, 102233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ding, J.F.; Li, H.; Zhang, Z.Q.; Lin, J.; Liu, F.; Mu, W. Thiamethoxam, clothianidin, and imidacloprid seed treatments effectively control thrips on corn under field conditions. J. Insect Sci. 2018, 18, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Walter, N.T.; Rojas, R.J.O.; Strzyzewski, I.; Funderburk, J.; Martini, X. Toxicity of different insecticides against Franklinellia invasor (Thysanoptera: Thripidae), a mango pest in central America. Fla. Entomol. 2020, 103, 296–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fan, Y.J.; Shi, X.Y. Characterization of the metabolic transformation of thiamethoxam to clothianidin in Helicoverpa armigera larvae by SPE combined UPLC-MS/MS and its relationship with the toxicity of thiamethoxam to Helicoverpa armigera larvae. J. Chromatogr. B 2017, 1061, 349–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, K.; Chen, J.W.; Huang, H.X.; Wen, H.Q.; Yang, J.F.; Geng, J.J.; Wu, S.Y. The amino acid Ser223 acts as a key site for the binding of Thrips palmi α1 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor to neonicotinoid insecticides. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2025, 213, 106484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Huang, T.B.; Dong, W.B.; Chen, J.W.; Jin, H.F.; Liu, W.J.; Li, F.; Wu, S.Y. CYP450 gene cloning and expression patterns induced by two neonicotinoid insecticides in Megalurothrips usitatus. Arch. Insect Biochem. 2025, 120, e70102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Wang, L.; Wang, W.; Yao, J.; Ullah, F.; Li, C.; Zhang, R.; Lu, Y. Susceptibility of field populations of Frankliniella intonsa to spinetoram, imidacloprid, and acetamiprid in Xinjiang cotton fields, China. Insects 2025, 16, 1234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, J.; Kim, J.H. Simultaneous analysis of fenthion and its five metabolites in produce using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Molecules 2020, 25, 1938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ataide, L.M.S.; Vargas, G.; Velazquez-Hernandez, Y.; De Giosa, M.; Reyes-Arauz, I.; Villamarin, P.; Canon, M.A.; Riley, S.S.; Revynthi, A.M. Greenhouse evaluation of conventional and biorational insecticides for managing the invasive Thrips parvispinus (Karny) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). Agriculture 2025, 15, 1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sun, Y.N.; Li, W.Z.; Xu, C.B.; Liang, Y.Y.; Ye, B.H.; Zhang, J.; Farooq, S.; Fan, Y.M.; Xie, J. Genome-wide analysis of the atp-binding cassette (ABC) transporter gene family in the bean flower thrips, Megalurothrips usitatus. Arch. Insect Biochem. 2025, 120, e70118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Zhao, X.Y.; Reitz, S.R.; Yuan, H.G.; Lei, Z.R.; Paini, D.R.; Gao, Y.L. Pesticide-mediated interspecific competition between local and invasive thrips pests. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 40512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, L.Z.; Pan, M.Y.; Hu, D.Y. An overview on the green synthesis and removal methods of pyridaben. Front. Chem. 2022, 10, 975491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- WHO. WHO Recommended Classification of Pesticides by Hazard and Guidelines to Classification, 2019 Edition; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Strolihova, A.; Velisek, J.; Stara, A. Selected neonicotinoids and associated risk for aquatic organisms. Vet. Med. 2023, 68, 313–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]



| Insecticides | Concentration (mg·L−1) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | V | |
| Thiamethoxam 30% SC | 6.0 | 12.0 | 18.0 | 240 | 30.0 |
| Clothianidin 48% SC | 6.0 | 12.0 | 18.0 | 240 | 30.0 |
| Sulfoxaflor 35% SC | 10.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 |
| Acetamiprid 25% EC | 5.0 | 15.0 | 25.0 | 35.0 | 45.0 |
| Imidacloprid 70% WP | 10.0 | 20.0 | 30.0 | 40.0 | 50.0 |
| Fenthion 50% EC | 10.0 | 18.0 | 26.0 | 34.0 | 42.0 |
| Pyridaben 30% EC | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 35.0 | 40.0 |
| Abamectin 5% EC | 20.0 | 25.0 | 30.0 | 35.0 | 40.0 |
| Beta-cypermethrin 4.5% ME | 30.0 | 50.0 | 60.0 | 70.0 | 80.0 |
| Spinetoram 6% SC | 50.0 | 60.0 | 70.0 | 80.0 | 90.0 |
| Insecticides | Concentration (g ai/ha) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | V | |
| Thiamethoxam 30% SC | 1.62 | 3.24 | 4.86 | 6.48 | 8.10 |
| Clothianidin 48% SC | 2.60 | 5.18 | 7.78 | 10.37 | 12.96 |
| Sulfoxaflor 35% SC | 1.98 | 2.97 | 3.96 | 4.95 | 5.94 |
| Acetamiprid 25% EC | 1.13 | 3.38 | 5.63 | 7.88 | 10.13 |
| Imidacloprid 70% WP | 6.30 | 12.60 | 18.90 | 25.20 | 31.50 |
| Fenthion 50% EC | 4.50 | 8.10 | 11.70 | 15.30 | 18.90 |
| Pyridaben 30% EC | 5.40 | 6.75 | 8.10 | 9.45 | 10.80 |
| Abamectin 5% EC | 0.90 | 1.13 | 1.35 | 1.58 | 1.8 |
| Beta-cypermethrin 4.5% ME | 1.22 | 2.03 | 2.43 | 2.84 | 3.24 |
| Spinetoram 6% SC | 2.70 | 3.24 | 3.78 | 4.32 | 4.86 |
| Year | Sticky Board Color | Initial Peak Period | Peak Occurrence Period | Late Peak Period | Mathematical Expressions | R2 | RMSE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Yellow | 11 July | 29 July | 10 August | 0.9972 | 52.7125 | |
| 2024 | Blue | 23 July | 5 August | 14 August | 0.9957 | 51.5082 | |
| 2025 | Yellow | 16 July | 1 August | 27 August | 0.9931 | 188.0151 | |
| 2025 | Blue | 13 July | 7 August | 31 August | 0.9950 | 90.3051 |
| Insecticide | Probit Model | Correlation Coefficient | LC50 (mg/L) 95% Confidence Interval | Relative Bioactivity Index | Chi-Square |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thiamethoxam 30% SC | y = 3.4445x + 1.3068 | 0.98 | 12.87 11.78~13.89 | 4.73 | 5.22 |
| Clothianidin 48% SC | y = 2.3474x + 2.3501 | 0.96 | 13.46 11.88~15.02 | 4.52 | 7.05 |
| Sulfoxaflor 35% SC | y = 5.0477x − 1.0393 | 0.98 | 15.72 14.68~16.67 | 3.87 | 9.09 |
| Acetamiprid 25% EC | y = 4.1324x + 0.0164 | 0.98 | 16.04 14.54~17.42 | 3.80 | 6.37 |
| Imidacloprid 70% WP | y = 2.3074x + 1.9905 | 0.97 | 20.15 17.52~22.62 | 3.02 | 6.67 |
| Fenthion 50% EC | y = 4.3363x − 0.3461 | 0.98 | 20.58 19.34~21.75 | 2.96 | 5.57 |
| Pyridaben 30% EC | y = 6.9876x − 4.6695 | 0.98 | 24.20 22.84~25.34 | 2.52 | 6.96 |
| Abamectin 5% EC | y = 5.6614x − 3.3092 | 0.99 | 29.36 28.01~30.79 | 2.07 | 2.58 |
| Beta-cypermethrin 4.5% ME | y = 3.9825x − 1.7914 | 0.96 | 50.73 47.14~54.13 | 1.20 | 7.56 |
| Spinetoram 6% SC | y = 8.7815x − 10.6750 | 0.98 | 60.88 58.41~63.02 | 1.00 | 7.47 |
| Insecticides | Dose (g ai/ha) | Insecticide Efficacy (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Days After Application (day) | ||||
| 1 | 3 | 7 | ||
| Thiamethoxam 30% SC | 1.62 | 31.39 ± 10.45 b | 46.75 ± 7.21 c | 54.21 ± 10.29 c |
| 3.24 | 48.91 ± 8.16 ab | 58.75 ± 3.75 bc | 68.42 ± 5.58 bc | |
| 4.86 | 55.47 ± 10.13 a | 61.75 ± 10.41 b | 73.16 ± 10.22 ab | |
| 6.48 | 56.20 ± 10.64 a | 70.75 ± 9.71 ab | 83.42 ± 13.50 ab | |
| 8.10 | 64.23 ± 11.07 a | 78.25 ± 4.89 a | 91.32 ± 7.06 a | |
| Clothianidin 48% SC | 2.59 | 25.55 ± 10.51 c | 40.75 ± 11.98 c | 54.21 ± 5.99 c |
| 5.18 | 39.42 ± 7.57 bc | 49.00 ± 8.22 bc | 57.37 ± 10.22 bc | |
| 7.78 | 48.18 ± 11.07 ab | 58.75 ± 7.02 b | 64.47 ± 10.81 bc | |
| 10.37 | 53.28 ± 9.79 ab | 60.25 ± 8.63 b | 72.37 ± 10.81 b | |
| 12.96 | 64.23 ± 8.71 a | 79.00 ± 8.22 a | 92.10 ± 4.83 a | |
| Sulfoxaflor 35% SC | 1.98 | 13.87 ± 4.16 e | 22.75 ± 4.28 d | 37.63 ± 7.59 c |
| 2.97 | 24.82 ± 4.16 d | 37.75 ± 4.28 c | 60.53 ± 6.24 b | |
| 3.96 | 37.23 ± 7.02 c | 52.00 ± 7.21 b | 74.74 ± 4.50 a | |
| 4.95 | 54.01 ± 7.57 b | 67.75 ± 4.28 a | 79.47 ± 7.59 a | |
| 5.94 | 67.88 ± 4.76 a | 73.75 ± 8.39 a | 88.16 ± 8.83 a | |
| Acetamiprid 25% EC | 1.125 | 10.95 ± 6.63 d | 20.50 ± 6.16 d | 43.95 ± 11.97 c |
| 3.375 | 25.55 ± 5.53 c | 37.75 ± 7.78 c | 61.32 ± 7.59 bc | |
| 5.625 | 41.61 ± 9.30 b | 59.50 ± 7.21 b | 70.00 ± 11.37 ab | |
| 7.875 | 54.01 ± 7.57 b | 69.25 ± 6.16 b | 82.63 ± 9.09 a | |
| 10.125 | 75.18 ± 6.00 a | 84.20 ± 6.16 a | 86.58 ± 4.50 a | |
| Imidacloprid 70% WP | 6.3 | 29.93 ± 10.13 b | 40.00 ± 11.56 c | 51.84 ± 10.22 c |
| 12.6 | 40.88 ± 20.87 ab | 52.00 ± 18.256 bc | 66.05 ± 21.55 bc | |
| 18.9 | 48.91 ± 12.90 ab | 60.25 ± 8.63 abc | 70.79 ± 5.99 abc | |
| 25.2 | 56.20 ± 9.30 a | 78.25 ± 13.88 a | 77.89 ± 4.50 ab | |
| 31.5 | 50.37 ± 7.57 ab | 73.00 ± 8.13 ab | 90.52 ± 4.50 a | |
| Fenthion 50% EC | 4.5 | 3.65 ± 4.90 d | 13.75 ± 5.93 c | 32.10 ± 9.42 c |
| 8.1 | 9.49 ± 7.02 cd | 26.50 ± 8.63 c | 37.63 ± 10.22 c | |
| 11.7 | 20.44 ± 7.02 bc | 42.25 ± 7.78 b | 62.11 ± 11.71 b | |
| 15.3 | 30.66 ± 8.16 ab | 58.75 ± 8.39 a | 71.58 ± 6.49 b | |
| 18.9 | 42.34 ± 7.02 a | 70.75 ± 7.21 a | 90.53 ± 9.09 a | |
| Pyridaben 30% EC | 5.4 | 3.65 ± 5.53 d | 17.50 ± 5.93 e | 32.11 ± 7.59 c |
| 6.75 | 12.41 ± 5.77 cd | 32.50 ± 5.93 d | 50.26 ± 8.19 b | |
| 8.1 | 23.36 ± 5.77 bc | 47.50 ± 5.93 c | 51.84 ± 7.59 b | |
| 9.45 | 34.31 ± 5.77 b | 62.50 ± 5.93 b | 78.68 ± 10.67 a | |
| 10.8 | 50.37 ± 8.40 a | 77.50 ± 5.93 a | 88.16 ± 6.24 a | |
| Abamectin 5% EC | 0.9 | 19.71 ± 9.30 a | 31.00 ± 12.04 c | 36.84 ± 10.06 c |
| 1.13 | 40.15 ± 11.99 b | 49.00 ± 7.78 b | 52.63 ± 9.26 bc | |
| 1.35 | 47.45 ± 11.71 ab | 52.00 ± 7.21 b | 61.32 ± 9.00 b | |
| 1.58 | 48.18 ± 3.05 ab | 67.00 ± 4.89 a | 84.21 ± 8.83 a | |
| 1.8 | 58.39 ± 4.16 a | 70.75 ± 5.56 a | 89.74 ± 5.99 a | |
| Beta-cypermethrin 4.5% ME | 1.22 | 23.36 ± 7.74 d | 41.50 ± 5.03 d | 55.79 ± 9.42 b |
| 2.03 | 38.69 ± 4.76 c | 54.25 ± 4.89 cd | 61.32 ± 7.59 b | |
| 2.43 | 48.91 ± 7.30 bc | 58.75 ± 10.27 bc | 73.16 ± 11.30 b | |
| 2.84 | 54.01 ± 7.57 b | 73.00 ± 14.86 ab | 69.21 ± 10.22 ab | |
| 3.24 | 70.80 ± 9.30 a | 85.75 ± 5.56 a | 89.74 ± 8.19 a | |
| Spinetoram 6% SC | 2.7 | 27.74 ± 6.53 b | 37.00 ± 8.95 b | 44.74 ± 9.26 c |
| 3.24 | 37.96 ± 9.30 b | 45.25 ± 11.12 b | 55.00 ± 12.67 bc | |
| 3.78 | 45.26 ± 9.30 ab | 49.00 ± 9.41 b | 62.89 ± 10.29 bc | |
| 4.32 | 48.91 ± 16.92 ab | 57.25 ± 16.47 ab | 72.37 ± 10.06 ab | |
| 4.86 | 66.42 ± 13.75 a | 74.50 ± 8.13 a | 87.37 ± 5.85 a | |
| Insecticides | Dose (g ai/ha) | Field Efficacy (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Days After Application (day) | |||||
| 1 | 3 | 7 | 14 | ||
| Thiamethoxam 30% SC | 1.62 | 15.48 ± 3.44 b | 40.47 ± 9.20 a | 37.19 ± 6.83 b | 43.23 ± 7.01 b |
| 3.24 | 66.13 ± 3.34 a | 47.15 ± 5.84 a | 75.47 ± 0.32 a | 57.68 ± 9.33 ab | |
| 4.86 | 61.14 ± 5.94 a | 31.53 ± 20.43 a | 70.35 ± 4.02 a | 45.40 ± 17.61 b | |
| 6.48 | 50.56 ± 8.97 a | 64.78 ± 3.92 a | 69.56 ± 3.46 a | 63.11 ± 11.47 ab | |
| 8.10 | 59.05 ± 11.17 a | 67.73 ± 6.31 a | 77.34 ± 5.50 a | 85.89 ± 2.91 a | |
| Clothianidin 48% SC | 2.59 | 45.75 ± 7.77 ab | 41.25 ± 4.83 a | 41.59 ± 8.34 b | 64.35 ± 6.43 a |
| 5.18 | 37.97 ± 5.85 ab | 36.08 ± 8.28 a | 56.52 ± 5.84 ab | 79.50 ± 1.79 a | |
| 7.78 | 30.31 ± 7.98 b | 44.75 ± 13.11 a | 74.26 ± 2.70 a | 67.98 ± 4.90 a | |
| 10.37 | 62.58 ± 13.41 ab | 24.74 ± 6.08 a | 67.44 ± 4.38 ab | 79.52 ± 2.04 a | |
| 12.96 | 69.20 ± 2.24 a | 44.12 ± 5.15 a | 68.83 ± 6.73 ab | 80.94 ± 5.93 a | |
| Imidacloprid 70% WP | 6.3 | 56.46 ± 5.87 a | 28.00 ± 1.89 a | 34.40 ± 3.66 a | 35.93 ± 4.31 a |
| 12.6 | 36.65 ± 5.49 a | 30.29 ± 10.42 a | 39.18 ± 2.44 a | 37.27 ± 3.05 a | |
| 18.9 | 47.73 ± 7.84 a | 41.70 ± 9.91 a | 45.50 ± 11.17 a | 32.58 ± 8.14 a | |
| 25.2 | 35.30 ± 8.23 a | 52.34 ± 4.57 a | 42.37 ± 0.92 a | 38.11 ± 1.89 a | |
| 31.5 | 39.04 ± 5.23 a | 45.88 ± 5.56 a | 51.22 ± 5.13 a | 42.16 ± 0.70 a | |
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. |
© 2026 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.
Share and Cite
Zhou, Y.; Pei, T.; Li, X.; Zhang, L.; Du, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, L.; Gao, Y. Occurrence Dynamics and Chemical Control of Mycterothrips glycines in Soybean Field in Northeast China. Insects 2026, 17, 365. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17040365
Zhou Y, Pei T, Li X, Zhang L, Du Z, Zhao Y, Wang L, Gao Y. Occurrence Dynamics and Chemical Control of Mycterothrips glycines in Soybean Field in Northeast China. Insects. 2026; 17(4):365. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17040365
Chicago/Turabian StyleZhou, Yue, Tianhao Pei, Xiaoshuang Li, Liyan Zhang, Zhengxiao Du, Yijin Zhao, Long Wang, and Yu Gao. 2026. "Occurrence Dynamics and Chemical Control of Mycterothrips glycines in Soybean Field in Northeast China" Insects 17, no. 4: 365. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17040365
APA StyleZhou, Y., Pei, T., Li, X., Zhang, L., Du, Z., Zhao, Y., Wang, L., & Gao, Y. (2026). Occurrence Dynamics and Chemical Control of Mycterothrips glycines in Soybean Field in Northeast China. Insects, 17(4), 365. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects17040365

