Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
Blueberry | Vaccinium spp Spotted wing drosophila | Drosophila suzukii spinosad, zeta-cypermethrin, GS-omega/kappa-Hxtx-HV1a The objective of this study was too evaluate the bioinsecticide Spear-T LC in rotation with the spinosad Entrust SC and the pyrethroid Mustang Maxx in management of spotted wing Drosophila (SWD). Materials were applied to 7 × 10-ft plots. There was a 5-ft buffer around and between each plot. There were four applications: 28 July, and 4, 10, and 17 August. All materials were applied in 25 gallons of water-mixture per acre with a CO2-propelled, 80-inch boom sprayer (76-inch swath) equipped with four, flat-spray, 8002VS TeeJet nozzles operating at 30 psi and at a slow walking speed. Walking speed for each application was regulated using a metronome. Materials, rates, and timing are in Table 1. Table 1. . Mean larvae/g . . . . . . . . Trt # Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Timingb 4 Aug.c 10 Aug. 17 Aug. 24 Aug. 31 Aug. 1 LI700 0.125%a ABCD 0.025a 0.038a 0.117a 0.496a 0.787a 2 Entrust SC 6a AC 0.006ab 0.008b 0.035a 0.111b 0.579a Mustang Maxx 4a BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 3 Spear-T LC Low 64a AC 0.002b 0.010b 0.032a 0.101b 0.649a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 4 Spear-T LC Mid 128 AC 0.000b 0.002b 0.004a 0.073b 0.663a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 5 Spear-T LC High 256 AC 0.000b 0.004b 0.017a 0.076b 0.501a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 6 No treatment AC 0.004ab 0.010b 0.027a 0.124b 0.725a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD P-value 0.1778 0.0897 0.435 0.062 0.813 . Mean larvae/g . . . . . . . . Trt # Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Timingb 4 Aug.c 10 Aug. 17 Aug. 24 Aug. 31 Aug. 1 LI700 0.125%a ABCD 0.025a 0.038a 0.117a 0.496a 0.787a 2 Entrust SC 6a AC 0.006ab 0.008b 0.035a 0.111b 0.579a Mustang Maxx 4a BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 3 Spear-T LC Low 64a AC 0.002b 0.010b 0.032a 0.101b 0.649a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 4 Spear-T LC Mid 128 AC 0.000b 0.002b 0.004a 0.073b 0.663a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 5 Spear-T LC High 256 AC 0.000b 0.004b 0.017a 0.076b 0.501a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 6 No treatment AC 0.004ab 0.010b 0.027a 0.124b 0.725a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD P-value 0.1778 0.0897 0.435 0.062 0.813 Means within columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different; P ≤ 0.05, LSD. aoz product per acre. bApplication number (date) A = 1 (28 July), B = 2 (4 Aug.), C = 3 (10 Aug.), D = 4 (17 Aug.). cData for SWD were adjusted for sample weight and Log(X + 1) transformed for analysis; nontransformed means (larvae/gram) are shown in the table. Open in new tab Table 1. . Mean larvae/g . . . . . . . . Trt # Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Timingb 4 Aug.c 10 Aug. 17 Aug. 24 Aug. 31 Aug. 1 LI700 0.125%a ABCD 0.025a 0.038a 0.117a 0.496a 0.787a 2 Entrust SC 6a AC 0.006ab 0.008b 0.035a 0.111b 0.579a Mustang Maxx 4a BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 3 Spear-T LC Low 64a AC 0.002b 0.010b 0.032a 0.101b 0.649a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 4 Spear-T LC Mid 128 AC 0.000b 0.002b 0.004a 0.073b 0.663a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 5 Spear-T LC High 256 AC 0.000b 0.004b 0.017a 0.076b 0.501a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 6 No treatment AC 0.004ab 0.010b 0.027a 0.124b 0.725a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD P-value 0.1778 0.0897 0.435 0.062 0.813 . Mean larvae/g . . . . . . . . Trt # Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Timingb 4 Aug.c 10 Aug. 17 Aug. 24 Aug. 31 Aug. 1 LI700 0.125%a ABCD 0.025a 0.038a 0.117a 0.496a 0.787a 2 Entrust SC 6a AC 0.006ab 0.008b 0.035a 0.111b 0.579a Mustang Maxx 4a BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 3 Spear-T LC Low 64a AC 0.002b 0.010b 0.032a 0.101b 0.649a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 4 Spear-T LC Mid 128 AC 0.000b 0.002b 0.004a 0.073b 0.663a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 5 Spear-T LC High 256 AC 0.000b 0.004b 0.017a 0.076b 0.501a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD 6 No treatment AC 0.004ab 0.010b 0.027a 0.124b 0.725a Mustang Maxx 4 BD LI700 0.125% ABCD P-value 0.1778 0.0897 0.435 0.062 0.813 Means within columns followed by the same letter are not significantly different; P ≤ 0.05, LSD. aoz product per acre. bApplication number (date) A = 1 (28 July), B = 2 (4 Aug.), C = 3 (10 Aug.), D = 4 (17 Aug.). cData for SWD were adjusted for sample weight and Log(X + 1) transformed for analysis; nontransformed means (larvae/gram) are shown in the table. Open in new tab Efficacy of the insecticides was evaluated based on the number of SWD larvae collected from fruit samples 1 wk after each application. On each of four dates (4, 10, 17, and 24 August), a commercial blueberry rake was used to harvest one, ca 4.5 oz sample (by volume) from each plot; an additional fruit sample was collected on 31 August, 2 wk after the last (17 August) application. Samples were brought back to the laboratory and accessed for infestation. Each sample was weighed prior to being processed for larval infestation. Data for SWD larvae were adjusted for sample weight and log(X+1) transformed to correct the normality and homoscedasticity and then differences were assessed using a one-way ANOVA. Post hoc tests were performed using an LSD test (α = 0.05). All rates of Spear-T in rotation with Mustang Maxx reduced infestation in comparison to the nontreated check at the first sample date on 4 August. On 10 and 24 August, all the treatments significantly reduced infestation levels in comparison to the nontreated checks. However, by the final sample date on 31 August, which was when SWD population increased, no significant differences were observed among the treatments (Table 1). This project was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Hatch Project Number ME0-22123 through the Maine Agricultural & Forest Experiment Station. Maine Agricultural and Forest Experiment Station Publication Number 3867. This research was supported in part by industry gift(s) of pesticides and/or research funding. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://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
Arthropod Management Tests – Oxford University Press
Published: Jan 1, 2022
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.