Management of girdling moth in blueberries

Introduction and background

• Pest• Idiophantis habrias (Lepidoptera:

Gelichiidae)• About 5mm in size• Virtually no information in literature or

otherwise• Only found near Woolgolga• Mainly active through autumn and

winter

Introduction and background (cont.)

• First symptoms• Discolouration of the bush• Frass on the crown of the bush• Easily detachable branches

• Damage• Ringbarking the crown of bush,

killing off branches• Producing callused tissue• Taking plant out of production

within about 3 years

Aim of research• Understanding of biology

and ecology of pest• Life-cycle etc.

• Management options• Chemical options• Biological• Cultural options

• Mulch system• Varieties• Propagation

• Monitoring• Potential for pheromone traps

Idiophantis and parasite population numbers

Date

Nu

mb

ers

of

Idiophantis

an

d p

ara

site

s e

xtra

cte

d

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Total live larvae Total live pupae Total parasites

Idiophantis and parasite population numbers

Date

Avera

ge

Idiophantis

an

d

para

site

s e

xtra

cte

d p

er s

tem

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0Average live larvae per stemAverage live pupae per stemAverage of parasites per stem

Rearing difficulties

• Our research required investigation of rearing options for Idiophantis

• Tested rearing methods:• Field collected branches• Artificial diets• Potted plants

• Old • Young• Tissue culture

• Young shoots from blueberry plants• Best results from field collected branches

Rearing difficulties (cont.)

• Breeding method for Idiophantis is required

• Tested breeding methods:• Test tube• Pieces of felt• Branches• Injured and uninjured shoots• Injured and uninjured potted plants• Best results gave mass release of

moths (25-40) into cage with plants

Potential biological control• Pupal parasites

• Frequently found in field collected branches

• No ID yet• Ichneumonid wasps

Chemical control• Field collected branches were dipped in

insecticide solution• 5 branches per replicate in each container

• Emerging moths were counted for each treatment• Number of emerging moths in untreated control

was used as a reference

Chemical control (cont.)Assay 1 - Treatments Average #

MothsAssay 2 - Treatments

Water control 7.4 Abamectin® (0.25ml/L)

In assessment

Talstar® (3 ml/L) 0.04 Exirel® (1.0ml/L)Indoxacarb (Avatar®) (0.17g/ L) 1.4 Proclaim® (0.5g/L)Pyganic® (2ml/L) 2.8 Proclaim® (0.5g/L) +

Pulse® (1.0ml/L)Lannate® (1ml/L) 1.0 Talstar® (1.0ml/L)Hasten® (0.5ml/L) 4.2 Talstar® (0.2ml/L)Confidor® (0.5ml/L) + Hasten (0.5ml/L) 3.4 Maldison® (1.4ml/L)Movento® (0.4ml/L) + Hasten (0.5ml/L) 2.6 Altacor® (1.0g/L)Transform® (0.8ml/L) 4.2 Pulse® (1.0ml/L)

Regent® (0.4ml/L)

• Talstar gave the best results so far Biopest® oil (20ml/L)

• Second assay is still being assessed Water control

Conclusion – Where to go?

• Idiophantis has posed a great challenge to rear in the laboratory

• We now have a way of screening insecticides in the laboratory

• We will screen more insecticides in the laboratory

• We will test a selection of promising insecticides in the field next season

• We will investigate pheromone options

Acknowledgements:I would like to thank: • HAL, ABGA and Costa Berry Exchange for supporting the project • Maurizio Rocchetti for assistance with project • Costa Berry Exchange and Mountain Blue Orchards for supplying

plants• Phil Wilk for input and support• Entomology team

• Craig Maddox, Ian Purdue, David and Tina Robertson and Ann Hickey for technical support.