Inside this issue...

NewsletterVol. 44 No. 3 Summer 2013

3568

10131415

Section 18s for BasilDowny Mildew

Time to Think Spring

IR-4 & IPMCollaborations

Pest Management Solutions for Specialty Crops and Minor Uses

Global Crop Protection

continued on page 2

On June 26, IR-4 HQ hosted anagricultural tour dubbed Beyondthe Battlefield: Apples toWatercress!! The purpose ofthese annual tours is to provideEPA personnel the opportunityto learn about growing practicesand to hear directly fromgrowers about their pest controlneeds. This year, there were 44participants from EPA and forover one third of the attendees,it was their first IR-4 tour. Manyalso were new to EPA.

The tour included four stops:one in West Virginia and three inSouthern Pennsylvania. Duringthe first stop attendees viewedthe growing practices of a veryminor crop, watercress. There,President of B&W QualityGrowers, Inc., Alan Temple,talked about this unique cropand shared some interestingfacts.

WatercressWatercress Rorripa nasturtiumacquaticum is a member of theCruciferae (or Brassicaceae)family, and therefore related tobroccoli, cabbage, Brusselssprouts, cauliflower, rocket andradish.

Cultivated in pure spring water,

its health benefits have beenknown since ancient times. It isbelieved to have originated inGreece and remains an integralpart of the Mediterranean diet.In 500BC, Hippocrates, thefather of medicine, is said tohave located his first hospitalclose to a stream to ensure freshwatercress to help treat hispatients.

Historically, watercress was usedby the Romans, Greeks andPersians as a natural medicine,prescribed for migraines,anemia, eczema, kidney and liverdisorders and tuberculosis.As alongstanding British favorite, ithas been used in herbalremedies from the 1600s, andhas been commercially cultivatedsince the 1800s. Watercress ispart of the fruit and vegetablefood group, with 80g (onecereal bowl full) providing one ofthe ‘at least five a day’ portionsrecommended by theDepartment of Health to helpreduce the risk of some cancers,cardiovascular disease and manyother chronic illnesses.

According to modern research,watercress has been found to bethe new miracle food withanti-cancer properties.

A study publishedin The AmericanJournal of ClinicalNutrition inFebruary of 2007

showed that, in addition toreducing DNA damage, a dailydose of watercress increased theability of cells to further resistDNA damage that may becaused by free radicals. In thestudy, 60 men and women, halfof whom were smokers,consumed their usual diet plus85-grams of raw watercress dailyfor 8-weeks. Blood samples

Crop Focus: Watercress— Information provided by B&W Quality Growers, Inc.

Retirees & Appointments

PHP Program CompletesFirst 5-yearsGrant Announcement

eQA System

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 2Vol 44 No 3

Dear Friends

I hope everyone is having a wonderfulsummer and having the opportunity forsome vacation time.

I wanted to bring everyone up to date onthe current funding status for IR-4. After avery tenuous 2012 first when USDAproposed to consolidate the IR-4 Project with five IntegratedPest Management Programs and then we experienced multiplerounds of budget reductions, 2013 is awash with good news. InApril, the President’s budget proposal for 2014 separated IR-4out from a modified IPM program consolidation plan. Duringlate spring/early summer, the Appropriations Committees ofboth the US House of Representatives and the US Senateconcurred with the President’s plan and maintained IR-4 as anindependent budget line and program. The AppropriationsCommittee of the House and Senate also approved a plan torestore some of the funding reductions. As of press time, the FY2014 Agriculture Appropriations Bill is awaiting approval by thefull House and Senate. If approved, IR-4 will again be fundednear the $12 million dollar level.

It seems like it was just last week IR-4 was working ondeveloping its Strategic Plan for 2009-2014 and writing aproject renewal for approval by the State Agriculture ExperimentStation Directors and USDA. Well it’s that time again and thisautumn we will be starting the process for the next round. IR-4plans to solicit input on future strategic directions at theSouthern, Northeast and North Central Regional Liaisonmeetings in late August, the Food Use Workshop, September17 & 18 in Albuquerque, NM and the Ornamental HorticultureWorkshop on October 9 &10 in Coconut Grove, FL. We willalso be soliciting input via focus groups as well as surveys atother venues. Please help us help you by participating in ourefforts to gather feedback.

IR-4 continues to celebrate its 50th anniversary at variousvenues and meetings. It has been a great opportunity toacknowledge the success of all those associated with IR-4 (past,present and future) in providing specialty crop growers andother minor use stakeholders with safe and effective pestmanagement technology.

To keep up to date on the happenings with IR-4, please followus on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/IR4Project) andTwitter (@IR4_Project and @IR4Project).

All the best,Jerry

Executive Director Notes

were analyzed for plasmaantioxidant status and DNAdamage in lymphocytes, a typeof white blood cell. Watercressconsumption significantlyreduced lymphocyte DNAdamage.

In another study publishedrecently in The British Journal ofNutrition, the consumption of athree ounce portion ofwatercress reduced the presenceof a key tumor growth factor sixto eight hours after eating thewatercress in healthy patientswho had previously been treatedfor breast cancer. The study wasconducted by the CancerResearch Center at the School ofMedicine, Southampton GeneralHospital in the United Kingdomand concluded watercress is astherapeutic as traditional drugtreatments with tamoxifen &herceptin, commonly usedchemotherapy drugs.

According to Temple, ”Sincewatercress is available yearround and is very inexpensive,we should eat a lot more of it forour health. Making watercressinto a plain vegetable dish isreally simple. Just put watercressin boiling water with a spoon ofsalt and some oil, blanch it for afew minutes and serve. Puttingwatercress into soup makes iteasy to eat a lot more of it inone serving.”

To learn more about watercressand B&W Quality Growers visitwww.watercress.com.

Watercresscontinued from page 1

fungicides that are currentlynationally labeled for control ofbasil downy mildew: ActinovateAG (Streptomyces lydicus WYEC108), Double Nickel 55 (Bacillusamyloliquefaciens strain D747),Regalia (extract of Reynoutriasachalinensis), Trilogy (neem oil),various potassium bicarbonateproducts: Eco-Mate Armicarb,Milstop, Armicarb 100, variouspotassium phosphite products:Fosphite, Fungi- Phite, Prophyt,K-Phite and Rampart, Phorcephite(potassium phosphate; potassiumphosphite) and Oxidate (hydrogendioxide),

Current recommendations forbasil downy mildew diseasecontrol include using anintegrated pest management(IPM) approach and a fungicideresistance management program.Growers should know thesymptoms of basil downy mildewand monitor the field daily fordetection of the pathogen. If thepathogen is detected, growersshould make frequent protectantfungicide applications that areregistered for basil downy mildewcontrol. It is also important toapply registered fungicides whenenvironmental conditions arefavorable for basil downy mildew,before the pathogen enters thefield and before symptoms occuron basil.

pg 3Vol 44 No 3

Emergency Exemptions

Sweet basil (Ocimum basilicum)is an economically importantfresh culinary herb grown in theUnited States. In October 2007,a new disease of basil downymildew (Peronospora belbahrii)was first reported in FL. Sincethen, basil downy mildew hasresulted in significant lossesthroughout the United States.The epidemiology of thepathogen is still unknown.However, it is believed that thepathogen has spread globally viathe shipment of infested seedand through natural weathercycles. Since basil downy mildewis a relatively new basil disease inthe United States, there are fewregistered conventional ororganic fungicides for its control.

The pathogen’s main diagnosticfeature is the production ofpurplish gray sporangia thatappear only on the undersidesurfaces of infected leaves(Figure 1). Symptoms include

yellowingbetweenthe leafveins,cuppingandeventual

necrosis of leaf tissue (Figure 2).Once symptoms develop, plantsare no longer marketable.

The IR-4 Project, a federallyfunded program that developsresearch data to support newEPA tolerances and labeled

product uses, has been essentialin registering products for thecontrol of basil downy mildew.Emergency exemptions (Seerelated article on page 4) wereestablished as Section 18 labelsfor cyazofamid; (Ranman®;FRAC code 21) andmandipropamid (Revus®; FRACcode 40) as requested by thestates of Alabama, California,Illinois and Texas. IR-4 conductedresidue studies on cyazofamidand mandipropamid in order toestablish national registrations. ASection 3 tolerance has beenestablished for cyazofamid andthe current label includes a usepattern for control of basil downymildew in field and greenhouseproduction. In November 2012,IR-4 made a joint submission withCanada to EPA and PMRA forthe use of mandipropamid tocontrol basil downy mildew in thefield and greenhouse. Thesubmission is currently underreview at the EPA, with anestimated decision date ofJanuary 2014.

As fungicide efficacy trials areconducted each year, new pro-ducts are discovered for basildowny mildew control. IR-4residue studies are currentlybeing conducted throughout theU.S. on several products includ-ing DPX-QGU42(oxathiapiprolin)fenamidone and fluopicolide.According to the CDMS website,in addition to Ranman(cyazofamid), the following are

Section 18s Lead to Tolerances for Basil Downy Mildew

Figure 1

Figure 2

— by Kathryn Homa, IR-4 Research Analyst

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Emergency Exemptions

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 4Vol 44 No 3

IR-4 and Section 18 Exemptions— by Ken Samoil, IR-4 Associate Coordinator, with information fromwww.epa.gov/opprd001/section18/

Section 18 of FIFRA (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) authorizes EPA to allowan unregistered use of a pesticide for a limited time if EPA determines that an emergency conditionexists. The regulations governing FIFRA’s Section 18 define the term “Emergency Condition” as anurgent, non-routine situation that requires the use of a pesticide(s). Such uses are often referred toas “emergency exemptions,” “Section 18s,” or simply “exemptions.” Emergency exemptions may berequested by a state or federal agency. Most requests are made by state lead agricultural agencies.

There are four types of emergency exemptions governing Section 18's of FIFRA—Specific,Quarantine, Public Health, and Crisis. Requests are made for pesticides needed for pest problemsthat impact production of agricultural goods when there are no alternatives for controlling the pest.Requests usually involve pesticides that have other approved uses, so EPA scientists have priorunderstanding of the requested chemical.

Uses are requested for a limited period of time to address the emergency situation only. Specific andpublic health exemptions are authorized for no longer than one year, whereas quarantine exemptionsare authorized for no longer than three years. EPA attempts to make decisions on the requests withina 50 day time frame from date of receipt, during which EPA performs a multi-disciplinary evaluationof the request.

If the emergency is determined to be valid and the risks are acceptable, EPA approves the emergencyexemption request. EPA will deny an exemption request if the pesticide does not meet the Agency’ssafety standards, or if emergency criteria are not met.

If the exemption program involves the treatment of agricultural goods, EPA will establish formaltolerances (maximum allowable residue levels) to cover any pesticide residues in food that mayresult. As required by the Food Quality Protection Act of 1996 (FQPA), EPA must make the findingthat there is "reasonable certainty that no harm" will result to human health from aggregate andcumulative exposure to the pesticide, before establishing a tolerance. Tolerances established foremergency exemption uses are time-limited, corresponding to the time that treated commoditiesmight be found in channels of trade.

When a Section 18 specific exemption is needed for multiple years because the requested producthas not yet been registered on the commodity and the pest problem is still significant, the EPA willre-authorize the exemption only if progress is being made towards the Section 3 registration of theproduct. Often, when a food use is involved, the IR-4 Project has a residue study underway insupport of that particular use. When a Section 18 request is being prepared by a state agency, theIR-4 Study Director may be contacted for an update on the progress towards registration. The StudyDirector will reply with a letter summarizing the ongoing residue study, including information aboutthe use pattern (rate, number, and timing of applications) and an estimated submission date. Ifresidue results are available, these are included in the letter of support, so that the time-limitedtolerance can be set at an appropriate level.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 5Vol 44 No 3

Crocus and other early springflowers are the harbingers ofwarmer days after a cold winter.Easter lilies and hyacinthscommonly are given to celebratethe springholidays.Daffodils, tulips,and Frittilariabrighten up anotherwise dullborder beforespring annualsand earlyfloweringperennialsemerge. Iris,Crocosomia,daylilies andgladiolus oftenare great companion plants forrose, lavender, hosta or otherperennials. What do most ofthese flowers have in common?They are grown from bulbs orcorms and usually need to beplanted in the fall for bloom thefollowing spring or summer incommercial and residentiallandscapes. Many will returnyear after year if they are plantedin a suitable location allowingthem to overwinter and receiveenough chilling to induceflowering.

In addition to landscape settings,bulb or corm crops can beforced to flower by simulatingoverwintering conditions andproviding the chillingrequirement. Often this will leadto flowering potted bulbs astemporary houseplants in winter

months, such as Amaryllisduring winter holidays or grapehyacinth paired with crocus tobrighten the day in late Januaryor February.

U.S. growersproduce $48.5million bulbsand cormsannually aspropagativematerials(USDA-NASS,Census ofHorticulture,2009). In otherwords, domesticproductionincludes bulbs

and corms for commercial anddomestic landscapes as well asfor specialty forced bulbs and forcut flowers. Gladiolus, lilies,and freesia are commonly placedin floral arrangements, but manyother bulb crops are found inthese special occasionarrangements.

Bulb and corm crops are proneto disease and pests and in fieldproduction weed management iskey to optimal cropproduction.This weed problemhas traditionally been controlledwith methyl bromide fumigation.The search for methyl bromidealternatives has been animportant research avenue tominimize initial weed seed anddisease inoculum for field grownbulbs. Disease issues includebulb and corm rots and root rots

caused by Fusarium, Rhizoctoniaand Pythium and foliar diseasessuch as Botrytis and downymildews. Viruses and bacteriacan plague production systems.Nematodes and arthropod pestsoften cause economic damage inaddition to vectoring viraldiseases. For more informationabout bulb crops, please consult‘Ornamental Geophytes: fromBasic Science to SustainableHorticultural Production’ by RinaKamentsky and Hiroshi Okubo.

To aid growers, IR-4 hasscreened bactericides,fungicides, insecticides, andherbicides for crop safety on anumber of bulb and corm cropsincluding daffodil, iris, and tulip.In addition, IR-4 has screenedproducts for Fusarium ongladiolus and facilitated researchon the invasive pathogengladiolus rust.

Time to Think Spring!— by Cristi Palmer, IR-4 Ornamental Horticulture Manager

Spotlight on Ornamentals

Dont forget to follow us.www.facebook.com/IR4Project,https://www.facebook.com/IR4OrnHortand @IR4_Project and @IR4Project.

Photos by Cristi Palmer

eQA

pg 6Vol 44 No 3

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Activity Alert from IR-4eQA!!!In the very near future IR-4 GLPparticipants won’t be waiting formail deliveries to receive theirmost recent QA inspectionreports. Instead, the participantwill be receiving an email that willtell them that their new QA auditreport is available on the IR-4eQA system (see Figure 1). TheIR-4 program has always lookedfor better, more efficient, andfaster ways to meet the needs ofour mission, “To facilitateregistration of sustainable pestmanagement technology forspecialty crops and minor uses”.These registrations typicallyrequire the collection of residuedata that is submitted to the USEPA (and other agencies). The USEPA data must be compliant withthe FIFRA Good LaboratoryPractice standards (GLP, 40 CFRPart 160). When conducting GLPcompliant residue studies it isrequired that the IR-4 QualityAssurance Unit (QAU) monitorsstudies for compliance with theGLPs and reports the results ofinspections to, at a minimum, theTesting Facility Management andthe Study Director.

The new eQA reporting systemwill meet the QA complianceneeds of FIFRA. The new systemis the result of a two year process.First, the essential characteristicsof the system were identified thenan analysis of potential “off the

shelf” systems tookplace. The essentialcharacteristics identifiedincluded that the system:1) be web based forbroad access; 2) have thecapability of being GLPcompliant by havingproper security,containing an audit trailand having an electronicsignature feature; 3)contain an internallygenerated notification andreminder system; 4) be a relationally based,searchable database to permittrend analysis of complianceissues and turnaround times;and 5) be reasonably priced(purchase and maintenancefees). Three quality assurancereporting software systems werevetted and the one having thebest of the 5 characteristics waschosen for a broader review byIR-4 HQ and Regional staff.

In March of 2012 the proposalto select the Quality SystemsIntegrators’ TMSWeb Workflowand Forms module waspresented to the IR-4 ProjectManagement Committee (PMC)and approved. In May of 2012the purchased software wasinstalled and developmentbegan. A three day training forQuality Assurance personnel thatwould be developing the customreporting forms and providingtraining to the IR-4 staff tookplace, during which the first

prototype reporting form wasdesigned (see figures 2 & 3 foran example QA audit formcoversheet and QA Findingspage). Following the initialdesign, all 9 of the current QAreporting forms wereconverted to their electronicform. Once the forms wereconverted, each of the three“implementation” teams tookthose forms and tested them.These teams were comprisedof HQ staff (Testing Facilitymanagement, Study Directorsand QA), Regional staff(Coordinators, QA, Field andLab) and regional Field/LabResearch Directors. Thereporting forms and theiraccompanying workflows weretested and modified until thesystem glitches were identifiedand repaired.

In February of 2013 a nationaltraining program for the eQAsystem took place at the IR-4National EducationConference. Four training

Quality Assurance Reporting Enters theWeb Zone with eQA

Figure 1

— by Tammy White-Barkalow, IR-4 Assistant Director, QA

pg 7Vol 44 No 3

eQA

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

sessions were provided to assurethat all training participantswould attend one of the trainingsessions.Training has also beensupplemented and performed viawebinar. The webinars allowmultiple individuals to view atraining information while beingable to discuss the presentationmaterials in real time. The use ofwebinars has also provided anexcellent mechanism for troubleshooting and conductingindividualized follow-up training.

The eQA system is in its finalstages of launch preparation.

Over 120+ users have beenidentified, added to the systemas users and their locationsinputed into the user’spermission systems. SOPsgoverning the installation,maintenance, use and retentionof records and generation/distribution of QA reports aredrafted, while the currentSOPs on conductance andgeneration of specific QAinspection reports are beingmodified for use of the neweQA system.

This project’s success has been

predicated on the cooperativeefforts of so many IR-4participants. Their time andefforts in the development,testing, training andimplementation of the systemare responsible for thesuccessful system development.

Through a simple webconnection, eQA allows for easyaccess to QA information. Wetrust this will translate into astreamlined reporting systemthat will provide for fasterreporting of QA audit findings, areduction in copying and mailing

costs, andadvancedanalysis ofcompliancetrends thatpermits moreroot causeidentification.

Figure 2

Figure 3

pg 8Vol 44 No 3

Feature IR-4 & IPM ColWestern IPM Center— by Steve Elliott, Writer,Western IPM Center

Western Region IR-4 and theWestern IPM Center EnhanceCooperation

Does this pesticide play asignificant role in an integratedpest management program? As IR-4 increasingly asks thatquestion, connections betweenthe regional IR-4 programs andthe regional IPM centers willbecome more important. In theWest, the IR-4 program and theWestern IPM Center havehistorically worked closely, buthave recently solidified thoselinks through more regularcommunication and sharedaccess to information thatbenefits both programs.

“The hope is, as we continue towork together, the minor-usepesticides that get approved willhave a good fit within IPMprograms, and therefore presentless risk to the environment andconsumers,” said Jim Farrar,director of the Western IPMCenter.

Rebecca Sisco, regional fieldcoordinator of the Western IR-4Program, said that traditionallythe IR-4 program and theWestern IPM Center haveworked well together. Part ofthat was personnel – the sameperson used to split time in bothareas – but mostly it’s the natureof agriculture in the West. Someof the most important crops inthe region – almonds, pistachiosand wine grapes just to name afew – are considered specialtycrops by national definitions.“Specialty crops are important tothe West, and because they’reimportant, people care,” shesaid. “I think with the local-foodmovement, you’ll begin to seespecialty crops and small-acreage crops becoming moreimportant across the U.S.”

Sharing InformationTo enhance the two programs’cooperation, IR-4 and the IPMCenter took several concretesteps. First, they participate inmonthly conference calls, andthe IPM Center’s commentcoordinators often participate.The Center’s three commentcoordinators have networks of

growers, extension specialists,crop consultants and commoditygroup contacts who providefeedback when federal agenciesmake a request for commentabout a particular product orcrop.

“Through the commentcoordinators, we get morein-depth information,” Siscosaid. “I remember reading oneresponse about indaziflam oncranberries, and it was a clear,concise presentation of theimportance of that product onthat crop. It’s very helpful.”In addition, Western IR-4 andthe Western IPM Center openeda Dropbox account, whereanyone in either program canpost comments or questions to acommon document, and shareupdates and new IPM-relatedinformation.

During a conference call last fall,Western IPM Center staffsuggested addingIPM-compatibility criteria toIR-4’s priority-setting process,and IR-4 headquarters quicklyadapted the standard IR-4

The use ofsulfur dioxideon blueberriesto control graymold is one ofthe entries onWestern IR-4’sdatabase ofIPM-fitcomments.

pg 9Vol 44 No 3

Feature

addition to the center’sRegulatory Information Network.

Joe LaForest, Assistant Directorof the SR IPM center will travelto the IR-4 SOR Priority settingmeeting in Orlando (August20-21, 2013) and will addressthe stakeholders present,reiterating the need for, and thebenefits of, increasedcooperation as well as sharing ofinformation to help both centersto better serve the SouthernRegion.

IR-4/IPM in theNortheast Region— by Edith Lurvey, NER FieldCoordinator; Carrie KoplinkaLoehr, Director NE IPM Center

NE IR-4 is collaborating with theNE IPM Center and the IPMInstitute of North America on anOrganic-IPM Working Groupthat will help identify commonissues and define research andextension priorities. Organicfruits and vegetables are asignificant portion of Northeastcrop production and helping toestablish a working group willprovide feedback on the pestmanagement needs of organicand conventional farmers alike.

The working group will conveneinitially via phone calls, and thefirst is scheduled for August2nd. Interested parties shouldcontact Jane Petzoldt at608.232.1410 orjpetzoldt@ipminstitute.org,

IR-4 & IPMCenters

In the recent expansion of collaborativeefforts between Regional IPM Centersand the IR-4 Project, the IPM Centershave provided valuable guidance forIR-4’s addition of an IPM component tothe IR-4 website Project ClearanceRequest form (PCR). Lynnae Jess,Co-Director of the Northcentral IPMCenter, Michigan State University, hasserved as liaison between the IPMCenters and IR-4 in facilitating thisinteraction (Lynnae replaced RickMelnicoe [retired last year from theWestern IPM Center] in this liaisoncapacity). Now when IR-4 stakeholderssubmit new crop/pest/ product requests,they are required to provide anassessment of the IPM compatibility ofthe requested use (i.e., very good fit,good fit, poor fit, very poor fit,unknown), as well as a textualexplanation of the fit of the proposeduse within an IPM system.

Additionally, IPM coordinators haveprovided feedback on how IR-4 mighttap their review of IR-4’s potentialpriority “A” projects for the next researchyear. In August, IR-4 will be requestingcomments on IPM compatibility duringthe online project nomination process.IPM comments submitted will becaptured in a new “IPM Compatibility”field in the IR-4 database, which willassist IR-4 and its stakeholders todetermine the best IPM fit projects tomove forward into the next year’sresearch plan for eventual registration.

project request form to includethis component. To evaluatecompatibility, the WesternRegion IR-4 program created anew page on its website, askingfor and listing IPM-fit commentsabout priority projects in theWest. That page, located athttp://wrir4.ucdavis.edu/pst/pst-ipm.html, launched in early June,and the Western IPM Centerpromoted it on its blog,http://ipmwest.blogspot.com,later the same month.

“Now if someone providesIPM-fit information to me, I caninput it into a database and postit on the website,” Sisco said.“As we gather these commentsand begin to use them, they’ll behelpful in setting priorities andwe’ll have a more completepicture of how compounds fitwith IPM considerations.”Contact Rebecca Sisco atWestern IR-4 atrsisco@ucdavis.edu, or (530)752-7634. Contact Jim Farrarat the Western IPM Center atjjfarrar@ucdavis.edu, or (530)754-8378.

IR-4/IPM in the Southern Region— by Michele Samuel-Foo, SORField Coordinator

The Southern IPM Center(SIPM) and the IR-4 SouthernRegion (SOR) are exploring waysthat both entities can work moreharmoniously together. MichelleSamuel-Foo is an active memberof the SR IPM center’s Advisorycouncil and she is a recent

llaborations

—by Van Starner, IR-4 Assistant Director;Keith Dorschner, IR-4/IPM Liaison

Interview

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 10Vol 44 No 3

Reprinted with Permission fromAmerican Vegetable Grower's June2013 issue.

The IR-4 Project expands itswork with organizationsworldwide to reduce pesticidetrade barriers for the U.S.

American Vegetable Growermagazine caught up with DanKunkel, Associate Director, Foodand International Programs atIR-4, just prior to his trip toChina for a meeting with theCodex AlimentariusCommission, or CodexCommittee on PesticideResidues, which is anorganization that developsharmonized international foodstandards, among other things.The meeting focused onpesticide residues. We asked Kunkel about IR-4’sinteraction with Codex, itsinterest in international markets,and plans to expandparticipation in globalorganizations.

What are the main reasonsIR-4’s efforts are being movedtoward international markets?

Kunkel: To help U.S. growersexport produce is the mainreason. Even though there are alot of new agreements that havebeen made for free trade,pesticide residue has become atrade barrier. So if the growersare using a new product in theU.S. and the receiving countriesdon’t recognize them as safe,

then commodities get held upon the border.

So IR-4 decided that we woulduse our data not only to submitto EPA domestically, but wewould also start using itinternationally to make sure thatthe U.S. commodities in tradearen’t stopped because of lack ofdata to indicate that they aresafe when they arrive on theshores of other countries.

We focus on Codex, mostly, andsome commodity groups contactus directly for data that theysubmit to other foreign bodieslike Korea, Japan, and theEuropean Union. Manycountries recognize Codex, sothat is going a long way inaddressing some of the issues,but it is a very fluid situation.

Can you talk about howincreasing Codex AlimentariusMaximum Residue Limits (MRL)for Minor Use is benefiting theU.S. and other countries?

Kunkel: Many countries defaultto Codex (or incorporate thosestandards) so we try to use ourdata or dovetail with the [cropprotection] companies when theysubmit their data to Codex. Themore Codex MRLs we get withcountries defaulting to Codex,that gives our growers moremarkets they can sell to.

It would be nice if morecountries would default to

Codex. I have to say thatpersonally because the U.S.doesn’t default to Codex. TheU.S. tries to do everything it canto match Codex MRLs, but it isnot that easy.

Why? A lot of it has to do withdelays. We can’t wait for Codexto set an MRL before we setours, so we usually set ours firstand then Codex sets theirs. Overthe past year, the agency hasbeen working really hard toharmonize MRLs. Let’s say weset an MRL in the U.S. and thenCodex sets its MRL. When EPAhas another action on thatchemical, that is when toharmonize the MRLs withCodex.

There are some pilot projects atCodex that hopefully will allowthe organization to get moreinvolved with MRLs at productregistration. Currently, a lot ofnew products are registered in aglobal joint review process. IfCodex can participate in that, itwill help to solve those issues ofdisparaging MRLs.

Is the trade barrier situationimproving?

Kunkel: It is getting better but itremains fluid and it remains verycomplicated. I say that becausewe continue to have countriesthat have their own list ofpesticides, they call it their‘positive list,’ which means it isthe list of products that they feel

A Global Crop Protection EffortAn Interview with Dan Kunkel

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 11Vol 44 No 3

are safe, and they list the MRLsthey feel are safe for a particularcommodity.

So it is those pesticides that theyallow on commodities, and thishas sometimes been a problemwith countries like China, India,and Taiwan. Instead of defaultingto Codex now they aredeveloping their own system.

So there is a lot more happeningand it changes sometimes on adaily basis. Even South Korea ismoving from Codex to having itsown positive list.

How is IR-4 continuing toexpand participation in globalorganizations?

Kunkel: In regard to globalorganizations, we alreadyparticipate in the NAFTAtechnical working group onpesticides. We attend thosemeetings and we usuallyparticipate as a governmentmember, as we are invited byEPA to participate. That is alsotrue for the Organization forEconomic Co-operation andDevelopment (OECD) [Editor’sNote: The OECD is aninternational organization thatpromotes policies that willimprove the economic and socialwell-being of people around theworld.] and Codex.

We would like to continue to seeexpansion of the work that weare already doing so that we canhave less concerns about ourcommodities when they areexported. All the work that IR-4is doing is just to support thegrowers and their markets, and

we don’t want pesticides to be atrade barrier for them.

IR-4 has a strong partnershipwith the Canadian Agricultureand Agri-Food Canada’s minoruse program. Can you talk aboutthe Pest Management Center(PMC) and how IR-4 hopes itwill be a model for othercountries?

Kunkel: We have been workingwith Canada since 1996, andthen they got significant fundingin 2003 that basically allowedthem to set up an IR-4 inCanada, which is known as thePest Management Center. About20% of our research is seamlesswhere either IR-4 is the sponsorof the study and we have trials inCanada for our U.S. studies, orCanada is a sponsor, and theyare running trials in the U.S.And then we submit the data toboth EPA and the PestManagement Regulatory Agencyin Canada. There are no tradeissues with those cooperativeprojects.

We also work together on a lotof other projects. We go toworkshops in Canada where theyset priorities, or they come toour workshops where we setpriorities so we can dovetail ourstudies of joint interest together.We have company meetings withSyngenta, BASF, Bayer, DowAgroSciences, DuPont, andothers and Canada joins us onthose discussions. I think thecompanies have realized if theyregister a product in the U.S.and it isn’t registered in Canada,the growers here aren’t going touse it because they are not sure

if that commodity can beexported to Canada. Canada isour biggest trade partner for theag commodities.

Can you talk about theimportance of the main areaswhich were identified at the2012 Global Minor UseSummit?

Kunkel: We ended up with fivethemes being covered inFebruary 2012. Those themesare coordination andcollaboration, communication,regulatory incentives forregistrants to register minoruses, capacity development, andregistration of minor uses andMRL setting.

I think most of those areas speakfor themselves but as a follow upwe have established a steeringgroup. There are a couple ofareas that we are looking at forthe steering group and theyinclude a data base – a globalneeds database and a datasharing database. In that area weare organizing a globalworkshop that will take place in2015. It will be like the IR-4workshops.

The other area is capacitydevelopment. A lot of that isbeing done by the USDAForeign Ag Service, and thatorganization has beensponsoring a number ofworkshops, and the three mainregions that the capacitydevelopment is working on arein Asia, Africa, and LatinAmerica.

continued on page 12

Interview

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

and maximum residue limits onbetween 25 or 30 commodities. It really helps to address theminor use issue, so now we arereally hoping that Codex willrecognize that as well. And theyhave, they actually haveapproved all the fruit types. Soall the fruiting crop groups havebeen updated and codex alsonow allows for this extrapolationof crop groups.

Now we are working thevegetable types and some of theother commodities. [Codex]crop groups are a little differentthan ours, but the fruit types aredone and we are going to getvegetables, herbs, and some ofthe other ones will be finished inthe coming years.

As global markets continue togrow, how will IR-4 involvementgrow as well?

Kunkel: We are going tocontinue to increase where weuse our data. To date, we haveincreased the amount ofcountries we work with togenerate data (especially withCanada), which will providesome cost savings to IR-4 in thelong run, but we will probablyincrease the number of globalstudies we do.

For example, let’s say we dotrials on blueberries and that wedo eight trials in the U.S. Well,now we may do 15 to 20 trials,but we may do it globally. Wewill continue to move in thatdirection — generating dataglobally instead of nationally.

pg 12Vol 44 No 3

Interview

By working with the countriesthe USDA Foreign Ag Servicehas been able to get three WorldBank Funds through theStandard Development TradeFacility (SDTF). Through thosegrants, we hope they will start todevelop data generation hubs inthose areas, and IR-4 is hopingthat we can tap into thatresearch source to not onlydevelop data for U.S. growers,but address needsinternationally.

The other main area that thesteering group is working on iscommunication. Withcommunication it involves theGlobal Minor Use Portal:www.gmup.org

We are communicating a lotthrough the portal and we aresharing information aboutupcoming minor use events. Onsome of the main areas, I’ll beposting information on themesthat were the outcome of arecent summit.

When did IR-4 beginincorporating internationalmarkets into its work?

Kunkel: Jerry Baron, theexecutive director of IR-4,started in 1995-96 and westarted communications withCanada. We started withNAFTA, and then there was aCanada/U.S. agreement, whichevolved into the North AmericanFree Trade Agreement. Weparticipated in a number ofOECD symposiums around

2005 and then OECDestablished an expert workinggroup on minor uses in 2008,where we are a member.

Crop grouping is also a big partof what IR-4 is involved in. Wehave been updating the U.S.crop groups, but we are alsoworking to update the Codexcrop groups, as well.

What will updating the Codexcrop groups entail?

Kunkel: It is using the samesystem that is used in the U.S.Part of it is a listing ofcommodities and making sureeveryone recognizes them.There is a common name that isrecognized by all the countriesin Codex but the one thing weare adding that helps with MinorUses is that you can haverepresentative commodities. Soyou generate data on therepresentative commodities butthen it allows you tolerances orMaximum Residue Limits on abig group of similarcommodities.

So it is kind of like extrapolationbut the extrapolation is very welldefined and it is within acommodity. So for example, forcucumbers, we would conductstudies on cucumbers, summersquash, and cantaloupe, butthen we can also get uses onwatermelons, winter squash, andall those other odd things inbetween. So by doing thosethree studies we get registrations

Global Effort continued from page 11

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 13Vol 44 No 3

Master of Science degreeprogram specializing in PlantPathology, is taking on additionalresponsibilities as lead biologistin IR-4’s plant diseasemanagement activities.

Bill Barney will be leading theBiopesticide & Organic Supportgrants in addition to managingstudies and crop groupingprojects.

Personalities in the News

The IR-4 Newsletter Vol 44 No. 3, Summer 2013The IR-4 Newsletter is published quarterly for distribution to cooperators in our partnerState/Federal/Industry research units, State and Federal officials, commodity groups, and private citizens. Material from the IR-4 Newsletter may be reproduced with credit to the publication. Major funding for IR-4 is provided by USDA-NIFA and USDA-ARS in coopera-tion with the State Agricultural Experiment Stations. New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station Publication No.P-27200-13-03, supported by state, US Hatch Act, and otherUSDA funds. Editor: Sherrilynn NovackIR-4 Public Relations and Communication Manager, 732.932.9575 x 4632, novack@aesop.rutgers.eduNewsletter Committee:Northeast Regional Field Coordinator, Edith Lurvey, 315.787.2308. North Central Regional Director, Bob Hollingworth, 517.432.7718. Western Regional Assistant Field Coordinator, Stephen Flanagan, 541.688.3155. Southern Regional Field Coordinator, Michelle Samuel-Foo, 352-392-1978 ext 406 Southern Region Program Assistant/Quality Assurance Support Robin Adkins352.392.1978 x 424. Commodity Liaison Committee member, Mike Bledsoe, 407-493-3933 of Village Farms. IR-4 HQ, 732.932.9575Assistant Director, Van Starner x 4621Ornamental Horticulture Manager, Cristi Palmer x 4629Technical Coordinator/Entomology, Ken Samoil x 4614Research Analyst, Kathryn Homa x 4604

The second quarter of 2013 hasbeen filled with retirements andappointments.

RetirementsQA Personnel:At IR-4 HQ, KathrynHackett-Fields, has retired andshe and her husband havemoved to North Carolina.Kathryn worked for !R-4 formore than 15 years. Kathryn hasstarted a consulting businesscalled QualiStat, Inc. where shewill provide QA services,training and retreats. Her emailis qualistat@aol.com.

Bharti Patel also retired in May.Bharti worked at IR-4 HQ for sixyears. She and her husband areenjoying their retirement in NewJersey.

Commodity Liaison Committeemember from American Nursery& Landscape Association(ANLA) Marc Teffeau, hasretired. Marc was the Director ofResearch and Regulatory Affairsfor the ANLA, a Washington,DC-based trade association thatrepresents, through its nationalgrassroots network, over12,000 firms who grow, sell,install and maintain landscapeplants. Marc had been at ANLAsince 2004.

Industry supporters, KenChisholm, from Nichino andWynn John from DuPont alsoretired this year.

AppointmentsIR-4 welcomes MicheleHumiston to the NortheastRegion QAU. Michele has takenon the duties of BarbaraAnderson who retired in 2011.Michele worked for over 15years in the NE IR-4 laboratoryand is very familiar with IR-4 andGood Laboratory Practices. Shewill be working closely with HQto perform field audits andreview Field Data Books.

Research Analyst, Carolyn Jolly,has joined IR-4 HQ full time.Carolyn was formerly employedat the IR-4 Western Regionlaboratory and for the last 1.5years has been at IR-4 HQ as areport writer.

Kathryn Homa, who is in thefinal stages of completion of her

Retirements andAppointments at IR-4

Save theDate

XXV International Congress ofEntomology

September 25-30, 2016Orlando, Florida

For more information contact Alvin Simmons

Alvin.Simmons@ars.usda.gov

Public Health Pesticides

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 14Vol 44 No 3

The IR-4 Public HealthPesticides program completed itsfirst five years of existence inJune 2013. Currently, withfunding extended throughmid-2018, the program isentering a period of expandedactivity and growth. In thisarticle we summarize theobjectives and some majoractivities of the program’s firstyears and look forward to keypriorities and strategies for thenear future.

In June 2008 the IR-4 Projectentered into a new five-yearcooperative agreement withUSDA-ARS to use IR-4resources and expertise to helpenhance the vector controltoolbox – the set of pest controlproducts that protect people andanimals from arthropod peststhat transmit disease or causemajor nuisance. Vector control isa classic minor use of pesticides,with a small market that oftenrequires public support forinnovation, productdevelopment and registration,and the retention of materialsfacing new data requirements.The overall objective of the newprogram was to build on IR-4’shistory of support for minoragricultural pest control marketsby facilitating the registration ofconventional and biologicalpesticides (including repellents,attractants, and toxicants) useful

for vector control. The financialsupport of ARS allowed IR-4 toestablish a new Public HealthPesticides (PHP) program withdedicated staff and access toadditional IR-4 resources at HQand in the regions to supportthese efforts.

The primary funding supportingthe IR-4 PHP program originatedin a joint effort of USDA-ARSand the Department of Defense– the Deployed War-FighterProtection Research Program(DWFP), The DWFP wasestablished in 2004 to developand validate novel methods toprotect United States militarypersonnel deployed abroad fromthreats posed bydisease-carryinginsects. Thus, aparticular focus ofthe IR-4 PHPprogram isenhancing thehealth and safety ofdeployed USmilitary personnelby helping translateentomological andchemical research

into vector control products withregulatory approvals for militaryuse anywhere in the world. Inaddition, the program has beenempowered by its funders tobroadly support thedevelopment, registration, andretention of pest controlproducts for civilian publichealth and veterinary medicinein the U.S. and globally.

A major objective of the IR-4PHP program has been toidentify underutilized vectorcontrol materials. A primaryproduct of the first five years wasa new PHP Inventory andDatabase that uniquelyintegrates data on specification,regulatory status, and bioactivity

Public Health Pesticides ProgramCompletes First Five Years— by Karl Malamud-Roam, IR-4 Public Health Pesticides Program Manager

Attractive toxic sugar baits -an innovation in mosquitocontrol, with regulatorysupport from IR-4.

continued on next page

GLP testing ofsprayequipment fornovel datacollectionefforts tosupportmosquitocideregistration.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ir4.rutgers.edu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . pg 15Vol 44 No 3

of over 700 materials with PHPactual or potential useir4.rutgers.edu/publichealth.html.

Direct regulatory support for newproducts is another majorobjective. The flagship projectsince the program’s inception hasbeen the development of dataand models to support all-croptolerances for the new mosquitoadulticide etofenprox, Themethods developed during thisproject are increasingly beingused to evaluate drift anddeposition of ultra-low-volume(ULV) pesticide applicationsgenerally. Another majorregulatory support activity hasbeen representing registrants ofnovel vector control toolsincluding insecticideautodissemination stations, lethalovitraps, attractive toxic sugarbaits, novel botanical vectorrepellents, and other innovativevector control strategies.

Assisting the retention ofregistrations for existing vectorcontrol tools facing new datarequirements has been animportant means to ensure anadequate vector control toolbox,and the IR-4 PHP program hasbeen instrumental in collectingusage data, preparing waiverarguments, and structuring jointdata collection efforts to helpprotect key chemicals.

IR-4 PHP program staff routinelyparticipates in World HealthOrganization panels and otherglobal efforts to foster innovativevector control interventions, andis increasingly recognized as a

continued from previous page

key partner in productdevelopment efforts. Withprogram funding recentlyextended through June 2018 byDWFP and ARS, and a new PHPResearch Assistant starting workon August 1, the future looksbright for the newest IR-4program.

Grant Announcement

EventsWestern Region TrainingWebinars

November 12: Using NewTechnologies for Plot Maps –Stephen Flanagan and MikaTolson

eQA System Update – SheritaNormington

December 10: Year in Review –Field Office

2013 Food Use WorkshopSept. 17-18, 2013Albuquerque, NM

2013 IR-4 OrnamentalWorkshopOctober 8-10, 2013Coconut Grove, FL

PMC meeting 11/5-6/2013 National Research PlanningMeeting, 11/6-7/2013 Davis, CA

Call for ProposalsThe IR-4 Biopesticide ResearchProgram announces a requestfor grant proposals for fundingof efficacy research in 2014.IR-4 is especially interested inproposals containingbiopesticides as resistancemanagement tools rotated withconventional products. Whileresistance management is animportant interest, the proposalmust still have a majority focuson biopesticides. Projectproposals will be accepted inEarly, Advanced andDemonstration stage categories.The total amount of fundingavailable will be around $400,000. Most successfulgrants have generally rangedfrom $5,000 to $25,000. Theprimary objective of the IR-4Biopesticides Research Programis to further the developmentand registration of biopesticidesfor use in pest managementsystems for specialty crops or forminor uses on major crops.Download applications athttp://bit.ly/biogrant.

Proposals will be due October 21, 2013

For questions about proposalformat and content contact: Michael Braverman 732.932.9575 ext 4610 braverman@aesop.rutgers.edu or Bill Barney732.932-9575 ext 4603barney@aesop.rutgers.edu.

IR-4 Headquarters, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey500 College Road EastSuite 201 WPrinceton, NJ 08540

NON-PROFITUS POSTAGE

PAIDNEW BRUNSWICK, NJ

PERMIT NO. 157

Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey •University of California •Cornell University•University of Florida •Michigan State University

Major funding for IR-4 is provided by Special Research Grants andHatch Act Funds from USDA-NIFA , in cooperation with the StateAgricultural Experiment Stations, and USDA-ARS.

TolerancesUnited States Department of AgricultureNational Institute of Food and Agriculture

Federal Register: May 1, 2013GlyphosateTrade Name: Roundup Ultra,Roundup Weathermax Crops: Berry andsmall fruit group 13-07, Carrot, Citrusfruit group 10-10, Pome fruit group11-10, Oilseed group 20 except canola,Teff, Bulb vegetable group 3-07,Fruiting vegetable group 8-10 exceptokra PR#: 11014, 01243, 11012,11013, 06159, 07210, 08672,10670, 10528, 11010, 11011

Federal Register: May 15, 2013Spirotetramat Trade Name: Movento,Ultor Crops: Globe artichoke, Lowgrowing berry except strawberrysubgroup 13-07H, Bushberry subgroup13-07B, Coffee, Citrus fruit group10-10, Pome fruit group 11-10,Pineapple, Pomegranate, Taro leaves,Bulb vegetable group 3-07, Fruitingvegetable group 8-10, WatercressPR#: 10243, 10198, 10194, 10041,10929, 10930, 10635, 10113,10581, 09983, 10942, 10928,09948

IR-4 Successes May - July 2013

The trade names listed below are provided as a means to identify the chemical for which atolerance has been established. A trade name listed here may not be the name of the prod-uct on which the new food use(s) will be registered. Only labeled products may be used ona food crop. Be sure to obtain current information about usage regulations and examine acurrent product label before applying any chemical.

Federal Register: May 22, 2013NAA Trade Name: Fruitone, Tre-HoldCrops: Avocado, Mango, Mameysapote, Rambutan, Pome fruit group11-10 PR#: 09660, 09701, 08666,10955

Federal Register: June 5, 2013Propamocarb Trade Name: Previcur Crops: Lima bean PR#: 07263

Imidacloprid Trade Name: Protector Crops: Fish, Shellfish PR#: 10553

Federal Register: June 17, 2013Fenpyroximate Trade Name: Akari,Fujimite, Portal Crops: Tuberous andcorm vegetable subgroup 1C, Stonefruit group 12-12, Small vine-climbingfruit except fuzzy kiwifruit subgroup13-07F PR#: 10173, 10438, 10468,10469, 11028

Federal Register: June 19, 2013Acetamiprid Trade Name: AssailCrops: Sweet corn PR#: 10216

Federal Register: July 3, 2013Ethalfluralin Trade Name: SonalanCrops: Rapeseed subgroup 20A,Sunflower subgroup 20BPR#: 10550

Federal Register: July 17, 2013Hexythiazox Trade Name: OnagerCrops: Pepper/Eggplant subgroup8-10B, Pome fruit group 11-10,Caneberry subgroup 13-07A, Smallvine-climbing fruit (except fuzzykiwifruit) subgroup 13-07F,Low-growing berry subgroup 13-07GPR#: 09134, 10961, 10962,10963, 10964

Federal Register: July 24, 2013Imazosulfuron Trade Name: V-10142Crops: Tuberous and corm vegetablesubgroup 1C, Melon subgroup 9APR#: 09645, 09819

Federal Register: July 31, 2013Trifluralin Trade Name: TreflanCrops: Oilseed group 20PR#: 10749