Next Article in Journal
Hydroponic Lettuce Cultivation with Organic Liquid Fertilizer: Examining Bacterial Inhibition and Phosphate Solubilization
Previous Article in Journal
Analysis of Parent and F1 Progeny Verification in African Yam Bean (Sphenostylis stenocarpa Hochst, Ex. A. Rich. Harms) Using Cowpea SSR Markers
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Genetic Variation in the Invaded Population of the Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in India

by
Bediganahally Annegowda Kavyashree
1,
Sharanabasappa Shrimantara Deshmukh
1,*,
Kundur Mahadevappa Satish
2,
Chicknayakanahalli Marulsiddappa Kalleshwaraswamy
1,
Shankrappa Sridhara
3,
Danappagala Satish
4 and
Rajendra Acharya
5,*
1
Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Keladi Shivappa Nayaka University of Agricultural Sciences, Shivamogga 577204, Karnataka, India
2
Department of Biotechnology, College of Agriculture, Keladi Shivappa Nayaka University of Agricultural Sciences, Shivamogga 577204, Karnataka, India
3
Center for Climate Resilient Agriculture, Keladi Shivappa Nayaka University of Agricultural Sciences, Shivamogga 577204, Karnataka, India
4
Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, College of Horticulture, University of Horticultural Sciences, Bagalkot 587104, Karnataka, India
5
Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Tifton, GA 31793, USA
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Crops 2024, 4(4), 491-501; https://doi.org/10.3390/crops4040035
Submission received: 21 July 2024 / Revised: 14 September 2024 / Accepted: 8 October 2024 / Published: 18 October 2024

Abstract

The fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, an invasive, polyphagous pest, causes significant damage to corn. The majority of insects rely on a broad range of digestive enzymes and an intricate detoxifying mechanism to consume chemically diverse host plants. The genetic variation in S. frugiperda was analyzed using cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI) and triose phosphate isomerase (Tpi). In addition, a new attempt was made to determine the variation with respect to two detoxifying genes, viz., carboxylesterase and glutathione S-transferase. The highest genetic variation (3.03%) was found between the S. frugiperda populations of Tirupati and Delhi with respect to the Tpi gene and between the populations of Punjab and Hosur regarding COI (3.30%). The results for various genes revealed that populations of the fall armyworm were homogeneous, showing low genetic distance using COI, ranging from 0.40 to 3.30%, and, using Tpi, ranging from 0.43 to 3.03%. The variation in carboxylesterase and glutathione S-transferase ranged from 0.04 to 0.15% and from 0.01 to 0.02, respectively. Amino acid sequences were also produced using DNA sequences from several fall armyworm populations. Populations in Tirupati, Solapur, and Hyderabad shared 98.7% of their sequence with that in Delhi. Fall armyworm amino acid sequences showed 79.7 to 82.0% identity with S. exigua and 69.6 to 73.0% identity with S. litura. Our study provides vital information for understanding the genetic variation in the fall armyworm following its invasion of India.

1. Introduction

The fall armyworm (FAW), Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), is native to the Americas and is known to attack a large number of crops. More than 350 plant species have been reported as host plants, meaning that the fall armyworm causes significant damage to economically valuable crops [1]. The FAW is divided into two strains, the rice strain and the corn strain, based on host plant preference. These strains differ genetically, with 2.09% genome divergence, although they have similar morphologies [2]. While the “corn strain” is more common in corn and sorghum, the “rice strain” is more frequently detected in pasture grass and millet. In 2016, the fall armyworm invaded the African continent and then spread rapidly to more than 28 countries in southern and eastern Africa [3,4], reaching India in May 2018 [5]. Recent findings suggest that migratory fall armyworm populations from Puerto Rico have undergone significant genetic exchange with populations in Florida [6,7]. Such genetic exchange between Indian populations and migratory populations of the fall armyworm across continents might have resulted in the introduction of resistance alleles into India. Thus, these occurrences provide clues that the migratory patterns of the fall armyworm involve significant genetic exchange between populations. Resistance build-up in S. frugiperda to various insecticides from different groups has been reported in different parts of the world [8,9,10]. Resistance in insects is usually a complex phenomenon with more than one mechanism operating simultaneously within the same insect strain. Insects employ a number of biochemical and genetic mechanisms to resist insecticides. Multiple applications of insecticides in one cropping season can lead to the rapid development of resistance [9]. In Spodoptera, three major detoxifying enzymes have been implicated in the metabolic detoxification of insecticides: carboxylesterase, mixed-function oxidases [11,12], and glutathione S-transferases [11]. The development of insecticide resistance in S. frugiperda is one of the major obstacles to the profitable cultivation of corn crops in countries to which it is native and in those it has invaded. The molecular basis of similarity in S. frugiperda populations has been studied using both universal primers and detoxifying genes. Efforts have been made to collect information on genetic diversity in S. frugiperda, in addition to other closely related species, which have been considered as outgroups in phylogenetic analyses, as knowledge of the similarities is also useful in tracking the subsequent evolution of the FAW in India [13]. In this study, we evaluated the association between fall armyworm populations from a number of remote locations. DNA sequencing was utilized to examine four gene segments, including the nuclear (triosephosphate isomerase gene, or Tpi) and mitochondrial (cytochrome oxidase I, or COI) segments that are commonly used for DNA barcoding. The genes responsible for detoxification, carboxylesterase, and glutathione S-transferase are represented in the third and fourth genomic segments. This is the first study to pinpoint variations brought about by detoxifying genes, allowing researchers to understand the chemical pressure on the introduced FAW population in order to control the pest. Knowledge of geographical and host plant variation in the susceptibility of S. frugiperda to insecticides, the mechanism of insecticide detoxification, and information on susceptibility to new molecules would be useful in formulating location-specific resistance management strategies.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Fall Armyworm Collection

Egg masses and different stages of FAW larvae were collected from unsprayed corn fields from different states of India between 2019 and 2022 (Figure S1, Table S1). The susceptible population (F16) was the field-collected population from corn fields in Shivamogga, Karnataka, India, in July 2018 and reared under laboratory conditions without exposure to the insecticides at the Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Shivamogga. To avoid cannibalism, later instar larvae were collected and kept individually in breeding dishes and provided an artificial diet until they were brought safely to the laboratory for further analysis. The laboratory culture was maintained at the Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, Shivamogga, Karnataka, at 26.9 to 29.2 °C, 80% RH, and a 16:08 h (L:D) photoperiod.

2.2. DNA Preparation

Populations of FAW were collected from different locations and were stored in 90% ethanol at −20 °C until DNA extraction. The stored samples were gathered in bulk and examined simultaneously. Genomic DNA was extracted from the fourth instar larvae of fall armyworms from the different populations using the Cetyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) method [14]. The Tpi gene of S. frugiperda was amplified via reference to the method [15,16]. The larvae were crushed in 1.5 mL microcentrifuge tubes using a micro pestle with 0.5 mL of CTAB extraction buffer. The samples were incubated at 60 °C for 1 h with intermittent mixing. The samples were cooled for 5 min at room temperature and an equal volume of chloroform–isoamyl alcohol 24:1 was added. The samples were centrifuged at 13,000 rpm for 15 min. The top aqueous phase was transferred into a new Eppendorf tube, and 2 µL of 10 mM of RNase was added to each tube and incubated at 37 °C for 30 min. Thereafter, 500 µL of ice-cold isopropanol was added to each tube, and they were then incubated overnight at −20 °C. Centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 15 min at 15 °C was carried out following overnight incubation. The supernatant was then discarded to avoid loss of the pellet formed at the bottom of the tube. The pellet was washed in 0.5 mL of 70% ethanol via centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 5 min. The ethanol was discarded, and the pellet was air-dried at room temperature for 15 min. Lastly, the dried pellet was suspended in 50 μL 1xX TE buffer and stored at −20 °C. A mitochondrial gene (COI), a nuclear gene (Tpi), and detoxifying genes (carboxylesterase and glutathione S-transferase) were used to study the genetic diversity of the S. frugiperda population.

2.3. Agarose Gel Electrophoresis and PCR Amplification

A total of 200 mL of 0.5% (w/v) of agarose gel was prepared by accurately weighing 1 g of agarose powder, made up to 200 mL with 1 × TAE (196 mL of water + 4 mL of 50 × TAE) as a solvent, heated in a microwave oven until the agarose dissolved entirely, and then allowed to cool. Ethidium bromide (DNA intercalating agent) was added when the solution was slightly cooled as the staining agent, which helps to visualize the DNA bands under UV light.
PCR was performed in a total reaction volume of 35 µL, containing 17.5 µL of PCR master mix, 2.1 µL of both forward and reverse primers, 3.5 µL of the DNA solution, and 11.9 µL distilled water. The reaction mixtures were amplified under the following conditions: a COI gene of 658 bp (initial denaturation at 92 °C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles at 92 °C for 1 min, 55 °C for 1 min, and 72 °C for 1 min and a final extension at 72 °C for 5 min) [17], a Tpi gene of 444 bp (initial denaturation at 94 °C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles at 92 °C for 30 s, 56 °C for 45 s, and 72 °C for 45 s, and a final extension at 72 °C for 3 min) [18], and a carboxylesterase gene of 568 bp (initial denaturation at 94 °C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles at 92 °C for 30 s, 56 °C for 45 s, and 72 °C for 45 s, and a final extension at 72 °C for 3 min). Since cDNA sequences were not available for glutathione S-transferase, primers were designed from the whole-genome sequence of S. frugiperda, with accession number NC049722.1. Then, 661 bp glutathione S-transferase (initial denaturation at 94 °C for 5 min, followed by 35 cycles at 94 °C for 30 s, 60 °C for 1 min, and 72 °C for 1 min, and a final extension at 72 °C for 5 min) was amplified in a 96-well thermal cycler. The details of the primers are provided in Table S2. The primers were custom synthesized at Sigma Aldrich in Bengaluru, India, supplied as lyophilized products of desalted oligos, and used to amplify the S. frugiperda. Amplified DNA samples were securely packed in ice packs, labeled separately, and sent to Barcode Biosciences, Bengaluru, for gene sequencing after being validated via gel electrophoresis.

2.4. Comparison of Fall Armyworm Population Using Amino Acid Sequences

DNA sequences of various populations were used to generate amino acid sequences to compare the variations in amino acids in different populations of S. frugiperda. Amino acid sequences of carboxylesterase were generated using the Translate online tool Expasy (https://web.expasy.org/translate/ (accessed on 5th February 2022)). Single and largest open reading frames were retrieved among the other frames. Lastly, the sequences were used to compare the variation in amino acids. Percent identity was also calculated to determine differences between the populations using Clustalo Emb software 1.2.2 (https://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/msa/clustalo/ (accessed on 10th April 2024)). Carboxylesterase genes from S. litura (KF835888), S. exigua (EF580101), and S. littoralis (HQ12260) were aligned with the inferred amino acid sequence of carboxylesterase from different populations of S. frugiperda.

2.5. Sequence Analysis

The sequences for the four genes were individually edited and aligned using Bio Edit version 7.2.5; poor-quality regions and gaps from the aligned sequences of various genes were removed using an automated option and then analyzed using MEGA X software (https://www.megasoftware.net/ ((accessed on 24 June 2022)). Following identification, the sequences were deposited in the NCBI GenBank database with different accession numbers. Phylogenetic analysis was carried out using the UPGMA method in MEGA-X software (https://www.megasoftware.net/ ((accessed on 24 June 2022)). The evolutionary divergence between sequences was estimated. All ambiguous positions were removed for each sequence pair (pairwise deletion option). Outgroups of closely related species were used, and a phylogenetic tree was constructed. The reliability of the phylogram was tested using bootstrap analysis with 1000 replicates [19,20,21].

3. Results

Genetic relatedness was studied among the populations of S. frugiperda collected from different locations using different genes. The genetic relatedness of S. frugiperda populations was studied using a mitochondrial gene, i.e., cytochrome oxidase subunit I (COI), a nuclear gene, i.e., triose phosphate isomerase (Tpi), and detoxifying genes, i.e., carboxylesterase and glutathione S-transferase. The sequences were aligned and analyzed. All of the sequences were submitted to the NCBI GenBank database and the accession numbers were obtained (Table 1).

3.1. Mitochondrial Marker: Cytochrome Oxidase Subunit I (MtCoI) Gene

UPGMA (Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean) cluster analysis showed that the genes were identical in all populations and that the sequences were closely matched with the nucleotide sequences of the fall armyworm sister species S. litura.
Pairwise distance analysis for the COI sequence indicated that the fall armyworm populations are genetically distinct from their sister species, S. litura, which was used in isolation as an outgroup. The highest genetic variation (3.30%) was found between the populations of Punjab and Hosur. Fall armyworm populations showed a consistent genetic variation of 6.60% with S. litura (Table 2).
For phylogenetic analysis of the COI gene, S. frugiperda populations collected from different locations were used along with a single out-group, S. litura. The phylogenetic analysis showed two main clusters that differentiated the S. frugiperda populations from S. litura (Figure 1a).

3.2. Triose Phosphate Isomerase (Tpi) Gene

The results of our pairwise distance analysis indicated that the fall armyworm populations were genetically distinct with respect to the Tpi gene. The highest genetic variation (3.03%) was found between the S. frugiperda populations of Tirupati and Delhi. When compared with the sequence of South Korean fall armyworm populations submitted to the NCBI GenBank database, the genetic variation in fall armyworm populations ranged from 0.74 to 2.55% (Table 3).
For phylogenetic analysis of the Tpi gene, S. frugiperda populations collected from different locations were used together with the NCBI sequence of South Korean (Accession no.—MT894240.1), Chinese (Accession no.—OR724712.1), Congolese (Accession no.—OQ857569.1), and Ugandan (Accession no.—MT894233.1) fall armyworm populations. The phylogenetic analysis showed two main clusters, 1 and 2. Group 1 consisted of fall armyworm populations, viz., Hyderabad, Hosur, Solapur, Susceptible, Davangere, and Tirupati. Group 2 consisted of Delhi and South Korean, Chinese, Congolese, and Ugandan populations, closely related to each other (Figure 1b).

3.3. Detoxifying Gene: Glutathione-S-Transferase

The glutathione S-transferase gene was amplified and sequenced from the DNA of the Spodoptera frugiperda population. The results of our UPGMA cluster analysis showed very few variations among the populations studied, and the sequences were closely linked with the nucleotide sequences of S. litura, S. exiua, and S. littoralis (Figure 1).
The results of our pairwise distance analysis indicated that the fall armyworm populations were genetically distinct from their sister species, such as S. litura, S. exigua, and S. littoralis, with the genetic variation in the fall armyworm with S. litura ranging from 2.02 to 2.13%, and that with S. littoralis ranging from 2.29 to 2.43%. In comparison, all of the populations of fall armyworm were consistent with the genetic variation of 1.46% with S. exigua (Table 4).
With respect to the glutathione S-transferase gene, there was minimal genetic variation between the populations of S. frugiperda. All of the populations of fall armyworm showed genetic variation in the range of 0.01 to 0.02 (Table 4).
For phylogeny analysis of the glutathione S-transferase gene, S. frugiperda populations collected from different locations were used together with out-groups (sister species of the fall armyworm). The phylogenetic analysis results showed three main clusters that differentiated the S. frugiperda populations from the S. litura, S. exigua, and S. littoralis populations. However, the sub-clusters of the glutathione S-transferase gene of the fall armyworm showed no distinct genetic variation among the populations of S. frugiperda (Figure 1c).

3.4. Detoxifying Gene: Carboxylesterase

The results of our UPGMA cluster analysis showed that the gene sequence was identical in all populations and that the sequences were closely matched with the nucleotide sequences of S. litura, S. exigua, and S. littoralis (Figure 1d).
The results of our pairwise distance analysis indicated that the fall armyworm populations were genetically distinct from their sister species, such as S. litura, S. exigua, and S. littoralis, with genetic variation with S. litura ranging from 0.96 to 1.06%, that with S. exigua ranging from 1.29 to 1.43%, and that with S. littoralis ranging from 1.13 to 1.35%. The highest genetic variation (0.15%) was found between the populations of Tirupati, Hosur, and Hyderabad and susceptible populations (Table 5).
For phylogenetic analysis of the caroboxylesterase gene, S. frugiperda populations collected from different locations were used together with out-groups (sister species of the fall armyworm). The phylogenetic analysis results showed three main clusters that differentiated the S. frugiperda populations from S. litura, S. exigua, and S. littoralis populations. However, the sub-clusters of the carboxylesterase gene of the fall armyworm showed no distinct genetic variation among the various populations of S. frugiperda (Figure 1d).

3.5. Comparison of Different Populations of Spodoptera Frugiperda Using Amino Acid Sequences

DNA sequences of various populations of the fall armyworm were used to generate amino acid sequences to compare the variations in the amino acid sequences of Spodoptera frugiperda. Utilizing amino acid sequences, the percent identity was verified. The sequence of the Tirupati, Solapur, and Hyderabad populations showed 98.7% identity with the Delhi population. All of the amino acid sequences of the fall armyworm exhibited a range of 79.7 to 82.0% identity with S. exigua and a range of 69.6 to 73.0% identity with S. litura (Table 6).
The average amino acid composition of fall armyworm populations with respect to the carboxylesterase gene was 4.3% Ala (alanine), 2.4% Cys (cysteine), 3.2% Asp (aspartic acid), 4.4% Glu (glutamic acid), 6.9% Phe (phenylalanine), 2.8% Gly (glycine), 1.7% His (histidine), 2.8% lle (isoleucine), 10.3% Lys (lysine), 10.0% Leu (leucine), 7.8% Met (methionine), 5.1% Asn (asparagine), 3.6% Pro (proline), 4.1% Gln (glutamine), 4.7% Arg (arginine), 5.7% Ser (serine), 6.9% Thr (threonine), 5.0% Val (valine), 2.0% Trp (tryptophan), and 6.5% Tyr (tyrosine) (Figure 2)

4. Discussion

The Tpi and COI genes are genetically characterized in African and Asian specimens, and the Tpi gene was found to be a better molecular marker of host plant preference than the COI gene [22]. There has been a significant genetic change in S. frugiperda species [23,24]. The geographical range of S. frugiperda is thought to cause genetic heterogeneity within this pest [23,24,25]. Variation and genetic diversity are critical for determining management strategies and monitoring resistance development [24,26]. The present results are consistent with those of other studies [23,24,25]. We found genetic variation among the populations of S. frugiperda; however, these results are contradictory to other studies showing no genetic variation in S. frugiperda populations [27,28]. Comparing our dataset to earlier research from India and Africa, less genetic variation could be the potential reason owing to the rapid migration within two years [13,18,22]. A single introduction followed by quick dispersion through natural and trade-related processes could account for the low number of haplotypes found in other studies conducted in the Republic of Congo and the Philippines [29,30]. These findings may be explained by its recent migration or more likely by the weak selection forces that accompanied its establishment [29,30]. In this regard, a clearer understanding of the genetic differences among polyphagous pests such as S. frugiperda will help scientists in better understanding the structure and population dynamics of these pests, their behavior, and their responsiveness to diverse selection pressures. More in-depth knowledge of the gene flow of sympatric and allopatric S. frugiperda populations linked with distinct locales and host plants is needed to provide insights into the evolutionary history of S. frugiperda in India.
In this study, phylogenetic trees were constructed using mitochondrial (COI), nuclear (Tpi), and detoxifying genes (carboxylesterase and glutathione S-transferase); the topologies of the trees revealed that all S. frugiperda populations belong to a single main clade. As a result, no distinct genetic diversity in COI, Tpi, or detoxifying genes was found in S. frugiperda from different geographical regions in India. In the future, the above findings can be validated by including large fall armyworm populations and a variety of host plants. The results of genetic diversity and phylogenetic analyses of S. frugiperda using COI, Tpi, carboxylesterase, and glutathione S-transferase revealed that S. frugiperda from different geographical regions are homogeneous, with populations showing overall low genetic distance for COI at 0.40 to 3.30%, Tpi at 0.43 to 3.03%, carboxylesterase at 0.04 to 2.53%, and glutathione S-transferase at 0.01 to 0.02, with low genetic distance across S. inferans populations found in rice in the Punjab state of India.
The Indian population of S. frugiperda differed significantly from other populations, including that of South Korea. The Tpi gene is specific to S. frugiperda; hence, populations in the present study were compared with the Tpi gene of the NCBI sequence of South Korean fall armyworm populations. However, the genetic distance in the Indian population was less between different geographical locations in India. Overall, it must be noted that there is a distinction between laboratory and fieldwork results. Differentiation in S. frugiperda most likely occurs during adaptation to mass rearing, leading to the selection of specific alleles that are not generally indicative of field populations. While our findings indicate that laboratory strains exhibit genetic diversity compared to field populations, the former may have unique allele frequencies that are not representative of field populations [31].
Based on the amino acid substitutions at various residues in S. litura populations from Delhi, Sonepat, and Varanasi, in addition to selected members of carboxylesterase from other Spodoptera species, we concluded that metabolic detoxification appears to be primarily due to the overproduction of the CarE enzyme in respective populations rather than amino acid residue changes [13]. The results of this study demonstrate that S. frugiperda is genetically less variable with the present collected populations, implying that future research should include more populations from a wider geographic area to acquire more genetic information on the host strain, geographic isolation, and reproductive incompatibility.

5. Conclusions

In conclusion, the analysis of all four genes, COI, Tpi, glutathione S-transferase, and carboxylesterase, suggested that invading FAW populations have low genetic variation. Glutathione S-transferase and carboxylesterase exhibited very little or no variation compared to COI and Tpi. Although the two detoxifying genes utilized in this study cannot be verified at the molecular level to determine diversity, we cannot rule out the possibility that invading FAW populations have a high capacity for genetic adaptability to new environments. Variation in detoxifying genes may occur in the future, depending on the extent of pest pressure and evolution, which is critical for determining management strategies. This study forms the basis for future studies on variation including detoxifying genes.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/crops4040035/s1, Figure S1: Map of India showing the collection sites of Spodoptera frugiperda samples; Table S1: Populations of Spodoptera frugiperda collected on corn field in India; Table S2: The details of the primers used in this study.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, S.S.D.; methodology, B.A.K., S.S.D. and C.M.K.; validation, B.A.K., K.M.S., D.S., S.S. and S.S.D.; formal analysis, B.A.K.; data curation, R.A.; writing—original draft preparation, B.A.K.; writing—review and editing, B.A.K., S.S.D., C.M.K., S.S., D.S. and R.A.; visualization, R.A. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors upon request.

Acknowledgments

The authors greatly acknowledge the Dean (PGS), KSNUAHS Shivamogga, for providing access to all of the facilities during the study period.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Montezano, D.G.; Specht, A.; Sosa-Gómez, D.R.; Roque-Specht, V.F.; Sousa-Silva, J.C.; Paula-Moraes, S.V.; Peterson, J.A.; Hunt, T.E. Host plants of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the Americas. Afr. Entomol. 2018, 26, 286–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Prowell, D.P.; McMichael, M.; Silvain, J.F. Multilocus genetic analysis of host use, introgression, and speciation in host strains of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2004, 97, 1034–1044. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. FAO. Integrated Management of the Fall Armyworm on Corn a Guide for Farmer Field Schools in Africa. 2018. Available online: http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/ (accessed on 20 April 2022).
  4. Goergen, G.; Kumar, P.L.; Sankung, S.B.; Togola, A.; Tamò, M. First report of outbreaks of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new alien invasive pest in West and Central Africa. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0165632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Sharanabasappa, S.D.; Kalleshwaraswamy, C.M.; Asokan, R.; Mahadeva Swamy, H.M.; Maruthi, M.S.; Pavithra, H.B.; Hegde, K.; Navi, S.; Prabhu, S.T.; Goergen, G. First report of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), an alien invasive pest on corn in India. Pest Manag. Hortic. Ecsyst. 2018, 24, 23–29. [Google Scholar]
  6. Nagoshi, R.N.; Meagher, R.L.; Jenkins, D.A. Puerto Rico fall armyworm has only limited interactions with those from Brazil or Texas but could have substantial exchanges with Florida populations. J. Econ. Entomol. 2010, 103, 360–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Nagoshi, R.N.; Meagher, R.L.; Mirian, M. Inferring the annual migration patterns of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the United States from mitochondrial haplotypes. Ecol. Evol. 2012, 2, 1458–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ewerton, C.L.; Anderson, B.; Antonio, R.B.N.; Fernando, S.A.A.; Rubens, H.K.; Ingrid, S.K.; Celso, O. Resistance of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to spinetoram: Inheritance and cross-resistance to spinosad. Pest Manag. Sci. 2020, 7, 2674–2680. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gutierrez-Moreno, R.; Mota-Sanchez, D.; Blanco, C.A.; Whalon, M.E.; Terán-Santofimio, H.; Rodriguez-Maciel, J.C.; Difonzo, C. Field-evolved resistance of the fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to synthetic insecticides in Puerto Rico and Mexico. J. Econ. Entomol. 2019, 112, 92–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Okuma, D.M.; Bernardi, D.; Horikoshi, R.J.; Bernardi, O.; Silva, A.P.; Omoto, C. Inheritance and fitness costs of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) resistance to spinosad in Brazil. Pest. Manag. Sci. 2017, 74, 1441–1448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Yu, S.J.; Nguyen, S.N.; Abo-Elghar, G.E. Biochemical characteristics of insecticide resistance in the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2003, 77, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Huang, S.; and- Han, Z. Mechanisms for multiple resistance in field populations of common cutworm, Spodoptera litura (Fabricius) in China. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 2007, 87, 14–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Nayyar, N.; Gracy, R.G.; Ashika, T.R.; Mohan, G.; Swathi, R.S.; Mohan, M.; Chaudhary, M.; Baktha-vatsalam, N.; Venkatesan, T. Population structure and genetic diversity of invasive fall armyworm after 2 years of introduction in India. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 7760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Chang, H.; Hao, D.; Yang, X.; Xiao, R.; Liu, Y.; Qian, L.; and An, Y. Comparison of four genomic DNA extraction methods with Scolytidae beetles. J. Beijing For. Univ. 2013, 35, 75–79. [Google Scholar]
  15. Zhang, L.; Liu, B.; Jiang, Y.Y.; Liu, J.; Wu, K.M.; Xiao, Y.T. Molecular characterization analysis of fall armyworm populations in China. Plant Prot. 2019, 45, 20–27. [Google Scholar]
  16. Nagoshi, R. Improvements in the identification of strains facilitate population studies of fall armyworm subgroups. Entomol. Soc. Am. 2012, 105, 351–358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Folmer, O.; Black, M.; Hoeh, W.; Lutz, R.; Vrijenhoek, R. DNA primers for amplification of mitochondrial cytochrome c oxidase subunit I from diverse metazoan invertebrates. Mol. Mar. Biol. 1994, 3, 294–299. [Google Scholar]
  18. Nagoshi, R.N.; Dhanani, I.; Asokan, R.; Mahadevaswamy, H.M.; Kalleshwaraswamy, C.M.; Meagher, R.L. Genetic characterization of fall armyworm infesting South Africa and India indicate recent introduction from a common source population. PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0217755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Karuppaiah, V.; Srivastava, C.; Padaria, J.C.; Subramanian, S. Quantitative changes of the carboxylesterase associated with pyrethroid susceptibility in Spodoptera litura (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Afr. Entomol. 2017, 25, 175–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Kumar, S.; Stecher, G.; Li, M.; Knyaz, C.; Tamura, K. MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across computing platforms. Mol. Biol. Evol. 2018, 35, 1547–1549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Kimura, M.A. simple method for estimating evolutionary rate of base substitutions through comparative studies of nucleotide sequences. J. Mol. Evol. 1980, 16, 111–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Acharya, R.; Akintola, A.A.; Malekera, M.J.; Kamulegeya, P.; Nyakunga, K.B.; Mutimbu, M.K.; Shrestha, Y.K.; Hemayet, J.S.; Hoat, T.X.; Dao, H.T.; et al. Genetic relationship of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) populations that invaded Africa and Asia. Insects 2021, 12, 439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Clark, P.L.; Molina-Ochoa, J.; Martinelli, S.; Skoda, S.R.; Isenhour, D.J.; Lee, D.J.; Krumm, J.T.; Foster, J.E. Population variation of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda, in the Western Hemisphere. J. Insect Sci. 2007, 7, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Monnerat, R.; Martins, E.; Queiroz, P.; Ordúz, S.; Jaramillo, G.; Benintende, G.; Cozzi, J.; Real, M.D.; Martinez-Ramirez, A.; Rausell, C.; et al. Genetic variability of Spodoptera frugiperda Smith (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) populations from Latin America is associated with variations in susceptibility to Bacillus thuringiensis Cry toxins. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2006, 72, 7029–7035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Belay, D.K.; Clark, P.L.; Skoda, S.R.; Isenhour, D.J.; Molina-Ochoa, J.; Gianni, C.; Foster, J.E. Spatial genetic variation among Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) sampled from the United States, Puerto Rico, Panama, and Argentina. Ann. Entomol. Soc. 2012, 105, 359–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Mahadeva-Swamy, H.M.; Asokan, R.; Kalleshwaraswamy, C.M.; Sharanabasappa, D.; Prasad, Y.G.; Maruthi, M.S.; Shashank, P.R.; Ibemu, D.N.; Anusha, S.; Adarsha, S.; et al. Prevalence of “R” strain and molecular diversity of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in India. Indian J. Entomol. 2018, 80, 544–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Lestari, P.; Budiarti, A.; Fitriana, Y.; Susilo, F.X.; Swibawa, I.G.; Sudarsono, H.; Suharjo, R.; Hariri, A.M.; Wibowo, L.; Hartaman, M. Identification and genetic diversity of Spodoptera frugiperda in Lampung Province, Indonesia. Biodiversitas 2020, 21, 1670–1677. Available online: http://repository.lppm.unila.ac.id/id/eprint/49552 (accessed on 30 September 2023). [CrossRef]
  28. Lewter, J.A.; Szalanski, A.L.; Nagoshi, R.N.; Meagher, R.L.; Owens, J.R.C.B.; Luttrell, R.G. Genetic Variation within and between strains of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Fla. Entomol. 2006, 89, 63–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Malekera, M.J.; Mamba, D.M.; Bushabu, G.B.; Murhula, J.C.; Hwang, H.S.; Lee, K.Y. Genetic Diversity of the Fall Armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Agronomy 2023, 13, 2175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Cabusas, J.V.B.; Latina, R.A.; Caoili, B.L. Genetic diversity and population structure of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the Philippines. J. Appl. Ent. 2024, 148, 983–995. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Schlum, K.A.; Lamour, K.; Bortoli, C.P.D.; Banerjee, R.; Meagher, R.; Pereira, E.; Murua, M.G.; Sword, G.A.; Tessnow, A.E.; Dillon, D.V.; et al. Whole genome comparisons reveal panmixia among fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) from diverse locations. BMC Genom. 2021, 22, 179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Phylogeny of various genes using the DNA sequences of Spodoptera species: MtCOI (a), Tpi (b), glutathione S-transferase (c), and carboxylesterase (d).
Figure 1. Phylogeny of various genes using the DNA sequences of Spodoptera species: MtCOI (a), Tpi (b), glutathione S-transferase (c), and carboxylesterase (d).
Crops 04 00035 g001
Figure 2. Amino acid composition of carboxylesterase in the populations of the fall armyworm and its sister species. Alanine—Ala; cysteine—Cys; aspartic acid—Asp; glutamic acid—Glu; phenylalanine—Phe; glycine—Gly; histidine—His; isoleucine—Ile; lysine—Lys; leucine—Leu; methionine—Met; asparagine—Asn; proline—Pro; glutamine—Gln; arginine—Arg; serine—Ser; threonine—Thr; valine—Val; tryptophan—Trp; tyrosine—Tyr.
Figure 2. Amino acid composition of carboxylesterase in the populations of the fall armyworm and its sister species. Alanine—Ala; cysteine—Cys; aspartic acid—Asp; glutamic acid—Glu; phenylalanine—Phe; glycine—Gly; histidine—His; isoleucine—Ile; lysine—Lys; leucine—Leu; methionine—Met; asparagine—Asn; proline—Pro; glutamine—Gln; arginine—Arg; serine—Ser; threonine—Thr; valine—Val; tryptophan—Trp; tyrosine—Tyr.
Crops 04 00035 g002
Table 1. Accession details of MtCOI, Tpi, carboxylesterase, and glutathione S-transferase genes of Spodoptera frugiperda deposited in the NCBI GenBank database.
Table 1. Accession details of MtCOI, Tpi, carboxylesterase, and glutathione S-transferase genes of Spodoptera frugiperda deposited in the NCBI GenBank database.
S.N.Populations MtCOITpiCarboxylesteraseGlutathione S-Transferase
1SusceptibleOL638179OL555556OL555549OL555565
2DavangereOL638153OL555557OL555550OL555563
3TirupatiOL624642OL555558OL555551OL555564
4SolapurOL638191OL555559OL55555OL555566
5HyderabadOL638185OL555560OL555553OL555567
6HosurOL797984OL555561OL555554OL555568
7Delhi*OL555562OL555555*
8PunjabOL638970***
* Samples with poor amplification.
Table 2. Dissimilarity in the MtCOI gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
Table 2. Dissimilarity in the MtCOI gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
PopulationsSusceptibleDavangereTirupatiSolapurHyderabadHosurPunjabS. litura
Susceptible-
Davangere0.4-
Tirupati0.40.6-
Solapur0.60.40.30-
Hyderabad0.40.70.600.60-
Hosur2.101.82.202.402.20-
Punjab1.601.301.801.601.503.30-
S. litura6.606.606.606.606.606.606.60-
Table 3. Dissimilarity in the Tpi gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
Table 3. Dissimilarity in the Tpi gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
PopulationsSusceptibleDavangereTirupatiSolapurHyderabadHosurDelhiSouth Korea
Susceptible-
Davangere0.44-
Tirupati1.751.76-
Solapur0.871.102.65-
Hyderabad1.091.322.870.87-
Hosur1.091.322.870.880.43-
Delhi1.752.013.032.022.012.01-
South Korea0.921.152.551.161.151.150.74-
Table 4. Dissimilarity in the glutathione S-transferase gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda populations (in percent).
Table 4. Dissimilarity in the glutathione S-transferase gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda populations (in percent).
PopulationsSusceptibleDavangereTirupathiSolapurHyderabadHosurS. lituraS. exiguaS. littoralis
Susceptible-
Davangere0.02-
Tirupati0.020.02-
Solapur0.010.020.02-
Hyderabad0.010.020.020.01-
Hosur0.010.020.020.010.01-
S. litura2.122.052.022.122.052.13-
S. littoralis2.402.292.392.432.372.392.14-
S. exigua1.461.461.461.461.461.461.251.40-
Table 5. Dissimilarity in the carboxylesterase gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
Table 5. Dissimilarity in the carboxylesterase gene of the Spodoptera frugiperda population (in percent).
PopulationsSusceptibleDavangereTirupathiSolapurHyderabadHosurDelhiS. lituraS. exiguaS. littoralis
Susceptible-
Davangere0.13-
Tirupati0.150.06-
Solapur0.080.050.06-
Hyderabad0.150.040.070.05-
Hosur0.150.040.080.080.04-
Delhi0.090.080.060.070.070.05-
S.litura1.000.981.001.010.961.011.06-
S.exigua1.381.381.431.291.381.341.300.14-
S.littoralis1.251.321.351.181.311.241.132.532.03-
Table 6. Percent identity matrix using the amino acid sequence of carboxylesterase.
Table 6. Percent identity matrix using the amino acid sequence of carboxylesterase.
PopulationsS. lituraS. exiguaSusceptibleHosurDelhiDavangereTirupatiSolapurHyderabad
S. litura-
S. exigua80.8-
Susceptible71.080.0-
Hosur71.080.0100.0-
Delhi68.979.796.096.0-
Davangere73.082.098.098.098.0-
Tirupati69.681.198.098.098.7100.0-
Solapur69.681.198.098.098.7100.0100.0-
Hyderabad69.681.198.098.098.7100.0100.0100.0-
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

Kavyashree, B.A.; Deshmukh, S.S.; Satish, K.M.; Kalleshwaraswamy, C.M.; Sridhara, S.; Satish, D.; Acharya, R. Genetic Variation in the Invaded Population of the Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in India. Crops 2024, 4, 491-501. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops4040035

AMA Style

Kavyashree BA, Deshmukh SS, Satish KM, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Sridhara S, Satish D, Acharya R. Genetic Variation in the Invaded Population of the Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in India. Crops. 2024; 4(4):491-501. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops4040035

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kavyashree, Bediganahally Annegowda, Sharanabasappa Shrimantara Deshmukh, Kundur Mahadevappa Satish, Chicknayakanahalli Marulsiddappa Kalleshwaraswamy, Shankrappa Sridhara, Danappagala Satish, and Rajendra Acharya. 2024. "Genetic Variation in the Invaded Population of the Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in India" Crops 4, no. 4: 491-501. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops4040035

APA Style

Kavyashree, B. A., Deshmukh, S. S., Satish, K. M., Kalleshwaraswamy, C. M., Sridhara, S., Satish, D., & Acharya, R. (2024). Genetic Variation in the Invaded Population of the Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in India. Crops, 4(4), 491-501. https://doi.org/10.3390/crops4040035

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop