Agronomic Evaluation of At-Plant Insecticides and Nematicides Cotton Specialist Working Group Presented By: Tom Barber University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture

Extension Cotton Specialists Working Group Auburn University Charles Burmester Dale Monks University of Arkansas Tom Barber University of Georgia Steve Brown University of Florida David Wright University of California – Davis Bob Hutmacher Louisiana State University Sandy Stewart North Carolina State University Keith Edmisten Oklahoma State University J.C. Banks Clemson University Mike Jones University of Tennessee Chris Main Texas AgriLife Extension Service Randy Boman Robert Lemon Virginia Tech Joel Faircloth University of Arizona Randy Norton Mississippi State University Darrin Dodds Kansas State University Stewart Duncan

Regions Upper SE Midsouth West Lower SE Southwest

Acknowledgements Bayer Crop Science Syngenta Crop Protection Extension Entomologists Extension Nematologists

At-Plant Insecticide / Nematicide Products Avicta Complete Pack Aeris Temik Cruiser/Dynasty CST Untreated Orthene 97 1-2lf, fb 4-5lf ASN No Orthene

At-Plant Insecticide / Nematicide Products ~ Ratings ~ Vigor = 0-5 (0=dead plants, 5=most vigorous) Thrips Injury = 0-5 (0=dead plants, 5=no visible injury) Lint yield (lb/A) Region States Variety Upper SE NC, TN, VA DP 117 B2RF Lower SE AL, GA, SC DP 555 BR Mid-South AR, LA PHY 485 WRF Southwest Texas FM 9063 B2RF

At-Plant Insecticide / Nematicide Products ~ Locations, Researchers ~ Alabama Charles Burmester, Auburn University Arkansas Tom Barber, University of Arkansas Georgia Steve Brown, University of Georgia Florida David Wright, University of Florida Louisiana Sandy Stewart, Louisiana State University North Carolina Keith Edmisten, North Carolina State University South Carolina Mike Jones, Clemson University Tennessee Chris Main, University of Tennessee Texas Robert Lemon, Texas AgriLife Extension Service Virginia Joel Faircloth, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Belt-wide - Vigor Ratings ~

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Belt-wide - Thrips Ratings ~

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Belt-wide - Lint Yield (lb/A) ~

At-Plant Insecticide / Nematicide Products ~ Individual Location Charts ~ The following graphs represent variables at individual locations that have significant differences. Vigor Thrips Damage Lint Yield

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Alabama - Vigor Ratings ~ LSD=0.6 LSD=NS a a a a b Similar results in Arkansas, North Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Louisiana - Vigor Ratings ~ LSD=0.7 LSD=0.3 a a a a a b b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ South Carolina - Vigor Ratings ~ LSD=0.9 LSD=0.4 a a ab ab b b c *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Alabama - Thrips Ratings ~ LSD=0.3 LSD=NS a a a a b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Arkansas - Thrips Ratings ~ LSD=0.42 LSD=NS ab a bc c d *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ South Carolina - Thrips Ratings ~ LSD=0.8 LSD=0.3 a ab a ab b b c *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Tennessee - Thrips Ratings ~ LSD=0.3 LSD=NS a ab ab b c *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Virginia - Thrips Ratings ~ LSD=0.3 LSD=NS a a b b c *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Arkansas - Lint Yield ~ LSD=107 LSD=NS a a a a b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Georgia - Lint Yield ~ LSD=83 LSD=37 ab a bc a bc c b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Louisiana - Lint Yield ~ LSD=100 LSD=NS a a ab ab b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.10.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ Tennessee - Lint Yield ~ LSD=66 LSD=NS a a a a b *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

At-Plant Insecticide/Nematicide Products ~ South Carolina - Lint Yield ~ LSD=111.8 LSD=NS a ab bc c c *Means followed by the same letter are not sig. different, Fisher’s Protected LSD, P<0.05.

Conclusions There were no differences in seedling vigor, thrips rating or cotton lint yield when data analyzed over all locations. Vigor 6 out of 10 locations treatments equal and showed increased vigor over check 2 locations where Orthene applications increased vigor SC - Aeris treatments less vigorous

Conclusions Thrips damage Yield 6 locations treatments equal and better than untreated check 3 locations where Aeris not as good as Temik but similar to other treatments 2 locations where Cruiser not as good as Temik Avicta and Aeris similar except for 2 locations Yield 6 locations no significant difference 4 locations where treatments better than check SC- Avicta and Aeris equal to check Temik higher in SC and GA but lower in LA 1 location where Orthene increased yield.

Conclusions All treatments better than check where thrips were present. No major differences in seedling vigor among treatments Orthene applications offered some benefit in a couple locations. Secondary pests (spider mites) More data needs to be included such as plant height, total nodes, first fruiting node etc.

Future Research Continue project for at least 1 more year. Analyze Nationally, Regionally and by State to determine if more differences occur.