Abstract
In a 2-yr study, the impacts of different plastic soil mulches, insecticides, and predator releases on Frankliniella thrips and their natural enemies were investigated in field-grown peppers. Ultraviolet light (UV)-reflective mulch significantly reduced early season abundance of adult thrips compared with standard black plastic mulch. This difference diminished as the growing seasons progressed. Late season abundance of thrips larvae was higher in UV reflective mulch compared with black mulch plots. The abundance of the predator Orius insidiosus (Say) was significantly lower in UV-reflective mulch compared with black mulch treatments. Infection of plants with tomato spotted wilt virus, a pathogen vectored by Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande), was <6%. In the year with the higher disease incidence (2000), UV-reflective mulch plots had significantly less disease (1.9%) compared with black mulch plots (4.4%). Yield was significantly higher in UV-reflective mulch (24,529 kg/ha) compared with black mulch (15,315 kg/ha) during this year. Effects of insecticides varied with species of thrips. Spinosad reduced abundance of F. occidentalis, but not Frankliniella tritici. In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis. Spinosad was the least disruptive insecticide to populations of O. insidiosus. Releases of O. insidiosus and Geocoris punctipes (Say) reduced populations of thrips immediately after releases; naturally occurring predators probably provided late season control of thrips. Our results suggest that UV-reflective mulch, combined with early season applications of spinosad, can effectively reduce abundance of thrips in field-grown pepper.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 20
Claim · model-written summary
UV-reflective mulch significantly reduced early adult thrips abundance relative to black mulch.
- Treatment
- Ultraviolet light (UV)-reflective mulche0
- Outcome
- early season abundance of adult thripse0
- Direction
- reducede0
- Comparator
- standard black plastic mulche0
Capsicum
ThripsOrganisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Ultraviolet light (UV)-reflective mulch significantly reduced early season abundance of adult thrips compared with standard black plastic mulch.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
The early adult thrips abundance difference between mulches diminished over the season.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“This difference diminished as the growing seasons progressed.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-reflective mulch had higher late-season thrips larval abundance than black mulch.
- Treatment
- UV reflective mulche0
- Outcome
- Late season abundance of thrips larvaee0
- Direction
- highere0
- Comparator
- black mulch plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Late season abundance of thrips larvae was higher in UV reflective mulch compared with black mulch plots.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-reflective mulch significantly lowered Orius insidiosus abundance relative to black mulch.
- Treatment
- UV-reflective mulche0
- Interactor
- Orius insidiosus
.jpg?width=60)
Orius insidiosuse0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- abundance of the predator Orius insidiosuse0
- Direction
- lowere0
- Comparator
- black mulch treatmentse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“The abundance of the predator Orius insidiosus (Say) was significantly lower in UV-reflective mulch compared with black mulch treatments.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Tomato spotted wilt virus infected fewer than 6% of plants.
- Interactor
- tomato spotted wilt virus
Orthotospovirus tomatomaculaee0pathogen - Second interactor
- Frankliniella occidentalis
Frankliniella occidentalise0pest - Outcome
- Infection of plants with tomato spotted wilt viruse0
- Value
- <6%e0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Infection of plants with tomato spotted wilt virus, a pathogen vectored by Frankliniella occidentalis (Pergande), was <6%.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-reflective mulch lowered disease incidence to 1.9% versus 4.4% with black mulch in 2000.
- Treatment
- UV-reflective mulche0
- Outcome
- diseasee0
- Direction
- lesse0
- Value
- 1.9%e0
- Qualifier
- 2000e0
- Comparator
- black mulch plotse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In the year with the higher disease incidence (2000), UV-reflective mulch plots had significantly less disease (1.9%) compared with black mulch plots (4.4%).”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
UV-reflective mulch increased yield to 24,529 kg/ha versus 15,315 kg/ha with black mulch.
- Treatment
- UV-reflective mulche0
- Outcome
- Yielde0
- Direction
- highere0
- Value
- 24,529 kg/hae0
- Comparator
- black mulche0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Yield was significantly higher in UV-reflective mulch (24,529 kg/ha) compared with black mulch (15,315 kg/ha) during this year.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad reduced F. occidentalis abundance.
- Treatment
- Spinosade0
- Interactor
- F. occidentalisFrankliniella occidentalise0pest
- Outcome
- abundance of F. occidentalise0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spinosad reduced abundance of F. occidentalis, but not Frankliniella tritici.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad did not reduce Frankliniella tritici abundance.
- Treatment
- Spinosade0
- Interactor
- Frankliniella triticiFrankliniella triticie0pest
- Outcome
- Frankliniella triticie0
- Direction
- no_changeinferrede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spinosad reduced abundance of F. occidentalis, but not Frankliniella tritici.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Esfenvalerate reduced F. tritici numbers.
- Treatment
- esfenvaleratee0
- Interactor
- F. triticiFrankliniella triticie0pest
- Outcome
- numbers of F. triticie0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Acephate reduced F. tritici numbers.
- Treatment
- acephatee0
- Interactor
- F. triticiFrankliniella triticie0pest
- Outcome
- numbers of F. triticie0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Esfenvalerate reduced F. bispinosa numbers.
- Treatment
- esfenvaleratee0
- Interactor
- Frankliniella bispinosaFrankliniella bispinosae0pest
- Outcome
- Frankliniella bispinosae0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Acephate reduced F. bispinosa numbers.
- Treatment
- acephatee0
- Interactor
- Frankliniella bispinosaFrankliniella bispinosae0pest
- Outcome
- Frankliniella bispinosae0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Esfenvalerate increased F. occidentalis populations.
- Treatment
- esfenvaleratee0
- Interactor
- F. occidentalisFrankliniella occidentalise0pest
- Outcome
- populations of F. occidentalise0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Acephate increased F. occidentalis populations.
- Treatment
- acephatee0
- Interactor
- F. occidentalisFrankliniella occidentalise0pest
- Outcome
- populations of F. occidentalise0
- Direction
- highere0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“In contrast, esfenvalerate and acephate reduced numbers of F. tritici and Frankliniella bispinosa, but resulted in higher populations of F. occidentalis.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Spinosad was least disruptive to O. insidiosus.
- Treatment
- Spinosade0
- Interactor
- O. insidiosusOrius insidiosuse0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- populations of O. insidiosuse0
- Direction
- least disruptivee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Spinosad was the least disruptive insecticide to populations of O. insidiosus.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Orius insidiosus releases immediately reduced thrips populations.
- Treatment
- Releases of O. insidiosuse0
- Second interactor
- O. insidiosusOrius insidiosuse0biocontrol_agent
- Outcome
- populations of thripse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Releases of O. insidiosus and Geocoris punctipes (Say) reduced populations of thrips immediately after releases;”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Geocoris punctipes releases immediately reduced thrips populations.
- Treatment
- Geocoris punctipese0
- Second interactor
- Geocoris punctipes
Geocoris punctipese0biocontrol_agent - Outcome
- populations of thripse0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Releases of O. insidiosus and Geocoris punctipes (Say) reduced populations of thrips immediately after releases;”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
Naturally occurring predators probably controlled thrips late in the season.
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“naturally occurring predators probably provided late season control of thrips.”
e1“field-grown peppers”
Claim · model-written summary
The authors suggest UV-reflective mulch with early spinosad applications to reduce thrips in field pepper.
- Taxon
- peppert0
- Treatment
- UV-reflective mulch, combined with early season applications of spinosade0
- Outcome
- reduce abundance of thripse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Our results suggest that UV-reflective mulch, combined with early season applications of spinosad, can effectively reduce abundance of thrips in field-grown pepper.”
t0“Field-Grown Pepper”
The same questions in other papers
spinosad · Frankliniella tritici · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- no effect
esfenvalerate · Frankliniella tritici · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
acephate · Frankliniella tritici · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
esfenvalerate · Frankliniella bispinosa · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
acephate · Frankliniella bispinosa · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
esfenvalerate · Frankliniella occidentalis · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
acephate · Frankliniella occidentalis · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- negative
Geocoris punctipes · Thrips · Capsicum (peppers)Results agree
1 paper in the same direction as this paper
- positive
8 of 18 groups shown: named compounds and organisms first, then groups whose results differ (checked claim by claim), then those with positive and negative results, then the smaller groups.
Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.