Title: | Effectiveness of insecticides in controlling the first and second generations of the Lobesia botrana (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) in table grapes |
Address: | "Agricultural Research Institute, Plant Protection Section, P.O. Box 22016, 1516 Nicosia, Cyprus. vassilis@arinet.ari.gov.cy" |
ISSN/ISBN: | 0022-0493 (Print) 0022-0493 (Linking) |
Abstract: | "The moth Lobesia botrana (Denis & Schiffermuller) (Lepidoptera: Tortricidae) is a key pest of table and wine grape (Vitis spp.) varieties in Cyprus. Many different insecticide combinations were applied for three consecutive years (2006-2008) in a Sultana seedless table grape vineyard, aimed at controlling the first and second generations of this pest under warm and dry Mediterranean climatic conditions. In Cyprus, Sultana is the main early maturing table grape variety grown in the country. L. botrana has two generations and a partial third on this export variety, of which the first two generations are the most destructive. Applications were made according to pheromone trap captures of males. One application was used against the first and two applications against the second generation of L. botrana. A high rate of bunch damage was observed in the untreated rows during all years, reaching 56.7, 62.5, and 69.2% in 2006, 2007, and 2008, respectively. Differences between insecticide treatments and the untreated control were statistically significant. The treatment combination of lufenuron, spinosad, and indoxacarb as well as the combination of chlorpyrifos, spinosa and indoxacarb, used against the first and second generations of L. botrana, were the most effective compared with the untreated control. Satisfactory control of the pest also was observed with other combinations such as lufenuron, cypermethrin, and Bacillus thuringiensis; chlorpyrifos, cypermethrin, and B. thuringiensis; and lufenuron, deltamethrin, and azadirachtin" |
Keywords: | Agriculture Animals Cyprus Fruit *Insect Control *Insecticides *Moths Vitis/*parasitology; |
Notes: | "MedlineVassiliou, V A eng England 2011/04/23 J Econ Entomol. 2011 Apr; 104(2):580-5. doi: 10.1603/ec10343" |