Comparative Evaluation and Economic Potential of Ecorational Versus Chemical Insecticides for Crucifer Flea Beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) Management in Canola

Abstract

From 2001 to 2004, field studies were conducted to evaluate the effect of the ecorational insecticides SpinTor (spinosad), BotaniGard (Beauveria bassiana), Neemix (azadirachtin), and Surround (kaolin) against crucifer flea beetle on canola, Brassica napus L., at the cotyledon stage. The ecorational treatments were compared with a standard foliar chemical insecticide, Capture (bifenthrin), and the chemical seed treatment insecticide Helix XTra (thiamethoxam). This study indicated that flea beetle injury was lower for Helix XTra, Capture, and the ecorational insecticide SpinTor. SpinTor was less effective when flea beetle populations were relatively high (200-300 per trap-week). Yields for chemical insecticide treatments were always greater than SpinTor, with differences being the smallest (68-374 kg/ha) at low levels of flea beetle feeding injury. Differences were greatest when canola seedling injury was high (775-1,364 kg/ha). Yield differences between the conventional insecticides and BotaniGard, Neemix, and Surround were 119-439 and 61-2,248 kg/ha at low and high flea beetle feeding injury, respectively. Although yield differences between SpinTor and chemical insecticides were relatively small at lower levels of flea beetle injury, net losses ranged from $47 to $151/ha when SpinTor was used as an alternative to a standard chemical seed treatment, Helix XTra. This suggests that SpinTor would not be a viable alternative to the chemical insecticide. Net losses ranged from $30 to $266/ha when BotaniGard, Neemix, and Surround were used as alternatives to the seed treatment.

Economic Feasibility of Methoprene Applied as a Surface Treatment and as an Aerosol Alone and in Combination With Two Other Insecticides

“…IPM in Þeld crops has a successful history of using EILs and economic thresholds to determine timing of control strategies. In fact, there are many recent studies involving economic analysis of novel control strategies where economic thresholds are applied to Þeld crops where it is possible to relate the number of insects with a damage estimate (Crowder et al 2006, Antwi et al 2007, Beres et al 2007). Indianmeal moth infestations of Þnished stored products present a unique challenge in that the products typically have high value and are stored for variable periods of time in multiple locations.…”

Potential biopesticides for crucifer flea beetle, Phyllotreta cruciferae (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) management under dryland canola production in Montana

“…Management is primarily focused in early spring when canola seedlings are most vulnerable to P. cruciferae injury (Thomas 2003). Currently, P. cruciferae management is based on using imidacloprid insecticide treated seeds, and further foliar application of insecticide when injury level reaches 15-20% at canola seedling stage (Lamb and Turnock 1982;Antwi et al 2007a;Reddy et al 2014). However, reliance on chemical insecticidebased pest management increases the risk of development of insecticide resistance (Turnock and Turnbull 1994), negative effects to pollinators and other beneficial insects.…”

The Performance of Insecticides – A Critical Review

“…That is, growers want to optimize labour and fuel costs, so if they are going to spray fertilizer or herbicides anyway -they might as well add a low-cost insecticide to the tank mix and possibly get an added benefit. Estimates suggest that insecticide applications constitute 2-10% of the crop yield [5][6][7], but use of tank mixtures obviously decreases the overall application costs. The three examples provided ("good growing season", value of seeds, and tank mixing) are important, because they are not directly related to actual estimates of the pest population density, but they may still lead to a grower applying insecticides.…”