Evaluation of Fruit Bagging as a Pest Management Option for Direct Pests of Apple
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Site
2.2. Fruit Bags
2.3. Treatments and Experimental Design
2.4. Fruit Damage Assessment
2.5. Fruit Quality Assessment
2.6. Bagging Set-Up Time and Durability
2.7. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Fruit Damage
3.2. Fruit Quality
3.3. Bagging Set-Up Time and Durability
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- National Agricultural Statistics Service. USDA NASS Quick Stats. Available online: https://quickstats.nass.usda.gov (accessed on 1 June 2018).
- Agnello, A.; Cox, K.; Lordan, J.; Francescatto, P.; Robinson, T. Comparative programs for arthropod, disease and weed management in New York organic apples. Insects 2017, 8, 96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Penn State University. Penn State Tree Fruit Production Guide, 2014–2015; The Penn State University: State College, PA, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Blommers, L.H.M. Integrated pest management in European apple orchards. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 1994, 39, 213–241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacHardy, W.E. Current status of IPM in apple orchards. Crop Prot. 2000, 19, 801–806. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prokopy, R.J.; Coli, W.M.; Hislop, R.G.; Hauschold, K.I. Integrated management of insect and mite pests in commercial apple orchards in Massachusetts. J. Econ. Entomol. 1980, 73, 529–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Whalon, M.E.; Croft, B.A. Apple IPM implementation in North America. Ann. Rev. Entomol. 1984, 29, 435–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amarante, C.; Banks, N.H.; Max, S. Effect of preharvest bagging on fruit quality and postharvest physiology of pears (Pyrus communis). N. Z. J. Crop Hortic. 2002, 30, 99–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hofman, P.J.; Smith, L.G.; Joyce, D.C.; Johnson, G.I.; Meiburg, G.F. Bagging of mango (Mangifera indica cv. ‘Keitt’) fruit influences fruit quality and mineral composition. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 1997, 12, 83–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leite, G.L.D.; Fialho, A.; Zanuncio, J.C.; Junior, R.R. Bagging tomato fruits: A viable and economical method of preventing diseases and insect damage in organic production. Fla. Entomol. 2014, 97, 50–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharma, R.R.; Reddy, S.V.R.; Jhalegar, M.J. Pre-harvest fruit bagging: A useful approach for plant protection and improved post-harvest quality—A review. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotech. 2014, 89, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoying, S.A.; Rosenberger, D.A.; Lamont, G. The apple industry in China. N. Y. Fruit Quart. 2006, 14, 13–20. [Google Scholar]
- Grasswitz, T.R.; Fimbres, O. Efficacy of a physical method for control of direct pests of apples and peaches. J. Appl. Entomol. 2013, 137, 790–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bentley, W.; Viveros, M. Brown-bagging granny smith apples on trees stops codling moth damage. Calif. Agric. 1992, 46, 30–32. [Google Scholar]
- National Agricultural Statistics Service. Census of Agriculture for West Virginia. 2012. Available online: https://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2012/Full_Report/Census_by_State/West_Virginia/index.asp (accessed on 1 June 2018).
- Teixeira, R.; Amarante, C.V.T.; Boff, M.I.C.; Rilbeiro, G. Control of insect pests and diseases, maturity and quality of imperial gala apples submitted to bagging. Rev. Brasil. Frutic. 2011, 33, 394–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brun, C.A.; Bush, M.R. Pest Management Guide for Apples in Washington Home Orchards; Publication EM101E; Washington State University Extension: Pullman, WA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Alston, D.; Murray, M.; Nischwitz, C. Utah Home Orchard Pest Management Guide; Publication HG137; Utah State University Cooperative Extension: Logan, UT, USA, 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Beckerman, J.; Foster, R.; Bordelon, B.; Hirst, P. Managing Pests in Home Fruit Plantings; Publication ID-146-W; Purdue University Extension: West Lafayette, IN, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Sharma, R.R.; Pal, R.K.; Sagar, V.R.; Parmanick, K.K.; Paul, V.; Gupta, V.K.; Kumar, K.; Rana, M.R. Impact of pre-harvest fruit-bagging with different coloured bags on peel colour and the incidence of insect pests, disease and storage disorders in ‘Royal Delicious’ apple. J. Hortic. Sci. Biotech. 2014, 89, 613–618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, C.S.; Zhang, D.; Wang, Y.Q.; Li, P.M.; Ma, F.W. Effects of fruit bagging on the contents of phenolic compounds in the peel and flesh of ‘Golden Delicious’, ‘Red Delicious’, and ‘Royal Gala’ apples. Sci. Hortic. 2012, 142, 68–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ju, Z. Fruit bagging, a useful method for studying anthocyanin synthesis and gene expression in apples. Sci. Hortic. 1998, 77, 155–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lancaster, J.E.; Dougall, D.K. Regulation of skin color in apples. Crit. Rev. Plant Sci. 1992, 10, 487–502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merzlyak, M.N.; Chivkunova, O.B. Light-stress-induced pigment changes and evidence for anthocyanin photoreception in apples. J. Photochem. Photobiol. B Biol. 2000, 55, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arakawa, O. Characteristics of color development in some apple cultivars: Changes in anthocyanin synthesis during maturation as affected by bagging and light quality. J. Jpn. Soc. Hortic. Sci. 1988, 57, 373–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bower, C.C. Control of European earwig, Forficula auricularia L., in stonefruit orchards at Young, New South Wales. Gen. Appl. Entomol. 1992, 24, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
- Carroll, D.P.; Hoyt, S.C. Augmentation of European earwig (Dermaptera, Forficulidae) for biological control of apple aphid (Homoptera, Aphididae) in an apple orchard. J. Econ. Entomol. 1984, 77, 738–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McLeod, J.H.; Chant, D.A. Notes on the parasitism and food habits of the European earwig, Forficula auricularia L. (Dermaptera, Forficulidae). Can. Entomol. 1952, 84, 343–345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solomon, M.G.; Cross, J.V.; Fitzgerald, J.D.; Campbell CA, M.; Jolly, R.L.; Olszak, R.W.; Niemczyk, E.; Vogt, H. Biocontrol of pests of apples and pears in Northern and Central Europe—3. Predators. Biocontrol Sci. Technol. 2000, 10, 91–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Year | Application Date | Pesticide | Product/Formulation | Type | Rate/ha(A) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2013 | 1 April | Copper sulfate | Cuprafix Ultra 40 | Fungicide | 6.7 kg (6 lb) |
Mineral oil | Damoil | Insecticide | 37.4 L (4 gal) | ||
20 May | Acetamiprid | Assail 30SG | Insecticide | 420.3 g (6 oz) | |
2014 | 4 March | Copper sulfate | Cuprafix Ultra 40 | Fungicide | 6.7 kg (6 lb) |
Mineral oil | Damoil | Insecticide | 37.4 L (4 gal) | ||
17 March | Dodine | Syllit 65WG | Fungicide | 1.7 kg (1.5 lb) | |
Cyprodinil | Vangard 75WG | Fungicide | 210.2 g (3 oz) | ||
24 April | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 2.2 kg (2 lb) | |
Cyprodinil, Difenoconazole | Inspire Super | Fungicide | 876.9 mL (12 fl oz) | ||
14 May | Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Fluopyram, Trifloxystrobin | Luna Sensation | Fungicide | 423.9 mL (5.8 fl oz) | ||
Acetamiprid | Assail 30SG | Insecticide | 420.3 g (6 oz) | ||
2015 | 7 April | Copper oxychloride, Copper sulfate | C-O-C-S WDG | Fungicide | 11.2 kg (10 lb) |
Mineral oil | BioCover MLT | Insecticide | 37.4 L (4 gal) | ||
15 April | Dodine | Syllit 65WG | Fungicide | 1.7 kg (1.5 lb) | |
Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
Myclobutanil | Rally 40WSP | Fungicide | 280.2 g (4 oz) | ||
Lambda Cyhalothrin | Warrior II 2CS | Insecticide | 182.7 mL (2.5 fl oz) | ||
22 April | Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Cyprodinil, Difenoconazole | Inspire Super | Fungicide | 876.9 mL (12 fl oz) | ||
29 April | Fluopyram, Trifloxystrobin | Luna Sensation | Fungicide | 365.4 mL (5 fl oz) | |
Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
Myclobutanil | Rally 40WSP | Fungicide | 280.2 g (4 oz) | ||
8 May | Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Cyprodinil, Difenoconazole | Inspire Super | Fungicide | 876.9 mL (12 fl oz) | ||
14 May | Fluopyram, Trifloxystrobin | Luna Sensation | Fungicide | 423.9 mL (5.8 fl oz) | |
Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
Myclobutanil | Rally 40WSP | Fungicide | 350.3 g (5 oz) | ||
Spinetoram | Delegate 25WG | Insecticide | 420.3 g (6 oz) | ||
26 May | Trifloxystrobin | Flint 50WG | Fungicide | 140.1 g (2 oz) | |
Mancozeb | Penncozeb 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
Myclobutanil | Rally 40WSP | Fungicide | 350.3 g (5 oz) | ||
Acetamiprid | Assail 30SG | Insecticide | 560.4 g (8 oz) |
Year | Application Date | Pesticide | Product/Formulation | Type | Rate/ha (A) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014 | 27 May | Mancozeb | Manzate 75DF | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) |
Fluopyram, Trifloxystrobin | Luna Sensation | Fungicide | 423.9 mL (5.8 fl oz) | ||
Novaluron | Rimon 0.83EC | Insecticide | 1.5 L (20 fl oz) | ||
10 June | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WSB | Fungicide | 840.6 g (12 oz) | ||
Spinetoram | Delegate 25WG | Insecticide | 490.3 g (7 oz) | ||
24 June | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WSB | Fungicide | 840.6 g (12 oz) | ||
Spinetoram | Delegate 25WG | Insecticide | 490.3 g (7 oz) | ||
8 July | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WSB | Fungicide | 840.6 g (12 oz) | ||
Thiacloprid | Calypso 4F | Insecticide | 584.6 mL (8 fl oz) | ||
22 July | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Methoxyfenozide | Intrepid 2F | Insecticide | 1169.2 mL (16 fl oz) | ||
5 August | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WSB | Fungicide | 560.4 g (8 oz) | ||
Methomyl | Lannate LV | Insecticide | 4.2 L (3 pt) | ||
August 19 | Captan | Captan 80WP | Fungicide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | |
Methomyl | Lannate LV | Insecticide | 4.2 L (3 pt) | ||
2015 | 25 June | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.6 kg (3.3 lb) |
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Spinetoram | Delegate 25WG | Insecticide | 420.3 g (6 oz) | ||
July 9 | Captan | Captan 80WDG | Fungicide | 3.6 kg (3.3 lb) | |
Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WP | Fungicide | 840.6 g (12 oz) | ||
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Methoxyfenozide | Intrepid 2F | Insecticide | 1169.2 mL (16 fl oz) | ||
30 July | Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WP | Fungicide | 560.4 g (8 oz) | |
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Phosmet | Imidan 70WSB | Insecticide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
13 August | Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WP | Fungicide | 560.4 g (8 oz) | |
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Phosmet | Imidan 70WSB | Insecticide | 3.4 kg (3 lb) | ||
27 August | Thiophanate-methyl | Topsin-M 70WP | Fungicide | 560.4 g (8 oz) | |
Ziram | Ziram 76DF | Fungicide | 4.5 kg (4 lb) | ||
Methomyl | Lannate LV | Insecticide | 4.2 L (3 pt) |
Year 1 | Treatment | Proportion Clean from: | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Insect | Disease | Insect and Disease | ||
2013 | Untreated | 0.39 ± 0.03 b | * | * |
Commercial Bag | 0.68 ± 0.04 a | * | * | |
2014 | Untreated | 0.07 ± 0.06 b | 0.10 ± 0.05 b | 0.01 ± 0.01 b |
Commercial Bag | 0.42 ± 0.08 a | 0.94 ± 0.03 a | 0.41 ± 0.08 a | |
Plastic Bag | 0.65 ± 0.10 a | 0.85 ± 0.11 a | 0.63 ± 0.10 a | |
Paper Bag | 0.53 ± 0.08 a | 0.80 ± 0.07 a | 0.48 ± 0.09 a | |
Pesticide | 0.36 ± 0.08 a | 0.93 ± 0.02 a | 0.32 ± 0.06 a | |
2015 | Untreated | 0.14 ± 0.02 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 d | 0.00 ± 0.00 d |
Commercial Bag | 0.68 ± 0.04 a | 0.89 ± 0.03 a | 0.61 ± 0.01 a | |
Plastic Bag | 0.84 ± 0.03 a | 0.07 ± 0.02 c | 0.05 ± 0.02 c | |
Paper Bag | 0.73 ± 0.05 a | 0.31 ± 0.06 b | 0.30 ± 0.06 b | |
Pesticide | 0.74 ± 0.01 a | 0.86 ± 0.03 a | 0.62 ± 0.04 a |
Year 1 | Treatment | BMSB | IL | LR | PC | TPB | SJS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2013 | Untreated | 0.30 ± 0.04 a | 0.09 ± 0.02 a | 0.12 ± 0.02 a | 0.03 ± 0.01 a | 0.01 ± 0.00 a | 0.06 ± 0.02 a |
Commercial Bag | 0.19 ± 0.04 b | 0.02 ± 0.01 b | 0.04 ± 0.01 b | 0.03 ± 0.02 a | 0.01 ± 0.01 a | 0.04 ± 0.02 a | |
2014 | Untreated | 0.23 ± 0.07 a | 0.25 ± 0.06 a | 0.11 ± 0.01 a | 0.07 ± 0.02 a | 0.18 ± 0.03 a | 0.30 ± 0.06 a |
Commercial Bag | 0.02 ± 0.02 b | 0.04 ± 0.01 b | 0.05 ± 0.02 a | 0.06 ± 0.04 a | 0.21 ± 0.09 a | 0.43 ± 0.06 a | |
Plastic Bag | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 0.03 ± 0.02 b | 0.07 ± 0.02 a | 0.11 ± 0.02 a | 0.06 ± 0.02 a | 0.13 ± 0.09 a | |
Paper Bag | 0.02 ± 0.02 b | 0.09 ± 0.03 ab | 0.07 ± 0.05 a | 0.14 ± 0.04 a | 0.14 ± 0.08 a | 0.23 ± 0.09 a | |
Pesticide | 0.02 ± 0.01 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 a | 0.11 ± 0.04 a | 0.07 ± 0.02 a | 0.40 ± 0.07 a | |
2015 | Untreated | 0.55 ± 0.03 a | 0.34 ± 0.02 a | 0.22 ± 0.05 a | 0.20 ± 0.03 a | 0.12 ± 0.03 a | 0.04 ± 0.02 ab |
Commercial Bag | 0.22 ± 0.04 b | 0.08 ± 0.02 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.03 ± 0.01 ab | |
Plastic Bag | 0.03 ± 0.02 c | 0.06 ± 0.01 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.02 ± 0.01 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.03 ± 0.01 ab | |
Paper Bag | 0.13 ± 0.04 b | 0.07 ± 0.02 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | 0.08 ± 0.03 a | |
Pesticide | 0.21 ± 0.02 b | 0.03 ± 0.01 b | 0.02 ± 0.01 b | 0.01 ± 0.00 b | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b |
Year 1 | Treatment | SB | SBFS | FRD |
---|---|---|---|---|
2014 | Untreated | 0.32 ± 0.09 a | 0.82 ± 0.05 a | 0.04 ± 0.02 a |
Commercial Bag | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 0.04 ± 0.02 b | 0.01 ± 0.01 a | |
Plastic Bag | 0.06 ± 0.04 b | 0.12 ± 0.09 b | 0.03 ± 0.02 a | |
Paper Bag | 0.10 ± 0.08 b | 0.14 ± 0.03 b | 0.01 ± 0.01 a | |
Pesticide | 0.06 ± 0.01 b | 0.03 ± 0.02 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 a | |
2015 | Untreated | 0.29 ± 0.04 a | 0.96 ± 0.03 a | 0.04 ± 0.02 a |
Commercial Bag | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 0.10 ± 0.03 c | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | |
Plastic Bag | 0.06 ± 0.02 b | 0.90 ± 0.02 a | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | |
Paper Bag | 0.01 ± 0.01 b | 0.68 ± 0.05 b | 0.00 ± 0.00 b | |
Pesticide | 0.05 ± 0.02 b | 0.10 ± 0.03 c | 0.00 ± 0.00 b |
Treatment | Year 1 | |
---|---|---|
2014 | 2015 | |
Commercial Bag | 0.54 ± 0.07 a | 0.71 ± 0.04 ab |
Plastic Bag | 0.64 ± 0.08 a | 0.82 ± 0.03 a |
Paper Bag | 0.32 ± 0.08 b | 0.60 ± 0.02 b |
© 2018 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Frank, D.L. Evaluation of Fruit Bagging as a Pest Management Option for Direct Pests of Apple. Insects 2018, 9, 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040178
Frank DL. Evaluation of Fruit Bagging as a Pest Management Option for Direct Pests of Apple. Insects. 2018; 9(4):178. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040178
Chicago/Turabian StyleFrank, Daniel L. 2018. "Evaluation of Fruit Bagging as a Pest Management Option for Direct Pests of Apple" Insects 9, no. 4: 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040178
APA StyleFrank, D. L. (2018). Evaluation of Fruit Bagging as a Pest Management Option for Direct Pests of Apple. Insects, 9(4), 178. https://doi.org/10.3390/insects9040178