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

Learn More →

INSECT CONTROL WITH SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES, 2011

INSECT CONTROL WITH SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES, 2011 Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.F89 (F89) Tobacco: Nicotiana tobacum, ‘K326’ Hannah Burrack Department of Entomology North Carolina State University Campus Box 7630 Raleigh, NC 27695 Phone: 919-513-4344 Fax: 919-515-3748 E-mail: hannah_burrack@ncsu.edu Anna Chapman E-mail: avchapma@ncsu.edu Tobacco flea beetle (TFB): Epitrix hirtipennis (Melsheimer) Tobacco aphid: Myzus persicae ssp. nicotianae Blackman The objective of this experiment was to assess the efficacy of systemic insecticides for insect control in flue cured tobacco as part of an ongoing research project studying resistance potential in target pests. The trial was conducted at the Upper Coastal Plain Research Station in Rocky Mount, NC and consisted of 7 treatments arranged in an RCB design with four replicates. All treatments were applied as greenhouse tray drench treatments on 19 Apr using a CO propelled sprayer fitted with a single nozzle boom and flat fan nozzle. Tobacco transplants were sprayed in greenhouse float trays and insecticides were washed down into the root ball with water. Plants were transplanted into 4 row plots on 21 Apr. All data was collected from the middle two rows of each plot. Plant height and leaf width was measured from 10 plants in each row. Total flea beetle adults were counted on 10 plants each in each row, and flea beetle holes were counted on single leaves from these 10 plants. All plants in the middle two rows were observed for aphid infested plants. Total aphid infested plants were counted and proportion of aphid infested plants per row was calculated. All data were analyzed using Proc Mixed in SAS v. 9.2 (Cary, NC). Means were separated using Fisher’s Protected LSD. Within treatments of Admire and Platinum, there were significant differences in plant leaf width with the lowest rate of each product having significantly larger leaves. However these differences were not consistent when compared to the untreated check. The untreated check had significantly lower mean plant height when compared to all treatments on the first sampling date. The highest rate of Platinum and the untreated check both had significantly lower mean plant height compared to all other treatments of the second sampling date (Table 1). All treatments had significantly fewer aphids and flea beetle holes when compared to the untreated check for all dates except 27 May (Tables 2 &3). All treatments had significantly fewer adult flea beetles when compared to the untreated check for the first two sampling dates. These differences diminished at later sampling dates. This research was supported by industry gifts of products and research funding. Table 1 Mean Leaf Width Mean Plant Height Rate formulated Treatment product/1000 plants 11 May 18 May 1 June 8 June Untreated Check 12.43bc 21.27bc 18.35c 31.32b Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 13.18ab 22.79b 23.21ab 36.10a Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 10.69c 20.00c 19.65bc 35.10a Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 11.40c 20.51c 20.63bc 35.30a Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 12.59bc 22.96b 21.92ab 35.95a Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 14.66a 25.31a 24.50a 38.87a Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 11.75bc 20.20c 19.32bc 32.98b Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.F89 Table 2 Proportion Aphid Infested Plants Rate formulated Treatment product/1000 plants 18 May 27 May 1 June 8 June Untreated Check 0.04a 0.18a 0.28a 0.43a Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.005b 0.00b Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.005b 0.00b Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD Table 3 Rate formulated Mean Adult Flea Beetles Mean Flea Beetle Holes product/1000 Treatment plants 11 May 18 May 21 May 1 June 11 May 18 May 27 May Untreated Check 49.0a 30.50a 0.25a 1.75a 66.70a 24.07a 0.40a Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 2.50b 0.75b 0.25a 1.00a 1.07b 1.67b 0.32a Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00a 1.00a 0.35b 0.15b 0.17a Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.75a 0.25b 0.15b 0.10a Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 0.25b 0.00b 0.00a 0.75a 0.70b 0.20b 0.50a Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.50a 0.52b 0.15b 0.15a Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.00b 0.27b 0.15b 0.10a Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Arthropod Management Tests Oxford University Press

INSECT CONTROL WITH SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES, 2011

Arthropod Management Tests , Volume 37 (1) – Jan 1, 2012

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/insect-control-with-systemic-insecticides-2011-A6013fsmxJ
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© Published by Oxford University Press.
eISSN
2155-9856
DOI
10.4182/amt.2012.F89
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.F89 (F89) Tobacco: Nicotiana tobacum, ‘K326’ Hannah Burrack Department of Entomology North Carolina State University Campus Box 7630 Raleigh, NC 27695 Phone: 919-513-4344 Fax: 919-515-3748 E-mail: hannah_burrack@ncsu.edu Anna Chapman E-mail: avchapma@ncsu.edu Tobacco flea beetle (TFB): Epitrix hirtipennis (Melsheimer) Tobacco aphid: Myzus persicae ssp. nicotianae Blackman The objective of this experiment was to assess the efficacy of systemic insecticides for insect control in flue cured tobacco as part of an ongoing research project studying resistance potential in target pests. The trial was conducted at the Upper Coastal Plain Research Station in Rocky Mount, NC and consisted of 7 treatments arranged in an RCB design with four replicates. All treatments were applied as greenhouse tray drench treatments on 19 Apr using a CO propelled sprayer fitted with a single nozzle boom and flat fan nozzle. Tobacco transplants were sprayed in greenhouse float trays and insecticides were washed down into the root ball with water. Plants were transplanted into 4 row plots on 21 Apr. All data was collected from the middle two rows of each plot. Plant height and leaf width was measured from 10 plants in each row. Total flea beetle adults were counted on 10 plants each in each row, and flea beetle holes were counted on single leaves from these 10 plants. All plants in the middle two rows were observed for aphid infested plants. Total aphid infested plants were counted and proportion of aphid infested plants per row was calculated. All data were analyzed using Proc Mixed in SAS v. 9.2 (Cary, NC). Means were separated using Fisher’s Protected LSD. Within treatments of Admire and Platinum, there were significant differences in plant leaf width with the lowest rate of each product having significantly larger leaves. However these differences were not consistent when compared to the untreated check. The untreated check had significantly lower mean plant height when compared to all treatments on the first sampling date. The highest rate of Platinum and the untreated check both had significantly lower mean plant height compared to all other treatments of the second sampling date (Table 1). All treatments had significantly fewer aphids and flea beetle holes when compared to the untreated check for all dates except 27 May (Tables 2 &3). All treatments had significantly fewer adult flea beetles when compared to the untreated check for the first two sampling dates. These differences diminished at later sampling dates. This research was supported by industry gifts of products and research funding. Table 1 Mean Leaf Width Mean Plant Height Rate formulated Treatment product/1000 plants 11 May 18 May 1 June 8 June Untreated Check 12.43bc 21.27bc 18.35c 31.32b Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 13.18ab 22.79b 23.21ab 36.10a Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 10.69c 20.00c 19.65bc 35.10a Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 11.40c 20.51c 20.63bc 35.30a Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 12.59bc 22.96b 21.92ab 35.95a Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 14.66a 25.31a 24.50a 38.87a Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 11.75bc 20.20c 19.32bc 32.98b Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD Arthropod Management Tests 2012, Vol. 37 doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.F89 Table 2 Proportion Aphid Infested Plants Rate formulated Treatment product/1000 plants 18 May 27 May 1 June 8 June Untreated Check 0.04a 0.18a 0.28a 0.43a Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.005b 0.00b Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.005b 0.00b Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b 0.00b Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD Table 3 Rate formulated Mean Adult Flea Beetles Mean Flea Beetle Holes product/1000 Treatment plants 11 May 18 May 21 May 1 June 11 May 18 May 27 May Untreated Check 49.0a 30.50a 0.25a 1.75a 66.70a 24.07a 0.40a Admire Pro 0.6 fl oz 2.50b 0.75b 0.25a 1.00a 1.07b 1.67b 0.32a Admire Pro 1.2 fl oz 0.00b 0.00b 0.00a 1.00a 0.35b 0.15b 0.17a Admire Pro 2.4 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.75a 0.25b 0.15b 0.10a Platinum 2SG 0.5 fl oz 0.25b 0.00b 0.00a 0.75a 0.70b 0.20b 0.50a Platinum 2SG 1.3 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.50a 0.52b 0.15b 0.15a Platinum 2 SG 2.6 fl oz 0.50b 0.00b 0.00a 0.00b 0.27b 0.15b 0.10a Means followed by the same letter are not significantly different (α = 0.05) via Fisher’s Protected LSD

Journal

Arthropod Management TestsOxford University Press

Published: Jan 1, 2012

There are no references for this article.