<%BANNER%>
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Agenda
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Introduction
 List of faculty
 Facilities of AREC - Bradenton
 Research
 Acknowledgement
 Map: location of AREC


FLAG IFAS PALMM



Vegetable field day
ALL VOLUMES CITATION SEARCH THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00054244/00005
 Material Information
Title: Vegetable field day
Series Title: Bradenton GCREC research report
Physical Description: v. : ill., maps ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: University of Florida -- Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Agricultural Research & Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
Publisher: University of Florida.
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Creation Date: 1981
Frequency: annual
regular
 Subjects
Subjects / Keywords: Plants, Cultivated -- Field experiments -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Plants, Protection of -- Research -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Vegetables -- Diseases and pests -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Vegetables -- Varieties -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )
 Notes
General Note: Description based on: 30th (1973); title from caption.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 43rd (1999).
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 62706005
lccn - 2005229077
System ID: UF00054244:00005

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Agenda
        Page 1
    Table of Contents
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Introduction
        Page 4
    Introduction
        Page 5
    List of faculty
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Facilities of AREC - Bradenton
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Research
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
    Acknowledgement
        Page 37
        Page 38
    Map: location of AREC
        Page 39
Full Text







pi t '
:l' ? t :*.. :** 1-!'* : .b ; *' ^


*; ,--*'*.
.4,


It


I .-

";-1. ,t. '.


Flif


'Iur -


t
., ;V
'
t;





::

i








: i' t.~'- .v i


. I


I
s,. ;i

i ;-
'i r
~ ''
-
?: ~ulbd


r^JT '' ;r


(^ -,* "'i

^c- *!


r

I


~rrl
i.F r~
I' ''
r-

! ,.
,,

S-C






Agricultural Research & Education Center
Bradenton, Florida




34th Vegetable Field Day

May 22, 1981




Bradenton AREC Research Report
GC1981-3

G.A. Marlowe & W.E. Waters, Editors
Printing: Editorial Dept., IFAS
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida







AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER BRADENTON

34th Vegetable Field Day Program

Field Day Coordinator George A. Marlowe, Jr.


Friday, May 22, 198

Moderator: Luther

A.M. 9:45 10:45

9:45

9:55

10:05

10:15

10:25

10:35

10:45

Moderator: R. M. A

11:00 12:00

11:00


11:15

11:25


11:35


11:45


P.M. 12:00 -

1:30 -


1:15

3:30


1

Rozar, Sarasota County Extension Director

Research Highlights by the Research and Extension Faculty

Welcome and Introduction W. E. Waters, Center Director

Off-season Management of Nematodes...........A. J. Overman

IPM Research on Tomatoes and Crucifers........D. J. Schuster

Air Pollution Research on Tomatoes............S. S. Woltz

Weed Control Programs for Vegetables..........J. P. Gilreath

Cauliflower Variety Evaluation................D. S. Burgis

Tomato Variety Evaluation....................W. E. Waters

alberg, Manatee County Extension Director

Continuation of Research Highlights

Comparisons of Seep and Trickle Irrigation
and Fertilizer Placement of Cauliflower.......A. A. Csizinszky

Refinements in the Full Bed Mulch System......C. M. Geraldson

Evaluation of Subsurface Tile Irrigation
and Water Recovery System....................C. D. Stanley

Economic Evaluation of Subsurface Tile
Irrigation and Water Recovery System...........J. W. Prevatt

Potential Forage Production for Vegetable
Growers ....................................C. G. Chambliss

Picnic box lunch under the oaks at AREC-Bradenton

Tour of research plots AREC-Bradenton
Moderators: R. T. Montgomery, Manatee County Extension Agent
and G. J. Marlowe, Jr.


Adjourn


3:30









TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Schedule of Activities................................................. 1

Table of Contents. ..................................................... 2,3

Introduction........................................................... 4

History of Station..................................................... 5

List of Faculty ....................................................... 6,7

Facilities of AREC-Bradenton...................... ....... .. ............ 8

Acknowledgement of Industry Support Contributors......................37,38,39


FIELD TOUR (R. T. Montgomery, Manatee County Extension Agent
and G. A. Marlowe)

Faculty and Experimental Plots Listed Respective
to Stations............................................. 9


TOUR STOPS

#1


#2


#3


#4

#5

#6


#7


#8

#9

#9


Evaluation of Horticultural Quality and Yield Potential
of Cherry Tomatoes (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)........

Evaluation of Plant Spacing Response of Fresh Market
Tomatoes (D. S. Burgis)...................................

Replicated Tomato Variety Trial (D. S. Burgis and
W. E. Waters)............................................

Leafminer Resistance in Tomatoes (D. J. Schuster).........

Pickleworm Resistance in Melons (D. J. Schuster)..........

Insect and Nematode Distribution on Tomato
(D. J. Schuster and A. J. Overman) .......................

Late Blight and Bacterial Leaf Spot Control on
Tomatoes (J. P. Jones, D. J. Schuster and A. J. Overman)..

Soil Fumigation Trials (A. J. Overman)

Off-Season Soil Management and Fumigation (A. J. Overman).

Response of 6 Tomato Cultivars to Soil Fumigation
(A. J. Overman and D. J. Schuster).......................







TOUR STOPS

#10



#11


#11


#11



#12

#12
#12



#13

#14

#14

#15


#15

#15


(Continued)

Evaluation of a Water Conveyance and Recovery System
for Ditch Irrigation (C. D. Stanley, J. W. Prevatt
and W. E. Waters)...................... ..................

Evaluation of New Tomato Varieties (D. S. Burgis and
W. E. Waters)........................................... ...

AREC Tomato Introductions, Observational Blocks, to
be Harvested for Seed (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters).....

Subsurface Tile Irrigation for Vegetables (C. D. Stanley,
J. S. Rogers, J. W. Prevatt and W. E. Waters).............

Seepage Irrigation Experiments with Vegetables
(A. A. Csizinszky and C. D. Stanley) .....................

Tomato Variety Trials (A. A. Csizinszky)..................

Utilization of Residual Fertilizers of Vegetable Fields
by Fuel Convertible Crops (A. A. Csizinszky,
C. G. Chambliss and J. W. Prevatt)........................

'Stability of the Root Environment (C. M. Geraldson).......

Snapbean Weed Competition Experiment (J. P. Gilreath)...

Tomato Herbicide Evaluation (J. P. Gilreath)..............

Trickle Irrigation Experiments with Vegetables
(A. A. Csizinszky and C. D. Stanley) ......................

Nematicides via the Drip Irrigation System (A. J. Overman)

Evapotranspiration Requirements of Subirrigated Tomatoes
(C. D. Stanley, A. J. Overman and A. A. Csizinszky).......


Page



20


21


22


23


24

26-



27

29

30

31


32

34


35









INTRODUCTION


On behalf of the faculty and staff, I extend to each of you a most cordial
welcome to the Agricultural Research and Education Center at Bradenton. This
Center was initiated in 1925 as a one-man operation in Palmetto and the first
ornamental programs began about 17 years later. This Center, with affiliated
Agricultural Research Centers located in Dover and Immokalee, Florida, is a
Research and Education unit of the University of Florida's Institute of Food
and Agricultural Sciences.

In Bradenton we have 12 research scientists from various disciplines of training
who participate in vegetable plant research programs. Each research scientist
also holds a joint appointment with his subject matter department at the University
of Florida. This combination of a broad base of research disciplines, industry
contacts and an excellent faculty makes the interdisciplinary cooperative team
approach to research problems far more productive than could otherwise be
accomplished with limited investment in independent programs.

An integral part of the overall mission of this Center deals directly with the
vegetable industries in Florida through research programs in (1) Genetics,
breeding and variety development; (2) Biological, chemical and mechanical pest
control; (3) Production efficiency, culture, management and environmental stress;
(4) Alternate energy sources, energy conservation and engineering; (5) Mechani-
zation, harvesting, handling, processing, transporting and post harvest physiology
of horticultural products; (6) Food quality, safety and utilization practices;
(7) Air, water and land pollution; (8) Water management and conservation;
(9) Advancement of basic knowledge of the various scientific disciplines repre-
sented by the faculty; and (10) Assistance to the cooperative extension service,
departments in the College of Agriculture and other Research Centers with
extension, educational training and cooperative research programs for the benefit
of producers, consumers and students.

Information presented in this publication summarizes the active research
projects under way this season. We sincerely appreciate your interest and
support of these research programs and continuously solicit your suggestions
for improvement and ideas of industry needs from our research and extension
programs.







Will E.r waters
Center Director






HISTORY OF THE AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER BRADENTON

Agricultural Research & Education Center Bradenton originated in the fall of
1925 with construction of the Tomato Disease Laboratory.

Tomato Disease Laboratory: In 1925 a 20-acre tract of county-owned property in
Palmetto was made available with the cooperation of the Manatee Board of County
Commissioners, with money and equipment supplied by local growers. Primary
objective of the laboratory was to formulate a control of nailhead spot of
tomato. Later studies emphasized the breeding for resistance to Fusarium wilt
and the control of tobacco mosaic on tomatoes. In 1937, with the expansion of
the vegetable industry in Manatee County and surrounding areas, the State
Legislature authorized new facilities for the research program.

Vegetable Crops Laboratory: In August, 1938, the Manatee County Commissioners
donated eighty percent of the purchase price of a 106-acre tract on the east
side of Bradenton. This expanded program led to the establishment of the
Vegetable Crops Laboratory. Following this relocation, horticultural,
entomological and soil studies were initiated on tomatoes, peppers, lettuce,
sweet corn and other vegetables. Since the laboratory was located in the
gladiolus growing area, the scope was further broadened in 1942 to include
disease problems confronting gladiolus growers.

Gulf Coast Experiment Station: In March, 1951, at a meeting of the State Board
of Control, the Vegetable Crops Laboratory was given the status of a branch
station and was renamed the Gulf Coast Experiment Station. Investigations were
then initiated dealing with chemical weed control, nematodes and other soil-
borne pests. The ornamental phase was broadened to include chrysanthemums and
other commercial cut flowers.

In the late 1950's it became apparent that the facilities on the outskirts of
Bradenton were no longer adequate for the research program. In 1959 a 200-acre
tract was acquired 8 miles east of Bradenton. All of the vegetable experimental
field programs were moved to this new location.

In 1965, upon completion of the construction of office and laboratory facilities,
farm buildings, greenhouses and a residence, all research programs were con-
ducted on this new land.

Agricultural Research & Education Center Bradenton: In 1971 the Gulf Coast
Experiment Station was renamed Agricultural Research & Education Center to
emphasize the programs of both research and education.

Active programs are in process on production problems associated with vegetables
and ornamentals grown on the sandy soils of Florida.

AREC-Bradenton has administrative and research supervision over two satellite
stations: ARC-Immokalee (formerly the South Florida Field Laboratory) and
ARC-Dover (formerly the Strawberry and Vegetable Field Laboratory). The former
Center specializes in vegetable nutrition and culture, etiology and control of
diseases and pasture research, while the latter is the hub of strawberry research
in Florida, including breeding, horticultural and pathological studies.









CURRENT LIST OF FACULTY, APPOINTMENT DATE AND AREA OF SPECIALIZATION
Agricultural Research and Education Center
Bradenton, Florida


Waters, Will E., 1960, Horticulturist and Center Director. Administration, soil
and plant nutrition and herbicides.

Burgis, D. S., 1946, Horticulturist. Emeritus. Vegetable production, weed control
and growth regulators.

Chambliss, C. G., 1976, Extension Agronomist. Develop extension educational
programs and cooperative research programs on forage production for south
Florida.

Csizinszky, A. A., 1976, Asst. Horticulturist. Production systems, crop manage-
ment and post-harvest studies of vegetable crops.

Engelhard, A. W., 1966, Plant Pathologist. Etiology and control of diseases of
ornamental crops.

Geraldson, C. M., 1951, Soils Chemist. Soil nutritional problems and their
relationship with cultural methods for vegetable production.

Gilreath, J. P., 1981, Asst. Horticulturist. Weed control of vegetable and
ornamental crops.

Harbaugh, B. K., 1975, Assoc. Ornamental Horticulturist. Systems for production,
harvesting and marketing of ornamental crops.

Howe, T. K., 1979, Asst. in Plant Physiology. Assist Plant Physiologist in
disorders and diseases of ornamental and vegetable crops.

Jones, J. P., 1958, Plant Pathologist. Etiology and control of diseases of
vegetable crops.

Magie, R. 0., 1945, Plant Pathologist. Emeritus. Etiology and control of
diseases of ornamental crops with emphasis on gladiolus flower and corm
diseases.

Marlowe, G. A., 1975, Extension Vegetable Specialist. Develop extension educa-
tional programs and cooperative research on vegetable crops of southwest
Florida.

Overman, A. J., 1945, Nematologist. Etiology and control of nematode problems
on ornamentals and vegetables.

Prevatt, J. W., 1979, Extension Farm Management Economist. Develop extension
farm management educational programs in agriculture and cooperative research
on production economics of vegetables and ornamentals.

Price, J. F., 1978, Asst. Entomologist. Identification, biology and control of
insects and mites of ornamentals and strawberry crops.







Schuster, D. J., 1975, Assoc. Entomologist. Identification, biology and control
of insects and mites of vegetable crops.

Scott, J. P., 1981, Asst. Geneticist. Tomato variety development and genetics
of characters related to tomatoes.

Snowden, S. E., 1980, Asst. in Plant Pathology. Etiology and control of diseases
of ornamental crops.

Stanley, C. D., 1979, Asst. Soil Scientist. Soil-water relations for ornamental
and vegetable crops.

Wilfret, G. J., 1969, Geneticist. Breeding and development of new varieties of
cut-flowers and other ornamental crops.

Woltz, S. S., 1953, Plant Physiologist. Physiology disorders and diseases of
vegetable and ornamental crops.

1981, Extension Agricultural Engineering Specialist. Solar energy,
water management and general agricultural design engineering.

1981, Asst. Plant Pathologist. Etiology and control of vegetable
diseases with emphasis on disease forecasting and fungicide longevity.


Agricultural Research Center Dover, Florida

Albregts, E. E., 1967, Soils Chemist. Center administration, production, soil
and plant nutrition of strawberries and vegetables.

Howard, C. M., 1967, Plant Pathologist. Strawberry breeding and etiology and
control of vegetable and strawberry diseases.


Agricultural Research Center Immokalee, Florida

Everett, P. H., 1958, Soils Chemist. Center administration, soil and plant
nutrition, production and variety development of vegetable crops.








FACILITIES OF AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER, BRADENTON


The Research and Education Center, Bradenton, has developed excellent new facilities
since 1965. Each scientist has available office, laboratory, greenhouse and field
areas as well as field and laboratory technicians to support his research programs.
The research facilities consist of 200 acres of sandy soil located at the main
Center, plus 40 acres near Cortez, Florida, 3 buildings containing 16 offices,
library, 9 laboratories, 3 headhouses, 13 greenhouses, 6 storage buildings, 8 walk-
in cold rooms, 2 large saran ranges for ornamental plants, maintenance shop, four
irrigation wells, a fleet of vehicles and tractors. The list below is a numerical
key to facilities sketched on Page 9.

KEY TO FACILITIES

Numerical Key Building Name State Bldg. No.

1 Office and Laboratories 7601
2 Ornamental Saran House 7616
3 Chemical Storage 7629
4 Soil Boxes
5 Ornamental-Nematology Greenhouse 7628
6 Ornamental Research Saran House 7626
7 Plant Production House 7625
8 Plant Pathology Greenhouse 7615
9 Entomology-Tomato Genetics Greenhouse 7614
10 Horticulture Greenhouse 7613
11 Ornamental-Genetics Greenhouse 7627
12 Herbicide Greenhouse 7611
13 Tomato-Genetics Greenhouse 7610
14 Pesticide Storage 7609
15 Headhouse, Laboratory, Cold Rooms 7624
16 Speedling Greenhouse 7630
17 Storage Shed
18 Well House
19 Equipment Storage 7607
20 Bulb Shed 7621
21 Well House
22 Farm Maintenance 7604
23 Farm Equipment Building 7605
24 Residence 7602
25 Cortez Farm Building (not shown) 7623
26 Soil Sterilization 7631
27 Fumigation Greenhouse 7632
28 Farm Storage Building (not shown) 7633
29 Student Housing Trailer (not shown) 7634
30 Entomology Greenhouse (not shown) 7635
31 Tomato Breeding Greenhouse (not shown) 7636
32 Plant Physiology Greenhouse (not shown) 7637
33 Aluminum Storage Building (not shown) 7638
34 Pavilion (not shown) 7641
35 Tomato Disease Screening Greenhouse (not shown) 7642
36 Soil and Media Storage (not shown) 7643
37 Floriculture Sawtooth Greenhouse (not shown) 7644
38 Pavilion Restroom Facilities (not shown)
39 Two Apartment Trailer (not shown) 7645
40 Fumigation Storage Building 7639
41 Irrigation Storage Building 7640




AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER
BRAD E N T ON, FLO R I DA


N.,


q CW7






TOUR STOP #1


TOMATO BREEDING


Location: Block A, Land 1 (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)

Purpose: A replicated comparison of AREC lines (4 inbred and 3 Fl) of
Cherry Tomatoes for an evaluation of horticultural quality and
yield potential. Evaluation of disease resistances will also
be finalized.

Crop: Cherry Tomato Cultivars

Set: March 3, 1981

Treatments: No. 1 Large Red Cherry Peto
2 Fla. 794874-1
3 Fla. 794881-1
4 Fla. 794882-3
5 Fla. S78139x31 Fl
6 Fla. S7831x32 Fl
7 Fla. S78146x2267 Fl

Operation: Plants sprayed twice weekly with fungicide + insecticide for general
maintenance until first harvest--weekly insecticide sprays there-
after. Weekly harvest will evaluate number and weight (size) yield
of ripe and pink fruit over life span of the plants.

Summary: All selections should be resistant to Races 1 and 2 of Fusarium
wilt, gray leafspot and Early Blight.



Location: Block A, Land 2 (2 South Rows) (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)

Purpose: Observational evaluation of Fl AREC lines of cherry type tomatoes.
Each population has some, but not all, necessary disease resistances
and still must be evaluated for quality and size.

Crop: Fl Hybrid Indeterminate Cherry Tomatoes

Set: March 3, 1981

Treatments: There are 16 entries in these two rows. These are shown only so
that those having an interest can see, first hand, the problems
and possibilities.

Operation: General maintenance sprays of fungicide + insecticide until first
harvest (seed saving) weekly insecticide sprays thereafter.

Summary: Horticultural quality-yield potential and disease resistances will
be monitored and recorded. Promising items will be grown in
replicated trial next season.





TOUR STOP #2


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Set:

Treatments:












Operation:


Summary:


TOMATO BREEDING

Block A, Lands 3 and 4 (D. S. Burgis)

To evaluate production response of fresh market tomatoes to row
spacing and within-the-row spacing of tomatoes.

Tomato (var. 'Hayslip')

March 3, 1981

Four replications (1 rep shown)

1. 9.0 ft row spacing (Land 3)

A. 18" in-row
B. 24" in-row
C. 32" in-row

2. 4.5 ft row spacing (Land 4)

A. 18" in-row
B. 24" in-row
C. 32" in-row

Plants sprayed twice weekly with maintenance fungicide-insecticide.
Ten plants will be harvested and evaluated for yield and quality.

App. No. Plants per Acre
Row Spacing In-Row-Spacing
18" 24" 32"

4.5 ft 6456 4842 3652
9.0 ft 3228 2421 1826






TOUR STOP #3


0 TOMATO BREEDING


Block A, Land 5 (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)


Purpose:! Replicated tomato variety trial. Cultivars to be evaluated for
horticultural quality and yield.

Crop: Fresh Market Tomatoes

Set: March 4, 1981


Treatments:


Walter PE
Hayslip
Burgis
Fla. 1A
Fla. 1B
Fla. 1C
Fla. 91914


Duke (Fl)
F156VFFStj2
F158VFFSt
F12170VFF
F12171VFF
VPH674
FTE 12


Peto
Ferry-Morse
Ferry-Morse
Keystone
Keystone
Asgrow
Peto


Operation:


Plants sprayed twice weekly for general maintenance. Multiple
harvests will be made to evaluate number and weight of size
graded fruits picked mature green.


Summary: All varieties will be indexed
cover and disease resistance.
fruit include color, firmness,


for earliness, vine size, leaf
Post harvest evaluations of
shape, etc.


Location:






TOUR STOP #4


LEAFMINER RESISTANCE IN TOMATOES


Location:


Block A, Land 14 (D. J. Schuster)


Purpose: To compare the relative resistance of tomato breeding material
for resistance to the vegetable leafminer.


Crop:


Tomato


Entries: 1. Walter PF
2. PI 126445
3. PI 126449
4. PI 128230
5. N.S.S.L. 27260
6. UF 763292
7. PI 140403

Operation: Plants will be sprayed weekly with Manzate. Counts of leafminer
larvae present in foliage will be completed and related to the
amount of sampling time and foliar leaf area. This is done to
standardize counts from leaflets of different sizes. Lab studies
will be completed to better study the effects of the entries on
leafminer adults and larvae.

Summary: In past experiments the wild species, PI 126445 and PI 126449,
have demonstrated the highest levels of resistance. UF 763292 is
hairy and appears to inhibit oviposition.






TOUR STOP #5


PICKLEWORM RESISTANCE IN MELONS


Block A, Lands 15 and 15A (D. J. Schuster)


Purpose: To evaluate selections of melons for resistance to the pickleworm.

Crop: Muskmelon


Entries: 1.
2.
3.
4.
5.


'Gulf Coast'
PI 140471
GCPW 2-15-5-C3
GCPW 2-15-5-B5
GCPW 5-7-15-A2


Operation:


Plants are treated weekly with Manzate. Every fruit
examined at maturation, and the number of pickleworm
feeding holes will be counted.


will be
larvae and


Summary: Selections were originally made from Gulf Coast because PI-140471,
previously demonstrated to be resistant, was present in its
pedigree. It was thought resistance might be present even though
selection pressure was not exerted. The present entries show
promise for resistance but may show pseudoresistance.


Location:





TOUR STOP #6


INSECT AND NEMATODE DISTRIBUTION ON, TOMATO


Location:


Block B, Lands 8-11 (D. J. Schuster and A. J. Overman)


Purpose: 1. To study the spatial and temporal distribution of insect pests
and parasites on individual tomato plants.
2. To develop more accurate sampling schemes for key insect pests.
3. To study the spatial distribution and population development
of nematodes.

Crop: Tomato var. 'Flora-Dade'


Operation:


The soil was not fumigated prior to planting. Plants are sprayed
weekly with Manzate. Twice a week, 5 plants are randomly selected.
Each leaf is individually removed and the number of pestiferous
- and beneficial insects counted. Once a week, soil samples are taken
and examined for the occurrence and abundance of nematodes.


Summary: In the fall season, population density for the vegetable leafminer
was greatest in the older portions of the plants. Other pests
appeared to be more randomly distributed. This information is being
analyzed in the computer to determine if more accurate sampling
procedures may be devised for the IPM program. Nematode densities
were low in the fall, and no patterns of distribution were observable.












Location:


TOUR STOP #7


LATE BLIGHT AND BACTERIAL LEAF SPOT CONTROL ON TOMATOES


Block C, Lands 5 and 23 (J. P. Jones, D. J. Schuster and A. J. Overman)


Purpose: 1. To evaluate effectiveness of 'blite-cast' in predicting
the occurrence of late blight.
2. To determine if weather factors may be used to determine
a spray schedule for late blight.
3. To evaluate the efficacy of spray schedules for control
of late blight and bacterial spot.

Crop: Tomato var. 'Flora-Dade'


Treatments:







Operation:


Control
Control
Blite-cast spray schedule with Bravo
Bravo Ix weekly
Bravo 2x weekly
Bravo 2x weekly after appearance of late blight
Kocide 101 Ix weekly
Kocide 101 + EDTA Ix weekly


Plants are sprayed as needed for insect control. Plots are monitored
periodically for the incidence and severity of late blight and
bacterial leaf spot. One half of each land is irrigated with
1.2 inches every 10 days to maintain moisture conditions favorable
for late blight.


Summary: In the fall season, the irrigation system was not operable and
weather conditions not favorable for late blight. Hence, this
disease did not appear. However, bacterial leaf spot was present
and results indicated that the addition of EDTA to Kocide 101 gave
significant reductions in the number of foliar lesions.





TOUR STOP #8


SOIL FUMIGATION TRIALS


Block C, Land 4 + 22 (A. J. Overman)


Purpose: To evaluate formulations of methyl bromide or D-D with chloropicrin.


Tomato cv 'Tempo'
Pepper cv 'Early Cal Wonder'


Treatments:


Broadcast rate


Control
M. Bromide
MB + chlor

DD + chlor

DD
M. Bromide


Operation:


Fumigants injected in 3 streams 8 inches apart and 6 inches deep.
Immediately covered with full-bed mulch 1.25 mil black embossed
polyethylene.
Treated Mar. 6 and set with containerized transplants Mar. 24.
Foliar sprays: Manzate + copper, DiPel and Diazinon.


Summary: All methyl bromide formulations controlled nutgrass to date. No
other data yet available.


Location:


Crop:


99.5
75/25
67/33
66/33
85/15

99.5


400 1b/A
375 1b/A
350 1b/A
320 1b/A
260 1b/A
240 1b/A
200 1b/A






TOUR STOP #9


OFF-SEASON SOIL MANAGEMENT AND FUMIGATION


Block C, Land 2 + 20 (A. J. Overman)


Purpose: To measure effect of summer management
of tomato.


Crop:


into the second season


Tomato Tempo and Duke


Management: Summer 1980


Paraquat fallow
Native weed cover
Sorghum
6.0 mil clear polyethylene film


Fumigants:


Operation:


Fall 1980 and Spring 1981


Control
Telone II



Telone C-17



Vorlex

Vapam
plus Telone II


Rate


15 gal/A

30 gal/A

25 gal/A

35 gal/A

35 gal/A

40 gal/A
15 gal/A


chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel
chisel


(middle)
(outer)


1. Fumigants injected 8 inches apart and 6 inches deep.
2. Immediately covered with full-bed mulch 1.25 mil black
embossed polyethylene.
3. Re-treated Feb. 17 and set with containerized
transplants Mar. 9.
4. Foliar sprays: Manzate + copper, DiPel and Diazinon.


Summary: In the full crop, solarization increased yield 48% over fallow.
Over all treatments, Vorlex reduced symptoms of Verticillium wilt
more than other fumigants. Three chisels gave higher yields than
one chisel of any fumigant.

No data on this season available.


Location:





TOUR STOP #9


RESPONSE OF 6 TOMATO CULTIVARS TO SOIL FUMIGATION


Block C, Lands 1 + 19 (A. J. Overman and D. J. Schuster)

To determine effect of soil fumigation on 6 tomato cultivars.


Burgis
Duke
Floradade 908


Tempo
FTE 12
Walter


Fumigants:


Operation:


Control
Methyl bromide 98%
M. bromide 67% + chloro 33%
D-D 43% + chloro 57% T
EDB 54% + chloro 45%
EDB 92.8% EC


400 Ib/A
350 Ib/A
270 Ib/A
7 gal/A
3.7 gal/A


Fumigants injected in 3 streams 8 inches apart 6 inches deep.
Immediately covered with full-bed mulch 1.25 mil black
embossed polyethylene.
Treated Feb. 17 and set with containerized transplants Mar. 5.
Foliar sprays: Manzate + copper.


Summary: Last fall the 6 cultivars were grown without fumigation in this
field. Burgis produced the highest yield, Walter the lowest. No
data on this season available.


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:






TOUR STOP #10


EVALUATION OF A WATER CONVEYANCE AND RECOVERY SYSTEM FOR DITCH IRRIGATION


Location:


Entire 200 acres of the land used by the Center (C. D. Stanley,
J. W. Prevatt and W. E. Waters)


Purpose: To evaluate the water budget and economic aspects of a water conveyance
and recovery system for irrigated vegetables.


Operation:


Irrigation water is pumped from main well to a 5-acre holding pond.
Water is then pumped from the pond into a semi-closed PVC pipe
delivery system to the various fields for crop growth. Runoff water
is channeled into main drainage ditches which empty into two catch
basins. This water is recovered and pumped back to the 5-acre pond
for re-use.


Summary: For the 1980 spring production season, the water budget shows an
approximate 60% savings in water pumped from the well for this system
as opposed to a system in which well-pumped water was put directly
into the delivery system. The savings resulted from the recovered
water and water seeping into the lake that was used for irrigation.
Economic evaluation of the system showed that investment into a water
recovery system such as this is, at present, unprofitable. The use
of the conveyance system was shown to be economically feasible.
Profitable investment into the water recovery system would only occur
in the event that water became a very limited resource.






TOUR STOP #11


TOMATO BREEDING


Block L, Land 2 (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)


Purpose: Evaluation of new varieties. Tomato introductions. Observational
blocks of Fla. lines and 1 block of new commercial varieties.

Crop: Tomatoes

Set: March 8, 1981


Treatments:


7 row blocks from north to south
-- Fla. 1A (part of irrigation test See Dr. Stanley, Page 23)
-- Fla. 1B
-- Fla. 1C
-- 14 new commercial varieties numbered as follows:


Jackpot Hybrid VFFNSt
Full House Hybrid #36
Royal Flush Hybrid VFNST
Market Hybrid #56 VFFSTj2
Market Hybrid #58 VFFSt
Hybrid KS 2170VFF
Hybrid KS 2171VFF
Hybrid 289
Hybrid E105
Hybrid E401
Hybrid E410
Corda
FTE 12
Duke


Operation:


Ferry-Morse



Keystone

Sluis and Groot



Peto
Peto


General maintenance sprays of insecticide and fungicide will be made
until time of first harvest only insecticide thereafter. Fruit
from Fla. lines will be saved for seed.


Summary: Horticultural quality yield potential and disease resistances
will be estimated and recorded. Outstanding items in Block 4 will
be evaluated in a replicated test in the fall of 1981.


Location:






TOUR STOP #11


TOMATO BREEDING


Block L, Land 3 (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)


Purpose: AREC tomato introductions. Observational blocks of Fla. lines.
Fruit to be harvested for seed increase.


Tomatoes

March 8, 1981


Treatments:




Operation:


7 row blocks from north to south
1. Hayslip
2. Burgis
3. Walter PF
4. Fla. 303 an ornamental dwarf basket type

Same as Land 2


Summary: All lines are observational and will be harvested for seed to
maintain AREC foundation seed stocks.


Location:


Block L, Land 6 (D. S. Burgis and W. E. Waters)


Purpose: AREC tomato introductions. Observational blocks.
harvested for seed.


Crop:

Set:


Fruit to be


Tomatoes


March 8, 1981


Treatments:


7 row blocks from north to south
1. Fla. 1A (part of irrigation test See Dr. Stanley, Page 23
2. Fla. 2432 4 west rows (3 east rows AREC breeding lines)
3. Fla. 303 an ornamental dwarf


Operation: Same as Lands 2 and 3

Summary: All lines are observational and will be harvested for seed to
maintain AREC foundation seed stocks.


Location:


Crop:

Set:





TOUR STOP #11


SUBSURFACE TILE IRRIGATION FOR VEGETABLES


Location:


Block L, Lands 2 and 6 (C. D. Stanley, J. S. Rogers, J. W. Prevatt
and W. E. Waters)


Purpose: To evaluate cultural and economic advantages and disadvantages of
subsurface tile irrigation as compared to the conventional ditch
irrigation system.

Crop: Tomato (Florida 1-A)

Set: March 2, 1981


Operation:


Irrigation control to minimize runoff is carried out for both ditch
and tile irrigation systems. Water tables of 45 cm (18 in) were
attempted to be maintained in both plot areas. Daily measurements
of water application and water table heights were carried out.
Harvesting for total weight, fruit numbers, grade and wt/fruit will
be carried out for both plot areas. The effect of distance from
the ditch or tile line on yield will also be investigated. Economic
evaluations of both systems with respect to ownership and operating
costs were made.


Summary: Data from the past five seasons indicate no yield advantage for
either system. Water use was shown to be cut an average of 60%
when using the tile system. No significant effect of the distance
a row is from the tile or ditch on yield was detected. Economic
evaluations showed that the ditch irrigation system was the more
economically attractive of the two systems, but only slightly.
Advantages of the tile systems are more precise control of runoff,
reduced water usage, more uniform water application and, probably
the greatest advantage, the ability to perform as a drainage system
in the event of excessive rains. Disadvantages of the system are
the inability to maintain as high a water table as ditch irrigation
(potentially a major problem in dry years), presently slightly more
expensive to install and operate and potential problems with
clogging of the tile from organic and inorganic substances in the
irrigation water.


n






TOUR STOP #12


SEEPAGE IRRIGATION EXPERIMENTS WITH VEGETABLES


Location: Block J, Land 1 and 2 (A. A. Csizinszky and C. D. Stanley)

Purpose: To determine the effect of fertilizer application methods, fertilizer
placements and within row plant spacings on cauliflower, green pepper
and tomato with seepage irrigation.


Cultivars:


Cauliflower: 'Snow Crown Hybrid'
Green Pepper: 'Keystone Resistant Giant'
Tomato: 'Hayslip'


I. Fertilizer application methods


Fertilizers were applied on a per plant basis, i.e. higher amounts of
nutrients with higher number of plants per 100 ft. bed

Nutrients applied


Crop

Cauliflower

Green Pepper

Tomato


Within row
plant spacing
(inches)
15
18
12
18
20
30


Nutrient
N P 0 K20
(lb/100 2f. bed)
3.04 1.53 4.22
2.51 1.26 3.48
4.97 1.86 6.89
3.35 1.26 4.65
4.91 2.64 9.81
3.30 1.78 6.58


II. Fertilizer placement


1) All P and micronutrients and 10% of N & K mixed in the bed and
90% of N & K banded on the shoulders.
2) All fertilizers applied as bed mix
3) All P and micronutrients and 50% of N & K mixed in the bed, the
remaining 50% of N & K banded on the shoulders.


III. Within row plant spacing


Cauliflower:

Green pepper:

Tomato:


in.and 15 in., in double rows per bed;
in. between rows
in. and 12 in., in double rows per bed
in. between rows
in. and 20 in., single row per bed


General: Cauliflower in Land 1 was harvested by the middle of April. Residual
salts in the soil are being utilized by a second crop of high energy
plants, with and without added fertilizers, for possible biofuel
conversion.










Field Guide for Experiments

Marker
No. Crop

1 Tomato
2
3
4 "
5
6
7 Green Pepper
8
9 "
10
11
12


Fertilizer Placement

Bed mix only
II
Banded

Banded + Bed mix
II
Banded

Banded + Bed mix

Bed Mix only
11


Plant Spacing (in)

30
20
30
20
30
20
18
12
18
12
18
12


I_





TOUR STOP #12


TOMATO VARIETY TRIALS


Block J, Land 5 (A. A. Csizinszky)


Purpose: To evaluate the cvs. 'UF1A,' 'UFlB,' 'Hayslip' and 'FTE 12' at
three fertilizer placements and at 2 within row plant spacings.
The cvs. were planted at low (lx), medium (1.5x) and high (2x)
fertilizer levels, at 20 in (51 cm) and at 30 in within row plant
spacings. Fertilizers were applied on a per plant basis, i.e.
higher amounts with higher number of plants per 100 ft. bed.
At the low (Ix) fertilizer treatment, the following amounts of
nutrients were applied.


Within row
plant spacing

20 in
30 in


/100 ft ed
Ib/100 ft bed


4.88
3.25


1.88
1.25


General: Total soil soluble salt (TSS) determinations were made after
transplanting and will be done again after harvest. Three
pickings are planned at weekly intervals. Marketable yield,
fruit size and number of fruits for each cv. at the various
treatments will be measured.


Field Experiment Guide:


Fertilizer
Treatment


1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2x
2x
2x
2x
2x
2 x
2x
2x
1 x
1 x
1 x
1 x
1 x
1 x
1 x
1 x


Plant
Spacing ( in.)

30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20
30
20


Location:


K20


9.76
6.50


Marker
No.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24


Culti var

UF 1A
UF 1A
UF 1B
UF 1B
Hayslip
Hayslip
FTE 12
FTE 12
FTE 12
FTE 12
Hayslip
Hayslip
UF 1B
UF 1B
UF 1A
UF 1A
UF 1B
UF 1B
UF 1A
UF 1A
Hayslip
Hayslip
FTE 12
FTE 12






TOUR STOP #12

UTILIZATION OF RESIDUAL FERTILIZERS OF VEGETABLE FIELDS BY FUEL CONVERTIBLE CROPS


Location: Block J, Lands 1, 5, 6 (A. A. Csizinszky, C. G. Chambliss, J. W. Prevatt).

Purpose: To determine the feasibility of utilizing the residual salts of
vegetable fields by growing a second crop of fuel convertible plants.

Operation: After a fall crop of tomatoes, winged beans and cauliflowers, and a
spring crop of cauliflowers, five different high energy crops were
planted with and without added fertilizers in the mulched beds.
The high energy crops were:

Jerusalem artichoke, Helianthus tuberosus
Kenaf, Hibiscus cannabinus
leucaena, Leucaena leucocephala
ramie, Boehmeria nivea
sweet potatoes, Ipomoea batata

Fertilizer treatments were as follows:

Fertilizer
Treatment 18-0-25+2 superphosphate
lb/100 ft. of bed.

1 0 0
2 3.0 2.7
3 6.0 2.7


The crop will be evaluated for dry matter, starch and cellulose content.

Field Guide for Experiments:

Block J-Land 1. Pre crop: Cauliflower, Spring, 1981.

Marker Supplemental Fertilizer Treatment
No. Crop 18-0-25+2 Superphosphate
Ib/A
1 Sweet Potatoes 222 200
2 Sweet Potatoes 444 200
3 Sweet Potatoes 0 0
4 Leucaena 222 200
5 Leucaena 444 200
6 Leucaena 0 0
7 Ramie 222 200
8 Ramie 444 200
9 Ramie 0 0
10 Jerusalem Artichoke 222 200
11 Jerusalem Artichoke 444 200
12 Jerusalem Artichoke 0 0









Block J-Land 5. Pre crop: Cauliflower, Fall, 1980.

Marker Supplemental Fertilizer Treatment
No. Crop 18-0-25+2 Superphosphate
Ib/A
1 Sweet Potatoes 0 0
2 Sweet Potatoes 222 200
3 Sweet Potatoes 444 200
4 Jerusalem Artichoke 0 0
5 Jerusalem Artichoke 222 200
6 Jerusalem Artichoke 444 200
7 Leucaena 0 0
8 Leucaena 222 200
9 Leucaena 444 200

Block J-Land 6. Rows 1 4. Pre crop: Tomato, Fall, 1980.

Marker Supplemental Fertilizer Treatment
No. Crop 18-0-25+2 Superphosphate
Ib/A
1 Leucaena 222 200
2 Leucaena 0 0
3 Kenaf 222 200
4 Kenaf 0 0
5 Sweet Potatoes 222 200
6 Sweet Potatoes 0 0
7 Jerusalem Artichoke 222 200
8 Jerusalem Artichoke 0 0

Block J-Land 6. Rows 5 7. Pre crop: Winged Bean, Fall, 1980.

Marker Supplemental Fertilizer Treatment
No. Crop 18-0-25+2 Superphosphate

1 Leucaena 222 200
2 Leucaena 0 0
3 Jerusalem Artichoke 222 200
4 Jerusalem Artichoke 0 0
5 Sweet Potato 222 200
6 Sweet Potato 0 0





TOUR STOP #13


STABILITY OF THE ROOT ENVIRONMENT


Block I (C. M. Geraldson)


Purpose: To study the effect of variations in water control on stability of
the root environment and productivity of vegetable crops.


Pepper Cal Wonder
Tomatoes Duke
Hayslip


Set 2/16
2/16
2/23


Treatments: Close row 1.
2.
Wide row 3.
4.


1200#/A--17.5#/100 ft.
1800 25.
1200 25.
1800 37.5


Operation:


Comparisons


Close row
Wide row


Row feet
per acre


7340
4840


Population
pepper tomato

14,600 3670
9,680 2420


Water table
high low

18" 16"
13" 12"


Overall field slope 4"/100'


Row length 390'


Summary: Stability of the root environment has been correlated with yields
of more than 40 Ibs/plant and 2000 30 lb units/acre. The effect
of field levels, field slope, row length, row spacing, water
table depth, bed compaction and water management on stability are
being evaluated.


Location:


Crop:






TOUR STOP #14


SNAPBEAN WEED COMPETITION EXPERIMENT


Block E, Land 16 (J. P. Gilreath)


Purpose: Determine 1) the critical weed-free period and 2) the critical
duration of weed competition. This information will tell us
when we really need weed control and for how long.


Snapbean, cultivar 'Sprite'


April 14, 1981


Treatments: No. 1 5
1
2
3
4
5
6 10
6
7
8
9
10


Weedy for x weeks from planting
Weedy 0 weeks (hand weeded checks
Weedy 2 weeks
Weedy 4 weeks
Weedy 6 weeks
Weedy 8 weeks
Weed-free for Z weeks from plant
Weed-free 0 weeks
Weed-free 2 weeks
Weed-free 4 weeks
Weed-free 6 weeks
Weed-free 8 weeks


- weed-free 10 weeks)


ng


Operation:


Plots
to be
stand
to be


are hand weeded as necessary. Weed counts and weights
made at appropriate times for the various treatments.
counts and yield data will also be obtained. All data
taken off center row of 3 row plots.


Location:


Crop:

Direct
Seeded:


are
Crop
are





TOUR STOP #14


TOMATO HERBICIDE EVALUATION


Block E, Land 17 (J. P. Gilreath)

To evaluate compounds for weed control in transplanted tomatoes.

Tomatoes Cultivar 'Hayslip'
Transplanted March 31, 1981


Weedy check
Hand weeded check
Napropamide (Devrinol)


Napropamide (Devrinol)
PASTS)
Diphenamid (Enide)
Trifluralin (Treflan)
Metribuzin (Sencor)
Metribuzin (Sencor)
Napropamide + Metribuzin
(Devrinol + Sencor)
Bifenox (Modown)
Bifenox (Modown)
MC 10108
(Tackle)
Benthiocarb (Bolero)
Pebulate (Tillam) +
Napropamide (Devrinol)
Pendimethalin (Prowl)
HOE 00661
HOE 00661
HOE 00661 + Metribuzin (Sencor)
HOE 00661 + Metribuzin (Sencor)


Operation:


Location:

Purpose:

Crop:


Treatments:

Treatment
No.


PPI and pre-transplant treatments applied March 31. Post-transplant
treatments applied April 2. Post directed treatments applied
April 18. Layby treatment applied April 29. Plots are to be
evaluated for early, mid and late season weed control and crop
phytotoxicity and yield.


Time + Method of Application


1 lb ai/A post transplant + 1 lb
ai/A at layby
2 lb ai/A post transplant
0.3 lb ai/A post transplant
4 lb ai/A post transplant
0.75 lb ai/A PPI
0.25 lb ai/A PPI
0.25 lb ai/A post directed spray
1 lb ai/A + 0.25 Ib/A pre s..a.
plus 1 + 0.25 lb ai/A post directed
2 lb ai/A PPI
4 Ib/A PPI
0.5 lb ai/A PPI
0.38 lb ai/A post transplant
4 lb ai/A pre transplant
4 lb ai/A PPI + 1 lb ai/A post
transplant
0.75 lb ai/A PPI
0.50 lb ai/A post directed
0.75 lb ai/A post directed
0.50 + 0.25 lb ai/A post directed
0.75 + 0.25 lb ai/A post'directed





TOUR STOP #15


TRICKLE IRRIGATION EXPERIMENTS WITH VEGETABLES


Location:

Purpose:



Cultivars:


Block G, Land 6 (A. A. Csizinszky and C. D. Stanley)

To determine the effect of fertilizer application methods, fertilizer
placements and within row plant spacings on cauliflower, green pepper
and tomatoes with trickle irrigation.


Cauliflower:
Green pepper:
Tomato:


'Snow Crown Hybrid'
'Keystone Resistant Giant'
'Hayslip'


I) Fertilizer application methods

1) All N, P, K and micronutrients applied pre-plant in dry form.
2) All P and micronutrients and 50% of N and K applied pre-plant in dry
form. The remaining 50% of N & K applied with the irrigation water.

Fertilizers were applied on a per plant basis, i.e. higher amounts of
nutrients with higher number of plants per 100 ft. bed. Plant nutrients
applied at 100% pre-plant fertilizer treatment, in lb/100 ft. mulched bed.


Within row plant


spacing

inches


Nutrient


P205


lb/100 ft. bed


Cauliflower

Green pepper

Tomato



II) Fertilizer placement


All dry fertilizer mixed in the
3 in (7.5 cm) deep band.
All the P and micronutrients an
and the remaining 50% of the N
above and around the trickle tut


bed in a 12 in (30.5 cm) wide and

d 50% of the N & K applied as bed mix
& K applied in a 2 in (5 cm) wide band
be.


III) Within row plant spacing


Cauliflower:

Green pepper:

Tomato:


15 in (38 cm) and 18 in (46 cm) in double row per bed;
12 in (30.5 cm) between rows.
12 in (30.5 cm) and 18 in (46 cm) in double row per bed;
12 in (30.5 cm) between rows.
20 in (51 cm) and 30 in (76 cm), single row per bed.


3.04
2.51
4.97
3.35
4.91
3.30


1.53
1.26
1.86
1.26
2.64
1.78


4.22
3.48
6.89
4.65
9.81
6.58









General: Trickle tube is Chapin twin wall, 4 mil thickness, with pores at
12 in (30.5 cm) apart. Tube placed ih the bed center, 2 in (5 cm)
below the soil surface. Irrigation is applied twice per day
(9 AM and 5 PM) in gradually increasing amounts as plant size, air
temperatures and open pan evaporation increase. Soil moisture is
determined periodically during the season.


Field Guide for


Experiments, Block G, Land 6


Fertilizer appli-
cation method


Fertilizer
placement


Toma to


Pre-plant, dry only


Green peppers
I,


Pre-plant, dry +
liquid with irri-
gation water
II


Bed mix + banded
11
Bed mix only
II
Bed mix + banded
11
Bed mix only
II
Bed mix + banded


Bed mix only
II
Bed mix + banded
II
Bed mix only


No.


Crop


Plant
spacing
(in)


Tomato





TOUR STOP #15


NEMATICIDES VIA THE DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM


Block G, Land 5 (A. J. Overman)


Purpose: To evaluate efficacy of nematicides applied in irrigation water.

Crop: Tomato cv 'Floradade 908' and Corn cv 'Silver Queen'


Treatments:


Control
Vapam
EDB 92.8EC
Vapam
EDB 92.8EC
Vapam + EDB
Vapam
EDB 92.8EC
Vapam + EDB


50 gal/A
4 gal/A
50 gal/A
4 gal/A
50 + 4 gal/A
50 gal/A
4 gal/A
50 + 4 gal/A


Operation:


Drip hose buried 4 inches off-center and 2 inches deep in the bed.
Treatments #2 and #3 injected into the beds through 3 chisels
spaced 8 inches apart and 6 inches deep on Feb. 25. Treatments
#4, #5 and #6 injected into the drip irrigation system Feb. 25.
Treatments #7, #8 and #9 were injected over a period of 9 weeks
through the drip hose.


Summary: To date the single applications of Vapam and EDB through the tube
are equivalent to soil injections.


Location:


3 chisels
3 chisels
tube
tube
tube
tube
tube
tube











Location:


TOUR STOP #15

EVAPOTRANSPIRATION REQUIREMENTS OF SUBIRRIGATED TOMATOES


Block G, Land 4 (C. D. Stanley, A. J. Overman and A. A. Csizinszky)


Purpose: To determine plant water requirements for field grown subirrigated
tomatoes.

Crop: Tomatoes (Hayslip)


Operation:


This is the first season of operation. Constant water tables are
maintained by use of the constant-head reservoirs located at each
lysimeter box. Daily water use is observed by amount of water
withdrawn from the reservoirs. The daily water use is related to
plant population, growth stage and the daily atmospheric demand
(open-pan evaporation).

This data will aid in the development of water use prediction
methods based on open-pan evaporation. This information will aid
in defining the actual plant water requirements as opposed to total
irrigation system water requirements in a vegetable production
system.

Planned studies include investigation of the effects of varying
plant populations, water table heights, types of vegetables and
cultivars of the same vegetable on water use.








EVALUATION OF SULFUR DIOXIDE (SO2) ON TOMATOES


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Treatments:


Fumigation greenhouses (S. S. Woltz and T. K. Howe)

To establish the susceptibility rankings of various tomato cultivars
to airborne sulfur dioxide (S02).

Tomato, 42 cultivars


(typical experiment, not in progress)


Fumi ation


Treatment No.


SO2 Exposure
Concentration Duration
ppm hours


0.5
1
2
0.5
1


Three fumigation trials resulted in the following list of more
resistant and more susceptible lines from the screening trials
with 42 cultivars.


Resistant

Ace
Bonanza
Jefferson
VF145-B7879
Walter
Yamaguchi


Susceptible


Basket Pak
Bellarina
Chico III
Sub-Arctic
Red Cherry


Results:


Delight
Large







ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INDUSTRY SUPPORT FOR THE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
AT AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER,
BRADENTON, FLORIDA

The effectiveness of the Research Programs at the Agricultural Research and Edu-
cation Center here in Bradenton has been greatly enhanced by the excellent support
from the various segments of the Agri-business industries and producers, both
locally and nationally. This support in the forms of financial grants-in-aid,
products and services, or equipment, supplements existing state funds and makes
each research project at the Center far more productive than could otherwise be
realized. We sincerely appreciate your participation in these research programs
and are pleased to acknowledge your support.

Listed below are the names of agencies, firms or individuals who have contributed
significantly to the research programs during the past two years. We trust that
our records are complete and say again, "Thank you for your confidence."

Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, IL
American Cyanamid Co., Princeton, NJ
Asgrow-Florida Co., Palmetto, FL
BASF Wyandotte Corp., Parsippany, NJ
Baysinger Farms, Ruskin, FL
Donald Bates, Lake Placid, FL
Bear Hollow Bulb Farms, Lake Placid, FL
Bedding Plants Research Assoc., Inc., Okemos, MI
Blue Acres Gardens, Piqua, OH
Bonney Farms, Lake Placid, FL
Boots-Hercules Agrichem. Co., Wilmington, DE
Campbell Soup Co., Camden, NJ
Capella Farms, Pompano Beach, FL
Chapin Watermatics, Watertown, NY
Chevron Chemical Co., Richmond, CA
CIBA-Geigy, Greensboro, NC
Conrel, Buckeye, AZ
W. R. Cooper, Sebring, FL
Council Farms, Inc., Ruskin, FL
Diamond Shamrock Chem. Corp., Cleveland, OH
Donald Dittmar, Sebring, FL
Dow Chemical, USA, Atlanta, GA
DSR Gatorade, Gainesville, FL
A. Duda & Son, Oviedo, FL
E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Wilmington, DE
Duval Sales Corp., Houston, TX
W. R. Ellis, Lake Placid, FL
Elsberry Farms, Inc., Ruskin, FL
Noah Evans, Lake Placid, FL
Florida Dept. of Transportation, Sarasota, FL
Florida Flower Assoc., Ft. Myers, FL
Florida Foundation Seed Producers, Inc., Greenwood, FL
Florida Tomato Exchange, Orlando, FL
Florida Tomato Packer, Homestead, FL
FMC Corp., Niagara Chem. Div., Middleport, NY
4-Star, Inc., Palmetto, FL
Fulwood Farms, Sun City, FL









Geo. J. Ball, Inc., West Chicago, IL
The Fred C. Gloeckner Foundation, Inc., New York, iY
Gloeckner Seed Co., New York, NY
Happiness Farms, Lake Placid, FL
Harllee Farms, Palmetto, FL
Harllee-Gargiulo, Inc., Palmetto, FL
B. J. Harris, Lake Placid, FL
Jessie Harrison, Lake Placid, FL
Jack Hendry, Lake Placid, FL
Hillsborough Co. Farm Bureau, Valrico, FL
Hillsborough Co. Marketing Comm., Inc., Plant City, FL
HMS Soil Fumigant, Inc., Palmetto, FL
Hooker Chemical and Plastics Corp., Niagara Falls, NY
ICI Americas, Inc., Goldsboro, NC
IFAS Environmental Center, Univ. of Fla., Gainesville, FL
J. J. Plant Brokers, Ruskin, FL
Kocide Chemical Corp., Houston, TX
R. W. Longabaugh, Sebring, FL
M & W Farms, Immokalee, FL
Mallinckrodt, Inc., St. Louis, MO
Manatee Board of County Commissioners, Highway Dept., Bradenton, FL
Manatee Co. Dept. of Human Services, CETA, Bradenton, FL
Manatee Co. School Board, Neighborhood Youth Corps, Bradenton, FL
Manatee Fruit Co., Palmetto, FL
Mattson Farms, Ft. Pierce, FL
Merck, Sharpe & Dohm Research Laboratories, Rahway, NJ
Mobil Chemical Co., Richmond, VA
Ortho Chevron Chemical Co., Orlando, FL
Pan American Plant Co., Cortez, FL
Pan American Seed Co., Palma Sola, FL
Parkedale Berry Farms, Dover, FL
Paul Ecke, Jr., Encinitas, CA
Peace River Peat Co., Bartow, FL
Penick Corp., Orange, NJ
Potash & Phosphate Institute, Atlanta, GA
Princeton Farms, Immokalee, FL
Producers Fertilizer Co., Palmetto, FL
R. J. Claprood Co., Sun City, FL
Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., Monmouth, NJ
Rohm & Haas, Inc., Altamonte Springs, FL
Bobby Scarborough, Lake Placid, FL
Alto Schuler, Lake Placid, FL
Shell Development Co., Modesto, CA
Sierra Chemical Co., Newark, CA
Smithers-Oasis, Kent, OH
Society of American Florists Endowment, Alexandria, VA
Southern Agri. Chem. Co., Rubonia, FL
Southwest Florida Water Management District, Brooksville, FL
Spaulding Bulb Farm, Sebring, FL
Speedling, Inc., Sun City, FL
Stauffer Chemical Co., Mountain View, CA
Strano Bros., Inc., Homestead, FL
Sunburst Farms, Inc., Miami, FL







^y~rsisesWW
T. i

^.;' :.- hi.!..,



1-;:il "".-:.C *-


.~;
r~n?



~-. L,; :~3
-1


'

.ri

~r


h. 14~


I r th



'-a--~~




I. ;: -


Ea.


a'.
.~ ya-





'Is,






aa .


d aS.
aa1


it-- A


* irso~altr


- -~*~ ~-~~"**


* .I -~ .:' .~l .-l' j~CL IUI .




.1*i


;iaa ~i adl4~S %a-J-aiaa ~ FJh)~-il Ij)i I a'(a4 -Ji( 'as'. *

;r'* ia: -


- .' I. a -." '


' aI*- .. -
p p ... ~a~ja.aa'.a a. ~ ~ : *.IW14.a 'aa a '-a3a.


~.v. -r ,.

IA


..-:;.. j~~i~c~~e~a,8 '1~3~ra,
: r~-.,-~;~k~iaico~,*~ilJrir r~ty~r ~

~.. ; ... .._~~~,~:~;cpz~p~.;- ~ -~-~.ji;s~
~~16~8~es~i~.
:?. "C';.':'-l~i~,~Li~BiJs3~1~';:-~i~. TIS :~II.T~qPQe
ri`cr ~- -r~ils -Zc~LI..-* -r- Clk
~.islilr
:,;.~a~V;rilDlfYBP~ea~~'-- ..hii-c~i-c~.z:. 2.~*:: I ~~..r'q


5. I
~ rra --
:
-d
--:-~itS;e. ,
~. ..?

i:' I-.~cf~
~
,-
~~r:.-m-i~i~aea! .. _~~,;~ -nll

+,
~


I...~a%+l~-s61,
--:r;

-- 1-I:~3159BIi~S~E~et~E~i~i~~;~!
.~.

:E +i~BY~:;" drlE; ~ 8~2~ :'
..~..~;




,.

d- '"


* .3k .*K<


. i ..


\ _J


~t~cF~1


. 4 i<~

9..~ irL: *


r. 'r


;-. '--a


.mljGCfaKYrJJ*


m. 1


IEII~Y--IL
-~,- ~E


c.
.~
t.~'rH" ~ r:;RI~~-~B~h~ebltrb~?I-A41
r~~.; J~J~h~P-~IO* e3F' ~. a'sc~-.~:~
.-.~~-k;~.t~-r~ *$
r`r~~~-c `- '7fi --Tjl~Clr~Tn-c:
grr -

j~?i;~li~y~~l~ .Ylbr.O r ~jj~Bb~;~*i*i~)lc-~ _4


u YY,;~~i~i~;ul~a~a~iilurteuP~~~ii~nu~t I- -~~W--IY~-Y-;I~-~-~IC ----


..



r u. ':~t:; .;inr


-- ~ "' .nq



!,:.. -:. ,
$ _: --


1; .
~;-;


,...

..,..


; ,i.: L I'~-
.. ..i


'sa-tP


.;nn




'*'~*