Progress 08/01/10 to 07/31/13
Outputs
Target Audience: The target audience for this project includes grape growers, grape juice processors, and wineries in the Great Lakes region, as well as Cooperative Extension personnel in PA and NY. Changes/Problems:
Nothing Reported
What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest? Presentations of this research and its application were presented at Viticulture 2013 (Rochester, NY, Feb. 6-8, 2013), the Mid-Atlantic Fruit and Vegetable Conference (Hershey, PA, Jan 28-31, 2013), at Summer Field Days presentations in New York and Pennsylvania research stations, and at numerous Coffee-Pot meetings held at growers homes during the field seasons. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals?
Continued large and small plot field trials consistently resulted in better control of GBM using spray timings based upon the GDD model (Phenology based timing) rather than the traditional Risk Assessment timed sprays. Risk Assessment timed sprays were based on a two-week post–bloom spray, an end of July spray, and an end of August spray. The Phenology based treatments were sprayed according to the GBM phenology model. The spray intervals were based on the temperature data from the Lake Erie Regional Grape Research and Extension Center weather station and recorded and calculated on the NEWA weather site. The biofix that has been adopted is the bloom period for the wild grape, Vitis riparia. The first treatment was applied at 810 growing degree days (GDD) F from wild grape bloom. The second spray was applied at 1620 GDD that predicted third flight and the third treatment was applied at 2430 GDD timed for the fourth flight. Rynaxypyr 35WG at a 4.5 oz/acre rate was applied on the first two sprays and Leverage 360 (Imidacloprid and Cyfluthrin) at a rate of 6.4 oz /acre was applied on the third spray. The efficacy of these treatments was assessed by destructively counting the number of infested berries on 25 clusters from the edge of each plot and 25 clusters from the middle sections of each treatment plot. These counts were taken approximately two weeks after each spray was applied. The phenology model based spray timing are a superior methodology for managing GBM over the Risk Assessment timings. A critical accomplishment was the determination that the bloom date of the earliest blooming variety of Vitis in an area is the best biofix date from which to accumulate growing degree days. Although this insect appears to terminate diapause in response to temperature, only those GBM that emerge in the presence of a suitable host on which to oviposit will product progeny that will survive and contribute to subsequent generations of GBM. We are in the final stages of writing a manuscript seeking to compare the GBM phenology model predictions with field based phenology measures. Initial analyses suggest that this insect experiences significant blurring of generations late in the year, likely due to the prolonged interval over which diapause is terminated.
Publications
- Type:
Websites
Status:
Published
Year Published:
2013
Citation:
Saunders, M.C., R. Isaacs, and G. Loeb. 2013. Focus on females provides new insights for grape berry moth management. Appellation Cornell. Research Focus 2013-2. 8 pages
|
Progress 08/01/11 to 07/31/12
Outputs
OUTPUTS: Large-plot field trials were conducted to compare the effectiveness of standard risk assessment timed grape insecticide sprays to insecticide spray timing based on the grape berry moth (GBM) degree-day phenology model. Three five-acre plots of commercially grown, Concord grapes were compared in North East Township, PA. All plots were located approximately 5 miles from each other and less than .5 miles from the shores of Lake Erie. Two of the plots have historically had medium to heavy GBM pressure. The third plot has had medium to low GBM pressure. Risk Assessment timed sprays were based on a two-week post-bloom spray (6/15/2012), an end of July spray (7/26/2012), and an end of August spray (8/23/2012). The Phenology based treatments were sprayed according to the GBM phenology model. The spray intervals were based on the temperature data from the Lake Erie Regional Grape Research and Extension Center weather station and recorded and calculated on the NEWA weather site. The biofix that was used this year is the bloom period for the wild grape, Vitis vinifera. The first treatment was applied (6/28/2012), at 810 growing degree days (GDD) F from wild grape bloom (5/25/2012). The second spray was applied at 1620 GDD that predicted third flight (7/31/2012) and the third treatment was applied at 2430 GDD timed for the fourth flight (9/2/2012). Rynaxypyr 35WG at a 4.5 oz/acre rate was applied on the first two sprays and Leverage 360 (Imidacloprid and Cyfluthrin) at a rate of 6.4 oz /acre was applied on the third spray. The efficacy of these treatments was assessed by destructively counting the number of infested berries on 25 clusters from the edge of each plot and 25 clusters from the middle sections of each treatment plot. These counts were taken approximately two weeks after each spray was applied. Although field data are still being collected and analyzed, the phenology model based spray timing appears to be a superior methodology for managing GBM over the Risk Assessment timings. End of season disease severity ratings will also be collected and analyzed to determine if there is a difference in disease incidence with the two GBM spray timings. Work has begun on a manuscript seeking to compare the GBM phenology model predictions with field based phenology measures. Initial analyses suggest that this insect experiences significant blurring of generations late in the year, likely due to the prolonged interval over which diapause is terminated. Given the unusual warmth experienced during Spring 2012, there were GBM emerging as early as mid-April, well before any suitable host plants were available. These early emergers likely died, and the later emergers would be the only overwintering insects to survive. It is possible that we will see significantly less generational blurring this season as a consequence of this differential survivorship. PARTICIPANTS: On the NE-IPM project Lead PI, Michael Saunders, PSU, and Greg Loeb,Cornell. Evaluation of diseases and other rots associated with the GBM treatments, Mr. Bryan Hed, PSU. Extension and outreach are led by Mr. Andrew Muza, PSU, and Mr. Timothy Weigle, Cornell. Ms. Jody Timer, PSU, participated and managed the day to day activities. TARGET AUDIENCES: The target audience for this project includes grape growers, grape juice processors, and wineries in the Great Lakes region, as well as Cooperative Extension personnel in PA and NY. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Grape growers and extension educators throughout the region have been seeking a new method to better time GBM management decisions, especially for the second and third generations. A temperature based phenology model will represent a major improvement over the calendar-based approach currently being employed that will lead to more cost efficient, less wasteful, and more efficacious use of insecticides for GBM control. Grape growers will transition from the remaining broad spectrum insecticides to more targeted, and less environmentally damaging compounds through the adoption of this more accurate method for calculating spray timings. Reduction in the use of broad spectrum compounds will reduce grower/applicator risk, non-target impacts, and issues associated with pesticide residues and human health. Incorporation of the GBM Phenology Model into a grower accessible decision support system will enhance the ability for growers to accurately time their control efforts, and to forecast the potential for damaging third and fourth generations. The phenology model will be incorporated into a regional system of weather stations accessible via the internet. Growers will be prompted to indicate the appropriate biofix to start degree day accumulation and the temperature based model will assess the current state of GBM population development using daily max/min temperature data and a projection of GBM phenology for the near future is also provided based upon predicted daily temperatures. This ability to forecast GBM population phenology is key to the successful management of this key pest of grapes. This project will contribute to the National Roadmap for IPM including; 1) Improve economic benefits related to the adoption of IPM practices. This project will test new approaches that aim to reduce grower reliance on broad-spectrum insecticides, 2) reduce potential human health risks from pests and the use of IPM practices. Our goal to decrease reliance on FQPA-targeted pesticides will reduce risk of worker exposure and residues in food, and 3) minimize adverse environmental risks from pests and the use of IPM practices. Increased adoption of reduced-risk management tactics, through the research, demonstration, and training objectives in this project will help reduce the use of pest management tools with potentially adverse environmental effects.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
Progress 08/01/10 to 07/31/11
Outputs
OUTPUTS: In Pennsylvania and New York, we sought to compare the effectiveness of standard risk assessment timed sprays to spray timing based on the degree-day phenology model of the grape berry moth (GBM). Two small plot trials were established in both Pennsylvania and in New York along the Lake Erie shoreline, and an additional two small plot trials were established in vineyards in the Finger Lakes region of New York. Five replicates of six-vine plots were set up for each treatment in a complete, random-block design. Risk Assessment timed sprays were based on a two week postbloom spray (6/17/2010), an end of July spray (7/27/2010), and an end of August spray (8/30/2010). The Phenology based treatments were timed according to the GBM Phenology model. The first treatment was applied at the predicted second flight (6/29/2010), the second treatment timed for the third flight (8/3/2010) and the third treatment timed for the fourth flight (9/2/2010). The Early Phenology timing treatment, also based on the GBM degree-day model, included the sprays of the Late Phenology and added a treatment timed for the first flight of GBM (5/21/2010). Efficacy was assessed by counting the number of infested berries on 25 clusters from the middle sections of each treatment plot. These counts were made 6/25, 7/26, 8/31 and 9/17/2010. A large plot study was established in a commercial Concord vineyard in North East, PA and in the Finger Lakes region. The large plots were divided into three equal sections. These were sprayed according to the Risk Assessment protocol, the Phenology protocol and the third section was left unsprayed as a control. This vineyard was sprayed with the covered boom sprayer according to the above written treatment schedules. The efficacy of this trial was assessed by destructively counting the number of infested berries on 25 clusters from the edge and 25 clusters from the interior of each treatment section. These counts were made 6/29/2010, 7/24/2010, and 9/2/2010. Results were analyzed for incidence (percent clusters damaged), and severity (percent berries damaged) using Fishers Protected LSD. In the small plot trial at LERGR&EC, the early and late phenology spray timings were significantly different than the Risk Assessment and control with the Risk Assessment cluster damage at 32% while the control was 29%. Due to an abnormally high incidence of grape berry moth during the 2010 growing season, the small plot trials did not show the expected significance in treatments in the last sampling period. The large plot trials showed greater significant difference between treatments, with the Phenology based timings outperforming other timings. Incidence of fruit rots was determined at the end of the growing season directly proceeding harvest. Different potential biofixes for establishing the start date for accumulating GDDs were examined, including wild grape bloom, 150 DD from January 1, first male trap catch in a pheromone trap, first female trapped in a light trap. Biofix establishment is still a work in progress. All these treatments were repeated in 2011, with data still being collected on the 2011 season experiments. PARTICIPANTS: Michael C. Saunders and Greg Loeb are lead investigators for the research portions of this project. Saunders and Loeb will design and implement the small and large block trials for comparison of phenology based timings with GBMRAP based timings. Saunders and Loeb will also conduct studies of biofixes for initiating the accumulation of GBM degree days. These individuals will also serve as speakers at Extension talks, twilight meetings, coffeepot meetings, and will assist in the implementation of the GBM phenology model into the NEWA system. Andrew Muza and Tim Weigle are lead Extension specialists responsible for grower meetings, Extension literature preparation, establishment of NEWA system and the incorporation of GBM model into NEWA system. Bryan Hed is a research plant pathologist who will assist in the evaluation of bunch rot incidence in the various field treatments for GBM control. TARGET AUDIENCES: This study is focused on refining and advancing our understanding of GBM phenology and the direct implementation of these findings into a regional IPM strategy for management of this important pest. Growers of juice and wine grapes along the PA/NY Lake Erie grape production belt at the Finger Lakes of New York will be exposed to this approach with regular Coffee Pot meetings (ca. 5/season, 25 growers/session), a revised GBM-IPM extension brochure (ca 200 growers in PA/NY, field demonstration projects and associated grower meetings (ca. 100 growers/meeting), as well as via the regular summer and winter grower Extension conferences (ca. 100-200). We anticipate that growers educated via these venues will readily adapt to this improved approach to the management of this important pest. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.
Impacts
Grape growers and extension educators throughout the region have been seeking a new method to better time GBM management decisions, especially for the second and third generations. A temperature based phenology model will represent a major improvement over the calendar-based approach currently being employed that will lead to more cost efficient, less wasteful, and more efficacious use of insecticides for GBM control. Grape growers will transition from the remaining broad spectrum insecticides to more targeted, and less environmentally damaging compounds through the adoption of this more accurate method for calculating spray timings. Reduction in the use of broad spectrum compounds will reduce grower/applicator risk, non-target impacts, and issues associated with pesticide residues and human health. Incorporation of the GBM Phenology Model into a grower accessible decision support system will enhance the ability for growers to accurately time their control efforts, and to forecast the potential for damaging third and fourth generations. The phenology model will be incorporated into a regional system of weather stations accessible via the internet. Growers will be prompted to indicate the appropriate biofix to start degree day accumulation and the temperature based model will assess the current state of GBM population development using daily max/min temperature data and a projection of GBM phenology for the near future is also provided based upon predicted daily temperatures. This ability to forecast GBM population phenology is key to the successful management of this key pest of grapes. This project will contribute to the National Roadmap for IPM including; 1) Improve economic benefits related to the adoption of IPM practices. This project will test new approaches that aim to reduce grower reliance on broad-spectrum insecticides, 2) reduce potential human health risks from pests and the use of IPM practices. Our goal to decrease reliance on FQPA-targeted pesticides will reduce risk of worker exposure and residues in food, and 3) minimize adverse environmental risks from pests and the use of IPM practices. Increased adoption of reduced-risk management tactics, through the research, demonstration, and training objectives in this project will help reduce the use of pest management tools with potentially adverse environmental effects.
Publications
- No publications reported this period
|
|