Background of Strawberry in the Northeast

Strawberries are an important crop throughout the Northeast (CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, RI, VT) and represent a high value and critical component of many diversified vegetable farms. In 2012, there were 1,213 acres of strawberries grown in Northeast with an average yield of 5,000 lbs/acre. At the average price of $2.80/lb, each acre of berries is worth $14,000, with the entire Northeast crop representing almost 17 million dollars over 1,213 acres (USDA NASS., 2012). In 2012, New York grew 1,400 acres of strawberries with the average value of the crop in the state being worth $6,880,000 (USDA NASS., 2012). The crop is grown for primarily for fresh retail and wholesale markets with Pick Your Own (PYO) operations widespread throughout the Northeast, offering valuable opportunities for agro-tourism on many farms. A high percentage of the crop is sold on a PYO basis and is viewed as a family activity. Many children are present in these PYO strawberry fields, potentially increasing their risk of exposure to pesticides. Making the proper choice of the most effective, yet lowest risk pest management strategy is critical.

Strawberries are attacked by variety of pests, including insects, mites, pathogens (including nematodes) and weeds. With the increased movement of insects, diseases, plant products, and invasive weeds coupled with the pressure from climate change, the scope of pests and diseases causing problems in strawberries is continually expanding. Spotted Wing Drosophila and brown marmorated stink bug are new and emerging pests in Northeast that are potentially devastating to strawberry (Koehler, G., 2011, Jacobs, S., 2010). The increased incidence and impact of Black Root Rot Complex in strawberry was noted on all four farms visited during the 2013 Northeast Small Fruit IPM Working Group meeting in Vermont and New Hampshire. This complex of key fungal pathogens and lesion nematodes was causing the growers to abandon plantings after one season, representing a significant loss in production and income. During the course of the 2014 growing season it was found these losses may also be related to virus-contaminated nursery plants. Increased disease incidence and severity caused by Anthracnose on strawberry foliage as a result of recent warmer, wetter summers along with increased Cyclamen Mite damage in strawberry crowns has also been noted by the Northeast Small Fruit IPM Working Group.

In recent years, there have been changes in many of the cultural practices in strawberry that can influence and increase the impacts from pests and diseases. Spotted Wing Drosophila has proven to be devastating in the past 3 years in small fruits produced later in the season in the Northeast, but with the increased interest in the use of day-neutral varieties to expand harvest time and increase production, SWD will likely become a larger problem in strawberries. The widespread adoption in the use of high tunnels and low tunnels on many Northeast farms has also spurred new challenges and approaches to pest management. The development of new bio-rational and conventional pesticide materials along with the loss of key pesticides also presents new challenges in pest management strategies. As a result, the most recent Northeast Strawberry Pest Management Strategic Plan (PMSP) done in 2007, based on a strawberry survey done in 2004, does not accurately reflect the current pests and strategies critical for strawberry pest management in the Northeast (Hazelrigg, A., et al. 2007).

How This Plan Was Created

A diverse review group Northeast of strawberry growers, researchers, organic association technical personnel, IPM practitioners and extension specialists met for two days in December of 2014 to develop the Pest Management Strategic Plan (PMSP) following the guidelines as outlined on the Northeast IPM Center website under “PMSP checklist” at http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/PMSP_CHECKLST.pdf and “PMSP revisions” at http://www.ipmcenters.org/pmsp/PMSPRevisionGuidelines.pdf.

Key pests driving pesticide use were identified from a survey of participants prior to the meeting (see note). Seventeen participants responded, representing every participating state. Key pest summaries and currently registered pesticides for each key pest were adapted from the 2013–2014 New England Small Fruit Management Guide and the 2014 Cornell Pest Management Guidelines for Berry Crops with input from participants. Information was updated following the meeting to include the 2015–2016 New England Small Fruit Management Guide (https://extension.umass.edu/fruitadvisor/ne-small-fruit-management-guide) and the 2015 Cornell Pest Management Guidelines for Berry Crops (http://www.nysipm.cornell.edu/guidelines.asp).

The group took a pest by pest approach and identified current pest management strategies that included both chemical (conventional and organic) and cultural methods. With each pest, the group discussed the efficacy, practicality, advantages and disadvantages of the current pest management methods; identified at-risk pesticides for key pests; identified acceptable alternative pest management methods and created lists of research, regulatory and education priorities needed to improve pest management outcomes while minimizing reliance on pesticides.

Points made in this discussion were recorded as table and list entries to create the draft Pest Management Strategic Plan document. The draft document was reviewed by meeting participants and by other Northeast University and private sector experts for accuracy and completeness. At least one person in each Northeast state reviewed the draft PMSP and approved it as representative for their state.

NOTE: In the past, the PMSP was typically done after a crop survey and crop profile, but to save time and money, the process was streamlined and limited to the PMSP. The Northeast Small Fruit IPM Working Group (http://www.northeastipm.org/working-groups/small-fruit/) felt a crop survey was not necessary since key growers and extension small fruit specialists from each state will be represented and have agreed to be involved in the PMSP process. Each specialist is well versed in the insect, weed and disease issues in strawberries and pest management options in his or her state. University of Vermont has played the lead role in development and delivery of all previous Northeast PMSPs based on small fruits (Hazelrigg, et al., 2010; Hazelrigg, et al., 2007; Hazelrigg, et al., 2006).

Benefits to the Northeast Strawberry Industry

Pest Management Strategic Plans have been long recognized as a valuable conduit for researchers, growers, IPM practitioners and extension to communicate with regulators and granting agencies. Through the PMSP process growers, researchers, extension and other IPM practitioners also identify critical priorities in research, extension and regulation that researchers and extension personnel use to drive critical grant and research requests for future work. The PMSP process also identifies gaps in knowledge of pests and management strategies that can be addressed in newsletters, at future grower meetings and through site visits with growers.

This Strawberry PMSP will benefit growers; researchers; grower associations such as New England Vegetable and Berry Growers Association, Vermont Vegetable and Berry Growers Association, New York State Berry Growers Association, etc.; organic grower associations such as NOFA-VT, MOFGA, etc.; IPM practitioners and other stakeholders, such as Red Tomato, working with strawberries in the Northeast. This PMSP will also be relevant and beneficial to strawberry stakeholders in the Midwest and North Central regions. Additionally, this strategic plan identifies regional needs for consideration in EPA regulatory decisions, strawberry grower education and strawberry research needs. A current and accurate Strawberry PMSP is an essential tool for stakeholders and will be used to direct successful pest management decisions based on IPM strategies. Current pest management programs will benefit from this review of advantages and constraints of current practices contained within this strategic plan.

The stakeholder-identified priority lists provide guidance for researchers to help secure future grant funding and research to benefit strawberry growers. This PMSP will be valuable to extension specialists to identify educational gaps in knowledge of pests and to develop and provide topics to be presented throughout the region in meetings, newsletters, websites and site visits on pests and pest management strategies for strawberry growers.

The members of the Northeast Small Fruit IPM Working Group find PMSPs capture a realistic and extremely valuable snapshot of the pest issues and management strategies for a specific crop. Several in the Working Group mentioned they find listing all the cultural, organic and conventional pest management strategies for one crop in a thorough document like a PMSP very helpful when working with growers. The Northeast Small Fruit IPM Working Group has listed “Updating Pest Management Strategic Plans” as a top priority for the Northeast region in their 2012 and 2013 meetings (http://www.northeastipm.org/neipm/assets/File/Priorities/Priorities-SmallFruitIPMWG-2013.pdf).

Pest Management

Key Strawberry Pests Summary

Insects and Mites

Tarnished Plant Bug (Lygus lineolaris)

• This is an annual pest beginning in early spring and continuing until heavy frost. Early blooming June-bearing varieties may not be as significantly affected as day-neutral varieties.
• Both adults and nymphs feed on the developing flower buds and fruit, resulting in deformed fruit that are generally unmarketable. Cultivars that bear later in the season may suffer more damage as pest populations increase.
• Management of weeds near the planting may reduce populations of this insect. Cultural management with weed management around site begins the year prior to planting.
• Insecticide sprays may be necessary when flower buds appear prior to bloom. Waiting to until nymphs are detected pushes spraying into the bloom period and increases bee toxicity. However, while spraying before bloom reduces pollinator exposure this may overtreat for pest.
• Parasitic wasp releases, originally in New Jersey and New Hampshire, has reduced total pest population pressure (evidence of efficacy in apples).

Cyclamen Mite (Steneotarsonemus pallidus)

• Day neutral varieties are less likely to be affected as pest population does not establish on annual crops.
• This pest is on the rise in strawberry and peppers. This pest can arrive via infested planting stock but symptoms do not appear until the following year or more, beginning in early spring through late summer. Presence and symptoms can be cyclical, appear in waves or flare-ups, or as hotspots in sites. Warm dry spring conditions exacerbate pest population and symptoms.
• These mites feed on new leaves in the plant crown, resulting in stunted plants, distorted purplish leaves, and buds that fail to open. Blossom feeding results in deformed fruit. Pest is very small and requires a microscope to see.
• Management by pre-plant treatment is a best practice for reducing the pest population on incoming nursery stock before it becomes established in fields.
• Management includes spot treatments with high gallonage miticide sprays (much higher than required for foliar mites). Very difficult to get spray penetration.
• It is often too late for effective management when symptom appear. Site is usually put into rotation sooner than otherwise would be.
• “Cabot” variety is particularly susceptible.

Root Weevils (Otiorhynchus spp., Polydrusus spp.)

• Day neutral varieties are less likely to be affected as pest population does not establish on annual crops.
• These larvae are a persistent pests where they appear, with symptoms appearing in early spring through autumn. Infestations are generally in patches in the site where they appear. Adults emerge mid-summer and lay eggs late summer through fall. Adults can overwinter in warmer areas and lay eggs in following season.
• Pest appears to be associated with site history of nursery production and can be moved between sites on equipment.
• Management includes soil applications of insect pathogenic nematodes in early spring or late summer or insecticide sprays as a soil drench or as a spray targeting adults to inhibit egg laying. It is usually easier to put site into rotation than to manage.
• Larvae feed on the crown and roots, resulting in declining, stunted plants with reduced yield. This is especially damaging where root diseases are also present. Symptoms appear when plants are under fruit load stress. Nothing to do about it at that point for the crop. Can treat bed for future seasons and prevent spread to other sites.
• Adult weevils feed on leaves, causing notching on leaf edge. Need to scout for adult leaf notching to time pesticide applications. Adults are very robust. Sprays MUST be applied at night when adults are active (in soil/mulch during day).
• Mowing during renovation in an infested site causes stress on plants and should be avoided.

Spotted Wing Drosophila (Drosophila suzukii)

• Populations of this invasive insect do not cause significant damage until mid-late summer and autumn. This pest is a specific threat to day-neutral varieties while June-bearing varieties are not significantly affected. A complete life cycle can be as little as 14 days.
• Female flies are able to insert eggs through the skin of ripening fruit. Larvae feed on the flesh of fruits, resulting in premature softening, decay and very reduced shelf life.
• Management is through frequent and repeated insecticide sprays throughout the day neutral ripening and harvest period. Netting can be effective on smaller plantings and removal of waste fruit may keep populations in check.

White Grubs (Scarabaeidae family)

• These larvae are primarily planting year pests when going into sod ground in autumn and early spring. High populations of larvae are more likely following a dry summer. Adults emerge and lay eggs from late spring to mid-summer. Populations of these pests are not established in every site.
• Larvae feed on the roots, resulting in stunted growth and plant dieback, especially where other diseases are present. Mobile adults feed on leaves, causing skeletonized leaves. Adults may injure leaves of day neutral varieties but management is rarely necessary.
• Management includes soil applications of insect pathogenic nematodes or insecticide sprays as a soil drench or as a spray targeting adults feeding on leaves and to inhibit egg laying. Segregation of plantings from turf areas is recommended. It is often too late for effective management for current crop when symptom appear.
• Can salvage sites through grass management against Japanese beetle, others. However, many new and different species are increasingly problematic and no longer easy to group and manage.
• Oriental and Asiatic Garden beetles are increasingly problematic, will breed in non-sod, don’t disperse as much, and prefer the high level of moisture in drip irrigation environments.

Diseases

Gray Mold (Botrytis cinerea)

• This is an annual fungal disease beginning in spring through late summer into fall with day neutrals, favored by cool and wet weather.
• Symptoms include powdery gray growth on softened fruit and leaf tissue, firm brown areas on fruit, or berries that retain shape but become tough and dry. Storage rots may also occur.
• Management with protective sprays during bloom and maintaining air circulation between plants is common.
• Resistance to chemical sprays is highly possible. Resistance has occurred in Pennsylvania and North Carolina. It is possible for new plants to carry resistant strains from the nursery.
• Spray material rotation is key to avoid resistance development. Growers are advised to ask suppliers for records of what new plant stock had been sprayed with prior to shipping to plan for rotation.

Black Root Rot Complex (Rhizoctonia, Pythium, Fusarium, Pratylenchus)

• This is an endemic complex that is favored by plant stress conditions such as drought, winter injury, poor nutrition, soil compaction, older beds and sites, or improper herbicide use with symptoms appearing in early spring through autumn. Climate change irregularities may further stress plants.
• Symptoms include lack of plant vigor and productivity and eventual collapse with a progression of blackened feeder, structural, then perennial roots. Structural roots retain a white core as the rot occurs from the outside to the center.
• Management of plant stress conditions through proper site selection and long crop rotation are common management techniques. There are no “silver bullet” treatments. Most products are labeled against Rhizoctonia only, with few products available to target other complex species. It is usually easier to put site into rotation than to manage.
• Very little is known about this pest complex and research is needed.

Anthracnose Fruit Rot (Colletotrichum acutatum)

• This is an annual fungal disease beginning in spring through late summer, favored by warm and humid spring weather. More common on day-neutral varieties. This pest has been seen in Pennsylvania, New York and Vermont.
• Symptoms include circular, sunken, water-soaked tan to brown lesions on fruit. A slimy spore mass spreads by splashing with rain and irrigation. Under dry conditions the fruit may become mummified and black. This fungus may also attack stolons, petioles, and crown tissues.
• Management with site sanitation and crop rotation is common. Sprays against GM will also manage this pest. One spray will typically manage when pest occurs although sometimes go a few weeks before see again then have to spray again. Protective sprays may be less effective in hot, humid conditions.
• Growers with no history of this pest and not scouting for it may be unprepared when this pest does occur.
• Spray product labels are not necessarily specific to fruit Anthracnose.

Leaf Spot (Mycosphaerella fragariae)

• This is an annual fungal disease beginning in early spring through late summer, spread favored by splashing rain. If pest is present in fall then it will also be present in the spring.
• Symptoms appear as irregular to circular purple spots with grayish centers on leaves, petioles, stems, and runners. Lesions can occasionally develop on fruit (black seed). Heavy infections can inhibit production of flower buds.
• Management with resistant varieties, maintaining air circulation between plants, sanitation, and removal of plant tops at renovation is common. Late fall renovation sprays are also used.
• Will spread from old sites to new sites. Keep out of new planting.
• The action or economic thresholds for this pest is unknown.
• There a several similar fungal foliar diseases that may be considered more of a complex than individual diseases including Leaf Spot (Mycosphaerella), Leaf Scorch (Diplocarpon), Leaf Blight (Phomopsis), and Leaf Blotch (Zythia). Angular Leaf Spot (Xanthomonas) is a bacterial disease.

Powdery Mildew (Sphaerotheca macularis)

• This is an annual fungal disease beginning in late spring through late summer, favored by warm and humid conditions. Pest incidence has been increasing earlier in year. More common on day-neutral varieties.
• Symptoms include white powdery growth on the lower leaf surface, causing the leaf edges to roll upward. Infected flowers and fruit may fail to ripen.
• Management with protective sprays to reduce inoculum and maintaining air circulation between plants are common. Easy to manage if pest is monitored.
• Special attention must be paid to pest development in new plantings and stressed plantings. Not necessarily a key pest on older plantings
• Pest develops resistance very rapidly and must rotate spray materials. There may be resistant strains developing.
• The action or economic thresholds for this pest is unknown.

Weeds

Annual Grass Weeds
Annual Broadleaf Weeds
Perennial Grass Weeds
Perennial Broadleaf Weeds

• Weed infestations occur in mixed populations including annual grasses, annual broadleaf, perennial grasses, perennial broadleaf, woody perennial and vine weeds. Weed populations vary across regions and farms.
• Weed pressure impacts plant development and productivity by competing with the crop for water, light, and nutrients. Weeds serve as habitat and alternate hosts for insects, diseases, nematodes, and small vertebrate pests such as voles and mice. Weeds can inhibit spray penetration, air circulation, and drying conditions.
• Weed pressure early in the season, or early in the year-of-planting, is more problematic than weed pressure later in the season.
• Management with herbicides is common from pre-plant through post-plant pre-emergence and post-emergence applications. Good pre-plant preparation to remove perennial weeds and reduce the weed seed bank is essential to maximize crop performance.
• False buckwheat, red sorrel, purple deadnettle, shepherd’s purse are notably problematic in some locations.
• Some weeds have become problematic (clover, perennial grasses, thistle) due to a limited number of effective spray materials. Clopyralid (Stinger) not available throughout the Northeast.
• Herbicide resistant groundsel and bedstraw are becoming problematic in New York.
• Cover crops can mask presence of fall winter annuals, causing problems in the spring.

Vertebrate and Other Pests

White-tailed Deer (Odocoileus virginianus)

• Deer may occasionally trample crops, but the primary form of damage consists of feeding on selected plant parts in early spring when few alternative foods are available. Damage levels may severely reduce crop yields on many sites especially in sites near woods.
• Management with various cultural control practices is common.
• Local authorities control size of populations
• Low electric fencing sometimes for short periods and can be cost effective, baited helps
• Tall fencing can be long term and effective if gates kept closed, expensive
• Taste repellants: Hinder, Neptune’s Harvest (can be phytotoxic, difficult to apply), use in fall to break feeding pattern, liquid manure around perimeter of site, Thiram is labeled as deer repellent. Repellents don’t tend to be rainfast

Mice and Voles (Peromyscus spp., Microtus pennsylvanicus, Microtus pinetorum)

• Voles directly feed on underground plant parts, can introduce weed seeds to site, and their tunnel systems interfere with crop irrigation.
• Mice frequently coexist and can introduce seed, some situations plant feeding
• Management with various cultural control practices is common.
• Problem in mulch, plastic, chew dripline, attract coyotes
• No rodenticides are legal for application in strawberry sites, some may be in certain situations in high tunnels in bait stations in some states
• Narrow rows and good weed management with discourage meadow vole, good mowing around site

Birds (various species)

• Birds (especially Cedar Waxwings, Bombycilla cedrorum) feed on ripe fruit, rendering the fruit unmarketable. Feeding damage varies widely by location and year.
• Management with various cultural control practices is common.
• Turkeys especially scratch off straw before heavy snow, require labor to recover. Avoid barley straw, straw with grains.
• Geese graze and may introduce foodborne pathogens before harvest, feet puncture plastic
• Songbird species (cedar waxwings) federally protected.
• Visual and auditory devices, combinations work best
• Some hail/insect netting can be laid over crop and be effective (vs. on poles)

Porcupines (Erethizon dorsatum)

• Will eat foliage and crowns

2013–2014 New England Small Fruit Management Guide

2015–2016 New England Small Fruit Management Guide

Hazelrigg, A., Kingsley-Richards, S. 2006 New England High Bush Blueberry Pest Management Strategic Plan.

Hazelrigg, A., Kingsley-Richards, S. 2007 New England Strawberry Pest Management Strategic Plan.

Hazelrigg, A., Kingsley-Richards, S. 2010 Raspberry Pest Management Strategic Plan for NE Growers.

Jacobs, S. 2010. Brown Marmorated Stink Bug.

Koehler, G., Dill, J., Hazelrigg, A. 2011 Urgent IPM Grant, Northeastern IPM Center. Spotted Wing Drosophila in New England—Rapid Response Training and Coordination.

Northeastern IPM Center. 2005. Suggested Process for Handling PMSP Revisions.

Northeastern IPM Center. 2013. Small Fruit IPM Working Group and Pest Issues Tour Priorities.

Northeastern IPM Center. 2013. Small Fruit IPM Working Group.

Northeastern IPM Center. 2014. Guidance in Developing a Pest Management Strategic Plan.

Pritts, M., Heidenreich, C., et. al. 2014 Cornell Pest Management Guidelines for Berry Crops.

Pritts, M., Heidenreich, C., et. al. 2015 Cornell Pest Management Guidelines for Berry Crops.

USDA NASS. 2012. New England Fruits and Vegetables 2012 Crop, G.R. Keough, Editor. 2013, New England Agricultural Statistics Concord, NH.

USDA NASS. 2012. New York Fruit Report. January 2013.

Strategic Plan Meeting Participants

Connecticut

Mary Concklin
University of Connecticut
Department of Plant Science & Landscape Architecture
1376 Storrs Road, Unit 4067
Storrs, CT 06269-4067
(860) 486-6449
mary.concklin@uconn.edu

Donny Dzen
Dzen Farms
187 Windsorville Road
Ellington, CT 06029
(860) 916-6438
dzen@sbcglobal.net

Maine

David Handley
University of Maine Cooperative Extension
Highmoor Farm
PO Box 179
Monmouth, Maine 04259-0179
(207) 933-2100
david.handley@maine.edu

Eric Sideman
Crop Specialist
Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association
120 Perry Road
Strafford, NH 03884
(603) 269-6201
esideman@mofga.org

Lauchlin W. Titus, CPAg
AgMatters LLC
1063 Main Street
Vassalboro, ME 04989
(207) 873-2108
ltitus1@myfairpoint.net

Massachusetts

Sonia Schloemann
University of Massachusetts Extension
Bowditch Hall
Amherst, MA 01003
(413) 545-4347
sgs@umext.umass.edu

Jim Ward
Ward's Berry Farm
614 South Main Street
Sharon, MA 02067
(781) 784-3600
info@wardsberryfarm.com

New Hampshire

Alan Eaton
University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension
Spaulding Hall
38 Academic Way
Durham, NH 03824-2617
(603) 862-1734
alan.eaton@unh.edu

Becky Sideman
University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension
Spaulding Hall
38 Academic Way
Durham, NH 03824-2617
(603) 862-3203
becky.sideman@unh.edu

Cheryl A. Smith
University of New Hampshire Cooperative Extension
Spaulding Hall
38 Academic Way
Durham, NH 03824-2617
(603) 862-3841
cheryl.smith@unh.edu

Pooh Sprague
Edgewater Farm
99 River Road
Plainfield, NH 03781
(603) 298-5764
ps@edgewaterfarm.com

New York

Marvin Pritts
Cornell University
School of Integrative Plant Science, Horticulture Section
134 Plant Science Building
Ithaca, NY 14853
(607) 255-1778
mpp3@cornell.edu

Laura McDermott
Cornell Cooperative Extension
415 Lower Main Street
Hudson Falls, NY 12839
(518) 746-2562
lgm4@cornell.edu

Rhode Island

Heather Faubert
University of Rhode Island
Department of Plant Sciences and Entomology
238 Woodward Hall
Kingston, RI 02881
(401) 874-2967
hhf@uri.edu

Vermont

Ann Hazelrigg
University of Vermont
Plant & Soil Science Department
63 Carrigan Drive
Burlington, VT 05405-0082
(802) 656-0493
ann.hazelrigg@uvm.edu

Sarah L. Kingsley-Richards
University of Vermont
Plant & Soil Science Department
63 Carrigan Drive
Burlington, VT 05405-0082
(802) 656-0475
sarah.kingsley@uvm.edu

Dave Marchant
River Berry Farm
191 Goose Pond Road
Fairfax, VT 05454
(802) 849-6853
riverberryfarm@comcast.net

Bob and Charlie Gray
4 Corners Farm
306 Doe Hill Road
Newbury VT 05051
 (802) 866-3342
4cornersfarm@gmail.com

Regional

Edith Lurvey
Cornell University
Entomology Department
630 West North Street
Geneva, NY, 14456
(315) 787-2308
ell10@cornell.edu

Other reviewers include:

Rich Bonanno
UMass Extension
255 Merrimack St
Methuen, MA 01844
(978) 682-9563
rbonanno@umext.umass.edu

Nate Nourse
Nourse Farms
41 River Road
South Deerfield, MA 01373
(413) 665-2658 x213
nnourse@noursefarms.com