Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-19T05:44:09.411Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Influence of tree growth on spray chemical deposits on peach leaves

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2009

H. W. Hogmire
Affiliation:
Division of Plant and Soil Sciences, West Virginia University Experiment Farm, Kearneysville, WV 25430, USA
M. J. Wimmer
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA
V. L. Crim
Affiliation:
Division of Plant and Soil Sciences, West Virginia University Experiment Farm, Kearneysville, WV 25430, USA
R. M. Welker
Affiliation:
Division of Plant and Soil Sciences, West Virginia University Experiment Farm, Kearneysville, WV 25430, USA
E. Wentz
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA
R. R. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV 26506, USA

Summary

A 50–fold increase in peach tree growth over a 98-day spraying season resulted in a 64 and 96% reduction in nigrosine dye deposit in the periphery and centre of the tree, respectively. Drift from spraying of adjacent rows made a significant contribution (18–39%) to the total chemical deposit in the tree periphery in four of six applications. Drift between rows was not a factor in centre tree deposit, except for a 38% contribution in the initial application. A variable reduced application rate of methyl parathion, calculated using a regression equation, resulted in a more uniform deposit throughout the season than a full application rate, providing comparable control of Oriental fruit moth with c. 50% less insecticide.

Type
Crops and Soils
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Biddinger, D. J. & Howitt, A. J. (1989). Peach insecticide broad-spectrum evaluation, 1988. Insecticide & Acaricide Tests 14, 61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, R. E., Hickey, K. D. & Hill, C. H. (1971). Base gallonage per acre. Virginia Fruit 60, 1923.Google Scholar
Byers, R. E., Lyons, C. G. jr, Yoder, K. S., Horsburgh, R. L., Barden, J. A. & Donohue, S. J. (1984). Effects of apple tree size and canopy density on spray chemical deposit. HortScience 19, 9394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, R. E., Lyons, C. G. jr & Donohue, S. J. (1985). Effect of chemical deposits from spraying adjacent rows on efficacy of peach bloom thinners. HortScience 20, 10761078.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, R. E., Hogmire, H. W., Ferree, D. C., Hall, F. R. & Donohue, S. J. (1989). Spray chemical deposits in highdensity and trellis apple orchards. HortScience 24, 918920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forshey, C. G., Weires, R. W. & Vankirk, J. R. (1987). Seasonal development of the leaf canopy of ‘Macspur Mclntosh’ apple trees. HortScience 22, 881883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrera-Aguirre, E. & Unrath, C. R. (1980). Chemical thinning response of delicious apples to volume of applied water. HortScience 15, 4344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, T. B. & Unrath, C. R. (1984). Evaluation of the tree-row-volume concept with density adjustments in relation to spray deposits in apple orchards. Plant Disease 68, 480484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, T. B. & Unrath, C. R. (1988 a). A comparison of handgun and tree–row–volume pesticide applications. Plant Disease 72, 509512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutton, T. B. & Unrath, C. R. (1988 b). Evaluation of the tree–row–volume model for full season pesticide application on apples. Plant Disease 72, 629632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Virginia & West Virginia Cooperative Extension Services (1989). 1989–1990 Spray Bulletin for Commercial Tree Fruil Growers. Publication 456–419.Google Scholar