scholarly journals Green Peach Aphid Control With Foliar Sprays, 1995

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 171-171
Author(s):  
Robert L. Stoltz ◽  
Nancy A. Matteson
Keyword(s):  
Green Peach Aphid ◽  
Sweet Pepper ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Silt Loam ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Aphid Control ◽  
Untreated Check ◽  
Extension Center ◽  
Pepper Plants

Abstract Experimental plots were established on the UI Research and Extension Center, Kimberly, Idaho. Potatoes were planted on 25 Apr and irrigated by solid set sprinkler. The soil type was Portneuf silt loam. Four treatments and one untreated check plot were replicated four times in a RCB design. Individual treatment plots were 4 rows (36 inch row spacing) wide by 25 ft long with 5 ft alleyways separating the plots. Green peach aphids were mass reared on greenhouse sweet pepper plants (California Wonder) for release into individual plots. Aphid releases were made into test plots the last wk in Jun and again in the first wk of Jul. A total of four heavily infested pepper plants was released per plot. Treatment sprays were broadcast applied using a CO2 pressurized backpack sprayer (30 psi) and delivering 20 gal finished spray per acre (four, 10X hollow cone nozzles). Aphid counts were made from non-destructively examining 10 randomly selected leaves in the center two rows of each plot. Leaves were sampled from the top, middle, and bottom sections of the plants. The data collected and presented are the total number of aphids per 20 leaves. On 19 Jul a pre-count was taken and on 21 Jul all treatment applications were made. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple means comparison.

scholarly journals Green Peach Aphid Control with Foliar Sprays, 1997

1998 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 134-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert L. Stoltz ◽  
Nancy A. Matteson
Keyword(s):  
Green Peach Aphid ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Aphid Control ◽  
Randomized Complete Block Design ◽  
Untreated Check ◽  
Pre Treatment ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Experimental plots were established on the UI Research and Extension Center, Kimberly, Idaho. Potatoes were planted on 28 Apr and irrigated by solid set sprinkler. The soil type was Portneuf silt loam. Seven treatments and one untreated check plot were replicated four times in a randomized complete block design. Individual treatment plots were 4 rows (36-inch row spacing) wide by 25 ft long with 5-ft alleyways separating the plots. Green peach aphids were mass reared on greenhouse mustard plants (Brassica juncea L. ‘Florida Broadleaf’) for release into individual plots. Aphid releases were made into test plots on 14 Jun. A total of four heavily infested leaves were used to inoculate each plot. Treatment sprays were broadcast applied using a CO2-pressurized backpack sprayer (30 psi) and delivering 20 gal finished S per acre (four, 10X hollow-cone nozzles). Aphid counts were made by non-destructively sampling leaves at random from the top, middle, and bottom sections of plants in the center two rows of each plot. The data collected and presented is the total no. of aphids per 20 leaves. On 25 Jun a pre-treatment count was made and all treatments were applied later that d. Data was analyzed using ANOVA and Newman-Keuls multiple means comparison (Significance Level P = 0.05).

scholarly journals Colorado Potato Beetle Control With Foliar Sprays, 1995

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-169
Author(s):  
Robert L. Stoltz ◽  
Nancy A. Matteson
Keyword(s):  
Colorado Potato Beetle ◽  
Individual Treatment ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Silt Loam ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Weekly Basis ◽  
Potato Beetle ◽  
Whole Plant ◽  
Untreated Check ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Experimental plots were established on the UI Research and Extension Center, Kimberly, Idaho. Potatoes were planted on 25 Apr and irrigated by solid set sprinkler. The soil type was Portneuf silt loam. Six treatments and one untreated check plot were replicated four times in a RCB design. Individual treatment plots were 4 rows (36 inch row spacing) wide by 25 ft long with 5 ft alleyways separating the plots. Treatment sprays were broadcast applied using a CO2 pressurized backpack sprayer (30 psi) and delivering 20 gal finished spray per acre (four, 10X hollow cone nozzles). On a weekly basis, egg masses, small larvae (1-2 instar), large larvae (3-4instar) and adult beetles were counted, and percent defoliation estimates were made from whole plant inspections of the center 5 hills of the middle 2 plot rows. On 5 Jul a pre-count of all Colorado potato beetle (CPB) life stages was taken and all treatment applications were made. A second application of both Spinosad rates was made on 12 Jul. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Student-Newman-Keuls multiple means comparison.

scholarly journals Colorado Potato Beetle and Green Peach Aphid Control with Soil Applied Insecticides and Foliar Sprays, 1996

1997 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 162-163
Author(s):  
Robert L. Stoltz ◽  
Nancy A. Matteson
Keyword(s):  
Seed Piece ◽  
Foliar Application ◽  
Green Peach Aphid ◽  
Sweet Pepper ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Potato Beetle ◽  
Whole Plant ◽  
Aphid Control ◽  
Untreated Check ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Experimental plots were established on the UI Research and Extension Center, Kimberly, Idaho. Potatoes were planted on 25 Apr and irrigated by solid set sprinkler. The soil type was Portneuf silt loam. Eight treatments and one untreated check plot were replicated four times in a RCB design. Individual plots were 4 rows (36 inch row spacing) wide by 25 ft long with 5 ft alleyways separating the plots. Green peach aphids were mass reared on greenhouse sweet pepper plants (‘California Wonder’) for release into individual plots. Aphid releases were made into test plots on 27 Jun and again on 8 Jul. A total of four heavily infested plants were released per plot. On a weekly basis, adults, large larvae (3-4 instar), small larvae (1 -2 instar), and egg masses of CPB were counted and percent defoliation assessed from whole plant inspections of the center 5 hills of the middle 2 plot rows. GPA counts were made on 20 leaves chosen at random from the top, middle and bottom sections of plants in the center two rows of each plot. Admire treatments were applied at plant in-furrow over the seed piece on 25 Apr. Temik and Thimet were applied in-furrow with the seed piece also at planting. Furadan was applied in a six-inch banded S over the plants at 4-inch rosette stage of plant growth on 4 Jun using a CO2 pressurized backpack sprayer. All foliar treatments were broadcast on 29 Jun using the backpack CO2 sprayer at a rate of 20 gpa (30 psi, with 4, 10X hollow cone nozzles). On 11 Jul, a second foliar application of Metasystox-R + Asana, Monitor and Alert was made. Data were analyzed using ANOVA and Newman-Keuls multiple means comparison.

scholarly journals Foliar Sprays to Control Insects in Fall Peppers, 1995

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 136-137
Author(s):  
John Speese
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Plant Spacing ◽  
Eastern Shore ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Foliar Sprays ◽  
Marketable Fruit ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Peppers were transplanted on 31 Jul at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Painter, VA. Each plot consisted of two 25ft long rows with 3ft between row spacing and 1ft between plant spacing. Each plot was bordered on each side by an untreated guard row and replicated 4 times in a RCB design. Treatments were applied on the dates indicated in the table with a backpack sprayer using 3 hollow cone nozzles/row and delivering 60 gal water/acre at 40 psi. Evaluation criteria consisted of hand-harvest of marketable fruit on 10 healthy, uniform-sized plants/row (.00062 acre) and GPA counts on 5 randomly picked leaves/plot on 06 Oct. Harvesting was done in this manner due to uneven stands in some plots due to the drought.

scholarly journals Control of Lepidopterous Larvae on Spring Cabbage, 1995

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 95-95
Author(s):  
M. R. Peters ◽  
J. V. Edelson
Keyword(s):  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Larval Feeding ◽  
Feeding Damage ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Extension Center ◽  
Direct Counts

Abstract Cabbage plants were transplanted on 6 Apr at the Wes Watkins Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Lane, OK. Each plot consisted of two 15 ft-long rows bordered on each side by an unplanted row. Cabbage was transplanted with 18-inch plant and 36-inch row spacing. Treatments were replicated 4 times in a RCB design. Sprays were applied with a back-pack sprayer using 2 TXVS-26 hollow cone nozzles/row and delivering 36 gal/acre at 40 psi. Applications were made on 10, 16, and 23 May and on 2 and 9 Jun. Evaluation criteria consisted of direct counts of all lepidopterous larvae on 5 randomly selected plants until 22 May and then 3 randomly chosen plants/treatment for the rest of the experiment. On 13 Jun damage ratings were determined. A head was considered marketable if no visible evidence of larval feeding damage was observed on the head or wrapper leaves.

scholarly journals Evaluating Insecticide Application Techniques to Control Aphids in Vegetable Leaf Crops

1995 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 317-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
Celeste Welty ◽  
Sandra Alcaraz ◽  
H. Erdal Ozkan
Keyword(s):  
Green Peach Aphid ◽  
Spray Deposition ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Insecticide Application ◽  
Major Species ◽  
Aphid Control ◽  
Application Techniques ◽  
Moisture Sensitive ◽  
Leaf Lettuce ◽  
Good Coverage

Insecticide application techniques were evaluated to find the most effective way to spray contact insecticides to control aphids on leaf crops under field conditions. A hydraulic boom sprayer was tested with several nozzle types, nozzle positions, and pressures, and compared with an electrostatic sprayer and a controlled droplet applicator (CDA). Spray deposition in the canopy and drift were evaluated with moisture-sensitive cards. Trials were conducted on collards and red leaf lettuce in 1989, mustard greens in 1990, and turnip greens in 1991. Green peach aphid [Myzus persicae (Sulzer)] was the major species in all trials. Among hydraulic boom treatments in all trials, aphid control was not significantly different when insecticide applied at 60 psi (414 kPa) was delivered by hollow cone, twin flat-fan, or standard flat-fan nozzles mounted directly on the boom. In most trials, hollow cones were more effective when mounted on drop pipes and directed sideways into rows than when mounted on the boom and directed over rows. Hollow cone nozzles used at 150 psi (1035 kpa) vs. 60 psi did not control aphids significantly better, but higher pressure caused significantly more drift. Contact insecticide applied by an electrostatic sprayer controlled aphids somewhat less satisfactorily than by a conventional hydraulic sprayer. Insecticide applied by a CDA controlled aphids the same as by a hydraulic boom sprayer but with slightly less drift. The desired objective of maximum aphid control, good coverage of downward-facing surfaces in the canopy, and minimum drift was most consistently provided by the hydraulic boom sprayer with hollow cone nozzles on drop pipes directed sideways into the canopy using a pressure of 60 psi.

scholarly journals Comparison of Viral, Bacteriological, and Standard Insecticides for Control of the Fruitworm Complex in Fall Tomatoes, 1995

1996 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-190
Author(s):  
John Speese
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Eastern Shore ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Tomatoes were transplanted into two fields on 27 Jul at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Painter, VA. Each plot consisted of a single 25ft row with 5ft between row spacing. Plots were replicated 3 times in a RCB design and separated from each other by untreated guard rows. The design in both fields was the same except for the number of treatments. Treatments were applied with a backpack sprayer using 3 hollow cone nozzles/row and delivering 45 gal waterlacre at 40 psi. Application dates for each field are indicated in the tables. Bravo 720 at 1.5pVacre was added to each treatment and the checks on 26 Sep and 02 Oct for disease control. On 9 Oct (Field I) and 16 Oct (Field 11). 25 green fruits were randomly picked from each plot and examined for worm damage.

scholarly journals Comparison of Cyromazine (Trigard) and Bacillus Thuringiensis (Novodor) Foliar Sprays for CPB Control on Potatoes, Painter, VA

1995 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 128-128
Author(s):  
John Speese
Keyword(s):  
First Generation ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Life Stages ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Egg Hatch ◽  
Randomized Complete Block Design ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Potatoes were planted on 8 April at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Painter, VA. Each plot consisted of six 30 ft long rows on 3 ft row spacing, replicated 4 times in a randomized, complete block design. Sprays were applied using either a tractor-mounted sprayer or a 3-hollow cone nozzle boom backpack sprayer if the ground was too wet for the tractor. Sprays were applied in 40 gal/acre water. Spray dates are indicated in the tables. The entire test was sprayed out on 20 Jun with Vydate L at 0.5 lb (AI)/acre and Furadan 4F at 1.0 lb (AI)/acre to control first generation CPB adults. Evaluation criteria consisted of weekly counts of all CPB life stages present on 10 randomly chosen plants/plot, and the first sprays were applied at peak CPB egg hatch. Percent defoliation for each plot was rated on 20 Jun, and the center two rows of each plot were harvested and graded on 1 Jul to determine yields.

scholarly journals Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Non-Transgenic Cotton, 1997

1998 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 238-239
Author(s):  
Michael S. Howell ◽  
Jack T. Reed
Keyword(s):  
Water Samples ◽  
Growing Season ◽  
Transgenic Cotton ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Seed Cotton ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Plot Size ◽  
Crop Development ◽  
Extension Center ◽  
High Clearance

Abstract Insecticides were evaluated at North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Verona, MS, in a RCB design with 4 replications. Plot size was 4 rows wide (38-inch row spacing) by 50 ft long with 4 untreated rows between plots and a 10-ft planted buffer at the end of each plot. Insecticides were applied on 8 and 11 Jul with a high-clearance spray tractor equipped with two Spraying Systems TX4 hollow-cone nozzles per row and calibrated for 5 gpa at a pressure of 40 psi at 4 mph. Carrier of the insecticide was water. Samples were taken from 10 leaves per plot at each of two levels on the plant: upper (first fully expanded leaf), and mid (mainstem leaf located one-third down the plant). Aphids were counted on the underside of each leaf. Throughout the growing season, there was ad-equate rainfall for crop development. Yield (lb of seed cotton per acre) was determined by mechanically harvesting the center two rows of each plot, and measuring the actual area picked.

scholarly journals Azadirachtin (Align) to Control CPB on Potatoes, 1994

1995 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-126
Author(s):  
John Speese
Keyword(s):  
First Generation ◽  
Agricultural Research ◽  
Block Design ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Row Spacing ◽  
Life Stages ◽  
Eastern Shore ◽  
Hollow Cone ◽  
Randomized Complete Block Design ◽  
Extension Center

Abstract Potatoes were planted on 11 April at the Eastern Shore Agricultural Research and Extension Center, Painter, VA. Each plot consisted of two 25 ft rows on 3 ft row spacing, replicated four times in a randomized, complete block design. An untreated guard row separated each plot. Admire 2F was applied in furrow preplanting using a single hollow cone nozzle boom backpack sprayer. Foliar sprays were applied on the dates indicated in the table using a 3 hollow cone nozzle boom backpack sprayer delivering 60 gal water/acre at 40 psi. On 21 and 23 Jun, the entire test was sprayed out with Vydate L at 0.50 lb(AI)/acre and Furadan 4F at 1.00 lb (AI)/acre to control first generation CPB adults. Evaluation criteria and spray decisions were based on weekly counts of all CPB life stages present on 10 random stems/plot. Sprays were applied if the following thresholds were exceeded: 4 small larvae, 1.5 large larvae, or 0.5 adults/stem. Percent defoliation for each plot was rated on 16 Jun and both rows of each plot were harvested and graded on 20 Jul to determine yields.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document