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

10 (

EDCL rHUM L RARY7

5 5-4 University-of Florida
CENTRAL FLORIDA RESEACR ANRkD EDU iFDN C^Rf V.
Sanford, Florida .----fo

Research Report SAN 85-8 September 1984

CATERPILLAR CONTROL ON CABBAGE, SPRING, 1983

G. L. Leibee

Cabbage was transplanted March 9 into Myakka fine sand on the University
of Floi da's Agricultural Research and Education Center Sanford. A plot
consisted of one 30' row with 12" plant spacing. Each plot row was separated
by 2 uiplanted rows; row spacing was 30". Nemacur 15G 2 lbs a.i. per acre
was aP ped pretransplant in a 15" band for nematode control. Treatments
were rplicated in 5 randomized complete blocks separated by 25' weed-free
alleys Sprays were applied with a C02 pressurized sprayer mounted on an
Allis- alrs model G tractor. Three nozzles were ited per row; one
overhead (TX24) and one drop (TX12) on each side. The delivery rate was
50 gpa th a boom pressure of about 50 psi and a speed of 3 mph. Sprays
were app ed April 26, May 5, 12, 20, and 26. Ten plants were rated for
damage the head and first 4 wrapper leaves in each plot on June 1
using a le of 1-6 as in Greene et al., Journal of Economic Entomology,
62(4):79 800, The percentage of heads that were marketable was based on
the frequ cy of heads with damage ratings of 3 or less. The number of
cabbage l' per and diamondback moth larvae per plant was determined on
May 18 an ,May 23 by examining 5 consecutive plants in the middle of each
plot.

Insect pressure was considered heavy. Based on the damage ratings
and percent marketability, Ammo 2.5EC, Payoff 2.5EC, Pydrin 2.4EC, Pounce
3.2EC, Orthne 75SP, and Larvin 80DF were the most effective. No significant
(P > .05) ite responses occurred, where applicable. Larvin 3.2F performed
significantly (P < .05) better than Larvin 80DF. No phytotoxicity was
observed. I

A v4 1 f III
4C 4.a 'H A i 0 0

=OOr10Woe-10cO0
..*

.0.0 ,.0 1 0 H

lol
04)0

eN
0U 4 U

* a a
C.,

0 A 4) 0 40 U0
* a a ar
\6 "40 0
0\OC

0

60

.)
0
43

ci
(0

4J
Cu
a4

U 0

0
"u

a0

m
0o

'r0
1 0)
Cu

a

(0)
O

O J

100
*rl
4-
U Q

100001.@00 III
.0i 44' .0.0 0

IIIII
44 44 44 44
1,0 D000C CM %0
(-4 a% cn cn

S-0 0 0 6044 43 .V
4, I 4 11 434 III 1
C4 C M0 Cu Cu Cu 40 Cu 0) 0 44 M 43 -n

n 400004 4064 UD0
Ncioo *'oo004-* 0 000co0o-Too0.0
% 00 000 "4 "% -400 M 0or4 0 "r 4 0T4

0o --T %D (s ITo
q ooooot-i -ioomomo *Qin
v ", "; "4 ,

0 '0 4) 44 44 f43
Cu0 .0 0.0 0

NCN4 4 4 4 4

.a f

r o 0
* Cu
c<~

19t W IS4M to U t

"CO4DNw?-4 wOO w

44 60 44
U (1p 44 4 44

D N t rl- r- 00 0
"4 *; .4r4a-4

0
430 U2z U4cOl U U
U MMaM a m u u Pa
uU tmw M T-MCaMjM i#QQN
SW M -**T.- **-ONC'CrC-4-OOO *

otNN N N c <7OcrN cMt^ < ooo
0 .. w 4 04a m:r aHT ag
u4c 4h'0 0 0 0 0 V43 43 0 r- V-r4 0 0 Cu 4 C 4 4
400000 0 k4.0001OO4"400>>>$

P< 4N frC O QQO OOI NNNNwli

0 M00 60bM00 00 '0CO 0 044 W "0 '0 6044 t0
'44 0 0 0 0044 1 44 1 1 .0 44 U I I I I 1, 1 I Iu
0) 444444 6 44 0 00) Ci0 Cu 0).0.0 U U 0 0 1-.0 .43 114 0. 0
00T 0-0
P-4 I 4 4 "4 4 4 ; 4 c4 c; -4 4 44 4c4l c4 C l "4

0 0 00 00 ll) u 0 '0 '4 44'0 6044 00 b 44
60 44 to I I I I I Q 10 d 4 1 1 1 1 44 1 1
44 0 bO Q) 0 ( U 'o 0 t 0 no0 4a

S* c a 4 4r 4 4 c4 O c 4 4 .. ..

"u

r-4
qd0
v4

LM 0)

Cu

o0 M0

'H 9S
41

4 -r0 0
10 0
00

uum
41.

4 1

HO

04

j co

.0 4

0 4 00
ro -4 ca

0 Tl$
S0d
44

4) ro
Ma

1-I

0
4

4 -
0)
SU1

)a

4

41
a0

Cu
0

0 4

-3-

Compound Source and Composition

DPX-5249 E. I. duPont de Nemours & Co.

Larvin Union Carbide Agricultural Products

Company, 3.2F and 80DF formulations of

thiodicarb.

OK-135 Otsuka Chemical Company.

Oncol Otsuka Chemical Company.