Integrated Pest Management in Processing Tomatoes
Project Name |
IPM Processing tomatoes 2001, 1998-2001. |
Coordinator |
Jane Moran (Ag Victoria), (Insect component) |
Project Team |
Sandra McDougall, Technical Specialist (Vegetables), and Karen Ryan (NSW Agriculture), Ary Hoffman and Swarna Hewa-Kapuge (La Trobe University) |
Description |
To futher develop the Integrated Pest Management strategy in Processing Tomatoes. Specifically to:
1. Evaluate new generation chemistries and biological insecticides on control of Heliothis and their impact on the beneficial egg parasitoid, Trichogramma.
2. To compare a Best Management Option strategy with a conventional grower strategy
3. To evaluate options for sap sucker control during establishment phase. |
Activities & Outcomes |
Conclusions
-
The new chemistries of Success® (spinosad), Avatar® (indoxacarb), Prodigy® (methoxyfenozide) and Proclaim® (emamectin benzoate) all controlled Helicoverpa spp. well.
-
A short acting organophosphate Naled®(dibrom) also was effective at controlling Helicoverpa spp.
-
The Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki product MVPII® gave some control of Helicoverpa spp. but was not as effective as the new chemistry trialed nor the comparative grower program. In a subsequent trial another Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki product Dipel® gave excellent control and the addition of a feeding stimulant, Pheast® and a sticker-extender NuFilm-17® didn’t improve its’ efficancy.
-
The Heliothis nuclear polyhedrosis virus, Gemstar® gave some control of Helicoverpa spp. but was not as effective as the other products trialed.
-
Gemstar®, the Bacillus thuringiensis products and Prodigy® had no negative impact on the egg parasitoid, Trichogramma in the field or in laboratory trials.
-
Avatar® and Proclaim® showed some indication of having some negative impact on Trichogramma in the laboratory but not in the field trials.
-
Success® and Naled® showed serious toxicity to Trichogramma in the laboratory but not in the field.
-
The comparative Grower treatment, using methomyl, synthetic pyrethroids and endosulfan had negative impacts on Trichogramma both in the field and the laboratory.
-
A comparative trial of a ‘Best Management Option’ using the then available ‘softer’ options of Success®, Bacillus thuringiensis products and Prodigy® was as effective as the Grower control but was more expensive.
-
No conclusions could be made for the sap-sucker products due to poor population pressure in the two trial years
|