Management Strategies for Apolygus spinolae(Hemiptera: Miridae) in Grapevine Yards

포도원에서 애무늬고리장님노린재(Apolygus spinolae(Meyer-Dur))방제체계

  • 김동순 (농촌진흥청 원예연구소 원예환경과) ;
  • 조명래 (농촌진흥청 원예연구소 원예환경과) ;
  • 전흥용 (농촌진흥청 원예연구소 원예환경과) ;
  • 임명순 (농촌진흥청 원예연구소 원예환경과) ;
  • 최용문 (농촌진흥청 원예연구소 원예환경과)
  • Published : 2002.03.01

Abstract

Studies were conducted to investigate the control effects of several insecticides on Apolygus(=Lygocoris) spinolae(Meyer-Dur) and to develop its management strategies in grapevine yards. Of insecticides which were applied by farmers in commercial grapevine yards, chlorpyrifos, parathion, fenvalerate, and esfenvalerate$.$fenitrothion showed good control effects against A. spinolae. In designed field experiments of fenitrothion and chlorpyrifos for the evaluation of A. spinolae control, both insecticides showed high control efficacy of 94.8 and 91.6%, respectively. The damage of A. spinolae was examined in a grapevine yard, where five different combinations of application timing and number were treated with fenitrothion to assess yield losses (average cluster weight) by A. spinolae. There were no significant differences among average cluster weights of sprayed vines; 466.0 g in sprayed vines on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded stage, 460.7g in sprayed vines on flower separating stage, 465.0 g in sprayed vines each on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded and flowers separating stage, and 487.4 g in sprayed vines each on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded, flowers separating and fruit set stage. Weights of fruit clusters of unsprayed vines was significantly lower than those of sprayed vines. Based on yield and spray cost, chemical control on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded stage produced higher net income than each spray on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded and flower separating stage (i.e., two times of spray), and produced similar net income as each spray on 2 to 3 leaves unfolded, flowers separating and fruit set stage (i.e., three times of spray). Thus, the 2 to 3 leaves unfolded stage was economical spray timing to controlA. spinolae in grapevine yards. Also, management strategies for A. spinolae were discussed.

포도에 피해를 주는 애무늬고리장님노린재에 대한 효과적인 방제약제를 선발하고 방제체계를 수립하기 위하여 몇 가지 실험을 실시하였다. 농가에서 살포한 약제들 중 애무늬고리장님노린재에 대한 방제효과를 조사한 결과 Chlorpyrifos, Parathion, Fenvalerate, Esfenvalerate.Fenitrothion 등이 효과가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 포장실험에서 Fenitrothion과 Chlorpyrifos는 각각 94.8과 91.6%의 좋은 방제가를 보였다 애무늬고리장님노린재에 대한 약제처리 시기 및 방제횟수가 과실수량(평균 상품화 과방중)에 미치는 영향을 조사한 결과 잎 전개기 1회 방제구 466.0g, 꽃송이 분리기 1회 방제구 460.7, 잎 전개기 및 꽃송이 분리기 각 1치 방제구465g, 잎 전개기, 꽃송이 분리기, 그리고 착과기 각 1회 방제구 487.4g으로 무처리구 418.2g보다 높았다. 방제비용을 감안할 때 잎 전개기 1회 방제는 잎 전개기 및 꽃송이 분리기 각 1회 방제(2회 살포)보다 효과가 높았으며, 잎 전개기, 꽃송이 분리기, 그리고 착과기 각 1회 방제(3회 살포)와 큰 차이가 없었다. 따라서 포도원에서 잎 전개기(2~3엽기 =3~4엽이 보이는 시기)애무늬고리장님노린재 적기방제는 경제적으로 타당성이 있었으며, 기타 관리방안에 대하여 고찰하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Anonymous. 1994. Check list of insects from Korea. 744 pp.The Entomological Society of Korea & Korean Society ofApplied Entomology. Konkuk Univ. Publisher, Seoul
  2. Anonymous. 1999. Income analysis of agricultural products andlivestocks. 507pp. Research Report for Parm Management 85,No. 11-1390000-000761-10. RDA.Suwon
  3. Anonymous. 2000. Agrochemicals use guide book. 823 pp.Korean Crop Protection Association, Seoul
  4. Amoldi, D., R.K. Stewart and G. Boivin. 1992. Predatory miridsof the green apple aphid Aphis pomi, Tetranychus urticae, andthe European red mite Panonychus utmi in apple orchards inQuebec. Entomophaga 37: 283-292 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02372429
  5. Bishop, S. 1993a. Apple brown bug. Nova Scotia orchard pestmanagement fact sheets. Series 4: 3. Nova Scotia Tree FruitResearch Foundation, Halifax
  6. Bishop, S. 1993b. Mullein bug. Nova Scotia orchard pest management fact sheets. Series 4: 4. Nova Scotia Tree Fruit Research Foundation, Halifax
  7. Bus, V., P. Mols and L. Blommers. 1985. Monitoring of thegreen capsid bug, Lygocoris pabutinus (L.) (Hemiptera: Miridae) in apple orchards. Mededlingen van de Faculteit Landbouwwetenschappen, Rijksuniversiteit Gent. 50: 505-510
  8. Jensen, B.M., J.L. Wedberg and D.B. Hogg. 1991. Assessmentof damage caused by tamished plant bug and alfalfa plant bug(Hemiptera: Miridae) on alfalfa grown for forage Wisconsin.J. Econ, Entomol. 84: 1024-1027 https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/84.3.1024
  9. Kasiwara, T., K. Umeya and K. Asakawa. 1986. Hand book ofcrop pests. 1st ed., 1446 pp. Inose Press, Tokyo
  10. Kim, D.-S., M.R. Cho, H.-Y. Jeon, M.-S. Yiem, J.-H. Lee, S.-Y.Na and J.-O. Lee. 2000. Damage pattems caused by Lygoconsspinolae (Hemiptera: Miridae) on 'Campbell early' grapes. J.Asia-Pacific Entomol. 3: 95-101 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1226-8615(08)60062-X
  11. Lee. S.H, H.K. Goh, G.S. Lee and J.Y. Choi. 2001. Mirid bugsoccurring on grape vine: damage, host plants and distribution.pp. 63-77. In Management and basic biology of the westemflower thrips and mirid bugs, ed. by RDA. 98 pp. Final Research Report of RDA Project, Suwon
  12. Martinson, T., D. Bernard, G. English-Loeb and T. Taft, Jr.1998. Impact of Taedia scrupeus (Hemiptera: Miridae) feeding on cluster development in Concord grapes. J. Econ. Entomol. 91: 507-511 https://doi.org/10.1093/jee/91.2.507
  13. Novak, H. and R. Achtziger. 1995. Influence of heteropteranpredators (Heteroptera: Anthocoridae, Miridae) on larvalpopulations of hawthorn psyllids (Homoptera: Psyllidae). J.Appl. Entomol. 119: 479-486 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.1995.tb01321.x
  14. OEPP/EPPO (European and Mediterranean Plant ProductionOrganization). 1984. EPPO crop growth stage keys. OEPP/EPPOBull. 14:295-298
  15. SAS Institute. 1999. SAS OnlineDoc', Version 8, SAS InstituteInc.,Cary,NC
  16. Snodgrass, G.L., W.P. Scott and J.W. Smith. 1984. Host plantsand seasonal distribution of the tamished plant bug (Hemiptera: Miridae) in the delta of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. Environ. Entomol. 13: 110-116 https://doi.org/10.1093/ee/13.1.110
  17. Yasunaga, T. 2000. Eight new species of the Mirine genusApolygus China (Heteroptera: Miridae) from Japan. Biogeography2: 81-92