Temperatures are still warm and worm pressure remains steady in most growing areas.   Here at the Ag Center, beet armyworm pressure is about average for early October, and still troublesome on new stands. Cabbage looper eggs are beginning to now show up. Pheromone trap counts for armyworm and loopers remain below average in most areas. However, diamondback moth larvae are present on broccoli and transplants at the Ag Center.  I’ve had several PCA reports of diamondback pressure in transplanted brassica crops in Wellton and Roll, and in the Yuma Valley. Trap catches have begun to increase also. So far, all insecticide products we’ve tested are providing good Lep control and no complaints from the field.  
 
Fortunately for local PCAs, several insecticide alternatives are available that provide excellent residual activity on Lep pests.   Perhaps equally important, many of the products have unique modes of action (MOA) that can be alternated throughout the growing season. This is important because the most fundamental way to reduce the risk of insecticide resistance is to eliminate exposure of multiple generations of Leps to the same MOA.   By using a different MOA on each subsequent spray application, you can minimize the risk of resistance by Lep larvae to these insecticide compounds. In contrast, repeatedly applying insecticide products with the same MOA for Lep control in the same area will significantly increase the risk of resistance.  This is particularly important with the Diamide group of insecticides (IRAC group 28). These products can be applied as both foliar sprays and soil systemic treatments, and currently 7 Diamide products are labeled for use in leafy vegetables - all with the same MOA (Coragen, Durivo, Besiege, Minecto Pro, Verimark, Exirel and Harvanta).  To avoid confusion among the Diamides, the IRAC group number (28) is placed on each label, adjacent to the product name.  Furthermore, applying a Diamide product (i.e., Coragen/Verimark) to the soil at planting or as a tray drench, and then subsequently applying Diamide foliar sprays (i.e., Harvanta/Besiege) on the same field is not a good idea as it can expose multiple generations of Leps to the same MOA.  For example, under ideal weather conditions, one could potentially expose 5-6 generations of BAW or DBM to the same MOA given the residual efficacy of the diamides.  That’s not a good way to use these products if you want them to remain effective.   Since the Diamides, as well as the other key products currently available (e.g., Radiant, Proclaim, Intrepid, Avaunt, Bts), are critical to effective management of Leps in leafy vegetables, PCAs should consciously avoid the overuse of any of these compounds. The most effective way to delay the onset of resistance by Leps in leafy vegetables is to consider the recommendations provided in the guidelines entitled Insecticide Resistance Management for Beet Armyworm, Cabbage Looper and Diamondback Moth in Desert Produce Crops.

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.

This is the second in a series of articles discussing technological advances being made by manufacturers of automated thinning and weeding machines. This is a fast-moving space and innovations are entering the marketplace constantly. One of these on the near-term horizon is a robotic thinner/weeder being developed by Tensorfield Agriculture, San Francisco, CA that uses hot vegetable oil to kill weeds. The idea is to spray a “micro-dose” of hot oil (320 °F) onto the targeted plant/weed with high levels of precision. Why vegetable oil and not water or steam? Sufficient levels of heat from any source will rupture cell membranes and kill plants, but the advantage of vegetable oils is that they adhere to plant surfaces better than water and can be raised to much higher temperatures before boiling. Soybean oil for example, has a boiling point of 450 °F which is much higher than that of water at 212 °F. Consequently, vegetables oils transfer more heat faster than hot water and kill plants more effectively. A limitation of steam is the difficulty in concentrating the heat energy onto the target plant.

The concept of using hot vegetable oil to control weeds with an automated machine is not new and has some merit. Vegetable oil degrades naturally in the soil and thus can be used in commercial and organic crop production. Researchers at UC Davis developed and tested a prototype, hot oil based micro-dosing sprayer for automated weeding in tomato crops (Giles et al. 2005, Zhang et al., 2012). They found the technique effective at controlling weeds (>90%), but computing speeds were too slow for the integrated automated weeding machine to be commercially viable at the time.

Tensorfield Agriculture is rejuvenating the idea using modern computers, artificial intelligence and automation. The company has built a micro-dosing sprayer that delivers heated oil to target weeds at the 1/2” scale level of precision (Fig. 1). The sprayer assembly is mounted on an autonomous, robotic platform (Fig 2 - please note that the robotic platform depicted is a first-generation design developed for testing and debugging purposes and that a commercial style unit is forthcoming). Computer imaging and artificial intelligence are used to detect crop plants and weeds. The company will be testing and debugging the system this winter in California with carrot, spinach and romaine crops. The aim is to have prototype commercial systems available for the spring of 2021.

Some of you may have visited Tensorfield Agriculture’s booth or seen their technical breakout-session presentation at the 2020 Southwest Ag Summit in Yuma, AZ. They have an interest in working in the Yuma area and with the University of Arizona. It will be interesting to see how this technology progresses over the winter and how killing weeds with heated vegetable oil may benefit weed management systems.

As I mentioned, 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 publication, please feel free to contact me.

______________________________

[1] Reference to a product or company is for specific information only and does not endorse or recommend that product or company to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.

Fig. 1. Custom built sprayer modules for delivering high temperature vegetable oil (350 °F) to kill weeds organically. The units are designed for precision weed control (1/2” scale of resolution) by Tensorfield Agriculture, San Francisco, CA (Photo credit – Tensorfield Agriculture).

Fig. 2. Autonomous robot for thinning and weeding using heated vegetable oil. The unit is a first-generation prototype designed for testing and debugging purposes by Tensorfield Agriculture, San Francisco, CA (Photo credit – Tensorfield Agriculture).

References
Giles, D.K., Lanini, W.T. & Slaughter, D.C. 2005. Precision weed control for organic and conventional specialty crops. In Buy California Crop Block Grant Program Final Report. Sacramento, Calif.: California Department of Food and Agriculture.

Zhang, Y., Staab, E.S., Slaughter, D.C., Giles, D.K. & Downey, D. Automated weed control in organic row crops using hyperspectral species identification and thermal micro-dosing. Crop Protection 41: 96-105.

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.

 

Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.
 
Corn earworm:            
CEW moth counts decreased considerably y in the past 2 weeks and about average for late summer
 
Beet armyworm:         
Trap counts stay active in some locations (Yuma Dome Valley and Wellton) particularly near alfalfa
 
Cabbage looper:         
Cabbage looper numbers remain low consistent previous years.
 
Diamondback moth:      
DBM moths were not caught in any trap since June; average for this time of the year.
 
Whitefly:                      
Adult movement decreased in past 2 weeks consistent with previous years
 
Thrips:                         
Thrips adults decreasing in most locations, and trending comparable to previous years.
 
Aphids:                       
Aphid movement is absent and consistent with what we typically see during the summer.
 
Leafminers:                  
Adult activity has highest in Wellton and Dome Valley, and slightly above average for early August