Pest, disease and weed management
Permanent URI for this collectionhttp://elibrary2.sugarresearch.com.au/handle/11079/13843
Research outcomes: A comprehensive RD&E program that addresses existing and emerging pests, diseases and weeds, allowing sugarcane growers to manage their crops efficiently with minimal environmental impacts. An enhanced industry capacity to deal with incursions of exotic pests, diseases and weeds.
Browse
4 results
Search Results
Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
Item Mulgrave cane growers strategic grub management; implementing BSES decision-making tools : SRDC Grower Group innovation project(BSES, 2010) Day, JThis project was a continuation of previous SRDC/BSES GrubPlan projects in which the importance of a thorough grub monitoring program was highlighted. Essentially, the need for more grower involvement led to the creation of the Mulgrave Cane Grub Management Group through this Grower Group project, and this concept has proven to be very successful due to the active involvement of interested growers in actual data gathering and result interpretation which facilitated adequate decision making. 20 Mulgrave growers participated in this monitoring project, of which 4 growers were heavily involved (Jeff Day, John Ferrando, Jim Dillon and Ron Downing). Christine Hancock from Mulgrave CANGROWERS was also involved, as well as staff from Mulgrave Productivity Service (Allan Hopkins, Richie Falla and David Wallis). The actual field work and data gathering were mainly conducted by BSES entomologist Dr Nader Sallam and the entomology research team at BSES Meringa. 42 sugarcane plots were used to monitor and predict greyback cane grub population dynamics and potential damage in Mulgrave over two consecutive seasons (2008-2009). Particular emphasis on “Whole Farm Planning” was given to the farms of the 4 previously mentioned growers, where prediction of future population dynamics and potential damage levels were conducted for the whole farm not only the plots monitored. This was also carried out with other keen growers who expressed high interest in this work, where a “Whole Farm Plan” could be drafted and recommendation for pesticide application and other activities were discussed with the grower on a ‘plot-by-plot’ basis. Predicting future grub dynamics and damage levels was made possible through prediction models that were developed by Dr. Frank Drummond, Maine University, USA. Dr. Drummond who used monitoring results generated through previous GrubPlan projects to build forecast models. During the 2 seasons, the selected farms were dug for grubs and all grubs collected were bred in the laboratory at Meringa and checked for diseases. Several factors were also monitored and recorded (these are mentioned in detail under the methodology section) and results were entered into the prediction models. Model-generated predictions and damage estimates for the following season were conveyed to growers through GrubPlan meetings and face-to-face discussions. Growers’ actions and whether they accepted BSES’s recommendations or not were all recorded.Item SRDC Grower Group Innovation Project final report Herbert cane growers strategic grub management implementing BSES decision making tools(BSES, 2013) Morley, GThis project was a continuation of previous SRDC/BSES grub monitoring projects in Mulgrave and Mackay, and aimed to value add the previous findings of the very high importance of thorough grub monitoring Grower involvement to spread the message was identified as a key factor in grub management, so the Herbert Cane Grub Management Group was formed through this Grower Group Project. This concept has proven to be very successful due to the active grower involvement, grower feedback and data collection, which aided in data interpretation, decision making and dissemination of information to the wider growing community beyond the actual growers in the project. 15 Herbert growers initially participated in the project , with six growers (Geoff Morley, Mario Porta and his two farm managers, Bert Bonassi, Frank and Alan White and Darren Harragon) being very actively involved. Staff from Herbert Productivity Services Ltd ( Graeme Holzberger, Lawrence Di Bella, Ash Benson and Ron Kerkwyk) as well as BSES Ltd was heavily involved. The actual field work and data collection was carried out by HCPSL and BSES staff with BSES entomologist Dr Nader Sallam and his entomology research team, processing and interpreting data and also making the district and farm predictions. 41 sugarcane blocks were used to monitor grub numbers and damage levels as well as to predict greyback cane grub numbers and potential damage across the Herbert district over 3 consecutive years (2010-2012). Some of these blocks were not sampled in 2011 due to the effects of 5 flood events and as many blocks had been left as standover in 2010.Due to the extreme weather associated events (cyclone Yasi and the we prolonged wet weather coupled with low grub numbers in dug fields which made the predicted grub numbers and the likely area that may be damaged the following year less reliable an extension of the project was requested and granted so data could be collected for the whole of the 2012 calendar year Emphasis had been placed on “Managing Grubs across the Whole Farm”. The growers mentioned above plus others in predicted “Likely damage Areas” had their predictions of future population dynamics and potential damage levels conducted for their whole farms. Strip trials with new product formulations, and comparing existing products were also undertaken after discussions with the growers within the grower group. Predicting the future grub dynamics and damage levels was made possible through the prediction models developed by Dr Frank Drummond, Maine University, USA. Dr Drummond used monitoring results generated through previous GrubPlan projects to build and develop the models. During the 3 seasons the selected blocks were dug for grubs. All grubs found were identified and recorded and then raised in the laboratory in the Herbert and Meringa and regularly checked for diseases. Various other factors were recorded (these are recorded in the methodology section) and results entered into the prediction models. The predictions and damage estimates that were generated for each season were discussed with growers at GrubPlan meetings and during one on one extension activities. Grower’s actions for managing their farms grub issues were recorded and compared to the BSES recommendations. This project proved to be very successful as it engaged the growers in a planned approach to grub management, reinforced the need for continual monitoring of population dynamics, and also raised the profile and awareness of grub levels and damage across the whole Herbert region. Previous to this, management tended to be reactionary with the rise and fall in insecticide treatment following the rise and fall in area damaged. This project has let to growers and indeed whole of districts treating to prevent grub damage, based on the predictions of increasing grub damage. Most Herbert growers can see the benefits of the current project in assisting to predict grub damage as well as assist in selecting areas at highest risk to treat, and seek to continue this work as a part of the district work program.Item GrubPlan 2; developing improved risk-assessment and decision-support systems for managing greyback canegrub : SRDC final report BSS257(BSES, 2008) Samson, PRThe vision of the project was to provide industry with refined greyback canegrub management systems complete with risk-assessment and decision-support models that could ultimately be deployed at a commercial consultancy level. The outputs of the project would allow proactive management of greyback canegrub by growers and their advisors.The specific objectives were to:1.Continue to develop and refine pest management packages for greyback canegrubs, incorporating regional forecasting, farm monitoring, on-farm risk assessment, decision aids and economic analysis, with groups of growers or individuals.2.Design and implement regional systems to monitor trends in greyback damage and management.3.Develop and validate models that predict the probability of greyback infestations from one year to the next.4.Determine the market acceptance and value of a greyback canegrub risk assessment and management program.Item Enhanced adoption of integrated pest management in sugarcane : SRDC final report BSS225(BSES, 2002) Hunt, WD; Samson, PRThe project focused on changing the way BSES engages clients in dealing with pest management issues, using the concept of participatory action-learning. Thirty-two small groups of canegrowers were formed around eight pest types. In addition, three major extension campaigns were delivered on the sugar industry?s two most damaging pests, greyback canegrubs and cane rats. A roadshow integrated pest management (IPM) program on rats that was run in central and northern areas in 1999 contacted 480 growers. The wider-reaching initiative Rat Attack trained 2,700 growers in a program to raise awareness and understanding of rodent IPM in late 2000. The greyback canegrub program GrubPlan trained 906 growers and rural industry staff through 70 IPM workshops in late 2001. Training was an interactive process based on developing understanding and skills, leading to a change in practices. Results have been rewarding. Following the rat programs, damage to cane was reduced by around 21% (98,000 t) in 2000 and 58% (273,000 t) in 2001, in comparison with 1999. The GrubPlan program is also reaping dividends with around 60% of growers implementing 80% or more of the management plans they developed in the series. Visible damage to cane from greyback has subsequently declined, which will be confirmed by estimates of crop losses at the end of 2002. The project has been able to mitigate pest impact through achieving learnings with clients. It has also assisted extension and research staff to operate more effectively using good meeting process and extension planning, and has served to standardise IPM programs in industry.