docEARWIG CONTROL IN PEACHES
download 
Report Transcription
EARWIG CONTROL IN PEACHES
E ARWIG C ONTROL IN P EACHES Andrew Tebeau and Diane Alston 1/31/2012 European Earwigs Invasive insect Abundant in homes, gardens, and orchards Mostly harmless Does not crawl into ears Interesting behaviors Two Ecological Roles Orchard Pest Beneficial Predator Photo Credits: Earwig Top : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Free_Documentation_License By: Fir0002/Flagstaffotos Green peach Aphid: http://www.ars.usda.gov/is/graphics/photos/sep01/k9602-1.htm By: Scott Bauer Peach Twig Borer: http://utahpests.usu.edu/htm/factsheets/publication=8001 By: Shawn Steffan Timing is Important! Main Talking Points Behavior in Peach Orchards Control Recommendations From the literature/ extension agencies My research and experiments Beneficial and pest Timing and predicting damage Effects of understory management Testing control recommendations Dr. Diane Alston’s research Future directions Conclusions Beneficial Predator Reported to control aphids, scales, caterpillars, flies, and mites (Buxton 1974, Crumb et al. 1941) Potentially contributes to the control of green peach aphid and peach twig borer Good idea to tolerate earwigs when possible Orchard Pest Peaches Early Season Buds, (Bower 1992) flower, and leaves Late Season Ripe 2010 fruit and split-pits 68% of respondents report injury 5-10% fruits injured USU USHA Survey research peaches 40% fruits injured Predominately adults Population Monitoring Justifies costs and timing of control Cardboard rolls tied to the tree Check weekly during the day Record We use 4”x10”, 1-sided cardboard Day refuge from sun/ predators Also, newspaper or cups of grease Quantity Life-stage (adult or nymph) In the research orchard 22 traps/ acre ~11 earwigs/ trap Chemical Control – Conventional Carbamate: carbaryl (Sevin) Organophosphate: Microbial: spinosad (Success) spinetoram (Delegate) malathion (Malathion) Synthetic Pyrethroids: B cyfluthrin (Baythroid) Insect Growth Regulator: lambda-cyhaolothrin (Warrior) novaluron (Rimon) pyriproxyfen (Esteem) methoxyfenozide Peach Spray List 2011 http://extension.usu.edu/productionhort/files/uploa (Intrepid) ds/Peaches%20insect.pdf Control – Organic Chemical Mechanical Botanical and Mineral: diatomaceous earth pyrethrin (Pyganic) Insect Growth Regulator: azadirachtin Neemix) (Azatin, Microbial: spinosad (Entrust) Trap and removal/ kill Exclusion (Sticky bands) Habitat manipulation Orchard-floor management Control Conclusions Monitoring is important and easy Many recommended options for both conventional and organic But many have not been tested! Focus of my PhD research Importance Effects of timing in earwig control of orchard floor management Effectiveness of control strategies Study Site Kaysville, Utah Two Peach Orchards North Organic South Integrated/ Conventional Approximately 1 Acre Each Importance of timing Earwigs only feed on ripe/ ripening fruits Only adults present at that How did I figure that out? time Ripening Fruit Damage correlates with fruit softening/ripening Earwigs do not feed on fruit until ripened Average Firmness of Peach Fruits 0.2 kg/mm 0.15 0.1 No overlap = Significant difference 0.05 0 Damage (n=6, 25%) No Damage (n= 18, 75%) Reproduction Lifestages AP Adult parents Overwinter underground Lays eggs in spring 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. N1 N2 N3 N4 AO 1st instar nymph 2nd instar nymph 3rd instar nymph 4th instar nymph Adult offspring Proportions Lifestage of Earwigs by Date - 2010 Proportion of Earwigs 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 5/27 AP N1 80% N2 20% N3 N2 50 % N4 50% AO N3 N4 AO 6/26 7/26 8/25 Proportion of Earwigs Lifestage of Earwigs by Date - 2010 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 5/17 AP N1 N2 N3 N4 AO 6/16 7/16 8/15 Proportion of Earwigs Lifestage of Earwigs by Date - 2011 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 5/17 AP N1 N2 N3 N4 AO 6/16 7/16 8/15 Lifestage of Earwigs by Degree Days* 90% Proportion of Earwigs 80% 70% 60% N2 → N3 550 DD 50% N3 → N4 750 DD N4 → AO 1120 DD 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 400 600 Degree Days Utah TRAPS – DD Calculator http://climate.usurf.usu.edu/pest.php 800 1000 2010 F1 Adult 1200 2011 F1 Adult * 46.5 and 73.5°F upper and lower limit, respectively 1400 Damage Timing Year 1st Damage Detected 1st Date of Harvest Peak Harvest Difference 2010 August 15 August 20 August 23 5 to 8 Days 2011 August 18 August 19 August 31 1 to 13 Days Peach vulnerability (earwig pest-status) begins approximately 3 to 10 days before harvest Timing Conclusions Only fruits feed on soft/ ripe Only adults earwigs when fruit/ ripe is soft Adults DD emerge at 1,120 Prevent earwigs at least 3 to 10 days before harvest Earwig abundance by understory and trapping site Study Design Organic Orchard Alleyway Integrated Orchard Legume Grass Grass Tree-row Mulch Weed Fabric Tillage Weeds Mulch Herbicide Fertilizer Compost NPK Fertilizer Compost Tree-row Paper Straw Alleyway Integrated to Organic Legume and Grass Weed Fabric and Straw Weed and Tillage Herbicide and Paper Mulch Average Trap-catch – Organic Orchard 12 10 Earwigs 8 6 4 2 0 Tree-row Weed Alleyway Grass Weed Legume Straw Grass Straw Legume Fabric Grass Tillage Grass Average Trap-catch – Integrated Orchard 5 4.5 4 Earwigs 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Herbicide + Herbicide + Transition Compost NPK to Organic System Paper Mulch + Compost Paper Mulch + NPK Average Earwig Trap-Catch per Trap Earwig Preference within Trees 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Canopy Trunk Abundance Conclusions Organic Orchard Legume support most earwigs Unsure about tree-row Integrated Orchard Unsure about any treatments More abundance in canopy than trunk Control Experiment Treatments 1. Check (experiment control) None 2. Organic Orchard Exclusion sticky-band duct tape) 3. (Tanglefoot and Insect Growth Regulator methoxyfenozide 4. Microbial Spinosad (Entrust) (Intrepid) Integrated Orchard Standardize Experimental Design Two different orchards Cannot compare one orchard to the other or one treatment to the other across orchards Compare treatment before and after! Management Effect on Earwig Trap-catch Average Earwigs Caught / Trap 16 14 12 10 8 Before 6 After 4 2 0 Check Exclusion Entrust Intrepid 0.5 4.0 4.6 2.8 Difference Exclusion Canopy vs. Trunk Average Earwigs Caught /Trap 18 Canopy 16 Trunk 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 before after Trap/Removal Observation Suggest Inefficient control Random variation / year Year lag period Earwig Density Trends by Year Gross Earwig Trapped 2000 Trap and Remove 1500 Trap and Return 1000 500 0 0 500 2010 2011 1000 Degree Days Poly. (2010) 1500 Poly. (2011) Dr. Diane Alston’s Data Fig. 4. Insecticide treatment effects on earwig densities, Kaysville, 2011 (trunk traps only) Mean # of earwigs per trap 40.0 35.0 30.0 Untreated 25.0 Sevin 20.0 Success 15.0 Entrust 10.0 Intrepid 5.0 Warrior 0.0 Arrow indicates date of insecticide treatment application Control Experiment Conclusions Entrust Need > Exclusion > Intrepid > Nothing to investigate trap/ removal Future Diane’s My research looking at predation research looking at mark and recapture Dr. Alston’s Predation Study Mark and Recapture Conclusions Earwigs are beneficial early in the season The nymphs transition into adults at ~1,120 DD Adult feed on softening fruits Control is most justified soon before harvest 3-10 days minimum Legumes supported the most earwigs Entrust and exclusion were the best control tactic Diane Alston Danielle Phillips Trevor Ballard Thor Lindstrom Kaysville Crew Mae Culumber O.S.F.P. Crew U.S.H.A. Jonathan Carlisle O.A.R.E.I. Colette Tebeau Bonnie Bunn & the I.P.M.‐Lab Crew Grad. Committee Academic Advisor Lab Technician Lab Technician Field Technician Field Technicians Graduate Student Co‐P.I.s Best Audience Ever Climate Consultant $$$ Funding $$$ Moral Support Questions??? Co‐conspirators Academic Guidance
