Now that the desert produce season is almost completed and the spring melon season is beginning, now is a good time to review the insecticide chemistries commonly used in your insect management programs. This is an important consideration as you make the transition from winter produce to alfalfa, spring melons and summer cotton where many of the same insecticide products are available in all these commodities.  Sustaining long-term insecticide efficacy that provides cost-effective crop protection requires a conscious effort on the part of PCAs and growers to use insecticides responsibly.  Over the past 35 years, Agrochemical Manufacturers have developed and brought to market over 20 new classes of chemistry that are highly effective, selective, and significantly safer than their chemical predecessors. These include the neonicotinoids, spinosyns, tetramic acid derivatives and anthranilic diamides to name a few.  Most recently, we have seen new feeding disruptor products, PQZ (pyrifluquinazon) and Versys/Sefina (afidopyropen) being applied to fall melons for virus management and in winter vegetables for aphid management. Although the development of new insecticide chemistries has been a bit slow over the past few years, we’re now seeing industry beginning to develop several new experimental insecticides for desert crops. You’ll be pleased to know that several compounds are being targeted for western flower thrips (i.e., Plinazolin). Of course, at best many of these products are a few years away from registration. But this is great news as many of the older products are slowly being phased out of the marketplace. It was just a couple of years ago that flubendiamide (Belt, Vetica) was removed from the market, chlorpyrifos (Lorsban) is now essentially gone, and EPA is currently proposing label changes to the neonicotinoids which could impact their use on many important crops. Thus, it is imperative to sustain the efficacy of the newer insecticide tools currently available and Insecticide Resistance Management (IRM) is now more important than ever. 
 
The most fundamental approach to IRM is to minimize the selection of resistance by a pest to any one type of insecticide chemistry. The key to sustaining insecticide susceptibility is to avoid exposure of successive generations of an insect pest population to the same MOA. Historically, alternating, or rotating compounds with different modes of action (MOA) each time you spray has provided sustainable and effective IRM in our desert cropping systems.  When it is comes to IRM; “rotation, rotation, rotation”. In other words, never expose a generation of insects to the same MOA more than twice.  The Insecticide Resistance Action Committee (IRAC), a coordinated crop protection industry group, was formed to develop guidelines to delay or prevent resistance. Using their most recent information we have produced a brief publication which provides the latest local information on the modes of actions, routes of activity and pest spectrum for important insecticide chemistries used in desert produce and melon crops - see the attached  Insecticide Modes of Action on Desert Produce Crops. This classification list will provide you with an additional set of guidelines for the selection of insecticides that can be used in desert IPM programs. 

On Tuesday, 15 August 2023 officials from the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) presented their 24-Month study reports with projections and operational plans for 2024 (USBR, 15 August 2023).  We are still dealing with the drought but there is some improvement in the 2024 plans for Colorado River water allocations for Arizona.
 
The wet winter and spring experienced in the Southwest in 2023 has provided some relief on the dire situation we were facing on the Colorado River system and reservoir levels have improved.  But unfortunately, one good precipitation season does not solve all the problems and they will still need to be dealt with.
 
The current plan for lower Colorado River water management is basically a return to the Drought Contingency Plan (DCP) Tier 1 schedule (Figure 1).  

Fgure 1.  Drought Contingency Plan Tier reductions for Arizona.

Tier 1 plans take us back to an 18% reduction or 512,000 acre-feet (KAF) of Arizona’s Colorado River allocation of 2.8 million acre-feet (MAF).  Arizona was operating under Tier 1 guidelines in 2022.  
 
The irrigation districts in central Arizona that have lost access to Central Arizona Project (CAP) water will not be receiving any additional water in 2024 based on this plan.  The districts immediately adjacent to the mainstem of the Colorado River will continue to receive the same amount of water as they have been receiving the past two years.  For Arizona and the other lower basin states, these are basically the same water allocation guidelines that were in place in 2022.
 
The urban areas and American Indian tribes will not experience any additional reductions based on the USBR plans. However, some cities and tribes have volunteered to reduce their Colorado River water allocations in exchange for payments from the federal government.
 
For example, in 2023 Arizona, California, and Nevada agreed to a plan that will conserve an additional 3 MAF of Colorado River water through 2026 in exchange for $1.2 billion from the federal government.  If approved by the USBR, this plan would reduce Colorado River allocations to the Imperial Irrigation District in California, which has some of the most senior water rights on the river.
 
The Gila River Indian Community (GRIC), which has a Colorado River allocation of 653 KAF, committed in April 2023 to relinquish temporarily 125 KAF in exchange for $400 per AF from the federal government.  The federal government is also funding GRIC infrastructure projects to increase wastewater reuse in irrigation.
 
Thus, some of the Colorado River water that is technically allocated to Arizona under Tier 1 guidelines will stay in Lake Mead due to previously agreed upon conservation measures.
 
Regarding other lower basin states and the current USBR plan, Nevada will have slightly more Colorado River water in 2024 than in 2023.  Mexico will deal with a 5% reduction in Colorado River water from their base and once again California will not be suffering any required cuts in their Colorado River water allocation.
 
Overall, this is good news.  We have some temporary relief on the Colorado River system and no additional reductions will be required in 2024.  This puts the seven Colorado River basin states and Mexico in a better position to negotiate the guidelines and agreements required for 2026 since all the existing agreements expire in two years.
 
Reference
 
USBR, 15 August 2023. 24-Month Study reports.   

• 24-Month Study Projections (Overview)
• August 2023 Most Probable  
• August 2023 Probable Minimum 
• August 2023 Probable Maximum   

August 2023 Lake Powell and Lake Mead: End of Month Elevation Charts

As the lettuce plants start to grow and get bigger in the field, you might start seeing the symptoms of bacterial soft rot. Though it rarely takes down the whole field, the symptom are not so pleasant. Bacterial soft rot in lettuce can occur in the field as well as post harvest. 

It is caused by several types of bacteria, but primarily subspecies and pathovars of Erwinia caro-tovora and E. chrysanthemi. Other bacterial species that cause soft rot include Pseudomonas cichorii, P. marginalis, and P. viridiflava. They have a wide host range host range and  includes genera from nearly all plant families
 
In lettuce fields, the symptoms are observed close to the harvest  time. The tissue, mostly around inside the head of head lettuce  softens and becomes mushy or watery. Slimy masses of bacteria and cellular debris frequently ooze out from cracks in the tissues. Decaying tissue, which may be opaque, white, cream-colored, gray, brown, or black frequently gives off a characteristically putrid odor. The odor is caused by secondary invading bacteria that are growing in the decomposing tissues.
 
The bacteria overwinter in infected fleshy tissues in storage, in the field, garden or greenhouse, in the soil (especially in the rhizosphere around the roots of many plants), and on contaminated tools, equipment, containers, and in certain insects. The bacteria enter primarily through wounds made during planting, cultivating, harvesting, grading, and packing and through freezing injuries, insect and hail wounds, growth cracks, and sunscald. They may also follow other disease-producing organisms. Uninjured tissues may become infected when the humidity approaches 100 percent or when free moisture is present. Rains, poorly drained or waterlogged soils, and warm temperatures favor infection in the field, as does high humidity in storage or transit.
 
The bacteria multiply rapidly by dividing in half every 20 to 60 minutes under ideal conditions at temperatures between 65° and 95° (18° and 35°C). Minimum temperatures for development is between 35° and 46°F (2° and 6°C); and maximum between 95° and 105°F (35° and 41°C. 
 
The bacteria are spread by direct contact, hands, tools and farm machinery, insects, running or splashing water, contaminated, water in washing vats, clothing, and decayed bits of tissue.
 
 
Management 
Promptly and carefully destroy infected plants. Maintain well aerated field, avoid close planting and overhead irrigation. 

To minimize post harvest losses, avoid mechanical injusry after harvest, packing and shipping. Do not pack produce when wet. Store and ship produce at temperatures near 4°C (39°F).

Mark C. Siemens, Department of Biosystems Engineering
Vol. 14, Issue 16, Published 8/9/2023
Pre-Season Vegetable IPM Workshop
Mark C. Siemens
Vol. 14, Issue 17, Published 8/23/2023

The Pre-Season Vegetable IPM Workshop will be taking place TOMORROW, Wednesday, August 23^rd at the Yuma Agricultural Center. Come learn about the latest IPM products, practices and trial results from university and industry experts. Registration begins at 7:30 am and the program starts at 8:00 am. Agenda below. Looking forward to seeing everyone there!

 

In the absence of Dacthal (DCPA) growers are looking for different herbicide options for Broccoli and Onions.
The following is data from a broccoli trial done in 2010 by Tickes/Pena, which compares Prowl, Goal Tender, Prefar, Treflan, Devrinol and Dacthal at different application timings. Plots were visually evaluated for weed control of  Goosefoot (Chenopodium murale), Malva (Malva parviflora), and Yellow Sweet Clover (Melilotus oficinalis). The label recommendations for Devrinol are “Use the lower rate on light soil (coarse textured-sandy), and the higher rate on heavy soil (fine textured-clay)”. The rate goes from 1-2 lbs on the DF-XT 50% formulation.
We hope this information is useful in our decision making for broccoli herbicide programs. 

 

Area wide Insect Trapping Network   VegIPM Update, Vol. 14, No.4, Feb 22, 2023
 
Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.
 
Corn earworm:           
CEW moth counts are down at all trap locations and average for this time of year. 
 
Beet armyworm:         
Trap counts remain low; below average compared to previous years.
 
Cabbage looper:          
Cabbage looper counts increased slightly in most traps and about average for this time of season.
 
Diamondback moth:   
DBM moths decreased in most areas. Well below average for this time of the year.
 
Whitefly:                      
Adult movement was negligible and typical for this time of year. 
 
Thrips:                          
Thrips adult counts decreased in most areas the past 2 weeks. Currently, below average compared with previous years.
 
Aphids:                        
Aphid movement increased in most locations, with seasonal peak high counts in the Yuma Valley.  Above average activity for mid-February.
 
Leafminers:                  
Adult activity up slightly in some locations, and below average for February.