This trial was conducted as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative (OREI), to evaluate several organic foliar insecticide treatment programs for controlling damaging thrips populations in onion. Plots were established on a community farm 4.5 miles south of Cross Plains, Wisconsin (43.048740°N, −89.654712°W), on a silt loam soil in 2019. Onion, Allium cepa cv. ‘Cortland’ transplants were established on 21 Apr at a 10 in. within-row spacing on a 60 in. bed, comprised of three rows spaced 15 in. apart. Four replicate blocks of 16 plots were arranged in an RCBD. Plots measured 6 ft. wide by 12 ft. long. The entire trial measured 18 ft. wide by 264 ft. long. All foliar treatment mixes included one or two insecticide products and one adjuvant. Initial foliar applications were performed on 11 Jul reapplied 8 days later on 19 Jul. Applications were made using a CO2-pressurized backpack sprayer operating at 30 psi, equipped with a 6 ft. boom with 4 flat-fan nozzles (Tee Jet XR 8002VS) spaced 18 in. apart, and delivering 20 gal/ac while traveling at 3.5 ft./sec. Onion thrips, Thrips tabaci, adult and immature life stages were counted on all leaves from 10 randomly selected onions per plot. Counts were performed on 17, 23, and 29 Jul (6, 12, and 18 days after initial foliar applications). The average number of leaves per plant for each plot was recorded on each count date and used to compute the average number of adult and immature thrips per leaf per plot. Thrips counts per leaf were square root transformed prior to statistical analysis to satisfy assumptions of normality. Treatment main effects were determined using ANOVA. Means separation letter codes were generated using Tukey’s HSD procedure (α = 0.05).

No significant differences in adult or immature thrips counts were observed between any of the treatment or control plots on any of the three count dates (Table 1). Lack of statistical significance of treatment main effects can be attributed, in part, to high variance between replicate blocks, generally low insect numbers present in the 2019 season, and a significant block effect (P < 0.05) observed for adult thrips counts on 29 Jul and on all three dates for immature thrips counts. The average number of leaves per onion was 8.9 on 17 Jul, 8.8 on 23 Jul, and 8.0 on 29 Jul.1

Table 1.

Results

TrtNo.Product(s)Rate (amt/ac)Adult thrips/leafImmature thrips/leaf
17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul
1UNTREATED0.33a0.40a0.00a0.28a5.19a0.39a
2Venerate XP 94.5 EC M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 2 % v/v0.26a0.14a0.16a0.45a2.17a0.28a
3Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.29a0.03a0.35a1.25a1.19a0.37a
4Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.33a0.32a0.42a2.73a2.44a1.22a
5Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.41a0.03a0.04a0.56a1.39a1.02a
6Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.20a0.10a0.07a0.19a1.22a0.41a
7Neemix 4.5 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL16 fl oz 1 % v/v0.20a0.11a0.09a0.20a0.86a0.56a
8Azera 0.21 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3.5 pt 8 fl oz0.28a0.14a0.19a2.08a0.73a0.87a
9Azera 0.21 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3.5 pt 2 % v/v0.28a0.31a0.50a0.61a1.72a0.75a
10Azera 0.21 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL3.5 pt 1 % v/v0.24a0.04a0.17a0.74a0.75a0.71a
11Entrust 2 SC NuFilm P 100 SL8 fl oz 8 fl oz0.40a0.23a0.12a0.52a3.57a0.53a
12Entrust 2 SC M-Pede 3.8 SL8 fl oz 2 % v/v0.12a0.03a0.12a0.50a0.94a0.20a
13Entrust 2 SC Trilogy 5.46 SL8 fl oz 1 % v/v0.22a0.14a0.27a0.28a1.31a1.44a
14PFR-97 20 WDG NuFilm P 100 SL2 lb 8 fl oz0.35a0.24a0.06a0.69a1.53a1.28a
15PFR-97 20 WDG M-Pede 3.8 SL2 lb 2 % v/v0.25a0.19a0.55a0.06a2.93a0.69a
16PFR-97 20 WDG Trilogy 5.46 SL2 lb 1 % v/v0.28a0.68a0.28a0.51a1.77a1.06a
P > F0.960.080.27a0.26a0.09a0.94a
TrtNo.Product(s)Rate (amt/ac)Adult thrips/leafImmature thrips/leaf
17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul
1UNTREATED0.33a0.40a0.00a0.28a5.19a0.39a
2Venerate XP 94.5 EC M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 2 % v/v0.26a0.14a0.16a0.45a2.17a0.28a
3Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.29a0.03a0.35a1.25a1.19a0.37a
4Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.33a0.32a0.42a2.73a2.44a1.22a
5Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.41a0.03a0.04a0.56a1.39a1.02a
6Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.20a0.10a0.07a0.19a1.22a0.41a
7Neemix 4.5 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL16 fl oz 1 % v/v0.20a0.11a0.09a0.20a0.86a0.56a
8Azera 0.21 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3.5 pt 8 fl oz0.28a0.14a0.19a2.08a0.73a0.87a
9Azera 0.21 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3.5 pt 2 % v/v0.28a0.31a0.50a0.61a1.72a0.75a
10Azera 0.21 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL3.5 pt 1 % v/v0.24a0.04a0.17a0.74a0.75a0.71a
11Entrust 2 SC NuFilm P 100 SL8 fl oz 8 fl oz0.40a0.23a0.12a0.52a3.57a0.53a
12Entrust 2 SC M-Pede 3.8 SL8 fl oz 2 % v/v0.12a0.03a0.12a0.50a0.94a0.20a
13Entrust 2 SC Trilogy 5.46 SL8 fl oz 1 % v/v0.22a0.14a0.27a0.28a1.31a1.44a
14PFR-97 20 WDG NuFilm P 100 SL2 lb 8 fl oz0.35a0.24a0.06a0.69a1.53a1.28a
15PFR-97 20 WDG M-Pede 3.8 SL2 lb 2 % v/v0.25a0.19a0.55a0.06a2.93a0.69a
16PFR-97 20 WDG Trilogy 5.46 SL2 lb 1 % v/v0.28a0.68a0.28a0.51a1.77a1.06a
P > F0.960.080.27a0.26a0.09a0.94a

Means followed by same letter code are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, α = 0.05).

aA significant block effect was observed (P < 0.05).

Table 1.

Results

TrtNo.Product(s)Rate (amt/ac)Adult thrips/leafImmature thrips/leaf
17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul
1UNTREATED0.33a0.40a0.00a0.28a5.19a0.39a
2Venerate XP 94.5 EC M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 2 % v/v0.26a0.14a0.16a0.45a2.17a0.28a
3Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.29a0.03a0.35a1.25a1.19a0.37a
4Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.33a0.32a0.42a2.73a2.44a1.22a
5Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.41a0.03a0.04a0.56a1.39a1.02a
6Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.20a0.10a0.07a0.19a1.22a0.41a
7Neemix 4.5 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL16 fl oz 1 % v/v0.20a0.11a0.09a0.20a0.86a0.56a
8Azera 0.21 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3.5 pt 8 fl oz0.28a0.14a0.19a2.08a0.73a0.87a
9Azera 0.21 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3.5 pt 2 % v/v0.28a0.31a0.50a0.61a1.72a0.75a
10Azera 0.21 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL3.5 pt 1 % v/v0.24a0.04a0.17a0.74a0.75a0.71a
11Entrust 2 SC NuFilm P 100 SL8 fl oz 8 fl oz0.40a0.23a0.12a0.52a3.57a0.53a
12Entrust 2 SC M-Pede 3.8 SL8 fl oz 2 % v/v0.12a0.03a0.12a0.50a0.94a0.20a
13Entrust 2 SC Trilogy 5.46 SL8 fl oz 1 % v/v0.22a0.14a0.27a0.28a1.31a1.44a
14PFR-97 20 WDG NuFilm P 100 SL2 lb 8 fl oz0.35a0.24a0.06a0.69a1.53a1.28a
15PFR-97 20 WDG M-Pede 3.8 SL2 lb 2 % v/v0.25a0.19a0.55a0.06a2.93a0.69a
16PFR-97 20 WDG Trilogy 5.46 SL2 lb 1 % v/v0.28a0.68a0.28a0.51a1.77a1.06a
P > F0.960.080.27a0.26a0.09a0.94a
TrtNo.Product(s)Rate (amt/ac)Adult thrips/leafImmature thrips/leaf
17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul17 Jul23 Jul29 Jul
1UNTREATED0.33a0.40a0.00a0.28a5.19a0.39a
2Venerate XP 94.5 EC M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 2 % v/v0.26a0.14a0.16a0.45a2.17a0.28a
3Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.29a0.03a0.35a1.25a1.19a0.37a
4Venerate XP 94.5 EC Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3 qt 16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.33a0.32a0.42a2.73a2.44a1.22a
5Neemix 4.5 SL NuFilm P 100 SL16 fl oz 8 fl oz0.41a0.03a0.04a0.56a1.39a1.02a
6Neemix 4.5 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL16 fl oz 2 % v/v0.20a0.10a0.07a0.19a1.22a0.41a
7Neemix 4.5 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL16 fl oz 1 % v/v0.20a0.11a0.09a0.20a0.86a0.56a
8Azera 0.21 SL NuFilm P 100 SL3.5 pt 8 fl oz0.28a0.14a0.19a2.08a0.73a0.87a
9Azera 0.21 SL M-Pede 3.8 SL3.5 pt 2 % v/v0.28a0.31a0.50a0.61a1.72a0.75a
10Azera 0.21 SL Trilogy 5.46 SL3.5 pt 1 % v/v0.24a0.04a0.17a0.74a0.75a0.71a
11Entrust 2 SC NuFilm P 100 SL8 fl oz 8 fl oz0.40a0.23a0.12a0.52a3.57a0.53a
12Entrust 2 SC M-Pede 3.8 SL8 fl oz 2 % v/v0.12a0.03a0.12a0.50a0.94a0.20a
13Entrust 2 SC Trilogy 5.46 SL8 fl oz 1 % v/v0.22a0.14a0.27a0.28a1.31a1.44a
14PFR-97 20 WDG NuFilm P 100 SL2 lb 8 fl oz0.35a0.24a0.06a0.69a1.53a1.28a
15PFR-97 20 WDG M-Pede 3.8 SL2 lb 2 % v/v0.25a0.19a0.55a0.06a2.93a0.69a
16PFR-97 20 WDG Trilogy 5.46 SL2 lb 1 % v/v0.28a0.68a0.28a0.51a1.77a1.06a
P > F0.960.080.27a0.26a0.09a0.94a

Means followed by same letter code are not significantly different (Tukey’s HSD, α = 0.05).

aA significant block effect was observed (P < 0.05).

Footnotes

1

This research was supported in part by direct industry funding.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact [email protected]
Section Editor: Vonny Barlow
Vonny Barlow
Section Editor
Search for other works by this author on: