Citation
use of systemic insecticides for controlling white peach scales, Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (Targioni), (Homoptera: Coccoidea

Material Information

Title:
use of systemic insecticides for controlling white peach scales, Pseudaulacaspis pentagona (Targioni), (Homoptera: Coccoidea
Creator:
Whitcomb, W. H.
Publisher:
Big Bend Horticultural Laboratory

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
145734383 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text





/ L- / BIG BEND HORTICULTURAL LABO TO1"UME LIBRARY
I Monticello, Florida

Big Bend Hort. Lab. Mimeo Report 71-1 80, A Otob r 21, 19 0


THE USE OF SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES FOR CONTROLLIn tfi*R .P E".fr lida
PSEUDAULACASPIS PENTAGON (TARGIONI), (HOMOP
1
W. H. Uhitcomb, S. S. Flukerl and S. A. Samuels2

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Because the insecticides used in this test had not been cleared for use on
peaches, and because the residual effects were not known, this test could not be
performed on commercial trees. Therefore, an abandoned orchard located approxi-
mately eight miles north of Madison, Florida, in the Cherry Lake Orchards was
chosen. This orchard, approximately four acres in size, consisted of Maygold var-
iety peach trees in their fourth leaf, and had a history of white peach scale
infestations.

The randomized block design with four replications was used, and each treat-
ment contained four trees. The treatments were separated by tying strips of col-
ored plastic tape onto the branches of the trees so they could be easily located.
Each treatment was assigned a separate color or combination of colors.

The compounds tested wTre Azodrin(R) (3-hydroxy-N-methyl-cis-crotonamide
dimethyl phosphate), Bidrin (3-hydroxy-N,N-dimethyl-cis-crotonamide, dimethyl
phosphate), Aldicarb (2-Methyl-2-(methylthio) propionaldehyde O-(Methylcarbamoyl)
oxime), Carbofuran (2,3-dihydro-2,2 dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl methylcarbamate),
Disulfoton (0,0-diethyl S-2-[(ethylthio)ethyl] phosphorodithioate), Oxydemetonmethyl
(S-[2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] 0,0-dimethyl phosphorothioate), and Thompson-Hayward
TH 427 I (N-s-cyanoisopropyl O,O-diethylthiophosphorylacetamide). A list of the
compounds, formulations, methods of application, and rates of application are given
in Table 1.

The materials were applied by one or more of the following methods:
(1) granules, (2) foliar spray, (3) injection, or (4) bark application.

Granules were applied to the soil around the drip-line of the tree using a
Cyclone(R) seeder/spreader Model 10 which was adjusted to give a very narrow pat-
tern. To assure that the correct amount of insecticides was applied to each tree,
the insecticide was carefully measured into paper sacks before leaving the labor-
atory.

Foliar sprays were applied using a Meyers hydraulic boom sprayer equipped
with a power-take-off pump using a hand gun attachment at 300 p.s.i.. The gun
was adjusted to deliver a mist to avoid knocking the scales from the branches with
the spray. Each tree was sprayed on all four sides to the point of run-off using
1 to 1 1/2 gallons of spray. Insecticides were mixed in 30 gallon quantities, and
after each treatment the tank and line was drained and thoroughly rinsed to avoid
contamination of insecticides.


IEntomologist and Assistant Entomologist
2Formerly Graduate Assistant


3wo CC









-2-


Injections were made on the trunk of the tree approximately six inches
below the crotch by first puncturing a hole, using a small finishing nail, through
the bark into the vascular system. Each puncture was approximately 1/8 to 1/4
inch deep. The insecticide was placed into the puncture using a 1 ml. hypodermic
syringe. The puncture was then sealed with grafting wax to prevent the escape of
the insecticide and to prevent the entrance of disease organisms. One injection
was placed into the trunk of the tree for each two inches of trunk circumference.

Bark applications were made by using either a paintbrush or a 4 ml. hypo-
dermic syringe.

The paint-on formulation was applied to the bark of the trunk of the tree
approximately 6 inches below the crotch using a 3 inch wide paintbrush in a uni-
form horizontal band, either 3 or 6 inches wide, around the trunk.

The syringe-on formulation was applied in a uniform horizontal ring to the
surface of the bark of the tree, approximately 6 inches below the crotch, using
a 4 ml. tuberculin syringe.

Treatments were applied 9 August 1968, and counts were made on 27 August
1968 and 23 November 1968.

Counts were made by counting 50 adult female scales per tree, and the
number dead and alive in each case was noted. Care was taken to avoid counting
those scales which obviously had been attacked by preditors and parasites.

The total number of adult, non-parasitized female scales occurring on new
growth on each tree was also counted in order to provide a second perimeter with
which to evaluate the treatments.

The data were then statistically analyzed using the Analysis of Variance
and the Duncan's llultiple Range Test. Abbott's Formula was used to convert per-
cent mortality into "corrected" percent mortality which is a more accurate mea-
sure of the control achieved by each treatment.












MATERIALS, FORMULATIONS, METHODS OF APPLICATION
AND RATES OF APPLICATION USED IN SYSTEMIC
INSECTICIDE TEST AGAINST WHITEE PEACH SCALE
Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968


Treatment Formulation Method of .Rate
Application


1. Azodrin


2. Bidrin


3. Bidrin


4. Temik



5. Bidrin


6. Carbofuran



7. Disulfoton



8. Oxydemeton-
methyl

9. Oxydemeton-
methyl


10. TH 427 I


11. TH 427 I


3.2 lbs. ai
per gal. s.c.

16% paint-on


16% paint-on


5% granules



81% technical


10% granules



10% granules



2 lbs. ai per
gal. e.c.

2 Ibs. ai per
gal. e.c.


2 Ibs. ai per
gal. s.c.

5% granules


foliar spray


paint on,.bark


paint on bark


applied to soil
around drip-line
of tree

injection


applied to soil
around drip-line
of tree

applied to soil
around drip-line
of tree

foliar spray


bark
application


foliar spray


applied to soil
around drip-line
of tree


0.8 lbs. ai
per 100 gal.

3 in. band on
trunk

6 in. bank on
trunk

1 lb. ai per
acre


1 ml. per 2 in.
trunk diameter

1 Ib. ai per
acre


1 lb. ai per
acre


0.5 Ibs. ai
per 100 gal.

10 g ai per
1 in. trunk
diameter

0.75 Ibs. ai
per 100 gal.

1.5 lbs. ai
per acre


12. Check


TABLE I.












TABLE II.


PERCENT MORTALITY OF WHITE PEACH SCALE WITH
SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES
Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968


Treatment Rate Percent Corrected
Mortality Percent
27 August Mortality
1968 (Abbott's Formula)


1. Azodrin


2. Bidrin


3. Bidrin


Temik

Bidrin


6. Carbofuran

7. Disulfoton

8. Oxydemeton-
methyl

9. Oxydemeton-
methyl

10. TH 427 I


11. TH 427 I

12. Check


0.8 Ibs. ai per
100 gal.

3 in. band on
trunk

6 in. band on
trunk

1 lb. ai per acre

1 ml. tech. per 2 in.
trunk diameter

1 lb. ai per acre

1 lb. ai per acre

0.5 Ib. ai per
100 gal.

10 g ai per 1 in.
trunk diameter

0.75 lbs. ai per
100 gal.

1.5 lbs. ai per acre


*All numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different from
each other, according to the Duncan Multiple Range Test.


85.84 a*


78.54 ab


81.36 a


66.84

87.56


79.36

85.60

91.68


81.49 a


91.42 a


78.55

15.21


82.78 a*


74.69 ab


78.01 a


60.89 a

85.32 a


75.65 ab

83.01 a

90.18 a


78.16 a


89.88 a


74.70

0.00












TABLE III.


-5-

PERCENT MORTALITY OF WHITE PEACH SCALE WITH
SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES
Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968


Percent
Mortality
23 November
1968


Corrected
Percent
Mortality
(Abbott's Formula)


1. Azodrin


2. Bidrin


3. Bidrin


Temik

Bidrin


6. Carbofuran

7. Disulfoton

8. Oxydemeton-
methyl

9. Oxydemeton-
methyl

10. TH 427 I


11. TH 427 I

12. Check


0.8 lbs. ai per
100 gal.

3 in. band on
trunk

6 in. band on
trunk

1 lb. ai per acre

1 ml. tech. per 2 in.
trunk circumference

1 lb. ai per acre

1 lb. ai per acre

0.5 Ibs. ai per
100 gal.

10 g ai per 1 in.
trunk diameter

0.75 lbs. ai per
100 gal.

1.5 lbs. ai per acre


*All numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different from each

other, according to the Duncan Multiple Range Test.


Treatment


Rate


80.87 ab*


96.24 a


83.85 ab


75.20 ab*


95.11 a


79.06 ab


88.55

75.25


86.02

92.98

88.48


85.16

67.92


81.88

90.90

85.06


93.36 a


95.58 a


91.39 a


94.27 a


95.83

22.86


94.59

0.00


1




Full Text

PAGE 1

400 ~ ~3 L /BIG BEND HORTICULTURAL LABO To1UMAE LIBRARY I Monticello, Florida Big Bend Hart. Lab. Mimeo Report 71-1 884, RO1tolr21, 19 0 THE USE OF SYSTEMI1C INSE CTICIDES FOR CONTROLLI1I tfiBP" S rd PSEUDAULACASPIS PENTAGONA (TARGIONI), (HOMOP W. HI. Vhitcomb, S. S. Fluker 1and S. A. Samuels2 MATERIALS AND METHODS Because the insecticides used in this test had not been cleared for use on peaches, and because the residual effects were not known, this test could not be performed on commercial trees. Therefore, an abandoned orchard located approximately eight miles north of Madison, Florida, in the Cherry Lake'Orchards was chosen. This orchard, approximately four acres in size, consisted of liaygold variety peach trees in their fourth leaf, and had a history of white peach scale infestations. The randomized block design with four replications was used, and each treatment contained four trees. The treatments were separated by tying strips of colored plastic tape onto the branches of the trees so they could be easily located. Each treatment was assigned a separate color or combination of colors. The compounds tested w Tre Azodrin (R) (3-hydroxy-N-methyl-cis-crotanam1ide dimethyl phosphate), Bidrin (3-hydroxy-N ,U-dimethyl-cis-crotonamide, dimethyl phosphate), Aldicarb (2-tiethyl-2-(methylthio) propionaldehyde O-(Methylcarbamoyl) oxime), Carbofuran (2 ,3-dihydro-2, 2 dimethyl-7-benzofuranyl methylcarbamate), Disulfoton (0 ,O-die-thyl S-2-[~(ethylthio) ethyl] phosphorodithioate), Oxydemetonmetlyl (S-[2-(ethylsulfinyl)ethyl] 0,0-dimethyl phosphorothioate), and Thompson-Hayward Iii 427 I (N-mC-cyanoisopropyl O,O-diethylthiophosphorylacetamide). A list of the compounds, formulations, methods of application, and rates of application are given in Table 1. The materials were applied by one or more of the following methods: (1) granules, (2) foliar spray, (3) injection, or (4) bark application. Granules were applied to the soil around the drip-line of the tree using a Cyclone(R) seeder/spreader Model 10 which was adjusted to give a very narrow pattern. To assure that the correct amount of insecticides was applied to each tree, the insecticide was carefully measured into paper sacks before leaving the laboratory. Foliar sprays were applied using a Meyers hydraulic boom sprayer equipped with a power-take-off pump using a hand gun attachment at 300 p.s.i.. The gun was adjusted to deliver a mist to avoid knocking the scales from the branches with the spray. Each tree was sprayed on all four sides to the point of run-off using 1 to 1 1/2 gallons of spray. Insecticides were mixed in 30 gallon quantities, and after each treatment the tank and line was drained and thoroughly rinsed to avoid contamination of insecticides. I Entomologist and Assistant Entomologist 2Formerly Graduate Assistant 3wo CC

PAGE 2

-2Injections were made on the trunk of the tree approximately six inches below the crotch by first puncturing a hole, using a small finishing nail, through the bark into the vascular system. Each puncture was approximately 1/8 to 1/4 inch deep. The insecticide was placed into the puncture using a 1 ml. hypodermic syringe. The puncture was then sealed with grafting wax to prevent the escape of the insecticide and to prevent the entrance of disease organisms. One injection was placed into the trunk of the tree for each two inches of trunk circumference. Bark applications were made by using either a paintbrush or a 4 ml. hypodermic syringe. The paint-on formulation was applied to the bark of the trunk of the tree approximately 6 inches below the crotch using a 3 inch wide paintbrush in a uniform horizontal band, either 3 or 6 inches wide, around the trunk. The syringe-on formulation was applied in a uniform horizontal ring to the surface of the bark of the tree, approximately 6 inches below the crotch, using a 4 ml. tuberculin syringe. Treatments were applied 9 August 1968, and counts were made on 27 August 1968 and 23 N'.ovember 1968. Counts were made by counting 50 adult female scales per tree, and the number dead and alive in each case was noted. Care was taken to avoid counting those scales which obviously had been attacked by preditors and parasites. The total number of adult, non-parasitized female scales occuring on new growth on each tree was also counted in order to provide a second perimeter with which to evaluate the treatments. The data were then statistically analyzed using the Analysis of Variance and the Duncan's 1lultiple Range Test. Abbott's Formula was used to convert percent mortality into "corrected" percent mortality which is a more accurate measure of the control achieved by each treatment.

PAGE 3

-3TABLE I. MATERIALS, FORMULATIONS, METHODS OF APPLICATION AND RATES OF APPLICATION USED IN SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDE TEST AGAINST WHITE PEACH SCALE Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968 Treatment Formulation Method of .Rate Application 1. Azodrin 3.2 lbs. ai foliar spray 0.8 lbs. al per gal. s.c. per 100 gal. 2. Bidrin 16% paint-on paint onbark 3 in. band on trunk 3. Bidrin 16% paint-on paint on bark 6 in. bank on trunk 4. Temik 5% granules applied to soil 1 lb. ai per around drip-line acre of tree 5. Bidrin 81% technical injection 1 ml. per 2 in. trunk diameter 6. Carbofuran 10% granules applied to soil 1 lb. ai per around drip-line acre of tree 7. Disulfoton 10% granules applied to soil 1 lb. ai per around drip-line acre of tree 8. Oxydemeton2 lbs. ai per foliar spray 0.5 lbs. ai methyl gal. e.c. per 100 gal. 9. Oxydemeton2 lbs. ai per bark 10 g ai per methyl gal. e.c. application 1 in. trunk di ameter 10. TH 427 1 2 lbs. ai per foliar spray 0.75 lbs. ai gal. s.c. per 100 gal. 11. TH 427 I 5% granules applied to soil 1.5 lbs. ai around drip-line per acre of tree 12. Check -------

PAGE 4

-4TABLE II. PERCENT MORTALITY OF WHITE PEACH SCAL1 4ITH SYSTEMIC INSECTI CIDES Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968 Treatment Rate Percent Corrected Mortality Percent 27 August Mortality 1968 (Abbott's Formula) 1. Azodrin 0.8 lbs. ai per 85.84 a* 82.78 a* 100 gal. 2. Bidrin 3 in. band on 78.54 ab 74.69 ab trunk 3. Bidrin 6 in. band on 81.36 a 78.01 a trunk 4. Temik 1 lb. ai per acre 66.84 a 60.89 a 5. -Bidrin 1 ml. tech. per 2 in. 87.56 a 85.32 a trunk diameter 6. Carbofuran 1 lb. ai per acre 79.36 ab 75.65 ab 7. Disulfoton 1 Tb. ai per acre 85.60 a 83.01 a 8. Oxydemeton0.5 lb. ai per 91.68 a 90.18 a methyl 100 gal. 9. Oxydemeton10 g ai per 1 in. 81.49 a 78.16 a methyl trunk diameter 10. TH 427 I 0.75 lbs. ai per 91.42 a 89.88 a 100 gal. 11. TH 427 I 1.5 lbs. ai per acre 78.55 ab 74.70 ab 12. Check --15.21 c. 0.00 c. *All numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different from each other, according to the Duncan ifultiple Range Test.

PAGE 5

TABLE III. PERCENT MORTALITY OF WHITE PEACH SCALE WITH SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES Cherry Lake Orchards, Madison County, Florida, 9 August 1968 Treatment Rate Percent Corrected Mortality Percent 23 November Mortality 1968 (Abbott's Formula) 1. Azodrin 0.8 lbs. ai per 80.87 ab* 75.20 ab* 100 gal. 2. Bidrin 3 in. band on 96.24 a 95.11 a trunk 3. Bidrin 6 in. band on 83.85 ab 79.06 ab trunk 4. Temik 1 lb. ai per acre 88.55 ab 85.16 ab 5. Bidrin 1 ml. tech, per 2 in. 75.25 b 67.92 b trunk circumference 6. Carbofuran 1 lb. al per acre 86.02 ab 81.88 ab 7. Disulfoton 1 lb. ai per acre 92.98 ab 90.90 ab 8. Oxydemeton0.5 lbs. ai per 88.48 ab 85.06 ab methyl 100 gal. 9. Oxydemeton10 g ai per 1 in. 93.36 a 91.39 a methyl trunk diameter 10. TH 427 I 0.75 lbs. ai per 95.58 a 94.27 a 100 gal. 11. TH 427 I 1.5 lbs. at per acre 95.83 a 94.59 a 12. Check -22.86 c 0.00 c *All numbers followed by the same letters are not significantly different from each other, according to the Duncan Multiple Range Test.