IPM practitioner Joe Barcinas with IPM researcher Joseph Morse
Transcription
IPM practitioner Joe Barcinas with IPM researcher Joseph Morse
CITRUS RESEARCH BOARD, P.O. Box 230, Visalia, CA 93279 Address Service Requested PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PAID PONTIAC, IL 61764 PERMIT 125 IPM practitioner Joe Barcinas with IPM researcher Joseph Morse Citrograph Citrograph March/April 2012 THAT’S HOW MOVENTO MAKES ORANGES FEEL. Movento®’s powerful two-way systemic action makes it unique among insecticides. Its chemistry allows it to get inside plants and spread throughout the entire system. This results in long-lasting, reliable and all-over protection against psyllids, mites and scale. So you’ll have stronger, highly pest-resistant plants and a healthier crop. For more information, visit www.Movento.us. Bayer CropScience LP, 2 T W Alexander Drive, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709. Always read and follow label instructions. Bayer, the Bayer Cross, and Movento are registered trademarks of Bayer. For additional product information, call toll-free 1-866-99-BAYER (1-866-992-2937) or visit our Web site at www.BayerCropScience.us. CRP0112MOVENT0222-R00 Citrograph MARCH/APRIL 2012 • Volume 3 • Number 2 An Official Publication of the Citrus Research Board Cover photo by Iqbal Pittalwala, UC Riverside IN THIS ISSUE SUBSCRIPTIONS U.S. Single Copies: $1.50 1-Year Subscription: $15.00 2-Year Subscription: $28.00 Canadian & Foreign: 1-Year Subscription: $30.00 2-Year Subscription: $56.00 Send Subscription Requests To: Citrus Research Board P.O. Box 230, Visalia, CA 93279 PUBLICATION OFFICE P.O. Box 230 Visalia, CA 93279 Phone: 559-738-0246 FAX: 559-738-0607 Web Site: http://www.citrusresearch.org Louise Fisher, Managing Editor Dr. MaryLou Polek, Chief Science Editor EDITORIAL BOARD Ted Batkin Richard Bennett Franco Bernardi Dr. Akif Eskalen Dr. Ben Faber Dan Dreyer Jim Gorden SCIENCE REVIEW PANEL Dr. Mary Lu Arpaia James A. Bethke Dr. Abhaya Dandekar Dr. Akif Eskalen Dr. Stephen Garnsey Dr. Joseph Smilanick Editorial services provided by Anne Warring, Warring Enterprises, Visalia, CA 93277 PRODUCTION INFORMATION Judy Brent Production Manager 255 38th Avenue Suite P St. Charles, IL 60174 Phone: 630-462-2919 FAX: 630-462-2924 [email protected] Dale Hahn, Design Phone: 630-462-2308 [email protected] ADVERTISING INFORMATION Sandy Creighton Ad Sales Manager Phone: (559) 201-9225 [email protected] Cherie Averill Ad Sales Representative Phone: 402-489-9334 [email protected] ADVERTISING RATES Rates B/W 2/C 4/C Page....................................... $690........ $860.......$1025 2/3 Page Vertical................. 540...........700........... 875 1/2 Page Vert/Horiz.............410.......... 580........... 750 1/3 Page Square/Vert........ 285.......... 455...........620 1/4 Page................................. 200 .........370...........540 1/6 Page Vertical..................140...........310...........480 1/8 Page Horizontal.............140...........310...........480 *Frequency discounts: 2X–5%, 3X–7%, 4X–10% Above rates are gross; 15% discount to recognized agencies. 4 Editorial 6 CCM Showcase, Protecting our Future 10 Industry Views 12 Proper monitoring and management of California Red Scale in the San Joaquin Valley 22 Management of citrus thrips to reduce the evolution of resistance 32 The evolution of biologically-based Integrated Pest Management in California citrus: history and perspective 44 What are the University of California sources for citrus integrated pest management information? 48 CRB 2011Annual Report 50 California Citrus Spurred Colonization– Aided Through the University of California... 54 Reagentless detection of citrus pathogens using differential mobility spectrometry 58 Celebrating Citrus Citrograph is published bimonthly by the Citrus Research Board, 217 N. Encina, Visalia, CA 93291. Citrograph is sent to all California citrus producers courtesy of the Citrus Research Board. If you are currently receiving multiple copies, or would like to make a change in your Citrograph subscription, please contact the publication office (above, left). Every effort is made to ensure accuracy in articles published by Citrograph; however, the publishers assume no responsibility for losses sustained, allegedly resulting from following recommendations in this magazine. Consult your local authorities. The Citrus Research Board has not tested any of the products advertised in this publication, nor has it verified any of the statements made in any of the advertisements. The Board does not warrant, expressly or implicitly, the fitness of any product advertised or the suitability of any advice or statements contained herein. March/April 2012 Citrograph 3 EDITORIAL BY TED A. BATKIN, President, Citrus Research Board Don’t let the background noise drown out the music This again shows how important it is to work with accurate information and how important a good communications system is in providing growers accurate, up-to-date information. 4 Citrograph March/April 2012 I n a previous life, I studied classical music and received a BA degree in conducting. One of the jobs of the conductor is to separate out the noise from the true music and bring all the musicians together to produce a harmonic sound. It is the same today in life as we attempt to keep focused on the true mission of the research and development programs for the California citrus growers. All too often, this effort is clouded by background noise from sectors with their own agendas and priorities. Such is the case with the recent reporting of an ACP in a trap in the San Joaquin Valley. The background noise in this event was deafening, and the true picture of what actually happened became drowned out in a myriad of false reports from many sectors in the media. In truth, there was a portion of an ACP found sticking to a trap from the glassy-winged sharpshooter program. The piece was DNA tested and found to be an Asian citrus psyllid. This event triggered action by CDFA to provide delimitation trapping grids and tree-by-tree ground surveys to determine if a breeding population existed in the area. When the additional efforts came up negative, the Department correctly identified the find as a “Regulatory Event” and closed the book on the issue. Delimitation will continue in the area, but no further quarantine action will take place. This event should serve as a reminder of just how vulnerable we are to specific actions. First, it proved the value of the constant trapping program being conducted by the industry in the commercial areas of the state to serve as an early warning system of ACP populations. The fact that there had not been any previous ACP detections played into the decision process to determine a potential quarantine. Second, it shows how easy it could be for an ACP to move into the San Joaquin Valley and how we need to be sure to have adequate contingency plans for ACP populations in the area. Do you have your plan in place??? Finally, it again shows how important it is to work with accurate information and how important a good communications system is in providing growers accurate, up-to-date information when a true infestation occurs. The industry will continue to develop better systems for informing all growers of the threat and any actual ACP populations that are detected, including what to do and how to do it. Your industry leaders are constantly working on this through all of the organizations that serve the growers. Just remember to sort out all the background noise and listen for the real music. l The Mission of the Citrus Research Board: Develop knowledge and build systems for grower vitality. Focus on quality assurance, clonal protection, production research, variety development, and grower/public education. CITRUS RESEARCH BOARD MEMBER LIST BY DISTRICT 2011-2012 District 1 – Northern California District 3 – California Desert Member Allan Lombardi, Exeter Donald Roark, Lindsay Jim Gorden, Exeter Joe Stewart, Bakersfield Etienne Rabe, Bakersfield John Richardson, Porterville Kevin Olsen, Pinedale Member Mark McBroom, Calipatria Public Member Member Seymour Van Gundy, Riverside Alternate Justin Brown, Orange Cove Dan Dreyer, Exeter Dan Galbraith, Porterville Franco Bernardi, Visalia Richard Bennett, Visalia Jeff Steen, Strathmore Tommy Elliott, Visalia District 2 – Southern California – Coastal Member Earl Rutz, Pauma Valley William Pidduck, Santa Paula Joe Barcinas, Riverside Alternate Alan Washburn, Riverside James Finch, Santa Paula Warren Lyall, Pauma Valley Alternate Craig Armstrong, Thermal Alternate Steve Garnsey, Fallbrook Citrus Research Board 217 N Encina, Visalia, CA 93291 PO Box 230, Visalia, CA 93279 (559) 738-0246 FAX (559) 738-0607 E-Mail [email protected] CALENDAR May 2 CRB/CPDPP Joint Operations Committee Meeting CRB Conference Room – Visalia May 2 CPDPP Outreach Subcommittee Meeting CRB Conference Room – Visalia June 28 CRB Board Meeting Four Points by Sheraton – Ventura August 21-23 CRB Research – Review of Proposals DoubleTree Hotel – Bakersfield September 18 CRB Annual Meeting Lindcove REC October 10-11 California Citrus Conference Porterville Fairgrounds – Porterville November 1 CCM Annual Meeting For more information on the above, contact the CRB office at (559) 738-0246. DO YOU KNOW...? What happened in California 40 years ago that still impacts pest management operations today? (Turn to the inside back cover for the answer.) March/April 2012 Citrograph 5 ‘We are laying out our unified plan to control the disease’ We need to be ready and will be. —Robert Leavitt Photo by Lynn Sanderson Editor’s Note: The following message from CDFA’s Dr. Robert Leavitt is a digest of the remarks he made at the 2012 Citrus Showcase, where he was a luncheon speaker and workshop panelist. A storm is coming to California citrus—huanglongbing (HLB), or citrus greening. History tells us it’s just a matter of time before the disease is detected here. It has always followed its vector, the Asian citrus psyllid, which has been in California since 2008.At the moment, we know HLB is inching closer after detections in Baja California, Mexico, and Texas. So we believe that, sooner or later, HLB will be here. Under the leadership of California Department of Food and Agriculture Secretary Karen Ross, we are laying out our unified plan to control the disease when the time comes. The need to protect citrus groves and residential trees is paramount. We are acutely aware of the risk to fresh and export markets and are doing all that is possible to secure those markets. Working with the USDA, local Ag Commissioners, the Citrus Research Board, and the federal office of Customs and Border Protection, and utilizing the best scientific and technical advice available, CDFA is presenting a plan with several key points: 1). Screen citrus mother trees so clean, disease-free stock may be planted. 2). Use robust surveying and detection in harmony with quarantine regulations to restrict the movement of host material. 3). Control, suppress and, where possible, eradicate psyllids. 4). Area-wide treatment programs in both residential and commercial citrus. 5). Removal of residential and commercial trees infected with HLB. This is the greatest challenge California’s citrus industry will face. We need to be ready and will be. We appreciate your support as we all move forward together in a program that is a model for public-private cooperation. Robert Leavitt, Ph.D., is Director of the California Department of Food and Agriculture’s Plant Health Division. l CCM’s 2012 Citrus Showcase ‘Protecting our citrus, protecting our future’ O n March 8, hundreds of growers along with packers and other members of the industry converged on the Visalia Convention Center for California Citrus Mutual’s Citrus Showcase. “Protecting our citrus, protecting our future” was the theme for this Showcase, and at no time during the day was that theme more appropriate than at the luncheon when Dr. Robert Leavitt of CDFA addressed the crowd on the subject of Asian citrus psyllid and huanglongbing. (See ‘laying out our unified plan’ above.) The audience also heard from attorney and ag advocate George Soares, managing partner of Kahn, Soares & Conway, who gave an update on State politics, offered insights into the “personality” of Sacramento, and shared thoughts on becoming more effective in dealings with government given today’s political climate. 6 Citrograph March/April 2012 The program included three workshops, each with a panel presentation and then follow-up Q&A, on meeting food safety requirements and expectations, evaluating the impact of this season’s frost events (especially the toll on mandarins), and the latest information on ACP/HLB. The trade show portion of the event had 70 exhibitors including the Citrus Research Board and the CPDPP. Sponsors of the 2012 Citrus Showcase were Bayer Crop Science, Dow AgroSciences, Farm Credit Associations, Fruit Growers Supply Company, Sinclair Systems International, Southern California Edison, Syngenta Crop Protection, Valent USA, and Yara North America. The workshops were sponsored by Amvac Chemical Corporation and Capital Agricultural Property Services, Inc., and the continental breakfast was hosted by Mary Roach Insurance. l March/April 2012 Citrograph 7 ABOUT THE COVER F or the cover of this issue featuring Integrated Pest Management, we chose orange grower and CRB Board member Joe Barcinas, who operates an insectary and is a pest control advisor, and research entomologist Dr. Joseph Morse, professor in the Department of Entomology at UC Riverside, whose work is focused on pests of citrus and avocado. Shown here is the Morse lab team, left to right (with their years in the lab in parentheses): 40%-time administrative specialist Heavenly Clegg (18), Morse, lab assistant Pam Watkins (30, retiring June 2012), SRA Alan Urena (33), and SRA Lindsay Robinson (28). Clegg and Watkins are holding a tray of waxed lemons used for armored scale colonies. Barcinas, who is based in Riverside, has worked for over 25 years as a PCA and IPM practitioner for Entomological Services, Inc. Today, Joe and fellow PCA Robert Walther are business partners in ESI and also as navel growers in the San Joaquin Valley. Barcinas is also the owner of Foothill Agricultural Research, Inc. in Corona, producing Aphytis melinus, Anagyrus pseudococci, Cryptolaemus, decollate snails, and brown lacewing. Photo by Iqbal Pittalwala, UC Riverside. Getting to the core of the matter CRB research program implements ‘Core Programs’ MaryLou Polek A nyone who has ever attended the March meetings at which scientists present the progress made on their CRB-funded research projects knows how mentally draining these few days are. Furthermore, the time limit placed on the length of the presentations does not do justice to our long-term programs such as the Integrated Pest Management (IPM), breeding, and variety evaluation programs. Despite the best efforts of Drs. Beth GraftonCardwell, Tracy Kahn, Joe Morse, and Mike Roose to interact with the Board for guidance and direction, there is not sufficient time for the board to focus on their questions and issues. To improve this situation, the Board and research committee members decided to separate these extended projects from the one- to three-year projects of limited scope and identify them as Core Programs. This idea was implemented during the past year. So far, this change has been quite successful. Researchers Beth Grafton-Cardwell and Joe Morse meet with the Pest Management Committee, and Mike Roose and Tracy Kahn meet with the New Varieties and Development Committee several times each year. These meetings occur both formally in a conference room and informally in research plots. 8 Citrograph March/April 2012 In addition, Core Program scientists report to the industry in feature articles in the Citrograph magazine. This issue of Citrograph features the IPM program. The September/October issue will feature articles by Mike Roose, Tracy Kahn and Glenn Wright on breeding and evaluation of new varieties. Some of the advantages of this approach are that: • It allows for greater grower input into these programs • Growers get their questions answered more rapidly • Research is conducted using the varieties meaningful to the grower • Research is conducted on insect pests that are currently bothersome • It enables the industry and researchers to identify what problems are most important to growers We hope this creates an environment that encourages greater interaction and communication between the scientific community and the industry and promotes a greater dispersal of information to the entire industry. This is another way the Citrus Research Board ensures the maximum return on the investment of grower assessment dollars in research. Dr. MaryLou Polek is Vice President, Science & Technology, Citrus Research Board. March/April 2012 Citrograph 9 INDUSTRY VIEWS asks: “What are you doing to manage/reduce/ Citrograph minimize insect pest resistance to insecticides?” I manage insect pest resistance by using the principles of resistance management that reduce the selective pressure to develop resistance in the target pest population. Management tactics include avoiding unneeded treatments by using monitoring and economic thresholds to decide when a treatment is justified, rotating between pesticides with different modes of action, tank mixing materials to combine modes of action, using non-chemical tactics like cultural control, and maximizing biological control. My pest advisory work is in coastal citrus in the counties of Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo. In these areas, we are fortunate that the majority of our insect and mite pests are under fair to excellent biological control. Generally, we get by with one or two insect/mite sprays in a season. Citrus bud mite is the primary pest in the lemons, requiring at least annual treatment for economic control. Also, in some production areas, there is a complex of argentine ant provoked scales and mealybugs requiring a broad-spectrum material every two to four years. In my region, we do have an interesting case of treatment for one pest (citrus bud mite) leading to the development of resistance in another pest (citrus thrips). UC Riverside has documented resistance of citrus thrips in lemons to abamectin (Agri-Mek, etc.). Repeated annual or biannual treatment with oil plus abamectin for bud mite has given rise to citrus thrips resistant to abamectin. Fortunately, we have other selective thrips materials we can rotate to treat any problem thrips populations. And, the reliance on oil plus abamectin for bud mite control is waning as new materials with different modes of action become available for use in citrus to control bud mite. — Dave Machlitt, PCA and Certified Crop Advisor, Consulting Entomology Services I am the PCA and PCO for my family’s company, which has been in the pest control business since 1921. Cyanide fumigation and parathion were the main chemicals used in the early days of Integrated Pest Management. In the 1930’s, red spider mite was introduced in California and could not tolerate temperatures over 100 degrees, and the use of Morestan, Vendex, Omite and Plictran was needed as the only way to go forward in Riverside and San Bernardino counties in the field of Integrated Pest Management. The red spider mite eventually became resistant to these chemicals. The use of Sevin and Supracide was very harsh on the beneficials; however, Lorsban has been a very rewarding tool as its use has opened the door for many new chemicals. The introduction of Aphytis melinus in the 1930s was a slow but promising start as the temperatures in the Inland valleys are very good for Integrated Pest Management. The biggest test for our future will be trying to stay focused on Integrated Pest Management in the battle with the Asian citrus psyllid. Pyrethroids are a great control against the Asian citrus psyllid but can also disrupt the biological control provided by the beneficials. The use of neonicotinoids as a control system will probably be our best source as long as resistance doesn’t ruin them. Insects will always be a part of my history and future. — Alan A. Washburn, PCA and PCO, Washburn & Sons, Inc. 10 Citrograph March/April 2012 I have been dealing with this concern for quite a few years. When I first started in this business (1960s), new insecticides were coming out quite regularly; most were in the organophosphate category. We soon learned that each year we would probably need a bigger/better “gun” for next year because of resistance. Over the years, I have always tried to minimize resistance by using the typical ways: alternating types of products and use only when necessary. This is not always successful; sometimes we can’t control a certain pest as well as we would like, and we find it necessary to repeat use or fall back to a more potent product. One of the concerns we face as pest control advisors is not only resistance but what a product might do to the ecological balance of a particular field. By using the proper choice of products that are now available, hopefully we can do both. Keeping in mind our primary role is to help keep the field as free of pests as possible and strive to maintain a balance and to minimize resistance at the same time. It’s not always easy. I have to say that it’s the challenge and rewards that make this something I enjoy doing. — Geary Austin, PCA, Leffingwell Ag Sales An invitation to the White House An opportunity for increased exports By Joel Nelsen L ate last year, Sunkist’s Mike Wootton and I received the invitation to the White House as the President of South Korea was coming to town for the signing of the historic Korean Free Trade Agreement. Since it wasn’t for beers in the Rose Garden, we chose not to attend. On March 15 the Agreement was implemented, and while the vast majority of the work to achieve this agreement was conducted by Mike, it is the whole industry that could reap the benefit. It wasn’t too many years ago that Korea was a developing market with the vast majority of tonnage shipped graded as Choice. As the citizens of Korea and the retailers became more familiar with our California navel orange, their taste buds demanded more and better fruit. The industry responded, and today this market commands premium product and at a tonnage factor larger than any other export market. It’s the first trade agreement in years that will benefit the specialty crop industry and more specifically California citrus. For the past two decades, we have been on the losing end or just not included in trade agreements. And, for the past 20 years, the nation’s citrus imports have exploded while exports have increased very slightly and only because our marketers have been diligent in finding new business. This agreement, while not perfect, can be a boon for our sales. The obscene 54% tariff on oranges will be phased out on fruit arriving between March 1 and August 31 with an immediate 20% reduction on landed fruit this year. For the next six years, the tariff will be phased out on all fruit landing in that time frame. For fruit landing the balance of the year, a tariff will remain at the higher level although each year 2,500 metric tons, increasing annually by 3%, will arrive duty-free. The current 30% tariff on lemons will be phased out over two years. The 30% duty on grapefruit will be phased out over five years. Not surprisingly, the mandarin variety is still stuck with a barrier as the 144% duty will take 15 years to be eliminated. Bottom line is that the importer and retailer should pass this Mike Wootton savings on to the Korean consumer, thereby making the in-store California citrus that much cheaper. Ideally, this will trigger more purchases at store level and thus more growth for our exports in the future. Presently, California oranges are the largest agricultural export commodity from our state. With this agreement, our position can be strengthened. As for the beers, invite Mike over. The Bush Administration negotiators frustrated him by doing better on other commodities since there wasn’t a competitive concern. He’s earned a sip or two. l March/April 2012 Citrograph 11 Proper monitoring and management of California Red Scale in the San Joaquin Valley Beth Grafton-Cardwell and Jim Stewart Editor’s Note: Work on California red scale is now a part of the CRB’s Core Program of Integrated Pest Management research with Drs. Grafton-Cardwell and Morse as lead investigators. C alifornia red scale has infested citrus nearly as long as citrus has been grown in California, but it did not become a significant pest of citrus in the San Joaquin Valley until the 1970s. All stages of California red scales attack twigs, leaves, and fruit by drinking plant fluids with their long, threadlike mouthparts. Heavily infested fruit may be downgraded in the packinghouse (Photo 1) and, if population levels are high, serious damage including leaf yellowing (Photo 2) and twig dieback reduces the health and vigor of trees. California red scale can be managed with releases of the parasitoid wasp Aphytis melinus (Photo 3), with oils, with the broad spectrum organophosphate insecticides chlorpyriphos (Lorsban) and methidathion (Supracide) and carbamates (Sevin), with soft insecticides such as oils, the insect growth regulators (IGRs) pyriproxyfen (Esteem) and buprofezin (Applaud) or with the foliar systemic lipid biosynthesis inhibitor spirotetramat (Movento). Sometimes, California red scale populations remain at low densities without any chemical intervention whatsoever and are managed by the naturally occurring parasitoids (Aphytis and Comperiella) and predators (Rhyzyobius beetles and lacewings). Sometimes they increase to high densities because of weather or chemical-related disruption of the natural enemies. Whatever the situation, management efforts should be aligned with careful monitoring of the scales to determine pest and natural enemy numbers. California red scale begins its life as a six-legged crawler that moves away from its mother towards the end of branches. It may crawl, or catch a ride on an insect, or blow in the wind. Once it settles down, if it is a female it does not move again. If it is a male, it does not move until it develops into a winged adult male. Photo 1. Fruit may be lightly infested or heavily infested. Fruit with more than 10 scales may be downgraded in the packinghouse because these patches of scale are noticeable. 12 Citrograph March/April 2012 This scale biology (Photo 4) provides us with three potential populations to monitor: winged males, crawlers, and settled stages. This article will provide you with information as to how best to monitor those stages for the most effective California red scale management. Pheromone traps Male scales use the pheromones emitted by the 3rd instar female scales to find them for mating (Photo 5). Once mated, the female stops emitting pheromone. Males may crawl or fly to the females. A synthetic form of the female pheromone can be loaded onto rubber septa (Photo 6) and placed on a paper clip at the top of a sticky trap to attract the males, who then become stuck on the trap. Luckily for us, the males have a very characteristic brown bar on their backs that make them easy to separate from other small insects with the aid of a hand lens or microscope (Photo 7). Sometimes the densities of male scales on the traps become so numerous that it is very time consuming to count them. Dan Moreno, USDA en- Photo 2. Leaves heavily in- Photo 3. The adult Aphytis wasp parasitoid fested with California red of the California red scale. Photo by Beth scales turn yellow around the Grafton-Cardwell. scale bodies. tomologist, applied statistics to show that when densities are >200 scales per trap, you can count just the scales inside the square boxes on both sides of the card and, because those boxes represent 20% of the surface area of the card, multiply by 5 to get an estimate of the total number of scales on the card (Photo 8A). When there are fewer than 200 scales per card (Photo 9A-C), then it is more accurate to count scales on the entire card, not just inside the squares. When there are more than 2,000 scales (Photo 8B-C), then you can just hold the card up to examples of various densities and use the photos to estimate what the density is. This greatly reduces the time spent counting scales. This method is much less accurate, especially since the two sides of the cards may vary a lot in their densities, but for cards above 2,000 scales it saves a lot of time. The Citrus Entomology Web site www.ucanr.org/sites/KACCitrusEntomology/ provides examples of various scale densities for comparison. California red scale completes three to four generations per year in the San Joaquin Valley. In this region, the harsh winters eliminate many of the younger stages of scales, so that the population consists primarily of late stage males and females at the end of winter. The first male flight occurs in March during which mating occurs. Approximately 550 degree-days later, the 1st generation of crawlers emerge from the female scale bodies. The exact timing of these events depends on temperature. California red scale begins to develop at temperatures above 53oF. Degree-days for California red scale are defined as the accumulation of the average daily temperature (maximum temperature – minimum temperature divided by 2) above the threshold of 53oF after the biofix of male flight. Biofix — A point in the lifecycle of an insect when a significant event occurs, that can be used as a starting point. For California red scale, the biofix of male flight is used as the starting point to accumulate degreedays in order to predict when crawlers will emerge. At 1,100 degree-days after the first male flight (or 550 degree-days after crawler emergence) another male flight Photo 4. The lifecycle of the California red scale (drawings by G. Conville). Photo 5. The male scale finds 3rd instar female scales and mates with them. Courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. Photo 6. The pheromone trap for the California red scale consists of a white card, sticky on both sides, with a pheromone-impregnated lure above it. Photo 7. A close-up of the male of the California red scale showing the brown bar on its back that identifies it as a male scale. March/April 2012 Citrograph 13 occurs, and so on (Figure 1). When temperatures are cool in the spring, it takes about eight weeks to accumulate 550 degree-days (male flight to crawler emergence). When temperatures are hot in the summer, it only takes two to three weeks to accumulate 550 degreedays and events happen quickly. Pheromone traps are first placed in the orchards in late February-early March before the first male flight that occurs at about March 15. Use a minimum of two traps on a 5-acre block, four traps on a 10-acre block, six traps on a 20-acre block, and nine traps on a 40-acre block. You want to have at least two traps per block, no matter how small the block, in case one gets lost or damaged. Hang the traps about eye level on a sturdy branch inside the NE corner of the tree canopy so that they are not disturbed. The pheromone lures are changed monthly from March through October. Weekly pheromone trap monitoring It is very important to choose a subset of your orchards and replace the pheromone trap cards weekly to obtain detailed information about when the male flights are occurring. Place these traps in a variety of orchards representing a range of temperatures (high ground and low ground, large orchards and small). At the Lindcove Research and Extension Center, we see about 7 days difference in male flights between the high ground and low ground, even though these orchards are only a mile apart. For this type of pheromone trapping, use sites you don’t expect to treat with insecticides or that had high populations of scale the previous year to catch enough male scales in the first flight to be confident about the biofix. In these orchards, an additional monitoring tool is double sticky tape wrapped around a green-grey twig towards the end of the branch next to female scales (Photo 10). When the crawlers emerge and move towards the end of the branch, they become stuck on the tape. Checking these tapes each week provides added confirmation to the degree-day calculations that crawler emergence is taking place. Pheromone trap monitoring by flight Photo 8. Heavy densities of male scales on pheromone cards. From left to right: 8,680 scales, 30,335 scales, and 70,845 scales per card. For these densities, count the scales inside the square boxes on both sides of the card and multiply times 5 to estimate their numbers or use reference cards. Photo 9. Light densities of male scales on pheromone cards. From left to right: 230 scales, 730 scales, 2,445 scales. For cards with very low densities (less than 200 scales), count all of the scales on both sides of the card to obtain an accurate estimate. For cards with moderate densities (200 to 2,000 scales), count the scales inside the square boxes on both sides of the card and multiply times 5 to estimate their numbers. 14 Citrograph March/April 2012 In the remaining orchards, use pheromone traps to determine areas of heavy scale infestation by leaving the traps out during the entire flight. • Hang the traps with a fresh lure just before the predicted 1st, 2nd, and 4th flights: the first flight is usually March 15, the second flight is 1,100 degree-days after the biofix of the first male flight, and the fourth flight is 3,300 degree-days after the biofix of the first male flight. • Remove traps at the end of each flight (your weekly pheromone cards indicate when flights are declining) and count (or estimate) scale numbers. • Record results. These traps will tell you which blocks and which areas of each block have treatable infestations. • Follow up with fruit evaluations and then decide on a treatment plan. In the San Joaquin Valley, citrus growers use pheromone traps to monitor male scales during the first (May), second (June-July), and fourth (SepOct) flights. Degree-days are used to estimate when these flights are occurring. The best treatment results are obtained during the 1st or 2nd generation of scale crawler activity because the scale populations are highly synchronized, and pesticides generally work best on the younger instars of scales. However, when monitoring with pheromone traps, the 1st generation male flight is usually too low to detect more than a few scales (Figure 1) and so it is Meet the faces of Dandy®citrus. For 85 years, Duda Farm Fresh Foods has been providing farm fresh fruits and vegetables to businesses and consumers. Our commitment to quality and availability holds true today now more than ever, as we aim to provide our customers with a year-round supply of the most sought after citrus products. With a trusted network of growers, both domestic and international, Duda Farm Fresh Foods provides a consistent and high quality citrus supply all year long. Phone 559-627-1337 Fax 559-627-3665 www.DudaFresh.com JOIN OUR COMMUNITY. Dandy Fresh Fruits and Vegetables @Dandy_Fresh dudafreshproduce March/April 2012 Citrograph 15 centage of fruit with scale. At the same time, you can estimate the percentage of citrus thrips, katydid, cutworm, and peelminer-damaged fruit. Insecticide treatments Treatments with most insecticides are more effective if applied during the 1st or 2nd generation of crawlers (early May, and late June to early July, respectively). This is because the stages of scale are synchronized by winter mortality of younger instars in these first two generations. Most pesticides are more effective against the younger in- 70000 350 60000 300 50000 250 3300 DD to 4th male flight 2750 DD to 3rd crawlers 40000 200 2200 DD to 3rd male flight 30000 150 1650 DD to 2nd crawlers 1100 DD to 2rd male flight 20000 Crawlers per tape Walk around 20 trees in each quadrant of the block, and record the number of fruit examined, the number of fruit with scale, and the number of fruit with noticeable patches of scales (10 or more scales). Calculate the percentages of fruit with scale and more than 10 scales. These fruit counts will give you an indication of whether treatments have been effective. Bin counts: At harvest, look at the fruit on the surface of at least 10 bins from areas throughout the block and count the number of uninfested and scale-infested fruit. Calculate the per- No. of Male scales/trap 100 550 DD to 1 crawlers st 50 10000 0 1-Nov 1-Oct 1-Sep 1-Aug 1-Jul 1-Jun 1-May 1-Apr 0 1-Mar not a good predictor of whether or not to treat; this flight is generally used just as a biofix. The 2nd generation flight can be a good indicator of heavy populations. The third flight is generally not used because the summer heat inhibits the flight. Most pest control advisors focus their monitoring efforts on the 4th flight, and if it is heavy (> 1,000/trap) and fruit is infested with scale at harvest, they plan to treat during the next season. The goal is to maintain California red scale populations at levels that do not result in more than 10 scale per fruit at harvest because these are the fruit that may be downgraded in the packinghouse. A chart was created in the 1980s that related the male scale trap card numbers in the 1st, 2nd and 4th flights to the expected percentage of scale infested fruit at harvest (Figure 2). We need to express caution when using the chart in Figure 2 because it was created by researchers during the organophosphate and carbamate insecticide era. Pheromone cards are not reliable predictors of scale populations in Aphytis-release orchards because Aphytis prefers to parasitize female scales, and the male scale numbers can be very high while the female population is very low. Pheromone cards also tend to overestimate populations that are treated by Movento, because Movento is controlling the scales on the fruit but not the wood. Thus, very high male scale counts can occur in spite of very clean fruit. In the other direction, pheromone cards may not be reliable predictors of red scale populations when insect growth regulators are used because the males are more sensitive to these insecticides than the females, and so the cards underestimate the scale population. In spite of these limitations, pheromone cards are very useful as one of several tools for monitoring California red scale. Fig. 1. This figure shows a typical pattern of male scale flight activity (red line) and crawler emergence (green line) and the number of degree-days between the first flight and each generation. There are usually four flights and emergences in the San Joaquin Valley. Treatments target the first two crawler emergences because the population is more uniform and the scales have not yet reached the fruit. Examining fruit In all orchards, whether Aphytis wasps are released or trees are sprayed with insecticides, conduct visual inspections of citrus fruit on the trees once a month during August, September, and October. 16 Citrograph March/April 2012 Photo 10. Double sticky tape wrapped around the green-grey wood branch of a tree near a female scale will collect the crawlers when they move toward the end of the branch. For Increased Fruit Set, Uniformity & Higher Quality! CitriFLO from Helena is a high-concentration foliar nutrient to help correct deficiencies of nitrogen, zinc and manganese. The result can be increased fruit set, uniform fruit sizing and improved quality! CitriFLO contains GA142. CitriFLO helps unleash a citrus tree’s ability to flower by enhancing synthesis of polyamines. These natural reproductive hormones control fruit quality and size at bloom and fruit set. With more higher-quality fruit, profit potential is enhanced. Choose CitriFLO and help your citrus produce • Helps correct deficiencies of nitrogen, zinc and manganese • Clear liquid won’t cause application problems • Helps to increase fruit set, improve size uniformity and enhance quality • Low use rate from high concentration of active ingredient • Enhances polyamine synthesis • Easy to apply with existing spray operations more high-quality fruit. And see why CitriFLO stands head and shoulders above the competition. Formulated with People... Products... Knowledge... Helena Chemical Company • 7576 North Ingram Ave. Suite 101 • Fresno, CA 93711 559-261-9030 • www.helenachemical.com March/April 2012 Citrograph 17 Always read and follow label directions. CitriFLO is a registered trademark of Goemar. People...Products...Knowledge... is a registered trademark of Helena Holding Company. © 2012 Helena Holding Company. stars. During the first two generations, the crawlers emerge at about the same time, but as the season progresses to the 3rd and 4th generations, the crawler emergence overlaps with other stages. Be sure not to rely on only one chemical group, as this will eventually lead to resistance. Organophosphates and carbamates: Time organophosphate or carbamate insecticide sprays (Lorsban, Supracide or Sevin) to treat the crawler stage, after the peak in the 1st or 2nd male flight. Optimal treatment timing varies from year to year because of temperature but usually occurs in early May (first generation) or late June-early July (second generation). An even more reliable method of timing organophosphate or carbamate treatments is to monitor for crawlers by wrapping sticky tape around 1-yearold branches (about 0.5 inch diameter) that have both gray and green wood and are infested with live female scales. Replace the tapes weekly and so determine precisely when crawler emergence is occurring. The organophosphate and carba- Predicted fruit infestation levels based on California red scale trap Predicted fruit infestation levels based on California red scale trap 1 catches in traps baited with pheromone in the San Joaquin Valley catches in traps baited with pheromone in the San Joaquin Valley1 Males/Trap First Flight (Apr/May) Males/Trap Fourth Flight (Sep/Oct) 0 1,783 2 0.7 0 1,385 6,263 4 1.3 21 3,006 10,893 6 2.0 43 4,679 15,665 8 2.6 65 6,403 20,594 10 3.3 87 8,184 25,697 12 3.9 111 10,028 30,993 14 4.6 1From % Fruit with one or more scales % Fruit with 11 or more scales Males/Trap Second Flight (Jun/Jul) the Integrated Pest Management for Citrus, UC DANR Publication 3303. Fig. 2. The expected infestation of fruit at the end of the season based on pheromone trap counts in untreated orchards during the 1st, 2nd and 4th male flights. mate insecticides are the least selective insecticide choices, causing mortality of Aphytis for weeks to many months. There are numerous populations of California red scale that are resistant to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides because of decades of use, and in these cases treatment will only partially reduce the scale population. Insect growth regulators: Apply Esteem or Applaud sprays after crawlers have completely emerged and become white caps because these insect growth regulators kill the scale when it tries to molt to the next stage. Optimal timing for insect growth New Optional Citrus Tower! New LectroBlast Tower – Increase your total coverage and efficiency. Cibo Ristorante Italiano Progressive Ag Inc. 1336 McWilliams Way, Modesto, CA 95351 209-567-3232 • www.proaginc.com • 800-351-8101 18 Citrograph March/April 2012 regulators is the second generation of scale (June-July) in order to protect vedalia beetle during the time it is controlling cottony cushion scale (February-May). The insect growth regulators are safe for parasitic wasps, predatory mites, spiders, and lacewings but are quite toxic to vedalia beetles which are needed for cottony cushion scale control. Often they are used to reduce the pest population before Aphytis releases are initiated. Lipid synthesis inhibitors: Make a foliar application of Movento one to two weeks after the 1st, 2nd or 3rd male flights. The systemic action of Movento takes several weeks to move throughout the tree, so it needs to be applied A The heavier oils (435 to 455 distillation point) exert greater scale control than light oils (415 oil); however, they also have a greater potential for phytotoxicity. When using oils for scale control, make sure the orchard is well-irrigated and avoid treating during the heat of the day. In addition, treatments after October 1 carry some risk of increasing frost damage. Highly refined oils with the lowest sulfonated residues (unsulfonated residues >98%) have fewer problems with phytotoxicity. See UCIPM precautions for using petroleum oil sprays: http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/r107301011.html. Oil has the advantage of being less damaging to natural enemy populations than other insecticides because it only kills natural enemies that it contacts (brief persistence). It is best to avoid oil use in Aphytis release programs because oil treatments will eliminate the younger scale instars and thus synchronize development of the scale Metarex® 4%* Snail and Slug Bait Protect Citrus Quality and Grade with • Superior palatability and attraction promotes early feeding and faster control. • Maximum weatherability—holds up to moisture and rehardens for longer-lasting control. • Highest pellet count per pound for superior coverage and maximum control. B Photos 11A and B. In August, fruit can be infested with scale in Aphytis release blocks and the scales appear healthy (A). However, in as little as one month later, the scales can begin to flake off of the fruit (B) because they have been parasitized, leaving behind white footprints that are easily washed off. earlier than the other insecticides. On the other hand, it is effective against all feeding scale stages (everything except late stage females and males), so precision of treatment timing is not as important as application technique. Make sure your orchard is well-irrigated, use 250-500 gpa water volume, and use an adjuvant such as oil. Movento is very safe for parasitic wasps and vedalia beetles, but it is toxic to predatory mites. Oils: Oils can be effective against California red scale if coverage is thorough and rates of 1.2-1.4% oil are used. Snail damage to orange Outlasts and outperforms. The Power is in the Pellet! March/April 2012 Citrograph 19 population. This makes parasitism by Aphytis more difficult because they prefer to deposit their eggs in 3rd instar scale; after an oil treatment, this stage may be absent for a period of time. Oil is an organically accepted treatment for California red scale. Parasite releases Releases of mass-reared Aphytis parasites can be useful in orchards with insufficient natural biological control. Keep in mind that pesticide residues on leaves may have a detrimental effect on released Aphytis parasites. Test for possible toxicity by putting 1-yearold twigs with leaves in gallon jars with Aphytis parasites for 24 hours and checking their mortality. If more than 35% have died, residues are too high for Aphytis releases. Also, prepare a control jar filled with known untreated leaves for comparison of Aphytis vigor. In the San Joaquin Valley, recommended release rates are 100,000 parasites per acre per year for orchards undergoing the transition to an integrated pest management program. Begin releases about March 1, making releases of 5,000 parasites per acre every two weeks with the objective of releasing 50% of the parasites during the critical spring period, 25% more in summer, and 25% more in fall. Continue releases through mid-November. A suggested release method is to hold the release cup upright and tap it to release a few Aphytis at every sixth tree in every sixth row, and start at different trees each time releases are made. This helps to spread the weakflying Aphytis through the block. Concentrate late season releases in areas in the block known to have higher red scale densities. Once an orchard has moved through the transition period (2 to 4 years), the total number of parasites released per acre may be reduced to 50,000 to 70,000. Control ants – particularly the Argentine ant in Southern California and the native gray ant in the San Joaquin Valley – because they disrupt red scale parasites. Excessive dust that coats the leaves and fruit, including dust from manure mulches as well as whitewash and kaolin clays, interferes with parasitism and should be minimized or delayed until the end of the season when Aphytis has completed its work. Water- ing roads and washing trees can help solve these problems. Detailed evaluations of parasitism in Aphytis-release blocks In orchards where biological control agents such as Aphytis and Comperiella wasps are used to control scale, visually monitor all stages of scales on twigs, fruit, and leaves in August, September, and October. • Collect 10 scale-infested fruit (preferably from different areas of the block). Do not take more than one to two fruit per tree, avoiding trees in the outside rows. • Record the number of 2nd and 3rd instar red scales and the number of these that are parasitized. To determine if a scale is parasitized, flip the cover over and search for Aphytis eggs, larvae, and pupae or Comperiella larvae and pupae (see publication “Life Stages of California Red Scale and its Parasitoids” http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/ InsectMiteMolluscPests/21529.aspx for detailed photos). • Calculate the percentage parasitism by dividing the number parasitized by the total number of 2nd and 3rd in- Forklifts and Hedgers Unmatched versatility and dependability. 800-392-6059 www.gillisons.com GVF grove equipment is the most rugged, dependable and innovative equipment of its kind. We have never stopped improving upon our products in order to exceed above competitor’s standards. But don’t just take our word for it, see for yourself. Call us today at 800-392-6059 to set up a demo, or go online to www.gillisons.com. Manufacturers of quality farm equipment since 1977. 20 Citrograph March/April 2012 star scales examined. If biological control is functioning properly, you should see percent parasitism increase from just a few percent in August to more than 70% in October. You should also see dead parasitized scales flaking off of the fruit and leaving behind white “footprints” as the season progresses (Photos 11A and B). Guidelines for determining when parasitism is at sufficient levels to fully control scale vary by growing region, cultivar, and whether or not fruit are sent to a packinghouse that employs a high pressure washer to remove scale. In the San Joaquin Valley, effective biological control of California red scale is achieved if by mid-to-late October more than 70% of the 3rd instar female scale are parasitized either by Aphytis or Comperiella. A good proportion (50%) of large 2nd instar females and 2nd instar males should also be parasitized. Reach Commercial California & Arizona Citrus Growers W hether you're selling tractors or other farm equipment,pickup trucks, irrigation equipment, fertilizer or pesticides...consider the value of your ad dollar in the pages of Citrograph. Each issue reaches every commercial citrus grower in the states of California and Arizona, plus associated business members affiliated with the citrus industry... the people in charge of purchasing. Your advertising message is directed to farm leaders who use vast amounts of goods and services. Circulation reaches over 5,000 key decision makers among California and Arizona fresh citrus growers, landowners and industry-involved companies. In the near future, Citrograph will reach the entire United States. Don’t miss the next issue! Summary California red scale can be effectively managed with Aphytis wasp releases or insecticide treatments or a combination of the two if you are careful about insecticide choice, rate, frequency of application, and treatment timing. Careful monitoring of California red scale populations using pheromone traps, crawler tapes and fruit inspection can greatly improve your decision making and provide more sustainable control of scales. Dr. Beth Grafton-Cardwell is a University of California Extension Specialist and Research Entomologist. She is a Citrus IPM Specialist in the Department of Entomology at UC Riverside and also serves as Director of the Lindcove Research and Extension Center. Jim Stewart is a partner in Ag IPM Consultants, Inc., Exeter. l Mark Ryckman of Progressive Ag, Inc. was leery about advertising. “I have tried magazine advertising in the past, along with other approaches like direct mail, without much success. Last year I decided to try marketing our LestroBlast sprayers in Citrograph. I had several new potential customers seek me out at the World Ag Expo specifically because they had seen my ad in there. Citrus growers read Citrograph and I now advertise in every issue!” Contact us today to be included in future issues of Citrograph Sandy Creighton, Sales Manager • Phone: 559-201-9225 E-mail: [email protected] PEARSON REALTY Farm Sales Specialists for California’s Central Valley 1.98 ± acs. Cold Storage Facility, Orange Cove (In Escrow) ..... $410,000 2.62± acres Exeter Cold Storage Facility (price reduced)....... $2,295,000 6.00± acs. Woodlake Area Navels & House............................... $215,000 6.48 ± acs. TurnKey Citrus Packing/Cold Storage ................. $2,200,000 9.72±acs Cutler Area Cold Storage Facility (price reduced)... $2,399,000 15.98 ± acs. Lindsay Development Potential, Price Reduced.... $260,000 18.52± acs Terra Bella Early Navels (Price Reduced)................ $230,000 20± acs, nice home site........................................................... $210,000 20 ± acs. Easton Cherry Ranch................................................. $350,000 30.27± acs. Atwood Navels (In Escrow).................................... $210,000 34.9 ± Porterville Navels........................................................... $472,500 38.53± acs. Cutler Area (In Escrow).......................................... $500,000 39.98± acs Lindsay Area Citrus................................................ $639,680 40.57± acs Porterville Area Treefruit with Residence................ $660,000 47.54± acs Lindsay Area Citrus and Large Residence . ............ $910,000 58.93 ± acs. Teapot Dome Navels & Open................................ $500,000 78.82± acs. Visalia Cherries, Shop, Open (SOLD)...................... $895,000 79.19± acs Citrus & Open, Southern Tulare Co. ....................... $300,000 110.00± acs. Citrus, Pistachios & Almonds............................ $1,530,000 137.88± acs. Navelencia Navels & Almonds.......................... $1,100,000 160 ± acs. Visalia Area Navel & Open.................................... $1,950,000 160± acs Navel Oranges, Kern Co......................................... $1,840,000 171.08± Stone Corral Open Land.......................................... $1,881,880 191.43± acs Citrus, Kern/Tulare line...................................... $1,800,000 215.01± acs Quality Citrus, Kern Co...................................... $2,687,500 241.65 ± acs. Nice Porterville Cattle Ranch/custom home....... $1,300,000 For Brochure Contact: Roy Pennebaker #0845764 (559)737-0084 or Matt McEwen #01246750 (559)280-0015 • www.citrusboys.com March/April 2012 Citrograph 21 Management of citrus thrips to reduce the evolution of resistance Joseph Morse and Beth Grafton-Cardwell Editor’s Note: Work on citrus thrips is now a part of the CRB’s Core Program of Integrated Pest Management research with Drs. Grafton-Cardwell and Morse as lead investigators. Background The citrus thrips, Scirtothrips citri (Moulton), is one of the few pests of California citrus which is native to California. In this case, the exotic organism is the citrus tree, and the native is citrus thrips. Dudley Moulton, a USDA scientist, named this insect in 1909 (calling it the orange thrips) after damage to citrus in southern Kern County made it clear that the characteristic surface scarring of citrus fruit that had been seen for many years was not wind rubbing or cold injury as had previously been thought. Even to the present day, it can be a challenge to differentiate citrus thrips damage from wind-caused fruit scarring. We like to use the presence of a partial or complete ring scar around the button as one good criterion – this is normally present with citrus thrips damage. In addition, checking fruit for damage shortly after petal fall will reveal the early stages of citrus thrips-induced fruit scarring. The article listed in “Further Reading”, Grafton-Cardwell et al. 2003, contains pictures that aid in differentiating citrus thrips fruit scarring from other types of fruit injury. tree, looking for a place to hide, where they pass through two relatively inactive and non-feeding stages, the propupa and pupal stages. Typically, about onethird of the thrips pupate in cracks and crevices in the tree. and two-thirds drop to the soil to pupate in the upper layers of the leaf duff and soil beneath a tree. Fig. 1. It is the first and second instar (larger, above) citrus thrips that cause most fruit scarring. Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. Natural enemies of citrus thrips The life cycle of citrus thrips Citrus thrips starts its life as an egg laid inside young leaves, twigs, flowers, or fruit. The most damaging stages are the first and second instar larvae (Figure 1), because they prefer to hide under the button when the fruit is small, concentrating their feeding in that area, which causes the characteristic ring scar as the fruit expands. Mature second instar larvae crawl towards the inside, dark portions of the 22 Citrograph March/April 2012 The adults then emerge, mate, and produce the next generation of thrips. Adult females concentrate their feeding in one area to a lesser extent than larvae, and males don’t feed all that much or live very long -- thus they are not considered as damaging as the larvae in most situations. There are eight or more generations of citrus thrips attacking the leaves and fruit of citrus over the spring, summer, and fall. The first generation in the spring feeds on the leaf flush prior to bloom, and the second generation of larvae typically appears about the time of petal fall. It is the second and third generation of citrus thrips that normally are of economic concern. Small fruit are fairly susceptible to citrus thrips scarring, and as the fruit grows it becomes less susceptible. Once fruit are larger than about 1.5 inches in diameter, citrus thrips do not typically cause economic scarring because the fruit is tough enough to make extensive feeding difficult (thrips feed best on tender leaf and fruit tissue). Coastal lemons are an exception to the above scenario because multiple fruit sets are produced over the year. Rather than being a spring pest, citrus thrips on coastal lemons typically isn’t a concern until the mid-to-late summer fruit set. Fig. 2. The predaceous mite Euseius tularensis will feed to some degree on citrus thrips (here feeding on a late second instar thrips). Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. We have searched for many years for ways in which to manage citrus thrips non-chemically and, in particular, with natural enemies. A number of natural enemies will feed on citrus thrips, but, unfortunately, in years when thrips levels are high they can cause substantial fruit injury in a relatively short period of time. Natural enemies often cannot keep up with the rapid growth of spring thrips populations. The only stages readily available for natural enemy attack are the first and second instar larvae. The two pupal Thrips Leafminer Katydids Peelminer Asian citrus psyllid Delegate Insecticide. ® By blasting out of spray rigs and hammering destructive pests, Delegate helps protect your citrus groves. And while the innovative mode of action of Delegate is broad-spectrum enough to control multiple pests, it maintains populations of most beneficials. Mites aren’t flared, and secondary pests stay…secondary. You also get favorable pre-harvest and re-entry intervals, plus minimal personal protective equipment requirements. To learn more, talk to your PCA or visit www.dowagro.com. ® Trademark of Dow AgroSciences LLC Always read and follow label directions. March/April 2012 Citrograph 23 stages are typically hidden in cracks or crevices in the tree or the soil, the winged adults are difficult for most predators to capture, and the egg stage is fairly protected inside plant tissue. Thus, any predator species trying to “make a living” off citrus thrips has sporadic availability of the larvae and cannot respond well numerically to increased thrips levels within a particular year. Triapitsyn & Morse (1999) searched for wasp parasitoids attacking citrus thrips and, although they found low levels of two parasitoid species on laurel sumac (a common native host, see below), these insects were not found associated with citrus. The citrus thrips has adapted over time to citrus, but perhaps the parasitoids have not, or they are not present at high enough levels to be detected easily. Jones & Morse (1995) used isoelectric gel electrophoresis to study to what degree the predaceous mite Euseius tularensis (Figure 2) feeds on citrus thrips, as this predator has been proposed as one of the more common natural enemies of citrus thrips on California citrus. Only 7 of 556 (1.3%) adult female E. tularensis tested positive for citrus thrips in their gut. Given this, we wonder if E. tularensis perhaps reduces citrus thrips levels only when the pest first starts to build from low levels but not when both species are present at moderate to high levels. Euseius spp. are generalist predators that feed on pollen, mites, insects and leaf sap, so they are not specifically tracking citrus thrips populations. Grafton-Cardwell demonstrated that pruning and fertilizing trees generated higher densities of Euseius than augmentative releases by providing the environment Euseius prefers. It is generally accepted that densities of >0.5 Euseius per leaf are associated with good citrus thrips control, but it is possible that the presence of this level of Euseius is indicative of good biological control in general because a suite of natural enemies provide citrus thrips suppression rather than Euseius specifically. Monitoring for citrus thrips Strategies used by pest control advisors and growers for managing citrus thrips vary. PCAs typically monitor citrus thrips levels on young, developing fruit immediately after petal fall to decide if treatments are needed. Post-petal 24 Citrograph March/April 2012 fall treatments are not needed every year. This is because thrips levels vary from year to year, and also the timing of when the second and third generation of immature thrips appears in relation to fruit size varies. In the San Joaquin Valley, wet weather during bloom typically results in lower thrips levels after petal fall, in part due to greater mortality of the pupae in the soil. Careful monitoring can reveal orchards that have low levels of immature thrips on young fruit, and treatments can be delayed or eliminated altogether. Reducing the number of treatments will reduce the selection pressure for resistance to insecticides. Problems controlling citrus thrips in a particular grove are more likely if one or more treatments are used each year in contrast to a treatment perhaps being used only 5 years out of 10 years based on sampling for thrips severity each year. Insecticides can aggravate thrips populations Fig. 3. We rate navel orange scarring caused by citrus thrips on a 0-4 scale where 0 = no scarring by citrus thrips (not shown), 1 and 2 are slight scarring (not sufficient to cause fruit to be downgraded from first to second grade) and 3 and 4 are severe (economic scarring). The threshold for fruit downgrading varies from year to year but is typically set at a level of 3 scar or worse. Over the period 1972 – 2003, we ran citrus pesticide screening trials in Field 12 (Atwood navel oranges) at the Lindcove Research and Extension Center (LREC). Untreated control plots were always included in order to assess how much fruit scarring would result if no treatment were applied. We used a 0-4 rating scale to assess the severity of citrus thrips-caused fruit scarring (see Figure 3), and scarring levels 3 and 4 were categorized as “economic scarring”. We set the threshold for economic scarring as the level that would typically lead to fruit being downgraded from first to second grade. Over the 20 years 1972-1991 (data prior to 1981 from O. L. Brawner and Dr. Bill Ewart), citrus thrips economic scarring on untreated trees ranged from 1.2% (1986) to a maximum of 69.0% (1988) on outside lower fruit with a mean of 30.2% economic scarring. In contrast, over the 12 years 1992-2003, economic scarring ranged from 0.1% (2000) to a maximum of 10.7% (1997) with a mean of 4.4%. Clearly, something changed dramatically between these two time periods. The maximum level of severe scarring over the latter time period was about 1/3 of the average level over the earlier period. We believe the reason for this is that citrus thrips is, to a considerable degree, a pesticide-induced pest. March/April 2012 Citrograph 25 During the first time period, 19721991, broad-spectrum organophosphate, carbamate, and pyrethroid insecticides were used in the SJV and in the test areas of this field at Lindcove for citrus thrips control. Many pest control advisors mentioned to us that spraying thrips “only makes them mad”. They found that if the first spray did not control them well, they “came back” at very high levels and were more difficult to control. We believe that what was happening was that citrus thrips populations had developed resistance in some areas and to varying degrees to organophosphates, carbamates, and/or pyrethroids. The level of resistance varied greatly depending on how often and which chemicals had been used in the past and how long thrips had NOT been exposed to that chemistry so that resistance could revert. When citrus thrips are sprayed with a broad-spectrum insecticide (as is the case for most products in these three classes of chemistry, see Table 1) these sprays reduce most natural enemies that might help hold the thrips in check. If the thrips are somewhat resistant, they are not completely killed. Hormoligosis is the term used to describe the stimulation of insects or mites when they are exposed to sublethal rates of pesticides or other toxins. As pesticide residues drop to sub-lethal rates, citrus thrips can be stimulated (depending on pesticide and dose) to lay more eggs, contributing to a “resurgence” of the thrips population several weeks later. Hormoligosis — the stimulation of insects or mites when they are exposed to sub-lethal rates of pesticides or other toxins. What happened to contribute to lower thrips levels over 1992-2003? The relatively “soft” insecticides Agri-Mek and Success (Entrust is the organic version) were registered for use on California citrus in 1994 and 1998, respectively, and growers largely switched to using those products, especially Success, for citrus thrips control (see Figure 4). In addition, growers switched to Esteem or Applaud for red scale control, in both cases replacing broad-spectrum organophosphate, carbamate, and pyrethroid treatments with softer insecticides that allowed more natural enemies to survive. Thus, although citrus thrips can still cause economic damage when weather conditions are conducive, in general, citrus thrips is less of a problem than it used to be. Whereas citrus thrips insecticide screening trials at LREC were quite productive prior to 2003, once the “organophosphate era” ended, it was difficult to consistently see differences between fruit scarring on trees treated with the standard, effective product versus levels on untreated control trees. We shifted in 2004 to screening experimental pesticides on what we believe is one of the major natural hosts of citrus thrips in California (before citrus was introduced), laurel sumac, in greenhouse trials (see Morse 1995). Treatments on non-bearing citrus Some growers and PCAs believe that treating citrus thrips on non-bear- Table 1. Pesticides that might be used in rotation for citrus thrips control. Trade name Common name Pesticide class Mode of Actiona Critical as part Resistance situation with of future ACP citrus thrips control? Comments and application methods to improve efficacy Dimethoate (and DimethoateOrganophosphate 1B Yes generics) Resistance in some areas depending on the degree of past organophosphate use Moderately systemic material Carzol Formetanate Carbamate 1A No? hydrochloride Resistance in some areas depending on the degree of past carbamate use Veratran D Sabadilla alkaloidsBotanical unclassified No Resistance not yet seen with citrus thrips (seen with avocado thrips) Baythroid XLBeta-cyfluthrin Pyrethroid 3A Yes Danitol Fenpropathrin Mustang Zeta-cypermethrin Adding 1-2 gallons of molasses/acre assists with efficacy and persistence; Critical to reduce spray tank pH to 4.5 prior to adding material; Works poorly in cold weather (active only as a stomach poison) Resistance in some areas depending on the degree of past pyrethroid use Agri-Mek (and Abamectin Chloride channel 6 Somewhat Possible cross-resistance generics) activator (adults) with class 5 Translaminar, add oil (1/4% or more) to aid leaf penetration and persistence Success Entrust Delegate Translaminar, add oil (1/4% or more) to aid leaf penetration and persistence Spinosad Spinosyn 5 Delegate – Possible cross-resistance Spinosad (organic) Yes with class 6 Spinetoram Movento Spirotetramat Inhibitor of acetyl 23 Yes CoA carboxylase a The IRAC MoA (mode of action) for each class of chemistry (see www.irac-online.org). 26 Citrograph March/April 2012 Resistance management critical to protect this material’s efficacy for ACP, red scale, and citrus thrips control Highly systemic; add oil to improve leaf penetration (surface residues are NOT active) treatments over years 1-3. In this study, we also measured fruit production in year 3. Although we saw a slight numerical trend with somewhat more fruit in the treated plots, this difference was not statistically significant. By year 4, this slight numerical trend had disappeared (an average of 244.5 fruit per tree on treated trees, 249.0 on untreated trees). Our conclusion for both the navel and Valencia studies is that despite leaf scarring caused by citrus thrips being unsightly, treating young citrus very much, if at all, is likely wasting money and can significantly contribute to the evolution of pesticide resistance. We strongly suggest that growers not treat citrus thrips on non-bearing citrus except perhaps the first year when trees are very small. The cost, in terms of losing the efficacy of pesticides to resistance, is too high and this is going to be even more important once treatments are needed for Asian citrus psyllid (ACP) control. The history of citrus thrips pesticide resistance Table 2 shows that over the years, citrus thrips has evolved pesticide resis- Fig. 4. Damage of young flush on citrus can be unsightly but does not warrant treatment except perhaps on very young trees just after planting. Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. Cygon Carzol Baythroid Baythroid XL Agri-Mek Veratran Success Delegate 2009 2007 2005 2003 2001 1999 1997 1995 1993 450,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 0 1991 Insecticides Used for Citrus Thrips & Katydid Control in the San Joaquin Valley Acres Treated ing, young citrus has value in terms of enhancing tree growth and/or bringing the tree into production sooner. We suggest it is perhaps worthwhile treating for citrus thrips only in year 1, when the trees are first planted in the ground to ensure they get a good start. For older trees, we admit that the leaf scarring of young leaves by citrus thrips is unsightly (Figure 5), but does citrus thrips really slow the growth of young trees, if they are well irrigated, well watered, and otherwise healthy? We believe the answer to that is no, based on two research trials reported in Grafton-Cardwell et al. (1997) in the San Joaquin Valley. The first study was done on navel oranges at LREC using 50 single-tree replicates over a three-year period. Treatment 1 never received any pesticides, and treatments 2-6 received 2 summer treatments in year 1. In years 2 and 3, the treatments were: (2) no citrus thrips treatments; (3) 2-3 spring treatments/year; (4) 1 fall treatment/ year; (5) 2-3 spring and 1 fall treatment each year; and (6) 2-3 spring, 4 summer, and 1 fall treatment each year. Thus, trees received as many as 17 treatments over a three-year period. As an indication of tree growth, we measured trunk circumference at 4 cm above the bud union 1, 2, 3, and 4 years after the trees were planted. To summarize the results, none of the 6 treatments had a differential impact on tree growth; that is, we could detect no difference in tree size during years 1-3 whether they were untreated, treated with 17 treatments, or with an intermediate number of treatments. The only significant effect we measured was a loss in citrus thrips susceptibility to Carzol. The second study was done with commercial Valencia oranges planted in April in Fresno County over a threeyear period. A 20-acre block was divided into 18 plots of 180-200 trees each, and 9 plots were randomly assigned to be treated with (1) no citrus thrips treatment over years 1-3 or (2) grower choice of treatments including a range of insecticides used for citrus thrips control (7 treatments in year 1, 7 in year 2, 5 in year 3). The entire field was treated after petal fall in the spring of year 4 to protect fruit from citrus thrips scarring. Again, we measured trunk diameter in years 1-4 and saw no difference between 0 treatments and, in this case, 19 Danitol Fig. 5. Insecticide acreage treated with various insecticides for citrus thrips and katydid control demonstrating the changes in grower uses during 19912010 for the San Joaquin Valley. Totals for Cygon and Agri-Mek include generic formulations of the same chemical. March/April 2012 Citrograph 27 tance to a number of different pesticides from DDT to pyrethroids in as short a time as 1 year (to Dieldrin after resistance to the related DDT had appeared) and in as many as 18 years (dimethoate). We now have evidence for resistance to Delegate in a population of citrus thrips in the San Joaquin Valley. Citrus thrips’ ability to rapidly develop resistance concerns us each time growers consistently rely on one or a small number of insecticides for the control of a particular pest (citrus thrips, red scale, ACP, etc.). Unfortunately, we often do not have as many effective pesticides from different classes of chemistry available for rotation as is desirable. What is meant by the word “resistance”? There are a number of definitions, but we like two of the more common ones: (1) if the “resistant” population of insect or mite develops a >10-fold increase in the LC50 or LC90 (the pesticide concentrations needed to kill 50 or 90% of the population, respectively) or (2) if one sees clear evidence of a lack of field control (either complete failure or reduced persistence) when the material is used properly. The first definition recognizes that there is variability in the response of various insects and mites to pesticides, and a population has not developed resistance until at least a 10-fold level has been reached. The latter definition is more of an operational term – when the material stops working or works less well, resistance has occurred. In most cases, laboratory measurements and field experience correlate well. Researchers typically try to take baseline resistance data in the labora- tory before a pesticide is used widely so they can later watch for changes in responses to the insecticide and confirm those changes based on field observations. Sometimes resistance to one insecticide also confers resistance to another insecticide. This is known as “cross resistance”. One way that insects resist pesticides is by breaking down (metabolizing) the pesticide more quickly; this is called metabolic resistance. Citrus thrips that have evolved resistance to organophosphates have increased levels of enzymes that break down the organophosphate relatively quickly compared to susceptible strains, and this also gives them resistance to other organophosphate and carbamate insecticides (MoA category 1, Table 1). A second type of resistance is due to an altered target site for the pesticide. The rapid development of citrus thrips resistance to pyrethroids may be due to previous exposure to DDT because these two types of pesticides have similar target sites (MoA 3). Following the registration of Success (spinosad) for use on California citrus in 1998, Success and Entrust were widely used for citrus thrips control, accounting for an average of 43% of the spring thrips/katydid treatments in the San Joaquin Valley between 1999 and 2007 (Figure 4). Delegate (spinetoram) was registered in 2007, is in the same class of chemistry as Success (cross resistance is expected), and is somewhat more effective and persistent against citrus thrips than Success. The use of Delegate until recently was hampered by the lack of MRLs (maximum residue limits) by some of the foreign trading partners to which California citrus is shipped. Each year over the last six years or so, we have offered to test for citrus thrips susceptibility to either Success or Delegate based on baseline data we took before these products were widely used. Each year, we have been pleasantly surprised to see a lack of documentable resistance. However, following a report of poor citrus thrips control from a Delegate application during the spring of 2011, we measured a significant increase in the spinetoram LC50 for citrus thrips collected at this location (9.4 to 19.8-fold higher LC50 than baseline values determined in 2008). Actually, we should feel very fortunate that it has been 14 years before the first signs of field resistance were observed with the Success/Delegate chemistry in the San Joaquin Valley. The need to manage citrus thrips resistance We plan to continue to monitor the Delegate resistance situation to determine whether this is a fairly isolated incident and whether such resistance is developing in other areas of the SJV. In addition, we are accelerating the testing of new products and chemistries which might be used to help manage citrus thrips resistance (several are moving closer to registration). As mentioned by Morse & GraftonCardwell (2009), once Asian citrus psyllid enters the SJV, it will be even more important to manage pesticide resistance by rotating between products with different modes of action, as many Table 2. Partial history of citrus thrips pesticide resistance evolution in California. Pesticide common Class of chemistry Mode of Actiona name DDT Sodium channel modulator Sabadilla + sugarBotanical bait Dieldrin GABA-gated chloride channel antagonist MalathionOrganophosphate DimethoateOrganophosphate Carzol Carbamate Baythroid Pyrethroid Abamectin Macrocyclic lactone Success + oil Spinosyn Delegate + oil Spinosyn Movento + oil Acetyl CoA carboxylase inhibitor a b 3 unclassified 2A 1A 1A 1B 3 6 5 5 23 Year first used commercially 1946 1948 1953 1954 1962b early 1980s 1991 1994 1998 2007 2008 Year first field failure reported 1949 -- 1954 1961 1980 1986 1996 -- -- 2011 -- Reference Morse & Brawner 1986 Morse & Brawner 1986 Morse & Brawner 1986 Morse & Brawner 1986 Morse & Brawner 1986 Immaraju et al. 1989 Morse & Grafton-Cardwell 2009 --Morse et al. unpublished The IRAC MoA (mode of action) for each class of chemistry is listed (see www.irac-online.org). Cross-resistance is expected between chemicals with the same mode of action. Non-bearing (limited) use only, until 1969. 28 Citrograph March/April 2012 of the materials that are effective against citrus thrips also will assist in control of ACP (see Table 1). There are currently six modes of action (1, 3, 5, 6, 23, and unclassified) for insecticides registered for citrus thrips control (Table 1). The best advice regarding resistance management for citrus thrips, or most pests for that matter, is to: (1) minimize pesticide use to the extent that is possible by sampling carefully to make sure the treatment is needed; (2) maximize the use of non-chemical control methods; (3) rotate among effective available chemistries to the maximum extent possible (clearly understand what mode of action each pesticide has and where the potential for cross resistance exists); and, (4) when a treatment is needed, apply it at the optimal time and with the best possible application method so as to avoid the need for re-treatment (Table 1). We view the first observation of citrus thrips resistance to Delegate in 2011 as an early warning. To maintain the effectiveness of Delegate and Success against citrus thrips, avoid making more than one application of a Group 5 insecticide (Delegate, Success, or Entrust) to a block each year. If additional applications are needed, other effective insecticides with different modes of action should be used. Also, try to make applications to adjacent blocks or groves at the same time or within a few days of each other to have an “area-wide” impact and thus slow re-infestation. It is important that we hold this situation in check as best we can until new chemistries become available for citrus thrips control. It is hoped we will have at least one new chemistry to use against citrus thrips prior to the 2013 spring field season. Acknowledgements We would like to thank the Citrus Research Board for funding to support in part the research described herein. We also thank Alan Urena, Lindsay Robinson, Pamela Watkins, and Heavenly Clegg for technical support and past graduate students/postdoctoral scientists Tim Grout, Bill Wiesenborn, Alex Rhodes, John Immaraju, Nasser Zareh, Jim Ferrari, Steven Jones, Heinrich Sch- weizer, Inamullah Khan, Kris Tollerup, and Dr. Serguei Triapitsyn for contributing to past citrus thrips research efforts which lead to some of the information in this article. Photographs 1, 2, and 4 were provided by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy of the UC Statewide IPM Program and are copyrighted by the Regents of the University of California. Dr. Joseph G. Morse is a Professor of Entomology and Dr. Beth GraftonCardwell is an Extension Specialist and Research Entomologist. Both are members of the Department of Entomology, University of California Riverside. Further reading Grafton-Cardwell, E.E., J.G. Morse, and A. Gjerde. 1997. Effect of Insecticide Treatments to Reduce Infestation by Citrus Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) on Growth of Nonbearing Citrus. Journal of Economic Entomology 91(1): 235-242. Grafton-Cardwell, E.E., N.V. O’Connell, C.E. Kallsen, and J.G. Morse. 2003. Photographic Guide to Citrus Fruit Scarring. University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural 800-992-2304 The SOURCE for all your citrus tree needs SuperCitrus Trees B&B Trees • Seedlings Starter Trees/Citrus Liners Rootstock Seed Budwood of all Types WWW.CITRUSTREESOURCE.COM March/April 2012 Citrograph 29 Resources Publication 8090, Oakland, CA. 8 pp. Haviland, D.R., S.M. Rill, and J.G. Morse. 2009. Southern Highbush Blueberries Are a New Host for Scirtothrips citri (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in California. Florida Entomologist 92(1): 147-149. Jones, S.A. and J.G. Morse. 1995. Use of Isoelectric Focusing Electrophoresis to Evaluate Citrus Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) Predation by Euseius tularensis (Acari: Phytoseiidae). Environ- mental Entomology 24(5): 1040-1051. Immaraju, J.A., J.G. Morse, and D.J. Kersten. 1989. Citrus Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) Pesticide Resistance in the Coachella and San Joaquin Valleys of California. Journal of Economic Entomology 82(2): 374-380. Immaraju, J.A., J.G. Morse, and R.F. Hobza. 1989. Field Evaluation of Insecticide Rotation and Mixtures as Strategies for Citrus Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) Resistance Management in California. Journal of Economic Ento- Uniquely effective products for controlling major pests in citrus with minimal disruption to IPM programs. Citricola Scale Cottony Cushion Scale California Red Scale Citrus Red Mite Two-spotted Spider Mite Bud Mite Contact Your area Nichino America sales representative to learn more. ©2012. Nichino America, Inc. All rights reserved. APPLAUD® and FujiMite® are trademarks of Nichino America, Inc. Farm Safely. Always read and follow label directions. 888-740-7700 www.nichino.net 30 Citrograph March/April 2012 mology 83(2): 306-314. Lovatt, C.J., S.M. Streeter, T.C. Minter, N.V. O’Connell, D.L. Flaherty, M.W. Freeman, and P.B. Goodell. 1984. Phenology of Flowering in Citrus sinensis (L.) Osbectk, cv. Washington navel orange. Proceedings of the International Society of Citriculture 1: 186-190. McMurtry, J.A. and B.A. Croft. 1997. Life-styles of Phytoseiid Mites and Their Roles in Biological Control. Annual Review of Entomology 42: 291-321. Morse, J.G. 1995. Prospects for IPM of Citrus Thrips in California. Pp. 371379, In: Thrips Biology and Management. Proceedings, 1993 International Conference on Thysanoptera, Towards Understanding Thrips Management. Editors: B.L. Parker, M. Skinner, T. Lewis. Sept. 28-30, 1993, Burlington, VT. Plenum, New York, NY. 636 pp. Morse, J.G. and O.L. Brawner. 1986. Toxicity of Pesticides to Scirtothrips citri (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) and Implications to Resistance Management. Journal of Economic Entomology 79(3): 565-570. Morse, J.G. and H. Schweizer. 1996. Citrus Thrips Resistance — A Problem Requiring Grower and PCA Restraint. Citrograph 81: 11-15. Morse, J.G. and E.E. GraftonCardwell. 2006. Bear Citrus Thrips Resistance in Mind When Deciding Whether and How to Treat in 2006. Topics in Subtropics 4: 11-13. Morse, J.G. and N. Zareh. 1991. Pesticide-Induced Hormoligosis of Citrus Thrips (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) Fecundity. Journal of Economic Entomology 84(4): 1169-1174. Morse, J.G. and E.E. GraftonCardwell. 2009. Managing Insecticide Resistance will be Key to the Future of Effective Citrus Pest Management. Topics in Subtropics 7(1): 6-8. Morse, J.G., E.E. Grafton-Cardwell, and A.A. Urena. 2001. Management Options for Citrus Thrips in the San Joaquin Valley. Citrograph 86: 4-5, 12. Rhodes, A.A., J.G. Morse, and C.A. Robertson. 1989. A Simple Multigeneration Phenology Model: Application to Scirtothrips citri (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) Prediction on California Oranges. Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 25(4): 299-313. Triapitsyn, S.V. and J.G. Morse. 1999. Survey of Parasitoids of Citrus Thrips, Scirtothrips citri (Moulton, 1909), in Southern California. Russian Entomology Journal 8(1): 47-50.l March/April 2012 Citrograph 31 The evolution of biologically-based Integrated Pest Management in California citrus: history and perspective Joseph Morse and Beth Grafton-Cardwell C itrus production in California occurs in four major climatic growing regions. These include coastalintermediate Southern California, interior Southern California, the Southern California desert valleys, and the San Joaquin Valley (Figure 1). Historically, the Southern California growing regions dominated in acreage, but over the past 50 years or so urban pressures, including rising land values and water costs, have led to a shift in acreage. Currently, more than 75% of the state’s citrus acreage is located in the San Joaquin Valley. Each of the climatic regions has somewhat different weather, key pest problems, levels of endemic biological control, and levels of adoption of biologically-based citrus IPM practices. The fumigation era The history of citrus arthropod pest management in California may be divided into three major eras, each of them broadly overlapping in time and showing regional differences. The first of these, prior to the introduction of DDT insecticide in 1946, might be called the “fumigation era.” During this period, beginning with the introduction of hydro-cyanic acid (HCN) in 1886 in California, all non-fumigant pesticides available (Paris Green, lead and calcium arsenate, oil, sulfur, lime sulfur, nicotine, rotenone, pyrethrum, etc.) had limited efficacy by modern standards. At peak use of HCN on citrus in California (1930-1940), as much as 6 million pounds of liquid HCN was used in a single season. This era was also characterized by numerous examples of rather high quality observational research focused on various aspects of taxonomy, basic biology, and the ecology of citrus pests. In addition, classical biological control (returning to the area of origin to search for and import natural enemies that co-evolved with the target pest) solved a number of pest outbreaks caused by the introduction of exotic citrus pests into California from various regions of the world. The science and philosophy of classical biological control originated with the outstanding control of cottony cushion Photo 1. Vedalia beetle adult, eggs, and larva feeding on cottony cushion scale. Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. San Joaquin Valley Navels, Valencias & Mandarins Coastal Lemons Fig. 1. Major growing regions for citrus in California. 32 Citrograph March/April 2012 Southern Interior Navels & Valencias Desert Grapefruit Photo 2. California red scale infested orange. Photo by Beth Grafton-Cardwell. Photo 3. First and second instar citrus thrips are the stages that damage fruit. Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. Photo 4. Aphytis melinus wasps parasitizing California red scale. Photo by Jack Kelly Clark, courtesy UC Statewide IPM Program. scale achieved by introducing the vedalia beetle (Photo 1) and Cryptochaetum fly into Southern California citrus groves in 1888. This led, in part, to the establishment of strong research units emphasizing biological control of pests of citrus and other crops at both Berkeley and Riverside within the University of California system. The philosophical bias in favor of chemical control of citrus pests maintained its momentum in California, however, with the commercial introduction of parathion in 1949, dieldrin in 1953, and malathion in 1954. Since that time, a number of other organophosphate and later, carbamate insecticides, were introduced and relied upon by growers. The pesticide era Biologically-based IPM The second era in the history of citrus pest management in California, ranging from perhaps 1946 to the mid 1970s, might be called the “pesticide era” following the introduction of DDT and other organochlorines, and later, organophosphate and carbamate insecticides. DDT was experimentally tested on citrus against California red scale (Aonidiella aurantii) (Photo 2) in 1943, was released for commercial use in the U.S. in 1945, and was first used commercially on California citrus in 1946. Throughout the U.S., the unprecedented level of control achieved with DDT on a wide range of pest species initiated, in retrospect, a shift of entomological research from a focus on basic pest biology to an emphasis on various aspects of chemical control. As an index of this shift, the percentage of research papers published in the Journal of Economic Entomology on the general biology of insect pests and their biological control dropped from 33% in 1937 to 17% in 1947, while the percentage devoted to the testing of insecticides rose from 59% to 76%. More so than with other commodities, however, research on basic pest biology, and especially biological control, continued on citrus in California during the pesticide era, due in large part to the presence and citrus focus of an independent Department of Biological Control at the University of California, Riverside and Berkeley campuses (at the time, this was a single department). Although we use the date of the introduction of DDT on citrus in California in 1946 as the start of the pesticide era, DDT use on citrus in the state had a limited lifespan. One of its main uses was for control of citrus thrips (Scirtothrips citri) (Photo 3), but resistance to DDT appeared in this species in 1949 (and is still present), resulting in reduced use in the following years. The third era, which we might call the “biologically-based integrated pest management era” has a less discrete beginning on citrus in California and continues to evolve to the present day. Here we define the biologically-based IPM approach as the combined use of selective chemical, biological, and cultural controls. The biologically-based approach includes regular monitoring of pest and natural enemy species, augmentative release of biological control agents such as Aphytis melinus (Photo 4) for control of California red scale, and use of economic thresholds which limit pesticide applications to an “as-needed basis”. The choice of selective pesticides and the timing and method of their application is made in a way that minimally interferes with endemic and augmentatively released natural enemies. Biologically-based IPM emphasizes the use of biological control and minimizes the use of pesticides that would be harmful to natural enemies. This is done by the careful selection of which pesticides are used and/or when and how they are applied. It requires the input of a supportive grower and a knowledgeable pest control advisor who carefully tracks pest and natural enemy populations. Such a system must be responsive to the appearance of new pest species and the year-to-year variability in pest and natural enemy populations. Origins of biologically-based citrus IPM in California A major tenet of biologically-based citrus IPM is a recognition of the importance of maintaining endemic (natural) biological control through minimal use of broad-spectrum pesticides, minimization of dust caused by vehicular traffic, and suppression of ant species which interfere with natural enemies. March/April 2012 Citrograph 33 In California, the appreciation for biological control was stimulated, in part, by classical biological control successes on citrus in Southern California. Following the example of cottony cushion scale, as new citrus pest species were introduced into the state, foreign exploration programs were initiated with the aim of introducing effective natural enemies of these pests. Many of these programs were initially unsuccessful but eventually led to control of the target or other non-target pests through the accumulation of a complex of natural enemy species or the introduction of a key natural enemy species. In Southern California, 13 exotic pests have been controlled biologically. Successes include the complete control of citricola scale (Coccus pseudomagnoliarum) in Southern California, where it is almost never seen presumably due to natural enemies introduced to control black scale (Saissettia oleae). Other classical biological control successes include control of purple scale (Lepidosaphes beckii), Comstock mealybug (Pseudococcus comstocki), citrophilus mealybug (P. calceolariae), longtailed mealybug (P. longispinus), citrus mealybug (Leptomastidae abnormalis), Japanese bayberry whitefly (Parabemesia myricae), citrus whitefly (Dialeurodes citri), and cloudy-winged whitefly (D. citrifolii). Many other arthropod pests of citrus in California are partially controlled in one or more of the growing regions in California by introduced or endemic natural enemies. In addition to classical biological control, the practice of augmentatively releasing biological control agents has a long and successful history on California citrus. The Fillmore Citrus Protective District (FCPD) was established in 1922 in coastal Southern California, mainly as a grower cooperative to assist with control of California red scale. In 1926, citrophilus mealybug, first introduced into the state in 1913, became a serious problem for FCPD growers and led to the construction of an insectary for rearing and annual release of the mealybug destroyer (Cryptolaemus montrouzieri). In 1937, the FCPD insectary began rearing and releasing Metaphycus helvolus (Photo 5) for black scale control and, in 1960, Aphytis melinus rearing began for control of California red scale in grower-member groves. Unfortunately, a declining Valencia orange market and conversion of groves to other uses resulted in closure of the FCPD and its insectary in 2003. Augmentative biological control is the practice of rearing and releasing large numbers of a natural enemy species to “augment” the impact of other natural enemies that are present. In the San Joaquin Valley, predators and parasitoids attack California red scale but without augmentation, their impact is usually insufficient to maintain red scale below economic levels. During the pesticide era, growers and pest control advisors in coastal and interior citrus growing regions of Southern California, often working in cooperation with researchers from the Citrus Experiment Station (CES) at Riverside, experimented with and implemented reduced pesticide input pest management programs. Many of these programs were coupled with the release of newly imported natural enemies or with insectary-reared natural enemies. Southern California growers started relying heavily on biological control after the mid-1960’s once the introduced 34 Citrograph March/April 2012 Photo 5. Metaphycus helvolus parasitizing a soft scale. Photo by A. Kapranas. parasitoid A. melinus started suppressing California red scale below levels of economic concern. Many growers in coastal areas started using twice annual (spring and fall) oil sprays to maintain key pest species such as California red scale, citrus bud mite (Eriophyes sheldoni), and others below economic levels, and were thus able to avoid the use of other pesticides. By the mid-1970’s, several progressive pest control advisors in coastal and interior Southern California had developed a biologically-based citrus IPM program which emphasized pest monitoring, selective pesticide use, and augmentative releases of insectary-reared A. melinus for California red scale control. Development of a biologically-based IPM program for SJV citrus During the latter period of the pesticide era, citrus production in the San Joaquin Valley (SJV) relied heavily on broad-spectrum pesticide use. Despite repeated attempts by pest control advisors and CES scientists to introduce various facets of biologically-based citrus IPM into the SJV, growers showed limited interest in reducing broad-spectrum pesticide use, and in the context of these treatments and the extremes of summer and winter temperatures, natural enemy effectiveness was limited. In the mid-1980’s, a group of UC Experiment Station scientists, Cooperative Extension advisors, and pest control advisors from both Southern California and the SJV (with funding provided by the Citrus Research Board, UC Statewide IPM Program, California Energy Commission, and the USDA Office of International Cooperation and Development) developed and tested a biologically-based citrus IPM program at the Crown Butte Ranch in Tulare County using methodologies and concepts originally developed in Southern California. After several years of research and evaluation, this IPM program was disseminated as a model that might be used on citrus throughout the SJV. The program consisted of specific, intensive monitoring methods, intervention thresholds, and selective insecticide recommendations for each of the major arthropod pests found on SJV citrus at that time. Key among these were use of sabadilla (Veratran D; at the time, other selective options were not available), a botanically derived insecticide mixed with sugar or molasses as an attractant for citrus thrips control, various formulations of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) for ”orangeworm” control, narrow range The Climate Stress Solution Anti-Stress 550® Excellent for Citrus Apply as a foliar spray to insulate trees & fruit from weather related stressors Drying Winds • Soil Moisture Variations Transplant Shock • Rapid Weather Changes Heat Stress • Frost & Freeze Apply to new plantings and young trees too! Request Anti-Stress 550® by name from your local chemical dealer Polymer Ag, LLC 800.678.7377 • www.polymerag.com • [email protected] Helping Growers for Over 20 Years oil for citrus red mite, low rates of chlorpyrifos (Lorsban) for katydid, citricola scale, and initial red scale knockdown, and management of California red scale through augmentative releases of 50,000-100,000 insectary-reared A. melinus parasitoids per acre per year. The Aphytis were released every two weeks beginning mid-February and ending mid-November each year, for a total of 20 releases of 2,500-5,000 wasps per acre per release. Low rates of chlorpyrifos were used to reduce California red scale levels prior to initiating the A. melinus releases. This program was shown to result in reduced pesticide use and similar, if not higher, fruit quality and economic returns compared with the conventional broad-spectrum pesticidebased program. Several earlier research advances from the UC Riverside Entomology Department and UC IPM Program were key for the development of the SJV biologically-based citrus IPM program. Guidelines proposing economic thresholds and sampling methods for the lepidopterous pests on citrus, which are collectively referred to as “orangeworms”, were developed. T.S. Bellows and J.G. Morse determined the toxicity and persistence of commonly used pesticides to important citrus natural enemies, thus facilitating the choice of selective materials that could be used in the program. J.D. Hare documented that citrus red mite (Panonychus citri) economic thresholds used in Southern California were too low for application in the SJV and that SJV populations seldom resulted in reduced yield. D.S. Moreno and R.F. Luck documented the efficacy of augmentative releases of A. melinus against California red scale in Southern California, setting the stage for augmentative release strategies in the SJV. Working with FMC Corp., G.P. Walker, Morse, and M.L. Arpaia adapted technology from South Africa and Israel and showed that a high-pressure postharvest washer was effective in removing California red scale from fruit, thus allowing the economic threshold of this key pest to be elevated. Although research efforts were critical, the biologicallybased IPM program would not have been adopted in the San Joaquin Valley without extension education (Photo 6) and the dedication of many progressive citrus growers and pest control advisors. Photo 6. Tulare County UCCE Farm Advisor Neil O’Connell conducting a field day training on citrus IPM. Photo by Beth Grafton-Cardwell. 36 Citrograph March/April 2012 Photo 7. UCR Entomologist Dr. Robert Luck (second from left) teaching growers and PCAs about biologically-based IPM. Photo by Beth Grafton-Cardwell. A number of grower meetings were held at the Crown Butte ranch in the late 1980s to present and discuss progress in development of the IPM program (Photo 7). Throughout the 1990s, yearly workshops were held to teach pest control advisors how to recognize the life stages of California red scale, their parasitoids, and how to determine if biological control was successful. Field days and video tapes on citrus thrips and orangeworm monitoring were produced. In addition, yearly roundtable discussions were jointly sponsored by UC Extension Specialist E.E. Grafton-Cardwell and the Association of Applied IPM Ecologists. In these discussions, pest control advisors shared information about pest pressures, monitoring methods, control tactics, and the level of success of biological control they had achieved. Smith-Lever and Citrus Research Board funds supported demonstration projects in Kern and Tulare counties that sampled pest and natural enemy densities in orchards utilizing biologicallybased versus pesticide-reliant strategies. Data on pest densities, natural enemy levels, degree-days, and the consequences of various pest management strategies in these orchards were discussed by extension personnel in grower meetings, provided as a newsletter, and posted on a citrus entomology Web site at the Kearney Agricultural Center. Organizations such as Paramount Citrus took a lead role in studying and transferring high-pressure postharvest washer technology from South Africa to San Joaquin Valley packinghouses. All of this activity helped to increase grower adoption of biologically-based IPM methods. Adoption of the biologically-based citrus IPM program in the SJV was initially slow but was accelerated by the development of pesticide resistance in two key pest species. Citrus thrips has a history of developing resistance to broad-spectrum pesticides used extensively for its control and, following the appearance of dimethoate resistance in 1980, formetanate resistance in 1986, and cyfluthrin resistance in 1996, growers became increasingly motivated to use a biologically-based approach in managing this pest. Of greater impact, however, was the appearance of California red scale resistance to organophosphate and carbamate insecticides in the SJV in 1990. Because no new effective chemical options were available to growers with pesticide-resistant California red scale, and because multiple applications of organophosphates and carbamates were so costly (ca. $160/acre per treatment), grower adoption of the biologically-based citrus IPM program accelerated in the early 1990s and reached a peak in 1997 with participation of an estimated 10-25% of SJV growers (this estimate varies based on who one talks to and what one considers the threshold for “participation”, i.e. does one include only those that relied very heavily on Aphytis releases to help manage red scale with only very occasional pesticide use). Impediments to adoption of biologically-based IPM; shifts in insecticide use change the status of some pests In 1998, because of increasing problems with California red scale resistance, the insect growth regulators pyriproxyfen (Esteem or Knack) and buprofezin (Applaud) were made available to SJV citrus growers through a Section 18 Emergency registration with full registration in 2000 and 2002, respectively. Pyriproxyfen was extremely effective against California red scale, but unfortunately was initially quite disruptive to March/April 2012 Citrograph 37 coccinellid predators such as the vedalia beetle (critical to cottony cushion scale control) and Rhyzobius (Lindorus) lophanthae, an important predator of California red scale. In South Africa, pyriproxyfen use led to mealybug flare-ups in untreated groves located near groves where it was used (the pesticide was sufficiently active to suppress mealybugs in treated groves but coccinellid predators which normally maintained mealybugs below economic levels were suppressed regionally). Similarly, in California, dramatic cottony cushion scale flare-ups were observed starting early in 1999 in biologicallybased citrus IPM blocks near groves using pyriproxyfen because of its toxicity to vedalia beetles. Unfortunately for California growers, malathion, methidathion (Supracide), and carbaryl (Sevin) were the only effective insecticides available for cottony cushion scale control, and these materials are highly toxic to natural enemies, such as A. melinus, needed for control of other pests. Based on experience from Israel and South Africa, California researchers were aware of the potential for secondary pest upsets if pyriproxyfen was used on California citrus. In May 1996, at the Seventh International Citrus Congress in Sun City, South Africa, a number of citrus growers and researchers listened to an impassioned talk by V. Hattingh and B.A. Tate describing upsets of mealybugs and cottony cushion scale which resulted from pyriproxyfen treatments in South Africa. Subsequently, six meetings of growers, pest control advisors, and researchers were held in 1997 at various sites in the SJV to discuss the likely benefits and detriments of requesting the Section 18 use of pyriproxyfen. Despite concerns raised about possible secondary pest upsets, the consensus at those meetings was that this insecticide was needed to deal with increasing populations of California red scale and the escalating use of organophosphate insecticides. As predicted, severe cottony cushion scale outbreaks were experienced in 1999-2000. Subsequent research by GraftonCardwell on vedalia beetle activity demonstrated that it is most effective in the spring and activity declines with summer heat. She then trained growers to delay use of pyriproxyfen until after vedalia had completed its springtime control of cottony cushion scale. Cottony cushion scale is now a sporadic secondary pest because of careful use (timing) of what Photo 8. Third instar katydid nymph on a new fruit, ready to begin feeding. Photo by Beth Grafton-Cardwell. 38 Citrograph March/April 2012 otherwise can be a highly disruptive insecticide. The availability of pyriproxyfen, a very effective red scale control material, dramatically lessened interest in adopting the biologically-based IPM program for SJV citrus because, initially, this insecticide could be applied for red scale control every second or third year if red scale levels were not high. This is quite common when a new and effective pesticide is introduced – initially, it can be remarkably effective (e.g., DDT against many pests, parathion-red scale, dimethoate-citrus thrips). In addition, there is a perception that use of biological control is riskier and more difficult to employ compared with a traditional chemical control program. For the present, many growers will continue to rely on pyriproxyfen for California red scale control, but we are beginning to see the early stages of resistance in some areas. In 2008, spirotetramat (Movento) was registered for California red scale control, and rotating its use with pyriproxyfen will help with managing resistance to either product. Both pyriproxyfen and spirotetramat are soft on parasitoids such as Aphytis, so they have allowed more natural biological control of California red scale to occur, minimizing the frequency of use of either product and providing longer term control of this pest. Soft insecticides release secondary pests from control At about the same time that pyriproxyfen and buprofezin were registered for California red scale control, spinosad was registered for citrus thrips control. All three of these insecticides showed greater safety for most natural enemies (other than coccinellids-pyriproxyfen and buprofezin) and greatly improved worker safety because of their specificity for certain pest groups because they replaced organphosphate and carbamate insecticide use. There was a problem, however, with greater selectivity allowing several secondary pests to become primary pests. Citricola scale and forktailed bush katydid (Scudderia furcata) (Photo 8) were quite susceptible to organophosphates. They were easily suppressed by treatments for citrus thrips and California red scale during the “pesticide era”. The insect growth regulators used for red scale are not very effective against citricola scale. The spinosad treatment (and later spinetoram [Delegate]) for citrus thrips has a relatively short residual period of activity and thus is not effective in years with a prolonged hatch of katydids or when used against the larger katydid instars. With the reduction in organophosphate and carbamate use, these insects have become chronic pests. In the San Joaquin Valley, biological control agents for these pests do not keep them below economic levels. In response to increased katydid densities (Photo 9), growers are tank-mixing low rates of pyrethroids or organophosphates with the spring spinosad or spinetoram treatment for citrus thrips control. Low rates of broad-spectrum insecticides, applied in low water volume (100-200 gpa) to the outside of the tree during spring, are fairly well tolerated by most natural enemies. Thus, these treatments can control katydids and minimize the impact on biologically-based IPM. The insect growth regulator diflubenzuron (Micromite) and stomach poison cryolite (Kryocide) are slow-acting, but they are selective and can be used before petal fall to control katydids prior to their causing damage on fruit. Cyantraniliprole (Altacor) was also recently registered and is fairly selective. Thus, katydids can be managed through low rates Knowledge grows Calcium is critical to early and uniform fruit set Calcium improves tolerance to drought stress YaraLiva® products are the best way to provide calcium. YaraLiva® Tropicote®, YaraLiva® CAN-17® and YaraLiva® CN-9® deliver more profits pound for pound. For more information, please contact: Yara North America, Inc 1-800-234-9376 www.yara.us March/April 2012 Citrograph 39 of a broad-spectrum material or via selective insecticides. Citricola scale has become a serious problem in the San Joaquin Valley because of inadequate biological control (except in groves with brown soft scale) and the low threshold for the economic damage it causes (lowered yield and sooty mold production). This scale has only one generation per year and long periods of time when citricola scale size is too small for use by several species of parasitic wasps that devastate the scale in Southern California. In addition, most areas of the San Joaquin Valley appear to lack alternative hosts of the parasitoids such as black scale and brown soft scale. Initially, growers managed increases in citricola scale (Photo 9) in the SJV biologically-based program with low rates of chlorpyrifos (Lorsban). Many natural enemies of citrus pests have developed tolerance to low rates of organophosphates, especially chlorpyrifos, due to repeated exposure, and thus, these treatments are now considered fairly compatible with IPM if they occur relatively infrequently (no more than once a year). However, as citricola scale became a common pest of citrus in the 2000s, continued use of chlorpyrifos led to resistance in about 40% of citricola scale populations, with even high rates of chlorpyrifos failing to suppress the scale below economic levels for more than a single year. Growers began to use foliar neonicotinoids (imidaclo- Photo 10. UCR Extension Specialist Beth Grafton-Cardwell utilizes a mobile laboratory to teach about scale pest management. Photo courtesy of Beth Grafton-Cardwell. prid [Provado] and acetamiprid [Assail]) for citricola scale control; however, this chemical group is highly toxic to most natural enemies, reducing the success of the biologicallybased program. Growers also used imidacloprid systemically to control citricola scale and reduce the impact on natural enemies. That formulation, however, is also toxic to natural enemies and only weakly suppresses citricola scale. The IGR buprofezin (Applaud) can be effective against ctiricola scale and is soft on parasitic wasps, thus it is a selective insecticide. However, both foliar neonicotinoids and buprofezin require direct contact to kill the scale, and thus coverage is critical. These insecticides do not reduce scale densities to levels as low as the organophosphates did before resistance became a problem, and they need to be used every one to two years. The current trend is that growers alternate selective insecticides (pyriproxyfen, buprofezin, and spirotetramat) for California red scale control with an organophosphate or neonicotinoid insecticide treatment for citricola scale so as to minimize costs and reduce the impact of broad-spectrum treatments on natural enemies. Ideally, a selective pesticide is one that reduces the target pest population below economic levels with limited impacts on important natural enemy species. In some cases, nonselective pesticides can be used in a selective manner based on when or how they are used. Photo 9. Heavy populations of citricola scale reduce yield of trees and produce honeydew that fosters sooty mold. Photo by Beth Grafton-Cardwell. 40 Citrograph March/April 2012 Changes in pesticide practices have caused a shift in pest pressures in the San Joaquin Valley. The softer insecticides used for California red scale and citrus thrips have resulted in a decline of these pests. Citricola scale is now the most common and most difficult pest to control, requiring the use of broad-spectrum insecticides that disrupt the biologicallybased IPM program. New selective insecticides for citricola scale are needed to allow natural enemies affecting other pests to flourish. Meanwhile SJV growers continue to be educated in monitoring methods, using treatment thresholds, and are averaging three to four pesticide treatments per year. Again, University of California extension programs and Citrus Research Board education in the form of grower seminars, field days, a mobile laboratory (Photo 10), Citrograph articles, online courses (http://classes.ucanr.org), and Web sites (www.ucanr.org/sites/ KACCitrusEntomology/, http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/ selectnewpest.citrus.html and www.citrusresearch.org) help growers and PCAs to stay informed and maintain biologicallybased IPM if they are interested in that approach. In spite of all of the recent pest and program changes, a number of growers and pest control advisors continue to use the biologically-based IPM program in the SJV, often adapting it based on their experience and the local situation. Based on sales information provided to us confidentially by producers and suppliers of Aphytis melinus, we estimate that ca. 1,410.8 million and 1,338.5 million Aphytis were sold to SJV users in 2010 and 2011, respectively. Practitioners likely used a minimum of 20,000 Aphytis per acre per year (in this case to augment mostly chemical red scale control) and as many as 130,000 Aphytis per acre per year (on organic citrus). If we estimate that the mean per acre Aphytis use is somewhere between 40,000 and 80,000 wasps per acre per year, then the above sales figures translate to between 17,246 - 34,492 acres in the San Joaquin being treated on average per year with Aphytis over the 2010 and 2011 seasons. Exotic pest introductions disrupt biologically-based IPM A second problem for growers using biologically-based citrus IPM in the SJV (and anywhere else for that matter) is the introduction of new (exotic) pest species (Table 1). The rate of new introductions appears to be increasing, partially because of greater movement of people and plant material between states and countries but also because of reduced vigilance at border entry points brought about by an emphasis on facilitating trade. When exotic pests enter a new region, they often arrive without the full complement of natural enemies present in their native range. Thus, chemical control is often needed to maintain damage below economic thresholds until the full natural enemy complex is introduced and provides adequate control. An example of a recent exotic invader is the glassy-winged sharpshooter (GWSS). GWSS live on citrus, as well as many other hosts, and vector various strains of the bacterium Xylella fastidiosa that cause Pierce’s Disease in grapes, almond leaf scorch, alfalfa dwarf, oleander leaf scorch, and several other diseases such as citrus variegated chlorosis and phony peach disease that are not yet present in California. Because this pest is so destructive to the grape industry, citrus growers are asked to control GWSS in their plantings to reduce the potential movement of Xylella into nearby grapes. The insecticide group of choice for this pest is the neonicotinoids, which can potentially disrupt natural enemies. The current GWSS treatment program attempts to reduce the impact of the neonicotinoids by applying them systemically or if as a foliar spray, waiting until late in the season. Other arthropod pests have also entered the state recently, and many of them require insecticide treatments, at least initially. The red imported fire ant (RIFA) (Solenopsis invicta) was found in February 1997 in Kern County, and eradication with soil treatments of pyrethroids has been attempted. Since then it has also shown up in large areas of Southern California. At present it is unclear whether RIFA populations will be eradicated in the SJV, but it is possible that this pest may eventually become established and spread into citrus groves there. The citrus leafminer (Phyllocnistis citrella) was discovered in Imperial County in southernmost California in January 2000, spread to Riverside Co. in 2002, and is now found throughout much of California. The citrus peelminer (Marmara gulosa) is well established in parts of California but has changed its habits, likely due to the recent introduction of a new biotype from Mexico in the late 1990s, and can cause extensive fruit damage to susceptible citrus varieties such as pummelos, grapefruit, and various navel oranges (especially Fukumoto, Atwood, and TI). Fortunately, the potential for biological control by parasitoids of citrus leafminer and citrus peelminer on bearing citrus is good, and thus these pests have not caused a major increase in insecticide use. For citrus leafminer, young plants require multiple insecticide treatments to maximize growth. Pheromone disruption methods are being developed to manage citrus leafminer in nurseries. Diaprepes root weevil (Diaprepes abbreviatus) was discovered in Southern California in 2005, and the larval stages are known to be a threat to the root systems of citrus and other crops, largely because they worsen the impact of soil diseases such as Phytophthora. Eradication of Diaprepes was initially attempted, but in part due to the State’s fiscal situation, this was discontinued in 2008. If it spreads to commercial citrus production areas, it will require several treatments a year, including several broad-spectrum insecticides such as pyrethroids and neonicotinoids, potentially disrupting IPM and Table 1. Exotic pests recently invading California citrus. Common name Scientific name Damage Detection in California Glassy-winged sharpshooter Homalodisca coagulata Vector of Pierce’s Disease in neighboring grapes Reduced fruit production in citrus exposed to extremely high densities Mid 1990s Red imported fire ant Solenopsis invicta Damage to young plantings of citrus Human health hazard 1997 Citrus peelminer (Mexican strain) Marmara gulosa Reduction in pack-out due to mining of the rind of susceptible varieties 1998 Citrus leafminer Phyllocnistis citrella Attacks new foliage, can reduce growth of plants in nurseries and new plantings 2000 Diaprepes root weevil Diaprepes abbreviatus Larvae attack the root system of citrus trees making trees more vulnerable to pathogens 2005 Asian citrus psyllid Transmits the bacterial pathogen that causes huanglongbing 2008 Diaphorina citri March/April 2012 Citrograph 41 greatly increasing costs to growers. The impacts of the above exotic pests are likely to appear mild in comparison to the Asian citrus psyllid (ACP), in particular if the bacterial disease it vectors, huanglongbing (HLB), is found in California. HLB is moving northward towards California from Mexico and was recently discovered in commercial citrus in Texas. This disease has had serious impacts on citrus production in China, Brazil, Florida, and elsewhere and has been the subject of many recent Citrograph articles. Thus, we will not address ACP and HLB in detail here other than to say that experience in Florida has clearly shown that to-date, the most effective strategy of managing HLB is via effective, regional insecticide treatment programs for ACP, which ideally include all commercial growers in the region. We still have much to learn about adapting the experience with ACP and HLB management from other states and countries for optimal use in California. In the long term, we are optimistic that research will develop a practical solution to ACP and HLB management that does not require continual broad-spectrum pesticide applications and maximizes the use of biological control of ACP to the extent that is feasible. Because of the severity of HLB, in the interim, we may go through a rocky period as we learn how to best deal with ACP and determine what sort of chemical program will cause the least impact on natural enemies and the upset of secondary pests that often results. If we can weather the ACP-HLB storm, we believe biologically-based IPM holds tremendous promise regarding the future of citrus pest management. It is important to note that the level to which a particular grower and/or pest control advisor adopts biologically-based citrus IPM varies tremendously across the SJV and, in reality, there is a spectrum of adoption varying from those who emphasize biologically-based IPM by severely limiting the use of pesticides which impact natural enemies to those who rely heavily on chemical control and are not as concerned with the occasional use of broad-spectrum pesticides. Most growers and pest control advisors are in the middle of this spectrum and would adopt biologically-based IPM to a greater degree if some of the more difficult challenges to this approach were solved (e.g., selective management of citricola scale, citrus peelminer on some varieties, and ACP once it enters the SJV). Conclusions Successful Biologically-Based IPM and Impediments to its Adoption and Success: 1. The success of the program depends on intensive sampling of pest and natural enemy populations in order to maximize the effectiveness of soft pesticides and natural enemy populations. 2. Developing the required level of knowledge and training Crooks are stealing: • Metal • Commodities • Equipment • Chemicals ProtECt your Profit Thieves are stealing from your bottom line. Protect your assets and your profits. With patrols and technology, Pipkin Detective Agency is the eyes on your property and equipment. Experienced Entomologists 75+ combined years of Aphytis Success in the San Jaoquin Valley [email protected] Call today for details and references. 42 Citrograph March/April 2012 Citrus and Subtropical Specialist Biologically Intensive Pest Management WWW.APHYTIS.COM Ag is your business. Preventing theft is ours. HQ: 4318 W. Mineral King, Visalia pipkindetectiveagency.com ENTOMOLOGICAL SERVICES, INC. 559-622-8889 PO Box 3043 Visalia, CA 93278-3043 Phone: (559) 627-1153 Fax: (559) 635-4955 16120 Krameria Ave. Riverside, CA 92054 (951) 285-5437 needed to successfully conduct biologically-based IPM for a crop system as complex as citrus takes years of experience and input from knowledgeable pest control advisors and supportive growers. 3. There is a learning curve associated with the adoption of biological-based IPM in the SJV, and the “system” does not stabilize for a year or two after the conversion from an IPM program based more on pesticide use. To make the program work effectively, a commitment to biologically-based IPM is needed by knowledgeable growers and their pest control advisors. 4. The biologically-based citrus IPM program is both sustainable and dynamic, due to changes in pesticide registrations, pest complexes, and the introduction of exotic species. Research, extension, and management programs have to be equally dynamic to respond to those changes. For the immediate future, further adoption of the biologically-based citrus IPM program in the SJV depends on the motivation of growers and PCAs who are interested in this approach. Unfortunately, this approach is likely to become more difficult, rather than easier, once the industry has to deal with the presence of ACP (and hopefully much later, HLB) in the SJV. For some people, an IPM program emphasizing chemical pest control appears to be a simpler pest management solution, and this approach may be absolutely essential to effectively dealing with ACP and HLB. However, experience with citrus has shown that this approach is not sustainable over the long term (pesticide resistance being one recurring problem) and is more costly than biologically-based IPM. Acknowledgments Development of the biologically-based citrus IPM program for SJV citrus would not have been possible without the input and assistance of a large number of individuals and agencies. Robert F. Luck; Harry Griffiths and Joe Barcinas of Entomological Services, Inc.; Frank Marshall of Central Valley Management, Inc.; Neil O’Connell, UC Cooperative Extension, Tulare County; Craig Kallsen, UC Cooperative Extension Kern County; Lisa Forster, Phil Haney, and Alan Urena of UC Riverside; the UC Riverside Entomology staff at the Lindcove Research and Extension Center (Ashley Derr, Janine Lee, Janet McClain, Melissa O’Neal, Yvonne Rasmussen, and Chris Reagan) and the Kearney Ag Center (Ping Gu, Greg Montez, Yuling Ouyang, Becky Striggow, and Stacy Vehrs); and Jim Stewart and Jim Gorden of Pest Management Associates, Inc. were all instrumental in helping to develop this program, as was funding provided by the California Citrus Research Board, the UC Statewide IPM Program, Smith-Lever funds, the California Energy Commission, and the USDA Office of International Cooperation and Development. This article is an update of a 2006 article that was published in the UC Plant Protection Quarterly. Dr. Joseph G. Morse is a Professor of Entomology with the Department of Entomology, University of California Riverside. Dr. Beth Grafton-Cardwell is a University of California Extension Specialist and Research Entomologist. She is a Citrus IPM Specialist in the Department of Entomology at UC Riverside and also serves as Director of the Lindcove Research and Extension Center. l “We want to earn the right to handle all of your insurance needs.” We Specialize in Agriculture Related Business Insurance Crop - Farm - Spray Commercial Ag Workers Comp Group Medical Call David or Bill 559-594-5500 Visit Our Website NielsenInsurance.net 502-A North Kaweah (Hwy 65) Exeter CA 93221 Lic # 0705090 March/April 2012 Citrograph 43 What are the University of California sources for citrus integrated pest management information? Beth Grafton-Cardwell T he University of California Integrated Pest Management Program (UC IPM) provides hundreds of pages of excellent information in print form and on the Web that explains how to recognize and manage pests and diseases of citrus. Below I discuss the three major components of these guidelines and their uses. While the citrus manual and guidelines have been around for decades, and most growers and PCAs are familiar with them, the Year-Round IPM Program for Citrus approach is less well-known, but extremely useful, especially for those who are new to citrus. I encourage you to explore these pages. Citrus IPM Manual - NEW THIRD EDITION Available March 2012! The previous edition of the Citrus IPM Manual was published in 1991. The new edition incorporates changes in our knowledge of various endemic vertebrate, weed, nematode, insect and mite pests and diseases and introduces a number of recently invading species. During the past 15 years, glassywinged sharpshooter, citrus leafminer, a new strain of citrus peelminer, diaprepes root weevil and Asian citrus psyllid have established in California. In addition, the manual provides photos of a number of diseases that have not yet reached California, including citrus bacterial canker, huanglongbing, citrus variegated chlorosis and citrus leprosis. The new edition emphasizes photorecognition of citrus pests and diseases and is an essential manual for the library of anyone with an interest in citrus management. Fig. 1. A snapshot showing a portion of the available information in the UC IPM Citrus Pest Management Guidelines. http://ucipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/ selectnewpest.citrus.html UCIPM Citrus Pest Management Guidelines http://www.ipm.ucdavis. edu/PMG/selectnewpest.citrus.html. The UCIPM citrus pest management guidelines provide information on all of the significant pests and diseases of citrus (Figure 1). For each pest or disease, the guidelines describe its lifecycle, the damage it causes to citrus, natural enemies that attack it, monitoring methods, organically acceptable methods of control, selectivity 44 Citrograph March/April 2012 Fig. 2. A snapshot of the first page of the year-round IPM program for Central Valley citrus. http://ucipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/C107/m107yi01.html of pesticides, resistance issues and pesticide treatment choices. It is an excellent reference source for pest control advisors and growers to make decisions about when to treat and what to treat with. The guidelines also have important links to pages such as “mandatory intervals between application, reentry (REI), and harvest (PHI) and hazards to bees”. This section is very helpful as a quick check for which pesticides are registered for citrus as well as their use restrictions. UCIPM Year-Round IPM Program for Central Valley Citrus http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/C107/ m107yi01.html In 2008, University of California farm advisors, extension specialists and researchers worked with UC IPM to develop a “YearRound IPM Program for Central Valley Citrus” (Figure 2). The year-round program provides perspective on when activities should occur during the year (pre-bloom, bloom, petal fall, fruit development and fall). For example, during the pre-bloom period, PCAs are advised to monitor for California red scale, mites, cottony cushion scale, earwigs, katydids and brown garden snails. They are also advised to watch for Fig. 3. The annual checklist for the citrus year-round IPM program. http:// ucipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/C107/citrus-checklist.pdf Are you growing under the influence? GR EE N ING HL B Let Nutri-Phite®and Key Plex® Drive You Home Safely with Amazing Results 35801 Road 132, Visalia, CA 93292 800-868-6446 • 559-635-4784 559-625-9255 FAX • www.biagro.com KP C HLB HIT E® om pa nio logical Fungi cid n Bio e T KO P hosphit e GRE G Tiger SA I EN N SA Micr ver ReNew ™ o Te c h A G ® Kphite, SAver and ReNew are registered trademarks of Plant Food Systems. Companion is a registered trademark of Growth Products Ltd. March/April 2012 Citrograph 45 Fig. 4. The forms and photo identification pages for the citrus year-round IPM program. http://ucipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/C107/m107yiformsphotos.html diseases such as bacterial blast, brown rot, dry rot, and Phytophthora as well as survey winter weeds and search for signs of vertebrate pests. For each of these pests or diseases, the details of how to monitor are provided using links to text, photos, and monitoring forms. The photos and monitoring forms (Figure 4) are easily downloaded and printed. The monitoring forms are especially helpful for PCAs new to citrus, providing consistent methods of sampling that allow orchard pest and disease populations to be compared. The Citrus Year-Round IPM Program also includes an 8-page annual checklist that can be printed out and used throughout the year. The checklist is an excellent way to demonstrate to regulatory agencies and employers that you are using integrated pest management tactics to manage pests and diseases. A University of California Extension Specialist, Dr. Beth Grafton-Cardwell is a Citrus IPM Specialist in the Department of Entomology at UC Riverside and serves as the Director of the Lindcove Research and Extension Center, Exeter. l See Results in Citrus! 6 Month Growth Trial Control With MycoApply® DISTRIBUTED BY Soil & Crop 34284-B Road 196 Woodlake, CA 93286 (559) 564-3805 46 Citrograph March/April 2012 Tulare Ag Products, Inc. 3233 South “I” Street Tulare, CA 93274 (559) 686-5115 New Era Farm Service 2904 E. Oakdale Ave. Tulare, CA 93274 (559) 686-3833 March/April 2012 Citrograph 47 CRB 2011 Annual Report Ted Batkin, President T he 2011 fiscal year brought about several changes and also some degree of stability. First, the program changed the fiscal year from 1 November to 1 October. This resulted in an 11-month year, so many of the figures in the budget report are a bit different from a normal 12-month year. Second, the Operations program is in its third year, so there is a level of stability in that program and the work is going smoothly. The Operations program, which is funded through a contract with the Citrus Pest and Disease Prevention Program (CPDPP), remains focused on maintaining a strong Asian citrus psyllid detection program in commercial groves and laboratory testing for HLB. For the research program, advances were made in the development of an ACP trap with some level of attractant. This work is now at the field-testing stage, and several of the compounds are showing promise to improve the traps. In the area of diagnostics, the year brought notable progress in the VOC detection system and the Lateral Flow Microarray device. Both of these platforms are moving towards commercialization and should be available to the industry within the next two years. ACP control still is a focus of the research agenda, and several new projects were initiated to help with field efficacy issues. The Jerry Dimitman Laboratory in Riverside is now fully certified by USDA-APHIS and processing both leaf samples and ACP samples for the presence of the bacteria associated with huanglongbing. In addition, the Board completed an expansion of the facilities to improve the capacity for sample processing and to provide room to conduct methods development from CRB-funded research projects. The Board welcomes your comments and observations to the Citrus Research Program. The following table lists the audited financial statement for the 2011 fiscal year. A complete copy of the audit is available for viewing at the CRB office at 217 N. Encina, Visalia, CA. You are welcome to visit us at any time to discuss any elements of the program and see what we are doing. This is your program, and we look forward to hearing from you. l 48 Citrograph March/April 2012 CITRUS RESEARCH BOARD November 1, 2010 through September 30, 2011 INCOME 2010-2011 FY Assessment Income................ 5,928,276 Prior Season Income......................................... 144,197 Investment Interest Income................................. 26,527 Investment Dividend Income............................... 21,087 Rent..................................................................... 2,117 Citrograph Advertising........................................ 27,874 Conference Registration Fees............................. 11,183 Outside Income................................................. 125,000 Grower Seminar Registration................................ 8,770 Reimbursed Expenses...................................... 137,500 CPDPC Reimbursement Income..................... 2,744,585 TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE...........9,177,116 EXPENSES RESEARCH PROGRAM Plant Management DMS VOC Sensor for Citrus............................... 270,000 Bio Sensor Development for Citrus Disease Diagnosis.................................. 114,887 Determination of Timing...................................... 28,000 Total Plant Management................................ 412,887 New Varieties Citrus Rootstock Evaluation............................... 111,191 Variety Evaluation for Trueness........................... 71,823 New Citrus Breeding......................................... 163,406 Evaluation of Desert Lemons............................... 13,006 Unforbidden Fruit: Preventing Citrus Smuggling...... 4,884 Total Plant Improvement............................... 364,310 Plant Pathology Septoria Spot of Citrus.........................................45,375 Small RNA for HLB Plant Response....................104,769 Investigation of Seedling Yellows Cross................69,540 Identification of Spiroplasma citri.........................58,600 Investigating Important Disease...........................82,249 Integrated Low Cost Nucleic Acid.......................151,448 Development, Validation & Deployment..............245,000 Rapid Identification of Unknown Viroid.................75,217 Avoiding Economic Losses in CA Citrus................48,092 Total Plant Improvement............................... 880,290 Entomology Pest Management Infrastructure....................... 187,871 Management of Thrips........................................ 69,692 Assessment of Systemic Neonicotinoid............. 128,502 Molecular Systematics of Diaphorina.................... 8,092 Optimization of Imidacloprid Application Rates.... 36,700 Host Specificity Testing of Tamarixia................... 74,929 Preparation for Citrus Leprosis............................ 25,205 Evaluation of Oils.................................................. 6,250 ACP Attractants................................................. 288,853 Development of Pathogen Dispenser to Control ACP...................................................... 114,400 Optimizing Chemical Control of ACP in CA......... 102,603 Maintenance of Foundation ACP............................ 8,226 Total Entomology......................................... 1,101,323 Post Harvest Treatment Evaluation.......................................... 47,250 New Technologies to Minimize P.H. Decay........... 50,000 Ethyl Formate Studies for Bean Thrips................. 63,945 Breaking Citrus Trade Barriers............................ 26,243 Assessing Factors Influencing Post Harvest Quality. . 55,758 Total Post Harvest.......................................... 243,196 TOTAL RESEARCH PROGRAM...................... 3,002,006 COMUNICATIONS PROGRAM Core Grower Education Program..........................33,543 Citrograph.........................................................103,848 Website.................................................................9,109 CPDPP Outreach Program..................................674,164 Salaries & Benefits - Communications...............181,456 Supplies................................................................1,051 Travel....................................................................1,559 TOTAL COMMUNICATIONS PROGRAM......... 1,004,730 Field Salaries & Benefits – Field................................ 192,127 Contracts (Outside Personnel)............................... 8,108 CASS Staffing................................................... 479,335 Trap Readers...................................................... 92,406 Travel & Mileage . .............................................. 15,153 Fuel.................................................................... 93,870 Vehicle Repairs & Maintenance........................... 35,571 Equipment Repair & Maintenance......................... 4,652 Supplies............................................................. 99,058 Phone................................................................. 16,493 Postage................................................................ 2,824 Total Field.................................................... 1,039,597 Administrative Support....................................................91,667 TOTAL OPERATIONS PROGRAM................... 1,731,260 PAYROLL EXPENSE – Communications, Operations & Admin................... 93,144 CALIFORNIA CITRUS QUALITY COUNCIL (CCQC) CCQC Administration......................................... 251,310 Registration Projects........................................... 20,660 International Issues........................................... 152,450 Other Projects..................................................... 11,466 TOTAL CALIFORNIA CITRUS QUALITY COUNCIL (CCQC)............................................. 435,886 CONFERENCES..........................................29,620 GENERAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE Salaries & Benefits – Administration................. 522,615 Audit Fee............................................................ 12,817 Equipment Repair & Maintenance......................... 3,613 Equipment Rental................................................. 1,916 CITRUS CLONAL PROTECTION PROGRAM Information Services........................................... 37,898 Core Citrus Clonal Protection Program...............386,403 Insurance & Bonds.............................................. 19,829 LREC Positive Pressure Greenhouse...................144,772 Workman’s Compensation Insurance.................. 10,458 TOTAL CITRUS CLONAL Office Supplies................................................... 20,479 PROTECTION PROGRAM................................. 531,175 Postage................................................................ 5,711 Printing............................................................... 10,496 OPERATIONS PROGRAM Rent & Storage................................................... 21,400 Data Management Research Consultant........................................... 10,000 Salaries & Benefits – Data Management........... 140,685 Meeting Costs..................................................... 37,269 Travel & Mileage................................................... 1,343 Telephone........................................................... 17,844 Training................................................................ 1,495 Travel & Mileage – Consultant................................. 935 Information Services......................................... 121,505 Travel & Mileage – Members.............................. 45,541 Supplies.................................................................. 834 Travel & Mileage – Staff...................................... 57,146 Phone................................................................... 2,166 Vehicle Maintenance & Fees.................................... 663 Total Data Management................................. 268,028 CDFA – Bureau of Marketing............................... 52,558 Laboratory – Riverside & Visalia CDFA – Handler Audit.......................................... 23,625 Building Repairs................................................... 2,456 Salaries & Benefits – Lab.................................. 151,773 Property Taxes...................................................... 4,840 Travel & Mileage................................................... 4,422 Utilities............................................................... 10,538 Equipment Repairs............................................. 10,215 Depreciation..................................................... 180,660 Supplies........................................................... 100,197 Utilities............................................................... 14,121 TOTAL GENERAL & ADMINISTRATIVE............1,111,307 Phone................................................................. 14,158 TOTAL EXPENSES.................................7,939,137 Postage................................................................... 179 TOTAL CASH RESERVES...................................2,756.653 Rent.................................................................. 36,911 TOTAL ASSETS.......................................................5,160,450 Total Laboratory – Riverside & Visalia........... 331,976 March/April 2012 Citrograph 49 Citrus Roots Preserving Citrus Heritage Foundation California Citrus Spurred Colonization– Help! Can you identify the packer and the location? Aided Through the University of California... Richard H. Barker Your Foundation through the work of Tom Pulley is compiling a list of citrus brands of each packer… A FIRST! We have listed 6,870 so far, and we are still going. We want to match a packinghouse photo to the majority of the packers on this list, and that is where you enter! WE NEED YOUR HELP IN FINDING PHOTOS OF CITRUS PACKERS IN Delano Dinuba Dixon Edison Exeter Fairoaks Hamilton City Ivanhoe Lemon Cove Lindsay Orange Cove Orosi Oroville Palermo Porterville Rocklin Seville Strathmore Terra Bella Visalia Woodlake Check out our website… www.citrusroots.com Our “Mission” is to elevate the awareness of California citrus heritage through publications, education, and artistic work. We are proud of our accomplishments as a volunteer organization, which means each donated dollar works for you at 100% [for we have no salaries, wages, rent, etc.]. All donations are tax deductible for income tax purposes to the full extent allowed by law. Citrus Roots – Preserving Citrus Heritage Foundation P.O. Box 4038, Balboa, CA 92661 USA 501(c)(3) EIN 43-2102497 The views of the writer may not be the same as this foundation. 50 Citrograph March/April March/April2012 2012 Commendation is given to the University of California’s College of Agriculture for the work of E. W. Hilgard and for the Demonstration Trains “California Agriculture Special”and “Frost Education Special”. The latter provided the opportunity of promoting the Experimental Station for citrus research… All due to the help of the Southern Pacific Company... s a prologue, our focus will start when Eugene W. Hilgard first came to the University of California in the mid-1870s. He brought a background in geology, mineralogy, chemistry, zoology and botany coupled with experiences in the central states and Spain. One would conclude that he was uniquely suited for his 30-year career at the university. As F. Slate described his personality in his “Biographic Memoir of Eugene Woldelmar Hilgard (1833-1916)”, “Many have marveled that a fighting exponent of personal views in the public arena can be radiant of unassuming gentleness at home.” Eugene Hilgard is remembered because of his pioneering work in California relative to soils -- “alkali-soil” and “arid fertility.” His initial landmark “call to fame” was his scientific study presented by soil maps, which were published as part of the 1880 U. S. Census. As Richard J. Orsi built the “case” in his book “Sunset Limited - The Southern Pacific Railroad and the Development of the American West 1850-1930”, the University of California’s College of Agriculture did not have the financial means, the capacity, or the capability of amassing the data of this scale, and it was the Southern Pacific which opened their immense collection for Hilgard to utilize in compiling these soil studies. Further, Orsi mentioned that the railroad company sent a young civil engineer, Norman J. Willson, to work with Hilgard, and for over three months he conveyed a handcar over most of their route collecting over 400 specimens and samples for this study. Had it not been for the support of the Southern Pa- A cific, these maps could not have been completed in such exactitude. The University’s College of Agriculture would not have been credited with this exemplary work, and the Southern Pacific would not have had these noteworthy documents to support their land promotions. From Hilgard’s successful work, the rail company took every opportunity to maximize their efforts from his findings. They concluded on having local irrigated demonstration gardens spotlighting trees, shrubs, and other plants which were adaptable to the soil and climate of each location. The selection was focused on beauty as a means of market appeal, though most importantly the highlighted horticulture example they chose to plant had a potentiality of becoming a high-traffic commodity. These “gardens” were located in key station areas and their various hotels. Supporting horticultural material on behalf of the University of California and the Southern Pacific Company was available at each “garden site.” Those “gardens” were successful in furthering colonization and development; one only needs to look at the citrus development in Southern California, the pioneering of citrus in the Central Valley, cotton in the area of Roseville, alfalfa in the Imperial Valley, etc. In the photo of the Southern Pacific Park (garden) in Pomona, in support of the above, when the train stopped for loading and unloading the passengers had a short opportunity to stroll and view this narrow, block-long park and enjoy the beauty of the flowers, the targeted scheme of planted shrubs, the citrus varieties and other fruit trees. Brilliant marketing resulted when the University of California, Southern Pacific Company, and the community worked together. Politics and the UC budget Now, with the background of the Prologue, we can turn our attention to the period of 1900 to 1917, our nation’s Progressive Period (the interval of Presidents were Theodore Roosevelt to Woodrow Wilson). It was a time when the middle-class Americans believed that they needed to restore the government to the hands of the people. Government should be in the interest of the many rather than just the few. (The aforementioned keeps echoing -- history does repeat itself!) Further, one percent of the population owned 50 per- The Southern Pacific Railroad Park in Pomona. Travelers could stroll through the narrow, block-long park and view the special trees, shrubs, and other plants adaptive to the soil and climate. Various citrus varieties were on-site. cent of the country’s wealth. With this setting, we can now obtain a better understanding of the public attitude and their emotional feelings toward any sizable organization. Large institutions were looked upon with distrust. The Southern Pacific Company stood out as the largest corporation in the West. The University of California was looked upon as powerful -- and as an elitist -- hence, its budget was slashed. These budget cuts drove the University and the College of Agriculture to Southern Pacific, for each had common-like goals to develop farm commodities. The programs of the university to advance “scientific farming” were being totally ignored. The Southern Pacific Company offered to help by having their local station agents distribute agricultural bulletins and assist in advertising the university forums offered to farmers. The company even developed programs under which farmers could take advantage of drastically reduced fares to attend these meetings offered by the university. Bringing the farmers to the University of California’s College of Agriculture did not work! The University became convinced that it had to go directly to the farmer. A ‘university on wheels’ This was conceived as a “university on wheels” by Benjamin I. Wheeler, president of the University. He also Citrus Roots Series... Selling the GOLD History of Sunkist® and Pure Gold® GIFT IDEAS!! Citrus Roots...Our Legacy - Volume IV Citrus Powered the Economy of Orange County for over a half century Induced by a “Romance” All donations are tax deductible for income tax purposes to the full extent allowed by law. Citrus Roots For ordering information visit our website www.citrusroots.com Preserving Citrus Heritage Foundation CITRUS ROOTS . . . OUR LEGACY Volume I of III By: Rahno Mabel MacCurdy, V.A. Lockabey and others... compiled and edited by R.H. Barker Citrus Roots...Our Legacy - Volume I Selling the Gold - History of Sunkist® and Pure Gold® Our Legacy: $ 1500 Baldy View ENTREPRENEU RS Citrus Roots...Our Legacy - Volume II Citriculture to Citrus Culture Citrus Roots...Our Legacy - Volume III Our Legacy...Baldy View Entrepreneurs - 25 men & women who left a legacy Including a fold out time line chart of American Business Cycles from 1810 to 1978 vs. the Life Span of Twenty-Five Entrepreneurs by Marie A. Boyd and Richard H. Barker CITRUS ROOTS ... OUR LEGACY Volume III of III (Fed. Tax ID # 43-2102497) Keeping citrus heritage alive in the minds of those living in California through publications, educational exhibits and artistic works March/April 2012 Citrograph 51 named it “An Evangel Train.” The Southern Pacific Company mapped the itinerary, made schedules, worked with community businesses, farm organizations, etc. Additionally, the rail agents publicized each visit. The Company also provided food and sleeping cars plus paid the bills as reported by historian Orsi in his book mentioned earlier, “Sunset Limited The Southern Pacific Railroad and Development of the American West 1850-1930”. The rolling of the “California Agriculture Special” demonstration trains covered three seasons: 1909-1910, 1910-1911, and 1911-1912. In 1911-1912, which was the peak, the train traveled between 4,000 and 5,000 miles, made 238 stops, and attracted 102,000 visitors. This “California Agriculture Special” train visited practically every town of importance within the citrus belt of Southern California. G. Harold Powell gave a presentation at many of Benjamin I. Wheeler, president of the University of California, is at the the stops on citrus pests, spraying methods, and center of the group (middle row, fifth from left). predatory insects used to control insects; additionally, experiments were conducted on new and better Southern California citrus industry was under siege and hoping for survival! Some estimated a 39 percent loss of varieties of oranges and lemons. The “trains” were most important in helping modern- crop, and the total tree loss was very high. The Southern Pacific and the University of California ize California agriculture. During the latter tours, women professors from the Department of Home Economics gave proactively came together, and the cars rolled again, this discussions on food preparation, labor-saving devices, and time as the “Frost Education Special” to the help of the grower to minimize long-term damage and to prepare them public health issues. The public resentment changed from this spotlighted at- for another, future freeze. The help was through giving adtention. Further, the California legislature took a more posi- vice as to pruning, irrigation, fertilization, and other importive attitude, which resulted in greater allotments of funding tant recommendations. The schedule included 24 cities starting on February for programs and buildings. 13th and continuing to February 18th, from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 A special frost education train p.m. Newspapers carried very positive wrap-ups of the tour. During the end of December 1912 and January 1913, a As reported by the Los Angeles Times (February 12, 1913), devastating freeze struck the citrus areas. The $175 million present were: T. F. Hunt, dean and director; H. J. Webber, director of the Citrus Experimental Station; E. J. Wickson, ex-dean and director; W. T. Clark, superintendent of Farmers’ Institute; J. E. Coit, professor of citriculture; J. S. Burd, chemist in charge of fertilizer control; and, J. B. Neff, conductor of Farmers’ Institutes for Southern California. President Wheeler of the University became a regular speaker, and General Manager Powell of the California Fruit Growers Exchange was a party during part of the trip. Again, all was paid for by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. Now, what made this a special opportunity was the fact that the population of growers widely attended these 24 stops. This gave the University a perfect audience to sign a petition and a resolution calling for the passage of a bill Railcar exhibit area. One of many. 52 Citrograph March/April 2012 then pending in Sacramento, the legislation to appropriate $385,000 to establish a University Experimental Station for citrus research. A “golden opportunity” and a “golden ending”! On December 14, 1914, the University of California approved Riverside as the site selection. The Mission Inn rang its bells, and the electrical plant blew its steam whistle for 15 minutes. This is just another positive story involving two major players working together to advance the California citrus industry. (The complete L.A. Times, Feb. 12, 1913, article on the “Frost Education Special” will be posted on the Foundation’s website.) Richard H. Barker is the founder and president of the Citrus Roots-Preserving Citrus Heritage Foundation. For a number of years, he has been leading a drive to bring about a higher awareness of the role citrus played in developing California. Dick is a retired investment banker and was a third generation Sunkist grower. He has published four volumes on citrus heritage. All illustrations for this article were sourced by the author, who writes that he is especially indebted to the staff at the Bancroft Library at UC Berkeley for their perseverance in searching their archives for photographs. The photo of the Southern Pacific Park in Pomona is from the Pomona Public Library. l PACIFIC DISTRIBUTING, INC Distributor for Orchard-Rite® wind machines for frost protection & Tropic Breeze® original parts Sales Service New Used Portable Stationary 24 Hour Emergency Service 559-564-3114 Woodlake, CA www.orchard-rite.com Randy Quenzer, Sales 559-805-8254 [email protected] Jeff Thorning, Sales 559-972-9937 [email protected] March/April 2012 Citrograph 53 CRB Funded Research Reports Research Project Progress Report Reagentless detection of citrus pathogens using differential mobility spectrometry (DMS) Alexander A. Aksenov, William Cheung, Weixiang Zhao, Hamzeh Bardaweel, Federico Martinelli, Oliver Fiehn, Abhaya M. Dandekar and Cristina E. Davis H uanglongbing (HLB) and tristeza (caused by Citrus tristeza virus [CTV]) are both destructive citrus diseases capable of severely limiting citrus production. To date, millions of trees throughout the world have been destroyed due to CTV infection alone. In certain areas of south Florida, the majority of trees in some orchards are known to be affected by HLB. As such, both diseases represent a significant burden to the citrus industry across the world, reducing the quality and the total amount of citrus production annually. The primary goal of this project is to develop an early-stage, rapid, and non-invasive means of detecting these pathogens via analysis of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emitted by citrus plants as their metabolism changes after infection. This approach would complement existing HLB and CTV detection techniques such as real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), electron microscopy and serological testing already in use. The VOCs emitted by plants are typically associated with the distinctive aroma of the specific plant species and/or varietals (e.g. fresh smell of pine forest, jasmine, basil, mint). The “fresh citrus” smell is mostly due to presence of terpenes, a class of organic compounds that are derivatives of the isoprene pathway. VOCs an indicator of plant health man nose (e.g. we don’t smell them, but they are still present at very low amounts). The application of a highly sensitive method to conduct VOC screening, which will allow us to detect and identify those trace level VOCs, will open a new avenue for monitoring overall plant health in many different biological systems. Our first approach was to examine this in citrus, given the acute need of the industry to diagnose and track HLB spread across infected orchards. Plants respond to the presence of a pathogen by hostpathogen interactions that result in changes in metabolic activity; some of these changes will affect volatile metabolites, which in turn will result in an alteration of the emitted VOC profile. Some VOCs may undergo down- or up-regulation, and certain metabolites may be associated with particular stages of the pathogen’s life cycle within the plant host. Stimulation of VOC production is often described by use of the term “induced VOC” (IVOC). The detection of the entire IVOC profile in a fast, reliable and reproducible manner that will allow the monitoring of plant health will provide a very valuable tool for the agricultural industry in general and the citrus industry in particular. At the same time, this poses a formidable challenge. Application of certain analytical techniques for VOC detection may be limited due to low sensitivity, insufficient resolution, high cost, or a lack of portability, which is essential for realtime and in-field measurements. Differential mobility spectrometry (DMS) is also commonly known in scientific circles as high f ield asymmetric waveform ion mobility spectrometry (FAIMS). It is a very suitable technology for the outlined challenges associated with VOC detection in agriculture mentioned previously. The released VOCs are closely associated with plant metabolism, therefore serving as an indicator of plant health status. The changes in VOC production can occur due to a variety of conditions, including changes in environment, water stress, nutrient status, or the presence of pathogens. The VOCs typically must be present in relatively high concentration to reach our human “olfactory threshold” to be detected by the human nose but in lower concentration for a dog’s nose. Out of thousands of chemical compounds released Use of DMS technology by plants, most will be present at The micro-machine DMS is a concentrations significantly below very small and portable device that the olfactory threshold of the hu- Fig. 1. Sampling of VOC using portable DMS unit. has great sensitivity and specificity 54 Citrograph March/April 2012 and a relatively low power consumption. It functions to de- cation of the DMS has only been around for about 10 years, tect a large number of volatile and semi-volatile compounds, and a constant stream of developments have already lead to even at very low concentrations — from parts-per-million the development of units that are briefcase size (Figure 1a) down to parts-per-trillion thresholds. The DMS technology that can be easily carried by a person. However, the actual belongs to the family of other ion mobility (IM) chemical size of the “guts” of the DMS sensor is only few millimeters, detection methods which exploit differences in gas-phase so the potential for further miniaturization is significant. behavior of ions under various applied electric fields. In conjunction with portable computing devices such as The drift time ion mobility spectrometry (DT-IMS) is a the smartphone (e.g. iPhoneTM or DROIDTM) technologies, very well established technology that is used extensively for the actual field unit may be reduced to a hand-held size in security applications (e.g. airport screening for explosives and the near future. These units could be easily taken into an narcotics), military applications (e.g. detection of chemical orchard and used for an on-site measurement by growers, warfare agents), and other trace compounds detection needs. managers, or regulators. An additional advantage of the DMS sensing method The DMS technology utilizes differences in ion behavior under low and high field conditions for various ionic chemical is its portability. The PCR-based assay for identification of species, unlike the DT-IMS method where ions are driven by HLB-associated bacteria, which is currently the method of relatively weak electric fields. In the DMS system we employ choice for the HLB detection, requires sophisticated instruin this study, volatiles are sampled through low-pressure in- mentation and sample processing that can only be done at the appropriately equipped let (“sniffing”), ionized, then regional laboratory. In conpassed between two small trast, DMS measurements metal electrodes using an apcan be done on-site and propriate sampling “carrier” streamlined with the use of gas (e.g. dried room air). dedicated equipment. A specifically-shaped For example, an autoradio-frequency (RF) elecmated GPS-controlled rotric field waveform is applied botic platform carrying sensacross the electrode pair. If ing unit(s) could be set up the mobility of a sampled to scout orchard acreage for chemical is different under diseased trees and map their high- and low-field condilocation with minimal need tions, the chemical will exfor an operator and/or laboperience net displacement ratory personnel interactions. toward one of the electrodes We have initiated DMS and will be neutralized (i.e., studies of trees infected with we cannot “see” it). An additional direct current (DC) Fig. 2. An example of DMS data for VOCs produced by orange one of two citrus pathogens, tree leaves. The left panel shows detected positively charged voltage, called a “compensa- ions; the right panel shows detected negatively charged ions. Liberibacter spp. and CTV, using the portable DMS tion voltage” (CV), is applied to the RF electrode to offset ion displacement and allow a units. For the HLB studies, the infected or diseased and preparticular chemical species to pass through the device — ef- sumed healthy Hamlin orange trees located in the orchard at the Citrus Research and Education Center (Lake Alfred, fectively acting as a filter. Each chemical species has a unique dependence of its FL) were visually selected by human scouts and confirmed mobility due to the electric field (chemical signature); there- to be healthy/infected by PCR. In order to sample a tree, leaves on a branch were placed fore the differences in ion mobilities under high- and lowin front of the DMS unit’s inlet (Figure 1b) to draw the air field conditions can be used to identify specific chemicals. Variation in the amplitude of the asymmetric waveform off the leaf surfaces and into the unit. The chemicals were will alter ion behavior and may result in different CV. Thus, pre-concentrated on a sorbent trap for a set period of time. using such amplitude scan in addition to the CV monitor- After that, the trap was heated and desorbed chemicals were ing allows a significant enrichment of information from each introduced into GC column followed by DMS analysis. The measurement. This is a critical advantage of the DMS method resultant GC/DMS trace reflects the total IVOC fingerprint compared to the DT-IMS for the discrimination of extremely for a particular tree (Figure 2). We have collected DMS data from infected citrus complex samples such as VOCs off-gassed by citrus trees. In addition, the DMS can be coupled with other separa- throughout the year to account for seasonal differences in tion methods such as gas chromatography (GC/DMS), fur- VOC production by the trees. Currently, the data are being ther increasing diagnostic capability. In a GC/DMS experi- analyzed, and our diagnostic algorithms are being fine-tuned ment, each chemical can be separated and characterized by for the detection of disease-related volatile “biomarker” their respective CVs and retention times, both indicative of compounds. a particular chemical species. Potential for miniaturization An important advantage of the DMS technology is its potential for further miniaturization. The commercial appli- Data analysis and model development This year-round sampling period included significant fluctuations in weather conditions from extremely hot temperatures with high humidity in summer to freezing temperMarch/April 2012 Citrograph 55 atures with lower humidity in winter. A number of trees with symptoms varying from very mild to severe were included in the study (health status confirmed by PCR in all cases). This will allow us to assess feasibility of the DMS-based chemical sensing for early-stage asymptomatic disease detection. The collected data are being analyzed, and a mathematical model is currently being developed for the differentiation of HLB-sick and healthy trees based on our data. We ultimately seek to identify the chemical compounds produced by citrus trees and then link the response of our DMS unit to variations in the production of these particular compounds. To do this, we also sample citrus VOCs using solid phase micro extraction (SPME) and TwisterTM devices, in parallel to the portable GC/DMS units. The SPME and Twister devices have a different design, but both operate in a similar fashion to each other – offgassed citrus VOCs are adsorbed onto a polymer coating when the collection devices are exposed to a tree leaf for a predetermined period of time. Upon heating, the adsorbed chemicals can be desorbed and introduced into laboratorybased traditional gas chromatography mass spectrometry (GC/MS) instruments. This lab analysis will allow us to identify differences in VOCs production due to pathogen infection and identify specific “biomarker” compounds using the MS data. An example of how we perform unique confirmatory chemical identification using MS is shown in Figure 3. In the final phase of our study, we are working to link the production of VOCs to specific gene activity in citrus plants that is associated with specific chemical signatures or IVOC biomarkers. Specific genes can be up- or down-regulated in response to a certain pathogen that in turn result in selected alterations of citrus metabolism and of the emitted VOCs that we can observe as off-gassed by the trees. By comparing healthy and infected trees it is possible to determine when particular genes were up- or down-regulated. Since one gene corresponds to a specific protein or an enzyme, it is possible to conceive of this as an entire network of metabolic activity leading to the production of certain end-product VOCs based on previously classified metabolic networks. To date, we have collected leaf samples for deep transcription level sequencing, and these transcriptome analyses will be carried out along with DMS and GC/MS experiments. Project Leader Dr. Cristina Davis is an Associate Professor in the Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, University of California Davis. Co-Project Leader Dr. Abhaya M. Dandekar is a Professor in the Department of Plant Sciences, UC Davis, and Co-Project Leader Dr. Oliver Fiehn is a Professor with the UC Davis Genome Center and Bioinformatics Program. Dr. Alexander Aksenov is a development engineer, Dr. William Cheung is a postdoctoral fellow, Dr. Weixiang Zhao is an associate specialist, and Dr. Hamzeh Bardaweel is a postdoctoral researcher, all in the Bioinstrumentation and BioMEDs laboratory directed by Prof. Davis. At the time of this work, Dr. Federico Martinelli was a postdoctoral fellow in the Dandekar laboratory, UC Davis Department of Plant Sciences. CRB research project reference number 5100-135. l Sabinene Fig. 3. Identification of chemical compounds from GC/MS data. The top panel shows a fragment of a typical gas chromatogram (GC) recording. The mass spectrum for the peak flagged on gas chromatogram is shown on the bottom panel. The mass spectrum corresponds to a specific terpene compound called sabinene that is commonly found in citrus. 56 Citrograph March/April 2012 IMPROVE H20 PENETRATION AND SOIL TILTH IMPROVES SOIL AEROBIC CONDITION Proven to have water penetrate deeper and more uniformly. TRANSFORMER allows water to penetrate over a larger area thereby displacing more CO2 which is then replaced with Oxygen and Nitrogen. TRANSFORMER reduces water agglomeration around compacted soil areas which can lead to disease pressure and reduced yields. 1 (See studies). 2 INCREASES FEEDER ROOT GROWTH OPTIMIZES NUTRIENT UPTAKE & H2O TRANSPORT The improved hydraulic conductivity and an increase in aerobic function in soil result in explosive feeder root growth. 3 Microbes and roots are then able to use the available Oxygen and Nitrogen. The improved soil conditions allow this cycle to continue. The increase in root surface area optimizes the uptake of water and nutrients such as N, P, K, Zn, Ca, Fe, Mg, Mn from the soil. The increased surface area and root mass of the feeder roots, exponentially increases the root / soil / nutrient contact surface area. 4 This increase has demonstrated the ability to reduce plant stress, accelerate canopy expansion, improve crop mature uniformity and increase yields. STIMULATES MICROBIAL ACTIVITY APPLICATION METHODS The higher aerobic levels increases microbial activity, which leads to enhanced nutrient efficacy and future water utilization. Applications of liquid TRANSFORMER can be made using: › irrigation › chemigation › boom sprays › aerial application Additionally, properly aerated soil, hosts fewer moisture related root diseases such as phytophthora. Contact ORO AGRI or your local approved distributor for more information. CHECK WITH YOUR STATE REGULATORY AGENCY TO DETERMINE REGISTRATION STATUS ALWAYS READ AND FOLLOW LABEL DIRECTIONS AVAILABLE FROM YOUR NEAREST QUALITY RETAILER COPYRIGHT © JANUARY 2012 ORO AGRI INC. • ALL RIGHTS RESERVED • TRANSFORMER AND LIQUID RIPPER ARE PROPRIETARY TRADEMARKS OF ORO AGRI Celebrating Citrus Farm Show concession for Boys & Girls Club serves up a ‘citrus-y slaw’ and fresh-squeezed juice Jim Gorden C abbage is an amazingly versatile and healthy vegetable. The use of cabbage in various forms is common in many cultures of the world. Here in the USA, one of its most common uses is in the quintessential American picnic green salad, coleslaw. I enjoy its versatility and durability for making green salads. I have hauled it on 10-day mule pack trips into the mountains of Baja California. There, I prepared cabbage salads for the trip participants and the cowboys/muleskinners of Baja who all enjoyed its freshness after a long day in the saddle. Interestingly, the cabbage maintained its quality with only the cooling provided by a moist bean sack and in spite of temperatures well into the 80s. I have prepared my citrus-y slaw for thousands of patrons of the Boys and Girls Clubs food concession at the World Ag Expo, aka “The Farm Show”, held every February in Tulare, California. At the inception of the food concession, we featured fresh navel orange juice. Now, we also offer a blend of navel and blood orange juice as well as fresh made lemonade. Many Farm Show visitors were at first put off by the blood orange juice, as it was new to them. But after a few years of its becoming familiar, we find people coming back and saying things such as “it’s really the Farm Show now as I’ve had my glass of blood orange juice”. About ten years ago, I started preparing coleslaw for the lunch plates served at the concession. Initially, we dressed the slaw with a rather traditional mayonnaise style dressing. I wanted to offer something a little different, featuring more citrus. Thus, I concocted a Meyer lemon vinaigrette dressing, which is a beautiful complement to the cabbage. We make the dressing fresh 58 Citrograph March/April 2012 Bottom left: The B&GCS concession is famous for its special blend of navel and blood orange juice. In the background are volunteers Emily Lowry and dad, Sonny. Bottom right: She may be in charge, but there’s no getting out of dishwashing duty for Mary Gorden. Photos by Chris Brooke. each day with locally produced olive oil and Meyer lemons. The super citrus-y version of the slaw includes diced orange, tangelo, or mandarin tossed into the salad. The citrus and cabbage complement each other very nicely when prepared this way. This salad may also be varied by adding other ingredients to change its character. Toss in a handfull of bacon bits and a bit of hot curry into the vinaigrette for a hint of the Far East. Add some chopped cilantro for a south-ofthe-border effect or a little chopped fresh mint for a Moroccan touch. For “feeding the masses” at the Farm Show, we start each day with at least 100 pounds of freshly shredded cabbage, two cups of finely grated Meyer lemon zest, and three quarts of vinaigrette. But for a smaller crowd, like maybe six, try the following: Super citrus-y slaw for 6 • ½ head of cabbage, finely shredded • Finely grated zest from a small to medium size Meyer lemon • Peel and dice an orange, tangelo or mandarin Meyer lemon vinaigrette dressing • Combine in a small jar with a tight lid, and shake to emulsify: • 3 Tablespoons Meyer lemon juice • 3 Tablespoons olive oil • 1 Tablespoon sugar • ½ Teaspoon salt Combine the cabbage, zest and diced citrus and toss with just enough of the dressing to coat the cabbage. Season to your taste with additional salt and pepper, and enjoy. Note that you can also use other citrus zest in salads for a different effect. Minneola tangelo—or for that matter almost any mandarin or orange—gives great flavor to salads. I use a micro-plane grater to remove the zest from a medium-size lemon with a few easy strokes. You may wish to adjust the acidity or sweetness of the vinaigrette, which you can do by adding or reducing the sugar proportion; or, if the Meyer lemons are too sweet as they may get toward spring, substitute some regular lemon juice. Extra vinaigrette may be stored in the refrigerator for a week or more but will need to warm up a bit before use as the oil will solidify. The backstory … Based in Exeter, the Boys & Girls Clubs of the Sequoias (B&GCS) serves more than 7,000 kids a year at their afterschool programs at 17 sites throughout Tulare County. For their World Ag Expo fundraiser, teams of volunteers contribute more than 2,000 man-hours of effort every year in staffing the concession, working from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. daily. Gorden reports that his wife, Mary, who serves on the B&GCS board of directors, “carries the bulk of the load for the overall planning and direction” of the concession while he’s more involved with the food prep, which includes making the beans and the slaw as well as overseeing the cooking of the meat and the juicing operation. They go through six bins of oranges, he says. Lemon Cove grower Jim Gorden, here with son Milo, is the immediate past chairman of the Citrus Research Board and continues to serve as an active member of the Board. CRB stakes out new territory at World Ag Expo A fter years of occupying booth space inside Pavilion A at the World Ag Expo, the Citrus Research Board moved to an outdoor space for this year’s “Farm Show”, allowing the program to expand the exhibit. The new location is on a northsouth street just east of Pavilion B. The number one advantage to the outdoor space is that it’s large enough to accommodate the mobile laboratory that Dr. Beth Grafton-Cardwell and her team use in the field to train members of the industry and the general public about management of citrus pests. The microscopes inside the lab provide close-ups of insect life stages. Facing the mobile lab, on the opposite side of the “lot”, a tented area housed a fresh fruit display, a demonstration of the CPDPP’s invasive pest mapping website, and a demonstration of the Nomad hand-held data loggers used in the field in the Asian citrus psyllid trapping program. As for CRB’s former space in Pavilion A, it’s now home to the CPDPP’s public education and outreach program on ACP and huanglongbing. ...continued on next page March/April 2012 Citrograph 59 2012 World Ag Expo Continued from p. 59 Photo by Lynn Sanderson Asian Citrus Psyllid Cooperative Project California, Arizona, Baja California, and Sonora United States Department of Agriculture SAN BENITO CO FRESNO CO MONTEREY CO Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service INYO CO TULARE CO Navajo Co KINGS CO NV Mohave Co SAN LUIS OBISPO CO Coconino Co KERN CO Yavapai Co SANTA BARBARA CO CA LOS ANGELES CO VENTURA CO Gila Co SAN BERNARDINO CO San Miguel Santa Santa Anacapa Island Rosa Cruz Island Island Island San Nicolas Island La Paz Co RIVERSIDE CO Graham Co Maricopa Co Santa Barbara Island Santa Catalina ORANGE CO Island AZ SAN DIEGO CO Pinal Co IMPERIAL CO San Clemente Island Yuma Co Pima Co Legend ACP_Regulatory Incidents_2011 thru Feb, 2012_CA & AZ ( ! Asian Citrus Psyllid, CA_2012 thru 3-12-12 (4,302 records) ( ! Asian Citrus Psyllid, CA_2011 (13,550 records) ! ( ( ! Asian Citrus Pysllid, AZ_2011 (3 records) ( ! Asian Citrus Psyllid, Mexico_2011 (614 records) Santa Cruz Co Baja California Sonora Asian Citrus Psyllid, Mexico_2012 thru 3-2-12 (82 recrods) Quarantine for Asian Citrus Psyllid, CA (1/26/2012) Quarantine for Asian Citrus Psyllid, AZ (12/7/2009) USDA, APHIS, PPQ GIS Specialist -- California 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 6-400 Sacramento, CA 95814 Coordinate-System: CA Teale Albers, NAD 83 Date Printed: 3/15/2012 Time Printed: 07:47 hrs PT Data Source: CA Dept of Food & Agric. AZ Dept of Agriculture USDA, APHIS, IS TeleAtlas Dynamap o 0 10 20 40 60 80 The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service collected the data displayed for internal agency purposes only. These data may be used by others; however, they must be used for their original intended purpose. Map of Asian citrus psyllid detections in California and neighboring portions of Arizona and Mexico through 3/12/12. 60 Citrograph March/April 2012 Miles 100 Please support the Harry Scott Smith Biocontrol Scholarship Fund at UC Riverside A special message from invasive species researcher Mark Hoddle I nvasive species are an ever-increasing problem in California agriculture, and obviously citrus is no exception. One tool that can be used to combat invasive species is biological control. The science of biological control – the use of a pest’s natural enemies to suppress its populations to less damaging densities – was pioneered in Southern California. This new discipline in entomology was in large part driven by the citrus industry’s need to control invasive species, especially the cottony cushion scale which was devastating citrus in the late 1880s. The phrase “biological control” was first used by Harry Scott Smith in 1919 at the meeting of Pacific Slope Branch of the American Association of Economic Professor Harry Scott Smith Entomologists at the Mission Inn in downtown Riverside. In 1923, Smith, who had been working on the biological control of gypsy moth with USDA, moved to the University of California Riverside to form the Division of Beneficial Insect Investigations, a unit separate and distinct from the Department of Entomology. Prof. Smith, affectionately known as “Prof. Harry”, went on to create and chair the Department of Biological Control at UCR, which offered the only graduate degrees in biological control in the world. He is considered the “father” of modern day biological control. Prof. Harry brought recognized entomological training in biocontrol to California for the first time, encouraging work on the applied and practical aspects. Under Prof. Harry’s supervision, the science of biological control was developed in Southern California, and, naturally, a major research focus was the biological control of citrus pests. The Harry Scott Smith Biological Control Scholarship Fund in the Entomology Department at UCR was started with a small gift from Prof. Harry, and regular fundraising is necessary to maintain and grow the fund. The sole purpose of the fund is to attract the brightest students to UCR to study biological control. To do this, awards are made annually to provide assistance to students studying biocontrol so they can attend conferences to present the results of their research or to participate in training workshops. With an ever-increasing number of production challenges facing the citrus industry, biological control is still one of the best tools available for reducing economic damage from invasive pests, and projects on Asian citrus psyllid and Diaprepes root weevil are attempting to do this. If you are interested in supporting the Harry Scott Smith Biological Control Scholarship Fund at UCR, tax deductible donations made payable to the “UC Foundation” can be mailed to Mark Hoddle, Department of Entomology, University of California, Riverside, CA 92521. More information on the Scholarship, past awardees, and a list of donors can be reviewed at http://biocontrol.ucr.edu/ hoddle/harrysmithfund.html. Any level of financial support you can provide for the Harry Scott Smith Mark Hoddle collecting Asian citrus psyllid Biological Control Scholarship Fund at UCR will be greatly appreciated. natural enemies in the Punjab of Pakistan. Thank you, Dr. Mark S. Hoddle Director, Center for Invasive Species Research UC Riverside March/April 2012 Citrograph 61 DPR honors Sunwest Fruit with IPM Innovator Award S unwest Fruit Company, Parlier, has been singled out by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation as one of four organizations receiving DPR’s 2011 IPM Innovator Awards. Ranch managers Greg Thonesen and Brian Fien accepted the honor on the company’s behalf at a Jan. 26 ceremony held at the Sacramento headquarters of the California Environmental Protection Agency. Sunwest President Martin Britz was in attendance as was his son, Brett Britz. The awards are presented annually for leadership in reducing pesticide use. Honored this year along with Sunwest were the city of Palo Alto, Gallo’s Sonoma Vineyards, and Marin County. Announcing the winners, DPR noted that Sunwest, a privately owned ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** grower/packer/shipper of stone fruit and citrus, “uses a variety of innovative IPM practices”. DPR reported that the company “grew the first citrus and stone fruit certified by Protected Harvest, a nonprofit organization that promotes sustainable agricultural practices, and sold under Zeal, an eco-label targeting socially and environmentally conscious consumers. “Sunwest has eliminated the use of simazine, diuron and other herbicides known to contaminate ground and surface water. It allows native vegetation to grow between trees, which reduces erosion and soil compaction and increases organic matter in the soil. Other practices include modifying tractors and adding enclosed cabs with carbon air filters to reduce applicator 35-60 Horsepower Requirement 15-600 Gallon per Acre Capability Maneuverable Ten ft. Long Chassis Weight & Height Adjustment Penetrating Spray from Twin Fans Save 20-30% in Chemicals Identical Spray Pattern Each Side 85% Droplets are 50 Micron Size 200-500 Gallon Tank “Heavyweight Performance! Lightweight Price!” 62 Citrograph March/April 2012 exposure and provide a safer, more comfortable work environment. “The company traps and tracks red scale populations with global positioning system mapping and partnered with Agrian, a Fresno-based software firm, to develop an iPad application to Brian Fien and Greg Thonesen of Sunwest Fruit Company. Photo by Alyssa Nichols, courtesy of California Citrus Mutual. capture the data. It uses pheromone disruption for pests in stone fruit using dispensers known as puffers and installed bio-filters in the Tivy Creek watershed to filter runoff and prevent pesticides and other pollutants from entering the creek. “ DPR reports that since the IPM Innovator Awards were initiated in 1994, more than 100 California organizations have been recognized for their efforts to reduce risks associated with pesticide use and for sharing their knowledge and methods with others. Nominees are evaluated in seven categories: innovation, value, effectiveness, supports research, organizational education, outreach, and leadership. l THE ANSWER HELP WANTED What happened in California 40 years ago that still impacts pest management operations today (Do You Know, page 5)? In the spring of 1972, the California Department of Agriculture unveiled proposed regulations “that will place persons recommending agricultural pest control methods under strict licensing and registration requirements.” As reported in the June 1972 issue of Citrograph, “The proposed regulations set up procedures for licensing by the State Director of Agriculture and registration with the agricultural commissioner of every county in which the pest control advisers operate. To get an agricultural pest control adviser’s license, the applicant must pass a comprehensive test of his knowledge of laws, regulations, safety, pests, pest control methods, and environmental effects of pesticides. “Each agricultural pest control adviser will be required to place all recommendations in writing and provide copies for the grower, dealer, and applicator...” Duarte Nursery is now hiring container growers specializing in citrus. Salary commensurate with experience, all levels of formal education welcome to apply. For more information, please contact Michael Vietti at (209) 531-0351 or [email protected]. Successful growers like Mark Campbell of Willits & Newcomb cover their Citrus with Agra Tech Greenhouses. Agra Tech is here to help your crop stay healthy and protected from Psyllids. A FOLLOW-UP NOTE… In our grower profile of John J. Gless (January/February 2012), we neglected to include something that obviously should have been mentioned and that’s his work with California Citrus Mutual. He has served on the CCM board of directors since 2003 and is an active member of their marketing committee. CITRUS 3LHGPRQW:D\3LWWVEXUJ&$ -LP%HUJDQW] 6DOHV(QJLQHHU MLPEHUJDQW]#DJUDWHFKFRPZZZDJUDWHFKFRP – AVOCADOS – OLIVES March/April 2012 Citrograph 63 Friends Day May 4th 2012 • 9 am - 2 pm • Tradeshow • Tours • Presentations • Wine Tasting • Lunch For more information contact: Sara at [email protected] 1555 Baldwin Rd. Hughson, Ca. 95326 1 - 800 - GRAFTE D