If you can't read please download the document
Upload
trinhphuc
View
215
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
SCHENCK AND ADLERZ: WATERMELON FERTILIZERS 209
COMPATIBILITY OF INSECTICIDES, FUNGICIDES, AND
FOLIAR FERTILIZERS ON WATERMELON
N. C. SCHENCK AND W. C. ADLERZ1
Florida Agricultural Experiment Station
Leesburg
Insecticides, fungicides, and foliar fertilizers
are all used in the production of watermelon
(Citrullus vulgaris L.) in Florida. In certain
areas of the state, particularly in south Florida,
pesticides are commonly applied at 5-7 day in
tervals to maintain disease and insect control.
Growers with large acreages combine insecticides
and fungicides so that both can be applied at the
required short interval. In addition, materials
are combined simply to save the time and labor
required to make separate applications.
Several pesticide-nutritional spray mixtures
have been suspected of causing physical damage
to watermelon plants, but no recommendations
have been made regarding the phytotoxicity of
these spray mixtures because of the lack of ex
perimental evidence. In addition, little was known
about the pesticidal effectiveness of these mix
tures.
In 1952, Kelsheimer et al. (3) compared 20
different pesticide-nutrient mixtures for their
compatibility on several vegetable crops. Al
though many of the materials tested in that study
are still in use, several new pesticides and nu
trients have since become available.
Several references report fungicide-insecticide
compatibilities on crops other than vegetables (4)
(5) (6), but no nutrients were included in these
tests, and results are not entirely applicable to
vegetable crops. In addition, pesticide mixtures
have been compared for compatibility in seed
treatment of cucurbits (7), peas (8), and corn
(1), but these results have little application to
the compatibility of pesticide mixtures as foliar
sprays.
The purpose of this paper is to preliminarily
report the progress of an evaluation of several
pesticide-nutrient combinations for their effect
on watermelons. Perhaps this report will stimu
late the interest of other researchers to perform
similar experiments on other crops and also act
as a deterrent to indiscriminate mixing of ma
terials in the spray tank.
lAssistant Plant Pathologist and Assistant Entomologist, respectively, Watermelon and Grape Investigations Labora
tory, Leesburg, Florida. T Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations Journal Series,
No. 1579.
Materials and Methods
Pesticide and pesticide-nutrient mixtures were
evaluated in the field on variety Charleston Gray
watermelon arranged in plots of 10 hills in 2
paired rows. The experimental design was a ran
domized block of 3 replicates, and the entire ex
periment was bordered with a row of Fairfax
watermelons. In addition, in 1962, separator rows
of variety Summit were planted between plots.
In 1961 there were 24 treatments consisting
of all possible combinations using 1 each of 4
insecticides, 3 fungicides, and 2 foliar fertilizers.
Materials and rates (for 100 gallons of water)
were as follows: fungicidesDithane Z-78 (75%
zineb w.p., Rohm and Haas Co.) at 1 lb. plus
Manzate (80% maneb w.p., E. I. duPont de Ne-
mours and Co.) at 0.75 lb.; Captan 50 (50%
captan w.p., California Chemical Co.) at 2 lb.;
Tribasic Copper Sulfate (53% metallic copper
as basic copper sulfate) at 3 lb.; insecticides
Dibrom 8E (100% naled emulsifiable liquid, Cali
fornia Chemical Co.) at 1 lb.; Diazinon 25W
(25% diazinon w.p., Geigy Chemical Co.) at 2
lb.; Phosdrin 25W (25% phosdrin w.p., Shell
Chemical Co.) at 1 lb.; Thiodan 50W (50% en-
dosulfan w.p., Niagara Chemical Division) at 1
lb.; fertilizersNugreen (45% urea jntrogen,
E. I. duPont de Nemours and Co.) at 4 lb.; ni
trate of soda-potash (15-0-14, Chilean Nitrate
Sales) at 5 lb.
In 1962 there were 48 treatments consisting
of all possible combinations using 1 each of 4
insecticides, 4 fungicides, and 3 foliar fertilizer
treatments. Materials and rates were as follows:
fungicidesDithane Z-78 at 2 lb.; Manzate at
1.5 lb.; Phaltan (50% folpet w.p., California
Chemical Co.) at 2 lb.; Dithane M-45 (16%
manganese, 2% zinc, 62% ethylenebisdithiocar-
bamate, Rohm and Haas Co.) at 2 lb.; insecti
cidesDibrom 8E at 1 lb.; Diazinon 25W, at 2
lb.; Thiodan 50W at 1 lb.; Guthion 25W (25%
guthion w.p., Chemagro Corp.) at 2 lb.; ferti
lizersNugreen at 4 lb.; nitrate of soda-potash
at 5 lb.; none.
Treatments were applied at approximately
125 psi from a Meyers 25-gallon Research Sprayer
with a 12-foot boom bearing 11 nozzles. Treat
ments were applied at 10-14 day intervals 4 times
in 1961 and 6 times in 1962. In both years disease
ratings were made at weekly intervals, using a
210 FLORIDA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY, 1962
Table 1. Effectiveness of various fungicides in the control of watermelon diseases^ 1961 and 1962,
Mean disease ratings^ 190I 19o2
Zineb-maneb
Copper
Captan
3.7 a<
4.5 b
5.1 c
Maneb
M-45
Folpet
Zineb
3.9 a2
5.2 b
6.0 c
6.4 c
1 Rating system scale 0-11.0; 1.0 = trace of disease, 11.0 = 100$ infection.
2 Values followed by the same letter nonsignificantly different according to analysis of variance.
Table 2. Effect of insecticides on the fungicidal
control of watermelon diseases, 1961.
Insecticide Mean
Phosdrin
Dibrom
Diazinon
Thiodan
disease rating
4.1 a
4.3 a
4.3 a
4.8 b
Table 3. Effect of fertilizers on disease and
insect control.
1961
Disease rating
15-0-14 4.2 a
Nugreen 4.6 b
None
1962 Percent rindworm
damaged melons
53.4 a
52.9 a
60.6 b
Table 4. Control of rindworm of watermelon by
insecticides, 1962
Insecticide
Guthion
Thiodan
Diazinon
Dibrom
Mean percent
damaged melons
41.4 a
57.2 b"
59.7 b
62.9 b
modification of HorsfalFs method (2). Melon
numbers and weights were recorded twice in
1961 and 3 times in 1962. Melons damaged by
rindworm were counted at the time of picking
in 1962. Other insect infestations did not develop
during either test.
Results and Discussion
Differences in disease control in 1961 resulted
principally from the major effects of fungicides,
insecticides, and foliar fertilizers rather than
from their interactions. In 1961 zineb-maneb
was significantly better than copper, which was
significantly better than captan. In 1962 maneb
and Dithane M-45 were significantly better than
folpet and zineb; maneb was also significantly
better than M-45 (Table 1). Disease control with
mixtures containing thiodan was significantly
less than control with those containing other
insecticides (Table 2). Combinations with Nu
green were significantly poorer in disease control
than those with 15-0-14 (Table 3).
A rindworm infestation in 1962 was the only
insect problem encountered during these tests.
Rindworm damage was significantly less in plots
sprayed with guthion than in those sprayed
with other insecticides (Table 4). Rindworm
damage also was significantly less in plots
sprayed with mixtures containing fertilizers than
in those sprayed with mixtures not containing
fertilizers (Table 3). Rindworm control was re
duced when insecticides were combined with di-
thiocarbamate fungicides in the absence of fer
tilizers (Fig. 1). However, control was not re-
SCHENCK AND ADLERZ: WATERMELON FERTILIZERS 211
5
o
i o
|
66 r
62
56
54
o: 50
46 FOLPET ZINEB
MANEB
FERTILIZER
FOLPET ZINEB
MANEB
NO FERTIUZER
Figure 1.Effect of fungicides and fertilizer combinations on insecticide control of rindworm of watermelons, 1962.
duced in similar combinations with folpet.
There were no significant differences in yield
due to the major effects of fungicides, insecti
cides, or foliar fertilizers.
Certain combinations were involved in sig
nificant interactions indicating apparent incom
patibility (Table 5). These interactions were not
supported statistically by significant major effects
or lower order interactions or both, which con
siderably lessens their importance. However,
these combinations are worthy of note and fur
ther evaluation.
Summary
In a 2-year study (1961-1962) 72 combina
tions of insecticides, fungicides, and foliar fer
tilizers were compared for their compatibility
on watermelon. In these tests disease control
was best with zineb-maneb and maneb alone.
Disease control with mixtures containing Thiodan
or Nugreen was significantly less than with mix
tures not containing them. Rindworm control
was best with guthion and mixtures containing
foliar fertilizers. Insecticidal control was re
duced by mixtures containing dithiocarbamate
fungicides without fertilizers. Other combina
tions showing apparent incompatibility will be
tested further.
LITERATURE CITED
1. Arnold, E. W. and J. W. Apple. 1957. Compatibility of insecticides and fungicides used for the treatment of corn seed. J. Econ. Entomol. 50:43-45.
2. Horsfall, James G. 1945. Fungicides and their action. Chronica Botanica Co. Waltham, Mass. p. 38-41.
3. Kelsheimer, E. G., James M. Walter, J. R. Becken-bach. 1952. Compatibility of insecticides, fungicides and nutrients for vegetable crops. Florida Agr. Expt. Sta. Circ.
S-47. 6p. 4. Kelsheimer, E. G. 1958. Compatibility of insecticides
Table 5. Pesticide-fertilizer combinations involved in interactions
indicating apparent incompatibility in 196l or 1962,
Combinations
Disease Percent rindworm Yield
ratings damaged melons (pounds per acre)
Thiodan/zineb-maneb/Nugreen 7.0
Thiodan/15-0-14
Diazinon/zineb-maneb/Nugreen
Phosdrin/captan/Nugreen
Dibrom/zineb-maneb/Nugreen
Diazinon/M-45/15-0-l4
Diazinon/zineb
Experiment mean 3.5
-
-
-
-
83^7
86.7
55.3
17,932
9,655
15,100
15,560
-
0
20,839
.2
.8
.8
.6
.2
212 FLORIDA STATE HORTICULTURAL SOCIETY, 1962
and fungicides for chrysanthemums. Proc. Florida State
Hort. Soc. 71:392-394. 5. Madsen, H. F. and Stanley C. Hoyt. 1962. Compati
bility chart of spray chemicals. Western Fruit Grower
16(2):26-29. 6. McBride, J. J., Jr. 1958. Reaction of zineb with
copper compounds, oil deposits when applied with zineb and deposits of zineb when applied with a variety of ma
terials. Proc. Florida State Hort. Soc. 71: 118-122. 7. Natti, J. J., W. T. Schroeder, G. E. R. Hervey, and
F. L. McEwen. 1958. Value of insecticide-fungicide combi nation treatments as protectants for seed of cucumber and winter squash. Plant Disease Reptr. 42:127-133.
8. Richardson, Lloyd T. 1960. Effect of insecticide-fungicide combinations on emergence of peas and growth of damping-off fungi. Plant Disease Reptr. 44:104-108.
PROGRESS REPORT ON POLE BEAN BREEDING AT THE
SUB-TROPICAL EXPERIMENT STATION
Robert A. Conover
Sub-Tropical Experiment Station
Homestead
Pole bean acreage in Dade County has in
creased steadily during the past decade so that
pole beans are now the second most important
vegetable crop grown in the county. About
7,000 acres were planted during the 1960-61 sea
son with production valued at $4,000,000. Dade's
crop accounts for about 85% of Florida's pole
bean acreage and 20% of the value of all green
beans produced in Florida.
The principal hazard to successful pole bean
production is bean rust caused by the fungu-3
Uromyces phaseoli typica Arth. Rust makes its
appearance in the fall, gradually builds up dur
ing the winter, and reaches a peak of destruc-
tiveness during the spring. Sulfur dust provides
adequate control during the fall and early winter,
but is inadequate when rust is severe. Dusts con
taining sulfur plus 3.5% maneb will control rust
under severe conditions but twice weekly appli
cations may be required. These dusts are expen
sive and close attention must be paid to details,
especially timing of applications, if satisfactory
control is to be obtained.
There are several other diseases and disorders
which may affect certain pole bf^an varieties.
The common bean mosaic and the Southern bean
mosaic viruses are sometimes devastating in sus
ceptible varieties. Resistances to both viruses are
available in present day varieties. Yellow bean
mosaic is sometimes a problem in Dade County,
particularly in small plantings near groves and
residences. Resistance to this virus is not known
in beans. Intumescence and black suture, two
physiological disorders thought to be induced by
environmental factors, are occasionally severe
in pole beans.
McCaslan is the only pole bean variety grown
to any extent in Dade County. It is well adapted
to the winter-growing conditions and to the cal
careous soils of Dade County, is resistant to the
common bean mosaic virus, black suture and in
tumescence, but it is very susceptible to rust.
The pods of McCaslan are too light in color,
and are also criticized for being flat and rough.
Other varieties, such as U.S. No. 4 (No. 191)
and Florigreen, have not found favor with
Dade County growers, although the latter is
rust resistant, and both have features which are
desirable in pole beans. Both Florigreen and
U.S. No. 4 are susceptible to black suture and
intumescence. Florigreen is resistant to the com
mon and Southern bean mosaic viruses.
The Florida Agricultural Experiment Sta
tions initiated a state-wide pole bean breeding
project* in 1957 to coordinate work being done
at several locations in the state. The main ob
jective of this project, as it applies to the Sub-
Tropical Experiment Station, has been to de
velop a high yielding, rust resistant pole bean
adapted to Dade County conditions, and produc
ing good quality pods able to withstand the rigors
of marketing. The immediate and primary aim
has been to develop a high yielding pole bean
combining the vigor and adaptability of McCaslan
with the rust resistance and pod color of Flori
green. Uniformity in length, straightness, and
smoothness of pod was sought in every selection.
This paper is a report of the progress made
toward developing a pole bean variety with these
features.
Most of the work at the SES has been pri
marily concerned with selections from a cross
of McCaslan and Florigreen made by Dr. A. P.
Lorz of the Main Station, Gainesville. Selec
tions from this cross have proved to be highly
resistant to rust, and to produce yields that
equal or exceed the yields of either parent. In
addition these stocks possess, in varying degree,
most of the features considered desirable in a
^Project 887: Breeding of Improved Pole Bean Varieties
for Commercial Production in Florida.