-11- 



points out the need to monitor AMF directly in commercial orchards 

 rather than relying on abandoned orchard captures (as recommended 

 in Canada) to indicate the need to spray. 



Table 1. Average percent of insect injury on fruit at harvest in 

 IPM and check commercial orchards in Massachusetts, 1979 



? injury 



Insect 



16 IPM 

 blocks 



11 Same orchard 9 Check 

 non IPM blocks blocks 



Tarnished plant bug 2.74 



Plum curculio 0.39 



San Jose scale 0.33 



Apple maggot fly 0.12 



European apple sawfly 0.03 



Green fruitworm 0.02 



Leafrollers 0.01 



Codling moth 0.00 



Total I of insect injury 3. 64 



Average number insecticide 



applications^ 6.0 



3.88 



9.1 



3.10 

 0.17 

 1.07 

 0.23 

 0.04 

 0.07 

 0.04 

 0.01 

 4TT3" 



11.0 



Woolly apple aphids 0.08 



White apple leafhopper 0.01 



Sooty mold 0. 00 



Total I of insect injury 0.09 



Average number aphicide 



applications 0.36 



1.56 



0. 36 



1.31 



0.36 



GRAND TOTAL % INSECT INJURY 



3.73 



5.44 



6.04 



Does not include materials directed solely at aphids (e.g., endo- 

 sulfan, phosphamidon) . 



Codling moth (CM), leafrollers (LR) and green fruitworms (GFW) 

 were relatively unimportant pests in 1979, although injury from these 

 insects was slightly higher in check than IPM blocks. Woolly apple 

 aphid (WAA) injury (i.e., WAA and/or sooty mold growth on the aphid 

 honeydew on fruit) was identical in IPM and check blocks. Speckling 

 of fruit with white apple leafhopper (WAL) excrement was particularly 

 high in 1 check orchard, resulting in high average injury from this 

 insect compared to IPM blocks. 



