• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Historic note
 Front Cover
 Main














Title: Evaluation of 'atonik ' plant stimulant spray on storm damaged 'agriset ' tomato
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00065272/00001
 Material Information
Title: Evaluation of 'atonik ' plant stimulant spray on storm damaged 'agriset ' tomato
Series Title: Bradenton GCREC research report
Physical Description: 7 p. : ; 28 cm
Language: English
Creator: Csizinszky, Alexander Anthony, 1933-
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center (Bradenton, Fla.)
Publisher: Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
Place of Publication: Bradenton FL
Publication Date: 1994
 Subjects
Subject: Plants -- Effect of agricultural chemicals on -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Tomatoes -- Yields -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references (p. 3).
Statement of Responsibility: A.A. Csizinsky.
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "November 1994."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00065272
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 68645867

Table of Contents
    Historic note
        Historic note
    Front Cover
        Front cover
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
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







UNIVERSITY OF
FFLORIDA
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences


EVALUATION OF
STORM


qiL4Z


'ATONIK'
DAMAGED


PLANT STIMULANT SPRAY ON
'AGRISET' TOMATO


A. A. CSIZINSZKY


Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
5007 60th St. E., Bradenton, FL 34203
Bradenton GCREC Research Report
SBA-1994-20 (November)
q r5to 50


~k3~Y"








GCREC Research Report BRA1994-20


Evaluation of 'Atonik' Plant Stimulant Spray
on Storm Damaged 'Agriset' Tomato
A. A. Csizinszky'
Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
University of Florida, IFAS
5007 60th Street East
Bradenton, FL 34203


The effect of a foliar-applied biostimulant, PCC-703 ('Atonik', Asahi Chemical
Co. Mfg. Ltd. Japan), containing 0.6%mono-nitrophenolates as active ingredients,
was evaluated in replicated trials in spring 1993 at the Gulf Coast Research and
Education Center in Bradenton. The recovery of storm-damaged tomato plants
treated with the foliar biostimulant spray and the effect of the biostimulant
spray on fruit size and earliness were of special interest.
MATERIALS AND METHODS

In February 1993 a land of EauGallie fine sand was prepared for tomatoes. Beds,
32 inches wide and 8 inches high, were formed on 5 ft centers with seepage
irrigation ditches spaced every 41 ft with six beds between ditches (8712 linear
bed ft per acre). Soil in the experimental area was sampled before fertilizer
application and analyzed at the Analytical Research Laboratory at Gainesville
(Hanlon and DeVore, 1989, Hanlon et al., 1990): pH:6.73, Mehlich I extractable
P = 64.0, K = 8.4, Ca = 773, Mg = 111, Cu = 2.2, Fe = 7.2, Mn = 3.5, and Zn = 5.1
ppm, and NH4-N = 1.0, and NO -N = 0.25 ppm. Nutrients, applied lbs per acre,
were: 262N, 46P and 434K. Nitrogen and K sources were NH4NO3, CaNO, and KNO, and
P source was a 0-8.74-0 (N-P-K) superphosphate. The superphosphate also
contained micronutrients (F503 oxide) at 21 lb per acre. Superphosphate was
applied on the false bed and the N and K fertilizers were placed in 2 inch deep
narrow furrows formed 12 inches from the bed center on both halves of the bed.
Soil was fumigated with 66% methylbromide and 33% chloropicrin then immediately
covered with a 1.4 mil thick black polyethylene film. Two weeks later, on
February 15, 5 week old 'Agriset 761' tomato seedlings were planted in a single
row on the bed at 18 inch spacing (5808 plants per acre). On 12 and 13 March,
a windstorm (The Storm of the Century) severely damaged the leaves of the plants,
but replanting was not necessary, the plants recovered rapidly and were lightly
pruned on 29 March. On the same date (March 29), tomatoes in eight, each 20 ft
long, plots were selected at random in the field and in four of the plots plants
were sprayed with the 'Atonik' spray and in four of the plots with water. The
'Atonik' spray was applied at a rate equivalent to 6 fl oz/acre in 30 gal of
water by a portable backpack sprayer at 40 psi. A biodegradable sticker/spreader
was added to the spray to facilitate spray cover for the plants. Plants were
sprayed four more times during the season: at first bloom, at fruit set (oldest
fruits approximately 1 inch diameter), just prior to first harvest and after
first harvest. The amount of water, in which the 'Atonik' biostimulant was
dissolved, was increased gradually from 30 to 100 gallons, to allow adequate


1Associate Horticulturist.


November 1994








spray cover as plants grew during the season. Plants were staked, then tied
three times during the season. Plant pests, insects, bacteria and fungi, were
controlled on a preventive weekly basis by approved pesticides.

Soil samples for pH, total soluble salts (TSS) and macro and micro-element
analyses were collected immediately after transplanting and after the last
harvest. Shoot samples, fully expanded leaves with petioles, were taken four
times: 63, 91, 116 and 126 days after planting (DAP), and fruit samples were
taken 126 DAP for dry matter determination and macro and micro-nutrient analyses.

Fruits were harvested four times: 29 May and 9, 16 and 24 June. Fruits were
separated into marketable and cull, then marketable fruits were graded by a
machine into extra-large (xlg), large (Ige), and medium (med) size. Number and
weight of fruits in each grade were recorded. Data were analyzed by analysis of
variance (ANOVA).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Due to the damage to the plants by the windstorm in March, harvest was delayed
by about 14 days, compared with previous seasons. Due to the favorable weather
during the remainder of the season there were no serious insect or disease
problems that had adverse effects on the crop.

In the first harvest (Table 1) extra-large and marketable yields were higher with
'Atonik' than with water sprays. In the second harvest the medium and in the
third harvest all marketable grade fruit yields were higher with water control,
than with 'Atonik' biostimulant spray. In the fourth harvest tomato yields were
similar with biostimulant or with water treatment.

Cumulative yield of extra-large fruit in the early harvests was better with
'Atonik' than with water sprays (Table 2). Medium and large size fruit yields
for the season were higher with water than with 'Atonik' sprays. Number of
fruits harvested in the various size grades had similar trends as the yields by
weight, therefore data will not be presented here.

Dry matter content in shoots and in fruit was similar with 'Atonik' or with water
spray (Table 3). Macronutrient concentrations in shoots were similar with
'Atonik' or water treatment until the end of the season (Table 3). At the end
of the season N and K concentrations were higher with water than with 'Atonik'
spray. Microelement concentrations in shoots were also similar with 'Atonik' or
with water spray until the end of the season (Table 4). At 126 days after
planting (DAP) Cu and Mn concentrations were higher with 'Atonik' than with water
spray. The concentration of all micronutrients in fruits were similar with
'Atonik' and with water spray (Table 4).

The results of this study on the effect of biostimulant spray on tomato yields
are similar to our previous studies with seaweed-based and other biostimulant
sprays: early yields, especially early yields of extra-large fruits, were
increased by the 'Atonik' biostimulant, but total yields for the season were
similar or reduced by the biostimulant sprays compared to water sprays. In
previous studies biostimulant treated plants had higher mineral concentrations
in shoots than water control plants (Csizinszky, 1986). In this study Cu and Mn









concentrations in shoots, especially in the later part of the season, were higher
with 'Atonik' than with water spray. On the other hand, N and K concentrations
in shoots were reduced by 'Atonik' sprays. A similar reduction in K
concentration was observed earlier at this center in 'Atonik' treated bell
peppers (Csizinszky, 1994).

It is advisable for growers, therefore, to test the effect of biostimulant sprays
on a small area before treating a large acreage of plants with biostimulants.

Note: The use of trade names in this publication does not imply either
endorsement or criticism of these products by the author or the University of
Florida.
LITERATURE CITED

Csizinszky, A. A. 1984. Response of tomatoes to seaweed-based nutrient sprays.
Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 97:151-157.

Csizinszky, A. A. 1986. Response of tomatoes to biostimulant sprays. Proc. Fla.
State Hort. Soc. 99:353-358.

Csizinszky, A. A. 1994. Yield response of 'Jupiter' bell pepper to foliar
biostimulant spray. Bradenton G.C.R.E.C. Research Report BRA-1994-4.

Hanlon, E. A. and J. M. deVore. 1989. Chemical procedures and training material.
Fla. Coop. Ext. Ser. Circ. 812. Gainesville, FL.

Hanlon, E. A., G. Kidder, and B. L. McNeal. 1990. Soil, container and water
testing. Fla. Coop. Ext. Circ. 817. Gainesville, FL.









Table 1. Yield (25 lb carton/acre) of 'Atonik' spray
tomato by harvest. Spring 1993.


treated 'Agriset 761'


Fruit size Treatment Mean
Harvest and grade Atonik Control differencez
25 lb ctn/acrey


xlgx
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total


607
121
34
762
270
1032

998
263
100
1361
337
1698

691
113
50
854
141
995

953
273
90
1316
156
1472


439
112
46
597
230
827

972
316
138
1426
315
1741

988
230
106
1324
158
1482

888
333
104
1324
146
1470


ZMean difference between treatments
level or non-significant (ns).


is significant at the 10% (*) and 5% (**)


YAcre = 8712 linear bed feet (5800 plants per acre).









Table 2. Cumulative yields (25 lb carton/acre) of 'Atonik'
'Agriset 761' tomato by harvest. Spring 1993.


spray treated


Fruit size Treatment Mean
Harvest and grade Atonik Control difference
25 lb ctn/acre


xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total

xlg
Ige
med
marketable
cull
total


607
121
34
762
270
1032

1605
383
134
2122
608
2730

2297
497
184
2978
749
3727

3249
770
274
4293
906
5199


439
112
46
597
230
827

1411
427
184
2021
545
2566

2399
657
290
3346
703
4049

3287
990
393
4670
849
5519


ZMean difference between treatments is significant at
level or non-significant (ns).

YAcre = 8712 linear bed feet (5800 plants per acre).


the 10% (*) and 5% (**)


1





1+2


1+2+3





1+2+3+4









Table 3. Dry matter content and macroelement concentrations
treated 'Agriset 761' tomato shoots and fruit.


in 'Atonik'


Shoots
DAPz
Treatment 66 91 106 126 Fruit
Dry Matter %


12.12
11.45
ns

%
3.70
3.68
ns


0.40
0.37
ns


3.54
3.62
ns


2.01
2.20
ns


0.61
0.74
ns


12.26
13.13
ns

dry weight
2.78
2.13
ns


0.38
0.33
ns


2.57
2.14
ns


3.02
2.89
ns


0.85
0.91
ns


14.05
14.00
ns


2.14
2.44
*


0.28
0.25
ns


1.56
3.33
**


3.71
2.95
ns


1.08
1.00
ns


5.68
5.92
ns


2.01
2.26
ns


0.40
0.39
ns


3.22
3.62
ns


0.09
0.10
ns


0.17
0.18
ns


ZDAP = days after planting.

YMean difference is significant at P < 0.1 (*) and 0.05 (**) or non-significant
(ns).


Atonik
Control
Signif.Y


Atonik
Control
Signif.


Atonik
Control
Signif.y


Atonik
Control
Signif.y


Atonik
Control
Signif.Y


Atonik
Control
Signif.y


11.92
11.88
ns


4.87
4.91
ns


0.71
0.70
ns


3.77
4.24
ns


1.74
1.64
ns


0.54
0.56
ns









Table 4. Microelement concentrations in 'Atonik' treated 'Agriset 761' tomato
shoots and fruit.

Shoots
DAPZ
Treatment 66 91 106 126 Fruit
B dry weight

Atonik 44 42 49 56 11
Control 43 40 47 42 12
Signif.Y ns ns ns ns ns

Cu
Atonik 98 68 56 111 9
Control 95 65 40 71 10
Signif. y ns ns ns ** ns

Fe
Atonik 62 56 49 42 28
Control 64 56 47 46 36
Signif.y ns ns ns ns

Mn
Atonik 156 158 135 234 11
Control 151 157 123 159 12
Signif.y ns ns ns ** ns

Zn
Atonik 79 57 51 52 30
Control 79 54 43 56 28
Signif.y ns ns ns ns ns

ZDAP = days after planting.
YMean difference is significant at P < 0.05 (**) or non-significant (ns).






The Gulf Coast Research and Education Center


The Gulf Coast Research and Education Center is
a unit of the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sci-
ences, University of Florida. The Research Center
originated in the fall of 1925 as the Tomato
Disease Laboratory with the primary objective of
developing control procedures for an epidemic out-
break of nailhead spot of tomato. Research was ex-
panded in subsequent years to include study of sev-
eral other tomato diseases.

In 1937, new research facilities were established
in the town of Manatee, and the Center scope was
enlarged to include horticultural, entomological, and
soil science studies of several vegetable crops. The
ornamental program was a natural addition to the
Center's responsibilities because of the emerging in-
dustry in the area in the early 1940's.

The Center's current location was established in
1965 where a comprehensive research and extension
program on vegetable crops and ornamental plants is
conducted. Three state extension specialists posi-
tions, 16 state research scientists, and two grant
supported scientists from various disciplines of
training participate in all phases of vegetable and
ornamental horticultural programs. This interdisci-
plinary team approach, combining several research
disciplines and a wide range of industry and faculty
contacts, often is more productive than could be ac-
complished with limited investments in independent
programs.


The Center's primary mission is to develop new
and expand existing knowledge and technology, and
to disseminate new scientific knowledge in Florida, so
that agriculture remains efficient and economically
sound.

The secondary mission of the Center is to assist
the Cooperative Extension Service, IFAS campus
departments, in which Center faculty hold appropri-
ate liaison appointments, and other research centers
in extension, educational training, and cooperative
research programs for the benefit of Florida's pro-
ducers, students, and citizens.

Program areas of emphasis include: (1) genetics,
breeding, and variety development and evaluation;
(2) biological, chemical, and mechanical pest manage-
ment in entomology, plant pathology, nematology,
bacteriology, virology, and weed science; (3) produc-
tion efficiency, culture, management, and counteract-
ing environmental stress; (4) water management and
natural resource protection; (5) post-harvest physiol-
ogy, harvesting, handling and food quality of horti-
cultural crops; (6) technical support and assistance to
the Florida Cooperative Extension Service; and (7)
advancement of fundamental knowledge of disciplines
represented by faculty and (8) directing graduate
student training and teaching special undergraduate
classes.


Location of
GCREC Bradenton


IFAS IS:
Q The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
University of Florida.
D A statewide organization dedicated to teaching,
research and extension.
" Faculty located in Gainesville and at 13 research
and education centers, 67 county extension
offices and four demonstration units throughout
the state.
SA partnership in food and agriculture, and natural
and renewable resource research and education,
funded by state, federal and local government,
and by gifts and grants from individuals, founda-
tions, government and industry.
O An organization whose mission is:
Educating students in the food, agricultural,
and related sciences and natural resources.
Strengthening Florida's diverse food and
agricultural industry and its environment
through research.
Enhancing for all Floridians, the application
of research and knowledge to improve the
quality of life statewide through IFAS exten-
sion programs.




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