Group Title: Quincy AREC research report - University of Florida Agricultural Research and Education Center ; NF 81-5
Title: Evaluation of chemicals for management of insects attacking flue-cured tobacco in 1981
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00074338/00001
 Material Information
Title: Evaluation of chemicals for management of insects attacking flue-cured tobacco in 1981
Series Title: Quincy AREC research report
Physical Description: 4, 6 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Tappan, William B., 1928-
Rich, J. R ( Jimmy Ray ), 1950-
Agricultural Research and Education Center (Quincy, Fla.)
Publisher: Agricultural Research and Education Center
Place of Publication: Quincy Fla
Publication Date: 1981
 Subjects
Subject: Tobacco -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: William B. Tappan and J.R. Rich.
General Note: Caption title.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00074338
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 84900149

Full Text




AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
Quincy, Florida

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTER
Live Oak, Florida

Quincy AREC Research Report NF 81-5

Evaluation of Chemicals for Management of Insects Attacking
Flue-Cured Tobacco in 1981

William B. Tappan, Entomologist, Quincy, and
J. R. Rich, Assistant Nematologist and Acting Center Director, Live Oak

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two baits, 4 granular, and 10 chemical foliar spray treatments were field tested
on Speight G-28 flue-cured tobacco for insect control, phytotoxicity, and effects on
crop yield and value. Formulations, number of applications, rate of applications,
and dosage of active ingredient per acre per application are presented in Table 1.

The dates treatment applications were made are given in a footnote in Tables 1
through 6. Three treatments (2, 2, and 4 Ibs Al/acre) of RH-9358 granules were
broadcast over the soil surface and incorporated with the soil to a depth of 2 inches
immediately prior to transplanting. One of the 2-pound dosages of RH-9358 gran-
ules was sidedressed with a 6-inch band of the granules at 2 Ibs. Al/acre 3 weeks later
and incorporated with the soil to a depth of 1 inch. One of the Orthene bait treat-
ments was sidedressed in a 6-inch band and incorpora th th h of
1 inch, and the other was broadcast over the foliage; cJ g i RAR wth same
dates of the foliar spray treatments. The Orthene gr nular treatment was side
dressed in a 6-inch band and left undisturbed on the ;oil surface en;nle days oliar
sprays were applied. An interval of 14 days was allo ed betweb f ll~foliar spr y and
Orthene bait and granular applications. A tractor-mo nted CO -pressurized s rayer
with 1 hollow-cone nozzle over each row and 1 hollow-c r~p.Aczil.Al3l i f the
row was used to make all spray applications. The 3 TeL Jet D3 25 rnuzls'-row
were designed to deliver approximately 26 gallons of spray per acre at 60 p.s.i. and
4 m.p.h.

Treatments were replicated 3 times in complete randomized blocks. Each plot
was 2 rows wide and was separated by a 5-foot vacant alley or buffer zone between
plots within a block. The rows were 40 feet long and 3.67 feet apart within plots.
Both rows served as the.experimental plot for insect counts, phytotoxicity ratings,
crop yield, and crop value determinations. Each row contained 24 to 28 plants set
on approximately 19-inch centers. Alleys between blocks of plots were 20 feet wide.
The test area was on the south side of the lake near the barn area of the Center.

All cultural practices in preparing the test area for planting were performed in
the usual manner. Beds for planting were prepared and fertilizer applied in early
March. The tobacco was transplanted on March 24, 1981, and hand topped on June
3. A sucker control, Royal M, was applied at .2 gallons per acre on June 4, and
again at 2 gallons per acre with MH-30 at 2 gallons per acre on June 16.

Green peach aphid counts were made from natural infestations beginning on
April 15 (pretreatment count), and succeeding counts followed at 14-day intervals.
The time lapse from treatment to first count of the RH-9358 granule broadcast treat-
ments was 23 days, and the band treatment was 2 days. All counts were made by


~'~` ~~'~'- ~-' ~~-~~-`"-FIF*IC~-.~-~~r -----~-





-2-


counting the number of live alate and apterous aphids on 4 leaves 3 inches or
longer down from the bud. Five plants equidistant from each other in each of the
experimental rows were counted. The plants were marked so that each succeeding
count was made on the same plants.

Counts of tobacco budworm and tobacco hornworm were made from natural
infestations on April 15. The count on April 15 was a pretreatment count for all
treatments excluding the RH-9358 granular treatments, which were applied prior to
the first count. All counts were made on the same dates as aphid counts. Each
plant in each plot that had at least 1 larva and the characteristic feeding injury was
counted as a damaged plant.

Visual phytotoxicity ratings were begun on April 15; pretreatment count and all
other counts were the same as explained above for aphid counts, and were made on
the same dates. Plots were rated according to severity of phytotoxicity observed.
The readings were based on the following system:

0 = None
1 = Slight leaf spotting or chlorosis
2 = Moderate leaf spotting or chlorosis
3 = Heavy leaf spotting or chlorosis with some necrosis
4 = Severe leaf spotting or chlorosis with considerable necrosis

Four leaf primings or harvests were made during the crop season for evaluation
of crop performance on June 11, June 22, July 6, and July 13. Yield was calculated
in pounds per acre from the total weight of cured leaves from each treatment repli-
cation. The crop value or dollar return per acre was obtained by multiplying the
yield in pounds per acre by the return in cents per pound of cured leaf. The value
per pound was based upon the price for the various grades of tobacco.

An analysis of variance was made, and Duncan's multiple range test was applied
to all means analyzed to obtain statistical comparisons for data interpretation.

Rainfall data expressed in inches for the term of the experiment were as follows:

March April May June July
23 0.94 1 0.34 7 -1.00 3 -0.66 5- .13
24 T 2- 0.31 21 T 7- 0.04 6- T
Total 0.94 6- 0.50 27 -0.15 8- 0.07 9- 0.35
21 0.59 Total 1.15 9- 0.05 14 0.70
Total 7 11 -0.55 Total TT1M
12 -0.12
13- 0.82
19 -0.82
20- 0.15
22- T
24 0.85
T = Trace 26 -0.15
Grand Total = 9.29 inches Total 4.28

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Insect activity on flue-cured tobacco during the crop season of 1981 was mixed.
The green peach aphid was present in the plant bed in mid-March and was trans-
ferred to the field during transplanting. Aphid populations began to increase in
mid-April in the field and by mid-June were 2 times as large as those in late June,




- 3-


1980. The increased aphid activity caused only a slight increase (ca. 15%) in the
incidence of PVY infected plants. Damage from PVY was light, and had no ad-
verse effect on yield. Populations of tobacco budworm were slightly larger than
those in 1980, but were considered to be within normal levels. After the tobacco
was topped on June 3, 1981, budworm populations declined for the remainder of the
growing season. Tobacco hornworm populations were 32% less numerous than in
1980. The extremely dry weather conditions in April and May contributed to the
low hornworm populations in June and July. Hornworm egg laying activity was light
in mid-June, and the population peak in late June was earlier and lighter than in
1980. A light blue mold infestation appeared in April and May, but was of little
consequence to the crop. The dry weather was the most severe problem the crop
faced the entire growing season. As has been the case during the past 13 years,
cabbage looper populations were extremely light, and no control data were obtained.

Green peach aphid were observed in the plant bed on March 23, and began
increasing on field plants on April 15 (pretreatment count). Aphid populations con-
tinued increasing until June 10 on untreated tobacco. (See Table 2.) Aphid popu-
lations began a natural decline from June 10 and continued for the remainder of the
growing season. On June 10, when populations were the largest on the untreated
checks, all treatments except Ammo at all rates and FCR-1272 at the low rate gave
significant control. FCR-1272 at the high rate and Pounce gave significant sup-
pression of aphid populations, but the degree of suppression would not be com-
mercially acceptable. The best spray treatments in order were: Orthene, Lannate,
and RH-0994. The bait and granule formulations of Orthene performed well, with
no significant difference between the method of application (band or broadcast)
of the bait. RH-9358 granule treatments gave significant control with the split ap-
plication (2 + 2 Ibs. Al/acre) being numercially superior. Yield and dollar return
data in Table 6 indicate that the green peach aphid had little influence on either
index.

Budworm populations in the pretreatment count were slightly larger than in
1980, and by late May had increased to levels about 10% above those in 1980. (See
Table 3.) The population levels were considered to be moderate and not severely
damaging. After the plants were topped on June 3, the population declined con-
siderably. All treatments except RH-9358 at 2 and 4 Ibs. Al/acre gave significant
control on May 27. Of the Orthene bait treatments, the broadcast over the foliage
application method was significantly better than the band soil incorporated method.
There was no apparent effect of budworm damage on yield or dollar return. (See
Table 6.)

The hornworm population in 1981 was smaller than in 1980, but began infesting
the tobacco in late April, about 2 weeks earlier than in 1980. (See Table 4.) The
population increased steadily on untreated tobacco with 64% of the plants infested
on June 24. All treatments significantly reduced hornworm populations on that date.
The count on June 10 was composed primarily of newly closed first instar larvae,
which had not been present on the treated tobacco long enough to be affected
greatly by the treatments. The succeeding count on June 24 was more indicative of
treatment efficacy. Damage by the hornworm did not significantly reduce either yield
or dollar return indices. (See Table 6.)

Phytotoxicity was observed from RH-9358 granule treatments regardless of
application method. (See Table 5.) The damage was primarily confined to the lower
4 to 5 leaves of the plant. Symptoms were chlorosis, necrotic spotting, and downward
leaf curl in severe cases. In lighter cases, necrotic spotting was seen in leaf tips
and isolated areas of the lamina with some upward leaf curl along leaf edges. Some
stunting was evident in plants of all RH-9358 treatments, but was not severe enough





-4-


to affect yield or dollar return indices. (See Table 6.) The injury was located at a
stalk position that would not preclude the material from commercial usage.

Yield was slightly smaller than in 1980, but dollar return was slightly larger
owing to higher sale prices. The lack of adequate rainfall definitely had an effect
on yield, but the improved sale prices helped recoup any adverse yield effect. Total
rainfall averaged 10.72 inches less than in 1980, and almost half (4.28 inches) of
that was recorded in June. The overall quality, as measured by the dollar return
index, was better than expected, and was considered good in spite of the poor rain-
fall. (See Table 6.) The preponderance of data collected over the past 13 years on
flue-cured tobacco in Florida indicate strongly that insect infestation threshold
values established for the crop in other tobacco growing states are too low and im-
practical. Most of the quality downgrading in commercial warehouse sales, which is
attributable to insect damage in the field, is a result of buyers prejudices rather
than actual quality deterioration.

Average maximum and minimum air temperatures during the test period were:
March 71 and 49, April 84 and 57, May 86 and 58, June 94 and 71, and July 94 and
710F. Temperatures were even for the maximum and 1 degree lower for the minimum
for 1980, which indicated that test period temperatures were generally cooler than
in 1980. The average test period temperature was the same for both years, 740F.
The temperatures probably had little effect on insect populations, but the lack of
adequate rainfall had a decided effect on late season insect populations. The generally
cool nights in early season probably enhanced the early blue-mold infestation.

The bait and granule formulations of Orthene and the granule formulation of
RH-9358 offer considerable promise for control of the 3 major pests of flue-cured
tobacco in Florida. The materials have a considerable advantage over conventional
sprays in that no mixing with water is required. Therefore, more material can be
transported to the area to be treated, since the amount of material weight required
per acre is about 90% less with the Orthene bait and granule and 80% less with the
RH-9358 granule. The Orthene bait and granule has an advantage over the RH-9358
granule in that it is not phytotoxic. However, the RH-9358 granule appeared to
require only 1 to 2 applications per season for effective control versus 6 for the
Orthene bait or granule. Also, the Orthene bait can be applied by aircraft, since
no incorporation with the soil is necessary.


--- -*---- -''-t--- -..-. - ',- -






AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 1. Foliar Treatments Applied for Insect Control on Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28)-1981.

Lbs. or Gals. Lbs. Al
No. per Acre per per Acre per
Treatmentab Applications Application Application
RH-9358, 5%c'd 2 40.0 + 3.36 2.0 + 2.0
RH-9358, 5%Gc 1 80.0 4.0
RH-9358, 5%Gc 1: 40.0 2.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158e 6 20.0 1.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158e 6 20.0 1.0
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242e 6 10.0 1.0
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 6 26.4 0.78
RH-0994, 0.35%S(EC) 6 23.6 0.70
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 6 24.6 0.99
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 6 24.5 0.60
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 6 26.7 0.020
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 6 25.8 0.039
Ammo, 0.011%S(EC) 6 23.2 0.018
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 6 24.7 0.037
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 6 23.5 0.053
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 6 25.1 0.11
aB = Bait, EC = Emulsifiable concentrate, G = Granule, L = Liquid, S = Spray, and SP = Soluble powder.
bSprays applied on 4/15, 4/29, 5/13, 5/27, 6/10, and 6/24/81. Tobacco transplanted on 3/24/81.
cBroadcast granules on 3/23/81.
Banded granules on 4/13/81.
eOrthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.
Pounds per 1,000 feet of row.





AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 2. Mean Number of Green Peach Aphid per Plot of Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28)-1981.


Aphid Countsb Mean Rate
a cLbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/15 4/29 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/24 7/8 Application
RH-9358, 5%Gd,e 10a 2a 3a 14a 15a 25a 13a 2.0 + 2.0
RH-9358, 5%Gd 6a 11a 22a 56a 99a 15a 40a 4.0
RH-9358, 5%G f 8a 9a 181a 639ab 875a 125a 92a 2.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158f 18a la 5a 13a 192a 97a 18a 1.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 f 13a la 3a 2a 6a Oa Oa 1.0
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242 12a la 4a 9a 5a Oa 87a 1.0
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 10a Oa 3a 12a 2a Oa 3a 0.78
RH-0994, 0.35%S(EC) 11a 31ab 166a 1,132b 2,742b 1,197ab 413ab 0.70
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 9a 4a 155a 1,218b 2,914b 1,592b 611ab 0.99
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 12a 3a 100a 120a 365a 140a 198a 0.60
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 10a 126abc 1,533cd 3,780de 6,500e 3,374c 2,820de 0.020
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 13a 114abc 877b 2,363c 4,995cd 3,237c 1,925de 0.039
Ammo, O.011%S(EC) 13a 184cd 1,295bc 3,027d 5,892de 3,420c 2,455de 0.018
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 12a 136bcd 1,824cd 3,056d 5,705cde 3,139c 2,925e 0.037
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 11a 86abc 1,884cd 3,198d 5,630cde 2,802c 2,612de 0.053
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 12a 38ab 895b 2,103c 4,507c 2,227bc 1,698cde 0.11
Check (Untreated) 22a 244d 2,020d 4,233e 6,632e 3,063c 1,569bcd ----


dSee Table 1 for more details.
b-


Sprays applied on 4/15, 4/29, 5/13, 5/27, 6/10, and 6/24/81.


Counts made on 10 plants per plot, totaling 30 plants in 3 plots. Means followed by the same
significantly different at the 5% level.


letter are not


CPretreatment count for sprays and Orthene baits and granules. Transplanted plots on 3/24/81. Sucker control
Royal-M on 6/4 and Royal-M + MH-30 on 6/16/81. Plants were topped on 6/3/81. Plots were harvested on
6/11, 6/22, 7/6, and 7/13/81.
Broadcast granules on 3/23/81.
eBanded granules on 4/13/81.
fOrthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.





AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 3. Mean Percent Budworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (Speight G-28)-1981.


Budworm Countsb Mean Rate
Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/15c 4/29 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/24 7/8 Application
d,e
RH-9358, 5%Gd 23ab 6a Oa 8ab 9a 12a 3a 2.0 + 2.0
RH-9358, 5%Gd 19a 24b 25gh 51e 22cd 35abc 7ab 4.0
RH-9358, 5%Gd 33abcd 32b 24fgh 49e 24de 37bc 8ab 2.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 32abcd 12a 12bcde 24bcd 14abc 21abc 6a 1.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 27abc 14a 2ab 3a 3a 28abc 5a 1.0
f
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242 39cd 13a 12bcde 10ab 7ab 15abc 6a 1.0
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 39cd 14a 6abc 15abc 10ab 19abc 3a 0.78
RH-0994, 0.35%S(EC) 26abc 9a 18defg 32d 17bcd 36abc 8ab 0.70
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 24ab 12a 13cde 29cd 13abc 13a 7ab 0.99
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 27abc 10a 14cdef 24bcd 8ab 17abc 6a 0.60
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 23ab 8a 13cde 11ab 10ab 25abc 7ab 0.020
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 43d 6a 13cde 14abc 7ab 21abc 5a 0.039
Ammo, 0.011%S(EC) 30abcd 12a 21efg 27cd 9ab 14ab 8ab 0.018
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 34bcd 14a 13cde 24bcd 7ab 13a 5a 0.037
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 32abcd 1 Oa 10abcd 20bcd 11ab 19abc 5a 0.053
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 30abcd 10a 9abcd 16abc 11ab 18abc 6a 0.11
Check (Untreated) 35bcd 42c 33h 52e 33e 39c 12b ----

aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays applied on 4/15, 4/29, 5/13, 5/27, 6/10 and 6/24/81.


Counts made on 49 to 55 plants per plot, totaling 150 to 156
letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.


plants in 3 plots. Means followed by the same


cPretreatment count for sprays and Orthene baits and granules. Transplanted plots on 3/24/81
trol Royal-M applied on 6/4 and Royal-M + MH-30 on 6/16/81. Plants were topped on 6/3/81.
vested on 6/11, 6/22, 7/6, and 7/13/81.
Broadcast granules on 3/23/81.
eBanded granules on 4/13/81.
Orthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.
/


. Sucker con-
Plots were har-





AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 4. Mean Percent Hornworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (Speight G-28)-1981.

b Mean Rate
Hornworm Countsb Mean Rate
a c Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/15c 4/29 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/24 7/8 Application
RH-9358, 5%Gd,e 0 0 Oa la 19abcd 12abc 5abc 2.0 + 2.0
RH-9358, 5%G 0 0 3ab 7bc 40de 25cd 15cd 4.0
RH-9358, 5%G 0 0 5b 5abc 31bcd 30d 24d 2.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158f 0 0 2ab 3ab 28bcd 17abcd 7abc 1.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 0 0 Oa Oa 13abc 8abc 11abc 1.0
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242 0 0 lab la 26bcd llabc 15bcd 1.0
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0 0 Oa la 21abcd 8abc 8abc 0.78
RH- 0994, 0. 35%S(EC) 0 1 4ab la 34cd 21bcd 9abc 0.70
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 0 1 3ab la 24abcd 13abc 6abc 0.99
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 0 0 3ab 9c 24abcd 14abc 7abc 0.60
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 0 0 Oa la 22abcd 8abc 6abc 0.020
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 0 0 Oa Oa 2a la la 0.039
Ammo, 0.011%S(EC) 0 1 5ab 3ab 13abc 7abc 5abc 0.018
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 0 0 3ab la 7ab 4ab 4abc 0.037
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 0 1 lab Oa 8ab 7abc 3ab 0.053
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 0 0 Oa Oa Ilab la la 0.11
Check (Untreated) 0 1 13c 18d 58e 64e 38e ---


aSee Table 1 for more details.


Sprays applied on 4/15, 4/29, 5/13, 5/27, 6/10, and 6/24/81.


bCounts made on 49 to 55 plants per plot, totaling 150 to 156 plants in 3 plots. Means followed
letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.


by the same


cPretreatment count for sprays and Orthene baits and granules. Transplanted plots on 3/24/81. Sucker con-
trol Royal-M applied on 6/4 and Royal-M + MH-30 on 6/16/81. Plants topped on 6/3/81. Plots harvested on
6/11, 6/22, 7/6, and 7/13/81.
Broadcast granules on 3/23/81.
eBanded granules on 4/13/81.
Orthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.






AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 5. Phytotoxic Effects of Certain Insecticide Formulations on Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28)-1981.


Mean Phytotoxicity Indicesb Lbs.Mean Rate
-Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/1 4/29 5/13 5/27 6/10 6/24 7/8 Application
RH-9358, 5%Gde 0.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 + 2.0
RH-9358, 5%Gd 0.0 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.7 0.0 0.0 4.0
RH-9358, 5%G" 0.0 3.3 3.3 2.3 3.0 0.0 0.0 2.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158f 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.78
RH-0994, 0.35%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.70
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.99
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.60
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.020
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.039
Ammo, 0.011%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.018
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.037
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.053
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.11
Check (Untreated) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ---


aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays applied on 4/15, 4/29,


5/13, 5/27,


6/10, and 6/24/81.


bRating System: 0 = None, 1 = Slight leaf spotting or chlorosis, 2 = Moderate leaf spotting or chlorosis 3 =
Heavy leaf spotting or chlorosis with some necrosis, and 4 = Severe leaf spotting or chlorosis with considerable
necrosis.
cPretreatment count for sprays and Orthene baits and granules. Transplanted plots on 3/24/81. Sucker con-
trol Royal-M applied on 6/4 and Royal-M + MH-30 on 6/16/81. Plants topped on 6/3/81. Plots harvested on
6/11, 6/22, 7/6, and 7/13/81.
dBroadcast granules on 3/23/81.
eBanded granules on 4/13/81.
Orthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.





AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 6. Effects of Certain Insecticidal Treatments on
Tobacco (Speight G-28)-1981.


Yield and Dollar Return per Acre of Flue-Cured


Mean Rate Yield Dollar
Lbs. AI/Acre/ Lbs/Acre Return/Acre
Treatment Application Mean 3 Reps.c Mean 3 Reps.c
RH-9358, %SGde 2.0 + 2.0 2,204a 3,117a
RH-9358, 5%Gd 4.0 2,165a 3,127a
RH-9358, 5%G 2.0 2,184a 3,049a
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158f 1.0 2,217a 3,234a
Orthene, 5%B-CC8158 1.0 2,041a 3,004a
Orthene, 10%G-CC11242' 1.0 2,211a 3,118a
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0.78 2,218a 3,119a
RH-0994, 0.35%S(EC) 0.70 2,003a 2,879a
RH-0994, 0.48%S(EC) 0.99 2,172a 3,178a
Lannate, 0.29%S(L) 0.60 2,250a 3,193a
FCR-1272, 0.011%S(EC) 0.020 2,090a 2,858a
FCR-1272, 0.022%S(EC) 0.039 2,044a 2,528a
Ammo, 0.011%S(EC) 0.018 2,164a 2,727a
Ammo, 0.022%S(EC) 0.037 2,061a 2,712a
Ammo, 0.032%S(EC) 0.053 1,953a 2,488a
Pounce, 0.05%S(EC) 0.11 2,256a 3,153a
Check (Untreated) ----- 2,1 03a 2,881a


aSee Table 1 for more details.
bTransplanted plots on 3/24/81.
on 6/11, 6/22, 7/6, and 7/13/81.


Sprays applied on 4/15, 4/29, 5/13, 5/27, 6/10, and 6/24/81.


Plots harvested


cMeans followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.
Broadcast granules on 3/23/81.
eBanded granules on 4/13/81.
Orthene baits and granules applied on same dates as sprays.




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