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. 

In a recent edition of this newsletter on 20 April 2022, I presented a cantaloupe phenological (crop growth and development) model based on heat units accumulated after planting (HUAP, 86/55 F^o thresholds) as shown in Figure 1.
 
The benefits of working with and using a model like this include being able to describe and predict important stages of crop growth and development (crop phenology) and harvest dates.  This can also be a good tool for improving crop management (e.g., fertilization, irrigation, harvest scheduling, pest management activities, labor and machinery management, etc.). 
 
Included in our work with the development of this phenological model, we have also conducted nutrient uptake studies and water use studies to develop a better understanding of nutrient and water demand for desert cantaloupe production (Silvertooth, 2003; Soto et al., 2006; and Soto, 2012).
 
Figure 2 presents the nitrogen (N) uptake and portioning patterns for desert cantaloupes (melons), Silvertooth, 2003 and Soto et al. 2006.  This data describes total N uptake for cantaloupes at ~ 140 lbs. N/acre.  From this data, maximum N flux (N uptake/day) period extends from early fruit development to the netting stage.
 
Water use by desert cantaloupe production was also measured in these studies and patterns of water use followed the crop coefficient (K_c) patterns provided by the Arizona Meteorological Network (AZMET) and conformed to the K_c values from FAO 56 (Allen et al., 1998) and Grattan et al. (1998). 
 
Considering N uptake and water demand patterns in relation to cantaloupe crop phenology, we can insert the overlaps as shown in Figure 1, with the red and blue lines for N and water management, respectively.  Maximum N demand occurs from approximately 500 to 1,000 HUAP, which coincides with primary fruit development.  Accordingly, the N application window for optimum N uptake is from approximately 300 to 800 HUAP, which is from early flowering to the netting stage of the crown fruit.  The N application window is recommended in advance of the optimum N uptake period to provide for N mineralization and the plant-available forms of N for plant uptake and utilization.
 
Considering the N application window described in Figure 1 and a maximum seasonal uptake and demand of ~ 140 lbs. N/acre, early and split applications during this period of cantaloupe crop development can help achieve optimum utilization of fertilizer N inputs.
 
The period of maximum water demand extends from early fruiting stages of development through the maturation of the crown fruit, 300 to 1300 HUAP.
 
Considering the conditions we are experiencing these days in desert crop production with water shortages and extremely high prices of fertilizers, we have an abundance of motivation to manage our crop production systems with the highest efficiency possible.  Understanding crop water and nutrient demand for each crop we are working with and using that knowledge to manage our crops most effectively, is to our benefit agronomically, economically, and environmentally.
 
Nitrogen is the plant nutrient required in largest amounts by most non-leguminous crops and it is important for us to manage that nutrient for a crop in a careful and deliberate manner.  Water and N interactions are a critical aspect of crop growth, development, and management in any system, but particularly in an irrigated crop production system.  Thus, the focus offered in this article on water and N management for desert cantaloupe production.
 
I encourage those who are working with spring cantaloupe production this season to test and evaluate this crop phenology model, particularly in relation to nutrient and water management under field conditions with various planting dates, varieties, and soil types.  We appreciate your feedback.

Figure 1. Heat Units Accumulated After Planting (HUAP, 86/55 ^oF)



 Figure 2.  Cantaloupe (melon) N uptake and partitioning patterns.  (Soto, Silvertooth, and Galadima 2006).  Note: kg/ha * 0.89 = lbs/acre

References:
 
Grattan, S.R., W. Bowers, A. Dong, R.L. Snyder, J.J. Carroll, and W. George. 1998. New crop coefficients estimate water use of vegetables, row crops. California Agriculture 52(1):16-21.https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v052n01p16
 
Allen, R.G., L.S. Pereira, D. Raes, and M. Smith.  1998. Crop evapotranspiration - Guidelines for computing crop water requirements - FAO Irrigation and drainage paper 56. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Rome (FAO). https://www.fao.org/3/x0490e/x0490e0b.htm
 
Silvertooth, J.C. 2003. Nutrient uptake in irrigated cantaloupes. Annual meeting, ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Denver, CO.
 
Soto, R. O. 2012. Crop phenology and dry matter accumulation and portioning for irrigated spring cantaloupes in the desert Southwest.  Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Soil, Water and Environmental Science, University of Arizona.
 
Soto-Ortiz, R., J.C. Silvertooth, and A. Galadima.  2006.  Nutrient uptake patterns in irrigated melons (Cucumis melo L.).  Annual Meetings, ASA-CSSA-SSSA, Indianpolis, IN.

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%). Variety: Deluxe (HMX2595) was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed on March 20, 2024on 84 inches 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. 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. 

Spray treatments were done on 05-21-2024, 05-31-2024, 06-07-2024 and 06-14-24. Powdery mildew was first seen on 06-05-24. Please see excel file for additional details.  

Disease severity of powdery mildew (caused by Sphaerotheca fuliginea and S. fusca) severity was determined 6-17-2024 by rating 10 plants within each of the four replicate plots per treatment using the following rating system: 0 = no powdery mildew present; 1 = one to two mildew colonies on leaves  ;2 = powdery mildew present on one quarter of leaves; 3 = powdery mildew present on half of the leaves; 4 = powdery mildew present on more than half of leaf surface area ; 5 = powdery mildew present on entire leaf. These ratings were transformed to percentage of leaves infected values before being statistically analyzed.

The data in the table illustrate the degree of disease control obtained by application of the various treatments in this trial. Most treatments significantly reduced the final severity of powdery mildew compared to nontreated plants. Quintec, Merivon, Tesaris, Luna Sensation, and V6M-5-14 V gave the best disease control. Phytotoxicity symptoms were not noted for any treatments in this trial.

ANR Webinar 10/17 click link for details.

Interested in the latest ag technologies? FIRA USA and a number of other entities are organizing a 3-day event October 18-20 in Freson, CA focused on autonomous ag robotics and technologies. The event includes keynote speakers, break out sessions, a trade show and in-field demos of harvesting, weeding, thinning, and planting robots. The emphasis is on specialty crops so it should be very interesting program. For more information, click here.

 

Last Thursday April 28, 2022 the EPA issued a notice of intent to suspend (NOITS) DCPA, which when effective, will prevent the sale, distribution, and use of the technical-grade product containing the pesticide dimethyl tetrachloroterephthalate (DCPA).
Please see all details of the NOITS by clicking the following link:
https://www.epa.gov/pesticides/epa-issues-notice-intent-suspend-herbicide-dcpa
 
Dacthal was first registered in 1958^[1] and we are constantly adjusting it to our changing cultural practices.  Recently some evaluations were done of Dacthal’s safety to iceberg lettuce applied Pre and Post-Transplanting. The product showed promising results. It is a mitotic inhibitor and kills germinating weeds by stopping cell division. This mode of action is similar to preemergence herbicides such as Prowl, Kerb, Balan, Trifluralin and others but its chemistry and how it moves in the soil differs. Dacthal is absorbed by both shoots and roots of germinating seedlings although most of the activity is from shoot absorption. When absorbed by the shoots, it will move upward into the plant. It is not absorbed by foliage and can be safely applied over the crop. Dacthal adheres strongly to soil particles. The best time to apply Dacthal is when the soil is moist but not saturated^[2]. 
We are also including in this update the statement from registrant AMVAC Corporation for more information regarding notice of intent to suspend DCPA: https://www.amvac.com/news/amvac-regulatory-issues-statement-regarding-dachtal-dcpa.
 
 
 
References:

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_tetrachloroterephthalate
2. https://cals.arizona.edu/crop/vegetables/advisories/more/weed193.html

Area wide Insect Trapping Network   VegIPM Update, Vol. 13, No. 15, Jul 13, 2022
Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.
 THE MOST RECENT RESULTS
Corn earworm:            
CEW moth counts increased slightly in the past 2 weeks and remains higher than the previous 2 summers.
 
Beet armyworm:         
Trap counts stay active in some locations (Yuma Dome Valley and Tacna) but lower than last summer
 
Cabbage looper:          
Cabbage looper numbers remain low consistent with the lack of activity this fall compared to last season.
 
Diamondback moth:      
DBM moths were not caught in any trap in the past 2 weeks; average for this time of the year.
 
Whitefly:                     
Adult movement continuing to increase, particularly in Gila, Yuma and Dome Valleys consistent with melon harvest.
 
Thrips:                         
Thrips adults decreasing in most locations, and trending comparable to previous years.
 
Aphids:                       
Aphid movement is absent consistent with what we typically see in the summer. 
 
Leafminers:                  
Adult activity has highest in Wellton and Dome Valley, and above average for early July.