title: Optimal Cotton Insecticide Application Termination Timing: A Meta-Analysis.
abstract: The concept of insecticide termination timing is generally accepted among cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) researchers; however, exact timings are often disputed. Specifically, there is uncertainty regarding the last economic insecticide application to control fruit-feeding pests including tarnished plant bug (Lygus lineolaris (Palisot de Beauvois)), boll weevil (Anthonomus grandis), bollworm (Helicoverpa zea), tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens), and cotton fleahopper (Pseudatomoscelis seriatus). A systematic review of prior studies was conducted within a meta-analytic framework. Nine publicly available articles were amalgamated to develop an optimal timing principle. These prior studies reported 53 independent multiple means comparison field experiments for a total of 247 trial observations. Stochastic plateau theory integrated with econometric meta-analysis methodology was applied to the meta-database to determine the shape of the functional form of both the agronomic optimal insecticide termination timing and corresponding yield potential. Results indicated that current university insecticide termination timing recommendations are later than overall estimated timing suggested. The estimated 159 heat units (HU) after the fifth position above white flower (NAWF5) was found to be statistically different than the 194 HU termination used as the status quo recommended termination timing. Insecticides applied after 159 HU may have been applied in excess, resulting in unnecessary economic and environmental costs. Empirical results also suggested that extending the insecticide termination time by one unit resulted in a cotton lint yield increase of 0.27 kilograms per hectare up to the timing where the plateau began. Based on economic analyses, profit-maximizing producers may cease application as soon as 124 HU after NAWF5. These results provided insights useful to improve production systems by applying inputs only when benefits were expected to be in excess of the respective costs.
authors.affiliation: Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, 342 Waters Hall, Manhattan, KS 66506 (spaceplowboy@gmail.com), spaceplowboy@gmail.com.
authors.forename: T W
authors.initials: TW
authors.lastname: Griffin
authors.affiliation: Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, 2401 E. Highway 83, Weslaco, TX 78596 (samuel.zapata@ag.tamu.edu).
authors.forename: S D
authors.initials: SD
authors.lastname: Zapata
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D001517:Coleoptera; D018556:Crops, Agricultural / Q000254:growth & development; D003368:Gossypium / Q000254:growth & development*; D006430:Hemiptera; D007300:Insect Control / Q000379:methods; D007306:Insecticides; D009036:Moths; D012621:Seasons; D013997:Time Factors
chemical_list: D007306:Insecticides
keywords: cotton insect; field & forage crop; pest control; plant insect