Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39
doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18
(E18)
TOMATO: Lycopersicon esculentum Mill., ‘Florida 47’
TRANSPLANT APPLIED INSECTICIDES FOR WHITEFLY AND TOMATO YELLOW LEAF CURL VIRUS
MANAGEMENT ON FRESH MARKET TOMATO, FALL 2012
Hugh A. Smith
University of Florida-IFAS
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
14625 CR 672
Wimauma, FL 33598
Phone: (813) 633-4124
Fax: (813) 634-0001
E-mail: [email protected]
Curtis A. Nagle
E-mail: [email protected]
Sweetpotato whitefly (SLW): Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius)
The efficacy of five insecticides applied to the soil at transplant and one combination soil and foliar treatment program were
evaluated compared to a non-treated check for control of SLW and tomato yellow leaf curl virus (TYLCV), which is
vectored by SLW, in tomato at the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Wimauma, FL in the fall of 2012. ‘Florida
47’ transplants were set on 21 Aug, 18 inches apart in single rows, in 8-inch-high and 32-inch-wide beds of Myakka fine
sand. The beds were spaced on 5-ft centers and covered with white virtually impermeable mulch. Plots consisted of 42
plants in three adjacent 21-ft long rows and were separated by 10 ft of unplanted bed within rows and 12 ft between rows.
Treatments were replicated four times in a RCB design. Soil applied treatments were hand ladled in 4 fl oz of preparation
per plant (Table 1). Foliar treatments were applied using a high clearance sprayer, fitted with Albuz orange nozzles,
pressurized to 200 psi and calibrated to deliver 60 gpa (early season) or 90 gpa (late season) (Table 1). SLW densities were
assessed on the middle ten plants of the middle row of each plot. Adult SLW densities were sampled by examining the third
leaf from the top on one stem per plant and recorded as the number per ten leaves. Immature SLW densities were sampled
from the terminal leaflet of a 7th or 8th leaf from the top of each of ten plants and recorded in the lab, with the aid of a stereo
microscope, as SLW eggs, 1st, 2nd & 3rd, or 4th instars per ten leaflets. All plants in a plot that possessed TYLCV symptoms
were recorded weekly. No yield data were collected. Adult and immature SLW data were transformed √(x+0.5) and
cumulative weekly percentage of plants showing TYLCV symptoms were calculated and transformed
arcsine[√(%TYLCV/100)] prior to ANOVA. Means were separated by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P=0.05). Means were
reported in the original scale.
There were no differences among treatments in SLW adult densities (Table 2) or SLW egg densities (Table 3). First instar
densities in plots of any chemical treatment were lower than in the non-treated checks on 24 Sep only; there were no
significant differences among treatments on any other sample date (Table 4). On 17 Sep, 2nd & 3rd instar densities were
lowest in plots drenched with A16901B, A16971B, Durivo or Venom (either drench alone or followed by A16901B foliar
applications). On 1 Oct, only plots treated with A16901B (drench or foliar) or Platinum possessed 2nd & 3rd instar densities
lower than in the check (Table 5). No differences among treatments were observed in 4th instar densities (Table 6) or
cumulative % plants with TYLCV symptoms throughout the experiment (Table 7). No phytotoxicity was observed. This
research was supported by industry gift(s) of pesticide and/or research funding.
1
Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39
doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18
Table 1.
Date of application
(gpa)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Application
method
21Aug
(181.5)
Non-treated check
A16901B 40 WG
A16971B 40 WG
Durivo 300 SC
Platinum 75 SG
Venom 70 SG
Venom 70 SG
fb A16901B 40 WG
--13.1 oz
6.54 oz
12.3 fl oz
3.42 oz
6.0 oz
6.0 oz
7.0 oz
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
X
X
X
X
X
X
19Sep
(60)
27Sep
(60)
3Oct
(60)
9Oct
(90)
X
X
X
X
a
‘fb’ means followed by.
Table 2.
SLW adults/ten leaves
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Application
method
Non-treated check
A16901B 40 WG
A16971B 40 WG
Durivo 300 SC
Platinum 75 SG
Venom 70 SG
Venom 70 SG
fb A16901B 40 WG
F6,18
P-value
--13.1 oz
6.54 oz
12.3 fl oz
3.42 oz
6.0 oz
6.0 oz
7.0 oz
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
10Sep
(20)
17Sep
(27)
24Sep
(34)
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.3a
0.0a
0.5a
2.8a
3.3a
5.0a
2.0a
4.3a
1.8a
1.0a
0.8a
2.0a
1.5a
1.0a
0.0a
1.00
0.4552
6.5a
1.8a
1.89
0.51
0.1377 0.7902
1Oct
(41)
0.0a
0.5a
0.0a
0.5a
1.3a
0.8a
8Oct
(48)
1.8a
2.3a
0.8a
2.5a
1.3a
1.8a
15Oct
(55)
5.0a
5.5a
4.3a
5.3a
5.3a
2.8a
0.0a
2.0a
1.0a
2.03
1.17
1.32
0.1141 0.3633 0.299
Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within
columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.).
a
‘fb’ means followed by.
Table 3.
SLW eggs/ten leaflets
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Non-treated check
A16901B 40 WG
A16971B 40 WG
Durivo 300 SC
Platinum 75 SG
Venom 70 SG
Venom 70 SG
fb A16901B 40 WG
F6,18
P-value
--13.1 oz
6.54 oz
12.3 fl oz
3.42 oz
6.0 oz
6.0 oz
7.0 oz
Application 10Sep
method
(20)
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
3.5a
0.0a
0.0a
2.5a
2.8a
0.0a
0.0a
1.94
0.1291
17Sep
(27)
24Sep
(34)
1Oct
(41)
8Oct
(48)
15Oct
(55)
6.5a
0.8a
1.8a
1.3a
5.0a
10.0a
2.0a
0.8a
0.5a
0.3a
0.3a
0.0a
5.0a
0.8a
1.3a
2.0a
2.0a
0.3a
8.3a
6.5a
5.5a
2.0a
2.0a
0.5a
2.3a
3.5a
2.0a
5.8a
5.8a
4.0a
2.0a
0.8a
0.8a
0.5a
1.0a
1.82
0.62
0.71
1.80
0.78
0.1508 0.7086 0.6444 0.1565 0.5932
Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means
within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected
LSD (P>0.05.).
a
‘fb’ means followed by.
2
Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39
doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18
Table 4.
st
SLW 1 instars/ten leaflets
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Non-treated check
--A16901B 40 WG
13.1 oz
A16971B 40 WG
6.54 oz
Durivo 300 SC
12.3 fl oz
Platinum 75 SG
3.42 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
fb A16901B 40 WG
7.0 oz
F6,18
P-value
Application
method
10Sep
(20)
17Sep
(27)
24Sep
(34)
1Oct
(41)
8Oct
(48)
15Oct
(55)
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
1.0a
0.3a
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.5a
0.0b
0.0b
0.0b
0.0b
0.0b
0.5a
2.0a
1.0a
2.8a
3.8a
1.0a
7.5a
0.8a
0.5a
1.0a
1.3a
1.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.3a
0.0a
0.0b
3.00
0.0327
0.5a 0.0a
0.0a
1.26 1.42
1.00
0.3250 0.2618 0.4552
0.0a
0.86
0.5411
0.0
-----
Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means
within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD
(P>0.05.).
a
‘fb’ means followed by.
Table 5.
nd
rd
SLW 2 & 3 instars/ten leaflets
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Non-treated check
--A16901B 40 WG
13.1 oz
A16971B 40 WG
6.54 oz
Durivo 300 SC
12.3 fl oz
Platinum 75 SG
3.42 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
fb A16901B 40 WG 7.0 oz
F6,18
P-value
Application 10Sep
method
(20)
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
17Sep
(27)
4.5a
0.3a
0.0a
0.5a
5.8a
0.0a
24Sep
(34)
20.8a
0.3bc
0.0 c
3.3bc
9.8ab
0.0 c
0.0a
1.61
0.2015
1Oct
(41)
10.5a
2.8a
3.0a
4.3a
3.3a
2.8a
4.3a-c
3.48
0.0184
8Oct
(48)
11.0a 10.3a
3.3bc 7.3a
5.5ab 4.5a
8.5ab 5.8a
2.5bc 12.3a
10.0ab 3.8a
1.5a
1.39
0.2725
15Oct
(55)
10.5a
4.0a
5.5a
8.3a
28.3a
10.0a
0.5 c 0.0a
0.3a
3.17
2.62
2.02
0.0265 0.0530 0.1163
Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within
columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.).
a
‘fb’ means followed by
Table 6.
th
SLW 4 instars/ten leaflets
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
amt/acre
Non-treated check
--A16901B 40 WG
13.1 oz
A16971B 40 WG
6.54 oz
Durivo 300 SC
12.3 fl oz
Platinum 75 SG
3.42 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
Venom 70 SG
6.0 oz
fb A16901B 40 WG 7.0 oz
F6,18
P-value
Application 10Sep
method
(20)
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
0.3a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.3a
0.0a
17Sep
(27)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0a
0.0
0.79
--0.5897 ---
24Sep
(34)
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
2.8a
0.3a
1Oct
(41)
3.3a
2.0a
0.5a
0.3a
1.8a
3.8a
8Oct
(48)
1.5a
2.3a
1.8a
2.8a
3.0a
2.0a
15Oct
(55)
1.0a
0.8a
0.8a
0.5a
1.0a
0.8a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a 0.0a
2.22
0.97
0.91 0.63
0.0886 0.4706 0.5123 0.7033
Data were transformed √(x+0.5) prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means within
columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.).
‘fb’ means followed by.
a
3
Arthropod Management Tests 2014, Vol. 39
doi: 10.4182/amt.2014.E18
Table 7.
Cumulative % of plants with TYLCV symptoms
(days after transplanting)
Treatment/
a
Formulation
Rate
Application 10Sep
amt/acre
method
(20)
Non-treated check
A16901B 40 WG
A16971B 40 WG
Durivo 300 SC
Platinum 75 SG
Venom 70 SG
Venom 70 SG
fb A16901B 40 WG
F6,18
P-value
--13.1 oz
6.54 oz
12.3 fl oz
3.42 oz
6.0 oz
6.0 oz
7.0 oz
--drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
drench
foliar
17Sep
(27)
24Sep
(34)
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
0.6a
0.0a
1.2a
0.0a
0.0a
0.0a
2.4a
0.6a
5.4a
3.0a
7.1a
3.6a
8.9a
1.8a
0.6a
0.79
0.5897
1.2a
2.15
0.0978
4.8a
0.88
0.5267
1Oct
(41)
8Oct
(48)
15Oct
(55)
22 Oct
(62)
8.3a
4.8a
8.9a
4.2a
10.7a
2.4a
32.1a
26.8a
29.8a
17.3a
30.4a
14.3a
40.5a
31.5a
38.7a
25.6a
36.3a
23.8a
52.4a
38.1a
56.0a
38.1a
61.3a
36.3a
8.3a
21.4a
29.8a
44.6a
1.23
1.07
0.68
1.29
0.3379 0.4170 0.6682
0.3110
Data were transformed arcsine[√(%TYLCV/100)] prior toANOVA. Non-transformed means were reported. Means
within columns not followed by the same letter were significantly different by Fisher’s Protected LSD (P>0.05.).
a
‘fb’ means followed by.
4