NYFVI Grant – Feb. 07-Jan 09 Testing the “PETE” Insect Developmental Model to Limit Resurgence of CM in Apples Deborah I. Breth, CCE-LOF Art Agnello, NYSAES, CU Elizabeth Tee, CCE-LOF Funded by NYFVI and CCE-LOF

PETE? MSU model for 8 different fruit pests MSU model for 8 different fruit pests “Predictive Extension Timing Estimator” “Predictive Extension Timing Estimator” Listed universally as the timing model for CM in University Guidelines. Listed universally as the timing model for CM in University Guidelines. Does it work? Does it work?

Testing PETE 2 high pressure and 2 low pressure blocks 2 high pressure and 2 low pressure blocks Treatments include: Treatments include: –a) MSU "PETE" CM model using first trap catch of the season with first generation spray at DD (using a base temperature of 50 degrees F) and second generation spray at 1250 DD followed by a second application for each generation days after the first. If greater than 5 moths per trap per week, continue spraying for the third generation –b) “Modified PETE” – based on seasonal trap catch data managing the first generation as above, DD50 F, but using a trap threshold of 5 moths per trap per week, treating 7-10 days after exceeding that. –c) the grower standard

Total Trap catch Per season BurnapHeberleBartlesonBrown Total Avg CM per week Total Avg OFM per week Total Avg LAW per week

Recommended Spray Dates – Brown PETE -Jun 10, 22, Jul 28, Aug 9 Modified – Aug 15

Recommended Spray Dates – Heberle PETE – Jun 7, 19, Jul 26, Aug 7 Modified – Jun 7, 19, Jul 1, 13, 25, Aug 10, 22, Sep 3, 15

Harvest Evaluations PressureFarmTreatment Means % clean % int lep % worms % sting LowBrown PETE Modified PETE Grower Std Bartleson PETE93.9 a*00 b2.3 a Modified PETE97.0 a00 b0.8 b Grower Std70.6 b**00.5 a0.3 b HighBurnap PETE92.7 b2.5 a0.5 a2 Modified PETE94.9 ab0.2 b0 b1.1 Grower Std97.5 a0.4 b0.1 b0.9 Heberle PETE b Modified PETE ab Grower Std a * - Numbers with letters following are statistically different by treatment for that farm ** - San Jose Scale infestation

NYFVI - Trap Network Pheromone traps (163) Pheromone traps (163) 32 locations 32 locations to monitor adult CM, OFM, and LAW flight to monitor adult CM, OFM, and LAW flight use information to predict insect development and spray timing. use information to predict insect development and spray timing. Traps were monitored weekly to maintain reliable data. Traps were monitored weekly to maintain reliable data. The trap data was entered into an Excel spreadsheet that could be viewed on the LOF website at The trap data was entered into an Excel spreadsheet that could be viewed on the LOF website at Harvest evaluations and spray records are being complied to help growers identify any weakness in spray schedule. Harvest evaluations and spray records are being complied to help growers identify any weakness in spray schedule.

2007 Harvest Survey Number of growers – 78 Number of growers – 78 –(up from 49 in 2006) Number worms – 466 Number worms – 466 CM – 83% - in 2002, 15%CM, 75% OFM CM – 83% - in 2002, 15%CM, 75% OFM OFM/LAW – 16% OFM/LAW – 16% Unidentified – 8% Unidentified – 8% Number loads – 313 infested Number loads – 313 infested

Harvest Survey Send letter to growers identifying ticket number, dates and variety, and pest identified in load Send letter to growers identifying ticket number, dates and variety, and pest identified in load Hope to identify specific problem areas Hope to identify specific problem areas Increases awareness of a growing problem that will impact on the economics of the fruit industry. Increases awareness of a growing problem that will impact on the economics of the fruit industry.

Managing CM and OFM with Mating Disruption Isomate CM/OFM TT – 200 per acre Isomate CM/OFM TT – 200 per acre Second season at Kast and Russell Second season at Kast and Russell Splat – ISCA Tech formulation for CM and OFM to apply before fruit set for full season control Splat – ISCA Tech formulation for CM and OFM to apply before fruit set for full season control Checkmate CM-F, OFM-F – apply 2 applications per generation, continued regular insecticide applications the first season Checkmate CM-F, OFM-F – apply 2 applications per generation, continued regular insecticide applications the first season

Mating Disruption with SPLAT for CM/OFM by ISCA Technologies

Mating Disruption with Checkmate CM-F and OFM-F Sprayable by Suterra – 2007

Checkmate CM-F/OFM-F Spray Records KASTGrwStdMDGrwStd OP725 IGR1 Pyrethroid111 Neonic252 Bio000 Avaunt000 Cost ($) *158 % internal lep * Checkmate CM-F and OFM-F additional cost $164/acre

Does it pay if MD is /acre? If 1000 bu/acre If 1000 bu/acre If 40 lb/bu If 40 lb/bu If 9.5/lb for peelers and canners If 9.5/lb for peelers and canners If 7/lb for juice If 7/lb for juice Then lose $1000 per acre If 5/lb for juice If 5/lb for juice Then lose $1800 per acre Then lose $1800 per acre

Summary Critical to know which leps are problems Critical to know which leps are problems CM is primary pest for most farms where internal lep pests are a problem, CM is primary pest for most farms where internal lep pests are a problem, –but not all !! Mating Disruption is viable option for high pressure orchards – need full insecticide program the first season Mating Disruption is viable option for high pressure orchards – need full insecticide program the first season Adds significant expense to spray cost ? Adds significant expense to spray cost ? Need cost analysis…rejected loads cost $ per acre depending on yield per acre and variety Need cost analysis…rejected loads cost $ per acre depending on yield per acre and variety