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

Learn More →

EVALUATION OF FOLIAR INSECTICIDES IN POTATOES, 2004

EVALUATION OF FOLIAR INSECTICIDES IN POTATOES, 2004 (E63) POTATO: Solanum tuberosum L., ‘Superior’ Thomas P. Kuhar Virginia Tech Eastern Shore AREC 33446 Research Drive Painter, VA 23420 Phone: (757) 414-0724 ext 14 E-mail: tkuhar@vt.edu John Speese III E-mail: jspeese@vt.edu Colorado potato beetle (CPB): Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Potato leafhopper (PLH): Empoasca fabae (Harris) European corn borer (ECB): Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) Wireworms: Melanotus communis, Conoderus vespertinus, C. lividus Experiments were conducted in two fields at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center near Painter, VA. The experiment had nine treatments plus two untreated checks (Field 1) and eight treatments plus an untreated check (Field 2), each arranged in RCB designs replicated four times. Each plot consisted of two 20-ft rows that were spaced 3 ft apart. Plots were flanked by two unplanted rows. The soil type was a Bojac sandy loam and potatoes were planted on 25 Mar in both fields. When foliar feeding insects were present, potatoes were treated with 30 gpa of spray using a boom with one hollow-cone nozzle oriented over the top of the row and two hollow cone drop nozzles oriented to each side of the row. For Field 1, all treatments were applied once on 27 May, except for Vydate and Asana treatments which were applied at drag-off 20 Apr, and the Vydate 14 and 28 d treatments on 5 and 18 May, respectively. The Vydate drench treatment in Field 1 was applied in 2.5 gal water per 2 reps using a watering can. For Field 2, all treatments except Rimon 0.83EC were applied twice on 18 and 25 May. The Rimon plot only received one application on 25 May due to a delay in receiving the material. CPB egg masses, small larvae (SL), large larvae (LL), and adults were counted on 10 random stems per plot. Sample dates for each field for stages in which significant differences were obtained are indicated in the tables. On 3 Jun, potato plots in both fields were assessed for percentdefoliation before F1 adult CPB appeared, but after larvae completed feeding. On 4 Jun, PLH nymphs were counted on 10 randomly-picked, fully expanded compound leaves/plot in both fields. On 10 Jun, the percentage of stems damaged by ECB was assessed in each plot in both fields. On 9 Jul, potato tubers in both fields were harvested, graded and weighed. In addition, a sub-sample of 50 grade large A tubers was evaluated for wireworm injury. All data were analyzed using ANOVA and means were separated using Tukey’s HSD (P ≤ 0.05). CPB did not colonize Field 1 until late in the season and the pressure was relatively low, and no significant differences in CPB counts were measured (Table 1). In Field 2, moderately high CPB pressure occurred, and most treatments had significantly lower CPB larval numbers than the check (Table 3). Higher CPB larval numbers were found in the Rimon 0.83EC and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil plots compared with the other insecticide treatments. Concomitant with CPB larval numbers, percentage defoliation (on 3 Jun) in the checks averaged 18.8% in Field 1 (Table 1) and 28.8% in Field 2 (Table 3). Differences were not significant in Field 1 (Table 1). In Field 2, the AgriMek + Warrior treatment had significantly less CPB defoliation than in the untreated check (Table 3). PLH pressure was moderate to high in both fields. In Field 1, the plots treated with Trigard + Warrior, AgriMek + Warrior, Leverage and Monitor had significantly fewer PLH nymphs/10 compound leaves than in untreated check 1 (Table 1). Since PLH was sampled fairly late, and the foliar spray application was also late, these PLH numbers may not accurately reflect the levels of “hopperburn” damage that actually occurred. Most plots had substantial “hopperburn” by the time the foliar treatments were applied on 27 May (except in the Vydate and Asana + Vydate plots). In Field 2, all treatments except Rimon and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil had significantly fewer PLH nymphs than the untreated check (Table 3). Pressure from European corn borer was relatively low, variable, and not significant in either field. Marketable yield averaged 139.26 and 151.26 cwt/acre in the two checks in Field 1, and the plots treated with Monitor, Vydate drench at drag-off + 2 foliar sprays, and Leverage had significantly greater marketable yields than the two untreated checks (Table 2). In Field 1, the materials that had the effective PLH efficacy also had the highest yields, since early season PLH pressure was heavy in this field. In Field 2, excellent yields were obtained in all treatments (Table 3). Marketable yield averaged 284.22 cwt/acre in the untreated check, which was a commercially acceptable yield for the Eastern Shore of Virginia. All treatments except Rimon 0.83EC, metaflumizone + Penetrator Plus, and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil had significantly higher marketable yield than the check. Wireworm injury to tubers was quite variable and not significantly different among treatments in either of the fields (Table 2). No visible sign of phytotoxicity was observed from any treatment in either field. Table 1. CPB /10 stems - 2 Jun ECB/10 stems - 10 Jun Rate Application PLH % defoliation Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) SL LL 4 Jun Damaged stems Holes/stem 3 Jun Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 0.00a 1.25a 0.75bcd 2.50a 3.50b 11.25a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 0.00a 3.00a 0.00d 3.75a 6.00ab 15.00a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 27 May 0.25a 0.50a 6.50abcd 3.75a 5.50ab 11.25a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 27 May 0.00a 0.25a 0.25cd 2.50a 2.75b 11.25a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125% v/v 27 May 5.25a 4.75a 2.25bcd 5.00a 7.25ab 17.50a Vydate 3.77C-LV 1.00 20 Apr Vydate 3.77C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 1.50a 9.25a 1.00bcd 4.25a 7.00ab 7.50a Monitor 4 1.00 27 May 3.00a 4.75a 0.00d 5.75a 7.75ab 17.50a Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 27 May 0.00a 0.50a 7.25a-d 2.75a 3.75b 17.50a Asana XL 0.66EC 0.05 20 Apr Vydate C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 5.75a 10.75a 0.75bcd 6.00a 10.25a 12.50a Untreated check 1 -- -- 9.25a 7.75a 11.75ab 5.50a 7.25ab 18.75a Untreated check 2 -- -- 1.50a 16.25a 9.75abcd 5.00a 6.00ab 18.75a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Defoliation proportions were transformed [arcsin(square root)] before analysis; actual values are presented. SL = small (first and second instar) larvae, LL = large (third and fourth instar) larvae. Nymphs/10 compound leaves. Drench. 14 and 28 d treatments. Drag off. Table 2. Marketable % tubers Wireworm damage Rate Application yield Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) cwt/acre B SA LA Chef % damaged tubers No. holes/tuber Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 251.26abcd 21.2 25.7 46.0 7.1 8.0abc 1.25a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 238.03abcde 21.0 31.3 40.9 6.8 10.5abc 1.27a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 27 May 194.74bcde 24.8 35.4 36.2 3.7 12.0abc 1.15a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 27 May 291.47ab 19.0 26.7 46.6 7.8 12.5abc 1.17a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125% v/v 27 May 203.79abcde 25.5 40.4 34.2 0.0 13.0abc 1.20a Vydate 3.77C-LV 1.00 20 Apr Vydate 3.77C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 306.51a 17.7 30.3 43.9 8.1 17.0a 1.09a Monitor 4 1.00 27 May 266.83abc 20.0 30.3 39.6 10.1 6.5abc 1.39a Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 27 May 167.02cde 29.8 36.6 33.6 0.0 8.5abc 1.00a Asana XL 0.66EC 0.05 20 Apr Vydate C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 196.91bcde 22.8 30.0 47.2 0.0 4.0c 0.79a Untreated check 1 -- -- 151.26de 30.1 38.2 31.6 0.0 9.6abc 1.29a Untreated check 2 -- -- 139.85e 28.8 36.1 35.1 0.0 11.8abc 1.20a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Small As + large As + chefs, SA = small A, LA = large A. Drench. 14 and 28 d treatments. Drag off. Table 3. CPB LL/10 stems ECB/10 stems – 10 Jun Rate Application LH % defoliation Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) 24 May 2 Jun 4 Jun Damaged stems Holes/ stem 3 Jun Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 25 May 37.25a 2.75ab 5.00ab 3.50abc 5.00abc 17.50abc AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 1.00c 2.00b 0.25b 2.75abc 3.50bc 3.75c Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 18, 25 May 0.00c 0.75b 2.25ab 5.25abc 7.50abc 17.50abc Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 18, 25 May 0.75c 0.75b 0.00b 1.75bc 2.00bc 16.25abc Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 6.75c 0.50b 0.00b 1.50bc 1.75bc 8.75abc Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125 v/v 18, 25 May 18.25abc 3.50ab 0.50b 1.00bc 1.25bc 16.25abc Venom 20SG 0.132 18, 25 May 1.75c 0.75b 0.25b 7.50a 13.50a 8.75abc Venom 20SG 0.176 18, 25 May 1.25c 0.00b 0.25b 5.00abc 7.75abc 5.00abc Untreated check -- -- 30.25ab 11.00a 9.75a 5.50abc 7.00abc 28.75a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Defoliation proportions were transformed [arcsin(square root)] before analysis; actual values are presented. LL = large (third and fourth instar) larvae. Small larvae and adults were also sampled but were not significant. Nymphs/10 compound leaves Table 4. % tubers Wireworm damage Rate Application Marketable yield Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) cwt/acre B SA LA Chef % damaged tubers No. holes/tuber Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 25 May 330.60efg 19.0 21.8 46.8 12.3 12.0a 1.28a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 364.29abcde 15.2 18.4 38.7 27.7 18.5a 1.22a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.50% v/v 18, 25 May 341.11defg 16.6 20.8 38.8 23.8 11.0a 1.17a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz. 18, 25 May 405.59abc 12.5 14.2 46.6 26.8 20.5a 1.34a Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 398.71abcd 12.5 16.9 47.0 23.6 16.0a 1.19a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125 v/v 18, 25 May 344.00cdefg 15.9 21.1 41.4 21.6 20.0a 1.32a Venom 20SG 0.132 18, 25 May 422.26ab 12.3 15.6 48.4 23.8 16.0a 1.20a Venom 20SG 0.176 18, 25 May 423.17a 14.2 17.4 47.0 21.4 23.0a 1.11a Untreated check -- -- 284.22g 20.1 27.2 44.2 8.5 29.5a 1.36a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Small As + large As + chefs. SA = small A, LA = large A. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

EVALUATION OF FOLIAR INSECTICIDES IN POTATOES, 2004

Arthropod Management Tests , Volume 30 (1) – Jan 1, 2005

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/evaluation-of-foliar-insecticides-in-potatoes-2004-ECaFR15Y20
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/30.1.E63
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

(E63) POTATO: Solanum tuberosum L., ‘Superior’ Thomas P. Kuhar Virginia Tech Eastern Shore AREC 33446 Research Drive Painter, VA 23420 Phone: (757) 414-0724 ext 14 E-mail: tkuhar@vt.edu John Speese III E-mail: jspeese@vt.edu Colorado potato beetle (CPB): Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Potato leafhopper (PLH): Empoasca fabae (Harris) European corn borer (ECB): Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) Wireworms: Melanotus communis, Conoderus vespertinus, C. lividus Experiments were conducted in two fields at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center near Painter, VA. The experiment had nine treatments plus two untreated checks (Field 1) and eight treatments plus an untreated check (Field 2), each arranged in RCB designs replicated four times. Each plot consisted of two 20-ft rows that were spaced 3 ft apart. Plots were flanked by two unplanted rows. The soil type was a Bojac sandy loam and potatoes were planted on 25 Mar in both fields. When foliar feeding insects were present, potatoes were treated with 30 gpa of spray using a boom with one hollow-cone nozzle oriented over the top of the row and two hollow cone drop nozzles oriented to each side of the row. For Field 1, all treatments were applied once on 27 May, except for Vydate and Asana treatments which were applied at drag-off 20 Apr, and the Vydate 14 and 28 d treatments on 5 and 18 May, respectively. The Vydate drench treatment in Field 1 was applied in 2.5 gal water per 2 reps using a watering can. For Field 2, all treatments except Rimon 0.83EC were applied twice on 18 and 25 May. The Rimon plot only received one application on 25 May due to a delay in receiving the material. CPB egg masses, small larvae (SL), large larvae (LL), and adults were counted on 10 random stems per plot. Sample dates for each field for stages in which significant differences were obtained are indicated in the tables. On 3 Jun, potato plots in both fields were assessed for percentdefoliation before F1 adult CPB appeared, but after larvae completed feeding. On 4 Jun, PLH nymphs were counted on 10 randomly-picked, fully expanded compound leaves/plot in both fields. On 10 Jun, the percentage of stems damaged by ECB was assessed in each plot in both fields. On 9 Jul, potato tubers in both fields were harvested, graded and weighed. In addition, a sub-sample of 50 grade large A tubers was evaluated for wireworm injury. All data were analyzed using ANOVA and means were separated using Tukey’s HSD (P ≤ 0.05). CPB did not colonize Field 1 until late in the season and the pressure was relatively low, and no significant differences in CPB counts were measured (Table 1). In Field 2, moderately high CPB pressure occurred, and most treatments had significantly lower CPB larval numbers than the check (Table 3). Higher CPB larval numbers were found in the Rimon 0.83EC and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil plots compared with the other insecticide treatments. Concomitant with CPB larval numbers, percentage defoliation (on 3 Jun) in the checks averaged 18.8% in Field 1 (Table 1) and 28.8% in Field 2 (Table 3). Differences were not significant in Field 1 (Table 1). In Field 2, the AgriMek + Warrior treatment had significantly less CPB defoliation than in the untreated check (Table 3). PLH pressure was moderate to high in both fields. In Field 1, the plots treated with Trigard + Warrior, AgriMek + Warrior, Leverage and Monitor had significantly fewer PLH nymphs/10 compound leaves than in untreated check 1 (Table 1). Since PLH was sampled fairly late, and the foliar spray application was also late, these PLH numbers may not accurately reflect the levels of “hopperburn” damage that actually occurred. Most plots had substantial “hopperburn” by the time the foliar treatments were applied on 27 May (except in the Vydate and Asana + Vydate plots). In Field 2, all treatments except Rimon and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil had significantly fewer PLH nymphs than the untreated check (Table 3). Pressure from European corn borer was relatively low, variable, and not significant in either field. Marketable yield averaged 139.26 and 151.26 cwt/acre in the two checks in Field 1, and the plots treated with Monitor, Vydate drench at drag-off + 2 foliar sprays, and Leverage had significantly greater marketable yields than the two untreated checks (Table 2). In Field 1, the materials that had the effective PLH efficacy also had the highest yields, since early season PLH pressure was heavy in this field. In Field 2, excellent yields were obtained in all treatments (Table 3). Marketable yield averaged 284.22 cwt/acre in the untreated check, which was a commercially acceptable yield for the Eastern Shore of Virginia. All treatments except Rimon 0.83EC, metaflumizone + Penetrator Plus, and Avaunt + Hyperactive Oil had significantly higher marketable yield than the check. Wireworm injury to tubers was quite variable and not significantly different among treatments in either of the fields (Table 2). No visible sign of phytotoxicity was observed from any treatment in either field. Table 1. CPB /10 stems - 2 Jun ECB/10 stems - 10 Jun Rate Application PLH % defoliation Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) SL LL 4 Jun Damaged stems Holes/stem 3 Jun Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 0.00a 1.25a 0.75bcd 2.50a 3.50b 11.25a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 0.00a 3.00a 0.00d 3.75a 6.00ab 15.00a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 27 May 0.25a 0.50a 6.50abcd 3.75a 5.50ab 11.25a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 27 May 0.00a 0.25a 0.25cd 2.50a 2.75b 11.25a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125% v/v 27 May 5.25a 4.75a 2.25bcd 5.00a 7.25ab 17.50a Vydate 3.77C-LV 1.00 20 Apr Vydate 3.77C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 1.50a 9.25a 1.00bcd 4.25a 7.00ab 7.50a Monitor 4 1.00 27 May 3.00a 4.75a 0.00d 5.75a 7.75ab 17.50a Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 27 May 0.00a 0.50a 7.25a-d 2.75a 3.75b 17.50a Asana XL 0.66EC 0.05 20 Apr Vydate C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 5.75a 10.75a 0.75bcd 6.00a 10.25a 12.50a Untreated check 1 -- -- 9.25a 7.75a 11.75ab 5.50a 7.25ab 18.75a Untreated check 2 -- -- 1.50a 16.25a 9.75abcd 5.00a 6.00ab 18.75a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Defoliation proportions were transformed [arcsin(square root)] before analysis; actual values are presented. SL = small (first and second instar) larvae, LL = large (third and fourth instar) larvae. Nymphs/10 compound leaves. Drench. 14 and 28 d treatments. Drag off. Table 2. Marketable % tubers Wireworm damage Rate Application yield Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) cwt/acre B SA LA Chef % damaged tubers No. holes/tuber Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 251.26abcd 21.2 25.7 46.0 7.1 8.0abc 1.25a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 27 May 238.03abcde 21.0 31.3 40.9 6.8 10.5abc 1.27a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 27 May 194.74bcde 24.8 35.4 36.2 3.7 12.0abc 1.15a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 27 May 291.47ab 19.0 26.7 46.6 7.8 12.5abc 1.17a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125% v/v 27 May 203.79abcde 25.5 40.4 34.2 0.0 13.0abc 1.20a Vydate 3.77C-LV 1.00 20 Apr Vydate 3.77C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 306.51a 17.7 30.3 43.9 8.1 17.0a 1.09a Monitor 4 1.00 27 May 266.83abc 20.0 30.3 39.6 10.1 6.5abc 1.39a Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 27 May 167.02cde 29.8 36.6 33.6 0.0 8.5abc 1.00a Asana XL 0.66EC 0.05 20 Apr Vydate C-LV 0.50 5, 18 May 196.91bcde 22.8 30.0 47.2 0.0 4.0c 0.79a Untreated check 1 -- -- 151.26de 30.1 38.2 31.6 0.0 9.6abc 1.29a Untreated check 2 -- -- 139.85e 28.8 36.1 35.1 0.0 11.8abc 1.20a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Small As + large As + chefs, SA = small A, LA = large A. Drench. 14 and 28 d treatments. Drag off. Table 3. CPB LL/10 stems ECB/10 stems – 10 Jun Rate Application LH % defoliation Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) 24 May 2 Jun 4 Jun Damaged stems Holes/ stem 3 Jun Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 25 May 37.25a 2.75ab 5.00ab 3.50abc 5.00abc 17.50abc AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 1.00c 2.00b 0.25b 2.75abc 3.50bc 3.75c Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.5 % v/v 18, 25 May 0.00c 0.75b 2.25ab 5.25abc 7.50abc 17.50abc Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz 18, 25 May 0.75c 0.75b 0.00b 1.75bc 2.00bc 16.25abc Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 6.75c 0.50b 0.00b 1.50bc 1.75bc 8.75abc Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125 v/v 18, 25 May 18.25abc 3.50ab 0.50b 1.00bc 1.25bc 16.25abc Venom 20SG 0.132 18, 25 May 1.75c 0.75b 0.25b 7.50a 13.50a 8.75abc Venom 20SG 0.176 18, 25 May 1.25c 0.00b 0.25b 5.00abc 7.75abc 5.00abc Untreated check -- -- 30.25ab 11.00a 9.75a 5.50abc 7.00abc 28.75a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Defoliation proportions were transformed [arcsin(square root)] before analysis; actual values are presented. LL = large (third and fourth instar) larvae. Small larvae and adults were also sampled but were not significant. Nymphs/10 compound leaves Table 4. % tubers Wireworm damage Rate Application Marketable yield Treatment/formulation lb (AI)/acre date(s) cwt/acre B SA LA Chef % damaged tubers No. holes/tuber Rimon 0.83EC 0.078 25 May 330.60efg 19.0 21.8 46.8 12.3 12.0a 1.28a AgriMek 0.15EC + 0.0094 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 364.29abcde 15.2 18.4 38.7 27.7 18.5a 1.22a Metaflumizone 2 + 0.0624 + Penetrator Plus 0.50% v/v 18, 25 May 341.11defg 16.6 20.8 38.8 23.8 11.0a 1.17a Leverage 2.7SE 3.75 fl oz. 18, 25 May 405.59abc 12.5 14.2 46.6 26.8 20.5a 1.34a Trigard 75WP + 0.25 + Warrior 1CS 0.025 18, 25 May 398.71abcd 12.5 16.9 47.0 23.6 16.0a 1.19a Avaunt 30WG + 0.065 + Hyper-Active 0.125 v/v 18, 25 May 344.00cdefg 15.9 21.1 41.4 21.6 20.0a 1.32a Venom 20SG 0.132 18, 25 May 422.26ab 12.3 15.6 48.4 23.8 16.0a 1.20a Venom 20SG 0.176 18, 25 May 423.17a 14.2 17.4 47.0 21.4 23.0a 1.11a Untreated check -- -- 284.22g 20.1 27.2 44.2 8.5 29.5a 1.36a Means in a column with a letter in common are not significantly different (P > 0.05, Tukey’s HSD). Small As + large As + chefs. SA = small A, LA = large A.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.