Insecticide resistance is frequently associated with field control failure, but such an assessment of its likelihood seldom occurs. This phenomenon is a potential cause of the control failure of the tomato leaf miner Tuta absoluta (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae); therefore we surveyed insecticide resistance as the control failure likelihood for a duration of 7 years in 20 field populations of this species. The insecticide label rate was used as the discriminating concentration, and the minimum efficacy threshold required for insecticides in Brazil (i.e. 80% efficacy) was the targeted efficacy. The spatial and temporal variations of the control failure likelihood were also assessed, as was the potential influence of land topography for the area‐wide pattern observed. Most populations of T. absoluta were susceptible to abamectin, chlorfenapyr and spinosad and not to bifenthrin, triflumuron and teflubenzuron. The indoxacarb susceptibility varied in space and time. Spatial dependence was observed for abamectin and indoxacarb. The control failure likelihood of T. absoluta was higher for bifenthrin, triflumuron and teflubenzuron. A flat topography and the wind direction may favour the spread of the control failure likelihood and should be considered in designing pest management programs for T. absoluta.

No abstract

No abstract

1 The present study used a crop life table to determine the critical components of production and the key factors of loss in tomato, and three treatments to identify the integrated pest management (IPM) benefits on the reduction of yield losses and the conservation of natural enemies. 2 The relative IPM benefits were compared using calendar-based pesticide applications, IPM and control (no pesticide). A total of 1248 tomato plants were allotted to treatments with four replicates of 104 plants, each in a random block design. The densities of vectors, leaf miners, fruit borers, predators and parasitoids were compared. 3 Fruit was the critical component of production, experiencing the greatest losses, followed by flower and plant in the vegetative phase. The key causes of loss of production were tospoviruses, Erwinia carotovora , Alternaria solani , Phytophthora infestans , Neoleucinodes elegantalis and blossom-end rot. 4 No significant differences in yield were detected between the calendar-based and IPM systems. In the control, the yield was lower than the yield in treatments with pesticides due to losses from fungal diseases and viruses. IPM more efficiently controlled pests than the calendar-system, reducing the number of parathionmethyl and abamectin applications by 3.8-and 2.9-fold, respectively. IPM treatment significantly reduced the impact of pesticides on natural enemies. 5 Tomato yield was more affected by biotic and abiotic factors during the reproductive stage. Because fruit was the production component most susceptible to loss, cultivation and IPM programmess should prioritize practices to reduce loss of this component.