TANGLER LR TECHNOLOGY, ADVANCE MATING DISRUPTION THAT PROVIDES FOR RAPID AND COST EFFECTIVE APPLICATION

• Sponsoring Institution: National Institute of Food and Agriculture
• Project Status: COMPLETE
• Funding Source: SMALL BUSINESS GRANT
• Reporting Frequency: Annual
• Accession No.: 1010091
• Grant No.: 2016-33610-25669
• Cumulative Award Amt.: $600,000.00
• Proposal No.: 2016-03980
• Project Start Date: Sep 1, 2016
• Project End Date: Aug 31, 2020
• Grant Year: 2016
• Program Code: [8.13]- Plant Production and Protection-Engineering

Recipient Organization
Ridge Quest Inc.
13864 Eagle Ridge Drive
Kent City,MI 49330

Performing Department
(N/A)

Non Technical Summary
Many factors acting together, including concerns about worker safety, food safety, pesticide resistance and new regulations governing pesticides, have heightened grower awareness to reduce insecticide inputs and increase reliance on biopesticides. Foremost among the forces leading to change is the need to reduce input costs in order to maintain economic viability. Mating disruption is among the most effective biopesticides for managing various lepidopteran fruit crop pests including Obliquebanded Leafroller. Although this tactic has proven to be a viable alternative to insecticides for some key pests, it is yet to be embraced as an economically viable alternative to insecticides in many fruit production regions. A major impediment to widespread adoption of disruption technologies are the number of devices needed, timing, physical application of the product, and the high product and application costs.

Animal Health Component

60%

Research Effort Categories

Basic

(N/A)

Applied

60%

Developmental

40%

Classification

Knowledge Area (KA)	Subject of Investigation (SOI)	Field of Science (FOS)	Percent
216	1110	1130	50%
215	1110	1130	50%

Knowledge Area
215 - Biological Control of Pests Affecting Plants; 216 - Integrated Pest Management Systems;

Subject Of Investigation
1110 - Apple;

Field Of Science
1130 - Entomology and acarology;

Keywords

leafroller

mating disruption

oblique banded leafroller

pandemis

pheromone

redbanded leafroller

Goals / Objectives
The major aim in developing the Tangler technology is to greatly improve the mating disruption application process, and substantially reduce its cost, especially the application cost, thereby increasing adoption. First, this research project will determine with large scale commercial plots the viability of the Tangler LR for leafroller damage control and the long term positive impacts on the populations. Secondly, compare Tangler LR to the commercially available competitor, Isomate OBLR/PLR Plus (Pacific Biocontrol Corporation, Vancouver, Washington). Thirdly, clarify the optimal rate of Tangler LR required to achieve mating disruption, long term population reduction and prevention of crop damage. Lastly, optimize Tangler LR's membrane to achieve the release of all active ingredients for the duration of the OBLR flight with emphasis on providing superior mating disruption.

Project Methods
Objective 1 - Large Scale Impact on Commercial Plots 2017 & 2018Field plots will consist of 40 hectare commercial apple orchards subdivided into 8 ha plots. The study will be set up as a randomized complete block design with one replicate of each treatment within a given orchard plot. There will be a minimum of 30 meter buffers between the 8-ha treatment blocks to allow for subsequent evaluation of the levels of disruption achieved. All treatments will be applied to the upper third of the canopy prior to moth emergence in the spring. Emergence typically occurs 3-4 weeks after bloom in apple, but dispensers will be applied at the standard Codling moth timing of approximately a week prior to bloom in red delicious apples. This will evaluate if the OBLR dispenser can be combined with the Tangler CM product to further save time and labor.The experiment will be comprised of four treatments replicated four times. The treatments will be as follows: 1) Tangler LR applied at 375 dispensers per hectare, 2) Tangler LR applied at 750 dispensers per hectare, 3) Tangler LR applied at 1500 dispensers per hectare, and 4) Conventional grower's standard of insecticide treatments. Tangler application will entail a person launching modules from the bed of a Mitsubishi mini truck. The actual number of dispensers applied per tree will depend on the tree spacing, but will likely be a maximum of two per tree and a minimum of one every other tree.Insecticide sprays will be applied for pests other than OBLR as needed to protect the crop from commercially unacceptable damage. If supplemental insecticide sprays for OBLR are required they will be applied to all treatments within a site. RQI will assess pest populations and make treatment recommendations. The growers working with RQI and participating in this project will strive to apply insecticides for OBLR only if necessary.Evaluation of treatment effects: Captures of males in pheromone-baited traps and shoot and fruit injury counts once per each larval emergence or once per flight and will be used to assess treatment effects. Nine large Delta traps (Trécé, Inc.) baited with OBLR lures (Trécé, Inc.) will be placed in a grid pattern in the central 3-5 hectares of each plot. Four large Delta traps placed each for Pandemis leafroller, Fruit Tree leafroller, Three Lined leafroller and Redbanded leafroller will also be placed in a grid pattern at trapping sites 1, 3, 4 and 6. Traps will be hung in the middle to upper third of the tree canopy depending on tree height. New pheromone lures will be deployed at the start of each moth generation or every 4-6 weeks. Moths captured in traps will be counted and removed weekly. Surveys of fruit and foliar damage will be performed every two weeks until harvest starting around the middle of June or when larval emergence is detected. Surveys will be divided into two different categories, 1) center of the orchard and 2) the edge of the orchard. Thirty apples per tree, 15 high in the canopy and 15 low in the canopy will be inspected from 30 trees per plot (600 fruit/plot total). Fifteen shoots high in the canopy will be inspected from 20 trees per plot (300 shoots/plot total). Monitoring flight of other leafroller with similar appearing damage will allow exclusion of damage occurring when they are present as larva. Only OBLR infestation will be included in the data analysis. Populations of OBLR will be evaluated from 2017 and compared to 2018 to determine effect of consecutive year's disruption in a commercial environment.Objective 2 - Comparison of Isomate OBLR/PLR to Tangler LR 2017 & 2018 Experiments to address Objective 2 will have the same design and set up as those described above for Objective 1 with the following exceptions. The plot size will be 2-4 hectares depending on the grower blocks selected. The treatments will be, 1) Isomate OBLR/PLR Plus at a 300/ac rate, 2) Tangler LR at a 300/ac rate and 3) a grower standard.Objective 3 - Dosage Response 2017 & 2018Field studies to determine the optimal rate of the Tangler LR dispensing system also will be conducted in 40-hectare commercial apple orchards in the Sparta, MI area. The plot size will be 2 hectares. The study will be set up as a randomized complete block design with one replicate of each treatment within a given orchard plot. There will be at least a 60 meter buffer area between the control plot and pheromone treated plots. Plots will be treated with insecticides if warranted as described previously.The experiment will be comprised of six treatments replicated four times. The treatments will be as follows: 1) Tangler LR applied at 0 dispensers per hectare, 2) Tangler LR applied at 6 dispensers per hectare, 3) Tangler LR applied at 30 dispensers per hectare, 4) Tangler LR applied at 100 dispensers per hectare, 5) Tangler LR applied at 300 dispensers per hectare, and 6) Tangler LR applied at 600 dispensers per hectare. Evaluation of male captures in traps in the different dosage treatments will be plotted to determine the optimum deployment rate for Tangler LR. Additionally, graphical analysis of the dosage response plot will reveal whether the principal mechanism of disruption for Tangler modules is competitive or non-competitive (Miller et al 2006). Under competitive disruption, catch drops dramatically initially and approaches zero asymptotically as the density of pheromone dispensers increases. In contrast, the impact per dispenser is constant for non-competitive disruption, generating a straight line when dispenser density is plotted vs. catch. Based on findings from the dosage response study in 2016 rates may be adjusted in the 2017 large commercial study to achieve optimal effectiveness.Objective 4 - Tangler LR Membrane Efficiency 2017Optimize Tangler LR: Research will entail evaluating season-long release of LR pheromone from multiple Tangler membrane formulations. Emission profiles for each formulation will be generated from studies conducted in three locations that represent a range of environmental conditions in regions where OBLR is abundant. The first location in New Era, Michigan will expose the Tangler modules to cooler temperatures found in midwestern and eastern production regions. The second location in Wenatchee, Washington will expose the release device to dryer and warmer climate in the western production regions. The third location in Biglerville, Pennsylvania will provide environmental conditions found in a more southern area. The locations selected outside of Michigan are major fruit growing regions that have adopted the use of mating disruption. Tangler formulations to be evaluated will include the Tangler LR Standard used in field trials and modified vessels that will be manufactured at different loading rates. Each location will be sent 100 standard Tangler's and 100 experimental Tangler's prior to the start of their growing season and OBLR flight. The dispensers will be placed in orchards and ten each collected at 14, 28, 60, 90, 120 and 150 days. They will be packaged with freezer packs and shipped overnight to MSU's laboratory for analysis. Pheromone emission rates from the Tangler LR dispensers for objective 4 will be compared by non-destructive flow-through volatile collection system (Tomaszewska et.al. 2005, Il'Ichev et. al. 2012).??

Progress 09/01/16 to 08/31/20

Outputs
Target Audience: Nothing Reported Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The scientists working on this project learned about Tangler LR and its behaviour in the field. We were unable to talk about our findings due to the Covid shutdown but hope that in the future we can share at meetings and conferences. A summary of our findings will be posted on our website. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Right now we disseminate our findings verbally to growers. This has been limited by Covid. We are going to initiate more electronic ways of communication to relay the information. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Potential Applications: Tangler LR, the name of the product being researched, will control Oblique banded leafroller, Redbanded leafroller and Pandemis leafroller and potentially more leafroller in other geographical areas. It could also be used in a back-yard orchard for a less toxic approach to pesticide use. Currently there is a Tangler CM product for Codling moth control already registered and being sold in the US. The Tangler system has infinite possibilities outside of the agricultural market. It can be used against forest pests and to control animals with the right product design. Ridge Quest is also researching several other insect pheromones that would be applicable to put in the Tangler system. The goal of this research was to develop a highly efficient and effective mating disruption product for OBLR and other leafrollers of economic importance that will prevent damage caused by these pests. Data showed that the Tangler LR disrupted the flight of three leafrollers and reduced damage on fruit and shoots where it was applied. The target rate for control of these pests was around 150-200/acre. Higher rates of the product reduce flight and damage but was not significant to increase the expense of a higher application rate/acre. Growers can adjust the rate needed to their current population. Higher populations will need more time and higher rates of Tangler LR to achieve populations being reduced. Tangler LR was comparable to other commercially available products when compared directly. The rate of the products insect pheromones released appropriately and at the targeted rate. It also does not have the burst effect of some products in the beginning which lends itself to a more consistent release for the season. It also lasted all season long which is important to note in longer growing season areas. Some commercial products only last for part of the season and leave the end unprotected. Multiple year use of the product will reduce populations to zero as seen in figure 11. This research has achieved all its goals and proved the product is viable for commercial use.

Publications

Progress 09/01/18 to 08/31/19

Outputs
Target Audience:Information is beingprovided to growers that are participatingin this project. We also talk to growers and distributors not involved in the project.It will also be provided toUniversity and Extension employees when complete. We are not done collecting data for this project yet this year so everything has not been summarized yet. Changes/Problems:There were no major changes this year to the project. There was some difficulty finding populations of moths in some of the plots due the extended rain and cold spring in Michigan. The solution was to run the projectlonger into the fall to collect more data. When this data is analyzed we hope that there will be enough to see results. The erratic seasons in the last couple of years have made it a challenge to find good plots. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?During presentation of the data that we had from this year, we attended several several meetings, and trade shows. At all of these we were able to learn and expand our knowledge of different parts of the industry and talk to people about Tangler products. This has given us ideas for several other ideas for using the Tangler system. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?These are the articles that have been written about the Tangler CM product that is currently for sale. The Tangler LR will have all of the same characteristics but will just control a different insect. •https://www.growingproduce.com/fruits/apples-pears/rapid-fire-mating-disruption-with-novel-device/ •https://fruitgrowersnews.com/article/the-tangler-makes-mating-disruption-quick/#// •https://www.goodfruit.com/the-tangler/ •http://nyshs.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/Gut-Pages-from-NYFQ-Book-Fall-2015-2.pdf What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We will finish up this season and analyze the data. From that information we will decide whattrials are needed to complete the researchin the different blocks. Working in the field has many difficulties such as weather and varying insect populations. The last few years have a been a challenge due to many things in the enviroment.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? The major aim of this product was achieved by substantially reducing the time it takes to apply making disruption. Cost analysis when comparing other hand applied products showing that Tangler was less expensive when labor cost was included. If labor was not included then cost was about the same. The time savings for labor were considerable. The next objective of the project was to prove that continued use of Tangler LR would drive down populations for a certain period of time. There seems to be a relationship between how many years leafroller disruption is used versus the population going back up. There is still a month of data to collect this year before data can be analyzed. Tangler LR was comparable to the commerically available option. Trials are still out this year to determine the optimal rate for Tangler LR. This is yet to be determined.

Publications

Progress 09/01/17 to 08/31/18

Outputs
Target Audience:Information was provided to growers that participated in this project and at meetings that we attended which would be University and Extension employees. Changes/Problems:The only problem that we have run into is finding the Isomate leafroller product to compare our Tangler LR. It was unavailable to purchase and we moved to another companies product. Since the objective of the this product was to compare to another commercially available product the objective was still being met. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Nothing Reported How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?During this period, results have been disseminated to growers verbally and through sharing data with MSU Faculty who then shares it with his peers. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Ridge Quest plans on disseminating this information in the last year of the project by attending the biocontrol's conference in New York, the entomological society meeting in Vancouver, Canada, and the OPDMC meeting in Portland, Oregon where we will do presentations about the Tangler LR and its data.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? In the period of performance ending August 31, 2018 we were able to complete all objectives. In objective one we evaluated large scale plots and the long term effects the product will have on the populations. The product seemed to have a positive effect on reducing the populations but without another year of data in the same plots we were unable to definitively say there was a reduction. These trials will be repeated in the next year. The previous year's populations were mixed due the early freeze in 2017 and the data being erratic. Objective two was comparing a competing pheromone product to our own for effectiveness. We were unable to obtain the Isomate product to compare Tangler LR but were able to compare to another similar product Scentry No Mate LR. The data was very comparable except for there being more flight in the first generation for the spiral LR product. The second-generation data was almost the same for flight. The shoot damage was quite a bit higher in the spiral plot but the fruit damage although higher in the end was not significantly different from Tangler LR plot. Objective three was to determine the optimal rate of application per acre for the Tangler LR. We have narrowed it down to between the 200 and 300 rate. Once you move above the 300 rate there does not seem to be any additive value in more Tangler LR. We will repeat this study also in the next year to further narrow down the rate. Plus add a 250-rate plot to the study. Objective four was to determine if the Tangler LR would last all season long or up to 150 days in longer growing seasons. The dispenser did last all season long and released the targeted amount of pheromone. It also was found to have no burst effect like most of the other pheromone products in the beginning of the season.

Publications

Progress 09/01/16 to 08/31/17

Outputs
Target Audience:Our target audience are the researchers and the growers involved in this project. We communicated the success of the product and ways that we will adjust the product so the study is more succressfull next year. Changes/Problems:As explained the previous paragraph we are changing our experimental design to allow for the variation in populations and orchard. There will be more orchards used and smaller plot sizes spread out over a larger area of Michigan. This will give us more control population and data that can be more easily analyzed. In a commercial orchard if the grower was using this for control it would not matter if there were no moths captured because that is what we are trying to do in the long run. In a reseach setting we need to prove the efficacy of the product. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?Staff and growers were trained on the identification of the different leafrollers that Tangler LR controls. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?We have met with our advisor at MSU and he will communicate our data to any interested parties. We are also planning on going to a conference next year were we will share our data. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?Conclusion: The goal of this research is to develop a highly efficient and effective mating disruption product for OBLR and other leafrollers that will prevent damage caused by this pest. Data was not definitive this year due to the short crop and short flights of leafroller. Objective 3 will be repeated next year along with Objective 1 and 2. When setting up plots next year, plot design will be changed to allow for the variation between orchards by doubling the number of plots, using more sites, shrinking the plot size and putting more traps out in untreated areas to capture control moths. It was difficult finding substantial populations of Leafrollers due to the early freeze and the hotseason.The pheromone may be pulling the moths out of the controls and into the treatments due to the strength of the attraction, constantly changing wind direction and smaller plot sizes.

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? Project Objectives: First, this research project will determine the application rate that is optimal for Oblique banded leafroller control. Secondly, to determine the efficacy of the Tangler OBLR mating disruption dispenser for Oblique banded leafroller control in commercial apple orchards at certain rates by evaluating terminals and fruit for damage. Thirdly, determine the volatile release from different climate areas. Methods: Oblique banded leafroller has two flights a growing season. A decision was made to complete objective 3 and objective 4 in the 2017 growing season due to restrictions put on the grant funds. The plot size was also reduced from ten to five acres due to orchard size and insect populations. Objective 3 was a study to determine the most effective rate of product to put out in the orchard to optimize control and eliminate damage. There were three different grower locations were populations of Oblique banded leafroller were found. Each location was at least 25- 80 acres in total acreage. Five, five acre plots were selected from these larger blocks. Each research block had 5 treatments containing a 30rate/acre treatment, 100rate/acre treatment, 300 rate/acre treatment, a 600 rate/acre treatment and a grower standard. The grower standard was always placed on the upwind side of the orchard to make sure that there was no pheromone contamination. There were two traps placed in each treatment for Oblique banded leafroller. Traps were placed towards the middle of the block to eliminate edge effect. Traps were monitored from the beginning of June until the end of September once a week. Objective 4 was a volatile collection study to determine the rate of release from the Tangler LR product in different climate areas. A longer growing season area was selected in the growing regions of Pennsylvania and a longer hot dry season was also selected in the growing regions in the state of Washington Results: Season trap catch was analyzed for Oblique banded leafroller and graphed (Figure 1). The Tangler OBLR product flight data was not as expected. Flight catch was lower in the control which could be due to the constantly shifting wind directions in Michigan which could move pheromone in the wrong direction. This could draw moths into other plots and effect the data. Flight was reduced in the 600 rate plots which was supported by previous trials. Flight was short, and very quick for both generations of moths which means less trap catch to analyze. Also the low crop load from the early frost this season has changed all of the insects and grower behavior this season. Little is known about the behavior of this moth and the mechanics of control with disruption. This would suggest that there is no difference until the higher rate in flight reduction. It is suspected that when this study is repeated next year that results will shift to a lower rate for flight reduction. A shoot evaluation was also taken midseason. Two Grand Rapids plots had 5% shoot damage and the Ludington plot had 30% damage to shoots. One of the Grand Rapids plots had to be thrown out for the fruit damage evaluation because it didn't have any fruit to evaluate. The other 2 plots were analyzed. The fruit damage evaluation is shown in figure 2. Previous data had shown that fruit damage was reduced at the 600 rate in the field studies. This data also supports that conclusion. Objective 4 samples were collected all season from Pennsylvania and Washington. They were collected at specific lengths of time from the date of placement in the field. They were placed in a freezer for future analysis. They are currently being tested. The amount of volatile release over time will show the length of the time that the capsule is releasing in different climate types.

Publications