Where do I find...?

I began this blog as an extension tool, a resource that would help me quickly reach a wide range of stakeholders including extension agents, growers, gardeners, and others I couldn't even imagine at the time.  My rule of thumb has been, if I am asked or emailed a question twice, I write a blog post on it because there are probably lots more where that came from.

There's one question, however, that I get asked on a daily basis that hasn't gotten its own post...yet.  In fact, I was asked this question twice already this morning! "Where do I find...?"  I have a tried and true set of resources that I used to answer the many "where do I find's", many of which have been listed in separate blog posts.  Here's a quick compendium of the most common questions and some of the resources I use.

Where do I find my county extension agent?

I refrain from making specific management recommendations in blog posts because these will vary for each grower or gardener.  I often refer readers to their county extension agent or request they contact me directly, but what if you don't know who your county agent is?

If you are in North Carolina

You can find your county center here.  Your county center's webpage will list their contact information and staff.  Many counties have more than one person who handles pest management issues depending on the plant, or in some cases, animal in question.  The staff page of each county center's website lists the specialties of all their agents.

If you are not in North Carolina

eXtension.org is a national extension effort involving all land grant universities (the large, public universities with the Agriculture and Engineering colleges, where extension efforts are headquartered).  When you navigate to the eXtension site, the nearest landgrant university (based on your IP address) will be listed. Clicking on this link will take you to extension resources for your state.

What insect pests can I expect on my blueberries/blackberries/grapes/strawberries/etc?

If you are in North Carolina

You've already found this blog, which has lots of information on pests present on small fruit and speciality crops (use the labels on the right hand side to navigate through topic areas or just search).  The NC Market Ready Team at the NC Research Campus near Kannapolis, NC has also assembled information portals for several small fruit crops including strawberries, caneberries, muscadine grapes, and blueberries.  My information is linked through these portals, but new information is still posted here exclusively.

If you are in the southeast

Another great regional resource is the Southern Region Small Consortium (SRSFC).  Their site contains information from their annual extension agent training sessions and crop specific production information.

If you are not in the southeast

Pest populations very widely between regions in the United States.  Blueberries grown in North Carolina will have a very different pest complex than those grown in Michigan, for example.  It's important that you identify your nearest land grant university (again, eXtension.org is a nice resource for this) and determine if they have the resources you need.  I often use the UC Statewide IPM program site for west coast pest management questions, the Michigan State University IPM site for midwestern issues, and New York State IPM site for New England and mid Atlantic information.  There are many other good sites, and when it comes to pest information, in general, local is better.

What is the bug I found on my blueberries/blackberries/grapes/strawberries/etc?

If you are in North Carolina

The Plant Disease and Insect Clinic at North Carolina State University provides both plant disease diagnostic and insect identification services.  This a fee based service, with lower fees for NC residents.  The agents at the Jones County Center have put together a great video describing how to collect a plant or insect sample for diagnosis.
 
I would add that if you are collecting a plant sample alone, these often are better preserved in a paper bag or cardboard container. If you are collecting an insect sample, a solid plastic container (not a plastic bag) is a better choice.  Some insects can chew their way out a paper bag but condensation inside of a plastic bag can damage samples.

If you are not in North Carolina

If the insect you found in your plants doesn't match the pest descriptions at any of the sites above, the internet is full of relatively good insect identification tools.  Two that I particularly like are BugGuide (which takes a little insect background to use really well) and the appropriately named What's That Bug?  This are both good tools if you don't have a clue what your critter is.  If you know what you found it on and what life stage it is, searching "blueberry caterpillar" for example, will often get you to your answer in a few clicks.
Update, June 2012
I've posted links to resources that describe how to take photos and collect samples of insects for diagnosis here. 

What can use to manage pests in my blueberries/blackberries/grapes/strawberries/etc?

"What do I spray to control..." is one of the most common questions I am asked.  I contribute to several North Carolina and regional resources which provide management recommendations for common insect pests of small fruits and specialty crops.

If you are in North Carolina

The North Carolina Agricultural Chemical Manual lists all recommended pesticides for management of common pests for nearly all crops grown in the state, not just small fruits.  This reference is updated annually.  In the next several years, we will be developing this resource into a more easily searchable tool.  The NC Agricultural Chemicals Manual generally only lists recommended management tools, which means that it may not include some materials are labeled on a crop but are not necessarily recommended.  To find all pesticides that are registered in a crop in North Carolina, you can search the North Carolina Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services pesticide database.

If you are in the southeast

The SRSFC publishes integrated pest management (IPM) guides for the small fruit crops grown throughout the region.  I prefer these guides to the NC Agricultural Chemical Manual because they contain much more information on pest biology and cover a broader area.

If you are not in the southeast

There are several online services that will search all registered pesticides on a specific crop.  My preferred site is Agrian's Label Lookup.  Using the advanced search function, you can specify your state and crop.  You can also search based on pest, but I haven't found this to be as useful.

Where can I find insect monitoring tools?

I purchase insect monitoring traps and lures from a number of sources, and by listing these here, I am not endorsing these specific vendors over others.  Great Lakes IPM carries a wide range of traps, monitoring supplies, and lures (pheromones and others). Suterra has a range of pheromone lures and traps as well as mating disruption based management tools.  ISCA Techonologies and Contech Enterprises, Inc. also carry many pheromone products and related traps.  

If you are interested in general insect collecting and curation supplies, Carolina Biological and BioQuip both carry the materials you'll need to get started.

Where can I find biological control agents?

Much as for insect monitoring tools, I am not specifically endorsing these suppliers of biological control agents.  Before purchasing any live insect or other biological control agent, be sure that it can be shipped to your state.  I have purchased biological control agents from both Rincon-Vitova (who also carry some insect sampling and monitoring tools) and from Koppert.  Koppert is in the eastern US (MI) and Rincon-Vitova in the west (CA), which may factor into your choices.  Consult with your local experts about which predators are more likely to be effective in your area and crops. 

This is far from an exhaustive list of questions and answers, and I will continue to add to it as I receive more "where do I find...?" questions.  Keep 'em coming!

Larvae in fruit: distinguishing between spotted wing drosophila and other internally feeding fruit pests

It finally feels like winter in North Carolina, which may seem like a strange time to talk about pest of ripe fruit.  However, this morning I answer what I expect to be the first several questions from a homeowner who had "lots of maggots" (we prefer to use the term larvae here) in their fruit last summer and wanted to be prevent the same issue from occurring this year.  In this case, the homeowner was growing blueberries and was searching for tools to monitor and manage blueberry maggot.

Before 2010, it would be reasonable to assume that blueberry maggot (Rhagoletis mendax) larvae would be the most likely insect to be present in infested ripe blueberries grown in North Carolina.  However, the establishment of spotted wing drosophila (SWD) throughout the eastern US means that it is no longer safe to assume that fly larvae found in blueberries (or blackberries, raspberries, strawberries and other soft skinned fruit) are native insects and not SWD.  It is important to correctly identify which pests are present in commercially or home grown fruit because the management strategies for pest species will differ.  If you suspect that you have either of these insects in your fruit, contact your county cooperative extension agent or myself. 

I posted this summer about insects that might be present in "funny looking" blueberries and included information and links about two caterpillar pests of blueberries, cranberry and cherry fruitworms.  I'm not going to review the distinctions between these pests and fly larvae except to reiterate that if a larvae has legs (even if they are tiny), it is not one of our fly pests.

In order to determine if you have fly larvae present in your fruit, collect a minimum of 30 ripe, sound fruit.  If you are growing more than one variety or species of fruit, collect a separate sample from each.  It is essential that only sound fruit be sampled. If you would not eat a fruit, don't sample it!  Lots of non pest insects will feed on overripe, damaged, or rotting fruit, and sampling this fruit may lead you to conclude that you have a problem when you actually do not.  You should never make management decisions based on a crop you wouldn't eat or sell.

Once you have collected your sample, there are several ways you can determine whether the fruit are infested.  These include simply dissecting or crushing the fruit and looking for live larvae.  If you have a relatively small number of samples and good eyes (or a hand lens), this is the easiest method.  However, fruit dissection can be time consuming when you have a large number of samples, and it is possible to miss larvae if you do not look carefully. SWD researchers at Oregon State University have posted a video detailing the fruit dunk sampling method here. This method involve freezing the samples, which causing larvae to exit fruit and then floating the frozen fruit away from the larvae, which can be observed in the bottom of your container.  Finally, salt or sugar solutions can be poured over gently crushed fruit, which encourages the larvae to exit.  When conducted in over a dark surface, it's easy to see larvae moving.  Protect US, an invasive species detection and monitoring program headquartered out of the University of Florida, has a posted videos describing the salt and sugar tests here.

All of these tests will help you determine if you have larvae in your sample but not what the larvae are. If you find fly larvae in sound, otherwise harvestable blueberries, they are most likely either blueberry maggot or SWD.  These two different pests can be distinguished from one and other based on shape and size.  Shape is the most reliable differentiator between these two pests.  Blueberry maggot larvae are "carrot-shaped". Their head end, with dark mouth parts often visible, is tapered to a point and their rear end, with six, light brown spiracles (breathing holes; in two rows of three) is flattened. Larvae of all Drosophila spp., including SWD, are tapered on both ends, with their breathing tubes coming to a point at their rear end.

Larva of "true" fruit flies (Tephritids), which include the blueberry maggot fly, cherry fruit fly, and many others (top); larva of "vinegar flies" (Drosophilids), which include spotted wing drosophila and many native species (bottom). 

SWD and blueberry maggot larvae may also be distinguished by size.  A full grown blueberry maggot larva will be roughly twice as large as a full grown drosophila larva.  However, a middle aged blueberry maggot larva will be similar in size to a SWD larva, so shape is a more reliable tool.

Spotted wing drosophila larvae in ripe yellow raspberry, a closer detail in upper left hand corner. Photo: HJB

Blueberry maggot larva inside a blueberry.  Note that the larva is in motion and not always curled in a c-shape. Photo: Shawn Banks, Johnston County Cooperative Extension.

You can trap adult blueberry maggot and SWD as well.  If you are trapping before fruit are ripe, catching adults may provide you with a warning that these insects are present before you find larvae in fruit.  I provided DIY instructions for blueberry maggot and SWD trapping last summer.


More information
Do it yourself - Spotted wing drosophila monitoring
Do it yourself - Blueberry maggot monitoring
Protect US - YouTube Channel
Oregon State University Spotted Wing Drosophila Site
Michigan State University Spotted Wing Drosophila Site

National Institute of Food and Agriculture Listening Session

The way we nationally fund agricultural science has changed dramatically in the last five years.  Perhaps the most notable and impactful change has been the move away from long-term dedicated funding for research and extension programs (such as regional integrated pest management (IPM) centers) and the move toward large multi state, multi disciplinary grants.  While neither of these may sound dramatic on their own, the effect has been to reduce support for research and extension infrastructure, things that are difficult to fund with grants.  These changes have also made it more difficult, in some cases, to fund promising preliminary research and for scientists to explore new fields, since its difficult to compete for huge grants without an abundance of background information.  Some positive results have come from recent changes to USDA funding as well, including the increased availability of funding for specialty crops (also known as "minor" crops) which are essentially anything other than large commodity crops (corn, soybeans, wheat, etc.).  Much of my work on blackberries, raspberries, hops, and blueberries has been supported by these funds.

The National Institue of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) has scheduled a listening session to solicit public comments for use in crafting future grant requests for February 22nd at the Waterfront Center in Washington, DC.  Stakeholders who use and conduct research, extension, or education activities are invited and encouraged to attend.  If you're reading this blog, that includes you!  You can find meeting details and registration information here.  In addition to this in person meeting, at least seven webinars will be held for stakeholders unable to come to Washington.  Watch the NIFA website for more information.

This is an important opportunity for stakeholder feedback and has the potential to directly impact how we support agriculture in the future.

Spotted wing drosophila stakeholder survey results

After a quiet month on the posting front, I'm back! I have been working on a large grant proposal in cooperation with several other entomologists, horticulturists, and economists to study the biology, ecology, and management of spotted wing drosophila (SWD) in the eastern United States. I asked for your help in crafting our objectives for this proposal by completing an online survey during November 2011, and your response was outstanding!  We received 274 responses to our online survey and 45 responses from an in-person facilitated stakeholder training in New Jersey (one of our cooperating states).  Your responses were used to craft our research objectives, and the proposal was successfully submitted this past Tuesday, January 31.

I am sharing the results of this survey so you can see what were considered high priority SWD research and education areas and how we used this information to craft our objectives.

How did we get the word out?
We distributed links to the survey via email to county extension agents, grower associations, and regional listserves.  I also asked for your input here.  All questions were voluntary, and responses were anonymous. 

What did we ask?
We collected minimal demographic information (age, sex, state of residence, size of farm, and profession) to help us in interpreting responses.  We also asked what small fruit crops were grown on respondents' farms and how they preferred to receive education and outreach information.

Next, we asked respondents to rank 40 possible research and extension activities on a 1 to 10 scale, with 1 least important and 10 most important.  We then averaged rankings by the number of responses for and compared rankings across farm size and profession.


Who responded to the survey?
Responses were evenly spread over our target study areas with 14 respondents either declining to provide their state of residence or living outside of the eastern US. Fifty five of the online respondents were female, while 216 were male and two declined to provide their gender.  

Number of online survey responses from eastern US regions.

Only one respondent was less than 25, while the largest number of responses were from those 45 to 65 years old.

Age distribution of online survey participants. 

We specifically targeted blueberry and caneberry (blackberry and raspberry) growers, the crops which have experienced the most SWD damage in the eastern US, but respondents also grew a wide range of other crops including: apples, cherries, currents, elderberry, figs, grapes, gooseberries, peaches, persimmons, pears, plums, and strawberries.

What SWD research and extension activities did respondents consider most and least important?
We calculated rankings for research and extension activities for all respondents and for subsets of respondents based on farm size and profession.

All responses
When we grouped all the responses together, the top and bottom five activities were:
Top Five Activities
1. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (rating: 8.94)
2. Insecticide residual activity against SWD (8.91)
3. Insecticide residues & time from harvest to meet maximum residue levels (MRLs) (8.75)
4. Online management guides (8.74)
5. Identification of native natural enemies (8.64)
Bottom Five Activities
36. Association with wild hosts (6.90)
37. Sprayer performance comparisons (6.81)
38. Insecticide implications for export markets (5.43)
39. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (5.12)
40. Management in tunnel systems (4.77)

Small sized growers
We received 80 responses from fruit farms smaller than 10 acres, and when these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:
Top Five Activities

1. Online management guides (8.90)

2. Identification of native natural enemies (8.87)

3. Insecticide residues & time from harvest to meet maximum residue levels (MRLs) (8.84)

4. Insecticide effects on natural enemies and/or pollinators (8.47)

5. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (8.70)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Association with wild hosts (7.04)

37. Sprayer performance comparisons (6.86)

38. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (5.20)

39. Management in tunnel systems (4.04)

40. Insecticide implications for export markets (4.01)

Medium sized growers

We received 55 responses from fruit farms ranging from 10 to 50 acres, and when these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:

Top Five Activities

1. Insecticide residual activity against SWD (9.07)

2. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (9.04)

3. Insecticide residues & time from harvest to meet maximum residue levels (MRLs) (8.87)

4. Management in open fields (8.80)

5. Online management guides (8.53)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Effects of irrigation & water management on SWD (6.37)

37. Association with wild hosts (6.32)

38. Insecticide implications for export markets (5.02)

39. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (4.42)

40. Management in tunnel systems (4.14)

Large sized growers

We received 27 responses from fruit farms ranging from 50 to 100 acres, and when these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:

Top Five Activities

1. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (9.43)

2. Insecticide residual activity against SWD (9.31)

3. Insecticide residues & time from harvest to meet maximum residue levels (MRLs) (9.15)

4. Insecticide effects on natural enemies and/pollinators (9.12)

5. Integration with current integrated pest management and/or brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB) management (9.08)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Effects of irrigation & water management on SWD (6.77)

37. Insecticide implications for export markets (6.67)

38. Association with wild hosts (6.35)

39. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (5.71)

40. Management in tunnel systems (4.00)

Very large sized growers

We received 34 responses from fruit farms larger than 100 acres, and when these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:

Top Five Activities

1. Insecticide residual activity against SWD (9.44)

2. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (9.41)

3. Insecticide residues & time from harvest to meet maximum residue levels (MRLs) (8.94)

4. Identification of native natural enemies (8.77)

5. Insecticide effects on natural enemies and/or pollinators (8.71)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Sprayer performance comparisons (6.76)

37. Insecticide implications for export markets (6.71)

38. Effects of irrigation & water management on SWD (6.59)

39. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (5.26)

40. Management in tunnel systems (3.94)

Agricultural professionals 

We received 59 responses from cooperative extension agents, crop consultants, regulators, university researchers, and graduate students.  When these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:

Top Five Activities

1. Insecticide efficacy against SWD (9.27)

2. Insecticide residual activity against SWD (9.21)

3. Management in open fields (9.07)

4. Online management guides (8.72)

5. Host preference (8.57)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Sprayer performance comparisons (6.96)

37. Effects of irrigation & water management on SWD (6.95)

38. Management in tunnel systems (6.67)

39. Insecticide implications for export markets (6.04)

40. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (5.36)

General public 

Finally, we received 16 responses from master gardeners, homeowners, and other members of the general public.  When these were grouped together, the highest and lowest ranked responses were:

Top Five Activities

1. Insecticide effects on natural enemies and/or pollinators (9.50)

2. Biological control (9.27)

3. Identification of native natural enemies (9.13)

4. Cultural/non chemical management tools (9.00)

5. Integration with current integrated pest management (IPM) and/or brown marmorated stink bug (BMSB) management (8.71)

Bottom Five Activities

36. Degree-day models (6.20)

37. Management in tunnel systems (6.15)

38. Sprayer performance comparisons (6.14)

39. Novel pesticide strategies such as chemigation, pesticide combinations, and/or synergists (5.46)

40. Off line (hard copy) trap capture reports (4.67)

How did respondents want to receive research and educational information?
Perhaps not surprisingly, respondents to the online survey preferred online information delivery tools. However, this presumably web savvy audience also exhibited a strong preference for hands on workshops, in person presentations, and extension publications very highly, suggesting that duel delivery modes for extension and education information would be desirable.

Research and extension delivery methods preferred by online survey respondents.

How will you use these results?
As suggested by delivery method preferences, hard copy monitoring information ranked low across all groups as did management strategies focused on high tunnel production.  The uniformly low ranking for management in high tunnel systems suggests that research and extension efforts focused on these systems are not necessary at this time.  Preliminary observations from North Carolina in 2010 and 2011 also suggest that SWD damage may be lower in caneberries grown in tunnels than in caneberries grown outside.

Management strategies with the potential for short-term results and implementation ranked highly when all responses were considered and among commercial fruit growers regardless of size.  These included Insecticide efficacy, Insecticide residual activity, and Insecticide residues necessary to meet maximum residue levels. Small growers (0-10 acres) and very large growers (100 acres or more) also ranked identification of natural enemies in their top four activities but had little interest in identification of foreign natural enemies. We did not ask stakeholders to prioritize international exploration and importation for foreign natural enemies, only identification, and it is possible that these other activities would be more appealing.


When members of the general public were considered separately from growers and agricultural professionals, potential non target impacts of pesticides (Insecticide effects on natural enemies/pollinators) and non chemical management strategies (Identification of native natural enemies, Biological control, and Cultural/non chemical control) ranked highly.  The priority differences between the public and agricultural stakeholders are among the most interesting results of this survey. While our public sample size is small, it is notable that this group was clearly concerned about the potential impacts of increased pesticide use due to SWD.   


We used these results to craft our proposal objectives, specifically:
1. Landscape, alternative host, species, and variety risk assessment
2. Optimize adult and larval monitoring tools
3. Best management practices for chemical control tools, including residual activity, rainfall impacts, and residue measurements
4. Demonstration, economic assessment, and adoption of best management practices

We will also use the results of this survey to develop additional proposals and to develop novel and appropriate delivery methods.  It will be at least a few months before we hear whether our project is funded, but our group is committed to addressing the unique management challenges posted by SWD in the eastern US.  Please don't hesitate to continue to share your thoughts in the comments, at Twitter, and via email.