Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

BIORATIONAL CONTROL OF PEPPER WEEVIL ON ‘JALAPENO’ PEPPER, 2010

BIORATIONAL CONTROL OF PEPPER WEEVIL ON ‘JALAPENO’ PEPPER, 2010 Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.E44 (E44) PEPPER ‘Jalapeno’ Capsicum annuum (L.), ‘Tormenta’ Philip A. Stansly University of Florida/ IFAS Southwest Florida Res. and Ed. Center 2686 State Road 29 North Immokalee, FL 34142-9515 Phone: (239) 658-3427 Fax: (239) 658-3469 Email: pstansly@ufl.edu Barry Kostyk Pepper weevil: Anthonomus eugenii Cano Pepper weevil is the key pest of pepper in the southern parts of the US due destruction of fruit through larval feeding. Control with conventional insecticides is difficult due in part to the inaccessibility to insecticide sprays of all but the adult stage. Therefore, novel control approaches are required. Greenhouse-grown pepper plants were transplanted at SWFREC in Immokalee on 1 March 2010 at 18 inch spacing in single rows 240 ft in length on 6 ft centers and covered with black polyethylene film mulch. Beds were divided into 8 plots and treatments distributed in an RCB design with 3 replicates. Each plot contained 10 pepper plants with four collard plants between plots as a buffer. Approximately 25 % of the fertilizer was preplant soil incorporated (granular 13-2-13) with the remainder applied as liquid 8-0-8 delivered daily through drip irrigation. Foliar applications were made with a high clearance sprayer operating at 180 psi at 2.3 mph with spray delivered through two vertical booms fitted with 4 yellow Albuz® hollow cone nozzles that discharged 10 gpa each. Dropped fruit was confined to the bed top by 2” x 2” x 8’ wooden lathe fastened to the edges of the raised beds with ground cloth staples to prevent fruit from falling to the ground. On 7, 14, 21, and 28 of June all fallen fruit were collected, counted and removed from the plots. All fruit greater than 2 inches in length was also removed from the plant and taken to the lab for further evaluation. Externally damaged and undamaged fruit were separated, counted and weighed. Half the apparently undamaged fruit up to 25 per plot were cut longitudinally and inspected for pepper weevil with the percentage damaged fruit used to estimate number of weevil-damaged fruit in each lot. Thus total number of damaged fruit for each plot was equal to the number of fallen, externally damaged and internally damaged fruit. Marketable fruit was estimated by taking the total number of fruit harvested and subtracting the number damaged. Yields were low and variable due to heavy infection of bacterial spot brought about by unseasonable rainfall. The percentage of marketable fruit was highest and damaged fruit least from plants treated with the standard Actara - Vydate rotation. However, differences between this treatment and the two including Requiem or the one with diatomaceous earth were not significant in regard to marketable fruit nor compared to the Rimon rotations or Surround treatments in regard to culls. This research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticide and/or research funding. Table 1 Application Dates Product/ Rate Formulation (Product/acre) 24 May 1 Jun 4 Jun 8 Jun 11 Jun 15 Jun 18 Jun 22 Jun 25 Jun Untreated check NA Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz x x x Vydate 2 L 4 pts x x x x x x Requiem 25 EC 4 qts x x x x x x x x x Requiem 25 EC 2 qts x x x x x x x x x Diatomaceous earth 5 lbs x x x x x x x x x Surround WP 0.5 lbs/gal x x x x x x x x x Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz x x x x x Vydate 2 L 4 pts x x x x Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz x x x x x Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz x x x x 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.E44 Table 2 Product/ Rate Formulation (product/acre) Marketable (%) Damaged (%) Untreated check NA 28.0d 72.0a Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz 56.7a 43.3d Vydate 2 L 4 pts Requiem 25 EC 4 qts 30.1cd 69.9ab Requiem 25 EC 2 qts 39.6bcd 60.4abc Diatomaceous earth 5 lbs 39.2bcd 60.8abc Surround WP 0.5 lbs/gal. 48.0ab 52.0cd Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz 44.5abc 55.5bcd Vydate 2 L 4 pts Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz 45.7abc 54.3bcd Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz Means followed by the same letter within a column are not statistically different (LSD P>0.05). http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

BIORATIONAL CONTROL OF PEPPER WEEVIL ON ‘JALAPENO’ PEPPER, 2010

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/biorational-control-of-pepper-weevil-on-jalapeno-pepper-2010-OJ1G3xJimT
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.4182/amt.2012.E44
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.E44 (E44) PEPPER ‘Jalapeno’ Capsicum annuum (L.), ‘Tormenta’ Philip A. Stansly University of Florida/ IFAS Southwest Florida Res. and Ed. Center 2686 State Road 29 North Immokalee, FL 34142-9515 Phone: (239) 658-3427 Fax: (239) 658-3469 Email: pstansly@ufl.edu Barry Kostyk Pepper weevil: Anthonomus eugenii Cano Pepper weevil is the key pest of pepper in the southern parts of the US due destruction of fruit through larval feeding. Control with conventional insecticides is difficult due in part to the inaccessibility to insecticide sprays of all but the adult stage. Therefore, novel control approaches are required. Greenhouse-grown pepper plants were transplanted at SWFREC in Immokalee on 1 March 2010 at 18 inch spacing in single rows 240 ft in length on 6 ft centers and covered with black polyethylene film mulch. Beds were divided into 8 plots and treatments distributed in an RCB design with 3 replicates. Each plot contained 10 pepper plants with four collard plants between plots as a buffer. Approximately 25 % of the fertilizer was preplant soil incorporated (granular 13-2-13) with the remainder applied as liquid 8-0-8 delivered daily through drip irrigation. Foliar applications were made with a high clearance sprayer operating at 180 psi at 2.3 mph with spray delivered through two vertical booms fitted with 4 yellow Albuz® hollow cone nozzles that discharged 10 gpa each. Dropped fruit was confined to the bed top by 2” x 2” x 8’ wooden lathe fastened to the edges of the raised beds with ground cloth staples to prevent fruit from falling to the ground. On 7, 14, 21, and 28 of June all fallen fruit were collected, counted and removed from the plots. All fruit greater than 2 inches in length was also removed from the plant and taken to the lab for further evaluation. Externally damaged and undamaged fruit were separated, counted and weighed. Half the apparently undamaged fruit up to 25 per plot were cut longitudinally and inspected for pepper weevil with the percentage damaged fruit used to estimate number of weevil-damaged fruit in each lot. Thus total number of damaged fruit for each plot was equal to the number of fallen, externally damaged and internally damaged fruit. Marketable fruit was estimated by taking the total number of fruit harvested and subtracting the number damaged. Yields were low and variable due to heavy infection of bacterial spot brought about by unseasonable rainfall. The percentage of marketable fruit was highest and damaged fruit least from plants treated with the standard Actara - Vydate rotation. However, differences between this treatment and the two including Requiem or the one with diatomaceous earth were not significant in regard to marketable fruit nor compared to the Rimon rotations or Surround treatments in regard to culls. This research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticide and/or research funding. Table 1 Application Dates Product/ Rate Formulation (Product/acre) 24 May 1 Jun 4 Jun 8 Jun 11 Jun 15 Jun 18 Jun 22 Jun 25 Jun Untreated check NA Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz x x x Vydate 2 L 4 pts x x x x x x Requiem 25 EC 4 qts x x x x x x x x x Requiem 25 EC 2 qts x x x x x x x x x Diatomaceous earth 5 lbs x x x x x x x x x Surround WP 0.5 lbs/gal x x x x x x x x x Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz x x x x x Vydate 2 L 4 pts x x x x Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz x x x x x Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz x x x x 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.E44 Table 2 Product/ Rate Formulation (product/acre) Marketable (%) Damaged (%) Untreated check NA 28.0d 72.0a Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz 56.7a 43.3d Vydate 2 L 4 pts Requiem 25 EC 4 qts 30.1cd 69.9ab Requiem 25 EC 2 qts 39.6bcd 60.4abc Diatomaceous earth 5 lbs 39.2bcd 60.8abc Surround WP 0.5 lbs/gal. 48.0ab 52.0cd Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz 44.5abc 55.5bcd Vydate 2 L 4 pts Rimon 0.83 EC 12.0 oz 45.7abc 54.3bcd Actara 25 WG 3.67 oz Means followed by the same letter within a column are not statistically different (LSD P>0.05).

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2012

There are no references for this article.