QUARTERLY Vol
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Utah Plant Pest UTAH PESTS Diagnostic Laboratory USU Extension Summer 2018 / QUARTERLY Vol. XII NEWSLETTER IN THIS ISSUE 20+ Years of Tree Fruit IPM Impacts in Utah p. 01 Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Management Survey p. 03 Resistance to Thousand Cankers Disease p. 04 Plant Disease Diagnosis 20+ Years of Tree Fruit IPM Impacts in Utah p. 06 Invasive Pest Spotlight: Utah The USU Extension Tree Fruit Integrated mating disruption, nutrient testing, irrigation Imposes Firewood Quarantine p. 07 Pest Management (IPM) Program has been monitoring, beneficial identification, and in existence for over 30 years. Periodic plant habitat for beneficial insects), and Indicator Plants for Pest grower surveys provide assessment of IPM 21% considered themselves high-level IPM- Activity - Another IPM Tool use, grower perceptions and needs, and users (low-level plus at least four additional p. 08 impacts. Our first comprehensive survey in practices). The most-used IPM practices Turf Billbug Management - 1996 resulted in a journal article (Alston and were visual monitoring (81%), pruning out Timing It Right Reding 1998). Two additional surveys of the diseases (77%), identification of beneficial p. 10 industry were conducted in 2010 and 2017. insects and mites (60%), resistant rootstocks Skeletonizers in the Closet It is informative to the Utah IPM Program to and traps for pest monitoring (54%), and p. 11 assess trends and changes in over time. avoid disturbing mites in ground cover and habitat plantings to promote beneficial IPM in the News p. 13 There has been substantial growth in insects and mites (52%). The Utah IPM the proportion of tree fruit growers who Program is proud to have helped growers Picture of the Quarter self-identify as IPM-users: 46% in 1996, make significant strides forward along the p. 15 65% in 2010, and 71% in 2017. In 2017, IPM continuum. 48% of growers classified themselves NEW FACT SHEETS as low-level users of IPM (a set of A New Utah Forest Insect Pest: basic IPM practices Balsam Woolly Adelgid including regular Root Weevils pest monitoring, use of thresholds, and Small Hive Beetle pesticide rotation). Medium-level IPM users made up 31% of the growers (low- level plus at least two more practices, such as pheromone traps, continued on next page UTAH PESTS TEAM 20+ Years of Tree Fruit IPM Impacts in Utah, continued Diane Alston When asked about pesticide use changes in the last five years, the proportion of farms with Entomologist decreased and unchanged pesticide use was greater in 2017 than 2010 across all fruit crops. Head, Biology Dept. In 2010, pesticide use increased on 22-35% of fruit farms; whereas in 2017, use increased [email protected] on only 7-13% of farms. Utah has not yet experienced severe disruption of IPM programs by 435-797-2516 invasive fruit pests, such as spotted wing drosophila and brown marmorated stink bug, seen in other fruit production regions. Although both pests occur in the state, IPM programs based Ryan Davis on mating disruption and primary reliance on narrow-spectrum insecticides for targeted pests Arthropod Diagnostician School IPM Associate (codling moth, peach twig borer, and cherry fruit fly) are still in practice. [email protected] 435-797-2435 Proportion of Survey Respondents Who Reported a Change in Pesticide Use Marion Murray 2010 Survey 2017 Survey IPM Project Leader Decreased and Decreased and Utah Pests Quarterly Editor Tree Fruit Crop Unchanged Increased Unchanged Increased [email protected] 435-797-0776 Apple 78% 22% 87% 13 % Peach 78 22 89 12 Claudia Nischwitz Sweet Cherry 66 34 93 7 Plant Pathologist [email protected] Tart Cherry 65 35 91 9 435-797-7569 Ricardo Ramirez Growers’ perceived impediments to using IPM have dramatically decreased since 1996. Entomologist Especially notable are the tremendous declines in concerns about higher cost, higher risk, poor [email protected] pest control, lower yield, and lower fruit quality with IPM programs. The greatest impediments 435-797-8088 remaining are lack of knowledge and training, difficulties in using IPM practices, and a lack of interest in IPM (although this latter impediment was only 20% in 2017). These results provide Lori Spears evidence of effective education and training; however, further improvements can still be made. USU CAPS Coordinator [email protected] 801-668-4056 Utah Plant Pest Diagnostic Lab BNR Room 203 Utah State University 5305 Old Main Hill Logan, UT 84322 To subscribe, click here. In addition to rising concerns about disruption of IPM programs from invasive pests, a major All images © UTAH PESTS concern for Utah’s tree fruit industry is encroaching urbanization (see graph on next page). and USU Extension unless The proportion of land adjacent to commercial tree fruit farms with urbanization has increased otherwise credited. over time. In 2017, 39% of farms reported that land adjacent to their farm was more than 75% developed with homes and/or businesses present (up from 32% in 2010), and only 39% of farms had less than 25% of land development adjacent to their farm (down from 46% in 2010). If Utah’s commercial tree fruit industry is to remain viable into the future, the state and local utahpests.usu.edu communities must invest in protecting agricultural lands. continued on next page www.utahpests.usu.edu Utah Pests Quarterly / Summer 2018 / page 2 20+ Years of Tree Fruit IPM Impacts in Utah, continued The Utah IPM Program has made great strides in increasing the use of IPM, decreasing pesticide use, and removing perceived barriers to IPM. As farmer demographics and land use changes over time, Utah has moved to a greater proportion of small-acreage, urban-based farms, and fewer large-scale fruit farms. As Utah’s population continues to increase along the Wasatch Front (a narrow corridor of land between the Rocky Mountains and Great Basin), the demand for local and high quality fruit production based on IPM practices will likely continue to increase. Through ongoing assessment, Utah’s IPM Program is prepared to adapt to future changing needs. Diane Alston, Entomologist, and Marion Murray, IPM Project leader The size of fruit farms is declining, the majority (56%) are only 1-5 acres in size, and only 18% are > 50 acres in size. The percentage of the growers’ income that comes Reference from fruit production has also declined: only 25% of fruit Alston, D. G. and M. E. Reding. 1998. Factors influencing adoption growers garner > 75% of their income from the farm; the and educational outreach of integrated pest management. Journal of majority (63%) earn < 25% of their income from the farm. Extension 36(3). INVASIVE SPECIES SPOTLIGHT Brown Marmorated Stink Bug Management Survey A nation-wide survey is currently underway to gather information from farmers and growers on the economic impact of the brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB) on agriculture. The objective of the survey is to better provide you with the help you need in managing this pest. We’d like to find out when BMSB became a problem for you, where you currently get information on how to control them, how much damage you have suffered, your use of and interest in various management practices, and your feelings about biological control methods and their potential for your operation. The results of the survey will be used by Extension programs across the United States to fine tune management advice for the BMSB and help prioritize research and outreach activities. The link to the online survey along with more information about the survey can be found on the StopBMSB.org If you’d like to participate, the survey should take you website. about 20-25 minutes to complete. Your individual survey responses will be confidential and the data collected If you have any questions about the Brown Marmorated will only be reported in summaries. Your participation Stink Bug Management Survey for Commercial Producers, is voluntary and you can decide not to answer a given please contact Jayson Harper by e-mail at [email protected] question if you choose. or call 814-863-8638. www.utahpests.usu.edu Utah Pests Quarterly / Summer 2018 / page 3 GUEST AUTHOR SPOTLIGHT Resistance to Thousand Cankers Disease Elisa Lauritzen was recently awarded her M.S. degree in Biology at USU where she studied walnut tree resistance to thousand cankers disease under Dr. Claudia Nischwitz. This fall, she will start work toward her PhD at Penn State University under Dr. Beth Gugino, where she will continue her passion for Extension and plant pathology. We wish her the best of luck! Thousand cankers disease (TCD) is a disease that is Distribution of Thousand Cankers Disease as of Aug. 1, 2017 detrimental to black walnut (Juglans nigra). The disease is the result of the symbiotic relationship between the walnut twig beetle (WTB) vector, Pityophthorus juglandis, and the pathogenic fungus, Geosmithia morbida. The beetles burrow into the walnut bark along the trunk and branches to feed, lay eggs, and overwinter. Thousands of WTB can enter a tree, and at each pin-prick-sized entry point, they introduce the pathogen which colonizes the phloem and generates inky, dark brown to black cankers. Thousands of cankers will then expand and coalesce until nutrient and water flow is restricted, effectively girdling the tree. The TCD confirmed disease name was derived from the overwhelming number Quarantine Issued of cankers that develop as a result of WTB attacks. Source: www.thousandcankers.com The Insect and the Disease Thousand cankers disease has been confirmed in 15 states The WTB is native to the Southwest and is thought to have and in parts of Northern Italy. As a result, quarantines of co-evolved with the native Arizona walnut (J.