The efficacy of registered insecticides against tobacco budworm was assessed at the Upper Coastal Plain Research Station (UCPRS) in Rocky Mount, NC. At this location, five treatments, including an untreated check, were arranged in an RCB design with four replicates per treatment (Table 1). On 27 Apr 2020 ca. 100 plants were transplanted into 0.018-acre plots. Each plot consisted of four rows (48 in centers), 50-ft in length. Foliar treatments were applied using a CO2 pressurized backpack sprayer fitted with a single TG2 solid cone nozzle calibrated to apply 15 gal/acre spray volume at 52 psi pressure to the middle two rows. The outer rows of each plot were left untreated to minimize drift. Applications were made at TBW threshold (10% of plants infested with ≥1 TBW) on 22 Jun. Each plant in the middle two rows of a plot was examined for presence of TBW once per week. TBW abundance was recorded prior to application on 22 Jun and then one and two WAT (29 Jun, 6 Jul, respectively). TBW abundance was analyzed in R v. 3.5.3 using LMER with Treatment as a fixed effect and replicate as a random effect. Means were separated by Fisher’s protected LSD (α = 0.05).

Treatment/formulationRate/acreApplication timingMean TBW abundance
22 Juna29 Junb6 Julc
Steward 1.25EC9.2 fl oz22 Jun4.88a5.25b5.25b
Exirel 0.83SC13.5 fl oz22 Jun4.88a3.13bc2.63c
Denim 0.16EC8 fl oz22 Jun3.13a1.00c2.50c
Spear-Lep 0.17L + Leprotec2 pt + 2 pt22 Jun5.00a5.13b6.50ab
Untreated Check--3.20a12.30a8.30a
P>F0.194<0.001<0.001
Treatment/formulationRate/acreApplication timingMean TBW abundance
22 Juna29 Junb6 Julc
Steward 1.25EC9.2 fl oz22 Jun4.88a5.25b5.25b
Exirel 0.83SC13.5 fl oz22 Jun4.88a3.13bc2.63c
Denim 0.16EC8 fl oz22 Jun3.13a1.00c2.50c
Spear-Lep 0.17L + Leprotec2 pt + 2 pt22 Jun5.00a5.13b6.50ab
Untreated Check--3.20a12.30a8.30a
P>F0.194<0.001<0.001

Means within columns with the same letter are not different via Fisher’s protected LSD (α = 0.05).

aPre-treatment count.

b1 WAT.

c2 WAT.

Treatment/formulationRate/acreApplication timingMean TBW abundance
22 Juna29 Junb6 Julc
Steward 1.25EC9.2 fl oz22 Jun4.88a5.25b5.25b
Exirel 0.83SC13.5 fl oz22 Jun4.88a3.13bc2.63c
Denim 0.16EC8 fl oz22 Jun3.13a1.00c2.50c
Spear-Lep 0.17L + Leprotec2 pt + 2 pt22 Jun5.00a5.13b6.50ab
Untreated Check--3.20a12.30a8.30a
P>F0.194<0.001<0.001
Treatment/formulationRate/acreApplication timingMean TBW abundance
22 Juna29 Junb6 Julc
Steward 1.25EC9.2 fl oz22 Jun4.88a5.25b5.25b
Exirel 0.83SC13.5 fl oz22 Jun4.88a3.13bc2.63c
Denim 0.16EC8 fl oz22 Jun3.13a1.00c2.50c
Spear-Lep 0.17L + Leprotec2 pt + 2 pt22 Jun5.00a5.13b6.50ab
Untreated Check--3.20a12.30a8.30a
P>F0.194<0.001<0.001

Means within columns with the same letter are not different via Fisher’s protected LSD (α = 0.05).

aPre-treatment count.

b1 WAT.

c2 WAT.

No difference was observed in the pretreatment counts on 22 Jun (Table 1). At one WAT, all materials reduced TBW counts compared to the untreated check. Denin and Exirel showed continued efficacy at two WAT compared to the untreated check. At two WAT, there was no difference between the Spear-Lep + Leprotect treatment and the untreated check. While Steward and Spear-Lep + Leprotect were not significantly different at two WAT, Steward did differ from the untreated check.1

Footnotes

1

This research was supported, in part, by industry gifts.

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: Donald Cook
Donald Cook
Section Editor
Search for other works by this author on: