Browsing Cotton Report 1999 by Authors
Monitoring Bemisia Susceptibility to Applaud (buprofezin) during the 1998 Cotton SeasonEllsworth, Peter C.; Sieglaff, D. H.; Yazui, M.; Lublinkhof, J.; Silvertooth, Jeff; The University of Arizona, Department of Entomology & Maricopa Agricultural Center; Nihon Nohyaku, Ltd., Osaka, Japan; AgrEvo USA Co., Wilmington, DE (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)Starting in 1993, we developed a field-based protocol for bioassaying sweetpotato whiteflies (SWF) for susceptibility to buprofezin (Applaud®). Since then, we have monitored Arizona SWF populations (up to 5 regions) for susceptibility to Applaud in four out of the last six seasons. We observed no appreciable decrease in susceptibility. Instead, we have observed an increase in susceptibility of present day whiteflies when compared to populations bioassayed in 1993 and 1996, before any Applaud use in the U.S.. This result, however, is likely related to various procedural changes in the bioassay methodology. Nevertheless, our current estimates of whitefly susceptibility are similar to those obtained from various unexposed populations from around the world and to populations we bioassayed in 1997. Differences between our LC50 estimates and those of some other researchers can probably be explained by various procedural differences: 1) method of Applaud application, 2) whitefly stage collected and sources of leaf foliage, and 3) bioassay environmental conditions. Our results also showed each year that Applaud susceptibility does not decline after Applaud application(s) based on commercial paired field comparisons and replicated small and large plot evaluations. In fact, susceptibilities actually marginally increased after an Applaud application. This fact does not alter the recommendation for Arizona to limit Applaud use to one time per crop season, but does provide hope for the development of a sustainable use pattern even if usage continues on non-cotton hosts (i.e., on melons and vegetables under Section 18). Given the tremendous value of this mode of action, however, commodity groups should work together wherever possible to coordinate the usage of this and other valuable compounds so that whitefly generations are not successively exposed to this product.
Preliminary Evaluation of the "Next Generation" of Bt CottonSieglaff, D. H.; Ellsworth, Peter C.; Silvertooth, Jeffrey C.; Hamilton, E.; Silvertooth, Jeff; The University of Arizona, Department of Entomology & Maricopa Agricultural Center; Department of Plant Sciences; Monsanto Company, Chesterfield, MO (College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1999)The next generation of Bollgard® cotton was evaluated for agronomic and insecticidal efficacy under central Arizona growing conditions. Two novel lines were compared with their recurrent parents, DP50 and DP50B. There were no seasonlong differences observed among the varieties in most plant development and insect parameters. However, DP50 had significantly lower emergence than the other lines tested (possibly related to seed quality). The lower plant population may have been responsible for greater whitefly abundance observed on two dates mid-season. During early-season ratings of secondary “pests” (15 DAP) (scaled on damage and/or presence), the two test lines received lower ratings for thrips and flea beetle when compared with DP50, DP50B and DP50Bu (untreated for Lepidoptera). However, these difference are likely as a result of the difference in seed treatments that the two test lines received (Gaucho®) and the others did not. This seed treatment does have known activity against thrips and beetle pests. In mid-season, the two test lines received lower ratings for beet armyworm when compared to DP50, DP50B and DP50Bu (although, not significantly different from DP50B or DP50Bu). Efficacy against pink bollworm (PBW) was assessed one time at the end of the season (we were limited to this time, so as to not affect yield), and DP50 was the only variety in which PBW exit holes were observed and PBW larvae collected. However, the low Lepidoptera pressure experienced during the season limited assessments of the two novel lines’ efficacy toward PBW. There was no significant difference in yield (bale/A) among the varieties. Although, one of the test lines had a lower lint turnout than each other variety. The two novel Bollgard lines performed well under our growing conditions, but continued evaluations will be necessary under more conditions and more insect pressures before “varietal” performance and gene efficacy can be assessed adequately.