Next Article in Journal
Comprehensive Analysis of Soil Physicochemical Properties and Optimization Strategies for “Yantai Fuji 3” Apple Orchards
Previous Article in Journal
Combined High Irradiance and Water Deficit Alters the Anatomy and Physiology of Photomorphogenic Mutant Micro-Tom Plants
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Agriculture
Volume 15
Issue 14
10.3390/agriculture15141519
agriculture-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

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

The Influence of Microorganism on Insect-Related Pesticide Resistance

by
Qiqi Fan
1,*,
Hong Sun
2 and
Pei Liang
1
1
Department of Entomology, College of Plant Protection, China Agricultural University, Beijing 100193, China
2
State Key Laboratory for Biology of Plant Diseases and Insect Pests, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100193, China
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Agriculture 2025, 15(14), 1519; https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15141519 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 21 May 2025 / Revised: 9 July 2025 / Accepted: 13 July 2025 / Published: 14 July 2025
(This article belongs to the Section Crop Protection, Diseases, Pests and Weeds)
Versions Notes

Abstract

Insect pests inflict significant agricultural and economic losses on crops globally. Chemical control refers to the use of agrochemicals, such as insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides, to manage pests and diseases. Chemical control is still the prioritized method, as insecticides are highly effective and toxic to insect pests. However, it reduces the quality of the environment, threatens human health, and causes serious 3R (reduce, reuse, and recycle) problems. Current advances in the mining of functional symbiotic bacteria resources provide the potential to assuage the use of insecticides while maintaining an acceptably low level of crop damage. Recent research on insect–microbe symbiosis has uncovered a mechanism labeled “detoxifying symbiosis”, where symbiotic microorganisms increase host insect resistance through the metabolism of toxins. In addition, the physiological compensation effect caused by insect resistance affects the ability of the host to regulate the community composition of symbiotic bacteria. This paper reviews the relationship between symbiotic bacteria, insects, and insecticide resistance, focusing on the effects of insecticide resistance on the composition of symbiotic bacteria and the role of symbiotic bacteria in the formation of resistance. The functional symbiotic bacteria resources and their mechanisms of action need to be further explored in the future so as to provide theoretical support for the development of pest control strategies based on microbial regulation.

1. Introduction

China was one of the earliest countries to use pesticides to control crop pests and is also the main producer and user of pesticides [1,2]. With the widespread application of pesticides in agriculture and forestry, insect resistance to these chemicals has been increasing and has become a significant limiting factor for environmental protection and sustainable agriculture [3]. Insect resistance is defined as the ability to develop a population where individual insects tolerate doses that would kill the majority of insects in a normal population [4]. Currently, more than 600 pest species have shown resistance to different types of insecticides, and the rate of resistance growth shows an increasing trend [5]. Multiple pest control strategies have been developed to delay the development of insecticide resistance, including crop rotation, chemical insecticides, the sterile insect technique, and biological control using natural predators and parasitoids [6,7,8]. The sterile insect technique specifically involves releasing sterile male insects that mate with wild females, thereby reducing reproductive success and subsequent pest populations [9]. While chemical pesticides have been widely employed, their usage has become increasingly controversial due to the documented risks they pose to non-target species, ecosystem integrity, and human health [10,11,12]. Biological control through parasitoid release, botanical pesticides, and microbial pesticides represents a new alternative, although its effectiveness remains inconsistent across applications [13,14]. In recent years, many studies have found that there is a certain relationship between insect symbiotic bacteria and insecticide resistance, which provides a new direction for integrated pest management, BT plants, biologicals, etc. [15,16,17,18]. The use of various strategies, such as the sterile insect technique, CRISPR/Cas9, RNAi, or the complete elimination of gut microbes, may have the most potential for integrated pest management. A detailed study of these insect symbionts and their regulation can open up a new era for pest control strategies.
Studies have shown that nearly all insects contain endosymbionts. The ubiquitous presence of symbiotic bacteria in insects has fostered intricate co-evolutionary dynamics, establishing multifaceted mutualisms [19,20,21]. Symbiotic bacteria regulate the host’s nutrient and reproductive metabolism processes by providing essential amino acids, digestive enzymes, or vitamins [22,23,24]. Yang et al. [25] found that Wolbachia and Spiroplasma infection could induce cytoplasmic incompatibility in Tetranychus truncatus (Acari: Tetranychidae), resulting in the death of female T. truncatus and significantly reducing the fertility of co-infected female individuals. Symbiotic bacteria also help to regulate the resistance of host insects to natural enemies, pathogenic microorganisms, and chemical pesticides [15,26]. In addition, symbiotic bacteria can regulate direct host–environment interactions by influencing host body color, drug resistance, heat resistance, and other factors [27,28,29]. The composition and changes in symbiotic bacterial communities directly affect the growth, development, metabolism, and adaptability of insects to their environment [30,31]. However, an underexplored dimension lies in the microbial mediation of xenobiotic resistance mechanisms against insecticides.
The causal relationship between symbiotic bacteria and insect resistance is reflected in two ways. First, the physiological compensation effect caused by insect resistance weakens the ability of insect resistance to regulate the composition of the symbiotic bacteria community, resulting in changes in the composition of symbiotic bacteria [15,32,33]. Second, symbiotic bacteria participate in forming insect resistance, including improving insect fitness and regulating insect detoxification metabolism [17,34,35]. The complex interdependence between insects and their microbiota presents significant challenges in distinguishing host-mediated defenses from symbiotic bacteria contributions.
A scoping review on insect endosymbiosis in relation to pest management was performed on the Web of Science using the key terms “insects; microorganisms; insecticide resistance”. The search was completed with a literature review of the selected articles. This review examines documented cases where symbiotic microorganisms potentially increase pest insect survival through detoxification mechanisms while exploring translational applications for developing novel pest management strategies. We focus on systems demonstrating crucial symbiotic bacteria involvement in neutralizing toxic compounds for their insect hosts.

2. Association Between Endosymbionts and Insecticide Resistance of Insects

There is a specific interaction between symbiotic bacteria and insecticide resistance in insects, demonstrating dual host–insecticide specificity. Studies have shown that when different host insects develop resistance to the same class of insecticides, their corresponding resistance-associated symbiotic bacteria exhibit interspecific variations [30,36,37]. Conversely, within the same host insect species, resistance to different insecticides correlates with distinct symbiotic microbial communities [38,39,40]. A study was performed to evaluate the effectiveness of the insect gut microbiota in the biodegradation of organophosphate pesticides, specifically polyethylene and chlorpyrifos in citrus mealybug, Planococcus citri (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae). In this study, four bacterial species (Bacillus licheniformis, Bacillus subtilis, Bacillus cereus, and Pseudomonas putida) were isolated from P. citri guts, and their role in organophosphate detoxification and resistance development in citrus mealybugs was examined. The results of this study indicated that these four symbiotic bacteria used chlorpyrifos and polyethylene as the sole carbon energy and source. At the same time, these bacteria could increase the enzymatic and growth activity of the host [38]. Almeida et al. [41] reported similar results, observing that gut bacteria from the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), including Leclercia adecarboxylata, Arthrobacter nicotinovorans, Pseudomonas stutzeri, P. psychrotolerans, and Microbacterium arborescens, can degrade lambda-cyhalothrin, deltamethrin, lufenuron, spinosyn, and chlorpyrifos ethyl, respectively. Compared to susceptible strains, resistant insects display two characteristic alterations in their symbiotic bacterial composition: either a significant increase or decrease in the relative abundance of specific bacterial taxa or the disappearance of original symbionts accompanied by colonization by novel bacterial species.
There were significant divergences in symbiotic bacteria composition between susceptible and insecticide-resistant strains across multiple species. Malathi et al. [42] examined the diversity of gut microbial species at different resistance levels in brown planthoppers (Nilaparvata lugens (Homoptera: Delphacidae)). The findings showed that the gut of the susceptible and resistant populations was enriched with a wide range of bacterial species but in different abundances. It was demonstrated that Proteobacteria dominated the susceptible populations with a proportion of 99.86%, while in the resistant populations, Firmicutes (46.06%), Bacteroidetes (30.8%), and Proteobacteria (15.49%) were the dominant bacteria. In a different study, the gut symbiotic bacteria species from the Asian tiger mosquito, Aedes albopictus (Skuse), were investigated for deltamethrin resistance. 16S rRNA results showed that the symbiotic bacteria groups from the prothiofos-resistant larval were more diverse. Additionally, this study explained that Serratia oryzae enhanced resistance in Ae. albopictus through upregulation of the expression of metabolic detoxification genes. Furthermore, the ability of S. oryzae to use deltamethrin as a sole carbon source suggests that it has the ability to biodegrade deltamethrin in vitro, which is critical for insecticide resistance development [34]. Moreover, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner)-resistant populations not only maintain significantly richer culturable gut microbiota than their susceptible counterparts but also show stronger insecticide-driven microbial shifts compared to host plant-induced variations [43]. These pieces of evidence emphasize the critical contribution of symbiotic communities in the evolution of insecticide resistance.
Changes in the sensitivity of host insects to insecticides often accompany changes in the abundance of dominant symbiotic bacteria. Xia et al. [44] researched the relationship between symbiotic bacteria species in susceptible and insecticide resistance strains of the diamondback moth Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae). The dominant bacteria in susceptible strains were Vibrionales, with a proportion of 22.51% in the total tags, Lactobacillales (Phylum Firmicutes), with 29.49%, and Enterobacteriales (Phylum Proteobacteria), with 45.17%, while in chlorpyrifos-resistant lines and fipronil-resistant lines, 54.76% and 48.51% were identified as Lactobacillales, 21.13% and 10.77% as Enterobacteriales, and 22.89% and 38.21% as Vibrionales, respectively. In addition, the abundance of Lactobacillus in the midgut of both resistant strains was increased under insecticide-stressed conditions. Similarly, cyantraniliprole-resistant P. xylostella demonstrated increased Proteobacteria abundance but diminished Firmicutes representation relative to susceptible strains [33]. Zhang et al. [45] found that field-evolved polyresistant N. lugens strains displayed heightened levels of Wolbachia, Actinobacteria, and Herbaspirillum alongside reduced colonization by Pantoea and Stenotrophomonas compared to laboratory-sensitive lines. From these results, it is shown that the diversity of bacterial species is involved in the defense mechanism and improves the resistance to toxic chemicals. An experiment was conducted to explore the effect of symbiotic bacteria in the process of resistance to dichlorvos in the host (Callosobruchus maculatus). The insect pests were examined at generations F1 and F5. The findings regarding adult mortality and 16S rRNA showed that the susceptibility of experimental beetles to dichlorvos was significantly affected by their symbiotic status [46]. In a separate study, an investigation of symbiotic bacteria from Aphis gossypii Glover (Homoptera: aphididae) was performed to study spirotetramat resistance. As indicated by the results, antibiotics, especially ampicillin and tetracycline, increased spirotetramat toxicity in resistant aphids. In addition, the 16S rRNA results demonstrated a more diverse bacterial community in spirotetramat-resistant adult guts [47]. This collective evidence underscores the functional significance of dominant symbiont dynamics in insects’ resistance trajectories.
The interplay between symbiotic microbiota and insecticide resistance exhibits sex specificity. In Culex pipiens L. (Diptera: Culicidae) populations carrying ace-1R or Ester4 resistance alleles, field-derived females harbor significantly higher Wolbachia titers than laboratory strains with females displaying 10- to 30-fold greater Wolbachia abundance than conspecific males. Resistant males exhibit elevated Wolbachia colonization compared to susceptible males, while resistant females paradoxically show reduced Wolbachia loads relative to susceptible females [48]. This sexual dimorphism suggests that beyond resistance-driven selection, there is a potential influence of the sexually dimorphic reproductive organ morphology. More specifically, larger ovarian or testicular tissue volume may critically regulate symbiont composition [49].
Insect-associated microbial communities demonstrate remarkable plasticity, which is shaped by intricate inter-symbiont interactions. Across host–symbiont systems, resistance-associated phenotypes vary substantially in their microbial signatures [15,30]. The environmental sensitivity of certain symbionts often triggers competitive or compensatory niche partitioning. For instance, siderophore-producing bacteria dominate microbial iron sequestration, creating nutritional bottlenecks that suppress competitor proliferation and enforce exclusive host–symbiont partnerships [50,51]. These context-dependent microbial dynamics underscore the evolutionary arms race between cooperative symbiosis and resource competition in shaping resistance phenotypes. In addition, there are also differences between dominant and differential microorganisms in hosts of different ages. As in the case of mosquitoes (Aedes albopictus), there was a higher diversity of Flavobacterium spp., Pantoea spp., and Aeromonas spp. in the gut of resistant field larvae compared with sensitive larvae. In contrast, the abundance of Flavobacterium spp., Pantoea spp., and Aeromonas spp. was significantly higher in the gut of tolerant field adults than in sensitive adults [52].
Many studies have shown that symbiotic bacteria paradoxically increase or reduce the sensitivity of insects to insecticides [53,54,55]. Deng et al. [56] studied the relationship between pesticide resistance in the Asian tiger mosquito (Aedes albopictus) and the symbiotic bacteria. They found that S. marcescens significantly increased A. albopictus survival after exposure to the insecticide deltamethrin. The activities of glutathione S-transferase (GST) and mixed-function oxidase (MFO) were found to be higher in mosquitoes containing S. marcescens. Specifically, two detoxification metabolism genes (ABCG4 and GSTD1) regulated by S. marcescens actively contribute to the development of resistance. Pan et al. [57] concluded that insect symbiotic bacteria had an important role in bifenthrin and thiamethoxam resistance in Diaphorina citri (Homoptera: Psyllidae). The results indicated that the host susceptivity to bifenthrin and thiamethoxam was significantly increased and the relative abundance of Wolbachia and Profftella was significantly reduced after antibiotic treatment. Furthermore, RNAi and in vitro functional assays confirmed that bacterial symbionts might affect host insecticide susceptibility by altering the expression levels of detoxifying genes in D. citri. Barnard et al. [58] reported the differential effects of symbiotic bacteria on the insecticide resistance of Anopheles arabiensis were studied. The results of this study indicated that bacterial supplementation affects insecticide tolerance. It was found that mortality was induced in An. arabiensis females by malathion and deltamethrin, following the supplementation of the Gram-positive bacterium Streptococcus pyrogenes. Moreover, they observed that the addition of vancomycin to the blood meal reduced mosquito resistance to deltamethrin, whereas the addition of streptomycin and gentamicin increased resistance. In another retrospective study on the relationship between the diversity of endosymbiotic species and insecticide resistance in Blattella germanica (L.), the results indicated that beta-cypermethrin-resistant cockroaches had a delayed developmental period and a shortened adult longevity compared to susceptible cockroaches. The variety of bacterial species in the digestive tract of B. germanica was studied using 16S rRNA gene amplicons. The results explained that in the foregut and midgut of hosts, the relative abundances of Acetobacteraceae and Lactobacillus were considerably lower in the resistant strain compared to the susceptible strain [59]. There is an interdependent relationship between symbiotic microorganisms, insecticides, and host insects, and the three interact with each other. The intestinal tract of insects supports microbial physiological processes and shapes their overall health and function. Also, the symbiotic microorganisms’ community structure affects insecticide toxicity and host behavior. The symbiotic relationship between insects and their gut microbes represents a complex biological adaptation that can affect the adaptability and viability of the host under pesticide stress.

3. Molecular Mechanism of Resistance Against Insecticides by Endosymbionts

Recent research has shown that insects have evolved the ability to resist toxic chemicals, and some symbiotic bacteria have the ability to degrade insecticides and improve insects’ ability to detoxify exogenous substances [60,61,62,63]. Various functional parts of an insect’s gut microorganisms, such as genes and enzymes, are responsible for developing pesticide resistance [37]. The causal link between symbiotic bacteria and insect resistance includes the direct degradation of certain insecticides by symbiotic bacteria and the indirect regulation of insect resistance by symbiotic bacteria (Table 1).

3.1. Direct Degradation of Pesticides by Symbiotic Bacteria

Symbiotic bacteria species isolated from the insect gut can directly degrade insecticides [82,83,84]. For instance, Goswami et al. [85] studied the degradation of various insecticides by isolating bacteria from rice stem borers and studied the resistance mechanisms. In their report, larvae from three rice stem borers (Sesamia inferens (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), Scirpophaga incertulus (Walker) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), and Chilo suppressalis (Lepidoptera: Crambidae)) were collected, and 16 bacterial strains were isolated. The results of this work showed that all the bacterial species screened were effective in degrading deltamethrin, chlorpyrifos, and chlorantraniliprole, utilizing their residues as the carbon and energy source that facilitates their growth. Gas chromatography and mass spectrometry analyses revealed that the bacterial strains had the potential to degrade 44.87–92.02% of chlorpyrifos and 10.52–74.38% of chlorantraniliprole, respectively. Similarly, another investigation examined the role of symbiotic bacteria in pesticide degradation and the development of resistance against various insecticides in adults of three stored grain pests (Cryptolestes ferruginous (Steph.) (Coleoptera: Cucujidae), Rhyzopertha dominica (F.), and Sitophilus oryzae (L.)). In this research, five bacterial species from insect guts, namely Bacillus flexus, Bacillus subtilis Cohn, Bacillus licheniformis Chester, Enterobacter sp., and Enterococcus faecalis Schleifer, were isolated and examined for their effect in deleting pirimiphos-methyl, malathion, and deltamethrin in stored grain pests. The results of this report indicated that these bacteria could utilize and degrade these three insecticides as their sources of carbon and nutrients. At the same time, they found that bacteria could enhance the survival rates of their beetle hosts when treated with insecticides, which implies that the host insecticide tolerance was highly dependent on insecticide dosage [86].
Organophosphates are among the most commonly overused agricultural insecticides to control pests in horticultural and agricultural crops. The persistent residues of these neurotoxic substances pose substantial environmental hazards while also demonstrating detrimental impacts on non-target species through bioaccumulation and disease transmission pathways. Therefore, it is important to remove these residues from the ecosystem through potential degradation methods. A symbiotic gut bacterium, Serratia marcescens, was isolated from the midgut of Riptortus pedestris (Hemiptera: Alydidae) and investigated for the efficiency of its degradation of organophosphate insecticides. As a result of this study, the insect gut microbiota could effectively degrade dimethoate into metabolites, which demonstrates that symbiotic bacteria contribute to the development of host resistance to toxic chemicals. In addition, it explains how genes related to the organophosphorus degradation of MBL-fold metallo-hydrolase were found in the bacterial isolate. It was also found that S. marcescens could stably colonize the insect midgut and improve the host’s survival in the presence of dimethoate [87].
Pyrethroids are commonly used insecticides often used in agriculture, forestry, horticulture, and public health and can effectively control a variety of insect pests. For the biodegradation of deltamethrin, 14 symbiotic bacteria were isolated from the guts of Orthoptera and Dermaptera and analyzed for their degradation efficiency at multiple locations. Bacterial strains were identified as Acinetobacter lwoffii, Bacillus atrophaeus, Brevundimonas vesicularis, Bacillus licheniformis, Enterobacter intermedius, Forficula auricularia, Gryllus bimaculatus, Poecilimon tauricola, Locusta migratoria, Serratia marcescens, Yersinia frederiksenii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Rhodococcus coprophilus, Pseudomonas syringae, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia by 16S rRNA analysis. This study found that all bacterial strains provided a satisfactory degradation rate of up to 100 mg/L of deltamethrin [88]. A newly identified bacterium, Glutamicibacter ectropisis, was isolated from Ectropis grisescens (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) for the potential biodegradation of bifenthrin. This study demonstrated that G. ectropisis mediated E. grisescens resistance by directly degrading bifenthrin, and the main metabolite was 2,4-ditert-butylphenol. An additional study revealed that when the E. grisescens strain lacking G. ectropisis was treated with bifenthrin, the survival rates significantly decreased, which implies that the development of bifenthrin resistance in E. grisescens was highly correlated with the abundance of G. ectropisis [89]. In another study, the mechanism of resistance to neonicotinoid insecticides through endosymbiotic bacterial biodegradation was reported in Aphis gossypii Glover. In this study, a symbiont Sphingomonas was isolated from the gut of aphids to detoxify imidacloprid. The results of the degradation experiment indicated that Sphingomonas could degrade imidacloprid with a degradation efficiency exceeding 50%. This study also explained that this microbiota could mediate A. gossypii resistance against imidacloprid by means of nitroreduction and hydroxylation [90]. The above findings suggest that resistance is also developed due to the degradation of parent compounds into their metabolites by means of insect endosymbiosis. Insect symbiotic microorganism species actively promoted insect resistance against insect pesticides.

3.2. Indirect Regulation of Symbiotic Bacteria on the Host

Endosymbionts can also regulate insect resistance to insecticides by activating the detoxification enzyme system or immune system in the host [91,92,93]. For example, the enzymatic molecular mechanism for the biodegradation of abamectin, pyridaben, and cyflumetofen in the spotted spider mite (Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae)) was studied. In this investigation, it was found that Wolbachia engaged in a defensive mechanism and increased T. urticae’s ability to defend against toxic chemicals. After exposure to pesticides, the survival rate of T. urticae significantly increased when supplied with Wolbachia. Furthermore, Wolbachia-infected mites showed a higher expression of detoxification genes such as glutathione-S-transferase (GST), P450, carboxyl/cholinesterases, and ABC transporters. Based on RNA interference experiments, it was found that Wolbachia increases the resistance of mites to cyflumetofen by promoting the expression of TuCYP392D2 and TuGSTd05. This study also suggested that Wolbachia plays a key role in orchestrating pesticide resistance by modulating host detoxification [94]. Another study was carried out to evaluate the impact of Wolbachia on bifenthrin to evaluate the resistance mechanism in Ectropis grisescens (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). After antibiotic treatment, the Wolbachia-free E. grisescens were more susceptible to bifenthrin compared to Wolbachia-infected E. grisescens and had a lower P450 activity. Based on transcriptome and 16S rRNA analysis, they found that removing Wolbachia reduced the xenobiotic metabolism of P450s, while the transcript level of two cytochrome P450 genes (Egri016388 and Egri002583) also significantly decreased [95].
For Plutella xylostella, the gut microbiota secretes chitinase enzymes and thus increases diamondback moth tolerance to prothiofos [96]. Furthermore, an experiment was conducted to study organophosphate pesticide resistance in Drosophila melanogaster provided by probiotic strains of Lactobacillus. The results demonstrated that L. rhamnosus may reduce exposure to toxic organophosphate insecticides by means of passive binding. The results also revealed that survival rates in D. melanogaster significantly increased after Lactobacillus inoculation when treated with parathion and chlorpyrifos. The test revealed that L. rhamnosus strain GG and L. rhamnosus strain GR-1 have the potential to degrade organophosphate insecticides (CP and parathion) in an aqueous solution, which implies that the combined efflux of bacteria to compounds is also one way to reduce toxic substances [21]. Together, these examples illustrate that insect microorganisms can regulate insect resistance to agrochemicals by activating the detoxification of the enzyme or immune system in hosts.
On the other hand, some microorganisms can increase the toxicity of insecticides, highlighting the complexity of symbiotic bacteria metabolism and its varying effects on insecticide resistance [97,98]. Paddock et al. [99] investigated the effects of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) on the western corn rootworm under laboratory conditions. The analysis of 16S rRNA gene sequencing showed that the sensitive population had more abundant intestinal bacteria than the Bt-resistant western corn rootworm. Furthermore, this report suggests that symbiotic bacteria reduce Bt resistance through the formation of sepsis by combining intestinal bacteria with Bt toxins, which results in a sharp increase in the midgut and blood fluid microbiota and changes in composition. Similar findings were reported in P. xylostella. This study found that the sensitivity of the diamondback moth to Bt was significantly reduced after antibiotic treatment, while the survival rate of the host was considerably lowered after re-inoculation with Acinetobacter guillouiae, Enterococcus mundtii, and Enterobacter maltose. These results revealed that the binding of Cry1Ac to gut bacteria accelerates host death [100]. Another study examined the relationship between indoxacarb, antibiotics, and intestinal hydrolase activity in the German cockroach (Blattella germanica L.). The results showed that indoxacarb could be converted by intestinal bacteria into a more toxic metabolite, N-decarboxylmethoxylated JW062. Antibiotic treatment increased cockroaches’ tolerance to indoxacarb by preventing the formation of N-decarboxylmethoxylated JW062 [101]. Similarly, it was found that Lactobacillus plantarum in Drosophila melanogaster can metabolize chlorpyrifos into chlorpyrifos oxon, which has higher toxicity [39]. The above findings suggest that not all symbiotic microorganisms’ interactions with insecticides result in beneficial host outcomes. In summary, these cases illustrate the variety of ways in which symbiotic bacteria modulate insect responses to insecticides via indirect mechanisms.

4. Conclusions and Future Perspectives

Insect endosymbionts act as evolutionary double-edged swords in insecticide responses, mitigating toxicity via enzymatic detoxification but also potentially exacerbating damage through bioactivation, which is governed by specific host–symbiont–ecological context interactions and toxin molecular structures. These symbiont-mediated resistance mechanisms underpin insects’ adaptation to both plant defensive metabolites and synthetic agrochemicals. Mechanistic decoding reveals the co-evolutionary selection for metabolic resistance pathways and context-dependent fitness trade-offs. Study of the biochemical and ecological mechanisms of symbiotic bacteria enables the precise manipulation of insect microbiomes for resistance management and next-generation probiotic biocontrol agents. These insights are important for controlling pest resistance and understanding biological control, chemical pollution, ecological restoration, pharmaceutical actions, and human–microbiome interactions.
In the future, the understanding of symbiont–host relationships can be utilized to design biological control strategies, delay the development of pesticide resistance, and move toward achieving sustainable agricultural practices. Symbiotic modification technology based on genomic reprogramming and symbiotic inhibition technology related to directed resistance are emerging technologies with great potential and can promote the personalized control of specific pest species and populations. These methods are likely to become new approaches for pest control. Future research should focus on the mining and utilization of functional symbiotic bacteria to reveal the potential mechanisms of symbiotic bacteria transmission and the factors influencing their stability within and among host populations. Studying these processes will not only deepen our understanding of symbiotic-mediated resistance but also pave the way for sophisticated tools in pest management. Advancing molecular technology to identify, monitor, and manipulate symbiotic bacteria with specific functions may completely transform our methods of controlling resistant pests and usher in a new era of environmentally friendly agricultural practices.

Author Contributions

Q.F. conceived the ideas of this review. Q.F., H.S. and P.L. contributed to the writing and revising of the manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to John Richard Schrock (Emporia State University, USA) for revising the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Sun, S.Y.; Hu, R.F.; Zhang, C.; Shi, G.M. Do farmers misuse pesticides in crop production in China? Evidence from a farm household survey. Pest Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 2133–2141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Wu, Q.L.; Zeng, J.; Wu, K.M. Research and application of crop pest monitoring and early warning technology in China. Front. Agric. Sci. Eng. 2022, 9, 19–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Souto, A.L.; Sylvestre, M.; Tölke, E.D.; Tavares, J.F.; Barbosa-Filho, J.M.; Cebrián-Torrejón, G. Plant-derived pesticides as an alternative to pest management and sustainable agricultural production: Prospects, applications and challenges. Molecules 2021, 26, 4835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Siddiqui, J.A.; Fan, R.; Naz, H.; Bamisile, B.S.; Hafeez, M.; Ghani, M.I.; Wei, Y.; Xu, Y.; Chen, X. Insights into insecticide-resistance mechanisms in invasive species: Challenges and control strategies. Front. Physiol. 2023, 13, 1112278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Moustafa, M.A.; Moteleb, R.I.; Ghoneim, Y.F.; Hafez, S.S.; Ali, R.E.; Eweis, E.E.; Hassan, N.N. Monitoring resistance and biochemical studies of three Egyptian field strains of Spodoptera littoralis (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to six insecticides. Toxics 2023, 11, 211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Plá, I.; García de Oteyza, J.; Tur, C.; Martínez, M.Á.; Laurín, M.C.; Alonso, E.; Martínez, M.; Martín, Á.; Sanchis, R.; Navarro, M.C.; et al. Sterile insect technique programme against Mediterranean fruit fly in the Valencian community (Spain). Insects 2021, 12, 415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Abbas, M.; Saleem, M.; Hussain, D.; Ramzan, M.; Jawad Saleem, M.; Abbas, S.; Hussain, N.; Irshad, M.; Hussain, K.; Ghouse, G.; et al. Review on integrated disease and pest management of field crops. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2022, 42, 3235–3243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Bhandari, M.K.; Paudel, M. Genetic, biological and sterile insect techniques: Insect pest management strategies: A review. Agric. Rev. 2024, 45, 390–399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Lance, D.R.; McInnis, D.O. Biological basis of the sterile insect technique. In Sterile Insect Technique; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2021; pp. 113–142. [Google Scholar]
  10. Alengebawy, A.; Abdelkhalek, S.T.; Qureshi, S.R.; Wang, M.Q. Heavy metals and pesticides toxicity in agricultural soil and plants: Ecological risks and human health implications. Toxics 2021, 9, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Zhou, W.; Li, M.; Achal, V. A comprehensive review on environmental and human health impacts of chemical pesticide usage. Emerg. Contam. 2024, 11, 100410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Bamal, D.; Duhan, A.; Pal, A.; Beniwal, R.K.; Kumawat, P.; Dhanda, S.; Goyat, A.; Hooda, V.S.; Yadav, R. Herbicide risks to non-target species the environment: A review. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2024, 22, 2977–3032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chowdhury, S.K.; Banerjee, M.; Basnett, D.; Mazumdar, T. Natural pesticides for pest control in agricultural crops: An alternative and eco-friendly method. Plant Sci. Today 2024, 11, 433–450. [Google Scholar]
  14. Fellin, L.; Grassi, A.; Puppato, S.; Saddi, A.; Anfora, G.; Ioriatti, C.; Rossi-Stacconi, M.V. First report on classical biological control releases of the larval parasitoid Ganaspis brasiliensis against Drosophila suzukii in northern Italy. BioControl 2023, 68, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhao, M.; Lin, X.Y.; Guo, X.R. The role of insect symbiotic bacteria in metabolizing phytochemicals and agrochemicals. Insects 2022, 13, 583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Rupawate, P.S.; Roylawar, P.; Khandagale, K.; Gawande, S.; Ade, A.B.; Jaiswal, D.K.; Borgave, S. Role of gut symbionts of insect pests: A novel target for insect-pest control. Front. Microbiol. 2023, 14, 1146390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Han, S.; Akhtar, M.R.; Xia, X.F. Functions and regulations of insect gut bacteria. Pest Manag. Sci. 2024, 80, 4828–4840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Banfi, D.; Mastore, M.; Bianchi, T.; Brivio, M.F. The expression levels of heat shock protein 90 (hsp90) in Galleria mellonella following infection with the entomopathogenic nematode Steinernema carpocapsae and its symbiotic bacteria Xenorhabdus nematophila. Insects 2025, 16, 201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Rafiqi, A.M.; Polo, P.G.; Milat, N.S.; Durmuş, Z.Ö.; Çolak-Al, B.; Alarcón, M.E.; Çağıl, F.Z.; Rajakumar, A. Developmental integration of endosymbionts in insects. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2022, 10, 846586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kaltenpoth, M.; Flórez, L.V.; Vigneron, A.; Dirksen, P.; Engl, T. Origin and function of beneficial bacterial symbioses in insects. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2025, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Trinder, M.; McDowell, T.W.; Daisley, B.A.; Ali, S.N.; Leong, H.S.; Sumarah, M.W.; Reid, G. Probiotic Lactobacillus rhamnosus reduces organophosphate pesticide absorption and toxicity to Drosophila melanogaster. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2016, 82, 6204–6213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Lv, C.; Huang, Y.Z.; Luan, J.B. Insect–microbe symbiosis-based strategies offer a new avenue for the management of insect pests their transmitted pathogens. Crop Health 2024, 2, 18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Yang, K.; Chen, H.; Bing, X.L.; Xia, X.; Zhu, Y.X.; Hong, X.Y. Wolbachia Spiroplasma could influence bacterial communities of the spider mite Tetranychus truncatus. Exp. Appl. Acarol. 2021, 83, 197–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Zhang, Q.; Wang, S.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, K.; Liu, W.; Zhang, R.; Zhang, Z. Enterobacter hormaechei in the intestines of housefly larvae promotes host growth by inhibiting harmful intestinal bacteria. Parasites Vectors 2021, 14, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Yang, K.; Chen, H.; Bing, X.L.; Xia, X.; Zhu, Y.X.; Hong, X.Y. Wolbachia dominate Spiroplasma in the co-infected spider mite Tetranychus truncatus. Insect Mol. Biol. 2020, 29, 19–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Janke, R.S.; Kaftan, F.; Niehs, S.P.; Scherlach, K.; Rodrigues, A.; Svatoš, A.; Flórez, L.V. Bacterial ectosymbionts in cuticular organs chemically protect a beetle during molting stages. ISME J. 2022, 16, 2691–2701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zhou, X.; Ling, X.; Guo, H.; Zhu-Salzman, K.; Ge, F.; Sun, Y. Serratia symbiotica enhances fatty acid metabolism of pea aphid to promote host development. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021, 22, 5951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Tian, P.P.; Zhang, Y.L.; Huang, J.L.; Li, W.Y.; Liu, X.D. Arsenophonus interacts with Buchnera to improve growth performance of aphids under amino acid stress. Microbiol. Spectr. 2023, 11, e01792-23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Doremus, M.R.; Hunter, M.S. Symbiosis: An escalating arms race between a butterfly and bacterium. Curr. Biol. 2025, 35, R339–R341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Haider, K.; Abbas, D.; Galian, J.; Ghafar, M.A.; Kabir, K.; Ijaz, M.; Hussain, M.; Khan, K.A.; Ghramh, H.A.; Raza, A. The multifaceted roles of gut microbiota in insect physiology, metabolism, and environmental adaptation: Implications for pest management strategies. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2025, 41, 75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Mondal, S.; Somani, J.; Roy, S.; Babu, A.; Pandey, A.K. Insect microbial symbionts: Ecology, interactions, biological significance. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 2665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Zhang, Y.; Cai, T.; Wan, H. Mobile resistance elements: Symbionts that modify insect host resistance. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2025, 73, 3842–3853. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Li, D.Y.; Zhang, Y.H.; Li, W.H.; Tang, T.; Wan, H.; You, H.; Li, J.H. Fitness and evolution of insecticide resistance associated with gut symbionts in metaflumizone-resistant Plutella xylostella. Crop Prot. 2019, 124, e104869. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wang, H.Y.; Liu, H.M.; Peng, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, C.X.; Guo, X.X.; Wang, H.F.; Liu, L.J.; Lv, W.X.; Cheng, P.; et al. Symbiotic gut bacterium enhances Aedes albopictus resistance to insecticide. PLoS Neglected Trop. Dis. 2022, 16, e0010208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Pietri, J.E.; Liang, D. The links between insect symbionts and insecticide resistance: Causal relationships and physiological tradeoffs. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2018, 111, 92–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, W.H.; Jin, D.C.; Shi, C.; Li, F.J. Midgut bacteria in deltamethrin-resistant, deltamethrin-susceptible, and field-caught populations of Plutella xylostella, and phenomics of the predominant midgut bacterium Enterococcus mundtii. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Jaffar, S.; Ahmad, S.; Lu, Y. Contribution of insect gut microbiota and their associated enzymes in insect physiology and biodegradation of pesticides. Front. Microbiol. 2022, 13, 979383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ibrahim, S.; Gupta, R.K.; War, A.R.; Hussain, B.; Kumar, A.; Sofi, T. Degradation of chlorpyriphos and polyethylene by endosymbiotic bacteria from citrus mealybug. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2021, 28, 3214–3224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Daisley, B.A.; Trinder, M.; McDowell, T.W.; Collins, S.L.; Sumarah, M.W.; Reid, G. Microbiota-mediated modulation of organophosphate insecticide toxicity by species-dependent interactions with Lactobacilli in a Drosophila melanogaster insect model. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2018, 84, e02820-17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Itoh, H.; Tago, K.; Hayatsu, M.; Kikuchi, Y. Detoxifying symbiosis: Microbe-mediated detoxification of phytotoxins and pesticides in insects. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2018, 35, 434–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Almeida, L.G.; Moraes, L.A.; Trigo, J.R.; Omoto, C.; Consoli, F.L. The gut microbiota of insecticide-resistant insects houses insecticide-degrading bacteria: A potential source for biotechnological exploitation. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0174754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Malathi, V.M.; More, R.P.; Anandham, R.; Gracy, G.R.; Mohan, M.; Venkatesan, T.; Samaddar, S.; Jalali, S.K.; Sa, T. Gut bacterial diversity of insecticide-susceptible and -resistant nymphs of the brown planthopper Nilaparvata lugens Stål (Hemiptera: Delphacidae) and elucidation of their putative functional roles. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2018, 28, 976–986. [Google Scholar]
  43. Gracy, R.G.; Malathi, V.M.; Jalali, S.K.; Jose, V.L.; Thulasi, A. Variation in larval gut bacteria between insecticide-resistant and -susceptible populations of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Phytoparasitica 2016, 44, 477–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Xia, X.F.; Zheng, D.D.; Zhong, H.Z.; Qin, B.C.; Gurr, G.M.; Vasseur, L.; Lin, H.L.; Bai, J.L.; He, W.Y.; You, M.S. DNA sequencing reveals the midgut microbiota of diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella (L.) and a possible relationship with insecticide resistance. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e68852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Zhang, Y.H.; Tang, T.; Li, W.H.; Cai, T.W.; Li, J.H.; Wan, H. Functional profiling of the gut microbiomes in two different populations of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2018, 21, 1309–1314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Akami, M.; Njintang, N.Y.; Gbaye, O.A.; Andongma, A.A.; Rashid, M.A.; Niu, C.; Nukenine, E.N. Gut bacteria of the cowpea beetle mediate its resistance to dichlorvos and susceptibility to Lippia adoensis essential oil. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, e6435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zhang, J.H.; Pan, Y.; Zheng, C.; Gao, X.W.; Wei, X.; Xi, J.H.; Peng, T.F.; Shang, Q.L. Rapid evolution of symbiotic bacteria populations in spirotetramat-resistant Aphis gossypii Glover revealed by pyrosequencing. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. 2016, 20, 151–158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Echaubard, P.; Duron, O.; Agnew, P.; Sidobre, C.; Noel, V.; Weill, M.; Michalakis, Y. Rapid evolution of Wolbachia density in insecticide resistant Culex pipiens. Heredity 2010, 104, 15–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Berticat, C.; Rousset, F.; Raymond, M.; Berthomieu, A.; Weill, M. High Wolbachia density in insecticide-resistant mosquitoes. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. B. 2002, 269, 1413–1416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hrdina, A.; Iatsenko, I. The roles of metals in insect–microbe interactions and immunity. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2022, 49, 71–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Gorman, M.J. Iron homeostasis in insects. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 2023, 68, 51–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sun, Y.; Li, T.; Zhou, G.; Zhou, Y.; Wu, Y.; Xu, J.; Chen, J.; Zhong, S.; Zhong, D.; Liu, R.; et al. Relationship between deltamethrin resistance and gut symbiotic bacteria of Aedes albopictus by 16S rDNA sequencing. Parasites Vectors 2024, 17, 330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Han, X.Y.; Xu, S.B.; Guan, R.B.; Gu, Y.C.; Miao, X.X.; Li, H.C. A symbiotic gut bacterium (Bacillus cereus) enhances insect susceptibility to insecticides by reducing antioxidant and detoxification enzyme. Entomol. Gen. 2025, 45, 229–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Ghanim, M.; Kontsedalov, S. Susceptibility to insecticides in the Q biotype of Bemisia tabaci is correlated with bacterial symbiont densities. Pest Manage. Sci. 2009, 65, 939–942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Thia, J.A.; Dorai, A.P.; Hoffmann, A.A. Symbiotic bacteria and pest control: Plant toxins, chemical pesticides, and fungal entomopathogens. Trends Microbiol. 2025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Deng, S.J.; Tu, L.; Li, L.; Hu, J.P.; Li, J.L.; Tang, J.X.; Zhang, M.C.; Zhu, G.D.; Cao, J. A symbiotic bacterium regulates the detoxification metabolism of deltamethrin in Aedes albopictus. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2025, 212, 106445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Pan, Q.; Yu, S.J.; Lei, S.; Zhang, S.H.; Ding, L.L.; Liu, L.; Li, S.C.; Wang, X.F.; Lou, B.H.; Ran, C. Bacterial symbionts contribute to insecticide susceptibility of Diaphorina citri via changing the expression level of host detoxifying genes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2024, 72, 15164–15175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Barnard, K.; Jeanrenaud, A.C.; Brooke, B.D.; Oliver, S.V. The contribution of gut bacteria to insecticide resistance and the life histories of the major malaria vector Anopheles arabiensis (Diptera: Culicidae). Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Zhang, F.; Yang, R. Life history and functional capacity of the microbiome are altered in beta-cypermethrin-resistant cockroaches. Int. J. Parasitol. 2019, 49, 715–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Zhang, Y.; Ju, F. Uninheritable but widespread bacterial symbiont Enterococcus casseliflavus mediates detoxification of the insecticide chlorantraniliprole in the agricultural invasive pest Spodoptera frugiperda. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2024, 72, 18365–18377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Ahmad, S.; Ahmad, H.W.; Bhatt, P. Microbial adaptation and impact into the pesticide’s degradation. Arch. Microbiol. 2022, 204, 288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Yin, F.; Ge, T.; Zalucki, M.P.; Xiao, Y.; Peng, Z.; Li, Z. Gut symbionts affect Plutella xylostella (L.) susceptibility to chlorantraniliprole. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2025, 209, 106327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Yuan, X.; Pan, Z.; Jin, C.; Ni, Y.; Fu, Z.; Jin, Y. Gut microbiota: An underestimated and unintended recipient for pesticide-induced toxicity. Chemosphere 2022, 227, 425–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Skaljac, M.; Kirfel, P.; Grotmann, J.; Vilcinskas, A. Fitness costs of infection with Serratia symbiotica are associated with greater susceptibility to insecticides in the pea aphid Acyrthosiphon Pisum. Pest Manag Sci. 2018, 74, 1829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Chen, B.; Zhang, N.; Xie, S.; Zhang, X.; He, J.; Muhammad, A.; Sun, C.; Lu, X.; Shao, Y. Gut bacteria of the silkworm Bombyx mori facilitate host resistance against the toxic effects of organophosphate insecticides. Environ. Int. 2020, 143, 105886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Ishigami, K.; Jang, S.; Itoh, H.; Kikuchi, Y. Insecticide resistance governed by gut symbiosis in a rice pest, Cletus punctiger, under laboratory conditions. Biol. Lett. 2021, 17, 20200780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Cheng, D.; Guo, Z.; Riegler, M.; Xi, Z.; Liang, G.; Xu, Y. Gut symbiont enhances insecticide resistance in a significant pest, the oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Microbiome 2017, 5, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wang, Z.; Zhao, Y.; Yong, H.; Liu, Z.; Wang, W.; Lu, Y. The contribution of gut bacteria to pesticide resistance of Tribolium castaneum (Herbst). J. Stored Prod. Res. 2023, 103, 102160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Ozdal, O.G.; Algur, O.F. Biodegradation α-endosulfan and α- cypermethrin by Acinetobacter schindleri B7 isolated from the microflora of grasshopper (Poecilimon tauricola). Arch. Microbiol. 2022, 204, 159. [Google Scholar]
  70. Ozdal, M.; Ozdal, O.G.; Alguri, O.F. Isolation and characterization of alpha-endosulfan degrading bacteria from the microflora of cockroaches. Pol. J. Microbiol. 2016, 65, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. El Khoury, S.; Gauthier, J.; Mercier, P.L.; Moïse, S.; Giovenazzo, P.; Derome, N. Honeybee gut bacterial strain improved survival and gut microbiota homeostasis in Apis mellifera exposed in vivo to clothianidin. Microbiol. Spectrum. 2024, 12, e00578-24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Pang, R.; Chen, M.; Yue, L.; Xing, K.; Li, T.; Kang, K.; Liang, Z.; Yuan, L.; Zhang, W. A distinct strain of Arsenophonus symbiont decreases insecticide resistance in its insect host. PLoS Genet. 2018, 14, e1007725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Li, Q.; Sun, J.; Qin, Y.; Fan, J.; Zhang, Y.; Tan, X.; Hou, M.; Chen, J. Reduced insecticide susceptibility of the wheat aphid Sitobion miscanthi after infection by the secondary bacterial symbiont Hamiltonella defensa. Pest Manag. Sci. 2021, 77, 1936–1944. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Wei, Y.; Li, W.; Chen, T.; Su, Y.; Han, X.; Yao, Y. Sublethal and transgenerational effects of Nitenpyram on Acyrthosiphon gossypii and its impacts on symbiotic bacteria. Crop Prot. 2025, 191, 107162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Fan, C.; Zhou, T.; Zhao, L.; Zhang, K.; Li, D.; Elumalai, P.; Xi, L.; Wang, L.; Ji, J.; Cui, J.; et al. Parasitoid of Aphis gossypii, Binodoxys communis Gahan exhibits metabolic changes in symbiotic bacterial community upon exposure of insecticides. Emerging Contam. 2025, 11, 100395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Fernández, M.D.M.; Meeus, I.; Billiet, A. Influence of microbiota in the susceptibility of parasitic wasps to abamectin insecticide: Deep sequencing, esterase and toxicity tests. Pest Manag. Sci. 2019, 75, 79–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Liu, Y.; Yu, J.; Zhu, F.; Shen, Z.; Jiang, H.; Li, Z.; Liu, X.; Xu, H. Function of cytochrome p450s and gut microbiome in biopesticide adaptation of Grapholita molesta on different host diets. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24, 15435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Shemshadian, A.; Vatandoost, H.; Oshaghi, M.A.; Abai, M.R.; Djadid, N.D. Relationship between Wolbachia infection in Culex quinquefasciatus and its resistance to insecticide. Heliyon 2021, 7, e06749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zeng, T.; Fu, Q.; Luo, F.; Dai, J.; Fu, R.; Qi, Y.; Deng, X.; Lu, Y.; Xu, Y. Lactic acid bacteria modulate the CncC pathway to enhance resistance to β-Cypermethrin in the oriental fruit fly. ISME J. 2024, 18, wrae058. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Li, Y.; Liu, X.; Guo, H. Variations in endosymbiont infection between buprofezin-resistant and susceptible strains of Laodelphax striatellus (Fallen). Curr. Microbiol. 2018, 75, 709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Chen, G.; Li, Q.; Yang, X. Comparison of the co-occurrence patterns of the gut microbial community between bt-susceptible and bt-resistant strains of the rice stem borer, Chilo suppressalis. J. Pest. Sci. 2023, 96, 299–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Blanton, A.; Olds, M.; Martinez, A.; Putman, J.; Armstrong, D.; Ravenscraft, A. Enantiomer-specific malathion degradation by gut microbes of the colorado potato beetle. bioRxiv 2025, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Francis, C.; Aneesh, E.M. Gut bacterium induced pesticide resistance in insects with special emphasis to mosquitoes. Int. J. Trop. Insect Sci. 2022, 42, 2051–2064. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. He, L.; Liu, B.; Tian, J.; Lu, F.; Li, X.; Tian, Y. Culturable epiphytic bacteria isolated from Teleogryllus occipitalus crickets metabolize insecticides. Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol. 2018, 99, e21501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Goswami, S.; Das, S.B.; Rath, P.C.; Adak, T.; Parameswaran, C.; Jambhulkar, N.N.; Govindharaj, G.P.P.; Gadratagi, B.G.; Patil, N.B.; Mohapatra, S.D.; et al. Comparative assessment of the gut bacterial diversity associated with field population of three rice stem borers and their in vitro insecticide degradation ability. J. Asia-Pac. Entomol. 2024, 27, 102229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Wang, Z.; Wang, W.; Lu, Y. Biodegradation of insecticides by gut bacteria isolated from stored grain beetles and its implication in host insecticide resistance. J. Stored Prod. Res. 2022, 96, 101943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Xia, X.J.; Wu, W.; Chen, J.P.; Shan, H.W. The gut bacterium Serratia marcescens mediates detoxification of organophosphate pesticide in Riptortus pedestris by microbial degradation. J. Appl. Entomol. 2023, 147, 406–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Özdal, Ö.G.; Algur, Ö.F. Isolation and identification of the pyrethroid insecticide deltamethrin degrading bacteria from insects. Avrupa Bilim Teknol. Derg. 2020, 18, 905–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Li, X.; Fang, T.; Gao, T.; Gui, H.; Chen, Y.; Zhou, L.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, Y.; Xu, L.; Long, Y. Widespread presence of gut bacterium Glutamicibacter ectropisis sp. nov. confers enhanced resistance to the pesticide bifenthrin in tea pests. Sci. Total Environ. 2024, 955, 176784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Lv, N.N.; Li, R.; Cheng, S.H.; Zhang, L.; Liang, P.; Gao, X.W. The gut symbiont Sphingomonas mediates imidacloprid resistance in the important agricultural insect pest Aphis gossypii Glover. BMC Biol. 2023, 21, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Malook, S.; Arora, A.K.; Wong, A.C.N. The role of microbiomes in shaping insecticide resistance: Current insights and emerging paradigms. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2025, 69, 101346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Wang, Z.Y.; Wang, W.F.; Lu, Y.J. Symbiotic microbiota and insecticide resistance in insects. Chin. J. Appl. Entomol. 2021, 58, 265–276. [Google Scholar]
  93. Jing, T.Z.; Qi, F.H.; Wang, Z.Y. Most dominant roles of insect gut bacteria: Digestion, detoxification, or essential nutrient provision? Microbiome 2020, 8, 38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Ye, Q.T.; Gong, X.; Liu, H.H.; Wu, B.X.; Peng, C.W.; Hong, X.Y.; Bing, X.L. The symbiont Wolbachia alleviates pesticide susceptibility in the two-spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae through enhanced host detoxification pathways. Insect Sci. 2024, 31, 1822–1837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Gao, T.; Zhang, Y.; Sun, W.; Li, Q.; Huang, X.; Zhi, D.; Zi, H.; Ji, R.; Long, Y.; Gong, C.; et al. The symbiont Wolbachia increases resistance to bifenthrin in Ectropis grisescens by regulating the host detoxification function. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Saf. 2025, 289, 117666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  96. Indiragandhi, P.; Anandham, R.; Madhaiyan, M.; Poonguzhali, S.; Kim, G.; Saravanan, V. Cultivable bacteria associated with larval gut of prothiofos-resistant, prothiofos-susceptible and field caught populations of diamondback moth, Plutella xylostella and their potential for, antagonism towards entomopathogenic fungi and host insect nutrition. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2007, 103, 2664–2675. [Google Scholar]
  97. Peterson, B.F. Microbiome toxicology—Bacterial activation and detoxification of insecticidal compounds. Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 2024, 63, 101192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Lei, X.; Zhang, F.; Zhang, J. Gut microbiota accelerate the insecticidal activity of plastid-expressed Bacillus thuringiensis cry3bb to a leaf beetle, Plagiodera versicolora. Microbiol. Spectr. 2023, 11, e05049-22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Paddock, K.J.; Pereira, A.E.; Finke, D.L.; Ericsson, A.C.; Hibbard, B.E.; Shelby, K.S. Host resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis is linked to altered bacterial community within a specialist insect herbivore. Mol. Ecol. 2021, 30, 5438–5453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Li, S.; Xu, X.; De Mandal, S.; Shakeel, M.; Hua, Y.; Shoukat, R.F.; Fu, D.; Jin, F. Gut microbiota mediate Plutella xylostella susceptibility to Bt Cry1Ac protoxin is associated with host immune response. Environ. Pollut. 2021, 271, 116271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Wolfe, Z.M.; Scharf, M.E. Microbe-mediated activation of indoxacarb in German cockroach (Blattella germanica L.). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2022, 188, 105234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. Pesticide resistance cases in various insects mediated by gut microbial species.
Table 1. Pesticide resistance cases in various insects mediated by gut microbial species.
PesticideTarget AgrochemicalSymbiontInsect SpeciesDescriptionReferences
Organophosphatechlorpyrifos methylSerratiaAcyrthosiphon pisumThe host was more sensitive to the tested insecticides after Serratia infection, but there is a fitness cost.[64]
chlorpyrifosStenotrophomonasBombyx moriIncreased insecticide resistance to chlorpyrifos by providing essential amino acids to increase host fitness and circumvent the deleterious effects of these toxic chemicals.[65]
fenitrothionBurkholderiaCletus punctigerBacteria can directly degrade fenitrothion into non-toxic substances.[66]
trichlorphonCitrobacter sp.Bactrocera dorsalisIncreased insecticide resistance of hosts by degrading trichlorphon into chloral hydrate and promoting expression of hydrolase-related genes[67]
malathion, pirimiphos-methylBacillus cereus and Achromobacter xylosoxidansTribolium castaneumB. cereus and A. xylosoxidans can decompose and utilize the test insecticide as well as improve the survival rate and metabolic detoxification enzyme activity.[68]
Organochlorideα-endosulfanAcinetobacter schindlerPoecilimon tauricolaDegradation rate of A. schindler to α-endosulfan was 67.31%.[69]
α-endosulfanPseudomonas aeruginosa G1, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia G2, and Acinetobacter lwoffii G5Blatta orientalisThe degradation of α-endosulfan by P. aeruginosa G1, S. maltophilia G2, and A. lwoffii G5 was 88.5%, 85.5%, and 80.2%, respectively.[70]
NeonicotinoidimidaclopridSerratiaAcyrthosiphon pisumThe host was more sensitive to the tested insecticides after Serratia infection, but there is a fitness cost.[64]
clothianidinEnterobacter sp. and Pantoea sp.Apis melliferaDirect degradation metabolism.[71]
imidaclopridArsenophonusNilaparvata lugensReduced insecticide resistance to imidacloprid by regulating expression of P450 and UGT gene.[72]
imidacloprid and acetamipridHamiltonella defensaSitobion miscanthiThe host was less sensitive to the tested insecticides after H. defensa infection, and insects infected with H. defensa strains had higher survival rate.[73]
nitenpyramBuchnera and SphingomonasAcyrthosiphon gossypiiThe richness of Buchnera and Sphingomonas changed notably after nitenpyram exposure.[74]
sulfoxaflor and flupyradifuroneActinobacteriota, Bacteroidota, and FirmicutesBinodoxys communisThe richness of Actinobacteriota, Bacteroidota, and Firmicutes changed notably after insecticide exposure.[75]
AntibioticabamectinArthrobacterEretmocerus mundusArthrobacter contained esterases involved in abamectin-degrading metabolism.[76]
emamectin benzoatePantoeaGrapholita molestaThe abundance of Pantoea promoted the resistance of host to emamectin benzoate.[77]
PyrethroidbifenthrinWolbachia/ProfftellaDiaphorina citriAffects the host’s resistance to bifenthrin by regulating the expression of DcitCCE15.[57]
deltamethrinWolbachiaCulex quinquefasciatusWolbachia could decrease host resistance to insecticide.[78]
β-cypermethrinEnterococcus casseliflavus/
Lactococcus lactis		Bactrocera dorsalisIncrease the host’s resistance to β-cypermethrin by increasing the enzymatic activities of GST and CYP450s.[79]
deltamethrinPantoea spp., Flavobacterium spp., and Aeromonas spp.Aedes albopictusPantoea spp., Flavobacterium spp., and Aeromonas spp. were significantly more abundant in resistant mosquitoes.[52]
α-cypermethrinAcinetobacter schindlerPoecilimon tauricolaDegradation rate of A. schindler to α-cypermethrin is 68.4%.[69]
deltamethrinBacillus cereus and Achromobacter xylosoxiansTribolium castaneumB. cereus and A. xylosoxidans can decompose and utilize the test insecticide as well as improve the survival rate and metabolic detoxification enzyme activity.[68]
DiamidechlorantraniliproleEnterococcus
casseliflavus		Spodoptera frugiperdaIncreases the host’s insecticide resistance to chlorantraniliprole by breaking amide bonds and dehalogenating insecticides.[60]
cyantraniliproleHamiltonella defensaSitobion miscanthiThe host was less sensitive to the tested insecticides after H. defensa infection, and insects infected with H. defensa strains had a higher survival rate.[73]
Inset growth regulatorbuprofezinWolbachia/SerratiaLaodelphax striatellusWolbachia exposure reduced pesticide sensitivity and detoxification enzyme activity; Serratia had higher abundance in resistant strain.[80]
CarbamatemethomylSerratiaAcyrthosiphon pisumThe host was more sensitive to the tested insecticides after Serratia infection, but it has a fitness cost.[64]
MicrobialB. thuringiensis (Bt)EnterococcusChilo suppressalisEnterococcus had higher abundance in Bt-susceptible strain.[81]
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

Fan, Q.; Sun, H.; Liang, P. The Influence of Microorganism on Insect-Related Pesticide Resistance. Agriculture 2025, 15, 1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15141519

AMA Style

Fan Q, Sun H, Liang P. The Influence of Microorganism on Insect-Related Pesticide Resistance. Agriculture. 2025; 15(14):1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15141519

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fan, Qiqi, Hong Sun, and Pei Liang. 2025. "The Influence of Microorganism on Insect-Related Pesticide Resistance" Agriculture 15, no. 14: 1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15141519

APA Style

Fan, Q., Sun, H., & Liang, P. (2025). The Influence of Microorganism on Insect-Related Pesticide Resistance. Agriculture, 15(14), 1519. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15141519

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