Group Title: Quincy NFREC research report - University of Florida Research and Education Center ; NF-85-4
Title: Management of insects on flue-cured tobacco in 1985
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00074349/00001
 Material Information
Title: Management of insects on flue-cured tobacco in 1985
Series Title: Quincy NFREC research report
Physical Description: 10 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Tappan, William B., 1928-
Rich, J. R ( Jimmy Ray ), 1950-
North Florida Research and Education Center (Quincy, Fla.)
Publisher: North Florida Research and Education Center
Place of Publication: Quincy Fla
Publication Date: 1985
 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.
Funding: Research report (North Florida Research and Education Center (Quincy, Fla.)) ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00074349
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 85535259

Full Text

- t"BS< ^,'


,. NORTH FLORIDA RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
Quincy, Florida
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
Live Oak, Florida


Quincy NFREC Research Report NF-85-4


Management of Insects on Flue-Cured Tobacco in 1985
William B. Tappan, Entomologist, Quincy, and
J. R. Rich, Associate Nematologist, Live Oak


MATERIALS AND METHODS

Ten chemical foliar spray treatments were field tested on Northrup King
K-326 flue-cured tobacco for insect control, phytotoxicity, and effect on crop
yield and value, and insect resistance to certain treatments. Formulations,
number of applications, rates 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. Spray treatments were applied at 14-day intervals with a
tractor-mounted CO -pressurized sprayer with 1 hollow-cone nozzle over each
row and 1 hollow-cone nozzle on each side of the row. The three Tee-Jet D3-25
nozzles per row were designed to deliver approximately 26 gallons of spray 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, crop value, and insect,resistance
to certain treatments. Each row contained 25 to 27 plants set on approxi-
mately 17-inch centers. Alleys between blocks of plots were 20 feet wide.
The test area was located west of the barn area of the Center near the paved
highway and adjacent to the unpaved access road.

All cultural practices in preparing the test area for planting were per-
formed in the usual manner. Beds for planting were prepared and fertilizer
applied in late February. The tobacco was transplanted on March 12, 1985, and
hand topped on May 20 and 29. A sucker control, Royal-Tac, was applied at 2
gallons per acre on May 17 and 23, followed by Royal MH at 2 gallons per acre
on May 30.

Green peach aphid counts were made from natural infestations beginning on
April 17 (pretreatment count), and succeeding counts followed at 14-day inter-
vals. All 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 marked plants
equidistant from each other in each of the experimental rows were counted.








Counts of tobacco budworm and tobacco hbrnworm were made from natural in-
festations on April 17 (pretreatment count), and all succeeding 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 17 (pretreatment count),
and all succeeding counts were made on the same dates as aphid counts. 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

Tobacco budworm egg and larval samples were taken from untreated tobacco
after buttoning and shipped to Dr. Thomas C. Sparks, Louisiana State Univer-
sity, for LD 50 and dosage mortality curve determinations for Lannate and
Orthene.

Four leaf primings or harvests were made during the crop season for evalu-
ation of crop performance on June 3, 17, July 8, and 22. 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 multi-
plying 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 of the various grades of
tobacco.

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

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

March April May June July

18 0.35 1 0.03 3 0.05 12 2.39 1 1.60
21 0.31 8 0.86 6 0.25 13 0.02 8 2.68
Total 0.6 15 1.27 10 0.57 17 3.62 17 0.01
16 0.29 13 0.11 28 0.34 22 0.80
17 0.51 20 0.05 Total ~.7 Total '50
Total .96 21 0.95
24 0.15
30 0.07
Total 2.2U

Grand Total = 17.28 inches








RESULTS AND DISCUSSION


Insect infestations occurred earlier, but populations were more eratic
than in 1984. The green peach aphid populations were lighter at the beginning
of the season, and began increasing at the end of May. By the end of June and
early July, the aphid populations were heavier than at the same time in 1984.
The light early aphid populations accounted for a decrease in PVY infection in
the field as compared to 1984. Less than 10% of the plants exhibited PVY
symptoms on May 15. Large tobacco budworm populations appeared earlier than
in 1984, but began declining on May 15, which was probably associated with
drought conditions that prevailed during late March, April, and May. The
budworm populations never recovered from the effects of the drought, and
remained light throughout the remainder of the season. The budworm popula-
tions at their peak on May 1 were not as large as at the peak on June 6, 1984.
Populations of the tobacco hornworm occurred about 8 days earlier than in
1984, but never were as large as in 1984. The early season drought during
March, April, and May (11.27 inches less than in 1984) no doubt reduced pupal
eclosion, and resulted in the low hornworm populations. The drought condi-
tions had no effect on crop yield or value, since irrigation supplemented the
moisture from a deficiency of rainfall. This marks the 17th year in succes-
sion that no control data have been obtained on the cabbage looper because
populations on the crop have been almost nonexistent.

Green peach aphid began building populations on field plants on April 17
(pretreatment count), which was about 8 days earlier than in 1984. The
drought conditions during March, April, and early May caused light initial
populations, which began increasing in numbers on May 29, and remained gener-
ally light until June 26. At that time, populations were larger than in 1984,
and were located primarily on leaf petioles and young sucker leaves near the
top and bottom of the plants. Populations remained large in those locations
through the conclusion of the season. (See Table 2.) On July 10, when popu-
lations were the largest on the untreated checks, all treatments except Bay-
throid at 0.22 and 0.046 lb. AI/A. and Lannate at 0.60 lb. AI/A. gave signifi-
cant (P = 0.05) control. Those treatments on July 10 with aphid counts above
1,000 would have difficulty in being accepted for commercial application even
though one, Lannate at 0.60 lb. AI/A., was not statistically different from
some of the better treatments. The data reconfirmed that Capture (FMC-54800)
at 0.057 lb. AI/A. gave effective control of the aphid, when applied on a bi-
weekly schedule. The yield and dollar return data in Table 6 indicated that
the aphid had no significant detrimental effect on either parameter.

Populations of the budworm in the pretreatment count indicated that the
season would have the potential for severe damage to the crop from the insect.
(See Table 3.) However, the drought conditions during March, April, and May
adversely affected the insect and reduced the population to the smallest level
in the past two years. Using the May 1 count for treatment comparison, all
treatments gave significant control, but the best treatments were Orthene at
2.01 and 4.20 and Lannate at 2.57 Ibs. AI/A. The data indicated a significant
(P = 0.05) relationship between dosage and control with Orthene and Lannate (r
=-0.808), which may or may not be related to insect resistance to the insecti-
cides. The budworm may have accounted for some of the loss in yield and
dollar return, but the loss was not statistically significant. (See Table 6.)






The hornworm population began to increase on the tobacco on May 1, which
was about 8 days earlier than in 1984, but never reached the levels recorded
during the past two years. The largest population occurred on June 26, when
29% of the plants in the untreated checks were damaged. (See Table 4.) On
June 26, all treatments gave significant control. The best treatments were
Capture at 0.057 and 0.102, Baythroid at 0.022 and 0.046, and Orthene at 2.01
and 4.20 Ibs. AI/A. Loss in yield and dollar return caused by the hornworm
was neglible as reflected in non-significant values between treatments for
both-parameters. (See Table 6.)

Only Lannate at 1.18 and 2.57 Ibs. AI/A. caused any detectable phytotoxi-
city. The injury was evident following the first spray application. Chloro-
sis and necrosis of the lamina was prevalent in the middle and top of the
plants and persisted over the entire season. As the leaves matured during the
latter part of the season, the severity of the phytotoxicity began to dimin-
ish. (See Table 5.)

No data on LD 50's and dosage mortality curves for the budworm against
Lannate and Orthene have been received from Dr. Thomas C. Sparks of Louisiana
State University.

Yield in the untreated checks was 1,813 Ibs./A. larger^that in 1984, which
indicated that the insects were not as damaging, and had little adverse effect
as was reflected in the lack of statistical difference between treatments.
Dollar return in the untreated checks increased $4,690/A. as compared to that
in 1984, indicating that the tobacco was enhanced by the lessened effects of
the insects and PVY infection. The best yield from treated tobacco was
increased 1,772 lbs./A., and dollar return was increased $4,573/A., indicating
that the insects and PVY were of no consequence to either parameter in 1985.
The quality of the tobacco generally was excellent in 1985, which was caused
by a combination of lessened insect and PVY damage and favorable weather.
Even though total rainfall was 13.39 inches less than in 1984, supplemental
irrigation provided adequate moisture to produce an excellent crop response.
(See Table 6.)

There was a dosage response by the budworm to'Orthene and Lannate, with
the higher doses giving the most effective control. As soon as LD 50 and
dosage mortality data are available from Louisiana State University, a better
interpretation of the field data can be made. Capture (FMC-54800) performed
well against all three insects season long and was one of the best treatments
at season's end. Capture was slightly weak on the budworm, but after three
applications at 0.057 and 0.108 lb. AI/A. was more effective than three appli-
cations of Orthene at 1.09 lbs. AI/A.






NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 1. Foliar Treatments Applied for Insect Control on Flue-Cured Tobacco (K-326)-1985.

Lbs. or Gals. Lbs. AI
b Number per Acre per per Acre per
Treatmenta,b Applications Application Application

Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 6 26.2 1.08
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 6 24.4 2.01
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 6 25.4 4.20
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 6 24.7 0.60
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 6 24.3 1.18
Lannate, 1.16% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 6 26.6 2.57
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 6 25.2 0.057
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 6 25.2 0.102
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 6 24.8 0.022
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 6 25.6 0.046
Check (Untreated) -- --

aEC = Emulsifiable concentrate, L = Liquid concentrate, S = Spray, and SP = Soluble powder.

bSprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15/, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/26/85. Tobacco was transplanted on 3/12/85, and
harvested on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.








NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 2. Mean Number of Green Peach Aphids per Plot of Flue-Cured Tobacco (K-326)-1985.

Aphid Countsb Mean Rate
a d Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/17c 5/1 5/15 5/29 6/12 6/26 7/10e Application

Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 2a Oa 21a 40a Oa la 247a 1.08
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 3a Oa 8a 4a Oa Oa 144a 2.01
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 3a Oa 5a 19a -Oa la 148a 4.20
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) la 6a 35a 233a 186a 463a 1,532ab 0.60
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 2a 7a 64a 143a 25a 333a 942a 1.18
Lannate, 1.16% S(1.8 lbs./gal. L) 3a la 11a 65a 6a 32a 795a 2.57
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) la 7a 33a 21a 25a 16a 26a 0.057
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 lbs./gal. EC) la 4a 23a 25a Oa la 23a 0.102
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 2a 108b 885b 2,332b 1,631c 2,545c 4,299c 0.022
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 2a 143c 576b 2,360b 826b 2,217bc 6,596d 0.046
Check (Untreated) 2a 132bc 516ab 2,074b 689b 1,744b 2,951bc

aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/26/85.

bCounts were made on 10 plants per plot, totaling 30 plants in 3 plots. Means followed by the same letter
are not significantly different at the 5% level.


CPretreatment count. Tobacco was transplanted on 3/12/85.
Sucker control Royal Tac was applied on 5/17 and 5/23/85,
on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.


Plants were hand topped on 5/20 and 5/29/85.
and Royal MH on 5/30/85. Tobacco was harvested


dAphids were on new sucker growth and petioles of harvestable leaves in plant tops.
eAphids were on new sucker growth in plant tops and bottoms.






NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida
Table 3. Mean Percent Budworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (K-326)-1985.

Budworm Countsb Mean Rate
a Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/17c 5/1 5/15 5/29 6/12 6/26 7/10 Application

Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 73a 31bc 17cd 16bcd 9ab lla 9ab 1.08
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 65a 8a 7ab 5a 7ab 8a 7ab 2.01
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 70a 8a la 5a 4a 4a 6a 4.20
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 67a 49de 24d 25d llb lla Ilb 0.60
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 58a 30bc 16cd 20cd '7ab 5a 9ab 1.18
Lannate, 1.16% S(1.8 lbs./gal. L) 59a 20ab 9abc l0abc 4a 4a 7ab 2.57
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 64a 41cd 18cd 8ab 7ab 6a 9ab 0.057
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 61a 35c 7ab 6ab 5ab 5a 9ab 0.102
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 58a 59e 15bc 7ab llb 6a 7ab 0.022
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 Ibs./gal.. EC) 55a 49de 13bc Sab 9ab 6a 7ab 0.046
Check (Untreated) 65a 86f 58e 44e 24c 20b 16c ---

aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/26/85.

bCounts were made on 50 to 56 plants per plot, totaling 160 to 167 plants in 3 plots. Means followed by the
same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.
cPretreatment count. Tobacco was transplanted on 3/12/85. Plants were hand topped on 5/20 and 5/29/85.
Sucker control Royal Tac was applied on 5/17 and 5/23/85, and Royal MH on 5/30/85. Tobacco was harvested
on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.





NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 4. Mean Percent Hornworm Damaged Flue-Cured Tobacco Plants per Plot (K-326)-1985.


Hornworm Countsb Mean Rate
a Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/17c 5/1 5/15 5/29 6/12 6/26 7/10 Application

Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 0 la 4bc 10c 7ab 11c 5ab 1.08
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 0 Oa 2abc 4a la 5abc lab 2.01
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 0 Oa labc la la 4ab 2ab 4.20
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0 la 5c 16d lOb lObc 6b 0.60
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0 la 4abc 10c 5ab 10bc 3ab 1.18
Lannate, 1.16 %S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0 la 2abc 12cd 7ab 9bc 3ab 2.57
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0 Oa Oa la la 2a 2ab 0.057
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0 Oa la Oa la 3ab la 0.102
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0 la la 5ab 3a 3ab 3ab 0.022
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0 la 2abc 3a 3a 4ab la 0.046
Check (Untreated) 0 4b 11d 22e 18c 29d 16c ---

aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/26/85.

counts were made on 50 to 56 plants per plot, totaling 160 to 167 plants per 3 plots. Means followed by
the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.
CPreatment count. Tobacco was transplanted on 3/12/85. Plants were hand topped on 5/20 and 5/29/85.
Sucker control Royal Tac was applied on 5/17 and 5/23/85, and Royal MH on 5/30/85. Tobacco was harvested
on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.






NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 5. Phytotoxic Effects of Certain Insecticide Formulations on Flue-Cured Tobacco (K-326)-1985.

Mean Phytotoxicity Indicesb Mean Rate
a Lbs. AI/Acre/
Treatment 4/17c 5/1 5/15 5/29 6/12 6/26 7/10 Application

Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.08
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.01
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.20
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.60
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0.0 3.7 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.0 1.18
Lannate, 1.16% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0.0 4.0 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.3 3.3 2.57
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.057
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.102
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.022
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 lbs./gal. EC) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.046
Check (Untreated) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 --

aSee Table 1 for more details. Sprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/26/85.


bRating System: 0 = None, 1 = Slight leaf spotting or
= Heavy leaf spotting or chlorosis with some necrosis,
siderable necrosis.
cPretreatment count. Tobacco was transplanted on 3/12/
Sucker control Royal Tac was applied on 5/17 and 5/23/
on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.


chlorosis, 2 = Moderate leaf spotting or chlorosis, 3
and 4 = Severe leaf spotting or chlorosis with con-

'85. Plants were hand topped on 5/20 and 5/29/85.
'85, and Royal MH on 5/30/85. Tobacco was harvested






NFREC, Quincy and AREC, Live Oak, Florida


Table 6. Effects of Certain Insecticidal
Tobacco (K-326)-1985.


Treatments on Yield and Dollar Return per Acre of Flue-Cured


Mean Rate Yield Dollar
Lbs. AI/Acre/ Lbs./Acre Return/Acre
Treatmenta,b Application Mean 3 Reps.c Mean 3 Reps.c


Orthene, 0.5% S(75% SP) 1.08 3,745a 6,397a
Orthene, 1.0% S(75% SP) 2.01 4,597a 7,973a
Orthene, 2.0% S(75% SP) 4.20 3,750a 6,356a
Lannate, 0.29% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 0.60 4,065a 7,012a
Lannate, 0.58% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 1.18 4,051a 7,065a
Lannate, 1.16% S(1.8 Ibs./gal. L) 2.57 4,015a 6,809a
Capture, 0.027% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.057 4,102a 7,103a
Capture, 0.054% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.102 4,142a 7,121a
Baythroid, 0.011% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.022 3,910a 6,304a
Baythroid, 0.022% S(2.0 Ibs./gal. EC) 0.046 4,068a 6,962a
Check (Untreated) -3.,471a 5,664a


aSee Table 1 for more details.


Sprays were applied on 4/17, 5/1, 5/15, 5/29, 6/12, and 6/29/85.


bTobacco was transplanted on 3/12/85, and harvested on 6/3, 6/17, 7/8, and 7/22/85.

CMeans followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level.


- ..




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