Dr. Jordan April 25-27, 2023 Peanut Notes
El inglés es el idioma de control de esta página. En la medida en que haya algún conflicto entre la traducción al inglés y la traducción, el inglés prevalece.
Al hacer clic en el enlace de traducción se activa un servicio de traducción gratuito para convertir la página al español. Al igual que con cualquier traducción por Internet, la conversión no es sensible al contexto y puede que no traduzca el texto en su significado original. NC State Extension no garantiza la exactitud del texto traducido. Por favor, tenga en cuenta que algunas aplicaciones y/o servicios pueden no funcionar como se espera cuando se traducen.
English is the controlling language of this page. To the extent there is any conflict between the English text and the translation, English controls.
Clicking on the translation link activates a free translation service to convert the page to Spanish. As with any Internet translation, the conversion is not context-sensitive and may not translate the text to its original meaning. NC State Extension does not guarantee the accuracy of the translated text. Please note that some applications and/or services may not function as expected when translated.Collapse ▲
Acephate for Thrips Control in the Seed Furrow Peanut Notes No. 42 2023
With imidacloprid performing less consistently and growers not set up of in-furrow granular applications in some cases, there have been questions about using acephate (often referred to as Orthene) in the seed furrow to control thrips. Acephate in the seed furrow controls thrips relatively well. However, growers and research/extension personnel have seen peanut stand reductions when acephate is applied in the seed furrow. Not every time but occasionally. We do not have a good feel for what conditions create the risk. We do not recommend acephate in the seed furrow for thrips control.
Comments on Thrips and Nematode Control Peanut Notes No. 43 2023
I had a question about alternatives to imidacloprid (Admire Pro and generic products) for thrips control. Resistance in thrips to imidacloprid has been documented in peanuts. The NC State Extension agent indicated that the grower has challenges getting back to peanut fields in a timely manner for foliar sprays of acephate. They wanted to know what product was the one that would most likely give complete thrips control and would not require a follow up postemergence spray of acephate.
My answer was that all of the in-furrow products we use need a follow up spray in some cases. However, AgLogic is the insecticide that often does not need a follow up spray of acephate. It is the new version of Temik (active ingredient is aldicarb.) However, it is the most expensive product. A second product that performs well is Thimet/Phorate (active ingredient is phorate.) It does a good job controlling thrips but is less effective in some instances compared with AgLogic. If using Thimet/Phorate, it is critical to calibrate accurately. On sandy soils with low organic matter, we can get significant chlorosis and necrosis on lower leaves. If you have never seen the chlorosis before, it can be disconcerting. Nevertheless, peanuts recover. AgLogic and Thimet/Phorate are applied as granular materials in the seed furrow. The farmer mentioned earlier was considering using an older planter with granular boxes because he was concerned that imidacloprid was going to be ineffective. This is a transition back to what we did over a decade ago for many farmers.
The in-furrow spray options are imidacloprid and Vydate. Data on Vydate are somewhat limited. However, it does provide suppression of thrips and is more effective than imidacloprid (due to imidacloprid resistance in thrips) in many fields. The jury is still out on how consistent performance will be relative to AgLogic and Thimet/Phorate. In 2022, Vydate performed well and competed with Thimet in a trial I had in cooperation with Rick and Brian. I did not have AgLogic in the trial.
Vydate is more expensive than a generic imidacloprid and Thimet/Phorate. It is considerably less expensive than AgLogic.
In many of our fields, we will need two sprays. One applied in the seed furrow and one applied about 3 weeks after planting. For April and early May plantings, the period needed for protection can be quite long. Peanuts can be slow to emerge when planted early and do not grow off quickly.
In a lot of the research Rick, Brian and I have conducted, the difference in thrips control with AgLogic, Thimet/Phorate, imidacloprid, and Vydate is often similar about a month or so after planting when acephate is applied postemergence 3 weeks after planting. That is to be expected. Of course, it depends a great deal on when you think you can get back to the field for the acephate spray. If you are usually on the late side, the performance of the in-furrow spray is more important.
The same grower indicated that they were going to spray Velum in the furrow to suppress nematodes. In the rotation research I have conducted with significant populations of nematodes, I have observed only minor effects on nematodes with Velum or Velum Total and no measurable yield response. However, if the grower decides to apply Velum, they will need to include a partner in the tank or they will need to apply a granular insecticide in the seed furrow to suppress thrips. The logical tank mixtures are imidacloprid and Vydate for thrips control. We have not mixed Vydate with Velum. This mixture, however, should control thrips well and increase the likelihood of nematode suppression (Vydate has some activity on nematodes.) However, this combination is not recommended because I am not aware of any research in North Carolina looking at this mixture. It is also a relatively expensive treatment.
The agent also asked about using AgLogic and Velum together. Thrips control would be good due to the AgLogic. The AgLogic and Velum would suppress nematodes better than either product alone. However, in my view, the combination of AgLogic and Velum is cost prohibitive.
If the goal is as much thrips control for as long as possible, AgLogic is the best option. Expense tempers its use and setting up for granular applications is an issue for some growers.
In-Furrow Fungicide Question Peanut Notes No. 44 2023
I had a grower considering using Provost Silver versus Proline in-furrow. Looked over your Peanut Science article from 2003 about tebuconazole in-furrow and talked with David Langston. Looks like tebuconazole in-furrow was of no benefit.
The tebuconazole caused peanuts to emerge more slowly. Provost Silver has prothioconazole plus tebuconazole. I would not apply this product in the seed furrow. Propulse is an option. It has prothioconazole plus fluopyram (the components of Proline plus Velum.) My understanding is Proline might be in short supply. Provost Silver is also not labeled for this use. Regardless, I would not put it in-furrow. Cost might be in favor of Provost Silver for the prothioconazole but label and impact on emergence are not.