• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 The insect Keiferia- lycopersicella...
 Host range
 Infestation and spread
 Control






Group Title: Research report - Bradenton Agricultural Research & Education Center - GC1973-2
Title: The tomato pinworm in Florida
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00067681/00001
 Material Information
Title: The tomato pinworm in Florida
Series Title: Bradenton AREC research report
Physical Description: 4 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Poe, S. L ( Sidney LaMarr ), 1949-
Agricultural Research & Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
Publisher: Agricultural Research & Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Bradenton Fla
Publication Date: 1973
 Subjects
Subject: Tomato pinworm -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Tomato pinworm -- Control -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: S.L. Poe.
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "March, 1973."
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00067681
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 71843505

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    The insect Keiferia- lycopersicella life history
        Page 1
    Host range
        Page 2
    Infestation and spread
        Page 2
    Control
        Page 3
        Page 4
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida






b jAGRICULTUPJAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
SIFAS, University of Florida
SBradenton, Florida
< Bradenton AREC Research Report GC1973-2 March, 1973


THE TOMATO PINWORM IN FLORIDA

.Poe


For the pastt OM and possibly or some time before, the population of
tomato pinworm, an insect pest of tomato potatoes and eggplant has steadily in-
creased in Florid part aW ethe w t coast and in south Florida. The insect
is not new to this area, t has not been resent in sufficient numbers to warrant
special concern fok many years. Since 197 it has been a serious pest and of con-
trol interest in the HillsboQowh Ttaa county area. Recently, however, the crop
of spring tomatoes P IaepliVTJsic.etafields of Lee and Collier counties has
baeen severely damaged-byt s pest. Eradication of established populations from
theoe crops met with minimal success and leaves bearing 5-10 larvae each were common.

The objective of this research report is to provide information about the pin-
w:.m for county agents, agriculturists, farmers and other interested persons. It
suiariizes published data from other areas where the pest occurs and also presents
datfl collected in Florida during the past two years.

The insect Keiferia .lycopersicella (Walsh.)

Life History Table 1

Adult. The tomato pinworm adult is a small grayish moth about 1/4 inch long.
Thlie rame pinwormm' is derived from the larval habit of entering tomato fruits,
l].iving a small, pin-sized hole. The pinworm is a semi-tropical pest distributed
Stomnato growing areas of Hawaii, California, Mexico, Texas, Louisiana, Florida,
RLiti, the Bahamas and Cuba. It was first reported in California in 1923 and in
Florida in 1932. Adults are generally nocturnal but numerous individuals have been
dif. covered among weeds within infested fields and in vegetation along border canals
and ditches. Development continues year round and is merely slowed by cold weather
conditions experienced in the infested areas of Florida.

Eggs. The eggs are elliptical, less than 1 mm long and are laid singly or in a
cluster of 2-3 on leaves or stems of the host plant. Initially a pale yellow, eggs
darken to orange prior to hatching. Eggs are laid primarily on the upper portions
of the plant foliage during the first few nights of adult activity. Most eggs are
laid within a few days of adult emergence. Incubation period varies with temper-
ature. During warm weather, 4 to 6 days are required while a longer period is
necessary at lower temperatures.

Larvae. Newly hatched larvae move about briefly before entering the leaf. The
small pinworm first forms a tent of silk and then proceeds to mine into the leaf.
Initially straight, mines become serpentine, then blotch shaped as the larva grows.
Frass is deposited in only one area of the mine. There are four larval instars, two
of which are spent as a miner before the larva emerges from its mine to form a pro-
tective leaf fold, often on the same leaf. The third instar appears to be the most
mobile and several types of behavior may occur. A few larvae draw two leaves to-
,9cth'c, others tunnel into stems or fruit at the calyx, but the majority form leaf
folds on the upper leaf surface. The four instars usually injure 3-6 leaves during
-.evc!opment.






-2-


Th most serious threat posed by the pinworm is realized when larvae mine the
calyx; lobj or the leaves in close proximity to fruit. From such mines the larva
r-cadly nove to the fruit. Usually penetration is initiated on the shoulder or in
t'he sten area. Larvae bore into the fruit, then quickly spin a fine silk web over
the cntranca to the tunnel. A preference is shown for the pithy or core portion as
well as thae hicker, less juicy areas of the fruit. Such damaged fruit may be in-
vaded by pathogens and rot or if processed, exceed the minimal tolerable level of
insect parts per unit.

Larvae are best described as gray with purple markings. When disturbed or
exposed they wriggle rapidly and may drop by spinning a fine silk thread. At
maturity they rarely exceed 1/4" in length.

Pupas. Mature larvae drop from the folds, the stems or fruit to the soil and
form a loose pupal cell of sand grains 0.25-1.5 inches beneath the soil surface.
Most are to be found within 1/2 inch of the surface. The adults are unable to
emerge fro-s a two inch depth. The time spent in this stage is somewhat longer than
as a larva and 15-30 days (Table 1) are commonly required for its completion. This
period is probably shorter in Florida.

Host Range

The o:1y hosts known for the tomato pinworm are members of the family Solanaceae.
Tomatoes, potatoes and eggplant are the important agricultural plants, while weeds
such as horse nettle and other nightshade relatives may serve as secondary hosts.
Only crop plant have been recorded as hosts in Florida.

Infestation and Spread

Dissemination of the tomato pinworm may occur via several routes. Transporta-
tion of infested fruit may be instrumental in moving larvae which mature and infest
nearby fields. Within and between adjacent fields individual moth flights are im-
portant; howeTver, no information on distance of moth flight is available. Moths
disturbed during the day take flight in a rapid erratic manner only to alight on
other plants within a few feet. Egg laying activity begins at dusk and continues
throughout the night. Other important means of infestation and spread include com-
posting of spoiled fruit and movement of packing or picking vessels from infested
arers.

The most important method, however, appears to be dissemination with infected
seedlings from greenhouse or plant production houses. A generation of pinworms may
be produced in the warm confines of a plant production house and seedlings bearing
eggs cr larvae transferred to the fields. For the past two years plant house and
seedi'.:n' iufectations have been observed frequently, although little damage has
bee. sustained in the field.

Survival and multiplication is greatly enhanced by the readily available plants
left in the fields after commercial picking has ceased. Plants left standing after
harvest or those pulled or cut and moved aside to begin a new crop provide food for
breedir3 popiulaticns and a source of infestation for the new crop.






-2-


Th most serious threat posed by the pinworm is realized when larvae mine the
calyx; lobj or the leaves in close proximity to fruit. From such mines the larva
r-cadly nove to the fruit. Usually penetration is initiated on the shoulder or in
t'he sten area. Larvae bore into the fruit, then quickly spin a fine silk web over
the cntranca to the tunnel. A preference is shown for the pithy or core portion as
well as thae hicker, less juicy areas of the fruit. Such damaged fruit may be in-
vaded by pathogens and rot or if processed, exceed the minimal tolerable level of
insect parts per unit.

Larvae are best described as gray with purple markings. When disturbed or
exposed they wriggle rapidly and may drop by spinning a fine silk thread. At
maturity they rarely exceed 1/4" in length.

Pupas. Mature larvae drop from the folds, the stems or fruit to the soil and
form a loose pupal cell of sand grains 0.25-1.5 inches beneath the soil surface.
Most are to be found within 1/2 inch of the surface. The adults are unable to
emerge fro-s a two inch depth. The time spent in this stage is somewhat longer than
as a larva and 15-30 days (Table 1) are commonly required for its completion. This
period is probably shorter in Florida.

Host Range

The o:1y hosts known for the tomato pinworm are members of the family Solanaceae.
Tomatoes, potatoes and eggplant are the important agricultural plants, while weeds
such as horse nettle and other nightshade relatives may serve as secondary hosts.
Only crop plant have been recorded as hosts in Florida.

Infestation and Spread

Dissemination of the tomato pinworm may occur via several routes. Transporta-
tion of infested fruit may be instrumental in moving larvae which mature and infest
nearby fields. Within and between adjacent fields individual moth flights are im-
portant; howeTver, no information on distance of moth flight is available. Moths
disturbed during the day take flight in a rapid erratic manner only to alight on
other plants within a few feet. Egg laying activity begins at dusk and continues
throughout the night. Other important means of infestation and spread include com-
posting of spoiled fruit and movement of packing or picking vessels from infested
arers.

The most important method, however, appears to be dissemination with infected
seedlings from greenhouse or plant production houses. A generation of pinworms may
be produced in the warm confines of a plant production house and seedlings bearing
eggs cr larvae transferred to the fields. For the past two years plant house and
seedi'.:n' iufectations have been observed frequently, although little damage has
bee. sustained in the field.

Survival and multiplication is greatly enhanced by the readily available plants
left in the fields after commercial picking has ceased. Plants left standing after
harvest or those pulled or cut and moved aside to begin a new crop provide food for
breedir3 popiulaticns and a source of infestation for the new crop.





-3-


Control

The best control for tomato pinworm is through prevention of the problem. To
prevent pinworm infestations four control measures are essential:

1. Seedlings should be clean and free of e of s of larvae before they
are taken into the field.

2. Field plants should be,carefully observed fok infestation and
remedial measures instituted when needfdi,

3. No plants should be left lying about in seed flats, pots, cans
or growing from seeds in compost heaps.

4. All old plants and plant debris should be destroyed by tilling
as soon as possible after harvest.

Several remedial measures may be taken to reduce or eradicate an infestation.
Sparse populations are present on seedling plants in a production house hand
-icing of damaged leaves to destroy larvae may be the best method. Adults are
attracted to light and thus might be trapped in small areas. However, if large
-is are involved or if the infestation is heavy, a more practical method is
.icide treatments.

Table 2 presents data from a test conducted for control of pinworms on seed-
:ing plants. Systemic granular materials are generally less satisfactory than
.prays due to label requirements and efficacy. Several chemical compounds can
be used successfully if precautions are adequate to insure optimal performance.
Attention should be given to rates, formulations and thoroughness of spray cover-
age. The best of materials is of no value unless applied properly and of these,
coverage is often the most neglected point of control. Thiodan(R), diazinon and
methomyl gave excellent control in the test reported in Table 2.

Certain compounds may cause adverse plant reaction. Leaf or foliar yellow-
ing, marginal necrosis, thickening of leaves or general stunting may result from
use of certain materials. Compounds known to cause adverse reaction in seedlings
are indicated in Table 2.

Plants in fruiting fields should be observed frequently for presence of damage
from this insect. Control measures initiated must be thorough and cover the entire
plant to be of optimal benefit. Eradication of a population is more difficult
than preventing a large buildup and not all the materials providing good control
in Table 2 will successfully eradicate the pest. Two populations have recently
been eradicated, one on potatoes by methomyl, the other on tomatoes by systox.
Also important to eradication is prompt action. As indicated by the life cycle,
the first and second stages are leafminers and are more easily killed than th2
third or fourth stages which form protective leaf folds. Also from these lattle.
stages fruit damage is sustained. Therefore, close and frequent field inspection
to determine early infestation will eliminate excessive population buildup.





-4-

Table 1. Duration of the developmental stages of the tomato pinworm.


Number of Days Required
Developmental Stage Average Minimal

Egg Incubation 8.9 4
Leaf Mining 11.5 5
Leaf Folding 9.5 3
Prepupae 6.9 1
Pupa 30.2 15
Egg to Adult 67.0 28
Hale Life span 10.3 1
Female Life span 13.8 2
Oviposition 5.9 1


Table 2. Effect of insecticides on tomato pinworms in seedling Floradel tomatoes
held in a plant production house in Bradenton, Florida. Plants were sprayed
weekly from 1-25-73 to 2-22-73 and evaluated on 2-6-73, 2-12-73 and 2-22-73.

Average Number Pinworm
Treatment Rate Live Dead
material ai/A Mines Larvae Larvae Plant Reaction**

Thiodan 50W 1.0 0.5 0.5 0.0 0
Diazinon 50W 1.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0
Methomyl 90S 1.0 1.7 0.3 0.0 0
Fundal 90S 1.0 3.0 0.3 0.3 5 Plant Chlorosis
Orthene 75W 1.0 3.7 0.7 0.0 1 Plant Chlorosis
Guthion 2E 1.0 4.7 0.3 1.7 0
Dibrom 8E 1.0 5.3 0.7 0.3 0
Phosvel 2E 1.0 7.0 2.7 3.0 2 Plant Stunting
Phosdrin 2E 1.0 8.0 0.5 1.5 0
Sevin 80S 1.0 8.3 2.0 0.3 0
Furadan 10G* 10 8.7 1.0 2.3 1.5 Leaf margin
necrosis
DiSyston 15G* 10 13.7 0.7 2.3 0
Systox 6E 1.0 20.7 0.7 4.0 0
Zolone 3E 1.0 29.0 2.0 8.5 0
Chack 33.3 11.7 3.0
TeTmi 10G* 10 33.7 2.3 5.0 0
Phorate 10G* 10 40.0 11.3 4.7 0
Dyfonate 10G* 10 54.3 10.7 10.7 0


'Granular materials applied on 1/25/73 only.

**Severity rating: 0 = none, 5 = severe.


1 *




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs