Abstract
Neonicotinoids bind selectively to insect nicotinic acetylcholine receptors with nanomolar affinity to act as potent insecticides. While the members of the neonicotinoid class have many structural features in common, it is not known whether they also share the same mode of binding to the target receptor. Previous competition studies with [^3^H]imidacloprid, the first commercialised neonicotinoid, indicated that thiamethoxam, representing a novel structural sub‐class, may bind in a different way from that of other neonicotinoids. In the present work we analysed the mode of [^3^H]imidacloprid displacement by established neonicotinoids and newly synthesized analogues in the aphids Myzus persicae Sulzer and Aphis craccivora Koch. We found two classes of neonicotinoids with distinct modes of interference with [^3^H]imidacloprid, described as direct competitive inhibition and non‐competitive inhibition, respectively. Competitive neonicotinoids were acetamiprid, nitenpyram, thiacloprid, clothianidin and nithiazine, whereas thiamethoxam and the N‐methyl analogues of imidacloprid and clothianidin showed non‐competitive inhibition. The chloropyridine or chlorothiazole heterocycles, the polar pharmacophore parts, such as nitroimino, cyanoimino and nitromethylene, and the cyclic or acyclic structure of the pharmacophore were not relevant for the mode of inhibition. Consensus structural features of the neonicotinoids were defined for the two mechanisms of interaction with [^3^H]imidacloprid binding. Furthermore, two sub‐classes of non‐competitive inhibitors can be discriminated on the basis of their Hill coefficients for imidacloprid displacement. We conclude from the present data that the direct competitors share the binding site with imidacloprid, whereas non‐competitive compounds, like thiamethoxam, bind to a different site or in a different mode. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry