We are finding threshold levels of bollworms (eggs and live worms) in conventional cotton (no Bollgard2 or Widestrike). Those fields should be managed using the old system (treat at egg threshold and retreat in 5-7 days). The best approach for Bollgard2 and Widestrike cotton is the treat one time 5-7 days after the egg threshold, which targets any escaped worms. Not treating Bollgard2 or Widestrike cotton could be a mistake. For the past 2 years, we have seen as much as 2-3% boll damage in some Bollgard2 varieties, and as much as 10% damage in one Phytogen variety. A single pyrethroid application (highest labeled rate) cleaned up the problem. One cautionary note, we have gotten reports of worms escaping pyrethroid treatments in cotton.
Category Archives: Commodity
EPA Federal Register on Cancellation of Pencap-M insecticide
Pesticide Federal Register Items for the Week of July 12-16, 2010
>
>Methyl Parathion: Cancellation Order for Certain Pesticide
>Registrations Date of publication: July 16, 2010
>Citation: Volume 75, Number 136, Page 41482-41483
>http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-17404.htm
>Purpose: This notice announces EPA’s order for the cancellations,
>voluntarily requested by the registrants and accepted by the Agency, of
>products containing methyl parathion, pursuant to section 6(f)(1) of
>the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as
>amended. This cancellation order follows an April 28, 2010 Federal
>Register Notice of Receipt of Requests from the registrants listed in
>Table 2 of Unit II. to voluntarily cancel all these product
>registrations. These are the last products containing this pesticide
>registered for use in the United States. In the April 28, 2010 notice,
>EPA indicated that it would issue an order implementing the
>cancellations, unless the Agency received substantive comments within
>the 30 day comment period that would merit its further review of these
>requests, or unless the registrants withdrew their requests. The
>Agency received comments on the notice but none merited its further
>review of the requests. Further, the registrants did not withdraw
>their requests. Accordingly, EPA hereby issues in this notice a
>cancellation order granting the requested cancellations. Any
>distribution, sale, or use of the products subject to this cancellation
>order is permitted only in accordance with the terms of this order,
>including any existing stocks provisions.
>Chemical(s): Methyl Parathion**
>Comments: EPA has established a docket for this action under docket
>identification number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0332. The cancellations are
>effective July 16, 2010.
>Contact: Kelly Ballard, Pesticide Re-evaluation Division (7508P),
>Office of Pesticide Programs, telephone number: (703) 305-8126; fax
>number: (703) 305-5290; e-mail address: ballard.kelly@epa.gov.
>
>
>Methyl Parathion; Registration Review Proposed Decision; Notice of
>Availability Date of publication: July 16, 2010
>Citation: Volume 75, Number 136, Page 41484-41485
>http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/2010-17403.htm
>Purpose: This notice announces the availability of EPA’s proposed
>registration review decision for the pesticide methyl parathion and
>opens a public comment period on the proposed decision.
>Registration review is EPA’s periodic review of pesticide registrations
>to ensure that each pesticide continues to satisfy the statutory
>standard for registration, that is, that the pesticide can perform its
>intended function without unreasonable adverse effects on human health
>or the environment. Through this program, EPA is ensuring that each
>pesticide’s registration is based on current scientific and other
>knowledge, including its effects on human health and the environment.
>Chemical(s): Methyl Parathion
>Comments: Submit your comments, identified by docket identification
>number EPA-HQ-OPP-2009-0332. Comments must be received on or before
>September 14, 2010.
>Contact: Kelly Ballard, Chemical Review Manager, Pesticide
>Re-evaluation Division (7508P), Office of Pesticide Programs, telephone
>number: (703) 305-8126; fax number: (703) 305-5290; e-mail address:
>ballard.kelly@epa.gov.
>
>Mailing address for all listed staff: Office of Pesticide Programs,
>Environmental Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW,
>Washington, DC 20460
Reminder to visit the Virginia Ag Pest Advisory (http://www.sripmc.org/Virginia/) for important updates on the corn earworm survey, resistance monitoring, and insect activity
This is an update concerning the automatically generated email that notifies people of new posts to the Virginia Ag Pest Advisory. Although our “Friday morning” email did not work on July 30, 2010, it seems that our “Emergency Notification” option is working. We wish to thank Dr. Yulu Xia for his generous assistance working through this glitch. Remember, all advisories are available anytime at http://www.sripmc.org/Virginia/ (you may have to search the archives at the bottom of the website). Please see Dr. Herbert’s posts about the results of the corn earworm survey and resistance monitoring, and also Dr. Kuhar and my posts concerning insect activity this week. Thank you.
Eastern Shore Insect Trap Counts for Week ending July 29
This week the corn ear worm flight seems to have spread throughout both counties with all trap locations showing increased activity. This week also showed a jump in beet armyworm catches at both the Eastville and Painter locations while cornborer activity has shown a significant decrease. Click more to view a spreadsheet of pheromone trap catch and blacklight trap catch from various locations on the Eastern Shore. Additional information: es-insect-trap-counts-7-16-10-7-23-10-5-xls
Black light trap captures for the week ending 29 July 2010
Black light trap captures of corn earworm moths greatly increased for nearly all of our reporting stations. The lowest nightly average was recorded in Petersburg (4) and our highest included Richmond County (69) and Prince George County (76). Please refer to the attached Table for more nightly averages. Additional information: blacklight-table-10-pdf
Corn earworm survey and predictions
Annually, we conduct a survey to estimate corn earworm infestation levels in field corn in late July. Earworms develop in corn, then move to other crops such as soybean, cotton, and peanut in August. We determined the number of corn earworms found in 50 ears of corn from 5 randomly selected corn fields in each of 24 counties, totaling 5,800 ears and 116 fields sampled. Statewide, 42% of ears were infested with earworms. This is up from 36% in 2009. Regional averages were 12% infested in Northern, 28% in the Northern Neck, 39% in Mid-Eastern, 58% in the Southeast, and 46% on the Eastern Shore. See the attachment with results from each county and many more details. From the survey, it looks like the areas of greatest risk to heavy infestations of earworms are the southeastern ‘cotton/peanut’ counties, and the Eastern Shore. However, as large as this effort is, it is not a complete picture. We always recommend scouting individual fields to determine exactly what is happening in terms of corn earworm as well as other pests and crop problems. We will continue posting moth catch numbers and other information regarding the 2010 insect pest situation.
Additional information: cew-survey-table10-2-docx
Corn earworm pyrethroid resistance update
As of July 29, we have tested a total of 768 corn earworm moths in our pyrethroid AVT (adult vial testing) program. Although the percent survivorship is down somewhat from last week, we are still seeing greater than 20% survive (see the attached line graph). Could this mean that field failures are likely? Possibly, especially if worm populations are large. Our goal is to process as many moths as we can and post these weekly updates. We are also responding to calls from crop consultants, advisors and growers. We have one reported case of a ‘less than acceptable’ level of control in a peanut field. Could some of those surviving worms have been tobacco budworms, which are known to be more difficult to control with pyrethroids? Possibly, but it is almost impossible to distinguish between corn earworm and tobacco budworm without inspecting the moth parts of the worms under magnification in lab. We do know that budworms can be in the mix, up to 30% one year when we did a lot of worm IDs. Bottom line, this is the third consecutive year that local corn earworm populations are demonstrating high levels of pyrethroid resistance. Proceed with caution and consider non-pyrethroids especially in peanut or soybean fields with a lot of worms.
Additional information: cew-avt-jul-29-2010-ppt
Eastern Shore Insect Trap Counts for Week Ending July 23
Mr. Kyle Sturgis and Bill Shockley have embarked on a more extensive insect pest trapping effort on the Eastern Shore. Click more to view a spreadsheet of pheromone trap catch and blacklight trap catch from various locations on the Eastern Shore of Virginia. This same spreadsheet will include other locations and will add new catch numbers on a weekly basis. We are getting organized to deliver a more comprehensive picture of the activity of major agricultural pest insects on the Eastern Shore.
In summary the spreadsheet shows the first real rise in counts of both corn earworm and European corn borer in the Mappsville and Assawoman areas of the Eastern Shore. Activity in Eastville appears to be low. There have been no catches of either beet armyworm or fall armyworm so far. It is early for those pests, although a fall armyworm infestation in late planted corn was seen in Northampton County this week.
Additional information: es-insect-trap-counts-7-16-10-7-23-10-xls
Corn earworm captures for the week ending 22 July 2010
As Dr. Herbert mentioned in his advisory, corn earworm moth captures in our network of black light traps are beginning to increase. Reports north of the James River ranged from 0 (Essex Co.) to 7 (Richmond Co./Warsaw) moths per night. In southeast Virginia, reports ranged from <2 (Petersburg) to 10 per night (Southampton Co./Courtland). Please see the attached table (pdf) for more information. Additional information: blacklight-table-10-pdf
New invasive insect pest of soybean
I am paraphrasing an email we received from Jack Bacheler at NC State last week alerting us to a new invasive insect pest of soybeans. The Figure images (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3) are attached:
The bean plataspid, Megacopta cribraria Fabricius, is a new invasive pest from south Asia that is currently spreading throughout the southeastern United States (Fig. 1). This insect is a piercing sucking pest (similar feeding as stink bugs) on legumes and was first found on kudzu in Georgia during December 2009. It has since been confirmed on both soybeans and kudzu in both Georgia and SoI am paraphrasing an email we received from Jack Bacheler last week alerting us to a new invasive insect pest of soybeans. The Figure images (Fig. 1, Fig. 2, and Fig. 3) are attached: uth Carolina in 2010. The confirmed distribution is represented in Fig. 2.
Research on insecticide management options is being conducted by Dr. Phillip Roberts, University of Georgia, and his colleagues. The University of Georgia researchers and Dr. Jeremy Greene, Clemson University, are monitoring this pest and we need to be vigilant for the appearance of this pest in North Carolina. Many invasive insects are found in extremely high numbers upon initial establishment, which may aid in our detection of this pest (Fig. 3). Current numbers from Georgia in soybeans are reported as close to 10 insects per sweep near field borders, where the distribution of this pest is the highest.
Please contact me if you see this insect in your soybean field (Ames Herbert, 757-657-6450, ext 411, Herbert@vt.edu).
Additional information: bean-plataspid-jul-22-2010-ppt