Our annual Lettuce Crop Losses Workshop was recently held in April and the results of the surveys continue to show consistent trends in insecticide usage on desert head lettuce. In general, the most commonly used insecticides in fall and spring lettuce correspond directly to the key pests that typically occur during these growing periods. By far, the pyrethroids, applied both as foliar sprays and chemigations, were the most commonly used insecticide class. No surprise there. Over the past 11 years, pyrethroid usage has remained steady. The reason for this is quite clear to me: pyrethroids are one of the most inexpensive and safe broad spectrum insecticides still available for use in tank-mixtures for effective control of flea beetles, crickets, plant bugs and some Lep larvae (looper and earworm). The overall use of OPs and carbamates continues to decline, but Lannate (methomyl) and acephate are still relied upon for thrips management. Their usage is being replaced primarily by several reduced-risk chemistries, of which the spinosyns remain the second most commonly used class of insecticides. In 2014-2015, nearly 95% of the lettuce acreage in our area was on average treated with > 2 applications of Radiant or Success. Their use against both lepidopterous larvae and thrips has remained steady since they were first registered. Foliar uses of Diamides (Coragen, Voliam Xpress, Vetica, Belt) were the third most commonly used chemistry in lettuce in 2014-2015. Since they were first registered in 2008, PCAs have steadily incorporated this new chemical class into their management programs. The use of Belt increased significantly this season, whereas soil uses of Coragen continue to decline. Ketoenol usage (Movento) on fall and spring lettuce increased this season likely due to heavier whitefly and aphid pressure. Another important class of chemistry used in fall and spring lettuce is the neonicotinoids driven primarily by soil-applied imidacloprid for whiteflies and aphids. The usage of imidacloprid on both fall and spring lettuce has increased markedly since 2009 and is used on almost 90% of the acreage, albeit at top of the label rates. Foliar neonicotinoid usage also increased last season, presumably due to heavier whitefly/aphid infestations in 2014-15. Finally, for the fifth season in a row, PCAs treated a greater percentage of their acreage with selective, reduced-risk products than with the broadly toxic, older chemistries. To view a summary of the estimated insecticide usage by chemical class, as well as the 12 most commonly used insecticides on head lettuce this past growing season, go to Insecticide Usage Summary in Arizona Lettuce 2015.
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%). Spinach ‘Revere’ was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed Jan 18, 2024 on beds with 84 in. between bed centers and containing 30 lines of seed per bed. All irrigation water was supplied by sprinkler irrigation. Treatments were replicated four times in a randomized complete block design. Replicate plots consisted of 15 ft lengths of bed separated by 3 ft lengths of nontreated bed. Treatments were applied with a CO2backpack sprayer that delivered 50 gal/acre at 40 psi to flat-fan nozzles.
Month
Max
Min
Average
Rainfall
January
68
42
54
1.14 in
February
73
47
59
0.50 in
March
77
50
63
0.31 in
Downy mildew (caused by Peronospora farinosa f. sp. spinaciae) was first observed in plots on Feb 19 and final reading was taken on February 26, 2024. Spray date for each treatments are listed in excel file with the results. Disease severity was recorded by determining the percentage of infected leaves present within three 1-ft2 areas within each of the four replicate plots per treatment. The number of spinach leaves in a 1-ft2 area of bed was approximately 144.
The data (found in the accompanying Excel file) illustrate the degree of disease reduction obtained by applications of the various tested fungicides. Products that provided effective control against the disease include Orondis ultra, Thrive 4 M, Fungout, Cevya, Eject and Zampro. No phytotoxicity was observed in any of the 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.
To contact John Palumbo go to: jpalumbo@ag.Arizona.edu
