Group Title: Quincy AREC research report - University of Florida Agricultural Research and Education Center ; NF 78-2
Title: Field evaluation of insecticides for control of insects attacking flue-cured tobacco in 1978
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00074341/00001
 Material Information
Title: Field evaluation of insecticides for control of insects attacking flue-cured tobacco in 1978
Series Title: Quincy AREC research report
Physical Description: 4, 6 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Tappan, William B., 1928-
Johnson, J. Troy
Agricultural Research and Education Center (Quincy, Fla.)
Publisher: Agricultural Research and Education Center
Place of Publication: Quincy Fla
Publication Date: 1978
 Subjects
Subject: Tobacco -- Diseases and pests -- Control -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Tobacco -- Effect of pesticides on -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: William B. Tappan and J.T. Johnson.
General Note: Caption title.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00074341
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 85809931

Full Text

I- ('2:






AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
Quincy, Florida

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTER
Live Oak, Florida


Quincy AREC Research Report NF 78-2


Field Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insects Attacking
Flue-Cured Tobacco in 1978

William B. Tappan, Entomologist, Quincy, and
J. T. Johnson, Associate Agronomist and Center Director, Live Oak

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One soil and 10 foliar-applied insecticidal spray formulations were field tested
on Speight G-28 flue-cured tobacco for insect control and phytotoxicity. Formulations,
number of applications, rate of applications, and dosage of active ingredients per
acre per application are presented in Table 1.

The dates treatment applications were mad are giU;n E in Tables 1
through 6. An interval of 14 days was allowed between all appli a on of spray.
Furadan flowable soil treatment was applied b oadca -un q8e- with 3-gallon
compressed-air hand sprayer and incorporated ~i h the soil to 2 depth of 4 to 6 inches
with a disc harrow. A tractor-mounted CO2-p S .iQ rayer with e hollow-cone
nozzle over each row and one hollow-cone nozzle odfP oQ f ow was used to
make all foliar applications. The 3 Tee Jet D3-25 nozzlesp r e 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 4 rows wide and was separated by a 4-foot vacant alley or buffer zone between
plots in a block. The rows were 40 feet long and 4 feet apart within plots. The 2
center rows constituted the experimental plot, and the 1 row on either side acted as
additional buffers between plots. Each experimental row contained 21 to 24 plants
set on approximately 20-inch centers. Alleys between blocks of plots were 20 feet
wide. Plots treated with Furadan flowable were 16 x 44 feet in size, and were reduced
to 16 x 40 feet after planting. The test area was located on the south side of the
lake near the maintenance shop adjacent to the roadway running north and south.

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 plants were transplanted on HIarch 27, 1978, and hand topped on May 25. A
dry cool spring caused late blooming and the plants had to be topped again on June 7
and June 14. A sucker control, Royal Tac, was applied on fay 26, June 5, and June 9.

Green peach aphid counts were made from natural infestations beginning on April 19
(pretreatment count), and succeeding counts followed at 14-day intervals. The time
lapse from treatment to first count of the Furadan treatment was necessarily longer.








- 2-


The remaining counts were made by 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 19. The count on April 19 was a pretreatment count for all treatments except
Furadan, which was applied pre-plant. All counts were made on the same dates as aphid
counts, and the time lapse from treatment to count was the same; 14 days. Each plant
that had at least one larva and the characteristic feeding injury in the 2 experimental
rows of each plot was counted as a damaged plant.

Visual phytotoxicity ratings were begun on April 19; pretreatment count was the
same as explained above for worm counts. The pretreatment and succeeding counts were
made on the same dates as for the aphid and worm counts. Plots were rated according
to severity of phytotoxicity observed. The readings were based on the following
system:

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

Four leaf primings or harvests were made during the crop season on June 13, 26,
July 10, and 24. Yield was calculated in pounds per acre from the total weight of
cured leaves from each treatment replication. 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 leaves. The value per pound was based upon the support price for
the various grades of tobacco.

Duncan's multiple range test was applied to all means analyzed to obtain statis-
tical comparisons for data interpretation.

Rainfall data express expressed in inches for the term of the experiment were as
follows:
March April Hay June July
14 0.90 13 0.05 2 0.70 3 0.23 5 0.75
15 0.11 14 0.97 4 -- 1.30 4 0.20 6 0.05
16 T 19 1.13 5 0.58 5 0.06 7 1.60
25 T 20 T 6 T 6 0.13 8 0.05
Total 1.01 26 0.48 10 T 9 0.30 10 1.28
Total 2.63 14 0.21 10 0.41 12 0.19
16 0.10 11 0.04 13 0.43
17 0.23 13 0.38 16 1.14
24 0.32 21 T 17 0.10
25 0.45 24 T 18 0.03
31 T 29 0.30 19 0.03
Total 3.89 30 0.38 22 0.70
Total 2.43 24 0.20
25 0.09
T = Trace Total 6.64
Grand Total 16.60 inches







- 3-


RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The green peach aphid was not active as early as in the proceeding 2 years nor were
populations as heavy during the crop season. The hard cold winters for the past 2 years
apparently caused a reduction in aphid numbers as well as early spring activity.
Potato virus Y (PVY) was not observed in any plot during the crop season, which was
attributed to the reduced aphid populations and activity. Again the effect of the hard
winters on natural hosts of the aphids and virus was evident in the reduced incidence of
PVY diseased plants. However, budworm populations were heavier at the beginning of the
crop season than in 1977, but declined to a lower level at the end of the season.
Early season ho-aworm population levels were lighter than in 1977, and remained that
way until early July. ilature hornworn larval populations completely disappeared at
the time of the last count on July 12, except for a few first instar larvae found on
sucker growth near the tops of the plants. This phenomenon was observed on the checks
as well as the treated plots. Counts of damaged plants on July 12 were made only
where damage cound be definitely attributed to hornworms owing to the presence of cast
moult skins adhering to the leaves in the vicinity of the observed damage. (See Table
4.) Cabbage looper populations were extremely light, and no meaningful control data
was obtained.

No green peach aphids were present at the pretreatment count on April 19. The
population began to increase on Hay 3 and all treatments except FMC-33297 at 0.1 lb.
AI/acre and Dipel gave significant control. The weakness of FIC-33297 as an aphicide
was quite evident in the counts on May 31, June 14, and June 28. However, the reduced
activity of the aphid caused considerable variability (C.V. = 157%) in the counts on
June 28. This variability was apparent as early as Hay 3, when the coefficient of
variation was 97%. The results with SD-43775, another synthetic pyrethroid, also
pointed to variability of aphid activity as a possible explanation for the significant
control obtained with that compound. Excluding Dipel, all other treatments performed
well for the entire season. (See Table 2.) In analyzing the data in Table 6,
aphid damage apparently caused no significant reduction in yield or dollar return.

The pretreatment count of tobacco budworm showed the population to be heavier
than in 1977. The population increased with time until Hay 31. After the plants
were topped on iHay 25, the population declined for the remainder of the season. On
May 3 and 17, all treatments gave significant control except Furadan. The tank-mix
formulation of FMC-33297 + Orthene performed well the entire season, but was not
significantly better than Orthene alone on May 3 and 17. However, the tank-mix
formulation was significantly different from F1MC-33297 alone at 0.1 lb. AI/acre on
Hay 3 and 17. The data indicated an additive rather than a synergistic effect of the
two compounds in the tank-mix foruulation. RIH-0994 showed a weakness for budworm
control, but appeared to be equal to Penncap-M, Lannate, FIC-3329 at 0.1 lb. AI/acre,
and Dipel. The best treatments were CGA-15324 at both rates, BAY NTN 9306, Monitor,
FMC-33297 at 0.16 and 0.21 lb. AI/acre, FrIC-33297 + Orthene, SD-43775, and Orthene alone.
There was a difference in control on Hay 3 and 17 with the various dosages of FMC-33297,
which showed that the 0.1 lb. rate was not as effective as the 0.16 or 0.21 lb. rates.
(See Table 3.) The effect of budworm damage on yield was not clearly apparent as
indicated by the data in Table 6.

Hornworn populations occurred later than in 1977, and reached their peak in
early July. As discussed previously, the population of mature larvae had disappeared
at the last count on July 12. Only a few first instar larvae were present at that








-4-


time on sucker growth near the tops of the plants. However, counts of identifiable
damaged plants showed the percent of damaged plants was 7% less than in 1977 at the
same point in time. All treatments gave significant control, while BAY NTN 9306,
Monitor, FMC-33297 alone at 0.16 and 0.21 lb. AI/acre, and FMC-33297 + Orthene were
consistently the best treatments. (See Table 4.) The yield data in Table 6 on the
check indicated the hornworm reduced yields, but the reduction was not significantly
different from some of the best control treatments.

Furadan was the only treatment that caused any discernible phytotoxicity symptoms,
which disappeared after the first priming on June 13. (See Table 5.) Symptoms of
Furadan injury involved only leaves in the first priming. The phytotoxicity along
with budwcrm damage probably contributed to the reduced yield from the Furadan
treatment as reflected by the data in Table 6. Furadan usually causes a positive
yield response, but for the past 2 years the response has not been as great as some
of the foliar spray treatments. The dry weather in early spring may have contributed
to this phenomenon in both 1977 and 1978.

Yield of cured tobacco from all treatments including the untreated check was
slightly smaller than in 1977. Total rainfall during the season was 4.47 inches
greater than in 1977, however, the first 4 months of the growing season showed 2.34
inches more fell in 1978. Therefore, the 1978 season was somewhat wetter, but was
still considered to be rather dry during the spring months of March and April. Those
2 months in 1977 recorded only 1 inch compared to 3.64 inches in 1978. During dry
weather, tobacco generally produces more body and weight, but for some reason this
did not happen in 1978. Quality was good for all treatments, and BAY NTN 9306 had
the best quality of any treatment for the second successive year. The quality of the
various treatments was indicated by the dollar return data in Table 6.

Average maximum and minimum air temperatures during the season were: March 76
and 46, April 84 and 53, Hay 87 and 61, June 92 and 67, and July 92 and 700 F.
Temperature averaged 1 degree higher for the maximum and 2 degrees higher for the
minimum in 1977, which indicated that cooler temperatures prevailed during the 1978
season. The cooler 1978 season definitely contributed to smaller yields, which re-
sulted in smaller dollar returns as compared to 1977. Temperatures evidently affected
insect activity causing smaller populations of green peach aphids and hornworms. The
budworm showed little effect, and populations apparently were enhanced by the cooler
weather conditions. Probably, the hard winter kept the budworm in the pupal stage
during February and early March, and prevented suicidal emergence during periods
when freezes might cause death of adult moths. When adult budworms began emerging
in late March and early April temperatures never dropped below 360 F, therefore no
temperature kill occurred. The beginning population at the April 19 count indicated
that weather conditions were favorable. (See Table 3.)

The tank-mix formulation of FHC-33297 + Orthene indicated that the rate of
Orthene could be reduced to 0.5 lb. AI/acre and that FMC-33297 could be applied at
the low rate of 0.1 lb. AI/acre. By tank mixing the 2 compounds at such low rates
would effect a reduction in possible residues of both materials on the cured leaf as
well as enhanced insect control. It is entirely possible that lower rates of both
materials as tank mixes would be possible without reducing efficacy of the mixture.
The data indicated that the tank-mix formulation was the answer to the ineffective
control of the green peach aphid by FIIC-33297. Other synethic pyrethroids will have
to be combined with an aphicide in order to provide broad spectrum insecticidal activity.








AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 1: Treatments Applied for Insect Control on Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28) 1978.

Gals. Lbs. AI
No. per Acre per per Acre per
Treatment Applications Application Application

Furadan, 4F 1 1.5 6.00
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 6 25.6 0.50
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 6 25.5 0.77
BAY NTU 9603, 0.5%S(EC) 6 25.5 1.06
Penncap-Hi, 0.5%S(F) 6 25.4 1.06
Monitor, 0.5%S(WI) 6 26.6 1.09
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 6 26.5 0.65
FHC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) 6 24.8 0.10
FHC-33297, 0.075%S(EC) 6 25.7 0.16
FHC-33297, 0.1%S(EC) 6 24.9 0.21
FMIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) + 6c 24.3 0.10
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 6c 24.3 0.50
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 6 24.9 0.10
Orthene, 0.35ZS(SP) 6 24.7 0.72
Dipel, 0.24%S(WP) 6 23.1 0.45
R1-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 6 24.7 0.50


a EC = Emulsifiable Concentrate, F = Flowable, L = Liquid, S = Spray, SP = Soluble Powder, 1~A = Water
UP = Uettable Powder. Treatments applied on 4/20, 5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, aid.6/28/78.

b Furadan applied on 3/15/78. Tobacco transplanted on 3/27/73.

c Treatment was a tank mix.


iisicible, and


dLbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.








AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 2: Hean Number of Green Peach Aphid per Plot of Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28)a 1978.

Iean Rate
Aphid Counts Ilean R
Aphid Counts Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/19c 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 6/28 7/12 Application

Furadan, 4Fd 0 5ab 5a 15a 43a 92ab 35ab 6.00
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 0 3ab 2a 0a 0a 0a 0a 0.50
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 0 2a 2a 0a 0a 0a 0a 0.77
BAY NTN 9306, 0.5ZS(EC) 0 2a 4a la Oa 0a Oa 1.06
Penncap-M, 0.5%S(F) 0 6ab 11a 0a 0a Oa 0a 1.06
Monitor, 0.5%(114I) 0 4ab 2a 0a Ia 0a 0a 1.09
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 0 11ab 16a 74a 60a Oa 22ab 0.65
FIIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) 0 31cd 23a 659b 398b 166ab 123ab 0.10
FIIC-33297, 0.075%S(EC) 0 12abc 44a 591b 927c 1,270d 494d 0.16
F1iC-33297, O.1%S(EC) 0 17abc 20a 123a 211ab 360abc 18bc 0.21
FIIC-33297, 0.05% S(EC) + 10e
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 0 2a 2a Oa 08 Oa 0a 0.50e
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 0 9ab ga 17a 4a 131ab 44ab 0.10
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0 2a Oa la Oa 0a Oa 0.72
Dipel, 0.24%S(WP) 0 23bcd 159c 984c 1,071c 602bc 73ab 0.45f
P1-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 0 10ab 31a 8a 65a 103ab 0a 0.50
Check (Untreated) 0 37d 114b 800bc 854c 7cd 331


aCounts made on 10 plants per plot, totaling 30 plants
significantly different at the 5% level.
bSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays applied on 4/20,
cPretreatment counts. Transplanted plots on 3/27/78.
Plants were topped on 5/25, 6/7, and 6/14/78. Plots h.
dFuradan applied on 3/15/78.
eTreatment was a tank mix.
fLbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.


in 3 plots. ;!eans followed by the same letter are not

5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, and 6/23/78.
Sucker control Royal-Tac applied on 5/26, 6/5, and 6/9/78.
arrested on 6/13, 6/26, 7/10, and 7/24/78.







AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 3: Iiean Percent Budworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (Speight G-28)a 1978.
i ean Rate Total # Plants
Budworm Counts Lbs. AI/Acre/ 3 Plots
Treatment 4/19c 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 6/28 7/12 Application 7/12

Furadan, 4Fd 25a 91e 85g 28cd 35fg 10bc 5b 6.00 136
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 54bc 32abc 37abcd 15abc 15abcd 2a 2ab 0.50 135
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 60bc 19a 27ab 16abc 10ab 3a 0a 0.77 136
BAY NTN 9306, 0.5%S(EC) 61bc 21a 22ab 6a 14abc 3a lab 1.06 141
Penncap-M, 0.5%S(F) 56bc 61d 50def 3ab 29efg 4ab 2ab 1.06 131
Monitor, 0.5%S(1) 58bc 24a 33abcd 23bcd 13abc 2a 0a 1.09 134
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 58bc 55d 40bcde 22bcd 24cdef 8ab 3ab 0.65 134
FHC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) 68c 44bcd 48cdef 15abc 17abcde 6ab 2ab 0.10 135
FIIC-33297, 0.075%S(EC) 62bc 26ab 31abc 14abc 22bcdef 5ab 2ab 0.16 128
FIC-33297, 0.1%S(EC) 61bc 17a 30ab ab 13abc 6ab ab 0.21 128
FIIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) + 0.10e
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 60bc 26ab 21a 13ab 7a 3a 0a 0.50e 136
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 64bc 19a 25ab 12ab 13abcde 11bc 2ab 0.10 131
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 64uc 24a 33abcd 15abc 23bcdef 5ab lab 0.72 128
Dipel, 0.24%S(IP) 59bc 62d 64f 33de 29def 2a 5b 0.45f 130
RHI-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 49b 49cd 56ef 17abc Iabcde 7ab 3ab 0.50 133
Check (Untreated) 59bc 90e 85g 45e 37g 15c 5b 129


a Counts made on 39 to 48 plants per plot, totaling 123 to 141 plants in 3 plots.


are not significantly different


at the 5% level.


HIeans followed by the same letter


b See Table 1 for more details. Sprays applied on 4/20, 5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, and 6/28/78.
c Pretreatment counts. Transplanted plots on 3/27/78. Sucker control Royal-Tac applied on 5/26, 6/5, and 6/9/78.
Plants were topped on 5/25, 6/7, and 6/14/78. Plots harvested on 6/13, 6/26, 7/10, and 7/24/78.
d Furadan applied on 3/15/78.
e Treatment was a tank mix.
f Lbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.








AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 4: lean Percent Hornworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (Speight G-28)a 1978.
l!ean Rate Total V Plants
UIornrorm Counts Lbs. AI/Acre/ 3 Plots
Treatment 4/19c 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 6/28 7/12 Application 7/12

Furadan, 4Fd 0 0 0 la gab 13abc 10a 6.00 136
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 0 0 0 4a 12abc 11ab 15a 0.50 135
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 0 0 0 3a 4a 22cd 19a 0.77 136
BAY NTN 9306, 0.5%S(EC) 0 0 0 3a 6ab 4a 6a 1.C6 141
Penncap-M, 0.5%S(F) 0 0 0 2a 20C 45e 37a 1.06 131
Monitor, 0.5%S(WII) 0 0 0 8a 8ab 10ab 4a 1.09 134
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 0 0 0 16b 10ab 29d 29a 0.65 134
FMC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) 0 0 0 6a 4a 6a 13a 0.10 135
FIC 33297, 0.075%S(EC) 0 0 0 la 3a 3a 3a 0.16 128
FIC-33297, O.1%S(EC) 0 0 0 2a 2a 2a 5a 0.21 128
FIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) + 0.10e
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 0 0 0 la 2a 2a 3a 0.50e 136
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 0 0 0 4a 2a 2a 12a 0.10 131
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0 0 0 6a 15bc 8a 10a 0.72 128
Dipel, 0.24%S(WlP) 0 0 0 4a 22c 25cd 25a 0.45 130
RH-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 0 0 0 5a 10ab 25cd 21a 0.50 133
Check (Untreated) 0 0 0 16b 32d 69f 92b -- 129

a Counts made on 39 to 48 plants per plot, totaling 128 to 141 plants in 3 plots. Means followed by the same letter
are not significantly different at the 5% level.
b See Table 1 for more details. Sprays applied on 4/20, 5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, and 6/28/78.
c Pretreatment counts. Transplanted plots on 3/27/78. Sucker control Royal-Tac applied on 5/26, 6/5, and 6/9/78.
Plants were topped on 5/25, 6/7, and 6/14/78. Plots harvested on 6/13, 6/26, 7/13, and 7/24/78.
d Furadan applied on 3/15/78.
e Treatment was a tank mix.
f Lbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.







AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 5: Phytotoxic Effects of Certain Insecticide Formulations on Flue-Cured Tobacco (Speight G-28) 1978.

Lean Phytotoxicity Indicesb Ilean Rate
SLbs. AI/Acre/
Treatmenta 4/19c 5/3 5/17 5/31 6/14 6/28 7/12 Application

Furadan, 4Fd 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.00
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.50
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.77
BAY NTN 9306, 0.5%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.06
Penncap-H, 0.5%S(F) 0,0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.06
Monitor, 0.5%S(WM) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.09
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.65
FIIC-33297, 0.05%G(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0/ 0.0 0.0 0.10
F1IC-33297, 0.075%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.16
FiIC-33297, 0.1%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.21
FIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) + 0.10e
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.50e
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.10
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.72
Dipel, 0.24%S(TP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.45
R1i-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.50
Check (Untreated) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --


a See Table 1 for more details. Spray applied on 4/20, 5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, and 5/28/78.
b Rating System: 0 = one, 1 = Slight leaf deformity or chlorosis, 2 = Hoderate leaf deformity or chlorosis,
3 = Heavy leaf deformity or chlorosis with some necrosis, and 4 = Severe leaf deformity or chlorosis with
considerable necrosis.
c Pretreatment counts. Transplanted plots on 3/27/78. Sucker control Royal-Tac applied on 5/26, 6/5, and 6/9/78.
Plants were topped on 5/25, 6/7, and 6/14/78. Plots harvested on 6/13, 6/26, 7/1), and 7/24/78.
d Furadan applied on 3/15/78.
e Treatment was a tank mix.
f Lbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.






AREC, Quincy and ARC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 6: Effect of Certain Insecticidal Treatments on Yield and Dollar returnn
(Speight G-28) 1970.


per Acre of Flue-Cured Tobacco


Lean Rate Yield Dollar
Lbs. AI/Acre/ Lbs./Acre Return/Acre
Treatment Application i!ean 3 Reps.b Hean 3 Reps.b

Furadan, 4FC 6.00 1,924bc 2,132cd
CGA-15324, 0.24%S(EC) 0.50 2,111abc 2,375abcd
CGA-15324, 0.36%S(EC) 0.77 2,057abc 2,421abcd
BAY UTN 9306, 0.5%S(EC) 1.06 2,327ab 2,697ab
Penncap-M, 0.5%S(F) 1.06 1,989bc 2,221Lcd
MIonitor, 0.5%S(WIi.) 1.0) 2,267ab 2,649a;c
Lannate, 0.3%S(L) 0.65 2,443a 2,00a
FRIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) 0.10 2,241ab 2,627abc
FIiC-33297, 0.075%S(EC) 0.16 2,019bc 2,398abcd
FHIC-33297, 0.1%S(EC) 0.21 1,978bc 2,345Cd
FIIC-33297, 0.05%S(EC) + 0.10d
Orthene, 0.25%S(SP) 3.50d 2,113abc 2,358abcd
SD-43775, 0.05%S(EC) 0.10 2,050abc 2,40abcd
Orthene, 0.35%S(SP) 0.72 2,120aLc 2,397abcd
Dipel, 0.24%S(WP) 0.45e 2,070abc 2,420abcd
R1i-0994, 0.24%S(EC) 0.50 2,197ab 2,639abc
Check (Untreated) 1,743c 1,)61d


a See Table 1 for more details.
b leans followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.
c Furadan applied on 3/15/78. Plots transplanted on 3/27/78. Sprays applied on 4/20, 5/3, 5/17, 5/31, 6/14, and
6/28/78. Plots harvested on 6/13, 6/26, 7/10, and 7/24/78.
d Treatment was a tank mix.
e Lbs. of 3.2% wettable powder per acre per application.




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