Suitability of two laboratory testing methods to evaluate the side effects of pesticides on Typhlodromus pyri Scheuten (Acari: Phytoseiidae).

Romain Bonafos, Philippe Auger, Sabine Guichou, Serge Kreiter

Index: Pest Manag. Sci. 64(2) , 178-84, (2008)

Full Text: HTML

Abstract

Laboratory results of the French ANPP/CEB guideline No. 167 and IOBC/WPRS Ring Testing Group methods for testing the side effects of pesticides on the predatory mite Typhlodromus pyri Scheuten were compared with respect to their suitability to evaluate the toxicity of three pesticides.Results obtained with the ANPP/CEB guideline allow the demonstration of significant differences between two slightly toxic products, a dichlofluanid 500 g kg(-1) kWP (Euparen) 50WP) and a quinoxyfen 250 g L(-1) SCC (Legend), and a highly toxic cymoxanil 60/mancozeb 200/folpet 275 g kg(-1) WP [Remiltine F Pepite) (RFP)], on the basis of bioassays conducted in the laboratory. In contrast, results obtained with the IOBC/WPRS method classified all three as harmful.The evaluation of the toxicity of RFP revealed that the concentration, the quantity of the wet deposit and the food source used in the IOBC/WPRS method maximise the toxicity, in comparison with those used in the ANPP/CEB protocol. Valid criteria in controls were all respected in the ANPP/CEB tests but not in the IOBC/WPRS samples. This result revealed difficulties related to the use of the IOBC/WPRS method in laboratories.