Every season is different, and this fall was quite unusual in terms of insect pressure. A quick look at both recent and historic data on pest abundance recorded from our University of Arizona research plots and areawide and pheromone/sticky traps suggests that insect pressure this fall low for most key pests. For the supporting data see Pest Abundance on Desert Produce and Melon Cops in Fall 2019.

Whitefly/CYSDV: Areawide, whiteflies in fall melons were relatively light like last season. CYSDV incidence at harvest in cantaloupe fields remains low, but incidence in 2019 was higher than we’ve seen in the past 3 years. The virus incidence at harvest in 25 commercial plantings was very low in most fields (1-5%), with a couple of hot spots observed in Texas Hill and Wellton. For the most part, whitefly adult abundance and immature densities were similarly light in produce crops with an occasional flare-up in some isolated areas. Data from our untreated broccoli/cauliflower plots at the Yuma Ag Center (YAC) showed that colonization by whitefly nymphs was moderate; higher than the previous 2 seasons, but lower than what we normally expect.

Beet armyworm, cabbage looper, and corn earworm: For the second year in a row, we had a very light worm year in Yuma. Population abundance on untreated lettuce at YAC this fall was similar to last season, and one of the lightest falls we’ve seen since 1996. Similarly, numerous reports from PCAs suggest that fewer sprays were applied this fall, and some field broccoli fields reportedly received only a single spray. Not sure why we had light activity, but cooler nighttime temps in Oct, coupled with the storms we had in late September appeared to slow down activity dramatically in most areas. Trap catches for both BAW and CL were some of the lowest we’ve seen in the past 7 years.

Diamondback moth (DBM): DBM was not a problem again for local desert growers in 2019; about what we normally expect for the fall. We received no calls from PCAs reporting difficulty in controlling populations. Areawide pheromone trapping showed that DBM moth activity began later this fall but trended very similarly to 2017 and 2018. At YAC, the larval populations were the lightest we’ve seen since 2001, and lab bioassays of DBM collected from cabbage plots at YAC showed that this population was very susceptible to Coragen. Caution: DBM can increase quickly in the spring in the desert, so keep your eyes open for larvae and damage on those Feb-Apr cole crops and late seed crops.

Thrips: Similarly, the western flower thrips pressure was light this fall; lighter than the previous three falls. These lower population levels were likely a result heavy rainfall associated storms in September and November. Bean thrips abundance was also lighter in 2019 relative to the previous three seasons. Scarring damage was negligible in untreated lettuce plots at YAC.

Bagrada bug: In contrast, bagrada bugs made a comeback in 2019. Adult populations at YAC were the highest we’ve seen in the past 5 years, but well below the outbreak numbers we saw from 2010-2013. Populations picked up in mid-September and then began to increase rapidly with warm October weather. There were numerous reports of bagrada throughout the desert southwest, with minor damage showing up in late November. Likely the wet spring contributed to enhanced numbers in the spring and survival during the summer. Much like Lygus. Have a Merry Christmas, and we’ll visit again next year!

In 2023 Arizona and the lower basin states were operating under Tier 2 reductions, consistent with the Drought Contingency Plans (DCP) for Colorado River conservation in response to the drought conditions (Figure 1).  Tier 2 conditions imposed a 592,000 acre-feet (kaf) reduction in Arizona’s 2.8 million acre-feet (maf) total allocation from the Colorado River.  These reductions have primarily impacted the irrigation districts in central Arizona.
 
For 2024, the Bureaus of Reclamation (BoR) has announced in August 2023 that the river operations will follow Tier 1 DCP reductions (Figure 1).  That is due to an increase in the water levels in Lake Mead in the past year with an excellent snowpack last winter and above average runoff in 2023.  That increase in water level at Hoover Dam in Lake Mead is primarily a function of an excellent snowpack and higher rainfall in the Colorado River basin in 2023.  Significant conservation efforts have been employed as well.

Figure 1.  2024 Tier 1 Shortage for the Colorado River operations.  Source:
Arizona Department of Water Resources.

With agriculture responsible for 70% of the diversions on the Colorado River, tracking the snowpack is an important exercise for forecasting and managing the precious water resources in this region and this watershed for sure.
 
The pressures on the Colorado River system because of the drought that has been impacting the entire basin and region for 23 years have slackened briefly due to the wet winter in 2023 with a good snowpack in the mountains, good rainfall throughout the basin, good flows into the river, and conservation.  
 
The current water level at Lake Mead on Hoover Dam is 1,068.25 ft. above sea level on 3 January 2024.  That level is 160.75 ft below full pool of 1,229.00 ft. (Figure 2).

Figure 2.  Lake Mead water height (feet above sea level at Hoover Dam) history
and critical Tier conditions.  Source: U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

The current snowpack in the Colorado River Basin is at 74% of average and below levels of this time last year.  However, hydrological records indicate that most of the snowpack in this basin accumulates between February and April.  
 
So, it is worth watching the snowpack accumulation and it is always good to pray for more snow in mountains to the north for those of us working and living in this desert with a heavy dependence on this water.  However, while monitoring the snowpack gives us a capacity to project, none of that really counts until there is water in the river and in the reservoirs, like money in the bank.

Bindu Poudel-Ward, Martin Porchas Sr., Martin Porchas Jr., Neeraja Singh, Johan Murcia, and Rebecca Ramirez, and Jason Furr 

Yuma Agricultural Center, University of Arizona, Yuma, AZ

This study was conducted at the Yuma Valley Agricultural Center. The soil was a silty clay loam (7-56-37 sand-silt-clay, pH 7.2, O.M. 0.7%). Lettuce was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed on Nov 15, 2022 on double rows 12 in. apart on beds with 42 in. between bed centers.  All other water was supplied by furrow irrigation or rainfall. Treatments were replicated five times in a randomized complete block design. Each replicate plot consisted of 25 ft of bed, which contained two 25 ft rows of lettuce. Plants were thinned Jan 5, 2023  at the 3-4 leaf stage to a 12-inch spacing. Treatment beds were separated by single nontreated beds. Treatments were applied with a tractor-mounted boom sprayer that delivered 50 gal/acre at 100 psi to flat-fan nozzles spaced 12 in apart.

Month	Max	Min	Avg	Rain
November (2022)	74°F	47°F	60°F	0.00
December (2022)	69°F	42°F	54°F	0.11
January	67°F	42°F	55°F	0.16
February	70°F	41°F	55°F	0.37
March	75°F	46°F	62°F	0.28

 
Sclerotia of Sclerotinia minor were produced in 0.25 pt glass flasks containing 15 to 20 sterilized 0.5 in. cubes of potato by seeding the potato tissue with mycelia of the fungus. After incubation for 4 to 6 wk at 68°F, mature sclerotia were separated from residual potato tissue by washing the contents of each flask in running tap water within a soil sieve. Sclerotia were air-dried at room temperature, then stored at 40°F until needed. Inoculum of Sclerotinia sclerotiorum was produced in 2 qt glass containers by seeding moist sterilized barley seeds with mycelia of the pathogen.  After 2 mo incubation at 68°F, abundant sclerotia were formed. The contents of each container were then removed, spread onto a clean surface and air-dried. The resultant mixture of sclerotia and infested barley seed was used as inoculum. Lettuce ‘Magosa’ was seeded and then sprinkler-irrigation was initiated to germinate seed in double rows 12 inches apart on beds with 42 inches between bed centers.  Plants were thinned Jan 6, 2020 at the 3-4 leaf stage to a 12-inch spacing. For plots infested with Sclerotinia minor, 0.13 oz (3.6 grams) of sclerotia were distributed evenly on the surface of each 25-ft-long plot between the rows of lettuce and incorporated into the top 1 inch of soil. For plots infested with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum, 0.5 pint of a dried mixture of sclerotia and infested barley grain was broadcast evenly over the surface of each 25-ft-long lettuce plot, again between the rows of lettuce on each bed, and incorporated into the top 1-inch of soil. Treatment beds were separated by single nontreated beds. Treatments were replicated five times in a randomized complete block design. Each replicate plot consisted of a 25 ft length of bed, which contained two 25 ft rows of lettuce. Control plots received sclerotia but were not treated with any fungicide. As a point of reference, the original stand of lettuce was thinned to about 65 plants per plot.
   
For treatments first applied at seeding, sclerotia were introduced into plots before the first application of treatments. The first application for at seeding treatments was made on Nov 15, with an additional application on January 5, 2023. Some treatments had second application on  Jan 19. 2023 (See table). For treatments first applied after thinning, sclerotia were introduced into plots after thinning before the first application of these treatments, with additional applications as noted in the data sheets. An initial sprinkler irrigation supplied water for seed germination, with subsequent furrow irrigations for crop growth. The final severity of disease was determined at plant maturity by recording the number of dead and dying plants in each plot due to Sclerotinia minor or Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (March 15, 2023).  As a point of reference, the original stand of lettuce was thinned to about 65 plants per plot.
In nontreated plots, 4-5% of lettuce plants were dead or dying due to infection with Sclerotinia sclerotiorumand  about 15 %  due to S. minor, at the end of the trial.  Please refer to the data tables to compare treatments of interest, using the Least Significant Difference Value listed at the bottom of each table to determine statistically significant differences among treatments.  (UA-3 Experimental)+Silwett,  and Endura fb Merivon +Silwett were most effective against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. UA-3 Experimental)+Silwett gave the best results against Sclerotinia minor as well (see table). Phytotoxicity was not observed in any of the treatments in this trial. 

In the preceding issue of UA Veg IPM Updates, the article below was published with an incorrect link to the video mentioned. For those interested in the video, which contains trial results and insightful videos of the technologies in action, the article has been updated with the correct link and is being reposted.


A couple years ago, we conducted evaluations of various “new” technologies for cultivating weeds in cotton as compared to conventional methods. The new technologies included 1) a camera-guided side-shift hitch and 2) finger weeders, an in-row weeding tool (Fig. 1). Camera-guidance of the maneuverable hitch allows cultivating tools to be positioned close to the seed row. In the study, the uncultivated band was 3.5" for the camera-guided system, and 6” for the conventional cultivator.  The aim of evaluating these technologies was to determine their efficacy in controlling herbicide resistant weeds. Trials conducted over 3 years showed that use of camera-guidance improved weed control by more than 30% and finger weeders removed about 45% of the in-row weeds. Overall weed control using the two technologies together was roughly > 90% for broadleaf weeds and about 85% for all weeds species.
Studies conducted by Texas A&M over two years showed similar results (Dotray et. al, 2021).

It is logical to think that similar type results would be realized in vegetable crops such as broccoli and cauliflower, plants that also have fairly long plant stems at the seedling stage of growth. A better than 40% reduction of in-row weeds would significantly lower hand weeding requirements. If you are interested in trying these technologies in vegetable or other crops on your farm, please contact me. We still have the equipment and I’d be happy to work with you.

A presentation given on the trial results and videos of the equipment used operating can be found by clicking here or on image below.

References
Dotray, P.A., Keeling, J.W., & Russell, K.R. 2021. Precision cultivation with finger weeder systems. Project No. 20-190 Final Report. Cary, N.C: Cotton Inc.

Acknowledgements
Project partially funded and supported by Arizona Cotton Growers Association, Cotton Inc., KULT-Kress, LLC and Keithly-Williams Fabrication. We thank them for their support.

Fig. 1. Technologies for precision cultivation and in-row weeding
used in efficacy trials included a a) a camera-guided side-shift hitch
attached to a cultivator and b) in-row weeding tools (finger weeders).

Fig. 2. Click on image above to watch presentation on precision cultivation and in-row weeding technologies.

There are many different types of pests that affect crops grown in Arizona. The three types of pests most often cited as the source of most problems are insects, diseases and weeds. These are the same types of pests that are cited as causing the major agricultural pest problems across the U.S. and worldwide. Graphs 1-3 illustrate, however, that the relative importance of these types of pest problems differ in Arizona from the rest of the U.S. and worldwide. In terms of pesticide use, worldwide herbicides accounted for 36% of total usage, insecticides 25%, and fungicides 10% and other 29% (nematicides, rodenticides, fumigants, bird, fish and aquatic pests). In the U.S., herbicides accounted for 44%, insecticides 10%, fungicides 6%, and other 40% of pesticide use. In Arizona, however, insecticides accounted for 58%, herbicides 17% and fungicides 12%. This is only an indirect measure of the relative importance of these three areas of pest management and may be heavily influenced by the amount of pesticides used. For instance, it is common to spray for insects five or more times per season while it is uncommon to spray for weeds more than twice. None the less, these graphs illustrate that weeds are the predominant pest problem in agricultural areas across the U.S. and worldwide.

We wanted to share the information above obtained from the PCA Study Guide Section VI prepared by our "amigo" Barry Tickes who is teaching the Applied Weed Science Class at the University of Arizona this semester.

Area wide Insect Trapping Network   VegIPM Update, Vol. 15, No. 21, Oct 16, 2024

Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.

Corn earworm: CEW moth counts increased in most traps; about average for early October.

Beet armyworm: Trap counts increased in most areas last week, and about average for early October.

Cabbage looper: Cabbage looper trap counts still most locations, below average for this time of the season.

Diamondback moth: Adult activity increasing, particularly in the Yuma and Dome Valleys.  Above average for this time of season.

Whitefly: Adult movement increasing Tacna, Dome Valley and Yuma Valley; overall about average for early October.

Thrips: Thrips adult movement picking up in all areas, overall activity above average.

Aphids: Winged aphids beginning to show up the north Yuma and Gila Valleys; about average for early October.

Leaf miners: Adult activity light in all areas, about average for this time of season