<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Beat Sheet &#187; mungbeans</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thebeatsheet.com.au/category/mungbeans/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thebeatsheet.com.au</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 21:53:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Mirids in Mungbeans</title>
		<link>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/mirids/mirids-in-mungbeans/</link>
		<comments>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/mirids/mirids-in-mungbeans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 01:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[mirids]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mungbeans]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeatsheet.com.au/?p=43</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mirids can cause significant crop losses in mungbeans with yield reductions of up to 25-50% common where high mirid populations (eg 10/m2) are left uncontrolled. Mirids can reduce yields by 60 kg/ha for every mirid/m2 of crop.
Mirids can be present in mungbeans at any stage from seedlings to podding. Budding, flowering and early-podding crops are [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mirids can cause significant crop losses in mungbeans with yield reductions of up to 25-50% common where high mirid populations (eg 10/m2) are left uncontrolled. Mirids can reduce yields by 60 kg/ha for every mirid/m2 of crop.</p>
<p>Mirids can be present in mungbeans at any stage from seedlings to podding. Budding, flowering and early-podding crops are at greatest risk. Low populations of green mirids are often present in vegetative crops but there is no evidence they cause ‘tipping’ of vegetative terminals or have any impact on yield. Mirid populations usually increase with the onset of budding and peak during late podfilll. Generally around 80% of mirids present in flowering/podding crops are nymphs..<span id="more-43"></span> </p>
<p><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><span style="color:#000099;">Damage caused by mirids</span></strong><br />
</span>Mirids are sucking insects and feed by piercing the plant tissue and releasing a chemical that destroys cells in the feeding zone. This causes plant tissue to discolour and die. Mirids prefer to feed on flowers, buds and young pods, causing these to abort (shed).</p>
<div>
<div>
<p><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306910823042389922" style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; width: 400px; cursor: hand; height: 342px; text-align: center;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JzxzW96-l5o/SaXvRr4eF6I/AAAAAAAAAEE/pg94YTPZe4Y/s400/mirid2.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
Severe mirid damage in mungbean results in fewer harvestable pods being set, however similar symptoms can also be caused by thrips, high temperatures and moisture stress. Mirids may also attack more mature pods, damaging the seeds inside without causing shedding. If pod set is greatly reduced and mirid populations are relatively low (e.g. 0.5 &#8211; 1.0 /m2) &#8211; loss may be due to other factors.</p>
<p>Mungbeans always set many more buds and flowers than they can convert to harvestable pods. Typically (in dryland crops) only 33% of buds/flowers are converted to harvestable pods. This % may be even lower in moisture stressed crops.</p>
<p>Recent Helicoverpa threshold trials show that mungbeans can compensate for considerable early damage (at budding/flowering) of up to 80% bud loss with no yield loss. However this only occurs when there is adequate moisture and no subsequent pest damage and there will be a delay in crop maturity. . The loss of replacement buds through continuous pest pressure will lead to reduced crop yields.</p>
<p>Medium and large mirid nymphs (instars 3-5) are as damaging as adults. Although small mirid nymphs (instars 1-2) are less damaging, they soon develop into larger more damaging pests (within 3-5 days respectively at 300C).</p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#000099;">Identification of mirids</span><br />
</strong>Three mirid species attack mungbeans and include green, brown and (less frequently) crop mirids. All these species are equally damaging.</p>
<div><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5306923308272109538" style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; width: 400px; cursor: hand; height: 273px; text-align: center;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_JzxzW96-l5o/SaX6oa_Mx-I/AAAAAAAAAEU/R9gi2YZZ9Bs/s400/threes.jpg" border="0" alt="" /><br />
For more information on the identification of these mirid species please refer to the Integrated Pest Management website by clicking onto the link provided below:</div>
<div><a href="http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/cps/rde/dpi/hs.xsl/26_5085_ENA_HTML.htm"><span style="color:#ff0000;">http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/cps/rde/dpi/hs.xsl/26_5085_ENA_HTML.htm</span></a></div>
<p><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#000099;">Where do the mirids come from?<br />
</span></strong>Mirids move into summer crops when alternative host plants dry off and they seek a fresh food source. Lucerne and sunflowers can be important sources of mirids in mungbean growing areas.</p>
<p>Influxes of mirid adults often coincide with northwest winds in spring. There is also evidence of long distance migration, possibly from inland areas, associated with weather fronts. This may be the cause of some of the widespread and repeated influxes of mirids sometimes observed in grain and cotton growing regions early in the summer.</p>
<p><span style="font-size:130%;"><strong><span style="color:#000099;">Monitoring for mirids</span></strong><br />
</span>- Mirids are very mobile and in-crop populations can increase rapidly from budding onwards.<br />
- Crops should be inspected weekly during the vegetative stage (to pick the start of budding) and twice weekly from budding onwards until post flowering.<br />
- In row crops, the preferred method is beat sheeting, as this method is the most effective for helicoverpa and pod-sucking bugs.<br />
- Sample 5 one-metre lengths of row (not consecutive) within a 20 m radius, from at least 6 sites throughout a crop.<br />
- Avoid sampling during very windy weather as mirids are easily blown off the sheet.</p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#000099;">Action level</span><br />
</strong>Mirid thresholds for budding/flowering mungbeans are 0.3-0.6 per m2 for aerial and ground rig respectively. While mirid thresholds are very low, this is more a reflection of the cheapness of the preferred mirid pesticide – dimethoate ($4/ha + application). The above thresholds are based on the cost of dimethoate. Were indoxacarb to be used, the threshold for an aerial sprayed crop would be 1 mirid/m2.</p>
<p>Note that these thresholds are the break even point (cost of control = value of likely damage) and that action only needs to be taken if populations exceed these levels. However in practice, mirid populations usually increase rapidly from budding onwards and spraying at-threshold populations would be justified. Because of the crop’s ability to compensate for early damage, spraying low mirid populations (i.e. at threshold) at very early budding can be delayed slightly with no risk to yield or harvest maturity. Taking this approach reduces the need for a subsequent mirid spray.</p>
<p><strong><span style="font-size:130%;color:#000099;">Cultural control<br />
</span></strong>A crop that has a short flowering period reduces the risk of mirid damage. Flowering periods can be shortened by planting on a full moisture profile and by watering crops just before budding. Consider planting crops in at least 50 cm rows (as opposed to broadcast planting) to facilitate easier pest sampling.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color:#000099;"><span style="font-size:130%;">Chemical control</span><br />
</span></strong>· Dimethoate at 500 mL/ha (all summer pulses) or<br />
· Indoxacarb at 400 mL/ha (mungbeans and soybeans only).</p>
<p>Dimethoate is often applied at lower than label rates (eg 200-250 mL/ha). These rates give excellent mirid control but have far less impact on many beneficials. Trail results have shown that the addition of salt (0.5% NaCl) as an adjuvant, improves the effectiveness of dimethoate at lower rates. The amount of salt used (0.5%) has no phytotoxic effect on summer pulse crops. ‘Hard’ water can markedly lower the effectiveness of dimethoate and should be countered by adding a buffering agent such as LI700.</p>
<p>Indoxacarb is not recommended at high mirid pressure (&gt;2/m2) because it is less effective than dimethoate. Because it is restricted to one (1) spray application per crop, indoxacarb is best reserved for Helicoverpa control during podding. As mentioned previously, the mirid thresholds are considerably higher if indoxacarb is used.</p>
<p><span style="color:#000099;"><strong><span style="font-size:130%;">Natural enemies</span></strong><br />
</span>There are no beneficial species that are recognised to be regulators of mirid populations in mungbeans. However damsel bugs, big-eyed bugs, predatory shield bugs, as well as lynx, night stalker and jumping spiders are known to feed on mirid adults, nymphs and eggs. Naturally occurring fungi (eg Beauvaria) may also infect and kill mirids, but are rarely observed in the field.</p>
<div><span style="color:#006600;">Article by Kate Charleston and Hugh Brier</span></div>
</div>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/mirids/mirids-in-mungbeans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Latest helicoverpa thresholds for mungbeans</title>
		<link>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/helicoverpa/latest-helicoverpa-thresholds-for-mungbeans/</link>
		<comments>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/helicoverpa/latest-helicoverpa-thresholds-for-mungbeans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 06:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[helicoverpa]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mungbeans]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[thresholds]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thebeatsheet.com.au/?p=39</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Revised thresholds for helicoverpa in flowering/podding mungbeans are based on a rate of damage of 35 kg/ha per larva per square metre in podding crops. The new thresholds are nearly double the old threshold of 1/m2, and make allowances for variations in control costs and crop value. For a typical scenario with pesticide control (including [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Revised thresholds for helicoverpa in flowering/podding mungbeans are based on a rate of damage of 35 kg/ha per larva per square metre in podding crops. The new thresholds are nearly double the old threshold of 1/m2, and make allowances for variations in control costs and crop value. For a typical scenario with pesticide control (including aerial application) costing $40/ha and an anticipated crop value of $600/t, the new threshold (see chart) is 1.9 larvae/m2.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color:#3333ff;">Helicoverpa threshold table for mungbeans 2008</span></strong><br />
Based on data from 2006/07 threshold trial<br />
<span style="font-size:85%;color:#006600;">Assumes yield loss of 35kg/ha for every larva/m2. No allowance for larval mortality, but this most likely cancelled out by sampling inefficiency with a beat sheet. Yield loss is probably at the upper end of that likely as the trial showed no yield loss for up to 8 larvae/m2 at flowering. </span><span style="font-size:85%;"><span style="color:#006600;">Very high control costs included in table reflect extremely high application costs in coastal crops.</span> </span><span style="font-size:78%;"><br />
</span><span style="font-size:78%;"> </span><span style="font-size:78%;"></span></p>
<p> </p>
<p><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5296977470274240258" style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; width: 400px; cursor: hand; height: 194px; text-align: center;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_JzxzW96-l5o/SYKk8dLxfwI/AAAAAAAAACs/F0lvPR-9EWs/s400/heli+tab1.bmp" border="0" alt="" /></p>
<p><span style="font-size:85%;color:#660000;">Cross-reference the cost of control versus the crop value to determine the economic threshold (ET). </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:85%;color:#660000;">If the cost of control = $35/ha and the crop value =$450/t, the ET = 2.2 </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:85%;color:#660000;">If the cost of control = $25/ha and the crop value =$650/t, the ET = 1.1 </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:85%;color:#660000;">The lower the cost of control, and the higher the crop value, the lower the threshold. </span></p>
<p>Note that the thresholds are at the break even point, where the cost of control = the value of the likely damage, i.e. where the benefit: cost ratio is 1:1, or in other words where there is not net gain if you spray and no net loss if you don’t spray. Hence control is only recommended if the population exceeds the economic threshold, in other words if the benefit:cost (B:C) ratio is greater than 1.</p>
<p>While IPM guidelines traditionally recommended a B:C ratio of 2:1, most growers using the control cost scenario (above $40/ha) are unlikely to tolerate another $40 of damage/ha before taking action. Therefore use the above table as follows: Decide how much extra potential damage (in $/ha) you are willing to accept before taking action. For example if you are only willing to accept another $10 of damage/ha before taking action, and control costs and likely crop values are $40/ha and $600/t respectively, then adjust your control costs up to $50/t, and cross reference with the above crop value to give an action threshold of 2.4 larvae/m2.</p>
<p>While early reproductive damage at flowering may be totally compensated for, significant early damage can delay harvest maturity, and may reduce ‘commercial harvest yield’, i.e. the yield in crops where desiccants are used to dry out green pods lagging behind the main crop of black pods. For this reason, the threshold is conservatively set from flowering to podfill.</p>
<p>Recent data suggest early moderate damage can be totally compensated for with no delay in harvest, in well growing crops with plentiful moisture. In such crops, growers might consider using a helicoverpa NPV product such as VivusMax for low-moderate populations (eg 2/m2) provided they are able to guarantee thorough coverage, include an Aminofeed adjuvant and are targeting small larvae (ideally not greater than 5 mm long).<br />
<a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JzxzW96-l5o/SYKeLn0tGfI/AAAAAAAAACc/1SMCYkUryC0/s1600-h/Picture1.jpg"><img id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5296970034246916594" style="float: right; margin: 0px 0px 10px 10px; width: 220px; cursor: hand; height: 156px;" src="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JzxzW96-l5o/SYKeLn0tGfI/AAAAAAAAACc/1SMCYkUryC0/s320/Picture1.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
In view of the recent changes to the Helicoverpa threshold in vegetative soybeans, a provisional threshold of 4-5 larvae/m2 has been set for vegetative mungbeans, in lieu of the old 33% defoliation threshold (which still holds for loopers). This is because helicoverpa are also likely to target the mungbean’s auxiliary buds which are the precursors to floral buds.</p>
<p>The threshold is set lower than the vegetative soybean threshold because mungbean plants are smaller than soybeans. <strong>Note that this vegetative mungbean threshold is provisional and has to be verified in replicated field trials.<br />
</strong><br />
<strong><span style="color:#000099;">Helicoverpa and mirids</span><br />
</strong>Recently we received a number of reports of flowering mungbean crops with above threshold mirid populations and low numbers of Helicoverpa. In such instances, dimethoate (250 mL/ha) plus NPV can be mixed with no risk of incompatibility. <strong>However it is critical to add a buffer such as LI700 to tank mix water to keep the pH below 7, as both dimethoate and NPV are deactivated in alkaline water (pH &gt;7). </strong></p>
<p>Note that dimethoate is recommended at the lower 250mL/ha rate as this has proven efficacy in DPI&amp;F’s trials and has far less impact on beneficials than the full registered rate of 500mL/ha. Preserving as many beneficials as possible will complement NPV’s impact on helicoverpa larvae and will reduce the risk of subsequent sprays to control this pest..</p>
<p><span style="color:#3333ff;">Article by Hugh Brier</span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://thebeatsheet.com.au/helicoverpa/latest-helicoverpa-thresholds-for-mungbeans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
