Final report for ONC24-155
Project Information
Pest management and pollinator conservation are two perennial concerns in many specialty crop systems that are challenging to balance. Cucurbit crops such as squash, melons, and pumpkin are impacted by several severe insect pests, yet rely on insect pollination. A management system involving the use of full-season row covers used in concert with the behavior of native cucurbit bees, Peponapis pruinosa, has been explored experimentally and demonstrated as an effective way to produce yields with little to no insecticide usage (Minter and Bessin 2014). While the impact would provide economic, environmental, and societal benefits from reduction of chemical inputs, adoption by producers has not yet occurred. While the results have been published in academic writing and described in limited audience presentation settings, on-farm demonstrations under various conditions would be key to expanded adoption.
This project aims to increase adoption of season-long row covers in diverse cucurbit production farms by partnering with Ohio farmers to explore ways to adapt the approach on a variety of farm settings and management considerations. This will allow for expanded communication as well through field events, printed extension literature, and electronic media to be produced with input and direct involvement of agriculture professionals and partner farmers.
The specific aims of this project are to investigate and demonstrate the applicability of management tactics of using season-long row covers in cucurbit production through active partnership of agricultural professionals and production growers by:
- Providing active involvement and direct observation opportunities to farmers on their operations.
- Collecting economic return data from production farms in Appalachian and northwestern Ohio to extrapolate to the North Central region.
- Highlighting yield and input savings to interested parties though various modes of active and passive communication.
- Dissemination of knowledge through demonstration and direct education, print, and digital media.
Cooperators
- (Researcher)
- (Researcher)
- (Researcher)
- (Researcher)
- (Researcher)
Research
Plots generally consisted of three rows of winter squash, each 50 ft long which were either covered with lightweight mesh row covers (ProtekNet) supported by 3 ft tall hoops, polypropylene fabric (Remay) row covers supported by 18 in tall wire hoops, or left open as controls. Further, the row middles were either treated with pre-emergent herbicides or seeded with Teff grass, Eragrostis tef, as a weed suppressing cover. No fungicides or insecticides were used at OSU South Centers, partner farms which are Organic, or on any covered plots, but conventional l growers and NCARS sprayed open plots as typical for their operations. One grower attempted to use the system in a high tunnel with melons, but due to the rapid growth of plants outpacing native bee phenology, this study was suspended. One farm used slightly different overall plot dimensions due to bed making equipment, but bee stocking density and yield was standardized to allow comparison.
At flowering, 25 native cucurbit bees, Eucera (Peponapis) pruinosa, were captured from nearby cucurbit fields while resting in closed flowers and transferred to a plastic bag. Any bycatch cucumber beetles were destroyed prior to released into each covered plot beneath the row covers.
All fruit were harvested and graded according to USDA standards.
Plant growth under the row covers was observed to be quicker and more vigorous, especially in early season. Squash bugs and cucumber beetles were often observed on the outside of the covers, unable to access the plants. Pollination by released squash bees under the covers appeared to be very good and evidence of nesting was observed. Powdery mildew and sunscald appeared to be less impact to plants under the covers. Results of plots covered with Remay and low hoops not reported here or included in statistical analysis.
Row covers generally worked well to keep pests from entering fields; Teff provided good weed suppression. Pollination appeared very good under covers using released squash bees. Plant growth and canopy establishment was much quicker under the row covers. Despite spaying of open plots, marketable yields were either not distinguishable or lower than those under covers. On organic partner farms, some varieties only produced marketable yields under this system.
Educational & Outreach Activities
Participation summary:
During the growing season, regular tours offered at OSU research station highlighted the project and discussed the on-farm components. Reports of all project activities in both years were generated and published in the new ePLUS report, which is written for applied, grower audiences and available online and in print. Presentations of the data have also been made at commodity meetings in the fall and winter season in 2025 and 2026. Two applied workshops which included demonstration tours and hands-on components were conducted during each growing season. Efforts are underway to release an additional instructional video, factsheet guide, conference presentation, and two drafted journal publications.
Learning Outcomes
Use of row cover in pest exclusion
Understanding of native pollinators
Project Outcomes
The growers who participated have indicated they are encouraged by the results as it helps reduce pesticide cost, protects natural enemies and other beneficial on their farms, and reduces their exposure to chemicals and potential of chemical residue on produce. Other farmers have reached out to ask about participating this year on their farms to adopt the practices. This point was emphasized by the fact that three of the prior participants and two of their neighbors/ collogues aided in development of a follow-up SARE partnership proposal to expand and continue the research. Sadly, the proposal was not funded with the primary concern expressed in reviewer comments being a presumed lack of research experience from the partners. However, at least three of these growers have indicated their intent to continue utilizing the practice and making tweaks on their own.
A partner vegetable farmer in northern Ohio said, "I have long been fascinated by new and innovative farming practices and the research that has led to them. The opportunity for my family and farm to be active participants in one such study has been both exciting and rewarding." Further, "I can’t tell you, how many customers I’ve told about it. I’ve explained the experiment, shown pictures and even brought people back to see it in person. Several people have bought squash just this past week because they wanted to have something that came out of it! Including a well known children’s author and his daughter, who would like to be a scientist someday! It has been a great privilege to be involved with this."
Following a successful season on an Athens county farm, a neighbor inquired about wanting to participate in future research, if funded. This indicates an appetite for application of the method based on farmers seeing and hearing about success from their peers.
As mentioned, the growers and their peers would very much like to continue this work to further fine-tune and adapt the method to more specialized operations if funding could support doing so.
Information Products
- Season-long Row covers for squash (Pike, Highland, Sandusky counties)
- Season-long Row Covers for Squash (Morrow County)
- Season-long Row Covers for Melons
- Will Squash Bees Pollinate Melons?
- Using season-long row covers for winter squash
- Season-long row covers and squash varieties
- Season-long row cover potential for melons