In preparation for fall produce season, it may be appropriate to reflect on what pest pressure you can anticipate encountering.   Even though it’s been five years since the devastating diamondback moth (DBM) outbreaks, apprehension remains that DBM could appear in large numbers this fall.   In the desert, DBM is generally considered a minor pest that occasionally builds up to damaging levels in the late winter and spring. In fall produce crops, survey data has shown that DBMs can easily be controlled control with 1-2 well timed insecticide sprays.   But in the fall 2016, outbreaks of DBM population occurred throughout all vegetable growing regions in Arizona where it was determined that the source of the DBM originated from infested transplants.  We later discovered that the invasive DBM population was highly resistant to chlorantraniliprole. Infestations experienced by Arizona growers that season were not anticipated, and overall, the resistant DBM caused serious economic losses in Cole crops.  However, the population abundance of DBM in the desert the last four seasons has been significantly lower than what was observed in 2016.   In fact, we received no complaints from PCAs or growers of uncontrollable DBM infestations, crop damage or yield losses like experienced in 2016, and PCAs reported having no difficulty controlling larvae or adults with commonly used insecticides, including the chlorantraniliprole. We have concluded that the DBM populations that appeared in in the desert in the past 4 seasons (2017-2021) were a distinctly different population than those that infested crops in the fall of 2016. It is highly likely that the DBM populations showing up in the desert the past 4 seasons migrated concurrently onto direct-seeded and transplanted cole crops in wind currents following September storms, or as we observed last fall, likely hitched a ride on transplants from coastal nurseries. Field trials conducted at the Yuma Ag Center last year confirmed the local DBM populations were susceptible to the key insecticides (Radiant, Proclaim, pyrethroids, Verimark/Exirel, Coragen/Beseige) used for their management. In addition, laboratory bioassays of field collected DBM from YAC last fall and spring showed no indication of resistance to any of the products.  Finally, Verimark transplant drenches remain popular on transplanted crops. Results from the survey and research at YAC suggest that this approach provides excellent residual activity of Lepidopterous larval species, including DBM. Growers considering including Verimark in their fall transplant program should weigh the cost of product and drench application to alternative foliar sprays normally used to control fall Lep pests.  
 
To document the impact of the DBM outbreaks on Arizona Cole crops the past four seasons, we conducted a two-part survey of growers and PCAs from Yuma, Maricopa, and Imperial Counties in April 2021 to (1) estimate the severity of yield losses from DBM on direct-seeded and transplanted Cole crops, and (2) the intensity of chemical management required to control DBM, and associated level of control provided by each insecticide product used.  To download a copy of the survey results and recent research click on the link below: 

Impact of Diamondback Moth on Desert Cole Crops, 2016-2021

 
Note:   DBM are like a box of chocolates: “You never know what you’re going to get”.  Do not become complacent.  Because DBM populations disappear from the desert each summer and reappear on fall crops from outside sources (see graph below), we never really know how abundant fall populations will be, or how susceptible to insecticides they will be. So be vigilant in scouting and follow IPM guidelines for DBM management.  To download a copy of the 2020 DBM Management Guidelines, click on the link below: 

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.

Late blight of celery is caused by fungi Septoria spp. The disease is named late blight as it is mostly seen at the later in the growing season but don’t be surprised if you see the symptoms in early season when the weather is conducive. With the rain and fog we had this week, it is possible that we get this disease in celery this growing season. Leaf spots are dark, circular to irregular in shape, and 3-10 mm in diameter. Dark colored fruiting bodies (pycnidia) of the fungus which form in the center of leaf spots give the spots a grainy appearance. In case of severe infection, large number of spots are formed and can significantly reduce yield. Sometimes, angular spots are seen as the symptoms are restricted by leaf venation. The stalk or petiole of the plants can also be infected and large number of pycnidia observed in the stalk. Pycnidia is basically huge amounts of asexual spores in dark fruiting bodies and are formed on the older lesions and their development is encouraged by moist weather.

The pathogen is seed borne but will survive in soil in decomposing celery tissue for months. Cool and wet weathers favor the disease. Temperatures below  75 F are conducive to disease formation. High humidity allows abundant production of spores and epidemics are initiated by splashing spores or by movement of spores by contact. Rain, heavy dew or fog, and sprinkler irrigation when temperatures are above 70°F encourage disease development; splashing water disperses spores and aids in spore germination and infection

 Acquiring clean seeds is the best management practice for the disease. Hot water treatments are effective but might interfere the germination percentage. Clean cultivation, not planting new crop next to the infected crop field, crop rotation, and fungicides can be used to manage the disease.  Avoid sprinkle irrigation after symptoms are observed. Copper sprays can be used in organic farming. 

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.