Welcome, Overview and Introduction - Ron Seward

Ron Seward, Chairman, welcomed participants, provided an overview of the agenda, indicated that minutes of the 1999 meeting were available and that Chris Bowley, Cheminova, was supplying break refreshments. There will be a registration fee of $10.00 to pay for the room and equipment.

Ray Frisbie, Administrative Representative, welcomed the group to Texas and invited the group to attend the Southwestern Branch ESA Meeting. He suggested that we pause and reflect on the largest insect elimination program in history. The cotton industry has undertaken this project which is about halfway through but many challenges remain especially with regard to the large acreages being added to the program. Equipment, supplies and personnel are becoming limiting factors as acreage increases. It is not a question of technology but available airplanes, malathion, people and leadership of each program. The Experiment Station directors are aware and supportive of this group.

Jim Harper, Administrative Representative, said that the meeting provided a good forum to exchange ideas of mutual concern on the boll weevil and brought greetings from the Southern Experiment Station Research Directors. Harper also suggested that the program begin to consider adding other cotton insects to discussions.

Overview of BWE Active Programs and Plans for Expansion - Bill Grefenstette

Grefenstette provided an overview of completed and active BWE programs. Some acreage in western Texas and New Mexico is organic production which is under discussion at this time on how it will be handled. U.S. acreage where BWE is complete amounts to about 4.7 million or about 1.3 of U.S. cotton. Active zones account about 7.2 million and 2.1 million (17%) has not been committed to BWE.

The Farm Service Agency (FSA) has authority to loan up to $100 million for BWE. Currently $93.4 million has already been committed. APHIS cost share in 1999 was $16.2 million, 2000 projected at $17.7 million but budget was cut by 2% thereby lowering the APHIS input to about $15.1 million. Government (USDA) share in new programs is 3.9-4%. Amount received by any one program is based on percentage of grower cost. Planned action in Mexico is being considered if and when the Lower Rio Grande Valley of Texas comes back into program.

Currently APHIS is spending money in Mexico in the form of planning and to keep Arizona boll weevil free. APHIS will use 1 trap/5 acres to monitor situation. There may be a future need for Texas and New Mexico growers to use some of their funds in Mexico. The El Paso/Trans Pacos zone is about 60,000 acres but in Mexico 25-30 thousand acres of cotton are grown. Mexico will be a challenge for organization, funding and treatment.

Breakdown of nonfarmer funding for BWE
 

	Million $
State	FSA loan	USDA, APHIS
AR	13.5	1.06
LA	a	1.56
MS	17.0	1.51
NM	0.8	0.08
OK	1.0	0.15
TN	15.1	.94
TX	46.0	5.00
Totals	93.4	10.3

^a Did not get figure.
 

Re-infestation/update (southeast), A. L. Brashear

The Southeast Program is about 5.5 million acres with active area in S.W. Tennessee and Mississippi (1.3 million acres). Missouri is a part of program but has not voted yet. The 3.4 million acres in containment zone compared for boll weevil catches for past several years (see attached chart). Most of Georgia catch in one county probably developing from infested cotton in a stripper from Texas. Infested fields use grid trapping at 100 ft. spacings to help hold weevils in an area. Other states had various levels of outbreaks with some due to migration. Many outbreaks can be attributed to equipment or individuals/automobiles coming from infested cotton to eradicated cotton. There are implications of this for areas currently involved in programs, especially in Texas. The number of reproductive fields very small compared to total (0.1-0.2%); however cost, of cleaning up these infestations is very high. It has cost southeast program over $5 million since 1995 to take care of reinfestations. Some of the more expensive infestations were thought to have come from infested equipment or about 50% ($2.2 million) of the costs due to this equipment.

Brashear outlined a double approach to reduce the problem. One would be informational and the other regulatory. The information approach will include media blitz, grower publications, newsletters to inform growers of cost, grower meetings by Extension and Farms Center posters. Regulatory enforcement involves state and Federal agencies. State regulations are in place but not currently enforced. There is also pink bollworm quarantine and they desire to utilize it by adding funds to tighten up activities.

Discussion by the group involved need to enforce quarantine regulations which require clean-up of equipment before it can be moved out of Texas, Oklahoma or New Mexico to the east under the pink bollworm law. We must have teeth in law now instead of later. Grefenstette commented that the National Cotton Council will also discuss the risk of reinfestation. The Plant Board is scheduled to discuss the issue. Currently states are encouraged to set their own regulations.

Jerry Coakley, Oklahoma, said there had been discussions in his state to get pink bollworm quarantine removed since none found in cotton in many years.

Status of Malathion, Osama El-Lissy

EPA evaluation of malathion now underway but no decisions have been made as of this date. There have been some positive findings and potential rulings may be favorable for malathion. Evaluations have shown no eye problems. Study on liver tumors in mice indicated that they had higher number but no statistical difference from controls. These were dietary tests. Exposure tests revealed no differences. Currently malathion is classified as a type "D" cancer agent = no known effects. EPA may change it to a "possible" human carcinogen. This created concern with BWE personnel due to public perception. There will be ample time to respond. EPA has also set up a different chemical carcinogen classification system, i.e. to replace A = human carcinogen, B₁ = probable human carcinogen with limited evidence, B₂ = probable human carcinogen with sufficient animal evidence but inadequate or no human evidence and C = possible human carcinogen.

El-Lissy reviewed field studies showing ULV malathion to have superior efficacy to other products tested in Lower Rio Grande Valley (Dan Wolfenbarger) and cage studies by Mandie England (papers are in Beltwide Proceedings). Current programs use ULV malathion by air at 10-12 fluid ounces, ground or mist blower application at 16 oz. ULV malathion average cost/acre by air in Texas in 1999 was $2.01 plus application averaged $1.00 for a total $3.01 where as an alternate material cost was $3.37 plus application at $3.50 for a total of $8.87/application.

Bill Grefenstette pointed out that 21 million cumulative acres were treated in Texas in 1999. If program had to use an alternate material, BWE program would be lost.

Charles Allen asked if human drugs have to be listed as possible carcinogens.

Gerald McKibben pointed out that there was no danger that malathion would be lost but it would create a public perception problem. El-Lissy agreed.

Bill Grefenstette pointed out that alarm was not called for but vigilance on what is going on in EPA should be maintained.

Dick Hardee stated that every agency and grower group could say that BWE would be lost if ULV malathion is lost.

Chris Bowley, Cheminova, said when they get EPA report they will share it with cotton groups. For 40 years malathion has not caused concern with National Institute of Health, National Cancer Institute and others and suddenly that has changed. The rules are being changed.

Updates on Active Eradication - Jim Leser

Jim Leser pointed out that boll weevil is not the number one pest in cotton belt due to BWE.

A. Brashear reported for Mississippi. They initiated their program in 1994-1995 but voted out in 1996 but voted back in in 1997. In 1998 the South Delta came into program followed in 1999 by rest of state. Eight sprays were applied in 3^rd season in east Mississippi (Hill Cotton). They averaged 0.7 weevils/trap in peak week in fall but only .08 in part of South Delta or about 10 times less than east Mississippi. They knew Delta would be easier to clean up due to larger fields and fewer overwintering sites. South Delta has been more active in midseason with lower trap triggers and success is evident.

Ron Seward, TN, reported that middle TN captured 22 weevils in 13 fields in 1999. West TN zone initiated in fall of 1998 ($211/acre, 5 years). Zone 2 ($174/acre) and Zone 3 ($132.00/acre) from south to north in west in scheduled for fall 2000. They scheduled 9.8 applications for first diapause year but used 11 due to extended growing season. Trap triggers used in early season was 2/field (40 acres) but in-season triggers were moved up to 10 weevils/field which caused much concern in grower groups. By fall of 1999 they tried to start late season by August 10. If 25 weevils/field were caught then they scheduled 3 applications at 5 day intervals. Acreage treated by midseason amounted to 110%. They are basically in a containment mode due to migration into zone.

Generally, with mild winters, weevil numbers have greatly increased in planned zones and new southwest TN zone. They had scheduled 5 sprays in historically lower weevil areas but ended up with 9.6 applications for season even at elevated trap triggers. In area they lost about 10 lb lint/acre to boll weevils and outside about 50 lb lint/acre. Full assessment of grower reaction to higher weevil numbers in active and planned zones with potential higher cost is not known. Ron said it was a difficult situation. They need normal winters to help the situation.

Ken Pierce, LA, reviewed the program. The Red River zone initiated in 1997. In 1999 trap triggers were 2, 5 and 2 weevils per 40 acres in early, mid and late season, respectively. Rest of state initiated full diapause in 1999.

Emphasis was placed on mist blower use. Eight-ten treatments were made. LA legislature provided $50 million for 7 year period.

Doug Ladner, AR, showed picture of mist blower truck with wooden bed and said it resulted in less dust, cost and odor. They are concerned with endangered species and have an environmental/quality control coordinator. They work with beekeepers to prevent problems. They initiated the program first in 1997 in the southwest in conjunction with LA northeast program. They expect little problem in southwest area. Diapause was initiated in 9 county southeast program in 1999 with expected good fall program. Weevils were reduced 90-95% in this area by fall program. Central AR will go into diapause in fall of 2000.

Stalk destruction was late due to weather. They must have access around fields. They expect to break up northeast AR into two areas (Delta and Crawley's Ridge).

In midseason AR expects to use 250 ft field edge sprays if the catch is 5 weevils/trap and whole field sprays if infestation detected. They are under budget in areas due to short season... 71% of the budget application, 12% equipment, 11% salary benefits, 2% overhead and 4% other...all under budget in 1999.

Grefenstette reported that MO did not expect to start their program until Crawley's Ridge in AR initiated a program.

Danny Kiser reported on the Texas program. There are now 13 statutory BWE zones in the state administered by the Texas Department of Agriculture with program operation by the Texas Boll Weevil Eradication Foundation headquartered in Abilene. There are cotton areas not currently included in any zone. Most notable are 7 counties just south of Houston and the Lower Rio Grande counties.

Southern Rolling Plains Zone initiated in 1995 and that year trap catches averaged 10.6 weevils/trap per week and 1999 averaged 0.002 weevils/trap per week = 99.98% reduction (Note: the program was initiated with diapause in 1995 therefore reduction is probably greater). Most (80%) weevils being captured now are on west side of zone within 20 miles of cotton not in active eradication. There are 260,000 cotton acres and currently the zone is in confirmation of functional eradication.

Rolling Plains Central Zone was initiated with a fall diapause program in 1996 on about 658,000 acres. After a program delay they conducted another diapause program in 1997. Boll weevils/trap/week = 17.6 season long in 1996 and 1999 = 0.16 weevils/trap/week. It amounts to a 99.1% reduction. Program judged to be very successful and dry weather further enhanced progress of program.

South Texas/Wintergarden Zone was also initiated in 1996 and program went through same process i.e. two diapause programs before first full season program in 1998. Acreage was 373,000 in 1999. In 1996 = 13.3 and 1999 = 1.3 weevils/trap/week for the season, respectively. A few setbacks were encountered in 1999 with 3 weeks rainfall at same time weevil population began to increase. This was followed by Hurricane Brett. Applications were either missed or washed off in many instances.

Northwest Plains Zone initiated in 1999 on 450,000 acres with diapause. Northern half historically low weevils; therefore, trap triggers were used and in south half of zone automatic diapause treatments. An average of 6.9 applications were made in zone and boll weevils averaged 6.9/trap/week for the season.

Western High Plains Zone consists of 750,000 acres and trapping initiated in zone in August of 1999. The pheromone trap catch was 16.1 weevils/trap/week for remainder of season. Treatments averaged 9.5/acre.

Northern Rolling Plains Zone has 300,000 acres. In early August 1999 they started trapping and averaged 18.4/trap/week of trapping. Treatments were 9.4/acre.

El Paso/TransPecos Zone with 50,000 acres ended up with cumulative of 3.7 applications for zone with most treatments in the TransPecos area. Very low populations were found at El Paso. They pulled 8,800 but bolls did not find any boll weevils. They suspect movement in from the Presidio area.

Permian Basin Zone or the Lamesa, TX area contains 720,000 acres. During the trapping period it averaged 11.3 weevils/trap. The Foundation treated 5.4 million acres = 7.7 applications/acre.

A damage (squares/bolls) survey was conducted during the last 3 years in late season. Ten fields were randomly selected in each county and 50 squares/bolls were pulled.

Damage levels found in late season bolls
 

Location	% Da. bolls	Active eradication
N.W. High Plains	17.4	No
N. High Plains	79.2	No
Caprock	72.8	No
W. High Plains	29.4	Yes
Permian Basin	21.3	Yes
St. Lawrence	5.1	No but own Diapause for 30 years
Rolling Plains Central	0.2	Yes
S. Rolling Plains	0.0	Yes
N. Rolling Plains	25.8	Yes

In summary Kiser said that in 1999 there were 3.576 million acres in the Texas program. They had 307 full time employees with 39 field offices and treated 21.9 million cumulative cotton acres.

Dale Spurgeon asked how much acreage remaining would be added if other areas voted to initiate eradication. Kiser responded that they are currently loaded and expected only small additions of a few counties/fields adjoining active programs in 2000 where it would make biological sense to reduce sprays in active zones. He does not expect additions until 2001.

Jim Leser reviewed data on temperatures in ground leaf litter on high plains in 1999-2000.

Location	Days abient temp below freezing	Days leaf litter below freezing	Weevil survival %*
Lubbock	41	0	45
Seminole	48	5	19
N. Lubbock	53	13	43

* Mortality mostly due to dryness of leaf litter

* Average survival over the years has been 5-10% but it has been much higher with recent warm winters.

* 5 cages were dug up every 3 weeks to examine boll weevils placed there after feeding adults for 3 weeks.

A brief report of the situation in New Mexico was given by Jane Pierce. The first program was initiated 2 years ago in northwest part of the state near Arizona but never had reproducing populations. The Mesilla Valley program was initiated about 1.5 years ago and is progressing nicely. Pecos Valley just passed referendum with 95% favorable vote; 66% of total acreage in region must be in favor for approval. Areas bordering Texas have requested a referendum in some counties. Cotton acreage in urban areas presents a significant problem. Weevil survival best near urban areas. Las Cruces and Carlsbad have the most significant problem. They have done some work on a remote control helicopter to treat urban fields and tried some mircoencapsulated malathion in an effort to extend residual activity on weevil. A New Mexico Cotton Growers Organization was formed two years ago and they have a Foundation Structure. Operationally, each area may conduct its own program. Jim Leser mentioned that 14,000 acres were sprayed by Texas Program in Lee County, New Mexico.

Jerry Cockley, Oklahoma, provided highlights of their program. Fields received an average of 1.65 treatments in 1999. Weevil numbers were very low in north central region. They have spent 66% of money of a 5 year budget in first two years of operation. The state provided $3.5 million, bond issue raised $5 million, producers accessed $1.47 million. Kansas traps caught no weevils in 1999 but traps may have been taken up too soon.

Program Operations/Guidelines - Ron Seward

Ron Seward, TN, opened the session to stimulate comments dealing with questions of trap density, treatment decision rules, trap triggers in transition zones, stalk destruction, diapause treatment termination rules and modifications due to secondary pest outbreaks. Could techniques be standardized in some cases? He raised concern about reduction of trap density in open vrs near habitat areas.

D. Hardee felt we have had overkill in trap density in early programs. If there is a budget problem then money could be saved on trapping during 1^st year or two of program. Hardee expects to research trap density: 175 ft baited every 2 weeks, 350 ft apart baited each week and 350 ft baited every two weeks. Pheromone does not last two weeks because he gets increased trap catch as soon as trap pheromone is changed. He further stated that it was most noticed in summer weather.

Gerald McKibben said he was not comfortable with 350 ft spacing (reducing density) but by changing pheromone every week he felt that they might not lose efficiency. In the North Carolina BWE program traps were deployed at 1/acre and in that case it was about one/100 ft. If greater spacing is not working he believes they will detect that quick enough not to jeopardize the program. The Technical Advisory Committee is trying to find ways to save money. Early in programs he did not have much concern but as programs progress he expressed concern with lower trap density. He believes traps play a major role in removing low level weevil populations.

Osama El-Lissy noted that the Texas program utilizes about 1 trap/5 acres (note field sizes are many fold larger than in the southeastern U.S.). Spacing about 350-530 ft apart away from O.W. habitat but 150 ft near habitat.

El-Lissy asked McKibben if he thought there was any relationship between trap and density threshold....or is there a relationship between trapping density and the threshold that is being used for treatment? How does that relate to relative detection of whatever population density is present in the field to which we are reacting?

McKibben: No, we hope the proposed test will provide an answer. Hypothesis is that reduced spacing with more pheromone will provide same number of weevils captured/acre.

El-Lissy further asked if Joe Leggett did work in 1984-85 comparing 1 and 5 acres per trap? Much discussion continued about trap density and their usefulness beyond simple detection to know what fields to treat.

R. Seward said that weevil numbers, due to mild winters, had far exceeded budgeted number of applications for areas as a whole i.e. 20 applications put on in 1998-99 and only had 17 in budget for 5 years.

R. Seward asked when fall programs could be stopped?

Group response: Treatments should end in fall when no more hostable fruit is available.

The trapping process is critical and could be a weak link. Things to improve trapping include bar code readers, quality control and training of people. Fields simply do not need to be sprayed if no hostable fruit is available.

Under heavy weevil pressure Hardee said that treatment intervals need to be reduced to 4-5 days. Further, under heavy population numbers, numerous applications would be required before noticeable progress could be detected.

Although ULV malathion will kill some percentage of weevil for a week (without rainfall on field) intervals/need to be reduced to kill enough to reduce long term population numbers.

B. Grefenstette commented on basis for 7-day treatment schedule with ULV malathion which provides 3-4 days with up to 80% control, unless rained off. If a fields is treated today anything emerging in 3 days we have a good chance of killing. By day 4, anything emerging has to feed for 3-4 days before any eggs are laid which gets one back around to treatments on 7-day schedule. This is the basis of 7-day schedule and he expressed confidence as long as good coverage with malathion is achieved.

Group response: If one treats 13 times in 15 weeks and still has large numbers of weevils, problems could exist with trapping, quality of applications or skip in scheduled treatments. Rainfall could also cause problems and some researchers have not achieved the long term mortality from ULV malathion.

Mist blowers must be used to assist in coverage. There is a general feeling that mist blowers were not utilized correctly.

February 8

General Discussion

Dick Hardee requested that next year we include discussion on secondary pests that may increase as a result of BWE spraying or become more of a problem in areas where boll weevils have been eradicated.

Gus Lorenz, Arkansas, agreed to serve as secretary for 2001. The 2001 meeting will be in Little Rock, Arkansas. Jim Harper again suggested that we include additional discussion on cotton insect management beyond BWE.

Others desired that we consider quarantine questions.

Consensus of the group was that we continue two half day programs. Some said a March date would be better but late February was also OK.

Charles Allen said we should continue to exchange information from various areas on BWE techniques, procedures etc.

Motion was made by Dick Hardee that 1999 meeting minutes be accepted. Charles Allen seconded the motion.

Boll Weevil Research Review - Dick Hardee, Moderator

John Westbrook, Meteorologist, USDA, College Station. Studies involve emergence and movement of boll weevils that overwinter. An area for study was selected along the Brazos River in Central Texas. Twenty emergence cages were deployed with devices to measure air and leaf litter temperature along with humidity. Cages were seeded with 25 male and 25 female boll weevils of known age that were reared on a diapausing inducing diet. Cages are also deployed in greenhouses of varying temperatures regimes. Cages are inspected on a daily basis. So far no emergence has occurred.

The second project involves a study of late season dispersal of boll weevils, i.e. movement of weevils out of late season crops into non-cultivated areas. The test is located in an area 9 miles from nearest cotton. There as a positive relationship between the portion of a day that weevils traveled toward a particular heading. He has captured marked weevils up to 11 miles. Maximum duration after release was 35 days. Plans are to work with Tom Sappington, Weslaco, on this project to investigate electronic means of detection.

The third project will be seasonal pattern of boll weevil movement relative to habitat proximity.

Gretchen Jones, USDA, College Station, reported on boll weevil foraging resources. How much actual foraging occurs is unknown, therefore feeding tests were conducted using boll weevils captured in pheromone traps. Test weevils were starved 50-58 hours with control weevils to see if any pollen was in the gut. Five plant taxa were used and cotton served as a standard. She dissected 700 weevils.

Questions: How long do boll weevil live after feeding on these various sources especially from coharts of weevils emerging from squares. She plans to examine life length.

Dale Spurgeon pointed out that it was one thing to feed weevils pollen in a cage compared with what happens in nature, i.e. weevils might have a much more difficult time under field conditions.

Clint Hoffman reported on three studies. (1) Studies with electrostatic sprayer comparing EC and ULV malathion showed initial mortality of boll weevil to be greater with the EC formulation however at 3 and 6 days later EC formulation had lower mortality. Fipronil applied with electrostatic sprayer showed favorable mortality at day 0 and 3 DAT. Results were not favorable with fipronil oil. They also examined reduced rates of malathion as a potential way to reduce cost. He compared 12 oz ULV with a mixture of 6 oz of malathion + 6 oz of oil but results were not favorable. They examined ways to reduce ULV malathion degradation by adding UV protectants. Congo red extended ULV malathion residual and he hopes to conduct field studies. Future plans involve (1) developing nozzle classification models to aid aerial applicators in selecting equipment, (2) swath width work to better define effective swaths, and (3) spray mix additives, equipment for attracticide baits and plant deposition work.

Bill Grefenstette asked fi the congo red would be noticable in an application. Hoffmann replied that he did not know at this point.

Al Brashear asked about the work with fipronil as to spray volumes applied. Hoffman responded that fipronil + oil = 16 oz/acre, fipronil water = 128 oz/acre compared with standard ULV malthion.

Ken Beerwinkle reported on 3 areas of study to include (1) synthetic attractants to cotton fleahopper since the insect prefers wild host plants over cotton, (2) use of electronic sensors with boll weevil pheromone traps to study weather parameters effecting weevil response to traps and (3) examining possibility of using plants other than cotton as a trap crop by placing pheromone (soybeans and corn mentioned).

Charles Suh just joined USDA-ARS a few months ago and he reported on his research plans: (1) deposition of aerial applied malathion on squares, leaves and bolls and relate it to efficacy, (2) what are the pheromone traps telling us with traps placed in, near and away from fields. He also plans to examine reproductive morphology of trapped and field collected bw., (3) examine response of bw in an olfactometer (how sex, age, feeding or reproductive status affects their response to pheromone and response to fruit). (4) Work with Dale Spurgeon on reproductive dormancy determination.

Allen Showler, USDA, ARS, just moved to Weslaco. He outlined areas of work to include (1) population development and host plant stress, (2) overwintering and alternate hosts, (3) boll weevil population dynamics in various tillage systems (more b.w. emerging in Dec. and Jan form minimum and no-till fields compared with conventionally tilled fields), (4) examination of early season treatments for boll weevils with Leverage and (5) survival of boll weevils on bolls in soil and its importance.

Dale Spurgeon indicated that boll weevils emerged from bolls after 6 months. In the Lower Rio Grande Valley this entire area of study is needed. Live cotton plants are present there every month of the year.

Ron Seward stated that freezes usually took care of bw inside bolls or just under the soil surface. Very little frozen ground occurs in Texas. Roy Parker asked why they chose Leverage for overwintered bw. The response was that farm managers wanted it for fleahopper control. Vydate was not the material of choice by farm managers. Charles Allen asked about effectiveness of ULV malathion on fleahopper. There was disagreement on its effectiveness on fleahopper. Allen said it as fairly effective on tarnished plant bugs.

S.M. Greenberg, USDA, ARS, Weslaco is conducting studies in the following areas: (1) effects of defoliants on bw, (2) Harmony Extra (herbicide) + Karate, (3) dispersal, (4) study of overwintered bw collected from traps by feeding them for 14 days and placing them into groups in controlled and uncontrolled conditions to examine reproductive potential, (5) study effects of tillage and other cultural practices on population dynamics of pests and beneficials and (6) evaluation of host effects on beet armyworm reproduction, damage, habitats, developmental times and net reproductive rates.

Tom Sappington, USDA, ARS, Weslaco, reported on 1999 work at Weslaco. (1) He is studying sources of variation of bw to pheromone traps. He studied the effects of wind and found negative relationship with increasing wind speed and trap captures (weevils are not strong fliers). Positioning of traps on leeward side of tree line results in 2.5 times more trap captures in moderate winds and up to 4-5 times more in higher winds. Implication is that by taking this information into account would explain variations. Also in maintenance areas or areas of very low bw selective placement of traps would improve trap efficiency (Increase probability of bw capture by 3 fold). They are using traps that record the time that weevils enter traps and relate it to microclimate. (2) Organic farmers in west Texas are looking for alternatives to malathion such as Diatect II (DE + pyrethrins). They found that 4 hrs after treatment a slight reduction in bw compared to the controls. By 24 hours Guthion was superior. They found that the Diatect II did not kill bw but was somewhat of a repellant. (3) Evaluation of late season trap crop with pheromone indicated that a significant proportion of the bw may leave the trap crop every 24 hours. He plans to continue this work. (4) Experiments are underway on ways to mass mark bw that would not affect their behavior. He hopes to be able to age bw. The ultimate goal is to use a quick Elissa type field test. (5) They found that beet armyworms emerge with about 90% of their egg complement and that in cotton most egg masses are placed in the top canopy of plants.

Dale Spurgeon, USDA, ARS, College Station. (1) He studied edge effects on number of boll weevils and really did not find a significant edge effect, i.e. they were not confined along field edges. This work will continue. Just at matchhead square stage there is a big movement into cotton. (2) They studied survival of bw larvae at various weights to find which ones could reach the adult stage. None less than 5 mg survived but 86% of the 3^rd instar larvae that reached 34 mg survived to an adult. They hope to relate the data to square size. He has reared bw from very small squares. (3) He is working to improve trap design but so for little progress. (4) Work continues on pheromone production from individual bw. About 94% of the total pheromone detected was in the head-space. The plan is to study effects of age, physiological status and diet on pheromone production. The feeding regime is the main thing controlling diapause. In comparison of squares of less than 7mm in diameter with larger squares as a food source, much higher reproduction occurred when bw were fed squares less than 7mm. Small squares did terminate diapause quicker.

Tom Plato reported on BWACT studies in Paraguay. After BWACT's used there was reduction in bw numbers. Currently about 100% acres (500-600 thousand) are using BWACT. Insecticide applications greatly reduced. They used one installation at planting and one at stalk destruction.

Jim Plato reported on development of a more user friendly trap. The trap utilizes a twist lock, center hole, locking device, polypropylene cone, tie down for stakes, step design in capture cylinder to view bw easier and a pheromone/insecticide holder. Cost may be about $0.95 each.

Bill Grefenstette discussed sensitive areas as related to very small fields in towns in New Mexico and development of a remote control helicopter for application of ULV malathion. Initial concern was whether they could get system down to 12 oz/acre and correct droplet size at a 17 mph operating speed. They were able to maintain operating speed. They hope to use a 30 ft working swath. It carries a 5 gallon payload. They are encouraged at this point. Cost would be $80,000 but may rent at $350/hour with minimum of 10 hours of work/week. It appears to be stable in winds under bwe requirements.

Jane Pierce, New Mexico, briefly reported on studies with encapsulated malathion. Additional information will appear in the 2000 proceedings - Beltwide Cotton Conferences. She is interested in testing different formulations. In the 1999 test residual activity was recorded up to 14 DAT. It did take longer to see initial activity. They were testing 10 oz/acre.

Joe Mulrooney, USDA, examined malathion in cottonseed oil at various ratios (mal/CSO) at 6:26, 6:10, 8:8 and 10:0. ULV malathion gave greater residual control. Malathion accumulated on leaf surface with each application until a light rainfall event. It may not be necessary to treat as often if it remains dry but how to judge this is not known. It would work best after plant development is complete. They are working with mist blower to determine effective swath width. Swath width was about 18 rows but wind speed effects swath and reduces it to 10-12 rows. Distribution was improved with a 36-inch height.

Bill McGovern examined ways to reduce destruction of honey bees. The bees feed in flowers and on nectar on underside leaves. If bees are in area it is best to treat in late afternoon especially at peak bloom. After cutout the problem is not as bad. Bees can compensate but they cannot stand massive kills. Treatment in morning creates more bee kill.

Eric Villavaso, USDA, conducted an attractiveness test using Cyrene (Last Call) + boll weevil pheromone. The 10 mg Hercon dispenser caught 60% more bw than the pheromone + Last Call. Bait stick work indicated reduced weevil mortality on aged sticks or on sticks where certain amounts were washed off. Some sticks killed out to 5-6 weeks others much shorter time. Gast reared bw were used for testing. One problem is lack of adequate of malathion coming to the surface.

Gerald McKibben reported that bw attracting compounds were found in many green plants. Several commercially available compounds have been shown to give a significant increase to boll weevil response to grandlure. They can be used to provide a more potent lure for traps.

Tina Montemayor, University Texas, reported on work on reproductive physiology, diapause and migration. They are cooperating with a number of bw researchers. She conducts basic physiology work with the endocrine system, especially with JH. How do shifts in activity relate to habits such as dispersal, migration, flight etc. They hope to use molecular markers to study dispersal and various populations.

Osama El-Lissy provided an update on the malathion EPA review. EPA is considering changing the cancer ratings for all compounds whether they are natural or synthetic. The proposed ratings will be:

1 = Likely to be a human carcinogen

2 = Suggested to be carcinogenic but not sufficient evidence to suggest human carcinogen.

3 = Inadequate data for assessment of human carcinogenic potential

4 = not likely to be a carcinogen

Malathion may be placed between 3 and 4.

Ron Seward closed the conference at 11:55 a.m.

Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Florida and Central Tennessee all were absent of reproductive weevil populations during the 1999 season. Virginia and Florida detected no weevils at all.

In Georgia, the Crisp County and Hart County reinfestations zeroed out at season's end. In Alabama, reinfestations were found in Talledega and Conecuh Counties, as well as migrating weevils primarily in the northwestern counties.

The third year east Mississippi program area made significant progress towards weevil eradication, as year-end populations peaked at 30 weevils trapped weekly per 100 cotton acres. The central area, while at a lower weevil level compared to the previous season, continued to receive heavy weevil migration from the North Delta.

The second year South Delta area recorded extremely low weevil levels both throughout the season and at year's end. The peak fall trap captures there were at 8 weevils per 100 acres trapped weekly.

The second season Southwest Tennessee area remains a buffer zone as trap catches peaked there at 4 weevils per weekly trapped cotton acre. The current plans are to expand the program into the Northwest Tennessee counties in 2000, which will begin to dampen weevil migration into southwest Tennessee.

The first season's expansion effort into the Mississippi North Delta was very successful with both timely insecticide applications and early cotton stalk destruction being accomplished.
 

1999 SEBWEP STATISTICS
Areas	Estimated Acres	Total Weevils Trapped	No. or % or Reproductive Fields (estimated)	No. or % of Fields Sprayed	No. of Sprays - Cumulative Total
Virginia	109,771	0	0	0	0
North Carolina	860,949	4	0	0	0
South Carolina	325,903	3	0	1	510 acres
Georgia	1,448,357	3,176	2	102 Fields	26,626
Florida	105,678	0	0	0	0
Alabama	564,776	5,073	26 Fields	2%	89,674 Acres
Tennessee Central Southwest	177,501 14,800 162,701	22  4,628,550	0  >95%	17 Fields  100%	1,197 Acres  9.7
Mississippi East Central South Delta North Delta	1,171,715 74,097 380,441 189,026 528,151	143,527  1,979,135 390,140 N/A	N/A  N/A N/A >99%	N/A  N/A N/A >100%	6.4  8.3 7.9 8.6