Cristina Carlos1, Fernando Alves1 , Laura Torres 2

1 ADVID- Associação para o Desenvolvimento da Viticultura Duriense

2 UTAD- Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro

Constraints to the application of

mating disruption against Lobesia botrana

in Douro Wine region

Douro Wine Region - Região Demarcada do Douro

Lower Corgo Upper Corgo Upper Douro

250 000 hectares (45 000 ha vineyards)

Structural organization of Douro region

Typical wine-farm is fragmented into plots of variable size, slope,

shape, orientation, and varieties

average surface / winegrower : 1,3 ha

Grapevine moth - Lobesia botrana Den & Schiff.

Key pest in Douro region

Variety highly susceptible - Touriga Franca: 22 % of Douro varieties

Damages

3rd generation often promotes Botrytis bunch rot

3 generations of larvae (sometimes 4, such as in 2009)

Current control measures

One to two sprays with insecticides are required annually (90 -180 € / ha)

• IGR (flufenoxuron, lufenuron, fenoxicarb, metoxifenozid)

Insecticides authorized in IPM in Portugal

• Bacillus thurigiensis, spinosade

Public pressure against the use of chemicals / marketing

led to search alternatives

• indoxacarb

Mating disruption technique

Isonet-L (Shin-Etsu dispensers):

172 mg (E,Z)-7,9-dodecadienyl acetate

(officially registred in Portugal since 2002)

Experimental trials in ADVID started in 2000

?

Mating disruption technique

Characterization of the experimental sites (2000-2009)

LSV (Landscape Systematization of Vineyards): VR-vertical rows; ST-small terraces; TV- traditional vines

2000 Seara d'ordens (SO) 4.0 VR 452-594 500 13-Mar

2001 “ 4.0 “ 452-594 500 19-Mar

2001 S. Luíz (SL) 3.0 ST 91-143 650 12-Mar

2002 “ 25.0 “ 91-241 560 19-Mar

2003 “ 15.0 “ 91-163 600 21-Mar

2004 “ 16.2 “ 91-163 560 12-Mar

2009 “ 82,07 ST, TV 91-373 610 17-Mar to 7-Mai

2005 Vallado (VAL) 11.8 ST 117-200 660 23-Mar

2006 “ 11.8 “ 117-200 700 21-Mar

2007 “ 19.7 “ 117-229 560 21-Mar

2008 “ 19,7 “ 117-229 570 21-Mar

2009 “ 19,7 “ 117-229 635 13-Mar

2006 Cidrô (CID) 15.2 VR 540-594 585 20-Mar

2007 “ 16.7 “ 540-594 600 20-Mar

2008 “ 15,2 “ 540-594 600 05-Mar

2009 “ 12,8 “ 540-594 690 20-Mar

2009 Ventozelo (VTZ) 13,1 VR 108-195 660 18-Mar

Year Wine-farm Area (ha) LSV* Altitude (m) Dispensers/ haDate of

installation

500-700/ha

Quinta Seara D’ordens (2000-2001)

Year Area (ha) LSV* Altitude (m) Dispensers/ ha Date of installation

2000 4.0 Vertical Rows 452-594 500 13-Mar

2001 4.0 “ “ 500 19-Mar

Quinta S. Luíz (2001-2004, 2009-2010)

Quinta Vallado (2005-2010)

Quinta Cidrô (2006-2009)

Quinta Ventozelo (2009)

Evaluation of the efficacy of MD

• Comparison between trap catches in MD / control plots

(loaded with 1 mg caps)

% male disorientation= (C – M)/(C) X 100

C- average males catches in control

M- average males catches in MD

Evaluation of the efficacy of MD

Evaluation of the efficacy of MD

• Comparison between levels of infestation in MD / control plots

1rst Gen. 2nd Gen. 3rd Gen.

100-200 damaged flower

clusters / 100 clusters

1-10 % infested

grape clusters

1-10 % infested

grape clusters

Levels of infestation

1st gen. 2nd gen. 3rd gen. Harvest

number of infested

flowers clusters/

100 grapes inspected

number of infested grape clusters/

100 grapes inspected

• % reduction of infestation = (C – M)/(C) X 100

C - average attack in control plot

M - average attack in MD plot

• Infestation

Results

Male disorientation - Seara D’ordens (4 ha)

MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating

sources of synthetic sex pheromone

1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.

2000 control 861 188 410 1459 -

MD int. 5 1 2 8 99

MD bord 9 5 2 16 99

2001 control 307 237 766 1310 -

MD int. 0 0 2 2 100

MD bord 1 3 73 77 94

Infestation level - Seara D’ordens (4 ha)

Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation

red. (%)MD border

Infestation

red. (%)

2000 1st 60* 21* 65 1* 98

2nd 22 26 0 10 55

3rd 39 44 0 16 59

Harvest 80 86 0 60 25

2001 1st 33 1 97 3 91

2nd 14* 8 43 3* 79

3rd 79* 65* 18 75* 5

Harvest 99 92 7 93 6

* sprays had to be appliedMD did not successfully reduce infestation

Male disorientation – S. Luíz (3, 25, 15, 16, 82 ha)

1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.

2001 control 249 445 440 1134 -

MD int. 0 0 0 0 100

MD bord 0 1 1 2 100

2002 control 233 292 194 719 -

MD int. 0 0 0 0 100

MD bord 8 5 1 14 98

2003 control 261 32 164 457 -

MD int. 1 0 2 3 99

2004 control 253 677 655 1585 -

MD int. 0 0 4 4 100

MD bord 253 677 655 1585 100

2009 control 594 494 203 1291 -

MD int. 1 0 0 1 100

MD bord 0 2 0 2 100

MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating

sources of synthetic sex pheromone

Infestation level - S. Luíz (3, 25, 15, 16, 82 ha)

* sprays had to be applied

Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.

(%)MD border

Infestation red.

(%)

2001 1st 28 4 86 4 86

2nd 9* 1* 89 1* 89

3rd 31* 13 58 13 58

Harvest 47 55 0 39 17

2002 1st 36 13* 64 18* 50

2nd 11* 3* 73 10* 9

3rd 6* 2 67 3* 50

Harvest 5 3 40 1 80

2003 1st 31 5 84 9 71

2nd 13 4 69 4 69

3rd 1 0 100 1 0

Harvest 52 10 81 33 37

2004 1st 71 3 96 5 93

2nd 47 17 64 15 68

3rd 7* 0* 100 2* 79

Harvest 66 26 61 53 20

2009 1st 187 1 99 20 89

2nd 56* 0* 100 16* 71

3rd 10* 0* 100 10* 0

Harvest - 4 - 4 -

Male Disorientation – Vallado (12, 20 ha)

1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight 4th flight Total catches % disor.

2005 control 220 444 341 - 1005 -

MD int. 1 0 0 - 1 100

2006 control 217 396 123 - 736 -

MD int. 1 0 0 - 1 100

2007 control 194 486 133 - 813 -

MD int. 0 1 0 - 1 100

MD bord 0 0 0 - 0 100

2008 control 394 435 154 - 983 -

MD int. 0 0 0 - 0 100

MD bord 0 0 0 - 0 100

2009 control 652 720 311 242 1925 -

MD int. 0 58 0 0 58 97

MD bord 0 0 0 0 0 100

MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating

sources of synthetic sex pheromone

Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.

(%)MD border

Infestation red.

(%)

2005 1st 23* 4 83 15* 35

2nd 31* 1 97 10* 68

3rd 4 1 75 4 0

Harvest 4 2 50 11 0

2006 1st. 13 1 92 5* 62

2nd 22 3 86 8* 64

3rd 2 2 0 18 0

Harvest 6 0 100 5 17

2007 1st 11 9* 18 15* 0

2nd 20* 0* 100 7* 65

3rd 11 4* 64 10* 9

Harvest 66 2 97 33 50

2008 1st 19 25 0 22 0

2nd 78* 52* 33 50* 36

3rd Harvest 23* 36* 0 66* 0

2009 1st 40 15 63 17 58

2nd 11* 30* 0 6* 45

3rd 4* 4* 0 0* 100

Harvest 24 2 92 0 100

* sprays had to be applied

Infestation level – Vallado (12, 20 ha)

Male Disorientation – Cidrô (15, 17, 15, 13 ha)

1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.

2006 control 249 155 61 465 -

MD int. 2 0 0 2 100

2007 control 279 246 29 554 -

MD int. 2 3 1 6 99

MD bord 0 1 2 3 99

2008 control 180 72,0 16 268 -

MD int. 0 5 0 5 98

2009 control 52 35 - 87 -

MD int. 2 0 - 2 98

MD bord 0 2 - 2 98

MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating

sources of synthetic sex pheromone

Infestation level – Cidrô (15, 17, 15, 13 ha)

Gen. control MD Infestation red.

(%)MD border

Infestation red.

(%)

2006 1st 11 23 0 22 0

2nd 1 1* 33 2* 0

Harvest 6 7 0 - -

2007 1st 13 8 37 5 60

2nd 0 0 - 0 -

Harvest 12 7 44 - -

2008 Harvest 42 10 76 8 81

2009 1st 10 0 100 0 100

3rd 18 0 100 - -

Harvest 32 2 94 - -

Since 2006, no more sprays had to be applied

Results – Ventozelo (13 ha)

1rst flight 2nd flight 3rd flight Total catches % disor.

2007 control 381 410 198 989 -

MD int. 0 1 0 1 100

MD bord 10 1 18 29 97

MD almost completly prevented male moths from locating

sources of synthetic sex pheromone

Year Gen. Control MD interiorInfestation red.

(%)MD border

Infestation red.

(%)

2009 1st 121 24 80 14 88

2nd 64 8 88 6 91

Harvest 97* 26* 73* - -

* spray had to be applied ( to 3rd Gen)

Male Disorientation

Infestation level

Good results for the 1rst year

Results

• Infestation on grape clusters was not reduced to

a level where MD could be used alone

• 1-3 sprays had to be applied

• Exhaustion of the pheromone in the dispensers in some years

Possible reasons for the low efficacy of MD (constraints)

• Long flight period of the adults (average 29 weeks) and

hight biotic potencial of Lobesia in Douro Valley

• Clima High temperatures / wind speed (May-September)

• Landscape Systematization in terraces, there is a hight % area

without dispensers (laneways, embankment) and the

hight heterogeneity of vineyards - Pheromone could have been not

homogenely distributed in the plots

30 % of the area - laneways, embankment

• Average wind velocity (2000-2005):

May-August - 1.9 m/sW-SW

Clima in experimental sites

annual - 1.7 m/s

Temp. (ºC)

Month AverageMay June July August September

2000-2008 17.5 21,8 23,1 21,6 18,4

30 years

(1961-1990)17,2 21,3 24,5 24,2 21,7

• Temperatures:

J F M A M J J A S O N D

1,9 1,3 1,6 2,3 2,0 1,9 2,2 1,4 1,3 1,4 1,2 1,9

29 Weeks of flying period

Long flying period

1st adults - mid March Adults remain active

until October

Evolution of pheromone in the dispensers

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

15-Mar 15-Abr 15-Mai 15-Jun 15-Jul 15-Ago 15-Set

RemainingAI quantity

(%)

2000 2002 2006

In 2002, levels of atmospheric pheromone below the required to prevent mating,

especially during the third generation of the insect

Discussion

Constraints to the sucessfull application of MD in Douro Valley:

- Hight Pest pressure (long life cycle, hight biotic potential)

- Heterogeneity typical of Douro Valley (in so many characteristics);

- Clima (temperatures, wind speed);

- Exhaustion of pheromone in dispensers due to climatic constrains;

- Area (only the big “quintas” have conditions for larger application of MD);

- The long effect of MD (you have to be pacient…)

- Need of technical support to estimate damages /high cost of MD ;

Acknowledgments

• Wine-growers of ADVID

• CBC (Europe Ltd.) and Shin-Etsu Chemical Co. Ltd

( for providing the pheromone dispensers in 2002)

(who made their vineyard available for the experiments)

Soc. Agric. Quinta da Seara d’ordens

Sogevinus Quintas S.A.

Quinta do Vallado

Real Companhia Velha (Cidrô e Ventozelo)

• ADVID colleagues Jorge Costa, Branca Teixeira(for technical support)

Thank you for your attention

Cristina Carlos