Alerting Crop Producers to Pest Outbreaks: Statewide Insect Pest Surveys and Rapid Technology...
31
Alerting Crop Producers to Pest Outbreaks: Statewide Insect Pest Surveys and A Rapid Technology Transfer System Speaker: Dr. Ayanava Majumdar Extension Entomologist (Peanuts, Vegetables) State SARE Coordinator, AU Gulf Coast Research & Extension Center 8300 State Hwy 104, Fairhope, Alabama 36532 Cell phone: 251-331-8416 ESA 58 th Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA (Symposium)
-
Upload
dr-ayanava-majumdar-auburn-university -
Category
Education
-
view
555 -
download
3
description
This presentation provides a description of the IPM project in Alabama that is based on technology convergence in the digital age. This presentation also discusses some of the major findings of the two-year insect survey project that demonstrated that sustainable agricultural practices in the long run can reduce insect outbreaks and need for corrective action. The presentation was delivered at the Annual Meeting of the Entomological Society of America 2010, San Diego, CA.
Transcript of Alerting Crop Producers to Pest Outbreaks: Statewide Insect Pest Surveys and Rapid Technology...
Alerting Crop Producers to Pest Outbreaks: Statewide Insect Pest Surveys and A Rapid Technology
Transfer System
Speaker:Dr. Ayanava Majumdar
Extension Entomologist (Peanuts, Vegetables)State SARE Coordinator, AU
Gulf Coast Research & Extension Center8300 State Hwy 104, Fairhope, Alabama 36532
Cell phone: 251-331-8416Email: [email protected]
ESA 58th Annual Meeting, San Diego, CA (Symposium)
Presentation Layout• Overview of SARE & ACES in Alabama• Current & Emerging Pest Issues• Constraints to Technology Adoption• Participatory Ext./Res. projects:
– Insect Pest Monitoring Program & Synchronized Information Transfer System
– Net house Vegetable Production (time permitting)
• Summary
Alabama Sustainable Agriculture Program (SARE Grants, 1988-2009)
Source: http://www.sare.org/highlights/state_summaries.shtml
SARE grants to universities:$539,827 Tuskegee U$134,488 Alabama A&M$1,276,678 Auburn U
Unique Attributes of Alabama Extension & IPM Program
• New ACES model, 2010: Strategic Program Initiatives, TEAM projects with Regional Ext. Agents (REAs)
• Use of Program Theory and Logic Model (Carroll & McKenna, 2001) in grant writing & project execution
• Use of educational models for program maturity
• Evaluations are continuous: Needs Assessment, Process Evaluation, Outcome Evaluation, Impact Assessment (Taylor-Powell, 2008)
Major Insect Pests – Sentinel Plots (2010 - A drought year)
Yellowstriped armyworm, Spodoptera ornithogalli (Guenee)
Tomato hornworm, Manduca quinquemaculata (Linnaeus)
Colorado potato beetleLeptinotarsa decemlineata (Say)
Brown stink bug, Euschistus servus (Say)
Aphid outbreak on bell pepper
Grasshopper
Mexican bean beetle, Epilachna varivestis
Emerging Pest on Vegetables: Leaffooted Bugs
Leptoglossus phyllopus
Leptoglossus zonatus
Leptoglossus gonagra
Brown marmorated stink bug, Hyalomorpha halys
Bean plataspid, Megacopta cribraria
IPM Needs/Asset Assessments, 2008-2010
• Main goal: Empowering farmers, establishing a feedback system
• N = 132 small or limited resource farmers (LRFs)
• Survey locations: AL Sustainable Agriculture Network, Southern Sustainable Agriculture Working Group, ACES Regional meetings
• Also referenced: Tackie et al., 2004, 2009; Molnar et al. 2002, 2006
Results I: Socio-economic Constraints • 64% earned <$10,000 annual sales (Tackie et al., 2004)• 40% high school educated (Tackie et al., 2004)• 4 acres per farm • Barriers to technology adoption:
– Lack of knowledge of Ext. resources: 40-50%– Difficult to access information: 30%– Difficulty in finding products: 20%– High cost of organic materials: 10%*– Low availability of reliable data: 10%– Difficulty in implementing recommendations: 10%– Lack of time: 5%*
* Added by growers during surveys.
• 10-44% respondents could not identify IPM tactic
• 11% indicated IPM should be clearly emphasized in Ext.
• 44% respondents not aware of Extension IPM resources
• Specific pest management challenges:– Timely pest detection, <10% use pheromone traps
– Insect pest ID poor (53% have ‘worms’, 22% ‘aphids’, 20% ‘beetles’)
– Crop scouting, priority 1-4 out of 5, 35% adoption rate
Results II: Technical Constraints
Ecological Pest ManagementFrom Altieri, Nicholls, and Fritz (2005): Manage Insects on Your Farm (SARE)
Ecological Pest Management System or EPM incorporates the broad knowledge of the agro-ecosystem to choose pest management tactics that are timely, environmentally friendly and cost-effective.
Goal of EPM: Maintain Healthy Plants From Root to Foliage
‘Pillars’ of EPM: Crop Diversity Reduce Tillage Rotations Maintain Soil Cover Cover Crops Add Organic Matter Plant Breeding Nutrient Management
Abov
e gr
ound
fact
ors
Belo
w g
roun
d fa
ctor
s
Starting Point for EPM…• Emphasis on Pest Detection & Correct Identification:
– INSECT PHEROMONE TRAPS for improved scouting– Trap Catch = Pest Density X Pest Activity (Taylor, 1963)– Insect Monitoring Project (2009-2010)– Highest trap catches in slideshow (May-Sept.)
Corn rootworm trapSticky wing trapStink bug trap
Pheromone-Based Insect Monitoring
Advantages :• Detect low populations• ‘Quantify’ pest pressure• Species specific • Reusable• Site-specific IPM Action Plan
Disadvantages:• Weather sensitive• No info about crop injury• Scouting still important• Training needed
Intensive Grower (& REA) EPM training, 2008-2010:• Meet a critical need of LRFs (capture attention)• Integrating multiple observations into ‘systems approach’ • Improve decision making for pest management• Where to find reliable information
EPM Training for Agents & Producers
Regional Extension Agent training in improved scouting practices
IPM training to LRFs in Alabama
Alabama Insect Survey Locations
2009 (8,500 insects)
Peanut farm
Vegetable farm
2010 (16,624 insects)
Insect Trap Catches in Alabama Vegetables2010 2009
InsectTrap
catchesNo. of sites
Trap catches
No. of sites Peak moth activity
Beet armyworm 978 15 606 7 July, AugustFall armyworm 733 15 674 7 July, AugustSouthern armyworm 46 13 167 4 AugustTomato fruitworm 120 15 290 7 JulyTobacco budworm 150 15 71 7 AugustLesser cornstalk borer 2307 15 715 1 July, AugustCabbage looper 274 15 83 3 AugustSoybean looper 181 15 100 1 AugustCorn rootworm 65 5 200 6 June, JulySquash vine borer 605 15 - - May, June, JulyTomato pinworm 54 15 4 6 AugustTOTAL 5563 2910
NASS Zones: 3 locations each zone – NE, NW, C, SE and SW AL
Beet Armyworm-BAW(Spodoptera exigua)
2010 2009
13 moths/trap
11 moths/trap
53 moths/trap
46 moths/trap
Traps placed near vegetable fields
10 moths/trap
21 moths/trap
55moths/trap
53 moths/trap
BAW Population Fluctuations in Alabama: Conventional Farm (A) vs. Organic Farm (B)
Early May
Late May
Early June
Late June
Early July
Late July
Early Aug.
Late Aug.
Early Sept.
Late Sept.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 14
27
48
20
2 2 0
10
2825
45
14
40
4 6 69
1 0
2009-A2010-A2010-B
Locations: Clay County (A) Dale County (B)
Numbers indicate moth catches in 12 days.
Noticeable larval feeding
Fall Armyworm-FAW (Spodoptera frugiperda)
2010 2009
18 moths/trap
26 moths/trap
37 moths/trap
5 moths/trap
Traps placed near vegetable fields
20moths/trap
29 moths/trap
36 moths/trap
14 moths/trap
Early May
Late May
Early June
Late June
Early July
Late July
Early Aug.
Late Aug.
Early Sept.
Late Sept.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
4 4
59
16
25
63
0
20
40
85
46
55
18
0 0 04 1 0 0 0
2009-A2010-A2010-B
Numbers indicate moth catches in 12 days.
Noticeable larval feeding
Locations: Clay County (A) Dale County (B)
FAW Population Fluctuations in Alabama: Conventional Farm (A) vs. Organic Farm (B)
Tomato Fruitworm-TFW (Helicoverpa zea)
2010 2009
6 moths/trap
1 moths/trap
21 moths/trap
2 moths/trap
Traps placed near vegetable fields
10 moths/trap
25 moths/trap
11 moths/trap
6 moths/trap
Early May
Late May
Early June
Late June
Early July
Late July
Early Aug.
Late Aug.
Early Sept.
Late Sept.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
24
0
5
24
10
31 0 0 1 2
17
9
4
0 0
4
02
0 0
2009-A2010-A2010-B
Numbers indicate moth catches in 12 days.
Noticeable larval feeding
Locations: Clay County (A) Dale County (B)
TFW Population Fluctuations in Alabama: Conventional Farm (A) vs. Organic Farm (B)
Tobacco Budworm-TBW(Heliothis virescens)
2010 2009
5 moths/trap
3 moths/trap
8 moths/trap
6 moths/trap
Traps placed near vegetable fields
2 moths/trap
7 moths/trap
3 moths/trap
3 moths/trap
Early May
Late May
Early June
Late June
Early July
Late July
Early Aug.
Late Aug.
Early Sept.
Late Sept.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
1 12
0 01
0 01
0
6
3
5
9
5
2
0
2
10
13
0
2
2009-A2010-A2010-B
Numbers indicate moth catches in 12 days.
Noticeable larval feeding
Locations: Clay County (A) Dale County (B)
TBW Population Fluctuations in Alabama: Conventional Farm (A) vs. Organic Farm (B)
Squash Vine Borer-SVB(Mellitia cucurbitae)
2010 2009
19 moths/trap
6 moths/trap
20 moths/trap
14 moths/trap
Traps placed near vegetable fields
NA
NA
NA
NA
Early May
Late May
Early June
Late June
Early July
Late July
Early Aug.
Late Aug.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
68
60
05
1915
1
1418
0
116 8 10
2010-A2010-B
Numbers indicate moth catches in 12 days.Locations: Marshall County (A) Dale County (B)
SVB Population Fluctuations in Alabama: Two Organic Farms
IPM COmmunication REsource (IPM-CORE): Providing New Thrust to Technology Transfer via Technology Convergence (Grant Funded Projects)
IPM Kiosks at local pesticide storesIPM Exhibit at tradeshows
www.aces.edu
CommHort Blog
15-40% LRFs use the website info
Facebook Page: Alabama Vegetable IPM
20% LRFs on Facebook25-83 impressions per newsSubscription increase rate : 1.7%
YouTube Channel: IPMNews
Recorded Live in
Field!
The IPM Communicator(A FREE electronic newsletter)
2010 Newsletter Highlights:• 410+ subscribers (60% LRFs, 30% crop advisors)• Articles: 76 Entomology, 13 Plant Pathology , 21 Home Garden • 22 contributing authors• 18 Weekly Issues (www.aces.edu/go/128; 171 page views/d)• Synchronized with Facebook, YouTube & Blogs• Moving to iContact in 2011
The IPM Communicator(A FREE electronic newsletter)
On-line Impact Evaluation, 2010 (n=58):• 34% farmers, 28% company representatives, 38% others• 53% read for 15 minutes and 22% for 30+ minutes• E-subscriptions growth rate = 12%• 94% support continuation of the newsletter in 2011• Six financial gains reports: $3,550 in pesticide saving
Questions?
Sustainable Insect Pest Management
• Insect pest detection & identification are critical needs
• Insect pest pressures vary by location & farming practices
• Growers encouraged to develop site-specific IPM plan
• Timely information to limited resource farmers important
• Technologies under evaluation: Net house, trap cropping, high tunnels
• Extension IPM program must have high ‘visibility’ even with limited resources
