Historically, our Areawide Pheromone and Sticky Trap monitoring for insects was terminated around the first of April as the produce season ended. Beginning 4 years ago however, we continued our Areawide Trapping Network throughout the summer to collect trapping data from all 15 areawide trap locations year-round.  So why is this additional trapping data useful? For several reasons: 

1) Understanding the activity of some of our key pests when produce is not grown during the summer may give us an indication of what to expect as the fall produce season begins. This may be particularly helpful for predicting moth flights and whitefly flights in August-September coinciding with early transplanting and direct seeded crops.  Another example is keeping track of corn earworm which can unexpectedly show up near the beginning of fall harvests. 
 
2) Trapping for pests during the summer has shown us that 2 of our more important produce pests are not caught in traps during the summer. We presume this is due to the absence of brassica crops and weeds for diamondback moth, and high daytime/nighttime temperatures lethal to aphids. The fact that trap catches resume in the fall supports our conclusion that these pests are absent in the summer, only to reenter the desert via winds and/or transplants in the fall. And finally, 

3) It gives me something to do in the summer other than write reports and papers. 
So, visit the Areawide Summer Trap Network if you’re curious what our key pests are up to.

As reductions of agricultural water allocations in central Arizona from the Colorado River are going into place in 2022 from the Tier 1 of the Drought Contingency Plan provisions, it is important for every segment of the Arizona agricultural industry to continue to review and refine our practices associated with water management and irrigation.  
 
Seasonal conditions are a benefit to vegetable crop production and water management in the desert Southwest, both in terms of cool-season crop adaptability and the general climatic conditions that create lower environmental crop water-use demands.  For example, based on more than 30 years of Arizona Meteorological Network (AZMET) data from the Yuma, Arizona area, approximately 20% of the total annual reference evapotranspiration demand typically occurs between August and May.  
 
Reference evapotranspiration (ETo) is the collective loss of water from a field due to evaporation from the soil surface and transpiration of water vapor from the plants.  Collectively, water movement from the soil and plant systems in a field is referred to as “crop consumptive use” and it is important to understand this process in our efforts to steward our water resources most effectively.
 
The AZMET system provides both historical and real-time weather information that can be used to assist in crop water and irrigation management.  Reference evapotranspiration values can be obtained daily from AZMET for the Yuma area and applicable to most of the region in the lower Colorado River Valley.  The ETo values multiplied by an appropriate crop coefficient (K_c) can provide very good estimates on actual crop evapotranspiration (ET_c) rates, ETo * K_c = ET_c.
 
The appropriate K_c values are specific for each crop species and stage of growth.  We commonly use crop coefficient K_cvalues that are provided in the publication “Consumptive Use by Major Crops in the Desert Southwest” by Dr. Leonard Erie and his colleagues, USDA-ARS Conservation Research Report No. 29 (see attached).  Reference information for K_cvalues can be obtained in this publication for common vegetable crops grown in this region.
 
Estimating and tracking actual crop-water use can be a valuable tool in understanding crop-water demand and irrigation management.  Comparing actual crop-water demand and crop irrigation practices can be important in our efforts to understand crop management needs and field-level efficiencies.
 
Reference:
Erie, L.J., O.A French, D.A. Bucks, and K. Harris. 1981. Consumptive Use of Water by Major Crops in the Southwestern United States.  United States Department of Agriculture, Conservation Research Report No. 29.

Bindu Poudel, Martin Porchas, and Rebecca Ramirez
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 ‘Magosa’ was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed on Nov 19, 2019 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 four 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 6, 2020 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.

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 Nov 19, 2019 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.

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 Nov 20, with an additional application on Jan 9. 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 (Mar 18) or Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Mar 17). As a point of reference, the original stand of lettuce was thinned to about 65 plants per plot.

In nontreated plots, 30 and 37% of lettuce plants were dead or dying due to infection with Sclerotinia minor and S. sclerotiorum, respectively, 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. Endura+Stragus alternated with Merivon+Stargus, PhD, and Luna Sensation were effective against Sclerotinia sclerotiorum. Endura on seeding water alternated with Merivon at thinning, Luna Sensation at thinning, Endura at thinning alternate with Merivon, Endura_stargus at thinning alternate with Merivon+stargus gave the best results against Sclerotinia minor(see table).

Automated thinning machines were first commercialized in 2012, almost a decade ago. Since then, the machines have improved tremendously, and automated thinning has become the standard practice in the Yuma area. As such, I was a bit surprised to see numerous fields this year with sub-optimal thinning performance. Many fields had numerous amounts of excess seedlings that should have been thinned and needed to be removed during the follow-up hand weeding/double removal operation (Fig. 1). There were also some fields where the machine was apparently not readily detecting seedlings, resulting in long sections of plants being killed and a poor final stand (Fig. 2).

Automated thinning machines can and do perform very well when set-up and calibrated correctly. However, field conditions such as lighting, levels of crop residue, weed pressure or soil type (color) change throughout the day and affect the way the machine chooses which plants to selectively thin.

As such, it may be beneficial to establish a protocol where automated thinning machine settings are checked at regular intervals throughout the day to ensure the unit is performing optimally. Doing so may help lower follow-up hand weeding/double removal costs and minimize the number of unnecessary skips in the field.

Fig. 1. Labor crew removing excess lettuce seedlings and weeds after machine thinning.


Fig. 2. Poor final stand establishment following machine thinning, possibly due to incorrect machine calibration.

Preemergence herbicides can be very effective in the low deserts where weeds germinate with every irrigation or rainfall. It is essential, however, that they be at the right place in the soil at the right time. The right place is in the soil around the weed seeds and the right time is when they are germinating. Only fumigants kill seeds. For most other herbicides, the seed must germinate and are then killed. When weed seeds germinate is dependent on a great number of interdependent variables.  These include weed species, soil type, moisture, soil temperature, condition of the seed, depth, organic matter and many other variables. Many seeds have biochemical mechanisms that allow them to germinate at different times. Some may germinate in a few hours and some may not germinate for several years. If they all germinated at the same time, they would be easier to control. The methods used to predict when weed seeds will germinate vary from very sophisticated numeric equations to Farmers Almanac type lore involving things like the thickness of gopher fur, the cuticle thickness of plants or the condition of bird feathers. Some methods will give you a precise day while others will give you just a general idea. In general, as the precision goes up, the accuracy goes down. Regardless of what technique you use, now is the best time to apply preemergence herbicides for the control of annual weeds. It is better to be a month early than a day late.We have conducted trials to determine how long it takes various weed species to germinate after receiving moisture. Results will vary depending on several factors and from field to field and year to year. Results are summarized below for individual species and by month. An average of all species is also included.
   Hours to Germination

NG = No germination

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