We conclude that insecticidal soaps may have a 

 role in future pear psylla control programs in spite of their 

 higher cost; however, more work needs to be done using 

 spray additives to reduce or eliminate fruit phytotoxicity. 

 Because insecticidal soaps arc non-selective, possible 

 negative effects on beneficial species (aphid predators, 

 spiders, minute pirate bugs, etc.) must be investigated. 



Further, other than learning that defoamcrs arc essential 

 when applying soaps, we know very little at present about 

 their application through air-blast sprayers, or whether 

 they may be applied using low-volume techniques. Conse- 

 quently, we are not prepared at this time to recommend 

 insecticidal soap on a large scale, although growers are 

 encouraged to experiment in small blocks. 



* * 



* * 



A REPORT ON THE 1987 MASSACHUSETTS APPLE IPM 

 PROGRAM 



William M. Coli, Kathleen Leahy, Daniel R. Cooley, Ronald J. Prokopy, and Mary T. O'Brien 

 Departments of Entomology and Plant Pathology, University of Massachusetts 



Acknowledgements: We wish to thank Keith 

 Bohne, Alex and Charlie Dowse, Tony Lincoln, Frank 

 Parker, Jesse and Wayne Rice, Ed Roberts, Bill Rose, 

 Mike and Tim Smith, Tony Rossi, and National Park 

 Service staff, Ron Catudal and Gene Gabriel, for their 

 cooperation. Thanks also to New England Fruit Consult- 

 ants, Sue Butkewich, and Tom Green for information they 

 provided which we included in pest messages and reports. 

 Special thanks to Regional Fruit Agents, Jim Williams and 

 DomMarini, for performing weekly scouting ofacommcr- 

 cial orchard in their region and reporting their findings for 

 use in pest alert messages. Thanks to all Regional Fruit 

 Agents for speedy turnaround of pest messages. 



Extension Program Activity 



As in previous years, the apple 1PM program was 

 funded by a combination of state, federal, and grower 

 sources. Voluntary grower contributions totaled $3,200 in 

 1987, a 14% increase from last year. We greatly appreciate 

 this continued support, and we consider it further evidence 

 that Massachusetts apple growers, through hiring IPM 

 consultants and support of Extension programs, have 

 adopted IPM on a large scale. 



Program activities were similar to those in 1986, 

 and continued to focus on grower and other group educa- 

 tion, information-transfer using newsletters, code-a- 

 phones, twilight meetings, and orchard visits, and on per- 

 forming appropriate adaptive studies. Eight commercial 

 orchard blocks, two blocks at the University of Massachu- 

 setts Horticultural Research Center (HRC) in Belcher- 



town, and one at an historic orchard in Quincy were 

 monitored weekly for arthropods and pathogens affecting 

 tree fruits. Increased emphasis was placed on monitoring 

 peach and pear pests and including this information in pest 

 messages. Scab infested leaves which had been placed in 

 wire cages at cooperator sites in November, 1986, were 

 collected weekly and examined to determine apple scab 

 spore maturity. In addition, temperature and rainfall were 

 recorded at the HRC, and other pest information was 

 gained by occasional orchard visits, and by reports from 

 Sue Butkewich, Tom Green, growers, Extension workers 

 in other states, and private scouts and consultants. 



Plant Pathology expanded the Vcnliiria iitacqiialis 

 (apple scab) ascospore maturity monitoring to cover more 

 effectively the range of development in the stale. As a side 

 benefit, it was possible to begin to model the development 

 of ascosporcs, and relate it to degree days. In New 

 Hampshire, such a model has eliminated the need for 

 frequent maturity sampling. However, discrepancies be- 

 tween the New Hampshire results and tests in other states 

 make it advisable for us to test the model in Massachusetts. 



Cooperating growers were strongly encouraged 

 tobuy modified recording hygrothermographs, which were 

 made available at a bulk discount along with weather 

 shelters or plans for their construction. Weather data from 

 these stations, as well as from the HRC, were used to advise 

 growers on the intensity of the scab pressure. 



Scouting information was used to reply to grower 

 calls and to write twice-weekly Entomology Pest Messages 

 from April 7 to August 25. Plant Pathology messages were 



15 



