Mites and Miticide Resistance

Transcription

1 Mites and Miticide Resistance Blue Bird 7 January, 2015 Wenatchee Convention Center, Wenatchee, WA 1 1:30 pm Elizabeth H. Beers Tree Fruit Research & Extension Center 1100 N. Western Ave. Wenatchee, Washington

2 What are secondary pests? (and why are they secondary?) Primary pests are usually direct pests (fruitfeeding) for PNW, it s codling moth Control of primary pest drives the entire IPM program Secondary pests can be either direct/sporadic, or indirect/chronic Typical examples are mites, aphids, leafhoppers, leafminers Control costs can be up to ½ the spray bill!

3 Induced pests Would not normally even be a pest in an unsprayed orchard Biological control keeps it at a low level But, wipe out its natural enemies, and Look out! How do we know it s induced? How to Create an Outbreak of a Secondary Pest Kill it s natural enemies Choice of materials for the primary pest (CM) Choice of materials for the secondary pest(s)

4 Apple Spray Program bloom harvest acaricides insecticides fruit protectants PGRs bactericides fungicides nutrients herbicides Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov

5 Galendromus [=Typhlodromus =Metaseiulus] occidentalis Twospotted spider mite Tetranychus urticae Western predatory mite attacks European red mite Galendromus (Typhlodromus) occidentalis Panonychus ulmi Mcdaniel mite Tetranychus mcdanieli

6 Hoyt 1969

7 Integrated Mite Control in Washington Alternate prey Apple Rust Mites Aculus schlechtendali Nalepa

8 Biological Control vs Integrated Control Integrated control is biological control in the presence of pesticides Pesticides may be targeting mites themselves, or any other pest in the system

9 New Orchard Pesticide to Replace Guthion (azinphosmethyl) Pesticide AI Class Targets Assail acetamiprid Neonicotinyl Codling moth, Heteroptera, thrips Rimon novaluron IGR Codling moth Delegate spinetoram Spinosyn Codling moth, pear psylla, thrips chlorantranil Codling moth Altacor iprole Calypso thiacloprid Neonicotinyl Codling moth, Heteroptera Entrust spinosad spinosyn Leafrollers, codling moth, cherry fruit fly

10 Predatory Mites on Apple Species composition can change! Galendromus occidentalis Amblydromella caudiglans Typhlodromus pyri Galendromus flumenis Typhlodromina citri Euseiulus finlandicus

11 G. occidentalis Type II Predator A. caudiglans Type III Predator OP tolerant?* OP susceptible?* * Downing & Moillet 1972

12 Who is the better predator? G. occidentalis Prefers dense webbing prey such as McDaniel mite, Twospotted spider mite OP tolerant (not many of those left) A. caudiglans Prefers low-web prey such as European red mite Unsure of tolerance (probably less OP tolerant than G. occidentalis) but, not many OPs left

13 Predatory mites Pesticide Susceptibility Miticide A. caudiglans G. occidentalis Different? Acramite Rimon Guthion * Altacor * Provado Sevin Delegate Ultor * Less toxic More toxic <25% 25-75% >75%

14 Nontarget Effects of Pesticides They are the unintended consequence of the pesticide the effect on all organisms other than the target pest Target pest is on the label nontarget effects are NOT.

15 Sublethal Effects All detrimental effects except killing it Reduced fecundity Reduced egg viability Reduced prey consumption Altered sex ratio Repellency

16 How do we establish nontarget effects? Laboratory bioassays Whole plant bioassays Small plot field trials Large plot field trials

17 G. occidentalis Acute Topical Mortality Corrected % Mortality Full Field Rate 1/10 th Field Rate 0 Delegate Warrior Provado Calypso Assai Rimon Manzate Kocide Entrust Belt Sevin Ultor Altacor Guthion Cyazypyr More Harmful Less Harmful

18 G. occidentalis Live Larvae Live Larvae - % of Check Full Field Rate 1/10 th Field Rate 0 Ultor Delegate Warrior Assail Sevin Rimon Provado Entrust Manzate+Kocide Calpyso Guthion Belt Altacor Exirel More Harmful Less Harmful

19 Historical Miticides Acaricide Year Acaricide Year Neotran 1945 Chlorbenside 1953 DMC 1946 Fenson 1953 Shradan 1946 Dioxathion 1954 Parathion 1947 Tetradifon 1954 Ovex 1949 Carbophenothion 1955 EPN 1950 Ethion 1955 Aramite 1950 Binapacryl 1960 Dinocap 1950 Morestan 1960 Sulphenone 1952 Omite 1960 Demeton 1952 Pentac 1960 Chlorobenzilate 1952 Plictran 1969 Dicofol 1952 Galecron 1969 Source: Table 1 in: Jeppson, L. R., H. H. Keifer, and E. W. Baker History of chemical control and mite resistance to acaricides, pp , Mites injurious to economic plants. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.

20 PNW Tree Fruit Miticides Set baselines for hexythiazox (Savey, Onager) and clofentezine (Apollo) Set dicriminating doses for hexythiazox and abamectin (Agri-Mek) (3 spider mite species) Checked resistance (Agri-Mek), reversion (Vendex, Plictran) Pyramite baselines/status Zeal baselines/status Envidor baselines/status FujiMite baslines/status

21 Miticide Resistance FujiMite in 2011 PSM TSM ERM 80 LC 50 (±95% CI) Pear orchard, Wenatchee River Valley N.a.N Biocode for Population

22 Miticide Resistance - TSM Agri-Mek over time % Mortality ppm ppm 10x 1,000x the 1990 dose = 16% mortality ppm 100x ppm ppm AI (log10 dose)

23 Miticides Studied TSM from pear Trade name Common name Group MOA bioassay type Agri-Mek Abamectin avermectins 6 adulticide Acramite bifenazate unknown adulticide FujiMite fenpyroximate METI 21A adulticide Envidor Onager Zeal spirodiclofen hexythiazox etoxazole tetronic/tetramic acid derivatives 23 ovicide mite growth inhibitors 10A ovicide mite growth inhibitors 10B ovicide

24 AgriMek label rate ppm AI Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK Acramite ppm AI Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK ppm AI FujiMite Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK Adulticides LC 50 s 2013

25 2.5e+5 2.0e+5 Zeal label rate ppm AI 10B -4.0e Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK Onager 3000 ppm AI A 0 Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK 400 Envidor ppm AI Historical Lab Colony VC FS WC KK Ovicides LC 50 s 2013

26 High Dose Strategy? LC 99 for Agri-Mek in fl oz/100 gal Agri-Mek SC LC 99 5,592x fl oz fl oz fl oz 0 LC99 in 1989 Field rate

27 High Dose Strategy? LC 99 for Agri-Mek in fl oz/100 gal fl oz Agri-Mek SC LC fl oz 5,592x 4.25 fl oz 4.25 fl oz of the 0.7 lb AI SC formulation = 20 fl oz of the 0.15EC formulation LC99 in 1989 Field rate KK FS VC WC

28 Miticide Resistance Spider mites have a long history of developing resistance Predatory mites also develop resistance, but more slowly High dose strategy not likely to work Rotation of MOAs better than nothing Integrated control a better solution