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.

I want to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to the University of Arizona (UA) Vegetable Integrated Pest Management (V-IPM) Team consisting of Marco, John, Barry, Bindu, and Mark for inviting me to join the team and provide an agronomic component. This is also a good opportunity to offer some background on myself and my connection to the V-IPM realm.

I was first exposed to the concepts of IPM in crop production systems while I was an undergraduate student in agronomy at Kansas State University in the early 1970’s. Following graduation 1976, I began working as an agronomist-crop consultant in the irrigated crop production systems on the high plains of southwestern Kansas. In this capacity I was responsible for contracting 10,000-15,000 acres per year with the duty of providing useful crop production and management input to the growers on a continual basis and very importantly for protecting the crop from pests (insects, weeds, and diseases).

I learned very quickly in my first year in the field as a young agronomist-crop consultant that I could do an excellent job of assisting in the planning and management of basic agronomic inputs such as variety selection, planting management, soil fertility, tillage, rotations, etc. But if I was going to survive and do well in that job, I needed to learn how control crop pests effectively. The use of IPM practices was very new at that time and the crop consulting group I was working with were employing IPM practices in the field. The IPM approach worked best for effective pest control and gave us that capacity to protect the crop and it was the best route for economic profitability, plus we could see the environmental benefits, even the late 1970s. The farmers we worked with were somewhat dubious at first but began to see this working and readily embraced the use of IPM.

In the five seasons that I worked on the southern high plains in this capacity, I developed an appreciation for good programs in applied research and Extension education. As crop consultants, we appreciated the work provided by the scientist from Kansas State, Oklahoma State, Nebraska, and Colorado State Universities for developing and communicating the thresholds and control methods for the important crop pests in our region. They gave us the basic tools and we took that to the field, refined it, and made it work most effectively. It was an important partnership between the land-grant universities and our work in the crop production industry.

As a result of those experiences, I was motivated to return to graduate school in the Agronomy Department at Oklahoma State University with a major area of focus in soil-fertility and plant nutrition.

In January 1987, I interviewed, was offered, and accepted a position at the UA in Tucson, Arizona as an Extension Agronomist-Cotton (aka Cotton Specialist). Cotton production in 1987 was robust and widespread throughout southern Arizona and IPM was being introduced by UA personnel, but the cotton community was dubious, to say the least. In 1990 we were hit with horrendous pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella, Saunders) infestations in cotton fields throughout the state and then whitefly populations (Bemisia tabaci Genn) rapidly increased to very damaging levels in 1991 and 1992. Working with an excellent team of UA Extension colleagues and the regional cotton industry, we were able to bring some good IPM practices, including important cultural practices, into our systems. New scientists like Drs. John Palumbo and Peter Ellsworth were hired and the IPM capacities in our UA programs significantly improved with their input and leadership.
Today, the IPM effort in Arizona is one of the very best in the country and the agricultural industry is among the most progressive as well. The V-IPM team stands out as one of the very best in this region or anywhere and I certainly appreciate the opportunity to work with this outstanding group and the vegetable crop production industry. Having some agronomic input to the V-IPM is good integration.

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.

It’s September and planting season is underway. When planting lettuce, uniform seed spacing is critical for efficient, economical crop thinning. Seedlings spaced too close together, commonly referred to as “doubles”, are difficult and time consuming to remove by hand. Automated thinning machines which intermittently deliver an herbicidal solution to thin excessive plants often consider doubles as a single plant. In such instances, both seedlings are left in the field (Fig. 1). This results in increased labor costs during the subsequent hand weeding operation where weeds and doubles are removed. 

Several years ago, we conducted trials examining the influence of planter travel speed on seed spacing uniformity (Siemens and Gayler, 2016). In the study, a Stanhay 785 Singulaire vacuum planter was tested at travel speeds of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 mph on shaped beds at the Yuma Agricultural Center. The results showed that the percentage of “difficult to thin” spacings, defined as doubles and seeds spaced less than 1 1/8” apart, increased from about 5% to 10% as speed increased from 1.0 mph to 2.5 mph (Fig. 2) . Similarly, the percentage of seeds “precisely placed” within 0.5” of the target location (i.e., 2.0 ± 0.5”) decreased from 70% to less than 45%, and the percentage of skips increased from 7% to 30%. Variability of seed spacing uniformity as measured by the coefficient of variation (COV) of seed spacings also increased. In short, planter travel speed had a significant effect on seed spacing uniformity and doubles - the higher the speed, the poorer the performance.

You may be asking what is the reason for the phenomenon observed? A logical explanation is that seeds are traveling at the speed of the planter when they are released and tend to “bounce and roll” in the direction of travel when they hit the soil surface. Thus, the higher the travel speed, the further seeds bounce and roll resulting in increased seed spacing variability. Other factors such as bed condition (i.e., cloddy vs well tilled) can also affect the amount of bounce and roll and cause poor seed placement and closely spaced seedlings that are difficult to thin (Fig. 3).

If you would like more information on how to accurately assess and analyze planter performance or are interested in conducting trials to determine how planter speed is affecting the percentage of doubles in your field conditions, please feel free to contact me.

References
Siemens, M.C., & Gayler, R.R. (2016). Improving seed spacing uniformity of precision vegetable planters. Appl. Eng. Agric., 32(5), 579-587.

Fig. 1. Lettuce seedlings intermittingly sprayed with an herbicidal solution by
automated thinning machine for purpose of thinning excess seedlings. Examples
of closely spaced seedlings, “doubles”, that are not sprayed and must be
subsequently thinned by hand (circled).


Fig. 2. Seeding performance of a vegetable planter sowing lettuce when
operated at four travel speeds.


Fig. 3. Poor seed spacing uniformity, possibly due to cloddy soil
conditions causing excessive seed bounce and roll.

An increasingly diverse number of minor acreage specialty crops are grown in this region every year. Managing some of these crops can be difficult without local experience. It is helpful to at least know what botanical family they belong to because crops in the same family often have similar growth habits, pest problems and fertility requirements. There are almost no pesticides registered for some of these crops because of the limited acreage, but response to pesticides is often, but not always, similar to that of other crops in the same family. Knowing the family they are in can often give you an idea of what to expect. Kerb, for instance, is generally safe to crops in the Composite family (Lettuce, artichokes, radicchio) but is harmful to crops in the brassica family (Broccoli, cabbage, bok choy). The following chart lists crops by botanical family. 

Crop Families

Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.
 
Corn earworm:             
CEW moth counts remain  at low levels  in all areas, well below average for this time of year. 
 
Beet armyworm:          
Trap increased areawide; about average compared to previous years.
 
Cabbage looper:          
Cabbage looper counts increased to seasonal highs; slightly below average for this time of season.
 
Diamondback moth:      
DBM moth counts decreased in most areas. About average for this time of the year.
 
Whitefly:                      
Adult movement negligible, average for late winter. 
 
Thrips:                          
Thrips adult counts increased in south Gila Valley, down in all other locations. Below average compared with previous years.
 
Aphids:                        
Aphid movement decreased in all area; below average for mid-March.
 
Leafminers:                  
Adults remain low in most locations, average for March.