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 II — 2012

PEACH INSECT STUDY II — 2012 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B7 (B7) 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, Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Brown marmorated stink bug: Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Green peach aphid (GPA): Myzus persicae (Sulzer) Japanese beetle (JB): Popillia japonica Newman Plum curculio (PC): Conotrachelus nenuphar (Herbst) Oriental fruit moth (OFM): Grapholita molesta (Busck) Various insecticides programs were applied at various degree-day (DD) timings during each of the egg hatch periods for control of the various broods of OFM and also to determine their activity on the other pests present, especially the stinkbug and tarnished plant bug complex, collectively called catfacing insects. The treatments were applied to single-tree plots replicated four times in a randomized block design. Three replicates of each treatment were randomized on two rows of ‘Autumn Glo’ peaches and one replicate on one row of ‘Beekman’ peaches. 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. The treatments were timed either for the various stages of OFM egg hatch, based on DD accumulations from biofix (i.e., first sustained capture of adult males in sex pheromone traps in peach) or for the presence of BMSB. DD calculations for OFM were based on minimum and maximum developmental thresholds of 45°F and 90°F, respectively (Table 1). 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 injured 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 ‘Beekman’ peaches per tree on 26 Jul and another 40 ‘Beekman’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. For ‘Autumn Glo’ peaches, up to 85 mature peaches per tree were harvested and evaluated for injury on 16 Aug and another 30 ‘Autumn Glo’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on 17 Aug. Fruit injury caused by the catfacing (CF) complex 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 (log and/or square root) and a means separation analysis was performed using Fisher’s Protected LSD at P > 0.05. Population pressure from the various pests was low to high throughout the study. Four seasonal insecticide programs consisting of two rates of DPX-KN128 and equivalent rates of Avaunt were compared with a traditional insecticide program and an untreated check. The petal fall of applications of all treatments contained either Admire Pro or Provado and all chemical programs provided excellent control of GPA (Table 2). Only a few of the treatments reduced the number of OFM injured shoots below the untreated check during various 3 min observations throughout the season (Table 2). However, the whole tree count on 30 May revealed the lowest number of OFM injured shoots on both Avaunt programs and the higher rate of DPX-KN128 (Table 2). Despite numerical differences in the number 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B7 of injuries caused by OFM (entries), PC, SB, CF and JB pests for some of the chemical programs, no significant differences were observed among the treatments and untreated check (Table 3). Also, although the percentage of clean fruit at harvest was numerically higher across all chemical programs, no chemical treatment was different from the untreated check. 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) DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + 0.09 + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + 0.09 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 0.09 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + 0.11 + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + 0.0719 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 0.11 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + 0.09 + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + 0.09 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 0.09 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + 0.11 + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + 0.0719 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 0.11 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + 2.1 + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + 0.075 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g 2.1 7 May (375) Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g 0.125 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532) Lannate 90SP 230.0 g 0.50625 9 Jul (1972) Assail 30SG 170.0 g 0.1125 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) 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.B7 Table 2. GPA inf. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/tree Treatment/formulation Amt/acre 9 May 11 May 16 May 25 May 22 Jun 10 Jul 19 Jul 30 May DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 8.8a 3.3a 0.3a 1.0ab 10.0a 72.3a 79.0a 5.0abc DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 4.8a 2.5a 0.5a 0.5a 17.3a 88.8a 89.8a 3.0ab Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 6.8a 5.8a 0.0a 0.0a 5.5a 66.3a 69.3a 1.0a Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 7.0a 4.0a 0.5a 1.3a 13.5a 70.0a 98.0a 3.0ab Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g Lannate 90SP 230.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g 11.3a 6.8a 0.0a 0.8a 7.0a 48.8a 60.8a 7.0bc Untreated Check --- 26.0b 22.3b 12.0b 3.8b 17.5a 67.8a 73.5a 10.0c 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 OFM % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC SB CF JB fruit DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 502 2.2a 0.6a 1.8a 9.3a 0.0a 86.1a DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 484 2.7a 0.2a 1.2a 8.3a 0.2a 87.4a Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 487 2.2a 0.4a 2.1a 10.1a 0.2a 84.1a Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 481 3.2a 0.6a 0.5a 8.7a 0.4a 86.7a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g Lannate 90SP 230.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g 490 2.2a 2.2a 0.4a 6.9a 0.2a 86.1a Untreated Check --- 505 4.9a 1.8a 1.0a 12.2a 0.2a 80.1a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

PEACH INSECT STUDY II — 2012

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

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/peach-insect-study-ii-2012-j7qkJeY0dh

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.B7
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B7 (B7) 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, Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Brown marmorated stink bug: Halyomorpha halys (Stal) Green peach aphid (GPA): Myzus persicae (Sulzer) Japanese beetle (JB): Popillia japonica Newman Plum curculio (PC): Conotrachelus nenuphar (Herbst) Oriental fruit moth (OFM): Grapholita molesta (Busck) Various insecticides programs were applied at various degree-day (DD) timings during each of the egg hatch periods for control of the various broods of OFM and also to determine their activity on the other pests present, especially the stinkbug and tarnished plant bug complex, collectively called catfacing insects. The treatments were applied to single-tree plots replicated four times in a randomized block design. Three replicates of each treatment were randomized on two rows of ‘Autumn Glo’ peaches and one replicate on one row of ‘Beekman’ peaches. 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. The treatments were timed either for the various stages of OFM egg hatch, based on DD accumulations from biofix (i.e., first sustained capture of adult males in sex pheromone traps in peach) or for the presence of BMSB. DD calculations for OFM were based on minimum and maximum developmental thresholds of 45°F and 90°F, respectively (Table 1). 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 injured 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 ‘Beekman’ peaches per tree on 26 Jul and another 40 ‘Beekman’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on the same date. For ‘Autumn Glo’ peaches, up to 85 mature peaches per tree were harvested and evaluated for injury on 16 Aug and another 30 ‘Autumn Glo’ fruit per tree were examined in-situ on 17 Aug. Fruit injury caused by the catfacing (CF) complex 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 (log and/or square root) and a means separation analysis was performed using Fisher’s Protected LSD at P > 0.05. Population pressure from the various pests was low to high throughout the study. Four seasonal insecticide programs consisting of two rates of DPX-KN128 and equivalent rates of Avaunt were compared with a traditional insecticide program and an untreated check. The petal fall of applications of all treatments contained either Admire Pro or Provado and all chemical programs provided excellent control of GPA (Table 2). Only a few of the treatments reduced the number of OFM injured shoots below the untreated check during various 3 min observations throughout the season (Table 2). However, the whole tree count on 30 May revealed the lowest number of OFM injured shoots on both Avaunt programs and the higher rate of DPX-KN128 (Table 2). Despite numerical differences in the number 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2013, Vol. 38 doi: 10.4182/amt.2013.B7 of injuries caused by OFM (entries), PC, SB, CF and JB pests for some of the chemical programs, no significant differences were observed among the treatments and untreated check (Table 3). Also, although the percentage of clean fruit at harvest was numerically higher across all chemical programs, no chemical treatment was different from the untreated check. 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) DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + 0.09 + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + 0.09 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 0.09 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + 0.11 + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + 0.0719 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 0.11 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + 0.09 + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + 0.09 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 0.09 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + 0.11 + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + 0.0719 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165), Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 0.11 7 May (375), 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532), 9 (1972) & 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + 2.1 + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + 0.075 + LI-700 473.0 ml 0.125% 19 Apr (165) Imidan 70W 1360.0 g 2.1 7 May (375) Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g 0.125 13 (1186) & 26 Jun (1532) Lannate 90SP 230.0 g 0.50625 9 Jul (1972) Assail 30SG 170.0 g 0.1125 24 Jul (2442), 7 Aug (2886) 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.B7 Table 2. GPA inf. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/3 min OFM inj. shoots/tree Treatment/formulation Amt/acre 9 May 11 May 16 May 25 May 22 Jun 10 Jul 19 Jul 30 May DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 8.8a 3.3a 0.3a 1.0ab 10.0a 72.3a 79.0a 5.0abc DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 4.8a 2.5a 0.5a 0.5a 17.3a 88.8a 89.8a 3.0ab Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 6.8a 5.8a 0.0a 0.0a 5.5a 66.3a 69.3a 1.0a Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 7.0a 4.0a 0.5a 1.3a 13.5a 70.0a 98.0a 3.0ab Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g Lannate 90SP 230.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g 11.3a 6.8a 0.0a 0.8a 7.0a 48.8a 60.8a 7.0bc Untreated Check --- 26.0b 22.3b 12.0b 3.8b 17.5a 67.8a 73.5a 10.0c 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 OFM % clean Treatment/formulation Amt/acre sampled Entries PC SB CF JB fruit DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 136.2 g 502 2.2a 0.6a 1.8a 9.3a 0.0a 86.1a DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml DPX-KN128 30WG 166.5 g 484 2.7a 0.2a 1.2a 8.3a 0.2a 87.4a Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g + + Admire Pro 74.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 136.2 g 487 2.2a 0.4a 2.1a 10.1a 0.2a 84.1a Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g + + Admire Pro 59.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Avaunt 30WDG 166.5 g 481 3.2a 0.6a 0.5a 8.7a 0.4a 86.7a Imidan 70W 1360.0 g + + Provado 1.6F 177.0 ml + + LI-700 473.0 ml Imidan 70W 1360.0 g Voliam Flexi 40WP 142.0 g Lannate 90SP 230.0 g Assail 30SG 170.0 g 490 2.2a 2.2a 0.4a 6.9a 0.2a 86.1a Untreated Check --- 505 4.9a 1.8a 1.0a 12.2a 0.2a 80.1a Means followed by the same letter(s) are not significantly different (Fisher’s Protected LSD Test, P > 0.05).

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2013

There are no references for this article.