31%. Wheat. 23%. Cotton. 5%. Peanut. 1%. Processed. Tomato. 71%. Tomato Field fresh 29%. Tomato GH Fresh. 0.24%. Other. 0%. Needle in the Haystack ...
Labeling Insecticides for vegetable production under greenhouses: the need of new modes of action Michael E. Bledsoe, Ph.D. Senior Vice President Food Safety and Regulatory Affairs
October 2013
Michael Bledsoe Background
• Ph.D. Entomology U of F (1977) • 22 years with Chevron/Valent USA – Research and Program Management
• 15+ years Village Farms – Sr. VP Food Safety and Regulatory Affairs (North America) • Food Safety • IPM • IR-4 – All Registrations
• State and Federal Regulatory • Crisis Management • Security
Ellie and her favorite beast of burden
Westlands, Netherlands
Greenhouse Europe Almeria, Spain
Beyond Core US Crop Markets 2013
Corn: 96.4 M Acres
Soybeans 76.1 M Acres
Wheat
Cotton
56 M Acres
12.6 M Acres
Peanut: 1.42 M Acres
Tomato •423,000 acres
Beyond Core US Crop Markets
Field Fresh: 123,000 Acres
Greenhouse Vine Ripe 1000 Acres
Beyond Core US Crop Markets based on Acres Needle in the Haystack
Tomato Field fresh 29%
Soybean 31%
Wheat 23%
Cotton 5%
Peanut 1%
Other 0% Corn 40%
Processed
Tomato
71%
Tomato GH Fresh 0.24%
North American Large Scale Greenhouse History 1989 - 1996 • 1989: Canadian Greenhouses, but new to US. • Tomato Less than 0.5% of US Retail sales in 1989 – Today: Retail Groceries: ~60% – Big Box: ~72%
Fresh Tomato Production USA using USDA Field data Type of Production
KG/M2
Lbs/Yard2
Increase per Acre against Field Production
Average Large Scale 60-65 GH (>10 Acre)
110-120
20x
New Semi-closed GH (>10 Acre)
80-114+
147-210
30x
Field Production
3.0.-3.6 (USDA Average)
5.5-6.6
1
Small Scale GH < 10 Acres
30-35
55-110
10X
New Agriculture 1989-1990
Required
• • • • • • • • •
Efficacious Insecticides Safe to multiple biologicals Short PHI (not std 7, 14, 21, 28 day PHI) Short REI Little to no Phytotoxicity Good residuals Chemigation > Fogging > Dusting > Foliar We needed it immediately Good luck
Regulatory Challenges – Existing Agriculture has been around for hundreds of year and the Regulatory Programs grew up around them. – Same with Basic Producers of Agricultural Chemicals. – 1990 - 2000: Nothing specifically registered for Greenhouse vegetable in USA. – Canada had multiple products – Beginning of the end of Organophosphates, and carbamates – Significant Changes in USEPA – New industry needing help • IR-4 – “Our industry would not be here today if not for the IR-4 and USEPA support!”
• USEPA (Certification and Worker Protection Branch) – Richard Pont – USEPA
USEPA -Richard Pont (Certification and Worker Protection Branch) • “unless use in a greenhouse is expressly
prohibited on the label, then it would not be considered use inconsistent with the label to use a product in a greenhouse as long as the crop site was listed on the label.” » Richard Pont, USEPA
Importance of Greenhouse on label
Industry is working each year to add Greenhouse to labels.
• Canada: required • USEPA interpretation can be locally challenged. • Areas of CA and NY has received challenges.
Early Large scale US Operations First Operations associated with CoGens (PA, NY, VA) 35 KG/M2 production
Not Best locations for production
• Heat • CO2 • Structure • Water
Stand Alone USA Large Scale Greenhouse Shift Acres of Large Scale Canada:–3300+ acres Sweet Previously Nature EuroFresh ~1992 (AZ) Vegetable Greenhouse in USA Mexico: 5000 acres The market is the USA.Farms 1995 (TX)(150 acre) – Village
Houweling Demand–for Regional and US grown.
800 701
1996 (CA) (120+) – Backyard Farms 2007 (ME) (42 acre) – Windset 2011 (CA) (128+ acre) – Sunset 2012 (MI) 26+ (Brush) 18, (NE) 20, IL (10) acres) – 100 Acres of ~10-15 acre GH 455
365
315
175
75
10
(300+)
25
25
75
365
375
375
375
495
495
499
499
499
541
541
541
541
Current Demographics Hydroponic Vegetable • Canada: ~1365 Ha (3373 acres) – Vancouver, BC; Leamington, ON – Why? 49th latitude (Netherlands 52nd)
• Mexico: 5000+ acres (mixed Technology) – Field, shade cloth, soil, high tech)
• USA: ~1000 acres – Small: 200 acres ( Fogging > Dusting > Foliar
• • • •
Label should be by CROP not YEAR Apply 100 gpa Tomato: 1-3 PHI Cucumber: 0-1 PHI – Under lights mini-cukes 4X/day
• Pepper: 3-5 PHI
Tomato Insect Challenges • Clavibacter (Bacterial canker) -Bee • PepMV - Bees • Whitefly: Trialeurodes and Bemisia (TYLCV) – Typed A
• • • • • • •
Aphids PM Psyllids: Psyllid Yellows (Liberibacter) Leps (worms) Thrips TSSM Engytatus modestus (Lygus/Miridae)
Scouting Reports WF
Beneficials • Bombus sp. – Bumble bee
• Encarsia formosa – Parasitoid wasp
• Eretmocerus sp. – parasitoid wasps
• Amblyseius swirskii – Predatory w – More than Gold
Biologicals and Beneficials and Softer Chemistry even to plants •
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) – – –
•
Cease – –
•
• • • • •
Root disease Insects and PM
Curative and Preventative
–
•
Botrytis and PM Cmm, Spot, Speck
BotaniGard
•
Brauveria bassiana
–
•
Potassium salt of fatty acid
Reyoutria sachalinensis PM, Alternaria, DM, GSB, Phytophtora
Biologicals
Lag Phase
Botrytis, PM, DM Discontinued
Affirm WDG replacement for Veranda by NuFarm
•
insects and PM
Met 52 – –
•
Many insects(soft bodied)
M-Pede
Metarhizium anisopliae (Tomato and Peppers)
Grandevo PTO – –
Veranda O – Polyoxin D zinc salt – –
–
•
IGR’s Regalia – –
Bacterial phage
Botrytis and PM
Suffoil-X : –
•
•
RootShield: Trichoderma harzianum (fungus) –
Actinovate (Streptomyces lydicus)
–
Bacillus subtilis Botrytis and PM
MilStop (potassium bicarbonate) –
•
Bt (kurstaki) – LEPS (WORMS) Bt (galleriae)- Coleoptera (Beetle and weevils) PENDING Bt (israelensis)- Fungus gnats, shore fly
•
Chromobacterium subtsugae Insect and mites
NemaShield® nematode Steinernema feltiae –
Fungus Gnat and Western Flower Thrips
New Modes of Activity
Required
• Efficacious Insecticides • Safe to multiple biologicals • Short PHI • Tomato 1-3 • Cucumber 0-1 • Pepper 3-5 • Short REI • Little to no Phytotoxicity • Good residuals • Chemigation > Fogging > Dusting > Foliar
Ideas Labeling Insecticides for vegetable production under greenhouses: the need of new modes of action Stop feeding materials- helps with arbovirus (plant)
Materials compatible with Biologicals to permit insecticide and fungicidal activity.
Delivery by Bombids
Miticide specific to TSSM
Labeling for Fruiting Vegetables
Systemic materials compatible
• No effect on Beneficial mites
• and Cucumbers
• with Bombids
New Modes of action To permit rotation
Attractants to increase effectiveness of Insecticides
Hudson’s beast of burden
Questions?
