Short Shoot Syndrome i t d ith t d b d associated with rust and bud

Transcription

Short Shoot Syndrome
associated
i t d with
ith rustt and
d bud
b d
mites
Vaughn Walton
Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
[email protected]
High Value Viticulture
Between 2-3 tons/acre
Cool climate varieties north
Cool spring, slow growth in early season
V
Very
littl
little option
ti ffor early
l crop llosses
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
worldwide, statewide
Distribution & Damage:
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
Sustainable management
Symptoms: early season
Eriophyid mite damage: World Distribution
Rust and bud mite damage in vineyards
Hluchy 1992
Boller 1984, Kreiter 1986, Duffner 1999
James 2003
Walton 2007
Duso 1996
Perez-Moreno1998
Smith 1948
1948,
Jeppson 1975
Dennil 1986
James 1991, Frost 1995,
Bernard 2005
Trunk this side
Walton et al 2006
Walton et al 2006
Walton et al 2006
Symptoms: summer
Die-back of primary shoots
Scar tissue due to feeding
Walton et al 2006
Symptoms: summer
Drawstring and cupped leaves
Walton et al 2006
Symptoms: late summer 2006
Sometimes: Bronzing
visible on leaves
Walton et al 2006
Symptoms: harvest 2006, 2007
Walton et al 2006
Symptom confusion: Phomopsis
Photo: J. Pscheidt
Symptom confusion: Phomopsis
Photo: J. Pscheidt
Symptom confusion: Zn, B deficiency
Symptom confusion: B toxicity
Photo: P. Skinkis
Symptom confusion: Frost
Photo: R. Smith
Symptom confusion: Frost
Photo: R. Smith
Symptom confusion: Herbicide damage
Photo: S. Castagnoli
Symptom confusion: Cane borers
Symptom confusion: Cane borers
Symptom confusion: Vine balance
Symptom confusion: Resources
http://extension oregonstate edu/catalog/details php
http://extension.oregonstate.edu/catalog/details.php
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
Organism biology: Life cycle
•Winter
Winter females generally near
the buds
• Females feed on bud tissue
during spring
•Migrate to the underside of the
leaves until October-November
•Some migrate towards the new
young buds
buds.
From Duffner 1999
Organism biology: Developm. parameters
1.6
Oviposition
n rate
1.4
Optimum oviposition rate = 26.49°C
1.2
1
0.8
Lower
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
14
19
24
Temperature (°C)
( C)
29
34
Calepitrimerus vitis oviposition rates (Eggs per day per female) on temperature. The
upper threshold for oviposition was 33.81°C
Walton et al. 2008a in prep.
0.80
C. vitis movement to
overwintering
g sites
2007
2008
0 70
0.70
Mean
n mites/lea
af
0.60
0.50
0.40
Period when
leaves have a
bronzed look
0.30
0 20
0.20
0.10
Walton et al. 2009 submitted.
10/5
9/5
8/5
7/5
6/5
5/5
4/5
0.00
0.80
C. vitis movement to
overwintering
g sites
2007
2008
0 70
0.70
Mean
n mites/lea
af
0.60
0.50
0.40
Period when
leaves have a
bronzed look
0.30
0 20
0.20
0.10
Walton et al. 2009 submitted.
10/5
9/5
8/5
7/5
6/5
5/5
4/5
0.00
Organism biology: Regional differences
a
2007
GDD for C.vitis
G
180
160
2008
Period of vine tissue susceptibility
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2/2
2/22
3/14
4/3
4/23
5/13
c
GDD for C.vitiis
Period of vine tissue susceptibility
2007
2008
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
2/2
2/22
3/14
4/3
4/23
5/13
Organism biology: Regional differences
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
statewide
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
Distribution: Statewide
a
Counties where analysis of plant material was done
Skinkis & Walton in prep.
Distribution: on vine, late dormant period
Under outer bud scale during late dormant
period
•Focus
Focus our search in this area during winter
(this is where damage happens later)
From Duffner 1999, Bernard 2005
Distribution: on vine
Dennil 1986, Duffner 1999, Bernard et al 2005, Walton et al 2007
Early season movement:
•double sided tape 40/block 2006
•14 day intervals
•showed rust mite movement
•results
lt erratic
ti
Bernard et al 2005, Walton et al 2007
Mite presence in buds, March 2008
No damage fo
found
nd on winter
inter b
bud
d tiss
tissues
es
Distribution: on vine, symptoms
First damage
found on ‘short
shoots’ after bud
break
Seasonal symptoms: Spring 2007
Dennil 1986, Duffner 1999, Bernard et al 2005, Walton et al 2007
Mean C. vitis per bud
30
25
20
15
10
5
proximal
distal
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Bud position
Mean number of C. vitis per bud (SE) in relation to bud position. Forty eight buds were
sampled per position. Buds were sampled during the winter (March 22, 2007) in one
vineyard
i
d bl
block
k near D
Dundee,
d
O
Oregon
On-vine distribution: winter 2007
Walton et al. 2007
Me
ean C. vitis
s incidence per shoot
Damage: on vine, symptoms
20
A
18
On vine symptoms: Spring 2007
16
14
12
a
10
a
8
6
B
4
b
2
C
0
short
medium
long
Internode category
Association of mean density of Calepitrimerus vitis and shoot length (SE) category on
Apr. 28, 2006 in three vineyard blocks near Dundee (A) and Sherwood (a), Oregon.
Short, medium and long shoots were 1-3mm, 4-7mm and 8-12mm in long, respectively.
Twenty seven, 137 and 135 shoots fell in each category, respectively in Dundee.
Ninety two, 232 and 31 shoots fell into each category, respectively in Sherwood.
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
Distribution and damage: in vineyard
In ine ard dispersal
In-vineyard
F
From
Duffner
D ff
1999
Distribution and damage: in vineyard
Calepitrimerus vitis
density
Ti
Tissue
damage
d
A
B
Association of mite
density and tissue
damage
C
N
Cl t i
Clustering
(patches)
Random
association
Gaps
Walton et al. 2007.
Distribution and damage: in vineyard, temporal
Location
Dundee
Sherwood
Dallas
Sheridan
Block
Estimated crop loss (%)
Seasonal
mites/leaf
2006
2007
2006
2007
1
23.72
11.95
59.02
32.41
2
7 17
7.17
48
4.8
26 53
26.53
12 41
12.41
3
1.54
3.8
8.30
2.8
1
0
6.78
-
0.1
2
0.63
10.75
-
4.18
3
2.04
16.88
-
9.32
1
-
9.1
-
8.51
2
-
9.55
-
10.12
1
-
28.5
-
52.38
2
-
49 87
49.87
-
75 37
75.37
Walton et al 2007, Dreves & Walton et al 2008b in prep.
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
Chemical control
When to act, wooly bud stage
Chemical control
16
Control
Mean mitte count/bu
ud
14
Miticide
12
Sulfur
10
8
6
4
2
6
/2
00
7/
21
7/
7/
20
06
6
/2
00
6/
23
20
06
6/
9/
6
/2
00
5/
26
/2
00
5/
12
4/
28
/2
00
6
6
0
Effects of mite sprays on mite numbers after bud break in one
vineyard
i
d iin D
Dundee.
d
R
Replicated
li t d bl
block
kd
design.
i
Th
Three vines/block
i
/bl k
and five blocks. Repeated measures ANOVA.
Management trials 2006, similar results 2007
Chemical control
Effects of miticides on mite numbers during fall and spring in one vineyard in
Dundee. Replicated block design. Three vines/block and three blocks. Three buds
taken per vine approx two weeks after spring application. Straight ANOVA.
Effects of post harvest and wooly bud sprays 2006/7
Chemical control
Perc
cent crop
p loss
Effects of Wooly bud sprays
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Dundee
Unsprayed
Dundee
Sprayed
Sherwood
unsprayed
Sherwood
Sprayed
Effect of early season1 sprays in two areas in
Oregon
Percent crop loss in two sprayed and unsprayed vineyards during 2007
Chemical control
Statewide change in management 2007-8
Stylet oil
predators
miticide
miticides
none
2 Sulfur
stylet oil
other
sulfur
2lf Sulfur
1 Sulfur
Pre- research
After initial research
Outline_______________
Symptoms
Organism
g
biology
gy
Distribution:
on vine
in vineyard
Ch i l control
Chemical
t l
8
7
Lo
og mites
6
Willamette mites
Pheitoseiid mites
5
4
3
2
1
0
5/22/2006
6/29/06
7/13/06
7/26/06
8/10/06
9/11/06
Log mites per 25 leaves on date in an organic farm during 2006 in two vineyards of Pinot Gris
Grapes in Corvallis, Oregon. Black arrows indicate sulphur sprays .
Field data confirmed with lab
bioassays
bi
IOBC guidelines used e.g. Potters
Precision Spray Tower
Indicator species T. pyri
USDA CSREES W-IPM grant
Sprays started at wooly bud stage
Seasonal fungicide
spray regimes
•No Sulfur
•Sulfur only
•Limited
Limited sulfur
Look at fungicide
spray impacts on
natural enemies:
Visual inspection
Beat sheets
Leaf samples
Every 14 day sampling
Focus on T. pyri and generalists
Rep. measures ANOVA
0.5
Location Dundee, Oregon
Log pest mites
Log predator mite
Se as onal m ite s pe r le af
0.4
Fruit set: July 30
Harvest Sept. 24
Pes t m ites : 0 .03
Pr ed at or mi te s: 0. 13
Pest mites: 0.08
Predator mites: 0.22
Pest mites: 0.05
Predator mites: 0.26
02
0.2
0.1
0.0
Synthetic fungicides only
Sulfur only
5/15/07
5/31/07
6/12/07
6/26/07
7/ 10/07
7/27/07
8/8/07
8/20/07
9/6/07
10/18/07
da te:
5/15/07
5/31/07
6/12/07
6/26/07
7/10/07
7/27/07
8/8/07
8/20/07
9/6/07
10/18/07
da te:
5/15/07
5/31/07
6/12/07
6/26/07
7/10/07
7/27/07
8/8/07
8/20/07
9/6/07
10/18/07
-0.1
01
da te:
Log m
mites
0.3
Synthetics and sulfur
Dreves & Walton 2009 in prep.
Role of cover cropping in survival of beneficials
Acknowledgements
Oregon Wine Board, USDA-CSREES WesternIPM, VCW
OSU faculty, Individual growers
Willamette Agricultural
g
Consulting
g
Commercial chemical companies for materials
Mike Burkey, Travis Forsman, Mike Reitmajer,
Jessie Luna, Lori Scarbrough, Drew Mahedy,
Angela Gadino, Tyler KilKenny
Thank you !

Short Shoot Syndrome i t d ith t d b d associated with rust and bud

Transcription

Similar documents