Pests Management COntrol

Pest Management Strategic Plan
for
Commercial Greenhouses in the Northeastern United States
Summary of a Workshop held

October 22-23, 2008
in
Ithaca, NY
Document prepared by:

Karen Dean Hall
New York State Flower Industries
Elizabeth Lamb, Brian Eshenaur, and Gary Couch

New York State Integrated Pest Management Program
Contact person:
Elizabeth Lamb
Coordinator, Ornamentals Program NYSIPM
Cornell University
607 254-8800
eml38@cornell.edu
This project was funded by the

Northeastern Integrated Pest Management Center
Workshop Participants
Area of Organization/State
Name Specialty/Occupation
Gary Couch Entomology NYS IPM Program
Margery Daughtrey Pathology Cornell University
Brian Eshenaur Pathology NYS IPM Program
Cheryl Frank Entomology University of Vermont
Dan Gilrein Entomology Cornell University/CCE
Karen Dean Hall Scout/Trade organization NYSFI
Carrie Koplinka-Loehr Northeastern IPM Center
Brian Kunkel Entomology DE Cooperative Extension
Elizabeth Lamb Horticulture NYS IPM Program
Elise Lobdell Scout/consultant NY
Edith Lurvey IR4
Alan Michaels Floriculture PA Cooperative Extension
Carrie Murphy Horticulture DE Cooperative Extension
Judson Reid Vegetable production Cornell University/CCE
Elwood Roberts Grower RI
John Sanderson Entomology Cornell University
Sarah Scally Horticulture ME Dept of Ag
Hugh Smith Entomology CT Agricultural Experiment
Station
John Speaker Consultant MD
Deborah Sweeton Grower NY
Mike Weber Grower NY
Jim Willmott Griffin rep. PA
Mark Yadon Grower NY
ii
Editors/Other Contributors
Area of
Name Specialty/Occupation Organization/State
Sue Adams Grower NY
Ruth Benner IPM Pennsylvania State University
Cooperative Extension
Nora Catlin Plant Pathology Cornell University/CCE
Alan Eaton Entomology University of New Hampshire
Jim Dill Pest Management University of Maine
Heather Faubert Entomology University of Rhode Island
Stanton Gill Entomology University of MD
Brian Krug Greenhouse/Floriculture University of NH Cooperative
Extension
Chris Logue Greenhouse production Cornell University/CCE
Paul Lopes Greenhouse production University of MA
Brian Maynard Horticulture University of Rhode Island
Kathy Murray Entomology Maine Dept of Agriculture
Walt Nelson Business management Cornell University/CCE
Leanne Pundt Commercial Horticulture University of CT Cooperative
Extension
Karen Rane Plant Pathology University of Maryland
Steve Rettke Greenhouse IPM Rutgers State University
Paula Shrewsbury Entomology University of MD
Margaret Skinner Entomology University of Vermont
Cheryl Smith Plant Pathology University of New Hampshire
Tina Smith Greenhouse production University of MA
Lois Berg Stack Ornamental Horticulture University of Maine
Stan Swier Entomology University of New Hampshire
Cathy Thomas IPM Coordinator PA Department of Agriculture
Rob Wick Plant Pathology University of MA (research)
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 7

PRIORITY ISSUES FOR COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE
NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES ...................................................................................... 7
Research............................................................................................................................. 7
Education ........................................................................................................................... 8
Regulatory ......................................................................................................................... 8
PEST MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN PROCESS ....................................................... 9
Advisory Group................................................................................................................. 9
Table 1: Top 10 greenhouse pests for the Northeast............................................. 10
Workshop......................................................................................................................... 10
Ranking the list of needs................................................................................................. 10
Review process ................................................................................................................ 11
COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED
STATES ....................................................................................................................................... 11
Production regions .......................................................................................................... 11
Production statistics........................................................................................................ 11
Table 2: Number of operations by gross value of sales in states covered in the
USDA Floriculture Crops 2007 Summary............................................................ 12
Table 3: Production statistics for those NE states covered in the USDA
Floriculture Crops Summary................................................................................. 12
General production practices and worker activities.................................................... 13
Size of operation ................................................................................................... 13
Labor ..................................................................................................................... 13
Crops ..................................................................................................................... 13
Propagation ........................................................................................................... 13
Production chain and marketing ........................................................................... 14
Factors that affect production ............................................................................... 14
Worker activities................................................................................................... 14
Potting and transplanting ......................................................................... 14
Watering.................................................................................................... 14
Fertilization............................................................................................... 14
Pinching and cutting back ........................................................................ 15
Harvest, marketing and sales.................................................................... 15
Vegetable production in greenhouses............................................................................ 15
Pest management ............................................................................................................ 16
Issues in pest management.................................................................................... 16
Use of plant growth regulators (PGRs):................................................................ 16
Adoption of integrated pest management (IPM) .................................................. 16
Use of biological control....................................................................................... 17
Organic and sustainable production...................................................................... 17
KEY PESTS................................................................................................................................. 18
DISEASES ................................................................................................................................... 19
Gray Mold, Botrytis Blight ............................................................................................ 19
Damage and Importance ....................................................................................... 19
1
Identification ......................................................................................................... 19
Disease Spread ...................................................................................................... 19
Management.......................................................................................................... 20
IPM ....................................................................................................................... 20
Environmental........................................................................................... 20
Fungicides................................................................................................. 20
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Botrytis ...................... 21
Critical issues and needs ............................................................... 21
Powdery Mildew.............................................................................................................. 22
Identification ......................................................................................................... 22
Disease Spread ...................................................................................................... 22
Management.......................................................................................................... 23
IPM ........................................................................................................... 23
Environmental........................................................................................... 23
Fungicides................................................................................................. 23
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Powdery Mildew........ 23
State/local pesticide restrictions or limitations, export issues, etc.24
Pythium Root Rot and Damping Off ............................................................................ 24
Identification ......................................................................................................... 25
Management.......................................................................................................... 26
IPM ........................................................................................................... 26
Environmental........................................................................................... 26
Fungicides................................................................................................. 27
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Pythium...................... 27
Rhizoctonia Root/Stem/Crown Rot and Damping Off ................................................ 27
Identification ......................................................................................................... 27
Disease Spread ...................................................................................................... 27
Management.......................................................................................................... 28
IPM ........................................................................................................... 28
Environmental........................................................................................... 28
Biological.................................................................................................. 28
Fungicides................................................................................................. 29
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Rhizoctonia
Root/Stem/Crown Rots and Damping Off.................................... 29
OTHER DISEASES........................................................................................................ 38
Alternaria leaf spot ......................................................................................................... 38
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 38
Management.......................................................................................................... 38
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Alternaria ........................................... 38
Bacterial Blight of Geranium......................................................................................... 39
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 39
Management.......................................................................................................... 39
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Blight of Geranium............. 39
2
Bacterial Leaf Spots........................................................................................................ 39
Symptoms and Disease Development................................................................... 40
Management.......................................................................................................... 40
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Leaf Spots........................... 40
Black root rot................................................................................................................... 40
Management.......................................................................................................... 40
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Thielaviopsis...................................... 41
Chrysanthemum white rust ........................................................................................... 41
Management.......................................................................................................... 41
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Chrysanthemum White Rust.............. 41
Cladosporium Leaf Mold ............................................................................................... 42
Disease Development............................................................................................ 42
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 42
Management.......................................................................................................... 42
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Cladosporium..................................... 42
Downy mildew ................................................................................................................. 42
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 43
Life Cycle.............................................................................................................. 43
Management.......................................................................................................... 43
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Downy Mildew .................................. 44
Impatiens Necrotic Spot Virus....................................................................................... 44
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 44
Disease Development............................................................................................ 45
Control .................................................................................................................. 45
Phytophthora Damping off, Root and Crown Rot....................................................... 45
Chemical Control .................................................................................................. 45
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Phytophthora Damping off, Root and
Crown Rot............................................................................................................. 45
Sclerotinia Stem Rot ....................................................................................................... 46
Host list ................................................................................................................. 46
Symptoms ............................................................................................................. 46
Life Cycle.............................................................................................................. 46
Management.......................................................................................................... 46
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Sclerotinia Stem Rot .......................... 46
Southern Wilt of Geranium ........................................................................................... 47
Symptoms and Identification ................................................................................ 47
Management.......................................................................................................... 48
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Southern Wilt of Geranium ............... 48
NEW DISEASES AND THOSE OF INCREASING IMPORTANCE ...................... 48
PESTICIDES IN THE PROCESS OF REGISTRATION.......................................... 49
INSECTS AND MITES.............................................................................................................. 50
Aphids .............................................................................................................................. 50
3
Identification ......................................................................................................... 50
Biology.................................................................................................................. 50
Management.......................................................................................................... 51
IPM ........................................................................................................... 51
Cultural/Mechanical ................................................................................. 52
Biological Control .................................................................................... 53
Chemical ................................................................................................... 53
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Aphids........................ 53
Fungus Gnats................................................................................................................... 54
Identification ......................................................................................................... 55
Biology.................................................................................................................. 55
Management.......................................................................................................... 55
IPM ........................................................................................................... 55
Biological.................................................................................................. 56
Chemical ................................................................................................... 57
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Fungus Gnats ............. 57
Twospotted Spider Mite ................................................................................................. 58
Identification ......................................................................................................... 58
Biology.................................................................................................................. 58
Management.......................................................................................................... 59
IPM ........................................................................................................... 59
Biological.................................................................................................. 59
Chemical ................................................................................................... 59
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Spider Mites............... 60
Shore Fly .......................................................................................................................... 61
Identification ......................................................................................................... 61
Biology.................................................................................................................. 62
Management.......................................................................................................... 62
IPM ........................................................................................................... 62
Biological.................................................................................................. 62
Chemical ................................................................................................... 63
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Shore Flies ................. 63
4
Western Flower Thrips................................................................................................... 63
Introduction........................................................................................................... 63
Identification ......................................................................................................... 64
Biology.................................................................................................................. 64
Management.......................................................................................................... 65
IPM ........................................................................................................... 65
Biological.................................................................................................. 66
Chemical ................................................................................................... 66
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Western Flower Thrips
....................................................................................................... 67
Whiteflies ......................................................................................................................... 68
Identification ......................................................................................................... 68
Biology.................................................................................................................. 69
Management.......................................................................................................... 69
IPM ........................................................................................................... 69
Biological.................................................................................................. 70
Chemical ................................................................................................... 70
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Whiteflies................... 71
OTHER INSECTS AND MITES .................................................................................. 75
Leafminers ....................................................................................................................... 75
Identification/Damage/Biology............................................................................. 75
Management.......................................................................................................... 76
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Leafminer........................................... 76
Tarsonemid Mites ........................................................................................................... 77
Damage ................................................................................................................. 77
Biology.................................................................................................................. 77
Identification ......................................................................................................... 78
Monitoring ............................................................................................................ 78
Management.......................................................................................................... 78
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Tarsonemid Mite................................ 78
Mealybugs and Scale Insects.......................................................................................... 79
Armored Scales ............................................................................................................... 79
Identification ......................................................................................................... 79
Damage ................................................................................................................. 79
Biology.................................................................................................................. 79
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Armored Scale ................................... 80
Soft Scales ........................................................................................................................ 80
Identification ......................................................................................................... 80
5
Damage ................................................................................................................. 80
Biology.................................................................................................................. 80
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Soft Scale ........................................... 81
Mealybugs........................................................................................................................ 81
Identification ......................................................................................................... 81
Damage ................................................................................................................. 81
Biology.................................................................................................................. 81
Management.......................................................................................................... 82
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Mealybugs.......................................... 82
NEW PESTS AND THOSE OF INCREASING IMPORTANCE ............................. 83
PESTICIDES IN THE PROCESS OF REGISTRATION.......................................... 83
TOXICITY TO BENEFICIAL INSECTS ................................................................... 83
Table 6: Toxicity to beneficial insects (biological control organisms)................. 78
WEEDS AND ALGAE ............................................................................................................... 88
Weeds ............................................................................................................................... 88
Management.......................................................................................................... 88
Chemical Control of Greenhouse Weeds.............................................................. 88
Table 7: Herbicides .............................................................................................. 89
Algae................................................................................................................................. 89
Management.......................................................................................................... 89
Table 8: Algaecides............................................................................................... 90
Liverworts........................................................................................................................ 90
Management.......................................................................................................... 91
PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS ........................................................................................ 91
Table 9: Plant Growth Regulators......................................................................... 91
RODENTS ................................................................................................................................... 92
Determining the Presence of Rodents ........................................................................... 92
Identification ................................................................................................................... 93
Long-Term Population Suppression ............................................................................. 93
Sanitation .............................................................................................................. 93
Exclusion............................................................................................................... 94
Traps ..................................................................................................................... 94
Rodenticides for Structural Use ............................................................................ 94
Table 10: Rodenticides ........................................................................................ 95
Voles ................................................................................................................................. 95
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 95
APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................. 98
Appendix 1: Raw ranking of research, education and regulatory needs................... 98
Research................................................................................................................ 98
Education ............................................................................................................ 102
Regulatory........................................................................................................... 106
Infrastructure building ........................................................................................ 107
Appendix 2: Stakeholder input collected in several states on needs for research,
extension and regulatory support for IPM in commercial greenhouses.................. 108
Appendix 3: Contact information for state reviewers ............................................... 110
6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The green industries, including greenhouse production, rank in the top four for market value of
agricultural products in all 12 states in the Northeast region. They have a wholesale value of over
$700 million in the six states for which statistics are reported. The variation in size and
organization of Northeastern greenhouses is vast, including type of production (wholesale/retail),
technology used, marketing options, and production season.
Because greenhouses create an ideal habitat for a variety of diseases, insects, and weeds, pest
management activities are a primary factor in the cost of production and affect both yield and
quality of the product. The variety of crops grown in a typical greenhouse operation makes
pesticide selection complex, especially if there are food and ornamental crops in the same
greenhouse, as is frequently true in bedding plant production. Limited pesticide options for some
pest/crop combinations make pesticide rotation difficult, and insecticide resistance has developed
in some insect populations. The appearance of new pests, and increasing importance of some old
pests, leads to a continued need for education in pest identification. Integrated pest management
(IPM) has been widely adopted, although the level of adoption, and sometimes the understanding
of IPM, varies. Cultural methods of pest management are common but there is a desire for
greater information on environmental methods of control and sanitation options. Biological
control is becoming more common as a method of pest management, and there is a great need for
both research and training in current and new biological control options.
PRIORITY ISSUES FOR COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE

NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
The following list of priority issues for research, education, and regulation is based on the
ranking of the list of 166 needs generated at the workshop. This list is arranged by priority within
the areas of research, education, and regulatory needs. For the complete list of needs and their
rankings, see Appendix 1. Information from other stakeholder surveys from Northeastern states
is summarized in Appendix 2.
Research
• Development of banker plant biological control systems for a broader range of insect
pests
• Development of new and more effective biological control organisms for root rot diseases
• Comparative economics of various biological control systems vs. pesticides
• Protocol for frequent use of disinfecting agents (for example, ZeroTol, XeroTon,
KleenGrow) for management of Xanthomonas. Issues of importance are phytotoxicity to
species and cultivars, efficacy, options for use as a preventative, use in overhead watering
systems, and use in propagation systems.
• Development of a quick test for Phytopthora identification for use by growers and
diagnostic labs
• Development of methodologies for maintaining viability of biological control agents
during packaging and shipping (quality control)
7
• Development of easy-to-use, accurate and affordable disease test kits (like the virus test
kits currently available) for more diseases
• Organic or products with low “days to harvest” intervals for management of powdery
mildew in rosemary
• INSV-resistant varieties of ornamental host plants
Education
• Training on use of disinfection materials for disease management of Botrytis, Pythium,
and Thielaviopsis
• Training on using environmental controls to manage Botrytis with current changes in
heating and ventilation for cost savings, include concept of dewpoints, stress of rapid
changes, etc.
• Comparison of efficacy and costs of different application techniques for biological
control organisms
• Guidelines on what, when, how many, and how to apply biological control organisms
taking into consideration the variations in greenhouse operations: size, environmental
conditions, crops, etc.
• Training on using sanitation for insect management, including information on
overwintering or survival in greenhouses without plant material
• Training of IPM scouts with an emphasis on hands-on training and creation of materials
that owners can use to train new workers
• Creation of a communication/resource hub, creating an information path from industry to
extension and research and back
• Creation and dissemination of educational materials on new/upcoming/potential pests:
identification, biology, damage caused, hosts, etc., color photos, other species they can be
confused with
• Training on cultural methods for fungus gnat and shore fly management, algae
management for shore fly management, including droplet size for overhead irrigation,
effect of nutrients and water management for shore fly management, management of
standing water when using plastic trays
• Training on use of disease test kits as a part of scouting for disease management: for
INSV and other diseases where kits are available
• Training on importance of weed management for disease and insect management: inside
and outside greenhouse, especially with lower pesticide use and increasing use of
biological control organisms, including nook and cranny weed management
Regulatory
• Development of additional effective pesticides for thrips
• Sale of disease test kits in smaller units to encourage use by growers
• Clear labeling of materials for management of pests in the greenhouse including
standardization of label language pertaining to site/pests/plants.
• Clarification on use of low volume sprayers for pesticides, particularly appropriate rates
and directions on pesticide labels
8
PEST MANAGEMENT STRATEGIC PLAN PROCESS
This Pest Management Strategic Plan (PMSP) covers commercial greenhouse production for the
12 states in the NE-IPM region: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and West Virginia.
Commercial greenhouse production includes both floricultural crops and vegetable crops,
although in this region there is a much greater production of ornamentals than vegetables in
greenhouses. Floricultural crops, as defined by the USDA, include bedding plants in flats, pots or
hanging baskets, potted crops usually used inside (such as chrysanthemums and poinsettias,
herbaceous perennials, foliage crops, and cut flowers) and propagative materials—such as
cuttings and liners.
The development of a PMSP is a method of setting pest management priorities for a commodity
and demonstrating stakeholder involvement in the process. A PMSP is developed by growers,
commodity associations, university research and extension specialists, Cooperative Extension
educators, crop consultants, and relevant agency representatives to address pest management
needs and priorities for specific commodities in a particular state or region. The plans take a
pest-by-pest approach to identifying the current management practices (chemical and non-
chemical) and those under development. Ideally, a PMSP outlines the current state of pest
management for a commodity at the state, regional, or national level and presents a prioritized
list of needs for research, regulatory activity, and extension education (National Information
System for the Regional IPM Centers http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/index.cfm. Benefits of
Crop Profiles and Pest Management Strategic Plans, O. Norman Nesheim & Russell F. Mizell,
III, University of Florida).
Pest Management Strategic Plans (PMSPs) were developed to make realistic and current
information on pest management practices and needs readily available to the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for use in regulatory decisions and risk/benefit assessments. The role
of PMSPs has expanded into guidance for pest management research, education, and
implementation based on stakeholder priorities. Funding agencies recognize PMSPs as credible
documentation of stakeholder interest. Feedback from target audiences is valuable for initiating
and guiding projects. Being able to cite stakeholder interest has become an important component
for successful funding applications. This is particularly important for specialty crops that do not
traditionally receive the same degree of private sector investment in crop protection
materials. (Glen W. Koehler, 2005, New England Pest Management Network)
Advisory Group
The initial step in creating the PMSP was to identify an advisory group representing as much of
the region as possible. We contacted 34 individuals from state universities working in research
and extension, state departments of agriculture, industry, and IPM programs. We received 27
responses, which covered 11 states. The advisory group assisted with identifying the pests of
interest and growers or other stakeholders to participate, prioritizing needs, and reviewing the
final document.
9
The advisory group helped to identify a “Top 10” list of pests (from the large number of insects,
diseases, weeds, and vertebrates that affect greenhouse crops) to consider for the PMSP. They
first sent us lists of disease, insect weed and vertebrate pests important in their areas and then
voted on the combined list to identify the “Top 10” list of pests (Table 1) from a total list of 26.
While all pest issues are important, with a broad geographical region and a diverse production
system like commercial greenhouses, it seemed essential to focus on those pests with the greatest
effect on production. “Importance” in this case is a combination of frequency of occurrence,
potential for damage, and difficulty of control.
Table 1: Top 10 greenhouse pests for the Northeast

(arranged alphabetically)
Insects Diseases
Aphids Botrytis
Fungus gnats Powdery mildew
Mites Pythium
Shore fly Rhizoctonia
Thrips
Whitefly
Because the value of a PMSP is based in large part on the input from growers and other
stakeholders, the advisory group also helped to identify potential participants from the entire
region. In some cases, stakeholders were asked to help identify the most important pest issues.
Others were suggested as participants for a two-day workshop to discuss the specifics of the
PMSP.
A draft PMSP was created, primarily covering existing pest management tools for the top 10
pests, plus some additional background information. It was based on available information from
the region, including the Cornell Guide for the Integrated Management of Greenhouse Floral
Crops. This draft was used as the basis for the discussion at the two-day workshop.
Workshop
A face-to-face workshop was held October 22-23, 2008 to discuss the draft document. The
participants were fairly diverse—nine states were represented at the meeting, with 3 growers, 4
industry representatives, 9 Extension personnel, 1 research scientist, 1 Department of Agriculture
representative, 1 IR4 representative, and 1 NE-IPM representative. While the discussion centered
on the Top 10 pests, other pests that were of importance to the industry were also covered and
added to the final document. The 20 pages of comments and suggestions from the discussion
were included as edits in the completed PMSP. The most important task for the group was to
create a list of needs for research, education, and regulation in pest management in commercial
greenhouses. One hundred and sixty four needs were listed, covering a broad range of pest
management methods and issues (Appendix 1).
Ranking the list of needs

After the meeting, the complete list of needs was organized by type (research, education,
regulatory) and sent to the workshop participants, the advisory group, grower and industry
organizations in the region, and Cooperative Extension educators working with the greenhouse
10
industry to be ranked. Each need could be ranked as high, medium, or low importance. Sixteen
people/groups ranked the needs, including 2 growers, 12 extension personnel, 1 industry rep, and
1 Department of Agriculture representative. Nine of those ranking the list were not at the
workshop. Needs most frequently ranked of high importance (56% of respondents or higher) are
included in the section on priorities.
Review process
The review process was extensive and took approximately two months. First, the final
documents were placed on the NYS IPM website. We then emailed 44 people asking them to
review the documents, focusing on the parts that were in their areas of expertise. This list of
contacts included IPM specialists, researchers, consultants, educators, and growers from 9 of the
states in the Northeastern region. Those contacted had attended the two-day meeting in Ithaca,
Fall 2008, or assisted with the development of the PMSP. One email reminder was sent to the
group after the original request. We received 12 reviews of the documents covering a range of
expertise. Reviewers’ comments were incorporated into the final document.
COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED

STATES
The commercial greenhouse industry was defined for this project as any production of plants for
sale that were grown under cover. This includes both floricultural and vegetable/edible crops,
wholesale and retail production, and a wide variety of sizes of operations and types of
greenhouse structures. Some characteristics of commercial greenhouse production in the
northeast are the diversity of crops produced, a predominance of family-owned and operated
businesses, and the high intensity of production, especially in the use of labor. While there is
little organic greenhouse production of ornamental crops in the region, there is some organic
vegetable production in greenhouses or high tunnels.
Greenhouses are also used to house plant collections at arboretums and botanical gardens. While
these “collection greenhouses” are not included in this plan, the pests that they deal with are
similar to those found in commercial greenhouses and the management methods may be similar.
Production regions
The Northeastern U.S. is a corridor of high green-industry production, in terms of percent of total
value of agricultural products. This area extends along the East Coast from Maryland to Maine.
Commercial greenhouses can be found in most counties in this 12-state region. Within the
Northeastern Region, most states have grower organizations for greenhouse producers, which
may advocate for the industry with government, serve as a clearinghouse for information and
education, and help market greenhouse products.
Production statistics
Commercial greenhouse production is important to the economy of the northeastern US. The
green industries, including floriculture greenhouses, rank in the top 4 for market value of
agricultural products in each of the 12 states in the region, and for 5 states, they rank number 1.
This does not include those operations growing solely edible crops, although vegetable
transplants and herbs would be included in the bedding plant category.
11
According to the 2002 Census of Agriculture, the Northeast Region had 22% of the operations
growing floriculture crops in the U.S. In 2007, there were 1,878 floriculture operations included
in the northeastern states included in the USDA Floriculture Survey (MD, NJ, NY, PA) (Table
2). On average, 37% of the operations have gross sales of over $100,000, although the
percentage is higher in MD and NJ. There was an average decrease of 9% in floriculture
operations with gross sales of $100,000+ from 2005 to 2007. These numbers are generally
considered to be low estimates of number of operations.
Table 2: Number of operations by gross value of sales in states covered in the USDA
Floriculture Crops 2007 Summary
State Total # floriculture % of operations with % loss in # operations
operations $100,000+ in gross sales from 2005
CT 288 35 Not available
MA 431 32 Not available
MD 140 44 3
NJ 337 47 12
NY 698 33 9
PA 703 29 10
CT and MA had 101 and 138 operations with gross sales of $100,000+, respectively, in 2005
For those states covered by the Floriculture Crops Summary for 2005 and 2007, the expanded
wholesale value of floriculture crops ranged from $75 to $200 million (Table 3). While there are
variations by state and by individual operation, the 2007 production, in value of sales, was
approximately 51% annual bedding plants, 21% each potted crops, and herbaceous perennials,
2% foliage crops, and 3% cut flowers (for MD, NJ, NY, and PA). Between 2006 and 2007, there
was an approximate overall loss in wholesale value of 4%, primarily in foliage plants and
flowering potted plants. There was an increase in wholesale value of cut flowers and herbaceous
perennials in NY and an increase in wholesale value of foliage plants in PA and MD.
Table 3: Production statistics for those NE states covered in the USDA Floriculture Crops
Summary
Statex Wholesale value Covered areay
($ x 1000) (sq ft x 1000)
CT 85,649 9,300
MA 75,318 9,301
MD 88,127 5,880
NJ 162,218 19,809
NY 199,028 24,848
PA 161,378 18,907
x
Statistics for MD, NJ, NY, and PA are from the USDA 2007 Floriculture Crops Summary, for
CT and MA from the 2005 Summary.
Even with the high value of floriculture production there have been significant reductions in
support and funding for research and extension related to floriculture crops. This creates a
12
challenge as growers look for research-based answers to their technology and pest management
questions.
General production practices and worker activities

An average ornamental greenhouse business will produce or sell over 200 different
species/cultivars each year. Crop production can vary for each grower from as little as 4 weeks
(for plugs) to up to 5-6 months (for poinsettias). Some growers operate only in the spring and
early summer while others are in production year-round. While greenhouse environments may be
similar, the importance of bedding plants and spring sales affects production start dates across
the region. All of these variables make it difficult to create a timeline of worker activities that
relate to pest management. However, based on several production surveys from the region, there
are also similarities in production practices
Size of operation
While there are some large, primarily wholesale, operations, the “typical” greenhouse operation
in the Northeast is small. In New York it ranges from 1,000-200,000 sq ft with an average of
23,000 sq ft; in New Jersey almost half are under 10,000 sq ft. The type of greenhouse, the type
of glazing material, and the degree of automation usually are related to the size of operation;
smaller operations are likely to have single-bay, poly covered greenhouses with little automation.
Greenhouses vary from single unit plastic-covered Quonset-style or even high tunnels to gutter-
connected multi-bay houses with polycarbonate walls. The larger the operation, the more likely
they are to have automated watering, environmental control, seeding and potting machines,
product transport, etc.
Labor
Many greenhouses are family owned and operated and rely heavily on family for the production
and business management tasks. They will often bring in people during peak sales times.
Keeping experienced help is difficult due to the seasonal nature of the operations. Employee
turnover is high. Larger operations hire more workers and more full-time, year-round workers.
Crops
As new crops come into the market, the diversity of plant materials produced continues to
increase. The majority of growers produce bedding plants (>80%), hanging baskets (>80%), and
potted flowering plants (70%). In a comparison of greenhouse growers in New York State
between 2000 and 2006, fewer growers were producing poinsettias in 2006, but production of
other flowering potted plants, herbs, and greenhouse vegetables had increased.
Propagation
Most growers (60-80% in New York and New Jersey) buy plugs. Forty to 60% grow their own
plugs and 30-50% buy prefinished plants. The choice of whether to grow or buy, and at what
stage to buy (plug or prefinished), is based on where growers can find cost savings. For niche
products or markets, they are likely to grow their own plugs. Vegetable transplants may be direct
seeded or purchased.
13
Production chain and marketing
Ornamental greenhouses frequently combine retail and wholesale sales. In New Jersey, 33% of
operations produced entirely for the wholesale market, 17% entirely retail. In New York, 75% of
the income from greenhouse ornamental sales came from retail. Specialization and niche markets
are important and found to increase sales for both wholesale and retail operations.
Wholesale growers sell primarily to garden centers, mass marketers, and other growers. Their
competition is primarily other wholesale operations. Smaller growers may be combined with
other agricultural production such as fruit or vegetable production. They consider large retail
chains as their primary competition.
There is some import and export of ornamentals. Larger wholesale operations are most likely to
export plant materials. Retail operations, even medium sized ones, may import plant materials if
they have identified cost savings compared to producing their own. In New Jersey, 44% of
operations sold all of their product in state, 23% sold only on site, and less than 10% sold more
than half their production out of state.
Factors that affect production

New York growers identified energy costs, weather, labor costs, and hard good costs as primary
limitations to a successful business. Limiting factors for plant quality were insect control,
weather, disease control, and environmental control (cost for manipulating). Availability of
extension programs and agricultural consultants, and existence of growers’ organizations have
also been noted as affecting success of production.
Worker activities
Potting and transplanting

Crops are typically grown in soil-less media in pot sizes varying from ½” diameter plugs to 14”
hanging baskets. Depending on whether growers are producing their own plugs or the size of the
purchased plug, plants may be transplanted 1 or more times before they reach saleable size.
Plants may also need to be spaced on the greenhouse benches as they grow. Larger and
wholesale operations are most likely to have automatic seeders, potting machines, product, and
transport systems.
Watering
Watering methods may include hand watering, drip irrigation, overhead watering booms,
overhead misting systems, and ebb and flood and hydroponic systems. Hand watering and drip
irrigation are the most common. Watering techniques must be tailored to each crop and pot size
so the wide diversity of crops in the same greenhouse restricts the use of automatic watering for
the smaller and/or retail grower.
Fertilization
The most commonly used method is soluble fertilizer applied through the irrigation system. The
amounts and types of fertilizer depend on the crop and the stage of growth. Slow release
fertilizer is also used in larger pots. Workers may test the soil media to determine pH and
electrical conductivity of the medium throughout the crop production period.
14
k
Pinching and cutting back

Plants may be pinched to encourage branching or cut back to meet a particular market window.
Many specialty crops are pinched or cut back.
Harvest, marketing and sales

Wholesale growers pull product onto rolling carts to match orders and then ship to markets that
range from big box stores to small garden centers. Many small and medium growers produce and
sell from the same location. They may move product from a production area to a retail area or
sell directly from the production benches.
Vegetable production in greenhouses

Most of the information in this PMSP is oriented toward commercial ornamental production in
greenhouses. Statistics on commercial greenhouse vegetable production in the United States are
difficult to find. In 2003, there were approximately 800 acres of tomato greenhouse operations in
the whole U.S. Five hundred acres were in large farms (>80 acres), approximately 100 acres in
medium farms (10-18 acres), and 200 acres in small farms (<10 acres) (Cook and Calvin, 2005).
There are no large vegetable greenhouses in the Northeast but Village Farms, one of the largest
greenhouse tomato firms in the U.S., had a farm in Pennsylvania in 2003. Only two of the
medium sized operations counted in 2003 were in the Northeast (NY). There is currently a 24-
acre tomato production greenhouse in Maine, which was not included in the 2003 report.
The U.S. acreage of greenhouse vegetable production increased 40% from 1996 to 2003.
Anecdotal evidence indicates that the greenhouse vegetable industry continues to increase in the
Northeast, primarily the number of small vegetable greenhouses. Small operations vary
considerably. Greenhouse production may provide season extension, adding spring and fall
production to the main field crop in summer. A variety of crops may be grown in the same
greenhouse over time, including tomatoes, peppers and cucumbers in the summer and greens in
the winter. Vegetable crops may be combined with cut flowers. The type of greenhouse used
varies from high tunnels to gutter connected greenhouses with temperature control.
Some production issues and activities are the same as in greenhouses used for floriculture crops.
Labor and energy costs are important. Marketing ranges from local retail sales to nationwide
distribution by wholesalers. Vegetable producers are more likely to grow in soil beds or use
hydroponics than the soil-less mixes of floriculture. Crops are more likely to be direct seeded.
While there are many different varieties available, the number of crops grown at the same time is
usually much less in a vegetable greenhouse. Drip irrigation is common. Harvest practices are
crop specific and may involve a greater degree of handling and packaging than for floriculture
crops.
While many of the insect and disease pests are the same in vegetable and floriculture
greenhouses, some are specific to the crop grown. High tunnels are more open so Lepidopterous
pests may be more common on vegetable crops. Bacterial canker and leaf mold are greenhouse
tomato diseases not commonly found in floricultural crops. Pesticides with the same active
15
ingredient usually have different trade names for vegetable and ornamental crops and for certain
pests there are fewer labeled pesticides for food crops. Few plant growth regulators are used in
vegetable production. Integrated pest management practices for vegetable production are
fundamentally the same as for ornamentals. Biological control is common in large vegetable
greenhouses and becoming more common in smaller operations, particularly with the increase in
organic production.
Pest management
Greenhouse pests are usually managed through a combination of cultural and chemical methods.
Physical control through screening is occasionally done, but usually on larger greenhouses.
Commonly used cultural practices include removing organic debris from floors and benches,
removing weeds from inside and outside the greenhouse, allowing a crops-free period of at least
a month between crops, disinfecting floors, walls, and benches, and disinfecting used pots and
flats before reusing. Pesticides may be applied to the foliage through a variety of types of
sprayers or applied to pots individually, either incorporated into the medium, applied as a drench
or applied in granular form.
Issues in pest management

Some of the issues that arise with the use of pesticides in greenhouse production, as with other
types of production, include pesticide resistance, label clarity, and licensing requirements. The
potential for development of pesticide resistance may be one of the most important issues. It has
already been reported for several insects and insecticides. Not all growers understand how
resistance develops and how pesticide classes should be rotated, or the interaction of mixtures of
chemicals on rotation requirements. Additional education needs to be provided on these topics.
Use of plant growth regulators (PGRs):

Ornamental crop producers use several synthetic growth regulators which are applied either as a
spray on the foliage, as a drench on the growing mix, or as a dip for bulbs. They are used to
control vegetative growth, rooting, and flowering. Because of the potential for negative effects of
PGRs on the crop, the environment, and the grower, they are labeled as pesticides and
applicators must be licensed. Most are active at low concentrations so they must be handled
carefully and with skill to achieve the desired results. PGR use varies with crop species and
environmental conditions.
Adoption of integrated pest management (IPM)

IPM has been promoted for at least 20 years and most growers include some aspects of it in their
production. The following statements are based on IPM adoption surveys conducted in New
York, Vermont, and New Jersey. The majority of producers integrate some aspect of cultural
management with chemical management of pests. Least-risk pesticides are used by over half of
the growers. Nearly all growers scout for pests, either whenever they are in the greenhouse or on
a set schedule. Few hire an outside consultant to scout or identify a specific employee to do the
scouting, but those that have additional employees often train them to identify pests and assist
with scouting. Keeping scouting records is not yet a common practice. However, basing pest
management tactics, including chemical applications, on scouting results is becoming the norm.
Almost all growers identify the disease or insect pest before deciding what type of control to use.
Use of sticky cards and other methods for insect monitoring, and using environmental conditions
16
that encourage disease to determine when to apply fungicides are fairly common practices. Most
growers inspect plants for pest problems on arrival although not all ‘quarantine’ them before
treating the problem. There is still an identified need for additional training in IPM practices,
especially in disease and insect identification.
Use of biological control

The use of microbial, soil applied products for disease and insect management is more widely
accepted than the use of predators or parasites for insect management. The assumption that
biological control of insects cannot be integrated with chemical control and the potential
complexity of integrating a biological control program into a crop production scheme has limited
its adoption. However, the reduction in efficacy of some widely used pesticides and the
increasing availability of information on the use of natural enemies for insect control is
encouraging the use of biological control in greenhouse crops in the northeast. Nearly 30% of
those surveyed in New York in 2008 said they have used biological control of some sort. There
is still a great need for educational materials on the use of biological control organisms, and
experienced users to assist growers, to increase the adoption rate in commercial greenhouse
production. General information on toxicity of insecticides to beneficial insects is in Table 4.
Organic and sustainable production

There is an increasing interest in organic and sustainable production of ornamentals. Organically
produced greenhouse vegetables and vegetable transplants are currently available, although not
widely. In New York in 2008, 15% of growers currently market some products as organic or
sustainable and 39% think they will in the future. In a 2003 New Jersey survey, 12% of growers
were considering organic production. They identified pest issues and product quality as the
limitations to acceptance of organic production. A variety of organizations are discussing the
creation of standards for organic and sustainable production of ornamental plants. Veriflora
provides certification of sustainable production for plants and cut flowers. Scientific Certification
Systems has a current project to create sustainability standards for all agricultural products in the
US. At this time, certification for sustainability is primarily sought by large companies where the
market demands it. Most greenhouse growers in the Northeast Region have not yet been
certified. However, sustainability as a marketing tool is being promoted by the industry and can
take a variety of forms, including eliminating pesticides and offering pot recycling to customers.
17
KEY PESTS
The pest portion of this PMSP is divided into disease, insect/mite, weed (including algae), and
vertebrate sections. There is additional information on plant growth regulators. The disease and
insect/mite sections are the most comprehensive. Each includes identification and management
information for the “Top 10 Pests”, and a table of labeled pesticides. It should be noted that not
all the pesticides listed are labeled in all the states of the northeast region. These tables are not
intended for use by growers but are to give an indication of the available pesticides, and their
respective pesticide class or group, that are available for management of a particular pest.
Less detailed information on species that are considered important but not key is also included.
Each section is followed by a list of new pests and those that are increasing in importance, and
pesticides currently being registered. The insect section includes a table on toxicity of labeled
insecticides to the major beneficial insects.
Top 10 Other
Diseases Grey mold, Botrytis blight Alternaria leaf spot
Powdery mildew Bacterial blight of geranium
Pythium root rot and damping Bacterial leaf spots
off
Rhizoctonia root/stem/crown Black root rot
rot and damping off
Chrysanthemum white rust
Cladosporium leaf mold
Downy mildew
Impatiens necrotic spot virus
Phytophthora damping off,
root and crown rot
Sclerotinia stem rot
Southern wilt of geranium
Insects and mites Aphids Leafminers

Fungus gnats Cyclamen mites
Two-spotted spider mites Mealybugs and scale insects
Shore fly
Western flower thrips
Whiteflies
18
DISEASES
Primary Source: 2009 Cornell Guide for the Integrated Management of Greenhouse Floral
Crops
Gray Mold, Botrytis Blight

(Botrytis cinerea)
Damage and Importance

The common gray mold fungus, Botrytis cinerea, attacks a wide variety of ornamental plants,
probably causing more greenhouse losses than any other single pathogen.
Identification
The fungus is usually identified by the development of fuzzy grayish spore masses over the
surface of the rotted tissues, although such sporulation will not develop under dry conditions.
The fungus causes a brown rotting and blighting of affected tissues. It commonly attacks the
stems of geranium stock plants and wounds on cuttings. As a result of Botrytis infection, very
small seedlings can be rotted; stems of poinsettia, snapdragon, zinnia, exacum, or lisianthus can
be girdled; and petal tissues of many plants, including carnations, chrysanthemums, roses,
azaleas, and geraniums, can be spotted and ruined. The foliage or stems of many other plants
can be infected including: cyclamen, bacopa, osteospermum, vinca (Catharathus roseus), and
tomato (full size plants and transplants).
Disease Spread
Spores of botrytis are produced on distinctive dark-colored, hair-like sporophores and are
readily dislodged and carried by air currents to new plant surfaces. The spores will not
germinate and produce new infections except when in contact with water, whether from
splashing, condensation, or exudation. Only tender tissues (seedlings, petals), weakened tissues
(stubs left in taking cuttings, tissues infected by powdery mildew), injured tissues (bases of
cuttings), or old and dead tissues are attacked on most crops. Active, healthy tissues, other than
petals, are seldom invaded. Petals shed from crops in hanging baskets may encourage Botrytis
leaf infections on the crops grown below.
19
Management
IPM
Method(s) Pros Cons Comments
Diagnosis/ID Visual Easy A trained eye
recognition can easily
(signs) recognize this
disease when it
is sporulating
-- -- -- --
Magnification Increased More time Often not
accuracy consuming necessary
Detection & Plant Catch other Too late once

Monitoring Inspection-- pests you can
especially visually
lower in the identify
plant canopies
Action Thresholds Botrytis
Triggers vary by crop, presence often
(Thresholds) growth stage an indicator to
and setting adjust
environmental
conditions
Environmental
Because high humidity is required for spore production and free water is necessary for spore
germination and infection, Botrytis blight can usually be controlled by watering early in the day
and by heating and ventilating to prevent any condensation on the plant surface at sunset. Use
fans and grow on open benches rather than solid surfaces to assist in good ventilation.
Because the fungus readily attacks old or dead tissues and produces tremendous quantities of
airborne spores, the importance of strict sanitation cannot be overemphasized. All old blossoms
and dead leaves should be removed, and all fallen leaves and plant debris under the benches or
on benches from hanging baskets should be gathered and carefully disposed in a sealed
container.
Fungicides
20
Fungicides may be required under some greenhouse conditions, especially with highly
susceptible crops such as exacum, geranium, poinsettia, lisianthus, bacopa, osteospermum and
fuchsia. Fungicide resistance occurs for Botrytis cinerea (benzimidazole and dicarboximide
materials). Materials containing solely Group 1 active ingredients are unlikely to control
greenhouse populations of Botrytis. Because there is only partial resistance to Group 2
(dicarboximide) fungicides, these materials are still effective.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Botrytis

(see Table 4 for information on fungicides)
Common name (class/group)

Group 1
Chlorothalonil + thiophanate-methyl (M5 + 1)
Thiophanate-methyl + mancozeb (1 + M3)
Group 2
Iprodione (2)
Vinclozolin (2)
Group 11
Azoxystrobin (11)
Pyraclostrobin (11)
Trifloxystrobin (11)
Group 12
Fludioxonil (12)
Group 17
Fenhexamid (17)
Group M1
Copper hydroxide(M1)
Copper hydroxide + mancozeb (M1 + M3)
Copper salts of fatty and rosin acids (M1)
Copper sulfate pentahydrate (M1)
Group M3
Copper hydroxide + mancozeb (M1 + M3)
Mancozeb (M3)
Group M5
Chlorothalonil (M5)
Chlorothalonil + thiophanate-methyl (M5 + 1)
Miscellaneous
Bacillus subtilis
Critical issues and needs

Resistance management requires rotational application of fungicides.
21
Powdery Mildew
(various fungal species)

One of the most easily recognized of all plant diseases, powdery mildew affects a wide range of
greenhouse crops. Seriously affected plants are unsaleable. Poinsettia crops are vulnerable to a
powdery mildew disease that affects during finishing. Other plants affected by powdery mildew
in the greenhouse include: African violet, dahlia, gerbera, hydrangea, rosemary, rose, verbena,
cucumber, and tomato.
Identification
Powdery mildew is characterized by the presence of a whitish, powdery mildew growth on the
surfaces of leaves, stems, pedicels, sepals, bracts or petals. The fungal threads and the spores
(which develop on short, erect branches) are visible with a strong hand lens. Under some
conditions, however, the threads are so sparse that the mildew can be detected only by
examination under strong light with a good lens or dissecting microscope. In some cases, the
mildew develops only in small areas in which the leaf cells are killed and turn black. On some
plants, such as grape ivy, rose, and delphinium, the young foliage and stems often become
severely distorted in addition to being covered by the whitish mildew growth.
Powdery mildew can often be distinguished from downy mildew by the leaf surface on which
the mildew is found. In most cases downy mildew will sporulate on the lower leaf surface in
limited areas whereas powdery mildew is mostly a problem on the upper leaf surface and is
often spread out rather than in discrete spots. Under low humidity conditions, powdery mildew
may be found primarily on the lower surfaces of lower leaves on the plant, while under high
humidity, downy mildew sometimes sporulates on the upper leaf surfaces.
Poinsettia powdery mildew disease develops rapidly during the fall. While scouting for
whiteflies on poinsettias, also watch for powdery mildew colonies on the upper or lower surface
of older leaves. At times a yellow spot on the upper leaf surface may indicate a mildew colony
growing on the undersurface.
Disease Spread
Powdery mildew spores are easily detached and carried by air currents to surrounding plants
where they initiate new infections. Unlike the spores of nearly all other fungi, the powdery
mildew spores can germinate and initiate infections at humidity levels far below those
commonly encountered in the greenhouse. So this disease may continue to worsen on potted
plants when moved to retail locations, homes, or public interiorscapes.
22
Management
IPM
Diagnosis/ID Visual Easy A trained eye
recognition can easily
(signs) recognize this
disease
-- -- -- --
Magnification Increased More time Magnification
accuracy consuming often not
necessary
Detection & Plant Catch other On some hosts Important to
Monitoring inspection pests it may be scout often and
difficult to see control before
signs, may the disease is
have to look out of hand
for distortion
or spotting
Action Thresholds Powdery
Triggers vary by crop, mildew is
(Thresholds) growth stage often an
and setting indicator of
need to
increase air
movement
Environmental
As a deterrent to mildew in greenhouses, ventilation and heating should be adjusted to avoid

poor air circulation and high-humidity conditions. Irrigate plants early in the day. Heat at least
one hour before sunset, and provide adequate ventilation. Horizontal airflow systems assist in
management of powdery mildew.
Fungicides
Under some conditions, fungicides are essential for mildew control. Systemic and non-systemic
protectant materials are available for spray application. Some greenhouse crops and varieties are
resistant to powdery mildew. To prevent crop damage from poinsettia powdery mildew, once
detected, pick off affected leaves and initiate fungicide treatment immediately.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Powdery Mildew

23
Group 1
Chlorothalonil + thiophanate-methyl (5 + 1)
Thiophanate-methyl (1)
Group 3
Myclobutanil (3)
Triadimefon (3)
Triflumizole (3)
Group 5
Chlorothalonil + thiophanate-methyl (5 + 1)
Piperalin (5)
Group 11
Azoxystrobin (11)
Kresoxim methyl (11)
Pyraclostrobin (11)
Pyraclostrobin + boscalid (11 + ?)
Trifloxystrobin (11)
Group M1
Copper hydroxide (M1)
Copper salts of fatty and rosin acids (M1)
Copper sulfate pentahydrate (M1)
Group M2
Sulfur (M2)
Group M3 (not the active ingredient providing control for above disease)
Group M5
Chlorothalonil (M5)
Miscellaneous
Bacillus subtilis
Hydrogen dioxide
Neem oil
Potassium bicarbonate
Trichoderma harzianum
State/local pesticide restrictions or limitations, export issues, etc.

Kresoxim-methyl and myclobutanil not labeled for use on LI.
Pythium Root Rot and Damping Off

(Pythium spp.)

Pythium is one of the most common fungi found in the roots of greenhouse crops. It is most
often invasive on roots weakened from excessive moisture or nutrient levels. The genus Pythium
24
includes many species that vary in their ability to cause disease and their sensitivity to
fungicides.
Pythium can be introduced into a greenhouse in plants, soil, water, and growing media, and may
be maintained in crop residue from previous seasons. Greenhouse insects such as shore flies can
also carry Pythium. Most Pythium species spread in water through swimming zoospores.
Zoospores that reach the plant root surface can infect, eventually destroying the root tissue and
absorbing nutrients as a food source. Pythium forms resting spores on decaying plant roots,
which can survive, prolonged adverse conditions on containers, in greenhouse growing media
and water, providing a reservoir of inoculum.
Identification
Root Rot: Pythium causes a brown wet rot that makes roots soften and disintegrate. It typically
attacks below the soil surface and may extend up into the base of the stem, blackening it.
Damping off: Seedlings fail to emerge because seeds are attacked after imbibition. May also
occur post-emergence as Pythium invades roots tips and progresses up the stem killing the
seedling or cutting.
25
Management
IPM
Diagnosis/ID Visual Easy Could confuse
recognition with certain
(symptoms) other causes of
root decline
--- --- --- ---
Microscopic Confirm Requires Experience
examination pathogen microscope needed with
presence More time fungal
consuming morphology
--- --- --- ---
ELISA Genus specific Expensive
results possible
--- --- --- ---

Culturing Obtain isolates Time Not used for
to I.D. species consuming routine GH
and test requires diagnosis
pathogenicity specialized
media and
training for
species
identification
Detection & Plant Catch other Other causes Look for
Monitoring inspection pests of root decline patterns,
may be hard to especially
distinguish those that have
to do with wet
areas of bench,
etc.
Action Thresholds
Triggers vary by crop,
(Thresholds) growth stage
and setting
Environmental
Avoid using a mix with poor drainage (and consequent low air pore space). Avoid excessively
high levels of soluble salts in the growing mix. Use evenly-applied watering techniques and a
bench surface that does not allow puddling at the base of the pots. Handle and store mix
carefully to avoid contamination with unpasteurized soil. Pythium can also be spread in systems
that use re-circulating water.
26
Fungicides
For most effective management, because fungicide resistance has been observed, alternate two
fungicides during production of highly susceptible crops such as poinsettia, geranium, and lily.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Pythium


Group 1(not the active ingredient providing control for above disease)
Etridiazole + thiophanate-methyl (14 + 1)
Group 4
Fludioxonil + mefenoxam (12 + 4)
Mefenoxam (4)
Group 11
Pyraclostrobin (11)
Group 12(not the active ingredient providing control for above disease)
Group 14
Etridiazole (14)
Group 28
Propamocarb (28)
Group 33
Fosetyl – A1 (33)
Phosphorus acid (33)
Miscellaneous
Rhizoctonia Root/Stem/Crown Rot and Damping Off

(Rhizoctonia solani)

The fungus Rhizoctonia is often found associated with soil or media and most often attacks at
the stem base. It has a wide host range.
Identification
Rhizoctonia causes a drier root or stem rot that Pythium. Affected tissues are brown or tan. It is
favored by an intermediate range of moisture; neither too wet nor too dry. Cankers formed by
Rhizoctonia usually appear at the soil line and can lead to a sudden wilting and death.
Occasionally Rhizoctonia will cause foliar blight on certain greenhouse crops with dense,
humidity-holding canopies.
Disease Spread
Warm temperatures often favor Rhizoctonia, so losses will typically occur during spring
bedding plant production and summer pot plant propagation. Rhizoctonia can be introduced into
27
a greenhouse through soil, contaminated growing media, containers and plant residue from
previous seasons.
Management
IPM
Diagnosis/ID Visual No specialized Could confuse
recognition equipment with certain
(symptoms) needed other causes of
damping off or
crown and root
rot
--- --- --- ---
Incubation and Confirm Requires time Experience
microscopic pathogen and needed with
examination presence microscope fungal
morphology
--- --- --- ---
Culturing Can get Time Not used for
Isolates to I.D. consuming routine GH
species and requires diagnosis
test specialized
pathogenicity media (lab use
only)
Detection & Plant Catch other Other causes Occasionally

Monitoring inspection pests of root decline may be able to
and damping see fine
off may be “threads”
hard to (mycelium) of
distinguish the fungus.
Soil and media
particles may
cling to stem
or leaves
Action Thresholds
Triggers vary by crop,
(Thresholds) growth stage
and setting
Environmental
Good sanitation practices are the primary defense against Rhizoctonia.
Biological
Good control has been shown with soil applied microbial biocontrol agents.
28
Fungicides
Fungicides may be necessary especially to control outbreaks in susceptible crops or young
plants.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Rhizoctonia Root/Stem/Crown Rots and Damping Off

Group 1
Thiophanate-methyl (1)
Group 2
Iprodione (2)
Group 3
Triflumizole (3)
Group 4 (not the active ingredient providing control for above disease)
Group 7
Flutolanil (7)
Group 11
Azoxystrobin (11)
Pyraclostrobin (11)
Trifoxystrobin (11)
Group 12
Fludioxonil (12)
Group 14 (not the active ingredient providing control for above disease)
PCNB (14)
Miscellaneous
29
Table 4. Fungicides*
Active Ingredient
Brand name Class / Group # Efficacy Comments (Pros & Cons)
Azoxystrobin 11 Powdery Mildew Conduct small-scale tests to ensure safety when applying to
Heritage plants not listed on the label and before using in a tank mix with
Rhizoctonia any material. Do not use a silicone-based surfactant. For
resistance management do not make more than three sequential
applications of Heritage—alternate with two applications of a
non-strobilurin fungicide.
Con – potential for fungicide resistance to develop.
Bacillus subtilis 44 and/ or NC ? Powdery Mildew This is a biological fungicide/bactericide used as a foliar spray at
(QST 713 strain) ? 2-8 qts/100 gal per acre. The label suggests small-scale tests on
Cease plants not specifically listed.
Chlorothalonil M5 Botrytis Bloom discoloration noted on petunia and hydrangea flowers.
Concorde DF Do not apply to Pittosporum or Schefflera. Do not use in mist
Concorde blowers or other high-pressure spray equipment. See labels for
Daconil Ultrex 82.5% additional plants.
Daconil Weather-Stik 54F Pro – low likelihood of resistance to this fungicide
Echo Ultimate T&O
Echo 90DF
Echo Zn T&O
Echo 720 T&O
Manicure 6 Flowable
Pegasus L
Countdown L&G
Quali-Pro Chlorothalonil 720 SFT
Quali-Pro Chlorothalonil DF
Quali-Pro Chlorothalonil 500 ZN
30
Chlorothalonil plus M5, 1 Thiophanate- Label cautions that the user should conduct tests for safety to
thiophanate-methyl methyl is largely plants not mentioned on the label before widespread use. Spectro
Spectro 90WDG ineffective on is not recommended for use on Swedish ivy, Boston fern, or
Botrytis due to Easter cactus (Hatiora gaertneri). Do not apply Spectro to
fungicide Pittosporum or Schefflera more than once to avoid phytotoxicity.
resistance.
Chlorothalonil
component is
effective against
Botrytis>
Copper hydroxide M1 Botrytis Note label precautions for treating some crops. Apply to a small
Champ Dry Prill 57.6% number of plants and observe for 7–10 days for symptoms of
Champion 77WP Powdery mildew phytotoxicity before commercial use. Do not tank mix with
Nu-Cop 50WP Aliette without buffering the spray solution.
Nu-Cop 3L Pro – low likelihood of resistance developing to this fungicide.
Nu-Cop HB
Copper hydroxide + mancozeb M1, M3 Botrytis – both The pH of the spray solution should be less than 6.5 to avoid
Junction 15DF components. phytotoxicity. Label cautions grower to conduct small-scale tests
on other ornamentals not listed on the label for signs of
Powdery mildew phytotoxicity before commercial use.
copper hydroxide Pro – low likelihood of resistance developing to this fungicide.
component.
Copper salts of fatty and rosin M1 Botrytis Pro – low likelihood of resistance developing to this fungicide.
acids Con – only for use on azalea.
Camelot 58EL Powdery mildew
Copper sulfate pentahydrate M1 Powdery Mildew Pro – low likelihood of resistance developing to this fungicide.
Phyton 27 21 .36%
Dicloran 14 Botrytis Chrysanthemum, geranium
Botran
31
Dimethomorph 40 Foliar
Stature DM Phytophthora, not
effective against
Pythium.
Etridiazole 14 Pythium Note that rates vary with the soil volume. Foliage must be rinsed
Terrazole 35 WP off with water immediately after application to avoid
Truban 30W phytotoxicity. Drench application is preferable to soil mix
Truban 25 EC incorporation.
Etridiazole + thiophanate-methyl 14, 1 Pythium (from Mix with soil, broadcast, or sidedress.
Banrot 8G etridiazole
Banrot 40W component)
Fenhexamid 17 Botrytis For resistance management, avoid making more than two
Decree 50 WDG consecutive applications of this product. Do not apply more than
6 lb. of product per crop per season.
Con – potential for fungicide resistance to develop.
Fludioxonil 12 Botrytis Use up to 30 oz. Medallion per 1,000 sq. ft. (80 lb. product/acre)
Medallion 50% WP per year or crop cycle. Do not apply to leatherleaf fern. Drench
Rhizoctonia applications to impatiens or New Guinea impatiens or geraniums
may cause stunting or chlorosis. Use with extreme caution as a
foliar spray on geraniums, especially at high growing
temperatures. Test the recommended rates on a small number of
plants for phytotoxicity before widespread use. On Long Island,
for use in enclosed structures only.
Fludioxonil plus mefenoxam 12, 4 Pythium (from Stunting and/or chlorosis have been noted with application to
Hurricane mefenoxam impatiens, New Guinea impatiens, pothos, geranium, and Easter
component) lily. Drench treatments qualify for an exception to the 48-hour
REI: see label for details.
Flutolanil 7 Rhizoctonia Use as a drench at 3-6 oz/100 gal, using 1-2 pints/sq ft. Sprays
Contrast are made at 3-12 oz/100 gal on a 14-21 day interval. Also
labeled for cutting and bulb dips.
32
Fosetyl – Al 33 Pythium Systemic protection. Allow foliage to dry before overhead
Aliette 80WDG irrigation. May not be compatible with foliar fertilizers or with
compounds containing metal ions. Do not apply within seven
days of any copper application.
Hydrogen dioxide NC Disinfectant, No residual. Contact action against exposed microbes (e.g.
ZeroTol 27% general fungal spores).
N/A ?
Iprodione 2 Often only partially Make no more than four foliar applications per year, totaling no
26GT (Bayer) effective against more than 10 qt. product/acre/year, with no more than 2.5 qt. or
Chipco 26019 Flo (Bayer) Botrytis due to 2.5 lb. product/acre in any application. Users should apply a
Sextant 23.3% EC fungicide label rate on a small number of plants to test for plant safety. Do
Chipco 26019 Brand (Bayer) resistance, still not use on spathiphyllum, and do not use as a soil drench on
Chipco 26019 N/G valuable. impatiens or pothos.
Iprodione Pro 2SE
Lesco 18-Plus Rhizoctonia
Sextant
Iprodione + thiophanate methyl 2, 1 Botrytis control

26/36 (from iprodione
primarily)
Rhizoctonia (from
both components)
Kresoxim methyl 11 Powdery Mildew For use on bedding plants, cut flowers, roses, poinsettias, and
Cygnus trees; in greenhouses, make no more than eight applications per
year. For resistance management, alternate each application of
Cygnus with two sequential applications of a non-strobilurin
fungicide.
Con – potential for fungicide resistance to develop in this
fungicide class.
33
Mancozeb M3 Botrytis Test a small section of the plant to be treated if the plant is not
Dithane T/O Rainshield 75% listed on the label: user assumes all risk in treating unlabeled
Lesco Mancozeb DG plants. Adding a spreader-sticker may improve performance. For
Dithane F-45 Rainshield T&O Dithane F-45, must use product with label listing ornamentals.
Fore WSP Rainshield T&O
Fore Rainshield T&O
Pentathlon DF 75%
Pentathlon LF 37%
Protect DF
Mefenoxam 4 Pythium (some For use on container-, bed-, and bench-grown ornamental plants
Mefenoxam 2 Pythium isolates as a soil drench or incorporated in soil media. Use is not limited
Quali-Pro mefenoxam 2 AQ are insensitive to to plants mentioned on the label. Pothos and English ivy are
Subdue MAXX 21.3% MEC mefenoxam); extremely sensitive to mefenoxam: see label for precautions.
Rotate with another
Pythium material.
Myclobutanil 3 Powdery mildew User should test for possible phytotoxicity to plants not listed on
Eagle 20 EW (see note ) the label.
Eagle 40 WP (see note )
Hoist (see note)
Neem oil extract, clarified NC? Powdery Mildew Conduct trials to be sure of safety to your crop. Do not spray
Triact 70 without testing first.
Con – Phytotoxicity from oil at high humidities. Risk of
defoliation on poinsettias.
Oxycarboxin 7
Plantvax
PCNB 14 Rhizoctonia Drench and dip applications.

Glacier 10G Apply only once to bedding plants to avoid phytotoxicity.
Hi-Yield T & O
Terraclor 75% WP
Terraclor 400F
34
Phosphorus acid 33 Phytophthora Mixtures with some foliar fertilizers and copper materials may
Alude cause phytotoxicity to some plants: test for crop safety before
Vital Pythium use
Piperalin 5 Powdery Mildew
Pipron 84.4%L
Polyoxin D zinc salt 19, ? Powdery mildew New active ingredient.

Endorse
Botrytis
Potassium bicarbonate NC Powdery Mildew Con – repeated sprays add salt to plants – get leaf scorch or
Armicarb stunting (salts in soil) if applied too often.
Kaligreen
Milstop
Propamocarb 28 Pythium Application at seeding or transplanting, or bare root dip at
Banol TOF 66.5% EC potting, as well as drenches to established plants.
Pyraclostrobin 11 Botrytis Plants: See label for extensive list of tolerant species; test for
Insignia phytotoxicity on a small sample of plants before widespread use.
Powdery mildew
Do not use on impatiens or petunias when in flower. Do not use
with organosilicone-based adjuvants. For resistance
management, make no more than two sequential applications of
Insignia before alternating with a material with a different mode
of action (i.e. do not rotate with Compass O, Cygnus, or
Heritage).
Pyraclostrobin + boscalid 11, 7 Botrytis To avoid phytotoxicity, do not use with organosilicone-based
Pageant adjuvants. Discoloration may occur on impatiens or petunia
Powdery mildew flowers. For resistance management, do not make more than 2
consecutive treatments with Pageant before rotating to a
fungicide with a different mode of action. Do not alternate with
another Group 11 (strobilurin or QoI) fungicide.
35
Streptomyces grisioviridis Streptomycin 25 Botrytis
Mycostop
Sulfur M2 Powdery Mildew Added benefit of mite control. Do not use when greenhouse
Microthiol Disperss temperature will exceed 90° F in the next three days. Do not use
within two weeks of an oil spray. Protectant.
Thiophanate-methyl 1 Rhizoctonia Plants: bedding plants, herbaceous annuals, perennials
3336-F 42.5%
3336-WP 50% Powdery mildew
Allban 50WSB
Allban Flo 46.2% F Botrytis Same spectrum of activity as benomyl. Surfactants may improve
OHP 6672 50% W populations in performance of foliar sprays. Limited systemic action.
T-Bird 85 WDG greenhouse are
Quali-Pro TM 4.5 F likely to be
Quali-Pro TM 85 WDG resistant.
Thiophanate-methyl 1, M3 Botrytis Not for use on French marigold or gloxinia.

+ mancozeb Foliar only.
Zyban WSB 79.6% Powdery mildew
Triadimefon 3 Powdery Mildew Systemic fungicide

Strike 50 WDG Ineffective against rose powdery mildew in some trials.
Effective against powdery mildew on poinsettias.
Trichoderma harzianum NC Rhizoctonia This is a biological fungicide. It may be applied as a spray at
(KRL – AG2) 0.25-0.5 oz/gal for suppression of foliar pathogens, or drenched
Plant Shield HC 1.15% Some suppression at 3-5 oz/100 gal for suppression of soil pathogens. Follow all
of Botrytis and label precautions.
powdery mildew.
Trifloxystrobin 11 Botrytis For resistance management, limit the number of sequential
Compass Fungicide 50 WDG applications of Compass; use no more than 2 or 3 applications
Compass O 50 WDG Powdery Mildew before rotating to a non-strobilurin. Petunia, African violet and
New Guinea impatiens may show phytotoxicity.
Rhizoctonia Con – potential for fungicide resistance to develop.
36
Triflumizole 3 Powdery Mildew Do not use on impatiens plugs; for impatiens transplants do not
Terraguard 50W exceed 2 oz/100 gal rate. For all bedding plant plugs, do not
Terraguard SC exceed 2 oz/100 gal.
For use on ornamentals grown in greenhouses.
Vinclozolin 2 Botrytis Label recommends that the grower conduct small-scale tests
Touché EG before broad use of any non-labeled ornamental species. Do not
Rhizoctonia spray poinsettias in color, and do not spray after November 1.
Do not use on V-14 Glory. Some poinsettia cultivars may show
leaf spotting.
*It should be noted that not all the pesticides listed are labeled in all the states of the northeast region. These tables are not intended
for use by growers but are to give an indication of the available pesticides, and their respective pesticide class or group, that are
available for management of a particular pest.
37
OTHER DISEASES
Alternaria leaf spot

Alternaria spp.
Symptoms
This disease is common on dusty miller, marigold, impatiens, zinnia, and geranium.
Small purple to brown leaf lesions develop under conditions of warmth and high moisture. On
impatiens, spots have a purple to black rim and a light center and are only a few millimeters in
diameter. They are easily confused with bacterial leaf spot, or impatiens necrotic spot virus
(INSV), but their uniformly small size and the tendency of the leaf to turn yellow help
distinguish them.
Management
Reduce the periods of leaf wetness to facilitate disease management. Overhead irrigation favors
this disease. Plugs may arrive already infected. Examine plants closely. Fungicides are available
to help control this disease.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Alternaria

Azoxystrobin
Bacillus subtilis
Captan
Chlorothalonil
Chlorothalonil in smoke formulation
Chlorothalonil plus thiophanate-methyl
Clarified extract of neem oil
Copper hydroxide
Copper hydroxide plus mancozeb
Copper salts of fatty and rosin acids
Fixed copper tannate
Flutolanil
Fludioxonil
Iprodione
Ipridione plus thiophanate-methyl
Kresoxim methyl
Mancozeb
Mancozeb plus thiophanate-methyl
Myclobutanil
Paraffinic oil
PCNB
Polyoxin D zinc salt
Potassium bicarbonate
Pyraclostrobin
Thiophanate-methyl
Triadimefon
Trifloxystrobin
Triflumizole
Vinclozolin
Bacterial Blight of Geranium

Xanthomonas hortorum pv. pelargonii
Symptoms
Bacterial blight can cause leaf spots as well as systemic infections in geraniums. Leaf symptoms
are either an overall tiny spotting (1/16 –1/8 in. diameter) or a wedge-shaped yellow to brown
area often followed by leaf wilting. The disease can cause black dieback of growing points and
stem cankers at the base of the petioles. In hot, humid weather, the bacteria may spread from
infected leaves into the stem, causing the plant to wilt and die.
Zonal and ivy geraniums (Pelargonium x hortorum and P. peltatum) are most likely to develop
symptoms of this disease; a few cases of leaf spots on Regal geraniums have been observed.
Hardy Geranium species may be a source of bacteria that can cause disease on greenhouse crops
of Pelargonium species. Geraniums grown from seed can become badly diseased if they are
grown with an infested cutting crop. Plants in families other than the Geraniaceae are not
susceptible.
Management
Grow culture-indexed cuttings only. Xanthomonas-free material for cuttings is assured through
careful culture indexing. Grow stock plants using individual tube watering systems. Splashing
water easily spreads the organism. Subirrigation may spread the disease from root system to root
system. Keep stock from different suppliers separate, and grow seedling geraniums separate from
cutting crops. Do not hang ivy geraniums over a bench or floor crop of geraniums. Do not grow
hardy (perennial) Geranium species near greenhouse crops of Pelargonium spp. Rogue out
symptomatic plants immediately. Thoroughly sanitize areas where infected plants were grown.
Bactericides are available for the prevention of spread of bacterial blight. Avoid spraying other
materials that might serve to spread the bacteria.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Blight of Geranium

Bacillus subtilis
Copper hydroxide
Copper sulfate pentahydrate
Bacterial Leaf Spots

Pseudomonas and Xanthomonas spp.
39
Symptoms and Disease Development
Bacterial pathogens Pseudomonas and Xanthomonas can both cause foliar spotting on various
crops. Pseudomonas spp. can produce irregular water-soaked areas on leaves of plants including
impatiens and New Guinea impatiens under wet conditions. Pseudomonas leaf spots on
impatiens are variable in size and may blight the entire leaf; spots often start at the leaf edge.
Zinnia and English ivy are susceptible to different bacteria (Xanthomonas spp.) causing angular
tan spots with yellow haloes.
Management
Inspect incoming material and use disease-free cuttings and seeds (zinnia leafspot caused by
Xanthomonas is known to be seed-borne). Splashing water can move bacteria and spread disease.
Eliminate overhead irrigation where possible. Avoid watering late in the day, rather irrigate
when the leaves will dry quickly.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Leaf Spots

Bacillus subtilis
Copper hydroxide
Black root rot

Thielaviopsis basicola

Pansies, violas, calibrachoas, petunias, and vinca (Catharanthus roseus and Vinca minor) are
among the most commonly susceptible greenhouse plants. The disease may be first noticed due
to stunting or pale colored, seemingly nutrient-deficient foliage. Thielaviopsis causes a black
root rot and sometimes a dark dry stem base lesion, High pH and poor drainage encourage
Thielaviopsis root rot. Losses have also occurred in hanging baskets of fuchsia grown at high pH
(6.5–7.0) and in poinsettia crops.
Management
The disease is rarely a problem in growing media adjusted to pH 4.5 to 5.0. Cleaning pots well is
a very important control measure as it common for this fungus to survive on pots and trays.
Prevention of contamination of media with outside soil can also help control this disease. Good
water management is also important as this disease is more likely to be a problem on over-
watered plants.
Fungicide drenches can be effective especially when used preventively if this disease has been a
problem in the past, because the fungus survives in greenhouses from year to year and may be
moved about by people, fungus gnats, etc..
40
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Thielaviopsis
Etridiazole plus thiophanate-methyl

Fludioxonil
Fludioxonil plus mefenoxam
Thiophanate-methyl
Triflumizole

Puccinia horiana
Chrysanthemum white rust (CWR) is caused by the fungus Puccinia horiana. This disease does
not occur naturally in the US, however it has appeared here occasionally over the past few years,
apparently as the result of importation.

This disease first appears as small yellow foliage spots that begin less than ¼” in diameter. A
characteristic feature that helps separate these spots from other spots is the tiny brown speck in
the center of the lesion. Below these spots a raised tan to pink colored pustule develops which
fades to white with age. These pustules are where spores are released. The best place to look for
the spots is on the young leaves and flower bracts. Also check mums growing outside near the
greenhouse, as well as including Montauk daisy (Leucanthemum X superbum).
Management
To help prevent this disease from occurring at your operation, carefully inspect incoming mums
especially from other growers. Imported cut chrysanthemums should never be handled in or near
a mum growing facility—a particular challenge for greenhouse/florist operations. Cool humid
conditions favor this disease (temperature range from 63 – 75 F).
Chrysanthemum white rust is a federal quarantine pest; growers are obligated to report it. If you
are not sure if you have white rust, contact your extension office or NY Ag and Markets to get a
confirmation.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Chrysanthemum White Rust

(CWR treatment post detection is determined by the USDA)
Azoxystrobin
Chlorothalonil
Kresoxim methyl
Mancozeb
Myclobutanil
Triadimefon
41
Cladosporium Leaf Mold
Fulvia fulva (syn. Cladosporium fulvum).
Cladosporium leaf mold is primarily a problem on greenhouse-grown tomatoes, but can occur in
the field when humidity is high.
Disease Development
Fungal spores germinate under high humidity (85% or greater) and cool to warm temperatures
(40 to 90ºF), but disease rarely occurs below 50ºF. Wind, splashing irrigation water and rain,
workers, tools, and insects readily disseminate spores. Contaminated seed can also initiate
epidemics. The pathogen survives between tomato crops in and on crop residues, and in the soil
as spores (conidia) or dormant resting structures (sclerotia).
Symptoms
Disease symptoms are usually limited to foliage, and first appear on the upper sides of older
leaves as pale green or yellow spots. Leaf spots have irregular borders, but when infection is
severe these spot coalesce and kill large areas of the foliage. The upper surface of affected leaves
turns an olive green with more intense color near the center of lesions. Leaves eventually curl,
wither, and may drop from the plant. Blossoms, stems, and fruit can be attacked by F. fulva.
Affected fruit has a black, leathery rot on the stem end with an irregular margin.
Management
Plant only high quality seed free from the leaf mold pathogen. Hot water treatment can reduce
seed contamination, but can reduce germination.. In greenhouse production, thoroughly sterilize
production areas by steam to eliminate F. fulva. Minimize wetting the foliage when irrigating
tomatoes. Maintain night temperatures higher than outside temperatures. Resistant varieties are
available, but many races of the pathogen exist, and resistance can be overcome quickly by the
appearance of new races.
Fungicides control leaf mold, but should be used in combination with as many cultural control
strategies as possible to be most effective. Read label carefully for specifications regarding use
on tomatoes as a food crop.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Cladosporium

Pyraclostrobin
Reference: High Plains IPM Guide, a cooperative effort of the University of Wyoming,
University of Nebraska, Colorado State University and Montana State University.
Downy mildew
Peronospora and Plasmopara spp, primarily.
Downy mildew is a newly important disease of bedding plant crops and is not as common as
foliar blights caused by Botrytis. Downy mildew, caused by fungus-like organisms in the
Oomycetes, can occur very rapidly and can be difficult to control. Some of the greenhouse crops
prone to infection by one of the downy mildews include: coleus, bacopa, basil, snapdragon,
42
salvia, alyssum, impatiens, jamesbrittenia, pansy, rose, rosemary, and ornamental cabbage.
Perennials susceptible to downy mildew include aster, coreopsis, geranium, geum, lamium,
potentilla, veronica and viola.
Symptoms
Symptoms can be confused with other plant problems. Leaves may become mottled and
yellowed, appearing to have nutritional deficiencies. On some plants, downy mildew infection
may look similar to injury from foliar nematodes. In both cases, angular lesions are bounded by
leaf veins. However, downy mildew infection eventually results in a soft, fluffy gray, brown or
purple fungal sporulation developing on the underside of leaves. On some plants including
coreopsis, the fungal sporulation is white. Systemically-infected plants may be stunted and off-
color.
Symptoms can vary depending upon the host plant. On coleus leaves are spotted, twisted, or drop
from the plant. On snapdragons, infected plants are yellow and stunted. You may see downward
leaf curling on the young seedlings. On salvia, angular yellow blotches can be seen between the
leaf veins. On pansy, leaves turn mottled and off-color with purple blotches. Pale green or yellow
patches develop on geum. Purplish patches occur on lamium and veronica. On roses, leaves
develop angular dark purple to black areas that resemble phytotoxicity from a spray application.
Life Cycle
Downy mildews usually develop during cool (50 - 75 F), wet conditions with high relative
humidity. A film of water is needed for spore germination and infection. Prolonged periods of
leaf wetness promote this disease. Fungal spores are easily spread by splashing water and wind,
sometimes over very long distances. Infection is sometimes carried in the seed.
In most cases there is no good mechanism for downy mildew to survive off host plants. It may be
introduced through seed or plugs into the greenhouse. Look at incoming plants closely. This
disease may travel via wind currents and consequently be worse in certain years when the
weather pattern favors spore movement from the south.
Management
Become familiar with the symptoms on susceptible crops and regularly scout to detect downy
mildew early when fungicides are more effective. With a 10 to 20x handlens, look on the
underside of leaves for the gray, purple, brown or white blooms of sporangia (microscopic stalks
bearing spores). The fungal stalks may branch in a pattern that looks like "deer antlers". Remove
all infected plants. Spores can be easily moved from plant to plant. Downy mildew may
sometimes be carried over in infected plant debris in the soil or in weed hosts. In the greenhouse,
keep relative humidity below 85 percent to decrease fungal sporulation and disease development.
Protect susceptible crops with preventative fungicide applications during cool, wet weather.
Repeated applications may be needed. Rotate among fungicide classes to delay the development
of resistance. Use of systemic (e.g. Dimethomorph) and contact (e.g. mancozeb) fungicides in
rotation is a good strategy.
43
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Downy Mildew
Aluminum tris o-ethyl phosphonate

Azoxystrobin
Captan
Chlorothalonil
Copper hydroxide
Dimethomorph
Etridiazole
Fosetyl-A1
Kresoxim methyl
Mancozeb
Phosphorus acid
Polyoxin D zinc salt
Potassium phosphate
Trifloxystrobin
Reference: University of Connecticut Integrated Pest Management Greenhouse Downy Mildew

Factsheet.
Impatiens Necrotic Spot Virus
Spread by the western flower thrips, INSV has caused devastating losses to some bedding plant
crops in cases where the grower was unaware that the thrips population had skyrocketed. Young
seedlings are more susceptible than older plants. Almost all crops are susceptible, but losses have
been most dramatic in impatiens, particularly double-flowered varieties. New Guinea impatiens,
begonia, coleus, browallia, nemesia and many other bedding plants are susceptible.
Symptoms
INSV causes a wide variety of symptoms, which vary by the host plant. Many species are stunted
and distorted by INSV infection. INSV-infected plants may also show ringspots, mottling, or
browning along the veins. Impatiens show black leaf spots as well as blackening of sections of
the stem. Not all infected plants show symptoms; symptomless plants (including weeds) may be
the source of virus for crops that are highly susceptible. Tomato spotted wilt virus (TSWV) is a
closely related virus. Symptoms are very similar to those of INSV but TSWV is far less common
in bedding plants. Tomato and pepper transplants are especially vulnerable to TSWV.
44
Disease Development
Vegetatively propagated flower crops in hanging baskets have often provided inoculum (and
thrips vectors) for a seed crop grown below them. Flowering pot plant crops or weeds in the
same greenhouse may also provide inoculum of INSV that may injure bedding plants. Begonias
are often a source of the virus.
Control
Discard symptomatic plants immediately and guard constantly against thrips population buildup
to avoid losses. Monitor the thrips population with yellow sticky cards, and initiate treatment if
more than 10 thrips are caught per card per week, assuming three cards per 1,000 sq. ft.
greenhouse. Keep vegetable transplants separate from flower crops, and grow plants from
cuttings well separated from plants from seed. Maintain a strict weed control program. Beware of
growing or carrying over virus-infected plants that may appear healthy. (no chemical treatments
available)
Phytophthora Damping off, Root and Crown Rot

Phytophthora spp

Sudden wilting of an individual shoot or an entire plant is an indication of Phytophthora
infection. Deteriorated or water-soaked roots or stem/foliar lesions may also be noticed.
Phytophthora is favored by deep planting and by wet, poorly drained growing mixes. Avoid
growing Phytophthora-sensitive plants in ebb-and-flood benches because the zoospores can
easily spread the disease from pot to pot. Remove symptomatic plants promptly. Petunias,
gerberas, vincas (Catharanthus), and pansies seem to be particularly susceptible.
Chemical Control
The same fungicides that work against Pythium will work against Phytophthora because both are
oomycetes (commonly called “water molds”). Resistance has occurred in greenhouse
Phytophthora populations, so always be careful to rotate among materials for the control of the
disease.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Phytophthora Damping off, Root and Crown Rot
Aluminum tris o-ethyl phosphonate

Azoxystrobin
Captan
Chlorothalonil
Copper hydroxide
Dimethomorph
Etridiazole
45
Fosetyl-A1
Mancozeb
Mefenoxam
Phosphorus acid
Potassium phosphate
Propamocarb
Pyraclostrobin
Trifloxystrobin
Sclerotinia Stem Rot

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
Host list
This disease can be found in the greenhouse or landscape. Many fleshy-stemmed greenhouse
plants can be infected with Sclerotinia Stem Rot including: tomato, petunia, snapdragon,
sunflower, lobelia, marigold, and zinnia, to name a few. A total of over 170 species could be
affected, including many vegetables.
Symptoms
Symptoms begin as a watery stem rot with white, moldy growth on stems, petioles, and lower
leaves. If conditions remain moist, a large amount of cottony, moldy growth can be seen on the
dead tissue. As this growth progresses, hard, black, irregularly-shaped bodies called sclerotia
form on the surface or often inside affected stems.
Life Cycle
The hard, black sclerotia can survive without a host plant for up to seven years in dry soil.
Disease is dependent on high humidity and cool temperatures (60-70 degrees F is ideal). In
addition to the sclerotia causing direct infection, small, cup-like fruiting structures, called
apothecia, can be formed.. The apothecia produce enormous numbers of spores that spread by air
movement and can also cause infections.
Management
During the growing season, the greenhouse soil surface and atmosphere should be kept as dry as
possible by continuous air circulation. All infected plant parts should be removed from the
greenhouse as they appear on plants. Look at incoming plants closely, as this disease can be
shipped in on plants.
Fungicides are available for control. Good spray coverage of stems and the bases of plants is
essential when controlling this disease.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Sclerotinia Stem Rot

46
Azoxystrobin
Chlorothalonil
Fenhexamid
Fludioxonil
Iprodione
Mancozeb
PCNB
Pyraclostrobin
Thiophanate-methyl
Trifloxystrobin
Triflumizole
Vinclozolin
Reference: Sclerotinia Stem Rot of Tomatoes in Greenhouses Vegetable Disease Information

Note 4 (VDIN-004) Charles W Averre, Extension Plant Pathologist, North Carolina State
University.
Southern Wilt of Geranium

Ralstonia solanacearum
Ralstonia solanacearum is a bacterium that has various races that vary in their host and climate
adaptation. Race 1 has been reported to cause disease on many flowering plants, including
geranium (Pelargonium x hortorum), as well as field crops. It is seen occasionally in US
greenhouse production, particularly in the South. Race 3 is found throughout the world except in
the U.S. and Canada. The race/biovar of most concern to the U.S. is Race 3 biovar 2, because of
its potential ability to cause damage to potato, tomato, eggplant and geraniums in cooler climates
than Race 1. In recent years, geranium cuttings produced in Kenya, Costa Rica and Guatemala
were found to carry this race of R. solanacearum, resulting in a massive eradication effort in U.S.
greenhouses under a federal quarantine in 2003. To keep this pathogen out of the United States, a
joint effort has been made by USDA, the geranium propagators, and the greenhouse industry.
Clean stock production procedures have been carefully refined in offshore propagation facilities.
Symptoms and Identification

Yellowing and wilting of leaves is the only aboveground symptom caused by Ralstonia in
geraniums, whereas Xanthomonas hortorum pv. pelargonii will cause tiny, round, brown leaf
spots (if the bacteria have been splashed onto the leaves), as well as wilting. Remember that
wilting in geraniums is most often caused by Pythium attack on the root systems. Seek help with
diagnosis from a qualified laboratory rather than assuming that your crop is infected with
Ralstonia. Test kits are available to check on-site for the presence of Xanthomonas or Ralstonia
bacteria in geraniums that have suspicious wilting symptoms. Identification of the particular race
of Ralstonia may only be done at a USDA-approved testing lab; the grower-friendly test kits will
only identify the organism as Ralstonia solanacearum, and can’t distinguish between Race 1 and
the very serious Race 3.
47
Management
Careful sanitation practices are important for each individual grower. To minimize risk, separate
geraniums from different suppliers and from different ship dates. Avoid hanging geraniums over
other crops. Do not grow geraniums in the same greenhouse with tomato transplants. Do not
subirrigate geraniums. Chemical controls are not as important as rouging out infected plants.
Some phosphorus acid materials have shown real promise for protecting plants against Ralstonia
solanacearum; copper treatments would help with sanitation but are not beneficial for reducing
root uptake of inoculum.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Southern Wilt of Geranium

Aluminum tris O-ethyl phosphonate

Copper hydroxide
NEW DISEASES AND THOSE OF INCREASING IMPORTANCE

Puccinia horiana*
Quarantine significant pest – control by eradication
Ralstonia solanacearum*
Southern wilt in geranium
Race 3, biovar 2 is on the Select Agent list - control is by eradication only
Peronospora sp.*
Basil downy mildew
In the US since 2007, in the NE since 2008; seedborne
Coleus downy mildew

Widespread but awareness still is lagging a bit; possibly
Seedborne. Different from the basil downy mildew even though coleus downy mildew
can be inoculated on to basil experimentally.
Plasmopara obducens
Impatiens downy mildew
Damaging effects in landscape plantings, possibly seedborne.
Fusarium oxysporum f. sp. chrysanthemi

Fusarium wilt of chrysanthemum
Becoming more prevalent with warming climates?
Thielaviopsis basicola*
Black root rot
48
Increasing as more growers are recycling plug trays, pots and flats
Xanthomonas axonopodis pv. begoniae

Attacking some of the new forms of begonia in the trade
*See the “Other diseases” section for additional information on these diseases
PESTICIDES IN THE PROCESS OF REGISTRATION
Active ingredient Trade name Active against Comments

Mandipropamid Downy mildew and Not yet registered
Phytophthora
Fluopicolide Adorn (V-10161) Pythium and Newly registered with
Phytophthora EPA
Fluoxastrobin DisArm Pythium and Newly registered with
Phytophthora EPA
Kasumin Bacteria Not yet registered
Bacillus subtilis var Taegro
amyloliquefaciens
49
INSECTS AND MITES
Primary Source: 2008 Cornell Guide for the Integrated Management of Greenhouse Floral
Crops
Aphids
(Myzus persicae, Aphis gossypii, Aulacorthum solani)

Aphids can infest most greenhouse crops. Their mere presence can ruin the beauty of a plant.
Feeding can cause stunting and plant/leaf deformities. Large infestations can reduce plant vigor.
They produce a sweet, sticky secretion called “honeydew,” which leads to unsightly grey sooty
mold. White cast skins that they leave behind as they molt from one stage to another are
unsightly. Aphids are responsible for the transmission of about 60% of all plant viruses on
agricultural crops world-wide.
Identification
Aphids are all generally small (1-3mm) and soft bodied, and have a pair of unique structures that
resemble “tailpipes” near the end of their abdomen, called cornicles. Adults may or may not have
wings. More than 20 aphid species can infest various greenhouse crops. Three of the most
common are:
Green peach aphid (Myzus persicae): Very common aphid. Color varies from light green to rose.
Have a pronounced indentation between the bases of their antennae on the front of their head.
Color of the cornicles is the same as the body except the extreme tips, which are dark.
Melon aphid (Aphis gossypii): Small, very common aphid. Color varies from light yellow to very
dark green, almost black. Have no pronounced indentation between the bases of their antennae.
The entire length of their cornicles is always black, regardless of their body color.
Foxglove aphid (Aulacorthum solani): Also called glasshouse potato aphid. Broad host range, and
has often been found on ivy and zonal geraniums, salvia, and cineraria, among many other crops,
in the northeastern U.S. Looks very much like green peach aphid in size, shape, and color, except
they are shiny, and the area of the abdomen around the bases of the cornicles is darker green than
the rest of the body.
Biology
Aphids reproduce parthenogenetically, i.e., all the insects present are females, and each female
gives birth to more females without the need to mate. These females give birth to living nymphs
rather than lay eggs. An unborn aphid already contains a complement of developing nymphs.
Aphid nymphs are genetic clones of their mothers. Populations can increase explosively –
newborns can reach adulthood and begin to reproduce in as little as 7 days. As a colony increases
in age and size on individual plants, the proportion of winged forms increases.
They feed by inserting their stylet-like mouthparts through plant tissue directly into the phloem
and removing plant sap. Aphids may be found feeding on buds, stems, and the lower surfaces of
50
leaves. Some will migrate to new host plants or young plant tissue and will actively search for
soft, fresh plant tissue. As plants begin to form flower buds, a previously undetected aphid
infestation can become terribly apparent as they move up the plant onto the recently developed
stems, buds, and flowers. Aphids on the upper canopy will be easier to contact with sprays.
Systemic insecticides will be most effective against those feeding on new growth. Aphids on
older growth lower in the canopy are often most difficult to kill chemically, and may be
responsible for producing new aphids that will reinfest the upper canopy. Green peach aphids are
prone to develop winged forms on mums, and may be more likely to spread quickly throughout a
mum crop. Melon aphids do not develop winged forms as readily and are not as likely to be
detected on yellow sticky cards.
Management
IPM
White cast skins on leaves of a plant may indicate an aphid colony on the leaves or stems above.
Ants are often attracted to the honeydew, so if you see ants on your plants, inspect them carefully
for aphids. Group aphid-susceptible plants together for easier monitoring. Inspect plant material
brought into your growing areas; do not purchase infested plants or cuttings. Inspect the
greenhouse thoroughly for all sources of all pests, including aphids, before a new crop arrives. If
possible, quarantine newly-arrived plants, and inspect thoroughly before moving them into
production areas.
The scouting procedure is made up of three components: plant inspection, sentinel plants, and
yellow sticky cards. Yellow sticky cards for winged adults, coupled with plant inspections for
non-winged aphids, can give a good overall picture of the presence, size, and location of an
infestation, and reveal if control strategies are working. Sentinel plants can indicate whether an
insecticide or a natural enemy was effective. It is important to know what living, dead, and
parasitized aphids look like. Parasitized aphids should not be crushed or removed from plants.
Parasitoid wasps will emerge from these cases to continue parasitizing aphids.
A. Plant Inspection. Some form of foliar scouting must be used to monitor aphids, because yellow
sticky cards used alone will only reveal the activity of winged aphids, which are much less
common than the wingless forms. A map of infested locations may help to target areas to be
sprayed and monitored.
B. Sentinel plants. When infested plants are found during plant inspection, some of these plants
are marked with flagging tape or survey flags, and are used as “sentinel plants”. The insects on
these sentinel plants are then monitored weekly to note whether control measures are having an
effect. Examine plants carefully and frequently to determine if repeat applications will be
required. For example, if aphids on the sentinel plants are increasing even though insecticides are
being applied, then you have an early indication that something is wrong before a large
infestation can develop.
C. Yellow sticky cards. Yellow sticky cards can monitor when winged aphids are active and may
detect a migration of aphids into the greenhouse, particularly in the spring and summer. In New
York we suggest using one 3-by-5 inch card per 1,000 sq. ft. Cards should be positioned
vertically just above the crop canopy. Additional cards placed near doors or vents can detect
51
whether insects are moving into the greenhouse from outside. Cards should be counted at least
weekly, and changed weekly or when they are full.
Methods Pros Cons Comments

Diagnosis/ID Images ID required for
effective
Magnification biological
control
Detection Plant inspection
Sentinel plants
Tap test Few winged

See other adults
Cast skins insects
Predator insects
Yellow sticky
cards
Monitoring Plant inspection
Sentinel plants
Yellow sticky Few winged

cards adults
Action
Thresholds*
*There are very few action thresholds identified for pest crop interactions in greenhouse settings.
For insects that vector diseases, such as thrips and impatiens necrotic spot virus, the threshold
may be 1 insect. The threshold may also depend on the stage of the production cycle and whether
the plant is produced for wholesale or retail sale.
Cultural/Mechanical
Sanitation is vital. Eliminate all weeds within or near your greenhouses. Discard old stock plants,
hanging baskets that have not sold, and don’t keep “pet” plants. Screen doors and vents to prevent
migration into the greenhouse, especially during the fall and spring. Avoid planting aphid-
susceptible cultivars near doorways or vents where they could be infested from an outside source.
Aphid control is much more successful when an infestation is detected and controlled early in a
crop. There are fewer aphids, spray coverage is better while the crop canopy is sparse, and the
risk of phytotoxicity is reduced. Among the worst times to first notice an aphid infestation is
when they are crawling all over the flowers. Therefore, a regular scouting program should be
implemented to detect aphids throughout the crop.
52
Biological Control
Commercially available natural enemies for aphids include ladybird beetles, lacewings, parasitic
wasps (e.g. Aphidius colemani), predaceous midges (Aphidoletes aphidomyza), and insect-
pathogenic fungi (Beauveria bassiana). It is usually best to use fungal pathogens while the
infestation is small, not against a major infestation. Repeated applications at 3-5 day intervals
may be necessary for a rapidly growing infestation. Researchers and growers are investigating the
use of various natural enemies for aphid control on greenhouse crops, including the use of banker
plants, impact of hyperparasitism and the possible negative impact on retail sales when the natural
enemies or evidence of their presence, such as aphid “mummies” are visible.
Chemical
Systemic or translaminar insecticides tend to be more effective than contact insecticides, provided
that a sufficient amount of insecticide reaches the aphid feeding sites. Contact insecticides can be
very effective with thorough spray coverage and good canopy penetration. Two applications of
foliar sprays, a week apart, are often needed, but follow label directions. Keep careful scouting
records to evaluate the effectiveness of various chemicals under your own conditions. Some
strains of aphids have developed resistance to some pesticides.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Aphids

(see Table 5 for information on insecticides and miticides)
Common Name (class)

Group 1A & 1B
Acephate (1B)
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Chlorpyrifos + cyfluthrin (1B + 3)
Dichlorvos (1B)
Fenpropathrin + acephate (3 + 1B)
Methiocarb (1A)
Naled (1B)
Group 3
Bifenthrin (3)
Cyfluthrin (3)
Cyfluthrin + imidacloprid (3 + 4A)
Fenpropathrin (3)
Fluvalinate (3)
Permethrin (3)
Pyrethrins + piperonyl butoxide (3 + 27A)
Pyrethrins + rotenone (3 + 21)
Pyrethroid (3)
Group 4
Acetamiprid (4B)
Clothianidin (4A)
53
Dinotefuran (4A)
Imidacloprid (4A)
Nicotine (4B)
Thiamethoxam (4A)
Group 6
Abamectin (6)
Group 7
Fenoxycarb (7B)
Kinoprene (7)
Pyriproxyfen (7C)
Group 9
Flonicamid (9C)
Pymetrozine (9B)
Group 18
Azadirachtin (18B)
Group 21
Group 27
Miscellaneous
Beauveria bassiana NC
Horticultural oils
Insecticidal soap
Neem oil
Soybean oil

• Resistance to certain organophosphate, carbamate, and synthetic pyrethroid insecticides is
common in aphids.
• Some efficacious materials are not registered in all states in the Northeast.

• Efficacy/resistance information lacking for most pesticides
• Lack of effective biocontrols for all species
• Early detection time consuming/unreliable
• Species/strain identification by experts is slow compared to aphid reproduction rate
Fungus Gnats
(Bradysia spp.)

The first few weeks of a crop are most critical for fungus gnat control. Chewing by larvae can
cause direct root damage, and provide an entry into the roots for fungal pathogens. Seedlings and
young plants without fully developed root systems are particularly susceptible to their damage.
Unrooted cuttings are also particularly vulnerable, with larval feeding interfering with callus
formation and thus root initiation. Adult fungus gnats do not cause direct damage to plants, but
54
are considered a nuisance pest to consumers. In addition, adults and larvae have been implicated
in the transmission of plant fungal diseases, including Thielaviopsis, Pythium, Verticillium,
Myrothecium, and Fusarium . Larvae may transmit fungal plant diseases via their excretion.
Adults may transmit these diseases via excretion or by carrying spores of disease organisms on
their bodies. Disease transmission by fungus gnats has been documented in lab studies, but it is
not yet clear whether fungus gnats play an important role in disease transmission under
commercial conditions.
Identification
Adult fungus gnats are small (approx. 1/8 inch long), blackish grey, gnat-like flies with long
gangly legs, many-segmented antennae that are longer than their heads, and have a single pair of
grayish transparent wings with a Y-shaped vein near each wing tip. They are weak flyers and may
be found running/flying near soil level. Fungus gnat larvae are the damaging stage of this insect.
They are usually concentrated in the top 1-2 inches of the growing media, but can be found
throughout the pot. The larvae are translucent, worm-like, with a distinctive black head capsule,
and are about ¼ inch long just prior to pupation. Larvae might be seen crawling near the surface
of the growing medium if the population is very high.
Biology
Mated adult females deposit up to 200 eggs singly or in clusters in crevices or cracks on the
surface of the growing media. Adult females prefer to lay eggs where fungus is growing. Larvae
prefer to feed on fungi rather than healthy plant tissue. Although fungus gnat larvae can eat plant
material, they need fungi in their diet for optimal survival, development, and reproduction. The
offspring of a given female will either be all males or all females. At 70° -75° F, these whitish-
yellow eggs hatch in 3-6 days. The four larval instars then feed for about 2 weeks and usually
pupate near the soil surface within a thread chamber. After 3-7 days in the pupal stage, adults
emerge and live for up to 8 days. They can develop from egg to adult in 3-4 weeks. This life cycle
is dependent on temperature and as temperatures decrease, the length of their developmental time
increases. Optimal temperature for development seems to be 70-75° F. They do not appear to
thrive at high temperatures. Overlapping life stages are often present at the same time, though the
bulk of the population may exist in only a few life stages.
Management
IPM
For monitoring adults, yellow sticky cards placed horizontally at soil level are most effective.
However, fungus gnats can be monitored along with most other flying greenhouse pests by
positioning yellow sticky cards vertically just above the crop canopy. Count them weekly and
record the numbers to see if the infestation is increasing or decreasing. Because fungus gnats are
often particularly damaging to young plants, monitor for adults several weeks before a crop is
started, and continue to monitor as the infestation is cleaned up before the new crop is started. To
monitor whether larval control is being achieved, use raw potato slices (at least 1 inch thick) or
wedges, placed cut-side down on the surface of the growing medium. Check the slices weekly,
replace them weekly, and record numbers of larvae found on the potato slices and on the soil
surface beneath the slices.
55
Diagnosis/ID Images Accurate ID of
either adults or
Magnification larvae is fairly
easy – note
difference
between drain
fly, shore fly,
and fungus gnats
Detection Yellow sticky Adults only,
cards Can catch
Inexpensive, beneficials Reliability
Potato readily variable
available, very May rot or
useful for direct sprout if left too
stick plus long
misting
especially
Observation
Monitoring Yellow sticky
cards
Potato
Cultural/Mechanical
No growing mixes are immune to fungus gnat infestation, but fungus gnat numbers can vary
among growing mixes. Adults are strongly attracted to microbial activity in soil/media. For
fungus gnat management, avoid immature composts (<1yr old), including composted pine bark
mix. Mixes with any compost are usually more attractive to fungus gnats than pure sphagnum
peat. Good sanitation is vital. Clean up spilled growing media, clean up algae, and fix plumbing
leaks. Weed control inside and outside the greenhouse is important. Avoid over-watering and
sloppy irrigation. Keep compost piles well away from production areas. Cycle plants through the
greenhouse as quickly as possible. Some growers have greatly reduced fungus gnat and shore fly
adult levels by stretching strips of sticky yellow plastic 6” wide ribbon throughout the greenhouse
near the soil level along the sides of benches or beneath benches, in areas of adult activity.
Biological
Releases of natural enemies should be done when populations are low, at start of crop.
1. Nematodes: Steinernema feltiae is the most effective nematode species for fungus gnat larvae.
Make first application at planting, or soon after, then 2-3 weekly applications. Irrigate the day
before application. Apply as a drench. Nematodes are not usually good at reducing a serious
infestation, one reason why they should be applied near the start of the crop.
2. Bacteria: Gnatrol is applied as soil drench. The active ingredient is a bacterium that must be
ingested by fungus gnat larvae. The bacterial toxin that kills the fungus gnat larva is only
56
effective for 48 hours after application; so repeat treatments with higher label rates at 3 to 5 day
intervals for heavy infestations.
3. Predators: Releases of the predaceous mite, Hypoaspis miles, may give excellent control.
Release soon after planting. A single release has provided 6-8 weeks of control in some cases.
The predators are capable of establishing and spreading throughout a greenhouse if the
environment is favorable. They live in the top layer of soil and feed on any small arthropods they
encounter (including thrips). Check each shipment for viability: shake up the bottle, then shake a
small amount of sawdust carrier onto a sheet of paper. Using a handlens, look for rapidly-moving
light-brown mites. Potato slices used for fungus gnat larval monitoring may also be useful for
Hypoaspis monitoring
4. Others: A predaceous rove beetle, Atheta, is also commercially available. A parasitoid,

Synacra, and a predaceous fly, Coenosia attenuate, occur naturally in many greenhouses.
Chemical
Many insecticides used for fungus gnat control are insect growth regulators and only affect larval
stages, not adults. Both an adulticide and a larvicide may be needed against well-established
populations.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Fungus Gnats

Common Name (class)

Group 1
Acephate (1B)
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Fenpropathrin + acephate (3 +1B)
Group 3
Bifenthrin (3)
Fenpropathrin + acephate (3 +1B)
Permethrin (3)
Group 4
Acetamiprid (4A)
Dinotefuran (4A)
Imidacloprid (4A)
Group 7
Kinoprene (7)
Pyriproxyfen (7C)
Group 13
Chlorfenapyr (13)
57
Group 15
Diflubenzuron (15)
Group 17
Cyromazine (17)
Group 18
Azadirachtin (18B)
Group 27
Miscellaneous
Bacillus thuringiensis israelensis
Horticultural oil
Insecticidal soap
Nematodes

• Some efficacious materials are not registered in all states in the NE.
• Europe may restrict/ban use of imidacloprid

• Linkage to disease transmission uncertain in some cases
Twospotted Spider Mite

(Tetranychus urticae)

Spider mites attack virtually every florist crop, including most species of foliage plants. These
mites cause severe chlorosis in attacked plants because the mites feed by “stabbing” cells with
their piercing mouthparts and sucking up the juices that exude. Spider mites remove chlorophyll
from plant cells and reduce photosynthesis. Removal of chlorophyll produces the characteristic
stippling or mottling of foliage and sometimes causes leaf drop. In severe infestations, the plants
may be covered with the mites’ characteristic webbing, which is why they are referred to as
spider mites.
Identification
This pest is the most common species of the spider mite family Tetranychidae to infest
greenhouse plants. These close relatives of insects are sometimes referred to as red spiders,
although they are not spiders at all. They are minute arthropods, with the largest life stage (adult
female) less than a millimeter in size. The body of the adult female and most immature stages is
oval-shaped and usually appears light yellow to green with two large dark green spots on either
side. All life stages have eight legs except for the larval stage, which has six.
Biology
Survival and developmental time and reproduction are greatly influenced by environmental
factors such as temperature, humidity, and host plant, with temperature being most important.
Females lay eggs (up to 12 per day) on the undersides of leaves, usually in the fine webbing that
the mites constantly produce. One female is capable of laying over 100 eggs during her lifetime.
58
The eggs hatch in as few as 3 days, depending on temperature, and the newly hatched mites
(called larvae) immediately begin to feed. After as few as 5 days, the mites pass through two
nymphal stages and become adults. Females will begin laying eggs from 1 to 3 days after
emerging as adults, and mating is not required. Egg to adult development may take as few as 7
days at 81° F, and about 20 days at 64° F. At warm temperatures, the mites’ ability for rapid
population increase becomes apparent. When populations of this pest are low, the mites prefer to
attack the lower surface of leaves, but may move upward as populations increase. Spider mites do
best under hot, dry conditions, and develop faster on water-stressed plants.
Management
IPM
A weekly routine plant inspection program is the best first step for spider mite management. The
scout should inspect plants carefully for the first signs of leaf stippling caused by spider mites.
Plants can be randomly chosen from each bench for inspection, with lower leaf surfaces being
examined for the presence of mites. Particular attention should be given to areas of the
greenhouse where mites are most likely to be spread on workers’ clothing, such as along
walkways or near entrances. Attention should also be focused on plant species or varieties that are
particularly susceptible to mite infestations, or in areas of a greenhouse that have a history of mite
problems. Efficient and regular scouting can lead to early detection of an infestation, and an
assessment of the location and number of infested plants.

Diagnosis/ID Images Fairly easy to
identify
Magnification
Detection Tap test weekly Use of webbing

for detection too
Observation of late for adequate
foliage control
Cultural/Mechanical
Weeds serve as alternate food for spider mites and should be eliminated. Clean greenhouses
between crops. Discard unsaleable plants with media as soon as possible.
Biological
Other mite species are known to feed voraciously on spider mites and their eggs, and these
beneficial species are commercially available
Chemical
Pesticide resistance can be a common problem in spider mite control. Unfortunately, many strains
of mites exist, and many of these strains are resistant to certain acaricides (miticides). Some
miticides are not effective against mite eggs, thus a repeat application may be needed after 5-7
days. Thorough coverage of upper and lower surfaces of all leaves is critical for effective mite
59
control. Plants on which an infestation is detected should be marked and re-inspected with a
handlens several days after a spray to evaluate the degree of control achieved.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Spider Mites

Common Name (class)

Group 1
Acephate (1B)
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Dichlorvos (1B)
Methiocarb (1A)
Naled (1B)
Group 3
Bifenthrin (3)
Fenpropathrin (3)
Fluvalinate (3)
Pyrethroid (3)
Group 5
Spinosad (5)
Group 6
Abamectin (6)
Group 7
Fenoxycarb (7B)
Group 10
Clofentezine (10A)
Etoxazole (10B)
Hexythiazox (10A)
Group 12
Fenbutatin (12B)
Group 13
Chlorfenapyr (13)
Group 18
Azadirachtin (18B)
Group 20
Acequinocyl (20B)
Group 21
Fenpyroximate (21)
Pyridaben (21)
60
Group 23
Spiromesifen (23)
Group 25
Bifenazate (25)
Group 27
Miscellaneous
Beauveria bassiana
Horticultural oil
Insecticidal soap
Neem oil
Soybean oil
Propargite

• Resistance.

• Detection (random plant inspections) prior to symptoms appearing is economically
unviable due to cost of labor time
• Limited options for herbs and greenhouse vegetables
Shore Fly
(Scatella tenuicosta)

Greenhouse workers and consumers consider adult shore flies a nuisance pest. In heavy
infestations they also deposit characteristic black "fly specks” on foliage that are unsightly.
Larvae are considered algae feeders, and do not feed on crop plant tissue. Adult shore flies are
capable of transmitting Pythium and other root disease organisms, but whether such transmission
commonly occurs in commercial greenhouses has not been evaluated. However, because algal
growth and shore flies are common in misted propagation areas, and diseases are particularly
severe to young plants during propagation, some growers aggressively manage shore flies in their
propagation facilities.
Identification
Shore flies and fungus gnats are often considered together as greenhouse pests, but they belong to
two distinct groups of insects. Adult shore flies are small, dark-grey flies (approx. 1/8 inch long),
which slightly resemble a Drosophila fruit fly, with a robust body and short legs and antennae.
They have five distinctive whitish spots on their grey wings. Their single pair of wings lacks the
characteristic Y-shaped vein at the tip seen in fungus gnats, and the shore fly adult has short
antennae. Larvae of the shore fly are small translucent-white maggots without a distinct head
capsule. Pupae are dark brown, spindle-shaped, with a distinctive forked structure at one end of
the puparium. They attach themselves, often in groups, to the sides of objects or pots just above
the water level.
61
Biology
Shore flies are adapted to living in a semi-aquatic environment. Larvae and adults are found in
close association with algae. Female shore flies lay on average about 300 tiny white eggs singly
on moist soil. They develop from egg to adult in 9-11 days. Eggs hatch in about a day and larvae
feed for 4 to 6 days on algae, after which they pupate. Adult flies emerge from the pupae in 3 to 5
days and generally live 2 to 3 weeks.
Management
IPM
Yellow sticky cards are useful in monitoring adults. They should be used positioned either
horizontally at the soil surface for the greatest trap catch, or vertically just above the plant canopy
for general monitoring. Larvae can sometimes be seen by examining algae-covered areas with a
handlens. Potato disks do not work for monitoring shore fly larvae.

Diagnosis/ID Images
Magnification
Detection Observation Low cost Population high

when detected
Yellow or blue Blue more

sticky cards attractive
Monitoring Yellow or blue
sticky cards
Cultural/Mechanical
Shore fly infestations can be reduced by managing algae growth. This includes minimizing
fertilizer and irrigation runoff and fixing leaky hoses and irrigation systems. Avoid over-watering
and over-fertilizing, and eliminate areas of standing water. In addition, greenhouse walls,
benches, gutters, and floors should be cleaned of algal growth as often as possible. A steam
cleaner may be effective. There are some chemical products that may aid in algae management.
Use according to label directions. One study has noted that Zero-Tol applications reduced algae
and shore flies, but also reduced plant growth. Use carefully.
Biological
Nematodes and predaceous mites used for fungus gnat control do not appear to work as well
against shore flies because of the semi-aquatic environment in which they live. A predaceous rove
beetle, Atheta, is also commercially available. In unsprayed greenhouses, a tiny parasitoid of
shore flies, Hexacola neoscatellae, is common. A predaceous fly, Coenosia attenuate, also occurs
62
naturally in many greenhouses. The impact of these on shore flies in commercial greenhouses is
unknown.
Chemical
Many insecticides are insect growth regulators and only affect larval stages, not adults. Growers
may need both an adulticide and a larvicide for well-established populations.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Shore Flies

Common Name (class)

Group 1
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Group 3
Group 5
Spinosad (5)
Group 7
Pyriproxyfen (7C)
Group 15
Diflubenzuron (15)
Group 17
Cyromazine (17)
Group 18
Azadirachtin (18B)
Miscellaneous
Steinernema carpocapsae

• Resistance suspected

• Lack of details on effective use of beneficials
Western Flower Thrips

(Frankliniella occidentalis)
Introduction
Several species of thrips can infest greenhouse floral crops, but the most severe and common pest
in recent years has been the western flower thrips (WFT).

Feeding by these tiny insects causes plant cells to collapse, which may eventually result in
distorted leaves or flowers if the damage was done while the thrips were feeding within buds and
63
terminals, or scarred, silvery patches and flecking if the damage is to open foliage or petals. The
damaged patches on expanded leaves and petals will also have tiny greenish-black fecal specks
that are left by the thrips. They also damage the appearance of African violets by spreading pollen
over the flowers as they feed on and break open the pollen sac. The most important and serious
damage comes as thrips' feeding can also transmit one of the two incurable tospoviruses that
cause severe damage to greenhouse plants, if the thrips are carrying the virus. Both the thrips and
the viruses have a very wide host range including flowers, vegetables, and many weeds. One
viruliferous western flower thrips adult can infect a plant after feeding on it for only 30 minutes.
Western flower thrips acquire the virus as first instar larvae, and retain it for the remainder of
their lives. Because the immature stages usually remain on one plant and do not move to other
plants, most of the spread of the virus is by the adult stage as they fly or are carried by wind
currents. (See INSV in Disease Section)
Identification
Thrips are tiny insects; adults are 1-2 mm in length, with narrow bodies and fringed wings. Colors
of western flower thrips can vary from straw-yellow to brown. Some fairly uncommon thrips
species can be identified by using a handlens and noting differences in color, shape, size, and
other characters, but is not possible to accurately identify which flower thrips (i.e., Frankliniella
sp.) species is infesting a crop while in the greenhouse, even with a handlens. Differences in tiny
morphological structures in the adult female flower thrips are used to tell one species from
another. Therefore, adult flower thrips must be inspected under a compound microscope to
accurately determine the species.
Biology
Control of western flower thrips is extremely difficult due to several biological characteristics of
this species. Eggs of this species are inserted into leaf, stem, or petal tissue, and are thus protected
from insecticides. The egg stage lasts from 2-1/2 to 4 days. The eggs hatch into larvae, which
usually remain protected in flower buds or terminal foliage. This is the stage that can acquire
INSV. The insect passes through two larval stages, both of which feed in these protected areas.
The first larval stage lasts 1 to 2 days, the second larval stage lasts 2 to 4 days. Toward the end of
the second larval stage, the insect stops feeding and usually drops into the soil or leaf litter to
pupate. The insect passes through two "pupal" stages (prepupal and pupal), during which no
feeding and little movement occurs. The prepupal stage lasts 1 to 2 days, and the pupal stage lasts
1 to 3 days. While in the pupal stage in the soil, the insect escapes exposure to insecticides
directed at the foliage. The adults, which can survive from 13 to 75 days and lay 40 to 250 eggs
(depending on temperature, host plant), are also primarily found feeding in protected areas of the
plant such as flowers and terminal buds. The pest's rapid developmental time (egg to adult in 10
to 15 days at fluctuating temperatures between 76 and 86°F) and reproductive rate, in these
protected areas, can allow an undetected infestation to quickly become a major problem. At cool
temperatures, immature development takes much longer (at 54°F, egg to adult development takes
57 days) and an infestation may escape detection because most of the population may be in
immature stages with very few adults. They fly readily (although they are not strong fliers) and
can be carried on wind currents, or on clothing, to greenhouses near an infestation. They can fly
from a sprayed to an unsprayed area, or can move into or out of a greenhouse through doors or
vents. Flight activity may be greatly reduced at cool temperatures (ca. 55°F or lower).
64
Management
IPM
Diagnosis/ID Images Easy to use Accuracy to Accurate thrips
species uncertain. identification often
Magnification dependent on
ID certain only professionals
under high
magnification
(high cost)
Detection Plant inspection Catch other pests Hiding, labor time
Time
Tapping Catch other Tapping may
insects/mites underestimate
number for
threshold –
depending on
plant type
Adults only
Yellow or blue Catch other pests
Sticky cards 7D/24hr coverage
Sentinel plant Tomato

Monitoring Card counts Catch increases Cost and labor Is sex/sex ratio
time, numbers important?
may be subjective Is pheromone useful
Blue vs. yellow?
Trap plant of
tomato or
eggplant
Action Adjust to Subjective,
Thresholds crop/grower wholesale may
tolerance/ INSV exceed retail
history
Cultural/Mechanical
Thrips control should start at the end of the previous crop or season, to avoid harboring a sizeable
population between crops. In extreme cases, it may be justified to keep some or all greenhouse
ranges empty for a time, to greatly reduce or thoroughly eliminate a thrips infestation before the
next crop cycle begins. This is best done in the winter, when thrips movement from outdoors is
65
not a problem. All plant material, including all weeds, must be eliminated from the greenhouse,
so there is absolutely no food for the thrips. Then, the greenhouse should be kept warm so that the
soil temperature is about 60F for about two weeks, to cause any thrips pupae in the soil to finish
their development and emerge as adults into a greenhouse without food. This fallow period
procedure is undoubtedly very expensive, but may be justified in extreme cases. Inspect incoming
plant material for tell-tale signs of thrips feeding injury. If the thrips may be entering from outside
sources, consider screening the vents. Use yellow (or blue) sticky cards to monitor for Western
flower thrips in the greenhouse. Count and change cards weekly, noting upward population trends
that signal the need for treatment. More than 10 thrips per trap per week is a threshold value some
growers have found useful, but growers should evaluate this threshold under their own conditions,
because the threshold will be affected by many factors including the trap color, size, location,
number of cards per sq. ft., crop, stage in crop cycle (early is worse) and presence of INSV or
TSWV, to name a few. Greenhouse workers should avoid wearing yellow or blue so that thrips
are less likely to be spread on workers' clothing. Avoid spreading the pest by moving from a
greenhouse with a noticeable thrips infestation into one that is not yet infested. This may require a
change in the usual movement patterns of greenhouse workers. Likewise, avoid moving plants
that are infested into an uninfested greenhouse, or vice versa. Eliminate weeds, which may harbor
thrips and/or the virus (they don't always show virus symptoms). Because thrips prefer flowers
and their populations tend to "explode" with the onset of flowers, flower removal, whenever
feasible, can remove a substantial portion of a thrips infestation.
Biological
Research on biological control of western flower thrips is being conducted in many laboratories
world-wide. An insect-killing fungal pathogen, Beauveria bassiana, is available in the U.S. as
BotaniGard or Naturalis-L. Three commercially available species of tiny predaceous mites,
Neoseiulus cucumeris, Amblyseius swirskii and Iphiseius degenerans, are available for thrips
control. Because these mites can only kill first instar thrips, there must be many more mites than
thrips for control to be successful. Such high populations of these predaceous mites may be
achieved by weekly releases, or by the use of "slow-release" bags or sachets, or possibly by
providing a source of pollen as food for the mites. Another predaceous mite, Hypoaspis miles, can
be released and established in the soil/growing medium. Hypoaspis is a general predator of
arthropods in the soil, including thrips pupae. Hypoaspis does not usually travel to the foliage.
Some growers have reported success with the combination of Hypoaspis and Neoseiulus
cucumeris. Research with the predaceous minute pirate bug (Orius spp.) is also being done, but
success with Orius is crop specific and more often reported from certain greenhouse vegetables
than ornamentals. A pheromone is commercially available but little research has been done on
how it may best be employed. Recommendations for biological control of thrips on commercial
flower crops have yet to be fully developed.
Chemical
Schedule insecticide treatments to best target the susceptible stages of the thrips' life cycle. For
many, though not all insecticides, it is effective to use a 5-day treatment interval for 2-3
treatments, in order to have an effect on thrips that will hatch from eggs or emerge from pupae
soon after the initial insecticide application. Read and follow all label directions. Ideally,
insecticides should be applied with equipment that produces very small spray particles (<100
microns). Spray particles of this size are best because they will penetrate deep into the protected
66
areas of the plant where the thrips are found, and can provide the most efficient use of insecticide
if coverage is thorough. Rotating the use of insecticides from different chemical classes may be
an effective way to delay the problem of insecticide resistance. However, it is best to maintain the
use of an effective insecticide for more than one generation of a pest before rotating to another
insecticide. Given the duration of the lifecycle of western flower thrips, an effective insecticide
should be used, as needed, for 3 to 4 weeks before switching to an insecticide from another class
of chemicals.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Western Flower Thrips

Common name (class)

Group 1
Acephate (1B)
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Chlorpyrifos + cycfluthrin (1B + 3)
Fenoxycarb + acephate (7B + 1B)
Methiocarb (1A)
Group 3
Bifenthrin (3)
Chlorpyrifos + cycfluthrin (1B + 3)
Cyfluthrin (3)
Fluvalinate (3)
Permethrin (3)
Pyrethrin + piperonyl butoxide (3 + 27A)
Group 4
Acetamiprid (4A)
Dinotefuran (4A)
Imidacloprid (4A)
Nicotine (4B)
Group 5
Spinosad (5)
Group 6
Abamectin (6)
Group 7
Fenoxycarb (7B)
Fenoxycarb + acephate (7B + 1B)
Kinoprene (7)
Group 9
Flonicamid (9C)
Group 15
Novaluron (15)
Group 18
67
Azadirachtin (18B)
Group 21
Pyridalyl (21)
Group 27
Pyrethrin + piperonyl butoxide (3 + 27A)
Miscellaneous
Beauveria bassiana
Horticultural oil
Insecticidal soap

• Resistance to certain organophosphate, carbamate, and synthetic pyrethroid insecticides
has been documented in certain western flower thrips populations.

• Few efficacious materials for resistance management
• Limit options for herbs and greenhouse vegetables
• Usage protocols and quality assurance for biologicals needed
Whiteflies
(Bemisia argentifolii = Bemisia tabaci strain B, Trialeurodes vaporariorum, Trialeurodes
abutilonea)

Whiteflies are pests mainly because consumers don’t want plants on which whiteflies are
noticeable. They infest numerous greenhouse crops, including poinsettia, fuchsia, mums, gerbera,
geranium, hibiscus, rose, tomato, many herbs, and many foliage crops. They feed by inserting
stylet-like mouthparts through plant tissue into the phloem and removing plant sap. In high
populations, their "honeydew" secretion can make leaves sticky and shiny, and lead to the growth
of ugly grey sooty mold. Silverleaf whitefly can transmit geminiviruses on outdoor vegetables,
and can transmit tomato yellow leaf curl virus in greenhouse tomato transplants.
Identification
Whiteflies are small, white, fly-like insects in their adult stage. The nymphal stages are tiny,
flattened, oval scales that have no obvious legs, do not crawl (except immediately after egg hatch
for a day or so), and with no obvious heads, thoraxes, or abdomens, do not look like a "typical"
insect. Because of their appearance and their location on the undersurfaces of leaves, the nymphal
stages may go unnoticed. Distinguishing the species of a whitefly can be difficult. The best stage
to use for identification is the pupal stage, which is found on the underside of leaves. The pupal
case, which is left behind after an adult emerges, can also be used to identify the species of
whitefly. Toward the end of the pupal stage, the red eyespots of the developing adult can be seen
through the pupal case. These red eyespots help distinguish the pupal stage from the other
nymphal stages. SLWF and GHWF often infest the same crop.
68
Silverleaf whitefly (SLWF), Bemisia argentifolii (=strain B of the sweetpotato whitefly, Bemisia
tabaci).
The pupa of the SLWF appears from the side to be more rounded, dome-shaped, or even pointed.
The SLWF pupa has no such filament fringe.
Greenhouse whitefly (GHWF), Trialeurodes vaporariorum.

The pupa of the GHWF is oval, and it has elevated sides that are very straight and perpendicular
to the leaf surface. This gives it a disk-like, or "cake-shaped" appearance. Seen from above, the
GHWF has a tiny "fringe" of wax filaments around the top "rim" of the pupa.
Bandedwinged whitefly (BWWF), Trialeurodes abutilonea.

The BWWF is not uncommon; it is sometimes found on yellow sticky cards, though rarely on the
crop. The BWWF is named for the 2 irregular smoky grey lines that zigzag across its front wings.
An obvious dark grey band that is fairly wide runs down the length of the pupa.
A 10x hand lens will be needed to examine pupae closely enough to see these characters and
differentiate accurately between the species. The adult GHWF is somewhat larger than the
SLWF. Both adults are white, as their name suggests, although the body of SLWF is slightly
more yellow in color. However, color alone is not a reliable basis for identification. The most
noticeable difference is the angle of their wings to their body. The wings of the GHWF adult lie
fairly flat over its abdomen, almost parallel with the leaf surface. The wings of the adult SLWF,
on the other hand, are held tent-like against its abdomen at approximately a 45-degree angle to the
leaf surface. Unfortunately, the primary means of examining adults — insects stuck to a yellow
sticky trap — almost inevitably obscures such fine distinctions of appearance.
Biology
Females can lay 200+ eggs and live up to 1-1/2 mos. All life stages are found on lower surfaces
of leaves. Tiny spindle-shaped eggs are often laid in semi-circles. Eggs hatch in about 10-12 days
at 65°-75°F. Tiny crawlers walk a few millimeters from egg, insert mouthparts into leaf to feed
and do not move again until they have completed the remaining three nymphal life stages and
emerge as an adult. On poinsettia at 65°-75°F, total egg-to adult development takes 32-39 days on
average. Development time is considerably faster at warmer temperatures, perhaps 2-1/2 to 3
weeks. A female can begin to lay eggs from one to four days after emerging from the pupal stage.
Mating is not necessary for egg production.
Management
IPM
Diagnosis/ID Images Q-type requires
lab technique
Magnification
Monitoring Yellow sticky No good
cards Sentinel plant
Sentinel/trap for silverleaf
crops
69
Cultural/Mechanical
Removal of weeds is believed to be helpful as is prompt removal of infested plants and/or leaves
but the impact on WF populations is uncertain
Biological
Whitefly biological control could include the release of parasitoids and/or predators, and/or
fungal pathogens. For biological controls to be successful, rely on releases of the natural enemies,
and use selected insecticides as a back-up. Growers interested in biological control must learn
about the natural enemies as well as the whiteflies, and have established a successful whitefly
monitoring plan. Encarsia formosa is the most commonly used natural enemy for GHWF on
greenhouse tomatoes. But this parasitoid species is not as effective against SLWF on ornamentals.
When compared with the commercial strain of E. formosa, another parasitoid, called Eretmocerus
eremicus, provides better SLWF control on poinsettia. E. eremicus will also control GHWF on
poinsettia. For successful SLWF management with parasitoids alone, E. eremicus should be
released weekly at 3 female wasps/pot/week. But such a release regime is expensive. Our recent
research has indicated that a less expensive approach may be to release E. eremicus at 1 female
wasp/pot/week, coupled with an IGR (Distance, or soon-to-be-registered Applaud) applied once,
just before bract coloration. Some growers have reported successful use of parasitoids on the
Christmas crop until late October, when smokes and aerosols were used for final clean up.
Quality control issues continue to plague the reliability of these parasitoids.
BotaniGard and Naturalis-L contain the insect fungal pathogen Beauveria bassiana. This
pathogen should be used while whitefly levels are still low. Three to 5 weekly sprays should be
applied, then carefully evaluate the degree of control to determine the need for additional sprays.
Tank mixes with most conventional insecticides can be used to reduce pest levels, but do not mix
with any fungicides, and be sure that the spray tank is clean of all fungicide residues. Do not use
48 hours before or after a fungicide application on the crop. Another fungal pathogen, PFR-97
(Paecilomyces fumosoroseus), is registered by Olympic and is expected to be available soon. A
predacious mite, Amblyseius swirskii is commercially available.
Combinations of natural enemies, such as Beauveria bassiana plus E. eremicus, or E. eremicus
plus the tiny predatory beetle Delphastus pusillus, or other combinations, may also provide good
whitefly biological control.
Eggplants have been employed as greenhouse whitefly attractant/trap and as a banker plant for
rearing natural enemies of greenhouse whitefly. No plant has been identified for corresponding
uses foe silverleaf whitefly.
Chemical
Many insecticides can provide good whitefly control. Marathon (granular or drench) continues to
give excellent long-term control when used properly. Several new IGR insecticides also show
excellent activity against nymphs. These IGR’s provide important new insecticide options for
pesticide rotation schemes. They are also very compatible with parasitic wasps for whitefly
biological control, as discussed later. All whitefly insecticides must be used carefully, according
to label directions, or resistance problems are likely to occur. Eggs and the older nymphal stages
are the most immune to many insecticides. When using foliar sprays, remember that thorough
coverage is easier to achieve early in the crop before the canopy becomes dense. Plants should be
spaced so as to maximize spray coverage. A spray wand or spray technique that directs the spray
70
to the undersides of leaves will kill many more whiteflies per application. Nymphs occur on the
undersides of leaves, and are generally covered more thoroughly with well-aimed hydraulic or
electrostatic sprayers. Adults can be controlled with aerosols, smokes, various types of low or
ultra low volume sprayers, or hydraulic sprayers. But adults should be killed before they are able
to lay eggs —about 3 to 4 days under northeastern U.S. poinsettia production temperatures. So
aerosol or ULV applications should be applied every 3 to 4 days as long as new adults are
emerging.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Whiteflies

Common name (class)

Group 1
Acephate (1B)
Chlorpyrifos (1B)
Dichlorvos (1B)
Naled (1B)
Group 3
Bifenthrin (3)
Cyfluthrin (3)
Fenpropathrin (3)
Fluvalinate (3)
Permethrin (3)
Pyrethrins + piperonyl butoxide (3 +27A)
Group 4
Acetamiprid (4A)
Clothianidin (4A)
Dinotefuran (4A)
Imidacloprid (4A)
Thiamethoxam (4A)
Group 6
Abamectin (6)
Group 7
Fenoxycarb (7B )
Kinoprene (7)
Pyriproxyfen (7C)
Group 9
Flonicamid (9C)
Pymetrozine (9B)
71
Group 15
Diflubenzuron (15)
Novaluron (15)
Group 16
Buprofezin (16)
Group 18
Azadirachtin (18B)
Group 21
Pyridaben (21)
Group 23
Spiromesifen (23)
Group 27
Pyrethrins + piperonyl butoxide (3 +27A)
Miscellaneous
Beauveria bassiana
Horticultural oil
Insecticidal soap
Neem oil
Soybean oil

• Resistance of some Bio-types
• Europe ban on whiteflies and whitefly transmitted viruses on any live plant

• Few materials for resistant bio-types
• Better quality control of biologicals
Table 5: Insecticides and Miticides*
Active Ingredient:
Brand name Class / Group # Comments (Pros & Cons)
Abamectin: 6
Ardent 0.15EC (supp), Avid 0.15EC (supp), Flora-Mek
0.15EC (supp), Lucid (supp), Quali-Pro Abamectin 0.15EC
(supp)
Acephate: 1B Phytotoxicity may be an
Acephate Pro 75, Avatar, 1300 Orthene TR, Orthene TT & O issue.
Acequinocyl 20B
Shuttle 15 SC
Acetamiprid: 4A
TriStar 30SG, TriStar 70WSP
72
Azadirachtin: 18B
Aza-Direct, Azatin XL, Ornazin 3% EC
Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki 11 B2
Biobit, Deliver, Dipel Pro DF, Javelin WG
Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. israelensis 11 A1
Gnatrol, Gnatrol WDG
Beauveria bassiana: Slow acting
BotaniGard 22WP, BotaniGard ES, Naturalis-L
Bifenazate 25
Floramite, Floramite SC
Bifenthrin: 3
Attain TR, *Attain Greenhouse, *Menace GC 7.9%
Flowable, *OnyxPro, Talstar, *Talstar Nursery, *Up-Star
SC, *Wisdom Flowable
Buprofezin 16
Talus 40SC, Talus (water soluble bags)
Chlorpyrifos: 1B Phytotoxic to some plants.
*Chlorpyrifos Pro 4, *Duraguard ME
Chlorpyrifos + cyfluthrin: 1B and 3
*Duraplex TR
Clofentezine 10A
Ovation SC
Clothianidin 4A
Celero 16WSG
Chlorfenapyr 13
Pylon
Cyfluthrin: 3
Decathlon 20WP
Cyfluthrin + imidacloprid: 3 and 4A Nursery ornamentals only.
*Discus
Cyromazine 17
Citation
Dichlorvos: 1B
*DDVP
Dicofol Unknown
Kelthane
Diflubenzuron 15 Not labeled on some
Adept, Dimilin plants.
Dinotefuran: 4A
Safari 20 SG
73
Etoxazole 10B
Tetrasan 5 WDG
Fenbutatin-oxide (hexakis) 12B
ProMITE 50WP
Fenoxycarb: 7B
Preclude TR
Fenpropathrin: 3
*Tame 2.4EC
Fenpropathrin + acephate: 3 and 1B
Tame/Orthene TR
Fenpyroximate 21
Akari 5SC
Flonicamid: 9C
Aria
Fluvalinate: 3 Respiratory issues
*Mavrik Aquaflow
Hexythiazox 10A
Hexygon DF
Horticultural oil: Phytotoxicity under certain
Ultrafine Oil conditions.
Imidacloprid: 4A
*Areca, *Benefit 60WP, *Imida E-Pro 1%, *Imida E-Pro
2F, *Imida E-Pro 60WSP, *Majesty, *Mallet, *Marathon
1G, *Marathon 60WP, *Marathon II
Insecticidal soap: Phytotoxicity under certain
M-Pede, Pro-mate Revoke conditions.
Iron phosphate Organic
Sluggo snail and slug bait
Kinoprene: 7A?
Enstar II
Metaldehyde
Deadline bullets, Deadline M-P’s
Methiocarb: 1A
*Mesurol
Naled: 1B
*Dibrom 8E
Neem oil:
Triact 70
Nicotine: 4B
*Fulex Nicotine Fumigator
Nematodes (entomopathogenic) Steinernema
Nemasys, NemaShield, Scanmask
74
Novaluron 15 Western flower thrips –
Pedestal immatures only.
Permethrin: 3 Phytotoxicity on some
*Astro, *Perm-Up 3.2EC, *Waylay 3.2 AG plants.
Propargite
Pymetrozine: 9B
*Endeavor
Pyrethrins + piperonyl butoxide: 3 and 27A Labeled for herbs.
*Prentox Pyronyl Crop Spray, Pyrenone Crop Spray
Pyrethrins + rotenone 3 and 21

Pyrellin EC
Pyrethroid 3
Scimitar
Pyridaben 21
Sanmite
Pyridalyl
Overture 35WP
Pyriproxyfen: 7C No definitive control on
Distance shore flies.
Soybean Oil
Golden Pest Spray Oil
Spinosad 5
Conserve SC, Entrust
Spiromesifen 23
Judo
Thiamethoxam 4A
Flagship
* It should be noted that not all the pesticides listed are labeled in all the states of the northeast
region. These tables are not intended for use by growers but are to give an indication of the
available pesticides, and their respective pesticide class or group, that are available for
management of a particular pest.
OTHER INSECTS AND MITES
Leafminers
(Liriomyza trifolii and other species)
Identification/Damage/Biology
Although several species of leafminers can attack floral crops, the most serious and most
common are flies of the family Agromyzidae, and the most common and severe pest species is
Liriomyza trifolii. These tiny (2 mm) flies are yellow and black, resemble small fruit flies, and
75
are rather strong fliers. Females make small punctures on upper leaf surfaces with their
ovipositors. Females and males feed on exuding plant juices from most of these punctures, but
females lay eggs singly beneath the epidermis in some of them. The punctures turn white with
time and give leaves a speckled appearance. On hatching, the larvae begin to slash open
surrounding cells, using their sickle-like mouth hooks. As the cells are ruptured, the larvae move
forward to destroy more cells, continuing in this fashion and leaving behind winding trails
(“mines”) within a leaf. The mines increase in length and width as the insects grow. The
appearance of the larval mines reduces the aesthetic value of a plant. The duration of the life
cycle depends on temperature and host plant but may be generalized as follows. Eggs hatch in as
few as four or five days. The larvae feed within the leaf for four to six days, molting twice. Third
instar larvae usually chew a small slit in the lower leaf surface and drop to the soil or onto lower
leaves to pupate. The pupal stage can last from 35 days at 58° F to 9 days at 80° F. Egg to adult
development can require 64 days at 59° F and only 14 days at 95° F.
Management
The best initial defense against these pests is to refuse to accept infested cuttings. Incoming plant
material should be inspected for leaf stipples and active mines and held for several days to see if
mines develop from leaf stipples. Yellow sticky cards can be used to detect adult activity and to
monitor population levels. Contact sprays to control adults should be repeated at three- to four-
day intervals to kill adults that will continue to emerge from puparia during the 10 to 14 days
following initial treatment. Insecticides that have translaminar properties, such as abamectin
(Avid), can be very effective against the larvae. Much recent work on biological control of
leafminers has been successful on certain flower crops. Releases of parasitic wasps as well as
nematodes that attack only insects have been used successfully under certain conditions.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Leafminer

Abamectin
Acetamiprid
Acephate
Azadirachtin
Bifenthrin
Carbaryl (azalea LM)
Chlorpyrifos
Cyromazine
Dinotefuran
Fenpropathrin
Fenpropathrin + acephate
Horticultural oil
Imidacloprid
Novaluron
Permethrin
Pyrethrins+ piperonyl butoxide
Pyrethrins and rotenone
76
Tarsonemid Mites
Cyclamen mite: Phytonemus pallidus

Broad mite: Polyphagotarsonemus latus
Damage
These tiny, insidious mite pests cannot be readily seen without magnification (20X to 40X) and
are rarely seen by growers. Their extremely small size makes it difficult to detect the mites
before severe feeding damage is evident. The damage they cause can be extensive. The tiny
mites hide in protected locations on the plant host and are most commonly found in buds,
flowers, young leaves, or in similar locations. The mites feed on plant cells, and foliage or
flowers expanding from infested buds is curled, distorted, and/or thickened. Broad mite damage
can be caused by a toxin injected as they feed. Cyclamen mites tend to occur in buds and very
young leaves. Broad mites can also attack buds and young leaves, but may also be found on
more mature leaves, where their feeding damage may cause leaf edges to curl under. On some
plants such as cyclamen, gerbera, and tuberous begonia, their feeding may cause the lower
surfaces of leaves to become bronzed.
Unfortunately, their extremely small size makes it difficult to detect an infestation before the
onset of damage. The injury they cause can resemble thrips damage, chemical phytotoxicity, or
physiological disorders. Thus plants that display curled, distorted leaves should be carefully
examined for the presence of these tiny mites using a hand lens, or preferably a dissecting
microscope, so as to avoid inappropriate control actions. Cyclamen mites are serious pests of
many flowering and foliage plants, including cyclamen, African violet, begonia, dahlia, exacum,
fuchsia, gerbera, kalanchoe, petunia, impatiens, English ivy, geranium, ivy, snapdragon,
chrysanthemum, verbena, viola, fittonia, and many others.
Broad mites also attack a wide variety of plants, including African violet, ageratum, azalea,
begonia, dahlia, gerbera, gloxinia, hibiscus , ivy, jasmine, New Guinea impatiens, impatiens,
lantana, marigold, peperomia, petunia, salvia, snapdragon, verbena, and zinnia, among other
plants. Vegetable bedding plants and herbs, such as tomatoes, peppers, beans, basil, and
rosemary, can also be attacked.
Biology
Female cyclamen mites lay one to three eggs each day and a total of up to 20 during their
lifetimes. Mating is not required for egg production; unfertilized eggs develop into males;
fertilized eggs develop into females. The eggs require four days to hatch at 70° F. The life cycle
depends on temperature and may be completed in one to three weeks. Cyclamen mites do best at
cooler temperatures (60-70F).
Female broad mites lay up to 75 eggs on the leaf surface over 8 to 13 days. Unfertilized eggs
develop into males; fertilized eggs develop into females. The larvae hatch in 2 or 3 days. Larvae
are slow moving and do not disperse far. In 2 or 3 more days, the larvae develop into a quiescent
larval stage. Quiescent female larvae become attractive to the males, which pick them up and
carry them to new foliage. Males mate with the females as soon as the adult females emerge
from the quiescent stage. Much of the dispersal of a broad mite infestation may be caused by the
77
males that carry the quiescent females to new leaves. Broad mites do best at moderate
temperatures (70-80F) and can develop from egg to adult in 1 week. Both cyclamen and broad
mites need a microclimate with high humidity.
Identification
Cyclamen mite eggs are oval shaped and are about half the length of the adult. Broad mite eggs
can be distinguished from cyclamen mite eggs by rows of white pegs (tubercles) on the egg's
upper surface. Immature stages are whitish. Adult cyclamen and broad mites are shiny and
elliptical in shape with four pairs of legs. The hind pair of legs of a female is threadlike while
that of a male is stout and clawed and used to carry quiescent females. Adults are colorless to
translucent yellow-to-orange or pale brown. Broad mites may have a whitish stripe down the
center of their backs. It may be necessary to peel apart curled or distorted plant tissue to find
these tiny mites.
Monitoring
The mites are too tiny to be easily observed, so susceptible plants should be checked weekly for
signs of leaf distortion or other damage symptoms. If symptoms are observed, check damaged
plant parts for the presence of mites with at least 20X magnification (a dissecting microscope is
best) or send a sample to a diagnostic lab. It is easy to confuse tarsonemid mite damage with
thrips damage, chemical phytotoxicity, or physiological disorders. There is no easy way to
determine if a mite infestation has been controlled other than observing no further plant
distortion after control measures were applied.
Management
These mites may be spread by air currents, direct contact between plants, or workers who handle
infested plants. They can also be transported on the legs of adult whiteflies. Chemical control can
be difficult because the mites’ reclusive habits make it difficult to reach them with acaricides;
therefore, it is usually necessary to make two or perhaps three spray applications to achieve
control of this pest. When feasible, the mites can be satisfactorily controlled by immersion of the
infested plants in 43 to 49°C water (109.4-120.2°F) for 15 minutes. This is obviously not a
practical means of control when large numbers of plants are involved, but it can be very useful to
eliminate these tiny pests from isolated infestations. If hotspots are detected, infested plants may
be rogued out and surrounding plants treated. Species of predaceous mites such as Amblyseius
barkeri or Neoseiulus californicus may also be useful for biological control although further
research is needed.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Tarsonemid Mite

Abamectin
Chlorfenapyr
Fenpyroximate
Pyridaben (broad mite only)
Spiromesifen
78
Mealybugs and Scale Insects
Mealybugs and scale insects are often difficult to control for several reasons. First, they easily go
undetected. In most cases they don’t resemble what we normally consider an insect. Because
they are often mistakenly overlooked as plant parts it is easy for them to go unnoticed,
particularly at the onset of an infestation when their numbers are low. Second, their bodies are
covered with waxy secretions that protect them. This makes it difficult for insecticides to
penetrate the wax and cause death. Third, they often occur in cryptic places on plants such as the
undersides of leaves, in leaf axils, or on roots in some cases. These cryptic habitats make them
difficult to detect and to provide protection from sprays. Fourth, they can very rapidly develop
overlapping generations with all life stages present at any time and, as will be discussed later,
certain stages are not susceptible to insecticides. Repeated sprays are usually required at regular
intervals to contact the insecticide-susceptible stages in the population.
Mealybugs and scales are related to aphids and whiteflies and are in the order Homoptera. These
soft-bodied insects feed with stylet-like mouthparts by inserting them into the plant tissue and
sucking plant juices. Entomologists classify them into three groups: armored scales, soft scales,
and mealybugs.
Armored Scales
Armored scales are usually smaller than soft scales, and their shapes vary between species, from
circular to an irregular shape resembling an oyster shell. Color may vary with life stage, sex,
and/or species, and may be shades of white, gray, red, brown, or green. These insects secrete a
hard, waxy shield over their bodies. This shield may be separated from the body of armored
scales, whereas it is inseparable from the body of soft scales.
Identification
Some common armored scale pests of greenhouses and interior plantscapes include oleander
scale, Boisduval’s scale, San Jose scale, Florida red scale, fern scale, greedy scale, purple scale,
and cactus scale.
Damage
It is very important to detect the early stages of an infestation to maximize control efforts.
Besides detecting the actual insects on the plants, knowing the symptoms of an infestation on the
plant is very important. Armored scales can produce either yellow or brown spots or streaks on
the leaves. They can cause general yellowing of the foliage, poor growth, and incrustations of
both stems and leaves. In very high populations they can cause twig dieback or even kill the
plant. Unlike mealybugs and soft scales, armored scales do not produce honeydew.
Biology
Aspects of the biology and life cycle can vary significantly between species, but the following
may be considered a generalized biology: The eggs are produced next to the female underneath
her scale cover or shield. Some species give birth to living young. Females can produce
anywhere from 20 to 400 eggs. These eggs hatch into crawlers, the stage that is susceptible to
insecticides. Natural mortality of crawlers without an insecticide is rather high. Crawlers move a
79
short distance from where they were hatched and find a suitable place to settle down and feed.
They do not move again for the remainder of their lives. Females pass through two nymphal
stages before adulthood. Males pass through two additional short pupal or resting stages. The
tiny winged males do not live long. Females begin to produce eggs after mating. The entire life
cycle can take anywhere from 60 to 120 days to complete, depending on temperature and the
species. Several generations may occur during the year, with all life stages present at any one
time.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Armored Scale

Acephate
Bendiocarb
Bifenthrin
Buprofezin
Cyfluthrin
Dinotefuran
Fenoxycarb
Horticultural oil
Insecticidal soap
S-kinoprene
Pyriproxyfen
Soft Scales
Identification
Soft scales can be fairly large (2–5 mm) and usually have a circular or oval shape. Colors are
usually shades of gray or brown, and some species appear black. The shield cannot be detached
from soft scales. Common species include black scale, soft brown scale, hemispherical scale, and
Niger scale.
Damage
Soft scales can produce distorted foliage from their feeding on young tissue, cause the leaves to
turn yellow, and in high populations can cause twigs and branches to die back. Soft scales (and
mealybugs) produce a sugary excretory product called honeydew, which can fall onto leaves and
cause them to become shiny and sticky. Honeydew can support the growth of unsightly sooty
mold. The presence of honeydew and sooty mold is a good indication of an infestation. Because
ants are attracted to honeydew, their presence on the plants may also signal an infestation.
Biology
A generalized life cycle for soft scales is fairly similar to that of armored scales. Eggs, or living
young, are produced beneath the female’s body, and females can produce more than 1,000 eggs.
Crawlers hatch after one to three weeks, crawl over the leaf and stem for several days, and find a
suitable feeding site at which they remain through adulthood. As with armored scales, the
crawler stage is the most sensitive to mortality factors such as insecticides. Females progress
through a total of three to four immature stages before adulthood; males pass through four
80
immature stages. Adult males emerge as tiny, delicate, winged insects that live only a few days.
There is roughly a 40- to 80-day life cycle depending on factors such as host plant, temperature,
and species. All life stages may be present at any one time.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Soft Scale

Acephate
Bendiocarb
Bifenthrin
Buprofezin
Cyfluthrin
Dinotefuran
Fenoxycarb
Fluvalinate
Horticultural oil
Imidicloprid
Insecticidal soap
S-kinoprene
Pyriproxyfen
Thiamethoxam
Mealybugs
Identification
Mealybugs are small (1–8 mm long), elongate-oval, soft-bodied insects that are not covered by a
hardened cover or shield but with a layer of white, cottony wax. They can be found infesting all
parts of a plant, including roots. Some produce short, spinelike filaments along the margins of
their bodies, and on some species the posterior filaments can be quite long. Some mealybug pests
of greenhouse crops include the citrus mealybug, obscure mealybug, and long-tailed mealybug.
Damage
Mealybug infestations can cause leaf distortion, particularly on new growth. Some species inject
a toxin as they feed that can produce necrotic areas, general yellowing, or leaf drop. They
produce honeydew that can support the growth of sooty mold. Their production of white cottony
wax and their very presence on leaf axils or undersides of leaves detract from the appearance of
the plant. Again, because ants can be attracted to honeydew as with soft scales, their presence
may signal a mealybug infestation.
Biology
Life cycles vary tremendously between different species but may be generalized as follows:
Females produce from 300 to 600 eggs, usually in a white, cottony ovisac. Some species give
birth to live young. The eggs mature in the ovisac for approximately two weeks, then hatch into
crawlers. Once more, the crawlers are the most susceptible life stage to insecticides. All
subsequent life stages of mealybugs are mobile, although they are slow-moving. They are not
sessile as are whiteflies and scale insects. It is therefore easy for this pest to move from leaf to
81
leaf or plant to plant and spread an infestation over many plants. Males are tiny, winged insects.
Mealybugs have a 30- to 70-day life cycle.
Management
Early detection is very important for effective control. Greenhouse workers should be educated
to recognize the pests and their damage symptoms while an infestation is at an early stage. As
soon as you detect an infestation, it may be best to isolate the plant(s) if possible to prevent the
problem from spreading to uninfested plants. In the long run, it may even be wise to discard a
badly infested plant(s) rather than spend time and money at control attempts while risking
spreading the infestation.
If contact sprays of synthetic organic insecticides are used, they should be applied against the
crawler stage of scales and mealybugs. Repeated applications are therefore necessary to contact
the susceptible stages as they are produced. Spray intervals will depend on the residual
effectiveness of the insecticide used, which may vary from one to three weeks. The inclusion of a
spreader-sticker can aid in coverage, penetration, and residual activity, although the risk of
phytotoxicity may be increased. Good coverage is important for contact insecticides. Insecticidal
oils and soaps can be very effective, killing more life stages of these pests than many contact
insecticides, but there is no residual control, and thorough coverage is critical.
Systemic insecticides may kill actively feeding stages of scales and mealybugs, assuming
adequate amounts of insecticide are translocated to the feeding site. Systemics will not kill the
egg stage, however. An additional application may be necessary after three to four weeks if the
residual activity of the systemic is inadequate after this time period. Fumigant insecticide
formulations can be effective against mealybugs and should be applied at 10- to 14-day intervals.
Good potential exists for biological control of certain mealybug and scale pests, particularly in
interior plantscape settings. Parasitoids and predators of these pests are commercially available,
although the supply can be inconsistent at times. Information regarding the use of these natural
enemies and integrated control of these pests can be obtained from the commercial insectaries.
Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Mealybugs

Acephate
Acetamiprid
Beauveria bassiana (GHA and JW-1 strain)
Bendiocarb
Bifenthrin
Buprofezin
Carbaryl
Chlorpyrifos
Chlorpyrifos + cyfluthrin
Cyfluthrin
Diazinon
Dichlorvos
Dinotefuran
82
Fenpropathrin
Fenpropathrin + acephate
Flonicamid
Fluvalinate
Horticultural oil
Imidacloprid
Insecticidal soap
S-kinoprene
Malathion
Naled
Neem oil
Permethrin
Pyrethrins + piperonyl butoxide
Thiamethoxam
NEW PESTS AND THOSE OF INCREASING IMPORTANCE

Scirtothrips dorsalis
Chilli thrips
First detected in the US in 2005, present in Florida and Texas
Wide host range, including ornamental plants, and causes leaf and bud distortion
Potential for movement on plant materials to Northeast
Bemisia tabaci, biotype Q

Q-biotype whitefly
Already found throughout the Northeast
Resistant or less susceptible to a variety of insecticides that control other biotypes
Maconellicoccus hirsutus
Pink hibiscus mealybug
Many tropical plants are hosts
Potential for movement on plant materials to Northeast
PESTICIDES IN THE PROCESS OF REGISTRATION
Active ingredient Trade name Active against Comments

Spirotetramat Kontos (BYI-8330) Thrips, coleopterans Newly registered with
EPA
Tolfenpyrad Thrips, coleopterans Just submitted to EPA
Beauveria strain Fungus gnat larvae
Spinetoram Thrips
TOXICITY TO BENEFICIAL INSECTS

(Biological Control Organisms)
Pesticides vary in their potential negative effects on those beneficial insects commonly used for
biological control. Table 6 ‘Toxicity to biological control organisms’ provides a general overview
83
of the side effects of those pesticides labeled for greenhouse use in the northeast. The beneficials
included are predatory mites, wasps, midges, coleopterans, Orius and nematodes. For the most up
to date information, and an indication of the persistence of the pesticide, check the Koppert and
Biobest side effects information on their websites.
84
Table 6: Toxicity to beneficial insects (biological control organisms)
Information on all species, life stages and pesticide combinations is not available. Non-inclusion in this table does not indicate lack of
toxicity. This information is taken from the Koppert and Biobest side effects databases and is current as of this writing. However,
some generalizations have been made, and method of application has not been included.
Predatory mites Wasps Coleoptera Orius Nematodes

(Phytoseiulus, (Aphidius, (Atheta, Lady (Steinernema,
Amblyseius, Encarsia, Midges beetles) Heterorhabditis)
Brand name: Hypoaspis) Eretmocerus,) (Aphidoletes,
Abamectin Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Not toxic to Toxic to Not toxic to
adult of Phytoseiulus Cryptolaemus nymph and larvae
and Amblyseius, adults adult
Not toxic to Hypoaspis

egg, moderately toxic
to nymph and adult
Acephate Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to adults, Toxic to adults Toxic Toxic to Moderately toxic
and adult of some pupae nymph and to larvae
Phytoseiulus and Moderately toxic adult
Amblyseius, to larvae

to nymph and adult
Acequinocyl Not toxic to
Amblyseius adult
Toxic to Phytoseiulus
adult
78
Acetamiprid Toxic to adult Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to
of Encarsia and adult
Aphidius
Azadirachtin Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
Phytoseiulus and Aphidius adults adults or larvae adults nymph and larvae
Amblyseius adult
Toxic to Moderately
Encarsia adults toxic to larvae
Bacillus thuringiensis Not toxic to Not toxic Not toxic Not toxic to Not toxic to
subsp. kurstaki Amblyseius and nymph and larvae
Phytoseiulus adult
Bacillus thuringiensis Not toxic to all stages Not toxic Not toxic Not toxic Not toxic
subsp. israelensis
Bifenazate Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
Amblyseius adults of larvae larvae adult or Steinernema
Encarsia and nymph larvae
Moderately toxic to Eretmocerus
Phytoseiulus adult
Bifenthrin Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to pupa Toxic to larvae Toxic to adult Toxic to Not toxic to
and adult of and adult and adults and larvae nymph and larvae
Phytoseiulus and adult
Amblyseius,

to nymph and adult
Buprofezin Not toxic Not toxic to pupa Toxic to larvae Moderately Not toxic to Not toxic to
and adult toxic to adult nymph and larvae
Moderately toxic adult
to adults Toxic to larvae
79
Chlorfenapyr Toxic to Phytoseiulus Toxic to adults Toxic to larvae Toxic to adults Moderately
adult of Aphidius and and larvae toxic to
Encarsia nymph and
adult
Chlorpyrifos Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to pupae Toxic to adults Toxic to adult Toxic to Toxic to larvae
and adult of and adults of and larvae adult
Amblyseius, Aphidius and
Encarsia Moderately
Toxic to nymph and toxic to
adult of Phytoseiulus, nymph
not toxic to egg

to nymph and adult
Clofentezine Not toxic to all stages Not toxic Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
adults adults or larvae adult
Clothianidin Very toxic to
adults
(Cryptolaemus)
Cyfluthrin Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to pupa Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to Moderately toxic
and adult of and adult and larvae and larvae nymph and to larvae
Phytoseiulus and adult
Amblyseius,

to nymph and adult
Cyromazine Not toxic to all stages Not toxic to all Not toxic to Moderately Not toxic to Not toxic to
stages adults toxic to adults adult larvae
Toxic to larvae
80
Dichlorvos Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to Moderately to
adult of Phytoseiulus and larvae nymph and larvae
and Amblyseius, adult
Not toxic to egg

eggs, moderately toxic
to nymph and adult
Dicofol Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Not toxic to Not toxic to
adult of Phytoseiulus of Aphidius and adults and larvae
and Amblyseius, Encarsia Not toxic to larvae
larvae
Not toxic to Hypoaspis Moderately toxic
egg, Moderately toxic to adults of
to nymph and adult Eretmocerus
Diflubenzuron Not toxic to all stages Not toxic Not toxic to Not toxic to Toxic to Not toxic to
adults and larvae adults nymph larvae
Toxic to larvae Not toxic to

adult
Dinotefuran Very toxic to
adults
(Cryptolaemus)
Etoxazole Toxic to Phytoseiulus
egg
Fenbutatin-oxide Not toxic to all stages Not toxic Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
(hexakis) adults and larvae adults adults
Moderately Toxic to
toxic to larvae nymph
81
Fenoxycarb Not toxic to all stages Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Toxic to Not toxic to
adults adults and larvae adults adult larvae
Moderately
toxic to larvae
Fenpropathrin Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to Toxic to larvae
and adult of mummy/pupa and larvae and larvae nymph and
Phytoseiulus and and adults adult
Amblyseius,

egg, Moderately toxic
to nymph and adult
Fenpyroximate Toxic to egg, nymph Toxic to adults Not toxic to Not toxic to
and adult of of Aphidius and adults adult
Phytoseiulus an Encarsia
Moderately
Varies in toxicity to toxic to larvae
Amblyseius,
Flonicamid Not toxic to adult Toxic to adults Not toxic to Not toxic to
Phytoseiulus and and larvae of adults or larvae adults or larvae
Amblyseius, Eretmocerus
Moderately toxic
to larvae of
Aphidius and
Encarsia
82
Fluvalinate Toxic to nymph Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to
and larvae of and larvae or larvae nymph and
Eretmocerus adult
Moderately toxic
to larvae of
Aphidius and
Encarsia
Hexythiazox Not toxic to all stages Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
Phytoseiulus and adults and pupae adults and larvae adults or larvae nymph and larvae
Amblyseius, adult
Horticultural oil Toxic to nymph and Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
adult of Amblyseius adults and adults adult larvae
and Phytoseiulus pupae/mummies
of Aphidius and
Encarsia
Imidacloprid Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to
adult not egg – depends and and larvae and larvae as a nymph and
on application method pupae/mummy spray adult
of Aphidius and Not toxic as
Encarsia drench
Kinoprene Not toxic to all stages Toxic to Not toxic to Toxic to
of Phytoseiulus and Eretmocerus adults or larvae nymphs
Hypoaspis adults
Not toxic to
Encarsia adults
Moderately toxic
to Encarsia
pupae
83
Methiocarb Toxic to all stages of Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to
Amblyseius and of all species and larvae and larvae nymph and
Phytoseiulus adult
Toxic to pupae
Moderately toxic to of Encarsia and
Hypoaspis nymph and Eretmocerus
adult
Naled Toxic to nymph and Toxic to Toxic to adults Toxic to adults
adult of Amblyseius Encarsia
and Phytoseiulus
Neem oil Toxic to nymph Not toxic to Toxic to
Aphidius adults adults and
or larvae nymphs
Nicotine Toxic to nymph and Toxic to Toxic to adults Toxic to
adult of Amblyseius Encarsia adult and larvae nymph and
and Phytoseiulus but not pupa adult
Novaluron Not toxic to nymph of Toxic to larvae Not toxic to
Amblyseius and adults
Phytoseiulus
Toxic to
nymphs
Permethrin Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to Moderately toxic
adult of Phytoseiulus and and larvae and larvae nymph and to larvae
and Amblyseius mummies/pupae adult

to nymph and adult
84
Propargite Some variation in Not toxic to Not toxic to Toxic to adults Toxic to Toxic to larvae
results but generally Aphidius adults adult
toxic to nymph and
adult of Amblyseius Toxic to Moderately toxic
and Phytoseiulus Encarsia to larvae
Pymetrozine Not toxic to all stages Toxic to Moderately toxic Not toxic to
of Phytoseiulus and Aphidius adults to adults nymph and
Amblyseius adult
Moderately toxic Toxic to larvae
to Encarsia and
Eretmocerus
adults
Not toxic to
pupae/Mummies
Pyrethrins + Toxic to nymph and Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to adults Toxic to Not toxic to
piperonyl butoxide adult of Phytoseiulus and larvae adult larvae
and Amblyseius, Not toxic to
Aphidius
Not toxic to all stages mummies
Hypoaspis
Moderately toxic
to Encarsia
pupae
Pyridaben Toxic to nymphs and Toxic to
adults of Amblyseius Encarsia and
and Phytoseiulus Eretmocerus
adults and pupae
to nymph and adult
85
Pyriproxyfen Not toxic to all stages Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
adults of adults adults adult or
Aphidius and nymph
Encarsia Toxic to larvae
Moderately toxic
to Eretmocerus
adults
Toxic to pupae
of Encarsia and
Eretmocerus
Soybean Oil Toxic to nymph and Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to Not toxic to
adult of Amblyseius adults and adults adults or larvae adult larvae
and Phytoseiulus pupae/mummies
of Aphidius and
Encarsia
Spinosad Some indication of Toxic to adults Not toxic to adult Not toxic to Moderately
toxicity to adult of of Aphidius and or larvae adults or larvae toxic to
Amblyseius and Encarsia adult
Phytoseiulus
Toxic to
larvae
Spiromesifen Not toxic to egg and Not toxic to Toxic to larvae Not toxic to Not toxic to
adult of Amblyseius adults larvae nymphs
Toxic to adult of
Phytoseiulus
86
Thiamethoxam Results vary Toxic to adult Toxic to adults Toxic to
Toxic to Phytoseiulus Encarsia and larvae adults and
nymph nymphs
Toxic to
Aphidius adults
and larvae
87
WEEDS AND ALGAE
Primary sources: 2008 Cornell Guide for the Integrated Management of Greenhouse Floral
Crops and 2009-2010 New England Greenhouse Floriculture Guide
Weeds
Maintaining weed-free growing conditions is necessary to produce high quality greenhouse
crops. Insects and diseases can be kept to a minimum only if proper weed control practices are
carried out regularly, along with appropriate control measures.
Weeds may compete with desirable crop plants for light, water and nutrients. The presence of
weeds also reduces the aesthetic value of the crops grown and creates a poor impression to
customers. Weeds are also a primary source of insects such as aphids, whiteflies, thrips, and
other pests such as mites, slugs, and diseases. Many common greenhouse weeds such as
chickweed, oxalis, bittercress, jewelweed, dandelion, and ground ivy can become infected with
tospoviruses, including impatiens necrotic spot virus (INSV) and tomato spotted wilt virus
(TSWV), while showing few, if any visible symptoms. Thrips can then vector the virus to
susceptible greenhouse crops. Weeds can also carry other plant damaging viruses that are
vectored by aphids. Wood sorrel, in particular, can rapidly spread throughout a greenhouse crop
as the pods disperse seeds by propulsion.
Management
The first and most important control measure is sanitation. Keep weeds out of the greenhouse by
using sterile media, introducing only “clean” plant materials, using physical barriers such as
weed block fabric, and controlling weeds outside of the greenhouse (mowing, vegetation-free
strips around perimeter, non-auxin-type pre- or post-emergence herbicides with caution). Where
possible, screening vents and windows will limit the introduction of wind-blown seed as well as
insect movement.
If the weeds are already established in the greenhouse they can be killed by (1) manual removal,
(2) emptying the range and allowing the weeds to desiccate, (3) using a postemergence herbicide
(see Table 9.2.1), or (4) emptying the range and fumigating. Each method (except fumigation)
will remove only the vegetation that is present but does nothing to prevent reestablishment from
seed that will be present. Continuous removal can be expensive and time consuming. Currently
no residual herbicides are labeled for greenhouse use. Where weeds are a continual problem,
clean up the area, remove residual soil, or cover soil with gravel or mulch. Only under extremely
rare circumstances would fumigation be recommended for weed control.
Chemical Control of Greenhouse Weeds

There are very specific restrictions on the use of herbicides in greenhouses. Although organic-
type products, such as acetic acid herbicides, are now available for use outside the greenhouse,
they are not labeled for use in the house. These products should be applied with the same
precautions, so that greenhouse windows and vents remain closed during external application to
minimize drift and volatility issues. Herbicides labeled for use in greenhouses are listed in Table
7.
88
Table 7: Herbicides
Active Ingredient:
Brand name Group # Comments (Pros & Cons)
Clethodim: 1 Selective, postemergence herbicide. Works by contact. Inhibits lipid
Envoy synthesis. No residual activity.
Envoy Plus
Diquat dibromide 22 Non-selective. Works by contact. Cell membrane disruptor.
Reward Pro: rapid kill, application when a crop is in the house, low cost,
limited injury by spray drift
Fluazifop-P-butyl 1 Selective, post emergence herbicide. Systemic. Inhibits cell division
Fusilade II by blocking an enzyme involved in lipid biosynthesis.
Glufosinate-ammonium 10 Nonselective, postemergence herbicide. Systemic. Works by

Finale disrupting cell membranes.
Glyphosate 9 Non-selective, postemergence herbicide. Systemic. Inhibits enzyme

Glyphosate Pro II found in plants essential to form specific amino acids. No residual soil
Roundup Pro activity.
Roundup Pro
Concentrate
Roundup Pro Dry
Touchdown Pro
Pelargonic acid and related 27 Non-selective, postemergence herbicide. Works by contact.
fatty acids Pro: lower toxicity than Reward, can use while crops remain in
Scythe the house.
Con: higher cost, slower acting with reduced efficacy in
comparison to Reward, odor can be persistent
Algae
Algae are a diverse grouping of plants that occur in a wide range of environments. Algae growth
on walks, water pipes, equipment, and greenhouse coverings, on or under benches and in pots is
an ongoing problem for growers. Algae form an impermeable layer on the media surface that
prevents wetting of the media and can clog irrigation and misting lines, and emitters. It is a food
source for insect pests like shore flies, and causes slippery walkways that can be a liability risk
for workers and customers. Recent studies have shown that algae are brought into the greenhouse
through water supplies and from peat in the growing media. Once in a warm, moist environment
with fertilizer, the algae flourish.
Management
Proper water management and fertilizing can help to slow algae growth. Avoid over-watering
slow-growing plants and especially crops early in the production cycle. Allow the surface of the
media to dry out between watering. Select a growing media with the proper drainage for your
crops. Water the growing containers only as needed to prevent excess puddling on the floor.
The greenhouse floor should be level and drain properly to prevent the pooling of water.
Proper ventilation reduces the amount of moisture in the greenhouse. Horizontal airflow fans
help to regulate greenhouse temperatures and reduce excess condensation. Retractable roof or
open roof greenhouses provide superior ventilation benefits.
Avoid excessive fertilizer runoff and puddling water on floors, benches, and greenhouse
surfaces. The greenhouse floor should be level and drain properly to prevent the pooling of water
prior to installing a physical weed mat barrier.
Algaecides are listed in Table 8.
Table 8: Algaecides
Active Ingredient:
Brand name Comments (Pros & Cons)
Ammonium chloride Stable. Little residual activity. Inactivated by
(Quaternary ammonium chloride salts, Q salts) organic matter so preclean before using. Follow label
Physan 20/20% as recommendations for use vary.
Green-Shield 20%
Triathalon
Hydrogen dioxide Wet surfaces before treatment. Do not mix with other
ZeroTol/27% hydrogen dioxide pesticides or fertilizers. Check for phytotoxicity.
Oxidate Eye ad skin damage possible from concentrate.
Oxidate may be allowable for organic producers

Sodium carbonate peroxhydrate Granular and activated by water. Breaks down into
Terracyte G/34% sodium carbonate and hydrogen peroxide
GreenClean Granular Algaecide
Chlorine dioxide Use on surfaces or for disinfecting irrigation lines.
Selectrocide T
Hydrogen Peroxide and Peroxyacetic Acid Strong oxidizing agent. Clean surfaces before
SaniDate 12.0 treatment. Thoroughly wet all surfaces.
Sodium hypochlorite Clorox will bleach clothing and can irritate eyes and
Clorox/6.15% sodium hypochlorite unprotected skin. Use with care. Injury has occurred
to mums set upon capillary mats treated with sodium
hypochlorite. To ensure the effectiveness of chlorine
solutions, it should be prepared fresh just before each
use. Chlorine is corrosive. Repeated use of chlorine
solutions may be harmful to plastics or metals.
Liverworts
Liverworts (Marchantia polymorpha) are branching, ribbon-like plants lacking distinct roots,
stems, and leaves. They reproduce by spores and vegetatively. Stalked, umbrella-like structures
release spores. Small, bud-like branches produced in cup-like structures on the surface of the
plant also help spread liverworts from pot to pot by water droplets during irrigation. Liverworts
thrive in conditions of high fertility, moisture, and humidity.
90
Management
Inspect incoming plants for signs of liverworts and isolate infected plants. If the growing media
stays moist, small infestations of liverwort can quickly spread through an entire greenhouse.
Clean and disinfect empty greenhouses to remove spores. Store growing media properly to
prevent contamination by spores. surface moisture levels. Topdressing slow release fertilizers
contribute to increased fertility levels on the media surface and to the growth of liverworts.
Proper plant spacing helps to reduce humidity levels. Liverworts lack true roots, so allowing the
media to dry between watering, helps reduce their vigor.
PLANT GROWTH REGULATORS
Plant growth regulators (PGRs) are compounds used in commercial floriculture, to modify plant
growth and development in order to control plant shape and quality. They may be applied as
drenches, dips, or foliar sprays. PGRs are regulated in the same way as pesticides because of
their potential environmental effects. PGRs are listed in Table 9.
Table 9: Plant Growth Regulators
Active Ingredient:
Brand name Class / Group # Mode of Action / Efficacy
Ancymidol 1 Retardants of stem elongation
A-Rest
Chlormequat 1 Promoter of flowering and/or breaking of

Chlormequat E-Pro dormancy, retardant of stem elongation
Cycocel
Ethephon 5 Defoliation, promoter of branching
Pistill and/or pinching, promoter of flowering
and/or breaking dormancy, suppressant
of flower initiation and development,
retardant of stem elongation,
suppressants of stem topple
Daminozide 1 Promoter of flowering and/or breaking of
B-Nine WSG dormancy, retardant of stem elongation
Dazide 85 WSG
Dikegulac-sodium 2 Promoter of branching and/or pinching
Atrimmec
Flurprimidol 1 Retardant of stem elongation
Topflor
Gibberellic acid 4 Promoter of stem elongation, promoter of
GibGro 4LS flowering and/or breaking of dormancy,
ProGibb T & O promoter of flower size, suppressant of
flower initiation and development
91
Indole-3-butyric acid 6 Promoter of rooting
Hormodin 1
Hormodin 2
Hormodin 3
Indole-3-butyricacid + 6 Promoter of rooting
1 – naphthaleneacetic acid
Dip ‘N
Grow
1-Methylcyclopropene Suppressant of senescence
EthylBloc
Methyl ester of fatty acids 3 Promoter of branching and/or pinching
Off-Shoot-O
N-(phenylmethyl) - H-purine 6-amine + 4 Promoter of stem elongation, suppressant

gibberellins A4A7 of senescence,
Fascination
Paclobutrazol 1 Promoter of flowering and/or breaking

Bonzi dormancy, retardant of stem elongation
Downsize
Paczol
Piccolo
Uniconazole-P 1 Retardant of stem elongation
Concise
Sumagic
RODENTS
Primary sources: 2008 Pest Management Guide for Commercial Production and Maintenance of
Trees and Shrubs and Integrated Pest Management for Multifamily Housing Training – Rodents
http://www.stoppests.org/handbook/publichousinghandbook.htm.
The information presented is not strictly for greenhouses.
Determining the Presence of Rodents

The habits of rodents provide numerous signs of their presence, including species, relative
numbers and areas of activity. Species can best be identified after rats and mice have been
trapped and closely examined.
• Sounds: Gnawing on solid objects; clawing and climbing in walls, above dropped
ceilings, and under cabinets; various squeaks; fighting noises.
• Droppings: May be found along runways, near shelters, or other places rodents frequent.
• Urine: Wet and dry rodent urine stains will fluoresce under ultraviolet light.
• Smudge marks: May be found on pipes, beams against walls and outside edges of holes
where dirt and oil from their fur is deposited where rodents frequently travel.
• Runs: Smooth or worn areas may be found next to walls, along fences, under bushes and
buildings.
92
• Tracks: Footprints or tail marks may be found in dusty surfaces, sand, soft soil, and snow.
The use of nontoxic tracking dust such as chalk powder or unscented talc will help
determine the presence of rodents inside buildings.
• Gnawing: May be indicated by wood chips around baseboards, doors, basement windows
and frames, stored materials, around pipes in floors and walls, and wherever rats might
try to enlarge a crack or enter a structure.
• Burrows: Most commonly made by Norway rats in soft ground, particularly where
burrow entrances can be concealed in low, dense vegetation or under concrete slabs,
foundation walls, lumber, and piles of rubbish. Norway rats also burrow into soil floors in
basements, warehouses, and animal quarters.
• Visual sighting: Frequent observation of rats in daylight generally indicates a high
population in the area. Mice may be active during the day or night.
• Nests and food caches: Can sometimes be found when cleaning garages, attics,
basements, and other storage places. Rodent species (i.e., squirrels and rats) often store
food in attics of buildings.
• Odors: Odors (resulting from deposits of fermenting rodent urine and feces and body
oils) in a room may provide a clue to their presence.
Identification
For an effective control program, you must know what species of mammals are involved. Correct
identification is essential for selecting the proper damage management measures. Identification
can be by activities, feeding behavior, or droppings.
Mice do not travel far from their nests; usually not more than 10 feet. Rats are more likely to live
outside in burrows and come inside to feed.
Most rats and some mice are omnivorous, eating nearly any food, although each kind and
population has its own preferences. Rats usually begin searching for food shortly after sunset.
When hungry, or under crowded conditions, they may also be seen in daylight. Rats and mice
may cache considerable amounts of solid food, which they may or may not eat later.
Prebaiting before a control program with a nontoxic bait or unset traps can enhance later
acceptance of traps or rodenticides by rats. The most acceptable bait is frequently a local food
the rats and mice have already become accustomed to eating.
Long-Term Population Suppression

Rodent populations have a remarkable capacity for growth and survival, but it is often people
who provide the conditions under which that potential can be realized. One must base control
measures on those circumstances that resulted in food, water, and shelter for the pests.
Sanitation
Remove excess unused materials from the greenhouse, especially if they can be used as a food
source or nesting material or nesting sites. Store equipment and materials off the floor and away
from walls if possible. Keep area around greenhouse clean of weeds and debris that can
camouflage rat burrows.
93
Exclusion
Rodents can enter the greenhouse through very small holes; ¼ in for mice and ½ inch for rats, for
example. Block entry holes with copper mesh and caulk or spackle. Check doors for spaces
between door and floor.
Traps
Trapping can be an effective method of controlling rodents especially in conjunction with
sanitation and exclusion. Trapping is recommended where use of poisons seems inadvisable and
is the preferred method in homes, garages, and other structures where there are few rodents, and
nontarget species risks may be great. Trapping has several advantages: (1) It does not rely on
inherently hazardous rodenticides, (2) it permits the user to view his or her success, and (3) it
eliminates rodent deaths in inaccessible locations, which frequently creates odor problems when
poisoning is done within structures.
Mice are curious and can be caught with baited traps. They can become trap shy so trap locations
need to be changed over time. Rats must become accustomed to the traps before they will get on
them so prebaiting unset traps for a few days is necessary.
Snap traps are cheap and easy to use. Rodents do not die quickly with glue traps. Electronic traps
are relatively expensive. Curiosity traps can be effective but may not always kill the rodent.
Traps should be placed against walls in corners or along known runways.
Rodenticides for Structural Use

The use of toxicants has often been the primary treatment or intervention in many rodent control
programs. Rodenticide applications have not proven ideal in all circumstances. They are
contradicted in some situations. It is best to place the bait where it will be in the rodents' normal
line of travel. Baits should be placed under cover so the animals will feel secure when they feed.
Put out more bait than you think necessary, unless prebaiting for three to five days has already
indicated how much is needed. It is generally much safer and more effective to use chronic
(multiple-dose) toxicants than acute (single-dose) poisons for rodents. There are times, however,
when the quick-acting acute poisons are required, such as when the disease hazard is high or
when a very large population must be reduced in a short period of time. Rodenticides are listed in
Table 10.
94
Table 10: Rodenticides
(for structural rodent control)
Active Ingredient: Efficacy Comments (Pros & Cons)

Chlorophacinone Chronic
Diphacinone Chronic All concentrations >3% are restricted-use
Bromadiolone Chronic Good control in Warfarin-resistant rats, toxic to poultry
Warfarin Chronic All concentrations >3% are restricted-use
Cholecalciferol (Vitamin D3) Chronic
Zinc phosphide Acute Effective against Norway and roof rats, house mice
Bromethalin Acute Effective against Norway and roof rats, house mice
Voles
It may be more common to find voles in greenhouses than rats or mice. The first step to
management is to limit the voles’ access to the greenhouse. Voles are easily caught in mouse
traps baited with apple pieces. Overhead cover above the trap increases effectiveness (e.g. a box
or cubby of some type). Most vole control products include zinc phosphide. A PVC bait station
(a T of PVC with a cover over the open upright) will help limit non-target consumption of the
bait and can be attached near where voles are entering the greenhouse. Some commercial mouse
bait stations would also work for voles.
REFERENCES
Brumfield, R.G., 2004, Strengths and Weaknesses of the Greenhouse Industry in New York,
Proc. XXVI IHC – Protected Cultivation 2002, Ed. A.P. Papadopoulos, Acta Hort.
633:121-126
Brumfield, R. G. 2001, Monroe County Greenhouse Industry Market Research Study 16

10/17/01, Monroe County Department of Planning and Development and Cornell
Cooperative Extension of Monroe County
Brumfield, R.G., L.E. Sim, 1987, An analysis of Pennsylvania floricultural production

differentiated by technology, Acta Hort 203: 139-146
95
Brumfield, Robin, George Wulster, Sara Goudarzi, A.J. Both, 2004, 2003 Survey results of the
greenhouse industry in New Jersey, Department of Extension Specialists, Rutgers
Cooperative Extension, New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station,
http://aesop.rutgers.edu/~FARMMGMT/ghsurvey/index.html
Cook, Roberta and Linda Calvin, 2005, Greenhouse Tomatoes Change the Dynamics of the
North American Fresh Tomato Industry, Economic Research Service, USDA
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/ERR2/
Cornell Cooperative Extension, 2009, 2009 Cornell Guide for the Integrated Management of
Greenhouse Floral Crops, Cornell University, Ithaca NY,
http://ipmguidelines.org/greenhouse/
The Entomology Research Laboratory Greenhouse IPM Group, 2005, Impact of Educational
Programs on IPM Adoption: Survey of Growers in Northern New England,
http://www.uvm.edu/~entlab/impact.html,
Fungicide Resistance Action Committee, 2009, FRAC Code List: Fungicides sorted by mode of
action, http://www.frac.info/frac/index.htm
Insecticide Resistance Action Committee, 2008, IRAC Mode of Action Classification,

http://www.irac-online.org/Crop_Protection/MoA.asp#area223
Koehler, Glen W., 2005, New England Pest Management Network: 2006 Stakeholder Priorities
and Feedback Census, New England Pest Management Network.
http://pronewengland.org/INFO/PROpubs/Stakeholder/StakeholderInput.htm
Lamb, E.M. B.C. Eshenaur, and G.J. Couch, 2007, Level of adoption of IPM in New York
Greenhouses, personal communication
Lamboy, Jana, 2003, Greenhouse Pest Management in the USA: Innovations for Meeting the
Challenges, Proc. IC on Greenhouse Veg., Ed: D. Cantliffe, Acta Hort 611:39-42
Lamboy, 2001, Level of adoption of IPM in New York Greenhouses, IPM Publication Number
417, New York State Integrated Pest Management Program
http://nysipm.cornell.edu/publications/pubngh.asp
Maryland Cooperative Extension, 2004, Total Crop Management for Greenhouse Production –
Bulletin 363. University of Maryland and The Maryland Department of Agriculture,
College Park, MD
Mattson, Neil, 2008, 2008 Needs assessment survey of the New York State Greenhouse Industry,
www.cornell.edu/greenhouse
National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2006, Floriculture Crops, 2005 Summary,

http://www.nass.usda.gov/QuickStats/index2.jsp under Floriculture Crops
96
National Information System for the Regional IPM Centers
http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/index.cfm
Nesheim, O. Norman and Russell F. Mizell, III Directors, 2005, Benefits of Crop Profiles and
Pest Management Strategic Plans, Southern Region Pest Management Center, University
of Florida, http://www.sripmc.org/CropProfiles/SRPMSPbenefits.htm
New England Floriculture, Inc., 2009, 2009 - 2010 New England Greenhouse Floriculture Guide
– A Management Guide for Insects, Diseases, Weeds and Growth Regulators
New England Pest Management Network, www.pronewengland.org
New York Farm Viability Institute, Green Industry Barriers to Success, April 2005,
www.nyfarmviability.org
New England Vegetable Management Guide, 2008-2009, http://www.nevegetable.org/
Northeastern IPM Center, Integrated Pest Management for Multifamily Housing Training –
Rodents, http://www.stoppests.org/handbook/publichousinghandbook.htm
OHP, Inc., 2008, Chemical Class Chart, Volume IX, ohp.com
State of Maine Department of Agriculture, 2007, 2007 Greenhouse Growers IPM Survey
Results, Maine Division of Plant Industry,
http://www.maine.gov/agriculture/pi/horticulture/IPMSurvey.htm
Uva, Wen-fei, 2000, An analysis of the economic dimensions of the greenhouse industry in new
York, United States, Proc XIV Int Symp on Hort Economics, ISHS 2000, ed J.P. Ogier,
Acta Hort 536:397-403
97
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Raw ranking of research, education and regulatory needs
The complete list of needs identified at the workshop, organized by type (research, education,
regulatory), was sent to the workshop participants, the advisory group, grower and industry
organizations in the region, and Cooperative Extension educators working with the greenhouse
industry for ranking. Each need could be ranked as being of high, medium, or low importance.
Seventeen people/groups ranked the needs, including 2 growers, 13 extension personnel, 1
industry rep and 1 Department of Agriculture representative. (Number in blank is number of
votes “of high importance” of 17 total votes).
Research
5 1. Thresholds for pest management decisions based on environment (temperature,

relative humidity, daylength, light levels, leaf wetness etc.) and stage in production.
6 2. Effect of lower growing temperatures on chemical and biological insect and disease
management,
6 3. Interaction of media (organic matter content, texture, water holding capacity) and soil
applied pesticides: include compost based media, peat based media, oasis cubes, etc.
5 4. Breeding for resistance/tolerance to pests
1 5. Explanation and basis for reduced pest management needs when plants are moved
outside – environment, presence of predator/parasitoid species/?
0 6. Climate change and effect on pest ranges, potential for new greenhouse pests
2 7. Effect of wetting agents on soil-borne pathogens and insect larvae
10 8. Comparative economics of various biocontrols vs. pesticides
9 9. Development of methodologies for maintaining viability of biocontrol agents during

packaging and shipping (quality control)
4 10. Marketing the use of biocontrol to customers
4 11. Interaction of insect-pathogenic fungi, like Beauveria bassiana, and insect growth
regulators for insect management
4 12. Interaction of insect-pathogenic fungi, like Beauveria bassiana, and greenhouse

environment for insect management
98
6 13. Research on Hunter fly for control of flying insects in the greenhouse, including
effects of pesticides on hunter fly, rearing methodology, etc.
11 14. Development of banker plant systems for biological control for a broader range of
insect pests
5 15. Development of additional, more effective strains of Beauveria bassiana for insect
management
6 16. Research on natural enemies for complete range of aphid species including new
species (oleander aphid, etc.)
7 17. Management of new or newly predominant aphid species (such as foxglove aphid),
including efficacy of chemicals labeled for aphids, development of resistance to
pesticides, population development rates, etc.
7 18. Use of Hypoaspis for fungus gnat management: efficacy, conditions under which it
works (including the difference in using it in pots and on floors), interaction with cultural
methods of fungus gnat management
3 19. Use of Beauveria bassiana for fungus gnat and shore fly management
4 20. Nematode management of fungus gnats and shore fly larvae: specifically of
nematode species not currently widely available for fungus gnat management, shelf life
and efficacy, stage of fungus gnat larvae attacked, interaction with Beauveria bassiana,
2 21. Fungus gnats as vectors of root diseases
6 22. Additional biocontrol agents for spider mite management that are less sensitive to
humidity, and their use
4 23. Methodology for mite detection prior to damage symptoms/signs,
3 24. Overwintering biology of mite species
5 25. Biological control of tarsonemid mites on ornamentals and tomato/cucumber in

greenhouse production
1 26. Effect of flower removal in conjunction with spraying for management of high thrips
populations
6 27. Orius banker plant system for thrips management
8 28. Interaction of Orius for thrips management with light level, including using
Amblyseius cucumeris then Orius when light levels are high enough for biocontrol
99
8 29. Encouraging movement of thrips biocontrol organisms throughout infested plants
and plant to plant, including application methods and comparative costs/efficacy
6 30. Compatibility of Safari and parasitoids commonly used for whitefly management
4 31. Resistance of Safari to Q biotype of whitefly
7 32. Sentinel/trap plants for silverleaf whitefly and Q biotype whitefly: are there
differences in attraction between biotypes?
1 33. Research on Bandedleaf whitefly: is there an economic impact, reproduction in

greenhouse, effect of environment and crops as hosts, chemical and biological control in
comparison to other whiteflies
4 34. Data on impact of removing infested plants/leaves/weeds from greenhouse on

whitefly management.
2 35. Development of new biological control methods for specific scale species, rather
than generalist predators
5 36. Interaction of spreader stickers with fungicides, pathogens and biological control
organisms for disease management. Include evaluation of new/reformulated adjuvants
8 37. Interaction of soil pH, fertility and disease incidence: to develop cultural
management options
6 38. Shelf life of biological control organisms: in media, change with time and/or
temperature etc, of storage?
3 39. Correlation of root system differences by variety with susceptibility to root diseases
11 40. Development of new and more effective biological control organisms for root rot
diseases
9 41. Development of easy to use, accurate and affordable disease test kits (like the virus
test kits currently available) for more diseases
4 42. Timing of cleaning of plants (leaf removal, etc.) and incidence of botrytis
3 43. Use of plant growth regulators and identification or development of botrytis

symptoms – increased incidence in more compact plants?
3 44. Botrytis management in high tunnel/passively heated greenhouses for greenhouse

tomato
100
5 45. Development/use of botrytis alert sensors or models based on temperature and
humidity levels
8 46. Biological fungicides for foliar application: comparison of efficacy for botrytis
management
5 47. Use of compost in media for botrytis management: include effect of uniformity of
available composts
8 48. Varietal resistance in phlox, rosemary, dahlia, dahlietta, bidens, gerbera etc. to
powdery mildew
9 49. Organic or products with low “days to harvest” intervals for management of powdery
mildew in rosemary
4 50. Use of sulfur canisters at night: micro-thio sulfur for powdery mildew management.
6 51. Use of composts in media for Pythium management, for ex. Aged pine bark compost
4 52. Genetic test to identify resistance to Subdue Maxx in Pythium
6 53. Interaction of heat, water, nutritional stress, EC level, N level and Pythium spp. on
disease incidence
5 54. Correlations between soluble salts levels and Pythium management
1 55. Description and control of Rhizoctonia aerial blight on mums
4 56. Source of INSV coming into greenhouse: plugs, thrips, etc.
7 57. Interaction of biological control of thrips and INSV incidence
9 58. INSV resistant varieties of ornamental host plants
10 59. Protocol for frequent use of disinfecting agents (for example, ZeroTol, XeroTon,
KleenGrow) for management of Xanthomonas. Issues of importance are phytotoxicity to
species and cultivars, efficacy, option for use as a preventative, use in overhead watering
systems, and use in propagation systems.
2 60. Biological control of Sclerotinia with soil applied biocontrol organisms
3 61. Iron nutrition interaction with the incidence of Thielaviopsis
1 62. Resistance to mefenoxam in Phytophthora infecting ornamentals
101
10 63. Development of a quick test for Phytophthora identification for use by growers and
diagnostic labs
2 64. Alternaria species important in greenhouse crops, source in greenhouse plants, host
range
3 65. Varietal differences in susceptibility of tomato to Cladosporium
5 66. ZeroTol efficacy and phytotoxicity data needed (for algae management)
1 67. Data on persistence for KleenGrow (Pace 49, Inc.)
8 68. Comparison of oxidizing agents (including XeroTon) and older quaternary

ammonium salts (Greenshield, etc.) and new products like KleenGrow (5th generation Q
salt) for algae management
6 69. Evaluate StripIt cleaning agent for weed management
2 70. Resistance to Roundup in greenhouse weeds
7 71. Data on steam/hot water methods of weed management for greenhouse use
8 72. Effect of exterior weeds (or other plants) on populations of beneficial insects inside
greenhouse
5 73. Buckwheat hulls (and other mulch materials) for weed management in pots,
including evidence of pre-emergence effect
8 74. Naturally weed suppressive compounds as pot mulches and/or floor treatments for
weed management: coco mulch, corn gluten
7 75. Oxidizing agents and other disinfection compounds for liverwort management
Education
9 76. Training of IPM scouts with an emphasis on hands-on training and materials that
owners can use to train new workers
9 77. Creation of a communication/resource hub: creating an information path from

industry to extension and research and back
8 78. Educational materials on interaction of biological control organisms and environment

(temperature, relative humidity, daylength, light levels, etc.)
7 79. Training on mode of action (class) of pesticides for resistance management
102
5 80. Information on varietal differences in tolerance/resistance/high susceptibility to
pests
9 81. Creation, and dissemination, of educational materials on new/upcoming/potential

pests: identification, biology, damage caused, hosts, etc., color photos, other species they
can be confused with
7 82. Training on record keeping, including pesticide use on in-coming

propagation materials
5 83. Training on interaction of pH and pesticide efficacy
10 84. Comparison of efficacy and costs of different application techniques for biological
control organisms
8 85. Information on quarantine pests: identification, reporting requirements, allowable

management options
6 86. Need for a “prescription” type approach for growers to use biocontrols
9 87. Guidelines on what, when, how many, and how to apply biocontrol organisms taking
into consideration the variations in operations: environmental conditions, crops, etc.
5 88. Education on identification and use of hunter fly as a biocontrol, including effect of
environment, interaction with pesticides
10 89. Training on using sanitation for insect management, including information on

overwintering or survival in greenhouses without plant material
7 90. Easy to understand aphid identification materials in color, including or especially for
new or newly predominant aphid species (oleander aphid, etc),
2 91. Explanation and identification of aphid mummies as a result of aphid biocontrol
5 92. Application methodology for use of nematodes for fungus gnat and shore fly
management
9 93. Training on cultural methods for fungus gnat and shore fly management: algae
management for shore fly management, including droplet size for overhead irrigation,
effect of nutrients and water management for shore fly management, management of
standing water when using plastic trays
2 94. Source of fungus gnats coming into the greenhouse: media, time of year media is
packaged, etc.
103
3 95. Use of Atheta for fungus gnat and shore fly management, including establishment as
population in greenhouse
4 96. Spider mite overwintering in greenhouses and how it relates to management
5 97. Identification and scouting for cyclamen and broad mite, including which plants to
check, id including egg and hatched egg, effect of population level and environment,
corkiness on foliage of some plants (ivy geranium).
8 98. Application techniques for thrips biocontrol, including which beneficials target
which life stages
3 99. Identification of Q biotype of whitefly
3 100. Banded wing whitefly: identification and presence, host range, presence vs.
relevance
3 101. Biocontrol using Amblyseius swirskii compared to that using other predatory mites
for whitefly management
3 102. Identification and general management information on Lepidoptera that infest

greenhouse crops
2 103. Possible greenhouse leafminer pests and their host ranges, identification and early
damage for scouting, possible look-alikes, and methods of mechanical management
3 104. Identification of mealybug species and hosts, information for scouting including
winged males on yellow sticky cards, size comparison of species, etc.
3 105. Sanitation for management of mealybug, including management of resistant stage

that survives without plant material
3 106. Biocontrol of mealybug with Cryptolaemus, identification to distinguish the

beneficial from the mealybug
2 107. Sanitation for management of scale
2 108. Identification of scale insects: species and stages for scouting, effect of
environment
4 109. Biocontrol methods for scale management
8 110. Treatment of irrigation water and disease management
9 111. Training on use of disease test kits as a part of scouting for disease management –
for INSV and other diseases where kits are available
104
12 112. Training on use of disinfection materials for disease management of Botrytis,
Pythium, and Thielaviopsis
8 113. Sanitation for management of root diseases as affected by irrigation system and
growing system
6 114. Training on the concept of early disposal of infected plants for disease management
4 115. Pros and cons of using adjuvants with fungicides for disease management
11 116. Training on using environmental controls to manage Botrytis with current changes
in heating and ventilation for cost savings, include concept of dewpoints, stress of rapid
changes, etc.
4 117. Effects of plant nutrition on incidence of Botrytis
2 118. Identification and comparison of symptoms: powdery and downy mildew on

Rudbeckia and rose
6 119. Management of Pythium by limiting water, heat and nutritional stress, including
high EC levels
5 120. The benefits of bottom heat as a useful management method for Pythium
1 121. Identification of pythium species
2 122. Identification and management of Rhizoctonia aerial blight on ornamentals
2 123. Varietal differences in susceptibility of ornamentals to INSV
6 124. Identification of INSV, with color pictures: confusion between disease symptoms,
variation in symptoms on different crops, especially early stages (plug trays) and in
crops/weeds to prevent the development of INSV harbors
7 125. Management of INSV as thrips management and weed management
6 126. Identification of symptoms of downy mildew at early stages of plant growth
4 127. Information on species and hosts of Xanthomonas, including differences in

management
4 128. Identification and basic information for Sclerotinia management: hosts, effect of
environment
105
5 129. Sanitation for management of Thielaviopsis, especially in reuse of pots and trays
6 130. Identification of Thielaviopsis including examination of roots to distinguish it from

nutritional issues, identification at plug stage for prevention of spread, variation in
symptoms with crop species
3 131. Soil pH for management of Thielaviopsis
2 132. Identification of species and hosts of Phytophthora, types of damage on specific

hosts, comparison of disease symptoms, for example, on pansy
0 133. Varietal differences in susceptibility of ornamentals to Phytophthora
4 134. Sanitation of irrigation systems for Phytophthora control
3 135. Fungicide rotations for management of Phytophthora
2 136. Conditions under which Pseudomonas is likely to occur
2 137. Seed preparation for management of Pseudomonas
0 138. Identification of Pseudomonas vs. Alternaria
2 139. Cultural management for Cladosporium in greenhouse tomatoes
6 140. Broad based IPM strategies for weed management: exclusion and treatment
9 141. Training on importance of weed management for disease and insect management:
inside and outside greenhouse, especially with lower pesticide use and increasing use of
biological control organisms, including nook and cranny weed management
5 142. Use of weed suppressive ground covers around greenhouses for management of
exterior weeds – fine fescues, hard fescues, groundcovers
1 143. Basic information on rodent management and exclusion, tamper proof containers
for rodenticides inside structures
Regulatory
7 144. Requiring information on what pesticides have been used on plant materials,
including plant growth regulators, from companies shipping them: in writing with
shipment, what has been applied and when and including pests they had been inspected
for prior to shipping where appropriate
7 145. Labeling of pesticides for use on tomato and pepper transplants and herbs
106
9 146. Clear labeling of materials for management of pests in the greenhouse including
standardization of label language pertaining to site/pests/plants.
2 147. Additional systemic management options for aphid management
5 148. Efficacy trials of pesticides for new (or newly predominant) aphid species
1 149. Additional pesticides for management of larval fungus gnats
3 150. Good translaminar miticide
4 151. Labeling of pesticide materials for spider mite management in greenhouse

vegetables and herbs, because of long crop production period for vegetables
3 152. Efficacious pesticides for management of tarsonemid mites
3 153. Need efficacy data for pesticides for shore fly management
13 154. Development of additional effective pesticides for thrips

.
6 155. Need for an additional systemic pesticide for whitefly management
11 156. Sale of disease test kits in smaller units to encourage use by growers
4 157. Efficacious fungicides for management of Sclerotinia in ornamentals and

greenhouse vegetables
2 158. Efficacy of difenthate methyl and rotational products for management of

Thielaviopsis
3 159. Fungicides for Cladosporium management in greenhouse tomato
6 160. Need pre-emergent herbicide labeled for use in greenhouse
9 161. Clarification of use of low volume sprayers for pesticides, particularly appropriate
rates and directions on pesticide labels
Infrastructure building
2 162. Additional/regional site for identification for Q biotype of whitefly
6 163. Need for additional biological control production in the US
2 164. Additional/regional site for identification of Pythium strains
107
Appendix 2: Stakeholder input collected in several states on needs for research, extension
and regulatory support for IPM in commercial greenhouses
Connecticut
• Need an IPM certified program from the Department of Ag & UConn. Need two
components, UConn and regulatory authority.
• Push IPM, need dollars for bodies to work out in the field to help farmers to put
together IPM programs.
• We need more people to do work with growers, like helping to scout and do IPM. We need
threshold information, what to look for next week, information on what’s expected next.
• Need more funding for staff.
Maine (Mid-Maine Greenhouse Growers)

• Need someone from university or state to give state of the art recommendations on
greenhouse control options, what actually works.
• Need more IPM program funding support from federal, state, and region. Can’t build
programs on competitive funds.
• Never ending need to expand horizons for greenhouse biocontrol, need practical methods
for year round greenhouses.
New Hampshire
• Need appropriate pesticide package sizes for small/part time growers.
New York
NY Farm Viability Institute Green Industry Barriers to Success, April 2005
• Potential production system changes that could make a difference
o #5 - Reduction of chemical use through predators, IPM, new spraying techniques,
etc.
• Five year threats to the success of the NY industry
o #6 - Difficulty in getting pesticides approved
Vermont
• More base funding is needed to support IPM programs (i.e., more funds for
personnel and operating expenses).
New England Regional Organizations

• New England Greenhouse Conference
o For greenhouse operators, finding effective registered pesticides is a priority,
registrations change quickly, restricted entry intervals are hard on operations, and
pesticide costs are high. It is difficult to find a product that will work on diverse
crops in a small space.
o Greenhouse employee pesticide safety training is an important issue. Greenhouse

industry is seasonal, and has to annually deal with applicator trainer education.
Regulations require training workers before they work.
• New England Pest Management Network, 2006 Stakeholder Priorities and Feedback
108
Census - Items relating to greenhouse production
Primary pests for greenhouses

CT – thrips
ME – fungus gnats, pythium
PRO New England mini-survey – thrips, whitefly
109
Appendix 3: Contact information for state reviewers
State Name Address Phone e-mail

Connecticut Leanne Pundt University of Connecticut, (860) leanne.pundt@uconn.edu
843 University Drive, 626-6240
Torrington, CT 06790
Maryland Stanton Gill Central Maryland MCE (301) sgill@umd.edu
11975 Homewood Road 596-9413
Ellicott City, MD 21042
New York Margery Long Island Horticultural (631) mld9@cornell.edu
Daughtrey Research and Extension 727-3595
Center
3059 Sound Ave.
Riverhead, NY 11901
Pennsylvania Alan Michaels Pennsylvania State (717) ahm4@psu.edu
University 921-8803
1451 Peters Mt Rd
Dauphin PA 17018
Vermont Cheryl Frank University of Vermont (802) Cheryl.Frank@uvm.edu
Entomology Laboratory - 656-5434
661 Spear St.
Burlington, VT 05405
110

Pests Management COntrol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pests Management COntrol

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pests Management COntrol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Pest Management Strategic Plan

Summary of a Workshop held

Document prepared by:

Elizabeth Lamb, Brian Eshenaur, and Gary Couch

This project was funded by the

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 7

PRIORITY ISSUES FOR COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE

Table 1: Top 10 greenhouse pests for the Northeast

Ranking the list of needs

COMMERCIAL GREENHOUSE PRODUCTION IN THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED

General production practices and worker activities

Factors that affect production

Potting and transplanting

Pinching and cutting back

Harvest, marketing and sales

Vegetable production in greenhouses

Issues in pest management

Use of plant growth regulators (PGRs):

Adoption of integrated pest management (IPM)

Use of biological control

Organic and sustainable production

Insects and mites Aphids Leafminers

Gray Mold, Botrytis Blight

Damage and Importance

Detection & Plant Catch other Too late once

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Botrytis

Common name (class/group)

Critical issues and needs

Damage and Importance

As a deterrent to mildew in greenhouses, ventilation and heating should be adjusted to avoid

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Powdery Mildew

State/local pesticide restrictions or limitations, export issues, etc.

Pythium Root Rot and Damping Off

Damage and Importance

--- --- --- ---

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Pythium

Common name (class/group)

Rhizoctonia Root/Stem/Crown Rot and Damping Off

Damage and Importance

Detection & Plant Catch other Other causes Occasionally

Common name (class/group)

Iprodione + thiophanate methyl 2, 1 Botrytis control

PCNB 14 Rhizoctonia Drench and dip applications.

Polyoxin D zinc salt 19, ? Powdery mildew New active ingredient.

Thiophanate-methyl 1, M3 Botrytis Not for use on French marigold or gloxinia.

Triadimefon 3 Powdery Mildew Systemic fungicide

Alternaria leaf spot

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Alternaria

Bacterial Blight of Geranium

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Blight of Geranium

Bacterial Leaf Spots

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Bacterial Leaf Spots

Black root rot

Symptoms and Disease Development

Etridiazole plus thiophanate-methyl

Chrysanthemum white rust

Symptoms and Disease Development

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Chrysanthemum White Rust

Some Currently Registered Pesticides for Cladosporium

Aluminum tris o-ethyl phosphonate