On April 15^th, the Central Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board (CCRWQCB) finalized and approved Ag Order 4.0. The new rulings affect several aspects of agricultural production such as buffer areas and discharge of pesticides to water ways. In this article we will focus on the impacts of Ag Order 4.0 on the use of nitrogen (N) fertilizers.

New targets and limits on the use of N fertilizer are calculated using the A minus R metric. In this scenario, “A” is N applied to the crop in the form of fertilizer (A_fertilizer), N in irrigation water (A_irrigation), N supplied by compost (A_compost) and N mineralized from organic fertilizer (A_{organic fertilizer}). “R” is N removed from the field by the crop (R_harvest), scavenged during the winter fallow by cover crops or immobilized by high-carbon compost (R_scavenge), N removed by denitrification bioreactors (R_treated), N sequestered in woody plant biomass (R_sequestered), or other unspecified forms of N removal from fields (R_other). Although AgOrder 4.0 outlines 3 pathways to compliance, pathway 1 is most likely the one that most ranches would use unless the wells have very high nitrate-N concentrations (> 40 ppm N).  A - R is not to exceed the targets or limits shown in Table 1 for pathway 1 compliance. The A-R is calculated over the growing season on a land acre basis. If two or more crops are grown on the same physical acre, each crop contributes to the value for the year. Below is a discussion of each component of the A-R metric.

Table 1. A-R regulatory schedule

 The “A” side of the equation:

A_fertilizer is the amount of N fertilizer added to grow the crop. The actual units of N in lbs/A are used in this calculation.

A_irrigation is the amount of N contained in the irrigation water that is taken up by the crop. For most vegetable and berry crops grown on the central coast the volume of water that must be accounted for in this calculation is equivalent to the volume used by the crop for evapotranspiration (ET).  For crops where less water is applied than ET, the volume of applied water can be used in the calculation.  To calculate A_irrigation use the equation:   

A_irrigation = water volume (inches) x nitrate-N concentration of water (ppm N) x 0.227

The factor 0.227 converts the units inches x ppm N to lbs of N/acre.

For example, if a lettuce crop uses 7.3 inches for ET, and is irrigated with water that has a 37 ppm N concentration, the A_irrigation would be:

 7.3 inches x 37 ppm N x 0.227 = 61 lbs N/acre

A_compost is the amount of N provided by compost. Given that the amount of N that is mineralized by the compost depends on the carbon to nitrogen (C:N) ratio not all the N in the compost becomes available. This fact is recognized in the Ag Order as follows:

For compost with a C:N ratio of <11, the amount of N in the compost is multiplied by 0.10, and for composts with a C:N ratio of >11 the amount of N in the compost is multiplied by 0.05. Only this amount of N is added to the A side of the equation. These discount factors were an important change made by the Regional Board staff to reflect the actual quantity of N provided by compost and to avoid a disincentive to the use of composts, a key soil health practice.

A_{organic fertilizer} is the amount of N that is mineralized during the cropping system. The amount of N mineralized depends upon the C:N ratio of the material and the CCRWQCB is using the regression curve in a recent paper published by Lazicki et al (2020) to determine the amount of N mineralized. For instance, a material like 4-4-2 has a C:N ratio of 7.3 (29% C/4% N) and has a discount factor of 0.39 (Table MRP-3 in Attachment B). This means that if 100 units of N are applied as 4-4-2, the amount mineralized from this material and that is attributed to the A side of the equation is 39 lbs/A (100 lbs x 0.39). This discount factor acknowledges the fact that not all N in organic fertilizer mineralizes during the cropping season and was an important correction made to Ag Order 4.0.

 The “R” side of the equation:

R_harvest is the amount of N that is removed from the field in the harvested product. The amount of N removed in the harvested product is calculated by a removal coefficient composed of the percent moisture multiplied by the percent N of the crop. This coefficient is then multiplied by the net pounds of product harvested from a field to determine lbs N/A removed. We have been working on a project developing N removal coefficients for a number of vegetable commodities. Table 2 shows data for full term romaine lettuce. Note that percent solids and nitrogen values observed in our evaluations vary significantly and that the mean value has a notable degree of variability which affects the estimate of N removed by the crop. Regardless of the variability, the important point to recognize is that the removed N is modest in relation to the amount of N applied. Figure 1 shows total fertilizer N to lettuce for a large number of vegetable operations in our area. It becomes evident that growers face some major challenges in complying with the application limits as the limits ratchet down over the next several years.

Table 2. Example of calculation of removal coefficient for a full-term romaine crop.

* 0.0569 x 0.0315 = 0.00178

Figure 1. Nitrogen fertilizer applied to lettuce in 2017. Data reported by growers to the CCRWQCB

R_scavenge is the amount of N that is captured by by cover crops or immobilized by high-carbon compost during the winter fallow period. The CCRWQCB agreed to credit non-legume winter cover crops with 97% of their N content that meet the following criteria: 1) are grown for ≥ 90 days during the winter fallow period, 2) accumulate more than 4,500 lbs/acre of dry biomass and 3) have a C:N ratio of ≥ 20 when incorporated into the ground. N scavenging credits granted for cover crops are helpful, but do not remove any of the current logistical barriers to using of cover crops in intensive vegetable systems. However, given that non-legume cover crops routinely contain 100 to 150+ lbs N/acre, as N application limits ratchet down, cover crop use may be incentivized to some degree.

High-carbon composts were also included in the R_scavenge category. This practice is still being researched to fully understand how  much N can be immobilized.  Growers already use compost (typical C:N ratio of 10-12) but could substitute high-carbon compost (C:N ratio of >30) which can quickly facilitate its use. Currently, high-carbon compost has been granted a credit of 30 lbs N/acre in Ag Order 4.0. However, once the research on this practice is completed, this practice may be granted greater credits as warranted on the R side of the equation.

R_treat is the quantity of N removed from tile drainage  and irrigation runoff by denitrification bioreactors or constructed wetlands. This practice can be implemented in the northern part of Monterey County where high nitrate tile drain water impacts the surrounding sloughs and creeks.  The bioreactors vary in size and sophistication, from sunken beds filled with wood chips to highly engineered portable treatment systems.

R_sequestered is the quantity of N that is captured in the woody plant tissue of perennial crops. This form of N removal is relevant to vineyards and orchards in our area and does not impact the vegetable industry.

R_other is the quantity of N removed from the field in other, unspecified ways. One form of N removal not addressed in Ag Order 4.0 is the gaseous loss of N by denitrification from soil. This is a topic that needs further research. Two studies done on the Central Coast showed that in sandy soils with drip irrigation, there is little nitrous oxide or dinitrogen loss (2-4 lbs N/acre/crop). However, an earlier study of celery and lettuce production fields in the 1980s showed that on heavier soil with furrow irrigation gaseous N losses ranged from 18 to 37 lbs N/acre. Further research is needed to understand denitrification rates more fully in coastal vegetable production.

What options does the industry have moving forward?

Basically, a timer has been started by Ag Order 4.0. The first dates are targets of 500 lbs N/acre/year 2 years from now and 400 lbs N/acre/year in 2025 (four years). Starting in 2027 the targets become limits ratcheting down to 300 lbs N/acre/year. In scenarios that we and others have run, the 300 lbs N/acre/year limit will become very challenging for growers to comply with in typical double cropped production. There are basically three key practices that will provide the most improvements in N use efficiency: 1) measuring residual soil nitrate and adjusting fertilizer applications accordingly, 2) accounting for the nitrate in irrigation water as part of the N budget, and 3) improving irrigation efficiency to help maintain residual soil nitrate in the active rootzone of crops. A concerted focus on these three practices will require a commitment from the decision makers at each farming operation. Farming operations have differed in their approach to the pending water quality regulations. Some have taken a proactive approach and are farther along on the learning curve. It is important to make attempts to begin implementing these practices and see what is possible for your operation given the crop mix, soil types, and nitrate levels in the irrigation water. The good news is that there is still time. To begin implementing these practices, it is important to start small to gain the needed knowledge base in efficient N and water management practices. Working with knowledgeable people will be essential.

 Other options that can help fine tune fertilizer applications and reduce the risk of cutting fertilizer rates are various nitrogen technologies such as nitrification inhibitors and controlled release fertilizers. In studies that we have done, there is clearly a benefit to the use of some of these materials, but again, there is a learning curve to obtaining the benefits that they can provide. Nitrapyrin (a nitrification inhibitor commonly used in the corn belt) was registered on lettuce and brassicas in 2019 and has not been widely used yet by the industry, but it along with other materials, deserves greater evaluation.

In addition to improving in-season N use efficiency, implementation of practices to minimize nitrate losses during the winter fallow period is needed.  Cover crops are a key practice for reducing leaching losses during the winter and finding opportunities for their use will become more important in the next several years. The credits given cover crops on the R side of the equation can help growers achieve compliance with Ag Order 4.0 as the A – R limits are reduced to less than 300 lbs N/acre/year.

In summary, the finalization of Ag Order 4.0 will have a significant impact on how vegetables are grown on the Central Coast in the coming years. There is a window of opportunity to experiment on how to address limits that will be applied to the use of N fertilizers. Now is the time to make the decisions needed to address this new reality.  Please do not hesitate to reach out to us for help or advice.

Authors: Surendra K. Dara, Entomology and Biologicals Advisor, University of California Cooperative Extension

                                 Western flower thrips adult (Photo courtesy: Jack Kelly Clark, UC IPM) 

The western flower thrips, Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande) (Thysanoptera: Thripidae) is one of the major pests of lettuce in California. It has a wide host range including several vegetable, ornamental, and other cultivated or wild plants. Native to North America, the western flower thrips is also known as alfalfa thrips, California thrips, and maize thrips among others. This article provides a general overview of the pest, its biology, damage, and management. 

Damage:

The western flower thrips prefers flowers, but also feeds on developing buds, fruits, and foliage. Larvae and adults rupture the leaf surface with their rasping mouthparts and feed on plant juices. Feeding damage results in silvery appearance of the leaf surface, which later turns brown. The presence of dark fecal specs indicates thrips occurrence. In lettuce, the western flower thrips transmits Tomato spotted wilt virus and is the sole vector of Impatiens necrotic spot virus. Only the larval stages acquire these tospoviruses and the adults transmit the viruses to other plants as they spread in the field.

Management: Integrated pest management approach is critical for successful pest management. It involves regular monitoring, exploring the potential of multiple options including cultural and biological solutions, and proper timing and application of various strategies among others. The western flower thrips is one of the pests where insecticide resistance is a common problem. To reduce the risk of resistance development, it is necessary to explore the potential of multiple control options and rotate insecticides with different modes of action. This is essential to suppress pest populations to desired levels and also to maintain control efficacy of existing pesticides.

Cultural control – Remove weed and other hosts that harbor thrips or viruses. Sprinkler irrigation can help reduce thrips populations. Plow down lettuce crop residue to destroy surviving stages. In general, maintaining good plant health with optimal nutrition and irrigation practices helps plants withstand pest damage. Silicate products can improve the structural strength of plant tissues and reduce pest damage and/or populations. Several biostimulants or biological soil amendments can also help activate plant's natural defenses against pest infestations. Consider using them to improve overall plant health and yields, and to protect plants from biotic and abiotic stresses.

Biological control – Predators such lacewings (Chrysopa spp. and Chrysoperla spp.), minute pirate bugs (Orius spp. and Anthocoris spp.), predatory mites (Amblyseius swirski, Ablyseius andersoni, Neoseiulus cucumeris and Stratiolaelaps scimitus), and rove beetles (Dalotia coriaria) attack thrips. Conserve natural enemies with insectary plants and applying safer pesticides, and augment natural populations by releasing commercially reared species.
Microbial control – Entomopathogenic fungi such as Beauveria bassiana and Cordyceps (Isaria) fumosorosea, products based on bacteria such as Burkholderia rinojensis and Chromobacterium subtsugae, and entomopathogenic nematodes such as Heterorhabditis spp. and Steinernema feltiae can be used against one or more life stages. Entomopathogenic nematodes are more effective against pupae in soil because they actively search for and infect their hosts. Entomopathogenic fungi can be used against all life stages.

Botanical control – Azadirachtin alone or in combination with entomopathogenic fungi or insecticides can also be used against multiple life stages. Azadirachtin is an insecticide, antifeedant, and a growth regulator. Similarly, pyrethrins derived from chrysanthemum flowers can be used alone or with other biological or synthetic insecticides. Pyrethrins are nerve poisons. Other botanical insecticides that contain soybean oil, rosemary oil, thymol, and neem oil (which also has a low concentration of azadirachtin) also provide control against thrips through insecticidal, repellency, and antifeedant activities.

Other control options – Insecticidal soaps and mineral oils can be used against different life stages of thrips. Spinosad, a popular insecticide of microbial origin and a mixture of two chemicals spinosyn A and spinosyn D, is very effective against thrips. However, overuse of spinosad can lead to resistance issues in thrips and other insects.
Chemical control – There are several synthetic insecticides that are effective against thrips. It is important to rotate chemicals among different mode of action groups to reduce the risk of insecticide 

Chemical control – There are several synthetic insecticides that are effective against thrips. It is important to rotate chemicals among different mode of action groups to reduce the risk of insecticide resistance. The following are some synthetic active ingredients and their mode of actions groups in parenthesis that can be used for thrips control: methomyl (1A), bifenthrin (3A), lambda-cyhalothrin (3A), zeta-cypermethrin (3A), clothianidin (4A), spinetoram (5), and cyantraniliprole (28).

Depending on the level of control needed, combinations of products from different categories can improve control efficacy. For example, a combination of entomopathogenic fungi and nematodes can be applied to the soil for controlling prepupae and pupae. While the soil-dwelling predatory mite S. scimitus and the rove beetle, D. coriaria, can be used against pupal stages, other natural enemies can be used against nymphs and adults. A combination of entomopathogenic fungi and azadirachtin can be applied both to the soil or foliage for controlling different life stages. Similarly, various biological and synthetic insecticides can be applied in combination or rotation to obtain desired control.

The categories presented above are based on the source or nature of the active ingredients and do not indicate their organic or conventional label status. Please check the product labels for their appropriateness for managing thrips in lettuce, for use in organic farms, and guidelines for storage, handling, and field use. Entomopathogenic nematodes, fungi, and other biologicals are compatible with several synthetic agricultural inputs, but verify the label guidelines for specific instructions.

Broad categories of control options for managing western flower thrips 

These guidelines can be used for thrips management in multiple crops depending on the label status.

Additional resources:

Dara, S. K. 2019. The new integrated pest management paradigm for the modern age. JIPM 10: 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jipm/pmz010

Dara, S. K. 2021. Biopesticides: categories and use strategies for IPM and IRM. UC ANR eJournal of Entomology and Biologicals. https://ucanr.edu/blogs/blogcore/postdetail.cfm?postnum=46134

Natwick, E. T., S. V. Joseph, and S. K. Dara. 2017. UC IPM pest management guidelines: lettuce. UC ANR Publication 3450. https://www2.ipm.ucanr.edu/agriculture/lettuce/Western-flower-thrips/

Riley, D. G., S. V. Joseph, R. Srinivasan, and S. Diffie. 2011. Thrips vectors of tospoviruses. JIPM 2: I1I10. https://doi.org/10.1603/IPM10020  

Posted by Richard Smith and Joji Muramoto

On March 2, 9 and 16, 2021 we held the sessions of the Organic Soil Fertility Series. The videos of those sessions are now available. The links to each session are listed below along with the topics covered and the presenters.

Part 1: https://youtu.be/WcukYVTeWQg

Estimating Nitrogen Contributions from Cover Crops and Soil Organic Matter and the Role of Soil Microbes in Providing Plant-Available Nitrogen
Presenters: Margaret Lloyd, Daniel Geisseler and Louise Jackson

Part 2:https://youtu.be/Ts1T-Dt2ucw

Estimating Nitrogen Release from Organic Amendments and Irrigation Water
Presenters: Patricia Lazicki, Margaret Lloyd and Michael Cahn

Part 3:https://youtu.be/GoTNhd-eSR0

Putting it all Together: Nitrogen Management in Strawberries and Vegetables and Discussion of New Concepts in Organic Nitrogen Nutrition
Presenters: Joji Muramoto and Richard Smith

Gouda (The Netherlands), 15 April 2021

Two new races of the downy mildew pathogen (Peronospora effusa) on spinach have been denominated by the International Working Group on Peronospora in spinach (IWGP) on the basis of a worldwide evaluation of isolates from growers fields and trap nurseries. Isolate SP1924 found in Europe, is denominated as race Pe: 18. Isolate UA202001E, found in the USA, is denominated as race Pe: 19. Both races pose a significant threat to the spinach industry in all parts of the world, and resistance to these new races is important.

Members of the IWGP are using a fixed set of spinach differentials (with different resistances)  to define races of downy mildew on spinach by their pattern of virulence on the set. The virulence patterns of all races are published as reference data by the International Seed Federation (ISF); https://www.worldseed.org/our-work/plant-health/differential-hosts/

Race Pe: 18 is able to infect the differentials NIL2, 3, 4, 5, Pigeon, Caladonia, and Meerkat. Pe: 18 has been found in the US in 2015 to 2018, not in 2019 and 2020. And in Europe it has been found more often in the last 3 years. Race Pe: 19 is able to infect the differentials NIL1, 2, 4, 5, 6, Pigeon, Meerkat and Hydrus. Pe: 19 has been reported only from the USA until now.

The IWGP is continuously monitoring the appearance of strains of the pathogen that deviate in virulence from the known races. In this way the IWGP aims to promote a consistent and clear communication between public and private entities, such as the seed industry, growers, scientists, and other interested parties, about all resistance-breaking races that are persistent enough to survive over several years, occur in a wide area, and cause a significant economic impact.

The IWGP is operating internationally and is administered by Plantum located in The Netherlands. The IWGP consists of representatives from spinach seed companies (BASF, Bayer, Bejo, DeSeed, Enza, Pop Vriend, Rijk Zwaan, Sakata, Syngenta, Takii, and Vilmorin) and Naktuinbouw, and is supported by public research at the University of Arkansas. Spinach researchers over the world are invited to join the IWGP initiative and use the common host differential set to identify new isolates. All denominated isolates and seeds of the differential set are available at Naktuinbouw (The Netherlands).

Attached:

Table with disease resistance reactions of spinach downy mildew races on IWGP differentials. Differentials and type isolates are available at Naktuinbouw in The Netherlands.

This table is also available at https://www.worldseed.org/our-work/plant-health/differential-hosts/

For more information on this subject you can contact Jim Correll (jcorrell@uark.edu), Diederik Smilde (d.smilde@naktuinbouw.nl), or the IWGP chairperson Anne Königs (a.konigs@rijkzwaan.nl)