| Material Information
||Insect control on gerbera daisy
||Bradenton AREC research report
||3 leaves : ; 28 cm.
||Poe, S. L ( Sidney LaMarr ), 1949-
Raulston, J. C
Agricultural Research & Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
||Agricultural Research & Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida
||Place of Publication:
||Gerbera -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida ( lcsh )
Daisies -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida ( lcsh )
||government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent) ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )
||Statement of Responsibility:
||S.L. Poe and J.C. Raulston.
||Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
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
site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.
Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
7-c AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER
IFAS, University of Florida
Bradenton AREC Research Report GC-1974-6 April, 1974
INSECT CONTROL ON GERBERA DAISY
S. L. Poe and J. C. Raulston
HlM ELIBR RY
The gerbera or transvaa S sy s a popu ar orn mental plant in Florida. It is
usually grown in green uses or plant production houses in 4 or 6 in. pots as
a garden item for patio plante~por o~ ndsca e use. Because gerberas are
grown indoors, insect and mite populations deve op very rapidly and reduce
saleability and must belcontrolled. This report discusses the use of several
chemicals for control o~. eo~, mopests b ras.
I.P,.A.-U IV. OTlOTIa
Four experiments were co~ndauci-efd'E~ lt-b se'ctcides, 5 granular systemic
materials and 7 spray contact materials, 2 with systemic qualities for control
of insect and mite populations on gerbera daisy. Experimental units for all
experiments were single plants grown in a standard mix in 6 in. pots held on
raised greenhouse benches. Evaluations of populations were made from leaf
samples before and/or after treatment to determine chemical efficacy. Each
experimental unit was replicated 3 or 4 times. Granular materials were applied
by hand and watered in and spray materials were applied with a hand sprayer
powered by carbon dioxide at 20-40 psi. Plants were sprayed until run-off
Experiment 1. Gerbera daisies infested with the broad mite, Polyphagotarsonemus
latus (Banks), and the two spotted spider mite, Tetranychus urticae Koch, were
treated 4 times with granular systemic insecticides during an 80 day period
(Table 1). Leaf samples were then taken and mite populations were estimated.
Experiment 2. A single application of granular or chemical sprays was made to
plants infested with sweet potato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Genn.) present in
all stages of development (Table 2). Estimates of the population were made
before and 14 days after treatment.
Experiment 3. Five granular and 5 spray materials were applied for five
successive weeks for control of mealybug, Ferrisia virgata (Ckll.)(Table 3).
Leaf samples were taken 5 days after the final application and the average
number of mealybugs per leaf was determined.
Experiment 4. Five commonly used chemicals were evaluated after three weekly
applications were sprayed on plants infested with mealybugs (Table 4). Popula-
tion numbers were determined one week after the final application.
1Dept. of Soil & Crop Science, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas 77840.
Results and Discussion. Data from the evaluations made in the four experiments
are given in Tables 1-4. Broad mites were controlled by all granular materials
used except carbophenthion and phorate (Table 1). Due to the damage initiated
by broad mite to the buds and leaves as they begin to develop, a true evaluation
of population control was possible only after an extended period of tiea when
the population and the symptoms of distorted, curled, thickened leaves had
disappeared. Such an extended period was not conducive to spider mite population
study, however, since these populations developed rapidly and then- declined
but left a severely damaged plant with few mites present. This decline is
reflected in the numbers of mites present in Experiment 1 on check plants.
Plants treated with other materials appeared superior to the chezk plants but
large mite populations had been present on all plants except these treated with
In Experiment 2 (Table 2) a single application of the chemicslI li-.ted 'as not
adequate to control a large population of whitefly, due to the many develop-
mental stages present on the foliage. Monocrotophos, a systemic, tas3 the only
spray material to reduce the population. The granulars aldicarb and di ulfoton
showed some effectiveness. This species of whitefly has been recently reported
to have developed resistance to organophosphate chemicals irn so:me areas. Several
applications of an effective chemical are required to eradicate a large es-
tablished population from a greenhouse.
In Experiment 3 (Table 3) mealybugs were effectively controlled by the two
systemic granulars, aldicarb and phorate, and by all contact chemicals sprayed.
The same materials, sprayed in Experiment 4, also provided excellent control
It is apparent from these experiments that effective chemicals are av-ilable
for the commercial grower of gerbera daisy to use for control of csveral species
of insect and mite pests. The granular systemic aldicarb provided control of
both broad mites and spider mites (Table 1), reduced the numbers of whiteflies
(Table 2), and controlled mealybugs (Table 3). Aldicarb is also effective
against leafminers which also attack gerbera. Although a single application of
Orthene and Zectran was not adequate to completely control rhitofly (Table 2),
these materials gave excellent control of mealybugs in Tables 3 and 4. In
addition, azinphosmethyl and the systemic, dimetho-te, remain effective and a
new compound, cidial, holds promise for use in insect control en ornamental crops.
STable 1. Control of mites on gerbera treated with insecticides.
Insecticide applied Avg. no. individuals/leaf
on Jan. 17, Feb. 10 Rate, lb ai/A Broad mite Spidermite
Control -- 14 5
Disulfoton 15G 10 5 8
Dyfonate 10G 10 1 5
Carbophenthion 10G 10 22 22
Phorate 10G 10 13 10
Aldicarb 10G 10 6 1
Table 2. Insecticides for control of Whitefly, miesia tabaci (Genn.) on gerbera.
Avg. no. whiteflies/leaf
before 14 days after
Insecticide Rate, lb ai/A treatment treatment
Control -- 106 101
Monocrotophos 3.2 EC 0.5 97 10
Disulfoton 15G 5.0 71 59
Orthene 50 WP 0.5 36 72
Aldicarb 10G 5.0 43 21
Zectran 2 EC 0.5 55 62
Table 3. Control of mealybugs Ferrisia virgata (Ckll.) on gerbera.
Insecticides applied on Avg. no. mealybugs/leaf
5 successive weeks Rate, lb ai/A after final application
Control -- 16
Aldicarb 10G 1.0 0
Disulfoton 15G 1.5 56
Dyfonate 10G 1.0 14
Phorate 10G 1.0 0
Pirimor 5G 1.0 57
Dimethoate 2.67 EC 0.5 0
Cidial 4 EC 1.0 0
Cidial 4 EC 0.5 0
Azinphosmethyl 2 EC 0.5 1
Zectran 2 EC 0.5 0
Orthene 75 WP 0.5 0
Table 4. Insecticidal control of mealybugs on gerbera.
Insecticides applied on Avg. no. mealybugs/leaf
5 successive weeks Rate, Ib ai/A after final application
Control -- 23
Azinphosmethyl 2 E 0.5 0
Cidial 4 EC 0.5 0
Dimethoate 2.67 EC 0.5 1
Orthene 75 WP 1.0 0
Zectran 2 E 0.5 0