Biological effectiveness of insecticides in pear psylla control

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Psylla pyri L. is the pear dominant pest, which damage can reach 70…90 %. 5–7 generations of the insect can develop during one growing season in the south of Russia. Phytophage is difficult to control due to development of insecticide resistance and presence of different growth stages at the same time in summer. Therefore, the research aim was to identify the most effective insecticides with various modes of action that restrain the number and development of pear psylla nymphs. The research tasks were to clarify biological features of pear psylla development and to determine effectiveness of insecticides with various modes of action in controlling P. pyri L. population. Pear psylla development in Prikubansky zone of the Krasnodar region was studied and the results were presented. During the research years, the sum of effective temperatures necessary for: start of egg laying was 40 °C (at a threshold of 6 °C); beginning of larvae hatching was 121…122 °C; period from egg to imago — 300 °C. Pest development monitoring showed that the insect has 6 full generations in the growing season. Field experiments were conducted with ‘Leven’ pear variety in Prikubansky zone, central gardening subzone of the Krasnodar Territory on the basis of genetic collection of North Caucasian Federal Scientific Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Winemaking in 2021–2022 to determine biological effectiveness of insecticides. The results revealed that chemicals based on juvenoids and chitin synthesis inhibitors were not inferior in effectiveness to chemical insecticides. The two-year studies showed that the highest effectiveness after a single application of the chemicals Akarb, WDG (250 g/kg fenoxycarb) and Dimilin, WDG (800 g/kg diflubenzuron) was on the 10th day and amounted to 83.3…91.7 %, which was higher than the effectiveness of the standard.

About the authors

Marina E. Podgornaya

North Caucasian Federal Scientific Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Winemaking

Email: podgornayame@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-2268-1279
SPIN-code: 6686-9037

Candidate of Biological Sciences, head of Laboratory of Protection and Toxicological Monitoring of Perennial Agrocenoses

39 im. 40-letiya Pobedy st. Krasnodar, 350901, Russian Federation

Nadezhda A. Didenko

North Caucasian Federal Scientific Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Winemaking

Author for correspondence.
Email: didenko-n.a@mail.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4012-4457
SPIN-code: 2418-6797

Junior Researcher, Laboratory of Protection and Toxicological Monitoring of Perennial Agrocenoses

39 im. 40-letiya Pobedy st. Krasnodar, 350901, Russian Federation

Svetlana V. Prah

North Caucasian Federal Scientific Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Winemaking

Email: sp41219778@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6416-3798
SPIN-code: 3652-3020

Candidate of Biological Sciences, Senior Researcher, Laboratory of Protection and Toxicological Monitoring of Perennial Agrocenoses

39 im. 40-letiya Pobedy st. Krasnodar, 350901, Russian Federation

Anfisa V. Vasilchenko

North Caucasian Federal Scientific Center of Horticulture, Viticulture, Winemaking

Email: anfisavv@yandex.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7680-7511
SPIN-code: 6853-1941

Junior Researcher, Laboratory of Protection and Toxicological Monitoring of Perennial Agrocenoses

39 im. 40-letiya Pobedy st. Krasnodar, 350901, Russian Federation

References

  1. Bozkurt V, Ugur A. Effects of kaolin on some biological properties of pear sucker [Cacopsylla pyri (L.) (Hemiptera: Psyllidae)]. Acta Hortic. 2020;1269:191–198. doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2020.1269.26
  2. Balykina EB, Korzh DA, Yagodinskaya LP. Psylla pyri seasonal population changes in the Crimea. Plant protection news. 2015;(3):34–38. (In Russ.).
  3. František K, Stará J. Management and control of insecticide-­resistant pear psylla (Cacopsylla pyri). Journal of Fruit and Ornamental Plant Research. 2006;14(3):167–174.
  4. Civolani S. The past and present of pear protection against the pear psylla, Cacopsylla pyri L. In: Perveen F (ed.) Insecticides: Pest Engineering. 2012. p.385–408.
  5. Gajski D, Pekar S. Assessment of the biocontrol potential of natural enemies against psyllid populations in a pear tree orchard during spring. Pest Management Science. 2021;155:104390. doi: 10.1002/ps.6262
  6. DuPont ST, Strohm C, Nottingham L, Rendon D. Evaluation of an integrated pest management program for central Washington pear orchards. Biological Control. 2021;152:104390. doi: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2020.104390
  7. Ahmad MJ, Mohiudin S, Pathania SS, Mukhtar M. Feeding potential of anthocorid bug, Blaptostethus pallescens (Poppius) (Hemiptera: Anthocoridae) against eggs of pear psylla, Cacopsylla pyricola (Foerster) (Homoptera: Psyllidae) on pear in Kashmir. Journal of Entomology and Zoology Studies. 2020;8(5):685–689.
  8. Petrakova L, Michalko R, Loverre P, Sentenská L, Korenko S, et al. Intraguild predation among spiders and their effect on the pear psylla during winter. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment. 2016;233:67–74. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2016.08.008
  9. Erler F, Tosun HS. Plant oils as oviposition deterrents against winterform females of pear psylla, Cacopsylla pyri (L.) (Hemiptera: Psyllidae). Phytoparasitica. 2017;45:509–515. doi: 10.1007/s12600‑017‑0609‑7
  10. Li J, Tian B. Peppermint essential oil toxicity to the pear psylla (Hemiptera: Psyllidae) and potential applications in the field. Journal of Economic Entomology. 2020;113(3):1307–1314. doi: 10.1093/jee/toaa009
  11. Didenko NA, Podgornaya ME. Biological approaches to the development of integrated protection of pear plants from pear psylla. Fruit growing and viticulture of South Russia. 2021;(70):254–268. (In Russ.). doi: 10.30679/2219‑5335‑2021‑4‑70‑254‑268
  12. Koltun NE, Grebneva YN. Control of pear psylla number and its harmfulness in the orchards of Belarus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus. Agrarian series. 2014;(4):66–74. (In Russ.).
  13. Skrylev AA, Kashirskaya NY. The use of modern insecticides of different mechanisms of action against pear psylla according to the growing season. Fruit growing and viticulture of South Russia. 2016;(40):137–145. (In Russ.).
  14. Balykina EB, Korzh DA, Gorina VM, Yagodinskaya LP. Comparative effectiveness of various protection systems of the pear from Psilla pyri L. in the Crimea. Acta Horticulturae. 2020;1298:469–475. doi: 10.17660/ActaHortic.2020.1298.64
  15. Civolani S, Soroker V, Cooper WR, Horton DR. Diversity, biology, and management of the pear psyllids: a global look. Annals of the Entomological Society of America. 2023;116(6):331–357. doi: 10.1093/aesa/saad025

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Согласие на обработку персональных данных

 

Используя сайт https://journals.rcsi.science, я (далее – «Пользователь» или «Субъект персональных данных») даю согласие на обработку персональных данных на этом сайте (текст Согласия) и на обработку персональных данных с помощью сервиса «Яндекс.Метрика» (текст Согласия).