Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/14

Outputs
Target Audience: Nothing Reported Changes/Problems: Nothing Reported What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided? Nothing Reported How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Demonstrations were provided for all RI growers. Information was forwarded and presentations made to each of the three state grower associations, including to grower association annual meetings. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals? Nothing Reported

Impacts
What was accomplished under these goals? OUTPUTS: Objective 1. Demonstrate compatibility of an optimized systemic insecticide application method with naturally occurring predators and parasites. It was apparent from the lack of available cooperating farms for the second year trials that growers in the three state area had and are adopting the technology. The basal bark spray method appears IPM compatible regarding predators and parasites, although the results of the project were mixed. In RI, most of the treated fields had excellent scale control. The exception was for trees treated late in the season. In New Jersey and Pennsylvania, the results were good, but not exceptional. Although sometimes this treatment method looks like a "magic wand," there are reasons why the degree of scale control can be inadequate. Potential reasons for mediocre results may be: 1. Treating trees that are too large for the dosage being applied. The basal bark spray is easiest to do on trees less than 6 feet tall, that have been basal pruned. When there are mixed age trees, the efficiency may be compromised. Large trees are difficult to make this method work, and so large trees mixed with small can lead to re-infestation of the small trees from the large trees that are inadequately treated; 2. Lack of basal pruning; growers have found that basal pruning enhances the performance of the basal sprays. This could be from either or both (a) better deposition of spray on the trunk, and (b) less dilution of active ingredient, because the lower foliage has been removed. Objective 4. A high-quality website on the biology and management of armored scales in Christmas trees will provide the opportunity for growers throughout the Northeast to adopt and implement the basal bark spray method for controlling armored scales in true fir Christmas trees. PARTICIPANTS: Rutgers University, University of Rhode Island and Pennsylvania State University were partners with the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. Dr. Mark Vodak, Forestry Extension Specialist, Rutgers University was the PI, with Dr. Steven Alm, University of Rhode Island, Mr. Timothy Abbey, York County Extension Educator, Pennsylvania State University, and Dr. Richard Cowles, Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, TARGET AUDIENCES: The target audience for this project was primarily Christmas tree growers in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, but growers throughout the Northeast should benefit. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Because of grower adoption of control strategy and the subsequent lack of significant scale populations on farms in the project region, no second yearl trials were implemented.

Publications

• Type: Journal Articles Status: Published Year Published: 2011 Citation: Cowles, R. S. 2011. Practical armored scale management. American Christmas Tree Journal, Natinal Christmas Tree Association, Vol. 55, No. 4, pp. 12-15.

Progress 09/01/11 to 08/31/12

Outputs
OUTPUTS: Objective 1. Demonstrate compatibility of an optimized systemic insecticide application method with naturally occurring predators and parasites. Cooperating growers were chosen for randomized design demonstration trials in PA, NJ, and RI. Farms were chosen for their abundance of armored scales and willingness of the grower to participate in this two-year demonstration. Dr. Steven Alm, University of Rhode Island, The York County Extension Educator (PA), Mr. Timothy Abbey, and Rutgers University extension forestry specialist Dr. Mark Vodak applied Safari 20 SG approximately 2 - 3 weeks prior to bud break, using a Solo backpack sprayer equipped with a 21 p.s.i. control flow valve pressure regulator and 6502E flat fan nozzle oriented vertically to direct a calibrated basal bark spray. The sprayers were calibrated to deliver 0.75 - 1 lb of Safari 20SG per acre, with the per acre dosage determined by the average height of trees in the treatment area. The dosage for each tree was adjusted based upon its size, with small trees receiving approximately 15 ml total, and trees over 6 feet in height receiving up to 60 ml. The treated trees were compared with adjacent untreated control trees within the planting, and/or with other plantings of trees that the grower managed according to standard procedures. Samples representative of these groups of trees were collected from PA and RI participants, and were assessed with microscopic examination by R. Cowles to determine live scales and percent parasitism and predation of scales. Objective 4. Publish a high-quality guide to the biology and management of armored scales. Photographs and text are being assembled to generate a high-quality color web publication on the biology and management of armored scales in Christmas trees. PARTICIPANTS: Dr. Mark Vodak, Forestry Extension Specialist, Rutgers University was the Co-PI, with Dr. Steven Alm, University of Rhode Island and Mr. Timothy Abbey, York County Extension Educator, Pennsylvania State University. Each selected cooperating farms and applied Safari 20 SG to true fir Christmas trees approximately 2 - 3 weeks prior to bud break, using a Solo backpack sprayer equipped with a 21 p.s.i. control flow valve pressure regulator and 6502E flat fan nozzle oriented vertically to direct a calibrated basal bark spray. Each then forwarded pre-application samples to Dr. Richard Cowles, Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station, followed the following fall by post-application samples for analysis and comparison. Rutgers University, University of Rhode Island and Pennsylvania State University are partners with the Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station. TARGET AUDIENCES: The target audience for this project is primarily Christmas tree growers in Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, but growers throughout the Northeast should benefit. This demonstration will be repeated another year, then efforts for grower change and adoption will include extension publication, presentation at extension programs and development of a website on armored scale. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.

Impacts
Objective 1. Scale populations assessed from the PA trial showed no statistical differences (P = 0.11) between the untreated and treated trees, with averages of 0.75, 2.8, and 2.1 scales per needle in trees receiving the basal bark spray of Safari, conventional sprays, and the untreated check, respectively. The numbers of parasitoid exit holes from scale tests in a 100 needle sample significantly differed among treatments, with means of 1.8, 3.2, and 8.2, (treatments in the same order as before), but the percent parasitism did not differ and were 4, 1, and 3%, respectively. Cooperators in Rhode Island provided comparisons between a basal bark spray with Safari and conventional practices on two farms, vs. untreated trees at a third farm. Growers in RI have recognized dinotefuran (Safari) as being a superior insecticide for scale management, and so the conventional treatments were separate foliar applications of dinotefuran and chlorpyrifos. Scale counts were extremely low from these farms. On Farm 1, scale counts were 0.003 per needle in the conventional treatment, 0.000 from the basal bark spray. On Farm 2, the averages were 0.03 and 0.000 per needle. For Farm 3, the untreated check averaged 0.69 scales per needle and the Safari basal bark spray 0.000, with highly significant differences between treatments (P < 0.0001). Trees in Rhode Island were between 4 and 6 feet in height, a size of tree in which the bark spray method works particularly well. Growers in Rhode Island and New Jersey recognize that the basal bark spray method is highly effective, and have adopted this as a standard treatment to manage scales in their plantations. This has led to some difficulty in being able to compare the dinotefuran basal spray treatment with practices that this method has replaced. Even so, the basal bark spray appears to perform slightly better (though not statistically significantly so) than foliar application of the same insecticide. There were too few scales present from samples obtained in RI to assess the impact of the spray programs on percent parasitism and predation.

Publications

• No publications reported this period