PMSP for Pest Management Research & Education in Southern Sweetpotato Production Systems


SettingSweet Potato
StateAlabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina


Executive Summary



Category Rank Pest Type Pest Crop Stage Date Priority
Extension/Outreach 1 Pathogens 2015 Enhance grower decision-making and minimize prophylactic insecticide applications and costs
Regulatory 1 All Pest Types 2015 Group 1 pesticides, as identified by EPA, are a high priority for regulatory scrutiny. These are: aldicarb (Temik), carbaryl (Sevin), chlorpyrifos (Lorsban), endosulfan (Thiodan or Phaser), ethoprop (Mocap), methyl parathion (PennCap M), phosmet (Imidan) thiabendazole (Mertect 340-F), dacthal (DCPA).
Regulatory 2 All Pest Types 2015 The need for SREIC to engage in the IR-4 process to enhance opportunities for testing and registering reduced-risk products in sweetpotatoes.
Regulatory 2 Pathogens 2015 Increase registration of herbicides for control of key weed species such as Carfentrazone, Sulfentrazine, Halosulfuron, Metolachlor and Dimethanamid.
Research 1 2015 Major weed species in need of further investigation: nutsedge (purple, yellow, rice flats), pigweed, annual grasses, sicklepod, sesbania, and ground cherry nightshade.
Research 1 All Pest Types 2015 Causal factors associated with insect damage,
Research 2 2015 Other weed species also worth review include morningglory species, lambsquarters, cocklebur, perennial grasses (Johnson grass, Bermuda grass), s. sandspur, common ragweed, prickly sida.
Research 2 All Pest Types 2015 Insect monitoring and scouting techniques,
Research 3 2015 The development of reduced risk strategies for weed management. Basic biology of various weeds such as sedges and Palmer amaranth interactions may be critical in reducing root damage.
Research 3 All Pest Types 2015 Interactions between weed populations and insect damage,
Research 4 2015 Information about causal factors related to the density and diversity of weeds in fields. 1) the interaction between weeds, insects and diseases, 2) crop history, 3) planting date, and 4) soil and moisture conditions.
Research 4 All Pest Types 2015 The etiology of post-harvest root damage,
Research 5 All Pest Types 2015 Reduced-risk disease management tools,
Research 6 All Pest Types 2015 Techniques for enhancing the health of propagation materials,
Research 7 All Pest Types 2015 Growers’ priority weed problems,
Research 8 All Pest Types 2015 Weed-free periods or density thresholds to minimize herbicide use, and
Research 9 All Pest Types 2015 New sweetpotato varieties resistant to diseases, insects and weed competition
Research 10 All Pest Types 2015 Research focused on basic pest biology, particularly for pathogens and soil-borne insects. A better understanding of pest life cycles and relationships to potential causal agents such as soil and climate conditions, cropping history, and cultivar selection is necessary to develop basic IPM tools.
Research 10 Pathogens 2015 At least eight insect pests cause significant yield and quality effects in sweetpotato production. 1) wireworms, 2) white grubs, 3) sweetpotato weevil, 4) sweetpotato flea beetle, 5) cucumber beetle, 6) white fringed beetle, 7) armyworm/cut worm complex, and 8) sugarcane beetle.
Research 11 Pathogens 2015 There is a lack of effective scouting and monitoring techniques, particularly for soil-borne insects, including wire worms, white grubs and spotted cucumber beetle
Research 12 Pathogens 2015 Registered pesticides or other control strategies, are not available to manage pests that emerge later in the growing season
Research 13 Pathogens 2015 Basic pest biology, population dynamics and field conditions necessary to correlate insect damage with causal factors
Research 14 Pathogens 2015 Viable cultivars with measurable resistance to insect pests
Research 15 Insects 2015 New, reduced-risk disease management methods is a limited understanding of which pathogens are causing significant loss of yield and quality. 1) the effect of specific pathogens on production, 2) the extent of root damage caused by particular pathogens, and 3) the relationship between specific pathogens and rejected product shipments. Additional knowledge gaps include an inadequate understanding of: 1) how selected pathogens are spread, 2) population dynamics of pathogens and vectors, 3) economic thresholds, particularly for nematodes, 4) buyer practices, including which diseases are present and how much must be present for a shipment to be rejected, and 5) the efficacy of existing materials.
Research 16 Insects 2015 The lack of information on the yield and quality effects of specific pathogens is particularly acute with viruses and postharvest diseases.
Research 17 Insects 2015 Alternatives are needed to control post-harvest diseases at this stage.
Research 18 Insects 2015 Disease transmission is a needed area of research. A better understanding of aphid and whitefly population dynamics would help identify whether it is feasible to reduce reinfection by viruses by controlling aphid and whitefly vectors. Little is known about the spread of the bacterium, E. chrysanthemi (e.g., via fruit flies in storage or by cutting plants).
Research 19 Insects 2015 Economic thresholds are not developed for most disease problems such as Rhizopus soft rot,

Production Facts

Production Year
US Rank
% US Acres
Acres Planted
Acres Harvested
Production Costs/Acre
Natl Avg/Acre
State Avg/Acre
Per Acre Value
Production Value

Worker Activities

Production Counties

Production Practices

IPM Practices

Pollinator Protection


No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data

No Data


Biological Controls

Cultural Controls

Physical Controls

Chemical Controls

Active Ingredient CAS PC Pests REI (hrs) PHI (days) Description IPM Resistance
1,3-dichloropropene 542-75-6 29001
Aldicarb 116-06-3 98301
Bacillus Thuringiensis (bt) 0
Bifenthrin 83322-02-5 128825
Calcium Hypochlorite 7778-54-3 14701
Carbaryl 63-25-2 56801
Chloropicrin 76-06-2 81501
Chlorpyrifos 2921-88-2 59101
Clethodim 99129-21-2 121011
Clomazone 81777-89-1 125401
Dcpa 1861-32-1 78701
Dicloran 99-30-9 31301
Endosulfan 115-29-7 79401
Eptc 759-94-4 41401
Ethoprop 13194-48-4 41101
Fluazifop 69806-50-4 122805
Glyphosate 1071-83-6 417300
Imidacloprid 138261-41-3 129099
Malathion (no Inert use) 121-75-5 57701
Metam-sodium 137-42-8 39003
Methoxychlor 72-43-5 34001
Methyl Bromide (no inert use) 74-83-9 53201
Methyl Parathion 298-00-0 53501
Napropamide 15299-99-7 103001
Oxamyl 23135-22-0 103801
Phosmet 732-11-6 59201
Pyrethrins 8003-34-7 69001
Sethoxydim 74051-80-2 121001
Spinosad 168316-95-8 110003
Tebufenozide 112410-23-8 129026
Thiabendazole 148-79-8 60101
Thiamethoxam 153719-23-4 60109


Pest Active Ingredient PC Code CAS Efficacy Code Comments
Efficacy Codes
EExcellent, 90-100%
GGood, 80-90%
FFair, 60-80%
PPoor, 25-60%
NCNo Control, <25%
G-EGood to Excellent, 80-100%
F-EFair to Excellent, 50-100%
P-EPoor to Excellent, 25-100%
F-GFair to Good, 50-90%
P-GPoor to Good, 25-90%
P-FPoor to Fair, 25-80%
NUNot Used
RRarely Used

Resistance Management



Production Practices JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Entered Comments

Pests JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Entered Comments

Stages JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Entered Comments

Chemicals JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Entered Comments
1,3-Dichloropropene 08-19-16
Aldicarb 08-19-16
Bacillus Thuringiensis (Bt) 08-19-16
Bifenthrin 08-19-16
Calcium Hypochlorite 08-19-16
Carbaryl 08-19-16
Chloropicrin 08-19-16
Chlorpyrifos 08-19-16
Clethodim 08-19-16
Clomazone 08-19-16
DCPA 08-19-16
Dicloran 08-19-16
Endosulfan 08-19-16
EPTC 08-19-16
Ethoprop 08-19-16
Fluazifop 08-19-16
Glyphosate 08-19-16
Imidacloprid 08-19-16
Malathion (NO INERT USE) 08-19-16
Metam-sodium 08-19-16
Methoxychlor 08-19-16
Methyl Bromide (NO INERT USE) 08-19-16
Methyl Parathion 08-19-16
Napropamide 08-19-16
Oxamyl 08-19-16
Phosmet 08-19-16
Pyrethrins 08-19-16
Sethoxydim 08-19-16
Spinosad 08-19-16
Tebufenozide 08-19-16
Thiabendazole 08-19-16
Thiamethoxam 08-19-16

Worker Activities JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec Entered Comments