Relationship of Insecticide Tolerance to Esterase Enzyme Activity in <I>Aphis pomi</I> and <I>Aphis spiraecola</I> (Hemiptera: Aphididae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Green apple aphid, Aphis pomi De Geer, and Aphis spiraecola Patch (both Hemiptera: Aphididae), are sympatric aphid species that are pests of apples (Malus spp.) and other crops. A. spiraecola has been shown to be significantly more tolerant to several insecticides compared with A. pomi. To establish the mechanisms contributing to this difference in insecticide response, clones of both species were collected from British Columbia, Canada, and Washington state. Dose-response bioassays were conducted to determine relative tolerances to the insecticides pirimicarb, dimethoate, and imidacloprid; these results have been reported previously. Samples of adult aphids from each clone were assayed for the activity of esterase enzymes often involved in the detoxification of insecticides. A. spiraecola had higher esterase activity compared with A. pomi; this was apparent for two model substrates, alpha-naphthyl acetate (alpha-NA) and alpha-naphthyl butyrate (alpha-NB). Aphid clones of both species collected from Washington had higher esterase activity than clones collected from British Columbia. Clones from both species and locations hydrolyzed alpha-NA to a greater extent than alpha-NB. Esterase activity measured with both substrates was significantly positively correlated with the relative response to pirimicarb and dimethoate; a significant positive correlation also was found for hydrolysis of alpha-NB and imidacloprid. The apparent involvement of esterases in the differential response of A. pomi and A. spiraecola to insecticides indicated that the choice of control chemicals for A. spiraecola should not involve chemistries that are metabolized predominantly by esterases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".