Integrated Codling Moth Management

Introduction

The codling moth is a major pest of deciduous tree fruit throughout the world (Putman 1963, Bajwa 1980, Riedl et al. 1985). High quality standards of modern fruit production do not tolerate more than 1-2 % of damaged apples or pear (Andermatt et al. 1988). Codling moth, as a key pest in the apple or pear orchards, dictates the rate and frequency of pesticide applications. At present control of this pest is principally achieved by two to six applications (depending on the number of generations in an area) of organic insecticides to produce blemish-free fruit (Bajwa 1996).  Application of these broad spectrum insecticides for the control of codling moth has resulted in several side effects such as destruction of useful natural enemies (Hagely & Laing 1979, Purcell & Granette 1986, Hardman & Gaul 1990) and development of resistance to pesticides (Varela et al. 1993. Knight et al. 1994) thus causing emergence of secondary insect pests and phytophagous mites as serious problems in the apple and pear ecosystem (Bower & Kaldor 1980, Hardman & Gaul 1990, Croft & Riedl 1991).  In fact, systems relying upon use of conventional, broad-spectrum insecticides to control the codling moth in pome fruits have broken down  (Varela et al. 1991, Knight et al. 1994, Varela et al. 1991).
 

Single tactic systems hold little promise for codling moth control. Table 1 provides a comparison of a control system based on conventional insecticides and alternative pest management systems relying on multiple tactics for the control of fruit pests with the codling moth as the primary target.  Research has demonstrated the effectiveness of highly integrated pest management programs which result in fresh-market-quality fruit produced with very few chemicals (Prokopy 1990). The careful consideration of multiple pest/multiple tactic interactions allows growers to apply sufficient control pressure on key pests without interfering with the natural regulation of sporadic and secondary pests.  Once interference between tactics has been diminished, an accumulation of beneficial insects develops in the orchard.  In an orchard where a variety of tactics—including selective pesticides—are used, sampling reveals a rich community of arthropods and a variety of second, third, and fourth level trophic interactions (Croft & Hull 1983, 1992).  Also, natural enemies and other factors often provide complete biological control of phytophagous mites.    Biotic imbalances can ensue from use of these chemicals leading to outbreaks of other pests, particularly mites.  Once interference among pest control tactics is reduced to a minimum, the orchard begins to function as a complex, multi-trophic ecosystem.  Small perturbations, slight changes in the initial conditions of seasonal cycles, and subtle fluctuations in the rates of change in the orchard subsystems can be magnified in the agroecosystem and give rise to significantly different  outcomes.  The challenge is to identify and manipulate these subtle interactions to the benefit of the grower.  In light of increasing incidences of field failures due to organophosphate resistance and the cross resistance that extends to almost all alternate insecticides, it is critical that more diversified IPM systems be used for control of codling moth.   Efforts to integrate methods, such as mating disruption, microbials, and selective insecticides (e.g., insect growth regulators), cultural controls (such as destruction of unharvested fruit) and biological control by egg parasitoids, are being tested as components of IPM for codling moth (Croft & Giliomee 1993).  Use of much more diversified control systems for this pest, which will include a number of resistance management components, such as monitoring methods, are essential for the future of the region's pome fruit industry.
 

 Table 1. Pest management Systems

Pests

Conventional Control Methods

Alternative Tactics

Codling moth Guthion (Azinphosmethyl)  Pheromone (mating disruption)
  Imidan, Lorsban, Penncap  Insect Growth Regulators
  Insect Growth Regulators Biological Controls
    Sterile Male Technique
Leafrollers    Mineral oils
Leafrollers  Lorsban, Penncap,  Bacillus thuringiensis 
  Pyrethroids, IGRs Pheromone (mating disruption)  
IGRs
    Biological Controls
Aphids Thiodan, Dimethoate Insecticidal Soap
  Pyerthroids Biological Controls
Leafhoppers Sevin/Thiodan  Insecticidal Soap
    Biological Controls
Leafminer Vydate Biological Controls
Scale Oil, Lorsban, Supracide Mineral oils
Misc. Lepidoptera  
(cutworms, armyworm,  
tent caterpillars, etc.)  
 
Lorsban, Thiodan, Sevin Bacillus thuringiensis
Biological Controls
Insect Growth Regulators
Sucking Bugs (Campylomma,  
lygus, stink bugs)
Lorsban, Dimethoate,  
Carzol, Thiodan,  
Pyrethroids
Insorganic sulfur 
Biological Controls
Selective acaricides 
Insecticidal soaps 
Mites  Acaricides  Selective Acaricides  
Biological Control  
 
Pear psylla Oil, Pyrethroids Biological Control
 
 
 
 
 HomeIndexNextLast