LAB03997 - Extension Integrated Pest Management Coordination and Support Program

Robert Carver, Hollier, Clayton A.  |  7/20/2011 8:49:11 PM

ACCESSION NO: 0219298 SUBFILE: CRIS
PROJ NO: LAB03997 AGENCY: NIFA LA.B
PROJ TYPE: 3D GRANT PROJ STATUS: EXTENDED
CONTRACT/GRANT/AGREEMENT NO: 2009-41534-05649 PROPOSAL NO: 2009-00685
START: 01 SEP 2009 TERM: 31 AUG 2012 FY: 2009 GRANT YR: 2009
GRANT AMT: $170,000

INVESTIGATOR: Hollier, C. A.

PERFORMING INSTITUTION:
Plant Pathology & Crop Physiol
LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY
BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA 70893

EXTENSION INTEGRATED PEST MANAGEMENT COORDINATION AND SUPPORT PROGRAM

CLASSIFICATION
KA Subject Science Pct
216 1510 1130 10
216 1520 1130 10
216 1530 1102 20
216 1542 1102 10
216 1710 1130 30
216 1820 1102 10
216 2020 1130 10

CLASSIFICATION HEADINGS: R216 . Integrated Pest Management Systems; S1510 . Corn; F1130 . Entomology and acarology; S1520 . Grain sorghum; S1530 . Rice; F1102 . Mycology; S1542 . Soft red wheat; S1710 . Upland cotton; S1820 . Soybean; S2020 . Sugar cane

BASIC 000% APPLIED 100% DEVELOPMENTAL 000%

NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY: Pest problems exist in the agronomic crops of Louisiana. The sub-tropical environment, particularly in the southern portion of the state, is conducive to pest development and spread, damaging crops not only in the state but also in neighboring states. The state's location is favorable for natural and introduced pests due to its location on the Gulf of Mexico and the possession of a major port receiving goods from many international locations. Regardless of method of introduction, severe damage can and does occur due to insect, disease and weed activity each year. Agronomic crop pest issues have been described by extension and research IPM faculty across the state. In many cases these problems have been investigated to the point of producing IPM strategies that will manage the pests in economic and environmentally acceptable ways. The EIPM role is to educate interested and affected agribusiness entities of the appropriate IPM strategies to manage the pests. The overall planning of the process follows a Logic Model that will take the IPM teams through a logical approach to education.

OBJECTIVES: The rationale behind "IPM in Agronomic Crops" is: (1) a focal point for IPM team building, communication and stakeholder participation; (2) applied research and demonstration; (3) development of information management systems; (4) preparation of manuals and fact sheets; (5) training programs for agents, consultants, scouts, growers, others; and (6) technical assistance and troubleshooting. The overall results of these activities are expected to be: (1) improving cost-benefit analyses through the adoption of IPM practices; (2) reducing potential human health risks from pests and related pest-management practices; and (3) minimizing adverse environmental effects from pests and related pest-management practices. Pest problems exist in the agronomic crops of Louisiana. The sub-tropical environment, particularly in the southern portion of the state, is conducive to pest development and spread. This damages crops not only in Louisiana but also in neighboring states. Louisiana's location is favorable for natural and introduced pests due to its location on the Gulf of Mexico and the possession of major ports receiving goods from many international locations. Regardless of method of introduction, severe damage can and does occur due to insect, disease and weed activity each year. Agronomic crop pest issues have been described by extension and research IPM faculty across the state. In many cases these problems have been investigated to the point of producing IPM strategies that will manage the pests in economic and environmentally acceptable ways. The EIPM role is to educate interested and affected agribusiness entities regarding appropriate IPM strategies to manage the pests. The overall process follows a Logic Model that will take the IPM teams through a logical approach to education. Although many agronomic crop producers understand the general idea of IPM and what that might mean for pest management in their crop(s), there is a major gap in understanding development and maintenance of IPM on the farm. To address this issue, steps will to be taken to educate producers of the specifics needed for full implementation. Within each commodity, educational meetings will address the specific pest issues of the crop and how to and when to scout for the pests; review the concept of IPM and its benefits for pest management, economics, environment and community relations; then address specific pest management issues by discipline to form a farm plan. Secondly, there will be on-farm demonstrations of a specific farm's pest issues; these demonstrations will be monitored by the appropriate pest discipline specialist. These demonstration farms (3 statewide) will be used for agent and consultant training and for public field days. Publications (pest identification guides and "how-to" manuals) will be produced for public use. Information also will be available on IPM Louisiana the LSU AgCenter's IPM website. Outputs include: two agent training meetings; ten grower educational meetings; one printed publication; five online publications and factsheets; and identification manuals, three field days and demonstrations.

APPROACH: Expected outcomes are behavioral changes in the farming practices to reduce pest pressure, reduce yield loss and reduce quality loss in the agronomic commodities. These will be determined by: pre- and post-tests at educational functions; pest surveys noting any changes in pest populations and measured damage; area-wide changes in production costs and the shifts in emphasis that occur with the use of IPM practices; reduction of agriculturally induced pollution and by the overall improvement in environment as measured by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry. These are goals of the IPM Roadmap, the agricultural producers of Louisiana and the citizens of the state. Result Dissemination: Successful results will be used to further enhance the IPM program efforts in Louisiana by: publishing of success stories locally, statewide, regionally and nationally in efforts of increase IPM usage; leveraging funding to expand the program and benefit the overall image of food production in the nonagricultural community; and through workshops, field days, grower meetings, extension publications and in applied journals and websites.

KEYWORDS: pest management; integrated pest management; ipm; yield loss; logic model

PROGRESS: 2009/09 TO 2010/08
OUTPUTS: From support of this project several outputs were generated in the form of educational experiences for IPM users. Two agent training sessions were held for agents in diverse cropping systems. In February 2009, an intensive training session for rice agents was held concerning rice diseases and weeds. In April 2009, a pre-field day training session was held for small-grain agents on disease and insect issues of wheat and oats. Twelve grower meetings were held to address variety choice, pest issues and economics/marketing for rice, wheat, corn, soybeans and cotton. Twenty-one online fact sheets were developed for vegetables, rice and turf grasses. Six grower field days were held to showcase IPM issues/solutions for rice (3), small grains (1) and general crop (corn, soybeans, cotton, grain sorghum) production (2). Forty local demonstrations of IPM issues/solutions were accomplished for rice (10), cotton (5), small grains (3), sugarcane (10), soybeans (3) grain sorghum (2) and vegetables (7). Twenty publications were produced. PARTICIPANTS: Pest discipline specialists, extension agricultural agents, commodity producers, agricultural consultants, commodity boards, economists, bankers, agribusiness personnel all participated in the planning, implementation and evaluation process. TARGET AUDIENCES: Pest discipline specialists, extension agricultural agents, commodity producers, agricultural consultants, commodity boards, economists, bankers, agribusiness personnel and news media were all target audiences in this project. PROJECT MODIFICATIONS: Nothing significant to report during this reporting period.

IMPACT: 2009/09 TO 2010/08
The rationale behind IPM is to disseminate IPM principles and practices to stakeholders so that they improve cost-benefit analyses through adoption of IPM practices, reduce human health risks and minimize adverse environmental effects from pests and related pest-management practices. To accomplish this goal oral presentation, publication, demonstration and hands-on techniques were employed to reach the various learning styles of participants. At grower meetings, PowerPoint presentations were used to convey specific IPM issues, show the pests involved and to suggest appropriate approaches to manage the pest safely. At field days, participants viewed IPM issues and management practices in the field and in most cases had the opportunity survey individual plots up close. At agent training sessions, participants learned pest identification, scouting techniques and management with hands-on experiences in the field with pest discipline specialists. This allowed for question-and-answer sessions as the training occurred. On-farm demonstrations were opportunities for stakeholders to compare IPM techniques/strategies for themselves so they can determine how IPM works and what the benefits were. Agricultural agents were heavily involved with on-farm demonstrations with stakeholders. It was determined through pre- and post-tests that IPM knowledge of participants increased by 84 percent regardless of teaching technique used. Impact on environment, health and economics will need to be measured over time.

PUBLICATIONS (not previously reported): 2009/09 TO 2010/08
1. Barbosa, R.N., Griffin, J.L. and Hollier, C.A. 2009. Effect of spray rate and method of application in spray deposition. Applied Engineering in Agriculture Vol. 25(2): 181-184.
2. Ferrin, D.M., Hollier, C.A, and Overstreet, C. 2009 Louisiana Plant Disease Management Guide. Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Publication No. 1802 (revised), March 2009.
3. Ferrin, Donald M., Hollier, Clayton A., Holcomb, Gordon E. 2009. Louisiana Plant Pathology Series - Camellia Flower Blight (PDF Format Only) Publication No. 3136
4. Groth, Donald E., Hollier, Clayton A., Rush, Milton C. 2009. Chapter 6 Disease Management in Louisiana Rice Production, LSU AgCenter Pub. 2321(Rev. 6/09):72-92.
5. Groth, Donald E., Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Rice diseases of Louisiana, LSU AgCenter. Publication No. 3084
6. Groth, Donald E., Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Rice Diseases Identification PowerPoint. AgCenter Web Page. http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Identification+Powerpoint.htm
7. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Sheath Blight Management. AgCenter Web Page: Http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
8. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Stem Rot Management. AgCenter Web Page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
9. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. False and Kernel Smut Management. AgCenter Web Page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
10. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Blast management. AgCenter Web Page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
11. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Bacterial Panicle Blight Management. AgCenter Web Page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
12. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Cercospora disease management. AgCenter Web page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
13. Groth, Donald E. and Hollier, Clayton A. 2009. Water mold and seedling disease. AgCenter Web page: http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/crops livestock/crops/rice/Diseases/Ric e+Disease+Management+Powerpoint++Presentations.htm
14. Hollier, Clayton A., Rush, Milton C., Groth, Donald E. 2009. Louisiana Plant Pathology: Sheath Blight of Rice (PDF Format Only). Publication No. 3123
15. Mascagni,H.J., Jr.,Robert Bell, Kelly Arceneaux, Millie Deloach, Rob Ferguson, Donald Groth, Dustin Harrell, Jim Hayes, Steve Harrison, Clayton Hollier, Roger Leonard, James Leonards, Ronnie Levy, Boyd Padgett, Chris Roider, Ron Regan, and Glen Schexnayder. 2009. Performance of Grain Sorghum Hybrids in Louisiana, 2009. LAES Research Summary No. 182 (on-line).
16. Nix, Karen, Hollier, Clayton A., Pollet, Dale K., Koske, Thomas J. 2009. Ornamental and Turf Pest Control (Category 3). Publication No. 1933.
17. Padgett, B and C. Hollier. 2009. Foliar-applied Fungicides in Corn: Does It Pay Louisiana Agriculture, Summer 2009. Vol. 52, No. 3. Pp. 26-27.
18. Saichuk, John K., Hollier, Clayton A., Groth, Donald E., Harrell, Dustin L., Webster, Eric P., White, Lawrence M., Rush, Milton C., Stout, Michael J., Blanche, Sterling, Linscombe, Steven D., Sha, Xueyan, Hummel, Natalie, Courville, Barrett A. 2009. Rice Varieties and Management Tips 2010. Publication No. 2270.
19. Saichuk, John K., Schultz, Bruce, Hollier, Clayton A., Groth, Donald E., Harrell, Dustin L., Webster, Eric P., White, Lawrence M., Rush, Milton C., Salassi, Michael, Stout, Michael J., Levy, Jr., Ronald J., Ph.D., Blanche, Sterling, Linscombe, Steven D., Reagan, Thomas E., Sha, Xueyan, Hummel, Natalie. 2009. Rice Production Handbook Publication No. 2321.
20. Singh, R., Ferrin, D., Hollier, C., and Overstreet, C. 2009. Plant Disease Diagnostic Clinic. Louisiana State University Agricultural Center, Miscellaneous 41.

PROJECT CONTACT:

Name: Hollier, C. A.
Phone: 225-578-4487
Fax: 225-578-1415
Email
Rate This Article:

Have a question or comment about the information on this page?

Innovate . Educate . Improve Lives

The LSU AgCenter and the LSU College of Agriculture

Top