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

Learn More →

PEACH INSECT STUDY I — 2012

PEACH INSECT STUDY I — 2012 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 (B6) PEACH: Prunus persica (L.) Larry A. Hull Fruit Research and Extension Center Pennsylvania State University P. O. Box 330 Biglerville, PA 17307-0330 Phone: (717) 677-6116 Ext. 6 Fax: (717) 677-4112 Email: lah4@psu.edu Greg Krawczyk Email: gxk13@psu.edu Tarnished plant bug: Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) Brown stink bug: Euschistus servus (Say) Dusky stink bug: Euschistus tristigmus (Say) Green stink bug: Acrosternum hilare (Say) Brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB): Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Green peach aphid (GPA): Myzus persicae (Sulzer) Japanese beetle (JB): Popillia japonica Newman Oriental fruit moth (OFM): Grapholita molesta (Busck) Plum curculio (PC): Conotrachelus nenuphar (Herbst) Western flower thrips (WFT): Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) Various insecticide treatments were applied at varying degree-day (DD) timings during each of the egg hatch periods for the first three broods of OFM to determine control efficacy and their activity against various other pests present. The treatments were applied to single-tree plots replicated six times in a RCB design. Three replicates of each treatment were randomized on two rows of ‘Redhaven’ peaches and three replicates on two rows of ‘SunGlo’ nectarines. The trees were planted to a spacing of 18 x 30 ft and were 16 yr old. All treatments were applied with a Durand-Wayland airblast sprayer calibrated to deliver 100 gpa, driven at 2.4 mph. Treatments were timed for various stages of OFM egg hatch and were based on DD accumulations from biofix (i.e., first sustained capture of adult males in sex pheromone traps in peach) (Table 1). DD calculations were based on minimum and maximum developmental thresholds of 45°F and 90°F (OFM). All treatments received a regular maintenance schedule of fungicides (Captan 80WDG, Indar 2F, Iprodione, sulfur and Topsin M 70WDF). GPA was sampled periodically by counting the number of live colonies found in a 3-min examination of each plot tree. OFM shoot injury was assessed by counting the number of infested shoots observed during a 3-min evaluation of each plot tree and the total number of injured per plot tree (30 May only). Effectiveness of the treatments in preventing injury from the various fruit pests was assessed by scoring for injury up to 85 harvested, mature ‘SunGlo’ nectarines per tree on 16 Jul and another 30 ‘SunGlo’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. For ‘Redhaven’ peaches, up to 85 mature peaches per tree were harvested and evaluated for injury on 20 Jul and another 30 ‘Redhaven’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. Fruit injury caused by the complex of stinkbugs and TPB (collectively called catfacing insects (CF)) was defined as deep dimpling and scarring injuries caused during the time period from shuck split and shuck fall through early Jul; while stink bug (SB) injury was defined as that injury occurring after early Jul through the harvest period and represented small necrotic scarring and only slight dimpling and distortion. Each fruit showing SB injury was further evaluated by slicing the fruit and if necrotic tissue was found below the skin, it was classified as a SB injured fruit. An ANOVA was conducted on all raw and transformed data and a means separation analysis was performed using Fisher’s Protected LSD at P > 0.05. Pest pressure was low to moderate throughout the study depending on the pest species. All insecticide programs reduced GPA populations during all observations (Table 2). Admire Pro at both rates provided excellent control of aphids while various rates of HGW86 plus LI-700 or HGW86 alone provided only varying levels of aphid suppression. The number of OFM injured shoots observed during multiple 3 min observations gradually increased for each of the evaluated programs (Table 2). All HGW86 programs and the Imidan et al. program controlled the number of OFM injured shoots during the 24 May observation, while the Avaunt et al. program gave control similar to the untreated check. During a whole tree observation on 30 May, all HGW86 programs provided excellent control of OFM injured shoots 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 (Table 2). No differences were found among all treatments for the number of OFM injured shoots during both evaluations in Jul. During the fruit evaluations conducted on ‘Redhaven’ peach fruit, the highest rate of HGW86 plus LI-700 and HGW86 alone provided the most effective protection against fruit entries caused by OFM, while the Avaunt et al. program provided the best protection from injury caused by PC (Table 3). None of the treatments was effective against SB, cat- facing insects or JB. Similarly, during evaluations on ‘SunGlo’ nectarine fruit no differences among treatments were detected in OFM entries or injuries caused by PC, SB, CF and JB, however, treatments with Delegate plus Lannate and Assail plus Lannate provided very good control of WFT (Table 4). When fruit injury data for both cultivars was combined, the two highest rates of HWG86 plus LI-700 and the Avaunt et al. program provided excellent protection of fruit from OFM injury (Table 5). The Avaunt et al. program again provided the best control of PC. There were no differences among any of the treatments for the percentage of clean fruit in this single-tree replicated study. There was no visible phytotoxicity found on leaves or fruit for any of the chemical treatments. This research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticides and/or research funding. Table 1. Treatment/formulation Amt/acre lb AI/acre Application dates (OFM degree days from biofix) HGW86 10SE + 300.0 ml + 0.066 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE + 400.0 ml + 0.088 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE + 606.0 ml + 0.134 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 0.088 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) Avaunt 30WDG + 142.0 g + 0.0938 Admire Pro 74.0 ml 0.09 19 Apr (165) Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g 0.0938 7 May (375) Delegate 25WG 170.0 g 0.0938 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509) Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 0.675 6 (1860) & 17 Jul (2226) Imidan 70W + 1360.0 g + 2.1 Admire Pro 59.0 ml 0.0719 19 Apr (165) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g 2.1 7 May (375) Assail 30SG 170.0 g 0.1125 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509) Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 0.5060 6 (1860) & 17 Jul (2226) Untreated check --- --- Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). 2 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 Table 2. Live GPA inf. colonies/tree OFM inj. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/tree Treatment/formulation Amt/acre 9 May 11 May 16 May 16 May 24 May 22 Jun 10 Jul 19 Jul 30 May HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 27.3b 17.5bc 14.2c 1.2a 0.8a 1.5a 22.2a 27.8a 2.0a HGW86 10SE + 400.0 ml + LI-700 946.0 ml 34.7bc 17.8bc 8.8bc 0.2a 0.3a 5.0abc 17.2a 19.0a 2.0a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 38.8c 13.8b 5.2b 0.2a 0.2a 3.0ab 7.7a 10.7a 2.7a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 35.0bc 24.2cd 14.7bc 2.2a 0.8a 1.3a 21.8a 26.2a 1.8a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 3.7a 5.0a 0.0a 0.7a 2.2bc 1.8ab 11.7a 17.8a 4.2ab Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 4.5a 1.5a 0.0a 1.0a 1.2ab 4.0bc 14.5a 31.3a 3.7ab Untreated check --- 55.3d 31.7d 23.5c 3.8a 2.8c 7.0c 31.8a 37.5a 9.0b Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Table 3. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 370 2.4abc 5.4c 0.0a 8.9a 0.5a 0.0a 83.2a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 372 1.9abc 3.0ab 1.1ab 8.9a 0.8a 0.0a 84.6a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 371 0.3a 2.4ab 1.4ab 6.2a 0.5a 0.0a 89.2a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 369 0.3a 3.5bc 1.9b 9.5a 0.3a 0.3a 84.6a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 375 0.8ab 0.8a 0.0a 4.5a 0.5a 0.0a 93.3a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 370 2.7bc 1.6ab 0.0a 10.9a 0.0a 0.3a 84.8a Untreated check --- 375 3.7c 2.9b 0.0a 5.4a 0.5a 0.0a 88.0a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Redhaven peaches 3 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 Table 4. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 312 2.3a 8.8a 0.8a 13.2a 0.6a 4.4bc 70.8a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 354 1.7a 5.0a 0.5a 13.5a 1.1a 6.0bc 72.2a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 346 2.0a 6.0a 1.2a 17.3a 0.0a 5.8bc 68.0a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 353 1.1a 2.3a 0.6a 14.2a 0.6a 5.9bc 75.0a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 315 1.7a 3.9a 0.6a 15.0a 0.0a 1.1a 76.7a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 323 2.5a 5.5a 0.3a 19.4a 0.3a 2.0ab 69.9a Untreated check --- 343 3.5a 5.3a 0.9a 16.1a 0.3a 8.7c 66.8a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). SunGlo nectarines Table 5. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 682 2.4abc 7.1c 0.4a 11.0a 0.6a 2.2a 77.0a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 726 1.8ab 4.0ab 0.8a 11.2a 0.9a 3.0a 78.4a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 717 1.1ab 4.2ab 1.3a 11.8a 0.3a 2.9a 78.6a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 722 0.7a 2.9ab 1.2a 11.8a 0.4a 3.1a 79.8a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 690 1.3ab 2.3a 0.3a 9.8a 0.3a 0.6a 85.0a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 693 2.6bc 3.6ab 0.1a 15.2a 0.1a 1.2a 77.4a Untreated check --- 718 3.6c 4.1bc 0.4a 10.7a 0.4a 4.4a 77.4a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Redhaven peaches and SunGlo nectarines combined. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

PEACH INSECT STUDY I — 2012

Arthropod Management Tests , Volume 38 (1) – Jan 1, 2013

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/peach-insect-study-i-2012-BW1ixXTS5x

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.4182/amt.2013.B6
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 (B6) PEACH: Prunus persica (L.) Larry A. Hull Fruit Research and Extension Center Pennsylvania State University P. O. Box 330 Biglerville, PA 17307-0330 Phone: (717) 677-6116 Ext. 6 Fax: (717) 677-4112 Email: lah4@psu.edu Greg Krawczyk Email: gxk13@psu.edu Tarnished plant bug: Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) Brown stink bug: Euschistus servus (Say) Dusky stink bug: Euschistus tristigmus (Say) Green stink bug: Acrosternum hilare (Say) Brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB): Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Green peach aphid (GPA): Myzus persicae (Sulzer) Japanese beetle (JB): Popillia japonica Newman Oriental fruit moth (OFM): Grapholita molesta (Busck) Plum curculio (PC): Conotrachelus nenuphar (Herbst) Western flower thrips (WFT): Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) Various insecticide treatments were applied at varying degree-day (DD) timings during each of the egg hatch periods for the first three broods of OFM to determine control efficacy and their activity against various other pests present. The treatments were applied to single-tree plots replicated six times in a RCB design. Three replicates of each treatment were randomized on two rows of ‘Redhaven’ peaches and three replicates on two rows of ‘SunGlo’ nectarines. The trees were planted to a spacing of 18 x 30 ft and were 16 yr old. All treatments were applied with a Durand-Wayland airblast sprayer calibrated to deliver 100 gpa, driven at 2.4 mph. Treatments were timed for various stages of OFM egg hatch and were based on DD accumulations from biofix (i.e., first sustained capture of adult males in sex pheromone traps in peach) (Table 1). DD calculations were based on minimum and maximum developmental thresholds of 45°F and 90°F (OFM). All treatments received a regular maintenance schedule of fungicides (Captan 80WDG, Indar 2F, Iprodione, sulfur and Topsin M 70WDF). GPA was sampled periodically by counting the number of live colonies found in a 3-min examination of each plot tree. OFM shoot injury was assessed by counting the number of infested shoots observed during a 3-min evaluation of each plot tree and the total number of injured per plot tree (30 May only). Effectiveness of the treatments in preventing injury from the various fruit pests was assessed by scoring for injury up to 85 harvested, mature ‘SunGlo’ nectarines per tree on 16 Jul and another 30 ‘SunGlo’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. For ‘Redhaven’ peaches, up to 85 mature peaches per tree were harvested and evaluated for injury on 20 Jul and another 30 ‘Redhaven’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. Fruit injury caused by the complex of stinkbugs and TPB (collectively called catfacing insects (CF)) was defined as deep dimpling and scarring injuries caused during the time period from shuck split and shuck fall through early Jul; while stink bug (SB) injury was defined as that injury occurring after early Jul through the harvest period and represented small necrotic scarring and only slight dimpling and distortion. Each fruit showing SB injury was further evaluated by slicing the fruit and if necrotic tissue was found below the skin, it was classified as a SB injured fruit. An ANOVA was conducted on all raw and transformed data and a means separation analysis was performed using Fisher’s Protected LSD at P > 0.05. Pest pressure was low to moderate throughout the study depending on the pest species. All insecticide programs reduced GPA populations during all observations (Table 2). Admire Pro at both rates provided excellent control of aphids while various rates of HGW86 plus LI-700 or HGW86 alone provided only varying levels of aphid suppression. The number of OFM injured shoots observed during multiple 3 min observations gradually increased for each of the evaluated programs (Table 2). All HGW86 programs and the Imidan et al. program controlled the number of OFM injured shoots during the 24 May observation, while the Avaunt et al. program gave control similar to the untreated check. During a whole tree observation on 30 May, all HGW86 programs provided excellent control of OFM injured shoots 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 (Table 2). No differences were found among all treatments for the number of OFM injured shoots during both evaluations in Jul. During the fruit evaluations conducted on ‘Redhaven’ peach fruit, the highest rate of HGW86 plus LI-700 and HGW86 alone provided the most effective protection against fruit entries caused by OFM, while the Avaunt et al. program provided the best protection from injury caused by PC (Table 3). None of the treatments was effective against SB, cat- facing insects or JB. Similarly, during evaluations on ‘SunGlo’ nectarine fruit no differences among treatments were detected in OFM entries or injuries caused by PC, SB, CF and JB, however, treatments with Delegate plus Lannate and Assail plus Lannate provided very good control of WFT (Table 4). When fruit injury data for both cultivars was combined, the two highest rates of HWG86 plus LI-700 and the Avaunt et al. program provided excellent protection of fruit from OFM injury (Table 5). The Avaunt et al. program again provided the best control of PC. There were no differences among any of the treatments for the percentage of clean fruit in this single-tree replicated study. There was no visible phytotoxicity found on leaves or fruit for any of the chemical treatments. This research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticides and/or research funding. Table 1. Treatment/formulation Amt/acre lb AI/acre Application dates (OFM degree days from biofix) HGW86 10SE + 300.0 ml + 0.066 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE + 400.0 ml + 0.088 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE + 606.0 ml + 0.134 LI-700 946.0 ml 0.25% 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 0.088 19 Apr (165), 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509), 9 Jul (1972) Avaunt 30WDG + 142.0 g + 0.0938 Admire Pro 74.0 ml 0.09 19 Apr (165) Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g 0.0938 7 May (375) Delegate 25WG 170.0 g 0.0938 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509) Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 0.675 6 (1860) & 17 Jul (2226) Imidan 70W + 1360.0 g + 2.1 Admire Pro 59.0 ml 0.0719 19 Apr (165) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g 2.1 7 May (375) Assail 30SG 170.0 g 0.1125 13 (1186) & 25 Jun (1509) Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 0.5060 6 (1860) & 17 Jul (2226) Untreated check --- --- Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). 2 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 Table 2. Live GPA inf. colonies/tree OFM inj. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/tree Treatment/formulation Amt/acre 9 May 11 May 16 May 16 May 24 May 22 Jun 10 Jul 19 Jul 30 May HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 27.3b 17.5bc 14.2c 1.2a 0.8a 1.5a 22.2a 27.8a 2.0a HGW86 10SE + 400.0 ml + LI-700 946.0 ml 34.7bc 17.8bc 8.8bc 0.2a 0.3a 5.0abc 17.2a 19.0a 2.0a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 38.8c 13.8b 5.2b 0.2a 0.2a 3.0ab 7.7a 10.7a 2.7a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 35.0bc 24.2cd 14.7bc 2.2a 0.8a 1.3a 21.8a 26.2a 1.8a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 3.7a 5.0a 0.0a 0.7a 2.2bc 1.8ab 11.7a 17.8a 4.2ab Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 4.5a 1.5a 0.0a 1.0a 1.2ab 4.0bc 14.5a 31.3a 3.7ab Untreated check --- 55.3d 31.7d 23.5c 3.8a 2.8c 7.0c 31.8a 37.5a 9.0b Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Table 3. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 370 2.4abc 5.4c 0.0a 8.9a 0.5a 0.0a 83.2a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 372 1.9abc 3.0ab 1.1ab 8.9a 0.8a 0.0a 84.6a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 371 0.3a 2.4ab 1.4ab 6.2a 0.5a 0.0a 89.2a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 369 0.3a 3.5bc 1.9b 9.5a 0.3a 0.3a 84.6a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 375 0.8ab 0.8a 0.0a 4.5a 0.5a 0.0a 93.3a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 370 2.7bc 1.6ab 0.0a 10.9a 0.0a 0.3a 84.8a Untreated check --- 375 3.7c 2.9b 0.0a 5.4a 0.5a 0.0a 88.0a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Redhaven peaches 3 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B6 Table 4. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 312 2.3a 8.8a 0.8a 13.2a 0.6a 4.4bc 70.8a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 354 1.7a 5.0a 0.5a 13.5a 1.1a 6.0bc 72.2a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 346 2.0a 6.0a 1.2a 17.3a 0.0a 5.8bc 68.0a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 353 1.1a 2.3a 0.6a 14.2a 0.6a 5.9bc 75.0a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 315 1.7a 3.9a 0.6a 15.0a 0.0a 1.1a 76.7a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 323 2.5a 5.5a 0.3a 19.4a 0.3a 2.0ab 69.9a Untreated check --- 343 3.5a 5.3a 0.9a 16.1a 0.3a 8.7c 66.8a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). SunGlo nectarines Table 5. Injuries/100 fruit No. fruit % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC BMSB/SB CF JB WFT fruit HGW86 10SE 300.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 682 2.4abc 7.1c 0.4a 11.0a 0.6a 2.2a 77.0a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 726 1.8ab 4.0ab 0.8a 11.2a 0.9a 3.0a 78.4a HGW86 10SE 606.0 ml + + LI-700 946.0 ml 717 1.1ab 4.2ab 1.3a 11.8a 0.3a 2.9a 78.6a HGW86 10SE 400.0 ml 722 0.7a 2.9ab 1.2a 11.8a 0.4a 3.1a 79.8a Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 142.0 g Delegate 25WG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 340.0 g 690 1.3ab 2.3a 0.3a 9.8a 0.3a 0.6a 85.0a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g Lannate 90SP 255.0 g 693 2.6bc 3.6ab 0.1a 15.2a 0.1a 1.2a 77.4a Untreated check --- 718 3.6c 4.1bc 0.4a 10.7a 0.4a 4.4a 77.4a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). Redhaven peaches and SunGlo nectarines combined.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2013

There are no references for this article.