| 
Research Projects
|
Blueberry On-Farm Insect Pest
Management
The Blueberry RAMP Project is a large-scale, multi-year
research and extension effort in the three largest blueberry-producing
states in the US. Our overall goal is to measure the positive and negative
aspects of reduced-risk insect management programs in blueberry, and to
deliver information on this project to our industry clientele. This report
contains the Year 1 results from Michigan in 2003.
The blueberry industry in Michigan and across the Eastern
US faces a combination of challenges to achieving high quality insect-free
product. To successfully manage multiple species of insect pests, growers
must be able to economically monitor and scout their plantings for these
pests, and must have effective insecticides available to them when control
of pest populations is required. At the same time, the pressures from
the food industry for zero contamination with blueberry maggot, Japanese
beetle, and other insects creates significant pressure to continually
achieve excellent insect control.
Six growers each provided access to two blueberry fields (4 to 20 acres)
of either Bluecrop or Jersey cultivars. Three farms were located in each
of the two main blueberry producing counties in southwest Michigan, Van
Buren and Ottawa counties. At each farm one field received a season-long
insect management program using reduced risk insecticides (RAMP) while
the other received a program employing broad spectrum insecticides (the
“Grower-Standard”). Key insect pests (cranberry fruitworm,
cherry fruitworm, Japanese beetle, and blueberry maggot) were monitored
weekly with pheromone (or fruit attractant) traps (2 per field) and scouting
procedures to determine the abundance of insect pests and damage. Secondary
pests (blueberry aphid, oblique-banded leafroller, red-banded leafroller,
plum curculio, and sharp-nosed leafhopper) were also monitored in each
field,. Growers were informed weekly of all pest pressure in both RAMP
and Grower Standard fields, and if pest populations reached a critical
level, recommendations for insecticide applications were made for the
RAMP plots. The major differences in the insecticides used were for fruitworm
control [Guthion (Organophosphate) in Grower Standard vs Confirm (Insect
Growth Regulator) in RAMP fields], for blueberry aphid [Lannate (Carbamate)
in Grower Standard vs Azadirect (botanical) in RAMP fields], and for Japanese
beetle [Imidan (Organophosphate) in Grower Standard vs Provado (Neonicotinoid)
in RAMP fields)].
Fruit clusters were collected from each field directly before each harvest
to determine levels of infestation caused by key pests. Prior to harvest,
leaf and fruit samples were collected from each field for pesticide residue
analysis.
In Year 1 of this project, fields managed under the RAMP program had similar
pest management success as those managed under the grower standard program.
There were more sprays applied on average in the RAMP program, and although
not shown here, this program was far more expensive. In future years,
a priority will be to reduce the use of insecticide sprays in the RAMP
plot, to improve the economic cost of this program. With our experience
from 2003, we consider this an attainable goal.
Overall, this first year of The Blueberry RAMP Project gives
us confidence that reduced-risk insecticides have a fit for commercial
blueberry production. In future years we will measure their long-term
effects and work to reduce the need for these expensive insecticides.
Funded by the USDA–CSREES Risk Avoidance and Mitigation Program
and Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station
Thanks to the Michigan blueberry growers who provided their land and
their ideas for this research; Karlis Galens, Larry Bodtke, Joe DeGrandchamp,
Al Ochoa, Rick Kiel, and Bob Carini. Thanks also to Dave Trinka and the
staff of MBG Marketing for their assistance with this project.
We thank various agrochemical companies for their generous donation of
product for testing within this or related projects: Bayer CropScience,
Dow Agrosciences, Gowan, DuPont, MGK, and Valent.
|
|
|