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

Learn More →

Efficacy of Selected Foliar Insecticides Against Tarnished Plant Bugs in Cotton, 2019 (Test 3)

Efficacy of Selected Foliar Insecticides Against Tarnished Plant Bugs in Cotton, 2019 (Test 3) applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" Arthropod Management T ests, 46(1), 2021, 1–1 https://doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsab144 Section F: Field & Cereal Crops COTTON: Gossypium hirsutum (L.), ‘Deltapine 1646 HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA BG2XF’ HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Efficacy of Selected Foliar Insecticides Against Tarnished Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA History=Text=History=Text_First Plant Bugs in Cotton, 2019 (Test 3) EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA 1,3 2 2 W. D. Crow, A. L. Catchot, and D. Bao EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC 1 Delta Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS 38776, USA, Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology, and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA MS 39762, USA, and Corresponding author, e-mail: wdc165@msstate.edu ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA Subject Editor: Donald Cook ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp. ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA Tarnished plant bug | Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) In 2019, a tarnished plant bug (TPB) efficacy trial in cotton TPB nymphs  captured from each plot. Data were analyzed with was  conducted to evaluate four insecticide treatments along with ANOVA and means were separated using Fisher’s protected LSD (P an untreated check in Glendora, MS. This trial was conducted ≤ 0.05). as a RCB  design with four replications. Plots were four rows At 3 DAT1, Savoy plus Orthene, Transform, and Orthene plus wide by 40 ft in length on 38-inch centers. At the third week Brigade provided the best TPB control compared to untreated of bloom, insecticide  treatments were applied with a tractor- check (Table 1). Savoy was not different from any of the insecti- mounted sprayer  calibrated to deliver 10.0 gpa at 60 psi using cide treatments or the untreated check. There were no statistical TX-6 Hollow  Cone nozzles (two per row). The first application differences between any of the treatments at 7 DAT2. At 3 DAT1, was  made  on 29 Jul, with a sequential application 7  days later, all insecticide treatments lowered populations below that in the un- 5 Aug. TPB populations were evaluated 3 and 7 DAT1 and then treated check. Savoy plus Orthene and Transform provided better again at 3 and 7 DAT2. Insecticide efficacy was evaluated by taking control than Savoy, but none of these treatments were different than two drops with a 2.5-ft black drop cloth on the center two rows Orthene plus Brigade. At 7 DAT2, all treatments resulted in fewer of each plot (10 row feet sampled) and recording the number of plant bug nymphs than the untreated check. Table 1. Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Average number of TPB nymphs per 10 row feet (fl oz prod.) 3 DAT1 7 DAT1 3 DAT2 7 DAT2 Untreated check – 13.5a 11.3 13.0a 25.1a Savoy 1.8EC 12.9 6.1ab 5.3 4.4b 4.6bc Savoy 1.8EC + Orthene 97S 12.9 + 8.0 4.1b 8.0 1.2c 25bc Transform 50WG 1.5 4.1b 5.8 0.7c 2.9bc Orthene 97S + Brigade 2EC 8.0 + 6.4 2.2b 4.5 2.0bc 1.8c P > F 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.01 Means within a column sharing the same letter are not significantly different (LSD; P > 0.05). oz product (wt)/acre. This study was supported by industry gifts of products and/or research funding. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. 1 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 journals.permissions@oup.com http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

Efficacy of Selected Foliar Insecticides Against Tarnished Plant Bugs in Cotton, 2019 (Test 3)

Crow, W D; Catchot, A L; Bao, D
Arthropod Management Tests , Volume 46 (1): 1 – Oct 27, 2021
Free
Download PDF
1 page

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/efficacy-of-selected-foliar-insecticides-against-tarnished-plant-bugs-VPyv0YaxBN
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.1093/amt/tsab144
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

applyparastyle "fig//caption/p[1]" parastyle "FigCapt" applyparastyle "fig" parastyle "Figure" Arthropod Management T ests, 46(1), 2021, 1–1 https://doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsab144 Section F: Field & Cereal Crops COTTON: Gossypium hirsutum (L.), ‘Deltapine 1646 HeadA=HeadB=HeadA=HeadB/HeadA BG2XF’ HeadB=HeadC=HeadB=HeadC/HeadB HeadC=HeadD=HeadC=HeadD/HeadC Efficacy of Selected Foliar Insecticides Against Tarnished Extract3=HeadA=Extract1=HeadA History=Text=History=Text_First Plant Bugs in Cotton, 2019 (Test 3) EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadA=EDI_HeadB/HeadA 1,3 2 2 W. D. Crow, A. L. Catchot, and D. Bao EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadB=EDI_HeadC/HeadB EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD=EDI_HeadC=EDI_HeadD/HeadC 1 Delta Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Mississippi State University, Stoneville, MS 38776, USA, Department of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, Entomology, and Plant Pathology, Mississippi State University, Mississippi State, EDI_Extract3=EDI_HeadA=EDI_Extract1=EDI_HeadA MS 39762, USA, and Corresponding author, e-mail: wdc165@msstate.edu ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadA=ERR_HeadB/HeadA Subject Editor: Donald Cook ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadB=ERR_HeadC/HeadB ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD=ERR_HeadC=ERR_HeadD/HeadC Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp. ERR_Extract3=ERR_HeadA=ERR_Extract1=ERR_HeadA Tarnished plant bug | Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois) In 2019, a tarnished plant bug (TPB) efficacy trial in cotton TPB nymphs  captured from each plot. Data were analyzed with was  conducted to evaluate four insecticide treatments along with ANOVA and means were separated using Fisher’s protected LSD (P an untreated check in Glendora, MS. This trial was conducted ≤ 0.05). as a RCB  design with four replications. Plots were four rows At 3 DAT1, Savoy plus Orthene, Transform, and Orthene plus wide by 40 ft in length on 38-inch centers. At the third week Brigade provided the best TPB control compared to untreated of bloom, insecticide  treatments were applied with a tractor- check (Table 1). Savoy was not different from any of the insecti- mounted sprayer  calibrated to deliver 10.0 gpa at 60 psi using cide treatments or the untreated check. There were no statistical TX-6 Hollow  Cone nozzles (two per row). The first application differences between any of the treatments at 7 DAT2. At 3 DAT1, was  made  on 29 Jul, with a sequential application 7  days later, all insecticide treatments lowered populations below that in the un- 5 Aug. TPB populations were evaluated 3 and 7 DAT1 and then treated check. Savoy plus Orthene and Transform provided better again at 3 and 7 DAT2. Insecticide efficacy was evaluated by taking control than Savoy, but none of these treatments were different than two drops with a 2.5-ft black drop cloth on the center two rows Orthene plus Brigade. At 7 DAT2, all treatments resulted in fewer of each plot (10 row feet sampled) and recording the number of plant bug nymphs than the untreated check. Table 1. Treatment/formulation Rate/acre Average number of TPB nymphs per 10 row feet (fl oz prod.) 3 DAT1 7 DAT1 3 DAT2 7 DAT2 Untreated check – 13.5a 11.3 13.0a 25.1a Savoy 1.8EC 12.9 6.1ab 5.3 4.4b 4.6bc Savoy 1.8EC + Orthene 97S 12.9 + 8.0 4.1b 8.0 1.2c 25bc Transform 50WG 1.5 4.1b 5.8 0.7c 2.9bc Orthene 97S + Brigade 2EC 8.0 + 6.4 2.2b 4.5 2.0bc 1.8c P > F 0.02 0.07 0.01 0.01 Means within a column sharing the same letter are not significantly different (LSD; P > 0.05). oz product (wt)/acre. This study was supported by industry gifts of products and/or research funding. © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Entomological Society of America. 1 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 journals.permissions@oup.com

Journal

Arthropod Management Tests – Oxford University Press

Published: Oct 27, 2021

Keywords: Cotton (cottonseed) | Gossypium spp; Tarnished plant bug | Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois); acetamiprid; bifenthrin; acephate; sulfoxaflor

There are no references for this article.