Do you want to learn about the current market situation and trends for agricultural products? Do you want to become a better marketer? If YES…we ask that you join this informative and interactive webinar IN SPANISH on Wednesday March 17, 2010 at 4:00 PM Pacific by visiting the following link:
http://www.msuextensionconnect.org/aginuncertaintimes/
Ag in uncertain times is an interactive Extension webinar series designed to assist ag professionals, including producers, to better understand the changing conditions in today’s economy. The series provides information that helps producers make informed decisions and improves ag professional’s ability to work with their farm and ranch customers/clients.
Each session is scheduled for 90 minutes with plenty of opportunity for participants to interact with presenters. All webinars will start at 4:00 PM Pacific. (5:00 PM Mountain, 6:00 PM Central, and 7:00 PM Eastern). Our series continues March 17the with:
Market Planning and Market Strategies for Success in Agriculture
ü Marketing in Uncertain Times: Education and Skills Critical for Success Miguel I. Gómez, Assistant Professor. Department of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University. Ithaca, NY.
ü Tools for Successful Direct Marketing in Agriculture
Gary Thompson, Professor and Head. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Arizona. Tucson, AZ.
ü Using Social Media (Facebook, Twitter, Blogs) as Marketing Tools
Myriam Grajales-Hall, Program Manager. News & Information Outreach in Spanish – NOS, University of California Cooperative Extension. Riverside, CA.
Wednesday – March 24, 2010: Strategies, Tools and Resources for Crop or Enterprise Selection and Diversification
To Participate: No pre-registration is required – first come – 500 seats available.
Please test your computer and Internet connectivity prior to the first webinar you attend by using the link below and clicking on the Test Your Connectivity link, at the right hand edge of page. This link also provides additional information about topics and speakers for this webinar series:
http://www.farmmanagement.org/aginuncertaintimes/
Equipment you will need: A computer with a set of speakers and a high speed Internet connection (LAN, DSL/Cable Modem, High speed wireless).
Web link: We will use the following link for all seminars in the series:
http://www.msuextensionconnect.org/aginuncertaintimes/
This web link opens a screen that has the “Enter as a Guest” option selected. Use this option and enter your name and then click on the “Enter Room” button.
Start Time: All seminars in the series will start at 4:00 PM Pacific Time (5:00 PM Mountain, 6:00 PM Central and 7:00 PM Eastern). Please log on a few minutes early to view information about how to ask presenters questions and to make sure your audio is working.
The Ag in Uncertain Times webinar series is the result of the collaborative efforts of the following members of the Western Extension Committee: Trent Teegerstrom, University of Arizona; Ramiro Lobo, University of California – ANR; Jeffrey Tranel, Colorado State University; Duane Griffith, Montana State University; John Hewlett, University of Wyoming; along with Jon Newkirk and John Nelson, Washington State University Extension Western Center for Risk Management Education; and Bob Craven, University of Minnesota Center for Farm Financial Management.
Additionally, the seminar series in Spanish has been organized by committee members and other collaborators including Karina Gallardo, Washington State University; Laura Tourte, University of California; Luisa Santamaria, Oregon State University; Myriam Grajales-Hall, University of California; John Hewlett, University of Wyoming; John Nelson, Washington State University; Jon Newkirk, Washington State University; Duane Griffith, Montana State University; Jeff Tranel, Colorado State University; Trent Teegerstrom, University of Arizona; Jose Aguiar, University of California – Davis; Malaquias Flores, Washington State University and Ramiro Lobo, University of California.
The Western Extension Committee is an organization of Extension Economists from the 13 western states, Guam and other Pacific Islands supported by Extension Directors in the western region and the WSU Extension Western Center for Risk Management Education.
For additional information email, westrme@wsu.edu or call John Nelson, 509-477-2176.
Extension programs and employment are available to all without discrimination.
Evidence of noncompliance may be reported through your local Extension office.
Mark Bolda
UC Cooperative Extension
Hillary Thomas
Post Doctoral Scholar, UC Davis
Light brown apple moth (LBAM) is a species of leafroller that was first detected in California in 2007 and is currently present on the Central Coast. It is a class A pest that has been subject to quarantine. This has resulted in strict regulation of its host crops, mandating zero tolerance for larvae in fields or on harvested fruit, and occasioned the financially devastating closure of several fields of caneberries in 2009.
For 2010, Central Coast caneberry growers have a variety of management methods available to them which they can deploy in their efforts to prevent LBAM from being detected in their fields. These methods are (1) mating disruption, (2) insecticide use and (3) cultural management. The following is summary for growers of how best to integrate these three methods to achieve the greatest result.
Mating Disruption: Field trials conducted by UC Davis in the fall of 2009 suggest that pheromone based mating disruption is a promising tool for managing light brown apple moth in caneberries. While these trials tested three possible pheromone application technologies, currently only the twist ties, also known as pheromone rope dispensers, are available.
Mating disruption with pheromone based twist ties is very attractive to use as a management tool, because of low toxicity, compatibility with biological control, high specificity to the target pest, reduced risk of resistance and ease of use. However, the use of twist ties should be supplemented at this time with insecticide sprays and cultural controls because it has not yet been determined whether there is a stand-alone twist tie application rate that will result in zero detection of light brown apple moth in fields, as currently mandated by state and Federal regulatory agencies. Additionally, management of similar looking leafroller species is useful, to reduce the probability of economic loss due to delays for leafroller identification during cooler and field inspections. Twist tie applications for light brown apple moth are target specific and will not be useful for managing other lepidopterous pests such as orange tortrix.
Mating disruption works best when applied over large continuous areas. Twist ties should be placed all across the production field. Non-production fields should be included if they are mixed in production fields so a contiguous area is formed. If possible, it is suggested to place twist ties as far out as the edges of the field or slightly farther where possible, to reduce the probability of a mated female moth flying in from external sources.
The minimum recommended label rate of 200 twist ties per acre appears to reduce LBAM pheromone trap captures to very low numbers, but does not result in zero detection of moths within a field. Therefore, where economically possible it is recommended that the twist ties be applied at a rate higher than this, up to the higher end label-recommended rate of 300 twist ties per acre. For severe infestations, more than 300 twist ties per acre may be warranted, so long as it remains below the maximum threshold allowed on the label. Twist ties should be attached to the upper trellis wire (see first picture below), and it is recommended that they be wrapped doubly around the wire if operations such as pruning and cane adjustment will be taking place for the duration of their use, which typically will be six months. If in-field monitoring is being conducted and there is a rise in adult moth finds 3-6 months after initial twist tie application, this could be an indication of reduced pheromone release by the dispensers. However, fluctuations in the moth population over time may also account for such a change, with flight peaks anticipated in the spring around April and a fall population peak between October and November. Following the early spring application, if desired, twist ties may be applied again after harvest to target the fall flight peak.
Insecticides: Since 2010 is the first year that mating disruption is being put into practice for light brown apple moth, and its efficacy for reducing light brown apple moth populations is not yet fully known, the use of twist ties should be supplemented with the use of insecticides to reduce the probability of an in-field light brown apple moth find. This also has the added benefit of targeting similar looking leafroller species, such as orange tortrix.
Since caneberry hedgerows are smaller and larval leafroller populations lower in the early part of year it is recommended that a program of spraying begin in late February to mid-March. As there is a wide variety of good leafroller pesticides available, growers should seek materials that have a lower impact on beneficials and the surrounding environment. Materials should also be rotated to mitigate the potential for resistance to a single pesticide.
Following the initial early season spray, it is important that growers continue to monitor the field for leafrollers. Growers should look for leaf surfaces that are webbed or rolled together, especially those of newly extending laterals Additionally, look for signs in newly extending laterals for webbing, frass, leaf damage, and the presence of larvae.
(for examples of LBAM and other leafroller infestation see photos below as well as the link: http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/EXOTIC/lightbrownapplemoth.html).
Another good way to look for leafrollers is to agitate the hedgerow, either by beating or shaking the plants, and collect the fallen material into a bucket or wide, flat container. Carefully sift through this material to detect larvae (early larval instars can be quite small). Concentrate monitoring activities in suspected or previously infested areas.
Any sign of leafroller activity should be a signal to act to protect the crop. It should be emphasized here that the economic threshold for leafrollers during this period of regulation is zero, and subsequently the threshold for spraying is much lower than one would deploy in an integrated pest management program.
Cultural Controls: Because of the zero tolerance mandated for light brown apple moth infestation in fields, it is recommended that growers impress upon harvest crews the importance of removing suspect rolled leaves, larvae and webbed fruit. Considering that crews are passing over every foot of hedgerow at least three times a week during harvest, they can be very effective in reducing LBAM and other leafroller numbers. An incentive program can be implemented to encourage participation with such a campaign of larval removal.
Proper sanitation practices during the dormant season will be an essential part of light brown apple moth management. Larvae will overwinter in leaf trash and surrounding weeds. Keep weeds to a minimum and move fallen leaves to the middle of rows where they can be disked into the soil.
There are pesticides mentioned for management of leafrollers in this article. Before using any of these products, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner's Office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions, and use information.
Photo courtesy Ed Show
Photo Mark Bolda
Photo Mark Bolda, UCCE
Photo courtesy USDA
Photo courtesy USDA
http://ucanr.org/strawberry2010
http://ucanr.org/caneberry2010
These are both don't miss events, so make plans to be there!
Introduction: An August 2009 field trial demonstrated the efficacy of malathion and zeta-cypermethrin (Mustang) against the spotted winged drosophila (SWD), Drosophila suzukii in raspberries. The following summary reports efficacy of additional materials trialed against SWD in December 2009.
Materials and Methods:
Treatments:
|
Chemical |
Treatment Rate per acre |
Water Carrier Rate per acre |
|
Malathion |
64 fl oz |
179 gallons |
|
Delegate (spinetoram) |
6 oz |
179 gallons |
|
HGW86 (Cyantraniliprole) Not Registered in Caneberry |
398.6 ml |
179 gallons |
|
Altacor (Chlorantraniliprole) |
64 fl oz |
179 gallons |
|
Actara (Thiamethoxam) |
129.6 g |
179 gallons |
|
Untreated Control |
- |
- |
Products were applied on December 3, 2009 with a Maruyama 056 gas powered back pack sprayer at maximum labeled rates in 179 gallons water per acre and 150 psi. Each plot was 1,173 sq ft of a proprietary raspberry variety under polyethylene-covered tunnels.
Pre- and post-treatment estimations of SWD were made with a D-Vac Model 122 (hand carry) gas-powered insect sampling device operated at an airflow capacity of 280 cu ft per minute per square foot at the opening of the collecting head. Each side of a 36-ft section of 4-ft high hedge row was sampled. Collected samples were transferred from the D-Vac into Ziploc bags for transport back to the lab where they were frozen for approximately an hour prior to counting.
Because male SWD (easily distinguished by the black spot on their forewings) comprised over half the total Drosophila captured in most samples, we assumed the remaining fraction of Drosophila to be female SWD (which do not have spotted wings). However, since the species of the females was not confirmed, they will be given in results as "females". Results are reported as total (male + female) SWD.
In order to evaluate the impact of treatments on incidence of fruit infestation by larval SWD, thirty marketable fruit were collected from the center of each treatment replicate prior to treatment and then 7-, 14-, 21- and 28-days post-application. Fruit samples were placed in 4x6x12-inch plastic bags fixed with a 1x ¾-inch PVC screened vent tube sealing the open ended of the rearing bag (see photo below). After two weeks, the numbers of larvae, pupae and adults were enumerated.
Results:
Table 1: Total numbers of male + "female" SWD captured in D-Vac samples
|
|
Pre-application |
Post One Day |
Post One Week |
Post Two Weeks |
Post Three Weeks |
|
|
12/3/2009 |
12/4/2009 |
12/9/2009 |
12/16/2009 |
12/23/2009 |
|
Altacor |
8.0 a |
28.7 a |
3.3 bc |
49.3 a |
6.3 a |
|
Actara |
13.0 a |
38.0 a |
6.0 abc |
48.7 a |
6.0 a |
|
UTC |
17.7 a |
38.0 a |
7.3 ab |
62.3 a |
4.7 a |
|
Delegate |
8.3 a |
18.0 a |
2.3 bc |
18.7 a |
4.7 a |
|
Malathion |
12.7 a |
10.3 a |
1.7 c |
14.3 a |
1.0 a |
|
HGW86 |
12.0 a |
33.0 a |
9.0 a |
46.7 a |
2.3 a |
Means followed by the same letter do not significantly differ (P=0.05, Student-Newman Keuls)
Table 2: Infested fruit
|
|
Pre-Application |
Post 1Week |
Post 2 Weeks |
Post 3 Weeks |
|
|
12/3/2009 |
12/9/2009 |
12/16/2009 |
12/23/2009 |
|
Altacor |
10.3 a |
2.7 b |
0.3 b |
4.3 ab |
|
Actara |
4.7 ab |
3.0 b |
1.7 b |
2.3 ab |
|
UTC |
8.7 ab |
9.0 a |
0.7 b |
6.3 a |
|
Delegate |
3.3 b |
0.3 b |
0.0 b |
0.0 b |
|
Malathion |
8.7 ab |
2.0 b |
0.7 b |
0.3 b |
|
HGW86 |
6.0 ab |
1.7 b |
0.7 b |
3.3 ab |
Means followed by the same letter do not significantly differ (P=0.05, Student-Newman Keuls)
The effect of Delegate and Malathion was most notable in the evaluation of infested fruit (Table 2). Although all treated fruit collected one week after application demonstrated significantly lower levels of infestation than the untreated control, Delegate and Malathion treatments continued to show significant levels of control up to three weeks after application.
Conclusion: This study demonstrates that Delegate is as effective as malathion in controlling SWD at relatively low population levels as those encountered during December 2009.
There are several insecticides mentioned for control of vinegar flies in this article. Before using any insecticides, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner's Office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions, and use information.
We are very grateful for the cooperation of Dutra Farms and Chris Hogan for providing the test site.
Fruit infestation study
Previous posts have outlined several pesticides which are very effective in controlling spotted wing drosophila in berry crops. Unfortunately, similar levels of success have not yet been achieved in organic production systems.
As it is well known that many pesticides such as pyrethrins, pyrethroids and some organophosphates (but definitely NOT spinosyns for which the opposite is true) are more active when applied in relatively acidic tank mixes. The following study addresses this hypothesis in controlling spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii, in organically managed raspberries.
Table 1 below describes the treatments which were made. Applications were made on November 18, 2009. Tank mix was acidified with Mixwell water conditioner and adjusted using a hand held pH meter. It is notable that it did not take much MixWell to acidify the six gallon tank mix, a mere 10 ml brought a pH 7.8 mix down to 5.8.
Water carrier rate was the equivalent of 180 gallons per acre, and applications were made with a backpack sprayer.
Samples were taken one day prior to application, one day and two days after treatment application. Sampling was done differently in this study than in others. Owing to the relatively low numbers of flies in the plots, a “buc vac” (depicted in the photograph below) was utilized. A 36 foot section of hedgerow was sampled on both sides, and these sections were not sampled again in the course of the study. Flies and other insects caught in the net were emptied into a large, labeled Ziploc bag, frozen and counted in the lab later on. Male spotted wing drosophila are easily recognized by the black spot on the back of each wing, other vinegar flies without spots were grouped together as female spotted wing drosophila.
Continuing work with the “bug vac” shows that this machine quite effective in removing and sampling flies. Resampling an infested area that has just been vacuumed with the "bug vac" yields very few flies, meaning that most have been removed the first time around. In the lack of a heavy infestion, the "bug vac" is probably the better choice for researchers.
Table 1: Treatment list.
|
Treatment |
Rate |
Adjusted pH |
|
Pestout |
1% v/v |
pH 5.8 |
|
Pyganic 1.4 |
64 oz |
pH 7.5 |
|
Pyganic 1.4 |
64 oz |
pH 5.5 |
|
Untreated control |
- |
- |
Results:
Table 2: Efficacy of various organically registered pesticides.
|
|
"Females" |
Males |
Total |
"Females" |
Males |
Total |
|
|
11/17/2009 |
11/17/2009 |
11/17/2009 |
11/19/2009 |
11/19/2009 |
11/19/09 |
|
PestOut @ 1% 5.8 pH |
9.33 a |
4.67 a |
14.00 a |
0.67 a |
1.33 a |
2.00 b |
|
Pyganic 64 oz/A 7.5 pH |
9.33 a |
7.33 a |
16.67 a |
0.33 a |
0.33 a |
0.67 b |
|
Pyganic 64 oz/A 5.5 pH |
15.67 a |
6.67 a |
22.33 a |
0.67 a |
0.00 a |
0.67 b |
|
Untreated control |
11.67 a |
6.33 a |
18.00 a |
3.67 a |
5.00 a |
8.67 a |
|
|
"Females" |
Males |
Total |
|
|
11/20/2009 |
11/20/2009 |
11/20/09 |
|
PestOut @ 1% 5.8 pH |
15.67 a |
7.67 a |
23.33 a |
|
Pyganic 64 oz/A 7.5 pH |
13.67 a |
5.33 a |
19.00 a |
|
Pyganic 64 oz/A 5.5 pH |
4.33 a |
6.33 a |
10.67 a |
|
Untreated control |
8.67 a |
13.33 a |
22.00 a |
Means followed by the same letter do not significantly differ (P=0.05, Student Neuman Keuls).
Spraying with Pyganic or Pestout with either tank mix pH modification arrived at the same result. Numbers of total flies fell significantly one day after application, but two days after application no statistical differences were found between any of the treatments and the untreated control.
It is apparent from this study that acidification of the tank mix makes no difference in the efficacy of Pyganic. Additionally, this work adds to the conclusion that the efficacy against vinegar flies of Pyganic or the horticultural oil PestOut is limited to one day.
There are several insecticides mentioned for control of vinegar flies in this article. Before using any insecticides, check with your local Agricultural Commissioner's Office and consult product labels for current status of product registration, restrictions, and use information.
Motorized bug vac for sampling spotted wing drosophila
