J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 21 Original Article Laboratory Evaluation of Toxicity of Insecticide Formulations from Dif- ferent Classes against American Cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattidae) *Ruhma Syed, Farkhanda Manzoor, Rooma Adalat, Abida Abdul-Sattar, Azka Syed Department of Zoology, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan (Received 13 Mar 2011; accepted 3 Sep 2013) Abstract Background: The present study was designed to investigate the insecticidal efficacy of four different classes of in- secticides: pyrethroids, organophosphates, phenyl-pyrazoles and neo-nicotenoids. One representative chemical from each class was selected to compare the toxicity: deltamethrin from pyrethroids, Dichlorovinyl Dimethyl Phosphate (DDVP) from organophosphates, fipronil from phenyl-pyrazoles and imidacloprid from neo-nicotenoids. The objec- tive of this study was to determine which of these insecticides were most effective against American cockroach. Methods: These insecticides were tested for their LC50 values against Periplaneta americana under topical bioassay method, using different concentrations for each chemical. Results: Fipronil 2.5% EC was highly effective at all concentrations applied, while DDVP 50% EC was least toxic amongst all. One way analysis of variance confirmed significant differences between mortality of P. americana and different concentrations applied (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Locality differentiation is an important factor in determining the range of resistance between various localities, as all three localities behaved differently in terms of their levels of resistance. Keywords: Insecticides, Periplaneta americana, Topical bioassay, Resistance, Efficacy Introduction Periplaneta americana (Linnaeus) is an ob- noxious and grubby domestic pest of tropical countries of the world (Lee and Robinson 2001). Their aesthetically unappealing dam- age to household materials and stored prod- ucts, and transmission of diseases makes them a high priority pest. It is considered as a com- monly found pest of bakeries, restaurants and kitchens (Gadd and Raubenheimer 2000, Lee and Lee 2000). They are usually found in basements, steam tunnels, grocery stores and boiler rooms. They contaminate food in contact by carrying filth and microbial path- ogens on their body and legs (Watanabe et al. 2003, Fasulo et al. 2005). As they have unsanitary mode of life, cock- roaches are potent vectors of infectious path- ogens (Vythilingam et al. 1997). Several spe- cies of Enterobacteriaceae including Klebsiella spp., Salmonella spp. and Escherichia spp. can be harbored in cuticle of P. americana (Mpuchane et al. 2006). According to the find- ings of Barcay (2004), E. coli, Compylobacter spp., Streptococcus spp., Salmonella spp., Toxoplasma gondii, Staphylococcus spp. and Shigella spp. are some of the medically im- portant species of pathogens for which P. americana serves as an important vector. Moreover, they may cause allergic reac- tions to some people by carrying the eggs of parasitic worms. Some of these major aller- gic responses include asthma, itching, swell- ing of eyelids, dermatitis and severe respir- atory problems (Sarinho et al. 2004, Gore and Schal 2007, Pechal et al. 2007). Several diseases such as cholera, pneumonia, anthrax, tetanus, diphtheria, tuberculosis, enteric fever, gastroenteritis and food poisoning may spread *Corresponding author: Dr Ruhma Syed, E-mail: ruhmasyed@gmail.com http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 22 by P. americana (Lane et al. 2001, Morane 2002). Kinfu and Erko (2008) have reported in their studies that cockroaches are potential carriers of human intestinal parasites espe- cially Ascaris lumbricoides, Entamoeba coli and E. histolytica. Besides mechanically trans- mitting a variety of diseases, it is also re- sponsible for causing insectophobia in some people (Czajka et al. 2003). The control of P. americana can be done by applying insecticides to the hiding and resting places in the form of insecticidal dusts and residual sprays. Chemical control has been the most popular and effective method so far Lee and Robinson (2001), but their control with insecticides is not a suitable approach because of several reasons; the most important of which is that they may develop resistance against certain frequently used insecticides (Tsai and Lee 2001). Resistance against pesticides is a phe- nomenon, mainly dependant on genetic ba- sis. Exposure of a population of pest to a certain pesticide results in development of resistance against that chemical (pesticide). Not necessarily all insects need to be killed during this phenomenon. Hemingway et al. (1993) have reported that cockroaches have developed resistance against many groups of insecticides especially pyrethroids. Much of the work regarding insecticidal efficacy has been done on german cock- roach, however, very little data is available with respect to american cockroach. There- fore, keeping in view the work carried out by various researchers, the present work was designed to investigate the insecticidal effi- cacy of four groups of insecticides (organo- phosphates, pyrethroids, phenyl-pyrazoles and neo-nicotenoids) on P. americana, and the susceptibility of adults to these insecti- cides through laboratory bioassay using top- ical application method. Considering all the facts which demonstrate that these in- secticides work as strong agents for the chemical control of P. americana, the aims of this study were to: Investigate the current status of insecti- cide resistance in different field populations of P. americana, that is useful to find out their extent of resistance against commonly used insecticides. Evaluate the toxic efficacy of four insec- ticides and to compare the older groups of insecticides i.e. pyrethroids and organophos- phates with that of relatively new com- pounds i.e. neo-nicotenoids and phenyl-py- razoles. This information will be helpful for the end users to choose better options for the management of these insects in Pakistan. Materials and Methods Experimental site The laboratory bioassays were conducted at the Entomology Research Laboratory, LCWU, Lahore, Pakistan. Experimental insect Keeping in view their unappealing dam- ages to house-hold materials and medical importance among all urban pests, P. ameri- cana was selected as experimental insect for testing against commonly used insecticides. These were collected from kitchens, base- ments, bakeries, and sewerage manholes by hand catch and trapping methods. Based on the previous history of insecticidal spray frequency, three different localities were se- lected for the collection of cockroaches (Ta- ble 1). These far apart areas were chosen to determine the degree of variability of insec- ticide resistance in different field popula- tions of P. americana. Collection of P. americana (L) The collection traps for cockroaches comprised of simple glass or plastic jars with butter, sugar and bread inside. The trapping jars were comprised of two parts: the upper http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 23 inside of it was coated with petroleum jelly (Vaseline®) in order to avoid their escape and keep them entrapped till bioassay. The sliding lower part was used to separate them from trapping jars and cockroaches were transferred to the main collection containers placed in laboratory. Considering the noc- turnal habitat of cockroaches and to provide their preferred hidden places of living, a dark paper was used to cover these contain- ers externally. They were provided with wet bread, card-board and water till the onset of bioassay. The collection containers were held at specified laboratory conditions (temper- ature= 28± 2 ºC and relative humidity= 75± 3%). Following the methodologies described by Appel et al. (1983) and Abd-Elghafar et al. (1990), only adult males were selected for bi- oassays because of their uniform weights, as compared to that of females. Chemicals Following technical grade insecticides and chemicals were used during bioassay: Imidacloprid 5% SC, Fipronil 2.5% EC, Deltamethrin 2.5% SC, DDVP 50% EC (Ali Akbar Group of Chemicals, Lahore), Ace- tone (E-Merck, D-6100, Germany), Distilled water. The choice of these insecticides was based on the fact that these chemicals have not been tested against P. americana in Pa- kistan so far. Moreover, relatively new in- secticides like imidacloprid and fipronil were also needed to be investigated for their toxicity, in order to determine whether they are effective against field populations of P. americana. Therefore, comparison between four groups of insecticides (in terms of LC50 values) was studied by selecting one repre- sentative from each insecticidal class. All chemical were obtained from Ali Akber group of chemical industries, 1-KM Bhoptian Chowk Defence Road, and Off Raiwind Road, Lahore, Pakistan. Preparation of stock solution For toxicity tests, stock solutions for four insecticides imidacloprid 5% SC, fipronil 2.5% EC, deltamethrin 2.5% SC and DDVP 50% EC were 5.0, 2.0, 20.0 and 50.0µ l/ml respectively. Known quantity from each in- secticide was pipetted out and dissolved in acetone (solvent for dissolving these insecti- cides). Following formula was used for pre- paring concentrations. [Concentration required in µ l/ ml] x [Volume required in ml] [% concentration in µ l/ ml] x 10 = ---------- µ l/ml For preparing 5.0 µ l/ ml stock solution of imidacloprid 5% SC, 2.0 µ l of it was pipet- ted out and dissolved in acetone to make fi- nal volume up to 20.0 ml. 2.0 µ l/ ml stock solution of fipronil 2.5% EC was prepared by dissolving 1.6 µ l of it in acetone to make final volume up to 20.0 ml. For preparing 20.0 µ l/ ml stock solution of deltamethrin 2.5% SC, 16.0 µ l of it was pipetted out and dissolved in acetone to make final volume up to 20 ml. For preparing 50.0 µ l/ ml stock solution of DDVP 50% EC, 2.0 µ l of it was pipetted out and dissolved in acetone up to final volume of 20.0 ml. Serial dilutions Using these stock solutions, further serial dilutions were prepared to obtain five con- centrations for each insecticide. Serial dilu- tions for imidacloprid 5% SC were 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0µl/ml. Serial dilutions for fipronil 2.5% EC were 0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0µ l/ ml. Serial dilutions for deltamethrin 2.5% SC were 1.0, 1.5, 10.0, 15.0 and 20.0µ l/ml. Se- rial dilutions for DDVP 50% EC were 5.0, 10.0, 30.0, 40.0 and 50.0µ l/ ml. Topical application method Topical bioassay was used to treat the adult male P. americana according to the method described by Lee et al. (1996). Four http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 24 preliminary tests were performed to find out the discriminating doses. Twenty insects were separated from collection containers and for easy handling during bioassay, they were ex- posed to 4 ºC for 1–2 minutes to keep them immobilized for few minutes. Using an insu- lin syringe serving as micro applicator, 1.0µ l of pre-determined amount of each insecticide concentration was topically applied to the first segment of abdominal sternites. Five to sev- en doses of each insecticide having mortality range between 1 and 100% were determined. No insecticide was applied to control group, they only received 1.0µ l acetone. Clean au- toclaved petri plates were used to maintain the treated cockroaches and they were pro- vided with bread and moistened cotton plug as food source. Each plate was having ten treated cockroaches which were provided with same temperature and humidity conditions as that of colony. Freshly prepared concen- trations were applied for the treatment, start- ing from low to high dilutions and three rep- licates were prepared for each concentration. Pair of forceps was used to properly orient the immobilized cockroaches. Mortality crite- rion was as follows: if a cockroach was unable to return back to its normal position within 2–3 minutes after being touched with for- ceps, it was considered dead and counted in mortality data. Data evaluation and statistical analysis The data obtained from this study was subjected to mean, standard error, regression analysis and one way analysis of variance. The LC50 values for each insecticide were ob- tained by using EPA Probit Analysis Program used for calculating LC/EC values (version 1.5). Regression analysis of variance was ap- plied to express the trend of variation within each treatment by using Microsoft Office Ex- cel 2007. Results with P< 0.05 were consid- ered statistically significant for all compari- sons. Results Table 2 represents the comparative toxic- ities of four insecticides against three locali- ties of P. amercana (L). When different con- centrations (1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0 and 5.0µ l/ ml) of imidacloprid 5% SC were tested against P. americana, variable range was obtained according to its respective localities. LC50 for SMH was 2.712 µ l/ ml, whereas compar- atively low values were recorded for KTCH and KLPT (1.966 µ l/ ml and 1.318 µ l/ ml re- spectively). The regression analysis of vari- ance further confirmed that there was an in- creasing trend in mean mortality of insects after 48 hours of treatment [for SMH: b= 3.1± 0.9, F(1,4)= 106.78, P= 0.001, for KTCH: b= 3± 2.63, F(1,4)= 3.42E+ 32, P= 3.48E- 49 and for KLPT: b= 2.7± 0.1, F(1,4)= 729, P= 0.001) (Fig. 1–3(a)]. The concentrations used for fipronil 2.5% EC were 0.05, 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0µl/ ml for all three localities tested. It is evident from results, that there is marked difference in toxicity of this insecticide. Localities 1, 2 and 3 were having their LC50 values 0.362, 0.176 and 0.092µ l/ ml respectively. The re- gression analysis of variance further con- firmed that there was an increasing trend in mean mortality of insects after 72 hours in topical application method [for SMH: b= 7.03± 9.63, F(1,4)= 12.46, P= 0.04, for KTCH: b= 6.63± 8.89, F(1,4)= 11.99, P= 0.04 and for KLPT: b= 5.20± 10.49, F(1,4)= 6.26, P= 0.08) (Figs 1–3(b)]. When different concentrations (1.0, 5.0, 10.0, 15.0 and 20.0 µ l/ ml) of deltamethrin 2.5% SC were tested against P. americana, variable range was obtained according to its respective localities. It is evident from table 2, that LC50 for SMH was 4.145µl/ ml, whereas comparatively low values were recorded for KTCH and KLPT (2.500µ l/ ml and 2.067µ l/ ml respectively). The regression analysis of variance further confirmed that there was an http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 25 increasing trend in mean mortality of insects at 48 hours post-treatment [for SMH: b= 0.82± 4.68, F(1,4)= 33.45, P= 0.01, for KTCH: b= 0.67± 4.98, F(1,4)= 21.32, P= 0.02 and for KLPT: b= 0.64± 4.12, F(1,4)= 22.70, P= 0.02) (Fig. 1–3(c)]. The concentrations used for DDVP 50% EC were 10.0, 20.0, 30.0, 40.0 and 50.0µl/ ml for all three localities tested. All three locali- ties were having their LC50 values 28.556, 26.388 and 20.138 µ l/ml respectively. The regression analysis of variance further con- firmed that there was an increasing trend in mean mortality of insects after 48 hours in topical application method [for SMH: b= 0.5± 0.267, F(1,4)= 937.5, P= 7.65E-05, for KTCH: b= 0.49± 0.367, F(1,4)= 654.82, P= 0.000 and for KLPT: b= 0.44 ± 2.53, F(1,4)= 76.42, P= 0.003) (Fig. 1–3(d)]. Based on LC50 values, Imidacloprid, Del- tamethrin and DDVP were having non-signif- icant values, and tested insecticides were ar- ranged according to following descending order of preferences: Fipronil 2.5% EC> Imidacloprid 5% SC> Deltamethrin 2.5% SC> DDVP 50% EC. Table 1. Information on field collected P. americana (L.) localities used in toxicity bioassay (during 2011) Localities Sources n Dates of collection SMH (Locality 1) Sewerage manholes from LCWU, Lahore 160 March 28–30, 2011 KTCH (Locality 2) Kitchens and basements from residential areas in Lahore cantonment and nearby localities 185 April 15–20, 2011 KLPT (Locality 3) Bakeries and food-courts from Kot Lakhpat area 210 May 21–26, 2011 Table 2. Comparative toxicities of four insecticides against three localities of P. americana (L) in topical application method Insecticides Localities LC50 (µl/ml) 95% confidence Limits Lower Upper Fit of probit line RR Slope ± SE χ2 (df) P Imidacloprid 5% SC SMH KTCH KLPT 2.712 1.966 1.318 2.024 3.622 1.304 2.554 0.714 1.771 2.353±0.579 2.321±0.562 2.419±0.585 2.698 (4) 1.701 (4) 3.091 (4) P< 0.001 P< 0.001 P<0.001 2.00 1.50 1.00 Fipronil 2.5% EC SMH KTCH KLPT 0.362 0.176 0.092 0.220 0.554 0.092 0.275 0.038 0.156 1.552±0.294 1.508±0.289 1.483±0.305 0.435 (4) 1.960 (4) 1.646 (4) P< 0.001 P< 0.001 P< 0.001 3.93 1.91 1.00 Deltamethrin 2.5% SC SMH KTCH KLPT 4.145 2.500 2.067 2.540 5.879 1.226 3.874 0.930 3.298 1.938±0.352 1.632±0.321 1.602±0.323 3.252 (4) 2.951 (4) 2.148 (4) P< 0.001 P< 0.001 P< 0.001 2 1.21 1.00 DDVP 50% EC SMH KTCH KLPT 28.556 26.388 20.138 24.650 32.292 22.293 30.380 16.119 23.900 6.028±1.097 5.018±0.885 4.035±0.695 3.680 (4) 4.164 (4) 6.600 (4) P< 0.001 P< 0.001 P< 0.001 1.42 1.31 1.00 http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 26 Fig. 1. Regression line of (a) Imidacloprid 5% SC (b) Fipronil 2.5% EC (c) Deltamethrin 2.5% SC and (d) DDVP 50% EC on mean mortality of SMH (locality 1) of P. americana (L) http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 27 Fig. 2. Regression line of (a) Imidacloprid 5% SC (b) Fipronil 2.5% EC (c) Deltamethrin 2.5% SC and (d) DDVP 50% EC on mean mortality of KTCH (locality 2) of P. americana (L) http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 28 Fig. 3. Regression line of (a) Imidacloprid 5% SC (b) Fipronil 2.5% EC (c) Deltamethrin 2.5% SC and (d) DDVP 50% EC on mean mortality of KLPT (locality 3) of P. americana (L) Discussion In various studies, researchers have paid at- tention to an effective and powerful strategy for control of cockroaches (Shafiqur-Rahman and Akter 2006, Sulaiman et al. 2007, Ahmad et al. 2010). Conventional pyrethroids and carbamates which are not much effective in pest management strategies have been re- placed by new chemicals like neonicotenoids and phenyl-pyrazoles. Resistance against these new formulated insecticides has not been re- http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 29 ported yet. Therefore, keeping in view the re- cent development in insecticides resistance management for the control of urban pests, this study was designed to monitor the insec- ticidal efficacy and resistance control strategy of these new chemicals and why these are con- sidered as better options for cockroach control. Among phenyl-pyrazole family of insec- ticides, fipronil is a relatively new insecti- cide that is found to be very effective against cockroaches and other household pests. Pre- vious studies have also explained the strong neurotoxic effects of fipronil, which demon- strate that even a very low dose of it is suita- ble enough to attain desirable results. Studies conducted by Ahmad and Suliyat (2011) have reported that in the form of gel baits, it worked efficiently and even a very small amount (0.03%) of it was proved to be lethal against cockroaches. Similar results were ob- tained by Nasirian et al. (2006) who have re- ported that fipronil acts as powerful neuro- toxicant against german cockroach. Current in- vestigation is in strong agreement with these findings, where low concentrations of fipronil were effective against adult P. americana. The toxicity data from this study explains that few hours after the topically applied fipronil, there was successive increase in mortality of treated cockroaches (same pattern observed in all three localities) that gradually got de- creased up to 48 hours post treatment and then became stable after 72 hours of exposure. Similar results were obtained by Holbrook et al. (2003) and Nasirian et al. (2006) who have reported that topical application is the most sensitive method in determining re- sistance ratio in field populations of cock- roaches and even 0.01% of fipronil is toxic to field population. They have also reported that regression line curve of log dose is in accordance with mortality rates of treated individuals. Rettich and Stejskal (2008) have reported that in bait formulations, soluble con- centration (SC) of fipronil is very effective against field populations of germen cockroach. American cockroach in our study has also found to be non-resistant against fipronil at low concentrations. Among all the four insecticides tested, fipronil was proved to be highly effective. In various other findings, same conclusions have been reported. Scott and Klen (1997), Wang et al. (2004) and Rina et al. (2002) have presented similar results as in current study. Our findings are also parallel with those of Valles et al. (1997) who have concluded that fipronil is sufficient enough to kill pre-resistant popula- tions even in nano-gram quantity. The most reasonable justification in this regard is per- haps fipronil being a new addition in phenyl- pyrazole class of insecticides, which has not been used frequently. That is why insects and agricultural pests have not yet developed resistance against this chemical. The results of present study have also revealed the fact that phenyl-pyrazole class is more toxic then organophosphates. DDVP, an effective mem- ber of organophosphates failed to control re- sistant field population of american cock- roaches. Kaakeh et al. (1997) supported our findings, while concluding that organophos- phates are not effective enough to combat sus- ceptible and resistant populations of cock- roaches. In contrast to a few studies where organ- ophosphates acted as neurotoxic agent against cockroaches, this chemical did not come up with satisfactory results in our study. The pos- sible reason for this least toxic effectiveness might be the frequency and level of its appli- cation. This class is less favored by pest con- trol industries, mainly because of its strong odor than pyrethroids (Lee and Lee 2004). In those parts of the world where such studies have proved organophosphate as effective class of insecticides, this chemical might not have been sprayed quite often, and its re- duced frequency of application have resulted in emergence of susceptible populations of cockroaches, which are sensitive to this chem- ical. Unless and until, an insecticide is ap- http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 30 plied repeatedly again and again over a cer- tain period of time, resistance does not de- velop. Whenever a chemical is sprayed quite often and its active ingredient is repeatedly exposed to pests’ species, it reduces its effec- tiveness and as a result, resistance against that insecticide gets developed gradually. Here in case of DDVP 50% EC, same phenomenon seems to have happened. This active ingre- dient is readily mixed in every other insecti- cidal spray from low to moderate quantity, it has almost lost its efficacy and the targeted species have become resistant against this insecticide. Various researchers have reported the presence of high level resistance in insects against pyrethroids and have highlighted its control failure incidence (Zhai and Rhobinson 1996, Lee et al. 1996, Scharf et al. 1997, Lee et al. 1997, Lee 1998, Lee et al. 2000). The results of present study highlight the fact that among all four insecticides used, pyrethroid (deltamethrin 2.5% SC) exhibited moderate to high level of resistance against adult P. americana. The comparison of percentage mortality of these localities at different con- centrations of deltamethrin reveals that there is a marked difference in range of effective concentrations for these localities. Even very low concentration (1µ l/ml) was found to be effective against localities 2 and 3 of P. americana, however, locality 1 remained almost ineffective (with almost 15% mortality rate comparable with other two). The highest concentration (20.0 µ l/ml) ended up with expected results, killing 100% of the overall tested individuals. Similar re- sults were obtained by Ballard et al. (1984), Scott et al. (1986), Scharf et al. (1996) and Lee at al. (1996) where either or two of the tested localities came up with 100% mortal- ity rate at this concentration. The findings of Shafiqur-Rahman and Akter (2006), however, contradict our results proving that pyrethroids are highly effective against P. americana. Using cypermethrin and permethrin instead of deltamethrin, the treated individuals gave immediate mortality response after treatment with topical application. This variation in susceptibility of differ- ent localities is because of their far apart lo- calities from where they were collected. Lo- cality 3, which proved to be highly suscepti- ble in both toxicity bioassays, was collected from those areas which were not previously exposed to any insecticide (or their exposure level was comparatively lower to develop resistance). That is why when they were treat- ed with deltamethrin, all of them showed mortality immediately after few hours. These results of current investigation strongly favor the concept given by Lee and Lee (2002), who have reported that pyrethroids exhibit low to moderate level of resistance. Similar conclusion has been made recently by Ah- mad et al. (2009) and Nasirian et al. (2009) who have reported that resistance against pyrethroids have been developed in certain species of cockroaches. Same concepts of deltamethrin resistance have been put for- ward by Choo et al. (2000) and Chai and Lee (2010) who have reported heavy resistance for pyrethroids (deltamethrin and cypermethrin) against both american and german cockroaches. Unlike conventional pyrethroids and or- ganophosphates which are older compounds and have given rise to resistant localities of cockroaches, imidacloprid is a relatively new chemical which have not been tested for so long in Pakistan. Low usage and reduced ap- plication of imidacloprid has raised its sig- nificance in controlling urban pests effec- tively. It’s completely different mode of ac- tion from organophosphates and pyrethroids has made it a sensible option for pest control industries (Cole et al. 1993, Salgado 1997). Imidacloprid was found to be slow re- sponding insecticide during toxicity bioas- says, and considerable results were achieved after 48 to 72 hours of treatment. Same case was reported by Appel and Tanley (2000). Regarding toxicity of imidacloprid, Kaakeh http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 31 et al. (1997) observed its transient and rapid knockdown effect in a similar manner as rec- orded in our study. Among its different con- centrations tested, the mortality response for all three localities was significantly differ- ent. This variable level of susceptibility is perhaps because of locality differentiation. Locality 3 might not be previously treated with imidacloprid or any other insecticide, which is why their individuals did not have resistant genes among them. Wei et al. (2001) have achieved similar results and presented the idea that cross resistance might be in- volved in this case. As the resistance ratio is quite low in this case, it is difficult to con- clude that whether these localities are natu- rally resistant against imidacloprid or phe- nomenon of cross-resistance is involved. Conclusion In the light of above mentioned findings it can be suggested that resistance against in- secticides is a common phenomenon and all tested localities of P. americana populations exhibited resistance against tested insecti- cides. It is therefore, mandatory to establish a sensitive method for a prior detection of resistant localities. The bioassay methods adopted in this study are suitable for meeting this criterion well. Moreover, dealing with discriminating doses requires extreme cau- tion, because minor errors may possibly alter the end results and susceptible localities may wrongly be considered as resistant localities. Another important aspect while establishing the discriminating doses of insecticides is the selective choice of susceptible locality. There should be completely distinguished range of doses for resistant and susceptible localities while dealing with insecticides resistance. Acknowledgements Our deepest acknowledgement is for the Our deepest acknowledgement is for the Head of Zoology Department, LCWU, for providing all the facilities to conduct re- search. The authors are grateful to the labor- atory staff for providing necessary equipments and their nice cooperation throughout the re- search period. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest. References Abd-Elghafar SF, Appel AG, Mack TP (1990) Toxicity of several insecticide formula- tions against adult German cockroach- es (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol. 83: 2290–2294. Ahmad I, Suliyat A (2011) Development Of Fipronil Gel Bait Against German Cock- roaches, Blattella germanica (Dictyop- tera: Blattellidae). J Entomol. 8(3): 288–294. Ahmad I, Sriwahjuningsih SA, Putra RE, Permana AD (2009) Monitoring pyre- throid resistance in field collected Blattella germanica Linn. (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) in Indonesia. Entomol Res. 39: 114–118. Ahmed AS, Bashir NH, Assad YO (2010) Susceptibility of Periplaneta americana (L.) (Orthoptera: Blattidae) population from wad medani (Sudan Gezira) to three public health insecticides. Rest Pest Manag Newsletter. 19(2): 8–14. Appel AG, Tanley MJ (2000) Laboratory and field performance of imidacloprid gel bait against german cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) in Indone- sia. Entomol Res. 39: 114–118. Appel AG, Reierson DA, Rust MK (1983) Comparative water relations and tem- perature sensitivity of cockroaches. Comp Biochem Physiol. 74: 357–361. Ballard JB, Gold RE, Rauscher JD (1984) Effectiveness of six insecticide treat- ment strategies in the reduction of Ger- http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 32 man cockroach (Orthoptera: Blattellidae) populations in infested apartments. J Econ Entomol. 77: 1092–1094. Barcay SJ (2004) Cockroaches. In: Hand- book of pest control (ed. by Mallis, A) 9th ed. GIE Media, Cleveland, Ohio, United States. pp. 121–215. Chai RY, Lee CY (2010) Insecticide Re- sistance Profiles and Synergism in Field Populations of the German Cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) From Singa- pore. J Econ Entomol. 103(2): 460–471. Choo LE, Tang CS, Pang FY, Ho SH (2000) Comparison of two bioassay methods for determining deltamethrin resistance in German cockroaches (Blattodea: Bla- ttellidae). J Econ Entomol. 93: 905–910. Cole LM, Nicholson RA, Casida JE (1993) Action of Phenyl pyrazole Insecticides at the GABA-Gated Chloride Channel. Pestic Biochem Physiol. 46: 47–54. Czajka E, Pancer K, Kochman M, Gliniewiez A, Sawicka B, Rabczenko D (2003) Characteristics of bacteria isolated from body surface of German cockroaches caught in hospitals. Przegl Epidemiol. 57(4): 655–662. Fasulo TR, Kern WH, Koehler PG, Short DE (2005) Pests In and Around the Home. University of Florida, United States, pp. 124–126. Gadd CA and Raubenheimer D (2000) Nu- trient specific learning in an omniv - orous insect: the American cockroach Periplaneta americana L. learns to as- sociate dietary protein with the odors citral and carvone. J Insect Behav. 13: 851–864. Gore JC, Schal C (2007) Cockroach Aller- gen Biology and Mitigation in the In door Environment. Annu Rev Entomol. 52: 439–463. Holbrook G, Roebuck J, Moore C, Waldvogel M, Schal C (2003) Origin and extent of resistance to fipronil in the german cockroach, Blattella germanica (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol. 96(5): 1548–1558. Kinfu A, Erko B (2008) Cockroaches as car- riers of human intestinal parasites in two localities in Ethiopica. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 102: 1143–1147. Kaakeh W, Reid BL, Bennett GW (1997) Toxicity of fipronil to German and American cockroaches. Entomol Exp Appl. 84: 229–237. Lane HC, Montagne JL, Fauci AS (2001) Bioterrorism: A clear and present dan- ger. Nature Medicine. 7: 1271–1273. Lee CY (1998) Control of insecticide-resistant German cockroaches, Blattella germa- nica (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) in food-outlets with hydramethylnon- based bait stations. Trop Biomed. 15: 45–51. Lee CY, Lee LC (2000) Influence of sani- tary condition on the field performance of chlorpyrifos based baits against American cockroaches, Periplaneta americana (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattidae). J Vect Ecol. 25: 218–221. Lee CY, Robinson W (2001) Handbook of Malaysian Household and Structural Pests. Pest Control Association of Ma- laysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp. 96–108. Lee CY, Hemingway J, Yap HH, Chong NL (2000) Biochemical characterization of insecticide resistance in the German cockroach, Blattella germanica, from Malaysia. Med Vet Entomol. 14: 11–18. Lee CY, Yap HH, Chong NL (1997) Elevated esterase detection in insecticide resistant German cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) using modified Pasteur- Georghiou's filter-paper method. Trap Biomed. 14: 81–86. Lee CY, Yap HH, Chong NL, Lee RS (1996) Insecticide resistance and synergism in field-collected German cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) in Peninsular Malaysia. Bull Entomol Res. 86: 675– 682. http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 33 Lee KM, Lee CY (2002) Prevalence of in- secticide resistance in field-collected populations of the German cockroach, Blattella germanica (Linnaeus) (Dictyop- tera: Blattellidae) in Peninsular Malay- sia. Med Entomol. 53(4): 219–225. Lee LC, Lee CY (2004) Insecticide re- sistance profiles and possible under- lying mechanisms in German cock- roaches, Blattella germanica (Linnaeus) (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae) from Pen- insular Malaysia. Med Entomol Zool. 55(2): 77–93. Morane G (2002) Threats in bioterrorism II: CDC category B and C agents. Emerg Med Clin N Am. 20: 311–330. Mpuchane S, Matsheka IM, Gashe BA, Allotey J, Murindamombe, G, Mrema N (2006) Microbiological studies of cock- roaches from three localities in Gabo- rone, Botswana. Afr J Food Nutr Sci. 6: 56–59. Nasirian H, Ladonni H, Vatandoost H (2006) Duration of Fipronil Topical Applica- tion Toxicity in Blattella germanica Field Population Strains. Pak J Biol Sci. 9(5): 800–804. Nasirian H, Ladonni H, Vatandoost H (2009) Duration of Fipronil Topical Applica- tion Toxicity in Blattella germanica Field Population Strains. Pak J Biol Sci. 9(5): 800–804. Nasirian H, Ladonni H, Shayeghi M, Vatan- doost H, Yaghoobi MR, Rassi Y, Abol- hassani M, Abaei MR (2006) Compar- ison of Permethrin and Fipronil Tox- icity against German cockroach (Dic- tyoptera: Blattellidae) Strains. Iranian J Publ Health. 35(1): 63–67. Pechal JL, Austin J, Gold R, Tomberlin JK (2007) Epidemiology and Spatial Re- lationships of Bacteria Associated with Periplaneta americana (L.) (Blattodea: Blattidae) in Central Texas. J Agric Ur- ban Entomol. 24(4): 205–216. Rettich F, Stejskal V (2008) Residual effect of Fipronil SC against insecticide re- sistant populations of the german cock- roach. Proceedings of the 6th Interna- tional Conference on Urban Pests (ed. by Robinson WH and Bajomi D), pp. 501–504. Rina T, Tilak VW, Yadav JD, Dutta G (2002) Efficacy of fipronil and propoxur in the control of German cockroaches (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J Com Dis. 34: 65–69. Salgado VL (1997) The modes of action of spinosad and other insect control prod- ucts. Down Earth. 52: 35–43. Sarinho ED, Schor MA, Rizzo JA (2004) There are more asmatics in homes with high cockroach infestation. Braz J Biol Res. 37: 503–510. Scharf ME, Hemingway J, Reid BI, Small GJ, Bennett GW (1996) Toxicological and biochemical characterization of in- secticide resistance in a field collected strain of Blattella germanica (Dic- tyoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol. 89: 322–331. Scharf ME, Kaakeh W, Bennett GW (1997) Changes in an insecticide resistant field-population of German cockroach following exposure to an insecticide mixture. J Econ Entomol. 90: 38–48. Shafiqur-Rahman AS, Akter MY (2006) Toxicity of diazinon and cypermethrin against the American cockroach, Peri- planeta americana (L.) Univ. J Zool Rajshahi. 25: 63–64. Sulaiman S, Muhammad AH, Othman H (2007) Efficacy of hydramethylnon and fipronil get baits with laboratory and field strains of Periplaneta ameri- cana (L.) (Dictyoptera: Blattidae) in Malaysia. J Trop Med Parasitol. 30: 64–67. Tsai C, Lee H (2001) Analysis of specific adaptation to a domicile habitat: A comparative study of two closely re- http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013 J Arthropod-Borne Dis, June 2014, 8(1): 21–34 R Syed et al.: Laboratory Evaluation of … 34 lated cockroach species. J Med Entomol. 38: 245–252. Valles SM, Koehler PG, Brenner RJ (1997) Antagonism of fipronil toxicity by piperonyl butoxide and S, S, S,-tributyl phosphorotrithioate in the German cockroach (Dictyoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol. 90: 1254–1258. Vythilingam I, Jeffery J, Oothuman P, Abdul Razak AR, Sulaiman A (1997) Cock- roaches from human dwellings: isola- tion of bacterial pathogens and control. Southeast Asian J Trop Med Pub Hlth. 28: 218–222. Wang C, Scharf M, Bennett G (2004) Be- havioral and physiological resistance of the German cockraoch to gel bait (Blattodea: Blattellidae). J Econ En- tomol. 97(6): 2067–2072. Watanabe H, Kobayashi Y, Sakura M, Matsu- moto Y, Mizunami M (2003) Classical olfactory conditioning in the cockroach Periplaneta americana. Zool Sci. 20: 1447–1454. Wei Y, Appel AG, Moar WJ, Liu N (2001) Pyrethroid resistance and cross-resistance in the German cockroach, Blatella ger- minca (L). Pest Manag Sci. 57: 1055– 1059. Zhai J, Robinson WH (1996) Instability of cypermethrin resistance in a field pop- ulation of the German cockroach (Or- thoptera: Blattellidae). J Econ Entomol. 89: 332–336. http://jad.tums.ac.ir Published Online: December 18, 2013