Effects of fumigant alternatives to methyl bromide on pest control in open field nursery production of perennial fruit and nut plants

HortTechnology

Volumn 19, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 526-532

  Schneider, Sally M ^a   Hanson, Bradley D ^b  

^a AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

^b AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MELOIDOGYNE; MELOIDOGYNE JAVANICA; NEMATODA; RUBUS; VITACEAE;

EID: 70349229756     PISSN: 10630198     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.21273/hortsci.19.3.526     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Barker, K.R. 1985. Nematode extraction and bioassays, p. 19-35. In: K.R. Barker, C.C. Carter, and J.N. Sasser (eds.). An advanced treatise on Meloidogyne volume II: Methodology. North Carolina State University Graphics, Raleigh, NC.
2. Becker, J.O., H.D. Ohr, N.M. Grech, M.E. McGiffen, Jr., and J.J. Sims. 1998. Evaluation of methyl iodide as a soil fumigant in container and small field plot studies. Pestic. Sci. 52:58-62.
3. California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). 2008a. Approved treatment and handling procedures to ensure against nematode pest infestation of nursery stock. Nursery inspection procedures manual, Item #7. 23 Dec. 2008. .
4. California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA). 2008b. Sampling procedures and techniques for detection of nematodes by laboratory examination. Nursery inspection procedures manual, Item #7.1. 23 Dec. 2008. .
5. California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR). 2002. California management plan: 1,3-Dichloropropene. 17 Nov. 2008. .
6. De Cal, A., A. Martinez-Treceno, J.M. Lopez-Aranda, and P. Melgarejo. 2004. Chemical alternatives to methyl bromide in Spanish strawberry nurseries. Plant Dis. 88:210-214.
7. Dreistadt, S.H. 2001. Diseases, p. 69-130. In: M.L. Flint (ed.). Integrated pest management for floriculture and nurseries. Publ. 3402. University of California, Oakland, CA.
8. Duniway, J.M. 2002. Status of chemical alternatives to methyl bromide for pre-plant fumigation of soil. Phytopathology 92:1337-1343.
9. Eayre, C.G., J.J. Sims, H.D. Ohr, and B. Mackey. 2000. Evaluation of methyl iodide for control of peach replant disorder. Plant Dis. 84:1177-1179.
10. Flegg, F.F.M. and D.F. Hooper. 1970. Laboratory methods for work with plant and soil nematodes, p. 5-22. In: J.F. Southey (ed.). Tech. Bul. 2. Ministry of Agriculture, Fish and Food, London.
11. Gilreath, J., B. Santos, T. Motis, J. Noling, and J. Mirusso. 2005. Methyl bromide alternatives for nematode and Cyperus control in bell pepper (Capsicum annuum). Crop Prot. 24:903-908.
12. Hanson, B.D. and S.M. Schneider. 2008. Evaluation of weed control and crop safety with herbicides in open-field tree nurseries. Weed Technol. 22:493-498.
13. Jenkins, W.R. 1964. A rapid centrifugal-flotation technique for separating nematodes from soil. Plant Dis. Rptr. 48:692.
14. Mann, R., S. Mattner, R. Gounder, R. Brett, and I. Porter. 2005. Evaluating novel soil fumigants for Australian horticulture. Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emis-sions Reductions. p. 34-1 to 34-4.
15. McKenry, M. 2005. Strategies and tactics for fumigating clay loam soils. Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. p. 37-1 to 37-3.
16. Noe, J.P. 1985. Analysis and interpretations of data from nematological experiments, p. 187-196. In: K.R. Barker, C.C. Carter, and J.N. Sasser (eds.). An advanced treatise on Meloidogyne, volume 2: Methodology. North Carolina State University Graphics, Raleigh, NC.
17. Ruzo, L.O. 2005. Physical, chemical, and environmental properties of selected chemical alternatives for the pre-plant use of methyl bromide as a soil fumigant. Pest Manag. Sci. 62:99-113.
18. Schneider, S., T. Trout, J. Gerik, A. Shrestha, and R. Rodriquez-Kabana. 2005. Methyl bromide alternatives for perennial crop field nurseries. Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. p. 41-1 to 41-4.
19. Schneider, S.M., B.D. Hanson, J.S. Gerik, A. Shrestha, T.J. Trout, and S. Gao. 2009. Comparison of shank- and dripapplied methyl bromide alternatives in perennial crop field nurseries. HortTechnology 19:331-339.
20. Schneider, S.M., E.N. Rosskopf, J.G. Leesch, D.O. Chellemi, C.T. Bull, and M. Mazzola. 2003. United States Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service research on alternatives to methyl bromide: Pre-plant and post-harvest. Pest Manag. Sci. 59:814-826.
21. Shrestha, A., G.T. Browne, B.D. Lampinen, S.M. Schneider, L. Simon, and T.J. Trout. 2008. Perennial crop nurseries treated with methyl bromide and alternative fumigants: Effects on weed seed viability weed densities, and time required for hand weeding. Weed Technol. 22:267-274.
22. Trout, T. 2006. Fumigant use in Califor-nia: Response to the phase-out. Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reductions. p. 18-1 to 18-5.
23. United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 1999. The Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer as adjusted and amended in London 1990, Copenhagen 1992, Vienna 1995, Montreal 1997, Beijing 1999. 23 Dec.2008. .
24. Wang, D., J.M. He, and J.A. Knuteson. 2004. Concentration-time exposure index for modeling soil fumigation under various management scenarios. J. Environ. Qual. 33:685-694.
25. Westphal, A., A.F. Robinson, A.W. Scott, Jr., and J.B. Santini 2004. Depth distribution of Rotylenchulus reniformis under crops of different host status and after fumigation. Nematology 6:97-107.