Dissertations / Theses: 'Cotton crops'

1

Ellsworth, P. C., D. L. Meade, D. N. Byrne, E. A. Draeger, and J. P. Chernicky. "Progress on the Use of Trap Crops for Whitefly Suppression." College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ), 1993. http://hdl.handle.net/10150/209575.

Full text

Abstract:

Article is abstract and references only
In 1992, a repeat of a trap -cropping experiment was conducted for the suppression of sweetpotato whiteflies in Pima (S-6) cotton (see Ellsworth et al. 1992). The 1991 experiment showed some promise, but was characterized by low to moderate and later infestations of whiteflies than was desired. The 1992 experimental design (land area = 9.5 acres) was modified to accomplish three improvements: 1) the cotton crop area was doubled in size to 8 rows by 50 ft to improve the ratio of crop to trap area, 2) a fourth treatment was added to form a Latin square design which consisted of cotton plots surrounded only by bareground (i.e., no trap crop): the other three were surrounded by Wright groundcherry that was untreated or treated with 1X or 2X rates of soil-applied aldicarb, and 3) melons (1 row X667') were late planted between blocks to ensure locally abundant whiteflies during the time of the test. The melons were watered regularly in order to retain whiteflies until the start of the test. Early groundcherry establishment was variable and later compromised by insufficient water. This prompted later than usual flushes of groundcherry growth and delayed canopy development. This fact coupled by the intense level of whitefly movement following melon dry -down effectively overwhelmed the insufficiently developed trap crop. Aldicarb was applied on two dates (7/29 & 8/15), and whiteflies were sampled from all plots five times through August. The sampling data are preliminary at this point, but several observations were apparent: 1) the groundcherry trap crop was insufficiently developed to protect the Pima crop, 2) the addition of melons to the system dramatically increased the ,cumbers of locally abundant whiteflies, 3) maintaining the melons in good condition (i.e., well- watered) effectively retained whiteflies in the melons until dry-down, 4) upon dry-down, the melons released overwhelming numbers of adult whiteflies which could not be suppressed on the groundcherry trap crop before reaching the adjacent cotton, 5) the groundcherry was still selectively attractive to the whiteflies (relative to cotton), but was insufficiently developed w trap and retain the huge numbers of dispersing whiteflies, 6) soil - applied aldicarb did accomplish some degree of control of whiteflies on the groundcherry plants, but was inadequate in the face of the tremendous immigration of whitefly adults, 7) the intense whitefly pressure ultimately killed the majority of immature groundcheny plants with the aldicarb-treated plants lasting somewhat longer than the untreated plants, and 8) the yield and quality of the adjacent, late -planted Pima crop was commercially unacceptable and judged to be virtually a total loss. The failure of this implementation of the trap -cropping concept does not preclude the possibility that a better implementation would have succeeded; however, the observation that melons in close proximity to the test area dramatically changed the number of locally dispersing adult whiteflies cannot be denied. It would seem unlikely that a suitable trap crop system could be developed where such an intense proximate source and near instantaneous release of thousands of whiteflies (i.e., at dry-down of melons) is occurring.