2010 ENTOMOLOGY RESEARCH REPORT Annual...This report is a compilation of results of Entomology...

2010

ENTOMOLOGY RESEARCH

REPORT

Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Beaumont

OFFICE OF M. O. (Mo) Way, Professor of Entomology

Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Beaumont 1509 Aggie Drive

Beaumont, Texas 77713

Tel. 409-752-2741, Extension 2231 Cell. 409-658-2186 Fax. 409-752-5560

Email. [email protected] WWW – http://beaumont.tamu.edu

Jun 6, 2011 Dear stakeholder, cooperator and/or colleague: This report is a compilation of results of Entomology Project experiments conducted in 2010. Financial support for these experiments was provided by Texas AgriLife Research, Texas Rice Research Foundation (rice check-off monies), Texas Soybean Board, USDA and various private agricultural companies. I thank these donors for their generous contributions. I am confident the results contained in this booklet will provide useful pest management information to clientele. I also wish to thank my support staff for an outstanding, productive year in 2010: Mark Nunez ....................... Research Associate Rebecca Pearson ................ Research Assistant Jannie Castillo .................... Student Assistant Caitlin Austin ..................... Student Assistant Travis Cammack ................ Student Assistant Casan Scott......................... Student Assistant Jacob Morrison................... Student Assistant Julia Thorp ......................... Student Assistant Katie Young ....................... Student Assistant Daun Humphrey ................. Office Associate Finally, I thank Jack Vawter and his staff at the David R. Wintermann Rice Research Station at Eagle Lake for excellent work at Eagle Lake and Ganado. This annual report is also available online at the Beaumont Center website: http://Beaumont.tamu.edu/eLibrary/Reports_default.htm If you have any questions or comments, please contact me. Sincerely, M.O. Way Professor Entomology

http://beaumont.tamu.edu/eLibrary/Reports_default.htm�

i

M.O. Way ⋅ [email protected] ⋅ (409)752-2741 ext.2231 Texas AgriLife Research and Extension Center at Beaumont ⋅ 1509 Aggie Dr. ⋅ Beaumont, TX 77713 ⋅ http://beaumont.tamu.edu

Table of Contents Rice Rice Water Weevil (Lissorhoptrus oryzophilus) DuPont Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control ...................................................1 Dermacor X-100 Hybrid Treatment Rates for Rice Water Weevil Control ........................4 Dermacor X-100 Large Scale Study ....................................................................................7 Dermacor X-100 Water-Seeded Study ..............................................................................10 Dermacor X-100 Seeding Rate Study ................................................................................14 Cruiser 5FS Seeding Rate Study ........................................................................................17 Syngenta Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control ..............................................20 Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control ...................................................24 Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Eagle Lake ............................28 Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Ganado .................................31 Belay Foliar and Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control ...................................34 Valent Post Flood Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control .........................................37 Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil .....................................................................39 Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil (AR Test) ....................................................44 Sheath Blight (Rhizoctonia solani) Foliar Fungicide Study .......................................................................................................49 Fungicide Seed Treatment Study .......................................................................................53 Rice Stink Bug (Oebalus pugnax) Rice Stink Bug Resistance to Pyrethroids .........................................................................57 Rice Stink Bug Residual Insecticide Activity Study .........................................................58 Stalk Borers Dermacor X-100 Seed Treatment on Main and Ratoon Crop Rice ...................................60 Stem Borer Economic Injury Level ...................................................................................65 Trapping for Mexican Rice Borer ......................................................................................68 Long-Horned Grasshopper (Conocephalus fasciatus) Grasshopper Contact Study................................................................................................69 Soybean DuPont Soybean Seed Treatment Study ..................................................................................71 Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG V Soybean ..........................76 Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG VII Soybean .......................84 Soybean Agronomy and Host Plant Resistance .......................................................................90 Sugarcane Sugarcane Insecticide Screening for Stem Borer Control at Nome .........................................96 Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance to Stem Borers 2009-2011 ..................................................99 Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance to Stem Borers 2010-2011 ................................................102

1


DuPont Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Block 7S

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN

⇐ North I II III IV

1 5 9 1 17 7 25 2 2 2 10 7 18 4 26 6 3 4 11 3 19 8 27 1 4 6 12 5 20 2 28 8 5 1 13 4 21 5 29 3 6 8 14 6 22 1 30 5 7 7 15 2 23 3 31 7 8 3 16 8 24 6 32 4

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed)

Note: smaller numbers in italics are plot numbers

TREATMENT DESCRIPTIONS, RATES AND TIMINGS

Treatment no. Description Rate

fl oz/cwt lb ai/A 1 Dermacor X-100 1.5 0.049 2 Dermacor X-100 2.2 0.072 3 Dermacor X-100 2.5 0.081 4 DPX-HGW86 2.0 0.071 5 DPX-HGW86 3.2 0.101 6 Karate Za --- 0.03 7 Cruiser 5FS 3.2 0.1 8 Untreated --- ---

a Foliar treatment applied before permanent flood

DuPont Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

2


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 8 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay

64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 10 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on May 20 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on May 12 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 11 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on May 12 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 30 at panicle differentiation Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 29 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments provided by DuPont Treatment 6 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied before flood on Jun 11 Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Jun 10 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jul 1 and Jul 12. Core samples were stored in a cold-room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whiteheads (WHs) counts in 4 middle rows on Aug 16; 10 WHs dissected for stem borers: 3 Mexican rice borer; 0 sugarcane borer

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 26 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data Analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using

x + 0.5 ; yields converted to 12% moisture; all data analyzed by ANOVA and means separated by LSD.

Discussion

Rice plant stands were not significantly different among treatments, so the seed

treatments did not affect stands (Table 1). RWW populations were low in the untreated on both sample dates; thus, the results of this experiment are not as meaningful as desired. The economic injury level for RWW is about 15 RWW per 5 cores, so RWW populations in the untreated were slightly more than this level. At any rate, all Dermacor X-100 treatments provided good control of RWW. The other seed treatments---DPX-HGW86 and Cruiser 5FS---also provided good

DuPont Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

3


control of RWW. All Dermacor X-100 treatments significantly reduced stalk borer damage as measured by WHs. All treatment yields were not significantly different from the untreated which is not unexpected, given the relatively low populations of RWW in this experiment. Table 1. Mean rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for DuPont seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Description

Rate Stand (plants/ft of row)

RWW/5 cores WHs in 4 rows

Yield (lb/A) fl oz/cwt lb ai/A Jul 1 Jul 12

Dermacor X-100 1.5 0.049 10 1 c 2 c 2 c 8115 Dermacor X-100 2.2 0.072 9.8 1 c 1 c 1 c 7949 Dermacor X-100 2.5 0.081 10 0 c 1 c 1 c 7899

DPX-HGW86 2.0 0.071 9.3 2 bc 1 c 7 ab 8099 DPX-HGW86 3.2 0.101 11 1 c 2 c 6 ab 8071

Karate Za --- 0.03 9.6 5 b 10 b 4 b 7963 Cruiser 5FS 3.2 0.1 11 1 c 1 c 7 ab 7865 Untreated --- --- 23 a 10 18 a 9 a

7930

NS NS a Karate Z applied immediately before flood Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

4


Dermacor X-100 Hybrid Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Block 7N

Beaumont, TX 2010

⇐ North PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 4 8 6 15 7 22 6 2 1 9 3 16 2 23 4 3 7 10 2 17 5 24 1 4 3 11 7 18 3 25 7 5 5 12 1 19 4 26 2 6 6 13 4 20 6 27 5 7 2 14 5 21 1 28 3

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, with barriers Variety: XL723 (seed provided by RiceTec, treated by DuPont)




fl oz/cwt fl oz/A 1 Dermacor X-100 3 0.75 2 Dermacor X-100 4.5 1.13 3 Dermacor X-100 6 1.5 4 Dermacor X-100 9 2.25 5 Karate Z a --- 0.03 lb ai/A 6 Cruiser 5FS 3.2 0.8 7 Untreated --- ---

a Karate Z applied immediately before flood

Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted XL723 @ 25 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%,

clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 5. Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on May 14

Dermacor X-100 Hybrid Treatment Rates for Rice Water Weevil Control

5


Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on May 5 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 9 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A on May 5 at planting 66.7 lb N/A on Jul 5 Total N = 180 lb/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb ai/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/acre with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 21 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments applied by DuPont. Treatment 5 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied using a hand-held, CO2

pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) spray rig on Jun 8 (before PF); application followed by rain (within 2 hrs).

Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Jun 7 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 30 and Jul 12. Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whitehead (WH) counts in 4 middle rows on Aug 13 Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 26 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data Analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using


Discussion

Rice water weevil (RWW) populations in the untreated were lower than desired;

however, populations were above treatment threshold levels of approximately 15 larvae/pupae per 5 cores (Table 1). Rice plant stands were not significantly different among treatments so the insecticidal seed treatments did not affect stands. For the first RWW sampling date, all seed treatments reduced populations significantly compared to the untreated; however, no significant differences were detected among rates of Dermacor X-100. Control was 69, 85, 81 and 85% for 3, 4.5, 6 and 9 fl oz/cwt seed, respectively. Cruiser 5FS seed treatment provided 54% control. For the second RWW sampling date, again, all seed treatments significantly reduced RWW populations. Similar to the first sampling date, no significant differences were detected among rates of Dermacor X-100. Control was 68, 84, 58 and 68% for 3, 4.5, 6 and 9 fl oz/cwt seed, respectively. Cruiser 5FS seed treatment provided 74% control. Stalk borer damage, as measured by whitehead density, was low in this experiment, so no valid conclusions can be drawn

Dermacor X-100 Hybrid Treatment Rates for Rice Water Weevil Control

6


regarding stalk borer control by the treatments. Yields were high, as expected from the hybrid XL723, but no significant differences in yields were detected among the treatments which may be due to the relatively low RWW populations encountered in the experiment. However, all seed treatments numerically outyielded the untreated. Dermacor X-100 at 4.5 fl oz/cwt seed (25 lb/A seeding rate) outyielded the untreated 443 lb/A and provided about 85% control of RWW. Table 1. Mean rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for Dermacor X-100 hybrid seed treatments for insect control. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Description

Rate Stand (plants/ft of row)

RWW/5 cores WHs in 4 rows

Yield (lb/A) fl oz/cwt fl oz/A Jun 30 Jul 12

Dermacor X-100 3 0.75 4.6 8 bc 6 bc 0 9150 Dermacor X-100 4.5 1.13 4.0 4 c 3 c 0 9416 Dermacor X-100 6 1.5 4.5 5 c 8 bc 0 9481 Dermacor X-100 9 2.25 4.2 4 c 6 bc 0 9422

Karate Z a --- 0.03 lb ai/A 3.9 4 c 10 ab 1 9090

Cruiser 5FS 3.2 0.8 4.3 12 b 5 bc 1 8957 Untreated --- --- 26 a 3.8 19 a 1

8973

NS NS NS a Karate Z applied immediately before flood Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

7


Dermacor X-100 Large Plot Study Block 5N

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN

⇐ North

Cruiser 5FS

Dermacor X-100

Karate Z

Untreated



Description Rate

fl oz/cwt lb ai/A Cruiser 5FS 3.3 0.1

Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.056 Karate Za --- 0.03 Untreated --- ---


Dermacor X-100 Large Scale Study

8


Agronomic and Cultural Information Planting: Drill-planted @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay

64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 20 Plot size = 28 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 88 ft long, no barriers around plots; 5 ft

separated plots Emergence on May 27 Irrigation: Block was not flushed after planting due to sufficient moisture present in soil at

planting. Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 11 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on Jun 11 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jul 5 Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb ai, Permit @ 1.0 oz prod, and Command 3ME @ 1.0 pt

prod/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 21 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments provided by DuPont Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A applied before flood on Jun 18 Sampling: Number of insects [chinch bug and adult rice water weevil (RWW)] counted in

4, 3 ft sections of row for all 4 plots on Jun 10; Plant height, number of tillers, and number of leaves were recorded for 10 plants/plot on Jun 10

Number of RWW feeding scars recorded for 30 plants/plot on Jun 11 RWW cores (20 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter x 4 inches deep,

containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jul 9 and Jul 19. Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whitehead (WH) counts (4 rows/plot) were taken on Aug 19; 25 WHs were collected and dissected for stem borers (10 Mexican rice borer, 0 sugarcane borer)

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Sep 5 Size harvested plot = 2 samples/plot, each sample = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing,

88 ft long

Discussion

This was a non-replicated experiment, so data were not statistically analyzed. Chinch bug populations were low, so no meaningful chinch bug data were collected (Table 1). The numbers of live and dead adult RWW were counted on rice plants before flood; 2 live and 4 dead (based on 12 foot of row) were found in the Cruiser 5FS plots. Numerically, plant height on Jun 11 (just prior to flood) was greatest in the Cruiser 5FS plot. The average number of tillers and leaves per

Dermacor X-100 Large Scale Study

9


plant was the same in all plots. Average number of adult RWW feeding scars per plant was much less in the Cruiser 5FS and Dermacor X-100 plots compared to the Karate Z and untreated plots (Table 2). Thus, both seed treatments affected RWW adults. Control of immature RWW on both sample dates was excellent for both seed treatments (95 and 93% control compared to the untreated for the 1st and 2nd sampling dates, respectively). Dermacor X-100 provided excellent control of stalk borers---sampling indicated all stalk borers were Mexican rice borers. Compared to the untreated, the Cruiser 5FS plot produced 649 lb/A more grain while the Dermacor X-100 plot produced 393 lb/A more grain. These data should be viewed with caution because the treatments were not replicated. Table 1. Adult rice water weevil (RWW) and chinch bug data and seedling plant characteristics for Dermacor X-100 large plot study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Description

Rate Chinch bug/12 ft of row

RWW/12 ft of row Plant hta (cm)

No. tillersa

No. leavesa fl oz/cwt lb ai/A Live Dead

Cruiser 5FS 3.3 0.1 1 2 4 21 1 3 Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.056 2 0 0 17 1 3

Karate Zb --- 0.03 0 0 0 16 1 3 Untreated --- --- 0 0 0 14 1 3

a Average of 40 plants/plot b Foliar treatment applied before permanent flood Table 2. Rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for Dermacor X-100 large plot study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Description

Rate RWW feeding

scars/plant

RWW/5 cores WHs/4 rows

Yield (lb/A) fl oz/cwt lb ai/A Jul 9 Jul 19

Cruiser 5FS 3.3 0.1 1 5 5 15 6560 Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.056 4 6 5 0 6304

Karate Za --- 0.03 15 62 30 17 5931 Untreated --- --- 12 99 71 28 5911


10


Dermacor X-100 Water-Seeded Study Block 6N

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN


1 4 6 5 11 3 16 5 2 3 7 2 12 1 17 4 3 1 8 4 13 2 18 3 4 5 9 1 14 5 19 2 5 2 10 3 15 4 20 1

Plot size: 4 ft x 18 ft long, with barriers Variety: Cocodrie @ 100 lb/A (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed)



Treatment no. Descriptiona Rate

fl oz/cwt lb ai/A 1 Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.071 2 Dermacor X-100 2.0 0.081 3 Dermacor X-100 2.5 0.102 4 Karate Z 2.56 fl oz/A 0.03 5 Untreated --- ---

a All treatments are seed treatments except Karate Z (applied at 3 days after emergence of rice through water) b Based on 18,800 Cocodrie seeds/lb

Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 5 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Water-seeded Cocodrie @ 100 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 3 Plot size = 4 ft x 18 ft with metal barriers Emergence through water on May 13 Irrigation: Flooded on Apr 29 (water drained out) reflooded on May 3 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand.

Dermacor X-100 Water-Seeded Study

11


113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on Apr 29 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 11 Total = 170 lb N/A Herbicide: Ordram 15G @ 27 lb/A applied before flooding on Apr 29 Londax @ 1.67 oz/A applied on May 28 Treatments: All seed treatments applied by DuPont Treatment 4 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb AI/A) applied on May 16 (3 days after

emergence of rice through water) Sampling: Differences observed in stands and floaters (Karate Z and untreated plots with

thin stands and many floaters); floaters removed from all plots and counted on May 17

Stands counted (3, 8 inch diam. samples/plot) on Jun 11. Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 3 and Jun 14. Core samples were stored in a cold-room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whitehead (WH) counts in entire plots on Jul 22; 10 WHs dissected for stem borers (1 Mexican rice borer, 0 sugarcane borer)

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 17 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using

x + 0.5 ; all data analyzed by ANOVA and means separated by LSD.

Discussion

On May 16, 3 days after emergence of rice through water, Way observed large numbers

of uprooted rice seedlings in untreated and Karate Z-treated plots. On May 17, these uprooted seedlings (floaters) were collected from all plots in the experiment, placed in plastic bags and refrigerated for later processing. Pearson helped count the floaters and observed Tropisternus lateralis adults mixed in with the masses of floaters collected. T. lateralis is a widely distributed aquatic beetle in the Family Hydrophilidae. Adults feed on plant material and detritus while larvae are predaceous. In her MS thesis research, Pearson showed T. lateralis was responsible for uprooting rice seedlings in water-seeded situations. She surmised adult T. lateralis uproot rice seedlings through foraging and/or reproductive activities. Numbers of uprooted seedlings were significantly greater in untreated and Karate-Z treated plots than in plots planted with Dermacor X-100-treated seed (Table 1). An average of more than 800 floaters were recovered in untreated and Karate-Z-treated plots compared to 41 and 20 in plots planted with seed treated with Dermacor X-100 at the lowest and middle/highest rates, respectively. One pound of Cocodrie contains about 18,800 rice seeds which means each plot was planted with about 3,172 seeds. Thus, in untreated plots, uprooted seedlings accounted for approximately 26% of the number of seeds planted. These data suggest Dermacor X-100 protected seed from T. lateralis uprooting


12


activities, probably by killing these adult beetles. Karate-Z-treated plots also produced many floaters which was likely due to timing of application. Karate-Z was applied 3 days after rice emerged through water (13 days after seeding in the water). Thus, by the time Karate-Z was applied, uprooting of seedlings already had occurred. Rice plant stands were lower in untreated and Karate-Z treated plots than plots planted with Dermacor X-100-treated seed. In hindsight, more plant stand samples should have been taken to provide better estimates. Although Dermacor X-100 reduced RWW numbers on the first sample date, the numbers were not significantly different from the untreated. Karate-Z applied 3 days after emergence through water, provided 87% control. On the second sample date, none of the treatments reduced RWW numbers significantly. WH counts (a measure of stalk borer damage) were not significantly different among the treatments, although numbers were less than the untreated in Dermacor X-100 plots (Table 2). Yields were significantly higher in all treatments compared to the untreated. For instance, Dermacor X-100 at the middle rate outyielded the untreated more than 1800 lb/A which was probably a result of partial RWW and stalk borer control, and better stands.

In conclusion, data show Dermacor X-100 applied at the rates in this experiment to dry seed in a water-seeded, continuous flood system did not effectively control RWW, but may have other benefits controlling potential seedling pests, such as T. lateralis. Further research is needed to better determine efficacy of Dermacor X-100 against T. lateralis and other seed/seedling pests of water-seeded rice, such as tadpole shrimp and rice seed midges. Application of Dermacor X-100 to sprouted rice seed is another possibility for future research. Table 1. Mean data for Dermacor X-100 water-seeded study, continuous flood. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate No.

floaters/plot Stand

(plants/ft2) No. RWW/5 cores

fl oz/cwt lb ai/A Jun 3 Jun 14 Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.071 41.0 b 34 a 56.3 a 26.5 ab Dermacor X-100 2.0 0.081 19.8 b 31 abc 49.8 a 17.0 b Dermacor X-100 2.5 0.102 20.0 b 32 ab 59.0 a 19.0 b

Karate Z 2.56 fl oz/A 0.03 804.3 a 25 bc 8.5 b 43.5 a

Untreated --- --- 840.8 a 23 c 65.8 a 26.0 ab Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD; P = 0.07 for stand).


13


Table 2. Mean whitehead (WH) and yield data for Dermacor X-100 water-seeded study, continuous flood. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate No. WHs/plot

Yield (lb/A) fl oz/cwt lb ai/A

Dermacor X-100 1.75 0.071 1 6417 a Dermacor X-100 2.0 0.081 1 6810 a Dermacor X-100 2.5 0.102 2 6459 a Karate Z 2.56 fl oz/A 0.03 3 6260 a Untreated --- --- 4 4912 b NS Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD; P = 0.07 for stand).

14


Dermacor X-100 Seeding Rate Study Block 8N

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN


1 7 8 5 15 1 22 4 2 1 9 3 16 7 23 6 3 2 10 6 17 4 24 5 4 5 11 4 18 2 25 3 5 6 12 1 19 3 26 7 6 4 13 2 20 5 27 1 7 3 14 7 21 6 28 2




Treatment no. Description Seeding Rate

(lb/A) Rate

(lb ai/A) 1 Dermacor X-100 120 0.085 2 Dermacor X-100 90 0.064 3 Dermacor X-100 60 0.043 4 Untreated 120 --- 5 Untreated 90 --- 6 Untreated 60 --- 7 Cruiser 5FS 90 0.116

Dermacor X-100 Seeding Rate Study

15


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 60, 90 and 120 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 25 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Jun 3 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on May 26 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 18 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on May 26, at planting Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on Jun 11 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments provided by DuPont Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Jun 14 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4


Whitehead (WH) counts in 4 middle rows on Aug 19; 10 WHs dissected for stem borers: 3 MRB and 0 SCB

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Sep 6 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data Analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using


Discussion

All seed to be planted in Dermacor X-100-treated plots was treated with Dermacor X-100

at 1.75 fl oz/cwt seed, regardless of seeding rate. Rice stand counts reflected seeding rates and seed treatments did not affect rice stands (Table 1). RWW populations were high in untreated plots on both sample dates, so the experiment has the potential of providing useful data. RWW populations were not significantly different among Dermacor X-100 treatments, regardless of seeding rate. All Dermacor X-100 treatments provided excellent control of RWW. All Dermacor X-100 treatments also significantly reduced the number of WHs which is strong evidence that Dermacor X-100 provided good control of stalk borers, primarily Mexican rice borer.

Dermacor X-100 Seeding Rate Study

16


As seeding rate increased, yields increased in untreated and Dermacor X-100-treated plots. These results are unexpected. However, RWW populations in untreated plots increased as seeding rate increased which also is unexpected---usually RWW populations are higher in fields and plots with low rice stands. Panicle blight was prevalent in 2010. However, excessive panicle blight was not observed in this experiment. Nevertheless, perhaps panicle blight was more severe in plots with lower seeding rates. Generally, rice plants tend to tiller more in thinner rice stands which means panicle maturity is more variable---some panicles mature earlier than others on the same plant. Maybe this variability in panicle maturity is associated with more panicle blight. This question needs to be further investigated. Yield response to all Dermacor X-100 treatments was excellent and increased with seeding rate. For instance, at the 60, 90 and 120 lb/A seeding rates, yield increases over the corresponding untreated controls was 888, 933 and 1100 lb/A, respectively. Table 1. Mean stand, rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for Dermacor X-100 seeding rate study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Description

Seeding Rate

(lb/A) Rate

(lb ai/A)

Stand (plants/ ft of row)


Yield (lb/A) Jul 9 Jul 19

Dermacor X-100 120 0.085 15 a 5 cd 3 b 1 c 7112 a Dermacor X-100 90 0.064 13 b 4 cd 5 b 1 c 6874 a Dermacor X-100 60 0.043 9 c 10 c 8 b 2 bc 6383 b

Untreated 120 --- 15 a 125 a 50 a 6 ab 6012 c Untreated 90 --- 11 b 100 b 46 a 8 a 5881 c Untreated 60 --- 8 c 80 b 51 a 9 a 5495 d

Cruiser 5FS 90 0.116 13 b 2 d 4 b 11 a 7064 a Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

17


Cruiser 5FS Seeding Rate Study Block 8S

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN


1 5 7 4 13 6 19 3 2 1 8 3 14 2 20 5 3 4 9 2 15 1 21 4 4 6 10 5 16 3 22 1 5 2 11 6 17 4 23 6 6 3 12 1 18 5 24 2




Treatment no. Description Seeding Rate

(lb/A) Rate

(lb ai/A) 1 Cruiser 5FS 25 0.032 2 Cruiser 5FS 50 0.064 3 Cruiser 5FS 75 0.096 4 Untreated 25 --- 5 Untreated 50 --- 6 Untreated 75 ---

Cruiser 5FS Seeding Rate Study

18


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 6 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 25, 50 and 75 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on May 25 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Jun 3 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on May 26 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 18 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on May 26 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jul 9 at panicle differentiation Total = 170 lb N/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on Jun 16 for early season weed control

Treatments: Seed was untreated or treated with Cruiser 5FS at 3.3 fl oz/cwt. Seed was treated

on May 19 by the Entomology Project Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Jun 11 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4


Counted number of whiteheads (WHs – measure of stalk borer damage) in rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 of each plot on Aug 19; dissected 10 WHs for stem borers (4 Mexican rice borer, 0 sugarcane borer)

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Sep 8 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data Analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using


Discussion

Rice plant stands reflected seeding rates---the highest, middle and lowest seeding rates

produced stands significantly different from one another (Table 1). The seed treatments did not affect rice stands. Populations of RWW were high in control plots on both sampling dates which means the experiment has potential for generating useful data. For both sampling dates, all seed

Cruiser 5FS Seeding Rate Study

19


treatments, regardless of seeding rate, significantly reduced RWW numbers relative to corresponding control treatments. Plots planted with treated seed produced significantly fewer RWW at the 50 and 75 lb/A seeding rate compared to the 25 lb/A seeding rate. For the first sampling date, plots planted with treated seed at 25, 50 and 75 lb/A provided 81, 91 and 95% control, respectively. For the second sampling date, plots planted with treated seed at 25, 50 and 75 lb/A provided 68, 86 and 92% control, respectively. Data suggest when rice seed is treated with Cruiser 5FS at 3.3 fl oz/cwt, RWW control may be compromised at a low seeding rate of 25 lb/A. WH counts were relatively low and not significantly different among the treatments which suggests Cruiser 5FS did not control stalk borers.

In general, yields were relatively low, probably due, in part, to the late planting date. At the 25 lb/A seeding rate, the difference in yield between treated and control plots was not significant, but the numerical difference was large---616 lb/A. At the 50 lb/A seeding rate, the difference in yield between treated and control plots was significant---876 lb/A. Likewise, at the 75 lb/A seeding rate, the difference in yield between treated and control plots was significant---807 lb/A.

The results are interesting and useful, but some limitations to the study should be noted. First, Cocodrie was used at the low seeding rate---25 lb/A. In future experiments, a hybrid variety should be used at this low seeding rate. Second, Cruiser 5FS was used and not CruiserMaxx which should be used in future experiments. The addition of the fungicides may impact plant stands, RWW control (thinner stands are associated with higher RWW densities) and yields. Third, planting date should be earlier---around Apr 1. The effect of CruiserMaxx on the ratoon crop should also be investigated (control of RWW and seedling diseases on the main crop may impact the ratoon crop). Table 1. Mean data for Cruiser 5FS seeding rate study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment

Seeding Rate

(lb/A) Rate

(lb ai/A)

Stand (plants/ft of row)

No. RWW/5 cores WHs/ 4 rows

Yield (lb/A) Jul 9 Jul 19

Cruiser 5FS 25 0.032 4 c 20 c 23 b 8 5864 bc Cruiser 5FS 50 0.064 7 b 11 d 8 c 9 6376 ab Cruiser 5FS 75 0.096 10 a 7 d 5 c 9 6567 a Untreated 25 --- 4 c 104 b 72 a 8 5248 c Untreated 50 --- 7 b 116 ab 58 a 9 5500 c Untreated 75 --- 11 a 138 a 59 a 5 5760 bc

NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).

20


Syngenta Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Block 3S

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN

← North I II III IV

1 5 8 1 15 7 22 4 2 2 9 4 16 5 23 6 3 1 10 3 17 2 24 7 4 7 11 6 18 3 25 5 5 6 12 2 19 4 26 1 6 4 13 5 20 1 27 3 7 3 14 7 21 6 28 2

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by Syngenta)




(g ai/hkg seed)

1 Untreateda --- 2 Cruiser 5FSa 135 (thiamethoxam) 3 A17469 150 4 CruiserMaxxb 3.3 fl oz/cwt (Cruiser 5FS) 5 EXC3925a 0.025 mg ai/seed 6 STP15201a 80 7 CruiserMaxxab 3.3 fl oz/cwt (Cruiser 5FS)

a Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 5.7 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 1.25 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty 0.83FS @ 1.0 g ai/hkg seed. b Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 10.0 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 2.0 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty .83FS @ 6.0 g ai/hkg seed.

Syngenta Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

21


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 90 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay

64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Apr 5 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Apr 20 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 6 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 12 (22 days after emergence) Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Apr 5 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on May 12 at PF 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 3 at panicle differentiation Total = 170 lb N/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 4 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments provided by Syngenta Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Apr 26 Inspected plots for insects (no. of aphids, chinch bugs and mealybugs) Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 1 and Jun 10 (20 and 29 days after PF). Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Counted number of whiteheads (WHs – measure of stalk borer damage) in rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 in each plot on Jul 22

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 15 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data Analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using


Discussion

Rice stands were not significantly different among treatments (Table 1). Aphids (bird

cherry oat aphid), chinch bugs and mealybugs were found in relatively low densities on seedling rice, so no valid conclusions can be drawn regarding control of seedling pests across treatments. However, numerically, more total seedling insect pests were found in the untreated than the seed


22


treatments. Immature RWW populations were high in untreated plots on both sample dates, so this experiment is a good test of the efficacy of the treatment insecticides (Table 2). All treatments significantly reduced RWW populations on both sample dates. None of the treatments significantly reduced number of whiteheads which is a measure of stalk borer damage. Yields were high, even in the untreated, but highest in the CruiserMaxx and EXC3925 treatments. The addition of the fungicides to thiamethoxam (the insecticidal active ingredient in Cruiser 5FS and CruiserMaxx) increased yields 390 lb/A (Cruiser 5FS vs CruiserMaxx). This difference was significant. Across all seed treatments, the average increase in yield compared to the untreated was 670 lb/A which shows the importance of controlling RWW. Table 1. Mean data for Syngenta seed treatements. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(g ai/hkg seed)


No. insects/row

Aphids Chinch bugs

Mealy bugs

Total insects

Untreateda --- 14 1.0 1.0 0.5 a 2.5 Cruiser 5FSa 135 13 0 0.3 0 b 0.3 A17469 150 13 0 0.3 0 b 0.3 CruiserMaxxb 3.3 fl oz/cwt 14 0 0 0 b 0 EXC3925a 0.025 mg ai/seed 13 0.3 0.5 0 b 0.8 STP15201a 80 13 1.0 0 0 b 1.0 CruiserMaxxab 3.3 fl oz/cwt 13 0 0.3 0 b

0.3

NS NS NS NS a Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 5.7 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 1.25 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty 0.83FS @ 1.0 g ai/hkg seed. b Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 10.0 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 2.0 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty .83FS @ 6.0 g ai/hkg seed. Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


23


Table 2. Mean rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for Syntenta seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(g ai/hkg seed) No. immature RWW/5 cores No. WH/4

rows Yield (lb/A) Jun 1 Jun 10

Untreateda --- 97 a 67 a 7 8209 d Cruiser 5FSa 135 3 b 3 bc 8 8717 c A17469 150 4 b 3 bc 6 8699 c CruiserMaxxb 3.3 fl oz/cwt 1 b 6 b 9 9107 ab EXC3925a 0.025 mg ai/seed 2 b 2 c 4 9221 a STP15201a 80 2 b 2 bc 7 8682 c CruiserMaxxab 3.3 fl oz/cwt 3 b 2 bc 6 8852 bc

NS a Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 5.7 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 1.25 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty 0.83FS @ 1.0 g ai/hkg seed. b Also treated with Apron XL 3LS @ 10.0 g ai/hkg seed, Maxim 4FS @ 2.0 g ai/hkg seed and Dynasty 0.83FS @ 6.0 g ai/hkg seed. Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

24


Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Block 4S

Beaumont, TX 2010

⇐ North PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 4 11 8 21 6 31 7 2 10 12 4 22 1 32 8 3 2 13 5 23 10 33 9 4 7 14 9 24 2 34 6 5 6 15 7 25 8 35 1 6 5 16 1 26 3 36 4 7 3 17 2 27 9 37 10 8 9 18 10 28 7 38 5 9 8 19 6 29 4 39 3 10 1 20 3 30 5 40 2

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, with barriers Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed, treated by Valent)




(fl oz/cwt)

1 Untreatedb --- 2 Dermacor X-100bc 2 3 Cruiser 5FSc 3.3 4 Cruiser 5FSbc 3.3 5 Nipsit INSIDEc 1.9 6 Nipsit INSIDEbc 3.3 7 V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEbc 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 8 Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEb 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 9 Belay 2.13SC (foliar)bc 4.5 fl oz/A 10 Karate Z (foliar)bc 0.03 lb ai/A

a All treatments are seed treatments except Belay 2.13SC (applied 12 days after flood) and Karate Z (applied before flood) b Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment c Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment

Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Beaumont

25


Agronomic and Cultural Information

Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 10 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Apr 6. Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Apr 19 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 7 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 12 (23 days after emergence) Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Apr 7 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on May 12 before PF 56/7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 3 at panicle differentiation Total N = 170 lb/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/acre with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 4 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments applied by Valent. Treatment 10 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb AI/A) applied using a hand-held, CO2

pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) spray rig on May 11 (before PF).

Treatment 9 applied as above on May 24 (12 days after flood) Sampling: Some differences noted in stands and plant height on Apr 20. Plants in trts. 3 and

5 appeared to be shorter and have thinner stands. Counted number of aphids in row 6 of each plot on Apr 23. Noted that trts. 3 and

5 appeared significantly shorter than other treatments. Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Apr 27 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 2 and Jun 11. Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whitehead (WH) counts on rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 on Jun 22 Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 3 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data analysis: Insect and WH counts transformed using

x + 0.5 ; yields converted to 12% moisture; all data analyzed by ANOVA and means separated by LSD


26


Discussion

Rice stands were not significantly different among the treatments, so seed treatments did not affect rice stand density (Table 1). Although bird cherry oat aphid populations were low, all of the seed treatments significantly reduced these populations. RWW numbers on the first and second sampling dates were high in the untreated, so data from this experiment are meaningful (Table 2). All of the seed treatments were very effective against RWW. Although applied very late (12 days after flood), the Belay treatment provided 81 and 97% control of RWW on the first and second sampling dates, respectively. WH counts were relatively low and not significantly different among the treatments, so these data are not as meaningful as the RWW data. All the Nipsit INSIDE treatments produced yields significantly greater than the untreated. For instance, Nipsit INSIDE at 1.9 fl oz/cwt (seeding rate = 80 lb/A), outyielded the untreated 684 lb/A. The Belay treatment also produced yields significantly higher than the untreated (662 lb/A). Addition of V-10212, Trilex and V-10209 did not enhance insect control or yield. Table 1. Mean stand and aphid data for Valent seed treatments for insect control. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/cwt) Stand

(plants/ft of row) No. bird cherry oat aphid/row

Untreatedb --- 11.7 14.5 a Dermacor X-100bc 2 12.2 4.8 b

Cruiser 5FSc 3.3 12.2 1.3 c Cruiser 5FSbc 3.3 12.4 1.3 c

Nipsit INSIDEc 1.9 11.9 1.0 c Nipsit INSIDEbc 3.3 12.4 0.3 c

V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEbc 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 11.3 2.0 c Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEb 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 11.7 1.5 c

Belay 2.13SC (foliar)bc 4.5 fl oz/A 12.1 6.8 b Karate Z (foliar)bc 0.03 lb ai/A 8.0 b 11.5

NS a All treatments are seed treatments except Belay 2.13SC (applied 12 days after flood) and Karate Z (applied before flood) b Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment c Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).


27


Table 2. Mean rice water weevil (RWW), whitehead (WH) and yield data for Valent seed treatments for insect control. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/cwt)


Yield (lb/A) Jun 2 Jun 11

Untreatedb --- 89 a 59 a 7 7894 b Dermacor X-100bc 2 3 d 2 d 1 8645 a

Cruiser 5FSc 3.3 4 d 8 c 5 8761 a Cruiser 5FSbc 3.3 3 d 8 c 5 8550 a

Nipsit INSIDEc 1.9 2 d 5 cd 4 8578 a Nipsit INSIDEbc 3.3 2 d 5 cd 6 8942 a

V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEbc 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 1 d 4 cd 4 8739 a Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEb 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 2 d 6 cd 7 8495 a

Belay 2.13SC (foliar)bc 4.5 fl oz/A 17 b 2 d 3 8556 a Karate Z (foliar)bc 0.03 lb ai/A 9 c 18 b 4 8449 a

NS a All treatments are seed treatments except Belay 2.13SC (applied 12 days after flood) and Karate Z (applied before flood) b Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment c Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).

28


Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Eagle Lake, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 2 11 6 21 blank 31 5 2 8 12 7 22 8 32 4 3 blank 13 4 23 9 33 6 4 6 14 2 24 1 34 3 5 7 15 blank 25 2 35 2 6 4 16 8 26 7 36 9 7 1 17 3 27 5 37 blank 8 9 18 5 28 6 38 8 9 3 19 1 29 3 39 7 10 5 20 9 30 4 40 1

Plot size: 6 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed, treated by Valent)




(fl oz/cwt)

1 Untreatedb --- 2 Dermacor X-100bc 2 3 Cruiser 5FSc 3.3 4 Cruiser 5FSbc 3.3 5 Nipsit INSIDEc 1.9 6 Nipsit INSIDEbc 3.3 7 V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEbc 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 8 Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEb 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 9 Karate Z (foliar)bc 0.03 lb ai/A

a All treatments are seed treatments except Karate Z (applied before flood) b Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment c Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment

Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Eagle Lake

29


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 9 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted test (Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A) into Edna soil on Apr 14 Plot size = 6 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long; NO BARRIERS Emergence on Apr 24 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 14 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 27 (33 days after rice emergence) Fertilization: 47.5-47.5-47.5 (lbs N-P-K/A) on Apr 12 at preplant 80 lb N/A (urea) on May 26 before permanent flood (BF) 60 lb N/A (ammonium sulfate) on Jun 18 at panicle initiation/differentiation Total N/A for main crop = 187.5 lb Herbicide: Propanil @ 2 lb ai/A and Command 3ME @ 0.35 lb ai/A applied on Apr 28 Propanil @ 3 lb ai/A, Facet @ 0.35 lb ai/A and Permit @ 0.06 lb ai/A on May

26 Treatments: Treatment 9 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb AI/A) applied on May 27 (before PF) Sampling: Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 and 3 cores per plot on 1st and 2nd sampling

dates, repectively, each core 4 inches diameter, 4 inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 18 and Jun 28. Core samples were stored in a cold-room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Harvest: Harvested on Aug 17 Size harvested plot = 4 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Data Analysis: RWW counts transformed using


Discussion

Populations of RWW were low in the experiment. None of the seed treatments

significantly reduced RWW populations compared to the untreated (Table 1). Karate Z applied just before the flood was the only treatment that reduced RWW populations significantly. A treatment of Belay 2.13EC should have been applied about 10-12 days after flood, but was inadvertently not applied. As noted before, plots were not surrounded by barriers, unlike a similar experiment at Beaumont. The lack of barriers may have been responsible for the failure to detect treatment differences in control of RWW. We simply did not have the man-power and time this year to install barriers at Eagle Lake. In addition, Eagle Lake is about 150 miles from Beaumont, so scheduling work at Eagle Lake can be difficult during the busy field season. We

Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Eagle Lake

30


hoped the lack of barriers would not affect experimental results. If this experiment is conducted in the future, we will make sure to install barriers. The employees at the Eagle Lake research site may be able to help us with this task. Also, the flood was applied a little late. In the future, we will request the flood be applied earlier (about 3 weeks after emergence of rice through soil). An earlier flood generally is associated with higher populations of RWW than a later flood.

Yields were relatively low, in part due to widespread panicle blight in 2010, and not significantly different among treatments. This result is not unexpected, given the low density of RWW populations in the experiment. Table 1. Mean data for Valent seed treatments for rice water weevil (RWW) control. Eagle Lake, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(g ai/hkg)

RWW cores Yield (lb/A) Jun 18b Jun 29b

Untreatedc --- 26 a 4 5362 Dermacor X-100cd 2 11 ab 3 5732

Cruiser 5FSd 3.3 17 a 7 5585 Cruiser 5FScd 3.3 18 a 4 5556

Nipsit INSIDEd 1.9 25 a 6 5677 Nipsit INSIDEcd 3.3 16 a 8 5699

V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEcd 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 20 a 4 5576 Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEc 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 18 a 4 5377

Karate Z (foliar)cd 0.03 lb ai/A 4 b 1

5367 NS NS

a All treatments are seed treatments except Karate Z (applied before flood) b RWW/5 cores on Jun 18; RWW/3 cores on Jun 29 c Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment d Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.07, ANOVA and LSD)

31


Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Ganado, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 2 11 6 21 blank 31 5 2 8 12 7 22 8 32 4 3 blank 13 4 23 9 33 6 4 6 14 2 24 1 34 3 5 7 15 blank 25 2 35 2 6 4 16 8 26 7 36 9 7 1 17 3 27 5 37 blank 8 9 18 5 28 6 38 8 9 3 19 1 29 3 39 7 10 5 20 9 30 4 40 1

Plot size: 6 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed, treated by Valent)




(fl oz/cwt)

1 Untreatedb --- 2 Dermacor X-100bc 2 3 Cruiser 5FSc 3.3 4 Cruiser 5FSbc 3.3 5 Nipsit INSIDEc 1.9 6 Nipsit INSIDEbc 3.3 7 V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEbc 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9

8 Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEb 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3

9 Karate Z (foliar)bc 0.03 lb ai/A a All treatments are seed treatments except Karate Z (applied before flood) b Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment c Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment

Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Ganado

32


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 9 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted test (Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A) into Edna soil on Apr 21 Plot size = 6 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long; no barriers Emergence on Apr 30 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 22 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 28 Fertilization: 47.5-47.5-47.5 (lbs N-P-K/A) on Apr 6 at preplant 80 lb N/A (urea) on May 27 before permanent flood (BF) 60 lb N/A (ammonium sulfate) on Jun 14 at panicle initiation/differentiation Total N/A for main crop = 187.5 Herbicide: Propanil @ 2 lb ai/A and Command 3ME @ 0.35 lb ai/A applied on Apr 27 Propanil @ 3 lb ai/A, Facet @ 0.35 lb ai/A and Permit @ 0.06 lb ai/A on May

27 Treatments: Treatment 9 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb AI/A) applied on May 27 (BF) Sampling: Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 and 3 cores per plot on 1st and 2nd sampling

dates, repectively, each core 4 inches diameter, 4 inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 18 and Jun 29. Core samples were stored in a cold-room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Harvest: Harvested on Aug 17 Size harvested plot = 4 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Data Analysis: RWW counts transformed using


Discussion

As with the identical experiment at Eagle Lake, no barriers were installed around the plots. This failure to use barriers was probably largely responsible for the lack of generation of meaningful data in this experiment. Basically, none of the seed treatments effectively controlled RWW (Table 1). In addition, not surprisingly, yields were not significantly different among treatments. If we conduct similar experiments at Eagle Lake in the future, we will install barriers which minimize interplot movement of pesticides and fertilizers. Also, the PF was applied late relative to rice emergence (28 days after rice emergence). In the future, the PF will be applied about 3 weeks after emergence.

Valent Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control at Ganado

33


Table 1. Mean data for Valent seed treatments for rice water weevil (RWW) control. Ganado, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(lb ai/A) RWW cores Yield

(lb/A) Jun 18b Jun 29b

Untreatedc --- 15 a 2 7356 Dermacor X-100cd 2 7 c 0 7679

Cruiser 5FSd 3.3 11 abc 3 7246 Cruiser 5FScd 3.3 12 abc 2 7171

Nipsit INSIDEd 1.9 14 ab 1 7679 Nipsit INSIDEcd 3.3 14 ab 3 7559

V-10212 + Nipsit INSIDEcd 25 g ai/hkg + 1.9 10 abc 1 7377 Trilex + V-10209 + Nipsit INSIDEc 0.32 + 0.75 + 3.3 19 a 1 6923

Karate Z (foliar)cd 0.03 lb ai/A 7 bc 1

7267 NS NS

a All treatments are seed treatments except Karate Z (applied before flood) b RWW/5 cores on Jun 18; RWW/3 cores on Jun 29 c Includes Release @ 0.44 oz/cwt as a seed treatment d Includes Maxim 4FS @ 0.08 fl oz/cwt and Apron XL @ 0.32 fl oz/cwt as a seed treatment Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.07, ANOVA and LSD)

34


Belay Foliar Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control Block 6S

Beaumont, TX 2010

⇐ North PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 1 8 5 15 3 22 2 2 7 9 3 16 5 23 6 3 6 10 7 17 4 24 1 4 3 11 4 18 2 25 7 5 4 12 2 19 1 26 3 6 5 13 1 20 6 27 5 7 2 14 6 21 7 28 4

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, with barriers Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed, treated by Valent)




(fl oz/A) Timinga

1 Untreated --- --- 2 Karate Z 0.03 lb ai/A BF 3 Belay 2.13SC + NISb 3.5 + 0.15 % v/v 10 DAF 4 Belay 2.13SC + NIS 4.5 + 0.15 % v/v 10 DAF

5 Belay 2.13SC + NIS + Progibb 40%

4.5 + 0.15 % v/v + 1.0 g ai/A 10 DAF

6 Nipsit INSIDE 75 g ai/hkg seed ST 7 Dermacor X-100 2.0 fl oz/cwt seed ST

a BF = before flood; DAF = days after flood; ST = seed treatment b NIS = non-ionic surfactant (Induce)


Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted Cocodrie @ 90 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Apr 28. Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on May 7

Valent Foliar and Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

35


Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 28 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jun 1 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Apr 28 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 1 before PF 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on at panicle differentiation Total N = 170 lb/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/acre with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on May 19 for early season weed control

Treatments: All seed treatments applied by Valent. Treatment 2 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied using a hand-held, CO2

pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) spray rig on Jun 1 (before PF). Treatments 3, 4 and 5 applied as above on Jun 11 (10 days after PF).

Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on May 14 Noted increased seedling vigor in seed treatments 6 (Dermacor X-100) and 7

(Nipsit INSIDE) on May 14 Noted increased plant height in trt. 5 plots on Jun 16 Average plant height recorded on Jun 21 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Jun 22 and Jul 5. Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Whitehead (WH – sign of stalk borer damage) counts on rows 2, 3, 5 and 6; 10 WHs collected for dissection (4 Mexican rice borer and 0 sugarcane borer larvae) on Jul 28



Discussion

Rice stand counts among treatments were not significantly different, so the seed

treatments did not negatively affect stand (Table 1). Gibberellic acid (GA) was tank-mixed with Belay and applied 10 days after flood (treatment 5) on Jun 11. Five days later, plants in plots of treatment 5 were markedly taller than plants in other plots. Average height of plants in plots was

Valent Foliar and Seed Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

36


recorded Jun 21. Data show plants treated with GA were significantly taller than all other plants. RWW populations in untreated plots on the first sampling date were sufficiently high to generate valuable data. All Belay treatments (which were applied 10 days after flood) significantly reduced RWW populations---the 3.5 fl oz/A rate provided 33% control while the 4.5 fl oz/A rate provided 64% control. The addition of GA to Belay (treatment 5) actually increased the level of RWW control (78%). This may be an anomaly, but should be further investigated. The seed treatments gave the best control (93%). For the second sampling date, RWW populations in untreated plots were less than the previous sampling date, but were still above treatment thresholds. The Belay treatments without GA provided 72% control, but the addition of GA increased control to 92%. However, these differences were not significant. Stalk borer damage, as measured by WH density, was too low and variable to draw valid conclusions. Yields were generally high in the experiment. The Belay treatments minus GA produced significantly higher yields than the untreated, and were similar to the seed treatment yields. Both Belay treatments minus GA averaged more than 300 lb/A compared to the untreated. Surprisingly, the addition of GA to Belay, produced the lowest yield in the experiment---even lower than the untreated. Perhaps GA applied at this time stimulated vegetative growth at the expense of reproductive development? Timing of GA application may be crucial to rice growth and development. Again, further research is needed to better understand this relationship.

In short, Belay applied relatively late---10 days after flood---may be a viable option to control RWW when the window of application has closed for currently labeled insecticides. Table 1. Mean data for Belay foliar treatments for rice water weevil (RWW) control. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/A)


Plant ht (cm)

No. RWW/5 cores WHsb in 4 rows

Yield (lb/A) Jun 22 Jul 5

Untreated --- 15 62 b 55 a 25 a 2 bc 7924 c Karate Z 0.03 lb ai/A 15 64 b 10 d 15 a 6 a 8087 bc

Belay 2.13SC + NIS 3.5 + 0.15 % v/v 15 63 b 37 b 7 b 6 ab 8256 ab Belay 2.13SC + NIS 4.5 + 0.15 % v/v 15 65 b 20 c 7 b 3 abc 8268 ab Belay 2.13SC + NIS

+ Progibb 40% 4.5 + 0.15 % v/v

+ 1.0 g ai/A 15 91 a 12 d 2 bc 3 abc 7875 c

Nipsit INSIDE 75 g ai/hkg seed 14 63 b 4 e 5 bc 2 bc 8366 ab Dermacor X-100 2.0 fl oz/cwt seed 65 b 14 4 e 1 c 1 c 8485 a

NS a Karate Z applied before flood; Belay 2.13SC applied 10 days after flood; NIS = non-ionic surfactant (Induce); Nipsit INSIDE and Dermacor X-100 applied as seed treatments b WHs = whiteheads Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, P = 0.07 for yield, ANOVA and LSD).

37


Valent Post Flood Treatments Block 9S

Beaumont, TX 2010

⇐ North PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 1 4 3 7 3 10 2 2 3 5 1 8 2 11 1 3 2 6 2 9 1 12 3

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, with barriers; test located on west side of block Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed)




(lb ai/A)

1 Untreated --- 2 Belay 2.13SC 0.058 3 Arena 0.058

Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 3 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt

32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Jun 16. Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Jun 23 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Jun 17 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on Jul 14 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 113.3 lb N/A (2/3 of 170) on Jun 17 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 30 at panicle differentiation 40 lb N/A on Aug 9 Total N = 210 lb/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/acre with a 2-person hand-held spray

Valent Post Flood Treatments for Rice Water Weevil Control

38


boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on Jul 9 for early season weed control

Treatments: Treatments applied using a hand-held, CO2 pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips

with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) spray rig on Jul 29 (15 days after flood) Sampling: Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Jul 12 Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on Aug 4 and Aug 14. Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Oct 1 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Data analysis: RWW counts transformed using


Discussion

Rice stands were the same among treatments (Table1). RWW populations were high on

the 1st sample date and well above treatment thresholds (about 15 larvae/pupae per 5 cores) on the 2nd sample date. Treatments were applied late---15 days after flood, yet, both the Belay and Arena treatments significantly reduced RWW numbers. Control was 38% for the 1st sample date and about 83% for the 2nd sample date. Yields were significantly higher in both insecticide treatments compared to the untreated---more than 250 lb/A. Belay and Arena applied relatively late after flood shows promise as a “rescue” treatment for RWW control. Table 1. Mean data for Valent post flood treatments for rice water weevil (RWW) control. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

lb ai/A

Stand (plants/ft of

row)

No. RWW/5 cores Yield (lb/A) Aug 4 Aug 14

Untreated --- 10 124 a 43 a 6850 b Belay 2.13SC 0.058 10 77 b 10 b 7115 a

Arena 0.058 10 78 b 5 b 7104 a Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

39


Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil Blocks 1N and 1S

Beaumont, TX 2010

⇐ North Block 1N I I II II

1 CLXL729 11 CL261 21 XL723 31 TXEL0038 2 CLXL729 12 CL261 22 XL723 32 TXEL0038 3 CLXL745 13 CL151 23 Rondo 33 TXEL0022 4 CLXL745 14 CL151 24 Rondo 34 TXEL0022 5 TXEL0038 15 XL723 25 CLXL729 35 CL111 6 TXEL0038 16 XL723 26 CLXL729 36 CL111 7 CL111 17 Presidio 27 CL151 37 CL261 8 CL111 18 Presidio 28 CL151 38 CL261 9 Rondo 19 TXEL0022 29 Presidio 39 CLXL745

10 Rondo 20 TXEL0022 30 Presidio 40 CLXL745

Block 1S III III IV IV

1 CL151 11 Presidio 21 CL111 31 TXEL0038 2 CL151 12 Presidio 22 CL111 32 TXEL0038 3 TXEL0038 13 CL261 23 CL151 33 XL723 4 TXEL0038 14 CL261 24 CL151 34 XL723 5 CLXL745 15 TXEL0022 25 Rondo 35 Presidio 6 CLXL745 16 TXEL0022 26 Rondo 36 Presidio 7 Rondo 17 XL723 27 CLXL729 37 TXEL0022 8 Rondo 18 XL723 28 CLXL729 38 TXEL0022 9 CL111 19 CLXL729 29 CLXL745 39 CL261

10 CL111 20 CLXL729 30 CLXL745 40 CL261

Treated with Dermacor X-100 Untreated

Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Conventional varieties seeded at 80 lb/A – 100 lb/A, depending on variety

Hybrids seeded at 25 lb/A No barriers

Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil

40


Agronomic and Cultural Information Planting: Drill-planted test into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay 64.4%, and

organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Mar 29 Experimental design: Split plot with 4 replications; main plot = genotype; sub plot = untreated or treated for rice water weevil (RWW) with Dermacor X-100 at 0.1 lb ai/A. Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long (no barriers) Inbred entries are CL151, Rondo and TXEL0038 seeded @ 80 lb/A, CL261, Presidio and TXEL0022 seeded @ 90 lb/A, and CL111 seeded at 100 lb/A; hybrid lines are CLXL729, CLXL745 and XL723 seeded @ 25 lb/A. Emergence on Apr 10

Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Mar 30 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 6 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. CL111, CL151, Presidio, Rondo, TXEL0022 and TXEL0038: 42.5 lb N/A (25% of 170) on Mar 29 at planting 59.5 lb N/A (35% of 170) on May 6 at PF 68.0 lb N/A (40% of 170) on May 26, at panicle differentiation CL261: 37.5 lb N/A (25% of 150) on Mar 29 at planting 52.5 lb N/A (35% of 150) on May 6 at PF 60.0 lb N/A (40% of 150) on May 26, at panicle differentiation CL XL729, CLXL745 and XL723: 120 lb N/A on May 6 at PF 60 lb N/A on Jun 25 at late boot Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

8E @ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Penetrator Plus @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 12 gpa final spray volume) on Apr 25 for early season weed control

Treatments: Seed treated with Dermacor X-100 @ 0.1 lb ai/A on Mar 29 Sampling: Emergence notes on Apr 13, TXEL0038 and CL261 had late emergence/poor stand Stand counts (3- 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Apr 23.

RWW cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inch diameter, 4 inch deep containing at least one rice plant) were collected on May 26 and Jun 7, later washed through 40-mesh buckets and immature RWW counted. On Jul 12 heading notes were recorded: Rondo @ milk; CLXL729 and CLXL745 @ milk/soft dough; TXEL0038 @ soft dough; XL723 @ soft dough/hard dough; CL111, CL261, CL151, Presidio and TXEL0022 @ hard dough.


41


Whitehead (WH) counts on rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 on Jul 13 Panicle blight ratings (worst in CL261 and more severe in untreated plots, in reps I and II only) on Aug 5



Discussion

Rice plant stands were significantly different due to recommended seeding rates for the

varieties/genotypes evaluated (Tables 1 and 2). However, Rondo, TXEL0022 and TXEL0038 stands were significantly lower than the other inbreds although seeding rates for Rondo, TXEL0022 and TXEL0038 were equal to or greater than those for the other inbred varieties. This implies germination and/or seedling vigor of Rondo, TXEL0022 and TXEL0038 is less than the other inbreds. For the 1st sampling date, RWW populations were highest in untreated plots of Presidio and Rondo and lowest in TXEL0022 and TXEL0038; however, across subplots, no significant differences were detected among varieties/genotypes. For the 2nd sampling date, RWW populations in untreated plots were highest in all the hybrids and TXEL0038 which may be due to the lower rice plant stands in these plots (RWW populations generally are higher in lower rather than higher density stands). Across subplots, RWW populations were significantly lower in CL261, CL151, Presidio, CL111, Rondo, TXEL0022 and TXEL0038 than the hybrids. When both sampling dates are considered for untreated plots, highest RWW populations were detected in CLX745, CLXL729 and XL723. Lowest populations were found in CL261, TXEL0022 and CL151. Across main plots for both sampling dates, Dermacor X-100 seed treatment provided excellent control of RWW in treated plots. Across main plots, whiteheads, a measure of stalk borer damage, were significantly lower in treated than untreated plots. Thus, Dermacor X-100 provided a degree of control of stalk borers (sugarcane and Mexican rice borer). So, yield differences are due to both stalk borer and RWW control. Across subplots, highest yields were produced by the hybrids and Rondo. Lowest yields were produced by TXEL0038, CL261, Presidio, TXEL0022, and CL111 (all these varieties/genotypes produced less than 7000 lb/A). Across main plots, the average difference in yield between treated and untreated plots was 545 lb/A which shows the importance of controlling RWW, and to a lesser extent, stalk borers. The difference in yield between treated and untreated plots is a measure of tolerance to RWW. CLXL729 produced the least difference in yield between treated and untreated plots (only 61 lb/A), in spite of relative high populations of RWW, so this variety possessed the greatest tolerance to RWW compared to the other varieties/genotypes. CL261 produced the greatest difference in yields between treated and untreated plots, in spite of relative low populations of RWW. Thus, CL261 is the least tolerant variety/genotype.

The authors’ interpretation of the data reveal the following RWW resistance/tolerance rating for the varieties/genotypes tested: CLXL729 .............moderately susceptible


42


CL151 ..................moderately susceptible TXEL0022 ...........susceptible CL111 ..................susceptible TXEL0038 ...........susceptible Presidio ................susceptible CLXL745 .............very susceptible XL723 ..................very susceptible Rondo ...................very susceptible CL261 ..................very susceptible

Based on these data, stakeholders should strongly consider controlling RWW if the above susceptible and very susceptible varieties/genotypes are planted. Table 1. Mean data for host plant resistance to rice water weevil. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Treatment


No. RWW/5 cores WHs/4 rows

Yield (lb/A) T – U May 27 Jun 7

CL111 T 14 3 4 2 6869 521

U 15 39 28 6 6348 CL151 T 14 3 3 1 7474

232 U 15 38 25 8 7242 CL261 T 15 1 1 2 6860

970 U 14 36 13 9 5890 Presidio T 15 1 2 1 6788

568 U 15 42 28 5 6220 Rondo T 10 1 1 0 9925

725 U 11 57 33 1 9200 TXEL0022 T 10 1 2 1 6777

421 U 10 25 34 5 6356 TXEL0038 T 8 3 2 1 6363

537 U 8 25 46 10 5826 CLXL729 T 4 2 12 1 9379

61 U 5 34 58 2 9318 CLXL745 T 6 2 26 1 9817

687 U 6 38 64 3 9130 XL723 T 6 4 17 1 10077

722 U 5 27 49 2 9355


43


Table 2. Statistical analysis of data from Table 1. Stand

(plants/3 ft of row)

No. RWW/5 cores

WHsa Yield (lb/A) May 27 Jun 7

Main plot effects: CL111 15 a 21 16 c 4 ab 6608 c CL151 15 a 21 14 cd 4 ab 7358 b CL261 14 a 18 7 d 6 a 6375 c Presidio 15 a 22 15 cd 3 bcd 6504 c Rondo 10 b 29 17 c 0 e 9562 a TXEL0022 10 b 13 18 c 3 abc 6567 c TXEL0038 8 c 14 24 c 5 ab 6095 c CLXL729 5 d 18 35 ab 1 cde 9349 a CLXL745 6 d 20 45 a 2 bcd 9473 a XL723 5 d 33 b 15 1 de 9716 a

Subplot effects: NS Treatedb 10 2 b 7 b 1 b 8033 a Untreated 36 a 10 38 a 5 a 7488 b

Interactions: NS Variety x treatment P = 0.2800 P = 0.1072 P = 0.1396 P = 0.0007 P = 0.3692 a WHs = whiteheads in rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 of each plot b Treated with Dermacor X-100 @ 0.1 lb ai/A Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

44


Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil (AR Test) Blocks 2N & 2S Beaumont, TX

2010

⇐ North Block 2N I I II II

1 4484-1693 9 CL151 17 PI312777 25 Cocodrie

2 4484-1693 10 CL151 18 PI312777 26 Cocodrie

3 4593-PI615031 11 PI312777 19 4484-1693 27 CL151

4 4593-PI615031 12 PI312777 20 4484-1693 28 CL151

5 TeQing PI536047 13 Cocodrie 21 TNIPI495830 29 4612-PI615039

6 TeQing PI536047 14 Cocodrie 22 TNIPI495830 30 4612-PI615039

7 TNIPI495830 15 4612-PI615039 23 4593-PI615031 31 TeQing PI536047

8 TNIPI495830 16 4612-PI615039 24 4593-PI615031 32 TeQing PI536047

Block 2S

III III IV IV

1 4484-1693 9 4612-PI615039 17 CL151 25 4593-PI615031

2 4484-1693 10 4612-PI615039 18 CL151 26 4593-PI615031

3 4593-PI615031 11 CL151 19 4484-1693 27 TNIPI495830

4 4593-PI615031 12 CL151 20 4484-1693 28 TNIPI495830

5 TeQing PI536047 13 Cocodrie 21 4612-PI615039 29 PI312777

6 TeQing PI536047 14 Cocodrie 22 4612-PI615039 30 PI312777

7 PI312777 15 TNIPI495830 23 TeQing PI536047 31 Cocodrie

8 PI312777 16 TNIPI495830 24 TeQing PI536047 32 Cocodrie

Treated with Dermacor X-100 @ 0.1 lb ai/A Untreated

Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, no barriers CL151 treated with MAZR

Host Plant Resistance to Rice Water Weevil (AR Test)

45



Planting: Drill-planted test @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Mar 31 Experimental design: Split plot with 4 replications; main plot = genotype; sub plot = untreated or treated for rice water weevil (RWW) with Dermacor X-100 at 0.1 lb ai/A Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long (no barriers) Emergence on Apr 11

Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Mar 31 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 6

Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. CL151 and Cocodrie: 42.5 lb N/A (25% of 170) on Mar 31 at planting 59.5 lb N/A (35% of 170) on May 6 at PF 68.0 lb N/A (40% of 170) on May 28, at panicle differentiation All other varieties: 31.3 lb N/A (25% of 125) on Mar 31 at planting 43.7 lb N/A (35% of 125) on May 6 at PF 50.0 lb N/A (40% of 125) on May 28, at panicle differentiation Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

8E @ 2.0 lb (AI)/acre and Penetrator Plus @ 1.0 pt/acre with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 12 gpa final spray volume) on Apr 25 for early season weed control

Treatments: Dermacor X-100 was applied to seed @ 0.1 lb ai/A on Mar 24

Sampling: Stand counts (3- 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Apr 23 RWW cores (5 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4 inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected on May 28 and Jun 7. Core samples were stored in a cold-room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted. Heading notes recorded on Jul 12: 4593-PI615031 @ heading; 4484-1693, TeQing PI536047, PI312777 @ heading/milk; TNIPI495830 @ milk; Cocodrie, 4612-PI615039 @ milk/soft dough; CL151 @ hard dough Whitehead (WH) counts on rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 on Jul 13 for CL151, Cocodrie, TNIPI495830 and 4612-PI615039 and on Jul 22 for 4484-1693, 4593-PI615031, PI312777 and TeQing PI536047

Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 18 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long


46


Data analysis: RWW and WH counts transformed using


Discussion

All genotypes were planted at 80 lb/A, so 4484-1693, 4593-PI 615031, 4612-PI 615039

and TeQing PI 536047 produced the lowest rice stands which may be a reflection of the seedling vigor of these genotypes (Tables 1 and 2). Across genotypes, rice stands were the same, so the Dermacor seed treatment did not affect stand density. In general, RWW populations on both sample dates were not high in untreated plots, but exceeded treatment thresholds of about 15 larvae/pupae per 5 cores. Across genotypes, the Dermacor seed treatment provided excellent control of RWW on both sample dates. However, across sub plots (treated or untreated for RWW), RWW populations were not significantly different. Thus, all genotypes in this experiment generated about the same densities of RWW which means these genotypes did not express varying degrees of resistance to RWW. WHs---an indication of stalk borer damage, primarily Mexican rice borer---were highest in CL151 and Cocodrie, and lowest in PI312777, 4484-1693, 4593-PI615031, 4612-PI615039 and TeQing PI536047. Across main plots, Dermacor seed treatment significantly reduced the number of WHs which means yield reductions are due to a combination of RWW and stalk borer damage, although stalk borer damage was minimal in this experiment. Yields in untreated plots were lowest for Cocodrie and 4484-1693, and highest for TeQing PI53604, 4612-PI 615039 and TN1 PI495830. So, these genotypes produced the highest yields when exposed to RWW attack. Finally, TN1 PI495830, TeQing PI536047and 4612-PI 615031 suffered the least when exposed to RWW attack (difference between protected and unprotected plots is lowest). In fact, TN1 PI495830 RWW-unprotected plots produced higher yields than protected plots. Thus, the above 3 genotypes were more tolerant to RWW damage than the other genotypes in this experiment.


47


Table 1. Data from host plant resistance to rice water weevil (RWW)-AR test. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Trt

Stand plants/3 ft

of row

No. RWW/5 cores

WHsa Yield (lb/A) T – U May 26 Jun 5

4484-1693 T 10 1 2 1 7500

661 U 9 39 35 0 6839

4593-PI 615031 T 9 1 2 0 8411

693 U 9 38 31 1 7718

4612-PI 615039 T 10 1 2 0 8459

183 U 10 28 27 1 8276

CL151 T 15 1 4 2 8055

424 U 15 35 22 11 7631

Cocodrie T 14 2 2 1 7198

686 U 14 33 35 7 6512

PI 312777 T 14 1 3 0 8114

191 U 15 26 17 0 7923

TN1 PI 495830 T 16 0 3 2 7873

-387 U 15 23 29 2 8260

TeQing PI536047 T 10 0 3 0 8423

20 U 10 27 24 1 8403

a WHs = whiteheads in 4 middle rows


48


Table 2. Statistical analysis of data in Table 1.

Stand plants/ft of

row

No. RWW/5 cores

WHsa Yield (lb/A) May 26 Jun 5

Main plot effects: 4484-1693 9 c 20 18 0 b 7170 b 4593-PI 615031 9 c 19 17 0 b 8064 a 4612-PI 615039 10 c 14 15 1 b 8368 a CL151 15 a 18 13 6 a 7843 a Cocodrie 14 b 18 18 4 a 6855 b PI 312777 15 ab 13 10 0 b 8019 a TN1 PI 495830 16 a 12 16 2 b 8066 a TeQing PI 536047 10 c 14 1 b 14 8413 a

Sub plot effects: Treated 12 1 b 3 b 1 b 8004 a Untreated 31 a 12 27 a 3 a 7695 b

Interactions: variety x treatment P = 0.4741 P = 0.8425 P = 0.1464 P = 0.0432 P = 0.1320 a WHs = whiteheads in rows 2, 3, 5 and 6 Means in a column followed by the same letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

49


Foliar Fungicide Treatment Study Block 5S

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV

1 8 14 7 27 11 40 13 2 9 15 5 28 13 41 9 3 1 16 6 29 4 42 7 4 12 17 2 30 8 43 10 5 13 18 3 31 10 44 3 6 7 19 11 32 12 45 6 7 4 20 9 33 6 46 1 8 11 21 4 34 2 47 4 9 2 22 8 35 9 48 8 10 3 23 12 36 1 49 11 11 5 24 10 37 3 50 2 12 6 25 1 38 5 51 12 13 10 26 13 39 7 52 5

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long, no barriers Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by LSU Foundation Seed)

Seed Treated with Dermacor X-100 @ 0.1 lb ai/A Note: smaller numbers in italics are plot numbers

Foliar Fungicide Treatment Study

50



Trt. no. Description Rate

(fl oz prod/A) 1 Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 16 + 1% v/v 2 Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 21 + 1% v/v 3 Convoy + Quadris 11.8 + 9 4 Stratego 19 5 Stratego pro 8 6 Stratego pro 9 7 Stratego pro + Tilt 8 + 4 8 Convoy 11.8 9 Convoy 16.8 10 Convoy 23.6 11 Artisan 14.9 12 Artisan 21.3 13 Untreated ---


Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 80 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%, silt 32.4%, clay

64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Apr 1 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long with metal barriers Emergence on Apr 14 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 1 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 7 (main crop) and Aug 5 (ratoon crop) Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Apr 1 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on May 7 at PF 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 2 at panicle differentiation 100 lb N/A on Aug 5 for ratoon Total main crop = 170 lb N/A Total ratoon crop = 100 lb N/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on Apr 25 for early season weed control


51


Treatments: Inoculated with sheath blight (SB) inoculum (Rhizoctonia solani) on May 19 and

Jun 4. The inoculum was prepared using 5 parts rice hulls and 1 part whole rice substrate colonized with R.solani.

Treatments 1 – 12 applied by Dr. Jo on Jun 22 Treatments applied to ratoon crop by Dr. Jo on Aug 16, followed by heavy rain Treatments reapplied to ratoon crop by Dr. Jo on Aug 26 Sampling: Stand counts (1 - 3ft count on 14 plots) on Apr 27 Sheath blight ratings by Dr. Jo on Jul 22 Removed 250 g from each main crop plot yield for milling samples Harvest: Harvested all main crop plots on Aug 4 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long

Discussion

Most treatments significantly reduced disease severity compared to the non-treated control. A tank-mixture of azoxystrobin and propiconazole provided the best control. Main crop yields were not significantly different among treatments, but ratoon crop yields were significantly different. The increase in ratoon yield was mainly due to healthy stems remaining after main crop harvest but not to fungicide application on the ratoon crop. Table 1. Disease pressure, stand and yields. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(fl oz/A) Disease severity

Main crop yield (lb/A)

% healthy standa

Ratoon crop yield (lb/A)

Total crop yield (lb/A)

Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 16 + 1% v/v 3.5 ed 8070.7 94.5 ab 3255.6 a-c 11326.4 ab Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 21 + 1% v/v 6.0 a-d 8203.4 96.5 a 3450.8 a 11654.3 ab Convoy + Quadris 11.8 + 9 4.4 b-d 8150.3 95.0 ab 3144.6 bc 11294.9 a-c Stratego 19 2.4 ef 7995.7 82.5 bc 3096.2 cd 11091.9 a-d Stratego Pro 8 2.3 ef 7881.1 92.5 ab 3151.3 bc 11032.4 a-d Stratego Pro 9 1.6 f 8034.8 93.8 ab 3087.0 c-e 11121.8 a-d Stratego Pro + Tilt 8 + 4 3.3 d-f 7955.5 94.5 ab 3408.8 ab 11364.3 ab Convoy 11.8 4.8 b-d 7942.4 57.5 ef 2639.6 fg 10582.0 d Convoy 16.8 4.3 cd 8019.0 75.0 cd 2794.8 ef 10813.8 b-d Convoy 23.6 3.6 de 7561.9 87.0 a-c 3046.0 c-e 10607.9 cd Artisan 14.9 6.1 ab 8067.5 65.0 de 2807.2 d-f 10874.7 b-d Artisan 21.3 4.6 b-d 8152.5 87.5 a-c 3152.3 bc 11304.8 ab Untreated --- 6.9 a 7012.9 50.0 f 2343.4 g 9356.3 e a Percent healthy stand, 12 days after main crop harvest Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and Fisher’s LSD).


52


Table 2. Mean main crop milling data for foliar fungicide treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(fl oz/A) % milled rice from rough

% head rice from rough

% brokens from rough

Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 16 + 1% v/v 63.3 43.9 18.5 Quilt Xcel 2.2 SE + COC 21 + 1% v/v 64.1 45.7 17.8 Convoy + Quadris 11.8 + 9 63.8 44.5 18.8 Stratego 19 63.2 44.6 17.8 Stratego pro 8 62.7 44.3 17.8 Stratego pro 9 63.7 44.5 18.4 Stratego pro + Tilt 8 + 4 63.9 44.7 18.7 Convoy 11.8 62.8 42.9 19.6 Convoy 16.8 63.2 43.0 19.5 Convoy 23.6 63.1 43.1 19.3 Artisan 14.9 63.3 43.5 19.3 Artisan 21.3 63.5 45.3 17.5 Untreated --- 62.8 43.0 18.9 Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).

53


Fungicide Seed Treatments Block 5S

Beaumont, TX 2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV

1 1 6 2 11 5 16 4 2 5 7 3 12 2 17 1 3 3 8 4 13 1 18 3 4 2 9 1 14 4 19 5 5 4 10 5 15 3 20 2

Plot size: 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Variety: Cocodrie (seed provided by Syngenta)



Trt. no. Description Rate

(ml/100 kg seed) 1 Untreated --- 2 Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar 5.6 + 48 3 Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar 28 + 48 4 Maxim 4 FS + Apron XL LS 5.2 + 29 5 Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar + NipsIt INSIDE 5.6 + 48 + 124

CHEMICALS USED IN THE STUDY

Group Brand name Active ingredient Fungicide Rancona 3.8 FS Ipconazole

Fungicide Metastar Metalaxyl

Fungicide Maxim 4 FS Fludioxinil

Fungicide Apron XL LS Mefenoxam

Insecticide NipsIt INSIDE Clothianidin

Fungicide Seed Treatment Study

54


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 5 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted 1.5 – 2 inches deep @ 56 lb/A into League soil (pH 5.5, sand 3.2%,

silt 32.4%, clay 64.4%, and organic matter 3.8 - 4.8%) on Apr 1 Plot size = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long Emergence on Apr 14 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 1 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 7 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Apr 5 at planting 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on May 7 at PF 56.7 lb N/A (1/3 of 170) on Jun 2 at panicle differentiation Total = 170 lb N/A Herbicide: Stam 80EDF @ 2.0 lb, Basagran @ 0.75 lb, Facet 75DF @ 0.25 lb and Ordram

@ 2.0 lb (AI)/A and Agri-Dex @ 1.0 pt/A with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- 80015 nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 16 gpa final spray volume) on Apr 25 for early season weed control

Insecticide: Karate Z @ 0.04 lb ai/A applied to all plots on May 6 Treatments: Seed treatments applied by Chemtura Sampling: No differences in emergence were noted. Stand counts (3, 3 ft counts on rows 2, 4 and 6) on Apr 27 Trt. 5 markedly more vigorous and taller than other treatments on May 12,

possibly due to NipsIt INSIDE seed treatment. Pictures taken and 5 plants/plot removed for plant characteristics on May 12. Removed 250 g from each plot yield for milling samples; samples were air dried

at room temperature to approximately 12% moisture Harvest: Harvested all plots on Aug 4 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7 inch row spacing, 18 ft long


55


Discussion Numerical differences in plant vigor, shoot growth and number of leaves by seed treatments, particularly treatment 5 (Rancona + Metastar + NipsIt INSIDE), were detected (Table 1 and Fig. 1). Yield was significantly improved by the NipsIt INSIDE seed treatment (P = 0.0458, Table 2). Percent head rice was low throughout the treatments. Rice water weevils (RWW) were presumably controlled in all plots because of a blanket preflood application of Karate Z. So, the marked increase in yield in the NipsIt INSIDE treatment is difficult to explain. However, photos and plant characteristics were taken only 5 days after flood when RWW damage would not be evident. Thus, the more vigorous growth of rice noted in the NipsIt INSIDE plots may be due to control of unknown insects or other organisms prior to flood or due to direct stimulatory effects of the seed treatment. Table 1. Plant characteristics for fungicide seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate Shoot length

(cm) Leaf no. Tiller no. Root length

(cm) Untreated --- 21.9 7.8 1.7 12.9

Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar

5.6 + 48 ml/100 kg seed 25.2 6.5 1.5 12.9


28 + 48 ml/100 kg seed 26.1 7.7 1.7 12.8

Maxim 4 FS + Apron XL LS

5.2 + 29 ml/100 kg seed 25.2 6.6 1.7 13.1

Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar + NipsIt

INSIDE

5.6 + 48 + 124 ml/100 kg seed 27.1 9.2 2.1 13.2

Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD) Table 2. Mean data for fungicide seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Yield (lb/A)

% milled from rough

% head rice from

rough

% brokens from rough

Untreated --- 9.1 8192 b 61.5 42.8 bc 18.2 Rancona 3.8 FS

+ Metastar 5.6 +

48 ml/100 kg seed 9.4 8396 ab 62.4 46.4 a 15.5


28 + 48 ml/100 kg seed 9.1 8517 ab 61.1 43.3 abc 17.4

Maxim 4 FS + Apron XL LS

5.2 + 29 ml/100 kg seed 8.9 8278 b 63.7 44.3 ab 19.1

Rancona 3.8 FS + Metastar +

NipsIt INSIDE

5.6 + 48 + 124 ml/100 kg seed 8742 a 10.0 40.8 c 60.7

19.5

NS NS NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


56


Fig. 1. NipsIt Inside seed treatment (left) vs. untreated seed (right) at 6 days after flood (DAF).

Treatment 5 Treatment 1

Treatment 5 Treatment 1

57


Rice Stink Bug Resistance to Pyrethroids 2010

In cooperation with Dr. Kelly Tindall at the University of Missouri, pyrethroid resistance

in the rice stink bug (RSB)---Oebalus pugnax---was documented in Texas in 2010. RSB adults were collected by sweep net in the late summer of 2010 from rice fields and surrounding field margins in Beaumont (Jefferson County: N 30 degrees 3.944 minutes; W 94 degrees 17.687 minutes), Kendleton (Fort Bend County: N 29 degrees 25.062 minutes; W 95 degrees 56.269 minutes), Round Mott (Wharton County: N 29 degrees 14.334 minutes; W 96 degrees 28.934 minutes), and Ganado (Jackson County: N 29 degrees 1.597 minutes; W 96 degrees 26.406 minutes). Adult RSBs were placed in glass scintillation vials (1 adult per vial) coated on the inside with various concentrations of lambda-cyhalothrin (the active ingredient in Karate Z). The active ingredient was dissolved in acetone before treatment of the inside of the vials. For the Beaumont location, 25 adult RSBs per concentration were collected; for all other Texas locations, 10 adult RSBs were collected per concentration. Mortality was recorded after 4 hours exposure. Similar experiments were conducted in Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi and Missouri. Basically, data show RSB populations in Round Mott and Ganado, Texas were much harder to kill with lambda-cyhalothrin than RSBs from the other states (Fig. 1). Specifically, the LC50 values (the higher the value, the harder to kill) for Round Mott populations were 10.5, 3.3, 11.2 and 4.1 times higher than those for Louisiana, Missouri, Mississippi and Arkansas, respectively. For Ganado populations, the LC50 values were 9.1, 2.9, 9.7 and 3.5 times higher than those for the above states, respectively. Data suggest a north-south gradient in Texas relative to susceptibility of RSB to lambda-cyhalothrin. From Beaumont (farthest north) to Ganado (farthest south), LC50 values increased (Fig. 1).

Figure 1. LC50 of RSB Exposed to λ-cyhalothrin in the Adult Vial Test

00.20.40.60.8

11.21.41.61.8

2

58


Foliar Treatments for Residual Rice Stink Bug Control Beaumont, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN ⇐ North

I II III IV 1 1 5 2 9 4 13 2 2 2 6 1 10 2 14 1 3 3 7 4 11 3 15 4 4 4 8 3 12 1 16 3

Plot size: 4 ft x 20 ft Variety: Hybrid ratoon rice




(pt/A) 1 Untreated --- 2 Endigo ZC 0.282 3 Endigo ZC 0.344 4 Tenchu 20SG 9 oz/A

Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 4 treatments and 4 replications Treatments: Treatments applied with a hand-held, CO2 pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips

with 50 mesh screens, 20 gpa) spray rig on Oct 19 Sampling: 4 panicles/plot were removed on Oct 22. The cut ends of panicles were placed

immediately in water after removal from the field. So, panicles were fresh when placed in the sand and remained relatively fresh throughout the experiment. A plastic, transparent, ventilated tube (cage) 18 inches long by 3 inches in diameter was inserted into moist sand in a plastic drinking cup. The panicles were inserted into the cups. Each cup represented a plot. RSB adults were collected with a sweep net from weeds growing on the margins of rice fields at the Beaumont Center. RSBs were placed in plastic tubes---10 per tube---which were placed in an ice chest for transport. Each cage was infested with 10 RSB adults and covered with mesh cloth secured with a rubber band.

Mortality (%) was recorded Oct 24, 48h after infestation.

Rice Stink Bug Residual Insecticide Activity Study

59


4 panicles/plot were removed on Oct 26 and cages set up as before. Cages were infested with 10 RSB adults on Oct 26.

Mortality was recorded on Oct 29, 72h after infestation. Data Analysis: % mortality transformed using arc sine; data analyzed by ANOVA and means

separated by LSD.

Discussion

The control treatment (untreated) produced little RSB mortality, so experimental methodology was appropriate (Table 1). At 3 DAT, Endigo ZC and Tenchu 20SG treatments produced about the same mortality (31.5-44.3%). However, at 7 DAT, the Tenchu 20SG treatment did not provide control of RSB whereas the Endigo ZC treatments provided up to 42.5% control. In 2010, Texas rice farmers could use Tenchu 20SG under a Section 18 Emergency Exemption. These data will help gain a potential rice label for Endigo ZC. Table 1. Data from Syngenta rice stink bug (RSB) residual activity study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(pt/A) % mortalitya

3 DAT 7 DAT Untreated --- 0.0 b 5.0 c Endigo ZC 0.282 31.5 a 42.5 a Endigo ZC 0.344 44.3 a 27.5 ab Tenchu 20SG 9 oz/A 42.5 a 5.0 bc a % mortality based on 10 RSB/cage after 48h exposure for 3 days after treatment (DAT) and 72h exposure for 7 DAT Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).

60


Dermacor X-100 Ratoon Study Ganado, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV

Coc

odrie

1 6 10 4 19 7 28 3 2 1 11 8 20 6 29 9 3 4 12 3 21 5 30 2 4 8 13 1 22 3 31 7 5 5 14 2 23 8 32 4 6 7 15 6 24 9 33 1 7 3 16 5 25 4 34 6 8 9 17 7 26 2 35 8 9 2 18 9 27 1 36 5

XL7

23

1 6 10 4 19 7 28 3 2 1 11 8 20 6 29 9 3 4 12 3 21 5 30 2 4 8 13 1 22 3 31 7 5 5 14 2 23 8 32 4 6 7 15 6 24 9 33 1 7 3 16 5 25 4 34 6 8 9 17 7 26 2 35 8 9 2 18 9 27 1 36 5

Plot size: 9 rows, 7.5 in. row spacing, 16 ft long Seed source: Cocodrie (LSU Foundation Seed Rice) seeded at 80 lb/A

XL723 (RiceTec) seeded at 35 lb/A

RO

AD

Dermacor X-100 Seed Treatment on Main and Ratoon Crop Rice

61


TREATMENT DESCRIPTION, RATE AND TIMING

Trt no. Description Rate

(lb ai/A) Timinga

RWW Main Ratoon

1 Dermacor X-100 0.025/0.05 mg ai/seedb --- ST ---

2 Karate Z 0.03 BF 1-2” P + LB/EH LB/H 3 Karate Z 0.03 BF 1-2” P + LB/EH --- 4 Karate Z 0.03 BF --- LB/H 5 Karate Z 0.03 --- 1-2” P + LB/EH LB/H 6 Karate Z 0.03 --- 1-2” P + LB/EH --- 7 Karate Z 0.03 --- --- LB/H 8 Untreated --- BF --- --- 9 Untreated --- --- --- ---

a RWW = treated for rice water weevil before permanent flood (BF); ST = seed treatment; P = panicle; LB/EH = late boot/early heading; LB/H = late boot/heading b 0.025 mg ai/seed application rate for Cocodrie and 0.05 mg ai/seed for XL723


Experimental design: Each test/variety is a randomized complete block with 9 treatments and 4

replications Planting: Drill-planted 2 tests (Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A and XL723 @ 35 lb/A) into Edna soil

on Apr 6 Plot size = 9 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long; no barriers Emergence on Apr 17 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 15

Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 28 (main) and Aug 16 (ratoon)

Fertilization: Cocodrie: 47.5-47.5-47.5 (lbs N-P-K/A) on Apr 6 at preplant 80 lb N/A (urea) on May 27 before permanent flood (BF) 60 lb N/A (ammonium sulfate) on Jun 14 at panicle initiation/differentiation Total N/A for main crop = 187.5 100 lb N/A (urea) on Aug 16 (ratoon) Total N/A for ratoon crop = 100 lb

XL723: 50 lb K and P/A on Apr 6 at preplant 90 lb N/A (urea) on May 27 BF 30 lb N/A (ammonium sulfate) on Jun 21 at boot/heading


62


Total N/A for main crop = 170 lb 100 lb N/A (urea) on Aug 16 (ratoon) Total N/A for ratoon crop = 100 lb

Herbicide: Propanil @ 2 lb ai/A, Command 3ME @ 0.35 lb ai/A and Permit @ 0.06 lb ai/A applied on Apr 27 Propanil @ 3 lb ai/A Facet @ 0.5 lb ai/A and Permit @ 0.06 lb ai/A on May 27

Treatments: Treatments 2, 3, 4 and 8 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied on May 27 BF. Treatments 2, 3, 5 and 6 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied to main crop on Jun

23 @ 1 - 2“ panicle (P) and Jul 6 @ late boot/early heading (LB/EH) Treatments 2, 4, 5 and 7 (Karate Z @ 0.03 lb ai/A) applied to ratoon crop on Sep

3 @ LB/H (late boot/heading). Sampling: Rice water weevil (RWW) cores (3 cores per plot, each core 4 inches diameter, 4

inches deep, containing at least one rice plant) were collected from trts.1, 2 and 9 in both tests on Jun 18 (Cocodrie @ ¼” P; XL723 @ 1” P). Core samples were stored in a cold room, later washed through 40 mesh screen buckets and immature RWW counted.

Panicle counts (2, 1 ft counts) in each plot on Jul 30 (main crop) Whitehead (WH) counts on rows 2, 3, 7 & 8 on Jul 30 (main crop) and Oct 8

(ratoon crop) Collected 20 WHs from border rows and dissected for stem borers on Jul 30 [2

Mexican rice borer (MRB); 0 sugarcane borer (SCB)] and Oct 8 (8 MRB; 9 SCB)

Harvest: Harvested main crop on Aug 11 Size harvested plot = 7 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Harvested ratoon crop on Oct 28 Size harvested plot = 4 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Data analysis: WH counts transformed using

x + 0.5 ; yields converted to 12% moisture and all data analyzed by ANOVA; means separated by LSD

Discussion

The seed treatment Dermacor X-100 controls both RWW and stalk borers. The objective

of this experiment was to determine main and ratoon crop yield responses of the rice varieties Cocodrie and XL723 to Dermacor X-100 in terms of RWW and stalk borer control. Thus, certain plots were sprayed BF with Karate Z to control RWW only. Other plots were sprayed later to control stalk borers on the main and/or ratoon crop. In addition, certain plots were planted with Dermacor X-100- treated seed which has activity against RWW and stalk borers. Finally, selected plots were left untreated for RWW and/or stalk borers. Thus, each experiment (planted with Cocodrie or XL723) consisted of treatments of Karate Z applied at various times to selectively control either or both RWW and stalk borers (see Table 1 for treatment descriptions).


63


The effects of these treatments were compared to the effects of Dermacor X-100 and corresponding control treatments.

Metal barriers were not erected around plots because of the time and labor required. However, in hindsight, the authors believe this would have been an appropriate action. Barriers minimize movement of pesticides and fertilizer among plots. So, in future similar experiments, barriers will be erected around at least those plots planted with treated seed or destined to be sprayed with Karate Z BF.

RWW populations were very low in both experiments (not all treatments were sampled---only those involving Dermacor X-100, Karate Z applied BF and the corresponding untreated controls). Thus, RWW populations did not impact yield responses which means all yield responses are due to stalk borer control. The PF was applied too late in both experiments---41 days after flood. The flood should have been applied about 3 weeks after rice emergence. This late flood was probably responsible for the low populations of RWW. Any future experiments will be requested to have the flood applied about 3 weeks after rice emergence. Cocodrie experiment

WH numbers (a measure of stalk borer damage/activity) in the main crop were lowest in the Dermacor X-100 and Karate Z treatments targeting stalk borers. In the ratoon crop, Dermacor X-100 reduced WH numbers 59%. Karate Z applied for RWW and stalk borer control on both main and ratoon crops produced the highest main crop yield---423 lb/A more than the corresponding untreated. Ratoon crop yields were high across treatments, but no significant differences among treatments were detected. The Highest total yield was produced by the treatment targeting both RWW and stalk borers on main and ratoon crops with Karate Z---911 lb/A more than the corresponding untreated. Total yield for the Dermacor X-100 treatment was about the same as the untreated. XL723 experiment

WH numbers were low across all treatments, including the untreated, in the main crop. In the ratoon crop, Dermacor X-100 reduced WH numbers 57% which was as low as any other treatment. Low WH numbers are characteristic of hybrids. Ratoon crop yields were extremely high across treatments, including the untreated. The Dermacor X-100 treatment produced 350 and 551 lb/A more main and ratoon crop rice, respectively, than the untreated. This result was somewhat unexpected given low populations of RWW and WH numbers. The experiments should be repeated next year. Barriers should be placed around selected plots and the flood should be applied about 3 weeks after rice emergence.


64


Table 1. Mean data for stem borer control in main and ratoon crop rice. Ganado, TX. 2010.

Treatment RWW

trt. Stem borer trt.a RWWb

/3 cores WHsb/4 rows Yield (lb/A)

Main Ratoon Main Ratoon Main Ratoon Total Cocodrie: Dermacor X-100 ST ST --- 1.5 3 b 11 d 6596 c 4178 10774 b Karate Z T T T 1.8 1 b 22 abc 7061 a 4627 11688 a Karate Z T T U --- 1 b 22 abc 7001 ab 4546 11547 a Karate Z T U T --- 9 a 17 bcd 6573 c 4630 11203 ab Karate Z U T T --- 2 b 15 cd 6987 ab 4562 11548 a Karate Z U T U --- 1 b 23 abc 6740 bc 4356 11096 ab Karate Z U U T --- 5 ab 19 abc 6469 c 4263 10731 b Untreated T U U --- 5 ab 24 ab 6506 c 4057 10562 b Untreated U U U 10 a 5.0 27 a 6638 c 10776 b 4138 XL723: NS NS Dermacor X-100 U ST --- 2.0 1 bcd 3 d 8924 ab 6021 a 14945 ab Karate Z T T T 0.5 0 d 4 a-d 9198 a 6300 a 15498 a Karate Z T T U --- 0 cd 7 abc 9199 a 5770 ab 14969 ab Karate Z T U T --- 3 a 3 bcd 8276 c 6164 a 14440 bc Karate Z U T T --- 0 d 3 cd 9396 a 6143 a 15538 a Karate Z U T U --- 1 bcd 8 a 9206 a 5895 ab 15100 ab Karate Z U U T --- 4 a 3 d 8253 c 6104 a 14357 bc Untreated T U U --- 2 ab 5 a-d 8413 bc 5467 b 13880 c Untreated U U U 2 abc 2.0 7 ab 8574 bc 5470 b 14044 c NS a ST = seed treatment; T = treated with Karate Z @ 1 – 2” panicle and late boot/early heading; U = untreated b RWW = rice water weevil; WHs = whiteheads Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.06 for ratoon WHs for XL723, P = 0.05 for all others, ANOVA and LSD)

65


Economic Injury Levels for Stem Borers Eagle Lake, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN

I II III IV 1 7 8 6 15 5 22 2 2 3 9 1 16 4 23 6 3 1 10 5 17 2 24 3 4 2 11 4 18 7 25 5 5 6 12 7 19 3 26 1 6 4 13 2 20 6 27 7 7 5 14 3 21 1 28 4

Plot size: 6 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Variety: Cocodrie seeded at 80 lb/A (seed source is LSU Foundation Seed Rice)


TREATMENT DESCRIPTION, RATE, AND TIMING

Treatment No. Description Rate

(lb ai/A) Timing 1 Untreated --- ---

2 Karate Z 0.015 1-2" Pa

3 Karate Z 0.030 1-2" P

4 Karate Z 0.015 LBb

5 Karate Z 0.030 LB

6 Karate Z 0.015 + 0.015 1-2" P + LB

7 Karate Z 0.030 + 0.030 1-2" P + LB a P = panicle b LB = late boot

RO

AD

Stem Borer Economic Injury Level

66


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 7 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted Cocodrie @ 80 lb/A into Nada soil on Apr 13 Plot size = 6 rows, 7.5 in. row spacing, 16 ft long; no barriers Emergence on Apr 25 Irrigation: Flushed blocks (temporary flood for 48 hours, then drain) on Apr 14 Note: Plots were flushed as needed from emergence to permanent flood Permanent flood (PF) on May 27 Fertilization: All fertilizer (urea) was distributed by hand. 47.5-47.5-47.5 (lbs N-P-K/A) on Apr 12 at preplant

80 lb N/A (urea) on May 26 before permanent flood (BF) 60 lb N/A (ammonium sulfate) on Jun 18 at panicle initiation/differentiation Total = 187.5 lb N/A Herbicide: Propanil @ 2 lb ai/A and Command 3ME @ 0.3 lb ai/A on Apr 28 Propanil @ 3 lb ai/A, Facet @ 0.35 lb ai/A and Permit @ 0.06 lb ai/A on May

26 Treatments: Entire test was treated with Mustang Max at 0.025 lb ai/A on May 26 for rice

stink bug control. Treatments applied on Jun 23 (trts. 2, 3, 6 & 7) and Jul 6 (trts. 4, 5, 6 & 7) using

a hand-held, CO2 pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips with 50 mesh screens) spray rig. Spray swath and length were 4 ft and 18 ft, respectively. Final spray volume was 29 gpa.

Sampling: Whitehead (WH) counts in 4 middle rows; 20 WHs dissected (7 MRB, 0 SCB);

panicle counts (3, 1 ft counts) on Jul 30 Harvest: Harvested on Aug 17 Size harvested plot = 4 rows, 7.5 inch row spacing, 16 ft long Data analysis: WH counts transformed using


Stem Borer Economic Injury Level

67


Discussion

The experiment was conducted at Eagle lake, but stem borer populations were nil, so no meaningful data were collected. Table 1. Mean data for economic injury level for stem borers. Eagle Lake, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(lb ai/A) Timinga WHsb/4 middle

rows Yield (lb/A)

Untreated --- --- 5 6436 Karate Z 0.015 1 – 2” P 2 6951 Karate Z 0.030 1 – 2” P 1 6806 Karate Z 0.015 LB 4 6645 Karate Z 0.030 LB 1 6609 Karate Z 0.015 + 0.015 1 – 2” P + LB 4 6590 Karate Z 0.030 + 0.030 1 – 2” P + LB 3 6654 a P = panicle; LB = late boot b WHs = whiteheads Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

68


Trapping for Mexican Rice Borer Texas Rice Belt

2010 PIs: Mo Way (Texas AgriLife), Gene Reagan (LSU AgCenter) and J. Beuzelin (LSU AgCenter) Co-PIs and trap operators: Becky Pearson (Chambers and Jefferson Cos.), Jack Vawter

(Colorado Co.), Ron Holcomb (Liberty Co.), Mike Hiller (Jackson Co.), Kelby Boldt (Jefferson Co. – sugarcane), and Noelle Jordan (Orange Co.)

Mexican rice borer (MRB) pheromone traps were set up in selected counties of the Texas Rice Belt (TRB). MRB was detected for the first time in Louisiana in November 2008. MRB was collected for the first time in Orange Co. in September 2010 (Table 1). Data are being used to follow the progress of MRB population densities over time in the TRB. Eventually, the data may be used to predict MRB outbreaks. Table 1. Monthly totals of Mexican rice borer adults from pheromone traps (2 traps/county) located next to rice, sugarcane or fallow fields on the Texas Upper Gulf Coast in 2010.

Month

Chambers Co.

Colorado Co. Jackson Co. Jefferson Co. Liberty Co.

Orange Co.

rice rice rice rice sugarcanea rice fallow

January 0 0 0 0 NA NA NA February 0 2 5 0 NA 2 NA March 15 60 27 18 NA 21 NA April 703 2259 41 160 NA 46 0 May 216 154 71 31 NA 78 0 June 379 181 336 109 87 343 0 July 116 112 81 88 96 74 0 August 347 144 93 118 150 70 0 September 248 267 308 49a 82 272 2 October 997 380 700 26a NA 707 3 November 303 104 449 19a NA 441 1 December 206 59 919 10a NA 784 NA

a Monthly total for one trap

69


Treatments for Grasshopper Control Beaumont, TX

2010



(pt/A) 1 Tenchu 20SG 8 oz/A 2 Endigo ZC 0.344 3 Untreated ---

Agronomic and Cultural Information Treatments: Long-horned grasshopper (LHG) adults (Conocephalus fasciatus) were collected

with a sweep net from weeds growing on the margins of rice fields at the Beaumont Center on Nov 5 and placed in cylindrical ¼ inch mesh hardware cloth cages (5 adults per cage) with screening material on the ends. Treatments (untreated LHGs were sprayed with water) were applied to the mesh cages containing LHGs with a hand-held, CO2 pressurized, 3 nozzle (800067 tips with 50 mesh screens, 20 gpa) spray rig on Nov 5. Cages with insects were allowed to dry.

Sampling: Rice panicles with leaves were removed from an untreated ratoon field. The cut

ends of panicles were placed immediately in water after removal from the field. Plastic drinking cups (4 for each treatment, 12 cups total) were filled with sand and placed in a flooded bin. Four panicles from above were inserted into the moist sand in each cup, so the panicles remained relatively fresh throughout the experiment. A plastic, transparent, ventilated tube 18 inches long by 3 inches in diameter was placed over the panicles and inserted into each cup. Each tube was infested with 5 LHG adults (collected as above) and covered with mesh cloth secured with a rubber band.

Mortality (%) was recorded Nov 6, 24h after treatment. All LHGs in trt. 3 were active and at the tops of cages; all surviving LHGs in trt. 2 were lethargic and on the sand or lower parts of the caged panicles/leaves.

Data Analysis: Each cage served as a replication for a particular treatment; % mortality was

transformed using arc sine; data were analyzed by ANOVA and means separated by LSD.

Discussion

This experiment evaluated the contact activity of the treatment insecticides (test insects were sprayed directly). No mortality was observed in the untreated, so handling of the insects was

Grasshopper Contact Study

70


appropriate (Table 1). All untreated insects were active and found at the top of the tubes. Tenchu 20SG provided excellent control---almost 100% mortality. The lone survivor was lethargic and on the sand surface, not on the panicles. The Endigo ZC treatment provided 35% mortality, but all survivors were lethargic and on the sand surface or on the panicles---none were at the top of the tubes which was characteristic of the untreated LHGs. In short, all surviving insects (in both treatments) were probably “functionally” dead. Table 1. Data from long-horned grasshopper (Conocephalus fasciatus) contact insecticidal activity study. Beaumont, TX. 2010. Treatment Rate % mortalitya

Tenchu 20SG 8 oz/A 95 a Endigo ZC 0.344 pt/A 35 b Untreated --- 0 c a % mortality based on 5 LHG/tube 24h after treatment Means in a column are significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD).

71


DuPont Soybean Seed Treatment Beaumont, TX

2010

Mo Way, Mark Nunez, Becky Pearson and Jacob Morrison Texas AgriLife Research

Beaumont Center

↑ North PLOT PLAN

I

40 11 27 6 14 7 1 4 41 1 28 9 15 10 2 5 42 13 29 8 16 3 3 2 43 12 30 11 17 8 4 9

II

44 2 31 12 18 1 5 10 45 7 32 5 19 4 6 13 46 3 33 6 20 11 7 2

III

47 4 34 9 21 10 8 12 48 5 35 7 22 3 9 1 49 13 36 8 23 6 10 3

IV 50 2 37 4 24 13 11 5 51 6 38 9 25 1 12 8 52 12 39 11 26 10 13 7

Plot size = 4 rows, 28 ft long, 30 inch row spacing Variety: Soybean Hybrid 95M60 (seed provided by DuPont)


DuPont Soybean Seed Treatment Study

72


TREATMENTS AND RATES


(mg ai/seed) 1 DPX-HGW86 75 2 DPX-HGW86 100 3 DPX-HGW86 125 4 DPX-HGW86 150 5 DPX-HGW86 200 6 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 75 + 95 7 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 125 + 95 8 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 75 + 75 9 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 125 + 75 10 DPX-YX860 75 11 DPX-YG771 95 12 DPX-VA780 75 13 Untreated ---

Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 13 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Drill-planted @ 50 lb/A into Morey silt loam on Jun 15 Plot size = 4 rows, 30 inch row spacing, 30 ft long Emergence on Jun 22 Cultivation: May 21 and Jun 14 Fertilization: None Herbicide: Dual II Magnum @ 2.5 pt/A and First Rate @ 0.75 oz/A with a 3-nozzle boom

(110-04) @ 28 gpa Treatments: All seed treatments provided by DuPont All plots sprayed with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb prod/A for stink bug and

lepidopterous larvae control on Sep 10 Sampling: Stand counts (2, 3 ft. of row) on Jul 13 Soybeans @ V12 on Jul 26 Inspected 5 plants/plot for thrips and thrips damage on Jun 28 Soybeans @ R2 on Aug 2


73


Removed 5 plants/plot and recorded plant height and number of threecornered alfalfa hopper girdles on the main stem and petioles on Aug 9 and 10

High populations of stink bugs and defoliators on Sep 10 Harvest: Harvested plots on Oct 15; some plots were not harvested because those plots

were in area of field with poor soil (plants were stunted and stands were thin) Size harvested plot = 2 middle rows, 30 inch row spacing, 28 ft long

Discussion

Plant stands were unaffected by the seed treatments (Table 1). Thrips populations and damage were relatively low in this experiment, so results should be treated with caution. Also, at time of writing this report, thrips collected in this experiment have not been identified, but Dr. Noel Troxclair has the thrips and will identify them. DPX-HGW86 did not control thrips, but DPX-YX860, DPX-YG771and DPX-VA780 significantly reduced the % of plants with thrips. Plant height in August was not different among the treatments. Threecornered alfalfa hopper populations and damage were low in the experiment (Table 2). Seed quality was not significantly different among treatments. Yields across treatments were relatively high for SE Texas (area east of Houston). None of the seed treatments significantly outyielded the untreated. This variety, hybrid 95M60, performed very well in this experiment. The authors are interested in evaluating this variety and seed treatments again in the future.


74


Table 1. Mean thrips data and plant characteristics 6 days after emergence for DuPont soybean seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(mg ai/seed)


% plants with thripsa

No. thrips/ 5 plants

Plant ht (cm)

DPX-HGW86 75 6.6 40 a 6.8 ab 34 DPX-HGW86 100 7.0 20 a 8.5 ab 33 DPX-HGW86 125 6.4 40 a 10.5 a 34 DPX-HGW86 150 6.7 35 a 9.8 a 36 DPX-HGW86 200 6.6 25 a 10.5 a 36

DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 75 + 95 6.6 0 b 7.0 ab 36 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 125 + 95 6.8 0 b 6.8 ab 36 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 75 + 75 6.2 0 b 8.5 ab 33 DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 125 + 75 5.8 40 a 9.8 a 32

DPX-YX860 75 5.7 0 b 6.8 ab 32 DPX-YG771 95 6.5 0 b 3.5 b 33 DPX-VA780 75 6.2 0 b 3.0 b 34

Untreated --- 30 a 6.8 9.3 a

35 NS NS

a Average of 5 plants Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


75


Table 2. Mean threecornered alfalfa hopper damage (girdles), seed quality and yield for DuPont soybean seed treatments. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(mg ai/seed) Mainstem girdlesa

Petiole girdlesa

Seed qualityb

Yieldc

(bu/A) DPX-HGW86 75 0.2 2.4 2.9 36.8 a DPX-HGW86 100 0.2 1.8 3.0 29.6 cd DPX-HGW86 125 0.2 1.8 2.6 35.9 abc DPX-HGW86 150 0.1 3.7 2.8 35.1 a-d DPX-HGW86 200 0.1 3.2 3.0 34.2 a-d

DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 75 + 95 0.1 1.8 2.6 37.5 a DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YG771 125 + 95 0.1 4.9 2.8 35.3 a-d DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 75 + 75 0.1 2.1 2.6 34.2 a-d DPX-HGW86 + DPX-YX860 125 + 75 0.2 3.1 2.8 32.8 a-d

DPX-YX860 75 0.2 2.4 2.9 30.5 bcd DPX-YG771 95 0 2.5 2.8 30.7 a-d DPX-VA780 75 0.2 2.0 2.9 28.6 d

Untreated --- 0.2 3.6 36.5 ab 2.8 NS NS NS

a Average of 5 plants; inspected 6 days after emergence b Seed quality: 1 = excellent, 5 = poor c Yield adjusted to 13% moisture Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

76


Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG V Soybean Insect Nursery Beaumont, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN ⇓ North

III 6 2 12 3 18 9 24 8 30 blank

5 1 11 7 17 5 23 6 29 4

II 4 9 10 1 16 3 22 4 28 blank

3 6 9 5 15 8 21 2 27 7

I

2 4 8 2 14 6 20 1 26 blank 1 9 7 7 13 3 19 8 25 5

Plot size = 4 rows, 30 inch row spacing, trimmed to 30 ft long, with 4 buffer rows between plots 2 buffer rows located on east and west ends of test

Variety = HBK C5941



(fl oz/A) 1 Untreated --- 2 Belt 480SC 2 3 Belt 480SC 3 4 Leverage 360 + NISa 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 5 Leverage 360 + COCb 2.8 + 1% v/v 6 Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 7 Baythroid XL 2.3 8 Karate Z 1.7 9 Endigo ZC 4

a NIS = non-ionic surfactant b COC = crop oil concentrate

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG V Soybean

77


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 9 treatments and 3 replications

(originally 4 replications but plants in rep IV lodged preventing sampling and harvesting)

Planting: Beds were pulled on Morey silt loam soil (30 inch row width) on Apr 23 On May 21 beds were cultivated and planted with HBK C5941 (MG V) on

May 22; seed coated with bacterial inoculant to promote nitrogen fixation Soybeans emerged on May 27. Plot size: 8 rows, 30 inch row width, trimmed to 28 ft after emergence Herbicide: 0.75 oz/A First Rate and 2.5 pt/A Dual Magnum were applied pre-emergence

on May 25 with a tractor-mounted spray tank and boom at 25 gpa. Irrigation: None Fertilizer: None Treatments: Treatments 2 – 9 were applied with a 2-nozzle hand-held spray boom (no. 2

cone nozzles on 30 inch centers, 20 gpa) on Sep 5. Sampling: Soybeans @ V3 –V4 and no insects observed on Jun 15 Soybeans @ R2 and some stink bugs, velvetbean caterpillar and

threecornered alfalfa hopper on Jul 26 Soybeans @ R2 with very few insects on Aug 2 15 sweeps per plot in 3rd row @ 2 days after treatment (DAT) on Sep 7 15 sweeps per plot in 5th row @ 5 DAT on Sep 10 15 sweeps per plot in 6th row @ 11 DAT on Sep 16 (soybeans @ R6) Insects collected from each plot (15 sweeps) placed in a plastic bag which

was stored in a freezer for later identification and enumeration of contents. Harvest: Harvested plots on Oct 15 Size harvested plot = 2 middle rows, 30 inch row spacing, 30 ft long Data analysis: Insect counts transformed using


Discussion

Populations of Lepidoptera defoliators, particularly velvetbean caterpillar (VBC); stink bugs, particularly green stink bug (GSB); and threecornered alfalfa hopper (TCAH) were relatively high throughout the experiment, so results are potentially very useful. At 2 days after


78


treatment (DAT), GSB was the most abundant stink bug in the experiment (Table 1). The Leverage and Endigo treatments provided best control, but all treatments significantly reduced populations compared to the untreated. Populations of VBC were very high, but were controlled by all treatments (Table 2). TCAHs were not controlled by the Belt treatments (Table 3). At 5 DAT, GSB populations were not controlled by the Belt treatments---all other treatments reduced GSB populations (Table 4). Again, VBC were in high numbers, but all treatments provided good control (Table 5). TCAH populations increased in the experiment at 5 DAT, but all treatments, except the Belt treatments, significantly reduced numbers (Table 6). At 11 DAT, GSB and brown stink bugs (BSBs) populations were sufficiently high to detect treatment differences (Table 7). Basically, the Belt treatments did not control GSB or BSBs. All other treatments significantly reduced these high populations. VBC populations were lower at 11 versus 5 DAT; no significant differences in numbers were detected among the treatments (Table 8). Populations of TCAH were very high in the untreated and Belt treatments, but all other treatments significantly reduced their numbers (Table 9). In general, the addition of NIS to Belt appeared to improve efficacy, compared to the addition of COC. However, this is not a conclusive statement.

Yields were low in the untreated, in large part due to the abundance of pest insects in this experiment. Highest yields were produced by the Leverage, Baythroid + Orthene, Karate and Endigo treatments (Table 10). The highest yield was produced by the Leverage + NIS treatment which was 7.7 bu/A more than the untreated. Seed quality was not good among the treatments. Although significant differences were detected among the treatments, these differences were minor.

Data show the importance of controlling all species of pest insects attacking soybeans. In this experiment, treatments probably should have been applied earlier, but we wanted to make sure pest populations were sufficiently high to generate valuable data. Given the relatively high and prolonged populations of pest insects in this experiment, in a commercial setting, more than 1 application of an effective insecticide probably would have been justified.


79


Table 1. Mean stink bug data 2 days after treatment for MGV soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/A) Green Redbanded Brown

Total Ab Nb Tb A N T A N T Untreated --- 2.0 a 4.3 a 6.3 a 0 0.1 0.7 0 1.0 1.0 8.0 a

Belt 480SC 2 0.7 b 2.0 b 2.7 b 0.7 0.3 1.0 1.0 1.3 2.3 7.0 ab Belt 480SC 3 0.3 b 1.7 b 2.0 b 0.7 1.3 2.0 0 0.7 0.7 5.0 abc

Leverage 360 + NIS

2.8 + 0.25% v/v 0 b 0 c 0 c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 d

Leverage 360 + COC

2.8 + 1% v/v 0 b 0 c 0 c 0 0 0 1.0 0 1.0 1.3 cd

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S

2 + 0.33 lb/A 0.3 b 0.3 bc 0.7 bc 0 0 0 0.7 0 0.7 1.3 cd

Baythroid XL 2.3 0 b 0.7 bc 0.7 bc 0 0.3 0.3 1.0 0 1.0 2.3 bcd Karate Z 1.7 0.3 b 1.7 bc 2.0 bc 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.3 2.7 bcd

Endigo ZC 4 0.3 b 0 c 0.3 bc 0 0 0 0 1.3 2.0 bcd 1.3 NS NS NS NS NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate b A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

Table 2. Mean lepidopterous larvae data 2 days after treatment for MGV soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/A) Soybean looper

Green cloverworm

Velvetbean caterpillar Total

Untreated --- 2.0 1.3 26.7 a 30.0 a Belt 480SC 2 1.0 0.3 2.3 b 3.7 b Belt 480SC 3 0.7 0.7 2.3 b 3.7 b

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 0.7 0 2.7 b 3.3 b Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 1.7 0 1.7 b 3.3 b

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 2.3 0 1.7 b 4.0 b Baythroid XL 2.3 0.7 0 1.0 b 1.7 b

Karate Z 1.7 0.7 0 2.0 b 2.7 b Endigo ZC 4 0 2.0 1.7 b 3.7 b

NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


80


Table 3. Mean misc. insect data 2 days after treatment for MGV soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/A) Threecornered alfalfa hopper

Adults Nymphs Total Untreated --- 5.3 bc 3.3 a 8.7 b

Belt 480SC 2 7.7 ab 2.7 a 10.3 ab Belt 480SC 3 14.3 a 4.0 a 18.3 a

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 2.0 cd 0.3 b 2.3 c Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 1.7 cd 0.7 b 2.3 c

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 0.7 d 1.7 ab 2.3 c Baythroid XL 2.3 0.7 d 2.3 ab 3.0 c

Karate Z 1.7 1.7 cd 0.7 b 2.3 c Endigo ZC 4 0.3 d 0.7 b 1.0 c

a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


Treatmenta Rate


Total Ab Nb Tb A N T A N T Untreated --- 1.3 a 7.0 ab 8.3 ab 0 1.0 1.0 0.3 1.0 1.3 10.7 ab

Belt 480SC 2 0.7 ab 5.7 abc 6.3 abc 0.3 0.7 1.0 3.0 1.3 4.3 11.7 ab Belt 480SC 3 0.3 b 10.3 a 10.7 a 0.7 1.3 2.0 1.3 2.0 3.3 16.7 a

Leverage 360 + NIS

2.8 + 0.25% v/v 0 b 0.3 d 0.3 de 0.3 0 0.3 0 0 0 0.7 c

Leverage 360 + COC

2.8 + 1% v/v 0.7 ab 3.7 bcd 4.3 bcd 0 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.3 6.3 bc


2 + 0.33 lb/A 0 b 0 d 0 e 0 0 0 0.7 0.3 1.0 1.0 c

Baythroid XL 2.3 0.3 b 1.3 cd 1.7 cde 1.3 0.7 2.0 1.0 0 1.0 4.7 bc Karate Z 1.7 0 b 0.7 d 0.7 de 0 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.3 1.0 2.0 c

Endigo ZC 4 0 b 0.3 d 0.3 de 0 0 0 0 0.7 1.0 c 0.7 NS NS NS NS NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate b A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


81



Treatmenta Rate


Green cloverworm


Untreated --- 3.7 1.7 35.7 a 41.0 a Belt 480SC 2 0.3 0 0 b 0.3 c Belt 480SC 3 0 0 0 b 0 c

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 1.3 0 0.3 b 1.7 bc Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 3.0 0.7 4.0 b 7.7 b

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 1.0 0 0 b 1.0 bc Baythroid XL 2.3 1.7 0 0.3 b 2.0 bc

Karate Z 1.7 1.0 0 0 b 1.0 bc Endigo ZC 4 0 2.7 1.0 b 3.7 bc

NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


Treatmenta Rate


Adults Nymphs Total Untreated --- 17.3 a 8.0 a 25.3 a

Belt 480SC 2 25.0 a 6.0 a 31.0 a Belt 480SC 3 18.3 a 5.3 a 23.7 a

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 4.3 b 0 b 4.3 b Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 6.7 b 1.0 b 7.7 b

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 2.0 b 0 b 2.0 b Baythroid XL 2.3 3.3 b 0 b 3.3 b

Karate Z 1.7 5.3 b 0 b 5.3 b Endigo ZC 4 3.3 b 0.3 b 3.7 b



82



Treatmenta Rate


Total Ab Nb Tb A N T A N T Untreated --- 3.7 abc 28.7 a 32.3 a 1.0 0.7 1.7 1.3 bc 1.3 2.7 bc 38.7 a

Belt 480SC 2 6.7 a 37.0 a 43.7 a 0.7 1.0 1.7 3.7 a 2.0 5.7 a 51.0 a Belt 480SC 3 4.3 ab 19.0 ab 23.3 a 0.3 0.3 0.7 1.7 bc 2.0 3.7 ab 31.7 a

Leverage 360 + NIS

2.8 + 0.25% v/v 2.0 bc 6.0 c 8.0 b 0 0 0 1.3 bc 1.3 2.7 bc 10.7 b

Leverage 360 + COC

2.8 + 1% v/v 0 d 2.7 c 2.7 b 0.3 1.0 1.3 0.7 bc 0.3 1.0 cd 5.0 b


2 + 0.33 lb/A 1.3 bcd 3.0 c 4.3 b 0.3 0.3 0.7 1.0 bc 0.3 1.3 cd 6.7 b

Baythroid XL 2.3 1.0 cd 3.0 c 4.0 b 0.3 0 0.3 2.0 ab 1.0 3.0 bc 7.3 b Karate Z 1.7 1.7 bcd 6.3 bc 8.0 b 1.3 0 1.3 0.7 bc 0.7 1.3 cd 10.7 b

Endigo ZC 4 4.0 abc 5.0 c 9.0 b 0 0.3 0.3 c 0.3 0.7 d 0.3 10.0 b NS NS NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate

b A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total

Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


Treatmenta Rate


Green cloverworm


Untreated --- 2.3 0.7 8.3 11.3 Belt 480SC 2 0 1.3 2.0 3.3 Belt 480SC 3 0 0 1.3 1.3

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 2.3 0 1.7 4.0 Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 1.7 0.3 0.7 2.7

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 3.0 0 0 3.0 Baythroid XL 2.3 2.3 0.3 4.0 6.7

Karate Z 1.7 3.0 0.3 5.7 9.0 Endigo ZC 4 2.7 1.3 3.3

7.3

NS NS NS NS a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


83



Treatmenta Rate


Adults Nymphs Total Untreated --- 60.7 ab 19.0 a 79.7 a

Belt 480SC 2 72.7 a 10.7 a 83.3 a Belt 480SC 3 79.0 a 14.3 a 93.3 a

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 19.0 c 0.3 b 19.3 b Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 30.0 bc 0 b 30.0 b

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 19.7 c 0 b 19.7 b Baythroid XL 2.3 32.7 bc 0.7 b 33.3 b

Karate Z 1.7 35.3 bc 0.3 b 35.7 b Endigo ZC 4 32.3 bc 0.3 b 32.7 b


Table 10. Mean seed quality and yield data for MGV soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatmenta Rate

(fl oz/A) Seed qualityb

(1 – 5) Yieldc

(bu/A) Untreated --- 3.7 a 17.0 c

Belt 480SC 2 3.7 a 16.7 c Belt 480SC 3 3.7 a 20.3 abc

Leverage 360 + NIS 2.8 + 0.25% v/v 3.3 bc 24.7 a Leverage 360 + COC 2.8 + 1% v/v 3.2 c 22.7 ab

Baythroid XL + Orthene 90S 2 + 0.33 lb/A 3.3 bc 23.7 a Baythroid XL 2.3 3.5 ab 18.3 bc

Karate Z 1.7 3.3 bc 22.7 ab Endigo ZC 4 3.3 bc 22.3 ab

a NIS = non-ionic surfactant; COC = crop oil concentrate b Seed quality: 1 = excellent, 5 = poor c Yield adjusted to 13% moisture Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

84


Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG VII Soybean Insect Nursery Beaumont, TX

2010

PLOT PLAN ⇓ North

IV 9 3 18 4

8 2 17 1

7 blank 16 blank

III 6 3 15 4

5 1 14 2

II 4 4 13 3

3 2 12 1

I

2 3 11 4 1 1 10 2

Plot size = 8 rows, 30 inch row spacing, trimmed to 28 ft long Variety = HBK R7028



(fl oz/A) 1 Scorpion 35SL 3.5 2 Scorpion 35SL 7.0 3 Karate Z 1.7 4 Untreated ---

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Insect Pests in an MG VII Soybean

85


Agronomic and Cultural Information Experimental design: Randomized complete block with 4 treatments and 4 replications Planting: Beds were pulled on Morey silt loam soil (30 inch row width) on Apr 23. On May 21, beds were cultivated and planted with HBK R7028 (MG VII) on

Jun 15. Soybeans emerged on Jun 22. Plot size: 8 rows, 30 inch row width, trimmed to 28 ft after emergence Herbicide: 0.75 oz/A First Rate and 2.5 pt/A Dual Magnum were applied pre-emergence

on May 25 with a hand-held 3-nozzle (110-04) boom at 28 gpa. Irrigations: None Fertilizer: None, seed was inoculated with Nitrastik-S. Treatments: Treatments 1 – 3 were applied with a 2-nozzle hand-held spray boom (no. 2

cone nozzles on 30 inch centers, 20 gpa) on Sep 17. Sampling: Soybeans @ V9 with very few insects observed on Jul 26 Soybeans @ R1/2 with very few insects observed on Aug 2 15 sweeps per plot in 3rd row @ 3 day after treatment (DAT) on Sep 20;

soybeans @ R6 15 sweeps per plot in 4th row @ 7 DAT on Sep 24; soybeans @ R6 15 sweeps per plot in 5th row @ 13 DAT on Sep 30; soybeans @ R6 Harvest: Harvested plots on Oct 19 Size harvested plot = 2 middle rows, 30 inch row spacing, 28 ft long Data analysis: Insect counts transformed using


Discussion

Populations of stink bugs, Lepidoptera and threecornered alfalfa hopper (TCAH) were

relatively high in the untreated plots throughout the experiment, so data should be meaningful. At 3 days after treatment (DAT), Lepidoptera larvae---soybean looper (SL), green cloverworm (GCW) and velvetbean caterpillar (VBC)---were significantly fewer in the Karate Z plots than all other plots (Table 2). TCAH numbers were lowest in the high rate of Scorpion 35SL and Karate Z plots (Table 3). The high rate of Scorpion 35SL and Karate Z plots effectively controlled GSB and BSBs at 7 DAT (Table 4). Lepidoptera larvae---primarily VBC---were controlled by Karate Z, but not the other treatments (Table 5). Again, at 7DAT, TCAH populations were high in untreated plots, but low in the high rate of Scorpion 35SL and Karate Z plots (Table 6). Also,


86


spider populations appeared to be unaffected by the Scorpion 35SL treatments. At 13 DAT, the high rate of Scorpion 35SL and Karate Z controlled all species of stink bugs (Table 7). For total number of stink bugs, the high rate of Scorpion 35SL provided 87% control at 13 DAT. The high rate of Scorpion 35SL also provided 80% control of high populations of TCAH (Table 9). Yield and seed quality were not significantly different among treatments, although the high rate of Scorpion 35SL and Karate Z treatments outyielded the untreated about 5.5 bu/A (Table 10).

In conclusion, Sorpion 35SL at 7 fl oz/A provided good and long-lasting control of a stink bug complex (GSB, RBSB and BSBs) attacking soybeans. The lower rate of Scorpion 35SL (3.5 fl oz/A) did not effectively control these stink bugs. Finally, the high rate of Scorpion 35SL provided significant control of TCAH whose populations were high in this experiment. Table 1. Mean stink bug data 3 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Total Aa Na Ta A N T A N T Scorpion

35SL 3.5 0.8 0.3 1.0 0.5 0 0.5 0.8 0.8 1.5 a 3.5

Scorpion 35SL 7.0 0 0.3 0.3 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.3 b 0.5

Karate Z 1.7 0.3 0.5 0.8 0 0 0 0.3 0 0.3 b 1.0 Untreated --- 0.8 0.3 0 1.0 0 0 0.8 1.0 ab 0.3

3.0

NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS a A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD, brown total P = 0.07)

Table 2. Mean lepidopterous larvae data 3 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Green cloverworm


Scorpion 35SL 3.5 3.5 1.3 7.0 a 11.8 ab Scorpion 35SL 7.0 2.0 0.3 5.8 a 8.0 b

Karate Z 1.7 1.5 0 1.3 b 2.8 c Untreated --- 3.0 9.8 a 0.5 13.3 a

NS NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


87


Table 3. Mean misc. insect data 3 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Adults Nymphs Total Scorpion 35SL 3.5 14.3 ab 0.8 15.0 ab Scorpion 35SL 7.0 2.3 b 1.5 3.8 b

Karate Z 1.7 1.3 b 0.5 1.8 b Untreated --- 30.0 a 30.8 a 0.8

NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

Table 4. Mean stink bug data 7 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate



35SL 3.5 1.5 a 0.5 ab 2.0 a 0.3 1.0 1.3 1.8 2.5 4.3 a 8.3 a

Scorpion 35SL 7.0 0.3 b 0 b 0.3 b 0.3 0 0.3 1.0 0 1.0 b 1.5 b

Karate Z 1.7 0 b 0 b 0 b 0.3 0 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.8 b 1.0 b Untreated --- 0.5 ab 1.8 a 2.3 a 0 0.3 0.3 1.8 3.5 ab 1.8 6.0 a

NS NS NS NS NS a A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


Treatment Rate


Green cloverworm


Scorpion 35SL 3.5 1.3 1.8 4.5 a 7.5 a Scorpion 35SL 7.0 1.3 0.5 3.8 a 5.5 a

Karate Z 1.7 1.0 0 0.3 b 1.3 b Untreated --- 0 2.0 5.5 a 7.5 a

NS NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


88


Table 6. Mean misc. arthropod data 7 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Spiders Adults Nymphs Total Scorpion 35SL 3.5 17.8 1.8 19.5 2.3 a Scorpion 35SL 7.0 4.3 0 4.3 2.3 a

Karate Z 1.7 4.0 0 4.0 0.3 b Untreated --- 21.3 0.3 2.0 a 21.5

NS NS NS Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

Table 7. Mean stink bug data 13 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate



35SL 3.5 0.5 b 3.0 a 3.5 a 0 1.8 b 1.8 b 3.0 a 1.8 4.8 ab 11.8 a

Scorpion 35SL 7.0 0 b 0.3 b 0.3 b 0.5 0 b 0.5 b 1.0 ab 0.3 1.3 c 2.0 b

Karate Z 1.7 0.3 b 0 b 0.3 b 0 0.3 b 0.3 b 0.3 b 1.5 1.8 bc 2.3 b Untreated --- 1.5 a 4.0 a 5.5 a 4.8 a 0.3 5.0 a 3.8 a 5.3 a 1.5 15.8 a

NS NS a A = adults; N = nymphs; T = total

Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


Treatment Rate


Green cloverworm


Scorpion 35SL 3.5 1.3 0.8 2.3 4.3 Scorpion 35SL 7.0 0.5 0.5 3.3 4.3

Karate Z 1.7 0.8 0 0.5 1.3 Untreated --- 0.8 0 1.8 2.5

Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)


89


Table 9. Mean misc. insect data 13 days after treatment for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate


Adults Nymphs Total Scorpion 35SL 3.5 15.5 a 0.3 b 15.8 a Scorpion 35SL 7.0 5.0 b 0 b 5.0 b

Karate Z 1.7 7.3 b 0 b 7.3 b Untreated --- 23.3 a 1.8 a 25.0 a

Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD, nymphs P = 0.06)

Table 10. Mean seed quality and yield data for MGVII soybean insecticide screening experiment. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(fl oz/A) Seed qualitya

(1 – 5) Yieldb

(bu/A) Scorpion 35SL 3.5 2.5 26.7 Scorpion 35SL 7.0 2.3 32.2

Karate Z 1.7 2.3 32.5 Untreated --- 2.5 26.5

a Seed quality: 1 = excellent, 5 = poor b Yield adjusted to 13% moisture Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA and LSD)

90


Soybean Host Plant Resistance Beaumont, TX

2010

↑ North PLOT PLAN

I

31 HBK C5941 21 HBK C5941 11 HBK R7028 1 HBK R7028 32 Jake 22 Jake 12 Vernal 2 Vernal 33 Otoño 23 Otoño 13 Otoño 3 Otoño

II 34 Vernal 24 Vernal 14 HBK C5941 4 HBK C5941 35 Jake 25 Jake 15 HBK R7028 5 HBK R7028

III

36 HBK R7028 26 HBK R7028 16 Jake 6 Jake 37 Vernal 27 Vernal 17 HBK C5941 7 HBK C5941 38 Otoño 28 Otoño 18 Vernal 8 Vernal

IV 39 HBK C5941 29 HBK C5941 19 HBK R7028 9 HBK R7028 40 Jake 30 Jake 20 Otoño 10 Otoño

Plot size = 4 rows x 28 ft Shaded plots treated with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb/A


Planting: Beds were pulled on Morey silt loam soil (30 inch row width) on Apr 23 On May 21 beds were cultivated Planted test (5 varieties, treated and untreated for insects, with 4 replications)

on May 24 (8 viable seeds/ft). Soybeans emerged on May 30. Plot size: Plot size = 4 rows, 30 inch row spacing, 28 ft long Buffer (HBK C5941) on north and south end of test with 4 buffer rows on

west end of test Herbicide: 0.75 oz/A First Rate and 2.5 pt/A Dual Magnum were applied pre-emergence

on May 25 with a tractor-mounted spray tank and boom at 25 gpa. Irrigations: None Fertilizer: None

Soybean Agronomy and Host Plant Resistance

91


Treatments: Treated plots sprayed with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb/A applied with a 2-person hand-held spray boom (13- No. 2 cone nozzles, 50 mesh screens, 20 gpa final spray volume) on Aug 20, Sep 2 and Sep 23

Sampling: Soybeans @ V3 – 4; no insects present on Jun 15 Soybeans @ R2; very few insects (soybean looper and threecornered alfalfa

hopper) on Aug 2 Sampled soybeans for insects (12 sweeps/plot) on Aug 24 (4 days after

treatment, DAT), Sep 4 (2 DAT) and Sep 24 (1 DAT) Harvest: Harvested all treated plots (2 middle rows) on Oct 14 Size harvested plot = 2 rows x 28 ft Harvested all untreated plots (2 middle rows) on Oct 18 Size harvested plot = 2 rows x 28 ft Data analysis: Insect counts transformed using


Discussion

On Aug 24 (4 days after the 1st insecticide application to “Treated” plots), when soybeans

were R5, populations of lepidopterous larvae were beginning to increase in this experiment (Tables 1 and 2). Most of these lepidopterous defoliators were SL. The 1st insecticide application effectively controlled insects in the “Treated” plots. On Sep 4 (2 days after the 2nd insecticide application), VBC and TCAH populations were increasing in the experiment (Table 3). The 2nd insecticide application was effective (Table 4). On Sep 24 (1 day after the 3rd insecticide application to “Treated” plots), populations of VBC, GSB, BSBs and TCAH were high in untreated plots (Table 5). However, the 3rd insecticide application was effective (Table 6). Across subplots (treated or untreated), VBC, GSB, BSBs and TCAH populations were highest for HBK R7028. Lowest total stink bug populations were collected from HBK C5941, but no significant differences in stink bug populations among the varieties were detected. These data suggest in this experiment, all varieties exhibited about the same degree of resistance to stink bugs in terms of population densities. However, seed quality and yields differed significantly among varieties (Tables 7 and 8). Highest yields in both treated and untreated plots were produced by Jake. The difference in yield between treated and untreated Jake plots was only 5.7 bu/A. The highest yield differences between treated and untreated plots was produced by Otoño (12.5 bu/A). Thus, Jake exhibited the greatest and Otoño the least tolerance to insect damage (combination of Lepidoptera defoliators, stink bugs and TCAH). Seed quality was exceptional for Jake---even in untreated plots. Further agronomic and entomological investigations involving Jake are clearly justified. These preliminary data suggest Jake may be a good variety for the SE Texas environment which is conducive to insect and disease pressure. Jake was released in 2006 by the University of Missouri. This conventional variety exhibits a determinate growth pattern and is classified as a mid-group V (RM 5.5) variety.


92


Table 1. Mean insect data per 12 sweeps on Aug 24 for soybean host plant resistance. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Trt.a Lepidopterous larvae Stink bugs

TCAHb SLb GCWb VBCb Total GSBb RBSBb BSBsb Total HBK C5941 T 0.8 0 0 0.8 0 0 0 0 1.3 HBK C5941 U 4.0 0 0 4.0 0 0 0.8 1.0 2.3 HBK R7028 T 0.5 0 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0.8 HBK R7028 U 1.8 0 1.0 2.8 0.3 0 0 0.3 2.5 Jake T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 1.8 Jake U 1.8 0 0 1.8 0.8 0 0 0.8 2.0 Otoño T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 1.5 Otoño U 3.0 0 0.5 3.5 0.3 0.3 0 0.8 1.8 Vernal T 0.5 0 0 0.5 0 0 0.3 0.3 1.8 Vernal U 2.0 0 0.3 2.3 0.8 0 0 0.8 3.5 a T = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb/A on Aug 20; U = untreated b SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper Table 2. Statistical analysis of data from Table 1. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Lepidopterous larvae Stink bugs

TCAHa SLa GCWa VBCa Total GSBa RBSBa BSBsa Total Main plot: HBK C5941 2.4 0 0 2.4 0 0 0.4 0.5 1.8 HBK R7028 1.1 0 0.5 1.6 0.1 0 0 0.1 1.6 Jake 1.0 0 0 1.0 0.4 0 0 0.4 1.9 Otoño 1.6 0 0.3 1.9 0.1 0.1 0 0.4 1.6 Vernal 1.3 0 0.1 1.4 0.4 0 0.1 0.5 2.6 Sub plot: Treatedb 0.5 b 0 0 b 0.5 b 0 b 0 0.1 0.1 b 1.4 Untreated 2.5 a 0 0.4 a 2.9 a 0.4 a 0.1 0.2 0.7 a 2.4 Interactions: P = 0.8122 --- 0.3026 0.8777 0.6714 0.4380 0.0808 0.8584 0.9471 a SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper b Treated = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1.0 lb ai/A on Aug 20 Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA, LSD)


93


Table 3. Mean insect data per 12 sweeps on Sep 4 for soybean host plant resistance. Beaumont, TX. 2010.


TCAHb SLb GCWb VBCb Total GSBb RBSBb BSBsb Total HBK C5941 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.3 0 HBK C5941 U 0.3 0 4.5 4.8 0.8 0 1.0 1.8 4.8 HBK R7028 T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0.3 HBK R7028 U 1.5 0 3.0 4.5 0.8 0 0.5 1.3 6.0 Jake T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0.3 0.5 0.5 Jake U 0.8 0 2.0 2.8 1.0 0 1.0 2.3 3.3 Otoño T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 Otoño U 0.5 0 2.5 3.0 1.5 0 0.8 2.3 3.3 Vernal T 0.3 0 0 0.3 0 0 0 0 0 Vernal U 0.3 0 2.5 2.8 1.3 0 0.3 1.5 2.3 a T = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb/A on Sep 2; U = untreated b SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper Table 4. Statistical analysis of data from Table 3. Beaumont, TX. 2010.


TCAHa SLa GCWa VBCa Total GSBa RBSBa BSBsa Total Main plot: HBK C5941 0.1 0 2.3 2.4 0.4 0 0.5 1.0 2.4 HBK R7028 0.9 0 1.5 2.4 0.4 0 0.3 0.6 3.1 Jake 0.5 0 1.0 1.5 0.5 0 0.6 1.4 1.9 Otoño 0.4 0 1.3 1.6 0.8 0 0.4 1.1 1.6 Vernal 0.3 0 1.3 1.5 0.6 0 0.1 0.8 1.1 Sub plot: Treatedb 0.2 0 0 b 0.2 b 0 b 0 0.1 b 0.2 b 0.2 b Untreated 0.7 0 2.9 a 3.6 a 1.1 a 0 0.7 a 1.8 a 3.9 a Interactions: P = 0.6551 --- 0.6766 0.5503 0.9126 --- 0.8973 0.9550 0.2273 a SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper b Treated = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1.0 lb ai/A on Sep 2 Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA, LSD)


94


Table 5. Mean insect data per 12 sweeps on Sep 24 for soybean host plant resistance. Beaumont, TX. 2010.


TCAHb SLb GCWb VBCb Total GSBb RBSBb BSBsb Total HBK C5941 T 0.3 0 0 0.3 2.0 0 2.3 4.3 1.3 HBK C5941 U 0 0 0 0 14.5 0.8 6.3 21.8 18.3 HBK R7028 T 0.5 0 0 0.5 3.0 0 3.5 6.5 6.0 HBK R7028 U 1.0 0.8 5.3 7.0 28.8 0.3 10.8 40.3 220.3 Jake T 0.3 0 0.3 0.5 2.3 0.3 1.3 3.8 15.5 Jake U 0.3 0.3 2.0 2.5 18.3 0 9.5 27.8 104.0 Otoño T 0.3 0.3 0 0.5 4.3 0 3.5 7.8 9.0 Otoño U 0.8 0 1.8 2.5 24.8 0.8 6.0 32.3 87.5 Vernal T 1.5 0 0 1.5 4.5 0.3 3.5 8.3 7.3 Vernal U 0.8 0 3.3 4.0 22.5 1.3 9.5 33.5 39.0 a T = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1 lb/A on Sep 23; U = untreated b SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper Table 6. Statistical analysis of data from Table 5. Beaumont, TX. 2010.


TCAHa SLa GCWa VBCa Total GSBa RBSBa BSBsa Total Main plot: HBK C5941 0.1 0 0 c 0.1 c 8.3 0.4 4.3 13.0 9.8 c HBK R7028 0.8 0.4 2.6 a 3.8 a 15.9 0.1 7.1 23.4 113.1 a Jake 0.3 0.1 1.1 ab 1.5 abc 10.3 0.1 5.4 15.8 59.8 ab Otoño 0.5 0.1 0.9 bc 1.5 bc 14.5 0.4 4.8 20.0 48.3 ab Vernal 1.1 0 1.6 ab 2.8 ab 13.5 0.8 6.5 20.9 23.1 bc Sub plot: Treatedb 0.6 0.1 0.1 b 0.7 b 3.2 b 0.1 b 2.8 b 6.1 b 7.8 b Untreated 0.6 0.2 2.5 a 3.2 a 21.8 a 0.6 a 8.4 a 31.1 a 93.8 a Interactions: P = 0.3630 0.1374 0.0015 0.0169 0.6238 0.1063 0.4761 0.6786 0.0587 a SL = soybean looper; GCW = green cloverworm; VBC = velvetbean caterpillar; GSB = green stink bug; RBSB = redbanded stink bug; BSBs = brown stink bugs; TCAH = threecornered alfalfa hopper b Treated = treated with Orthene 90S @ 1.0 lb ai/A on Sep 23 Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA, LSD)


95


Table 7. Mean seed quality and yield for soybean host plant resistance. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Treatment Seed qualitya

(1 – 5) Yieldb

(bu/A) HBK C5941 T 3.4 22.8

HBK C5941 U 3.9 17.3

HBK R7028 T 2.3 27.5

HBK R7028 U 3.9 21.3

Jake T 1.8 41.0

Jake U 1.9 35.3

Otoño T 2.8 28.5

Otoño U 3.5 16.0

Vernal T 2.0 30.3

Vernal U 2.8 21.5 a Seed quality = 1 (excellent) – 5 (very poor) b Yields adjusted to 13% moisture Table 8. Statistical analysis of data from Table 7. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Seed qualitya

(1 – 5) Yieldb

(bu/A) Main plot:

HBK C5941 3.6 a 20.0 b HBK R7028 3.1 b 24.4 b Jake 1.8 d 38.1 a Otoño 3.1 b 22.3 b Vernal 2.4 c 25.9 b Sub plot: Treated 2.4 b 30.0 a Untreated 3.2 a 22.3 b Interactions: P = 0.0034 0.8461 a Seed quality = 1 (excellent) – 5 (very poor) b Yields adjusted to 13% moisture Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly different (P = 0.05, ANOVA, LSD)

96


Sugarcane Insecticide Screening Doguet’s Farm

Nome, TX 2010

M.O. Way, M.S. Nunez, R.A. Pearson, T.E. Reagan, J. Beuzelin and B. Wilson

PLOT PLAN

⇒ North I II III IV

1 9 10 6 19 1 28 3 2 7 11 5 20 7 29 8 3 3 12 8 21 5 30 7 4 8 13 2 22 6 31 9 5 5 14 7 23 4 32 6 6 4 15 9 24 2 33 1 7 2 16 1 25 3 34 4 8 6 17 3 26 9 35 5 9 1 18 4 27 8 36 2

Plot size: 1 row, 5.25 ft row spacing, 30 ft long; plots separated by buffer rows Variety: L79-1002


TREATMENT DESCRIPTION, RATE AND TIMING


(fl oz/A) 1 Untreated --- 2 Diamond 0.83EC 12 3 Belt 480SC 1 4 Belt 480SC 2 5 Belt 480SC 3 6 Belt 480SC 4 7 DPX-EZY45 6.8 8 DPX-EZY45 13.3 9 DPX-EZY45 19.9

Sugarcane Insecticide Screening for Stem Borer Control at Nome

97


Agronomic and Cultural Information Treatments: Treatments 2 – 9 applied with a hand-held 3 nozzle boom (11002VS, 50 gpa) on

Jul 15 and Aug 22 Sampling: Collected 25 stalks from north end of field and dissected for stalk borer activity

on Jun 9; all stalks had 4 – 6 nodes; 1 Mexican rice borer larva found. Stalk counts (10 ft of row) per plot and removed 10 stalks per plot for wet

weight and dissection and inspection for stalk borer damage on Oct 5 – 6. Data Analysis: Percent data transformed using arcsine; all data analyzed by ANOVA and means

separated by LSD.

Discussion

Unfortunately, populations of stalk borers, primarily Mexican rice borer, were low in the untreated, so data should be viewed with caution. However, % of stalks with borer damage was higher in the untreated and the low rate of DPX-EZY45 than in the other treatments (Table 1).

If this test is repeated in the future, fire ants will be controlled in the plots using a granular insecticide applied to the soil in early spring. These insects are excellent predators of stalk borer larvae. Table 1. Wet weight and stalk damage data for sugarcane insecticide screening for stalk borer control. Nome, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate

(fl oz/A) Stand

(stalks/10 ft) Wet weight

(lb/10 stalks) Wet wt. (tons/A)

No. internodes

/ stalk

% stalks with borer

damage

% damaged internodes /

stalk Untreated --- 126 10.5 54.9 13.4 15.3 a 1.1 a

Diamond 0.83EC 12 109 12.1 54.7 13.0 5.0 bc 0.4 abc Belt 480SC 1 114 11.3 53.4 13.1 2.5 c 0.2 c Belt 480SC 2 122 10.9 55.2 11.3 5.0 c 0.7 bc Belt 480SC 3 119 11.6 57.3 13.3 0 c 0 c Belt 480SC 4 113 11.7 54.8 13.6 2.5 c 0.2 c

DPX-EZY45 6.8 122 10.9 55.2 13.3 10.0 ab 0.8 ab DPX-EZY45 13.3 124 10.8 55.6 12.9 2.5 c 0.2 c DPX-EZY45 19.9 122 11.7 59.2 12.6 2.5 c 0.4 bc

All data collected from 10 stalks per plot except stand. Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05 and ANOVA).

Sugarcane Insecticide Screening for Stem Borer Control at Nome

98


Table 2. Bored internode data for sugarcane insecticide screening for stalk borer control. Nome, TX. 2010.

Treatment Rate (fl oz/A)

% stalksa with borer damage in internodesb:

1 - 5 6 - 10 11 - 15 16 - 20 Untreated --- 2.5 7.5 5.0 0

Diamond 0.83EC 12 2.5 0 2.5 0 Belt 480SC 1 0 2.5 0 0 Belt 480SC 2 2.5 2.5 0 0 Belt 480SC 3 0 0 0 0 Belt 480SC 4 2.5 0 0 0

DPX-EZY45 6.8 2.5 5.0 2.5 0 DPX-EZY45 13.3 2.5 0 0 0 DPX-EZY45 19.9 2.5 0 0 0

a % out of 10 stalks per plot b internodes in ascending order [e.g. internode 1 = lowest on stalk (next to soil); internode 20 = highest on stalk] Means in a column are not significantly different (P = 0.05 and ANOVA).

99


Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance Test Insect Nursery Beaumont, TX

2009-2011

Cooperators: Gene Reagan, Bill White, Waseem Akbar, Julien Beuzelin and Blake Wilson

PLOT PLAN US 02-9010 (3 rows) HoCP 91-552 (2 rows) US 07-9027 (2 rows)

V

US

04-9

076

US 08-9003 Ho 06-563 HoCP 05-961 L07-57 HoCP 05-902

US

07-9

019

HoCP 85-845 Ho 07-604 Ho 07-612 US 08-9001 Ho 06-537 HoCP 04-838 L 03-371 Ho 06-9610 N-24 N-27

L 01-299 Ho 07-613 HoCP 00-950 HoCP 96-540 N-17 N-21 US 01-40 L 07-68 Ho 07-617 US 93-15

IV

US

07-9

612

HoCP 05-902 Ho 07-612 US 01-40 HoCP 05-961 Ho 07-604

HoC

P 04

-838

US 93-15 Ho 07-613 L 01-299 US 08-9003 US 08-9001 L 07-57 L 07-68 HoCP 85-845 Ho 06-563 N-24

HoCP 00-950 L 03-371 HoCP 04-838 N-21 Ho 07-617 N-17 HoCP 96-540 N-27 Ho 06-537 Ho 06-9610

III

US

07-9

015

Ho 06-563 Ho 07-612 HoCP 05-961 US 08-9003 L 07-57

US

02-1

13

Ho 06-9610 HoCP 00-950 N-21 HoCP 04-838 HoCP 96-540 Ho 07-617 N-24 N-17 US 93-15 N-27

HoCP 85-845 Ho 07-613 L 03-371 HoCP 05-902 US 01-40 US 08-9001 L 01-299 Ho 07-604 L 07-68 Ho 06-537

II

US

07-9

014

Ho 07-617 HoCP 04-838 HoCP 85-845 N-27 L 03-371

US

07-9

017

N-17 Ho 07-613 N-21 Ho 06-9610 HoCP 00-950 L 01-299 US 93-15 US 01-40 HoCP 96-540 N-24

Ho 06-563 Ho 06-537 Ho 07-612 US 08-9001 L 07-68 Ho 07-604 HoCP 05-961 US 08-9003 L 07-57 HoCP 05-902

I

CP

44-1

55 HoCP 05-902 US 01-40 Ho 07-612 Ho 06-537 L 03-371

L 01

-299

L 07-57 L 07-68 HoCP 00-950 HoCP 85-845 US 08-9003 Ho 06-563 HoCP 04-838 N-17 HoCP 05-961 US 08-9001 L 01-299 N-21 N-27 HoCP 96-540 Ho 07-604

Ho 06-9610 N-24 US 93-15 Ho 07-617 Ho 07-613 HoCP 85-845 (7 rows)

↓ Plot size = 1 row, 5.25 ft row width, 12 ft long with 4 ft alley N Shaded plots = Seed increase as buffer

Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance to Stem Borers 2009 - 2011

100


Agronomic and Cultural Information Planting: Beds pulled Oct 20, 2009 and opened just prior to planting; soil type = Morey

Silt Loam All stalks heat-treated prior to planting Test planted and rows covered on Oct 21, 2009 Experimental design = randomized complete block with 25 varieties and 5

replications Plot size = 1 row, 5.25 ft row spacing, 12 ft long, 4 ft alleys Seed increase varieties (14) used as buffer Emerged to 6 – 8 inches on Nov 23, 2009 Ratoon crop emerged to 12 – 18 inches on Mar 21, 2011 Cultivation: Beds cultivated on Apr 7 and May 20, 2010 Irrigation: Plots were not irrigated; experiment was rain-fed Herbicide: Prowl 3.3EC @ 1 gal/A and Atrazine 4L @ 1 gal/A applied on Oct 21, 2009

with a 3 nozzle spray boom (110º04 nozzles with 50 mesh screens) for pre-emergence control of grasses and broadleaves, respectively

Weedar 64 @ 1 qt/A and Sencor DF @ 2 lb ai/A as above on May 7, 2010 Weedar 64 @ 1 qt/A, Sencor DF @ 3 lb prod/A and Permit @ 1 oz prod/A

applied (post- directed from seed row to seed row) on Mar 21, 2011 with a 3 nozzle spray boom (110º04 nozzles with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) for control of grasses and broadleaves

Fertilization: 100 lb N/A (urea) applied on May 17, 2010 100 lb N/A (urea) applied on Apr 21, 2011 Insecticide: Mocap @ 10 lb/A applied with a hand-held gandy on non-buffer rows on Oct

21, 2009 Sampling: Removed 10 stalks/plot for processing (number of internodes and stem borer

damage) on Sep 7 Counted number of stalks/plot and removed and weighed 5 stalks/plot in reps 1

– 4 on Sep 15 – 16 Discussion

In general, stalk borer (Mexican rice borer and sugarcane borer) populations and damage were relatively low in the experiment; however, significant differences were detected among lines in stalk borer damage and wet weight (yield) (Table 1). Lines with the fewest bored internodes (fewer than 5) were N-21, HoCP 85-845, US 93-15, N-24, L 01-299 and US 08-9003. The highest yielding lines (greater than 50 tons/A) were L 03-371, N-27, US 01-40 and Ho 07-613. Of particular interest are N-27, US 01-40 and Ho 07-613. All these lines produced yields over 50 tons/A and suffered fewer than 9 bored internodes.

Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance to Stem Borers 2009 - 2011

101


The “energy cane” lines in this experiment are US 08-9001 and US 08-9003. Both these lines had relatively few bored internodes, but yields were less than 40 tons/A. Stalk density was relatively high for both these lines and weight of 5 stalks was relatively low; thus, these lines produced an abundance of small stalks---probably small diameter.

After harvest, this experiment was ratooned, so more data will be collected from these plots in 2011. Table 1. Mean data for sugarcane host plant resistance study. Beaumont, TX. 2010.

Variety Bored

internodesa Bored with emergencea

Wt of 5 stalks (lb)

Stalk density (stalks/A)

Wet weight (tons/A)

Ho 06-537 8.2 c-g 1.8 a-d 11g-k 37685 42 d-g Ho 06-563 31.2 a 3.8 a 14 cd 31462 44 def Ho 06-9610 6.4 c-g 0.4 d 10 jk 43044 44 def Ho 07-604 8.6 c-f 0.4 d 12 f-j 33363 38 e-h Ho 07-612 12.4 bcd 1.8 a-d 13 c-f 34228 45 cde Ho 07-613 7.6 c-g 0.2 d 14 cde 40797 55 a Ho 07-617 5.4 d-g 0.6 d 12 d-i 33190 40 e-h HoCP 00-950 5.8 c-g 0.4 d 13 c-g 33018 43 d-g HoCP 04-838 17.0 bc 2.0 a-d 13 c-g 36302 47 a-e HoCP 05-902 16.0 ab 3.2 ab 13 c-g 31289 41 e-h HoCP 05-961 7.8 c-g 1.2 bcd 13 d-g 35783 46 b-e HoCP 85-845 1.4 g 0 d 12 e-i 28177 35 gh HoCP 96-540 11.2 b-e 0.8 cd 14 cd 29042 41 e-h L 01-299 2.6 efg 0.4 d 11ijk 24028 25 i L 03-371 12.6 bcd 1.4 bcd 15 bc 34573 51 a-d L 07-57 11.8 b-f 3.3 abc 13 c-g 34400 46 b-e L 07-68 6.8 d-g 1.2 bcd 12 e-j 37166 43 d-g N-17 8.0 c-g 0.8 cd 13 d-h 26621 33 hi N-21 1.4 g 0 d 16 ab 22646 36 fgh N-24 2.4 efg 0 d 10 jk 34055 35 gh N-27 8.4 c-g 1.2 bcd 17 a 32153 53 abc US 01-40 8.4 c-f 0.6 d 14 cd 38376 54 ab US 08-9001 7.2 c-g 0.4 d 10 k 39759 39 e-h US 08-9003 4.0 efg 0.6 d 7 l 47711 33 hi US 93-15 1.5 fg 0 d 10 h-k 23164 24 i a Sum of 10 stalks Means in a column followed by the same or no letter are not significantly (NS) different (P = 0.05, GLIMMIX and LSD)

102


Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance Test Insect Nursery Beaumont, TX

2010-2011

PLOT PLAN

US

02-9

010

US 02-9010

V

HoCP 08-726 Ho 08-706 L 08-090 L 08-088 Ho 08-711 Ho 08-717 HoL 08-723 L 08-075 L 08-092 L 79-1002 Ho 08-709 HoCP 85-845

HoCP 91-552 Ho 02-113 HoCP 00-950 Ho 05-961 L 07-57 HoCP 04-838 Ho 07-613 blank

IV

L 08-092 L 08-090 blank L 08-088 Ho 08-709 Ho 08-717 HoL 08-723 L 08-075

HoCP 85-845 HoCP 08-726 Ho 08-711 Ho 08-706 Ho 05-961 HoCP 91-552 Ho 02-113 HoCP 00-950

HoCP 04-838 L 79-1002 L 07-57 Ho 07-613

III

HoCP 00-950 L 08-088 L 08-075 Ho 08-717 HoL 08-723 L 08-090 Ho 08-706 Ho 08-711 Ho 08-709 HoCP 04-838 HoCP 85-845 blank

HoCP 08-726 HoCP 91-552 L 79-1002 Ho 02-113 Ho 07-613 L 07-57 Ho 05-961 L 08-092

II

L 08-075 L 08-092 L 08-090 L 79-1002 HoL 08-723 Ho 08-709 Ho 08-717 L 08-088

blank Ho 08-706 HoCP 08-726 Ho 08-711 Ho 02-113 HoCP 85-845 HoCP 00-950 HoCP 91-552 Ho 05-961 L 07-57 Ho 07-613 HoCP 04-838

I

L 08-092 L 08-090 blank Ho 05-961 L 07-57 Ho 07-613 Ho 08-709 L 08-075

Ho 08-717 L 08-088 L 79-1002 HoCP 04-838 Ho 08-706 HoL 08-723 HoCP 08-726 HoCP 00-950 Ho 08-711 Ho 02-113 HoCP 85-845 HoCP 91-552

US 02-9010 ↓ Plot size = 1 row, 5.25 ft row width, 12 ft long with 4 ft alley N Buffer rows on north (6 ft), south (6 ft) and east (1 row) ends of test

Sugarcane Host Plant Resistance to Stem Borers 2010 – 2011

103


Agronomic and Cultural Information Planting: Beds pulled Oct 7, 2010; soil type = Morey Silt Loam Test planted and rows covered on Oct 28, 2010 Experimental design = randomized complete block with 19 varieties

and 5 replications Plot size = 1 row, 5.25 ft row spacing, 12 ft long, 4 ft alleys Repulled beds on western 2 rows of test (run over by forage harvester)

on Nov 12 Herbicide: Prowl 3.3EC @ 1 gal/A, Ignite @ 2 qt/A and Atrazine 4L @ 1 gal/A

applied on Oct 21, 2009 with a 3 nozzle spray boom (110º04 nozzles with 50 mesh screens) for pre-emergence control of grasses and broadleaves, respectively on Nov 16

Weedar 64 @ 1 qt/A, Sencor DF @ 3 lb prod/A and Permit @ 1 oz prod/A applied (post- directed from seed row to seed row) on Apr 19, 2011 with a 3 nozzle spray boom (110º04 nozzles with 50 mesh screens, 29 gpa) for control of grasses and broadleaves

Sampling: Nematode soil samples taken from selected plots on Dec 2

Date post:	06-Mar-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

2010 ENTOMOLOGY RESEARCH REPORT Annual...This report is a compilation of results of Entomology...

Documents