Influence of Seed Treatments and Granular Insecticide on Two Peanut Cultivars for Thrips Management, 2013

Whalen, R.; Herbert, D. A.; Malone, S.

doi:10.4182/amt.2014.f30

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, availability of aldicarb was reduced following the 2009 growing season and farmers and their advisors began using other systemic insecticides to control thrips. Phorate applied in the seed furrow at planting is an effective alternative to aldicarb but can cause phytotoxicty under certain conditions (Herbert et al, 2007;Marasigan et al, 2016;Rhodes et al, 2008;Tubbs et al, 2013Tubbs et al, , 2015Whalen et al, 2014). Acephate can also be applied in the seed furrow at planting, but in some instances slower emergence of peanut after application of acephate has been observed (Brandenburg, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Imidacloprid to Control Thrips in Peanut in North Carolina

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tobacco thrips (Frankliniella fusca Hinds) is an important pest in peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) in North Carolina and injury from this insect can lower yield. Research was conducted from 2012 through 2014 in North Carolina to compare visible injury from tobacco thrips feeding and peanut yield when acephate, imidacloprid, and phorate were applied alone in the seed furrow at planting or followed by acephate applied postemergence 3 weeks after planting. In a second experiment conducted during the same time period, a commercial liquid formulation of Bradyrhizobia inoculant was applied alone or with imidacloprid in fields with and without plantings of peanut in recent years. Peanut injury from tobacco thrips feeding was reduced by acephate, imidacloprid, and phorate applied in the seed furrow at planting compared with nontreated peanut. Acephate applied 3 weeks after planting generally reduced injury from thrips. Pod yield was greater when imidacloprid was applied compared with yield for the non-treated control or when acephate was applied in the seed furrow. Pod yield was similar regardless of infurrow treatment when acephate was applied postemergence. Thrips control by imidacloprid was not affected by Bradyrhizobia inoculant, and imidacloprid did not negatively affect efficacy of Bradyrhizobia inoculant regardless of previous field history. These data indicate that imidacloprid protects peanut as well as or more effectively than the systemic insecticides acephate and phorate and that imidacloprid is compatible with Bradyrhizobia inoculant.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Utilization of Imidacloprid to Control Thrips in Peanut in North Carolina

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the peanut plants generally recovered from thrips injury and yield losses only occurred under certain conditions ( Funderburk et al, 2007 ). The losses that were observed were more often associated with Virginia type peanut cultivars than runner type ( Amin and Mohammed, 1980 ; Campbell and Wynne, 1980 ; Mulder, 1999 ; Mulder and Seuhs, 2002 ; Herbert et al, 2005 ; Whalen et al, 2014 ). Choice experiments conducted with peanut cultivars and tobacco thrips suggest that cultivars may differently affect thrips density as well as severity of thrips feeding injury (Figure 3 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resistance to Thrips in Peanut and Implications for Management of Thrips and Thrips-Transmitted Orthotospoviruses in Peanut

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thrips are major pests of peanut (Arachis hypogaea L.) worldwide, and they serve as vectors of devastating orthotospoviruses such as Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) and Groundnut bud necrosis virus (GBNV). A tremendous effort has been devoted to developing peanut cultivars with resistance to orthotospoviruses. Consequently, cultivars with moderate field resistance to viruses exist, but not much is known about host resistance to thrips. Integrating host plant resistance to thrips in peanut could suppress thrips feeding damage and reduce virus transmission, will decrease insecticide usage, and enhance sustainability in the production system. This review focuses on details of thrips resistance in peanut and identifies future directions for incorporating thrips resistance in peanut cultivars. Research on thrips–host interactions in peanut is predominantly limited to field evaluations of feeding damage, though, laboratory studies have revealed that peanut cultivars could differentially affect thrips feeding and thrips biology. Many runner type cultivars, field resistant to TSWV, representing diverse pedigrees evaluated against thrips in the greenhouse revealed that thrips preferred some cultivars over others, suggesting that antixenosis “non-preference” could contribute to thrips resistance in peanut. In other crops, morphological traits such as leaf architecture and waxiness and spectral reflectance have been associated with thrips non-preference. It is not clear if foliar morphological traits in peanut are associated with reduced preference or non-preference of thrips and need to be evaluated. Besides thrips non-preference, thrips larval survival to adulthood and median developmental time were negatively affected in some peanut cultivars and in a diploid peanut species Arachis diogoi (Hoehne) and its hybrids with a Virginia type cultivar, indicating that antibiosis (negative effects on biology) could also be a factor influencing thrips resistance in peanut. Available field resistance to orthotospoviruses in peanut is not complete, and cultivars can suffer substantial yield loss under high thrips and virus pressure. Integrating thrips resistance with available virus resistance would be ideal to limit losses. A discussion of modern technologies such as transgenic resistance, marker assisted selection and RNA interference, and future directions that could be undertaken to integrate resistance to thrips and to orthotospoviruses in peanut cultivars is included in this article.

show abstract

“…While employing cultural control methods to minimize impact of thrips on peanut is important for farm managers, insecticides are typically applied to suppress thrips and protect peanut yield in North Carolina (Brandenburg, 2017). Phorate applied in the seed furrow at planting or acephate applied postemergence (POST) to peanut foliage are used to control thrips (Herbert et al, 2007;Marasigan et al, 2016;Rhodes et al, 2008;Tubbs et al, 2013;Whalen et al, 2014). Whalen et al (2014) reported less thrips injury and greater yield when phorate was applied in the seed furrow at planting compared with non-treated peanut.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phorate applied in the seed furrow at planting or acephate applied postemergence (POST) to peanut foliage are used to control thrips (Herbert et al, 2007;Marasigan et al, 2016;Rhodes et al, 2008;Tubbs et al, 2013;Whalen et al, 2014). Whalen et al (2014) reported less thrips injury and greater yield when phorate was applied in the seed furrow at planting compared with non-treated peanut. Tubbs et al (2013) measured 50% fewer adult thrips 14 and 21 days after planting (DAP) and 75% fewer immature thrips 28 DAP when phorate was applied in the seed furrow at planting compared with the non-treated control.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Planting Date and Insecticide on Injury Caused by Tobacco Thrips and Peanut Yield in North Carolina

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planting date can affect pest incidence and severity in peanut. Research was conducted from 2013 to 2016 in North Carolina to determine tobacco thrips [Frankliniella fusca (Hinds)] injury and pod yield when peanut was planted in early, mid-, and late-May when phorate was applied in the seed furrow at planting, acephate was applied to emerged peanut 3 wk after planting, or when both insecticides were applied. Differences in visible injury to peanut caused by tobacco thrips feeding were observed across yr, planting dates, and insecticide treatments. Applying either phorate or acephate was often as effective as the combination of both insecticides in preventing injury caused by tobacco thrips although in some instances applying both insecticides was more effective than a single insecticide. Visible injury caused by tobacco thrips was often greater when peanut was planted in early May compared with later plantings. Peanut yield was protected equally from tobacco thrips injury by phorate, acephate, and the combination of both insecticides. Planting date and insecticides affected peanut yield independently suggesting that strategies for managing tobacco thrips will not differ across planting dates in North Carolina. Peanut yield was greater in 2 of 4 yr when planted in mid-May compared with planting in early or late-May.

show abstract

Influence of Seed Treatments and Granular Insecticide on Two Peanut Cultivars for Thrips Management, 2013

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Utilization of Imidacloprid to Control Thrips in Peanut in North Carolina

Utilization of Imidacloprid to Control Thrips in Peanut in North Carolina

Resistance to Thrips in Peanut and Implications for Management of Thrips and Thrips-Transmitted Orthotospoviruses in Peanut

Influence of Planting Date and Insecticide on Injury Caused by Tobacco Thrips and Peanut Yield in North Carolina

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About