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

Learn More →

Insecticide Efficacy Against Crapemyrtle Bark Scale (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae) in Containerized Production, 2020

Insecticide Efficacy Against Crapemyrtle Bark Scale (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae) in... Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" Arthropod Management T ests, 46(1), 2021, 1–3 doi: 10.1093/amt/tsab116 Section G: Ornamentals & Turf CRAPEMYRTLE: Lagerstroemia indica (L.), ‘Queen’s HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA Lace’ HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Insecticide Efficacy Against Crapemyrtle Bark Scale Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA History=Text=History=Text_First (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae) in Containerized EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA Production, 2020 EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC 1, Erfan K. Vafaie EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA Department of Entomology, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, 1710 N. FM 3053, Overton, TX 75684-2322, USA and Corresponding ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA author, e-mail: erfan.vafaie@ag.tamu.edu ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB Section Editor: Carlos Bogran ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC Crapemyrtle | Lagerstroemia indica ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA Crapemyrtle bark scale (CMBS) | Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Kuwana) The efficacy of several insecticides applied either alone or in ro- shape and color. The number of blooms per tree was also counted tation was tested for suppression of crapemyrtle bark scale on on weeks 25 (18 Jun), 28 (9 Jul), and 31 (30 Jul). Comparisons were containerized crapemyrtles at the Texas A&M Research and made on the average number of male pupae and egg sacs per branch Extension Center (Overton, TX). Five-gallon standard crapemyrtle (n  =  6) per replicate. Values were log-transformed (log(x + 1)) be- plants (Lagerstroemia indica ‘Queen’s Lace’) were acquired from a fore analysis and treatment effects compared using generalized linear local nursery in early 2019, maintained on an outdoor nursery pad, mixed models, with treatment and week number as interacting fixed and were subsequently haphazardly infested with crapemyrtle bark factors and plant ID as the random factor. Insecticide treatments scale. Pest inoculation was done by tying infested plant material were compared to untreated controls within each assessment period to individual tree branches. Applications were made as foliar/bark using Dunnett’s post hoc test. sprays or soil drenches (Table 1). Foliar/bark applications were made Insecticidal treatment had a significant effect on the number of with an R&D CO sprayer (Model D-203S with 601FA single nozzle male pupae (P < 0.001) and egg sacs (P < 0.001) for the duration of spray boom; Bellspray, Inc., Opelousas, LA). All containers were the trial (week number × treatment interaction). More specifically, lightly watered prior to drench applications, to prevent insecticides the Nukem, Merit, Talus, and Altus treatments significantly reduced from leaching. Treatments were assigned to crapemyrtle plants in the number of male pupae by week number 25 (19 Jun; Table 2) and a CR design with eight replicates for insecticide treatments and 16 Xxpire 2x, Ventigra, Ult + Ventigra, and Ult + Ven + Vel by week replicates for untreated control plants. number 33 compared to the untreated controls (12 Aug; Table 2). The number of male pupae and egg sacs were counted on 30 cm Insecticidal impacts on egg sacs were less apparent, with Nukem, of six selected branches, three lower and three upper branches for Merit, Talus, Altus, and Velifer causing a significant decrease in egg each crapemyrtle. Counts were made on weeks 14 (31 Mar), 18 (1 sacs compared to the untreated control by week 33 (12 Aug; Table 3). May), 20 (20 May), 25 (18 Jun), and 33 (12 Aug) of 2020. Only Insecticidal treatments did not significantly impact bloom counts for living male pupae and egg sacs were counted, as determined by their the duration of the trial (P = 0.445). This work is partially supported by Specialty Crop Research Initiative project ‘Systematic Strategies to Manage Crapemyrtle Bark Scale, An Emerging Exotic Pest’ (grant no. 2017-51181-26831/project accession no. 1013059) from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture, and industry gifts of pesticides. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the USDA. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. 1 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 2 Arthropod Management T ests, 2021, Vol. 46, No. 1 Table 1. No. Tradename Treatment name Active ingredients Application rates Application method Application date(s) 1 Water UTC — 2 Safari Nukem Dinotefuran 4 fl oz of dilute solution (24 oz/100 gal) in 20 fl oz of Drench 27 Mar water Talus Buprofezin 14 oz/100 gal Bark Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 4 Xxpire Xxpire (High) Sulfoxaflor & Spinetoram 3.5 oz/100 gal Bark/Foliar Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 5 Xxpire Xxpire 2x Sulfoxaflor & Spinetoram 14 oz (first app), then 7 oz/100 gal, 20 fl oz per pot Bark/Foliar Spray 6 Apr 23 Apr 6 Altus Altus Flupyradifurone 3.7 fl oz/100 gal Drench 16 Apr 7 Merit Merit Imidacloprid 1.5 fl oz/100 gal, 0.5 liter per pot Drench 6 Apr 8 Ventigra + CapSil Ventigra Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 9 Velifer Velifer B. bassiana PPRI 5339 13 oz/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 23 Apr 29 Apr 6 May 10 UltraPure Oil Ult + Ven Horticultural oil 2 gal/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr Ventigra + CapSil Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 23 Apr 6 May 11 UltraPure Oil Ult + Ven + Vel Horticultural oil 2 gal/100 gal Spray 15 Apr Ventigra + CapSil Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 23 Apr Velifer B. bassiana PPRI 5339 13 oz/100 gal Spray 29 Apr 6 May 12 Talus Talus Buprofezin 14 oz/100 gal Spray 7 Apr 23 Apr Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 Arthropod Management T ests, 2021, Vol. 46, No. 1 3 Table 2. Treatment Average number of male pupae n Week no. (date) 14 (31 Mar) 18 (1 May) 20 (20 May) 25 (18 Jun) 33 (12 Aug) UTC 0.2 0.27 0.36 11.79 18.72 16 Nukem 0.06 0.12 0.25 0* 0* 8 Merit 0.15 0.23 0.53 0.02* 0.1* 8 Talus 0.06 0.17 0.1 0* 0.06* 8 Altus 0.46 1.27 2.02 0.42* 1* 8 Xxpire (High) 0.31 0.42 0.81 5.06 8.1 8 Xxpire 2x 0.29 0.31 0.6 1.08 4.77* 8 Ventigra 0.15 0.29 0.21 2.38 5.15* 8 Velifer 0.12 0.17 0.29 8.77 21.12 8 Ult + Ventigra 0.02 0.19 0.27 1.17 2.69* 8 Ult + Ven + Vel 0.02 0.27 0.42 7.92 3.9* 8 Log(x + 1)-transformed data used for analysis, nontransformed means presented in the table. *Denotes significantly different from the untreated control (UTC) within column using Dunnett’s post hoc test with control (P ≤ 0.05). Table 3. Treatment Average number of egg sacs n Week number (date) 14 (31 Mar) 18 (1 May) 20 (20 May) 25 (18 Jun) 33 (12 Aug) UTC 0.04 2.8 1.93 0.95 16.51 16 Nukem 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0* 8 Merit 0.02 1.02 1.69 0.02 0.15* 8 Talus 0 1.44 1.48 0 0.27* 8 Altus 0.02 0.52 1.12 0.06 1.04* 8 Xxpire (High) 0.04 0.73 1.58 1.17 13.98 8 Xxpire 2x 0.1 0.38 0.73 0.6 15.21 8 Ventigra 0 2.6 2.19 1.31 12.21 8 Velifer 0 0.73 0.73 1.27 3.74* 8 Ult + Ventigra 0 1.73 0.98 0.19 14.65 8 Ult + Ven + Vel 0 0.71 1.31 2.71 9.79 8 Log(x + 1)-transformed data used for analysis, nontransformed means presented in the table. *Denotes significantly different from the untreated control (UTC) within column using Dunnett’s post hoc test with control (P ≤ 0.05). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

Insecticide Efficacy Against Crapemyrtle Bark Scale (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae) in Containerized Production, 2020

Arthropod Management Tests , Volume 46 (1) – Jan 1, 2021

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/insecticide-efficacy-against-crapemyrtle-bark-scale-acanthococcus-kIKRTJju0S
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2021 Entomological Society of America
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/tsab116
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" Arthropod Management T ests, 46(1), 2021, 1–3 doi: 10.1093/amt/tsab116 Section G: Ornamentals & Turf CRAPEMYRTLE: Lagerstroemia indica (L.), ‘Queen’s HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA Lace’ HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Insecticide Efficacy Against Crapemyrtle Bark Scale Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA History=Text=History=Text_First (Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae) in Containerized EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA Production, 2020 EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC 1, Erfan K. Vafaie EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA Department of Entomology, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, 1710 N. FM 3053, Overton, TX 75684-2322, USA and Corresponding ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA author, e-mail: erfan.vafaie@ag.tamu.edu ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB Section Editor: Carlos Bogran ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC Crapemyrtle | Lagerstroemia indica ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA Crapemyrtle bark scale (CMBS) | Acanthococcus lagerstroemiae (Kuwana) The efficacy of several insecticides applied either alone or in ro- shape and color. The number of blooms per tree was also counted tation was tested for suppression of crapemyrtle bark scale on on weeks 25 (18 Jun), 28 (9 Jul), and 31 (30 Jul). Comparisons were containerized crapemyrtles at the Texas A&M Research and made on the average number of male pupae and egg sacs per branch Extension Center (Overton, TX). Five-gallon standard crapemyrtle (n  =  6) per replicate. Values were log-transformed (log(x + 1)) be- plants (Lagerstroemia indica ‘Queen’s Lace’) were acquired from a fore analysis and treatment effects compared using generalized linear local nursery in early 2019, maintained on an outdoor nursery pad, mixed models, with treatment and week number as interacting fixed and were subsequently haphazardly infested with crapemyrtle bark factors and plant ID as the random factor. Insecticide treatments scale. Pest inoculation was done by tying infested plant material were compared to untreated controls within each assessment period to individual tree branches. Applications were made as foliar/bark using Dunnett’s post hoc test. sprays or soil drenches (Table 1). Foliar/bark applications were made Insecticidal treatment had a significant effect on the number of with an R&D CO sprayer (Model D-203S with 601FA single nozzle male pupae (P < 0.001) and egg sacs (P < 0.001) for the duration of spray boom; Bellspray, Inc., Opelousas, LA). All containers were the trial (week number × treatment interaction). More specifically, lightly watered prior to drench applications, to prevent insecticides the Nukem, Merit, Talus, and Altus treatments significantly reduced from leaching. Treatments were assigned to crapemyrtle plants in the number of male pupae by week number 25 (19 Jun; Table 2) and a CR design with eight replicates for insecticide treatments and 16 Xxpire 2x, Ventigra, Ult + Ventigra, and Ult + Ven + Vel by week replicates for untreated control plants. number 33 compared to the untreated controls (12 Aug; Table 2). The number of male pupae and egg sacs were counted on 30 cm Insecticidal impacts on egg sacs were less apparent, with Nukem, of six selected branches, three lower and three upper branches for Merit, Talus, Altus, and Velifer causing a significant decrease in egg each crapemyrtle. Counts were made on weeks 14 (31 Mar), 18 (1 sacs compared to the untreated control by week 33 (12 Aug; Table 3). May), 20 (20 May), 25 (18 Jun), and 33 (12 Aug) of 2020. Only Insecticidal treatments did not significantly impact bloom counts for living male pupae and egg sacs were counted, as determined by their the duration of the trial (P = 0.445). This work is partially supported by Specialty Crop Research Initiative project ‘Systematic Strategies to Manage Crapemyrtle Bark Scale, An Emerging Exotic Pest’ (grant no. 2017-51181-26831/project accession no. 1013059) from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture, and industry gifts of pesticides. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the USDA. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. 1 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 2 Arthropod Management T ests, 2021, Vol. 46, No. 1 Table 1. No. Tradename Treatment name Active ingredients Application rates Application method Application date(s) 1 Water UTC — 2 Safari Nukem Dinotefuran 4 fl oz of dilute solution (24 oz/100 gal) in 20 fl oz of Drench 27 Mar water Talus Buprofezin 14 oz/100 gal Bark Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 4 Xxpire Xxpire (High) Sulfoxaflor & Spinetoram 3.5 oz/100 gal Bark/Foliar Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 5 Xxpire Xxpire 2x Sulfoxaflor & Spinetoram 14 oz (first app), then 7 oz/100 gal, 20 fl oz per pot Bark/Foliar Spray 6 Apr 23 Apr 6 Altus Altus Flupyradifurone 3.7 fl oz/100 gal Drench 16 Apr 7 Merit Merit Imidacloprid 1.5 fl oz/100 gal, 0.5 liter per pot Drench 6 Apr 8 Ventigra + CapSil Ventigra Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr 9 Velifer Velifer B. bassiana PPRI 5339 13 oz/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 23 Apr 29 Apr 6 May 10 UltraPure Oil Ult + Ven Horticultural oil 2 gal/100 gal Spray 15 Apr 29 Apr Ventigra + CapSil Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 23 Apr 6 May 11 UltraPure Oil Ult + Ven + Vel Horticultural oil 2 gal/100 gal Spray 15 Apr Ventigra + CapSil Afidopyropen 7 oz/100 gal + 6 oz/100 gal Spray 23 Apr Velifer B. bassiana PPRI 5339 13 oz/100 gal Spray 29 Apr 6 May 12 Talus Talus Buprofezin 14 oz/100 gal Spray 7 Apr 23 Apr Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/amt/article/46/1/tsab116/6301369 by DeepDyve user on 22 June 2021 Arthropod Management T ests, 2021, Vol. 46, No. 1 3 Table 2. Treatment Average number of male pupae n Week no. (date) 14 (31 Mar) 18 (1 May) 20 (20 May) 25 (18 Jun) 33 (12 Aug) UTC 0.2 0.27 0.36 11.79 18.72 16 Nukem 0.06 0.12 0.25 0* 0* 8 Merit 0.15 0.23 0.53 0.02* 0.1* 8 Talus 0.06 0.17 0.1 0* 0.06* 8 Altus 0.46 1.27 2.02 0.42* 1* 8 Xxpire (High) 0.31 0.42 0.81 5.06 8.1 8 Xxpire 2x 0.29 0.31 0.6 1.08 4.77* 8 Ventigra 0.15 0.29 0.21 2.38 5.15* 8 Velifer 0.12 0.17 0.29 8.77 21.12 8 Ult + Ventigra 0.02 0.19 0.27 1.17 2.69* 8 Ult + Ven + Vel 0.02 0.27 0.42 7.92 3.9* 8 Log(x + 1)-transformed data used for analysis, nontransformed means presented in the table. *Denotes significantly different from the untreated control (UTC) within column using Dunnett’s post hoc test with control (P ≤ 0.05). Table 3. Treatment Average number of egg sacs n Week number (date) 14 (31 Mar) 18 (1 May) 20 (20 May) 25 (18 Jun) 33 (12 Aug) UTC 0.04 2.8 1.93 0.95 16.51 16 Nukem 0.02 0.5 0.02 0.02 0* 8 Merit 0.02 1.02 1.69 0.02 0.15* 8 Talus 0 1.44 1.48 0 0.27* 8 Altus 0.02 0.52 1.12 0.06 1.04* 8 Xxpire (High) 0.04 0.73 1.58 1.17 13.98 8 Xxpire 2x 0.1 0.38 0.73 0.6 15.21 8 Ventigra 0 2.6 2.19 1.31 12.21 8 Velifer 0 0.73 0.73 1.27 3.74* 8 Ult + Ventigra 0 1.73 0.98 0.19 14.65 8 Ult + Ven + Vel 0 0.71 1.31 2.71 9.79 8 Log(x + 1)-transformed data used for analysis, nontransformed means presented in the table. *Denotes significantly different from the untreated control (UTC) within column using Dunnett’s post hoc test with control (P ≤ 0.05).

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2021

There are no references for this article.