The spread of resistance to imidacloprid is restricted by thermotolerance in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster

Abstract

Imidacloprid, the world’s most used insecticide, has caused considerable controversy due to harmful effects on non-pest species and increasing evidence showing that insecticides have become the primary selective force in many insect species. The genetic response to insecticides is heterogeneous across populations and environments, leading to more complex patterns of genetic variation than previously thought. This motivated the investigation of imidacloprid resistance at different temperatures in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster originating from four climate extremes replicated across two continents. Population and quantitative genomic analysis, supported by functional tests, have revealed a mixed genetic architecture to resistance involving major genes (Paramyosin and Nicotinic-Acetylcholine Receptor Alpha 3) and polygenes with a major trade-off with thermotolerance. Reduced genetic differentiation at resistance-associated loci indicated enhanced gene flow at these loci. Resistance alleles showed stronger evidence of positive selection in temperate populations compared to tropical populations in which chromosomal inversions In(2L)t, In(3R)Mo and In(3R)Payne harbour susceptibility alleles. Polygenic architecture and ecological factors should be considered when developing sustainable management strategies for both pest and beneficial insects.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Sampling locations and effects of imidacloprid resistance and thermotolerance on longevity.
Fig. 2: Genome-wide association for imidacloprid resistance.
Fig. 3: Functional tests for the effect of Prm and nAChRα3.
Fig. 4: Genomic location of candidate genes and genome-wide pattern of diversity and selection.

Data availability

Aligned sequence data generated in this study are deposited on NCBI under the BioProject ID PRJNA515537 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bioproject/515537). All custom codes are deposited on GitHub (https://github.com/aflevel/IMIresist_vs_TEMPtol) and the derived data are deposited on figshare (https://doi.org/10.26188/5b592f305226b).

References

  1. 1.

    Miles, A. et al. Genetic diversity of the African malaria vector Anopheles gambiae. Nature 552, 96–100 (2017).

  2. 2.

    Zamoum, T. et al. Does insecticide resistance alone account for the low genetic variability of asexually reproducing populations of the peach-potato aphid Myzus persicae? Heredity 94, 630–639 (2005).

  3. 3.

    Woodcock, B. A. et al. Country-specific effects of neonicotinoid pesticides on honey bees and wild bees. Science 356, 1393–1395 (2017).

  4. 4.

    Anderson, C. J. et al. Hybridization and gene flow in the mega-pest lineage of moth, Helicoverpa. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 5034–5039 (2018).

  5. 5.

    Daborn, P. J. et al. A single p450 allele associated with insecticide resistance in Drosophila. Science 297, 2253–2256 (2002).

  6. 6.

    Pittendrigh, B., Reenan, R., ffrench-Constant, R. H. & Ganetzky, B. Point mutations in the Drosophila sodium channel gene para associated with resistance to DDT and pyrethroid insecticides. Mol. Gen. Genet. 256, 602–610 (1997).

  7. 7.

    Fournier, D., Bride, J. M., Hoffmann, F. & Karch, F. Acetylcholinesterase. Two types of modifications confer resistance to insecticide. J. Biol. Chem. 267, 14270–14274 (1992).

  8. 8.

    Traverso, L. et al. Comparative and functional triatomine genomics reveals reductions and expansions in insecticide resistance-related gene families. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 11, e0005313 (2017).

  9. 9.

    Faucon, F. et al. Identifying genomic changes associated with insecticide resistance in the dengue mosquito Aedes aegypti by deep targeted sequencing. Genome Res. 25, 1347–1359 (2015).

  10. 10.

    Faucon, F. et al. In the hunt for genomic markers of metabolic resistance to pyrethroids in the mosquito Aedes aegypti: an integrated next-generation sequencing approach. PLoS Negl. Trop. Dis. 11, e0005526 (2017).

  11. 11.

    Ffrench-Constant, R. H. The molecular genetics of insecticide resistance. Genetics 194, 807–815 (2013).

  12. 12.

    Messer, P. W. & Petrov, D. A. Population genomics of rapid adaptation by soft selective sweeps. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28, 659–669 (2013).

  13. 13.

    Ventola, C. L. The antibiotic resistance crisis: part 1: causes and threats. Pharm. Ther. 40, 277–283 (2015).

  14. 14.

    Tabashnik, B. E. & Carrière, Y. Surge in insect resistance to transgenic crops and prospects for sustainability. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 926–935 (2017).

  15. 15.

    Mallet, J. The evolution of insecticide resistance: have the insects won? Trends Ecol. Evol. 4, 336–340 (1989).

  16. 16.

    Munro, A. Economics and biological evolution 1. Environ. Resour. Econ. 9, 429–449 (1997).

  17. 17.

    Lynd, A. et al. Field, genetic, and modeling approaches show strong positive selection acting upon an insecticide resistance mutation in Anopheles gambiae s.s. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27, 1117–1125 (2010).

  18. 18.

    Barnes, K. G. et al. Genomic footprints of selective sweeps from metabolic resistance to pyrethroids in African malaria vectors are driven by scale up of insecticide-based vector control. PLoS Genet. 13, e1006539 (2017).

  19. 19.

    Jones, C. M. et al. Footprints of positive selection associated with a mutation (N1575Y) in the voltage-gated sodium channel of Anopheles gambiae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 6614–6619 (2012).

  20. 20.

    Battlay, P., Schmidt, J. M., Fournier-Level, A. & Robin, C. Genomic and transcriptomic associations identify a new insecticide resistance phenotype for the selective sweep at the Cyp6g1 locus of Drosophila melanogaster. Genes Genom. Genet. 6, 2573–2581 (2016).

  21. 21.

    Schmidt, J. M. et al. Copy number variation and transposable elements feature in recent, ongoing adaptation at the Cyp6g1 locus. PLoS Genet. 6, e1000998 (2010).

  22. 22.

    Garud, N. R. et al. Recent selective sweeps in North American Drosophila melanogaster show signatures of soft sweeps. PLoS Genet. 11, e1005004 (2015).

  23. 23.

    Schmidt, J. M. et al. Insights into DDT resistance from the Drosophila melanogaster genetic reference panel. Genetics 207, 1181–1193 (2017).

  24. 24.

    Fournier-Level, A. et al. Behavioural response to combined insecticide and temperature stress in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. J. Evol. Biol. 29, 1030–1044 (2016).

  25. 25.

    Labbé, P. et al. Forty years of erratic insecticide resistance evolution in the mosquito Culex pipiens. PLoS Genet. 3, e205 (2007).

  26. 26.

    Andersson, D. I. & Hughes, D. Antibiotic resistance and its cost: is it possible to reverse resistance? Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 8, 260–271 (2010).

  27. 27.

    Kliot, A. & Ghanim, M. Fitness costs associated with insecticide resistance. Pest Manag. Sci. 68, 1431–1437 (2012).

  28. 28.

    Vila-Aiub, M. M., Neve, P. & Powles, S. B. Fitness costs associated with evolved herbicide resistance alleles in plants. New Phytol. 184, 751–767 (2009).

  29. 29.

    ffrench-Constant, R. H. & Bass, C. Does resistance really carry a fitness cost? Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 21, 39–46 (2017).

  30. 30.

    Wu, C., Davis, A. S. & Tranel, P. J. Limited fitness costs of herbicide-resistance traits in Amaranthus tuberculatus facilitate resistance evolution. Pest Manag. Sci. 74, 293–301 (2018).

  31. 31.

    Melnyk, A. H., Wong, A. & Kassen, R. The fitness costs of antibiotic resistance mutations. Evol. Appl. 8, 273–283 (2015).

  32. 32.

    Bourguet, D., Guillemaud, T., Chevillon, C. & Raymond, M. Fitness costs of insecticide resistance in natural breeding sites of the mosquito Culex pipiens. Evolution 58, 128–135 (2004).

  33. 33.

    Cousens R. D.. & Fournier-LevelA.. Herbicide resistance costs: what are we actually measuring and why? . Pest Manag. Sci. 74, 1539–1546 (2017).

  34. 34.

    Nkya, T. E. et al. Insecticide resistance mechanisms associated with different environments in the malaria vector Anopheles gambiae: a case study in Tanzania. Malar. J. 13, 28 (2014).

  35. 35.

    Sternberg, E. D. & Thomas, M. B. Local adaptation to temperature and the implications for vector-borne diseases. Trends Parasitol. 30, 115–122 (2014).

  36. 36.

    Lack, J. B., Lange, J. D., Tang, A. D., Corbett-Detig, R. B. & Pool, J. E. A thousand fly genomes: an expanded Drosophila genome nexus. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 3308–3313 (2016).

  37. 37.

    Hoffmann, A. A., Anderson, A. & Hallas, R. Opposing clines for high and low temperature resistance in Drosophila melanogaster. Ecol. Lett. 5, 614–618 (2002).

  38. 38.

    Turner, T. L., Levine, M. T., Eckert, M. L. & Begun, D. J. Genomic analysis of adaptive differentiation in Drosophila melanogaster. Genetics 179, 455–473 (2008).

  39. 39.

    Kapun, M., Fabian, D. K., Goudet, J. & Flatt, T. Genomic evidence for adaptive inversion clines in Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 1317–1336 (2016).

  40. 40.

    Kapun, M., Van Schalkwyk, H., McAllister, B., Flatt, T. & Schlötterer, C. Inference of chromosomal inversion dynamics from Pool-Seq data in natural and laboratory populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Mol. Ecol. 23, 1813–1827 (2014).

  41. 41.

    Rane, R. V., Rako, L., Kapun, M., Lee, S. F. & Hoffmann, A. A. Genomic evidence for role of inversion 3RP of Drosophila melanogaster in facilitating climate change adaptation. Mol. Ecol. 24, 2423–2432 (2015).

  42. 42.

    Matsuda, K. et al. Neonicotinoids: insecticides acting on insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors. Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 22, 573–580 (2001).

  43. 43.

    Venken, K. J. T. et al. MiMIC: a highly versatile transposon insertion resource for engineering Drosophila melanogaster genes. Nat. Methods 8, 737–743 (2011).

  44. 44.

    Lavington, E. & Kern, A. D. The effect of common inversion polymorphisms In(2L)t and In(3R)Mo on patterns of transcriptional variation in Drosophila melanogaster. Genes Genom. Genet. 7, 3659–3668 (2017).

  45. 45.

    Vörösmarty, C. J. et al. Global threats to human water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555–561 (2010).

  46. 46.

    Boitard, S., Schlotterer, C., Nolte, V., Pandey, R. V. & Futschik, A. Detecting selective sweeps from pooled next-generation sequencing samples. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29, 2177–2186 (2012).

  47. 47.

    Buckingham, S. D., Lapied, B., Le Corronc, H., Grolleau, F. & Sattelle, D. B. Imidacloprid actions on insect neuronal acetylcholine receptors. J. Exp. Biol. 200, 2685–2692 (1997).

  48. 48.

    Cervera, M., Arredondo, J. J. & Ferreres, R. M. in Nature’s Versatile Engine: Insect Flight Muscle Inside and Out (Springer, New York, 2006); https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-31213-7_6

  49. 49.

    Liu, H. et al. Paramyosin phosphorylation site disruption affects indirect flight muscle stiffness and power generation in Drosophila melanogaster. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 10522–10527 (2005).

  50. 50.

    Merzendorfer, H. et al. Genomic and proteomic studies on the effects of the insect growth regulator diflubenzuron in the model beetle species Tribolium castaneum. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 42, 264–276 (2012).

  51. 51.

    Zhao, L., Alto, B., Shin, D. & Yu, F. The effect of permethrin resistance on Aedes aegypti transcriptome following ingestion of zika virus infected blood. Viruses 10, 470 (2018).

  52. 52.

    Gonzalez-Freire, M., de Cabo, R., Studenski, S. A. & Ferrucci, L. The neuromuscular junction: aging at the crossroad between nerves and muscle. Front. Aging Neurosci. 6, 208 (2014).

  53. 53.

    Takamori, M. Synaptic homeostasis and its immunological disturbance in neuromuscular junction disorders. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 18, E896 (2017).

  54. 54.

    Joussen, N., Heckel, D. G., Haas, M., Schuphan, I. & Schmidt, B. Metabolism of imidacloprid and DDT by P450 CYP6G1 expressed in cell cultures of Nicotiana tabacum suggests detoxification of these insecticides in Cyp6g1-overexpressing strains of Drosophila melanogaster, leading to resistance. Pest Manag. Sci. 64, 65–73 (2008).

  55. 55.

    Fusetto, R., Denecke, S., Perry, T., O’Hair, R. A. J. & Batterham, P. Partitioning the roles of CYP6G1 and gut microbes in the metabolism of the insecticide imidacloprid in Drosophila melanogaster. Sci. Rep. 7, 11339 (2017).

  56. 56.

    Denecke, S. et al. Multiple P450s and variation in neuronal genes underpins the response to the insecticide imidacloprid in a population of Drosophila melanogaster. Sci. Rep. 7, 11338 (2017).

  57. 57.

    Broderick, N. A., Raffa, K. F. & Handelsman, J. Midgut bacteria required for Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal activity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 15196–15199 (2006).

  58. 58.

    Cheng, D. et al. Gut symbiont enhances insecticide resistance in a significant pest, the oriental fruit fly Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel). Microbiome 5, 13 (2017).

  59. 59.

    Dada, N., Sheth, M., Liebman, K., Pinto, J. & Lenhart, A. Whole metagenome sequencing reveals links between mosquito microbiota and insecticide resistance in malaria vectors. Sci. Rep. 8, 2084 (2018).

  60. 60.

    Kikuchi, Y. et al. Symbiont-mediated insecticide resistance. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 109, 8618–8622 (2012).

  61. 61.

    Hoffmann, A. A. Rapid adaptation of invertebrate pests to climatic stress? Curr. Opin. Insect Sci. 21, 7–13 (2017).

  62. 62.

    Ayala, D., Ullastres, A. & González, J. Adaptation through chromosomal inversions in Anopheles. Front. Genet. 5, 129 (2014).

  63. 63.

    Cressey, D. The bitter battle over the world’s most popular insecticides. Nature 551, 156–158 (2017).

  64. 64.

    Cernansky, R. Controversial pesticides found in honey samples from six continents. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2017.22762 (2017).

  65. 65.

    Sureda Anfres, M. Controversial insecticides linked to wild bee declines. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2016.20446 (2016).

  66. 66.

    Rundlöf, M. et al. Seed coating with a neonicotinoid insecticide negatively affects wild bees. Nature 521, 77–80 (2015).

  67. 67.

    Hallmann, C. A., Foppen, R. P. B., van Turnhout, C. A. M., de Kroon, H. & Jongejans, E. Declines in insectivorous birds are associated with high neonicotinoid concentrations. Nature 511, 341–343 (2014).

  68. 68.

    Henry, M. et al. A common pesticide decreases foraging success and survival in honey bees. Science 336, 348–350 (2012).

  69. 69.

    Hijmans, R. J. & Graham, C. H. The ability of climate envelope models to predict the effect of climate change on species distributions. Glob. Change Biol. 12, 2272–2281 (2006).

  70. 70.

    Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3997 (2013).

  71. 71.

    Kofler, R., Gómez-Sánchez, D. & Schlötterer, C. PoPoolationTE2: comparative population genomics of transposable elements using pool-seq. Mol. Biol. Evol. 33, 2759–2764 (2016).

  72. 72.

    Talevich, E., Shain, A. H., Botton, T. & Bastian, B. C. CNVkit: genome-wide copy number detection and visualization from targeted DNA sequencing. PLoS Comput. Biol. 12, e1004873 (2016).

  73. 73.

    Fournier-Level, A., Robin, C. & Balding, D. J. GWAlpha: genome-wide estimation of additive effects (alpha) based on trait quantile distribution from pool-sequencing experiments. Bioinformatics 33, 1246–1247 (2016).

  74. 74.

    Antonov, A. V., Schmidt, E. E., Dietmann, S., Krestyaninova, M. & Hermjakob, H. R spider: a network-based analysis of gene lists by combining signaling and metabolic pathways from Reactome and KEGG databases. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, W78–W83 (2010).

  75. 75.

    Ferretti, L., Ramos-Onsins, S. E. & Pérez-Enciso, M. Population genomics from pool sequencing. Mol. Ecol. 22, 5561–5576 (2013).

  76. 76.

    Kofler, R., Pandey, R. V. & Schlötterer, C. PoPoolation2: identifying differentiation between populations using sequencing of pooled DNA samples (Pool-Seq). Bioinformatics 27, 3435–3436 (2011).

  77. 77.

    Boitard, S. et al. Pool-hmm: a Python program for estimating the allele frequency spectrum and detecting selective sweeps from next generation sequencing of pooled samples. Mol. Ecol. Resour. 13, 337–340 (2013).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank D. Begun, S. Myles and C. Hart for sharing their laboratory facilities, P. Griffin for fly collection, and K. Charles at Foursights Wines, D. Herbert at Herbert Vineyard, P. Dixon at the Henty Estate, J. Leahy at Becker’s Vineyard, J. Seago at Ponchartrain Vineyard and Landry Vineyards for providing access to their estates. This work was supported by the Human Frontier in Sciences Long-Term fellowship no. LT000907/2012-L awarded to A.F.L.

Author information

A.F.-L. and C.R. designed the study and wrote the manuscript with contributions from T.P. and A.A.H. A.F.-L., R.T.G. and S.W. performed the experiments. A.F.-L. analysed the data with contributions from A.A.H., R.V.R. and P. Battlay. A.A.H., P. Battlay and T.P. revised the manuscript. A.A.H., M.S., P. Batterham, T.P. and W.C. provided new genetic material.

Correspondence to Alexandre Fournier-Level or Charles Robin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Figures 1–5, Supplementary Tables 1–5 and 7–9

Reporting Summary

Supplementary Table 6

List of candidate genes for imidacloprid resistance. Candidate genes were identified on the basis of the excess of significantly associated polymorphism within 2.5 kbp of a gene coding sequence in at least two GWAS or present in 300-bp segments with significant copy-number association.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fournier-Level, A., Good, R.T., Wilcox, S.A. et al. The spread of resistance to imidacloprid is restricted by thermotolerance in natural populations of Drosophila melanogaster. Nat Ecol Evol 3, 647–656 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0837-y

Download citation

Further reading