Second-level integrated pest management in commercial apple orchards

Abstract

As historical background helpful to understanding current concepts and practices of apple pest management, we review the origin and rise of key pests of apple in North America and the evolution of approaches to their management, culminating with the concept of integrated pest management (IPM). We propose four levels of integration of orchard pest management practices. First-level IPM integrates chemically based and biologically based management tactics for a single class of pests, such as arthropods, diseases, weeds or vertebrates. Second-level IPM, the focus of our effort here, integrates multiple management tactics across all classes of pests. We describe components of second-level IPM for Massachusetts apple orchards, which are threatened each year by an exceptionally broad range of injurious pests. We illustrate the tentative advantages and shortcomings of second-level IPM using 1993 data from six commercial orchard test blocks. Our predominant approach was to use chemically based tactics for controlling arthropods, diseases and weeds early in the growing season, and afterwards to rely exclusively (for insects) or largely (for other pests) on biologically based tactics, such as cultural, behavioral, and biological controls. Compared with nearby first-level IPM blocks, insecticide use in 1993 was reduced substantially (about 30%), with only slightly more insect injury to fruit and little difference in populations of foliar insect pests. The results for mite pests and diseases were less encouraging although summer pruning significantly reduced disease injury caused by flyspeck. We discuss how second-level IPM poses special biological or operational challenges to apple pest management practitioners. The concept has merit, but refinements are necessary before it can be recommended broadly to commercial apple growers in Massachusetts as an economical and reliable alternative to first-level IPM.

Biopesticides as Promising Alternatives to Chemical Pesticides: A Review of Their Current and Future Status

“…It has been suggested to use biopesticides in teak nurseries as a replacement of toxic pesticides to resist the white grub (Meshram and Homkar, 2011). In addition, there are four levels of integration of orchard IPM (Prokopy et al, 1994). The first level IPM integrates biologically and chemically based pest management strategies, for example, weeds, arthropods, diseases and vertebrates.…”

Alternatives to Chemical Control of Insect Pests

“…For example, apple maggots are effectively controlled in apple orchards with 8-cm, red, spherical traps covered in adhesive. The attractiveness of these traps is enhanced by adding butyl hexanoate and ammonium acetate, synthetic olfactory stimulants (Prokopy et al, 1994). Another common tactic is to use sex pheromones for mating disruption.…”

Size of orchard trees as a factor affecting behavioural control of apple maggot flies (Dipt., Tephritidae) by traps

“…From 1978 to 1986, research and demonstration programmes in commercial apple orchards in Massachusetts focused on first‐level integrated pest management (IPM) practices (P ROKOPY et al., 1980). From 1987 to 1996, the focus was on second‐level IPM practices (P ROKOPY et al., 1994, 1996; C OOLEY and A UTIO , 1997). In 1997, we initiated the first of two 3‐year phases investigating third‐level IPM practices in Massachusetts apple orchards.…”