COMPARISON OF SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE APPLICATION OF AN EXPERIMENTAL INSECTICIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF MOLE CRICKET NYMPHS IN TURF, 1998

Abstract

COMPARISON OF SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE APPLICATION OF AN EXPERIMENTAL INSECTICIDE FOR THE CONTROL OF MOLE CRICKET NYMPHS IN TURF, 1998: A field efficacy trial was performed to evaluate rate and application placement of an experimental insecticide (CGA-293343) for the control of mole cricket nymphs. Plots 16 ft x 85 ft were established on a heavily infested bermudagrass driving range at Oyster Bay Golf Links near Sunset Beach in Brunswick Co., NC. Treatments were replicated four times and randomly assigned to the plots. The timing of application was targeted to coincide with peak hatch for the control of small nymphs. Two of the treatments (Dursban Pro 2E, subsurface appliedand surface-applied Merit 75 WP) were applied on 25 Jun. All subsurface treatments were applied using a tractor-drawn ToroR Subsurface Liquid Injector delivering a volume of 150 gpa of liquid insecticide mixture at 150 psi. All broadcast applications were applied using a John Deere Turf Gator-mounted research sprayer delivering 23 gpa. The fairway irrigation system was used to apply 0.25 inch of water to the entire test site immediately after application. All other treatments (CGA-293343 25WG) were applied on 28 Jun. Soapy water flush sampling of the test site indicated that the population was approximately 79% MC and 21% TMC. The first evaluation of the plots on 14 Jul involved flushing three separate one m2 previously damaged areas of each plot with soapy water and counting the number of nymphs that came to the surface. The average number of nymphs found in each plot is reported in the Table. Plots were evaluated for fresh damage on 21 Jul, and 5, 20 Aug using a 1 m2 grid. The grid, divided into nine subsections, was placed randomly in each plot and a damage rating (0-9) was given depending on the number of subsections in which fresh damage was observed (with 0 = no damage and 9 = severe damage). Ten damage ratings were taken in each plot on each sampling date. Actual damage means are presented in the Table. All data were transformed (check)X + 0.5 prior to ANOVA and Tukey's Studentized Range Test (HSD).