Source: OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY submitted to
BIOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT OF SPOTTED WING DROSOPHILA ON SMALL AND STONE FRUIT
Sponsoring Institution
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
Project Status
NEW
Funding Source
OTHER GRANTS
Reporting Frequency
Annual
Accession No.
0222385
Grant No.
2010-51181-21167
Project No.
ORE00244
Proposal No.
2010-01200
Multistate No.
(N/A)
Program Code
SCRI
Project Start Date
Sep 1, 2010
Project End Date
Feb 28, 2015
Grant Year
2010
Project Director
Walton, V. M.
Recipient Organization
OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY
(N/A)
CORVALLIS,OR 97331
Performing Department
Horticulture
Non Technical Summary
This 4.5-year long-term CAP project addresses four of the five SCRI-mandated focus areas(threats, productivity, innovation, food safety). The Spotted Wing Drosophila (SWD),Drosophila suzukii, is a new invasive pest of small and stone fruits, most notably, blueberries, blackberries, strawberries, raspberries, cherries, and peaches. Throughout the Pacific States(Oregon, California, Washington) three observations indicate an urgent need for the coordination of region-wide comprehensive project to development of a SWD Integrated Pest Management Program (SWD*IPM): 1) the lack of biological information regarding the population dynamics of SWD, 2) the lack of information concerning pest control options specific to SWD in the array of fruit production systems throughout a vast physio-geographical range, and 3) the extent of SWD-caused injury to fruits reported in 2008 and 2009. The overarching goals of our proposal are: 1) develop a trans-disciplinary systems-based and sustainable approach to the management of SWD, and 2) to provide a network of outreach programs that will deliver new information to improve crop production. The SWD*IPM Research Team includes personnel with expertise in entomology, horticulture, genomics, pest management consulting, agricultural production, economics, sociology, extension, and policy-making. The foundation of the SWD*IPM project is based on three components: biological/management information, economic analysis, and assessing sociological impacts (Fig. 1). The project includes stakeholder input and employs a number of approaches including networking and social tools to guide the development, coordination, and implementation of a comprehensive plan for SWD*IPM.
Animal Health Component
50%
Research Effort Categories
Basic
30%
Applied
50%
Developmental
20%
Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)Subject of Investigation (SOI)Field of Science (FOS)Percent
2111199113040%
2111199301010%
2111199308010%
2151199113010%
6011199113010%
8031199113010%
8031199301010%
Knowledge Area
215 - Biological Control of Pests Affecting Plants; 211 - Insects, Mites, and Other Arthropods Affecting Plants; 803 - Sociological and Technological Change Affecting Individuals, Families, and Communities; 601 - Economics of Agricultural Production and Farm Management;

Subject Of Investigation
1199 - Deciduous and small fruits, general/other;

Field Of Science
1130 - Entomology and acarology; 3010 - Economics; 3080 - Sociology;
Goals / Objectives
Goals and outputs: Long-term Goals and Critical Stakeholder Needs: Stakeholder needs revolve around the acquisition of appropriate data for prescribing SWD control measures. Thus, our two main longterm goals are to develop an economically viable and environmentally sustainable integrated pest management program for managing SWD; and deliver information developed from this project via activities such as training seminars, workshops, and in-field demonstration events offered to the fruit-production industry, growers, homeowners, and farming consultants. These goals will be addressed via research/outreach activities regarding genomics, population dynamics, and the development of prescriptive measures for control. Objectives: Objective 1: Evaluate genetic, biological, and ecological parameters of SWD. 1.1 Conduct genomic studies. 1.2 Evaluate biological and ecological parameters. 1.3 Study seasonal phenology. 1.4 Assess host preferences and fruit susceptibility. Objective 2: Develop a management strategy to minimize infestation and reduce risk. 2.1 Optimize monitoring systems. 2.2 Develop and validate degree-day model and establish treatment thresholds. 2.3 Conduct laboratory assays and replicated field trials for chemical controls. 2.4 Determine propensity for insecticide resistance development. 2.5 Initiate surveys for natural enemies for long-term biological control. 2.6 Explore area-wide sanitation and preventative practices. 2.7 Complete economic analysis. Objective 3: Measure awareness, impact and success. 3.1 Conduct stakeholder advisory panel meetings to review accomplishments and guide and direct objectives. 3.2 Design evaluation tools that assess biological, economical and social impacts. Objective 4: Synthesize existing and new information and provide. real-time support. 4.1 Organize and schedule outreach and education interactions. 4.2 Create informational materials. 4.3 Develop real-time interactive online information, networking tools and forums.
Project Methods
Outreach Plan: Our outreach plan will be guided by the project's stakeholder advisory panel and will report area-wide pest incidence data using already developed real-time interactive websites, and will promote the most effective IPM tools. We will organize Extension meetings and training sessions, report new SWD information at existing grower field days, conduct collaborative on-farm experiments and demonstration tours, and present seminars at public and scientific venues. We will conduct outreach education via newspaper articles, video clips, and You-Tube showings, furthermore, we will create sets of laminated informational cards and pocket identification aids, a newsletter, and technical bulletins/journal publications. Economic, Social, and Environmental Benefits: The proposed research and Extension effort will benefit all stakeholders (listed in Stakeholder Engagement section below). Effective management of SWD will result in a major reduction in maggot-infested fruit and reduce potential for export restrictions that may be imposed by trading partners. In the absence of the development of an effective integrated pest management program, growers will use prophylactic pesticide-intensive control methods. An effective IPM program will maintain high levels of fruit production and environmental quality, while avoiding excessive pesticide use and economic and social stresses to rural communities and their family core businesses. Stakeholder Engagement: Our stakeholders, including commercial growers and homeowners, fruit handlers, community leaders, consultants, and the public, have welcomed this proposal and they are committed to helping the mission accomplish its goals. We have held many open-forum meetings in Oregon, Washington, and California prior to and during the development of this proposal, and we have established a stakeholder advisory group that will grow, and help guide and direct the project and review accomplishments at annual meetings. We will present recent advances in SWD biology and crop management in each of the planned project years at venues such as the annual Tree Fruit Conference (Portland), Commodity Commission and grower meetings, crop consultant conferences, and professional meetings such as the Entomological Society of America (ESA) National Meeting and regional ESA Pacific Branch Meeting.

Progress 09/01/12 to 08/31/13

Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this project include include stone-fruit (cherries, peaches, etc.) and berry producers, the associated processing and distribution sectors, and home gardeners who produce stone-fruits and berries. Changes/Problems: We would like to solve this issue for organic growers. We have not been able to survey community leaders; this part of the project will not happen. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Training and professional development were offered at a presentation of SWD management titled “SWD in Caneberries: The End of IPM?” at the North American Raspberry and Blackberry Association annual meeting, a full hour of monitoring updates at UCCE Annual Caneberry Meeting on January 18 in Watsonville, CA and at the Annual Cherry Meeting in Stockton, CA on February 1, and at the Small Farm Conference in Fresno, CA on March 12. One professional scientist attended 2 professional meetings to report on our results The Extension specialist and staff person who were responsible for this work received ad-hoc training by entomologists on the project. One OSU faculty research assistant organized, conducted and reported research protocols of her own design with foreign collaborators in Korea and presented a seminar at Seoul Women’s University. Another FRA has attended and presented at local, regional, and national meetings. This was professional development for them. We brought on an undergraduate work-study student to enter and help analyze the data. Two undergraduate interns prepared and presented SWD talks. This was professional development for them. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? An alert was issued to USFS Gifford Pinchot and Mount Hood special forest products license program, seeking picker complaints about SWD in National Forest berry fields. Avenues of dissemination included online through the SWD website (Spottedwing.com) and via grower meetings and professional meetings and on-site demonstrations. Spotted Wing Drosophila: Insect resistance management (Y-tube video), WSU Mount Vernon Research Center and Skagit County Extension websites. Whatcom County Extension Ag Monthly articles: Insecticide degradation vs. SWD population dynamics in northwest Washington blueberry: “How to win the game” (March), SWD overwintering and life cycle strategies in the PNW (April), SWD insecticide strategy for Washington blueberry growers: Know thy markets and treatment intervals. Multiple grower workshops, extension sponsored presentations regarding SWD management and regional/national/international/ESA meetings/symposia. New educational products, factsheets, news items and alerts were disseminated through the WSU home and garden listserve with 283 members. WSU Gardening webpage, http://gardening.wsu.edu premiers October 2013; SWD tools for gardeners will be linked. SWD information is disseminated to communities of interest via: 1) The Small Fruit Update, a weekly berry industry newsletter distributed to a large segment of the commercial berry growing community in the Pacific Northwest, the industries that support commercial berry growing and most of the public researchers working with Northwest berry growers; 2) Weekly SWD Updates embedded within the Small Fruit Update and posted on Spottedwing.com; 3) Industry website (www.peerbolt.com/swd/) offering real time SWD trap monitoring data by crop and county and four years of archived historical SWD trap monitoring data .Results are summarized and distributed to research and Extension faculty who disseminate to their stakeholders. Biological, social, and economic impact data is shared annually with the stakeholder advisory group, the researchers, and the Extension faculty. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? California: More grower education throughout California. Look into entomopathogenic fungi and predaceous nematodes for SWD management in organic caneberries. Research regarding Objectives 2.1 and 2.7 at 2014 conference for Agricultural & Resource Economics Associations (AAEA). Submit paper based on dissertation research regarding SWD to the American Journal of Agricultural Economics (AJAE). Our seasonal phenology work in California raspberries and our California mixed crop seasonal phenology work will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Begin bioassays on laboratory insecticide-selected populations. Begin sequencing insecticide target site genes from field populations. Begin sequencing laboratory selected populations, if indicated. Research will continue on SWD diel periodicity. We are currently working on refining a SWD population model, aimed at implementing it as a web-based interface to determine SWD infection risk. Washington: Continue trapping program through 2014, disseminate results. Continue to test trap design parameters and experimental baits and lures. Implement organic/”soft chemistry” control trial in sweet cherries. Monitor to efficacy of control strategies. Establish BMPs for organic/sustainable control. Delve into genetic homogeneity of overwintering SWD in a dry, cold winter, hot summer climate. Complete peer reviewed management factsheet gardeners and for small farmers. Continue physical barrier demonstration, monitor for SWD in native huckleberry Continue dissemination via listserve, workshops, presentations, factsheets, webinars. Determine maximum residue levels with decline for insecticides on highbush blueberry and mistigation and airblast treatments. These determinations will be coupled with insecticide residues in/on blueberry foliage and adulticidal residue efficacy with foliage bioassay data support. Trap design parameter studies will continue. Oregon: Conduct foreign exploration in search of natural enemies in Asia. Regional natural enemy survey is ongoing. Publish Extension bulletins on SWD management, create video on larval extraction, complete two journal articles on larval extraction, and alternate hosts. Continue to maintain the present scouting and data and information dissemination system to ensure consistency throughout the life of the grant. We are going to run one last year of social, economic, and biological impact evaluation, then run analyses across years.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? All findings here are preliminary; only published findings have been verified by peer review. Evaluate genetic, biological, and ecological parameters of SWD. The SWD genome analysis is complete and available online (http://spottedwingflybase.oregonstate.edu). In blueberry and cherry, temperature had a significant influence on SWD development rate, survival and fecundity and increased with temperature to 28°C and decreased at higher temperatures, suggesting the developmental extreme for SWD. Population models using a temperature-dependent matrix explained SWD pressure levels during harvest periods. No unacclimated SWD survived beyond 150 days in field overwintering cages in the Willamette Valley during 2009 – 2012. A winter morph of SWD (larger and darker) survives cold temperatures better than summerform (smaller and lighter); this change is triggered by day length. Microsatellite analysis will determine heterogeneity of overwintering SWD. Dissections indicate feeding and egg development of field-collected surviving flies may begin during late May. First oviposition from field collections of non-managed, uncultivated fruit was found in Sarcoccoca confusa berries after 30-54 degree-days. Seasonal canopy distribution studies showed no consistent infestation pattern among varying canopy heights in cherry. In no-choice laboratory bioassays of Sweetheart, Bing, Lapins and Rainier cherry, all but ‘Sweetheart’ were fully susceptible to SWD. The majority of flies trapped from October 2012 to June 2013 in no-spray blueberry were in non-crop vegetation and higher populations were found within the crop as it ripened. A multiple crop unsprayed, unharvested site provided a prolonged period of SWD susceptible fruit in Winters, CA. The highest SWD trap captures were in figs, plums and cherries, but did not correlate with fruit presence. Citrus and sheltered sites near a house are suggested as overwintering sites. Develop a management strategy to minimize infestation and reduce risk. The most significant findings regarding optimizing trapping were that traps with a large mesh entry area were more attractive than traps with discrete holes, as is a larger bait surface area. Yeast-sugar-water lures caught significantly more SWD during the fall than apple cider vinegar (ACV). Mixes of ACV and Monterey Insect Bait (MIB) captured significantly more flies than ACV or undiluted MIB alone. The USDA Cha lure was superior to ACV. In a field study of nine baits, the Cha-Landolt 4-compound, Chinkiang (black rice) vinegar, Hanseniaspora uvarum and the Suzukii trap bait (bioiberica.com) were most attractive. A lure from Trece holds promise: http://www.trece.com/agmon.html. Several attract and kill and bait spray trials are underway. A mixture of 1: 1.5 MIB: ACV and 1: 1 ACV: H2O may be useful in attract and kill management strategies in cherry. An attract-and-kill trial in cherry with Danitol and a MIB, ACV and Merlot mixture had significantly fewer larvae than the attractant only and untreated checks. Malathion and the attractant were not significantly different from the untreated check. In blueberry, vegetation was treated with 1: 3: 0.25 of red wine: ACV: molasses and 0.4 g of Spinosad delivered as coarse droplets. One sentinel bait trap and one ACV-baited trap were placed in each of transect to determine oviposition and presence of SWD in each of the treatments. Foliage exposure trials comparing various insecticides showed that a new formulation of Malathion gave high mortality at 1 DAT but rapidly dissipated though 7 DAT. Danitol alone and Danitol with Belay did not provide the degree of control observed in previous studies. Lethal and sublethal effects of four neonicotinoids on several life stages of SWD showed that residues and topical applications were toxic to SWD but not at levels acceptable for commercial production. Commercial laboratory tests confirmed no uptake of neonicotinoids into blueberry tissues. Leaf uptake of imidacloprid and dinotefuran however did occur. Neonicotinoids reduce SWD infestation in the laboratory but field implementation may be impractical. Chemigation bioassays revealed no oviposition deterrence, ovicidal or larvicidal activity in treated blueberry. Lab-reared SWD have been selected for resistance to Mustang Max® (zeta-cypermethrin), Success® (spinosad) and Malathion at a high and low dose of each in a coordinated resistance study. A rotation treatment of these insecticides and a tank mix of Malathion/Mustang Max rotated with Success were included; this is the practice in conventional raspberries (California). All trialed SWD populations are in a fourth generation of selection for resistance. The SWD genome indicates large regions of non-coding sequences surrounding short coding sequences in the target sites for OP, pyrethroid and spinosyn resistance. SWD’s ability to acquire resistance to these compounds is not yet clear. Amplification of the genetic sequences conferring resistance is ongoing with new primers. Local SWD parasitoids have been recovered. Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae and a Leptopilina spp. have been reared from sentinel traps during 2012-2013. Low rates of parasitism are however found, stressing the importance of foreign exploration. Foreign exploration for parasitoids was conducted in South Korea during 2013. Over 3,000 Drosophila pupae were delivered to the quarantine laboratory at Berkeley. Three potential parasitoids have been recovered and are being tested for suitability as possible future biocontrol agents. Cold treatment of commercial harvested blueberries killed young larvae and eggs. No fruit that dropped to the ground contained larvae; a well-managed spray program appears to prevent re-infestation from fallen fruits. A bio-economic model of SWD damages and management programs was created. Four enterprise budgets for cherry and blueberry producers were created. These studies provide the return and cost to manage SWD. Measure awareness, impact and success Data collected 2009-2012 describes baseline biological, economic and social impacts of SWD to Oregon fruit production, allowing us to assess changes and guiding stakeholders, Extension faculty and researchers. Surveys distributed in early spring assess impacts with berries, stone fruits, and wine grapes among growers, packers and processors, and event participants. Managing the SWD message is a critical part of this project; sensitive data is screened by stakeholders before publication. Packers and processors of wine grapes and stone fruit reported no economic losses in 2010 or 2011; packers and processors of berries indicated losses near 50% annually for 2009-2011. Producers of wine grapes reported no losses for 2010 or 2011, while losses for stone fruit producers were near 10% each year, and berry growers reported 10% and 26% economic losses in 2010 and 2011 respectively. Principal concerns for both groups and all crops included potential for quality impact, reduced yield, increased regulation, loss of market; increased pesticides; increased costs. Synthesize existing and new information and provide real-time support These activities have been documented in detail in other sections of this report.

Publications

  • Type: Other Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Beers, Elizabeth. "RE: Low hatch rates/ protocol for hatching SWD out of infected fruit.." Message to Carol Ann Miles. 16 Jul 2013. E-mail. Beers, E. (2013, July 26)
  • Type: Other Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Dreves, A. and D. Ruttan. 2013. Keep an eye out for spotted wing drosophila in your yard; http://extension.oregonstate.edu/gardening/keep-eye-out-spotted-wing-drosophila-your-yard
  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Awaiting Publication Year Published: 2013 Citation: Lee, J. C., P. Shearer, L. D. Bahder, E. H.Beers, H.J. Burrack,D.T. Dalton, A. Dreves, L. Gut, K. Hamby, , D. Haviland, R. Isaacs, A.L. Nielsen, T. Richardson, C. Rodriguez-Saona , C. Stanley, D. Walsh, V. Walton, W. Yee, F. Zalom, D. Bruck. In Press. Trap designs for monitoring Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Environmental Entomology manuscript #EN-13-148.
  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Lee, Jana C., Hannah J. Burrack, Luz D. Barrantes, Elizabeth H. Beers, Amy J. Dreves, Kelly Hamby, David R. Haviland, Rufus Isaacs, Tamara Richardson, Peter W. Shearer, Cory A. Stanley, Doug B. Walsh, Vaughn M. Walton, Frank G. Zalom, and Denny J. Bruck. 2012. Evaluation of monitoring traps for Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North America. J. Econ. Entomol. 105(4): 1350-1357.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Hamby, K.A., Chiu, J.C., Bruck, D., Shearer, P.W., Tanigoshi, L.K., and Zalom, F.G. Quantifying the effect of pesticide resistance management: A multifaceted approach. Symposium: Proceeding Along the IPM Continuum: Developing Multifaceted Approaches for Invasive Species. Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting Nov. 11-14, 2012
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Hamby, K.A., Hern�ndez, A., Boundy-Mills, K., and Zalom, F.G. Yeast Associations of Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila suzukii, Diptera: Drosophilidae) in Cherries and Raspberries. Pacific Branch Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting Apr. 6-11, 2013
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Harris, D.W., Wilson, H.E., Zalom, F.G. and Hamby, K.A. (Poster) Seasonal trapping of Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in a multi-crop setting. Pacific Branch Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting Apr. 6-11, 2013
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Host status and fruit odor response of Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) to figs (Ficus carica L.) and mulberries (Morus spp.). Pacific Branch Entomological Society of America Annual Meeting Apr. 6-11, 2013
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Janet Caprile and R.A. Van Steenwyk. Enhancing GF-120 to control spotted wing drosophila. 87th Annual Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference. Portland, OR. Jan 8-11, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Klick, J., W.Q. Yang, A.J. Dreves, V.M. Walton, J.R. Hagler, J.C. Lee, and D. Bruck. 2012. Immunomarking field perimeters to determine Drosophila suzukii movement into red raspberries. POSTER. Entomology Society of America Meeting. Nov. 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: L. Coop, V. Walton, D. Dalton, and A.J. Dreves. Title-Advances and prospects on monitoring and modeling of Drosophila suzukii in Europe. Webinar. COST-Action FA 1104 Meeting  WG3 Crop Protection. W�denswil, Switzerland. Mar. 26-27, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: R. A. Van Steenwyk, C.R. Wise, L.M. Novotny, W.W. Coates, J.L. Caprile, J. A. Grant, K.K. Anderson and C. A. Ingels. Monitoring of spotted wing drosophila in sweet cherry. VII International Cherry Symposium. Plasencia, Spain. June 22-26, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: R.A. Van Steenwyk, Caroline Wise and Lauren Novotny. Post-harvest control of spotted wing drosophila in cherry. 87th Annual Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference. Portland, OR. Jan 8-11, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Shearer, P. W., E. Beers, P. Brown, H. J. Burrack, R. Isaacs, J. Lee,. B. Miller, L. Novotny, S. Van Timmerman, R. Van Steenwyk, V. Walton and C. Wise. Drosophila suzukii in the USA; monitoring and management in berries and cherries. International Organization of Biological Control. 8th International Conference on Integrated Fruit Production. Aydin Province, Turkey. Oct. 7-12, 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Walton et al. 2013. Giornata di Technici, D. suzukii. Centro Trasferimento Tecnologico. San Michele, Trento, Italy. February 15, 2013
  • Type: Theses/Dissertations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: A Bio-Economic Model of Spotted Wing Drosophila for California Raspberries. 2013. PhD Qualifying Exam,
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: A Bio-Economic Model of Spotted Wing Drosophila for California Raspberries. 2013. Presentation at: Western Agricultural Economics Association Meetings,
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: A Bio-Economic Model of Spotted Wing Drosophila for California Raspberries. 2013. Presentation at: Giannini Agricultural and Resource Economics Student Conference
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: A Bio-Economic Model of Spotted Wing Drosophila for California Raspberries. 2013. Poster presentation, Interdisciplinary Graduate and Professional Student Symposium.
  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Rossi Stacconi M.V., Grassi A., Dalton D., Miller B., Ouantar M., Ioriatti C., Walton V., Anfora G. 2013. First field records of Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae (Rondani) (Hymenoptera Pteromalidae) as a parasitoid of Drosophila suzukii in European and Oregon Small fruit production areas. Entomologia 1; 11-16.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Brewer, L. J. Curso-Taller para el Control y Manejo de la Mosca del Vinagre de Alas Manchadas Drosophila suzukii.September 3-4, 2012 Zamora, Michoac�n, Mexico.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Walton et al. SWD Terror: Understanding the bug and its impacts. North American Berry Conference. Portland, Oregon. January 27-30, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Walton V.M. et al. Advances and prospects on monitoring and modelling of Drosophila suzukii in Europe. WG3 Crop Protection, W�denswil, Switzerland. 26-27 March 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Walton V.M. et al. Physiological characteristics of Spotted Wing Drosophila. WG3 Crop Protection, , W�denswil, Switzerland. Advances and prospects on monitoring and modelling of Drosophila suzukii in Europe. 26-27 March 2013.
  • Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Van Steenwyk, R. A., L. M. Novotny, and C. Wise. 2012. Post-harvest spotted wing drosophila control in cherry, 2011. Arthropod Management Tests 37: B1.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Barrantes-Barrantes, L., M. Hauser, & D. Walsh. Preferences of four species of Drosophila (Diptera: Drosophilidae) for different bait types and crop varieties in South-Central WA, USA. Data from 2011-2012. Pacific Branch Entomological Society of America. Stateline, NV. April 7-10, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Beers, E. H. P. W. Shearer and R. A. Van Steenwyk. Management of spotted wing drosophila in west coast cherries: A short ride on the IPM continuum. Symposium. 60th Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, Knoxville, TN. Nov. 11-14, 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Brown, P. H., P. W. Shearer, H. M. A. Thistlewood and J. C. Miller. Pachycrepoideus vindemmiae: A potential biological control agent of spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. Symposium. 60th Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, Knoxville, TN. Nov. 11-14, 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Caroline R. Wise, Robert A. Van Steenwyk and Lauren M. Novotny. Insecticide efficacy for spotted wing drosophila in sweet cherry. 87th Annual Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference. Portland, OR. Jan. 8-11, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Caroline R. Wise, Robert A. Van Steenwyk and Lauren M. Novotny. Monitoring spotted wing drosophila in sweet cherry. 87th Annual Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference. Portland, OR. Jan. 8-11, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Coop, L., A.J. Dreves, A. Ohrn, P. Jepson. Phenology models from uspest.org - recent developments. POSTER. Pacific Branch Meeting, Lake Tahoe, NV. April 9, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Dreves, A.J. From Crisis Management to IPM Programming- Monitoring and Prevention Methods. Pacific Northwest Insect Management Conference. Portland OR. Jan. 7, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Dreves, A.J. Monitoring Trap Designs. Pacific Northwest Insect Management Conference Portland OR. Jan. 7, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Dreves, A.J. SWD in Context: An Examination of the Connection between Fly Populations, Crop, and Surrounding Landscape. Pacific Branch Insect Management Conference. Portland OR. Jan. 8, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Dreves, A.J. Understand SWDs Lifestyle, Biology, and Desires to Inform Management Tool Use. Invasive Pest Symposium. National Entomology Society of America. Knoxville TN. Nov. 12 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Dreves, A.J., A. Ohrn, J. Lee, A. Cave and D. Bruck. Integrating D. suzukii monitoring and preventative practices. POSTER. Pacific Branch Meeting, Lake Tahoe, NV. April 9, 2013.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Dreves, A.J., L. Coop, A. Ohrn, D. Bruck, J. Lee. 2012. Spotting the uninvited: Monitoring adult activity, winter survival and phenology. POSTER. Entomology Society of America Meeting. Nov. 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2012 Citation: Hamby, K. A., J. C. Chui, D. Bruck, P. W. Shearer, L. K. Tanigoshi and F. G. Zalom. Quantifying the effect of pesticide resistance management: A multifaceted approach. Symposium. 60th Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, Knoxville, TN. Nov. 11-14, 2012.
  • Type: Conference Papers and Presentations Status: Published Year Published: 2013 Citation: Hamby, K.A., and Zalom, F.G. SWD in California: Seasonal trapping, molecular resistance monitoring, and chemoreception. Canadian Berry Crop Researchers and Extension Specialist Webinar: Informal Spotted Wing Working Group Mar. 6, 2013


Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/12

Outputs
OUTPUTS: Obj 1.1 A second iteration of the genome was assembled, filling gaps and low coverage areas. Additional refinement and labeling are necessary, but the genome should be completed soon. Obj 1.2 Previously described physiological parameters inform population matrixes and modeling systems for contrasting SWD controls. Studies under harsh overwintering field conditions show the importance of urban refuges and related risk to proximate growers. Survival models and seasonal phenology studies confirm earlier SWD emergence in milder climates compared to harsher climates. Oviposition preference in the upper third of cherry canopies; decreased preference at higher positions in the tree. Obj 1.3 Long-term data from weekly adult trapping with apple cider vinegar traps and larval fruit infestation in major production areas reveal seasonal differences, with earlier emergence during milder winters (2012 cf. 2011), higher populations during optimal summer temperatures. High populations and some crop loss on susceptible crops evident early in mild California areas compared to less favorable areas in the Mid-Columbia and Eastern Washington, where numbers remained generally low. Larval fruit infestation was found July to August in crops in mild production areas in Oregon. Fall populations increased exponentially in all production areas. Obj 1.4 Caneberry, cherry and blueberry are preferred commercial hosts. Several non-crop hosts have been identified, and may provide SWD refugia near production areas. Their presence must be considered when developing management protocols. Studies of SWD movement into commercial crops support the importance of non-crop hosts. Obj 2.1 Alternate baits were tested in lab and field for attractiveness to SWD. Trap design, monitoring and bait studies revealed shortcomings of currently used traps. Studies for improvement continue. Obj 2.3 Pesticides which provide effective control have been identified; resistance management control strategies are designed. Additional pesticides with control potential are under evaluation. Preliminary data from perimeter and alternate-row insecticide applications in raspberry and blackberry show promise for control similar to full cover sprays. Pesticide application by mist irrigation shows promise; evaluation continues. Obj 3 The central theme from stakeholders nationwide is that SWD results in significant economic loss. Annual feedback provides direction for project improvement and guides studies. Audience-specific survey tools have provided two years of evaluation data. Obj. 4.1 SWD websites are integrated, providing static and dynamic alerts and educational materials to stakeholders. Resource materials are released after stakeholder feedback regarding market-sensitive information. Workshops and field days reviewed identification, biology and control recommendations to growers; with peer talks at regional, national and international meetings. Obj. 4.2 Backyard reporting was promoted. Obj. 4.3 A dynamic data dissemination system allows OR and WA growers to view SWD infestation on a regional and temporal basis. PARTICIPANTS: PIs/PDs: Oregon State University: Vaughn Walton (PD); Amy Dreves (PI); Jeff Miller (PI); Peter Shearer (PI); Clark Seavert (PI); Wei Q. Yang (PI); Flaxen Conway (PI evaluation); Mary Halbleib (FRA evaluation); Jos. DeFrancesco (IR-4); Leonard Coop (phenology modeler); Daniel Dalton, Preston Brown, Betsey Miller, Amanda Ohrn (Research Assistants); Linda Brewer (Project Manager). Washington State University: Doug Walsh (PI); Elizabeth Beers (Field research); Jessica Goldberger (economist); Carol Miles, Todd Murray, Tim Smith, (Extension educators); Lynell Tanigoshi (Bench and field research). University of California Davis: Frank Zalom (PI); David Begun (genomics); Rachael Goodhue (economist); Kelly Hamby (post doc). University of California Berkeley: Bob VanSteenwyk (PI). University of California Agriculture and Natural Resources: Mark Bolda (PI); Janet Caprile, Wm. Coates, Jos. Grant, David Haviland (Extension educators). Jana Lee (PI). Partner Organizations: Peerbolt Crop Management - Trapping. Collaborators and contacts are within the recipient's organization, non-formal collaborations outside the organization. OSU: Bernadine Strik, Patricia Skinkis, Gail Langellotto, Paul Jepson; USDA-Aphis: Karen Ackerman; USDA-NIFA: Herb Bolton; USDA-ARS: Peter Landolt; U MI: Rufus Isaacs; N Carolina State: Hannah Burrack; U of ID: Stephen Cook; Utah State: Marion Murray; U of FL: James Price; Rutgers: Cesar Rodriguez-Saona; Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada: Sheila Fitzpatrick. Training or professional development: (ugrad, grad, post docs, faculty, K-12, farmers, producers, managers, staff or volunteers. Graduate Students: Samantha Tochen, Jimmy Click, Joe Kleiber. Undergraduate Students: Monica Marcus, Jamie Christenson, Sarah Wong, Lisa Thompson, Seta Kavianian. Interns: Charlene Marek and Teresa Chase. Volunteers: Leyz Magana, Piper Davis, Rich Little. TARGET AUDIENCES: Target audiences for this work include commercial stone and small fruit growers in Oregon, Washington, California, and by extension throughout the US. In Oregon and Washington, berry farms are generally smaller acreages; berries can be a good alternative enterprise contributing to the whole-farm diversity with which the traditionally underserved small farms population can manage risk. Backyard fruit growers also are included in our target audience. Efforts include traditional extension outreach efforts such as publications, workshops, field days, but also Web 2.0 techniques including websites, blogs, webinars, online databases and models. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: No major changes in approach to report at this time.

Impacts
Established that trellised blueberries reflected greater efficacy of insecticide applications, and suffered significantly less fruit drop following airblast insecticide applications, so much so that the grower on whose plots the study was conducted trellised his entire operation following one year of data collection. Larval fruit infestation was monitored in three raspberry varieties commonly grown in Watsonville, CA, and patterns of movement between varieties and seasonal infestation levels determined. Potential fruit hosts were identified though sampling a multi-crop trapping experiment in Wolfskill, CA, then verified to be hosts via larval infestation counts paired with adult emergence from infested fruits. Determined greater tolerance to OP insecticides in a D. suzukii field population from California. Economic analysis identified characteristics influencing countries' choices for maximum residue limits: rich countries with high expenditures on healthcare as a percentage of GSP and are net importers of a commodity and have a relatively small agricultural sector tend to have stricter MRLS for fresh horticultural products. Such maximum residue limits may be stricter than is compatible with control or non-existence. Washington cherry growers who followed recommendations to minimize SWD infestations had fewer infestations than growers who did not. In warehouses, only one larval incident was found in 2011. Higher insect pressure in 2012 led to substantially more finds. In aggregate, project members reported 36 presentations to academic peers; 113 presentations to industry (producers, packers, processors); and 114 presentations to extension audiences. By state, California project members reported 19 presentations to academic peers (including 3 international presentations); 28 presentations to industry (producers, packers, processors); and 34 presentations to extension audiences. Oregon project members reported 15 presentations to academic peers (including 6 international presentations); 76 presentations, including 2 international presentations) to industry (producers, packers, processors); and 35 presentations to extension audiences. Washington project members reported 9 presentations to academic peers (including 3 international presentations); 9 presentations to industry (producers, packers, processors); and 35 presentations to extension audiences. The CRIS report writer is well aware that the project members underreport this type of information and hypothesizes that existing relationships with and proximity to the Oregon project members promotes more complete reporting by those members.

Publications

  • Caprile, Janet. 2012. Spotted Wing Drosophila Damage and Spray Survey. 2 page meeting handout.
  • Caprile, J. L., M. L. Flint, M. P. Bolda, J. A. Grant, R. A. Van Steenwyk, and D. R. Haviland. 2011. Pest Notes: Spotted Wing Drosophila. UC ANR Publications 74158.
  • Caprile, Janet, Joe Grant, Bill Coates, R.A. Van Steenwyk. 2011. Biology and Control of the Spotted Wing Drosophila: Phenology and Trap Comparisons. California Cherry Research Reports. Nov 2011.
  • Caprile, Janet. 2012. Seasonal Phenoloy, Trap Comparisons and Damage Observations for Spotted Wing Drosophila in California Cherries. Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference, Jan 2012, Portland, OR. Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference Website: http://entomology.tfrec.wsu.edu/wopdmc/proceedings.php [author and presenter]
  • Caprile, Janet. 2012. Spotted Wing Drosophila Damage & Spray Survey. 2 page meeting handout.
  • Caprile, Janet. 2012. Spotted Wing Drosophila Traps. 1 page meeting handout.
  • Caprile. J., M.L. Flint, M.P. Bolda, J.A. Grant, R.Van Steenwyk, D.R. Haviland. 2011. Spotted Wing Drosophila. UCANR Statewide IPM Program Pest Note. Publication 74158. August 2011. 4 pages.
  • Dalton, D.T., V.M. Walton, P.W. Shearer, D.B. Walsh, J. Caprile, R. Isaacs. 2011. Laboratory survival of Drosophila suzukii under simulated winter conditions of the Pacific Northwest and seasonal field trapping in five primary regions of small and stone fruit production in the United States. Pest Management Science 67(11): 1368-1374.
  • DeFrancesco, Joseph. 2012. Effective SWD insecticides registered for use in OR and WA blueberries, and considerations for their use. http://horticulture.oregonstate.edu/system/files /Blueberry%20SWD%20Pesticides%20for%20OR%20and%20WA%206-15-12_2.pdf
  • DeFrancesco, Joseph. 2012. Effective SWD insecticides registered for use in OR and WA caneberries, and considerations for their use. http://horticulture.oregonstate.edu/system/files/Caneberry%20SWD%20Pe sticides%20for%20OR%20and%20WA%206-15-12_1.pdf
  • DeFrancesco, Joseph. 2012. Effective SWD insecticides registered for use in OR and WA strawberries, and considerations for their use. http://horticulture.oregonstate.edu/system/files/Strawberry%20SWD%20P esticides%20for%20OR%20and%20WA%206-15-12_1.pdf
  • Dreves, A.J. 2011. IPM Program Development for an invasive pest: coordination, outreach and evaluation. Pest Manag. Sci. 67(11): 1403-1410. DOI: 10.1002/ps.2266.
  • Farnsworth, Derek, Rachael Goodhue, and Jeffrey Williams. "Maximum Residue Limits: Protectionism or Food Safety" Selected Paper at AAEA 2012. AgEcon Search. .
  • Goodhue, R.E, M. Bolda, D. Farnsworth, J.C. Williams, and F.G. Zalom. 2011. Spotted wing drosophila infestation of California strawberries and raspberries: economic analysis of potential revenue losses and control costs. Pest Management Science. 67: 1396-1402.
  • Hamby, K.A., A. Hernandez-Leon, K. Boundy-Mills, and F.G. Zalom. 2012. Associations of yeasts with spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii, Diptera: Drosophilidae) in cherries and raspberries. Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 78(14): 4869-4873.
  • Haviland, D. R., and E. H. Beers. 2012. SWD and MRLs: Controlling One While Complying with the Other, In Abstracts of the 86th Annual Orchard Pest & Disease Management Conference, 2012, 11-13 January, 2012, Portland Hilton, Portland, OR.
  • Beers, E. H., R. A. Van Steenwyk, P. W. Shearer, B. Coates, and J. A. Grant. 2011. Development of Drosophila suzukii management programs for sweet cherry in the western SU. Pest Manag. Sci. 67: 1386-1395.
  • Beers, E. H., T. J. Smith, and B. D. Walsh. 2011. Spotted wing drosophila: 2011 update, Washington State Horticultural Association, 5-7 December 2011, Wenatchee Convention Center, Wenatchee, WA [poster].
  • Bolda, M.P. 2011. A Summary of What We Know So Far About Spotted Wing Drosophila. Sept 21. Strawberries and Caneberries ANR Blog. http://ucanr.org/blogs/strawberries_caneberries/
  • Bolda, M.P. 2011. Suspected Tolerance to Pyganic Found in Spotted Wing Drosophila. August 23. Strawberries and Caneberries ANR Blog. http://ucanr.org/blogs/strawberries_caneberries/ Bolda, M.P. 2011. The Efficacy of Sake as a Trap for Spotted Wing Drosophila. Aug 31. Strawberries and Caneberries ANR Blog. http://ucanr.org/blogs/strawberries_caneberries/
  • Bolda, M.P. 2011. Updates for Invasive Pests for Berry Growers on the Central Coast. February 28. Strawberries and Caneberries ANR Blog. http://ucanr.org/blogs/strawberries_caneberries/
  • Bolda, M.P. 2012. A Look inside the Abdomen of the Spotted Wing Drosophila. March 14. Strawberries and Caneberries ANR Blog. http://ucanr.org/blogs/strawberries_caneberries/
  • Bolda, M.P. 2011. Un resumen sobre el manejo y control de drosofila de alas manchadas, Drosophila suzukii. Nov 16. http://ucanr.org/blogs/fresamora/
  • Bruck, D.J., M. Bolda, L. Tanigoshi, J. Klick, J.R. Kleiber, and J. DeFrancesco. 2011. Laboratory and field comparisons of insecticides to reduce infestation of Drosophila suzukii in berry crops. Pest Manag. Sci. DOI: 10.1002/ps.2242
  • Caprile, Janet. 2012. Spotted Wing Drosophila Traps. 1 page meeting handout.
  • Jana C. Lee, Hannah J. Burrack, Luz D. Barrantes, Elizabeth H. Beers, Amy J. Dreves, Kelly Hamby, David R. Haviland, Rufus Isaacs, Tamara Richardson, Peter Shearer, Cory A. Stanley, Doug B. Walsh, Vaughn M. Walton, Frank G. Zalom, and Denny J. Bruck. 2012. Evaluation of monitoring traps for Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North America. J. Econ. Entomol. 105(5): 000D000 (2012); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EC12132
  • Thistlewood H., P. W. Shearer, R. A. Van Steenwyk, V. Walton, and S. Acheampong. 2011. Drosophila suzukii, a new pest of stone fruits in western North America. Proc. IOBC Working Group "Integrated Protection of Fruit Crops, subgroup: Pome fruit arthropods, stone fruit," Workshop on "Sustainable protection of fruit crops in the Mediterranean area," Vico del Gargano (Italy), September 2010. IOBC/wprs Bulletin Vol. 74, 2012 pp.133-137.
  • Van Steenwyk, R.A., Bill Coates, Joe Grant, Janet Caprile, Kathy Anderson. 2011. Biology and Control of the Spotted Wing Drosophila. California Cherry Research Reports.Oct 2011.
  • Van Steenwyk, R.A., Joe Grant, Janet Caprile. 2011. Two Page ID Cards for SWD males and females. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PDF/PMG/SWD_IDCard.pdf
  • Lee, J.C., H.J. Burrack, L.D. Barrantes, E.H. Beers, A.J. Dreves, K.A. Hamby, D.R. Haviland, R. Isaacs, T. Richardson, P. Shearer, C.A. Stanley, D.B. Walsh, V.M. Walton, F.G. Zalom, Murray, T.A. & L.K. Tanigoshi. 2012. Installing trellises in established blueberries for conventional and organic production. Washington State Extension Factsheet.
  • Van Steenwyk, R. A., and L. M. Novotny. 2011. Spotted wing drosophila control in cherry, 2010. Arthropod Management Tests 36: B1.
  • Van Steenwyk, R. A., L. M. Novotny, and C. Wise. 2011. Post-harvest spotted wing drosophila control in cherry, 2011. Arthropod Management Tests 37:
  • Haviland, D., and E. H. Beers. 2012. Chemical control programs for Drosophila suzukii that comply with International limitations on pesticide residues for exported sweet cherries. Journal of Integrated Pest Management Vol. 3, Issue 2.
  • Moulton, G.A. and J. King. 2012. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) for Successful Management on Organic Farms and in Home Gardens http://maritimefruit.wsu.edu.
  • Lee, J. C., D.J. Bruck, A.J. Dreves, C. Loriatti, H. Vogtd, P. Baufelde. 2011. In Focus: Spotted wing Drosophila, Drosophila suzukii, across perspectives. Pest Manag. Sci. 67(11): 1349-1351. DOI 10.1002/ps.2271.
  • Lee, J. C., D. J. Bruck, H. Curry, D. Edwards, D. R. Haviland, R. A. Van Steenwyk, and B. M. Yorgey. 2011. The susceptibility of small fruits to spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. Pest Management Sci. DOI 10.1002/ps 2279.
  • Lee, J.C., H.J. Burrack, L.D. Barrantes, E.H. Beers, A.J. Dreves, K.Hamby, D.R. Haviland, R. Isaacs,T.Richardson, P. Shearer, C. A. Stanley, D.B. Walsh,V.M. Walton, F.G. Zalom, and D. J. Bruck. 2012. Evaluation of Monitoring Traps for Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae) in North America. J. Econ. Entomol. 105(5): 000D000 (2012); DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/EC12132.
  • Beers, E. H. 2011. Shock and awe: A narrative history of spotted wing drosophila in west coast sweet cherries, In Pacific Branch of the Entomological Society of America, 27-30 March 2011, Waikaloa Hilton, Kona, HI [Abstract].
  • Beers, E. H. 2011. Spotted Wing Drosophila Management on Sweet Cherry - Final Report. Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission. http://jenny.tfrec.wsu.edu/wtfrc/PDFfinalReports/2012FinalReports/Bee rsSWDcherryFinal.pdf
  • Beers, E. H., D. Walsh, and T. Smith. 2012. Spotted wing drosophila update, In Proceedings, 106th Annual Meeting of the Washington State Horticultural Association, Wenatchee Convention Center, Wenatchee, WA. WSHA.
  • Beers, E. H., P. Smytheman, and B. M. Greenfield. 2012. Spotted Wing Drosophila in Eastern Washington: 2011 Update, In Abstracts of the 86th Annual Orchard Pest & Disease Management Conference, 2012, 11-13 January, 2012, Portland Hilton, Portland, OR.


Progress 09/01/10 to 08/31/11

Outputs
OUTPUTS: Obj 1.1 A draft SWD genome was assembled but many gaps & low coverage regions exist. Improvement strategies are ongoing. Obj 1.2 Temperature-related developmental parameters and winter survival were determined. Overwintering field studies for 2 seasons show limited adult SWD survival in the Pacific Northwest. Early phenology models predict 50% peak first generation SWD emergence in the mid-Willamette Valley, OR with earlier emergence in milder climates and later emergence in harsher climates. In most production areas, apple cider vinegar (ACV) traps mostly attract females in the early season thus identifying females early season is crucial. 
 Obj 1.3 Monitoring SWD weekly throughout the year using ACV-baited traps for adults combined with larval fruit infestation were conducted in most major production areas. Seasonal populations show higher early season abundance in mild regions of California compared with harsher areas such as Mid-Columbia region in OR where numbers remained low until mid-August. SWD abundance in Eastern Washington remained low most of the season. Larval fruit infestation was found during harvest in some California crops and in late crops in August in mild areas in Oregon. Populations increased rapidly in fall in all production areas. Obj 1.4 Lab tests indicate females laid 85-161 eggs the first 4 weeks post-emergence. Susceptible fruit is more prone to attack when color change starts. Cherry, commercial caneberry, blueberry and wild blackberry are the important hosts. No commercial impact was seen on wine grapes or cranberries. Obj 2.1 Alternate baits were tested in lab and field for attractiveness to SWD. Some were as or more attractive than ACV. Alternate trap types are being evaluated. Obj 2.3 Effective pesticides were identified. Perimeter and alternate row insecticide application studies demonstrated that reduced spray applications in raspberry & blackberry may be as effective as full cover sprays . Obj 3 Data was gathered from growers, packers and at Extension events using 3 audience-specific surveys. Response rates from growers and packers were 16- 50%. Surveys will be revised for 2012 based on scientist & advisory panel feedback. Obj. 4.1 SWD-focused websites alerted and educated growers and disseminated information around the country (about 80,000 domestic views) and more than 100,000 views from 96 countries. Several publications were developed. Preseason workshops and field days were held to review identification, biology and recommendations to growers; peer talks were held at regional and national meetings. Obj. 4.2 Backyard reporting was promoted. Obj. 4.3 An integrated, real-time online SWD information collection/dissemination system was created, allowing OR and WA growers to view SWD infestation on a regional basis. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals Beers, Betsy Bolda, Mark Brewer, Linda Brown, Preston Dalton, Daniel DeFrancesco, Joseph Dreves, Amy: PI Halbleib, Mary Kelley, Kathy Anderson Lee, Jana Luh, Hang-Kwang - ONID Miller, Jeffrey: PI Murray, Todd Peerbolt, Tom Shearer, Peter: PI Tanigoshi, Lynell VanSteenwyk, Robert Walsh, Doug: PI Walton, Vaughn: PD Yang, Wei Qiang Zalom, Frank: PI Partner Organizations Washington State University University of California, Davis University of California, Berkeley Peerbolt Crop Management Collaborators and contacts Begun, David Bruck, Denny Caprile, Janet Coates, William Conway, Flaxen Coop, Leonard Epstein, David Fitzgerald, Tonie Fitzpatrick, Sheila Goldberger, Jessica Goodhue, Rachael Grant, Joe Haviland, David Jepson, Paul Kaufman, Diane Landolt, Peter Langellotto, Gail Martin, Tunyalee Miles, Carol Peerbolt, Anna Pickel, Carolyn Seavert, Clark Smith, Tim Skinkis, Patricia Strik, Bernadine Vollmer, Emily TARGET AUDIENCES: The target audiences for these efforts include growers and their workers, field men, packers, home gardeners, the general public, academic peers, Extension faculty, and other organizations, businesses, NGOs and non-profits, and individuals supporting outreach education around this introduced pest. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.

Impacts
Short term outcome:Growers, packers, and the general public are aware of SWD as a threat to fruit production and identify Cooperative Extension as a trusted source of information. This awareness promotes continued requests for education. Producers are aware of increasing risk of fruit infestation with increased ripening, and that cranberry is not a host for SWD. Communication outputs identified above and monitoring efforts permit growers to limit spray interventions to times when SWD is active in their fields. We believe this awareness has reduced unnecessary pesticide applications - a medium term outcome.

Publications

  • Walsh DB, Bolda MP, Goodhue RA, Dreves AJ, Lee J, Bruck DJ, Walton VM, ONeal SD, Zalom FG. 2010. Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae): Invasive Pest of Ripening Soft Fruit Expanding Its Geographic Range and Damage Potential. J. Integ. Pest Mngmt. 2(1): 2011; DOI: 10.1603/IPM10010
  • Walton, V., J. Lee, D. Bruck, P. Shearer, E. Parent, T. Whitney, A.J. Dreves. 2010. Recognizing fruit damaged by spotted wing Drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. OSU Extension Publication, EM9021.
  • Zalom, F.G., K. Hamby and H. Wilson. 2011. Spotted wing drosophila, a concern for dried plum producers California Dried Plum Board Research Reports, 2010, pp.62-66.
  • Haviland, D. R. 2010. The Relationship Between Spotted Wing Drosophila and Citrus. Kern Citrus and Subtropical Fruit Newsletter, UC Cooperative Extension, Kern Co. April, 2010 p. 2
  • Haviland, D. R., M. Bolda and F. Zalom. 2011. Establishment of Spotted Wing Drosophila in the Western United States and Impact on Small Fruit Crops. Abstracts of the 95th Annual Meeting of the Pacific Branch of the Entomological Society of America. Waioloa, Wawaii, March 27-30, 2011
  • Beers, E.H., R.A. Van Steenwyk, P.W. Shearer, W.W. Coates and J.A. Grant. 2011. Developing Drosophila suzukii management programs for sweet cherry in the western United States. Pest Manag Sci DOI 10.1002/ps.2279.
  • Bolda, M.P. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila, A New Vinegar Fly Pest in California. Drosophila suzukii. 52th Anniversary Horticulture Growers Short Course Proceedings. 2010. British Columbia, Canada.
  • Bolda, M.P., Goodhue, R.E., and Zalom, F.G. Spotted Wing Drosophila: Potential Economic Impact of a Newly Established Pest. Agricultural and Resource Economics Update. V. 13 no. 3. Jan/Feb 2010.
  • Bolda, M.P., R.E. Goodhue, and F.G. Zalom. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila: Potential Economic Impact of a Newly Established Pest. Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics Library, University of California.
  • Brooks, T. et al. 2010. Know your enemy. Spotted Wing Drosophila vs. Other Drosophila. Washington State Extension Pub.
  • Bruck, D.J., M. Bolda, L. Tanigoshi, J. Klick, J. Kleiber, J. DeFrancesco, B. Gerdeman and H. Spitler. 2011. Laboratory and field comparisons of insecticides to reduce infestation of Drosophila suzukii in berry crops. Pest Manag Sci DOI 10.1002/ps.2242.
  • Caprile, J.L., M.L. Flint, M.P. Bolda, J.A. Grant, R. Van Steenwyk, D.R. Haviland. 2011. Pest Notes: Spotted Wing Drosophila. UC ANR Publication 74158. http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/PMG/PESTNOTES/pn74158.html
  • Caprile, Janet. 2010. Developing Monitoring Methods for Spotted Wing Drosophila in California Cherries. Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference, Jan 2010, Portland, OR. Available on Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference Website: http://entomology.tfrec.wsu.edu/wopdmc/proceedings.php [author and presenter]
  • Caprile, Janet. 2010. Home Cherry Tree Mass Trapping for the Spotted Wing Drosophila. Handout for home orchardists.
  • Caprile, Janet. 2010. Home Cherry Tree Mass Trapping Spotted Wing Drosophila Project. 3 pages. Guidelines and protocols for project volunteers.
  • Caprile, Janet. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila Biology and Life Cycle. 2 pages. Meeting Handout. March 2010.
  • Caprile. J., M.L. Flint, M.P. Bolda, W.W. Coates, J.A. Grant, F.G. Zalom, R. Van Steenwyk. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila, Drosophila suzukii: A New Pest in California, Provisional Guidelines: Management on Cherries in Home Garden Situations. UC IPM website, Exotic and Invasive Pests: http://www.ipm.ucdavis.edu/EXOTIC/drosophila.html
  • Dalton D.T., Walton V.M, Shearer, P.W., Walsh, D.B., Caprile J. and R. Issacs. 2011. Laboratory survival of Drosophila suzukii under simulated winter conditions of the Pacific Northwest and seasonal field trapping in five primary regions of small and stone fruit production in the United States. Pest Manag Sci DOI 10.1002/ps.2280.
  • Dreves, A.J. and G. Langellotto. 2011. EMERGING PEST: Spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila suzukii), a new berry, grape, and stone fruit pest, IN PNW Insect Management Handbook. Oregon State, Washington State and University of Idaho Extension Services.
  • Dreves, A.J. and G. Langellotto. 2011. Protect your garden fruits from Spotted wing Drosophila. OSU Extension Publication, EM 9026, 4/2011.
  • Dreves, A.J., V. Walton, and G. Fisher. 2009. A new pest attacking healthy ripening fruit in Oregon: Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura). OSU Extension Publication EM 8991; http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/bitstream/1957/13090/1/em8991 .pdf.
  • Goodhue, R.E., M. Bolda, D. Farnsworth, J.C. Williams, and F.G. Zalom. 2011 Spotted wing drosophila infestation of California strawberries and raspberries: economic analysis of potential revenue losses and control costs. Pest Manag Sci DOI 10.1002/ps.2259.
  • Grant, J.A., J.L Caprile, W.W. Coates, R.A. Van Steenwyk, K.M. Daane. 2010. Cherry: Spotted Wing Drosophila. In: Cherry Pest Management Guidelines: Insects. UC ANR Publication 3440, May 2010. UC IPM Website: www.ipm.ucdavis.edu
  • Haviland, D. R. 2010. Ability to Manage Spotted Wing Droshphila is an Essential Skill for Fruit Crop PCAs in California. CAPCA Adviser, Feb, 2010 Vol. XIV, NO. 1, p 16-18
  • Haviland, D. R. and S. M. Rill. 2010. Status of Spotted Wing Drosophila as a Pest in Hot Inland Valleys of California. Proceedings of the 85th Annual Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference, Portland OR, 12-17 January 2011, p. 40
  • Haviland, D. R. 2010. Provisional Guidelines for Management of Spotted Wing Drosophila in Blueberries in California. San Joaquin Valley Entomology Newsletter, UC Cooperative Extension, Kern Co. Feb. 2010, p. 2-3
  • Lee, J.C., D.J. Bruck, H. Curry, D. Edwards, D.R. Haviland, R.A. Van Steenwyk and B.M. Yorgey. 2011. The susceptibility of small fruits and cherries to the spotted-wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. Pest Manag Sci DOI 10.1002/ps.2225.
  • Maiguashca, F., H. Ferguson, B. Bahder, T.Brooks, S. Neal, D. Walsh. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila Grape Update. Injured and ripening fruit may become more attractive: Monitoring strongly recommended. Washington State Extension Document.
  • Van Steenwyk, R.A. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila Recommendations for Sweet Cherry, 2010. Meeting Handout UC IPM website publication: Cherry Pest Management Guidelines
  • Haviland, D. R. 2010. Provisional Guidelines for Management of Spotted Wing Drosophila in Blueberries in California. Blueberry News, UC Cooperative Extension, Tulare Co. May 2010, p. 2-3
  • Van Steenwyk, R.A., J.L. Caprile, W.W. Coates, P.W. Shearer. 2010. Spotted Wing Drosophila on Stone Fruit in California: Invasion History, Seasonal Trapping and Control Plans. April 2010 Meeting. Abstract. Pacific Branch Entomology Society of America, p. 6.