• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Search Projects
  • Help
  • Log in

Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education

Grants And Education To Advance Innovations In Sustainable Agriculture
  • Grants
  • Project Reports
    • Search Projects
    • Search Project Coordinators
  • Learning Center
  • SARE In Your State
  • Events
  • Newsroom
  • About SARE

Final Report for FNE96-143

Broad Based Organic Control of Cranberry Fruit Worm

FNE96-143 (project overview)
Project Type: Farmer
Funds awarded in 1996: $2,950.00
Projected End Date: 12/31/1997
Region: Northeast
State: Maine
Project Leader:
Michael McFarlane
Expand All Collapse All

Project Information

Summary:

Note to readers, attached is the complete final report for FNE96-143

The cranberry fruitworm (Acrobasis vacinii Riley) is a serious and chronic pest on cranberry bogs. Mr. Macfarlane, who grows cranberries organically, used his SARE grant to explore various non-chemical means of controlling this insect. He tried 1) establishing habitats for creatures such as bats, toads, and salamanders, that prey upon A. vacinii, 2) catching these insects in moth traps, 3) releasing wasps that parasitize the eggs of A. vacinii, 4) applying Bacillus thuringiensis, 5) planting dill, cilantro, and garlic as natural repellents, 6) emplacing bug “zappers” baited with cranberry vine, and screened to exclude birds, and 7) covering sections of the bog with plastic, thereby raising temperatures to induce early emergence from the pupal stage. Sticky traps were placed under the plastic to catch the adults as they emerged.

Mr. Macfarlane’s results are both surprising and instructive. The most effective treatment was the last, but not for the reason postulated. While emerging adults evaded the sticky traps and escaped easily through vents in the plastic, they did not readily return through these vents to lay their eggs. Mr. Macfarlane lost only 2% of the berries under the plastic to cranberry fruitworm, while outside the covering loss was on the order of 12%. His efforts at habitat establishment were successful in the case of frogs and toads, but he was not able to draw bats or salamanders. Of the insect-repellent plants he was able to establish only garlic, but crop loss remained high in this area anyway. The other treatments were either ineffective or, in the case of the bug zappers and moth traps, which caught only beneficial insects, actually detrimental.

  • FNE96-143 Final Report

Cooperators

Click linked name(s) to expand
Don Mairs
Techincal Advisor
23 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333
Return to Project Overview
Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Agriculture or SARE.

Primary Sidebar

Footer

SARE - Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education USDA
1122 Patapsco Building | University of Maryland | College Park, MD 20742-6715

This site is maintained by SARE Outreach for the SARE program and features research projects supported by the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture. SARE Outreach operates under cooperative agreement award No. 2018-38640-28731 with the University of Maryland to develop and disseminate information about sustainable agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education © 2019
Help | Contact us