<%BANNER%>
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Title Page
 Agenda
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 History of the Gulf Coast Research...
 Current list of program leader...
 GCREC-Bradenton field plot...
 Facilities of GCREC-Bradenton
 Research
 Acknowledgement
 Map: location of GCREC


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/UF00054244/00007
 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: 1985
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: UF00054244:00007

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Agenda
        Page i
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Introduction
        Page 3
    History of the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
        Page 4
    Current list of program leaders
        Page 5
        Page 6
    GCREC-Bradenton field plot diagram
        Page 7
    Facilities of GCREC-Bradenton
        Page 8
        photo
    Research
        Page 9
        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
        Page 37
    Acknowledgement
        Page 38
        Page 39
    Map: location of GCREC
        Page 40
Full Text



iK\i











Bradenton GCREC Research Report BRA1985-10


GULF COAST RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER
IFAS, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
5007-60th Street East
Bradenton, FL 34203






36TH VEGETABLE FIELD DAY
May 16, 1985

J. P. Jones and W, E, Waters, Editors

















Printing: Editorial Department, IFAS, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL


May 1985














Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Bradenton
University of Florida, IFAS

36th Vegetable Field Day Program
Thursday, May 16, 1985

Field Day Coordinators John Paul Jones and Will E. Waters

Moderator: Dr. Don Maynard, Extension Vegetable Specialist

8:45 AM Assembly and Registration

9:15 W. E. Waters Welcome and Introduction

9:25 F. A. Wood IFAS Research Overview

9:40 A. A. Csizinszky Biostimulants and Broccoli Nutrition

9:50 C. D. Stanley Trickle Irrigation

10:00 C. M. Geraldson Stability of Root Environments

10:10 S. S. Woltz Inorganic Nutrition in Transplant Production

10:20 J. P. Gilreath Weed Control Programs for Vegetables

10:30 D. J. Schuster Pest Management on Vegetables

10:40 COFFEE BREAK

10:55 T. K. Howe Vegetable Variety Trials

11:05 J. W. Scott Tomato Breeding Update

11:15 R. G. McGuire Bacterial Populations on Resistant Tomatoes

11:25 J. B. Jones Control of Bacterial Spot of Tomato

11:35 J. P. Jones Tomato Disease Control

11:45 A. J. Overman Nematode Management

12:00 noon * DUTCH TREAT PICNIC BOX LUNCH * *

1:30 PM Tour of Research Plots:

P. R. Gilreath, Manatee County Extension Agent
R. Mitchell, Hillsborough County Extension Agent
L. L. Rozar, Sarasota County Extension Director

4:00 Adjourn

SPECIAL THANKS are extended to Agricultural Pest Management, Asgrow-Florida,
Ferry-Morse Seed, Producer's Fertilizer and Southern Agricultural Insecticides
for providing refreshments for the Field Day.















TABLE OF CONTENTS


Schedule of Activities ............................................... i
Table of Contents .................................................... 1
Introduction ................................*....................... 3
History of the Gulf Coast Research & Education Center ................ 4
Current List of Program Leaders ................................. ..... .. 5
Guide to Field Plots at GCREC-Bradenton ............................. 7
Facilities of the GCREC-Bradenton ................................... 8
TOUR STOPS:
Chemical Control of Bacterial Spot of Tomato ......................... 9
(J. B. Jones and J. P. Jones)
Bacterial Spot Genetics in Tomato ................................... 9
(J. W. Scott and J. B. Jones)
Water, Nutrient and Soil Pesticide Management for Staked Tomatoes .... 10
(A. A. Csizinszky, A. J. Overman and C. D. Stanley)
Pesticides via Drip Irrigation ....................................... 11
(A. J. Overman)
Trickle Irrigation for Staked Tomato Production ...................... 12
(C. D. Stanley and A. A. Csizinszky)
Vegetable Production Trickle Irrigation ............................ 12
(C. M. Geraldson)
Response of Spring Double Cropped Cucumber and Cabbage to Herbicides 13
(J. P. Gilreath, P. H. Everett and P. R. Gilreath)
New Herbicides for Weed Control in Non-mulched Tomato ................ 14
(J. P. Gilreath)
Evaluation of Herbicides for Weed Control in Tomato Row Middles ...... 15
(J. P. Gilreath, P. R. Gilreath and P. H. Everett)
New Herbicides for Weed Control in Snapbean .......................... 16
(J. P. and P. R. Gilreath)
New Herbicides for Weed Control in Cabbage ........................... 17
(J. P. Gilreath)
New Herbicides for Weed Control in Cucumber ......................... 18
(J. P. Gilreath)
Evaluation of Nutrient Sprays on.Tomato Production ................... 19
(A. A. Csizinszky)
Cucurbit Multicropping .............................................. 20
(A. A. Csizinszky, G. J. Hochmuth, D. N. Maynard, P. R. Gilreath
and R. L. Mitchell)
Pickleworm Resistance in Melons ...................................... 21
(D. J. Schuster)














Compatibility of a Bacillus thuringiensis and Copper Combination ..... 22
(D. J. Schuster and J. B. Jones)
Insecticides for Tomato .............................................. 23
(D. J. Schuster)
Insecticides for Pepper .............................................. 24
(D. J. Schuster)
Miticides for Tomato ................................................. 25
(D. J. Schuster)
Copper Bactericides .................................................. 26
(D. J. Schuster and J. B. Jones)
Effect of Row Spacing on Insect Pest Management ...................... 27
(D. J. Schuster, C. D. Stanley and J. B. Jones)
Effect of Row Spacing on Water Table Height and Movement for
Seep Irrigated Tomato Production ..................................... 28
(C. D. Stanley, D. J. Schuster and J. B. Jones)
Water Budget for Seep Irrigated Tomato Production .................... 28
(C. D. Stanley)
At Plant Soil Treatment for Tomato ................................... 29
(A. J. Overman and J. P. Jones)
Soil Fumigants for Tomato ............................................ 30
(A. J. Overman and J. P. Jones)
Soil Fumigants for Tomato ............................................ 31
(A. J. Overman and J. P. Jones)
Fusarium Wilt Race 3 and Bacterial Wilt Breeding in Tomato ........... 32
(J. W. Scott, J. B. Jones and J. P. Jones)
Effect of Row Spacing and Fertilizer Variation on Vegetables ......... 33
(C. M. Geraldson)
Cherry Tomato Breeding ............................................... 3
(J. W. Scott)
Blossom End Scar in Tomato ........................................... 34
(N. Kedar and J. W. Scott)
Tomato Variety Trial ................................................. 36
(T. K. Howe and J. W. Scott)
Bell Pepper Variety Trial ............................................ 36
(T. K. Howe)
Sweet Corn Variety Trial ............................................. ..
(T. K. Howe)
Tomato Spacing Test .................................................. 37
(T. K. Howe and J. W. Scott)
Acknowledgement of Industry Support for the GCREC-Bradenton .......... 3.
Location of the GCREC-Bradenton ...................... Inside Back Cover










INTRODUCTION


On behalf of the faculty and staff, I extend to each of you a most cordial
welcome to the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center at Bradenton, Florida.
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 and Education Centers located in
Dover and Immokalee is a Research and Education unit of the University
of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

In Bradenton, we have one grant supported scientist position, three Extension
Specialists, and 16 state research scientists from various disciplines
of training who participate in all phases of vegetable and ornamental horti-
culture. This interdisciplinary team approach, combining several research
disciplines and a wide range of industry and faculty contacts, often is
more productive than could be accomplished with limited investments in
independent programs.

The Center's primary mission is to develop new and expand existing knowledge
and technology, and disseminate new scientific knowledge on vegetable and
ornamental crops in Florida, so that agriculture remains efficient and
economically competitive with other geographic areas of the world.

The secondary mission of the Center is to assist the Cooperative Extension
Service, IFAS campus departments in which Center faculty hold appropriate
liaison appointments, and other research centers in extension, educational
training, and cooperative research programs for the benefit of Florida's
producers, students and consumers.

Program areas of emphasis include: (1) genetics, breeding, and varietal
development and evaluation; (2) biological, chemical, and mechanical pest
management for diseases, insects, nematodes, and weeds; (3) production
efficiency, culture, management of environmental stress; (4) water utilization,
quality, conservation, and management; (5) food quality, safety, utilization
and post-harvest physiology of horticultural crops; (6) air, water, and
land management; (7) mechanization, harvesting, handling, and engineering;
(8) energy conservation techniques and alternate energy sources; (9) advancement
of the basic knowledge in disciplines; (10) regional and state cooperative
extension programs and public service; and (11) student advisement and
teaching.

Information presented in this publication summarizes the active research
projects under way this season on vegetable crops. 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. Waters
Center Director











HISTORY OF THE GULF COAST RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER


The University of Florida's Gulf Coast Research and Education Center in
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 County
Board of Commissioners with money and equipment supplied by local growers.
The primary objective of the laboratory was to formulate a control of nail-
head spot of tomatoes. 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 80% of the purchase price of a 106-acre tract of land 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 of land was acquired eight miles east of Bradenton. All
of the vegetable experimental field programs were moved to this location.

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

Agricultural Research and Education Center-- Bradenton: In 1971 the Gulf
Coast Experiment Station was renamed the Agricultural Research and Education
Center to emphasize the programs of both research and education. During
the next 14 years the Center research and extension programs were broadened
and the physical plant expanded.

Gulf Coast Research and Education Center: In 1984 the Agricultural Research
and Education Center in Bradenton was renamed the Gulf Coast Research and
Education Center (GCREC). to emphasize the regional status of the Center.
The GCREC has administrative and research supervision over two other Research
Centers the Agricultural Research and Education Center in Immokalee and
the Agricultural Research and Education Center in Dover. The Immokalee
Center specializes in vegetable nutrition and culture, while the Dover
Center is the hub of strawberry research in Florida.













CURRENT LIST OF PROGRAM LEADERS, APPOINTMENT DATE, AND AREA OF SPECIALIZATION

Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
Bradenton, Florida

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

Csizinszky, A. A., 1976, Assoc. Horticulturist. Production systems, crop
management 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, Biological Scientist III. Variety evaluations for ornamental
and vegetable crops.

Jones, J. B., 1981, Asst. Plant Pathologist. Ecology and control of bacterial
diseases of ornamental and vegetable crops.

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

Maynard, D. N., 1985, Extension Vegetable Specialist. Develop extension
education programs and cooperative research on vegetable crops of southwest
Florida.

McGuire, R. G., 1983, Adj. Post Doctoral Assoc. Ecology of bacterial pathogens.

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 vegetable and ornamental crops.

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

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

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














Stanley, C. D., 1979, Assoc. 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. Physiological disorders and diseases
of vegetable and ornamental crops.



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

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


Agricultural Research & Education Center Dover, Florida

Albregts, E. E., 1967, Soils Chemist. Center administration, production, soil
and plant nutrition of strawberry and vegetable crops.

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


Agricultural Research & Education Center Immokalee, Florida

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







GCREC-Bradenton Field Plot Diagram




-- J -(
C C

)f







B / N
-: I "I- lake .7
4 ( /-'




(, r L







B N















E
cu c L o'


ID fn1
Crs Rd. -0 Street East














E
N----S
W









FACILITIES IN 1985 OF THE GULF COAST RESEARCH & EDUCATION CENTER BRADENTON


The Gulf Coast 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, 48 buildings containing 28 offices, a library, 16 laboratories, 1 headhouse,
1 large research and storage service building, 18 greenhouses, 12 storage buildings, 6 walk-in cold rooms,
6 walk-in growth rooms, 2 large saran ranges for ornamental plants, 3 maintenance shops, 4 irrigation wells,
and a fleet of vehicles and tractors. The list below is a numerical key to facilities shown in the photograph
on the adjacent page.
KEY TO FACILITIES


Building Name


State
Building #


Numerical
Key


State
Building Name Building #


Office and Laboratories
Ornamental Saran House
Sawtooth Greenhouse
Chemical Storage Building
Nematology Greenhouse
Ornamental Greenhouse
Entomology-Solar Greenhouse
Tomato Breeding Greenhouse
Ornamental Res. Saranhouse
Plant Production Greenhouse
Farm Storage Building
Speedling Greenhouse
Soil and Media Storage
Aluminum Storage Building
Irrigation Storage Bldg.
Fumigant Storage Building/
Tomato Processing Shed
Pesticide Storage Building
IPM Mist Greenhouse
Air Fumigation Greenhouse
Soil Sterilization Bldg.
Pern'ticide Weighing Bldg.
Plant Physiology Greenhouse
Research and Storage Service
Tomato Disease Greenhouse
Physiology Greenhouse


7601
7616
7644
7629
7647
7628
7635
7636
7626
7625
7633
7630
7643
7638
7640

7639
7609
7610
7632
7631.
7611
7637
7653
7642
7657


Vegetable Crops Greenhouse
Ornamental Genetics Greenhouse
Horticultural Greenhouse
Entomology Greenhouse
Plant Pathology Greenhouse
Headhouse Laboratories,
Cold Room, Offices
Lawn Shed Location
Farm Equipment Building
Farm Maintenance
Farm Service Building
Residence
Graduate Student Housing
Graduate Student Housing
Educational Pavilion
Pavilion Annex #1
Pavilion Annex #2
Potting Shed and Implement
Shelter
Hazardous Chemical Storage
Equipment Storage Building
Open Equipment Building
Bulb Handling Building
Horticultural Supply Storage
Security Trailer Location
Insect Rearing Chamber


Numerical
Key


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16


7656
7627
7613
7614
7615

7624

7605
7604
7654
7602
7634
7645
7641
7648
7649

7623
7655
7607
7646
7621
7650





























































"a MLA











CHEMICAL CONTROL OF BACTERIAL SPOT OF TOMATO


Location:

Purpose:


Field set:

Treatments:







Operation:



Results:










Location:

Purpose:


Field Set:

Treatment:


Operation:





Summary:


Block F, Land 3 (J. B. Jones and J. P. Jones)

Evaluate various compounds for control of bacterial spot of
tomato.

April 3, 1985 with Sunny tomato


Mancozeb + TBCS 2 Ibs + 4.0 lbs.
Chlorox 5%
Chlorox 10%
Aliette 5.0 lbs
Alcide (rate 1)
Alcide (rate 2)
Control


Normal i secticide program maintained. Plants to be inoculated
with 10 cfu/ml of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria.
Sunny tomatoes staked and tied.

Incomplete


BACTERIAL SPOT GENETICS IN TOMATO


Block F, Land 2 (J. W. Scott and J. B. Jones)


To determine the inheritance of resistance to bacterial
spot in tomato.

March 18, 1985, reset March 28, 1985

Thirty plants each of Walter (susceptible), Hawaii 7998
(resistant), their F1, 21 F3's, 14 BCP1S1's, and 6 BCP2S1's

Normal insecticide practices were used. Only Bravo was
used to control fungal diseases without inhibiting bacterial
spot. Plants were spray inoculated with 105 cfu/ml Xanthomonas
campestris pv. vesicatoria causal agent of bacterial spot.
Each plant was rated for incidence of bacterial spot.

In a previous experiment last fall; Walter, Hawaii 7998,
F1, F2, and backcross generations were evaluated for bacterial
spot incidence. Selections with different disease ratings
were made and are planted here to help verify genetic control
of resistance. Further data analysis is needed, but at
present it appears that bacterial spot resistance is controlled
by at least 2 genes. Disease incidence of F1 hybrids is
intermediate between the 2 parents.












WATER, NUTRIENT AND SOIL PESTICIDE MANAGEMENT
FOR STAKED TOMATOES IN A COMBINED
SEEPAGE-TRICKLE IRRIGATED SYSTEM


Location:


Block G, Lands 5 and 6 (A. A. Csizinsky, A. J. Overman and
C. D. Stanley)


Purpose: To evaluate the response of two tomato cultivars to trickle and
trickle plus seepage irrigation, and to a liquid fertilizer vs.
50% pre-plant dry:50% liquid fertilizer.

Crop: Tomato, var. Duke and Sunny


Treatments:


Land 5: Drip and seepage irrigation
Land 6: Drip irrigation


Liquid fertilizer, Sunny, 30 inches spacing
Liquid fertilizer, Hayslip, 30 inches spacing
Liquid fertilizer, Sunny, 20 inches spacing
Liquid fertilizer, Hayslip, 20 inches spacing
Dry & liquid fertilizer, Sunny, 30 inches spacing
Dry & liquid fertilizer, Hayslip, 30 inches spacing
Dry & liquid fertilizer, Sunny, 20 inches spacing
Dry & liquid fertilizer, Hayslip, 20 inches spacing


Operation:


In Land 5, water was provided for land preparation and transplant
establishment through furrow irrigation. In Land 6, water
was provided through the trickle tubes only. In the dry and
liquid treatment, 50% of the nutrients were applied pre-plant
and 50% were applied in liquid form through the trickle tubes.
In the liquid fertilizer treatment, 100% of the nutrients were
applied in liquid form through the trickle tubes. At harvest,
fruit will be sorted into marketable and cull, and marketable
fruit will be size graded.


Summary: In previous experiments with trickle irrigation, tomato fruit
size was smaller than with seepage irrigation. Land preparation
and stand establishment was also difficult with the trickle
system. Trickle irrigation, supplemented by seepage irrigation,
could help to overcome the above problems.


-10-











PESTICIDES VIA DRIP IRRIGATION


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:



Drip Systems:


Transplanted:


Treatments:


Block G, Land 3 (A. J. Overman)

To evaluate use of soil pesticides applied via two drip
irrigation systems to tomato and pepper.

Tomato cv Sunny, Pepper cvs Gator Belle, Skipper, Shamrock,
XPH 5020, Crispy, Espadon, Better Belle, and Yolo Wonder
L.

South half = Chapin Drip hose (12" ports)
North half = Netafim (20" ports)


April 1


Treated: Fumigants: March 19
Nematicide: At planting and bi-weekly.

Broadcast
rate/acre


1. Control
2. Metam sodium
3. Methyl bromide 98%/
chloropicrin
4. 20% aldoxycarb
5. Fenamiphos


Operation:


Summary:


50 gal
435 lbs

3 lb a.i.
1 lb a.i./wk


Metam sodium and standak SF were injected with a peristaltic
pump into the irrigation water. MBC 98/2 was injected as
a gas into the empty tubing.

Irrigation was withheld for 5 days after fumigants were
applied.

Standak SF (aldoxycarb) was applied in .5 lb a.i. increments:
at planting over 3 days of irrigation, and bi-weekly 5 times.
Nemacur 3 was applied weekly.

Nematode populations were estimated at planting and 30 and
60 days after planting.

Yields will be recorded for at least 2 picking dates.

Metam-sodium was used as the standard in this test. No
treatments were phytotoxic, all chemicals were compatible
with the 2 drip systems.


-11-











TRICKLE IRRIGATION FOR STAKED TOMATO PRODUCTION


Location:

Purpose:



Crop:

Operation:


Block G, Land 1 (C. D. Stanley and A. A. Csizinszky)

To determine effect of irrigation amount and frequency and
fertilizer source (dry vs. injected) on yield and quality
of staked tomatoes.

Tomato, cv. 'Sunny'

Irrigation rate
1. 1.0 evaporation pan rate
2. 0.5 evaporation pan rate


Irrigation frequency
1. water applied 1 time daily
2. water applied 3 times daily

Fertilizer source
1. dry, applied pre-plant
2. liquid, injected throughout


growing season


VEGETABLE PRODUCTION TRICKLE IRRIGATION


Location:

Purpose:



Crops:

Treatments:


Comments:


Block G. Land 2 (C. M. Geraldson)

Evaluation of the root environment using variations in fertilizer
placement in conjunction with trickle irrigation and a perched
water table.

Tomatoes, squash, cantaloupe


Fertilizer placement

Center band (1/3 mix)
2 bands (1/3 mix)


Trickle


a) Trickle tube Chapin biwall; 12 and 36 inch intervals
b) Barrier paper and plastic iulch trough, 26" wide and
12 to 14" deep centered below the soil bed surface.

In comparison to seepage irrigation, it has not been possible
to maintain a comparable root environment or a comparable
productivity.


-12-













Location:


Purpose:



Crop:


Transplanted:

Treatments:


RESPONSE OF SPRING DOUBLE CROPPED CUCUMBER AND CABBAGE
TO FALL TOMATO HERBICIDE RESIDUES

Block E, Land 14 (J. P. Gilreath, P. H. Everett, and P. R.
Gilreath)

To determine the effect, if any, of residues of herbicides
applied to row middles of mulched fall tomatoes on spring
planted double cropped cucumber and cabbage.

Cucumber cv. Poinsett
Cabbage cv. Bravo

22 February 85


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


Number of
applications


1. Untreated check
2. Devrinol +
Paraquat +
3. Lexone +
Paraquat
4. Goal +
Paraquat
5. Lexone +
Cinch +
Paraquat
6. Goal +
Cinch +
Paraquat
7. Lexone +
PP005
8. Goal +
PP005


Operation:



Summary:


Cabbage were transplanted and cucumber seeded. Plant vigor
will be evaluated twice. Cabbage heads and cucumber fruit
will be harvested at commercial maturity, counted and weighed.

As interest in double cropping has grown, growers have
reported occasional injury to some crops due to what is
believed to be herbicide residues. This work will determine
if problems exist with what are considered to be 1) the
most common tomato herbicides presently in use and 2) what
I consider to be herbicide treatments of the near future.


-13-


2.0
0.5
0.375
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.375
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.375
0.25
0.5
0.25









NEW HERBICIDES FOR
WEED CONTROL IN NON-MULCHED TOMATO


Block E, Land 9, North end of field (J. P. Gilreath)

To evaluate new herbicides for weed control and
phytotoxicity to tomato grown without mulch.

Tomato cv. Floradade


Transplanted:

Treated:

Treatments:


18 March 85

4 & 5 April 85


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


Method of
application


1. Weedy check
2. Hoed check
3. Cinch
4. Cinch +
Lexone
5. Cinch +
Lexone


Lexone
RE-39571
RE-39571
RE-39571
RE-39571
RE-39571
RE-39571
Selectone
Selectone
Selectone
Assure
Assure
PP005
PP005
Poast
Poast
Poast


--

0.75
0.60
0.375
0.75
0.375

0.375
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
0.125
0.2
0.3
0.09
0.188
0.188
0.25
0.2
0.3
0.5


posttransplant
posttransplant
tank mix
posttransplant
posttransplant
(not tank mix)
posttransplant
preemergence
preplant inc.
preemergence
preplant inc.
preemergence
preplant inc.
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence
postemergence


Operation:






Summary:


Plots 1-12 were seeded with crabgrass, goosegrass and
pigweed. Plots 13-22 were only seeded with crabgrass and
goosegrass because these herbicides only control emerged
grass weeds. Weed control will be evaluated 3 times and
plant vigor twice. Mature fruit will be harvested, graded,
counted and weighed.

Cinch, Assure, PP005 and Poast have performed well on tomato
in previous research. Lexone is labelled for use cr tomato.
RE-39571 is a new preemergence herbicide and Selectone is
a new postemergence grass herbicide similar to ?cast, Fusilade,
PP005, and Assure. This is the first evaluation cf these
2 compounds on this station.


-14-


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:








EVALUATION OF HERBICIDES FOR
WEED CONTROL IN TOMATO ROW MIDDLES


Location:


Purpose:


Crop:

Transplanted:


Treated:


Block E, Land 9, South end of field (J. P. Gilreath,
P. R. Gilreath and P. H. Everett)

To evaluate new and old herbicides for weed control and
phytotoxicity to mulched tomato when applied to row middles.

Tomato cv. Hayslip

5 March 85


Treatments 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10 on 26 March 85
Treatments 2, 5, 6 on 8 April 85


Treatments:


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


1. Weedy check
2. Paraquat +
X-77
3. Devrinol +
Paraquat +
X-77
4. Lexone
5. Goal +
PP005 +
Agridex
6. Goal +
PP005 +
Agridex
7. Lexone +
PP005 +
Agridex
8. Lexone +
PP005 +
Agridex
9. Lexone +
Cinch
10. Goal +
Cinch +
Paraquat +
X-77


--
0.50
0.25%
2.0
0.5
0.25%
0.375
0.50
0.125
1%
0.50
0.25
1%
0.375
0.188
1%
0.375
0.25
1%
0.375
0.60
0.50
0.60
0.50
0.25%


Method of
application


postemergence

postemergence
tank mix

postemergence
postemergence
tank mix

postemergence
tank mix

postemergence
tank mix

postemergence
tank mix

postemergence
tank mix
postemergence
tank mix


Operation:





Summary:


In order to have reliable data on nightshade control, the
east row middle of each plot was seeded with nightshade
seed prior to planting. Weed control will be evaluated
three times and plant vigor once. Fruit will be harvested
at maturity, graded, counted and weighed.

Some of these herbicides are already labelled for use in
tomato. All of these treatments have provided accenpable
weed control without a reduction in plant vigor or crop
yield; however, additional data on nightshade control are
needed. This experiment will provide this data along with
additional performance data to support future registration
requests.


-15-











NEW HERBICIDES FOR
WEED CONTROL IN SNAPBEAN


Location:


Purpose:


Crop:

Planted:

Treated:

Treatments:


Block E, Land 5, 4th row from east (J. P. and
P. R. Gilreath)

To evaluate new herbicides for weed control and
phytotoxicity to snapbean.

Snapbean cv. Harvester

27 February 85

28 February 85


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


Method of
application


Weedy check
Hoed check
Cinch
Cinch
Cinch +
Premerge
Premerge
Dual


Operation:


Summary:


0.75
0.75
0.60
3.0
3.0
1.0


preemergence
preplant surface blend
preemergence
tank mix
preemergence
preemergence


Weed control will be evaluated twice and plant vigor once.
Pods will be harvested at maturity, and weighed.

Cinch has shown promise in a number of other vegetable crops.
Increased snapbean acreage in this area prompted this experiment.


-16-










NEW HERBICIDES FOR
WEED CONTROL IN CABBAGE


Block E, Land 5, 3rd row from east (J. P. Gilreath)

To evaluate new herbicides for weed control and
phytotoxicity to transplanted cabbage.

Cabbage cv. Conquest


Transplanted:

Treated:

Treatments:


28 February 85

28 February 85


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


Method of
application


1. Weedy check
2. Hoed check
3. Cinch
4. Cinch +
Dacthal
5. Cinch +
Goal
6. Dacthal
7. Goal
8. Bolero
9. Bolero
10. Bolero
11. Bolero +
Bolero


Operation:


Summary:


0.75
0.60
8.0
0.60
0.50
8.0
0.50
6.0
8.0
10.0
6.0
2.0


pretransplant
pretransplant
tank mix
pretransplant
tank mix
pretransplant
pretransplant
pretransplant
pretransplant
pretransplant
pretransplant
posttransplant


Weed control will be evaluated twice and plant vigor once.
Heads will be harvested at maturity, counted and weighed.

Previous work has demonstrated excellent weed control and
no crop injury with Goal and low rates of Bolero. Cinch
has looked promising in a number of other crops at this
station.


-17-


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:











NEW HERBICIDES FOR
WEED CONTROL IN CUCUMBER


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Planted:

Treated:

Treatments:


Block E, Land 5, 2nd row from east (J. P. Gilreath)

To evaluate new herbicides for weed control and
phytotoxicity to cucumber.

Cucumber cv. Marketmore 76

27 February 85

28 February 85


Rate
(lb. a.i./A)


Method of
application


1. Weedy check
2. Hoed check
3. Cinch
4. Cinch +
Alanap
5. Cinch +
Devrinol
6. Devrinol


Operation:


Summary:


0.75
0.60
3.0
0.60
2.0
2.0


preemergence
preemergence
tank mix
preemergence
tank mix
preemergence


Weed control will be evaluated twice and plant vigor once.
Fruit will be harvested at maturity, counted and weighed.

Cinch has shown promise in a number of other vegetable
crops. Research conducted at the Sanford AREC has shown
it to have potential for use in cucumbers for preemergence
grass control. Devrinol is currently labelled for use on
watermelon and squash, but not cucumbers due to occasional
reports of injury.


-18-











EVALUATION OF NUTRIENT SPRAYS ON TOMATO PRODUCTION

Location: Block E, Land 3. (A. A. Csizinsky)

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of commercially available biostimulants
and nutrient sprays on tomato fruit size andyield.


Crop:


Tomato, cv. Hayslip and Sunny; transplanted Feb. 1985.


Treatments:














Operation:



Summary:


Agriblend
BM 86
Burst
Control
Cytex
Ergostim
Keyplex 350
MZ 63
MZ 63 (1x) and BM 86 (3x)
MZ 63 (2x) and BM 86 (2x)
Oxamide
Stimulate
Nutrileaf, 20-20-20


Plants will be treated according to manufacturer's recommendation.
At harvest, fruit will be sorted into marketable and cull,
then marketable fruit will be size graded.

In previous experiments, BM 86, Cytex, MZ 63 and oxamide increased
total marketable yields of fruit size as both marketable yields
and fruit size. Additional work is needed to evaluate commer-
cially available biostimulants for their effect on fruit size
and yield of tomatoes.


-19-











CUCURBIT MULTICROPPING


Location: Block E, Land 1 (A. A. Csizinszky, G. J. Hochmuth, D. N.
Maynard, P. R. Gilreath, R. L. Mitchell)

Purpose: To evaluate liquid fertilizer-wheel applications for spring
cucurbits following fall tomatoes..

Crop: Squash, var. Hybrid Zucchini; Muskmelon, var. Florida 85-2M

Transplanted: Squash March 25
Muskmelon April 8


Treatments:


Fertilizer Rate
(lb/A N-P225-K20)


Application Time
(% Fertilizer Applied)


1 2 3


0-0-0
75-31-75
150-62-150
225-92-225
0-0-0
75-31-75
150-62-150
225-92-225
75-31-75
150-62-150
225-92-225


Operation:


Observations of plant growth and
made.


yield determination will be


Summary: Second-crop cucurbits following tomatoes utilize fertilizer
and mulch resources from the tomato crop. Injection of fertilizer
for the cucurbit crop may enable lower initial application
for the tomato crop.


-20-












PICKLEWORM RESISTANCE IN MELONS


Block J, Lands J22 & 23 (D. J. Schuster)

To continue the development of cantaloupe germplasm resistant
to the pickleworm.

Cantaloupe


Direct seeded: March 14


Selections:








Operation:







Summary:


'Gulfcoast'
PW-82C7
PW-82D6
PW-82C6
PW-81A23
PW-83A103
PW-81A24
PI 140471


Each plant will be infested with pickleworm larvae at flowering.
A single harvest will-be completed and the number of undamaged
fruit, the number of damaged fruit and the numbers of holes
and larvae per damaged fruit will be recorded for each plant.
Cuttings will be taken from superior plants and rooted in
the greenhouse. Each selected plant will be back crossed
to "Gulfcoast".

An intermediate level of resistance has been indicated in
previous fixed trials. The resistance may be of value in
a pest management program utilizing reduced pesticide inputs.


-21-


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:











COMPATIBILITY OF A BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS AND COPPER COMBINATION


Block J, Land 22 (D. J. Schuster, J. B. Jones)

To evaluate the influence of a copper bactericide on the
efficacy of Bacillus thuringiensis (Dipel) for the control
of lepidopterous larvae.

Tomato, Var. 'Sunny'


Transplanted:

Treatments:


March 12;


Treated: Weekly, beginning April 16.


lb ai/100 gal


1. Water Check
2. Dipel 2X
3. Kocide 101
4. Dipel 2X +
Kocide 101


Operation:


Summary:


'Worm' control will be evaluated by counting the number
of damaged and nondamaged fruit in a once-over harvest.

Laboratory bioassays with beet armyworm larvae indicate
a reduction in the efficacy of B. thuringiensis when combined
with Kocide 101 or tribasic copper sulfate. This effect
has not been consistently demonstrated in the field.


OVIPOSITION OF TOMATO FRUITWORMS


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Transplanted:


Operation:






Summary:


Block J, Land 22 (D. J. Schuster)

To determine preferred oviposition sites for two species
of tomato fruitworms, Heliothis zea and H. virescens.

Tomato, var. 'Sunny'

March 14

Plants will be grown in screen-covered cages until flowers
and small fruit are present. Laboratory-reared B. zea moths
will be released in 3 cages and H. virescens will be released
in 3 other cages. Subsequently, each leaflet, flower and
fruit will be examined for eggs. The location of each egg
will be recorded.

No direct comparison of preferred oviposition sites for
both fruitworm species has been conducted. Previous studies
have focused on H. zea. This species apparently prefers
to oviposit on leaves adjacent to flowers; however, we
occasionally find eggs inserted in flowers. A core thorough
knowledge of the intraplant distribution of eggs nay enable
the development of a refined detection and sampling plan
for fruitworms on tomatoes.


-22-


Location:

Purpose:



Crop:


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -









INSECTICIDES FOR TOMATO


Block J, Land 21 (D. J. Schuster)

To evaluate pesticides for insect control on tomato.

Tomato, var. Sunny


Transplanted:

Treatments:


March 25;


Treated: Weekly, beginning April 18.


lb ai/100 gal


Water Check
M0070616 1.92EC
M0070616 1.92EC
M0070616 1.92EC
Dipel AF
Dipel AF
Dipel 2X
Dipel 2X
MK936 0.15 EC
MK936 0.15 EC +
Ambush 2 EC
Ambush 2 EC
Trigard 75 WP
Trigard 75 WP
Selecron 500 EC
Monitor 4 EC
*Amount of product
**Treated on demand


Operation:



Summary:


Counts of leafminer larvae and damage will be made on foliage.
"Worm" control will be evaluated by determining the number
of damaged fruit at harvest.

MK 936 and Trigard have proven effective in controlling
leafminers. Dipel AF is a flowable formulation of Dipel.
M0070616 is a purified isomer of Pydrin and has not demonstrated
phytotoxicity.


-23-


Location:

Purpose:

Crop:


-
0.025
0.05
0.10
1 pt.*
2 pts.*
0.25*
0.50*
0.005
0.005
0.05
0.10
0.125
0.125**
0.5
1.0









INSECTICIDES FOR PEPPER


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Transplanted:

Treatments:


Block J, Land 21 (D. J. Schuster)

To evaluate insecticides for control of insects, particularly
the pepper weevil.

Bell pepper, var. 'Jupiter'


March 12


Treated: Weekly after first flowering.


lb ai/100 gal


Water Check
Pydrin 2.4 EC
Ambush 2 EC
Vydate 2 L
M0070616 1.92 EC
M0070616 1.92 EC


Operation:





Summary:


To supplement the natural infestation, pepper fruit infested
with pepper weevil larvae will be distributed among all
plots. Each fruit will be harvested and examined for external
and internal damage and the internal presence of pepper
weevil larvae, pupae and adults.

Pydrin, Ambush and Vydate are all registered for pepper
weevil control although control has sometimes been variable.
A head to head comparison will be made in this trial.


-24-


0.2
0.2
1.0
0.025
0.05











MITICIDES FOR TOMATO


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Transplanted:


Block J, Land 21 (D. J. Schuster)

To evaluate miticides for phytotoxicity and for control
of the two-spotted spider mite.

Tomato, var. 'Sunny'


March 12


Treated: Weekly beginning on indicated dates


Treatments:


Ib ai/100 gal


Date of
First Spray


1. Water Check
2. Vendex 50 WP
3. Vendex 50 WP
4. Omite CR (30%)
5. Omite CR (30%)
6. BASF 276 00 I 250 EC
7. BASF 276 00 I 250 EC
8. BASF 276 00 I 250 EC
9. Ethion 4EC


Operation:





Summary:


Plants will be infested with mites during the third week
of April. Following the last application of miticides on
May 28, the control of mites will be evaluated on foliage.
Phytotoxicity symptoms will be observed following each
application. Yields will be determined in a single harvest.

The incidence of mites on tomatoes has been increasing.
Vendex and Omite have proven effective in controlling mites
on other crops, and are being evaluated as part of the IR-4
program.


-25-


0.5
1.0
0.9
1.8
0.125
0.25
0.50
0.5


May 6
May 6
May 6
May 13
May 13
May 28
May 28
May 28
May 6












COPPER BACTERICIDES AND CONTROL OF LEPIDOPTEROUS LARVAE

Block J, Land 20 (D. J. Schuster, J. B. Jones)

To evaluate the influence of copper bactericides and fungicides
on lepidopterous larval populations and damage.

Tomato cv. 'Sunny'


Transplanted:

Treatments:


March 12


Treated: Weekly, beginning April 16.

Am't product/100 gal


Water Check
Kocide 101
TriBasic Copper Sulfate
Citcop 5 E
Copper Count N
Copper oxychloride WP
Bravo
Manzate 200


Operation:


The numbers of damaged and
in a once-over harvest.
shook, and the numbers
will be counted.


nondamaged fruit will be determined
Five plants/plot will be cut and
of lepidopterous larvae dislodged


Previous studies have indicated that certain compounds applied
for disease control have resulted in increased damage by
"worms".


-26-


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:


2 lbs
4 lbs
3 pts
2 qt
2 lbs
1.5 qts
1.5 lb


Summary:










EFFECT OF ROW SPACING ON INSECT PEST MANAGEMENT


Location:


Purpose:



Crop:

Operation:


Summary:


Location:


Purpose:



Operation:


Summary:


GCREC-Bradenton, Lands D-8, 9, 10 (D. J. Schuster, C. D. Stanley,
and J. B. Jones

Compare the efficiency and efficacy of spraying on demand
for control of insects on tomato grown at different row
spacings compared to a regular weekly spray schedule.

Tomato cv. 'Sunny'

1. Middle row of 'Sunny' of each IPM subplot will be sampled
weekly.
2. "Weekly" plots will be sprayed each week with:
a. Ambush 2E (6.4 oz/100 gallons)
b. Monitor (1 pint/100 gallons)
3. Demand plots sprayed upon predetermined thresholds:
a. 0.7 leafminer larvae/trifoliate
b. 1 worm/6 plants >> pre-bloom
c. 1 worm >> fruit set
4. Control: Ambush at above rate for worms
Monitor at above rate for leafminer
5. Plots will be sampled on Tuesday and sprayed on Wednesday.
6. The number of nozzles/row should be recorded each spray.
7. The sprayer should be calibrated for each nozzle
configuration.


Weekly IPM scouting data.
Yield of marketable and non-marketable fruit.


EFFECT OF ROW SPACING ON BACTERIAL SPOT INCIDENCE
AND SEVERITY FOR STAKED TOMATO PRODUCTION

Block D, Lands 8, 9, 10 (J. B. Jones, C. D. Stanley, and
D. J. Schuster)

To determine the effect of row spacing on the incidence
and severity of bacterial leaf spot of tolerant and highly
susceptible lines of tomato.

1. Inoculate 1 to 3 times with 108 cfu/ml of Xanthomonas
campestris pv, vesicatoria (applied to entire area).
2. Plans include to make 2-3 ratings during the season
(depending on severity of disease)

1. Disease severity
2. Yield of marketable and non-marketable fruit (including
fruit numbers)


-27-










EFFECT OF ROW SPACING ON WATER TABLE HEIGHT AND MOVEMENT FOR
SEEP IRRIGATED TOMATO PRODUCTION


Location:


Purpose:


Crop:

Operation:



Summary:


Block D, Lands 8, 9, 10 (C. D. Stanley, D. J. Schuster,
and J. B. Jones)

To evaluate the effect that row spacing has on water table
height and movement, and quantity and quality of yield.

Tomato, cv. 'Sunny'

1. Daily monitor water table movement in each plot.
2. Periodic leaf water potential measurements to detect
water stress development.

1. Water table height data.
2. Leaf water potential data.
3. Yield of marketable and non-marketable fruit.


WATER BUDGET FOR SEEP IRRIGATED TOMATO PRODUCTION


Location:

Purpose:



Crop:

Operation:


Block D, Lands 8, 9, 10 (C. D. Stanley)

To identify directions of water movement and to quantify
amounts of water lost in these directions for seep irrigated
tomato.

Tomato, cv. 'Sunny'

Constant monitoring of inflow and outflow of 4 seepage water
supply ditches irrigating a full bed mulched tomato crop
will be performed until a constant diurnal cycle of outflow
is reached. These ditches must include interior as well
as border ditches. Once a constant cycle is reached, specific
-measurements of inflow and outflow will be made on specific
ditches at specific times as follows:

1. Interior ditch from 4-6 AM (the difference between inflow
and outflow should estimate deep percolation since ET should
be negligible with no lateral movement).

2. Exterior ditch from 4-6 AM (the difference between inflow
and outflow from this ditch compared to difference found
in interior ditch should give estimate of lateral movement
away from field).

3. Interior ditch from 1-5 PM (when corrected for deep
.percolation and lateral flow estimates should give estimate
of ET).


-- -- -- -- --- -- -- -- ---- --- --- ---- --- -- -- -- -- --- --- -- -








AT PLANT SOIL TREATMENT FOR TOMATO


Block C, Land 20 (A. J. Overman & J. P. Jones)

To evaluate a soil fungicide alone and in combination with
a nematicide, both applied at planting.

Tomato cv. 'Sunny'


Transplanted: March 11


Treated: March 11


Treatments:


Control
Fecundal 5G
Fecundal 5G
Fecundal 5G
Standak FS
Standak FS
Standak FS
#3 & #6


Operation:


Summary:


Broadcast
rate/acre


2 lbs. formulation
4 lbs. formulation
8 lbs. formulation
2 lbs. a.i.
3 lbs. a.i.
6 lbs. a.i.


South half of each 37' plot was inoculated with Fusarium
crown rot, the north half with Fusarium wilt race 3.

Fecundal was applied in a narrow band in the center of the
bed.

Standak was drenched in a 12-inch band on the surface of
the bed.

Both materials were incorporated with a rolling tiller to
a depth of 2 inches.

Black polyethylene film (1.25 mil) was sealed over the beds
and containerized transplants of tomato were set into the
plots immediately.

Residual, non-phytotoxic nematicides have been under study
for several years. Absence of an efficacious soil fungicide
compatible with "at treatment" planting has not been available.
Broad spectrum pest control is desirable for maximizing
yield of a high value crop like tomato.


-29-


Location:

Purpojse:


Crop:








SOIL FUMIGANTS FOR TOMATO


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:

Transplanted:

pH Levels:

Treatments:


Block C, Land 24 (A. J. Overman & J. P. Jones)

To evaluate soil fumigants for control of Fusarium crown
rot and root-knot nematodes on tomato at two pH levels.

Tomato cv 'Sunny'


March 11


Treated: February 25


I = 5.5 II = 6.5


Broadcast
rate/acre


1. Control
2. Methyl bromide 67%/
chloropicrin 33%
3. Methyl bromide 99.5%/
chloropicrin .5%
4. Methyl bromide 99.5%/
chloropicrin .5%
5. Metam sodium
6. MENCS


Operation:


Summary:


Application through 3 chisels 8 inches apart delivering
6 inches below the surface of the finished (pressed) bed.
Black polyethylene film (1.25 mil) sealed over the bed within
1 minute.

Plants will be inspected for symptoms of crown rot after
the last harvest. Roots will be indexed for root-knot galling.

Yields will be recorded for at least 2 harvest dates.

The chemicals used in the test are labeled for use on tomato,
but little has been published on the efficacy of any to
control Fusarium crown rot in association with root-knot
nematode infestations.


-30-


350 lb

300 lb

400 lb

50 gal
25 gal








SOIL FUMIGANTS FOR TOMATO


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:


Transplanted:

Treatments:


Block C, Land 3 & 21 (A. J. Overman & J. P. Jones)

To evaluate 4 soil fumigants for control of Fusarium wilt
race 3, Verticillium wilt, and root-knot nematodes in tomato.

Tomato cv. 'Sunny' (Land 21); cv. 'Walter' and 'Manapal'
(Land 3)


March 8


Treated: February 19


Control
Metam sodium
Metam sodium & water
Metam sodium & water
Metam sodium & water
Metam sodium & water
Metam sodium & water
MENCS/1, 3-D
MENCS/1, 3-D/ch
MENCS


Operation:


Summary:


Broadcast
rate/acre


25 gal
25 gal & 50 gal
25 gal & 100 gal
50 gal
50 gal & 100 gal
50 gal & 100 gal
25 gal
25 gal
25 gal


Application through 3 chisels 8 inches apart delivering
6 inches below the surface of the pressed bed.

Black polyethylene film (1.25 mil) was sealed over the bed
within 1 minute.

Disease indices will be made at appropriate times during
the season.

Root-knot gall ratings will be made after the last harvest.

Tomato yields will be taken on at least 2 picking dates.

The 3 cultivars in the test are susceptible to Fusarium
wilt race 3; Walter and Manapal are susceptible to Verticillium
wilt.


-31-








FUSARIUM WILT RACE 3 AND BACTERIAL WILT BREEDINg; IN TOMATO


Location:


Purpose:


Field Set:


Treatment:


Operation:


















Summary:


Block C, Lands 10-13, 28, and 29 (J. W. ",cott, J. B. Jones
& J. P. Jones)

To develop inbreds for variety or brooding line release
with resistance to Fusarium wilt race 3 or bacterial wilt.

Fusarium wilt race 3 (most) March 8, 1985
Bacterial wilt March 19, 1985

Approximately 200 race 3 breeding lines
Thirty six bacterial wilt F2's and F3's

Normal pesticide practices were utilized. Plants of the
race 3 lines were dipped at cotyledon stage in a suspension
of 106 spores/ml. of the race 3 pathogen. This killed
approximately 80% of the plants, the survivors were transplanted
to the field which was also inoculated with race 3. Many
of these lines have had up to 4 backcrosses away from some
race 3 tolerant genotypes from Australia. Other lines have
had 1 or 2 backcrosses from some other more resistant sources
i.e. LA 716, PI 126449, Chang 1, PI 129028).

Plants of the bacterial wilt lines were inoculated at 32
days old by cutting some roots and applying 7 ml of 108
cfu/ml of the bacterial wilt pathogen. Survivors were
transplanted to the field where some plants continued to
show disease symptoms. These lines have had 2 backcrosses
away from the resistant sources, Hawaii 7997, CRA 66, PI
126408, and Saturn.

Some of the race 3 lines backcrossed from the Australian
sources should have good horticultural type and be ready
for inbreeding. Thus if the need for race 3 resistance
becomes acute, such lines could begin to "fill the gap"
by 1987. Lines derived from the more resistant sources
are not as advanced horticulturally, but such lines could
provide a more long range solution to fusarium wilt race
3.

The bacterial wilt lines need at least 1 more backcross
to obtain acceptable inbreds with resistance. At present,
the resistance is being stabilized before further backcrossing
is done.


-32-









EFFECT OF ROW SPACING AND FERTILIZER VARIATION ON COMPOSITION
OF THE ROOT ENVIRONMENT AND VEGETABLE PRODUCTION


Location:

Purpose:



Crops:



Treatments:


Block I (C. M. Geraldson)

To evaluate the effect of row spacing and fertilizer variations
on root environment stability and yields of vegetable crops
using seepage irrigation.

Tomatoes (674)
Sweet corn (Silver Queen)
Pepper (Mercury)


iL near ft/A


2 rows
7 rows


6,450
7,260


13-14"
19-20"


Fertilizer*

15-0-30
18-0-25


Rates/A

1,500-2,000
1,500-2,000


*Soluble fertilizer (N and K) was placed in a groove in
center of the soil bed surface. On 0-20-0 + minors (500
lb/A) was mixed in the soil bed.

Identifying an optimal root environment and factors that
effect root environment stability will be discussed.


CHERRY TOMATO BREEDING


Location:


Field Set:

Treatment:

Operation:




Summary:


Block N, Lands 6 & 7 (J. W. Scott)


To evaluate and select cherry tomato inbreds for possible
variety release.

Mar 4, 1985

Seventy-five cherry tomato lines.

Normal pesticide applications, except no copper will be
applied. Plants were inoculated with 1i cfu/ml of
Xanthomonas campestris pv. vesicatoria to screen for bacterial
spot tolerance.

Cherry tomato breeding lines are being compared to 'Cherry
Grande' and 'Red Cherry Large'. Two inbreds which have
been tested before, Fla. 7117 and Fla. 7143, are being compared
to the commercially grown varieties and to several promising
new inbreds. Several of the new inbreds looked good for
both fruit set and bacterial spot tolerance last summer.
If they also perform well here they will be submitted for
advanced testing in yield trials.


-33-


Comments:


....P vig M...... v .. .. b e.


---- --- --- --- --- --- ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---- --- --- --- --- --- ---


Row s acin


Water table










BLOSSOM-END SCAR IN TOMATO


Block N, Lands 12 & 13 (N. Kedar and J. W. Scott)


To breed tomato varieties with fruit, characterized by improved,
(point like) blossom-end scars.

Distribution of blossom-end scar index.

To develop an index objectively expressing roughness of
fruit, to test the genetic distribution of this character
and to select F2 plants with improved blossom-end scar.


Location:

Overall
Purpose:


Exp. 1:

Purpose:



Material:


Generation


NC8276
Suncoast
84334
84334 x
NC140
NC8345
NC8345 x
7131-S9
3021-SBk
3021 x Suncoast
7060


Field Set:

Operation:


Purpose:



Material:


Field Set:


Feb 27, 1985


Size of blossom-end scar in relation to size of fruit
be evaluated for about 800 plants, 20 fruits per plant.


will


Effect of hormone spray on fruit set and on blossom-end
scar under high temperature.

To test the effect of a commercial growth substance (TOMASET
= N-meta-tolyl phthalamic acid, 20%) on % fruit set, fruit
shape and blossom-end scar.


Genotypes


Valerie
Fla. 1B
7131-89
Tropic
FA 16
BRN71-1
FA67
677
Suncoast
NC8288


March 18, 1985


-34-


Genotype









Blossom-end Scar in Tomato, cont'd.


Operation:


Purpose:


Material:


Two replications of each line will be sprayed with TOMASET
and 200 treated fruit as well as 200 untreated control fruit
of each cv. will be checked for fruit set, blossom-end scar
and shape.

The relationship between style breakage point and blossom
scar index.

To investigate the relationship between age of flower, location
of style breakage and blossom-scar roughness.


Genotype


Source


1. Valerie
2. 7131-S9
3. Horizon
4. Piedmont
5. 7132 (source)
6. Suncoast


P827

Found.
P847
840098-2
844027-BK


Comments

gd. BE
gd. BE
med. BE
med. BE
bad BE
bad BE


Treatments:



Field Set:

Operation:




Summary:


100 flowers of each cv. to
Style breakage point to be
Each flower tagged and BSI


be marked on 0-day anthesiss).
estimated at +1, +2, +3, +4 days.
measured after 4 weeks approx.


February 27, 1985

At least 400 flowers of each line will be tagged at anthesis.
Style breakage point will be measured after 1, 2, 3 and
4 days after anthesis. Blossom scar roughness will be evaluated
4 weeks later.

(Exp. 1 to 3). Rough blossom-end scars develop on 10% to
30% of tomato fruits under both low and under high temperature
conditions. Most of these fruits are discarded.

It is the aim of this project to develop selection methods
and to prepare improved genotypes resistant to the disorder.


-35-







TOMATO VARIETY TRIAL


Block N, Land 14 (T. K. Howe and J. W. Scott)

To evaluate fresh market tomato varieties and breeding lines
in replicated trial.

Tomato


Transplanted:


January 21, 1985


Trial Entries: 4 replications


7129 GCREC
7130 GCREC
7131 GCREC
7134 GCREC
7144 GCREC
7145 GCREC
Horizon (7067) GCREC


Hayslip GCREC
Duke Peto
Sunny Asgrow
FTE 12 Peto
Shamrock #1 Shamrock
XPH 724 Asgrow
PSI 72482 Peto


Mature green fruit will be harvested and sized/graded as
in commercial production practices. Yields will be assessed
for each harvest and the entire season. Subjective evaluations
will be made on plant habit, fruit characteristics and pest
and disease tolerance.

In progress.


BELL PEPPER VARIETY TRIAL

Block N, Land 16 (T. K. Howe)

To evaluate bell pepper varieties in replicated trial.

Bell Pepper


Transplanted:


March 7, 1985


Trial Entries: 4 replications


1. Gator Bell Peto
2. Bell Captain Peto

3. Jupiter Northrop King
4. Skipper Asgrow
5. Early Calwonder -
Asgrow
6. Melody Asgrow
7. Shamrock Asgrow
8. XPH 5020 Asgrow
9. Crispy Burpee
10. Pro Bell Twilley
11. Pro Bell II Twilley


Mature fruit will be harvested
practices. Yields will be as
the entire season. Fruit charac


12. Lady Bell Harris
13. Liberty Belle Abbott
& Cobb
14. Mission Belle Ferry-Morse
15. Block Buster Pan American
16. Espadon Sluis & Groot
17. WF 75-6 -GCREC
18. Bell Boy Peto
19. Better Belle Ball
20. Yolo Wonder L Asgrow
21. Miss Belle Ferry-Morse


as in commercial production
sessed for each harvest and
teristics will be documented.


In progress.


-36-


Location:

Purpose:


Crop:


Operation:





Summary:


Location:

Purpose:

Crop:


Operation:


~-~~~~(~~--HLIIIUII-~-W ----- ---







SWEET CORN VARIETY TRIAL


Location: Block N, Land 17 (T. K. Howe)

Purpose: To evaluate supersweet sweet corn varieties and breeding
lines in replicated trial.

Crop: Supersweet (Shrunken 2) sweet corn.

Direct Seeded: April 11, 1985

Trial Entries: 4 replications


IPH 2563 Asgrow
XPH 2551 Asgrow
FMX 23 Ferry-Morse
Sweetie Sun
AVX 2574 Sun
Sugar Crunch Sun
Bon Bon Sun
HXP 3359S Harris-Moran
BXP 3365S Harris-Moran


10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.


Great Time Twilley
Main Time Twilley
Sweet Time Twilley
XP024 Agway
XP4035 Agway
Butterfruit Park
PX1 Park
XPH 2575 Asgrow
XPH 2573 Asgrow


Ears will be hand harvested as needed for each cultivar.
Comparisons of yields, earliness, concentration of harvest
and ear characteristics will be assessed.

In progress.


TOMATO SPACING TEST

Block.N, Land 18 (T. K. Howe and J. W. Scott)

To evaluate yield and shoot fresh weight of two commercial
tomato cultivars as influenced by within row plant spacing.
This is one location of six in a statewide experiment by
IFAS researchers.

Tomato cvs. 'Horizon' and 'Sunny'


Transplanted:

Treatments:


January 21, 1985

4 replications


'Sunny' -
'Sunny' -
'Sunny' -
'Horizon'
'Horizon'
'Horizon'
'Horizon'I


Operation:


12" within row spacing
24" within row spacing
36" within row spacing
- 12" within row spacing
- 24" within row spacing
- 36" within row spacing


Mature green fruit will be harvested and sized/graded as
in commercial production practices. Total and marketable
fruit numbers and weights will be tabulated. After the
last harvest the plants will be cut below the 1st node,
renaming fruit removed, and weighed fresh. All six IFAS
locations will contribute to a single analysis.


In progress. It is possible that
closer within row plant spacing than
fruit yields on a per plant basis.
substantiating data.

-37-


'Horizon' can tolerate
'Sunny' with comparable
This test will provide


Operation:



Summary:


Location:

Purpose:




Crop:


Summary:


-mO e e me e---------------------------------








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



The effectiveness of the Research Programs at the Gulf Coast Research and Education
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 form 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
Ag. Water Supply Co., Sebring, FL
Agro-K Corp., Minneapolis, MN
American Cyanamid Co., Wayne, NJ
Applied-Research Group, Raleigh, NC
Asgrow-Florida Co., Plant City, FL
BASF Wyandotte Corp., Parsippany, NJ
Bates, Donald, Lake Placid, FL
Baysinger Farms, Ruskin, FL
Bear Hollow Bulb Farms, Lake Placid, FL
Bedding Plants, Inc., Okemos, MI
Buckman Laboratories, Memphis, TN
Burpee Seeds, Warminster, PA
Burst Agritech, Oakland Park, KS
Chevron Chemical Co., San Francisco, CA
Ciba-Geigy, Greensboro, NC
Circle A, Balm, FL
Cities Service Co., Atlanta, GA
Collier Farms, DelRay Beach, FL
DOW Chemical, USA, Midland, MI
Deerfield Plastics, So. Deerfield, MA
DiMare Farms, Homestead, FL
Dickman Artesian Farms, Ruskin, FL
Dittmar, Donald, Sebring, FL
DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc-,
Wilmington, DE
Duda & Sons, Oviedo, FL
Ecke, Paul, Jr., Encinitas, CA
Elsberry Farms, Inc., Ruskin, FL
Elsberry Greenhouses, Ruskin, FL
FMC Corp.,-NY, NY
Florida Flower Association,
Ft. Myers, FL


Florida Foundation Seed Producers, Inc.
Greenwood, FL
Florida Strawberry Growers Assoc.,
Plant City, FL
Florida Tomato Exchange, Orlando, FL
Florida Tomato Packer, Homestead, FL
Gas Research Institute, Washington, DC
Gloeckner Seed Co., NY, NY
Goemar Int. Corp., Atlanta, GA
Great Lakes Chem. Co., W. Lafayette, IN
Grooms Farms, Inc., Plant City, FL
Growers Fertilizer Corp., Lake Alfred, FL
HMS Soil Fumigant, Inc., Palmetto, FL
Happiness Farms, Lake Placid, FL
Harllee Farms, Palmetto, FL
Harllee-Gargiulo, Inc., Palmetto, FL
Harris Seeds, Rochester, NY
Hartman Laboratories, Palmdale, FL
Helena Chemical, Memphis, TN
Hunsader Bros., Bradenton, FL
ICI Americas, Inc., Wilmington, DE
Kocide Chemical Corp., Houston, TX
Liewald Nursery, Palmetto, FL
MAAG Agrochemicals, Nutley, NJ
Manatee Fruit Co., Palmetto, FL
Melamine, Inc., Donaldsonville, LA
Merck, Sharpe & Dohm Res. Lab.,
Rahway, NJ
Microjet, Inc., Dundee, FL
Mineral Research & Devel. Corp.,
Charlotte, NC
Mobay Chemical Corp., Kansas City, MO
Monsanto Agricultural Prod. Co.,
St. Louis, MO


-38-







NOR-AM Agricultural Prod., Inc.,
Naperville, IL
0. M. Scott's Fertilizer Co.,
Marysville, OH
Palmetto Plant Co., Inc., Parrish, FL
Pan American Plant Co., Parrish, FL
Pan American Seed Co., W. Chicago, IL
Parkesdale Farms, Inc., Dover, FL
Pennwalt Corp., Philadelphia, PA
Peto Seed Co., Saticoy, CA
Pfizer Chemicals, NY, NY
Plantco, Inc., Bramalea, Ont.
Plants of Ruskin, Ruskin, FL
Plants, Inc. of Sarasota, FL
Producers Fertilizer Co., Palmetto, FL
Protector Corp., Johns Island, SC
Reasoner's Tropical Nurseries, Inc.
Oneco, FL
Reed Irrigation, Winter Park, FL
Rhone-Poulenc Chem. Co.,
Monmouth Junction, NJ
Rohm & Haas, Co., Philadelphia, PA
SDS Biotech, Cleveland, OH
Sandoz Corp., Hanover, NJ
Shell Development Co., Modesto, CA
Sierra Chemical Co., Milpitas, CA
Sluis & Groot, Salinas, CA
Society of American Florists Endowment,
Alexandria, VA


Southern Agricultural Chemicals Co.,
Rubonia, FL
Southwest Florida Water Management District
Brookesville, FL
Speedling, Inc., Sun City, FL
Staked Tomatoes of Ruskin, Ruskin, FL
Stallings Farm, Antioch, FL
Stauffer Chemical Co., San Francisco, CA
Strano Brothers, Inc., Homestead, FL
Tennessee Chemical Co., Atlanta, GA
The Plant Farm, Sarasota, FL
Tropicana Products, Bradenton, FL
USDA-ARS-DSR, IR-4 Project,
New Brunswick, NJ
USDA-SEA Tropical and Subtropical,
Agriculture PL89-808, Section 406
Program, Washington, DC
Union Carbide Agr. Prod. Co., Inc.,
Research Triangle Park, NC
University of Florida, IFAS,
Gainesville, FL:
International Programs
Center for Biomass Energy Systems
SHARE Program
Vogel & Sons Farms, Gibsonton, FL
Whisenant Farms, Parrish, FL
Yoder Brothers, Ft. Myers, FL
and Barberton, OH
Zoecon Corp., Palo Alto, CA


-39-