Apple Integrated Pest Management in 

 1993: Insects and Mites in Second-level 

 Orchard Blocks 



Jennifer Mason, Ronald Prokopy, Starker Wright, Sarah Goodall, 

 Kristian Jones, Yu Ma, Vanessa Mohr, and Miyu Nogaki 

 Department of Entomology, University of Massachusetts 



For the past two years we have reported results 

 of our ongoing program of second-level IPM trials in 

 Massachusetts apple orchards. Under second-level 

 IPM, orchard management is integrated across all 

 classes of pests: insects, mites, diseases, weeds, and 

 vertebrates, rather than focusing on a single type of 

 pest. Here we report results of the third year of 

 second-level IPM trials on insects and mites in 

 commercial Massachusetts orchards. 



Insect and mite management under second-level 

 IPM practices require application of three to four 

 selective insecticide sprays from April to early June 

 to manage tarnished plant bug (TPB), European 

 apple sawfly (EAS), plum curculio (PC), green fruit- 

 worm (GFW), and the first generations of codling 

 moth (CM), lesser appleworm (LAW), leafminer 

 (LM), and white apple leafhopper (WALH). Insecti- 

 cide application to the interior of the block ceases 

 after the final plum curculio spray in early June, 

 hopefully allowing populations of predatory insects 

 and parasitoids to increase to levels sufficient to 

 provide control of summer populations of foliar 

 pests. In full second-level IPM blocks, apple 

 maggot fiies (AMP) are controlled by perimeter in- 

 terception traps. In transitional second-level 

 IPM blocks, use of AMF interception traps is re- 

 placed by perimeter-row spraying with Guthion™* or 

 Imidan''''^ every three weeks beginning in early July. 

 In both types of blocks, removal of unmanaged apple 

 and pear trees within 100 yards of each block reduces 

 immigration of CM and LAW. Removal of drops 

 during and after harvest discourages buildup of 

 within-orchard populations of AMF, CM, and LAW. 



We believe there are at least four distinct poten- 

 tial benefits of employing biologically-based meth- 

 ods as a substitute for insecticides from early June 

 until harvest. These include reduction in insecticide 

 residue on fruit at harvest, reduction in impact of 

 insecticide on areas bordering orchards, reduction in 



selection pressure leading to pest resistance to insec- 

 ticides, and buildup of beneficial natural enemies in 

 the absence of insecticide use afi-er early season 

 sprays. For some growers and some intended mar- 

 kets, one or more of these potential benefits could be 

 important in the near future, if not now. 



In 1993, we continued work in the same six full 

 and six transitional second-level IPM test blocks 

 used in 1991 and 1992. Each second-level block was 

 matched with a nearby control block that was man- 

 aged by the grower, using first-level IPM methods. 



Early-Season Fruit-injuring Pests 



For control of arthropod pests active up to early 

 June, second-level IPM relies on early-season pesti- 

 cide treatment based on monitoring. We monitored 

 each orchard weekly beginning in mid-April, then 

 biweekly from mid-June through September. Five 

 each of four types of sticky traps were hung in each 

 block to monitor for TPB, LM, and EAS. We exam- 

 ined 100 or 200 leaves or watersprouts per block for 

 LM, LH, aphids, mites, and mite predators. During 

 PC season, scouts examined fruit on perimeter trees 

 for evidence of fresh injury, while growers were 

 urged to do likewise on a daily basis. On the basis of 

 this monitoring, recommendations were made to the 

 grower for treatment of the experimental block. 



In second-level IPM blocks (both full and transi- 

 tional) in 1993, combined injuries from early- season 

 fruit pests were rather similar to those in nearby 

 first-level IPM (grower control) blocks. In both first- 

 and second- level IPM blocks, TPB caused by far the 

 most damage, followed by PC and EAS (Table 1). 

 Due to a lack of alternatives to pesticidal control of 

 early-season fruit pests, both first- and second-level 

 blocks had similar management and therefore simi- 

 lar insecticide use(Table2).Thisyear sawa marked 

 increase in TPB damage over 1992 in all blocks, 

 though injury due to PC and EAS remained similar. 



Fruit Notes, Winter, 1994 



