Insecticides For Aphid Control Research Articles

Evaluating Selected Foliar Insecticides for Aphid Control in Cotton, 2020

Evaluating Selected Foliar Insecticides for Aphid Control in Cotton, 2020

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids in Romaine Lettuce in Florida, 2017

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids in Romaine Lettuce in Florida, 2017

The prospect of using sub-lethal imidacloprid or pirimicarb and a parasitoid wasp, Lysiphlebus fabarum, simultaneously, to control Aphis gossypii on cucumber plants

The broad-spectrum insecticides greatly influence the control of cotton aphids; however, due to frequent chemical control, Aphis gossypii (Hemiptera: Aphididae) has developed resistance against several classes of synthetic insecticides. In this study, we explored the sub-lethal effects of imidacloprid and pirimicarb, two commonly used insecticides for aphid control, on a parasitoid wasp, Lysiphlebus fabarum (Marshall) (Braconidae: Aphidiinae), when simultaneously used to control melon aphid on cucumber plants, as part of a comprehensive study for integrated pest management. Bioassays of imidacloprid and pirimicarb were performed to calculate LC50 with third instars of A. gossypii. The LC50 of these insecticides (110.55 and 250.89μg/lit, respectively) were used to expose the wasp larvae, pupae, and adult parasitoids on a cucumber leaf. The percent mortality, percent adult emergence, and sex ratio were calculated during each exposure test. Moreover, the body size, egg load, and mature egg size of wasps surviving the insecticide treatments, as well as the sex ratio of the second generation was evaluated. Regardless of the host aphid mortality, none of the insecticides caused mortality of larval stage of the parasitoid. The insecticide application on pupal stage revealed that the percentage of mortality, sex ratio, body size, and egg load of surviving wasps, as well as the sex ratio of their offspring was adversely affected by imidacloprid, but not by pirimicarb. The present study suggests pirimicarb as a preferred insecticide, with less harmful effects on the fitness components of L. fabarum, for integrated pest management of cotton aphids.

Insecticide Efficacy Against Aphids in Cauliflower, 2014

The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of insecticides for control of aphids on cauliflower under desert growing conditions. Cauliflower “Cumberland” plants were transplanted into single row beds on 40-inch centers on 1 November 2013 at the University of California Desert Research and Extension Center, El Centro, CA. Stand establishment was achieved using overhead sprinkler irrigation; furrow irrigation was utilized thereafter. Plots were four beds 13.3 ft in width by 40 ft in length and bordered by one untreated bed. Included were four foliar insecticide spray treatments and an untreated check in an RCB design experiments with five replicates. A surfactant, Dyne-Amic (Helena Chemical Co., Collierville, TN), was added to each insecticide spray mixture at 0.25% vol/vol prior to …

Insecticide Efficacy Against Aphids on Artichoke, 2014

The objective of the study was to evaluate the efficacy of insecticides for control of aphids on artichoke under desert growing conditions. An established stand of artichoke (Imperial Star) at the University of California Desert Research and Extension Center, El Centro, CA, was used in the experiment. Plots were 1 bed (3.33 ft) by 25 ft with a 2-ft buffer between blocks. Included were four foliar insecticide spray treatments and an untreated check in an RCB design experiments with five replicates. Insecticidal compounds, formulations, and application rates …

Engineering plants for aphid resistance: current status and future perspectives.

The current status of development of transgenic plants for improved aphid resistance, and the pros and cons of different strategies are reviewed and future perspectives are proposed. Aphids are major agricultural pests that cause significant yield losses of crop plants each year. Excessive dependence on insecticides for aphid control is undesirable because of the development of insecticide resistance, the potential negative effects on non-target organisms and environmental pollution. Transgenic plants engineered for resistance to aphids via a non-toxic mode of action could be an efficient alternative strategy. In this review, the distribution of major aphid species and their damages on crop plants, the so far isolated aphid-resistance genes and their applications in developments of transgenic plants for improved aphid resistance, and the pros and cons of these strategies are reviewed and future perspectives are proposed. Although the transgenic plants developed through expressing aphid-resistant genes, manipulating plant secondary metabolism and plant-mediated RNAi strategy have been demonstrated to confer improved aphid resistance to some degree. So far, no aphid-resistant transgenic crop plants have ever been commercialized. This commentary is intended to be a helpful insight into the generation and future commercialization of aphid-resistant transgenic crops in a global context.

ESTABLISHING EFFECT OF COMMONLY USED INSECTICIDES FOR APHID CONTROL ON THE INFECTIVITY OF THE ENTOMOPATHOGENIC NEMATODE Steinernema feltiae USING A STREAMLINED SCREENING METHOD

The entomopathogenic nematode Steinernema feltiae (Filipjev) has been shown to offer much potential for tank-mixing with chemical insecticides in a range of pest control situations. This preliminary study investigated the compatibility of S. feltiae with selected insecticides commonly used for the control of aphid pests in UK glasshouse environments. Steinernema feltiae showed a level of direct compatibility with both dimethoate and imidacloprid. Cypermethrin proved non-compatible for direct mixing with S. feltiae. The potential for tank-mixing nematodes with chemical insecticides for aphid control in UK glasshouses is discussed.

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Nucotn 33B Cotton, 1997

Abstract Insecticides were evaluated at North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Verona, MS, in a RCB design with 4 replications. Plot size as 4 rows wide (38-inch row spacing) by 50 ft long with 4 untreated rows between plots and a 10-ft planted buffer at the end of each plot. Insecticides were applied on 11 Jul with a high-clearance spray tractor equipped with two Spraying Systems TX4 hollow-cone nozzles per row and calibrated to deliver 10 gpa at 40 psi at 3 mph. Carrier of the in-secticide was water. Samples were taken from 10 leaves per plot at each of two levels on the plant: upper (first fully expanded leaf), and mid (mainstem leaf located one-third down the plant), aphids were counted on the underside of each leaf. Yield (lb of seed cotton per acre) was determined by mechani-cally harvesting the center two rows of each plot, and measuring the actual area picked.

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Non-Transgenic Cotton, 1997

Abstract Insecticides were evaluated at North Mississippi Research and Extension Center, Verona, MS, in a RCB design with 4 replications. Plot size was 4 rows wide (38-inch row spacing) by 50 ft long with 4 untreated rows between plots and a 10-ft planted buffer at the end of each plot. Insecticides were applied on 8 and 11 Jul with a high-clearance spray tractor equipped with two Spraying Systems TX4 hollow-cone nozzles per row and calibrated for 5 gpa at a pressure of 40 psi at 4 mph. Carrier of the insecticide was water. Samples were taken from 10 leaves per plot at each of two levels on the plant: upper (first fully expanded leaf), and mid (mainstem leaf located one-third down the plant). Aphids were counted on the underside of each leaf. Throughout the growing season, there was ad-equate rainfall for crop development. Yield (lb of seed cotton per acre) was determined by mechanically harvesting the center two rows of each plot, and measuring the actual area picked.

Efficacy of Selected Insecticides for Aphid Control on Cotton, 1997

Abstract Cotton was planted on 26 Apr on 30-inch rows near Weldon in Northampton Co., NC. Recommended practices for fertility and weed management were followed. Disyston 15 G at the rate of 0.75 lb (AI)/acre was used at planting for thrips control. On 19 and 28 May, cotton was sprayed with a banded application of 0.25 (AI) Orthene 75 S for thrips control. The banded foliar aphid treatments were applied on 15 Jun via a CO2-pressurized sprayer calibrated to deliver 8.0 gpa at 50 psi with a single TX-8 Spray Systems nozzle 9 inches over the row. Plots were 6 rows X 20 ft with 4 reps and arranged in a RCBD. On 20 Jun, treatments were evaluated by randomly collecting 10 plants in each plot and counting the aphids. On 30 Jun, treatments were evaluated by randomly collecting 10 expanded terminal leaves in each plot and counting the number of aphids. Plots were harvested from the middle 2 rows with a 2-row John Deere picker on 22 Oct. Seed cot-ton yields were converted to lint cotton/acre using 40% gin turnout. All data were analyzed via ANOVA and DMRT.

Evaluation of Insecticides for Aphid Control (Trial 2), 1996

Abstract This test evaluated the effectiveness of insecticides and insecticide combinations to control cotton aphids. Plots were 4 rows wide and 50 ft long with four untreated rows and a 10 ft planted buffer between plots. Plants in each plot were sampled at 3 to 4 day intervals early in the growing season for cotton aphids by selecting 10 random plants in each plot. One leaf from the terminal and one leaf four nodes below the terminal (mid-canopy level) were sampled on each plant. The total number of aphids on the terminal leaves and mid-canopy leaves was recorded. Treatment was initiated when population levels were rapidly increasing. All insecticide applications were applied with a high clearance spray tractor equipped with two TX4 hollow cone nozzles perrow traveling 4 MPH and delivering 5 gallons of water per acre. Plots within a replicate were sprayed sequentially to maintain true replicate integrity. Yield was estimated by mechanically harvesting the center two rows of each plot. Applications of insecticides for aphid control were made 23 Jun and 10 Jul.

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Cotton in Mississippi, 1995

Abstract Insecticides were evaluated at the Plant Science Research Farm, Mississippi State, MS, in a RCB design with 4 replications. Plot size was 4 rows wide (38 inch spacing) by 50 ft long with 4 unsprayed buffer rows between plots. Insecticides were applied on 12 Jul with a high clearance spray tractor equipped with two Spraying Systems TX4 hollow cone nozzles spaced at 19 inches and calibrated for 5 gpa at a pressure of 40 psi and a speed of 3.5 mph. Carrier of the insecticides was water, with an initial pH of 8.0. Samples were taken from 10 leaves per plot at each of 3 levels on the plant: upper (4th true leaf), mid (mainstem leaf located a third down the plant), and lower (leaf on the bottom of the plant). Aphids were counted on one side of the leaf midvein (1/2 leaf) only.

Evaluation of Selected Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Cotton, 1995

Abstract A small plot test was conducted at the Texas A&M Research and Extension Center in Weslaco to evaluate selected insecticides for efficacy against aphids on cotton. Plots measured 1 row (40 inches) by 30 ft. Treatments were arranged in a RCB design with 4 replications. Insecticides were applied with a CO2 pressurized (40 psi) backpack sprayer in a total volume of 10 gpa. Nozzle arrangement consisted of three 10X nozzles per row (1 over-top, 2 on drops). Treatments were applied 13 May. Aphids were monitored by random selection of 5 plants per plot and counting all apterous aphids on the first fully expanded leaf below the terminal.

Test of Registered and Experimental Insecticides for Aphid Control, 1994

Abstract This experiment was conducted in a 2-yr-old commercial ‘Gala’ orchard near Orondo, WA. Trees were planted in double rows. Plots consisted of groups of contiguous trees within a double row, with buffer trees between plots, and buffer rows between treated rows. Four trees per plot with aphid infestations were chosen, and one shoot per tree was tagged. The number of aphids on the most infested leaf was counted on tagged shoots. Pre-treatmerit counts were used as a blocking factor for randomization. Treatments were applied with a handgun to the point of drip on 15 Jul. Post-treatment counts were taken ca. weekly until late Aug.

Evaluation of 12 Insecticides for Aphid Control on Cotton in Mississippi, 1992:

Abstract Twelve treatments were evaluated for relative efficacy against aphids on cotton planted 8 May in Marrietta sandy loam soil on the Plant Science Research Farm, Mississippi State, MS. Plots were 4 rows (96.6 cm centers), by 22 m with 4 unsprayed buffer rows. Treatments were arranged in a RCB design with 4 replications. Applications were made on 6 Jul by high clearance spray tractor equipped with a compressed air spray system and 2, TX4 nozzles per row spaced 48.3 cm apart. Tractor speed was 6.4 km/h and the total volume was 46.8 1/ha. The spray boom was maintained at approximately 46 cm above the average height of the terminals. Aphids were counted on one half of the abaxial surface of each of 10 leaves chosen at random within 15 m of row at each of 2 levels: a leaf 4 nodes down from the apical meristem and a mainstem leaf approximately 1/3 down the plant from the terminal. Data were adjusted to represent aphids/leaf. A fungul epizootic reduced the aphid population drastically following the 13 Jul sample and populations remained too low for evaluation for the remainder of the season.

Evaluation of Insecticides for Control of Aphids on Raspberry, 1989

Abstract The experiment was conducted at the Rock Springs Research Farm. The study was laid out as a completely randomized design with 7 treatments each, replicated 4 times. Treatments consisted of 5 plants, spaced 3 feet apart. Data were obtained from samples taken from the center section of plots. The number of aphids were counted on each of 5 canes per crown, 3 crowns for each plot. On 16 Jun, sprays were applied using a CO2 Precision Boom Sprayer that delivered 72 gal/acre at 35 psi as a dilute spray. The spray boom was equipped with twin fan nozzles (T.J. 60-1104 vs). On 18 Jul, sprays were applied using a Meyers Boom Sprayer that was adjusted to deliver 72 gal/acre as a dilute spray. Treatments in parentheses were applied previously on 25 May.

Evaluation of 3 Insecticides for Aphid Control on Cotton—Northeast Mississippi Location, 1989

Abstract The efficacy of 3 insecticides was evaluated in non-irrigated cotton planted 8 May at the Northeast Mississippi Branch Experiment Station, Verona, MS. Plots were 8 rows wide (40 inch centers) by 50 ft and were arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4 replications. Treatments were applied to the center 4 rows by a high clearance spray tractor equipped with a compressed-air plot spray system calibrated for 8 gal/acre at 4 mph using 3 TX-3 nozzles/row with the outside nozzles on 13 inch drops. Applications were made on 11 and 17 Aug. Prior to the test, the plots received applications of organophosphorus insecticide for early season thrips and for boll weevil control. Aphids were counted in each plot on each of 10 leaves picked at random from 2 levels of the plant; the third or fourth fully expanded leaf below the terminal, and a leaf arising from the mainstem approximately Vs of the plant height down the plant from the terminal. Leaves were collected in the field and transported to the laboratory in plastic bags to count aphids. All data were collected from the center 2 rows.

Evaluation of Pyrethroid and Organophosphate Insecticides for Aphid Control on Cotton—Northeast Mississippi Location, 1989

Abstract Eight treatments were tested for relative efficacy against aphids on non-irrigated cotton planted 8 May at the Northeast Mississippi Branch Experiment Station, Verona, MS. Plots were 8 rows wide by 50 ft with 40 inch centers and were arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4 replications. Treatments were applied to the center 4 rows by a high clearance spray tractor equipped with a compressed air plot spray system calibrated for 8 gal/acre at 4 mph using 3 TX-3 nozzles/row, with the outside nozzles on 13 inch drops. Applications were made on 3 and 11 Aug. Environmental conditions during both applications were excellent. Aphids were sampled in each plot on each of 10 leaves picked at random from each of 2 levels of the plant. The leaves sampled were the third or fourth fully expanded leaf below the terminal and a leaf arising from the mainstem approximately M> of the plant height down the plant from the terminal. All data were collected from the center 2 rows.

Efficacy of Insecticides for Control of Aphids in Cotton, 1986

Abstract Stoneville 112 cotton was planted 6 May at the Macon Ridge Branch of the Northeast Research Station. Treatments were applied to plots that were 6 rows (40 inches wide) × 65 ft. The experimental design was a randomized complete block with 4 replications. Insecticides were applied with a high clearance sprayer equipped with a compressed air system for spraying small plots, delivering 2.5 gal/acre with 2 X-3 hollow cone nozzles/row. Applications were made on 21 Jul. Insecticides were evaluated 3 and 7 days after treatment by randomly collecting 5 leaves from the upper third of plants in the center 2 rows of all plots. Leaves were placed in 1 qt mason jars and transferred to the lab for processing. A solution of water, soap, and bleach was added to the jars, and the samples in individual jars were washed through a series of mesh sieves (#100 and #40) in order to separate the aphids from leaf samples. The contents collected on the #100 mesh sieve were washed into a Buchner funnel and separated onto filter paper for observation under the microscope.

Evaluation of Selected Insecticides for Aphid Control on Cotton, 1986

Abstract Twelve insecticide treatments were evaluated for aphid control at the Red River Research Station, Bossier City, LA, using a randomized complete block design with 3 replications. Cotton was planted 13 May on 1.02-m centers. Plots were 8 rows × 30.5 m. Insecticides were applied with a high-clearance sprayer equipped with a CO2 system for spraying small plots. Treatments were applied on 25 Jul. Insecticides were applied in 11.4 liters of water/acre with TX-3 hollow cone nozzles spaced 50.8 cm apart. Pretreatment and posttreatment counts were based on randomly collected 5 and 10-leaf samples, respectively. For all samples, each leaf collected was the third fully expanded leaf down from the terminal. No yield data were collected.