1 / 33

Herbert, 2006

Thrips Control in VA/NC: Overview, Insights and Options. A. Herbert & S. Malone, Virginia Tech and Jack Bacheler & D. Mott, NC State. Herbert, 2006. Avg. lint loss potential to thrips in Virginia. 2001=352 2003=279 2004=341 2005=543 2006=655. Herbert, 2006. Thrips Control Levels.

kim-sparks
Download Presentation

Herbert, 2006

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Thrips Control in VA/NC: Overview, Insights and Options A. Herbert & S. Malone, Virginia Tech and Jack Bacheler & D. Mott, NC State Herbert, 2006

  2. Avg. lint loss potential to thrips in Virginia • 2001=352 • 2003=279 • 2004=341 • 2005=543 • 2006=655 Herbert, 2006

  3. Thrips Control Levels Excellent 1112 lb Moderate 888 lb Poor 469 lb

  4. 1254 lb lint 598 lb lint Herbert, Virginia Tech, 2006

  5. Thrips injury rating scale0 = no injury, 5 = dead plants 0.25 4.75

  6. Cotton thrips sampling 10 seedlings/plot

  7. The plant coverage issue!

  8. Nozzle study—TAREC, VA, 2006 Roundup OriginalMAX @ 22 oz/A tank mixed with Orthene 97 @ 0.36 lb ai/A (= 6 oz/A) @ 1st tl & 2-3 tl (May 22 & 30), 10 gpa. Variety = DP 434 RR. CT06THP7 Herbert, 2006

  9. * NS=no difference among treatments Significantly different (P=0.05) Nozzle study—adult thrips * * Mean no. adult thrips/10 plants NS NS CT06THP7 Herbert, 2006

  10. * NS=no difference among treatments Significantly different (P=0.05) Nozzle study—immature thrips * * Mean no. immature thrips/10 plants * NS NS NS CT06THP7 Herbert, 2006

  11. * NS=no difference among treatments Significantly different (P=0.05) Nozzle study—thrips injury ratings * * * NS NS Mean plant injury rating NS CT06THP7 Herbert, 2006

  12. Nozzle study—lint yield a a a a a a a a a Lint yield (lb/acre) b Herbert, 2006

  13. Hilldrop vs. single seed—TAREC, 2006 DP 444 BG/RR 1 Based on a scale of 0 (no injury) to 5 (dead plants), averaged over 4 sample dates. CT06THP11 Herbert, 2006

  14. Gaucho 0.23 0.375 mg ai/seed Cruiser 0.30 0.34 Thiamethoxam 0.34 + Abamectin 0.15 (Avicta Complete Pak) Imidacloprid + Thiodicarb (Aris) Improvements in seed treatment technology

  15. THP 4 Virginia Tech 2006

  16. Thrips counts—adults Mean no. adult thrips/10 plants CT06THP8 Herbert, 2006

  17. Thrips counts—immatures Mean no. immature thrips/10 plants CT06THP8 Herbert, 2006

  18. * NS=no difference among treatments Significantly different (P=0.05) Thrips injury ratings * * * * Mean plant injury rating NS * NS CT06THP8 Herbert, 2006

  19. Lint yields--CT06THP4 a b b Lint yield (lb/acre) c Herbert, 2006

  20. THP 6 Virginia Tech 2006

  21. Thrips counts—adults Mean no. adult thrips/10 plants CT06THP6 Herbert, 2006

  22. Thrips counts—immatures Mean no. immature thrips/10 plants CT06THP6 Herbert, 2006

  23. * NS=no difference among treatments Significantly different (P=0.05) Thrips injury ratings Mean plant injury rating * * * CT06THP6 Herbert, 2006

  24. Lint yields—CT06THP6 a a a a a a Lint yield (lb/acre) b Herbert, 2006

  25. Lint yields—CT06THP6 a a a a a a Lint yield (lb/acre) Herbert, 2006

  26. Lint yield summary—VA, 2005-2006 Lint yield (lb/acre) n = 14 3 8 3 8 2 16 4 16 Herbert & Bacheler, 2006

  27. Lint yield summary—NC, 2005-2006 Lint yield (lb/acre) n = 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 1 5 Herbert & Bacheler, 2006

  28. Mean thrips injury rating—CT05THP4 With Orthene 97 4 oz BC Mean injury rating 0.34 0.15 0.34 0.15 0.375 0.34 3.5 lb 5 lb 0.375 0.34 3.5 lb 5 lb Herbert, 2005

  29. Overall yield comparisons—2005 tests Orthene 97 broadcast @ 4.0 oz/A Herbert, 2005

  30. Cotton aphid treatments may be less with Temik vs. seed trt. + foliar Bacheler, NC State

  31. NC acreage treated for cotton aphids (2004-2005 Consultants’ Survey) Difference: 2.3-fold Bacheler, NC State

  32. Spider mite treatments may be less with Temik vs. seed trt. + foliar Bacheler, NC State

  33. NC acreage treated for spider mites (2004-2005 Consultants’ Survey) Difference: 9.1-fold Bacheler, NC State

More Related