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

Learn More →

Full-season insecticide management programs for the control of Colorado potato beetle in Wisconsin potato, 2014 *

Full-season insecticide management programs for the control of Colorado potato... Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, 1–3 doi: 10.1093/amt/tsv064 Section E: Vegetables POTATO: Solanum tuberosum L., “Russet Burbank” Full-season insecticide management programs for the control of Colorado potato beetle in Wisconsin potato, 2014* 1,2 1 1 Russell L. Groves, Scott A. Chapman, Linda K. Crubaugh, 3 1 Kenneth E. Frost, and Emily J. Duerr Entomology Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, Phone: (608) 262-3229, Fax: (608) 262-3322, (groves@entomology.wisc.edu, chapman@entomology.wisc.edu, crubaugh@wisc.edu, 2 3 ejduerr@wisc.edu), Corresponding author, e-mail: groves@entomology.wisc.edu and Plant Pathology Department, Oregon State University, Hermiston, OR 97838, Phone: (541) 567-8321, email: kenneth.frost@oregonstate.edu Subject Editor: Vonny Barlow Colorado potato beetle (CPB): Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Potato leafhopper (PLH): Empoasca fabae (Harris) The purpose of this experiment was to evaluate various full-season, May using a two nozzle boom equipped with Tee Jet XR8001 flat reduced-risk, insecticide programs designed to manage Colorado fan spray nozzles powered by a CO backpack sprayer at 30 psi. potato beetle (CPB) on potatoes in Wisconsin. With developing neo- Furrows were cut using a commercial potato planter without closing icotinoid insecticide resistance among CPB populations in the potato discs attached. Immediately after the in-furrow treatments were ap- production areas in Wisconsin, several systemic-based and foliar- plied and all seed piece treatments were placed in open furrows, all based programs were designed to evaluate their effectiveness on seed were covered by hilling. Foliar insecticides were applied using a managing the CPB on potato. This experiment was conducted in CO pressurized sprayer with a 24-feet boom operating at 30 psi de- 2014 on a loamy sand soil at Hancock Agricultural Research station livering 20 gpa through 16 Tee Jet XR8002XR flat fan nozzles (HAES) located 1.1 mile (1.8 km) southwest of Hancock, WI. spaced 18 inches apart while travelling at 4.0 ft/s The efficacy of Potato, Solanum tuberosum cv. “Russet Burbank,” seed pieces were treatments was assessed by counting the number of egg masses, planted on 2 May. Plants were spaced 12 inches apart within rows small larvae, and large larvae per plant on 10 randomly selected and rows were spaced 3 feet apart. The 8-row plots were 24 feet in plants in each plot. Percent defoliation (% DF) ratings were taken width by 40 feet in length, for a total of 0.025 acres/plot. Replicates by visual observation of the entire plot. Potato leafhopper (PLH), were separated by a 5-feet border of bare ground. Three replicates Empoasca fabae, efficacy was assessed by counting the number of of 15 full-season insecticide programs were arranged in a random- adults collected from 15 sweep net samples in each plot. Aphid and ized complete block (RCB) design. Systemic insecticides were ap- PLH nymph populations were surveyed by visual assessment of 25 plied in-furrow at planting (2 May for treatments 1–6). The first leaves per plot. Insect counts occurred on several dates throughout application of Rimon (treatment 7) was made on 19 June. The first the summer, and reported means were averaged across those dates foliar insecticide applications were applied after peak egg hatch and (Tables 2 and 3). Insect count averages reflect time periods during prior to large larval population development (27 June, for treat- the summer when specific life stages peaked in the plots. Yield and ments 7–12). Subsequent applications were made on 3 July (for quality data were collected after harvest (18 September) (Table 4). treatments 3–6) and 10 July (for treatments 2, 3, and 9–12). Second- Data sets were analyzed using analysis of variance, and means were generation CPB foliar applications were made to treatments 1, 2, 7, compared using a Fisher’s protected least significant difference mean 8, 11, and 12 on 30 July. Treatment information is available in separation test (P¼ 0.05). No signs of phytotoxicity were observed Table 1. All in-furrow treatments were applied at 11.0 gpa on 2 among treatments. *This research was partially supported by industry gifts including products and research funding. V C The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of America. 1 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com 2 Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, Vol. 41, No. 1 Table 1. Full-season, integrated pest and resistance management programs for control of the CPB Treatment 1st generation CPB 2nd generation CPB Application date Insecticide Rate Type Application date Insecticide Rate Type 1 2 May Platinum 75 SC 2.67 fl oz/acre IF 30 July Besiege 1.25 ZC 9 fl oz/a F 2 2 May Belay 2.13 SC 12 fl oz/acre IF 30 July Agri-Mek 0.7 SC 3.5 fl oz/a F 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 3 2 May Verimark 20 SC 7 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.0 oz/acre F 4 2 May Verimark 20 SC 10 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 5 2 May Verimark 20 SC 13.5 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 6 2 May Admire Pro 4.6SC 8.7 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F b c 7 19 June Rimon 0.83 EC 10 fl oz/acre F 30 July Exirel 10 SE 6.75 fl oz/a F 27 June Rimon 0.83 EC 10 fl oz/acre F c b 8 27 June Coragen 1.67 SC 5 fl oz/acre F 30 July Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz/a F 10 July Coragen 1.67 SC 3.5 fl oz/acre F 9 27 June Agri-Flex 1.55 EC 8.5 fl oz/acre F No application 10 July Agri-Flex 1.55 EC 6 fl oz/acre F 10 27 June Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz wt/acre F No application 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 2.5 oz wt/acre F d c 11 27 June Radiant 1SC 8 fl oz/acre F 30 July Actara 25WDG 3 oz wt/a F 10 July Radiant 1SC 6 fl oz/acre F a d 12 27 June Athena 0.87EC 17 fl oz/acre F 30 July Admire Pro 550 SC 1.3 fl oz/a F 10 July Athena 0.87EC 14 fl oz/acre F F, foliar; IF, in furrow. MSO 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. Silwet 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. MSO 100L added at 0.5% vol/vol. NIS 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. Table 2. Mean lifestage counts per 10 plants of CPBs and percent Table 3. Mean PLH and aphid counts per 10 plants defoliation Treatment PLH PLH Aphids Treatment Adults Egg masses Small larvae Large larvae % Defoliation adults nymphs 1 2.2 bc 0.3 bc 1.1 d 0.6 cd 1.0 a 1 0.3 e 0.0 f 0.0 bc 2 1.8 bc 0.2 bc 3.9 bcd 0.9 bcd 1.0 a 2 0.4 e 0.1 f 0.0 bc 3 2.1 bc 1.1 a 4.3 abc 0.4 d 1.0 a 3 3.9 bc 0.8 a 0.2 abc 4 1.8 c 0.1 c 4.6 ab 0.9 bcd 1.0 a 4 7.5 a 1.6 a 0.2 abc 5 0.8 d 0.6 ab 1.7 cd 0.4 d 1.0 a 5 5.9 ab 0.6 ab 0.2 abc 6 1.5 cd 0.2 c 3.5 a–d 1.3 ab 1.0 a 6 1.6 de 0.1 ef 0.0 c 7 1.1 cd 0.3 bc 6.8 a 0.8 bcd 1.0 a 7 5.4 abc 0.4 bc 0.3 ab 8 2.9 ab 0.5 ab 4.2 ab 1.5 ab 1.0 a 8 3.2 cd 0.5 bc 0.4 a 9 2.0 bc 0.5 bc 4.5 ab 1.2 bc 1.0 a 9 1.3 e 0.0 f 0.0 c 10 1.6 c 0.4 ab 3.7 bcd 0.8 bcd 1.0 a 10 5.6 ab 0.4 cd 0.2 abc 11 1.7 cd 0.3 ab 5.4 ab 0.4 cd 1.0 a 11 3.3 cd 0.3 cde 0.2 abc 12 3.2 a 0.5 ab 5.7 ab 2.0 a 1.0 a 12 0.8 e 0.2 def 0.1 bc P 0.0046 0.1767 0.0211 0.0062 0.000 P 0.0001 0.0001 0.0751 LSD 0.45 0.15 0.42 0.45 0.00 LSD 0.43 0.08 0.03 LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square root Xþ 1) prior to separation. root X þ1) prior to separation. Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, Vol. 41, No. 1 3 Table 4. Mean yield estimates Treatment Total US 1 (lbs) Proportion US 1-A CWT/A 1 130.1 a 92.1 b 435.4 acc 2 131.0 a 91.5 b 421.6 abc 3 115.4 a–e 94.0 ab 393.3 a–d 4 108.7 de 94.9 ab 374.2 bcd 5 115.3 a–e 94.1 ab 393.6 a–d 6 126.3 ab 95.3 a 436.6 a 7 112.9 b–e 95.1 ab 390.2 a–d 8 119.9 a–d 95.4 a 415.0 ab 9 125.4 abc 95.0 ab 432.9 ab 10 109.9 cde 95.0 ab 379.3 a–d 11 103.4 e 94.2 ab 354.0 d 12 108.1 de 94.5 ab 371.2 cd P 0.0394 0.6513 0.0881 LSD 6.543 1.09 5.761 LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square root Xþ 1) prior to separation. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

Full-season insecticide management programs for the control of Colorado potato beetle in Wisconsin potato, 2014 *

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/full-season-insecticide-management-programs-for-the-control-of-GQzaG6YgGp
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of America.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/tsv064
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, 1–3 doi: 10.1093/amt/tsv064 Section E: Vegetables POTATO: Solanum tuberosum L., “Russet Burbank” Full-season insecticide management programs for the control of Colorado potato beetle in Wisconsin potato, 2014* 1,2 1 1 Russell L. Groves, Scott A. Chapman, Linda K. Crubaugh, 3 1 Kenneth E. Frost, and Emily J. Duerr Entomology Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706, Phone: (608) 262-3229, Fax: (608) 262-3322, (groves@entomology.wisc.edu, chapman@entomology.wisc.edu, crubaugh@wisc.edu, 2 3 ejduerr@wisc.edu), Corresponding author, e-mail: groves@entomology.wisc.edu and Plant Pathology Department, Oregon State University, Hermiston, OR 97838, Phone: (541) 567-8321, email: kenneth.frost@oregonstate.edu Subject Editor: Vonny Barlow Colorado potato beetle (CPB): Leptinotarsa decemlineata (Say) Potato leafhopper (PLH): Empoasca fabae (Harris) The purpose of this experiment was to evaluate various full-season, May using a two nozzle boom equipped with Tee Jet XR8001 flat reduced-risk, insecticide programs designed to manage Colorado fan spray nozzles powered by a CO backpack sprayer at 30 psi. potato beetle (CPB) on potatoes in Wisconsin. With developing neo- Furrows were cut using a commercial potato planter without closing icotinoid insecticide resistance among CPB populations in the potato discs attached. Immediately after the in-furrow treatments were ap- production areas in Wisconsin, several systemic-based and foliar- plied and all seed piece treatments were placed in open furrows, all based programs were designed to evaluate their effectiveness on seed were covered by hilling. Foliar insecticides were applied using a managing the CPB on potato. This experiment was conducted in CO pressurized sprayer with a 24-feet boom operating at 30 psi de- 2014 on a loamy sand soil at Hancock Agricultural Research station livering 20 gpa through 16 Tee Jet XR8002XR flat fan nozzles (HAES) located 1.1 mile (1.8 km) southwest of Hancock, WI. spaced 18 inches apart while travelling at 4.0 ft/s The efficacy of Potato, Solanum tuberosum cv. “Russet Burbank,” seed pieces were treatments was assessed by counting the number of egg masses, planted on 2 May. Plants were spaced 12 inches apart within rows small larvae, and large larvae per plant on 10 randomly selected and rows were spaced 3 feet apart. The 8-row plots were 24 feet in plants in each plot. Percent defoliation (% DF) ratings were taken width by 40 feet in length, for a total of 0.025 acres/plot. Replicates by visual observation of the entire plot. Potato leafhopper (PLH), were separated by a 5-feet border of bare ground. Three replicates Empoasca fabae, efficacy was assessed by counting the number of of 15 full-season insecticide programs were arranged in a random- adults collected from 15 sweep net samples in each plot. Aphid and ized complete block (RCB) design. Systemic insecticides were ap- PLH nymph populations were surveyed by visual assessment of 25 plied in-furrow at planting (2 May for treatments 1–6). The first leaves per plot. Insect counts occurred on several dates throughout application of Rimon (treatment 7) was made on 19 June. The first the summer, and reported means were averaged across those dates foliar insecticide applications were applied after peak egg hatch and (Tables 2 and 3). Insect count averages reflect time periods during prior to large larval population development (27 June, for treat- the summer when specific life stages peaked in the plots. Yield and ments 7–12). Subsequent applications were made on 3 July (for quality data were collected after harvest (18 September) (Table 4). treatments 3–6) and 10 July (for treatments 2, 3, and 9–12). Second- Data sets were analyzed using analysis of variance, and means were generation CPB foliar applications were made to treatments 1, 2, 7, compared using a Fisher’s protected least significant difference mean 8, 11, and 12 on 30 July. Treatment information is available in separation test (P¼ 0.05). No signs of phytotoxicity were observed Table 1. All in-furrow treatments were applied at 11.0 gpa on 2 among treatments. *This research was partially supported by industry gifts including products and research funding. V C The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Entomological Society of America. 1 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com 2 Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, Vol. 41, No. 1 Table 1. Full-season, integrated pest and resistance management programs for control of the CPB Treatment 1st generation CPB 2nd generation CPB Application date Insecticide Rate Type Application date Insecticide Rate Type 1 2 May Platinum 75 SC 2.67 fl oz/acre IF 30 July Besiege 1.25 ZC 9 fl oz/a F 2 2 May Belay 2.13 SC 12 fl oz/acre IF 30 July Agri-Mek 0.7 SC 3.5 fl oz/a F 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 3 2 May Verimark 20 SC 7 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.0 oz/acre F 4 2 May Verimark 20 SC 10 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 5 2 May Verimark 20 SC 13.5 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F 6 2 May Admire Pro 4.6SC 8.7 fl oz/acre IF No application 3 July Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz/acre F b c 7 19 June Rimon 0.83 EC 10 fl oz/acre F 30 July Exirel 10 SE 6.75 fl oz/a F 27 June Rimon 0.83 EC 10 fl oz/acre F c b 8 27 June Coragen 1.67 SC 5 fl oz/acre F 30 July Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz/a F 10 July Coragen 1.67 SC 3.5 fl oz/acre F 9 27 June Agri-Flex 1.55 EC 8.5 fl oz/acre F No application 10 July Agri-Flex 1.55 EC 6 fl oz/acre F 10 27 June Blackhawk 36WG 3.3 oz wt/acre F No application 10 July Blackhawk 36WG 2.5 oz wt/acre F d c 11 27 June Radiant 1SC 8 fl oz/acre F 30 July Actara 25WDG 3 oz wt/a F 10 July Radiant 1SC 6 fl oz/acre F a d 12 27 June Athena 0.87EC 17 fl oz/acre F 30 July Admire Pro 550 SC 1.3 fl oz/a F 10 July Athena 0.87EC 14 fl oz/acre F F, foliar; IF, in furrow. MSO 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. Silwet 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. MSO 100L added at 0.5% vol/vol. NIS 100 L added at 0.25% vol/vol. Table 2. Mean lifestage counts per 10 plants of CPBs and percent Table 3. Mean PLH and aphid counts per 10 plants defoliation Treatment PLH PLH Aphids Treatment Adults Egg masses Small larvae Large larvae % Defoliation adults nymphs 1 2.2 bc 0.3 bc 1.1 d 0.6 cd 1.0 a 1 0.3 e 0.0 f 0.0 bc 2 1.8 bc 0.2 bc 3.9 bcd 0.9 bcd 1.0 a 2 0.4 e 0.1 f 0.0 bc 3 2.1 bc 1.1 a 4.3 abc 0.4 d 1.0 a 3 3.9 bc 0.8 a 0.2 abc 4 1.8 c 0.1 c 4.6 ab 0.9 bcd 1.0 a 4 7.5 a 1.6 a 0.2 abc 5 0.8 d 0.6 ab 1.7 cd 0.4 d 1.0 a 5 5.9 ab 0.6 ab 0.2 abc 6 1.5 cd 0.2 c 3.5 a–d 1.3 ab 1.0 a 6 1.6 de 0.1 ef 0.0 c 7 1.1 cd 0.3 bc 6.8 a 0.8 bcd 1.0 a 7 5.4 abc 0.4 bc 0.3 ab 8 2.9 ab 0.5 ab 4.2 ab 1.5 ab 1.0 a 8 3.2 cd 0.5 bc 0.4 a 9 2.0 bc 0.5 bc 4.5 ab 1.2 bc 1.0 a 9 1.3 e 0.0 f 0.0 c 10 1.6 c 0.4 ab 3.7 bcd 0.8 bcd 1.0 a 10 5.6 ab 0.4 cd 0.2 abc 11 1.7 cd 0.3 ab 5.4 ab 0.4 cd 1.0 a 11 3.3 cd 0.3 cde 0.2 abc 12 3.2 a 0.5 ab 5.7 ab 2.0 a 1.0 a 12 0.8 e 0.2 def 0.1 bc P 0.0046 0.1767 0.0211 0.0062 0.000 P 0.0001 0.0001 0.0751 LSD 0.45 0.15 0.42 0.45 0.00 LSD 0.43 0.08 0.03 LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square root Xþ 1) prior to separation. root X þ1) prior to separation. Arthropod Management Tests, 2016, Vol. 41, No. 1 3 Table 4. Mean yield estimates Treatment Total US 1 (lbs) Proportion US 1-A CWT/A 1 130.1 a 92.1 b 435.4 acc 2 131.0 a 91.5 b 421.6 abc 3 115.4 a–e 94.0 ab 393.3 a–d 4 108.7 de 94.9 ab 374.2 bcd 5 115.3 a–e 94.1 ab 393.6 a–d 6 126.3 ab 95.3 a 436.6 a 7 112.9 b–e 95.1 ab 390.2 a–d 8 119.9 a–d 95.4 a 415.0 ab 9 125.4 abc 95.0 ab 432.9 ab 10 109.9 cde 95.0 ab 379.3 a–d 11 103.4 e 94.2 ab 354.0 d 12 108.1 de 94.5 ab 371.2 cd P 0.0394 0.6513 0.0881 LSD 6.543 1.09 5.761 LSD, least significant difference. Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different at a> 0.05. Means transformed (square root Xþ 1) prior to separation.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2016

There are no references for this article.