California Polytechnic State University's (Cal Poly) learn-by-doing philosophy permeates all areas of the environmental horticultural science curriculum by combining an emphasis on the science of horticulture in lecture sessions and the opportunity to engage in activities similar to those used by industry in the lab activities integral in all courses. The course, Disease and Pest Control Systems in Ornamental Plants (EHS 427), has taken this philosophy a step further by using problem-based learning and allowing students to function as pest control advisors and qualified applicators in the class. This approach has resulted in greatly increased student understanding of pest control, improved student morale, and increased interest in integrated pest management careers and research projects.
Robert P. Rice Jr.
Laura Pickett Pottorff and Karen L. Panter
Integrated pest management (IPM) is an approach to managing pests that uses appropriate physical, cultural, biological, and chemical tactics that are safe, profitable, and environmentally compatible ( Thomas and Rajotte, 2004 ). Currently
Mary H. Meyer, Rhoda Burrows, Karen Jeannette, Celeste Welty, and Aaron R. Boyson
teaching MGs ( Meyer and Hanchek, 1997 ). MGs are encouraged to use integrated pest management (IPM) in their own gardening practices and in their educational outreach work. IPM is “a long-standing, science-based, decision-making process that identifies and
Boysie E. Day
The terms “integrated pest control,” “pest management,” and “integrated pest management” are used more or less interchangeably. They apply to the concept of dealing comprehensively and systematically with pest problems, taking into account all significant factors and variables.
Anthony LeBude, Amy Fulcher, Jean-Jacque Dubois, S. Kris Braman, Matthew Chappell, J.-H (J.C.) Chong, Jeffrey Derr, Nicole Gauthier, Frank Hale, William Klingeman, Gary Knox, Joseph Neal, and Alan Windham
instruction while in attendance at a workshop on horticultural management. Attendees completed the survey after attending the horticulture portion of the workshop ( n = 41). IPM = integrated pest management; EC = electrical conductivity. After each discipline
Amy Fulcher, Anthony LeBude, Sarah A. White, Matthew R. Chappell, S. Christopher Marble, J.-H (J.C.) Chong, Winston Dunwell, Frank Hale, William Klingeman, Gary Knox, Jeffrey Derr, S. Kris Braman, Nicole Ward Gauthier, Adam Dale, Francesca Peduto Hand, Jean Williams-Woodward, and Steve Frank
and quantity of Southern Nursery Integrated Pest Management working group deliverables and their percentage of overall working group effort. Financial support from the initial Southern Region IPM Center grant and the ensuing stakeholder needs
Karen A. Delahaut and Charles F. Koval
A Nursery Integrated Pest Management program was initiated in Wisconsin in 1991. From 1991 to 1993, the educational and monitoring program enhanced grower familiarity with the IPM concept, as well as provided detailed information on the pest problems common to woody landscape plants in Wisconsin. Educational features of the program include twilight seminars and winter workshops, a pest control guide that described the management strategies available for pests of woody landscape plants, and also statewide pest reporting and pest predictions.
Sidney L. Poe
An overview of integrated pest management (IPM) includes consideration of at least 4 major points. 1) What IPM is, its objectives and goals; 2) IPM history and evolution or why we have IPM; 3) how IPM is implemented and how it works today, and 4) IPM tomorrow. To provide more than a superficial coverage of these points is not possible; however, the serious student will want to begin with a study of the literature cited in this report. This treatise will relate mainly to IPM for plant communities; however, similar programs are underway for live stock, urban systems, aquatic systems and othe
S.K. Braman, J.G. Latimer, and C.D. Robacker
Questionnaires on pesticide use and other aspects of integrated pest management (IPM) were mailed to 1678 lawn care and landscape maintenance firms in the 20 county metropolitan Atlanta area. The survey return rate adjusted for nonapplicable addresses and undeliverable mailings was 25.4%, yielding a total of 350 usable surveys. Responding lawn care and landscape maintenance professionals purchased a total active ingredient of 250,527 lb (93,447 kg) of herbicide, 35,416 lb (13,210 kg) of insecticide and 10,367 lb (3,867 kg) of fungicide during 1993. Most insecticides and fungicides were applied during June, July, and August. About one-third of herbicides were applied during March to May, one-third during June to August, and one-third during September to February. Key pests and plants were identified by survey respondents. Opportunities and impediments to implementation of IPM in the landscape as reported by respondents are discussed.
Ellen M. Bauske, Geoffrey M. Zehnder, Edward J. Sikora, and Joseph Kemble
Multidisciplinary integrated pest management (IPM) teams from seven states in the southeastern United States (Alabama, North Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee) met to develop standards for adopting IPM in fresh-market tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum L.) production. Teams were composed of growers, private consultants, extension personnel, and faculty. IPM practices available for use on tomatoes in the southeastern United States were identified and a survey to assess the current level of adoption of IPM practices was developed. The survey also allowed growers to identify insect, disease, and production problems; beneficial technology and research developments; and other information relevant to IPM adoption. In northern Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, North Carolina, and South Carolina, IPM adoption by tomato growers was classified as medium or high on >75% of the fresh-market tomato acreage surveyed. It appears these states may have met the federal mandate for IPM adoption. Tomato producers listed early blight, late blight, bacterial spot, bacterial speck, and bacterial wilt as the main disease problems; tomato fruit worm, thrips, and aphids as the primary insect problems; and poor weather conditions, government regulation, and labor as their primary production problems. Twenty-six percent of the producers throughout the region felt that the development of insect- and disease-resistant varieties would be most helpful to increase production.