Group Title: Annual rice field day ...
Title: Annual rice field day
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00054448/00009
 Material Information
Title: Annual rice field day
Series Title: Belle Glade EREC research report
Physical Description: v. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Belle Glade AREC
Belle Glade EREC (Fla.)
Publisher: University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension Service, Agricultural Research and Education Center.
Place of Publication: Belle Glade, FL
Publication Date: 1989
Frequency: annual
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Rice -- Field experiments -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Rice -- Diseases and pests -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Rice -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: Began 1978?
Dates or Sequential Designation: Ceased in 1991 or 1992.
Issuing Body: Prior to 1984 this was issued by the Agricultural Research and Education Center (Belle Glade, Fla.), which changed its name to the Everglades Research and Education Center.
General Note: Description based on: 4th (1981); title from cover.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 11th (1991).
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00054448
Volume ID: VID00009
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 40942624
lccn - 2006229205
 Related Items

Full Text


Belle Glade AREC Research Report EV-1983-6


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE





SIXTH ANNUAL

RICE FIELD DAY


AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH

AND

EDUCATION CENTER


BELLE GLADE, FL
JULY 15. 1983










RICE FIELD DAY
AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION CENTER
BELLE GLADE, FLORIDA
JULY 15, 1981

Kenneth D. Shuler, Presiding
Palm Beach County Extension Agent


8:30 a.m.


8:40


9:00


9:20


10:00

10:15


10:30


10:45


11:05




11:20

11:30

12:15 p.m.

1:15


Page
Welcome Remarks
J. M. Good,AREC Center Director

1982 Rice Fertility Trials 1
G. H. Snyder and D. B. Jones

Promising New Rice Varieties for the Everglades 6
D. B. Jones

Weed Control Technology for Rice in the Southern U.S.
Roy J. Smith Jr. 10

Break

Rice Weed Control in the EAA
J. A. Dusky 15

Stinkbugs Attacking Florida Rice
R. H. Cherry and D. B. Jones 20

Sugarcane Production Following Rice:
Four Years of Data
J. Alvarez and G. H. Snyder 23

Pesticides Approved for Use on Rice in Florida
K. D. Shuler 25

Comments from Fellow Rice Growers 27
W. C. Donovan

Closing Remarks

AREC Rice Field Tour

Dutch Treat Lunch (catered)

Tour of Glades Area Rice Fields










1982 RICE FERTILITY TRIALS

G. H. Snyder and D. B. Jones

NITROGEN. Trails were carried out both at the AREC and at Seminole Sugar

using Lebonnet and Belmont rice varieties to determine the effect of nitrogen

fertilization on rice yield. In all cases nitrogen was applied from urea at

panicle initiation, at rates of 0, 30, 60 or 90 kn N/ha (multiply kg/ha by

0.89 to convert to Ibs/acre), In some cases these rates were split, with one

half being applied at panicle initiation and the second half 7 to 10 days

later. Belmont did not respond to nitrogen fertilization at either location.

However Lebonnet yields were markedly increased by nitrogen fertilization at

both locations (Fig. 1). It is important to notice the nature of this res-

ponse, At the AREC yield increased up to about 42 Ibs N/acre and at Seminole

(Brida) 52 lb N/acre produced maximum yield. At both locations yield de-

creased at fertilization rates greater than that required for maximum pro-

duction. There appears to be no benefit from using split applications or in-

sufficient benefit to warrant the extra cost. Based on data from Seminole

Sugar trials, in which rice was flooded approximately one month after planting

and the flood was maintained essentially uninterrupted until harvest, the

* rate of nitrogen giving maximum economic return can be calculate as:

CN
N = 51.5 1.7 -----
PR

in which N is the optimum nitrogen fertilization rate in Ibs/acre, CN is the

cost of nitrogen in $/lb including application cost, and PR is the price of

Professor and Rice Agronomist respectively, AREC-Belle Glade.

1










rice in $/lb. Assuming urea costs $320/ton ($0.356/lb N) applied, and the

value of rough rice is $8.00/CWT ($0.08/Ib), the nitrogen fertilization rate

giving maximum economic return calculates out at 44 Ib/acre. Then the follow-

ing economics apply:

N N Rice Income Attributed
Rate Yield* Cost Value To N Fertilization
----lb/acre------ --------------------------------------

0 4044 0 323.52 0

44 4795 15.66 383.60 60.08

These results are in line with those of past years in which substantial

increases in rice yield have been obtained for nitrogen fertilization at

approximately 50 Ib/acre at panicle initiation. We believe Everglades rice

growers should experiment with such fertilization on a few fields or on por-

tions of some fields. However, we caution that the effect of this fertil-

ization on such factors as lodging and susceptability to disease has not been

adequately determined. Therefore, we are not encouraging growers to nitrogen

fertilize their entire acreage until they are satisfied that the benefits of

this practice outweigh any risks.

POTASSIUM. A trial was conducted at Seminole Sugar (Brida) using Lebonnet

rice in which potassium (K) was applied at 0, 75, 150 and 225 kg/ha (0, 81,

161 and 242 lb K20/acre, respectively) prior to planting. The AREC-Belle

Glade soil test prior to fertilization was 24 lb K/acre and the recommendation

was 150 Ib/A (170 Kg/ha). All plots received phosphorus at the rate recor-
mended by soil test. The rice was planted on March 19, 1982, flooded appror;xi_-

mately one month later and harvested July 16, 1982. The following results

Yield = 4044 + 29.79 N 0.289 N2










were obtained for the plant crop:

K
Fertilization
Rate Yield

-------Kg/ha --------

0 4094
75 4235
150 4634
225 4267

Although there appears to have been an increase in rice production with in-

creasing K fertilization up to about 150 kg/ha (161 lb K20/acre), a statisti-

calanalysis of the data showed no significant effect of K on rice yields.

Thus in this experiment the AREC soil test recommendation for K on rice was

conservative and no increase in applied K was warranted.


CALCIUM SILICATE SLAG. A trial was conducted at Seminole Sugar (Brida) using

Lebonnet rice in which calcium silicate slag was applied at 0, 2500, 5000,

10,000 and 20,000 kg/ha (0, 2232, 4464, 8929 and 17,857 Ib/acre, respectively)

prior to planting. All plots received P and K according to the AREC soil tet

recommendations. The rice was planted on March 19, 1982, flooded approximately

one month later and harvested July 16, 1982. The following results were ob-

tained for the plant crop:

Slag Application Silicon Content
Rate Yield of Straw
--------- kg/ha---------- %
0 5329 1.02
2500 6285 2.78
5000 6614 4.34
10000 7190 6.25
20000 7675 6.30










The trend for increasing yield with increasing rates of calcium silicate slag

was statistically significant (linear and quadratic terms). The theoretical

optimum rate of slag was 17,320 kg/ha. The yield response appeared to result

from the silicon (Si) contained in the slag. Plots that received amounts of

P, Ca, or Fe equivalent to that in the slag did not have higher yields than

the check. Silicon in the straw at harvest increased considerably as rates of

calcium silicate slag were increased (above). Although yield was increased

over 40% by the application of slag, it is doubtful whether slag applications

are economically justified.


BIOSTIMULANTS. Three commercially available "biostimulants" were evaluated

in the Everglades Agricultural Area during the summer of 1982. Field trials

with ERGOSTIM were conducted on rice growing on organic soils at Seminole

Sugar (Brida Ranch) in the eastern part of the Everglades, at the AREC in the

north-central Everglades, and at Gulf & Western, Okeelanta Division, in the

western Everglades. The materials BURST and KEYPLEX were evaluated only at

Gulf & Western. Most trials utilized the variety Lebonnet, but some used

Labelle or Belmont. Foliar applications were accomplished by diluting the

required amount of material with tap water and spraying at the rate of 20

gallons per acre with a CO2 pressurized hand sprayer. Field plots generally

were 1 to 2 meters in width by 6 to 10 meters in length. Harvest generally

were made by hand collecting the panicles from 4-meter portions of two ad-

jacent rows.

Over the course of 6 trials, ERGOSTIM was applied either as a seed

treatment, or as a foliar spray at an early tillering stage, at a late til-

lering stage, and at a heading stage. BURST and KEYPLEX were applied cnly :t






5



an early tillering stage. In all foliar application trials rates greater than

recommended(5X -10X) were included along with the recommended rates to assure

adequate opportunity for plant absorption. The use of these "biostimulants"

did not result in statistically significant increases in rice yield in any of

the trials.


6.8-

6.6-

6.4.

6.2

6.0

5.8

5.6

5.4

5.2

5.0

4.8

4.6

4.4


AREC


r rida


II-I- --- r I
0 20 40 60 80 100

N (Kg/ha)

Fig. 1. Yield of Lebonnet rice at two locations as affected by ni tr' ,
fertilization at panicle initiation.










Promising New Rice Varieties for the Everglades

D.B. Jones*

Five new rice varieties adapted to southern rice growing conditions were

released for production on a limited basis in 1983. Four of the varieties are

long grained and the fifth, Pecos, is medium grained. Since Pecos has not

been tested in the Everglades yet, it will not be discussed here. The other

four varieties, Bond,Newbonnet, Skybonnet and Lemont were tested last year at

AREC and all showed some promise, Table 1.


BOND- Bond is a very-short-season, short statured,long grain variety having

the same maturity as Labelle, but has the larger seed size of Lebonnet. Com-

pared to Labelle. Bond hac averaged 10% higher grain yields in tests in

Arkansas over the past 6 years. Ityielded 15% higher than Labelle when tested
at ARFC in 1982.

Plants of Bond average about 5 inches shorter than thoro of Labelle,

have a more upright growth habit and are more resistant to lodging; also they

tiller more profusely and react similarly to common diseases. As might bl ex-

pected with its larger grain size, the whole (head) rice milling yields of

Bond average 3 to 4 percentage points less than those of Labelle,but the added

grain yield from Bond results in an average of 5% greater per-acre value of

milled rice than from Labelle in Arkansas tests.


NEWBONNET- Newbonnet is a high yielding, short-statured, long-grain variety,

Compared to Starbonnet, a full seasoned variety (140 days from seedinq to

harvest) Newbonnet is approximately 9 days earlier in maturity ('rka c d-T-a)

At AREC Newbonnet was three days later in maturity than Lebonnet, the -it

Assistant Professor, Rice Agronomist, AREC-Bee Glade.
Assistant Professor, Rice Agronomist, AREC-Belle Glade.










should be about a 125 to 130 day variety here in the Everglades.

Plants of Newbonnet are relatively short, averaging about 34 inches when

properly fertilized and they tiller profusely. Leaves are relatively erect

and narrow and retain a dark green color after heading, Newbonnet shows very

good lodging resistance and somewhat more resistance to the prevalent races of

blast in the Gulf States.

Newbonnet has about 11% heavier kernel weight than Starbonnet (a very

small kernelled variety), is equally high in milling yields and has exceeded

Starbonnet by 12% in grain (rough rice) yields in 23 replicated tests in

Arkansas over the past 5 years. The estimated per-acre value of milled rice

of Newbonnet is about 12% above that for Starbonnet. Newbonnet was one of

the highest yielding varieties tested at AREC last year. It yielded the same

as Mars ( a high yielding medium-grain variety) and 28 and 31% more than

Lebonnet and Labelle. Although Newbonnet has only been tested one year in the

Everglades, it looks very promising. Its only possible drawback at this time

is its slightly longer growing season than other varieties that are currently

being grown in the EAA.

SKYBONNET- Skybonnet was developed from the same cross as Lebonnet. The

average plant height of Skybonnet is about 38 inches, approximately 1-2 inches

less than Labelle and Lebonnet. In the reproductive stage, Skybonnet closely

resembles Lebonnet but the top three leaves are slightly smaller than those of

Lebonnet so that, overall, Skybonnet appears less leafy than Lebonnet. In

tests in the Gulf States, Skybonnet matured about 3 days later than La!el i

and 3 days earlier than Lebonnet. When tested at AREC last year, SkyL :~rnt

was slightly later in maturity than Lebonnet. A major advantage of S'L .: t










over Labelle and Lebonnet is that it is more lodging resistant than either of

them.

Whole-grain milling yields of Skybonnet have been consistently higher

than those of Lebonnet and the superior milling of Skybonnet relative to that

of Lebonnet was a primary factor in its release. Skybonnet has yielding

ability equal to that of Lebonnet and superior to that of Labelle and Star-

bonnet. The ratoon crop yielding ability of Skybonnet appears to be about

equal to that of Labelle and superior to that of Lebonnet.


LEMONT- Lemont was developed from the same cross from which Bellemont was

developed. Lemont possesses a semidwarf plant type and in all morphological

characteristics closely resembles Bellemont. Lemont is about 2 inches taller

than Bellemont and 12 inches shorter than Labelle.

Milled kernels of Lemont are approximately the same length as, but wider

and heavier than,those of Lebonnet. They are distinctly larger in all di-

mensions than those of Labelle, Bellemont, and Starbonnet. Lemont has

milling.quality markedly superior-to .that of.Leah and.equal or superior

to.that:.of other long-grain cultivars. ;

Lemont has demonstrated the ability to produce yields superior to those

of current U.S. long-grain cultivars in numerous tests across the Southern

rice-growing area of the United States. Lemont is extremely resistant to

lodging and it can be fertilized for maximum economic yield with no fear of

lodging.

Seedling vigor of Lemont is somewhat better than that of Bellemont but

it should be drilled shallow (less than 1 inch and preferably 0.5 inch) he-

cause the seedlings may not emerge from the soil as well as stan~dir ~ight










cultivars, particularly under cool wet conditions. Therefore, if this va-

riety is to be used, proper.spedbed preparation.is very important.


Table 1. Performance of some promising new rice varieties tested.at AREC
in 1982.

Yield Days to 50% 'Stand
Variety Ibs/A1/ Headin/ Establishment3-

Lebonnet 3670 90 3.1

Labelle 3580 79 4.0

Bond 4110 79 4.0

Newbonnet 4700 93 3.7

Skybonnet 3770 92 2.2

Lemont 3900 95 3.1


I' Rough rice at 12% moisture

- Days from planting (4/15/82) to head emergence of 50% of the plants in
the stand. Most varieties are ready to harvest approximately 30 to 35
days after this time.

3/ A visual rating of stand density from 0 (no plants) to 5 (100 % stand)
taken on 6/1/82.










WEED CONTROL TECHNOLOGY FOR RICE IN THE SOUTHERN U.S.1

Roy J. Smith, Jr.2


Weeds reduce the yield and quality of rice. Annual losses due to weeds

in U. S. rice have been estimated 17% of potential production or 22 million

cwt. valued at $205 million,

More than 50 weed species infest rice in the U. S. The seven plants or

groups of plants most frequently reported as weeds of rice fields are barn-

yardgrass, broadleaf signalgrass, sprangletop, red rice, ducksalad, hemp ses-

bania, and sedges (bulrush spikerush and umbrellaplant). Of the seven, four

are grasses, two are broadleaf weeds and one is a sedge. Two are single

species (broadleaf signalgrass and hemp sesbania) while the other five are

weed groups containing two or more species and/or genera.

The integration of weed control technologies into systems for rice is im-

portant. Effective weed control for rice in the U.S. combine preventive, cul-

tural, mechanical, biological and chemical methods. The system that omits

any one of these components is often inadequate.


Cultural-mechanical methods

Crop rotation, seedbed preparation, seeding method, water and fertilizer

management and cultivar selection are important components of integrated weed

control systems for rice.

Rotations of upland crops with rice is the only means of controlling many

hard-to-kill weeds such as red rice. Because red rice is the samo species as

lCooperative investigations of the Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric. and the
Arkansas Agric. Exp. Sta.

Res. Agron., Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric., Stuttgart, AR 72160.










white rice, it is difficult to control in the rice crop. Rotating upland

crops with rice permits the use of herbicides that control red rice in soy-

beans. If red rice iscontrolled for 2 years in soybeans, rice can be grown

in the third year without severe competition from red rice.

Thorough seedbed preparation helps to control weeds that infest rice

fields. The goal is to eliminate all weed growth up to the time of seeding

rice. Weeds that germinate and emerge with the rice crop are easier to con-

trol with herbicides.

Seeding method influences weed population shifts in rice. -Barnyardgrass

is more prevalent in dry-seeded than in water-seeded rice. However, aquatic

weeds, such as ducksalad, redstem, waterhyssop, spikerush, and annual umbrella-

plant are more troublesome in water-seeded rice.

Water management influences weed growth in rice fields. Floodwater ap-

plied 1 to 2 days after treatment with propanil prevents barnyardgrass from

reinfesting rice fields. Maintenance of the floodwater on rice fields for 2

to 3 weeks after applying molinate is essential to obtaining control of til-

lering barnyardgrass.

Although cultural-mechanical methods of weed control for rice are ben-

eficial, nonchemical methods alone seldom control weeds adequately. They

control weeds more effectively when combined with herbicide treatments.


Herbicides

Use of herbicides for control of weeds in rice in the U.S. is an important

component of weed control systems. Herbicides used in the US. are propanil,

.molinate, phenoxys (2,4-D, MCPA, 2,4,5-T and silvex), bentazon, thiobe:-rb,

pendimethalin and acifluorfen.










Propanil

Propanil is applied at 3 to 5 Ib/A postemernence when grass weeds are

in the 1- to 4-leaf stages of growth. It is usually applied aerially to un-

flooded rice fields. Sequential applications are frequently made to about

70% of the rice in the Southern U.S. The activity of propanil is influenced

by rainfall. At least 8 hours without rainfall after propanil treatment are
required for effective weed control. Best control of weeds by propanil occurs

when daily maximum air temperatures range from 700 to 900F and daily minimums

are above 600F. When temperatures are above 900F, rice may be burned severely

especially if the rice plants are succulent from high levels of residual ni-

trogen in the soil. Irrigation water must be managed properly to obtain sa-

tisfactory weed control with propanil. If the soil is dry, irrigating the

rice field 2 to 5 days before propanil treatment increases weed control.

Flooding rice 3 to 4 inches deep within 1 to 5 days after treatment prevents

germination of more grass weeds. Propanil controls or suppresses weeds other

than grasses -- broadleaf weeds, including seedlings of eclipta, hemp ses-

bania and northern jointvetch, and sedges and aquatics including spikerush,

ducksalad, false pimpernel, redstem, smartweed and waterhyssop.

Molinate

Molinate is applied at 3 to 5 lb/A postemergence into the floodwater wh'

barnyardgrass ranges from the 4-leaf to jointing stages of growth. Rice is

tolerant to molinate if the plants have grown above the floodwater. Water

management is critical for effective weed control when using molinate. As

grass weeds get larger, longer flood periods are required to kill or c!ppres-

them. Granular molinate is applied aerially to large commercial rice fields










Molinate also controls or suppresses broadleaf signalgrass, fall panicum,

bearded and Amazon sprangletop, eclipta, spikerush and spreading dayflower.


Phenoxy herbicides

Phenoxy herbicides are applied as postemergence treatments. The stage

of growth greatly influences the response of rice plants to phenoxy herbi-

cides. Rice in the late-tillering to early-jointing stages is not injured

by phenoxy herbicides. The tolerant stage can be positively identified when
the basal internodes begin to elongate from 0.25 to 0.5 inch. Rice cultivars

vary in the length of time required to reach this tolerant growth stage.

Also, environmental and cultural practices influence the period required for

rice to reach the tolerant stage.

Environment and nitrogen fertilization may influence the activity of

phenoxy herbicides on rice and weeds. Phenoxy herbicides control weeds ef-

fectively if rain occurs no sooner than 6 hours after treatment. Even when

rice is treated during the tolerant stage, high temperatures (above 900F)

may increase rice injury by phenoxy herbicides. Temperatures below 600F

during the week before treatment may slow weed growth and reduce control.

Because phenoxy herbicides may cause some injury to the crop even when ap-

plied in the tolerant stage of growth, nitrogen applied within 5 days after

treatment helps the rice to recover from the herbicide injury.

Pendimethalin and thiobencarb

These two herbicides give residual control of grass weeds in rice. Pen-

dimethalin at 0.75 to 1 lb/A is tank mixed with propanil at 3 to 4 1;:/:.

This mixture is applied after rice emerges and when grasses range f'ro: to

4-leaf stages of growth. Thiobencarb alone at 4 Ib/A may be applied from










just before or after rice emergence; grass weeds should be no larger than the

1- to 3-leaf stages of growth. Thiobencarb at 3 Ib/A may also be tank mixed

with propanil at 3 Ib/A and applied early postemergence when grass weeds

range fron the 1- to 4-leaf stages of growth. Pendimethalin gives residual

control of grasses and other susceptible weeds for 1 to 2 weeks. Thiobencarb

gives residual control of weeds for 3 to 4 weeks. Pendimethalin controls or

suppresses barnyardgrass, bearded and Amazon sprangletop, broadleaf signal-

grass, fall panicum, ducksalad, redstem, spikerush and waterhyssop. Thio-

bencarb controls or suppresses all of these weeds except broadleaf signal-

grass.


Bentazon and acifluorfen

Both of these herbicides may be applied alone or in a tank mixture with

propanil as a postemergence treatment. Bentazon at 0.75 to 1 Ib/A alone ap-

plied early postemergence controls flatsedges, nutsedge, spikerush, redstem,

cocklebur, dayflower, smartweed and waterhyssop. Tank mixtures of bentazon

+ propanil (0.75+3-5 Ib/A) applied early postemergence control weed species

susceptible to both herbicides.

Acifluorfen at 0.125 to 0.25 Ib/A alone applied at midseason controls

hemp sesbania. Tank mixtures of acifluorfen + propanil (0.2+2-3 Ib/A)

applied at midseason control hemp sesbania, eclipta, morningglory and water-

hyssop. Rice in the late-jointing stage of growth is tolerant to bentazon or

acifluorfen, but not to propanil.










RICE WEED CONTROL IN THE EAA

J. A. Dusky*

Since 1980, evaluations of various herbicides for weed control in rice

have been made. Results indicated a number of compounds provided acceptable

weed control. During 1982, trials were conducted at two locations to further

evaluate these compounds as well as combinations of these compounds,

Emphasis was placed on early postemergence treatments.

Herbicide Trial-1982

Trial 1: Rice (Lebonnet) was planted April 4, 1982 at the Seminole Sugar
Brida Ranch. A preemergence application of Prowl (pendimethalin) was made on

April, 6 using a CO2 charged back sprayer, 28.4 gpa and 26 psi. Early post-

emergence applications were made on April, 22 with a ground rig sprayer, 37.5

gpa and 30 psi. Compounds evaluated were Stam (propanil), Prowl (pendimetha-

lin), Bolero (thiobencarb), Machete (butachlor) Modown (bifenox), Basagran

(bentazon) and Blazer (acifluorfen). Evaluations were made 2 and 6 weeks

after application. Plots were 600 ft.2 and there were 3 replications of each
treatment in a randomized complete block design.

Trial 2: Rice (Mars) was planted on April 18 at Roth Farms. No preemergence

application of Prowl was made, Postemergence applications were made on April

20 in the same manner as above. Evaluations were made 2 and 6 weeks after

application. Yields at the time of harvest were also recorded. The experi-
mental design was the same as above except the plots were 450 ft.2

Weed Scientist AREC-Belle Glade.










Results: Results for trials 1 and 2 are given in Tables 1 and 2, respective-

ly. The primary weed species at location 1 were goosegrass, Panicum sp.,

Amaranthus sp., Eclipta alba, and taro. No yield results were obtained from
this experiment.

Preemergence applications of Prowl (2.0 3.0 lb ai/A) provided accept-

able grass and broadleaf weed control for six weeks with little or no crop

injury. Bolero (4.0 6.0 Ib ai/A) used as an early postemergence treatment
provided acceptable (>72%) broadleaf and grass weed control for six weeks

with little or no crop injury. However, treatment with Bolero (4.0 lb ai/A)
in combination with Stam (1.5-3.0 lb ai/A) enhanced weed control. Machete

(4.0-8.0 lb ai/A) and Modown (2.0-3.0 lb ai/A) did not provide acceptable

broadleaf and grass control when used alone. However, thesecompounds in com-

bination with Stam did result in acceptable control. Basagran (0.75 15

lb ai/A) did not provide acceptable weed control either. Some crop injury

was also evident. A combination early postemergence treatment of Basagran and

Stam (1.5+3.0 lb ai/A) did, however, result in good weed control. Blazer

(0.5 lb ai/A) provided excellent grass and broadleaf control for two weeks

but six weeks after treatment the weed control was no longer acceptable.

At location 2 the primary weed species were goosegrass and barnyard grass
with very few broadleaf weeds present. The infestation of the grass species

was also considered relatively low.

Weed control ratings at six weeks were similar to those at two weeks and

are not included in the report. Bolero and Prowl alone and in combination

with Stam provided excellent weed control when used as early postemergence

treatments.










Early postemergence treatments with Machete, Modown, or Basagran provided

less weed control than Prowl and Bolero. However treatment with these com-

pounds in combination with Stam provided excellent control.

The relatively light weed infestation is documented by the high yield

(4676 cwt) of the check plots. Because the weed infestation was so low,

little or no weed competition occurred. None of the yields were significant-
ly different from each other.


Future Weed Control Practices


From the experiments conducted many potential weed control practices

exist. The use of Bolero, Prowl, Machete and Modown as preemergence herbi-

cide applications have provided four to six weeks residual weed control.

Bolero and Prowl also have some contact activity whereas Machete and Modown

do not. Consequently, the use of Bolero and Prowl with a contact herbicide

such as Stam as early postemergence treatments would extend the residual

control of these compounds past six weeks. Results have indicated that early

postemergencetreatments of Bolero, Prowl, Machete, and lodown with Stam pro-

vided good season lonr weed control if the permanent flood is applied four

to six weeks after planting.

From previous work the effectivines of Prowl and Bolero seems to be de-

pendent upon soil moisture and the exact constraints must be determined. At

the present time, work is being conducted to support the registration of

these compounds.









Table 1. Weed control and vigor ratings of herbicide trials conducted at
Seminole Sugar, 1982.


Ratg(lb ai/A)


Weed Control**


2 Wat

BL Gr

0.0 0.0


Check.


SStam
Stam
*Prowl
*Prowl
Prowl+Stam
Prowl+Stam
Prowl+Stam
Bolero
Bolero
Bolero+Stam
Bolero+Stam
Machete
Machete
Machete+Stam
Modown
Modown
Modown
Basagran
. Basagran
Basagran+Stam
Blazer
Blazer


1.5
3.0
2.0
3.0
0.75+3.0
1.0 +3.0
2.0 +3.0
4.0
6.0
4.0 +3.0
4.0 +1.5
4.0
8.0
4.0 +3.0
2.0
3.0
3.0 +3.0
0.75
1.5
1.5 +3.0
0.25
0.5


9.0
9.5
8.8
9.3
9.3
9.0
9.4
7.2
8.3
9.5
9.7
3.6
4.3
9.5
7.8
8.2
8.1
6.3
6.8
9.8
9.0
8.8


8.3
9.0
9.5
9.3
9.3
9.3
9.5
9.5
9.2
9.5
9.6
2.2
3.4
9.6
6.5
7.8
9.2
5.5
5.8
9.5
5.2
9.6


6 Wat


BL

0.0

4.6
6.2
7.3
8.2
8.3
8.6
9.2
8.3
8.8
9.2
9.5
2.5
4.2
8.3
5.3
6.6
8.4
4.8
5.2
8.7
6.5
7.7


Gr

0.0

5.3
4.8
8.3
9.2
8.1
8.4
8.2
7.8
8.3
9.2
9.1
0.0
0.8
8.9
4.1
4.0
8.3
3.4
4.1
7.6
4.3
3.8


Vigor

2 Wat 6 Wat



10.0 7.2


9.5
9.0
9.7
9.3
9.7
9.7
10.0
9.5
9.8
9.7
9.7
9.7
9.5
9.3
9.8
9.5
9.5
9,7
10.0
9.5
9.5
9.3


8.5
8.8
9.2
9.6
9.5
9.2
9.7
8.9
9.3
9.8
9.5
7.5
7.2
8.7
8.2
8.0
9.5
8.1
7.7
8.9
9.4
9.1


* PreEmer-eJnce Arplicaticns ;
Weed Control Ratings; 0=no control,
Bl= Broadleaf; Gr= Grass
Vigor Ratings; 0= Dead ,10=no injury


10=100%; Wat=Weeks after treatment;


Treatment


-I










Table 2. Weed Control and
Roth Farms 1982,


Vigor Ratings of Herbicide Trials conducted at
two weeks after treatment and yields at harvest.


Treatment

Check
Stam
Stam
Prowl
Prowl
-Prowl+Stam
Prowl+Stam
Prowl+Stam
Prowl+Stam
Bolero
Bolero
Bolero+Stam
Bolero+Stam
Machete
Machete
Machete+Stam
Machete+Stam
Modown
Modown
Modown+Stam
Modown+Stam
Basagran
Basagran
Basagran+Stam
Basagran+Stam


Rate (Ib ai/A)


1.5
3.0
2.0
3.0
0.75+3.0
1.0 +3.0
2.0 +3.0
1.0 +1.5
4.0
6.0
4.0 +3.0
4.0 +1.5
4.0
8.0
4.0 +3.0
4.0 +1.5
2.0
3.0
3.0 +3.0
3.0 +1.5
0.75
1.5
0.75+3.0
0.75+1.5


Grass Weed Control*

0.0
9.3
8.5
9.0
9.6
9.6
8.8
9.5
9.5
9,5
9.0
8.8
9.5
6.3
8.0
8.6
9.2
7.8
8.7
9.3
8.3
7.5
8.2
9.1
9.2


Vigor**

10.0
9.0
8,5
9.0
8.8
9.2
8.8
9.0
8.3
9.3
9.8
9.5
9.0
9.8
9.7
9.7
9.5
9.3
8.3
9.2
9.2
8.5
9.2
9.5
8.2


Yield (cwt)

4676
4501
3709
3995
3905
4451
3244
4381
4079
427;3
4421
4172
4113
4184
4323
4425
3911
4627
4027
3848
4106
4259
4130
4000
3916


Weed Control Ratings; 0=no control ,10= 100%;
Vigor Ratings; =Dead =no injury
Vigor Ratings; 0=Dead ,10=no injury











Stink Bugs Attacking Florida Rice
R. H. Cherry and D. B. Jones*

Introduction

Stink bugs (Family Pentatomidae) are one of the most important insect

pests of rice in Florida. These pests occur annually in Florida and rice

growers frequently treat for them.

Often these practices have given unsatisfactory control. Thus it is of

importance to the successful establishment of rice in Florida to gain a better

understanding of these pests so that effective control procedures can be de-

veloped.

Five different species of stink bugs are found in Florida rice fields.

Of these, the rice stink bug (0 laebus pugnax) and the southern green stink

bug (Nezara viridula) are the most important. The rice stink bug is found in

rice growing areas of Cuba, Dominican Republic, and the U.S.A. while the

southern green stink bug is found wherever rice is grown although it does not

always attack rice.

Both the adult and nymphal stages of stink bugs feed on individual grai::s

of rice as the panicle develops. The insect uses its long stylets to puncture

and extract the fluid from the developing grain. Grains of rice fed upon in

the early milk stage fail to continue normal development, and the result is a-

empty glume or shriveled grain. Grains fed upon in the dough stage may be

weakened structurally, or if infected with certain fungi, may develop a blTck

spot which is commonly known as pecky rice. Such damage leads to lower r'l-

ling yields and inferior grades of rice.

Entomologist and Rice Agronomist, respectively, AREC-Belle nlde.










General economic thresholds for the rice stink bug were set at 15 stink

bugs/10 sweeps of a 15 inch diameter net: These recommendations were later

reduced to 10 bugs/10 sweeps. Yet, even at a population of 3.7 insects/10

sweeps, Bowling reported the per acre loss in Texas based on value factors and

harvested yields was $90.44 in 1982.

Research conducted on stink bugs outside of the U.S. has indicated the

pest can cause severe damage to rice. In the Dominican Republic, where the

climate is more similar to Florida than that of Texas, another species, Oebalus

(Solubea) ornata, has been reported to cause serious losses to rice. It fre-

quently occurs in large numbers and crop loss as high as 50 percent has been

recorded often. In Japan, the southern green stink bug (N viridula), is be-

coming increasingly serious (Feakin, 1976). Growers have been using earlier

maturing varieties in recent years which have provided the pest with a pre-
ferred host early in the season. Therefore, large populations of bugs are able

to build up on later crops.

Information is badly needed on the population dynamics of the stink bug

complex in Florida rice in an effort to achieve better control of these pests.

General observations are that currently used control measures are insufficient
since shortly after spraying stink bugs reappear in the rice fields. Currently

we simply do not know when or how to control stink bugs in Florida rice.
Therefore, the need exists for information on population dynamics of this pest

under our local conditions.


Methods

Sampling for stink bug populations in rice began in spring, 1983 rcd

continue for two years during the 1983 and 1984 rice growing seasons. E.t










commercial rice fields planted at four different dates are being sampled.

Each week, 100 sweeps are being taken in each of the rice fields to collect

insects. Sweeps are being made with 15 inch diameter sweep nets. These are

standard and inexpensive sampling tools which can easily be used by rice

growers to evaluate their own insect problems. After collection, all insects

are being stored for later counting. Date and stage of rice development are
S being noted to correlate stink bun populations with these factors.


Results

Since this project has only started this spring 1983, results and con-

clusions will be given at a future date. At the termination of this study,

the data gathered will give the following information.

1) The relative abundance of major stink bug species will be known. This will

allow identification of major species so that literature on the subject can be

examined for control techniques, etc.

2) Variability of stink bug populations between fields will be known. This

will identify how well synchronized stink bug populations are over a wide aros.

3) Seasonal abundance of stink bugs in rice will be known. This will allow

for more appropriate timing of pesticide application when necessary.

4) Since this will be the first intensive survey of rice insects in Florida,

any unplanned data such as other pest insects, beneficial insects, etc. will

also be noted.

5) The effect of planting rice at different times (i. e., early planted vs

late-planted) on stink bug populations will also be known.

In summary, this study should aid growers in deciding if, when, art !~- to
control stink bugs in Florida rice fields.









SUGARCANE PRODUCTION FOLLOWING RICE:

FOUR YEARS OF DATA

Jose Alvarez and George H, Snyder*

At the 1980 Rice Field Day the authors reported the results of a preliminary

attempt at investigating the effect of rice culture on subsequent yields of

sugarcane. The conclusion that rice production increased sugarcane yields
was based on two years of data and was stated tentatively until more data
became available,

Today we are presenting the results of a similar analysis which included

sugarcane yield data from the first rice fields planted in 1977 to rice fields

where cane was harvested in the 1980-81 season. The total number of obser-
vations amounted to 130. The "rice fields" (fields in which rice immediately
preceded the sugarcane crop) included 90, and the "nearby fields" (fields

located near the-above fields that were followed during the summer prior to
sugarcane planting) were 40. The information collected included yield (gr s
tons and-% sucrose in normal juice), cane variety, planting and harvestifn

dates, and method of harvesting, Four firms were included in the s-anmp';
To-test the-validity of the assumption that equivalent fields were
chosen to compare with the fields in which rice was grown prior to.sugarcar:f

(i, e., that both sets of fields would have produced approximately equal
sugarcane yields-in the absence of rice production in one set),.data from "the

same fields for-the plant cane crop of the previous cycle were collected,-.
The results of-the regression analysis supported the hypothesis that w- lent fields had been chosen.

*Area Economist and Professor, respectively, AREC-Belle Glades











The "rice effect" (the difference in cane yields between "rice fields"

and "nearby fields") was then estimated using repgression analysis. Equations

were developed in terms of net tons/acre, % sucrose in normal juice ard stan-

dard tons per acre. The three models were statistically sound. Results

showed an increase of 7.2 net tons/acre, 0.30 % sucrose in normal juice, and

8.5 standard tons/acre for sugarcane following rice. The benefit of rice

cultivation to the subsequent sugarcane crop was computed using economic

figures for the 1981-82 season. The average season price was approximately

$22.25 per standard ton. Harvesting, loading and hauling costs were $9,50

per ton. Therefore, the rice effect amounted to a net return of $108/acre.

While a determination of the factors responsible for the rice effect is

beyond the scope of this study, the extended period of flooding associated

with rice production is likely a major contributing factor. Clearly, t1e

bonus in sugarcane profits that can be obtained by including rice in t`6-

sugarcane production cycle makes consideration of rice production worthy -;

all Everglades sugarcane growers.







Pesticides Approved for Use on Rics in !-'E:i

K. D, Sluler-1


Most of the pesticides listed below have federal labels which do not restrict their application to any specific area
of rice production and are therefore approved for use on rice grown in Florida. Several pesticides still only have
registrations for the traditional production areas of California and the Mississippi Delta states. Some of the herbi-
cides listed below which may be used in Florida are approved for use on weeds and/or soil types which are not common
to Florida. Therefore, this is a list of pesticides which may be used in Florida, but are not necessarily recommen-
ded for Florida conditions.


Material

A. FUNGICIDES

Benlate
Mertect 340-F
Dithane M-45
Vitavax R
thiram 50%
captain 50%
Difolatan-4F
Terra-Coat L-205
Nusan 30-A


Company


DuPont
Merck
Rohm and Haas
Uniroyal Chemical
BASF, Mobah, DuPont


Chevron
Olin


Use


blast and stem rot
Blast, stem rot, sheath
seed treatment
seed treatment
seed treatment
seed treatment
seed treatment
seed treatment
seed treatment


Rate


1-2 Ibs./A
6.12 oz./A
2-4 oz./100 Ibs.
3-4 oz./100 Ibs.
1.5 oz./bu.
2.25 oz./100 lbs.
4. oz./100 lbs.
4-8 oz./100 Ibs.
1.5 oz./100 lbs.


/Palm Beach County Extension Agent, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, located in Belle Glade, Fl.

-/Preharvest Interval


PHIV- r,
Ln





B. INSECTICIDES

malathion 57%


parathion 4E methyl


Di-Syston 15G

Dibrom

Methoxychlor 50 WP

malathion 57%

NOTE: Several fumigants

C. HERBICIDES

Stam M-4

Bolero 8 EC


Prowl

Basagran


Modown


WCPA Ester


2,4,5-T 4EC
2,4-D 4EC
D. Harvest Aid
Sodium chlorate


I 0


American Cyanamid
Helena

Asgrow Florida


Mobay

Chevron





are available for use in



Rohm and Haas

Chevron


American Cyanamid

BASF


Rhone Poulenc


Union Carbide


Union Carbide


Helena


Stinkbug, grasshoppers,
chinch bug, fall armyworm

Stinkbug, grasshoppers,
chinch bug, fall armyworm

leafhoppers

grassohppers

storage bin treatment

starage bin insects

gas tight storage bins.



grass

junglerice, barnyardgrass
and goosegrass

grass

selected aquatics and
broadleaf

selected aquatics and
grasses

broadleaf, bulrush, and
sedge

broadleaf
Broadleaf

defoliant-desiccant


1.5-2.5 pts./A


7 days


0.5-1 pt./A


13.3 Ibs./A .100 days

0.5-0.75 pt/A 2 days

1 lb./1,000 sq. ft.

1 pt./1,000 bu.


3-6 qts./A

4 pts./A


1.5-2.0 pts./A

1.5 pts./A


2-3 qts./A


1.5-2.5 pts./A


1.5-2.5 pts./A
1.5-3 pts./A

3-4 qts./A










COMMENTS FROM FELLOW RICE GROWERS

by

Bill Donovan

In talking with different rice growers in the Everglades Agricultural

Area (E.A.A.) several points were made:

One comment was the need to find rice varieties better suited for our

organic soils. The easiest method to accomplish this is to adapt existing

varieties from other locations to our conditions.

Related to the need for better varieties is the problem with lodging.

Lodging is directly related to the level of fertility, especially nitrogen.

Short stature rice varieties are resistant to lodging and respond readily to

nitrogen fertilizer. Using short stature varieties would enable moderate

amounts of nitrogen to be used to increase yields. One method of nitrogen

fertilization, would be to broadcast the fertilizer by airplane. Another way

would be to drain the fields at midseason and let the soil release the nitro-

gen. Researchiscurrently being done at AREC-Belle Glade on short stature rice

varieties.

Another problem occurring in the E.A.A. is a sterility problem, in that

the grains of rice in the head do no fill. The cause for this condition is

not known, and it has occurred under both drought and normal wet conditions.

Possibly severe winds from storm conditions during booting and early heading,

thirty to forty days before harvest, affect sterility.

A general comment was that flooding the rice fields early resulted in a

good rice stand. For a manganese deficiency, for example, putting the water

William C. Donovan is Extension Agronomist Specialist, Sugar Cane at AREC-
Belle Glade.











on fifteen days after planting corrected the problem. Flooding the rice

field early does not solve all problems. A seedling yellowing problem in

some locations, for example, can be only corrected through iron sulfate ap-

plication.

Another observation was that if the rice field was to be flooded early,

the cane stubble in the field should be plowed to cover it to prevent it from

drifting to the windward side of the field and killing the rice. Disking will

not prevent the stubble from drifting. If the rice is up and well establish-

ed, the stubble will not kill the plant and the field can be disked as usual.

Several different approaches were used for weed control when the field

was flooded early. One grower used 3 pints of propanil/acre (1 Ibs. of

active ingredients) when the rice plant was at the 1 to 2 leave stage with a

second application of 4 to 5 pints/acre of propanil applied when the rice

plant was at the 3rd or 4th leaf stage. The rice field was then flooded the

next day after the second application. Another rice grower flooded his fields

15 days after planting, then allowed the water to receed for 3 to 4 days.

Propanil was then sprayed on the 20th day after planting, resulting in a 90%

reduction in weeds. The field was then reflooded.

The management of herbicide application is a function of cultural

practices; if the grower does not flood early, his management practices will

be different.

Different rice growers had fertility conditions that were specific for

their locations and these were not mentioned except as examples. The above

comments were the result of interviews with different rice growers in the EAA,

Your additional comments are welcome.










RICE RESEARCH PROGRAM SUPPORT


The University of Florida Agricultural Research and Education Center Belle Glade rice
research program received support in 1982 in the form of financial aid and/or equipment donations.
With limited availability of public funds, outside support significantly enhances the rice research
program. Contributions from the following organizations are gratefully acknowledged: The
Florida Rice Council, Busch Agricultural Resources Anheuser Bush and Montedison USA, Inc.


A


Research Plot Seeder
donated by
Busch Agricultural Resources


Research Plot Combine
donated by
The Florida Rice Council




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