DOCSLIB.ORG

Production Guide for Organic Blueberry

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Production Guide for Organic Blueberry 2013 Production Guide for Organic Blueberries NYS IPM Publication No. 225 Integrated Pest Management New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets ORGANIC BLUEBERRY PRODUCTION Coordinating Editors Juliet Carroll (Cornell University, New York State IPM Program) Marvin Pritts* (Cornell University, Department of Horticulture) Catherine Heidenreich* (Cornell University, Department of Horticulture) Contributors and Resources Kerik Cox* (Cornell University, Department of Plant Pathology and Plant Microbe-Biology) Greg Loeb* (Cornell University, Department of Entomology) Michael Helms* (Cornell University, Pesticide Management Education Program) Andrew Landers (Cornell University, Department of Entomology) Paul Curtis (Cornell University, Department of Natural Resources) Laura McDermott (Cornell Cooperative Extension, Capital District Vegetable and Small Fruit Program) *Pesticide Information and Regulatory Compliance Staff Writers Elizabeth Graeper Thomas (Cornell University, New York State IPM Program) Theodora Bucien (Cornell University, New York State IPM Program) Editing for the 2013 update Mary Kirkwyland (New York State IPM Program) Michelle Marks (New York State IPM Program) Special Appreciation Format based on the Pest Management Guidelines for Berry Crops ipmguidelines.org/BerryCrops/, content editor Marvin Pritts and coordinating editor Cathy Heidenreich; and on the Production Guide for Organic Grapes, coordinating editors Tim Weigle and Juliet Carroll. Funded in part by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. The guidelines in this bulletin reflect the authors’ best effort to interpret a complex body of scientific research, and to translate this into practical management options. Following the guidance provided in this bulletin does not assure compliance with any applicable law, rule, regulation or standard, or the achievement of particular discharge levels from agricultural land. Every effort has been made to provide correct, complete, and up-to-date pest management information for New York State at the time this publication was released for printing (May 2013). Changes in pesticide registrations, regulations, and guidelines occurring after publication are available in county Cornell Cooperative Extension offices or from the Pesticide Management Education Program web site (pmep.cce.cornell.edu). Trade names used herein are for convenience only. No endorsement of products is intended, nor is criticism of unnamed products implied. This guide is not a substitute for pesticide labeling. Always read the product label before applying any pesticide. Updates and additional information for this guide are available at www.nysipm.cornell.edu/organic_guide. Please submit comments or suggested changes for these guides to [email protected]. This guide is published by the New York State Integrated Pest Management Program, which is funded through Cornell University, Cornell Cooperative Extension, the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and USDA-NIFA. Cornell Cooperative Extension provides equal program and employment opportunities. NYS IPM Publication number 225, June 2013. http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu. 2013 1 ORGANIC BLUEBERRY PRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................ 3 1. GENERAL ORGANIC MANAGEMENT PRACTICES .......................................................................................... 3 1.1 Organic Certification ........................................................................................................................................ 3 1.2 Organic Farm Plan ........................................................................................................................................... 3 2. SOIL HEALTH ............................................................................................................................................. 4 3. SITE SELECTION ......................................................................................................................................... 4 3.1 Organic Certification Site Requirements ......................................................................................................... 4 3.2 Soil and Air Drainage and Soil Depth ............................................................................................................... 5 3.3 Soil Testing ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.4 Irrigation Water Source ................................................................................................................................... 6 4. COVER CROPS – Before Planting and Row Middles .................................................................................... 6 4.1 Goals and Timing for Preplant Cover Crops .................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Cover Crops for Row Middles .......................................................................................................................... 7 5. VARIETY SELECTION .................................................................................................................................. 8 6. NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................................................... 8 6.1 Soil and Leaf Analysis ....................................................................................................................................... 9 6.2 Soil pH .............................................................................................................................................................. 9 6.3 Managing Nutrients ....................................................................................................................................... 10 6.4 Preparing a Nitrogen Budget ......................................................................................................................... 11 7. ORGANIC BLUEBERRY IPM ....................................................................................................................... 13 7.1 Developing a Blueberry IPM Strategy ............................................................................................................ 13 7.2 Weed Management ....................................................................................................................................... 14 7.3 Principles of Insect and Disease Management .............................................................................................. 15 7.4 DISEASES OF PRIMARY CONCERN .................................................................................................................. 16 7.5 OTHER DISEASES OF NOTE ............................................................................................................................ 22 7.6 INSECTS OF PRIMARY CONCERN ................................................................................................................... 26 7.7 MINOR AND SPORADIC INSECT PESTS ........................................................................................................... 32 7.8 Wildlife Management .................................................................................................................................... 36 7.9 Considerations During Harvest and Post-harvest .......................................................................................... 38 8. FOOD SAFETY ......................................................................................................................................... 38 9. SMALL-SCALE SPRAYER TECHNOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 39 9.1 Spraying Small Blueberry Plantings: .............................................................................................................. 39 9.2 Selecting a Small Sprayer for the Small, Organic Blueberry Planting ............................................................ 41 10. PESTICIDES MENTIONED IN THIS PUBLICATION ...................................................................................... 42 10.1 Pesticides Labeled for use in Organic Blueberry Production ...................................................................... 44 10.2 Pesticide Regulatory Considerations ........................................................................................................... 44 10.3 Optimizing Pesticide Effectiveness .............................................................................................................. 45 11. REFERENCES AND RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 45 12. GLOSSARY ............................................................................................................................................. 48 2013 2 ORGANIC BLUEBERRY PRODUCTION INTRODUCTION This guide for organic blueberry production is an outline of cultural and pest management practices and includes topics that have an impact on improving plant health and reducing pest problems. The guide is divided into sections, but the interrelated quality of organic cropping systems
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Multi-Species Mating Disruption in Cranberries (Ericales: Ericaceae): Early Evidence Using a Flowable Emulsion
    Journal of Insect Science (2017) 17(2): 54; 1–6 doi: 10.1093/jisesa/iex025 Research article Multi-Species Mating Disruption in Cranberries (Ericales: Ericaceae): Early Evidence Using a Flowable Emulsion Shawn A. Steffan,1,2,3 Elissa M. Chasen,1,2 Annie E. Deutsch,2,4 and Agenor Mafra-Neto5 1USDA-ARS Vegetable Crops Research Unit, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706 ([email protected]; elissa.chasen@ ars.usda.gov), 2Department of Entomology, University of Wisconsin, 1630 Linden Drive, Madison, WI 53706 (steffan@entomology. wisc.edu; [email protected]; [email protected]), 3Corresponding author, e-mail: ([email protected]), 4Door County University of Wisconsin-Extension, 421 Nebraska St., Sturgeon Bay, WI 54235 ([email protected]), and 5ISCA Technologies, Incorporated, 1230 W. Spring St., Riverside, CA 92507 ([email protected]) Subject Editor: Cesar Rodriguez-Saona Received 11 October 2016; Editorial decision 11 March 2017 Abstract Pheromone-based mating disruption has proven to be a powerful pest management tactic in many cropping systems. However, in the cranberry system, a viable mating disruption program does not yet exist. There are commercially available pheromones for several of the major pests of cranberries, including the cranberry fruit- worm, Acrobasis vaccinii Riley (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) and blackheaded fireworm, Rhopobota naevana (Hu¨ bner) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Previous studies have shown that mating disruption represents a promising approach for R. naevana management although carrier and delivery technologies have remained unresolved. The present study examined the suitability of Specialized Pheromone & Lure Application Technology (SPLAT; ISCA Technologies, Inc., Riverside, CA), a proprietary wax and oil blend, to serve as a pheromone carrier in the cranberry system.
    [Show full text]
  • Highbush Blueberry: Cultivation, Protection, Breeding and Biotechnology
    The European Journal of Plant Science and Biotechnology ©2007 Global Science Books Highbush Blueberry: Cultivation, Protection, Breeding and Biotechnology Daniele Prodorutti1* • Ilaria Pertot2 • Lara Giongo3 • Cesare Gessler2 1 Plant Protection Department, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy 2 Safecrop Centre, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy 3 Agrifood Quality Department, IASMA Research Centre, Via E. Mach 1, 38010 San Michele all’Adige (TN), Italy Corresponding author : * [email protected] ABSTRACT Highbush blueberry is one of the most commercially significant berry crops. It is mainly cultivated in the United States and Canada, but also in Europe, Australia, Chile and New Zealand. Production of this crop is likely to increase in response to increased consumer demand for healthy foods, including the antioxidant-rich blueberry. This review describes several issues and developments in sustainable blueberry farming, including agronomical and cultural techniques (mulching, irrigation, the beneficial effects of mycorrhizae and fertilization), disease management (biology and control of common and emerging diseases), pest management, pollinators (effects on fruit set and production), conventional breeding and molecular techniques for examining and engineering blueberry germplasm. This paper describes past problems and current challenges associated with the commercial production of highbush blueberry, as well as new approaches and techniques for
    [Show full text]
  • Florida Blueberry Leaf Disease Guide1 Douglas A
    PP348 Florida Blueberry Leaf Disease Guide1 Douglas A. Phillips, Norma C. Flor, and Philip F. Harmon2 This publication is intended for Florida blueberry growers different blueberry cultivars. Symptoms with different to use as a diagnostic field guide in the identification causes can have similar appearances, and more than and management of common leaf diseases on southern one disease can occur on the same leaf. Growers should highbush blueberry (SHB). Management recommendations consult UF/IFAS Extension or use a lab diagnostic service. include fungicide applications and horticultural inputs Blueberry disease samples can be sent to the UF/IFAS Plant intended to reduce disease severity. Diagnostic Center (plantpath.ifas.ufl.edu/extension/plant- diagnostic-center) or another diagnostic lab for accurate Introduction identification of the problem. Southern highbush blueberry (SHB) cultivars are com- Several leaf diseases affect SHB in Florida and have the mercially grown throughout much of Florida, in both potential to defoliate bushes. For fungal leaf diseases, deciduous and evergreen production systems. Growers in growers have many effective chemical management deciduous production should strive to keep leaves healthy options; however, proper product selection and timing of through flower bud differentiation in fall to ensure opti- application depends on correct disease diagnosis. Because mum yield potential. In evergreen production, it is critical fungicides are only effective for fungal diseases, differentiat- to maintain the prior year’s foliage through winter months ing between symptoms caused by fungi and other factors to support early fruit production the following season. In can help prevent unnecessary fungicide use and costs. both systems, leaves can be damaged by many factors, such as environmental conditions, chemical applications, insects, The first step in diagnosing the cause of leaf symptoms in and diseases.
    [Show full text]
  • Series I. Correspondence, 1871-1894 Box 1 Folder 1 Darwin to Riley
    Special Collections at the National Agricultural Library: Charles Valentine Riley Collection Series I. Correspondence, 1871-1894 Box 1 Folder 1 Darwin to Riley. June 1, 1871. Letter from Charles Darwin to Riley thanking him for report and instructions on noxious insects. Downs, Beckerham, Kent (England). (handwritten copy of original). Box 1 Folder 2 Koble to Riley. June 30, 1874. Letter from John C. Koble giving physical description of chinch bugs and explaining how the bugs are destroying corn crops in western Kentucky. John C. Koble of L. S. Trimble and Co., Bankers. Box 1 Folder 3 Saunders to Riley. Nov. 12, 1874. William Saunders receipt to C. V. Riley for a copy of descriptions of two insects that baffle the vegetable carnivora. William Saunders, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. Box 1 Folder 4 Young to Riley. Dec. 13, 1874. William Young describes the flat-headed borer and its effects on orchards during summer and winter seasons. From Palmyra Gate Co., Nebraska. Box 1 Folder 5 Saunders to Riley. Dec. 22, 1874. William Saunders receipt of notes of investigation on the insects associated with Sarracenia. William Saunders, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. Box 1 Folder 6 Bonhaw to Riley. Jan. 19, 1875. L. N. Bonhaw requesting a copy of his Missouri report, for him to establish a manual or handbook on entomology, and to find out about an insect that deposits eggs. Subject: tomato worm, hawk moth. 1 http://www.nal.usda.gov/speccoll/ Special Collections at the National Agricultural Library: Charles Valentine Riley Collection Box 1 Folder 7 Holliday to Riley.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Conditions in Alaska 2020
    Forest Service U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE Alaska Region | R10-PR-046 | April 2021 Forest Health Conditions in Alaska - 2020 A Forest Health Protection Report U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, State & Private Forestry, Alaska Region Karl Dalla Rosa, Acting Director for State & Private Forestry, 1220 SW Third Avenue, Portland, OR 97204, [email protected] Michael Shephard, Deputy Director State & Private Forestry, 161 East 1st Avenue, Door 8, Anchorage, AK 99501, [email protected] Jason Anderson, Acting Deputy Director State & Private Forestry, 161 East 1st Avenue, Door 8, Anchorage, AK 99501, [email protected] Alaska Forest Health Specialists Forest Service, Forest Health Protection, http://www.fs.fed.us/r10/spf/fhp/ Anchorage, Southcentral Field Office 161 East 1st Avenue, Door 8, Anchorage, AK 99501 Phone: (907) 743-9451 Fax: (907) 743-9479 Betty Charnon, Invasive Plants, FHM, Pesticides, [email protected]; Jessie Moan, Entomologist, [email protected]; Steve Swenson, Biological Science Technician, [email protected] Fairbanks, Interior Field Office 3700 Airport Way, Fairbanks, AK 99709 Phone: (907) 451-2799, Fax: (907) 451-2690 Sydney Brannoch, Entomologist, [email protected]; Garret Dubois, Biological Science Technician, [email protected]; Lori Winton, Plant Pathologist, [email protected] Juneau, Southeast Field Office 11175 Auke Lake Way, Juneau, AK 99801 Phone: (907) 586-8811; Fax: (907) 586-7848 Isaac Dell, Biological Scientist, [email protected]; Elizabeth Graham, Entomologist, [email protected]; Karen Hutten, Aerial Survey Program Manager, [email protected]; Robin Mulvey, Plant Pathologist, [email protected] State of Alaska, Department of Natural Resources Division of Forestry 550 W 7th Avenue, Suite 1450, Anchorage, AK 99501 Phone: (907) 269-8460; Fax: (907) 269-8931 Jason Moan, Forest Health Program Coordinator, [email protected]; Martin Schoofs, Forest Health Forester, [email protected] University of Alaska Fairbanks Cooperative Extension Service 219 E.
    [Show full text]
  • Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)
    DAVID MARCHAND STRATÉGIES DE PONTE ET D’ALIMENTATION LARVAIRE CHEZ LA PYRALE DE LA CANNEBERGE, ACROBASIS VACCINII (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE) Thèse présentée à la Faculté des études supérieures de l'Université Laval pour l’obtention du grade de Philosophiae Doctor (Ph. D.) Département de biologie FACULTÉ DES SCIENCES ET GÉNIE UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL QUÉBEC MAI 2003 © David Marchand, 2003 ii Résumé Chez les espèces d’insectes dont le développement larvaire nécessite plusieurs hôtes, la survie larvaire peut être dépendante à la fois du comportement d’oviposition des femelles et du comportement de recherche des larves. La présente thèse porte sur l'étude de ces deux comportements et leurs possibles impacts sur la performance larvaire de la pyrale de la canneberge, Acrobasis vaccinii (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), une espèce dont chaque larve a besoin de plusieurs fruits de canneberge, Vaccinium oxycoccos (Ericacae), pour compléter son développement. Dans un premier temps, j’ai démontré que les femelles en laboratoire pondent significativement plus souvent sur les plus gros fruits disponibles; la taille des larves sortant du premier fruit choisi par la femelle étant proportionnelle à la taille de ce fruit. Cependant, sur le terrain, cette préférence n’a pas été observée et mon étude met en évidence que la période d’oviposition survient tôt dans la saison, dès l’apparition des premiers fruits; ceci impliquant une faible variabilité dans la taille des sites de ponte disponibles. Cette étude démontre également une distribution hétérogène des fruits de canneberge en nature et une variabilité importante dans la production annuelle de fruits entre mes deux années d’étude. Le fait que les fruits puissent être rares certaines années serait une raison conduisant les femelles à accepter les fruits de plus faible qualité (fruits de petite taille).
    [Show full text]
  • 39. Blueberry Leaf Rust
    Wild Blueberry in a Context of Production Guide... Sustainable Development 39. Blueberry Leaf Rust Latin name: Naohidemyces vaccinii (Wint.) Sato, Katsuya et Hiratsuka (Thekopsora minima, Pucciniastrum vaccinii) French name: La rouille Blueberry leaf rust is present in most Québec blueberry fi elds, and its incidence seems to be increasing. It is generally found in one or more sections of a fi eld, often in association with other leaf infections such as powdery mildew and Septoria leaf spot. It has a growing tendency to spread throughout a fi eld where it is present, and infects fi elds both in growth years and crop years. It is characterized as rust-coloured pustules on the underside of leaves. So far in Québec, no infection of blueberry leaf rust alone has required fungicide treatment. DESCRIPTION The incidence of blueberry leaf rust starts to intensify in mid-July. For this reason it has little effect on fi elds that are in a crop year, since harvesting normally occurs in August. In a growth year however, leaf rust can cause extensive leaf spotting and premature leaf drop. By early September there can be signifi cant defoliation, and in severely affected fi elds the production of fl oral buds can be reduced by 30% or more. The symptoms are similar to other leaf diseases, consisting of brown spots in a variety of shapes and sizes, accompanied or not by the leaves turning yellow. However, blueberry leaf rust is easily distinguished by the pustules of rust on the underside of leaves (Figure 1). This fungus produces various types of spores and infections.
    [Show full text]
  • Thekopsora Minima - Occurrence - Prepared By: Julius Kühn-Institute, Institute for Plant Health On: 4 June, 2015, Dr
    1) Express – PRA for Thekopsora minima - Occurrence - Prepared by: Julius Kühn-Institute, Institute for Plant Health on: 4 June, 2015, Dr. Gritta Schrader; Dr. Wolfgang Maier (Institute for Epidemiology and Pathogen Diagnostics) (translated by Elke Vogt-Arndt) Initiation: Occurrence of blueberry rust on blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum) in a nursery in Lower Saxony Express - PRA Thekopsora minima P. Syd. & Syd. 1915 Phytosanitary Risk for high medium low Germany Phytosanitary Risk for high medium low EU-MS Certainty of Assessment high medium low Conclusion The fungus Thekopsora minima is endemic in eastern North America and Japan and is not yet established in Germany. In 2002, it presumably was found for the first time in the EU in Southwest Spain but was wrongly identified as the endemic Pucciniastrum vaccinii (Naohidemyces vaccinii). Up to now T. minima is neither listed in the Annexes of the Dir. 2000/29/EC nor by EPPO. Thekopsora minima infests the highbush blueberry Vaccinium corymbosum which is native to North America and various Rhododendrons and Azaleae as well as various further genera of Ericaceae. Two Tsuga-species are alternating hosts. It can be assumed that due to suitable climate conditions Thekopsora minima is capable to establish outdoors in Germany. An establishment in South European EU-Member States would also be possible. Due to its damage potential for cultivated blueberries, Rhododendrons and other Ericaceae, Thekopsora minima poses a considerable phytosanitary risk for Germany and other EU- Member States. Based on this risk analysis, it can be assumed that the pest is able to establish and cause considerable damage in Germany or other Member States.
    [Show full text]
  • Blueberry Rust
    Plant Disease Oct. 2008 PD-51 Blueberry Rust Scot Nelson Department of Plant and Environmental Protection Sciences everal years ago, blueberry (Vaccinium spp.) seemed and the United States). Vaccinium species are usually to be a diversified crop with some promise for found in acidic soils that may be sandy or peaty or SHawai‘i. Exceptional yield potentials were found at a composed of other organic matter such as leaf litter, trial planting of six southern highbush blueberry variet- especially that from pine trees. A few subtropical and ies (Vaccinium darrowi) at CTAHR’s Mealani Research neotropical species are loosely epiphytic. Station near Waimea on the island of Hawai‘i (Zee et al. 2006). Initially, there did not seem to be any significant The pathogen pest and disease problems for blueberry at the site (Hum- The rust fungus is Naohidemyces vaccinii (Wint.) Sato, mer et al. 2007). Katsuya and Hiratsuka; it had previously been named This changed in 2007 when a fungal disease known as Pucciniastrum vaccinii (Wint.) Joerst. and P. myrtilli blueberry rust occurred and caused great damage to the Arthur, and much of the literature about it still refers experimental crop, despite fungicide applications. The to it as Pucciniastrum vaccinii. The pathogen was first epidemic was so severe that USDA’s Pacific Basin Agri- collected in Hawai‘i in 1921. cultural Research Center terminated its involvement with N. vaccinii is heteroecious (having two hosts in its the blueberry trials, citing the rust as one of the principal life cycle). Hemlock (Tsuga sp.) is the alternate host. factors (F. Zee, personal communication).
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Topic Description 217-G-263
    1. Content of the ‘Topic Description’ document 1.1. Topic area Pest Risk analysis. 1.2. Topic title Blueberry rust caused by Thekopsora minima – improved risk assessment by supplying quick and reliable identification tools and by performing infection studies. 1.3. Description of the problem the research should solve Blueberry rust of the North American highbush blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum) caused by Thekopsora minima has been reported from Germany for the first time in 2015 (Schrader & Maier). Because of a complicated systematic history the disease-causing agent was probably often mislabelled as Pucciniastrum vaccinii. This allows for confusion with the European blueberry rust on the native Vaccinium myrtillus, because Pucciniastrum vaccinii is a synonym of Naohidemyces vaccinii. The confused systematic history also causes problems in reliably drawing distribution maps for the rust species responsible for the diseases on the North American versus the European blueberries based on currently published reports. The suggested project is aiming to (1) provide a quick and reliable identification of the different blueberry rust fungi. We have built DNA data sets, which could be used as “one-click-identification-tools” by other researchers or plant protection officers clearly distinguishing T. minima from N. vaccinii. By using these tools the confusing use of the two names could be eventually ended. (2) By clarifying the nomenclatural problems reliable distribution maps of the relevant fungi could be drawn. (3) Develop a qPCR protocol to enable detection in asymptomatic tissue during the latent period of infection, (which could be important for testing import consignments.) (4) It is currently unclear whether Thekopsora minima can potentially infect the native European blueberry (Vaccinium myrtillus).
    [Show full text]
  • Using Hyperspectral Remote Sensing As a Tool for Early Detection of Leaf Rust in Blueberries
    Using hyperspectral remote sensing as a tool for early detection of leaf rust in blueberries V. Ahlawat 1, O. Jhorar 1, L. Kumar 1, D. Backhouse 1 1School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale-2351, New South Wales, Australia- (vahlawat, jhorar2, lkumar, dbachou)@une.edu.au Abstract disease detection before the pustules appear and usefulness in detecting leaf rust in blueberry has never been conducted for Monitoring and early detection of leaf rust caused by the crop. This study therefore, was conducted with the objective fungus Naohidemyces vaccinii in plants is critical for to investigate the possibility of using hyperspectral remote sustainable production of blueberries in Australia. In this sensing data as a tool for early or pre-visual detection of leaf study, the main aim was to use hyperspectral remote rust in blueberries. sensing as a tool to detect leaf rust at an early stage in blueberries. Reflectance was measured in the wavelength 2. MATERIAL AND METHODS range from 350 to 2500nm using a handheld hyperspectral spectro-radiometer. Differences in spectral reflectance were 2.1 Glasshouse Experiment seen at a number of wavelengths in the visible, NIR and SWIR regions for the Sharpblue variety under field 2.1.1. Study sites and materials conditions. In glasshouse conditions the OB1 and Sharpblue varieties showed differences between inoculated and un- The experiment was conducted in the glasshouse located at the inoculated plants in NIR and SWIR regions. The NIR University of New England in the New England region of New region showed significant spectral difference between the South Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • TITLE: Isolation and Identification of Host-Plant Attractants for Cranberry Weevil and Cranberry Fruitworm
    RIPM 2006 Rodriguez-Saona Proposal TITLE: Isolation and identification of host-plant attractants for cranberry weevil and cranberry fruitworm SUMMARY The proposed research will investigate the role of volatiles from flower buds, flowers, and fruit as attractants for the cranberry weevil (CBW) and cranberry fruitworm (CBFW), two major pests in cranberries and blueberries in the Northeast, with the goal to develop traps for monitoring CBW and CBFW populations. In the past, pheromone traps used for monitoring adults of the CBFW have failed to predict fruit damage, and no traps are available to monitor CBW populations. New monitoring tools will prevent unnecessary insecticide applications, reduce management costs, and decrease the development of resistant populations. This proposal will investigate the behavioral and antennal electrophysiological responses of CBW and CBFW to host-plant volatiles, in order to isolate and identify attractants for the development of new traps. Olfactometer assays will be conducted to determine the response of male and female CBW and CBFW to flower buds, flower, and fruit volatiles. Headspace volatile emissions from flowers and fruit will be collected and analyzed via gas chromatography (GC-FID). Active volatile compounds will be identified by coupled gas chromatography and electroantennographic detection (GC-EAD). These studies will provide evidence of host-plant attractants for the development of traps to monitor CBW and CBFW. PROBLEM, BACKGROUND, AND JUSTIFICATION: Economic Importance of Crops. Highbush blueberries (Vaccinium corymbosum L.) and cranberries (Vaccinium macrocarpon Aiton) are both native to North America, and have been under commercial cultivation for many years. These are two important crops in the northeast United States: blueberries are grown on 48,310 acres, primarily in Michigan, New Jersey, and Georgia (USDA-NASS 2006a).
    [Show full text]