Evaluation of foliar damage by Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to genetically modified corn (Poales: Poaceae) in Mexico.
A reliance on chemical control to manage pest populations has become increasingly ineffective as S. frugiperda now expresses resistance to several toxicological groups of insecticides (Georghiou & Mellon 1983; Yu 1991; Pacheco-Covarrubias 1993; Morillo & Notz 2001; Yu et al. 2003).
The development of new control techniques led to the elaboration of genetically modified corn hybrids expressing a Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner (Bacillales: Bacillaceae) (Bt) crystal protein that, when consumed by lepidopterous larvae, proved fatal to the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis Hubner (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), the southwestern corn borer, Diatraea grandiosella Dyar (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), the sugarcane borer, Diatraea saccharalis (F.) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), the corn earworm, Helicoverpa zea Boddie (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), and S. frugiperda (Abel et al. 2000; Castro et al. 2004). A pyramided strategy that combines 2 or more Bt genes deployed in the same corn plant is now used to conserve insecticidal efficacy (Burkness et al. 2010; Niu et al. 2013; Yang et al. 2013). Genetically modified corn (GM) hybrids with Bt genes have also been developed to resist a wider range of pests within Lepidoptera and Coleoptera (Buntin et al. 2004a,b; Buntin 2008; Duan et al. 2008; Hardke et al. 2011). These hybrids support a pest management strategy in modern agriculture (Fernandes et al. 2007), although concerns from an economic, scientific, and social standpoint remain in Mexico.
Mexico is the center of origin of over 61 native races of corn (Reyes 1990; Matsuoka 2005; CONABIO 2006; Kato et al. 2009), and there is concern that GM corn could jeopardize those races (Kato-Yamakake 2004; Serratos-Hernandez et al. 2004; Turrent et al. 2010); however, Baltazar et al. (2015) suggest that measures such as spatial isolation could minimize contamination risks. More information is needed in Mexico to validate if the Bt Cry proteins of GM corn are effective in controlling the crop pests under various environmental conditions beyond those reported by Aguirre et al. (2015a) to control corn earworm in the state of Sinaloa and by Aguirre et al. (2015b) to control S. frugiperda in the state of Tamaulipas. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate foliar damage in corn hybrids with Cry1Ab, Vip3Aa20, and mCry3A toxins from B. thuringiensis to control S. frugiperda larvae in Sinaloa, Mexico, during 3 growing seasons.
Materials and Methods
Research was conducted at Oso Viejo, El Dorado, and Camalote in the city of Culiacan and the city of Navolato, both in the state of Sinaloa, during the 2011-2013 fall-winter growing seasons. Plots were planted under biosafety conditions, isolated at least 500 m from commercial corn plots and planted at least 21 d later than recommended to avoid cross-pollination with non-GM hybrids in accordance with government regulations for field tests with GM corn (Halsey et al. 2005; LBOGM 2005).
Three Bt corn hybrids (Agrisure[TM] 3000 GT with Cry1Ab and mCry3A proteins; Agrisure[R] Viptera[TM] 3111 with Cry1Ab, Vip3Aa20, and mCry3A; and Agrisure[R] Viptera[TM] 3110 with Cry1Ab and Vip3Aa20) were used in this research and compared with their respective non-GM isolines provided by Syngenta Agro S.A de C.V. de Mexico (San Lorenzo 1009, Primer Piso, Colonia Del Valle, 03100, Mexico, D.F.). The first two hybrids are resistant to Lepidoptera and Coleoptera and the last one is resistant to Lepidoptera.
A randomized complete block design was used in each locality and date. In 2011, Agrisure 3000 GT and Agrisure Viptera 3110, plus their isolines, were planted at Oso Viejo. In addition, each variety had a corresponding treatment that included a foliar insecticide control (see Table 1). There were 4 replicate blocks per treatment, and they were planted on 28 Jan. In 2012, Agrisure Viptera 3111 and Agrisure 3000 GT hybrids, with and without insecticide treatments, were planted on 15 Feb at Navolato. Agrisure Viptera 3111 was planted at El Dorado on 19 Feb, also with and without insecticide applications (see Table 1). Only 3 replicates were planted in these areas. In 2013, Agrisure Viptera 3111 was planted at Camalote and Oso Viejo on 14 and 15 March, respectively, with 3 treatments (GM hybrid, isoline, isoline plus insecticide) and 4 replicates (see Table 1). In addition, experimental plots during the 3 yr period received an insecticide treatment for S. frugiperda if plants less than 20 cm tall reached a 10% infestation level, or plants 20 cm or taller reached a 20% infestation level, at the rate of 2 applications per year (Table 1).
Each experimental plot consisted of 10 rows, each 5 m long, with 0.8 m between rows with a 40 to 50 seed planting density. The seedlings were later thinned to 34 plants per row. The experimental plot was surrounded with a buffer area of 6 rows of conventional corn, and other buffer areas were planted between replicates, which were planted the same time as the experimental material as required by official regulations. Agricultural management of the plot followed the technical guide for corn growers developed by the Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agricolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP 2010).
Foliar damage under natural infestation by fall armyworms was evaluated by sampling 10 plants randomly in the 4 central rows at V6V8 (2011), and V2-V4, V6-V8, and V10-V12 (2012 and 2013) phenological stages of the plant. A numerical scale (1-9), also known as the Davis scale, was used to evaluate foliar feeding damage (Davis et al. 1989, 1992; Mihm 1983) ranging from 1 = no foliar damage (highly resistant) to 9 = severe foliar damage (totally susceptible).
PROC ANOVA and Tukey's multiple rank test (P < 0.05) were used to compare among treatments. SAS/STAT (SAS version 9.0; SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina) software was used to analyze the percentage of injury to plants injured and the damage ratings (Davis scale).
Genetically modified hybrids at Oso Viejo in 2011 did not show significant (P > 0.05) damage by fall armyworms. The isolines with insecticide treatment also had low damage scores, 1.85 and 1.22 (Davis scale) for Agrisure 3000 GT and Agrisure Viptera 3110, respectively, with only some pinhole feeding marks on leaves and no significant differences between treatments (P > 0.05). In contrast, isolines without chemical treatment had an average of damage score of 4.20 in both hybrids, which possessed large holes and long lesions on leaves. Spodoptera frugiperda did not damage Agrisure Viptera 3110 and Agrisure 3000 GT with insecticide treatment, and 5.0% of plants were damaged in the latter without treatment. The non-GM hybrids displayed damaged plants from 15.0 to 90.0%, including those in which chemical control was used (Table 2).
At El Dorado and Navolato in 2012, results were similar to those in 2011. Agrisure Viptera 3111 and Agrisure 3000 GT, including those with insecticide treatment, showed little foliar damage (<1.4 on the Davis scale) and few injured plants, with some plants with pinholes and only 13.3% of plants injured in the Agrisure 3000 GT treatment. The isolines of the GM hybrids were significantly different, with 52.2 to 81.1% of plants injured and plant damage that varied from 2.89 to 4.97 on the Davis scale, including large holes and long leaf lesions (Table 3).
In 2013, Agrisure Viptera 3111 did not show feeding signs by S. frugiperda at any of the test sites, whereas the isolines were heavily infested including those in which chemical control was applied. Foliar injury was 1.72 to 3.22 on the Davis scale and 35.8 to 74.2% of plants injured, including large lesions (Table 4).
Agrisure 3000 GT, Agrisure Viptera 3110, and Agrisure Viptera 3111 hybrids were resistant to S. frugiperda as compared with their severely injured respective isolines during the 3 yr research study in the Sinaloa corn-growing areas. These results are similar to those found by Aguirre et al. (2015b), testing the same Bt hybrids in the state of Tamaulipas. Also, Pina & Solleiro (2013) indicated that experimental tests of GM corn in various areas of Mexico are consistently efficacious in controlling key pests.
This research showed that use of GM Bt corn hybrids provides season-long protection from S. frugiperda. In contrast, chemical control only protects the plant when the insecticide residue is present, and a failure in timing of application(s) represents a risk in control efficacy. Pina & Solleiro (2013) reported that protecting non-Bt corn in several areas of Mexico from infestations of corn earworms and fall armyworms required from 3 to 5 insecticide applications per season, and from 720 g to 3.6 kg of active ingredient per ha. In addition, researchers in other countries reported similar results of Bt corn with the Cry1Ab toxin for controlling the fall armyworm with respect to conventional hybrids with and without insecticide control (Buntin et al. 2001, 2004a,b; Buntin 2008; Hardke et al. 2011; Huang et al. 2011; Rios-Diez et al. 2012).
Hybrids with the Bt toxin used in this research consistently demonstrated reduction in foliar damage. However, in all areas tested, Agrisure 3000 GT displayed more injured plants and larger lesion size than Agrisure Viptera 3110 and Agrisure Viptera 3111. The higher level of damage is thought to be due to Agrisure 3000 GT having only 1 Bt toxin (Cry1Ab) for Lepidoptera control, whereas the other tested hybrids have 2 pyramided Bt genes. Multiple genes for resistance are thought to provide better resistance to the pest. Agrisure Viptera 3110 and Agrisure Viptera 3111 have 2 toxins (pyramid events) for Lepidoptera control, the 5-endotoxin Cry1Ab and the vegetative insecticide protein Vip3Aa20, which provide excellent protection to the crop, not only from S. frugiperda but also from other Lepidoptera (Burkness et al. 2010; Niu et al. 2013; Yang et al. 2013).
Planting dates of experimental plots were at least 21 d later than the recommended date in Sinaloa. This requirement was imposed by regulatory authorities in order to avoid cross pollination with conventional corn in the area. This condition put the experimental plots in this research under high pest pressure, which came from surrounding corn fields and sorghum fields. Despite this high level of pest pressure, the Bt toxin in the crop reduced the infestation level and damage. If these GM hybrids were planted on the recommended planting date under optimal conditions to the crop, these Bt hybrids could be expected to perform well. Such a corn pest management program would reduce the use of chemical insecticides, allow the crop to better express its genetic potential, and conserve yield and grain quality by decreasing foliar damage.
The authors would like to thank Syngenta Agro S.A de C.V. de Mexico for providing the genetic material that made this research possible.
Abel CA, Wilson RL, Wiseman BR, White WH, Davis FM. 2000. Conventional resistance of experimental maize lines to corn earworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), southwestern corn borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae), and sugarcane borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 93: 982-988.
Aguirre LA, Hernandez A, Flores M, Frias GA, Cerna E, Landeros J, Harris MK. 2015a. Genetically modified maize resistant to corn earworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in Sinaloa, Mexico. Florida Entomologist 98: 821-826.
Aguirre LA, Hernandez A, Flores M, Perez-Zubiri R, Cerna E, Landeros J, Frias GA. 2015b. Comparacion del nivel de dano de Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) en plantas de maiz geneticamente modificado y convencional en el Norte de Mexico. Southwestern Entomologist 40: 171-178.
Baltazar BM, Castro EL, Espinoza BA, de la Fuente MJM, Garzon TJA, Gonzalez GJ, Gutierrez MA, Guzman RJL, Heredia DO, Horak MJ, Madueno MJI, Schapaugh WA, Stojsin D, Uribe MHR, Zavala GF. 2015. Pollen-mediated gene flow in maize: implications for isolation requirements and coexistence in Mexico, the center of origin of maize. PLoS One 10: e0131549.
Buntin GD. 2008. Corn expressing Cry1Ab or Cry1F endotoxin for fall armyworm and corn earworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) management in field corn for grain production. Florida Entomologist 91: 523-530.
Buntin GD, Dewey LR, Wilson DM, McPherson RM. 2001. Evaluation of Yieldgard transgenic resistance for control of fall armyworm and corn earworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on corn. Florida Entomologist 84: 37-42.
Buntin GD, All JN, Lee RD, Wilson DM. 2004a. Plant-incorporated Bacillus thuringiensis resistance for control of fall armyworm and corn earworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in corn. Journal of Economic Entomology 97: 1603-1611.
Buntin GD, Flanders KL, Lynch RE. 2004b. Assessment of experimental Bt events against fall armyworm and corn earworm in field corn. Journal of Economic Entomology 97: 259-264.
Burkness EC, Dively G, Patton T, Morey AC, Hutchison WD. 2010. Novel Vip3A Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) maize approaches high-dose efficacy against Helicoverpa zea (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) under field conditions. GM Crops 1: 337-343.
Casmuz A, Juarez ML, Sodas MG, Murua MG, Prieto S, Medina S, Willink E, Gastaminza G. 2010. Revision de los hospederos del gusano cogollero del maiz, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Revista de la Sociedad Entomologica Argentina 69: 209-231.
Castro BA, Leonard BR, Riley TJ. 2004. Management of feeding damage and survival of southwestern corn borer and sugarcane borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) with Bacillus thuringiensis transgenic field corn. Journal of Economic Entomology 97: 2106-2116.
CONABIO (Comision Nacional para el conocimiento y uso de la Biodiversidad). 2006. Elementos para la determinacion de centros de origen y centros de diversidad en general y el caso especifico de la liberacion experimental de maiz transgenico al ambiente en Mexico. Documento base preparado por la Coordinacion Nacional de la CONABIO para la Secretaria de Medio Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (SEMARNAT) y la Secretaria de Agricultura, Ganaderia, Pesca y Alimentacion (SAGARPA). Mexico, D.F. http://www.biodiversidad.gob.mx/genes/pdf/Doc_CdeOCdeDG.pdf (last accessed 10 Nov 2014).
Davis FM, Williams WP, Wiseman BR. 1989. Methods used to screen maize for and to determine mechanisms of resistance to the southwestern corn borer and fall armyworm. In Proceedings, Toward Insect Resistant Maize for the Third World. International Symposium on Methodologies for Developing Host Plant Resistance to Maize Insects, 9-14 Mar 1987, International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, D.F.
Davis FM, Ng SS, Williams WP. 1992. Visual rating scales for screening whorlstage corn for resistance to fall armyworm. Mississippi Agricultural & Forestry Experiment Station. Technical Bulletin 186.
Duan JJ, Teixeira D, Huesing JE, Jiang C. 2008. Assessing the risk to nontarget organisms from Bt corn resistant to corn rootworms (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae): tier-I testing with Orius insidiosus (Heteroptera: Anthocoridae). Environmental Entomology 37: 838-844.
Fernandes OA, Faria M, Martinelli S, Schmidt F, Ferreira CV, Moro G. 2007. Short-term assessment of Bt maize on non-target arthropods in Brazil. Scientia Agricola (Piracicaba, Brazil) 64: 249-255.
Garcia-Gutierrez C, Gonzalez-Maldonado MB, Cortez-Mondaca E. 2012. Uso de enemigos naturales y biorracionales para el control de plagas de maiz. Ra Ximhai 8: 57-70.
Georghiou GP, Mellon RB. 1983. Pesticide resistance in time and space, pp. 1-46 In Georghiou GP, Saito T [eds.], Pest Resistance to Pesticides. Plenum Press, New York, New York.
Halsey ME, Remund KM, Davis CA, Qualls M, Eppard PJ, Berberich SA. 2005. Isolation of maize from pollen-mediated gene flow by time and distance. Crop Science 45: 2172-2185.
Hardke JT, Leonard BR, Huang F, Jackson RE. 2011. Damage and survivorship of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on transgenic field corn expressing Bacillus thuringiensis Cry proteins. Crop Protection 30: 168-172.
Herrera AJ. 1979. Principales Plagas del Maiz. Boletin Especial de la Direccion de Agricultura y Ganaderia del Peru.
Huang F, Andow DA, Buschman LL. 2011. Success of the high dose/refuge resistance management strategy after 15 years of Bt crops in North America. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 140: 1-16.
INIFAP (Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agricolas y Pecuarias). 2010. Centro de Investigacion Regional del Noreste (CIRNO). Campo Experimental Valle de Culiacan (CEVACU). Maiz, pp. 41-47 In Gufa tecnica para el area de influencia del Campo Experimental Valle de Culiacan. Culiacan, Sinaloa, Mexico.
Kato TA, Mapes C, Mera LM, Serratos JA, Bye RA. 2009. Origen y diversificacion del maiz: una revision analitica. Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico (UNAM), Comision Nacional para el Conocimiento y Uso de la Biodiversidad (CONABIO), Mexico.
Kato-Yamakake TA. 2004. Variedades transgenicas y el maiz nativo en Mexico. Agricultura, Sociedad y Desarrollo 1: 101-109.
LBOGM (Ley de Bioseguridad de Organismos Geneticamente Modificados). 2005. Diario Oficial de la Federacion, 18 marzo 2005, Mexico.
Matsuoka Y 2005. Origin matters: lessons from the search for the wild ancestor of maize. Breeding Science 55: 383-390.
Mihm JA. 1983. Efficient Mass-Rearing and Infestation Techniques to Screen for Host Plant Resistance to Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda. International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Mexico, D.F.
Morillo F, Notz A. 2001. Resistencia de Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) a lambdacihalotrina y metomil. Entomotropica 16: 79-87.
Niu Y, Meagher Jr RL, Yang F, Huang F. 2013. Susceptibility of field populations of the fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from Florida and Puerto Rico to purified Cry1F and corn leaf tissue containing single and pyramided Bt genes. Florida Entomologist 96: 701-713.
Ortega AC. 1987. Insectos nocivos del maiz: una guia para su identificacion en el campo. Centro Internacional de Mejoramiento de Maiz y Trigo (CIMMYT), Mexico.
Pacheco-Covarrubias JJ. 1993. Monitoring insecticide resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda populations from the Yaqui Valley, Son., Mexico. Resistant Pest Management, Newsletter 5: 3-4.
Pina S, Solleiro JL. 2013. Mexico, pp. 341-408 In Solleiro RJL, Castanon IR [eds.], Introduccion al ambiente del maiz transgenico: Analisis de ocho casos en Iberoamerica, Mexico. AgroBio Mexico y CambioTec, Mexico.
Reyes CP. 1990. El maiz y su cultivo. AGT-EDITOR S.A., Mexico.
Rios-Diez JD, Siegfried B, Saldamando-Benjumea CI. 2012. Susceptibility of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) strains from central Colombia to Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac entotoxins of Bacillus thuringiensis. Southwestern Entomologist 37: 281-293.
Rodriguez DLA, Mann AJ. 2008. Insectos plaga y su control, pp. 29-46 In Rodriguez MR, De Leon C [eds.], El cultivo del maiz. Temas selectos 1. Colegio de postgraduados, Mundi Prensa, Mexico.
Sena Jr DG, Pinto FAC, Queiroz DM, Viana PA. 2003. Fall armyworm damaged maize plant identification using digital images. Biosystems Engineering 85: 449-454.
Serratos-Hernandez JA, Islas-Gutierrez F, Buendia-Rodriguez E, Berthaud J. 2004. Gene flow scenarios with transgenic maize in Mexico. Environmental Biosafety Research 3: 149-157.
Silva-Aguayo G, Rodriguez-Maciel JC, Lagunes-Tejeda A, Landeral-Cazares C, Alatorre-Rosas R, Shelton AM, Blanco CA. 2010. Bioactivity of boldo (Peumus boldus Molina) (Laurales: Monimiaceae) on Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) and Helicoverpa zea (Boddie) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Southwestern Entomologist 35: 215-231.
Turrent FA, Cortes FJI, Espinosa CA, Mejia AH, Serratos HJA. 2010. ?Es ventajosa para Mexico la tecnologia actual de maiz transgenico? Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Agricolas 1: 631-646.
Yang F, Qureshi JA, Leonard BR, Head GP, Niu Y, Huang F. 2013. Susceptibility of Louisiana and Florida populations of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to pyramided Bt corn containing Genuity[R] VT Double Pro[TM] and SmartStax[TM] traits. Florida Entomologist 96: 714-723.
Yu SJ. 1991. Insecticide resistance in the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith). Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 39: 84-91.
Yu SJ, Nguyen SN, Abo-Elghar GE. 2003. Biochemical characteristics of insecticide resistance in the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith). Pesticide Biochemistry and Physiology 77: 1-11.
Luis A. Aguirre (1) *, Agustin Hernandez-Juarez (1), Mariano Flores (1), Ernesto Cerna (1), Jeronimo Landeros (1), Gustavo A. Frias (1), and Marvin K. Harris (2)
(1) Universidad Autonoma Agraria Antonio Narro, Departamento de Parasitologia, Calzada Antonio Narro 1923, Buenavista, Saltillo, Coahuila, 25315, Mexico
(2) Texas A&M University, Department of Entomology, College Station, Texas 77843, USA
* Corresponding author; E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Table 1. Insecticide treatments used to evaluate leaf damage by fall armyworms in genetically modified (GM) corn during 2011-2013 fall-winter growing seasons in localities of Culiacan and Navolato, Sinaloa, Mexico. Year Hybrid (a) Locality 2011 Agrisure 3000 GT Oso Viejo Agrisure 3000 GT + ic Oso Viejo Isoline + ic Oso Viejo Isoline Oso Viejo Agrisure Viptera 3110 Oso Viejo Agrisure Viptera 3110 + ic Oso Viejo Isoline + ic Oso Viejo Isoline Oso Viejo 2012 Agrisure Viptera 3111 El Dorado Agrisure Viptera 3111 + ic El Dorado Isoline + ic El Dorado Isoline El Dorado Agrisure Viptera 3111 Navolato Agrisure Viptera 3111 + ic Navolato Isoline + ic Navolato Isoline Navolato Agrisure 3000 GT Navolato Agrisure 3000 GT + ic Navolato Isoline + ic Navolato Isoline Navolato 2013 Agrisure Viptera 3111 Camalote Isoline + ic Camalote Isoline Camalote Agrisure Viptera 3111 Oso Viejo Isoline + ic Oso Viejo Isoline Oso Viejo Year Hybrid (a) Insecticide (b, c) 2011 Agrisure 3000 GT without insecticide application Agrisure 3000 GT + ic permethrin--lambda Isoline + ic cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline check Agrisure Viptera 3110 without insecticide application Agrisure Viptera 3110 + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline check 2012 Agrisure Viptera 3111 without insecticide application Agrisure Viptera 3111 + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline check Agrisure Viptera 3111 without insecticide application Agrisure Viptera 3111 + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline check Agrisure 3000 GT without insecticide application Agrisure 3000 GT + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline + ic permethrin--lambda cyhalothrin--emamectin benzoate Isoline check 2013 Agrisure Viptera 3111 without insecticide application Isoline + ic emamectin benzoate Isoline check Agrisure Viptera 3111 without insecticide application Isoline + ic emamectin benzoate Isoline check (a) ic = insecticide control (b) check = isoline without insecticide application (c) Insecticides were applied at the following rates: permethrin, 400 mL/ha; lambda cyhalothrin, 500 mL/ha; emamectin benzoate, 200 mL/ha. Table 2. Foliar damage and percentage of plants injured by fall armyworms on the genetically modified hybrids Agrisure 3000 GT and Agrisure Viptera 3110 and their respective isolines at Oso Viejo, Culiacan, Sinaloa, in 2011. Hybrid (a) Leaf damage (b, c) Plants injured (%) (c) Agrisure 3000 GT 1.10 a 5.0 a Agrisure 3000 GT + ic 1.00 a 0.0 a Isoline + ic 1.85 a 30.0 b Isoline 4.20 b 82.5 c F = 17.33 *** F = 38.58 *** Agrisure Viptera 3110 1.00 a 0.0 a Agrisure Viptera 3110 + ic 1.00 a 0.0 a Isoline + ic 1.22 a 15.0 b Isoline 4.20 b 90.0 c F = 13.22 *** F = 297.00 *** (a) ic = insecticide control (b) Mean numerical scale (c) Genetically modified hybrids and their respective isolines followed by the same letter do not differ significantly (ANOVA and Tukey's test; P > 0.05). *** Indicates significant F value at P < 0.001, df = 3,15. Table 3. Foliar damage and percentage of plants injured by fall armyworms on the genetically modified corn hybrids Agrisure Viptera 3111 and Agrisure 3000 GT and their respective isolines at El Dorado and Navolato, Sinaloa, in 2012. Hybrid (a) Locality Leaf Plants injured damage (b, c) (%) (c) Agrisure Viptera 3111 El Dorado 1.00 a 0.0 a Agrisure Viptera El Dorado 1.00 a 0.0 a 3111 + ic Isoline + ic El Dorado 3.53 b 64.4 b Isoline El Dorado 2.89 b 56.7 b F = 10.35 *** F = 16.54 *** Agrisure Viptera 3111 Navolato 1.07 a 1.1 a Agrisure Viptera Navolato 1.07 a 1.1 a 3111 + ic Isoline + ic Navolato 3.20 b 52.2 b Isoline Navolato 4.90 c 81.1 c F = 11.52 *** F = 14.99 *** Agrisure 3000 GT Navolato 1.34 a 13.3 a Agrisure 3000 GT + ic Navolato 1.13 a 7.8 a Isoline + ic Navolato 3.87 b 66.7 b Isoline Navolato 4.97 b 77.8 b F = 9.65 *** F = 10.39 *** (a) ic = insecticide control (b) Mean numerical scale (c) Genetically modified hybrids and their respective isolines followed by the same letter do not differ significantly (ANOVA and Tukey's test; P > 0.05). *** Indicates significant F value at P < 0.001, df = 11,35. Table 4. Foliar damage and percentage of plants injured by fall armyworms on the genetically modified corn hybrid Agrisure Viptera 3111 and its respective isoline at Camalote and Oso Viejo, Culiacan, Sinaloa, in 2013. Hybrida Locality Leaf Plants injured damage (b, c) (%) (c) Agrisure Viptera 3111 Camalote 1.00 a 0.0 a Isoline + ic Camalote 1.72 b 35.8 b Isoline Camalote 3.22 c 74.2 c F = 48.92 *** F = 58.44 *** Agrisure Viptera 3111 Oso Viejo 1.00 a 0.0 a Isoline + ic Oso Viejo 1.80 b 39.2 b Isoline Oso Viejo 2.63 c 62.5 c F = 35.46 *** F = 27.38 *** (a) ic = insecticide control (b) Mean numerical scale (c) Genetically modified hybrid and the respective isoline treatments followed by the same letter do not differ significantly (ANOVA and Tukey's test; P > 0.05). *** Indicates significant F value at P < 0.001, df = 8,35.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Aguirre, Luis A.; Hernandez-Juarez, Agustin; Flores, Mariano; Cerna, Ernesto; Landeros, Jeronimo; Fr|
|Date:||Jun 1, 2016|
|Previous Article:||Malaise trap sampling efficiency for bees (Hymenoptera: Apoidea) in a restored tallgrass prairie.|
|Next Article:||Appraisal of the impact of three insecticides on the principal rice pests and their predators in China.|