Insectarios.com.ar

Parasitol Res (2009) 105:489–493DOI 10.1007/s00436-009-1425-x Insecticide resistance of house fly, Musca domestica (L.)from Argentina Gonzalo Roca Acevedo & Miguel Zapater &Ariel Ceferino Toloza Received: 16 March 2009 / Accepted: 18 March 2009 / Published online: 2 April 2009 Abstract The status of resistance to cyromazine, 2,2- are mechanical carriers of more than 100 human and animal dichlorovinyl dimethyl phosphate (DDVP), and permethrin intestinal diseases and are responsible for protozoan, relative to field populations of the house fly, Musca domestica bacterial, helminthic, and viral infections (Greenberg L. from Argentinean poultry farms was studied. All the three ; Förster et al. Malik et al. Flies pick up studied populations (SV, Q, and C) showed resistant ratios disease-causing organisms via their mouthparts, feces, (RRs) to cyromazine of 3.9, 10.98, and 62.5, respectively.
through vomits, and via their body surface. It has been We observed high levels of resistance toward the organo- shown that some bacteria could proliferate in the mouth- phosphate DDVP and permethrin. The RRs to DDVP ranged parts (Kobayashi et al. Transmission takes place from 45.4 to 62.5. No significant differences were found when the fly makes contact with people and/or the animals among the studied populations. All the house fly populations (Malik et al. In poultry farms, great quantities of were permethrin-resistant, in comparison with the susceptible manure exposed to high temperature and humidity levels strain. Two of the analyzed populations (SV and Q) differed provide an ideal environment for the development of house significantly in toxicity to the population C. This is the first fly. High density of flies can cause stress to poultry workers evidence that house flies from Argentina showed a multi- and hens or affect the economic value of their products resistance pattern. The implementation of an insecticide (Moon et al. ; Learmount et al. ). In poultry monitoring program on poultry farms of Argentina is needed farms, the application of cyromazine and the neurotoxic to prevent field control failures. Furthermore, integrated 2,2-dichlorovinyl dimethyl phosphate (DDVP) and pyreth- control strategies are needed to delay detrimental develop- roids have been shown to be a successful control strategy worldwide (Kristensen et al. ). The annual cost ofhouse fly control in poultry farms in the USA has beenestimated to be over 1.6 millions of dollars (Crespo et al.
). Cyromazine is an insect growth regulator derivedfrom azidotrazine herbicides (Shen and Plapp ) that The house fly, Musca domestica (L.) is an important affects the endocrine system of developing larvae causing sanitary pest of humans and domesticated animals. They abnormal growth, integument swelling, thinning of thecuticle, cuticular lesions, larviform puparia, and irregularmuscle formation (Awad and Mulla Friedel et al. ; Tang et al. ). Either DDVP or pyrethroid-based products are neurotoxic insecticides applied as aerosols or space sprays for adult house fly control. However, the repetitive Juan Bautista de La Salle 4397,ALO1603 Villa Martelli, Buenos Aires, Argentina and inappropriate use of compounds in all these classes has led to resistance worldwide (Shen and Plapp Pinto andPrado ; Liu and Yue 2000; Tang et al. Marçon et al. ; White et al. ). In Argentina, cyromazine has Facultad de Agronomía, UBA,Buenos Aires, Argentina been used in two ways: added to poultry food and sprayed over the manure. The most widely used insecticide against house fly is the organophosphate DDVP sprayed over thesurfaces where flies rest. Even though pyrethroid products were registered to control house fly, their use in the farms isfour to five times lesser than the organophosphates.
Cyromazine was dissolved in the fresh water and added to In 1998, the annual cost estimation in Argentina of the larval medium. Final concentrations ranged from 0.08 house fly control in poultry farms was over 10,000 US to 10 ppm. Treated medium was added into plastic pots (55- dollars (Crespo et al. ). Nowadays, this estimation has mm high×90-mm diameter), and first larvaes (≈20-100) increased considerably. Even though there are numerous were individually transferred using a fine paintbrush and reports of insecticide resistance of house fly populations covered with an autoclaved cloth. Each concentration was worldwide, no previous work was reported to assess the replicated three to six times. Control consisted of the susceptibility of M. domestica field populations from medium without the addition of the larvicide. The number Argentina. The aim of the present work was to study the of emerging house flies was recorded 2 weeks after setting resistance spectrum of fly populations from poultry farms.
up the tests, and larval mortality was calculated. Tests werekept at 25±1°C, 57–75% RH, and a photoperiod of 12:12(L/D).
Four- to 7-day-old adult houseflies were anesthetized The larvicide ciromazine (N-cyclopropyl-1,3,5-triazine- with CO2, and 0.2 μl of the insecticide diluted in acetone 2,4,6-triamine) of technical grade (95.0% purity) was was applied on the ventral side of the abdomen using a provided by CIBA-GEIGY Ltd, Basle, Switzerland. For 25-μl Hamilton syringe. F1 and F2 generations were used topical application tests, technical samples of permethrin for topical bioassays. Final concentration ranged from (95.4%, 52.4% cis) and DDVP (97.8 %) were provided by 0.005 to 15 mg/ml for DDVP and from 0.0003 to 15 mg/ml for permethrin. Batches of ten to 20 house flies perconcentration were replicated three to five times. Control groups received acetone alone. After topical application,house flies were kept in plastic jars (250 ml), covered House fly pupae were collected (≈400–600 per site) from with tulle cloth, and secured with rubber bands. Insects three poultry farms located in Buenos Aires province (SV, were kept at 25 ± 1°C, 57–75% RH, and a photoperiod of S34.56848 W59.11743; Q, S34.32077 W59.00690; C, 12:12 (L/D). A water-saturated piece of cotton was S34.92691 W58.94680).The farms were situated 70 km apart placed on the bottom of each jar. Mortality consisted of from one another and were not surrounded by another poultry flies without any movement and was recorded 18 h after farms. Thus, we expected that populations were not connected between them. In the laboratory, house fly pupaewere held for eclosion in plastic jars (250 ml) with a smallquantity of untreated wood shavings. Containers where placed into 28-×28-×28-cm plastic boxes that were screenedon both sides and the top. Pupae were maintained at 25±1°C, Because some mortality occurred in some controls 57–75% RH, and a photoperiod of 12:12 (L/D) for 2–6 days.
(<10%), data were separately corrected according to During this eclosion period, emerged adult flies were fed by Abbott’s formula (Abbott ). Mortality data were placing dry milk, sugar, and water inside the boxes. The subjected to probit analysis (Litchfield and Wilcoxon medium to rear larvae consisted of dried yeast, whole dry ) to estimate the lethal concentration (parts per milk, agar, and nipagine diluted in absolute ethanol (10%), million) or the lethal dose (microgram per insect) required diluted in water in a proportional amount of 1:1:0.2:0.1, to kill 50% of treated insects (LC50) or (LD50), respec- respectively. The strain CIPEIN was laboratory insecticide- tively. Resistance ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence limits susceptible that had never been exposed to insecticides were estimated by comparison with the susceptible strain and originated from the Institute for Pesticide Research, CIPEIN, as reported by Robertson and Preisler ( Wageningen, The Netherlands in 1981. Colony rearing Data were analyzed by using the Polo-PC v 2.0 (LeOra rooms were maintained at the conditions mentioned above.
chemical control strategies would also affect the evolutionof house flies.
Cyromazine was used in the three poultry farms since the last 20 years ago. The different resistance levels to The results of the concentration–mortality test of larvicidal cyromazine found in the studied populations would suggest effect are presented in Table . LC50 and LC90 values that the application of this larvicide has been heterogeneous indicated that all the studied populations were resistant to in every site. Information collected from the farmers cyromazine. There were significant differences among all indicated that this larvicide has been more frequently used the populations. The population SV showed the highest than product label recommendations, suggesting possible resistant ratio (RR=62.5), followed by Q and C, with RR field control failures. In the three studied sites, cyromazine levels of 10.9 and 3.9, respectively.
was sprayed onto surfaces of manure and used as foodadditive. However, in the last 5 years in Argentina, the incorporation of this larvicide as food additive was limitedand controlled due to the international food regulations. In Data on adults exposed to DDVP and permethrin are shown the USA, cyromazine feed-through was commercially in Table . LD50 and LD90 values revealed that the introduced in 1982, and 2 years later, house flies tolerant individuals from the Q population were the most tolerant to this larvicide were found (Bloomcamp et al. to DDVP. However, no significant differences in suscepti- Moreover, house flies collected from a population where bility to DDVP were found among the field populations.
cyromazine control failed had an average resistant factor of The RRs to DDVP ranged from 45.4 to 62.5. Permethrin 4.2 (Sheppard et al. ). These suggest that field house LD50 and LD90 values revealed that all the field populations fly with resistant ratios over 5 would be a useful value to differed significantly from the reference strain. The popu- predict control failures in the field. In Brazil, a study by lation Q showed the highest RR (RR=117.3). Both Q and Pinto and Prado ) revealed that three out of five house SV populations differed significantly from the C popula- fly populations were cyromazine resistant, with RRs of 6.5 tion, and were 1.7- and 1.4-fold more tolerant than the to 12.8. However, no correlation between history applica- tion and resistance levels was made. In Europe, cyromazinehas also been used as a manure application in Denmarksince 1984 and in the UK since 2000. A survey of the impact of house fly resistance strategies in intensive animalunits in the UK revealed that, after 5 years of cyromazine The results of the current study indicate that house fly application, all the 15 field populations analyzed were fully populations from Argentina are highly resistant to the susceptible to this larvicide (Learmount et al. ). On the larvicide cyromazine and to the adulticides DDVP and other hand, the monitoring program of cyromazine suscep- permethrin. This is the first study reporting that house fly tibility developed at the Danish pest infestation laboratory from Argentina are resistant to a variety of different indicated that, after >10 years of intensive use, tolerance or insecticides. A multi-resistance pattern was found in the low-level resistance was found (Kristensen and Jespersen studied poultry farms, suggesting an intensive and contin- ). After 15 generations of cyromazine selection, a 4.5- uous selective pressure against house fly populations. Scott fold resistant field strain was selected to a 70-fold resistance et al. (studied house fly populations from New York (Bloomcamp et al. The high resistance levels of that were exposed to a wide variety of insecticides and cyromazine found in the field house fly populations from found a strong correlation between insecticide use and Argentina suggest that it was widely overused in Argentina control histories. However, different regional or local and played an important role in the development of Table 1 Responses to cyromazine of house fly larvae Table 2 Toxicity of adult house flies to DDVP and permethrin insecticide resistance populations. In addition, the exposure pressure with the pyrethroid beta-cypermethrin, house fly of house flies to the two treatments—food additive and resistance strains increased 1,700-fold. These indicate that direct sprayed onto the manure—would probably led to a resistance to pyrethroids in house fly could be developed The organophosphate DDVP has been introduced in The permethrin resistance found in the present work Argentina for the use on poultry farms two decades ago.
could be considered as part of a multi-resistance mechanism Since then, it has been one of the products most employed with incremented detoxification metabolism of xenobiotics.
against adult house flies. The three studied populations of This is the first report of a multi-resistance pattern of house fly were highly resistant to the organophosphate Argentinean house flies collected in the field. Considering DDVP. Direct sprayed actions to knock down high levels of that cyromazine and DDVP are the most sold products in the house flies has led to an overuse of this insecticide in the Argentinean market and that they had been used in the poultry farms studied. This selective pressure could explain studied poultry farms with slightly different chemical control the elevated RRs reported in this study. Scott et al. ( strategies; we can assumed that these products were found low to moderate resistant levels to organophosphates responsible for the resistance pattern found in this work.
from several house fly strains collected from New York Pospischil et al. ) reported that a field population of poultry farms. These authors found a correlation between house fly had adults highly resistant to organophosphates the insecticide histories of organophosphates and the and pyrethroids but tolerant to cyromazine. The reported resistant levels. Moreover, Kristensen et al. (studied multi-resistance profile could also be attributable in part to the azamethiphos tolerance of house flies from Denmark, the movement of house flies between poultry houses and showing that after 15 years of intensive resistance moni- into appropriate breeding habitats. The study of Lysyk and toring, 10% of the population was highly resistant.
Axtell (indicated that house fly dispersal plays an However, this resistance pattern was highly labile, dis- important role in the movement of insects from one area to another. Moreover, the three poultry farms are surrounded All the studied populations were highly resistant to by several crop fields where insecticide applications are permethrin. No previous information about field control frequent. The insecticide resistance profile showed in the failures was available. A correlation of data topical present study could be associated with both the application application of permethrin and control failures in the field exposure of larvae and adults at the poultry farms and to made by Farham et al. (revealed that control failures direct and indirect insecticide residues from surrounding usually occurs when RRs are over 15-fold. Marçon et al.
fields. Further work is needed to understand the multi- ) found that two studied house fly populations from resistance pattern found in this study. These studies should the USA had RRs less than fivefold, suggesting that be focused at either biochemical or molecular level, since a permethrin should still be used against house fly. The lot of information is currently available worldwide. Actual- number of generations required for a tenfold increase in ly, no insecticide monitoring program of house fly popula- LD50s through different permethrin selection intensity tion is currently available in Argentina. An effective varied from 9 to 21 (Zhu et al. Another experiment resistance management strategy would bring new insights of permethrin selection showed that, after five generations, into the level, extend, and degree of resistance in the the level of resistance in the house flies could increase to studied sites. Thus, the implementation of regular surveys 1,800-fold (Lui and Yue Similarly, Zhang et al.
on poultry farms would be very informative in order to reported that, after 25 generations of selective establish effective strategies against house flies. In addi- tion, the implementation of successful guidelines imple- Kristensen M, Spencer A, Jespersen J (2001) The status and development of insecticide resistance in Danish populations of mented in Denmark and UK would prevent the detrimental the house fly Musca domestica L. Pest Manag Sci 57:82–89 effects of multi-resistance insects avoiding future field Learmount J, Chapman P, Macnicoll A (2002) Impact of an insecticide resistance strategy for house fly (Diptera: Muscidae) control inintensive animal units in the United Kingdom. J Econ Entomol We thank the owners of the poultry farms where house flies were collected. The present work is part of the thesis of the LeOra Software (2002) Polo-PC: a user's guide to probit or logit student Gonzalo Roca Acevedo at the CAECE University. We thank Dr. Eduardo Zerba and Dra María Inés Picollo for helping us to Litchfield J, Wilcoxon F (1949) A simplified method of evaluating perform this work at the CIPEIN. Technician Susana Segovia helped dose-effect experiments. J Exp Ther 96:99–110 us to rear the different populations. The experiments in this work Lui N, Yue X (2000) Insecticide resistance and cross-resistance in the comply with the current laws of Argentina.
house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). J Econ Entomol 93:1269–1275 Lysyk T, Axtell R (1986) Movement and distribution of house flies (Diptera: Muscidae) between two livestock farms. J EconEntomol 79:993–998 Malik A, Singh N, Satya S (2007) House Fly (Musca domestica): a review of control strategies for a challenging pest. J Environ SciHealth Part B 42:453–469 Abbott W (1925) A method of computing the effectiveness of an Marçon P, Thomas G, Siegfried B, Campbell J, Skoda S (2003) Resistance status of house flies (Diptera: Muscidae) from Awad T, Mulla M (1984) Morphogenetics and histopathological effects Southeastern Nebraska beef cattle feedlots to selected insecti- induced by the insect growth regulator cyromazine in Musca domestica (Diptera. Muscidae). J Med Entomol 21:416–426 Moon R, Hinton J, O'Rourke D, Schmidt D (2001) Nutritional value Bloomcamp C, Patterson R, Koehler P (1987) Cyromazine resistance of fresh and composted poultry manure for house fly (Diptera: in the house fly (Diptera: Muscidae). J Econ Entomol 80:352– Muscidae) larvae. J Econ Entomol 94:1308–1317 Pinto M, Prado A (2001) Resistance of Musca domestica L.
Crespo D, Lecuona R, Hogsette J (1998) Biological control: an populations to cyromazine (insect growth regulator) in Brazil.
important component in integrated management of Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) in caged-layer poultry houses in Pospischil R, Szomm K, Londershausen M, Schröder I, Tuberg A, Buenos Aires, Argentina. Biol Control 13:16–24 Fuchs R (1996) Multiple resistance in the larger house fly Musca Farham A, O´Dell K, Denholm I, Sawicki R (1984) Factors affecting domestica in Germany. Pestic Sci 48:333–341 resistance to insecticides in house flies, Musca domestica L.
Robertson J, Preisler H (1992) Pesticide bioassays with arthropods.
(Diptera: Muscidae). III. Relationship between the level of resistance of pyrethroids, control failure in the field and the Scott J, Alefantis T, Kaufman P, Rutz D (2000) Insecticide resistance frequency of gene Kdr. Bull Entomol Res 74:581–589 in house flies from caged-layer poultry facilities. Pest Manag Sci Förster M, Klimpel S, Mehlhorn H, Sievert K, Messler S, Pfeffer K (2007) Pilot studies on synantropic flies (e.g. Musca, Sarcoph- Shen J, Plapp F (1990) Cyromazine resistance in the house fly aga, Calliphora, Fania, Lucilia, Stomoxys) as vectors of (Diptera: Muscidae): genetics and cross-resistance to difluben- pathogenic microorganisms. Parasitol Res 101:243–246 Friedel T, Hales D, Birch D (1988) Cyromazine-induced effects on the Sheppard C, Hinkle N, Hunter JIII, Gaydon D (1989) Resistance in larval cuticle of the sheep bowfly, Lucilia cuprina: ultrastructural constant exposure livestock insect control systems: a partial evidence for a possible mode of action. Pestic Biochem Physiol review with some original findings on cyromazine resistance in Greenberg B (1971) Flies and disease, vol. I. Princeton University Tang J, Caprio M, Sheppard C, Gaydon D (2002) Genetics and fitness costs of cyromazine resistance in the house fly (Diptera: Kobayashi M, Sasaki T, Saito N, Tamura K, Suzuki H, Watanabe H, Agui N (1999) Houseflies are not simple mechanical vectors of White W, McCoy C, Meyer J, Winkle J, Plummer P, Kemper C, enterohemorragic Escherichia coli O157:H7. Am J Trop Med Starkey R, Snyder D (2007) Knockdown and mortality compar- isons among spinosad-, imidacloprid-, and methomyl-containing Kristensen M, Jespersen J (2003) Larvicide resistance in Musca baits against susceptible Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) domestica (Diptera: Muscidae) populations in Denmark and under laboratory conditions. J Econ Entomol 100:155–163 establishment of resistance laboratory strains. J Econ Entomol Zhang L, Shi J, Gao X (2008) Inheritance of beta-cypermethrin resistance in the house fly Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae).
Kristensen M, Knorr M, Spencer A, Jespersen J (2000) Selection and reversion of azamethiphos-resistance in a field population of the Zhu F, Yuan J, Zhuang P, Tang Z (2002) Inheritance of resistance to housefly Musca domestica (Diptera: Muscidae), and the under- cyhalothrin in the housefly (Diptera: Muscidae). Acta Entomol lying biochemical mechanisms. J Econ Entomol 93:1788–1795

Source: http://www.insectarios.com.ar/pdf/roca-acevedo-2009.pdf