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

Learn More →

CONTROL OF GRAPE BERRY MOTH IN CONCORD GRAPE, 2004

CONTROL OF GRAPE BERRY MOTH IN CONCORD GRAPE, 2004 (C26) GRAPE: Vitus labrusca L. 'Concord' John C. Wise Department of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1115 Phone: (517) 432-2668 Fax: (517) 353-5598 E-mail: wisejohn@msu.edu Kevin Schoenborn E-mail: schoenb6@msu.edu Rufus Isaacs E-mail: isaacsr@msu.edu Grape berry moth (GBM): Endopiza viteana Clemens This trial was designed to help optimize rates and timings of insecticide programs for GBM control. Insecticides were applied to mature (22-yr old) ‘Concord’ grape vines (Vineyard 1) at the Trevor Nichols Research Complex near Fennville, MI with an FMC 1029 airblast sprayer calibrated to deliver 50 gpa at 2.5 mph. Regular fungicide applications of Nova and Dithane were applied separately to all treatments, and herbicide applications included Glyphomax Plus, Sinbar, and Gramaxone Extra. Plots consisted of single 42 ft long rows of vines arranged in a RCB design with four replications. Vine spacing was 6 ×10 ft, with a buffer row separating all plots. In addition to using buffers to minimize drift, a donut-shaped piece of cardboard was placed over the fan on the airblast to reduce airflow. As the canopy in the vineyard increased, the hole in the center of the ‘donut’ was enlarged to ensure spray penetration. st nd Applications of test materials were made on 21 Jun (1 generation GBM egg hatch), 28 Jul (2 rd generation GBM egg hatch), 16 Aug (3 generation GBM egg hatch), and 3 Sep, as indicated in the following tables. GBM evaluations were made on 12 Aug, 31 Aug and 22 Sep by examining 25 clusters per replicate for injury. Damage severity ratings were taken on 12 Aug and 22 Sep by counting the number of damaged berries on each plot. GBM incidence and severity ratings were analyzed using ANOVA and means separation by Duncan’s New MRT (P ≤ 0.05). All treatment compounds provided good control of GBM by the first evaluation on 12 Aug. Control of late season damage tends to be more difficult as GBM populations build over time. At the 31 Aug evaluation, only Intrepid, Clutch, Capture, and the Danitol/Intrepid treatments controlled GBM significantly compared to the untreated check. Clutch (3 oz), Capture (3.2 fl oz) and the Danitol/Intrepid treatments also significantly reduced the severity level of berry damage compared to the untreated check in that 12 Aug rating period (Table 2). All treatment compounds provided good reductions in the percentage of clusters damaged by the third evaluation on 22 Sep, although only Intrepid, Capture (6.4 fl oz) and Venom (7.0 oz) had severity ratings that were significantly lower than the untreated check. Table 1. Application timing per generation GBM cluster damage st nd rd 1 2 3 b b b Treatment/ Rate 12 Aug 31 Aug 22 Sep formulation amt product/acre EH EH EH +18d % damaged % damaged % damaged Untreated --- --- --- --- --- 14.3a 10.4a 29.3a Imidan 70W 2.125lb a b c d 2.3b 2.6abc 5.6b TriFol L 0.5pt/100 gal a b c d Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz a b c d 1.5b 0.0c 1.5b Calypso 4F 8.0 fl oz a b c d 5.1ab 5.1abc 6.6b Rimon 0.83EC 20.0 fl oz a b c d 2.6b 2.1abc 4.4b Clutch 50WDG 2.0 oz a b c d 1.1b 0.0c 3.4b Clutch 50WDG 3.0 oz a b c d 0.0b 1.5bc 4.9b Capture 2EC 3.2 fl oz a b c d 0. 0b 0.6bc 0.6b Capture 2EC 6.4 fl oz a b c d 0.6b 1.5bc 1.1b Venom 20SG 7.0 oz a b c d 4.4ab 6.9ab 2.3b Venom 20SG 10.5 oz a b c d 0.6b 4abc 9.1ab TD2472 30WDG 5.3 oz a b c d 1.5b 4.6abc 4.9b Danitol 2.4EC 10.6 fl oz a 0.0b 0.0c 2.6b Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz b c Means in a column followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, Duncan’s New MRT). a st nd rd Application timing: a = 1 generation egg hatch (21 Jun); b = 2 generation egg hatch (28 Jul); c = 3 generation egg hatch (16 Aug); d = 3 Sep. statistical analysis performed on square-root transformed data, data presented are actual counts. Table 2. Application timing per generation GBM severity st nd rd 1 2 3 no. berries damaged per cluster Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre EH EH EH +18d 12 Aug 22 Sep Untreated --- --- --- --- --- 1.11a 3.14a Imidan 70W 2.125 lb a b c d 0.25ab 1.67ab TriFol L 0.5 pt/100 gal a b c d Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz a b c d 0.25ab 0.5b Calypso 4F 8.0 fl oz a b c d 0.95ab 1.07ab Rimon 0.83EC 20.0 fl oz a b c d 0.58ab 1.78ab Clutch 50WDG 2.0 oz a b c d 0.38ab 1.63ab Clutch 50WDG 3.0 oz a b c d 0.0b 2.13ab Capture 2EC 3.2 fl oz a b c d 0.0b 1.5ab Capture 2EC 6.4 fl oz a b c d 0.25ab 0.25b Venom 20SG 7.0 oz a b c d 0.55ab 0.55b Venom 20SG 10.5 oz a b c d 0.5ab 1.75ab TD2472 30WDG 5.3 oz a b c d 0.5ab 1.63ab Danitol 2.4EC 10.6 fl oz a 0.0b 1.25ab Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz b c Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, Duncan’s New MRT). a st nd Application timing: a = 1 generation egg hatch (21 Jun); b = 2 generation egg hatch (28 Jul); rd c = 3 generation egg hatch (16 Aug); d = 3 Sep. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

CONTROL OF GRAPE BERRY MOTH IN CONCORD GRAPE, 2004

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/control-of-grape-berry-moth-in-concord-grape-2004-D830gg09La
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/30.1.C26
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

(C26) GRAPE: Vitus labrusca L. 'Concord' John C. Wise Department of Entomology Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824-1115 Phone: (517) 432-2668 Fax: (517) 353-5598 E-mail: wisejohn@msu.edu Kevin Schoenborn E-mail: schoenb6@msu.edu Rufus Isaacs E-mail: isaacsr@msu.edu Grape berry moth (GBM): Endopiza viteana Clemens This trial was designed to help optimize rates and timings of insecticide programs for GBM control. Insecticides were applied to mature (22-yr old) ‘Concord’ grape vines (Vineyard 1) at the Trevor Nichols Research Complex near Fennville, MI with an FMC 1029 airblast sprayer calibrated to deliver 50 gpa at 2.5 mph. Regular fungicide applications of Nova and Dithane were applied separately to all treatments, and herbicide applications included Glyphomax Plus, Sinbar, and Gramaxone Extra. Plots consisted of single 42 ft long rows of vines arranged in a RCB design with four replications. Vine spacing was 6 ×10 ft, with a buffer row separating all plots. In addition to using buffers to minimize drift, a donut-shaped piece of cardboard was placed over the fan on the airblast to reduce airflow. As the canopy in the vineyard increased, the hole in the center of the ‘donut’ was enlarged to ensure spray penetration. st nd Applications of test materials were made on 21 Jun (1 generation GBM egg hatch), 28 Jul (2 rd generation GBM egg hatch), 16 Aug (3 generation GBM egg hatch), and 3 Sep, as indicated in the following tables. GBM evaluations were made on 12 Aug, 31 Aug and 22 Sep by examining 25 clusters per replicate for injury. Damage severity ratings were taken on 12 Aug and 22 Sep by counting the number of damaged berries on each plot. GBM incidence and severity ratings were analyzed using ANOVA and means separation by Duncan’s New MRT (P ≤ 0.05). All treatment compounds provided good control of GBM by the first evaluation on 12 Aug. Control of late season damage tends to be more difficult as GBM populations build over time. At the 31 Aug evaluation, only Intrepid, Clutch, Capture, and the Danitol/Intrepid treatments controlled GBM significantly compared to the untreated check. Clutch (3 oz), Capture (3.2 fl oz) and the Danitol/Intrepid treatments also significantly reduced the severity level of berry damage compared to the untreated check in that 12 Aug rating period (Table 2). All treatment compounds provided good reductions in the percentage of clusters damaged by the third evaluation on 22 Sep, although only Intrepid, Capture (6.4 fl oz) and Venom (7.0 oz) had severity ratings that were significantly lower than the untreated check. Table 1. Application timing per generation GBM cluster damage st nd rd 1 2 3 b b b Treatment/ Rate 12 Aug 31 Aug 22 Sep formulation amt product/acre EH EH EH +18d % damaged % damaged % damaged Untreated --- --- --- --- --- 14.3a 10.4a 29.3a Imidan 70W 2.125lb a b c d 2.3b 2.6abc 5.6b TriFol L 0.5pt/100 gal a b c d Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz a b c d 1.5b 0.0c 1.5b Calypso 4F 8.0 fl oz a b c d 5.1ab 5.1abc 6.6b Rimon 0.83EC 20.0 fl oz a b c d 2.6b 2.1abc 4.4b Clutch 50WDG 2.0 oz a b c d 1.1b 0.0c 3.4b Clutch 50WDG 3.0 oz a b c d 0.0b 1.5bc 4.9b Capture 2EC 3.2 fl oz a b c d 0. 0b 0.6bc 0.6b Capture 2EC 6.4 fl oz a b c d 0.6b 1.5bc 1.1b Venom 20SG 7.0 oz a b c d 4.4ab 6.9ab 2.3b Venom 20SG 10.5 oz a b c d 0.6b 4abc 9.1ab TD2472 30WDG 5.3 oz a b c d 1.5b 4.6abc 4.9b Danitol 2.4EC 10.6 fl oz a 0.0b 0.0c 2.6b Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz b c Means in a column followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, Duncan’s New MRT). a st nd rd Application timing: a = 1 generation egg hatch (21 Jun); b = 2 generation egg hatch (28 Jul); c = 3 generation egg hatch (16 Aug); d = 3 Sep. statistical analysis performed on square-root transformed data, data presented are actual counts. Table 2. Application timing per generation GBM severity st nd rd 1 2 3 no. berries damaged per cluster Treatment/ Rate formulation amt product/acre EH EH EH +18d 12 Aug 22 Sep Untreated --- --- --- --- --- 1.11a 3.14a Imidan 70W 2.125 lb a b c d 0.25ab 1.67ab TriFol L 0.5 pt/100 gal a b c d Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz a b c d 0.25ab 0.5b Calypso 4F 8.0 fl oz a b c d 0.95ab 1.07ab Rimon 0.83EC 20.0 fl oz a b c d 0.58ab 1.78ab Clutch 50WDG 2.0 oz a b c d 0.38ab 1.63ab Clutch 50WDG 3.0 oz a b c d 0.0b 2.13ab Capture 2EC 3.2 fl oz a b c d 0.0b 1.5ab Capture 2EC 6.4 fl oz a b c d 0.25ab 0.25b Venom 20SG 7.0 oz a b c d 0.55ab 0.55b Venom 20SG 10.5 oz a b c d 0.5ab 1.75ab TD2472 30WDG 5.3 oz a b c d 0.5ab 1.63ab Danitol 2.4EC 10.6 fl oz a 0.0b 1.25ab Intrepid 2F 12.0 fl oz b c Means followed by same letter do not significantly differ (P > 0.05, Duncan’s New MRT). a st nd Application timing: a = 1 generation egg hatch (21 Jun); b = 2 generation egg hatch (28 Jul); rd c = 3 generation egg hatch (16 Aug); d = 3 Sep.

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.