January 2005

Pesticide Potpourri

  • wpdoc12.gifXanthomonas axonopodis pv. citri is the plant-pathogenic bacterium that causes citrus canker. Due to the threat posed to the Florida citrus industry by the disease, an eradication program has been instigated. A recent USDA study examined the effect of wind-blown rain on dispersal of the pathogen. Their data show that citrus canker bacteria are readily dispersed in wind-driven rain. They are produced in large quantities immediately after the stimulus for dispersal occurs, are dispersed over a prolonged period, and can be blown a substantial distance in the splash. This combined action of wind and rain has ramifications for the spread of the disease, likely leading to infection of susceptible citrus in rainstorm events. (Plant Disease online, January 2005)
  • Based on a draft EPA notice, the agency will consider industry and other third-party research involving the intentional dosing of human subjects. The notice will serve as guidance for a policy that will probably take many years to complete. The policy will rely on the “Common Rule” - a set of ethical guidelines, and the Agency suggests that researchers submit proposed protocols to the EPA prior to conducting them. (Chemical Regulation Reporter, 12/6/04).
  • wpdoc13.gifThe European Commission has asked a regulatory committee made up of EU members to back a proposal forcing Austria, Denmark, Germany, Greece, and Luxembourg to rescind their national restrictions on bioengineered products. These five nations had invoked the “safeguard” clause, which allows individual members to ban an EU-approved product if there is new evidence of risk, even though none of the five presented any “new” evidence. The Commission now wants the other 20 member nations to support its efforts to end the restrictions - but they refused. The whole morass may well end up in the European Court of Justice. (Pesticide & Toxic Chemical News, 12/6/04 & 12/13/04).
  • wpdoc14.gifWith final Japanese approvals now in place, Monsanto plans to offer herbicide- and insect-resistant “triple stack” corn varieties to Midwest growers in 2005. The St. Louis-based company received Japanese environmental approval late in November for YieldGard Plus® with Roundup Ready 2 corn. The product, which provides Roundup® herbicide tolerance and resistance to both Western and Northern rootworm larvae and the European corn borer, is the industry’s first commercial triple-trait offering. Monsanto already had obtained Japanese food and feed approvals and all U.S. clearances, but environmental clearance was necessary for the company to release the triple-stack product in the U.S. (Farmweek, 12/14/04).
  • ole.gifFor the daring few Spaniards, planting GM corn in the EU is profitable. Economists of the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven in Belgium presented a bio-economic model constructed to estimate the impact of B.t. maize adoption in Spain. Spain provides 11 percent of the EU’s corn grain, and is the only country in the Union where transgenic crops are currently grown by farmers. During the 6-year period from 1998-2003, a total gain of 15.5 million euros was estimated from its adoption, of which Spanish farmers captured two thirds, the rest accruing to the seed industry. (Crop Biotech Update, 12/17/04).
  • wpdoc15.gifVermont became the first state in the nation to pass a law requiring the labeling of all genetically modified seeds. Now activists are rearming with a salvo of new bills in the upcoming legislative session to temporarily halt the use of genetically modified crops on Vermont farmland. Jim Molton, an organizing member of GE-Free Vermont, was quoted as saying, "Personally, while I care about farmer information, my focus is on a moratorium,” referring to his group’s focus. “In a broad context, we in Vermont are leading on this issue, so yes, passing unique [seed-labeling] legislation was very important. …… but as far as where it fits in the list of priorities, it’s down the list, and in my view it’s the least we could do.” But Vermont Agriculture Secretary Steve Kerr was cited as saying the Douglas administration’s opposition to such a move has not wavered. The preponderance of scientific opinion is that current GMOs pose no greater risk than traditionally hybridized crops. Because of that, he said, a moratorium could be legally indefensible. The secretary pointed to Vermont’s unsuccessful battle in the U.S. Second Circuit Court in the 1990s, when the state challenged the ban on labeling milk produced with bovine somatotropin (BST), a supplemental growth hormone for dairy cows. The court rejected Vermont’s arguments, ruling that there was no evidence to suggest that BST was unsafe. (Vermont Guardian, 12/28/04).
  • wpdoc16.gifA recent Plant Health Progress bulletin reported widespread occurrence of strobilurin-resistant gummy stem blight in Georgia watermelon fields. Fields and transplant houses were sampled in 2001 and 2002. Of the 272 isolates collected in 2001, 247 (91 percent) were resistant to azoxystrobin. In 2002, 82 percent of the isolates were resistant to azoxystrobin. Of the 40 isolates from watermelon transplants, 39 were positive for resistance. These results lead Georgia researchers to believe that resistant isolates in the field may have originated from seed or transplants and they are now advising their growers to avoid this class of fungicide (as well as strobilurins mixed with boscalid). (Plant Health Progress, 12/7/04).
  • wpdoc17.gifIn a story much different than above, communication with Dr. David Schuster has revealed that sensitivity quotients for nicotinoid-resistant whitefly are the lowest yet observed, supporting the concept that resistance management is feasible for this pest. Congratulations and keep up the good work! (Dr. D. Schuster, 1/5/05).
  • wpdoc18.gifAnd lastly, public health managers outside of Houston must deal with mosquito populations that are becoming resistant to resmethrin, and have historical resistance to malathion, although malathion is currently effective. The manager’s biggest complaint is that in some subdivisions of his county, private contractors spray for these pests at costs less than the material alone (obviously using substantially less than the label suggests). Although not illegal, this practice hastens resistance development. One manager would like to see a minimum rate placed on the label. (Pesticide & Toxic Chemical News, 11/22/04).

Back to Menu

Pesticide Information Office Main Menu