Asian Citrus Psyllid Update

Winter and spring rains have given us a robust growing season this year. Tender new citrus flush is ideal habitat for ACP to feed, lay eggs and build new populations. An increase in ACP numbers and feeding can increase the risk of HLB spreading and building up. University of California recommends growers monitor trees regularly for ACP, paying careful attention to new flush, and treat when populations reach the detection threshold.  The UC IPM website lists a range of materials effective against ACP, including organic options. Growers are also encouraged to work with a pest management professional to better detect and manage ACP.

Advanced notification of nearby beekeepers is required before pesticide treatments. Use the BeeWhere BeeCheck system, or contact the County Agricultural Commissioner's office, 805-681-5600, for more information. Always follow label instructions for bee safety. 

If your citrus is no longer being cared for or is not worth the resources required to protect it from ACP and HLB, consider removing it.

HLB Quarantine Update

As of May 5, a total of 5.007 trees and 709 ACP have been confirmed positive for the bacterium that causes HLB. Trees confirmed positive are treated for ACP and removed, and the HLB quarantine may be expanded. Additional ACP treatments and HLB detection surveys are conducted on a recurring basis to remaining citrus within 250 meters of each detection.

Counties where HLB has been detected via PCR testing are Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego, with the majority of detections in Orange County. To see a map of the current HLB quarantine areas, and other details of locations and numbers of HLB detections, please visit maps.cdfa.ca.gov/WeeklyACPMaps/HLBWeb/HLB_Treatments.pdf. 

HLB Detection Response Guide for Growers 

To ensure California citrus growers are well prepared in the event of a potential commercial grove detection of Huanglongbing (HLB), the Citrus Pest and Disease Prevention Program (CPDPP) has developed the  Response Guide for a Confirmed HLB Positive Detection in a Commercial Grove, which details the steps taken by CDFA and actions required of the property or grove owner, as outlined in CDFA's Action Plan and Information for Citrus Growers/Grove Managers.

Citrus Pest and Disease Prevention Committee Meetings -- Webinar and In Person 

All meeting agendas and eventually the minutes are posted at www.cdfa.ca.gov/citrus committee/. The 2022-23 schedule for the Full Committee is here, and the schedule for Subcommittees is here.

Upcoming Meetings

• Operations Subcommittee, Wednesday May 10 at 9 am (agenda and webinar link)
• Outreach Subcommittee, Wednesday May 10 at 1:30 pm (agenda and webinar link)
• CPDPP Full Committee, Wednesday August 9 (agenda pending)

All meetings are free and open to the public to listen to or make public comment. Meetings are currently in person and accessible via phone and/or webinar. Links to register for and join meetings are included in agendas when posted.

For a list of current committee members, click here. 

Additional ACP/HLB Resources

• CDFA Citrus Division website: https://www.cdfa.ca.gov/Citrus/
• General ACP/HLB

oInformation on the state ACP/HLB program including maps, quarantine information, and a signup option for email alerts: citrusinsider.org/

oBiology of ACP and HLB, detection maps and recommendations for monitoring, eradication and management: ucanr.edu/sites/acp/ 

oUC IPM recommendations for ACP insecticides

oWeb-based map to find out how close you are to HLB: ucanr.edu/hlbgrowerapp

oVideo on Best Practices in the Field, available in English and Spanish

oSpanish-only ACP/HLB presentation video presentation and audio-only recording. 

• Research

oLatest Science Advisory Panel Report

oUC Ag Experts Talk presentations on management of various citrus pests and diseases are available for viewing here and here on YouTube.

oSummaries of the latest research to combat HLB: ucanr.edu/sites/scienceforcitrushealth/

oScience-based analyses to guide policy decisions, logistics, and operations: www.datoc.us

• Regulatory/Quarantine

oSign up for program updates from the Citrus Pest and Disease Prevention Division at www.cdfa/signup-email-updates.

oRegulatory requirements for moving bulk citrus: Information for Citrus Growers

oSummary of regulatory requirements in the event of an HLB detection in commercial citrus: citrusinsider.org/Regulatory-Flyer

oSanta Barbara County Ag Commissioner's Office

--------

Cressida Silvers

CA Citrus Pest and Disease Prevention Program

ACP/HLB Grower Liaison

Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo Counties

805 284-3310 (phone or text)

I recently harvested 'GEM' avocados and found that some of the fruit was splitting. The split fruit was just turning from a bright green to one with dark tinges. There were also gobs of snails and slugs on the fruit. I mentioned the cracking fruit to a grower who had been harvesting ‘Hass' fruit and the comment was that their fruit was turning black on the tree and falling. This is way early for ‘Hass' to show this level of maturity.

Several mandarin growers also mention peel breakdown or rind disorder. There can be brown, water-soaked blotches or dark, sunken areas developing on the rind after rainy weather. The fruit matures rapidly, turning orange early. Secondary fungi can then colonize the affected areas. It's more of a problem in northern California where thin-skinned satsumas are grown and there are early rains. But accelerated maturity and fruit/whole plant breakdown can happen on all citrus and many other fruiting plant species.

This is another example of accelerated maturity due to wet roots. The roots need air, like we do, and when they are asphyxiated for even short periods of time, they start signaling the rest of the plant that something is wrong. Prolonged rainy periods or actual ponding conditions will lead to ethylene precursors that start the maturation process – “banana in a bag” effect. This is in spite of many crops being delayed in their maturity because of the cold winter we have had. Drown the roots, and they start responding as if they are choking. They are. In some cases, leaves will droop (epinasty or wilting) and drop, immediately.   And then the fruit may drop right away or then just start rapidly maturing/ripening on the tree. Once this process starts, there's no stopping it. Some growers, seeing fruit drop have gone out to start harvests, but then inadvertently gotten their forklifts stuck in the mud. Rain can have its downsides.

To maximize profits in the early navel orange market, growers need to have large fruit size and sufficient yellow-orange color and a high enough sugar-acid ratio to meet or exceed the legal minimum harvesting standards. Growers of early-maturing navel oranges in Kern County use different strategies to produce these oranges. Some growers irrigate at full evapotranspiration rates nearly up to harvest with the belief this will maximize fruit size, while others begin deficit irrigating a month or two prior to harvest to maximize development of sugar and color to promote earlier maturity. Little information exists in the literature to assist growers in making decisions related to producing early maturing navels such as Beck, Fukumoto and Thompson Improved. To determine the effects of late season irrigation stress, I, along with two University of California co-researchers Blake Sanden and Dr. Mary Lu Arpaia, participated in an experiment to elucidate some of the trade-offs that relate to irrigation strategies and early navel fruit production. The research was conducted from 2006 through 2008 in a cooperating grower's Beck orchard at the extreme southern end of the San Joaquin Valley. Our generous and patient cooperating growers were George and Colby Fry.

Three different irrigation treatments, defined as low, mid and high, were developed based on the relative amounts of irrigation water applied to the test plots. Each plot consisted of 10 trees in a central row, bordered by ten similarly irrigated trees in the two adjacent rows. Each treatment was replicated five times. The same irrigation treatment was applied to the same plots for the first two years, while in the third year the low treatment was changed to the high treatment to provide information on how rapidly the trees would recover from stress. The different irrigation treatments were administered by using irrigation emitters with different flow rates and by differentially shutting off water to some treatments as needed to achieve desired stress levels. Between growing seasons, the top three feet of soil profile was refilled with water during the winter and differential irrigation began in early August. Measurable differences in tree shaded stem water potential among treatment usually were noted by early September. In the second year of the experiment (2007), the low and mid-irrigation treatments applied approximately 38 and 71 percent, respectively on average, of the water of the high treatment. Water potential measurements made mid-day on shaded, interior leaves demonstrated that good separation was achieved among the three differential treatments. In 2007, for example, shaded stem water potential measurement in early September were about -9, -12, and -18 bars for the high, mid and low irrigation treatments, respectively and at harvest in mid-October were -12, -18, -24, respectively. Neutron probe measurements also demonstrated that trees differentially depleted available water stored in the soil as the season progressed (data not shown). In 2007, differences in applied water among the treatments were large. Including the increased quantity of water applied to refill the soil profile in the winter, 3.55, 2.58 and 2.11 acre feet of water on a per acre basis, were applied to the high, mid and low irrigation treatments respectively, from October 30, 2006, to harvest, October 15, 2007. Rainfall was minimal.

Again, using 2007 as an example, as the level of applied water decreased, soluble solids (i.e. sugars) and titratable acid, were greater at harvest, although the sugar acid ratio was not different (see Table 1).

Rows in the experimental orchard were oriented east and west. Fruit on the south side of the tree had higher soluble solids concentration and sugar/acid ratio than fruit on the north side of the tree, regardless of irrigation treatment. Fruit juiciness, either measured as weight of juice to weight of fruit (see Table 1) or volume of juice per weight of fruit (results not shown) were not different among irrigation treatments, suggesting the increase in sugars and acid was the result of osmotic adjustment and not fruit dehydration. We were also interested in seeing if the differential irrigation treatments influenced eating quality of the fruit. To test this idea, we provided fruit from the highest and lowest irrigation treatments of 2007 and 2008 to volunteer panelists at the UC Kearney Ag Center and asked if they could detect any differences between the fruit. Results from both years showed that the panelists could not detect differences between the two irrigation treatments. This suggests that the increase in soluble solids in the low irrigation treatment was not sufficient to influence eating quality.

In 2007, yield and grade decreased as the amount of applied water decreased (see Table 2).

Fruit in the high and mid irrigation treatments peaked on size 56 per carton and on size 72 per carton in low treatment (data not shown). The decrease in fruit grade at pack-out appeared to be largely due to a more oblong shape. The negative yield, fruit size and grade effects measured in the low and mid treatments in 2007 were probably the cumulative result of deficit irrigation in Years 1 and 2 and not just Year 2 alone. Reduced rates of irrigation hastened development of fruit color compared to the high irrigation treatment (see Table 3) and this occurred every year.

The deleterious effects on yield, and grade on the trees in the low-irrigation treatments suggested that not much would be gained by continuing this level of stress for a third season in the same plots. In 2008, the low irrigation treatment was replaced by a high irrigation treatment and, at harvest, yield by weight and fruit numbers were not different from the control high-irrigation treatment. This observation demonstrated that the Beck navels rebounded quickly from the low irrigation stress of 2006 and 2007. The mid-level irrigation stress of 2006 and 2008 was less severe than that of 2007, and yield and fruit quality was not as adversely affected as in 2007.

This study provides information on some of the trade-offs that might be expected among fruit yield, size, grade, sugar and color in relation to reduced irrigation as harvest approaches. More detailed information from the trial can be found at the following link: https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.46.8.1163. How growers respond to this information will depend on their approach to profiting in the early navel market and how much water will be available for irrigation. If reducing water use is the primary goal of the grower, while minimizing effects on yield and fruit quality compared to fully irrigated orchards, work by Dr. Goldhamer, UC irrigation specialist, demonstrated that regulated deficit irrigation in the mid-May through mid-July time period would be the best strategy. The authors gratefully acknowledge the Citrus Research Board for its financial support of this project.

A recent call came through inquiring about the cause of “water spotting” or "staining" on lemons from a coastal orchard. The orchard was sprayed for pests using a horticultural oil in October and at harvest, the spotting was noted. The guidelines for oil use are to avoid use when temperatures exceed 90 deg or so and when it gets cold or is forecast to get cold. The cold injunction is because that fruit mass causes condensation which leads to the spotting. It should never be used when frost is forecast either. The problem along the coast is the weather is about as fickle as weather can get anywhere in the state. Hot one day and cold the next. You can break the rules 9 out of 10 times and get away with it, but according to our Advisor Craig Kallsen in Kern, you get caught the one time when you break the rule.

Oil sprays are an important component in citrus IPM programs for the control of armored and soft scales, aphids, leafminers, and certain species of mites. When used alone, they may be applied using outside coverage (OC) for aphids, leafminers or mites, intermediate coverage (IC) if used for soft scales, and thorough coverage (TC) if used for armored scales at rates of 1 to 6% depending on the crop, time of year and the target pest. Oils are frequently used at rates of 0.25 to 1% in combination with other insecticides. Because petroleum oils can cause phytotoxicity, the following precautions are important:

• Soil moisture should be maximum before application; spray as soon after an irrigation as the ground will permit operation of the equipment. Be sure to maintain adequate soil moisture from spring throughout the entire irrigation season.
• Do not spray oils when temperatures exceed 95°F or relative humidity falls to 20% or below (in coastal regions, do not spray if the temperature will exceed 85° to 90°F or the relative humidity goes below 30%); also do not use oil sprays immediately before, during, or following an unusually cold weather period.
• Problems of leaf drop and fruit drop can be minimized, in general, by adding 2,4-D to the oil spray mixture. Be careful not to apply 2,4-D within 2 miles of sensitive crops such as tomatoes, cotton, olives, and grapes and do not use 2,4-D during spring to avoid phytotoxicity problems.
• If navel orange orchards are sprayed with oil when oranges are approaching maturity, generally from November until harvest, protection against water spot may be obtained by using gibberellic acid. (Caution: fall oil sprays may increase the risk of damage caused by frost).
• Complete coverage of the tree with an oil spray provides more effective control than increased dosage. If spraying is done by ground, equip the rig with a tower capable of elevating a sprayer 4 feet above the tallest trees.
• Generally, narrow range oils with a 50% distillation range of 415 to 455 are recommended for use in citrus.
• The heavier the oil is (e.g., NR 440 is heavier than NR 415), the better its insecticidal properties will be, but also the greater the potential for phytotoxicity to the tree.

Precautions for Using Petroleum Oil Sprays  from UC Integrated Pest Management website