mating disruption against lobesia botrana - advid · structural organization of douro region...
TRANSCRIPT
Cristina Carlos1, Fernando Alves1 , Laura Torres 2
1 ADVID- Associação para o Desenvolvimento da Viticultura Duriense
2 UTAD- Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro
Constraints to the application of
mating disruption against Lobesia botrana
in Douro Wine region
Douro Wine Region - Região Demarcada do Douro
Lower Corgo Upper Corgo Upper Douro
250 000 hectares (45 000 ha vineyards)
Structural organization of Douro region
Typical wine-farm is fragmented into plots of variable size, slope,
shape, orientation, and varieties
average surface / winegrower : 1,3 ha
Grapevine moth - Lobesia botrana Den & Schiff.
Key pest in Douro region
Variety highly susceptible - Touriga Franca: 22 % of Douro varieties
Damages
3rd generation often promotes Botrytis bunch rot
3 generations of larvae (sometimes 4, such as in 2009)
Current control measures
One to two sprays with insecticides are required annually (90 -180 € / ha)
• IGR (flufenoxuron, lufenuron, fenoxicarb, metoxifenozid)
Insecticides authorized in IPM in Portugal
• Bacillus thurigiensis, spinosade
Public pressure against the use of chemicals / marketing
led to search alternatives
• indoxacarb
Mating disruption technique
Isonet-L (Shin-Etsu dispensers):
172 mg (E,Z)-7,9-dodecadienyl acetate
(officially registred in Portugal since 2002)
Experimental trials in ADVID started in 2000
?
Mating disruption technique
Characterization of the experimental sites (2000-2009)
LSV (Landscape Systematization of Vineyards): VR-vertical rows; ST-small terraces; TV- traditional vines
2000 Seara d'ordens (SO) 4.0 VR 452-594 500 13-Mar
2001 “ 4.0 “ 452-594 500 19-Mar
2001 S. Luíz (SL) 3.0 ST 91-143 650 12-Mar
2002 “ 25.0 “ 91-241 560 19-Mar
2003 “ 15.0 “ 91-163 600 21-Mar
2004 “ 16.2 “ 91-163 560 12-Mar
2009 “ 82,07 ST, TV 91-373 610 17-Mar to 7-Mai
2005 Vallado (VAL) 11.8 ST 117-200 660 23-Mar
2006 “ 11.8 “ 117-200 700 21-Mar
2007 “ 19.7 “ 117-229 560 21-Mar
2008 “ 19,7 “ 117-229 570 21-Mar
2009 “ 19,7 “ 117-229 635 13-Mar
2006 Cidrô (CID) 15.2 VR 540-594 585 20-Mar
2007 “ 16.7 “ 540-594 600 20-Mar
2008 “ 15,2 “ 540-594 600 05-Mar
2009 “ 12,8 “ 540-594 690 20-Mar
2009 Ventozelo (VTZ) 13,1 VR 108-195 660 18-Mar
Year Wine-farm Area (ha) LSV* Altitude (m) Dispensers/ haDate of
installation
500-700/ha
Quinta Seara D’ordens (2000-2001)
Year Area (ha) LSV* Altitude (m) Dispensers/ ha Date of installation
2000 4.0 Vertical Rows 452-594 500 13-Mar
2001 4.0 “ “ 500 19-Mar
Quinta S. Luíz (2001-2004, 2009-2010)
Quinta Vallado (2005-2010)
Quinta Cidrô (2006-2009)
Quinta Ventozelo (2009)
Evaluation of the efficacy of MD
• Comparison between trap catches in MD / control plots
(loaded with 1 mg caps)
% male disorientation= (C – M)/(C) X 100
C- average males catches in control
M- average males catches in MD
Evaluation of the efficacy of MD
Evaluation of the efficacy of MD
• Comparison between levels of infestation in MD / control plots
1rst Gen. 2nd Gen. 3rd Gen.
100-200 damaged flower
clusters / 100 clusters
1-10 % infested
grape clusters
1-10 % infested
grape clusters
Levels of infestation
1st gen. 2nd gen. 3rd gen. Harvest
number of infested
flowers clusters/
100 grapes inspected
number of infested grape clusters/
100 grapes inspected
• % reduction of infestation = (C – M)/(C) X 100
C - average attack in control plot
M - average attack in MD plot
• Infestation
Results
Male disorientation - Seara D’ordens (4 ha)
MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating
sources of synthetic sex pheromone
1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.
2000 control 861 188 410 1459 -
MD int. 5 1 2 8 99
MD bord 9 5 2 16 99
2001 control 307 237 766 1310 -
MD int. 0 0 2 2 100
MD bord 1 3 73 77 94
Infestation level - Seara D’ordens (4 ha)
Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation
red. (%)MD border
Infestation
red. (%)
2000 1st 60* 21* 65 1* 98
2nd 22 26 0 10 55
3rd 39 44 0 16 59
Harvest 80 86 0 60 25
2001 1st 33 1 97 3 91
2nd 14* 8 43 3* 79
3rd 79* 65* 18 75* 5
Harvest 99 92 7 93 6
* sprays had to be appliedMD did not successfully reduce infestation
Male disorientation – S. Luíz (3, 25, 15, 16, 82 ha)
1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.
2001 control 249 445 440 1134 -
MD int. 0 0 0 0 100
MD bord 0 1 1 2 100
2002 control 233 292 194 719 -
MD int. 0 0 0 0 100
MD bord 8 5 1 14 98
2003 control 261 32 164 457 -
MD int. 1 0 2 3 99
2004 control 253 677 655 1585 -
MD int. 0 0 4 4 100
MD bord 253 677 655 1585 100
2009 control 594 494 203 1291 -
MD int. 1 0 0 1 100
MD bord 0 2 0 2 100
MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating
sources of synthetic sex pheromone
Infestation level - S. Luíz (3, 25, 15, 16, 82 ha)
* sprays had to be applied
Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.
(%)MD border
Infestation red.
(%)
2001 1st 28 4 86 4 86
2nd 9* 1* 89 1* 89
3rd 31* 13 58 13 58
Harvest 47 55 0 39 17
2002 1st 36 13* 64 18* 50
2nd 11* 3* 73 10* 9
3rd 6* 2 67 3* 50
Harvest 5 3 40 1 80
2003 1st 31 5 84 9 71
2nd 13 4 69 4 69
3rd 1 0 100 1 0
Harvest 52 10 81 33 37
2004 1st 71 3 96 5 93
2nd 47 17 64 15 68
3rd 7* 0* 100 2* 79
Harvest 66 26 61 53 20
2009 1st 187 1 99 20 89
2nd 56* 0* 100 16* 71
3rd 10* 0* 100 10* 0
Harvest - 4 - 4 -
Male Disorientation – Vallado (12, 20 ha)
1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight 4th flight Total catches % disor.
2005 control 220 444 341 - 1005 -
MD int. 1 0 0 - 1 100
2006 control 217 396 123 - 736 -
MD int. 1 0 0 - 1 100
2007 control 194 486 133 - 813 -
MD int. 0 1 0 - 1 100
MD bord 0 0 0 - 0 100
2008 control 394 435 154 - 983 -
MD int. 0 0 0 - 0 100
MD bord 0 0 0 - 0 100
2009 control 652 720 311 242 1925 -
MD int. 0 58 0 0 58 97
MD bord 0 0 0 0 0 100
MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating
sources of synthetic sex pheromone
Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.
(%)MD border
Infestation red.
(%)
2005 1st 23* 4 83 15* 35
2nd 31* 1 97 10* 68
3rd 4 1 75 4 0
Harvest 4 2 50 11 0
2006 1st. 13 1 92 5* 62
2nd 22 3 86 8* 64
3rd 2 2 0 18 0
Harvest 6 0 100 5 17
2007 1st 11 9* 18 15* 0
2nd 20* 0* 100 7* 65
3rd 11 4* 64 10* 9
Harvest 66 2 97 33 50
2008 1st 19 25 0 22 0
2nd 78* 52* 33 50* 36
3rd Harvest 23* 36* 0 66* 0
2009 1st 40 15 63 17 58
2nd 11* 30* 0 6* 45
3rd 4* 4* 0 0* 100
Harvest 24 2 92 0 100
* sprays had to be applied
Infestation level – Vallado (12, 20 ha)
Male Disorientation – Cidrô (15, 17, 15, 13 ha)
1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.
2006 control 249 155 61 465 -
MD int. 2 0 0 2 100
2007 control 279 246 29 554 -
MD int. 2 3 1 6 99
MD bord 0 1 2 3 99
2008 control 180 72,0 16 268 -
MD int. 0 5 0 5 98
2009 control 52 35 - 87 -
MD int. 2 0 - 2 98
MD bord 0 2 - 2 98
MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating
sources of synthetic sex pheromone
Infestation level – Cidrô (15, 17, 15, 13 ha)
Gen. control MD Infestation red.
(%)MD border
Infestation red.
(%)
2006 1st 11 23 0 22 0
2nd 1 1* 33 2* 0
Harvest 6 7 0 - -
2007 1st 13 8 37 5 60
2nd 0 0 - 0 -
Harvest 12 7 44 - -
2008 Harvest 42 10 76 8 81
2009 1st 10 0 100 0 100
3rd 18 0 100 - -
Harvest 32 2 94 - -
Since 2006, no more sprays had to be applied
Results – Ventozelo (13 ha)
1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.
2007 control 381 410 198 989 -
MD int. 0 1 0 1 100
MD bord 10 1 18 29 97
MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating
sources of synthetic sex pheromone
Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.
(%)MD border
Infestation red.
(%)
2009 1st 121 24 80 14 88
2nd 64 8 88 6 91
Harvest 97* 26* 73* - -
* spray had to be applied ( to 3rd Gen)
Male Disorientation
Infestation level
Good results for the 1rst year
Results
• Infestation on grape clusters was not reduced to
a level where MD could be used alone
• 1-3 sprays had to be applied
• Exhaustion of the pheromone in the dispensers in some years
Possible reasons for the low efficacy of MD (constraints)
• Long flight period of the adults (average 29 weeks) and
hight biotic potencial of Lobesia in Douro Valley
• Clima High temperatures / wind speed (May-September)
• Landscape Systematization in terraces, there is a hight % area
without dispensers (laneways, embankment) and the
hight heterogeneity of vineyards - Pheromone could have been not
homogenely distributed in the plots
30 % of the area - laneways, embankment
• Average wind velocity (2000-2005):
May-August - 1.9 m/sW-SW
Clima in experimental sites
annual - 1.7 m/s
Temp. (ºC)
Month AverageMay June July August September
2000-2008 17.5 21,8 23,1 21,6 18,4
30 years
(1961-1990)17,2 21,3 24,5 24,2 21,7
• Temperatures:
J F M A M J J A S O N D
1,9 1,3 1,6 2,3 2,0 1,9 2,2 1,4 1,3 1,4 1,2 1,9
29 Weeks of flying period
Long flying period
1st adults - mid March Adults remain active
until October
Evolution of pheromone in the dispensers
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
15-Mar 15-Abr 15-Mai 15-Jun 15-Jul 15-Ago 15-Set
RemainingAI quantity
(%)
2000 2002 2006
In 2002, levels of atmospheric pheromone below the required to prevent mating,
especially during the third generation of the insect
Discussion
Constraints to the sucessfull application of MD in Douro Valley:
- Hight Pest pressure (long life cycle, hight biotic potential)
- Heterogeneity typical of Douro Valley (in so many characteristics);
- Clima (temperatures, wind speed);
- Exhaustion of pheromone in dispensers due to climatic constrains;
- Area (only the big “quintas” have conditions for larger application of MD);
- The long effect of MD (you have to be pacient…)
- Need of technical support to estimate damages /high cost of MD ;
Acknowledgments
• Wine-growers of ADVID
• CBC (Europe Ltd.) and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd
( for providing the pheromone dispensers in 2002)
(who made their vineyard available for the experiments)
Soc. Agric. Quinta da Seara d’ordens
Sogevinus Quintas S.A.
Quinta do Vallado
Real Companhia Velha (Cidrô e Ventozelo)
• ADVID colleagues Jorge Costa, Branca Teixeira(for technical support)
Thank you for your attention
Cristina Carlos