Control of woolly aphid, Eriosoma lanigerum (Hausmann) (Hemiptera: Pemphigidae) on mature apple trees using insecticide soil‐root drenches

Abstract

Woolly aphid, Eriosoma lanigerum, is an important pest of apples that infests both the aerial and root parts of the tree. Root colonies are protected from the pesticide sprays applied during the growing season and the climatic effects of winter. Consequently, root colonies are a major source of aerial re‐infestation in the following spring. Imidacloprid, the first of a new group of insecticides from the chloronicotinyl family, is known to provide excellent control of woolly aphid on trees up to 7‐years‐old when applied as a root soil drench. This study compared the effects of a single application of chlorpyrifos, imidacloprid, pirimicarb or vamidothion, applied as a root drench over four growing seasons. A soil wetting agent was added to each chemical to improve soil saturation and penetration. Imidacloprid provided excellent control of woolly aphid on the trees that were 17‐years‐old at the start of the study and continued to do so for four seasons. Pirimicarb appeared to offer some suppression of woolly aphid during the first season but not in subsequent seasons, while chlorpyrifos and vamidothion failed to control woolly aphid in any season. The potential role for imidacloprid in IPM programs is discussed.

Abundance and natural control of the woolly aphid Eriosoma lanigerum in an Australian apple orchard IPM program

“…Those over-wintering below ground continue developing and reproducing at a slow rate, while those overwintering aerially are for the most part dormant, especially in the cooler regions (Thwaite and Bower, 1983). In late spring-early summer, when the soil temperature is approximately 10°C, young nymphs produced by over-wintering females move up from below ground to the aerial parts of the tree (Nicholas et al, 2003). Early colonies develop on vulnerable, thinly barked areas, such as around pruning cuts, or splits caused by past heavy cropping.…”

Enemigos naturales asociados al pulgón lanígero en huertos de manzano con diferente manejo de plagas

“…La idea se infiere con base en los resultados presentados por Gontijo et al (2012); Nicholas et al (2005), en los que señalan el incremento de poblaciones de pulgón lanígero por el uso continuo de insecticidas de amplio espectro y a pesar del reducido número de colonias aéreas de pulgón lanígero detectadas en el huerto con manejo convencional en este trabajo. Por lo tanto, el combate del pulgón lanígero podría ser satisfactorio con el diseño de estrategias comercialmente viables de manejo integrado de fitófagos (Nicholas et al, 2003).…”

“…The idea is inferred based on the results presented by Gontijo et al (2012); Nicholas et al (2005), in which they indicate the populations increase of woolly aphid by the continuous use of wide spectrum insecticides and in spite of the reduced detected number of aerial colonies of woolly aphid in the orchard with conventional management in this research. Therefore, the control of the woolly aphid could be satisfactory with the design of commercially viable integrated phytophagous management strategies (Nicholas et al, 2003).…”

Options for managing chrysomelid leaf beetles in Australian eucalypt plantations: reducing the chemical footprint

“…Trunk injection in particular is effective at targeting leaf chewing and sap sucking pests, including leaf beetles; this method reduces the exposure of nontarget species and the amount of pesticide applied per hectare and has a negligible risk of off‐site contamination (Hand et al ., ; Helson et al ., ; Young, ; Elek et al ., , ). Soil drenches appear to protect trees for several years but could have a higher risk of water contamination, if the pesticide was mobile in the soil, and nontarget effects on local litter and soil fauna (Nicholas et al ., ; Cowles et al ., ; Collett & McBeath, ; Kreutzweiser et al ., , ). If the insecticide translocated into nectar or pollen, pollinators and nectar feeders could be at risk.…”