Test Results with Grupo Sol, Honduras
Dates: January – May 2019
Objectives:
1) Validate the efficacy and profitability of the insecticide – Aramite®® – on the Whitefly population, comparing it with another botanical extract and a natural one. 2) Validate efficacy and profitability of Aramite® on the control of Whitefly in a mixture with other conventional chemicals used commercially by Grupo Sol-Honduras.
Location : Marcovia, Choluteca, Honduras CA
Location: Finca Lavaderos, Marcoravia, Choluteca, Honduras.
Crop: Cantaloupe
Test 1: Aramite vs Pyrex
Phenological Stage at the time of application: Harvest
These two tests were carried out with conventional Boom (350 pounds pressure), with a discharge of 300 liters / mz, 3B tractor speed at 1,800-2000 rpm, test (1) Lot 53 and test (2) Handles Lot 3, two days after having applied the commercial T. The results conclude that Aramite® (0.6 L / mz) with 40% less dose compared to Pyrex (natural Pyrethrin 1.5 / mz) shows 3.71% more control, which means a significant cost / benefit for the SURAGROH company, We can also appreciate the repellency effect of Aramite® where the plot treated by it has 1,028 MB less than the plot with Pyrex, in both tests and treatments 200 leaves were counted completely at random. The commercial control was a natural soap, it was applied two days before fumigating with Aramite® and Pyrex, so the data obtained only to reference which control is in the part that remained as absolute control (only with natural soap counting 2 dda) .
Test 2: Aramite vs Bralic
Phenological Stage at the time of application: Harvest
Summary of total control (beam and underside)
of test # 1 and # 2
These two tests were carried out with Air Boom (150 pounds pressure), with a discharge of 190 liters / mz, 3B tractor speed at 1,800-2000 rpm, test (1) Lot 5 of Rhodes and test (2) Lot 2C, three days after having applied the commercial T., the results conclude that ARAMITE (380 cc / mz) with 40% less dose compared to Bralic (garlic extract-950cc / mz) shows 5.79% more control, which means a significant cost / benefit for the SURAGROH company.
We can also appreciate the repellency effect of ARAMITE where the plot treated by this, presents 638 MB less than the plot with Bralic, in both tests and treatments 100 leaves were counted completely at random. The commercial control was a mixture of two conventional products Kilate (Pyrethroid 2 cc / liter) and Collision (Neocotinoid + Pyrethroid 0.75 cc / liter), it was applied three days before spraying with ARAMITE and Bralic, so the data obtained only to reference which control is in the part that remained as absolute control (mixture of Kilate + Collision count 3 dda).
Test 3: Aramite mix
Phenological Stage at the time of application: Harvest
Summary of total control (beam and underside)
of test # 1 and # 2
This application was carried out with a conventional boom in Lot Germany 1, where it is notably observed that the mixture with Aramite® exceeds by 12.26% the treatment that does not carry ARAMITE , it is also to be considered that the underside shows a control of 64.83% (with ARAMITE ) versus 42.20% (without ARAMITE ) which marks a difference of 22.63% of control, considering that the treatment with ARAMITE It was applied at 1,500 rpm and the one that does not carry ARAMITE to 1,800-2,000, so we conclude that good control goes hand in hand with a good calibration in the fumigation equipment.
Conclusions and recommendations
Ing. Hector Matamoros, Commercial Technical Representative of ExcelAg Honduras
Email: hmatamoros@excelag.com
