Annual/Termination Reports:

[01/08/2001] [10/26/2001] [11/11/2002] [02/06/2004] [02/14/2005]

Report Information

Participants

Mr. Clyde Crumley Texas Agricultural Extension Service;
Dr. Scott Armstrong Texas Tech University & Texas A&M University;
Dr. Phil Mulder Oklahoma State University Extension Service;
Dr. Ames Hebert University of Virginia Extension Service;
Dr. Dennis Kopp USDA Coop. State Research, Education and Extension;
Dr. Rick Brandenburg North Carolina Extension Service;
Dr. Jim Todd University of Georgia Experiment Station;
Dr. Steve Brown University of Georgia Extension Service;
Dr. Phil Utley Assistant Dean, CAES, Tifton, Georgia ;
Dr. Roy Pittman USDA ARSSAA;
Mr. Scott Russel Texas Agricultural Extension Service;
Dr. Jay Chapin South Carolina Extension Service;
Joe Funderburk Florida State University, Department of Entmology;

Brief Summary of Minutes

(See Copy of Minutes)

Accomplishments

(See Copy of Minutes)

Publications

Impact Statements

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Dr. Dennis Kopp, USDA CSREES, dkopp@intranet.reeusda.gov;
Dr. Scott Armstrong, Texas Tech University & Texas A&M University, joarmstr@ttacs.ttu.edu;
Mr. Jokirk Newbrough, Texas Cooperative Extension Service, Texas A&M University, j newbrough@tamu.edu;
Dr. Rick Brandenberg, North Carolina State University, rick_brandenberg@ncsu.edu;
Dr. Jim Todd, University of Georgia, todd@tifton.cpes.peachnet.edu ;
Dr. Steve L. Brown, University of Georgia, bugbrown@arches.uga.edu;
Mr. Simmy McKeown, University of Georgia;
Mr. James R. Weeks, Auburn University, jweeks@acesag.auburn.edu;
Dr. Jay Chapin, Clemson University, Jchapin@clemson.edu;

Project Leadership:
Chair: James R. Weeks, jweeks@acesag.auburn.edu;
Chair Elect: Scott Armstrong, joarmstr@ttacs.ttu.edu;
Secretary Elect: Ames Herbert, herbert@vt.edu;

Brief Summary of Minutes

I. Chairman Ron Weeks opened the meeting. Chairman Weeks mentioned that the minutes of the meeting would be due to Dr. Jones within two weeks.



II. Scott Armstrong introduced Dr. Dick Auld and Dr Jaroy Moore. Dr. Moore, director of the Lubbock Experiment Station, introduced the goals and directives of the Experiment Station with some comments on production statistics. Dr. Auld, head of the Department of Plant and Soil Science at Texas Tech University, discussed department faculty and their role in agriculture in the region. He also discussed the issue of water use and water quality as related to peanut production in West Texas.



III. A registration fee of $4.00 was collected from each attendee to cover local meeting expenses.



IV. Administrative Advisors

Dr. Richard Jones our experiment station advisor due to a previous obligation was not able to meet with the group this year.

As of the time of the meeting an extension advisor had not been selected for our group.

Dennis Kopp handed out literature and introduced 12 CREES Programs. He also presented the Regional Pest Management Initiative for fiscal year 2003.



V. Election of officers for 2002

Ames Herbert was nominated and unanimously elected as secretary for 2002. Armstrong will preside as chairman from the step wise progression from secretary.



VI. Site and date selection for 2002 meeting

Ron Weeks asked for any suggestions for 2002. Rick Brandenburg mentioned that it might be time to rotate our meeting up to Virginia to visit and discuss production problems in that area since tomato spotted wilt was a serious problem in both the Virginia and North Carolina areas. Those in attendance unanimously voted to travel to the Suffolk, Virginia area and meet at the Tidewater Agricultural Research and Extension Center. A general quorum decided that a tour was needed, and the meeting was set for October 2 4, 2002.



VII. Discussion on a regional peanut insect management publication

The subject of producing a regional publication for peanut IPM was brought forward from last years discussion. A significant amount of time was spent on trying to determine if it would possible for the ESA to publish and market the publication. Many expressed the concern that it would not be feasible and that the ESA would not be interested. The other option would be for APS to use a brief, but quality photo publication to use if the older, previously published a publication on peanut insect management needed updating. A quorum present expressed that this was unlikely. Dennis Kopp suggested that perhaps a "crop profile" could be produced for peanuts at the national or state levels. A crop profile is a resource of production and management that includes a list of insect, weed, fertility production practices and used by university and government agencies and published electronically. After discussion on this subject, it was discovered that most states, including Texas already had "crop profiles". Dennis said he would talk to some people that would determine if a national profile was needed and that he would have them contact SERA IEG 7 with further information.



VIII. State reports for insect situations and yield estimates:



North Carolina Rick Brandenburg thrips densities were considered low in the early season but tomato spotted wilt ended up being a significant problem with up to 40% infection in some fields. Rick commented that this was the most significant TSW problem that has occurred under his observations. Potato leafhopper densities were also high and never seemed to drop. They appear to be a pest to manage in the future. Lepidopteran pest were not an issue all season long this problem is probably an indication that corn acreage is decreasing and cotton acreage is increasing. Spider mites were "spotty" in areas that were dry. Rick expressed concern over the TSW and said that he understands some of the concern and frustration that other entomologist felt as they went through epidemics.



South Carolina Jay Chapin - CBR and leafspot, peanut diseases, were a problem for Jay‘s growing region this year. Burrowing bugs were monitored with pitfall traps and caused damage in some areas. Jay mentioned that he could not notice a ttastev difference in peanuts that were burrowing bug damaged. Leser cornstalk borers were a problem where drought showed up. Spider mites were not a problem in the 2001 production season.



Georgia Jim Todd, Steve Brown and Simmy McKeown indicated that insect pressure in general was light, but late season infection of TSWV did reduce yields where present. Lesser corn stalk borers were injuring peanuts until rain slowed the problem but some significant damage did occur. Potato leafhopper‘s were moderate in densities. Three cornered alfalfa hoppers were spotty but caused some problems in late planted fields. Simmy mentioned that velvetbean caterpillar were a problem late season but that Dimilin worked very well for controlling them. Steve mentioned the TSW program in Georgia, handed out the publication entitled "Tomato Spotted Wilt of Peanut" and that adaption of management practices from producers was increasing every year.



Texas Jokirk Newbrough, Scott Armstrong Jokirk said that the first obvious problem in his area was water quality and quantity. The water is salty and later in the season when no rain fell, the stress of low water quality and the inability to keep peanuts watered adequately turned out to be a problem. Yellow decline, a disease that was a symptom of the aforementioned stress is also evident in some fields. Jokirk mentioned that the cause of the "yellow decline" has not been determined. Droughthy conditions also allowed for LCSB and spider mite problems in areas where water was inadequate. Sclerotinia was evident in some fields, especially where producers were not rotating there crops out of peanuts. Scott mentioned that although it appeared that the rednecked peanut worm (RNPW) infested peanuts from mid October on, every terminal was infested in some fields. If RNPW were to infest peanuts earlier in the season, control measures might have to be used to prevent yield loss.



Alabama Ron Weeks mentioned that Alabama producers were adopting management practices for TSW and planting late along with using systemic insecticides was having an impact on reducing the incidence of TSW. Ron said that leaf spot was a problem and that symptoms of the disease were more different than he had seen in previous seasons. The symptoms often looked like burn injury at first in some instances. Yields for Alabama peanuts have the potential to be higher than average with the possibility that record yields may occur. Foliage feeders were not a factor and three cornered alfalfa hoppers caused problems in some spotty locations.



IX. Insect control recommendations

Chairman Weeks called for insect control recommendations. Steve Brown, Jim Todd and Simmy McKeown discussed the recommendations from Georgia. Some pesticides like Fury from FMC were being evaluated for peanut insect control, Fipronil was also being considered. Steve asked the group if Tracer were to labeled on peanuts, what would the target insects be? Jay Chapin said that Fall armyworms would be a good candidate in his area because Lannate was providing marginal to poor control. Steve said that when Lannate is applied in hot weather, it will dissipate quickly and provide poor results plus the fact that producers do not like applying it with ground rigs. Rick Brandenburg mentioned that Danitol was providing adequate control of Lepidopterous pests in his area.

Steve mentioned recommendations for defoliators and the problem with making recommendations for different types of peanuts (i.e. florunners vs. Spanish) or the age and overall canopy development. A sliding scale that considers these factors has not been developed but certainly could be used.

Leaf hopper control is recommended when 25% leaf burn occurs. Jim Todd commented that this threshold works well but that there is a species difference in leafhoppers and there is know sure way to take this in to account.



IX. Brief overview of research and extension projects



South Carolina Jay Chapin Presented images of the three different species of burrowing bugs that are found in his area and briefly discussed some differences in biology and host plants. Jay also presented some data on burrowing bug damage and resulting economic consequences. A lengthy discussion followed concerning burrowing bug insecticide control, alternate host plants, biology and pod damage to peanuts.



North Carolina Rick Brandenburg Explained that possibly 10% of peanut fields may actually have southern corn rootworm (SCRW) infestations but estimates of 75% of fields are treated with prophylactic treatments. Rick explained that this was even after many educational meetings and the "Risk Management" publication that he and Ames Herbert developed. Rick mentioned that he enlisted the help of a sociologist to conduct a study on why producers treat when the risk is minimal. The results of the study were that the treatments are used for insurance, or that the producers had heard from family members or other producers how much damaging SCRW‘‘s were and simply were not willing to produce the crop without the use of insecticide.



Texas Scott Armstrong Explained that he and Forrest Mitchell were screening peanut varieties for proteinase inhibitors by using the world collection peanut variety and by incorporating them in diets of LCSB and the SCRW. Mitchell is responsible for the LCSB trials while Armstrong is responsible for diet studies on SCRW. Additionally, Dr. Keyan Salzman at College Station, Texas, is responsible for screening peanut tissue for proteinase inhibitors. Armstrong also mentioned the previous two years survey for thrips vectors of TSW in the West Texas growing region and that the tobacco thrips appears to be in low densities early in the season and at thus possess a small risk for epidemics.



Georgia Jim Todd presented the results of several insecticide, cultivar, row patterns, and combinations of pre plant herbicides with at planting insecticides for management of TSW. Thimet insecticide is providing yield advantages that may not be explained by thrips control. Recent studies were mentioned by Jay Chapin that suggested when the peanut plant is exposed to Thimet, certain genetic traits may be expressed or over expressed which could explain the advantages in yield when Thimet is used. Todd also mentioned that cultivars like "Georgia Green" are still helping in the suppression of TSW. Steve Brown‘s observations were that reducing the first generation of TCAH‘s greatly reduced problems later in the season because reproduction in the field was significantly reduced.



Alabama Ron Weeks reported on the evaluation of major insect populations in minimum till peanuts. Combinations of ryegrass with wheat and oats, or ryegrass alone appear to have slightly lower TSW infected plants. Ron presented the results of leafhopper and three cornered alfalfa control tests. From the products evaluated, Leverage and Karatez provided good control while Centric provided marginal control. Ron also presented the results of planting "Georgia Green" peanuts with the use of different combinations of at planting insecticides and foliar applied insecticides. The pressure from thrips damage and TSW symptoms was low for June and most of July, but by the August evaluations, TSW was higher than 38% in the untreated control. Most treatments kept TSW symptoms reduced, especially where Thimet was used.

Accomplishments

As result of this group meeting, regional and multi state research has been planned and discussed for specific pests. An example is the management of tomato spotted wilt virus of peanut which is vectored by thrips. This pest began as a localized problem and has spread across the peanut belt. Multi state research and extension programs in Georgia, Florida, and Alabama supported by peanut grower check off funds have provided a significant management tool for southeast growers. As TSWV incidence increases in other peanut states, the strategies developed in Georgia called the "Virus Index" are being adopted and localized to those states. Exchange of data in this SERA IEG has enhanced the research and extension specialists‘ ability to rapidly employ the management tactics necessary for TSWV in peanut. The discussion by this group of pesticide efficacy, new emerging pests and potential problems has given direction to our individual research and extension programs and allowed an early adoption of management tactics by peanut growers.

Publications

None, although an insect identification guide is in the planning stages with collaboration by all group members on specific groups of insects (see minutes for discussion).

Impact Statements

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Ron Weeks, Auburn University,Wiregrass Research & Extension Center, jweeks@acesag.auburn.edu; James W. Todd, Department of Entomology, University of Georgia, Coastal Plain Experiment Station, todd@tifton.uga.edu; Steve Brown, Extension Entomology, Rural Development Center, bugbrown@arches.uga.edu; Phil Mulder, Oklahoma State University, philmul@okstate.edu; Jay W. Chapin, Clemson University, Edisto Research & Education Center, jchapin@clemson.edu; Scott Armstrong, Texas Tech. University, Plant & Soil Science, joarmstr@ttacs.ttu.edu; Ames Herbert, Virginia Tech, Tidewater AREC, herbert@vt.edu; Mike Fitzner, USDA/CSREES, mfitzner@reeusda.gov; Richard L. Jones, University of Florida, rljones@mail.ifas.ufl.edu. Dennis Kopp, USDA/CSREES

Brief Summary of Minutes

Tuesday, October 29

• 1:00 Convene at Waterfront Centre, Washington D.C, welcome, opening comments, introductions, Scott Armstrong.
  
  
• 1:10 Comments from administrative advisors & CSREES representative. Mike Fitzner introduced himself , Nat. IPM Coordinator, as the new CSREES advisor. Federal perspective: reminded us of the need for renewal of this project. He described the ‘agency‘ as a funding agency that disperses funds via grants and non-competitive funding. Mike stressed accountability and the need to report success stories. He also, encouraged developing a web site for this multi-state project and mentioned the new IPM Centers and the interest to develop and sustain them across the US.
  
  

  Richard Jones provided comments about his role as the new AES administrative advisor. He distributed and discussed the guidelines for resubmitting this project. It expires next fall so needs to be rewritten. Scott Armstrong agreed to do the rewrite.
  
  

• 1:30 Election of officers and site selection for 2003 meeting. Rick Brandenburg was elected to be the Secretary-elect for 2002-2003. Dr. Brandenburg will work on site selection (Charlotte, NC was suggested by the group as a possible site). The group discussed changing the meeting time to later in the year. December 9-10 was suggested.
  
  
• 1:45 IR-4 discussion, developing a concerted effort for peanut insecticides? Scott Armstrong suggested that this group visit the idea of coordinating an IR-4 effort among peanut states. This could be enabled by creating a list serve of email addresses of the group so that all could be updated. The group suggested inviting an IR-4 representative to the next meeting to provide a better picture of the process, and show us how we can better coordinate with them. It was suggested that the group spend time on this each year, and when possible, coordinate efforts to improve opportunities for registrations. A list of possible priorities to work on during the next year was developed: Acramite (Crompton Uniroyal Chemical) and Intrepid (Dow AgroSciences). The Chair for next year (Ames Herbert) has been asked to contact IR-4 and set up a visit for the meeting next year, and to check on the status of Intrepid insecticide.
  
  
• 2:30 Insect updates and crop situations for 2002
  
  

  Alabama - Ron Weeks: 195,000 acres were planted and yield is projected to be only about 2000 lb/acre. They had average thrips pressure early in the season. Dry weather prevailed early in the season, which reduced activity of in-furrow insecticides. Dry weather persisted throughout most of the season. Sporadic infestations of defoliators [beet armyworm (BAW), soybean loopers (SBL), fall armyworm (FAW), corn earworm (CEW)] occurred. Lesser corn stalk borer (LCB) problems were severe in some areas. Most growers did not treat for LCBs because of high cost and reduced yield potential. Leafhoppers occurred late in the season and 3-cornered alfalfa hopper infestations occurred in some fields. A few growers treated with Orthene or low rates of pyrethroids. Burrowing bugs reappeared in some areas. Shellers are finding BB damaged kernels and are claiming increases in aflatoxin. There was some discussion of BB damage and how it is handled, rated, at the grading/buying stations.
  
  

  Georgia - Steve Brown: 530,000-550,000 acres, down slightly from last year, with projected yields of 2700 lb/acre, also down from last year. Very heavy thrips populations early and very high incidence of tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV). TSWV incidence was higher than in recent years. They experienced one of the heaviest foliage feeder years with some fields being treated 3 to 4 times. BAW nearly defoliated some fields in some areas, which was very unusual. Most fields with heavy BAW had been previously treated with Lorsban. Steward insecticide gained a federal label and was used by a lot of growers. Other foliage feeders also came in [FAW, SBL, and velvetbean caterpillar (VBC)]. Leafhoppers came in to many fields, both potato leafhopper and one or two other larger species (sharpshooters). Some wireworm damage was reported, especially in irrigated fields.
  
  
  
  

  North Carolina - (submitted prior to the meeting by Rick Brandenburg): I expect our crop will be down to about 80,000 acres next year, a 50% reduction from this year and half what we had a few years ago. We were eaten alive this year by beet armyworms and thrips were heavy early. Irrigated fields got hammered by SCR, a few spider mites, but not as many as I would have expected. Corn earworms weren‘t too bad. A few lesser cornstalk borers were out there in the driest fields. TSWV was worse than last year and we had fields that we documented at 40% infestation levels.
  
  

  South Carolina - Jay Chapin: 13,000 acres in 2002 with yields estimated at 2200 lb/acre. It was a very bad year with dry conditions throughout the growing season and very poor harvesting conditions. TSWV was worse than every reported. TSWV caused a lot of pod damage. BAW was bad, but FAW was worse. VBC populations were also high. LCB occurred early, but was ignored by producers because of poor control with insecticides, high cost, and problem with flaring spider mites, CEW and cutworm. Lorsban use has been pretty much discontinued in SC. Because of the farm bill, not much future for dry land peanut production. Only irrigated peanuts will make it.
  
  

  [A comment was made to invite Jon Ruberson, UGA, to become a participant of this project. His research specialty, natural enemies in row crops - especially peanut, would be of interest and add a valuable dimension to the group.]
  
  

  Oklahoma - Phil Mulder: 65,000 acres, down 15,000 from last year, with an estimated yield of 2200 lb/acre. Almost no insect problems to report. No defoliators, no thrips, very few mite problems. Rainfall was ample. 2002 was a nearly ideal season. However, rainy, cold October weather is preventing growers from completing harvest. This may become a very significant part of our peanut story soon, especially if the freezing weather gets to the crop before we can.
  
  

  Texas - Scott Armstrong: 172,000 acres in west TX, down from 180,000 last year. If you add central and south TX, an estimated 300,000 acres are grown in TX. Yield is estimated to be high for irrigated fields, up to 7000 lb/acre in the best areas, but 3200 lb/acre statewide. West TX peanuts are mostly irrigated. Water quality is an issue, not good in some cases. Water has salts that can scorch leaves. Disease levels are beginning to show up (Pythium, early leafspot). Thrips populations were fairly high. A few spider mite problems occurred. FAW occurred at high levels in some isolated areas but didn‘t appear to do much damage.
  
  

  Virginia - Ames Herbert: Virginia‘s peanut acreage has dropped 23% since 2001, to an estimated 57,000 acres in 2002. Because of extended drought conditions and increases in disease levels (especially TSWV) yields are estimated to be below average at 2,400 lb per acre. Uncertainty surrounding the new peanut program and lower potential value will further reduce acreage in 2003. Estimates range from 0 to 20,000-30,000 acres expected in 2003. Thrips populations were high early in the season and plant damage was severe in insecticide-unprotected fields. TSWV was rampant in peanut fields in 2002. Many acres were infested and some with as much as 75% infested plants. Populations of defoliators were higher than normal. CEW populations were high in many fields and many producers applied insecticides for control. Beet armyworm was discovered on cotton, peanut and soybean fields in the last week of July. Many fields were infested and treated.
  
  

• 5:00 Adjourn
  
  
• 6:00 Social gathering and meal

Wednesday, October 30

• 8:00 Research results and sharing control strategies on problem insects
  
  

  Thrips, thrips\tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) management: Jim Todd presented information on the GA thrips research/extension program. He distributed the newest version of the TSWV index (UGA Bull. 1165R). C-11-2-39 was the most resistant line evaluated in the 2002 studies and shows promise to be bred with more marketable lines. It is a big-seeded runner, so needs gypsum application to fill out the kernels, but has a red seed coat, which is an undesirable trait according to shellers. Georgia Green is showing more TSWV virus symptoms across the state. INSV (Impatiens necrotic spotted virus) is now showing up in a mixture with TSWV. UF98116 and ‘Hull‘are showing promise. AT-201 has not performed well in terms of TSWV susceptibility. Thimet 20G at the 5 lb/acre rate results in significantly less TSWV and higher yields compared with no insecticide, and the twin row planting pattern results in less virus. Many other lines were evaluated and discussed. In general, results conferred findings from previous years and supported the TSWV index. Steve Brown showed data that indicated the positive impact of adoption of the index by growers on losses to TSWV. On-farm surveys (1996-2000) also show that the index has been fairly accurate. Farmers were shifting to later planting dates in response to the index, but lapsed in 2002. Steve showed data on the impact of wheat straw cover on thrips damage, with damage and incidence of virus decreasing as amount of straw cover increased. Ron Weeks passed out his data on response of thrips to insecticide treatments. Ames Herbert presented data from 5 trials in VA where insecticides, row spacing, plant population and varieties were evaluated for TSWV incidence. Phil Mulder passed out and summarized data on thrips trials in OK.
  
  

• 9:00 Leafhopper species: Ron Weeks passed out data on insecticide efficacy against potato leafhopper and 3-cornered alfalfa hopper. Karate tends to provide more residual activity compared with Orthene. Steve Brown presented data on leafhopper control with hopper burn (plant damage) ratings and yield.
  
  
• 9:30 Break
  
  
• 9:45 Lepidopterous pests (FAW, BAW, SBL, CEW and VBC): Ron Weeks passed out data on insecticide efficacy against CEW, BAW, FAW and SBL. Jay Chapin showed data on foliage feeders (FAW, CEW, VBC). SC is experiencing burrowing bug (BB) outbreaks in some fields. BB damage is associated with tillage (more in minimum tillage) and dry weather (more in dry weather). There could be an association with aflatoxin. Fall or spring tillage, or irrigation, can reduce BB damage. Ames Herbert also reported on field trials comparing product efficacy against mixed populations of CEW, BAW, yellowstriped armyworm and others.
  
  
• 10:45 Soil pests (southern corn rootworm (SCR), wireworm, burrowing bug): Scott Armstrong presented results of work with SCR and use of cysteine proteinase inhibitors. He presented detailed results of graduate student studies relating to this area of research. Ames Herbert presented a brief overview of the NC/VA SCR Risk Index, and showed a sample of pods with damage to an unknown pest. No conclusions were drawn by the group, except that soil sampling will be needed to determine what insect might be responsible. Ron Weeks showed data on soil samples using a soil-sampling machine developed by Steve Brown. Samples from AL contained BB and various wireworms.
  
  
• 11:45 Final comments and review: The group had to disband at 12 noon but agreed that more time was needed next year in order to cover topics in more detail. It was suggested and voted upon to increase next year‘s meeting to 1-= days, beginning at 8:00 on a Tuesday (Dec. 9 was suggested) and adjourning at noon the following day. This change is hereby noted and will be revisited during the planning of the 2003 meeting.
  
  
• 12:00 noon - Adjourn

Accomplishments

: This meeting served its purpose as an annual information exchange among peanut entomologists, both research and extension. Pest problems and management tactics were discussed for all states participating, and many opportunities were presented for comparing data and results. From this annual exchange, participants are able to see changes in pest complexes and management strategies and relate those changes back to their respective state programs. Shared data serves to guide regional recommendations and coordinate activities among researchers. A few specific examples of the advantages and impacts of sharing information are following. The VA/NC peanut area experienced higher levels of TSWV in 2002 and as a result, participants of this group have prepared a risk index, based on a similar index developed by University of GA participants, which will be the first step in providing growers in the VA/NC area with TSWV management strategies. A rather unique insect pest, the burrowing bug, was discovered for the first time in NC and information on this pest generated by the Clemson University participant was helpful in identifying the problem and developing management recommendations. Information on soil insect pests generated in the VA/NC area has been helpful in guiding management programs in other states. All eastern states experienced unusual species and high numbers of lepidopterous pests. Discussion of management options and efficacy data was useful for all participants. As an output, the group agreed to focus on certain products for new registration via the IR-4 program, which could benefit peanut producers in many states. Participants from western states shared information on soil and foliage pests that was unique and therefore benefited participants from eastern states.<br /> <br><br /> <br>

Publications

Armstrong, J. S., G.C. Kraemer and F.L. Mitchell. 2001. Thrips species associated with Texas High Plains peanut. Southw. Entomol. 26:345-352.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brandenburg, R., and A. Herbert. 2002. The peanut rootworm advisory. NC State Univ. Coop. Ext. Serv., and VPI & SU, VA Coop. Ext.2M-06/2002.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brown, S, J. Todd, A. Culbreath, J. Baldwin, J. Beasley and B. Kemerait. 2002. Managing spotted wilt of peanut. GA Coop. Ext. Serv. and Univ. of GA College of Agric. & Environ. Sci. Bull. 1165R.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Campbell, H. L. and J. R. Weeks. 2002. Impact of Strip-Till Planting Using Various Cover Crops on Insect Pests and Diseases of Peanuts. In E. Van Santan (ed.) 2002. Making Conservation Tillage Conventional : Building A Future on 25 Years of Research. Proc. Of 25th Annual Southern Tillage Conference for Sustainable Agriculture. Special Report No. 1 Ala. Agric. Expt. St. & Auburn University, AL. <br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D. A. 2002. Insect pest management in Virginia peanuts, soybeans, and cotton. Virginia Tech, TAREC Info. Ser. No. 453.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D. A., Jr. 2002. Application of field research results to management and recommendations for insect pests of Virginia peanut. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc. 33:72-73. <br /> <br><br /> <br>Mulder, P.G., K.E. Jackson and S.K. Seuhs. 2002. Management of insect and disease incidence in peanuts. In:Partners in Progress - Peanut research at OSU 2001. Oklahoma State Univ., DASNR, OAES, and OCES. P-990. Pgs. 8-14. <br /> <br><br /> <br>Vogt, J.T., P.G. Mulder, Jr., A. Sheridan, E.M. Shoff, and R.E. Wright. 2002. Red imported fire ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) fail to reduce predator abundance in peanuts. J. Entomol. Sci. 200-202. <br /> <br><br /> <br>Weeks, J. R. and L. Wells. 2002. Evaluation of Novel Insecticides for Control of Thrips and Lepidopterous Larvae of Peanuts in Alabama. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. And Educ. Soc. 33:73.<br /> <br>

Impact Statements

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Kopp, Dennis (dkopp@csrees.usda.gov)  USDA/CSREES;Jones, Richard (rljones@ifas.ufl.edu)  University of Florida;Chapin, Jay (jchapin@clemson.edu)  Clemson University, Edisto Research & Education Center;Brown, Steve (bugbrown@uga.edu)  University of Georgia, Rural Development Center;Mulder, Phil (philmul@okstate.edu)  Oklahoma State University;Brandenburg, Rick, Secretary 2002-03, Chair-Elect 2003-04 (rick_brandenburg@ncsu.edu)  North Carolina State University;Russell, Scott, Secretary-Elect 2003-04 (sarussel@tamu.edu)  Texas A&M University, Terry County Extension Office;Weeks, Ron (jweeks@acesag.auburn.edu)  Auburn University, Wiregrass Research & Extension Center;Pittman, Roy (rpittma@gaes.griffin.peachnet.edu)  University of Georgia, Plant Genetics Resource Conservation Unit;Herbert, Ames, Chair 2002-03 (herbert@vt.edu)  Virginia Tech., Tidewater AREC

Brief Summary of Minutes

Accomplishments

The SERA-IEG 7 group will provide updates as to successes and accomplishments that were completed by individuals participating in this group and enhanced through the coordinated efforts of this SERA. A major accomplishment has been the multi-state, regional approach to minimize the impact of tomato spotted wilt virus in all three production regions. Through initial work conducted in Texas that was passed along to scientists in Georgia, a comprehensive risk index that has given growers a number of peanut production options that significantly reduce yield loss from this virus. In turn, these findings allowed scientists in North Carolina and Virginia to aggressively pursue a similar research program and greatly accelerate the timetable to develop a similar and effective risk index. Figure 1 demonstrates the level of virus through time in Georgia peanuts, the implementation of various management strategies, and the dramatic reduction in virus associated with this program. A similar graph could be developed for North Carolina for just the past three years.

Publications

Barnes, J.S., D.L. Jordan, C.R. Crozier, R.L. Brandenburg, C.A. Hurt, J.E. Bailey, J.E. Lanier, P.D. Johnson and F.R. Cox. 2003. Peanut response and tomato spotted wilt virus incidence following various cultural practices. 2002 Proceedings. American Peanut Research and Education Society Annual Meeting. July 16-19, 2002. Research Triangle Park, NC. p 55.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brandenburg, R.L., B.M. Royals, J.H. Scott and D.A. Herbert, Jr. 2002. Recent strategies for rootworm management in North Carolina peanut production. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc. 34:31.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brandenburg, R., B. Royals and J. Scott. 2003. Recent strategies for rootworm management in NC peanut production. 2002 Proceedings. American Peanut Research and Education Society Annual Meeting. July 16-19, 2002. Research Triangle Park, NC. p. 31.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brown, S.L. and J.W. Todd. 2003. Peanut insect control, pp. 110-113, In: P. Guilleabeau (ed.), Georgia Pest Management Handbook, Univ. of Ga. Coop. Ext. Ser. Spec. Bulletin 28. 658 pp.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Brown, S.L., J.W. Todd, A.K. Culbreath, J.A. Baldwin, J.P. Beasley, R. Kemerait and E. Prostko. 2003. Minimizing spotted wilt of peanut. Univ. of Ga. Coop. Ext. Ser. Bulletin 1165. 11pp.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Chappell, G.F., II and D.A. Herbert, Jr. 2002. Extension efforts for quality peanut production in Prince George County, Virginia. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc. 34:51-52.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Garcia, L.E., R.L. Brandenburg, G.G. Kennedy, J.E. Bailey and J.R. Bradley. 2003. Winter occurrence and spring migration of <i>Frankliniella fusca</i> (Hinds) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) in North Carolina peanut (<i>Arachis hypogaea</i> L.) fields. Peanut Science (In Press)<br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D.A., Jr. 2002. Effects of foliar-applied insecticides in thrips injury and yield of Virginia-type peanut, 2001. Arthropod Mngt. Tests 27:F77.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D.A., Jr. 2002. Evaluation of selected insecticides for control and impact of potato leafhopper in Virginia-type peanut, 2001. Arthropod Mngt. Tests 27:F78.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D.A., Jr. 2002. Impact and management of potato leafhopper, <i>Empoasca fabae</i> (Harris), in Virginia Peanut. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc. 34:32-33.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Herbert, D.A., Jr., H.M. Linker and R. Brandenburg. 2003. The peanut southern corn rootworm advisory. Va. Coop. Ext. Pub. No. 444-351, http://www.ext.vt.edu/pubs/entomology/444-351/444-351.html. <br /> <br>Herbert, Jr., D.A., S. Malone and R.L. Brandenburg. 2004. Evaluation of the southern corn rootworm advisory for peanut. Peanut Science. (Submitted). <br /> <br><br /> <br>Hurt, C., R. Brandenburg and D. Jordan. 2003. Evaluation of management strategies to reduce the incidence of tomato spotted wilt virus in peanut in NC. 2002 Proceedings. American Peanut Research and Education Society Annual Meeting. July 16-19, 2002. Research Triangle Park, NC. p. 33.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Jordan, D., R.L. Brandenburg and C.A. Hurt. 2003. Complexity of recommending reduced tillage as a component of IPM in Virginia-type peanut production. Abstract G40-P, p. 62. 4th National Integrated Pest Management Symposium. Indianapolis, IN.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Jordan, D.L., J.S. Barnes, C.R. Bogle, R.L. Brandenburg, J.E. Bailey, P.D. Johnson and A.S. Culpepper. 2003. Peanut response to cultivar selection, digging date, and tillage intensity. Agron. J. 95:380-385.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Jordan, D., R.L. Brandenburg, B. Shew, T. Isleib and H.M. Linker. 2003. Managing tomato spotted wilt virus in peanuts in North Carolina and Virginia. NCCES, Raleigh, NC, Publ. AG-638.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Jordan, D.L., J.F. Ferguson, A.C. York, R.L. Brandenburg, A.B. Brown, J.E. Bailey, G.T. Roberson, G. Naderman and B. Shew. 2003. 2003 Peanut Information. North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service AG-331. 95 pp.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Lanier, J.E., S.R. Hans, D.L. Jordan, P.D. Johnson, J.F. Spears, R. Wells, C.A. Hurt and R.L. Brandenburg. 2004. Sicklepod control in peanut seeded in single and twin row planting patterns. Peanut Science (Submitted).<br /> <br><br /> <br>Linker, H.M., S.M. Pheasant, S.C. Lilley, R.L. Brandenburg and D.A. Herbert, Jr. 2002. Push, pull or partner  a process of implementation for public good and profit. Proc. Amer. Peanut Res. and Educ. Soc. 34:55.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Linker, H.M., S.M. Pheasant, S.C. Lilley, R.L. Brandenburg and D.A. Herbert, Jr. 2003. Push, pull, or partner  a process of implementation for public good and profit. 2002 Proceedings. American Peanut Research and Education Society Annual Meeting. July 16-19, 2002. Research Triangle Park, NC. p 55.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Rayburn, M.L., H.M. Linker, D.L. Jordan, J.E. Bailey and R. Brandenburg. 2003. Development, implementation, and acceptance of IPM practices for peanut in northeastern NC. 2002 Proceedings. American Peanut Research and Education Society Annual Meeting. July 16-19, 2002. Research Triangle Park, NC. p 54.<br /> <br><br /> <br>Scott, J.H., R.L. Brandenburg and G.G. Kennedy. 2003. Laboratory bioassay evaluating peanut seedlings for resistance to the southern corn rootworm, <i>Diabrotica undecimpunctata howardi</i> Barber (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae). Peanut Science (In Press).

Impact Statements

1. The recent loss of the peanut program in the new Farm Bill has created a significant financial hardship on peanut farmers nationwide. In addition, the increase in the incidence of tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) has added an additional yield-limiting factor into the production equation. The prophylactic use of rootworm insecticides also remains an input that has questionable benefit.
2. A major research effort focused on the impact of using various management strategies to minimize the incidence of TSWV. Research focused on the impact of planting date, insecticide use, cultivar selection, tillage, seeding rate, row spacing, and their interactions with incidence of southern corn rootworm injury. A publication focusing on the TSWV advisory has been published and was widely used by growers.
3. This research and extension effort has produced a rootworm advisory that provides sound decision-making principles for southern corn rootworm insecticide use. The TSWV index has been validated and initially presented to growers. Its full implementation took place in 2003, and our research indicates that by selecting the appropriate complement of cultural practices in 2003 growers may have reduced the incidence of TSWV in peanuts by over 50%.

Back to top

Report Information

Participants

Brief Summary of Minutes

Accomplishments

Publications

Impact Statements

Back to top