• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Copyright
 Title Page
 Introduction
 Seeding rates and plant popula...
 Band vs broadcast fertilizer
 Residual fertility
 Nitrogen fertilization
 Cover crop
 Burning stubble
 Date of planting
 Pest problems
 Back Cover






Group Title: Florida Cooperative Extension Service circular 506
Title: Principles of wheat and no-till soybean production
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00049247/00001
 Material Information
Title: Principles of wheat and no-till soybean production
Series Title: Circular
Physical Description: 10, 1 p. : ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Wright, David L
Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Publisher: Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1982
 Subjects
Subject: Wheat   ( lcsh )
Soybean   ( lcsh )
No-tillage   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: D.L. Wright ... et al..
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "11-2M-82"--P. 11.
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00049247
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 20733711

Table of Contents
    Copyright
        Copyright
    Title Page
        Page i
    Introduction
        Page 1
    Seeding rates and plant population
        Page 2
    Band vs broadcast fertilizer
        Page 3
    Residual fertility
        Page 4
    Nitrogen fertilization
        Page 5
    Cover crop
        Page 6
    Burning stubble
        Page 7
    Date of planting
        Page 8
    Pest problems
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
    Back Cover
        Page 11
Full Text





HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida






November 1982


PRINCIPLES OF WHEAT AND
NO- TILL SO YBEAN PRODUCTION


D. L. Wright, F. M. Shokes,
M. C. Lutrick, and W. B. Tappan


HUME LIBRARY


I.FA.S.- Univ. of Florida


Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida, Gainesville
John T. Woeste, Dean for Extension


Circular 506








PRINCIPLES OF WHEAT
AND NO-TILL SOYBEAN PRODUCTION



D. L. Wright, F. M. Shokes, M. C. Lutrick,
and W. B. Tappan*



No-till farming has been conducted on a limited scale by growers
and researchers in the Southeast for several years. Many success
stories on no-till farming have appeared in farm magazines and
newsletters. Through efforts by researchers and growers, many new
techniques and management options have been developed for no-till
farming. However, no-till farming problems have been more severe
in the Deep South than in the no-till regions of Kentucky, Ten-
nessee, and Virginia. When soybeans are being grown, production
practices have to be managed closely since the soil is warm at plant-
ing time and conditions are ideal for the growth of weeds, insects,
and disease. No-till farming depends upon foliage and surface-
applied herbicides for weed control. Soybean growth is slow ini-
tially, and requires a control period of 4 to 6 weeks until the crop
reaches sufficient size to overlap row middles so that weeds do not
effectively compete with the crop.
No-till farming has typically worked best in a livestock operation
where corn, soybeans, and wheat or winter pastures were grown.
Where rye and ryegrass are used for grazing, surplus pasture may
be excluded from cattle and planted to no-till corn in February or
early March. If the pasture is needed until April or May, soybeans
may be planted into the stubble in May. If it is necessary to kill re-
maining vegetation, best results are achieved when herbicide is ap-
plied to vegetation that is a minimum of 3 to 5 inches high. Closely
grazed fields may have a large amount of regrowth from tillers
within a few days after herbicide application, and the vegetation
may compete with the crop through the season.
The most widely used no-till system in the Southeast is soybeans
planted into small grain stubble. New varieties of high-yield,
disease-resistant wheat are a popular crop into which to plant no-
till. In Florida, where irrigation water is supplied, corn may be
planted in rye-ryegrass stubble followed by a crop of soybeans.

*Assistant Professor, Extension Agronomist and Assistant Professor, Plant Pathol-
ogy, AREC Quincy; Professor of Soil Science, ARC Jay; Professor of Entomology,
AREC Quincy; IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville 32611







Key considerations for no-till soybean production are:
1. Seeding rate and plant population.
2. Band or broadcast fertilizers.
3. Residual fertility from small grain or grass crop.
4. Nitrogen for decay of organic matter.
5. Effect of cover crop on soybean yields.
6. Effect of burning stubble on soybean yields.
7. Time of planting as related to yields.
8. Weed, insect, nematode, and disease problems.
Several planters are available for no-till planting with and
without subsoil shanks. No-till equipment does not require any
more horsepower than similar conventional planting equipment.


Seeding Rates and Plant Population
Seeding rates for no-till soybeans should be increased by 10 to 15
percent over conventional plantings, since there will be a reduction
in stand with no-till planting, due partly to misplacement of seed
caused by soil clods, stalks, vegetation, and uneven ground, and due
partly to disease (discussed later). Soil conditions may also be drier
where the living mulch is allowed to take up water until a few days
before planting. Under these conditions, if rain does not occur
within a few days, stands may be less than those from conventional
plantings. However, no-till planting is best accomplished where soil
is drained and in the moisture range that would be satisfactory for
conventional plantings.
If stands from no-till plantings are reduced to such a level that
replanting is being considered, the date at which replanting takes
place also needs to be considered. More often than not, replanted
fields with good stands produce a lower yield than do fields with
poor stands that were planted earlier in the season. Table 1 shows
yields of both no-till and conventionally planted soybeans; various
numbers of plants were planted in 36-inch rows in early June. Soy-
bean yields from no-till or conventional plantings were not reduced
significantly until less than 3 plants per row foot remained. With 2
plants per foot of row, weed competition was severe. If a field of soy-
beans was planted in the first week of June, with a 40 bushel yield
expectation and a stand of 2 plants per foot of row surviving in mid-
July, it would probably not pay to replant. Yield from a good stand
planted in mid-July in 36-inch rows would be 1/3 to 1/4 of what it
might have been from mid-June plantings (Table 2). Yields are
sharply reduced when stands are reduced to 1 plant per foot of row
(Table 1); normally there are 6 to 8 plants per foot of row.








Table 1. Effect of Plant Population on Soybean Yields with No-Till and Conven-
tional Planting (Quincy).


No-till (bu/A)
1979 1980
58 a* 35 ab
59 a 37 a
56 a 36 ab
55 a 36 ab
41 b 31 b
28 c 22 c
17 d 11 d


Conventional (bu/A)
1979 1980
57 a 38 a
57 a 38 a
55 a 37 a
51 a 40 a
43 b 37 a
31 c 34 b
25 d 21 c


*Means followed by a common letter are not significantly different (P < 0.05) according to
Duncan's Multiple Range Test.

Table 2. Influence of Planting Period on Soybean Yields (2 yr. Avg.) (Quincy).

April May June July
Variety 3-11 1-16 8-12 24-31
....................................... bu/A -----------------------buA------------------------------
Forrest 8.2 32.8 36.3 7.5
Centennial 15.6 45.2 36.4 13.3
Bragg 18.9 42.1 47.3 14.9
Hutton 27.9 45.9 42.6 10.7
Cobb 15.2 35.2 41.8 12.4


Band vs Broadcast Fertilizer

Portions of most fields are low in fertility. This situation usually
is not corrected by a single broadcast application of fertilizer.
Several years may be required to build up the levels of all the
nutrients that may be limiting crop yields. In fields with low fertil-
ity, fertilizer may be banded at planting time to expose the plant to
a larger quantity of nutrients, and to aid in the uptake of nutrients
for a quick start to the plant. Many nutrients can be lost to leaching
if fertilizer is broadcast before the plant root system is large enough
to reach the row middles. Where soils have been heavily fertilized
and have high nutrient levels, little or no response is expected from
banded versus broadcast fertilizers, and broadcast applications are
suitable. In no-till planting, nutrients can be tied up by decaying
surface mulch and weed growth. Less fertilizer is tied up by decay-
ing mulch when it is banded. Yields are often higher with banded
fertilizers under both conventional and no-till conditions (Table 3).


Plants/ft. row








Table 3. Effect of Fertilizer Placement on Soybean Yields with No-Till and Con-
ventional Planting (Jay).

No-Till Conventional
Banded Broadcast Banded Broadcast
Yield (bulA) 27 24 28 26
Plant ht. (in) 29 26 32 35


Fertilizer should not be broadcast before planting no-till soy-
beans for two major reasons: fertilizer in the middles promotes weed
growth, and the equipment used for planting may throw some soil
out of the row, leaving young seedlings with only residual fertility
for growth.
Table 3 shows plant heights obtained under no-till and conven-
tional conditions with banded and broadcast fertilizers. Plant
heights generally have been noted to be shorter under no-till condi-
tions than under conventional planting conditions. Shorter plant
heights may increase the amount of light getting into row middles
unless the soybeans are planted in more narrow rows. If planting
after July 15, row spacings should be 24 inches or narrower than if
planted earlier.

Residual Fertility
Assuming an adequate liming program, and depending upon soil
type, residual fertility from high application rates of potash and
phosphate will produce good soybean yields for several years. In a
double cropping system, when all of the fertilizer is applied to the
preceding small grain crop, no yield reduction to the following soy-
bean crop should be noted unless phosphorus and potash levels are
extremely low. Tables 4 and 5 show that soils well fertilized over a
period of years had little yield reduction over a period of 4 years
when no fertilizer was applied. With no fertilization, the yield reduc-
tion from the wheat crop was more than from the soybeans, even
where fertilizer had been applied at high rates for the previous 8
years. Because grass crops have such fibrous root systems, little
leaching loss of potash occurs until after the death of the plant.
Therefore, when soil test levels are medium to high, fertilizer may be
broadcast on wheat or other winter annual grasses for the soybean
crop with no expected loss in bean yields. When soil nutrient levels
are low, fertilizer should be applied to each crop since root develop-
ment would be less and more leaching could be expected.








Table 4. Potassium Fertilization on Next 4 Years of Unfertilized Wheat-Soybean
Yields (Jay).

Annual rate of
KO during 1st Year 3rd Year 4 Year Avg.
previous 8 yrs Ibs/A Wheat Soybeans Wheat Soybeans Wheat Soybeans
-- ---------------------- --............ bu/A -------- --------------------
0 22 20 11 18 14 16
K20 30 25 24 13 21 17 21
rates 60 27 25 25 19 24
120 26 26 15 16 19 25


Table 5. Phosphorus Fertilization on next 4 years of Unfertilizer Wheat-Soybean
Yields (Jay).

Annual rate of
P205 during 1st Year 3rd Year 4 Year Avg.
previous 8 yrs Ibs/A Wheat Soybeans Wheat Soybeans Wheat Soybeans
.------ ------------------------------------ ------ bu/A ----- ---------------------------------
0 9 12 8 8 9 10
P205 60 29 25 14 24 19 23
rates 120 33 28 16 30 22 27
140 32 30 17 30 22 28


Nitrogen Fertilization

Nitrogen is often applied directly to soybeans at planting time; it
can also be applied as a sidedressing. Soybean plants fix nitrogen,
and the rate of fixation depends upon the nitrogen-fixing bacteria
and many other soil and environmental factors. Nitrogen fixation
starts when the emerged soybean plant is about 12 days old. Data
from Gainesville show that, during this period of rapid nodule
development, nearly half of the fixed nitrogen is retained. From 20
to 30 days after emergence, total nitrogen fixed by the plant doubles
every 6 to 10 days until it reaches a peak during late flowering.
After that time, fixation declines as seeds develop.
Many growers have observed greener and more vigorous-looking
plants when nitrogen was used at planting time. These observations
have caused some debate as to whether nitrogen increases yields of
soybeans. Data from the ARC in Jay indicate that nitrogen is not
necessary to obtain yields as high as 45 bushels per acre (Table 6).
Addition of nitrogen inhibits both the number of nodules that
develop and the nitrogen fixation of the nodules. Nitrogen rates of
up to 600 pounds per acre sidedressed in three applications gave no
yield response. Likewise, other studies showed no increase in grain
yield with nitrogen applied before planting at rates from 0 to 400








pounds per acre. Since yields are basically no different for conven-
tional or no-till farming, as noted in Table 2, no yield response
should be expected from nitrogen or no-till beans.

Table 6. Effect of Nitrogen (Ammonium Nitrate) Rate on Soybean Grain and
Forage Yields and Nodule Number (Jay).

Application Forage tons July 6
ratelyr No. of 2 yr. avg. dry matter nodules/
(Ibs N/A) application (bu/A) (tons/A) plant
0 45.5 4.5 32
40 1 45.5 4.6 31
60 3 44.0 4.3 41
150 3 42.5 4.5 24
250 3 48.5 4.5 25
400 3 46.0 4.5 23
600 3 43.0 4.5 19



Cover Crop
Small grain crops preceding soybean crops have a twofold pur-
pose: to serve as a stubble mulch (conserving soil moisture) and to
provide soil cover to prevent erosion. When soil erosion is a severe
problem, these winter annuals may increase yields by holding soil
and fertilizer in place. No-till farming fits in with soybean produc-
tion when cattle are present, since the winter pasture provides good
ground cover and animal feed at the same time. When soil is not
subject to erosion and a cover crop is not needed for grazing or hay,
soybean stubble may be left on the ground undisturbed until plant-
ing time the next year. However, this practice may increase disease
problems the following year. The soybean stubble serves as an in-
oculum reservoir for both soilborne and aerial plant pathogens.
Where no erosion occurred, there was no yield response to plant-
ing rye and ryegrass as a cover crop (Table 7). However, when the
soil was not plowed or harrowed at least once either in the spring or
fall, and when rye-ryegrass was aerially seeded for a cover crop,
spiral and ring nematode numbers more than doubled. These
nematodes are generally associated with grasses and tend to build
up on grass plants under no-till conditions. Spiral and ring
nematodes could reduce yields of the following winter cover crop or
a grass crop in rotation with soybeans (Table 8). No buildup of root
knot or cyst nematodes was found to occur. Rye-ryegrass or wheat
has not increased soybean yields, but each does protect the soil from
erosion.








If spiral nematodes have reduced yields of the grass crop, the
population can be decreased by plowing in the fall before planting
the winter annual grasses. If ryegrass or wheat was aerially seeded
into soybean fields in the fall, plowing before planting soybeans in
the spring can reduce nematode populations. Moldboard plowing
can decrease weed, insect, and disease problems as well as
nematodes.


Table 7. Yield of
(Quincy).


Soybeans as Influenced by No-Tillage and Cover Crops


Planting Method in Spring
Fall treatment No-Till Conventional
------------------------- bu/A -------------------------
Rye-ryegrass 35.0 32.0
Soybean stubble 34.4 34.0



Table 8. Nematode Numbers as Influenced by No-Till and Conventional Plant-
ing (2 yr. Avg.) (Quincy).

Nematodes (Number per 100 cc soil)
Helicotylenchus Macroposthonia
Planting (Spiral) (Ring)
No-Till 917 14

Conventional 462 4


Burning Stubble
Burning wheat or other small grain residue has become a com-
mon practice to aid in plowing before planting soybeans. Burning
will kill existing weeds and result in better herbicide placement for
better weed control late in the season. When the residue is burned
off, no significant yield change is noted (Table 9). Soil test data
showed that no decrease in organic matter or potash occurred as a
result of burning. With no-till planting, burning is not necessary if
the straw is scattered with the combine during wheat harvest.








Table 9. Effect of Burning Small Grain Residue and Nitrogen Application on
Soybean Yields (Jay).
Plowed Burned
previous crop previous crop
Ibs N/A Wheat Oats Fallow Wheat Oats Fallow
--------.........--------------------- bu soybeans/A----------------------------------
0 33 32 32 29 31 31
30 31 33 32 30 32 32


Date of Planting
If soybeans are planted after small grain, optimum yields of
beans may be expected in 30- or 36-inch rows. Where soybeans are
planted after corn, a 50 percent or more reduction in yield may be
expected because of late planting and the fact that soybeans need to
be planted in narrow rows (Table 2). With irrigation, good fertility,
narrow rows, and a Group VIII soybean variety, 15 to 40 bushels
per acre may be expected when soybeans are planted between
July 15 and August 5. With shorter-growing plants, row widths
need to be reduced to 10 to 20 inches for complete lapping to aid
in weed control.

Pest Problems
Soybeans grown after corn may receive damage from the lesser
cornstalk borer. Georgia data have shown that lesser cornstalk
borer damage to no-till corn was much less than that of conven-
tionally planted corn. This is because movement of the borer larvae
was altered, requiring up to 7 days for the borer to find the corn
plant. Improved moisture relations, as a result of mulch may
decrease lesser cornstalk borer damage. However, late-planted
soybeans (planted after no-till corn) may be damaged by the lesser
cornstalk borer. Most of the damage is done to plants less than 10
inches tall.
Soybean insects that also feed in the whorl of corn (fall army-
worm, armyworm, European corn borer, and the Southwestern corn
borer) may be worse in no-till soybeans. Greater damage is likely to
occur on late plantings that undergo drought or fertility stress.
However, heavy infestations may occur any time after mid-May.








Table 9. Effect of Burning Small Grain Residue and Nitrogen Application on
Soybean Yields (Jay).
Plowed Burned
previous crop previous crop
Ibs N/A Wheat Oats Fallow Wheat Oats Fallow
--------.........--------------------- bu soybeans/A----------------------------------
0 33 32 32 29 31 31
30 31 33 32 30 32 32


Date of Planting
If soybeans are planted after small grain, optimum yields of
beans may be expected in 30- or 36-inch rows. Where soybeans are
planted after corn, a 50 percent or more reduction in yield may be
expected because of late planting and the fact that soybeans need to
be planted in narrow rows (Table 2). With irrigation, good fertility,
narrow rows, and a Group VIII soybean variety, 15 to 40 bushels
per acre may be expected when soybeans are planted between
July 15 and August 5. With shorter-growing plants, row widths
need to be reduced to 10 to 20 inches for complete lapping to aid
in weed control.

Pest Problems
Soybeans grown after corn may receive damage from the lesser
cornstalk borer. Georgia data have shown that lesser cornstalk
borer damage to no-till corn was much less than that of conven-
tionally planted corn. This is because movement of the borer larvae
was altered, requiring up to 7 days for the borer to find the corn
plant. Improved moisture relations, as a result of mulch may
decrease lesser cornstalk borer damage. However, late-planted
soybeans (planted after no-till corn) may be damaged by the lesser
cornstalk borer. Most of the damage is done to plants less than 10
inches tall.
Soybean insects that also feed in the whorl of corn (fall army-
worm, armyworm, European corn borer, and the Southwestern corn
borer) may be worse in no-till soybeans. Greater damage is likely to
occur on late plantings that undergo drought or fertility stress.
However, heavy infestations may occur any time after mid-May.








Insecticides or nematicides may be considered for use in no-till
planting for initial soil insect control on young seedlings.
Nematicides are generally effective against nematodes for the first
4 to 6 weeks. After this period, nematodes can build up rapidly on
the enlarged root system of the plants. Resistant soybean varieties
should be used where a root knot or cyst nematode problem is
known to exist, whether a nematicide is used or not.
Seedling diseases are more likely to occur in no-till than in con-
ventional soybean plantings. Table 10 shows 2-year data from
Quincy, where soybean seedlings were evaluated for symptoms of
root and stem diseases. When over 1000 plants from both systems
were evaluated, it was found that no-till plantings had more seed-
lings with evidence of disease than did conventional plantings.
Disease incidence in the second year was less in both plantings,
probably due to drier conditions. Another test with nine chemicals
(Table 11) also indicated that seedling disease was higher in no-till
plantings. Reduced stands were evident for all treatments in the no-
till area. More plants survived in untreated check plots that were
conventionally planted than in no-till planted plots (82 percent vs 67
percent). Indications are that stands may be reduced in no-till plant-
ings due to seedling disease, since stands were lower in no-till than
in the conventional soybeans for all treatments except one. This
reduction could be higher with wetter soil conditions at planting.
Therefore, with no-till plantings a fungicide seed treatment should
be considered.



Table 10. Effect of No-Till Plantings on Soybean Seedling Diseases (Quincy).

Number of healthy Number of plants with Number of plants with
plants stem or root lesions insect damage
No-Till Conventional No-Till Conventional No-Till Conventional


1979 500 763 528 497
% Total 49.6 61.6 51.4 39.4
1980 703 707 305 269 36 63
% Total 67.3 68.0 29.2 25.9 3.4 6.1








Table 11. Effect of Chemical Seed and Soil Treatments on Soybean Stands in
No-Till and Conventional Plow-Plant Systems-1980 (Quincy).
Seedling survival'
Conventional No-Till
Treatment and rate (%) (%)
Check 82 67
Vitavax 3F 8 oz/100 81 75
PCNB + ETMT 5.0 Ibs/A in-furrow 80 56
PCNB+ ETMT 20 Ibs/A in-furrow 79 70
Orthocide 75W 1.67 oz/100 Ibs 76 63
Demosan 65W 75 65
Arasan 50 Red 2 ozlbu 75 72
Terraclor-Super X+ Moly 4 oz/100 Ibs 72 66
Orthocide 4F 72 69
Terraflo M 4 oz/bu 67 71
'Seedling survival as a percent of the total seed planted. Soybeans were'McCurdy
ML 3' planted on July 11 and evaluated on September 2.
Since perennial as well as annual weeds create problems in no-till
plantings, more selective herbicides are needed for weed control
when cultivation is not an option. Perennial weeds can increase if
no-till planting practices are followed for several years. Moldboard
plowing will help eliminate perennial weeds and reduce pest prob-
lems, if no-till planting of soybeans is planned for other years. If
perennial weeds are a problem, the area could be plowed and planted
conventionally, then the second crop (or the crop planted the next
year) could be planted no-till. An alternative would be to spray with
a herbicide far enough in advance of planting to determine that
weeds are controlled. When planting soybeans in May or later, a
recommended herbicide should be used at planting time to retard
emergence and growth of weeds. Early spraying will establish a
crop-to-weed height differential that will allow the use of
postemergence-directed sprays. If weeds are not eliminated, cultiva-
tion of the soybeans is almost impossible where plantings were
made in mature wheat stubble. Therefore, postemergence-directed
spray equipment is a necessity under these conditions.
Good soil moisture at planting or immediately after planting is
critical for the success of no-till farming. Surface-applied herbicides
need water to activate them. Planting in soils with less than op-
timum moisture may reduce stands. No-till planting of soybeans
may be more successful in June than in May because of the in-
creased probability and amount of rain. The small grain, no-till soy-
bean, double-cropping system works well when the small grain is
harvested in the last weeks of May or first week of June. Maximum
yields may be obtained from soybeans if they are planted no later
than June 15 and if all production practices are used properly.

























































This publication was promulgated at a cost of $1,349.40, or $.54
cents per copy, to provide information on no-till production of
soybeans in wheat or small grain stubble. 11-2M-82.



COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE, UNIVERSITY OF FLORI-
DA, INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES, K. R.
Tefertlller, director, In cooperation with the United States Department IFA
of Agriculture, publishes this Information to further the purpose of the
May 8 and June 30, 1914 Acts of Congress; and Is authorized to pro-
vide research,'educational Information and other services only to Indi-
viduals and Institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex or national ori-
gin. Single copies of Extension publications (excluding 4-H and Youth publications) are
available free to Florida residents from County Extension Offices. Information on bulk
rates or copies for out-of-state purchasers Is available from C. M. Hinton, Publications
Distribution Center, IFAS Building 664, University of Florida, Galnesville, Florida
32611. Before publicizing this publication, editors should contact this address to deter-
mine availability.




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