varietal introductions and growth control in poinsettia ... › media... · presentation page...

Poinsettia Discussion Group Meeting

Varietal introductions and growth control in poinsettia production

21 November 2019

Neame Lea Nursery, Horseshoe Road, Spalding, Lincolnshire PE11 3JB

Staplehurst Nurseries, 8 October 2019 – water deficit and PGR grown crops

Event programme

Time Presentation Speaker 9.30 Registration, coffee/tea refreshments 10.00 Event welcome by the BPOA Poinsettia Group

Chairperson Graeme Edwards,Woodlark Nurseries

10.05 Growing with water deficit irrigation, the pros and cons

Vasile Agache, Neame Lea Nurseries

10.30 Water deficit trial 2019 Mark Else, NIAB EMR

11.00 Coffee/tea refreshments

11.15 Results from the poinsettia monitoring scheme and residue testing work

Neil Bragg, Substrate Associates

11.30 IPM update for pest and disease control in poinsettia

David Hide, Fargro

12.00 Plant growth regulator programmes for poinsettia trial

Jill England, ADAS

12.15 Poinsettia variety trial 2019 Harry Kitchener, Consultant

12.30 Lunch 13.00 Visits to on-site demonstrations (30 mins each):

PGR programme assessment trial Water deficit trial Poinsettia production at Neame Lea Poinsettia variety trial scoring

Jill England, ADAS Mark Else, NIAB, EMR Vasile Agache, Neame Lea Harry Kitchener, Consultant

15.00 Any other business including further discussion on research needs and study tour ideas for 2020

Graeme Edwards, BPOA Poinsettia GroupChairperson

15.30 Coffee/tea refreshments and depart

Contents

Presentation Page Growing poinsettia crops using water deficit irrigation Vasile Agache

1

PO22: Developing precision and deficit irrigation techniques to reduce reliance on PGRs and to optimise plant quality, uniformity and shelf-life potential in commercial protected pot and bedding plant production Mark Else

6

Poinsettia monitoring scheme and active ingredient residue testing Neil Bragg

18

Poinsettia: an IPM update David Hide

20

Evaluation of PGRs on poinsettia Jill England

29

Poinsettia variety scoring sheet 34

Growing poinsettia crops using water deficit irrigation Vasile Agache

Growing poinsettia crops using water deficit irrigation

Vasile Agache

21 November 2019

HKConsultancy

Substrate associates

Ltd.

Water Deficit trial - the beginning

2015 - 15,000 poinsettia grown on benches, with capillary matting

2016 - first 25,000 poinsettia grown without any PGR, but no data captured

2017 - 100 plants: data was captured for the first time as part of AHDB WD trial

Water Deficit trial continued…

2018 - 4,000 plants were grown with WD method

2019 - 40,000 plants were grown with the same method

2020 - we will aim to grow as many poinsettia as we can with this innovative technology

Page 1


Advantages

• NO PGR use – environmental friendly

• Better plant shelf life

• Better quality plants for end customer

• Better root system

Further advantages

• Less risk of disease

• Better foliage colour

• Stronger, sturdier plants

• Significantly smaller water bills for those using mains water or not recycling

Further advantages

• Electricity and other bills related to crop irrigation

• Chemical cost saving

• No risk of phytotoxicity after PGR application

• Reduces the risk of nutrient locking or flushing

Page 2


More advantages

• WD uses latest technologies which can maintain the optimum moisture content for crop

• Data updated every 15 min to smartphone, tablet, PC or Mac

• Mild and temporary wilting will not damage the crop prior to flower initiation

And even more advantages …

• Use the available technology to be able to irrigate the crop

• Use precise irrigation events based on data provided by sensors

Disadvantages

• Poor root structure when drying regime is applied may cause cropfailure

• Drying the crop too much might cause crop failure

• Pot moisture content may vary on the same bench or within the glasshouse

Page 3


Disadvantages

• Uneven growing surface will cause uneven growth/dry spots

• Watering benches at different pressure, hence more or less water quantity

• Growing media with quick drainage

• Confusion between water deficit trial being used as a grower tool and not a system which grows poinsettia without growers input

Disadvantages

• Wrong sensor calibration will cause inaccurate readings

• Always must have clean bench drainage holes and filters in place

• It is unlikely to happen but sensors, dataloggers and telemetry may be unreliable

Other things to consider when using WD method

• Weather probability forecasting to help irrigation scheduling

• Outdoor weather and indoor phytoclimate

• Light transmission (PAR) across the growing area

• Need appropriate controls

Page 4


Other things to consider when using WD method

• Choose carefully when to dry down – avoid hot, sunny days with high VPD

• The bench with sensors must be representative for the whole crop toreduce variability

• The water quality needs to be high, with very low salinity, to avoid the accumulation of salts within the root zone

Page 5

PO22: Developing precision and deficit irrigation techniques to reduce reliance on PGRs and to optimise plant quality, uniformity and shelf-life potential in commercial protected pot and bedding

plant production

AHDB PO 22, 21 November 2019 [email protected]

HKConsultancy

Substrate Associates Ltd

WPs 2 & 3: Using precision irrigation and regulated deficit irrigation to control stem

height without reliance on PGRs

[email protected]

Contents

Objectives for 2019 PI RDI trials

Remote monitoring of substrate water contents – DeltaLINK Cloud and Dashboard

RDI - height control with reduced reliance on PGRs

Staplehurst – one spray

Neame Lea – no sprays

Mapping variability across the growing area

Vapour Pressure Deficit (VPD) and crop co-efficients

Summary of progress

Next steps:

Does stress pre-conditioning improve shelf-life potential?

Scaling-up using crop-coefficients and VPD forecasts

Page 6

PO22: Developing precision and deficit irrigation techniques Mark Else

Objectives for the 2019 PI RDI trials

Use PI & RDI to deliver height control in four varieties

‘Freya Red’, ‘Astro Red’, ‘Infinity Red’, Week 30 – Neame Lea

‘Hera Red’, Week 29 – Staplehurst Nurseries

Use PI technology to schedule irrigation to separate blocks

Identify SVMC (substrate volumetric moisture content) values at which visible wilting first occurred in each variety under a range of VPDs

Determine the timing and frequency of water deficits needed to control stem height effectively - regulated deficit irrigation (RDI)

Quantify the impact of RDI on plant quality and shelf-life potential

Derive crop co-efficients for the four varieties to facilitate scaling-up

Monitoring of substrate water contents

SM150T sensors installed in nine pots of each variety

Sensors being calibrated for each substrate

Temperature-corrected moisture content measured every 15 min

Data from nine sensors averaged, and displayed in DeltaLINK Cloud

Air temperature, RH, VPD and PAR measured every 15 min

Remote access to real-time data

DeltaLINK Cloud Reports

Data updated every 15 min to smartphone, tablet, PC or Mac

Alarm sent to user if values move below or above pre-determined thresholds

Page 7


Grower Dashboard

Dashboard not shared with Staplehurst team…

Irrigation to Commercial crop

Commercial crop - a ‘growy’ season

Crop sprayed with CCC after pinching (14 August 2019, Week 33)

Subsequently sprayed 5 times with Bonzi, once with CCC

Onset of bract colouration advanced in commercial crop

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

29.5

30.5

31.5

32.5

33.5

34.5

35.5

36.5

37.5

38.5

39.5

40.5

41.5

42.5

43.5

44.5

45.5

Plant heigh t (cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

23/08/19

30/08/19

06/09/19

13/09/19

20/09/19

27/09/19

04/10/19

11/10/19

18/10/19

25/10/19

01/11/19

Rate of stem extendion (mm / day)

Page 8


Change in slope indicates that plants are experiencing water deficit stress

Rate of change in SVMC is slowed by stomatal closure

RDI stress imposed on three occasions

Remote detection of RDI stress

Stress…

RDI - height control with reduced reliance on PGRs

Crop sprayed with CCC after pinching (14 August 2019, Week 33)

Three RDI events applied

Height control also achieved during RDI pre-conditioning phase (Weeks 36-37)

Any adverse or positive effects on plant quality….?

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Plant heigh t (cm

)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Rate of stem extendion (mm / day)

Page 9


Minimising on-bench and between-bench variability

Drips!

Laser-levelled / water-levelled benches

Pressure-regulated irrigation inputs to benches

Clean bench trays and channels

Clean drainage holes, with mesh grids, similar drainage rates

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

29 30

CCC and PI RDI plants from Staplehurst at dispatch

Which plants are the PI RDI ones?

Beneficial stress…

Page 10


Growth-controlling water deficits – ‘Astro Red’

Pre RDI conditioning treatment applied from 12 – 30 September 2019

RDI applied from 21 September 2019 and continuing…

Target SVMC in 2018 was 24% (applied with caution in Week 46)

Pre‐conditioning RDI

Changing height specs mid season is challenging….

Mapping on bench variability

Plant-and-pot weight (g)

Substrate VMC (m3 m-3)

Pore E.C. (mS m-1)

Substrate temperature (oC)Orientation

W S E

Sam

plin

g p

osi

tion

alo

ng

be

nch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

440.3

500.3

480.3

460.3

480.3

480.3

460.3

500.3

460.3

440.3

Plant-and-pot wt (g)

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

po

sitio

n a

lon

g b

ench

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

540.3

520.3

500.3480.3

540.3

520.3

540.3

520.3500.3480.3

500.3

PI/RDI Bl5, #2 14/09/19 CC Bl4, #2 14/09/19

Page 11


Mapping on bench variability

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

posi

tion

alo

ng

ben

ch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

19.0

18.9

18.9

19.219.1

19.0

18.9

18.7

18.7

18.7

18.7

18.6

19.0

18.618.5

18.4

18.6

19.018.9

18.7

19.0

19.0

19.1

19.519.4

19.2

19.3

18.8

18.8

18.8

18.8

19.3

Substrate temp. (oC)

W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

19.5

19.4

19.6

19.6

19.5

19.4

19.2

19.2

19.1

19.5

19.2

19.4

19.3

19.3

19.3

19.3

19.3

19.3

19.3

PI/RDI Bl 5, #2 04/10/19 PI/RDI Bl 5, #3 04/10/19

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

pos

itio

n a

lon

g b

enc

h

0

1

2

3

4

5

60.20

0.25

0.25

0.20

0.20

0.30

0.25

0.20

0.25

SVMC (m3 m-3)

W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.25

PI/RDI BL 5, #2 04/10/19 PI/RDI BL 5, #3 04/10/19

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

po

sitio

n a

long

be

nch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

300.3

300.3

300.3

300.3

W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

300.3

250.3250.3

250.3

PI/RDI Bl 5, #2 04/10/19 PI RDI Bl5, #3 04/10/19


Mapping variability between benches

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

pos

itio

n a

long

be

nch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

300.3

350.3

300.3

300.3

300.3

300.3


W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

500.3

500.3

500.3

500.3

450.3

450.3

PI/RDI Bl3, #2 26/09/19 CC Bl4, #2 26/09/19

W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

400.3

350.3

400.3

350.3

350.3

PI RDI Bl5, #2 26/09/19

Orientation

W S E

Sam

plin

g p

ositi

on

alo

ng b

ench

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0.25

0.30

0.25

0.25

0.30

0.25

0.25


W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0.55

0.50

0.50

0.500.50

0.45

0.55

0.45

0.45

0.40

0.55

0.50

PI RDI Bl3, #2 26/09/19 CC Bl4, #2 26/09/19

W S E

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

0.40

0.35

0.40

0.35

0.35

0.30

0.35

0.35

0.45

0.30

0.30

PI RDI Bl5, #2 26/09/19


Orientation

W S E

Sam

plin

g p

ositi

on a

long

ben

ch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

290.3

280.3

290.3

280.3

270.3

270.3

270.3

280.3

270.3

290.3

330.3320.3310.3

290.3

280.3

300.3


W S E

270.3260.3

270.3

290.3

280.3

280.3

270.3

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

W S E

0.23

0.22

0.21

0.21

0.23

0.24

0.23

0.220.21

0.20

0.20

0.20


W S E

0.23

0.22

0.21

0.230.220.21

0.24

0.22

0.260.240.23

0.20

0.20

0.20

0.25

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mpl

ing

pos

itio

n a

lon

g b

ench

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

450.3

450.3

450.3

450.3


W S E

450.3

450.3

450.3

450.3

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

W S E

0.35

0.40

0.40

0.50

0.450.45

0.35

0.40

0.35

0.45


W S E

0.40

0.35

0.35

0.350.30

0.450.40

0.40

0.45

0.35

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

Before irrigation After irrigation

Page 12


Mapping variability on benches

Before irrigation After irrigation

Orientation

W S E

Sa

mp

ling

pos

itio

n al

ong

ben

ch

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

290.3

280.3

290.3

280.3

270.3

270.3

270.3

280.3

270.3

290.3

330.3320.3310.3

290.3

280.3

300.3


W S E

270.3260.3

270.3

290.3

280.3

280.3

270.3

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

W S E

0.22

0.20

0.18

0.20

0.24

0.18

0.22

0.20

0.18

0.18


W S E

0.20

0.22

0.20

0.220.20

0.24

0.18

0.260.24

0.18

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

Orientation

W S E

Sam

plin

g po

sitio

n al

ong

benc

h

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

450.3

450.3

450.3

450.3


W S E

450.3

450.3

450.3

450.3

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19

W S E

0.35

0.40

0.40

0.50

0.450.45

0.35

0.40

0.35

0.45


W S E

0.40

0.35

0.35

0.35

0.450.40

0.40

0.45

0.35

PI RDI Bl3, #202/10/19

PI RDI Bl3, #302/10/19


Orientation

NE NW SW

Sam

plin

g posi

tion a

long

benc

h

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

330

330

320

360

340

340

340

340330

330

320

350

350350

350

NE NW SW

326

322

318

314

326

322

322

318

322

318

322

PI RDI Astro Red#6, 24/09/19

NE NW SW

310.3

310.3

320.3

320.3

340.3

340.3

330.3

330.3

340.3

360.3

300.3350.3

350.3

350.3

350.3


NE NW SW

360.3

360.3

440.3

440.3

430.3

430.3

420.3

420.3

410.3

410.3

390.3

390.3

380.3

380.3

370.3

370.3

440.3

430.3420.3

410.3

400.3

400.3

400.3

400.3

NE NW SW

370.3

360.3

360.3340.3

340.3

340.3

330.3

320.3

310.3

350.3

350.3

NE NW SW

330.3

320.3

310.3

330.3

340.3

340.3

390.3

380.3

380.3

370.3

370.3

360.3

360.3

350.3

350.3

NE NW SW

370.3

360.3

360.3340.3

340.3

360.3340.3

330.3

370.3

370.3

360.3

330.3

350.3

350.3

350.3350.3

#11#16Sensor bench #21 #26 #31 #36

Using VPDs to schedule PI and RDI

High VPDs result in higher rates of transpiration… until stomata close

Plants recover from wilting quickly once VPD begins to fall

Mild and temporary wilting will not damage the crop (growth stage…)

Page 13


Linking VPD with plant water loss

Daytime rate of change (RoC) of substrate drying correlates with plant water loss

Relationship changes with plant development stageMature bracts don’t have stomata and so water loss is slowed at maturity

Should be able to estimate plant water loss and degree of plant stress…

10.4%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Accumlated day tim

e hourly VPD

(kPa)

Daily water loss (% decrease in VMC)

Daily water loss vs VPD

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Daily RoC VSM

C (%)

Accumulated day time hourly VPD kPa)

VPD vs Daily water loss

Forecasting VPD to help to schedule irrigation

05/08/19 19/08/19 02/09/19 16/09/19 30/09/19

VP

D (

kPa

)

0

1

2

3

Frittenden

Date

05/08/19 19/08/19 02/09/19 16/09/19 30/09/19

Inte

rnal

VP

D (

kPa

)

0

1

2

3

Trial area

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Outside vs inside VPD

Series1 Series2

Summary of Staplehurst PI RDI work…

‘Hera Red’, potted Week 29, into short days on 12 September 2019

Market date 11 November 2019, height spec. 23-32, target 27-28 cm

One CCC spray applied following pinching

All plants spaced and graded twice to date

Commercial crop sprayed x7 times to date

PI RDI crop sprayed once

Sensors, dataloggers and telemetry reliable and working well

Remote access to real-time data informs decision-making

Repeated exposure to water deficits over a 3-week period (Week 38-41) should optimise growth control

Page 14


Summary of Neame Lea PI RDI work so far…

‘Freya Red’, ‘Astro Red’, ‘Infinity Red’, Week 30 – Neame Lea

No PGR sprays

Changing height specs mid-season is a challenge…

Sensors, dataloggers and telemetry reliable and working well

Remote access to real-time data informs decision-making

Grower Dashboard helpful to check on SVMCs and VPDs

Repeated exposure to water deficits over a 4-week period (week 39-42) will optimise growth control

Choose carefully when to dry down – avoid hot, sunny days with high VPD

WP 5: Capillary matting and drip irrigation

[email protected]


• Took a number (>700) of moisture readings in several areas representing, dry, wet,or just watered pots on capillary matting

• Weighed pots in some areas to double check moisture variation• Data sets being analysed

Measurements at Volmary

Page 15


WP 6: Plant quality and shelf-life potential

HKConsultancy

Objective assessment of plant qualityQuality Criteria

Characteristic Description/method Description of range Standard specificationPlant height Assessment is made from pot top to tallest part of plant n/a Dependant on customer

specificationShoot loss Only plants with 4 shoots enter assessment. Counts of the loss

of primary shoots from removal of sleeves onwardsn/a 4 should be maintained

through entire processLeaf drop Observed as sleeve removed and then weekly count of drop

with a final assessment of overall loss as a proportion of the total number of leaves using a 1-5 scale

Final score 1= all fallen off, to 5= all present 3 and above

Bract drop Observed as sleeve removed and then weekly count of drop with a final assessment of overall loss as a proportion of the total number of bract leaves using a 1-5 scale

Final score 1= all fallen off, to 5= all present 3 and above

Bract head difference in height

Measure the distance between the highest and lowest of the 4 main bract heads

Pass/fail Customer dependant specification

Bract head diameter

Measure with of width at broadest part of the bract head n/a More important to compare difference between CC and RDI

Bract edge blackening

Observed once sleeve removed and home-life testing underway

n/a Absent

Cyathia quality Single overall score which takes size, pollen production and abscission into consideration

1= closed bud; 2=closed bud with colour showing; 3=pollen visible, stigma closed; 4=no pollen, stigma open; 5=pollen visible, stigma open; 6=presence of scars from abscission of cyathia

3 and above

Plant quality Single overall score which takes into consideration all scored aspects as well as plant habit/shape, bract position, bract colour (how it is maintained over time), cyathia colour, leaf colour.

1= of unacceptable standard in one or more aspects, 2= 2nd quality does not achieve retail standards, 3= acceptable in all aspects, 4= less than excellent in one aspect, 5 =excellent quality in all areas

3 and above

• First scoring of quality ‘at dispatch’ by nursery staff• Sleeved plants placed 6 in a box• Transportation with data recording • Arrival at testing facility• Removal of sleeves after 1 +6 days• Second quality scoring 24 h after sleeve removal• Plants placed in shelf life room, randomised, spaced and on saucers• Wireless temperature and RH sensors located around shelf-life room• Installation of SM150T moisture sensors to track changes in SVMC• Weekly scoring for 6-8 weeks completing in early January 2020

Quality assessment and shelf / home life testing

Page 16


Thanks to:Marcel, Martyn, Simon, John, Geoff and SteveVasile and ViktorijaHilary, Ben and HarryMike, Fernando, Lucia, Matteo, Victor, Pablo

AHDB PO 22, 21 November 2019 [email protected]

HKConsultancy


Page 17



Poinsettia monitoring scheme and active ingredient residue

testing

Neil Bragg

Summary of the issues raised: Poinsettia Monitoring Scheme ‐ 2019

• Far fewer growers have opted for ‘Infinity’, therefore generally less lower leaf visible marking

• Most growers switched to high phosphate feeds at the end of August, this avoided the usual drop in phosphate levels

• Some growers failed to check their injector systems or fertiliser stock tanks

• This led in some cases to dangerously low overall fertiliserlevels

• Compared to plants seen in Germany, crops were generally paler!

Examples of poinsettia ‐ UK Vs Germany

Page 18


Examples of poinsettia ‐ UK Vs Germany

Leaf active ingredient residue levels at rooted cutting stage (mg/kg)

Azoxystrobin 0.02Buprofezin 0.83

Chlorothalonil 39.0

Deltamethrin 0.25Fluopyram 2.80

Mepanipyrim 1.30Metalaxyl‐M 0.02

Pyrimethanil 0.04

Azadirachtin 0.57Carbendazim 0.02

Cryomazine 3.80Flonicamid 0.25

Spiromesifen 0.08Spirotetramat 0.24

Thiophanate‐methyl 0.01

Possible side effects of active ingredient residues on bio‐control agents

Page 19


Poinsettia: an IPM update

Main culpritsAphids: several species including Peach‐potato aphid (Myzus persicae), Glasshouse potato aphid (Aulacorthumsolani) and Potato aphid (Macrosiphum euphorbiae).

Thrips: Japanese or Eastern Flower Thrips (Thripssetosus).

Whitefly: Glasshouse, Honeysuckle, Bemisia tabaci.

Spider mite: Lewis mite (Eotetranychus lewisi).

Bacterial leaf spot: Xanthomonas arboricola.

Aphid control on poinsettiaBiological: Aphidius colemani + A. ervimix per 1 to 2 m2 per fortnight on 4 to 6 occasions as soon as aphids found.

IPM compatible sprays: Sequoia 200g/ha.

Mainman: EAMU 0045 of 2013 at 0.14 kg/ha in 200 to 1,500 ltwater (14 g per 100 lt at 1,000 lt/ha rate).

Page 20


Controls aphid and whitefly. Unique mode of action. No cross resistance to other chemical classes. Active ingredient is new ‐ sufloxaflor. Approved for use on ‐

Permanent protection with full enclosure crops of:ornamental plant production,tomato, aubergine pepper,cucumber, melon, courgette.

New product Sequoia

4

New product Sequoia ‐mode of action

5

New product Sequoia ‐ propertiesLack of cross‐resistance to all other insecticide MOAs.

Control of pyrethroid, carbamate, flonicamid and OP resistance aphid biotypes.

Controls neonicotinioid resistance aphids in S. Europe (not found in UK to date).

Systemic and translaminar activity.

Active by contact and ingestion.

Safe on a wide range of ornamental plants.

Labelled for control of whitefly and aphid.

Activity likely on: psyllids, scale insects, leafhoppers, capsids, mealybugs.

6

Page 21


New product Sequoia• Sequoia – speed of activity

7

Sequoia ‐ Compatibility with Beneficial insects & mites

State of play at April 2019.

For more informationSee Fargro Technical Notes

8

Sequoia ‐ key points

Rapid acting. Systemic and translaminar. Controls aphids and whitefly. Contact and ingestion . New chemical class: sulfoximines ‐ IRAC 4C. Usable in biological programmes.

9

Page 22


Sequoia ‐ the label

Whitefly rate 1 application per year at 400 ml/ha.

Aphid rate 2 applications per year at 200 ml/ha.(minimum of 14 days apart if needed)

10

Sequoia ‐ further information Further information see the leaflet, label or Technical Notes available from

Fargro or your distributor. For more information on the active see http://isoclast.eu

11

Polyphagous, very similar host range to WFT.

Dark brown to black, similar to cereal thrips.

Virus transmission, TSWV (same as WFT).

Similar life cycle to WFT, eggs laid in leaves, first and second instar larvae feed in patches on the underside of leaves causingcharacteristic silvering with minute black faecal pellets.

Thrips setosus ‐ Eastern Flower Thrips

Page 23


Thrips setosus ‐ Eastern Flower Thrips

Photo adult T. setosus leaf damage and excrement. Courtesy : Wietse den Hartog (NPPO of NL)

Photo of adult T. setosus courtesy Rens van den Biggelaar, NVWA

Photo of adult Limothrips cerealium courtesy Nigel

Cattlin

Limothrips cerealium: Cereal thrips.

Glasshouse whitefly Trialeurodes vaporariorum

Cotton whitefly: Bemisia tabaci

Whitefly ‐ Glasshouse vs Bemisia tabaci

Photo’s courtesy Nigel Cattlin

Trialeurodes Bemisia tabaci

‘Pork pie’ or Cornish pasty

Page 24


Glasshouse whitefly control by parasitoidsEncarsia formosa

1 : 1 up to 60 eggs per female wasp.

Min temp 12oC.

Eretmocerus eremicus

1 : 1 up to 50 eggs per female wasp,host feeding is high.

Min temp 17oC but good up to 40oC.


Whitefly control

Macrolophus pygmaeus

• 1 : 500 +, 70 eggs per female.

•Mediterranean origin.

•Min temp 15oC.

• Licensed for use on protected crops inproduction.

• Supplementary food to improveestablishment.


Whitefly control by pathogen

Beauveria bassianaLecanicillium lecanii

Min 60% Rh, (B. bassiana) 95% at leafsurface (L. lecanii).Slow curative.Ideal for severe ‘hot spots’ and mixingwith selective pesticides.

Page 25


Batavia ‐ 18449 EAMU 20192597

Control for whitefly, aphid, and thrips.Approved for use in protected and permanent protection with fullenclosure ornamental plant production.

Maximum individual dose 0.75l/ha.

2 applications, min 14 days apart.

Latest application 14 days before or following flowering.

Worker PPE 39 days, thermal comfort checks.

Additional controls

FLiPPER

SB Plant Invigorator

Applaud

Gazelle SG

Azatin?

Lewis mite: Eotetranychus lewisi

Page 26


Spider mites ‐ Eotetranychus lewisi

Smaller than common two‐spotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae.

Yellowish with 2 small dark spots.

Leaf damage and life cycle similar to TSSM.

Amblyseius andersoni far better than Phytoseiulus.

A. montdorensis and A. swirskii limited activity on spider mites.

Dynamec (abamectin), good but will disrupt Encarsia and Eretmocerus for whitefly control.

Lewis mite: Eotetranychus lewisii

Photo of adult E. lewis mite courtesy Tetsuo goto

Capsicum Carica papaya Cucumis sativus Euphorbia pulcherrima Solanum Citrus

Major host plants (all protected crops)

Xanthamonas arboricola pv. poinsettiicola

Photo courtesy: Y.‐A. Lee 1*, P.‐C. Wu 1 and H.‐L. Liu New Disease Reports (2006) 13, 24

Page 27



Found recently in West Sussex on Poinsettia from Ethiopia,rooted in Germany.

Similar symptoms found in UK since 2006.

Classified under various Xanthamonas species and sub‐species.

Common name bacterial leaf spot.


Initially as small spots on leaves, quickly turn brown and surrounded by pale yellow haloes. Spots and haloes enlarge rapidly and coalesce into irregular, yellow to brown lesions.

6 interceptions in the UK since July 2006, all on poinsettia, incidence of infected plants ranged from 0.5% to 30%. All interceptions traced toone supplier via the Netherlands, plants originally from Brazil,Zimbabwe and other unknown locations.

Thank you!

[email protected]

Page 28


Evaluation of PGRs on poinsettia

w w w .adas.uk

Dr Jill England, Chloe Whiteside, David Talbot, Chris Need and Harry Kitchener

The Bedding and Pot Plant Centre (PO 019a)New product opportunities for bedding and pot plant growers

@ahdbbppc@ADAS_hortic

Overview

1. Evaluation of PGRs and fungicides on

poinsettia.

2. Further information.

Evaluation of PGRs, fungicides and nutrients on poinsettia 2019

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and phytotoxicity of a range of plant growth regulators (PGRs), fungicides and nutrients for use on poinsettia.

Page 29


Product approvals

Product Active ingredient / formulation Approval status

1 Terpal (PGR)Ethephon (155 g/L) +

mepiquat chloride (305 g/L)EAMU 0151/18

2Stabilan 750

(reference, PGR)Chlormequat (750 g/L) EAMU 0910/17

3 Bonzi (PGR) Paclobutrazol (4.0 g/L) Label approval

4 HDC P006 (adjuvant) ‐ EAMU application

5 Topas (fungicide) Penconazole (100 g/L) EAMU 0169/19

6 Control Seaweed based nutrients n/a

Non‐approved uses applied under experimental permit. Applied in 300 L/ha water except for *Bonzi (T10) applied in 600 L/ha water.

Modes of action

Glyceraldehyde phosphate

Geranylgeranyl pyrophosphate

ent‐Kaurene

GA12 ‐ aldehyde

GA19

GA20

GA8

Quaternary Ammonium Compounds (QAC)e.g. chlormequat chloride, mepiquat chloride(Stabilan 750, HDC P005, Terpal)

Triazoles e.g. paclobutrazol, propiconazole (Bonzi, Bumper)

Prohexadione calcium, trinexapac‐ethyl, daminozide (Regalis Plus, HDC P005, Primo Maxx II, B‐nine, Moddus)

Exception: ethephon (Terpal, Cerone), breaks down to ethylene

Gibberellin biosynthesis pathway

Evaluation of PGRs ‐ 2018

• Terpal: Good efficacy. No phytotoxicity.Recommend rate 1.67 ml/L (0.5 L/ha) orlower (300 L/ha water).

• Bonzi: Good efficacy at higher rates, nophytotoxicity. Useful during late stages.

• Regalis Plus: Limited efficacy andrestricted use; most expensive.

• HDC P006: Once approved, use withTerpal and Stabilan 750 at reduced doserates.

• HDC P005 and Primo Maxx II:Phytotoxicity. Use not recommended.

Page 30


Evaluation of PGRs and fungicides

Culture

• Variety: ‘Infinity’ (Dummen).

• 13 cm pots.

• Potted: week 30.

• Pinched: week 33.

Treatments

• Weekly applications, week 39‐43(5 applications).

• Holding spray of Bonzi if necessary.

Standard dose rates ‐ 2019

Treatment Product Dose rates (L/ha) Dose rate (ml/L)

1 Terpal 0.5 L/ha 1.67 ml/L

2 Stabilan 750 0.15 L/ha 0.5 ml/L

3Bonzi 0.105 L/ha 0.35 ml/L

4 HDC P006 0.75 L/ha 2.5 ml/L

5 Topas 0.5 L/ha 1.67 ml/L

6 Control 1.5 L/ha 5.0 ml/L

Non‐approved uses applied under experimental permit. Applied in 300 L/ha water.

Treatments ‐ 2019

Non‐approved uses applied under experimental permit. Applied in 300 L/ha water.

Treatme

ntSpray 1 Spray 2 Spray 3 Spray 4 Spray 5

1 Water Water Water Water Water Water

2 Stabilan 750 Stabilan 750 Bonzi Bonzi Bonzi

Bonzi holdingtreatment3

Stabilan 750

+ HDC P006

Stabilan 750

+ HDC P006Bonzi Bonzi Bonzi

4 Terpal Terpal Terpal Terpal Terpal

5Terpal + HDC

P006

Terpal + HDC

P006

Terpal +

HDC P006

Terpal + HDC

P006

Terpal + HDC

P006

6 Stabilan 750 Stabilan 750 Terpal Terpal Terpal

7Stabilan 750

+ HDC P006

Stabilan 750

+ HDC P006Terpal +

HDC P006

Terpal + HDC

P006

Terpal + HDC

P006

8 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35

Page 31


Treatments ‐ 2019

* Applied in 600 L/ha water.

Treatme

ntSpray 1 Spray 2 Spray 3 Spray 4 Spray 5

9 Bonzi 0.5 Bonzi 0.5 Bonzi 0.5 Bonzi 0.5 Bonzi 0.5

Bonzi holding treatment

10* Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35 Bonzi 0.35

11 Terpal Terpal Terpal Stabilan 750 Stabilan 750

12 Topas x1 Topas x1 Topas x1 Topas x1 Topas x1

13 Topas x0.5 Topas x0.5 Topas x0.5 Topas x0.5 Topas x0.5

Obs 1Topas x2

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

Obs 2 Control Control Control Control Control Control

Obs 3 Control x2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐

PGR costs

ProductCost of active*

(p)Cost /L of spray

(p)Terpal (1.67 ml/L) 1.7 /ml 2.8Bonzi (0.35 ml/L) 9.5 /ml 3.3Stabilan 750 (0.5 ml/L) 0.3 /ml 0.2HDC P006** (2.5 ml/L) tbc tbcControl (5.0 ml/L) 2.7 /ml 13.4*Non‐discounted, excluding VAT**Awaiting approval, not currently marketed in the UK.

Further information

Twitter: @ahdbbppc

Report: March 2020

AHDB Horticulture News articles

Poinsettia Discussion Group meeting, 15th January 2020

Page 32


Thank you

• Stuart Whiteman, Nick Nolan and the team at Newey.

• Peter Seymour and Megan‐Rose Beard, ADAS.

• BASF.

• Syngenta.

• Nufarm.

• GrowDesign.

• AHDB.

Page 33

PO 023 'Commercial evaluation of new poinsettia varieties'

Poinsettia variety trials 2019

Grower poinsettia variety assessment at harvest, prior to shelf life 21 November 2019, Neame Lea Nurseries Spalding

There are 20 varieties from five suppliers, 12 will go into shelf life.

Please score the varieties below out of 10, with 0 being unmarketable and 10 representing best quality.

Variety Score Comments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Please tick which market you supply with poinsettias and indicate numbers produced:

Market supplied Garden centres Local retailers Multiple retailers

Number of 13cm poinsettias grown

Further comments, ideas and suggestions

Page 34

varietal introductions and growth control in poinsettia ... › media... · presentation page...

Documents