Inside thisissue...

NewsletterVol. 42 No. 4 Fall 2011

26

8,911

Drip IrrigationField Studies

Pomegranates

Workshop Results

Mosquito ControlPMSP

Pest Management Solutions for Specialty Crops and Minor Uses

On September 14, 2011,IR-4’s Executive Director, JerryBaron, surprised the ExecutiveDirector of the CaliforniaSpecialty Crops Council(CSCC) Lori Berger bypresenting her with the IR-4SOAR award.

This award recognizesindividuals who excel in servinggrowers of Specialty and MinorUse Crops. Awardeesdemonstrate: clear Servicetoward enhancing the missionof IR-4 through participationon committees advisory panelsor similar activities; excellentOutreach to growers,educating them about IR-4;Altruism by donating time andeffort towards IR-4’s mission;and outstanding Research,

which contributes towardexpanded product labels andincreased understanding ofproduct use. A candidate mustdemonstrate excellence inthree of the four categories.

Lori demonstrates excellence inall four categories and hersupporters gave clearexamples. One nominatorspoke of her Service to IR-4 by“participating on severalcommittees that addressdiverse agriculturally-relatedissues and concerns acrossmultiple groups, including theMinor Crop Farmers Alliance,Crop Protection Coalition,NAFTA Technical WorkingGroup, EPA Farm Ranch andRural Communities Committeeand the IR-4 CommodityLiaison Committee.”

Lori’s Outreach efforts includean annual tour of CaliforniaCrops that she organizes toeducate state and federalregulators, and an annualWorkshop that Lori hasdeveloped that focuses onissues related to harmonizationof Maximum Residue Limitsand their impact on the exportof US agriculturalcommodities.

Many who nominated Lorispoke of her acts of Altruismas being a Big Sister, helping

young women in her comm-unity, as well as giving her timeand energy serving on a numberof non-profit boards working onchildren’s health issues.

Finally, in support of herResearch efforts, one nominatortouted Lori’s success atobtaining over $1 million ingrant funds to supportcross-community outreach inthe area of integrated pestmanagement. Also, Lori activelyhosts webinars on invasives andother timely updates coveringresearch relevant to specialtycrop production.

Congratulations Lori, onreceiving the IR-4 SOAR award!

SOAR WinnerLori Berger

CSCC Executive Director, Lori Berger, (second fromright) receives the IR-4 SOAR Award from IR-4Executive Director, Jerry Baron as Western Region IR-4Center Regional Field Coordinator, Rebecca Sisco (farright) and MGK Regulatory Department Manager, JanSharp join Jerry in congratulating Lori.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Information Exchange

pg 2 Vol 42 No 4

Recent IR-4 field studies havebeen conducted throughoutthe US with a twist on standardapplication equipment. MostIR-4 residue trials utilizebackpack or tractor mountedspray booms which use amixture of water, adjuvant andtest substance to deliver thetest substance to the researchplot. This season saw the firstof several studies whichincluded additional treatmentsusing pressurized injectionsystems that apply testsubstance through dripirrigation.

The practice of injectingagricultural chemicals throughpressurized irrigation systemsis increasingly common in theUS. The practice has manyadvantages for growers,including reduced applicationcosts and lower workerexposure to pesticides. Inaddition, the targeting of soilborne insects and pathogens isideally suited for applicationthrough irrigation systems.

When IR-4 study directorsdesign pesticide use patterns instudy protocols, they need toclosely mimic the future use ofthose compounds in growerfields. For these recent IR-4projects, additional treatmentoptions have used soil-directedsprays or drench applicationsalong with drip systeminjections.

So, how does a field researcherset up a system to mimic acommercial drip injection? Tostart with, the researcher setsup test plots with a drip systemfor crop irrigation. This samesystem is then “tapped into” toinject the test substance. Thisyear’s protocols called for thetest substance to be applied in1/2 acre-inch of irrigation withthe injection occurring in thefirst 1/4 to 1/3 of the irrigationevent.

The most common method fordrip injection in growers’ fieldsis with a simple venturi devicecommercially known as aMazzei® injector. The smallplastic device (Fig. 1, source:www.mazzei.net) creates a

restriction in the water flowwhich in turn creates a suctionwhich takes up apre-calibratedconcentration of testsubstance and water.

The calibration process iscompleted by comparingthe injector suction ratewith the time required toapply the first 1/4 to 1/3of the 1/2 inch irrigationamount. For example, if

the drip system takes fourhours to apply a half acre inchof water, the injector needs toapply the test substance andwater in roughly 60 to 80minutes.

Correspondingly, if the injectorsucks up 4 liters of solutionper hour, the required testsubstance would need to bediluted in 4 to 4.8 liters ofwater. The researcher thendilutes the appropriate amountof test substance for the plotsize into the water, fires up theinjector system and applies thetest substance. Once theinjector has sucked up all thetest substance solution, theresearcher adds rinse water tothe mix bucket and continuesrunning the irrigation system toflush all test substance throughthe system and onto the testplot.

Figure # 2 illustrates theplumbing of a Mazzei ®

Drip Irrigation Field Studies

Figure 1: Mazzei injector diagram

Figure 2: Mazzei injector and line setup.

continued on next page

— by Western Region Assistant Field Coordinator, Stephen Flanagan and IR-4 Assistant Coordinator, Kathryn Homa

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Tolerances

pg 3 Vol 42 No 4

Federal Register: July 27 2011ChlorantraniliproleTrade Name: CoragenCrop: Root and tubervegetable group 1, Leaves ofroot and tuber vegetable group2, Bulb onion subgroup3-07A, Berry (large shrub/tree)subgroup 13-07C, Lowgrowing berry subgroup13-07G, Ti leaves and rootPR#: 10217

Federal Register: August 17 2011MetconazoleTrade Name: QuashCrop: Bushberry subgroup13-07B, Tuberous and cormvegetable subgroup 1CPR#: 09501, 09861, 09890

Federal Register: August 29 2011TetraconazoleTrade Name: MettleCrop: Small vine-climbing fruit(except fuzzy kiwifruit)subgroup 13-07F, Lowgrowing berry subgroup13-07GPR#: 09663, 09662

Federal Register: August 31, 2011MRLs established in JapanFludioxonilTrade Name: Not availableCrop: Citrus fruit, Peach,Nectarine, Apricot, Plum,Cherry, Kiwifruit, Apple, Pear,Quince, Loquat, Pomegranate

PR#: 07947, 06934, 06944,06943, 06933, 07639,07568, 07569, 08085

Federal Register: September 9 2011DicambaTrade Name: DistinctCrop: TeffPR#: 10195

2,4-DTrade Name: LatigoCrop: Teff PR#: 10195

NovaluronTrade Name: RimonCrop: Sweet cornPR#: 09838

IR-4 Successes Jul-11 to Sep-11The trade names listed below are provided as a means to identify the chemical for which a tolerance has been established. A trade namelisted here may not be the name of the product on which the new food use(s) will be registered. Only labeled products may be used on afood crop. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations and examine a current product label before applying any chemical.

device into a two inch supplyline with a check valve toprevent backflow of the testsubstance into the irrigationsupply. Figure # 3 shows asimilar layout which accom-plishes the same function. Thesystem in Figure # 3 alsoutilized a flow meter tocompare the delivered watervolume to the plot versus themeasured output from the dripemitters.

The 2011 trials using thesesystems included peppers,

lettuce and cucurbits. The2012 trials that will use thesesystems include cantaloupe,cucumber, bell and non-bellpepper and squash.

The same system could alsoapply to orchard cropsusing either drip ormicrojet systems. Fieldresearchers’ efforts toconfigure, test andcalibrate these systems ensure that field residue data is generated underconditions very similar to grower systems. The

cooperative efforts between registrants, studydirectors and field researchers delivers high quality data tosupport registration of newtools for specialty cropgrowers.

Dripcontinued from previous page

Figure 3: Mazzei injector setup with inline flow meter.

pg 4 Vol 42 No 4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Personalities in the News

Welcome back, Joe! On Father’s Day, 2010, JoeDeFrancesco, Oregon StateUniversity researcher and IR-4State Liaison Representativefor Oregon, received a powerwasher as a gift.

Being anxious to try his new“toy” Joe decided to clean thedeck awning. He took hisextension ladder out of thegarage and was careful toposition it against the side ofthe house. What Joe didn’tknow, but soon discovered,was the ladder wasn’t in asturdy enough position to holdhim, and it slipped.

As Joe stepped onto the roof,he was knocked down andknocked out. He sustainedmultiple injuries, breaking hispelvis, ribs, and elbow,suffered a concussion and hiswhole face was black and blue.These injuries knocked Joe out

of work for many months andeveryone felt his absence at the2010 Food Use Workshop.

In an act of support, theparticipants of the workshopfilled many flip chart pages withbest wishes for a strongrecovery. Joe’s wife, Cathy,said, “Joe is so fortunate tohave co-workers and colleagueswho were such a support,comfort and strength. He reallyis lucky to work in such anenvironment.”

Joe agrees and attributes muchof his recovery not only to his

He’s Back...

retired, he attended one lastIR-4 Food Use Workshop(FUW). During the FUW, IR-4management recognized Mel’scontributions and dedicatedservice by presenting him withan IR-4 Special RecognitionAward.

“Mel has quietly and efficientlyprovided excellent support toIR-4; his partnership effortshave yielded great results

IR-4 Recognizes Mel Tolliver — by Robyn Kneen, Regulatory Affairs, Bayer CropScience

physicians and re-habprofessionals but also to hissupportive IR-4 colleagues.

In September 2011, Joe wasback at the Food UseWorkshop feeling strong,healed, and back to normal. Hesaid, “When we wereintroducing ourselves at theworkshop, I wanted to saythank you to everyone, butdidn’t want to draw attention tomyself.” But through thisarticle, Joe says just that. Thankyou IR-4 and IR-4 stakeholders.“I really am grateful for suchgood friends. The concern andcaring shown by my colleagueswas very touching and meant alot to me during my months ofrecovery.”

Since there were five other menin the emergency room thesame day as Joe as a result ofpower tool and ladderaccidents, Cathy says, “themoral of the story: givehammocks, not power tools onFather’s Day.”

For nearly 50 years, IR-4 hasbeen working with BayerCropScience to providespecialty crops growers withminor use registrations. MelTolliver has been Bayer’s IR-4Liaison coordinating requests,samples, trials, regulatorysubmissions and many otheractivities. He served in thiscapacity for 20 years. Melretired from Bayer onNovember 4, but before he

It was so good to see OSU researcherJoe Defrancesco (r) seated with colleagueEd Peachey, back at the Food UseWorkshop after suffering injuries thatprohibited his attendance in 2010.

including many, manyregistrations for Bayer’sproducts on specialty crops,”said Jerry Baron, IR-4 ExecutiveDirector. “It's great to see thatMel is appreciated by others inthe industry, because he hasbeen appreciated by all of ushere at Bayer for a long time,"said Randy Myers, MarketingManager, "We will really misshim.” A sentiment echoed byall Mel’s friends and colleaguesat Bayer.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 5Vol 42 No 4

Personalities in the News

The IR-4 Newsletter Vol 42 No. 4Fall 2011

The IR-4 Newsletter is published quarterly for distribution to cooperators in ourpartner State/Federal/Industry research units, State and Federal officials, commoditygroups, and private citizens. Material from the IR-4 Newsletter may be reproducedwith credit to the publication. Major funding for IR-4 is provided by USDA-NIFA andUSDA-ARS in cooperation with the State Agricultural Experiment Stations. NewJersey Agricultural Experiment Station Publication No.P-27200-11-04, supported bystate, US Hatch Act, and other USDA funds.

Editor: Sherrilynn NovackIR-4 Public Relations and Communication Manager, 732.932.9575 x 4632,novack@aesop.rutgers.eduNewsletter Committee:Northeast Regional Field Coordinator, Edith Lurvey, 315.787.2308. North Central Regional Director, Bob Hollingworth, 517.432.7718. Western Regional Assistant Field Coordinator, Stephen Flanagan, 541.688.3155. Southern Regional Field Coordinator, Michelle Samuel-Foo, 352-392-1978 ext 406Southern Region Program Assistant/Quality Assurance Support Robin Adkins352.392.1978 x 424. Commodity Liaison Committee member, Mike Bledsoe, 407.936.1190 andLiz Johnson 604-940-6012 Ext. 308 of Village Farms. Alabama State Liaison Representative, Charles Gilliam, 334-844-3045 IR-4 HQ, 732.932.9575.Assistant Director, Van Starner x 4621Ornamental Horticulture Manager, Cristi Palmer x 4629Technical Coordinator/Entomology, Ken Samoil x 4614Assistant Coordinator, Interdisciplinary Working Group Kathryn Homa x 4604

Puerto Rico native, WilfredoRobles is an assistant professorat the University of PuertoRico (UPR) Mayaguez, and thenew IR-4 State Liaisonrepresenting Puerto Rico. DrRobles completed both hisBachelor’s degree (AnimalSciences) and his Master’sdegree (Crop Protection withmajor in entomology) at theUPR. In 2002, he was hired asa research associate at theUPR Agricultural ExperimentStation to evaluateentomological agents asbiological control of aquaticplants. In 2004, Wilfredoattended Mississippi StateUniversity (MSU) pursuing aPh.D. in Weed Science. Hisdissertation was titled“Population Assessment andHerbicide Injury Detection onAquatic Plants Using RemoteSensing”. This research projectinvolved an interdisciplinaryeffort among many disciplinessuch as weed science,geography, biology, andengineering. During his timespent at MSU, he was awardedthe Midsouth Aquatic PlantManagement Student

Scholarship in 2007 and theGraduate Research Assistant ofthe Year in 2008. In 2009,Wilfred earned his Ph.D. fromMSU.

Since 2009, Wilfredo has beenbuilding the weed scienceprogram at UPR Mayaguez andteaching undergraduate andgraduate classes such asPrinciples in Weed Science andMode of Action of Herbicides.His research interests involvethe use of herbicides andbiopesticides as tools inintegrated pest management ontropical crops. Throughout hiscareer, he has authored andco-authored nine peer

reviewed articles, 16 pro-ceedings articles, and more than25 oral presentations in bothEnglish and Spanish.

Wilfredo has also served as areviewer for many journals andis an active member of SouthernWeed Science Society, AquaticPlant Management Society,Weed Science Society ofAmerica, and Puerto RicoSociety of Agricultural Sciences.

The IR-4 Southern Region isproud to welcome Dr. WilfredoRobles as our new State LiaisonRepresentative for Puerto Rico,and we look forward tocollaborating on future projectsas we make strides tore-establish an IR-4 fieldresearch center at the Universityof Puerto Rico.

New SLR for Puerto RicoWilfredo Robles

—by IR-4 Southern Region FieldCoordinator, Michelle Samuel-Foo

pg 6Vol 42 No 4

Feature Article

omegranate’s arrival inCalifornia predates its inclusioninto the United States. Startingin 1769 Franciscanmissionaries from Spain, led byFather Junipero Serra,established Roman CatholicChristian missions, commercialenterprises, and lodgingthroughout the coastal region.Pomegranates were importedfrom outside Alta Californiaand planted at these missions.

Commercially, pomegranateshave been grown in the CentralValley of California for over100 years. Althoughpomegranates do thrive inother climates, most noticeablyTexas, Georgia and Florida,only California has historicallyproduced fresh marketpomegranates for domestic andinternational markets.

Pomegranate as a Unique CropPunica granatum, the scientificname assigned by Linneaus, isonly one of two species in thebotanical family ofpomegranate. What this orphangenus lacks in width it surelymakes up for in depth: aspecies that can be found as anevergreen in tropical conditionsto a deciduous plant intemperate climates.

Pomegranates are thechameleon of the botanicalworld. Their phenologicalcharacteristics are as much afunction of their human ownersas they are the hand of mothernature. Dwarf varieties can beused both for landscaping as

well as bonsai, with daintytrees less than 12 inches inheight producing golf ball sizedfruit. Commercially their fullsize brethren are naturalbushes but can be trained tobe multi trunk trees, singletrunk trees, or free formbushes which constantly renewtheir vegetative growth throughsuckers. This flexible growthhabit comes with evolutionarybenefits – trees killed by winterfreezes will regrow from thecrowns, while tropical trees willbloom nearly year round.

Common folklore for this crop,which has been reportedthroughout antiquity, still ispresent in the modern era. Thecommonly held belief that allpomegranate fruit contain thesame number of arils, or seeds,has recently been provenincorrect by researchers in theUnited States. The largest ofpomegranate fruit can containup to 2000 arils, while someornamental pomegranatesproduce finger shaped fruitthat are completely void of anyseeds! A humorous feature ofWonderful, the most widelyrecognized pomegranatecultivar in the United States, isthat this inside-out berry-likefruit is nearly sphericalregardless of how many arilsare inside. Only a unique croplike pomegranates could be thecolor of royalty and also wear acrown – naturally!

Pomegranates are shaped as

bushes, single trunk trees ormulti scaffold trees dependingon the farming practices of thegrower. Cultural practices usedby farmers on companion cropshave a significant bearing onpomegranate croppingstrategies. If farmers alreadyproduce grapes then machinerymanagement optimization willmake pomegranateestablishment with in rowspacing of 5 foot with rows at12 feet prudent. For farms withlarge canopy permanent cropssuch as citrus, almonds orwalnuts, pomegranate orchardsare established at a widerspacing, such as in row spacingof 17 feet with rows at 19 feet.Wider spacing betteraccommodates a common setof large farming implementssuch as disc harrows, andbrush shredders alreadyutilized for tasks on othercrops.

Because of the indeterminateflowering pattern ofpomegranates there arerepeated harvest passesthrough each pomegranateorchard until the supply offresh fruit is exhausted ormarket conditions do not justify

Pomegranates’ Sphere of Appreciation and Production GrowsP — article and photos provided by the Pomegranate Council

pg 7Vol 42 No 4

the harvest costs for additionalefforts. Since the crop isselectively hand harvested,large groups of laborers areneeded each autumn. Theharvest process involvesremoving the fruit from thetree by either clipping the fruitor using a twist-snapprocedure. Fruit is then placedinto canvas bags, and can beloaded into plastic totes orlarge bins for transport topacking facilities. Packingfacilities vary in sophistication.Nearly all facilities pack othertypes of tree fruit so methodsof conveyance and sortingdepend on companion crops ata given farming operation.

Production Challenges for anEmerging CropAlthough considered a heartycrop, relatively free fromproduction limitations,pomegranates face challengesin their primary areas in thewestern parts of the U.S. Somesuch as cold heartiness andsusceptibility to fruit summerscald are a part of normalenvironmental conditions facedby farmers annually. But thelargest obstacles to reliableproduction of high quality fruithave and continue to comefrom biological organisms.

IR-4’s Assistance InvaluableAs pomegranate acreage ebbedand flowed through the latterhalf of the 20th century, thefarmers responsible for thisodd commodity faceddifficulties in defending the

crop from several insect pests.Omnivorous Leaf Roller (OLR)was the most damaging, butwith IR-4’s assistance in the late1970s new products becameavailable. Because of theextremely long period whichfruit is in the field – bloomoccurs starting in mid April andharvest can begin as late as midOctober – OLR was deemedenemy #1 for growers seekinglate harvest season fruit to fillthe void created betweensummer stone fruit productionand winter citrus harvest in theCentral Valley of California.

IPM and food safety toolsEven as acreage began toprominently increase,pomegranates were notconsidered when many newchemistries were launched overthe past 10 years. However,IR-4 has been present tosupport tools for integratedcontrol of such pests as aphidsand whiteflies (imidacloprid),and materials which allow forexport markets to be supportedwhile maintaining external andinternal quality (methoxy-fenozide and spinosad).

Feature Article

Pomegranates’ Sphere of Appreciation and Production Grows The Modern PomegranateIndustryThe breakthrough forpomegranate production cameat the exact moment where thecrop’s health benefits becameprominently known. In 2001,the post harvest fungicidefludioxonil began its’development for control ofBotrytis in stored fruit. Prior tothis product’s IR-4 registrationfruit had been marketedexclusively as pick-pack-ship,with tremendous losses fromstorage decay. Syngenta’ssupport of Scholar allowed thefruit to be stored beyond thetraditional autumn harvest,opening up export opportunitiesas well as extended marketingfor whole fruit and anever-broadening array ofpomegranate-based productssuch as extracted fresh arils.

“As the pomegranate industryhas grown, IR-4, especially thewestern region staff at Davis,has worked collaboratively withtechnology providers and thegrowers to tackle the issues asthey’ve emerged,” statedBernard Puget, the director ofpomegranate production atParamount Farming Company.Puget has spent yearsinteracting with IR-4 and thechemical registrants andreflected that many of theproducts which make currentlarge scale production of thisfruit possible came throughminor crop registration efforts.The need for management toolsto address glyphosate-resistantweeds such as marestail andfleabane are on the horizon,reported Puget.

Workshop

pg 8Vol 42 No 4

The 2011 IR-4 Food UseWorkshop (FUW) was heldSeptember 13-14 in Cary, NC.Each year this is the singlemost important gathering of IR-4 stakeholders forestablishing the next year’sresearch plan. This year IR-4stakeholders selected a total of45 priority “A” projects tosatisfy some of the most criticalherbicide, fungicide andinsecticide needs of U.S.specialty crop grower stake-holders. These “A” priorityprojects form the core of theIR-4 food use field and labresearch program in 2012.Additional researchable projectshave been added to the 2012plan via upgrades determinedbetween IR-4 regional andheadquarters staff.

A pre-workshop on-line projectnomination process has been inplace since 2006, and a similarnomination process was usedthis year in August (an IR-4website-based process, listingprojects potentially researchablein 2012, presented fornomination in three separatelists, one for each discipline – herbicides, insecticides andfungicides). Any stakeholder(except employees of agricul-tural chemical companies)could individually nominateprojects. Those projects givenat least one “A” nomination

were the focus of workshopdiscussions. At the Workshopthis year IR-4 replaced the discipline-driven projectprioritization with acommodity-driven process,focusing on the most criticalpest management needs foreach commodity. There was noquota of “A” priorities bydiscipline, by crop group or bycommodity. Attendees simplyworked through the entire slate(~210) of potential projectsfor 2012 crop by crop,beginning with Crop Group 1through Crop Group 99 andidentified a “first pass” of “A”priorities. Subsequently, thetotal “A” priorities was whittleddown to a target of 45. (To seethe assigned Priority “A” projects visit ir4.rutgers.edu.)

The impetus for the significantchange in the projectprioritization process wasdriven by many comments andsuggestions received over thepast few years from FUWparticipants and other IR-4stakeholders. Some 2010 FUW

participants also indicated thatthe final slate of “A” prioritiesassigned for 2011 researchincluded some questionableprojects to “filldiscipline-allotted quotas.”They suggested a different prioritization scheme beconsidered that would 1) betteraddress grower needs, 2) beable to adapt to these needs asthey change from year to year,and 3) be a more reasonableuse of taxpayer dollars thatsupport IR-4.

From feedback provided byFUW attendees this year (~60survey responders) and throughother verbal communications,the new prioritization processappears to have been a hugesuccess. About two thirds ofresponders commented thatthis new priority setting processwas quick and efficient, and itworked really well. A few evenwrote that this was the “bestFood Use Workshop ever.”Others commented that theydidn’t think it would work (vsthe prior discipline-based,quota system of “A” priorities),were pleasantly surprised howsmoothly it went, and that itshould be continued in futureworkshops. With this kind ofpositive response, the 2012FUW at the Union StationMarriott in St. Louis, MO, willlikely be organized around thisnew priority setting process.

2011 Food Use Workshop – Resultsand New Process Assessment

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

— by IR-4 Assistant Director, Van Starner

Workshop

pg 9Vol 42 No 4

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The IR-4 OrnamentalHorticulture Program held aworkshop October 5-6th todetermine research prioritiesfor 2012 and 2013. Afterpresentations on ongoingprojects and new potentialareas for existing and newproducts, the attendinggrowers, researchers, andextension agents establishedhigh priority projects forentomology, pathology andweed science.

EntomologyFor insects infesting crops ingreenhouses, thrips andwhiteflies are high priorities.The thrips protocol will test 3new products for westernflower thrips and other species.For whiteflies, 5 products willbe examined for Bemisia andother whiteflies. For insectsfeeding on woody ornamentals,scale, borers, and foliar feedingbeetles are important. Inaddition to these priorities,thrips materials crop safety willcontinue. This project willscreen Hachi-Hachi, Kontos,Overture, NNI-0101, andtolfenpyrad SC.

PathologyAfter reviewing the efficacyprojects from 2010/2011, thepathologists elected to maintainthree projects as high priority:

Bacterial Efficacy, PythiumEfficacy and Disease ProductsCrop Safety. For Bacterial andPythium Efficacy projects, theproducts will shift to focus onthe most promising materialsand new active ingredients.The crop safety protocols willcover foliar and drenchapplications and include 7different materials(acibenzolar, MCW-2,NF-149, Orvego, Torque,Tourney, Trinity).

Weed ScienceThis lively discussiongenerated two high priorityprojects for crop safety. Thefirst focuses on the over thetop application of liquidherbicides as plants breakdormancy with a repeatapplication 6 weeks later. Theherbicides to be testedinclude F6875, indazaflam,and Tower with Galleryincluded as a standard. Thesecond protocol focuses onover the top application ofliverwort managementproducts. An additional factorto be tested is whetherirrigation immediately afterapplication will alter cropsafety. This protocol will alsoinclude a minimal efficacyconfirmation with the newapplication and irrigationpattern.

2011 Ornamental Horticulture Program WorkshopOutcomes & Tour Photos

Dr. Lieth (UCDavis) explains benefits ofphotovoltaic shadehouse which generateselectricity while growing crops under itscanopy. Photo by Cristi Palmer.

UC Davis' Arboretum supportsteaching and research. Gardensrepresent different geographicareas, plant groups, orhorticultural themes. Photo by Kathleen Hester.

Matsuda's of Sacramento is a familyowned business specializing in woodyand perennial ornamental production.Photo by Cristi Palmer.

—by Ir-4 Ornamental Horticulture Manager, Cristi Palmer

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 10Vol 42 No 4

Spotlight on Ornamentals

Cyclamen – The Persian Violet

Calendar ofEvents

Western Region TrainingFebruary 7-8. 2012University of California, DavisContact: Becky Sisco530.752.7634

Global Minor Use Summit 2February 21-23, 2012Rome, ItalyContact: Dan Kunkel732.932.9575 x 4616

2012 Food Use WorkshopSt. Louis, MOSeptember 11-12, 2012Contact: Van Starner732.932.9575 x 4621

— by Cristi Palmer, IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Program Manager

With ethereal blooms hoveringabove heart-shaped, variegatedleaves, cyclamen almost glowsin wintry light.

Cyclamen originating in theMediterranean is hardy to zone7, and, although it can begrown outside in some areas ofthe United States, it isprimarily known as ahouseplant. Its lengthy bloomsare commonly used to brighteninteriors in the winter, and itspopularity as a winter-bloominghouseplant is growing. In2009, 5.1 million plants weresold in the United States at avalue of $14.8 million.

Cyclamen has relatively fewpest and disease issues formost homeowners as long as itis kept in a sunny location andnot overwatered.

Producers do, however, facesome issues when growing

cyclamen. Impatiens NecroticSpot Virus causes necrotic(dead, brown) patterns in theleaves. Leaf spots such asSeptoria and Phyllosticta marfoliage, while Botrytis graymold also causes floral spotsand will grow and sporulate indecaying flowers and leaves.Erwinia bacteria rot the tuber,and root pathogens such asPythium, Phytophthora, andFusarium can cause heavylosses if not managed. Thripsand mites including cyclamen,broad, and spider may becomeissues. Cyclamen mites feedwithin the calyx and base ofpetals and cause cyclamenflowers to be discolored or toshrivel or wilt. Infested flowersmay fail to open. These mitesalso feed on leaves causingthem to pucker, crinkle, orcurl. Broad mites will bronzefoliage as they are feedingbecause of a toxin in theirsaliva.

Other than a little crop safetyresearch with Endorse, IR-4has not worked directly withcyclamen, although several ofthe diseases and pestsdamaging this crop have beenstudied. Botrytis, Erwinia,Pythium, Phytophthora andFusarium have been some ofthe pathogens receivingattention in research projectsover the last 3 – 4 years.

APS Compendium of Flowering PottedPlants

Photo by Cristi Palmer

Screening for effective thripsproducts has been a keyresearch priority. To readIR-4 summary reports onthese projects, visitir4.rutgers.edu/ornamentals.html.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 11Vol 42 No 4

Did You Know?

When the Food QualityProtection Act (FQPA), with itsextensive new datarequirements for pesticides,was passed in 1996, there wasconcern in many pesticide usercommunities that importantpest control tools could losetheir registration if the datacosts were too high, and thatthis could leave substantialgaps in the ability to respondto pest outbreaks. Thisconcern was especially acutefor growers of low acreagecrops, for vector controlpersonnel, and for otherswhose pesticide purchasesmight not be sufficient to allowmanufacturers to economicallycover the new regulatorycosts. The new law respondedto the risk that small pesticidemarkets might face criticalshortages in their pest controltoolboxes through several newmechanisms, including supportfor the development of PestManagement Strategic Plans orPMSP’s. PMSP’s are intendedto serve as formal mechanismsfor growers or other IPMpractitioners to communicatetheir pest managementpractices and challenges, andin particular, any criticalshortfalls in available pestcontrol tools, to regulators, toresearchers, and to funders(see ipmcenters.org/pmsp/).

PMSP’s are created with thesupport of USDA’s Office ofPest Management Policy(OPMP) and the Regional IPMCenters, and they have beenpopular and effective. Untilrecently, almost all of the 100PMSP’s have been developedby agricultural commoditygroups, but recent Notices ofCancellation of registration forsignificant public healthpesticides have led to an effort,initiated by IR-4, to prepare aMosquito Control PMSP.The FQPA addresses: vectorcontrol and public healthpesticides (PHP’s) as a specificpesticide “minor use”,provisions for a Public HealthCoordinator within the Officeof Pesticides Programs,requirements that public healthconsequences be considered inregulatory decisions involvingPHP’s, and an authorization forpotential federal funding if thecosts of new data requirementscaused registrants to pullPHP’s off the market. Since theAct’s passage, however, theseprovisions were not directly putto the test until recently, whenthe registrants of resmethrin, apyrethroid used to controladult mosquitoes, andtemephos, an organophosphatelarvicide, announced that theycould not afford the data-call-in(DCI) expenses associated withre-registration of their materials

(edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-11697.pdf;edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-1583.pdf). Vectorcontrol practitioners,represented primarily by theAmerican Mosquito ControlAssociation (AMCA), theCenters for Disease Controland Prevention (CDC), and theIR-4 Public Health PesticidesProgram, submitted numerouscomments and letters on theproposed cancellations,focusing on the small numberof registered PHP’s and theneed to protect them generally,as well as providinginformation on use patternsand extraordinary attributes ofthese specific chemicals.However, efforts to secure anappropriation of federal fundsto generate the data requiredby the DCI’s have beenunsuccessful, perhaps notsurprisingly given currentbudget challenges. Proposalsto satisfy the DCI’s withexisting data or to justify

Development of a Mosquito ControlPest Management Strategic Plan— by Karl Malamud-Roam, IR-4 Public Health Pesticides Program Manager

Larvicide application in HudsonCounty, New Jersey

continued on back page

In light of these challenges andquestions, IR-4 approachedOPMP and AMCA early in2011 to discuss the feasibilityof developing a MosquitoControl PMSP similar to thosein agriculture. Specifically,there is a need for an inventoryof the chemical tools that areavailable or underdevelopment, a review of theirlimitations and the regulatorychallenges facing them, and apresentation of priorities forresearch, regulatory assistance,funding, and training. Thesediscussions led to a series ofsubsequent workshops, andhas demonstrated that there issignificant interest in the idea.Current plans include a finalworkgroup meeting in lateOctober, and a draft PMSP forpublic comments for release inearly 2012.

IR-4 Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey500 College Road EastSuite 201 WPrinceton, NJ 08540

NON-PROFITUS POSTAGE

NEW BRUNSWICK, NJ

PERMIT NO. 157

Address Service Requested

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey • University of California • Cornell University• University of Florida • Michigan State University

Major funding for IR-4 is provided by Special Research Grantsand Hatch Act Funds from USDA-NIFA , in cooperation with theState Agricultural Experiment Stations, and USDA-ARS.

Information Exchange

United States Department of Agriculture

waivers from some datarequirements have beenprepared, but it is not nowclear whether these proposalswill be accepted, whether thematerials will in fact disappearfrom the tool box, or whetherthere will be some otheroutcome.

Resmethrin and temephos arenot the only mosquitocidesthat have faced regulatoryscrutiny in recent decades,from state or local as well asfederal authorities. Manycarbamates and

organophosphates have beentaken off the market andmosquito larvicidal oils areincreasingly scarce andscrutinized. While new controltools have also entered themarket during this period, theloss or potential loss ofwell-known, reliable productshas caused significantuncertainty in many cornersabout whether needed toolswill be available in years tocome not only for routineoperations against familiarpests, but also to respondquickly and effectively tointroduced mosquito species,disease outbreaks requiringhigh vector control efficacy,resistance to standardpesticides, budget cuts, or anumber of other foreseeablechallenges.

MosquitoPMSPcontinued from page 11