We continue to trap diamondback moth (DBM) in traps throughout the area. We currently have 57 pheromone traps stretched from Texas Hill to San Luis. In the past few weeks we’ve seen moth activity decrease in general in traps at Texas Hill, Tacna Roll, Wellton, Dome Valley and Bard/ Winterhaven. In contrast, we’ve recorded increases in trap captures in some traps in the Gila and Yuma Valleys. (See DBM Trap Network).
One trap located at the Yuma Ag Center captured more than 28 moths /trap per night last week. That trap is adjacent to several acres of untreated broccoli that are infested with DBM larvae. However, most traps throughout the Yuma area are not catching anywhere near those numbers of moths, and not surprising, the fields adjacent to these traps have little to no DBM larvae. Furthermore, to date no PCAs have reported failures in controlling DBM like they experienced last fall. On the Yuma Ag Center, we have had plenty of DBM in our cole crops. This allowed us to conduct a number of efficacy trials with both soil and foliar applied insecticides. In our Verimark tray-drench trial in cauliflower, we observed DBM control for almost 40 days. Soil shank applications of Verimark in broccoli provided DBM efficacy for ~ 30 days. Our foliar spray trials consistently showed that the all conventional insecticides we evaluated provided significantly better control of DBM larvae compared to the untreated check following multiple spray applications (for results see Efficacy of Foliar Insecticides Against Diamondback Moth, Fall 2017 andEfficacy of Foliar Insecticides Against DBM and Whitefly). On the other hand, we found it more difficult to control DBM with organically-approved biopesticides (see Organic Insecticide for DBM Control on Broccoli, Fall 2017).
An important lesson was learned from these studies. This fall DBM was not an issue, unlike last season. We’re obviously dealing with a different population this year. It is highly likely that the present DBM populations found at the Yuma Ag Center and throughout the Yuma area moved into the area via monsoon/tropical storms. I base this on the fact that the DBM have been easy to control with our standard insecticides (unlike last season), and we have been trapping moths adjacent to direct-seeded broccoli fields since early September. We’ve also been trapping them next to fallow fields. This clearly suggests that the DBM in Yuma this fall did not exclusively arrive on transplants, nor did last season’s resistant population over-summer here. I believe this explains why DBM is seldom a problem for Yuma PCAs. DBM populations have to migrate in and over the past 20 years or so, they have been susceptible to our industry standards. The exception would be last year, where the DBM outbreaks we experienced were associated with a resistant population that moved into fields from infested transplants. One last thing to consider: it is possible we may see additional DBM move into the area via winter storms from the coast. Hopefully we can pick up such movement with our traps.
We are on the final section of virus transmission. Virus transmission by insects is one of the most efficient and economically important transmission in agriculture. When you have insects in your crops, not only you are losing your crops because of feeding/chewing by insects, a lot of insects also act as a vector of plant viruses.
Seven out of 29 orders of insect feeding on living green land plants are vectors of plant viruses.
Insect transmit viruses in 4 distinct modes:
Non persistent transmission: The insects can acquire the virus in a matter if seconds/minutes and they are immediately viruliferous. The virus in retained in the stylet of the insect and are transmitted to the next plant the insect feeds on. The virus is retained in the vector only for few minutes and is lost after insect molting. Most viruses transmitted by aphids are non persistent. So when you see few aphids in your melon field and see cucumber mosaic virus symptoms 1-2 weeks later in your field, don’t be surprised. Aphids are efficient vectors, and since viruses are systemic it takes anywhere from few days to 2-3 weeks for the plants to show symptoms. Thus it is very important to manage insects in the field even if you don’t think the ‘pressure’ is not as high.
Semi-persistent transmission: The insects can acquire the virus in minutes/hours and there is no latent (incubation) period in the insect. The virus can stay in the insects foregut for hours and is lost after insect molting. Some species of aphids and whiteflies fall in this category. Example: Cucurbit yellow stunting disorder virus in melons transmitted by whiteflies.
Persistent circulative: Insects have to feed on virus infected plants for hours/days to acquire the virus and the virus has to incubate for hours/days in the insect. After insect can transmit the virus for weeks. Virus can be present in the vectors hemolymph but there is no multiplication of virus in the insect body. Vectors in this transmission includes: Aphids, leafhopper, whiteflies, treehopper.
Example: Beet curly top virus transmission by beet leafhopper
Persistent propagative: Insects have to feed on virus infected plants for hours/days to acquire the virus and the virus has to incubate for hours/days in the insect. After insect can transmit the virus throughout its lifespan. The virus can multiply in the vector system and often times the virus particles are also passed on to the insect offspring. Tomato spotted wilt virus is transmitted on persistent propagative manner by 9 different species on thrips.
Save the Date : 2024 Plant Pathology Workshop
When: August 29th 8AM-12 PM ( breakfast and Lunch provided by Gowan Company and BASF)
Where: Yuma Ag Center, 6425 W 8th Street
What will covered: Plant Pathology program Updates, past season field trial results (we
have some exciting results to share), Q&A to help better Plant pathology program,
Industry panel discussion for all your industry related questions! See you in few weeks!
Controlling Disease and Weeds with Band-Steam – Yuma Trials Show Good Promise
In previous articles (Vol. 11 (13), Vol. 11 (20), Vol. 11(24)), I’ve discussed using band-steam to control plant diseases and weeds. Band-steaming is where steam is used to heat narrow strips of soil to temperature levels sufficient to kill soilborne pathogens and weed seed (>140 °F for > 20 minutes). The concept is showing good promise. This past season, three trials were conducted examining the efficacy of using steam for disease and weed control in Yuma, AZ. In the studies, steam was applied in a 4-inch-wide by 2-inch-deep band of soil centered on the seedline using a prototype band-steam applicator (Fig.1). The band-steam applicator is principally comprised of a 35 BHP steam generator mounted on top of an elongated bed shaper. The apparatus applies steam via shank injection and from cone shaped ports on top of the bed shaper.
Trial results were very encouraging as the prototype applicator was able to raise soil temperatures to target levels (140°F for >20 minutes) at viable travels speeds of 0.75 mph. Steam provided better than 80% weed control and significantly lowered hand weeding time by more than 2 hours per acre (Table 1). Results also showed that Fusarium colony forming units (CFU) were reduced from 2,600 in the control to 155 in the 0.75 mph and 53 in the 0.5 mph treatments, respectively (a more than 15-fold reduction). A significant difference in Fusarium wilt of lettuce disease incidence was not found, however disease infection at the field site was low (< 2%) and differences were not expected. At 0.5 mph, fuel costs were calculated to be $238/acre which was considered reasonable and consistent with the values reported by Fennimore et al. (2014).
An unexpected finding was that plants in steam treated plots appeared to be healthier and more vigorous than untreated plots (Fig. 2). This trial is still in progress and it will be interesting to see if this improved early growth translates into increases in crop yield.
In summary, early trial results are showing good promise for use of band-steam as a non-herbicidal method of pest control. We plan on conducting further trials in this multi-year study. If you are interested in evaluating the device on your farm and being part of the study please contact me. We are particularly interested in fields with a known history of Fusarium wilt of lettuce and/or Sclerotinia lettuce drop that will be planted to iceberg or romaine lettuce.
As always, if you are interested in seeing the machine operate or would like more information, please feel free to contact me.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by Crop Protection and Pest Management grant no. 2017-70006-27273/project accession no. 1014065 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, the Arizona Specialty Crop Block Grant Program and the Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council. We greatly appreciate their support. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
A special thank you is extended to Mellon Farms for allowing us to conduct this research on their farm.
References
Fennimore, S.A., Martin, F.N., Miller, T.C., Broome, J.C., Dorn, N. and Greene, I. 2014. Evaluation of a mobile steam applicator for soil disinfestation in California strawberry. HortScience 49(12):1542-1549.
Click link below or picture to see the band-steam and co-product applicator in action!
Carryover of Vegetable Herbicides to Wheat Grown in Rotation
Almost all the herbicides used on lettuce, cole crops and melons have restrictions on how soon wheat can be planted in rotation after they have been used. Experience has demonstrated, however, that safe intervals can vary considerably based upon many factors and are almost always much longer than they need to be. The most important factors are rate applied, irrigation practices and tillage. For example, when Kerb used to be banded at 2 to 4 lbs. per acre after planting and incorporated with furrow irrigation, it was common to see treated strips across wheat fields which followed. This is uncommon now that lower rates are Chemigated. We still see some Balan injury at ends of fields or in overlaps especially when sudan is planted. Wheat it not very sensitive to Prefar and carryover injury is uncommon.
Corn earworm:
CEW moth counts increased in most locations over the past 2 weeks; about average for this time of the season.
Beet armyworm:
Trap counts remain low in all locations, and below average for late-January.
Cabbage looper:
Cabbage looper trap counts increased in all locations, but still below average for mid-March.
Diamondback moth:
Adult activity decreased across all locations in the past two weeks. Overall, activity is below average for this time of year.
Whitefly:
Adult movement remained low in all locations consistent with previous seasons.
Thrips:
Thrips adult movement beginning to increase in all locations recently particularly in the Yuma Valley. Activity is well below average for mid-March.
Aphids:
Aphid movement low in most locations but increased slightly in Gila and Dome Valleys. Trap captures well below average for this time of the season.
Leafminers:
Adult activity increased in many areas, about average for this time of season.