S293: Improved Pecan Insect and Mite Pest Management Systems

(Multistate Research Project)

Status: Inactive/Terminating

Project Menu

SAES-422 Reports

Annual/Termination Reports:

[04/24/2003] [04/14/2004] [05/08/2002]

Date of Annual Report: 04/24/2003

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 02/25/2003 - 02/25/2003
Period the Report Covers: 01/01/2002 - 01/01/2003

Participants

McVay, J.R. - AL; Mizell, R.F. - FL; Dutcher, J.D. - GA; Reid, W. - KS; Hall, M.J. - LA (Chairman); (vacant) - MS; Ellington, J. - NM; Mulder, P. Jr. - OK; Harris, M.K. - TX; Ree, W.O. Jr. - TX; Cottrell, T. - USDA-ARS (Vice Chairman); Shapiro-Ilan, D.I. - USDA-ARS (Secretary); F. Gilstrap - TX (Admnistrative Advisor).

Brief Summary of Minutes

The meeting was held on February 25, 2003 at the Renaissance Hotel in Oklahoma City, OK. This meeting was held in conjunction with the Southwestern Branch Meeting of the Entomological Society of America (ESA). Site selection and nominating committees were appointed and reports were received from each. Received status on publication in the SW Entomologist of the papers that were presented at the ESA meeting in San Diego, CA. Discussed publishing papers presented at the 2003 Southwestern Branch ESA meeting in Oklahoma City. Discussed research project objectives.

Accomplishments

Objective 1: Improve monitoring and chemical techniques for hickory shuckworm, pecan nut casebearer, pecan weevil, and brown stink bug, and transfer this technology to large grower groups by making the techniques less expensive and more accessible. Field evaluations of Circle traps have led to the development of a treatment threshold utilizing these traps in pecan orchards for control of pecan weevil (OK). These traps have proven extremely useful for Oklahoma pecan growers in making treatment decisions for control of pecan weevil. Two (LA) and three (OK) of pecan phylloxera emergence data have been collected. The data, currently under analysis, will be used to develop a degree-day model to predict emergence of this insect (OK, LA). Monitoring of pecan nut casebearer with pheromone traps, hickory shuckworm with light traps, pecan weevil with emergence traps is continuing in Alabama. Casebearer activity was detected at 80% of minotored locations, shuckworm activity was apparent at all locations, while pecan weevil emergence was erratic (dependent on soil moisture), being detected at only 60% of the sites (AL). Yellow aphid populations were moderate, black pecan aphid populations were high at 50% of the locations, and pecan leaf scorch mite populations were insignificant at 90% of the orchards sampled (AL). Pecan insects were monitored in four pecan orchards in Sumpter, Tift, Burke, and Irwin Counties, Georgia. Foliage and nut pest populations were monitored from May to September with standard scouting techniques and important signals of pest activity were reported on a website (GA). Research to develop an attractant and collecting trap for Harmonia axyridis, an exotic ladybird beetle, as they respond to buildings during overwintering behavior was continued (FL). The current traps don collect a small percentage of the responding beetles but not enough to protect houses. Spatial distribution of pecan weevils was related to soil type (KS). Circle traps were deployed on pecan trees growing in four soil series at four locations in the Neosho River floodplain. Soil types were Lanton silt loam, Osage silty clay, Hepler silt loam and Verdigris silt loam. The largest number of weevils were captured on trees growing on Lanton soil, while the fewest were captured on trees growing in Osage soils. Results were consistent across all locations (KS). Objective 2: Develop biointensive insect pest management technologies through crop profiling, habitat diversification, host plant resistance, and biological control, and integrate these technologies into an overall pest management program. Soybeans and cowpeas were again evaluated for use as a trap crop for control of late-season southern green stink bug (LA). Data showed that soybeans were prefered and that the soybeans were attractive for longer periods of time. Stink bug damage was light throughout the orchard and no significant differences in damage to the nut cluster were observed in samples taken from trees in proximity to the trap crops and from trees away from the trap crop plots (LA). Trap crop studies were also conducted in Alabama. Plants evaluated included sesame, soybeans, cowpeas, and various combinations of the three. Brown and green stink bug populations were light, with the most common kernel feeder being one of the leaffooted bugs, Leptoglossus spp. The trial will be repeated as soybean germination was erratic and a true picture of trap crop efficacy was not determined (AL). Research was conducted to determine variation in beneficial traits among strains of the nematode Steinernema carpocapsae, which has proven to be the most virulent nematode species to pecan weevil adults. This research will be used as a basis for developing a genetic improvement program for enchanced biocontrol potential (USDA-ARS). Field testing of entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi suppression of the pecan weevil was continued (USDA-ARS). Trials with entomopathogenic fungi indicated that novel formulations may enhance suppression of pecan weevil. Studies with entomopathogenic nematodes indicated that efficacy in pecan weevil control decreases as the distance from the trunk increases, probably due to UV light exposure (USDA-ARS). Biocontrol of the pecan weevil with entomopathogenic fungi could be hindered by simultaneous application of fungicides. Artifical selection and strain discovery were found to be viable mechanisms to enhance fungicide resistance in Beauveria bassiana against fungicides commonly used in pecan management. Furthermore, it was found that repeated exposure to fungicides increased B. bassiana virulence to the pecan weevil (USDA-ARS). Inundative releases of two phytoseiid predators, Phytoseiulis persimilis and Galendromus occidentalis, were evaluated as possible biocontrol agents for control of pecan leaf scorch mite (GA). Three treatments (0, 500, 1000 mites/tree) were applied to six, single tree replications on September 6, 2002. Mite counts indicated that pecan leaf scorch mite was effictively and similarly controlled by both application rates of both mites. Predator mites of both species were found at increasing levels of abundance in the treated trees and in trees throughout the farm for the remainder of the season (GA). It was observed that high numbers of tydeid mites inhabited the foliage at this time and may have served as an alternate host for the predatory mites, sustaining them through the season. Conservation of aphidophagous insects (ladybird beetles and lacewings) and spiders was possible through habitat manipulation (GA). Trunk bands of insecticides or ant repellent compounds applied to pecan trees were tested to determine if they would keep ants out of the tree crown where they interfere with biological control of aphids (GA). Ant repellent compounds (methyl carbitol, methyl anthranilate, methyl myristate, neem extract) were compared to a standard chlorpyrifos barrier and an untreated control in a controlled field experiment (GA). Potential vectors of xylem-limited bacteria were studied in the field to determine which species transmit the disease to pecan and the seasonal occurrence of certain sharpshooters known to transmit similar diseases in other woody plants (GA). A massive data base is currently being developed on the effects of fire ants in pecan ecosystems (TX). Objective 3: Develop pesticide management strategies to conserve and optimize the efficacy of currently registered insecticides and integrate reduced-risk pesticides into the insect pest management programs. Insecticides were evaluated for control of key pecan insect pests across the region (LA, OK, TX, AL, GA). Insecticides evaluated for control of pecan nut casebearer included; Confirm 2F (AL, GA, OK), Spintor 2SC (AL, GA, LA, OK), Lorsban 4E (GA, LA, OK), Intrepid 2F (AL, GA, OK), Actara 25G (GA), Dimilin 2L (GA), GWN 1730 (GA), USAI 10702 (AL, GA), Imidan 70WSB (LA), and DECIS 1E (AL). Spintor, Confirm, Intrepid, Lorsban, and Imidan were effective in controlling pecan nut casebearer (AL, GA, LA, OK). Trees treated with Actara and the higher rate of USAI 10702 were free of casebearer damage (GA). No significant differences were observed in infestation levels among treated plots, but all were significantly lower than the untreated control plots (AL). Infestation levels ranged from 1.33% (Spintor at 0.63 lb[ai]/acre), to 5.33% (USAI 10702 at 0.63 lb[ai]/acre), to 17.33% for the untreated control trees (AL). All treatments, except Spintor, provided excellent control of high population of hickory shuckworm (AL). Timing of the insecticide application and the short residual properties of Spintor may have contributed to the poor control (AL). In Georgia, the level of shuckworm control was quite variable within and between treatments. No significant differences were observed between the untreated control trees and any treatments with higher than 3.2% damage (GA). Trees treated with the higher concentrations of Intrepid, GWN 1730, USAI 10702, and Spintor had less shuckworm damage than the untreated control trees, as did those trees treated with Confirm and Dimilin (GA). In Alabama, Provado 1.6F, Calypso 2SC, Centric 40WG, Fulfill 50WG, and Disyston 8E were evaluated for control of pecan aphids. All treatments, except Fulfill at 0.083 lb[ai]/acre, provided excellent control of black aphids up to 7-DAT. At 14-DAT, aphid counts in all treated plots exceeded the pretreatment levels. The trial was discontinued because of the severity of the outbreak. Plots treated with Provado (0.088 lb[ai]/acre), Calypso (all rates), Centric (0.063 lb[ai]/acre), and Disyston retained the greatest amount of foliage and had the healthiest foliage. BioCover LS and UL were ineffective in controlling yellow aphids (LA). Fury 1.5E, Banshee 0.83E, Fury 1.5E+Lorsban 4E, and USAI 10702+Calypso were evaluated for late-season control of kernel feeding hemipterans and pecan weevil (GA). All treated trees were free of hemipteran damage, pecan weevil damage was 0.5% or less, and hickory shuckworm damage was 1.0% or less. No significant differences were observed between the treated trees; however, differences were observed between the treated trees and the untreated control trees (GA). Acramite proved effective in controlling pecan leaf scorch mites, with little or no effect on phytoseiid mites (GA). Extinguish Fire Ant Bait reduced the number of fire ant mounds by 80-96% during a three year study in Texas. Extinguish provided up to one year of residual control once ant densities were significantly reduced (85% or more). Work is ongoing to evaluate alternatives to currently registered at-risk pesticides (as a result of the Food Quality Protection Act) on pecan (TX).

Publications

Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Impact of insects on pecan nut drop from nut set to shell hardening. J. Entomol. Sci. 37: 259-269. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Pecan insects in 2001. The Pecan Grower. 13(3): 12-13. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Spray coverage important for pecan pest control. The Pecan Grower. 13(4): 8-9. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Effective pecan aphid control with new insecticides and biological controls. The Pecan Grower. 14(1): 18-19. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Teachers set out experiments in pecan orchard. The Pecan Grower. 14(2): 34-35. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Pecan insects 2002. www.angelfire.com/yt/pecanbugs. Grantham, R.A., P.G. Mulder, J.K. Collins, and G.W. Cuperus. 2002. Comparisons on the efficacy of different trap types in capturing pecan nut casebearer, Acrobasis nuxvorella. SW Entomol. 27: 21-30. Grantham, R.A., P.G. Mulder, J.K. Collins, G.W. Cuperus, and J.D. Carlson. 2002. Evaluation of pecan nut casebearer, Acrobasis nuxvorella (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae), prediction models using pheromone trapping. Environ. Entomol. 31: 1062-1070. Hall, M.J. and J. Austin. 2002. Emergence of the nut curculio, Conotrachelus hicoriae (Schoof), at two pecan orchards in Louisiana. J. Entomol. Sci. 37: 293-299. Hall, M.J. and P.G. Mulder. 2002. Biology and life cycle of pecan phylloxera, Phylloxera devastatrix (Pergande), pp. 32-34. In M.W. Smith[ed.], Proc. 72nd Oklahoma Pecan Growers Assoc. Afton, OK. 45p. Hall, M.J. and R.R. Shelton. 2002. Evaluation of four insecticides for control of yellow aphids on pecan, pp. 43-44. In, M. Hall[ed.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 139.88p. Hall, M.J. and R.R. Shelton. 2002. Evaluation of four insecticides for control of yellow aphids on Stuart pecan, pp. 45-46. In, M. Hall[ed.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 139.88p. Hall, M.J. and R.R. Shelton. 2002. Evaluation of five insecticides for control of hickory shuckworm, pp. 47-48. In, M. Hall[ed.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 139.88p. Hall, M.J. and R.R. Shelton. 2002. Evaluation of two miticides for control of pecan leaf scorch mite, pp. 49-50. In, M. Hall[ed.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 139.88p. Mulder, P.G. and M.J. Hall. 2002. Emergence patterns of pecan phylloxera on different pecan cultivars in Louisiana and Oklahoma, pp. 35-39. In, M.W. Smith[ed.], Proc. 72nd Oklahoma Pecan Growers Assoc. Afton, OK. 45p. Mulder, P.G., R.A. Grantham, W. Reid, and S. Landgraf. 2002. Pecan weevil perhomone traps? pp. 22-32. In, E. Herrera[ed.], Proc. 36th West. Pecan Conf. Las Cruces, NM. 165p. Reid, W. 2002. Current pest management systems for pecan. HortTechnology. 12: 633-639. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I, C.C. Reilly, M.W. Hotchkiss, and B.W. Wood. 2002. The potential for enhanced fungicide resistance in Beauvaria bassiana through strain discovery and artifical selection. J. Invert. Path. 81: 86-93. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., W. Gardner, J.R. Fuxa, B.W. Wood, T. Cottrel, K. Nguyen, B. Adams, R.A. Humber, and M.J. Hall. 2002. Microbial control research for the suppression of pecan weevil, pp. 2-15. In, E. Herrera[ed.], Proc. 36th West. Pecan Conf. Las Cruces, NM. 165p. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., W. Gardner, J.R. Fuxa. B.W. Wood, K. Nguyen, B. Adams, R.A. Humber, and M.J. Hall. 2002. A survey for insect-killing nematodes and fungi endemic to pecan orchards of the southeastern US and their virulence to the pecan weevil. The Pecan Grower. 13(3): 6-8. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., W. Gardner, J.R. Fuxa, B.W. Wood, K. Nguyen, B. Adams, R.A. Humber, and M.J. Hall. 2002. Survey to entomopathogenic nematodes endemic to pecan orchards of the southeastern US and their virulence to the pecan weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Nematology. 4:197.

Impact Statements

Continued development and analysis of monitoring methods for key pecan pests provide the means for growers to implement localized (individual orchards) IPM programs which can help to reduce pesticide usage and increase pesticide efficacy.
Knowing pest distribution in the orchard, knowing emergence patterns, and having the tools to monitor pest activity will greatly enhance the growers ability to determine the need for pesticide applications and to apply the pesticides in the most effective manner.
Continued evaluation of biorational insecticides and acaricides will help in providing growers with an array of products to select from, this will be of benefit when developing pesticide resistance management strategies, and will provide products that can be used in conjunction with non-target, benefical arthropods.
Entomopathogens, and various methods to manipulate orchard habitat (i.e. trap crops, ground covers, etc.) will provide additional management strategies to deal with control of pests that are difficult to control in pecan such as aphids, mites, pecan weevil, and late-season kernel feeding hemipterans. These strategies would be compatible with a biorational approach in dealing with pecan arthropod pests.

Date of Annual Report: 04/14/2004

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 03/07/2004 - 03/07/2004
Period the Report Covers: 01/01/2003 - 01/01/2004

Participants

Phil Mulder (Oklahoma State University), Marvin Harris (Texas A&M University), Joe Ellington (New Mexico State University), Bill Reid (Kansas State University), Jim Dutcher (University of Georgia), Ted Cottrell (USDA, Agricultural Research Service), John McVay (Auburn University), Bill Ree (Texas A&M University), Ken Hunt (University of Missouri) and Michael W. Smith (Oklahoma State University).

Brief Summary of Minutes

The S-293 Improved Pecan Insect and Mite Pest Management Systems annual meeting was held March 7, 2004 at the Las Cruces Hilton in Las Cruces, NM in conjunction with the Western Pecan Growers Annual Conference. The meeting was called to order by Chair Ted Cottrell at 9:00 am. Minutes of the 2003 meeting, previously submitted to all S-293 members, were put forth for approval by the members with Phil Mulder making a motion to approve and being seconded by John McVay with unanimous approval from the members. The 2005 meeting site and date was discussed with a tentative site and date to be Tunica, MS in conjunction with the annual meeting of the Southeastern Branch of the Entomological Society of America. If, however, the SEB-ESA meeting conflicted with the Western Pecan Growers Annual Conference, then by default the 2005 meeting would be held in Las Cruces, NM. Objectives of the new project, DC-306, were discussed and the timeline for finishing and submitting the full write-up for the new project. The remainder of the meeting was devoted to discussion of research accomplishments during the prior year and research needs and plans for the upcoming season. The meeting was adjourned at 1:15pm.

Accomplishments

Georgia - pecan insect and mite pest management research investigated the efficacy of new chemical and biocontrol methods in field and lab experiments. Overall, the 2004 season was unusual with rainfall on 4 of 5 days per week and residual action of chemical controls was very short, # 1 wk. However, 2 new miticides ? Acramite (Crompton-Uniroyal) and Envidor (Bayer) effectively controlled pecan leaf scorch mites for 4 wk. Pecan leaf scorch was ameliorated with soil application, adjacent to the emitters of a drip irrigation system, of the systemic insecticide imidacloprid in ?Kiowa? pecans. Trees treated in mid-summer had significantly less scorch symptoms and better foliage retention than untreated trees. Biocontrol of pecan leaf scorch mite was possible using the predatory mites Phytoseiulis persimilis and Galendromus occidentalis. Release of the predators in the center tree in one acre plots effectively controlled pecan leaf scorch mites in the entire plot. Control took 3 wk for P. persimilis and 4 wk for G. occidentalis. Phytoseiulis persimilis controlled mites equally over the entire plot whereas control by G. occidentalis was more effective in the center of the plot than along the edges. Prionus root borer adult emergence was monitored with light traps. Additional research in Georgia included research for development of an alternative non-chemical control measure for the pecan weevil. ARS scientists from Byron Georgia, in cooperation with University of Georgia, conducted field trials to determine the potential of Beauveria bassiana to suppress adult pecan weevils. The fungus was found capable of causing high mortality in adult pecan weevils. Lab research indicated that the beneficial insect-killing nematode Steinernema carpocapsae, is highly virulent to adult pecan weevils, but the potential of this nematode species as an effective biological control agent varies among strains. Therefore, ARS scientists in Byron Georgia (in collaboration with Univ. of Florida) compared eight different strains of S. carpocapsae for various traits important to biological control. Nematode strains were identified that were most likely to succeed in suppressing the pecan weevil. Lady beetles are primarily beneficial insects that eat pest insect and mite species, but the introduced multicolored Asian lady beetle (Harmonia axyridis) has become a pest when it overwinters in homes and is suspected to negatively impact native lady beetle species. Studies were done at Byron, GA to determine the potential for predation by the exotic beetle upon native lady beetle species and vice versa. Texas - current Pecan IPM programs have reduced insecticide application by 40% over the past 2 decades and are currently using at-risk chemicals for 90+% of their very limited applications organophosphates, carbamates and lindane). Loss of these products will greatly increase use of pyrethroids with increased problems of secondary pests, resistance and costs, jeopardizing the Texas Pecan IPM programs. A pesticide/technology use grower survey was initiated Dec., 2003 to track progress of pecan IPM program. Studies initiated in conjunction with A. Knutson and B. Ree on "Impact of Fire Ants in Pecan" and continued with Dr. Charles Barr. Fire ant management with methoprene baits did not affect foliar pests of pecan. Follow-up work with A. Cognato on pecan-insect interaction and J. Jackman on web based predictions for pecan nut casebearer (PNC). Worked with O. Ochoa and Mech. Eng. students on physical properties of Carya, with Dr. C. Coble in Ag. Eng. on development of an inexpensive clock trap to monitor insect circadian rhythms and initiated a study of chemical properties of hickories with Dr. L. Rooney of Soil and Crop Science. Work with USDA Pecan Breeding Lab on host plant resistance in pecan and with chemical companies continued to develop new materials. Consolidated and published data on PNC pheromone, discovered a cryptic species of nut borer in Mexico (probably Acrobasis caryivorella) and found an attractant having pheromone potential. Kansas/Missouri - The impact of a sawfly outbreak and subsequent defoliation on pecan pistillate flower abortion was studied on 4 cultivars. Fruit drop from trees defoliated by sawflies were compared to trees that sustained little or no sawfly damage. Early season defoliation by sawfly larvae did not influence fruit drop by the cultivars Chetopa, Pawnee, and Posey. Fruit drop was increased 4x following sawfly defoliation of the cultivar, Giles. Giles trees not infested with sawfly larvae dropped 0.7 nuts per cluster following pollination while heavily infested trees dropped 2.8 nuts/cluster. Additionally, a study of normal pecan fruit abortion following pollination in native pecans revealed that abortion rates are much higher during ?off? years than in ?on? years. Over the same time period, percent of clusters damaged by PNC larvae was greater during ?off? years than ?on? years. Pistillate flower abortion rate provides a tool for predicting nut set and for predicting the need for casebearer control measures. Alabama - pecan orchards across production areas in AL were monitored with pheromone traps for PNC, light traps for hickory shuckworm and emergence traps for pecan weevil. Direct counts were made to determine relative populations of yellow aphids, the black pecan aphid and the pecan leaf scorch mite. Traps were serviced daily and reported weekly, while direct counts were made weekly. Louisiana - Two varieties of Round-Up Ready soybeans (Garst 588RR/N, Asgrow AG6101)were planted as stink bug trap crops in mid-June. Sweep net samples for stink bugs were taken weekly, beginning at pod formation. When sweep net samples were taken, 100 nut clusters were inspected for stink bugs. Sweep net sampling indicated attractiveness of the soybeans to stink bugs. However, the soybeans proved to be unattractive to Leptoglosus phyllopus. No statistically significant differences could be detected in the number of nuts damaged on trees in the area around the trap crop and on trees where there was no trap crop. Damage levels were low, ranging from 2 to 8 %. Insecticide trials were conducted for control of pecan nut PNC and hickory shuckworm (HSW). PNC trials were conducted at a commercial pecan orchard located south of Benton, LA. Significantly fewer nut clusters were damaged by first and second generation PNC on trees treated with Dimilin 2L (.126 lb[ai]/acre), Lorsban 4E (1.0 lb[ai]/acre), Spintor 2SC (0.06 lb[ai]/acre), and Imidan 70WSB (1.4 lb[ai]/acre) than on the untreated control trees. HSW trials were conducted at the Pecan Research-Extension Station orchard located south of Shreveport, LA. Although shuckworm damage levels were low (four percent on the untreated control trees) significantly fewer nuts were damaged on trees treated with Spintor 2SC (0.06 lb[ai]/acre), Intrepid 2F (0.06,0.12 lb[ai]/acre), Baythroid 2EC (0.022 lb[ai]/acre), Lorsban 4E (1.0 lb[ai]/acre), and Confirm 2F (0.12 lb[ai]/acre) than on the untreated control trees. Oklahoma: Use of Circle trap technology has proven useful for Oklahoma growers attempting to make treatment decisions for pecan weevil. Field evaluations of this trapping system have resulted in development of a threshold utilizing these traps in pecan. Field evaluations have also shown effective control of PNC with Spintor, Confirm, Intrepid, and Lorsban. A 3rd yr of work was completed on developing a degree-day based model for pecan phylloxera in native and improved pecan cultivars in Oklahoma and Louisiana. Studies were completed on the effects of grazing legume-based or native orchard floors in flood-prone and non-flood prone areas. Pecan weevil populations were greater in non-flood prone areas than in the flood plane. Pecan aphid populations were greater and beneficial organisms were slightly lower in areas with native grasses, compared to sites with legumes. PNC adult populations were similar in flooded and non-flooded areas. These same populations were greater in grazed areas than in ungrazed sites. In addition, adult casebearer populations were greater in areas overseeded with legumes as opposed to areas with native vegetation. Damage from PNC larvae was similar across all treatments. New Mexico - the importance of ground covers on the complex of beneficial insects that feed on PNC was determined in addition to the efficacy of Deraeocris nebulosis in controlling the pecan aphid complex. An eleven acre, seven yr old pecan orchard was divided into PNC paintball pheromone and check treatments. Each treated tree received three-four PNC pheromone paintballs. Shots were targeted at the low, mid and upper canopy. Five nutlet clusters per tree and 25 trees per replication were examined for infestation after the first and second PNC generation. All trap data was collected using the ISCA Technologies Moritor System. Trap data can be easily transferred from the PDA directly to the Moritor web site. The mean number of moths caught over the season showed that pheromone disruption occurred after treatments were applied and resulted in a reduction of infested pecan nut clusters. Infestations were reduced in both generations in treated plots. Paintball pheromone treated pecan trees significantly (p reduced the number of moths caught in traps and reduced infested versus untreated pecan trees. When the pheromone was depleted there was an increase in trap catches. Data was averaged by replication, descriptive statistics were derived and a test of significance performed to compare statistical differences. Pheromone disruption is a novel insect control method that may prove to be valuable in integrated pest management of PNC, particularly in small orchards and home owner settings. Continued research need to be conducted to increase longevity, determine efficacy of control on larger trees and acreages and to determine cost effectiveness.

Publications

Cottrell, T. E. and D. I. Shapiro-Ilan. 2003. Susceptibility of a native and an exotic lady beetle (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) to Beauveria bassiana. J. Invert. Path. 84: 137-144. Cottrell, T. E. and B. W. Wood. 2003. Pecan weevil management: past, present and toward a future strategy. Southw. Entomologist. Suppl No. 27. 142 pp. Cottrell, T.E., J.K. Greene, R.F. Mizell, C.E. Yonce and B.W. Wood. Using pheromone traps to sample stink bugs in and around pecan orchards. Proceedings of the Oklahoma Pecan Growers Assoc. 2003. P. 14-27. Dutcher, J. D., M. K. Harris, and D. A. Dean. (Eds.) 2003. Integration of Chemical and Biological Insect Control in Native, Seedling, and Improved Pecan Production. Southw. Entomologist. Suppl. No. 27. 142 pp. Dutcher, J. D., G. W. Hudson, and H.C. Ellis. 2003. Recent advances in pecan pest management in improved and seedling pecan orchards. P. 21-38. In Dutcher, J. D., M. K. Harris, and D. A. Dean. (Eds.) 2003. Integration of Chemical and Biological Insect Control in Native, Seedling, and Improved Pecan Production. Southw. Entomologist. Suppl. No. 27. 142 pp. Dutcher, J. D. and W. Hudson. 2003. Pecan Nut Casebearer Control with Insect Growth Regulator Insecticides. Southeastern Pecan Growers Proceedings ? Articles & Information 96: 62-67. Dutcher, J. D. 2003. Keep pecan leaves healthy. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. V. 14(3): 10-11. Dutcher, J. D. 2003. Pecan entomology field notes from 2002. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. V. 14(4): 17-18. Dutcher, J. D. 2003. Environmental factors loom over orchard management. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. V. 15(1): 10. Dutcher, J. D. 2003. Pecan leaf scorch mite, an increasingly important problem. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. V. 15(2): 26-27. Ellington, J. and T. Carrillo. 2003. Black Aphid Control. XXXVIV Annual Western Pecan Conference Proceedings. Hall, M. J. 2003. Evaluation of three insecticides for control of yellow aphids on pecan in Louisiana, Pp.71-72. In, M. Hall and R. S. Sanderlin [eds.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 147. 104p. Hall, M. J. 2003. Evaluation of four insecticides for control of first and second generation pecan nut casebearer in a commercial pecan orchard in Louisiana, Pp. 73-74. In, M. Hall and R. S. Sanderlin [eds.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 147. 104p. Hall, M. J. 2003. A comparison of two miticides for control of pecan leaf scorch mite in a commercial pecan orchard in Louisiana, Pp. 75-76. In, M. Hall and R. S. Sanderlin [eds.], Citrus, Fruit, and Nut ACE Group Research Summary. LAES Res. Sum. 147. 104p. Harris, M.K. 2003. Pecan Nut Casebearer Management in the Far West. 37th West. Pec. Conf. Proc., Las Cruces. pp 11-16. Harris, M. K., and D. A. Dean. 2003. Horticultural and Floricultural Entomology/Field Crop Entomology. CD-ROM (self-published). Harris, M., A. Knutson, A. Calixto, A. Dean, L. Brooks, and B. Ree. 2003. Impact of red imported fire ant on foliar herbivores and natural enemies. In Integration of chemical and biological insect control in native, seedling, and improved pecan production. eds. J.D. Dutcher, M. K. Harris and D.A. Dean. 2003. Southwest. Entomol. Supplement No. 27: 123-34 Kulkarni, R., J. Brewer, O. Ochoa and M. Harris. 2003. Anisotropy in Hickory Shells. Proceedings of the American Society of Composites 18th Ann. Tech. Conf. Oct. 2003. McCraw, B.D. and P.G. Mulder, Jr. 2003. Pecan management e-learning on the Internet. http://pecan.okstate.edu Mulder, P.G., W. Reid, R.A. Grantham, S. Landgraff, L. Talleferro, M.E. Payton, and A. Knutson. 2003. Evaluation of trap design and pheromone formulation used for monitoring pecan weevil, Curculio caryae. Southwestern Entomol. (in press) Shapiro-Ilan, D. I., W. A. Gardner, J. R. Fuxa, B. W. Wood, K. B. Nguyen, B. J. Adams, R. A. Humber, and M. J. Hall. 2003. Survey of entomopathogenic nematodes and fungi endemic to pecan orchards in the southeastern United States and their virulence to the pecan weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae). Environ. Entomol: 32(1):187-195. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., Gouge, D.H.,Koppenhofer., A.M. Factors affecting commercial success: case studies in cotton, turf, and citrus. Gaugler, R. editor. New York, NY: CABI Publishing; Chapter 16. 2002. p.333-355 Entomopathogenic Nematology. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., Gardner, W., Fuxa, J.R., Wood, B.W., Nguyen, K., Adams, B., Humber, R.A., Hall, M.J.. Microbial control research for the suppression of the pecan weevil. Proceedings of the Western Pecan Conference, 2002. p. 2-15. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., Reilly, C.C., Hotchkiss, M.W., Wood., B.W. The beneficial insect-killing fungus, Beauveria bassiana, can overcome effects of fungicide sprays. Pecan Grower. 2003. v.14(4). p. 24-27. Smith, D., M. Harris and T. Liu. 2003. IPM practices by vegetable growers. Am. Entomol. 48: 236-242. Stevenson, D. E., A. E. Knutson, W. Ree, J. A. Jackman, A. Dean, J. H. Matis, J. McVay, M. Mesbitt, R. Mizell, J. D. Dutcher, W. Reid, M. Hall, D. Barlow, M. T. Smith, P. Mulder, M. W. Smith, J. G. Milar and M. K. Harris. 2003. Pecan nut casebearer pheromone monitoring and degree-day model validation across the pecan belt. P. 57-74. In Dutcher, J. D., M. K. Harris, and D. A. Dean. (Eds.) 2003. Integration of Chemical and Biological Insect Control in Native, Seedling, and Improved Pecan Production. Southw. Entomologist. Suppl. No. 27. 142 pp. Reid, W. and P.G. Mulder. 2003. Insect pest management systems for native pecans. Southwestern Entomologist (in Press). Reid, W. 2003. Current pest management systems for pecan. Oklahoma Pecan Growers Newsletter 44(2): 3-8. Reid, W. 2003. Spray What? Pecan South 36(4):12-17.

Impact Statements

New biorational insecticides and miticides were found to be as effective as standard treatments for many pecan pest species while maintaining beneficial insect populations. Improved pest monitoring continues to refine thresholds to trigger control applications and provides information via grower hotlines.
Advances in biocontrol show that predatory mites can manage pecan scorch mites and enhanced persistence of an insect-killing fungus and nematode spp. may reduce reliance upon insecticides weevil control. An exotic lady beetle was found to feed on eggs of native lady beetles.

Date of Annual Report: 05/08/2002

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 03/03/2002 - 03/03/2002
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/1999 - 09/01/2004

Participants

Harris, Marvin - Texas A&M University; Hall, Michael - Louisiana State Univeristy; Cottrell, Ted - USDA-ARS; Ellington, Joe - New Mexico State University; McVay, John - Auburn University; Dutcher, Jim - University of Georgia; Mulder, Phil - Oklahoma State University; Shapiro-Ilan, David - USDA-ARS; Ree, Bill - Texas A&M University; Hunter, Martha - University of Arizona; Reid, William - Kansas State University

Brief Summary of Minutes

The meeting was called to order by Marvin Harris at 9:05 AM in the Soccorro Room of the Las Cruces Hilton. First order of business was to select a site to the 2003 S-293 meeting. Oklahoma City, OK was chosen and the S-293 meeting will be held in conjunction with the Southwestern Branch Meeting of the ESA. Second order of business was to nominate a new secretary. Phil Mulder nominated David Shapiro-Ilan, seconded by Ted cottrell and David Shapiro-Ilan was unanimously elected. Officers for S-293 during 2002-2003 are as follows: Michael Hall, chairman, Ted Cottrell, vice-chair, David Shapiro-Ilan, secretary.

Marvin Harris asked Jim Dutcher to report on the symposium titled "Integration of Chemical and Biological Insect Control in Native, Seedling, and Improved Pecan Production" held at the 2001 annual meeting of ESA. [Papers presented in the symposium are to be submitted to the Southwestern Entomologist for peer review]. Jim reported that he has received 8 of 12 manuscripts and he will not submit the group of manuscripts to the Southwestern Entomologist until all manuscripts are in. Jim set March 15 as the last day to get manuscripts to him. Phil Mulder asked how the manuscripts would be presented in the Southwestern Entomologist and Jim replied that they would appear as a supplement to the SW Entomologist.

The next order of business involved a discussion of the project by objective:

Objective 1: Improve monitoring and management techniques for hickory shuckworm, pecan nut casebearer, pecan weevil and kernel-feeding hemipterans.

Various members in attendance reported on pecan research results pertaining to monitoring of hickory shuckworm, pecan weevil, pecan nut casebearer, phylloxera, cerambycids, buprestids and kernel-feeding hemipterans. Emphasis was placed on improving detection of pests and estimating their abundance through use of new attractants, trap designs and trapping methodology.

Objective 2: Develop and integrate biointensive IPM through crop profiling, habitat diversification, host plant resistance and biological control.

Reports are made on kernel damage by hemipterans to different pecan varieties and that host plant resistance may alleviate this problem. Supplemental nitrogen applied to orchards may decrease hickory shuckworm damage but generally increased aphid and mite abundance. Trap crops may help to control stink bugs in orchards. Reports also included information on PNCB models beging used in Texas and Oklahoma, attract-and-kill studies for PNCB management, management of pecan weevil with Beauveria bassiana and entomopathogenic nematodes, release of imported green lacewing spp. in pecan orchards, use of mini-insectaries to sustain Trichogramma populations in pecan orchards, evaluation of alternative pecan aphid control products (Surround particle film, Talcum powder and Habanero pepper extact), screeing of entomopathogenic fungi against pecan aphids, and studies showing that alfalfa fields act as natural insectaries for various natural enemies to move into pecan. Orchard soil profiling revealed differences in numbers of pecan weevils between soil types.

Objective 3: Develop pesticide management strategies to conserve and optimize insecticide efficacy for currently registered insecticides and integrate reduced-risk pesticides into pecan management.

Reports included information from studies evaluating conventional insecticides and newer ‘soft‘ chemistry against pecan pests. Researchers commented on efficacy of various insecticide combinations and rates that provided economical control of pest species. Many of the new insecticides can provide for good control against certain pecan pest while not harming beneficial insects within the orchard. Reduced spray programs for pecean weevil are being tested.

Accomplishments

The goal of the S-293 regional project is to provide pecan growers with the means to monitor and economically manage arthropods pests of pecan. Methods for improved pest detection have been developed that lead to responsible application of insecticides based upon pest populations and economic thresholds. Introduction of biorational insecticides and development of biological control methods five growers management tools that will provide for continued pecan production. Members of the S-293 regional project will continue to evaluate methods of pest detection with a focus on improving existing methods. Pest management will be improved with safer and fewer insecticide and through biological control utilizing pathogens and natural enemies.

Publications

Cottrell, T.E. 2001. Improved trap capture of Euschistus servus and Euschistus tristigmus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in pecan orchards. Flor. Entomol. 84: 731-732. Cottrell, T.E. and P.G. Mulder. 2001. Circle trunk traps for monitoring pecan weevil emergence. The Pecan Grower 13:27 Cottrell, T.E., Jeremy K. Greene, and G.A. Herzog. 2001. Seasonal occurrence of brown and dusky stink bugs across agricultural landscapes. Proceedings of the Southeastern Pecan Growers Association 94: 77-81. Dutcher, J.D., R.E. Worley, P. Conner, and S. Dove. 2001. Pecan varietal differences in Hemipteran kernal damage. J. Engomol. Sci. 36: 445-452. Dutcher, J.D. 2002. Impact of insects on pecan nut drop from nut set to shell-hardening. J. Entomol. Sci (in press, accepted 10/22/01). Dutcher, J.D. 2001. Advances in Pecan Pest Management. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. 12(3): 16-17. Dutcher, J.D. 2001. Pecan Variety is an Important Factor in Kernel Spot Caused By Stink Bugs and Leaffootted Bugs. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. 12(4): 20-21. Dutcher, J.D. 2001. Technology Transfer is Important to a Successful Pecan Crop. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. 13(1): 13. Dutcher, J.D. 2001. Interactions Impact Pecan Insect Control in 2001. Research Spotlight. The Pecan Grower. 13(2): 25. Grantham, R.A., P.G. Mulder, G.W. Cupersus. 2002. Comparisons on the efficacy of different trap types in capturing pecan nut casebearer, acrobasis nuxvorella. SW Entomologist. In press. Grantham, R.A., P.G. Mulder, G.W. Cupersus, and J.D. Carlson. 2002. evaluation and assessment of phenological models for pecan nut casebearer Acrobasis nuxvorella Neunzig (Lepidopter: Pyralidae) using pheromone traps. In Press. Accepted for publication 1/10/02. Mulder, P.G. 2001. Possible alternatives for pecan weevil control. Are organic pecans on the horizon? 13(2): 42-43. Mulder, P.G. 2001. Pecan phylloxera season is upon us. Okla. Pecan Growers Assoc. 42(2): 2-6. Mulder, P.G. 2001. Prepare for pecan nut casebearer season. Okla. Pecan Growers Assoc. 42(2): 4. Mulder, P.G. 2001. Suggestions for use of pecan weevil Circle traps. Okla. Pecan Growers Assoc. 42(3): 7. Petersen, M.K. and M.S. Hunter. 2001. Variation in the outcome of competition between two aphid species on pecan: Plants matter more than predators. Oikos 92: 107-118. Petersen, M.K. and M.S. Hunter. 2002. Ovipositional preference and larval - early adult performance of two generalist lacewing predators of aphids in pecans. (In press) Biological Control. McVay, J.R. 2001. Low-impact Pecan Insect Management: Another Fork in the IPM Highway. In B. Pass [ed.] 2001 Integrated Pest Management in the Southern Region. Reid, W. 2001. Sawflies attack. Oklahoma Pecan Growers Newsletter 42(3): 7. Reid, W. 2001. Advanced pest management systems for pecans. Abstract. HortScience 36: 481. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I. 2001. The potential for microbial control of the pecan weevil: questions and answers. The Pecan Grower 12: 19. Shapiro-Ilan, D.E., B. Wood, W. Gardner, J. Fuxa, T. Cottrell, M. Hall, K. Nguyen, and B. Adams. 2001. Research toward microbial control of the pecan weevil. Proceedings of the Southeastern Pecan Growers Association 94: 116-121.