Crop Profile for Raspberries (Red) in Washington

Prepared: January, 1999

General Production Information

 

Production Regions


The entire area of Washington State west of the Cascade mountains is considered raspberry production area. However, Whatcom County produces 77% of the state total, followed by Skagit County (10%) and Clark and Cowlitz counties combined (11%) (2).

 


Cultural Practices

Red raspberries are a biennial, summer bearing crop. The root system is perennial and plants are capable of living for several years. Their growth habit is to produce vegetative primocanes the first year, that then become flowering and fruiting floricanes the second year, which then die. Each established field will contain both primocanes and floricanes at the same time. Under ideal soil conditions and good cultural maintenance, a planting may remain productive for 10 years or more in this region. The maritime climate of western Washington, combined with well-drained, deep sandy loam soils scattered throughout the above regions makes these areas ideal for long-term commercial production (3).


A row of raspberries in early JuneYbloom period

 

Although over 10 different cultivars are grown commercially, the Meeker variety now dominates (80% of planted acres) due to several characteristics which make it suitable for both the fresh and processed markets. These include superior yield, good color and fruit firmness, compatibility with machine harvesting, vigorous growth, and relatively low susceptibility to Phytophthora root rot compared to other varieties. The Willamette variety accounts for 19% of total acreage, with the balancing acreage, 1% spread over several varieties picked mostly for fresh market sales (1).

 

A raspberry field is established by planting certified, nursery grown rootstock. Plants are set 22 to 3 ft. apart in rows about 10 ft. apart. The first year planting produces vegetative canes only (primocanes). In the fall, these primocanes are trained to a single trellis wire about 5 ft. from the ground. In mid-summer of the following season, these overwintering canes (now called floricanes) will flower and produce fruit. It is necessary to bring in honeybees for the 6 week bloom period (mid-May through late June) for adequate pollination to occur. A new flush of primocanes begins to emerge from the root crown area every spring beginning in late March. In order to maximize yield, control cane growth, and reduce fungal disease, growers practice chemical cane burning to suppress this first flush of primocanes. A second flush of primocanes emerges in mid-April, growing to 8-12 feet tall by summer=s end. Floricanes are cut out each fall after harvest, and the remaining primocanes are tied in bundles and secured to the top trellis wire.

 


Primocane bundles tied to trellis

 

This combination of primocanes and floricanes are maintained in a hedge type row, which allows for the machine harvesting operation. Only fruit grown for the fresh market (<2%) is harvested by hand. The harvest period is intense and confined to a six week period from late June through early to mid-August. During this period, fields are picked on average, once every 2 to 3 days. In some cases, where fruit is destined for the high quality IQF (Individually Quick Frozen) market, fields are picked daily to maximize quality and minimize the potential for Botrytis fruit rot development.

 

Growers have several marketing options for their fruit. The highest value markets are the fresh and IQF markets. Intermediate in value is the processing market, and at the low end is the juice market. Prices paid to growers typically range from 30 to 40 cents per pound for juice grade up to well over a dollar per pound for the IQF and fresh markets. Superior fruit quality, in terms of fruit shape, size, and freedom from disease or insect contaminants, is a necessity, particularly in the mid and higher end markets.

 


Fruit on harvest machine belt

 

Growers and processors who deliver an inferior crop are likely to have the crop rejected at the point of delivery and/or may have difficulty contracting their fruit for the following season. Raspberry products which are contaminated with insects can usually be traced back through the broker, processor and to the farm. This places extreme pressure on raspberry growers to deliver a disease and insect-free, quality product, or else their livelihood is at stake. In order to meet these quality requirements, a pre-harvest Aclean-up@insecticide spray must be applied to control insect contaminants. Without this application, fruit on the harvesting machine belts would literally be crawling with various worms, weevils, spiders and aphids in numbers far greater than could be hand-picked from the passing fruit. Current machine technology and structure of the fruit (hollow), require a rigorous removal of any potential insect contaminant before harvest.

 


Top side view from harvest machine, looking down on picking rods, which shake fruit from the row

 


Back view of mechanical harvester

 

Raspberries require irrigation during the bloom, harvest, and post-harvest periods in most years depending on rainfall amounts and timing. Most fields are irrigated with either drip tape, which is buried in the soil along one edge of each row, or overhead sprinkler irrigation. The recent switch to drip irrigation is an added practice to minimize the risk of foliar, fruit, and cane diseases because these aerial plant parts are not wet as often as with overhead sprinkler irrigation. Drip irrigation also reduces the dispersal of pathogens with water-splashed spores. Weed control between the rows is accomplished largely by routine cultivation during the growing season. Weed control within the rows is accomplished using pre-emergent herbicides usually applied in the spring and contact herbicides as needed. Floricanes, cut from the trellis after harvest, are chopped and disced back into the soil. This practice adds organic matter and helps reduce cane disease inoculum, by subjecting the overwintering stages of cane diseases to microbial breakdown in the soil. Planting into elevated ridges is becoming quite widely practiced as a cultural method to reduce infection from Phytophthora and other root rotting organisms. Insect control prior to harvest is critical in order to avoid contamination of fruit by a myriad of pest and non-pest arthropods which inhabit the raspberry canopy. Fungicides are applied during the bloom period to control cane and foliar diseases and help prevent Botrytis fruit infection and subsequent fruit rot during harvest.

 

There has been a significant effort to develop IPM strategies for raspberries. A manual titled:AIntegrated Pest Management for Raspberries BA Guide for Sampling and Decision-Making for Key Raspberry Pests in Northwest Washington@ was recently completed (June 1998) by Washington State University (WSU) Cooperative Extension, Whatcom County under an EPA 319 Grant (Nooksack Watershed IPM Project). This manual was the culmination of 3 years of work with cooperation from raspberry growers, fieldmen, local community leaders, and research and extension specialists. The manual is designed to assist growers with pest identification, scouting methods, record keeping, and more knowledge-based decision-making. It is being distributed during the fall and winter of 1998 to growers, private consultants, and research and extension personnel throughout the raspberry production area. This IPM project also spawned a new cooperative effort between raspberry growers and the WSU Vancouver Research and Extension Center in the form of an on-farm research station situated in the heart of the raspberry region (Lynden, WA). ThisASatellite Station@ is managed by WSU research personnel and has been invaluable in facilitating on-farm research directed towards investigations of basic pest biology, pesticide performance trials, and efficacy of biorational alternatives to traditional agrichemicals.

 

IPM development is driven and partially limited by the requirement that fields be sprayed prior to harvest with a broad spectrum insecticide to control fruit-contaminating insects. The current material of choice (bifenthrin) provides superior insect pest control, and although it kills most beneficial insects as well as target pests, it does not seem to aggravate spider mites in a widespread or consistent fashion. One of the key, naturally occurring spider mite predators, Amblyseius fallacis is tolerant of this pesticide. Unfortunately, it does kill the spider mite destroyer, Stethorus punctum picipes, which is a very effective spider mite predator (26). A single pre-harvest application of bifenthrin usually provides adequate insect control during the entire harvest period (late June through early August).

 

Insect Pests

Insect pests are grouped into two major categories:

 

Harvest Contaminants

Many insects occur on raspberry plant foliage. Most of the insects and spiders are either innocuous or are beneficial because they eat other insects. However, when shaken off with the raspberries during machine harvesting, they become contaminants of the harvested product. The US Food and Drug Administration defect action level is Aan average of four or more larvae per 500g or average of ten or more whole insects or equivalent per 500g (excluding thrips, aphids, and mites)@. Food processors= standards are often more strict because of consumer pressure (23). Some insects can be removed by hand on the machine belt and the sorting belt in the processing plant, but this method is inefficient, costly, and prone to error. Harvesters are equipped with air suction fans, which help remove some plant and insect debris, but not all. Experiments with other air blasting equipment has helped but not solved this problem. Use of a Aclean-up@ insecticide spray just prior to harvest is a necessary supplement to these procedures (4). If uncontrolled, contamination of fruit can result in crop rejection. The key fruit contaminating insects are listed below beginning with the most commonly encountered and important pests.

 

Root Weevils:

Black Vine Weevil, Otiorhynchus sulcatus

Rough Strawberry Root Weevil, Otiorhynchus rugosostriatus

Strawberry Root Weevil, Otiorhynchus ovatus

These three species of root weevils are the more commonly observed weevils prior to and during the raspberry harvest season. The life cycles are similar in that most of the population overwinter as grubs, feeding on roots in the top 2-8@ of soil. Most pupate in April and emerge from the soil as adults during May and early June. These adults are active on foliage at night during June and July, feeding on aboveground plant parts. Newly emerged adults begin laying eggs in late June prior to the onset of harvest. It is the adult stage which coincides with harvest and is the most consistent and problematic fruit-contaminating insect on raspberries. These insects will crawl into the hollow center of the fruit and are not distinguishable to visual inspection. Species distribution varies from farm to farm, but the black vine weevil (BVW) tends to dominate. An insecticide (usually bifenthrin) is usually applied in late June prior to harvest and before egg laying begins in even lightly infested fields to prevent egg laying, buildup of weevils, and adult weevil contamination of the fruit (4). Routine monitoring using a beating tray from mid-May through late June is a useful method to identify the species which are present and provide a rough estimate of population density before and after treatment. If left uncontrolled, losses include reduced vigor and yield from larval damage to roots, and crop rejection due to adult weevil contamination of fruit.

 


Sprayer setup in raspberries

Control

Numerous biopesticides alone and in combination were field-tested in Whatcom County for controlling BVW larvae, but unfortunately none offered any significant level of control (15). Biopesticides which were tested in 1996 by WSU researchers included commercially available entomopathogenic nematodes, Steinernema carpocapsae (Biosafe) and 2 strains of Heterorhabdites bacteriophora (Bioxcel and Cruiser), and a new species isolated by Oregon State University (OSU), H. marelatus. The entomopathogenic fungus, Beauveria bassiana (Mycotrol) was also tested. Several species of ground beetles (Family: Carabidae) are found in association with root weevil larvae in the soil and detected in the raspberry canopy but they do not provide economic control (8).

 

Miscellaneous Caterpillars:

Speckled Green Fruitworm, Orthosia hibisci

Raspberry Looper, Autographa ampla

Zebra Caterpillar, Melanchra picta

Bertha Armyworm, Mamestra configurata

These are the most commonly seen lepidopteran (butterfly and moth) pests on raspberries. They have either one or two broods of caterpillars per year (depending on the species) but the larval stage of each of these pests can coincide with harvest. For this reason, they pose a serious threat as fruit contaminants, being knocked from the foliage during the harvesting operation. Direct feeding on plant leaves in and of itself rarely justifies chemical control. Scouting, using a beating tray or by examination of foliar feeding has not proven to be effective in predicting the likelihood of significant caterpillar hatches and fruit contamination problems in most cases. However, pre-harvest leafroller evaluations can be useful in detecting hatch of bertha armyworms and need for treatment (8). If uncontrolled, contamination of fruit can result in crop rejection.

Control

 

Western Raspberry Fruitworm, Byturus bakeri

Overwintering fruitworm beetles emerge from the soil during April and May. These small brown beetles feed on fruit buds and unfolding leaves during the early season, mate and then lay their eggs attaching them to flower buds and within opening flowers. The emergent young larvae work into the center of the developing young fruits where they feed for 30 days or more. Larvae can contaminate and downgrade machine harvested fruit (4). Adult populations are monitored by direct examination of the earliest open flowers and/or with a beating tray from mid-April through early bloom. A specific pattern of damage to foliage is also used to confirm presence of adult fruitworm beetles. The economic threshold for this insect is very low due to its direct damage to flower buds, resultant misshapen fruit, and potential for fruit contamination (7). Where scouting indicates presence of the insect in a field, an insecticide is applied to control adults prior to egg laying and before bees are introduced for pollination.

Control

 

Leafrollers:

Obliquebanded Leafroller, Choristoneura rosaceana

Orange Tortrix, Argyrotaenia citrana

Various species of leafroller larvae web and feed on raspberry foliage. This damage in itself is rarely economic, but larvae, if not controlled prior to harvest, can contaminate hand-picked and machine harvested fruit. The insect overwinters as a larva usually within protected old foliage or cane bundles in the field. In the spring the larvae move out to feed on developing foliage, pupate and emerge as adult moths. There are usually 2-3 generations per season. Obliquebanded leafroller (OBLR) is the dominant species in Whatcom County, whereas Orange Tortrix (OT) dominates in Skagit and the other southern counties. Life cycles of these two key species are quite similar, although OT poses a greater threat because hatch of the first summer brood of larvae is more likely to coincide with harvest and therefore contaminate fruit. Pheromone traps are used to monitor adult leafroller flight, but there is weak correlation between trap catch and larval infestation. Traps are used to identify peak flight. Fields are then scouted 10 days after peak flight (usually 2 weeks before harvest) to evaluate the degree of foliar infestation in order to determine if chemical treatment is necessary. If scouting shows 10% or more infested hills, treatment is usually warranted (7,10).

Control

 

Other Most Common Insect Contaminants in Machine- Harvested Raspberries:

Raspberry Aphid, Amphorophora agathonica

European Earwig, Forficula auricularia

Various Stink Bugs (Family:Penatomidae)

Lygus Bugs (Family: Miridae)

Spiders

Control

 

 

Slugs

Slugs can be a fruit contamination problem. Usually associated with wet weather, slugs can climb up into the lower raspberry canopy where they are knocked from the plant during machine harvesting.

Control

 

Direct Pests

 

Clay Colored Weevil, Otiorhynchus singularis

Adult clay weevils begin emerging from the soil in mid-March. They feed on developing buds, and new shoots with peak damage occurring in late March and April. Damage is similar to that caused by climbing cutworms. When numerous, this insect causes significant yield loss. 17% theoretical yield loss was estimated in 1998 field trials (6), but actual yield impacts are probably higher in heavily infested fields. This insect is becoming more widespread, and requires timely control when found to avoid yield loss and to deter population increase. Early season examination of damage to buds and new growth, combined with evening field monitoring using a beating tray are appropriate methods to monitor this insect (7). At the present time, there are no fully registered materials which provide adequate clay weevil control.

Control

 

Raspberry Crown Borer, Pennisetia marginata

This sporadic pest has a two-year life cycle. Adult clear-winged moths are present from late July through early October. Eggs laid by these moths, hatch into small caterpillars which crawl down to the base of the canes where they form an overwintering cell in the side of the cane. They begin to feed in early March on cane buds around the plant crown. Feeding damage in canes and crowns can weaken plants and kill infested canes (7,12). Weak areas within a field can be checked for evidence of this insect. Infested areas often have uneven bud break in the spring, and spindly canes, which break off at ground level. This symptom is most likely noticed during winter cane pruning and tying (7). Populations can increase rapidly, requiring control if this pest is present. Due to its two-year life cycle, this pest must be treated for two consecutive seasons in order to achieve control.

Control

 

Spotted Cutworm, Amathes c-nigrum

This is the most commonly detected, early season climbing cutworm. It overwinters as a partly grown larva, which begins to feed on developing primocane and floricane buds in late March and early April. Feeding on primary buds can reduce production by 50% in infested areas (4). There are two overlapping generations per season. The second-generation larva can be a harvest contaminant. This insect is an occasional pest, spotty in distribution and damage, but when found can seriously impact yield. Early season examination of buds for damage and evening inspection of fields to confirm pest identity are appropriate monitoring techniques.

Control

None of the currently registered insecticides are particularly effective for controlling overwintering spotted cutworm larvae. Fortunately, it rarely is numerous enough to warrant control in the early season.

 

Spider Mites:

Twospotted Spider Mite, Tetranychus urticae

Yellow Spider Mite, Eotetranychus carpini borealis

These are the two most prevalent species of plant-feeding spider mites which inhabit raspberry foliage. Both species feed on chlorophyll on the underside of leaves. Feeding damage reduces plant vigor and may cause leaves to drop prematurely contributing to potential for winter injury and subsequent yield loss. They overwinter as adult females within protected micro-habitats in raspberry fields. They begin to colonize the plants in the early summer, moving upward on the canes as the season advances. Populations usually increase through June, and July, with potential for rapid increase after harvest in mid to late August. In September, populations decline as a result of predation by natural enemies and migration of overwintering females from the raspberry plants to overwintering sites (4). Raspberries appear to tolerate significantly greater densities of yellow mite compared to twospotted mites. Rough treatment thresholds are 75 vs 25 mites/leaflet prior to September 1 for these species. Foliar symptoms associated with feeding are different with the two species, which helps in determining which is present. Most growers rely on intuitive evaluations based on the degree of foliar damage, vigor of the field, and time of the year when determining spray needs. Direct counts of spider mites and predators can also be taken in the field to establish population trends. If uncontrolled, excessive defoliation during and after harvest from heavy twospotted mite feeding can reduce yield 25% the following season (20).

Control

 

 

Diseases

Botrytis Cane and Fruit Rot, Botrytis cinerea

Very common fungus which causes fruit rot and primocane lesions. It overwinters as sclerotia on primocanes and as mycelia on dead leaves and mummified fruit. These overwintering structures produce spores beginning in the spring which infect blossoms. These early blossom infections remain inactive (latent) until fruit is nearly ripe. When conditions are favorable for fungal growth within the berry, the fungus sporulates on the berry surface (gray mold). These spores contribute to secondary infection of fruit, primocanes, and other above ground, green plant parts. The infection and spread of the disease is favored by high moisture (excessive rain) and poor drying conditions (humid, stagnant air) during the bloom and harvest periods. Infections on the primocanes allow the fungus to overwinter within the field. Due to the microscopic nature of the latent blossom infections, monitoring for this disease is impractical (7). Preventative fungicide sprays during the bloom period and various cultural practices are used to help suppress the disease. This disease can drastically reduce both fruit quality and yield and has led to major crop failure and lost revenue for numerous growers over the past two seasons (1997 & 1998). If uncontrolled, estimated yield losses can reach 30% (8).

Control

 

Spur Blight, Didymella applanata

This common fungal disease infects floricane leaves, primocane leaves, and causes primocane lesions which can damage buds. Damaged buds are predisposed to winter injury, potentially reducing yield the next season. The disease overwinters on infected primocanes. In the spring it produces both windblown and rain-splashed spores (7). Recent research has identified key infection periods and optimum timing of fungicide applications to control spur blight. Field rating systems have been developed to help growers roughly categorize disease incidence (8).

Control

 

Yellow Rust, Phragmidium rubi-idaei

This fungus infects floricane and primocane foliage. In some years, it causes significant premature leaf death, reducing plant vigor and increasing the likelihood of winter cold injury. It overwinters in old primocane leaf debris trapped in bundles of canes where they are tied to the trellis wire. Spores from this debris cause the initial spring infection of floricane leaves, the first visible symptom of disease. Spores from these lesions allow the disease to spread further, ultimately giving rise to a repeating spore type which allows for continuous spread and development of the overwintering stage. Scouting early in the season and after harvest is recommended to assist with decision-making on sprays and need for cultural practices to reduce winter carryover (7).

Control

 

Cane Blight, Leptosphaeria coniothyrium

This fungus is a wound parasite and can only enter the plant through wounds. Physical damage to the surface of the primocanes (usually from machine-harvesting) allows the fungus to enter the vascular tissue. The fungus remains in the vicinity of the wound, but toxins produced by the fungus move up the cane, killing vascular tissue and buds. In infected canes, a reddish streaking lesion can be seen in the fall by scraping away the epidermis above primocane wounds. The disease overwinters on old cane stubble and infection is favored by wet conditions during the harvest period. Examination of suspect primocanes in the fall and early spring is recommended to confirm presence of this disease (7).

Control

 

Phytophthora Root Rot, Phytophthora fragariae var rubi

This soilborne fungus, favored by wet soil conditions, can directly invade and kill root and crown tissue. Aboveground symptoms include collapse of fruiting canes and wilting of primocanes. Diseased plants have fewer feeder roots and brown or black discolored root tissue. Infection and plant destruction is usually more common in low, wet areas within a field. Fields should be scouted during harvest for these symptoms, and where found, laboratory analysis of root tissue is recommended (7). If uncontrolled, with disease present and favorable conditions for infection, yield losses can reach 75% (21).

Control

Cultural practices to prevent infection include: avoidance of fields with history of the disease, planting only in well drained soils, ripping soil to improve soil drainage, ridging or planting into raised beds, cleaning cultivation equipment to avoid spread from infected to healthy fields, and use of certified root stock (7). With the exception of "cleaning cultivation equipment", these cultural practices are standard industry practices. No cultivars have acceptable levels of resistance.

 

 

Nematodes

Root Lesion, Pratylenchus penetrans

Dagger, Xiphinema bakeri

Root lesion nematodes inhabit the soil and are capable of feeding on and migrating within raspberry roots. Damage associated with root lesion nematode feeding includes root destruction and a general reduction in field vigor over time. Dagger nematodes feed on root tips and in addition to directly damaging root tissue, are capable of transmitting the tomato ringspot virus, which can stunt raspberry plants and cause crumbly fruit, thus impacting both yield and fruit quality. Soil samples are collected before planting a field to aid in site selection and/or need for pre-plant fumigation. Soil and root samples collected in the fall from good and poor areas within established fields will help evaluate nematode density, species distribution, and need for treatment. Treatment threshold levels based on laboratory analysis are established for root lesion nematodes. Populations that exceed 250 nematodes/250 cu. cm. at planting will affect stand establishment, and populations exceeding 500 nematodes/250 cu. cm. will weaken established fields. As with most pests, the impact of nematodes on a vigorous field is less pronounced than on a weak field. Nematode damage may occur at lower nematode densities if plants also are stressed by root rotting diseases, insects, or other factors (27). Due to its capability to transmit virus, the threshold for dagger nematodes is very low and there are no materials registered for use in established fields to control this pest (7). If left uncontrolled, root lesion nematodes will shorten the productive life span of an established field by 2 to 3 years (25), and dagger nematodes if not treated prior to establishment in replant situations will weaken fields and reduce fruit quality and yield (3). Both species are widespread throughout the region.

Control

Keeping fields fallow and weed-free for a year prior to planting raspberries will reduce, but not eliminate nematode populations (5). Planting stock certified to be free from tomato ringspot virus on land which is free from dagger nematodes is advised but may be difficult to accomplish (3). Crop rotation is not an option since tomato ringspot has such a wide host range and dagger nematodes feed on so many hosts as well. A planting site need not have ever been in red raspberries before for Tomato ringspot virus to cause serious damage to a new (young) field.

 

 

Weeds

Various species of weeds compete with raspberry plants for water and nutrients. In addition weeds can interfere with harvesting efficiency and reduce air movement, thus increasing the likelihood of cane, fruit and foliar diseases. Growers rely on a combination of chemical and cultural practices to manage weeds in their raspberry fields. Weeds within the rows are usually managed with banded herbicide applications, either pre- or post-emergent, and weeds between the rows are managed primarily by regular, frequent, shallow cultivation during the growing season. Raspberries respond to a non-disturbed, competition-free strip in the planted row. This is achieved through the application of directed, banded herbicides as well as primocane suppression materials (cane burning) usually applied once in the early spring (18). It is recommended that growers make it a practice to take note of shifts in predominant weed species which indicates development of resistance and the need to select alternative weed management strategies or materials (5).

Control

Shallow tillage between the rows using a rotary-type cultivator is the standard method for summer weed control. Although this operation is performed routinely during the growing season, care is taken to avoid excessive frequency since it can destroy soil structure, lead to soil compaction and increase root stress. Some growers plant winter cover crops between the rows in the late summer to compete with weeds, reduce erosion, and improve soil condition (5).

Weeds are controlled in areas immediately around fields primarily by maintaining year-round sod, which is mowed regularly during the growing season.

 

Primocane suppression

It is standard practice for raspberry growers to burn back or suppress new shoots or primocanes in the spring. The primary benefits of cane burning are a reduction in cane size to a size which is more favorable for machine harvesting, and the overall suppression of numerous fungi which cause diseases of leaves, fruit and canes. One spray is usually applied to the row when the first flush of primocanes is about 6" tall. Cane burning may not be practiced in older, weaker fields because they are less likely to produce a second vigorous flush of primocanes which are necessary for sustaining production (3).

Control

 

Estimates of Pesticide Usage and Representative Spray Program

The tables on the following two pages are included in order to provide a more complete understanding of key chemicals and usage patterns (Table 1), as well as a typical pesticide program for the year in an established raspberry field on a farm which is targeting higher-end/higher-value markets (Table 2). Farms targeting the lower-end juice market would apply about half of the fungicide applications shown in this table. As the text spells out, some of these treatments are not needed nor used every year.

TABLE 1

Estimate of Usage of the Most Common Pesticides* in Raspberries
in
Washington State During the 1997 crop year

 

Pesticide

 

% Area treated

 

# Applications

per year

 

Lb. AI/acre

per application

 

Lb. AI/treated acre

per season

Insecticides

       

»Bifenthrin**

81

1.0

0.10

0.10

Bt

46

2.1

   

»Diazinon

77

1.4

1.10

1.54

Esfenvalerate

36

1.0

0.06

0.06

»Malathion

44

1.0

1.07

1.07

         

Fungicides

       

»Benomyl

76

1.7

0.49

0.83

»Captan

94

5.0

1.17

5.85

Ferbam

61

1.3

1.23

1.60

Iprodione

71

1.3

0.60

0.78

»Lime Sulfur

70

1.0

9.16

9.16

»Metalaxyl

49

1.2

0.49

0.59

Vinclozolin

58

2.6

0.54

1.40

         

Herbicides ***

       

»Diuron

31

1.0

0.97

0.97

Norflurazon

4

1.0

1.20

1.20

»Oryzalin

62

1.0

1.20

1.20

»Oxyfluorfen

74

1.0

0.10

0.10

»Paraquat

85

1.1

0.32

0.35

Sethoxydim

5

1.0

0.19

0.19

»Simazine

56

1.1

0.62

0.68

Source: Adapted from the National Agriculture Statistics Service, USDA Pesticide Data Program, Fruit summary for the 1997 Crop Year. URL: http://www.usda.gov/nass/pubs/estindx1.htm#agchem

* Limited to pesticides used to control insects, diseases, and weeds only.

** Materials shown in red or marked with this symbol (») are heavily relied upon and have few or no currently registered and effective substitutes.

*** Discrepancies in rates between this table and text in the weed control section are due to different methods of reporting. The text shows labelled rates per acre. Because these materials are typically applied in 3-4 ft. wide bands in the row, actual use per acre is 30-40% of the labelled/broadcast rate as shown here.

 

TABLE 2

Typical Pesticide Spray Program for the Year
On an Average Farm

 

Date

Pesticide

Lbs ai/acre

Method

Target Pest*

Crop Stage

           

March

Diazinon

2.0

Banded

Crown borer

Dormant

 

Diuron

1.6-2.4

Banded

Weeds

Dormant

 

Metalaxyl

0.5

Banded

Root rot

Dormant

           

Late March

Lime Sulfur

9

Foliar

Cane diseases

Delayed dorm.

           

Early April

Oxyfluorfen

0.1

Directed base

Cane burn

Pre-bloom

           

Early May

Captan

2.0

Foliar

SB

Pre-bloom

           

Mid May

Captan

2.0

Foliar

SB

Early Bloom

 

Iprodione

0.5

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Early Bloom

 

Diazinon

1.0

Foliar

Fruitworm

Early Bloom

           

Late May

Captan

2.0

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Bloom

           

Early June

Captan

2.0

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Bloom

 

Vinclozolin

0.5

Foliar

Botrytis

Bloom

           

Mid June

Captan

2.0

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Bloom

           

Late June

Captan

2.0

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Pre-Harvest

 

Iprodione

0.5

Foliar

Botrytis, SB

Pre-Harvest

 

Bifenthrin

0.1

Foliar

Insects

Pre-Harvest

           

August

Benomyl

0.375

Foliar

Cane blight

Post-Harvest

 

Fenbut. Oxide

1.0

Foliar

Spider Mites

Post-Harvest

           

October/Nov

Fenamiphos

6.0

Banded

Nematodes

Post-Harvest

           

Source: WSU Vancouver, Lynden Satellite Station IPM Project (1998) and personal communication with raspberry growers.

 

*Target pest codes where abbreviated:

 

On-Line Resources

Washington Red Raspberry Commission (http://www.red-raspberry.com

Oregon Raspberry and Blackberry Commission (http://www.oregon-berries.com

 

Contacts

Plant Pathology
Peter R. Bristow
Washington State University
Puyallup Research and Extension Center
7612 Pioneer Way E.
Puyallup, WA 98371-4998
Phone (253) 445-4529
Fax (253) 445-4569
Internet:bristowp@wsu.edu

 

Entomology
Lynell K. Tanigoshi
Washington State University
Vancouver Research and Extension Center
1919 NE 78th Street
Vancouver, WA 98665-9752
Phone (360) 576-6030
Fax (360) 576-6032
Internet:tanigosh@wsu.edu

 

Weed Science
Timothy W. Miller
Washington State University
Mt. Vernon Research Station
1468 Memorial Highway
Mt. Vernon, WA 98273-9788
Phone (360) 848-6138
Fax (360) 848-6159
Internet:twmiller@wsu.edu

 

Horticulture
Craig B. MacConnell
Washington State University
Cooperative Extension, Whatcom County
1000 N. Forest Street
Bellingham, WA 98225-5594
Phone (360) 676-6736
Fax (360) 738-2458
Internet:cbmac@wsu.edu

 

References

  1. Anne Seeger, Washington State Red Raspberry Commission. Personal Communication. October, 1998.
  2. Washington Agricultural Statistics Service, 1998 Report.
  3. Commercial Red Raspberry Production, Pacific Northwest Cooperative Extension Bulletin 176. 1987.
  4. Antonelli, A.L., Shanks, C.H., Fisher, G.C. Small Fruit Pests, Biology, Diagnosis and Management. Washington State University Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1388. 1988.
  5. Pest Management Guide for Commercial Small Fruits. Washington State University Cooperative Extension Bulletin 1491. 1998.
  6. Studies of the Clay Colored Weevil on Meeker Raspberries. Washington State University Vancouver/Lynden Research Station, summary report, unpublished. September, 1998.
  7. Menzies, G.W. and MacConnell, C.B. Integrated Pest Management for Raspberries, a Guide for Sampling and Decision-Making for Key Raspberry Pests in Northwest Washington. Washington State University Cooperative Extension publication. June, 1998.
  8. Comparison of Traditional to IPM Strategy for Managing Key Insect and Diseases Pests of Raspberry; Meeker Variety. Washington State University Vancouver/Lynden Research Station, summary report, unpublished. September, 1998.
  9. Evangelista, Li, Fitzpatrick, Isman, and Troubridge. Identification and Control of Caterpillars on Raspberries in the Lower Fraser Valley, B.C. Agriculture Canada and University of British Columbia special report. 1993.
  10. Sheila Fitzpatrick, Research Entomologist, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, Agasiz, B.C., Canada. Personal Communication. May, 1997.
  11. Knight, A.L., LaLone, R., Fisher, G.C., and Coop, L.B. Managing Leafrollers on Caneberries in Oregon. Oregon State University Extension Circular 1263. January 1988
  12. Pacific Northwest Insect Control Handbook. Pacific Northwest Cooperative Extension Bulletin. 1998
  13. Raspberry On-Farm Research Activities. Washington State University Nooksack IPM Project, summary report, unpublished. October 1997.
  14. Tom Peerbolt, Peerbolt Crop Management, Portland Oregon. Personal Communication. October 22, 1998.
  15. Booth, S.R., Tanigoshi, L.K., and Murray, T. The Potential of Microbial Agents to Suppress Root Weevils in Red Raspberry and Strawberry: Preliminary Results. Washington State University Vancouver Research and Extension Center, Research Summary. July, 1996.
  16. Peter Bristow, Plant Pathologist, Washington State University, Puyallup Research and Extension Center. Personal Communication. September 29 and October 28, 1998.
  17. Steve Midboe, Whatcom Farmers Cooperative, Lynden, WA. Personal Communication. October 22, 1998.
  18. Pacific Northwest Weed Control Handbook. Pacific Northwest Cooperative Extension Bulletin. 1998.
  19. Rolf Haugen, Riverberry, Inc. Personal Communication. October 28, 1998.
  20. Raworth, D.A., and Clements, S.J. Plant Growth and Yield of Red Raspberry following Primocane Defoliation. Hort Science, Vol 31(6), 920-921, October 1996.
  21. Bristow, P.R. and Windom, G.E. Red Raspberry Root Rot. In the 1992 Red Raspberry Research Proposals, 1991 Progress Reports to the Washington State Red Raspberry Commission.
  22. Tanigoshi, L. T., Research Entomologist, Washington State University, Vancouver Research and Extension Center. Personal Communication. November 5, 1998.
  23. Shanks,C.H., Antonelli, A.L., and Congdon, B.D. Effect of pesticides on twospotted spider mite (Acari: Tetranychidae) populations on red raspberries in western Washington, Agriculture, Ecosystems, and Environment, 38, 159-165, 1992.
  24. Mike Conway, Trident Ag Products, Vancouver, WA. Personal Communication. November 6, 1998.
  25. Brian Cieslar, Agronomist, Tri-Fruit, Lynden, WA. Personal Communication. November 19, 1998.
  26. Shanks,C.H., Antonelli, A.L., and Congdon, B.D. Impact of Insecticides on the Spider Mite Destroyer and Twospotted Spider Mite on Red Raspberries in Washington. WSU Research Bulletin XB 1034, 1996.
  27. Pacific Northwest Plant Disease Control Handbook. Pacific Northwest Cooperative Extension Bulletin. 1998.
  28. Johnson, K.B., Sawyer, T.L., and Powelson, M.L. 1994. Frequency of benzimidazole- and dicarboximide-resistant strains of Botrytis cinerea, in western Oregon small fruit and snap bean plantings. Plant Disease 78: 572-577.

 

January 1999

Author

Geoffrey W. Menzies
Washington State University
Cooperative Extension, Whatcom County
1000 N. Forest Street.
Bellingham, WA 98225-5594
Phone (360) 676-6736
Fax (360) 738-2458
Internet:gmenz@coopext.cahe.wsu.edu


Prepared January 1999


Database and web development by the NSF Center for Integrated Pest Managment located at North Carolina State University. All materials may be used freely with credit to the USDA.