cherry ramp i “had to ’s” mark whalon guthion (azm) used ... · •eco-impacts •cost...

1

Cherry RAMP I & the “Had To’s”Mark Whalon

• Had to work as a team.

• Had to learn how Guthion worked.

• Had to learn PC biology and ecology.

• Had to learn how Guthion replacements worked.

• Had to “think out of the box” & attack PC with a “diversified” approach.

• Had to develop a PARTNERSHIP with the USEPA.

Plum CurculioPlum CurculioPlum CurculioPlum Curculio

Guthion (AZM) Used for 35+ Years!

• It worked, that’s all we needed to know…

• Well, it’s a different world today!

• In the absence of AZM we will have to know much, much more to control PC…

1. Biology, movement and reproductive ecology

2. Tailor control strategy to PC’s Biology in it’s Environment at the time we spray/treat…

3. Understand how our insecticide interacts with the environment, the targeted substrate and PC’s life-stage biology and its location in the environment

Guthion Reregistration: the Final Decision Came from EPA on October 28th, 2006…

Key Considerations:

• Worker Protection

• Residues

• Eco- Impacts

• Cost vs Benefits

• Alternatives

Other CompoundOther Compound

Replacements?

• Synthetic

Pyrethroids

• Carbamates

• Many other

New compounds!

Replacements?

• Synthetic

Pyrethroids

• Carbamates

• Many other

New compounds!

USEPA: Has a specific and well oiled Re-registration Process

Technically Guthion (AZM) Has Lots of Very Significant Reregistration Problems.

Technically Guthion (AZM) Has Lots of Very Significant Reregistration Problems.

Sweet and Tart Cherries

AZM Rate Reduction Phase Out Plan

2007-2009 2010-2012

Season Max 1.5 lbs .75 lbs

ai/acre/year ai/acre/year

• Aerial Applications Prohibited

• 60 ft Buffer Zone – Dwellings

• 60 ft Buffer – Water

• Pick Your Own – Prohibited

Apply Insecticide

Using Insecticides: 101

Issues:1- Enviro. Conditions2- Insecticide materials3- Adjuvant(s)4- pH of the carrier (H2O)5- Other materials?6- Target characteristics7- Sprayer Characteristics8- Dilution9- Tree Row Volume10- Etc.

Key Questions-What’s your target?-Where is your target?-Best way to “hit” or deliver your

insecticide to the target?-Characteristics of the delivered

material & your target in itsenvironment or setting?

- OR, How does the “material” you’re delivering interact with the target in order to achieve a desiredoutcome? NO WORMS In Fruit!

Plum Curculio Developmental Stages:

Egg

1st instar

Pupa

2nd instar 3rd instar4th instar

Summer generation adultSummer generation adult

Post Harvest Target Summer Adults1- Kill them or 2- Break Diapause & Prevent Over-

Winter Survival


Winter SurvivalTarget Overwintering Adults

♀♀Target Adult

Prevent Egg LayingTraditional AZM Use

Target Adult Prevent Egg LayingTraditional AZM Use

Target Eggs Target

Larvae in Fruit

Target Larvae as they crawl

into soil

- AVAUNT

ACTARAASSAILImidanPyrethroid

- AVAUNT


•Novaluron•Novaluron

Soil ApplicationSoil Application•Fungi & Nemas•Fungi & Nemas

Renee Pereault

-Esteem

-Esteem

2

Timing Sprays: The PC Phenology

Model

• Still Refining

• Much improved

• New Targets

– Eggs

– Larvae

– Prepupa

– Eclosed young

adults

– Summer Adults

M. Whalon, R. Pereault & J. Laubach

PC Phenology: Timing New Tools

• Spring Feeding

• Mating

• Egg Laying

• Larval Development

• Larvae Exit Fruit

• Pupation

• Summer Adult

Emergence

1918

2119

17

31 30 30 32

3739

49

55

45

56

64

61

6663 64 64 65

6365 64 63 63 64 63 63

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

145 170 195 220 245 271 296 321 346 371 396 421 446 472 497

DD base 50F after egg laying

He

ad

ca

ps

ule

wid

th (

um

)

Larval Development

W. Bryane, R. Pereault, M. Whalon & P. Nelsen


Egg

1st instar

Pupa




Winter Survival



♀♀Target Adult



Target Eggs Target

Larvae in Fruit


into soil

- AVAUNT


- AVAUNT




Renee Pereault

-Esteem

-Esteem

Lethal Time: AZM Vs. RR & OP AltsLethal Time: AZM Vs. RR & OP Alts

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000 100000

Time (hours)

Perc

ent M

ort

ality

Azinphosmethyl

Imidacloprid

Thiacloprid

Thiamethoxam

Indoxacarb

Indoxacarb (High Dose)

Wise, Whalon, Gut 2006 JEE

Reduced RiskCompoundsMuch Slower

ActingUnder

the Best Circumstance& Most Uptake in one Mode

John Wise

What AZM Does:

TOXIC ACTION•Fumigant•Contact Toxicant•Ingested Toxin

•Covers the surface

•Penetrats the Fruit, Leaves

Stems and Bark…

Kill larvae in fruit at

2ppm with no residue

at harvest if timed well

Adult Feeding Patterns During Cherry Production Season

A Critical Issue For RR Compounds = Ingestion Uptake

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Avera

ge N

um

ber of Feedin

g E

vents

29-Apr 13-May 27-May 20-Jun 29-Jul

Leaf Stem

Leaf blade

Fruit Stem

Fruit

Receptical

Sepal

Plum CurculioPlum Curculio

Eric Hofman

3

Pro

port

ion o

f re

covere

d

active ingre

die

nt (a

.i.)

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Novaluron Methoxy-fenozide

Thiacloprid Azinphos-methyl

Phosmet Indoxacarb

4.43µg/g 3.21µg/g 2.56µg/g 4.43µg/g 1.6mg/g 1.44µg/ga.i. Recovered

per gram of fruit

Skin

Outer

2mm Flesh

Central

5mm Flesh

Core

5mm Flesh

Where the Compound IS & its CONCENTRATIONin Relation to the TARGET & its BEHAVIOR;

Determine Efficacy

Where the Compound IS & its CONCENTRATIONin Relation to the TARGET & its BEHAVIOR;

Determine Efficacy

With RR Compounds: Pest Control Just Got Much, Much More Complex!

John Wise & Chris Vandervort

• New Research– Finishing 1st USDA RAMP GRANT

(Other Grants: CAR, PMAP, PESP)

– INDUSTRY’S INVESTMENT– MSU’S INVESTMENT

• AZM – GFW, LR, PC, CFF

• New Tool’s– Imidacloprid (2002)

• GFW, LR, PC, CFF (7d)

– Thiamethoxam (2006)• GFW, LR, PC, CFF (14d)

– Acetamiprid (2008)• GFW, LR, PC, CFF (7d)

– Spinosyn (2001)• GFW, LR, PC, CFF (7d)

– Indoxacarb (2007*)• GFW, LR, PC, CFF (14d)

MRL’s

• EconomicallySustainable?

AZM Alternative’s in Cherry

USDA/Cherry RAMP Grant

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2004 2005 2006 2007

Year

Gro

wers

Resort

ing to A

ZM

in R

AM

P

plo

ts

*One grower had infested fruit but did not

resort to using AZM

*

none low moderate High

PC Efficacy

RAMP-I Team & E-154


Egg

1st instar

Pupa




Winter Survival



♀♀Target Adult



Target Eggs Target

Larvae in Fruit


into soil

- AVAUNT


- AVAUNT




Renee Pereault

-Esteem

-Esteem

Plum Curculio Control Targets:

Woods edge, Soil,

Bark, Scaffold, Branch,

Leaf, Blossom, Stem, Fruit Surface,

Fruit Interior?


Egg

1st instar

Pupa




Winter Survival



♀♀Target Adult



Target Eggs Target

Larvae in Fruit


into soil

- AVAUNT


- AVAUNT




Renee Pereault

-Esteem

-Esteem

IGR’s Present a New Set of Ecological ChallengesSubtle Endocrine-Like Effects & Vertical

Transmission• Esteem (pyriproxifen): will

break diapause

• Esteem treated females produced eggs = use fat body & don’t survive winter!

• Therefore, Esteemtreatment caused reduced fat reserves = winter mortality…

• Novaluron (Rimon):

vertical transmission ♀ to offspring…eggs don’t live

• Esteem (pyriproxifen): will break diapause

• Esteem treated females produced eggs = use fat body & don’t survive winter!

• Therefore, Esteemtreatment caused reduced fat reserves = winter mortality…

• Novaluron (Rimon):

vertical transmission ♀ to offspring…eggs don’t live

Esteem

N- UTC N- UTC

Esteem

Eggs

Plum CurculioPlum Curculio

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

South

ern

UTC

Este

em

South

ern

UTC

Este

em

South

ern

UTC

Este

em

January February March

Perc

ent Surv

ival

Adult Females Field TreatedIn August

Adult Females Field TreatedIn August

M. Whalon,

K. Kim, S. Kim

& D. Nortman

4

USEPA & AZM Outcome? Better than Good!Considering the alternatives!

USEPA Wash. DC

Jim Gulliford

Nikhil Mallampalli

Katie Hall

USEPA Region 5

Margaret Guerriero

Barbra VanTil

USEPA Wash. DC

Jim Gulliford

Nikhil Mallampalli

Katie Hall

USEPA Region 5

Margaret Guerriero

Barbra VanTil

The Day That the USEPA Came to TownThanks to our cooperative efforts and to good relationships with people like Barb VanTill USEPA Region 5

and Pat Cimino (EPA Headquarters)

Toxic

ity

Num

ber

of S

pecie

s A

ffecte

d

Time

AZM Orchard Ecosystem

Deep & Short DisruptionDeep & Short Disruption

Deep ImpactShort Residue& Recovery

Time

Figure 1. An illustration of the chronic ecological effects of different insecticidesupon an orchard ecosystem.

Acute vs Chronic Effects of Various RR Insecticides

Time

Toxic

ity

Neonicotinoid or IGROrchard Ecosystem

Num

ber

of S

pecie

s A

ffecte

d

Shallower ImpactBut

Long Residue &Recovery Time

Shallow & Long Disruption

FQPA Ushered Changes Yields New Insight!FQPA Ushered Changes Yields New Insight!

The Data That Kept AZM Alive

Natural Enemy Sampling Summary for 2007Shannon Diversity Index (H’) measures diversity using species richness and evenness.

• H’ = where p= (# of individuals in species i)/(total # of individuals)

• Richness (S) = Number of different species observed

• Evenness (E) = H’/Hmax ; Hmax = ln(S)

2007

RAMP Grower H' Richness Evenness

4 1.39 4 1.00

9 1.39 5 0.86

3 1.33 4 0.96

5 1.10 3 1.00

2 0.95 3 0.87

1 0.69 2 1.00

8 0.64 2 0.92

6 0.00 1 0.01

7 0.00 1 0.01

2007

COMP

Grower H' Richness Evenness

3 1.64 6 0.92

7 1.64 6 0.92

8 1.52 5 0.95

4 1.31 4 0.943

5 1.08 4 0.78

2 1.04 3 0.95

6 0.90 3 0.82

1 0.59 2 0.85

9 0.00 1 0.01

Natural Enemy Biodiversity Indicators

Bees Leaf Guilds- Mites PhytoseidsWasps, Syrphids, Nabids, Reduvids

Aphid PredatorGuilds

CoccinellidsParasitoids Litter Guilds

OP Alternatives More Damaging to

the Environment than AZM?

EPA Must Consider

– Worker Protection

– Residues

– Hormonal Effects

– Environmental Impact

– Ecological Impact

Impact of AZM (COMP) and the Alternative (RAMP)

Insecticides on Natural Enemies in 18 Tart Cherry

Orchards

RAMP sprays significantly

reduced natural enem ies

AZM sprays moderately

reduced natural enem ies

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

400 500 600 700 800 900

Degree Days

Div

ers

ity

RAMP

COMP

Linear (RAMP)

Linear (COMP)

Cherry RAMP vs. COMP Blocks

Table 3: Average Shannon Indexes (H’) by grower for the Yellow Sticky Method across 3 sample periods (pre- & post bloom & pre-harvest) during the season. The grower codes are ranked from greatest to least average H’.

Average RAMP Block Average COMP Block Total Average

Grower H' Grower H' Grower Total AVE H'

9-F 1.70 5-L 2.53 5-L 1.99

6-B 1.51 6-B 2.40 6-B 1.96

5-L 1.45 9-F 1.66 9-F 1.68

8-G 1.41 3-V 1.56 3-V 1.42

3-V 1.27 7-C 1.45 8-G 1.28

4-S 1.00 4-S 1.25 4-S 1.13

1-W 0.99 8-G 1.16 7-C 1.06

7-C 0.67 2-M 0.79 1-W 0.81

2-M 0.53 1-W 0.64 2-M 0.66

S Ave 10.53 13.44* (P= 0.05)

Data that kept AZM Alive: Natural Enemy Indexes

(Diversity = Number of Good Guys : Bad Guys) AZM Blocks Rated BetterThan Reduced Risk Blocks

5

Bottom Line: RAMP DATA had a very Significant Impact

1. AZM or Guthion has many problems– FQPA: Residues- Infants, Children, Preg. Mothers

– Worker Protection

– Pesticide Drift

– Water Issues

– Ecological Impacts & History of “incidents”

2. Exceedingly unlikely that Cherry industry will get another reprieve!

3. Therefore, we must forge ahead into the Reduced Risk Pesticide world!

RAMP-II Management Team Meeting Tomorrow 9-12

“2008 & Beyond:”1. Successful competed for and won a

new 3-year (2008-2010)

Cherry RAMP-II Grant

2. Will require an unprecedented push from the cherry industry…to adopt new chemistries and practices

3. Cherry Industry will require new registrations & MRLs from USEPA

4. Growing Cherries will cost more $

Cherry RAMP-II Management Team MeetingInterested growers are invited to attend…

9-12 Friday 1/18/08 NWHREC

Cherry RAMP-II Management Team MeetingInterested growers are invited to attend…

9-12 Friday 1/18/08 NWHREC

cherry ramp i “had to ’s” mark whalon guthion (azm) used ... · •eco-impacts •cost...

Documents