2011 Product Evaluation and Varietal Differences for Reniform Nematode Suppression in Mississippi Delta Sweetpotato Production Larry Adams and Randy Luttrell.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Biofumigation in Combination with Conservation Tillage to Control Reniform Nematode in Cotton Ernst Cebert*
Advertisements

Nematode Management in Florida Peanut Production
Abstract This project reports laboratory studies conducted to evaluate the effects of organic pesticides on the survival and reproduction of a predatory.
Morteza Mozaffari Soil Testing and Research Laboratory, Marianna Efforts to Improve N Use Efficiency of Corn in Arkansas Highlights of Research in Progress.
Introduction Cotton producers throughout Tennessee must battle glyphosate-resistant (GR) weeds. The most problematic of these is Palmer amaranth, also.
Jacob P. Vossenkemper Department of Plant and Soil Sciences Oklahoma State University.
Evaluation of Various Insecticide Regimes in Sweetpotato Production for Sugarcane Beetle Control in the Mid-South Larry Adams 1, Randall Luttrell 1 and.
Cotton Nematode Management Jimmy R. Rich and Charles Overstreet.
Insecticidal Control of Caterpillar Pests of Cole Crops Alton N. Sparks, Jr. and David G. Riley, University of Georgia, Tifton, Georgia INTRODUCTION Cole.
INFLUENCE OF PHC PRODUCTS ON POTATO GROWTH AND YIELD PT Summary Across Studies - WA Only PRE-HARVEST APPLICATION EFFECTS ON POST-HARVEST STORAGE.
IMPACT OF BAHIAGRASS, COTTON, AND CORN CROPPING FREQUENCY ON THE SEVERITY OF DISEASES OF PEANUT A. K. Hagan, L. H. Campbell, J. R. Weeks, M. E. Rivas-Davila.
Introduction Sweetpotato (Ipomoea batatas) is a major horticultural crop in the U.S. valued at $309 million annually (Anonymous 2005). Many soil and foliage.
Chad Lee © 2006 University of Kentucky 1 Wheat: Weeds & Insects Presentation by: Chad Lee, Grain Crops Extension Specialist University of Kentucky.
Evaluation of Mechanical Disturbance of Mounds During Cold Weather on Red Imported Fire Ants Lawrence C. ‘Fudd’ Graham 1, Vicky E. Bertagnolli 1, and Amber.
Integrated Pest Management
Evaluation of the Effects of Plastic Mulches - Red, Black, Olive and Control, on the Growth and Yield of Tomato A. A. James, J. A. Sawtelle, and R. W.
Ministry of Agriculture
Influence of Planting Date, Harvest Date, Soil Type, Irrigation and Nematicides on Pest Numbers, Yield and Quality of Sweetpotatoes in the Mississippi.
Three Year Evaluation of High Populations of Reniform Nematode On Yield and Quality of Sweet Potatoes in the Mississippi Delta Larry Adams and Craig Abel.
SCC-33 National Variety Testing Meeting New Orleans – February 8-10, 2012 Rick Mascagni LSU AgCenter St. Joseph, LA.
Soybean Aphids in Iowa – Past and Present Marlin E. Rice Extension Entomologist Iowa State University.
The Effects of Topdressing Organic Nitrogen on Hard Red Winter Wheat - Year 2 Name: Erica Cummings Date: March 15, 2012 Title: Crops and Soils Technician.
Value of Neonicotinoid Insecticides In MS Cotton Jeff Gore – MSU, DREC, Stoneville.
Management of the Reniform Nematode in Cotton
Comparison of Conventional, Roundup Ready, and Liberty-Link Cotton Weed Management Programs in Two Tillage Systems Michael Patterson, Bob Goodman and Dale.
BELT 4 SC (FLUBENDIAMIDE): A NEW INSECTICIDE FOR CONTROL OF HELIOTHINES IN CONVENTIONAL COTTON – 2006 Jarrod T. Hardke 1, Gus M. Lorenz 1, B.R. Leonard.
Response of African Nightshade Species (ANS) to Organic, Mineral Fertilization and Bio-Protection Measures Supervised by; 1. Prof. John Kimenju 2. Dr.
Advanced Pest Protection for Maximizing Profitability in Corn Production Avicta ® Duo Corn is a Restricted Use Pesticide. For use by certified applicators.
Use of By-Plot CV’s for Refining Mid-Season Fertilizer N Rates Daryl Brian Arnall Plant and Soil Sciences Department Oklahoma State University.
Insect Control Spectrum of AERIS TM Seed-Applied System.
Integrated Pest Management. Learning Objectives 1.Define IPM (Integrated or Insect Pest Management). 2.Describe why IPM is important. 3.Describe what.
Funded by an annual grant from the Northwest Center For Small Fruit Research Acknowledgments Biology and Control of Blueberry.
Soil and Environmental Implications of Land Rolling Corn Logan Ahlers and Paul Kivlin College of Agriculture, Food, and Environmental Science University.
Timothy Johnson Plato Industries, Ltd. Houston, TX
College Station July 2006 College Station October 2006 Evaluation of Soil from Selected Sites for Suppressiveness against the Reniform Nematode A.F. Robinson.
Insecticide Application Method and Chemistry Evaluation for Sweetpotato Production in the Mississippi Delta Larry C. Adams and Randall G. Luttrell USDA-ARS,
UW MADISON AGRONOMY Raising Non-Rotation Soybean P. Pedersen, J.G. Lauer, C.R. Grau, and J.M. Gaska University of Wisconsin-Madison January 18, 2001.
Managing Difficult to Control Tarnished Plant Bugs Jeff Gore – USDA-ARS, Stoneville.
Figure 3. Concentration of NO3 N in soil water at 1.5 m depth. Evaluation of Best Management Practices on N Dynamics for a North China Plain C. Hu 1, J.A.
15 July 2009 INFLUENCE OF PHC SEED AND FOLIAR TREATMENTS ON IRISH POTATO GROWTH AND YIELD Summary of Rhizoctonia Data, Holland Ag Services, Washington.
Objectives To evaluate the effects of two simulated drift rates of 2,4-D on non-tolerant cotton at various stages of development. 1 Chandler P. Rowe, 1.
Cotton Nematode Management Jimmy R. Rich and Mike Donahoe.
Open Discussion “Stink Bug Movement, Sampling, Damage and Controls – What We Have Learned in Recent Years” 2006 GA PAC/ACAA Annual Meeting Dothan, Al February.
LATE SEASON N APPLICATIONS FOR IRRIGATED HARD RED WHEAT PROTEIN ENHANCEMENT. S.E. Petrie*, Oregon State Univ, B.D. Brown, Univ. of Idaho. Introduction.
Tolerance Of Staked Tomatoes Grown On Plastic Mulch To SANDEA (HALOSULFURON) Hudgins, J. E. 1, A. S. Culpepper 2, L. M. May 1,and D. E. Mcgriff 1 1 decatur.
1 Cotton 2005 Ouachita Fertilizer Red River. 2 Ouachita Commitment to you Increase yields Lower Costs / Unit Produced Help solve specific production problems.
©2005 copyright, FMC Corporation. FMC confidential. Carbine TM 50WG (flonicamid) 2006 Field Efficacy Results Craig Heim Henry R. Mitchell Yemel Ortega.
Effect of Fallow Period Weed Control on Wireworm Populations in Sugarcane C. Rainbolt and R. Cherry Everglades REC University of Florida/IFAS.
Insecticide Efficacy of Foliar Applications for Tarnished Plant Bug and Other Key Insect Pests of Cotton in the Mississippi Delta Dr. James Robbins Delta.
Row Patterns - Tillage John Baldwin Univ. of Georgia.
Impact of Rotation and Fumigation on 2006 Cotton Production in Reniform Infested Cotton Fields. Gazaway, W.S., K. Lawrence, and J.R. Akridge Auburn University.
Cotton and Palmer Amaranth (AMAPA) Response to Milo-Pro Applied at-Plant and POST Lynn M. Sosnoskie and A. Stanley Culpepper UGA, Tifton, GA Jared Whitaker.
Efficacy of EMD Crop Bioscience products on cotton stand and yield M. S. Reddy, R. Bowman and R. Osburn Dept. of Entomology & Plant Pathology, Auburn University,
Experiences With Tarnished Plant Bugs in the Mississippi Delta Angus Catchot, J.F. Smith, and J. Gore Mississippi State University 2007 Beltwide.
Phosphorus Fertilization Reduced Hessian Fly Infestation of Spring Wheat S. E. Petrie and K. E. Rhinhart Columbia Basin Agricultural Research Center, Oregon.
Controlling weeds in vegetable farming is a major concern. Most growers use conventional tillage practices. Excessive tillage, however, decreases organic.
Subodh Kulkarni Extension Engineer (Bio. & Ag. Engineering) Leo Espinoza Associate Professor (Crop & Soil Science) M. Isminov Program Technician ( Crop.
Control of Tropical Spiderwort in Peanut with Selected Herbicides J. Tim Flanders Grady County Extension Coordinator Eric P. Prostko Dept. of Crop & Soil.
New Peanut Cultivar Response to Paraquat Applications
Irrigation Method Impacts on Peanut Pod Yield. S. Leininger 1, L. J
Conservation Tillage in Cotton: A Mississippi Delta Perspective
Influences of Planting Population on Sugarcane Aphid (Melanaphis sacchari) in Grain Sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) Brittany Lipsey Mississippi State University.
Timothy Johnson and Thomas Plato Plato Industries Ltd.,
Sorghum – Sugarcane Aphid Research Exchange Meeting
Long-term crop rotations suppress soybean sudden death
Lodging immediately after July 4, 2007 storm.
Amy G. Carroll Dr. Scott Monfort Dr. Terry Kirkpatrick Michael Emerson
Untreated Weed-Free Check
Crop Protection and Management Research Unit
Evaluating “Ultra-Early” Corn Hybrids
Presentation transcript:

2011 Product Evaluation and Varietal Differences for Reniform Nematode Suppression in Mississippi Delta Sweetpotato Production Larry Adams and Randy Luttrell USDA, ARS, SIMRU Stoneville, MS Introduction The reniform nematode, Rotylenchulus reniformis, can cause significant losses in sweetpotato, Ipomoea batatas, production in the Mississippi Delta. Reniform nematode is a microscopic plant parasite that feeds on sweetpotato roots causing severe stunting of root growth. Reduction in yield due to the presence of above threshold populations has been documented across historical sweetpotato producing areas of the United States. Reniform nematodes can cause significant economic loss if managed improperly. Traditionally, high numbers of reniform nematodes are encountered in sandy/silt loam delta soils where sweetpotato production follows cotton acreage. In 2011 researchers at the USDA, ARS, Southern Insect Management Research Unit (SIMRU) compared five treatments for control of the reniform nematode in Mississippi Delta sweetpotato fields. In a second study during 2011 SIMRU scientist compared three sweetpotato varieties, Beauregard 63, Covington and Evangeline, in an area with a moderately high reniform nematode population. Sweetpotato plots with and without a nematicide and sweetpotato plots with and without a soil incorporated insecticide before transplanting of sweetpotato slips were evaluated. In both studies soil samples were taken twice during the season to assess reniform populations. Yield, quality and insect damage were recorded and analyzed. Significant yield increases were recorded in the K-Pam, Telone II and NemOut.9 lbs/A treatments when compared to the untreated control plots. Acknowledgement We thank Chris P. Johnson, USDA, ARS, SIMRU, for his assistance in field plot preparation, maintenance and harvest and Debbie Boykin, USDA, ARS, Statistician, for assistance with the statistical analysis of the data in this study Product Evaluation Study Materials and Methods Research Plot Design Sweetpotato plots were replicated four times with four rows x 25’ (RCB). Spring nematode samples were taken on 4/25/2012. Reniform nematode counts were 2800/pint of soil. Recommended herbicides were applied before and after transplanting. B63 sweetpotato slips were transplanted using a two row transplanter at 12” spacing on 40” rows on 6/1/2011. Plots were harvested on 10/3/2011 at 114 days after transplanting. Irrigation was applied as needed to all plots. Insect Sampling Sweep net samples were taken weekly using a 15” net with 25 sweeps in four locations randomly across the field. Insect populations were recorded and treatments applied as needed. Nematicide Treatments Applied in the Product Evaluation Study Untreated *K-Pam 8 Gal/A 3 weeks before transplanting *Telone 6 Gal/A 2 weeks before transplanting lbs/A 2 weeks before transplanting lbs/A 2 weeks before transplanting Mocap 1 Gal/A 2 weeks before transplanting Insecticide Treatments *Nematicide treatment plots included 64 oz/A (Incorporated). A foliar insecticide treatment of Intrepid ai/A plus Capture 2 ai/A was applied to all treatment plots on 8/10/2011 Soil Sample Dates Mid-Season nematode samples were taken on 7/20/2011 & Pre-Harvest nematode samples were taken on 9/15/ Varietal Differences Study Materials and Methods Research Plot Design Sweetpotato plots were replicated four times with four rows x 25’ (RCB). Spring nematode samples were taken on 4/25/2012. Reniform nematode counts averaged 1800/pint of soil (±SEM). Recommended herbicides were applied before and after transplanting. B63, Covington and Evangeline variety sweetpotato slips were transplanted using a two row transplanter at 12” spacing on 40” rows on 6/2/2011. Plots were harvested on 10/4/2011 at 114 days after transplanting. Irrigation was applied as needed to all plots. Insect Sampling Sweep net samples were taken weekly using a 15” net with 25 sweeps in four locations randomly across the field. Insect populations were recorded and treatments applied as needed. Nematicide Treatments Applied in the Product Evaluation Study Control Treated – B63 Control Untreated – B63 Control Treated – Covington Control Untreated – Covington Control Treated – Evangeline Control Untreated – Evangeline *K-Pam HL Treated – B63 *K-Pam HL Untreated – B63 *K-Pam HL Treated – Covington *K-Pam HL Untreated – Covington *K-Pam HL Treated – Evangeline *K-Pam HL Untreated *K-Pam 8 Gal/A applied 3 weeks before transplanting. Insecticide Treatments The Control & K-Pam HL treated plots included 64 oz/A (Incorporated). A foliar insecticide treatment of Intrepid ai/A plus Capture 2 ai/A was applied to all treatment plots on 8/10/2011. Soil Sample Dates Mid-Season nematode samples were taken on 7/20/2011 & Pre-Harvest nematode samples were taken on 9/15/2011. Summary The mid-season nematode samples in the product evaluation study indicated a decrease in the reniform nematode population in all treatments except Mocap when compared to the untreated control (Chart 1). The Telone II treatment continued to suppress the reniform nematode population in the pre-harvest nematode samples (Chart 1). K-Pam, Telone II and NemOut.9 lbs/A treatment yields were significantly higher than the untreated control (Chart 2). All treatments in the varietal differences study showed a response to the K-Pam treatment in the mid-season and pre-harvest nematode samples with the exception of the K-Pam TRT B63 and the Control TRT B63 treatments at mid-season (Chart 3). There was no indication that Lorsban treatment with or without K-Pam application was contributing to suppression of reniform nematode populations in this study (Chart 3). The Evangeline Control UnTRT and TRT with Lorsban showed a higher number of reniform nematodes than the Covington and B63 Control UnTRT and TRT with Lorsban in the mid-season nematode samples (Chart 3). In the pre-harvest nematode samples, all of the K- Pam Evangeline and K-Pam Covington treatments were above or approaching the fall threshold population of reniform nematodes while the K- Pam B63 treatments were still below threshold (Chart 3). All varieties in the Control treatments were above the fall threshold number for reniform nematodes in the pre-harvest nematode samples (Chart 3). Yield results from the varietal differences study showed the K-Pam treatments higher than the Control treatments, in all varieties, with the exception of the Control TRT Evangeline treatment (Chart 4). Only the K- Pam TRT Covington treatment yield was significantly different from all other treatments (LSD, P=0.05). Covington and Evangeline varieties yielded more than B63 in both the Control and K-Pam treatments although only the yield of Control UnTRT Covington, Control TRT Evangeline, K-Pam TRT Covington and K-Pam UnTRT Covington were significantly different from all other treatments (Chart 4).