Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

CONTROL OF PEAR PSYLLA IN LATE SUMMER, 2004

CONTROL OF PEAR PSYLLA IN LATE SUMMER, 2004 (A30) PEAR: Pyrus communis (L)., ‘d’Anjou’ John E. Dunley Washington State University Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center 1100 N. Western Avenue Wenatchee, WA 98801 Phone: (509)-663-8181 Fax: (509)-662-8714 E-mail: dunleyj@wsu.edu Bruce M. Greenfield Tara M. Madsen Keith Granger Pear psylla (PP): Cacopsylla pyricola Förster This was a late-season trial of neonicotinyls for control of PP. All materials were applied with 0.25 % v/v horticultural oil. The test was conducted in a block of mature ‘d’Anjou’ pear at the WSU Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center in Wenatchee, WA. Treatments were applied to single trees and replicated four times in a RCB design. All treatments were applied to drip with a handgun sprayer at 200 psi, simulating a dilute spray of 400 gpa. Treatments were applied on 29 Jul. A pretreatment count of PP density was performed on all treatments 23 Jul. Weekly samples were taken beginning on 30 Jul, and continued for six weeks after the application. Adults were monitored using four beating tray samples per replicate (16 per treatment). On each sample date, eggs and nymphs were monitored on leaf samples collected separately from the upper and lower canopy of the trees. Each sample was five leaves from each of five shoots, taken from each replicate (100 leaves per treatment). Insects were brushed from leaves onto plates using a leaf-brushing machine. Each plate was then placed over a grid, and PP eggs and nymphs on ½ of the plate surface were counted under a binocular dissecting microscope. Data were analyzed using the ANOVA option of PRM, and means separations were determined with SNK Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). This trial was conducted in a block of stressed pears with high PP density. All applications had equivalent knock-down effects on adult PP, showing average 1 DAT densities of about half that in the untreated check (Table 1). By one week after application, there were no differences between treated and untreated plots. This knock-down is consistent with an application of horticultural oil. Applications had no noticeable effects on PP eggs or nymphs, and densities were consistently low (Table 2). Table 1. Adult PP/tray Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 13 Aug 27 Aug 9 Sep F1785-03-1 50SG 0.063 lb(AI) 13.06a 22.56b 19.88a 32.94a 19.06a 8.81a F1785-03-1 50SG 0.071 lb(AI) 11.00a 19.13b 26.75a 29.44a 20.38a 7.06a F1785-03-1 50SG 0.088 lb(AI) 8.31a 22.31b 28.00a 29.69a 19.69a 9.56a Actara 25WDG 5.5 oz 12.19a 25.94b 13.50a 32.88a 23.63a 9.00a Assail 70WP 3.4 oz 9.94a 19.25b 23.31a 37.63a 17.69a 8.06a Calypso 4F 6.0 fl oz 13.69a 10.38b 19.13a 41.00a 20.69a 12.25a Fujimite 5EC 16.0 fl oz 10.38a 15.00b 11.13a 19.25a 18.00a 10.31a Applaud 70WP 2.0 lb 10.00a 17.38b 19.50a 27.50a 20.44a 6.38a Agri-Mek 0.15EC 16.0 fl oz 9.56a 19.88b 15.75a 24.06a 17.38a 11.06a Untreated check --- 11.13a 48.19a 20.00a 36.50a 15.69a 8.75a Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, SNK). All treatments except check applied with 0.25% v/v Saf-T-Side oil. Table 2. PP eggs/leaf in upper canopy PP nymphs/leaf in upper canopy Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 9 Sep 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 9 Sep F1785-03-1 50SG 0.063 lb(AI) 0.44a 0.20a 0.30a 0.24a 3.80a 1.48a 2.74a 1.10bc F1785-03-1 50SG 0.071 lb(AI) 0.46a 0.22a 0.14a 1.06a 4.04a 2.24a 1.46a 1.74bc F1785-03-1 50SG 0.088 lb(AI) 0.30a 0.46a 0.24a 0.58a 3.84a 4.02a 3.26a 2.02bc Actara 25WDG 5.5 oz 0.32a 0.32a 0.18a 0.34a 3.44a 2.74a 1.12a 3.94a Assail 70WP 3.4 oz 0.20a 0.28a 0.14a 0.32a 2.04a 1.74a 1.66a 2.88ab Calypso 4F 6.0 fl oz 0.34a 0.50a 0.06a 0.32a 3.04a 1.84a 1.44a 2.16bc Fujimite 5EC 16.0 fl oz 0.30a 0.38a 0.20a 0.46a 2.74a 2.18a 1.56a 0.74c Applaud 70WP 2.0 lb 0.26a 0.22a 0.20a 0.42a 3.90a 2.34a 2.14a 0.94c Agri-Mek 0.15EC 16.0 fl oz 0.42a 0.54a 0.04a 0.24a 3.98a 1.28a 1.26a 0.64c Untreated check --- 0.42a 0.50a 0.08a 0.18a 4.24a 5.04a 3.22a 0.68c Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, SNK). All treatments except check applied with 0.25% v/v Saf-T-Side oil. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

CONTROL OF PEAR PSYLLA IN LATE SUMMER, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/control-of-pear-psylla-in-late-summer-2004-VTE39R1063
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/30.1.A30
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

(A30) PEAR: Pyrus communis (L)., ‘d’Anjou’ John E. Dunley Washington State University Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center 1100 N. Western Avenue Wenatchee, WA 98801 Phone: (509)-663-8181 Fax: (509)-662-8714 E-mail: dunleyj@wsu.edu Bruce M. Greenfield Tara M. Madsen Keith Granger Pear psylla (PP): Cacopsylla pyricola Förster This was a late-season trial of neonicotinyls for control of PP. All materials were applied with 0.25 % v/v horticultural oil. The test was conducted in a block of mature ‘d’Anjou’ pear at the WSU Tree Fruit Research and Extension Center in Wenatchee, WA. Treatments were applied to single trees and replicated four times in a RCB design. All treatments were applied to drip with a handgun sprayer at 200 psi, simulating a dilute spray of 400 gpa. Treatments were applied on 29 Jul. A pretreatment count of PP density was performed on all treatments 23 Jul. Weekly samples were taken beginning on 30 Jul, and continued for six weeks after the application. Adults were monitored using four beating tray samples per replicate (16 per treatment). On each sample date, eggs and nymphs were monitored on leaf samples collected separately from the upper and lower canopy of the trees. Each sample was five leaves from each of five shoots, taken from each replicate (100 leaves per treatment). Insects were brushed from leaves onto plates using a leaf-brushing machine. Each plate was then placed over a grid, and PP eggs and nymphs on ½ of the plate surface were counted under a binocular dissecting microscope. Data were analyzed using the ANOVA option of PRM, and means separations were determined with SNK Least Significant Difference test (P ≤ 0.05). This trial was conducted in a block of stressed pears with high PP density. All applications had equivalent knock-down effects on adult PP, showing average 1 DAT densities of about half that in the untreated check (Table 1). By one week after application, there were no differences between treated and untreated plots. This knock-down is consistent with an application of horticultural oil. Applications had no noticeable effects on PP eggs or nymphs, and densities were consistently low (Table 2). Table 1. Adult PP/tray Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 13 Aug 27 Aug 9 Sep F1785-03-1 50SG 0.063 lb(AI) 13.06a 22.56b 19.88a 32.94a 19.06a 8.81a F1785-03-1 50SG 0.071 lb(AI) 11.00a 19.13b 26.75a 29.44a 20.38a 7.06a F1785-03-1 50SG 0.088 lb(AI) 8.31a 22.31b 28.00a 29.69a 19.69a 9.56a Actara 25WDG 5.5 oz 12.19a 25.94b 13.50a 32.88a 23.63a 9.00a Assail 70WP 3.4 oz 9.94a 19.25b 23.31a 37.63a 17.69a 8.06a Calypso 4F 6.0 fl oz 13.69a 10.38b 19.13a 41.00a 20.69a 12.25a Fujimite 5EC 16.0 fl oz 10.38a 15.00b 11.13a 19.25a 18.00a 10.31a Applaud 70WP 2.0 lb 10.00a 17.38b 19.50a 27.50a 20.44a 6.38a Agri-Mek 0.15EC 16.0 fl oz 9.56a 19.88b 15.75a 24.06a 17.38a 11.06a Untreated check --- 11.13a 48.19a 20.00a 36.50a 15.69a 8.75a Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, SNK). All treatments except check applied with 0.25% v/v Saf-T-Side oil. Table 2. PP eggs/leaf in upper canopy PP nymphs/leaf in upper canopy Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 9 Sep 23 Jul 30 Jul 3 Aug 9 Sep F1785-03-1 50SG 0.063 lb(AI) 0.44a 0.20a 0.30a 0.24a 3.80a 1.48a 2.74a 1.10bc F1785-03-1 50SG 0.071 lb(AI) 0.46a 0.22a 0.14a 1.06a 4.04a 2.24a 1.46a 1.74bc F1785-03-1 50SG 0.088 lb(AI) 0.30a 0.46a 0.24a 0.58a 3.84a 4.02a 3.26a 2.02bc Actara 25WDG 5.5 oz 0.32a 0.32a 0.18a 0.34a 3.44a 2.74a 1.12a 3.94a Assail 70WP 3.4 oz 0.20a 0.28a 0.14a 0.32a 2.04a 1.74a 1.66a 2.88ab Calypso 4F 6.0 fl oz 0.34a 0.50a 0.06a 0.32a 3.04a 1.84a 1.44a 2.16bc Fujimite 5EC 16.0 fl oz 0.30a 0.38a 0.20a 0.46a 2.74a 2.18a 1.56a 0.74c Applaud 70WP 2.0 lb 0.26a 0.22a 0.20a 0.42a 3.90a 2.34a 2.14a 0.94c Agri-Mek 0.15EC 16.0 fl oz 0.42a 0.54a 0.04a 0.24a 3.98a 1.28a 1.26a 0.64c Untreated check --- 0.42a 0.50a 0.08a 0.18a 4.24a 5.04a 3.22a 0.68c Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, SNK). All treatments except check applied with 0.25% v/v Saf-T-Side oil.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.