Foxglove Aphids in Lettuce: Control with Reduced-risk and Conventional
Insecticides
John C. Palumbo
Introduction
As key pests of desert lettuce, aphids and thrips probably represent
the most important insect problems currently facing the industry. A new
aphid species, the foxglove aphid, Aulacorthum solani, was found
infesting commercial lettuce fields in the Yuma area for the first time
this past growing season. It has been present in California since at least
1940, and has caused problems for lettuce growers in Salinas for the past
5 years. The foxglove aphid was first discovered infesting head lettuce
at low levels the Yuma Agricultural Center in the spring of 2001. Then
in the spring of 2002 foxglove aphids reached high population levels at
YAC on spring plantings, but were not reported in commercial fields (Table
1). This pasts spring foxglove aphid populations were wide-spread
throughout the Yuma Valley, particularly in fields near the river and
adjacent to citrus orchards and residential areas.
Unlike the lettuce aphid which was first found in Yuma five years ago,
the foxglove aphid is known to colonize a much broader range of plant
hosts, including a wide variety of weeds (i.e., Shepards purse, ground
cherry, pigweed), ornamentals (i.e., geraniums, gladiolas, verbena) and
crops (i.e., cucurbits, beans, canola, spinach, citrus, safflower, tomatoes).
This large availability of hosts and apparent adaptation to our winter
and spring growing conditions suggests that foxglove aphids might present
growers with some new challenges.
Although we are uncertain how this new species will behave under desert
growing conditions in the long-term, infestations this spring reached
high levels in experimental plots and in some commercial fields. Another
aphid species, Acyrthosiphon lactucae (no common name) which is
commonly misidentified as potato aphid, was also present this year in
extremely high levels. Because of the importance of these aphids as contaminants
of lettuce and other leafy vegetables, we designed several insecticide
trials this past season to determine how effective conventional, reduced-risk
and other new insecticides were against these aphids under local growing
conditions
Material and Methods
Small-plot, field studies were conducted in head lettuce and romaine
at the University of Arizona, Yuma Agricultural Center in the spring 2003
growing seasons to evaluate the efficacy of several new reduced risk and
conventional insecticides for control of aphids and thrips. In each trial,
lettuce was direct seeded into double row beds on 42 inch centers and
sprinkled beginning the following day. Plots for each trial consisted
of 2-4 beds, 50' long with a two bed buffer between the plots. Plots were
arranged in a randomized complete block design with 4 replications. Treatments
and rates for each crop are presented in the data tables. Specific information
for each trial is listed below:
|
Head Lettuce-I |
Head Lettuce- II |
Romaine -I |
Romaine - II |
Variety |
Bubba |
Desert Spring |
PIC |
PIC |
Planting date |
Nov 14 |
December 4 |
December 12 |
January 10 |
Harvest date |
Mar 6 |
March 12 |
March 17 |
April 9 |
Spray dates |
1/21, 2/4, 2/16 |
1/26, 2/8, 2/18 |
1/22, 2/8, 2/18, 3/17 |
3/13, 3/21, 3/30 |
Pre-spray
aphid densities |
0.7 aphids/plant
20% infested plants |
1.4 aphids/plant;
16 % infested plants |
0.3 aphids / plant
6% infested plants |
33.5 aphids/plants;
100% infested plants |
In the head lettuce-I trial, the at-planting soil applications of Admire,
Platinum and dinotefuron were applied as a preplant injection at a depth
of 1.5" below the seed line at bed shaping in 15 GPA final dilution.
The side dress treatment of Platinum was applied at 2nd side dress (Jan
15) similar to fertilizer side dressing and the materials were placed
on the bed shoulder at @ 3" below the soil in 30 GPA final dilution.
In all trials, foliar spray applications were hand applied with a CO2
operated boom sprayer operated at 60 psi and 27 GPA. A directed spray
(~75% band, with rate adjusted for band; nozzles directed inward toward
the plants) was delivered through 3 nozzles (TX-10) per bed. An adjuvant
was applied to all foliar treatments; DyneAmic, Exit, Hook or Induce at
0.065%v/v. The first spray in each trial was initiated when aphids were
first found colonizing plants (see above; pre-spray aphid densities).
Aphid populations were assessed by estimating the number of aphids /plant
in whole plant, destructive samples. Five aphid species were present on
plants during the trials and have been classified into two groups for
analysis in the following (1) Foxglove aphid, and (2) Green aphid complex
consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae (no common name), potato aphid
and green peach aphid. In addition, Lettuce aphids were present
in significant numbers during the Romaine-II trial. On each sampling date,
8-10 plants were randomly selected from each plot and placed individually
into large 5-gal tubs. Each plant was sampled by visually examining all
plant foliage and counting the number of alate (winged) and apterous (non-winged)
aphids present. In the head lettuce, infestation levels of apterous aphids
at harvest were estimated by randomly selecting 10 plants within each
replicate, visually counting the number of aphids on frame/wrap per leaves
and heads separately. In romaine, all leaves were sampled when plants
were harvested and particular attention was given to hearts and terminal
growing points.
Results and Discussion
Head Lettuce I: Foxglove aphids were the dominant aphid
species during this trial, but A. lactucae was also very abundant (Table
2). Several new insecticides, both soil and foliar applied, were evaluated
for economic aphid control. The soil applied neonicotinoid treatments
provided marginal control of foxglove aphids at harvest, and head contamination
was lowest in the Admire (16 oz) plots (Table 2).
None of the soil treatments were comparable to the foliar sprays in controlling
foxglove aphids, but all of the soil treatments except dinotefuron suppressed
populations of the green aphid complex to very low levels. In most cases,
all of the foliars reduced aphid numbers to acceptable levels at harvest.
Dinotefuron did not provided significant control relative to the other
foliar compounds, and Assail applied alone, provided marginal control
of Foxglove aphid. When combined with Capture, Assail provided significantly
better control. Flonicamid, Actara and Fulfill provided excellent control
of all aphids, and addition of Capture did not significantly improve efficacy.
Head Lettuce II: Foxglove aphid abundance was lower in this
trial, whereas A. lactucae abundance was extremely high (Table
3). Interestingly, green peach and potato aphid populations were low,
comprising less than 10% of the green aphid complex. This trial was originally
designed to evaluate thrips (thus the inclusion of the Success treatments)
but we focused on the aphids due to their overwhelming presence in the
plots. All treatments were applied as foliar spray and the 3rd application
was made 22 days before harvest. The Success treatments did not control
aphids and in fact actually resulted in greater numbers of foxglove aphids
than the untreated control. The Lannate + Mustang treatments did significantly
suppress Foxglove aphid numbers, but did not significantly lower numbers
of green aphids compared with the untreated check. All of the older compounds
evaluated provided significant control of all aphid species at harvest
(>95% control). In particular, MSR+Capture, Othehene+Mustang and dimethoate
provided very good residual efficacy. Endosulfan applied alone was a little
less consistent on Foxglove aphid.
Romaine I: This trial was designed similar to the above
trial in head lettuce, but only older treatments registered on Romaine
were evaluated. Aphid numbers in general were lower in this trial, not
exceeding 100 aphids/plant (Table 4). Foxglove aphids
were the dominant aphid species in the untreated plots, but GAC were actually
higher in the Success (6 oz) treatment than in the check. Similar to the
above trials, Success and Lannate did not significantly reduce aphid numbers.
Foxglove aphids were best controlled in plots treated with dimethoate,
Provado, endosulfan, and Flonicamid. Overall, the dimethoate and endosulfan
combination was particularly effective against aphids during the trial.
Fulfill did reduce numbers at significantly lower levels than the check,
but not as efficaciously as the older compounds.
Romaine II: This test was a late season trial on romaine
where aphid numbers were allowed to establish on plants prior to spray
initiation. Numbers of aphids exceeded 33 aphids / plant before the 1st
application where lettuce aphids were 15.5 aphids/ plant, green aphids
were about 12 aphids/plant and foxglove were 5.1 aphids. We also focused
on tank mixtures with older contact materials and newer systemic compounds
to evaluate both knockdown and residual control. For the 1st spray all
treatments were combined with Mustang. Flonicamid provided the most significant
efficacy of Foxglove at 7-DAT, but was not as effective against lettuce
aphids (Table 5). The dimethoate and Actara treatments
provided the most significant knockdown efficacy against Green and Lettuce
aphids. Following the 2nd spray combined with Capture, again flonicamid
provided the best foxglove aphid control. Dimethoate provided good green
and lettuce aphid knockdown, but appeared to be less effective on foxglove
aphid. Relative to the untreated check, Actara provided good efficacy
of both green and lettuce aphids. Residual efficacy of foxglove aphid
following the 3rd spray was again most significant with the Flonicamid
combination. Similar to the previous application, Actara and dimethoate
provided good sustained knockdown of the green aphid complex. Although,
both of these treatments provided >90% control of lettuce aphids at
10 DAT #3, romaine hearts harvested in these plots were not marketable
due to excessive aphid infestation (>70 aphids/heart).
Conclusions:
- Older Chemistry: dimethoate, MSR and Orthene consistently
provided economic efficacy of foxglove and green aphids in head lettuce
and romaine. These products should be used at high rates.
- New Foliar Chemistry: Flonicamid and Actara consistently
provided good systemic residual control of foxglove and green aphids.
Fulfill was less consistent, but provided good residual control on head
lettuce when applied on a timely basis. Assail provided inconsistent
efficacy and performed best when combined with a contact insecticide.
Presently, Actara, Flonicamid and Assail are not registered for use
on lettuce in Arizona, but labels may be available in 1-2 years. Again,
these products should be used at higher rates.
- Soil-applied Insecticides: Admire appeared to provide
less control of Foxglove aphids (~85% control) than green aphids (>95%)
in head lettuce. However, other studies this past spring showed that
Admire provided good control of foxglove aphids (90+ % control), particularly
when populations were lighter. At best, Platinum appears to be comparable
to Admire, and dinotefuron has shown inconsistent performance as both
a soil and foliar treatment.
- Spray Timing: The compounds used in these trials should
be applied when aphids first begin to colonize. This is consistent with
a threshold of no more than 10% infested plants (the percentage of plants
infested with 1 or more non-winged aphids). Control has been most consistent
using spray intervals of 10-14 days. None of the products tested have
the capability to rapidly knockdown aphid infestations, especially when
plants are heading.
Table 1. Aphid infestations on untreated
head lettuce plants at harvest, YAC 1999-2003.
|
|
|
|
Mean Apterous Aphids
/ Plant at Harvest |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Green aphid complex
a |
|
Lettuce aphid |
|
Foxglove aphid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Season |
Planting date |
Harvest date |
Variety |
Head |
Frame |
|
Head |
Frame |
|
Head |
Frame |
|
1999- |
11-Oct |
24-Jan |
Grizzley |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
- |
- |
2000 |
1-Nov |
20-Feb |
Wolverine |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
- |
- |
|
15-Nov |
1-Mar |
Del Rio |
1.3 |
0.6 |
|
12.3 |
0 |
|
- |
- |
|
1-Dec |
23-Mar |
Jackel |
0.3 |
0.3 |
|
8.2 |
0.5 |
|
- |
- |
|
15-Dec |
23-Mar |
Diamond |
0.2 |
0.1 |
|
42.9 |
0.6 |
|
- |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2000- |
11-Oct |
25-Jan |
Grizzley |
2 |
14.4 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
- |
- |
2001 |
1-Nov |
2-Mar |
Wolverine |
15.2 |
38.5 |
|
5.1 |
0 |
|
- |
- |
|
15-Nov |
3-Mar |
Del Rio |
8.5 |
42.6 |
|
6.5 |
0.9 |
|
- |
- |
|
1-Dec |
26-Mar |
Jackel |
2.6 |
12.9 |
|
9.6 |
0.4 |
|
- |
- |
|
15-Dec |
26-Mar |
Diamond |
0.3 |
3.0 |
|
8.2 |
0.6 |
|
- |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001- |
10-Oct |
14-Jan |
Wolverine |
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0 |
2002 |
28-Oct |
4-Feb |
Grizzley |
0 |
2.3 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
0.3 |
0 |
|
15-Nov |
5-Mar |
Wolverine |
0.5 |
7.1 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
0 |
0.1 |
|
3-Dec |
22-Mar |
Diamond |
3.6 |
7.9 |
|
1.1 |
0.1 |
|
1.4 |
6.3 |
|
13-Dec |
6-Apr |
Diamond |
1.0 |
1.5 |
|
6.3 |
0.4 |
|
11.7 |
2.9 |
|
2002- |
10-Oct |
14-Jan |
Winterhaven |
0.4 |
3.5 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
0.5 |
3.4 |
2003 |
29-Oct |
12-Feb |
Winterhaven |
1.1 |
6.9 |
|
0 |
0 |
|
2.4 |
48.1 |
|
14-Nov |
9-Mar |
Bubba |
96.6 |
244.6 |
|
44.7 |
16.4 |
|
33.9 |
150.9 |
|
3-Dec |
18-Mar |
Diamond |
105.5 |
345.6 |
|
145.7 |
21.4 |
|
125.9 |
201.3 |
|
12-Dec |
18-Mar |
Diamond |
126.2 |
170.9 |
|
182.2 |
18.9 |
|
81.8 |
101.0 |
Data taken from samples of whole plants taken at harvest in small, untreated
¼ acre plots of head lettuce at the Yuma Ag Center.
aGreen
aphid complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae , potato
aphid and green peach aphid
Table 2. Head Lettuce -I. Aphid
densities on heads, wrapper and frame leaves of lettuce plants at harvest,
Mar 6th (18 DAT 3), YAC 2003
|
Apterous
Aphids (mean / plant)
|
AphidTreatment |
|
Foxglove
Aphid
|
|
Green
Aphid Complex a |
Rate/acre |
Wrappers |
Heads |
Total |
Wrappers |
Heads |
Total |
Admire at plant |
At plant - 16 oz |
43.6 bc |
8.0 cd |
51.7 bc |
0.3 bc |
0.6 c |
0.9 bcd |
Platinum |
At plant - 8 oz |
39.4 bc |
22.6 bc |
62.0 bc |
1.0 bc |
0 c |
1.0 bcd |
Platinum |
Side dress - 8 oz |
64.4 b |
16.9 bc |
81.2 bc |
7.1 b |
1.2 bc |
8.3 b |
dinotefuron |
At plant - 500 g a.i. |
82.3 b |
28.5 ab |
110.8 b |
117.7 a |
22.0 a |
139.7 a |
dinotefuron |
Foliar- 120 g a.i. |
52.8 b |
28.4 ab |
81.2 bc |
44.1 a |
8.6 b |
52.7 a |
Assail |
Foliar- 1.7 oz |
18.0 cd |
14.8 bc |
32.9 c |
3.2 bc |
1.3 c |
4.6 bcd |
Assial+Capture |
Foliar- 1.7 oz+5 oz |
3.7 de |
3.4 de |
7.1 d |
1.0 bc |
0 c |
1.0 bcd |
Actara |
Foliar- 4 oz |
2.2 e |
0.9 e |
3.1 d |
0 c |
0 c |
0 d |
Actara+Capture |
Foliar- 4 oz + 5 oz |
1.1 e |
1.2 e |
2.3 d |
0.4 bc |
0.5 c |
1.0 bcd |
Fulfill |
Foliar- 2.75 oz |
1.5 e |
1.4 e |
2.9 d |
1.6 bc |
2.8 bc |
4.4 bcd |
Fulfill+Capture |
Foliar- 2.75 oz + 5 oz |
2.2 e |
1.6 e |
3.8 d |
0.2 bc |
0 c |
0.2 cd |
Flonicamid |
Foliar- 0.13 lb a.i. |
2.7e |
2.0 e |
4.7 d |
0 c |
0.2 c |
0.2 cd |
Untreated |
-- |
233.0 a |
70.4 a |
303.4 a |
194.8 a |
39.1 a |
233.9 a |
aGAC, green
aphid complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae , potato
aphid and green peach aphid.; population at this time consisted primarily
of Acyrthosiphon lactucae.
Table 3. Head Lettuce -II. Aphid
densities on heads, wrapper and frame leaves of lettuce plants at harvest,
Mar 12th (22 DAT#3), YAC 2003
|
Apterous
aphids (mean / plant)
|
Foxglove aphid
|
|
Green
aphid complex a |
Treatment |
Rate |
Frame |
Heads |
Total |
Frame |
Heads |
Total |
Success |
6.0 oz |
209.6 ab |
37.5 ab |
247.1 ab |
368.1 ab |
49.2 bc |
417.3 ab |
Success |
10. oz |
243.9 ab |
22.0 abc |
265.9 ab |
776.7 a |
63.9 ab |
840.5 a |
Success +Mustang |
5 oz+ 4 oz |
448.9 a |
46.4 a |
494.9 a |
633.7 a |
67.9 ab |
701.7 a |
Lannate+Mustang |
0.75 lb+4.0 oz |
121.4 ab |
4.9 cd |
126.3 bc |
305.7 b |
9.7 cd |
315.4 b |
MSR + Capture |
2 pts + 5 oz |
7.7 d |
0.4 e |
8.1 e |
6.7 d |
2.5 d |
9.3 d |
Provado + Endosulfan |
3.75 oz+32 oz |
9.0 d |
3.5 cde |
12.5 e |
20.6 cd |
5.8 cd |
26.4 cd |
Orthene+Mustang |
1 lb + 4.0 oz |
10.4 d |
2.2 de |
12.6 e |
23.8 cd |
0.9 d |
24.7 cd |
Dimethoate |
0.75 pt |
13.0 cd |
2.6 de |
15.6 e |
15.9 cd |
2.3 d |
18.2 cd |
Endosulfan |
1.0 qt |
22.2 cd |
4.2 cde |
26.4 de |
35.3 c |
4.5 cd |
39.8 c |
Untreated |
|
98.5 bc |
8.3 bcd |
106.7 cd |
1034.5 a |
138.9 a |
1173.3 a |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly
different (LSD p<0.05)
aGAC, green aphid
complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae , potato aphid and
green peach aphid.; population at this time consisted primarily of Acyrthosiphon
lactucae.
Table 4. Romaine - I. Aphid densities
on all leaves of romaine plants at pre-harvest and at harvest, YAC 2003
|
|
Apterous aphids (mean / plant)
|
|
|
Pre- Harvest
Feb 25th (7 DAT 2)
|
|
Harvest
B
Mar 17th (7 DAT 4) |
Treatment |
Rate |
FG |
GACa |
Total |
FG |
GACa |
Total |
Success |
6 oz |
- |
- |
- |
57.3 a |
40.1 a |
97.4 a |
Success |
9.5 oz |
21.5 a |
3.4a |
24.9 a |
38.1 a |
7.7 ab |
45.8 ab |
Success+Mustang |
5 oz+ 4 oz |
- |
- |
- |
32.5 a |
3.1 abc |
35.6 b |
Lannate+Mustang |
0.75 lb +4 oz |
8.8 ab |
2.1 a |
10.9 b |
34.3 ab |
1.2 bc |
35.5 b |
Provado+Endosulfan |
3.7 oz+ 1 qt |
0.6 de |
0.6 a |
1.2 c |
1.5 d |
0 c |
1.5 d |
Fulfill |
2.75 oz |
3.3 bc |
1.9 a |
5.2 bc |
8.5 bc |
2.9 bc |
11.4 c |
Dimethoate+Endosulfan |
12 oz+1 qt |
2.3 c |
1.1 a |
3.4 c |
0.9 d |
0 c |
0.9 d |
Flonicamid |
0.133 lb |
0.2 e |
1.4 a |
1.6 c |
5.1 cd |
0.7 c |
5.8 cd |
Dimethoate/Malathion |
12 oz+2 pts |
1.2 cd |
1.5 a |
2.7 c |
1.7 d |
0.1 c |
1.8 d |
Untreated |
- |
13.7 a |
8.3a |
24.0 a |
42.4 a |
3.7 bc |
46.1 ab |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Means followed by the same letter are not significantly
different (LSD p<0.05)
aGAC, green aphid
complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae , potato aphid and
green peach aphid.; population at this time consisted primarily of Acyrthosiphon
lactucae.
Table 5. Romaine - II. Aphid densities
on all leaves of romaine plants at pre-harvest and at harvest, YAC 2003
Pre-Harvest March 20 |
7-DAT 1 |
Mean Aphids / Plant |
Treatment |
Rate/ac |
FG |
Green complex |
LAb |
Total a |
Dimethoate+Mustang Max |
0.75 pt+4.0 oz |
15.9 b |
8.3 c |
19.7 bcd |
49.8 d |
Mustang Max |
4.0 oz |
47.8 a |
94.7 a |
37.9 abc |
184.0 ab |
Provado + Mustang Max |
3.75 oz+4.0 oz |
36.2 ab |
125.3 a |
18.4 cd |
180.9 abc |
Flonicamid+Mustang Max |
0.133 lb ai |
7.0 c |
34.1 bc |
45.9 ab |
88.3 cd |
Actara+Mustang Max |
4 oz+ 4.0 oz |
25.5 ab |
12.1 c |
9.9 d |
47.9 d |
Assail+Mustang Max |
1.7 oz + 4.0 oz |
16.6 b |
22.7 bc |
44.9 bcd |
86.6 cd |
Fulfifll+Mustang Max |
2.75 oz+4.0 oz |
19.1 ab |
26.5 bc |
47.5 abc |
99.6 bcd |
Untreated |
|
34.9 ab |
80.6 ab |
107.9 a |
234.5 a |
Mean followed by the same letter are not significantly different (LSD
p<0.05).
aGreen aphid complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae,
potato aphid and green peach aphid;
bLA=lettuce aphid, Nosanovia reibi-nigri.
Pre-Harvest March 28 |
7-DAT 2
|
Mean Aphids / Plant
|
Treatment |
Rate/ac |
FG
|
Green complex
|
LAb
|
Total a
|
Dimethoate+Capture |
0.75 pt+6 oz |
34.1 abc
|
1.4 d
|
16.2 d
|
52.5 cde
|
Capture |
6.0 oz |
59.3 ab
|
44.3 b
|
63.8 b
|
168.7 b
|
Provado + Capture |
3.75 oz+6.0 oz |
21.6 bc
|
56.5 b
|
76.9 b
|
155.7 b
|
Flonicamid+ Capture |
0.133 lb ai+6 oz |
2.8 d
|
2.4 cd
|
36.1 bc
|
41.3 de
|
Actara+ Capture |
4 oz+ 6.0 oz |
15.9 c
|
2.3 cd
|
19.3 cd
|
37.7 e
|
Assail+ Capture |
1.7 oz + 6.0 oz |
16.7 c
|
42.7 b
|
46.9 b
|
106.4 bc
|
Fulfifll+ Capture |
2.75 oz+6.0 oz |
24.5 abc
|
11.2 bc
|
48.3 b
|
84.3 bcd
|
Untreated |
|
65.8 a
|
266.9 a
|
364.5 a
|
700.6 a
|
Mean followed by the same letter are not significantly different
(LSD p<0.05).
aGreen aphid complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae, potato
aphid and green peach aphid;
bLA=lettuce aphid, Nosanovia reibi-nigri.
Harvest Apr 9 |
10- DAT 3 |
Mean Aphids / Plant |
Treatment |
Rate/ac |
FG |
Green complex a |
LA b |
Total |
Dimethoate+Endosulfan |
0.75 pt+32 oz |
11.4 b |
0.4 e |
89.1 b |
101.4 b |
Endosulfan |
32 oz |
81.3 a |
30.0 bc |
178.0 ab |
290.3 b |
Provado + Endosulfan |
3.75 oz+32 oz |
68.6 a |
5.9 bc |
162.7 b |
237.1 b |
Flonicamid+ Endosulfan |
0.133 lb ai+32z |
2.9 c |
2.3 cde |
150.4 b |
155.9 b |
Actara+ Endosulfan |
4 oz+ 32 oz |
13.2 b |
1.2 de |
70.0 b |
84.4 b |
Assail+ Endosulfan |
1.7 oz + 32 oz |
11.0 b |
16.1 b |
165.0 ab |
192.1 b |
Fulfifll+ Endosulfan |
2.75 oz+32 oz |
19.8 b |
5.0 bcd |
204.7 ab |
229.9 b |
Untreated |
|
67.6 a |
465.7 a |
831.8 a |
1365.0 a |
Mean followed by the same letter are not significantly different
(LSD p<0.05).
aGreen aphid complex consisting of Acyrthosiphon lactucae, potato
aphid and green peach aphid;
bLA=lettuce aphid, Nosanovia reibi-nigri.
Full Disclaimers
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, acts
of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture,
James A. Christenson, Director Cooperative Extension, College of Agriculture
and Life Sciences, The University of Arizona.
The University of Arizona is an equal opportunity, affirmative
action institution. The University does not discriminate on the basis of race,
color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, veteran status, or sexual
orientation in its programs and activities.
Any products, services, or organizations that are
mentioned, shown, or indirectly implied in this web document do not imply
endorsement by The University of Arizona.
Information
provided by:
John C. Palumbo, jpalumbo@ag.arizona.edu
Research Scientist (Entomology)
University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona.
Material written June 2003.
|