Proposed EPA Labels Changes Could Impact Desert Crops 2015
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently proposed additional mandatory pesticide label restrictions that would prohibit the application of acutely toxic pesticides during the time crops are in bloom and commercial bees have been placed in or near fields for pollination services. If these proposed label changes are implemented they could have important implications for managing key pests on desert crops which require the use of contracted bees for pollination. Specifically, the proposed labelling reads as follows: “Foliar application of this product is prohibited from onset of flowering until flowering is complete when bees are on-site under contract”. This label would apply to pesticides that have an acute contact toxicity value less than 11 micrograms per bee (LD50<11 μg/bee). Unfortunately for desert producers, the list of acutely toxic insecticides includes all of the pyrethroid, organophosphate, carbamate and neonicotinoid insecticide active ingredients currently used for control of major pests. Also included in this list are Exirel, Radiant, Success, Sequoia, Abamectin, Proclaim, Avaunt and Torac. Even insecticides approved for organic production are not exempt, as azadirachtin (e.g., Aza-Direct), pyethrins (e.g., Pyganic), spinosad (Entrust) and rotenone are also on the restricted list. The full description of the proposed label changes, including the list of acutely toxic pesticides (Appendix A) affected and proposed label language (Appendix B), can be found here: EPA’s Proposal to Mitigate Exposure to Bees from Acutely Toxic Pesticide Products In my view, fall melons would be most directly affected by this proposed label change. Economic production of fall melons requires pollination services, but of course also requires adult whitefly control during the bloom/pollination period to suppress the spread of virus (CYSDV). Based on EPAs proposed label restrictions, application of industry standards like Assail, bifenthrin, fenpropathrin, and Exirel would not be allowed anytime, day or night, on fall melons as long as commercial bee hives are present. This could make whitefly/CYSDV control during bloom very difficult. UA research has clearly shown that the remaining alternatives labeled for whitefly control not on EPAs proposed list (i.e., Knack, Vetica, Oberon, Coragen, Fulfill, Beleaf) have little effect on preventing virus infection. Under this scenario, spread of CYSDV in some fields could essentially go unchecked for several weeks. If you are interested in voicing your opinion on this new proposal, EPA is currently accepting public comments until July 29, 2015. For more information on how to submit comments go to: http://www2.epa.gov/pollinator-protection/proposal-protect-bees-acutely-toxic-pesticides and http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=EPA-HQ-OPP-2014-0818.
This study was conducted at the JV farms at Gila Valley. Lettuce variety ‘Guapo’ was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed on September 19, 2023, on double rows 12 in. apart on beds with 42 in. between bed centers. Rest of the irrigation 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, which contained two 25 ft rows of lettuce. Plants were thinned on October 9, 2023 at the 3-4 leaf stage to a 12-inch spacing. Treatment beds were separated by single nontreated beds. Treatments were applied by incorporating in soil before seeding or with a tractor-mounted boom sprayer that delivered 50 gal/acre at 100 psi to flat-fan nozzles spaced 12 in apart.
Month
Max
Min
Avg
Rain
September
100
71
86
0.71 in
October
93
61
77
0.00 in
November
80
51
65
0.08 in
December
71
44
57
0.82 in
Fusarium wilt (caused by Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lactucae ) rating was done in the field by observing the typical symptom of lettuce wilt. Confirmation was done by cutting the cross section of roots. Disease scoring/rating was done on December 6, 2023.
The data in the table illustrate the degree of disease control obtained by application of the various treatments in this trial. The disease pressure was extremely high in 2023, and most treatments showed little or no control against the disease. The treatments that showed some activity were Bexfond, Cevya, Rhyme, and Serifel. Plant vigor was normal and phytotoxicity symptoms were not observed in any treatments in this trial.
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!
Contact herbicides are those that only affect the part of the weed that they “contact” They don’t move into or affect any other part of a plant. They were the first herbicides used and surprisingly, they still are better at controlling some weeds than any other products that have been developed. They usually control only small weeds with good coverage although some of them will kill large malva , Purslane and some other difficult to kill weeds. Goal, Sharpen, Treevix and Gramoxone, which are all contacts, will kill malva and purslane while systemic herbicides like Glyphosate and 2,4-D, misses them. Maestro or Bucril (Bromoxynil), also an old contact, will kill swinecress while many systemics like the growth regulators ,miss it. Glufosinate( Liberty, Rely) is a contact that is very broad spectrum and kills more grasses and broadleaves than many systemic herbicides. These all work very fast and in this age of immediate gratification ,you don’t have to wait long. Most have little soil residual activity (except Goal, Chateau and a couple others) Goal and Chateau are contacts but used mostly preemergence to the weeds. They “ contact” the weeds when they emerge at the surface. which is a benefit where double or triple cropping is common. Most( again except Goal) are not volatile but will cause pretty clear contact injury when the spray moves to sensitive crops. Paraquat was registered in 1959 and is still a very useful tool for desiccating plants. Many restrictions have been put on its use because of its toxicity to humans. Most contact herbicides are non-selective and will injure most living plant tissue. They are used selectively with directed spray or timing. Adjuvants are often required to increase absorption, spreading and sticking.
To contact John Palumbo go to: jpalumbo@ag.Arizona.edu
