Managing Cherry Insects Under Changing Insecticide Use Patterns

1. Managing Cherry Insects Under Changing Insecticide Use Patterns Supported by OKCGA & BCAC Agriculture Environment Initiative

2. Study Objective:To assist producers with the implementation of IPM techniques for the controlof cherry insect pests

3. Study Design 12 Orchards3 Years InsectMonitoringPrograms CropDamageAssessments Spray Programs

4. Pests Monitored • Cherry Fruit Fly • Leafroller species • Eyspotted Budmoth • Mites • Cherry Fruitworm • Peachtree Borer & Clearwing Moth • Black Cherry Aphid • Beneficial insects, mites & parasitoids

5. Cherry Fruit Fly • Pest with biggest changes in insecticide use • Historically, monitoring not performed in Creston area due to poor experience • Excellent pest control maintained during study

6. Trends in Insecticide Use for WCFF

7. Summary of Changes in Insecticide Use Patterns • Decline in the use of Organophosphates • Increase in the use of Spinosyns • Avoidance of the use of Sevin • Earlier season spray timing of Admire

8. Cherry Fruit Fly Monitoring • Monitoring of abandon & infested sites • Used to test Degree Day Model for adult emergence • Used by producers to time initial spray • Used to identify the variation in timing emergence within local microclimates

9. Testing Degree Day ModelVince Jones Model - Emergence +/- 2 days of 3 year average (550 DD)- Delay of 100 DD (approx 7 days) between early and late locations within valley

10. Monitoring in Commercial Blocks • Species identification confirmed • Increase in pest awareness • Improved visual recognition and understanding of pest biology • Captures not limited to orchard perimeter • Variation in population pressure exists between orchards • “Hot spots” frequently identified • Improved ability to manage risk

11. Effectiveness of Control

12. LeafrollersRelative Level of Species Present

13. Fairly wide variation in population pressure between farms

16. Testing Leafroller Degree Day Model (L.Gut) • Predicting Biofix • Predicting peak flight • Estimating egg hatch and spray timing

17. Predicting Biofix

18. Predicting Peak Flight

20. Predicting Egg Hatch & Spray Timing

21. Leafroller Spray Timing

22. Changes in Leafroller protection

23. Incidence of Leafroller Injury

24. Only 1 summer adult generation per year • Peak flight occurred in early August between the 2 adult generations of OBLR

25. Variation Between BlocksTwo Generation Leafroller Species

26. Variation Between BlocksSingle Generation Leafroller Species

27. Leafroller Parasitoids – Apanteles sp.collected from overwintering larvae

28. Eyespotted Budmoth Gradual increase in captures over 3 years

29. Variation Between Farms

30. Mites Some leaf brushing issues need to be addressed • Predators • Brushes • Mid-vein

31. Typical Mite Pattern

32. Summary of Leaf Brushing Results • 85% of blocks recorded no active McDaniel or European Red Mites prior to the end of July • During August & September, several blocks exceeded 30 McDaniel & Red mites per leaf: • 2006: 4 0f 6 blocks • 2007: 4 of 6 blocks • 2008: 1 of 6 blocks • 2 blocks suffered severe leaf discoloration and some defoliation in Sept 2007 where counts exceed 80 McDaniel &/or Red mites

33. Phytoseiid Ratios and Biocontrol

34. Review of Spray Programs • All blocks received dormant oil • Only 1 summer miticide applied over 3 years to site 3 in 2007 • Products with potential impact • Sevin • Admire – toxic to phytoseiid adults1 • Sulphur – toxic to phytosiied larvae11 recent studies by Thistlewood

35. Influence of Pesticide Use • No clear pattern between individual products used and phytoseiid survival • Admire frequently used once per season & sulphur twice – generally early in season • More severe mite outbreaks occurred in 2 blocks with the highest combined use of sulphur, Admire and Sevin • 4 sulphur + 1 admire • 1 sulphur + 2 admire + 1 sevin (wasps)

36. Additional Observations • Higher proportion of predators at the end of the 3 year study than at the beginning • Complete absence of predatory mites in 1 block following a relatively soft program (no OP’s but used Admire) • Some blocks with high McDaniel and others with high European red mites • Rust mites present in some blocks but never at threshold levels

37. Cherry Fruitworm • No captures in traps over 3 year period • No fruit damage or larvae found

38. Clearwing Moth & Peach tree Borer • No captures of Clear Wing moth in traps over 3 year period • No peach tree borer injury observed in any of the sites • Increase in peach tree borer captures each year over 3 year period • Range of capture in 2008 from 7 to 74 adults / trap / season

39. Black Cherry Aphid • 20 minute timed inspections used for monitoring • Gradual decline in presence over 3 period and decline in number of blocks treated • Difficult to assess predatory influence due to lack of control over spray programs

40. Pesticide Risk ReductionQuantifyingEnvironmental Impact fromChanging Insecticide Use

41. Insecticide Use Patterns

42. Calculating Environmental Impact QuotientKovach, Cornell • Example • EIQ Diazinon = 43.4 (pre-determined) • (farmworker safety, consumer protection, ecological effects) • % a.i. = 50% • Kg / Ha = 4.5 • No. of applications = average of 12 blocks • Calculating Field EIQ • 43.3 x .5 x 4.5 x no. of apps.

43. Environmental Impact QuotientCalculated from all insecticides used – 12 orchards(higher numbers represent higher environmental impact)

44. Field EIQ by Product

45. Insecticide Residues at Harvest Remained Well Below Tolerance