;
-------
REPORT To THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ANALYSIS OF SPECIALIZED PESTICIDE PROBLEMS
INVERTEBRATE CONTROL AGLETS - EFICACY TEST
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.
-------
TURF, ORNAMENTALS, AND FOREST LANDS*
Chairman:
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.
-------
Page
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
Exhibits:
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
-------
INTRODUCTION
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
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
available.
GREENHOUSE AND SARAN FLORICULTURAL CROPS
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.
-------
-2-
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.
References
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.
-------
-3-
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-
plicable.
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
Investigator:
Physical Layout
Date Set:
Stage of Plant Treated:
Soil Type:
Date:
Experimental Design
Treatment Dates:
Target Pest:
Stage Treated:
Nozzle No. Type:
Evaluations
Expt. No.
Crop:
Variety:
Location:
Harvest:
Plot Size:
No. Plants:
Replications:
Means of Application:
Sample:
Product Applicability:
Compatability:
Effect on Non-Target Organisms:
Efficacy Data
Materials Form Rate lb/100 GPA
Dates:
Phytotoxicity:
Environmental Imoact:
-------
—5—
Phytotoxicity
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.
-------
-6-
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-
ation.
Fig. la: Leaf showing symptoms of deterioration
Fig. Ib: Reduction in flower quality caused by spotting
of petals
Fig. Ic: Chlorosis around leaf margins
-------
-7-
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-
ment.
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
-------
-8-
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
recorded.
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-
erance.
-------
-9-
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.
Reference
Poe, S. L., and J. L. Green. 1974. Pest management determinant factors
in chrysanthemum culture. FZa. St. Hort. Soc. Proc. 87: 467-471.
-------
-10-
TURF
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.
Chinchbugs
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
-------
-11-
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.
References
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.
-------
-12-
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
-------
-13-
(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).
References
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.
Spittlebugs
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).
-------
-14-
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).
References
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
1975).
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.
References
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,
-------
-15-
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).
References
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).
References
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.
-------
-16-
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
counting.
Samples are taken at intervals after treatment for up to one year. Results
are compared with pretreatment counts.
References
Short, D. E. 1973. Ground pearl control studies. Proc, Fla. Turf Grass
Manag. Conf. XXI pp. 111-123.
-------
-17-
GREENHOUSE, SARAN AND OUTDOOR FLORICULTURAL CROPS
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
-------
-18-
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
tolerable.
-- 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.
-------
-19-
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-
tions.
References
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.
-------
-20-
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
data.
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.
References
Appleby, J. E. 1972. Chrysanthemums tests-green peach aphid control.
(Exhibit 3).
-------
-21-
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).
-------
-22-
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-
cide.
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).
-------
-23-
Reporting Tabular Data: — Efficacy may be reported as percent control,
compared with untreated checks (Poe 1972), or mean number individuals per
plant (Hamlen 1974).
References
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.
WHITEFLIES
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
-------
-24-
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) ,
-------
-25-
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).
References
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):
1223-4.
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.
-------
-26-
THRIPS
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
fluid.
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-
searcher.
-------
-27-
Refeyenoes
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.
-------
-28-
Referenaes
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
water.
Evaluation Techniques: — Samples of 8-12 infested terminal leaves per
plant are examined and thrips counted before and weekly after application for
7 weeks.
References
Reinert, J. A. 1973. Cuban laurel thrips: Systemic insecticides for
control. J. Eaon. Entomol. 66: 1217-1218.
LEPIDOPTEROUS LARVAE (CATERPILLARS)
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-
formation.
-------
-29-
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.
References
Allen, W. W. 1967. Effectiveness of various pesticides applied as sprays
for control of the omnivorous leafroller on greenhouse roses. (Exhibit
11).
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.
Cutworms
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
thereafter.
-------
References
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
sufficient.
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.
References
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.
LEAFMINERS (DIPTERA: AGROMYZIDAE)
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).
-------
-31-
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
section.
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.
References
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
treatments.
-------
-32-
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
-------
-33-
indication of control. Counts are made under a binocular microscope. Re-
cording flowers produced also can be useful (Lindquist, Exhibit 13).
MITES
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
purpose.
Reporting Results : — When mites are sampled using one of the general
procedures listed above, results may be recorded in three ways:
-------
-34-
» 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).
Eefevenoes
Baranowski, R, M. 1966. Soil applications of systemic insecticides for
mite control on chrysanthemums. Proc, Fla. State Hoptf Soo, 79:
478-81.
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);
1026-7.
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.
-------
-35-
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).
References
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).
-------
-36-
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.
References
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.
-------
-37-
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) .
References
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.
-------
-38-
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.
Jfr"
-------
-39-
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
groups.
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
appropriate.
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).
'^y*
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
-------
-40-
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.
References
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):
874-876.
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.
-------
-41-
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.
APHIDS
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),
References
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).
-------
-42-
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).
References
Reinert, J. A., and N. L. Woodiel. 1974, Palm aphid control on "Malayan Dwarf"
coconut palsm. Fla. Entomol. 57(4): 411-413.
ADELGIDS
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).
References
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.
MEALYBUGS
For methods and statements concerning mealybugs, refer to the General
Introduction and the section on Mealybugs in the Floricultural Crops.
-------
-43-
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).
References
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-
1105.
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).
-------
-44-
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
water.
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
-------
-45-
efficacy. Abbots formula is then used to adjust the data for control mortality
(Reinert 1976).
References
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.
WHITEFLIES
For methods and statements concerning whiteflies on outdoor woody ornament-
als, refer to the General Introduction and Whitefly section of the Floricultural
Crops.
BUGS
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).
References
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
ideal.
-------
-46-
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 .
References
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.
THRIPS
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).
References
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.
-------
-47-
CULworms
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).
References
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
plot.
References
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.
-------
-48-
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.
Bagworms
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.
COLEOPTERA
For methods and statements concerning beetles on woody ornamentals,
refer to the General Introduction and the Introduction to the Outdoor
Woody Ornamentals.
Borers
This group of insects includes, among others, the bronze birch borer,
cottonwood twig borer, apple tree borer and lilac borer.
-------
-49-
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).
References
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.
-------
-50-
Brown, L, R. , and C. 0. Eads. 1977. Elm leaf beetle control by spraying
and trunk implantation. 1975. Insect, & Acax>. Tests 2: 121.
Weevils
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).
References
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),
-------
-51-
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).
References
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,
LEAFMINERS
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).
Estsr^nces
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.
MITES
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.
-------
-52-
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).
References
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.
Eriophyids
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).
References
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.
-------
-53-
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).
-------
-54-
Refevenees
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.
Unpubl.
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.
-------
-55-
Referenees
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).
References
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.
-------
-56-
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)
References
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.
-------
-57-
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).
References
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.
-------
-58-
Exhibit 1
USE OF AEROSOL PROPELLANT TO APPLY INSECTICIDES
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.
-------
-59-
Exhibit 2
GREEN PEACH APHID CONTROL ON CHRYSANTHEMUMS
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
2
0
0
0
0,5
18
6
0
0
0
0
20
14
0
1.0
0
0
20
21
0
1.2
0
0
24
27
0.2
0
0
0
26
^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.
-------
-60-
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
TEMPERATURE: 21-23°C
Treatments
Applied
April 21, 1972
Pretreatment
No. of blooms
with live
aphids
Count
with no
live aphids
May 7,
No. of blooms
with live
aphids
1972
with no
live aphids
Check
A
B
49
73
69
0
0
0
49
10
34
Phytotoxicity
None, blooms are open on all varieties
0
63
35
-------
-61-
Exhibit 4
GREEN PEACH APHID CONTROL ON CHRYSANTHEMUMS
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
R LC
.5 gm
.5 gm
.5 gm
.5 gm
1 gm
1 gm
1 gm
1 gm
3 gm
3 gm
3 gm
3 gm
-------
-62-
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).
-------
GRANULAR SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES FOR GREEN PEACH APHID CONTROL ON CHRYSANTHEMUMS
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 .
Treatment!*/
Rate
(gm/pot)
Mean no. aphids/plant at indicated interval pre- and posttreatmentH/
24 hr 72 hr 7 day 14 day 21 day 28 day
Pretreat
Regular 0.1
Regular 0.05
Altered release 0.1
Altered release 0.05
Untreated
62.8
65.5
105.2
68
86.5
29.5
55
125
325
127.2
0
3.5
22.2
4.0
153.2
0
0
0
0
281.2
0
.2
0
0
340.2
0
0
0
0
490.2
—'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.
2.5
10.5
19.2
14.8
1020.5
No phytotoxicity noted.
H-
CT*
H-
-------
-64-
Exhibit 6
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VARIOUS INSECTICIDES FOR THE CONTROL OF
THE GREENHOUSE WHITEFLY ON GERBERA - San Jose, 1972
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.
Material
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
Check
Lbs. act.
per 100 gals .I/
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
0.5
0.5
6.5
0.5
0.5
-
Pre-
Treatment
count
9,080
11,152
7,228
12,896
11,604
10,748
10,424
12,732
11,954
11,430
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.
-------
-65-
Exhibit 7
WHITEFLY CONTROL ON POINSETTIAS
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.
Treatment:^/
Soil (Broadcast)
Wet Foliage (Broadcast)
Dry Foliage (Broadcast)
Untreated
CultivarW
White
Red
White
Red
White
Red
White
Red
Mean no . nymphs on inducated
day posttreatmentE.'
14
75.8
216.0
166.5
159.8
329.0
143.0
460.2
206.5
21
10
7.2
14.5
8
26.2
24.2
45.5
39.8
37
0.2
0
4.8
4.2
0.5
0.8
76,8
30.2
83
0.2
1
0.5
4.8
0
2.2
70.5
50.2
104
26.5
17
34.5
24.0
3.0
18.2
52.5
18.5
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/
rep.
-------
EVALUATING INSECTICIDES FOR GREENHOUSE WHITEFLY CONTROL ON POINSETTIA
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
Material
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Check
L.R.S.D. 5%
L.R.S.D. 1%
Gals. Water
3/4 lb-
Aerosol
1 qt.
Aerosol
75%
2 qts.
Aerosol
Untreated
T
T +
Live Emerged Live
71
124
145
158
L93
226
470
162.3 71.2 220
132
216
.5a
a
.2a
.8a
.5a
.5b
.8b
a
.5
.6
7
Emerged
25
10
31
70
7
20
84
75
47
-
a
a
a
,3b
.3a
.5a
.3b
.8b
.7
-
Live
157.
151.
178.
190.
217.
203.
345.
196,
110
180
T +
14
Emerged
3a
3a
5a
9a
5a
5a
3b
7a
4
3
20
54
5
10
41
45
NS
NS
.8
.3
.5
.8
.0
.8
.0
.0
Exhibit
CO
-------
-67-
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.
-------
-68-
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:
-------
1974
FLOWER TRIPS, FTankliniella tritioi FITCH ON CARNATIONS
INDIANA STATE SOLDIER'S HOME
Formulation
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
2,3
3.0
0
7.5
4.3
8.5
11
8
15
T + 7
1.5
23.3
2
1.8
2
2.5
9
7.3
14.5
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
5.3
17.8
6
5.3
5.8
11
10,8
1
16
2T + 10
4.8
12
12.8
10.8
20.3
12.5
9.8
21.5
28.3
LRSD
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
N,S.
N.S.
N.S.
N.S.
-------
-70-
Exhibit 11
THE EFFECTIVENESS OF VARIOUS PESTICIDES APPLIED AS SPRAYS FOR CONTROL
OF THE OMNIVOROUS LEAF ROLLER ON GREENHOUSE ROSES. SAN BRUNO, CALIF. 1967
W. W. Allen
Department of Entomology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Material-/
A
A
B
B
c
D
E
F
G
E.
W.
E.
W.
E.
W.
W.
W.
E.
C.
P.
C.
p.
c.
p.
p.
p.
c.
Pounds Actual
per 100 gallons
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
.0
.0
.75
.75
.5
.5
.0
.0
.0
Check
No . of larvae
found 14 days
after treatment:/
0
2
2
3
2
6
19
22
29
51
!_/ 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.
-------
-71-
Exhibit 12
USE OF PYRETHRINS TO EVALUATE EFFICACY OF INSECTICIDES
AGAINST FUNGUS GNAT LARVAE
R. K. Lindquist
Department of Entomology
OARDC
Wooster, Ohio
Control of fungus gnat larvae on bedding plants with several insecticides
applied as soil drenches
Treatment!/
A
A
A
B
B
C
Untreated
Rate
4 oz
8 oz
16 oz
4 oz
8 oz
16 oz
-
Mean no. larvae
5 days posttreatment?/
.5
1
0
2.5
5.5
4.8
12
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.
-------
-72-
Exhibit 13
CONTROL OF ROSE MIDGE LARVAE WITH INSECTICIDES:
COLUMBUS, OHIO, 1975
R. K. Lindquist
Department of Entomology
OARDC
Wooster, Ohio
Mean no. rose midge larvae on indicated date—/
Treatment!-'
A 2 G
A
B
C
Untreated
Rate
5 lb/1000
12 oz/100
ft2
gals.
1 fl. oz/gal.
32 oz/100
—
gals
6/25
4 a
2.3 a
39.3 ab
96.8 b
195.8 c
7/2
4
0.5
7.5
103.7
92.7
a
a
a
ab
ab
7/11
2.3 a
0.2 a
2.7 a
30 b
86.7 c
7/17
1
3
14
64
85
.5
.3
.7
.3
a
a
a
b
b
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.
-------
-73-
Exhibit 14
TESTS ON CARNATIONS FOR THE CONTROL OF THE
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
microscope.
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:
Formulation
Treatment
A
B
A
A
A
C
D
E
F
Check - Untreated
LRSD 5%
LRSD 1%
Average
T T + 1
.8
1.0
1.8
2.0
2.5
1.0
1.8
.3
8
4.3 8
5.4
no. mites
T + 7
1.8
2,8
6.3
4.0
3.0
1.5
1.0
.5
7.5
10.5
5.4
sample dates
2T + 7
4
9,3
4.5
3
9.3
8
0
13
27.8
11
9.7
13.1
2T + 14
7.5
38.0
13.0
7.7
6.7
4.8
.3
21
25
17.5
13.5
18.2
-------
-74-
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.
-------
-75-
Exhibit 15
EVALUATION OF GRANULAR, SOIL-APPLIED SYSTEMIC INSECTICIDES
FOR CONTROL OF INSECTS ON SHADE TREES IN NURSERIES
D. G. Nielsen
Ohio Agricultural Research and Development Center
Wooster, Ohio
Procedure
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
Insecticide
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
Check
Application
Application
« f
10
(1
5
(2
(1
(2
(1
(2
20
(1
10
(2
(1
C2
Date:
Rate
Ib AIA
side)
Ib AIA
sides)
1 oz
side)
1 oz .
sides)
2 oz.
side)
2 oz.
sides)
Ib AIA
side)
Ib AIA
sides)
4 oz .
side)
4 oz.
sides)
6/18
28
3
1
0
0
0
18
16
2
0
15
111
8
18
2
0
0
0
14
is
5
6
6
7/20
13
26
5
19
3
0
9
9
4
9
23
8/3'
22
31
3
6
0
2
5
21
5
5
26
8/19
3
1
0
0
2
1
3
1
0
0
1
May 12, 1976
Equipment: Gandy
•'i „ ™i, r> ,
i r\i^ ^ j-v
2' wide
granule
spreader
9/16 E
0 74
0 79
0 11
0 25
0 5
i
i
0 3
0 49
0 62
0 16
0 20
0 71
0 M
0, X
ft H-
H-'cr
3 H-
C rt
ro
CL H
-------
-77-
Exhibit 16
EVALUATION!/ OF INSECTICIDES AND SPRAYING SCHEDULES FOR CONTROL OF KUNO
.SCALE, Leoan-ium kunoensis., ON PYRACANTHA, Walnut Creek, Calif. 1973-74
C. S, Koehler
Division of Entomology and Parasitology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Material
A
A
B
B
C
C
(75 SP)
(75 SP)
(3 EC)
(3 EC)
(80 Spr.)
(80 Spr,)
Untreated
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
3.28
% scale
reduction!.'
32
80
70
75
59
86
-
!/
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.
-------
-78-
Exhibit 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
C. S. Koehler
Division of Entomology and Parasitology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Material—'
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
Untreated
No.
Ib./lOO gal, 5
1.0 0
.5 0
1.0 0
.5 0
37 1
47 12
.5 0
.5 0
130
living larvae/6
after (days) :— '
12
0
0
0
1
13
21
1
10
71
plants
26
1
2
1
0
4
8
2
6
14
I/
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.
water.
0.5 Ib. wettable powder formulation, containing 6,000 A,U.Ak./Mg, used/
100 gal. water.
-------
-79-
Exhibit 18
EVALUATION OF INSECTICIDES FOR CONTROL OF THE CYPRESS TIP
MOTH, Argyresthia cuyressella, ON Thuja (ARBORVITAE), Berkeley Calif.
1973-74
C. S. Koehler
Division of Entomology and Parasitology
University of California
Berkeley, California
Treatment^-/
A
A
B
C
D
E
(3 EC)
(3 EC)
(75 EC)
(4,320 lU/Mfe)
(2 EC)
(4 EC)
Untreated
Act, toxicant,
Ib./lOO gal.
0.5
1.0
1.0
2.0
0.5
0.5
-
Avg, no,
cocoons/
10 grams
foliage?/
0.32
0.30
0.43
10.53
0.37
1.57
14.95
Unsight-
liness
rating^-'
1.5
1.3
1.3
3.8
1.5
2.0
3.8
I/
3/
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.
-------
-80-
Exhibit 19
METHOD FOR USING LABORATORY BIOASSAYS
OF SPRAY RESIDUES APPLIED TO FOLIAGE IN THE FIELD
FOR BLACK VINE WEEVIL ADULT CONTROL
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.
2
I
33
r
s
5
|
z
o
•n
O
m
03
[V
&-
a
oo
o
£
~
Insecticide
A 2EC
B 2.4EC
B 2.4EC
C 76WP
C 76WP
D 75SP
D 75 SP
E 2EC
F SOS
Check
a/ Rates in
"™~
g AI/
100 liter*!/
30(0.25)
15(0.125)
30(0.25)
60(0.5)
120(1.0)
60(0.5)
120(1.0)
120(1.0)
60(1.0)
parentheses are Ib
1
hour
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
0
0
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 - -
0
13 27 7
_____
_____ _
70700 0
0 M
0 X
3 3"
rt H-
H' CT*
3 I-1-
C rt
n>
vo
I
00
------- |