May 5, 2021Summer Sanitation Is Important as Ever
To contact John Palumbo go to: jpalumbo@ag.Arizona.edu
When known weedy fields are ready to plant and labor is expected to be short, it is tempting to use all the preplant herbicides that are available. In lettuce, there are three preplant herbicides available and it is not uncommon to use 2 and occasionally all 3 on the same crop. All three of these herbicides use the same mode of action to kill weeds. There are slight differences between them but they all either stop or disrupt cell division in the roots and or stems of the weeds. They are normally safe to lettuce unless the crop is stressed or the rate, timing or placement are poor. The rationale for using multiple preplant herbicides in lettuce is often to broaden the weed control spectrum or guard against misses caused by misapplication or environmental conditions. There are some hazards, however, that sometimes outweigh the benefits. Potential crop injury is increased. All 3 use the same mode of action and the chance of injuring developing crop roots is compounded. Sometimes herbicides are added that contribute nothing but potential injury to the mix. If you look at the following chart you can see that many weeds are controlled by Kerb, for instance, that are not controlled by Balan or Prefar. Why add them? All three control grasses, goosefoot and purslane. If environmental conditions and applications are optimal it is often possible to use only one. Herbicides are much less expensive than labor, but it is possible to overdo it and cause more problems and expense.
It is that time of the year! Every year, September starts with “Is it April yet?” If you did not say that, then you cannot sit with us!
This past growing season has been an interesting one. From wearing masks at 120 degree to maintaining social distancing; while producing same amount of produce, feeding same amount of people, and dealing with same amount of disease and pests. A big thank you to everyone involved in agriculture for your hard work and perseverance.
In regards to plant health, we had plenty of disease problems to deal with this year. Below is brief report of the major diseases observed in growing season 2020/2021 and the disease we should be keeping an eye on for next growing season.
We observed a lot of fields with fusarium wilt this year. We had a lot of infected watermelon fields from Winterhaven to Yuma, Wellton, and Mohawk Valley. Rain, and overwatering of fields when plants set fruits might have contributed to the disease development.
Disease management include planting clean seeds/transplants, use of resistant cultivars, crop rotation, soil fumigation, soil solarization, grafting, biological control. An integrated approach utilizing two or more methods is required for successful disease management.
Fusarium wilt of Lettuce
Though detected in a lot of fields and some new fields, the disease pressure in lettuce was relatively low. Please continue with proper management practice for next growing season. Avoid overwatering, add soil amendments/organic matter, practice crop rotation if possible.
Lettuce dieback associated virus
Lettuce dieback is a soil-borne disease caused by two closely related viruses from the family Tombusviridae Tomato Bushy Stunt Virus (TBSV) and Lettuce Necrotic Stunt Virus (LNSV) that has been reclassified as Moroccan Pepper Virus (MPV). The disease has been observed throughout the main lettuce producing areas of California and Arizona.
Sclerotinia rot (known as lettuce drop) is caused by fungi Sclerotinia sclerotiorum and Sclerotinia minor.The initial aboveground symptom is observed as wilting of outermost layer of leaves giving an impression of stress in plants. However, as infection progresses rapidly towards other leaf layers and the entire plant wilts including the head. The entire plant/planting can collapse within the matter of 2 days when the condition is favorable. Management practices include use of subsurface drip irrigation, keeping the top 5-8cm of soil on planting bed is crucial. Deep plowing, crop rotation with non-hosts like small grains and broccoli, removal of infected plant tissue from the field etc. help reduce the inoculum level. Soil fumigation is effective though may not be economical. In Florida growers flood fallow their lettuce field for 4-6 weeks in summer which has almost 100% control of S. sclerotiorum. This is something you might wan to consider doing this summer if you have had high disease pressure in your fields this growing season.
Downy mildew has been a problem for years in lettuce as well as spinach. One of the main reason that hinders the disease management is the complexity of the pathogen. Bremia lactucae (lettuce pathogen) consists of multiple races (pathotypes), and new races continue to occur as pathogen evolves. The pathogen is one of the fastest evolving plant pathogen. And each pathotypes have developed insensitivity to fungicides to different extent. Resistant cultivar, preventative application of fungicides are effective to some extent. Reducing leaf wetness and humidity by using drip or furrow irrigation can be helpful.
Impatiens necrotic spot virus (INSV)
INSV has been detected in a number in fields mostly in Tacna/Roll/Wellton area. It has been found in lower numbers in Gila Valley. If your field has been infected with INSV this growing season, be proactive next season in regards to clearing up the weeds, managing thrip population etc. If you see symptomatic plants please let me or Dr. Palumbo know.
This week in Clinic
If you haven’t submitted your entry for Melon powdery mildew fungicide trial for this spring please send it to Dr. Bindu Poudel-Ward (email@example.com)
There are many innovative automated weeding technologies coming out of Europe. One of these is the autonomous weeding robot being developed by Ecoroboti (Yverdon-les-Bains, Switzerland). The device is lightweight and solar powered. Early prototypes used a spider like, three-axis delta robot to precisely deliver herbicides to target weeds. Videos of the device were futuristic and intriguing to watch. The company has since moved on to a simpler weeding robot equipped with a fixed boom for spot spraying weeds (Fig. 1 & 2). The autonomous robot has some specifications that are plausible for use in Arizona vegetable production. Machine travel speed is 2.2 mph and work rate is 15 acres/day (10 hour day). Spot spray resolution is reasonable at 2.5 inch2 (1.5 x 1.5 inch). This is accomplished using a series of 52 nozzles mounted on an 80 inch wide boom (Fig. 2). The machine uses computer imaging and artificial intelligence for crop/weed differentiation to identify and target weeds.
This past summer, the system was tested in sugar beets in Germany. Results showed the system correctly sprayed about 80% of the weeds. For a first time, real-world, field scale test, this outcome is encouraging.
There are some limitations however. According to product literature, the machine’s artificial intelligence system will identify a crop plant as a weed approximately 5% of the time. Given the high value of vegetable crops, killing 5% of the crop as a trade-off for robotically controlling weeds is probably not viable. It should be noted that this level of crop/weed recognition performance is consistent with other artificial intelligence-based systems reported in the literature.
Don’t give up hope though. This type of technology is advancing rapidly, and may become feasible in the future. Computing speed and sensor capabilities are advancing all the time. A review of literature indicates that systems that combine 3-D morphology, optical color and accurate location data with deep learning techniques may be a viable approach to reliably differentiate crops from weeds. It will be interesting and exciting to watch this technology as it develops. That’s for sure.
As I have mentioned before, automated thinning and weeding technologies are advancing at a very rapid pace. If you know of a new technology that would be of interest and appropriate for this newsletter, please feel free to contact me.
The Yuma County Leaf Wetness Network remains in place for the 2018/19 vegetable season. Growers and PCAs may access information generated by the network by entering the following internet address: http://22.214.171.124:460
Upon entering the address above, you will be transferred to internet page that provides a series of tabs at the top of the page. Simply click on the tabs to access the information of interest.
Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed HERE.
Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed HERE.
Corn earworm: CEW moth activity increased a bit in the past 2 weeks but remains well below average for late spring.
Beet armyworm: Moth counts increased slightly, but remain very low consistent with seasonal temperatures, and below average for this point in the season.
Cabbage looper: Significant increase in activity in Dome Valley, Gila Valley and Tacna, but moth counts remain unusually low for this time of year, as they have all season.
Whitefly: No adult movement recorded across all locations and overall low numbers consistent with temperatures.
Thrips: Thrips adult movement beginning to pick up considerably, particularly in Yuma and Dome Valleys. Movement is below average for late March.
Aphids: Seasonal aphid counts down considerably compared with the Feb and Jan. Counts highest in Bard and Gila Valley. Below average movement for this time of year. Majority of species found on traps were green peach aphid.
Leafminers: Adult activity up slightly in some locations, but well below average for late season.