• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Front Matter
 Table of Contents
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion and summary
 Literature cited






Group Title: Bulletin - University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station ; 495
Title: Irrigation and other cultural studies with cabbage, sweet corn, snap beans, onions, tomatoes and cucumbers
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026697/00001
 Material Information
Title: Irrigation and other cultural studies with cabbage, sweet corn, snap beans, onions, tomatoes and cucumbers
Series Title: Bulletin University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station
Physical Description: 26 p. : ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Nettles, V. F ( Victor Fleetwood ), 1914-
Jamison, F. S ( Frank Stover ), 1903-
Janes, Byron Everett, 1910-
Publisher: University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1952
 Subjects
Subject: Vegetables -- Irrigation -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Vegetables -- Climatic factors -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Bibliography: p. 26.
Statement of Responsibility: V.F. Nettles, F.S. Jamison and B.E. Janes.
General Note: Cover title.
Funding: This collection includes items related to Florida’s environments, ecosystems, and species. It includes the subcollections of Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit project documents, the Florida Sea Grant technical series, the Florida Geological Survey series, the Howard T. Odum Center for Wetland technical reports, and other entities devoted to the study and preservation of Florida's natural resources.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00026697
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: aleph - 000925760
oclc - 18266813
notis - AEN6416

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page 1
    Front Matter
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Table of Contents
        Page 4
    Introduction
        Page 5
    Materials and methods
        Page 6
        Page 7
    Results
        Page 8
        Cabbage
            Page 8
            1945
                Page 8
            1946
                Page 9
                Page 10
            1947
                Page 11
                Page 12
        Sweet corn
            Page 13
            1945
                Page 13
            1948
                Page 13
                Page 14
                Page 15
            1949
                Page 16
                Page 17
                Page 18
                Page 19
        Beans
            Page 20
            1946
                Page 20
            1947
                Page 20
                Page 21
        Onions
            Page 22
            1949
                Page 22
        Tomatoes
            Page 23
            1951
                Page 23
        Cucumbers
            Page 23
            1951
                Page 23
    Discussion and summary
        Page 24
        Page 25
    Literature cited
        Page 26
Full Text


Bulletin 495


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS
WILLARD M. FIFIELD, Director
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA










Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with

Cabbage, Sweet Corn, Snap Beans, Onions,

Tomatoes and Cucumbers


V. F. NETTLES, F. S. JAMISON and B. E. JANES
Department of Horticulture

















Single copies free to Florida residents on request to
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA


June 1952










BOARD OF CONTROL

Frank M. Harris, Chairman, St. Petersburg
Hollis Rinehart, Miami
Eli H. Fink, Jacksonville
George J. White, Sr., Mount Dora
Mrs. Alfred I. duPont, Jacksonville
George W. English, Jr., Ft. Lauderdale
W. Glenn Miller, Monticello
W. F. Powers, Secretary, Tallahassee
EXECUTIVE STAFF
J. Hillis Miller, Ph.D., President
J. Wayne Reitz, Ph.D., Provost for Agr.'
Willard M. Fifield, M.S., Director
J. R. Beckenbach, Ph.D., Asso. Director
L. O. Gratz, Ph.D., Asst. Dir.,
Rogers L. Bartley, B.S., Admin. Mgr.'
Geo. R. Freeman, B.S., Farm Superintendent

MAIN STATION, GAINESVILLE
AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
H. G. Hamilton, Ph.D., Agr. Economist' 2
R. E. L. Greene, Ph.D., Agr. Economist
M. A. Brooker, Ph.D., Agr. Economist
Zach Savage. M.S.A., Associate
A. H. Spurlock, M.S.A., Associate
D. E. Alleger, M.S., Associate
D. L. Brooke, M.S.A., Associate4
M. R. Godwin, Ph.D., Associate 3
H. W. Little, M.S., Assistant 4
Tallmadge Bergen, B.S., Assistant
W. K. McPherson, M.S., Economist
Eric Thor, M.S., Agr. Economist
J. L. Tennant, Ph.D., Agr. Economist
H. W. Little, M.S., Asst. Agr. Economist
Orlando, Florida (Cooperative USDA)
G. Norman Rose, B.S., Asso. Agr. Economist
J. C. Townsend, Jr., B.S.A., Agr.
Statistician 2
J. B. Owens, B.S.A., Agr. Statistician
J. K. Lankford, B.S., Agr. Statistician
AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING
Frazier Rogers, M.S.A., Agr. Engineer's
J. M. Johnson, B.S.A.E., Agr. Eng.3
J. M. Myers, B.S., Asso. Agr. Engineer
J. S. Norton, M.S., Asst. Agr. Eng.
AGRONOMY
Fred H. Hull, Ph.D., Agronomist'
G. B. Killinger, Ph.D., Agronomist
H. C. Harris, Ph.D., Agronomist
R. W. Bledsoe, Ph.D., Agronomist
W. A. Carver, Ph.D., Associate
Darrel U. Morey, Ph.D., Associate 2
Fred A. Clark, B.S., Assistant 2
Myron C. Grennell, B.S.A.E., Assistant t
E. S. Horner, Ph.D., Assistant
A. T. Wallace, Ph.D., Assistant
D. E. McCloud, Ph.D., Assistant 3
H. E. Buckley, B.S.A., Assistant
E. C. Nutter, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist
ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND NUTRITION
T. J. Cunha, Ph.D., An. Husb.1'
G. K. Davis, Ph.D., Animal Nutritionist 3
S. John Folks, Jr., M.S., Asst. An. Husb. '
Katherine Boney, B.S., Asst. Chem.
A. M. Pearson, Ph.D., Asso. An. Husb.3
John P. Feaster, Ph.D., Asst. An. Nutri.
H. D. Wallace, Ph.D., Asst. An. Husb.3
M.. Koger, Ph.D., An. Husbandman 3
G. E. Combs, Jr., B.S.A., Asst. Animal
Husbandman
E. F. Johnston, M.S., Asst. Animal Husband-
man
DAIRY SCIENCE
E. L. Fouts, Ph.D;, Dairy Tech.'s
R. B. Becker, Ph.D., Dairy Husb.3
S. P. Marshall, Ph.D., Asso. Dairy Husb.3
W. A. Krienke, M.S., Asso. Dairy Tech. 3


P. T. Dix Arnold, M.S.A., Asst. Dairy Husb.'
Leon Mull, Ph.D., Asso. Dairy Tech.
H. H. Wilkowske, Ph.D., Asst. Dairy Tech.
James M. Wing, M.S., Asst. Dairy Husb.
EDITORIAL
J. Francis Cooper, M.S.A., Editor 0
Clyde Beale, A.B.J., Associate Editor
L. Odell Griffith, B.A.J., Asst. Editor
J. N. Joiner, B.S.A., Assistant Editor
ENTOMOLOGY
A. N. Tissot, Ph.D., Entomologist'
L. C. Kuitert, Ph.D., Associate
II. E. Bratley, M.S.A., Assistant
F. A. Robinson, M.S., Asst. Apiculturist
R. E. Waites, Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist
HOME ECONOMICS
Ouida D. Abbott, Ph.D., Home Econ.1
R. B. French, Ph.D., Biochemist
HORTICULTURE
G. H. Blackmon, M.S.A., Horticulturist1
F. S. Jamison, Ph.D., Horticulturist 3
Albert P. Lorz, Ph.D., Horticulturist
R. K. Showalter, M.S., Asso. Hort.
R. A. Dennison, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
R. H. Sharpe, M.S., Asso. Horticulturist
V. F. Nettles, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
F. S. Lagasse, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.2
R. D. Dickey, M.S.A., Asso. Hort.
L. H. Halsey, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
C. B. Hall, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
Austin Griffiths, Jr,., B.S., Asst. Hort.
S. E. McFadden, Jr., Ph.DP., Asst. Hort.
C. H. VanMiddelem, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
Buford Thompson, M.S.A., Assl. Hort.
LIBRARY
Ida Keeling Cresap, Librarian
PLANT PATHOLOGY
W. B. Tisdale, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist's
Phares Decker, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Erdman West, M.S., Mycologist and Botanist
Robert W. Earhart, Ph.D., Plant Path.2
Howard N. Miller, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
Lillian E. Arnold, M.S., Asst. Botanist
C. W. Anderson, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.
POULTRY HUSBANDRY
N. R. Mehrhof, M.Agr., Poultry Husb.1i
J. C. Driggers, Ph.D., Asso. Poultry Husb.
SOILS
F. B. Smith, Ph.D., Microbiologist 13
Gaylord M. Volk, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
J. R. Henderson, M.S.A., Soil Technologist3
J. R. Neller, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
Nathan Gammon, Jr., Ph.D., Soils Chemist
Ralph G. Leighty, B.S., Asst. Soil Surveyor'
G. D. Thornton, Ph.D., Asso. Microbiologist'
Charles F. Eno, Ph.D., Asst. Soils Micro-
biologist 4
H. W. Winsor, B.S.A., Assistant Chemist
R. E. Caldwell, M.S.A., Asst. Chemist 3
V. W. Carlisle, B.S., Asst. Soil Surveyor
James H. Walker, M.S.A., Asst. Soil
Surveyor
S. N. Edson, M.S., Asst. Soil Surveyor s
William K. Robertson, Ph.D., Asst. Chemist
0. E. Cruz, B.S.A., Asst. Soil Surveyor
W. G. Blue, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
J. G. A. Fiskel, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
H. F. Ross, B.S., Soils Microbiologist
L. C. Hammond, Ph.D., Asst. Soil Physicist
VETERINARY SCIENCE
D. A. Sanders, D.V.M., Veterinarian'
M. W. Emmel, D.V.M., Veterinarian'
C. F. Simpson, D.V.M., Asso. Veterinarian
L. E. Swanson, D.V.M., Parasitologist
Glenn Van Ness, D.V.M., Asso. Poultry
Pathologist
W. R. Dennis, D.V.M., Asst. Parasitologist










BRANCH STATIONS
NORTH FLORIDA STATION, QUINCY
W. C. Rhoades, Jr., M.S., Entomologist
R. R. Kincaid, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
L. G. Thompson, Jr., Ph.D., Soils Chemist
W. H. Chapman, M.S., Asso. Agronomist
Frank S. Baker, Jr., B.S., Asst. An. Hush.
T. E. Webb, B.S.A., Asst. Agronomist

Mobile Unit, Monticello
R. W. Wallace, B.S., Associate Agronomist
Mobile Unit, Marianna
R. W. Lipscomb, M.S., Associate Agronomist

Mobile Unit, Pensacola
R. L. Smith, M.S., Associate Agronomist

Mobile Unit, Chipley
J. B. White, B.S.A., Associate Agronomist
CITRUS STATION, LAKE ALFRED
A. F. Camp, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
W. L. Thompson, B.S., Entomologist
R. F. Suit, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
E. P. Ducharme, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
C. R. Stearns, Jr., B.S.A., Asso. Chemist
J. W. Sites, Ph.D., Horticulturist
H. 0. Sterling, B.S., Asst. Horticulturist
H. J. Reitz, Ph.D., Horticulturist
Francine Fisher, M.S., Asst. Plant Path.
I. W. Wander, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
J. W. Kesterson, M.S., Asso. Chemist
R. Hendrickson, B.S., Asst. Chemist
Ivan Stewart, Ph.D., Asst. Biochemist
D. S. Prosser, Jr., B.S., Asst. Horticulturist
R. W. Olsen, B.S., Biochemist
F. W. Wenzel, Jr., Ph.D., Chemist
Alvin H. Rouse, M.S., Asso. Chemist
H. W. Ford, Ph.D., Asst. Horticulturist
L. C. Knorr, Ph.D., Asso. Histologist'
R. M. Pratt, Ph.D., Asso. Ent.-Pathologist
J. W. Davis, B.S.A., Asst. in Ent.-Path.
W. A. Simanton, Ph.D., Entomologist
E. J. Deszyck, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
C. D. Leonard, Ph.D., Asso. Horticulturist
I. Stewart, M.S., Asst. Biochemist
W. T. Long, M.S., Asst. Horticulturist
M. H. Muma, Ph.D.. Asst. Entomologist
F. J. Reynolds, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
E. J. Elvin, B.S., Asst. Hort.
W. F. Spencer, Ph.D., Asst. Chem.
I. H. Holtsberg, B.S.A., Asst. Entomologist-
Pathologist
K. G. Townsend, B.S.A., Asst. Entomologist-
Pathologist
J. B. Weeks, B.S.. Asst. Entomologist
E. C. Lundbert, B.S.A., Asst. Biochemist
N. F. Shimp, M.S., Asst. Chem.
R. B. Johnson, M.S., Asst. Entomologist

EVERGLADES STATION, BELLE GLADE
R. V. Allison, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
Thomas Bregger, Ph.D., Physiologist
J. W. Randolph, M.S., Agricultural Engr.
W. T. Forsee, Jr., Ph.D., Chemist
R. W. Kidder, M.S., Asso. Animal Husb.
C. C. Seale, Asso. Agronomist
N. C. Hayslip, B.S.A., Asso. Entomologist
E. A. Wolf, M.S., Asst. Horticulturist
W. H. Thames, M.S., Asst. Entomologist
W. N. Stoner, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.
W. A. Hills, M.S., Asso. Horticulturist
W. G. Genung, B.S.A., Asst. Entomologist
Frank V. Stevenson, M.S., Asso. Plant Path.
Robert J. Allen, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist
V. E. Green, Ph.D., Asst. Agronomist
J. F. Darby, Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.
H. L. Chapman, Jr.. M.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.
Thos. G. Bowery. Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist
V. L. Guzman, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
M. R. Bedsole, M.S.A., Asst. Chem.


SUB-TROPICAL STATION, HOMESTEAD
Geo. D. Ruehle, Ph.D., Vice-Dir. in Charge
D. 0. Wolfenbarger, Ph.D., Entomologist
Francis B. Lincoln, Ph.D., Horticulturist
Robert A. Conover, Ph.D., Plant Path.
John L. Malcolm, Ph.D., Asso. Soils Chemist
R. W. Harkness, Ph.D., Asst. Chemist
R. Bruce Ledin, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
J. C. Noonan, M.S., Asst. Hort.
M. H. Gallatin, B.S., Soil Conservationist

WEST CENTRAL FLORIDA STATION,
BROOKSVILLE
William Jackson, B.S.A., Animal Husband-
man in Charge

RANGE CATTLE STATION, ONA
W. G. Kirk, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
E. M. Hodges, Ph.D., Agronomist
D. W. Jones, M.S., Asst. Soil Technologist

CENTRAL FLORIDA STATION, SANFORD
R. W. Ruprecht, Ph.D., Vice-Dir. in Charge
J. W. Wilson, Sc.D., Entomologist
P. J. Westgate, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.
Ben. F. Whitner, Jr., B.S.A., Asst. Hort.
Geo. Swank, Jr., Ph.D., Asst. Plant Path.

WEST FLORIDA STATION, JAY
C. E. Hutton, Ph.D., Vice-Director in Charge
H. W. Lundy, B.S.A., Associate Agronomist
W. R. Langford, Ph.D., Asst. Agron.

SUWANNEE VALLEY STATION,
LIVE OAK
G. E. Ritchey, M.S., Agronomist in Charge

GULF COAST STATION, BRADENTON
E. L. Spencer, Ph.D., Soils Chemist in Charge
E. G. Kelsheimer, Ph.D., Entomologist
David G. A. Kelbert, Asso. Horticulturist
Robert O. Magie, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
J. M. Walter, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Donald S. Burgis, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
C. M. Geraldson, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
W. G. Cowperthwaite, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
Amegda Jack, M.S., Asst. Soils Chemist

FIELD LABORATORIES

Watermelon, Grape, Pasture-Leesburg
C. C. Helms, Jr., B.S., Asst. Agronomist
L. H. Stover, Asst. in Hort.

Strawberry-Plant City
A. N. Brooks, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Vegetables-Hastings
A. H. Eddins, Ph.D., Plant Path. in Charge
E. N. McCubbin, Ph.D., Horticulturist
T. M. Dobrovsky, Ph.D., Asst. Entomologist
Pecans-Monticello
A. M. Phillips, B.S., Asso. Entomologist'
John R. Large, M.S., Asso. Plant Path.
Frost Forecasting-Lakeland
Warren O. Johnson, B.S., Meteorologist2

1 Head of Department
SIn cooperation with U. S.
3 Cooperative, other divisions, U. of F.
4 On leave.















CONTENTS

Page
INTRODUCTION .............. .............. ................... ........ ....... ........... 5

MATERIALS AND METHODS .................................... ........ ................... 6

RESULTS .......................... ................ .... .................... ------ 8

Cabbage ..............8..... ................... 8

1945 .......................................................- -.

1946 ..................... ..... ..... .. .................. ............ 9

1947 .............................. ... ....... .. .. .. ......... ... ......... ......... 11

Sweet Corn .................................... .....-- ....-- 13

1945 ...................... ... ............ .. .... .............. ...... 13

1948 ...................... .......... ....... ......... 13

1949 ...... ................... ............... ...... .. ................ .. 16

Beans ........... .... .... ................ ...... .......... .. .... 20

1946 .... ..................... ............. ....... 20

1947 ............................ ............ 20

Onions ..................................... ......... .......... ............. .... .... 22

1949 ...................... ................. ..... .. .... .. ......... .... 22

Tomatoes ........... .................. ........ ... ..... ........ 23

1951 ....................................... .. .. ......... .. ... ....... 23

Cucumbers ..................... ........................ .... 23

1951 ................................... ... .... .... ........ .... ..... 23

DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY ............................ ............. 24

LITERATURE CITED ....... ........ ..........................................2 26









Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies
with Cabbage, Sweet Corn, Snap Beans,
Onions, Tomatoes and Cucumbers

V. F. NETTLES, F. S. JAMISON and B. E. JANES

Introduction
Irrigation has been used for many years for vegetable pro-
duction in certain areas of the state and could probably be used
to advantage in additional areas. Annual rainfall for Florida
averages close to 52 inches, which would be adequate for the
production of most vegetable crops if it were distributed uni-
formly over the year. Actually the larger part of the rainfall
occurs during the summer months, when few vegetables are
grown. During the seasons when most vegetables are grown,
rainfall is often light and irregular. Thus the major part of
the commercial acreage is produced on land where the soil moist-
ure is often increased by various methods of irrigation. Methods
of application may vary from a simple flooding of the soil, using
a minimum of equipment, to the establishment of permanent
irrigation systems with sprinkler nozzles mounted on uprights
connected to underground mains.
This bulletin reports the response of several vegetables, as
measured in terms of yields, to sprinkler irrigation and the in-
fluence of irrigation on certain fertilizer treatments with cabbage
and spacing of sweet corn.
Much emphasis has been placed on irrigation methods and
practices in the southwestern region of the United States, where
moisture is often the limiting factor for vegetable crop produc-
tion. Many of the findings from research conducted in these
regions are not completely applicable to Florida conditions, from
the standpoints of both soils and water supply.
The problems of irrigation are not new to Florida and the
need for supplementing natural rainfall has received the atten-
tion of several investigators. Sellards (10) and Stringfield
(11) investigated the availability of artesian water for the
irrigation of vegetables and other crops. Clayton, Neller and
Allison (5) studied water control in the peat and muck soils of
the Florida Everglades and conclude that a 1.5- to 2.0-foot water
table is best for vegetables.
Volk and Winsor (12), in potato trials at Hastings, found no







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


significant differences between irrigation made by furrow or
overhead methods in the seasons of 1940 and 1941. Beckenbach,
Pratt and Spencer (2), studying the seedbed culture of tomatoes
and celery, report results indicating that overhead irrigation
is superior to seep irrigation. Burgis, Spencer and Beckenbach
(4), in additional seedbed studies the following year, found no
significant difference in plant growth or germination of tomatoes
or celery when grown under overhead or seep irrigation.
Some results of the current investigations have been reported
by Nettles, Jamison and Janes (9) and Nettles (8). Investiga-
tion of the chemical composition of beans and cabbage were
made concurrently with the yield studies. Effects of irrigation
on the chemical composition of beans grown in 1947 (6) and
cabbage grown in 1948 (7) have been reported by Janes.

Materials and Methods
Experiments on the effectiveness of irrigation on several vege-
tables were begun at Gainesville in the spring of 1945. Plots
were located on soil classified as Arredonda loamy sand, the
average moisture equivalent of which ranged from 6.04 to 9.24.l
In the initial year a temporary sprinkler irrigation system was
used, employing a slip-joint pipe for lateral mains to which
uprights supporting oscillating sprinkling nozzles were attached.
In the summer of 1945 a permanent irrigation system was estab-
lished, consisting of an oscillating nozzle on a single upright
supplied by underground mains for each plot. The experimental
area consisted of 16 plots arranged in a Latin square. Individual
plots were approximately 1/24 acre in size with sufficient aisle
space to prevent the overlapping of the irrigation treatments.
Crops included in the test and the seasons in which they are
planted are shown in Table 1.
TABLE. 1.-SEASONS OF PLANTING OF VEGETABLES IN TEST.

Vegetable ITime of Planting
Spring I Fall
Cabbage .........................-.............. I .............. 1945, 1946, 1947
Sweet Corn ........................... 1945, 1948, 1949..........
Snap Beans ... ...................... 1946, 1947
Onions ..................................... 1949
Tom atoes ........................................ 1951
Cucumbers ................................ .. 1 1951 ..............

1 Moisture equivalents determined by Dr. G. M. Volk, Soils Department,
Experiment Station.







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 7

In the experiments three to four levels of water were tested,
including plots which received no irrigation. From 1945 through
1947 the levels were varied by changing the amounts applied
at any one application. With sweet corn in 1945 the applica-
tions were made on a weekly schedule, making adjustments in
schedule when rainfall of 1/ inch or more occurred. Amounts
tested ranged from 1/ to 11/2 inch per application. During the
first season with beans and cabbage the irrigations were timed
by observing the vegetables for visual characteristics indicating
need for water and the apparent dryness of the soil. An evapori-
meter was used with the second crop of beans and cabbage.
Irrigations were made after 1 0.1 inch of water had evaporated
from a tank 48 inches in diameter and 10 inches deep. Rates
used with beans and cabbage ranged from 1/ to 1 inch per
application.
Starting with cabbage in 1947 the level of moisture was varied
by changing the frequency of application. The following sched-
ule was adopted, using the evaporimeter: occasional irrigation,
1/2 inch of water applied after one inch evaporation; medium
irrigation, 1 inch of water applied after each half inch of
evaporation; frequent irrigation, 1/ inch applied after one-quar-
ter inch of evaporation. This procedure was satisfactory during
winter when evaporation was slow. However, in spring, an
increased evaporation rate necessitated too frequent irrigations.
Therefore the following time schedule was adopted: occasional
irrigation, 1. inch of water applied every eight days; medium
irrigation, 1/2 inch of water applied every four days; and fre-
quent irrigation, 1/ inch of water applied every two days. In
maintaining the schedule rainfall of 1/ inch or more was con-
sidered equivalent to an irrigation and the time of next applica-
tion was dated from the day of rain.
The time schedule modified to 12, 6 and 3 days was used after
the spring of 1947 for tests with corn, tomatoes, onions and
cucumbers.
The individual plots receiving the various irrigation treat-
ments were of sufficient size to permit their division into sub-
plots. It was therefore possible to investigate the response of
different varieties and the effect of certain cultural practices
on yield and to determine their relationship with irrigation
treatments. Cultural practices tested included the use of side-
dressings of nitrogen, spacing of plants and time of planting.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Results
Results of the irrigation tests are grouped by crop. The data
for cabbage, sweet corn and snap beans include several crop
seasons but those for onions, tomatoes and cucumbers are for
one year only.
Cabbage
This crop was grown for three successive years. The variety
Copenhagen Market was planted in the fall of 1945 and Glory
of Enkhuizen in the fall of 1946 and 1947. During the three
seasons the cabbage was grown under four levels of moisture.
1945.-Four moisture treatments were tested. These were:
(a) no irrigation; (b) light irrigation to maintain the moisture
above the point where permanent wilting would occur; (c) heavy
irrigation, or twice the amount applied in (b), and (d) the same
amount of water as in the heavy treatment but applied in a split
application three days apart. The amount of water was equiva-
lent to 1/4 to 1/2 acre inch per individual application to plots
receiving the light amount of water.
The individual plots receiving the irrigation treatments were
divided into equal sections and the following fertilizer treat-
ments applied to the sub-plots; (a) 1,600 pounds 8-7-5 fertilizer
per acre; (b) 1,600 pounds 4-7-5 per acre plus two side-dressings
each of 200 pounds of nitrate of soda per acre; (c) 1,600 pounds
4-7-5 fertilizer. All fertilizer applications, except the side-
dressings, were made at planting time by machine which placed
the fertilizer in bands to each side of the plant.

TABLE 2.-COMPARATIVE PRECIPITATION RECORDS FOR PERIOD COVERED BY
IRRIGATION STUDIES.*
Normal
SAverage 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951
January ......... 3.16 4.43 1.95 1.40 6.19 1.16 0.11 1.01
February .......... 2.92 1.63 2.74 4.67 1.83 5.94 0.54 0.99
March ............. 3.35 Trace 2.87 8.75 8.51 2.45 4.75 4.58
April .............. 2.40 4.28 1.70 1.70 2.06 8.95 2.16 2.11
May ......... .. 3.15 2.72 7.00 4.16 2.99 0.49 0.90 2.40
June ............... 1 4.20 1 5.42 11.58 5.52 3.31 7.57 2.83 1 3.81
October ..........- 2.84 1.39 4.57 7.20 5.96 1.09 6.35
November ....... 1.82 2.00 1.28 3.28 1.20 4.17 0.24
December ....... 3.21 9.22 0.19 2.00 3.10 0.23 2.79

* Bennett (3) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
Anderson (1) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
The rainfall during the growing season of cabbage planted
in the fall of this year was near normal for all months except






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Results
Results of the irrigation tests are grouped by crop. The data
for cabbage, sweet corn and snap beans include several crop
seasons but those for onions, tomatoes and cucumbers are for
one year only.
Cabbage
This crop was grown for three successive years. The variety
Copenhagen Market was planted in the fall of 1945 and Glory
of Enkhuizen in the fall of 1946 and 1947. During the three
seasons the cabbage was grown under four levels of moisture.
1945.-Four moisture treatments were tested. These were:
(a) no irrigation; (b) light irrigation to maintain the moisture
above the point where permanent wilting would occur; (c) heavy
irrigation, or twice the amount applied in (b), and (d) the same
amount of water as in the heavy treatment but applied in a split
application three days apart. The amount of water was equiva-
lent to 1/4 to 1/2 acre inch per individual application to plots
receiving the light amount of water.
The individual plots receiving the irrigation treatments were
divided into equal sections and the following fertilizer treat-
ments applied to the sub-plots; (a) 1,600 pounds 8-7-5 fertilizer
per acre; (b) 1,600 pounds 4-7-5 per acre plus two side-dressings
each of 200 pounds of nitrate of soda per acre; (c) 1,600 pounds
4-7-5 fertilizer. All fertilizer applications, except the side-
dressings, were made at planting time by machine which placed
the fertilizer in bands to each side of the plant.

TABLE 2.-COMPARATIVE PRECIPITATION RECORDS FOR PERIOD COVERED BY
IRRIGATION STUDIES.*
Normal
SAverage 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951
January ......... 3.16 4.43 1.95 1.40 6.19 1.16 0.11 1.01
February .......... 2.92 1.63 2.74 4.67 1.83 5.94 0.54 0.99
March ............. 3.35 Trace 2.87 8.75 8.51 2.45 4.75 4.58
April .............. 2.40 4.28 1.70 1.70 2.06 8.95 2.16 2.11
May ......... .. 3.15 2.72 7.00 4.16 2.99 0.49 0.90 2.40
June ............... 1 4.20 1 5.42 11.58 5.52 3.31 7.57 2.83 1 3.81
October ..........- 2.84 1.39 4.57 7.20 5.96 1.09 6.35
November ....... 1.82 2.00 1.28 3.28 1.20 4.17 0.24
December ....... 3.21 9.22 0.19 2.00 3.10 0.23 2.79

* Bennett (3) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
Anderson (1) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
The rainfall during the growing season of cabbage planted
in the fall of this year was near normal for all months except






Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Results
Results of the irrigation tests are grouped by crop. The data
for cabbage, sweet corn and snap beans include several crop
seasons but those for onions, tomatoes and cucumbers are for
one year only.
Cabbage
This crop was grown for three successive years. The variety
Copenhagen Market was planted in the fall of 1945 and Glory
of Enkhuizen in the fall of 1946 and 1947. During the three
seasons the cabbage was grown under four levels of moisture.
1945.-Four moisture treatments were tested. These were:
(a) no irrigation; (b) light irrigation to maintain the moisture
above the point where permanent wilting would occur; (c) heavy
irrigation, or twice the amount applied in (b), and (d) the same
amount of water as in the heavy treatment but applied in a split
application three days apart. The amount of water was equiva-
lent to 1/4 to 1/2 acre inch per individual application to plots
receiving the light amount of water.
The individual plots receiving the irrigation treatments were
divided into equal sections and the following fertilizer treat-
ments applied to the sub-plots; (a) 1,600 pounds 8-7-5 fertilizer
per acre; (b) 1,600 pounds 4-7-5 per acre plus two side-dressings
each of 200 pounds of nitrate of soda per acre; (c) 1,600 pounds
4-7-5 fertilizer. All fertilizer applications, except the side-
dressings, were made at planting time by machine which placed
the fertilizer in bands to each side of the plant.

TABLE 2.-COMPARATIVE PRECIPITATION RECORDS FOR PERIOD COVERED BY
IRRIGATION STUDIES.*
Normal
SAverage 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951
January ......... 3.16 4.43 1.95 1.40 6.19 1.16 0.11 1.01
February .......... 2.92 1.63 2.74 4.67 1.83 5.94 0.54 0.99
March ............. 3.35 Trace 2.87 8.75 8.51 2.45 4.75 4.58
April .............. 2.40 4.28 1.70 1.70 2.06 8.95 2.16 2.11
May ......... .. 3.15 2.72 7.00 4.16 2.99 0.49 0.90 2.40
June ............... 1 4.20 1 5.42 11.58 5.52 3.31 7.57 2.83 1 3.81
October ..........- 2.84 1.39 4.57 7.20 5.96 1.09 6.35
November ....... 1.82 2.00 1.28 3.28 1.20 4.17 0.24
December ....... 3.21 9.22 0.19 2.00 3.10 0.23 2.79

* Bennett (3) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
Anderson (1) U. S. Weather Bureau Records.
The rainfall during the growing season of cabbage planted
in the fall of this year was near normal for all months except







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 9

December, when it was heavy, as shown in Table 2. The total
amount of supplemental water applied for each treatment and
total precipitation for the growing season are listed in Table 3.

TABLE 3.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZER TREATMENTS ON
AVERAGE YIELD IN TONS PER ACRE OF COPENHAGEN MARKET CABBAGE, 1945.

Moisture Record I Fertilizer Treatment
I 1,600 I Yield
Total Lbs./Acrel Average
Irrigation Inches Total 1,600 4-7-5+ 1,600 Irriga-
Treatment of Rain- Lbs./ 400 Lbs. Lbs./ tion
Water I fall Acre NaNOa Acre Treat-
Appliedl Inches 8-7-5 Side- 4-7-5 meant
SI ____Dressing j _
No irrigation .......... None 14.96 5.03 7.30 5.24 5.86
Light irrigation .... 1.12 14.96 5.87 9.27 5.38 6.84
Heavy irrigation .. 2.44 14.96 4.84 8.00 4.28 5.71
Split irrigation ...... 2.11 14.96 5.19 7.30 5.49 6.00

Average yield fertilizer treatment .... 5.23 7.97 5.10

Difference required for significance between averages for
irrigation ................................ .......................... .......................... 5 0.98
1% 1.49
Difference required for significance between averages for
fertilizer ............................. ....----- .................... ......................... 5% 0.77
1% 1.05
Interaction between irrigation X fertilizer not significant.

Light irrigation resulted in a significant increase in yield over
either the non-irrigated or heavy irrigation. A significant in-
crease in average yield was obtained when the plants were side-
dressed twice with nitrate of soda 7 and 10 weeks after trans-
planting. Table 3 shows an increase in yield of more than two
and one-half tons from the use of side-dressing. No increase
was found to result by increasing the nitrogen level of the
fertilizer applied at planting.
1946.-Evaporation measurements as described under methods
were made to assist in ascertaining the time for application of
water. Moisture trials included the following: (a) no irriga-
tion; (b) 1/~ acre inch of water; (c) 1 inch of water; (d) 1 acre
inch of water divided into two applications of 1/2 acre inch of
water separated by three-day interval of time.
Individual plots were divided to repeat the fertilizer tests
conducted in 1945. To the plots fertilized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer
and receiving side-dressing, two side-dressings of nitrate of
soda were made 8 and 11 weeks after transplanting at the rate












TABLE 4.-RESPONSE OF GLORY OF ENKHUIZEN CABBAGE TO SEVERAL IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZER TREATMENTS, 1946.


Irrigation
Treatment


Moisture Record

Total
Inches Total
of Water Rainfall
Applied Inches


No irrigation .... None

Light .................. 3.04

Heavy .............. 5.41

Split .................... 4.89


Average for fertilizer treatment


6.12

6.12

6.12

6.12


1,600 Lbs./Acre
8-7-5

ITons/Acrel Lbs./Head


Fertilizer Treatment
I 1,600 Lbs./Acre
S 4-7-5+400 Lbs.
S NaNO:,
Side-Dressing


1,600 Lbs./Acre
4-7-5


Average for
SIrrigation Treatment


Tons/Acrel Lbs./Headl Tons/Acrel Lbs./Headl Tons/Acrel Lbs./Head


2.49

5.34

5.86

7.08


5.19


Differences required for significance between averages for irrigation: 5% .................... ........................

1% ................................... ................

Differences between averages for fertilizer treatments not significant.
Interaction between irrigation X fertilizer not significant.


2.35

5.24

5.77

6.77





0.77

1.17







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 11

of 200 pounds per acre per application. The plots receiving
the 4-7-5 and the 8-7-5 received all fertilizer at planting time.
The precipitation was much lower than the previous year,
with rainfall especially light during the first two months of
the growing season. This resulted in a need for more frequent
irrigation than in 1945.
Glory of Enkhuizen cabbage grown on irrigated plots, regard-
less of amount of water, produced a larger yield than cabbage
grown on non-irrigated plots, as seen from the data in Table 4.
PThis increase in yield was obtained despite the fact that freezing
weather near the end of the season prevented the normal head-
ing of the plants and necessitated the harvesting of the cabbage
when immature. Average yield from plots which received the
split application of water was significantly higher than that
from the light and heavy applications.
Average weights of cabbage per head from the treatments
are tabulated in Table 4. The average weight per head from
the heavily irrigated plots was comparable to that from the
light and split-application treatments but higher than that from
the non-irrigated plots.
The use of additional nitrogen in the form of side-dressing,
or by increasing the nitrogen level at fertilization prior to plant-
ing, gave no increase over the use of a 4-7-5 fertilizer applied
at planting at the rate of 1,600 pounds per acre. Results of this
fertilizer sub-treatment as affecting average yield and weight
of heads are given in Table 4.
1947.-Glory of Enkhuizen cabbage was planted on three
dates: October 20, 1947, December 3, 1947, and February 6, 1948.
Evaporation measurements were initially made for determin-
ing the time for irrigation application as described under methods,
but this method was discarded in favor of a time schedule.
The moisture treatments included: (a) no irrigation; (b) oc-
casional application of water equivalent to 1/ acre inch applied
every eight days; (c) medium application or above amount
applied every four days and (d) frequent application or above
amount applied every two days.
All plots were fertilized with 2,000 pounds of a 4-7-5 fertilizer
per acre. One-half of each plot received a side-dressing of
nitrate of soda at the rate of 200 pounds per acre per applica-
tion. The number of applications made varied with the time
of planting. Two were made to the early planting, three to the
mid-season and four to the late planting.










TABLE 5.-AVERAGE YIELD OF GLORY OF ENKHUIZEN CABBAGE AS AFFECTED BY IRRIGATION AND FERTILIZER TREATMENTS, 1947.

First Planting-10/20/47 Second Planting-12/3/47 Third Planting-2/6/48
Moisture Record I Tons of Cabbage per Acrel Mcisture Record ITons of Cabbage per Acrel Moisture Record Tons of Cabbage per Acre
Irrigation Total Aver- Total I Aver- I Total I I Aver-
Treatment Inches Total INot age Inches Total Not gage Inches I Total NNot age
of Rain- 1 Side- Side- for of Rain- Side- Side- for of Rain- Side- Side- for
Water fall, Idressed dressed Irriga- I Water fall, dressed dressed Irriga- Water fall, dressed dressed Irriga-
Applied Inches ___ __ __Appd I s tion Applied Innch es IA tion

No irrigation None 7.59 10.30 13.08 11.69 I None 19.24 5.59 5.38 5.49 None 13.00 6.55 7.25 6.90
Occasional .... 0.43 7.59 10.72 11.58 11.15 0.92 19.24 3.93 3.84 3.89 1.37 13.00 7.57 9.28 8.43
Medium ..... 2.14 7.59 10.48 13.68 12.08 3.64 19.24 3.54 2.96 3.25 5.12 13.00 12.15 11.55 12.05
Frequent...... 7.55 7.59 7.59 10.79 9.19 7.40 19.24 i 3.86 5.77 4.82 9.96 13.00 12.74 13.97 13.36

Average for fertilizer 9.77 12.28 4.22 4.49 9.75 10.61

Difference required for significance between averages for irrigation: 3.09
5% N.S. N.S.3.09
1% N.S. N.S. 4.67
Difference required for significance between averages for fertilizer treatment, first planting: 5% 0.99
1% 1.38
Difference between averages for fertilizer treatment, second 'planting-not significant.
Difference required for significance between averages for fertilizer treatment, third planting: 5% 0.79
1% 1.38
Interaction between irrigation x fertilizer-not significant for all plantings.







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 13

The three plantings were grown under different rainfall con-
ditions. The early planting matured during the latter part of
January and February, which was cold and wet. The mid-
season planting suffered from cold damage, while the late plant-
ing had good growing conditions and produced an excellent
crop of cabbage.
Effect of irrigation on yield is given in Table 5. There were
no significant differences in yield as a result of irrigation treat-
ments with either the first or second planting of cabbage. In the
third planting, yields were increased by either medium or frequent
irrigation. Frequent irrigation (water equivalent to 1/2 acre
inch every two days) or medium irrigation, (water equivalent
to 1/2 acre inch every four days) produced approximately double
the yield obtained from plots not irrigated. Average yields of
plots given the frequent and medium irrigation treatments were
also higher than for the plots receiving the occasional irrigation
(water equivalent to 1 acre inch every eight days).
The effect of side-dressing of nitrate of soda on yield is shown
in Table 5. Side-dressing with nitrogen increased the average
yield of the first and third crops of cabbage.

Sweet Corn
1945.-The initial experiment with this crop was made in the
spring of 1945 prior to the establishment of a permanent irriga-
tion system. Two varieties, Golden Cross Bantam and Illinois
Golden 10, were tested.
Moisture trials included: (a) no irrigation; (b) light irriga-
tion or water equivalent to 1/2 to 3/ acre inch per week and (c)
heavy irrigation or twice the amount placed on the lightly irri-
gated plots. All plots were fertilized with 1,200 pounds of a
4-7-5 fertilizer and received water at time of planting to assure
germination. Yield data are reported for only the first harvest
of corn.
Average yield of corn grown under the several levels of
irrigation was greatly affected by amount of moisture, as shown
in Table 6. Plots heavily irrigated produced approximately
nine times the corn produced by the plots receiving no irrigation.
Yield of corn from heavily irrigated plots was larger than from
the lightly irrigated plots. No difference in average yield of
the two varieties was obtained.
1948.-The variety Golden Security was grown under four
levels of moisture. To irrigated plots water equivalent to 1/







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 13

The three plantings were grown under different rainfall con-
ditions. The early planting matured during the latter part of
January and February, which was cold and wet. The mid-
season planting suffered from cold damage, while the late plant-
ing had good growing conditions and produced an excellent
crop of cabbage.
Effect of irrigation on yield is given in Table 5. There were
no significant differences in yield as a result of irrigation treat-
ments with either the first or second planting of cabbage. In the
third planting, yields were increased by either medium or frequent
irrigation. Frequent irrigation (water equivalent to 1/2 acre
inch every two days) or medium irrigation, (water equivalent
to 1/2 acre inch every four days) produced approximately double
the yield obtained from plots not irrigated. Average yields of
plots given the frequent and medium irrigation treatments were
also higher than for the plots receiving the occasional irrigation
(water equivalent to 1 acre inch every eight days).
The effect of side-dressing of nitrate of soda on yield is shown
in Table 5. Side-dressing with nitrogen increased the average
yield of the first and third crops of cabbage.

Sweet Corn
1945.-The initial experiment with this crop was made in the
spring of 1945 prior to the establishment of a permanent irriga-
tion system. Two varieties, Golden Cross Bantam and Illinois
Golden 10, were tested.
Moisture trials included: (a) no irrigation; (b) light irriga-
tion or water equivalent to 1/2 to 3/ acre inch per week and (c)
heavy irrigation or twice the amount placed on the lightly irri-
gated plots. All plots were fertilized with 1,200 pounds of a
4-7-5 fertilizer and received water at time of planting to assure
germination. Yield data are reported for only the first harvest
of corn.
Average yield of corn grown under the several levels of
irrigation was greatly affected by amount of moisture, as shown
in Table 6. Plots heavily irrigated produced approximately
nine times the corn produced by the plots receiving no irrigation.
Yield of corn from heavily irrigated plots was larger than from
the lightly irrigated plots. No difference in average yield of
the two varieties was obtained.
1948.-The variety Golden Security was grown under four
levels of moisture. To irrigated plots water equivalent to 1/







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 13

The three plantings were grown under different rainfall con-
ditions. The early planting matured during the latter part of
January and February, which was cold and wet. The mid-
season planting suffered from cold damage, while the late plant-
ing had good growing conditions and produced an excellent
crop of cabbage.
Effect of irrigation on yield is given in Table 5. There were
no significant differences in yield as a result of irrigation treat-
ments with either the first or second planting of cabbage. In the
third planting, yields were increased by either medium or frequent
irrigation. Frequent irrigation (water equivalent to 1/2 acre
inch every two days) or medium irrigation, (water equivalent
to 1/2 acre inch every four days) produced approximately double
the yield obtained from plots not irrigated. Average yields of
plots given the frequent and medium irrigation treatments were
also higher than for the plots receiving the occasional irrigation
(water equivalent to 1 acre inch every eight days).
The effect of side-dressing of nitrate of soda on yield is shown
in Table 5. Side-dressing with nitrogen increased the average
yield of the first and third crops of cabbage.

Sweet Corn
1945.-The initial experiment with this crop was made in the
spring of 1945 prior to the establishment of a permanent irriga-
tion system. Two varieties, Golden Cross Bantam and Illinois
Golden 10, were tested.
Moisture trials included: (a) no irrigation; (b) light irriga-
tion or water equivalent to 1/2 to 3/ acre inch per week and (c)
heavy irrigation or twice the amount placed on the lightly irri-
gated plots. All plots were fertilized with 1,200 pounds of a
4-7-5 fertilizer and received water at time of planting to assure
germination. Yield data are reported for only the first harvest
of corn.
Average yield of corn grown under the several levels of
irrigation was greatly affected by amount of moisture, as shown
in Table 6. Plots heavily irrigated produced approximately
nine times the corn produced by the plots receiving no irrigation.
Yield of corn from heavily irrigated plots was larger than from
the lightly irrigated plots. No difference in average yield of
the two varieties was obtained.
1948.-The variety Golden Security was grown under four
levels of moisture. To irrigated plots water equivalent to 1/







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


acre inch was applied at each irrigation. Moisture treatments
were: (a) no irrigation; (b) occasional irrigation applied every
twelfth day; (c) medium irrigation applied every third day.

TABLE 6.-EFFECT OF IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON YIELD IN POUNDS PER
ACRE OF Two VARIETIES OF SWEET CORN, 1945.

Moisture Variety
Irrigation Record I Average
Treatment Total Illinois Golden for
Inches of Golden I Cross Irrigation
Rainfall No. 10 Bantam

None ........... ............... 7.00 127.9 167.5 147.7
Heavy ................... 7.00 1371.1 1281.9 1326.5
Light .......... ................. 7.00 745.6 783.2 764.4
Average for variety .... 748.2 744.2

Difference required for significance between averages for
irrigation ........................................ ........--- 5% 424
1% 643
Differences between averages for varieties not significant.
Interaction between irrigation X varieties not significant.

Each plot was sub-divided to permit the corn to be planted
on two dates at four different spacings. The corn was planted
on February 27 and April 6. For the spacing test, corn was
planted in hills which were 6, 12, 18 and 24 inches apart in the
row. The distance between rows of corn was 3 feet.
Corn was fertilized at the rate of 1,200 pounds per acre with a
4-7-5 fertilizer applied in bands to each side of the seed at time
of planting. In addition, all corn was side-dressed at the rate
of 200 pounds of nitrate of soda per acre for each application.
The first planting was side-dressed three times and the second
planting was side-dressed twice.
Results from the two plantings of corn are shown in Table 7.
Both crops responded to irrigation. In the first planting the
plots receiving the medium and frequent applications of water,
1/2 inch every 6 and 3 days, respectively, gave comparable
yield in average number and weight of corn. Yields from these
treatments were higher than those obtained from the occasional
application and no irrigation. A larger average number of ears
was harvested from the plots receiving the occasional irrigation
than from plots with no irrigation. Although there was no
difference in the weight of the corn produced, this was due to
the smaller sized ears on the occasionally-irrigated plots. Dur-
ing the season of the second planting less rainfall occurred and











TABLE 7.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON YIELD OF Two PLANTINGS OF GOLDEN SECURITY SWEET CORN, 1948.


Irrigation
Treatment




No irrigation ....

Occasional .........

Medium ...........

Frequent ..........


First Planting-2/27/48


Moisture Record
Total
Inches Total
of Water Rainfall,
Applied Inches

None 11.47

2.37 11.47

6.57 11.47

11.90 11.47


Differences required for
significance between averages:


Average
Number
of Ears
/Acre


10,300

12,818

21,757

21,099



1,986

3,006


Average
Weight
of Corn,
Lbs./Acre


5,227

6,244

11,809

11,443



2 617

3,961


Second Planting-4/6/48


Moisture
Total
Inches
of Water
Applied

None

1.76

6.12

11.23


Record

Total
Rainfall,
Inches

7.57

7.57

7.57

7.57


Average Average
Number Weight
of Ears of Corn,
/Acre Lbu./Acrel
II


4,583

13,658

18,604

16,653



3,710

5,623


1,990

6,659

10,429

9,536



2,287

3,467


Season Average

Total Total
Number Weight
of Ears of Corn
per Acre Lbe./Acre


7,441 3,608

13,238 6,442

20,181 11,119

18,876 10,490


3,022

4,578


4,709

7,135


------ --


--~-







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


the average yield of corn was lower. The medium irrigated
plots gave a larger number of ears than either the occasional or
non-irrigated plots but all irrigated plots produced more ears
than the non-irrigated. In total weight the yields obtained
from the medium and frequent irrigated plots were comparable.
These yields were higher than those harvested from the plots
with the occasional irrigation and all irrigation treatments gave
larger yields than no irrigation.
In considering the combined or season average from the two
crops the largest number of ears was harvested from the medium
and frequent irrigation plots. As in the initial planting, the
trend was for the number from the medium irrigated plots to
be slightly higher. The number of ears harvested from the
occasionally irrigated plots was lower than obtained from the
heavier irrigation treatments. Plots receiving no water pro-
duced the lowest number of ears.
The trend for the medium irrigated plots to produce highest
weight of corn was found in the season's average as well as in
separate plantings. As in the separate plantings, yield from
these plots was similar to that found from the frequently irri-
gated plots. Plots receiving no irrigation or only occasional ap-
plication returned the lower yields, in comparison to plots
receiving the medium application.
Results of spacing and its relationship to irrigation for the
season are shown in Table 8. The number of ears per acre was
found to increase progressively as the spacing between plants
was reduced from 24 to 6 inches. Quite similar data were ob-
tained for total weight of sweet corn. Corn plants spaced 6
inches apart gave the largest weight. The 12-inch spacing was
the next best, with little difference between 18 and 24-inch spac-
ings. Differences in weight of corn as a result of spacing were
widest in those plots irrigated most frequently. The largest
number of ears and most weight of corn were harvested from
plots with corn at 6-inch spacing receiving medium or frequent
irrigation. Weight per individual ear was decreased by closer
spacing and lower rates of irrigation. Non-irrigation produced
fewest and lowest weight of ears, both number and weight de-
creasing progressively as width of spacing increased.
1949.-The test with corn was similar to the 1948 trial, the
only difference being that a larger planting of each spacing was
made in only one planting. Irrigation treatments and width
of spacings were the same.







TABLE 8.-EFFECT OF SPACING AND IRRIGATION FOR THE 1948 SEASON ON AVERAGE NUMBER OF EARS AND
TOTAL WEIGHT OF GOLDEN SECURITY SWEET CORN.
[I
Number of Ears/Acre I| Total Weight of Corn (Lbs./Acre)
Hill | Average I | Average
Spacing, No Occa- I Number No Occa- Weight
Inches Irriga- sional Medium Frequent for Irriga- sional Medium | Frequent for
tion Spacing tion I _Spacing

6 8,757 16,471 26,681 26,771 19,670 3,753 6,951 13,594 1 14,207 9,626
12 7,623 14,656 21,236 18,967 15,621 i 3,630 7,373 11,466 10,967 8,331
18 7,305 11,571 16,743 17,197 13,204 3,512 5,835 9,764 9,397 7.127
24 6,080 10,255 16,068 12,614 11,254 3,539 5,645 9,651 7,387 6,556

Difference'required for significance
between averages: 5% 1,202 706
1% 1,596 934

Difference required for significance of interaction spacing X irrigation:

Number of ears: 5% 2,404 |
1% 3,193
Weight 5% 1,412 I
1% 1,876 I







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Golden Security sweet corn was planted March 6-7. All plots
were fertilized with a 4-7-5 mixture at the rate of 1,000 pounds
per acre three days prior to planting. Two side-dressings of 200
pounds of nitrate of soda per acre were made during the growth
of the crop.


TABLE 9.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS
GOLDEN SECURITY SWEET CORN, 1949.


Moisture Record
Irrigation TotalI
Treatment Inches of I Total
IWater I Rainfall,
Applied I Inches

No irrigation .... None 10.26
Occasional .......... 1.00 10.26
Medium .........-... 3.00 10.26
Frequent ............. 6.00 10.26

Difference required for significance: 5%
1%


Nu
Ea


Total
mber of
rs/Acre

11,574
15,324
19,391
22,377

2,528
3,823


ON YIELD OF


Total
Weight of
Corn
(Lbs./Acre)


5,014
7,285
9,722
11,897

1,325
2,007


Effect of irrigation on yield is presented in Table 9. Number
of ears and total weight of corn increased with each increase
in irrigation. Highest yield in number of ears and total weight
of corn was harvested from the plots receiving the frequent
application of water.
In Table 10 is shown effect of spacing and relationship of
irrigation and spacing. 'Number of ears harvested from the
6-inch spacing was larger than from either the 18- or 24-inch
spacing, but was not significantly higher than from the 12-inch
spacing.< In relation to irrigation, the most ears were harvested
at the closer spacings and the number increased as the amount
of irrigation increased, being highest on plots receiving frequent
irrigation. 'The lowest numbers were produced at the 6- and
24-inch spacings on plots not irrigated/ /Largest total weight
of corn was produced on the frequently irrigated plots at the
12-inch spacing- Although the number was increased by plant-
ing at 6 inches, individual weight per ear was reduced sufficiently
to result in total weight being reduced. The wider spacing did
not produce a sufficient number of ears to increase the weight
above that produced at 12-inch spacing. /Lowest yield was at
the 6-inch spacing with no irrigation.,


{









TABLE 10.-EFFECT OF SPACING AND IRRIGATION ON AVERAGE NUMBER OF EARS AND TOTAL WEIGHT
SWEET CORN, 1949.


OF GOLDEN SECURITY


Number of Ears/Acre
Hill
Spacing, Irrigation Treatment
Inches No I I
__ Irrigation Occasional[ Medium Frequent

6 10,708 16,909 24,018 28,344
12 12,342 16,607 22,415 25,289
18 12,372 14,459 16,486 19,360
24 10,890 13,340 14,671 16,516


Difference required for significance between averages: 5%
1%

Difference required for significance of interaction spacing


Average
Number
for
Spacing

19,988
19,157
15,664
13,850


I I
ii


Total Weight of Corn (Lbs./Acre)


Irrigation Treatment


No
Irrigation

4,029
5,003
5,789
5,242


SOccasional

6,706
7,750
7,623
7,072


Medium

10,049
11,253
9,335
8,264


Frequent

13.086
13,890
11,232
9,398


Average
Weight
for
t I Spacing

8,461
9,471
8,492
7,491


1,294 | 688
1,730 1 923

x irrigation:


Number of ears: 5%
1%

Weight: 5%
1%


646
866

344
462


--


--


[







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Beans
1946.-Two varieties of beans, Florida Belle and Logan, were
planted in the fall of 1946. All plots received, 1,200 pounds per
acre of a 4-7-5 fertilizer applied in bands to each side of the
seed at planting time.
Moisture treatments tested were: (a) no irrigation; (b) light
irrigation, 1/4 to 1/ inch of water per application; (c) heavy
irrigation or twice the amount in (b); and (d) the same amount
of water as in the heavy treatment but in a split application.
Timing of the application in this season was determined from
the visual characteristics exhibited by the plants indicating the
need for water.

TABLE 11.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON AVERAGE
YIELD IN BUSHELS PER ACRE OF TWO VARIETIES OF SNAP BEANS, 1946.

Moisture Record Variety [ Average
Irrigation Total | for
Treatment Inches of Total Florida Irrigation
Water Rainfall, Belle Logan Treatment
Applied Inches
No irrigation .. None 10.74 153.3 138.9 146.1
Light .............. 1.40 10.74 168.5 180.2 174.3
Heavy .............. 2.84 10.74 153.6 154.3 153.9
Split ........-......... 1.80 10.74 174.0 178.4 176.2
Variety
average ........ 162.4 162.9

Difference required for significance between averages
for irrigation: 5% 7.3
1% 11.0

Difference between average for varieties not significant.
Interaction between irrigation x varieties not significant.

Amounts of water applied for each treatment and resulting
yield are presented in Table 11. Rainfall was fairly uniform
for this season. Average yield from plots irrigated in a split
application was comparable to yield from plots which received
only light application. Both of these treatments produced higher
average yields than no or heavy applications. No differences
in yielding ability of Florida Belle and Logan varieties were ob-
served under the conditions of the experiment,
1947.-Seed of the varieties Stringless Black Valentine and
Logan were planted as test crop in the fall of 1947. Fertilizer,
4-7-5, at the rate of 1,200 pounds per acre was applied in bands







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Beans
1946.-Two varieties of beans, Florida Belle and Logan, were
planted in the fall of 1946. All plots received, 1,200 pounds per
acre of a 4-7-5 fertilizer applied in bands to each side of the
seed at planting time.
Moisture treatments tested were: (a) no irrigation; (b) light
irrigation, 1/4 to 1/ inch of water per application; (c) heavy
irrigation or twice the amount in (b); and (d) the same amount
of water as in the heavy treatment but in a split application.
Timing of the application in this season was determined from
the visual characteristics exhibited by the plants indicating the
need for water.

TABLE 11.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON AVERAGE
YIELD IN BUSHELS PER ACRE OF TWO VARIETIES OF SNAP BEANS, 1946.

Moisture Record Variety [ Average
Irrigation Total | for
Treatment Inches of Total Florida Irrigation
Water Rainfall, Belle Logan Treatment
Applied Inches
No irrigation .. None 10.74 153.3 138.9 146.1
Light .............. 1.40 10.74 168.5 180.2 174.3
Heavy .............. 2.84 10.74 153.6 154.3 153.9
Split ........-......... 1.80 10.74 174.0 178.4 176.2
Variety
average ........ 162.4 162.9

Difference required for significance between averages
for irrigation: 5% 7.3
1% 11.0

Difference between average for varieties not significant.
Interaction between irrigation x varieties not significant.

Amounts of water applied for each treatment and resulting
yield are presented in Table 11. Rainfall was fairly uniform
for this season. Average yield from plots irrigated in a split
application was comparable to yield from plots which received
only light application. Both of these treatments produced higher
average yields than no or heavy applications. No differences
in yielding ability of Florida Belle and Logan varieties were ob-
served under the conditions of the experiment,
1947.-Seed of the varieties Stringless Black Valentine and
Logan were planted as test crop in the fall of 1947. Fertilizer,
4-7-5, at the rate of 1,200 pounds per acre was applied in bands







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Beans
1946.-Two varieties of beans, Florida Belle and Logan, were
planted in the fall of 1946. All plots received, 1,200 pounds per
acre of a 4-7-5 fertilizer applied in bands to each side of the
seed at planting time.
Moisture treatments tested were: (a) no irrigation; (b) light
irrigation, 1/4 to 1/ inch of water per application; (c) heavy
irrigation or twice the amount in (b); and (d) the same amount
of water as in the heavy treatment but in a split application.
Timing of the application in this season was determined from
the visual characteristics exhibited by the plants indicating the
need for water.

TABLE 11.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON AVERAGE
YIELD IN BUSHELS PER ACRE OF TWO VARIETIES OF SNAP BEANS, 1946.

Moisture Record Variety [ Average
Irrigation Total | for
Treatment Inches of Total Florida Irrigation
Water Rainfall, Belle Logan Treatment
Applied Inches
No irrigation .. None 10.74 153.3 138.9 146.1
Light .............. 1.40 10.74 168.5 180.2 174.3
Heavy .............. 2.84 10.74 153.6 154.3 153.9
Split ........-......... 1.80 10.74 174.0 178.4 176.2
Variety
average ........ 162.4 162.9

Difference required for significance between averages
for irrigation: 5% 7.3
1% 11.0

Difference between average for varieties not significant.
Interaction between irrigation x varieties not significant.

Amounts of water applied for each treatment and resulting
yield are presented in Table 11. Rainfall was fairly uniform
for this season. Average yield from plots irrigated in a split
application was comparable to yield from plots which received
only light application. Both of these treatments produced higher
average yields than no or heavy applications. No differences
in yielding ability of Florida Belle and Logan varieties were ob-
served under the conditions of the experiment,
1947.-Seed of the varieties Stringless Black Valentine and
Logan were planted as test crop in the fall of 1947. Fertilizer,
4-7-5, at the rate of 1,200 pounds per acre was applied in bands








Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 21

to each side of the seed prior to planting. One side-dressing of
200 pounds of nitrate of potash was made during the growing
season.
Moisture treatments included in the test were: (a) no irriga-
tion; (b) light irrigation, or water equivalent to 1/ acre inch of
water per application; (c) heavy irrigation, or twice the amount
applied in (b) ; and (d) the same amount of water as in the heavy
application but applied in a split amount.
An evaporimeter was used and irrigations were made after
one inch of evaporation of water had been recorded as described
under cabbage.


TABLE 12.-EFFECT OF SEVERAL IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON AVERAGE
YIELD IN BUSHELS PER ACRE OF Two VARIETIES OF SNAP BEANS, 1947.

Moisture Record I Variety I Average
Irrigation I Total I I i for
Treatment Inches of I Total Black Irrigation
Water I Rainfall, Valen- Logan Treatment
_Applied I Inches tine
No irrigation .. None 6.78 22.5 25.4 24.0
Light ............. 3.50 6.78 180.6 213.6 197.2
Heavy .............. 7.04 6.78 231.0 229.7 230.4
Split ................ 6.52 | 6.78 274.1 308.3 291.2

Variety average ..................................... 177.1 194.2

Difference required for significance between average
for irrigation: 5% 36.8
1% 55.8

Difference required for significance between averages
for varieties: 5% 13.1
1% 18.3

Interaction between irrigation x varieties not significant.

Rainfall was lighter than in 1946 and the recorded precipita-
tion and yield results are seen in Table 12. The highest average
yield was 291 bushels of beans per acre from the plots receiving
irrigation in a split-application. In contrast, plots receiving no
irrigation produced an average yield of 24 bushels of beans per
acre. Logan produced a higher average yield than Stringless
Black Valentine.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Onions

1949.-Two varieties, Texas Grano and Excel, were grown from
seed and transplanted to the irrigation plots December 12. These
were fertilized with 1,800 pounds per acre of a 4-7-5 fertilizer,
placed to each side of the plant at transplanting. One side-
dressing of 200 pounds per acre of a 10-0-12 fertilizer was made
during the growing season.
Irrigation treatments were made on a time schedule, each
application including water equivalent to 1/2 acre inch. Moisture
treatments were: (a) no irrigation; (b) light irrigation, applica-
tion made every 12 days; (c) medium irrigation, application
made every 6 days; and (d) frequent irrigation, application
made every 3 days. Rainfall of 1/2 inch or more was considered
as an irrigation. It was necessary to irrigate all plots at time
of transplanting to insure a stand of plants.

TABLE 13.-AVERAGE YIELD OF MARKETABLE ONIONS EXPRESSED IN POUNDS
PER ACRE AS AFFECTED BY IRRIGATION TREATMENTS, 1949.*

Moisture Record I Variety Average
Irrigation Total I I Yield
Treatment Inches of Total Texas I Irrigation
Water Rainfall, I Grano Excel Treatment
Applied Inches I
No irrigation .. 0.50 8.65 10,364 7,841 9,103
Occasional ...... 4.50 8.65 18,912 11,217 15,065
Medium .......... 9.50 8.65 28,205 19,275 23,650
Frequent .......... 16.50 8.65 21,635 15,990 18,813

Variety average ........................... ....... 19,779 13,581

Difference required for significance between averages
for irrigation: 5% I 9,746
1% [ 12,914
Difference required for significance between averages
for varieties: 5% | 2,055
1% 2,880

Interaction between irrigation x varieties-not significant.
* Marketable onions-Diameter of onion greater than 2 inches.

Rainfall was below normal for January and February and as
a result of this and the long growing season for onions a number
of irrigation applications were made. Total amount of water
applied for each treatment and yield of marketable onions are
shown in Table 13. Marketable onions were considered to be







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Onions

1949.-Two varieties, Texas Grano and Excel, were grown from
seed and transplanted to the irrigation plots December 12. These
were fertilized with 1,800 pounds per acre of a 4-7-5 fertilizer,
placed to each side of the plant at transplanting. One side-
dressing of 200 pounds per acre of a 10-0-12 fertilizer was made
during the growing season.
Irrigation treatments were made on a time schedule, each
application including water equivalent to 1/2 acre inch. Moisture
treatments were: (a) no irrigation; (b) light irrigation, applica-
tion made every 12 days; (c) medium irrigation, application
made every 6 days; and (d) frequent irrigation, application
made every 3 days. Rainfall of 1/2 inch or more was considered
as an irrigation. It was necessary to irrigate all plots at time
of transplanting to insure a stand of plants.

TABLE 13.-AVERAGE YIELD OF MARKETABLE ONIONS EXPRESSED IN POUNDS
PER ACRE AS AFFECTED BY IRRIGATION TREATMENTS, 1949.*

Moisture Record I Variety Average
Irrigation Total I I Yield
Treatment Inches of Total Texas I Irrigation
Water Rainfall, I Grano Excel Treatment
Applied Inches I
No irrigation .. 0.50 8.65 10,364 7,841 9,103
Occasional ...... 4.50 8.65 18,912 11,217 15,065
Medium .......... 9.50 8.65 28,205 19,275 23,650
Frequent .......... 16.50 8.65 21,635 15,990 18,813

Variety average ........................... ....... 19,779 13,581

Difference required for significance between averages
for irrigation: 5% I 9,746
1% [ 12,914
Difference required for significance between averages
for varieties: 5% | 2,055
1% 2,880

Interaction between irrigation x varieties-not significant.
* Marketable onions-Diameter of onion greater than 2 inches.

Rainfall was below normal for January and February and as
a result of this and the long growing season for onions a number
of irrigation applications were made. Total amount of water
applied for each treatment and yield of marketable onions are
shown in Table 13. Marketable onions were considered to be







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 23

those with a diameter larger than 2 inches. In this experiment
only the plots irrigated every six days produced more market-
able onions than the plots not irrigated. The variety Texas
Grano gave a higher yield than the variety Excel.

Tomatoes
1951.-Tomato plants of the Rutgers variety were planted
into the experimental block on March 19. All plots were fertil-
ized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the rate of 1,800 pounds per acre.
Moisture treatments were the same as for onions in 1949,
using 1/2 inch of water for each irrigation application. Total
amount of water applied during the season is shown in Table 14,
with effect of treatments on average bushel yield per acre.

TABLE 14.-THE EFFECT OF IRRIGATION ON THE AVERAGE BUSHEL YIELD
PER ACRE OF U. S. NO. 1 AND U. S. No. 2 RUTGERS TOMATOES, 1951.

Moisture Record
Irrigation Total Total
Treatment Inches of Total Number 1 Number 2 Harvested
Water Rainfall,
SApplied Inches _
No irrigation .. None 10.50 167.9 111.6 393.6
Light .............. 2.00 10.50 173.8 123.8 418.0
Medium ........... 5.50 10.50 257.5 149.3 542.5
Heavy ............. 13.50 10.50 218.9 140.0 500.2

Differences between averages for grades-not 'significant.

No significant differences in yield of tomatoes resulted from
irrigation. However, the trend was for the highest yield to be
obtained where 1/2 inch of water was applied every six days.

Cucumbers
1951.-Plots used for irrigation this season were divided, with
one-half of each individual plot planted to tomatoes and the other
half to cucumbers. Marketer cucumbers planted March 7 were,
therefore, grown on plots receiving the same moisture treat-
ments as the tomatoes for which the treatments have been
described. Plots were fertilized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the
rate of 1,200 pounds per acre.
The number of applications were lower for cucumbers, due
to a shorter growing season. The moisture record for this crop
and the effect of several treatments on average bushel yield per







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 23

those with a diameter larger than 2 inches. In this experiment
only the plots irrigated every six days produced more market-
able onions than the plots not irrigated. The variety Texas
Grano gave a higher yield than the variety Excel.

Tomatoes
1951.-Tomato plants of the Rutgers variety were planted
into the experimental block on March 19. All plots were fertil-
ized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the rate of 1,800 pounds per acre.
Moisture treatments were the same as for onions in 1949,
using 1/2 inch of water for each irrigation application. Total
amount of water applied during the season is shown in Table 14,
with effect of treatments on average bushel yield per acre.

TABLE 14.-THE EFFECT OF IRRIGATION ON THE AVERAGE BUSHEL YIELD
PER ACRE OF U. S. NO. 1 AND U. S. No. 2 RUTGERS TOMATOES, 1951.

Moisture Record
Irrigation Total Total
Treatment Inches of Total Number 1 Number 2 Harvested
Water Rainfall,
SApplied Inches _
No irrigation .. None 10.50 167.9 111.6 393.6
Light .............. 2.00 10.50 173.8 123.8 418.0
Medium ........... 5.50 10.50 257.5 149.3 542.5
Heavy ............. 13.50 10.50 218.9 140.0 500.2

Differences between averages for grades-not 'significant.

No significant differences in yield of tomatoes resulted from
irrigation. However, the trend was for the highest yield to be
obtained where 1/2 inch of water was applied every six days.

Cucumbers
1951.-Plots used for irrigation this season were divided, with
one-half of each individual plot planted to tomatoes and the other
half to cucumbers. Marketer cucumbers planted March 7 were,
therefore, grown on plots receiving the same moisture treat-
ments as the tomatoes for which the treatments have been
described. Plots were fertilized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the
rate of 1,200 pounds per acre.
The number of applications were lower for cucumbers, due
to a shorter growing season. The moisture record for this crop
and the effect of several treatments on average bushel yield per







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 23

those with a diameter larger than 2 inches. In this experiment
only the plots irrigated every six days produced more market-
able onions than the plots not irrigated. The variety Texas
Grano gave a higher yield than the variety Excel.

Tomatoes
1951.-Tomato plants of the Rutgers variety were planted
into the experimental block on March 19. All plots were fertil-
ized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the rate of 1,800 pounds per acre.
Moisture treatments were the same as for onions in 1949,
using 1/2 inch of water for each irrigation application. Total
amount of water applied during the season is shown in Table 14,
with effect of treatments on average bushel yield per acre.

TABLE 14.-THE EFFECT OF IRRIGATION ON THE AVERAGE BUSHEL YIELD
PER ACRE OF U. S. NO. 1 AND U. S. No. 2 RUTGERS TOMATOES, 1951.

Moisture Record
Irrigation Total Total
Treatment Inches of Total Number 1 Number 2 Harvested
Water Rainfall,
SApplied Inches _
No irrigation .. None 10.50 167.9 111.6 393.6
Light .............. 2.00 10.50 173.8 123.8 418.0
Medium ........... 5.50 10.50 257.5 149.3 542.5
Heavy ............. 13.50 10.50 218.9 140.0 500.2

Differences between averages for grades-not 'significant.

No significant differences in yield of tomatoes resulted from
irrigation. However, the trend was for the highest yield to be
obtained where 1/2 inch of water was applied every six days.

Cucumbers
1951.-Plots used for irrigation this season were divided, with
one-half of each individual plot planted to tomatoes and the other
half to cucumbers. Marketer cucumbers planted March 7 were,
therefore, grown on plots receiving the same moisture treat-
ments as the tomatoes for which the treatments have been
described. Plots were fertilized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the
rate of 1,200 pounds per acre.
The number of applications were lower for cucumbers, due
to a shorter growing season. The moisture record for this crop
and the effect of several treatments on average bushel yield per







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 23

those with a diameter larger than 2 inches. In this experiment
only the plots irrigated every six days produced more market-
able onions than the plots not irrigated. The variety Texas
Grano gave a higher yield than the variety Excel.

Tomatoes
1951.-Tomato plants of the Rutgers variety were planted
into the experimental block on March 19. All plots were fertil-
ized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the rate of 1,800 pounds per acre.
Moisture treatments were the same as for onions in 1949,
using 1/2 inch of water for each irrigation application. Total
amount of water applied during the season is shown in Table 14,
with effect of treatments on average bushel yield per acre.

TABLE 14.-THE EFFECT OF IRRIGATION ON THE AVERAGE BUSHEL YIELD
PER ACRE OF U. S. NO. 1 AND U. S. No. 2 RUTGERS TOMATOES, 1951.

Moisture Record
Irrigation Total Total
Treatment Inches of Total Number 1 Number 2 Harvested
Water Rainfall,
SApplied Inches _
No irrigation .. None 10.50 167.9 111.6 393.6
Light .............. 2.00 10.50 173.8 123.8 418.0
Medium ........... 5.50 10.50 257.5 149.3 542.5
Heavy ............. 13.50 10.50 218.9 140.0 500.2

Differences between averages for grades-not 'significant.

No significant differences in yield of tomatoes resulted from
irrigation. However, the trend was for the highest yield to be
obtained where 1/2 inch of water was applied every six days.

Cucumbers
1951.-Plots used for irrigation this season were divided, with
one-half of each individual plot planted to tomatoes and the other
half to cucumbers. Marketer cucumbers planted March 7 were,
therefore, grown on plots receiving the same moisture treat-
ments as the tomatoes for which the treatments have been
described. Plots were fertilized with a 4-7-5 fertilizer at the
rate of 1,200 pounds per acre.
The number of applications were lower for cucumbers, due
to a shorter growing season. The moisture record for this crop
and the effect of several treatments on average bushel yield per







Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


acre are presented in Table 15. Highest yield of U. S. No. 1
cucumbers was obtained with medium irrigation, application
of 1/2 inch every six days, followed closely by frequent irriga-
Stion, application of 1/2 inch every three days. Both of these
treatments produced a larger harvest of this grade than the
light or no irrigation treatment. Number 2 grade and total
cucumbers were net affected greatly by irrigation, although the
trend was for the higher yields of these fruit to be harvested
from the medium irrigated plots.

TABLE 15.-EFFECT OF IRRIGATION TREATMENTS ON AVERAGE BUSHEL YIELD
PER ACRE OF U. S. No. 1 AND U. S. No. 2 MARKETER CUCUMBERS, 1951.

Moisture Record
Irrigation Total Total
Treatment Inches of Total Number 1 Number 2 Harvested
Water Rainfall
Applied ___

No irrigation .. None 9.17 115.8 49.2 283.0
Light ................ 1.50 9.17 139.9 57.6 324.9
Medium ............ 4.00 9.17 242.7 65.4 437.3
Heavy ........... 10.00 9.17 229.2 53.2 394.1

Difference required for significance
between averages: 5% 86.9 N.S. N.S.
1% 131.2 N.S. N.S.


Discussion and Summary
Sprinkler irrigation experiments were conducted over a six-
year period with cabbage, sweet corn, snap beans, onions, to-
matoes and cucumbers. Results of these tests emphasize the
advisability of growing vegetables in areas where adequate pro-
visions can be made for irrigation. Supplemental irrigation did
not result in increased yield of crops for all seasons, but in some
years or seasons it was responsible for the difference between
a successful harvest and crop failure. Such variation in response
can be explained partly by the level and distribution of rainfall
during the growing season and partly by type of crop grown.
Increased yields from irrigation were found in three of the
five crops of cabbage. These were the years in which rainfall
was below normal or the growing season extended into the spring
months.
Irrigation resulted in an increase in sweet corn yields in all
tests, with both the highest number of ears and weight of corn







Irrigation and Other Cultural Studies with Vegetables 25

produced when irrigated with 1 to 11/2 inches of water per week
in 1945. In 1948 and 1949 1/2 inch of water every three or six
days produced highest yield.
Large increases in yield were found with snap beans in the
dry 1947 season with all irrigation treatments tested. In 1946
light amounts of water applied at any one date, in either single
or split application, gave a significant increase in yield of snap
beans.
The application of 1/ inch of water every six days in 1949
produced a significant increase of marketable onions, in com-
parison with the no irrigation treatment.
In 1951 no significant response from irrigation was found with
tomatoes. In the same season the highest yield of U. S. No. 1
cucumbers was harvested from vines receiving /2 inch of sup-
plemental water every three or six days.
Too heavy an application of water may result in a reduction
in yield. Light application of water with cabbage in 1945, light
and split application on beans in 1946 and split application on
this crop in 1947 produced significantly higher yields than heavy
application. The tendency for crops receiving the medium
application to produce higher yields than those receiving heavier
amounts was noted with the early crops of cabbage and corn
in 1947 and 1948, respectively, and with cucumbers, tomatoes
and onions. /Observation of these crops heavily irrigated indi-
cated that perhaps excessive leaching of plant nutrients occurred!
A relationship was found between levels of irrigation and
spacing of corn plants in the row, with a tendency for the largest
number and total weight of ears to be produced at the closer
spacings and with heavier rates of irrigation. However, in-
dividual weight of ear increased with wider spacing and higher
rates of irrigation.
Side-dressing with nitrogen gave increased yields in three of
the five crops of cabbage. No significant interaction was found
between irrigation and fertilizer treatment.
Vegetable crops will respond to irrigation in seasons of light
and irregular rainfall. With other conditions for normal growth
present, satisfactory growth and yield of vegetables can be ex-
pected from 1/2 inch of water as natural rainfall or as supple-
mental irrigation every six days.









Florida Agricultural Experiment Stations


Literature Cited
1. ANDERSON, R. L. Florida Section, Climatological Data. U. S. Dept.
of Commerce, Weather Bureau, LIII-LV. 1949-1951.
2. BECKENBACH, J. R., A. J. PRATT and E. L. SPENCER. Chemical Soil
Studies. Ann. Rpt. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1946: 117. 1946.
3. BENNETT, W. J. Florida Section, Climatological Data. U. S. Dept.
of Commerce, Weather Bureau, XLIX-LIII. 1945-1949.
4. BURGIS, D. S., E. L. SPENCER and J. R. BECKENBACH. Management
Studies. Ann. Rpt. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta., 1947: 130-132. 1947.
5. CLAYTON, B. S., J. R. NELLER and R. V. ALLISON. Water control in
the peat and muck soils of the Fla. Everglades. Fla. Agr. Exp.
Sta. Bul. 378. 1942.
6. JANES, B. E. The effect of varying amounts of irrigation on the com-
position of two varieties of snap beans. Proc. Amer. Soc. Hort.
Sci. 57: 457-462. 1948.
7. JANES, B. E. The effect of irrigation, nitrogen level and season on
the composition of cabbage. Plant Physiology 25: 441-453. 1949.
8. NETTLES, V. F. Two years' results of the effect of several irrigation
treatments on the yield of cabbage and snap beans. Proc. Amer.
Soc. Hort. Sci. 51: 463-467. 1948.
9. NETTLES, V. F., F. S. JAMISON and B. E. JANES. Irrigation studies
with sweet corn, cabbage and snap beans at Gainesville. Fla. State
Hort. Soc. Proc. 60: 155. 1947.
10. SELLARDS, E. H. Occurrence and use of artesian and other under-
ground water. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 89: 91-113. 1907.
11. STRINGFIELD, V. T. Ground water investigations in Florida. Fla.
State Geological Survey Bul. 11. 1933.
12. VOLK, G. M., and H. W. WINSOR. Effect of type and treatment of
Florida soils on yield, composition and quality of horticultural
crops. Ann. Rpt. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. 1941. 132: 1941.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs