Air-assisted electrostatic application of pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures for sweetpotato whitefly (Homoptera

Alerodidae) control and spray deposition in cauliflower

John C Palumbo, W. E. Coates

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures applied at full and reduced rates with 3 application methods (air-assisted electrostatic, air-assisted hydraulic, and standard hydraulic sprayers) were evaluated in field studies in 1992 and 1993 for control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci strain B (Gennadius), also known as silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii Bellows and Perring, and spray deposition on cauliflower. Brassiva oleracea L. Evaluations of sweetpotato whitefly control were based on adult suppression, immature colonization, and cauliflower harvests. Spray deposition and coverage on abaxial and adaxial leaf surfaces was measured with a leaf wash technique and water sensitive cards placed on leaves near the terminal and base of plants. Depending on how control was assessed, the air-assisted electrostatic application technique did not consistently improve sweetpotato control when compared with hydraulic application equipment. Based on adult suppression, improved control of whiteflies was achieved with full and reduced rates of the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer following 2 applications in 1992, but percentage of reduction of adults did not differ significantly among the application methods when full rates of insecticide were applied in 1993. Control based on immature colonization indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer was the only spray method to reduce significantly nymph densities when compared with the control in 1992, but differences in numbers of eggs, nymphs, and enclosed pupal cases varied among application methods and rates of active ingredient in 1993. Comparisons of cauliflower harvest dates indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer did not provide significantly better control than the other application methods when used at similar rates. Spray deposition with the air-assisted electrostatic application technique was variable throughout these studies with no clear trends being observed. Our results suggest the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer may offer a means to control sweetpotato whitefly with a 50% reduction in insecticide usage.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)970-980
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Economic Entomology
Volume89
Issue number4
StatePublished - 1996

Fingerprint

spray deposition
whitefly
endosulfan
pyrethroid
cauliflower
Bemisia tabaci
pyrethrins
Homoptera
spray
sprayers
air
application methods
Bemisia argentifolii
fluid mechanics
hydraulics
insecticide
nymphs
insecticides
colonization
immatures

Keywords

  • Bemisia argentifolii
  • Bemisia tabaci
  • electrostatic application
  • imidacloprid
  • spray coverage
  • spray deposition

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Insect Science

Cite this

@article{7c42abb314c14fde84d2923d47baf191,
title = "Air-assisted electrostatic application of pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures for sweetpotato whitefly (Homoptera: Alerodidae) control and spray deposition in cauliflower",
abstract = "Pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures applied at full and reduced rates with 3 application methods (air-assisted electrostatic, air-assisted hydraulic, and standard hydraulic sprayers) were evaluated in field studies in 1992 and 1993 for control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci strain B (Gennadius), also known as silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii Bellows and Perring, and spray deposition on cauliflower. Brassiva oleracea L. Evaluations of sweetpotato whitefly control were based on adult suppression, immature colonization, and cauliflower harvests. Spray deposition and coverage on abaxial and adaxial leaf surfaces was measured with a leaf wash technique and water sensitive cards placed on leaves near the terminal and base of plants. Depending on how control was assessed, the air-assisted electrostatic application technique did not consistently improve sweetpotato control when compared with hydraulic application equipment. Based on adult suppression, improved control of whiteflies was achieved with full and reduced rates of the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer following 2 applications in 1992, but percentage of reduction of adults did not differ significantly among the application methods when full rates of insecticide were applied in 1993. Control based on immature colonization indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer was the only spray method to reduce significantly nymph densities when compared with the control in 1992, but differences in numbers of eggs, nymphs, and enclosed pupal cases varied among application methods and rates of active ingredient in 1993. Comparisons of cauliflower harvest dates indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer did not provide significantly better control than the other application methods when used at similar rates. Spray deposition with the air-assisted electrostatic application technique was variable throughout these studies with no clear trends being observed. Our results suggest the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer may offer a means to control sweetpotato whitefly with a 50{\%} reduction in insecticide usage.",
keywords = "Bemisia argentifolii, Bemisia tabaci, electrostatic application, imidacloprid, spray coverage, spray deposition",
author = "Palumbo, {John C} and Coates, {W. E.}",
year = "1996",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "89",
pages = "970--980",
journal = "Journal of Economic Entomology",
issn = "0022-0493",
publisher = "Entomological Society of America",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Air-assisted electrostatic application of pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures for sweetpotato whitefly (Homoptera

T2 - Alerodidae) control and spray deposition in cauliflower

AU - Palumbo, John C

AU - Coates, W. E.

PY - 1996

Y1 - 1996

N2 - Pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures applied at full and reduced rates with 3 application methods (air-assisted electrostatic, air-assisted hydraulic, and standard hydraulic sprayers) were evaluated in field studies in 1992 and 1993 for control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci strain B (Gennadius), also known as silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii Bellows and Perring, and spray deposition on cauliflower. Brassiva oleracea L. Evaluations of sweetpotato whitefly control were based on adult suppression, immature colonization, and cauliflower harvests. Spray deposition and coverage on abaxial and adaxial leaf surfaces was measured with a leaf wash technique and water sensitive cards placed on leaves near the terminal and base of plants. Depending on how control was assessed, the air-assisted electrostatic application technique did not consistently improve sweetpotato control when compared with hydraulic application equipment. Based on adult suppression, improved control of whiteflies was achieved with full and reduced rates of the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer following 2 applications in 1992, but percentage of reduction of adults did not differ significantly among the application methods when full rates of insecticide were applied in 1993. Control based on immature colonization indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer was the only spray method to reduce significantly nymph densities when compared with the control in 1992, but differences in numbers of eggs, nymphs, and enclosed pupal cases varied among application methods and rates of active ingredient in 1993. Comparisons of cauliflower harvest dates indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer did not provide significantly better control than the other application methods when used at similar rates. Spray deposition with the air-assisted electrostatic application technique was variable throughout these studies with no clear trends being observed. Our results suggest the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer may offer a means to control sweetpotato whitefly with a 50% reduction in insecticide usage.

AB - Pyrethroid and endosulfan mixtures applied at full and reduced rates with 3 application methods (air-assisted electrostatic, air-assisted hydraulic, and standard hydraulic sprayers) were evaluated in field studies in 1992 and 1993 for control of sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia tabaci strain B (Gennadius), also known as silverleaf whitefly, Bemisia argentifolii Bellows and Perring, and spray deposition on cauliflower. Brassiva oleracea L. Evaluations of sweetpotato whitefly control were based on adult suppression, immature colonization, and cauliflower harvests. Spray deposition and coverage on abaxial and adaxial leaf surfaces was measured with a leaf wash technique and water sensitive cards placed on leaves near the terminal and base of plants. Depending on how control was assessed, the air-assisted electrostatic application technique did not consistently improve sweetpotato control when compared with hydraulic application equipment. Based on adult suppression, improved control of whiteflies was achieved with full and reduced rates of the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer following 2 applications in 1992, but percentage of reduction of adults did not differ significantly among the application methods when full rates of insecticide were applied in 1993. Control based on immature colonization indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer was the only spray method to reduce significantly nymph densities when compared with the control in 1992, but differences in numbers of eggs, nymphs, and enclosed pupal cases varied among application methods and rates of active ingredient in 1993. Comparisons of cauliflower harvest dates indicated that the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer did not provide significantly better control than the other application methods when used at similar rates. Spray deposition with the air-assisted electrostatic application technique was variable throughout these studies with no clear trends being observed. Our results suggest the air-assisted electrostatic sprayer may offer a means to control sweetpotato whitefly with a 50% reduction in insecticide usage.

KW - Bemisia argentifolii

KW - Bemisia tabaci

KW - electrostatic application

KW - imidacloprid

KW - spray coverage

KW - spray deposition

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030485282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030485282&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 89

SP - 970

EP - 980

JO - Journal of Economic Entomology

JF - Journal of Economic Entomology

SN - 0022-0493

IS - 4

ER -