Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T01:58:49.207Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rainfall influences performance of insecticides on the codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apples

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 September 2016

John C. Wise ,
Daniel Hulbert  and
Christine Vandervoort
John C. Wise*
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, 578 Wilson Road, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, United States of America
Daniel Hulbert
Affiliation:
Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, 578 Wilson Road, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, United States of America
Christine Vandervoort
Affiliation:
Pesticide Analytical Laboratory, Michigan State University, 578 Wilson Road, East Lansing, Michigan, 48824-1311, United States of America
*
1 Corresponding author (e-mail: wisejohn@msu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Semi-field studies were used to evaluate the effects of rainfall and field ageing on the performance of insecticides from six different chemical classes used to control the codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). All insecticides were significantly more toxic to codling moth larvae than the untreated control, although seven-day field ageing reduced control for several compounds. Simulated rainfall events of 2.54 and 12.7 mm did not have negative effects on the performance of the insecticides. Simulated rainfall events of 50.8 mm of rainfall resulted in significant reductions of efficacy for thiacloprid and spinetoram. Residue profiles of apple leaves and fruit provided evidence for wash-off ranging from 13% to 93%, with patterns varying by compound, plant substrate, and rainfall level. This study will help apple growers make informed decisions on when reapplications of insecticides are needed in the field with the aim of improving integrated pest management.

Type
Insect Management
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 149 , Issue 1 , February 2017 , pp. 118 - 128
Copyright
© Entomological Society of Canada 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Subject editor: Matt O’Neal

References

Barnes, M.M. 1991. Tortricids in pome and stone fruits, codling moth occurrence, host race formation and damage. In Torticid pest, their biology, natural enemies and control. Edited by L.P.S. Geest and H.H. Evenhuis. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Pp 313–327.Google Scholar
Brunner, J.F., Beers, E.H., Dunley, J.E., Doerr, M., and Granger, K. 2005. Role of neonicotinyl insecticides in Washington apple integrated pest management. Part I. Control of lepidopteran pests. Journal of Insect Science, 5: 1–10.Google Scholar
Charmillot, P.J., Gourmelon, A., Fabre, A.L., and Pasquier, D. 2001. Ovicidal and larvicidal effectiveness of several insect growth inhibitors and regulators on codling moth Cydia pomonella L. (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Journal of Applied Entomology, 125: 147–153.Google Scholar
Enviro-weather Automated Weather Station Network. 2008. Michigan State University Enviroweather: weather-based pest, natural resources, and production management tools [online]. Available from http://www.agweather.geo.msu.edu/mawn [accessed 1 February 2014].Google Scholar
Gocke, A., Kim, S., Wise, J.C., and Whalon, M. 2009. Reduced egg viability in codling moth Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) following adult exposure to novaluron. Pest Manage Science, 65: 283–287.Google Scholar
Howitt, A. 1993. Common tree fruit pests. North Central Region Extension Publication 63. Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.Google Scholar
Hoyt, S.C., Leeper, J.R., Brown, G.C., and Croft, B.A. 1983. Basic biology and management components for insect IPM. In Integrated management of insect pests of pome and stone fruits. Edited by B.A. Croft and S.C. Hoyt. John Wiley and Sons, New York, New York, United States of America, 1–97.Google Scholar
Hulbert, D., Isaacs, R., Vandervoort, C., Earhardt, S., and Wise, J.C. 2012. Rainfastness of insecticides used to control Japanese beetle in blueberries. Journal of Economic Entomology, 105: 1688–1693. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EC11412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hulbert, D., Isaacs, R., Vandervoort, C., and Wise, J.C. 2011. Rainfastness and residual activity of insecticides to control Japanese beetle (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae) in grapes. Journal of Economic Entomology, 104: 1656–1664.Google Scholar
Kerchove, G. 2005. A statistical handbook for agriculture field trials specialists. Gylling Data Management Inc., Brookings, South Dakota, United States of America.Google Scholar
Knight, A.L., Brunner, J.F., and Alston, D. 1994. Survey of azinphosmethyl resistance in codling moth (Lepidoptera, Tortricidae) in Washington and Utah. Journal of Economic Entomology, 87: 285–292.Google Scholar
Magalhaes, L.C. and Walgenbach, J.F. 2001. Life stage toxicity and residual activity of insecticides to codling moth and oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Journal of Economic Entomology, 104: 1950–1959.Google Scholar
McDowell, L., Willis, G.H., Southwick, L., and Smith, S. 1984. Methyl parathion and EPN washoff from cotton plants by simulated rainfall. Environmental Science & Technology, 18: 423–427.Google Scholar
Mota-Sanchez, D., Wise, J., Vander Poppen, R., Gut, L., and Hollingworth, R. 2008. Resistance of codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.) larvae in Michigan to insecticides with different modes of action causes reduced field residual activity. Pest Management Science, 64: 881–890.Google Scholar
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2005. Michigan 2004–2005 highlights. United States Department of Agriculture, Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.Google Scholar
Pimentel, D., Acquay, H., Rice, P., Silva, M., Nelson, J., Lipner, S., et al. 1992. Environmental and economic costs of pesticide use. BioScience, 42: 750–760.Google Scholar
R Development Core Team. 2010. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.Google Scholar
Reuveny, H. and Cohen, E. 2004. Resistance of the codling moth Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lep., Tortricidae) to pesticides in Israel. Journal of Applied Entomology, 128: 645–651.Google Scholar
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1997. Guidelines for expedited review of conventional pesticides under the reduced-risk initiative and for biological pesticides. Pesticide Registration Notice 97-3. Available from https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-registration/prn-97-3-guidelines-expedited-review-conventional-pesticides-under-reduced [accessed 11 July 2016].Google Scholar
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2006. Proposed decisions for the remaining uses of azinphos-methyl. EPA-HQ-OPP-2005-0061-0134. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, District of Columbia, United States of America.Google Scholar
Whalon, M.E., Hollingworth, R.M., and Mota-Sanchez, D. 2008. Arthropod pesticide resistance database [online]. Available from http://www.pesticideresistance.org [accessed 11 July 2016].Google Scholar
Willis, G.H., McDowell, L.L., Smith, S., and Southwick, L.M. 1992. Foliar washoff of oil-applied malathion and permethrin as a function of time after application. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 40: 1086–1089.Google Scholar
Willis, G.H., McDowell, L.L., Southwick, L.M., and Smith, S. 1994. Azinphosmethyl and fenvalerate washoff from cotton plants as a function of time between application and initial rainfall. Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 27: 115–120.Google Scholar
Willis, G.H., Smith, S., McDowell, L.L., and Southwick, L.M. 1996. Carbaryl washoff from soybean plants. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 31: 239–243.Google Scholar
Wise, J.C., Coombs, A.B., Vandervoort, C., Gut, L., Hoffmann, E.J., and Whalon, M.E. 2006. Use of residue profile analysis to identify modes of insecticide activiry contributing to control of plum curculio in apples. Journal of Economic Entomology, 99: 2055–2064.Google Scholar
Wise, J.C., Schilder, A., Zandstra, B., Hanson, L., Gut, L., and Sundin, G. 2015. Michigan fruit management guide 2016. Bulletin E-0154. Michigan State University Extension, East Lansing, Michigan, United States of America.Google Scholar
Wise, J.C. and Whalon, M. 2009. A systems approach to IPM integration, ecological assessment and resistance management in tree fruit orchards. In Biorational control of arthropod pests: application and resistance management. Edited by I. Ishaaya and A. Rami Horowitz. Springer Publishing, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. Pp. 325–345.Google Scholar
Zhou, J.L., Rowland, S.J., Fauzi, R., Mantoura, C., and Lane, M.C.G. 1997. Desorption of tefluthrin insecticide from soil in simulated rainfall runoff systems – kinetic studies and modelling. Water Research, 31: 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar