In Vitro Pathogenicity of Some Entomopathogenic Fungal Strains Against Green Peach Aphid Myzus Persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae)

agronomy

Article In Vitro Pathogenicity of Some Entomopathogenic Fungal Strains against Green Peach Aphid Myzus persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae)

Talha Nazir 1 , Abdul Basit 1, Abdul Hanan 1, Muhammad Zeeshan Majeed 2 and Dewen Qiu 1,*

1 Key Laboratory of Integrated Pest Management in Crops, Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081, China; [email protected] (T.N.); [email protected] (A.B.); [email protected] (A.H.) 2 Department of Entomology, College of Agriculture, University of Sargodha, Sargodha 40100, Pakistan; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +86-135-206-42805

Received: 27 November 2018; Accepted: 24 December 2018; Published: 25 December 2018

Abstract: Green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Hemiptera: Aphididae), is an economically important pest of crops within more than 40 plant families all over the world. This study encompasses in-vitro pathogenicity of two strains of Beauveria bassiana (BB-72 and BB-252) and one strain of Lecanicillium lecanii (V-4) against green peach aphid (M. persicae). Using a leaf-dip method, three different bioassays were conducted comprised of filtrates and conidial concentrations of BB-72, BB-252 and V-4 fungal strains and their binary combinations. Infiltrate bioassays, 2 mL fungal filtrate of each strain was used. In conidial bioassays, three different concentrations (i.e., 1 × 106, 1 × 107 and 1 × 108 conidia −1 mL ) of each fungal strain were used, while in binary combination bioassays, LC50 and LC33 of these fungal strains were evaluated. According to the results, maximum pathogenicity against test aphids was observed at 10th day of all treatments. Both strains of B. bassiana (BB-72 and BB-252) exhibited higher mortality of aphids (up to 95 and 91%, respectively) than L. lecanii (V-4) strain (87%) in all three types of bioassays. Moreover, binary combinations of BB-72 and BB-252 strains showed significantly higher aphid mortality (94%) than other combinations. Reduced mortality in case of fungal combinations of V-4 strain might be due to the antagonistic effect of L. lecanii strain along with both strains of B. bassiana. Nevertheless, evaluation of combined pathogenicity of the fungal strains constitutes the novelty of this in-vitro study which revealed that both strains of B. bassiana (i.e., BB-72 and BB-252) are mutually compatible and can be utilized together as new biocontrol tools against destructive insect pests such as M. persicae.

Keywords: Beauveria bassiana; Lecanicillium lecanii; Myzus persicae; binary combination; entomopathogenicity; fungal isolates; virulence

1. Introduction In temperate regions, aphids are the most damaging and economically important insect pests of many crops. They suck cell sap and nutrients from plants and also spread many viral diseases in various ﬁeld and horticultural crops [1]. Myzus persicae Sulzer, commonly known as the green peach aphid, is considered as one of the most important pest species. This aphid has been found attacking more than 800 plant species worldwide. Moreover, its incidence is gradually increasing on different fruit and vegetable crops [2]. Primarily, the control of M. persicae relies on its management through hazardous synthetic insecticides. However, indiscriminate use of pesticides has resulted in many

Agronomy 2019, 9, 7; doi:10.3390/agronomy9010007 www.mdpi.com/journal/agronomy Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 2 of 12 conspicuous problems including pesticide resistance, the resurgence of secondary pests, disruption of beneficial fauna and other environmental and human health issues [3]. For instance, M. persicae populations have been reported to acquire resistance against various carbamate, organophosphate and pyrethroid pesticides [2]. To overcome these problems associated with the extensive use of chemical insecticides, alternative approaches such as the use of biological control agents have been widely studied in many countries. Many microbial bio-pesticides based on entomopathogenic organisms such as viruses, nematodes, fungi and bacteria have been playing important roles in the field of plant protection and are being used against a wide range of insect pests [4–8]. Entomopathogenic fungi such as Beauveria bassiana, Lecanicillium lecanii, Metarhizium anisopliae, Isaria fumosorosea are appearing to be effective, environment-friendly and target-specific biocontrol tools against many sucking insect pest species [5,9–11]. Upon germination of spores attached to the cuticle of a target insect, fungal hyphae penetrate the insect body and cause host death within a few days [12–14]. Moreover, entomopathogenic fungi have no or low mammalian toxicity or residual activity and are target specific and less vulnerable to resistance development [15,16]. These fungi have been focused for rigorous research in past decades for being important bio-control agents all over the world and can exist at enzootic or epizootic levels in the populations of their hosts. B. bassiana Balsamo and L. lecanii Zimmerman are among the most studied and virulent entomopathogenic fungi belonging to order Hypocreals (Fungi: Ascomycota). Both these fungal species are ubiquitous and are distributed in a wide range of habitats including aquatic, urban, forest, agricultural, pasture and desert habitats. They have a wide range of target host species of insect pests [17,18]. Strains of both these fungi can be easily isolated even from phylloplanes of vegetation as well as from soil and infected insect bodies [19,20]. Keeping in view the ecological and environmental issues of synthetic chemical insecticides and current need of developing new alternate biological control tools, the present study aimed to assess the virulence and pathogenicity of isolates of B. bassiana and L. lecanii against M. persicae under laboratory conditions. Moreover, as there is a lack of information about any possible combined effect of different entomopathogenic fungal strains; it was also aimed to determine if these fungal strains can act synergistically against M. persicae. We hypothesized that the combination of fungal strains would have greater efficiency than a single strain.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Insect Culture Green peach aphids (M. persicae) were collected from the seedlings of Chinese cabbage (Brassica rapa subsp. pekinensis) grown in the greenhouse at Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) Beijing, China. The aphid population was reared on the seedlings of same cabbage subspecies grown in pots placed in cages at 55–60% relative humidity and 27 ± 2 ◦C temperature with 16:8 h light:dark (L:D) photoperiod. Plants were replaced every week with new ones during the whole study period.

2.2. Fungal Isolates and Conidial Suspensions Preparation Three fungal isolates (Table1), two of B. bassiana (BB-72 and BB-252) and one of L. lecanii (V-4), were maintained on refined potato dextrose agar (PDA) medium (200 gL−1 potatoes, 20 gL−1 dextrose and 20 gL−1 agar) in polystyrene petri-plates (90 mm diameter) for 3 weeks in the dark at 25 ± 2 ◦C. Sporulating mycelia of these fungal strains were carefully selected and identified according to their standard morphological descriptions [21]. For each fungal strain, stock suspension of conidia was prepared in 250 mL reagent bottle with the addition of mass sporulating culture in 100 mL of distilled sterile water having 0.01% (w/v) Tween 80® (Sigma-Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA). The mixture was shaken vigorously by hand for two min and the filtrate was blended to isolate the hyphal debris through sterilized Miracloth (EMD Milipore Corp., Billerica, MA, USA). Improved Neubauer haemocytometer (Brand GmbH, Wertheim, Germany) was used for the determination of the conidial concentration. Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 3 of 12

Three different suspensions of the conidia (i.e., 1 × 106, 1 × 107, 1 × 108 conidia mL−1) were dissolved in sterilized water with 0.05% Tween 80®. Before performing bioassays against aphids, a germination test was carried out on PDA medium in order to determine the percentage of viable conidia [22]. For all bioassays, conidial germination remained more than 95%. Fungal filtrates were prepared by adding 2 mL of conidial suspension of each fungal strain in 50 mL of Adamek liquid medium (40 g yeast extract (Difco, Detroit, MI, USA), 40 g dextrose and 30 g corn steep liquor (Sigma-Aldrich, Saint Louis, MO, USA) for primary cultures of all three fungal strains. Culture incubation was carried out for three days at 140 rpm and secondary cultures were prepared by the addition of 2 mL from primary culture of each strain into 200 mL of the Adamek liquid medium via incubation at 25 ◦C and 140 rpm for six days. Centrifugation of the samples was then carried out at 4 ◦C and 12,000 rpm for 20 min. Later, filtration of the subsequent supernatant was taken through 0.45 µm pore size filter (Millipore Corp., Billerica, MA, USA) in order to get the filtrate. The pH of the filtrate was maintained at 6.

Table 1. Isolates, strain codes, original hosts and geographical origins of the three entomopathogenic fungal strains used in this study.

Isolates Strain Code Original Host Geographical Origin Beauveria bassiana 72 BB-72 Green peach aphid Vladivostok (Russia) Beauveria bassiana 252 BB-252 Green peach aphid Vladivostok (Russia) Lecanicillium lecanii 4 V-4 Whiteﬂy Moscow (Russia) Lecanicillium lecanii was previously known as Verticillium lecanii. BB-72 and BB-252: Isolates No. 72 and 252 of Beauveria bassiana, respectively. V-4: Isolate No. 4 of V. lecanii.

2.3. Pathogenicity Bioassays The susceptibility of test aphids to these entomopathogenic fungal strains (BB-72, BB-252 and V-4) was determined by conducting their filtrate and conidial bioassays and by evaluating the binary combinations of their LC50 and LC33 (lethal concentrations causing 50 and 33% mortality of the exposed aphid individuals, respectively). The leaf-dip method was used for all bioassays as described previously [23] after slight modifications. For each treatment, leaf discs of 50 mm diameter were obtained from healthy cabbage plants and were dipped for 10 s in 5 mL of conidial and fungal filtrate suspensions. Then, leaf discs were placed on sterilized filter paper for 15–20 min in order to remove the excessive suspension. Leaf discs in control treatments were dipped in 0.05% Tween 80 only. Ten newly molted (up to 12 h old) non-alate adults of laboratory-maintained M. persicae were released on treated and untreated leaf discs with the sterilized camel hair brush and these petri-plates were then incubated at 25 ± 2 ◦C and at a photoperiod of 16:8 h of Light: Dark. Each treatment was replicated 10 times. In binary combination bioassays, LC50 values of each fungal strain, as obtained from their respective conidial bioassays, were used for the combinations of BB-72 × BB-252, BB-72 × V-4 and BB-252 × V-4 and LC33 for BB-72 × BB-252 × V-4 combination. Aphid mortality was recorded on 3rd, 5th, 7th and 10th day post-treatment. Dead aphids were collected from petri-plates and were kept in dark at 90% relative humidity to promote fungal development and sporulation in order to confirm that aphids died due to infection by each particular fungal strain.

2.4. Data Analysis Cumulative aphid mortality from dose-response tests was compared with controlled mortality (natural) test. LC50 and LC33 values were calculated for each fungal strain by Probit analysis using Polo Plus (Version 2.0, LeOra Software, Berkeley, CA, USA) [24] in association with 95% conﬁdence interval. Furthermore, aphid mortality was analyzed using two-way factorial analysis of the variance (Statistix 8.1v, Tallahassee, FL, USA). Comparisons of the treatment means were performed using Fischer’s least signiﬁcant difference (LSD) test at α = 0.05. Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 4 of 12

3. Results

3.1. Pathogenicity of Filtrates of Different Strains of B. bassiana and L. lecanii against M. persicae Results of filtrate bioassay revealed that overall mean mortality of aphids by the isolates of tested fungal strains was higher in comparison to their conidial treatments. There was a significant effect of fungal filtrates, observation time intervals and their interaction on M. persicae mortality (Table2). Maximum mortality (95%) was recorded on 10th day of treatment of (BB-72). On the other hand, minimum mortality (87%) was recorded on 10th day by filtrate application of strain V-4. Filtrate of fungal strain BB-252 exhibited mean aphid mortality of 91% (Figure1).

Table 2. Factorial Analysis of variance of mortality of M. persicae bioassayed with the ﬁltrates of three different strains of entomopathogenic fungi. See Figure1.

Source DF SS MS F-value p-Value * Treatments 3 97003 32334.2 426.38 ≤0.001 Time 3 39507 13169.2 173.66 ≤0.001 Time × Treatments 9 13548 1505.3 19.85 ≤0.001 Error 144 10920 75.8 Total 159 160978 CV/GM 18/48.375 * p < 0.001 (highly significant) and p < 0.05 (significant); two-way factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) at α = 0.05. DF: Degree of freedom, SS: Sum of squares, MS: Mean sum of squares, F: F-statistic, CV: Coefficient of variation, GM: Grand mean.

3.2. Virulence of Conidial Bioassay of Three Fungal Strains against M. persicae Results of the conidial bioassay showed that all three strains tested exhibited signiﬁcant mortality of aphid individuals (F = 13.21, p < 0.001; Table3). Furthermore, factorial analysis of variance revealed that there was a signiﬁcant effect of different concentrations, different time intervals and of their interaction on mean aphid mortality (F = 600.11, p < 0.001, F = 1047.24, p < 0.001 and F = 122.62, p < 0.001, respectively; Table3). Strain BB-72 of B. bassiana caused considerable aphid mortality at all concentrations. However, maximum mortality (93%) was recorded at 10th day post-treatment at a concentration of 1 × 108 conidia mL−1. In contrast, minimum mortality (74%) was recorded for the lowest concentration of BB-72 (i.e., 1 × 106 conidia mL−1) (Figure2). Toxicity of B. bassiana strain BB-252 against M. persicae exhibited a similar trend as in the case of BB-72. Highest mean mortality (86%) of aphids was recorded after the 10th day of the treatment by the concentration of 1 × 108 conidia mL−1 (Figure2). On the other hand, minimum mortality (70%) was recorded at a lowest concentration of 1 × 106 conidia mL−1 (Figure2). Similarly, the entomopathogenicity of strain V-4 of L. lecanii against M. persicae aphids showed that aphid mortality increased along with the fungal concentration and the time of exposure (Figure2). Minimum mortality (2.5%) was observed at 3rd day post-treatment for all three concentrations, while maximum aphid mortality (79%) was exhibited by the highest conidial concentration at 10th day post-treatment (Figure2). Mean aphid mortality in control petri-plates remained 6%. Moreover, according to Probit analysis median lethal concentration 4 4 3 (LC50) values for strains BB-72, BB-252 and V-4 were recorded as 3.09 × 10 , 1.29 × 10 and 4.10 × 10 conidia mL−1 (Table4). AgronomyAgriculture2019 2018, 9,, 8 7, x FOR PEER REVIEW 65 of 1212

Figure 1. Mean mortality (%) of M. persicae recorded at different time intervals (DAT: Days after treatment) for filtrate bioassays performed with different strains ofFigureB. bassiana 1. Mean(BB-72 mortality and BB-252) (%) of M. and persicaeL. lecanii recorded(V-4). Columnsat different represent time intervals mean (DAT: percent Days mortality after treatmen± SE (n =t) 10).for filtrate Treatment bioassays columns performed bearing with different different alphabets strains are of significantlyB. bassiana (BB-72 different and from BB-252) other and treatments L. lecanii (Least (V-4). Significant Columns represent Difference mean (LSD) percent test at α mortality= 0.05). See ± SE Table (n 2=. 10). Treatment columns bearing different alphabets are significantly different from other treatments (Least Significant Difference (LSD) test at α = 0.05). See Table 2.

Table 4. Median lethal concentration (LC50) values of different entomopathogenic fungal strains bioassayed against green peach aphid M. persicae.

Observation Time Fungal Strain LC50 (%) 95% FL Slope ± SE X2 (DF = 28) p-Value (days) BB-72 10 3.09 × 104 7.974–10.493 0.395 ± 0.035 197.736 ≤0.01 BB-252 10 1.29 × 104 8.759–15.214 0.278 ± 0.032 192.637 ≤0.01 V-4 10 4.10 × 103 10.306–23.828 0.183 ± 0.030 107.348 ≤0.01

LC50: Lethal concentration (%) of tested entomopathogenic fungal strains that killed 50% of the exposed aphid individuals; FL: 95% Fiducial (confidence) limits, DF: Degree of freedom. X2: Chi square

Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 6 of 12 Agriculture 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 12

Figure 2. MeanFigure mortality 2. Mean (%) mortality of M. persicae (%) of M. recorded persicae atrecorded different at time different intervals time intervals(DAT: Days (DAT: after Days treatmen after treatment)t) for conidial for conidialbioassays bioassays performed performed with different with different strains of strains B. of 6 7 8 −1 bassiana (BB-72B. bassiana and BB-252)(BB-72 and BB-252)L. lecanii and (V-4).L. lecaniiTreatments(V-4). included Treatments thr includedee conidial three concentrations conidial concentrations (i.e., 1 × 106, (i.e.,1 × 10 1 7× and10 1, 1× ×10108 conidiaand 1 mL× 10−1) ofconidia each fungal mL )strain of each and fungal one control.strain Columns and one represent control. mean Columns percent represent mortality mean ± percentSE (n = mortality10). Treatment± SE (columnsn = 10).Treatment bearing di columnsfferent alphabets bearing different are significantly alphabets different are signiﬁcantly from other different treatments from other (LSD test attreatments p = 0.05). See (LSD Table test at3. p = 0.05). See Table3.

Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 7 of 12

Table 3. Factorial analysis of variance comparison of mortality of M. persicae bioassayed with three different strains of entomopathogenic fungi. See Figure2.

Source DF SS MS F-value p-Value Concentration 3 117064 39021.3 600.11 ≤0.001 Time 3 204284 68094.7 1047.24 ≤0.001 Treatment 2 1718 859.0 13.21 ≤0.001 Concentration × Time 9 71757 7973.0 122.62 ≤0.001 Concentration × Treatment 6 645 107.6 1.65 0.131 Time × Treatment 6 745 124.2 1.91 ≤0.05 Concentration × Time × Treatment 18 411 22.8 0.35 0.994 Error 432 28090 65.0 Total 479 424715 CV/GM 26.1/30.9

Table 4. Median lethal concentration (LC50) values of different entomopathogenic fungal strains bioassayed against green peach aphid M. persicae.

Fungal Observation LC (%) 95% FL Slope ± SE X2 (DF = 28) p-Value Strain Time (days) 50 BB-72 10 3.09 × 104 7.974–10.493 0.395 ± 0.035 197.736 ≤0.01 BB-252 10 1.29 × 104 8.759–15.214 0.278 ± 0.032 192.637 ≤0.01 V-4 10 4.10 × 103 10.306–23.828 0.183 ± 0.030 107.348 ≤0.01

LC50: Lethal concentration (%) of tested entomopathogenic fungal strains that killed 50% of the exposed aphid individuals; FL: 95% Fiducial (conﬁdence) limits, DF: Degree of freedom. X2: Chi square

3.3. Entomopathogenicity of Binary Combinations of Entomopathogenic Fungal Strains against M. persicae

In case of pathogenicity bioassays performed with the binary combinations of LC33 and LC50 values of three fungal strains, there was a significant effect of all treatments and observation time intervals and their interaction on aphid mortality (Table5). Highest and significant aphid mortality (94%) was observed for BB-72 (LC50) + BB-252 (LC50), whereas 84% mortality was recorded for the combination of BB-72 (LC50) and V-4 (LC50). Binary combination of BB-252 (LC50) and V-4 (LC50) caused 80% aphid mortality (Figure3). However, in the final tertiary combination of LC 33 values of all three tested fungal strains (BB-72, BB-252 and V-4), mean aphid mortality was recorded as 78% (Figure3).

Table 5. Factorial analysis of variance of mortality of M. persicae bioassayed with binary combinations of three different strains of entomopathogenic fungi. See Figure3.

Source DF SS MS F-value p-Value Treatments 3 894 297.8 4.15 0.001 Time 4 109763 27440.8 382.01 <0.001 Time × Treatments 12 1049 87.4 1.22 0.2743 Error 180 12930 71.8 Total 199 124636 CV/GM 27.21/31.150 Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 8 of 12 Agriculture 2018, 8, x FOR PEER REVIEW 8 of 12

Figure 3. Mean mortality (%) of M. persicae recorded at different time intervals (DAT: Days after treatment) for bioassays performed with the binary combinations of

different strains of B. bassiana and L. lecanii. Treatments included the combination of LC33 values for BB-72 × BB-252 × V-4, LC50 values for BB-72 × BB-252, BB-72 × Figure 3. Mean mortality (%) of M. persicae recorded at different time intervals (DAT: Days after treatment) for bioassays performed with the binary combinations of V-4 and BB-252 × V-4, and control. Columns represent mean percent mortality ± SE (n = 10). Treatment columns bearing different alphabets are signiﬁcantly different different strains of B. bassiana and L. lecanii. Treatments included the combination of LC33 values for BB-72 × BB-252 × V-4, LC50 values for BB-72 × BB-252, BB-72 × V-4 and from other treatments (LSD test at α = 0.05). See Table5. BB-252 × V-4, and control. Columns represent mean percent mortality ± SE (n = 10). Treatment columns bearing different alphabets are significantly different from other treatments (LSD test at α = 0.05). See Table 5.

Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 9 of 12

4. Discussion Developing entomopathogenic fungi based biological control tools with enhanced efficacy against the target pests is one of the core areas of current biocontrol research. Many entomopathogenic fungal strains have been found effective against various insect pests [25–28]. The present study encompassed in-vitro determination of the effectiveness of different strains of entomopathogenic fungi against green peach aphid M. persicae. The results revealed that all tested strains of B. bassiana and L. lecanii could be effective biocontrol agents against aphids. These results are corroborated by the findings of previous studies reporting the efficiency of different strains of B. bassiana and L. lecanii against M. persicae and other aphid species [29,30]. In all bioassays, mortality of aphids appeared dose and time dependent and increased by increasing the concentrations of conidia and time after application. As 93, 86 and 79% mortality was found after 10 days of application at highest concentrations (1 × 108 conidia mL−1) of B. bassiana BB-72, B. bassiana BB-252, and L. lecanii V-4, respectively, while 94, 84, 80 and 78% mortality of aphids were caused after 10 days of application by fungal strain combinations of BB-72 (LC50) + BB-252 (LC50), BB-72 (LC50) + V-4 (LC50), BB-252 (LC50) + V-4 (LC50), and BB-72 (LC33) + BB-252 (LC33) + V-4 (LC33), respectively. An experiment was conducted for the evaluation of pathogenicity of L. lecanii isolates and found that best concentration was 1 × 108 conidia mL−1 with 86% nymphal mortality observed after at five days of application [31]. These results also corroborate the conclusions of [32] who studied that maximum mortality was 100% recorded after 12 days of application (at 107 and 108 conidia mL−1) of L. lecanii bioassayed against 3rd instar nymphs of green peach aphid. The virulence of entomopathogenic fungi is usually concentration dependent and target insects’ mortality by these fungi also depends on the temperature, exposure time and concentration (conidial suspension) [33,34]. The response of similar species of green peach aphid may differ to unlike strains of fungus. Even biotypes of aphid (same species) may have different susceptibility to a fungal suspension [35]. Efficacy of B. bassiana against M. persicae aphids was evaluated under controlled conditions with the concentration of 1 × 107 conidia mL−1 and found that three isolates of B. bassiana (BAU004, BAU018 and BAU019) showed high virulence against test aphids with a mortality of more than 75% [36]. Similarly, the results of our study are in accordance with those found by [29,37–39]. However, the findings of some studies are different from ours. This might be because of varied virulence of fungal strains and due to the differential response of target host individuals to that of particular entomopathogenic fungal isolates. Regarding the pathogenicity of different combinations of these fungal strains, no synergistic effect was observed for any combinations. L. lecanii strain (V-4) caused significant mortality alone but showed an antagonistic action for its combinations with both strains of B. bassiana (BB-72 and BB-252). The later strains showed compatibility and exhibited significantly higher mortality of M. persicae individuals than other combinations. However, these fungal strains might show a synergistic or additive action if applied in a sequential combination as demonstrated in the case of entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi [40]. Nevertheless, aphids have piercing-sucking type mouthparts to suck plant sap directly from the conductive (phloem) tissues. This behavior may prevent the ingestion of microbial agents such as bacteria and viruses because they need to be swallowed for infecting their hosts. On the other side, entomopathogenic fungi as B. bassiana and L. lecanii cause direct infection through the cuticular surface of target insect pests [41]. Furthermore, entomopathogenic fungi are considered to be safe and eco-friendly in comparison to the chemical insecticides [42], hence, are recommended against harmful sucking insect pests, such as aphids.

5. Conclusions In conclusion, this in-vitro study demonstrates the effectiveness of two different strains of B. bassiana (BB-72 and -252) and a strain of L. lecanii (V-4) against M. persicae, a cosmopolitan pest of winter vegetables and fruits worldwide. Both strains of B. bassiana exhibited higher mortality (91–95%) Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 10 of 12

than L. lecanii either alone or in binary combinations of LC50 values. Moreover, the compatibility of both entomopathogenic strains of B. bassiana (i.e., BB-72 and BB-252) constitutes the novelty of this study signifying the combined utilization of different entomopathogenic fungal isolates as new biocontrol tool against agricultural insect pests. However, further characterization of these fungal isolates and their potential functional insecticidal proteins is needed to better elucidate their mode of action.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, T.N., M.Z.M. and D.Q.; Methodology, T.N., A.B. and A.H.; Data Analysis, M.Z.M. and T.N.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, T.N. and A.B.; Writing—Review & Editing, D.Q., M.Z.M.; Supervision and Project Administration, D.Q.; Funding Acquisition, D.Q. Funding: This research was funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2017YFD0200900) and was partially supported by the Graduate School of Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (GSCAAS) for providing the PhD fellowship for this study. Acknowledgments: Authors thank Xiufen Yang and Lihua Guo of the Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences for their valuable advice on the experimental protocols and for their technical assistance. Conﬂicts of Interest: There is no potential conﬂict of interest regarding the publication of this manuscript.

References

1. Torres-Quintero, M.C.; Arenas-Sosa, I.; Peña-Chora, G.; Hernández-Velázquez, V.M. Feeding chamber for Myzus persicae culture (Hemiptera: Aphididae). Fla. Entomol. 2013, 96, 1600–1602. [CrossRef] 2. Van Emden, H.F.; Harrington, R. Aphids as Crop Pests; CAB International: Oxford, UK, 2017; p. 717, ISBN 9781780647098. 3. Blair, A.; Ritz, B.; Wesseling, C.; Freeman, L.B. Pesticides and Human Health; BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.: London, UK, 2015. 4. Motta-Delgado, P.A.; Murcia-Ordoñez, B. Hongos entomopatógenos como alternativa para el control biológico de plagas. Ambiente Água Interdiscip. J. Appl. Sci. 2011, 6, 77–90. [CrossRef] 5. Majeed, M.Z.; Fiaz, M.; Ma, C.-S.; Afzal, M. Entomopathogenicity of Three Muscardine Fungi, Beauveria bassiana, Isaria fumosorosea and Metarhizium anisopliae, against the Asian Citrus Psyllid, Diaphorina citri Kuwayama (Hemiptera: Psyllidae). Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2017, 27, 211–215. 6. Sahayaraj, K.; Namachivayam, S. Field evaluation of three entomopathogenic fungi on groundnut pests. Tropicultura 2011, 29, 143–147. 7. Scholte, E.-J.; Knols, B.G.; Samson, R.A.; Takken, W. Entomopathogenic fungi for mosquito control: A review. J. Insect Sci. 2004, 4, 19. [CrossRef][PubMed] 8. Tanzini, M.R.; Batista, S.; Setten, A.; Toschi, N. Compatibilidad de agentes tensoactivos con Beauveria bassiana y Metarhizium anisopliae. Manejo Integrado de Plagas Costa Rica 2001, 59, 15–18. 9. Cabanillas, H.E.; Jones, W.A. Pathogenicity of Isaria sp. (Hypocreales: Clavicipitaceae) against the sweet potato whitefly B biotype, Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae). Crop Prot. 2009, 28, 333–337. [CrossRef] 10. Landa, Z.; Osborne, L.; Lopez, F.; Eyal, J. A Bioassay for Determining Pathogenicity of Entomogenous Fungi on Whiteflies1. Biol. Control 1994, 4, 341–350. [CrossRef] 11. Mu¸stu, M.; Demirci, F.; Kaydan, M.B.; Ülgentürk, S. Laboratory assay of the effectiveness of the entomopathogenic fungus Isaria farinosa (Holmsk.) Fries (Sordariomycetes: Hypocreales) against the vine mealybug Planococcus ficus (Signoret) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), even under the use of fungicides. Int. J. Pest Manag. 2015, 61, 264–271. [CrossRef] 12. Ekesi, S.; Dimbi, S.; Maniania, N. The Role of Entomopathogenic fungi in the Integrated Management of Fruit Flies (Diptera: Tephritidae) with Emphasis on Species Occurring in Africa; Research SignPost: Kerala, India, 2007; Volume 37, pp. 239–274. 13. Mora, M.A.E.; Castilho, A.M.C.; Fraga, M.E. Classification and infection mechanism of Entomopathogenic fungi. Arquivos do Instituto Biológico 2017, 84.[CrossRef] 14. Nasir, M.; Hussain, M.; Iqbal, B.; Shehzad, M.A.; Ali, S.; Abbas, W.; Javed, M.M.; Hussain, S. A review on whitefly control by the use of Entomopathogenic fungi. In Proceedings of the 8th National Conference of Plant Pathology, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad, Pakistan, 28–29 November 2011; pp. 28–40. 15. Copping, L.G. The Manual of Biocontrol Agents; British Crop Protection Council: Alton, UK, 2004. Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 11 of 12

16. Zimmermann, G. Review on safety of the entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana and Beauveria brongniartii. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2007, 17, 553–596. [CrossRef] 17. Annamalai, M.; Kaushik, H.; Selvaraj, K. Bioefficacy of Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin and Lecanicillium lecanii Zimmerman against Thrips tabaci Lindeman. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. India Sect. B Biol. Sci. 2016, 86, 505–511. [CrossRef] 18. Dogan, Y.O.; Hazir, S.; Yildiz, A.; Butt, T.M.; Cakmak, I. Evaluation of entomopathogenic fungi for the control of Tetranychus urticae (Acari: Tetranychidae) and the effect of Metarhizium brunneum on the predatory mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Biol. Control 2017, 111, 6–12. [CrossRef] 19. Freed, S.; Jin, F.-L.; Ren, S.-X. Phylogenetics of entomopathogenic fungi isolated from the soils of different ecosystems. Pak. J. Zool. 2011, 43, 417–425. 20. Meyling, N.V.; Pell, J.K.; Eilenberg, J. Dispersal of Beauveria bassiana by the activity of nettle insects. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2006, 93, 121–126. [CrossRef][PubMed] 21. Samson, R.A.; Evans, H.C.; Latgé, J.-P. Atlas of Entomopathogenic fungi; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin, Germany, 2013. 22. Barta, M. Pathogenicity assessment of entomopathogenic fungi infecting Leptoglossus occidentalis (Heteroptera: Coreidae). Czech. Mycol. 2010, 62, 67–78. 23. Xu, J.-H.; Feng, M.-G. Pandora delphacis (Entomophthorales: Entomophthoraceae) infection affects the fecundity and population dynamics of Myzus persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae) at varying regimes of temperature and relative humidity in the laboratory. Biol. Control 2002, 25, 85–91. [CrossRef] 24. Finney, D. Probit Analysis; Cambridge University Press: London, UK, 1971; p. 333. 25. Amnuaykanjanasin, A.; Jirakkakul, J.; Panyasiri, C.; Panyarakkit, P.; Nounurai, P.; Chantasingh, D.; Eurwilaichitr, L.; Cheevadhanarak, S.; Tanticharoen, M. Infection and colonization of tissues of the aphid Myzus persicae and cassava mealybug Phenacoccus manihoti by the fungus Beauveria bassiana. BioControl 2013, 58, 379–391. [CrossRef] 26. de Faria, M.R.; Wraight, S.P. Mycoinsecticides and mycoacaricides: A comprehensive list with worldwide coverage and international classification of formulation types. Biol. Control 2007, 43, 237–256. [CrossRef] 27. Shah, P.; Pell, J. Entomopathogenic fungi as biological control agents. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2003, 61, 413–423. [CrossRef] 28. Yun, H.-G.; Kim, D.-J.; Gwak, W.-S.; Shin, T.-Y.; Woo, S.-D. Entomopathogenic Fungi as Dual Control Agents against Both the Pest Myzus persicae and Phytopathogen Botrytis cinerea. Mycobiology 2017, 45, 192–198. [CrossRef] 29. Khan, S.; Guo, L.; Shi, H.; Mijit, M.; Qiu, D. Bioassay and enzymatic comparison of six entomopathogenic fungal isolates for virulence or toxicity against green peach aphids Myzus persicae. Afr. J. Biotechnol. 2012, 11, 14193–14203. [CrossRef] 30. Hesketh, H.; Alderson, P.G.; Pye, B.J.; Pell, J.K. The development and multiple uses of a standardised bioassay method to select hypocrealean fungi for biological control of aphids. Biol. Control 2008, 46, 242–255. [CrossRef] 31. Loureiro, E.S.; Oliveira, N.C.; Wilcken, C.F.; Batista, A.B. Patogenicidade de Verticillium lecanii ao pulgão-do-pinus. Revista Árvore 2004, 28, 765–770. [CrossRef] 32. Ashouri, A.; Arzanian, N.; Askary, H.; Rasoulian, G. Pathogenicity of the fungus, Verticillium lecanii, to the green peach aphid, Myzus persicae (Hom.: Aphididae). Commun. Agric. Appl. Biol. Sci. 2004, 69, 205–209. 33. Ansari, M.; Vestergaard, S.; Tirry, L.; Moens, M. Selection of a highly virulent fungal isolate, Metarhizium anisopliae CLO 53, for controlling Hoplia philanthus. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2004, 85, 89–96. [CrossRef] 34. Wright, M.S.; Raina, A.K.; Lax, A.R. A strain of the fungus Metarhizium anisopliae for controlling subterranean termites. J. Econ. Entomol. 2005, 98, 1451–1458. [CrossRef] 35. Blanford, S.; Thomas, M.B.; Pugh, C.; Pell, J.K. Temperature checks the Red Queen? Resistance and virulence in a fluctuating environment. Ecol. Lett. 2003, 6, 2–5. [CrossRef] 36. Al-alawi, M.S.; Obeidat, M. Selection of Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin isolates for management of Myzus persicae (Sultzar) (Hom.: Aphidae) based on virulence and growth related characteristics. Am. J. Agric. Biol. Sci. 2014, 9, 94. [CrossRef] Agronomy 2019, 9, 7 12 of 12

37. Abdelaziz, O.; Senoussi, M.M.; Oufroukh, A.; Birgücü, A.K.; Karaca, I.;˙ Kouadri, F.; Naima, B.; Bensegueni, A. Pathogenicity of three entomopathogenic fungi, to the aphid species, Metopolophium dirhodum (Walker) (Hemiptera: Aphididae), and their Alkaline protease activities. Egypt. J. Biol. Pest Control 2018, 28, 24. [CrossRef] 38. Al-Keridis, L.A. Entomopathogenic Fungi as A biological Control Agents on green peach aphid, Myzus persicae in Potatoes Crop. Int. J. ChemTech Res. 2017, 10, 378–385. 39. Jandricic, S.; Filotas, M.; Sanderson, J.; Wraight, S. Pathogenicity of conidia-based preparations of entomopathogenic fungi against the greenhouse pest aphids Myzus persicae, Aphis gossypii, and Aulacorthum solani (Hemiptera: Aphididae). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 2014, 118, 34–46. [CrossRef] 40. Anbesse, S.A.; Adge, B.J.; Gebru, W.M. Laboratory screening for virulent entomopathogenic nematodes (Heterorhabditis bacteriophora and Steinernema yirgalemense) and fungi (Metarhizium anisopliae and Beauveria bassiana) and assessment of possible synergistic effects of combined use against grubs of the barley chafer Coptognathus curtipennis. Nematology 2008, 10, 701–709. 41. Wraight, S.P.; Carruthers, R.I. Production, delivery, and use of mycoinsecticides for control of insect pests on ﬁeld crops. In Biopesticides: Use and Delivery; Humana Press Inc.: Totowa, NJ, USA, 1999; pp. 233–269. 42. Goettel, M.S.; Jaronski, S.T. Safety and registration of microbial agents for control of grasshoppers and locusts. Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can. 1997, 129, 83–99. [CrossRef]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).