DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Production Research Report 2011 — 2012

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Production Research Report 2011 — 2012 California Strawberry Commission ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT 2011 — 2012 ® CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY COMMISSION ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT 2011 - 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction – Message From The Research Committee Chairman ................................................ 5 PATHOLOGY A Comprehensive Approach To Management of Wilt Diseases Caused by Fusarium oxysporum and Verticillium dahlia ..................................................................................................... 9 Dr. Thomas R. Gordon Operating A State-wide Strawberry Disease Diagnostic Services Center ...................................... 21 Steven Koike Continuing Development of Management Strategies for Charcoal Rot (Macrophomina phaseolina) of Strawberry in California .................................................................. 27 Steven Koike Fungicide Trials For Fruit and Foliar Pathogens of Strawberry ....................................................... 35 Mark Bolda Steven Koike PLANT NUTRITION Establishing Nutrient Management Practices For High-yield Strawberry Production ..................... 41 Dr. Timothy Hartz IRRIGATION MANAGEMENT Effects of Sprinkler, Partial Sprinkler/Drip and Drip Only Irrigation on Strawberry Transplants ....... 59 Dr. Stuart Styles ENTOMOLOGY California Strawberry Commission Lygus Management Program in Strawberries: Evaluating the Degree-day Model and Insecticide Resistance ....................................................... 77 Dr. Hillary Thomas Strawberry Insect and Mite Control ................................................................................................. 85 Dr. Frank G. Zalom WEED SCIENCE Weed Management In Strawberry ................................................................................................. 101 Dr. Steven Fennimore 2 CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY COMMISSION ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT FARMING WITHOUT FUMIGANTS Efficacy of Drip Treatments for Management of Macrophomina and Fusarium Pathogens of Strawberry ......................................................................................................................................111 Dr. Husein Ajwa Steven Koikev Effect of Substrate Air-filled Porosity on Growth of Strawberry ..................................................... 121 Dr. Richard Evans Active Management of Soil Microbial Communities to Limit Soilborne Disease Development in Strawberry Production Systems .................................................................................................... 133 Dr. Mark Mazzola Non-fumigant Strategies for Soilborne Disease Control in California Strawberry Production Systems ......................................................................................................................................... 145 Dr. Carol Shennan Evaluation of a Substrate Based Raised Bed Trough (RaBeT) Strawberry Production System in California ....................................................................................................................................... 161 Dr. Hillary Thomas REGULATORY Predicting Harvester Pesticide Exposure From Leaf Residues ..................................................... 171 Dr. Robert Krieger APPENDICES Commission Members and Alternates for 2011-2012 ................................................................... 184 Research Committee Members 2011-2012 .................................................................................. 186 2012 Grower Resource and Contact Information ......................................................................... 187 3 2011 - 2012 RESEARCH PROJECTS 4 CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY COMMISSION ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT Introduction A Message From the Research Committee Chairman The 2011-2012 Annual Production Research Report summarizes the results of 15 research and extension projects funded by the California Strawberry Commission. These reports are progress updates for the research projects funded by the commission during the 2010-2011 fiscal year. These projects include strawberry nutrition, Lygus bug monitoring, farming without fumigants and fumigant emission reduction, and many others. The commission is a leading funding source for strawberry production research and we hope that these reports help strawberry growers address production problems. These reports are also intended to document research that may not be readily available in other in other publications. It is hoped that these reports will be used by researchers in California and elsewhere to guide their own research. On the behalf of the California strawberry industry and the California Strawberry Commission, I would like to thank the researchers and their associates for their dedication to the needs of the California strawberry industry. California strawberry growers face increasing production and regulatory challenges and the research efforts of these researchers are critical for the continued viability of the California strawberry industry. I also want to thank the Research Committee, the Research Committee Leadership Group (Will Doyle, Bryan Gresser, Brian Driscoll and Dan Legard) and the members of the Science Advisory Committee for their help to ensure that we fund projects appropriate for the California strawberry industry. I would like to especially thank the many growers, PCA’s and other members of the strawberry industry who have provided assistance, plants, field plots, labor and materials for this work. I also want to thank the California Strawberry Nurserymen’s Association, The University of California and the USDA for their continuing support of the commission’s research programs. Sincerely, Carl Lindgren Research Committee Chairman 5 2011 - 2012 RESEARCH PROJECTS 6 CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY COMMISSION ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT PATHOLOGY 7 2011 - 2012 RESEARCH PROJECTS 8 CALIFORNIA STRAWBERRY COMMISSION ANNUAL PRODUCTION RESEARCH REPORT PATHOLOGY A Comprehensive Approach to Management of Wilt Diseases Caused by Fusarium oxysporum and Verticillium dahliae Principle Investigator Dr. Thomas R. Gordon University of California Department of Plant Pathology One Shields Avenue Davis, CA 95616 (530) 754-9893 [email protected] Co-Principal Investigators Steven T. Koike, UC Cooperative Extension Oleg Daugovish, UC Cooperative Extension Cooperators Douglas V. Shaw and Kirk D. Larson Plant Sciences Department U.C. Davis SUMMARY Our research in 2011 was directed toward the study of vascular wilt diseases caused by the soilborne pathogens, Verticillium dahliae and Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. fragariae. A central focus was on development and characterization of genetic resistance, which will make an increasingly important contribution toward management of wilt diseases in the future. Selecting for resistance to Verticillium wilt over many years has significantly increased levels of resistance to this disease, and in 2011, 63% of 61 breeding lines tested had resistance scores of 4.5 or higher (on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being a disease-free plant). We conducted a second year of tests in naturally infested soil to confirm the efficacy of resistance to Verticillium wilt. The results showed that ranking of cultivars based on susceptibility was essentially the same when infection occurred from exposure to inoculum in soil as when plants were root-dip inoculated. This indicates that genotypes identified as resistant by the screening procedure used in the University of California (UC) breeding program should be resistant under field conditions as well. In 2011, we continued development and implementation of a procedure to screen for resistance to Fusarium wilt. This included a comparison of inoculations with a single isolate and a mix of five isolates, and also a comparison of two different inoculum levels. Although disease was somewhat more severe in plants inoculated with the higher dose, the ranking of genotypes was similar. There was not a significant difference in results obtained with the single isolate or the mix. 9 2011 - 2012 RESEARCH PROJECTS As in past years, ‘Ventana’ and ‘San Andreas’ proved to be resistant to Fusarium wilt, whereas ‘Camarosa’ and ‘Albion’ were highly susceptible. Resistance scores for 26 breeding lines ranged from 1.0 to 5.0, with a mean of 3.3. Because grower observations suggested that soil acidification might render plants more prone to Fusarium wilt, we conducted experiments to test for an effect of pH on development of disease. Our results indicate that soil pH has at most only a weak effect on disease development, at least under controlled conditions. We continued to monitor the occurrence of Fusarium wilt and dieback caused by Macrophomina phaseolina, within California. Although Fusarium wilt has thus far been a serious problem only in Ventura County, recent finds indicate it may now also be established in the Santa Maria and Watsonville areas. Macrophomina has been confirmed to occur in all of the major strawberry production regions in the state. INTRODUCTION Historically, Verticillium wilt, caused by the pathogenic soilborne fungus, Verticillium dahliae, has been a major constraint on strawberry production in California. This disease remains a serious problem for organic strawberry growers and is of increasing concern for conventional producers where flat fumigation with methyl bromide and chloropicrin is no longer an option. When a plant suffering from Verticillium wilt dies, the pathogen produces large numbers of melanized, multi-cellular survival structures known as microsclerotia, which
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Role of Biopesticides in Sustainable Agriculture Nature Fighting Nature Susan M
    The role of biopesticides in sustainable agriculture Nature fighting nature Susan M. Boyetchko Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan,Canada [email protected] Introduction • Investment in biopesticide R&D in Canada has progressed • perceptions and attitudes towards chemical pesticides have changed • renewed interest in biopesticides, more products being registered since 2000 • social and economic drivers – legislative changes – regulatory policies – changing attitudes of consumers – greater interest by small-to-medium sized enterprises (SME’s) What are biopesticides? • beneficial use of living organisms to (directly or indirectly) suppress, inhibit, damage, or kill a pest or pest population • biocontrol agents: e.g. fungi, bacteria, viruses, natural products • inundative application, applied repeatedly, annually • easy to use and mass-produce, acceptable shelf life • host specific (target pests/pathogens, group of related pathogens) • no detrimental effects on non-target organisms • environmental and toxicological safety standards Biopesticides – Opportunities/Need • pesticide-resistance management • control of invasive alien species • reduced risk pest control products (new active ingredients & new modes of action) • expand label registration of existing biopesticide products; more products registered in Canada • reduce chemical residues (soil, water, food) • IPM in crop production systems (e.g. conventional, organic, no/low pesticide use) • where control measures (e.g. chemicals) are inadequate/unavailable/deregistered Biopesticides = Next Generation of Pest Control Products (transformative research) Biopesticide Market Global Biopesticides and Synthetic Pesticides Market ($millions) Type 2003 2004 2005 2010 Ave. Ann. growth rate Biopesticides 468 562 672 1,075 9.9 Synthetic 27,144 26,600 26,076 24,205 -1.5 Pesticides Total 27,612 27,162 26,748 25,280 -1.1 Biopesticides as % of total 1.69 2.07 2.51 4.25 from Business Communications Company, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • S525 Certified Cabs Shouldn't Be Used in Lieu Of
    July 2002 Volume 15, No. 4 S525 Certified Cabs Shouldn’t Be Used in Lieu of PPE 1 S525 Certified Cabs Shouldn’t Be Used in Lieu of PPE The American Society of Agricultural Engineers (ASAE) now recommends using agricul- tural cabs certified to meet ASAE standard S525-1.1 as a supplement to personal protec- tive equipment (PPE), rather than as a replacement for it. S525 was initially created to 2 Pesticide Protection: Cabs certify specially equipped cabs intended to provide equivalent protection of some specific on Sprayers and Tractors PPE listed on pesticide labels. Two main features of S525-certified cabs are special cab filters for removing organic pesticide vapors, and positive-pressure ventilation. These cabs use filters with a tested and 3 Custom Hay Balers, Take proven efficiency at removing pesticide vapors to provide a supply of filtered air to the Note climate-control system in the cab. In addition, the cabs are well sealed and maintain higher pressure inside the cab, so any air leakage would be of filtered air leaking out rather than of contaminated air leaking in. An in-cab pressure indicator is required so the 3 Systemic, Local Systemic, operator can monitor the pressure and be assured that the filtration system is functioning or Translaminar: What’s the properly. Low in-cab pressure could indicate excessive air leakage (as from a poorly sealed Difference? door) or a plugged air filter in need of replacement. US–EPA personnel endorsed S525 in 1998, allowing operators of equipment with 4 Study Shows Turf certified cabs to spray without some specific forms of PPE.
    [Show full text]
  • Integration of Biological Control Into Ipm Systems for Aquatic Weeds
    INTEGRATION OF BIOLOGICAL CONTROL INTO IPM SYSTEMS FOR AQUATIC WEEDS James J. Marois, Department of Plant Pathology, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 USA ABSTRACT The development of effective long-term control programs for aquatic weeds is dependent upon the ability to integrate biological, chemical, and cultural control strategies. Successful IPM programs are dependent upon a sound knowledge of the cropping system (especially the inputs and outputs of the system), the biology of the aquatic weed pest, and the biology of the control agent(s). There are several ways to analyze these complex systems, from the molecular to the community level. This presentation will emphasize the ecological interactions that should be con- sidered. INTRODUCTION approach may be to augment or inundate the system with the control organisms at specific times in the Integration of biological control of paddy and cropping history. This is especially true when the aquatic weeds into integrated pest management control agent is a fungus or bacterium, since these programs is a necessary goal for the implementation are relatively easy to produce in large quantities and of sustainable rice production systems. To reach are dependent upon specific environmental this goal, however, a number of obstacles must be conditions for greatest efficacy. When a fungus is overcome. Most important is the current status of used to control a weed in this manner, it is referred biological control of aquatic weeds which, in this to as a bioherbicide (Emge and Templeton 1981). discussion, will be defined narrowly as the use of Successful integration of control agents, either beneficial microorganisms or their gene products pathogens or insects, is dependent upon the for pest control.
    [Show full text]
  • Introductory Chapter: Need of Bioherbicide for Weed Control 3
    DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.77958 ProvisionalChapter chapter 1 Introductory Chapter: NeedNeed ofof BioherbicideBioherbicide forfor WeedWeed Control RamalingamRamalingam Radhakrishnan Radhakrishnan Additional information is available at the end of the chapter http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.77958 1. Introduction Food production is affected by climatic changes and environmental pollutions. The growth and yield of crop plants are significantly declined due to the effect of weed (a plant considered unwanted in a particular location) growth in farming fields. Weeds are strong competitors against crops to the absorption of water and nutrition from the soil, and also occupy more soil area, which result to suppress the crop growth [1, 2]. The integrated approach of weed control management (including tillage, mechanical way of weed removal, and crop rotation) can able to effectively decrease the weed growth 3[ –5]. The application of chemical-based her- bicides, that is, 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D), glyphosate, and dicamba suppress the germination and growth of weeds, but the prolonged application of those chemicals could not effectively control the weeds and causes to develop the resistant weed germplasms and also pollutes the environment [6]. In addition, Kim et al. [7] reported that 32% of food products in Korea are unsuitable for consumption due to higher accumulation of pesticides. Recently, sev- eral biological organisms or their extracts are utilized to integrate weed control strategies [8]. 2. Importance of bioherbicides Bioherbicides are either living organisms or the natural metabolites that have the ability to con- trol weed populations without harming the environment [9, 10]. The numbers of bacterial and fungal species demonstrate their host-specific or nonspecific bioherbicide activities against sus- ceptible weed populations [9].
    [Show full text]
  • Biopesticides: Strategies for Discovery, Development, and Adoption
    Biopesticides: Strategies for Discovery, Development, and Adoption What are Biopesticides? Objectives Biopesticides are living organisms and/or their natural • identify, evaluate, and develop biopesticides for control of products that control or suppress pest populations such as insect pests, weeds, and plant diseases insects, weeds, and plant diseases. Greater awareness and demand for safer foods and the environment have spurred • develop platform technologies relevant to all facets of interest by the public for reduced risk pest control products. biopesticide research including fermentation, formulation, Recently, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) has application technology, and molecular biology invested in a National Biopesticide Programme for discovery and development of new biopesticide products for registration • develop reduced-risk pest control products that address in Canada and worldwide. public demand for safer foods and environmental health • develop strategies to increase adoption of Integrated Pest Management (IPM) technologies National Biopesticide Study: Team of 20 scientists / 8 research centres For more information contact: Dr. Susan M. Boyetchko Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 107 Science Place Telephone: (306) 956-7619 Saskatoon Research Centre Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 0X2 E-mail: [email protected] Dr. Antonet Svircev Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada 4902 Victoria Ave N Telephone: (905) 562-4113 (227) Southern Crop Protection and Food Research Centre Vineland, ON, Canada L0R 2E0 E-mail: [email protected] © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2009 AAFC No. 10733 Cat. No. A52-120/2009E-PDF ISBN 978-1-100-11640-2 www.agr.gc.ca Aussi offert en français sous le titre : Stratégies pour la découverte, le développement et l’adoption de biopesticides SPCS (E.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioherbicides in Organic Horticulture
    horticulturae Review Bioherbicides in Organic Horticulture Xiaoya Cai and Mengmeng Gu * Department of Horticultural Sciences, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, College Station, TX 77843, USA; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-979-845-8657; Fax: +1-979-845-8906 Academic Editor: Douglas D. Archbold Received: 8 October 2015; Accepted: 4 January 2016; Published: 29 March 2016 Abstract: Organic horticulture producers rank weeds as one of their most troublesome, time-consuming, and costly production problems. With the increasing significance of organic horticulture, the need for new bioherbicides to control weeds has grown. Potential bioherbicides may be developed from pathogens, natural products, and extracts of natural materials. Fungal and bacteria pathogens are two important types of microbial agents that have potential to be used as bioherbicides. The byproducts of natural sources such as dried distillers grains with solubles (DDGS), corn gluten meal (CGM), and mustard seed meals (MSMs) have shown herbicidal activities in controlling many weed species. Some essential oil extracts have shown bioherbicide potential as well. The efficacy of a bioherbicide is the main limiting factor for its application, and it may be affected by environmental factors such as humidity and moisture, the application method, the spectrum of the bioherbicide, and the type of formulation. In addition to efficacy, costs and concerns about potential human health threats are also limitations to bioherbicide use. As the integration of bioherbicide technology into current weed management systems may help manage herbicide resistance, reduce production costs, and increase crop yields, future research should involve the development of more cost-effective and efficient bioherbicides for control of weeds, as well as the optimization of production methods and cultural practices with use of candidate bioherbicides.
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, Battalion Pro,09/30/2020
    U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EPA Reg. Number: Date of Issuance: Office of Pesticide Programs Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division (7511P) 91213-3 9/30/2020 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20460 NOTICE OF PESTICIDE: Term of Issuance: X Registration Reregistration Unconditional (under FIFRA, as amended) Name of Pesticide Product: Battalion Pro Name and Address of Registrant (include ZIP Code): U.S. Department of Agriculture – Agricultural Research Service George Washington Carver Center 5601 Sunnyside Ave. Beltsville, MD 20705 Note: Changes in labeling differing in substance from that accepted in connection with this registration must be submitted to and accepted by the Biopesticides and Pollution Prevention Division prior to use of the label in commerce. In any correspondence on this product, always refer to the above EPA Registration Number. On the basis of information furnished by the registrant, the above named pesticide is hereby registered under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA or the Act). Registration is in no way to be construed as an endorsement or recommendation of this product by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In order to protect health and the environment, the Administrator, on his or her motion, may at any time suspend or cancel the registration of a pesticide in accordance with the Act. The acceptance of any name in connection with the registration of a product under the Act is not to be construed as giving the registrant a right to exclusive use of the name or to its use if it has been covered by others. This product is unconditionally registered in accordance with FIFRA section 3(c)(5) provided that you: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Herbicide Resistance: Toward an Understanding of Resistance Development and the Impact of Herbicide-Resistant Crops William K
    Weed Science 2012 Special Issue:2–30 Herbicide Resistance: Toward an Understanding of Resistance Development and the Impact of Herbicide-Resistant Crops William K. Vencill, Robert L. Nichols, Theodore M. Webster, John K. Soteres, Carol Mallory-Smith, Nilda R. Burgos, William G. Johnson, and Marilyn R. McClelland* Table of Contents and how they affect crop production and are affected by management practices, and to present the environmental impacts Executive Summary……………………………………… 2 of herbicide-resistant crops. This paper will summarize aspects of I. Introduction: A Summary of Weed Science Practices herbicide resistance in five different sections: (1) a description of and Concepts………………………………………… 3 basic weed science management practices and concepts, (2) II. Resistance and Tolerance in Weed Science………… 12 definitions of resistance and tolerance in weed science, (3) envi- III. Environmental Impacts of Herbicide Resistance in ronmental impacts of herbicide-resistant crops, (4) strategies for Crops………………………………………………… 15 management of weed species shifts and herbicide-resistant weeds IV. Strategies for Managing Weed Species Shifts and Devel- and adoption by the agricultural community, and (5) gene-flow opment of Herbicide-Resistant Weeds…………………… 16 potential from herbicide-resistant crops. V. Gene Flow from Herbicide-Resistant Crops………… 19 Literature Cited…………………………………………… 24 Section 1: Introduction. To avoid or delay the development of resistant weeds, a diverse, integrated program of weed management practices is required to minimize reliance
    [Show full text]
  • Bioint Kremer
    The Role of Bioherbicides in Weed Management ROBERT J. KREMER* U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Cropping Systems and Water Quality Research Unit and Department of Soil, Environmental and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia MO 65211, USA Biopestic. Int. 1(3,4): 127-141 (2005) ABSTRACT The bioherbicide approach to weed management involves the inundative use of selected microorganisms for attacking specific weeds and controlling their infestations within the same year of application. Ideally, bioherbicides are most effective for weed management in annual cropping systems that are unsuitable for the classical biological control approach, which involve the use of natural enemies requiring more than one year to develop effective, weed suppressive populations. Only a few bioherbicides are successful in field-scale control of weeds while the effectiveness of other candidate bioherbicides has been limited by restricted host-range, elaborate formulation requirements, and lack of persistence in the field. Special situations in which bioherbicides may be most effective include management of weeds that are considered herbicide-resistant, parasitic, and invasive. Based on the current status of bioherbicide use, strategies for widening host ranges, improving formulations for practical use, and improving techniques for enhancement of weed-suppressive activity in conventional and sustainable agricultural systems are needed if bioherbicides are to make significant contributions to non- chemical weed management. KEY WORDS : Weed biological control, biotic agents, weed-suppressive microorganisms; deleterious rhizobacteria INTRODUCTION are allowed to adapt and flourish in their new habitat over time to eventually establish a self-perpetuating Biological control of weeds is the intentional regulation of the weed infestation at acceptable levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Phoma Macrostoma: As a Broad Spectrum Bioherbicide for Turfgrass and Agricultural Applications
    CAB Reviews 2018 13, No. 005 Phoma macrostoma: as a broad spectrum bioherbicide for turfgrass and agricultural applications Russell K. Hynes* Address: Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada,Saskatoon Research and Development Centre, 107 Science Place, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 0X2, Canada. *Correspondence: Russell K. Hynes. Email: [email protected] Received: 14 December 2017 Accepted: 7 April 2018 doi: 10.1079/PAVSNNR201813005 The electronic version of this article is the definitive one. It is located here: http://www.cabi.org/cabreviews © CAB International 2018 (Online ISSN 1749-8848) Abstract Phoma macrostoma Montagne 94–44B is an effective bioherbicide for broadleaved weed reduction. In 2016, Health Canada’s Pest Management Regulatory Agency (PMRA), under the authority of the Pest Control Products Act and Regulations, granted full registration for the sale and use of the bioherbicide P. macrostoma Montagne 94–44B to control a broad spectrum of broadleaf weeds in established turfgrass and new seeding of grasses as well as in field grown nursery plants, trees and container-grown ornamentals. P. macrostoma 94–44B colonizes susceptible and non-susceptible plant roots, however, only in susceptible plants, such as Taraxacum officinale (dandelion), do mycelium proliferate around the vascular trachea interfering with the function of neighbouring cells while not entering them. Macrocidins, secondary metabolites secreted by P. macrostoma 94–44B mycelia, inhibit multiple steps in carotenoid precursor formation including phytoene desaturase and steps associated with β carotene and lutein carotenoid biogenesis, Fe and Mg chelation and OJIP chlorophyll fluorescence, thus uncoupling the light-harvesting complex of photosystem II from the reaction centre. The combined actions of P.
    [Show full text]
  • Three New Bio-Herbicides
    Governor’s Environmental and Economic Leadership Award 2008 2012 Global cleantech 100 2010 Investors’ Circle Top 20 Three New Bio‐herbicides Company Overview • Dedicated to discovery, development, manufacturing and marketing of natural products for pest management • Founded in 2006 by serial entrepreneur Pam Marrone in Davis, California; 101 employees; 16 PhD, 10 MS, 4 MBA; 54 in R&D • Selling Regalia® biofungicide and Grandevo® bioinsecticide, and Zequanox® Invasive mussel product • Opportune™ Bioherbicide EPA approved; launch late 2013 • Additional bioinsecticide (Venerate™) – launch in 2013, upon EPA approval . Other pipeline candidates: two nematicides, biofumigant, nutrient uptake enhancer, herbicide, fungicide, and many early stage from the screen • More than three dozen patents pending; $60 million of investment capital raised Screening Microbes for Bio‐Herbicide Activity Herbicidal Screening Has Yielded Promising Hits Total Hit One hit What has been Hit type # Rate per… screened? Herbicidal broadleaf 302 1.83% 55 16,500 microbes Herbicidal grass 135 1% 100 11,500 microbes Bacteria Broadleaf Hits Grass Hits Actino 9% 5% Fungus 15% 32% 63% 76% MBI‐010 Systemic Bio‐herbicide Screening for Systemic Mode of Action • Used discovery of bialaphos & glufosinate as a model. • Phosphinothricin (a breakdown product of bialaphos) discovered from Streptomyces viridochromogenes and S. hygroscopicus by researchers in Japan. • Phosphinothricin inhibits the activity of the glutamine synthetase enzyme, which causes ammonia build‐up in the cell.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Integrated Pest Management with Emphasis on Weeds
    MARCEL DEKKER, INC. • 270 MADISON AVENUE • NEW YORK, NY 10016 ©2002 Marcel Dekker, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be used or reproduced in any form without the express written permission of Marcel Dekker, Inc. Principles of Integrated Pest Management with Emphasis on Weeds Heinz Mueller-Schaerer University of Fribourg/Pe´rolles, Fribourg, Switzerland INTRODUCTION suppressed using physical and ecological tactics. The existence, and risk of development, of herbicide resist- Agrochemical companies promise that transgenic crops ance makes herbicide-dependent cropping systems in- will simplify pest management programs through the use creasingly vulnerable. Moreover, widespread concern of singular chemical tactics. This ‘‘silver-bullet’’ ap- about environmental side effects of herbicides combined proach has consistently failed and almost certainly will with fear for public health, has resulted in several her- again. It will do so as a result of fundamental ecological bicides being banned in some countries and increasing relationships governing population size and diversity.[1] pressure on farmers to reduce the use of herbicides.[4] At the same time, in many countries, pesticide policies In contrast to disciplines of plant pathology and en- have called for significant use reductions together with the tomology, the ‘‘how to control’’ technological orientation promotion of biodiversity in agro-ecosystems.[2] However, was shaped early on in the evolution of weed science as a initiatives to reduce reliance on herbicides will require a discipline and, until recently, this has dominated the much fuller understanding of how management practices science. The fact that weeds have been regarded as a complement one another to maintain weed populations at problem that can be controlled with herbicides, rather low equilibrium densities.
    [Show full text]