Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39 doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18 (E18) TOMATO: Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., ‘Florida 47’ TRANSPLANT APPLIED INSECTICIDES FOR WHITEFLY AND TOMATO YELLOW LEAF CURL VIRUS MANAGEMENT ON FRESH MARKET TOMATO, FALL 2012 Hugh A. Smith University of Florida-IFAS Gulf Coast Research and Education Center 14625 CR 672 Wimauma, FL 33598 Phone: (813) 633-4124 Fax: (813) 634-0001 E-mail: hughasmith@ufl.edu Curtis A. Nagle E-mail: cnagle@ufl.edu Sweetpotato whitefly (SLW): Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) The efficacy of five insecticides applied to the soil at transplant and one combination soil and foliar treatment program were evaluated compared to a non-treated check for control of SLW and tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV), which is vectored by SLW, in tomato at the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Wimauma, FL in the fall of 2012. ‘Florida 47’ transplants were set on 21 Aug, 18 inches apart in single rows, in 8-inch-high and 32-inch-wide beds of Myakka fine sand. The beds were spaced on 5-ft centers and covered with white virtually impermeable mulch. Plots consisted of 42 plants in three adjacent 21-ft long rows and were separated by 10 ft of unplanted bed within rows and 12 ft between rows. Treatments were replicated four times in a RCB design. Soil applied treatments were hand ladled in 4 fl oz of preparation per plant (Table 1). Foliar treatments were applied using a high clearance sprayer, fitted with Albuz orange nozzles, pressurized to 200 psi and calibrated to deliver 60 gpa (early season) or 90 gpa (late season) (Table 1). SLW densities were assessed on the middle ten plants of the middle row of each plot. Adult SLW densities were sampled by examining the third leaf from the top on one stem per plant and recorded as the number per ten leaves. Immature SLW densities were sampled from the terminal leaflet of a 7th or 8th leaf from the top of each of ten plants and recorded in the lab, with the aid of a stereo microscope, as SLW eggs, 1st, 2nd & 3rd, or 4th instars per ten leaflets. All plants in a plot that possessed TYLCV symptoms were recorded weekly. No yield data were collected. Adult and immature SLW data were transformed √(x+0.5) and cumulative weekly percentage of plants showing TYLCV symptoms were calculated and transformed arcsine[√(%TYLCV/100)] prior to ANOVA. Means were separated by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P=0.05). Means were reported in the original scale. There were no differences among treatments in SLW adult densities (Table 2) or SLW egg densities (Table 3). First instar densities in plots of any chemical treatment were lower than in the non-treated checks on 24 Sep only; there were no significant differences among treatments on any other sample date (Table 4). On 17 Sep, 2nd & 3rd instar densities were lowest in plots drenched with A16901B, A16971B, Durivo or Venom (either drench alone or followed by A16901B foliar applications). On 1 Oct, only plots treated with A16901B (drench or foliar) or Platinum possessed 2nd & 3rd instar densities lower than in the check (Table 5). No differences among treatments were observed in 4th instar densities (Table 6) or cumulative % plants with TYLCV symptoms throughout the experiment (Table 7). No phytotoxicity was observed. This research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticide and/or research funding. 1 Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39 doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18 Table 1. Date of application (gpa) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Application method 21Aug (181.5) Non-treated check A16901B 40 WG A16971B 40 WG Durivo 300 SC Platinum 75 SG Venom 70 SG Venom 70 SG fb A16901B 40 WG --13.1 oz 6.54 oz 12.3 fl oz 3.42 oz 6.0 oz 6.0 oz 7.0 oz --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar X X X X X X 19Sep (60) 27Sep (60) 3Oct (60) 9Oct (90) X X X X a ‘fb’ means followed by. Table 2. SLW adults/ten leaves (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Application method Non-treated check A16901B 40 WG A16971B 40 WG Durivo 300 SC Platinum 75 SG Venom 70 SG Venom 70 SG fb A16901B 40 WG F6,18 P-value --13.1 oz 6.54 oz 12.3 fl oz 3.42 oz 6.0 oz 6.0 oz 7.0 oz --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 10Sep (20) 17Sep (27) 24Sep (34) 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.3a 0.0a 0.5a 2.8a 3.3a 5.0a 2.0a 4.3a 1.8a 1.0a 0.8a 2.0a 1.5a 1.0a 0.0a 1.00 0.4552 6.5a 1.8a 1.89 0.51 0.1377 0.7902 1Oct (41) 0.0a 0.5a 0.0a 0.5a 1.3a 0.8a 8Oct (48) 1.8a 2.3a 0.8a 2.5a 1.3a 1.8a 15Oct (55) 5.0a 5.5a 4.3a 5.3a 5.3a 2.8a 0.0a 2.0a 1.0a 2.03 1.17 1.32 0.1141 0.3633 0.299 Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). a ‘fb’ means followed by. Table 3. SLW eggs/ten leaflets (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Non-treated check A16901B 40 WG A16971B 40 WG Durivo 300 SC Platinum 75 SG Venom 70 SG Venom 70 SG fb A16901B 40 WG F6,18 P-value --13.1 oz 6.54 oz 12.3 fl oz 3.42 oz 6.0 oz 6.0 oz 7.0 oz Application 10Sep method (20) --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 3.5a 0.0a 0.0a 2.5a 2.8a 0.0a 0.0a 1.94 0.1291 17Sep (27) 24Sep (34) 1Oct (41) 8Oct (48) 15Oct (55) 6.5a 0.8a 1.8a 1.3a 5.0a 10.0a 2.0a 0.8a 0.5a 0.3a 0.3a 0.0a 5.0a 0.8a 1.3a 2.0a 2.0a 0.3a 8.3a 6.5a 5.5a 2.0a 2.0a 0.5a 2.3a 3.5a 2.0a 5.8a 5.8a 4.0a 2.0a 0.8a 0.8a 0.5a 1.0a 1.82 0.62 0.71 1.80 0.78 0.1508 0.7086 0.6444 0.1565 0.5932 Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). a ‘fb’ means followed by. 2 Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39 doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18 Table 4. st SLW 1 instars/ten leaflets (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Non-treated check --A16901B 40 WG 13.1 oz A16971B 40 WG 6.54 oz Durivo 300 SC 12.3 fl oz Platinum 75 SG 3.42 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz fb A16901B 40 WG 7.0 oz F6,18 P-value Application method 10Sep (20) 17Sep (27) 24Sep (34) 1Oct (41) 8Oct (48) 15Oct (55) --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 1.0a 0.3a 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5a 0.0b 0.0b 0.0b 0.0b 0.0b 0.5a 2.0a 1.0a 2.8a 3.8a 1.0a 7.5a 0.8a 0.5a 1.0a 1.3a 1.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.3a 0.0a 0.0b 3.00 0.0327 0.5a 0.0a 0.0a 1.26 1.42 1.00 0.3250 0.2618 0.4552 0.0a 0.86 0.5411 0.0 ----- Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). a ‘fb’ means followed by. Table 5. nd rd SLW 2 & 3 instars/ten leaflets (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Non-treated check --A16901B 40 WG 13.1 oz A16971B 40 WG 6.54 oz Durivo 300 SC 12.3 fl oz Platinum 75 SG 3.42 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz fb A16901B 40 WG 7.0 oz F6,18 P-value Application 10Sep method (20) --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 17Sep (27) 4.5a 0.3a 0.0a 0.5a 5.8a 0.0a 24Sep (34) 20.8a 0.3bc 0.0 c 3.3bc 9.8ab 0.0 c 0.0a 1.61 0.2015 1Oct (41) 10.5a 2.8a 3.0a 4.3a 3.3a 2.8a 4.3a-c 3.48 0.0184 8Oct (48) 11.0a 10.3a 3.3bc 7.3a 5.5ab 4.5a 8.5ab 5.8a 2.5bc 12.3a 10.0ab 3.8a 1.5a 1.39 0.2725 15Oct (55) 10.5a 4.0a 5.5a 8.3a 28.3a 10.0a 0.5 c 0.0a 0.3a 3.17 2.62 2.02 0.0265 0.0530 0.1163 Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). a ‘fb’ means followed by Table 6. th SLW 4 instars/ten leaflets (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate amt/acre Non-treated check --A16901B 40 WG 13.1 oz A16971B 40 WG 6.54 oz Durivo 300 SC 12.3 fl oz Platinum 75 SG 3.42 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz Venom 70 SG 6.0 oz fb A16901B 40 WG 7.0 oz F6,18 P-value Application 10Sep method (20) --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 0.3a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.3a 0.0a 17Sep (27) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0a 0.0 0.79 --0.5897 --- 24Sep (34) 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 2.8a 0.3a 1Oct (41) 3.3a 2.0a 0.5a 0.3a 1.8a 3.8a 8Oct (48) 1.5a 2.3a 1.8a 2.8a 3.0a 2.0a 15Oct (55) 1.0a 0.8a 0.8a 0.5a 1.0a 0.8a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 2.22 0.97 0.91 0.63 0.0886 0.4706 0.5123 0.7033 Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). ‘fb’ means followed by. a 3 Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39 doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18 Table 7. Cumulative % of plants with TYLCV symptoms (days after transplanting) Treatment/ a Formulation Rate Application 10Sep amt/acre method (20) Non-treated check A16901B 40 WG A16971B 40 WG Durivo 300 SC Platinum 75 SG Venom 70 SG Venom 70 SG fb A16901B 40 WG F6,18 P-value --13.1 oz 6.54 oz 12.3 fl oz 3.42 oz 6.0 oz 6.0 oz 7.0 oz --drench drench drench drench drench drench foliar 17Sep (27) 24Sep (34) 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 0.6a 0.0a 1.2a 0.0a 0.0a 0.0a 2.4a 0.6a 5.4a 3.0a 7.1a 3.6a 8.9a 1.8a 0.6a 0.79 0.5897 1.2a 2.15 0.0978 4.8a 0.88 0.5267 1Oct (41) 8Oct (48) 15Oct (55) 22 Oct (62) 8.3a 4.8a 8.9a 4.2a 10.7a 2.4a 32.1a 26.8a 29.8a 17.3a 30.4a 14.3a 40.5a 31.5a 38.7a 25.6a 36.3a 23.8a 52.4a 38.1a 56.0a 38.1a 61.3a 36.3a 8.3a 21.4a 29.8a 44.6a 1.23 1.07 0.68 1.29 0.3379 0.4170 0.6682 0.3110 Data were transformed arcsine[√(%TYLCV/100)] prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.). a ‘fb’ means followed by. 4
© Copyright 2024