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 Leaffooted Bug in Cotton Using Foliar-Applied Insecticides, 2022

Control of Leaffooted Bug in Cotton Using Foliar-Applied Insecticides, 2022 Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp Leaffooted bug (LFB) | Mozena obtusa (Uhler) dicrotophos, bifenthrin, imidacloprid, zeta-cypermethrin, oxamyl, sulfoxaflor, acephate This test was conducted on an irrigated commercial cotton field near Sundown, TX. The field was planted on 31 May on 40-inch row spacing. The experiment was designed as a RCB with eight treatments and four replications. The plots were 4-rows wide × 40 ft in length. Treatments were applied on 12 Jul during the peak squaring stage of cotton. Insecticide applications were made with a CO2-pressurized hand-boom sprayer calibrated to deliver 15 GPA through hollow cone TeeJet TXVS6 spray tip nozzles (2 per row) at 30 psi. Wind speed was ~9 mph during spray applications. Two drop cloth (2.5 ft long) samples, each rendering a five-foot subsample, were taken from the middle two rows of each plot at 3 DAT, 7 DAT, and 10 DAT. Numbers of leaffooted bug (LFB) nymphs were counted in each drop cloth sample. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and means were separated by Tukey’s mean separation. Insecticide application had a significant impact on LFB population (Table 1). No significant difference was observed in the number of LFB nymphs across treatments at 3 DAT. At 7 DAT, plots treated with Fanfare and Mustang Maxx resulted in significantly fewer LFB nymphs than the untreated check. Overall, the LFB infestation levels declined over time and no significant differences were observed among treatments at 10 DAT.1 Table 1. Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, P = 0.05). Open in new tab Table 1. Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, P = 0.05). Open in new tab Footnotes 1 This research was supported in part by industry gifts of pesticides and research funding. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

Control of Leaffooted Bug in Cotton Using Foliar-Applied Insecticides, 2022

Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/control-of-leaffooted-bug-in-cotton-using-foliar-applied-insecticides-N43TbUW00u

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/tsac138
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp Leaffooted bug (LFB) | Mozena obtusa (Uhler) dicrotophos, bifenthrin, imidacloprid, zeta-cypermethrin, oxamyl, sulfoxaflor, acephate This test was conducted on an irrigated commercial cotton field near Sundown, TX. The field was planted on 31 May on 40-inch row spacing. The experiment was designed as a RCB with eight treatments and four replications. The plots were 4-rows wide × 40 ft in length. Treatments were applied on 12 Jul during the peak squaring stage of cotton. Insecticide applications were made with a CO2-pressurized hand-boom sprayer calibrated to deliver 15 GPA through hollow cone TeeJet TXVS6 spray tip nozzles (2 per row) at 30 psi. Wind speed was ~9 mph during spray applications. Two drop cloth (2.5 ft long) samples, each rendering a five-foot subsample, were taken from the middle two rows of each plot at 3 DAT, 7 DAT, and 10 DAT. Numbers of leaffooted bug (LFB) nymphs were counted in each drop cloth sample. Data were analyzed by ANOVA and means were separated by Tukey’s mean separation. Insecticide application had a significant impact on LFB population (Table 1). No significant difference was observed in the number of LFB nymphs across treatments at 3 DAT. At 7 DAT, plots treated with Fanfare and Mustang Maxx resulted in significantly fewer LFB nymphs than the untreated check. Overall, the LFB infestation levels declined over time and no significant differences were observed among treatments at 10 DAT.1 Table 1. Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, P = 0.05). Open in new tab Table 1. Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Treatment/formulation . Rate amt product/acre . LFB nymphs/drop cloth . 3 DAT . 7 DAT . 10 DAT . Untreated check — 3.6 5.0a 2.3 Bidrin 8E 4.0 fl oz 1.4 1.9ab 0.4 Fanfare 2ES 6.4 fl oz 0.6 0.3b 0.0 Admire Pro 4.6SC 1.3 fl oz 3.1 3.6ab 0.4 Mustang Maxx 0.8EC 3.0 fl oz 0.5 0.4b 0.0 Vydate C-LV 3.77L 8.0 fl oz 1.1 2.1ab 0.9 Transform 50WG 1.5 oz wt 1.5 3.1ab 0.8 Orthene 97S 5.0 oz wt 1.1 1.8ab 0.3 P > F 0.4226 0.0302 0.0678 Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, P = 0.05). Open in new tab Footnotes 1 This research was supported in part by industry gifts of pesticides and research funding. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected]

Journal

Arthropod Management Tests – Oxford University Press

Published: Dec 31, 2022

Keywords: Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp; Leaffooted bug (LFB) | Mozena obtusa (Uhler); dicrotophos; bifenthrin; imidacloprid; zeta-cypermethrin; oxamyl; sulfoxaflor; acephate

There are no references for this article.