Second-level integrated pest management in commercial apple orchards
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in American Journal of Alternative Agriculture
- Vol. 9 (4) , 148-156
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s0889189300005890
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.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- 10.1007/BF00188239Published by Test accounts ,2011
- Effect of understory and border vegetation composition on phytophagous and predatory mites in Massachusetts commercial apple orchardsAgriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 1994
- Integrated Pest Management in European Apple OrchardsAnnual Review of Entomology, 1994
- Phytoseiid mites (Acari: Phytoseiidae) on apple trees and in surrounding vegetation in southern Finland. Densities and species compositionExperimental and Applied Acarology, 1991
- A small low-input commercial apple orchard in eastern North America: management and economicsAgriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 1991
- Integrated pest management theory and practiceEntomologia Experimentalis et Applicata, 1988
- Hedges as potential sources ofTyphlodromus pyri, the most important predatory mite in vineyards of Northern SwitzerlandBioControl, 1988
- Forecasting Ascospore Dose of Venturia inaequalis in Commercial Apple OrchardsPhytopathology®, 1986
- Apple IPM Implementation in North AmericaAnnual Review of Entomology, 1984
- Survival of Inoculum of the Entomopathogenic Fungus Beauveria bassiana as Influenced by FungicidesEnvironmental Entomology, 1983