Progress report for LNE19-385R

Sustainable Management of Fire Blight in Apples using Plant Growth Regulators and Plant Defense Activators

Project Type: Research Only
Funds awarded in 2019: $118,125.00
Projected End Date: 04/30/2022
Grant Recipient: Cornell University
Region: Northeast
State: New York
Project Leader:
Kerik Cox
Cornell University
Expand All

Project Information

Project Objective:

The objective of this work is to optimize use of the plant growth regulator, prohexadione calcium, natural plant defense activators, and biological antimicrobials to manage the bacterial disease fire blight (Erwinia amylovora) expressing both as blossom and shoot blight, without the use of antibiotics or compromising tree productivity. To achieve transition to practice, trials demonstrating both disease management and unhindered tree performance will be needed for regionally important cultivars.

Cooperators

Click linked name(s) to expand
  • Dr. Terence Bradshaw (Educator and Researcher)
  • Chris Carballeiro
  • Scott Palmer (Researcher)
  • Tom DeMarree

Research

Hypothesis:

We hypothesize that the novel fire blight management programs tested here, including prohexadione calcium, plant defense activators, and biological products, can provide sustainable fire blight control for commercial productions, without negative impact to tree productivity or performance. Specifically, we predict that prohexadione calcium applied pre-bloom at low doses can control blossom and shoot blight, without reducing tree vigor. Biological materials may provide additional protection by outcompeting the pathogen at the point of primary infection. Plant defense activators prime host defenses, making them less susceptible to infection. These programs would offer an alternative to the currently accepted form of control, antibiotics.

Materials and methods:

In the first two years of this project, we evaluated several management programs for the management of fire blight using the plant growth regulator prohexadione-calcium (PhCa), trade name Apogee (BASF), plant defense activators, and other biopesticides.

Research Sites

Field trials were conducted at two research sites in the Northeast, with a mature semi-dwarf block and a young high-density block in each location (for a total of four orchard blocks):

  1. Cornell AgriTech Research Orchards
  • A mature planting of ‘Gala’ apples on B.9 rootstock, established 2000 (year 1)
    Or a mature planting of ‘Empire’ apples on B.9 rootstock, established 2000 (year 2)
  • A young planting of ‘NY-1’ apples on G.935 rootstock, established 2017

 

  1. University of Vermont Horticultural Research Farm
  • A mature planting of ‘Crimson Crisp’ and ‘Topaz’ apples, established 2017
  • A young planting of ‘Macoun’ apples on G.41, rootstock established 2017

 

Methods

In each orchard, a randomized complete block design was established with four replications; an experimental unit consisted of a single tree in mature blocks or panel of several trees in young blocks. Materials and experimental treatments are summarized in Tables 1-3 below. Treatments were slightly modified from those initially proposed; changes were made based on discussions with advisory board, the opportunity to inoculate fields, and limitations of tree number and ability to visit remote field site regularly. In addition, orchard blocks received slightly different treatments, as noted in the treatment table, due to limited number of trees at some sites. At most sites, treatments were applied to the same trees in subsequent years in order to evaluate the cumulative effects on horticultural characteristics. In the mature orchard trial at Cornell AgriTech, a different block of trees was used in the second year in order to evaluate the effects of treatments on disease control for different cultivars.

PhCa has been recommended for shoot blight management since it was registered for use as a plant growth regulator for tree fruit in 1999. However, disease control is correlated with reduction in shoot growth. In trials conducted at Cornell AgriTech from 2016-2018 in a bearing semi-dwarf block, we have seen promising results using PhCa at lower rates applied pre-bloom for management of blossom and shoot blight, without shoot growth reduction. Therefore, we and the advisory board were most interested in evaluating the most promising programs in multiple site and in plantings of different ages. Specifically, PhCa was used alone pre-bloom (at pink or tight cluster, ~1 or 2 weeks pre-bloom, respectively) at two different rates (3 and 6oz/100gal), reflecting lower rates than would be used for shoot growth reduction or post-bloom fire blight control. We also evaluated in combination with another products. These combinations included Actigard (acibenzolar-methyl) or Rampart (a phosphite fungicide), both of which act by inducing plant defenses and have been effective in other fire blight trials. In addition, we evaluated Regalia, a plant defense inducer whose active ingredient is a plant extract produced from Reynoutria sachalinensis. This material has also has been a top performer in our research trials at Cornell AgriTech over the past few years.

Table 1. Trade Names of Commercial Products used in Trials

Trade Name (Company)

Active ingredient

Type

Apogee
(BASF)

Prohexadione calcium

Plant growth regulator

Regalia CG
(Marrone BioInnovations)

Reynoutria extract

Plant defense activator

Actigard
(Syngenta)

Acibenzolar-S-methyl

Plant defense activator

Rampart
(Loveland)

Phosphite fungicide

Plant defense activator

Magna Bon CS 2005
(Magna Bon Agricultural Solutions)

Copper sulfate pentahydrate

Adjuvant applied with Regalia 

Table 2. Experimental Fire Blight Management Programs – Mature Orchards

Abbreviation

Treatment

Rationale

Untreated

Untreated

Control

Strep*

FireWall17 24oz @ bloom

Grower standard

Strep + PhCa PB

FireWall17 24oz @ bloom,
Apogee 6oz/100gal @ petal fall and 2wks later

Grower standard, negative control for reduced shoot growth

PhCa TC 3oz**

Apogee 3oz/100gal @ tight cluster

PGR low rate, ~2 weeks pre-bloom

PhCa TC 6oz**

Apogee 6oz/100gal @ tight cluster

PGR high rate, ~2 weeks pre-bloom

PhCa Pink 3oz

Apogee 3oz/100gal @ pink

PGR low rate, ~1 week pre-bloom

PhCa Pink 6oz

Apogee 6oz/100gal @ pink

PGR high rate, ~1 week pre-bloom

Regalia

Regalia 32floz
+ Magna Bon CS 2500 @ pink, bloom

Plant defense activator

PhCa + Actigard*

Actigard 1oz/100gal
+ Apogee 2oz/100gal @ pink, petal fall

Plant defense activator
+ PGR

PhCa + Phosphite*

Rampart 64floz/100gal
+ Apogee 3oz/100gal @ pink

Plant defense activator
+ PGR

 

Table 3. Experimental Fire Blight Management Programs – Young Orchards

Abbreviation

Treatment

Rationale

Untreated

Untreated

Control

Strep + PhCa PB*

FireWall17 24oz @ bloom,
Apogee 6oz/100gal @ petal fall and 2wks later

Grower standard, negative control for reduced shoot growth

PhCa 3oz

Apogee 3oz/100gal @ pink

PGR low rate

PhCa 6oz

Apogee 6oz/100gal @ pink

PGR high rate

PhCa 3oz + SO**

Apogee 3oz/100gal @ pink
+ Serenade Opti @ bloom

PGR low rate
+ biopesticide at bloom

PhCa 6oz + SO**

Apogee 6oz/100gal @ pink
+ Serenade Opti @ bloom

PGR high rate
+ biospestice at bloom

Regalia

Regalia 32floz
+ Magna Bon CS 2500 @ pink, bloom

Plant defense activator

PhCa + Actigard*

Actigard 1oz/100gal
+ Apogee 2oz/100gal @ pink, petal fall

Plant defense activator
+ PGR

PhCa + Phosphite*

Rampart 64floz/100gal
+ Apogee 3oz/100gal @ pink

Plant defense activator
+ PGR

PhCa Trickle**

Apogee 2oz/100gal @ pink, petal fall, and two weeks later

PGR ‘trickle’ program for duration of season

*Only included at University of Vermont
**Only included at Cornell AgriTech

 

To ensure adequate disease pressure under the most intense conditions, bearing blocks were inoculated at 80 to 90% bloom (May) with Erwinia amylovora strain Ea 273 at 1×10CFU ml-1 using a hand-pumped Solo backpack sprayer. Young blocks were not inoculated, so that treatments could be evaluated for effects on horticultural characteristics with low or absence of disease pressure. Applications were made using at the full field rates for apples according to label recommendations at the appropriate timings, using a SOLO 451 Backpack Mist Blower calibrated to output at 100 gal/A.

Data Collection

Disease management. To measure efficacy of programs for controlling fire blight (in mature orchard blocks only), blossom and shoot blight symptoms were assessed on blossom clusters and terminal shoots in July once symptoms were reliably detectable. For each of 4-6 replicate trees per treatment, 20 collections of five blossom clusters (number of blighted blossoms per cluster) and the percentage of blighted first year shoots were assessed.

Horticultural Impact. To assess potentially negative impacts on trees and crop, horticultural characteristics were measured. Shoot length, fruit number, fruit size, and fruit set per trunk cross sectional area (TCSA) were evaluated at two points in the season: once in mid-July at approximately terminal budset, the point at which trees stop putting on significant vegetative growth, and once mid-September at harvest when growth is concluded for the season. For each of 4-6 replicate trees per treatment, percent incidence of blossom and shoot blight was assessed for 20 blossom clusters (number of blossoms blighted of 5) or 20 first year shoots.

Disease incidence and host response data were subjected to analysis of variance (ANOVA) for a randomized block design using accepted statistical procedures and software (i.e. Generalized Linear Mixed Models (GLIMMIX)) procedure of SAS (version 9.4; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). All percentage data were subjected to arcsine square root transformation prior to analysis. In Year 2, data were analyzed with a linear mixed effects model using the ‘lmer’ command in lme4 package of R with treatment as main effect and replication as random effect (Bates et al. 2015). Analyses were carried out in R version 3.6.3 (R Core Team 2020).

 

 

Research results and discussion:

Year 1

Disease Management. At Cornell AgriTech, in the mature semi-dwarf block, the untreated trees experienced 88.1 ± 3.3 and 54.7 ± 5.4 % incidence of blossom and shoot blight respectively. All treatments experienced significantly less blossom and shoot blight (p < 0.0001, Table 4, Figure 1). Antibiotic programs performed the best with a mean of less than 5.7 ± 3.7 or 1.0 ± 1.0 % blossom and shoot blight respectively. The experimental treatments frequently provided similar (non-significantly different) levels of disease control as compared to antibiotic programs. Pre-bloom PhCa applications at both rates and timings experienced less than 20% or 10% blossom or shoot blight incidence respectively.

At University of Vermont in the mature orchards, treatments frequently had a significant effect on blossom blight incidence, although effects were not as great as at the Cornell AgriTech orchard (Figure 2, Table 4). The untreated trees experienced 64.0 ± 15.4 and 18.0 ± 10.0 (‘Crimson Crisp’) or 69.0 ± 10.0 and 13.3 ± 7.8 (‘Topaz’) percent incidence of blossom and shoot blight respectively. For ‘Crimson Crisp,’ only antibiotic programs experienced significantly less blossom blight than untreated trees, with a mean of 10.9 ± 5.2 % (p < 0.0001, Figure 2). For Topaz, all experimental programs had less blossom blight than the untreated trees (p < 0.0001, Figure 2). Antibiotics performed the best (19.2 ± 9.7 %), followed by Regalia (26.2 ± 5.6 %), and then by the pink PhCa programs, ranging from 39.5 to 44.5 % incidence. Shoot blight pressure was not adequate for either cultivar to draw conclusions about experimental treatments.

Horticultural Impact. At Cornell AgriTech in the mature semi-dwarf block, minimal differences were observed between treatments with regard to horticultural parameters (Table 4). There was a significant effect on shoot length at harvest (p < 0.0001, Figure 3). Post-bloom applications of PhCa reduced shoot length, as expected; tight cluster application of PhCa at the higher rate also reduced shoot length as compared to the untreated trees. Trunk size (p = 0.2851) and fruit size (p = 0.0730) were not impacted by treatments. Fruit number was influenced by treatment (p = 0.0096), with the tight cluster application of PhCa at the higher rate having the higher fruit number than the streptomycin application at bloom; however, neither were different than untreated trees. 

At University of Vermont in the mature semi-dwarf block, similarly, experimental treatments had a minimal impact on horticultural parameters (Tables 5 and 6). Shoot length at harvest was impacted for both ‘Crimson Crisp’ (p = 0.0023) and ‘Topaz’ (p = 0.0019). For ‘Crimson Crisp,’ the lower rate of PhCa at pink and the PhCa+Actigard treatments had shorter shoots than the untreated trees. For ‘Topaz’ the lower rate of PhCa at pink had longer shoots than the Regalia treatment, but neither were different than the untreated control. More importantly, shoot growth in this block (both varieties) was minimal due to low vigor (<20 cm of growth), and this data is likely not an accurate representation of whether that shoot length was compromised by treatments.   

At Cornell AgriTech in the young high-density planting, experimental treatments did not have an effect on any of the horticultural parameters (Table 7) evaluated including shoot length (p = 0.4071), trunk diameter (p = 0.2337), fruit number (p = 0.1207), and fruit size (p = 0.4217).

At University of Vermont in the young high-density planting, experimental treatments also did not have an effect on any of the horticultural parameters evaluated (Table 8), including shoot length (p = 0.3387), trunk diameter (p = 0.8405), fruit number (p = 0.1596), and fruit size (p = 0.5535).

 

Figure 1a. Blossom blight incidence in mature semi-dwarf ‘Gala’ block at Cornell AgriTech in 2019.
Figure 1b. Shoot blight incidence in mature semi-dwarf ‘Gala’ block at Cornell AgriTech in 2019.
Figure 2a. Blossom blight incidence in mature semi-dwarf ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard blocks at the University of Vermont in 2019.
Figure 2b. Blossom blight incidence in mature semi-dwarf ‘Topaz’ orchard blocks at the University of Vermont in 2019.
Figure 3. Shoot length in a mature, semi-dwarf ‘Gala’ block at Cornell AgriTech 2019
Table 4. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at Cornell AgriTech in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Gala’ orchard 2019
Table 5. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at University of Vermont in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard 2019
Table 6. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at University of Vermont in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Topaz’ orchard 2019
Table 7. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at Cornell AgriTech in a young high-density ‘NY-1’ orchard 2019
Table 8. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at University of Vermont in a young high-density ‘Macoun’ orchard 2019

Year 2

In year two, we observed very similar results compared to the first year’s evaluation.

Disease incidence. In the mature orchard at Cornell AgriTech, disease incidence in untreated control trees was 82.0 ± 6.4 and 42.6 ± 5.9 % incidence for blossom and shoot blight, respectively, indicating disease incidence was sufficient for reliable evaluation of treatments. Both blossom and shoot blight were significantly affected by treatments (Table 9). Blossom and shoot blight were both significantly lower for all treatments than Untreated trees (p < 0.0001). No difference was detected between other treatments. Disease incidence was always less than 30% and 13% for blossom and shoot blight respectively. In addition, no differences were detected between treatments for any of the horticultural parameters evaluated.

In the mature ‘Crimson Crisp’ and ‘Topaz’ orchards at University of Vermont, blossom blight incidence in the Untreated treatment was 84.4 ± 3.4 % and 60 ± 7.5 %, respectively, again indicating sufficient disease pressure for evaluation of treatments. In both orchards, disease incidence was significantly effected by treatment (Tables 10 and 11). Strep+PhCaPB was the most effective at reducing blossom blight in both orchards with 52.5 ±8.4 and 9.5 ± 4.0 % incidence, in respective orchards. In the ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard, only Strep+PhCaPB and PhCa+Actigard significantly reduced blossom blight compared to the Untreated treatment (p < 0.0001). In the ‘Topaz’ orchard, all the experimental fire blight programs successfully reduced blossom blight incidence (p = 0.0006). Shoot blight incidence was again very low in the Untreated treatment with 21.0 ± 4.3 % and 1.4 ± 1.1 % incidence in the ‘Crimson Crisp’ and ‘Topaz’ orchards, respectively. None of the experimental treatments resulted in significantly different shoot blight control than the Untreated trees (p = 0.2291 and 0.7334).

Horticultural Impact. In the mature ‘Empire’ orchard at Cornell AgriTech as well as the mature ‘Crimson Crisp’ and ‘Topaz’ orchards at University of Vermont, no significant effects were detected for any of the horticultural parameters that were evaluated (Tables 9-11, p > 0.05).

In the young, high-density plantings, minimal impact was observed on horticultural parameters at both Cornell AgriTech (Table 12) and at the University of Vermont (Table 13). In the ‘NY-1’ orchard at Cornell Agritech, shoot length was impacted in both July (p = 0.027) and September (p = 0.0012) measurements. In both cases, the PhCa Trickle program significantly reduced shoot length as compared to Regalia and PhCa 6oz in July and the Untreated trees at harvest. In the ‘Macoun’ orchard at University of Vermont, horticultural parameters were never impacted by treatments (p > 0.05).

Figure 4a. Blossom blight incidence for trees under fire blight management programs in mature semi-dwarf ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard at the University of Vermont 2020.
Figure 4b. Blossom blight incidence for trees under fire blight management programs in mature semi-dwarf ‘Topaz’ orchard at the University of Vermont 2020.
Table 9. Effect of fire blight management programs on fire blight disease incidence and horticultural parameters in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Empire’ orchard at Cornell AgriTech in 2020
Table 10. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at University of Vermont in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard 2020
Table 11. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at University of Vermont in a mature semi-dwarf ‘Topaz’ orchard 2020
Table 12. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at Cornell AgriTech in a young high-density orchard 2020
Table 13. Effect of fire blight management programs on disease and horticultural parameters at Cornell University of Vermont in a young high-density orchard 2020

 

Discussion

Regarding disease control, the results from the mature semi-dwarf block at Cornell AgriTech for all experimental treatments was promising. The disease management programs provided both blossom and shoot blight control comparable to antibiotic treatments, the current industry standard, and may be appropriate for commercial use. However, results from the UVM orchard for both varieties in the mature, semi-dwarf planting were less promising. None of them provided adequate disease control for blossom or shoot blight. However, several factors may be influencing results. This block was historically managed as organic and the soil is extremely sandy. Results from the 2019 season indicated that adequate tree vigor may be important for the PGR PhCa and/or plant defense inducers to be effective for fire blight management. In the second season of this trial, the fertilization program included increased nitrogen in order to maintain normal tree nutrition and tree growth. As a result, we saw slightly more shoot growth in 2020 than in 2019, and slightly better disease control. In the 2021 season, we will continue to maintain a higher nitrogen program, essential to tree growth and potentially the efficacy of PGR and plant defense inducers in fire blight control. In addition, greater disease control was observed for both 2019 and 2020 in the ‘Topaz’ orchard as compared to ‘Crimson Crisp’ orchard for many of the experimental treatments. Several factors may contribute to this difference including 1. ‘Topaz’ blooms slightly earlier and 2. the materials evaluated require time to activate host defense response. As a result, it is possible that specific timing of applications to phenology in advance enough may be important for providing disease control. Another explanation may be the differential host-resistance for specific varieties. Future seasons evaluating these treatments may elucidate patterns indicating whether phenology, cultivar, and or tree vigor and nutrition influence efficacy of these PGR and plant defense inducer treatments for fire blight disease management. The results from our first two seasons of trials indicate that there may be variability in the efficacy of PhCa and plant defense inducers for management of fire blight, with regard to region, cultivar, and/or tree vigor. These results, in combination with data from future seasons, are likely to be valuable for informing more nuanced recommendations for using PhCa and plant defense inducers to manage fire blight. 

Plant growth regulator and plant defense inducer programs had minimal effects on horticultural parameters in mature semi-dwarf plantings and they did not affect any of the measured parameters in the young high density plantings. The main exception we observed was for the post-bloom applications of PhCa, which in some cases slightly reduced shoot vigor. Where tree growth was impacted, it was minimal, typically on the order of 10 cm or less. This amount of growth reduction is likely not horticulturally significant, especially in a mature block of larger trees. There is more concern about shoot growth reduction for young, high-density trees, which are pushed to fill canopy space in the first 2-3 years of establishment. In the first two years of this work, young high-density blocks were not influenced by the experimental treatments. Treatments will be applied to the same trees in consecutive years in order to evaluate cumulative effects of these management programs. 

Overall, our results indicate that pre-bloom PhCa programs alone and in combination with plant defense inducer products (Actigard and a phosphite fungicide) may be effective fire blight management programs for mature semi-dwarf trees, and without negatively impacting tree growth or productivity. These results are consistent with our results in previous trials in a Gala semi-dwarf planting in Cornell AgriTech Research Orchards. These prohexadione-calcium programs offer promising alternatives to fire blight management using antibiotics.

Participation Summary
4 Farmers participating in research

Education & Outreach Activities and Participation Summary

30 Consultations
1 Journal articles
11 Published press articles, newsletters
12 Webinars / talks / presentations

Participation Summary

900 Farmers
75 Number of agricultural educator or service providers reached through education and outreach activities
Outreach description:

In the first two years of this project, our focus was to conduct research on these novel management programs for fire blight in commercial orchards. Results were communicated to apple producers and industry support personnel (university researchers, extension specialists, consultants) primarily though extension and scientific meetings, as well as a number of publications either featuring the work or including recommendations informed by our results. In addition, extension specialists in the region have incorporated results from this work into their recommendations given through direct communication with farmers as well as periodic newsletters such as the Lake Ontario Fruit Team Fruit Facts and Fruit Notes newsletters, the Eastern NY Commercial Horticulture Program (ENYCHP) Tree Fruit News and Apple e-alerts, and the University of Vermont Apple email listserv. In the future years, our efforts will include replicating the research in in a final field season, as well as outreach and education of stakeholder audience. In 2020, we had planned to research trials as stops in field meetings and tours, but due to COVID restrictions, we were forced to post-pone these efforts to future years. 

To date, the following activities and outreach has been conducted:

  • Presentations
    • Cox, K., and Wallis, A. 2020 LOFT Petal Fall Meeting. May 28. Zoom. (125 attendees)
    • Wallis, A. Managing fire blight with prohexadione-calcium. International Fruit Tree Association (IFTA) Annual Conference and Tour. Grand Rapids, MI. 2/10/2020. (200 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Managing fire blight with prohexadione-calcium. LOFT Winter Fruit School. Niagara, NY. 2/3/2020. (200 attendees)
    • Cox, K., and Wallis, A. 2020 NY State Producer’s Expo. Jan 13-14, Syracuse, NY. 1/14/2020. (179 participants)
    • Cox, K., and Wallis, A. 2020 Mid-Atlantic Fruit and Vegetable Convention. Jan 30, Hershey, PA. 1/28/2020. (312 participants).
    • Wallis, A. The use of prohexadione-calcium to manage fire blight without antibiotics. Cumberland Shenandoah Fruit Worker Conference. Winchester, VA. 12/5/2019 (50 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. The use of prohexadione-calcium to manage fire blight without antibiotics. ARDP Reporting Session. Geneva, NY. 11/21/2019 (20 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Managing fire blight with pre-bloom applications of prohexadione-calcium. Great Lakes Fruit Workers Conference. Simcoe, Ontario. 11/6 (75 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Managing fire blight with pre-bloom applications of prohexadione-calcium, on farm trials. PLPPM6820 Student Seminar. Geneva NY. 11/1/2019 (25 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Using prohexadione calcium to manage fire blight at novel rates and timings. Northwest Michigan Fire Blight Grower Meeting. Suttons Bay, MI. 6/17/19 (50 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Biocontrols for Managing Fire Blight. PLPPM6820 Student Seminar. Geneva NY. 5/3/2019 (25 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Evaluating Biocontrols for Managing Fire Blight in Eastern North America. BioControls USA West Conference and Expo. Portland, OR. 3/14/2019 (150 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. The use of prohexadione calcium to manage fire blight without antibiotics. ARDP Reporting Session. Geneva, NY. 12/4/2018 (20 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. The use of prohexadione calcium to manage fire blight without antibiotics. Cumberland Shenandoah Fruit Worker Conference. Winchester, VA. 11/29/2018 (50 attendees).
    • Wallis, A. Antibiotic Alternatives for Fire Blight: Evaluating prohexadione-calcium for apple production. Cornell AgriTech Symposium. Geneva, NY. 6/29/18 (100 attendees)
  •  
  • Peer-reviewed publication
    • Wallis, A. and Cox, K. 2020. Management of fire blight using pre-bloom application of prohexadione-calcium. Plant Disease. 104(4):1048-54
  • Extension and Popular Press Articles
    • van Zoeren, J., Wallis, A., Miranda Sazo, M., and Cox, K. (2020). Fire Blight Management Series (3 Parts). CCE LOFT Fruit Facts Special Series.
    • Wallis, A. and Cox. (2020). Fire Blight Survey FAQs. Scaffolds. 29(15): 5-6.
    • Wallis, A., Cox, C., and VanZoeren, J. (2020). Streptomycin Resistant Fire Blight in 2020. Scaffolds. 29(13): 3-4.
    • van Zoeren, J., Wallis, A., and Cox, K. Streptomycin resistant fire blight in NY in 2019: let’s keep our best tools sharp. Fruit Notes
    • Wallis, A., Carroll, J., Cox, K. (2020). Fire blight. [Fact sheet]. NYS Integrated Pest Management
    • Wallis, A., Cox, C., and Carroll, J. (2020). Managing Fire Blight in 2020. Scaffolds. 29(7): 3-7.
    • Wallis, A. and Cox, C. (2020) Prohexadione-calcium at Pink: A strategy for managing fire blight in apple orchards. Fruit Quarterly 28(1): 20-26.
    • Wallis, A., Cox, K. and Choi, M. (2019). Battling Fire Blight with Biologicals. Biocontrol Bytes. New York State Integrated Pest Management Program, Cornell University. Web, accessed 26 April 2019.
    • Wallis, A. (2019). What Comes Naturally: Battling Fire Blight with Biologicals. Scaffolds. 28(4): 9-11.
    • Robbins, J. 2019 Dec 2. Fire blight spreads northward, threatening apple orchards. The NY Times. Section D, Page 1. Available online: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/02/science/fire-blight-spreads-northward-threatening-apple-orchards.html
    • Flynn, E. 2020. Anna Wallis: Helping protect the health of New York state’s apples. Field Note Cornell AgriTech Graduate Student Spotlight. Available online: https://cals.cornell.edu/news/anna-wallis-helping-protect-health-new-york-states-apples
  •  

 

Planned outreach activities include:

  • Participation in field days:
    • 2021 Eastern NY Petal Fall Meeting 
    • 2021 Western NY Petal Fall Meeting
    • University of VT Field Day
    • ENYCHP and/or LOFT field days
  • Articles and Newsletters
    • Article for NY Fruit Quarterly
    • Plant Disease article (focus on high-density orchard trials)

Learning Outcomes

Key areas in which farmers reported changes in knowledge, attitude, skills and/or awareness:

Data will be collected at regional meetings this winter and in the future on knowledge, attitude, skills and awareness increase among participants.

Project Outcomes

1 Grant applied for that built upon this project
1 Grant received that built upon this project
$90,954.00 Dollar amount of grant received that built upon this project
4 New working collaborations
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.