https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2076-1494
-
PDF
- Split View
-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Thomas P Kuhar, Hélène Doughty, Peter B Schultz, Evaluation of Foliar Insecticides for the Control of Harlequin Bugs in Collards, 2016, Arthropod Management Tests, Volume 43, Issue 1, 2018, tsy101, https://doi.org/10.1093/amt/tsy101
Close - Share Icon Share
The objective of this experiment was to assess the efficacy of select foliar insecticides for the control of harlequin bugs in collards. The experiment was conducted at the Virginia Tech Hampton Roads Agricultural Research and Extension Center in Virginia Beach, VA and consisted of five treatments arranged in an RCB design with four replicates. ‘Champion’ collards were transplanted on 19 May 2016. Plots were 1-row wide and 20-ft (6.1 m) long with unplanted guard rows on each side. Rows were planted on a 3-ft row center (0.9 m) with 12 inches (0.30 m) between plants, in a four-tier field design with 6-ft (1.8 m) alleys between tiers. All foliar treatments were applied on 28 Jul with a 3-nozzle boom equipped with D3 spray tips and powered by a CO₂-backpack sprayer at 40 psi delivering 30 gpa. All plots were maintained according to standard commercial practices.
On 3 and 10 Aug, the number of harlequin bug nymphs and adults was recorded per five randomly selected plants per row. Data were analyzed using ANOVA. Means were separated using Tukey’s HSD at the 0.05 level of significance.
At 7 and 13 DAT, all treatments had significantly fewer harlequin bug nymphs than the untreated check (Table 1 ). Adult counts were not significantly different.
| Treatment/formulation . | Rate—amt product/acre . | Nymphs . | Adults . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | ||
| 1. Untreated check | – | 266.3a | 90.8a | 5.5 | 3.0 |
| 2. Certador EC + Scanner | 6.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.3b | 7.5b | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| 3. Certador EC + Scanner | 19.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.3b | 0.3b | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| 4. Certador EC + Scanner | 26 fl. oz + 0.25 % v/v | 3.3b | 2.0b | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 5. Actara 25WG + Scanner | 5.5 oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.8b | 1.5b | 1.3 | 1.0 |
| 6. Brigade 2EC + Scanner | 5.20 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.8b | 9.3b | 0.3 | 3.0 |
| 7. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 11 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 6.8b | 12.3b | 4.0 | 2.3 |
| 8. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 16.4 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 8.3b | 1.8b | 3.8 | 2.3 |
| 9. Sivanto 200SL+ Scanner | 10 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 3.8b | 18.0b | 0.8 | 1.5 |
| P value from ANOVA | 0.0002 | 0.0013 | ns | ns | |
| Treatment/formulation . | Rate—amt product/acre . | Nymphs . | Adults . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | ||
| 1. Untreated check | – | 266.3a | 90.8a | 5.5 | 3.0 |
| 2. Certador EC + Scanner | 6.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.3b | 7.5b | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| 3. Certador EC + Scanner | 19.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.3b | 0.3b | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| 4. Certador EC + Scanner | 26 fl. oz + 0.25 % v/v | 3.3b | 2.0b | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 5. Actara 25WG + Scanner | 5.5 oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.8b | 1.5b | 1.3 | 1.0 |
| 6. Brigade 2EC + Scanner | 5.20 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.8b | 9.3b | 0.3 | 3.0 |
| 7. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 11 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 6.8b | 12.3b | 4.0 | 2.3 |
| 8. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 16.4 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 8.3b | 1.8b | 3.8 | 2.3 |
| 9. Sivanto 200SL+ Scanner | 10 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 3.8b | 18.0b | 0.8 | 1.5 |
| P value from ANOVA | 0.0002 | 0.0013 | ns | ns | |
All data were analyzed using ANOVA. Means were separated using Tukey’s HSD at the 0.05 level of significance. Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different (P > 0.05).
| Treatment/formulation . | Rate—amt product/acre . | Nymphs . | Adults . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | ||
| 1. Untreated check | – | 266.3a | 90.8a | 5.5 | 3.0 |
| 2. Certador EC + Scanner | 6.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.3b | 7.5b | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| 3. Certador EC + Scanner | 19.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.3b | 0.3b | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| 4. Certador EC + Scanner | 26 fl. oz + 0.25 % v/v | 3.3b | 2.0b | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 5. Actara 25WG + Scanner | 5.5 oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.8b | 1.5b | 1.3 | 1.0 |
| 6. Brigade 2EC + Scanner | 5.20 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.8b | 9.3b | 0.3 | 3.0 |
| 7. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 11 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 6.8b | 12.3b | 4.0 | 2.3 |
| 8. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 16.4 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 8.3b | 1.8b | 3.8 | 2.3 |
| 9. Sivanto 200SL+ Scanner | 10 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 3.8b | 18.0b | 0.8 | 1.5 |
| P value from ANOVA | 0.0002 | 0.0013 | ns | ns | |
| Treatment/formulation . | Rate—amt product/acre . | Nymphs . | Adults . | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | 3 Aug (6 DAT) . | 10 Aug (13 DAT) . | ||
| 1. Untreated check | – | 266.3a | 90.8a | 5.5 | 3.0 |
| 2. Certador EC + Scanner | 6.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.3b | 7.5b | 0.0 | 0.3 |
| 3. Certador EC + Scanner | 19.5 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.3b | 0.3b | 0.0 | 0.5 |
| 4. Certador EC + Scanner | 26 fl. oz + 0.25 % v/v | 3.3b | 2.0b | 0.5 | 0.5 |
| 5. Actara 25WG + Scanner | 5.5 oz + 0.25% v/v | 0.8b | 1.5b | 1.3 | 1.0 |
| 6. Brigade 2EC + Scanner | 5.20 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 1.8b | 9.3b | 0.3 | 3.0 |
| 7. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 11 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 6.8b | 12.3b | 4.0 | 2.3 |
| 8. Harvanta 50SL + Scanner | 16.4 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 8.3b | 1.8b | 3.8 | 2.3 |
| 9. Sivanto 200SL+ Scanner | 10 fl. oz + 0.25% v/v | 3.8b | 18.0b | 0.8 | 1.5 |
| P value from ANOVA | 0.0002 | 0.0013 | ns | ns | |
All data were analyzed using ANOVA. Means were separated using Tukey’s HSD at the 0.05 level of significance. Means followed by the same letter within a column are not significantly different (P > 0.05).
This research was supported by BASF and ISK BioSciences in the forms of pesticide and/or research funding.
