criteria for ranking evaluations of ir-4 ...ir4.rutgers.edu/biopesticides/proposals/4a.pdfproposal...

Reviewer’s Initials

CRITERIA FOR RANKING EVALUATIONS OF IR-4 ADVANCED STAGE BIOPESTICIDE PROPOSALS-2014

Proposal number/Title/PI: 4A, Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila as a resistance and residue management strategy, Ahmad

The following criteria were established to assist the reviewers in selecting biopesticide projects for funding that: (1) are either in a more advanced stage of development (as opposed to exploratory or early stage of development) or involve expansion of the label; (2) have a high probability of being registered/marketed in a reasonable period of time; and (3) will be useful in meeting pest control needs involving minor crops (uses), including minor uses on major crops.

Criteria Score

(0 to 10 or 20)

1. Adequacy of investigators and facilities.

of 10

2. Experimental design, work plan and preliminary research. of 10

3. Does experimental design allow to determine performance relative to conventional control practices and how the biopesticide might fit into IPM programs.

of 10

4. Evaluation of Budget of 10

5. Relevance of the proposal toward the development of data for

registration or label expansion of the biopesticide.

of 10

6. Evidence of Efficacy. Positive supporting data provided. of 20

7. Probability of biopesticide being used by growers (factors such as effectiveness and economics of use rates should be considered).

of 10

8. Other control measures currently available to control target pest. of 10

9. Probability of biopesticide being registered, time to registration,

and if label expansion, time to market.

of 10 TOTAL* of 100

Funding Recommendation YES ____________ (Check appropriate line) NO ____________

MAYBE ____________ Note: Attach a comment page, should you have specific comments related to the proposal not covered in the above criteria. * There is a possibility of 10 points per criteria (except efficacy=20) for a total of 100 points. A rating of 0 means that the proposal does not meet the criteria at all, while a rating of 10 means it is ideal.

IR-4 BIOPESTICIDE GRANTS COVER PAGE

2014

Proposal Number(For IR-4 Use): Principal Investigator: Ashfaq Ahmad Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila as a resistance and residue management strategy

Institution: The University of Georgia Total dollars Requested (Year 1 only): $24,612

Enter each biopesticide /crop/ pest combination

No. Biopesticide and/or Conventional Product TRADE Name

Active Ingredient

Crop Pest (Weeds, Diseases, Insects)

1 GRANDEVO® Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T and spent fermentation media

Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

2 Entrust Naturalyte Spinosad Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

3 Delegate Spinetoram Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

4 Mustang Max Zet-‐cypermethrin Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

5 Imidan Phosmet Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

6 Malathion Malathion Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

4A

Biopesticide Grants Contact Information Form

Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila as a resistance and

residue management strategy Name Address Phone Number & Fax

Number E-mail Address

Street City/State Zip + 4 Project Director (Principal Investigator):

Ashfaq Ahmad

University of Georgia, Department of Entomology,

463D Bio Sciences Building

Athens, GA 30602 (706) 542-1320 Ph

(706) 542-2279 Fax

[email protected]

Administrative Contact:

Debra Rucker

203 Conner Hall Athens, GA 30602 (706) 542-9001 Ph

(706) 542-0301 Fax

[email protected]

Financial Grant Officer:

Pamela Ray

279 William Street Athens, GA 30602 (706) 542-7223 Ph

(706) 542-7222 Fax

[email protected]

Authorized Grant Official:

Debra Rucker


(706) 542-0301 Fax

[email protected]

Individual Responsible for Invoicing:

Pamela Ray


(706) 542-7222 Fax

[email protected]

NOTE: THIS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE SIGNED. DO NOT DELAY SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL BY ATTEMPTING TO GET THIS SIGNED. THIS IS NOT MEANT AS A REPLACEMENT FOR ANY INSTITUTIONAL APPROVAL PAGES.

4A

I. Grant Stage What is the grant Stage to which you are applying? Early or Advanced

(Check appropriate line)

Early – Biopesticide not yet registered and has not completed the Tier I toxicology data requirements.

X Advanced – the biopesticide is registered or at least has completed the Tier I toxicology data requirements.

If you are applying for any Advanced Stage Proposal, and the product is not currently registered with EPA, provide a list of the toxicology work that has been completed. Ask registrant or have company provide information to IR-4.

4A

II. Introduction (Limit 1 page) Include the objective, description of the pest problem and justification.

Fruit production in the US has recently been challenged with a new invasive insect pest, spotted wing drosophila (SWD), Drosophila suzukii Matsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae). The SWD, a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia (1), is a devastating pest of small and stone fruits. Since it’s first detection in California in 2008 (2, 3), the SWD has spread throughout the United States (4) causing significant losses in crop yield and quality, and risk of even more profound damage. The SWD is highly polyphagous insect (5, 6) and presents a major threat to soft- and thin-skinned fruit crops including cherry, raspberry, blackberry, blueberry, strawberry, peach, and grapes worldwide. The SWD females can produce up to 350 eggs in their two to three week lifetime. Generation time can be as short as eight days leading to 15 generations per year (7). Because of this short generation time, SWD populations can increase to potentially devastating levels rather quickly. Actual loss statistics have been more difficult to generate, however, potential losses due to damage caused by SWD in fruit crops in the United States have been estimated at $850-900 million annually (8, 9).

Georgia is among the top three blueberry producing states in the US (NASS 2012). Since its first introduction in Georgia in 2010, SWD infestations have led to 15-20% loss of blueberry crop annually which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone (Sial, Pers. Comm. with Georgia Blueberry Growers Association). Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment. It can be difficult to determine if fruit are infested by SWD at harvest because they often appear otherwise sound. Unfortunately, currently available traps and baits are useful for determining fly presence only but are not reliable predictors of fly density and fruit infestation risk. While this aspect of SWD monitoring is actively being researched (10, 11), SWD management is currently achieved primarily through preventative insecticide applications (2, 12, 13, 14). The number of insecticides available is limited to those with SWD activity and sufficiently short preharvest intervals (≤3 days) to allow their use on frequently picked crops such as blueberries. The most effective insecticides available for use against SWD are primarily broad-spectrum chemicals including organophosphates, pyrethroids, and spinosyns (12, 13, 14, 15), the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances.

The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. The repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials could lead to: 1) resistance development in SWD rather quickly, compromising the useful life span of these products, and threaten the sustainability of SWD management programs; and 2) failure of growers to export their fruit to the target markets because of pesticide residues higher than the maximum residue limits established by those markets. Additionally, increased public concerns over health and environmental effects of broad-spectrum pesticides as well as ever-increasing restrictions in export markets have led growers to consider newer and environmentally safer options.

In this situation, biopesticides such as Grandevo are candidates as possible effective and environmentally sound alternatives. Grandevo has already shown efficacy against SWD in laboratory bioassays and dose-response in small-scale cage studies, and has been registered for use against SWD in blueberries under FIFRA Section 2(ee) Recommendation. Integration of this product into conventional SWD management programs could be extremely valuable as a resistance and residue management strategy which will not only extend the useful lifespan of conventional products but also help reduce their residue levels due to less number of applications. Therefore, the major objectives of this project are to: 1) assess effectiveness of Grandevo in suppressing SWD populations when alternated with conventional and organic standard pesticides in blueberry IPM programs; and 2) determine impact of Grandevo on residue levels of conventional products on blueberries at harvest.

4A

III. Experimental Plan (Please limit this section to 10 pages)

1. Provide a numerical list of all treatments including the products(Trade names and active ingredients, rate (units), application timing, etc. A majority of the treatments must be biopesticides (see http://ir4.rutgers.edu/Biopesticides/LabelDatabase/index.cfm). If you are not sure, ask.

No. Products Rate Application timing

1. Grandevo – season long

3.0 lbs per acre Weekly applications with a 90/10 non-ionic spreader-wetter type surfactant

2. Mustang Max and Malathion – season long

8.0 fl.oz per acre (Mustang Max)

2 pts per acre (Malathion)

Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Short Pre-harvest Interval (PHI) Program

3. Grandevo alternated with Mustang Max and Malathion

3.0 lbs per acre (Grandevo)



Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Short PHI Program with Grandevo

4. Delegate – season long

6.0 oz per acre Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Reduced Risk Program

5. Grandevo alternated with Delegate


6.0 oz per acre (Delegate)

Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Reduced Risk Program with Grandevo

6. Mustang Max, Imidan (Phosmet), and Delegate – season long


1.33 lbs per acre (Imidan)


Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Export-Friendly Program with maximum modes of actions (MOAs)

7. Grandevo alternated with Mustang Max, Imidan (Phosmet), and Delegate





Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Export-Friendly Program with maximum MOAs with Grandevo

8. Entrust Naturalyte – season long

2.0 oz per acre Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Organically Certified Program

9. Grandevo alternated with Entrust Naturalyte


2.0 oz per acre (Entrust Naturalyte)

Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Organically Certified Program with Grandevo

10. Untreated Control – –

2. What crops or sites will this study be conducted on?

This study will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia.

4A

3. What experimental design will be utilized? (Such as Randomized Complete Block. Will there be a complete factorial arrangement of treatments? Also include plot size, statistical tests, etc. Please see section Treatment lists and design of biopesticide studies on page 40). Note: EPA requires an Experimental Use Permit if the total treated area is above 10 acres. It may also require destruction of a food crop if there is no existing tolerance. Please document the existence of an EUP if applicable.

The treatments will be organized in a randomized complete block design. All treatments will be replicated three times. So, there will be three blocks of ten treatments including an untreated control. The size of each plot for this study will be 0.5 – 1.0 acre. All the treatments will be applied using a standard airblast sprayer. Program efficacy will be measured in two ways. First, we will collect a sample of 100 berries from each plot weekly to measure SWD infestation rate. Fruit samples will be held at 68°F in sealed, vented containers for at least seven days, and the number of SWD larvae and pupae present will be counted. Pupae will be held until adult emergence to confirm species composition. Second, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine pesticide efficacy. Briefly, a single treated branch with both foliage and at least five berries will be collected from each on farm plot 1, 3, and 7 days after treatment (DAT), placed in a sealed paper bag, and returned to the laboratory. Treated branches will then be exposed to ten SWD (five male and five female) in 32 oz arenas provisioned with food (yeast and sugar) and water. Flies will be observed 24, 72, and 120 hours after exposure, and mortality will be assessed. Following 120 hours, the number of larvae present in fruit will be counted. Data from all experiments will be analyzed via a mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA, SAS v. 9.1.3) including random (e.g. replicate and site) and repeated measure (e.g. DAT) effects as appropriate, and Tukey-Kramer HSD will be used to compare the means.

We will then measure pesticide residues associated with season long SWD management programs in order to determine which are least likely to exceed existing tolerances both in the US and with key trading partners. In order to do so, we will collect 50 g samples of fruit in all treatments at harvest (twice per week, 3 DAT and 7 DAT). Samples will be collected wearing single use gloves, changed between each plot, to minimize potential contamination between plots. We have partnered with the Georgia Department of Agriculture’s Pesticide Residue Laboratory in Tifton, GA to conduct all residue analyses following USDA Pesticide Data Program standard methods. Residue data will be collected in ppm or ppb as appropriate.

4. How many locations (field or greenhouse)? How many replications?

These studies will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia. All treatments will be replicated three times. So, there will be three blocks of ten treatments including an untreated control.

4A

5. Describe how this proposal is designed to provide information on how it fits into an integrated

pest management program. (Note: We favor proposals that determine the utility of biopesticides as early season treatments or in rotation with conventional products, rather than only a direct comparison of conventional products versus Biopesticides). Please see section: Treatment lists and design of biopesticide studies begin on page 40. Keep in mind that the data need to be sufficient to determine the value of the biopesticide product to the pest control program. The major goal of this project is to determine the utility of Grandevo in rotation with conventional products currently used in SWD management programs. As detailed in the treatments section, our treatments include Grandevo integrated into four SWD control programs most commonly used by growers including Short PHI Program, Reduced Risk Program, Export-Friendly Program, and Organically Certified Program alternated, and those programs without Grandevo. The results in terms of program efficacy would clearly indicate whether or not the integration of Grandevo into each of the programs resulted in comparable or better SWD control. If the programs integrated with Grandevo show as much as or even higher efficacy than the same program without Grandevo then the Grandevo would be an excellent biopesticide to be integrated into SWD management programs. It will provide an additional MOA to be rotated with other materials for resistance management. It will also result in less total number of applications of other broad-spectrum materials and consequently lower residue levels of those materials on the fruit at harvest.

6. Data collection – (Describe what data will be collected such as crop yields, crop quality, etc. If visual efficacy evaluations will be collected, describe the rating scale used and the evaluation timings). First, we will collect a sample of 100 berries from each plot weekly to measure SWD infestation rate. Fruit samples will be held at 68°F in sealed, vented containers for at least seven days, and the number of SWD larvae and pupae present will be counted. Pupae will be held until adult emergence to confirm species composition. Second, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine pesticide efficacy. Briefly, a single treated branch with both foliage and at least five berries will be collected from each on farm plot 1, 3, and 7 days after treatment (DAT), placed in a sealed paper bag, and returned to the laboratory. Treated branches will then be exposed to ten SWD (five male and five female) in 32 oz arenas provisioned with food (yeast and sugar) and water. Flies will be observed 24, 72, and 120 hours after exposure, and mortality will be assessed. Following 120 hours, the number of larvae present in fruit will be counted. Data from all experiments will be analyzed via a mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA, SAS v. 9.1.3) including random (e.g. replicate and site) and repeated measure (e.g. DAT) effects as appropriate, and Tukey-Kramer HSD will be used to compare the means. We will then measure pesticide residues associated with season long SWD management programs in order to determine which are least likely to exceed existing tolerances both in the US and with key trading partners. In order to do so, we will collect 50 g samples of fruit in all treatments at harvest (twice per week, 3 DAT and 7 DAT). Samples will be collected wearing single use gloves, changed between each plot, to minimize potential contamination between plots. We have partnered with the Georgia Department of Agriculture’s Pesticide Residue

4A

Laboratory in Tifton, GA to conduct all residue analyses following USDA Pesticide Data Program standard methods. Residue data will be collected in ppm or ppb as appropriate.

7. Describe the pests to be controlled, the degree to which they are a problem in your state or region and the frequency that they occur (season long problem, every year, every few years). Fruit production in the US has recently been challenged with a new invasive insect pest, spotted wing drosophila (SWD), Drosophila suzukii Matsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae). The SWD, a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia, is a devastating pest of small and stone fruits. Since it’s first detection in California in 2008, the SWD has spread throughout the United States causing significant losses in crop yield and quality, and risk of even more profound damage. The SWD is highly polyphagous insect and presents a major threat to soft- and thin-skinned fruit crops including cherry, raspberry, blackberry, blueberry, strawberry, peach, and grapes worldwide. The SWD females can produce up to 350 eggs in their two to three week lifetime. Generation time can be as short as eight days leading to 15 generations per year. Because of this short generation time, SWD populations can increase to potentially devastating levels rather quickly. Actual loss statistics have been more difficult to generate, however, potential losses due to damage caused by SWD in fruit crops in the United States have been estimated at $850-900 million annually.

Georgia is among the top three blueberry producing states in the US (NASS 2012). Since its first introduction in Georgia in 2010, SWD infestations have led to 15-20% loss of blueberry crop every year which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone. Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment. It can be difficult to determine if fruit are infested by SWD at harvest because they often appear otherwise sound. Unfortunately, currently available traps and baits are useful for determining fly presence only but are not reliable predictors of fly density and fruit infestation risk. Therefore, SWD management is currently achieved primarily through preventative insecticide applications. The number of insecticides available is limited to those with SWD activity and sufficiently short preharvest intervals (≤3 days) to allow their use on frequently picked crops such as blueberries. The most effective insecticides available for use against SWD are primarily broad-spectrum chemicals including organophosphates, pyrethroids, and spinosyns, the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications.

8. Will the crop be inoculated with the target pest or otherwise be brought into the test system to

ensure that it will be available for evaluation? If not, describe the frequency of occurrence. In this study, the crop will not be inoculated with the target pest. These studies will be conducted on the University of Georgia Blueberry Farms where SWD infestations have been recorded every year since its first detection in Georgia in 2010. However, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine efficacy of the treatment programs.

4A

9. What is the proposed start date and completion date? Also describe this in chronological order in the context of the experimental plan. Proposed start date: March 1, 2014

Completion date: February 28, 2015

We will start working on this project in March 2014 by selecting the blueberry blocks to be used for these studies. We will measure and flag (label) the research treatment plots those blocks, and get our chemicals, supplies and equipment ready for treatments including calibrating our sprayers. As soon as blueberries start to ripen and change their color which will happen anywhere from mid-April to mid-May 2014 depending on prevailing weather conditions, we will start applying treatments on a weekly basis, and more often in case of rain events. We will continue applying treatments and collecting data (as described earlier) all the way until the end of harvest in July or August 2014. We will also collect last batch of fruit samples for residue analysis at the time of last harvest. After completing harvest sampling, we’ll organize and analyze efficacy as well as residue data in the fall through September-November. As soon as results become available, we will share those results with blueberry growers, County Extension Agents, and other agricultural professionals. We will properly acknowledge IR4 as funding source for this study in all presentations, posters, pamphlets, and other digital publications. Finally, we will write progress report along with a publication and submit the final report by the end of February 2014.

10. Describe the test facilities where these studies will be conducted. This study will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia (UGA) blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia. The UGA Blueberry Orchard in Alma has over 25 acres of blueberries dedicated to research aimed at evaluating novel and innovative technologies to improve blueberry production in the state of Georgia. So, the blueberry blocks at the orchard would be available at no cost. However, we will use our laboratory staff and temporary student help to prepare the blueberry blocks and maintain them for our studies because there is no staff to support our research related activities.

11. Budget: Provide an itemized budget, with categories such as labor, supplies, travel, etc. Provide a grand total. Note: Overhead costs are not permitted. Funding is only awarded on a per year basis, if this is a multiple year proposal, divide the budget for each year. Also include a list of support from the registrant and/or other sources. Provide information on other sources of monetary support and in-kind contributions from growers (land, plant material, etc). See the attached Biopesticide Budget Form

4A

12. Describe why this product is needed and why growers are likely to use this product. (Also list alternative conventional and alternative biopesticide treatments)

The current SWD management programs rely primarily on preventative applications of broad-spectrum chemicals including carbamates (methomyl), organophosphates (phosmet and malathion), pyrethroids (bifenthrin, fenpropathrin, and zeta-cypermethrin), and spinosyns (spinosad and spinetoram), the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre-harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. At this point growers and researchers clearly understand that such repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials to control SWD would lead to resistance development in SWD rather quickly and also problems with trade related residue tolerances established by the export markets. In this situation, due to virtually benign toxicological profile and novelty of mode of action, biopesticides such as Grandevo are the most desirable and needed option for growers, and will provide growers with an effective tool to manage both resistance as well as residue problems at the same time. It is therefore highly likely that growers would adopt this environmentally sound alternative into blueberry IPM programs for SWD if results of these studies show Grandevo to be effective against SWD.

Note: See appendix for attachment of additional information.

4A

REFERENCES: 1. Lee, J.C., Bruck, D.J., Curry, H., Edwards, D., Haviland, D.R., Van Steenwyk, R.A., Yorgey, B.M.,

2011. The susceptibility of small fruits and cherries to the spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1358e1367.

2. Walsh, D.B., Bolda, M.P., Goodhue, R.E., Dreves, A.J., Lee, J., Bruck, D.J., Walton, V.M., O’Neal, S.D., Zalom, F.G., 2011. Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae): invasive pest of ripening soft fruit expanding its geographic range and damage potential. J. Int. Pest Manage. 2, 1e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/IPM10010.

3. Hauser, M., 2011. A historic account of the invasion of Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura)(Diptera: Drosophilidae) in the continental United States, with remarks on their identification. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1352e1357.

4. Burrack, H., J. P. Smith, D. G. Pfeiffer, G. Koeher and J. Laforest. 2012. Using volunteerbased networks to track Drosophila suzukii an invasive pest of fruit crops. J. Integrated Pest Management 3(4):B1B5.

5. Cini, A., Ioriatti, C., Anfora, G., 2012. A review of the invasion of Drosophila suzukii in Europe and a draft research agenda for integrated pest management. Bull. Insectol. 65, 149e160.

6. Burrack, H.J., Fernandez, G.E., Spivey, T., Kraus, D.A., 2013. Variation in selection and utilization of host crops in the field and laboratory by Drosophila suzukii Matsumara (Diptera: Drosophilidae), an invasive frugivore. Pest Manag. Sci.. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ps.03489.

7. KanzawaT,StudiesonDrosophilasuzukiiMats(in Japanese).YamanashiAgricultural Experimental Station, Kofu, Japan (1939).

8. Bolda, M.P., Goodhue, R.E., Zalom, F.G., 2010. Spotted wing drosophila: potential economic impact of a newly established pest. Agric. Resour. Econ. Update Univ. Calif. Giannini Found. Agric. Econ. 13, 5e8.

9. Goodhue, R.E., Bolda, M., Farnsworth, D., Williams, J.C., Zalom, F.G., 2011. Spotted wing drosophila infestation of California strawberries and raspberries: economic analysis of potential revenue losses and control costs. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1396e1402.

10. Lee, J.C., Barrantes, L.D., Beers, E.H., Burrack, H.J., Dreves, A.J., Gut, L.J., Hamby, K.A., Haviland, D.R., Isaacs, R., Nielson, A.R., Richardson, T., Rodriguez-Saona, C.R., Shearer, P.W., Stanley, C.A., Walsh, D.B., Walton, V.M., Zalom, F.G., Bruck, D.J., 2013. Improving trap design for monitoring Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Environ. Entomol. (in press).

11. Landolt PJ, Adams T, Rogg H. 2011. Trapping spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura) (Diptera:Drosophilidae), with combinations of vinegar and wine, and acetic acid and ethanol. J. Appl. Entomol. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.2011.01646.x.

12. Bruck, D.J., Bolda, M., Tanigoshi, L., Klick, J., Kleiber, J., DeFrancesco, J., Gerdeman, B., Spitler, H., 2011. Laboratory and field comparisons of insecticides to reduce infestation of Drosophila suzukii in berry crops. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1375e1385.

13. Beers, E.H., Van Steenwyk, R.A., Shearer, P.W., Coates, W.W., Grant, J.A., 2011. Developing Drosophila suzukii management programs for sweet cherry in the western United States. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1386e1395.

14. 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. http://esa.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/esa/jipm/2012/00000003/

15. Timmeren, S. V. and Isaacs, R., 2013. Control of spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii, by specific insecticides and by conventional and organic crop protection programs. Crop Protection 54, 126-133.

4A

Appendix 1 (ATTACHED) PCR Forms. Please fill out the attached Project Clearance Request Form for each biopesticide/crop combination involved in your proposal. (Not needed for Demonstration Stage Proposals).

Appendix 2 (ATTACHED)

Labels – Supply the label or the proposed label of the biopesticide(s) to be evaluated. (Note: Labels of conventional products are not needed.).


Supporting preliminary data (Attach tables, graphs of the current data that coincide with the proposed use. Please include complete efficacy reports and do not only list literature citations. If appropriate, attach the full copy of actual literature. Summarize the significance of the efficacy data. In order to compare your proposed list of treatments to the data make sure the products are identified in the same way or if the names of the products are different, provide a key to all the names so that they can be compared directly. Do not assume the reviewers know which code names or active ingredients match with a given trade name. Avoid color graphs or any low quality graphics that do not copy well in black and white copies. Note: Proposals without supporting data are less likely to be funded.


Attach resume for Principal Investigator and Co-PI’s. Please limit the size of resumes to 3 pages. Please do not submit an exhaustive list of publications. Only those showing experience with the crop and pest in the proposal and any experience with biopesticides.

Appendix 5 (N/A)

If you were funded last year, submit a progress or final report. This must be submitted regardless of whether or not the current proposal is related to the previous one.


Registrant support. Please submit your proposal to the registrant and request the registrant or potential registrant fill out the registrant questionnaire form and submit this to IR-4. Letters of support from the registrant as well as grower or commodity groups are encouraged.

4A

Appendix 1—Registrant Questionnaire Please fill out the first page of this form for each crop/biopesticide combination and send to the registrant. Registrant please return to IR-4 Project Headquarters, Michael Braverman, Biopesticide and Organic Support Program Manager, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635, Tel: (732) 932-9575 ext. 4610, Fax: (609) 514-2612, [email protected] Principal Investigator: _ Ashfaq Ahmad Address: Assistant Professor

Department of Entomology, University of Georgia 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602 Telephone: 706-542-1320 (office), 706-224-5377 (cell)

Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing

drosophila as a resistance and residue management strategy Registrant name and address: Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

2121 Second Street, Suite B-107, Davis, CA 95618 530-750-2800 (phone) Product Name: Grandevo® Active Ingredient: Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T and spent fermentation media Trade Name: Grandevo®

4A

The following section is to be completed by the Biopesticide Registrant. The PCR form is to be completed by the researcher for Early and Advanced Stage Proposals (Due Oct. 21, 2013) 1) Is this product EPA registered through BPPD? Yes X No

2) Is this use covered by your current label? Yes No X

If this product is not yet registered with EPA, describe where you are at in collecting the toxicology data or Stage of the registration process. If this project was previously funded, describe how the registration status has changed since last year. 3) Is label and toxicology work currently limiting product only to non-food uses?

No, Grandevo is exempt from residue tolerances and additional food uses can be added to the label.

4) Assuming the efficacy data are favorable, what is the likelihood that this use will be

added to your label? SWD would immediately be added to the Section 3 label and submitted to EPA.

5) Considering the use rate(s), what is considered to be the farm-level cost for the treatment in

$/acre? The 3 lb/acre rate costs approximately $48/acre.

6) How would you rank the importance of the proposed use compared to other potential uses?

Very high. 7) If you are only considered a potential registrant (do not currently own rights to the

product), rank your degree of interest in this product. N/A

8) Were you involved or consulted in the development of the treatments or proposal?

Yes

9) What financial support are you planning on providing, if any?

$10,000

Timothy Johnson October 15, 2013

Name of Registrant representative Date Global Product Development Director

Title Other comments – Please attach a letter of support for this project by October 21, 2013

4A

FOR OFFICE US ONLY Date: Cat: PR#:

IR-4 Minor Use Biopesticide (*Required Fields)

Project Clearance Request (PCR) Form 1. *Requestor: Ashfaq Ahmad Affiliation: University of Georgia

*Address: Dept. of Entomology, 463D Bio Sciences Building *City: Athens *State/Territory: GA *Zip: 30602 *Telephone: (706 ) 542-1320 FAX: (706 ) 542-2279 *E-mail address: [email protected]

2. *Pest Control Product (Active Ingredient {a.i.}): Chromobacterium subtsugae strain

PRAA4-1 and spent fermentation media (30%) *Trade Name/Formulation: Grandevo®

Registrant (manufacturer): Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc. Method of Production (Fermentation, in vivo, extraction from plants): Fermentation

3. *Commodity (one crop or crop group per form): Blueberry

*Use Site (e.g., field, greenhouse, post-harvest): Field (UGA Blueberry Farms, Alma, GA) Parts Consumed: Fruit Animal Feed By-Products: Yes No__X__ Planting Season: Perennial (already planted) Harvest Season: Summer 2014 State/Territory Acreage: GA % National: Average Field Size:0.5-1.0 acres

4. Insect/Disease/Weed: Spotted wing drosophila

Damage caused by pest: fruit infestation rendering the fruit unmarketable immediately 5. *Why is this use needed?: for resistance and residue management 6. *Proposed Label Instructions

*Rate per Application (lbs a.i. per acre or 1000 linear ft): 2-3 lbs per acre Type of sprayers that may be used (e.g., fixed wing, ground boom sprayer,

chemigation, air blast, ULV, granular spreader): Foliar spray using air blast sprayer Range of Spray Volume (if applicable): 100 gallons per acre Maximum Acreage Treated per Day: N/A

*Crop Stage during Application(s): Fruit ripening stage *Maximum no. of applications: N/A Minimum interval betw. applications: <7 days Maximum lbs active ingredient per acre per year/season: N/A *PHI: 0 DAYS

7. *Availability of Supporting Data1: *Phytotoxicity(P) _ *Efficacy(E) X *Yield(Y)

1Supporting data may be required before a residue study will be initiated. 8. *Submitted By (print name): Ashfaq Ahmad

*Signature: *Date: October 15, 2013

Send this completed form to: IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635; Telephone

(732)932-9575 ext 4610 (Michael Braverman) FAX (609) 514-2612 or e-mail: [email protected]

4A

Final Report Recipients are also required to submit two (2) hard copies of a Final Report consisting of:

A one page Executive Summary describing the project and its accomplishments that could be used in a press release.

A standard scientific format of abstract, introduction, materials and methods, statistically analyzed data in tables or graphs and a results and discussion section.

Alternatively, an electronic version of the Executive Summary and Final Report on a CD in MS Word or PDF format or via e-mail. Send one copy to Bill Barney [email protected] and be sure to copy the IR-4 Regional Coordinator.

The Final Report is due 30 days following the completion of the projection or end of the project period whichever comes first. Any materials published whether print, video, etc. must include language that funding was provided in whole (or part) by the IR-4 Project.

Deadline:

Proposals must be received at the IR-4 Project Headquarters offices, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635, on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, October 21, 2013. The review and selection timing is dependent upon when funds are made available to the IR-4 Project.

Address:

Submit one original copy of the proposal and the electronic version to Dr. Michael Braverman, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635; Tel: 732-932-9575, ext. 4610; Fax: 609-514- 2512; e-mail: [email protected]. Budget:

Provide an itemized budget, with categories such as labor, supplies, travel, etc. Provide a grand total. Note: Overhead costs are not permitted. Funding is only awarded on a per year basis, if this is a multiple year proposal, divide the budget for each year. Also include a list of support from the registrant or other sources. Provide information on other sources of monetary support and in-kind contributions from growers (land, plant material, etc).

4A

$ $ $ $ $ $ NOT ALLOWED $ $ $

BIOPESTICIDE PROJECT BUDGET Project Period: From: March 1, 2014 To: February 28, 2015

Funds Requested Matching Funds

Totals ($)

A. Senior/Key Person $ 0 $ 0 B. Other Personnel $ 17,146 $ 6,480 Total Number, Other Personnel 3 C. Fringe Benefits $ 5,866 $ 0 Total Salary, Wages and Fringe Benefits $ 23,012 $ 6,480

D. Equipment NOT ALLOWED $ 0

E. Travel $ 1,100 $ 1,500 1. Domestic $ 1,100 $ 0 2. Foreign NOT ALLOWED $ 0

F. Participant Support Costs $ 0 $ 0 1. Travel $ 0 $ 0 2. Other $ 0 $ 0

G. All Other Direct Costs 1. Materials and Supplies 500 $ 1,520 2. Publication Costs 0 $ 500 3. Consultant Services 0 $ 0 4. Computer Services 0 $ 0 5. Subawards/Consortium/Contractual Costs 0 $ 0 6. Equipment or Facility Rental/User Fees 0 $ 0 7. Alterations and Renovations $ 0 8. Other 1 0 $ 0 9. Other 2 0 $ 0 10. Other 3 0 $ 0

Total Direct Costs $24,612 $10,000

**Each budget item requires documentation** **IMPORTANT** On a separate sheet provide the following information: Project title, PI name and one paragraph statement of work Identify each budget item individually - provide cost and a written description and/or purpose for the cost. For rentals and fees: identify type of rental or fee and provide rental rate & purpose for the cost Any contractual work will require a separate budget and statement of work including rate and purpose

The Other category MAY NOT include construction or indirect overhead. These costs are not permitted,

under any circumstances, under this grant. 1Indicate in a footnote if the matching funds are monetary or in kind and their source. Please enter all values to the nearest hundred dollars.

4A

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

Total funds for this project are estimated at $34,612 out of which the manufacturer Marrone Bio Innovations Inc. has agreed to provide $10,000 in matching funds. Thus, we are requesting a total of $24,612 from the IR-4 Biopesticides Research Program for this project.

Budget items:

Salary:

We are requesting a Research Professional I at 33.33% for 12 months ($10,666), and two student helpers for the field season. The identified Research Professional I is currently working in the laboratory and her salary is $2,666.67 per month at 100%. Heather received her BS in Biology from UC Davis and has previously worked with SWD related projects in the laboratory of Dr. Frank Zalom. She will work on this project under the direct supervision of the PI, Dr. Ashfaq Ahmad Sial. The fringe benefits for Research Professional I are assessed at 55% based on the UGA current benefit rate ($5,866). Wages for each of the two student assistants are estimated at $9 per hour and 40 hours per week for a period of 18 weeks ($6,480 per student assistant). The matching funds from the manufacturer would pay for one of the two student assistants at $6,480.

Domestic travel:

The travel funds to visit field sites for this project were estimated at $2,600 per year. Travel for field research has been estimated using a $0.565 per mile reimbursement, as described at the UGA website: http://www.busfin.uga.edu/accounts_payable/mileage_reimburse.html. The proposed field sites, the UGA Blueberry Farm is located in Alma, GA which is 200 miles from our lab located at UGA main campus in Athens, GA. The number is estimated at 8 trips to the UGA Blueberry Farms during the field season each with one overnight stay in hotel ($90 per night) at an average 400 miles round trip per visit ($0.565 × 400 × 8) + ($90 × 8) = 2528; rounded to a $2,600). Matching funds would cover some of the travel to field sites ($1,500).

Materials and supplies:

Materials and supplies were estimated at $2,020 for laboratory consumables and disposables (chemicals, plastic/glass ware, sample bags, protective clothing and materials for sample collections, and sample processing. Matching funds would cover some of the supplies for this project ($1520)

Publications:

Publication costs: (for one publication) were set at $500 per publication, based on recent charges (page charges and reprints) for journals in the Entomological Society of America, and matichng funds would cover all that.

Indirect overhead costs are not allowed.

4A

On a separate sheet provide the following information: Project title, PI name and one paragraph statement of work

Project Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila

as a resistance and residue management strategy

Principal Investigator (PI): Ashfaq Ahmad, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602.

Spotted wing drosophila (SWD), a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia, has emerged as a threat to small and stone fruit production in the United States. Since it’s first detection in 2008 in California, it has spread throughout the United States causing significant economic losses which have been estimated at $850-900 million annually. Georgia being one of the top three blueberry producing states in the US has suffered 15-20% loss of blueberry crop annually which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone. Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment, which has led growers to make calendar day weekly applications of broad-spectrum insecticides as a preventative measure, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. The use of those broad-spectrum chemicals is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre-harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. However, growers clearly understand that such repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials would lead to resistance development in SWD rather quickly, compromising the useful life span of these products and threaten the sustainability of SWD management programs, and also cause problems with trade related residue tolerances established by the export markets. In this situation, biopesticides such as Grandevo are candidates as possible effective and environmentally sound alternatives. Grandevo has already shown efficacy against SWD in laboratory bioassays and dose-response in small-scale cage studies, and has been registered for use against SWD in blueberries under FIFRA Section 2(ee) Recommendation. Integration of this product into SWD management programs could be extremely valuable as a resistance and residue management strategy which will not only extend the useful lifespan of currently used products but also help reduce their residue levels due to less number of applications. Therefore, in this project we propose to determine the effectiveness of Grandevo in suppressing SWD populations when used in combination with existing conventional as well as organic standard pesticides in blueberry IPM programs, and the impact of Grandevo on residue levels of conventional products on blueberries at harvest. If effective, we believe that due to virtually benign toxicological profile and novelty of mode of action, Grandevo will provide growers with an effective tool to manage both resistance as well as residue problems at the same time.

4A

1

Active Ingredient: Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T

and spent fermentation media*…. ………………………………….... 30.0%

Other ingredients: …………………………………………………………………………. 70.0%

Total:…… ………………..……………………………………………………………….. 100.0%

*Contains not less than 1000 Cabbage Looper Killing Units (CLKU)/mg. Note: The percent active ingredient does

not indicate product performance and potency measurements are not federally standardized.

EPA Reg. No.: 84059-17 EPA Est. No.: 39578-TX-1

EPA Est. No.: 84059-MI-001

KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN

CAUTION FIRST AID

IF IN EYES:

Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15 – 20 minutes. Remove

contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye.

Call a poison control center or doctor for treatment advice.

IF INHALED: Move person to fresh air.

If person is not breathing, call 911 or an ambulance, then give artificial respiration,

preferably mouth-to-mouth if possible.

Call a poison control center or doctor for further treatment advice.

IF SWALLOWED: Call a poison control center or doctor immediately for treatment advice.

Have person sip a glass of water if able to swallow.

Do not induce vomiting unless told to do so by the poison control center or doctor.

Do not give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.

IF ON SKIN OR

CLOTHING: Take off contaminated clothing.

Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15 – 20 minutes.


HOT LINE NUMBER

Have the product container or label with you when calling a poison control center or doctor, or going for

treatment. You may also contact 1-800-222-1222 for emergency medical treatment information.

PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS

HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION: Causes moderate eye irritation. Harmful if inhaled, swallowed or absorbed through the skin. Avoid contact with skin,

eyes or clothing. Avoid breathing dust or spray mist. Wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling and before eating, drinking,

chewing gum, using tobacco or using the toilet. Remove and wash contaminated clothing before reuse.

PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE)

Applicators and other handlers must wear:

● long-sleeved shirt and long pants

● waterproof gloves

● shoes plus socks

● protective eyewear

Mixer/loaders and applicators must wear a dust/mist filtering respirator meeting NIOSH standards of at least N-95, R-95, or P-95.

Repeated exposure to high concentrations of microbial proteins can cause allergic sensitization. Follow the manufacturer’s

instructions for cleaning/maintaining PPE. If no such instructions for washables are available, use detergent and hot water. Keep and

wash PPE separately from other laundry.

Engineering Controls: When handlers use closed systems, enclosed cabs or aircraft in a manner that meets the requirements listed in

the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides [40 CFR 170.240(d)(4-6)], the handler PPE requirements may be

reduced or modified as specified in the WPS.

2121 Second St., Ste. B-107

Davis, CA 95618 USA

[email protected]

NET WEIGHT: 5 lb, 30 lb, ____

GRA-13-03 Lot #:

4A

2

IMPORTANT: When reduced PPE is worn because a closed system is being used, handlers must be provided all PPE specified

above for "applicators and other handlers" and have such PPE immediately available for use in an emergency, such as a spill or

equipment breakdown.

USER SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS

Users should:

● Remove clothing/PPE immediately if pesticide gets inside. Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing.

● Remove PPE immediately after handling this product. Wash the outside of gloves before removing. As soon as

possible, wash thoroughly and change into clean clothing.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

This product is toxic to aquatic invertebrates. Drift and runoff may be hazardous to aquatic organisms in water adjacent to treated

areas.

This product is toxic to certain nontarget terrestrial arthropods. Minimize spray drift away from target area to reduce effects to

nontarget insects.

For terrestrial uses: Do not apply directly to water, or to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean high

water mark. Do not contaminate water when disposing of equipment washwater or rinsate.

DIRECTIONS FOR USE

It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. For any requirements specific to your

State or Tribe, consult the State or Tribal agency responsible for pesticide regulation. Do not apply this product in a way that will

contact workers or other persons, either directly or through drift. Only protected handlers may be in the area during application.

AGRICULTURAL USE REQUIREMENTS

Use this product only in accordance with its labeling and with the Worker Protection Standard, 40 CFR Part 170. This

Standard contains requirements for the protection of agricultural workers on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses, and

handlers of agricultural pesticides. It contains requirements for training, decontamination, notification, and emergency

assistance. It also contains specific instructions and exceptions pertaining to the statements on this label about personal

protective equipment (PPE) and restricted-entry interval. The requirements in this box only apply to uses of this product that

are covered by the Worker Protection Standard.

Do not enter or allow worker entry into treated areas during the restricted-entry interval (REI) of 4 hours.

PPE required for early entry to treated areas (that is permitted under the Worker Protection Standard and that involves

contact with anything that has been treated, such as plants, soil or water) is:

● Coveralls

● Waterproof gloves

● Shoes plus socks

● Protective eyewear

EXCEPTION: If the product is soil incorporated or soil injected, the Worker Protection Standard, under certain

circumstances, allows workers to enter the treated area if there will be no contact with anything that has been treated.

NON-AGRICULTURAL USE REQUIREMENTS

The requirements in this box apply to uses of this product that are not within the scope of the Worker Protection Standard for

agricultural pesticides (40 CFR Part 170). The WPS applies when this product is used to produce agricultural plants on

farms, forests, nurseries or greenhouses.

Keep unprotected persons out of treated areas until sprays have dried.

PRODUCT INFORMATION

GRANDEVO® is a biological insecticide/miticide containing fermentation solids of Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1

T for use

on edible crops against the pests listed in the Directions for Use section. GRANDEVO® functions primarily as a stomach poison for use in

the control or suppression of many foliar-feeding pests, including caterpillars, and certain coleopteran. GRANDEVO®

has multiple effects,

including reducing fecundity and oviposition, deterring feeding and acting as a stomach poison on Homoptera and Hemiptera, such as

aphids, psyllids, whiteflies, Lygus and mealybugs, and on thrips and phytophagous mites infesting labeled crops or use sites.

GRANDEVO® must be mixed with water and applied as a foliar spray with ground or aerial equipment equipped for conventional

insecticide spraying or by chemigation.

GRANDEVO® can be used in the field or greenhouse for the control of any labeled pest.

USE INSTRUCTIONS

GRANDEVO® is a biological insecticide/miticide for use against listed insects and mites. Close scouting and early attention to infestations

is highly recommended. For insects and mites, proper timing of application targeting new populations or recently hatched larvae and

nymphs is important for optimal results. Applying GRANDEVO® when pest populations are low is recommended.

4A

3

This product temporarily repels honey bees, for up to 4 to 6 days after spraying. When needed, time applications so that pollination is not

disrupted.

For insects and mites, thorough coverage of infested plant parts is necessary for effective control. GRANDEVO® does not have systemic

activity. For some crops, directed drop nozzles by ground machine are required.

Under heavy pest populations, apply a knockdown insecticide prior to or in a tank mix with GRANDEVO®, use the higher label rates,

shorten the spray interval, and/or increase the spray volume to improve coverage.

Repeat applications at an interval sufficient to maintain control, depending upon plant growth rate, insect and mite activity, and other

factors. If attempting to control an insect population with a single application, make the treatment when egg hatch is essentially complete

but when larvae or nymphs are young and before economic damage occurs.

To enhance control, consider tank mixing with contact insecticides/miticides. Use the lower label rates of GRANDEVO®

when

populations are low and when tank mixing with other insecticides/miticides. Use the higher rates of GRANDEVO® when applied stand-

alone, when populations are high or when egg numbers are high.

For hard-to-wet crops, consider using a spreader/sticker or adjuvant, which has been approved for targeted crop use, to enhance coverage

and adhesion of GRANDEVO® to the crop.

GRANDEVO® has been evaluated for phytotoxicity on a variety of crops under various normal growing conditions. However, testing all

crop varieties, in all mixtures and combinations, is not feasible. Prior to treating entire crop, test a small portion of the crop for sensitivity.

GROUND AND AERIAL APPLICATIONS

Apply GRANDEVO® in ground and aerial equipment with quantities of water sufficient to provide thorough coverage of infested plant

parts. The amount of water needed per acre will depend upon crop development, weather, application equipment, and local experience.

Do not spray when wind speed favors drift beyond the area intended for use.

Avoiding spray drift is the responsibility of the applicator.

Mixing directions

Important - Do not add GRANDEVO® to the tank mix before introducing 3/4 of the desired amount of water. Add water to mix tank.

Start the mechanical or hydraulic agitation to provide moderate circulation before adding GRANDEVO®. Add the desired volume of

GRANDEVO® to the mix tank and continue circulation while adding the remainder of the water. Maintain circulation while loading and

spraying. Do not mix more GRANDEVO® than can be used in 24 hours. Use a strainer no finer than 50 mesh in conventional spray

systems.

Spray volume

For conventional air and ground applications, use at least 10 gallons of total volume per acre in water-based sprays.

Tank mixing

Do not combine GRANDEVO® in the spray tank with other pesticides, surfactants, adjuvants, or fertilizers if there has been no previous

experience or use of the combination to show it is physically compatible, effective, and non-injurious under your use conditions. Observe

the most restrictive of the labeling limitations and precautions of all products used in mixtures.

To ensure compatibility of tank mix combinations, they must be evaluated prior to use. To determine the physical compatibility of this

product with other products, use a jar test. Using a quart jar, add the proportionate amounts of the products to one quart of water with

agitation. Add dry formulations first, then flowables, and then emulsifiable concentrates last. After thoroughly mixing, let this mixture

stand for 5 minutes. If the combination remains mixed or can be readily remixed, it is physically compatible. Once compatibility has been

proven, use the same procedure for adding required ingredients to the spray tank.

AERIAL DRIFT REDUCTION INFORMATION

GENERAL: Avoiding spray drift at the application site is the responsibility of the applicator. The interaction of many equipment- and

weather-related factors determine the potential for spray drift. The applicator and the grower are responsible for considering all these

factors when making decisions. Where states have more stringent regulations, they should be observed.

Do not apply directly to aquatic habitats (such as, but not limited to, lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams, marshes, ponds, estuaries, and

commercial fish ponds).

INFORMATION ON DROPLET SIZE: Use only medium or coarser spray nozzles according to ASAE (S572) definition for standard

nozzles. In conditions of low humidity and high temperatures, applicators should use a coarser droplet size. The most effective way to

reduce drift potential is to apply large droplets. The best drift management strategy is to apply the largest droplets that will provide

sufficient coverage and control. Applying larger droplets reduces drift potential, but will not prevent drift if applications are made

improperly, or under unfavorable environmental conditions (see Wind, Temperature and Humidity, and Temperature Inversions).

CONTROLLING DROPLET SIZE: Volume - Use high flow rate nozzles to apply the highest practical spray volume. Nozzles with

higher rated flows produce larger droplets. Pressure - Do not exceed the nozzle manufacturer's specified pressures. For many nozzle types,

lower pressure produces larger droplets. When high flow rates are needed, use higher flow rate nozzles instead of increasing pressure.

4A

4

Number of Nozzles - Use the minimum number of nozzles that provide uniform coverage. Nozzle Orientation - Orienting nozzles so that

the spray is released parallel to the airstream produces larger droplets than other orientations and is the recommended practice. Significant

deflection from horizontal will reduce droplet size and increase drift potential. Nozzle Type - Use a nozzle type that is designed for the

intended application. With most nozzle types, narrower spray angles produce larger droplets. Consider using low-drift nozzles. Solid

stream nozzles oriented straight back produce the largest droplets and the lowest drift.

BOOM WIDTH: For aerial applications, the boom width must not exceed 75% of the wingspan or 90% of the rotary blade.

APPLICATION HEIGHT: Do not make applications at a height greater than 10 feet above the top of the largest plants unless a greater

height is required for aircraft safety. Making applications at the lowest height that is safe reduces exposure of droplets to evaporation and

wind. If application includes a no-spray zone, do not release spray at a height greater than 10 feet above the ground or crop canopy.

SWATH ADJUSTMENT: When applications are made with a crosswind, the swath will be displaced downward. Therefore, on the

upwind and downwind edges of the field, the applicator must compensate for this displacement by adjusting the path of the aircraft

upwind. Swath adjustment distance should increase with increasing drift potential (higher wind, smaller drops, etc.).

WIND: Only apply this product if the wind direction favors on-target deposition. Do not apply when the wind velocity exceeds 15 mph.

Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2 - 10 mph. However, many factors, including droplet size and equipment type, determine

drift potential at any given speed. Application should be avoided below 2 mph due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential.

NOTE: Local terrain can influence wind patterns. Every applicator should be familiar with local wind patterns and how they affect spray

drift.

TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY: When making applications in low relative humidity, set up equipment to produce larger droplets

to compensate for evaporation. Droplet evaporation is most severe when conditions are both hot and dry.

TEMPERATURE INVERSIONS: Do not apply during a temperature inversion because drift potential is high. Temperature inversions

restrict vertical air mixing, which causes small, suspended droplets to remain in a concentrated cloud. This cloud can move in

unpredictable directions due to the light variable winds common during inversions. Temperature inversions are characterized by increasing

temperatures with altitude and are common on nights with limited cloud cover and light to no wind. They begin to form as the sun sets and

often continue into the morning. Their presence can be indicated by ground fog; however, if fog is not present, inversions can also be

identified by the movement of smoke from a ground source or an aircraft smoke generator. Smoke that layers and moves laterally in a

concentrated cloud (under low wind conditions) indicates an inversion, while smoke that moves upward and rapidly dissipates indicates

good vertical air mixing.

SENSITIVE AREAS: The pesticide should only be applied when the potential for drift to adjacent sensitive areas (e.g. residential areas,

bodies of water, known habitat for threatened or endangered species, non-target crops) is minimal (e.g. when wind is blowing away from

the sensitive areas). Do not allow spray to drift from the application site and contact people, structures people occupy at any time and the

associated property, parks and recreation areas, non-target crops, aquatic and wetland areas, woodlands, pastures, rangelands, or animals.

CHEMIGATION USE DIRECTIONS Spray preparation

First, prepare a suspension of GRANDEVO® in a mix tank. Fill tank with ¾ of the amount of water for the area to be treated. Start

mechanical or hydraulic agitation. Add the required amount of GRANDEVO®, and then the remaining volume of water. Then, set the

sprinkler to deliver a minimum of 0.1 to 0.3 inch of water per acre. Start sprinkler and uniformly inject the suspension of GRANDEVO®

into the irrigation water line so as to deliver the desired rate of GRANDEVO® per acre. Inject the suspension of GRANDEVO

® with a

positive displacement pump into the main line ahead of a right angle turn to ensure adequate mixing. GRANDEVO® is to be metered

continuously for the duration of the water application. If you have questions about calibration, you should contact State Extension Service

specialists, equipment manufacturers or other experts.

Do not combine GRANDEVO® with other pesticides, surfactants, adjuvants, or fertilizers for application through chemigation equipment

unless prior experience has shown the combination to be physically compatible, effective and non-injurious under your conditions of use.

General Requirements -

1) Apply this product only through sprinkler, including center pivot, lateral move, end tow, side (wheel) roll, traveler, big gun,

solid set, or hand move irrigation systems. Do not apply this product through any other type of irrigation system.

2) Crop injury, lack of effectiveness, or illegal pesticide residues in the crop can result from non-uniform distribution of treated

water.

3) If you have questions about calibration, you should contact State Extension Service specialists, equipment manufacturers or

other experts.

4) Do not connect an irrigation system (including greenhouse systems) used for pesticide application to a public water system

unless the pesticide label-prescribed safety devices for public water systems are in place.

5) A person knowledgeable of the chemigation system and responsible for its operation, or under the supervision of the

responsible person, shall shut the system down and make necessary adjustments should the need arise.

Specific Requirements for Chemigation Systems Connected to Public Water Systems -

1) Public water system means a system for the provision to the public of piped water for human consumption if such system has

at least 15 service connections or regularly serves an average of at least 25 individuals daily at least 60 days out of the year.

2) Chemigation systems connected to public water systems must contain a functional, reduced-pressure zone, backflow

4A

5

preventer (RPZ) or the functional equivalent in the water supply line upstream from the point of pesticide introduction. As an

option to the RPZ, the water from the public water system should be discharged into a reservoir tank prior to pesticide

introduction. There shall be a complete physical break (air gap) between the flow outlet end of the fill pipe and the top or

overflow rim of the reservoir tank of at least twice the inside diameter of the fill pipe.

3) The pesticide injection pipeline must contain a functional, automatic, quick-closing check valve to prevent the flow of fluid

back toward the injection pump.

4) The pesticide injection pipeline must contain a functional, normally closed, solenoid-operated valve located on the intake side

of the injection pump and connected to the system interlock to prevent fluid from being withdrawn from the supply tank

when the irrigation system is either automatically or manually shut down.

5) The system must contain functional interlocking controls to automatically shut off the pesticide injection pump when the

water pump motor stops, or in cases where there is no water pump, when the water pressure decreases to the point where

pesticide distribution is adversely affected.

6) Systems must use a metering pump, such as a positive displacement injection pump (e.g., diaphragm pump) effectively

designed and constructed of materials that are compatible with pesticides and capable of being fitted with a system interlock.

7) Do not apply when wind speed favors drift beyond the area intended for treatment.

Specific Requirements for Sprinkler Chemigation -

1) The system must contain a functional check valve, vacuum relief valve and low-pressure drain appropriately located on the

irrigation pipeline to prevent water source contamination from backflow.



3) The pesticide injection pipeline must also contain a functional, normally closed, solenoid-operated valve located on the intake

side of the injection pump and connected to the system interlock to prevent fluid from being withdrawn from the supply tank



water pump motor stops.

5) The irrigation line or water pump must include a functional pressure switch, which will stop the water pump motor when the

water pressure decreases to the point where pesticide distribution is adversely affected.




Application Instructions for All Types of Chemigation -

1) Remove scale, pesticide residues, and other foreign matter from the chemical supply tank and entire injector system. Flush

with clean water. Failure to provide a clean tank, void of scale or residues, may cause product to lose effectiveness or strength.

2) Determine the treatment rates as indicated in the directions for use and make proper dilutions.

3) Prepare a solution in the chemical tank by filling the tank with the required water and then adding product as required. Utilize

agitation to keep solution in suspension.

APPLICATION RATES FOR SELECTED CROPS

For greenhouse applications on the crops and pests listed, use 1 - 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® in 100 gallons of water sprayed until just

before point of runoff.

See specific application rates for each crop for additional details on greenhouse applications and for all other application types.

FOR USE ON THE FOLLOWING CROPS FOR CONTROL OF SPECIFIED INSECTS AND MITES: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pre-harvest Interval (PHI) = 0 days _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Alfalfa (Hay and Seed), Hay and Other Forage Crops

1 - 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® per acre

Alfalfa caterpillar, alfalfa webworm, armyworms, cutworms, European skipper, sod webworm

2 – 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® per acre

Aphids, billbugs, chinch bug, leafhoppers, Lygus, mites (such as clover, Bermuda grass stunt, two-spotted, winter grain), plant bugs, spittle

bugs _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Artichoke (Globe)


Armyworms, artichoke plume moth, loopers


Aphids, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Asparagus

2 – 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® acre

Aphids, armyworms, cutworms _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

6

Bananas


Banana skipper _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables

Broccoli, Broccoli Raab, Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Cavalo Broccolo, Chinese Broccoli, Chinese Cabbage (Bok

Choy), Chinese Cabbage (Napa), Chinese Mustard Cabbage (Gai Choy), Collards, Kale, Kohlrabi, Mizuna, Mustard Greens,

Mustard Spinach, and Rape Greens


Armyworms, beet armyworm, cabbage looper, cabbage webworm, cross-striped cabbageworm, cutworms, diamondback moth, imported

cabbageworm, light brown apple moth


Aphids, billbugs, leafhoppers, mites, plant bugs, thrips, whiteflies, yellow margined leaf beetle larvae

Yellow margined leaf beetle larvae – apply to newly hatched to 2nd

instar. If adult beetles are also present, tank mix with a knockdown

insecticide. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bulb Vegetables

Leek, Garlic, Onion (Bulb and Green), and Shallot


Armyworms, cross-striped cabbageworm, cutworms, diamondback moth, European corn borer, green cloverworm, Heliothis, hornworm,

imported cabbageworm, leek moth, loopers, omnivorous leafroller, saltmarsh caterpillar, webworms


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bushberries

Blueberry, Currant, Elderberry, Gooseberry, Huckleberry, Juneberry, Lingonberry, and Salal


Armyworms, cherry fruitworm, cranberry fruitworm, fireworms, leafrollers, loopers


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Caneberries

Blackberry, Black and Red Raspberry, Loganberry, and Cultivars, Varieties and/or Hybrids of these


Armyworms, beet armyworm, bertha armyworm, green fruitworm, leafrollers, loopers, western raspberry fruitworm


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cereal Grains

Barley, Buckwheat, Oats, Pearl Millet, Proso Millet, Rye, Sorghum (Milo), Triticale, and Wheat


Armyworms, corn earworm (headworm), southwestern corn borer, web worms


Aphids (including greenbug), chinch bugs, mites, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Citrus Fruit

Grapefruit, Lemons, Limes, Oranges, and Tangerines


Citrus cutworm, citrus leafminer, fruittree leafroller, orangedog


Asian citrus psyllid, aphids, citrus blackfly, citrus red mite, citrus rust mite, citrus thrips, citrus whitefly, cloudy-winged whitefly, glassy-

winged sharpshooter, mealybugs, six-spotted spider mite, Texas citrus mite, two-spotted spider mite _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

7

Corn (Field Corn, Popcorn, Sweet Corn and Corn Grown for Seed)


Armyworms, common stalk borer, corn earworm, European corn borer, lesser cornstalk borer, southwestern corn borer, webworms,

western bean cutworm


Chinch bugs, corn leaf aphid, mites, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cotton


Cotton bollworm, European corn borer, fall armyworm, loopers (soybean and cabbage), saltmarsh caterpillar, tobacco budworm, yellow-

striped armyworm


Cotton aphid, cotton fleahopper, leafhoppers, Lygus, mites, silverleaf whitefly, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cranberry


Aphids, armyworms, brown spanworm, cranberry blossom weevil, cranberry fruitworm, cutworms, fireworms, leafrollers, loopers, mites,

sparganothis fruitworm, thrips

Do not apply to flooded fields. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cucurbit Vegetables

Cantaloupe, Cucumber, Edible Gourds, Muskmelon, Pumpkin, Watermelon, and Winter and Summer Squash


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, cutworms, melonworm, pickleworm, rindworm complex


Aphid, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Fig


Navel orangeworm


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Fruiting Vegetables

Tomato, Pepper, Eggplant, Groundcherry, Pepino, Okra, and Tomatillo


Armyworms (including beet and yellow-striped), European corn borer, hornworms, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar, tomato fruitworm,

tomato pinworm, variegated cutworm


Aphids, Lygus, mites, pepper weevil, plant bugs, psyllids, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grape, Amur River Grape, Gooseberry, Kiwifruit, Maypop, and Schisandra Berry


Grape berry moth, grape leaf skeletonizer, grape leafroller, light brown apple moth, obliquebanded leafroller, omnivorous leafroller,

orange tortrix


Glassy-winged sharpshooter, leafhoppers, mealybugs, mites, Pacific spider mite, thrips, two-spotted spider mite, Willamette spider mite,

whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Herbs and Spices

Angelica, Balm, Basil, Borage, Burnet, Camomile, Catnip, Chervil, Chive, Clary, Coriander, Costmary, Cilantro, Curry, Dillweed,

Horehound, Hyssop, Lavender, Lemongrass, Lovage, Marjoram, Nasturtium, Parsley (Dried), Rosemary, Sage, Savory (Summer

and Winter), Sweet Bay, Tansy, Tarragon, Thyme, Wintergreen, Woodruff, and Wormwood


Armyworm, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar


Aphids, mites, thrips, whiteflies

4A

8

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hops and Dried Cones


Armyworms, loopers


Hops aphid, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Leafy Vegetables

Arugula, Celery, Corn Salad, Cress, Dandelion, Dock, Edible-Leaved Chrysanthemum, Endive, Fennel, Head Lettuce, Leaf

Lettuce, Parsley, Purslane, Radicchio, Rhubarb, Spinach, and Swiss Chard


Armyworm, cabbage looper, cutworm species, diamondback moth, green cloverworm, loopers, tobacco budworm


Aphids, mites, psyllids, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Leaves of Root and Tuber Vegetables

Beets and Turnips


Armyworm, cabbage looper, diamondback moth


Aphids, psyllids, whiteflies ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried) and Grain Crops

Adzuki Bean, Blackeyed Pea, Beans, Chickpea, Cowpea, Crowder Pea, Edible-Pod Pea, English Pea, Fava Bean, Field Bean, Field

Pea, Garbanzo Bean, Garden Pea, Green Pea, Kidney Bean, Lentils, Lima Bean, Lupins, Mung Bean, Navy Bean, Peas, Pigeon

Pea, Pinto Bean, Runner Bean, Snap Bean, Snow Pea, Soybean, Sugar Snap Pea, Tepary Bean, Wax Bean, and Yardlong Bean


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, green cloverworm, loopers, podworms, soybean looper, velvetbean caterpillar


Aphids, kudzu bugs, leafhoppers, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Oilseed Crops

Canola, Safflower, and Sunflower (including Sunflower Grown for Seed)


Armyworms, diamondback moth, headworms, Heliothis, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar


Aphids, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Peanut


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, European corn borer, green cloverworm, podworms, red-necked peanut worm, saltmarsh

caterpillar, soybean looper, velvetbean caterpillar



Peppermint


Armyworms, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pineapple


Gummosos-Batracheda Comosae (Hodges), Thecla-Thecla Basilides (Geyr) (Fruitborer) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

9

Pome Fruit

Apples, Crabapple, Loquat, Mayhaw, Pears, and Quince


Codling moth, leafrollers (including fruittree, obliquebanded, redbanded, variegated), light brown apple moth, oriental fruit moth, tufted

apple budmoth

Application timing: optimal timing for codling moth, leafrollers, and oriental fruit moth can vary between species and geographic

locations. Monitor moth flights with pheromone traps and scout regularly to determine larval populations. GRANDEVO®

can be used to

supplement mating disruption programs.


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, pear psylla, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pomegranate


Armyworms, cankerworms, codling moth, cutworms, European red mite, filbert leafroller, fruittree leafroller, gypsy moth, McDaniel

spider mite, obliquebanded leafroller, oriental fruit moth, Pacific spider mite, redbanded leafroller, tufted apple budmoth, twig borer,

two-spotted red mite, variegated leafroller, walnut caterpillar _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Root and Tuber Vegetables

Black Salsify, Carrot, Cassava, Celeriac, Chayote Root, Chicory, Chinese Artichoke, Edible Burdock, Garden Beet, Ginger,

Ginseng, Horseradish, Jerusalem Artichoke, Oriental Radish, Parsnip, Potatoes, Radish, Rutabaga, Salsify, Skirret, Spanish

Salsify, Sugar Beet, Sweet Potatoes, Turmeric, Turnip, Turnip Rooted Chervil, Turnip Rooted Parsley, and Yams


Armyworms, artichoke plume moth, European corn borer, loopers


Aphids, potato aphid, potato leafhopper, psyllids, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Stone Fruits

Apricots, Cherry, Nectarine, Peach, Plum, and Prune


Green fruitworm, leafrollers (including fruittree, obliquebanded, pandemic, redbanded, and variegated), oriental fruit moth, peach twig

borer, redhumped caterpillar, tent caterpillar

Application timing: optimal timing for leafrollers and peach twig borer can vary between species and geographic locations. Monitor moth

flights with pheromone traps and scout regularly to determine larval populations. GRANDEVO®

can be used to supplement mating

disruption programs.


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Strawberry


Armyworms, cutworms, leafrollers


Aphids, Lygus, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tobacco


Hornworms, loopers, tobacco budworm



Tree Nuts and Pistachios

Almonds, Cashew, Chestnut, Filbert (Hazelnut), Macadamia Nut, Pecan, Pistachios, and Walnut


Fall webworm, filbert worm, hickory shuckworm, navel orange worm, obliquebanded leafroller, peach twig borer, pecan nut casebearer,

redhumped caterpillar


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, pecan weevil, whiteflies

4A

10

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tropical and Subtropical Fruit

Acerola, Atemoya, Avocado, Biriba, Black Sapote, Canistel, Cherimoya, Custard Apple, Feijoa, Guava, Ilama, Jaboticaba, Kiwi,

Longan, Lychee, Mamey Sapote, Mango, Papaya, Passionfruit, Pulasan, Rambutan, Sapodilla, Soursop, Spanish Lime, Star Apple,

Starfruit, Sugar Apple, Ti Palm Leaves, Wax Jambu (Wax Apple), and White Sapote


Aphids, avocado leafroller, citrus peelminer, cutworms, fruittree leafroller, omnivorous leafroller, orange tortrix, thrips, western tussock

moth, whiteflies

STORAGE AND DISPOSAL

Do not contaminate water, food or feed by storage and disposal.

Pesticide Storage: Store in original container in a cool, dry place.

Pesticide Disposal: To avoid wastes, use all material in this container by application according to label directions. If wastes

cannot be avoided, offer remaining product to a waste disposal facility or pesticide disposal program (often such programs

are run by state or local governments or by industry).

Container Handling: Non-refillable container. Do not reuse or refill this container.

Completely empty bag into application equipment. Then offer for recycling if available, or dispose of empty bag in a sanitary

landfill or by incineration. Do not burn, unless allowed by state and local ordinances. (For instances where state and local

ordinances do allow burning): If burned, stay out of smoke.

WARRANTY

To the extent consistent with applicable law, the seller makes no warranty, expressed or implied, of merchantability, fitness or otherwise

concerning use of this product. To the extent consistent with applicable law, the user assumes all risks of use, storage or handling that are

not in accordance with the accompanying directions.

Label date: May 13, 2013

Made in the U.S.A.

US Patents No. 7,244,607

GRANDEVO® is a registered trademark of Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

Marrone Bio Innovations’ name and logo are registered trademarks of Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

© Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

2121 Second St., Ste. B-107, Davis, CA 95618

1-877-664-4476 www.marronebio.com [email protected]

4A

http://www.marronebio.com/

2121 S

TO S

FIFRA SThis recomor approve FOR USE ARE REC GRAND

It is a viol GRANDEVstrain PRA

CROBushberrieincluding Blueberry Currant ElderberryGooseberryHuckleberrJuneberry LingonberrSalal All applica

This FIFRAnot appear appearing

This recom

Grandevo

© 2013. Co

Marrone B2121 SeconDavis, CalTelephone www.marr

Second Stree

SUPPRESS S

Section 2(ee)mmendation is med by the U. S.

IN ALL STATOGNIZED.

EVO, EPA

ation of Feder

VO® is a bioloAA4-1T for use

OP es

y y ry

ry

Sp(D

able direction

A Section 2(eeon the packag

on the product

mmendation m

is a registeredopyright Marro

Bio Innovationsnd Street, Suiteifornia 95618 (530) 750-280

ronebioinnovat

et, Suite B-1

TECHF

SPOTTED W

) Recommenmade as permiEnvironmenta

TES WHERE C

A Reg. No. 84

ral law to use

ogical insecticion edible crop

PEST potted Wing DrDrosophila suzu

ns, restrictions

e) recommendage label. Read at label.

must be in the

d trademark of one Bio Innova

s, Inc. e B-107

00 tions.com

107

HNICAL INFFOR THE US

WING DROSO

ndation itted by Sectional Protection Ag

CROP AND P

059-17

DIRECTthis product i

ide/miticide cops.

rosophila ukii)

2-Gac

and precauti

ation contains nand carefully o

possession of

f Marrone Bio Iations, Inc.,

Davis, CA

FORMATIONSE OF GRANOPHILA (Dr

n 2(ee) of FIFRgency.

EST(S) EXIST

TIONS FOR Uin a manner in

ontaining ferme

RATE -3 pounds

Grandevo per cre

ons on the EP

new or additionbserve the cau

f the user at th

Innovations, In

95618

N BULLETINDEVO rosophila suz

RA, as amende

T AND WHER

USE nconsistent wi

entation solids

Ground AppApply Grandspreader-wettusing a wateracre to providplant parts. Rinterval, or mheavy infestaof an integratWing Drosop

PA-registered

nal directions futionary statem

he time of pest

nc.

Phone:

IN

zukii) IN BU

ed, and has not

RE 2(EE) REC

ith its labeling

of Chromobac

USE DIRECTplications: devo® with a 90ter type surfactr carrier volumde thorough co

Repeat applicatimore frequentlyations. Grandevted program fophila.

label are to be

for use of this pments plus all th

ticide applicat

: 530-750-28

USHBERRIE

been submitte

OMMENDAT

g.

cterium subtsug

TIONS

0/10 non-ionic tant, as a foliar

me of 100 gallonoverage of infesion on a 7-day

y under moderavo® should be r control of Sp

e followed.

product, whichhe other inform

tion.

800

ES

ed to

TIONS

gae

r spray ns per sted

ate to part

potted

h may mation

4A

Spo$ed Wing Drosophila

Tim Johnson October 17, 2013

4A

Grandevo® (MBI-203) Evaluations Against Spotted Wing Drosophila

Trt Treatment Rate ApplNo. Name Rate Unit Code1 Untreated ABC 14.12 a 8.53 a 3.29 a 2.25 a2 MBI-203 DF 1 1 lb/a ABC 4.50 b 1.39 b 1.30 ab 1.25 b

Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC3 MBI-203 DF 1 4 lb/a ABC 2.49 bc 0.43 b 0.19 b 0.00 c


Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC5 MBI-203 DF 2 4 lb/a ABC 0.70 cd 0.20 b 0.19 b 0.00 c

Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC6 Entrust 1.5 oz/a ABC 0.20 d 0.36 b 0.00 b 0.00 c

Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC

14 DAA 21 DAA 28 DAA 35 DAA

Number of Drosophila suzukii larvae per berry in greenhouse trial on strawberries

Study conducted by Pacific Agricultural Research in San Luis Obispo, CA in 2012

4A


Number of Drosophila suzukii larvae per 25 berries in small plot trial on European blackberry

Study conducted by Agricultural Development Group near Eltopia, WA, in 2012

Product Rate # maggots/25 berries 6DAT1

Untreated -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐ 5.8 ab

Grandevo 1 lb/acre 2.5 b


Grandevo 3 lb/acre 4.3 ab

Entrust 1 oz/acre 6.0 ab

MBI-‐206 EP 1 gallon/acre 3.8 ab

MBI-‐206 EP 2 gallon/acre 1.5 b

4A

PI: Ashfaq Ahmad Sial Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602-2603 706-542-2816 (office) 706-224-5377 (cell) 706-542-2279 (fax) 706 [email protected] (email)

EDUCATION: Ph.D. Entomology (2010) Washington State University. M.S. Grain Storage Management (2003) University of Greenwich, United Kingdom M.S. Agric. Entomology (Distinction) (2000) University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan B.S. Agriculture Honors (Gold Medal) (1998) University of Arid Agriculture Rawalpindi, Pakistan

EXPERIENCE:

University of Georgia, Athens (July 2013-Present) Assistant Professor (Fruit Entomologist), Dept. of Entomology Cornell University, Ithaca (May-June 2013) Postdoctoral Research Scientist (Fruit Entomologist), Dept. of Entomology University of California, Berkeley (2010-2013) Postdoctoral Research Scientist (Fruit Entomologist) ESPM Dept. Washington State University, Pullman (2006-2010) Graduate Research Assistant (Fruit Entomology), Dept. of Entomology Medway School District, United Kingdom (2003-2005) Science Teacher University of Greenwich, United Kingdom (2001-2003) ACU Scientific Exchange Scholar, Food Systems Department, Natural Resources Institute

ADDITIONAL TRAINING (Total: 6)

Responsible Conduct of Research (Spring 2011) University of California, Berkeley (Course Instructor: Dr. Charles Gross, Professor of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ) Preparing Future Faculty (Spring 2011) University of California Berkeley, Course Instructor: Dr. Clair Krasch, Professor, UC Berkeley (Distinguished Teaching Award 2000, 2008) Research Commercialization (April-May 2011) University of California Berkeley, offered by National Council of Entrepreneurial Tech Transfer in collaboration with NSF and NIH

AWARDS & HONORS (Total: 28) Professional Activity Award 2011 • Henry and Sylvia Richardson Research Grant 2011 • John Henry Comstock Award 2010 • WSU President’s Award 2009 • Robert & Mary Lou Harwood Grad Fellowship 2009 • AAAS Honorable Mention 2009 • Dr. William R. Wiley Award 2009 • ESA Personal Profile Highlight 2009 • Country Adviser to British Council, United Kingdom 2009-2010 • Dr. C. C. Burkhardt Graduate Student Award 2009 • ESA Linnaean Games 2009 – Team Leader • Robert & Mary Lou Harwood Grad Fellowship 2008 • ESA Student and Young Professionals Award 2008 • WSU Excellence Award 2008 • Dean’s Letter of Recognition 2008 • Winner of the ESA Student Debate 2008 – Team Leader (Team Award) • Dr. C. C. Burkhardt Graduate Student Award 2008 • ESA President’s Prize 2008 • Dr. William R. Wiley Award 2008 • Gold Medal (Academics) 1998

RESEARCH & EXTENSION PRESENTATIONS (Total: 49)

Keynote Address: 1 Invited Presentations: 21 Contributing Presentations: 19 Display Presentations (Posters): 8 Extension & Education Events Organized/Participated: 14

‘A’ – invited, ‘B’ – contributing (submitted), and ‘C’ – poster; ‘*’ published abstract with presentation) 1. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. 2014 Southeastern Regional Fruit and Vegetable

Conference, Savannah International Trade & Convention Center, 9-12 Jan 2014, Savannah, GA. 2. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. Georgia Blueberry Growers Meeting, 8 Jan 2014,

Alma, GA. 3. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. WERA 1021: Spotted Wing Drosophila Biology,

Ecology, and Management Meeting, 14 Nov 2014, Austin, TX. 4. A Sial, A. A. Strategies to develop sustainable resistance management programs. In a symposium, “Connecting Our

Past with Our Future. A Look at Past Student Award Winners. Then, Now, and in the Future”, The 61st Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, 10-13 November 2013, Austin, TX.

5. A Sial, A. A. An over view of Blueberry IPM. Guest lecture in Insect Pest Management class, 21 Oct 2013, Athens, GA.

6. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: a threat to Georgia blueberry industry. Brantley County Blueberry Grower’s Meeting, 10 Oct 2013, Nahunta, GA.

4A

7. A Sial, A. A. Blueberry IPM: an overview. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 20 Sep 2013, Athens, GA.

8. B Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila monitoring and management: an update. Southeastern Professional Fruit Workers Conference, 17-19 Sep 2013, Athens, GA.

9. A Sial, A. A. Chemical Delivery Technologies: Engineering, Efficiency, Economics. Georgia Blueberry Sprayer Field Day, 10 Sep 2013, Alma, GA.

10. A Sial, A. A. Insect internal morphology. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 21 Aug 2013, Athens, GA.

11. A Sial, A. A. Introduction to arthropods and insects. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 19 Aug 2013, Athens, GA.

12. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wind drosophila: a threat to Georgia blueberry industry. Georgia Blueberry Growers Association, 25 Jul 2013, Alma, GA.

PUBLICATIONS (Total: 15; Submitted/In Prep: 9; Abstracts Published: 30)

1. Burrus, R. G. and A. A. Sial. 2013. Implications of insect management for human survival. American Entomologist 59(2): 113-122.

2. Sial, A. A., J. T. Hutchins, K. M. Daane. 2012. In-season management of vine mealybug using single application of reduced-risk insecticides. Arthropod Management Tests 37, doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.C16.

3. Sial, A. A., J. T. Hutchins, K. M. Daane. 2012. Effectiveness of mating disruption technologies for vine mealybug management in vineyards. Arthropod Management Tests 37, doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.C17.

4. Sial, A. A. and C. M. Abraham. 2012. Issues surrounding biodiversity: transgenic crops, biological control, and global climate change. American Entomologist 58 (2): 94-104.

5. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2012. Selection for resistance, reversion toward susceptibility, and synergism of chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 68 (3): 462-468. DOI: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ps.2294/pdf.

6. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2012. Baseline toxicity and stage specificity of reduced-risk insecticides, chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram, on obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 68 (3): 469-475. DOI: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ps.2296/pdf.

7. Sial, A. A., J. F. Brunner and S. F. Garczynski. 2011. Biochemical characterization of chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram resistance in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 99(3): 274-279.

8. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Assessment of resistance risk in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to the reduced-risk insecticides chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram. J. Econ. Entomol. 103(4): 1378-1385.

9. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Toxicity and residual efficacy of chlorantraniliprole, spinetoram and emamectin benzoate to obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 103(4): 1277-1285.

10. Sial, A. A., N. G. Wiman, J. L. Buchman, and B. Ohler. 2010. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be incorporated into management programs for insect crop pests to reduce insecticide use while providing acceptable levels of damage against all pests and improve crop yield. Am. Entomol. 56(2): 109-110.

11. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Lethal and sublethal effects of an insect growth regulator, pyriproxyfen, on obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 103 (2): 340-347.

12. Sial, A. A., J. F. Brunner, and M. D. Doerr. 2010. Susceptibility of obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to two new reduced-risk insecticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 103(1): 140-146.

COMPETITIVE GRANT FUNDING: $527, 686.00 (Research, Extension, and Travel Grants as PI /Co-PI)

1. Western SARE Research and Education Grant ($224,051), [2012-2015] Proactive understanding of non-target effects and resistance: key to sustainable management of invasive mealybug pests in West Coast vineyards.

2. Regional Integrated Pest Management, Western Region _ W-RIPM ($93,717), [2012-2014] Proper selection of materials for sustainable management of insect pests in Western vineyards.

3. Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission ($20,000), Improving sustainable controls for insect pests of grapes in the Lodi-Woodbridge district.

4. American Vineyard Foundation ($107, 850), [2010-2012] Mealybug pests and an emerging viral disease: Vector ecology and their role in grape leafroll associated virus epidemiology

5. Western SARE Graduate Student Research Grant ($21,239), [2009-2010] A proactive approach to understanding resistance to novel OP alternatives as a strategy for sustainable management of obliquebanded leafroller.

4A

6. ESA Program Enhancement Funds to organize symposium ($2,618), [2009] Evolutionary arms race of resistance in herbivores to novel chemistries: lessons from native and agricultural systems.

7. Bayer CropSciences gift grant to organize symposium ($1,000), [2009] Evolutionary arms race of resistance in herbivores to novel chemistries: lessons from native and agricultural systems.

8. Washington State Commission on Pesticide Registration ($28,324), [2009] Sustainable management of codling moth and leafrollers in orchards.

9. Washington Tree Fruit Research Commission ($31,241), [2009] Sustainable management of codling moth and leafrollers in orchards.



12. WSU Louis W. Getzin Memorial Research Scholarship ($400), [2007] Cloning and characterization of acetylcholinesterase genes Ace-1 and Ace-2 in resistant and susceptible strains of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).

13. WSU H. S. Telford Entomology Research Scholarship ($250), [2007] Cloning and characterization of acetylcholinesterase genes Ace-1 and Ace-2 in resistant and susceptible strains of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).

14. Association of Commonwealth Universities (United Kingdom) Fellowship (£23,000 ≈ $38,000) [2001-2003], Natural alternatives to broad-spectrum insecticides to effectively manage insect pests of stored-grains. Food Systems Departments, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, United Kingdom

TEACHING/MENTORING EXPERIENCE (Total: 13) 1. Environmental Sciences Senior Thesis _ ES196B (Spring 2013) University of California, Berkeley 2. Environmental Sciences Senior Thesis _ ES196A (Fall 2012) University of California, Berkeley 3. Pesticide Chemistry And Toxicology _ ESPM C148/NST C114 (Spring 2012) University of California, Berkeley 4. Principles Of Integrated Pest Management _ PPSC 441 (Spring 2012) California State University, Chico 5. Plant Protection Science _ PPSC 311 (Fall 2011) California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 6. Plant Protection Materials _ PPSC 353 (Fall 2011) California State University, Chico 7. Mentored Borlaug Fellows from Ghana _ Africa (Fall 2009) Washington State University Biochemical And

Molecular Research Techniques Used In Insecticide Toxicology (Fellows: Brenda Aluda and Jacinter Atieno). 8. Biotechnology In Pest Management _ ENTOM 590 (Fall 2008) Washington State University 9. Sciences For Honors Students II _ SCI 299 (Spring 2007), Washington State University 10. Insects, Science And World Cultures _ ENTOM 150 (Fall 2006), Washington State University

PROFESSIONAL LEADERSHIP & SERVICE

Symposia Organized: 10 (Regional, National, and International Symposia) Manuscripts Reviewed: 28 (For 12 Scientific Journals of International Repute)

PROFESSIONAL COMMITTEE SERVICE (Total: 12 Committees at the Regional and National Level)

Georgia State Committee on Herbicide Procurement • Program Committee for the 96th Annual Meeting of Entomological Society of America (ESA)- Pacific Branch (PB), 7-10 April 2013, Lake Tahoe, NV (Program Chair) • Program Committee for the 58th Annual Meeting of ESA (National), 12-15 December 2010, Town and Country Resort & Convention Center, San Diego, CA • ESA Committee on Student Affairs 2010 (Chair) • Presidential Committee on ESA Website Improvement 2010 • Presidential Committee on ESA Fellows 2010 • ESA Committee on Awards and Honors 2009-2010

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity • Entomological Society of America • New York Academy of Sciences • American Association for Advancement of Science • Entomological Society of Canada • Royal Entomological Society, United Kingdom • Australian Entomological Society • Northwest Scientific Association • Sigma Xi (Elected) • Pi Chi Omega - The National Professional Pest Control Fraternity (Elected) • Pakistan Entomological Society

4A

2121 Second Street, Suite B-107 • Davis, CA 95618 • Phone: 530-750-2800

October 15, 2013 Timothy Johnson, PhD Product Development Director Northeast U.S. and International Marrone Bio Innovations 14 Baldtop Heights Danville, PA 17821 IR-4 Project Headquarters Attn: Michael Braverman Biopesticide and Organic Support Program Manager 500 College Road East Suite 201 W Princeton, NJ 08540-6635 Re: Proposal Titled “Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosopohila as a resistance and residue management strategy” Dear Dr. Braverman:

I am writing in support of this proposal to evaluate Grandevo® alone and in combination with other insecticides for control of spotted wing drosophila on blueberries. Currently, blueberry producers have a limited number of options available for this emerging pest that threatens the economic viability of blueberry production. We believe Grandevo could be a viable component for management in organic and conventional production when used in combination with other products. If this proposal is successful, Marrone Bio Innovations will support this research with $10,000 in support funding. Thank you for considering this grant proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by email at [email protected] or by phone at 570-441-8775. Sincerely,

Timothy B. Johnson Dr. Timothy Johnson Product Development Director Marrone Bio Innovations

4A

IR-4 BIOPESTICIDE GRANTS COVER PAGE

2014

Proposal Number(For IR-4 Use): Principal Investigator: Ashfaq Ahmad Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila as a resistance and residue management strategy

Institution: The University of Georgia Total dollars Requested (Year 1 only): $24,612

Enter each biopesticide /crop/ pest combination

No. Biopesticide and/or Conventional Product TRADE Name

Active Ingredient

Crop Pest (Weeds, Diseases, Insects)

1 GRANDEVO® Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T and spent fermentation media

Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

2 Entrust Naturalyte Spinosad Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

3 Delegate Spinetoram Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

4 Mustang Max Zet-‐cypermethrin Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

5 Imidan Phosmet Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

6 Malathion Malathion Blueberry Spotted wing drosophila

4A

Biopesticide Grants Contact Information Form

Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila as a resistance and

residue management strategy Name Address Phone Number & Fax

Number E-mail Address

Street City/State Zip + 4 Project Director (Principal Investigator):

Ashfaq Ahmad

University of Georgia, Department of Entomology,

463D Bio Sciences Building

Athens, GA 30602 (706) 542-1320 Ph

(706) 542-2279 Fax

[email protected]

Administrative Contact:

Debra Rucker


(706) 542-0301 Fax

[email protected]

Financial Grant Officer:

Pamela Ray


(706) 542-7222 Fax

[email protected]

Authorized Grant Official:

Debra Rucker


(706) 542-0301 Fax

[email protected]

Individual Responsible for Invoicing:

Pamela Ray


(706) 542-7222 Fax

[email protected]

NOTE: THIS IS FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THIS IS NOT MEANT TO BE SIGNED. DO NOT DELAY SUBMITTING YOUR PROPOSAL BY ATTEMPTING TO GET THIS SIGNED. THIS IS NOT MEANT AS A REPLACEMENT FOR ANY INSTITUTIONAL APPROVAL PAGES.

4A

I. Grant Stage What is the grant Stage to which you are applying? Early or Advanced

(Check appropriate line)

Early – Biopesticide not yet registered and has not completed the Tier I toxicology data requirements.

X Advanced – the biopesticide is registered or at least has completed the Tier I toxicology data requirements.

If you are applying for any Advanced Stage Proposal, and the product is not currently registered with EPA, provide a list of the toxicology work that has been completed. Ask registrant or have company provide information to IR-4.

4A

II. Introduction (Limit 1 page) Include the objective, description of the pest problem and justification.

Fruit production in the US has recently been challenged with a new invasive insect pest, spotted wing drosophila (SWD), Drosophila suzukii Matsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae). The SWD, a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia (1), is a devastating pest of small and stone fruits. Since it’s first detection in California in 2008 (2, 3), the SWD has spread throughout the United States (4) causing significant losses in crop yield and quality, and risk of even more profound damage. The SWD is highly polyphagous insect (5, 6) and presents a major threat to soft- and thin-skinned fruit crops including cherry, raspberry, blackberry, blueberry, strawberry, peach, and grapes worldwide. The SWD females can produce up to 350 eggs in their two to three week lifetime. Generation time can be as short as eight days leading to 15 generations per year (7). Because of this short generation time, SWD populations can increase to potentially devastating levels rather quickly. Actual loss statistics have been more difficult to generate, however, potential losses due to damage caused by SWD in fruit crops in the United States have been estimated at $850-900 million annually (8, 9).

Georgia is among the top three blueberry producing states in the US (NASS 2012). Since its first introduction in Georgia in 2010, SWD infestations have led to 15-20% loss of blueberry crop annually which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone (Sial, Pers. Comm. with Georgia Blueberry Growers Association). Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment. It can be difficult to determine if fruit are infested by SWD at harvest because they often appear otherwise sound. Unfortunately, currently available traps and baits are useful for determining fly presence only but are not reliable predictors of fly density and fruit infestation risk. While this aspect of SWD monitoring is actively being researched (10, 11), SWD management is currently achieved primarily through preventative insecticide applications (2, 12, 13, 14). The number of insecticides available is limited to those with SWD activity and sufficiently short preharvest intervals (≤3 days) to allow their use on frequently picked crops such as blueberries. The most effective insecticides available for use against SWD are primarily broad-spectrum chemicals including organophosphates, pyrethroids, and spinosyns (12, 13, 14, 15), the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances.

The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. The repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials could lead to: 1) resistance development in SWD rather quickly, compromising the useful life span of these products, and threaten the sustainability of SWD management programs; and 2) failure of growers to export their fruit to the target markets because of pesticide residues higher than the maximum residue limits established by those markets. Additionally, increased public concerns over health and environmental effects of broad-spectrum pesticides as well as ever-increasing restrictions in export markets have led growers to consider newer and environmentally safer options.

In this situation, biopesticides such as Grandevo are candidates as possible effective and environmentally sound alternatives. Grandevo has already shown efficacy against SWD in laboratory bioassays and dose-response in small-scale cage studies, and has been registered for use against SWD in blueberries under FIFRA Section 2(ee) Recommendation. Integration of this product into conventional SWD management programs could be extremely valuable as a resistance and residue management strategy which will not only extend the useful lifespan of conventional products but also help reduce their residue levels due to less number of applications. Therefore, the major objectives of this project are to: 1) assess effectiveness of Grandevo in suppressing SWD populations when alternated with conventional and organic standard pesticides in blueberry IPM programs; and 2) determine impact of Grandevo on residue levels of conventional products on blueberries at harvest.

4A

III. Experimental Plan (Please limit this section to 10 pages)

1. Provide a numerical list of all treatments including the products(Trade names and active ingredients, rate (units), application timing, etc. A majority of the treatments must be biopesticides (see http://ir4.rutgers.edu/Biopesticides/LabelDatabase/index.cfm). If you are not sure, ask.

No. Products Rate Application timing

1. Grandevo – season long

3.0 lbs per acre Weekly applications with a 90/10 non-ionic spreader-wetter type surfactant

2. Mustang Max and Malathion – season long



Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Short Pre-harvest Interval (PHI) Program

3. Grandevo alternated with Mustang Max and Malathion




Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Short PHI Program with Grandevo

4. Delegate – season long

6.0 oz per acre Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Reduced Risk Program

5. Grandevo alternated with Delegate



Weekly applications as permitted by the label – A Reduced Risk Program with Grandevo

6. Mustang Max, Imidan (Phosmet), and Delegate – season long




Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Export-Friendly Program with maximum modes of actions (MOAs)

7. Grandevo alternated with Mustang Max, Imidan (Phosmet), and Delegate





Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Export-Friendly Program with maximum MOAs with Grandevo

8. Entrust Naturalyte – season long

2.0 oz per acre Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Organically Certified Program

9. Grandevo alternated with Entrust Naturalyte


2.0 oz per acre (Entrust Naturalyte)

Weekly applications as permitted by the label – An Organically Certified Program with Grandevo

10. Untreated Control – –

2. What crops or sites will this study be conducted on?

This study will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia.

4A

3. What experimental design will be utilized? (Such as Randomized Complete Block. Will there be a complete factorial arrangement of treatments? Also include plot size, statistical tests, etc. Please see section Treatment lists and design of biopesticide studies on page 40). Note: EPA requires an Experimental Use Permit if the total treated area is above 10 acres. It may also require destruction of a food crop if there is no existing tolerance. Please document the existence of an EUP if applicable.

The treatments will be organized in a randomized complete block design. All treatments will be replicated three times. So, there will be three blocks of ten treatments including an untreated control. The size of each plot for this study will be 0.5 – 1.0 acre. All the treatments will be applied using a standard airblast sprayer. Program efficacy will be measured in two ways. First, we will collect a sample of 100 berries from each plot weekly to measure SWD infestation rate. Fruit samples will be held at 68°F in sealed, vented containers for at least seven days, and the number of SWD larvae and pupae present will be counted. Pupae will be held until adult emergence to confirm species composition. Second, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine pesticide efficacy. Briefly, a single treated branch with both foliage and at least five berries will be collected from each on farm plot 1, 3, and 7 days after treatment (DAT), placed in a sealed paper bag, and returned to the laboratory. Treated branches will then be exposed to ten SWD (five male and five female) in 32 oz arenas provisioned with food (yeast and sugar) and water. Flies will be observed 24, 72, and 120 hours after exposure, and mortality will be assessed. Following 120 hours, the number of larvae present in fruit will be counted. Data from all experiments will be analyzed via a mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA, SAS v. 9.1.3) including random (e.g. replicate and site) and repeated measure (e.g. DAT) effects as appropriate, and Tukey-Kramer HSD will be used to compare the means.

We will then measure pesticide residues associated with season long SWD management programs in order to determine which are least likely to exceed existing tolerances both in the US and with key trading partners. In order to do so, we will collect 50 g samples of fruit in all treatments at harvest (twice per week, 3 DAT and 7 DAT). Samples will be collected wearing single use gloves, changed between each plot, to minimize potential contamination between plots. We have partnered with the Georgia Department of Agriculture’s Pesticide Residue Laboratory in Tifton, GA to conduct all residue analyses following USDA Pesticide Data Program standard methods. Residue data will be collected in ppm or ppb as appropriate.

4. How many locations (field or greenhouse)? How many replications?

These studies will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia. All treatments will be replicated three times. So, there will be three blocks of ten treatments including an untreated control.

4A

5. Describe how this proposal is designed to provide information on how it fits into an integrated

pest management program. (Note: We favor proposals that determine the utility of biopesticides as early season treatments or in rotation with conventional products, rather than only a direct comparison of conventional products versus Biopesticides). Please see section: Treatment lists and design of biopesticide studies begin on page 40. Keep in mind that the data need to be sufficient to determine the value of the biopesticide product to the pest control program. The major goal of this project is to determine the utility of Grandevo in rotation with conventional products currently used in SWD management programs. As detailed in the treatments section, our treatments include Grandevo integrated into four SWD control programs most commonly used by growers including Short PHI Program, Reduced Risk Program, Export-Friendly Program, and Organically Certified Program alternated, and those programs without Grandevo. The results in terms of program efficacy would clearly indicate whether or not the integration of Grandevo into each of the programs resulted in comparable or better SWD control. If the programs integrated with Grandevo show as much as or even higher efficacy than the same program without Grandevo then the Grandevo would be an excellent biopesticide to be integrated into SWD management programs. It will provide an additional MOA to be rotated with other materials for resistance management. It will also result in less total number of applications of other broad-spectrum materials and consequently lower residue levels of those materials on the fruit at harvest.

6. Data collection – (Describe what data will be collected such as crop yields, crop quality, etc. If visual efficacy evaluations will be collected, describe the rating scale used and the evaluation timings). First, we will collect a sample of 100 berries from each plot weekly to measure SWD infestation rate. Fruit samples will be held at 68°F in sealed, vented containers for at least seven days, and the number of SWD larvae and pupae present will be counted. Pupae will be held until adult emergence to confirm species composition. Second, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine pesticide efficacy. Briefly, a single treated branch with both foliage and at least five berries will be collected from each on farm plot 1, 3, and 7 days after treatment (DAT), placed in a sealed paper bag, and returned to the laboratory. Treated branches will then be exposed to ten SWD (five male and five female) in 32 oz arenas provisioned with food (yeast and sugar) and water. Flies will be observed 24, 72, and 120 hours after exposure, and mortality will be assessed. Following 120 hours, the number of larvae present in fruit will be counted. Data from all experiments will be analyzed via a mixed model analysis of variance (ANOVA, SAS v. 9.1.3) including random (e.g. replicate and site) and repeated measure (e.g. DAT) effects as appropriate, and Tukey-Kramer HSD will be used to compare the means. We will then measure pesticide residues associated with season long SWD management programs in order to determine which are least likely to exceed existing tolerances both in the US and with key trading partners. In order to do so, we will collect 50 g samples of fruit in all treatments at harvest (twice per week, 3 DAT and 7 DAT). Samples will be collected wearing single use gloves, changed between each plot, to minimize potential contamination between plots. We have partnered with the Georgia Department of Agriculture’s Pesticide Residue

4A

Laboratory in Tifton, GA to conduct all residue analyses following USDA Pesticide Data Program standard methods. Residue data will be collected in ppm or ppb as appropriate.

7. Describe the pests to be controlled, the degree to which they are a problem in your state or region and the frequency that they occur (season long problem, every year, every few years). Fruit production in the US has recently been challenged with a new invasive insect pest, spotted wing drosophila (SWD), Drosophila suzukii Matsumura (Diptera: Drosophilidae). The SWD, a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia, is a devastating pest of small and stone fruits. Since it’s first detection in California in 2008, the SWD has spread throughout the United States causing significant losses in crop yield and quality, and risk of even more profound damage. The SWD is highly polyphagous insect and presents a major threat to soft- and thin-skinned fruit crops including cherry, raspberry, blackberry, blueberry, strawberry, peach, and grapes worldwide. The SWD females can produce up to 350 eggs in their two to three week lifetime. Generation time can be as short as eight days leading to 15 generations per year. Because of this short generation time, SWD populations can increase to potentially devastating levels rather quickly. Actual loss statistics have been more difficult to generate, however, potential losses due to damage caused by SWD in fruit crops in the United States have been estimated at $850-900 million annually.

Georgia is among the top three blueberry producing states in the US (NASS 2012). Since its first introduction in Georgia in 2010, SWD infestations have led to 15-20% loss of blueberry crop every year which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone. Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment. It can be difficult to determine if fruit are infested by SWD at harvest because they often appear otherwise sound. Unfortunately, currently available traps and baits are useful for determining fly presence only but are not reliable predictors of fly density and fruit infestation risk. Therefore, SWD management is currently achieved primarily through preventative insecticide applications. The number of insecticides available is limited to those with SWD activity and sufficiently short preharvest intervals (≤3 days) to allow their use on frequently picked crops such as blueberries. The most effective insecticides available for use against SWD are primarily broad-spectrum chemicals including organophosphates, pyrethroids, and spinosyns, the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications.

8. Will the crop be inoculated with the target pest or otherwise be brought into the test system to

ensure that it will be available for evaluation? If not, describe the frequency of occurrence. In this study, the crop will not be inoculated with the target pest. These studies will be conducted on the University of Georgia Blueberry Farms where SWD infestations have been recorded every year since its first detection in Georgia in 2010. However, because SWD infestation could be non-uniform at grower locations, we will conduct parallel laboratory bioassays on field treated foliage and fruit to determine efficacy of the treatment programs.

4A

9. What is the proposed start date and completion date? Also describe this in chronological order in the context of the experimental plan. Proposed start date: March 1, 2014

Completion date: February 28, 2015

We will start working on this project in March 2014 by selecting the blueberry blocks to be used for these studies. We will measure and flag (label) the research treatment plots those blocks, and get our chemicals, supplies and equipment ready for treatments including calibrating our sprayers. As soon as blueberries start to ripen and change their color which will happen anywhere from mid-April to mid-May 2014 depending on prevailing weather conditions, we will start applying treatments on a weekly basis, and more often in case of rain events. We will continue applying treatments and collecting data (as described earlier) all the way until the end of harvest in July or August 2014. We will also collect last batch of fruit samples for residue analysis at the time of last harvest. After completing harvest sampling, we’ll organize and analyze efficacy as well as residue data in the fall through September-November. As soon as results become available, we will share those results with blueberry growers, County Extension Agents, and other agricultural professionals. We will properly acknowledge IR4 as funding source for this study in all presentations, posters, pamphlets, and other digital publications. Finally, we will write progress report along with a publication and submit the final report by the end of February 2014.

10. Describe the test facilities where these studies will be conducted. This study will be conducted on blueberries at the University of Georgia (UGA) blueberry orchards in Alma, GA 31510 situated in Bacon County, the top blueberries growing County in the state of Georgia. The UGA Blueberry Orchard in Alma has over 25 acres of blueberries dedicated to research aimed at evaluating novel and innovative technologies to improve blueberry production in the state of Georgia. So, the blueberry blocks at the orchard would be available at no cost. However, we will use our laboratory staff and temporary student help to prepare the blueberry blocks and maintain them for our studies because there is no staff to support our research related activities.

11. Budget: Provide an itemized budget, with categories such as labor, supplies, travel, etc. Provide a grand total. Note: Overhead costs are not permitted. Funding is only awarded on a per year basis, if this is a multiple year proposal, divide the budget for each year. Also include a list of support from the registrant and/or other sources. Provide information on other sources of monetary support and in-kind contributions from growers (land, plant material, etc). See the attached Biopesticide Budget Form

4A

12. Describe why this product is needed and why growers are likely to use this product. (Also list alternative conventional and alternative biopesticide treatments)

The current SWD management programs rely primarily on preventative applications of broad-spectrum chemicals including carbamates (methomyl), organophosphates (phosmet and malathion), pyrethroids (bifenthrin, fenpropathrin, and zeta-cypermethrin), and spinosyns (spinosad and spinetoram), the use of which is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre-harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. The zero tolerance policy for SWD by marketers has led growers to make calendar day weekly insecticide applications, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. At this point growers and researchers clearly understand that such repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials to control SWD would lead to resistance development in SWD rather quickly and also problems with trade related residue tolerances established by the export markets. In this situation, due to virtually benign toxicological profile and novelty of mode of action, biopesticides such as Grandevo are the most desirable and needed option for growers, and will provide growers with an effective tool to manage both resistance as well as residue problems at the same time. It is therefore highly likely that growers would adopt this environmentally sound alternative into blueberry IPM programs for SWD if results of these studies show Grandevo to be effective against SWD.

Note: See appendix for attachment of additional information.

4A

REFERENCES: 1. Lee, J.C., Bruck, D.J., Curry, H., Edwards, D., Haviland, D.R., Van Steenwyk, R.A., Yorgey, B.M.,

2011. The susceptibility of small fruits and cherries to the spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1358e1367.

2. Walsh, D.B., Bolda, M.P., Goodhue, R.E., Dreves, A.J., Lee, J., Bruck, D.J., Walton, V.M., O’Neal, S.D., Zalom, F.G., 2011. Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae): invasive pest of ripening soft fruit expanding its geographic range and damage potential. J. Int. Pest Manage. 2, 1e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1603/IPM10010.

3. Hauser, M., 2011. A historic account of the invasion of Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura)(Diptera: Drosophilidae) in the continental United States, with remarks on their identification. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1352e1357.

4. Burrack, H., J. P. Smith, D. G. Pfeiffer, G. Koeher and J. Laforest. 2012. Using volunteerbased networks to track Drosophila suzukii an invasive pest of fruit crops. J. Integrated Pest Management 3(4):B1B5.

5. Cini, A., Ioriatti, C., Anfora, G., 2012. A review of the invasion of Drosophila suzukii in Europe and a draft research agenda for integrated pest management. Bull. Insectol. 65, 149e160.

6. Burrack, H.J., Fernandez, G.E., Spivey, T., Kraus, D.A., 2013. Variation in selection and utilization of host crops in the field and laboratory by Drosophila suzukii Matsumara (Diptera: Drosophilidae), an invasive frugivore. Pest Manag. Sci.. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ps.03489.

7. KanzawaT,StudiesonDrosophilasuzukiiMats(in Japanese).YamanashiAgricultural Experimental Station, Kofu, Japan (1939).

8. Bolda, M.P., Goodhue, R.E., Zalom, F.G., 2010. Spotted wing drosophila: potential economic impact of a newly established pest. Agric. Resour. Econ. Update Univ. Calif. Giannini Found. Agric. Econ. 13, 5e8.

9. Goodhue, R.E., Bolda, M., Farnsworth, D., Williams, J.C., Zalom, F.G., 2011. Spotted wing drosophila infestation of California strawberries and raspberries: economic analysis of potential revenue losses and control costs. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1396e1402.

10. Lee, J.C., Barrantes, L.D., Beers, E.H., Burrack, H.J., Dreves, A.J., Gut, L.J., Hamby, K.A., Haviland, D.R., Isaacs, R., Nielson, A.R., Richardson, T., Rodriguez-Saona, C.R., Shearer, P.W., Stanley, C.A., Walsh, D.B., Walton, V.M., Zalom, F.G., Bruck, D.J., 2013. Improving trap design for monitoring Drosophila suzukii (Diptera: Drosophilidae). Environ. Entomol. (in press).

11. Landolt PJ, Adams T, Rogg H. 2011. Trapping spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii (Matsumura) (Diptera:Drosophilidae), with combinations of vinegar and wine, and acetic acid and ethanol. J. Appl. Entomol. doi:10.1111/j.1439-0418.2011.01646.x.

12. Bruck, D.J., Bolda, M., Tanigoshi, L., Klick, J., Kleiber, J., DeFrancesco, J., Gerdeman, B., Spitler, H., 2011. Laboratory and field comparisons of insecticides to reduce infestation of Drosophila suzukii in berry crops. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1375e1385.

13. Beers, E.H., Van Steenwyk, R.A., Shearer, P.W., Coates, W.W., Grant, J.A., 2011. Developing Drosophila suzukii management programs for sweet cherry in the western United States. Pest Manag. Sci. 67, 1386e1395.

14. 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. http://esa.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/esa/jipm/2012/00000003/

15. Timmeren, S. V. and Isaacs, R., 2013. Control of spotted wing drosophila, Drosophila suzukii, by specific insecticides and by conventional and organic crop protection programs. Crop Protection 54, 126-133.

4A

Appendix 1 (ATTACHED) PCR Forms. Please fill out the attached Project Clearance Request Form for each biopesticide/crop combination involved in your proposal. (Not needed for Demonstration Stage Proposals).


Labels – Supply the label or the proposed label of the biopesticide(s) to be evaluated. (Note: Labels of conventional products are not needed.).


Supporting preliminary data (Attach tables, graphs of the current data that coincide with the proposed use. Please include complete efficacy reports and do not only list literature citations. If appropriate, attach the full copy of actual literature. Summarize the significance of the efficacy data. In order to compare your proposed list of treatments to the data make sure the products are identified in the same way or if the names of the products are different, provide a key to all the names so that they can be compared directly. Do not assume the reviewers know which code names or active ingredients match with a given trade name. Avoid color graphs or any low quality graphics that do not copy well in black and white copies. Note: Proposals without supporting data are less likely to be funded.


Attach resume for Principal Investigator and Co-PI’s. Please limit the size of resumes to 3 pages. Please do not submit an exhaustive list of publications. Only those showing experience with the crop and pest in the proposal and any experience with biopesticides.

Appendix 5 (N/A)

If you were funded last year, submit a progress or final report. This must be submitted regardless of whether or not the current proposal is related to the previous one.


Registrant support. Please submit your proposal to the registrant and request the registrant or potential registrant fill out the registrant questionnaire form and submit this to IR-4. Letters of support from the registrant as well as grower or commodity groups are encouraged.

4A

Appendix 1—Registrant Questionnaire Please fill out the first page of this form for each crop/biopesticide combination and send to the registrant. Registrant please return to IR-4 Project Headquarters, Michael Braverman, Biopesticide and Organic Support Program Manager, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635, Tel: (732) 932-9575 ext. 4610, Fax: (609) 514-2612, [email protected] Principal Investigator: _ Ashfaq Ahmad Address: Assistant Professor

Department of Entomology, University of Georgia 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602 Telephone: 706-542-1320 (office), 706-224-5377 (cell)

Proposal Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing

drosophila as a resistance and residue management strategy Registrant name and address: Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

2121 Second Street, Suite B-107, Davis, CA 95618 530-750-2800 (phone) Product Name: Grandevo® Active Ingredient: Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T and spent fermentation media Trade Name: Grandevo®

4A

The following section is to be completed by the Biopesticide Registrant. The PCR form is to be completed by the researcher for Early and Advanced Stage Proposals (Due Oct. 21, 2013) 1) Is this product EPA registered through BPPD? Yes X No

2) Is this use covered by your current label? Yes No X

If this product is not yet registered with EPA, describe where you are at in collecting the toxicology data or Stage of the registration process. If this project was previously funded, describe how the registration status has changed since last year. 3) Is label and toxicology work currently limiting product only to non-food uses?

No, Grandevo is exempt from residue tolerances and additional food uses can be added to the label.

4) Assuming the efficacy data are favorable, what is the likelihood that this use will be

added to your label? SWD would immediately be added to the Section 3 label and submitted to EPA.

5) Considering the use rate(s), what is considered to be the farm-level cost for the treatment in

$/acre? The 3 lb/acre rate costs approximately $48/acre.

6) How would you rank the importance of the proposed use compared to other potential uses?

Very high. 7) If you are only considered a potential registrant (do not currently own rights to the

product), rank your degree of interest in this product. N/A

8) Were you involved or consulted in the development of the treatments or proposal?

Yes

9) What financial support are you planning on providing, if any?

$10,000

Timothy Johnson October 15, 2013

Name of Registrant representative Date Global Product Development Director

Title Other comments – Please attach a letter of support for this project by October 21, 2013

4A

FOR OFFICE US ONLY Date: Cat: PR#:

IR-4 Minor Use Biopesticide (*Required Fields)

Project Clearance Request (PCR) Form 1. *Requestor: Ashfaq Ahmad Affiliation: University of Georgia

*Address: Dept. of Entomology, 463D Bio Sciences Building *City: Athens *State/Territory: GA *Zip: 30602 *Telephone: (706 ) 542-1320 FAX: (706 ) 542-2279 *E-mail address: [email protected]

2. *Pest Control Product (Active Ingredient {a.i.}): Chromobacterium subtsugae strain

PRAA4-1 and spent fermentation media (30%) *Trade Name/Formulation: Grandevo®

Registrant (manufacturer): Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc. Method of Production (Fermentation, in vivo, extraction from plants): Fermentation

3. *Commodity (one crop or crop group per form): Blueberry

*Use Site (e.g., field, greenhouse, post-harvest): Field (UGA Blueberry Farms, Alma, GA) Parts Consumed: Fruit Animal Feed By-Products: Yes No__X__ Planting Season: Perennial (already planted) Harvest Season: Summer 2014 State/Territory Acreage: GA % National: Average Field Size:0.5-1.0 acres

4. Insect/Disease/Weed: Spotted wing drosophila

Damage caused by pest: fruit infestation rendering the fruit unmarketable immediately 5. *Why is this use needed?: for resistance and residue management 6. *Proposed Label Instructions

*Rate per Application (lbs a.i. per acre or 1000 linear ft): 2-3 lbs per acre Type of sprayers that may be used (e.g., fixed wing, ground boom sprayer,

chemigation, air blast, ULV, granular spreader): Foliar spray using air blast sprayer Range of Spray Volume (if applicable): 100 gallons per acre Maximum Acreage Treated per Day: N/A

*Crop Stage during Application(s): Fruit ripening stage *Maximum no. of applications: N/A Minimum interval betw. applications: <7 days Maximum lbs active ingredient per acre per year/season: N/A *PHI: 0 DAYS

7. *Availability of Supporting Data1: *Phytotoxicity(P) _ *Efficacy(E) X *Yield(Y)

1Supporting data may be required before a residue study will be initiated. 8. *Submitted By (print name): Ashfaq Ahmad

*Signature: *Date: October 15, 2013

Send this completed form to: IR-4 Project Headquarters, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635; Telephone

(732)932-9575 ext 4610 (Michael Braverman) FAX (609) 514-2612 or e-mail: [email protected]

4A

Final Report Recipients are also required to submit two (2) hard copies of a Final Report consisting of:

A one page Executive Summary describing the project and its accomplishments that could be used in a press release.

A standard scientific format of abstract, introduction, materials and methods, statistically analyzed data in tables or graphs and a results and discussion section.

Alternatively, an electronic version of the Executive Summary and Final Report on a CD in MS Word or PDF format or via e-mail. Send one copy to Bill Barney [email protected] and be sure to copy the IR-4 Regional Coordinator.

The Final Report is due 30 days following the completion of the projection or end of the project period whichever comes first. Any materials published whether print, video, etc. must include language that funding was provided in whole (or part) by the IR-4 Project.

Deadline:

Proposals must be received at the IR-4 Project Headquarters offices, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635, on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time, October 21, 2013. The review and selection timing is dependent upon when funds are made available to the IR-4 Project.

Address:

Submit one original copy of the proposal and the electronic version to Dr. Michael Braverman, 500 College Road East; Suite 201 W; Princeton, NJ 08540-6635; Tel: 732-932-9575, ext. 4610; Fax: 609-514- 2512; e-mail: [email protected]. Budget:

Provide an itemized budget, with categories such as labor, supplies, travel, etc. Provide a grand total. Note: Overhead costs are not permitted. Funding is only awarded on a per year basis, if this is a multiple year proposal, divide the budget for each year. Also include a list of support from the registrant or other sources. Provide information on other sources of monetary support and in-kind contributions from growers (land, plant material, etc).

4A

$ $ $ $ $ $ NOT ALLOWED $ $ $

BIOPESTICIDE PROJECT BUDGET Project Period: From: March 1, 2014 To: February 28, 2015

Funds Requested Matching Funds

Totals ($)

A. Senior/Key Person $ 0 $ 0 B. Other Personnel $ 17,146 $ 6,480 Total Number, Other Personnel 3 C. Fringe Benefits $ 5,866 $ 0 Total Salary, Wages and Fringe Benefits $ 23,012 $ 6,480

D. Equipment NOT ALLOWED $ 0

E. Travel $ 1,100 $ 1,500 1. Domestic $ 1,100 $ 0 2. Foreign NOT ALLOWED $ 0

F. Participant Support Costs $ 0 $ 0 1. Travel $ 0 $ 0 2. Other $ 0 $ 0

G. All Other Direct Costs 1. Materials and Supplies 500 $ 1,520 2. Publication Costs 0 $ 500 3. Consultant Services 0 $ 0 4. Computer Services 0 $ 0 5. Subawards/Consortium/Contractual Costs 0 $ 0 6. Equipment or Facility Rental/User Fees 0 $ 0 7. Alterations and Renovations $ 0 8. Other 1 0 $ 0 9. Other 2 0 $ 0 10. Other 3 0 $ 0

Total Direct Costs $24,612 $10,000

**Each budget item requires documentation** **IMPORTANT** On a separate sheet provide the following information: Project title, PI name and one paragraph statement of work Identify each budget item individually - provide cost and a written description and/or purpose for the cost. For rentals and fees: identify type of rental or fee and provide rental rate & purpose for the cost Any contractual work will require a separate budget and statement of work including rate and purpose

The Other category MAY NOT include construction or indirect overhead. These costs are not permitted,

under any circumstances, under this grant. 1Indicate in a footnote if the matching funds are monetary or in kind and their source. Please enter all values to the nearest hundred dollars.

4A

BUDGET JUSTIFICATION

Total funds for this project are estimated at $34,612 out of which the manufacturer Marrone Bio Innovations Inc. has agreed to provide $10,000 in matching funds. Thus, we are requesting a total of $24,612 from the IR-4 Biopesticides Research Program for this project.

Budget items:

Salary:

We are requesting a Research Professional I at 33.33% for 12 months ($10,666), and two student helpers for the field season. The identified Research Professional I is currently working in the laboratory and her salary is $2,666.67 per month at 100%. Heather received her BS in Biology from UC Davis and has previously worked with SWD related projects in the laboratory of Dr. Frank Zalom. She will work on this project under the direct supervision of the PI, Dr. Ashfaq Ahmad Sial. The fringe benefits for Research Professional I are assessed at 55% based on the UGA current benefit rate ($5,866). Wages for each of the two student assistants are estimated at $9 per hour and 40 hours per week for a period of 18 weeks ($6,480 per student assistant). The matching funds from the manufacturer would pay for one of the two student assistants at $6,480.

Domestic travel:

The travel funds to visit field sites for this project were estimated at $2,600 per year. Travel for field research has been estimated using a $0.565 per mile reimbursement, as described at the UGA website: http://www.busfin.uga.edu/accounts_payable/mileage_reimburse.html. The proposed field sites, the UGA Blueberry Farm is located in Alma, GA which is 200 miles from our lab located at UGA main campus in Athens, GA. The number is estimated at 8 trips to the UGA Blueberry Farms during the field season each with one overnight stay in hotel ($90 per night) at an average 400 miles round trip per visit ($0.565 × 400 × 8) + ($90 × 8) = 2528; rounded to a $2,600). Matching funds would cover some of the travel to field sites ($1,500).

Materials and supplies:

Materials and supplies were estimated at $2,020 for laboratory consumables and disposables (chemicals, plastic/glass ware, sample bags, protective clothing and materials for sample collections, and sample processing. Matching funds would cover some of the supplies for this project ($1520)

Publications:

Publication costs: (for one publication) were set at $500 per publication, based on recent charges (page charges and reprints) for journals in the Entomological Society of America, and matichng funds would cover all that.

Indirect overhead costs are not allowed.

4A

On a separate sheet provide the following information: Project title, PI name and one paragraph statement of work

Project Title: Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosophila

as a resistance and residue management strategy

Principal Investigator (PI): Ashfaq Ahmad, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602.

Spotted wing drosophila (SWD), a native of Eastern and Southeastern Asia, has emerged as a threat to small and stone fruit production in the United States. Since it’s first detection in 2008 in California, it has spread throughout the United States causing significant economic losses which have been estimated at $850-900 million annually. Georgia being one of the top three blueberry producing states in the US has suffered 15-20% loss of blueberry crop annually which accounts for $14-15 million in Georgia alone. Blueberries produced in the Southeastern states are primarily marketed as fresh fruit in the US as well as export markets and the fresh fruit marketers have zero tolerance for SWD infestation. Detection of a single larva in fruit samples can result in rejection of entire shipment, which has led growers to make calendar day weekly applications of broad-spectrum insecticides as a preventative measure, which are reapplied if feasible in the event of rain, resulting in as many as twice weekly applications. The use of those broad-spectrum chemicals is further complicated by annual application restrictions, pre-harvest intervals, and trade related issues with residue tolerances. However, growers clearly understand that such repeated applications with the similar broad-spectrum materials would lead to resistance development in SWD rather quickly, compromising the useful life span of these products and threaten the sustainability of SWD management programs, and also cause problems with trade related residue tolerances established by the export markets. In this situation, biopesticides such as Grandevo are candidates as possible effective and environmentally sound alternatives. Grandevo has already shown efficacy against SWD in laboratory bioassays and dose-response in small-scale cage studies, and has been registered for use against SWD in blueberries under FIFRA Section 2(ee) Recommendation. Integration of this product into SWD management programs could be extremely valuable as a resistance and residue management strategy which will not only extend the useful lifespan of currently used products but also help reduce their residue levels due to less number of applications. Therefore, in this project we propose to determine the effectiveness of Grandevo in suppressing SWD populations when used in combination with existing conventional as well as organic standard pesticides in blueberry IPM programs, and the impact of Grandevo on residue levels of conventional products on blueberries at harvest. If effective, we believe that due to virtually benign toxicological profile and novelty of mode of action, Grandevo will provide growers with an effective tool to manage both resistance as well as residue problems at the same time.

4A

1

Active Ingredient: Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1T

and spent fermentation media*…. ………………………………….... 30.0%

Other ingredients: …………………………………………………………………………. 70.0%

Total:…… ………………..……………………………………………………………….. 100.0%

*Contains not less than 1000 Cabbage Looper Killing Units (CLKU)/mg. Note: The percent active ingredient does

not indicate product performance and potency measurements are not federally standardized.

EPA Reg. No.: 84059-17 EPA Est. No.: 39578-TX-1

EPA Est. No.: 84059-MI-001

KEEP OUT OF REACH OF CHILDREN

CAUTION FIRST AID

IF IN EYES:

Hold eye open and rinse slowly and gently with water for 15 – 20 minutes. Remove

contact lenses, if present, after the first 5 minutes, then continue rinsing eye.


IF INHALED: Move person to fresh air.

If person is not breathing, call 911 or an ambulance, then give artificial respiration,

preferably mouth-to-mouth if possible.

Call a poison control center or doctor for further treatment advice.

IF SWALLOWED: Call a poison control center or doctor immediately for treatment advice.

Have person sip a glass of water if able to swallow.

Do not induce vomiting unless told to do so by the poison control center or doctor.

Do not give anything by mouth to an unconscious person.

IF ON SKIN OR

CLOTHING: Take off contaminated clothing.

Rinse skin immediately with plenty of water for 15 – 20 minutes.


HOT LINE NUMBER

Have the product container or label with you when calling a poison control center or doctor, or going for

treatment. You may also contact 1-800-222-1222 for emergency medical treatment information.

PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS

HAZARDS TO HUMANS AND DOMESTIC ANIMALS CAUTION: Causes moderate eye irritation. Harmful if inhaled, swallowed or absorbed through the skin. Avoid contact with skin,

eyes or clothing. Avoid breathing dust or spray mist. Wash thoroughly with soap and water after handling and before eating, drinking,

chewing gum, using tobacco or using the toilet. Remove and wash contaminated clothing before reuse.

PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT (PPE)

Applicators and other handlers must wear:

● long-sleeved shirt and long pants

● waterproof gloves

● shoes plus socks

● protective eyewear

Mixer/loaders and applicators must wear a dust/mist filtering respirator meeting NIOSH standards of at least N-95, R-95, or P-95.

Repeated exposure to high concentrations of microbial proteins can cause allergic sensitization. Follow the manufacturer’s

instructions for cleaning/maintaining PPE. If no such instructions for washables are available, use detergent and hot water. Keep and

wash PPE separately from other laundry.

Engineering Controls: When handlers use closed systems, enclosed cabs or aircraft in a manner that meets the requirements listed in

the Worker Protection Standard (WPS) for agricultural pesticides [40 CFR 170.240(d)(4-6)], the handler PPE requirements may be

reduced or modified as specified in the WPS.

2121 Second St., Ste. B-107

Davis, CA 95618 USA

[email protected]

NET WEIGHT: 5 lb, 30 lb, ____

GRA-13-03 Lot #:

4A

2

IMPORTANT: When reduced PPE is worn because a closed system is being used, handlers must be provided all PPE specified

above for "applicators and other handlers" and have such PPE immediately available for use in an emergency, such as a spill or

equipment breakdown.

USER SAFETY RECOMMENDATIONS

Users should:

● Remove clothing/PPE immediately if pesticide gets inside. Then wash thoroughly and put on clean clothing.

● Remove PPE immediately after handling this product. Wash the outside of gloves before removing. As soon as

possible, wash thoroughly and change into clean clothing.

ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARDS

This product is toxic to aquatic invertebrates. Drift and runoff may be hazardous to aquatic organisms in water adjacent to treated

areas.

This product is toxic to certain nontarget terrestrial arthropods. Minimize spray drift away from target area to reduce effects to

nontarget insects.

For terrestrial uses: Do not apply directly to water, or to areas where surface water is present or to intertidal areas below the mean high

water mark. Do not contaminate water when disposing of equipment washwater or rinsate.

DIRECTIONS FOR USE

It is a violation of Federal law to use this product in a manner inconsistent with its labeling. For any requirements specific to your

State or Tribe, consult the State or Tribal agency responsible for pesticide regulation. Do not apply this product in a way that will

contact workers or other persons, either directly or through drift. Only protected handlers may be in the area during application.

AGRICULTURAL USE REQUIREMENTS

Use this product only in accordance with its labeling and with the Worker Protection Standard, 40 CFR Part 170. This

Standard contains requirements for the protection of agricultural workers on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses, and

handlers of agricultural pesticides. It contains requirements for training, decontamination, notification, and emergency

assistance. It also contains specific instructions and exceptions pertaining to the statements on this label about personal

protective equipment (PPE) and restricted-entry interval. The requirements in this box only apply to uses of this product that

are covered by the Worker Protection Standard.

Do not enter or allow worker entry into treated areas during the restricted-entry interval (REI) of 4 hours.

PPE required for early entry to treated areas (that is permitted under the Worker Protection Standard and that involves

contact with anything that has been treated, such as plants, soil or water) is:

● Coveralls

● Waterproof gloves

● Shoes plus socks

● Protective eyewear

EXCEPTION: If the product is soil incorporated or soil injected, the Worker Protection Standard, under certain

circumstances, allows workers to enter the treated area if there will be no contact with anything that has been treated.

NON-AGRICULTURAL USE REQUIREMENTS

The requirements in this box apply to uses of this product that are not within the scope of the Worker Protection Standard for

agricultural pesticides (40 CFR Part 170). The WPS applies when this product is used to produce agricultural plants on

farms, forests, nurseries or greenhouses.

Keep unprotected persons out of treated areas until sprays have dried.

PRODUCT INFORMATION

GRANDEVO® is a biological insecticide/miticide containing fermentation solids of Chromobacterium subtsugae strain PRAA4-1

T for use

on edible crops against the pests listed in the Directions for Use section. GRANDEVO® functions primarily as a stomach poison for use in

the control or suppression of many foliar-feeding pests, including caterpillars, and certain coleopteran. GRANDEVO®

has multiple effects,

including reducing fecundity and oviposition, deterring feeding and acting as a stomach poison on Homoptera and Hemiptera, such as

aphids, psyllids, whiteflies, Lygus and mealybugs, and on thrips and phytophagous mites infesting labeled crops or use sites.

GRANDEVO® must be mixed with water and applied as a foliar spray with ground or aerial equipment equipped for conventional

insecticide spraying or by chemigation.

GRANDEVO® can be used in the field or greenhouse for the control of any labeled pest.

USE INSTRUCTIONS

GRANDEVO® is a biological insecticide/miticide for use against listed insects and mites. Close scouting and early attention to infestations

is highly recommended. For insects and mites, proper timing of application targeting new populations or recently hatched larvae and

nymphs is important for optimal results. Applying GRANDEVO® when pest populations are low is recommended.

4A

3

This product temporarily repels honey bees, for up to 4 to 6 days after spraying. When needed, time applications so that pollination is not

disrupted.

For insects and mites, thorough coverage of infested plant parts is necessary for effective control. GRANDEVO® does not have systemic

activity. For some crops, directed drop nozzles by ground machine are required.

Under heavy pest populations, apply a knockdown insecticide prior to or in a tank mix with GRANDEVO®, use the higher label rates,

shorten the spray interval, and/or increase the spray volume to improve coverage.

Repeat applications at an interval sufficient to maintain control, depending upon plant growth rate, insect and mite activity, and other

factors. If attempting to control an insect population with a single application, make the treatment when egg hatch is essentially complete

but when larvae or nymphs are young and before economic damage occurs.

To enhance control, consider tank mixing with contact insecticides/miticides. Use the lower label rates of GRANDEVO®

when

populations are low and when tank mixing with other insecticides/miticides. Use the higher rates of GRANDEVO® when applied stand-

alone, when populations are high or when egg numbers are high.

For hard-to-wet crops, consider using a spreader/sticker or adjuvant, which has been approved for targeted crop use, to enhance coverage

and adhesion of GRANDEVO® to the crop.

GRANDEVO® has been evaluated for phytotoxicity on a variety of crops under various normal growing conditions. However, testing all

crop varieties, in all mixtures and combinations, is not feasible. Prior to treating entire crop, test a small portion of the crop for sensitivity.

GROUND AND AERIAL APPLICATIONS

Apply GRANDEVO® in ground and aerial equipment with quantities of water sufficient to provide thorough coverage of infested plant

parts. The amount of water needed per acre will depend upon crop development, weather, application equipment, and local experience.

Do not spray when wind speed favors drift beyond the area intended for use.

Avoiding spray drift is the responsibility of the applicator.

Mixing directions

Important - Do not add GRANDEVO® to the tank mix before introducing 3/4 of the desired amount of water. Add water to mix tank.

Start the mechanical or hydraulic agitation to provide moderate circulation before adding GRANDEVO®. Add the desired volume of

GRANDEVO® to the mix tank and continue circulation while adding the remainder of the water. Maintain circulation while loading and

spraying. Do not mix more GRANDEVO® than can be used in 24 hours. Use a strainer no finer than 50 mesh in conventional spray

systems.

Spray volume

For conventional air and ground applications, use at least 10 gallons of total volume per acre in water-based sprays.

Tank mixing

Do not combine GRANDEVO® in the spray tank with other pesticides, surfactants, adjuvants, or fertilizers if there has been no previous

experience or use of the combination to show it is physically compatible, effective, and non-injurious under your use conditions. Observe

the most restrictive of the labeling limitations and precautions of all products used in mixtures.

To ensure compatibility of tank mix combinations, they must be evaluated prior to use. To determine the physical compatibility of this

product with other products, use a jar test. Using a quart jar, add the proportionate amounts of the products to one quart of water with

agitation. Add dry formulations first, then flowables, and then emulsifiable concentrates last. After thoroughly mixing, let this mixture

stand for 5 minutes. If the combination remains mixed or can be readily remixed, it is physically compatible. Once compatibility has been

proven, use the same procedure for adding required ingredients to the spray tank.

AERIAL DRIFT REDUCTION INFORMATION

GENERAL: Avoiding spray drift at the application site is the responsibility of the applicator. The interaction of many equipment- and

weather-related factors determine the potential for spray drift. The applicator and the grower are responsible for considering all these

factors when making decisions. Where states have more stringent regulations, they should be observed.

Do not apply directly to aquatic habitats (such as, but not limited to, lakes, reservoirs, rivers, streams, marshes, ponds, estuaries, and

commercial fish ponds).

INFORMATION ON DROPLET SIZE: Use only medium or coarser spray nozzles according to ASAE (S572) definition for standard

nozzles. In conditions of low humidity and high temperatures, applicators should use a coarser droplet size. The most effective way to

reduce drift potential is to apply large droplets. The best drift management strategy is to apply the largest droplets that will provide

sufficient coverage and control. Applying larger droplets reduces drift potential, but will not prevent drift if applications are made

improperly, or under unfavorable environmental conditions (see Wind, Temperature and Humidity, and Temperature Inversions).

CONTROLLING DROPLET SIZE: Volume - Use high flow rate nozzles to apply the highest practical spray volume. Nozzles with

higher rated flows produce larger droplets. Pressure - Do not exceed the nozzle manufacturer's specified pressures. For many nozzle types,

lower pressure produces larger droplets. When high flow rates are needed, use higher flow rate nozzles instead of increasing pressure.

4A

4

Number of Nozzles - Use the minimum number of nozzles that provide uniform coverage. Nozzle Orientation - Orienting nozzles so that

the spray is released parallel to the airstream produces larger droplets than other orientations and is the recommended practice. Significant

deflection from horizontal will reduce droplet size and increase drift potential. Nozzle Type - Use a nozzle type that is designed for the

intended application. With most nozzle types, narrower spray angles produce larger droplets. Consider using low-drift nozzles. Solid

stream nozzles oriented straight back produce the largest droplets and the lowest drift.

BOOM WIDTH: For aerial applications, the boom width must not exceed 75% of the wingspan or 90% of the rotary blade.

APPLICATION HEIGHT: Do not make applications at a height greater than 10 feet above the top of the largest plants unless a greater

height is required for aircraft safety. Making applications at the lowest height that is safe reduces exposure of droplets to evaporation and

wind. If application includes a no-spray zone, do not release spray at a height greater than 10 feet above the ground or crop canopy.

SWATH ADJUSTMENT: When applications are made with a crosswind, the swath will be displaced downward. Therefore, on the

upwind and downwind edges of the field, the applicator must compensate for this displacement by adjusting the path of the aircraft

upwind. Swath adjustment distance should increase with increasing drift potential (higher wind, smaller drops, etc.).

WIND: Only apply this product if the wind direction favors on-target deposition. Do not apply when the wind velocity exceeds 15 mph.

Drift potential is lowest between wind speeds of 2 - 10 mph. However, many factors, including droplet size and equipment type, determine

drift potential at any given speed. Application should be avoided below 2 mph due to variable wind direction and high inversion potential.

NOTE: Local terrain can influence wind patterns. Every applicator should be familiar with local wind patterns and how they affect spray

drift.

TEMPERATURE AND HUMIDITY: When making applications in low relative humidity, set up equipment to produce larger droplets

to compensate for evaporation. Droplet evaporation is most severe when conditions are both hot and dry.

TEMPERATURE INVERSIONS: Do not apply during a temperature inversion because drift potential is high. Temperature inversions

restrict vertical air mixing, which causes small, suspended droplets to remain in a concentrated cloud. This cloud can move in

unpredictable directions due to the light variable winds common during inversions. Temperature inversions are characterized by increasing

temperatures with altitude and are common on nights with limited cloud cover and light to no wind. They begin to form as the sun sets and

often continue into the morning. Their presence can be indicated by ground fog; however, if fog is not present, inversions can also be

identified by the movement of smoke from a ground source or an aircraft smoke generator. Smoke that layers and moves laterally in a

concentrated cloud (under low wind conditions) indicates an inversion, while smoke that moves upward and rapidly dissipates indicates

good vertical air mixing.

SENSITIVE AREAS: The pesticide should only be applied when the potential for drift to adjacent sensitive areas (e.g. residential areas,

bodies of water, known habitat for threatened or endangered species, non-target crops) is minimal (e.g. when wind is blowing away from

the sensitive areas). Do not allow spray to drift from the application site and contact people, structures people occupy at any time and the

associated property, parks and recreation areas, non-target crops, aquatic and wetland areas, woodlands, pastures, rangelands, or animals.

CHEMIGATION USE DIRECTIONS Spray preparation

First, prepare a suspension of GRANDEVO® in a mix tank. Fill tank with ¾ of the amount of water for the area to be treated. Start

mechanical or hydraulic agitation. Add the required amount of GRANDEVO®, and then the remaining volume of water. Then, set the

sprinkler to deliver a minimum of 0.1 to 0.3 inch of water per acre. Start sprinkler and uniformly inject the suspension of GRANDEVO®

into the irrigation water line so as to deliver the desired rate of GRANDEVO® per acre. Inject the suspension of GRANDEVO

® with a

positive displacement pump into the main line ahead of a right angle turn to ensure adequate mixing. GRANDEVO® is to be metered

continuously for the duration of the water application. If you have questions about calibration, you should contact State Extension Service

specialists, equipment manufacturers or other experts.

Do not combine GRANDEVO® with other pesticides, surfactants, adjuvants, or fertilizers for application through chemigation equipment

unless prior experience has shown the combination to be physically compatible, effective and non-injurious under your conditions of use.

General Requirements -

1) Apply this product only through sprinkler, including center pivot, lateral move, end tow, side (wheel) roll, traveler, big gun,

solid set, or hand move irrigation systems. Do not apply this product through any other type of irrigation system.

2) Crop injury, lack of effectiveness, or illegal pesticide residues in the crop can result from non-uniform distribution of treated

water.

3) If you have questions about calibration, you should contact State Extension Service specialists, equipment manufacturers or

other experts.

4) Do not connect an irrigation system (including greenhouse systems) used for pesticide application to a public water system

unless the pesticide label-prescribed safety devices for public water systems are in place.

5) A person knowledgeable of the chemigation system and responsible for its operation, or under the supervision of the

responsible person, shall shut the system down and make necessary adjustments should the need arise.

Specific Requirements for Chemigation Systems Connected to Public Water Systems -

1) Public water system means a system for the provision to the public of piped water for human consumption if such system has

at least 15 service connections or regularly serves an average of at least 25 individuals daily at least 60 days out of the year.

2) Chemigation systems connected to public water systems must contain a functional, reduced-pressure zone, backflow

4A

5

preventer (RPZ) or the functional equivalent in the water supply line upstream from the point of pesticide introduction. As an

option to the RPZ, the water from the public water system should be discharged into a reservoir tank prior to pesticide

introduction. There shall be a complete physical break (air gap) between the flow outlet end of the fill pipe and the top or

overflow rim of the reservoir tank of at least twice the inside diameter of the fill pipe.



4) The pesticide injection pipeline must contain a functional, normally closed, solenoid-operated valve located on the intake side

of the injection pump and connected to the system interlock to prevent fluid from being withdrawn from the supply tank



water pump motor stops, or in cases where there is no water pump, when the water pressure decreases to the point where

pesticide distribution is adversely affected.




Specific Requirements for Sprinkler Chemigation -

1) The system must contain a functional check valve, vacuum relief valve and low-pressure drain appropriately located on the

irrigation pipeline to prevent water source contamination from backflow.



3) The pesticide injection pipeline must also contain a functional, normally closed, solenoid-operated valve located on the intake

side of the injection pump and connected to the system interlock to prevent fluid from being withdrawn from the supply tank



water pump motor stops.

5) The irrigation line or water pump must include a functional pressure switch, which will stop the water pump motor when the

water pressure decreases to the point where pesticide distribution is adversely affected.




Application Instructions for All Types of Chemigation -

1) Remove scale, pesticide residues, and other foreign matter from the chemical supply tank and entire injector system. Flush

with clean water. Failure to provide a clean tank, void of scale or residues, may cause product to lose effectiveness or strength.

2) Determine the treatment rates as indicated in the directions for use and make proper dilutions.

3) Prepare a solution in the chemical tank by filling the tank with the required water and then adding product as required. Utilize

agitation to keep solution in suspension.

APPLICATION RATES FOR SELECTED CROPS

For greenhouse applications on the crops and pests listed, use 1 - 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® in 100 gallons of water sprayed until just

before point of runoff.

See specific application rates for each crop for additional details on greenhouse applications and for all other application types.

FOR USE ON THE FOLLOWING CROPS FOR CONTROL OF SPECIFIED INSECTS AND MITES: _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pre-harvest Interval (PHI) = 0 days _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Alfalfa (Hay and Seed), Hay and Other Forage Crops


Alfalfa caterpillar, alfalfa webworm, armyworms, cutworms, European skipper, sod webworm


Aphids, billbugs, chinch bug, leafhoppers, Lygus, mites (such as clover, Bermuda grass stunt, two-spotted, winter grain), plant bugs, spittle

bugs _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Artichoke (Globe)


Armyworms, artichoke plume moth, loopers


Aphids, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Asparagus

2 – 3 pounds of GRANDEVO® acre

Aphids, armyworms, cutworms _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

6

Bananas


Banana skipper _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Brassica (Cole) Leafy Vegetables

Broccoli, Broccoli Raab, Brussels Sprouts, Cabbage, Cauliflower, Cavalo Broccolo, Chinese Broccoli, Chinese Cabbage (Bok

Choy), Chinese Cabbage (Napa), Chinese Mustard Cabbage (Gai Choy), Collards, Kale, Kohlrabi, Mizuna, Mustard Greens,

Mustard Spinach, and Rape Greens


Armyworms, beet armyworm, cabbage looper, cabbage webworm, cross-striped cabbageworm, cutworms, diamondback moth, imported

cabbageworm, light brown apple moth


Aphids, billbugs, leafhoppers, mites, plant bugs, thrips, whiteflies, yellow margined leaf beetle larvae

Yellow margined leaf beetle larvae – apply to newly hatched to 2nd

instar. If adult beetles are also present, tank mix with a knockdown

insecticide. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bulb Vegetables

Leek, Garlic, Onion (Bulb and Green), and Shallot


Armyworms, cross-striped cabbageworm, cutworms, diamondback moth, European corn borer, green cloverworm, Heliothis, hornworm,

imported cabbageworm, leek moth, loopers, omnivorous leafroller, saltmarsh caterpillar, webworms


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Bushberries

Blueberry, Currant, Elderberry, Gooseberry, Huckleberry, Juneberry, Lingonberry, and Salal


Armyworms, cherry fruitworm, cranberry fruitworm, fireworms, leafrollers, loopers


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Caneberries

Blackberry, Black and Red Raspberry, Loganberry, and Cultivars, Varieties and/or Hybrids of these


Armyworms, beet armyworm, bertha armyworm, green fruitworm, leafrollers, loopers, western raspberry fruitworm


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cereal Grains

Barley, Buckwheat, Oats, Pearl Millet, Proso Millet, Rye, Sorghum (Milo), Triticale, and Wheat


Armyworms, corn earworm (headworm), southwestern corn borer, web worms


Aphids (including greenbug), chinch bugs, mites, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Citrus Fruit

Grapefruit, Lemons, Limes, Oranges, and Tangerines


Citrus cutworm, citrus leafminer, fruittree leafroller, orangedog


Asian citrus psyllid, aphids, citrus blackfly, citrus red mite, citrus rust mite, citrus thrips, citrus whitefly, cloudy-winged whitefly, glassy-

winged sharpshooter, mealybugs, six-spotted spider mite, Texas citrus mite, two-spotted spider mite _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

7

Corn (Field Corn, Popcorn, Sweet Corn and Corn Grown for Seed)


Armyworms, common stalk borer, corn earworm, European corn borer, lesser cornstalk borer, southwestern corn borer, webworms,

western bean cutworm


Chinch bugs, corn leaf aphid, mites, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cotton


Cotton bollworm, European corn borer, fall armyworm, loopers (soybean and cabbage), saltmarsh caterpillar, tobacco budworm, yellow-

striped armyworm


Cotton aphid, cotton fleahopper, leafhoppers, Lygus, mites, silverleaf whitefly, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cranberry


Aphids, armyworms, brown spanworm, cranberry blossom weevil, cranberry fruitworm, cutworms, fireworms, leafrollers, loopers, mites,

sparganothis fruitworm, thrips

Do not apply to flooded fields. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Cucurbit Vegetables

Cantaloupe, Cucumber, Edible Gourds, Muskmelon, Pumpkin, Watermelon, and Winter and Summer Squash


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, cutworms, melonworm, pickleworm, rindworm complex


Aphid, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Fig


Navel orangeworm


Aphids, thrips _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Fruiting Vegetables

Tomato, Pepper, Eggplant, Groundcherry, Pepino, Okra, and Tomatillo


Armyworms (including beet and yellow-striped), European corn borer, hornworms, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar, tomato fruitworm,

tomato pinworm, variegated cutworm


Aphids, Lygus, mites, pepper weevil, plant bugs, psyllids, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Grape, Amur River Grape, Gooseberry, Kiwifruit, Maypop, and Schisandra Berry


Grape berry moth, grape leaf skeletonizer, grape leafroller, light brown apple moth, obliquebanded leafroller, omnivorous leafroller,

orange tortrix


Glassy-winged sharpshooter, leafhoppers, mealybugs, mites, Pacific spider mite, thrips, two-spotted spider mite, Willamette spider mite,

whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Herbs and Spices

Angelica, Balm, Basil, Borage, Burnet, Camomile, Catnip, Chervil, Chive, Clary, Coriander, Costmary, Cilantro, Curry, Dillweed,

Horehound, Hyssop, Lavender, Lemongrass, Lovage, Marjoram, Nasturtium, Parsley (Dried), Rosemary, Sage, Savory (Summer

and Winter), Sweet Bay, Tansy, Tarragon, Thyme, Wintergreen, Woodruff, and Wormwood


Armyworm, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar


Aphids, mites, thrips, whiteflies

4A

8

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Hops and Dried Cones


Armyworms, loopers


Hops aphid, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Leafy Vegetables

Arugula, Celery, Corn Salad, Cress, Dandelion, Dock, Edible-Leaved Chrysanthemum, Endive, Fennel, Head Lettuce, Leaf

Lettuce, Parsley, Purslane, Radicchio, Rhubarb, Spinach, and Swiss Chard


Armyworm, cabbage looper, cutworm species, diamondback moth, green cloverworm, loopers, tobacco budworm


Aphids, mites, psyllids, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Leaves of Root and Tuber Vegetables

Beets and Turnips


Armyworm, cabbage looper, diamondback moth


Aphids, psyllids, whiteflies ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Legume Vegetables (Succulent or Dried) and Grain Crops

Adzuki Bean, Blackeyed Pea, Beans, Chickpea, Cowpea, Crowder Pea, Edible-Pod Pea, English Pea, Fava Bean, Field Bean, Field

Pea, Garbanzo Bean, Garden Pea, Green Pea, Kidney Bean, Lentils, Lima Bean, Lupins, Mung Bean, Navy Bean, Peas, Pigeon

Pea, Pinto Bean, Runner Bean, Snap Bean, Snow Pea, Soybean, Sugar Snap Pea, Tepary Bean, Wax Bean, and Yardlong Bean


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, green cloverworm, loopers, podworms, soybean looper, velvetbean caterpillar


Aphids, kudzu bugs, leafhoppers, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Oilseed Crops

Canola, Safflower, and Sunflower (including Sunflower Grown for Seed)


Armyworms, diamondback moth, headworms, Heliothis, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar



Peanut


Armyworms, cabbage looper, corn earworm, European corn borer, green cloverworm, podworms, red-necked peanut worm, saltmarsh

caterpillar, soybean looper, velvetbean caterpillar



Peppermint


Armyworms, loopers, saltmarsh caterpillar _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pineapple


Gummosos-Batracheda Comosae (Hodges), Thecla-Thecla Basilides (Geyr) (Fruitborer) _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

4A

9

Pome Fruit

Apples, Crabapple, Loquat, Mayhaw, Pears, and Quince


Codling moth, leafrollers (including fruittree, obliquebanded, redbanded, variegated), light brown apple moth, oriental fruit moth, tufted

apple budmoth

Application timing: optimal timing for codling moth, leafrollers, and oriental fruit moth can vary between species and geographic

locations. Monitor moth flights with pheromone traps and scout regularly to determine larval populations. GRANDEVO®

can be used to

supplement mating disruption programs.


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, pear psylla, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Pomegranate


Armyworms, cankerworms, codling moth, cutworms, European red mite, filbert leafroller, fruittree leafroller, gypsy moth, McDaniel

spider mite, obliquebanded leafroller, oriental fruit moth, Pacific spider mite, redbanded leafroller, tufted apple budmoth, twig borer,

two-spotted red mite, variegated leafroller, walnut caterpillar _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Root and Tuber Vegetables

Black Salsify, Carrot, Cassava, Celeriac, Chayote Root, Chicory, Chinese Artichoke, Edible Burdock, Garden Beet, Ginger,

Ginseng, Horseradish, Jerusalem Artichoke, Oriental Radish, Parsnip, Potatoes, Radish, Rutabaga, Salsify, Skirret, Spanish

Salsify, Sugar Beet, Sweet Potatoes, Turmeric, Turnip, Turnip Rooted Chervil, Turnip Rooted Parsley, and Yams


Armyworms, artichoke plume moth, European corn borer, loopers


Aphids, potato aphid, potato leafhopper, psyllids, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Stone Fruits

Apricots, Cherry, Nectarine, Peach, Plum, and Prune


Green fruitworm, leafrollers (including fruittree, obliquebanded, pandemic, redbanded, and variegated), oriental fruit moth, peach twig

borer, redhumped caterpillar, tent caterpillar

Application timing: optimal timing for leafrollers and peach twig borer can vary between species and geographic locations. Monitor moth

flights with pheromone traps and scout regularly to determine larval populations. GRANDEVO®

can be used to supplement mating

disruption programs.


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Strawberry


Armyworms, cutworms, leafrollers


Aphids, Lygus, mites, thrips, whiteflies _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tobacco


Hornworms, loopers, tobacco budworm



Tree Nuts and Pistachios

Almonds, Cashew, Chestnut, Filbert (Hazelnut), Macadamia Nut, Pecan, Pistachios, and Walnut


Fall webworm, filbert worm, hickory shuckworm, navel orange worm, obliquebanded leafroller, peach twig borer, pecan nut casebearer,

redhumped caterpillar


Aphids, mealybugs, mites, pecan weevil, whiteflies

4A

10

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tropical and Subtropical Fruit

Acerola, Atemoya, Avocado, Biriba, Black Sapote, Canistel, Cherimoya, Custard Apple, Feijoa, Guava, Ilama, Jaboticaba, Kiwi,

Longan, Lychee, Mamey Sapote, Mango, Papaya, Passionfruit, Pulasan, Rambutan, Sapodilla, Soursop, Spanish Lime, Star Apple,

Starfruit, Sugar Apple, Ti Palm Leaves, Wax Jambu (Wax Apple), and White Sapote


Aphids, avocado leafroller, citrus peelminer, cutworms, fruittree leafroller, omnivorous leafroller, orange tortrix, thrips, western tussock

moth, whiteflies

STORAGE AND DISPOSAL

Do not contaminate water, food or feed by storage and disposal.

Pesticide Storage: Store in original container in a cool, dry place.

Pesticide Disposal: To avoid wastes, use all material in this container by application according to label directions. If wastes

cannot be avoided, offer remaining product to a waste disposal facility or pesticide disposal program (often such programs

are run by state or local governments or by industry).

Container Handling: Non-refillable container. Do not reuse or refill this container.

Completely empty bag into application equipment. Then offer for recycling if available, or dispose of empty bag in a sanitary

landfill or by incineration. Do not burn, unless allowed by state and local ordinances. (For instances where state and local

ordinances do allow burning): If burned, stay out of smoke.

WARRANTY

To the extent consistent with applicable law, the seller makes no warranty, expressed or implied, of merchantability, fitness or otherwise

concerning use of this product. To the extent consistent with applicable law, the user assumes all risks of use, storage or handling that are

not in accordance with the accompanying directions.

Label date: May 13, 2013

Made in the U.S.A.

US Patents No. 7,244,607

GRANDEVO® is a registered trademark of Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

Marrone Bio Innovations’ name and logo are registered trademarks of Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

© Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc.

2121 Second St., Ste. B-107, Davis, CA 95618

1-877-664-4476 www.marronebio.com [email protected]

4A

http://www.marronebio.com/

2121 S

TO S

FIFRA SThis recomor approve FOR USE ARE REC GRAND

It is a viol GRANDEVstrain PRA

CROBushberrieincluding Blueberry Currant ElderberryGooseberryHuckleberrJuneberry LingonberrSalal All applica

This FIFRAnot appear appearing

This recom

Grandevo

© 2013. Co

Marrone B2121 SeconDavis, CalTelephone www.marr

Second Stree

SUPPRESS S

Section 2(ee)mmendation is med by the U. S.

IN ALL STATOGNIZED.

EVO, EPA

ation of Feder

VO® is a bioloAA4-1T for use

OP es

y y ry

ry

Sp(D

able direction

A Section 2(eeon the packag

on the product

mmendation m

is a registeredopyright Marro

Bio Innovationsnd Street, Suiteifornia 95618 (530) 750-280

ronebioinnovat

et, Suite B-1

TECHF

SPOTTED W

) Recommenmade as permiEnvironmenta

TES WHERE C

A Reg. No. 84

ral law to use

ogical insecticion edible crop

PEST potted Wing DrDrosophila suzu

ns, restrictions

e) recommendage label. Read at label.

must be in the

d trademark of one Bio Innova

s, Inc. e B-107

00 tions.com

107

HNICAL INFFOR THE US

WING DROSO

ndation itted by Sectional Protection Ag

CROP AND P

059-17

DIRECTthis product i

ide/miticide cops.

rosophila ukii)

2-Gac

and precauti

ation contains nand carefully o

possession of

f Marrone Bio Iations, Inc.,

Davis, CA

FORMATIONSE OF GRANOPHILA (Dr

n 2(ee) of FIFRgency.

EST(S) EXIST

TIONS FOR Uin a manner in

ontaining ferme

RATE -3 pounds

Grandevo per cre

ons on the EP

new or additionbserve the cau

f the user at th

Innovations, In

95618

N BULLETINDEVO rosophila suz

RA, as amende

T AND WHER

USE nconsistent wi

entation solids

Ground AppApply Grandspreader-wettusing a wateracre to providplant parts. Rinterval, or mheavy infestaof an integratWing Drosop

PA-registered

nal directions futionary statem

he time of pest

nc.

Phone:

IN

zukii) IN BU

ed, and has not

RE 2(EE) REC

ith its labeling

of Chromobac

USE DIRECTplications: devo® with a 90ter type surfactr carrier volumde thorough co

Repeat applicatimore frequentlyations. Grandevted program fophila.

label are to be

for use of this pments plus all th

ticide applicat

: 530-750-28

USHBERRIE

been submitte

OMMENDAT

g.

cterium subtsug

TIONS

0/10 non-ionic tant, as a foliar

me of 100 gallonoverage of infesion on a 7-day

y under moderavo® should be r control of Sp

e followed.

product, whichhe other inform

tion.

800

ES

ed to

TIONS

gae

r spray ns per sted

ate to part

potted

h may mation

4A

Spo$ed Wing Drosophila

Tim Johnson October 17, 2013

4A


Trt Treatment Rate ApplNo. Name Rate Unit Code1 Untreated ABC 14.12 a 8.53 a 3.29 a 2.25 a2 MBI-203 DF 1 1 lb/a ABC 4.50 b 1.39 b 1.30 ab 1.25 b



Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC5 MBI-203 DF 2 4 lb/a ABC 0.70 cd 0.20 b 0.19 b 0.00 c

Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC6 Entrust 1.5 oz/a ABC 0.20 d 0.36 b 0.00 b 0.00 c

Silw et L77 0.05 % v/v ABC

14 DAA 21 DAA 28 DAA 35 DAA

Number of Drosophila suzukii larvae per berry in greenhouse trial on strawberries

Study conducted by Pacific Agricultural Research in San Luis Obispo, CA in 2012

4A


Number of Drosophila suzukii larvae per 25 berries in small plot trial on European blackberry

Study conducted by Agricultural Development Group near Eltopia, WA, in 2012

Product Rate # maggots/25 berries 6DAT1

Untreated -‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐-‐ 5.8 ab



Grandevo 3 lb/acre 4.3 ab

Entrust 1 oz/acre 6.0 ab

MBI-‐206 EP 1 gallon/acre 3.8 ab

MBI-‐206 EP 2 gallon/acre 1.5 b

4A

PI: Ashfaq Ahmad Sial Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, 463D Bio Sciences Building, Athens, GA 30602-2603 706-542-2816 (office) 706-224-5377 (cell) 706-542-2279 (fax) 706 [email protected] (email)

EDUCATION: Ph.D. Entomology (2010) Washington State University. M.S. Grain Storage Management (2003) University of Greenwich, United Kingdom M.S. Agric. Entomology (Distinction) (2000) University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan B.S. Agriculture Honors (Gold Medal) (1998) University of Arid Agriculture Rawalpindi, Pakistan

EXPERIENCE:

University of Georgia, Athens (July 2013-Present) Assistant Professor (Fruit Entomologist), Dept. of Entomology Cornell University, Ithaca (May-June 2013) Postdoctoral Research Scientist (Fruit Entomologist), Dept. of Entomology University of California, Berkeley (2010-2013) Postdoctoral Research Scientist (Fruit Entomologist) ESPM Dept. Washington State University, Pullman (2006-2010) Graduate Research Assistant (Fruit Entomology), Dept. of Entomology Medway School District, United Kingdom (2003-2005) Science Teacher University of Greenwich, United Kingdom (2001-2003) ACU Scientific Exchange Scholar, Food Systems Department, Natural Resources Institute

ADDITIONAL TRAINING (Total: 6)

Responsible Conduct of Research (Spring 2011) University of California, Berkeley (Course Instructor: Dr. Charles Gross, Professor of Psychology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ) Preparing Future Faculty (Spring 2011) University of California Berkeley, Course Instructor: Dr. Clair Krasch, Professor, UC Berkeley (Distinguished Teaching Award 2000, 2008) Research Commercialization (April-May 2011) University of California Berkeley, offered by National Council of Entrepreneurial Tech Transfer in collaboration with NSF and NIH

AWARDS & HONORS (Total: 28) Professional Activity Award 2011 • Henry and Sylvia Richardson Research Grant 2011 • John Henry Comstock Award 2010 • WSU President’s Award 2009 • Robert & Mary Lou Harwood Grad Fellowship 2009 • AAAS Honorable Mention 2009 • Dr. William R. Wiley Award 2009 • ESA Personal Profile Highlight 2009 • Country Adviser to British Council, United Kingdom 2009-2010 • Dr. C. C. Burkhardt Graduate Student Award 2009 • ESA Linnaean Games 2009 – Team Leader • Robert & Mary Lou Harwood Grad Fellowship 2008 • ESA Student and Young Professionals Award 2008 • WSU Excellence Award 2008 • Dean’s Letter of Recognition 2008 • Winner of the ESA Student Debate 2008 – Team Leader (Team Award) • Dr. C. C. Burkhardt Graduate Student Award 2008 • ESA President’s Prize 2008 • Dr. William R. Wiley Award 2008 • Gold Medal (Academics) 1998

RESEARCH & EXTENSION PRESENTATIONS (Total: 49)

Keynote Address: 1 Invited Presentations: 21 Contributing Presentations: 19 Display Presentations (Posters): 8 Extension & Education Events Organized/Participated: 14

‘A’ – invited, ‘B’ – contributing (submitted), and ‘C’ – poster; ‘*’ published abstract with presentation) 1. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. 2014 Southeastern Regional Fruit and Vegetable

Conference, Savannah International Trade & Convention Center, 9-12 Jan 2014, Savannah, GA. 2. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. Georgia Blueberry Growers Meeting, 8 Jan 2014,

Alma, GA. 3. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: Georgia blueberry update. WERA 1021: Spotted Wing Drosophila Biology,

Ecology, and Management Meeting, 14 Nov 2014, Austin, TX. 4. A Sial, A. A. Strategies to develop sustainable resistance management programs. In a symposium, “Connecting Our

Past with Our Future. A Look at Past Student Award Winners. Then, Now, and in the Future”, The 61st Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America, 10-13 November 2013, Austin, TX.

5. A Sial, A. A. An over view of Blueberry IPM. Guest lecture in Insect Pest Management class, 21 Oct 2013, Athens, GA.

6. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila: a threat to Georgia blueberry industry. Brantley County Blueberry Grower’s Meeting, 10 Oct 2013, Nahunta, GA.

4A

7. A Sial, A. A. Blueberry IPM: an overview. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 20 Sep 2013, Athens, GA.

8. B Sial, A. A. Spotted wing drosophila monitoring and management: an update. Southeastern Professional Fruit Workers Conference, 17-19 Sep 2013, Athens, GA.

9. A Sial, A. A. Chemical Delivery Technologies: Engineering, Efficiency, Economics. Georgia Blueberry Sprayer Field Day, 10 Sep 2013, Alma, GA.

10. A Sial, A. A. Insect internal morphology. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 21 Aug 2013, Athens, GA.

11. A Sial, A. A. Introduction to arthropods and insects. Guest lecture in Integrated Pest Management class, 19 Aug 2013, Athens, GA.

12. A Sial, A. A. Spotted wind drosophila: a threat to Georgia blueberry industry. Georgia Blueberry Growers Association, 25 Jul 2013, Alma, GA.

PUBLICATIONS (Total: 15; Submitted/In Prep: 9; Abstracts Published: 30)

1. Burrus, R. G. and A. A. Sial. 2013. Implications of insect management for human survival. American Entomologist 59(2): 113-122.

2. Sial, A. A., J. T. Hutchins, K. M. Daane. 2012. In-season management of vine mealybug using single application of reduced-risk insecticides. Arthropod Management Tests 37, doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.C16.

3. Sial, A. A., J. T. Hutchins, K. M. Daane. 2012. Effectiveness of mating disruption technologies for vine mealybug management in vineyards. Arthropod Management Tests 37, doi: 10.4182/amt.2012.C17.

4. Sial, A. A. and C. M. Abraham. 2012. Issues surrounding biodiversity: transgenic crops, biological control, and global climate change. American Entomologist 58 (2): 94-104.

5. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2012. Selection for resistance, reversion toward susceptibility, and synergism of chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 68 (3): 462-468. DOI: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ps.2294/pdf.

6. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2012. Baseline toxicity and stage specificity of reduced-risk insecticides, chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram, on obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pest Manag. Sci. 68 (3): 469-475. DOI: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ps.2296/pdf.

7. Sial, A. A., J. F. Brunner and S. F. Garczynski. 2011. Biochemical characterization of chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram resistance in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 99(3): 274-279.

8. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Assessment of resistance risk in obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to the reduced-risk insecticides chlorantraniliprole and spinetoram. J. Econ. Entomol. 103(4): 1378-1385.

9. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Toxicity and residual efficacy of chlorantraniliprole, spinetoram and emamectin benzoate to obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 103(4): 1277-1285.

10. Sial, A. A., N. G. Wiman, J. L. Buchman, and B. Ohler. 2010. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) should be incorporated into management programs for insect crop pests to reduce insecticide use while providing acceptable levels of damage against all pests and improve crop yield. Am. Entomol. 56(2): 109-110.

11. Sial, A. A. and J. F. Brunner. 2010. Lethal and sublethal effects of an insect growth regulator, pyriproxyfen, on obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 103 (2): 340-347.

12. Sial, A. A., J. F. Brunner, and M. D. Doerr. 2010. Susceptibility of obliquebanded leafroller (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to two new reduced-risk insecticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 103(1): 140-146.

COMPETITIVE GRANT FUNDING: $527, 686.00 (Research, Extension, and Travel Grants as PI /Co-PI)

1. Western SARE Research and Education Grant ($224,051), [2012-2015] Proactive understanding of non-target effects and resistance: key to sustainable management of invasive mealybug pests in West Coast vineyards.

2. Regional Integrated Pest Management, Western Region _ W-RIPM ($93,717), [2012-2014] Proper selection of materials for sustainable management of insect pests in Western vineyards.

3. Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission ($20,000), Improving sustainable controls for insect pests of grapes in the Lodi-Woodbridge district.

4. American Vineyard Foundation ($107, 850), [2010-2012] Mealybug pests and an emerging viral disease: Vector ecology and their role in grape leafroll associated virus epidemiology

5. Western SARE Graduate Student Research Grant ($21,239), [2009-2010] A proactive approach to understanding resistance to novel OP alternatives as a strategy for sustainable management of obliquebanded leafroller.

4A

6. ESA Program Enhancement Funds to organize symposium ($2,618), [2009] Evolutionary arms race of resistance in herbivores to novel chemistries: lessons from native and agricultural systems.

7. Bayer CropSciences gift grant to organize symposium ($1,000), [2009] Evolutionary arms race of resistance in herbivores to novel chemistries: lessons from native and agricultural systems.





12. WSU Louis W. Getzin Memorial Research Scholarship ($400), [2007] Cloning and characterization of acetylcholinesterase genes Ace-1 and Ace-2 in resistant and susceptible strains of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).

13. WSU H. S. Telford Entomology Research Scholarship ($250), [2007] Cloning and characterization of acetylcholinesterase genes Ace-1 and Ace-2 in resistant and susceptible strains of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae).

14. Association of Commonwealth Universities (United Kingdom) Fellowship (£23,000 ≈ $38,000) [2001-2003], Natural alternatives to broad-spectrum insecticides to effectively manage insect pests of stored-grains. Food Systems Departments, Natural Resources Institute, University of Greenwich, United Kingdom

TEACHING/MENTORING EXPERIENCE (Total: 13) 1. Environmental Sciences Senior Thesis _ ES196B (Spring 2013) University of California, Berkeley 2. Environmental Sciences Senior Thesis _ ES196A (Fall 2012) University of California, Berkeley 3. Pesticide Chemistry And Toxicology _ ESPM C148/NST C114 (Spring 2012) University of California, Berkeley 4. Principles Of Integrated Pest Management _ PPSC 441 (Spring 2012) California State University, Chico 5. Plant Protection Science _ PPSC 311 (Fall 2011) California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo 6. Plant Protection Materials _ PPSC 353 (Fall 2011) California State University, Chico 7. Mentored Borlaug Fellows from Ghana _ Africa (Fall 2009) Washington State University Biochemical And

Molecular Research Techniques Used In Insecticide Toxicology (Fellows: Brenda Aluda and Jacinter Atieno). 8. Biotechnology In Pest Management _ ENTOM 590 (Fall 2008) Washington State University 9. Sciences For Honors Students II _ SCI 299 (Spring 2007), Washington State University 10. Insects, Science And World Cultures _ ENTOM 150 (Fall 2006), Washington State University

PROFESSIONAL LEADERSHIP & SERVICE

Symposia Organized: 10 (Regional, National, and International Symposia) Manuscripts Reviewed: 28 (For 12 Scientific Journals of International Repute)

PROFESSIONAL COMMITTEE SERVICE (Total: 12 Committees at the Regional and National Level)

Georgia State Committee on Herbicide Procurement • Program Committee for the 96th Annual Meeting of Entomological Society of America (ESA)- Pacific Branch (PB), 7-10 April 2013, Lake Tahoe, NV (Program Chair) • Program Committee for the 58th Annual Meeting of ESA (National), 12-15 December 2010, Town and Country Resort & Convention Center, San Diego, CA • ESA Committee on Student Affairs 2010 (Chair) • Presidential Committee on ESA Website Improvement 2010 • Presidential Committee on ESA Fellows 2010 • ESA Committee on Awards and Honors 2009-2010

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS

National Center for Faculty Development and Diversity • Entomological Society of America • New York Academy of Sciences • American Association for Advancement of Science • Entomological Society of Canada • Royal Entomological Society, United Kingdom • Australian Entomological Society • Northwest Scientific Association • Sigma Xi (Elected) • Pi Chi Omega - The National Professional Pest Control Fraternity (Elected) • Pakistan Entomological Society

4A

2121 Second Street, Suite B-107 • Davis, CA 95618 • Phone: 530-750-2800

October 15, 2013 Timothy Johnson, PhD Product Development Director Northeast U.S. and International Marrone Bio Innovations 14 Baldtop Heights Danville, PA 17821 IR-4 Project Headquarters Attn: Michael Braverman Biopesticide and Organic Support Program Manager 500 College Road East Suite 201 W Princeton, NJ 08540-6635 Re: Proposal Titled “Integration of biopesticides into blueberry IPM programs for spotted wing drosopohila as a resistance and residue management strategy” Dear Dr. Braverman:

I am writing in support of this proposal to evaluate Grandevo® alone and in combination with other insecticides for control of spotted wing drosophila on blueberries. Currently, blueberry producers have a limited number of options available for this emerging pest that threatens the economic viability of blueberry production. We believe Grandevo could be a viable component for management in organic and conventional production when used in combination with other products. If this proposal is successful, Marrone Bio Innovations will support this research with $10,000 in support funding. Thank you for considering this grant proposal. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me by email at [email protected] or by phone at 570-441-8775. Sincerely,

Timothy B. Johnson Dr. Timothy Johnson Product Development Director Marrone Bio Innovations

4A

criteria for ranking evaluations of ir-4 ...ir4.rutgers.edu/biopesticides/proposals/4a.pdfproposal...

Documents