DOCSLIB.ORG

2020 New York Sweet Corn Pheromone Trap Network (SCPTN) Project Leader

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2020 New York Sweet Corn Pheromone Trap Network (SCPTN) Project Leader 2020 New York Sweet Corn Pheromone Trap Network (SCPTN) Project Leader Marion Zuefle, New York State Integrated Pest Management Program This work was supported by the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, USDA- NIFA project 2017-70006-27142. Cooperators Anne Bloomfield, Hudson Valley Farm Hub; Brian Boerman and Jessica Dueppengiesser, ACS; Derek Johnson, Unadilla; Chad Kirby, Brockport; David and Sarah Krist, Portville; George Krul, Oswego; Jeff Kubecka, Kirkville; Ashley and Matt Merle, Attica; David Munsee, Panama; Bruce Reed, Geneva; Allie Strub, Williamson; Don Sweet, Crop Advantage; Linda Underwood, Preble; Jen Wilcox, independent consultant; Mike Hunter, CCE Jefferson Co.; Kitty O’Neil, CCE Franklin Co.; Abby Seaman, NYS IPM; Elizabeth Buck, John Gibbons, Christy Hoepting, Cornell Vegetable Program; Chuck Bornt, Andy Galimberti, Ethan Grunberg, Natasha Field, Elisabeth Hodgdon, Laura McDermott, Teresa Rusinek, and Crystal Stewart, Eastern New York Commercial Horticulture Program Abstract In 1993 the Sweet Corn Pheromone Trap Network (SCPTN) began monitoring the flight of European corn borer (ECB) E and Z race moths. In 1997 corn earworm and fall armyworm were added and in 2010 Western bean cutworm. In 2020 we also started trapping for the hybrid ECB at six locations. All these insect pests can cause damage to sweet corn ears in their larval stage. These pests are moths in their adult stage and can be monitored using traps baited with pheromone lures specific for each species. Traps are placed near sweet corn fields to monitor moth flights. The weekly trap catch information allows growers, consultants, Cooperative Extension and vegetable processor field staff to track the flights and make informed decisions about when sweet corn fields need to be scouted or treated with an insecticide. This project was funded in part by in-kind contributions from growers and consultants who host and check traps. Background and Justification Sweet corn for the fresh and processing markets is an important crop throughout NY. In 2020 sweet corn was planted on 27,000 acres in New York with a value of 37 million dollars (USDA Vegetable 2020 Summary). Four major pests of sweet corn, European corn borer (ECB-E and ECB-Z), corn earworm (CEW), fall armyworm (FAW) and Western bean cutworm (WBC) can be monitored in their adult stage using pheromone traps. Pest management is an especially important aspect of fresh market sweet corn production because the unhusked ear is marketed, and buyers are frequently very sensitive to insect damage or the presence of larvae in the ear. Harvest quality requirements are different for processing corn, which usually receives fewer insecticide applications than fresh market corn. Integrated pest management practices are widely used on both crops to determine the need for insecticide applications. Pheromone trap catches provide valuable information to growers, consultants, and processor field staff making pest management decisions. Pheromone trap catches help growers and consultants decide when to start scouting fields for egg masses and larvae, reinforce what scouts are finding, help growers choose the best spray materials for the pest complex that’s present, and alert the industry to the arrival of the migratory pests, CEW and FAW. Pheromone Trap catches from 22 sites in western NY and 14 sites in Eastern NY (Figure 1) were an integral part of the weekly pest update newsletter, VegEdge and Veg Update. VegEdge is sent by the Cornell Vegetable Program to subscribers in 14 counties and Veg Update is sent by the Eastern NY Commercial Horticulture Program (ENYCHP) to subscribers in 17 counties. The Trap catches were also posted weekly to the sweet corn pheromone trap network blog, linked through the NYS IPM Program website, the Network for Environment and Weather Applications website, and posted to regional websites (PestWatch and Great Lakes and Maritimes Pest Monitoring Network) that include trap catches from several northeastern states and Canada, making the information available to a large number of growers and extension personnel. Figure 1. Map showing the 22 trap locations in western NY (pink) and the 14 trap locations in eastern NY (blue). Objectives 1. Establish and maintain a network of pheromone traps for sweet corn pests in NY. 2. Add ECB hybrid traps to six locations to monitor for this potential new pest. 3. Provide regional trapping information and recommendations to extension field staff and consultants working with sweet corn growers. 4. Provide regional trapping information to growers, along with scouting and threshold recommendations. Procedures 1. Sets of one each of ECB-E, ECB-Z, CEW, FAW, and WBC traps were placed at each of 36 trapping locations, 22 sites in western NY and 14 sites in eastern NY (Figure 1). Scentry Heliothis net traps were used to trap ECB and CEW. The BCS/Agrisense Unitrap was used for FAW and WBC. Lures from Trece Inc. were used for both races of ECB. Lures from Scentry Inc. were used for CEW, FAW and WBC. All lures were replaced every two weeks. 2. ECB, CEW, and FAW traps were set up in late-May at fresh market locations, and as processing fields approached tassel emergence in other locations. WBC traps were set up in early to mid-June. 3. Traps were placed at least 40 meters apart in grassy areas near sweet corn fields, avoiding areas near hedgerows where air circulation is poor. Heliothis traps were mounted on posts such that the bottom of the trap is ~6" above the grassy canopy. Unitraps were hung from short stakes to which angle brackets had been attached and were placed either in the field or at the edge of the field. Whenever possible, traps were moved to new fields as the previous fields matured (silks became dry) and became less attractive to moths. 4. Six ECB hybrid traps were set-up and monitored following procedures for ECB-E and X and Z traps. These traps were located at: Bellona, Farm Hub, Farmington, Geneva, Penn Yan, and the Seneca Castle sites. 5. Cooperators checked traps weekly on Monday or Tuesday and sent trap catch numbers to Marion Zuefle via phone or email. Weekly catches for each location were collated and posted, along with interpretation and scouting and thresholds recommendations for fresh market sweet corn, on the sweetcorn.nysipm.cornell.edu blog. 6. Information posted on the blog was used directly by subscribing growers, incorporated into crop and pest updates distributed weekly by regional extension programs, or provided to growers via direct contact with collaborating consultants. All catches were also posted to the PestWatch and Great Lakes and Maritimes Pest Monitoring Network sites. Results and Discussion The overall trend for the flights of the five moth species is represented in Figure 2, which gives the average trap catch for all 36 sites. ECB-E and ECB-Z remained fairly low throughout the season, this is similar to what we experienced in 2019 (Figure 3) and 2018. Peak flight for both ECB-E and ECB-Z averaged below 5 moths per week. There were two minor peaks for ECB-E, one the week of May 26th and again the week of June 9th. ECB-Z remained low throughout the season. After receiving several reports of ECB damage in sweet corn but with low nearby trap catches, we decided to have the pheromone lures tested for potency. The lures were tested by Denis Willett, chemical ecologist at Cornell University, who found the lures to be of good quality and with the appropriate amount of compounds present. Since the lures were not the issue, we selected 6 sites (Farmington, Penn Yan, Bellona, Geneva, Seneca Castle and Hurley) to install and monitor hybrid ECB traps. All six locations caught hybrid ECB but at relatively low numbers with the highest cumulative catch at the Geneva site with 31 total moths caught over the 18-week trapping period. Even with this potential new hybrid, ECB moths continue to decline overall when looking at the 26-year trend (Figure 4), with the biggest drop seen after 2006. This decline has been attributed in part to the increase use of Bt field corn. In 2020 we had the third highest CEW flight since 1997 (Figure 5). Two years ago, in 2018, I also reported the third highest CEW flight, which at that time was 10 CEW on average per location per week. The average CEW per location per week went up to 12 moths in 2020. However, the peak flight occurred about a week later in 2020 and did not seem to cause as much concern among growers as in 2018. Fall armyworm trap CatChes in 2020 were about the same as in 2019 with an average of just above 7 moths per location per week for both years (Figure 5). The difference between the two years was that there was a seCond peak observed in 2019 (Figure 3) whiCh was not present in 2020 (Figure 2). In 2010 we began monitoring the flight of Western bean Cutworm in NY. Flight usually begins in late July and lasts through the end of August. In 2020 WBC peaked August 4th with an average trap CatCh of 42 moths (Figure 2). This was over a week earlier than in 2019 (Figure 3). Pest pressure varies greatly among years but also within a year depending on the site location. This Can be seen in the Cumulative trap CatCh for eaCh moth speCies at the 36 different sites (Table 1). For this reason, it is important to Continue monitoring the flights throughout NY with traps plaCed in representative areas of the state. Figure 2. Average number of moths caught per week for all 36 sites in 2020. Figure 3. Average number of moths caught per week for all 38 sites in 2019.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Composite Insect Trap: an Innovative Combination Trap for Biologically Diverse Sampling
    The Composite Insect Trap: An Innovative Combination Trap for Biologically Diverse Sampling Laura Russo1*, Rachel Stehouwer2, Jacob Mason Heberling3, Katriona Shea1 1 Biology Department, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania, United States of America, 2 Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America, 3 Department of Biology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York, United States of America Abstract Documentation of insect diversity is an important component of the study of biodiversity, community dynamics, and global change. Accurate identification of insects usually requires catching individuals for close inspection. However, because insects are so diverse, most trapping methods are specifically tailored to a particular taxonomic group. For scientists interested in the broadest possible spectrum of insect taxa, whether for long term monitoring of an ecosystem or for a species inventory, the use of several different trapping methods is usually necessary. We describe a novel composite method for capturing a diverse spectrum of insect taxa. The Composite Insect Trap incorporates elements from four different existing trapping methods: the cone trap, malaise trap, pan trap, and flight intercept trap. It is affordable, resistant, easy to assemble and disassemble, and collects a wide variety of insect taxa. Here we describe the design, construction, and effectiveness of the Composite Insect Trap tested during a study of insect diversity. The trap catches a broad array of insects and can eliminate the need to use multiple trap types in biodiversity studies. We propose that the Composite Insect Trap is a useful addition to the trapping methods currently available to ecologists and will be extremely effective for monitoring community level dynamics, biodiversity assessment, and conservation and restoration work.
    [Show full text]
  • Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team
    Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Mating Disruption A REVIEW OF THE USE OF MATING DISRUPTION TO MANAGE GYPSY MOTH, LYMANTRIA DISPAR (L.) KEVIN THORPE, RICHARD REARDON, KSENIA TCHESLAVSKAIA, DONNA LEONARD, AND VICTOR MASTRO FHTET-2006-13 U.S. Department Forest Forest Health Technology September 2006 of Agriculture Service Enterprise Team—Morgantown he Forest Health Technology Enterprise Team (FHTET) was created in 1995 Tby the Deputy Chief for State and Private Forestry, USDA, Forest Service, to develop and deliver technologies to protect and improve the health of American forests. This book was published by FHTET as part of the technology transfer series. http://www.fs.fed.us/foresthealth/technology/ Cover photos, clockwise from top left: aircraft-mounted pod for dispensing Disrupt II flakes, tethered gypsy moth female, scanning electron micrograph of 3M MEC-GM microcapsule formulation, male gypsy moth, Disrupt II flakes, removing gypsy moth egg mass from modified delta trap mating station. Information about pesticides appears in this publication. Publication of this information does not constitute endorsement or recommendation by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, nor does it imply that all uses discussed have been registered. Use of most pesticides is regulated by State and Federal law. Applicable regulations must be obtained from appropriate regulatory agencies. CAUTION: Pesticides can be injurious to humans, domestic animals, desirable plants, and fish or other wildlife if not handled or applied properly. Use all pesticides selectively and carefully. Follow recommended practices given on the label for use and disposal of pesticides and pesticide containers. The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication is for information only and does not constitute an endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Commercial Pheromone Lures and Traps for Monitoring Male Fall Armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) in the Coastal Region of Chiapas, Mexico
    Malo et al.: Monitoring S. frugiperda with sex pheromone 659 EVALUATION OF COMMERCIAL PHEROMONE LURES AND TRAPS FOR MONITORING MALE FALL ARMYWORM (LEPIDOPTERA: NOCTUIDAE) IN THE COASTAL REGION OF CHIAPAS, MEXICO EDI A. MALO, LEOPOLDO CRUZ-LOPEZ, JAVIER VALLE-MORA, ARMANDO VIRGEN, JOSE A. SANCHEZ AND JULIO C. ROJAS Departamento de Entomología Tropical, El Colegio de la Frontera Sur, Apdo. Postal 36, Tapachula, 30700, Chiapas, Mexico ABSTRACT Commercially available sex pheromone lures and traps were evaluated for monitoring male fall armyworm (FAW), Spodoptera frugiperda, in maize fields in the coastal region of Chia- pas, Mexico during 1998-1999. During the first year, Chemtica and Trécé lures performed better than Scentry lures, and there was no difference between Scentry lures and unbaited controls. In regard to trap design, Scentry Heliothis traps were better than bucket traps. In 1999, the pattern of FAW captured was similar to that of 1998, although the number of males captured was lower. The interaction between both factors, traps and lures, was signif- icant in 1999. Bucket traps had the lowest captures regardless of what lure was used. Scen- try Heliothis traps with Chemtica lure captured more males than with other lures or the controls. Delta traps had the greatest captures with Chemtica lure, followed by Trécé and Pherotech lures. Several non-target insects were captured in the FAW pheromone baited traps. The traps captured more non-target insects than FAW males in both years. Baited traps captured more non-target insects than unbaited traps. Key Words: Spodoptera frugiperda, sex pheromone, monitoring, maize, Mexico RESUMEN Se evaluaron feromonas y trampas comercialmente disponibles para el monitoreo del gusano cogollero Spodoptera frugiperda en cultivo de maíz en la costa de Chiapas, México durante 1998-1999.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparison of Pheromone Trap Design and Lures for Spodoptera Frugiperda in Togo and Genetic Characterization of Moths Caught
    DOI: 10.1111/eea.12795 Comparison of pheromone trap design and lures for Spodoptera frugiperda in Togo and genetic characterization of moths caught Robert L. Meagher Jr1* ,KomiAgboka2, Agbeko Kodjo Tounou2,DjimaKoffi3,Koffi Aquilas Agbevohia2,Tomfe€ı Richard Amouze2, Kossi Mawuko Adjevi2 &RodneyN. Nagoshi1 1USDA-ARS CMAVE, Insect Behavior and Biocontrol Research Unit, Gainesville, FL 32608, USA , 2Ecole Superieure d’Agronomie, UniversitedeLome, 01 BP 1515, Lome 1, Togo , and 3Africa Regional Postgraduate Programme in Insect Science, University of Ghana, Accra, Ghana Accepted: 29 November 2018 Key words: fall armyworm, monitoring, host strain markers, maize, Lepidoptera, Noctuidae, integrated pest management, IPM, rice, Leucania loreyi, COI gene, Tpi gene Abstract Fall armyworm, Spodoptera frugiperda (JE Smith) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), is a pest of grain and vegetable crops endemic to the Western Hemisphere that has recently become widespread in sub- Saharan Africa and has appeared in India. An important tool for monitoring S. frugiperda in the USA is pheromone trapping, which would be of value for use with African populations. Field experiments were conducted in Togo (West Africa) to compare capture of male fall armyworm using three com- mercially available pheromone lures and three trap designs. The objectives were to identify optimum trap 9 lure combinations with respect to sensitivity, specificity, and cost. Almost 400 moths were captured during the experiment. Differences were found in the number of S. frugiperda moths cap- tured in the various trap designs and with the three pheromone lures, and in the number of non-tar- get moths captured with each lure. The merits of each trap 9 lure combination are discussed with respect to use in Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Biological Infestations Page
    Chapter 5: Biological Infestations Page A. Overview ........................................................................................................................... 5:1 What information will I find in this chapter? ....................................................................... 5:1 What is a museum pest? ................................................................................................... 5:1 What conditions support museum pest infestations? ....................................................... 5:2 B. Responding to Infestations ............................................................................................ 5:2 What should I do if I find live pests or signs of pests in or around museum collections? .. 5:2 What should I do after isolating the infested object? ......................................................... 5:3 What should I do after all infested objects have been removed from the collections area? ................................................................................................ 5:5 What treatments can I use to stop an infestation? ............................................................ 5:5 C. Integrated Pest Management (IPM) ................................................................................ 5:8 What is IPM? ..................................................................................................................... 5:9 Why should I use IPM? .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Lymantria Dispar) Populations in the USA
    Area-Wide Management of Invading Gypsy Moth (Lymantria dispar) Populations in the USA Andrew Liebhold, USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, Morgantown, WV USA Numbers of Damaging Non-native Forest Insect & Pathogen species Morgantown, West Virginia Liebhold, A.M., D.G. McCullough, L.M. Blackburn, S.J. Frankel, B. Von Holle and J.E. Aukema. 2013. A highly aggregated geographical distribution of forest pest invasions in the USA. Diversity and Distributions 19, 1208-1216. Alien Forest Insect Establishments in US Over Time All alien forest insects 2.6 species per year 0.5 species per year Economically damaging insect pests Cumulative Pest Establishments Cumulative Year Medford, Massachusetts, 1868 Étienne Léopold Trouvelot, 1827 - 1895 27 Myrtle St., Medford, MA Forbush EH, Fernald CH (1896) The gypsy moth, Porthetria dispar (Linn). Wright and Potter, Boston Eradication is attempted, 1880-1900 “Barrier Zone” The DDT era Application of DDT over Scanton, PA (1948) Gypsy Moth Management Detection / Slow the Eradication Spread Suppression Gypsy Moth Outbreaks Nuisance and aesthetic impacts on homeowners Defoliation Suppression Gypsy Moth Management Detection / Slow the Eradication Spread Suppression Accidental movement of life stages Generally infested Uninfested area area Transition area Gypsy Moth Egg Masses Accidentally Transported During Household Moves Use of pheromone traps to locate and delimit isolated colonies delta trap delimitation base grid grid treatment Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 0 moths/trap >0 moths/trap treatment 350 European
    [Show full text]
  • Impact of Trap Design, Windbreaks, and Weather on Captures of European Corn Borer
    Entomology Publications Entomology 12-2006 Impact of Trap Design, Windbreaks, and Weather on Captures of European Corn Borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in Pheromone-Baited Traps Brendon James Reardon Iowa State University Douglas V. Sumerford Iowa State University Thomas W. Sappington Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ent_pubs Part of the Agronomy and Crop Sciences Commons, Atmospheric Sciences Commons, Entomology Commons, and the Systems Biology Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ ent_pubs/226. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Entomology at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Entomology Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Impact of Trap Design, Windbreaks, and Weather on Captures of European Corn Borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) in Pheromone-Baited Traps Abstract Pheromone-baited traps are often used in ecological studies of the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). However, differences in trap captures may be confounded by trap design, trap location relative to a windbreak, and changes in local weather. The bjo ectives of this experiment were, first, to examine differences in O. nubilalis adult (moth) captures among the Intercept wing trap, the Intercept bucket/funnel UNI trap, and the Hartstack wire-mesh, 75-cm-diameter cone trap (large metal cone trap) as well as among three cone trap designs.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of the Most Effective Trap to Monitor the Presence of the Cactus Moth Cactoblastis Cactorum (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)
    300 Florida Entomologist 88(3) September 2005 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MOST EFFECTIVE TRAP TO MONITOR THE PRESENCE OF THE CACTUS MOTH CACTOBLASTIS CACTORUM (LEPIDOPTERA: PYRALIDAE) STEPHANIE BLOEM1, STEPHEN D. HIGHT2, JAMES E. CARPENTER3 AND KENNETH A. BLOEM4 1Center for Biological Control, Florida A&M University, Tallahassee, FL 32308 2USDA-ARS-CMAVE at Florida A&M University, Center for Biological Control, Tallahassee, FL 32308 3USDA-ARS-CPMRU, Tifton, GA 31794 4USDA-APHIS-PPQ-CPHST, at Florida A&M University, Center for Biological Control, Tallahassee, FL 32307 ABSTRACT Various trap specifications were evaluated to identify the most effective trap for capturing wild male Cactoblastis cactorum (Berg). All traps were baited with virgin female C. cac- torum and, except for the first comparison of trap type, a standard wing trap was used in all experiments. Although wing traps captured more males than did the other trap types (delta or bucket), the differences were not significant. However, significantly higher numbers of males were captured in wing traps placed 2 m above ground than traps at 1 m or 0.5 m, and wing traps baited with four virgin females caught significantly more males than wing traps baited with a single female. Differences in number of males captured by young and old fe- males were not significant, but more than twice as many males were captured in traps baited with one-day-old females than traps baited with four day old females. In addition, there were no significant differences in number of males caught in unpainted, white, wing traps and wing traps painted one of eight different colors (flat white, black, dark green, flu- orescent green, yellow, fluorescent yellow, orange, or blue), although, more males were cap- tured in the unpainted wing traps.
    [Show full text]
  • Performance of Pheromone-Baited Traps to Monitor the Seasonal Abundance of Tortrix Moths in Chestnut Groves
    insects Article Performance of Pheromone-Baited Traps to Monitor the Seasonal Abundance of Tortrix Moths in Chestnut Groves Chiara Ferracini 1,* , Cristina Pogolotti 1, Giada Lentini 1, Valerio Saitta 1, Enrico Busato 1, Franco Rama 2 and Alberto Alma 1 1 Department of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences (DISAFA), University of Torino, Largo Paolo Braccini 2, 10095 Grugliasco, Italy; [email protected] (C.P.); [email protected] (G.L.); [email protected] (V.S.); [email protected] (E.B.); [email protected] (A.A.) 2 Biological Products Unit, Isagro S.p.A., Via Fauser, 28, 28100 Novara, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-0116708700 Received: 9 October 2020; Accepted: 15 November 2020; Published: 17 November 2020 Simple Summary: Investigations were performed in 2018–2019 in chestnut groves in northern Italy to monitor the seasonal flight activity of Pammene fasciana (L.), Cydia fagiglandana (Zeller), and C. splendana (Hübner) with pheromone-baited traps. Commercially available and experimental pheromone blends were tested. Newly formed chestnut husks and fruits were randomly collected to evaluate damage. Damage was correlated with trap catches. P. fasciana was present in all the sites, while Cydia species were recorded in three of six sites, with differences in abundance related to pheromone blends studied. Several morphologically similar non-target species occurred, highlighting the risk of overestimating catches. Fruit damage did not correlate with trap captures, suggesting that monitoring probably underestimates the true size of the moths’ populations. These data contribute to ascertaining the presence of tortrix moths in northern Italian chestnut groves, and are important for planning specific control measures.
    [Show full text]
  • Ro Uc Atalogue 8
    atalogue C ct u d o r P 2018 1 Slimey Pests 8 Furry Pests 9 Bird Brained Pests 14 Flying Pests 16 Crawling Pests 20 Personal Protection 23 Product Key Manufactured in New Zealand Non toxic and kinder on the environment For use in the home For use in the garden For use on the land NoPests® Simple Pest Solutions that Work. Pest control doesn’t have to be hard! We are great believers in keeping things simple. NoPests® is about bringing no-nonsense, effective, do it yourself pest control to the people. Products that Really Work Innovative Technology Tested and proven within New Zealand’s harsh, and We are constantly reviewing our products to ensure often unforgiving environment ensuring that every that they are inline with the latest in pest control product is up to the task. innovation and technology. Whether this is the raw ingredients in our insecticides or the materials and Too Easy Application construction of our traps and bait stations, you can be assured they are leading the industry. Effective do it yourself pest control with simple instructions ensures success no matter your level of experience. Non Toxic Environmentally Friendly We try our best to use non toxic ingredients to ensure we are being friendly to the environment. However, this is not always possible as some pests are more difficult to control than others. You can identify the non-toxic products in our range by the “Non Toxic” logo. New Zealand Made Where possible, we develop and manufacture our NoPests® products in New Zealand ensuring that our products are tailored for our unique environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Gypsy Moth (Lymantria Dispar )
    Invasive Species Management and Control: Gypsy moth (Lymantria dispar) 1.0 INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT 2.0 PREVENTATIVE MEASURES 3.0 PREDICTION OF SPREAD 4.0 MONITORING OF IMPACT 5.0 PHYSICAL CONTROL 6.0 CHEMICAL CONTROL 7.0 BIOLOGICAL CONTROL 8.0 BREEDING RESISTANT TREES 1.0 INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT “To address the economic and environmental impacts caused by the expanding range of the gypsy moth infestation, a national strategy was developed to manage gypsy moth populations along the leading edge of the infestation. The goal of this USDA Forest Service project, known as the ‘Slow the Spread of the Gypsy Moth’ (STS) program, is to intensively monitor populations along the leading edge and apply treatments such that the rate of expansion of the infested area is reduced by 50%. These goals are achieved through the use of a sophisticated Internet-based data management system and a decision algorithm to aid in decision making (Tobin et al., 2004). The STS program was pilot tested in 1993, became fully implemented in 2000, and currently includes 10 states and nearly 40 million ha (Sharov et al., 2002a)” (Tobin et al. 2007). More information is available in the gypsy moth Slow the Spread (STS) website and factsheet. 2.0 PREVENTATIVE MEASURES Landscapes may be protected from the gypsy moth in many different ways. The forest can be altered to prevent outbreaks. High-risk forests can be harvested before outbreaks occur to prevent some economic loss. Thinning stands of medium to high quality can increase the vigor of surviving trees, reducing the risk of major outbreak.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplement 1 A) Trap Types Into Which the New Sensors Are Planned to Build In
    Supplement 1 A) Trap types into which the new sensors are planned to build in Cumulatively there are five main trap types (Table 1) into which we planned to insert the IRSR-1 and IRSR-2 sensors. Two trap types were developed by our team (EPIEDAPH, EUEDAPH), while the frames of the pheromone trap constructions (VARL, KLP, Yf) were developed by the Zoology Department of the Plant Protection Institute (Centre for Agricultural Research, Hungary). These last ones are called CSALOMON® pheromone trap family and are being developed since 1993 (http://csalomontraps.com/). The pheromone traps are used to detect the emergence of pest species and we plan to install our new sensors into these traps, as well. Table 1. Summary of the traps types Trap type Target arthropod groups VARL Flying insects, mostly used on trees KLP Crawling insects, especially western corn rootworm (Diabrotica virgifera) Yf Click beetles EPIEDAPH Ground living microarthropods EUEDAPH Soil-dwelling microarthropods The VARL trap type (Figure 1) is appropriate for detection, quantitative monitoring and mass trapping of Lepidopteran species, such as small leafminers (Lithocolletidae), and for bigger sized moth species as cutworms (Noctuidae). Usually their size vary between 0.5-3 cm, and their wingspan is roughly similar to their body size. VARL is a plastic funnel trap, insects are attracted by species-specific pheromone sticks, and flying through a funnel into a sample container. The VARL traps also need a separation tool, which moves the animals in electric or mechanical way right after the detection, e.g., preventing the fallen insects to get back to the sensing area.
    [Show full text]