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

Learn More →

Systemic Insecticide Efficacy Against Japanese Beetle, 2021

Systemic Insecticide Efficacy Against Japanese Beetle, 2021 applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" Arthropod Management T ests, 47(1), 2022, 1–2 applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" https://doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsac025 Section G: Ornamentals & Turf LINDEN: Tilia spp. HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB Systemic Insecticide Efficacy Against Japanese HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA Beetle, 2021 History=Text=History=Text_First Caitlin Littlejohn, Amber Stiller, and Kevin Chase EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, Charlotte, NC 28278, USA and Corresponding author, e-mail: clittlejohn@bartlett.com EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC Section Editor: Carlos Bogran EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA Linden | Tilia spp. ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA Japanese beetle | Popillia japonica ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of multiple were applied using an Arborjet QUIK-jet AIR Tree Injection System. ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA systemic insecticide applications for management of Japanese beetle Root flare injections with Harvanta were experimental because this (JB) defoliation on Tilia spp. JB are a particularly difficult pest to product is not currently labeled for this usage. TriStar, with Pentra- control on the urban landscape due to mass aggregation pheromones Bark as an adjuvant, was applied as a basal bark spray with a Solo which allow them to rapidly congregate and defoliate trees. This 4.5 gallon battery backpack sprayer. Acelepryn foliar spray was ap- study consisted of eight treatment groups and was conducted on plied using a Greenguard JD9-C spray gun with a Plant Health Care two research plots (Table 1) at the Bartlett Tree Research Laboratory rig at ~225 psi. One JB pheromone lure was placed on each Tilia and Arboretum in Charlotte, NC, USA, during the summer of 2021. prior to emergence to attract JB to the study sites. The first plot consisted of mature Tilia cordata arranged in tightly The first samples were collected by removing foliage surrounding spaced rows. The second plot consisted of variably aged individual each lure approximately 2 wk after first detection of JB. After each trees widely spaced apart. This plot contained a random assortment sample collection, pheromone lures were moved to a branch with of T.  platyphyllos, T.  tomentosa, T.  tomentosa ‘Green Mountain’, negligible leaf defoliation. Samples were collected every other week T. americana ‘Szeleste’, T. americana ‘Wandell’, T. oliveri, T. cordata for the duration of the study. To assess defoliation, the 10 most ‘Summer Sprite’, T.  cordata ‘Chancellor’, T.  mongolica and affected leaves from each sample were placed on a blue mat and T. petiolaris. Six replicates were used for each treatment for a total photographed with a Nikon D670 and 35-mm lens. Each photo was of 48 trees. Mainspring insecticide was applied as a soil drench using visually rated on a relative scale of 1–10 based on a created template a Rainbow HTI-2000 Soil Injection System. Acelepryn was also ap- of 10% increments, where a rating of 10 represents maximum defo- plied as a soil drench using the same system; however, this application liation. Four individuals rated each sample and the treatment mean was done in 2020 to test whether systemic uptake occurred during is presented (Table 2). Early in the growing season, Tristar, applied the following field season. Mectinite, Harvanta 2-mo pre-JB emer - gence, and Harvanta 1-mo pre-JB emergence root flare injections Table 2. Treatment/ Rating 1 Rating 2 Rating 3 Rating 4 Average Table 1. formation rating Plot Treatment/ Mix rate Application Application Date applied 15 June 30 June 15 July 30 July number formation (oz) rate method Mainspring 8.00a 8.17 5.00 3.50 5.91a 1 Mainspring 1 oz/gal 1 gal/in DBH SD 19 Mar. Mectinite 6.17ab 7.20 5.67 4.00 5.69ab Harvanta (Apr) 5.80ab 7.00 4.83 3.17 5.07abc 1 Mectinite Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 1 Apr. 2021 Harvanta (May) 5.60abc 6.00 4.17 3.50 4.43bc 1 Harvanta Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 1 Apr. 2021 Tristar 1.67d 6.50 4.33 3.33 3.86c 1 Harvanta Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 10 May Acelepryn (SD) 3.20bcd 5.80 4.33 3.00 4.01c 2021 Acelepryn (FS) 2.33cd 6.67 5.67 3.33 4.41bc 2 Tristar 20 oz/gal 2–3 oz/in DBH BBS 7 May 2021 Check 3.83bcd 7.50 5.67 3.33 4.97abc 1 Acelepryn 1 oz/gal 1 qt/in DBH SD 2 June 2020 (P > F) 0.003 0.52 0.85 0.97 0.05 2 Acelepryn 0.02 oz/gal Full coverage FS 4 June 2021 2 Check — — — — Means within columns for each test followed by a common letter are not sig- nificantly different (P = 0.05; LSD). Lower ratings indicate less defoliation. SD, Soil Drench; RFI, Root Flare Injection; BBS, Basal Bark Spray; FS, Foliar Spray. SD, Soil Drench; FS, foliar spray. © The Author(s) 2022. 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 (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 2 Arthropod Management T ests, 2022, Vol. 47, No. 1 as a basal bark spray, was the most effective treatment. JB feeding Acelepryn soil drench replicates were located in the interior rows of was heaviest during the second and third rating periods and no the plot and not exposed to the heaviest JB feeding, which may have product provided a significant reduction in feeding. Overall, Tristar altered the results. It is unknown why check trees were attacked less and Acelepryn soil drench were the best treatments. However, most than some treated trees. This research was supported in part by industry gifts of pesticides. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

Systemic Insecticide Efficacy Against Japanese Beetle, 2021

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/systemic-insecticide-efficacy-against-japanese-beetle-2021-GeUDWt6eNE
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/tsac025
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" Arthropod Management T ests, 47(1), 2022, 1–2 applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" https://doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsac025 Section G: Ornamentals & Turf LINDEN: Tilia spp. HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB Systemic Insecticide Efficacy Against Japanese HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA Beetle, 2021 History=Text=History=Text_First Caitlin Littlejohn, Amber Stiller, and Kevin Chase EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB Bartlett Tree Research Laboratories, Charlotte, NC 28278, USA and Corresponding author, e-mail: clittlejohn@bartlett.com EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC Section Editor: Carlos Bogran EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA Linden | Tilia spp. ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA Japanese beetle | Popillia japonica ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of multiple were applied using an Arborjet QUIK-jet AIR Tree Injection System. ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA systemic insecticide applications for management of Japanese beetle Root flare injections with Harvanta were experimental because this (JB) defoliation on Tilia spp. JB are a particularly difficult pest to product is not currently labeled for this usage. TriStar, with Pentra- control on the urban landscape due to mass aggregation pheromones Bark as an adjuvant, was applied as a basal bark spray with a Solo which allow them to rapidly congregate and defoliate trees. This 4.5 gallon battery backpack sprayer. Acelepryn foliar spray was ap- study consisted of eight treatment groups and was conducted on plied using a Greenguard JD9-C spray gun with a Plant Health Care two research plots (Table 1) at the Bartlett Tree Research Laboratory rig at ~225 psi. One JB pheromone lure was placed on each Tilia and Arboretum in Charlotte, NC, USA, during the summer of 2021. prior to emergence to attract JB to the study sites. The first plot consisted of mature Tilia cordata arranged in tightly The first samples were collected by removing foliage surrounding spaced rows. The second plot consisted of variably aged individual each lure approximately 2 wk after first detection of JB. After each trees widely spaced apart. This plot contained a random assortment sample collection, pheromone lures were moved to a branch with of T.  platyphyllos, T.  tomentosa, T.  tomentosa ‘Green Mountain’, negligible leaf defoliation. Samples were collected every other week T. americana ‘Szeleste’, T. americana ‘Wandell’, T. oliveri, T. cordata for the duration of the study. To assess defoliation, the 10 most ‘Summer Sprite’, T.  cordata ‘Chancellor’, T.  mongolica and affected leaves from each sample were placed on a blue mat and T. petiolaris. Six replicates were used for each treatment for a total photographed with a Nikon D670 and 35-mm lens. Each photo was of 48 trees. Mainspring insecticide was applied as a soil drench using visually rated on a relative scale of 1–10 based on a created template a Rainbow HTI-2000 Soil Injection System. Acelepryn was also ap- of 10% increments, where a rating of 10 represents maximum defo- plied as a soil drench using the same system; however, this application liation. Four individuals rated each sample and the treatment mean was done in 2020 to test whether systemic uptake occurred during is presented (Table 2). Early in the growing season, Tristar, applied the following field season. Mectinite, Harvanta 2-mo pre-JB emer - gence, and Harvanta 1-mo pre-JB emergence root flare injections Table 2. Treatment/ Rating 1 Rating 2 Rating 3 Rating 4 Average Table 1. formation rating Plot Treatment/ Mix rate Application Application Date applied 15 June 30 June 15 July 30 July number formation (oz) rate method Mainspring 8.00a 8.17 5.00 3.50 5.91a 1 Mainspring 1 oz/gal 1 gal/in DBH SD 19 Mar. Mectinite 6.17ab 7.20 5.67 4.00 5.69ab Harvanta (Apr) 5.80ab 7.00 4.83 3.17 5.07abc 1 Mectinite Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 1 Apr. 2021 Harvanta (May) 5.60abc 6.00 4.17 3.50 4.43bc 1 Harvanta Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 1 Apr. 2021 Tristar 1.67d 6.50 4.33 3.33 3.86c 1 Harvanta Undiluted 5 ml/in DBH RFI 10 May Acelepryn (SD) 3.20bcd 5.80 4.33 3.00 4.01c 2021 Acelepryn (FS) 2.33cd 6.67 5.67 3.33 4.41bc 2 Tristar 20 oz/gal 2–3 oz/in DBH BBS 7 May 2021 Check 3.83bcd 7.50 5.67 3.33 4.97abc 1 Acelepryn 1 oz/gal 1 qt/in DBH SD 2 June 2020 (P > F) 0.003 0.52 0.85 0.97 0.05 2 Acelepryn 0.02 oz/gal Full coverage FS 4 June 2021 2 Check — — — — Means within columns for each test followed by a common letter are not sig- nificantly different (P = 0.05; LSD). Lower ratings indicate less defoliation. SD, Soil Drench; RFI, Root Flare Injection; BBS, Basal Bark Spray; FS, Foliar Spray. SD, Soil Drench; FS, foliar spray. © The Author(s) 2022. 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 (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 2 Arthropod Management T ests, 2022, Vol. 47, No. 1 as a basal bark spray, was the most effective treatment. JB feeding Acelepryn soil drench replicates were located in the interior rows of was heaviest during the second and third rating periods and no the plot and not exposed to the heaviest JB feeding, which may have product provided a significant reduction in feeding. Overall, Tristar altered the results. It is unknown why check trees were attacked less and Acelepryn soil drench were the best treatments. However, most than some treated trees. This research was supported in part by industry gifts of pesticides.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Mar 5, 2022

Keywords: Linden | Tilia spp; Japanese beetle | Popillia japonica; cyantraniliprole; emamectin/abamectin-aminomethyl; cyclaniliprole; acetamiprid; chlorantraniliprole

There are no references for this article.