If you have been procrastinating on your fall garden clean-up (like me), I’ve got good news for you! You may want to just erase some of those tasks from your to-do list altogether. And you can do it guilt-free!
As you may recall from my post this spring, a messy garden provides good shelter for friendly insects like pollinators and natural enemies of pests over the winter. Whether it’s leaves on the ground or dead plant stems, it’s not a bad idea to leave at least some debris in your yard and garden. The Xerces Society provides a nice summary of the benefits fallen leaves offer to insects and other creatures. You can read an eloquent description of all the benefits of a messy yard here.
Just to prove I’m putting my money where my mouth is, here are some pictures from my own yard. I’m thinking about cutting down the sunflower stalks and propping them up next to my compost bin in the back yard, just to make things a little tidier in the front yard.
I’m going to still take out (and send to my local municipal compost facility) my vegetable plants (tomatoes and peppers). Leaving dead stems from healthy plants in your garden is one thing, but this year’s vegetable plants can harbor next year’s vegetable diseases and insect pests if left over the winter. Disposing of diseased or insect-infested plants away from your garden is just good IPM.
A few more caveats…
First, you should know that ticks complicate the simple advice to “leave the leaves”. If you’ve had problems with ticks in your yard (learn how to monitor for ticks here), be strategic about where you leave things messy, and where you clean them up. For example, consider cleaning up areas where your family and pets spend more time. You should also be careful about where you pile leaves. My co-worker Joellen explains why here. And definitely use other IPM strategies to protect yourself from ticks, regardless of your yard clean-up plans.
Second, if you’ve got a garden bed in the front yard that you just can’t stand to leave messy through the winter, it’s ok to clean it up and not feel guilty. Maybe pick another part of your yard that you can leave a bit messy instead. Don’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good.
Happy Fall!
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
This work is supported by:
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
It’s hard to believe it, but we are in our fourth year of a project establishing perennial wildflowers and grasses to support populations of pollinators and natural enemies of pests. You can read more about this ongoing project in past blog posts, but in just a few weeks, you can also come visit these plots in person (if you live near Geneva, NY)!
Our Habitat for Beneficial Insects Open House is taking place on Thursday, August 19, 2021. We’re inviting members of the public, home gardeners, and beneficial insect enthusiasts to stop in between 1:30 and 3:30 PM to:
see how the wildflower plots are looking
learn about the methods we’ve used to establish them
practice recognizing some of the beneficial insects we’ve attracted
In order to offer an experience that is accessible and as safe as possible for all attendees, we are requesting that everyone wear a mask unless you maintain at least 6 feet of distance between yourself and people you do not live with, regardless of your COVID vaccination status. There will be plenty of space at the field to spread out, and we will have microphones available so that you will still be able to hear even if you are standing further from a speaker than usual. We will have masks available if you do not have one. (But if you have a favorite insect or wildflower themed mask, we want to see them!) These recommendations follow Cornell’s current guidance and if that guidance changes, we will let you know.
To get there, put this address into your GPS:
1097 County Rd. 4
Geneva, NY 14456
Then look for these signs to find our field and park:
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
If you’ve been following this blog for a bit, you might recall that the beneficial insect habitat plots I’ve been helping to establish and monitor with my colleagues Betsy Lamb and Brian Eshenaur are located on the edges of a field of Christmas trees. Once the trees get a bit bigger, we’ll be able to start assessing whether trees closer to these wildflowers have fewer pests or not.
New in 2021, I’m collaborating with Bryan Brown, Brian Eshenaur, Betsy Lamb, and Lynn Sosnoskie on a three-year project funded by the USDA to look at IPM when you’re establishing a new field of Christmas trees. An important part of IPM is the integration of multiple strategies when managing pests. So in this project we’re looking at some tools for managing both weeds and root diseases (specifically Phytophthora).
Weeds
Our weed management strategies include:
Mulching with approximately 3 inches of chipped shrub willow
Cultivating three times early in the season using a KULT Kress Argus Toolbar with rear side-shift adjustment pulled by a tractor
Mowing grass seeded around the trees
Conventional herbicides (oxyfluorfen and pendimethalin applied shortly after planting, with the possibility of additional applications depending on the length of the residual control) as a control treatment
No weed management at all (another control treatment)
We planted 560 Fraser firs in 20 rows on May 19th, and four of these rows will be receiving each of these different weed management treatments. So far, we’ve spread mulch…
…and applied herbicides.
Lynn and her team collected soil from the field to assess which weed seeds are currently present in the seedbank. They will continue to evaluate the weed seedbank yearly to determine whether different weed management programs result in different weed seeds in the seedbank. Bryan, Lynn, and technicians working for them will also be assessing the success of each weed control strategy throughout the season (weed density and biomass).
Disease
Within each row, plots of seven trees have been assigned to one of four different treatments for root disease control. The biocontrol piece of this project is the root disease management tools. The biofungicide RootShield PLUS WP contains two different species of the fungus Trichoderma. These fungi may protect the trees by:
Inducing resistance – turning on the plants defense mechanisms ahead of pathogen attack
Exclusion – growing on the roots so there’s no space for the pathogen to grow
“Eating” the pathogen – Trichoderma is a fungus that parasitizes other fungi (and water molds)
Poisoning the pathogen – Trichoderma produces antimicrobial compounds
Promoting plant growth – Stronger, healthier trees are more likely to survive pathogen attack (and probably be more resilient to water stress).
A study done in Oregon on Douglas fir found that Trichoderma species might help improve survival of trees in pots when they are being attacked by the water mold Pythium. So we’re curious if we can document similar results in the field. We applied RootShield PLUS as a soil drench immediately after transplanting, and will repeat the application 6-8 weeks later.
There’s also been some work done by Richard Cowles in Connecticut suggesting that ProPhyt could improve the color of Fraser firs when they are planted in a field known to have Phytophthora. The active ingredient in ProPhyt is potassium phosphite (equivalent to phosphorous acid), so this product is also classified as a biopesticide by the EPA. I think of it as not really a biological control, since it neither contains a (current or formerly) living organism, nor was made by a living organism. We applied ProPhyt as a root dip immediately before planting. It works by inducing plant resistance, and also inhibiting (“poisoning”) water molds like Phytophthora.
The other two root disease treatments are controls: Subdue Maxx (active ingredient mefenoxam) and just water. Subdue Maxx was applied as a shielded, soil-directed spray the day after we transplanted the trees. All the trees were watered in right after planting because we planted a bit late in the season and it was a pretty warm day. The label calls for a second application in the fall.
So far, we’ve collected data on the initial height, stem diameter (4 inches above the soil) and needle color of every tree in the field. We’ll do this again in the fall to assess tree growth over this first season, and tree health (needle color). We will also record how many trees in each treatment survive. Bi-weekly weed surveys have also been initiated. Bryan has started cultivating the trees in that weed control treatment.
For updates on this project, you can check back on this blog (subscribe so you’ll know when new posts are available), follow Lynn and Amara on Twitter or on Instagram (@specialtycropweedscience and @biocontrol.nysipm), or listen to Bryan’s podcast. We’ll also be hosting events at the field (Geneva, NY) in this and subsequent years (put August 19th on your calendars, and stay tuned for more details), and hope to provide updates at future Christmas Tree Farmers Association of NY meetings.
This work is supported by Agriculture and Food Research Initiative – Foundational and Applied Science Grant no. 2021-68008-34179/project accession no. 1025660 from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
The days are getting longer and (sometimes) warmer, trees are beginning to leaf out, spring bulbs are blooming, and lots of people are anxious to clean up their gardens. But you may have heard that cleaning up your garden too early is bad for pollinators and other beneficial insects like natural enemies of pests. Is this true? How long do you need to wait?
What’s the concern with early garden clean-up?
There are two aspects of garden clean-up that pose a risk to beneficial insects in your garden: cutting out dead stems and clearing away leaves or other debris on the ground. Some species of wild bees nest in dead stems, so cutting down and disposing of these stems before the bees emerge for the spring is problematic. Dead leaves and other plant debris on the ground provide shelter for natural enemies like lady beetles, fireflies, and ground beetles. Pristinely-raked garden beds remove this shelter. You can read more about the benefits of messiness in thisThinkIPM blog post.
When should I clean up my garden?
First, please don’t clean your garden up in the fall. With the exception of removing and disposing of diseased or insect-infested plants (especially annuals), let your garden rest in the fall.
Ok, so you’ve waited until spring. But when? It’s complicated. You are trying to protect a diverse group of wild bee species, who are nesting in diverse settings (including both the ground and dead plant stems), in addition to many different species of beetles, spiders, and other arthropod natural enemies of pests. It should come as no surprise that all of these different arthropods emerge from their winter homes at different times. For example, around here (NY) bumble bees, carpenter bees, mason bees, and mining bees emerge earlier (early April) than sweat bees (May). Even within two species of mason bee, researchers found that the temperature during the winter, the sex of the bees, and their size all significantly impacted when they would emerge in the spring (varying by up to 40 days). Winter temperatures also impact when alfalfa leafcutting bees and other bees emerge.
So what should I do?
First, don’t let the complexity of the situation paralyze you. Can you leave just a part of your garden “messy” year round, while you clean up the flower bed right next to the street? Do it. Don’t let the perfect become the enemy of the good. You might also consider making or purchasing a sign that lets your neighbors know why you are keeping your garden a bit untidy. It could spark some interesting conversations, and maybe you’ll start a new trend!
Second – and related to the first suggestion – remember that diversity is a strength. No single way of gardening is good for all beneficial insects. For example, mulch provides shelter for beetles (many of which are predators), but ground nesting bees need bare ground. Different parts of your yard or garden can support different beneficial insects.
Third, the Xerces Society offers some guidelines for timing garden clean-up by watching the weather and what’s happening to other plants around you. However, this advice is specifically for protecting bees, and doesn’t address the needs of natural enemies of pests.
In the northeast, don’t start garden clean-up until your taxes are submitted. But realize that even waiting until mid to late April is still too early for some bee species.
The cool season grasses we usually have growing in our lawns generally require the soil to be about 50° F in order to start growing. Wait to clean up your gardens until you need to mow your lawn regularly. But always remember to mow high.
Wait until apple and pear trees finish blooming. In the northeast U.S., apricots, peaches, plums, and cherries will bloom early (when many ground-nesting bees are emerging), but apples and pears won’t finish blooming until mid-May.
To be extra safe, wait until you are ready to plant tomatoes (when night temperatures are consistently above 50° F). At least in my part of NY, this may not be until late May.
Fourth, if you feel like you absolutely can’t wait to do some garden clean-up, change how you dispose of the debris you remove. Cut back last-year’s dead stems and pile them loosely in a corner of your yard (rather than bagging them and taking or sending them to a compost facility). Insects that have yet to emerge from the stems can still do so. Once you’re well into summer, feel free to compost this debris. But remember that your landscaping choices can also create spaces for ticks to hang out.
Happy gardening!
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
As many people did, we had to change our plans for this project in response to COVID-19. The biggest change was that we didn’t collect any insects this year. If you follow me on Twitter or Instagram, you saw some pictures of different insects I spotted while visiting these plots this summer. Here are a few highlights:
The Christmas trees are still growing, and Brian Eshenaur and I made sure that the weeds didn’t take over. One Christmas tree grower suggested that they might need some trimming next year. I’m adding “Christmas tree shearing” to the list of new things I will try (learn?) in 2021.
From May through mid-October, I visited our beneficial insect habitat plots once a week to take pictures and document what was blooming. Brian and I also mowed plots that were direct seeded in fall 2018 twice (May and June). Those of you reading this from NY know how dry much of our summer was, and there really wasn’t a need for more frequent mowing. We decided not to mow Treatment C, which had been direct seeded in spring of 2018. The standard recommendation for establishing perennial wildflowers from seed is to mow for the first two growing seasons, and in the third year to start scaling back on the mowing. Since this was the third season for these spring-seeded plots, we skipped the mowing. I’m not sure we made the right decision for our plots.
Some of the perennials we seeded bloomed, but mostly these plots were over-run by grass and some weedy asters. It could be that the wildflower establishment was poor. Spring is not the recommended time for planting perennial wildflower seeds. Or it could be that these plots needed to be mowed at least once this season. Since 2021 will be the third year for the fall-seeded plots, I’m wondering about reducing the mowing in these plots, instead of stopping “cold turkey”.
In the meantime, the fall-seeded Treatments F and G (mowed twice in 2020) are developing nicely! Even when there weren’t many flowers, I could recognize lots of wildflower seedlings.
In July and August, there were abundant blackeyed susan blossoms, and in September and October all four aster species bloomed.
This year, I kept notes not only on what was blooming each week, but on whether blossoms had just started to open (E = early bloom), were fully open (P = peak bloom), or were fading (F = fading bloom). Because there were 12 plots for each transplanted or direct seeded species, if the plots were evenly split between early and peak (E/P) or peak and fading (P/F), I included these two intermediate categories. You can see a color version of the following tables here. The colors give a nice visual of the progression of blooms over the season (including some weeks when there was a bit of a lull in blooms).
E
early bloom
E/P
evenly mixed early & peak bloom in different plots
P
peak bloom
P/F
evenly mixed peak & fading bloom in different plots
F
fading blooms
When transplanted wildflowers bloomed in 2020
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
5
12
21
27
1
9
16
23
30
6
14
21
28
6
12
17
26
1
8
15
22
28
6
14
Golden alexanders
E
P
P
P
F
F
Ohio spiderwort
E
E
E
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Catmint
E
P
P
P/F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Lanceleaf coreopsis
E
P
F
F
F
Blue false indigo
E
P
Tall white beard tongue
E
P
F
F
F
F
Common milkweed
E
F
Purple coneflower
E
E
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Wild bergamot
E
P/F
F
F
F
F
F
Anise hyssop
E
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
Boneset
E
P
P
F
F
F
F
NY ironweed
E
E
E
P
P
P
P
F
F
Orange coneflower
E
E
P
P
P
P
P/F
F
F
F
F
New England aster
E
E
E
E
P
P
P
F
Showy goldenrod
E
P
P
F
F
When direct seeded wildflowers bloomed in 2020
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
5
12
21
27
1
9
16
23
30
6
14
21
28
6
12
17
26
1
8
15
22
28
6
14
Golden alexanders
E
P
P/F
Hairy beard tongue
E
E
Lanceleaf coreopsis
E
P/F
F
F
F
F
F
E
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
Tall white beard tongue
E
Blackeyed susan
E
E
P
P
P
P
P
P
P/F
P/F
F
F
F
F
F
F
Purple coneflower
E
E
P
P
P
P
F
F
F
F
F
F
E/P
Wild bergamot
E
F
F
Butterfly milkweed
P
F
E
Orange coneflower
E
P
P
P/F
F
F
Smooth blue aster
E
E
P
P
P
P
Gray goldenrod
E
E
E/P
P
F
F
New England aster
E
E
P
P
P
Zigzag aster
E
E
P
P
P
Aromatic aster
E/P
E/P
P
Yellow false indigo
Partridge pea
Marsh blazing star
Narrowleaf mountainmint
Wild senna
Maryland senna
Early goldenrod
Ohio spiderwort
Common name
Scientific name
Anise hyssop
Agastache foeniculum
Aromatic aster
Symphyotrichum oblongifolius
Blackeyed susan
Rudbeckia hirta
Blue false indigo
Baptisia australis
Boneset
Eupatorium perfoliatum
Butterfly milkweed
Asclepias tuberosa
Catmint
Nepeta faassinii
Common milkweed
Asclepias syriaca
Early goldenrod
Solidago juncea
Golden alexanders
Zizia aurea
Gray goldenrod
Solidago nemoralis
Hairy beard tongue
Penstemon hirsutus
Lanceleaf coreopsis
Coreopsis lanceolata
Marsh blazing star
Liatris spicata
Maryland senna
Senna marilandica
Narrowleaf mountainmint
Pycnanthemum tenuifolium
New England aster
Symphyotrichum novae-angliae
NY ironweed
Vernonia noveboracensis
Ohio spiderwort
Tradescantia ohiensis
Orange coneflower
Rudbeckia fulgida va. Fulgida
Partridge pea
Chamaecrista fasciculata
Purple coneflower
Echinacea purpurea
Showy goldenrod
Solidago speciosa
Smooth blue aster
Symphyotrichumlaeve
Tall white beard tongue
Penstemon digitalis
Wild bergamot
Monarda fistulosa
Wild senna
Senna hebecarpa
Yellow false indigo
Baptisia tinctoria
Zigzag aster
Symphyotrichum prenanthoides
From the second or third week of May through the second week of October, there was always something blooming in these plots, whether they were transplanted or direct seeded. You can also see that a fair number of species in the seeded plots did not bloom this year. Hopefully next year.
In the meantime, I’ll be making plans for the 2021 growing season, which will hopefully include a return to insect sampling. Stay well and stay safe!
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
This work is supported by:
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Well, the days are getting shorter, the air is getting cooler, and pumpkins are starting to show up on front porches. I guess it’s time for me to admit that fall is coming. So it seemed like a good time to provide an update on my efforts to establish habitat for beneficial insects around my home. If you need to catch up on this project, you can read more about site selection, plant selection, and weed control in previous posts.
#BeneficialHabitatAtHome in pictures
Overall, I’m pretty happy with how the garden turned out this first year! If you follow me on Instagram or Twitter, you’ve seen some of these pictures already.
I attracted quite a few pollinators…
…and natural enemies.
I also picked a lot of cut flowers!
Plant establishment success
This spring, I planted four perennials: arnica (Arnica chamissonis), blanketflower (Gaillardia aristata), echinacea (Echinacea purpurea), pyrethrum daisy (Chrysanthemum coccineum), and ‘Chim chiminee’ rudbeckia (Rudbeckia hirta). I started some blue vervain from seed, but by the time I’d figured out that stratification was needed, it was pretty late in the spring. The seedlings that did emerge didn’t survive. The blanketflowers and rudbeckia bloomed already this first year.
The arnica, echinacea, and pyrethrum daisy put their energy into vegetative growth, and hopefully they will bloom next year.
Not surprisingly, the annuals produced abundant blooms. Others have noted that there can be value in mixing annuals with perennials when you are establishing habitat for beneficial insects. The annuals will provide abundant flower resources right away, while it may take a few years to achieve peak bloom production on perennials.
Fall planting
Hopefully this is not the first time you’ve heard that “fall is for planting”. In preparation for this, I started some butterfly milkweed (Asclepias tuberosa) and columbine (Aquilegia sp.) seeds back in late July so that I’d have some seedlings ready to go in the ground this fall. The columbine benefitted from spending about three weeks in my fridge (after I’d seeded them in moist potting mix) before giving them some light and warmth. (Don’t judge me. The real question is why not reserve one shelf of your fridge for seed storage and germination!) Columbine seedlings will go in my backyard where there’s less sun.
I also snagged a few seed heads from the golden alexanders and the blackeyed susans (also Rudbeckia hirta, but the straight species) in our beneficial insect habitat research plots. I’m going to plant them this fall, too and hope to see some seedlings next spring.
Whether I’m working remotely next year or not, I’ll keep providing periodic updates on my efforts to establish habitat for beneficial insects around my house.
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
This work is supported by:
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
It’s been two months since I since I wrote about the plants I selected to provide habitat for beneficial insects around my home. Today I’ll talk a bit about weed control and how my spring transplants are doing.
Weed control
I have mentioned before that managing weeds turns out to be far more than half the battle when it comes to establishing perennial wildflowers as habitat for beneficial insects. Based on the results from the habitat plots we planted on the edges of our Christmas tree research field, I decided to use mulch for weed management in my home gardens. While mulch does add extra cost, after you make the initial investment of time to spread the mulch, it really cuts down on the time required to manage weeds during the rest of the season. I had a relatively small area to mulch, and was able to purchase some relatively inexpensive mulch made from the brush and leaves picked up by my city. Also, while I haven’t tested the organic matter content of my soil, just digging up some of the grass told me that my soil could use more organic matter. The mulch will eventually help with that as it breaks down. One downside to mulch is that it could block access to the soil for ground-nesting bees. There are some spots of bare ground in other parts of my yard, and perhaps next year I will be a little more deliberate about keeping some areas bare to support these pollinators.
Like many (but not all) New Yorkers, I have found myself frequently wishing for more rain this summer. According to the closest NEWA station, we only got 1.3 inches of rain in May, 1.44 inches in June, and 1.48 inches in July (so far). This spring and summer is an excellent illustration of why experts recommend transplanting perennials in the fall, and not in the spring. Hot and dry are not ideal conditions for young seedlings just trying to get started. We often get more rain in the fall, and the cooler temperatures mean the transplants are subjected to less stress.
I started my plants from seed, and most of my seedlings were pretty small when I transplanted them the first week of June.
I admit that I also didn’t harden off my seedlings exactly the way you are supposed to. After losing some un-protected plants to marauding bands of squirrels, and lacking a protective structure that would let me keep my seedlings in full sun, I hardened them off on my screen porch. Moving from this environment to the south side of my house in full sun was a bit of a shock, especially when it got so hot and dry so soon after transplanting. I’ve done a lot of watering over the past month and a half, and I still lost more of my perennial seedlings (and some annuals) than I had hoped.
In spite of these obstacles, quite a few of my transplants survived. The blanketflowers (Gaillardia aristata) are the only perennials that look like they will bloom this season. If I had bought seedlings from a local nursery, they might have been bigger and might have established faster. But I can be patient.
You already saw the echinacea. Here are some of the other perennials.
Not surprisingly, the annuals have grown faster. (Remember, they’re in a race to reproduce and pass on their genes before winter returns!)
Japanese beetles are eating the common zinnias.
But they are leaving the ‘Persian Carpet’ zinnias alone. It turns out these are a variety of Mexican zinnias (Zinnia haageana), which is a different species than the common zinnias (Zinnia elegans).
I’ve been picking the Japanese beetles off by hand (adding them to my compost bin after they drown). I found the beetles to be more sluggish in the evenings (although admittedly I wasn’t out at the break of dawn), and a colleague recently shared this article with me that suggests that hand-picking Japanese beetles in the evening is indeed the best option. This strategy has not prevented all damage (especially on my roses), but I think my plants will survive. And I admit I haven’t picked them every single day.
The snap dragons have started blooming.
And so have the calendulas.
I’ve seen hover flies on the bachelor’s buttons. Remember the adult hover flies are pollinators, while their larvae are voracious aphid predators.
The cosmos and sunflowers (that survived the squirrels and a local rabbit) haven’t started blooming yet, but they’re looking good!
This spring I ran out of space to start seeds indoors, and since fall is a better time for planting I saved a few perennials for the fall. Last week I seeded butterfly milkweed (Asclepias tuberosa) and some columbine. In the absence of grow lights, and since I’m not an expert transplant producer, I wanted to give these seedlings a good two and a half months to grow before I transplant them.
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
This work is supported by:
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Hopefully you’ve been following along with a project I’m working on with Betsy Lamb and Brian Eshenaur to establish (and document the impacts of) habitat for natural enemies of pests and pollinators (collectively, beneficial insects). In December, I wrote about how the plants were growing, and in February I wrote about the time and money we’d invested in the project so far and the success of our weed management strategies. I promised an update on insect sampling, and here it is!
First of all, let me clarify that we were collecting more than just insects. Insects only have six legs. We also collected arachnids like spiders (and harvestmen), which usually have eight legs, and pillbugs, millipedes, and centipedes, which have many more than eight legs. All of these “bugs” could be correctly called arthropods. But there’s more! We also counted earthworms (which are annelids) and slugs and snails (which are mollusks). Hopefully the entomologists in my audience will pardon my use of the term “insect” to include creatures that crawl or fly but may have more (or less) than six legs throughout the rest of this post.
Pan traps catch flying insects, especially those attracted to the colors yellow and blue.
Pitfall traps catch insects that crawl along the soil surface.
Sweep nets catch insects that are flying or hanging out on plants.
Below is a quick reminder of our treatments. You can read all the details here. Except for Treatment H. These are “new” plots that we added in 2019. I just measured out four, 23-foot long sections of grass planted between rows of Christmas trees in the middle of the field. These row middles are mowed by the excellent Field Research Unit staff at Cornell AgriTech, where our research field is located. The grass mixture was seeded right after the Christmas trees were planted in Spring 2018, but it does include some blooming weeds from time to time (dandelions and clover, especially).
Treatment
Description
A
Spring transplant, no mulch
B
Spring transplant with mulch
C
Spring direct seed
D
Buckwheat cover crop, then fall transplant
E – control
Whatever was growing there, just keep it mowed
F
Soil solarization, then fall direct seed
G
Herbicide and tillage, then fall direct seed
H – control
Mow seeded orchard grass mix
And one last note before we get into the actual results. These are still preliminary results. Many, many thanks to Jason Dombroskie and Paige Muñiz for helping us with insect identification. Identification and number crunching of the data are still ongoing.
Ok, ready to see some cool insects (etc.)? Here we go!
Spiders and harvestmen
We caught a lot of spiders and harvestmen, mostly in pan and pitfall traps. What’s a harvestman? You might know it by the name daddy long legs. It looks a lot like a spider, but instead of having a distinct narrowed “waist” (actually where the two body segments of the arachnid meet), their bodies just look like single “blobs”. Both spiders and harvestmen are predators and will eat many other insects (including some pests). They may also eat nectar and pollen. Very few spiders you are likely to encounter in New York are venomous, so welcome these eight-legged biocontrol agents to your fields and gardens without fear!
We caught a lot of spiders and harvestmen, but it looks like there were fewer in the plots that were mulched at transplanting or solarized prior to seeding.
Carabid beetles
You may not notice carabid beetles (also called ground beetles) because they crawl along the surface of the soil and are usually more active at night. Also, many of them move very quickly. They are great predators of insects (and other arthropods), as well as mollusks like slugs. Some also eat seeds.
From these preliminary results, it looks like we tended to catch more carabid beetles in the fall-planted treatments (whether they were transplanted or direct-seeded). We’ll have to see if this turns out to be a consistent pattern. There were generally fewer carabids in the two control treatments.
Rove beetles
We did not catch very many rove beetles (only 55 in all of the plots for the entire summer), but like carabid beetles these predators live at the soil surface or in the soil. Some also scavenge things that are already dead or eat seeds. You can recognize them by the short wing covers (called elytra) on their backs. I think they look like mini capes.
Hover flies
Hover flies (also called syrphids) come in many shapes and sizes and get their name from the way the adults hover in the air when traveling between flowers. Many look like bees, but if they hold still long enough and you look closely, you will see that they only have two wings (bees have four), and they have very large eyes. The adults feed on pollen and nectar and are also pollinators. The larvae are predators, eating aphids, whiteflies, and scales.
We were surprised to see similarly low numbers of hover flies in the two spring transplanted plots (in which deliberately-planted wildflowers were largest and produced the most flowers) and in the mowed grass control. More hover flies were collected from the weedy control, all the direct seeded plots, and the fall transplanted plots (which had smaller wildflowers with fewer blooms). We don’t know why.
Lady beetles
Lady beetles may be the most well-recognized biocontrol agent, but they were not the most abundant one collected in our sampling. We only collected 65 larvae or adults from all plots over the entire summer. Both life stages are predators, but adults of at least some species will also eat pollen and nectar. We identified the species of each adult (but not the larvae), and a picture of each is below.
Lacewings
All lacewing larvae are predators, and the more easily recognized adults of some species are also predators. Others eat pollen as adults. We did not catch very many in our plots; only 40 all summer from all plots.
Minute pirate bugs
This may be one of my new favorite natural enemies. They are definitely minute (no more than a quarter of an inch long) but feed on small insect pests like aphids, mites, scales, and thrips, as well as pollen and nectar. We only collected 19 from all plots over the whole summer. At home, I sometimes find them running across my table after I’ve brought freshly cut flowers inside. In this video, you can see one exploring the map of a corn maze. Actually, it was looking for thrips to eat.
Interestingly, while we collected a lot of bees of many different kinds over the summer (at least 18 different genera), very few were the iconic honey bees or bumble bees. I have been told by a bee expert that the pan traps tend to catch bees other than honey or bumble bees, and we did set these traps about twice as often as we used sweep nets. So this may have impacted the types and numbers of bees we collected. Nevertheless, these data are a reminder that there are lots of bees out there besides the ones we’re most familiar with. I encourage you to learn more about wild bees of New York.
Butterflies
At the beginning of this post, I listed three methods we used to collect insects. Well, actually there was a fourth method, but it was used to count insects rather than to collect them. We did a Pollard Walk through each plot once a month by simply walking along the side of the plot and counting the number and type of butterflies we saw. We counted very few butterflies during these walks, but here are pictures of the species that did visit our plots (either in the adult or caterpillar life stage).
So that’s it for the beneficial insects I’m going to write about today. We also caught some not-so-beneficial insects (and mollusks).
Tarnished plant bugs
These are generalist herbivores, feeding on leaves, fruits and flowers of many plants. They can be damaging pests on some fruits (like strawberries) and vegetables. In our plots, I think they caused some damage to the coreopsis flowers. We’re not too worried because they aren’t pests of Christmas trees, but we were disappointed to find the largest numbers of tarnished plant bugs in the more mature habitat plots (those started by transplanting, as opposed to direct-seeding). Other researchers also reported that planting wildflower strips adjacent to strawberries could increase tarnished plant bug populations.
Leafhoppers
Leafhoppers are another insect that we aren’t too concerned about with Christmas trees, but can be a pest of other crops. I learned that you can distinguish this group of insects by their pointy flattened (top to bottom) heads and the bristles on their back legs. The spring transplanted plots in which wildflower plants were most mature and produced the most blooms also had fewer leafhoppers than other treatments.
Slugs
As I mentioned at the beginning of this post, slugs are mollusks, not insects (or even arthropods) and they can be pests of many different crops. The picture above is definitely the largest slug that we collected during 2019. Interestingly, there seemed to be fewer slugs in the plots where we solarized the soil during the 2018 growing season. I was interested to learn that soil solarization is known to kill slug eggs, and I wonder if we’re seeing that effect here. I don’t know how far slugs move from where the eggs hatch, and it will be interesting to see if this effect persists in future years.
Believe it or not, this is not the full list of insect (or arthropod, mollusk, or annelid) groups we collected and counted. Also, I will remind you again that these data (especially the bee data) are preliminary. Although I’m sad to be unable to collect insects this summer due to COVID-19, I’m looking forward to finishing the analysis of the 2019 data and getting ready to hopefully collect insects again in 2021. In the meantime, you can see pictures of what’s happening in these plots throughout the summer on my Twitter and Instagram accounts. And I will write at least one more post about this project later this year.
This post was written by Amara Dunn. All pictures or videos were taken by her, unless otherwise credited.
This work is supported by:
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets
Natural enemies of pests are going to help you out with pest control, so when you are applying pesticides, it’s in your best interest to choose products that will have the least impact on them. Two quick points before we get into details for where to find this information:
Remember that the information in this post is not a substitute for a pesticide label. The label is the law, and you must read and follow the label of any pesticide you are using. Laws and labels change. It is your responsibility to use pesticides legally. Trade names used here are for convenience only; no endorsement of products is intended, nor is criticism of unnamed products implied. For questions about pesticide use, regulations, and safety, contact the Cornell Pesticide Management Education Program: pmep_webmaster@cornell.edu.
A great way to protect natural enemies is by following the steps for IPM. Preventing pests (e.g., through cultural strategies and exclusion), scouting to detect pests early when populations are low, and proper identification of pests will help you reduce your need to use pesticides and can save you money. Win win!
Ok, let’s assume you’re doing good IPM and you’ve gotten to the point where you need to choose a pesticide. How do you make the best choice for protecting natural enemies? Here are a few options. (Note that I did post about this about 2 years ago. I’ve learned more, so I thought an update would be in order.)
Read the label
This should go without saying. You should be doing this anyway when you are considering using a pesticide. The label may contain information about the compatibility of a pesticide with either natural enemies or pollinators. And of course it will contain important information about how to minimize risks to yourself and the environment when you use it.
EIQ
EIQ stands for Environmental Impact Quotient. You can read more details on the NYSIPM website, but in a nutshell the EIQ puts a number on the risks of pesticides at the rates they are applied in the field. You can use the EIQ calculator on our website to compare these numbers for different pesticides. The higher the number, the higher the risk. There are different components to the EIQ; risks to consumers, workers, and the environment (ecological). The ecological risk will include risks to natural enemies (as well as fish, birds, and bees).
Pocket IPM Greenhouse Scout App
Temporary update: As of January 2024, this app is in the process of being updated and is not currently available. Hopefully a new and improved version will be available again soon!
Especially if you are growing in a greenhouse and releasing a lot of natural enemies, you may find this app helpful. In addition to providing information about compatibility of pesticides with arthropod natural enemies you may be releasing, you can also use it to help you keep records of scouting and product applications.
Cornell Guidelines
If you are a commercial producer, hopefully you are already utilizing the Cornell Guidelines, as they are a wealth of information on many subjects. At least some of them also include information on the toxicity of different pesticides to natural enemies. For example, if you have the grape guidelines, check out Table 4.2.2 for insecticide toxicity to natural enemies.
Websites and apps from companies that produce natural enemies
Companies that sell natural enemies (especially predatory and parasitoid arthropods for greenhouse pest control) have an interest in making sure that customers don’t inadvertently kill the natural enemies they buy with pesticides they are applying. I am aware of searchable databases, apps, or charts describing pesticide compatibility from four companies that sell (mostly) arthropod and nematode natural enemies: Agrobio, Biobest, BioWorks, and Koppert. If you know of some I’ve missed, please let me know! There are of course other companies that supply natural enemies. Here I’m focusing on resources that help you choose pesticides to conserve natural enemies.
This website is also available as an app for Android (but not Apple) devices. To use it, start by clicking Organisms selection and choose the natural enemies you want to conserve. Then, click Ingredients selection and choose the pesticides you are thinking about applying. You can only search active ingredients, not product names. Finally, click Query. Use the legend to help you interpret the table that’s produced.
Biobest has put their compatibility information into an app for Android and Apple devices. Select pesticides by either active ingredient or commercial product name. Then, search for the name of the Beneficial organism you want to conserve. Note that there are a lot of pesticide/natural enemy combinations for which toxicity data just aren’t available. If you select a pesticide, then natural enemies for which no data are available will be grayed out in the Beneficial organism list. As you check boxes next to pesticides and natural enemies, a chart is automatically generated. The results include information on toxicity to different life stages of the beneficial organisms and persistence of the product.
BioWorks provides a table of the compatibility of their products with pesticides, fertilizers, and adjuvants. You can filter the table by several criteria to find the information you’re looking for.
This website is also available as an app for Android and Apple devices. Start by entering the name of the Beneficial organism you want to protect. You can search by either the Koppert product name, or the Latin (scientific) name, but you can’t select from a drop-down menu. Just start typing. Then, choose the Agent (pesticide you are considering applying), by either trade name or active ingredient. Again, you need to know the name; you can’t select from a drop-down list. Start typing, and then check the box next to the product you are interested in. Click Results and be sure to click on ‘Legend’ at the bottom to help you interpret the table. There is also a more complete explanation of information in the legend under Info.
Some caveats about these websites
Admittedly, finding information about conserving natural enemies that are not commercially available for release (e.g., in greenhouses) has some challenges. These websites tend to focus on what you can buy and release, rather than on what may be naturally occurring in a field. Although sometimes there is some overlap. These apps/websites don’t include all natural enemies, and data aren’t available for all natural enemy/pesticide combinations. Also, these websites/apps usually list natural enemies by scientific names. Do you know what the scientific name of a lacewing is? I didn’t before I started this job!
To help with this last barrier, I created a chart (also below) to help you figure out what scientific names you should look for on these websites/apps if you want to conserve a particular natural enemy. It also includes information about which pests the natural enemies target, whether they are commercially available, and whether they are naturally occurring (not necessarily native) in NY.
Arthropod and nematode natural enemies
Can I buy them?
Found in NY?
If I want to conserve this beneficial arthropod…
(whose scientific name is…)
that helps me control…
I should look for these names on the compatibility apps:
yes
yes
aphid midges
Aphidoletes aphidimyza
aphids
Aphidoletes aphidimyza
some
yes
beetles that are predators (for example, rove beetles, ground beetles, and others)
Coleoptera is the scientific name of the insect group that includes all beetles. The following families are generally predatory: Coccinellidae (lady beetles), Carabidae (ground beetles), Staphylinidae (rove beetles), Cantharidae (soldier beetles), Melyridae (flower beetles)
many insect pests
Coleoptera is a beneficial insect listed on at least one compatibility app. However, some coleoptera are pests. And, since this is such a broad group, the compatibility information provided may not be correct for all beneficial beetle species.
insect eggs, small caterpillars, thrips, mites, aphids
Orius laevigatus may be a reasonable proxy; Orius spp.; Orius insidiosus
yes
yes
nematodes
Steinernema spp., Heterorhabditis spp.
thrips, fungus gnats, shore flies, some grubs
Nematodes (note that this is a very broad category and it’s possible there are differences among species), Heterorhabditisbacteriophora, Steinernema, Steinernemafeltiae, Steinernemacarpocapsae
Aphelinus abdominalis or Aphelinus mali may be reasonable proxies
yes
yes
predatory gall midge
Feltiella acarisuga
spider mites
Feltiella acarisuga
some
yes
predatory mites
Amblyseius (= Neoseiulus) fallacis, Typhlodromus spp., and probably others
thrips, whitefly, pest mites; may vary among natural enemy species
Amblyseius californicus, Amblyseius cucumeris, Amblyseius swirskii, Phytoseiulus persimilis are sold commercially and may be good proxies for the pesticide compatibility of naturally-occurring predatory mites
yes
yes
spined soldier bug
Podisus maculiventris
many immature insects, including many species of caterpillars
I should look for these names on the compatibility apps:
yes
yes
bumble bee
Bombus spp.
NA – pollinator
Bombus spp., Bombus terrestris
yes
yes
European honey bee
Apis mellifera
NA – pollinator
Apis, Apis mellifera
Notes:
Different strains or populations of these natural enemies are sold by different companies and each population may differ from natural populations. Each company is most likely to report compatibility data that applies to their population. It’s not perfect, but it’s a start.
When the first word in the scientific name of an insect (e.g. Trichogramma) is followed by the designation ‘spp.’, it means multiple species that all belong to the same genus. Some compatibility information is given for only the larger group (e.g., Aphidius spp. or Syrphus spp.).
Natural enemies that are pesticides (active ingredients are microorganisms, i.e., fungi, bacteria, viruses)
If I want to conserve this microbial natural enemy…
(whose scientific name is…)
that helps me control…
I should look for these names on the compatibility apps:
Bt
Bacillus thuringiensis (various strains are available, and they control different pests)
many caterpillars and some immature beetle and fly pests (target pest varies by strain)
many insects (target pest depends on fungal species and strain)
Paecilomyces (=Isaria) fumosoroseus, Beauveriabassiana, Metarhiziumanisopliae (= M. brunneum)
fungi that attack plant diseases
there are multiple species, including Trichoderma harzianum (several strains)
Plant pathogens (the target pathogen depends on the fungal strain)
Trichoderma harzianum T-22 is the only fungal natural enemy I found on these apps, so far. It is unlikely that its compatibility is representative of other fungi that are natural enemies.
Notes:
Different strains or populations of these microorganisms are sold by different companies and each of these populations may differ from natural populations. Each company is most likely to report compatibility data that applies to their population. It’s not perfect, but it’s a start.
In these apps/websites, the microbial active ingredient may be listed as the natural enemy (e.g., Paecilomyces fumosoroseus on Biobest website), but sometimes it’s only listed as a pesticide active ingredient. For compatibility of biopesticides with chemical pesticides, you should start by reading the label, then seek information provided by the manufacturer. I am starting to create biopesticide profiles that include available compatibilitiy information for these products.
All tables were assembled by Amara Dunn, NYSIPM using information from Natural Enemies of Vegetable Insect Pests (Hoffman & Frodsham) and were last updated January 2020.
Give it a try!
Imagine you were considering using one of the following active ingredients:
abamectin
acequinocyl
fenpyroximate
…to control spider mites. (Of course, before you did this, you’d read the labels and be sure that the use you were considering was legal!) If you were concerned about hurting parasitoids that help with aphid control (for example, the species Aphidius colemani and Aphidius ervi) which of these active ingredients would be the best choice (from a compatibility standpoint)?
Go ahead!
Look it up!
A note about microorganisms as natural enemies
There are a few “natural enemies” on this chart that are actually biopesticides, and I have listed them separately. Remember that microorganisms (fungi, bacteria, viruses) that are natural enemies of pests are biopesticides. A few of them can be found in the websites/apps summarized above. There are two compatibility questions when it comes to using biopesticides with living microorganisms as active ingredients: (1) Will this biopesticide harm other natural enemies (e.g., predators and parasitoids)? and (2) Will the living microbe in this biopesticide be killed by other pesticides I might use? The websites/apps have some information about the compatibility of biopesticides with arthropod natural enemies. If you’re wondering about the compatibility of biopesticides with other pesticides, that may be a topic for another post (so many posts to write, so little time!). I’ll just offer two quick pieces of advice here:
Read the label of the biopesticide. If it doesn’t contain compatibility information (for use with other pesticides) or doesn’t answer your questions about compatibility with other natural enemies, contact the manufacturer to get your questions answered.
If you happen to be using one of their products, BioWorks describes the compatibility of their products with other pesticides, and this information is linked to individual product pages.
And what about the bees?
Take a look at the resources created by the Pollinator Network @ Cornell. They have prepared decision-making guides for several crops already, with more to come.
This post was written by Amara Dunn, Biocontrol Specialist with the NYSIPM program. All images are hers, unless otherwise noted.
In December, I updated you on how perennial wildflowers and grasses were establishing in our beneficial insect habitat plots during the 2019 growing season. As I wrote that post, I quickly realized that there was too much good information for just one post. So here’s the rest of the story when it comes to plant establishment – time, money, and weeds.
Before I get started, below is a quick reminder of what our treatments were. You can read all the details here.
Treatment
Description
A
Spring transplant, no mulch
B
Spring transplant with mulch
C
Spring direct seed
D
Buckwheat cover crop, then fall transplant
E – control
Whatever was growing there, just keep it mowed
F
Soil solarization, then fall direct seed
G
Herbicide and tillage, then fall direct seed
Weed control
One thing that has surprised me about this project (although others certainly gave me fair warning) was how big a role weed management plays in establishing habitat for beneficial insects. It’s definitely still a struggle in our plots.
Bryan Brown did weed assessments for us in May and September of 2019. The graph below shows the average percent of the area of each plot covered by either weeds (orange) or beneficial habitat flowers and grasses (blue).
This was before we did any hand-weeding. By far, the plots that were mulched in Spring 2018 (treatment B) had the fewest weeds compared to beneficial habitat plants. You’ll also notice that in May there were still relatively few weeds in the plots where we tried to deplete the weed seed bank in the soil through solarization (treatment F) or repeated herbicide and tillage (treatment G).
By September 2019, the spring transplant treatments looked even better. Our wildflowers grew well during 2019 (with the help of some extra hand weeding). The plants we transplanted in Fall 2018 are still struggling and not nearly as large as the wildflowers in treatments A and B. I think this may have more to do with the weed competition they experienced that first fall (when we couldn’t plant for a few weeks after the buckwheat was mowed) than transplant timing. Hopefully they will catch up.
There are still a lot of weeds in the direct-seeded treatments (C, F, or G). Remember that our weed management strategy in these plots is repeated mowing to control annual weeds. Over time, the perennial wildflowers and grasses should take over. But it’s not supposed to be a quick method.
Effort
Most of the treatments we are comparing required much less work in their second year (2019) than in their first (2018). The exception is that we spent a lot more time hand weeding treatment D (buckwheat cover crop followed by fall transplanting) in 2019. Although we weeded the two spring transplanted plots the same number of times in 2019 (twice), it took longer to hand weed the plots without mulch. I’m not surprised. If you’re looking for the right establishment method for your project, you really need to ask yourself how much help you have available and when. If you can get a lot of people excited about helping you install the planting, but worry about getting consistent volunteers year after year, mulch may be the right choice for you. In the direct seeded treatments (C – spring; F – fall following solarization; G – fall following herbicide and tillage), the time input for 2019 was mowing, which was relatively quick. And we did just a little hand weeding of perennial weeds.
Costs
Nearly all of our costs were incurred in the first year of the project (2018). The only additional costs from 2019 were for gas to run the mower. We did replace a few plants in transplanted plots in Fall 2019, but we used some extra plants we had purchased in 2018. Below is the total cost of the plants and other supplies for each treatment. Transplanting will always be more expensive than direct seeding.
Treatment
Costs
A
$417.12
B
$539.29
C
$18.83
D
$390.55
E
$3.40
F
$149.10
G
$23.12
You may remember that we were also collecting insects. I promise I will write more about the insects we caught in another post. If you are tired of looking at snow and bare trees outside, you can see pictures of some of the insects we caught in my post from August 2019.
This post was written by Amara Dunn. All pictures were taken by her, unless otherwise credited.
This work is supported by:
Crop Protection and Pest Management -Extension Implementation Program Area grant no. 2017-70006-27142/project accession no. 1014000, from the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets