Ortho� Flower, Fruit & Vegetable uses Acetamiprid. It is rated for apple peaches and plums and other stuff.
Any thought how this compares with Triazicide?
Description : ACETAMIPRID is a systemic insecticide with contact and stomach action. It belongs to new class of neonicotinoide insecticide. It is used to control sucking pests including hoppers, aphids, thrips and whitefly on a wide range of crops, especially cotton, vegetables, fruits and tea.
gator_rider2 developed in China or made in china?
http://www.gharda.com/company_profile.html This where developed. The supply to USA comes from china.
Universities test the efficacy of crop protectants against one another. Research of this sort isn't always in complete harmony, but it seems to be fairly consistent overall.
The 2012 Midwest Spray Guide lists Proaxis (same active ingredient as Triazicide) control of the major pests PC, Codling moth, OFM, and apple maggot as follows:
Good, Excellent, Good, Good - respectively
Assail (same a.i. as Ortho Flower, Fruit, Veg. insecticide) is rated:
Good, Excellent, Excellent, Good
As you can see they both give comparable control, but Triazicide is cheaper.
I use a pyrethroid similar to Triazicide and also use Assail. Both give good control of major pests for me.
Here is a link that might be useful: Link to 2012 Midwest Spray Guide
Please, please please guys dont use this. If you study all the research done on it, you will see that it is a potent neurotoxin , more damaging to the young and possibly with permanent effects. The US is ignoring this research and keeps quoting poor incomplete studies done years ago. Not to mention it is toxic to the liver etc. And if you study the logic used to set limits, etc. you will be appalled. Also remember that if you spray on your property, it will go onto your neighbors, so DONT DO IT! Here is a link to one study that just came out, as an example:
Here is a link that might be useful: Japanese study on neurotoxicty of acetaminiprid
I have talked with commercial orchardists in WI who use Asail with good results. However, I am hesitant to switch to it being systemic. I hear the neonicotinoides are being banned in europe as they claim too dangerous to bee populations?
Of course, we know better than to spray insecticides when our fruit trees are in bloom. However, I am geeting great
results with Imidan 70 so I will stick with it as long as I
can buy it.
I will drop Acetamiprid off my list for sure.
"The US is ignoring this research and keeps quoting poor incomplete studies done years ago."
I doubt you and I would ever agree on pesticide risk assessment because we have a fundamental difference in the information we trust.
You have a distrust of the EPA, whereas in many cases I believe the EPA to be overly regulatory largely because of enormous pressure from environmental groups. These groups constantly bring lawsuits against the federal gov (EPA) to remove pesticides. They scrutinize every aspect of the research to try to find something to cast doubt on the margin of safety. As a result, it's not unusual for the EPA to require the maker to re-register a pesticide and provide more research because there was some minor technicality not covered in the first research. This costs the manufacturer 10s of millions of dollars. Many times the company will forgo the re-registration because of the cost, and instead voluntarily withdrawal their registration rather than fight it.
Regarding Acetamiprid, I am very familiar with the type of studies you link. There are similar studies on any pesticide. The reason for this is that any pesticide is harmful to humans at some dose. Even natural (organic) ones are harmful. People have been hospitalized for spraying sulfur. The study is not at all surprising to me, since nicotine causes the same effects, and acetamiprid is basically synthetic nicotine.
If you look up just about any common pesticide on pesticideinfo.org you will find they list it as a carcinogen, has mutagenic effects, endoctrine disruptor, ect. I'm not saying they present the whole picture. They are run by Pesticide Action Network, a group that wants to ban pesticides, including acetamiprid. I'm just saying the same arguments used against acetamiprid can be used against virtually any pesticide.
Of course almost any substance can be harmful at some dose. Gasoline is listed as a carcinogen, however most people don't use gloves when pumping their gas. Similarly most people don't use a respirator when operating their riding mower or weedeater, even though they are breathing dangerous carbon monoxide and a host of dangerous hydrocarbons. Oven cleaner, spray paint, even toothpastes are dangerous substances at some level of exposure.
Just because a substance is listed as harmful to vertebrates doesn't automatically mean it needs to be banned. Paracelsus, the "father" of modern toxicology (1493-1541) discovered an important point in this regard, "all substances are poisons, there is none that is not. It's the dose that makes the difference."
Most current pesticides have an extremely low level of risk to consumers because the maximum allowable reside is so low (1.2 ppm for acetmiprid). Most people don't realize just how minute that number is.
There is much more risk to applicators, because exposure is much higher. We (applicators) are the canaries in the coal mines.
I am aware that many countries in Europe have banned some neonics. I'm also aware that the ban has been in effect for the last few years and according to the last info. I read, the ban has done nothing to reduce colony collapse disorder.
I'm not saying there is no risk to honey bees. The concern is because it's systemic, it can be present in pollen, even though an application of the pesticide was not made during bloom. To me a solution to this problem is to prohibit applications before bloom if it's demonstrated to harm bees at the dosage in the pollen.
The systemic nature of the compound does have advantages. Because it is absorbed into plant tissues, it is safer for beneficial insects that land on the foliage.
The EPA lists acetamiprid as a reduced-risk pesticide precisely because it offers a higher margin of safety for humans and the environment. It's much safer than organophosphates like Imidan. BTW, there was a study a few years ago suggesting phosmet (Imidan) was linked to ADD in children. There were flaws in the study, but it made big news.
Have you read this article about neonicotinoids?
The research seems pretty solid. Personally, I'm not using neonics. I used a very small amt last year on a few fruit to test the curative effect of fruit that had been hit by PC and it did "cure" them, but I really don't want to be using some chemical that can sit around for YEARS before breaking down. For what I understand and have read, for humans neonics are pretty safe (compared to organophosphates).
The problem I'm seeing is we are running out options if the EPA or whoever keeps removing pesticides from the market.
I may have missed it, but the link you posted was specifically about Imidacloprid. I don't use Imidacloprid but looked up the enviromental fate. It lasts about the same as Lorsban, and degrades faster than Brigade (bifenthrin).
This doesn't tell the whole story. For example, Lorsban is used at a greater rate than, say, Assail (by a factor of ten) so there is much more Lorsban left over after a half-life vs. Assail. The older pesticides like organophosphates are used at rates of lbs./acre vs. the newer compounds used at ounces/acre.
Nicotine has been used as an insecticide for 100 years (i.e. blackleaf 40) and is dangerous. Neonics have a considerably higher margin of safety. They're a good advancement in technology. I'm trying to avoid organophosphates. To remove neonics would force me to use older more dangerous compounds.
I maintain the same rationale used to argue against neonics can be used to argue against just about any pesticide.
Where's the like button for Olpea?
That is just it. I feel squeezed on what I can use now. I'm basically stuck with pyrethroids...which is all I'll use this year.
I used Thiamethoxam last year.
Here's an interesting tidbit:
"Nitroguanidine derivatives are used as insecticides, having a comparable effect to nicotine. Derivatives include clothianidin, dinotefuran, imidacloprid, and thiamethoxam."
So neonics come from $hit!
"That is just it. I feel squeezed on what I can use now. I'm basically stuck with pyrethroids...which is all I'll use this year."
I completely agree Frank. It's long been a disappointment of mine that there are so few choices for backyard orchardists. There is a big push for local food and it doesn't get more local than growing one's own food. Homeowners need the tools to do that.
Thanks Missa and Glenn for the kind compliment:-)
Olpea, I'm tossing in my two thumb's up for your scholarly comment. None of us want to use any more or toxic insecticides than we have to. Remember, we are ALL eating our own fruit. I think it's very important to really read the studies, especially if they've been replicated elsewhere and outcomes are similar, as well as the funding source for the study. I'm an RN and work in the pharma support industry, and spend a large part of my time reading and interpreting clinical studies. Thank you for your very erudite comments.
And according to this study, we canaries are doing much better than the general public, health-wise, in spite of multiple exposures to known carcinogens.
I believe fear of pesticides is a kind of social hysteria based on displaced anxiety, at least initially. Now it survives on media momentum.
To me, the issue is more environmental than health and in the context of small plantings of fruit trees there is so much buffer and so little material being used that growers should make their decisions based on convenience, price and efficacy.
Way I see it, if you want to help save the environment, don't have more than a child or two and don't buy so much sht. Of course this would sink the economy- but you can't have everything.
Olpea you are very close on the ppm thing. Army core and envrios were setting up a dredge job in FL. The spec called for not more than a 29 ppm diff up stream and down stream of the dredge. After we got up off the floor from LOL we took the core on a drift down the water way. Before the dredge was on site the samples were more than 100 ppm in the mile channel. The answer from the core was we don't want to SEE more than 29 ppm.
April 17th 1971 I was in the clean march in Hartford Conn. Now I have changed my mind a little. I have 2 kids, they are married to 2 people who are from 1 child homes, I have 3 grand kids (1 is still tube fed at 6 yo). All the family histories show us living into our 90's. We are not poor but we take care of our own, No nursing homes. I just can't think of my 2 smart grand kids taking care of 6 grand parents. At thanksgiving we joke about how we have to build a house while we still can with cages in the cellar we can get food pushed under the door , and a warm hose bath on the weekend. Don't go nuts on this it has been a joke in our family for 80 years. When you spanked me when I was 6 I will wait till you are 90 for pay backs.
My grandma "Red" was in her mid 80s when the doctor said she "HAD" to have heart surgery. She had a stroke on the operating table (most likely stress) and ended up dying shortly thereafter. She was a chain smoking alcoholic ... These days I think diet/lack of exercise (video games, fast food, power everything) is killing us, not so much the chemicals, although avoidance is still preferred in my opinion...I rarely buy organic, although I will spend the money on grass fed meat because I'm not a fan of factory farming.
In the case of these neonics, its more the fact that they are systematics and if you are like me and grow flowers near your fruit trees (don't worry, they are far from blooming), when I spray the pesticides land all over them..if the plant takes up that chemical and it is present when the plant flowers ...probably not a good situation when the bumblee lands to collect nectar/pollen.
That is where i'm coming from...from a human health perspective, they look a he** of a lot safer then something like Phosmet.
I'm coming from a bee perspective, and there's too much implication of the entire class of neonicotinoides. No bees, no fruits.
Olpea! Well done. There isn't a day that goes by that I do not learn something new and useful from this forum. Your research is very helpful. Thank you, Mrs. G