Abstract
BACKGROUND
The combination of entomopathogenic fungi (EPFs) with natural enemies represents a promising strategy for more sustainable management programs within the context of integrated pest management (IPM). This study aimed to evaluate the pathogenicity of EPF isolates on 2nd‐instar nymphs of Euschistus crenator, through daily mortality and estimation of lethal time, in addition to investigating the selectivity of the most efficient isolates with respect to the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi, an important natural enemy of stink bugs in soybean crops.
RESULTS
All isolates were pathogenic to E. crenator, with LCMAP106, UFSM‐01, and the commercial strain PL63 (BOV) of Beauveria bassiana promoting 83.75%, 75% and 87.5% mortality, respectively, after 10 days. The biological parameters of the offspring of females of T. podisi exposed to these isolates were evaluated. The exposure did not affect parasitism or survival, although it did influence the sex ratio, emergence and egg‐to‐adult cycle. This study also confirmed, for the first time, the parasitism of E. crenator eggs by T. podisi.
CONCLUSION
The results demonstrate the potential of different fungal isolates in controlling E. crenator and indicate that T. podisi can be used in conjunction with EPFs, as its ability to parasitize pest eggs and interrupt their biological cycle was not affected. © 2026 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
Keywords: biological control, entomopathogenic fungi (EPFs), intraguild interaction, natural enemy, stink bugs
Entomopathogenic fungi effectively suppressed the emerging soybean pest Euschistus crenator, with isolates LCMAP106, UFSM‐01 and a commercial bioinsecticide achieving the highest mortality. These agents did not reduce parasitism or survival of the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi, highlighting their potential for integration into environmentally sustainable pest management programs.

1. INTRODUCTION
Phytophagous stink bugs of the genus Euschistus Dallas (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) are considered key pests in soybean cultivation [Glycine max (L.) Merrill], causing direct damage to the grains and compromising crop productivity. 1 , 2 , 3 Among the species of this genus, Euschistus crenator (Fabricius, 1794) has been recorded in the northern regions of Brazil, in the states of Roraima and Pará. 4 Owing to its morphological similarities with the brown soybean stink bug, Euschistus heros (Fabricius, 1798), this species is often misidentified in the field, which hinders the adoption of specific management strategies. 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 This limitation is concerning because susceptibility to insecticides varies significantly among species and developmental stages. 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 Considering that chemical control is still the main strategy employed in stink bug management, 2 , 16 , 17 , 18 identification errors may favor the evolution of resistant populations and negatively impact beneficial insects, especially when there are successive applications of broad‐spectrum insecticides. 8 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25
Within the context of integrated pest management (IPM), biological control is a promising strategy for managing phytophagous stink bugs, 2 , 26 , 27 , 28 with particular emphasis on the use of the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi Ashmead, 1893 (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). This micro‐hymenopteran, measuring ≈1.0 mm in length, develops from egg to adult inside stink bug eggs 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 and exhibits high reproductive potential, allowing parasitism rates to exceed 80%, depending on the host species and environmental conditions. 26 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 T. podisi is recognized for its ability to disrupt the life cycle of pests and its effectiveness in regulating pentatomid populations in agricultural systems. 30 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 Considering that E. crenator exhibits biological parameters similar to those of E. heros, 4 the preferential host of T. podisi, 4 , 30 , 47 it is feasible to explore the potential of this parasitoid against E. crenator.
Phytophagous stink bug populations also can be regulated by biological control promoted by entomopathogens, with emphasis on entomopathogenic fungi (EPFs), which are characterized by their unique mode‐of‐action (MoA), which is characterized by their ability to actively penetrate the cuticle of insects. 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 Several fungal isolates have demonstrated high insecticidal potential for the biological control of stink bugs, representing a promising alternative to chemical insecticides. 48 , 50 , 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 The most studied EPFs for controlling phytophagous stink bugs are Metarhizium anisopliae (Metschn.) Sorokin and Beauveria bassiana (Bals.‐Criv.) Vuill. 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 The latter shows high efficiency in controlling pentatomid species such as E. heros, Piezodorus guildinii, Nezara viridula and Halyomorpha halys, with mortality rates from 88% to 100%, depending on the isolate, concentration and exposure time. 48 , 50 , 55 , 63 However, for these agents to be effectively incorporated into IPM, they must be selective towards natural enemies, ensuring the conservation of ecosystem services. 64 , 65
The interaction between natural enemies is called intraguild and can be synergistic, additive or antagonistic, depending on the species involved, concentration and exposure time. 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 Therefore, the integration of different biological control agents requires careful attention, as negative interactions among system components can compromise management effectiveness. 70 , 71 In light of this, the present study was conducted to evaluate the insecticidal effect of fungal isolates on E. crenator nymphs and their selectivity to the egg parasitoid T. podisi.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Obtaining and rearing of Euschistus crenator
Adults and eggs of E. crenator were obtained from the Insect Biology Laboratory at the ‘Luiz de Queiroz’ College of Agriculture, University of São Paulo (ESALQ/USP) in Piracicaba, São Paulo, Brazil. The colony was maintained in the laboratory under controlled conditions of temperature (27 ± 1 °C during the day and 26 ± 1 °C at night), relative humidity (RH, 65% ± 10%) and a photoperiod of 12 h:12 h, light:dark. Nymphs and adults were fed a natural diet consisting of green beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) and raw, shelled peanuts (Arachis hypogaea L.). Water was provided ad libitum via moistened cotton, which was replaced as needed.
2.2. Obtaining and rearing of Telenomus podisi
Euschistus heros eggs parasitized by T. podisi were provided by the Research Group on Integrated Pest Management in Agriculture (AGRIMIP) at the São Paulo State University ‘Júlio de Mesquita Filho’ (FCA/UNESP), Botucatu, São Paulo, Brazil. The newly emerged parasitoids were fed with droplets of honey and kept in a BOD‐type incubator under controlled conditions of temperature (27 ± 1 °C during the day and 26 ± 1 °C at night), relative humidity (65 ± 10%) and photoperiod (12 h:12 h, light:dark). For colony establishment, unparasitized eggs of E. heros from a laboratory colony were used. The eggs were affixed to strips of white cardboard (20 × 60 mm) using a 20% gum arabic solution.
2.3. Obtaining the fungal isolates and the bioinsecticide
The entomopathogenic fungal isolates LCMAP078 and LCMAP106 (B. bassiana), and LCMAP099 (Penicillium bilaiae Chalab.) were provided by the Entomopathogenic Microorganism Bank of the Laboratory of Microbial Control of Pest Arthropods (LCMAP) at the Faculty of Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences, São Paulo State University ‘Júlio de Mesquita Filho’ (FCAV/UNESP). The tested fungal isolates were deposited in the NCBI database (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore) under accession nos PV656746 (LCMAP078), PV656748 (LCMAP099) and PV656747 (LCMAP106). The B. bassiana isolate (UFSM‐1) was supplied by the Soil Department of the Federal University of Santa Maria (UFSM). 50 The isolates were stored in glycerol (10%) in an ultrafreezer at −80 °C. In addition to the isolates, the bioinsecticide Boveril Evo®, based on B. bassiana STRAIN PL63 (BOV) (Koppert Brasil, Paracicaba, Brazil), was used at the average dose recommended for E. heros (0.844 g a.i. L−1, equivalent to 1.7 × 106 conidia mL−1). Suspensions were prepared by diluting fungal isolates in autoclaved deionized water containing Tween 80 (0.05%). Conidia counting was performed using a Neubauer chamber under a phase‐contrast microscope (Axio Lab.A1; Zeiss, Jena, Germany), and the concentration was standardized to 1 × 108 conidia mL−1.
2.4. Mortality bioassay
For the tests, newly hatched E. crenator nymphs were fed and kept in Petri dishes (diameter 14 cm) until they reached the 2nd‐instar (± 5 days), 4 an instar with high susceptibility to entomopathogen infection. 72 A total of 400 2nd‐instar nymphs were used in the experiments.
Fungal suspensions were prepared by cultivating the isolates in Petri dishes (diameter 14 cm) containing potato dextrose agar (PDA) and pentabiotic (0.5 g L−1), kept in a BOD‐type incubator at 28 ± 2 °C for 10 days until conidiogenesis occurred. After this period, the cultures were scraped with a metal spatula, and the contents were diluted in autoclaved deionized water containing Tween 80 (0.05%).
In order to assess the bioactivity of the isolates, 100‐mL suspensions were prepared containing autoclaved distilled water, Tween 80 (0.05%), and the respective isolate at a concentration of 1 × 108 conidia·mL−1, as well as the commercial strain PL63 (BOV) applied at the average dose recommended by the manufacturer (0.844 g a.i. L−1, equivalent to 1.7 × 106 conidia·mL−1). Snap bean sections (± 5.0 cm) were immersed in the suspensions for 30 s, and after air‐drying, they were transferred to plastic containers lined with filter paper and sealed with voile fabric. The test arenas, containing the insects and treated pods, were maintained under controlled conditions of temperature (27 ± 1 °C during the day and 26 ± 1 °C at night), RH (65 ± 10%) and photoperiod (12 h:12 h, light:dark). The control treatment consisted of 2nd‐instar nymphs treated with autoclaved deionized water containing Tween 80 (0.05%). Snap beans were offered and replaced every 2 days for the insect feeding. Cumulative mortality was evaluated daily for 10 days, a timeframe within the mortality period of pentatomids caused by different B. bassiana isolates. 48 , 62 , 73
2.5. Selectivity bioassay
Twenty‐five nonparasitized eggs of E. crenator, <48 h old, were used. The eggs were fixed onto strips of white cardboard (5.0 × 15 mm) using 20% gum arabic. For the selectivity tests, the fungal isolate LCMAP106, owing to its greater lethality against E. crenator, and UFSM‐01, owing to its efficiency in pest control and previous studies involving E. heros, another host species of T. podisi, 50 were selected. Fungal suspensions were prepared at a concentration of 1 × 108 conidia mL−1 in 100‐mL beakers containing autoclaved deionized water and Tween 80 (0.05%), in addition to the commercial strain PL63 (BOV) applied at the recommended average dose (0.844 g a.i. L−1, equivalent to 1.7 × 106 conidia mL−1). The suspensions were applied inside glass tubes (25 × 85 mm) with the aid of a Potter Tower (Burkard, Hertfordshire, England) until runoff under constant air pressure (10.0 psi and 0.6895 bar).
After complete drying of the tubes in a laminar flow chamber (VECO, Campinas, Brazil), droplets of honey were added to the inner walls, and a mated T. podisi female was introduced. Fifteen mated females <48 h old were used per treatment, totaling 60 T. podisi females. The control consisted of autoclaved deionized water containing Tween 80 (0.05%) under the same conditions described above.
The females were kept in contact with the treated surface for 24 h, after which a card containing 25 unparasitized E. crenator eggs was added for parasitism. After 24 h, the parasitized eggs were removed and transferred to glass tubes without the presence of females. A second set of eggs was offered to assess the effects of the treatments after 72 h of exposure, according to the methodology described. 74
The evaluated parameters were survival (days), parasitism rate (%), emergence rate (%), sex ratio and egg‐to‐adult cycle of the offspring (days), after 24 and 72 h of exposure of T. podisi females to the contaminated surface.
2.6. Data analysis
Bioassays were conducted using a completely randomized design (CRD). The data obtained were subjected to normality and homoscedasticity tests using the Shapiro–Wilk and Bartlett tests, respectively. Mortality data were previously transformed using √(Y + 0.5) or arcsine(√(Y/100)), depending on the nature of the dataset, to meet the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance before analysis using ANOVA (P ≤ 0.05). When significant, Tukey's multiple comparison test was performed at the 95% probability level. When the assumptions were not met, the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis analysis was used, followed by multiple comparisons with the Mann–Whitney U‐test (P ≤ 0.05). The survival curve was constructed using daily survival data and based on the Kaplan–Meier methodology with the log‐rank test, 75 and the lethal time for 50% mortality (LT50) was estimated using probit analysis. All statistical analyses were performed using SAS ondemand for academics software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA), and graphs were produced using sigmaplot (SigmaPlot 12.3).
3. RESULTS
3.1. Mortality of Euschistus crenator by fungal isolates
The mortality rates of 2nd‐instar nymphs of E. crenator exposed to pods contaminated with fungal isolates of B. bassiana (LCMAP078, LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01), P. bilaiae (LCMAP099, and strain PL63 (BOV) are shown in Fig. 1. Three days postapplication (dpa), a significant difference was observed among the treatments (χ2 = 14.721; df = 5; P = 0.0116), with the LCMAP106 isolate showing the highest accumulated mortality (7.5 ± 2.5%), which differed from that of the control and the other isolates. At 4 dpa, LCMAP106 (18.75% ± 8.99%) maintained a significantly higher mortality, similar only to PL63 (BOV) (6.25% ± 2.39%), according to Tukey's test (P ≤ 0.01). At 6 dpa, LCMAP106 (46.25% ± 2.39%) showed significantly higher accumulated mortality than the other treatments and the control (5.0%) (P ≤ 0.01). The other treatments remained statistically similar to each other, with mortality ranging from 17.5% ± 5.95% (LCMAP078) to 42.5% ± 13.62% (BOV).
Figure 1.

Cumulative mortality (%) of 2nd‐instar nymphs of E. crenator exposed to residues of different fungal isolates and the control (autoclaved deionized water) over 10 days of evaluation. Values are expressed as mean ± standard error. Significant differences between treatments and the control were determined using Kruskal–Wallis or ANOVA, followed by Mann–Whitney's U‐test or Tukey's test for multiple comparisons. Mortality data were transformed using √(Y + 0.5) or arcsine(√(Y/100)) when necessary. Asterisks indicate significant differences: **, P < 0.01;***, P < 0.001; and ****, P < 0.0001
At 7 dpa, all treatments differed significantly from the control (P < 0.0001), and differences were observed among the isolates. The LCMAP106 isolate (75.0% ± 5.40%) showed the highest mortality rate, followed by BOV (66.25% ± 9.44%), UFSM‐01 (58.75% ± 12.97%), and LCMAP099 (47.5% ± 6.61%), whereas LCMAP078 (40.0% ± 2.04%) had the lowest mortality during this period. The control group had a mortality rate of 10.0% ± 2.04%. Between 8 and 10 dpa, all treatments showed significantly higher mortality than the control (P < 0.0001), ranging from 68.75% ± 10.28% (LCMAP078) to 83.75% ± 8.26% (LCMAP106) at 10 dpa. During the same period, the control showed a mortality of 18.75% ± 3.15%, whereas BOV showed 87.5% ± 5.95%.
The fungal isolates tested showed variations in the mean lethal time for 50% of the population (LT50). LCMAP78 exhibited the highest LT50 (8.224 ± 0.153 days), indicating a slower speed of action than the other treatments, whereas LCMAP99 (7.970 ± 0.213 days) and UFSM01 (7.326 ± 0.282 days) presented intermediate values. Finally, BOV (6.707 ± 0.181 days) and the B. bassiana isolate LCMAP106 (6.402 ± 0.208 days) showed the lowest LT50, demonstrating a faster effect on E. crenator nymphs than the other treatments (Table 1).
Table 1.
Estimated LT₅₀ for 50% mortality of 2nd‐instar nymphs of E. crenator exposed to different fungal isolates
| Trataments | LT50 a (days) ± SE b | 95% CI (days) c |
|---|---|---|
| LCMAP078 | 8.224 ± 0.153 | 7.925–8.524 |
| LCMAP099 | 7.970 ± 0.213 | 7.479–8.460 |
| LCMAP106 | 6.402 ± 0.208 | 5.923–6.882 |
| UFSM‐01 | 7.326 ± 0.282 | 6.676–7.975 |
| BOV | 6.707 ± 0.181 | 6.290–7.125 |
LT50 = Lethal time for the death of 50% of individuals.
SP = Standard error.
CI 95% – 95% confidence interval for TL50.
3.2. Selectivity of Beauveria bassiana isolates against Telenomus podisi
The morphology of healthy and unparasitized E. crenator eggs is whitish‐yellow, whereas parasitized eggs display gray to black coloration (Fig. 2). The presence of fungal isolates did not alter the coloration of parasitized eggs, which remained similar to that of the control group. Contact between females and surfaces treated with B. bassiana isolates did not influence the average rate of egg parasitism by T. podisi (P > 0.05). The parasitism rates after 24 h were 93.37% ± 2.09% (control), 91.15% ± 2.28% (LCMAP106), 88.7% ± 1.76% (UFSM‐01), and 91.25% ± 2.02% (BOV) [Fig. 3(A)]. After 72 h, the average parasitism rates were 69.65% ± 3.77% (control), 74.04% ± 3.26% (LCMAP106), 73.32% ± 3.20% (UFSM‐01) and 74.04% ± 3.26% (BOV) [Fig. 4(A)].
Figure 2.

Morphology of E. crenator eggs: healthy (A) and parasitized (T. podisi) (B).
Figure 3.

(A) Parasitism (%), (B) emergence (%), (C) sex ratio and (D) egg‐to‐adult cycle duration (days) of T. podisi offspring after 24 h of exposure of parasitoid females to different B. bassiana isolates (LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01) and to the commercial strain PL 63. Bars with the same letter do not differ significantly according to the nonparametric Kruskal–Wallis test (P ≤ 0.05). Error bars represent the standard errors of the mean.
Figure 4.

(A) Parasitism (%), (B) emergence (%), (C) sex ratio and (D) egg‐to‐adult cycle duration (days) of T. podisi offspring after 72 h of exposure to parasitoid females to different B. bassiana isolates (LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01) and the commercial strain PL 63. Bars with the same letter do not differ significantly according to Tukey's test (P ≤ 0.05). Error bars represent the standard errors of the mean.
The emergence rate of T. podisi offspring did not differ significantly between the treatments after 24 h, with rates ranging from 80.44% (LCMAP106) to 87.29% (BOV) (χ2 = 2.846; df = 3; P = 0.416), with values above 80.0% [Fig. 3(B)]. However, after 72 h, a significant reduction in emergence was observed for the treatments with LCMAP106 (47.42% ± 4.734%) and UFSM‐01 (48.84% ± 4.972%) compared to the control (68.97% ± 5.18%) and BOV (61.88% ± 4.97%), according to Tukey's test (P ≤ 0.01) [Fig. 4(B)]. The sex ratio of T. podisi offspring was significantly affected by the treatments after 24 h (χ2 = 23.612; df = 3; P < 0.0001), with the LCMAP106 (0.599% ± 0.098%) and UFSM‐01 (0.503% ± 0.10%) treatments resulting in a lower proportion of females compared to the control (0.848% ± 0.064%) and BOV (0.869% ± 0.063%) [Fig. 3(C)]. However, after 72 h, there were no significant differences in the sex ratio between the treatments (χ2 = 2.579; df = 3; P = 0.461), with all values ranging from 0.5589 ± 0.123 (UFSM‐01) to 0.856 ± 0.064 (Control) [Fig. 4(C)]. The developmental period from egg to adult was significantly affected by the treatments at both time intervals (P < 0.0001). The fungal isolates prolonged this period compared to the control group, whereas PL63 (BOV) led to an increased cycle only after 24 h [Figs 3(D) and 4(D)].
Despite the visual tendency for higher early mortality in the BOV group, especially evident in the Kaplan–Meier curve (Fig. 5), statistical analysis using the log‐rank test did not indicate significant differences in the survival rates of T. podisi females exposed to the fungal isolates and the PL63 (BOV) strain of B. bassiana (log‐rank test: χ2 = 0.6232; df = 3; P = 0.8911). These results suggest that the bioinsecticide may affect the survival of T. podisi females, but this effect was not statistically detectable under the experimental conditions used. Survival analysis using the Kaplan–Meier method indicated that the LT50 ranged from 27.5 days for the commercial strain PL63 (BOV) to 32.0 days for the UFSM‐01 isolate, with 30.0 days for LCMAP106 and 28.0 days for the control group, with no significant differences between treatments (Table 2).
Figure 5.

Survival curves of T. podisi females after exposure to different treatments: control, bioinsecticide based on B. bassiana (BOV), and fungal isolates LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01 (log‐rank test: χ2 = 0,6232; gl = 3; P = 0,8911).
Table 2.
Estimated survival of T. podisi females after exposure to different fungal isolates and the bioinsecticide based on Beauveria bassiana
| Treataments | Mean±SE (days) | LT50 (days) † | 95% CI (days) ‡ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Control | 28.07 ± 2.00 | 28.0 | 22.0 – 35.0 |
| BOV | 26.88 ± 2.07 | 27.5 | 20.0 – 33.0 |
| LCMAP106 | 28.66 ± 2.02 | 30.0 | 22.0 – 37.0 |
| UFSM‐01 | 29.76 ± 1.97 | 32.0 | 24.0 – 39.0 |
LT50, lethal time for death of 50% of individuals.
CI, 95% confidence interval for LT50.
4. DISCUSSION
This study demonstrated, for the first time, the potential of different EPFs in controlling E. crenator, a species for which there have been no records of the effectiveness of these biological agents. Although the action of EPFs on stink bugs has been widely reported, most related studies have sought to evaluate the insecticidal potential of these fungi by means of insect immersion or direct topical application on the pest. 48 , 50 , 57 , 59 , 63 , 72 , 76 , 77 , 78 , 79 The present study specifically aimed to evaluate the effect of surfaces treated with different fungal isolates, simulating conditions closer to those found in the field, in which spraying presents difficulties in reaching the target insect, and control depends largely on the pest's exposure to contaminated surfaces. 80 , 81 , 82 , 83 , 84 , 85 The results obtained broaden the scope of studies on the microbial control of stink bugs, including E. crenator, among the complex of target pests for these biological agents, which is particularly relevant in light of the growing demand for more sustainable and environmentally safe control methods. 86 , 87 , 88 , 89
A remarkable finding of this study was the mortality rate of 71.25% ± 5.91% in E. crenator nymphs caused by the P. bilaiae isolate LCMAP099. This finding is particularly significant, as there are no records of insecticidal activity of this species against soybean‐associated stink bugs. Unlike B. bassiana, which acts through active penetration of the insect cuticle, species of the genus Penicillium are widely recognized for producing toxic secondary metabolites with insecticidal properties. 90 , 91 , 92 The insecticidal activity of Penicillium‐derived metabolites against insect pests suggests that mortality may be the result from ingestion or contact toxicity rather than cuticular infection. 93 , 94 , 95 Therefore, the observed activity of P. bilaiae against E. crenator may be associated with the production of one or more bioactive metabolites, opening new perspectives for the biotechnological exploration of this genus as a source of novel natural insecticides. 96 , 97
In the present study, the control group exhibited performance within the expected survival parameters. Under laboratory rearing conditions, E. crenator nymphs fed on soybean pods may exhibit mortality rates close to 36% up to the adult stage. 4 However, the UFSM‐01 isolate promoted a mortality rate of 75.0% ± 10.6% in E. crenator, a result comparable to that observed by other authors 50 for E. heros, who reported 75% mortality by 9 dpa and 97% by 15 dpa of the same isolate. The use of B. bassiana in the management of E. heros has been explored, with mortality rates ranging from 70% to 90% under glasshouse conditions and reaching ≤97% in laboratory conditions, especially when concentrations between 1 × 108 and 1 × 109 conidia mL−1 are used. 50 , 58 These results corroborate the potential of B. bassiana as a biological control agent for different species within the stink bug complex. 56 , 98 , 99
However, susceptibility to the same isolate can vary significantly between species because of physiological and behavioral differences. 100 , 101 For example, the emission of volatile compounds by stink bugs may have fungicidal or fungistatic effects, compromising the efficacy of the pathogen. 102 , 103 This intra‐ and interspecific variability reinforces the need for careful selection of isolates and prior characterization of the pathogen–host interaction, crucial steps for the development of more effective and selective formulations. 51 , 104 , 105
The germination of EPF conidia occurs between 12 and 48 h after adhesion to the host's integument, provided that the temperature and humidity are adequate. 106 , 107 , 108 , 109 The destruction of the cuticle, which is necessary for insect death, usually occurs between 7 and 10 days after infection but may extend up to 21 days depending on the species. 110 , 111 , 112 In the present study, a similar pattern was observed, with a progressive increase in mortality over time (Fig. 1). The more pronounced mortality between 6 and 10 days indicates that the action cycle of B. bassiana on E. crenator is compatible with that described for other stink bugs, such as E. heros and Nezara viridula (Linnaeus, 1758) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) and Piezodorus guildinii Westwood, 1837 (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). 58 , 103 , 113 Among the treatments, the commercial strain PL63 (BOV) was the most efficient, reaching 87.5% ± 5.95% mortality after 10 days, which reinforces the stability and potential of commercial formulations. 104 , 114
The selectivity of B. bassiana toward natural enemies including predators and parasitoids, 64 , 115 , 116 , 117 allows its integration with other biological control strategies, contributing to the sustainability of agricultural systems. 105 , 118 , 119 , 120 In this context, the egg parasitoid T. podisi, even after exposure to B bassiana‐based fungal isolates, maintained high parasitism rates, reaching >80% of E. crenator eggs within 24 h and over 70% after 72 h. The development of the parasitoids could be monitored by the change in coloration of the host eggs, which darkened as the adults emerged, as described. 40 These results confirm previous studies 74 that did not observe adverse effects on the parasitism of E. heros eggs by T. podisi, even after females were exposed to surfaces contaminated with B. bassiana‐ and M. anisopliae‐based bioinsecticides. Although formulated products contain co‐formulants that may interfere with interactions with natural enemies, 121 , 122 in this study, the interaction was observed to be positive, and the parasitism of E. crenator eggs by T. podisi was not affected.
The emergence of T. podisi can be affected by several factors, including the age of the females, with a progressive decrease in the emergence of offspring observed as the females age. 123 Fungi can reduce the quality of the host for parasitoid larvae, thus influencing the emergence rate of the offspring. 124 This effect was observed in the reduction of offspring emergence percentages to 47.4% and 48.8%, caused by the LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01 isolates after 72 h. Nevertheless, parasitoids can secrete substances with fungistatic action in the host, preventing fungi from colonizing it and thus ensuring the emergence of their offspring. 67
The sex ratio of egg parasitoids is influenced by factors such as the age of the female and the quality of the host egg. 30 , 125 In the present study, the fungal isolates altered the sex ratio, which approached 0.5 after 24 h of exposure. Reductions in the sex ratio can negatively impact stink bug control, as only females are parasitic. 126 The development time from egg to adult emergence for T. podisi lasts an average of 10–14 days at temperatures of 25–32 °C. 127 Spraying B. bassiana isolates onto T. podisi and Telenomus remus Nixon, 1937 (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) did not alter the egg‐to‐adult period in previous studies. 74 , 128 Although some isolates may reduce or prolong this period, 129 , 130 , 131 small changes are unlikely to affect the population maintenance of natural enemies in the field. 132
No significant differences were observed in the survival time of adult T. podisi, regardless of whether they were exposed to fungal isolates. Under laboratory conditions, the longevity of adults of this species can range from 3 to 54 days, depending on factors such as nutrition and the availability of host eggs. 40 , 133 This variation can be influenced by a variety of factors, including the direct effects of nonselective entomopathogens, as well as environmental conditions such as temperature, humidity and host quality. 29 , 42 , 130 , 134 , 135 However, the survival values obtained in this study indicate that the tested fungal isolates were selective for the parasitoids, even under conditions of high exposure, such as those applied in laboratory tests. 136 , 137 , 138 These results indicate the potential for integration between EPFs and egg parasitoids, promoting more sustainable and ecologically sound pest management. 49 , 139 , 140
5. CONCLUSION
The results obtained demonstrate the potential of B. bassiana isolates in the biocontrol of E. crenator, with special emphasis on the performance of LCMAP106 and UFSM‐01 isolates. Regarding the selectivity of the isolates toward the egg parasitoid T. podisi, despite the reduction in offspring emergence rate and changes in the sex ratio of the parasitoids, the impact on the performance of T. podisi in terms of parasitism was minimal. This indicates that the association between egg parasitoids and the use of entomopathogenic fungi is promising for the management of E. crenator.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work reported in this study.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
Paulo Henrique Martins da Silva: Contributed to the conception, design, acquisition and interpretation of data, was involved in drafting the manuscript and agreed to be responsible for aspects related to the work, such as its accuracy and integrity. Gustavo Andrade Carneiro: Contributed to the conception, design, acquisition and interpretation of data, and critical review of the manuscript. Ricardo Antônio Polanczyk: Contributed to the conception and design of the work, and was involved in the critical review of the manuscript for important intellectual content and final approval of the version to be published.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior – Brasil (CAPES) – finance code 001. The Article Processing Charge for the publication of this research was funded by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior ‐ Brasil (CAPES) (ROR identifier: 00x0ma614). [Correction added on 10 February 2026, after first online publication: CAPES funding statement has been added.]
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
REFERÊNCIAS
- 1. Panizzi AR, Mcpherson JE, James DG, Javahery M and Mcpherson RM, Stink Bugs (Pentatomidae), in Stink Bugs (Pentatomidae) in Heteroptera of Economic Importance, ed. by Schaefer CW and Panizzi AR. CRC Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 421–474 (2000). [Google Scholar]
- 2. Sosa‐gómez DR, Corrêa‐ferreira BS, Kraemer B, Pasini A, Husch PE, Vieira CED et al., Prevalence, damage, management and insecticide resistance of stink bug populations (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in commodity crops. Agric For Entomol 22:99–118 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 3. Ziller S, Euschistus heros (neotropical brown stink bug). CABI Compend 1–13 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 4. Hickmann F, Savaris M, Corrêa AS and Schwertner CF, Euschistus crenator (Fabricius) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae): a new invasive species on soybean fields in northern Brazil. Neotrop Entomol 50:497–503 (2021). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Esquivel JF, Anderson RM and Droleskey RE, A visual guide for identification of Euschistus spp. (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in central Texas. Southwest Entomol 34:485–488 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 6. Preti M, Verheggen F and Angeli S, Insect pest monitoring with camera‐equipped traps: strengths and limitations. J Pest Sci 94:203–217 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 7. Golan K, Kot I, Kmie' K and Górska‐Drabik E, Approaches to integrated pest management in orchards: Comstockaspis perniciosa (Comstock) case study. Agriculture 13:131 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 8. Siddiqui JA, Fan R, Naz H, Bamisile BS, Hafeez M, Ghani MI et al., Insights into insecticide‐resistance mechanisms in invasive species: challenges and control strategies. Front Physiol 13:1112278 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Takeuchi H and Nobuyuki E, Insecticide susceptibility of Nezara viridula (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) and three other stink bug species composing a soybean pest complex in Japan. Entomol Soc Am 105:1024–1033 (2012). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Steinhaus EA, Warpechowski LF, Braga LE, Morin M, Tenório C, Boff JS et al., Intra‐ and interspecific variation in the susceptibility to insecticides of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) that attack soybean and maize in southern Brazil. Entomol Soc Am 115:631–636 (2022). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Somavilla JC, Reis AC, Gubiani PS, Godoy DN, Stürmer GR and Bernardi O, Susceptibility of Euschistus heros and Dichelops furcatus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) to selected insecticides in Brazil. J Econ Entomol 113:924–931 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Pedersen KE, Pedersen NN, Meyling NV, Fredensborg BL and Cedergreen N, Differences in life stage sensitivity of the beetle Tenebrio molitor towards a pyrethroid insecticide explained by stage‐specific variations in uptake, elimination and activity of detoxifying enzymes. Pestic Biochem Physiol 162:113–121 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Nagloo N, Rigosi E, Herbertsson L and Carroll DCO, Comparability of comparative toxicity: insect sensitivity to imidacloprid reveals huge variations across species but also within species. Proc B 291:20232811 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Machado EP, Garlet CG, Weschenfelder MAG, Führ FM, Godoy DN, Pretto VE et al., Insecticide resistance and resistance management interspecific variation in susceptibility to insecticides by lepidopteran pests of soybean, cotton, and maize crops from Brazil. J Econ Entomol 115:305–312 (2022). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Müller C, Impacts of sublethal insecticide exposure on insects — facts and knowledge gaps. Basic Appl Ecol 30:1–10 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 16. Marques RP, Filho AC, Melo AA, Guedes JVC, De Carli C, Rohrig A et al., Managing stink bugs on soybean fields: insights on chemical management. J Agric Sci 11:225–234 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 17. Carnevalli RA, Prando AM, Borges RDS, Possamai EJ, Reis EA, Gomes EC et al., Resultados do manejo integrado de pragas da soja na safra 2022/2023 no Paraná Embrapa Soja. Embrapa (Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuária), Londrina, PR: (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 18. Bueno AF, Panizzi AR, Hunt TE, Dourado PM, Pitta RM and Gonçalves J, Challenges for adoption of integrated pest management (IPM): the soybean example. Neotrop Entomol 50:5–20 (2021). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Guzmán JAG and Ruiz RG, Side effects of insecticides on beneficial insects: a practical tool to identify organic agroecosystems. World J Agric Soil Sci 4:1–5 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 20. Reddy PP, Insects Pests and Their Management, in Insects Pests and their Management in Sustainable Crop Protection under Protected Cultivation, ed. by Reddy PP. Springer Singapore, Singapore, pp. 187–206 (2016). [Google Scholar]
- 21. Ademokoya B, Athey K and Ruberson J, Natural enemies and biological control of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Heteroptera) in North America. Insects 13:932 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Bavithra CML, Murugan M, Pavithran S and Naveena K, Enthralling genetic regulatory mechanisms meddling insecticide resistance development in insects: role of transcriptional and post‐transcriptional events. Front Mol Biosci 10:1257859 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Liang J, Xiao F, Ojo J, Chao WH, Ahmad B, Alam A et al., Insect resistance to insecticides: causes, mechanisms, and exploring potential solutions. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 118:e70045 (2025). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Barathi S, Sabapathi N, Kandasamy S and Lee J, Present status of insecticide impacts and eco‐friendly approaches for remediation‐a review. Environ Res 240:117432 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Stejskal V, Vendl T, Feng S, Qin Y, Aulicky R and Li Z, The relationship between taxonomic classification and applied entomology: stored product pests as a model group. J Insect Sci 25:ieaf019 (2025). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Bueno ADF, Sutil WP, Jahnke SM, Carvalho GA, Cingolani MF, Colmenarez YC et al., Biological control as part of the soybean integrated pest management (IPM): potential and challenges. Agronomy 13:2532 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 27. Cingolani MF and Laumann RA, Conservation biological control of stink bugs: current knowledge and future perspectives. BioControl 69:485–491 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 28. Ioriatti C, Mazzoni V, Franceschi P, Chiesa SG, Angeli G, De Concini M et al., Classical biological control of the brown marmorated stink bug (Halyomorpha halys) in apple orchard: a success story. Pest Manag Sci 81:8500–8509 (2025). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Parra LM, de Carvalho JR, Hoback WW and Oliveira RC, Optimizing mass rearing of the egg parasitoid, Telenomus podisi, for control of the brown stink bug, Euschistus heros . Insects 14:435 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Queiroz AP, Favetti BM, Hayashida R, Grande MLM, Neiva MM, Panizzi AR et al., Effect of the ages of parasitoid and host eggs on Telenomus podisi (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) parasitism. Neotrop Entomol 48:974–982 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Souza JR, Silva CG, Barrigossi JAF, Junior JBM, Conceição DP and Sousa GO, Biology of Glyphepomis dubia Campos & Souza, 2016 (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) and the parasitoids Telenomus podisi Ashmead, 1893 and Trissolcus basalis (Wollaston, 1858) (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) on rice. Brazilian J Biol 83:e247433 (2021). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32. Tognon R, Ana JS and Jahnke SM, Influence of original host on chemotaxic behaviour and parasitism in Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae). Bull Entomol Res 104:781–787 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. Tillman PG, Cottrell TE and Grabarczyk EE, Black cherry as a host plant for stink bugs (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in agroecosystems in Georgia, USA. Fla Entomol 105:79–86 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 34. Taguti ÉA, Gonçalves J, de Bueno AF and Marchioro ST, Telenomus podisi parasitism on Dichelops melacanthus and Podisus nigrispinus eggs at different temperatures and Podisus nigrispinus eggs at different temperatures. Fla Entomol 102:607–613 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 35. Pernambuco‐Filho JCA, Almeida WSM, Gladenucci J, Zachrisson B and De Oliveira RC, Efficacy of Telenomus podisi Ashmead, 1893 (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) release for the control of Euschistus heros (Fabricius, 1794) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) eggs in soybean, in Brazil. Idesia (Arica) 1893:77–86 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 36. Bueno ADF, Braz EC, Favetti BM, de França‐Neto JB and Silva GV, Release of the egg parasitoid Telenomus podisi to manage the neotropical Brown stink bug, Euschistus heros, in soybean production. Crop Prot 137:105310 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 37. Bueno ADF, Sutil WP, Roswadoski L and Colmenarez YC, Augmentative biological control of stink bugs on soybean: the Brazilian scenario. CABI Agric Biosci 5:58 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 38. Riffel CT, Prando HF and Boff MIC, Primeiro relato de ocorrência de Telenomus podisi (Ashmead) e Trissolcus urichi (Crawford) (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) como parasitóides de ovos do percevejo‐do‐colmo‐do‐arroz, Tibraca limbativentris (Stål) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae), em Santa Catarina. Neotrop Entomol 39:447–448 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. de Paz‐Neto AA, Querino RB and Margaría CB, Egg parasitoids of stink bugs (Hemiptera: Coreidae and Pentatomidae) on soybean and cowpea in Brazil. Fla Entomol 98:929–932 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- 40. de Oliveira RC, Capítulo 9. Utilização de Telenomus podisi no manejo de Euchistus eros, in Utilização de Telenomus podisi no manejo de Euschistus heros in Controle Biológico com Parasitoides e Predadores na Agricultura Brasileira, 1st edn, ed. by Parra JRP, de Pinto AS, Nava DE, de Oliveira RC and Diniz AJF. Fealq, Piracicaba, SP, pp. 235–248 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 41. Panizzi AR, Lucini T and Aldrich JR, Dynamics in pest status of phytophagous stink bugs in the neotropics. Neotrop Entomol 51:18–31 (2022). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42. Ramos GS, Dalbianco AB, Santos DM, de Alvarez DL and de Oliveira RC, Management of Euschistus heros with the release of Telenomus podisi in soybean in Brazil. BioControl 69:529–537 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 43. Ribeiro P, Frassini G and Nunes C, Inoculative releases of Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) for management of the stink bug complex in soybean crops. Phytoparasitica 52:78 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 44. Hoback WW, Ramos G, Hayashida R, Santos DM, Alvarez DDL and De ORC, Optimizing the release pattern of Telenomus podisi for effective biological control of Euschistus heros in soybean. Insects 15:192 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45. Cingolani MF, Greco NM and Liljesthröm GG, Effect of Telenomus podisi, Trissolcus urichi, and Trissolcus basalis (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) age on attack of Piezodorus guildinii (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) eggs. Environ Entomol 43:377–383 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46. Nascimento IN, Michereff MFF, Pereira WE, Boas PRV, Gusmão MR, Caufield J et al., Role of herbivore‐induced maize volatiles in the chemotactic behaviour of Telenomus podisi and Diceraeus melacanthus . Entomol Exp Appl 171:196–205 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 47. Pacheco DJP and Corrêa‐Ferreira BS, Parasitismo de Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae) em populações de percevejos pragas da soja. An da Soc Entomol do Bras 29:295–302 (2000). [Google Scholar]
- 48. Ramos Y, Portal O, Meyling NV and Klingen I, Biological control potential of two Beauveria bassiana isolates against the stink bugs Nezara viridula L. and Piezodorus guildinii Westwood (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in common bean. Egypt J Biol Pest Control 34:23 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 49. Quesada‐Moraga E, Garrido‐Jurado I, Yousef‐Yousef M and González‐Mas N, Multitrophic interactions of entomopathogenic fungi in BioControl. BioControl 67:457–472 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 50. Nora DD, Piovesan BC, Bellé C, Stacke RS, Balardin RR, Guedes JVC et al., Isolation and evaluation of entomopathogenic fungi against the neotropical brown stink bug Euschistus heros (F.) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) under laboratory conditions. Biocontrol . Sci Technol 31:22–34 (2021). [Google Scholar]
- 51. Mantzoukas S, Kitsiou F, Natsiopoulos D and Eliopoulos PA, Entomopathogenic fungi: interactions and applications. Encyclopedia 2:646–656 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 52. Karthi S, Vasantha‐Srinivasan P, Senthil‐Nathan S, Han YS, Shivakumar MS, Murali‐Baskaran RK et al., Entomopathogenic fungi promising biocontrol agents for managing lepidopteran pests: review of current knowledge. Biocatal Agric Biotechnol 58:103146 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 53. Ma M, Luo J, Li C, Eleftherianos I, Zhang W and Xu L, A life‐and‐death struggle: interaction of insects with entomopathogenic fungi across various infection stages. Front Immunol 14:1329843 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 54. Chepkemoi J, Fening KO, Ambele FC, Munywoki J and Akutse KS, Effects of four potent entomopathogenic fungal isolates on the survival and performance of Telenomus remus, an egg parasitoid of fall armyworm. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 14:1445156 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 55. Parys KA and Portilla M, Effectiveness of Beauveria bassiana against Piezodorus guildinii (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae), a key pest of soybeans in the neotropics. Biocontrol Sci Technol 30:451–461 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 56. Portilla M, Tertuliano M, Parys K, Glover JP and Reddy GVP, Effects of Beauveria bassiana on the growth and reproductive rates of Nezara viridula . BioControl 69:413–425 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 57. Resquín‐Romero G, Cabral‐Antúnez C, Sarubbio‐Orue H, Garrido‐Jurado I, Valverde‐García P, Schade M et al., Virulence of Metarhizium brunneum (Ascomycota: Hypocreales) strains against stinkbugs Euschistus heros and Dichelops furcatus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). J Econ Entomol 113:2540–2545 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 58. Silva‐Santana MF, Selection and characterisation of Beauveria bassiana fungus and their potential to control the brown stink bug. Biocontrol Sci Technol 32:90–102 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 59. Portilla M, Zhang M, Glover JP, Reddy GVP and Johnson C, Lethal concentration and sporulation by contact and direct spray of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana on different stages of Nezara viridula (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). J Fungi 8:1164 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 60. da Silva PF, dos Santos MSN, de Araújo BA, Kerber BD, Oliveira HAP, Guedes JVC et al., Co‐cultivations of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae, and Trichoderma harzianum to produce bioactive compounds for application in agriculture. Fermentation 11:30 (2025). [Google Scholar]
- 61. de Almeida ACS, Rodrigues MA, Boaventura HA, Vieira AS, Silva JFA e, de Jesus FG et al., Can Metarhizium anisopliae reduce the feeding of the neotropical brown stink bug, Euschistus heros (Fabricius, 1798), and its damage to soybean seeds? J Fungi 11:247 (2025). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 62. De Sousa LM and Quintela ED, Selection of entomopathogenic fungi to control stink bugs and cotton boll weevil. Pesqui Agropecuária Trop 53:e76316 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 63. Gouli V, Gouli S, Skinner M, Hamilton G, Su J and Parker BL, Virulence of select entomopathogenic fungi to the brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Stål) (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae). Pest Manag Sci 68:155–157 (2012). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 64. Lisi F, Cavallaro C, Pitruzzello MF, Arnó J, Desneux N, Han P et al., Compatibility of bioinsecticides with parasitoids for enhanced integrated pest management of Drosophila suzukii and Tuta absoluta . Insects 15:467 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 65. Exteckoetter V, Oliveira JAC, de Figueiredo KG, Bueno AF and Carvalho GA, Side effects of insecticides used in soybean and corn for the egg parasitoid Telenomus remus (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Ecotoxicology 34:1–10 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 66. Hennessy AB, Anderson RM, Mitchell N, Mooney KA and Singer MS, Parasitoid avoidance of intraguild predation drives enemy complementarity in a multi‐trophic ecological network. Ecologicy 106:e4483 (2025). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 67. Abbas MST, Interactions between entomopathogenic fungi and entomophagous insects. Adv Entomol 8:130–146 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 68. Maoz Y, Gal S, Argov Y, Domeratzky S, Coll M and Palevsky E, Intraguild interactions among specialised pollen feeders and generalist phytoseiids and their effect on citrus rust mite suppression. Soc Chem Ind 72:940–949 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 69. De Pedro L, Beitia F and Tormos J, Two better than one? Potential effects of intraguild predation on the biological control of Ceratitis capitata (Diptera: Tephritidae) by the parasitoid Aganaspis daci (Hymenoptera: Figitidae) and the predator Pseudoophonus rufipes (Coleoptera: Carabidae). Agronomy 13:87 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 70. Martin EA, Reineking B, Seo B and Steffan‐dewenter I, Natural enemy interactions constrain pest control in complex agricultural landscapes. Proc Natl Acad Sci 110:5534–5539 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 71. Bohloolzadeh M, Elragig A, Bielza P, Montserrat M and Recker M, Synergistic and antagonistic interactions between plant defences and biological pest control. Crop Prot 184:106841 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 72. Mantzoukas S, Koutsogeorgiou EI, Lagogiannis I, Gogolashvili N, Fifis GT, Navrozidis EL et al., Effect of entomopathogenic fungi to eggs and nymphs survival of Halyomorpha halys (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) under laboratory conditions. Curr Microbiol 81:1–14 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 73. Özdemir İO, Yildirim E, Uluca M and Tunçer C, Efficacy of native Beauveria bassiana and B. Pseudobassiana isolates against invasive brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Stal) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Black Sea J Agric 5:227–233 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 74. Battisti L, Warmling JV, de Vieira CF, de Oliveira DHR, Lima YRA, de Bueno AF et al., Selectivity of Metarhizium anisopliae and Beauveria bassiana to adults of Telenomus podisi (Hymenoptera: Scelionidae). Semin Ciências Agrárias 43:727–738 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 75. Kaplan EL and Meier P, Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 53:457–481 (1958). [Google Scholar]
- 76. Tozlu E, Saruhan I, Tozlu G, Kotan R, Dada F and Tekiner N, Potentials of some entomopathogens against the brown marmorated stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Stål, 1855) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Egypt J Biol Pest Control 29:1–8 (2019). [Google Scholar]
- 77. Costa FSS, De CMT, Martins É and Monnerat RG, Insecticidal effect of cry toxins produced by Bacillus thuringiensis on insecticidal effect of cry toxins produced by Bacillus thuringiensis on Diceraeus melacanthus (Dallas, 1851) and Euschistus heros (Fabricius, 1798) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). J Agric Sci 14:1–14 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 78. Esparza‐mora SF, Leite luís G, Baldo FB, Harakava R and del Rodríguez‐Rodriguez MP, Exploration of entomopathogenic bacteria as potential control agents for brown stink bug Euschistus heros (F.) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Arq Inst Biol (Sao Paulo) 91:1–13 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 79. Swathy K, Parmar MK and Vivekanandhan P, Biocontrol efficacy of entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana conidia against agricultural insect pests. Environ Qual Manag 34:e22174 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 80. Felsot AS, Unsworth JB, Linders JBHJ, Roberts G, Harris C, Carazo E et al., Agrochemical spray drift; assessment and mitigation‐a review. J Environ Sci Heal Part B 46:1–23 (2010). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 81. Pimentel D and Burgess M, Small amounts of pesticides reaching target insects. Environ Dev Sustain 14:1–2 (2012). [Google Scholar]
- 82. Hoang BTL, Fletcher SJ, Brosnan CA, Ghodke AB, Manzie N and Mitter N, RNAi as a foliar spray: efficiency and challenges to field applications. Int J Mol Sci 23:6639 (2022). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 83. Anjum F and Wright DJ, Ecotoxicology foliar residual toxicity of insecticides to brassica pests and their natural enemies. J Econ Entomol 116:153–159 (2023). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 84. de Araújo TA, Picanço MC, de Ferreira DO, Campos JN, de Arcanjo LP and Silva GA, Toxicity and residual effects of insecticides on Ascia monuste and predator Solenopsis saevissima . Pest Manag Sci 73:2259–2266 (2017). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 85. Nixon LJ and Leskey TC, Evaluation of insecticide residues against spotted lanternfly (Hemiptera: Fulgoridae). J Econ Entomol 117:1582–1587 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 86. Ayilara MS, Adeleke BS, Akinola SA, Fayose CA, Adeyemi UT, Gbadegesin LA et al., Biopesticides as a promising alternative to synthetic pesticides: a case for microbial pesticides, phytopesticides, and nanobiopesticides. Front Microbiol 14:1040901 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 87. Hezakiel HE, Thampi M, Rabello S and Sheikhmoideen JM, Biopesticides: a green approach towards agricultural pests. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 196:5533–5562 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 88. Mawcha KT, Malinga L, Muir D, Ge J and Ndolo D, Recent advances in biopesticide research and development with a focus on microbials. F1000Res 13:1071 (2025). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 89. Pinto CPG and Romanello N, Microbial alternatives for pest control. J Entomol Zool Stud 12:36–40 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 90. Berestetskiy A and Hu Q, The chemical ecology approach to reveal fungal metabolites for arthropod pest management. Microorganisms 9:1379 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 91. Nicoletti R, Andolfi A, Becchimanzi A and Salvatore MM, Anti‐insect properties of penicillium secondary metabolites. Microorganisms 11:1302 (2023). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 92. Overy DP, Frisvad JC, Witte TE, Hicks CL, Hermans A, Sproule A et al., Chemodiversity of Penicillium isolated from alpine and arctic environments, including ten new species. Stud Mycol 116:75–116 (2025). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 93. Cooray MPM, Gobika T and Paranagama PA, Inseticidal properties of secundary metabolites produced by endolichenic fungus, Penicillium pinophilum against stored grain insect pests, Callosobruchus maculatus . 2nd Int Conf Biosci Biotechnol 2:108–116 (2017). [Google Scholar]
- 94. López‐Gresa MP, González MC, Ciavatta L, Ayala I, Moya P and Primo J, Insecticidal activity of paraherquamides, including paraherquamide h and paraherquamide i, two new alkaloids isolated from Penicillium cluniae . J Agric Food Chem 54:2921–2925 (2006). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 95. Arunthirumeni M, Vinitha G and Shivakumar MS, Parasitology international antifeedant and larvicidal activity of bioactive compounds isolated from entomopathogenic fungi Penicillium sp. for the control of agricultural and medically important insect pest (Spodoptera litura and Culex quinquefasciatus). Parasitol Int 92:102688 (2023). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 96. Bai Y, Kong F, Song X, Han Y, Jiang Y, Hu J et al., Indole‐diterpenoids from an endophytic Penicillium brefeldianum F4a and their antifeedant and insecticidal activities against Spodoptera frugiperda . Pest Manag Sci 81:4788–4798 (2025). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 97. Bai M, Zheng C, Nong X, Zhou X, Luo Y and Chen G‐Y, Four new insecticidal xanthene derivatives from the mangrove‐derived fungus Penicillium sp. JY246. Mar Drugs 17:649 (2019). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 98. Bento EP, Alves LF, Silva‐Santana MF and de Souza ILB, Horizontal transmission of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana (Unioeste 76 strain) among adults of Euschistus heros (Fabricius, 1798) (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). Arq Inst Biol (Sao Paulo) 91:e00262022 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 99. Boggione MJ, Sala A, Tubio G, Barrena R, Gea T and Artola A, Effective biocontrol on Nezara viridula (L.) using a biopesticide produced from Beauveria bassiana. Biocatal Agric . Australas Biotechnol 66:103614 (2025). [Google Scholar]
- 100. Baverstock J, Roy HE and Pell JK, Entomopathogenic fungi and insect behaviour: from unsuspecting hosts to targeted vectors. BioControl 55:89–102 (2010). [Google Scholar]
- 101. Ortiz‐urquiza A and Keyhani NO, Action on the surface: entomopathogenic fungi versus the insect cuticle. insects 4:357–374 (2013). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 102. da Silva RA, Quintela ED, Mascarin GM, Pedrini N, Lião LM and Ferri PH, Unveiling chemical defense in the rice stalk stink bug against the entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae . J Invertebr Pathol 127:93–100 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 103. Lopes RB, Laumann RA, Blassioli‐moraes MC, Borges M and Faria M, The fungistatic and fungicidal effects of volatiles from metathoracic glands of soybean‐attacking stink bugs (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) on the entomopathogen Beauveria bassiana . J Invertebr Pathol 132:77–85 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 104. Mascarin GM, Lopes RB, Delalibera Í Jr, Fernandes ÉKK, Luz C and Faria M, Current status and perspectives of fungal entomopathogens used for microbial control of arthropod pests in Brazil. J Invertebr Pathol 165:46–53 (2019). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 105. Quesada‐Moraga E, González‐Mas N, Yousef‐Yousef M, Garrido‐Jurado I and Fernández‐Bravo M, Key role of environmental competence in successful use of entomopathogenic fungi in microbial pest control. J Pest Sci 97:1–15 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 106. Moino A Jr, Alves SB, Lopes RB, Oliveira PM, Neves J, Pereira RM et al., External development of the entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium anisopliae in the subterranean termite Heterotermes tenuis . Sci Agrícola 59:267–273 (2002). [Google Scholar]
- 107. Shin TY, Lee MR, Park SE, Lee SJ, Kim WJ and Kim JS, Pathogenesis‐related genes of entomopathogenic fungi. Arch Insect Biochem Physiol 105:e21747 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 108. Liu Z, Lei Z, Hua B, Wang H and Liu T‐X, Germination behavior of Beauveria bassiana (Deuteromycotina: Hyphomycetes) on Bemisia tabaci (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae) nymphs. J Enomological Sci 45:322–334 (2010). [Google Scholar]
- 109. Moldovan A, Munteanu‐molotievskiy N and Toderas I, Temperature effects on the entomopathogenic fungi Beauveria bassiana strain CNMN‐FE‐01: vegetative growth, sporulation, germination rate. Curr Trends Nat Sci 11:332–338 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 110. Altinok H and Koca AS, Modes of action of entomopathogenic fungi. Curr Trends Nat Sci 8:117–124 (2020). [Google Scholar]
- 111. Hassuba MMM, Gad HA, Atta AAM and Abdelgaleil SAM, Efficacy of entomopathogenic fungi for the management of Trogoderma granarium everts on wheat grains. Int J Trop Insect Sci 44:1367–1374 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 112. Koca AS, Efficacy of native entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana (Balsamo) Vuillemin (Hypocreales: Cordycipitaceae) against Helicoverpa armigera (Hübner, 1808) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Turkish J Entomol 48:461–475 (2025). [Google Scholar]
- 113. Ramos Y, Sosa DR and Orelvis G, Host weed plant preference of Piezodorus guildinii Westwood (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) and its susceptibility to Beauveria bassiana in common beans management. Int J Trop Insect Sci 44:2655–2659 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 114. Hernandez‐tenorio F, Miranda AM, Rodríguez CA, Giraldo‐Estrada C and Sáez AA, Potential strategies in the biopesticide formulations: a bibliometric analysis. Agronomy 12:2665 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 115. Dias PM, Souza D, Gustavo L, Pessoa A, Luiz G, Devoz R et al., Selectivity of entomopathogenic fungi to Chrysoperla externa (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). Insects 11:716 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 116. Saito T, Buitenhuis R and Brownbridge M, Use of the generalist predator Anystis baccarum in greenhouse IPM: interactions with other biological control agents, a laboratory study. BiolControl 177:105127 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 117. Morda W, Nuvoli MT and Ruiu L, Safety of the entomopathogenic fungus Beauveria bassiana for wild and laboratory‐reared Chrysoperla lucasina strains. Insects 15:576 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 118. Krutmuang P, Rajula J, Pittarate S, Chanbang Y, Perumal V, Alford L et al., Biocontrol efficacy of Beauveria bassiana in combination with tobacco short stem and modified lure traps. Int J Trop Insect Sci 43:1591–1600 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 119. Sharma A, Sharma S and Yadav PK, Entomopathogenic fungi and their relevance in sustainable agriculture: a review. Cogent Food Agric 9:2180857 (2023). [Google Scholar]
- 120. Sharma A, Thakur N, Hashem A, Dawoud TM, Fathi E and Allah A, Inseticidal potential of Bacillus thuringiensis, Beauveria bassiana and Metarhizium anisopliae individually and their synergistic effect with barazide against Spodoptera litura . Heliyon 10:e37175 (2024). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 121. Schmidt‐Jeffris RA, Nontarget pesticide impacts on pest natural enemies: progress and gaps in current knowledge. Curr Opin Insect Sci 58:101056 (2023). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 122. Straw EA and Brown MJF, Co‐formulant in a commercial fungicide product causes lethal and sub‐lethal effects in bumble bees. Sci Rep 11:21653 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 123. Pacheco DJP and Corrêa‐Ferreira BS, Potencial reprodutivo e longevidade do parasitóide Telenomus podisi Ashmead, em ovos de diferentes espécies de percevejos. An Soc Entomol Bras 27:585–591 (1998). [Google Scholar]
- 124. Rashki M, Kharazi‐pakdel A, Allahyari H and van Alphen JJM, Interactions among the entomopathogenic fungus, Beauveria bassiana (Ascomycota: Hypocreales), the parasitoid, Aphidius matricariae (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), and its host, Myzus persicae (Homoptera: Aphididae). Biol Control 50:324–328 (2009). [Google Scholar]
- 125. Cingolani MF, Greco NM and Liljesthröm GG, Effect of Telenomus podisi, Trissolcus urichi, and Trissolcus basalis (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) age on attack of Piezodorus guildinii (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) eggs. Biol Control 43:377–383 (2014). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 126. Rakes M, Morais MC, do Ribeiro LP, Palma GR, de Moral RA, Bernardi D et al., Temperature‐altering effects of synthetic insecticides on the parasitoid wasp Telenomus Podisi for the biocontrol of pentatomids in soybean crops. J Crop Heal 76:1027–1038 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 127. de Bueno AF, Sosa‐Gómez DR, Corrêa‐Ferreira BS, Moscardi F and de Bueno RCOFB, in Inimigos Naturais das Pragas da Soja in Soja: manejo integrado de insetos e outros artrópodes, ed. by Hoffmann‐Campo CB, Corrêa‐Ferreira BS and Moscardi F. Embrapa, Brasília, DF, pp. 493–629 (2012). [Google Scholar]
- 128. Potrich M, Alves LFA, Lozano E, Roman C and Neves PMOJ, Interactions between Beauveria bassiana and Trichogramma pretiosum under laboratory conditions. Entomol Exp Appl 154:213–221 (2015). [Google Scholar]
- 129. Potrich M, Alves LFA, Lozano ER, Bonini AK and Neves PMOJ, Biological and microbial control potential side effects of the entomopathogenic fungus Metarhizium anisopliae on the egg parasitoid Trichogramma pretiosum (Hymenoptera: Trichogrammatidae) under controlled conditions. J Econ Entomol 110:2318–2324 (2017). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 130. Putri QS, Oktapiani W, Herlinda S and Suwandi S, Susceptibility of immature Telenomus remus, an egg parasitoid of Spodoptera frugiperda (J.E. Smith), to entomopathogenic fungi from South Sumatra, Indonesia. Egypt J Biol Pest Control 34:21 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 131. Colombo FC, Amaro JT, Mendes R, Maciel A, Hayashida R, Neves PMOJ et al., Parasitism capacity of Trichogramma pretiosum Riley, 1879 and Telenomus remus Nixon, 1937 after ingestion of biological pesticides. Semin Ciências Agrárias 43:1441–1456 (2022). [Google Scholar]
- 132. Battisti L, Warmling JV, Vieira CF, Oliveira DHR, Lima YRA, Potrich M et al., Biological and microbial control side effects of organic products on Telenomus podisi (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae). J Econ Entomol 113:1694–1701 (2020). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 133. Roswadoski L, Sutil WP, Carneiro GS, Maciel RMA, Coelho A and Bueno AF, Release strategy and egg parasitism of Telenomus podisi adults fed with different diets. Biol Control 198:105626 (2024). [Google Scholar]
- 134. Doetzer AK and Foerster LA, Storage of pentatomid eggs in liquid nitrogen and dormancy of Trissolcus basalis (Wollaston) and Telenomus podisi Ashmead (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) adults as a method of mass production. Neotrop Entomol 42:534–538 (2013). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 135. Silva GV, Bueno ADF, Manuel P, Janeiro O and Favetti BM, Biological characteristics and parasitism capacity of Telenomus podisi (Hymenoptera: Platygastridae) on eggs of Euschistus heros (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae). J Agric Sci 10:210–220 (2018). [Google Scholar]
- 136. Gentz MC, Murdoch G and King GF, Tandem use of selective insecticides and natural enemies for effective, reduced‐risk pest management. Biol Control 52:208–215 (2010). [Google Scholar]
- 137. Garzón A, Medina P, Amor F, Viñuela E and Budia F, Chemosphere toxicity and sublethal effects of six insecticides to last instar larvae and adults of the biocontrol agents Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae) and Adalia bipunctata (L.) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae). Chemosphere 132:87–93 (2015). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 138. Overton K, Hoffmann AA, Reynolds OL and Umina PA, Toxicity of insecticides and miticides to natural enemies in australian grains: a review. Insects 12:187 (2021). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 139. Araujo ES, Poltroniei AS, Poitevin CG, Mirás‐Avalos JM, Zawadneak MAC and Pimentel IC, Compatibility between entomopathogenic fungi and egg parasitoids (Trichogrammatidae): a laboratory study for their combined use to control Duponchelia fovealis . Insects 11:630 (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 140. Schaffner U, Heimpel GE, Mills NJ, Muriithi BW, Thomas MB, Gc YD et al., Biological control for one health. Sci Total Environ 951:175800 (2024). [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Data Availability Statement
The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
