Table 31. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), overwintering leafhopper eggs, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Normal eggs/ cm |
% Live eggs |
% Parasitized eggs |
|||
|
CONV |
7 |
0.57 |
a |
82.56 |
a |
17.00 |
a |
|
|
MD |
7 |
0.15 |
a |
62.52 |
a |
36.72 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 32. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), white apple leafhopper nymph counts, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Nymphs/leaf |
|
|
Gen 1 |
CONV |
7 |
0.04 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.02 |
a |
|
|
Gen 2 |
CONV |
7 |
0.09 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.09 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 33. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), leafroller larval counts, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% Shoots with live larvae |
% Damaged shoots |
||
|
P Fall |
CONV |
7 |
0.02 |
a |
0.24 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.00 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
|
|
Mid Season |
CONV |
7 |
0.27 |
a |
0.87 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.05 |
a |
0.54 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 34. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), campylomma tap counts, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
C. verbasci |
White apple leafhopper |
Spiders |
True bugs |
Lady beetles |
T. occidentalis |
||||||
|
Petal Fall |
CONV |
7 |
0.33 |
a |
1.05 |
a |
0.07 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.18 |
a |
0.63 |
a |
0.07 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 35. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), western tentiform leafminer density sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Mines/leaf |
|
|
Gen 2 |
CONV |
7 |
2.02 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
1.57 |
a |
|
|
Gen 3 |
CONV |
7 |
2.16 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
1.96 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 36. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), western tentiform leafminer parasitism sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Total mines/leaf |
Live mines/leaf |
% Parasitism |
|||
|
Gen 2 |
CONV |
7 |
4.61 |
a |
1.31 |
a |
20.10 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
3.02 |
a |
0.56 |
a |
29.36 |
a |
|
|
Gen 3 |
CONV |
7 |
3.15 |
a |
0.80 |
a |
27.79 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
2.76 |
a |
0.34 |
b |
25.14 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 37. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), aphids and natural enemies, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Infested leaves per shoot |
Lady beetles |
C. verbasci |
Lacewings |
Syrphids |
Motile predators |
||||||
|
Seasonal |
CONV |
7 |
0.63 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
0.18 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.07 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.49 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
0.09 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 38. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), mite binomial, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% Mite-infested leaves |
|
|
June |
CONV |
6 |
3.07 |
a |
|
MD |
6 |
1.76 |
a |
|
|
July |
CONV |
6 |
14.84 |
a |
|
MD |
6 |
1.74 |
a |
|
|
Sept. |
CONV |
6 |
6.40 |
a |
|
MD |
6 |
0.65 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 39. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), mite brush and count, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Tetranychids/leaf |
Predatory mites/leaf |
Apple rust mites/leaf |
|||
|
mid-June |
CONV |
7 |
0.64 |
a |
0.19 |
a |
7.47 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.08 |
a |
0.32 |
a |
7.19 |
a |
|
|
mid-August |
CONV |
7 |
1.38 |
a |
0.45 |
a |
16.46 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.08 |
a |
0.45 |
a |
15.22 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 40. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), apple fruit damage sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% CM Sting |
% CM Entry |
|||
|
Mid Season |
CONV |
7 |
0.07 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
|
|
MD |
7 |
0.02 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
||
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% Codling moth |
% Leafroller |
% Thrips |
% C. verbasci |
% Lygus |
% Aphid |
% Stinkbug |
% Cutworm |
||||||||
|
Pre- Harvest |
CONV |
7 |
0.53 |
a |
0.29 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.05 |
a |
0.06 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
0.10 |
a |
0.11 |
a |
|
MD |
7 |
0.05 |
a |
0.10 |
a |
0.08 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
0.05 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
0.10 |
a |
0.12 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 41. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), pear cluster sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Psylla eggs/cluster |
Psylla nymphs/cluster |
ERM eggs/cluster |
|||
|
DD |
CONV |
3 |
0.86 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
3.09 |
a |
|
MD |
3 |
0.28 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
5.21 |
a |
|
|
TC |
CONV |
3 |
4.09 |
a |
0.10 |
a |
2.12 |
a |
|
MD |
3 |
4.21 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
1.34 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 42. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), pear leafroller larvae sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% shoots with live larvae |
% Damaged shoots |
% Sawfly damage |
|||
|
PF |
CONV |
3 |
0.00 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
. |
. |
|
MD |
3 |
0.01 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
. |
. |
|
|
MS |
CONV |
3 |
0.00 |
a |
0.70 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|
MD |
3 |
0.02 |
a |
0.41 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 43. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), pear limb tap sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Psylla adults |
Deraeocoris |
Anthocoris |
C. verbasci |
Earwig |
Spider |
Trechnites |
||||||||
|
Seasonal |
CONV |
3 |
0.98 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|
|
MD |
3 |
0.65 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.04 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
||
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 44. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), pear leaf brushing sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
Psylla nymphs |
Trechnites |
Total tetranychids |
Predatory mites |
||||
|
Seasonal |
CONV |
3 |
0.17 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.58 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|
MD |
3 |
0.05 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.35 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional
Table 45. Cross-project data analysis (Type 2), pear fruit damage sample, 1998
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% Sting |
% Entry |
||||||||||||
|
Mid Season |
CONV |
2 |
0.00 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
||||||||||
|
MD |
2 |
0.07 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
|||||||||||
|
Sample |
Type |
n |
% Codling moth |
% Leafroller |
% Psylla |
% Mealy- bug |
% Lygus |
% Stink bug |
% Earwig |
% Cutworm |
||||||||
|
Pre-Harvest |
CONV |
3 |
0.05 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
5.00 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.05 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.02 |
a |
|
MD |
3 |
0.48 |
a |
0.18 |
a |
1.18 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.14 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
0.00 |
a |
0.01 |
a |
|
MD= Mating Disruption, CONV= Conventional