![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
UFDC Home |
myUFDC Home | Help | ![]() |
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 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Full Citation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
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- |