newsletter - the ir-4 project · 2016-06-29 · newsletter vol. 47 no. 2 spring 2016 and available...

might have ranged in skill set andknowledge base from generalenvironmental science to vastentomological expertise. Thesechallenges led me to select imagesgeared more towards a naiveaudience instead of a group ofexperts.

Hence, the arrival of my littlegreen friend, who represented anynumber of different ‘problems’ornamental horticulture growers,landscape managers, and pestcontrol operators might encounterfrom structural pests to weeds innurserycontainers.The various“screenbeans” ,shownthroughoutthis article

If you can’t tell yet, this Spotlighton Orn Hort is going to be a littledifferent. This little green monsterwas my ‘friend’ recently helping meto communicate complex conceptsto a diverse group of people at theCropLife America/ResponsibleIndustry for a Sound EnvironmentSpring Conference. I was invited tobe one of a round-robin set ofspeakers presenting various aspectsof how new uses of specialtyproducts are researched,registered, and stewarded throughcommercialization. My charge wasto cover problem identification andgenerally how those problems aresolved with research &development – all in 8 minutes orless, repeated 7 times to rotatinggroups.

This was indeed a challenging task.Just the identification of problems,whether pathogen, pest, or weedissues could be an hours-longseminar, not to mention adding inconcepts related to how newproblems arise and how solutionsare discovered or created. The endusers needing solutions could begrowers, landscape maintenancepersonnel or urban/structural pestapplicators. And the audience

Inside thisissue...34569

10

WSR Training

WSR Award Winners

New Product Corner

Pest Management Solutions for Specialty Crops and Minor Uses

Zika Virus, AedesMosquito and IR-4

Hall of Fame Awardees

Path Forward

Monsters! (Or WWE -Wrangling WithEducation)— by Cristi Palmer, IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Manager

NewsletterVol. 47 No. 2 Spring 2016

and available from the publicdomain, represented growers,researchers and others who mightfirst observe a problem, identify itand its solutions, or researchoptions for an uncontrollableproblem.

None of these images wereoriginally intended for a scientificaudience, but they helped illustratea very complex set of developmentpathways simplistically. Whencoupled with short 2 to 3 sentencestories like how researchers willstudy timing of product applicationbecause insect susceptibility might

continued on pg 8

Spotlight on Ornamental Horticulture

These “screen beans”are used to illustrateproblem solving.

vol47no2qxp11pt_Layout 1 5/2/2016 12:31 PM

Executive Director Notes

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 2Vol 47 No 2

Dear Friends,

I recently attended the CropLife America Annual Conference. Many IR-4 liaisons from industry and EPAattend this excellent conference. Compliments to Jay Vroom and his team at CLA for the superior job inplanning and organizing. During the conference I was asked repeatedly “what’s new with IR-4”? The stockanswer contained three points:

1. IR-4’s food program had a record breaking year in 2015 - In case you missed it, IR-4 submissions supported 1175 new registration last year.

2. The 2016 research program continues to be extremely challenging - A significant number of food program studies have changed since we finalized the plan in October. The changes were due to a variety of reasons, including changes in company support, new data requirements and potential regulatory issues.

3. IR-4 critically needs a funding increase – IR-4 has suffered many years of funding reductions along with corresponding increases in expenses. IR-4 simply can no longer absorb this funding gap. New resources are needed or IR-4 will have to start the painful process of cutting back on research capacity. This challenge is on top of the situation at IR-4’s host land-grant universities where there is a need for these universities to recoup some of the expenses they have been covering for IR-4. Please see the Path Forward Communique on pages 10 & 11 for more information.

Through the efforts of many, IR-4 is involved with providing solutions for world changing problems.The Public Health Pesticide program is seeking solutions in controlling the Aedes mosquito, which carriesthe Zika virus (pages 6 & 7). The Ornamental Horticulture Program has developed a strategy for datadevelopment to protect pollinators, ensuring producers have access to necessary pesticides to controlcritical pests. The Biopesticide & Organic Support Program is supporting useful pest control alternatives.

In early March, IR-4 held its annual joint meeting between the Commodity Liaison Committee (CLC) andProject Management Committee. The CLC was established in 1991. It has recently grown to 33 membersconsisting of farmers (both large and small operations), commodity group representatives from variousregions, food processors as well as representation from the chemical pesticide and biopesticide industries.During the meeting we discussed IR-4’s challenges. From that, the CLC developed strategies for assistingwith future funding needs. Many new ideas were shared and activity has started.

Three long time members of the CLC have retired or resigned.Brian Flood of Del Monte USA and Lin Schmale of the Society ofAmerican Florist have retired from their day jobs. During themeeting we were able to thank them for all the help and assistancethey have provided to IR-4. Also leaving the CLC was the Chair,Rich Bonanno. Rich has moved from the family farm and hasrelocated to North Carolina where he has joined North CarolinaState University as Director of Cooperative Extension. We wish allthree the best as they transition into a new phase of their lives.

Finally, the CLC members elected Mike Bledsoe of Village Farms for a two-year term as Chair. Todd Schultz of USA Dry Pea and Lentil Council, who consistently reminds us that “2016 is the International Year of the Pulse”, was elected Vice-Chair.

All the best,Jerry

Saying goodbye to CLC members Brian & Linabove, who have retired, and Rich, whohas a new position as NCSU Director ofCooperative Extension.


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 3Vol 47 No 2

The Western Region IR-4 held a field and laboratory GLP trainingmeeting at UC Davis on March 15 & 16, 2016. Instead ofrehashing the training agenda, we decided to let a few picturestell the story. Through the collaboration of many IR-4 participantsan excellent training session occurred covering the life of a fieldtrial. The day in the life of a trial went from protocol developmentand field activities, through to laboratory analysis. If you’reinterested in any of the training presentations, they are availableat the following url: http://goo.gl/AhXCZD.

Training

Potassium Phosphite/Walnut11504.16-CA122

TRT 03


Western Region Awards


The Western Region presented twoField Research Directors withTechnical Service awards at therecent UC Davis training meeting.Wilson Peng and Nathan Leach areexemplars of the quiet, steadyforces that drive the IR4 datamachine. All EPA data submissionsstart in an agricultural field and inthe hands of someone who ispaying attention to the many detailsof a GLP field study. Wilson hasbeen the steady workhorse fortwenty years of Washington StateUniversity field trials while NathanLeach is a relative newcomer to theUniversity of California at Riverside.The Western Region is grateful forthe dedication and perseverance ofthese researchers who havedelivered on the data front.

If you have reviewed or stumbledupon a Washington State Universitynotebook from the 1990’s (saymyclobutanol/hops orfenpropathin/currants) you’ll noticesome of Wilson Peng’s earlieststudies at IR4. You might alsonotice Wilson’s unique history

intertwined in thegeography of his CV.Wilson was born inVietnam and with hisfamily immigrated to theUnited States via arefugee camp in thePhilippines. Wilson’sbright smile and quiet

demeanor almost hide theremarkable fact that he speaks threelanguages (Vietnamese, Chinese,and English), and as he trudgedthrough years of GLP data, he alsocompleted his BS degree atWashington State University.Wilson has worked on everythingfrom hops and mint to asparagusand wasabi in his untiring efforts on

behalf of IR4. The Western Regionhonored Wilson with this technicalservice award in recognition of hisremarkable and long standingcontributions to the IR4 program.

The University of California atRiverside Field Research Center hasbenefited remarkably with theadvent of Nathan Leach whobecame the new FRD at Riversidein 2015. Nathanmay be at thestart of his IR4career, but histhorough andsteadfast studyconduct has been rapidlyestablished.When Field Research Centers gothrough transitions, the handoff canbe challenging. Nathan steppedinto his role as FRD at Riversidewith considerable determination.Nathan focused on study details,learned the GLP documentation,and delivered the goods at UCRiverside. With his efforts andpractical, unflappable attitudeNathan put UC Riverside on asteady course.

IR4’s job and purpose is to delivernew crop production tools forspecialty crop growers. As aprogram we plan, execute and, if allgoes well and the regulatory starsalign, deliver these tools togrowers. Our task, as a program, isdependent on the consistentdelivery of high quality andreproducible field data fromresearchers like Wilson Peng andNathan Leach. Congratulations andappreciation goes out to bothWilson and Nathan for excellentwork in support of the IR4program.

2016 WSR AwardsThe IR-4 Newsletter Vol 46 No.4Fall 2015

The IR-4 Newsletter is published quarterly fordistribution to cooperators in our partnerState/Federal/Industry research units, Stateand Federal officials, commodity groups, andprivate citizens. Material from the IR-4Newsletter may be reproduced with credit tothe publication. New Jersey AgriculturalExperiment Station PublicationNo.P-27200-15-04. This material is basedupon work that is supported by the NationalInstitute of Food and Agriculture, U.S.Department of Agriculture, under awardnumber 2015-34383-23710 and the HatchMultistate project accession number1008823 through the New JerseyAgricultural Experiment Station HatchMultistate project NJ27202, with substantialcooperation and support from other StateAgricultural Experiment Stations,USDA-ARS, and USDA-FAS.USDA-ARS.

Editor: Sherrilynn NovackIR-4 Public Relations and CommunicationManager, 732.932.9575 x 4632, [email protected]

Newsletter Committee:North Central Regional Director, John Wise, 517.432.2668.

Western Regional Assistant Field Coordinator, Stephen Flanagan,541.688.3155.

Southern Regional Field Coordinator,Michelle Samuel-Foo, 352-294-3991Southern Region Program

Research Prog/Svs, Crd/QA Robin Federline 352-294-3983.

Commodity Liaison Committee member,Mike Bledsoe, 407-493-3933, VillageFarms.

IR-4 HQ, 732.932.9575Assistant Director, Van Starner x 4621

Ornamental Horticulture Manager, andTechnical Copy EditorCristi Palmer x 4629

Technical Coordinator/Entomology, Ken Samoil x 4614

Fungicide Coordinator, Kathryn Homa x 4604

Public Health Pesticides Manager, andTechnical Copy Editor, Karl Malamud-Roam x 4628



This is for informational purposes only as IR-4 does not endorse aparticular product or registrant.

New Product CornerOxathiapiprolin (Fungicide–Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC)

Introduction: Unconditionalregistration for the new activeingredient oxathiapiprolin(DuPont™ Zorvec™) was grantedby the EPA in August 2015 forvarious food crop uses. Syngentasecured a license from DuPont in2013 to develop and marketproducts containing oxathiapiprolinand has exclusive rights for foliarand soil uses on all crops in NorthAmerica. Registration ofoxathiapiprolin provides growerswith a novel mode of actionfungicide for use in controllingvarious oomycete diseases. It hasbeen shown to be highly effectiveat very low use rates, exhibits nocross-resistance with any otherproduct and provides preventativeand residual disease control.Oxathiapiprolin is classified by theFungicide Resistance ActionCommittee (FRAC) as a GroupU15 fungicide, the only compoundin this group.

Other global registrations:Registrations have been granted toDuPont in Singapore, Canada,South Korea, China, Australia,Japan, and Argentina, with severalmore countries expected in 2016.

US trade names/formulations/labeled crops: Orondis® Gold200 (a 1.67 lb ai/gal suspensionconcentrate), Orondis® Opti andOrondis® Ultra (both 0.83 lbai/gal oil dispersions) - for uses onginseng, potato, tuberous andcorm vegetables – crop subgroup1C, bulb vegetables – crop group3-07, leafy greens – cropsubgroup 4A, head and stem

Brassica vegetables – cropsubgroup 5A, fruiting vegetables –crop group 8-10, cucurbitvegetables – crop group 9, peas,succulent shelled and ediblepodded, and tobacco (see labelsfor specific crops, use patterns andother general directions for use)

Orondis® labeled pest spectrum:Phytophthora capsici, P. infestansand other species; downy mildew(Bremia spp., Peronospora spp.,Pseudoperonospora spp.); blackshank, etc.

IR-4/PMC projects submitted withthe first dossier (PR#): cucurbitvegetables crop group 9 –cantaloupe (10620), cucumber(field and greenhouse - 10618,10607), summer squash (10619);ginseng (10616); head and leaflettuce (10653); bulb vegetablecrop group 3-07 (10617 – drybulb and green onion); succulentpeas (10837); bell/nonbell pepper(field and greenhouse – 10621)

IR-4 projects pending at EPA(PR#) – asparagus (10623); basil(field and greenhouse – 10722,10881); leafy Brassica greens,subgroup 5B (11125); caneberry(11720); crop group/subgrouptolerance revisions (Brassica headand stem group 5 – 11856, leafygreens subgroup 4A – 11855)

Ongoing IR-4 residue projects(PR#): 2015 – pomegranate(10915); 2016 – avocado(11795), hops (11759),strawberry (11719)

Other IR-4 database requests(PR#): papaya (11603 - to becovered by pomegranate plusavocado), orange, post-harvest(11312 – MFG objective), cacaobean (11883 – under evaluation)

Fenazaquin (Miticide – GowanUSA)

Introduction: Unconditionalregistration for the new activeingredient (AI) fenazaquin wasgranted by the EPA in May 2015for several food uses and non-fooduses on various ornamentalhorticulture plants. This new AIregistration provides growers witha selective contact miticide (quickknockdown with excellent residualcontrol), active against all stages ofvarious mite species. Fenazaquinalso controls certain insect pestslike psyllids, some whiteflies andscales; and it is a unique miticideas it also controls powdery mildewin cherries (Podosphaeraclandestine) and on greenhouseand shade house ornamentalhorticulture plants (FIFRA Sec2(ee) recommendation forMagus® Miticide). It is soft onbeneficial insects and can be usedeffectively in resistancemanagement programs. Belongingto the quinazoline class ofchemistry, fenazaquin ischaracterized by inhibition of cellrespiration (is a mitochondrialcomplex I electron transportinhibitor). The AI has beenclassified by the InsecticideResistance Action Committee(IRAC) as a Group 21 acaricide.

Other global registrations:Fenazaquin has been registeredand used successfully on a widerange of agricultural andhorticultural crops in more than 40countries worldwide.

continued on pg 8

New Products


Feature


Zika virus poses a majorpublic health challengethroughout the Americas,

and the IR-4 Project is helping tominimize its impact by promoting arobust toolbox to control the Aedesmosquitoes that spread thepathogen. Working with diversepartners, our primary goals includemaintenance of a comprehensiveinventory of Aedes controlmethods, assisting registration ofnovel products that control thesevectors, retaining registration ofcritical existing pesticides facingregulatory challenges, and sharinginformation widely with researchers,registrants, regulators, and vectorcontrol staff.

Zika is primarily transmitted bybites from Aedes aegypti and Aedesalbopictus, and preventing itsspread will require interventionseffective against both species.These mosquitoes are notoriouslyhard to control, as they lay eggs insmall and dispersed sites, live theiradult lives largely in houses, biteduring the day, and maintaindisease cycles even at lowpopulation densities. Thus, thevector control approaches that workwell with malaria or West Nile virus,which are spread by Anopheles andCulex species respectively, areinsufficient. Insecticide-treated bednets have been the mainstay of

malaria control programs but dolittle to prevent Aedes bites, andarea-wide larval or adult controlmethods which work well toreduce West Nile vectors haveshown relatively little effect inreducing Aedes-borne pathogentransmission. Environmentalsanitation can reduce Aedeshabitats for a time, but theabundance of plastic trash in mosturban areas makes this anunsustainable effort, and nobiological control has been foundto reduce these challenging pestssignificantly. Finally, while screensand repellents can providepersonal protection, they do notreduce the abundance ofmosquitoes or stop outbreaksunless everybody is protected.Thus, aggressive use of existingchemical control products, rapiddevelopment of novelAedes-control interventions, andintegrated use of all available toolswill probably be required foreffective control.

These Aedes species are“skip-ovipositors”, which meansthey lay their eggs in many smallbatches and, like all Aedes, lay theireggs on moist surfaces rather thanin open water, with the eggshatching in large numbers afterthey are wetted. Together, thesefeatures make larval control verydifficult, especially withconventional spray equipment. Aparticular challenge is larvalproduction in drinking watercontainers. The IR-4 project issupporting research on“autodissemination” of insectgrowth regulators (IGR’s) byegg-laying female mosquitoes, andfield evidence of efficacy is startingto accumulate, although theseefforts have not yet led toregistration. In addition, we haveconducted literature and labelsearches to identify products thatmight be useful in drinking water,and are working closely withpotential registrants to bring thesesoon to Hawaii and Puerto Rico,where the need is most urgent.

Zika Virus, Aedes Mosquito Control, and the IR-4 Project— by Karl Malamud-Roam, IR-4 Public

Aedes aegypti (left), the yellow fever mosquito, is themost important vector spreading Zika virus so far.Aedes albopictus (right), the Asian tiger mosquito, ispotentially an even greater threat as the virus movesinto the U.S. mainland.

Globaldistribution ofAedes aegypti(above) andAedesalbopictus,showing thepossibledistribution ofZika, as well asdengue andsimilar viruses.



Efforts to reduce bites from Aedesinfected by Zika, dengue, or similarviruses have generally focused onadult mosquito control, and ourreview of the toolbox showsreasons for concern, for optimism,and, above all, for substantialactivity in this realm.

The concerns come fromobservations that space spraysoutdoors rarely enter buildingseffectively, and that residents oftenfear indoor pesticide applications.Therefore, efficacy is generally aconcern with chemical control ofthese vectors. In addition, the onlytwo classes of insecticides –pyrethroids and organophosphates(OP’s) – registered for use againstadult mosquitoes in the U.S. bothface major challenges. Pyrethroidresistance has been widely foundthroughout the world, andexperience over the last decade inMexico has shown that reliance onthis class of adulticide alone canlead rapidly to overwhelmingcontrol failures. On the other hand,regulatory pressure on the OP’s isincreasing rapidly in the U.S., withincreasingly stringent requirementsin many realms, and in particular

relative to developmental toxicologyand endangered species. Proposednew risk assessment methods forboth human health andecotoxicology could lead toreduced availability of OP’s forvector control. While EPA hasshown a willingness to retain theseregistrations for public health, thelong-term commercial viability ofthis class of adulticides is uncertain.IR-4 is working to retain criticaluses and search for viablealternatives.

On the other hand, optimism aboutadult Aedes control is justified by adecade of active mosquito controlresearch aimed primarily at malariacontrol and protection of militarypersonnel. A wide range of newproduct classes might help againstAedes species. Attractive toxicsugar baits (ATSB), lethal ovitraps(LOT), Wolbachia endosymbionts,new fabric treatments, and othernovel vector control interventionshave been introduced in thisNewsletter, and many of these showgood potential for Zika protection,even if they were developed forother purposes. One ATSB materialbased on garlic and at least threeLOT products are nowcommercially available in the U.S.for both homeowner and mosquitoabatement use, and other novelproducts are coming soon. IR-4 hasworked closely with the developersof many of these products and welook forward to more product andexperimental use permitsubmissions.

We continue to add to ourinventory other new interventions,including GMO mosquitoes and theuse of bacterial inclusions in

mosquitoes to block pathogeninfection or transmission, which wehave not directly supported.

In the longer term, there are greathopes that wholly new chemicalsmight be introduced soon forvector control. Large-scalechemical screening supported bythe Innovative Vector ControlConsortium (IVCC) will likely leadto the introduction of two or threewholly new insecticide chemicalclasses with no cross-resistance toexisting tools within the next threeyears. IR-4 and IVCC are exploringcollaboration.

New biopesticides in our portfoliomight reduce pollinator risks invector control, and companies withRNAi technologies for highlyselective pesticides haveapproached us for regulatorysupport. Finally, we are workingwith new chemical screening effortsto incorporate results into our PHPDatabase.

Finally, there is good evidence thatboth established and novel Aedescontrol tactics can reducemosquito populations, but there islittle known on the relative value orthe optimal integration of controltools, and IR-4 is promoting amajor comparative efficacy trial inthe coming year. With colla-borators, we hope to clarify whichelements of the toolbox mosteffectively reduce Aedes numbersand which combinations of actionsprovide the greatest value indisease protection at the lowestcost. While it is likely that Zikavirus will continue to spread, wehope that IR-4 activities will keepits impact as limited as possible.

Zika Virus, Aedes Mosquito Control, and the IR-4 Project ublic Health Pesticides Program Manager

Feature

Aedes life cycle in a plastic bottle. The adults leave tofind mates and food, and then lay eggs in other smallhabitats. (figure courtesy of Nature.com)


Spotlight on Orn. Hort.


vary throughout a pest’s lifecycle,these images helped engagevarious members of my audience .

So why am I sharing this story?Scientific literacy is a majorimpediment in developing soundscience based US policy. Oftentimes with complex issues, emotiontrumps reason. Fear of theunknown and protection of thosewe hold dear drive many decisionswithout pausing to think criticallyabout the topic or potentialramifications of the variousoptions. Without solid informationbased on science, whichever choicestirs the most positive or the leastnegative emotions is selected.

Over the past several years,communication of scientificconcepts has been a theme at theannual meetings of the AmericanPathological Society and theEntomological Society of Americaand at the recent CLA/RISE SpringConference. My takeaway fromthese events include: 1) KISS (KeepIt Simple and Short to describe thescientific topic in 30 seconds orless using everyday language ordefining science terms that need tobe included); 2) pictures orcartoons are worth a thousandwords; 3) the same words or

images may have different meaningsto different people based on theirbackgrounds (flowers may bring tomind a bouquet given for a specialevent, a certain favorite color orfragrance, or even source of foodfor pollinators); and 4) make itmemorable. People rememberstories where there are strongemotions or personal connections.

Engaging stories and images willinfluence policy more than dryfacts.

As I continue to wrangle withdeveloping those engaging,emotionally-positive outreachstories for future Spotlights, theOrnamental Horticulture Programwill continue to develop solutionsto dispel the little green monstersbedeviling ornamental horticulturecrops.

Spotlight on Orn Hortcontinued from pg 1

US trade names/formulations/labeled crops: Magister® SCMiticide (1.6 lb ai/gal) - for fooduses on cherries and almonds, andfor use on Christmas trees andnon-bearing tree fruits and nuts;Magus® Miticide (1.6 lb ai/gal) -for use on greenhouse and shadehouse ornamental horticultureplants, Christmas trees and fieldgrown, outdoor ornamental plants,non-bearing tree fruits and nuts,and established ornamentallandscape plantings (see labels forspecific crops, use patterns andother general directions for use)

US labeled pest spectrum:Tetranychid mites (McDaniel,Pacific, Twospotted, European redmite, brown mite, Willamette,Spruce and Strawberry spidermites), Eriophyid gall mites (plumnursery mites), cherry powderymildew (Podosphaera clandestine),powdery mildew on ornamentals

IR-4 database requests: blueberry(10384 – Mfg submitted), grape(11791 – under evaluation)

NewProducts

continued from pg 5

eNewsletter isAvailablePlease let Sherri Novack know if you nolonger wish to receive a hard copyNewsletter. She can be reached at732.932.9575 x 4632 or via email [email protected]



Welcome New CLC Members

IR-4 welcomes new CommodityLiaison Committee Members

Jill CalabroAmericanHort

Alan DeYoungVan Drunen Farms

Drew Gruenburg (Alternate)Society of American Florist

Keith PittsMarrone Bio Innovations

Allen MizeDel Monte

Dennis TristaoJ.G. Boswell Company

IR-4’s highest award is given tothose who have made aconsiderable contribution to theprogram. In October, 2015, theProject Management Committee(PMC) approved the selection ofthree award winners for thisprestigious award. The winners,Robert (Bob) Hollingworth, MaryDuryea and Diane Infante eachserved IR-4 for many years and IR-4is better today because of theircontributions.

Bob and Mary received their awardsat the spring IR-4 PMC meeting.There, family and peers attended areception on their behalf; it was abeautiful spring night inWashington, when Bob spoke aboutmemories of his years as Directorof the North Central regionprogram. Mary was also delightedfor being chosen and shared herfondness for the program. Marywas the Administrative Advisor(AA) for the Southern region andalso held the position of AA chairfrom 2012 until her retirement in2015. Mary was also very active insupporting IR-4 when attending theannual Southern Region AgExperiment Station Directors’meetings.

Diane Infante worked at IR-4 Head-quarters and was the master of theIR-4 database and the Food UseProgram. She served IR-4 for nearly40 years. Her knowledge of theIR-4 process made her the person

to go to for answers to almost anyquestion they had about the FoodUse program. Diane retired in2014, but will return to IR-4 toreceive her award at the NationalEducation Conference in early2017.

IR-4 wishes to express itsthankfulness to these three veryworthy IR-4 Hall of Fame Awardrecipients.

IR-4 Recognizes ThreeHall of Fame Recipients

Hall of Fame

Bob Hollingworth shares his memories ofIR-4 at the spring PMC meeting.

Diane Infante will receive heraward at the National EducationConference in 2017.

Mary Duryea with IR-4 Executive Director,Jerry Baron, at the spring PMC meeting.

Hall of FameRecipients Charles Compton 1987John (Ed) Swift 1987Harold Alford 1989Tom Archer 1989James Mahlstede 1989Howard Wilkowske 1989Virgil Freed 1990Bailey Pepper 1990John Bourke 1991Duane Coyier 1991Robert Menges 1993Jack Sheets 1993Kenneth Dorschner 1994Willis Wheeler 1997Gene Carpenter 1998Dick Guest 1999Bob Libby 2000Pat Sarica 2002Takayuki Shibamoto 2002George Markle 2003Neal Thompson 2003Ray Frank 2003Hoyt Jamerson 2003Robert Holm 2006Charles Mouer 2008Marion Miller 2013Rocky Lundy 2014Lois Rossi 2014Robert Hollingworth 2015Mary Duryea 2015Diane Infante 2015


Path Forward


Dear Friends,On behalf of the IR-4 Project Management Committee (PMC), I am reaching out to IR-4 stakeholders and

supporters to notify you of certain fundamental changes that will be occurring within the IR-4 system andorganization. To best prepare for this, we have created a task force to identify the issues and to begin to explore ouroptions. This effort is referred to as the IR-4 Path Forward and the task force's multiple objectives will be discussedin more detail in the next update.

BackgroundSince 1963, the IR-4 Project has been the primary entity in the United States to facilitate registrations ofconventional pesticides and biopesticides on specialty food crops (fruits, vegetables, nuts, herbs, spices) andnon-food ornamental horticulture crops (greenhouse flowers, nursery, landscape plants, and Christmas trees). Theseregistrations are necessary to prevent damage to the crops we eat, or the plants that enhance our environment. Inthis capacity, IR-4, with primary funding support, from the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA) NationalInstitute for Food and Agriculture (NIFA), develops research data to support US Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) registrations and cooperates in the registration of pest management tools for specialty crops and specialty(minor) uses on major crops.

Challenges and concernsThe majority of IR-4 research is conducted at Land Grant Universities/State Agricultural Experiment Stations (SAES)throughout the US. The SAES have historically received significant appropriations from State and Federal funds tosupport infrastructure and fulfill their mission to agriculture, both in terms of research and extension activities. Inmore recent decades, as public funds declined, this funding has diminished or ceased altogether. One way the SAEShas closed the funding shortfall is to collect indirect costs (IDC) from research grants. IDC is a federally definedpercentage of a grant that covers the cost of centrally-provided services such as electricity, heat, water, building andfreezer maintenance, administrative services such as personnel, grant administration and purchasing.

In 2015, Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences could no longer subsidize IR-4, as requiredby University policy, and other programs that did not recover sufficient IDC to cover the costs of centrally-providedservices. Based on Federal regulations, SAES are not allowed to collect IDC on IR-4 grants. Cornell Universitypolicy resulted in the need for IR-4 to relocate its Northeast Regional Center. IR-4 sees this as the first university toinitiate a policy for cost recovery and believes other universities will follow this trend. In fact, University of Floridarecently proposed that no faculty member will be allowed to submit a proposal if it is an IDC rate below 12%.

The IR-4 Project Management Committee firmly believes that the long term sustainability of the IR-4 programdepends on taking proactive steps to assure its regional units will continue to be hosted on university campuses.The IR-4 PMC is considering requesting a change in the USDA funding mechanism which would allow institutionsto charge up to 10% IDC. While this still falls well below the full IDC rates at participating institutions, it will showan important "good faith" effort of support. This move will also greatly enhance the ability for IR-4 AdministrativeAdvisors to defend hosting IR-4 operations to university administrators, and maintain IR-4 operations well into thefuture.

In addition to the IDC issue, the workload at IR-4 is increasing. There is an increased demand for productperformance data needed to register emerging biopesticide technology. Additionally, certain companies are askingIR-4 to conduct performance trials before they will agree to register new uses. IR-4 is scheduling extra field trialsand conducting more analytical analysis to ensure that there is adequate data to meet both EPA requirements andinternational trade standards. IR-4 labs are using more resources on modern chemicals which are often difficult toanalyze.

All told, IR-4 simply does not have the funding to continue to operate the same way we do now.

Moving ForwardWhile it is unclear at this point exactly how a potential 10% IDC and the increase/modified need for IR-4 data willimpact IR-4 research, it is believed that the number of research studies IR-4 conducts and the personnel conductingthis research will change. In order to clarify the impact of this change, the IR-4 PMC will examine ways to adjust


procedures to accommodate these changes. Concurrently, IR-4 will beconducting a comprehensive organizational review to identify different operational models (completed by summer 2016)and will continue to identify new potential sources of funding.

The PMC will issue frequent letters, emails, etc., to notify you of these changes and we will solicit input onimplementation and further direction in moving forward. I look forward to sharing more detailed information as potentialsolutions and changes in operations are identified.

Path Forward Working GroupThe Path Forward Working Group was established to comprehensively consider how IR-4 can best operate after years offlat/decreasing funding; a changing budgetary environment in the Land-grant institutions; challenging regulatoryrequirements; and evolving industry needs. The Path Forward Working Group has formed five subcommittees and anOrganizational Assessment Panel with the following members to look at various elements including:

• Changes Within the Land Grant Universities- John Wise, Doug Buhler• Impact of a Reduction in Operational Funds - Jerry Baron, Dan Kunkel, Matt Hengel• Regulatory and Environmental Changes-Dan Kunkel, Jerry Baron, Marty Marshall• Transparent and Open Communication-Dan Rossi, Mike Bledsoe, Sherri Novack• Alternative Funding Sources-Jerry Baron; Commodity Liaison Committee representative• Organizational AssessmentPanel - Steve Slack, Professor Emeritus, The Ohio State University, former Director of the Ohio Ag Experiment Station; Jim Cranney, California Citrus Quality Council; John Abbott, Syngenta Crop Protection; Brian Scully, USDA-ARS; Kathryn Burkgren, Director of Organizational Development for Faculty and Staff, Cornell University

The work by many of the Subcommittees are progressing. In fact, most of the subcommittees provided an initialdocument for review at the March IR-4 Project Management Committee Meeting. For example, Changes Within theLand Grant University Subcommittee noted that there is ample evidence that multiple Land-Grant Universities that hostIR-4 field research centers, analytical laboratories and coordination offices are putting new processes into place thatmandates the collection of funds to cover some administrative costs. The Impact of a Reduction in Operational FundsSubcommittee developed some scenarios and models to account for many years of stagnate funding. The Subcommitteedocuments are being further refined and should be available for review and further input next quarter.

Meanwhile, crop protection product technology and regulation continue to evolve. IR-4 has witnessed some shifts indevelopment of new crop protection products; there are fewer new chemical pesticides in the development pipelinewhile an increasing number of biopesticides are gaining registration. We expect this trend to continue with EPA's latestconcerns over pollinator protection, endangered species, cumulative risk of pesticides, modeling of pesticides in water,worker protection, as well as the consolidation of companies that develop and register new chemical pesticides. Anothersignificant trend is that for various reasons, the amount of data required by IR-4 for a new pesticide registrationcontinues to increase, both in terms of residue exposure and product performance.

In IR-4's most recent strategic plan: IR-4 Vision 2020, the IR-4 Project Management Committee authorized anOrganizational Assessment of existing IR-4 infrastructure, capabilities and stakeholder needs for IR-4 services. The goalof the Organizational Assessment is to provide recommendations on how to position the IR-4 Project for the future. Thetiming of the Organization Assessment fits right in with the larger and more comprehensive Path Forward activities.

The Organizational Assessment Panel (OAP) is scheduled to meet at IR-4 Headquarters the week of May 23. The OAPis being asked to critically evaluate the number and locations of the state and ARS coordination offices, field researchcenters/field research cooperators and analytical laboratories, as well as future expected workload, and suggestappropriate changes for a responsive and relevant IR-4. Specifically, the OAP is examining operational efficiencies and/orif savings can be achieved through reorganization of IR-4's units. Simply put, if you were starting IR-4 from scratch today,how would it best be structured to provide deliverables to stakeholders? It is anticipated that the OrganizationalAssessment report will be available July 2016.

Thanks in advance for your support as we undertake this extremely important dialogue and decisions on the future ofIR-4. – Jerry


Path Forward


IR-4 Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey500 College Road EastSuite 201 WPrinceton, NJ 08540

NON-PROFITUS POSTAGE

PAIDNEW BRUNSWICK, NJ

PERMIT NO. 157

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey •University of California •Cornell University•University of Florida •Michigan State University

Major funding for IR-4 is provided by Special Research Grants andHatch Act Funds from USDA-NIFA , in cooperation with the StateAgricultural Experiment Stations, and USDA-ARS.

Tolerance SuccessesUnited States Department of AgricultureNational Institute of Food and Agriculture

Federal Register: January 13, 2016PronamideTrade Name: Kerb Crop: Leaf LettucePR#: 08709, 11278

Federal Register: February 3, 2016CyazofamidTrade Name: Ranman Crop: Herb subgroup 19APR#: 10265

Federal Register: February 12,2016DiflubenzuronTrade Name: DimilinCrop: Cottonseed subgroup 20C,Carrot, Pepper/eggplant subgroup8-10B, Peach subgroup 12-12B,Plum subgroup 12-12C, Tree nutgroup 14-12, Alfalfa (west of theMississippi only)PR#: 05526, 08643, 08664,08678, 08910, 09599, 10110,10111, 10112, 11420, 11421

Federal Register: March 2, 2016PenoxsulamTrade Name: Pindar Crop: Pome fruit group 11-10,Stone fruit group 12-12, Smallvine-climbing fruit (except fuzzykiwifruit) subgroup 13-07F, Treenut group 14-12, Olive,PomegranatePR#: 10866, 10867, 10899,10944, 11609, 11610

Federal Register: March 8, 2016ZoxamideTrade Name: GavelCrop: Ginseng, Small vine-climbingfruit (except fuzzy kiwifruit)subgroup 13-07F, Tomatosubgroup 8-10A, Tuberous andcorm vegetable subgroup 1CPR#: 09708, 11615, 11616,11617

Dont forget to follow us.www.facebook.com/IR4Project,www.facebook.com/IR4OrnHortand

@IR4_Project and @IR4Project.


newsletter - the ir-4 project · 2016-06-29 · newsletter vol. 47 no. 2 spring 2016 and available...

Documents