Impact of False Codling Moth FCM in horticulture

  • Slides: 9
Download presentation
Impact of False Codling Moth (FCM) in horticulture in Kenya John Nderitu University of

Impact of False Codling Moth (FCM) in horticulture in Kenya John Nderitu University of Nairobi

Introduction Horticulture (US$ 1 billion) in 2015 (1. 45% GDP) Fruits(26%) Vegetables (36%) Domestic

Introduction Horticulture (US$ 1 billion) in 2015 (1. 45% GDP) Fruits(26%) Vegetables (36%) Domestic value of hort. in 2014 Capsicums ( Kshs 514 M) Flowers-69 % of export earnings in 2014 (US$ 630 million) Employment >2 million people (Farmers, employees, exporters, input suppliers, logistics, transport Source: KNBS 2015

Challenges Climate change Market Access Changing market requirements (stds)e. g. 10% inspection rule Loss

Challenges Climate change Market Access Changing market requirements (stds)e. g. 10% inspection rule Loss of market due pesticide residues )-beans and peas Emerging new pests and diseases e. g. FCM Non-compliance and loss of market

False codling Moth • Are small, inconspicuous moths (noctuidae) • Highly polyphagous (wide host

False codling Moth • Are small, inconspicuous moths (noctuidae) • Highly polyphagous (wide host range-capsicum, avocado, roses, citrus, maize, sorghum) and short life cycle • FCM -quarantine pest by the European Commission and EPPO and named a ‘harmful organism’ since 2014. • Leading cause of non-compliance in capsicums in export market • Increased scrutiny of Kenyan capsicum and increased cost of business= low profit margins or losses Source: UK moths. com and www, kephis. org,

ct ob er N 20 ov 14 em be D r 2 ec 01

ct ob er N 20 ov 14 em be D r 2 ec 01 em 4 be r 2 Ja 01 nu 4 ar y Fe 20 15 br ua ry 20 15 M ar ch 20 15 Ap ril 20 15 M ay 20 15 Ju ne 2 o 15 Ju ly 20 Au 15 gu st Se 20 pt 15 em be r 2 01 5 O No. of Interceptions Economic and Phytosanitary significance of FCM interceptions 5 0 7 2 4 6 2 3 1 0 2 1 Total interceptions 35 30 29 25 20 22 15 10 9 9 6 4 5 10 6 7 4 5 2 4 KEPHIS 2015

INTERCEPTION TREND DUE TO HARMFUL ORGANISMS Jan – March 2018 Source. EUROPHYT 2018

INTERCEPTION TREND DUE TO HARMFUL ORGANISMS Jan – March 2018 Source. EUROPHYT 2018

INTERCEPTION TREND DUE TO HARMFUL ORGANISMS April- June 2018 Source. EUROPHYT 2018

INTERCEPTION TREND DUE TO HARMFUL ORGANISMS April- June 2018 Source. EUROPHYT 2018

Management options and their shortcomings: • Use of chemicals e. g. (collagen, cypermethrin, IGRS)

Management options and their shortcomings: • Use of chemicals e. g. (collagen, cypermethrin, IGRS) v Overlapping generations, larvae in fruits and resistance • Use of pheromones to disrupt mating v Not all males can be trapped hence not 100% effective • Orchard sanitation and cultural control e. g. growing under protected environment v Labour intensive and less effective because FCM pupates in soil • Sterile male techniques v Expensive and not available locally • Phytosanitary control e. g. cold treatments v Expensive and not available to small-holder farmers Way forward-development of a comprehensive IPM strategy

THANK YOU

THANK YOU