REPORT To THE
                  VOLUME X  (VOL  VI  REVISED)

                    TURF., ORNAMENTALS, FOREST LANDS
     The work upon which  this publication is based was performed in whole
or in part under Contract No. 68-01-2457 with the Office of Pesticide
Programs, Environmental Protection Agency.

                           Report  To The
                  Environmental Protection Agency

                              By The

             American Institute of Biological Sciences
                     Arlington, Virginia 22209
                         EPA REVIEW NOTICE

This Report has been reviewed by the Office of  Pesticide Programs,
Criteria and Evaluation Division,  and approved  for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect
the views and policies of the Environmental Protection Agency, nor
does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute
endorsement of recommendation for  use.


                       MR.  FRANK S.  MORISHITA
                 University of California, Riverside
DR. RICHARD K.  LINDQUIST                    DR.  SIDNEY L.  POE
Ohio Agricultural Research                  University of Florida
  and Development Center
EPA OBSERVER:                               AIBS COORDINATORS:
MR. ROGER PIERPONT                          MS.  PATRICIA RUSSELL
Criteria and Evaluation Division            MR.  DONALD R.  BEEM
*  This report is a revision and update of Analysis of Specialized Pesticide
Problemsj Invertebrate Control Agents - Efficacy Test Methods:  Vol.  VI3
LawnSj Ornamentalsj Forest Lands.   January 1977.  EPA-540/10-77-004.   The
task group members were:  Chairman, Mr. Gary N.  Clark, O.M. Scott and Sons
Company; Dr. R. Lee Campbell, Western Washington Research and Extension
Center; Mr. Frederick W. Honing, U.S. Forest Service, Forest Insect and
Disease Management; Dr.  Richard K.  Lindquist, Ohio Agricultural Research
and Development Center;  and, Dr. Henry Willcox,  ERA Laboratory, Inc.


Introduction .  	   1

General Considerations 	  .  	   3

Turf	10
  Chinchbugs	10
  Grubs, Weevils and Scarabs	.	11
  Spittlebugs	13
  Mole Crickets	,  .  .  .  ,	14
  Lepidopterous Larvae	.	15
  Sod Webworms	15
  Margarodid Scales	16

Greenhouse, Saran and Outdoor Floricultural Crops  	  17
  Aphids		19
  Mealybugs and Soft Scales	  21
  Whiteflies 	 ..........  	  23
  Thrips .	  26
  Lepidopterous Larvae (Caterpillars)  ..... 	  28
  Leafminers (Diptera:  Agromyzidae)  .....  	  30
  Mites		33
  Garden Symphylan ........  o  ......... 	  35
  Slugs and Snails	36

Outdoor Woody Ornamentals	39
  Aphids ..... 	 ......  	  41
  Adelgids	42
  Mealybugs	  42
  Soft Scales	,43
  Armored Scales 	  .........  44
  Whiteflies	45
  Bugs	45
  Thrips	,	  46
  Lepidopterous Larvae .......  	  46
  Coleoptera ....... 	  . 	  48
  Leafminers	51
  Mites	51

Forest and Shade Trees 	  53
  Gypsy Moth	54
  Spruce and Western Spruce Budworm  	 .....  55
  Douglas-fir Tussock Moth 	  56
  Bark Beetles	57


  1  Use of Aerosol Propellant to Apply Insecticides  	  58
  2  Green Peach Aphid Control on Chrysanthemums 	  59
  3  Chrysanthemum Tests Green Peach Aphid Control 	  60

 4  Green Peach Aphid Control on Chrysanthemums 	  61
 5  Granular Systemic Insecticides for Green Peach Aphid
    Control on Chrysanthemums	  63
 6  The Effectiveness of Various Insecticides for the Control
    of the Greenhouse Whitefly on Gerbera - San Jose, 1972  . .  64
 7  Whitefly Control on Poinsettias ..... 	  65
 8  Evaluating Insecticides for Greenhouse Whitefly Control
    on Poinsettia	66
 9  Flower Thrips Extraction  	 . 	 .....  67
10  Flower Thrip Experiment .... 	  68
11  The Effectiveness of Various Pesticides Applied as Sprays
    for Control of the Omnivorous Leaf Roller on Greenhouse
    Roses.  San Bruno, Calif. 1967  ..... 	  70
12  Use of Pyrethrins to Evaluate Efficacy of Insecticides
    Against Fungus Gnat Larvae  	 .71
13  Control of Rose Midge Larvae with Insecticides:  Columbus,
    Ohio, 1975	  72
14  Tests on Carnations for the Control of the Two Spotted
    Spider Mite, Tetranychus urtieae (Koch) 	 .....  73
15  Evaluation of Granular, Soil-Applied Systemic Insecticides
    for Control of Insects on Shade Trees in Nurseries  ....  75
16  Evaluation of Insecticides and Spraying Schedules for
    Control of Kuno Scale, Leoaniwn kunoensis, on Pyracantha,
    Walnut Creek, Calif. 1973-74  ...... 	  ....  77
17  Evaluation of Insecticides Applied as Sprays for Control
    of the Barberry Looper, Coryphista meadi-, on Container
    Grown Oregon Grape, Mahonia aquifolia, Saratoga, Calif.
    1973	78
18  Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of the Cypress Tip
    Moth, Argyresthia cupressella, on Thuja (Arborvitae),
    Berkeley, Calif. 1973-74  	  79
19  Method for Using Laboratory Bioassays of Spray Residues
    Applied to Foliage in the Field for Black Vine Weevil
    Adult Control	80

     Test methods, protocols and procedures for evaluating the effective-
ness of invertebrate chemical control on turf, ornamentals, forest lands
and shade trees are discussed in this report.  Specific techniques and
methods are documented in selected references, exhibits and other appro-
priate sources of information.  All available references using similar
procedures and methods are not cited in order to avoid repetition.  Those
cited contain generally accepted protocols  and methods, but it is realized
that they are not all-inclusive and other references may include different
methods or variations of those presented here.
     The scope of organizing test methods for turf, greenhouse,saran and
outdoor ornamentals, shade trees and forest lands is briefly addressed in
the following paragraphs.

     Turf  throughout the country provides a fairly uniform habitat for in-
vertebrates and creates a situation where methods used for evaluating pesti-
cides on turf pests such as grubs, sod webworms and chinchbugs are basically
similar in many respects.  Such factors as insect population densities, soil
types and  conditions, and turf quality have resulted in variations of basic-
ally similar methods or completely novel approaches.  Accepted and commonly-
used methods to evaluate pesticide effectiveness on other turf pests such
as mole crickets, hyperodes and vegetable weevils, flea beetles, frit flies,
millipedes, centipedes, sow bugs, slugs and snails, are not readily

     It is nearly impossible to produce a commercially acceptable floricul-
tural crop without conducting an effective pest control program. Approximately
30 species of insects and mites are capable of causing problems on greenhouse
ornamentals and vegetables, (Smith and Webb 1977).  Many of these species
plus others attack floricultural crops grown under saran or in the field.
There is also a great number of plant species (plus cultivars) produced.

     Many pests attack a large group of plant species while others are
quite specific.  Methods were written to include as broad a group of
pest-host combinations as possible.  The investigators using these tech-
niques often will have to adapt a general procedure to a specific pest-
host combination.
                        OUTDOOR FLORICULTURAL CROPS

     In many respects, the crops under this category  are similar  to the
greenhouse and saran floricultural crops infested by insects and mite
pests.  Evaluating pesticides on outdoor floricultural crops is basically
similar to the testing methods on turf, greenhouse and saran floricultural
crop pests.  Plants under this category are grown  throughout the  year in
specific locations and are under attack from pests, so the methods and
techniques for testing are specific for each crop.
                         OUTDOOR WOODY ORNAMENTALS

     Woody ornamentals are generally produced in commercial nurseries and
 are used  for  landscaping public and institutional buildings, parks, indus-
 trial  sites,  home grounds, etc.  Such plants include a nearly infinite and
 constantly increasing number of cultivars, contained in more than 1000
 species,  150  genera  and 60 families.  Approximately 2000 species of in-
 vertebrates attack these plants (Westcott 1973).  Because of the large num-
 bers of hosts and pests  and the limited number of active researchers, eval-
 uation of insecticides on outdoor woody ornamentals and shrubs is difficult
 and, therefore,  specific test methods for every pest are not available.
                          FOREST AND SHADE TREES

     Approximately one-third of the total land area of the continental United
 States  and  coastal Alaska is covered by forests, and about 500 species of
 insects cause  damage  to  these forest trees.  Pesticides are developed to pre-
 vent attack or to  destroy 'existing pest populations in these  forests.  The
 efficacy of these compounds is evaluated by the Insect and Disease Suppression
 programs of the U.S.  Forest Service and other investigators.  The programs
 evaluate pesticides used on insects that attack shade trees as well as forest
 trees,  and  pesticides that are applied to a single tree or. thousands of
 trees in single or multiple applications.  The test procedure used is deter-
 mined by the pest problem under consideration.


 Smith,  F. F.,  and R.  E. Webb, eds,  1977.  Biogeographic  and  agronomic  problems
     relating  to the  utilization of biocontrol organisms  in  commercial  green-
     houses in  the continental United States.  Pages  89-93 in Pest Management
     in Protected Culture Crops.  ARS-NE-85, USDA9 Beltsville, Md.

Westcott, C.   1973.   The Gardeners Bug Book,  Doubleday,  Garden  City, N.Y.  689pp.

                          GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

     The test methods in this report are suggested for evaluating the
effectiveness of pesticides for control of invertebrates on lawns and
turf, greenhouse, saran and outdoor floricultural crops, woody ornament-
als, and forest and shade trees.  These methods are to be used as guides
and will require periodic revision and updating.  The procedures and
methods are organized based on pest group basis due to the large numbers
of both invertebrates and host plants involved.

     Certain aspects concerning test site location, experimental design,
reporting of data including phytotoxicity, and analysis of data are ap-
     Location of Test Site; — Outdoor application sites should be selected
where known infestations exist and should reflect variations in environ-
mental conditions which may be encountered.

     Greenhouse or saran applications, due to their respective protected
environments, are similar regardless of geographic location.  Normally,
data from three major locations (north central - east, south and west)
are adequate as long as they cover the range of variation in cultural con-
ditions likely to be encountered.

     Experimental Test Design: — A sound experimental test design should
be used to reduce variability but yet be practical.  Random observation or
pre-treatment counts may be used to determine population distribution and/
or to provide guidance in establishing plot location.  Experimental designs
generally used are randomized complete block design, completely randomized
design or Latin square.

     Generally, 4-6 replicates are desirable, but 3 may provide adequate
data.  There are cases where neither of these crite'ria may be met, due to
limited plant availability, size .of area infested and uniformity of the
infestation.  Larger numbers of replications may be used when an infesta-
tion is sparse and uneven.  In cases such as greenhouse testing, where an
entire greenhouse may be fumigated, a series of individual trials over a
period of time utilizing a single greenhouse may provide adequate data.

     Poe and Green (1974) studied the effects of several factors (cultivar,
fertilization, irrigation practices) on insect and mite pests of chrysanthe-
mums.  They recommended that the usual practice of maintaining a completely
untreated adjacent check plot should be replaced by a standard material or
management practice.   Extremely high insect populations in the untreated
plots resulted in many pests migrating into treated areas and giving false
results on the effects of various treatments.
     Reporting of Data; — A thorough and complete reporting of test data
is essential to draw conclusions concerning the effectiveness of a pesti-
cide.  Refer to the Guidelines for Registering Pesticides  in  the United

States for desired variables that should be reported.  All parameters ad-
dressed in the General Considerations -and those specific considerations in-
corporated into each test method should also be reported.  An example of a
data report form is provided.

                             SAMPLE TEST FORM

                       Experiment Evaluation Report


                              Physical Layout

                                     Date Set:

                                     Stage of Plant Treated:

                                     Soil Type:


                            Experimental Design

                                     Treatment Dates:

                                     Target Pest:

                                     Stage Treated:

                                     Nozzle No.  Type:

Expt. No.





Plot Size:

No. Plants:


Means of Application:

Product Applicability:


Effect on Non-Target Organisms:

                               Efficacy Data

Materials     Form     Rate lb/100 GPA


                                     Environmental Imoact:


     On ornamentals and turf, phytotoxicity, the visible response of the
plant to some external factor is important when evaluating pesticides.
Phytotoxicity is a symptomatic result of what may be a single factor or a
complex of several factors.  Environmental conditions (temperature, humi-
dity) can aggravate a situation and result in product injury only under
those specific conditions.  Plant stress, either environmental, nutritional
or water, may be cause for concern when applying pesticides safely to
plants.  In some cases, these variables can be controlled and in all cases
should be noted as part of the experimental data.  The more common
variables utilized in phytotoxicity evaluations follow.
Evaluation of Phytotoxicity

     Application Rates; — Rates should include X (recommended), 2X and
4X, either by volume or by unit area treated.
     Application Frequency: — Apply at intervals necessary to control
pest(s), and twice as often as would normally be necessary.  The exact
intervals are left to the discretion of the researcher.
     Method; — Materials should be used in a manner similiar to convention-
al practices and as prescribed by the manufacturer.
Plant Material, Growth Stage, etc.

     All major stages of plant growth (seedling, vegetative, flowering)
on which the pesticide is expected to be used should also be included.  In
addition, trials should be conducted during all seasons that the host
plant is produced and subject to pest attack.

     Examples of most common and/or most easily damaged cultivars must be
included in phytotoxicity trials.  The number of cultivars to be included
will vary with ornamental or turf plant species, region of the country
and season of growth.
Measurement of Plant Response

     Plant Growth Response: — Any growth deviating from what is expected
or normal judging by past performance should be measured, since this may
represent a response of a plant or portion of a plant to a stress
situation.  The definition of what is "normal" may vary considerably, and
usually is interpreted within broad limits.  Deviations should be
observable in. each replicate of a treatment.

     Typical plant responses to pesticides include leaf deformity (Fig. la),
leaf drop, growth reduction (or stimulation), reduced flower production 	
number or quality (Figure Ib),  and a general change in leaf character  (e.g.,
"hardening" of tissues), chlorosis (Fig. Ic), discoloration, or color alter-
          Fig. la:  Leaf showing symptoms of deterioration
          Fig. Ib:  Reduction in flower quality caused by spotting
                    of petals
          Fig.  Ic:   Chlorosis  around leaf margins

     Chlorosis: — In this condition, the normal green color disappears
and leaves become pale green, yellow, white, orange or reddish depending
on remaining pigments.  Symptoms can vary widely in area of leaf affected
and intensity  from a slight loss of green color in local areas of the
leaf to a faint mottling or a uniform pale green appearance.  More severe
chlorosis results in general yellowing, or the entire leaf becomes pale,
yellow  or bleached.  Chlorotic tissue may recover in time or can retain
symptoms throughout the life of the plant.  Some products cause symptoms
on portions of the plant treated and on new growth that appears after treat-

     Marginal  chlorosis probably is the most common form, but interveinal
chlorosis also occurs frequently.

     Another type of chlorosis (Fig. Ic) appears when cells below the leaf
epidermis are  killed and the epidermis separates from the mesophyll.  This
results in symptoms called glazing, bronzing or silvering.
     Necrosis; — Necrosis means death, and can include individual cells,
specific parts of leaves (Fig. Id), buds, roots or entire plants.  Some-
times initial symptoms of chlorosis progress into necrosis.  Color expressed
by necrosis can vary from pale yellow or white to dark brown, depending
upon the type of cell affected, how fast it died, and what killed it.  In
all cases, necrosis is irreversible and the tissue affected never recovers.

     As with chlorosis, leaf margins are usually affected first.  Symptoms
can then extend inward toward the midrib, and possibly affect the entire
leaf.  Necrotic spots also are common and variable in size (Fig. le).
          Fig. Id:  Leaf showing large (necrotic) area in center
          Fig. le:  Leaf showing necrotic spots

     Necrosis of stems or shoots is called dieback.
include "burn", "scorch", "spotting".
Other common terms
     Regardless of type of symptom(s), any effects of pesticides should be
 fully described, e.g., extent of necrotic/chlorotic areas as a percent of
 leaf or plant affected, or portions of plant affected.  Often only parts
 of uniform age or development are symptomatic.  Not only should the area
 or portion of the plant affected be noted, but the degree or intensity
 of damage is important.  A subjective rating from a visual examination
 may be developed to ascribe a numerical value to the damage based on in-
 tensity of symptoms (Fig. 2).  A 0-3 scale is appropriate:  0 - no damage
 observed; 1 - mild symptoms but considered marketable under most conditions;
 2 - moderate damage symptoms with definite market value decrease; 3 - severe-
 ly damaged, definitely unmarketable.
      Fig.  2:   Types of phytotoxicity that can be quantified using a numerical
               rating  system to illustrate level of damage
      Visible  effects may be immediate, or may not appear for several days
 or weeks  after application.  Often only one application of a pesticide
 will  result in symptoms, but more than one may be necessary.  Researchers
 should  observe treated and untreated plants closely for a season or through
 the growth cycle of one crop.

      Obviously, not all plant cultivars, pesticide rates, treatment intervals,
 plant growth  stages, environmental conditions, etc., can be included in ex-
 perimental work.  What is necessary are data showing a pesticide to be safe
 to most plants on which it is applied under conditions where it will common-
 ly be used.   Specific conditions of the experiment, however, should be

      Phytotoxicity data are especially pertinent since a product registered
 for use against a pest on one host may be registered for use against that
 pest  on another host, providing that phytoxicity data indicates plant tol-

     Analysis of Data; — Statistical analysis of data should be applied
wherever possible using a valid statistical test.  If significant differ-
ences are obvious without analysis of variance, a comparison of means  may
suffice.  Evaluation of results usually involves counting the number of
pests which survive the treatment and comparison of this with an untreated
check and/or standard commercial treatment (control).  Presentation of
means and percent control compared to an untreated check or a commercial
standard is a common practice.

     Additional Considerations: — Application techniques, sampling tech-
niques, sampling intervals, and pertinent details differing from those
provided under General Considerations are described either under the applica-
ble subject area or each individual test method which follows.

Poe, S. L., and J. L. Green.  1974.  Pest management determinant factors
     in chrysanthemum culture.  FZa. St. Hort. Soc. Proc. 87: 467-471.

     The test methods for calculating the effectiveness of pesticides  on
invertebrate pests of turf are organized on a pest group basis,  including
insects such as chinchbugs, grubs and sod webworms.  The comments  offered
under General Considerations are applicable to these test methods  unless
otherwise specified.


     The following procedures hsve proven successful for evaluation of
effectiveness of insecticides for control of chinchbugs:  Elissus  'Lmoopt-
er>a hirtus Montandon and Bl-issus insutar-ia Barber,

     Experimenta1 Design: — The experimental design commonly  used to  test
the effectiveness of insecticides, which yields data suitable  for  simple
statistical analysis utilizes a 3m x 3m (equivalent to 10' x 10')  plot
(Ken  1962, Polivka 1963, Reinert 197.2, Stre'i and Cruz 1972}  with treat-
ments arranged in a randomized complete block design (Kerr 1962, Reinert
1972, Streu and Cruz 1972)=  Pretreatment counts are usually taken for the
purpose of establishing population  uniformity and to provide guidance  in
establishing the experimental design (Kerr 1962, Reinert 1972,  Streu and
Cruz 1972).  Alleyways between plots are desirable to prevent  pesticide
contamination when applying treatments, hut are not always pra.ctical.

     Application Methods: —• Granular formulations are usually applied by
using a shaker can (Xeinert 1972) or a  lawn fertilizer spreader (Polivfca
1963).  Wettable powder and emulsifiable concentrate formulations  are  mixed
with water and usually applied with a sprinkling can (Reinert  1972, Polivka
1963), but may be applied with a pressurized sprayer or other  suitable cali-
brated applicator.  Watering plot areas prior to treatments to moisten the
turf and/or thatch is a desirable practice (Kerr 1962).  It is not always
applicable due to 'turf conditions, thatch thickness, etc., and may also
depend upon whether liquids or granules are being applied.  Watering plot
areas following application (Kerr 1962„ Reinert 1972, Streu and Cruz 1972)
is a common practice where applicable, for the purpose of washing  the  in-
secticide into the zone of insect activityr

     Sampling and Counting _^chniques_; — Chinclibug counts are taken by forcing
a metal cylinder (open at both ends), covering an area of approximately 0,06
m2 to 0,09 m2 (equivalent to 2/3 - 1 sq. ft.), into the turf  (Kerr 1962,
Reinert 1972, Streu and Cruz 1972).  The cylinder is filled with water and
the live chinchbugs which float to the surface In a 7-10 minute period are

counted (Kerr 1962, Reinert 1972, Streu and Cruz 1972).  One (Kerr 1962,
Reinert 1972) to three (Streu and Cruz 1972, Polivka 1963) samples may
be taken per replication.  Actual counts should be recorded.  In high-
density populations, such as those that occur in Florida, counts in ex-
cess of 100 chinchbugs are recorded as 100, and counting stopped at that
factor (Reinert 1972).  Morishita, et al.  (1969) found that a D-Vac
machine was the most efficient of several  sampling methods tried.

     Sampling Intervals; — Counts of live chinchbugs should be taken
within  a 7-day period (Reinert 1972) following application, to provide
a measure of initial kill.  Subsequent counts may be taken on a one (Reinert
1972), two  (Kerr 1962, Streu and Cruz 1972) or four to six (Polivka 1963,
Streu and Cruz 1972) week intervals, extended over a period of time suf-
ficient to determine the residual effectiveness of the treatments.

Kerr, S. H.  1962.  Lawn insect studies 	 1962; Chinchbugs.  Pros. Annu.
     Flo,. Turf-Grass Manage. Conf.  10: 201-208.

Morishita, F. S., R. N. Jefferson, and L. Johnson.  1969.  Southern
     chinchbug, a new pest of St. Augustine grass in southern California,
     Calif, Turf-Grass Culture  19(2): 9-10.

Polivka, J.B.  1963.  Control of hairy chinchbug,  Blissus leuoopterous.
     Mont., in Ohio.  Ohio Agrio, Res. Dev, Cent. Res. Giro.  122: 1-8.

Reinert, J. A.  1972.  Control of the southern chinchbug, Blissus insulari
     in  South Florida.  Fla. Entomol.  55(4): 231-235.

Streu, H. T., and Carlos Cruz.  1972.  Control of the hairy chinchbug in
     turf-grass in the northeast with Dursban insecticide.  Down to Earth
     28(1): 1-4.
Grubs, Weevils and Scarabs

     The following procedures have proven successful for evaluation of
effectiveness of insecticides for controlling larval stages of  the Japanese
beetle, northern and southern masked chafers, European chafer,  Oriental
beetle, Asiatic garden beetle Phyllophaga sp., and weevils.

     Experimental Design; — A commonly used experimental design  to test
the effectiveness of insecticides for control of grubs utilizes plot  sizes
ranging from 3 m x 3 m (101 x 10') to 7.5 m x 7.5 m  (25' x 25')  (Dunbar and
Beard 1975, Gambrell et al. 1968, Tashiro and Fieri  1969).  This  allows for
sampling and resampling at periodic intervals.  Treatments are  usually ar-
ranged in a randomized complete block design (Dunbar and Beard  1975,  Tashiro
and Neuhauser 1973) and this will yield more dependable results.

     Application Methods: — Granular formulations may be applied with a
shaker can  (Polivka 1965) or a lawn fertilizer spreader  (Dunbar and Beard
1975, Tashiro and Neuhauser 1973).  Liquids from wettable powders and emul-
sifiable concentrates should be mixed with water and applied with a sprinkler
can  (Dunbar and Beard 1975, Polivka 1965, Tashiro and Neuhauser 1973)
pressurized sprayer or other suitable calibrated applicator.  The method
used should provide thorough coverage of the plot area at the desired rate
of application.  This may be accomplished by applying premeasured amounts
to each plot, in two directions at right angles to each  other (Tashiro and
Neuhauser 1973),

     Watering plot areas prior to treatments to moisten  the thatch and/or
soil is a desirable practice.  It is not always applicable due to the turf
conditions, thatch thickness, etc., and may also depend  upon whether liquids
or granules are being applied.  Where applicable, plots  should be watered
thoroughly  following application of treatments (Dunbar and Beard 1973,
Tashiro and Fiori 1969).

     Sampling Techniques: — Since grubs generally feed  on the roots of
plants in the turf, a tool for digging is required to sample.  Several
available tools are suitable, such as a 175 mm x 175 mm  (7" x 7") ice
scraper, a  100 mm (4") diameter cup cutter and mechanical sod cutters.

     The depth of the sample can be determined by the thickness of the turf
and  the depth of the grubs.  To provide data suitable for analysis, randomly
select sample sites three to ten per plot (Dunbar and Beard 1975, Polivka
1965, Tashiro and Fiori 1969).  Generally, a total area  of not less than
0.09 m2 (1  ft2) per plot is desired, utilizing sample sizes such as 100 mm
(4") diameter (Polivka 1965), 160 mm (6.4") diameter (Dunbar and Beard 1975)
and  175 mm  x 175 mm (7" x 7").

     Niemczyk and Dunbar (1976) reported that density, moisture content, and
depth of thatch over the target pests should be recorded.  Their data indicated
that variation in these factors may explain inconsistent results obtained in
some experiments with nonpersistent insecticides.

     Niemczyk (personal communication 1977) also stated  that type of turf,
soil pH, percent of various growth stages of the pest present at the time
of treatment and amount of water applied posttreatment are very important
and should be reported when presenting data.

     Counts of living insects in each sample should be recorded.

     Sampling Intervals: — Parameters of individual tests will determine
the intervals for sampling.   Spring or summer treatments during the period
of activity may be evaluated one to three weeks following application to
determine  initial kill or on four, six or eight week intervals (Dunbar and
Beard 1975,  Tashiro  and Neuhauser 1973)  to determine effectiveness and/or
residual activity of the insecticide.    Generally, summer applications

(July through August) directed at killing young insects are evaluated in
the fall (September through October) when remaining larvae are large enough
to be readily found and soil moisture is adequate to allow for proper sampling
and examination  (Tashiro et al.  1971).  Counts on longer-term studies fol-
lowing a spring, summer or fall treatment may be taken from a nine to twelve
month period or longer intervals (annually to determine residual control
activity)(Gambrell et al. 1968).

Dunbar, D. M., and R. L. Beard.  1975.  Japanese and oriental beetles in
     Connecticut.  Conn. Agr*ic. Exp. Stn. Bull.  757: 1-5.

Gambrell, F.  L., H. Tashiro, and G. L. Mack.  1968.  Residual activity of
     chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides in permanent turf for European
     chafer control.  J. Econ. Entomol.  61(6): 1508-1511.

Niemczyk, H,  D,.  1977.  Personal communication.  OARDC, Wooster, Ohio.

Niemczyk, Harry D,, and Dennis M. Dunbar.  1976.  Field observations,
     chemical control, and contact  toxicity experiments on Ataenius spr>etulus3
     a grub pest of turf grass.  J. Econ. Entomol.  69(3): 345-348.

Polivka, J. B.  1965.  Effectiveness of insecticides for control of white
     grubs in turf.  Ohio Agric. Pes, Dei). Cent, Res. Ci-TO.  140: 1-7-

Tashiro,, H. ,  and B. J. Fiori.  1969.  Susceptibilities of European chafer  and
     Japanese beetle grubs to chlordane and dieldrin:  suggesting reduction
     in application rates.  J. Econ. Entomol.   62(5): 1179-1183.

Tashiro, H.,  K. E. Personius, D. Zinter, and M. Zinter.  1971.  Resistance
     of the European chafer to cyclodiene insecticides.  J. Econ. Entomol.
     64(1): 242-245.

Tashiro, H.,  and W. Neuhauser.  1973.  Chlordane-resistant  Japanese  beetles
     in New York.  N.Y. Agric. Exp. Stn. Ithaca Mem. Search Agric. 3(3): 1-6.


     Most published spit_lebug control work has been done on pasture grasses,
however methods should be readily adaptable to  turf.

     Experimental Design: — Randomized complete block experimental design
with four replications in 300-375 mm (12"-15") high pasture grass  (Pass
and Reed 1965).

     Application Methods: — Materials may be applied as sprays in 57 1
(15 gal.) water per acre, or as granulars broadcasted (Pass and Reed 1965).

     Evaluation: — Numbers of spittlebugs  are determined in a 0.9 m^
 (1 yd.2) area of each plot.  Counts  are made one, three and seven days
 after treatment (Pass and Reed 1965).


 Pass, B. C.,, and J. K. Reed.  1965.  Biology and control of the spittlebug
 Prasapia bioinota in coastal Bermuda grass.  J.  Eaon. Entomol. 58: 275-278.

 Mole Crickets

     Mole crickets are highly mobile subterranean insects that damage turf
 by their tunneling activities in the root zone and by their appareant feeding.
 Insecticides have been used as granules, baits,  sprays and drenches.

     Experimental Design: — Commonly used design in turf or on golf courses
 utilizes plots that are from 3 m to 7 m square.   Plots are bordered on all
 sides by an untreated zone 1 m to 3 m wide  and roped off with strings or
 otherwise clearly marked.  Four replicates are treated in a randomized block
 design  (Habeck and Kuitert 1964, Short and Driggers 1973, Barry and Suber
     Application Methods: — Insecticides are applied as baits, sprays,
granules, or drenches, and may be watered in by irrigation (Habeck and
Kuitert 1964, Short and Driggers 1973).  Materials can be dispersed by
hand, compressed air sprayer, or by sprinkler cans.
     Evaluation Techniques: — Different methods have been used .  The
most common method is to count dead and moribund crickets on  the  turf  in
in  each plot.  Counts are made for four to seven days after treatment.
A second method is to drench a 1 m2 area with 1% pyrethum and count
the crickets that emerge within 15 minutes.  A third method has
been to count surface burrows in open spaces after irrigation or rain.

Barry, R. M., and E. F. Suger.  1975.  Field evaluation of insecticides
     for mole crickets in turf.  J.  Georgia Entomol. Soo. 10: 254-249.

Habeck, D. H.,  and L. C. Kuitert.  1964.  Mole cricket control studies.
     Sunshine State. Agr. : Report for January,  pp. 11-12, 20.

Short, D. E., and D. P. Driggers.  1973.  Field evaluation of insecticides
     for controlling mole crickets in turf.  Fla.  Entomol,  56;  19-23,

Lepidopterous Larvae

     Grass loopers of the genus moois and other turf foliage feeding Lepi-
doptera  (Spodopter>a) have been treated for control.

     Experimental Design: — Plots may be laid out similar to that for mole
crickets  (see previous section) or where larger acreages are involved, three
18 m bands across 8 ha of coastal bermuda have been found adequate  (Koehler
et al.  1973).

     Application Method: — A Cessna Ag truck with a transland spray
system equipped with 60 DG and 30 DG nozzles to apply material in 18 m
wide bands may be utilized (Koehler et al. 1973).

     Evaluation Techniques: — Pretreatment and posttreatment counts at 0,
24,and  72 hours should" be conducted.  Each sample should consist of 0.4 m2
areas of  the treated area, selected by tossing aO.6mxO.6m plastic
pipe frame into each treatment area.  Larvae are collected and counted from
inside the frame area (Koehler et al. 1976).


Koehler,  P.  G., R. J. Gouger, and D. E. Short.  Control of striped grass
     loopers and armyworms In pasture: 1976.  Fla. Entomol.  (In Press),

Sod Webworms

     Experimental  Design: — Plots  of 4.7 m2 (1.5 m x 3.0 m), bordered by a . 6 m
buffer  zone  on all sides  are randomized  in blocks with 4 replications per
treatment.   Blocks are  laid out according to pretreatment infestation level
and bordered by 0.5 m buffer zone  (Reinert 1972, 1974).

     Application Method: — Granular insecticides  are dispersed with a hand
shaker  and watered in with  7.61 water per plot.   Spray materials  are
applied  in  1-2  1 water  with  a  hand sprayer (Reinert  1972,  1974).

     Evaluation Technique: — Sod webworms  are counted by sprinkling   1
of a  0.02-0.05% pyrethrum ona0.6mx0.6 m section of each plot  and count-
ing the  larvae that emerged in 10 minutes  (Reinert 1972, 1974).


R.einert,  J.  A.  1972.   Sod webworm  control in Florida  turfgrass.   Fla. Entomol,
     56:  333-337.

Reinert,  J.  A.  1974.   Tropical sod webworm and  southern chinchbug control  in
     Florida.  Fla. Entomol.  57: 275-279.

Margarodid Scales

     These scales, commonly known as ground pearls, attack turf in the thatch
and soil-root zone.

     Experimental Design; •— Experimental units may consist of 1.5 m x 1.5 m
plots divided into 5 blocks (Short 1973) selected in areas of turf known to be
infested with ground pearls.  4 replications of each treatment are necessary.

     Application Method: — Materials may be applied as granules with a
hand shaker (bottle or can), or as sprays dispersed with a compressed air
sprayer.  Application is followed by irrigation to move materials into the root
zone (Short 1973).

     Evaluation Techniques: — Samples consisting of 10 25 mm cores of soil
12.7 cm deep  are  taken from each plot  and placed in a  1000 ml Erlenmayer  flask
fitted with 0.4 molar sucrose.   A rubber cork, just small enough to pass
through the neck of the flask is placed in the flask with a 30,5  cm wire attached.
The soil samples are stirred in the sucrose intermittently for 5 minutes,
after which the cork is pulled from the flask by the wire, removing from the
flask neck all the floating scales.  The collection is  lifted onto checkered
cloth over a coffee can, rinsed and transferred to a binocular microscope for

     Samples are taken at intervals after treatment for up to one year.   Results
are compared with pretreatment counts.


Short,  D.  E.   1973.  Ground pearl control studies.   Proc, Fla.  Turf Grass
     Manag.  Conf.  XXI  pp.  111-123.

     Methods outlined are designed so that insecticides and acaricides
can be evaluated against insects and mites on the following general crop
groups.  (Crops listed are examples of major crops within each group.)

     • Flowering Plants

       Azalea, rose, poinsettia, gardenia, chrysanthemum, carnation,
       snapdragon, aster, geranium, orchid, African violet, Easter
       lily, iris  (including bedding plants)

     « Foliage Plants

       Ficus, palms, Schefflera, Dracaena, ferns, Philodendron,
       Pothos, sansevieria

     After data are obtained that show a material to be effective in con-
trolling a pest on one crop within a group, that material may be considered
effective against that pest on all crops where it occurs within the group.
However, adequate phytotoxicity data must be obtained on all crops on which
a material is to be used.

     These methods have been gathered from several sources, and documented
by published and unpublished reports.  Cited material is only to serve as
a guide for a procedure and often many more references containing the same
or similar procedures could have been listed.
     Application Techniques and Equipment: — Many researchers use small
compressed air sprayers (capacity 3.8 - 7.5 liters = 1-2 gallons) to dis-
perse materials.  Others simulate high-volume sprays by dipping leaves or
plants into insecticide solutions or suspensions (Henneberry and Smith 1965,
Webb et al. 1974), or by using small hand-held aerosol propellant cans to
spray plants (Lindquist 1974).  The common element in all applications is
coverage to the point of runoff and no matter which method is used, data
obtained from these tests may be used to support results of larger, com-
mercial trials, if proper sampling and adequate replication is used.
However, at least one trial must be conducted with equipment used in com-
mercial plant production to substantiate results.

     For most pests of floricultural crops, it is particularly important
to direct sprays at the undersides of leaves to contact surfaces where
pests are generally found.

     Granular insecticides usually are scattered evenly over the soil sur-
face of plant beds or pots or over foliage of closely-spaced plants.  Ap-
plication rates for granular materials are calculated either on the basis

 of  surface  area  or  on volume of soil  (Smith 1952).  Both procedures may
 provide  adequate efficacy data, depending upon  the objectives  of  the
 experiment.   Following application, water is applied  to wash off  any
 granules adhering to foliage and to carry the toxicant down to the root
 zone.  Applications may be made with  a shaker jar or  broadcast spreader
 that  does not grind the granules,

      Liquid systemic insecticides are usually applied to the media of
 pots  or  plant beds.  Enough solution  is applied to carry the toxicant
 to  the root zone (Neiswander 1962).

      Aerosols, fumigants, fogs (thermal and non-thermal) are applied at
 a. certain rate per  cubic meter, with  the appropriate  specialized  appli-
 cation equipment.
      Location  of  Tests: — A minimum of  three distinct geographical
 regions  is  necessary.
      Greenhouse  and  Saran: — Geographical variation is not  as  critical as
 in field  tests,  but  because of some differences in climate and  cultivars
 produced,  data should be obtained from the three major producing  areas
 (West,  Southwest, North  Central-East).
      Plot  Size." •— Plot size may vary depending upon available  plant
 material,  numbers of materials included in the test and whether trials
 are  conducted  in a research or in a commercial operation.

      For preliminary, or supplemental testing with insecticides,  data
 obtained in replicated tests with only 1-3 plants per replicate may
 be considered  valid if other test parameters are adequate  (Webb  et al.
 1974, Lindquist 1975).  These data may be used as supportive, but should
 not  be  considered "primary".  At least one trial must also  be conducted
 under commercial growing conditions with commercial equipment to  validate
 data obtained  in small plot tests.  Before and after treatment  counts can
 be used to obtain efficacy data where only low thresholds of damage are
                  -- Four replicates are preferred, but at  least  .3 replicates
of each treatment are necessary for statistical analysis.   In aerosol, or
other fumigant applications, where an entire greenhouse must be treated,
a series of 3-4 trials over a period of time provides a means of replication
when insufficient area is available for replication at one  time.

     Sampling;  — Pretreatment counts are often made to establish the
presence of an infestation before selecting plants to be treated or as an
aid in designing the experiment.  These counts are not always necessary nor
are. they always included in tabular results.

       In some tests,  e.g., with aerosols^  furaigants,  fogs,  etc., pretreatment
counts are necessary to  establish  the  efficacy of  a  treatment.   For  these
treatments, a known number of  insects  or mites may also be put  in cages and
placed in different areas of the greenhouses  to measure efficacy.

     It is essential to  have temperature records,  especially at times when
treatments are applied.  These data,  should  provide information  on the ef-
fectiveness of a material over a range of temperatures or a  clue as  to why
phyto toxic symptoms appeared,

     Phytotoxicity: — Refer to Phytotoxicity section  in General Considera-

Henneberry, T. J.,  and W.  R.  Smith.   1965.  Malathion  synergism  against
     organcphosphate-resistant  two-spotted  spider mites.  J. Eoon. Entomol.
     58(2): 312-4.

Lindquist, R. K.   1974.  Use  of aerosol propellant  to  apply  insecticides.
     (Exhibit 1).

Lindquist.. R. K.   1975.  Green  peach  aphid  control  on  chrysanthemum.
     (Exhibit 2) .

Neiswarider, Ralph  B.  1962.   The use  of systemic insecticides  on potted
     chrysanthemums in the greenhouse.  J.  Eoon. Entomol.  55(4):  497-501.

Smith, Floyd F.  1952.   Conversion Of per-acre  dosages of soil insecticide
     to  equivalents for  small units.  
 Because the green peach aphid is the most common species and the most
 difficult to control (Hussey et al.  1969),  efficacy data obtained on a
 material for controlling this species may also indicate the effectiveness
 for that material in controlling other species.

 Sampling of Treated Population

      Aphids on Leaves,  Stems and Terminal Shoots:  — Sampling methods
 can be divided into several basic types,  including counting aphids on
 entire plants (Gould 1969,  Webb and  Smith 1973),  or on leaves (Helgesen 1971,
 Poe and Marousky 1971,  Poe  and Green 1974).   Counting aphids on entiie plants
 should eliminate any variation in location  of aphid populations on differ-
 ent cultivars of a host (Markkula et al.  1969, Webb and Smith 1973).   How-
 ever, if samples are taken  from the  same  location on all plants, this po-
 tential source of bias  may  be eliminated.

      Another sampling method which may be used is  counting  aphids on
 stems, or recording stems and/or terminal shoots  as infested or not in-
 fested.   Sometimes recording stems or shoots  as  infested or not infested
 is combined with a weighted rating system to  give  an estimate of the sever-
 ity of infestation (Overman and Poe  1971, Lindquist 1972).   Because aphids
 in greenhouses are all  females that  give  birth to  living young without
 mating,  the presence of one or more  aphids  on a  stem leaf,  or flower in-
 dicates that there is the potential  for a severe  infestation (Hussey et
 al.  1969).

      A known number of  aphids may be introduced onto previously uninfested
 plants just prior to treatment (Helgesen  and  Tauber 1974).

      Aphids in Flowers:  —  Often,  controlling aphids in open flowers  is
 necessary before plants  are sold,  or insecticides  are applied to prevent
 flowers  from becoming infested.   Recording  the number of flowers with and
 without  aphids (Appleby  1972),  the number of  live  aphids in a number  of
 flowers  (Lindquist  1974), or  using an extraction technique  to separate
 aphids from flowers (Gray and Schuh  1941) should provide adequate efficacy

      Because aphids  are  capable  of migrating  into  greenhouses from outdoor
 plantings,  or  moving  around within greenhouses (Dixon 1971),  it often is
 necessary to obtain an estimate  of a material's residual killing power.
 This may  be  achieved  by  placing  infested plants among treatments,  using un-
 treated check  plants  as  the potential source of a  new population,  or  to
 reinfest  plants  at  intervals  after treatments have been applied (Gould 1969).
 This latter  procedure should  provide  the most reliable data on residual
 effectiveness, because aphids  are  not  always in a  migratory (winged)  stage.


Appleby, J. E.   1972.  Chrysanthemums  tests-green  peach aphid control.
     (Exhibit 3).

Dixon, A. F. G.  1971.  Migration in aphids.  Soi. Prog.  59: 41-53.

Gould, H. J.  1969.  Further tests with insecticides for the control of
     Ityzus persicae  (Sulzer) on year round  chrysanthemums.  Plant Pathol.
     18: 176-81.

Gray, K. W., and J.  Schuh.  1941.  A method and contrivance for sampling
     pea aphid populations.  J. Boon. Entomol. 34(3): 411-5.

Helgesen, R. G.  1971.  Green peach aphid control on chrysanthemums.
     (Exhibit 4).

Helgesen, R. G., and L. Tauber.  1974.  Pirimicarb, an aphicide nontoxic
     to  three entomophagous arthropods.  Environ. Entomol. 3(1): 99-101.

Hussey, N. W., W. H. Read, and J. J. Hesling.  1969.  The Pests of
     Protected Cultivation.     American Elsevier, Inc., New York.
     pp. 106-21.

Lindquist, R. K.  1972.  Insect control on  outdoor roses. Pesticide Netts
     25(1):  8-12.

Lindquist, R. K.  1974.  Granular systemic  insecticides for green peach
     aphid  control on chrysanthemums.  (Exhibit 5).

Markkula, M., K. Roukka, and K. Tiittanen.  1969.  Reproduction  of Myzus
     persicae (Sulz.) and Tetranychus telarius (L.) on different chrysanthe-
     mum cultivars.  Ann. Agric. Fenn.   8: 175-183.

Overman, A.  J., and  S. L. Poe.  1971.  Suppression of aphids, mites, and
     nematodes with  foliar application of chemicals.  Proa. Fla. State.
     Hort. SOQ.  84: 419-22.

Poe, S. L.,  and J. L. Green.  1974.  Pest management determinant factors in
     chrysanthemum culture.  Proc. Fla. State Hort.  Soc.  87: 467-71.

Webb, Ralph  E., and  Floyd F. Smith.  1973.  Control of aphids on chrysanthe-
     mums with aerosols.  J. Econ. Entomol.   66(5): 1135-6.
                         MEALYBUGS AND SOFT SCALES

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against all insects on floricultural crops, see both General Considerations
and introduction to the floricultural crops section.

Foliar Feeding Mealybugs and Soft Scales

     Experiments may be conducted with naturally-infested plants, or pests  may
be transferred to uninfested plants by placing heavily infested plants  or foli-
age in contact with the uninfested plants  (Hamlen, 1975).

     A laboratory procedure with excised leaves placed  in  a  specially
constructed bioassay chamber may be utilized  (Hamlen  1975).

     Insecticide Application: — Spray materials are  applied to runoff with
either small compressed air equipment or commercial sprayers, depending
on the number of plants to be treated.

     Soil drenches or systemic granular materials are applied as described
in the introductory section of floricultural crops.   The number of applica-
tions and interval depends on pest species and residual life of the pesti-

     Evaluation of Results: -- Pretreatment counts are  utilized  (Hamlen
1975a, b, 1977).  Mealybugs are sampled by agitating  3  leaves
detatched from basal, mid, and upper foliage for 5 sec. in 30 ml water con-
taining 2 drops of surfacant, and counting the mealybugs removed.  Counts are
made 5 days posttreatment and at 14-day intervals.  Other counts are  made
by examining entire plants.

     Hemispherical scales (Saissetia eoffeae) are recorded (Hamlen 1975)
from 3 leaves removed from basal, middle and upper portions  of each plant at
14 weeks posttreatment, or by recording live adults on entire plants  at
monthly intervals.  The number of scales appearing on previously uninfested
foliage also are used in evaluations.

Root Mealybugs, Rhizoeous spp. on Container-Grown Floricultural Crops
     Insecticide Application: — Depending on the insecticide formulation
used, 3 application methods are employed.

     • Spreading granules on soil surface (Poe, 1972, Poe et al. 1973,
       Hamlen 1974).

     « Applying liquid suspensions as soil drenches  (Poe 1972, Poe et al.
       1973, Hamlen 1974).

     9 Submerging pot and root ball for a certain amount of time (5 minutes)
       in insecticide suspensions (Poe 1972).
     Evaluation of Results: — Mealybug populations are measured by lifting
each plant from its container and counting individuals lying adjacent to the
exposed roots on the outside of the root ball (Poe 1972).  These counts may
be made in a restricted band (Hamlen 1974).

     Counts made beginning 7 days posttreatment (Poe 1972), and at weekly
or biweekly intervals thereafter (Hamlen 1974).

      Reporting Tabular Data:  — Efficacy may be reported as percent control,
 compared with untreated checks (Poe 1972),  or mean number individuals per
 plant (Hamlen 1974).

 Hamlen,  R.  A.   1974.   Control of Rhisoecus  floridanus  Hambleton (Homoptera:
      Pseudococcidae)  on bromeliads.   Proc.  Fla.  State  Hovt.  Soo.  87:  516-18.

 Hamlen,  R.  A.   1975a.   Insect growth regulator control of  longtailed  mealy-
      bug,  hemispherical scale,  and Phenaeoceus solani  on ornamental foliage
      plants.   J.  Boon.  Entomol.   68(2):  223-6.

 Hamlen,  R.  A.   1975b.   Survival of hemispherical scale and an Encyrtus  para-
      sitoid after treatment with insect  growth regulators  and insecticides.
      Env.  Entomol.   4(6):  972-4.

 Hamlen,  R.  A.   1977.   Laboratory and greenhouse evaluations  of  insecticides
      and insect growth regulators for control  of foliar and  root  infesting
      mealybugs.   J.  Eaon.  Entomol.   70(2):  211-4.

 Poe,  S.  L.   1972.  Treatment for control of a  root mealybug  on  nursery  plants.
      J.  Eaon.  Entomol.   65(1):  241-2.

 Poe,  S.  L.,  D.  S. Short,  and G.  W. Dekle.   1973.  Control  of Rhizoeeus
      07?,vri'aonus  (Homoptera:  Pseudococcidae)  on ornamental  plants. J.  Ga. Entomol.
      Soj.  8(1):  20-6.

      For methods  and  other  information applicable  to  testing  insecticides
 against all  insects on  floricultural  crops,  see both  General  Considerations
 and  introduction  to the floricultural crops  section.

      Most  of  the  emphasis is on evaluation of materials  to control  the  immature
 stages  (egg,  nymphs,  "pupae" - the  last nymphal instar), rather  than the adult
 stage.  There are two reasons for this.  First, the adult is  susceptible to
 many  materials, and although it is  desirable to control  this  stage, a material
 is more valuable  if it  controls the developing nymphs because fewer applica-
 tions will be necessary.  Second, adults are able  to  fly among the  treatments,
 and mortality is  difficult  to assess  unless  treatments are separated by some
 physical barrier  (screens,  separate greenhouse compartments,  etc.).  Therefore,
 beyond rather immediate killing power of a material,  residual effects on adults
 are difficult to measure.

 Obtaining Test Insects

     Greenhouse whitefly populations  usually are readily available  in most
greenhouses, and  few  specific rearing instructions for the insects  should be
necessary.   However,  large  numbers  of whiteflies can  be  reared on tobacco
plants, or on the specific  host plants to be used  in  the tests.  Rearing

 should be done in a separate greenhouse compartment  or  caged  area within a
 compartment,  and  the  adult population used  to  obtain life  stages  of known
 age (Smith  et al. 1970, Webb et  al.  1974).

      Because  whiteflies normally develop  from  the  apical portion  of the
 plant downward on undersides of  leaves, similar  age  group  distribution may
 be obtained by selecting  these areas to make counts  (adults and eggs on
 apical leaves, nymphs and pupae  on subapical leaves).

 Sampling of Treated Population

      Adults;  — Sampling  adult populations  normally  involves  counts from
 a  certain number of apical leaflets  (Lindquist 1972) , on the  entire
 plant (Webb et al 1974),  or on blackened  glass plates  (or  paper)  placed
 among the plants  (Smith et al. 1970, Webb et al. 1974).  All  of these
 procedures  may give reliable data on whitefly  adult  mortality.  Residual
 killing can only be measured by  using glass plates or paper,  or by caging
 adults on treated leaves  at intervals after application (Kreuger  et al.  1973).
 If glass plates or paper  are used, dead adults must  be  removed each time
 data are recorded.  The other methods give  only  estimates  of  immediate kill,
 unless treatments are physically separated  by  a  barrier (cages) or in sepa-
 rate greenhouses.

      In some  cases, e.g., aerosol or fumigation  trials  when materials must
 be applied  to an entire  greenhouse  compartment, pretreatment and posttreat-
 ment counts will be necessary (Lindquist  1974).

      Nymphs and Eggs:  —  There are many procedures used to evaluate control,
 or mortality, of whitefly immature stages.  Procedures  mentioned  here may
 be used to  develop reliable data, with adequate  replication.

      Recording life stages from  entire leaves, leaflets, or per unit of  leaf
 area can be done if the same plant species  (or cultivar) is utilized for
 efficacy trials (Smith et al.  (1970), Webb  et al.  (1974),  Krueger et al.
 (1973), Lindquist (1974), and Schuder (1974)).

      To record life stages from  portions  (e.g.,  1/2) of  leaves, the criteria
 apply as above.

      Recording life stages from  uniform-sized  leaf discs or punches should
 give  the best estimate of populations if  several cultivars of the same species
 or several different species are included in a trial, because the area sampled
will be equal for all plants.   Discs or punches  should  be  removed from the
 same relative areas on all plants to ensure a uniform age  distribution of
 sampled population.

     Record  the number of live and dead life stages  in the first   50  or 100
encountered  (Webb  et al.  1974) ,

Recording of Efficacy Data

     Adults:  Adults may be recorded as number alive per sampling unit
(leaf, leaflet, plant), or number dead per glass plate or paper square.

     Immature Stages;  — These data may be recorded in several ways (Smith
et al. 1970).  Count live nymphs plus empty "puparia"  (i.e.,  adults had
emerged")  (Schuder 1974).  This procedure should provide adequate  data  if
pretreatment observations establish that only young nymphs  are present.

     Intervals after treatment for recording data may vary.  Adult mortality
may be measured within a few hours, but if effects on immature stages are
to be measured, it will be necessary to wait at least 7 days before any
effects are noted.  Appropriate intervals are described by  Smith  et al.  (1970),
Allen  (1972), Schuder, (1974).


Allen, W. L.  1972.  Greenhouse whitefly control. ^Exhibit 6),.

Krueger,  H. R., R. K. Lindquist, J. F. Mason, and R. R. Spadafora.  1973.
     Application of methomyl to greenhouse tomatoes: Greenhouse whitefly
     control and residues in foliage and fruits.  J. Soon. Entomol. 66(5):

Lindquist, R. K., W. L. Bauerle, and R. R. Spadafora.  1972.  Effect of the
     greenhouse whitefly on yields of greenhouse tomatoes.  J. Econ. Entomol.
     65(5): 1406-8.

Lindquist, R. K.  1974.  Use of Micro-Gen Insecticidal Dispersal  Unit and
     Micrd-Gen BP-300 insecticide for greenhouse whitefly,  control on
     greenhouse tomatoes and cucumbers.  Ohio Agric. Res. Dev. Cent. Res.
     Simrn.  73: 31-3.

Lindquist, R. K.  1975.  Whitefly control on poinsettias.   (Exhibit 7 ).

Schuder,  D. L. 1974.  Evaluating insecticides for greenhouse  whitefly
     control on poinsettias.   (Exhibit 8).

Smith, Floyd F., Asher K. Ota, and A. L. Boswell.  1970.  Insecticides for
     control of the greenhouse whitefly.  J. Econ. Entomol.   63(2): 522-7.

Webb, Ralph E., Floyd F. Smith, A. L. Boswell, E. S. Fields,  and  R. M. Waters.
     1974.  Insecticidal control of the greenhouse whitefly on greenhouse
     ornamental and vegetable plants.  J. Econ. Entomol.  67(1):  114-8.


     Several species of thrips injure foliage,, flowers and below-ground
parts of floricultural crops.  The methods outlined below should provide
adequate data against species likely to be encountered.

     For general methods and statements concerning insect and mite control
on floricultural crops, see both General Considerations and introduction to
the floricultural crops section.

Flower Thrips, Franklin-Leila spp., in Open Flowers

     Sampling Methods: — Sampling treated flowers may be divided into
three basic methods, which are described below.

     1.  The Wash Method (Taylor and Smith 1955, Ota 1968).  This procedure
involves tearing flowers apart in a detergent solution, allowing flower
parts to float to the top and thrips to settle out, then pouring the mixture
through a series of different sized screens to separate the thrips from the

     2.  The Mechanical Method (Henneberry et al. 1964).  Infested rose
flowers are torn apart, placed in a plastic container with a screen bottom,
and shaken over a wet black cloth.

     3.  The Irritation Method (Evans 1933).  An irritant, such as turpentine,
ethyl acetate, or methyl isobutyl ketone is used to drive thrips out of in-
fested flowers and into a pan of water or onto a paper coated with a sticky
substance.  Another technique is to use a Berlese Funnel to drive thrips
into an alcohol solution (Schuder 1974, Morishita 1975).
     Reporting of Results: — With all of the techniques above, results  are
reported as number of thrips per flower, or groups of flowers.

     Sampling Interval; — After applications of an insecticide, the first
samples usually are taken one day after treatment  (Henneberry et al. 1961,
Lindquist 1972, Schuder 1974).  Following this initial sample, subsequent
counts to measure residual action may be made at the discretion of the re-


 Evans,  J.  W.   1933.   A simple method of collecting thrips and other insects
      from  blossoms.   Bull.  Entomol.  Res.   24:  349-50.

 Henneberry,  T.  J.,  F. F.  Smith,  and David Schriver,   1964.   Flower thrips
      in outdoor rose fields and an improved method of  extracting thrips from
      rose  flowers.   J.  Econ.  Entomol.   57(3):  410-2.

 Henneberry,  T.  J.,  E. A.  Taylor, and F. F. Smith.   1961.   Foliage and soil
      treatments for the control of flower thrips in outdoor roses.  J.  Eoon.
      Entomol.   57(3): 233-5.

 Lindquist, K.   1972.  Insect control on outdoor roses.   Pest'Loide News.
      25(1):  8-13.

 Morishita, Frank S.   1975.   Thrips extraction.   (Exhibit 9).

 Ota,  Asher K.   1968.  Comparison of three methods  of  extracting the flower
      thrips from rose flowers.  J. Eoon.  Entomol.   48:  747-8.

Schuder, D. L.   1974.  Flower thrip experiment.   (Exhibit 10) .

 Taylor, E. A.,  and F. F.  Smith.   1966.   Three  methods  for extracting thrips
      and other insects from rose flowers.  J.  Eaon. Entomol.   48: 767-8.
 Gladiolus Thrips

      This thrips attacks corms ,  foliage and flowers of galdiolus.   Individuals
 may survive on corms in storage  and be transplanted into fields.   Consequent-
 ly, it is necessary to treat corms and plants,  and to protect flowers from
 the gladiolus thrips.

      Experimental Design:  — 25  single or double row plots or 100 large
 corms may be utilized  as an experimental unit (Schuster and Wilf ret 1975) .
 Four replicates per treatment block are treated in a randomized fashion.
 With corms 3 corms per replicate are treated with each treatment replicated
 6  times .
      Application Methods :  — To field grown plants weekly applications
 made  for 7  weeks with a compressed air sprayer.   Corms a?e  dipped in pesti
 cide  solutions  for 10 or 30 minutes (Schuster and Wilfret 1975) .
      Evaluation Techniques;  — Plant populations  are estimated in flowers
 from 5  spikes  cut from each  plot.   Flowers  are cut when color begins to
 show and  held  at 80° F for 3 days»then the number of thrips counted in the
 5  lowest  florets on each spike.

      On corms, nymphs and adults  are counted 4 or 7 days posttreatment.


Schuster, D, J. and G. J. Wilfret,  1975.  Evauation of acephate on gladiolus
     for control of thrips and lepldopterous larvae.  Fla. State Hort. Soo.
     Fi-oo,   88: 584-586.
Cuban Laurel Thrips

     Cuban laurel thrips, Gynaikothrips ficorim  (Marchal) caused  damage  to
ornamental ficus by its feeding on foliage which begins on young  leaves  as
sunken red to purple spots along the mid vein.  Gradually, the leaf folds in
or rolls to form a tight curl.

     Experimental Design: — Infested plants  1.5 m tall in 7.6 1  containers
are  divided into 4 replicates based on level of infestation.  Treatments
are  randomly assigned within the replicates  (Reinert 1973).

     Application Method: — Foliar sprays are applied with a  7.6  1 compressed air
sprayer, granules are  applied directly to the containers and washed  in  with
     Evaluation Techniques: — Samples of 8-12 infested terminal leaves per
plant are  examined and thrips counted before and weekly after application for
7 weeks.

Reinert, J. A.  1973.  Cuban laurel thrips:  Systemic insecticides for
     control.  J.  Eaon. Entomol.  66: 1217-1218.

     For general methods and statements concerning insect and mite control
on all floricultural crops, see both General Considerations and introduction
to the floricultural crops section.

     Obtaining Test Insects: -- Caterpillars can be reared if facilities
are available, or shipped from laboratories able to do the rearing.  Natural
infestations do occur, but may be uneven.  Caterpillars or eggs should
be evenly distributed among plants to be treated.

     Application Methods: — See General Considerations for applicable in-

Foliar Feeding Caterpillars (Including Leafrollers)

     Species that occur  on the foliage, flowers, and buds of floricultural
crops include the cabbage looper, Tr-'ic1nop1us'La ni; budworm and corn earworm,
Heliothis spp.; armyworm, Spodoptera spp; and omnivorous leafroller Platynota
stultana.  Other species may be pests on one or more crops.

     Evaluation of Results: — Record the number of living larvae per plant
or group of plants (Lindquist  1976, Schuster and Wilfret 1975).  Number of
damaged plants in a given area is also used to measure efficacy (Schuster
and Wilfret 1975).  Allen (1967, Exhibit 11) used a time search procedure.

     Sampling intervals will vary with the test species and chemical used,
but the  first counts should be made within 48-72 hours posttreatment.

Allen, W. W.   1967.  Effectiveness of various pesticides applied as sprays
     for  control of  the omnivorous leafroller on greenhouse roses.  (Exhibit

Lindquist, R.  K.   1977.  Using Dipel effectively for caterpillar control.
     Ohio Florists'  Assn.  Bull. No. 567:8.

Schuster, David J.,  and Gary J. Wilfret.  1975.  Evaluation of acephate
     on gladiolus  for control of thrips and lepidopterous larvae.  Proa.
     Fla. St.  Hort.  Soo.  88: 584-6.

     Several species of cutworms may attack floricultural crops, including
the black cutworm, Agrotis ipsilon and variegated cutworm., Peridroma sauoia.
The variegated cutworm is known as a climbing cutworm because it moves up
the plant and feeds on foliage, buds and flowers.  All hide in the soil or
mulch during the day and feed at night.
     Application Methods: — Insecticides are applied as sprays or baits,
generally late in the afternoon before cutworms become active.   Sprays  are
directed at the foliage and root, while baits are broadcast on the  soil
surface only.
     Evaluation of Results: — Dead larvae may be recorded directly  from
the soil surface, or a measurement made of plant injury  (Lindquist 1977).
Data usually are recorded  1 day posttreatment and at  suitable  intervals


Lindquist, R. K.  1977.  Cutworm control trials on greenhouse  crops  in
      1976.  Ohio Florists' Assn. Bull. 568: 8-9.
 Iris Borer, Macronoctua onusta Grote

     The iris borer is an example of a leaf mining  caterpillar  that  later
 feeds in developing rhizomes.

     Application Methods:  Timing of the applications, sprays,  drenches
 or granules is critical.  Make applications in the  spring, when larvae are
 actively feeding in leaves.  1 or 2 -applications, 15 days apart,  should  be
     Evaluation of Results: — Two basic methods are used, depending  on  the
 season.  The first is to examine a certain number of leaves  for  larvae or
 larval feeding injury (Schuder 1958).   The second  is  the  examin-
 ation of rhizomes and/or surrounding soil for injury,  larvae  or  pupae.   This
 involves digging up treated areas (or portions thereof) and  physically in-
 specting rhizomes or searching the soil (Schread 1970, Dunbar 1975).

     The first method is used in May or June, while the second method is used
 in July and August.


 Dunbar, Dennis M.  1975.  What's new in iris borer  control?   Bull. Am. Iris. Soc.
     216: 44-7.

 Schread, John C.  1970.  Iris borer and its control.   Conn. Agric. Exp.
     Sta. Res. Circ.   235.  6 pp.

 Schuder, Donald L.  1958.  Promising insecticides for  the  control of  the
     iris borer.  Bull.  Am. Iris. Soc.  150: 1-5.


     Several species may be involved, but all have  similar life  histories.

     For methods and other information applicable to testing  insecticides
against all insects on floricultural crops, see both General  Considerations
and the Introduction to the Floricultural Crops Section.

     Obtaining Test Insects: — If natural infestations are not  available,
leafminers can be reared by following procedures 'outlined  by  Webb  and Smith
(1970).   Larvae of similar age can be obtained for  testing purposes by follow-
ing the procedures outlined by Smith et al. (1974).

     Application Methods: — Timing of applications will vary, depending
on whether the desired objective is to prevent larval injury or kill eggs
or larvae at some developmental stage.  For information concerning applica-
tion of sprays, aerosols, granules, etc., see the introduction to this

     Most test methods are designed to evaluate larval mortality or injury.
Two basic procedures may be used to measure efficacy.  The first method is
the assessment of larval mortality by dissecting larvae from leaves, or
marking the limits of mines on leaves at the time of treatment and observing
any further development  (French et al. 1967).  Smith et al. (1974) observed
live and dead larvae through a binocular microscope without dissection.  This
method is most useful if the age structure of larval populations is similar
when treated.

     The second method which may be used is recording the number of mines
per leaf, branch or plant (Wolfenbarger 1958).  This is most useful in a
field or greenhouse infestation when the age structure is not uniform, and
a series of applications is made in a preventive control program.


French, N., Margaret Ejohn, and A. Wright.  1967-  Chemical control of
     chrysanthemum leafminer and some observations on varietal preference.
     PI. Path.  16: 181-6.

Smith, Floyd F., Ralph E. Webb, and A. L. Boswell.  1974.  Insecticidal
     control of a vegetable leafminer.  J. Eoon.  Entomol.  67(1): 108-10.

Webb, R. E., and F. F. Smith.  1970.  Rearing a leafminer, Li-ritOmyza munda,
     J. Eoon. Entomol.  63: 2009-10.

Wolfenbarger, D. 0.  1958.  Serpentine leaf miner:  Brief history and
     summary of a decade of control measures in south Florida.  J. Eoon.
     Entomol.  51: 357-9.
Fungus Gnat Larvae  (Sciaridae)

     For methods and statements concerning insect and mite control on all
floricultural crops, see both General Considerations and introduction to
the Floricultural Crops Section.

     Obtaining Test Insects; •— Egg laying adults are attracted to moist
soil, high in organic matter.  Often plants such as broad bean  (Phaseolus
vulgar-is} grown in vermiculite, attract large numbers.  The area or con-
tainers used for testing should be exposed to egg-laying adults (i.e., placed
in areas where adult activity is noted) for 10-14 days prior to application of

     Application Methods: — Most insecticides are applied to control  larvae
 in  the  soil or roots as soil drenches.  Granular insecticides scattered on
 the soil surface may be used.  Enough liquid must be applied to  ensure
 that the toxicant is distributed throughout the growing medium.

     Recording of Efficacy Data: — Control may be measured by recording
 emerged adults after application (Lindquist 1971).  The soil surface is
 covered with a layer of white silica sand to facilitate counting of adults.
 Pots are covered with clear polyethylene bags or cheesecloth to  trap any
 adults  that emerge.

     Another procedure is to drive larvae out of the soil with a pyrethrum
 drench  (Lindquist, Exhibit 12).  This method gives a direct larval count
 without having to cover treated areas, but all larvae are killed, so no
 subsequent counts can be made.

                                References                                 >

 Lindquist, R. K.  1971.  Control of fungus gnat larvae with soil drenches.
     Ohio Florists' Assn. Bull. 500 p. 4.

 Lindquist, R. K. 1977,  Use of pyrethrins to evaluate efficacy of insecticides
     against fungus gnat larvae.  (Exhibit 12).

 Rose Midge  (Daysyneura rhodophaga)

     For methods and statements concerning insect and mite control on  all
 floricultural crops3 see both General Considerations and introduction  to
 the Floricultural Crops section.

     These pests are sometimes severe pests of field and greenhouse roses.
 During  heavy infestations, roses are prevented from flowering due to larval
 feeding on terminal shoots.

     Infestations often can be found in areas sheltered from wind, such as
 municipal parks and large estates.  Greenhouse infestations also occur.

     Insecticide Application; — Applications may be made in the form  of
 heavy sprays (e.g., a hose-end sprayer on soil setting) or granules on the
 soil or mulch surrounding rose bushes.  Spraying plants with short-residual
materials is  of little benefit.   Applications to soil or mulch will kill
adults as they emerge (Lindquist,  Exhibit 13).  Make applications at 7-14
day intervals.
     Evaluation of Results: — Examination of a certain number of terminal
shoots (e.g., 10) per replicate for larvae at 7~day intervals will give an

indication of control.  Counts are made under a binocular microscope.  Re-
cording flowers produced also can be useful (Lindquist, Exhibit 13).

     For methods and statements concerning insect and mite control on all
floricultural cropSj see both General Considerations and  introduction  to  the
floricultural crops section.
Tetranychids Mites

     Spider mites are probably the most serious pests of greenhouse crops
throughout the world (Hussey et al. 1969) largely because of their ability
to develop resistance to many acaricidal materials.

     Spider mites may  feed on and damage some 200 host plants (Hussey et
al. 1969) but the few techniques from major hosts may serve as examples of
methods for nearly all hosts.

     Sampling Procedures: — Details of sampling procedures may vary
with individual host plants, but most fall into one of four basic categories.

     The first is the recording of mites from a certain number of leaves or
flowers.  Depending on the host, samples are taken at random, from leaves
of similar age, or near leaves that have feeding damage (Baranowski 1966,
Binns, 1969, Poe and McFadden 1972, Poe and Willret 1972).

     The second sampling  procedure employs the recording of mites from a
certain number of leaf discs, removed at random from leaves showing any
feeding injury (Taylor et al. 1969).

     The third technique involves using bean seedlings as host plants.  The
seedlings should be trimmed of all but 2 leaves.  Plants are infested by
pinning infected leaves from mite colony to seedling leaves for 2-4 hours,
then dipping entire plant in insecticide solutions.  Living and dead mites
are then recorded from the entire plant (Henneberry and Smith 1965).

     The fourth technique uses a Renderson-McBurnie mite brushing machine to
brush mites onto g3ass plates coated with a material causing mites to adhere
to the surface (Schuder 1974).

     In all of these procedures, some magnification is necessary to make
mite counts.  Generally, a binocular microscope (12-15 X) is used for this

     Reporting Results : — When mites are sampled using one of the general
procedures listed above, results may be recorded in three ways:

     » mean number of mites and/or eggs per leaf, leaflet,  leaf  disc,  or
       groups of these;

     • mean number of mites per glass plate, removed from a certain  amount
       of foliage; or

     • average infestation rating.

     Sampling Interval: — The sampling interval may vary,  depending upon
 the objectives of the experiment, but some common intervals include  24 hours,
 7 days, and 14 days posttreatment (see references under sampling procedures).


 Baranowski, R, M.  1966.  Soil applications of systemic insecticides for
     mite control on chrysanthemums.  Proc,  Fla.  State Hoptf Soo,  79:

 Binns, E. S.  1969.  The chemical control of red spider mite on  glasshouse
     roses.  Plant Pathol.   18: 49-56.

 Henneberry, T, J., and W. R. Smith.  1965.  Malathion synergism  against
     organophosphate-resistant two-spotted spider mites. J,  Boon,  Entomol,
     58(2): 312-14.

 Hussey, N. W., W. H. Read, and J. J. Hesling.  1969.  The Pests  of Pro-
     tected Cultivation.  American Elsevier, Inc., New York.

 Poe,  S. L., and S. McFadden.  1972.  Effect of benomyl and surfacants
     on populations of the two spotted spider mite on dwarf marigolds.
     J".  Ca.  Entomol,  Soo.   7(3): 167-70.

 Poe, S.  L. , and C.  J. Wilfret,  1972.  Factors affecting spidermite  (letrany-
     dhus wot-icae Koch) population development on carnation;  relative culti-
     var susceptibility and physical  characteristics.  Proa. Fla.  State Hort.
     Soo.   85: 384-7.

 Schuder, D. L.  1974.  Twospotted spider mite experiment,   (Exhibit  14).

 Taylor,  E. A., T. J,  Henneberry, and F, F. Smith,  1969,  Control  of re-
     sistant spider mi.tes on greenhouse roses,  J\ Boon, Entomol.  52(5);
Tarsonemid Mites

     Broad and cyclamen mites are the two most common tarsonemid mite pests
of ornamental plants,  These species are usually more devastating under
sheltered conditions,  Because of their minute size and cryptic habits, in-
dividuals are rarely observed.  Further, damage initiated in buds and un-
opened flowers is detected only after a latent period.

     Experimental Design: — Plants 15-20 cm tall in 10 cm diameter plastic
pots are used (Hamen 1974).  4 plants are replicated 4 times and treatments
applied in a randomized fashion.
     Application Method: — Two foliar applications are  made at 5-day inter-
vals as sprays with a compressed air hand sprayer at 40 psi.
     Evaluation Techniques: — Counts of live mites infesting the shoot apex
are made at 1 and 13 days posttreatment.  Mites are extracted in 5 ml water
with detergent shaken vigorously for 10 seconds (Hamlen 1974).


Hamlen, R. A.  1974.  The broad mite:  new and important pest of greenhouse
     grown aphelandra.  J. Eoon. Entomol,  67: 791-792.
                 GARDEN  SYMPHYLAN  (Soutigerella immaaulata)

     Obtaining Test  Species; — Natural infestations of symphylans usually
are localized, rearing  populations  for testing is desirable.  Another system
for mass  rearing  consists of placing 20 adults in a  .947 1 glass canning
jar with  2,5  cm  of gravel at the bottom.  The remainder of the jar is
loosely filled with  soil at 25% soil moisture and held at 21° C, (Ramsey
1971).  Ground hemlock  bark at 30%  moisture and 24° C as the holding
temperature may  be used (Berry 1972).  Fresh carrot roots supplied twice
weekly as food may be used  (Shanks  1966).  Lettuce leaves and carrot roots
may be used as food  (Berry  1972).

     To infest plots, portions of the media containing symphylans are placed
in the test area (Ramsey 1971).  Several days are necessary for symphylans
to become distributed within the test area.
     Application Methods:  —  The  principal method of  control  are soil fumi-
 gation  or  preplant  incorporation  of pesticides  (Berry and Crowell  1970).
 Granules are  applied  in  the furrow or broadcast on  the soil surface and in-
 corporated.   Soil drenches of liquid pesticides also  can be applied at the
 base of individual  plants.  A technique of dipping  roots of transplants
 into the pesticide  solution just  prior to placing in  plant beds is used
 (Berry and. Crowell  1970).

     Evaluation of  Results: — Symphylan populations  in experimental plot
areas are recorded by examining soil from each plot (Gesell and Hower 1973).
Soil examination of 25 x 25 cm root-core samples is another method of
population evaluation (Berry  and  Crowell 1970).

     Plant samples often give an excellent picture of symphylan activity.
Alternate plants are removed to check for symphylan injury  (Berry and
Crowell 1970).  Stem diameter also is measured.  Plant height is-recorded
(Gesell and Hower 1973).

     Sampling Interval: — Evaluation for symphylan control is done  at  a
point midway  through or at the end of a crop.  This ranges  from several
weeks to several months.

Berry, R. E.  1972.  Garden Symphylan;  Reproduction and development  in  the
      laboratory.  J. Econ. Entomol. 65(6): 1628-32.

Berry, R. E. , and H. H. Crowell.   1970.  Effectiveness of Bay  37289 as a
      transplant dip  to control the  garden symphylan in broccoli.  J. Econ.
      Entomol.   63(5) 1718-9.

Gesell,  S.  S.,  and  A. A.  Hower.  1973.  Garden symphylan:   Comparison of
      row and broadcast application of granular insecticides  for  control.
      J.  Econ. Entomol.  66(3):  822-3.

Ramsey;  H.  L.   1971.  Garden symphylan populations in laboratory cultures.
      J.  Econ. Entomol.  64(3):  657-60.

Shanks,  C.  H.   1966.  Factors that affect reproduction of the  garden
      symphylan, Scutlgerella immaculata.  J. Econ. Entomol.  59(6): 1403-6.
                               SLUGS AND SNAILS

      Obtaining  Test  Species: — During certain seasons,  animals  are  abundant,
 and  can be  field  collected and used for laboratory  trials  or  application of
 candidate molluscicides  can be made during  these periods of activity.   How-
 ever,  for laboratory trials, rearing needs  to be done  to assure  the  investiga-
 tor  of both a steady supply of animals and  a uniform population  for  testing.
 Rearing procedures are described by Arias and Corwell  (1963),  Brooks (1968),
 Cunningham  and  Gottfried  (1967), Judge (1972) and Karlin and  Naegele (I960).
      Application  of  Candidate Molluscicides  and  Evaluation of  Results:  —
Molluscicides  often  are  formulated as baits  containing  the toxicant mixed with
wheat bran  or  apple  pomace.  Conventional  granular  or spray materials also
are  used, especially in  preliminary  trials.
     Laboratory Methods: — Most procedures  involve  confining animals in a
 container  and recording mortality.   Several  basic  methods  are used.

     Bait  formulations  are  used  in  testing  boxes  (46 x 24 x 9 cm)  where
slugs had  access  to  either  a  covered  refuge or an open area containing
moist soil and baits  (Crowell 1967).

     Slugs are directly injected with candidate materials (Henderson 1969),

     Slugs are confined on  filter paper or  plant  leaves that had been
sprayed  in a Potter  Tower  (Getzin and Cole  1964 and Wilkinson 1963).

     A two-step procedure of  confining slugs in containers with carrot
discs dipped in solutions of  candidate materials, followed by caging
slugs on flats of pea seedlings  sprayed with materials found promising
in  the first stage is used  (Judge 1969).

     Placing baits on greenhouse benches  infested with slugs is considered
to  be simulated field trial (Smith  and Boswell 1970).
     FieId Methods: — Four basic methods  may be used in  field trials. These
are:  making spray applications of candidate materials to plants and record-
ing the number of  slugs on plants during their  daily activity period  (Barry
1.969); placing baits beneath bait stations  (usually square plywood boards),
and recording dead animals daily  (Howitt and  Cole  1962);  making applications
of candidate materials and recording  the feeding damage on plants  (Howitt
and Cole  1962);  and making applications of  candidate materials and recording
dead animals from  individual field plots  (Lindquist and Krueger  1976) .


Arias, R. 0. , and  H. H. Crowell.  1963.  A  contribution to the biology of
     the  gray garden slug.  Bull. So.  Calif.  Acad. Sc'l. 62:  83-97-

Barry, B. D.  1969.  Evaluation of chemicals  for control  of  slugs  on  field
     corn in Ohio.  J. Econ. Entomol.  62(6):  1277-9.

Brooks, Wayne M.   1968.   Tetrahymenid ciliates  as  parasites  of  the gray
     garden slug.  Si loo?die, 39(8): 207-8.

Crowell,  H. H,   1967.  Slug and snail control with experimental poison
     baits.  c.  Feon. Entc-'ol.  60(4):  1048-50.

Cunningham, J. James and  H. Gottfried.  1967.   The laboratory  care of
     giant  land  slug?.  Labcpata-:-' An:.^;nl  Care  17(4):  382-5.

Getzin, L. W., and S. G.  Cole.  1964.   Evaluation  of potential  molluscicides
     for  slug control.  Xasn. Agi\ Fxr. $ts<.  Full.   658.  9 pp.

Henderson. I.  F.  1969.   A laboratory method  for assessing the  toxicitv
     of stomach poisons to slugs.  Ann. .4rrZ. Piol,  63:167-71.

Howitt, Angus J., and Stanley G. Cole.  1962.  Chemical control of  slugs
     affecting vegetables and strawberries in the Pacific Northwest.  J.
     Eaon. Entomol.  55(3): 320-5.

Karlin, Edward J.,  and John A. Naegele.  1960.  Biology of the mollusca of
     greenhouses in New York State.  Cornell Agr, Exp, Sta, Memoir  372: 8-9.

Judge, F. D.  1969.   Preliminary screening of candidate molluscicides.
     J. Eoon. Entomol.  62(6): 1393-7.

Judge, F. D.  1972.   Aspects of the biology of the gray garden slug  (Deroceras
     reticulatum Muller).  Search Agric.   2(19): 18 p.

Lindquist, R. K., and H. R, Krueger.  1976.  Slugs a tough problem  for home
     gardeners.  Ohio Report 61 (2): 24-7.

Smith, Floyd F., and Anthony L. Boswell,   1970.   New baits and attractants
     for slugs.  J.  Eoon.  Entomol, 63(6):  1919-22,

Wilkinson, A. T. S.   1963.  Preliminary screening of pesticides for control
     of slugs.  Pesticide Prog. 1(4): 100.

                         OUTDOOR WOODI ORNAMENTALS
     The most common outdoor woody ornamentals and shrubs include arborvitae,
azalea, boxwood, camelia, chamaecyparis, cotoneaster, crabapple, dogwood,
euonymus, forsythia, holly, honeylocust, juniper, laurel, lilac, magnolia,
oleander, palm, pine, privet, pyracantha, redbud, rhododendron, spirea,
viburnum, and yew.  For the purpose of pesticide test methods development,
pests of woody ornamentals may be grouped as aphids, adelgids, mealybugs and
soft scales, armored scales, whiteflies, lace bugs, lygus bugs and other true
bugs, thrips, lepidopterous larvae, beetles, leafminers and mites.  Test
methods applicable  to each of these groups are given under their respective
headings.  The following general statements are applicable to all of these

     Application Techniques and Equipment: — Application techniques should be
appropriate for the use contemplated and the size of the test plots used.
Frequently, hand-pumped, compressed air sprayers are used in evaluating ma-
terials for efficacy on woody ornamentals.  Results from such applications
may be comparable to those obtained with power equipment provided that the
same dilution is used and the same amount of toxicant per  plant unit is applied.
Commonly this is achieved by spraying to runoff (Campbell 1968).  Systemic
materials applied to the soil should be evenly distributed over the active
root zone and this  is assumed to be an area around the stem to the drip line
of the tree.  Dosages are calculated on a surface area basis or on stem diameter
of the host (Tashiro 1973).  See Nielsen (Exhibit 15 ) for a description and
results of a method of applying a granular systemic insecticide.  The systemic
materials are applied to moist soil, incorporated, and watered in (Scheer and
Johnson 1970, Saunders 1970).  Dosages for container-grown plants are calcu-
lated as shown by Smith (1952).  Other application techniques such as ULV,
LV, trunk drenches, trunk injections or implantations (Brown and Eads 1977),
soil injection (Brown et al. 1972) or aircraft treatments may be used when

     Plot Size: — Generally 4 replicates are appropriate, although 3 may be
used if test plants are limited and the infestation is uniform.  More than
4 may be required when the infestation is sparse or uneven (Koehler 1963,
Nielsen et al. 1973).  To enhance validity of tests it is common practice to
select test plants that are known to be infested before randomization of the
plots.   This may be done by taking pretreatment counts (Reinert 1973).  Pre-
treatment counts may be used to provide guidance in establishing the experi-
mental design (Reinert and Woodiel 1974).

     Samplimg..: — Evaluation of results usually involves counting the number
of pests wh^Lch survive the treatment and comparison of this with an untreated
check and/& a standard commercial check.  An indication of population reduction

 by reporting percent control in relation to an untreated check is common
 practice (Campbell 1968).   Rating schemes may be appropriate, but they
 must be fully explained (Campbell and Balderston 1969).   Efficacy may be
 evaluated on the basis of  plant protection, rather than on counts of
 living insects,  when appropriate.  For example, it is immaterial whether a
 leafminer is dead or alive if it has already destroyed the aesthetic value of
 the leaf in which it occurs and so it is reasonable to assess the efficacy
 of a pesticide on the basis of the number of leaves marred per test plant in
 comparison to an untreated check (Hartzell et al. 1943).  The concept of
 an Aesthetic Injury Level  in -contrast to the conventional Economic Injury
 Level is valid.

      Phytotoxicity: — Refer to Phytotoxicity section in General Considerations.


 Brown, L. R., A.  S. Deal,  and C. 0.  Eads.   1972.   Soil injection of oxydemeton-
      methyl to control the painted maple aphid.  J,  Eoon.  Entomol.   65(3):

 Brown, L. R., and C. 0. Eads.  1977.  Nantucket pine  tip moth by soil treat-
      ment and trunk implantation.  Insect.  & Acar.  Tests 2: 124-125.

 Campbell, R. L.   1968.  Control of some pests of  Scotch  pine Christmas trees
      in Ohio.  j.  Econ.  Entomol.  61(5): 1365-1369.

 Campbell, R. L.,  and C. P-  Balderston.   1969.  New control for maple bladder
      gall mite.   Pesticide News  22(3): 78, 80.

 Hartzell, A., D.  L. Collins, and W.  E.  Blauvelt.   1943.   Control of the holly
      leaf miner.   Contrib.  Boyse Thompson Inst.   13(1):  29-34.

 Kohler,  C. S.  1963.  Lygus hesperus as an economic insect on magnolia nursery
      stock,  j.  Eoon.  Entomol.   56(3):  421-422.

Koehler, C. S.  1964.  Control of Asterolecaniwn scales and Cynipid leaf galls
      on oak in northern California.   J.  Econ.  Entomol.   57(4): 579-581.

 Nielsen, D. G. ,  F, F. Furrington, and C. P. Balderston.   1973.  Evaluation of
      insecticides for control of lilac borer, Podosesia  syvingae  in Rancho
      Roundhead ash.  Pesticide News   26(4,); 94-95,

 Reinert, J. A.  1973.  Cuban laurel thrips:  systemic insecticides for control.
      J.  Econ.  Entomol.  66(5): 1217-1218.

 Reinert, J. A.,  and N. L.  vloodiei.  1974.  Palm aphid control on "Malayan Dwarf"
      coconut palms.  Fla,  Entomol,  57(4);  41.1-413.

 Saunders, J. L.   1970.  Carbofuran drench for black vine weevil control on
      container-grown spruce.  J.  Econ.   Entomol,   63(5): 1698-1699.

Scheer, C. F., and G. V. Johnson.  1970.  Systemic insecticide against the
     spirea aphid, birch leaf miner, and Nantucket pine tip moth. J. Eoon.
     Entomol.   63(4): 1205-1207.

Smith, F. F.  1952.  Conversion of per-acre dosages of soil insecticide to
     equivalents for small units.  J. Eaon, Entomol.   45(2): 339-340.

Tashiro, H.  1973.  Evaluation of soil applied systemic insecticides on in-
     sects of white birch in nurseries.  Search Agric, (Geneva, N. Y.)
     3(9): 1-11.

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against aphids on outdoor woody ornamentals, see both the General Introduction
and Introduction to the Outdoor Woody Ornamentals.

     Colonies to be treated experimentally should be composed predominantly
of apterous nymphs.  The presence of substantial numbers of parasites or
predators at the time of treatment may give misleading data.  Some species
of aphids are easily dislodged by a spray stream regardless of toxicant,
expecially if a high pressure spray is used.  In this case it is advisable
to include a "water only" spray treatment as the untreated check to ensure
validity of the resuts.

     Sampling: —- Observations on effectiveness can be made 24 hours after
treatment and should be repeated at 48 hours and then continued on a weekly
basis at the discretion of the investigator.  Counts of living aphids are
usually based on plant unit (length of stem, number of leaves, etc.). These
sampling units should be chosen at random from each plot and the counts
should be averages of at least 3 subsamples per plot (Reinert and Woodiel
1974). Beating trays or other mechanical devices may be used for sampling
plots if the above principles regarding randomization and subsampling are
adhered to (Campbell 1968),


Campbell, R. L.  1968.  Control of some pests of Scotch pine Christmas trees
     in  Ohio.  J.  Eoon. Entomol.   61(5): 1365-1369.

Reinert, J. A., and N, L. Woodiel.  1974.  Palm aphid control on "Malayan
     Dwarf" coconut palms.  Fla,  Entomol.  57(4): 411-413,
Palm Aphid

     Experimental Design: — 18-month old 1.5-2.5 m tall palms  are blocked
according to pretreatment counts of mean numbers of aphids per leaflet.
5 replicates of one plant each  are randomly treated within blocks  (Reinert
and Woodiel 1974).

      Application Method :  — For spray materials a compressed air hand sprayer
is   used and thorough coverage emphasized.   For drenches, 4 soil cores, 15 cm
 deep 10.2 cm diameter and  46 cm from the base of the palms  are removed and
 the holes poured full of insecticide.   When this material had soaked in, the
 entire area is   flushed with water.
      Evaluation Techniques:  — Total number of aphids on the 3 heaviest in-
 fested leaflets determined pretreatment and at 4,  14, and 28 days posttreatment
 or weekly  for  4 weeks  (Reinert and Woodiel 1974).

 Reinert,  J.  A.,  and  N.  L.  Woodiel.  1974,  Palm aphid control on "Malayan Dwarf"
      coconut palsm.  Fla.  Entomol.   57(4):  411-413.


      For  methods and other information  applicable  to testing insecticides
 against adelgids,  see both the General  Introduction and the Introduction to
 the  Outdoor  Woody  Ornamentals.

      Sampling: —  On spruce, where  the  object  of control is prevention of galls,
 observations on efficacy .-should  be  made after  new  growth has developed.   At
 other  times  of the year counts of living adelgids  per unit  length of  twig
 are  useful, supplemental data  (Campbell  and  Balderston 1972b).   On hosts  where
 the  object of control is population reduction  of free-living adelgids,  counts
 of living adelgids per plant unit (Length of twig,  area of  bark,  etc.) are
 appropriate.  These  plant  units  should  be chosen at  random  from each  plot and
 the  counts should  be averages of at least 3 subsamples  per  plot (Campbell
 and  Balderston 1972a).

Camrball, 7  L., and C, P. Balderston.  1972a.  Insecticidal  control  of
     EasLe.- spruce gall aphid during autumn in Ohio.  J. Eicon. Entomol,
     65(6): 1745-1746.

Campbell, R. L,, and C. P. Balderston. 1972b.  Insecticidal control of
     Adelges cooleyi Douglas-fir in Ohio, with notes on biolopy.  J
     --?1?  :"--'  —,7,  65(3); 912-914.

     For methods and statements concerning mealybugs, refer to the General
Introduction and the section on Mealybugs in the Floricultural Crops.

                                 SOFT SCALES

      For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
 against soft scales on outdoor woody ornamentals, refer to the General In-
 troduction and the Introduction to the Outdoor Woody Ornamentals.

      Sampling:  — The stage of development of the scales when treated must
 be specified (Smith et al.  1971).  If foliar treatments are being tested
 against migrating crawlers, it may be necessary to account for mechanical
 dislodgement.  This may be done by including a "water only" treatment as  the
 untreated check.  Efficacy may be determined by counting survivors per plant
 unit (Koehler et al.  1965) or by determining percent mortality by examining
 a given number of individuals per plot (Nielsen and Johnson 1972).

      Results of trials against the unarmored irregular pine scale are
 evaluated by taking 5 current-season twigs from each plot and determining
 mortality of scales on them by puncturing each with a needle under
 magnification;  live scales exude a clear-yellowish fluid when punctured,  while
 dead scales are either dry or exude a discolored fluid (Koehler et al. 1965).

      Results are evaluated by recording the mean number of scales on 3 leaves
 per replicate (8 replicates), 14 weeks after treatment (Hamlen 1975).

      Evaluation may be delayed to allow residues to dissipate and  survivors
 to mature to a size which can be easily counted (Koehler 1974).


 Hamlen, Ronald A.  1975.   Survival of hemispherical scale and an Encyrtus
      parasitoid after treatment with insect growth regulators and  insecticides.
      Environ.  Entomol.   4: 972-974.

 Koehler,  C.  S.   1974.   Evaluation of insecticides and spraying  schedules  for
      control of Kuno scale, Leemiim kunoensis,  or pyracantha.  (Exhibit 16) .

 Koehler,  C.  S.,  M.  E.  Kattoulas,  and R.  L.  Campbell.   1965.   Timing of treat-
 ments  for control of the  irregular pine  scale.   J.  Econ.  Entomol.  58(6):  1102-

 Nielsen,  D.  0.,  and N.  E.  Johnson.   1972.   Control of the pine  needle scale
     in central  New York.   J.  Econ.  Entomol.  65(4):  1161-1164.

 Smith,  F. F., A.  K.  Ota,  C.  W.  McComb,  and J. A.  Weidhaas,  Jr.   1971.   De-
     velopment  and  control of  a wax  scale,  Ceroplastes cer"i ferns.   J.  Eoon.
     Entomol. 64(4):  889-893.

Hemispherical Scale

     Experimental Design:  — 15 cm diameter plastic pots  of Aphelandra, in a
randomized block of  4-8 replications  with  1-3 plants  per  replicate,  may be
used in evaluating hemispherical  scale  control  (Hamlen 1975a,  b).

     Application Method: — Foliar application with hand sprayer at 40 psi
is made, as" are 1-3 drenches at 3 week intervals, with 250 ml  insecticide
per 15 cm container, granules are hand applied and watered in  with  250 cc

     Evaluation Techniques: — Count of live adults pretreatment on plants
may be compared with the posttreatment count.  Record the number of scales
appearing on previously uninfested foliage.  Leaf drops may be recorded as
a measure of phytotoxicity.  Population counts on three leaves, basal, mid and
upper portions, are  made 14 weeks posttreatment (Hamlen 1975a, b).
Hamlen, R. A.  1975a..  Insect growth regulator control of longtailed mealybug,
     hemisperhical scale and Phenacoccus sotani- on ornamental foliage plants.
     J. Econ. Entomol.  68: 223-226.

Hamlen, R. A.  1975b.  Survival of hemispherical scale and an Enayvtus
     parasitoid after treatment with insect growth regulators and insecti-
     cides.  Environ. Entomol. 4: 972-974.

                              ARMORED SCALES

     For methods and general statements concerning armored scales on outdoor
woody  ornamentals, refer to the General Introduction and the Introduction to
the Outdoor Woody Ornamentals.

     Determination of individual scale mortality differs according to whether
the scale species is armored or not.  The relative effectiveness of treatments
for the armored tea scale is evaluated on the basis of mortality of adult
females at monthly or bimonthly intervals after treatment (Kouskolekas  and  Self  1972).
Leaf samples of 3-4 infested leaves  are taken from the middle and upper
portion of each plant.  Female scales  are selected at random, the armor re-
moved, and mortality  is determined under magnification.  At each sampling
date two mortality counts of 100 females  are made and averaged.

     Experimental Design: — 4 blocks of 10 plants each with treatments
randomized on one plant replicates are used (Reinert 1974).   Hedge plants
are treated using 3-6 plants per treatment, with buffer between plants
(Reinert 1976).

     Application Method: — Foliar sprays  are applied to runoff with a com-
pressed air hand sprayer (Reinert 1974).  Granules  are applied to loosened
soil,  then watered in.  Plants  are retreated after 4 weeks  (Reinert 1976).

     Evaluation Techniques: — Scale populations  are sampled by removing 4
leaves per plant and counting the number of live scales present.  Plants are
reexamined at 4, 8 and 16 weeks after treatment (Reinert 1974).  One 30-40 cm
long infested terminal per plant is used to determine the number of live
females (Reinert 1976).   After treatment counts are made at 8 and 16 weeks -to determine

efficacy.  Abbots formula  is then used to adjust the data for control mortality
(Reinert 1976).


Kouskolekas, C. A., and R. L. Self.  1972.  Control of tea scale on container-
     grown camellias with systemic insecticdes.  J. Eoon. Entomcl. 66(5): 1163-1166.

Reinert, J. A.  1974.  Management of the false oleander scale, Pseudocapsis
     cockerelli (Cooley).  Fla. Sta. Hort. Soc. Proc. 87: 518.20.

Reinert, J. A.  1976.  Cerococcus dekeli and its control on Hibiscus.  J. Econ.
     Entomol.  69:713-714.

     For methods and statements concerning whiteflies on outdoor woody ornament-
als, refer to the General Introduction and Whitefly section of the Floricultural

     For methods and statements  concerning bugs  (lace bugs, lygus bugs and
others), refer  to the General Introdcution and the Introduction to Outdoor
Woody Ornamentals.

     Sampling:  — Efficacy of materials tested against relatively inactive
species may be  assessed by counting all living bugs on each plant (Johnson 1960)
or by counting  them on randomly  selected subsamples from each plant  (Koehler
and Rosenthal 1967).  For active species which may move off plants or be easily
dislodged, an injury rating system can be used (Koehler 1962).


Johnson, W. T.  1960.  Studies with several systemic insecticides for the
     control of azalea lace bugs.  J. Econ. Entomol. 53(5) 839-841.

Koehler, C. S.  1962.  Lygus Hesperus as an economic insect on magnolia nursery
     stock.  J.  Econ. Entomol. 56(3): 421-422

Koehler, C. S., and S. S. Rosenthal.  1967.  Bark vs. foliage application of
     insecticides for control of Psylla uneatoides on Acacia. J. Econ. Entomol.
     60(6): 1554-1558

Royal Palm Bug

     Because of the presence of  these insects in foliage of tall established
trees, special  equipment is necessary to reach the sampling site.  A lift of
the type on service trucks of electric companies or city maintenance crews is

     Experimental Design: — Trees   are  15 m  tall  and  grouped  into 5 blocks
based on population size before treatment.  Treatments 8EfiiJTa.m_dgiiized on
single tree replicates within blocks, (Reinert 1975) .

     Application Methods: — Sprays  are  applied  to runoff  on the  entire  tree
canopy at 150 psi with a compressed  air  sprayer.

     Drenches  are applied by mixing insecticide in  7.6  1  water in a sprinkling
can and applying to loosened soil 10-15  cm deep  in a circle about equal  to
1/2 the radius of the drip line of each  tree.  A potato  fork   is  used to loosen
the soil before drenching.  The application   is made and followed by flooding
with 38 1 water.
     Evaluation Technique: — 10 infested leaflets from  the most  recently  un-
folded leaf  are examined and the 3 most heavily infested  leaflets   are  removed
and brushed in a leaf brushing machine.  Specimens  are  caught  in alcohol
filled petri dishes and counted at pretreatment and 4, 14  and 28  days  post-
treatment .

Reinert, J. A.  1975.  Royal palm bug, Xylastodoris luteolus damage and  control
     on royal palms in Florida. Fla. St. Eort. Soo. Proa, 88: 591-593.

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against thrips, refer to the General Introduction and the section on  thrips
in  the Floricultural Crops section.

     Sampling: — Efficacy is evaluated by counting the average number  of
thrips per leaf on 8-12 subsamples per replicate at weekly  intervals  after
treatment (Reinert 1973).

Reinert, J. A.  1973.  Cuban laurel thrips:  systemic insecticides for control.
     J. Econ.  Entomol.   66(5): 1217-1218.

                            LEPIDOPTEROUS LARVAE

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against lepidopterous larvae on outdoor woody ornamentals, refer to the
General Introduction and the section on lepidopterous larvae in the Floricul-
tural Crops.


     Rafer  to Lepidopterous Larvae in the Floricultural Crops.

Foliar Feeding Caterpillars

     Refer  to Lepidopterous Larvae in the Floricultural Crops.

     Sampling: — When  test plants are small, it is possible to count survivors
per plant  (Koehler 1973).  Timed-count procedures  are used successfully in
oakworm trials (Koehler 1975).     Larvae  are not removed after counting and
so  are available for counting at subsequent sampling intervals.  Using a
stopwatch, a person should record the number of live larvae seen in a 1-2 minute
search of foliage on the plant.  A second and third person should follow the
same procedure in the same plot.   Alternatively, several people can enter the
same plot simultaneously with one person timing the sampling period for all.
Efficacy of ovicides may be evaluated by determining percent hatch (Swenson
et al.  1969).


 Koehler, C. S.  1973.  Evaluation of insecticides applied as sprays  for control
      of the barberry looper, Caryphista w.eadi,  on container grown Oregon grape,
      Mahonia aquifolia.  (Exhibit 17) .

 Koehler, C. S.  1975.  Personal Communication.

 Swenson, K. G., H. Tashiro, F. L. Gambrell, and H. Breitfeld.   1969.   Ovicidal
      efficiency of parathion and diazinon for quarantine treatment of the
      western tent caterpillar.  J,  Eccm. Entornol.

 Bud and Tio Feeders
      Evaluation: — Results of trials may be evaluated by examining entire
 plants for surviving insects (Free and Saunders 1972), by examining appropriate
 plant units (Campbell 1968), by counting the number of adults or by a rating
 scheme (Koehler and Tauber 1964) .   Cocoons per unit weight of foliage  are
 counted 10 months after treatment and an insect damage rating scheme  is used
 (Koehler  1974).      If plant units are used, they should be selected at random
 from each plot and the counts should be averages of at least 3 subsamples per


 Appieby,  J. E., and R. B. Neiswander.  1966.  Life history and control of the
      juniper tip midge.  Ohio Agric.  Res.  Dev.  Cent.  Res.  Bull.  980:26.

Campbell, R. L.  1968.   Control of some pests of Scotch pine Christmas trees
     in Ohio.  J.  Econ.  Entomol.   61(5): 1365-1369.

Koehler, C. S.  1974.  Evaluation of insecticides for control of the cypress
     tip moth, Argyresthia cupresella, onThuja (Arborvitae).  (Exhibit 18).

Koehler, C. S., and M. Tauber.  1964.  Seasonal activity and control of the
     Monterey pine tip moth.  J.  Econ. Entomol 57(6): 825-829.

Free, D. J., and J. L. Saunders. 1972.  Chemical control of the European
     pine shoot moth. J.  Econ. Entomol.   65(4): 1081-1085.

     Natural infestations normally are utilized when evaluating insecticides
for bagworm control.  5 larvae are tagged on each of the 4 replicate trees
per treatment prior to application of insecticides (Nielsen and Balderston
1977).   Trees are inspected prior to treatment to obtain an approximate
larval density per 10 cm of branch tip.

     Application of Insecticides: — High volume sprays applied to runoff
when larvae are actively feeding are recommended.
     Evaluation of Results; — Treatment effectiveness is measured after 1
week by counting the number of tagged larvae surviving on each tree (Nielsen
and Balderston 1977).  Results were evaluated by inspecting 10 branch tips,
each 20 cm, per tree (Nielsen and Balderston 1976).
Nielsen, D. G., and C. P. Balderston.
     Zanesville, Ohio, 1975.  Insect.

Nielsen, D. G., and C. P. Balderston.
     Zanesville, Ohio, 1976.  Insect.
 1976.   Juniper,  bagworm control,
I Acar.  Tests   1: 106-107.

 1977-   Arborvitae,  bagworm control,
§ Acar.  Tests  1:  106-107.
     For methods and statements concerning beetles on woody ornamentals,
refer to the General Introduction and the Introduction to the Outdoor
Woody Ornamentals.
     This group of insects includes, among others, the bronze birch borer,
cottonwood twig borer, apple tree borer and lilac borer.

     Application Method: — Usually entire susceptible portions of plants are
treated by trunk sprays, bands, drench or granular application to the soil.
Excised bolts may be treated (Neiswander 1961).

     Evaluation; — Evaluation of results may be made by counting the number
of new adults which emerge from treated wood (Appleby et al. 1973), counting
new attacks on susceptible plant parts (Coster et al. 1972), or by indexing
schemes such as the frass indexing scheme used by Nielsen et al.  (1973).


Appleby, J. E., R. Randell, and S. Rachesky.  1973.  Chemical control of the
     bronze birch borer.  J. Econ. Entomol.  66(1): 258-259.

Coster, J. E., R. G. Merrifield, and R. A. Woessner.  1972.  Evaluation of
     four systemic insecticides against the cottonwood twig borer.   J.  Econ.
     Entomol.  65(2): 612-613.

Neiswander, R. S. 1961.  Control of the flat headed apple tree borer. Proa.
     N. Central Branch Entomol. Soc. Am.    16: 77-79.

Nielsen, D. G., F. F. Purrington, and C. P. Balderston.  1973.  Evaluation
     of insecticides for control of lilac borer, Podesesia syringas on Rancho
     Roundhead ash.  Pesticide News  26(3): 58, 60.

Leaf Feeders

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against the leaf-feeding adults and larvae of the beetles on outdoor woody
ornamentals, see the General Introduction and Introduction to the Outdoor
Woody Ornamentals.

     Application Techniques and Equipment: — Buffered cover sprays are
applied with a power sprayer at 175 psi (Brown and Eads 1977).  For trunk
implantation of a Medicap®, an electric drill is utilized to drill the
holes in the trunk.  For trunk injection a hole is drilled and a hypodermic
syringe is used to meter the exact amout of material for injection.  The
hole is then plugged with a #2 cork.  All trees are thoroughly irrigated
for 24 hours just prior to treatment.

     Plot Size; — A randomized block experiment  is designed with 44 infested
elms from 1.8 to 4.6 m tall.  Untreated check  and  treatments  consist of a  single
tree plot replicated 4 times.

     Sampling: — Samples from each tree consists of counting all larvae on
leaves of 10 terminal twigs, 45.7 cm each, pruned  randomly  from the  lateral per-
iphery of the tree.  Counts  are made at 1, 2, 5 and 8 weeks after treatment.

Brown, L, R. , and C. 0. Eads.  1977.  Elm leaf beetle control by spraying
     and trunk implantation.  1975.  Insect, & Acax>. Tests  2: 121.

     For methods and other information applicable to testing insecticides
against weevils on outdoor woody ornamentals, refer to the General Intro-
duction and the Introduction to the Outdoor Woody Ornamentals.

     Location of Tests: — The type of soil or other medium in which the
plants are grown must be specified and, if container-grown, the volume of
medium should be stated (Saunders 1970).

     Application Techniques and Equipment: -—  To control the root weevil
soil fumigants may be applied tinder 4 ml polyethylene film (Hamlen and Beavers
1975).  Plots remained covered for 7 days.  The fumigants are in.iected 2.5 cm
deep on 25.4 cm centers.

     Evaluation: — The screened cages with larvae placed in the soil are
recovered 7 days after treatment and mortality recorded.

     A procedure for measuring the effects of insecticides against the
black vine weevil adults by conducting laboratory bioassays of spray residues
applied to foliage in the field may be utilized (Nielsen Exhibit 19).


Hamlen, R. A., and J. B. Beavers.  1975.  Evaluation of soil fumigants and
     soil insecticides to control Diaprepes abbrev-iatus in muck and potting
     soil.  Fla. St. Hort.  Soc. Proc.  88: 519-522.

Saunders, J. L.  1970.  Carbofuran drench for black vine weevil control on
     container-grown spruce.  J. Econ. Entomol.  63(5): 1698-1699.

Apopka Weevil

     The Apopka weevil, Diaprepes dbbTeviatus, also known as the West Indian
sugar cane root stalk borer weevil is a pest of field grown ornamentals in
organic soils.
     Experimenta 1__Design: -- Plots of soil 1.5 m x  3.0 m  replicated  3  times  are
used to bury 8 larvae per plot at 30.5 cm depth or  6  larvae per  plot at  10 cm
and 60 cm depths (Hamlen and Beavers 1975),

     Application Method: — Soil fumigants  are  added  to  the.  ceil  surface
under 4 ml polyethylene  covered plots or  injected  to a 23 cm  depth on  25 cm
centers with a Fumigun.
     Evaluation Techniques: —  Screen  cages with  larvae   are  recovered from
various depths in the soil and  mortality after  7  days  is  recorded  (Hamlen
and Beavers 1975).

Hamlen, R. A., and J, B. Beavers.   1975.  Evaluation  of  soil  fumigants and
     soil insecticides  to  control Diapre.se-3 cibbreviatus  in muck  and potting
     soil.  Fla. St. Eori. See. Prce/88: 519-522,

     The  proper  interval between  treatment  and  evaluation  depends on  the
species involved (Matthysse  and Naegele  1952),  but  in  any  case  counts must
be made before injured  leaves  drop  from  the plants  (Hartzell  et al. 1943).
Species (such as some infesting conifers) which cause  symptoms  other  than
mines  can be evaluated  by  counting  the number of  such  sites  (Tashiro  1974).
Typically the proportion of  damaged leaves  on treated  and  untreated plants is
compared  by examining an appropriate  number of  leaves  per  plant (Kulp 1963).

Hartzell,  A.,  D.  L.  Collins,  and T.T.  E.  BlauVelt.,   1943.   Control  of  the
     holly leafminer.   Conti-ib.  Boyoe Thompson Inst.  13(1):  29-34.

Kulp, L,   1963.   Control  of  the  native  holly  leaf  miner,  Phytomysa i-lia'i
      (Diptera;  Agronyzidae).  J. Eaon. Etnomot.   56(6):  736-739.

Matthysse,  J.  G., and J.  A,  Naegele.  1952.   Control  of  several tree and
     shrub leaf miners.   J.Eoon. Entomol.   45(3):  377-383.

Tashiro, H.  1974,   Biology  and  control of  the spruce needle miner.   J. Eaon.
     Entomol.  67(1): 89-92.

Tetranychids, Spidermites

     Several species of spidermites  are known  to  attack ornamental  plants.
However, because life cycles and developmental stages  are  similar for the
various species, test methods may be outlined  according to the nature of
the host plant.

     On broad leaved plants  (pyracantha ,   holly,  magnolia) efficacy data  are
obtained from making weekly  samples  of the foliage.   Counts  are made under
magnification of the number  of  live  mites  per  leaf.


Four replicates of 3 plants each separated from adjacent plots by buffer
plants are used in designing a test on Ilex for control of southern red mite
(Poe et al 1976a, b).   Granular materials are applied by sprinkling the product
over the soil surface beneath the plants, sprays are applied with a compressed
air hand sprayer at 40 psi.  Samples consist of 10 leaves taken at random from
the plants at intervals after treatment.

     On narrow leaved evergreens (pine, spruce, juniper) uniform samples of
twigs may be clipped and counts of live mites made on each twig (Matthyase and
Naegele 1952).   Mites may be extracted from foliage by using methyl isobutyl
ketone (Koehler and Frankie 1968).

     The effect of pesticides may be made by counting live mites and viable
eggs on 3 leaflets per plant on parlor palms (Reinert 1976).


Koehler, C. S., and C. W. Frankie.   1968.  Distribution and seasonal abundance
     of Oligonychus subnudies on Monterey pine.  Ann.  Entomol. Soo.  Amer.
     61(6): 1500-1506.

Matthyase, J. G., and J. A. Naegele.  1952.  Spruce mite and southern red
     mite control experiments.  J.  Econ. Entomol.   45(3): 383-387-

Poe, S. L., H.  Collisn, and Chain-ing Shih.  1976a.  Effect of systemic pesti-
     cides on the southern red mite on Ilex crenata var. Hetzii.   Proc. SNA
     Res. Conf.  21: 41-42.

Poe, S. L., H.  Collins, and Chain-ing Shih.  1976b.  Numeric response of
     Oligonychus ilicis to contact acaricides.   Proc.  SNA Res. Conf.  21: 39-40.

Reinert, J. A.   1976.   Control of tumid spider mite, Tetranychus tymidus,  on
     parlor palm, Collinea elegans, in containers.  Proc.  SNA Res.  Conf.
     21: 42-43.

Wilson, N. L.,  and A.  D. Oliver.  1969.  Evaluation of some acaricides for
     control of spidermites on three woody ornamentals in Louisiana.   J.
     Econ. Entomol.  62(6): 1400-01.


     For species which cause galls or other distinctive plant symptoms,
(resetting, erinose, blister) rating of damage may be used as an indication
of efficacy (Campbell 1969).  Non gall-forming species may be counted by
examining appropriate plant material with the aid of a microscope (Saunders
and Barstow 1972).


Campbell, R. L., and C. P. Balderston.  1969.  New control for maple bladder
     gall mite.  Pesticide News 22(3): 78, 80.

Saunders, J, L, ; and D, A, Barstow,  1972.  TriectacMS campnodus control on
     Pinus sylecstris.   J. Econ. Entomol.' 65(2): 500-501.

                      FOREST AND SHADE TREES

     Insecticides are tested for use on forest lands either to prevent
damage from, or to destroy, existing insect pest populations.  Approxi-
mately one-third of the total land area of the continental United States
and coastal Alaska is covered by forests.  There are about 500 different
species of insects that cause damage to forest trees.  However, insecticides
are generally developed for use only against those pests which have re-
ceived attention in U. S. Forest Service Insect and Disease Regulatory
Programs and by other investigators in various sections of the United
States.  These programs cover a wide spectrum of forestry uses and
may encompass treatments of from single trees to thousands of acres
in single or multiple applications.  Because of the large acreages involved,
and the amount of publicly owned forest lands, public agencies also
conduct their own insecticide evaluation tests in the public interest.
It is estimated that defoliating insects and bark beetles are responsible
for 40% of all tree mortality from all destructive sources, therefore,
for the purpose of test method guidelines, these are the only insect
pests dealt with.  Few insecticides have been developed that can be used
to suppress or control large-scale outbreaks of destructive forest insects.
     Experimental Design (General):—It is desirable to use the largest
plot size practicable with aircraft application as soon as chemical
effectiveness is proven, to reflect actual field practices and obtain
operational dosage rates.  Therefore, minimum plot size is generally
50 acres in a fixed-wing aircraft test, 20 acres for helicopter, and
1-3 individual trees for backpack or hydraulic sprayer studies.  Corners
of plots using aircraft should be marked for guidance using helium filled
kytoons, groups of balloons, or other highly visible markers (Doane
1966, Doane and Dunbar 1973, USDA 1975).  Study areas are usually es-
tablished with the following minimum criteria:

1.   An area in which insect pest population is building and which no
more than one year's noticeable defoliation or damage has occurred prior
to the test year, to insure that natural virus incidence is minimal.

2.   A readily measurable population is present.

3.   Predominance of preferred host trees suitable for population
sampling (USDA 1974).

     Three replications of each concentration tested are generally used
with a minimum of five replicate sample stations within each plot.
Foliage protection is frequently as important as population reduction as
an efficacy criterion (USDA 1974).


Doane, C. C., 1966.  Field tests with newer materials against the gypsy
     moth.  J.  Eoon.  Entomol.   59(3):618-20.

Doane, C. C. and D. M. Dunbar, 1973.  Evaluation of insecticides against
     the gypsy moth and elm spanworm and repellant action of chlordi-
     meform.  J. Eoon. Entomol.   66(5):1187-89.

USDA.  1974.  Final environmental statement on the cooperative 1974
     gypsy moth suppression and regulatory program, USDA Forest Service
     and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.  March 29, 1974.

USDA.  1975.  Pilot project work plan for 1 and 2 aerial applications
     of fenitrothion for control of western spruce budworm 1975.  US
     Forest Service,  Region 6, Portland, OR.  Unpubl.

Gypsy Moth  - Lymantria dispgp (L.)

     Experimental Design:—Generally two parameters are examined in an
efficacy evaluation study:  foliage protection and population reduction.
Study areas with 100-900 egg masses/acre (Herbaugh et al. 1975) and a
predominance of oak trees are appropriate.  Infested apple orchards
lend themselves well for ground application studies  (Doane 1966) .

     Application Methods:—Experimental test plot sizes for ground
application are a minimum of 0.05 acres with 5-25 acres sufficient for an
aerial test; four studies are conducted on proven insecticides using
triplicate plots of 150 acres or larger.  More than one geographic area
is desireable  (USDA 1975).  Application is usually made when the majority
of larvae are  in late 2nd instar with oak foliage 50-75% expanded.

     Sampling Methods:—Foliage protection is estimated by visual exami-
nation in 20%  increments before and after treatment on l/40th acre
subplots on all tree species on both test and control plots.  Population
reduction is estimated by measuring the percent mortality due to treatment
as evidenced by pre- and post-treatment square-yard drop cloth counts
(Merriam et al. 1970, USDA 1975) and pre- and post-treatment egg mass
counts (Herbaugh et al. 1975).  Estimates of residual population are
usually measured by 24 inch terminal branch larval counts (AFRI 1972) ,
by 5 or 10 minute timed counts on l/10th acre -(Merriam et al. 1970 ,
Doane 1966) or on l/40th acre subplots  (USDA 1975),  or by larval counts
under burlap bands (Merriam et al. 1970).

     Reduction of populations to less than 250 egg masses/acre generally
will not require retreatment.  Usually  the measurement of treatment
effects should be followed into the following season.

AFRI.  1972.  Environmental impact and efficacy of Dylox used for gypsy
     moth control in New York State.  Applied Forestry Research Institute,
     Syracuse, NY, Res. Rpt. No. 10. 94 pp.

Doane, C. C.  1966.  Field tests with newer materials against the gypsy
     moth.  J. Eoon. Entomol.  59(3):617-20.

Herbaugh, L. L., W. H. McLane and C. R. Stacy.  1975.  Field evaluations
     of insecticides against the gypsy moth, Porthetvia di-spca> L. Gypsy
     Moth Methods Development Laboratory, Otis AFB, MA.  Unpubl.  27 pp.

Merriam, W. A., G. C. Tower, E. C. Paszek and J. L. McDonough.  1970.
     Laboratory and field evaluation of insecticides against the gypsy
     moth.  J. Eoon. Entomol.  63(1):155-59.
Spruce and Western Spruce Budworm - ChoTistoneuTa fwniferana  (clem.)
and C. occ-identalis Freeman
     Experimental Design:—Study areas 20-1000 acres in size with a pre-
dominance of  spruce/fir or Douglas-fir having more than 8 larvae per
100  square  inches of bark surface/mid-crown branch are appropriate
(USDA  1975, Schmiege et al.  1970).

     Application Methods:—Treatment is generally scheduled shortly after
75%  of the  larvae reach 5th  instar  (USDA 1975) or in late 4th  instar
(USDA  1974).   Instar identification is determined using Carolin's larval
head capsule  characteristics (Carolin and Coulter 1972).

     Sampling Methods;—Unually 15 trees/plot in the range of  30-50 feet
high are selected as sample  trees.  From 2-4 fifteen-inch branch samples
are  excised from the mid-crown region of each tree.  Population density
is expressed  as larvae/100 new buds or shoo.ts (USDA 1975, Honing 1968,
McCowan et al. 1973).  Foliage protection is usually measured  by optical
examination of volume of feeding on 100 buds/tree, recorded as percent
defoliation to nearest 10% (USDA 1975, USDA 1974).
Carolin, V. M. and W. K. Coulter.   1972.   Sampling populations  of western
     spruce budworm and predicting  defoliation on Douglas-fir in eastern
     Oregon. Pac. NW Forest and Range Experiment Station. Res.  Paper  No.
     149. 38 pp.

Honing, F. B. 1968.  Spruce budworm Zectran pilot control test-1966.
     USDA Forest Service, Northern Region.  12 pp. Unpubl.

McCowan, V. F. and D, A. Stark.  1973.  Operational test of mexacarbate
     (Zectran) against spruce budworm in Main-1973.  US Forest Service,
     Northeastern Area State and Private Forestry, Upper Darby, PA.
     Kept. No. P-73-5.

Schmiege, D. C., C. E. Crisp, R, L. Lyon, P. Miskus, R. B. Roberts
     and P. J. Shea.  1970.  Evaluation Report on Zectran as a substitute
     of DDT in control of western spruce budworm.  US Forest Service, Pac.
     SW Forest and Range Exp. Sta. Berkley, CA.  Unnumbered Rpt. 35 pp.

USDA.  1974.  Final environmental statement on cooperative spruce bud-
     worm project.  Maine 1974 Activities.  Northeastern Area, State and
     Private Forestry, Upper Darby, PA.  102 pp,

USDA.  1975.  Pilot project work plan for 1 and 2 applications of fenitro-
     thion for control of western spruce budworm-1975.  US Forest Service,
     Region 6, Portland OR.  Unpubl.

Douglas-fir Tussock Moth - Ori/gia pseudosuqata McD.
     Experimental Design:—Study areas 20-1000 acres in size with a pre-
dominance of Douglas-fir or true firs having 20 or more larvae and/or
egg masses/1000 square inches of foliage are usually appropriate (USDA
1974, Mason 1970).

     Application Methods:—Treatment is generally schedule shortly after
70% of the egg masses have hatched (USDA 1974).

     Sampling Methods:—Usually 15 trees/plot in the range of 30-50 feet
high are selected as sample trees.  From 2-4 eighteen-inch branches are
excised from the mid-crown region of each tree.  Population density is
expressed as larvae/1000 square inches of foliage (USDA 1974).  Foliage
protection is measured by optical examination of volume of feeding on
100 buds/tree expressed as percent defoliation to nearest 10% (USDA 1974)
Mason, R. R. 1970.  Development of sampling methods for the Douglas-fir
     tussock moth.  Can, Entomol.  102:836-45.

USDA.  1974.  Final environmental statement, cooperative Douglas-fir
     tussock moth pest management plan,  562 pp.  Unpubl.

Bark Beetles - Dendroctonus frontalis Zim. ,  Dendroctonus spp.

     Experimental Design:—This group of forest insect pests includes the
southern pine beetle, mountain pine beetle,  Douglas-fir bark beetle, etc.
Test trees are generally mature, of even diameter at breast height and of
the same overall height.  Cut bolt sections, 15 to 18 inches long, may
also be selected for test purposes (Frye and Wygant 1971).  Treatments
should be randomly assigned to trees or bolt sections.

     Application Methods;—Insecticide formulations are applied in
sufficient amounts for runoff to occur (spray to drip) using hand-held
garden watering cans, compressed-air sprayers, or hydraulic spray equip-
ment (Massey and Wygant 1954, Stevens 1959,  Lyon 1965).

     Sampling Methods:—Pre- and post-treatment counts are made for the
numbers of bark beetle larvae, pupae, and adults per square foot in both
standing infested forests and cut bolt sections (Lyon 1965, Ragenovich
and Coster 1974, Buffam et al. 1973, Massey and Wygant 1954).
Buffam, P. E., C. K. Lister, R. E. Stevens, and R. H. Frye.  1973.  Fall
     cacodylic acid treatments to produce lethal traps for spruce beetles.
     Environ. Entomol.  2:259-262.

Lyon, R. L.  1965.  Structure and toxicity of insecticide deposits for
     control of bark beetles.  USDA Technical Bulletin  No. 1343.  59 p.

Lyon, R. L., and B. E. Wickman.  1960.  Mortality of the western pine
     beetle and California five-spined Ips in a field trial of lindane.
     U.S. Forest Service Research Note PSW-166.  7 p.

Massey, C. L., and N. D. Wygant.  1954,  Biology and control of the
     engelmann spruce beetle in Colorado.  USDA Circular No. 944.  35 p.

Ragenovich, I. R., and J. E. Coster.  1974.  Evaluation of same carbarnate
     and phosphate insecticides against southern pine beetles and Ips
     bark beetles.  J. Econ. Entomol.  67:763-5.

Schmid, J. M.  1972.  Reduced ethylene dibromide concentrations or field
     oil alone kills spruce beetles.  
                                                           Exhibit 1
                           R,  K.  Lindquist
          Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                            Wooster, Ohio
     This method is for the use of small universal aerosol devices
to apply  insecticides to run-off to small groups of plants.

     The units,  Universal Aerosol Kits®  manufactured by ICN  Pharma-
ceuticals, Inc., Cleveland, Ohio, are very useful in applying insecti-
cides to small groups of plants.   Insecticide solutions or suspensions
are mixed in 100-150 ml lots and placed in container attached to the
pressurized can by means of a plastic holder.  Applications with these
devices simulates spraying to run-off with a larger sprayer.

                                                           Exhibit  2
                           R, K, Lindquist
                      Department of Entomology
          Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                         Wooster, Ohio  44691
     Control of green peach aphids on greenhouse chrysanthemums with
insecticides applied as foliar sprays.
Mean no, aphids on indicated day after
Application treatment?:/
Treatment Rate 1
A 0.25 gm 0
A 1.0 gm 0
B 0.25 gm 0.5
B 1.0 gm 0.2
Check - 18.2
^JMeans of 4 replications; 2 plants/replicate; aphids recorded from upper
  surface of 4 apical leaves/replicate.
Cultivar:   'Bright Golden Anne1

Stage of Growth:  Vegetative, 4 wk after potting.

Application Equipment:  7.8 liter compressed air sprayer.

Temperature:  Generally 23-24°C day, 16-16°C night.

Fhytotoxicity:  None noted in this test.

Remarks:  Both materials  are effective in controlling green peach
          aphids at rates used.

                                                         Exhibit 3
                         CHRYSANTHEMUM TESTS
                      GREEN PEACH APHID CONTROL

                            J.  E, Appleby
                   Illinois Natural History Survey
                       Urbana,  Illinois  61801
CROP:    Greenhouse chrysanthemums (pot):  Cvs.  "Orange Bowl", "Mermaid",
         "Neptune", "Vermilion",  "Ice Follies".

STAGE:   Nearly full bloom

PEST:    Green peach aphid,  Myzus persioae

METHODS: Chemicals were applied as soil drenches onto 21,2 cm diam. pots,
         each pot containing 5 plants of one variety.  Each treatment was
         applied onto 1 pot  of each variety.

TREATMENT DATE:  April 21, 1972

April 21, 1972
No. of blooms
with live
with no
live aphids
May 7,
No. of blooms
with live
with no
live aphids









                        None, blooms are open on all varieties



                                                              Exhibit 4

                           R. G, Helgesen
                      Department of Entomology
                         Cornell University
                       Ithaca, New York  14850
                        Materials and Methods

     The experimental design to test the efficacy of four systemic
insecticides to control aphids on chrysanthemums include  a control
and insecticide treatments of A, B, C and D at dosages of approximately
1/2X, IX and 3X recommended rates applied to the following ten chry-
santhemum varieties:

     1 - Mefo                     6 - Indianapolis

     2 - Southern Comfort         7 - Princess Anne

     3 - Fred Shoesmith           8 - Iceberg

     4 - Albatross                9 - May Shoesmith

     5 - Southern Sun            10 - Detroit News

     The design  is replicated four times.

     Five cm rooted cuttings of these varieties are used.  The rooted
cuttings are planted in 12.7 cm pots containing the Cornell Peat-lite
mix.  The plants are maintained on a constant feed program of 20-20-20
fertilizer and grown at 21°.C day - 15°C night temperatures.  They are
brought to flower under standard commercial practices.  One week after
potting ten green peach aphids are placed on each plant from cultures
maintained at the insectary.  Three weeks after potting insecticides
are applied to the  soil at the following  rates:
                                  Dosage of formulated material
Formulation                       1/2X          IX          3X
                                       (recommended rate)
15% granular
19% granular
10% granular
.5 gm
.5 gm
.5 gm
.5 gm
1 gm
1 gm
1 gm
1 gm
3 gm
3 gm
3 gm
3 gm

     The same applications  are repeated 8 weeks after planting, so that
the insecticide treatment consists  of two applications during the pro-
duction of the crop.

     Twelve weeks after potting, when flowers  are in full bloom, the
number of aphids on the top leaf of each plant are counted.  The height
of the plant  is measured and the level of phytotoxicity  is evaluated
on a scale of 0-5 (0 = none, 5 = total),  Analysis of variance of these
data  are computed using the analysis of variance, program for factorial
design developed by the Computer Activities Group at Cornell,

                       Results and Discussion

     Three dependent variables:  (1)  the number of aphids per top-leaf,
(2)  the relative level of visible phytotoxicity, and (3)  plant height,
 are observed as measures of insecticide efficacy in this experiment.  A
three-level factorial design including insecticide treatment, dosage and
plant vari.ety  is used for the analysis of variance for each of the de-
pendent variables.

     Aphid Control:—Although there  are significant differences in the
number of aphids per top-leaf at all three levels, the differences between
insecticide treatment means (F = 74)  are much greater than those between
dosages (F = 4) and varieties (F = 5),   When all dosages  are considered,
the number of aphids per top-leaf  is lowest in the 10G treatment in all
varieties (x 8).


                                               R. K. Lindquist
                              Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                                            Wooster, Ohio  446910

     Regular and latered release formulations for green peach aphid control on pot- grown chry-
santhemums .
Mean no. aphids/plant at indicated interval pre- and posttreatmentH/	
           24 hr     72 hr     7 day     14 day       21 day       28 day
Regular               0.1

Regular               0.05

Altered release       0.1

Altered release       0.05

























—'Applied 10/22/74; all treatments applied to soil surface; cv. "Bright Golden Anne"; plants
  approximately 6 wk old.

—/Means of 4 replicates; aphids recorded from 1 plant/rep.

  Temperatures were variable, depending on sky cover.  Generally, the range was 21-22°C day,
  18-19°C night.




  No phytotoxicity noted.

                                                              Exhibit 6

                             W,  L.  Allen
                      Department of Entomology
                      University of California
                       Berkeley, California

     The tabular data illustrate the use of pre-treatment counts in es-
tablishing the presence of a infestation, suitable sampling methods and
sampling intervals.
Lbs. act.
per 100 gals .I/
Post treatment count after :—'
12 days 20 days 27 days
93 a 992 a 64
1,719 b 957 a 2,212
6,007 c 4S488 ab 3,254
9,232 c 1,730 a 683
21,527 c -
10,956 c -
11,439 c -
12,102 c
20,004 c -
11,532 c 7,443 b 6,037
I/Full coverage sprays applied on March 31.

—'The number of whiteflies found on 5 leaf punches 4 cm in diameter.  Counts
  followed by the same letter are not significantly different at the 5% level,

   No injury was evident from any of the treatments.

                                                             Exhibit 7

                           R. K, Lindquist
          Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                        Wooster, Ohio  44691
     Poinsettias  are grown in 10.2 cm diam. pots.

     Granules  are broadcast on foliage of closely-spaced plants with a
shaker jar; granules  are applied to foliage from pre-weighed dosages in
glass vials.

     Temperatures during the experiment varied but  are generally 21-22°C
day and 18-20°C night.

     No phytotoxicity was observed throughout the trial.

Soil (Broadcast)

Wet Foliage (Broadcast)

Dry Foliage (Broadcast)




Mean no . nymphs on inducated
day posttreatmentE.'










JL'Applied 10/30/73; foliar treatments applied at rate of 4 oz. formulation/
  100 ft2; soil treatment applied at rate of 0.1 gm formulation/10.2 cm diam.
  (= 4-in.).

yWhite = "Ekkespoint C-l White"; Red = "Dark Red Hegg"

£/Means of 8 replications; whitefly nymphs recorded from 2 subapical leaves/


                                               D. L. Schuder
                                         Department of Entomology
                                             Purdue University
                                            Lafayette, Indiana

     Similarly infested 15.2 cm tall  (6-in,) plants  are selected, and each treatment applied to 4 plants
(1 plant = 1 replicate).  Leaves for  future sampling of immature stages  are marked with white tags.  Tempera-
ture at application was 28°C (80°F).  Application   is made with B & G sprayers operating at 30 psi.  Counts
of the number of live nymphs and empty "puparia"  are made 7 and 14 days post treatment.  No mention was
made of the number of leaves or leaf  sections sampled.  This should be made clear in the future use of this or
similar method.

                                      Results of Whitefly Experiment
Counting Dates

L.R.S.D. 5%
L.R.S.D. 1%

Gals. Water
3/4 lb-
1 qt.
2 qts.

T +
Live Emerged Live
162.3 71.2 220


T +




                                                           Exhibit 9
                      FLOWER THRIPS EXTRACTION

                           F, S. Morishita
                      Department of Entomology
                      University of California
                        H.iverside, California
     Extracting thrips or aphids out of the flower or plant samples is
accomplished with Berlese funnels.  With this technique, the samples
are collected in alcohol and labelled so that if time does not permit
an immediate count, the count can be made later.

                                                             Exhibit  10
                       FLOWER THRIP EXPERIMENT

                            D.  L,  Schuder
                      Department of Entomology
                          Purdue University
                      Lafayette, Indiana  47907
     An established bed of carnations  is divided into 1 m^ plots and
an experiment laid out with 4 replications on April 12, 1974 at the
Indiana State Soldier's Home greenhouse.  At the time of application it
was bright and sunny, the temperature was 35°C (96°F) and the relative
humidity was 64%.   Sprays  are applied with a 3,8 liter B and G sprayer
and, granulaes  are applied with a Vibra-seeder passed between the rows
of carnation plants and watered immediately.  Aerosols  are applied for
45 seconds approximately .5 m from the plants.

     Carnation flowers from each plot  are removed, placed in paper
sacks and transported to the laboratory where the flowers  are split
open and placed in Berlese Funnels for 24 hours.   The thrips driven from
the blossoms  are  caught in vials containing 70% alcohol and then counted
in a watch glass under a binocular, dissecting microscope.  Samples are
taken at the time  of treatment (T) and at.T + 1,  T + 4, T + 7, T + 10
(time of second treatment 4/22/74) and samples  are taken at 2T + 7 and
2T + 10.

     A and C caused some blanching of buds.

     The results of the experiment are shown in the following table:


                   FLOWER TRIPS, FTankliniella tritioi FITCH ON CARNATIONS

                                 INDIANA STATE SOLDIER'S HOME
Treatment T T + 1
A - 33.6
B - 8.5
C - 27.5
D 31
E - 31
F 22
G - 15.3
H - 37
Check 61.3 36
Average No. thrips/ flower
Sample Dates
T + 4
T + 7
T + 10 2T + 4
4 2.8
3.3 11
11 8.3
3.8 5
2,3 19.3
2.5 7
6 32.3
24.5 53.8
19.5 38.3
2T + 7
2T + 10

                                                           Exhibit 11

                              W. W.  Allen
                       Department of Entomology
                       University of California
                         Berkeley, California
Pounds Actual
per 100 gallons
No . of larvae
found 14 days
after treatment:/
!_/ Materials applied on September 11 at 1900 G.P.A.

2j Count based on the number of larvae found during 100 minutes search of
   40 feet of bed.

                                                           Exhibit 12
                      AGAINST FUNGUS GNAT LARVAE

                            R. K. Lindquist
                       Department of Entomology
                             Wooster, Ohio
Control of fungus gnat larvae on bedding plants with several insecticides
applied as soil drenches
4 oz
8 oz
16 oz
4 oz
8 oz
16 oz
Mean no. larvae
5 days posttreatment?/

I/Treatments applied with a watering can to plants growing in flats.

2/Means of 4 replications.  Larvae recorded on soil surface after drenching
~~ with synergized pyrethrins  (1 capful/gallon water) to drive them  to  surface.

                                                                   Exhibit 13
                                 COLUMBUS, OHIO, 1975

                                     R. K. Lindquist
                                 Department of Entomology
                                      Wooster, Ohio
                                 Mean no. rose midge larvae on indicated date—/
A 2 G
5 lb/1000
12 oz/100

1 fl. oz/gal.
32 oz/100

4 a
2.3 a
39.3 ab
96.8 b
195.8 c
2.3 a
0.2 a
2.7 a
30 b
86.7 c

JY  Treatments applied 6/16, 6/23 (except A 2 G), 7/2, 7/17; application made with Ortho
    Hozon sprayer on soil setting; A 2 G applied with fertilizer spreader.

2j  Means of 3 replicates; 10 terminals sampled/replicate; mean in each column followed
    by same letter not significantly different at .05 probability level.


                                                             Exhibit 14

         TWO SPOTTED SPIDER MITE, Tetranychus urticae (Koch)

                            D. L. Schuder
                      Department of Entomology
                          Purdue University
                      Lafayette, Indiana  47907

     An established bed of carnations  is divided into .8m2 (9 ft2)
and an experiment laid out with 4 replications on April 12, 1974,
At application time the temperature was 35°C  (96C'F) and the weather
bright and sunny and the relative humidity 64%.  Sprays are applied with
a 3.8 liter B & G compressed air sprayer.  Granules are applied by passing
a Vibro-Seeder between the rows of carnation  plants, plants were watered
immediately.  Aerosols are applied for 45 seconds per plot at approximately
46 cm (18 in.) from the plant.

     A 30 cm  (12 in.) sample of carnation stem and leaves  is removed,
placed in a paper bag and transported to the  laboratory where the samples
are  brushed  from the plants with a Henderson-McBurnie mite brushing
machine.  Mites removed from the plant  are collected on 12 cm round
glass plates.  The mites  are  counted beneath a binocular, dissecting

     A and C  caused some blanching of buds.

     Samples  are taken at time of treatment  (T) and at T  + 1, T +  7,
 (time of 2T 4/22/74) 2T + 7, 2T + 14.

     The results of this experiment are shown in the following table:
Check - Untreated
T T + 1
4.3 8
no. mites
T + 7
sample dates
2T + 7

2T + 14

     Examination of these data indicate that all of the treatments except
F reduced the population of the two spotted spider mite significantly
in the first experiment.  The second treatment did not result in a
dramatic reduction of the numbers of mites.  D was the outstanding material
for control of the two-spotted mite on carnations.  Of the series of A
treatments applied, the granular formulation seemed to perform the best
and gave the longest period of effectiveness.

                                                                  Exhibit 15

                                D. G. Nielsen
              Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                                Wooster, Ohio


    Cultivate 2-foot wide band of soil from tree trunk toward middle of row to
depth of 3-4".

    Apply granular insecticides with Gandy Turf Tender, Model 24H  (=2* wide) or
equivalent, to one or both sides of trees.

    Cultivate again as above.

    Apply overhead irrigation immediately  (ca. 1" of water).  Repeat irrigation
at weekly intervals unless rainfall totals l"/week.  Monitor sucking insect popu-
lations at 2 week intervals with D-Vac or  equivalent suction device.

    Quantify defoliator or bark beetle activity by  counting number of  caterpillars
or new exit holes/unit area when larvae  are present.

Total Nymphs
Sample Date












« f









1 oz
1 oz .
2 oz.

2 oz.
4 oz .
4 oz.



















































May 12, 1976

Equipment: Gandy

•'i „ ™i, r> ,

i r\i^ ^ j-v

2' wide



9/16 E

0 74
0 79

0 11

0 25

0 5
0 3

0 49

0 62

0 16

0 20

0 71
0 M
0, X
ft H-
3 H-
C rt

                                                             Exhibit 16

.SCALE, Leoan-ium kunoensis., ON PYRACANTHA, Walnut Creek, Calif.  1973-74

                            C. S, Koehler
               Division of Entomology and Parasitology
                      University of California
                        Berkeley, California
(75 SP)
(75 SP)
(3 EC)
(3 EC)
(80 Spr.)
(80 Spr,)
Act. tox. , Date(s) of Avg. no.
Ibs. per application!/ scales/inch of
100 gal. in 1973 twig growth!/
1.0 June 16 2.23
1.0 June 16, July 5 0.65
0.5 June 16 0.97
1.0 June 16 0.82
1.0 June 16 1.33
1.0 June 16, July 5 0.45
% scale
      Single  plant  plots  sprayed  to  point  of complete coverage using hand
      compression sprayer.   Four  replications.

      Peak  of crawler  emergence in 1973 occurred approximately June 1.

      Evaluation made  May 27,  1974;  surviving females counted on 5 twig
      samples,  each approximately 11 inches long, collected from each plot.

                                                                Exhibit 17
LOOPER, Coryphista meadi, ON CONTAINER GROWN OREGON GRAPE, Mahonia aquifolia,
                        Saratoga, Calif.  1973

                            C. S. Koehler
               Division of Entomology and Parasitology
                      University of California
                        Berkeley, California
Ib./lOO gal, 5
1.0 0
.5 0
1.0 0
.5 0
37 1
47 12
.5 0
.5 0
living larvae/6
after (days) :— '
Applied to single plant (12-24" high) plots, replicated 6 times, on June 7
Full coverage sprays applied using hand compression sprayers.  No
phytotoxicity noted from any treatment.

All living larvae on each plant counted at intervals noted.

2 Ib. wettable powder formulation, containing 4,320 I.U./Ng used/100 gal.

0.5 Ib. wettable powder formulation, containing 6,000 A,U.Ak./Mg, used/
100 gal. water.

                                                               Exhibit 18
MOTH, Argyresthia cuyressella, ON Thuja  (ARBORVITAE), Berkeley  Calif.
                            C. S. Koehler
               Division of Entomology and Parasitology
                      University of California
                        Berkeley, California

(3 EC)
(3 EC)
(75 EC)
(4,320 lU/Mfe)
(2 EC)
(4 EC)
Act, toxicant,
Ib./lOO gal.
Avg, no,
10 grams
Treatments applied May 16, 1973, when adult moths are active.   Full
coverage sprays applied by hand compression sprayer to single plant
(4-6* tall) plots replicated 4 times.  No evidence of phytptoxicity
noted from any treatment.

Cocoon counts made Mar. 15, 1974 after taking 4, 4" terminal samples
of foliage from each plot.  Foliage samples weighed to standardize
foliage volume.

1 = no unsightliness attributable to tip moth, to 4, representing severe
browning of plants.  Rating of 2.0 or over considered unacceptable.

                                                             Exhibit  19

                           D. G. Nielsen
         Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
                           Wooster, Ohio
     Taxus media Rehder cv. Vermeulen and T. media cv. Hatfield, over 3
m high, located in the Secrest Arboretum at the Ohio Agricultural Re-
search and Development Center  are used.  The south sides of the plants
are  sprayed to run-off with a compression sprayer on August 3, 1976.
Ambient temperature was 24°C.  At regular intervals, 10-15 cm twigs are
clipped, taken to the laboratory, and placed in 9 x 16 cm (1 qt) cylindrical
paper cartons fitted with screen lids.  Five ovipositing weevil;; are
added to each carton.  These are collected from untreated Taxus
in nurseries and held at least 7 days on Taxus foliage.  Preconditioning
and testing conditions  are 20°C and 90-95% RH with 15 h light/day.
Treatments, including water-sprayed checks,  are replicated 3 times.
Initial readings  are made 24 h after confinement at which time it was
impossible to distinguish dead from moribund individuals, especially
those intoxicated with pyrethroids.  Consequently, weevils  are held
for 4 additional days with either treated or untreated foliage.  In both
bases, fresh-cut foliage replaced older foliage on alternate days. This
method duplicates field circumstances, i.e., adults crawling onto treated
foliage to feed, walking or falling off in response to the toxicant, and
either returning to the treated plant or moving to an untreated area.

Table 1.  Percent black vine weevil adults itoribund 24 h after confinement with Taxus foliage, sprayed

          until runoff Aug. 3, 1976.




B 2.4EC
B 2.4EC
C 76WP
C 76WP
D 75SP
D 75 SP



a/ Rates in

g AI/
100 liter*!/


parentheses are Ib




AI/100 gal.

1 3
day days
100 100
100 93
100 100
100 93
100 100
100 7
100 70
100 0

- -

0 0

1234 68
week weeks weeks weeks weeks weeks
100 87 100 80 33 0
100 100 100 100 54 47
100 100 100 100 100 100
33 13 - - -
27 27 0 - -
13 27 7

_____ _

70700 0

0 M
0 X
3 3"
rt H-
H' CT*
3 I-1-
C rt