WERA_OLD43: Establishing Bio-Intensive Pest Management Programs for Western Orchard Systems

(Multistate Research Coordinating Committee and Information Exchange Group)

Status: Inactive/Terminating

Project Menu

SAES-422 Reports

Annual/Termination Reports:

[09/09/2003] [12/21/2004] [03/10/2006] [03/09/2007]

Date of Annual Report: 09/09/2003

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 10/23/2002 - 10/25/2002
Period the Report Covers: 09/01/2001 - 10/01/2002

Participants

Brunner,Jay(jfb@wsu.edu)-Washington State University;
Arthur,Agnello-Cornell University;
Brown,John (brownjj@mail.wsu.edu)-Washington State University;
Pszczolkowski,M.A.-Washington State University;
Gut,Larry-Michigan State University;
Dunley,John(dunleyj@wsu.edu)-Washington State University;
Hull,Larry-Pennsylvania State University;
Landolt,Peter(landolt@yarl.ars.usda.gov)-USDA-ARS Yakima;
Millar,Jocelyn(jocelyn.millar@ucr.edu)-U C Riverside;
Mills,Nick-U C Berkeley;
Harvey,Reissig-Cornell University;
Helmut,Riedl-Oregon State University;
Shearer,Peter-Rutgers University;
Van Steenwyk,Robert-U C Berkeley;
Welter,Stephen-U C Berkeley;
Judd,Gary-Agriculture Canada, Summerland;
Carde,Ring-U C Riverside;
Thistlewood,Howard-Agriculture Canada, Summerland;
Jones,Vince(vpjones@wsu.edu)-Washington State University;
Varela,Lucia-U C Davis;
Light,Doug-USDA-ARS Albany.

Brief Summary of Minutes

The 2002 WCC-43 meeting was held from Oct 23-25 in Riverside California. Twenty members were in attendance, 6 from California, 6 from Washington, 1 from Oregon, 2 from Canada and 5 from the eastern United States. Discussion centered on the major areas of cooperative research large-scale implementation projects, mating disruption, monitoring, semiochemicals, and attract and kill, management of true bugs, new insecticides. There was general agreement to hold the 2003 meeting at an eastern US location to facilitate more interaction and planning with eastern entomologists working on similar programs and problems. Dr. Larry Gut, Michigan State University was identified as the contact person and agreed to host the meeting at his institution. There was discussion about the new proposal and some additional sections, specifically an educational plan and administrative organization needed to be added to the proposal. Dr. Jay Brunner agreed to work with Dr. John Brown to accomplish the needed revisions and submit the new proposal to the western Directors for approval

Minutes Attachment:

Attachment

Accomplishments

1. The Areawide II project funded by federal grants demonstrated that alternatives to organophosphate (OP) insecticides in supplementing pheromone-based management programs in apple and pear were as effective and about the same cost as OP based programs. 2. The evaluation of different pheromone dispensing systems (hand-applied dispensers) provided the fruit industry with unbiased information on the behavior of these products. This allows growers and crop consultants to make a better determination of which products best fit their situation and which are performing according to advertised claims. 3. Several scientists reported the evaluation of sprayable pheromone formulations. In most cases these formulations are releasing very low rates of pheromone for very short periods of time. This information is being made available to the companies making sprayable pheromones in the hope that they could improve their performance. 4. Scientists compared results of evaluations of new insecticides for control of key orchard pests. The results of bioassays establish base-line data for future assessments of resistance development. Efficacy of new insecticides for different pests that was shared at the meeting helps different states to prepare the best recommendations for use of products when they are registered. The unbiased evaluation of pesticides provides stakeholders with reliable information about the relative efficacy of different products and how they affect different pests. 5. Scientists reported some preliminary information on the effects of insecticides on selected natural enemies common to western orchard environments. These data will help form the basis of recommendations on how to use new, and old, pesticides so that natural enemies are conserved. 6. Canadian colleagues reported on the efforts to use sterile male releases and mating disruption to manage codling moth in British Columbia. This program has provided some valuable insights into the populations changes of codling moth existing at low levels in orchard-urban interfaces. The combination of mating disruption and sterile release of codling moth seems to be a powerful tool in reducing populations of this pest but the costs seem high. 7. Investigations into the mechanisms of how pheromones affect moths have helped our understanding of this pest control tactic. The results show that every pest responds to its own pheromone to different degrees and this seems to be the main clue as to how effective mating disruption is against the pest. The impact is that by understanding better the mechanisms of how pheromones affect pests the better we can design formulations for control purposes. 8. Educational programs were planned for the fall and winter of 2002-03 to extend the knowledge represented in the WCC-43 group. The plan was to combine forces and travel to different locations, Oregon, Washington and California, to summarize the knowledge gained through collective research efforts. The impact on stakeholders will be to provide them with the best up to date information on new technologies and more importantly how to integrate these diverse technologies into the best management program for their situation.

Publications

Stelinski, L.L. L.J. Gut & J.R. Miller. 2003. Concentration of air-borne pheromone required for long-lasting peripheral adaptation in the obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris). Physiol. Entomol. 28:97-107 Stelinski, L.L. J.R. Miller & L.J. Gut. 2003. Presence of long-lasting peripheral adaptation in the obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana and absence of such adaptation in the redbanded leafroller, Argyrotaenia velutinana. J. Chem. Ecol. 29: 403-422. Waldstein, D.W. & L.J. Gut. 2003. Comparison of microcapsule density with various apple tissues and formulations of oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) sprayable pheromone. J. Econ. Entomol. 96:58-63. Pszczolkowski, M.A., L.F. Matos, S.M. Bushman, and J. J. Brown. 2001. Feeding enhancements for insecticide targeting neonate lepidopteran larvae. In: Procceding of the 6th.International Symposium on Adjuvants for Agrochemicals ISAA (Ed: Ruiter, H.) ISAA 2001 Foundation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp 420-424. Pszczolkowski, M., L.F.Matos, S.M.Bushman, and John J. Brown. 2001. Effects of glutamate receptor agonists and antagonists on feeding in economically important insect pest. Acta Neurobiologiae experimentalis 61:237. Pszczolkowski M.A. and Brown J.J. 2002. Prospects of monosodium glutamate use for enhancement of pesticides toxicity against the codling moth. Phytoparasitca 30: 243-252. Pszczolkowski, M., Matos, L., Zahand, A. and Brown, J. J. 2002. Effect of monosodium glutamate on apple leaf consumption by codling moth larvae. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata 103: 91-98. Pszczolkowski, M.A., Matos, L.F., Brown, R., and Brown, J.J. 2002. Feeding and development of codling moth larvae on apple leaves. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am. 95:603-607. Pszczolkowski, M., Zahand, A., Bushman, S.M., and Brown J. J. Effects of calcium and glutamate receptor antagonists on leaf consumption by lepidopteran neonates. Pharmacology Biochemistry and Behavior 74: 389-394. 2003. Pszczolkowski M.A. and J. J. Brown. 2003. Chilling affects allatal cell proliferation via antennae and protocerebral neurons in the cockroach Diploptera punctata. J. Insect Physiol. 49: 123-129. Pszczolkowski, M. A. and J. J. Brown. Effect of sugars and non-nutritive sugar substitutes on consumption of apple leaves by codling moth neonates. (accepted Feb 2003) Phytoparasitica. 2003. McBrien, H. M., J.G. Millar, L. Gottlieb, X. Chen, and R.E. Rice. 2001. Male produced sex attractant pheromone of the green stink bug, Acrosternum hilare. Journal of Chemical Ecology, 27:1821-1839. Ho, H.-Y. and J.G. Millar. 2001. Identification and synthesis of male-produced sex pheromone components of the stink bugs Chlorochroa ligata and Chlorochroa uhleri. J. Chem. Ecol. 27:2067-2095. Millar, J. G., R. E. Rice, S. A. Steffan, K. M. Daane, E. Cullen, and F.G. Zalom. 2001. Attraction of female digger wasps, Astata occidentalis Cresson (Hymenoptera: Sphecidae) to the sex pheromone of the stink bug Thyanta pallidovirens. Pan-Pac. Entomol. 77: 244-248. Ho, Hsiao-Yung and J.G. Millar. 2002. Identification, Electroantennogram Screening, and Field Bioassays of Volatile Chemicals From Lygus hesperus Knight (Heteroptera: Miridae). Zoological Studies, 41: 193-198. Krupke, C.H. and J.F. Brunner. 2003. Parasitoids of the consperse stink bug, Euschistus conspersus (Hemiptera: Pentatomidae) in north central Washington and attractiveness of a host-produced pheromone component. J. Entomol. Science 38(1): 84-92. Krupke, Christian and Jay Brunner. 2002. Response of the consperse stink bug to synthetic aggregation pheromone sources. J. Econ. Entomol 94: 1500-1505. Doerr, M.D., J.F. Brunner and V. Jones. 2002. Temperature-dependent development of Lacanobia subjuncta (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae). Environ. Entomol. 31 (6): 995-999. Brunner, J.F. 2002. New technologies for mating disruption in tree fruit crops. Proc. Wash. State Hort. Assoc. 97: 160-164. Brunner, J.F, W. Jones, E. Beers, J. Dunley, J. Tangren. 2002. Pest management practices in Washington: a journey through time. Proc. Wash. State Hort. Assoc. 97: 177-184. Krupke, C. and J.F Brunner. 2002. Stink bug biology, behavior and management. Proc. Wash. State Hort. Assoc. 97: 173-176. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Assail and (Guthion), trial #1, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A9, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of the codling moth with acetamiprid (Assail) and azinphos-methyl (Guthion), trial #2, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A10, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Assail, Success, and Guthion, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A11, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Calypso and Guthion, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A12, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Intrepid and Confirm using different sprayer technologies, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A13, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Lorsban, Success and Guthion, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A14, Electronic publication by Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Avaunt, Novaluron, Confirm, and Guthion, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A15, Electronic publication by Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Surround, Confirm, and Guthion, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A16, Electronic publication by Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of pandemis leafroller with Proclaim, Intrepid, Confirm, and Success. 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A17, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of the pandemis leafroller with methoxyfenozide (Intrepid), tebufenozide (Confirm), and spinosad (Success) in spring, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A18, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002 Control of Lacanobia subjuncta with Avaunt and Lorsban, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. A19, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth and mites with Assail and Imidan, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A20, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Kryocide, Calypso, and Guthion. 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A21, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Intrepid, Assail, Imidan, and Guthion, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A22, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with Novaluron, Dimilin, and Guthion, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A23, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of codling moth with granulosis virus Virusoft CP4, Orchex 796, and Assail, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A24, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of pandemis leafroller with emamectin benzoate (Proclaim), lambda-cyhalothrin (Warrior) and spinosad (Success), 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A25, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr and L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of the pandemis leafroller with methoxyfenozide (Intrepid), pyriproxyfen (Esteem) and spinosad (Success), 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A26, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr, L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of Lacanobia subjuncta with Avaunt, Intrepid, and Success, trial 1, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A27, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., M.D. Doerr, L.H. Bennett. 2002. Control of lacanobia fruitworm with Avaunt, Intrepid, and Success, trial 2, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. A28, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) against neonate Lacanobia subjuncta larvae, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. L1, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F., and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Assessment of azinphos-methyl (Guthion) on different populations of Lacanobia subjuncta larvae, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. L2, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, stage-specific activity of spinosad (Success) and endosulfan (Thiodan) against Lacanobia subjuncta larvae, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. L3, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, relative effect of contact activity versus ingestion of spinosad by third instar pandemis leafroller larvae, 2000. Arthropod Management Tests. L4, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of thiacloprid (Calypso) against neonate leafroller larvae, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. L5, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of lambda-cyhalothrin (Warrior) against neonate leafroller larvae, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. L6, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of emamectin benzoate (Proclaim) against neonate leafroller larvae, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. L7, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of difluorobenzamide (Novaluron) against neonate leafroller and Lacanobia subjuncta larva, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. L8, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Brunner, J.F. and M.D. Doerr. 2002. Bioassay, effect of acetamiprid (Assail) against neonate leafroller and Lacanobia subjuncta larva, 2001. Arthropod Management Tests. L9, Electronic publication of Entomology Society of America. Light, D. M., A. L. Knight, C. A. Henrick, D. Rajapaska, B. Lingren, J. C. Dickens, K. M. Reynolds, R. G. Buttery, G. Merrill, J. Roitman, and B. C. Campbell. 2001. A pear-derived kairomone with pheromonal potency that attracts male and female codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.). Naturwissenschaften 88: 333-338. 2001. Light, D. M. and Henrick, C. A. Bisexual attractants, aggregants and arrestants for adults and larvae of codling moth and other species of Lepidoptera, United States Patent, No. US 6,264,939 B1, issued July 24, 2001. (US Patent)

Impact Statements

Several scientists have worked with the kairomone referred to as the DA lure. This plant volatile has been shown to be attractive to both sexes of codling moth. Its use in monitoring orchards varies depending on the type, that is walnut > apple > pear. The development of this attractant as well as research on other non-pheromone attractants for monitoring moth pests holds a promise of more reliable and efficient monitoring system for use in pheromone treated orchards.
The biology, behavior and management of several true bug species were reported. An understanding of the behavior and biology has helped in the development of better monitoring protocols and management strategies. A knowledge of how different plants, both in an outside the orchard, support true bug pests has helped to develop concepts of ground cover and near-orchard habitat management for these pests.
The propagation of wild rose and strawberry gardens near to orchards that provides a reservoir for alternative hosts for leafroller parasites was shown to increase parasitism of orchard leafroller pests. Several growers in different locations are planting these gardens as a means of enhancing and conserving leafroller biological control agents near orchards but away from harmful or disruptive pesticide applications.
The eastern entomologists that attended the meeting provided insights into specific problems they face in managing pests without the use of OP insecticides. They have a federally funded RAMP project that has many objectives in common with the western research projects. Plans were developed to hold the 2003 meeting in an eastern location where additional exchange of ideas and collaborative planning could occur.

Date of Annual Report: 12/21/2004

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 10/25/2004 - 10/26/2004
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2003 - 09/01/2004

Participants

Brunner, Jay (jfb@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University;
Dunley, John (dunleyj@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University;
Beers, Elizabeth (ebeers@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University;
Jones, Vince (vpjones@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University;
Gut, Larry (gut@pilot.msu.edu) - Michigan Sate University;
Lacey, Lerry (llacey@yarl.ars.usda.gov)-USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Landolt, Peter (landolt@yarl.ars.usda.gov)-USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Unruh, Tom (unruh@yarl.ars.usda.gov)-USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Knight, Alan (aknight@yarl.ars.usda.gov)-USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Riedl, Helmut (helmut.riedl@oregonstate.edu)-Oregon State University; Hilton, Rick (richard.hilton@oregonstate.edu)-Oregon State University;
Van Steenwyk, Robert (bobvanst@nature.berkeley.edu)-University of California, Berkeley;
Smirle, Mike (smirlem@AGR.GC.CA)-Agriculture Canada, Summerland; Shearer, Peter (shearer@aesop.rutgers.edu)-Rutgers University.

Brief Summary of Minutes

The agenda was divided into major categories of discussion topics: pesticide resistance in key tree fruit pests; insect behavior and biology; pheromone delivery technology and assessment; new pests; biological control issues and options; organic research and biological pesticides; next meeting timing, location and topics. Discussion focused on short reports of current activities and concepts or issues that are shared by different researchers. The intent of the meeting format was to bring out discussions of common problems, approaches to researchable issues (methods discussion), and new problems that offer new opportunities for research. The following summary is organized by agenda topic and captures the essence of discussions that occurred.

Pesticide resistance in key fruit pests.
Codling moth (CM) resistance to organophosphate (OP) insecticides has been noted in all western states and in most eastern states. Levels of resistance are variable and do not usually confer complete field failures in orchards relying primarily on these products for CM control. CM was adequately controlled with several insecticides, including an OP, in one orchard showing signs of OP resistance (moderate levels) in 2003. One report indicated that OP resistant CM populations had a different phenology, delayed development, than populations that were not resistant.

A survey of obliquebanded leafroller (OBLR) tolerance to several insecticides showed that resistance to OP insecticides remained high and that cross-resistance between OPs and an insect growth regulator was present in every population tested (8). For the first time a shift in tolerance was detected in OBLR to spinosad, a relatively new insecticide in use for only 5 years. Every population tested showed an increase in tolerance of from 3 to 11-times relative to a susceptible colony. Some evidence of OBLR resistance to an insecticide not yet registered in tree fruit raised concerns about cross-resistance between OP insecticides and new chemistries.

Insect behavior and biology.
CM phenology was discussed in detail. In many situations the degree day model that has been used for many years to predict CM development and to time control activities was not providing accurate representations of the pests biology. Several possible reasons were considered but a general consensus was that we simply had not addressed this issue with good research. Some possible research approaches were discussed and experimental procedures were debated. No consensus was reached in the meeting about what teams might be formed to address this issue.

OBLR was found to have a 4 to 5 fold higher reproductive output than CM. Delay of mating in OBLR and CM were shown to have a significant impact on both insects reproductive output. The age of either the male or female has an affect on reproductive output. A delay of 4 days in mating can result in a 60-70% reduction in egg production. Longer delays almost completely eliminate production of viable eggs. This information helps explain why we capture mated females in pheromone treated orchards but we do not necessarily observe significant crop losses.

Vertical wind tunnels were used to examine the effects of CM or OBLR density on mating. For CM, in the absence of pheromone, having multiple males present in the tunnel did not increase the percentage of calling females that mated, but did decrease the time required to mate. When pheromone sources were added (lures with 0.01x, 1 or 10x load rates) mating decreased dramatically and tended to occur primarily in the situations with multiple males present. For OBLR, the peak mating in non-mating disruption conditions occurred with two males. When mating disruption conditions were being simulated, except in the lowest dose, mating only occurred in the situations with 2 or 3 males present. Adding more OBLR males decreased the time required to mate under both mating disruption and non-mating disruption conditions.

When CM female equivalent dispensers (flakes) were placed around a virgin female there was a direct relationship between dispenser density and male attraction. There was some discussion about CM behavior and how pheromone sources interact with mate location and this discussion was continued in the next section.

New information on phenology models for OBLR and another leafroller species, Pandemis pyrusana, were presented. This information adjusts thresholds for OBLR and provides instar specific development for both species.

Vince Jones presented a new method of marking field populations of insects with proteins. The method is being used to assess movement of moths, leafroller parasites and general predators of pear psylla. The technique appears to provide a powerful method to enhance our understanding of movement of natural populations of pests and their natural enemies.

Pheromone delivery technology and assessment.
There were several reports on different kinds of new technology for delivering pheromone for control of CM and OBLR. A new method of delivering a microencapsulated pheromone formulation showed promise in control of CM. A fiber pheromone formulation showed promise for managing CM populations in low to moderate pressure orchards when supplemented with insecticides, however, aerial applications of this technology met with some difficulties. A new flake type pheromone delivery technology was evaluated for longevity and retention in trees. This technology is adapted from that used in the gypsy moth control program.

A wax-based pheromone formulation being developed by MSU was evaluated in small plots to determine the effect of wax droplet densities on the mating of Oriental fruit moth (OFM). Results showed an increased orientation disruption to tethered virgin female moths as the density of pheromone emitting wax droplets increased. The hypothesis was that this provided evidence for competitive attraction as the mechanism, but some debate about this conclusion resulted.

A method of assessing pheromone release from hand-applied dispensers was presented and its value in assessing release of pheromone from different kinds of formulations was discussed.

A detailed discussion on mechanisms of mating disruption took place. Some interest in members of the group to form a working group around this topic has resulted in new research projects being submitted to commodity commissions, private groups and other agencies.

There was considerable discussion about monitoring CM in pheromone treated orchards. A non-pheromone attractant that has been evaluated for several years was shown by some researchers to have value as a monitoring tool while other researchers indicated difficulty in repeating research results or to understand how the attractant worked. Some new research on other non-pheromone attractants for CM, especially b-farnesene, was discussed. The area of non-pheromone attractants for CM was identified as an area of interest.

Biological control issues and options.
The effort to enhance biological control of leafrollers by habitat manipulation was discussed by Tom Unruh. Wild rose gardens established at different orchard locations and seeded with the strawberry leafroller and a key leafroller parasite, Colpoclypeus florus, have shown promising results at some locations but challenges at others. At some locations growers have over sprayed gardens and thus eliminated the alternate host for C. florus, the strawberry leafroller. In some locations natural reduction of strawberry leafroller densities have occurred but the reasons for this are not apparent.

Vince Jones discussed the phenology of leafrollers and biological control agents, parasites, and how different degree-day intervals can be used in sampling to assess the presence and impact of these agents. Peter Shearer discussed the effects of several insecticides in natural enemies in peach orchards, especially effects on Chrysopa sp.

New pests.
An update on the stink bug, Halyomorpha halys (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae), was provided by Peter Shearer. This insect was first detected in Allentown, PA in 1996 but not correctly identified until 1999. It has its origin from eastern Asia. It is unclear how it entered the US. It has a wide host range and feeds on numerous horticultural and agronomic crops including apples, peaches, pears, grapes, vegetables, ornamentals, and soybean. It also is considered as a nuisance pest when it overwinters in large numbers inside homes. Shearer presented some of his ongoing research including pheromone trapping and laboratory efficacy studies.

Organic research and biological pesticides.
John Dunley reviewed progress on the areawide organic pear project in Washington. In the third year organic or very soft products easily managed the densities of CM and pear psylla. The cost of organic pest control was the same or is less than conventional practices. Growers in the project have formed a marketing group and are getting higher ($2/box) prices for their product, due mainly to assurances of zero pesticide residues.

Several researchers reported on experience with different CM granulosis virus formulations. Lerry Lacey talked about the stability of different formulations. The main virus used in orchards is Cyd-X and it was used on almost every acre of organic production in WA and OR in 2004. There was a good deal of discussion on how to implement the CM virus in conventional CM control programs as a long-term strategy to suppress populations and create a more favorable situation for mating disruption.

Results of studies with the organic formulation of spinosad, Entrust, showed that it was as effective against leafrollers and CM as the conventional formulation, Success. Entrust used in conjunction with CM virus and mating disruption have been used to bring serious CM problems in organic orchards under control in one generation at two different locations. These examples demonstrate the power of combining multiple tactics against a key pest to bring populations to the point where maintenance can be achieved by mating disruption and virus only.

Entomopathogenic nematodes were shown to be a viable tool for control of the overwintering stage of CM. High rates were needed to achieve high levels of control but lower rates might provide enough control along with other soft tactics to provide maintenance of CM at acceptable densities. The combination of different in-row mulches used for weed control and water management was demonstrated to also be beneficial to nematodes.

Research on insecticide-baits was conducted for control of apple maggot and blueberry maggot. The baits sprays reduced infestation in both fruit relative to an untreated control. Behavioral observations showed that the flies were not strongly attracted to the baits but became arrested and searched more on foliage with droplets. Research into enhancing the attactancy of baits is being conducted in MI and WA.

Next meeting location, time and topics.
There was considerable discussion about the proliferation of meetings that researchers are asked to participate in. The traditional timing of the WCC043 meeting had been late October. This is getting to be a more and more difficult time of year for people to meet and it coincides with industry meetings of eastern researchers. The participation of eastern research and extension personnel in the WCC043 meeting is valued because of the depth and scope it brings to the discussions. It was decided to hold the next meeting just prior to the Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference (WOPDMC) in 2006. This meeting is held annually in January in Portland, OR at the Hilton Hotel. Since many researchers and extension personnel who attend the WCC043 meeting also participate in the WOPDMC the combining of two meetings was considered an efficient use of everyones time and resources. The meeting WCC043 meeting will be held on Tuesday and half of Wednesday of the week the WOPDMC is held each year. An organizing committee headed by Peter Landolt was appointed to establish a meeting theme for 2006. The intent of the group was to focus on specific issues of importance and to conduct a meeting around problems, concepts, experimental designs, and cooperative projects.

Accomplishments

The most important accomplishment of this year's meeting was the exchange of information on results of different studies involving methods for managing pests in orchard ecosystems. The sharing of information on use of different pheromone technologies has resulted in the formation of a team of researchers that are proposing significant changes in research direction to challenge current assumptions on how this technology works against CM. This may be one of the most important accomplishments of the meeting. Growers have a high interest in use of pheromones for CM control but are concerned that it does not always work as well as it should, pointing to a lack of understanding either how the technology works or of the limits under which it should be expect to work. In either case a better understanding of CM behavior and effects of pheromones and other plant volatiles on mating success is needed. Much of the research on alternatives to OP insecticides discussed at the meeting is being shared with growers and crop consultants. There is a great need, especially in WA, to help the fruit industry understand how to use OP alternatives more effectively due to regulatory demands on cholinesterase testing and worker re-entry intervals. A presentation at the Washington Horticulture Association meeting will focus on alternatives to OP insecticides and several presentations will be given at industry meeting throughout the winter (2004-05). A manual on producing apples without use of OP insecticides is under development and a web-based version should be available prior to the 2005 growing season. Reducing dependence on OP and other broad-spectrum insecticides can be accomplished by continued research on CM viruses, Entrust, and entomopathogenic nematodes. These products and organisms have the potential to provide enough additional mortality of CM to allow for more stable, effective, and less costly soft or organic programs. The introduction of the CM virus into the conventional apple and pear pest control programs will initiated and followed to determine its value in reducing CM densities over several generations. Biological control has always been a component of IPM programs in the western US. Integrated mite control was one of the first and has been the most stable biological control programs in agriculture. Growers know that biological controls can help them combat pests but must fit into the demands for high quality fruit and low pest damage. The effort to establish or manipulate selected native habitats near orchards for the express purpose of providing refugia for natural enemies is new to the orchard industry. By combining use of pesticides that do not negatively affect natural enemies and habitat that conserves natural enemies, biological control of even direct fruit pests like leafrollers is possible. Growers are very interested in projects where habitat manipulation can be incorporated into their normal practices, if it can be shown to have benefit.

Publications

Pszczolkoqski, M.A., J.F. Brunner, M.D. Doerr, and J.J. Brown. 2004. Enhancement of Bacillus thuringiensis with monosodium glutamate against larvae of obliquebanded leafroller (Lep. Tortricidae). J. Appl. Entomol. 128 (7): 474-477. Doerr, M.D., J.F. Brunner and L.E. Schrader. 2004. Integrated pest management approach for a new pest, Lacanobia subjuncta (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae), in Washington apple orchards. Pest management science. 60: 1025-1034. Gut, L.J., L.L. Stelinski, D.R. Thomson and J. R. Miller. 2004. Behavior-modifying chemicals: prospects and constraints in IPM. In: Koul, O., G.S. Dhaliwal and G. Cuperus (eds) Integrated Pest Management - Potential, Constraints, and Challenges. CABI Press, N.Y., pp. 73-121. Stelinski, L. L. J. R. Miller & L. J. Gut. 2004. Captures of two leafroller moth species in traps baited with varying dosages of pheromone lures or commercial mating-disruption dispensers in untreated and pheromone-treated orchard plots. Can. Entomol. Accepted. Stelinski, L.L., L.J. Gut, A.V. Pierzchala and J.R. Miller. 2004. Field observations quantifying attraction of four tortricid moth species to high-dosage pheromone rope dispensers in untreated and pheromone-treated orchards. Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata. In press. Wilkinson, T.K., D.A. Landis and L.J. Gut. 2004. Parasitism of obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), in commercially managed Michigan apple orchards. J. Econ. Entomol. 97:1524-1530. Stelinski, L.L., L.J. Gut, K.J. Vogel and J. R. Miller. 2004. Behaviors of naïve vs. pheromone-exposed leafroller moths in plumes from high-dosage pheromone dispensers in a sustained-flight wind tunnel: implications for mating disruption of these species. J. Insect Behavior 17: 533-554. Arthurs, S.P. and L.A. Lacey. 2004. Field evaluation of commercial formulations of the codling moth granulovirus (CpGV): persistence of activity and success of seasonal applications against natural infestations in the Pacific Northwest. Biol. Contr. 31: 388-397. Lacey, L. A. 2004. Microbial control of insects. In: Encyclopedia of Entomology (J. Capinera, ed.). Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht, The Netherlands. pp. 1401-1407. Lacey, L. A. and J. Becnel. 2004. Microbial control of medically important insects. In: Encyclopedia of Entomology (J. Capinera, ed.). Kluwer Academic Publishers Dordrecht, The Netherlands. pp. 1407-1410. Lacey, L. A., S. P. Arthurs, A. Knight, K. Becker, and H. Headrick. 2004. Efficacy of codling moth granulovirus: effect of adjuvants on persistence of activity and comparison with other larvicides in a Pacific Northwest apple orchard. J. Entomol. Sci. 39: 500-513. Lacey, L. A., S. P. Arthurs, D. Thomson, R. Fritts, Jr., and D. Granatstein. 2004. Codling moth granulovirus and insect-specific nematodes for control of codling moth in the Pacific Northwest. Tilth Producers Quarterly 13 (2): 10-12 (Trade Journal for Organic Farmers). Pfannenstiel, R. S., M. Szymanski, L. A. Lacey, J. F. Brunner and K. Spence. 2004. Discovery of a granulovirus of Pandemis pyrusana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), a leafroller pest of apples in Washington. J. Invertebr. Pathol. 86: 124-127. Siegel, J., L. A. Lacey, R. Fritts, Jr. , B. S. Higbee, and P. Noble. 2004. Use of Steinernematid nematodes for post harvest control of navel orangeworm (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Amyelois transitella) in fallen pistachios. Biol. Contr. 30: 410-417. Yee, W.L. and P.J. Landolt P.J. 2004. Responses of apple maggot (Diptera: Tephritidae) to ammonium hydroxide lures. Can. Entomologist. 136: 139-142.

Impact Statements

At least one research team was formed as a result of the 2004 WCC043 meeting that will focus on mechanisms of mating disruption in CM.
CM virus formulations are used on essentially all organic apple production in Washington, the direct result of research demonstrating the value of this technology.
Use of OP alternatives in fruit production has steadily increased over the last five years.
The WCC43 members became aware of a new and potential very serious pest, Halyomorpha halys, that while present in the eastern US could eventually affect most production areas of the western US.
The manipulation of near-orchard habitat for enhancement of biological control of leafroller pests is being adopted by a significant number of growers in WA and OR.
The impact of delayed mating, as a likely mechanism of mating disruption is better understood and is leading to new questions being asked on how to assess the efficacy of this tactic
New pheromone delivery technologies, in the form of multi-point source formulations, are being developed and evaluated in tree fruit systems. This is in large part due to the success of mating disruption in orchards and the active research programs of WCC43 members.

Date of Annual Report: 03/10/2006

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 01/10/2006 - 01/11/2006
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2004 - 09/01/2005

Participants

Brunner, Jay (jfb@wsu.edu) - Washington State University;
Dunley, John (dunleyj@wsu.edu) - Washington State University;
Beers, Elizabeth (ebeers@wsu.edu) - Washington State University;
Jones, Vince (vpjones@wsu.edu) - Washington State University;
Gut, Larry (gut@pilot.msu.edu) - Michigan State University;
Stelinski, Lukasz (stelinski@msu.edu) - Michigan State University;
Isaacs, Rufus (isaacsr@msu.edu)- Michigan State University;
Epstein, David (epstei10@msu.edu) - Michigan State University;
Lacey, Lerry (llacey@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Landolt, Peter (landolt@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Unruh, Tom (unruh@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Knight, Alan (aknight@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory;
Riedl, Helmut (helmut.riedl@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; Walston, Allison (Allison.walston@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; Hilton, Rick (richard.hilton@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; VanBuskirk, Philip (Philip.vanbuskirk@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University;
Briand, Francoise (francoise.briand@rac.admin.ch) - Oregon State University; Flanagan, Stephen (srflanagan@vcd.osu) - Oregon State University;
Van Steenwyk, Robert (bobvanst@nature.berkeley.edu) - University of California, Berkeley;
Welter, Stephen (welters@nature.berkeley.edu) - University of California, Berkeley;
Judd, Gary (JuddG@AGR.GC.CA) - Agriculture Canada, Summerland; Thistlewood, Howard (thistlewoodh@agr.gc.ca) - Agriculture Canada, Summerland;
Hull, Larry (LAH4@psu.edu) - Pennsylvania State University;
Kranczyk, Greg (gxk13@psu.edu) - Pennsylvania State University;
Biddinger, Dave (djb134@psu.edu) - Pennsylvania State University;
Light, Doug (dlight@pw.ars.usda.gov) - USDA, ARS Western Regional Research Center;
Reissig, Harvey (whr1@cornell.edu) - New York State Agricultural Experiment Station;
Agnello, Art (ama4@cornell.edu) - New York State Agricultural Experiment Station;
Cardé, Ring (ring.carde@ucr.edu) - University of California, Riverside;
Alston, Diane (dianea@biology.usu.edu) - Utah State University

Brief Summary of Minutes

Thirty individuals representing 11 different institutions participated in the 2006 meeting. The agenda was divided into two major categories of discussion topics: semiochemicals in the context of orchard IPM and production systems, and biological control in the context of orchard IPM and production systems. The meeting agenda purposely limited the time for PowerPoint reports of research results but instead was organized around a list of discussion topics. The intent of the meeting format was to bring out discussions of common questions and problems, approaches to researchable issues, and new problems that offer new opportunities for research. This list of topics was a summation of solicited suggestions from WERA043 members. The following summary is organized by agenda topic and captures the essence of discussions that occurred.

SEMIOCHEMICALS:
1. Can we improve mating disruption?
It is thought that further increases in the use of pheromonal mating disruption for managing codling moth in apple and pear orchards are hampered by cost and by need for complementary methods to keep population densities within a range that can then be effectively managed by mating disruption. Discussion centered on researched and researchable areas to reduce cost and a desire to understand better how mechanisms of mating disruption are working under different pheromone release systems and patterns. Pheromone dispensers and formulations were discussed, including some very encouraging work on sprayable formulations that shows improved longevity of, although still not adequate, effectiveness. There is interest also in determining where female codling moths are calling from in the orchard and relating that information to mating disruption efficacy, differences in behavior and physiology of moths in the first versus second generation in the Pacific Northwest, and possible resistance to mating disruption.

2. Can mating disruption be synergized with kairomones?
There are indications that codling moth males respond to combinations of female sex pheromone and host plant or host fruit odor. However, this information is not clear cut, the kairomonal chemistry is poorly understood, and some claims of kairomonal enhancement or synergism of sex attraction are contested. Nonetheless, a kairomonal role in sex attraction might be an opportunity to improve mating disruption. There were efforts to evaluate kairomone/pheromone combinations as mating disruptants, with some encouraging but mixed results. These studies involved the pear ester and beta farnesene as the kairomones. One problem is the lack of good information on which kairomones to use, and also there was discussion of the possible mechanisms of kairomonal effects on pheromonal mating disruption. These discussions illuminated a number of research needs and researchable questions, such as which kairomones are best to evaluate, what release rates to use, how to formulate the kairomone for a steady release and longevity comparable to that of the pheromone, and questions regarding the significance of background odor in orchards that vary with variety, damage, and maturity of fruit.

Additional work was conducted on codling moth kairomones, leaving yet unanswered questions regarding how codling moth use odorants to locate and select apple and pear for oviposition. Issues addressed included the number of compounds implicated, codling moth oviposition on cut pear, the absence of pear ester in apple odor and in pear odor until they are ripe, effective release rates, and geographical differences in research results.

3. Lure and Kill.
Work continues to develop lure and kill technology for codling moth, in part using the pear ester to attract females. A panel-shaped piece of netting treated with a pyrethroid gave good results when baited with a combination sex pheromone/pear ester lure.

4. Where do we go with leafrollers?
Research on leafroller biology and management appears to be much reduced compared to past years. However, questions remain regarding incongruence between monitoring results and subsequent populations in orchards. They are possibly moving from unmonitored areas or orchards.

5. Mature larvae.
An idea was discussed to replace banding for cocooning codling moth larvae with a sprayable biodegradable foam formulation. This approach, using foam applied to tree trunks, might provide opportunities to reduce application costs, formulate pesticide to make it a lure and kill system, formulate larval pheromone to improve larval recruitment, and possibly formulate nematodes for organic applications.

6. Neonates.
Research to reduce numbers of newly hatched codling moth larvae includes possible use of the kairomone pear ester to attract larvae to a pesticide, confuse larvae to reduce their rate of success in finding and infesting fruit, and to improve efficacy of a pesticide by inducing larvae to move more and for a longer period of time before infesting fruit. Work appears to be needed on dose, formulations, and strategies. Previous work to use feeding stimulants in combination with pesticides for controlling neonate larvae was brought up, although there were no new developments to develop field applications.

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL
1. Where is biocontrol in a continuum of pest control strategies?
Concern was expressed that in its present state biological control and mating disruption are not robust enough control methods and growers fall back into spraying disruptive or ineffective insecticides. It was also argued that this leaves an expensive pest control system that is less predictable than a pesticide-based approach. It was argued that if we consider reliability vs. risk vs. the low cost of insurance then insecticides are easier and cheaper. Others argued that biological control is already significant in orchards and that taking a pesticide-first approach will abandon these benefits. Harvey Reissig asked what about leafroller biological control, and Dave Biddinger at this point provided slides that showed occurrence of some parasitoids in Pennsylvania apples. He then followed with a full presentation on the appearance and spread of the predatory mite, Typhlodromus pyri, and showed how reduced mite sprays were required and how this can benefit that industry. This represents a 4-yr RAMP funded project to Dr. Biddinger.

2. Biocontrol as a yardstick of orchard health.
Initial work by Rick Hilton proposing using the abundance of the European earwig as an indicator of orchard health was discussed. He has continued this work and considers it a robust and very simple method of placing cardboard rolls in the apex of scaffold branches and then counting the number in each roll.

3. Microbial control
Lerry Lacey made a fairly complete presentation of his group's research on codling moth granulovirus virus, and there was much discussion of similar results in other states including Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania. There was also some significant back and forth about how effective this product is on oriental fruit moth, with some claiming absolutely no efficacy and others claiming high efficacy.

4. Status of biocontrol and broad-spectrum biological pesticides and other new chemistries
Discussions brought up the previous afternoon reemerged questioning the value of narrow spectrum, newer insecticides. Unruh noted that even the newer, "softer" insecticides are disruptive, especially if sublethal bioassays are employed. Helmut Riedl showed data that indicated that this even persisted in the field with Intrepid. The consortium (Riedl, Hilton, Mills, Unruh, and Beers) that worked on sublethal effects under the RAMP-IFAS grant was urged to publish their data and produce a combined summary, as it would be very useful for the other states as well. Beers suggested that we would have more leeway in pest control decisions if we found ways to live with a higher damage threshold for codling moth and other pests. The main roadblock she identified was our need for better sorting methods.

Unruh suggested also that the social structure of those personnel doing insect pest monitoring often is those that recommend insecticide sprays harking back to the van den Bosch theme of an implicit pesticide conspiracy.

5. Biocontrol and the orchard habitat
This final topic of the biocontrol section began with the question, "What parasite are we waiting for or waiting to preserve?" Unruh made a brief presentation of the landscape level effects of habitat manipulations to promote leafrollers in Washington. Dave Biddinger stated that he is finding C. florus but only at low numbers in PA. It was questioned if we need more effective natural enemies or if we need to live with what we have. There was a consensus that we have most of what we should need but that we need to learn how to get the most out of these beneficial organisms.

Landscape level pests were cited as a problem for counting on biological control. Specifically, leafrollers and pear psylla can move from other orchards and congregate, causing much higher densities than the natural enemies at the high-pressure sites can subdue. Bins and bad neighbors can lead to similar problems with less vagile pests like codling moth. It was agreed yet again that leafroller and psylla are compelling reasons for developing areawide management.

Accomplishments

Some recent advances in the development of new pheromonal delivery systems have stimulated a good deal of discussion among the scientific community on mechanisms and how to enhance the effect of pheromone in commercial settings. The combination of pheromones and kairomones in the same formulation or applied separately but to the same orchard holds some promise of using two biologically active chemicals to more effectively manage codling moth. At least one working group has been established to design experiments examining the mechanisms that might be working where both chemistries are present at the same time. A working group was also formed to examine the use of a kairomone or selective insecticide as part of a new spray foam formulation that could be applied to the trunks of fruit trees. There was a robust discussion of the current value and future of biological control in orchard ecosystems. There was some strong evidence presented and discussed showing the negative effects of newer insecticides that were initially thought to be safe against most biological control agents. The negative effects of new insecticides on biological control agents show the need for more detailed biological information on the life histories and behaviors of these agents. There was also a call for continued efforts to evaluate the effects of newly registered insecticides on biological control agents. The greatest barrier to such activity is the availability of funding for such studies. There was some effort discussed to organize a working group to address issues of evaluating new insecticides against biological control agents. Microbial control of codling moth using virus is seen as a very valuable and highly adopted technology to help move growers, not just organic growers, away from reliance on broad-spectrum insecticides. There was discussion concerning the rewrite of the project in 2007. Vince Jones agreed to lead the organization of the 2007 meeting. In general, the format for the 2006 meeting worked well but there needs to be time for some breakout meetings in topic areas for planning. Holding the meeting in Portland, Oregon, prior to the Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference was generally thought to be a positive, as it helped increase participation from across the United States.

Publications

Alston, D.G., D.E.N. Rangel, L.A. Lacey, H.G. Golez, J.J. Kim, and D.W. Roberts. 2005. Evaluation of novel fungus and nematode isolates for control of Conotrachelus nenuphar (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) larvae. Biol. Contr. 35: 163-171. Arthurs, S.P., L.A. Lacey, and R. Fritts, Jr. 2005. Optimizing the use of the codling moth granulovirus: effects of application rate and spraying frequency on control of codling moth larvae in Pacific Northwest apple orchards. J. Econ. Entomol. 98: 1459-1468. Bau, J., K.A. Justus, C. Loudon and R.T. Cardé. 2005. Electroantennographic resolution of pulsed pheromone plumes in two species of moths with bipectinate antennae. Chem. Senses 30:771-780. Bezemer, T.M., J. A. Harvey, and N.J. Mills. 2005. Influence of adult nutrition on the relationship between body size and reproductive parameters in a parasitoid wasp. Ecol. Entomol. 30: 571-580. Biddinger, D. and L.A. Hull. 2005. Survey of Pennsylvania apple orchards for a mite predator to give effective and sustainable control of spider mites. Penn Fruit News. 85(3): 23-31. Biddinger, D.J. 2005. Predatory mites benefit apple growers in Pennsylvania. PA IPM, Fall 2005, Vol. 8, No. 4. http://paipm.cas.psu.edu/newsletter.html. Biddinger, D.J. and L.A. Hull. 2005. Survey of Pennsylvania apple orchards for a mite predator to give effective and sustainable control of spider mites. Penn Fruit News, 85: 23-28. Biddinger, D.J., L.A. Hull, G. Krawczyk. 2006. Conservation and augmentation of the predatory mite, T. pyri, in Pennsylvania apple orchards. Proceedings of the 80th Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference, January 11-13, 2006, Portland, OR. Biddinger, D., G. Krawczyk, and L. Hull. 2006. Conservation and augmentation of the predatory mite, Typhlodromus pyri, in Pennsylvania apple orchards. Proceedings of the 81st Cumberland-Shenandoah Fruit Workers Conference, Nov. 17-18, 2005, Winchester, VA. Brunner, J.F., E.H. Beers, J.E. Dunley, M. Doerr, and K. Granger. 2005. Role of neonicotinyl insecticides in Washington apple integrated pest management. Part I. Control of lepidopteran pests. 10 pp. Journal of Insect Science, 5:14, available online: insectscience.org/5.14. Beers, E.H., J.F. Brunner, J.E. Dunley, M. Doerr, and K. Granger. 2005. Role of neonicotinyl insecticides in Washington apple integrated pest management. Part II. Nontarget effects on integrated mite control. 10 pp. Journal of Insect Science, 5:16, available online: insectscience.org/5.16. Cossentine, J.E., L.B.M. Jensen and K. Eastwell. 2005. Incidence and transmission of a granulovirus in a large codling moth, Cydia pomonella L. (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) rearing facility. J. Invertebrate Pathology 90:187-192. Cossentine, J.E., E.K. Deglow, L.B.M. Jensen and H. Goulet. 2005. Biological assessment of Macrocentrus linearis Nees and Apanteles polychrosidis Viereck (Hymenoptera: Braconidae) as parasitoids of the obliquebanded leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Biocontrol Science and Technology 15:711-720. Curkovic, T. and J.F. Brunner. 2005. Residual and sublethal effects of an attracticide formulation on Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris), Pandemis pyrusana Kearfott, and Cydia pomonella (L.) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Crop Protection 24(7): 637-641. DeLury, N.C., G.J.R. Judd, and M.G.T. Gardiner. 2005. Antennal detection of sex pheromone by female Pandemis limitata (Robinson) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) and its impact on calling behaviour. J. Entomol. Soc. British Columbia. 102:1-9. Ellis, N.H. and L.A. Hull. 2005. Flight behavior and field biology of adult oriental fruit moths in the presence of Malus and Prunus host crops. Penn Fruit News. 85(3):18-21. Fernandez, D.E., E.H. Beers, J.F. Brunner, M.D. Doerr and J.E. Dunley. 2005. Effects of seasonal mineral oil applications on the pest and natural enemy complexes of apple (Malus domestica Borkhausen). J. Econ. Entomol. 98(5): 1630-1640. Hilton, R.J. New control tactics for orchard IPM: selective pesticides, microbials, and behavioral control methods. Abstr. 5th Asia-Pacific Congress of Entomology. Jeju, Korea, Oct. 18-21. Hilton, R., and H. Riedl. 2005. Tree fruit pests: pear. pp 178-186. In Pacific Northwest Insect Management Handbook, OSU Press, Corvallis. Hull, L., G. Krawczyk, and D. Biddinger. 2006. Effect of insecticide, water, volume, and method of application on the internal fruit feeding lepidopteran complex in apples. Proceedings of the 81st Cumberland-Shenandoah Fruit Workers Conference, Nov. 17-18, 2005, Winchester, VA. Hull, L., G. Krawczyk, and D. Biddinger. 2006. Management of CM and OFM on apple with insecticides, water, volume, and method of application. Proceedings of the 80th Western Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference, January 11-13, 2006, Portland, OR. Jones, V.P., M.D. Doerr, J.F. Brunner, C.C. Eastburn, T.D. Wilburn and W.G. Wiman. 2005. Instar specific phenology of Pandemis pyrusana and Choristoneura rosaceana in Washington apple orchards. J. Econ. Entomol. 98: 862-874. Judd, G., H. Thistlewood, M. Gardiner, and B. Lannard. 2005. Mass-reared male codling moth from the sterile insect programme in British Columbia currently lack mating competitiveness in spring: is it a question of mating asynchrony? In Proceedings of 3rd Research Coordination Meeting, Improvement of codling moth SIT to facilitate expansion and field application, FAO/IAEA Coordinated Research Programme, Mendoza, Argentina, September 16-20, 2005. Working Paper Series, IAEA- in press. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria. Judd, G.J.R. 2005. New insights into codling moth mating behavior. Proceedings of the Washington State Horticultural Association. in press. Judd, G.J.R. and M.G.T. Gardiner. 2005. Towards eradication of codling moth in British Columbia by complimentary action of mating disruption, tree-banding and sterile insect technique: five-year study in organic orchards. Crop Protection 28:718-733. Judd, G.J.R. and M.G.T. Gardiner. 2006. Efficacy of Isomate-CM/LR for managing codling moth and leafrollers (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) by mating disruption in organic apple orchards in western Canada. Agricultural and Forest Entomol. in press. Judd, G.J.R. and M.G.T. Gardiner. 2006. Several factors affecting spring-time flight activity and recapture of mass-reared male codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.), released by the Okanagan-Kootenay sterile insect programme. J. Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia 103. in press. Judd, G.J.R., S. Cockburn, C. Eby, M.G.T. Gardiner, and S. Wood. 2006. Diapause improves spring-time mating competitiveness of male codling moth mass-reared for a sterile insect programme. Entomologia Exp. Appl. in press. Judd, G.J.R., N.C. DeLury and M.G.T. Gardiner. 2005. Examining disruption of pheromone communication in Choristoneura rosaceana and Pandemis limitata (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) using microencapsulated (Z)-11-tetradecenyl acetate applied in a laboratory flight tunnel. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 114: 35-45. Judd, G.J.R., M.G.T. Gardiner, N.C. DeLury and G. Karg, G. 2005. Reduced antennal sensitivity, behavioural response and attraction of male codling moths, Cydia pomonella (L.), to their pheromone (E,E)-8,10-dodecandien-1-ol following various pre-exposure regimes. Entomol. Exp. Appl. 114:65-78. Judd, G.J.R., H.M.A. Thistlewood, M.G.T. Gardiner and B.L. Lannard. 2006. Is lack of mating competitiveness in spring linked to mating asynchrony between wild and mass-reared male codling moth from an operational sterile insect programme? Entomologia Exp. Appl. in press. Jumean, Z., E. Rowland, G.J.R. Judd, and G. Gries. 2006. Pheromone-based trapping of larval codling moth, Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae), in commercial apple orchards. Entomologia Exp. Appl. in press. Justus, K.A., R.T. Cardé and A.S. French. 2005. Dynamic properties of antennal responses in two moth species. J. Neurophysiol. 93: 2233-2239. Knight, A.L. and D.M. Light 2005. Developing action thresholds for codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) with pear ester and codlemone-baited traps in apple orchards treated with sex pheromone mating disruption. Can. Entomol. 137(6): 739-747. Knight, A.L. and D.M. Light. 2005. Dose-response of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) to ethyl (E, Z)-2,4-decadienoate in apple orchards treated with sex pheromone dispensers. Environ. Entomol. 34: 604-609. Knight, A.L. and D.M. Light. 2005. Factors affecting the differential capture of male and female codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in traps baited with ethyl (E, Z)-2,4-decadienoate. Environ. Entomol. 34(5): 1161-1169. Knight, A.L. and D.M. Light. 2005. Seasonal flight patterns of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) monitored with pear ester and codlemone-baited traps in sex pheromone-treated apple orchards. Environ. Entomol. 34(5): 1028-1035. Knight, A.L. and D.M. Light. 2005. Timing of egg hatch by early-season codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) predicted by moth catch in pear ester and codlemone-baited traps. Can. Entomol. 137(6): 728-738. Knight, A.L., P. VanBuskirk, R. Hilton, B. Zoller, and D.M. Light. 2005. Monitoring codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in four cultivars of pear. Acta Hort. 671: 565-570. Knight, A.L., R. Hilton, and D.M. Light. 2005. Monitoring codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple with blends of ethyl (E, Z)-2,4-decadieonoate and codlemone. Environ. Entomol. 34: 598-603. Krawczyk, G. and L.A. Hull. 2005. Factors in monitoring and controlling codling moth populations in PA apple orchards. Penn Fruit News. 85(2): 13-21. Krawczyk, G. and L.A. Hull. 2005. Use of a new generation of horticultural oils for mite management in fruit orchards. IOBC/WPRS Bull. 28(7): 206-210. Lacey, L.A. and D.I. Shapiro-Ilan. 2005. Microbial control of insect and mite pests in orchards: tools for integrated pest management and sustainable agriculture. In: R. Dris (Ed.), "Crops: Quality, Growth and Biotechnology", pp.1-24. WFL Publisher, Helsinki, Finland. Lacey, L.A. and T.R. Unruh. 2005. Biological control of codling moth (Cydia pomonella, Tortricidae: Lepidoptera) and its role in integrated pest management, with emphasis on entomopathogens. Vedalia 12: in press. Lacey, L.A., and S.P. Arthurs. 2005. New method for testing solar sensitivity of commercial formulations of the granulovirus of codling moth (Cydia pomonella, Tortricidae: Lepidoptera). For: J. Invertebr. Pathol. 90:85-90. Lacey, L.A., D. Granatstein, S.P. Arthurs, H.L. Headrick and R. Fritts, Jr. 2006. Use of mulches to improve the efficacy and persistence of entomopathogenic nematodes (Steinernematidae) for control of overwintering codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 41: in press. Lacey, L.A., L.G. Neven, H.L. Headrick, and R. Fritts, Jr. 2005. Factors affecting entomopathogenic nematodes (Steinernematidae) for the control of overwintering codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in fruit bins. J. Econ. Entomol. 98: 1863-1869. Lacey, L.A., S.P. Arthurs and H. Headrick. 2005. Comparative activity of the codling moth granulovirus against Grapholita molesta and Cydia pomonella (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). For: J. Entomol. Soc. Brit. Columbia. 102: 79-80. Lacey, L.A., S.P. Arthurs, T.R. Unruh, H. Headrick and R. Fritts, Jr. 2006. Entomopathogenic nematodes for control of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple and pear orchards: effect of nematode species and seasonal temperatures, adjuvants, application equipment and post-application irrigation. Biol. Contr. 37: in press. Light, D.M. and A.L. Knight. 2005. Specificity of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) for the kairomone ethyl (2E, 4Z)-2, 4-decadienoate: field bioassays with pome fruit volatiles, analog and isomeric compounds. J. Agricultural & Food Chemistry 53(10): 4046-4053. Lowery, D.T., M.J. Smirle, R.G. Foottit and E.H. Beers Peryea. 2005. Susceptibilities of green apple aphid and spirea aphid collected from apple in the Pacific Northwest to selected aphicides. Journal of Economic Entomology (in press). Lowery, D.T., M.J. Smirle, R.G. Foottit, C.L. Zurowski and E.H. Beers. 2005. Baseline susceptibilities to imidacloprid for green apple aphid and spirea aphid (Homoptera: Aphididae) collected from apple in the Pacific Northwest. Journal of Economic Entomology 98: 188-194. Mills, N.J. 2005. Classical biological control of codling moth: the California experience. In: 2nd International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods. M.S. Hoddle (ed.), USDA Forest Service, FHTET-2005-08, Volume 1, pp. 126-131. Mills, N.J. 2005. Selecting effective parasitoids for biological control introductions: codling moth as a case study. Biological Control 34: 274-282. Mills, N.J., and K.M. Daane. 2005. Nonpesticide alternatives can suppress agricultural pests. California Agriculture 59(1): 23-28. Myers, C.T., and L.A. Hull. 2005. Oriental fruit moth (Grapholita molesta Busck) mating disruption trials in peach orchards: 2004. Penn Fruit News. 85(3): 36-41. Myers, C.T., and L.A. Hull. 2005. Understanding differences in oriental fruit moth (Grapholita molesta Busck) behavior between peach and apple orchards in Pennsylvania. Penn Fruit News. 85(2): 48-52. Myers, C.T., L.A. Hull and G. Krawczyk. 2005. Using mating disruption tactics to mitigate OFM and CM pressure in an abandoned orchard site: a case study. Penn Fruit News. 85(5): 15-26. Myers, C.T., L.A. Hull, and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Early-season host plant fruit impacts on reproductive parameters of the oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Entomol. Sci. (in press). Myers, C.T., L.A. Hull and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Effects of orchard host plants on the oviposition preference of the oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) J. Econ Entomol. (in press). Myers, C.T., L.A. Hull and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Effects of orchard host plants, Apple, Malus domestica Borkh., and "Peach", Prunus persica L., on the development of the oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ. Entomol. (in press). Myers, C.T., L.A. Hull and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Seasonal and cultivar associated variation in the oviposition behavior of the oriental fruit moth, (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) adults and feeding behavior of neonate larvae in apples. J. Econ. Entomol. (in press). Paulson, G.S., L.A. Hull and D.J. Biddinger. 2005. The effects of a plant growth regulator prohexadione-calcium on insect pests of apple and pear. J. Econ. Entomol. 98: 423-431. Riedl, H., and R. Hilton. 2005. Tree Fruit Pests: apple, pp 168-178. In Pacific Northwest Insect Management Handbook, OSU Press, Corvallis. Robertson, S., L.A. Hull, and D. Calvin. 2005. A model to predict fruit injury by the tufted apple bud moth, Platynota idaeusalis. J. Econ. Entomol. 98(4): 1229-1235. Schlamp, K.K., R. Gries, G. Khaskin, K. Brown, E. Khaskin, G.J.R. Judd, and G. Gries. 2005. Pheromone components from body scales of female Anarsia lineatella induce contacts by conspecific males. J. Chem. Ecol. 31: 1-15. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., L.W. Duncan, L.A. Lacey, and R. Han. 2005. Orchard applications. In: Grewal P. S., Ehlers, R.-U. and David, Shapiro-Ilan, D. I. (Eds), Nematodes as Biocontrol Agents, CABI Publishing, CAB International, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, pp. 215-230. Shapiro-Ilan, D.I., L.W. Duncan, L.A. Lacey, and R. Han. 2005. Orchard crops. In "Nematodes as Biological Control Agents" P. S. Grewal, R.-U. Ehlers, and D. I. Shapiro-Ilan (Eds), CABI Publishing, Wallingford, Oxon, UK, pp. 215-229. Tomascewska, E., V.R. Hebert, J.F. Brunner, V.P. Jones, M. Doerr, and R. Hilton. 2005. Evaluation of pheromone release from commercial mating disruption dispensers. J. Ag. Food Chem. 53: 2399-2405. VanBuskirk, P., and R. Hilton. 2005. The challenge of implementing a successful IPM program in pear. Acta Horticulturae 671: 577-581. Zaid, J., R. Gries, T.R. Unruh, E. Rowland, and G. Gries. 2005. Identification of the larval aggregation pheromone of codling moth, Cydia pomonella. J. Chemical Ecology. 31: 911-924. Zaid, J., T. Unruh, R. Gries, and G. Gries. 2005. Mastrus ridibundus parasitoids eavesdrop on cocoon-spinning codling moth, Cydia pomonella. Naturwissenschaften 92:20-25.

Impact Statements

At least one research collaboration was formed as a result of the 2006 WCC43 meeting that will focus on development of pheromonal formulations to be incorporated into a sprayable foam to replace banding for codling moth larvae.
Use of codling moth virus formulations continues to expand for organic and conventional apple production in Washington, the direct result of research demonstrating the value of this technology.
Sprayable formulations of pheromone continue to improve, holding out hope that this technology may at some time be a viable effective option that is less expensive than hand applied dispensers. This is in large part due to the success of mating disruption in orchards and the active research programs of WCC43 members.
There is a strong sense of promise that kairomones may be useful to enhance pheromonal mating disruption. The interactions at the 2006 WCC43 meeting stimulated interest and intentions by several researchers to pursue this avenue of investigation.
Measuring the impact of biological control in orchard ecosystems continues to be a challenge. There is evidence that biological control agents are present in orchards, especially those where broad-spectrum insecticides are curtailed, but their direct effects on pest species are highly variable. In pear orchards earwigs appear to act as an indicator of orchard health. In Pennsylvania, biodiversity, especially of biological control agents, increased over 4 years of a RAMP project.
The codling moth virus has shown very good efficacy in organic and conventional orchards when combined with pheromones. The virus is non-toxic to biological control agents so poses a valuable tool for transitioning orchards towards a status where biological control can be shown to have significant impacts on selected pest populations.
The negative impact of newer insecticides through sublethal effects on a spectrum of biological control agents was both enlightening and a challenge to the future of "soft" pest control programs in orchard systems. This information has, however, allowed scientists to realistically classify new insecticides and their effects on biological control agents that will help growers make better selections of products and how to use them in their pest management programs.

Date of Annual Report: 03/09/2007

Report Information

Annual Meeting Dates: 01/09/2007 - 01/10/2007
Period the Report Covers: 10/01/2005 - 09/01/2006

Participants

Brunner, Jay (jfb@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University; Dunley, John (dunleyj@wsu.edu) - Washington State University; Beers, Elizabeth (ebeers@wsu.edu) - Washington Sate University; Jones, Vince (vpjones@wsu.edu) - Washington State University; Gut, Larry (gut@pilot.msu.edu) - Michigan State University; Epstein , David (epstei10@msu.edu) - Michigan State University; Lacey, Lerry (llacey@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory; Landolt, Peter (landolt@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory; Knight, Alan (aknight@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory; Riedl, Helmut (helmut.riedl@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; Walston Allison (Allison.walston@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; Hilton, Rick (richard.hilton@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; VanBuskirk, Philip (Philip.vanbuskirk@oregonstate.edu) - Oregon State University; Van Steenwyk, Robert (bobvanst@nature.berkeley.edu) - University of California, Berkeley; Welter, Stephan (welters@nature.berkeley.edu) - University of California, Berkeley; Judd, Gary (JuddG@AGR.GC.CA) - Agriculture Canada, Summerland; Thistlewood, Howard (thistlewoodh@agr.gc.ca) - Agriculture Canada, Sumerland; Hull, Larry (LAH4@psu.edu) - Pennsylvania State University; Kranczyk, Greg (gxk13@psu.edu) - Pennsylvania State University; Light, Doug (dlight@pw.ars.usda.gov) - USDA, ARS Western Regional Research Center; Reissig, Harvey (whr1@cornell.edu) - New York State Agricultural Experiment Statoin; Agnello, Art (ama4@cornell.edu) - New York State Agricultural Experiment Station; Alston, Diane (dianea@biology.usu.edu) - Utah State University; Pszczolkowski, Maciej A (MPszczolkowski@MissouriState.edu) - Missouri State University; Bergh, Chris (cbergh@vt.edu) - University of Vermont; Garczynski, Stephen (sgarczynski@yarl.ars.usda.gov) - USDA-ARS Yakima Agricultural Research Laboratory.

Brief Summary of Minutes

Twenty-seven individuals participated in the 2007 meeting representing 13 different institutions. The agenda was divided into two major categories of discussion topics: population biology and semiochemicals, both in the context of orchard IPM and production systems. Biological control was discussed as part of the population biology. The meeting agenda limited time for PowerPoint reports of research results. The focus was instead organized around a list of discussion topics. The intent of the meeting format was to bring out discussions of common questions and problems, approaches to researchable issues, and new problems that offer new opportunities for research. This list of topics was a summation of solicited suggestions from WERA-043 members. The following summary is organized by agenda topic and captures the essence of discussions that occurred.

REPORTING OF MEETING CONTENT

POPULATION BIOLOGY

DISPERSAL - LOCAL OR LONG DISTANCE

The discussion focused on methods of measuring dispersal of insects within and between habitats. Vince Jones shared about the method developed using protein markers to assess movements of wild populations between different orchard and extra-orchard habitats. The distances moved by certain insects, for example codling moth adults, was greater than suggested from other measures. Problems in measuring the result of movement of the mobile stage of an insect, usually the adult, were discussed as well as barriers or difficulties to interpreting these kinds of data. Many studies on dispersal or movement rely or have relied upon release and recapture of laboratory-reared insects, especially moths. The fitness and behavioral response of laboratory-reared moths has been the subject of studies in Canada for many years where the release of sterile codling moths as a control or eradication means has been ongoing. The Canadian sterile codling moths have been shown to be attractive to pheromone sources, but their ability to fly long distances relative to wild types is limited.

RESISTANCE

The introduction of several new insecticides with different modes of action has raised numerous questions about the possibility of pests developing resistance to them and how to best delay this eventual fate. There was some discussion about cross-resistance between old chemistries, primarily the organophosphate insecticides and new chemistries. There exist examples of pre-existing cross-resistance to new chemistries, which have limited their utility as pest control products. There is some evidence, though not yet validated in the laboratory, of resistance in codling moth to neonicotinyl insecticides. There was one report based on preliminary data of possible negatively correlated cross-resistance of codling moth to an insect growth regulator. Surveys of leafroller populations in Washington State indicate that many populations have developed significant resistance to spinosad, a chemistry that has only been registered for use for eight years. In most cases the level of spinosad resistance was low, 2- to 3-fold, and field failures had not been widely reported; however, diminished levels of control have been reported. An area for cooperative research discussed was the use of molecular methods to help characterize resistance before it becomes well established in orchards. Baseline data on susceptibility of many of the new insecticides for codling moth and leafrollers have been developed and will be useful in future assessments of resistance in the field. Concerns about stewardship of new chemical controls led to a discussion on how best to educate growers on use patterns of available chemical tools. Some cooperative projects on education will likely arise from these discussions.

BIOLOGICAL CONTROL

There was some very good discussion about the value of biological control in commercial orchards and how much time should be devoted to this kind of activity. It was acknowledged that the amount of biological control of key pests operating in orchards is likely low, 10-20%, but even this could contribute significantly to overall population reductions that could make soft control programs sustainable. The hope of conserving biological control agents in orchards through use of newly registered and "selective" insecticides has been diminished with recent studies showing significant sublethal effects from many of these products. More research in these areas is much needed but obtaining funding to conduct it was very doubtful. Some discussion about trying to incorporate testing for sublethal effects of new chemistries into the regulatory apparatus occurred. In addition, several of the new insecticides registered as replacements for organophosphate insecticides have been shown to disrupt existing stable biological control systems, especially biological control of spider mites. Attempts to enhance biological control of selected key pests through extra-orchard habitat manipulation shows promise, but the management of the extra-orchard habitats requires additional studies on how to make them sustainable systems. The good news is that growers have shown an interest in establishing extra-orchard habitats and managing them, suggesting that this area of research should be continued and build upon the successes that have been made.

PHENOLOGY

Phenology models have been a mainstay of tree fruit IPM for many years. Some new models have been developed for new pests, for example for Lacanobia subjuncta, while older models for leafrollers have been revised and improved. A new model for codling moth was discussed, and a paper documenting its development was distributed and reviews requested from the group. A new web-based information delivery system, the Washington State University Decision Aids System (WSU-DAS), was discussed. This system uses real time weather data from a distributed system to automatically update insect and disease models. It then provides output in the form of model predictions and future events, which are tied to management guidelines. The system also provides direct linkage to the pesticide recommendations developed by WSU for control of pests. The WSU-DAS will be fully operable in 2007.

DIURNAL PATTERNS OF INSECT BEHAVIOR

Most of the discussion focused on codling moth. Some observations of moth activity following their release at the base of trees showed differences between laboratory reared and wild moths, indicating the need to use wild moths when possible in such behavioral studies. There were some differences between sexes in their behavioral response following release. While most moths ended up in trees several remained or returned to the ground for up to two nights following release. A Michigan study indicated some evidence of moths being in the ground cover but also demonstrated the need to sample at times when moths might be expected to be most active.

SAMPLING

The issues around sampling could be divided into field assessments of populations and development of lure methods for moths. Codling moth as a quarantine pest limiting exports to key markets has stimulated the development of sampling plans based on historical data. These plans have helped reduce the incidence detections of codling moth infested fruit into Taiwan. Sampling plans for leafrollers were also discussed, and the importance of sample timing based on new models was stressed as a way to increase confidence in and accuracy of sampling for these pests. The problems associated with using lures of pheromones or kairomones to monitor moths as a means of assessing risk of crop injury were discussed. New lures that combine pheromones and kairomones show promise of capturing more moths in pheromone treated orchards but interpretation of the data for management decision-making remains uncertain. There are some new combinations of pheromones and kairomones that were discussed, which show promise to improve upon exiting lures.

SEMIOCHEMICALS

DEALING WITH BIASES - COLONIES VERSUS WILD POPULATIONS

There was considerable discussion about how to interpret data on responses to various stimuli from moths originating in colonies versus the wild type. It was generally agreed that colony moths could be used for certain kinds of studies to show proof of concept when addressing certain questions, but the need to bridge these data to behaviors of wild moths was stressed. The use of wind tunnel data and extrapolation to field behavior of wild moths was discussed. Some behaviors can be elucidated in the wind tunnel, but the differences between wild moth behavior in the field to stimuli that are not active in wind tunnel situations suggest that the latter data be interpreted with caution. While no one suggested that wind tunnel studies have no value there was a realization that inferences from such studies need to be confirmed in field studies, which present some serious challenges associated with experimental design and resources.

FACTORS STABILIZING MATING DISRUPTION

Mating disruption has become a major pest management tool for western orchard systems and is becoming more important in eastern systems. Therefore, the discussion on how to optimize mating disruption and create stability of pheromone-based pest management systems is important to many of those participating in the meeting. New pheromone technologies are focusing on automated delivery methods to reduce dependence on labor, which is identified as a barrier to increased adoption of the technology. For codling moth, the distribution of point sources of pheromone as flakes, fibers or sprayable formulations of different kinds shows promise of enhancing control using pheromones; however, technological barriers remain in delivery of these devices into the tree canopy at critical times. The combination of kairomones and pheromones in some new mating disruption technologies was discussed, but evidence of the contribution of the kairomone component is not conclusive. The most important factor in maintaining stability of mating disruption is to maintain the target population as low levels using a combination of tactics, including supplemental applications of insecticides as required and biological control. The concern about insects developing resistance to pheromones was discussed. Studies establishing for the first time baselines for behaviors and electro-physiological measurements of different populations of codling moth were discussed. The good news was that while there were differences between colony and wild moths there were no differences between wild moth populations evaluated from Washington, Michigan and Canada.

MECHANISMS - HIGH POINT SOURCE VERSUS LOW POINT SOURCE

There is a considerable amount of research being conducted on delivery of pheromones that do not require hand application of release devices. These formulations rely upon a low release rate per dispensing unit relative to the traditional hand-applied devices. Labor intensive studies that place known amounts of high point source - low release pheromone devices in orchards have shown remarkable power in reducing successful mating of codling moth and oriental fruit moth. The delivery of most of these formulations, however, is not efficient in placing release devices in trees, less than 35% in most cases, and the longevity of some formulations is not likely to be sufficient to make them commercially viable. There was discussion on what studies were needed to demonstrate the value of the high point source approach in mating disruption so as to encourage companies to continue to develop such technologies and to improve on the efficiency of delivery systems.

LURE AND KILL

Discussion on lure and kill as a management approach focused on codling moth. The only active research being conducted combines a sprayable pheromone technology and an extremely low volume of a broad-spectrum insecticide. There was some good evidence presented that this approach has promise and does not lead to negative consequences associated with the use of the broad-spectrum insecticide applied using typical air-blast spraying methods. There are some issues associated with label changes required for certain pesticides if the technology and approach continue to show promise.

Accomplishments

The future of biological control in orchard ecosystems is a challenge for the group to bring into focus because of the wide variety of activities most participants are involved in. The negative effects of newer insecticides on biological control agents needs to be further clarified. One outcome of the meeting was at least one working group that will if funding is approved, work on the biology/phenology of key biological control agents. These data are lacking and are key to using new insecticides at times when they would have the least negative impact on biological control. There will likely be establishment of a working group on further evaluating the negative effects of new insecticides on selected natural enemies. This group will seek funding from various sources for this activity. Advances in the development of new pheromone delivery systems resulted in a good discussion on mechanisms and how to enhance the effect of pheromone in commercial settings. The combination of pheromones and kairomones continues to be of great interest and several individuals and groups are working on identifying new chemistries. The working group established in 2006 to examine the mechanisms of mating disruption for codling moth and oriental fruit moth is continuing to work together. The WERA-043 project will need to be re-written in 2008. Leadership was assigned to begin working on the project re-write. Steve Welter and Peter Shearer agreed to lead the organization of the 2008 meeting. The format for the 2008 meeting worked well but there needs to be time for some breakout meetings in topic areas for planning. The meeting will once again be held in Portland, OR prior to the Orchard Pest and Disease Management Conference.

Publications

Arthurs, S. P., L. A. Lacey, and R. W. Behle. 2006. Evaluation of spray-dried lignin-based formulations and adjuvants as ultraviolet light protectants for the granulovirus of the codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L). J. Invertebr. Pathol. 93:88-95. Biddinger, D., L. A. Hull, H. Huang, B. McPheron, and M. Loyer. 2006. Sublethal effects of chronic exposure to Tebufenozide on the development, survival, and reproduction of the tufted apple bud moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ Entomol. 99(3):834-842. Brunner, J. F., J. E. Dunley, E. H. Beers, and V. P. Jones. 2006. Building a multi-tactic biologically intensive pest management system for Washington orchards. In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture: Environmental, Health, and Efficacy Assessment. A. S. Felsot and K. D. Racke (eds.). American Chemical Society Symposium Series 947. pp.131-143. Curkovic, T. and J. F. Brunner. 2006. Courtship behavior in Choristoneura rosaceana (Harris) and Pandemis pyrusana Kearfott (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 99(3):617-624. Curkovic, T., J. F. Brunner, and P. J. Landolt. 2006. Evaluation of permethrin for attracticide development against Choristoneura rosaceana and Pandemis pyrusana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) males. Crop Protection. 25:973-976. Dunley, J. E., J. F. Brunner, M. D. Doerr, and E. H. Beers. 2006. Resistance and cross-resistance in populations of Choristoneura rosaceana and Pandemis pyrusana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in Washington apple. Journal of Insect Science. 6:14, available online: insectscience.org/6.14. Fernandez, D. E., E. H. Beers, J. F. Brunner, M. Doerr, and J. E. Dunley. 2006. Horticultural mineral oil applications for apple powdery mildew and codling moth, Cydia pomonella (L.). Crop Prot. 25:585-591. Georgis, R., A. M. Koppenhöfer, L. A. Lacey, G. Bélair, L. W. Duncan, P. S. Grewal, M. Samish, P. Torr, and R. W. H. M. van Tol. 2006. Successes and failures in the use of parasitic nematodes for pest control. Biol. Contr. 38: 103-123. Hansen, J. D., C. L. Xiao, and G. Kupferman. 2006. Bin sanitizer - an effective way to reduce codling moth and fungal decay. Good Fruit Grower 57(15):24-25. Hansen, J. D. and P. A. Anderson. 2006. Mass rearing codling moths: improvements and modifications. J. British Columbia Ent. Soc. 103:33-36. Hebert, V. R., E. Tomaszewska, J. F. Brunner, V. P. Jones, and M. Doerr. 2006. Evaluating the pheromone release rate characteristics of commercial mating disruption devices. In Crop Protection Products for Organic Agriculture: Environmental, Health, and Efficacy Assessment. A. S. Felsot and K. D. Racke (eds.). American Chemical Society Symposium Series 947. pp. 144-157. Hilton, R., and H. Riedl. 2006. Tree fruit pests: pear. In Pacific Northwest Insect Management Handbook, OSU Press, Corvallis. pp 178-186. Hilton, R. J. 2006. Pear psylla management: neonicotinoids and other options. Proceedings of the Oregon Horticultural Society. Jones V. P., T. R. Unruh, D. R. Horton, and J. F. Brunner. 2006. Improving Apple IPM by maximizing opportunities for biological control. Good Fruit Grower. Dec. p. 1-8. Jones V. P., J. R. Hagler, J. F. Brunner, C. C. Baker, and T. D. Wilburn. 2006. An inexpensive immunomarking technique for studying movement patterns of naturally occurring insect populations. Environ. Entomol. Forum section 35: 827-836. Knight, A. L. 2006. Assessing the mating status of female codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in orchards treated with sex pheromone using traps baited with ethyl (E, Z) -2, 4-decadienoate. Environ. Entomol. 35:894-900. Knight, A. L. 2006. Another tool to manage codling moth: ULV ground pheromone sprays. Good Fruit Grower 57(7):25-27. Knight A., R. Hilton, P. VanBuskirk, and D. Light. 2006. Using pear ester to monitor codling moth in sex pheromone treated orchards. Oregon State University Agricultural Experiment Station. Oregon State University, Extension Service Publication EM 8904, February 2006. 8 p. Krupke, C. H., V. P. Jones, and J. F. Brunner. 2006. Diel periodicity of Euschistus conspersus (Heteroptera: Pentatomidae) aggregation, mating, and feeding. Ann. Entomol. Soc. Amer. 99:169-174. Lacey, L.A., S. P. Arthurs, T. R. Unruh, H. Headrick, and R.T. Fritts, Jr. 2006. Entomopathogenic nematodes for control of codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in apple and pear orchards: effect of nematode species and seasonal temperatures, adjuvants, application equipment and post-application irrigation. Biological Control 37:214-223. Lacey, L. A., D. Granatstein, S. P. Arthurs, H. Headrick, and R. Fritts, Jr. 2006. Use of entomopathogenic nematodes (Steinernematidae) in conjunction with mulches for control of overwintering codling moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Entomol. Sci. 41:107-119. Lacey, L.A. and D.I. Shapiro Ilan. 2006. Microbial control of insect and mite pests in orchards: Tools for integrated pest management and sustainable agriculture. In: "Crops: Quality, Growth and Biotechnology", R. Dris (Ed.), WFL Publisher, Helsinki, Finland. pp. 1-24. Lowery, D. T., M. J. Smirle, R. G. Foottit, and E. H. Beers. 2006. Susceptibilities of apple aphid and spirea aphid collected from apple in the Pacific Northwest to selected insecticides. J. Econ. Entomol. 99:1369-1374. Myers, C. T., L. A. Hull, and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Early-season host plant fruit impacts on reproductive parameters of the oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) J. Entomol. Sci. 41(1):65-74. Myers, C. T., L. A. Hull, and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Seasonal and cultivar associated variation in the oviposition behavior of the oriental fruit moth, (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) adults and feeding behavior of neonate larvae in apples. J. Econ Entomol. 99(2):349-358. Myers, C. T., L. A. Hull, and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Effects of orchard host plants on the oviposition preference of the oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae). J. Econ Entomol. 99(4):1176-1183. Myers, C. T., L. A. Hull, and G. Krawczyk. 2006. Comparative survival rates of oriental fruit moth (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) larvae on shoots and fruit of apple and peach. J. Econ Entomol. 99(4):1299-1309. Riedl, H., and R. Hilton. 2006. Tree Fruit Pests: Apple. In Pacific Northwest Insect Management Handbook, OSU Press, Corvallis. pp. 168-178. Riga, K., L. A. Lacey, N. Guerra, and H. L. Headrick. 2006. Control of the oriental fruit moth, Grapholita molesta, using entomopathogenic nematodes in laboratory and bin assays. J. Nematol. 38(1):168-171. Siegel, J., L. A. Lacey, B. S. Higbee, P. Noble, and R. Fritts, Jr. 2006. The effect of application rate and abiotic factors on the efficacy of Steinernema carpocapsae for control of overwintering navel orangeworm (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae, Amyelois transitella) in fallen pistachios. For: Biol. Contr. (In Press). Yee, W. L. 2006. Feeding history effects on feeding responses of Rhagoletis indifferens (Diptera: Tephritidae) to GF-120 and nulure. J. Applied Entomol. 130:538-550. Yee, W. L. and D. Alston. Effects of spinosad, spinosad bait, and chloronicotinyl insecticides on mortality and control of adult and larval western cherry fruit fly, Rhagoletis indifferens (Diptera: Tephritidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 99(5):1722-1732. Yee, W. L. and R. B. Goughnour. 2006. New host records for the apple maggot, Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae) in Washington State. The Pan-Pacific Entomologist. 82(1):54-60. Yee, W. L., P. J. Landolt, and T. J. Darnell. 2006. Attraction of Rhagoletis pomonella (Diptera: Tephritidae) and non-target flies to traps baited with ammonium carbonate and fruit volatile lures in Washington and Oregon. J. Agric. and Urban Entomol. p. 133-149.

Impact Statements

The negative impact on biological control agents of newer insecticides through sub-lethal effects represents a challenge to the future of "soft" pest control programs in orchard systems. This information has, however, allowed scientists to realistically classify new insecticides and their effects on biological control agents and this will help growers make better selections of products and how to use them in their pest management programs.
The product of last year‘s meeting was evident in the discussions in 2007. A large cooperative project, the genesis of which was a previous WERA-043 meeting, has contributed much to the discussion on understanding mechanisms of pheromone mating disruption and how to stabilize programs using this technology. This project has developed baseline data on behavior and electro-physiology of codling moth that will be used to address future questions of resistance development to pheromones.
The promise that kairomones may be useful to enhance pheromone mating disruption is being more carefully evaluated and some critical questions arose out of the meeting discussions. The interactions at the 2007 WEAR-043 meeting stimulated interest and intentions by several researchers to pursue further this avenue of investigation.
The threat of resistance development to newly registered insecticides has raised interest in scientists contributing more of their resources to this area and will likely result in formation of collaborative working groups in this area. Concerns over resistance from the WERA-043 group have helped shape pest management recommendations toward sound resistance management strategies for growers.
Phenology models for codling moth are being re-examined in light of biological data indicating a shift in the pest‘s life history over time. One new model was shared with the group and critical reviews were requested. Another group is also looking at ways to make model output easier to use as tools in pest management through the development of a Decision Aids System (http://entomology.tfrec.wsu.edu/das/). This latter system integrates weather data, model output, pest management recommendations and negative effects of pesticides on natural enemies in real time via the web.
Research into alternative methods of delivering pheromones will lead to products that are less expensive and more effective than current products. This will result in lower costs to growers, increased use of pheromone technologies as well as increased use of safer pesticides.