A Review of Pesticides for the Control of Some Cotton Pests

Open Access Annals of Agricultural & Crop Sciences Special Article: Pesticides A Review of Pesticides for the Control of Some Cotton Pests Lawrence N Malinga1*; Mark D Laing2 Agricultural Research Council, Industrial Crops, Private Bag X82075, Rustenburg, 0300, South Africa 2 University of KwaZulu-Natal, P/Bag X01, Scottsville, Pietermaritzburg, 3209, South Africa 1 *Corresponding author: Lawrence N Malinga Agricultural Research Council, Industrial Crops, Private Bag X82075, Rustenburg, 0300, South Africa. Email: Lawrence.Malinga@sugar.org.za Received: January 02, 2024 Accepted: February 06, 2024 Published: February 13, 2024 Introduction Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) is one of the most important fibre cash crops grown for fibre in over 83 countries with tropical and subtropical climatic conditions. The incidence of cotton pests is a significant factor that affects cotton production. The production is severely affected by insect pests, resulting in poor yields despite the growing demand for the commodity. Pests and diseases are estimated to cause 60% losses in cotton production throughout the world [107]. A successful control strategy requires integrated pest management that prevents or suppresses damaging populations of insect pests by applying the comprehensive and coordinated integration of multiple and compatible control tactics, including chemical control, which involves the use of pesticides [21]. Pesticides are mainly used on cotton to control insect pests rapidly [10], and farmers opt for pesticides as the first line of defense [54]. Since the development of pesticides after World War II, they have been extensively used in agriculture due to their efficiency in pest control and crop yield increment [68]. Cotton has been reported to receive more chemical control than most other arable crops [66]. Cotton uses up to 60% of all commercialized agrochemicals globally [116]. In Africa, about 50% of pesticides are used on cotton [46], and South Africa has been one of the largest importers of chemical pesticides in sub-Saharan Africa (Quinn et al., 2011). Various insect pests and beneficial insects coexist in a cotton ecosystem; however, pesticides have reduced the impact of beneficial insects [35]. Pesticides, as one of the management tools for pests, can be used as part of integrated pest management to promote sustainable pest control methods [20]. When pesticides such as organophosphates (1960s), carbamates (1970s), and pyrethroids Annals of Agricultural & Crop Sciences Volume 9, Issue 1 (2024) www.austinpublishinggroup.com Malinga LN © All rights are reserved (1980s) were introduced, they had an impact on agricultural pest control and resulted in high yields [5]. In Africa, the use of pesticides has been reported to be low compared to the rest of the world due to economic and social constraints. Most pesticides are applied mostly against pests of commercial crops such as cotton [1]. The use of pesticides in Africa is reported to be more than 1.2 kg.ha-1, a fraction of what is used in Latin America (7.17 kg.ha-1) [95]. Although chemical control remains a key method to control targeted pests, a controversy has surfaced regarding the use and abuse of pesticides [5]. The diversity of pests found in cotton requires serious control, mostly with pesticides, which negatively impact natural enemies and the environment [61]. The continuous use of synthetic chemicals to protect crops may also result in pesticide resistance in pest populations [54]. Combining selective chemical and biological controls is important for integrated pest management; however, this has not been entirely explored due to, among others, insufficient information on the pesticide tolerance or resistance of natural enemies [81]. Developing integrated pest management strategies is required to reduce pesticide use and maximize the impact of natural enemies. However, there is still a need to address the complexity of insect pests in cotton where control needs may conflict [22]. This paper provides an overview of the use of some pesticides to control cotton pests and their challenges. Pyrethroid – Lambda-Cyhalothrin Pyrethroids are non-systemic pesticides with contact and stomach action [12]. Pyrethroids are pesticides that are mainly used to control insects that are leaf-eaters [105]. In Africa, py- Citation: Malinga LN, Laing MD. A Review of Pesticides for the Control of Some Cotton Pests. Ann Agric Crop Sci. 2024; 9(1): 1148. Austin Publishing Group Malinga LN rethroids are the most commonly used pesticides for cotton [47]. They are synthetic derivatives of pyrethrins produced by chrysanthemum flowers [62]. Pyrethroids differ in their vulnerability to sunlight, characterized by their ability to dissolve in water with persistent compounds [59]. This group of pesticides includes cypermethrin, deltamethrin, fenvalerate, lambda-cyhalothrin, and permethrin, among others. Lambda-cyhalothrin, known as Karate®, is a non-selective pesticide commonly used to control agricultural insect pests [61]. It is frequently used on cotton and other crops to control insects, including lepidopterans and coleopterans [15]. The pesticide has low vapour pressure and is relatively stable in water at a pH of less than eight (He et al., 2008). The effect of lambda-cyhalothrin on cotton pests and beneficial insects has been widely reported around the globe. Cole et al. (1997) investigated the efficacy of lambda-cyhalothrin (Karate®) in Bt cotton and reported that lambda-cyhalothrin had no major disruption of beneficial insects but significantly increased yield. Gayi et al. (2017) evaluated the efficacy of bio and pesticides against H. armigera and its natural enemies on cotton. They reported that under laboratory conditions, lambda-cyhalothrin combined with Thiamethoxam showed 100% mortality of third instar larvae of H. armigera after 96 hours, while under field conditions, lambda-cyhalothrin combined with profenofos showed 100% mortality after 96 hours. Furthermore, it was observed that pesticides significantly reduced natural enemy populations. This aligns with the findings of Ruberson and Tillman (1999) and Riley et al. (2001), who recorded a reduction in the number of natural enemies after applying Karate. Lambdacyhalothrin has been reported to have the quickest and best control against cotton leafhopper nymphs after the first spray [63]. In a study comparing the efficacy of some conventional and neonicotinoid pesticides against whiteflies, leafhoppers, and thrips, Asif et al. (2016) observed that Karate®, when sprayed twice, had a significant reduction of the pests from one to seven days after application. Lambda-cyhalothrin showed a 57.93% reduction against leafhopper seven days after application. Zidan et al. (2012) found that lambda-cyhalothrin was the most efficient pesticide against bollworms and aphids, with an average reduction of 71.91% in pink bollworms and 81.61% in spiny bollworms. However, the data also revealed that this pesticide had a weak to moderate effect against leafhoppers and whiteflies and was more toxic against predators. Javaid et al. (1999) recommended that including insect growth regulators in managing cotton insect pests could eliminate the continuous use of pyrethroids. Organophosphate – Chlorpyrifos Organophosphates are one of the major pesticide classes that became prominent in the mid-1940s [27]. They are the large chemical class used in agriculture [49]. Over the years, there has been a significant decline in the use of organophosphates in developed countries, but this has been offset by an increase in developing countries [36]. Organophosphates are highly toxic and impact both target insect pests and non-target species and mammals, including humans [29]. Chlorpyrifos is a heterocyclic organophosphate that belongs to organophosphorus pesticides and has been widely used in agriculture [101]. Chlorpyrifos is a non-systemic pesticide that disrupts the production of certain important nervous system enzymes [110]. It is a frequently used pesticide on a wide range of crops, including cotton [79], and various formulations have been developed to control important insect and arthropod pests [48]. ChlorpySubmit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com rifos is known to be persistent and toxic to non-target organisms; however, it may exhibit low persistence in the field [55]. Chlorpyrifos is among the most effective and cheaper pesticides than alternative products [101]. However, in South Africa, chlorpyrifos was banned for residential use in 2010 and is only used in the agricultural sector. A mixture of chlorpyrifos and alphacypermethrin was tested against cotton bollworms and compared to chlorpyrifos alone [100]. The mixture was more effective in controlling the cotton bollworm complex and resulted in the highest seed cotton yield. Similar results were observed by Vojoudi et al. (2011), who reported that chlorpyrifos controlled the third larval instars of cotton bollworms and reduced the longevity and fecundity of adults. Chlorpyrifos has been found to significantly affect the control of cotton stainers in a laboratory experiment [87]. Chlorpyrifos has also been recorded to control J. facialis [54]. Zidan et al. (2012) evaluated the efficacy of different pesticides against cotton bollworms and sucking insects and their associated natural enemies. It was evident from the results that chlorpyrifos was efficient against cotton bollworms and aphids but had a weak to moderate effect against whiteflies and leafhoppers. Martin et al. (2003) studied the synergism of pyrethroids by organophosphorus pesticides on cotton using the combination index method. They revealed that the organophosphorus pesticides significantly reduced the resistance of H. armigera against pyrethroids and increased the toxicity of the pyrethroids. Neonicotinamide – Imidacloprid Neonicotinoids, such as imidacloprid, are products of synthetic nicotinoids used to control insects and pests of different crops, including cotton [74]. They are a newer class of pesticides developed in the late 1970s with low risk for non-target organisms and selective for insect pests [94]. Neonicotinoids attack the central nervous system, reducing reproduction and insect movement and resulting in their death [17]. Imidacloprid is the first and most-used member of the neonicotinoid family [33]. In the US, over 60% of cotton is planted with seed treated with the neonicotinoids imidacloprid [6]. Imidacloprid belongs to a newer class of chloronicotinyl [99], registered for many agricultural uses [91]. Imidacloprid has been reported as a safer pesticide than the older pesticide classes because, despite its high-water solubility, it has low leaching potential in the soil [72]. However, this depends on soil type, as some soils with low organic matter content may not absorb imidacloprid well [23]. Imidacloprid can be applied directly onto the crops or used as a seed or soil treatment to control different pests, including leafhoppers, aphids, whiteflies, and thrips [60]. Imidacloprid can control aphid infestations of cotton plants [26]. However, the pesticide harms ladybirds [115] and has been found to reduce the fecundity of other natural enemies of aphids [52]. It is, therefore, recommended that imidacloprid be applied only during the initial stages of aphid invasion in cotton fields [115]. Imidacloprid has been widely reported to significantly reduce cotton leafhopper, thrip, and whitefly infestations [9,93]. Asif et al. (2016) tested different pesticides against sucking insect pests of cotton. They reported that imidacloprid exhibited a significant reduction in the populations of leafhoppers (86.92%), whiteflies (74.5%), and thrips (66.30%) and gave the highest seed cotton yield. In a study to determine the production of honeydew by whiteflies, Cameron et al. (2014) documented that when adult whiteflies were placed on pesticide-treated plants, imidacloprid showed a reduction in the honeydew proAnn Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 02 Austin Publishing Group duced by the pest. Similarly, He et al. (2013) reported that imidacloprid reduced feeding, honeydew excretions, and fecundity of adult whiteflies. Afzal et al. (2014) compared different pesticides under field conditions. They reported that imidacloprid reduced the leafhopper population up to seven days after application and gave an average of more than 90% mortality after three days of application. Challenges of Pesticides Despite the duration of use of pesticides on agricultural pests, their extensive use has resulted in health hazards, environmental pollution, outbreaks of secondary pests, toxicity to natural enemies, development of resistances, and decreases in biodiversity [29,57,58,75,111]. Health Hazards Pesticide use in cotton poses a hazard to humans [116]. In developing countries, the use of pesticides has been reported to account for up to 14% of work-related injuries, of which 10% of these injuries led to fatality [14]. In Pakistan, health problems associated with the absence of personal protective equipment were reported in cotton pickers who experienced headaches, stomachaches, fever, and skin and eye problems due to the lack of proper education and training programmes on personal protective measures [67]. In Sudan, human blood samples were analyzed for organochlorine pesticide residues in areas that used pesticides intensively. The levels of organochlorine in blood samples were lower in areas distant from where the heavy application of these pesticides was previously done [32]. In Benin, Agbohessi et al. (2015) conducted a study to determine the impact of agricultural pesticides on the health status of fish found in the water near cotton fields. It was evident that pesticides significantly reduced the health condition of fish living in the Beninese cotton basin. Toxicity to Natural Enemies In any area where cotton is grown, insect pests and natural enemies coexist. It is therefore important that while the use of pesticides reduces the pest populations, it must not have a negative impact on natural enemies. Lambda-cyhalothrin has been recorded as toxic to natural enemies of different crop pests [38]. Van Hamburg and Guest (1997) noted that the variety of natural enemies in South Africa plays a vital role in controlling insect pests; however, spraying of pesticides reduces the ability of natural enemies to control cotton pests. Barros et al. (2018) observed that after exposure to different pesticide residues, parasitoids and some of the predator populations were reduced by lambda-cyhalothrin. D’ávila et al. (2018) studied the effects of imidacloprid and lambda-cyhalothrin and reported that the pesticides negatively affected the longevity of adult aphid parasitoids. In contrast, Saner et al. (2014) reported that lambdacyhalothrin and imidacloprid were eco-friendly towards the ladybird beetle population. Similarly, Ahmed et al. (2014) conducted a study to evaluate the impact of neonicotinoids and traditional pesticides against cotton pests and their natural enemies. From the outcome of the study, it was evident that imidacloprid controlled sucking pests while it did not have an impact on the natural enemies. Tillman and Mulrooney (2009) recorded that, after spraying cotton with lambda-cyhalothrin, the number of predators of cotton aphids was found to increase as the number of cotton aphids increased, indicating that lambda-cyhalothrin did not have an impact on the predator population. Saeed et al. (2016) evaluated Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com the efficacy of imidacloprid against the cotton leafhopper and its predators. They documented that when imidacloprid is applied at the manufacturer-recommended dose, there are fewer negative effects on the abundance of natural enemies [70]. Chlorpyrifos has been reported to cause high mortality among the natural enemies of whiteflies [77], aphids [34], and spider mites [7] as well as the larvae of green lacewing and spiders (Dhawan, 2000). Natural enemies also reduce cotton bollworm eggs and larvae without pesticide application [109]. Despite all the positive and negative impacts of pesticides, cases of natural enemies showing resistance to pesticides have also been recorded in some studies [11]. It is recommended that selective pesticides be encouraged to control cotton pests, maintaining the natural enemies' population [61]. Environmental Pollution The excessive use of hazardous pesticides greatly impacts the environment, water, and soil fertility in many countries [98]. Over 4.6 million pesticides are applied to the environment [8]. Most pesticides are resilient to degradation, so they remain in the environment for a prolonged period [37]. Environmental impact due to repeated use of pesticides is categorized by different environmental compartments such as air, soil, land, and groundwater [73]. The soil is regarded as the main source of pollutants and contaminants in surface water, groundwater, and air [118]. Pesticides can be transported from the soil through contaminated surface water and leach into groundwater, resulting in damage to non-target organisms and pollution of the soil [119]. The use of neonicotinoid pesticides in agriculture has been reported to contaminate the soil while their residues are transferred to the aquatic environment and reduce the abundance of aquatic insects [85]. Sumon et al. (2018) stated that imidacloprid might pollute aquatic ecosystems through spray drift, surface runoff, and groundwater leaching. They further conducted a study to assess the effects of imidacloprid on Bangladesh's freshwater and sub-tropical ecosystems. It was recorded that imidacloprid negatively affected sub-tropical ecosystems compared to temperate regions. Lambda-cyhalothrin has also been widely used in agriculture, and its residues in runoff waters are toxic to humans and aquatic organisms [25]. Imidacloprid and chlorpyrifos residues contaminate most soils [78]. A study was done in fruit orchards in the Western Cape province of South Africa to determine the effect of organophosphorus and endosulfan pesticides as a potential source of contamination in farm streams [90]. It was found that the level of pesticide deposition on the ground declined with increasing distance from the sprayed plants. In India, a study was conducted to determine the level of organophosphorus pesticide residues along the 85 km stretch of a river that flows near cotton plantations [102]. Chlorpyrifos was one of the organophosphorus pesticides detected in the water samples above the permissible limit. Secondary Pest Outbreaks The effect of broad-spectrum pesticides on targeted pests may reduce natural enemies and cause outbreaks of secondary pests [40]. The outbreak of secondary pests may occur after effective control of primary pests when the two pest species feed on the same plant part [31]. However, secondary pest outbreaks are occasionally difficult to document as they may be due to factors other than the applied pesticides [40]. With the introduction of Bt cotton, there has been a reduction in pesticide use for bollworms. However, this led to outbreaks of Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 03 Austin Publishing Group secondary pests, necessitating the continuous use of pesticides [117]. This continued use of pesticides may also cause the resistance of the target pests. Harris et al. (1998) have demonstrated that over-spraying Karate (λ-cyhalothrin) combined with proper habitat management can control secondary pests on Bt cotton and reduce resistance development. Pesticides are highly toxic to insect predators of pink bollworms, and they are alleged to encourage the outbreaks of other cotton pests [96]. While lambda-cyhalothrin has been highly poisonous to spider mites and their natural enemies, imidacloprid has been recorded to have minimal harm to this pest but is highly poisonous to the natural enemies [89]. This may be because spider mites are initially susceptible to the pesticide and develop resistance faster than their natural enemies. In Australia, the application of organophosphates has been observed to disrupt beneficial insects, which may result in outbreaks of secondary pests [45]. Wilson et al. (1998) studied the effect of pesticides on cotton red spider mites and their predators, and they reported an outbreak of spider mites when pesticides significantly suppressed the predator. In South Africa, red spider mites were also recorded as a primary pest on cotton after predator suppression caused by the negative effect of pesticides [109]. Pest Resistance to Pesticides The resistance of pests to different pesticides, such as pyrethroids, neonicotinoids, and biopesticides, has been extensively studied worldwide [84]. Insects can develop resistance to pesticides through various mechanisms such as behavioural, morphological, and physiological adaptations [51]. Cotton bollworms and whiteflies have shown resistance to organophosphates, organochlorines, pyrethroids, and carbamates [69]. The development of resistance in whiteflies on cotton has been recorded for over 40 active ingredients of pesticides in several countries [69]. Pittendrigh et al. (2008) have observed resistance mechanisms of whiteflies to imidacloprid. The resistance of whiteflies to different pesticides can be reduced by alternating the pesticides with products such as biological agents [19]. Using pesticides to control H. armigera has led to widespread resistance [106]. Ochou and Martin (2002) studied pyrethroid resistance management using several non-pyrethroid pesticides to control H. armigera on cotton in West Africa. They found that alternating pyrethroids with endosulfan or profenofos at the vegetative stage of cotton significantly controlled H. armigera and increased yields. In Côte d’Ivoire, Martin et al. (2000) noted that the continuous application of pyrethroids resulted in resistance of H. armigera populations. This led to the development of resistance management of the pest that was intended to reduce the reliance on pyrethroid by using alternative pesticides (Djihinto et al., 2016). Although the resistance management strategy to control the H. armigera populations is effective, this often significantly increases secondary pests on cotton plants [16]. Pest resistance to pyrethroids has been noticed in cottonproducing regions around the world. In Australia, cotton bollworm resistance to pyrethroids was first identified in 1983 [50], while countries such as Thailand, Egypt, and Zimbabwe reported resistance by 1985 [8]. In South Africa, pesticide restrictions were introduced in the late 1970s to avoid over-reliance on synthetic chemicals [42]. Cotton aphids have developed resistance against neonicotinoid pesticides despite using high rates [108]. Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com Herron and Wilson (2017) revealed that although aphids were effectively controlled by pesticides sprayed against cotton bollworms, they showed resistance to organophosphates targeted against bollworms after some time. Similarly, Wu and Guo (2003) reported significant resistance of cotton aphids to pyrethroid and organophosphate pesticides used to control cotton bollworms. Furthermore, Ulusoy et al. (2018) revealed that aphids had developed resistance to imidacloprid. Thrips have also developed resistance to pyrethroids [104] and organophosphates (Nazemi et al., 2016). Pests with high fertility and a short life cycle can easily infest their hosts and develop pesticide resistance [30]. The spider mites can quickly develop resistance to pesticides due to their short life cycle and abundant reproduction (van Leeuwen et al., 2010). Although cotton stainers continue to be susceptible to pyrethroids, including lambda-cyhalothrin, they may develop resistance to these pesticides [84]. With the rising concern among different stakeholders regarding the negative impact of pesticide application on the control of crop pests [53], biopesticides can be alternated with pesticides to avoid insect resistance [56]. The increasing pest status of H. armigera in South Africa has prompted renewed interest in using biopesticides, especially as resistance is suspected to develop against commonly used chemical control measures. However, nearly 30 insect species have been reportedly resistant to B. thuringiensis toxins [92]. The insect-resistant varieties have been used as a method of insect control; however, due to Bt resistance by non-target pests, cotton farmers are spending more money on pesticides than before the introduction of Bt cotton [56]. References 1. Abate T, van Huis A, Ampofo JKO. Pest management strategies in traditional agriculture: an African perspective. Annu Rev Entomol. 2000; 45: 631-59. 2. Afzal M, Babar MH, . I, Iqbal Z. Relative Efficacy of Different Insecticides Against Jassid, Amrasca devastans (Dist.) on Cotton, Bt-121. Pak J Nutr. 2014; 13: 344-7. 3. Agbohessi PT, Imorou Toko I, Ouédraogo A, Jauniaux T, Mandiki SNM, Kestemont P. Assessment of the health status of wild fish inhabiting a cotton basin heavily impacted by pesticides in Benin (West Africa). Sci Total Environ. 2015; 506-507: 567-84. 4. Ahmed S, Nisar MS, Shakir MM, Imran M, Iqbal K. Comparative efficacy of some neonicotinoids and traditional insecticides on sucking insect pests and their natural enemies on BT-121 cotton crop. J Anim Plant Sci. 2014; 24: 660-3. 5. Aktar MW, Sengupta D, Chowdhury A. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2009; 2: 1-12. 6. Allen KC, Luttrell RG, Sappington TW, Hesler LS, Papiernik SK. Frequency and abundance of selected early-season insect pests of cotton. J Integr Pest Manag. 2018; 9: 1-11. 7. Al-Ne’ami KT. Side effects of insecticides on the strawberry spider mite, Tetranychus Turkestani. Anz Schadlingskde Pflanzenschutz Umweltschutz. 1981; 54: 161-4. 8. Ansari MS, Moraiet MA, Ahmad S. Insecticides: impact on the environment and human health. In: Malik A, Grohmann E, Akhtar R, editors. Environmental deterioration and human health: natural and anthropogenic determinants. Vol. 6. Springer Netherlands. 2014; 99-123. Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 04 Austin Publishing Group 9. Asif MU, Muhammad R, Akbar W, Sohail M, Tariq JA, Ismail M, et al. Comparative efficacy of neem derivatives and Imidacloprid against some cotton pests. J Entomol Zool Stud. 2018; 6: 113-7. 25. Colombo R, Yariwake JH, Lanza MRV. Degradation products of lambda-cyhalothrin in aqueous solution as determined by SBSEGC-IT-MS. J Braz Chem Soc. 2018; 29: 2207-12. 10. Asif MU, Muhammad R, Akbar W, Tofique M. Relative efficacy of some insecticides against the sucking insect pest complex of cotton. Nucleus. 2016; 53: 140-6. 26. Conway HE, Kring TJ, McNew R. Effect of Imidacloprid on wing formation in the cotton aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae). Fla Entomol. 2003; 86: 474-6. 11. Barbosa PRR, Michaud JP, Rodrigues ARS, Torres JB. Dual resistance to lambda-cyhalothrin and dicrotophos in Hippodamia convergens (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Chemosphere. 2016; 159: 1-9. 27. Costa LG. Organophosphorus compounds at 80: some old and new issues. Toxicol Sci. 2018; 162: 24-35. 28. D’ávila VA, Barbosa WF, Guedes RNC, Cutler GC. Effects of Spinosad, Imidacloprid, and lambda-cyhalothrin on survival, parasitism, and reproduction of the aphid parasitoid Aphidius colemani. J Econ Entomol. 2018; 111: 1096-103. 29. Dewer Y, Pottier MA, Lalouette L, Maria A, Dacher M, Belzunces LP, et al. Behavioral and metabolic effects of sublethal doses of two insecticides, chlorpyrifos and methomyl, in the Egyptian Cotton leafworm, Spodoptera littoralis (Boisduval) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2016; 23: 3086-96. 30. Diaz-Montano J, Fuchs M, Nault BA, Fail J, Shelton AM. Onion thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae): A global pest of increasing concern in onion. J Econ Entomol. 2011; 104: 1-13. 31. Dutcher JD. A review of resurgence and replacement causing pest outbreaks in IPM. In: Ciancio A, Mukerji KG, editors. General concepts in integrated pest and disease management. Springer Netherlands. 2007; 27-43. 32. Elbashir AB, Abdelbagi AO, Hammad AMA, Elzorgani GA, Laing MD. Levels of organochlorine pesticides in the blood of people living in areas of intensive pesticide use in Sudan. Environ Monit Assess. 2015; 187: 68. 33. Elbert A, Becker B, Hartwig J, Erdelen C. Imidacloprid – a new systemic insecticide. Pflanzenschutz Nachr Bayer. 1991; 44: 11336. 34. El-Sayed AEM, El-Ghar GESA. The influence of normal and low-rate application of insecticides on populations of the cotton whitefly and melon aphid and associated parasites and predators on cucumber. Anz Schadlingskde Pflanzenschutz Umweltschutz. 1992; 65: 54-7. 35. El-Wakeil N, Abdallah A. Cotton pests and the actual strategies for their management control. In: Giuliano B, Vinci EJ, editors. Cotton: Cultivation, Varieties and Uses. Nova Science Publishers. 2012; 1: 1-59. 36. Esen M, Uysal M. Protective effects of intravenous lipid emulsion on malathion-induced hepatotoxicity. Bratisl Lek Listy. 2018; 119: 373-8. 37. Farhan M, Butt ZA, Khan AU, Wahid A, Ahmad M, Ahmad F, et al. Enhanced biodegradation of chlorpyrifos by agricultural soil isolate. Asian J Chem. 2014; 26: 3013-7. 38. Fernandez L. Lethal and sublethal effects of pesticides used in Western United States orchards on Hippodamia convergens [thesis]. Environmental Science, Policy and Managementin, Graduate Division, University of California Berkeley. 2015. 39. Gayi D, Ocen D, Lubadde G, Serunjogi L. Efficacy of bio and synthetic pesticides against the American bollworm and their natural enemies on cotton. J Agric Sci. 2017; 17: 67. 40. Gross K, Rosenheim JA. Quantifying secondary pest outbreaks in cotton and their monetary cost with causal-inference statistics. Ecol Appl. 2011; 21: 2770-80. 41. Harris JG, Hershey CN, Watkins MJ. The usage of Karate (Λ-cyhalothrin) oversprays in combination with refugia, as a viable and sustainable resistance management strategy for Bt cotton. In: Proceedings of the Beltwide cotton conference. 1998; 2: 1217-20. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. Barr DB, Buckley B. In vivo biomarkers and biomonitoring in reproductive and developmental toxicity. In: Gupta RC, editor. Reproductive and developmental toxicology. Elsevier. 2011; 253-65. Barros EM, da Silva-Torres CSA, Torres JB, Rolim GG. Short-term toxicity of insecticides residues to key predators and parasitoids for pest management in cotton. Phytoparasitica. 2018; 46: 391404. Bennett R, Buthelezi TJ, Ismael Y, Morse S. Bt cotton, pesticides, labour and health: A case study of smallholder farmers in the Makhathini flats, Republic of South Africa. Outlook Agric. 2003; 32: 123-8. Birolli WG, Arai MS, Nitschke M, Porto ALM. The pyrethroid (±)-lambda-cyhalothrin enantioselective biodegradation by a bacterial consortium. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 2019; 156: 12937. Bouslama T, Chaieb I, Rhouma A, Laarif A. Evaluation of a Bacillus thuringiensis isolate-based formulation against the pod borer, Helicoverpa armigera Hübner (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Egypt J Biol Pest Control. 2020; 30: 16. Buszewski B, Bukowska M, Ligor M, Staneczko-Baranowska I. A holistic study of neonicotinoids neuroactive insecticides—properties, applications, occurrence, and analysis. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019; 26: 34723-40. Cameron R, Lang EB, Alvarez JM. Use of honeydew production to determine reduction in feeding by Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) adults when exposed to cyantraniliprole and Imidacloprid treatments. J Econ Entomol. 2014; 107: 546-50. Capinera JL. Order Homoptera—aphids, leaf- and planthoppers, psyllids and whiteflies. In: Capinera JL, editor. Handbook of vegetable pests. Academic Press. 2001; 279-346. Chamuene A, de Araújo TA, Lopes MC, Ramos Pereira R, Berger PG, Picanço MC. Investigating the natural mortality of Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae) on cotton crops in tropical regions using ecological life tables. Environ Entomol. 2020; 49: 66-72. 21. Chattopadhyay P, Banerjee G, Mukherjee S. Recent trends of modern bacterial insecticides for pest control practice in integrated crop management system. 3 Biotech. 2017; 7: 60. 22. Cherry A, Cock M, van den Berg H, Kfir R. Biological control of Helicoverpa armigera in Africa. In: Langewald J, Neuenschwander P, Borgemeister C, editors. Biological control in IPM systems in Africa. CA B International. 2003; 329-45. 23. Churchel MA, Hanula JL, Berisford CW, Vose JM, Dalusky MJ. Impact of Imidacloprid for control of hemlock woolly adelgid on nearby aquatic macroinvertebrate assemblages. South J Appl For. 2011; 35: 26-32. 24. Cole JFH, Pilling ED, Boykin R, Ruberson JR. Effects of Karate® insecticide on beneficial arthropods in Bollgard® cotton. Proceedings of the Beltwide cotton conferences, new Orleans la USA. 1997; 2: 1118-20. Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 05 Austin Publishing Group 42. Hatting JL, Moore SD, Malan AP. Microbial control of phytophagous invertebrate pests in South Africa: current status and future prospects. J Invertebr Pathol. 2019; 165: 54-66. 60. Li YF, An JJ, Dang ZH, Pan WL, Gao ZL. Systemic control efficacy of neonicotinoids seeds dressing on English grain aphid (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J Asia Pac Entomol. 2018; 21: 430-5. 43. He Y, Zhao J, Zheng Y, Weng Q, Biondi A, Desneux N, et al. Assessment of potential sublethal effects of various insecticides on key biological traits of the tobacco whitefly, Bemisia tabaci. Int J Biol Sci. 2013; 9: 246-55. 61. Machado AVA, Potin DM, Torres JB, Silva Torres CSA. Selective insecticides secure natural enemies action in cotton pest management. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2019; 184: 109669. 62. Mahdavian SE, Somashekar RK. Organochlorine and synthetic pyrethroid pesticides in agricultural soil and water from Chamaranagar district, Karnataka, India. J Environ Sci Water Resour. 2013; 2: 221-5. 63. Maketon M, Orosz-Coghlan P, Hotaga D. Field evaluation of metschnikoff (Metarhizium anisopliae) Sorokin in controlling cotton jassid (Amrasca biguttula) in aubergine (Solanum aculeatissimum). Int J Agric Biol. 2008; 10: 47-51. 64. Martin T, Ochou GO, Hala-N’Klo F, Vassal J, Vaissayre M. Pyrethroid resistance in the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner), in West Africa. Pest Manag Sci. 2000; 56: 549-54. 65. Martin T, Ochou OG, Vaissayre M, Fournier D. Organophosphorus insecticides synergize pyrethroids in the resistant strain of cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) from West Africa. J Econ Entomol. 2003; 96: 468-74. 66. Matthews G. Integrated pest management practice. Plant Sci, Encyclopedia of Applied. 2003; 1. 67. Memon QUA, Wagan SA, Chunyu D, Shuangxi X, Jingdong L, Damalas CA. Health problems from pesticide exposure and personal protective measures among women cotton workers in southern Pakistan. Sci Total Environ. 2019; 685: 659-66. 68. National Research Council. The future role of pesticides in US agriculture. National Academies Press. 2000. 69. Naveen NC, Chaubey R, Kumar D, Rebijith KB, Rajagopal R, Subrahmanyam B, et al. Insecticide resistance status in the whitefly, Bemisia tabaci genetic groups Asia-I, Asia-II-1 and Asia-II-7 on the Indian subcontinent. Sci Rep. 2017; 7: 40634. 70. Nazir T, Gogi MD, Majeed MZ, Hassan W, Hanan A, Arif MJ. Field evaluation of selective systemic formulations against sucking insect pest complex and their natural enemies on a transgenic Bt cotton. Pak J Zool. 2017; 49: 1789-96. 71. Ochou GO, Martin T. Pyrethroïd resistance in Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner): recent developments and prospects for its management in Côte d’Ivoire, West Africa. Resistant Pest Manag. 2002; 12: 10-6. 72. Oi M. Time-dependent sorption of Imidacloprid in two different soils. J Agric Food Chem. 1999; 47: 327-32. 73. Özkara A, Akyil D, Konuk M. Pesticides, environmental pollution, and health. In: Larramendy ML, Soloneski S, editors. Environmental health risk – hazardous factors to living species. IntechOpen. 2016. 74. Pang S, Lin Z, Zhang W, Mishra S, Bhatt P, Chen S. Insights into the microbial degradation and biochemical mechanisms of neonicotinoids. Front Microbiol. 2020; 11: 868. 44. Herron GA, Wilson LJ. Can resistance management strategies recover insecticide susceptibility in pests?: A case study with cotton aphid Aphis gossypii (Aphididae: Hemiptera) in Australian cotton. Aust Entomol. 2017; 56: 1-13. 45. Hill MP, Macfadyen S, Nash MA. Broad spectrum pesticide application alters natural enemy communities and may facilitate secondary pest outbreaks. PeerJ. 2017; 5: e4179. 46. ICAC. The ICAC recorder. 2019; 37: 1-27. 47. Javaid I, Uaine RN, Massua J. The use of insect growth regulators for the control of insect pests of cotton. Int J Pest Manag. 1999; 45: 245-7. 48. Jepson PC. Pesticides uses and effects of. In: Levin SA, editor. Encyclopedia of biodiversity. 2nd ed. Elsevier. 2001; 692-702. 49. Jett DA. Central cholinergic neurobiology. In: Slikker W, Paule MG, Wang C, editors. Handbook of developmental neurotoxicology. Elsevier. 1998; 257-74. 50. Joußen N, Agnolet S, Lorenz S, Schöne SE, Ellinger R, Schneider B, et al. Resistance of Australian Helicoverpa armigera to fenvalerate is due to the chimeric P450 enzyme CYP337B3. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012; 109: 15206-11. 51. Joußen N, Heckel DG. Resistance mechanisms of Helicoverpa armigera. In: Horowitz AR, Ishaaya I, editors. Advances in insect control and resistance management. Springer international publishing. 2016; 241-61. 52. Kang ZW, Liu FH, Pang RP, Tian HG, Liu TX. Effect of sublethal doses of Imidacloprid on the biological performance of aphid endoparasitoid Aphidius gifuensis (Hymenoptera: Aphidiidae) and influence on its related gene expression. Front Physiol. 2018; 9: 1729. 53. Knox C, Moore SD, Luke GA, Hill MP. Baculovirus-based strategies for the management of insect pests: a focus on development and application in South Africa. Biocontrol Sci Technol. 2015; 25: 1-20. 54. Kone PWE, Didi GJR, Ochou GEC, Kouakou M, Bini KKN, Mamadou D, et al. Susceptibility of cotton leafhopper Jacobiella facialis (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) to principal chemical families: implications for cotton pest management in Côte d’Ivoire. J Exp Biol Agric Sci. 2018; 6: 774-81. 55. Koshlukova SE, Reed NR. Chlorpyrifos. In: Wexler P, editor. Encyclopedia of toxicology. Elsevier; 2014; 3: 930-4. 56. Kranthi KR, Stone GD. Long-term impacts of Bt cotton in India. Nat Plants. 2020; 6: 188-96. 75. 57. Kumar S, Kaur J, Kumar SC. Efficacy of Beauveria bassiana and Bacillus thuringiensis as ecosafe alternatives to chemical insecticides against sunflower capitulum borer, Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner). J Entomol Zool Stud. 2017; 5: 185-8. Pimentel D, Burgess M. Environmental and economic costs of the application of pesticides primarily in the United States. In: Pimentel D, Peshin R, editors. Integrated pest management. Dordrecht: Springer. 2014. 76. Kuye RA, Donham KJ, Marquez SP, Sanderson WT, Fuortes LJ, Rautiainen RH, et al. Pesticide handling and exposures among cotton farmers in the Gambia. J Agromedicine. 2007; 12: 57-69. Pittendrigh BR, Margam VM, Sun L, Huesing JE. Resistance in the post-genomics age. In: Onstad DW, editor. Insect resistance management. Elsevier. 2008; 39-68. 77. Prabhaker N, Morse JG, Castle SJ, Naranjo SE, Henneberry TJ, Toscano NC. Toxicity of seven foliar insecticides to four insect parasitoids attacking citrus and cotton pests. J Econ Entomol. 2007; 100: 1053-61. 58. 59. Laskowski DA. Physical and chemical properties of pyrethroids. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol. 2002; 174: 49-170. Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 06 Austin Publishing Group 78. Rafique N, Tariq SR, Ahmed D. Monitoring and distribution patterns of pesticide residues in soil from cotton/wheat fields of Pakistan. Environ Monit Assess. 2016; 188: 695. 96. Steenwyk R, Toscano N, Kido BK, G, Reynolds H. Increased insecticide use in cotton may cause secondary pest outbreaks. Calif Agric. 1976; 30: 14-5. 79. Racke KD. Environmental fate of chlorpyrifos. Rev Environ Contam Toxicol. 1993; 131: 1-150. 97. 80. Riley TJ, Castro BA, Liscano J. Effect of Karate and Tracer insecticides on beneficial arthropods in grain sorghum, 2000. Arthropod Manag Tests. Oxford Academic. 2001; 26. Sumon KA, Ritika AK, Peeters ETHM, Rashid H, Bosma RH, Rahman MS, et al. Effects of Imidacloprid on the ecology of subtropical freshwater microcosms. Environ Pollut. 2018; 236: 43241. 98. Rodrigues ARS, Spindola AF, Torres JB, Siqueira HAA, Colares F. Response of different populations of seven lady beetle species to lambda-cyhalothrin with record of resistance. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2013; 96: 53-60. Székács A, Mörtl M, Darvas B. Monitoring pesticide residues in surface and ground water in Hungary: surveys in 1990-2015— Hungarian Consortium. J Chem. 2015; 1: 1-15. 99. Talcott PA. Miscellaneous herbicides, fungicides, and nematocides. In: Peterson ME, Talcott PA, editors. Small animal toxicology. 3rd ed. Elsevier. 2012; 401-8. 82. Ruberson JR, Tillman PG. Effect of selected insecticides on natural enemies in cotton: laboratory studies. Proceedings of the Beltwide cotton conference. 1999; 1210-3. 100. Tambe AB, Kadam UK, Mali AR. Bioefficacy of chlorpyrifos + alphacypermethrin against bollworm complex of cotton. Pestology. 1997; 11: 23-5. 83. Saeed R, Razaq M, Hardy IC. Impact of neonicotinoid seed treatment of cotton on the cotton leafhopper, Amrasca devastans (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae), and its natural enemies. Pest Manag Sci. 2016; 72: 1260-7. 101. Testai E, Buratti FM, di Consiglio E. Chlorpyrifos. In: Krieger R, editor. Hayes’ handbook of pesticide toxicology. Elsevier. 2010; 1505-26. 84. Saeed R, Razaq M, Mahmood Ur Rehman H, Waheed A, Farooq M. Evaluating action thresholds for amrasca devastans (Hemiptera: Cicadellidae) management on transgenic and conventional cotton across multiple planting dates. J Econ Entomol. 2018; 111: 2182-91. 81. 85. Sánchez-Bayo F, Goka K, Hayasaka D. Contamination of the aquatic environment with neonicotinoids and its implication for ecosystems. Front Environ Sci. 2016; 4: 71. 86. Saner DV, Kabre GB, Shinde YA. Impact of newer insecticides on ladybird beetles [Menochilus sexmaculatus]. hybrid cotton. J Ind Pollut Control. 2014; 30: 269-71. 87. Sarwar ZM, Ijaz M, Sabri MA, Yousaf H, Mohsan M. Effects of selected synthetic insecticides on the total and differential populations of circulating haemocytes in adults of the red cotton stainer bug Dysdercus koenigii (Fabricius) (Hemiptera: Pyrrhocoridae). Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2018; 25: 17033-7. 88. Sawicki RM, Denholm I. Management of resistance to pesticides in cotton pests. Trop Pest Manag. 1987; 33: 262-72. 89. Schmidt-Jeffris RA, Beers EH. Potential impacts of orchard pesticides on Tetranychus urticae: A predator-prey perspective. Crop Prot. 2018; 103: 56-64. 90. 91. 92. Schulz R, Peall SKC, Dabrowski JM, Reinecke AJ. Spray deposition of two insecticides into surface waters in a South African orchard area. J Environ Qual. 2001; 30: 814-22. Sheets LP. Imidacloprid. In: Wexler P, editor. Encyclopedia of toxicology. 3rd ed. Elsevier. 2014; 1000-3. Siegwart M, Graillot B, Blachere Lopez CB, Besse S, Bardin M, Nicot PC, et al. Resistance to bio-insecticides or how to enhance their sustainability: a review. Front Plant Sci. 2015; 6: 381. 102. Thakur S, Gulati K, Jindal T. Monitoring of organophosphorus pesticides in river ghaggar from cotton cropping area of Sirsa. Indian J Environ Prot. 2017; 37: 573-9. 103. Tillman PG, Mulrooney JE. Effect of selected insecticides on the natural enemies Coleomegilla maculata and Hippodamia convergens (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae), Geocoris punctipes (Hemiptera: Lygaeidae), and Bracon mellitor, Cardiochiles nigriceps, and Cotesia marginiventris (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) in cotton. J Econ Entomol. 2000; 93: 1638-43. 104. Toda S, Morishita M. Identification of three-point mutations on the sodium channel gene in pyrethroid-resistant Thrips tabaci (Thysanoptera: Thripidae). J Econ Entomol. 2009; 102: 2296300. 105. Torres JB, Rodrigues AR, Barros EM, Santos DS. Lambda-cyhalothrin resistance in the lady beetle Eriopis connexa (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) confers tolerance to other pyrethroids. J Econ Entomol. 2015; 108: 60-8. 106. Tossou E, Tepa-Yotto G, Kpindou OKD, Sandeu R, Datinon B, Zeukeng F, et al. Susceptibility profiles of Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) to deltamethrin reveal a contrast between the Northern and the Southern Benin. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019; 16: 1882. 107. UIA. Pests and diseases of cotton. The encyclopedia of world problems. 2019. 108. Ulusoy S, Atakan E, Di ̇Nçer S. Neonicotinoid resistance of Aphis gossypii Glover, 1877 (Hemiptera: Aphididae) in cotton fields of Çukurova Region, Turkey. Turk Entomoloji Derg. 2018; 42: 25-33. 109. Van Hamburg H, Guest PJ. The impact of insecticides on beneficial arthropods in cotton agro- ecosystems in South Africa. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol. 1997; 32: 63-8. 93. Singh M, R. Mehra Krishi Vigyan Kendra, K. Mehra, K. J Entomol Zool Stud. Bio-efficacy of imidacloprid 17.1 SL against sucking pests of cotton. 2018; 6: 2154. 110. Vigneshwaran S, Preethi J, Meenakshi S. Removal of chlorpyrifos, an insecticide using metal free heterogeneous graphitic carbon nitride (g-C 3 N 4) incorporated chitosan as catalyst: photocatalytic and adsorption studies. Int J Biol Macromol. 2019; 132: 289-99. 94. Sobhakumari A, Poppenga RH, Tawde S. Avian toxicology. In: Gupta R, editor. Veterinary toxicology: basic and clinical principles. 3rd ed. Elsevier. 2018; 711-31. 111. Visnupriya M, Muthukrishnan N. Negative cross resistance of Spodoptera litura Fabricius population of tomato to newer molecule spinetoram. Entomon. 2019; 44: 127-32. 95. Srinivasan R, Sevgan S, Ekesi S, Tamò M. Biopesticide based sustainable pest management for safer production of vegetable legumes and brassicas in Asia and Africa. Pest Manag Sci. 2019; 75: 2446-54. 112. Vojoudi S, Saber M, Hejazi MJ, Talaei-Hassanloui R. Toxicity of chlorpyrifos, Spinosad and abamectin on cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera and their sublethal effects on fecundity and longevity. Bull Insectology. 2011; 64: 189-93. Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 07 Austin Publishing Group 113. Wilson LJ, Bauer LR, Lally DA. Effect of early season insecticide use on predators and outbreaks of spider mites (Acari: Tetranychidae) in cotton. Bull Entomol Res. 1998; 88: 477-88. 117. Zeilinger AR, Olson DM, Andow DA. Competitive release and outbreaks of non-target pests associated with transgenic Bt cotton. Ecol Appl. 2016; 26: 1047-54. 114. Wu K, Guo Y. Influences of Bacillus thuringiensis Berliner cotton planting on population dynamics of the cotton aphid, Aphis gossypii Glover, in Northern China. Environ Entomol. 2003; 32: 312-8. 118. Zhang A, Liu W, Yuan H, Zhou S, Su Y, Li YF. Spatial distribution of hexachlorocyclohexanes in agricultural soils in Zhejiang Province, China, and correlations with elevation and temperature. Environ Sci Technol. 2011; 45: 6303-8. 115. Wumuerhan P, Yuntao J, Deying M. Effects of exposure to Imidacloprid direct and poisoned cotton aphids Aphis gossypii on ladybird Hippodamia variegata feeding behavior. J Pestic Sci. 2020; 45: 24-8. 119. Zhang M, Zeiss MR, Geng S. Agricultural pesticide use and food safety: California’s model. J Integr Agric. 2015; 14: 2340-57. 116. Yadav S, Dutta S. Evaluation of organophosphorus pesticide residue in cotton of Tijara Tehsil, Alwar, Rajasthan. Nat Environ Pollut Technol. 2019; 18: 1455-8. Submit your Manuscript | www.austinpublishinggroup.com 120. Zidan NE-HA, El-Naggar JB, Aref SA, El-Dewy MEH. Field evaluation of different pesticides against cotton bollworms and sucking insects and their side effects. J Am Sci. 2012; 8: 128-36. Ann Agric Crop Sci 9(1): id1148 (2024) - Page - 08