Betsy Beers, WSU Entomology described efficacy information on new codling moth products at North Central Washington Apple Day. Part of North Central Washington Tree Fruit Days sponsored by WSU Extension, NW Cherry Growers, Pear Bureau NW, and North Central Washington Fieldmen’s Association.
Text Transcript and Description of Visuals
| Audio | Visual |
|---|---|
| Well, thanks, Chris, and thanks for inviting me this morning, and thank you for the over 30 years. It’s going to be 40 here very, very soon. So I’m going to talk about some different approaches to codling moth control. Hopefully there’s something here for both organic and conventional growers. Hopefully highlight some of the paths forward, but some of the new tools I’m going to talk about are actually old tools. | The presenter appears on stage, standing at a podium. |
| We’ve been dealing with this pest for about 140 years now, and we still haven’t got it down, and we’ll probably be dealing with it for the next 140 years. | Title slide. Presentation title: New Codling Moth Tools. Presenter information: Elizabeth H. Beers, WSU-TFREC |
| So it’s not an event, it’s a process. And based on the past, what we can expect in the future is, things will change. The codling moth will change, and our approaches to managing it will also change. So nothing ever stays the same. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| I’m sure the previous speakers have covered some of these things, so I’m going to just sort of skim through this. But I like to start with mating disruption just because of how important this is as a foundational technique to control codling moth. There are some orchards out there that probably don’t need it, but for most of us this lays the groundwork for the rest of our programs to work better. And certainly, if you’re organic, it’s really, really critical. It is one of your mainstays. When Guthion was $10 an acre and mating disruption was $110 an acre, it was a tough sell. | Slide titled “Mating Disruption” contains a simple diagram explaining normal mate finding in codling moth, with the male following a pheromone plume upwind to find the female. To the left of this is a microscopy image of the sensilla on the antenna of a moth. |
| The cost structures have really changed over the years, and all of a sudden mating disruption is looking better and better by comparison as a tool that you need to have in your toolbox. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| Just as an indication of how well this has been accepted by the industry, this is just the chart that Jay put together on the increase in acreage, in mating disruption over the first decade or so after it was registered, and we continue to stay at about the 85 to 90% implementation rate, which is pretty fabulous. | Slide titled “The Rise of Mating Disruption” contains a bar graph of acres of apples treated with codling moth pheromone products for every year from 1990 to 2010. There has been a steady increase in use since the 1990’s. |
| The other thing that I think, is a good indicator of how important this technique is, is the proliferation of products available for mating disruption. We don’t just have one material. We’ve got 7 or 8 or more. Lots of variations on the theme out there. And again, at some point, you figure out what’s best for your operation in terms of labor, efficiency, cost efficacy, whatever it is, and you go with that. Mating disruption can work in different ways with different products. | Slide titled “Mating Disruption: Product Proliferation” contains a photo of several different types of mating disruption including hand applied and puffers. |
| Another thing that if Vince Jones were here, he would be hammering on, is that we don’t necessarily prevent mating. We check mating in some of our colling moth blocks, and the mating is actually the level of mating is pretty high, so it doesn’t completely shut down mating. We wish it did, but it usually just delays it a bit, and that is surprisingly important for insects. If a female, the life of a female, the useful life of a female is about barely a week. So if she doesn’t get mated in the first 48 hours, basically, her fecundity just goes down and down and down, and that’s what slows the population growth, and that is part of what makes mating disruption really effective. | Slide titled “Delay, Not Prevention” contains a bar graph of the cumulative number of fertile female eggs laid versus the day of female moth life. The number of fertile eggs laid goes down with each progressive day that mating is prevented. |
| So don’t worry if you catch a female in a trap and you check it, and find that she has mated. It’s not if she’s mated. It’s how old she was when she got mated. So very important mechanism for mating disruption. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| And then here is some work by Jim Miller and Larry Gut. They published this in 2015, and it shows you, well, it shows you a couple things. It shows you all the proposed mechanisms. Is one of these a pointer? (Offstage conversation about pointer) But part of the things that’s really sort of amazing is that we’ve proposed all of these mechanisms. These are all ideas that people had about how mating disruption works. We haven’t really proven absolutely which of them it really is, or if it’s combinations of a number of these things. But what Jim and Larry did that is so useful to us is they divided it into two groups. And those two groups tell us a lot about what we can expect from mating disruption. So on the left, we have competitive mating disruption, and this is, as they pointed out, it is a numbers game. It depends on the number of dispensers, but even more, it depends on the numbers of codling moth in your orchard. And the bad news is, as the numbers go up, mating disruption is going to work less and less well, it will be less effective. It’s most effective when your densities are low. And that’s why we like to beat them down at the very beginning of the season, so that mating disruption can do its job even better. | Slide titled “Competitive vs non-competitive” contains a flow chart which outlines whether a proposed mating disruption method is competitive or non-competitive. To the right is are two bullet points outlining the differences between codling moth and oriental fruit moth mating disruption, highlighting that codling moth mating disruption is competitive and oriental fruit moth mating disruption is non-competitive. |
| The other thing is that, that’s how codling moth mating disruption works, and that’s unfortunate. It would be better if we had the one on the right-hand side of the page. And that’s noncompetitive mating disruption. And it’s basically where the insect’s sensory system gets so overwhelmed by this load of pheromone out in the orchard, it just sort of shuts down and says, “That’s it no more. I’m not flying. I’m not mating. I’m not doing anything.” | |
| And that’s the mechanism, for OFM. And that’s… since OFM is becoming increasingly important in certain regions of the state, I think it helps to point out that there are mating disruption products for both of these insects, but you can expect better results from mating disruption with OFM than you can with codling moth. There’s a little more latitude, a little more wiggle room. With codling moth, you need to be very careful about keeping your populations low right from the start. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| The other thing that Jim and Larry spent a lot of time working on is the number of point sources. And they are subject to the laws of diminishing returns, which means, as you get more and more dispensers out there, you will get more and more mating disruption. But if you double the number of dispensers, you don’t get double the effect anymore. And so the choice of dispensers, at some point, was just a compromise between the cost, which at the time it was first proposed was actually very high, it was a compromise between the cost and the additional effect the incremental effect you get by adding more. So yeah, you can up the dose of mating disruption, and you can get a better effect. But at that point you need to consider all of your options, and which ones are going to be the most cost effective. | Slide titled “Mating Disruption: Diminishing Returns” contains a line graph of codling moth catches versus dispensers per hectare from zero to 600. As the number of dispensers go up, the number of codling moth catches declines, sharply at first, then at a lower rate. |
| And there’s a reason that Don Thompson always told us to keep the keep the populations low, because every time it goes through a generation it’s able to increase dramatically. You don’t hit the reset button over the winter, but there’s a lot of mortality, there’s some predation. They start out lower in the spring, and that first generation is probably the poorest flying and mating weather that we have all season long. Come July, everything’s perfect for them, and they’re going to do great. So they will increase dramatically during the summer months. So if you have a second and a third generation, or a second and a third flight, they’re really going to be high by the end of the season. So, make sure that they start low and then never get high, and your mating disruption will then work even better in the middle of the summer. | Slide titled “It gets worse…” contains two bar graphs of the percentage of codling moth damage versus the codling moth generation. This data is shown for the 2019 and 2023 seasons. The percentage of damage increases with each subsequent generation. |
| I’m going to switch now to chemical control, because that’s something I’ve worked on for quite a bit of my career, mainly on secondary pests, but also recently on codling moth. And we’ve basically, we’ve come from an era where we had one material at a time, and that was the lead arsenide era, or the DDT era or, well, for the organophosphate era, we mainly settled on Guthion at some point. But we really sort of had one material or one group at a time, for years and years and years. And then, all of a sudden, we had this explosion of new materials with different modes of action, and in some ways we have never had such a variety of things to work with. | Slide titled “Codling Moth Control with Insecticides: Diversity! The modern era” contains a flow chart of codling moth insecticides starting with arsenicals, then DDT, then Guthion, and then to a diversity of insecticide options in the modern day. |
| Part of the reason why this is so good is because of resistance, and resistance is just, it’s just omnipresent in any insect system where pesticides are used. And we’ve been fighting it with pear psylla, we’ve been fighting with mites, we’ve been fighting with codling moth. | |
| And the expectation is that we always will be fighting that. I just heard a talk by a colleague from Pennsylvania, Greg Krofcek, and he’s recorded high levels of resistance in codling moth to the diamides. That’s one of our major classes of insecticides that we use. So they’ve been out there for a couple decades now, and I guess it really shouldn’t surprise any of us. At some point, if you use something that much, eventually, you’re probably going to get resistance to it. So with that onto some of the new materials. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| Oh, first a word about timing. And again this sort of goes back to the Guthion era. Back when Guthion lasted 21 days, we only needed 2 sprays to cover a generation that really did everything for us. Guthione also killed multiple stages: adults, eggs, larvae, everything but the pupae, Guthion would get, and that just gave us a huge amount of latitude to only spray a couple times. The new materials are a little more specific as to what stage they kill. And so, in order to stretch out our coverage for an entire generation, Jay Bruner developed the delayed first cover approach, which sticks an ovicide at the front, where you have most of the eggs, and then saves the larvicide, for later on, when you have more eggs hatching, and you’re able to get those neonates. So basically, it uses the materials to the greatest advantage. And that allows us to cover our generation with three sprays. | Slide titled “Codling Moth: Degree Day Timing” contains an example spray program for codling moth control which is based on degree day. |
| And you can do the same thing for succeeding generations, but generally we like to employ this at the very least, this strategy during the first generation. And then your pressure after that just depends on, well, how much pressure you have. And some people can get away with very little after the first generation, and some people have to keep spraying. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| But I want to talk about some new materials, because for the first time in a long time we have new materials to talk about. It’s been sort of, like I said, a couple of decades since Altacore and Delegate were introduced, and in the meantime there hasn’t been a whole lot new. So I was pretty excited when Syngenta said they had a new product for codling moth Plinazolin, and also Vestaron has a new material called Spear-Lep, which is, and I’m not going to even try to pronounce that, let’s just call it a peptide. | Slide titled “Codling Moth Insecticides (Old and New) contains a chart of codling moth insecticides along with their group and an example product. Two of the newer insecticides are circled: Plinazolin and Spear-Lep. |
| So here’s my 2021 trial. This was a three generation test. And I usually put a big red arrow next to what I call my standard treatment. And for many years now I’ve been saying Altacor first generation, Delegate first generation. And the Altacor has an ovicide in front of it, usually in my plots it’s intrepid. So Altacor and Delegate. But this we had a third generation, and we sort of have the choice now, technically, we could go back to our first generation material in the third generation or bring in a whole new one. So I decided, let’s switch it up. And I went with Assail. But at the top there in red, you have the Plinazolin treatments. And this was one of my first indications, and actually the one below it also that was one of my first indications, like, this this is really working quite well. This is this is working the way we hope a codling material will work. | Slide titled “2021 Codling Moth Trial” contains a bar graph of percent of damage after three generations of codling moth versus nine different spray programs. A red arrow points to the standard treatment of Altacor, Delegate, and Assail. All programs were seen to significantly reduce damage compared to the control treatment, with the Plinazolin trials showing a large reduction, especially when used in the second generation. |
| Then in 2022, we had a very unfortunate hail event at the Sunrise Research Orchard, and it was really hard to tell the stings from the hail damage. So we just counted entries which we were sure of what they were. But, as you can see again we looked at 2 formulations of Plinazolin, the DC and the SC. And the SC was looking very sharp, and again very comparable to Altacor and Delegate. And the SC formulation is what Syngenta eventually ended up going with. | Slide titled “2022 Codling Moth Trial – ‘Golden Delicious'” contains a photo of a damaged apple. Many pits and brown spots are seen on its skin. To the right of this is a bar graph of percentage of fruit damage versus four different spray programs. All the treatments showed reduction in damage compared to the control, with Plinazolin SC showing the lowest damage rates. |
| We also looked at Spear-Lep in this trial, but we didn’t get it out until the second generation, so we had way too much, way too much damage in the first generation before this went out. But clearly Spear-Lep did a pretty good job suppressing a very high level of codling moth in this block. | Slide titled “2022 Codling Moth Trial” contains a bar graph of percentage of fruit damage versus the Spear-Lep treatment and the control treatment. The Spear-Lep treatment shows a large reduction in fruit damage compared to the control. |
| Moving on to 2023, again we have the red arrow for the intrepid Altacor. Oh, sorry I’m pointing out the Plinazolin treatment there. The reason I was pointing that one out is, it had the lowest overall damage in this trial. And the Plinazolin was put into place against the very highest levels of codling moth, which occur later in the season, and it did a very impressive job of holding that codling moth damage back. We also looked at Shenzi, which is the new generic form. And then the gray one is the standard intrepid Altacor delegate. These are all looking good, and they just sort of switch around from one test to the other, about which one does the best. | Slide titled “2023 Codling Moth Trial” contains a bar graph of percentage of fruit damage versus seven different spray programs. All of the spray programs show reduction in damage, with the Plinazolin treatments, shown in green, having particular reduction when used in the third generation. |
| And then in 2024. The box there again is my standard in blue. It’s looking pretty good. And then the Plinazolin treatments are at the top there in turquoise. And they all looked very good. The very best one, and that was sort of a surprise were those purple treatments, and that was all Cormoran. Cormoran is a premix of novaluron and acetimiprid. So there’s really no surprise that it did a good job when you put it on in 6 treatments full season program. So the difficulty, of course, with Cormoran is, it has two materials, both of which have been known to flare mites. So you might want to be on the lookout for some mite problems if you’re looking at something like Cormoran. | Slide titled “2024 Codling Moth Test – ‘Gala'” contains a bar graph of percentage of fruit damage versus 12 different spray programs. All the spray programs showed a reduction in damage compared to the control, with the Cormoran treatments showing the highest reduction. |
| The Spear-Lep was not statistically different from the standard, but it seemed to struggle a bit more with holding back the codling moth under the high pressure populations that we have in our research orchard. | |
| I also wanted to examine this assumption that we didn’t kill many adults with our new materials. And sure enough, we don’t. Some I just didn’t expect any mortality like Intrepid. And sure enough, I didn’t. Imidan gave us a little something, and surprisingly, Delegate actually had a little bit of adulticidal activity, but certainly not what we would call an adulticide. | Slide titled “How many adults do we kill? (Lab Bioassay – Contact” contains a bar graph of percentage of adult mortality versus eight different pesticides and a control treatment. The treatments with the highest mortality were Imidan and Delegate with around 20 percent mortality, with Plinazolin showing around five percent mortality. |
| We did much better as an ovicide with a lot of these materials. We have oil looking incredibly good in this particular test, as well as Assail, Warrior, Tetracurb. Another surprise. Tetracurb was, was a great ovicide. So those the main ones. Everybody else had a little bit of activity, but really probably not enough to use it in the ovicide position. | Slide titled “How many eggs do we kill?” contains a bar graph of percentage of egg mortality versus eight different pesticides and a control treatment. Several treatments show around 100 percent mortality, with Plinazolin showing around 20 percent mortality. |
| So a word about some, some old new tools, and some of them are old. We’ve been using them for decades or centuries, and they’ve sort of circled around again as something we may want to re-examine for the future, where we’re struggling a little bit with codling moth and maybe have some resistance issues. Bands and sanitation. As a physical means of control, it’s actually pretty bomb proof. It’s just really expensive and labor intensive. Sterile insect release. I’ll talk about that a little bit. You’ve heard some of the other speakers. And then, of course, the last one is nets or just physical exclusion. | Slide titled “Some Old “New” Tools” contains a bullet point list: Bands/Sanitation, Sterile Insect Release, and Physical Exclusion, along with supporting photos of each of these methods. |
| I love these old photos from the old bulletins for trunk banding. That’s probably a 40 by 40 planting there, and the fact is trunk banding works, and it’s probably even more effective on young trees with smooth bark than it is on these older trees that already have a lot of places for the hibernacula to go. Another thing that I think is sort of intuitive, for most growers is fruit removal. If you have infested fruit, get it out of your orchard. Don’t let it pupate in place, and just contribute to the next generation. Get it out of there. And you’ve already heard a little bit about bins. They are a known source of diapausing larvae and pupae, so if they are brought in next to your block, and all of a sudden you see your traps light up, that could be the reason. | Slide titled “Sanitation: Trunk banding/Infested Fruit Removal” contains photos of a tree banded with chemically treated cardboard and an apple that is infested with codling moth. To the right are reminder lists for trunk banding and fruit removal. |
| In 2018, through 2020, I did a project on SIR. And this was the first time that this technique had been available in the State of Washington. And it was a departure from the Canadian program in a number of ways. It wasn’t area-wide, it wasn’t mandatory, and it was applied by drones. | Slide titled “2018-2020: Yes SIR!” contains a photo of a drone releasing moths with the caption “Don’t worry, they’re sterile”. |
| But it’s been proven in Canada. And this is why it’s not a new idea. It was actually proposed in the fifties and implemented in the nineties in BC. But it was by sort of happenstance it became available to Washington growers because of the excess production of the Canadian facility. The best thing is, it’s organically approved. And so that meant it was a good supplementary tactic for people who are having some codling moth issues in their orchard. And I called this the Cadillac option because it was quite a bit more expensive than some of the other options. But again, that was then, and this is now, and cost structures keep changing. So I’m revisiting all of my thoughts about that. | Slide titled “SIR: Sterile Insect Release” contains a photo of a sterile codling moth abdomen in which red dye can be seen. To the left, a bullet point list outlines the positive traits of sterile insect release. |
| So this was the results from the first year of the project, and they were just excellent. It showed a clear suppression at the two rates of sterile moths that we used relative to the untreated check. The next two years we didn’t see any differences between our treatments. But I came away from the project with a pretty positive impression of sterile insect release. This is something that really can work, and the truth is, we don’t have to prove it works. The Canadians already have proven it works, but it is context dependent. And that’s sort of where the hangup is, is what orchards and what situations is it going to work the best? | Slide titled “It’s Raining Moths!” contains a photo of a drone flying over an orchard and a bar graph of percentage of codling moth damage in preharvest versus a trial with three sterile insect releases, a trial with one release, and a control. The damage is divided into stings and entries, and the lowest overall damage was seen in the three release trial. |
| And lastly, this is another new old technique, and that’s just plain old physical exclusion. This is some information from Lee Kalscits, who started working on nets for shading, and that’s how they really sort of got a start here in Washington is because of our sunburn problems. And I think the feeling was as well, if you’re going to all the trouble to put a net up overhead to protect the trees from sunburn. Why not just drop the sides and make it a cage, and you’ll also get protection from codling moth. But there’s several different styles of nets, and also different colors of nets, and Lee’s work went into some of the reasons why you might want to use those. | Slide titled “Cultural Control: Net Enclosures” contains photos several different styles of drape nets including tree wrap, and top cover only. To the right is a list of positive traits of drape nets including the exclusion of vertebrates and insects and reducing heat stress on trees and workers. |
| So here’s my student, Adrian Marshall, and Adrian spent 5 years looking at cages and codling moth immigration in and out of cages, and we built our own cages and put a door in them for convenience of access. And just so you know, this is a video that Adrian and I did. It’s linked to my website. It only has 40 views. So please go in there, smash the like button and take a look at this video. It’s a lot of fun. | Slide titled “Adrian Marshall Explains CM and Nets” contains a screenshot of a YouTube video. |
| As part of his dissertation work, he looked at the reduction of codding moth damage and immigration across nets. And it was clear and unambiguous that even that a cage with netting that was the same mesh as our sunburn protection did a good job of inhibiting codling moth movement. | Slide titled “Do nets reduce codling moth damage” contains a bar graph of percentage of codling moth damage versus cage, air blast sprayer, and netted trees. This data is shown for the 2016 and 2017 season. The caged trial shows the least amount of fruit damage in both years. |
| But he did find in later studies that inhibited but it didn’t stop it. And that was one of the problems with that particular style of cage. We also looked at some commercial installations, and we and we found the same thing. Cages really inhibit codling moth movement, and even the overhead nets seem to have a behavioral effect. They just they didn’t like it as much, and we didn’t capture them as much. But it’s definitely an approach that is viable for controlling or helping in the control of codling moths. | Slide titled “Physical Exclusion Works!” contains a bar graph so the percentage of recovered sterile moths versus a full cage, overhead net and the control. Photos of the trials to the right show the setup as well as a clarification that moths were released outside the net and recaptured inside. The full cage showed the lowest number of recaptured moths, with the overhead net showing less substantial reduction. |
| But all of this really started in Europe like 20 years ago. And it all started because of widespread resistance to virus. That was the that was the initial reason why European growers had to find something totally different. And they had a lot of organic orchards and southeastern France. And this is what they came up with is this alt’carpo netting. | Slide titled “Europe: How did it start” which contains a the author information and abstract of the mentioned study. |
| So Adrian and I were fortunate enough to talk to one of the main authors of this work, Aud Alephilippe, and talked to her about what this project was, and how it started, and how it was working now, and she was kind enough to send us her slide set for a presentation she gave. So she says that basically this technique was invented by the French extension service in 2005, and they tried a couple of different styles, which is the single row or the whole orchard. And they also tried some different mesh sizes. | Slide titled “Exclosure netting description” contains photos of the drape netting used in the trials, along with a bullet point list outlining the experimental setup, as outlined in the audio. |
| And they basically did a giant three-year implementation study on the use of these nets. And it was all commercial installations. And then they checked a number of parameters, codling moth damage for one and also just the number of sprays that you needed. And the results were actually just spectacular. It essentially solved their problem of resistance. So they did this. This was a big study. It was done both in France and Italy. And they had something like 20 or so farms that were that were in the study. | Slide titled “What was studied” contains a list of study parameters as well as a count and description of the farms used for the trial. |
| So here is a summary of the codling moth damage, and they actually looked at OFM 2. They didn’t emphasize that a lot. But there was some OFM in there, too. And basically, the blue bars are without nets, and you can’t see the other bars, because basically, the damage with the nets was reduced to 0. And then it was also very effective in Italian pears, maybe not quite as effective as in French apples, but it still worked very well, and one of the things that they noted and is just a footnote on her slide is that the whole orchard nets were not as effective as the single row nets. And they never published the difference or examine that really specifically in this study, but they noted it, and basically just moved on and went only to the single row netting. | Slide titled “French and Italian” contains two bar graphs showing the percentage of damaged fruits for farms with and without nets. This data is shown for both the French and Italian farms. The nets are shown to have great efficacy against codling moth, with almost complete reduction in fruit damage. |
| And then the other thing, of course, which they were really keen on, is how much could you reduce your pesticide use by putting on a net? And again, it was pretty spectacular that they reduced insecticide use by 10 to 20 treatments, which means they were putting on a whole bunch of treatments before them. So it was considered a resounding success, this program. | Slide titled “Efficacy: pesticide reduction” contains two bar graphs show the total treatment frequency index and the insecticide treatment frequency index for farms with and without nets. This data is shown for both the French and Italian farms. The nets are shown to reduce insecticide use by 10 to 20 applications. |
| So that brings us today. And I didn’t even know this was available in Washington until I just googled it. And it turns out, there’s guys in Prosser, Washington that sell drape nets. And that reanimated my interest in these. The results on this other side, it’s hard to tell, because I had to translate this paper, but I think it’s the exact same study, but he breaks it out differently. But if you look at the right-hand side, you have all of the mating disruption. It’s mating disruption plus insecticides, whether it’s organic or IPM. And that’s the damage they got. And if you look at the ones under nets, it’s basically it’s basically 0. So it just reemphasizes how effective these nets can be. | Slide titled “Drape Nets: Cheaper, better” contains a photo of a drape net in an orchard and a bar graph comparing codling moth damage at harvest versus netted orchards and un-netted orchards treated with mating disruption. This data is shown for both organic and IPM orchards for three different years. The nets are shown to reduce damage to almost zero in each trial while the mating disrupted treated shows a higher degree of damage. |
| And then the last question, I guess, is sort of not my area of expertise is, do nets pay? And I used to jokingly refer to nets as being, if SIR was the Cadillac option, this was the Rolls Royce option. But again, cost structures change, and I think everybody needs to pencil out for themselves what their current costs are what they think their future costs are, and whether or not this might pencil out for them. So I did – again, this is an entomologist, not an economist – I did a calculation of the break even point. This is all based on organic and its different numbers of applications of oil and virus, and it’s based on cumulative costs where the cost of labor and the cost of material is inflated by the same percent every year for the next 10 years, and I just calculated the break even point. Because the premise of this is that your costs for spraying is likely to go up, but once you install the nets, the majority of that cost is fixed. And once you break even, you’re ahead every year thereafter. So I really revised my idea about how expensive nets are. | Slide titled “Do Nets Pay?” contains a graph of cumulative projected codling moth program costs in dollars per acre versus the year from 2024 to 2034. Lines are drawn on the graph of the break even points for installing nets and nets, bullhorns, and extensions. |
| And again, it really depends very much on how much you’re paying for codling moth control, and if you are an organic grower who’s putting on a lot of sprays, possibly facing resistance. | The view changes back to the presenter on stage. |
| Yeah, I think this is a really good idea. So with that, I’d like to thank you. And apparently it’s time for Q and A. | Thank you slide containing links to further resources on the WSU Tree Fruit website. |
YouTube Video Link: New codling moth tools
