; Pink Hibiscus mealybug conference call Regional IPM Centers
Learning Center
Plans & pricing Sign in
Sign Out
Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Pink Hibiscus mealybug conference call Regional IPM Centers


  • pg 1
									       Pink Hibiscus Mealybug Conference Call - 11 AM-1:00 PM, December 3, 2004

Conference call organizer: Robert Nowierski, USDA-CSREES, Washington, DC


Dan Barchert, USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Center for Plant Health Science and Technology
     (CPHST), Raleigh, NC
Deborah Bivens, USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Eastern Regional Office, Raleigh, NC
Luis Canas, Assistant Professor, Department of Entomology, Ohio State University, Wooster,
Dan Fieselmann, CPHST, USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Raleigh, NC
Ray Hammerschmidt, Professor and Chairperson, Department of Plant Pathology, Michigan
     State University, East Lansing, MI
Bill Kauffman, USDA-APHIS-PPQ, Western Regional Office, Fort Collins, CO
Dennis Kopp, National Program Leader for Entomology, USDA-CSREES, Washington, DC
Dale Meyerdirk, Pest Detection and Management Programs, (PDMP), USDA-APHIS-PPQ,
     Riverdale, MD
Robert Nowierski, National Program Leader for Bio-Based Pest Management, USDA-CSREES,
     Washington, DC
Larry Olsen, Co-Director, North Central Integrated Pest Management Center, Michigan State
     University, East Lansing, MI
Lance Osborne, Professor, University of Florida, Mid-Florida Research and Education Center,
     Apopka, FL
Bill Roltsch, California Department of Food and Agriculture, Sacramento, CA
Amy Roda, CPHST, USDA-APHIS-PPQ, South Miami, FL
Cliff Sadof, Professor, Department of Entomology, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN
Ron Stinner, Associate Director (Information Technology), Southern Region IPM Center,
     NCSU, Raleigh, NC
Steve Toth, Associate Director (Information Technology), Southern Region IPM Center, NCSU,
     Raleigh, NC
Jim VanKirk, Director, Southern Region IPM Center, North Carolina State University, Raleigh,

Welcome, introductory remarks, and objectives of conference call from Nowierski.
   Objectives: Discuss some short-term and long-term strategies to manage the pink
     hibiscus mealybug (PHM) to hopefully help avoid a national disaster


      900,000 hibiscus plants shipped from a plant nursery in Homestead, FL from January
       through July 2004 to various stores such as Wal-mart, Kmart, Home Depot, Lowe’s, etc.
       in 36 states in the U.S.
      A number of these plants were infested with PHM
      APHIS-PPQ is in the process of mapping the distribution of these Hibiscus plants to all
       the retail outlets throughout the U.S.; this information will be helpful in future planning
      According to the climate-matching models used, 17 states in the U.S. are climatically
       suitable for establishment of PHM (11 of these received hibiscus plant shipments from
      If infested plants were sent to retailers for propagation in the greenhouse PHM could
       persist in temperate climatic states as well
      PHM has been recorded on 300 different host plants including citrus, ornamentals, and
       vegetables; new host plant records are still being found
      PHM was found on hibiscus plants at garden centers in KS, LA, and NC; the hibiscus
       plants were destroyed

Potential Solution:

      Biological control, chemical control (neonicotinoids, etc.), sanitation, and other methods
      Nurseries have a zero tolerance for PHM because of interstate and export trade, hence
       chemical control will have to be emphasized in these settings
      Two effective encyrtid parasitoids have been used by Meyerdirk and others to
       successfully control PHM in Grenada, other Caribbean countries, the Bahamas, Belize,
       the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, California, and Florida
      These parasitoids will be mass-reared at insectaries in Puerto Rico, Florida, and
       California and will be made available to cooperators by APHIS-PPQ for release against
       PHM in spring and summer 2005; comment was made that parasite releases could take
       place in greenhouses over the winter if found early, to give the biocontrol practitioners a
       jump start in implementing biocontrol efforts against the PHM
      The question of hyperparasitoids was raised; Over the long-term, hyperparasitoid attack
       of these encyrtids have not reduced their over-all effectiveness; Meyerdirk has
       documented 95-99% reductions in PHM levels following parasitoid introductions at
       numerous release sites
      APHIS-PPQ has produced a 120 page manual for implementing a biological control
       program against PHM (the manual can be obtained electronically from Dale Meyerdirk)
      Visual monitoring has typically been used to detect PHM; a sex pheromone trap has been
       developed that will enhance PHM detection in the future
      Judy Brown, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, has used molecular genetic approaches
       to identify PHM; conceivably this could be used by the NPDN’s to identify PHM in the
      The importance of having long-term sites for monitoring the impact of natural enemies
       and other management strategies was discussed

Potential Game Plan:

      Successful management of PHM will require monitoring, detection, correct identification,
       and the implementation of management strategies (including natural enemy
       releases/monitoring of natural enemy impact, sanitation, chemical control, and other
      Nowierski discussed other educational training efforts that were used for sudden oak
       death (SOD) and soybean rust that could be used as models (this information was
        generously provided by Sue Ratcliffe, IPM Facilitator with the North Central IPM
        Center, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL)
           o For SOD, following a series of conference calls and training sessions a
               teleconference session took place which reached 731 people
           o A team of experts put together Power Point presentations and the accompanying
               audio, which reached all 731 people via the web; this was a very cost-effective
               approach, which compared to a workshop, required considerably less travel (as
               long as one had access to a computer, travel was unnecessary)
           o Master Gardener Coordinators, point contacts for each state, State Plant
               Regulatory Officers, university and federal agency people, IPM Centers, National
               Plant Diagnostic Networks, and others were involved in this effort
           o The teleconferencing session was followed by some state-specific
               teleconferencing sessions, training CD’s and pest alert pamphlets
           o A similar approach was used to provide early detection and rapid response
               training which could be used against soybean rust

       Ray Hammerschmidt (also the Director of the North Central National Plant Diagnostic
        Network) mentioned that training for PHM could be added to first detector and state
        diagnostic lab training that will still continue for SOD and soybean rust
       Ray also mentioned that the National Plant Diagnostic Networks (NPDN), located in
        regions with relatively little SOD activity, practiced load sharing for SOD samples to
        relieve diagnostic laboratory pressure from other NPDN’s; a similar approach could be
        used for PHM

Next Steps:

       PHM Steering Committee will be formed
       IPM Centers and NPDN’s in regions of U.S. potentially at greatest risk to PHM will
        participate on the PHM Steering Committee and will communicate appropriate
        information to other IPM Centers and NPDN’s
       Monthly conference calls will be held
       Teleconferencing Training Session will be planned for May 2005
       Short-term and long-term funding will be pursued
       A proposal will be developed for CSREES' Critical and Emerging Pests and Diseases
        Program to help fund the teleconferencing session for PHM, PHM training workshops*,
        educational CD’s, pest alert pamphlets, etc. The RFA requires that a pre-proposal be
        submitted (Nowierski, Lance Osborne, and Meyerdirk will take lead in developing a pre-
        proposal; Cliff Sadof, Luis Canas, Amy Roda**, Jim VanKirk, Sue Ratcliffe, Ray
        Hammerschmidt, Gail Wisler [Director of Southern Region NPDN/Professor and Head,
        Department of Plant Pathology, University of Florida/IFAS, Gainesville, FL] and
        additional administrators from the IPM Centers and NPDN’s will also provide input)

*Suggested by Lance Osborne and Amanda Hodges (Assistant in Extension Scientist, University of Florida,
 Entomology and Nematology Department, Gainesville, FL) subsequent to the PHM conference call.
**Amy Roda will be coordinating parasitoid releases against PHM. Hence, her name was added to the proposal
  participant list subsequent to the PHM conference call.

To top