Determinants of optimal insecticide resistance management strategies.

The use of insecticides to control agricultural pests has resulted in resistance developing to most known insecticidal modes of action. Strategies by which resistance can be slowed are necessary to prolong the effectiveness of the remaining modes of action. Here we use a flexible mathematical model of resistance evolution to compare four insecticide application strategies: (i) applying one insecticide until failure, then switching to a second insecticide (sequential application), (ii) mixing two insecticides at their full label doses, (iii) rotating (alternating) two insecticides at full label dose, or (iv) mixing two insecticides at a reduced dose (with each mixture component at half the full label dose). The model represents target-site resistance. Multiple simulations were run representing different insect life-histories and insecticide characteristics. The analysis shows that none of the strategies examined were optimal for all the simulations. The four strategies: reduced dose mixture, label dose mixture, sequential application and label dose rotation, were optimal in 52%, 22%, 20% and 6% of simulations respectively. The most important trait determining the optimal strategy in a single simulation was whether or not the insect pest underwent sexual reproduction. For asexual insects, sequential application was most frequently the optimal strategy, while a label-dose mixture was rarely optimal. Conversely, for sexual insects a mixture was nearly always the optimal strategy, with reduced dose mixture being optimal twice as frequently as label dose mixture. When sequential application of insecticides is not an option, reduced dose mixture is most frequently the optimal strategy whatever an insect's reproduction.

The Evolution of Fungicide Resistance Resulting from Combinations of Foliar-Acting Systemic Seed Treatments and Foliar-Applied Fungicides: A Modeling Analysis.

For the treatment of foliar diseases of cereals, fungicides may be applied as foliar sprays or systemic seed treatments which are translocated to leaves. Little research has been done to assess the resistance risks associated with foliar-acting systemic seed treatments when used alone or in combination with foliar sprays, even though both types of treatment may share the same mode of action. It is therefore unknown to what extent adding a systemic seed treatment to a foliar spray programme poses an additional resistance risk and whether in the presence of a seed treatment additional resistance management strategies (such as limiting the total number of treatments) are necessary to limit the evolution of fungicide-resistance. A mathematical model was developed to simulate an epidemic and the resistance evolution of Zymoseptoria tritici on winter wheat, which was used to compare different combinations of seed and foliar treatments by calculating the fungicide effective life, i.e. the number of years before effective disease control is lost to resistance. A range of parameterizations for the seed treatment fungicide and different fungicide uptake models were compared. Despite the different parameterizations, the model consistently predicted the same trends in that i) similar levels of efficacy delivered either by a foliar-acting seed treatment, or a foliar application, resulted in broadly similar resistance selection, ii) adding a foliar-acting seed treatment to a foliar spray programme increased resistance selection and usually decreased effective life, and iii) splitting a given total dose-by adding a seed treatment to foliar treatments, but decreasing dose per treatment-gave effective lives that were the same as, or shorter than those given by the spray programme alone. For our chosen plant-pathogen-fungicide system, the model results suggest that to effectively manage selection for fungicide-resistance, foliar acting systemic seed treatments should be included as one of the maximum number of permitted fungicide applications.