Group Title: Research report - Ft. Pierce Agricultural Research Center ; FTP 85-2
Title: SWAP tree condition and disease survey, November 1984
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00055946/00001
 Material Information
Title: SWAP tree condition and disease survey, November 1984
Series Title: Ft. Pierce AREC research report
Physical Description: 17 leaves : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Pelosi, Robert R
University of Florida -- Agricultural Research Center
Publisher: University of Florida, Insititute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Research Center
Place of Publication: Fort Pierce Fla
Publication Date: [1985]
 Subjects
Subject: Trees -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Trees -- Diseases and pests -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Summary: Results of the fifth annual survey of tree conditions and diseases in the SWAP Project (contains 2592 tree spaces).
Statement of Responsibility: Robert R. Pelosi.
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "June 1985."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00055946
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 66464126

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










FT. Pierce AREC Research Report FTP 85-2 June 1985


SWAP TREE CONDITION AND DISEASE SURVEY
November 1984

Robert R. Pelosi


The fifth annual survey of tree condition and diseases
in the SWAP project was made during the week of November
20th, 1984 by Robert R. Pelosi. Trees were rated on a scale
of 0=healthy to 3=severe decline (almost dead). Causes of
tree decline were determined, if possible, for all unhealthy
trees. In addition to searching for the usual disease
symptoms a special effort was made to look for citrus canker.
None was found. Another focus for this year's survey was to
determine if a tree had several disease problems. Footrot
and blight are becoming common combinations on rough lemon
rootstock as is water damage and blight on carrizo and
trifoliate in this study. Causes of tree removal since 1980
were obtained from previous years's records and recorded.
This was done to present an accurate picture of the total
number of declined and declining trees.

Impressions in this year's survey were as follows:

1. Average tree condition is much poorer than in previous
years since declining trees in only three blocks were
removed and replanted in 1984.

2. The number of healthy trees is continuing to drop.

3. The number of trees with blight increased by about 30%.

4. Overall incidence of blight in DT is lower than in other
soil treatments, but the rate of increase is now the
same.

5. A total of 46.8% of trees on rough lemon are in decline
from blight or have been removed due to it.

6. A break in the tile drainage line caused trees in chronic
water damage areas of Blocks 6 through 9 to exhibit
strong recent water damage symptoms. The number of
recently damaged trees increased considerably while the
chronic count decreased.


1
Biological Scientist II, University of Florida, Institute of
* Food and Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Research and
Education Center, Fort Pierce, Florida 33454.








7. An increase in footrot has occurred particularly in rough
lemon rootstock.

8. Tristeza is now affecting more Pineapple oranges than
Marsh grapefruit.

Twelve statistical data tables are contained in this
report. Some specific comments on the 1984 observations are
as follows:

Original Trees Presently Healthy. SWAP contains 2592
tree spaces. Presently 1490 or 58% of the original trees are
healthy (Table 1). This is a decrease of 11% from the 1983
survey. Marsh grapefruit on trifoliate in all three soil
treatments have the fewest healthy trees. Pineapples on
Carrizo have the poorest record for oranges. Only 22% of the
trees in DT and DTL treatments are healthy and in the ST
treatment 54% are healthy. Trees planted on Cleopatra
rootstock remain the healthest throughout the SWAP
treatments. Over 95% of the original trees planted on
Cleopatra are healthy producing trees.

Original Trees Dead, Missing, or Replanted. No large
changes have occurred in Table 2 since only a limited number
of replants were available in 1984 and decline trees were not
removed unless a replant was available. Thirty-seven trees
died or were removed this year. Two trees died from
lightning and several died from footrot. Approximately 30
trees in severe decline were removed and replanted. The
total number of trees dead, missing, or replanted stands at
302. Sixty-two trees of grapefruit on Rangpur constitute the
largest group in this category. The next largest group with
tree loss is rough lemon (both scions). Tristeza has claimed
a number of trees on sour orange. Losses on trifoliate have
not been as specific but blight, water damage, and failure of
growth in the ST plots have claimed a total of 55 trees for
both scion varieties.

Total Trees in Decline. Table 3 lists trees in decline.
An increase of 214 trees in decline was recorded in 1984.
The largest increases were for those trees on Carrizo and
trifoliate rootstocks affected by water damage. The
breakdown in the underground drainage system for Blocks 6
through 9 had an effect, but was not totally responsible as
large increases also occurred in Blocks 1 through 5.
Footrot, blight, and tristeza also contributed to an increase
in decline. The compound effect of two problems affecting
the same tree has made rating for tree condition increasingly
difficult.

Overall Tree Condition. Using the 0-3 rating system it
is very easy to determine how each rootstock/scion
combination is doing and the effect of the soil treatments on






them (Table 4). Cleopatra appears the best in all categories
and has the number one ranking throughout the SWAP project in
this year's survey. Carrizo has the worst combined tree
condition rating for all three soil treatments on both
scions. Marsh grapefruit on trifoliate and pineapple on
rough lemon follow with poor averages. The overall tree
condition average has slipped from .194 in 1983 to .337 in
1984. This may be partially due to the many trees ranked in
the 2.0 condition or worse that were not removed because of a
shortage of replants.

Blight. Blight continues to be a major disease in the
Ft. Pierce SWAP project. This year's count brings the total
to 152 which is an increase of 50 trees since 1983. Blight
is normally thought of as a disease that affects oranges more
than grapefruit but in this experiment the losses are
similar. Seventy-nine Marsh grapefruit and 73 pineapple
oranges have succumbed to blight. DTL has 63 trees with
blight, ST contains 52, and DT has 36. The differences
between treatments are being closely studied. Table 6
focuses on blight statistics as they affect rough lemon
rootstock. Rough lemon now has 46.8% of the original trees
in decline or removed. The total of 101 blighted trees on
rough lemon rootstock is divided almost equally between the
two scion varieties, 50 on pineapples and 51 on Marsh
grapefruit.

Water Damage. Water damage data are again presented in
three tables and divided into two categories: "recent water
damage" and "chronic water damage" (decline from uncertain
causes). These data are presented in Tables 7, 8, and 9.
This past year was a relatively dry one with only 44.8 inches
of rainfall recorded. We would expect a decrease in water
damage but this was not the case. The year 1984 showed an
increase of 199 trees with water damage over the previous
year. This suggests that water damage symptoms are not
predictable by simply recording total rainfall. The
placement pattern of damaged trees is interesting. Trees
under the heading "recent water damage" can be described as
trees with chlorotic leaf symptoms and a recent dieback
indicating a sudden unfavorable water situation had been
imposed upon them after a period of good growing conditions.
"Chronic water damage" trees are those usually stunted with
dieback and darker green leaves because the top of the tree
is in equilibrium with the roots. Water damaged trees can
vary between the two categories as wet conditions upset the
root-top balance and the trees decline further and then try
to recover. The break in the underground drainage system
that impaired proper drainage of Blocks 6 through 9 had a big
effect on the condition of trees within these blocks. Block
6 had the most water damage and almost doubled its 1983 total
when it went from 51 water damaged trees to 97. The largest
percentage increase was in Block 8 where the number of water
damaged trees jumped from 11 to 40. Carrizo and trifoliate







appeared to be affected the most by water damage. Their
performance on DT and DTL vs. ST clearly indicates these two
rootstocks need a deeper, well-drained soil without a
fluctuating water table. Trees tabulated under the "chronic
water damage" heading decreased this year as many took on the
symptoms of "recent water damage". The total number of trees
in both categories totaled 592 in 1984, up 199 over 1983 but
only 43 more than were recorded in 1982. This demonstrates
the variability and recovery common with this malady.

Tristeza. The tristeza picture has changed considerably
this year. In other years oranges and grapefruit were almost
equally affected. This was unusual as orange trees are
historically more susceptable. This year the outbreak
changed to a more normal situation; 56 pineapple oranges on
sour orange rootstock or 26% of the susceptible total now
have declined from tristeza as opposed to 29 Marsh grapefruit
or 13.5%. The only explanation may be that mild strains now
have affected the trees on Marsh giving them some measure of
cross-protection which they didn't have a few years ago.
Indexing several years ago showed healthy grapefruit were
free of any tristeza while those in decline had a very severe
strain. The pineapples from the beginning all had a mild
strain with the declining trees also containing a severe
strain. This situation will be monitored to see if
grapefruit decline slows and the oranges continue to go out.

Footrot. Footrot (Table 11) has once again appeared in
epidemic form on the SWAP project. This disease was a very
severe young tree problem in the experiment. Originally it
attacked trees on Rangpur lime and an occasional tree on
rough lemon. The incidence of footrot tripled from 26 cases
to 76. Rough lemon registered the largest increase rising
from 17 to 43 trees. Rangpur rooted trees accounted for 25
more while the remaining rootstocks had 1 to 3 affected
trees. Most of the footrot was active and losses will
probably continue for a period of time.

CONCLUSION

Disease incidence has increased each year on the SWAP
project. The average tree condition remains variable as
water damage fluctuates and the poorest trees are removed.
Except for trees on Cleopatra, the trees are succumbing
rapidly to the diseases or maladies that effect tree
productivity and survival. No rootstock comes close to
Cleopatra's record of tree survival and health. Rootstocks
are often judged by their average yield performance per tree
but this can be misleading. A better gauge of performance is
to enter the survival rate into the formula and calculate an
overall projected yield based on average yield per tree
* multiplied by the number of healthy trees for each rootstock
and scion variety. Table 12 lists projected yields based on









1984 data. Pineapples on Cleo outyielded it closest rival by
74.5 boxes. Grapefruit trees on Cleo outproduced second
place sour orange by 217.7 boxes. In 1984 the combined
Cleopatra output on both scions was a tenth of a box better
than any other rootstock. Usually this rootstock ranks in
the midrange for yield until about 12 years of age. In other
rootstock experiments at AREC, Cleopatra yield continued to
increase after other rootstocks leveled off. This coupled
with good tree survival makes Cleopatra one of the best
rootstock choices for groves that are being planted for a
long term investment.







TABLE 1


SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS

TOTAL ORIGINAL TREES PRESENTLY HEALTHY

NOVEMBER, 1984


Rangpur Cleo
0 G 0 G


Rough Sour


Trifol. Totals


0 G O G 0 G


Grand Total


0 G


TILLAGE


ST3





DT





DTL5


BLOCK

1
5
8
TOTAL


2
4
9
TOTAL


3
6
7
TOTAL


GRAND TOTAL
% of ORIG. NO.


11 10
12 12
16 14
39 36


5 3
5 8
9 4
19 15


8 8
1 4
4 5
13 17


23 17 24 24 12
20 15 24 23 15
19 18 24 24 17
62 50 72 71 44


22 14 23 23 18
22 13 22 22 18
21 18 23 21 13
65 45 68 66 49


23 11 24 22 4
15 9 21 24 7
19 13 21 21 9
57 33 66 67 20


71 68 184 128 206 204 113
33 32 85 59 95 95 52


19 15 18 13 2
14 11 17 9 7
13 19 18 16 7
46 45 53 38 16


17 10 16 8 4
13 7 18 2 7
13 13 14 9 5
43 30 48 19 16


9 11 17 12 7
10 9 15 6 4
9 13 19 13 8
28 33 51 31 19

117 108 152 88 51
54 50 70 41 24


1. Pineapple orange
2. Marsh grapefruit
3. Surface tilled
4. Deep tilled
5. Deep tilled plus lime


0


Carrizo
O1 G2
0 G


98 90
91 88
111 94
300 272


86 77
76 81
88 75
250 233


82 74
59 66
79 75
220 215

770 720
60 58


188
179
205
572


163
157
163
483


156
125
154
435

1490
S58






TABLE 2


SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
TOTAL ORIGINAL TREES DEAD, MISSING OR


NOVEMBER 20,


Rangpur


Cleo


0 G O G


REPLANTED


1984


Rough
0 G


Sour
0 G


Trifol


GRAN
Totals TOTA


0 G 0 G


22
44
32
98


19
22
45
86


36
40
42
118


GRAND TOTAL
% OF ORIG. NO.


Pineapple orange
Marsh grapefruit


1
0.5


39 46
18 21


137 165 302
11 13 12


Carrizo
01 G2


TILLAGE
TRMT.


ST




DT





DTL


BLOCK

1
5
8
TOTAL


2
4
9
TOTAL


3
6
7
TOTAL







TABLE 3

SWAP:TOTAL TREES IN DECLINE
11/20/84


Pineapple Orange

BLOCK Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL


Marsh Grapefruit
GRAN
Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL TOT


TOTAL 21 4 0 16 18 17 76 33 4 1 17 16 47 118


2 19 2 1 6 13 14 55 20 3 0 4 6 18 51
4 19 2 2 6 13 17 59 16 6 1 7 5 15 50
9 13 1 1 9 4 7 35 18 2 0 6 5 14 45


TOTAL 51 5 4 21 30 38 149 54 11 1 17 16 47 146


3 16 1 0 8 11 11 47 15 5 0 7 5 17 49
6 20 6 3 8 10 17 64 17 6 0 8 8 19 58
7 20 4 2 10 6 10 52 16 0 2 3 4 15 40


TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL
PERCENT IN
DECLINE


11 5 26
20 9 63

9 4 29


27 38 163
75 93 388

35 43 30


78
63
51


194


106
109
80


295


96
122
92


310
752


48 11
135 26


63 12 2 24 23 67 28 29


TILLAGE
TRMT.


I _






TABLE 4

SWAP OVERALL TREE CONDITION3
11/20/84


Rangpur


Cleo


Rough


0 G 0 G 0


Sour


G 0 G 0


TILLAGE
TRMT.


ST





DT




DTL


BLOCK
1--!
5
8
AVG.
RANK


2
4
9
AVG.
RANK


3
6
7
AVG.
RANK


OVERALL AVG.
RANK


.29 .63 0
.18 .27 .15
.17 .26 .03
.214 .387 .060
3 4 2


.67 1.28 .04
.67 .69 .15
.36 .68 .02
.567 .884 .070
5 6 2


.63 .76 .08
.84 .73 .34
.58 .79 .19
.684 .760 .204
6 6 2


.489 .677 .115
6 6 2


.08 0 0 .55 .36 .36 .17 .23 .89
.15 0 .11 .48 .43 .50 .19 .32 .52
0 0 0 .18 .36 .10 .11 .12 .33
.072 0 .037 .404 .384 .320 .470.224 .580
2 1 1 6 3 5 5 4 6


.24 .02 0 .33 .43 .76 .39 .43 .93
.26 .08 .02 .23 .45 .80 .17 .71 .50
.05 .02 0 .55 .24 .30 .15 .28 .50
.184.040 .007 .370 .374 .620 .237.474 .644
2 1 1 3 4 6 3 4 5


.47 0 0 .71 .78 .43 .27 .76 .67
.40 .06 0 .83 .53 .50 .31 .61 .63
0 .04 .07 .45 .25 .37 .17 .35 .46
.290.034 .024 .664 .520 .434 .250.574 .584
3 1 1 5 4 3 2 4 5


.182.025 .023 .480 .426 .458 .319.424 .604
2 1 1 5 4 4 3 3 5


1. Pineapple orange
2. Marsh grapefruit
3. 0 Healthy
1 Slight Decline
2 Moderate Decline
3 About Dead
0 0 0


Carrizo
01 G2
0


Trif.


AVG.


.29
.27
.14
.234



.46
.38
.26
.367



.45
.46
.32
.410


.337






TABLE


SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84

BLIGHT


Pineapple Orange


Marsh Grapefruit


GRAND
BLOCK Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL TOTAL


TOTAL 2 4 0 17 0 3 27 4 2 0 16 0 4 26 52

2 1 0 0 6 0 0 7 3 0 0 2 0 0 5 12
4 1 1 0 3 0 0 5 1 0 0 2 0 1 4 9
9 0 0 0 5 0 1 6 2 0 0 6 0 1 9 15


TOTAL 2 1 0 14 0 1 18 6 0 0 10 0 2 18 36

3 4 1 0 10 0 0 15 3 1 0 8 0 2 14 29
6 0 1 0 5 0 1 7 2 0 0 8 0 0 10 17
7 0 1 0 4 0 1 6 2 0 0 9 0 0 11 17


TOTAL

GRAND TOTAL


3 0 19 0 2 28 7

8 0 50 0 6 73 17


1 0 25 0 2 35 63

3 0 51 0 8 79 152


Trees presently in decline from blight and trees


removed due to blight since 1980.


0


TILLAGE
TRMT.


DT






DTL













TABLE 6

SWAP BLIGHT SUMMARY
1978 to 1984

Trees on Rough Lemon rootstock only


TILLAGE TREATMENT


BLOCK


DTL


GRAND
1 5 8 TOTAL 2 4 9 TOTAL 3 6 7 TOTAL TOTAL
TOTAL


09/28/78


Pine 0
Marsh 1


TOTAL 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 4

Pine 2 2 1 5 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 8
11/24/80 Marsh 2 3 0 5 1 0 0 1 4 2 3 9 15
TOTAL 4 5 1 10 1 00 1 6 2 4 12 23

SPine 2 1 1 4 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 9
16/81 Marsh 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 1 4 2 0 6 9
TOTAL 3 2 1 6 1 00 1 9 2 0 11 18

Pine 2 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 8 12
11/23/82 Marsh 3 3 0 6 1 1 0 2 6 3 3 12 20
TOTAL 5 5 0 10 1 1 0 2 13 3 4 20 32

Pine 6 4 4 14 2 1 4 7 7 3 3 13 34
11/20/83 Marsh 3 3 4 10 2 16 6 9 6 6 5 1.7 36
TOTAL 9 7 8 24 4 2 10 16 13 9 8 30 70

Pine 7 5 5 17 6 3 5 14 10 5 4 19 50
11/20/84 Marsh 4 5 7 16 2 2 6 10 8 8 9 25 51
TOTAL 11 10 12 33 8 5 11 24 18 13 13 44 101


11984 DATA INCLUDES TREES REMOVED WITH BLIGHT SINCE 1980.
percentage by tree spaces
Percentage by tree spaces


0 0
1 0


0 0
0 0


BLIGHT2


0.9%



5.3%


4.2%




7.4%



16.2%



23.4%







TABLE 7


SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84
ALL TREES WITH WATER DAMAGE1
(Recent & Chronic)


Pineapple Orange


Marsh Grapefruit


BLOCK Carrizo Rang.


1
ST 5
8


Cleo Rough


0 1


Sour Trif. TOTAL Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL


7 7
2 4
1 5


TOTAL 21 1 0 2 10 16 50 27 2 0 1 11 46 87 137


2 18 2 1 0 5 15 41 18 0 0 0 0 18 36 77
4 18 1 1 2 7 17 46 15 0 0 0 4 13 32 78
9 13 1 1 2 2 7 26 18 1 0 1 4 14 38 64


TOTAL 49 4 3 4 14 39 113


1 0 1 8 45 106


1 3 15
3 5 20
0 3 15


TOTAL 53 5 5 10 11 38 122


GRAND TOTAL
PERCENT OF
ORIGINAL
TREES WITH
WATER DAMAGE


10 8 16 35 93 285


57 5 4 7 16 43 22 56


6 1 4 11 50 114
9 1 6 30 141 307


4 .5 3 14 65 24


This table combines "typical"
chronic water damage).

0


water damage and "decline unknown" ratings (can also be called recent water damage and


TILLAGE
TRMT.


GRAND
TOTAL


TOTAL


DTL


2 0
4 0
0 1


236







TABLE 8
SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84
WATER DAMAGE1
TREES PRESENTLY IN DECLINE FROM WATER DAMAGE OR REMOVED DUE TO WATER DAMAGE SINCE 1980


Pineapple Orange


TILLAGE
TRMT. BLOCK


1
ST 5
8


Marsh Grapefruit


GRAND
Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL TOTAL


38
12
36


TOTAL 13


0 0 0 5 13 31 19


0 0 0 5 31 55 86


TOTAL 36 0 0 1 2 32 71 41 1 0 0 3 38 83 154


3 9 1 0 0 1 6 17 10 0 0 1 2 13 26 43
6 21 1 2 1 3 16 44 16 2 0 2 4 19 43 87
7 18 1 2 1 1 7 30 14 0 0 0 2 14 30 60


TOTAL


GRAND TOTAL


Typical symptoms only.


3 4 2 5 29 91 40


3 4 3 12 74 193


Partial count of total. For cou:


2 0 3 8 46 99 190

3 0 3 16 115 237 430


nt of total trees with water damage see Table 7 which


combines counts of trees in this table with Table 9 (Decline from unknown cause presumed water damage).


*


0








TABLE 9

SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84
Decline from unknown cause presumed water damage
(Chronic water damage)


Pineapple Orange


Marsh Grapefruit


GRAND
BLOCK Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL TOTAL


1 0 2 5 3 19


2 0 1 6 15 32 51


TOTAL 13


TOTAL


GRAND TOTAL


4 3 3 12 7 42 10


3 1 8 6 9 32 2


8 4 13 23 19 93 20


0 0 1 5 7 23 65


3 1 1 3 4 14 46


5 1 3 14 26 69 162


See Table 7 for total of all trees suffering from water damage.


TILLAGE
TRMT.


TOTAL


DTL
















TABLE 10

SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84

TRISTEZA
TREES PRESENTLY IN DECLINE FROM TRISTEZA OR REMOVED DUE TO TRISTEZA SINCE 1980


Pineapple Orange


SOUR


Marsh Grapefruit


SOUR


TOTAL 16 7 23


2 8 8 16
4 7 1 8
9 6 5 11


TOTAL 21 14 35


3 8 2 10
6 6 4 10
7 5 2 7


TOTAL 19 8 27


56 29


TILLAGE
TRMT.


BLOCK


TOTAL


DTL


GRAND TOTAL









TABLE 11
SWAP SUMMARY BY BLOCKS
11/20/84
FOOT ROT

TREES PRESENTLY IN DECLINE FROM FOOT ROT AND TREES REMOVED DUE TO FOOT ROT SINCE 1980


Pineapple Orange


Marsh Grapefruit


Block Carrizo Rang.


Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL


Carrizo Rang. Cleo Rough Sour Trif. TOTAL


GRAND
TOTAL


1 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3
ST 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 3 0 0 5 6
8 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 8

TOTAL 0 2 0 5 0 0 7 0 3 1 6 0 0 10 17


2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 2 0 0 6 6
DT 4 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 7 1 5 0 1 14 16
9 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 0 1 0 2 0 0 3 8


TOTAL


3
6
7


TOTAL
GRAND TOTAL


0 1 6 0 0 7


4 0 10 1 0 16
6 1 21 1 0 30


0 12 1 9


0 1 23


*


TILLAGE
TRMT.


I t








TABLE 12


PROJECTED YIELDS BASED ON NUMBER1
of HEALTHY ORIGINAL TREES for 1984.


PINEAPPLES

Rootstock 1984 YIELD2 NO. HEALTHY TREES3 PROJECTED YIELD4

1. Carrizo 1.84 71 130.6
2. Rangpur 2.64 184 485.8
3. Cleopatra 2.72 206 560.3
4. Rough Lemon 2.69 113 304.0
5. Sour Orange 2.14 108 231.1
6. Trifoliate 1.42 88 125.0


MARSH GRAPEFRUIT

1. Carrizo 2.87 68 195.2
2. Rangpur 3.69 128 472.3
3. Cleopatra 3.72 204 758.8
4. Rough Lemon 3.38 117 395.5
5 Sour Orange 3.56 152 541.1
6 rifoliate 2.42 51 123.4


1. Each category started with 216 original trees
2. Avg. boxes per tree, includes those in all conditions.
3. From 1984 condition survey
4. Per rootstock based on number of trees.




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