A problem around the world


Codlingmoth control methods vary, but mating disruption is themost widespread. By Judie Steeves


T


he codling moth—that devastating pest of fruit such as apples and pears—actually hails from Kazakhstan, the home of the apple, where wild apple forests form a huge canopy.


As the apple itself was brought to the rest of the world, so has the codling moth been introduced to apple producing areas.


The history lesson was presented to the board of the Sterile Insect Release program by Don Thomson of DJS Consulting Services, a researcher and entomologist who once worked at the Pacific Agri-food Research Centre in Summerland but now has a consulting firm working out of Seattle in the area of biopesticides.


The codling moth moved to Europe during the Middle Ages and first appeared in Canada in 1858. It overwinters as a larva, then pupates, emerging at the beginning of May here, laying eggs that hatch after adequate heat units trigger this stage in development. In September, it goes into the diapause stage, amongst leaf litter on the orchard floor or on the tree. Around the world, the main way of controlling its damage is with the use of a pheromone for disruption of the moth’s attempts at mating, although ovicides are used sometimes to deal with the egg stage.


Mating disruption is the method of control used on an estimated half million acres around the world, including 190,000 acres in North America. Growers in China likely use chemicals to control it, Thomson said. An area-wide pheromone program in South Africa is very effective at


controlling codling moth, while in the South Tyrol, Italy, a codling moth and leafroller combination of mating disruption is used on about 35,000 acres. Because that is an important tourism area, it’s also important to protect a pristine environment. Often there are homes adjacent to farms, so there is intensive management to control pests without the use of chemicals, he explained.


In Italy it was the packinghouses that implemented mating disruption, while the government led the move in Argentina.


There are challenges, Thomson said. Low populations of the pest are needed, and isolation.


Because it’s a fairly expensive way to control the moth, it’s mainly used in developed countries, such as South Africa, Argentina and the U. S., with very little use in Chile.


Because there are far more pests in eastern North American orchards,


there is less interest in using mating disruption when they still have to spray for so many other pests, he noted.


The reason it’s been so successful in Okanagan orchards is because the SIR program monitors with traps as well as individual


orchardists monitoring their orchards.


“Monitoring and management are essential,” he noted.


“I believe mating disruption is the best foundation for control going forward,” Thomson stated. Increasing resistance to pesticides is one reason growers should not rely on spraying for control of codling moth any longer, he noted.


In future, he predicted, there will be lots of researchers keen to use moths irradiated by the SIR program’s Osoyoos facility.


Thomson also envisioned large orchards south of the border being interested in buying irradiated moths. “Perhaps SIR could become the foundation of Integrated Pest Management in the U.S.,” Thomson speculated, but he said it’s more likely that mating disruption will remain the foundation, with SIR a part of the package for controlling the pest.


Environmental Farm Planning is still available


An Environmental Farm Plan is voluntary, free of charge and confidential.


Do it at your own pace, there’s no pressure!


Improve agricultural practices and reduce risks to the environment. Expand marketing opportunities by demonstrating your commitment to sustainable environmental practices. Improve farm profits by reducing input costs such as heating, fertilizer and water.


Call the ARDCorp office or visit our website for a current list of ARDCorp recognized planning advisors.


604-854-4483 Toll Free 1-866-522-3447 www.ardcorp.ca


British Columbia FRUIT GROWER • Spring 2011


23


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40