Ecotoxicological Impact of Ad-Hoc Approved Synthetic Insecticides on the Biological Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

Ecotoxicological Impact of Ad-Hoc Approved Synthetic Insecticides on the Biological Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Ecotoxicological Impact of Ad-Hoc Approved Synthetic Insecticides on the Biological Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Fazil Hasan, Kahkashan Parveen, Najat A. Bukhari, Mukesh Kumar Dhillon, and 3 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Laboratory assessments were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of seven ad-hoc approved insecticides, namely Chlorantraniliprole, Emamectin benzoate, Spinetoram, Thiodicarb, Chlorantraniliprole + Lambda-cyhalothrin, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron, and Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, against Spodoptera frugiperda . These evaluations were carried out using a diet incorporation assay in a controlled laboratory environment with a temperature of 27 ± 1°C, relative humidity of 65 ± 5%, and a 12:12 (L:D) photoperiod. During the bioassay procedure, it is noteworthy that the doses of all tested insecticides were carefully administered within the minimum range of their recommended field rates. In acute toxicity trials, spinetoram had the greatest impact on reducing the survival of S. frugiperda . Similarly, corrected mortality was highest with spinetoram and lowest with thiodicarb. Additionally, chronic toxicity trials were conducted using life table response experiments (LTREs) in the F 1 progeny of the group that had experienced acute toxicity. Extended development with the highest mortality was observed in spinetoram compared to other tested insecticides. Furthermore, life indices parameters like potential fecundity ( Pf ), natality rate ( m x ), intrinsic rate of increase ( r m ), net reproductive rate ( m x ) and finite rate of increase ( λ ) was greatly reduced in S. frugiperda treated with spinetoram compared with other insecticides specially thiodicarb. However, mean generation time ( T c ), corrected generation time ( τ ) and the doubling time ( DT ) was prolonged in spinetoram compared with other tested insecticides. Furthermore, in sex ratio analysis, all tested insecticides, except for thiodicarb, led to a significant decrease in the proportion of females in the population of S. frugiperda . These findings strongly suggest the possible emergence of resistance in S. frugiperda against thiodicarb. Moreover, considering the endorsement of this insecticide by the Government of India through ad-hoc approval, farmers are likely to persist in its application. Hence, it is imperative to conduct further validation of these results, necessitating field evaluations for confirmation. Spodoptera frugiperda ad-hoc approved insecticides Ecotoxicology Demography Sex ratio Figures Figure 1 Key message Seven ad-hoc approved synthetic toxicants by CIBRC, Government of India were studied against Spodoptera frugiperda . Among the tested toxicants, spinetoram exhibited the highest corrected mortality rate. Life indices parameters were significantly diminished in the spinetoram treatment. Mean generation time, corrected generation time, and doubling time were all extended in spinetoram. Except for thiodicarb, all tested toxicants significantly reduced the proportion of female. Introduction The fall armyworm (FAW), Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), is an invasive and highly destructive pest that attacks a wide range of plants. It is known to infest 80 species of plants across a total of 14 plant families (FAO 2018 ; Herlinda et al. 2022 ). The fall armyworm is indigenous to Neotropical areas of Central and South America (Luginbill 1928 ) and is acknowledged as a primary pest species, particularly in maize cultivation (Kumela et al. 2019 ). This pest exhibits high migratory behavior and possesses a high fecundity rate. Its larvae are polyphagous, known for voracious feeding habits, and do not undergo diapause (Suby et al. 2020 ). These traits collectively contribute to its reputation as one of the most destructive insect pests of crops (Sharanabasappa et al. 2018). In India, the fall armyworm was first documented on maize crops in May 2018 (Sharanabasappa et al. 2018). Subsequently, it has disseminated to various maize-growing states throughout the country (Mahadevaswamy et al. 2018). Presently, the fall armyworm has been extensively distributed across more than 80 countries spanning the Americas (Luginbill 1928 ), Africa (Goergen et al. 2016 ), Europe (Early et al. 2018 ), Asia (Guo et al. 2018 , Nagoshi et al. 2020 ), Indonesia (Sartiami et al. 2020 ) and Australia (Maino et al. 2021). The distribution range of this pest continues to expand, and its pest status is anticipated to intensify further as a consequence of climate change (Timilsena et al. 2022 ). This widespread distribution poses varying degrees of threat to local corn planting industries (FAO 2018 ; Montezano et al. 2019 ; Lee et al. 2020 ; Ye et al. 2022 ). Furthermore, the fall armyworm (FAW) has caused maize yield losses totaling up to 13 million US dollars in 12 African countries (Harrison et al. 2019 ). In Kenya alone, the annual loss attributable to this pest amounts to 1 million tons (De Groote et al. 2020 ). Considering the significant economic impact caused by this pest, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has classified the fall armyworm as a food security threat in the African continent. Similarly, preliminary reports indicate that since its introduction in India, the fall armyworm has been linked to yield losses ranging from 33–36%, which has significantly jeopardized India's food security (Jagdish et al. 2019 ; Aruna et al. 2019 ). The fall armyworm heavily relies on maize and rice, which are staple food crops in India. This emphasizes the critical importance of prioritizing the development and implementation of effective control measures for combating the fall armyworm. Moreover, synthetic insecticides have remained pivotal in programs aimed at controlling fall armyworm, driven by concerns surrounding food security and global economic implications. In response to these critical food security challenges, the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee (CIBRC), Government of India has initiated measures to combat the fall armyworm threat by approving seven ad-hoc synthetic insecticides for immediate control. Among these seven insecticides, four are single formulation products, while three are combination formulation products. These insecticides belong to a diverse range of chemical classes, including diamides, avermectins, spinosyns, carbamates, synthetic pyrethroid type-II, and benzoylphenylureas. According to the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC) mode of action classification scheme (IRAC 2024), these insecticides have demonstrated adverse effects on the primary target sites of action, including nerve action, nerve + muscle action, and growth regulation. Neurotoxic insecticides like spinetoram act as nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) allosteric modulators, which is effective on all life stages of insects (Adom and Adams 2020). Thiodicarb acts by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity and used as ovicidal insecticide against various lepidopteran pests including Helicoverpa armigera (Hubner) (Saber et al. 2013 ). Diamide insecticides such as chlorantraniliprole exert their effects on ryanodine receptors (RyR), disrupting the release of calcium. This disruption leads to muscle shrinkage, which in turn causes feeding cessation, muscle paralysis and death (Masaki et al. 2006 ). Moreover, Emamectin benzoate's mode of action involves its ability to penetrate leaf tissues via translaminar activity. Once inside insects, it acts by disrupting muscle contraction, resulting in a continual influx of chloride ions at the Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid (GABA) and H-Glutamate receptor sites (Fanigliulo and Sacchetti 2008 ). This mechanism ultimately leads to paralysis and death of the targeted pests. Lambda-cyhalothrin exerts its effect on the nervous system of insects by disrupting the gating mechanism of sodium channels, which are essential for the generation and transmission of nerve impulses (WHO 1990). Furthermore, both Lufenuron and Novaluron acts as insect growth regulators (IGRs) by inhibiting the biosynthesis of chitin, a crucial component of the exoskeleton of insects (Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC 2024 ). This disruption in chitin production hinders the normal growth and development of insect larvae, ultimately leading to their inability to molt and mature properly. The availability of a diverse array of insecticidal compounds with varying modes of action is crucial for establishing sustainable integrated pest management programs to combat the threats posed by this invasive and destructive species. In the present study, synthetic insecticides based on ad-hoc approval were selected as they have not yet been certified for use against fall armyworm in Indian agro-climatic conditions. Therefore, the aim of this investigation was to evaluate and monitor the efficacy of all seven ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides using life table response experiments (LTREs). LTREs have been extensively employed to evaluate the impact of pesticides on invasive species, utilizing both direct and indirect toxicity assessments (Hardke et al. 2011 ; Belay et al. 2012 ). The existing body of literature concerning the efficacy of ad-hoc approved insecticides on Fall Armyworm (FAW) is notably limited, with Dileep and Murali ( 2020 ). However, their study primarily centered on assessing the bio-efficacy of these insecticides. Unfortunately, this narrow focus leaves significant gaps in our understanding, particularly regarding the potential impacts of these chemicals on various critical parameters such as development, fecundity, reproductive performance, life indices, and sex ratio of FAW. Indeed, establishing the baseline susceptibility of ad-hoc insecticides for FAW necessitates a comprehensive assessment of various parameters. This includes evaluating both acute and sub-lethal ecotoxicity to understand their implications on population growth of FAW. By conducting such evaluations, we can better understand the potential effects of these insecticides on population growth of FAW. Furthermore, this research can aid in minimizing the reliance on synthetic chemicals by identifying and recommending the most effective insecticides from the ad-hoc approved list. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize studies that assess the acute and sub-lethal ecotoxicity of ad-hoc approved insecticides on FAW to inform evidence-based decision-making in pest management strategies. Certainly, the outcomes of this study will establish the baseline susceptibility of ad-hoc approved insecticides against FAW. These data will aid in predicting resistance development early, enabling proactive pest control strategies to effectively manage this pest. Materials and Methods Insect Origin and Culture maintenance Larvae of undetermined age and instars of S. frugiperda were collected from the fodder farm planted with maize at Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University (CCS – HAU) in Hisar, India, located at coordinates 29.1492°N, 75.7217°E, and an altitude of 215 meters above sea level. This collection took place in May, 2021. The randomly collected larval culture were brought to the insectary of Noida International University, Greater Noida. These larvae were then raised in a controlled laboratory environment with conditions set at 27 ± 1°C (temperature), 65 ± 5% relative humidity (RH), and a 12:12 (Light: Dark) photoperiod. The rearing process utilized an artificial corn-based diet, as synthesized by Pinto et al. ( 2019 ). Upon reaching the third instar stage, the larvae were individually released into six-well tissue culture plates filled with artificial diet. This approach was employed to mitigate the risk of cannibalism among the larvae. After the larvae underwent pupation, they were collected and transferred into adult cages equipped with a honey solution to support and facilitate smooth oviposition. An oviposition cage, housing 10-day-old potted maize plants of the BML 6 variety, was utilized as a preferred substrate for ovipositing female. Daily observations were conducted to monitor oviposition activities, and egg masses deposited by female moths on leaves were periodically collected. Subsequently, these collected egg masses underwent surface disinfection by immersion in a 10% formaldehyde solution for 15 minutes. After surface disinfection, the eggs were rinsed with distilled water and subsequently dried on filter paper. Following this process, the disinfested egg batches were carefully transferred onto waxed paper and placed into clean glass containers with a capacity of 1000 ml. The progeny of the F1 generation was sustained without exposure to selection pressure, specifically avoiding insecticide exposure. This maintenance occurred under precisely controlled environmental conditions as mentioned above throughout all stages of development. This particular approach ensured the controlled laboratory conditions for the mass culture of S. frugiperda , allowing its utilization in various experiments as required. Preparation of insecticides concentration Seven insecticides, namely Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC, Emamectin benzoate 5% SG, Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC, Thiodicarb 75% WP, Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC, Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG, and Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC, were ad-hoc approved for use against S. frugiperda . These insecticides were procured through pesticide dealers representing their respective firms, as summarized in Table 1 . These insecticides were utilized in the bioassay at concentrations within a minimum range of their recommended field doses, as follows: Chlorantraniliprole (0.00148 ml a.i. liter − 1 ), Emamectin benzoate (0.00002 ml a.i. liter − 1 ), Spinetoram (0.0007 ml a.i. liter − 1 ), Thiodicarb (0.1125ml a.i. liter − 1 ), Chlorantraniliprole + Lambda-cyhalothrin (0.00097 ml a.i. liter − 1 ), Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron (0.0032 ml a.i. liter − 1 ), and Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate (0.0011 ml a.i. liter − 1 ). The minimum recommended field doses of the insecticides were accounted for, following the guidelines outlined in the Major Use of Pesticides (MUP-1.06.2023) from CIB & RC, DPPQS in Faridabad, India (Anon 2023). Each tested toxicant was individually diluted by gradually introducing the specific formulation into one liter of distilled water, with continuous stirring for approximately 20 minutes at room temperature. Deionized water was consistently used as the untreated control in all experimental set up. Table 1 Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides tested on Invasive Spodoptera frugiperda on Maize with their respective mode of action of each chemical as per the classification system of Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC), and recommended dose rates to control this species in India. Active ingredient Trade name Pesticide Company Chemical class/sub-class Recommended dosage* in dilution water/hac Mode of action IRAC MoA Class Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC Coragen® FMC Corporation Ltd. Diamide/Anthranilic diamide 40 gm in 500L/hac Ryanodine receptors (RyR) modulator 28 Emamectin benzoate 5% SG EGAO® Chloride channel activator Avermectins/Macrocyclic lactone 200 gm in 500L/hac Chloride channel activator 6 Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC Konatsu® IFFCO-MC Crop Science Private Limited. Spinosyn/ Macrocyclic lactone 30 gm in 500L/hac Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) allosteric modulator 5 Thiodicarb 75% WP Larvin® Bayer Crop Science Ltd. India Carbamate 750 ml in 500L/hac Cholinesterase enzyme inhibitor 1A Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC Ampligo® Syngenta Pvt. Ltd. India Anthranilic diamide + Synthetic Pyrethroid type - II 35 (23.42 + 11.58) gm in 500L/hac Ryanodine receptors (RyR) modulator + Sodium channel modulator 28 + 3A Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG Evicent® Syngenta Pvt. Ltd. India. Avermectins + Benzoylphenylureas 36 gm in 500L/hac Chloride channel activator + Chitin Synthesis Inhibitor 6 + 15 Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC Neuken® Maharashtra Bio Fertilizers India Pvt. Ltd. Benzoylphenylureas + Avermectins 92.25 (78.75 + 13.5) gm in 500L/hac Chitin Synthesis Inhibitor + Chloride channel activator 15 + 6 *Recommended dosage as per Government of India, Central Insecticide Board & Registration Committee, Faridabad (Haryana). Abbreviations used: SC – Suspension Concentrate; SG – Water Soluble Granule; WP – Wettable Powder; ZC – Mixture of Suspension Concentrate (SC) + Capsule Suspension (CS); WG – Wettable Granule. Diet overlay method A bioassay was conducted utilizing a diet assimilation assay, following the IRAC test method number 20 (Annon 2021 ), with minor adaptations. Third instars of S. frugiperda were selected for the bioassay due to their heightened sensitivity to both biotic and abiotic stresses, making them more susceptible to insecticides when compared to later instars. Additionally, these instars were chosen for their ease of rearing in experimental settings as well as cost effective to control under actual cultivation conditions. Third instar larvae of S. frugiperda were placed individually onto semi-synthetic diet (@ 1ml) within each well of insect bioassay trays (model no LI-IB-01 and 12.5cm (h) x 8cm (w) x 2.5cm (h)). The surface of the artificial diet in bioassay tray is applied with 200 µl of recommended dose of each tested Ad-hoc approved insecticide. The control treatment involved using an artificial diet supplemented with distilled water. The bioassay trays were rotated to ensure an even distribution of the solution over the surface of the artificial diet, and then they were allowed to dry for ~ 1 hour. Following the drying process, a third instar larva was introduced into each well and covered with a perforated plastic lid. The bioassay trays were then placed in a Biological Oxygen Demand incubator (BOD) that was adjusted to maintain the same environmental conditions as described earlier. This setup allowed for a 24-hour observation period to assess the acute toxicity of tested toxicants as follows. Acute toxicity trials on percent survival of S. frugiperda Each treatment was replicated five times, and each replication comprised 50 freshly molted third instar larvae, resulting in a cohort of 250 individuals. The experimental design followed a Complete Randomized Block Design (CRBD). The method of exposing the insects to treated and untreated surfaces remained consistent with the previously described diet overlay bioassay. Mortality of third instar larvae was assessed 24 h after insecticide exposure. Larvae were deemed deceased if they exhibited no response when touched with a brush or displayed severe intoxication symptoms such as lethargic movement, cessation of feeding, and intermittent molting. Deceased larvae were removed, and surviving individuals were transferred to six-well tissue culture plates containing artificial diet for continued development. The rearing method for the surviving individuals remained consistent with the procedures described under the sub-heading “Insect Origin and Culture Maintenance”. Once the adults in both the treated and untreated groups emerged, they were allowed to oviposit. Upon completion of the oviposition process, the acute toxicity was determined using the following equation: E = 100%−(100%− CM ) × R Where: E = toxicity coefficient; CM = mortality (%) (Abbott, 1925 ); R = mean numbers of eggs laid/female/day in treated group: average numbers of eggs laid/female/day in untreated group (Boller et al. 2005 ). Indirect toxicity trials using F 1 generation Larval, pupal and total immature development Freshly oviposited eggs from treated and untreated aforementioned direct exposure experiments were transferred in Petri dishes (9.0×2.0 cm) until they hatched. A filter paper was carefully positioned at the bottom of each Petri dish to provide a stable surface, and controlled humidity levels were maintained by adding a precise amount of water as needed. This ensured that the humidity remained consistently within the optimal range of 60–70% RH. Each insecticidal treatment, along with the control, underwent counting of ten eggs in ten replications, constituting a cohort totaling 100 eggs. Regular inspections were conducted at 8-hour intervals to carefully observe the eggs, noting the number of larvae that successfully hatched. The first instar larvae were transferred from the glass Petri dishes to individual 30 mL plastic cups (measuring 4 × 4 × 4.5 cm), each equipped with small ventilation holes in the cap to ensure proper airflow. These plastic cups, pre-loaded with artificial diet for the developing instars, were introduced into a Biological Oxygen Demand incubator (BOD) within the laboratory calibrated to maintain optimal environmental conditions, as described above, for the development of immature stages. To determine the larval instars, the number of exuviae shed during molting was counted whenever observed. In addition, both deceased and living individuals were documented, with dead larvae promptly discarded. When larvae were reaching the third instar stage, each larva was carefully placed into individual compartments of six-well tissue culture plates containing artificial diet. This precautionary measure was taken to reduce the potential risk of cannibalism among the larvae. Following the pupation, the pupae were collected and relocated into adult cages furnished with a honey solution to aid and facilitate the process of oviposition. The observation of the development time for different developing stages was carried out for each toxicant treatment and the control. This experimental procedure was repeated ten times for robust analysis and consistency. Biological performance and adult longevity From the aforementioned experiments, newly emerged males and females were sexed, and one pair was transferred in an oviposition cage (12 × 9 cm), forming a group of 5 couples. This setup was repeated five times for both the treated and control experiments. The adult insects were supplied with oviposition substrate, which consisted of 10-day-old potted maize plants of the BML 6 variety. Daily monitoring encompassed pre-mating, pre-oviposition, oviposition, post-oviposition, and the longevity of both female and male adults. The eggs laid in this experiment were employed to examine the life indices of females, as outlined below. Life indices of female Utilizing Birch's (1948) methodology, we generated data on female survivorship at age x ( l x ), potential fecundity ( P f ), and natality rate ( m x ) based on our observations. These recorded data served as the basis for computing vital biological parameters, such as intrinsic rate of increase ( r m ) (Ʃ l x m x . e − r.x = 1), net reproductive rate ( R 0 = Ʃ l x . m x ), finite rate of increase ( λ = e r ), mean generation time ( T c = ln R 0 /r ), corrected generation time ( τ = ln R 0 /r m ) and the doubling time ( DT = ln 2/r ). This experimental configuration underwent replication five times for both the treated and untreated control experiments, ensuring robustness and reliability in the obtained results. Analysis of sex ratio The identification of male and female pupae of S. frugiperda relied upon characteristics such as genital and anal openings on the terminal segments, along with the specific morphology of the terminal segments, following the descriptions provided by Odhiambo and Ondasi in 2020. The estimation of sex ratio followed the methodology proposed by Wilson and Hardy ( 2002 ). In this analysis, the number of female progenies was designated as the response variable, which was then divided by the total progeny count per cohort. The estimates were subjected to analysis using the following formula: - Sex ratio = ♀♀ / (♀♀ + ♂♂) Statistical analysis Before proceeding with the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Bartlett's test was employed to evaluate the homogeneity of variances among the tested groups. This sequential analytical approach enhances the robustness and reliability of the statistical assessments, ensuring accurate interpretation of the results. The comparison of female and male longevity as well as sex ratio was conducted through the application of t-test for independent samples within the particular treatment groups. This statistical analysis was employed to discern any significant differences in the lifespan of females and males under the specified treatments. The Jackknife method based on the pseudo-values was employed to assess the significance of differences in life indices parameters (Maia De et al. 2000 ; La Rossa and Kahn 2003 ). Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test aids in identifying specific differences between treatment groups following the initial analysis of variance (ANOVA). The statistical analysis was conducted using the R programming language, version 4.2.3. (R Development Core Team 2023 ). Results Acute toxicity of insecticides on percent survival of S. frugiperda Results of the present study (Table 2 ) reveals that all insecticidal treatments exhibited a statistically significant impact (P < 0.05) on per cent survival, per cent corrected mortality, fecundity (eggs/female/day) and per cent toxicity coefficient of S. frugiperda. All tested insecticides significantly reduced the per cent survival of S. frugiperda compared to control ( F (7, 39) = 152.88; P < 0.05 ). Among the tested insecticidal treatments spinetoram greatly reduced the per cent survival of S. frugiperda followed by chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorantraniliprole, novaluron + emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, emamectin benzoate and thiodicarb. Corrected mortality was significantly highest in spinetoram and it was lowest in thiodicarb treatment ( F (6, 34) = 49.38; P < 0.05 ). Chlorantraniliprole and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin did not demonstrate any significant difference (P = NS) in per cent corrected mortality of S. frugiperda. Similarly, there was no significant difference in the per cent corrected mortality among emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate (Table 2 ). Fecundity of S. frugiperda was also significantly reduced in spinetoram (2.93 eggs/female/day) as compared with other treatments and control ( F (7, 39) = 519.54; P < 0.05 ). The significantly highest value of toxicity coefficient observed in spinetoram (95.13%) indicates its lethality to S. frugiperda as compared to other treatments ( F (6, 34) = 110.29; P < 0.05 ). Table 2 Mortality of 3rd instar of Spodoptera frugiperda treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides with toxicity coefficient (% E). Treatments Survival (%) CM (%) Eggs/female/day E (%) Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Control 86.80 ± 1.01a - 21.23 ± 0.54a - Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 45.60 ± 0.74d 51.17 ± 0.80b 04.20 ± 0.90c 90.31 ± 0.31b Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 53.60 ± 1.93c 42.61 ± 2.07c 05.03 ± 0.11c 86.36 ± 0.71c Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC 32.20 ± 1.35e 64.45 ± 1.45a 02.93 ± 0.28d 95.13 ± 0.43a Thiodicarb 75% WP 62.60 ± 1.01b 32.75 ± 1.09d 07.54 ± 0.27b 76.11 ± 0.84d Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC 43.20 ± 0.48d 51.17 ± 0.80b 04.34 ± 0.79c 90.01 ± 1.99b Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG 52.40 ± 1.72c 43.89 ± 1.84c 04.82 ± 0.22c 87.26 ± 0.64c Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC 52.00 ± 1.26c 44.32 ± 1.73c 04.60 ± 1.25c 87.94 ± 0.31c F (df = 7, 39) 152.88 - 519.54 - F (df = 6, 34) - 49.38 - 110.29 Number of individuals tested (n) = 250 CM = Corrected mortality using Abbott’s formula (Abbott, 1925 ) E = toxicity coefficient Means followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P < 0.05) by Tukey's HSD Chronic toxicity of insecticides through F 1 progeny Stage specific and total immature development Results (Table 3 ) of the present study demonstrated that all tested insecticides significantly affected the eggs, larval and pupal duration of S. frugiperda (P < 0.05). The duration of hatching of S. frugiperda eggs was significantly prolonged in spinetoram and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin treatment as compared other insecticidal treatments and control ( F (7, 79) = 25.34; P < 0.05 ). Similarly, larval duration of all larval instar (L 1 – L 6 ) was also significantly prolonged in spinetoram treatment as compared with other insecticidal treatments and control ( F (7, 79) = 22.02* 1st instar , F (7, 79) = 33.45* 2nd instar , F (7, 79) = 25.25* 3rd instar , F (7, 79) = 39.56* 4th instar , F (7, 79) = 12.69* 5th instar , F (7, 79) = 25.54* 6th instar ; P < 0.05 ). Interestingly, it was also observed that thiodicarb treatment and control did not show any significant difference in duration of eggs hatching and duration of all larval instars (P = NS) . The pre-pupal and pupal duration of S. frugiperda were significantly extended in spinetoram treatment as compared to other treatments and control ( F (7, 79) = 23.00* pre−pupa duration , F (7, 79) = 56.92* pupal duration ; P < 0.05 ). Moreover, total immature development of S. frugiperda was significantly prolonged in spinetoram treatment as compared to other treatments and control ( F (7, 79) = 86.96; P < 0.05) (Table 3 ). Table 3 Stage-specific and total immature development of Spodoptera frugiperda treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides. Treatments Eggs I Instar II Instar III Instar IV Instar V Instar VI Instar Pre-pupa Pupa TID* Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Control 4.50 ± 0.131d 3.06 ± 0.25e 2.57 ± 0.10d 2.61 ± 0.13e 2.32 ± 0.03f 2.66 ± 0.13e 2.31 ± 0.02f 1.39 ± 0.40e 07.64 ± 0.12f 29.07 ± 0.43e Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 6.90 ± 0.20ab 4.85 ± 0.16b 4.60 ± 0.17b 4.15 ± 0.19b 4.13 ± 0.17bc 4.40 ± 0.27ab 3.29 ± 0.17bc 2.18 ± 0.11ab 09.95 ± 0.18c 44.49 ± 0.95b Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 5.67 ± 0.19c 3.89 ± 0.13cd 3.64 ± 0.13c 3.20 ± 0.15d 2.86 ± 0.10e 3.23 ± 0.32c 2.51 ± 0.60d 1.61 ± 0.50c 08.19 ± 0.13d 34.82 ± 0.75d Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC 7.74 ± 0.31a 5.66 ± 0.27a 5.24 ± 0.15a 4.78 ± 0.12a 4.7 ± 0.19a 5.06 ± 0.20a 4.43 ± 0.25a 2.39 ± 0.08a 11.46 ± 0.28a 51.49 ± 0.92a Thiodicarb 75% WP 4.53 ± 0.16 d 3.46 ± 0.12de 3.08 ± 0.14cd 2.92 ± 0.13de 2.64 ± 0.08ef 2.74 ± 0.13e 2.39 ± 0.04d 1.50 ± 0.51d 07.91 ± 0.12b 31.21 ± 0.46e Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC 7.22 ± 0.23a 4.88 ± 0.18b 4.86 ± 0.19ab 4.29 ± 0.14ab 4.50 ± 0.17ab 4.93 ± 0.24a 3.73 ± 0.18b 2.28 ± 0.08ab 10.54 ± 0.20b 47.25 ± 1.16b Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG 6.17 ± 0.29bc 4.23 ± 0.11bc 4.13 ± 0.17c 3.42 ± 0.16cd 3.42 ± 0.16d 3.46 ± 0.30cd 2.63 ± 0.07d 1.76 ± 0.38c 08.82 ± 0.16e 38.07 ± 0.89c Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC 6.07 ± 0.27bc 4.43 ± 0.77bc 4.85 ± 0.17b 3.87 ± 0.99bc 3.68 ± 0.11cd 3.88 ± 0.36bc 2.98 ± 0.16cd 2.06 ± 0.12b 09.32 ± 0.14d 40.47 ± 0.87c F (df = 7, 79) 25.34 22.02 33.45 25.25 39.56 12.69 25.54 23.00 56.92 86.97 Means followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P < 0.05) by Tukey's HSD TID* represents total immature development Biological performance and adult longevity The results presented in Table 4 show that insecticidal treatments had a significant impact on the reproductive performance and adult longevity of S. frugiperda (P < 0.05). The duration of pre-mating in S. frugiperda adults was extended in those treated with spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin and novaluron + emamectin benzoate with no significant difference observed among these treatments (P = NS). However, when these treatments were compared with rest of the other treatments and the control, a significant difference was encountered ( F (7, 39) = 5.21; P < 0.05) . Similarly, the duration of pre-oviposition period did not differ significantly among chlorantraniliprole, spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, novaluron + emamectin benzoate and emamectin benzoate + lufenuron (P = NS). However, a significant difference in the pre-oviposition period was detected when these treatments were compared with the rest of the other treatments and the control ( F (7, 39) = 6.83; P < 0.05) . The oviposition period of female S. frugiperda was significantly prolonged in thiodicarb and control; however, rest of the insecticidal treatments markedly reduced the oviposition period ( F (7, 39) = 12.88; P < 0.05) . Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the post-oviposition period when a comparison was made between the tested insecticide (P = NS). Furthermore, a significant difference was detected when a comparison of the post-oviposition period was made between the insecticidal treatment and the control ( F (7, 39) = 4.84; P < 0.05). In present results (Table 4 ) it was noted that longevity of female did not exhibit a significant difference when compared between insecticidal treatments and control ( F (7, 39) = 0.973; P < 0.468* NS ). However, longevity of male was significantly affected by insecticidal treatments ( F (7, 39) = 6.23; P < 0.05 ). Results of the present study also showed that female lived significantly longer than the male in all the treated and control group ( Student’s t-test = 5.95* Control ; t-test = 27.71* chlorantraniliprole ; t-test = 11.46* emamectin benzoate ; t-test = 21.63* spinetoram ; t-test = 8.11* thiacloprid ; t-test = 17.73* chlorantraniliprole + lambda−cyhalothrin ; t-test = -13.00* emamectin benzoate + lufenuron ; t-test = 13,28* novaluron + emamectin benzoate ; df = 8; P < 0.05 ) (Table 4 ). Table 4 Reproductive performance and adult longevity of Spodoptera frugiperda treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides. Treatments Pre-mating (days) Pre-oviposition (days) Ovipostion (days) Post-oviposition (days) Female longevity (days) ¥ Male longevity (days) ¥ t-values ¥ ( df = 8 ) Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Control 1.64 ± 0.21b 2.60 ± 0.14c 7.63 ± 0.27a 1.61 ± 0.22b 13.48 ± 0.69aA 9.35 ± 0.85aB 5.95 Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 2.38 ± 0.48a 3.52 ± 0.13a 5.91 ± 0.51c 2.32 ± 0.68a 14.13 ± 0.21aA 8.12 ± 0.43bB 27.71 Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 1.99 ± 0.87ab 2.92 ± 0.22b 6.51 ± 0.17bc 1.87 ± 0.14a 13.92 ± 0.32aA 8.52 ± 0.26bB 11.46 Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC 2.47 ± 0.37a 3.84 ± 0.40a 5.57 ± 0.21c 2.41 ± 0.57a 14.29 ± 0.23aA 7.45 ± 0.20cB 21.63 Thiodicarb 75% WP 1.87 ± 0.14ab 2.80 ± 0.15b 7.41 ± 0.32ab 1.75 ± 0.17a 13.83 ± 0.54aA 8.77 ± 0.30bB 8.11 Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC 2.45 ± 0.06a 3.72 ± 0.04a 5.72 ± 0.20c 2.38 ± 0.07a 14.27 ± 0.26aA 7.81 ± 0.25cB 17.73 Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG 2.09 ± 0.97ab 3.24 ± 0.29a 6.17 ± 0.93c 2.02 ± 0.13a 13.52 ± 0.27aA 8.41 ± 0.28bB 13.00 Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC 2.37 ± 0.22a 3.44 ± 0.18a 6.06 ± 0.18c 2.17 ± 0.13a 14.04 ± 0.31aA 8.43 ± 0.28bB 13.28 F (df = 7, 39) 5.21 6.83 12.88 4.84 0.973 6.23 P = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.468 0.00 Means followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P < 0.05) by Tukey's HSD ¥ Longevity of female and male were compared by t-test for independent samples at respective treatments and means were separated by different capital alphabets (A/B) in rows are significantly different (P < 0.005). Life indices of female The life indices parameters of S. frugiperda were found to be significantly influenced (P < 0.05) by the application of insecticides, as evidenced in the present study (Table 5 ). The potential fecundity ( P f ) was significantly reduced to 81.65, 82.54, 83.05, 85.18 and 90.50 females/female/generation when S. frugiperda was exposed to spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron and Emamectin benzoate treatment, respectively as compared with control and thiodicarb i.e. 233.08 and 123.51 females/female/generation, respectively ( F (7,39) = 330.45; P < 0.05 ). Similarly, net reproductive rate ( R 0 ), intrinsic rate of increase ( r m ) and finite rate of increase ( λ ) were significantly reduced in all insecticidal treatments except thiodicarb and control ( F (7,39) = 476.68* R0 ; F (7,39) = 187.3* rm ; F (7,39) = 181.73* λ ; P < 0.05 ). In contrary to these parameters, the mean length of generation ( T c ), corrected generation time ( τ ) and doubling time (DT) of S. frugiperda were significantly increased in all insecticidal treatments except thiodicarb and control ( F (7,39) = 49.59* Tc ; F (7,39) = 418.46* τ ; F (7,39) = 608.62* DT ; P < 0.05 ) (Table 5 ). Table 5 Life indices parameters of Spodoptera frugiperda treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides. Treatments P f R 0 r m λ T c τ DT Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Mean ± SE Control 233.08 ± 4.01a 82.32 ± 0.97a 0.0987 ± 0.0001a 1.103 ± 0.0003a 60.12 ± 0.600c 44.68 ± 0.07c 7.02 ± 0.00c Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC 83.05 ± 0.24c 19.35 ± 0.06c 0.0361 ± 0.0002c 1.037 ± 0.0003c 97.90 ± 0.184a 82.18 ± 0.04a 19.22 ± 0.00a Emamectin benzoate 5% SG 90.50 ± 2.33c 22.34 ± 1.58c 0.0355 ± 0.0009c 1.036 ± 0.0010c 93.27 ± 5.155a 87.30 ± 2.02a 19.57 ± 0.52a Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC 81.65 ± 0.72c 18.92 ± 0.26c 0.0358 ± 0.0002c 1.036 ± 0.0002c 96.58 ± 1.090a 82.11 ± 0.10a 19.36 ± 0.11a Thiodicarb 75% WP 123.51 ± 6.56b 36.33 ± 2.10b 0.0663 ± 0.0011b 1.068 ± 0.0012b 72.99 ± 2.267b 54.09 ± 0.69b 10.46 ± 0.17b Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC 82.54 ± 0.23c 19.18 ± 0.07c 0.0360 ± 0.0000c 1.037 ± 0.0003c 98.55 ± 0.315a 82.03 ± 0.01a 19.25 ± 0.01a Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG 85.18 ± 1.10c 20.11 ± 0.37c 0.0361 ± 0.0003c 1.037 ± 0.0003c 97.12 ± 0.915a 83.03 ± 0.44a 19.19 ± 0.01a Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC 83.49 ± 0.47c 19.65 ± 0.22c 0.0361 ± 0.0002c 1.037 ± 0.0003c 98.23 ± 0.160a 82.56 ± 0.26a 19.21 ± 0.03a F (df = 7, 39) 330.45 476.68 187.3 181.73 49.59 418.46 608.62 P = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Means followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P < 0.05) by Tukey's HSD Abbreviations used: P f = Potential fecundity; R o = Net reproductive rate; r m = Intrinsic rate of increase; λ = Finite rate of increase; T C = Mean length of generation; τ = Corrected generation time; DT = Doubling time. Sex ratio Results of the present study (Fig. 1 ) also demonstrated that proportion of females is greatly affected by the insecticidal application (GLM’s; X 2 = 12.87; df = 7; P < 0.05 ). All tested insecticides significantly reduced the proportion of female from the population of S. frugiperda except thiodicarb ( F (7,39) = 134.85; P < 0.05 ). Furthermore, the results of the t-test for independent samples confirm that the proportion of females is significantly lower than males in all insecticides, except thiodicarb ( t-test = -3.003* chlorantraniliprole ; t-test = -4.419* emamectin benzoate ; t-test = -5.177* spinetoram ; t-test = -7.00* thiacloprid ; t-test = -3.252* chlorantraniliprole + lambda−cyhalothrin ; t-test = -5.211* emamectin benzoate + lufenuron ; t-test = -3.331* novaluron + emamectin benzoate ; df = 8; P < 0.05 ). However, proportion of female is significantly higher than males in thiodicarb ( Student’s t-test = 7.00; df = 8; P < 0.005 ) and control ( Student’s t-test = 14.26; df = 8; P < 0.005 ). Discussion The work demonstrated here elucidate the short-term and long-term effects of seven Ad-hoc approved insecticides (i.e., chlorantraniliprole, emamectin benzoate, spinetoram, thiodicarb, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate) through the laboratory bioassay on various biological traits of S. frugiperda. These synthetic pesticides were recommended and Ad-hoc approved by CIBRC-DPPQS, Government of India, taking into account the national urgency associated with the destructive nature of S. frugiperda . The findings of the current laboratory bioassay can contribute to establishing baseline statistical data for regulating the population of this emerging pest. Additionally, it aids in enhancing the integrated pest management program designed to address the challenges posed by this introduced species. To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first comprehensive scrutiny focusing on the ecotoxicity of all seven Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides collectively within a single research investigation. Furthermore, the outcomes of the current investigations clearly reveal that the application of tested insecticides, excluding thiodicarb, has detrimental effects on S. frugiperda . These effects manifest as an elevated rate of mortality, prolonged immature development, compromised reproductive performance and life indices of females, diminished adult longevity, and altered sex ratios. The deleterious effects of Ad-hoc based insecticides on S. frugiperda were already been investigated in various countries where this pest has already been invaded like West Africa (Hruska et al. 2019; Babendreier et al. 2020 ; Ahissou et al. 2022 ), India (Kumar and Mohan, 2020; Deshmukh et al. 2020 ; Deshmukh et al. 2021 ; Kulye et al. 2021 ), China (Zhang et al. 2020 ); Southeast Asia (Boaventura et al. 2020 ; Rane et al. 2022 ) and Australia (Nguyen et al. 2021 ; Tay et al. 2022 ) based on the data available from the America. Moreover, the results of the present study from acute toxicity trials indicate that all tested insecticides significantly reduced the survival percentage of S. frugiperda . Furthermore, these insecticides demonstrated a noteworthy impact on fecundity and corrected mortality of S. frugiperda when tested in the laboratory through diet overlay bioassays. In particular, among the tested insecticidal treatments, spinetoram exerted a significant impact on these parameters in acute toxicity trials followed by chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorantraniliprole, novaluron + emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, emamectin benzoate. Similar results were previously reported by Sisay et al. ( 2019 ) in Ethiopia. Their study demonstrated that the highest mortality of fall armyworm was evident in spinetoram treatments, followed by chlorantraniliprole, spinosad, and lambda cyhalothrin (Sisay et al. 2019 ). The research conducted by Phani et al. ( 2021 ) reported comparable findings, emphasizing that chlorantraniliprole exhibits significant effectiveness against fall armyworm when compared to other tested insecticides. Importantly, this efficiency was attained without any apparent phytotoxic effects. Moreover, in the sub-lethal bioassay conducted by Abbas et al. ( 2023 ), spinetoram and emamectin benzoate exhibited the highest mortality and a notable reduction in the reproductive ability of S. frugiperda . However, in the current study, it was observed that thiodicarb treatment did not show a significant impact on various biological parameters when compared to other tested insecticides. This lack of significant impact could be attributed to the potential development of resistance against carbamate insecticides in the previously invaded population of S. frugiperda . Similarly, resistance to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides has been observed in indigenous populations, particularly in Hubei, China, as elucidated by Guo et al. ( 2020 ). Furthermore, this resistance phenomenon has been detected at a low frequency within populations in Indonesia, as reported in the study conducted by Boaventura et al. in 2020. Furthermore, the present study elucidated that all tested insecticides exerted a significant influence on the eggs, larval, and pupal duration of S. frugiperda . The duration of all immature stages exhibited a considerable prolongation in the spinetoram and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin treatments in comparison to other insecticidal treatments and the control. Additionally, noteworthy observations included the absence of any significant difference in the duration of overall immature developmental stages of S. frugiperda when treated with thiodicarb, as compared to the control. The observed effects can potentially be attributed to the neurotoxic nature of specific insecticides, like spinetoram, that directly target nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR). This mode of action disrupts neural transmission, consequently leading to disturbances in the molting process among treated insects (Geng et al. 2013 ; Lu et al. 2022 ). Furthermore, the delay in development could be attributed to the tendency of most insects to avoid feeding on insecticide-treated food, resulting in insufficient nutritional intake and ultimately leading to an extended developmental period (Andreazza et al. 2021 ; Siddiqui et al. 2023 ). Numerous investigations by different researchers have consistently reported detrimental effects of spinetoram (Gao et al. 2021 ; Abbas et al. 2023 ), chlorantraniliprole (Li et al. 2021 ; Padovez et al. 2022 ; Husnain et al. 2023), emamectin benzoate (Liu et al. 2022 ; Abbas et al. 2023 ; Chang et al. 2023 ), lambda cyhalothrin (Zhao et al. 2020 ; Sileshi et al. 2022 ), lufenuron (Lv et al. 2023 ), and novaluron (Shareef et al. 2022 ) on the developmental trajectory of S. frugiperda , aligning with the findings of the present study. Present investigation revealed that the reproductive parameters, including pre-mating, pre-oviposition, and post-oviposition periods of S. frugiperda , exhibited prolongation in individuals subjected to treatments with spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate. Consistent with the current investigation, several other studies have indicated that exposure to lethal and/or sublethal doses of pesticides can disrupt crucial behavioral traits, including pre-oviposition, mating, and post-oviposition periods (Geng et al. 2013 ; Li et al. 2021 ; Husnain et al. 2023; Lv et al. 2023 ). Furthermore, the longevity of adults was significantly impacted by the application of insecticides in present study. It was observed that spinetoram considerably reduced the longevity of male individuals, while the longevity of females appeared to be less affected by insecticidal treatments. The observed impact on longevity, differing between males and females in response to insecticidal treatments, may be explained by sex-specific stress effects, a phenomenon demonstrated in previous studies (Margus et al. 2019 ). It is suggested that females generally exhibit higher sensitivity to stress than males (Piiroinen et al. 2013 ). These sex-specific differences in sensitivity could be attributed to factors such as sexual size dimorphism (Blanckenhorn, 2005 ), sex-linked insecticidal resistance mechanisms (Brevik et al. 2018 ), or hormetic effects induced by distinct mechanisms in males and females (Hercus et al. 2003 ). Estimating the essential demographic parameters like potential fecundity ( Pf ), net reproductive rate ( R 0 ), intrinsic rate of increase ( r m ), and finite rate of increase ( λ ), length of generation ( T c ), corrected generation time ( τ ), and doubling time ( DT ) is crucial when assessing the effects of insecticides. Our investigation demonstrated a substantial impact of tested insecticides on these parameters of S. frugiperda . Exposure to spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron, and Emamectin benzoate resulted in a significant reduction in Pf , R 0 , r m , and λ in S. frugiperda . In contrast, T c , τ , and DT exhibited a notable increase in all insecticidal treatments, with thiodicarb and the control group being exceptions to this trend. Similarly, Han et al. (2012) observed a pronounced decline in fecundity in conjunction with reductions in the values of R 0 , r m , and λ following the application of sublethal doses of chlorantraniliprole to Plutella xylostella larvae. Moreover, Abbas et al. ( 2023 ) documented that spinetoram and emamectin benzoate prove to be effective insecticides, significantly diminishing the fecundity behavior of S. frugiperda even at low and/or sublethal concentrations. In previous studies Xu et al. (2013) reported a reduction of R 0 , r m , and λ in S. frugiperda following the administration of sublethal doses of chlorantraniliprole. In our current investigation, we have observed that the application of thiodicarb did not influence the demographic parameters when compared to other tested insecticides. The vital life-indices parameters, such as Pf , R 0 , r m , and λ remained nearly unchanged in the thiodicarb-treated group compared to the control group. This can be understood in term of insecticide hormoligosis resulting in resurgence of pest and secondary pest outbreaks (Cohen, 2006 ; Cutler, 2013 ). Due to hormoligosis, the heightened response of insects to the treated surface for oviposition leads to an increase in population rather than the expected reduction. Furthermore, according to Yin et al. ( 2009 ) population growth of P. xylostella increased after an exposure to sublethal concentrations (LC 25 ) of spinosad. Furthermore, in the analysis of sex ratio, the insecticidal application had a significant impact on the proportion of females in S. frugiperda . The proportion of females was notably lower than males in all insecticides, ranging from 0.400 to 0.464 females, except for thiodicarb (0.613 females) and the control group (0.733 females). The observed alteration in sex ratio could potentially be attributed to the influence of insecticide pressure during the fertilization process and/or the target specificity of insecticides associated with a particular sex before the eclosion of adults from pupae (Idris and Grafius, 1993). Many more investigations have suggested the possibilities of sex ratio adjustment due to insecticides application in various arthropods (Teather et al. 2005 ; Kalajahi et al. 2014 ). The production of males in insects is a pivotal factor influencing population growth and diminishing the intrinsic rate of increase. Therefore, the reduced number of female individuals resulting from the application of insecticides may be linked to lower population growth and ultimately less damage to the crop. This outcome appears to be consistent in the present study with the application of insecticides, except in the case of thiodicarb. Conclusion Our comprehensive laboratory bio-assay, which assessed the relative ecotoxicity of Ad-hoc approved insecticides on population growth parameters, survival, and sex ratio, confirmed that the majority of the tested insecticides proved lethal to S. frugiperda , particularly spinetoram. Contrary to this, among the seven tested insecticides, thiodicarb did not exhibit toxicity against S. frugiperda , as indicated by parameters such as mortality rate, demography, longevity of adults, and sex ratio. The observed outcomes lead us to suspect that the tested population of S. frugiperda may have developed resistance against thiodicarb, indicating a potential adaptive response to this specific insecticide. Moreover, since this insecticide is approved by the Government of India based on ad-hoc approval, farmers are likely to continue its use. There is a concern that the persistent use of this chemical may contribute to further resistance development in this pest. Consequently, there is a fear that, in the future, this pest could become more devastating in maize-growing states or regions in India. Therefore, further validation of these results is crucial and warrants evaluation in the field for confirmation. Based on the outcomes of our laboratory-based bioassay and with the prospect of future field assessments, if thiodicarb is further identified as ineffective or less effective against S. frugiperda , it is advisable to consider the removal of this insecticide from the list of Ad-hoc approved insecticides by the Government of India. Certainly, this decision aligns with the necessity for a judicious and evidence-based approach, ensuring the maintenance of robust and effective pest control measures. Additionally, there is a critical need for ongoing research to investigate the potential development of resistance in S. frugiperda to each of the Ad-hoc approved insecticides or those already registered against this pest, with systematic assessments conducted every three years. This proactive approach is essential for monitoring and addressing any evolving resistance patterns in a timely manner. Declarations Author contributions FH, KP, NAB and MKD formulated and planned the research. FH and AS conducted the experiments, with FH analyzing the data. FH, RG, RV and MKD drafted the initial manuscript, while FH, MKD, and AS participated in its writing, review, and editing. All authors gave their approval for the final version of the manuscript. Funding The study was conducted under the sponsorship of Professor Kahkashan Parveen who received funding through the Researchers Supporting Project (RSP2024R229) at King Saud University, located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Acknowledgments The authors express their sincere gratitude to the Department of Agriculture, Noida International University, Greater Noida, India, and the Division of Entomology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, for furnishing the essential infrastructure for conducting this experimental work. Additionally, we extend our heartfelt thanks to CCS-HAU, Hisar, for generously providing the fodder farm for larval collection. Conflict of interest Authors declare that they have no competing interests relevant to the content of this article. References Abbas A, Zhao CR, Arshad M, Han X, Iftikhar A, Hafeez F, Aslam A, Ullah F (2023). Sublethal effects of spinetoram and emamectin benzoate on key demographic parameters of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) under laboratory conditions. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 30(34):82990-83003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28183-8 Abbott WS (1925) A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J Econ Entomol 18:265–267. Ahissou BR, Sawadogo WM, Sankara F, Brostaux Y, Bokonon-Ganta AH, Somda I, Verheggen FJ (2022) Annual dynamics of fall armyworm populations in West Africa and biology in different host plants. Scientific African 16: e01227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01227 Andreazza F, Oliveira EE, Martins GF (2021) Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission. Insects 8;12(10):917. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917 Annon (2021) Test Methods: Insecticide Resistance Action Commiee (IRAC). Available online: https://irac-online.org/methods/ Aruna B, Bhaskar M, Bagade P, Rawal N (2019) Yield losses in maize (Zea mays) due to fall armyworm infestation and potential IoT-based interventions for its control. J Entomol Zool Stud 7 (5), 920-927. Babendreier D, Koku Agboyi L, Beseh P, Osae M, Nboyine J, Ofori SEK, Frimpong JO, Attuquaye Clottey V, Kenis M (2020) The Efficacy of Alternative, Environmentally Friendly Plant Protection Measures for Control of Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera Frugiperda , in Maize. Insects 11(4):240. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11040240 Belay DK, Huckaba RM, Foster JE (2012) Susceptibility of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) at Santa Isabel, Puerto Rico, to different insecticides. Florida Ent., 95: 476– 478. https://doi.org/10.2307/23268570 Birch LC (1948) The intrinsic rate of natural increase of an insect population. J Animal Ecol 17:15–26. Blanckenhorn WU (2005) Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethol 111, 977–1016. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2005.01147.x Boaventura D, Martin M, Pozzebon A, Mota-Sanchez D, Nauen R (2020) Monitoring of Target-Site Mutations Conferring Insecticide Resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda . Insects 18;11(8):545. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080545 Boaventura D, Martin M, Pozzebon A, Mota-Sanchez D, Nauen R (2020) Monitoring of Target-Site Mutations Conferring Insecticide Resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda . Insects 18;11(8):545. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080545 Boller EF, Vogt H, Ternes P, Malavolta C (2005) Working document on selectivity of pesticides. Available at www.iobc.ch/2005/Working%20Document%20Pesticides_Explanations.pdf. Accessed May 2008 Brevik K, Lindström L, McKay SD, Chen YH (2018) Transgenerational effects of insecticides—implications for rapid pest evolution in agroecosystems. Curr Opin Insect Sci 26, 34–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2017.12.007 Chang H, Guo J, Qi G, Gao Y, Wang S, Wang X, Liu Y (2023). Comparative analyses of the effects of sublethal doses of emamectin benzoate and tetrachlorantraniliprole on the gut microbiota of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Insect Sci 1;23(4):7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iead039 Cohen E (2006) Pesticide-mediated homeostatic modulation in arthropods. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 85: 21–27. 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2005.09.002 Cutler GC (2013) Insects, insecticides and hormesis: evidence and considerations for study. Dose-Response. 11:154–177. https://doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.12-008 . De Groote H, Kimenju SC, Munyua B, Palmas S, Kassie M, Bruce A (2020) Spread and impact of fall armyworm ( Spodoptera frugiperda J.E. Smith) in maize production areas of Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ 292:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2019.106804 Deshmukh S, Pavithra HB, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Shivanna BK, Maruthi MS, Mota-Sanchez D (2020) Field Efficacy of Insecticides for Management of Invasive Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Maize in India. Fla Entomol 103(2), 221-227. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.103.0211 Deshmukh SS, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Prasanna M, Sannathimmappa HG, Kavyashree BA, Sharath KN, Pradeep P, Patil KR (2021) Economic analysis of pesticide expenditure for managing the invasive fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) by maize farmers in Karnataka, India. Current Sci 121(11):1487. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v121/i11/1487-1492 Dileep KNT, Murali MK (2020) Bio-efficacy of selected insecticides against fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Noctuidae: Lepidoptera), in maize. J Entomol Zool Stud 8(4), 1257–1261. 31. Early R, González-Moreno P, Murphy ST, Day R (2018) Forecasting the global extent of invasion of the cereal pest Spodoptera frugiperda , the fall armyworm. NeoBiota 40:25–50. https://doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/10871/34861. Fanigliulo A, Sacchetti M (2008) Emamectin benzoate: new insecticide against Helicoverpa armigera. Commun Agric Appl Biol Sci. 73(3):651-3. FAO (2018). Integrated Management of the Fall Armyworm on Maize: A Guide for Farmer Field Schools in Africa; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 130p. Gao Z, Chen Y, He K, Guo J, Wang Z (2021) Sublethal Effects of the Microbial-Derived Insecticide Spinetoram on the Growth and Fecundity of the Fall Armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Econ Entomol 5;114(4):1582-1587. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toab123 Geng C, Watson GB, Sparks TC (2013) Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors as Spinosyn Targets for Insect Pest Management. In Ephraim Cohen (Eds). Advances in Insect Physiology, Academic Press, 44:101-210, ISBN 9780123943897. Goergen G, Kumar PL, Sankung SB, Togola A, Tamò M, Luthe DS (2016) First report of outbreaks of the fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J E Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new alien invasive pest in West and Central Africa. PLoS ONE 11 (10), e0165632. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165632 Guo JF, Zhao JZ, He KL, Zhang F, Wang ZY (2018) Potential invasion of the crop-devastating insect pest fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda to China. Plant Prot 44:1–10. Guo ZM, Deng XQ, Li J, Yuan MJ, Wan H (2020). Detection of insecticide sensitivity and target site mutations in field populations of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in four regions of Hubei, central China. Acta Entomol Sin 63:582–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2022.2050835 Hardke JT, Temple JH, Leonard BR, Jackson RE (2011). Laboratory toxicity and field efficacy of selected insecticides against fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Florida Ent 94: 272– 278. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.094.0221 Harrison RD, Thierfelder C, Baudron F, Chinwada P, Midega C, Scha U, Berg J, Van D (2019) Agro-ecological options for fall armyworm ( Spodoptera frugiperda JE Smith) management: Providing low-cost, smallholder friendly solutions to an invasive pest. J Environ Manage 243:318–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.011 Hasnain A, Zhang S, Chen Q, Xia L, Wu Y, Gong C, Liu X, Jian P, Zhang L, Wang X (2023) Effects of chlorantraniliprole on the life history traits of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Front Physiol 14:1155455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1155455. Hasnain A, Zhang S, Chen Q, Xia L, Wu Y, Gong C, Liu X, Jian P, Zhang L and Wang X (2023) Effects of chlorantraniliprole on the life history traits of fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Front Physiol 30;14:1155455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1155455 Hercus MJ, Loeschcke V, Rattan SI (2003) Lifespan extension of Drosophila melanogaster through hormesis by repeated mild heat stress. Biogerontol 4,149–156. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024197806855. Herlinda S, Simbolon IMP, Hasbi, Suwandi S, Suparman (2022) Host Plant Species Of The New Invasive Pest, Fall Armyworm (Spodoptera Frugiperda) In South Sumatra. In Sriwijaya Conference on Sustainable Environment, Agriculture and Farming System 29 th September, 2021, Palembang, Indonesia. IOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci. 995 (2022) 012034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/995/1/012034 Hruska AJ (2019) Fall armyworm ( Spodoptera frugiperda ) management by smallholders CAB Rev 14 (043):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR201914043 Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC, 2024). Mode of action Classification Scheme. Version 11.1, January 2024 Jagdish J, Mishra S, Maknwar P (2019). Strategies for sustainable management of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith) in sorghum. Paper presentation in XIX International Plant Protection Congress IPPC 2019, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. www.ippc2019. icrisat.org. Kalajahi MJ, Ganbalani GN, Kazemi MH, Shojai M, Imani S (2014) Investigation of sex ratio and adult longevity of Habrobracon hebetor Say in relation to some conventional and biorational insecticides, Archives Phytopathol Plant Prot 47:7, 852 856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03235408.2013.823714 Kulye M, Mehlhorn S, Boaventura D, Godley N, Venkatesh SK, Rudrappa T, Charan T, Rathi D, Nauen R (2021) Baseline Susceptibility of Spodoptera frugiperda Populations Collected in India towards Different Chemical Classes of Insecticides. Insects. 23;12(8):758. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080758 Kumela TJ, Simiyu B, Sisay P, Likhayo E, Mendesil L, Gohole, Tefera T (2019) Farmers’ knowledge, perceptions, and management practices of the new invasive pest, fall armyworm ( Spodoptera frugiperda ) in Ethiopia and Kenya. Int. J. Pest Manag . 65:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2017.1423129 La Rossa R, Kahn N (2003) Dos programas de computadora para confeccionar tables de vida de fertilidad y calcular parametros biologicos y demograficos en afidos (Homoptera: Aphidoidae). R.I.A., 32:127-142. Lee GS, Seo BY, Lee J, Kim HJ, Song JH, Lee WH (2020) First report of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new migratory pest in Korea. Korean J Appl Entomol 59:73–78. Li X, Jiang H, Wu J, Zheng F, Xu K, Lin Y, Zhang Z, Xu H (2021) Drip application of chlorantraniliprole effectively controls invasive Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and its distribution in maize in China. Crop Prot 143:105474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105474 Liu ZK, Li XL, Tan XF, Yang MF, Idrees A, Liu JF (2022) Sublethal effects of emamectin benzoate on fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Agriculture 12:959. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12070959 Lu W, Liu Z, Fan X, Zhang X, Qiao X, Huang J (2022) Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor modulator insecticides act on diverse receptor subtypes with distinct subunit compositions. PLoS Genet. 19;18(1):e1009920. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1009920 Luginbill, P (1928) The Fall Armyworm. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA. Lv H, Ling S, Guo Z, Zheng C, Ma H, Li J, Ma K (2023) Effects of lufenuron treatments on the growth and development of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 263:109499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpc.2022.109499 Maia De AHN, Luiz AJB, Campanhola C (2000) Statistical inference on associated fertility life table parameters using Jackknife technique: computational aspects. J Econ Entomol 93:511-518. https://doi.org/10.1603/0022-0493-93.2.511 Margus A, Piiroinen S, Lehmann P (2019) Sublethal Pyrethroid Insecticide Exposure Carries Positive Fitness Effects Over Generations in a Pest Insect Sci Rep, 11320. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47473-1 Masaki T, Yasokawa N, Tohnishi, M, Nishimatsu T, Tsubata K, Inoue K, Motoba K, Hirooka T (2006) Flubendiamide, a Novel Ca 2+ channel modulator, reveals evidence for functional cooperation between Ca 2+ pumps and Ca 2+ release. Molecular Pharmacol 69(5):1733-1739. https://doi.org/10.1124/mol.105.020339 Montezano DG, Specht A, Sosa-Gómez, DR, Roque-Specht VF, Malaquias JV, Paula-Moraes SV, Peterson JA, Hunt TE (2019) Biotic potential and reproductive parameters of Spodoptera frugiperda (J. E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Agric Sci 11, 240–252. Nagoshi RN, Htain NN, Boughton D, Zhang L, Xiao Y, Nagoshi BY, Mota-Sanchez D (2020). Southeastern Asia fall armyworms are closely related to populations in Africa and India, consistent with common origin and recent migration. Sci Rep 29;10(1):1421. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58249-3 Navasero, MV, Navasero MM, Burgonio GAS, Ardez KP, Ebuenga MD, Beltran MJB, Bato MB, Gonzales PG, Magsino, GL, Caoili BL (2019) Detection of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) using larval morphological characters, and observations on its current local distribution in the Philippines. Philipp Entomol 33:171–184. Nguyen DT, Chen Y, Herron GA (2021) Preliminary characterisation of known pesticide resistance alleles in Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in its invasive Australian range. Austral Entomol 60:782–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/aen.12570 Odhiambo D, Ondasi S (2020) Identification of Male and Female pupae of Spodoptera frugiperda at icipe, Thomas Odhiambo Campus. Full text on ResearchGate. Padovez EOF, Hideo KR, Omoto C, Sartori GA (2022) Fitness costs associated with chlorantraniliprole resistance in Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) strains with different genetic backgrounds. Pest Manag Sci. 78(3):1279-1286. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6746 . Phani KK, Mohan VK, Kamakshi N, Dakshina MK, Mohan RK (2021) Field efficacy of selected insecticides against invasive pest, fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E.Smith) on maize crop The Pharma Innova J 2021; 10(10): 884-889. Piiroinen S, Lyytinen A, Lindström L (2013) Stress for invasion success? Temperature stress of preceding generations modifies the response to insecticide stress in an invasive pest insect. Evol Appl 6:313–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12001 Pinto JRL, Torres AF, Truzi CC, Vieira NF, Vacari AM, De Bortoli SA (2019) Artificial Corn-Based Diet for Rearing Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Insect Sci 1;19(4):2. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iez052 R Development Core Team (2023) R: a language and environment for statistical computing . Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. URL www.r-project.org. Rane R, Walsh TK, Lenancker P, Gock A, Dao TH (2022) Complex multiple introductions drive fall armyworm invasions into Asia and Australia. bioRxiv 06.11.495773. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.11.495773 Saber M, Parsaeyan E, Vojoudi S, Bagheri M, Mehrvar A, Kamita SG (2013). Acute toxicity and sublethal effects of methoxyfenozide and thiodicarb on survival, development and reproduction of Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Crop Prot 43:14-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.09.011 Sartiami D, Dadang, Harahap IS, Kusumah YM, Anwar R (2020) First record of fall armyworm ( Spodoptera frugiperda ) in Indonesia and its occurrence in three provinces. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ Sci 468 p012021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/468/1/012021 Sharanabasappa, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Asokan R, Mahadeva Swamy HM, Maruthi MS, Pavithra HB et al (2018) First report of the fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E.Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), an alien invasive pest on maize in India. Pest Manag Horticul Ecosyst 24:23–29. Shareef SM, Madhumathi T, Swathi M, Patibanda AK (2022) Toxicity of Some Insecticides to The Fall Army Worm Spodoptera frugiperda . Ind J Entomol 84(3):680–682. https://doi.org/10.55446/IJE.2021.283 Siddiqui JA, Fan R, Naz H, Bamisile BS, Hafeez M, Ghani MI, Wei Y, Xu Y, Chen X (2023) Insights into insecticide-resistance mechanisms in invasive species: Challenges and control strategies. Front Physiol. 9;13:1112278. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.1112278 Sileshi A, Negeri M, Selvaraj T, Abera A (2022) Determination of most effective insecticides against maize fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda in South Western Ethiopia, Cogent Food & Agriculture, 8:1, 2079210, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2022.2079210 Sisay B, Tefera T, Wakgari M, Ayalew G, Mendesil E (2019) The Efficacy of Selected Synthetic Insecticides and Botanicals against Fall Armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda , in Maize. Insects. 1;10(2):45. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10020045 Suby SB, Soujanya LP, Yadava P, Patil J, Subaharan K, Shyam Prasad G, Srinivasa Babu K, Jat SL, Yathish KR, Vadassery J, Kalia VK, Bakthavatsalam N, Shekhar JC, Rakshit S (2020) Invasion of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) in India: nature, distribution, management and potential impact. Current Science 119(1): 44-51. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v119/i1/44-51 Tay WT, Rane RV, James W, Gordon KHJ, Downes S, Kim J, Kuniata L, Walsh TK (2022) Resistance Bioassays and Allele Characterization Inform Analysis of Spodoptera frugiperda (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Introduction Pathways in Asia and Australia. J Econ Entomol 14;115(6):1790-1805. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toac151 Teather K, Jardine C, Gormley K (2005) Behavioral and sex ratio modification of Japanese medaka ( Oryzias latipes ) in response to environmentally relevant mixtures of three pesticides. Environ Toxicol 20(1):110-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.20084 Timilsena BP, Niassy S, Kimathi E, Abdel-Rahman EM, Seidl-Adams I, Wamalwa M, Tonnang HEZ, Ekesi S, Hughes DP, Rajotte EG, Subramanian S (2022) Potential distribution of fall armyworm in Africa and beyond, considering climate change and irrigation patterns. Sci Rep 12:539. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04369-3 Wilson K, Hardy ICW (2002) Statistical analysis of sex ratios: an introduction. In: Hardy ICW (ed) Sex ratios: concepts and research methods. Cambridge University Press, New York, Cambridge, 48–92 pp. World Health Organization. Cyhalothrin, Environmental Health Criteria, 99; Geneva, Switzerland, 1990 Xu C, Zhang Z, Cui K, Zhao Y, Han J, Liu F (2016) Effects of Sublethal Concentrations of Cyantraniliprole on the Development, Fecundity and Nutritional Physiology of the Black Cutworm Agrotis ipsilon (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). PLoS ONE 11(6): e0156555. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156555 Ye H, Li YP, Feng, D, Li CL (2022) Construction of prevention and control barriers for Spodoptera frugiperda in the border areas of Yunnan Province. J Yunnan Univ 44:1054–1061. Yin XH, Wu QJ, Li XF, Zhang YJ, Xu BY (2009) Demographic changes in multigeneration Plutella xylostella (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) after exposure to sublethal concentrations of spinosad. J Econ ntomol 102:357–365. https://doi.org/10.1603/029.102.0146 Zhang L, Liu B, Zheng W, Liu C, Zhang D, Zhao S, Li Z, Xu P, Wilson K, Withers A, Jones CM, Smith JA, Chipabika G, Kachigamba DL, Nam K, d'Alençon E, Liu B, Liang X, Jin M, Wu C, Chakrabarty S, Yang X, Jiang Y, Liu J, Liu X, Quan W, Wang G, Fan W, Qian W, Wu K, Xiao Y (2020). Genetic structure and insecticide resistance characteristics of fall armyworm populations invading China. Mol Ecol Resour. 20(6):1682-1696. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13219 Zhao YX, Huang JM, Ni H, Guo D, Yang FX, Wang X, Wu SF, Gao CF (2020) Susceptibility of fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E.Smmith), to eight insecticides in China, with special reference to lambda-cyhalothrin. Pestic Biochem Physiol 168:104623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2020.104623 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4260751","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":291711647,"identity":"26c8c353-fe3e-48d4-901a-e5c36261eab5","order_by":0,"name":"Fazil Hasan","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Noida International University","correspondingAuthor":true,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Fazil","middleName":"","lastName":"Hasan","suffix":""},{"id":291711648,"identity":"bc963ea3-3d50-47b8-b41d-d620ae729d75","order_by":1,"name":"Kahkashan Parveen","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Saud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kahkashan","middleName":"","lastName":"Parveen","suffix":""},{"id":291711649,"identity":"bfd5bba3-7645-4114-9892-edefbdbc6ea0","order_by":2,"name":"Najat A. Bukhari","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"King Saud University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Najat","middleName":"A.","lastName":"Bukhari","suffix":""},{"id":291711650,"identity":"ac31d7f7-761d-4991-893b-c8caaada2787","order_by":3,"name":"Mukesh Kumar Dhillon","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Mukesh","middleName":"Kumar","lastName":"Dhillon","suffix":""},{"id":291711651,"identity":"20b3da13-3352-4dac-a2fe-e717a645d688","order_by":4,"name":"Archana Singh","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Noida International University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Archana","middleName":"","lastName":"Singh","suffix":""},{"id":291711652,"identity":"bd921a51-d10d-437d-8458-8c7aad95342e","order_by":5,"name":"Rupali Gill","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Chitkara University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rupali","middleName":"","lastName":"Gill","suffix":""},{"id":291711653,"identity":"9e95d0b5-d567-4bd4-a095-b3b43d42d52d","order_by":6,"name":"Rajan Verma","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Chitkara University","correspondingAuthor":false,"submittingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Rajan","middleName":"","lastName":"Verma","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-04-13 07:14:19","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":54861710,"identity":"62d61ed5-9e2e-4249-93e8-1bf1e8e9bc3d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-04-17 19:55:58","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":282830,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSex ratio (♀♀ / (♀♀ + ♂♂)) of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003eunder the influence of Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides. Bars (means±SE) designated with different letters are significantly different (P\u0026lt;0.05) by Tukey's HSD.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4260751/v1/4c9f60c24e3f11c3810dcec8.jpeg"},{"id":64688779,"identity":"6603092c-50bc-4334-b2dc-4cca8c3aa743","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-09-17 15:34:47","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1400776,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4260751/v1/ea9f4359-7562-4866-93c0-b1a255a5bcdb.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Ecotoxicological Impact of Ad-Hoc Approved Synthetic Insecticides on the Biological Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)","fulltext":[{"header":"Key message","content":"\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eSeven ad-hoc approved synthetic toxicants by CIBRC, Government of India were studied against \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eAmong the tested toxicants, spinetoram exhibited the highest corrected mortality rate.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eLife indices parameters\u0026nbsp;were significantly diminished in the spinetoram treatment.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eMean generation time, corrected generation time, and doubling time\u0026nbsp;were all extended in\u0026nbsp;spinetoram.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eExcept for thiodicarb, all tested toxicants significantly reduced the proportion of female.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e"},{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe fall armyworm (FAW), \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), is an invasive and highly destructive pest that attacks a wide range of plants. It is known to infest 80 species of plants across a total of 14 plant families (FAO \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Herlinda et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The fall armyworm is indigenous to Neotropical areas of Central and South America (Luginbill \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1928\u003c/span\u003e) and is acknowledged as a primary pest species, particularly in maize cultivation (Kumela et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). This pest exhibits high migratory behavior and possesses a high fecundity rate. Its larvae are polyphagous, known for voracious feeding habits, and do not undergo diapause (Suby et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). These traits collectively contribute to its reputation as one of the most destructive insect pests of crops (Sharanabasappa et al. 2018). In India, the fall armyworm was first documented on maize crops in May 2018 (Sharanabasappa et al. 2018). Subsequently, it has disseminated to various maize-growing states throughout the country (Mahadevaswamy et al. 2018). Presently, the fall armyworm has been extensively distributed across more than 80 countries spanning the Americas (Luginbill \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1928\u003c/span\u003e), Africa (Goergen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e), Europe (Early et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), Asia (Guo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e, Nagoshi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), Indonesia (Sartiami et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) and Australia (Maino et al. 2021). The distribution range of this pest continues to expand, and its pest status is anticipated to intensify further as a consequence of climate change (Timilsena et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This widespread distribution poses varying degrees of threat to local corn planting industries (FAO \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Montezano et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Lee et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ye et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR77\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the fall armyworm (FAW) has caused maize yield losses totaling up to 13\u0026nbsp;million US dollars in 12 African countries (Harrison et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). In Kenya alone, the annual loss attributable to this pest amounts to 1\u0026nbsp;million tons (De Groote et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Considering the significant economic impact caused by this pest, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has classified the fall armyworm as a food security threat in the African continent. Similarly, preliminary reports indicate that since its introduction in India, the fall armyworm has been linked to yield losses ranging from 33–36%, which has significantly jeopardized India's food security (Jagdish et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Aruna et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The fall armyworm heavily relies on maize and rice, which are staple food crops in India. This emphasizes the critical importance of prioritizing the development and implementation of effective control measures for combating the fall armyworm. Moreover, synthetic insecticides have remained pivotal in programs aimed at controlling fall armyworm, driven by concerns surrounding food security and global economic implications. In response to these critical food security challenges, the Central Insecticides Board and Registration Committee (CIBRC), Government of India has initiated measures to combat the fall armyworm threat by approving seven ad-hoc synthetic insecticides for immediate control. Among these seven insecticides, four are single formulation products, while three are combination formulation products. These insecticides belong to a diverse range of chemical classes, including diamides, avermectins, spinosyns, carbamates, synthetic pyrethroid type-II, and benzoylphenylureas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to the Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC) mode of action classification scheme (IRAC 2024), these insecticides have demonstrated adverse effects on the primary target sites of action, including nerve action, nerve + muscle action, and growth regulation. Neurotoxic insecticides like\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003espinetoram act as nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) allosteric modulators, which is effective on all life stages of insects (Adom and Adams 2020). Thiodicarb acts by inhibiting acetylcholinesterase (AChE) activity and used as ovicidal insecticide against various lepidopteran pests including \u003cem\u003eHelicoverpa armigera\u003c/em\u003e (Hubner) (Saber et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). Diamide insecticides such as chlorantraniliprole exert their effects on ryanodine receptors (RyR), disrupting the release of calcium. This disruption leads to muscle shrinkage, which in turn causes feeding cessation, muscle paralysis and death (Masaki et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, Emamectin benzoate's mode of action involves its ability to penetrate leaf tissues via translaminar activity. Once inside insects, it acts by disrupting muscle contraction, resulting in a continual influx of chloride ions at the Gamma-Aminobutyric Acid (GABA) and H-Glutamate receptor sites (Fanigliulo and Sacchetti \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). This mechanism ultimately leads to paralysis and death of the targeted pests. Lambda-cyhalothrin exerts its effect on the nervous system of insects by disrupting the gating mechanism of sodium channels, which are essential for the generation and transmission of nerve impulses (WHO 1990). Furthermore, both Lufenuron and Novaluron acts as insect growth regulators (IGRs) by inhibiting the biosynthesis of chitin, a crucial component of the exoskeleton of insects (Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). This disruption in chitin production hinders the normal growth and development of insect larvae, ultimately leading to their inability to molt and mature properly.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe availability of a diverse array of insecticidal compounds with varying modes of action is crucial for establishing sustainable integrated pest management programs to combat the threats posed by this invasive and destructive species. In the present study, synthetic insecticides based on ad-hoc approval were selected as they have not yet been certified for use against fall armyworm in Indian agro-climatic conditions. Therefore, the aim of this investigation was to evaluate and monitor the efficacy of all seven ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides using life table response experiments (LTREs). LTREs have been extensively employed to evaluate the impact of pesticides on invasive species, utilizing both direct and indirect toxicity assessments (Hardke et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e; Belay et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). The existing body of literature concerning the efficacy of ad-hoc approved insecticides on Fall Armyworm (FAW) is notably limited, with Dileep and Murali (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). However, their study primarily centered on assessing the bio-efficacy of these insecticides. Unfortunately, this narrow focus leaves significant gaps in our understanding, particularly regarding the potential impacts of these chemicals on various critical parameters such as development, fecundity, reproductive performance, life indices, and sex ratio of FAW. Indeed, establishing the baseline susceptibility of ad-hoc insecticides for FAW necessitates a comprehensive assessment of various parameters. This includes evaluating both acute and sub-lethal ecotoxicity to understand their implications on population growth of FAW. By conducting such evaluations, we can better understand the potential effects of these insecticides on population growth of FAW. Furthermore, this research can aid in minimizing the reliance on synthetic chemicals by identifying and recommending the most effective insecticides from the ad-hoc approved list. Therefore, it is crucial to prioritize studies that assess the acute and sub-lethal ecotoxicity of ad-hoc approved insecticides on FAW to inform evidence-based decision-making in pest management strategies. Certainly, the outcomes of this study will establish the baseline susceptibility of ad-hoc approved insecticides against FAW. These data will aid in predicting resistance development early, enabling proactive pest control strategies to effectively manage this pest.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e "},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eInsect Origin and Culture maintenance\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLarvae of undetermined age and instars of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were collected from the fodder farm planted with maize at Chaudhary Charan Singh Haryana Agricultural University (CCS – HAU) in Hisar, India, located at coordinates 29.1492°N, 75.7217°E, and an altitude of 215 meters above sea level. This collection took place in May, 2021. The randomly collected larval culture were brought to the insectary of Noida International University, Greater Noida. These larvae were then raised in a controlled laboratory environment with conditions set at 27 ± 1°C (temperature), 65 ± 5% relative humidity (RH), and a 12:12 (Light: Dark) photoperiod. The rearing process utilized an artificial corn-based diet, as synthesized by Pinto et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Upon reaching the third instar stage, the larvae were individually released into six-well tissue culture plates filled with artificial diet. This approach was employed to mitigate the risk of cannibalism among the larvae. After the larvae underwent pupation, they were collected and transferred into adult cages equipped with a honey solution to support and facilitate smooth oviposition. An oviposition cage, housing 10-day-old potted maize plants of the BML 6 variety, was utilized as a preferred substrate for ovipositing female. Daily observations were conducted to monitor oviposition activities, and egg masses deposited by female moths on leaves were periodically collected. Subsequently, these collected egg masses underwent surface disinfection by immersion in a 10% formaldehyde solution for 15 minutes. After surface disinfection, the eggs were rinsed with distilled water and subsequently dried on filter paper. Following this process, the disinfested egg batches were carefully transferred onto waxed paper and placed into clean glass containers with a capacity of 1000 ml. The progeny of the F1 generation was sustained without exposure to selection pressure, specifically avoiding insecticide exposure. This maintenance occurred under precisely controlled environmental conditions as mentioned above throughout all stages of development. This particular approach ensured the controlled laboratory conditions for the mass culture of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, allowing its utilization in various experiments as required.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePreparation of insecticides concentration\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeven insecticides, namely Chlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC, Emamectin benzoate 5% SG, Spinetoram 11.7% w/w SC, Thiodicarb 75% WP, Chlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC, Emamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG, and Novaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC, were ad-hoc approved for use against \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. These insecticides were procured through pesticide dealers representing their respective firms, as summarized in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e. These insecticides were utilized in the bioassay at concentrations within a minimum range of their recommended field doses, as follows: Chlorantraniliprole (0.00148 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), Emamectin benzoate (0.00002 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), Spinetoram (0.0007 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), Thiodicarb (0.1125ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), Chlorantraniliprole + Lambda-cyhalothrin (0.00097 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron (0.0032 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e), and Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate (0.0011 ml a.i. liter\u003csup\u003e− 1\u003c/sup\u003e). The minimum recommended field doses of the insecticides were accounted for, following the guidelines outlined in the Major Use of Pesticides (MUP-1.06.2023) from CIB \u0026amp; RC, DPPQS in Faridabad, India (Anon 2023). Each tested toxicant was individually diluted by gradually introducing the specific formulation into one liter of distilled water, with continuous stirring for approximately 20 minutes at room temperature. Deionized water was consistently used as the untreated control in all experimental set up.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAd-hoc approved synthetic insecticides tested on Invasive \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e on Maize with their respective mode of action of each chemical as per the classification system of Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC), and recommended dose rates to control this species in India.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eActive ingredient\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrade name\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePesticide Company\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChemical class/sub-class\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRecommended dosage* in dilution water/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMode of action\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIRAC MoA Class\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCoragen®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFMC Corporation Ltd.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiamide/Anthranilic diamide\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40 gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRyanodine receptors (RyR) modulator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% SG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEGAO®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChloride\u0026nbsp;channel activator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAvermectins/Macrocyclic lactone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e200 gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChloride\u0026nbsp;channel activator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinetoram 11.7% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKonatsu®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIFFCO-MC Crop Science Private Limited.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinosyn/ Macrocyclic lactone\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30 gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR) allosteric modulator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThiodicarb 75% WP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLarvin®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBayer Crop Science Ltd. India\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCarbamate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e750 ml in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCholinesterase enzyme inhibitor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmpligo®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSyngenta Pvt. Ltd. India\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnthranilic diamide + Synthetic Pyrethroid type - II\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e35 (23.42 + 11.58) gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRyanodine receptors (RyR) modulator + Sodium channel modulator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28 + 3A\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEvicent®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSyngenta Pvt. Ltd. India.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAvermectins + Benzoylphenylureas\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36 gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChloride\u0026nbsp;channel activator + Chitin Synthesis Inhibitor\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6 + 15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNovaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNeuken®\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMaharashtra Bio Fertilizers India Pvt. Ltd.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBenzoylphenylureas + Avermectins\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e92.25 (78.75 + 13.5) gm in 500L/hac\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChitin Synthesis Inhibitor + Chloride\u0026nbsp;channel activator\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15 + 6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003e*Recommended dosage as per Government of India, Central Insecticide Board \u0026amp; Registration Committee, Faridabad (Haryana).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"7\"\u003eAbbreviations used: SC – Suspension Concentrate; SG – Water Soluble Granule; WP – Wettable Powder; ZC – Mixture of Suspension Concentrate (SC) + Capsule Suspension (CS); WG – Wettable Granule.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eDiet overlay method\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eA bioassay was conducted utilizing a diet assimilation assay, following the IRAC test method number 20 (Annon \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), with minor adaptations. Third instars of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were selected for the bioassay due to their heightened sensitivity to both biotic and abiotic stresses, making them more susceptible to insecticides when compared to later instars. Additionally, these instars were chosen for their ease of rearing in experimental settings as well as cost effective to control under actual cultivation conditions. Third instar larvae of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were placed individually onto semi-synthetic diet (@ 1ml) within each well of insect bioassay trays (model no LI-IB-01 and 12.5cm (h) x 8cm (w) x 2.5cm (h)). The surface of the artificial diet in bioassay tray is applied with 200 µl of recommended dose of each tested Ad-hoc approved insecticide. The control treatment involved using an artificial diet supplemented with distilled water. The bioassay trays were rotated to ensure an even distribution of the solution over the surface of the artificial diet, and then they were allowed to dry for ~ 1 hour. Following the drying process, a third instar larva was introduced into each well and covered with a perforated plastic lid. The bioassay trays were then placed in a Biological Oxygen Demand incubator (BOD) that was adjusted to maintain the same environmental conditions as described earlier. This setup allowed for a 24-hour observation period to assess the acute toxicity of tested toxicants as follows.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAcute toxicity trials on percent survival of\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach treatment was replicated five times, and each replication comprised 50 freshly molted third instar larvae, resulting in a cohort of 250 individuals. The experimental design followed a Complete Randomized Block Design (CRBD). The method of exposing the insects to treated and untreated surfaces remained consistent with the previously described diet overlay bioassay. Mortality of third instar larvae was assessed 24 h after insecticide exposure. Larvae were deemed deceased if they exhibited no response when touched with a brush or displayed severe intoxication symptoms such as lethargic movement, cessation of feeding, and intermittent molting. Deceased larvae were removed, and surviving individuals were transferred to six-well tissue culture plates containing artificial diet for continued development. The rearing method for the surviving individuals remained consistent with the procedures described under the sub-heading “Insect Origin and Culture Maintenance”. Once the adults in both the treated and untreated groups emerged, they were allowed to oviposit. Upon completion of the oviposition process, the acute toxicity was determined using the following equation:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e = 100%−(100%−\u003cem\u003eCM\u003c/em\u003e) × \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhere:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eE\u003c/em\u003e = toxicity coefficient;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eCM\u003c/em\u003e = mortality (%) (Abbott, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1925\u003c/span\u003e);\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e = mean numbers of eggs laid/female/day in treated group: average numbers of eggs laid/female/day in untreated group (Boller et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eIndirect toxicity trials using F\u003c/b\u003e \u003csub\u003e \u003cb\u003e1\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/sub\u003e \u003cb\u003egeneration\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLarval, pupal and total immature development\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFreshly oviposited eggs from treated and untreated aforementioned direct exposure experiments were transferred in Petri dishes (9.0×2.0 cm) until they hatched. A filter paper was carefully positioned at the bottom of each Petri dish to provide a stable surface, and controlled humidity levels were maintained by adding a precise amount of water as needed. This ensured that the humidity remained consistently within the optimal range of 60–70% RH. Each insecticidal treatment, along with the control, underwent counting of ten eggs in ten replications, constituting a cohort totaling 100 eggs. Regular inspections were conducted at 8-hour intervals to carefully observe the eggs, noting the number of larvae that successfully hatched. The first instar larvae were transferred from the glass Petri dishes to individual 30 mL plastic cups (measuring 4 × 4 × 4.5 cm), each equipped with small ventilation holes in the cap to ensure proper airflow. These plastic cups, pre-loaded with artificial diet for the developing instars, were introduced into a Biological Oxygen Demand incubator (BOD) within the laboratory calibrated to maintain optimal environmental conditions, as described above, for the development of immature stages. To determine the larval instars, the number of exuviae shed during molting was counted whenever observed. In addition, both deceased and living individuals were documented, with dead larvae promptly discarded. When larvae were reaching the third instar stage, each larva was carefully placed into individual compartments of six-well tissue culture plates containing artificial diet. This precautionary measure was taken to reduce the potential risk of cannibalism among the larvae. Following the pupation, the pupae were collected and relocated into adult cages furnished with a honey solution to aid and facilitate the process of oviposition. The observation of the development time for different developing stages was carried out for each toxicant treatment and the control. This experimental procedure was repeated ten times for robust analysis and consistency.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eBiological performance and adult longevity\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom the aforementioned experiments, newly emerged males and females were sexed, and one pair was transferred in an oviposition cage (12 × 9 cm), forming a group of 5 couples. This setup was repeated five times for both the treated and control experiments. The adult insects were supplied with oviposition substrate, which consisted of 10-day-old potted maize plants of the BML 6 variety. Daily monitoring encompassed pre-mating, pre-oviposition, oviposition, post-oviposition, and the longevity of both female and male adults. The eggs laid in this experiment were employed to examine the life indices of females, as outlined below.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLife indices of female\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eUtilizing Birch's (1948) methodology, we generated data on female survivorship at age x (\u003cem\u003el\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), potential fecundity (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ef\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), and natality rate (\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) based on our observations. These recorded data served as the basis for computing vital biological parameters, such as intrinsic rate of increase (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) (Ʃ\u003cem\u003el\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e.\u003cem\u003ee\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e− r.x\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e = 1), net reproductive rate (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e=\u003c/em\u003e Ʃ\u003cem\u003el\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e. \u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), finite rate of increase (\u003cem\u003eλ = e\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e), mean generation time (\u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e = \u003cem\u003eln R\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003e/r\u003c/em\u003e), corrected generation time (\u003cem\u003eτ = ln R\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003cem\u003e/r\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) and the doubling time (\u003cem\u003eDT = ln 2/r\u003c/em\u003e). This experimental configuration underwent replication five times for both the treated and untreated control experiments, ensuring robustness and reliability in the obtained results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAnalysis of sex ratio\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe identification of male and female pupae of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e relied upon characteristics such as genital and anal openings on the terminal segments, along with the specific morphology of the terminal segments, following the descriptions provided by Odhiambo and Ondasi in 2020. The estimation of sex ratio followed the methodology proposed by Wilson and Hardy (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR74\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2002\u003c/span\u003e). In this analysis, the number of female progenies was designated as the response variable, which was then divided by the total progeny count per cohort. The estimates were subjected to analysis using the following formula: -\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSex ratio = ♀♀ / (♀♀ + ♂♂)\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eStatistical analysis\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBefore proceeding with the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), Bartlett's test was employed to evaluate the homogeneity of variances among the tested groups. This sequential analytical approach enhances the robustness and reliability of the statistical assessments, ensuring accurate interpretation of the results. The comparison of female and male longevity as well as sex ratio was conducted through the application of t-test for independent samples within the particular treatment groups. This statistical analysis was employed to discern any significant differences in the lifespan of females and males under the specified treatments. The Jackknife method based on the pseudo-values was employed to assess the significance of differences in life indices parameters (Maia De et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2000\u003c/span\u003e; La Rossa and Kahn \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e). Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference (HSD) post-hoc test aids in identifying specific differences between treatment groups following the initial analysis of variance (ANOVA). The statistical analysis was conducted using the R programming language, version 4.2.3. (R Development Core Team \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eAcute toxicity of insecticides on percent survival of\u003c/b\u003e \u003cb\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults of the present study (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e) reveals that all insecticidal treatments exhibited a statistically significant impact (P \u0026lt; 0.05) on per cent survival, per cent corrected mortality, fecundity (eggs/female/day) and per cent toxicity coefficient of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda.\u003c/em\u003e All tested insecticides significantly reduced the per cent survival of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e compared to control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 152.88; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Among the tested insecticidal treatments spinetoram greatly reduced the per cent survival of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e followed by chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorantraniliprole, novaluron + emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, emamectin benzoate and thiodicarb. Corrected mortality was significantly highest in spinetoram and it was lowest in thiodicarb treatment (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(6, 34)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 49.38; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Chlorantraniliprole and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin did not demonstrate any significant difference (P = NS) in per cent corrected mortality of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda.\u003c/em\u003e Similarly, there was no significant difference in the per cent corrected mortality among emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Fecundity of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e was also significantly reduced in spinetoram (2.93 eggs/female/day) as compared with other treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 519.54; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). The significantly highest value of toxicity coefficient observed in spinetoram (95.13%) indicates its lethality to \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e as compared to other treatments (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(6, 34)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 110.29; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMortality of 3rd instar of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides with toxicity coefficient (% E).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSurvival (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCM (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEggs/female/day\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eE (%)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.80 ± 1.01a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.23 ± 0.54a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e45.60 ± 0.74d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.17 ± 0.80b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e04.20 ± 0.90c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90.31 ± 0.31b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% SG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e53.60 ± 1.93c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e42.61 ± 2.07c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e05.03 ± 0.11c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.36 ± 0.71c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinetoram 11.7% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.20 ± 1.35e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e64.45 ± 1.45a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e02.93 ± 0.28d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e95.13 ± 0.43a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThiodicarb 75% WP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62.60 ± 1.01b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.75 ± 1.09d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e07.54 ± 0.27b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e76.11 ± 0.84d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.20 ± 0.48d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.17 ± 0.80b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e04.34 ± 0.79c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90.01 ± 1.99b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.40 ± 1.72c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43.89 ± 1.84c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e04.82 ± 0.22c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87.26 ± 0.64c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNovaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e52.00 ± 1.26c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.32 ± 1.73c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e04.60 ± 1.25c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87.94 ± 0.31c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(df = 7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e152.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e519.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(df = 6, 34)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e-\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e110.29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eNumber of individuals tested (n) = 250\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eCM = Corrected mortality using Abbott’s formula (Abbott, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1925\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eE = toxicity coefficient\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"5\"\u003eMeans followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P \u0026lt; 0.05) by Tukey's HSD\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eChronic toxicity of insecticides through F\u003c/b\u003e \u003csub\u003e \u003cb\u003e1\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/sub\u003e \u003cb\u003eprogeny\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eStage specific and total immature development\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) of the present study demonstrated that all tested insecticides significantly affected the eggs, larval and pupal duration of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (P \u0026lt; 0.05). The duration of hatching of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e eggs was significantly prolonged in spinetoram and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin treatment as compared other insecticidal treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 25.34; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Similarly, larval duration of all larval instar (L\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e – L\u003csub\u003e6\u003c/sub\u003e) was also significantly prolonged in spinetoram treatment as compared with other insecticidal treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 22.02*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e1st instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 33.45*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2nd instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 25.25*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e3rd instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 39.56*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e4th instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 12.69*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e5th instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 25.54*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e6th instar\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Interestingly, it was also observed that thiodicarb treatment and control did not show any significant difference in duration of eggs hatching and duration of all larval instars \u003cem\u003e(P = NS)\u003c/em\u003e. The pre-pupal and pupal duration of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were significantly extended in spinetoram treatment as compared to other treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 23.00*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003epre−pupa duration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e, \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 56.92*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003epupal duration\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Moreover, total immature development of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e was significantly prolonged in spinetoram treatment as compared to other treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 86.96; P \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003c/em\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c9\" colnum=\"9\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c10\" colnum=\"10\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c11\" colnum=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStage-specific and total immature development of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"11\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEggs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eI Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eII Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIII Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIV Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eV Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVI Instar\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-pupa\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePupa\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTID*\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.50 ± 0.131d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.06 ± 0.25e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.57 ± 0.10d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.61 ± 0.13e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.32 ± 0.03f\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.66 ± 0.13e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.31 ± 0.02f\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.39 ± 0.40e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e07.64 ± 0.12f\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29.07 ± 0.43e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.90 ± 0.20ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.85 ± 0.16b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.60 ± 0.17b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.15 ± 0.19b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.13 ± 0.17bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.40 ± 0.27ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.29 ± 0.17bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.18 ± 0.11ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e09.95 ± 0.18c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.49 ± 0.95b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% SG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.67 ± 0.19c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.89 ± 0.13cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.64 ± 0.13c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.20 ± 0.15d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.86 ± 0.10e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.23 ± 0.32c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.51 ± 0.60d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.61 ± 0.50c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e08.19 ± 0.13d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e34.82 ± 0.75d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinetoram 11.7% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.74 ± 0.31a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.66 ± 0.27a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.24 ± 0.15a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.78 ± 0.12a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.7 ± 0.19a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.06 ± 0.20a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.43 ± 0.25a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.39 ± 0.08a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.46 ± 0.28a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e51.49 ± 0.92a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThiodicarb 75% WP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.53 ± 0.16 d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.46 ± 0.12de\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.08 ± 0.14cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.92 ± 0.13de\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.64 ± 0.08ef\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.74 ± 0.13e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.39 ± 0.04d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.50 ± 0.51d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e07.91 ± 0.12b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31.21 ± 0.46e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.22 ± 0.23a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.88 ± 0.18b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.86 ± 0.19ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.29 ± 0.14ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.50 ± 0.17ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.93 ± 0.24a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.73 ± 0.18b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.28 ± 0.08ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.54 ± 0.20b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e47.25 ± 1.16b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.17 ± 0.29bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.23 ± 0.11bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.13 ± 0.17c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.42 ± 0.16cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.42 ± 0.16d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.46 ± 0.30cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.63 ± 0.07d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.76 ± 0.38c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e08.82 ± 0.16e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38.07 ± 0.89c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNovaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.07 ± 0.27bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.43 ± 0.77bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.85 ± 0.17b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.87 ± 0.99bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.68 ± 0.11cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.88 ± 0.36bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.98 ± 0.16cd\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.06 ± 0.12b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e09.32 ± 0.14d\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e40.47 ± 0.87c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(df = 7, 79)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e33.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e39.56\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.69\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25.54\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c9\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c10\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e56.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c11\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.97\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"11\"\u003eMeans followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P \u0026lt; 0.05) by Tukey's HSD\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"11\"\u003eTID* represents total immature development\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eBiological performance and adult longevity\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe results presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e show that insecticidal treatments had a significant impact on the reproductive performance and adult longevity of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (P \u0026lt; 0.05). The duration of pre-mating in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e adults was extended in those treated with spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin and novaluron + emamectin benzoate with no significant difference observed among these treatments (P = NS). However, when these treatments were compared with rest of the other treatments and the control, a significant difference was encountered (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 5.21; P \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003c/em\u003e. Similarly, the duration of pre-oviposition period did not differ significantly among chlorantraniliprole, spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, novaluron + emamectin benzoate and emamectin benzoate + lufenuron (P = NS). However, a significant difference in the pre-oviposition period was detected when these treatments were compared with the rest of the other treatments and the control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 6.83; P \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003c/em\u003e. The oviposition period of female \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e was significantly prolonged in thiodicarb and control; however, rest of the insecticidal treatments markedly reduced the oviposition period (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 12.88; P \u0026lt; 0.05)\u003c/em\u003e. Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the post-oviposition period when a comparison was made between the tested insecticide (P = NS). Furthermore, a significant difference was detected when a comparison of the post-oviposition period was made between the insecticidal treatment and the control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 4.84; P \u0026lt; 0.05).\u003c/em\u003e In present results (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e) it was noted that longevity of female did not exhibit a significant difference when compared between insecticidal treatments and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 0.973; P \u0026lt; 0.468*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eNS\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e). However, longevity of male was significantly affected by insecticidal treatments (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 6.23; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Results of the present study also showed that female lived significantly longer than the male in all the treated and control group (\u003cem\u003eStudent’s t-test\u003c/em\u003e = 5.95*\u003csup\u003eControl\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 27.71*\u003csup\u003echlorantraniliprole\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 11.46*\u003csup\u003eemamectin benzoate\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 21.63*\u003csup\u003espinetoram\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 8.11*\u003csup\u003ethiacloprid\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 17.73*\u003csup\u003echlorantraniliprole + lambda−cyhalothrin\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -13.00*\u003csup\u003eemamectin benzoate + lufenuron\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = 13,28*\u003csup\u003enovaluron + emamectin benzoate\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003edf = 8; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"char\" char=\".\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReproductive performance and adult longevity of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-mating (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePre-oviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOvipostion (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePost-oviposition (days)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFemale longevity (days)\u003csup\u003e¥\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMale longevity (days)\u003csup\u003e¥\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003et-values\u003csup\u003e¥\u003c/sup\u003e (\u003cem\u003edf = 8\u003c/em\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.64 ± 0.21b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.60 ± 0.14c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.63 ± 0.27a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.61 ± 0.22b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.48 ± 0.69aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.35 ± 0.85aB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.38 ± 0.48a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.52 ± 0.13a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.91 ± 0.51c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.32 ± 0.68a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.13 ± 0.21aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.12 ± 0.43bB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27.71\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% SG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.99 ± 0.87ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.92 ± 0.22b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.51 ± 0.17bc\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.87 ± 0.14a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.92 ± 0.32aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.52 ± 0.26bB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinetoram 11.7% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.47 ± 0.37a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.84 ± 0.40a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.57 ± 0.21c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.41 ± 0.57a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.29 ± 0.23aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.45 ± 0.20cB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThiodicarb 75% WP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.87 ± 0.14ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.80 ± 0.15b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.41 ± 0.32ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.75 ± 0.17a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.83 ± 0.54aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.77 ± 0.30bB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.45 ± 0.06a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.72 ± 0.04a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.72 ± 0.20c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.38 ± 0.07a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.27 ± 0.26aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.81 ± 0.25cB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.09 ± 0.97ab\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.24 ± 0.29a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.17 ± 0.93c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.02 ± 0.13a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.52 ± 0.27aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.41 ± 0.28bB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNovaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.37 ± 0.22a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.44 ± 0.18a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.06 ± 0.18c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.17 ± 0.13a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.04 ± 0.31aA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.43 ± 0.28bB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"char\" char=\".\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13.28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF (df = 7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.84\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.973\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP =\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.468\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\"\u003eMeans followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P \u0026lt; 0.05) by Tukey's HSD\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\"\u003e\u003csup\u003e¥\u003c/sup\u003eLongevity of female and male were compared by t-test for independent samples at respective treatments and means were separated by different capital alphabets (A/B) in rows are significantly different (P \u0026lt; 0.005).\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eLife indices of female\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe life indices parameters of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were found to be significantly influenced (P \u0026lt; 0.05) by the application of insecticides, as evidenced in the present study (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The potential fecundity (\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ef\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) was significantly reduced to 81.65, 82.54, 83.05, 85.18 and 90.50 females/female/generation when \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e was exposed to spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron and Emamectin benzoate treatment, respectively as compared with control and thiodicarb i.e. 233.08 and 123.51 females/female/generation, respectively (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 330.45; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Similarly, net reproductive rate (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), intrinsic rate of increase (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) and finite rate of increase (\u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e) were significantly reduced in all insecticidal treatments except thiodicarb and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 476.68*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eR0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 187.3*\u003c/em\u003e \u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003erm\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 181.73*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). In contrary to these parameters, the mean length of generation (\u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), corrected generation time (\u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e) and doubling time (DT) of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were significantly increased in all insecticidal treatments except thiodicarb and control (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 49.59*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eTc\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 418.46*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 608.62*\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003eP \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e) (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c7\" colnum=\"7\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c8\" colnum=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e\u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLife indices parameters of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e treated with Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e\u003ccolgroup cols=\"8\"\u003e\u003c/colgroup\u003e\u003cthead\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTreatments\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ef\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/thead\u003e\u003ctbody\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMean ± SE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eControl\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e233.08 ± 4.01a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.32 ± 0.97a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0987 ± 0.0001a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.103 ± 0.0003a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e60.12 ± 0.600c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e44.68 ± 0.07c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.02 ± 0.00c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 18.5% SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83.05 ± 0.24c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.35 ± 0.06c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0361 ± 0.0002c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.037 ± 0.0003c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97.90 ± 0.184a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.18 ± 0.04a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.22 ± 0.00a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% SG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e90.50 ± 2.33c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22.34 ± 1.58c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0355 ± 0.0009c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.036 ± 0.0010c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e93.27 ± 5.155a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e87.30 ± 2.02a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.57 ± 0.52a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSpinetoram 11.7% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e81.65 ± 0.72c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18.92 ± 0.26c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0358 ± 0.0002c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.036 ± 0.0002c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e96.58 ± 1.090a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.11 ± 0.10a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.36 ± 0.11a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThiodicarb 75% WP\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e123.51 ± 6.56b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e36.33 ± 2.10b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0663 ± 0.0011b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.068 ± 0.0012b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e72.99 ± 2.267b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e54.09 ± 0.69b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.46 ± 0.17b\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eChlorantraniliprole 9.3% + Lambda-cyhalothrin 4.6% ZC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.54 ± 0.23c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.18 ± 0.07c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0360 ± 0.0000c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.037 ± 0.0003c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e98.55 ± 0.315a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.03 ± 0.01a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.25 ± 0.01a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEmamectin benzoate 5% + Lufenuron 40% WG\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e85.18 ± 1.10c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20.11 ± 0.37c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0361 ± 0.0003c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.037 ± 0.0003c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e97.12 ± 0.915a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83.03 ± 0.44a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.19 ± 0.01a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNovaluron 5.25% + Emamectin benzoate 0.9% w/w SC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e83.49 ± 0.47c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.65 ± 0.22c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.0361 ± 0.0002c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.037 ± 0.0003c\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e98.23 ± 0.160a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e82.56 ± 0.26a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19.21 ± 0.03a\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eF (df = 7, 39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e330.45\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e476.68\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e187.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e181.73\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e49.59\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e418.46\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e608.62\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eP =\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c7\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c8\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tbody\u003e\u003ctfoot\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\"\u003eMeans followed by different letters in column are significantly different (P \u0026lt; 0.05) by Tukey's HSD\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003ctr\u003e\u003ctd colspan=\"8\"\u003eAbbreviations used: \u003cem\u003eP\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ef\u003c/em\u003e =\u003c/sub\u003e Potential fecundity; \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eo\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e = Net reproductive rate; \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e = Intrinsic rate of increase; \u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e \u003cb\u003e=\u003c/b\u003e Finite rate of increase; \u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003eC\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e = Mean length of generation; \u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e = Corrected generation time; \u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e = Doubling time.\u003c/td\u003e\u003c/tr\u003e\u003c/tfoot\u003e\u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eSex ratio\u003c/b\u003e \u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eResults of the present study (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) also demonstrated that proportion of females is greatly affected by the insecticidal application (GLM’s; \u003cem\u003eX\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e\u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sup\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 12.87; df = 7; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). All tested insecticides significantly reduced the proportion of female from the population of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e except thiodicarb (\u003cem\u003eF\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e(7,39)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e \u003cem\u003e= 134.85; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). Furthermore, the results of the t-test for independent samples confirm that the proportion of females is significantly lower than males in all insecticides, except thiodicarb (\u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -3.003*\u003csup\u003echlorantraniliprole\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -4.419*\u003csup\u003eemamectin benzoate\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -5.177*\u003csup\u003espinetoram\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -7.00*\u003csup\u003ethiacloprid\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -3.252*\u003csup\u003echlorantraniliprole + lambda−cyhalothrin\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -5.211*\u003csup\u003eemamectin benzoate + lufenuron\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003et-test\u003c/em\u003e = -3.331*\u003csup\u003enovaluron + emamectin benzoate\u003c/sup\u003e; \u003cem\u003edf = 8; P \u0026lt; 0.05\u003c/em\u003e). However, proportion of female is significantly higher than males in thiodicarb (\u003cem\u003eStudent’s t-test\u003c/em\u003e = 7.00; \u003cem\u003edf = 8; P \u0026lt; 0.005\u003c/em\u003e) and control (\u003cem\u003eStudent’s t-test\u003c/em\u003e = 14.26; \u003cem\u003edf = 8; P \u0026lt; 0.005\u003c/em\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe work demonstrated here elucidate the short-term and long-term effects of seven Ad-hoc approved insecticides (i.e., chlorantraniliprole, emamectin benzoate, spinetoram, thiodicarb, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate) through the laboratory bioassay on various biological traits of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda.\u003c/em\u003e These synthetic pesticides were recommended and Ad-hoc approved by CIBRC-DPPQS, Government of India, taking into account the national urgency associated with the destructive nature of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. The findings of the current laboratory bioassay can contribute to establishing baseline statistical data for regulating the population of this emerging pest. Additionally, it aids in enhancing the integrated pest management program designed to address the challenges posed by this introduced species. To the best of our knowledge, this study represents the first comprehensive scrutiny focusing on the ecotoxicity of all seven Ad-hoc approved synthetic insecticides collectively within a single research investigation. Furthermore, the outcomes of the current investigations clearly reveal that the application of tested insecticides, excluding thiodicarb, has detrimental effects on \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. These effects manifest as an elevated rate of mortality, prolonged immature development, compromised reproductive performance and life indices of females, diminished adult longevity, and altered sex ratios.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe deleterious effects of Ad-hoc based insecticides on \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e were already been investigated in various countries where this pest has already been invaded like West Africa (Hruska et al. 2019; Babendreier et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Ahissou et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), India (Kumar and Mohan, 2020; Deshmukh et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Deshmukh et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Kulye et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), China (Zhang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR79\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e); Southeast Asia (Boaventura et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Rane et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Australia (Nguyen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Tay et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) based on the data available from the America.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eMoreover, the results of the present study from acute toxicity trials indicate that all tested insecticides significantly reduced the survival percentage of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Furthermore, these insecticides demonstrated a noteworthy impact on fecundity and corrected mortality of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e when tested in the laboratory through diet overlay bioassays. In particular, among the tested insecticidal treatments, spinetoram exerted a significant impact on these parameters in acute toxicity trials followed by chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorantraniliprole, novaluron + emamectin benzoate, emamectin benzoate + lufenuron, emamectin benzoate. Similar results were previously reported by Sisay et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) in Ethiopia. Their study demonstrated that the highest mortality of fall armyworm was evident in spinetoram treatments, followed by chlorantraniliprole, spinosad, and lambda cyhalothrin (Sisay et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). The research conducted by Phani et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) reported comparable findings, emphasizing that chlorantraniliprole exhibits significant effectiveness against fall armyworm when compared to other tested insecticides. Importantly, this efficiency was attained without any apparent phytotoxic effects. Moreover, in the sub-lethal bioassay conducted by Abbas et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), spinetoram and emamectin benzoate exhibited the highest mortality and a notable reduction in the reproductive ability of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. However, in the current study, it was observed that thiodicarb treatment did not show a significant impact on various biological parameters when compared to other tested insecticides. This lack of significant impact could be attributed to the potential development of resistance against carbamate insecticides in the previously invaded population of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Similarly, resistance to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides has been observed in indigenous populations, particularly in Hubei, China, as elucidated by Guo et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, this resistance phenomenon has been detected at a low frequency within populations in Indonesia, as reported in the study conducted by Boaventura et al. in 2020.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, the present study elucidated that all tested insecticides exerted a significant influence on the eggs, larval, and pupal duration of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. The duration of all immature stages exhibited a considerable prolongation in the spinetoram and chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin treatments in comparison to other insecticidal treatments and the control. Additionally, noteworthy observations included the absence of any significant difference in the duration of overall immature developmental stages of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e when treated with thiodicarb, as compared to the control. The observed effects can potentially be attributed to the neurotoxic nature of specific insecticides, like spinetoram, that directly target nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR). This mode of action disrupts neural transmission, consequently leading to disturbances in the molting process among treated insects (Geng et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Lu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the delay in development could be attributed to the tendency of most insects to avoid feeding on insecticide-treated food, resulting in insufficient nutritional intake and ultimately leading to an extended developmental period (Andreazza et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Siddiqui et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Numerous investigations by different researchers have consistently reported detrimental effects of spinetoram (Gao et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Abbas et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), chlorantraniliprole (Li et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Padovez et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Husnain et al. 2023), emamectin benzoate (Liu et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Abbas et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Chang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), lambda cyhalothrin (Zhao et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR80\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Sileshi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), lufenuron (Lv et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), and novaluron (Shareef et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) on the developmental trajectory of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, aligning with the findings of the present study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003ePresent investigation revealed that the reproductive parameters, including pre-mating, pre-oviposition, and post-oviposition periods of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, exhibited prolongation in individuals subjected to treatments with spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, and novaluron + emamectin benzoate. Consistent with the current investigation, several other studies have indicated that exposure to lethal and/or sublethal doses of pesticides can disrupt crucial behavioral traits, including pre-oviposition, mating, and post-oviposition periods (Geng et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e; Li et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Husnain et al. 2023; Lv et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the longevity of adults was significantly impacted by the application of insecticides in present study. It was observed that spinetoram considerably reduced the longevity of male individuals, while the longevity of females appeared to be less affected by insecticidal treatments. The observed impact on longevity, differing between males and females in response to insecticidal treatments, may be explained by sex-specific stress effects, a phenomenon demonstrated in previous studies (Margus et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). It is suggested that females generally exhibit higher sensitivity to stress than males (Piiroinen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). These sex-specific differences in sensitivity could be attributed to factors such as sexual size dimorphism (Blanckenhorn, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e), sex-linked insecticidal resistance mechanisms (Brevik et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), or hormetic effects induced by distinct mechanisms in males and females (Hercus et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2003\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEstimating the essential demographic parameters like potential fecundity (\u003cem\u003ePf\u003c/em\u003e), net reproductive rate (\u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), intrinsic rate of increase (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), and finite rate of increase (\u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e), length of generation (\u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), corrected generation time (\u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e), and doubling time (\u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e) is crucial when assessing the effects of insecticides. Our investigation demonstrated a substantial impact of tested insecticides on these parameters of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Exposure to spinetoram, chlorantraniliprole + lambda-cyhalothrin, Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron, and Emamectin benzoate resulted in a significant reduction in \u003cem\u003ePf\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. In contrast, \u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e exhibited a notable increase in all insecticidal treatments, with thiodicarb and the control group being exceptions to this trend. Similarly, Han et al. (2012) observed a pronounced decline in fecundity in conjunction with reductions in the values of \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, and λ following the application of sublethal doses of chlorantraniliprole to \u003cem\u003ePlutella xylostella\u003c/em\u003e larvae. Moreover, Abbas et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) documented that spinetoram and emamectin benzoate prove to be effective insecticides, significantly diminishing the fecundity behavior of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e even at low and/or sublethal concentrations. In previous studies Xu et al. (2013) reported a reduction of \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, and λ in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e following the administration of sublethal doses of chlorantraniliprole. In our current investigation, we have observed that the application of thiodicarb did not influence the demographic parameters when compared to other tested insecticides. The vital life-indices parameters, such as \u003cem\u003ePf\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eR\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003e0\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e, and \u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e remained nearly unchanged in the thiodicarb-treated group compared to the control group. This can be understood in term of insecticide hormoligosis resulting in resurgence of pest and secondary pest outbreaks (Cohen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2006\u003c/span\u003e; Cutler, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eDue to hormoligosis, the heightened response of insects to the treated surface for oviposition leads to an increase in population rather than the expected reduction. Furthermore, according to Yin et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR78\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2009\u003c/span\u003e) population growth of \u003cem\u003eP. xylostella\u003c/em\u003e increased after an exposure to sublethal concentrations (LC\u003csub\u003e25\u003c/sub\u003e) of spinosad.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFurthermore, in the analysis of sex ratio, the insecticidal application had a significant impact on the proportion of females in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. The proportion of females was notably lower than males in all insecticides, ranging from 0.400 to 0.464 females, except for thiodicarb (0.613 females) and the control group (0.733 females). The observed alteration in sex ratio could potentially be attributed to the influence of insecticide pressure during the fertilization process and/or the target specificity of insecticides associated with a particular sex before the eclosion of adults from pupae (Idris and Grafius, 1993). Many more investigations have suggested the possibilities of sex ratio adjustment due to insecticides application in various arthropods (Teather et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Kalajahi et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). The production of males in insects is a pivotal factor influencing population growth and diminishing the intrinsic rate of increase. Therefore, the reduced number of female individuals resulting from the application of insecticides may be linked to lower population growth and ultimately less damage to the crop. This outcome appears to be consistent in the present study with the application of insecticides, except in the case of thiodicarb.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eOur comprehensive laboratory bio-assay, which assessed the relative ecotoxicity of Ad-hoc approved insecticides on population growth parameters, survival, and sex ratio, confirmed that the majority of the tested insecticides proved lethal to \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, particularly spinetoram. Contrary to this, among the seven tested insecticides, thiodicarb did not exhibit toxicity against \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, as indicated by parameters such as mortality rate, demography, longevity of adults, and sex ratio. The observed outcomes lead us to suspect that the tested population of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e may have developed resistance against thiodicarb, indicating a potential adaptive response to this specific insecticide. Moreover, since this insecticide is approved by the Government of India based on ad-hoc approval, farmers are likely to continue its use. There is a concern that the persistent use of this chemical may contribute to further resistance development in this pest. Consequently, there is a fear that, in the future, this pest could become more devastating in maize-growing states or regions in India. Therefore, further validation of these results is crucial and warrants evaluation in the field for confirmation. Based on the outcomes of our laboratory-based bioassay and with the prospect of future field assessments, if thiodicarb is further identified as ineffective or less effective against \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, it is advisable to consider the removal of this insecticide from the list of Ad-hoc approved insecticides by the Government of India. Certainly, this decision aligns with the necessity for a judicious and evidence-based approach, ensuring the maintenance of robust and effective pest control measures. Additionally, there is a critical need for ongoing research to investigate the potential development of resistance in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e to each of the Ad-hoc approved insecticides or those already registered against this pest, with systematic assessments conducted every three years. This proactive approach is essential for monitoring and addressing any evolving resistance patterns in a timely manner.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAuthor contributions\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFH, KP, NAB and MKD formulated and planned the research. FH and AS conducted the experiments, with FH analyzing the data. FH, RG, RV and MKD drafted the initial manuscript, while FH, MKD, and AS participated in its writing, review, and editing. All authors gave their approval for the final version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study was conducted under the sponsorship of Professor Kahkashan Parveen who received funding through the Researchers Supporting Project (RSP2024R229) at King Saud University, located in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAcknowledgments\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors express their sincere gratitude to the Department of Agriculture, Noida International University, Greater Noida, India, and the Division of Entomology, ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute, for furnishing the essential infrastructure for conducting this experimental work. Additionally, we extend our heartfelt thanks to CCS-HAU, Hisar, for generously providing the fodder farm for larval collection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConflict of interest\u003c/strong\u003e Authors declare that they have no competing interests relevant to the content of this article.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbbas A, Zhao CR, Arshad M, Han X, Iftikhar A, Hafeez F, Aslam A, Ullah F (2023). Sublethal effects of spinetoram and emamectin benzoate on key demographic parameters of fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) under laboratory conditions. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 30(34):82990-83003. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-023-28183-8 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbbott WS (1925) A method for computing the effectiveness of an insecticide. J Econ Entomol 18:265\u0026ndash;267.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhissou BR, Sawadogo WM, Sankara F, Brostaux Y, Bokonon-Ganta AH, Somda I, Verheggen FJ (2022) Annual dynamics of fall armyworm populations in West Africa and biology in different host plants. Scientific African 16: e01227. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01227\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAndreazza F, Oliveira EE, Martins GF (2021) Implications of Sublethal Insecticide Exposure and the Development of Resistance on Mosquito Physiology, Behavior, and Pathogen Transmission. Insects 8;12(10):917. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12100917 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAnnon (2021) Test Methods: Insecticide Resistance Action Commiee (IRAC). Available online: https://irac-online.org/methods/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAruna B, Bhaskar M, Bagade P, Rawal N (2019) Yield losses in maize (Zea mays) due to fall armyworm infestation and potential IoT-based interventions for its control. J Entomol Zool Stud 7 (5), 920-927.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBabendreier D, Koku Agboyi L, Beseh P, Osae M, Nboyine J, Ofori SEK, Frimpong JO, Attuquaye Clottey V, Kenis M (2020) The Efficacy of Alternative, Environmentally Friendly Plant Protection Measures for Control of Fall Armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera Frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, in Maize. Insects 11(4):240. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11040240\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBelay DK, Huckaba RM, Foster JE (2012) Susceptibility of the fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) at Santa Isabel, Puerto Rico, to different insecticides. Florida Ent., 95: 476\u0026ndash; 478. https://doi.org/10.2307/23268570 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBirch LC (1948) The intrinsic rate of natural increase of an insect population. J Animal Ecol 17:15\u0026ndash;26.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBlanckenhorn WU (2005) Behavioral causes and consequences of sexual size dimorphism. Ethol 111, 977\u0026ndash;1016. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0310.2005.01147.x \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoaventura D, Martin M, Pozzebon A, Mota-Sanchez D, Nauen R (2020) Monitoring of Target-Site Mutations Conferring Insecticide Resistance in \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Insects 18;11(8):545. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080545 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoaventura D, Martin M, Pozzebon A, Mota-Sanchez D, Nauen R (2020) Monitoring of Target-Site Mutations Conferring Insecticide Resistance in \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Insects 18;11(8):545. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects11080545 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoller EF, Vogt H, Ternes P, Malavolta C (2005) Working document on selectivity of pesticides. Available at www.iobc.ch/2005/Working%20Document%20Pesticides_Explanations.pdf. Accessed May 2008\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrevik K, Lindstr\u0026ouml;m L, McKay SD, Chen YH (2018) Transgenerational effects of insecticides\u0026mdash;implications for rapid pest evolution in agroecosystems. Curr Opin Insect Sci 26, 34\u0026ndash;40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cois.2017.12.007\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChang H, Guo J, Qi G, Gao Y, Wang S, Wang X, Liu Y (2023). Comparative analyses of the effects of sublethal doses of emamectin benzoate and tetrachlorantraniliprole on the gut microbiota of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Insect Sci 1;23(4):7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iead039 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCohen E (2006) Pesticide-mediated homeostatic modulation in arthropods. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 85: 21\u0026ndash;27. 39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2005.09.002\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCutler GC (2013) Insects, insecticides and hormesis: evidence and considerations for study. Dose-Response. 11:154\u0026ndash;177. https://doi.org/10.2203/dose-response.12-008 .\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDe Groote H, Kimenju SC, Munyua B, Palmas S, Kassie M, Bruce A (2020) Spread and impact of fall armyworm (\u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e J.E. Smith) in maize production areas of Kenya. Agric Ecosyst Environ 292:1\u0026ndash;10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2019.106804 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeshmukh S, Pavithra HB, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Shivanna BK, Maruthi MS, Mota-Sanchez D (2020) Field Efficacy of Insecticides for Management of Invasive Fall Armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J. E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) on Maize in India. Fla Entomol 103(2), 221-227. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.103.0211 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeshmukh SS, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Prasanna M, Sannathimmappa HG, Kavyashree BA, Sharath KN, Pradeep P, Patil KR (2021) Economic analysis of pesticide expenditure for managing the invasive fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E. Smith) by maize farmers in Karnataka, India. Current Sci 121(11):1487. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v121/i11/1487-1492\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDileep KNT, Murali MK (2020) Bio-efficacy of selected insecticides against fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E. Smith) (Noctuidae: Lepidoptera), in maize. J Entomol Zool Stud 8(4), 1257\u0026ndash;1261. 31.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEarly R, Gonz\u0026aacute;lez-Moreno P, Murphy ST, Day R (2018) Forecasting the global extent of invasion of the cereal pest \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, the fall armyworm. NeoBiota 40:25\u0026ndash;50. https://doi.org/http://hdl.handle.net/10871/34861.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFanigliulo A, Sacchetti M (2008) Emamectin benzoate: new insecticide against \u003cem\u003eHelicoverpa armigera.\u003c/em\u003e Commun Agric Appl Biol Sci. 73(3):651-3. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFAO (2018). Integrated Management of the Fall Armyworm on Maize: A Guide for Farmer Field Schools in Africa; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 130p. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGao Z, Chen Y, He K, Guo J, Wang Z (2021) Sublethal Effects of the Microbial-Derived Insecticide Spinetoram on the Growth and Fecundity of the Fall Armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Econ Entomol 5;114(4):1582-1587. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toab123 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeng C, Watson GB, Sparks TC (2013) Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors as Spinosyn Targets for Insect Pest Management. In Ephraim Cohen (Eds). Advances in Insect Physiology, Academic Press, 44:101-210, ISBN 9780123943897.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoergen G, Kumar PL, Sankung SB, Togola A, Tam\u0026ograve; M, Luthe DS (2016) First report of outbreaks of the fall armyworm \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J E Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new alien invasive pest in West and Central Africa. PLoS ONE 11 (10), e0165632. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0165632 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuo JF, Zhao JZ, He KL, Zhang F, Wang ZY (2018) Potential invasion of the crop-devastating insect pest fall armyworm Spodoptera frugiperda to China. Plant Prot 44:1\u0026ndash;10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuo ZM, Deng XQ, Li J, Yuan MJ, Wan H (2020). Detection of insecticide sensitivity and target site mutations in field populations of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in four regions of Hubei, central China. Acta Entomol Sin 63:582\u0026ndash;89. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2022.2050835 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHardke JT, Temple JH, Leonard BR, Jackson RE (2011). Laboratory toxicity and field efficacy of selected insecticides against fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Florida Ent 94: 272\u0026ndash; 278. https://doi.org/10.1653/024.094.0221 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHarrison RD, Thierfelder C, Baudron F, Chinwada P, Midega C, Scha U, Berg J, Van D (2019) Agro-ecological options for fall armyworm (\u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e JE Smith) management: Providing low-cost, smallholder friendly solutions to an invasive pest. J Environ Manage 243:318\u0026ndash;330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.05.011\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHasnain A, Zhang S, Chen Q, Xia L, Wu Y, Gong C, Liu X, Jian P, Zhang L, Wang X (2023) Effects of chlorantraniliprole on the life history traits of fall armyworm \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Front Physiol 14:1155455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1155455.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHasnain A, Zhang S, Chen Q, Xia L, Wu Y, Gong C, Liu X, Jian P, Zhang L and Wang X (2023) Effects of chlorantraniliprole on the life history traits of fall armyworm \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Front Physiol 30;14:1155455. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2023.1155455 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHercus MJ, Loeschcke V, Rattan SI (2003) Lifespan extension of \u003cem\u003eDrosophila melanogaster\u003c/em\u003e through hormesis by repeated mild heat stress. Biogerontol 4,149\u0026ndash;156. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024197806855.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHerlinda\u003csup\u003e \u003c/sup\u003eS, Simbolon IMP, Hasbi, Suwandi S, Suparman (2022) \u003csup\u003e \u003c/sup\u003eHost Plant Species Of The New Invasive Pest, Fall Armyworm \u003cem\u003e(Spodoptera Frugiperda)\u003c/em\u003e In South Sumatra. In Sriwijaya Conference on Sustainable Environment, Agriculture and Farming System 29\u003csup\u003eth\u003c/sup\u003e September, 2021, Palembang, Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eIOP Conf Ser: Earth Environ Sci.\u003c/em\u003e 995 (2022) 012034. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/995/1/012034 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHruska AJ (2019) Fall armyworm (\u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e) management by smallholders CAB Rev 14 (043):1-11. https://doi.org/10.1079/PAVSNNR201914043 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eInsecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC, 2024). Mode of action Classification Scheme. Version 11.1, January 2024\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJagdish J, Mishra S, Maknwar P (2019). Strategies for sustainable management of fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J. E. Smith) in sorghum. Paper presentation in XIX International Plant Protection Congress IPPC 2019, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. www.ippc2019. icrisat.org.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKalajahi MJ, Ganbalani GN, Kazemi MH, Shojai M, Imani S (2014) Investigation of sex ratio and adult longevity of \u003cem\u003eHabrobracon hebetor\u003c/em\u003e Say in relation to some conventional and biorational insecticides, Archives Phytopathol Plant Prot 47:7, 852 856. https://doi.org/10.1080/03235408.2013.823714 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKulye M, Mehlhorn S, Boaventura D, Godley N, Venkatesh SK, Rudrappa T, Charan T, Rathi D, Nauen R (2021) Baseline Susceptibility of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e Populations Collected in India towards Different Chemical Classes of Insecticides. Insects. 23;12(8):758. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects12080758 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKumela TJ, Simiyu B, Sisay P, Likhayo E, Mendesil L, Gohole, Tefera T (2019) Farmers\u0026rsquo; knowledge, perceptions, and management practices of the new invasive pest, fall armyworm (\u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e) in Ethiopia and Kenya. \u003cem\u003eInt. J. Pest Manag\u003c/em\u003e. 65:1\u0026ndash;9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09670874.2017.1423129\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLa Rossa R, Kahn N (2003) Dos programas de computadora para confeccionar tables de vida de fertilidad y calcular parametros biologicos y demograficos en afidos (Homoptera: Aphidoidae). R.I.A., 32:127-142.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLee GS, Seo BY, Lee J, Kim HJ, Song JH, Lee WH (2020) First report of the fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), a new migratory pest in Korea. Korean J Appl Entomol 59:73\u0026ndash;78.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi X, Jiang H, Wu J, Zheng F, Xu K, Lin Y, Zhang Z, Xu H (2021) Drip application of chlorantraniliprole effectively controls invasive \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and its distribution in maize in China. Crop Prot 143:105474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2020.105474 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu ZK, Li XL, Tan XF, Yang MF, Idrees A, Liu JF (2022) Sublethal effects of emamectin benzoate on fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Agriculture 12:959. https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12070959 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLu W, Liu Z, Fan X, Zhang X, Qiao X, Huang J (2022) Nicotinic acetylcholine receptor modulator insecticides act on diverse receptor subtypes with distinct subunit compositions. PLoS Genet. 19;18(1):e1009920. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1009920 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLuginbill, P (1928) The Fall Armyworm. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, USA.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLv H, Ling S, Guo Z, Zheng C, Ma H, Li J, Ma K (2023) Effects of lufenuron treatments on the growth and development of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Comp Biochem Physiol C Toxicol Pharmacol 263:109499. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpc.2022.109499 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMaia De AHN, Luiz AJB, Campanhola C (2000) Statistical inference on associated fertility life table parameters using Jackknife technique: computational aspects. J Econ Entomol 93:511-518. https://doi.org/10.1603/0022-0493-93.2.511\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMargus A, Piiroinen S, Lehmann P (2019) Sublethal Pyrethroid Insecticide Exposure Carries Positive Fitness Effects Over Generations in a Pest Insect Sci Rep, 11320. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-47473-1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMasaki T, Yasokawa N, Tohnishi, M, Nishimatsu T, Tsubata K, Inoue K, Motoba K, Hirooka T (2006) Flubendiamide, a Novel Ca\u003csup\u003e2+\u003c/sup\u003e channel modulator, reveals evidence for functional cooperation between Ca\u003csup\u003e2+\u003c/sup\u003e pumps and Ca\u003csup\u003e2+ \u003c/sup\u003erelease. Molecular Pharmacol 69(5):1733-1739. https://doi.org/10.1124/mol.105.020339 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMontezano DG, Specht A, Sosa-G\u0026oacute;mez, DR, Roque-Specht VF, Malaquias JV, Paula-Moraes SV, Peterson JA, Hunt TE (2019) Biotic potential and reproductive parameters of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J. E. Smith, 1797) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Agric Sci 11, 240\u0026ndash;252. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNagoshi RN, Htain NN, Boughton D, Zhang L, Xiao Y, Nagoshi BY, Mota-Sanchez D (2020). Southeastern Asia fall armyworms are closely related to populations in Africa and India, consistent with common origin and recent migration. Sci Rep 29;10(1):1421. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-58249-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNavasero, MV, Navasero MM, Burgonio GAS, Ardez KP, Ebuenga MD, Beltran MJB, Bato MB, Gonzales PG, Magsino, GL, Caoili BL (2019) Detection of the fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) using larval morphological characters, and observations on its current local distribution in the Philippines. Philipp Entomol 33:171\u0026ndash;184.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNguyen DT, Chen Y, Herron GA (2021) Preliminary characterisation of known pesticide resistance alleles in \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in its invasive Australian range. Austral Entomol 60:782\u0026ndash;90. https://doi.org/10.1111/aen.12570\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOdhiambo D, Ondasi S (2020) Identification of Male and Female pupae of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e at icipe, Thomas Odhiambo Campus. Full text on ResearchGate. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePadovez EOF, Hideo KR, Omoto C, Sartori GA (2022) Fitness costs associated with chlorantraniliprole resistance in \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) strains with different genetic backgrounds. Pest Manag Sci. 78(3):1279-1286. https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.6746 . \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePhani KK, Mohan VK, Kamakshi N, Dakshina MK, Mohan RK (2021) Field efficacy of selected insecticides against invasive pest, fall armyworm \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E.Smith) on maize crop The Pharma Innova J 2021; 10(10): 884-889.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePiiroinen S, Lyytinen A, Lindstr\u0026ouml;m L (2013) Stress for invasion success? Temperature stress of preceding generations modifies the response to insecticide stress in an invasive pest insect. Evol Appl 6:313\u0026ndash;323. https://doi.org/10.1111/eva.12001 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePinto JRL, Torres AF, Truzi CC, Vieira NF, Vacari AM, De Bortoli SA (2019) Artificial Corn-Based Diet for Rearing \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). J Insect Sci 1;19(4):2. https://doi.org/10.1093/jisesa/iez052 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eR Development Core Team (2023) \u003cem\u003eR: a language and environment for statistical computing\u003c/em\u003e. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. URL www.r-project.org.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRane R, Walsh TK, Lenancker P, Gock A, Dao TH (2022) Complex multiple introductions drive fall armyworm invasions into Asia and Australia. bioRxiv 06.11.495773. https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.06.11.495773 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaber M, Parsaeyan E, Vojoudi S, Bagheri M, Mehrvar A, Kamita SG (2013). Acute toxicity and sublethal effects of methoxyfenozide and thiodicarb on survival, development and reproduction of \u003cem\u003eHelicoverpa armigera\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Crop Prot 43:14-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cropro.2012.09.011 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSartiami D, Dadang, Harahap IS, Kusumah YM, Anwar R (2020) First record of fall armyworm (\u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e) in Indonesia and its occurrence in three provinces. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ Sci 468 p012021. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/468/1/012021 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSharanabasappa, Kalleshwaraswamy CM, Asokan R, Mahadeva Swamy HM, Maruthi MS, Pavithra HB et al (2018) First report of the fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E.Smith) (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae), an alien invasive pest on maize in India. Pest Manag Horticul Ecosyst 24:23\u0026ndash;29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShareef SM, Madhumathi T, Swathi M, Patibanda AK (2022) Toxicity of Some Insecticides to The Fall Army Worm \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Ind J Entomol 84(3):680\u0026ndash;682. https://doi.org/10.55446/IJE.2021.283\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSiddiqui JA, Fan R, Naz H, Bamisile BS, Hafeez M, Ghani MI, Wei Y, Xu Y, Chen X (2023) Insights into insecticide-resistance mechanisms in invasive species: Challenges and control strategies. Front Physiol. 9;13:1112278. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.1112278 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSileshi A, Negeri M, Selvaraj T, Abera A (2022) Determination of most effective insecticides against maize fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e in South Western Ethiopia, Cogent Food \u0026amp; Agriculture, 8:1, 2079210, https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2022.2079210 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSisay B, Tefera T, Wakgari M, Ayalew G, Mendesil E (2019) The Efficacy of Selected Synthetic Insecticides and Botanicals against Fall Armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e, in Maize. Insects. 1;10(2):45. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects10020045 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSuby SB, Soujanya LP, Yadava P, Patil J, Subaharan K, Shyam Prasad G, Srinivasa Babu K, Jat SL, Yathish KR, Vadassery J, Kalia VK, Bakthavatsalam N, Shekhar JC, Rakshit S (2020) Invasion of fall armyworm (Spodoptera frugiperda) in India: nature, distribution, management and potential impact. Current Science 119(1): 44-51. https://doi.org/10.18520/cs/v119/i1/44-51 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTay WT, Rane RV, James W, Gordon KHJ, Downes S, Kim J, Kuniata L, Walsh TK (2022) Resistance Bioassays and Allele Characterization Inform Analysis of \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) Introduction Pathways in Asia and Australia. J Econ Entomol 14;115(6):1790-1805. https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/toac151 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTeather K, Jardine C, Gormley K (2005) Behavioral and sex ratio modification of Japanese medaka (\u003cem\u003eOryzias latipes\u003c/em\u003e) in response to environmentally relevant mixtures of three pesticides. Environ Toxicol 20(1):110-7. https://doi.org/10.1002/tox.20084 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTimilsena BP, Niassy S, Kimathi E, Abdel-Rahman EM, Seidl-Adams I, Wamalwa M, Tonnang HEZ, Ekesi S, Hughes DP, Rajotte EG, Subramanian S (2022) Potential distribution of fall armyworm in Africa and beyond, considering climate change and irrigation patterns. Sci Rep 12:539. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-04369-3 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilson K, Hardy ICW (2002) Statistical analysis of sex ratios: an introduction. In: Hardy ICW (ed) Sex ratios: concepts and research methods. Cambridge University Press, New York, Cambridge, 48\u0026ndash;92 pp.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWorld Health Organization. Cyhalothrin, Environmental Health Criteria, 99; Geneva, Switzerland, 1990\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXu C, Zhang Z, Cui K, Zhao Y, Han J, Liu F (2016) Effects of Sublethal Concentrations of Cyantraniliprole on the Development, Fecundity and Nutritional Physiology of the Black Cutworm \u003cem\u003eAgrotis ipsilon\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). PLoS ONE 11(6): e0156555. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156555\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYe H, Li YP, Feng, D, Li CL (2022) Construction of prevention and control barriers for \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e in the border areas of Yunnan Province. J Yunnan Univ 44:1054\u0026ndash;1061. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYin XH, Wu QJ, Li XF, Zhang YJ, Xu BY (2009) Demographic changes in multigeneration \u003cem\u003ePlutella xylostella\u003c/em\u003e (Lepidoptera: Plutellidae) after exposure to sublethal concentrations of spinosad. J Econ ntomol 102:357\u0026ndash;365. https://doi.org/10.1603/029.102.0146 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang L, Liu B, Zheng W, Liu C, Zhang D, Zhao S, Li Z, Xu P, Wilson K, Withers A, Jones CM, Smith JA, Chipabika G, Kachigamba DL, Nam K, d\u0026apos;Alen\u0026ccedil;on E, Liu B, Liang X, Jin M, Wu C, Chakrabarty S, Yang X, Jiang Y, Liu J, Liu X, Quan W, Wang G, Fan W, Qian W, Wu K, Xiao Y (2020). Genetic structure and insecticide resistance characteristics of fall armyworm populations invading China. Mol Ecol Resour. 20(6):1682-1696. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.13219 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhao YX, Huang JM, Ni H, Guo D, Yang FX, Wang X, Wu SF, Gao CF (2020) Susceptibility of fall armyworm, \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e (J.E.Smmith), to eight insecticides in China, with special reference to lambda-cyhalothrin. Pestic Biochem Physiol 168:104623. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pestbp.2020.104623 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Spodoptera frugiperda, ad-hoc approved insecticides, Ecotoxicology, Demography, Sex ratio","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eLaboratory assessments were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of seven ad-hoc approved insecticides, namely Chlorantraniliprole, Emamectin benzoate, Spinetoram, Thiodicarb, Chlorantraniliprole + Lambda-cyhalothrin, Emamectin benzoate + Lufenuron, and Novaluron + Emamectin benzoate, against \u003cem\u003eSpodoptera frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. These evaluations were carried out using a diet incorporation assay in a controlled laboratory environment with a temperature of 27 ± 1°C, relative humidity of 65 ± 5%, and a 12:12 (L:D) photoperiod. During the bioassay procedure, it is noteworthy that the doses of all tested insecticides were carefully administered within the minimum range of their recommended field rates. In acute toxicity trials, spinetoram had the greatest impact on reducing the survival of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. Similarly, corrected mortality was highest with spinetoram and lowest with thiodicarb. Additionally, chronic toxicity trials were conducted using life table response experiments (LTREs) in the F\u003csub\u003e1\u003c/sub\u003e progeny of the group that had experienced acute toxicity. Extended development with the highest mortality was observed in spinetoram compared to other tested insecticides. Furthermore, life indices parameters like potential fecundity (\u003cem\u003ePf\u003c/em\u003e), natality rate (\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), intrinsic rate of increase (\u003cem\u003er\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), net reproductive rate (\u003cem\u003em\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ex\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e) and finite rate of increase (\u003cem\u003eλ\u003c/em\u003e)\u003cem\u003e \u003c/em\u003ewas greatly reduced in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda \u003c/em\u003etreated with spinetoram compared with other insecticides specially thiodicarb.\u0026nbsp; However, mean generation time (\u003cem\u003eT\u003c/em\u003e\u003csub\u003e\u003cem\u003ec\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/sub\u003e), corrected generation time (\u003cem\u003eτ\u003c/em\u003e) and the doubling time (\u003cem\u003eDT\u003c/em\u003e) was prolonged in spinetoram compared with other tested insecticides. Furthermore, in sex ratio analysis, all tested insecticides, except for thiodicarb, led to a significant decrease in the proportion of females in the population of \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e. These findings strongly suggest the possible emergence of resistance in \u003cem\u003eS. frugiperda\u003c/em\u003e against thiodicarb. Moreover, considering the endorsement of this insecticide by the Government of India through ad-hoc approval, farmers are likely to persist in its application. Hence, it is imperative to conduct further validation of these results, necessitating field evaluations for confirmation.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Ecotoxicological Impact of Ad-Hoc Approved Synthetic Insecticides on the Biological Performance of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-04-17 19:55:53","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4260751/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"8a74b329-308f-4ed1-ab17-4cbb07379cef","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 17th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-09-24T14:46:01+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-04-17 19:55:53","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4260751","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4260751","identity":"rs-4260751","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"CiT4i_kKBbxQbnFL0ufpk","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}