Applying a mix of latex paint and water to young almond tree trunks has been the standard protection practice against herbicide damage. Research done at Nickels Soil Lab in Arbuckle last year showed that a hardening off period prior to herbicide applications provided better protection.
Former UCCE orchards advisor Dani Lightle and UC Davis graduate student Drew Wolter initiated the trial in 2019 and Wolter is continuing the study this year. Wolter said he was surprised to see the level of protection that a hardening off period provided compared to the paint application.
Weeds competing with young almond trees for water and nutrients can impact the long-term production of the orchard. Standard practice has been to apply white latex paint to the lower two to three feet of the trunk prior to applying herbicides. The young, tender bark of the trees that have been covered by a carton since planting is especially vulnerable to systemic and contact herbicides.
The trial used low and high rates of glyphosate and glufosinate or a mix of the two for weed control. The herbicides were applied in second leaf almond orchards with different levels of trunk protection including unpainted trunks which had been hardened-off for nine weeks, fresh paint, old paint and cartons.
Results from the trial showed that tree stress caused by trunk applied systemic and contact herbicides was lowest in the cartoned and unpainted treatments where tree trunks were allowed to harden off for nine weeks. Wolter observed that hardening of the green and tender tree bark after the protective carton is removed provided the best protection from herbicides. When the newly exposed bark was sprayed with an herbicide, Wolter said, the result was tree stress with wilted canopies and tissue damage. In the trial, trees treated with top of label rate tank mix of glyphosate and glufosinate had 4 to 22 percent greater trunk damage than trees that were not painted.
Wolter said the most effective trunk protection option for young almonds is to use a carton. When it is removed, waiting nine weeks before applying an herbicide is recommended. A practical strategy for controlling weeds and protecting young trees is to apply the herbicide early in the spring before the protective carton is removed. If necessary, a second application of herbicide can be made nine weeks after carton removal. Hardening off is crucial, Wolter said, and is best done in late spring or early summer.
A new fungal pathogen that causes twig and shoot dieback and woody cankers in citrus can be found in Central California orchards and citrus orchardists should be on the lookout for symptoms in early summer months. Symptoms are caused by the fungal species Colletotrichum, which is a well-known pathogen in citrus. This new species of Colletotrichum, C. karsti, is distinct from C. gloeosporioides, which causes the post harvest disease anthracnose. Recent field surveys in the Central Valley found both species in citrus.
According to UC researchers Dr. Akif Eskalen and Dr. Florent Trouillas, the most characteristic symptoms of this disease are the gum pockets which appear on young shoots either alone or in clusters and the dieback of twigs and shoots.
Figure 2. Pathogenicity of Colletotrichum spp. on ‘4B’ clementine after 15 months. Vertical lines represent standard error of the mean.
These symptoms were reported in clementine, mandarin and navel orange varieties. Pathogenicity tests on clementine mandarin also confirmed that C. karstii is a more aggressive pathogen of citrus in California compared to C. gloeosporioides. Research continues to focus on understanding the biology of the fungal pathogens and factors that influence the disease expression with hopes of developing management strategies. There is no chemical control as the pathogen survives in the cambium layer. Pruning out infected wood and disposing of it outside the orchard can reduce the inoculum level in an orchard.
Greg Douhan, UCCE area citrus advisor for Tulare, Fresno and Madera counties, said the infections, first noticed in the valley in 2013, has been seen in many citrus varieties. Infections can be minor, with a dieback of a single shoot on a tree or significant with woody cankers and multiple shoots affected. All age trees can become infected.
Figure 1. Symptoms of Colletotrichum Dieback. A) Shoot dieback symptoms on Clementine, B) Gumming symptoms on an infested shoot. C) Branch dieback symptoms on Clementine. D) Wood discoloration and canker on the wood.
Outbreaks of this disease in citrus trees is likely due to environmental factors, Douhan said. Outbreaks may be noticeable one year and not seen the next. Relative humidity and precipitation in California citrus growing regions are known to play a role in Colletotrichum infections. Conidia are dispersed by rain and humidity is conducive to spread of the pathogen. A spore trap study of the Colletotrichum species showed higher frequency during wet months, but there are additional avenues to infections. Wounding is also known to be an opening for infection. Wind and sand damage also give the species an opportunity to colonize citrus. Douhan said the Central Valley’s drier climate is likely a limiting factor to spread of the disease.
PGRs provide color enhancement and other benefits to ripening grape crops.
Uniform and timely red table color development is a crucial component of grape quality. California’s table grape growing regions have climate conditions that favor productivity and other aspects of fruit quality, but hot summer temperatures can inhibit coloring. For this reason, many growers use certain plant growth regulators that can promote faster and more uniform color.
Different plant growth regulators are used in table grape production. Those used to increase berry size may also suppress coloration. Other PGRs are applied to bring color.
Matthew Fidelibus, UC Davis viticulture specialist, said the most common active ingredients in products sold to promote color in table grapes are ethephon and S-abscisic acid. Most table grape growers use some type of PGR to improve crop quality.
Degradation of ethephon releases ethylene, a plant hormone that promotes pigment accumulation in grapes. Timing and application rate for ethephon are important for optimizing quality. Late or excessive applications can result in soft berries, which decreases shelf life and opportunity to export.
Ethrel® is a trademarked ethephon product that has been marketed by Bayer to promote early uniform color development in red table grape varieties. Treatment is advised when 5 to 30 percent of berries show color. Rates will vary depending on site temperatures. Higher than recommended rates can cause fruit to soften. There is also a 14-day harvest interval after an application and MRLs (maximum residue levels) apply.
Vineyards under stress due to insect damage or under irrigation should not be treated with ethephon. Absorption by plant tissues is influenced by temperature, humidity and pH of plant surfaces. This PGR must be applied at a rate sufficient to wet vines and fruit clusters uniformly.
Following label instructions for PGRs is important, Fidelibus added, to achieve efficacy and also due to post harvest intervals with ethephon.
S-abscisic acid (S-ABA) is the active ingredient in ProTone®, a trademarked product marketed by Valent. S-ABA is a naturally occurring PGR that is involved in many processes of plant maturation including senescence. This product is exempt from post-harvest interval restrictions.
S-ABA is involved in many major processes during plant growth and development including dormancy, germination, bud break, flowering, fruit set, general growth and development, stress tolerance, ripening, maturation, and senescence.
While grapes can normally produce enough of this PGR for color development, high temperatures can hinder production. The ProTone product can be used to supplement the naturally occurring S-abscisic acid to achieve faster and more complete coloring.
Growers looking for different ways to maximize the effectiveness of each insecticide spray in the upcoming months have a new tool in the form of an adjuvant. Using technology that reduces evaporation and keeps tank mix droplets on the target in a liquid state twice as long as a typical surfactant, OMRI listed Ampersand® adjuvant gets more of your tank mix to the leaf and keeps it there longer, giving your insecticide time to perform its function. Learn more at www.attuneag.com.
CCAs have a deep knowledge of soil and water science and crop nutrition on which growers in California and Arizona have come to rely (photo by Marni Katz.)
California and Arizona grow produce that feeds the United States and the world. The diversity and value of the products grown in the West require a high level of technical expertise. The intensity of specialty agriculture must be balanced with concern for the environment to ensure sustainable crop production for generations to come. For these reasons, and more, it has never been a better time to add the Certified Crop Advisor (CCA) credential to the Pest Control Advisor license. The two credentials are complimentary.
The Pest Control Advisor (PCA) program consists of thousands of individuals who are licensed to make recommendations of restricted use pesticides in California and Arizona. The PCA program is a great career choice for individuals who want to make a living in agriculture. PCAs who want to provide the highest level of service to their growers should consider becoming a Certified Crop Advisor. There is nothing more important to a crop advisor than their reputation for making their growers successful. The deep knowledge of soil and water science and crop nutrition required to become a CCA means a grower is working with the most well-rounded crop advisor in the industry.
PCAs must study and display knowledge of integrated pest management (IPM) to receive their license. Integrated pest management emphasizes a holistic approach to controlling insects, weeds and diseases, relying on pesticides only when good farming practices can no longer contain the pest. However, the overall performance objectives for the PCA license are focused on laws and regulations pertaining to pesticides and don’t capture the breadth and complexity of agronomic practices outside of pesticide use. CCAs have the knowledge and experience to put IPM into practice. Growers know that good pesticide recommendations prevent loss of productivity but adding a balanced irrigation and nutrition program can result in gains in yield, quality and return on investment.
Keeping Up with Changing Times
CCAs must pass two challenging exams to obtain certification. The international exam tests the applicant’s general knowledge of soil and water science, nutrient management, crop production, and pest management. The state exam is more specific to management of irrigated specialty crops common across California and Arizona. Students in agricultural colleges who are interested in becoming CCAs should speak with their advisors about developing an appropriate curriculum that will help the candidate pass the exams. The West Region CCA Board has a program to subsidize the registration fees for the CCA exams for students. Check the West Region Certified Crop Advisors (WRCCA.org/exams) web site for more information. Candidates must have a Bachelor of Science in an agronomic field of study and two years of experience before they obtain certification. CCAs must stay up to date on current best agronomic practices by obtaining 40 continuing education hours every two years. When you are working with a PCA who also carries a CCA, you are working with the best.
Farming practices are constantly changing to meet new challenges. Over the 20 years, I have worked as an agronomist in California, trees and vines have replaced field crop acres and drip and micro-sprinklers have replaced flood and furrow irrigation. Growers switched from applying heavy doses of nitrogen fertilizer alone to balanced blends with lower total nitrogen applications, and they realized higher yields. Ironically, as growers’ efficiency has improved, so has increased scrutiny of nitrate pollution of ground and surface waters. In order to sustain the rich bounty of California agriculture into the future, documentation was needed to demonstrate that growers’ nitrogen fertilizer management practices were not contributing to ground water pollution.
The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) added ground water to the Irrigated Lands Regulatory Program (ILRP) in 2012. Soon thereafter, farmer coalitions formed within watersheds to begin the process of collecting data on nitrogen management practices. It was apparent that many technically qualified agronomists were needed to accurately complete the nitrogen plans the coalitions would present to the SWRCB. Clearly, CCAs were the most qualified service providers when it came to nutrient management. Nitrogen management plans require soil testing, knowledge of a grower’s fertility plan, yield forecasts and final harvest totals. CCAs have been proven to be one of the most trusted sources of information by growers in surveys across the United States. CCAs were a perfect fit to help build the data required to manage nitrogen on a watershed scale. Thanks to language in the ILRP, the West Region CCA program has grown since 2014 to have the largest number of CCAs.
A CCA understands how to use soil, water and plant tissue analysis to develop a balanced plant nutrition program that meets crop needs (photo by M. Katz.)
But being a CCA has benefits well beyond completing nitrogen management plans. Retail sales companies know that their business depends on strong fertilizer sales. A CCA understands how to use soil, water and plant tissue analysis to develop a balanced plant nutrition program that meets crop needs. Custom nutrient programs benefit the customer as they only spend money on necessary nutrients and maximize return on investment. Ag businesses benefit, in turn, as profitable farmers can pay their bills. Custom nutrition benefits the environment by applying the right fertilizer at the right time, place and rate to reduce waste.
Optimizing Soil, Water and Nutrients
Pesticide recommendations are made within a narrow regulatory framework and don’t allow for much creativity; one must follow the label. Fertilizer programs, on the other hand, can be very satisfying to create as there are many options and challenges to consider. In addition, technical expertise in managing water quality and soil salinity will be critical for the future as marginal lands and water reuse become more important for food production. Watching a healthy crop yield a bountiful harvest while knowing you played a key role is a very satisfying experience. Many of the most successful salespeople carry both the PCA and CCA as they can provide whole farm solutions that improve a grower’s bottom line.
CCAS provide whole farm solutions that improve a grower’s bottom line
Farmers in the western states face many challenges. As their operations increase in size and complexity, they have come to rely on the expertise that a PCA/CCA offers. They can trust that pests are being dealt with and their fertility programs are based on sound agronomic principles that will bring the most profitable production at the end of the season. Farmers also know CCAs are collecting data to help them demonstrate to regulators they are using the most conservative practices possible to prevent ground and surface water pollution. The sustainable future of the West’s farming depends on CCAs.
If you are already a CCA, we thank you for your membership. If you would like to become more involved in the WRCCA, there are regional committees that are looking for new members. Check wrcca.org for more information on regional committees. If you are not a CCA but are interested in the program, refer to both certifiedcropadvisor.org and wrcca.org for information on exams, performance objectives and many other topics related to the program. The Agronomy Society is making it easier to take exams by switching to remote proctoring. There are also many more opportunities to get continuing education hours on-line. Stay tuned for more articles from WRCCA Board members in the months ahead.
Handleafing on Petite Sirah (all photos courtesy G. Zhuang.)
Early season vineyard management is critical for several reasons. First, the grapevine microclimate and fungal disease severity at early season largely affect the yield, e.g., yield loss and fruit unmarketability due to fungal disease, and fruit quality, e.g., Brix and color for red varieties; second, some missteps in early season vineyard practices might hinder the following year’s success if they affect bud fruitfulness; finally, optimal early management might save you money on pest/disease management.
The season starts at budbreak and once buds start to push, the clock begins clicking. Although several vineyard practices during grapevine dormancy might also be important, such as pruning and fungicide application (e.g., lime sulfur), I will focus on post-budbreak vineyard management in this article.
The most important steps during early season vineyard management include:
Irrigation
Nutrition
Pest/disease
Canopy management
Crop management
The objectives of early season vineyard management are simple and straightforward: To sustain yield with desired fruit quality at harvest with low disease/pest pressure. Irrigation, grapevine nutrition, pest/disease pressure, canopy management, and crop level all play in the formula to decide the timing and severity of vineyard practices at the early growing stage.
Irrigation
According to retired UCCE Viticulture Specialist Dr. Larry Williams, in a year with normal winter rainfall, a typical San Joaquin Valley (SJV) vineyard might not require irrigation until bloom, which might be approximately late April or early May in the SJV depending on weather, site, variety, and other farming practices. However, the timing of first irrigation can vary dramatically based on the winter and spring precipitation. Too much irrigation or precipitation at an early canopy development stage can promote rapid shoot growth and create a large and dense canopy which increases shading and relative humidity (RH) inside the canopy favoring fungal diseases, such as phomopsis, botrytis, and powdery mildew.
Canopy management such as shoot thinning, leafing and cane trimming can alleviate some negative effects from excessive vigor or dense canopy. However, canopy management alone might not offer the complete solution if the excessive growth resulted from too much precipitation or irrigation. Understanding when and how much to irrigate is beyond the scope of this article. However, some basic tools, such as visual assessment and soil moisture meter, can generally serve the purpose of deciding when to irrigate. Other irrigation scheduling tools, e.g., crop evapotranspiration (ETc), can also offer information on how much to irrigate on a daily or weekly basis. Managing irrigation and adjusting the canopy accordingly can optimize yield and fruit quality, along with the effectiveness of fungicide/pesticide programs, and that will improve your profit and reduce your fungicide/pesticide costs.
Nutrition
Managing grapevine nutrition serves two purposes: First, to make sure there are no nutrient deficiencies that could limit yield level or fruit quality; second, to make sure there are no excessive or even detrimental levels of nutrients that could also lead to reduced yield potential and fruit quality, unnecessary expense, and unwanted effects on the environment. Among grape nutrients, N has the most impact on vine vigor and canopy growth. Excessive N either from fertilizer application or irrigation water can promote excessive canopy growth causing shading and high RH inside of the canopy. As a result, excessive shading can impact the fruit-zone microclimate, and create high RH, favoring fungal disease, which will reduce fruit quality/marketability and basal bud fruitfulness for the following year’s crop.
Opening the canopy by shoot thinning, leafing and cane trimming can increase the exposure of basal buds and clusters and improve spray coverage and air circulation. However, like irrigation, canopy management might not be enough to correct the negative impact resulting from excessive N status, if N is left unchecked, an oversupply of N will promote the canopy growth to diminish any benefit from canopy management.
Growers should conduct a visual assessment and consider laboratory results, and rely on historical records, like yield and pest/disease conditions, to adjust the grapevine nutrition program. Among all the measures, bloom petiole or leaf blade tests are recommended to take a snapshot of early vine nutrient status that will give growers enough time to adjust the fertilizer program accordingly. Grapevine bloom petiole critical values are published in Table 1, above. Be cautious with N critical value. The N critical value was solely established on data based on Thompson Seedless with own root. Growers should judge the grapevine N status with additional information, e.g., vine general health, vigor and yield.
Canopy Management
As I discussed previously, typical grapevine canopy management includes shoot thinning, shoot positioning, leafing and cane trimming. Based on the trellis type, growers might not need to apply all of them. Most common practices in the SJV are shoot thinning, leafing, and canopy trimming and all of them can be performed mechanically.
Shoot thinning is typically conducted when shoots are 8 to 10 inches; the objectives are to reduce shoot density and improve light exposure inside of the canopy as well as reduce the crop level. In the SJV, few growers adopted this practice due to the potential yield loss. However, shoot thinning can be beneficial when the vines are young with excessive crop or vines that have an excessive number of fruitful buds following mechanical pruning (see Figure 1, above). Shoot thinning regulates the crop load to avoid the negative impact of overcropping on berry ripening and potential carryover effect on the following year’s crop. Many researchers have shown the benefits of shoot thinning and a few have demonstrated the feasibility of mechanical shoot thinning (Geller and Kurtural 2012). However, the benefit of shoot thinning might gradually diminish during the season if the irrigation is unchecked since the canopy could recover and refill the gaps when water is abundant.
Leafing aims to increase light exposure on clusters and basal buds to improve the fruit quality and bud fruitfulness as well as improve spray coverage and lower disease pressure (Figure 2, above). Both timing and severity of leafing are critical to achieve success. Leafing after veraison typically has no or negative effect on fruit quality, especially in the SJV. Leafing around berry set is commonly recommended to improve the color of red grape varieties, and studies show better results from mechanical leafing in comparison to hand leafing. Recently, several studies including a couple in Fresno and Madera, have proven pre-bloom or bloom mechanical leafing might offer the most benefits in comparison to classical berry set leafing. Compared to berry set leafing, bloom leafing offers more or similar fruit quality benefits with less cost by eliminating the need for shoot positioning prior to leafing, since most shoots are vertically positioned at bloom (Figure 3 and 4, below).
In cool climates and less productive vine systems, pre-bloom or bloom leafing might reduce berry set and ultimately decrease yield (Achimovic. et al. 2016). However, in our study and other studies in the SJV (Cook et al. 2015), no effect on berry set and yield has been observed, and the effect on berry set and yield from leafing prior to bloom may largely depend on growing conditions and severity of leaf area reduction from leafing.
Cane trimming is used to open the canopy for light exposure and increase air circulation in order to reduce RH and fungal disease pressure when the canopy is excessive and dense. However, severe canopy trimming might result in significant loss of leaf area that can delay the berry ripening by reducing the photosynthetic productivity (Figure 5, below). Severe canopy trimming might also over-expose the cluster and cause sunburn before harvest. The goal of canopy trimming is to effectively open the canopy without severely reducing functional leaves and over-exposing the fruit.
Figure 5. Canopy trimming too close to the cordon damages the canes and leaves which delays ripening and over-exposes clusters.
In conclusion, canopy management should be integrated with water and nutrient management as part of early season vineyard practices paying attention to pest/disease management, growing conditions (e.g., climate, soil condition, and irrigation water availability and quality) and production goals to achieve the maximum production efficiency with low disease and pest pressure.
Reference:
Geller, J. and Kurtural, K. 2012. Mechanical Canopy and Crop-Load Management of Pinot gris in a Warm Climate. American Journal of Enology and Viticuture. 64: 65-73.
Acimovic, D., Tozzini, L., Green, A., Sivilotti, P., and Sabbatini, P. 2016. Identification of a defoliation severity threshold for changing fruitset, bunch morphology and fruit composition in Pinot Noir. Austalian Journal of Grape and Wine Research. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajgw.12235.
Cook, M., Zhang, Y., Nelson, C., Gambetta, G., Kennedy, J., and Kurtural, K. 2015. Anthocyanin Composition of Merlot is Ameliorated by Light Microclimate and Irrigation in Central California. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture. 66: 266-278
Some common chemical resistant materials for gloves are barrier laminate, butyl rubber, nitrile rubber, neoprene rubber, natural rubber, polyethelyene, polyvinylchloride (PVC), and viton rubber.
In March a national emergency was declared for the novel Coronavirus and the Defense Production Act invoked to ensure that ventilators and PPE are distributed to healthcare workers in response to the pandemic.
This act empowers the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, to work from the top of the supply chain and directly with manufacturers of PPE, such as 3M and Dupont, to prioritize supplies of N95 respirators, protective clothing, and other PPE for medical staff, ensuring that they receive the supplies necessary to address the pandemic.
Before the pandemic, 10 percent of N-95 respirators from 3M went to healthcare; that number is now 90 percent.
This has led to significant backorders of PPE supplies for distributors. Carl Atwell, president of Gempler’s, explains that normal lead times for PPE before the crisis was up to 10 days. Now, current reports from suppliers shift daily as manufacturers work to address the executive order.
Estimated times for the availability of disposable respirators suggest fall of this year; and the estimated wait for other PPE supplies is August.
Suppliers are working to significantly ramp up production of PPE: The company 3M announced plans to produce 50 million units of respirators in the U.S. by June for domestic distribution, compared to the 13 million manufactured in the U.S. before the crisis.
“There is a tremendous need, but when you put that much supply chain resources behind it, you intuitively believe that we should catch up at some point,” Atwell says. He encourages agricultural producers to find ways to communicate with each other and distribute PPE as one way to mitigate the shortage. Atwell also suggests looking for lesser known brands of PPE: “Don’t just go to your first tier of choice.”
On their company website, disposable protective clothing is available from brands like Keystone rather than the more recognizable TyvekÒ coverall from Dupont, including reusable chemical-resistant clothing as opposed to their disposable counterpart. Supplies in high demand include reusable and disposable nitrile gloves, protective clothing, and disposable respirators, including certain protective eyewear, such as goggles and face shields. Although this could change in the days ahead, half-mask and full-mask respirators are more available than disposable N-95 respirators for now.
Since there are many of us in agriculture that will be applying pesticides soon or in the near future, here are some common questions and answers on how to meet PPE requirements as the shortage continues.
Q: I heard that the CDC is loosening regulations on PPE requirements for healthcare workers. Is this the case for agriculture?
Answer:
No. The label is the law. PPE requirements on pesticide labels are written by the U.S. EPA, while state PPE regulations are overseen by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation; neither of these agencies have loosened their regulations for PPE.
Q: Should I stock up on PPE?
Answer:
No. Purchase the PPE that you anticipate needing for the growing season to avoid overstocking and shorting available supplies. Choose reusable PPE whenever possible.
Q: What if I can’t find the respirator that is required on the pesticide label?
If the pesticide label requires a particulate respirator, such as an N95, you can wear an elastomeric mask respirator with organic vapor filtering cartridges, but only if N95 particulate pre-filters are added.
Answer:
Option 1: Seek alternative, more protective respirators:
Applicators may not know how to decide which is the appropriate respirator to choose if the one the label requires them to wear is not available. For example, if the label requires a particulate respirator, such as an N95, wearing a half mask respirator with organic vapor filtering cartridges will not protect you from particulates. However, wearing an organic vapor filtering cartridge with N95 pre-filters will.
With an increase in PPE, the risk for heat illness increases.
If an employee or applicator is wearing a different respirator than normal, they will need to repeat their medical evaluation, annual fit test and annual respirator safety training to correspond with the new respirator.
Option 2: Seek alternative pesticide products that do not require a respirator:
Currently, there is not one central list of pesticide products that require respirators, so a grower, applicator, or pest control advisor will need to consult all potential pesticide product labels for respirator requirements. Consider visiting agrian.com to review PPE requirements quickly in search results under the “safety” tab of a product.
Q: What if I can’t find the right chemical-resistant gloves that are 14 mils thick?
Some common chemical resistant materials for gloves are barrier laminate, butyl rubber, nitrile rubber, neoprene rubber, natural rubber, polyethelyene, polyvinylchloride (PVC), and viton rubber.
Answer:
Nitrile gloves are in high demand. Handlers must always wear gloves made of the material listed on the label but consider searching for reusable chemical-resistant gloves made of other materials that still comply with the requirements of the label. Some common chemical resistant materials for gloves are barrier laminate, butyl rubber, nitrile rubber, neoprene rubber, natural rubber, polyethelyene, polyvinylchloride (PVC), and viton rubber. With the exception of barrier laminate and polyethylene, chemical resistant gloves are required to be at least 14 mils thick.
Disposable gloves made out of chemical resistant materials listed on the label less than 14 mils thick can be worn, but for no more than 15 minutes at a time and then disposed of. This may be an option for mixers or handlers who are conducting tasks that require more dexterity. Consider that removing and replacing disposable gloves every 15 minutes is likely a requirement that is not feasible to comply with. Also, thinner gloves cannot be layered on top of one another to add up to 14 mil.
Glove Category Selection Key developed by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) to help label readers identify the correct glove material.
15 mil disposable nitrile gloves are manufactured by suppliers such as, Showa and Cordova Safety among others. If available, they can be worn for the duration of the handling task, so long as they remain intact.
Reusable 15 or 22 mil nitrile gloves are compliant with the majority of handling tasks.
Q: How do I know when to wear a coverall and which ones will protect me?
A storage area with mostly blue cloth coveralls, one chemical resistant coverall, and a laundry basket.
Answer:
Coveralls must be worn if the pesticide label specifies they are required in the PPE section, or if handling a pesticide with a DANGER or WARNING signal word. For applications where contact with spray residue is likely, such as a backpack or air blast application, coveralls should be added. They can be made of any closely woven fabric, most commonly Tyvek or a tightly woven cotton.
Coveralls must be provided by the employer and if a reusable cotton coverall is chosen, the employer is responsible for laundering them. A chemical resistant suit worn over work clothing is an appropriate substitute for coveralls, but there is an increase in the risk of heat illness when worn because they are made of a heavier material than most coveralls.
A person wearing PPE and making a pesticide application using a backpack sprayer.
Q: What if I can’t find a face shield?
Face shields protect against splashing during mixing and loading. Goggles and safety glasses that meet all the requirements are an appropriate substitute for other handling tasks.
Answer:
Face shields protect against splashing during mixing and loading and must be worn if specified by the pesticide label. The only substitute for wearing a face shield is using a full-face respirator.
If the label does not specify that eyewear is required, or if it requires “protective eyewear,” you can choose to wear either a face shield, goggles, or safety glasses that provide front, side, and brow protection and meets the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z87.1 standard for impact resistance.
If questions or concerns arise, contact your county agricultural commissioner for more information and assistance during this time.
Carl Atwell from Gempler’s is willing to be a personal resource at this time for those wanting to discuss supplies of PPE and with other related questions. He can be reached at: carl@gemplers.com.
Alec Garcia from Woodland Farm Supply in California is available to help with requests for supplies of N95s or other masks that comply with regulations that come available. You can reach out to her directly and she can provide you with updated information regarding restocking at agarcia@growwest.com.
Dr. Peter Larbi at the Kearney Ag Center has developed models and simulation tools to help improve the efficiency of spray applications (photo courtesy P. Larbi.)
Plenty of factors can contribute to inefficiencies in pesticide spray applications. Complex interactions between equipment, environmental conditions and physical properties of the material being sprayed influence how much of the material hits the target and how much is wasted.
Spray applications in tree nut orchards for pest and disease control are typically done with airblast sprayers. Cost of the spray material and application plus the potential loss of crop yield from pests and disease make achieving high target deposition and coverage critical.
Dr. Peter Larbi, assistant UCCE specialist in the Agricultural Application Engineering program (AgAppE Lab) at the Kearney Agricultural Research and Extension Center in Parlier, spoke on the components of a good spray application at the 2020 UC Pistachio Day. Larbi is also working on an Expert System model for spray applications to help growers achieve optimum spray coverage. Larbi said that significant material loss can result from drift and ground fall out because of variability in tree canopy profile and size. Lack of calibration and maintenance of spray equipment and operator error also contribute to spray inefficiency. Material that does not contribute to pest or disease control represents a production cost without a return, he said.
Spray Application Basics
Airblast sprayers use high volume, high velocity air to transport spray material. They atomize the tank mix liquid and the fan air transports the droplets toward the target. Atomization produces a spray consisting of a spectrum of droplet sizes. Three things can happen to the droplets: they can drift beyond the canopy, they can hit the ground, or they can be intercepted by the tree canopy, i.e. they can hit the target. Research in citrus has shown that 18 to 26 percent of applied spray material is generally off-target. Six to 14 percent is lost to drift, 9 to 20 percent hits the ground.
Environmental factors, such as wind, air temperature and humidity can negatively affect the efficiency of the spray application. Added to those are improper operating settings of the airblast sprayer, including nozzle design, operating pressure and the physical properties of the tank solution.
Maintenance of the sprayer is critical for proper function, Larbi said. Parts, including the agitator in the tank, pressure gauges, pumps, nozzles and fan must be operating correctly.
The rate and speed of the airflow also determine how much of the spray material reaches the target. These factors must be managed with the tree canopy size and foliage density in mind.
The operator of the sprayer is one of the primary arbiters in an effective application. This person should be trained and knowledgeable about sprayer operation, be familiar with and follow best management practices, be attentive to the machinery and respond quickly when a problem arises.
Accurate Calibration
The airblast sprayer must be calibrated accurately to deliver the material. Calibration should be done at the beginning of the spray season and changes made when conditions, such as foliage density, warrant. Larbi noted that not all calibration steps are always necessary. Adjustments can be made to the components of the sprayer that are affected by the change in conditions.
The spray application must be timed according to weather conditions and to the target pest for best control. The spray must be directed at the target canopy and adequately penetrate the canopy for optimal coverage. If in excess, penetration can lead to spray droplets exiting the target canopy without depositing on it.
It is important, Larbi said, to take into account specific orchard conditions before starting a spray application. Adjustments in fan speed, ground speed and nozzles can achieve better efficiency. Making sure the droplets hit the target and are being retained there is important, and different situations may call for changes in the tank mix formulation, including the use of adjuvants to improve deposition. Target coverage can be assessed with the use of spray cards (see Larbi’s related article on March/April 2020 edition of Progressive Crop Consultant magazine for details.) These can show if the spray made it to the target, but do not show deposition.
Expert System Model
Modeling and simulation tools developed by Larbi focus on efficiency – which is the amount of spray material reaching the target versus the amount of spray delivered by the airblast sprayer. Efficiency entails spray deposition. Larbi’s spray evaluation section of the Expert System can be used to simulate several different spray application scenarios by changing values of inputs and observing spray deposition. These scenarios may represent different optional settings a grower could use in the application. By comparing the outcomes—on-target deposition—of the various settings, the grower can identify the setting that would result in optimum spray material deposition.
Computer modeling utilizes the tree characteristics, application parameters, weather and orchard conditions to develop the optimal settings. Larbi said that validating a model with data from an actual field experiment provides confidence to trust the model’s predictions and to make decisions based on the model.
Tree height, foliage density, and canopy diameter are the tree characteristics. Application parameters are the airflow rate, nozzle type and number of nozzles, operating pressure and ground speed. Temperature, relative humidity and wind are the weather parameters. Orchard conditions include number of trees per row, tree and row spacing and missing trees. Other parameters in the modeling are output per side, total volume applied, total area covered, application rate and number of trees sprayed.
Using the model, inputting the parameters of the sprayer application and orchard design, is one way of improving the efficiency of the spray operation. In contrast, Larbi said that guessing the outcome of an airblast spray application for its canopy deposition, drift and ground fall-out is almost impossible.
Modeling the simulation tools for predictions can improve decision making for better planning, Larbi said. CitrusSprayEx or similar tools can help. For more information on the Expert System, go to ucanr.edu/sites/CSEESDeploy/CitrusSprayEx_Resources/.
There are a number of options for controlling—or at least limiting the damage of—birds in vineyards, but experts say the best defense is to build a strategy that includes multiple points of protection and mix it up.
The extent of bird damage within a vineyard depends on vineyard site location, varietal and other variables, as well as bird species. UCCE Viticulture Farm Advisor Glenn McGourty in Mendocino County said birds can be a particular problem on vineyards located along the edges of wildland areas. Particularly in those situations, the best protection is to create a barrier around the vines such as netting. He said woven polypropylene netting works best in his region and experience.
Birds begin to feed on grapes in vineyards as fruit turns color and starts to ripen. In McCourty’s north coast winegrape region, early ripening red varieties such as Pinot Gris, Cielogiolo and Pinot noir are among the favorites, he said. Birds feed around the clock during the day but are particularly voracious in the early morning.
Protecting the Crop
UC Cooperative Extension Wildlife Specialist Roger Baldwin said netting appears to be the most effective, and most expensive, option for controlling grapes in problem areas.
“Netting is used in areas where the grower expects substantial grape loss in the vineyard, and the crop is relatively high in value,” Baldwin said.
Another effective option is using birds of prey as a natural bird deterrent. Baldwin said preliminary research shows that falcons can prove to be a good deterrent and provide “fairly substantial reduction” in crop loss.
“Falconry is a pretty effective tool but it too is pretty expensive. While it’s a little less expensive than netting, it also should be used in higher value cropping areas,” Baldwin said.
McGourty agreed falcons can be effective in his high end vineyard area, particularly in larger vineyards.
“Falcons work quite well, but are expensive, starting at about $20,000, so you need about 500 acres to make it pencil out,” McGourty said. While netting and falconry are two effective options for controlling birds, they can be cost-prohibitive for smaller or lower value vineyards.
One lower-cost control is to put a human in the vineyards with a shotgun, but that comes with both regulatory and public/neighbor relations considerations. Invasive pests, such as starlings don’t require specific depredation permits, while most native and migratory species, including house finches and robins, will require permits through state and federal wildlife agencies to remove birds through shooting or trapping.
Starlings, an invasive bird common in many vineyard regions can cause significant damage to grapes (photo courtesy UC Regents.)
Many growers rely on frightening devices that use auditory or visual hazing, such as propane cannons or electronic sound transmitters. Visual devices such as reflective mylar streamers, scare-eye balloons and even air dancers can provide some benefit for brief periods of time. Baldwin said auditory devices must also provide variety and target specific bird populations in the vineyard to maintain their effectiveness.
Know Your Birds
Baldwin said an overall program should take into account what type of birds are in the vineyard and the corresponding damage, which will vary by species. Starlings can cause extensive damage, for instance, plucking off and eating the whole berry and damaging neighboring berries with their feet. House finches tend to peck at berries and tear them open, which can lead to secondary disease problems such as bunch rot from juices dripping on berries below. It is important to have someone who is experienced at identifying bird species looking at the damage and keep track of what is in the vineyard year to year, as with most pest issues, he said.
House finches tend to peck at berries and tear them open, which can lead to secondary disease problems such as bunch rot from juices dripping on berries below (photo courtesy UC Regents.)
Generally, Baldwin noted, migratory birds are more susceptible to frightening devices because they typically only loiter in one place for a week or two. For more resident or semi-permanent populations, the UC IPM manual suggests combining visual devices such as mylar strips, with auditory devices such as propane cannons. The key to success is to mix things up so that birds don’t become habituated to the hazing device, Baldwin said.
“Loud noises like propane cannons and shell crackers can be effective at deterring birds from a given area for a short period of time,” he said. “What we generally recommend is growers would mix and match some of these tools. Maybe use propane canons for five to six days then when birds habituate, move to electronic distress calls, then incorporate visual hazing devices, and so on. You can’t just put mylar streamers out there and think you are going to solve the problem, and you can’t just put propane cannons and think that will solve the problem; you have to be smart.”
One auditory hazing device, Bird Gard, relies on what the Sisters, Ore.-based company calls “bioacoustics” to randomly produce calls of naturally occurring local dominant predator birds combined with resident pest bird distress and alarm calls. All sounds are customized to repel the specific birds within a particular vineyard. Since the species of pest birds can change during the season, each unit contains a changeable sound card that is customized to vineyard location and the type of pest bird in the vineyard.
“Bird Gard has been around for over 30 years. In our early stages of development, we learned pretty quickly that birds habituate to the same sound played over and over,” said Quay Richerson, California sales director for Bird Gard. “So, we developed a microprocessor within our circuit board that randomizes the order in which sounds playback, the frequency of the sounds, and the intermittent time-off period. The keyword there is randomized. The sounds have to keep changing all the time for it to have the effectiveness we desire.”
Quay said that to protect the crop as sugars come on, growers should ensure the Bird Bard units are operating two weeks before veraison and run through harvest.
Baldwin said growers can usually get three to four weeks of protection with a strategic program, so they should wait to put defenses out until close to when feeding begins to get control through harvest. The decision on when to start implementing bird strategies is largely site specific. Individual growers should look at the previous year’s bird damage and crop value to figure out if and when it is time to spend the money on bird control.
“It’s best to begin before birds start coming and feeding in those fields, but you don’t want to begin too soon because each control measure will only last so long,” Baldwin said.
New Technologies
While some bird control measures are as old as farming, newer measures are looking at integrating technologies to outsmart one of grape production’s smart pests. New research is being done on devices that create background noise that interferes with birds’ ability to communicate with each other. Feeding repellents are also in trial, though that technology is in its infancy. In addition, drone technology is also being researched.
Dr. Page Klug, Supervisory Research Wildlife Biologist with the USDA National Wildlife Research Center at the North Dakota Field Station, has conducted evaluations of unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) as a tool to protect agricultural crops from bird damage.
UAS are known to elicit behavioral and physiological responses in wildlife and have been proposed as a means to protect crops from birds. Klug evaluated behavior responses of blackbirds to fixed wing and rotary wing drones on a number of platforms and hazing methods.
The birds showed no response to the fixed wing UAS but did show a response to the rotary UAS and responses were more pronounced with lower altitude approaches.
Klug concluded that the rotary UAS has the potential to modify bird behavior in a way that may reduce crop damage, but emphasized in her research that no studies have been done to assess potential effectiveness.
Klug said that to be effective in protecting crops from blackbird depredation, modifications to the physical UAS might be needed. Modifications include the addition of an audio system to produce distress or alarm calls or firearm discharge sounds, adding lasers or lights or shapes that mimic an aerial predator.
In addition, a fully automated UAS may be a more effective strategy. This modification could potentially reduce labor, Klug wrote, The UAS could also be programmed to fly patterns which would be most likely to deter birds. Environmental conditions also come into play with UAS use as low temperatures can affect battery packs. Klug noted that their evaluations were done with specific UAS models and other types of drones and responses by birds to approaching UAS can vary based on the specific platform and are likely species and context specific.
While growers have access to a number of measures for controlling what can be one of a vineyard’s most perplexing pests, an effective program is not “set it and forget it” experts said. An effective program should be customized and managed according to each specific site, taking into consideration the bird pests present and the size and value of the vineyard and grapes.
Adult spotted lanternfly on grapes in Pennsylvania (all photos and graphics courtesy S. Darra.)
In 2014, Pennsylvania reported the occurrence of a large planthopper, the spotted lanternfly (SLF), in Berks County. SLF (Lycorma delicatula) is a hemipteran insect of the family Fulgoridae and is thought to have arrived in the US on a shipment of stones in 2012. Ever since it was found in Pennsylvania, it rapidly spread to many states with infestations currently present in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. SLF has also been found, without established populations, in Connecticut, Massachusetts, New York, and North Carolina as of March 2020. SLF is native to China and has a wide host range including fruit trees such as apple, apricot, cherry, and peach; ornamental or woody trees such as birch, black walnut, dogwood, lilac, maple, pine, poplar, and tree of heaven; and grapes. The tree of heaven, which is also an invasive species in the United States, is a favorite host of SLF.
Spotted lanternflies were first reported in the U.S. in Pennsylvania and have since spread significantly on the East Coast. The tree of heaven, which is also an invasive species in the United States, is a favorite host of SLF.
Considering the history of the spread of invasive pests from other areas to California, the presence of tree of heaven throughout California, and the importance of the grape industry and others susceptible hosts to the California economy, it is important to be aware of this pest and strategies to mitigate its potential negative impact.
Biology
SLF adults are about 1” with tan-colored forewings that have black spots and markings and hind wings having red, black, and white coloration and black spots. The abdomen is yellow with dark bands. Females deposit eggs in batches of 30 to 50 and cover them with a yellowish-brown waxy protective deposit. Eggs are the overwintering stage of SLF. Nymphs emerge in spring and go through four instars. First to third instar nymphs are black with white markings and the fourth instar is red with black and white markings.
Female SLF deposit eggs in batches of 30 to 50 and cover them with a yellowish brown waxy protective deposit.
Damage
SLF can occur in large numbers and suck plant sap with their needle-like mouthparts, reduce the plant vigor, and can cause mortality in severe cases. Copious amounts of honeydew secreted by SLF promotes the development of sooty mold, which affects photosynthesis when on foliage or quality when on fruits. Since SLF infests several landscape trees and populations build in large numbers, it can also be a nuisance in urban and landscape areas.
Lifecycle of the spotted lanternfly.
Spread
SLF can fly and spread to long distances through wind currents. They typically land on large trees and then distribute to other hosts. Their ability to deposit eggs on non-living surfaces like rocks, vehicles, and packages increases the risk of their accidental spread through materials shipped or vehicles moving from the infested areas. A recent modeling study identified California as a region highly suitable for the establishment of SLF.
Control
Scientists on the east coast and in California are currently working on biocontrol agents such as parasitic wasps (referred to as parasitoids) that attack SLF eggs and nymphs. If these parasitoids are specific to SLF and do not pose a risk to native insect populations or beneficial insects, they can be reared and mass-released for areawide control of the pest. There are certain chemical pesticides and biological pesticides based on entomopathogenic fungi such as Beauveria bassiana can be used to treat SLF infestations. However, the best strategy is to reduce the risk of its introduction and spread.
Although adults may be detected and removed, eggs deposited on packages, vehicles, and other surfaces could be dispersed to new areas and become sources of infestation.
As the SLF not only infests agriculturally important hosts, but also infests hosts in urban and landscape areas, both the agricultural community and the general public should be vigilant and join hands to prevent its invasion and spread in California. When there is an areawide problem, collective actions have a major impact on addressing them. A few important points to note are:
Be aware of the pest and able to identify the eggs, nymphs, and adults. This link to a video provides an overview of the pest, its biology, damage, and control: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45103-PFI4M.
Check vehicles and packages arriving from the infested regions in the United States for egg masses.
If found, immediately report to the local Agricultural Commissioner, University of California Cooperative Extension, or California Department of Food and Agriculture office.
