Sulfoxaflor Cancelled for use in Winter Vegetables
You may be aware that the registration of sulfoxaflor, the active ingredient in SequoiaTM and Transform®, was recently cancelled by the US EPA. On Nov 12, EPA issued a cancellation order for sulfoxaflor products resulting from a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that vacated the product registration. Based on a lawsuit filed by a number of beekeepers and beekeeper associations (Sulfoxaflor Court Opinion), the court ruled that the EPA did not have sufficient data to unconditionally register sulfoxaflor for use on agricultural crops due to concerns over pollinator protection. So, what does this mean for our local winter vegetable industry? First, end-users (growers) who presently have Sequoia or Transform in their inventory can continue to use the products on labeled crops provided they follow the terms on the preexisting label. However, existing product in the hands of retailers or distributors cannot be sold to growers for use in winter vegetables. Thus, no product can be purchased until such time as a new registration is in place. On a positive note, Dow AgroSciences has assured the industry that they are working diligently with the EPA to achieve renewed registrations for these important products as soon as possible. Given the extensive scientific data that Dow has already generated for sulfoxaflor, they expect the pollinator protection concerns filed in the lawsuit to be thoroughly addressed by EPA through further review of scientific data. In the meantime, local growers and PCA’s have available alternatives to use for the remainder of the season, albeit not all of which provide the same level of cost-effective control as Sequoia. For aphid control, PCAs can use Movento and imidacloprid soil applications (at planting). Foliar alternatives such as Assail, Sivanto, and Beleaf are good aphicides also, but do not provide the same level of residual control as either Sequoia or Movento. Under heavy aphid pressure, PCAs should be prepared to max out their Movento uses (2 applications) and will likely need to make additional foliar sprays with the remaining alternatives. For control of lygus on crops such as celery and lettuce, PCAs will have to rely on Beleaf, Vydate and Acephate.
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.
Controlling Fusarium Wilt of Lettuce Using Steam Heat – Trial Initiated
Earlier this week, we initiated a trial examining the use of band steam for controlling Fusarium wilt of lettuce. The premise behind this research is to use steam heat to raise soil temperatures to levels sufficient to kill soilborne pathogens. For Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. lactucae, the pathogen which causes Fusarium wilt of lettuce, the required temperature for control is generally taken to be > 140°F for 20 minutes. Soil solarization, where clear plastic is placed over the crop bed during the summer, exploits this concept. The technique raises soil surface temperatures to 150-155˚F, effectively killing the pathogen and reducing disease incidence by 45-98% (Matheron and Porchas, 2010).
In our trials, we are using steam heat to raise soil temperatures. Steam is delivered by a 35 BHP steam generator mounted on a custom designed elongated bed shaper (Fig. 1). Preliminary results were encouraging. The device was able to increase the temperature of the top 3” of soil to over 180°F at a travel speed of 0.5 mph as shown in this video of the machine in action (shown below). These temperatures exceed that of those known to control pathogens responsible for causing Fusarium wilt of lettuce (> 140°F for 20 minutes).
Stay tuned for final trial results and reports on the efficacy of using steam heat to control Fusarium wilt of lettuce.
If you are interested in evaluating the technique on your farm, please contact me. We are seeking additional sites with a known history of Fusarium wilt of lettuce disease incidence to test the efficacy and performance of the device.
References
Matheron, M. E., & Porchas, M. 2010. Evaluation of soil solarization and flooding as management tools for Fusarium wilt of lettuce. Plant Dis. 94:1323-1328.
Acknowledgements
This project is sponsored by USDA-NIFA, the Arizona Specialty Crop Block Grant Program and the Arizona Iceberg Lettuce Research Council. We greatly appreciate their support.
A special thank you is extended to Cory Mellon and Mellon Farms for allowing us to conduct this research on their farm.
Weeds are one of the most visible of all agricultural pests. They can’t move or hide and once established often stick up over the crop. Just one weed in a 10 acre field is annoying to look at. With insects and diseases, the damage is often more visible than the pest. That is not the case with weeds. A moderate weed infestation is approximately 10 weeds per square foot. If a herbicide produces 90% control, that leaves 1 weed per square foot or 43 weeds per acre. Without an untreated check, this can look like the herbicide failed! It is easy to leave an untreated spot in a field and it is well worth doing. Many applicators do so unintentionally because of skips, powerlines and other causes. They help determine crop injury and weed control. Here are some examples of what various levels of control looked like from one of our cole crop trials:
Corn earworm:
CEW moth counts remain low across all locations; average for this time of the season.
Beet armyworm:
Trap counts decreased in all locations, and below average for late-January.
Cabbage looper:
Cabbage looper trap counts remained low in all locations; below average for early February.
Diamondback moth:
Adult activity increased slightly in some locations, particularly fields where trap is adjacent to with nearby brassica seed crops. 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 slightly in most locations. Activity a about average for mid-February.
Aphids:
Aphid movement increased in many locations, particularly in Yuma Valley. Trap captures about average for this time of year.
Leafminers:
Adult activity increased in most areas, below average for this time of season.