nematode thresholds and damage levels for california crops howard ferris
Post on 19-Dec-2015
218 views
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Nematode Thresholdsand
Damage Levelsfor
California Crops
Howard Ferris
![Page 2: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Some of those involved….
• Dan Ball• Larry Duncan• Pete Goodell• Joe Noling• Diane Alston• Sally Schneider• Lance Beem
![Page 3: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Thresholds by field plot
South Coast Field StationUSDA ShafterTulelake
![Page 4: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Thresholds by transectImperial and Coachella Valleys
Ventura CountyTulare County
![Page 5: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Seinhorst Damage Function
• Y=m+(1-m)z(Pi-T)
• Y=relative yield• m=minimum yield• Z=regression parameter• Pi=population level• T=tolerance level
• Based on preplant population levels – measured or predicted from overwinter survival rates
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 2 4 6 8
Ln (Pi+1)R
elat
ive
Yie
ld
![Page 6: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Case Study on Cotton
Cultivar Soil Location (T)olerance Z m
SJ2 loamy sand south SJV 65 0.998 0.55
Deltapine loamy sand imperial 50 0.9972 0.65
SJ2, SJ5, SJ-C1 l. sand/s. loam south SJV 55 0.999 0.48
average (all) --------------------- ------------- 57 0.998 0.56
average (SJV) --------------------- ------------- 60 0.9985 0.52
SJ2(-FOV) sandy loam south SJV 55 0.9966 0.54
SJ2(+FOV) sandy loam south SJV 55 0.9847 0.38
![Page 7: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Meloidogyne incognita, J2/250 cc soil
Expected % yield loss at different preplant nematode densities
Cultivar Soil Location Threshold 20 50 100 200 500
SJ2 loamy sand south SJV 25 0 5 15 27 41
Deltapine loamy sand imperial 19 0 7 16 26 34
SJ2, SJ5, SJ-C1 l. sand/s. loam south SJV 21 0 4 10 19 37
average (all) --------------------- ------------- 22 0 6 15 27 40
average (SJV) --------------------- ------------- 23 0 5 12 24 41
SJ2(-FOV) sandy loam south SJV 21 0 10 23 37 45
SJ2(+FOV) sandy loam south SJV 21 0 42 59 62 62
Case Study on Cotton
![Page 8: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Damage Function Parameters for Selected Crops
Crop (T)olerance Z m
Bell Pepper 65 0.9978 0.87
Cantaloupe 10 0.9972 0.40
Carrot 0 0.99 0.6
Chile Pepper 39 0.9934 0.70
Cotton 57.5 0.9976 0.6
Cowpea 22 0.9816 0.96
Potato 18 0.99 0.49
Snapbean 14 0.9978 0.57
Squash 0 0.9898 0
Sugarbeet 0 0.9955 0.89
Sweetpotato 0 0.99375 0.47
Tomato 41.8 0.99934 0.47
![Page 9: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Thresholds and Expected Yield Loss
Meloidogyne incognita, J2/250 cc soil; adjusted for extraction efficiency
Expected % yield loss at different preplant nematode densities
Crop Threshold 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200
Bell Pepper 25 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 8
Cantaloupe 4 0 0 1 3 7 17 30 46
Carrot 0 1 2 5 9 16 29 37 40
Chile Pepper 15 0 0 0 0 3 14 24 30
Cotton 22 0 0 0 0 0 6 15 27
Cowpea 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 8
Potato 7 0 0 0 4 15 34 47 51
Snapbean 5 0 0 0 1 3 10 18 29
Squash 0 3 5 12 23 41 74 93 100
Sugarbeet 0 0 0 1 1 2 5 8 10
Sweetpotato 0 1 2 4 8 15 30 43 51
Tomato 16 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 14
![Page 10: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Expected Damage
Meloidogyne chitwoodi; summer crop potato; Klamath Basin
Fall population levels; adjusted for extraction efficiency
Expected % tuber blemish at different fall nematode densities
J2/250 cc 1 2 5 10 20 50 100 200 500
% Blemish 3 4 5 7 8 12 15 18 25
![Page 11: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Thresholds and Expected Yield Loss
Cultivar Soil Location (T)olerance Z m
US-H9 clay Imperial 100 0.99886 0
US-H9 loam SJV/Idaho 300 0.99976 0
Heterodera schachtii, eggs/100g soil
Sugarbeets
Cultivar Soil Location Threshold 50 100 200 500 1000
US-H9 clay Imperial 100 0 0 11 37 64
US-H9 loam SJV/Idaho 300 0 0 0 5 15
Expected % yield loss at different preplant nematode densities
Data from P.A. Roberts
![Page 12: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Optimized Discrete Model
![Page 13: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Annual Population Change (Host Crop)
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
0 500 1000 1500 2000Pi1
Pi1
* (
Pi2
/Pi1
)
![Page 14: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Annual Population Change (Non-host)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 500 1000 1500 2000Pi(t)
Pi(t
+x)
Pi1
Pi2
Pi3
![Page 15: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Years After Planting Host Crop
Pi(t
+x)
![Page 16: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Population Convergence
0
1000
2000
3000
0 5 10 15Year
Po
pu
lati
on
Le
vel
0NHR
2NHR
4NHR
6NHR
Optimum Rotation Length
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Years of Non-host
Ave
. An
nu
al R
etu
rns
($
)
![Page 17: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Perennial Crop Considerations
![Page 18: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200
Days
Mes
ocric
onem
a xe
nopl
ax
Lovell
Nemaguard
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000
Degree-Days
Mes
ocric
onem
a xe
nopl
ax
![Page 19: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Year 1
0
20
40
60
80
100
0 1000 2000 3000DD
AU
C LU
LT
NU
NT
Year 2
02000400060008000
1000012000
0 1000 2000 3000DD
AU
C LU
LT
NU
NT
Year 3
05000
1000015000200002500030000
0 1000 2000 3000DD
AU
C LU
LT
NU
NT
![Page 20: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Some ReferencesBenedict, J.H., K.M. El-Zik, L.R. Oliver, P.A. Roberts, and L.T. Wilson. 1989. Economic injury levels for cotton pests. Chapter 6.
In: Integrated Pest Management Systems and Cotton Production. R.E. Frisbie, K.M. El-Zik, and L.T. Wilson (eds.). John Wiley and Sons, New York. Pp. 121-153.
Cooke, D. A., and I. J. Thomason. 1979. The relationship between population density of Heterodera schachtii, soil temperature, and sugarbeet yields. Journal of Nematology 11:124-128.
Duncan, L. W. and H. Ferris. 1983. Effects of Meloidogyne incognita on cotton and cowpeas in rotation. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Production Research Conference: 22-26.
Ferris, H. 1984. Probability range in damage predictions as related to sampling decisions. Journal of Nematology 16:246-251.
Ferris, H. 1985. Population assessment and management strategies for plant-parasitic nematodes. Agricultural, Ecosystems and Environment 12(1984/85):285-299.
Ferris, H., D. A. Ball, L. W. Beem and L. A. Gudmundson. 1986. Using nematode count data in crop management decisions. California Agriculture 40:12-14.
Ferris, H., H. L. Carlson and B. B. Westerdahl. 1994. Nematode population changes under crop rotation sequences: consequences for potato production. Agronomy Journal 86:340-348.
Ferris, H., P. B. Goodell and M. V. McKenry. 1981. Sampling for nematodes. California Agriculture 35:13-15.
Goodell, P.B., M. A. McClure, P. A. Roberts, and S. H. Thomas 1997. Nematodes. In: Integrated Pest Management for Cotton in the Western Region of the United States. 2nd edition. Univ. of California Publ. No. 3305. Pp. 103-110.
Roberts, P.A. and G.D. Griffin. 1994. The economic feasibility of management alternatives. In: Quantifying Nematode Control. G.D. Griffin and P.A. Roberts (eds.). Western Regional Research Publication #149, Utah State University Press, Logan, UT. Pp. 23-49.
Roberts, P.A. and I.J. Thomason. 1981. Sugarbeet Pest Management: Nematodes. Univ. of California Special Publ. No. 3272. 32 pages.
![Page 21: Nematode Thresholds and Damage Levels for California Crops Howard Ferris](https://reader030.vdocuments.net/reader030/viewer/2022032703/56649d375503460f94a107dd/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
References
Burt, O. R. and H. Ferris. 1996. Sequential decision rules for managing nematodes with crop rotations. J. Nematology 28:457-474.
Chen, J., J.R. Carey and H. Ferris. 2001. Comparative demography of isogenic populations of Caenorhabditis elegans Expt. Gerontology 36:431-440.
Ferris, H. 1978. Nematode economic thresholds: derivation, requirements and theoretical considerations. J. Nematology 10:341-350.
Ferris, H. 1985. Density-dependent nematode seasonal multiplication and overwinter survivorship: a critical point model. J. Nematology 17:93-100.
Hsin, H. and C. Kenyon. 1999. Signals from the reproductive system regulate the lifespan of C. elegans. Nature 399:362-366.
Kim D.G. and H. Ferris. 2001. Relationship between crop losses and initial population densities of Meloidogyne arenaria in winter-grown oriental melon in Korea. J. Nematology (subm.)
Noling, J.W. and H. Ferris. 1987. Nematode-degree days, a density-time model for relating epidemiology and crop losses in perennials. J. Nematology 19:108-118.
Seinhorst, J.W. 1965. The relationship between nematode density and damage to plants. Nematologica 11:137-154.
Seinhorst, J.W. 1967. The relationship between population increase and population density in plant parasitic nematodes. II. Sedentary nematodes. Nematologica 13:157-171.
Somers, J.A., H.H. Shorey and L.K. Gaston. 1977. Reproductive biology and behavior of Rhabditis pellio (Schneider) (Rhabditida:Rhabditidae). J. Nematology 9:143-148.
More information:http://plpnemweb.ucdavis.edu/nemaplex