• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Table of Contents
 Front Matter
 Confectionary sunflower research...
 Confectionary sunflower research...
 Confectionary sunflower research...
 Published literature and manus...














Group Title: Agronomy research report
Title: Confectionery sunflower research in Florida, 1978-1980, final report
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00080899/00001
 Material Information
Title: Confectionery sunflower research in Florida, 1978-1980, final report
Series Title: Agronomy research report
Physical Description: iv, 171 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Green, Victor E
University of Florida -- Agronomy Dept
Publisher: University of Florida, Agronomy Dept.
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1984
 Subjects
Subject: Sunflowers -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Sunflowers -- Seeds   ( lcsh )
Genre: bibliography   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Bibliography: Includes bibliographical references.
Statement of Responsibility: Victor E. Green, Jr.
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: "May 1984."
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00080899
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 11161379

Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Front Cover
    Table of Contents
        Page i
        Page ii
    Front Matter
        Page iii
        Page iv
        Page v
    Confectionary sunflower research in Florida -- 1978
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    Confectionary sunflower research in Florida -- 1979
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
    Confectionary sunflower research in Florida -- 1980
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 64a
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
    Published literature and manuscripts
        Page 83
        Page 83a
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
        Page 137
        Page 138
        Page 139
        Page 140
        Page 141
        Page 142
        Page 143
        Page 144
        Page 145
        Page 146
        Page 147
        Page 148
        Page 149
        Page 150
        Page 151
        Page 152
        Page 153
        Page 154
        Page 155
        Page 156
        Page 157
        Page 158
        Page 159
        Page 160
        Page 161
        Page 162
        Page 163
        Page 164
        Page 165
        Page 166
        Page 167
        Page 168
        Page 169
        Page 170
        Page 170a
        Page 171
        Page 172
        Page 173
        Page 174
        Page 175
        Page 176
        Page 177
        Page 178
Full Text





c )
AGRONOMY RESEARCH REPORT
AG-84-14


CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA 1978-1980


FINAL REPORT


VICTOR E. GREEN, JR.
Agronomy Department
IFAS
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Gainesville, Florida, 32611
USA


I
,,r -- --.S .- --. _-


JOHN GERARDE HERBALL,


MAY 1984
-J.-*


LONDON, 1633 AD


SUNFLOWER










CONTENTS
Pages

Confectionery Sunflower Research in Florida--1978 1-14

Confectionery Sunflower Research in Florida--1979 15-38

Confectionery Sunflower Research in Florida--1980 39-82

Published literature and manuscripts:

Green, V. E., Jr., W. G. Genung, and G. B. Killinger. 1978. 84-88
Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida 38: 12-14.

Genung, W. G. and V. E. Green, Jr. 1979. Insect pests of
sunflower in Florida. Sunflower 5(2): 10-11, 29-30. Feb. 89-95

Green, V. E., Jr. 1979. Striped seedcoats and large nuts.
Australian Sunflower 3(1): 14. Jan. 96

Green, V. E., Jr. 1980. Determining resistance of sunflower
to Southeastern U. S. Diseases. Sunflower World 2(10); 10,12. 97-98

Green, V.E., Jr. 1980. Use phytomass and epiphytotic when
referring to plants. Agronomy Journal 72: 1068. Nev.-Dec. 99

Green, V. E., Jr. and J. R. Lofgren. Quality of Florida-grown
Confectionery sunflower. ISA Sunflower Newsletter 5(1): 9-12.
January. 100-105

Green, V. E., Jr. 1981. Sunflower researchers study Alter-
naria disease in Gainesville Florida nursery. June. 106-111

Green, V. E., Jr. 1981. The sunflower world of belt buckles.
Enlarged version as seen in Sunflower World 3(7): 21. 112-114

Green, V. E., Jr. 1981. Louisiana State University honors
sunflower as first print in Flora of Louisiana. 115

Hartley, Thornton. Sunflower research may be boon to Flor-
ida. The Florida-Times Union, Monday, Feb. 16, 1981. B-3. 116.

Hartley, Thornton. Sunflower patch pulls in visitors with
notebooks. The Florida Times-Union, Monday, Jun. 22, 1981. 117

Green, V.E., Jr. 1981. Phytomass and Epiphytotic, When
plants are discussed. Plant Disease 65: 459iJune. 118

Britton, Susan. 1981. Drive starts to name sunflower
national flower. The Sacramento Bee, Sat. Sept. 26, 1981. 119

Green, V. E., Jr. 1982. Singularity and Plurality in crops.
Agronomy Journal 74: 164. Jan.-Feb. 120

Moses, Galen. 1982. Sunflower Test. Gainesville Sun, Sunday,
May 16, 1982. 121








Genung, W. G. 1983. Two beetles new to the Everglades
that attack sunflower (Coleoptera: Curculionidae and
Cerambycidae). The Florida Entomologist 66(1): 207-208. 122-123

Green, V. E., Jr. and J. A. Robertson. 1983. The oil
content and fatty acid composition of some confectionery
sunflower hybrids. ISA Sunflower Newslatter 6(3/4):2-8. 124-131

Hartley, Thornton. 1984. Sunflower could be important
crop, researcher says. The Florida Times-Union, Monday,
March 12, 1984, page B-3. 132

Green, V. E., Jr. and W. G. Genung. 1984. Florida
Sunflower Bibliography-- 1917-1984. Agronomy Research
Report AG-84-7 (Revised). May 1984. 10 pp. 133-142

Green, V. E., Jr., S. M. Yang, and G. W. Simone. 1984.
Sunflower diseases in Florida. International Sunflower
Association Newsletter 7: 143-146

Genung, W. G. and V. E. Green, Jr. 1984. Insect pests
of sunflower in Florida--A comparison of two seasons and
three geographical areas. International Sunflower
Association Newsletter 7: 147-153

Green, V. E., Jr. 1985. Agronomic characteristics of
confectionery sunflower grown in Florida, USA. Proceed-
ings of the XI International Sunflower Conference of the
International Sunflower Association to be held in March
1985 in Mar del Plata, Argentina. 154-163

Figures 1-13 showing disease and insect damage 164-170


4Tk6t


-ii-













Oro3nbianfc Flos Solis Peruuianus.
jamblum.


WOODCUT DRAWING OF SUNFLOWER PARTS FROM AN HERBAL BY PIERANDREA MATTIOLI 1586

This was a German version published nine years after Mattioli's death in 1577.
Note the name of the plant is given in both Latin (Flos Solis Peruuianus)and
German (Sonnenblum). This drawing appeared, among other places, in the 1586
herbal from Frankfort, Germany, entitled DE PLANTIS EPITOME UTILISSIMA.


V. E. GREEN, JR.














































1978 CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA


-Iv-











































a






















This 55 bani Romanian stamp shows a honeybee helping to pollin-
ate an attractive sunflower disk and shows the initials of the
USSR All-Union Research Institute of Oil Crops (VNIIMK) and the
words FLOAREA SOARELUI.


I


%4M 11i














CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA -- 1978 1/


Victor E. Green, Jr. 2/



Confectionery sunflower cultivars are a special type of sunflower, Helianthus
annuus L., that have very large stalks and very large leaves. Their seeds
are achenes and they are usually striped. The seeds themselves are very
large and are loosely contained within the hull. This permits easy hulling
either with human teeth or with impact hullers. The largest seed are used
as a confection, either salted or unsalted, hulled or unhulled, and either
roasted or unroasted. The smaller seeds are used in baking or as bird feed.
As bird feed, they are sold as such or in mixtures with millet, sorghum,
cracked corn, etc. The shelled seed for human consumption are usually referred
to as "sun-nuts". A very palatable nut butter can be made from the sun-nuts.
The nuts, sunbutter, and the sunflower oil itself, which is normally made from
the smaller seeded oilseed cultivars with black seed, are very good sources
of linoleic acid, a fatty acid necessary in human nutrition.

With the older open-pollinated varieties, it was not uncommon to see plants
15 feet high with leaves 18 inches wide and 24 inches long and a terminal
seedhead up to 24 inches across, containing hundreds of seeds.

With the nationwide interest in sunflower and with inquiries from local
potential growers of the crop, it was decided to test confectionery
hybrids for the first time in north-central Florida. The crop should prove
to be a valuable addition to the crops available for cropping systems in the
area since sunflower is resistant to frost in both the seedling stage and in
the maturity stage. The species is also deep-rooting and should prove
valuable in the drought sands of the area.

There seem to be good markets for the crop both in the USA and overseas.
Sun-nuts should make a good source of snacks for persons on fat free diets
regarding animal fats. They should be excellent substitutes for snacks
with chocolate or sugar bases. They are probably the most palatable source
of linoleic acid.
1/ Appreciation is expressed to the suppliers of seed and technology transfer
for the confectionery sunflower cultivars: Dr. Gary Fick of Sigco Research,
Box 289, Breckenridge, MN 56520; to Sandy Kraig,of Kraig Seed and Supply,
Inc., Sheldon, ND 58068; and Dr. Jim Lofgren of Dahlgren & Co., Division of
Beatrice Foods Company, 1220 Sunflower St., CrooKston, MN 56716. The FMC
Corporation furnished the Furadan and ELANCO Corp. furnished the Treflan
used in these tests. Mr. Billy D. Crawford furnished technical assistance
in the field, greenhouse and the laboratory during 1978.

2/ Professor (Agronomist), Agronomy Department, Institute of Food and Agri-
cultural Sciences, Building 857, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.










Oilseed cultivars were investigated at the Main Station at Gainesville by
Dr. Gordon B. Killinger from 1971 through 1974 until his retirement and by
the current writer beginning in 1976, using most of the then current culti-
vars supplied by the seedsmen in the Red River Valley of Minnesota and North
Dakota. Hence, the tests were small and were adjuncts to other research
then being conducted by those researchers.

Tests with the confectionery hybrids began in 1978 and consisted of three
plantings at the Green Acres Agronomy Farm about 10 miles west of the Main
Station Agronomy Farm on the University of Florida Campus. This location
was selected for these tests because damage from birds is usually much less
at Green Acres. The confectionery tests were planted contiguously and simul-
taneously with tests with oilseed cultivars.

The three tests were planted on 14 March, 13 April and 17 August 1978. The
cultural practices are shown in the footnotes to Tables 1, 2, and 3. Rows
ran north and south to facilitate hand harvest and rows were three feet
apart and 25 feet long. There were 4 or 6 replications of three-row plots
in randomized complete blocks. Cultivation was accomplished only at lay-by
time by the action of small sweeps behind the fertilizer distributor that
applied ammonium nitrate. Field and laboratory data were collected and are
reported in tables 1 through 5. Trial averages an meteorological data are
shown in Table 5. Detailed meteorological readings and growing degree days
(GDD) are shown in Tables 6, 7, and 8. A comparison of the agronomic char-
acteristics of the March and April plantings is shown in Table 4.


DISCUSSION

March Planting

This test contained 12 entries which was most of those available on the 1978
market. Plants in this test grew to maturity with little or no problems.
About 200 mm. of rain fell on the test and the area was irrigated with a
sprinkler system with about 100 mm. of water. rThe plants were sturdy and
green to maturity and the seedheads were well filled and relatively free of
disease. There was relatively little insect damage, bird damage, or lodging.
Yields of achenes at 10% moisture varied from a high of 4,010 to a low of
1,950 kg/ha, averaging 2,930 for the test. Yields of this magnitude have
not been repeated at this location. The crop cycle was completed from seed
to seed in 90 days, with harvest on 14 June. Seedhead diameters averaged
24 cm. and plant heights about 160 cm. See Table 1.

April Planting

After seeing such an almost perfect trial planted in March, the April plant-
ing was very disappointing. Early growth of the plants was satisfactory, but
about mid-flowering time disease symptoms began to manifest themselves on the
leaves, stalk, and back of the seedhead. Samples of the tissue were taken to
Dr. Gary Simone of the Florida Plant Disease Clinic in the Plant Pathology
Department, IFAS, where Dr. Simone identified the disease as the Alternaria
leaf and stem black spot caused by the fungus Alternaria helianthi (Hansf.)
Tubaki & Nishihara (Helminthosporium helianthi Hansf.). It was also beginning
to appear on oilseed hybrids in commercial plantings in the area. Interestingly,







-3-


Zimmer and Hoes in Sunflower Science and Technology, American Society of
Agronomy Monograph 19, 1978, on page 250 wrote "A. helianthi has not been
reported in North America, but seedborne inoculum from other continents
is a potential danger to sunflower on this continent "

The Florida plantings looked as if they had literally "blowtorched'. No
cultivar of either oilseed or confectionery sunflower escaped the ravages of
the disease. In the present test, only the outer 8 to 10 rings of achenes
filled with sun-nuts. The centers of the disks had only empty hulls. The
florets tended to cling to the disk even at physiological maturity, or
when the disk was rubbed briskly with the hand.

Figure 1 shows an immature sunflower deedhead from which the flowers have
been rubbed to show empty achenes where flowers were not pollinated due to
attack by the black spot disease fungus Alternaria helianthi.

Figure 2 shows three mature sunflower heads showing the persistent flower
characteristic in the center of the heads, where pollination occurs last,
and where only empty hulls were under the sterile flowers.

Head diameters and stalk heights were reduced as compared with those in the
March planting. Plants averaged 147 cm. high and seedheads averaged only
14 cm. across. Yields averaged only 910 kilograms per hectare in this test.
The oilseed test adjacent to this test that was planted on the same day had
yields averaging only 450 kg/ha.

No chemical fungicides were applied to the plants since this was the first
record of the disease in the North American Continent. No hybrids were even
tolerant of the disease because absolutely no efforts had been made to breed
against a disease that no one had ever seen on the continent.

This occurrence of a first epiphytotic on a crop in the USA is reminiscent
of two others that have occurred during this agronomist's scientific career.
The first was in 1958 at Belle Glade and was concerned with the Hoja Blanca
(White Leaf) of rice, a virus disease transmitted by a planthopper. The
second occurred at Belle Glade in 1970 and spread from there to Canada as
Southern Corn Leaf Blight caused by Helminthosporium maidisf;Nisik.& Miyake.
Very few scientists have the experience of three original epiphytotics in
a career.

See Table 2 for the details of this April-planted test. See Table 4 for a
comparison of the March-planted test with the April-planted test.

August Planting

This test grew under a light attack of the Alternaria leaf and stem black
spot disease. Plants were a little shorter and seedhead diameters were
a little greater than those in the April planting. However, since the
disease was lighter in this trial, yields of achenes were higher. Yields
averaged about 1180-1290 kg/ha. There was no damage due to head moth,
birds, or from lodging. Test weights wer the highest of any 1978 planting.
The sun-nuts produced could have entered industry satisfactorily.







-4-


Table 5 shows at a glance all the pertinent averages of agronomic and
meteorological data important to the trials of confectionery sunflower
for 1978.

Table 6 shows the rainfall distribution per month during the growth of the
test as well as the total and photosynthetically active radiation available
to the plants, and the GDD calculated from a base of 32F for the three trials
with confectionery sunflower and all the oilseed trials.

Table 7 shows the daily rainfall distribution at the Green Acres Farm for 1978.

Table 8 shows the GDD calculated for each day in 1978 at the Green Acres Farm
from a base of 32F.


Time and funds in 1978 did not permit the laboratory and industrial evaluation
of the achenes as edible or as birdseed usage. Attempts will be made in 1979
to obtain these and similar data.

Persons interested in the trials with oilseed hybrids in 1978 are referred to
Agronomy Research Report AG-79-6 of March 1979 by Victor E. Green,Jr. and
William G. Genung.

Gainesville, Florida is located on the earth's surface at 29040' north lati-
tude and 82020' west longitude and is given here in the interest of those
who desire this type information.

In the Jacksonville, Florida Times Union Newspaper of 16 October 1978, Mr.
Thornton Hartley, Farm Editor, writing from Moultrie, Georgia said: "Sunflower
may have a bright future as a crop in Georgia, but the first effort at it
could be termed a failure, says a University of Georgia crop specialist.
Georgia farmers trying sunflower as a new crop this year had much the same
problems as did Florida growers, says Dr. Keith Wesley of the Rural Develop-
ment Center at Tifton. During the summer when Florida growers were discover-
ing that a disease identified as Alternaria leaf spot was reducing the yields
on their sunflower, they were saying that it must be the variety because Georgia
growers with different varieties were not having the problems. But Wesley
said that Georgia growers did have problems with Alternaria, and their yields
were also greatly reduced. The Georgia growers also had problems with culti-
vation practices, fertilizer, and plant spacing, he said. In fact, says
Wesley, asked how he would term the spring crop, 'We would call it a failure"
because most growers lost money on it. A lot of farmers had yields of only
600 to 800 pounds, he said. The Georgia economist figured a yield of about
1,500 pounds would be needed to make any money. In the spring about 25,000
acres were planted. But the acreage this fall is only about ten percent of that,
said Wesley. Besides the disease and other problems,"The drought also took
its toll", said Wesley. Wesley said the position of the Georgia Extension
Service is that "the jury is still out" on sunflower. "It's a new crop
that we don't know how to economically produce."

Dr. Victor E. Green, Jr. applied for six months of faculty development leave
from 1 July to 31 December 1968 and travel funds to support trips and visits
to the sunflower production areas and research stations in Minnesota, North
Dakota, and Texas. The leave was approved for three months only and no funds
were provided for travel and per diem. He was assigned full time to research
on sunflower effective 1 January 1979.








Table 1 Agronomic and Industrial characteristics of 12 confectionery sunflower
Florida. Winter and Spring 1978. March planting. Green Acres Farm.


hybrids grown at Gainesville,


Brand Hybrid Emergence Flowering date, Days to Flo- Stalk Dia- Head Dia- Stalk Yield
Date, first Mid- wer, number meter above meter, Height, Kg
Mar. May rlrst nir- the 12th centi- centi- per
leaf petiole, meters meters Ha,@
centimeters IOH20

12. SIGCO 924 27 -- 15 -- 62 3.15 26.4 155 4010

10. SIGCO 852 27 -- 16 -- 63 3.99 30.7 169 3610
2. Dahlgren D-717 25 10 17 57 64 2.67 21.8 161 3100
I. Dahlgren 0-715 25 9 16 56 63 2.74 24.4 159 3000
8. Sheyenne 883 24 9 13 56 60 2.03 22.9 130 2970
3. Dahlgren 0-818 24 10 15 57 62 2.13 20.6 166 2930
5. Dahlgren D-821 25 10 17 57 64 2.74 24.6 152 2840
9. Sheyenne 923 25 13 20 60 67 2.82 23.1 169 2830
11. SIGCO 923 28 -- 17 -- 63 3.73 29.0 156 2810
7. Sheyenne 853 24 10 15 57 62 2.62 20.6 166 2670
6. Dahlgren D-823 24 9 17 56 64 2.41 21.6 159 2430
4. Dahlgren D-719 24 9 11 56 58 2.16 20.6 165 1950

Test Average 25 10 16 57 63 2.77 23.9 159 2930
Std. Dev., % 1.4 1.3 2.3 1.3 2.2 0.6 3.3 10.7 520
Planting dates: Hybrids 1-9: March 14; Hybrids 10-12: March 16, 1978. Treflan--I 1/Ha. and Furadan-- 22 Kg/Ha on
March 13. Fertilizer: 670 Kg/Ha.4-3.5-13.3.NH4NO3- 112 Kg/Ha April 6 and 16; 224 Kg/Ha on April 26. Thiodan--2.25
Kg/Ha. against insects on April 26. Irrigated: 4/20--50mm; 5/16--50mm.; Harvested June 14. qo days after planting.
No, insect or disease damage; no lodging.
V.E. GREEN, JR.


-5-









Table 2. Agronomic and Industrial characteristics of 12 confectionery
Florida, Winter and Spring 1978. April planting. Green Acres


sunflower hybrids
Farm.


grown at Gainesville,


Brand Hybrid Emergence Flowering date, Days to Flo- Head Dia- Stalk Yield,
Date, First Mid- wer, number meter, height, Kg
April June First Mid- centi- centi- per
meters meters Ha., @
10%H20
00 0o
2. Dahlgren D-717 23 14 n 62 14.5 152 1340
12. SIGCO 924 23 c 14 c 62 12.2 157 1020
5. Dahlgren D-821 24 15 -o 6 3 15.0 145 970
10. SIGCO 852 23 u 13 u 61 13.7 157 950
11. SIGCO 923 24 21 o 69 13.0 152 950
6. Dahlgren D-823 26 O 12 U 60 15.2 152 930
7. Sheyenne 853 24 8 56 13.0 147 880
1. Dahigren D-715 24 15 63 16.5 152 860
3. Dahlgren D-818 24 14 62 13.5 152 840
9. Sheyenne 923 24 M 16 64 14.2 150 820
8. Sheyenne 883 24 8 U 56 12.4 109 730
4. Dahlgren D-719 24 11 59 14.0 152 670

Test Average --- 24 13 61 14.0 147 910
Std. Dev., % 0.8 3.5 3.5 1.2 12.8 170
Planting date: April 13, 1978. Treflan--I 1/ha. and Furodan--22.5 Kg/Ha. on March 13, Fertilizer:672 Kg/Ha 4--3.5-13.3.
NH4NO3--112 Kg/Ha Aprl8& May 10; 224 Kg/Ha. on May 26 Thiodan--2.25 Kg/Ha against insects on April 28. Irrigated
4/20/-51mm; 5/16-51mm; Harvested July 25, 103 days after planting. Heavy infestation of Alternaria leaf and stalk
spot disease. Outer 8-10 rings of achenes filled, others blank. No insect damage; no lodging.
V.E. GREEN, JR.




















Table 3. Agronomic and industrial characteristics of confectionery sunflower hybrids, August planting, Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, Florida 1978.
Stalk Diameter
Emergence Flowering date Days to Flower above 12th Head Stalk Test Heads per Yields @
Brand Hybrid dates First Mid First Mid leaf petiole Diameter Heights Weights 3 M 10% H 0
West Test Aug --------Oct------- -------Number------- -----------------cm--------------- bs/bu kg/h No. Ibs/A kg/ha

Sheyenne 883 23 1 10 45 54 1.52 11.9 112 25.0 32.1 12.0 810 910

Sheyenne 923 26 9 16 53 60 1.98 15.2 140 23.3 30.0 8.5 910 1020

SIGCO 852 26 9 14 53 58 2.46 15.5 140 24.6 31.7 7.5 960 1080

SIGCO 923 27 11 15 55 59 2.54 16.3 137 21.6 27.8 5.0 890 1000

SIGCO 924 23 9 13 53 57 1.91 14.5 147 24.5 31.5 12.3 1690 1890
Test Average 25 8 14 52 5b z.U8 14.7 135 23.8 30.b 9.1 1050 1180

East Test

SIGCO 852 24 10 15 54 59 2.11 15.0 137 24.5 31.5 6.4 1220 1370

SIGCO 923 26 8 14 52 58 2.16 16.3 137 24.0 30.9 6.0 1070 1200

SIGCO 924 23 8 14 52 58 1.91 15.0 137 24.0 31.7 12.6 1150 1290
Test Average 24 9 14 53 58 2.06 15.5 137 24.4 31.4 8.3 115u 1290
Planted August 17: Harvested November 27, 1978.


identical to those in oilseed test, fall planting, footnotes to Table 11, AY Res. Rep. 79-6, Rev.


Cultural practices














Table 4. Comparsion of several characteristics
confection and bird seed hybrids near


recorded in the March and April plantings of sunflower
Gainesville, Florida in 1978. Green Acres Farm.


Brand and Hybrid Seedhead Diameter, Test Weight for Plumpness Number of Heads Yields, Kg
Accession Desig- centimeters Pounds/Bushel Kg/HI per 3 m. of row per ha 10%
Number C nation March April March April March April March April March April

12. SIGCO 924 26.4 12.2 19.1 16.5 24.6 21.2 4.9 5.4 4010 1020
10. SIGCO 852 30.7 13.7 16.1 13.9 20.7 17.9 4.4 5.1 3610 950
2. Dahigren D-717 21.8 14.5 18.0 17.0 23.2 21.9 6.8 6.5 3100 1340
1. Dahlgren D-715 24.4 16.5 16.6 16.5 21.4 24.6 6.3 5.0 3000 860
8. Sheyenne 883 22.9 12.4 19.3 17.5 24.8 22.5 5.7 5.0 2970 730
3. Dahlgren D-818 20.6 13.5 20.0 16.8 25.7 21.6 7.5 5.0 2930 840
5. Dahlgren D-821 24.6 15.0 18.1 16.0 23.3 20.6 5.8 5.0 2840 970
9. Sheyenne 923 23.1 14.2 17.1 13.9 22.0 17.9 6.8 5.7 2830 950
11. SIGCO 923 29.0 13.0 14.5 1 39 18.7 17.9 3.3 5.0 2810 950
7. Sheyenne 853 20.6 13.0 19.3 15.5 24.8 19.9 7.8 5.1 2670 880
6. Dahlgren D-823 21.6 15.2 17.8 16.0 22.9 20.6 7.0 6.8 2430 930
4. Dahlgren D-719 20.6 14P 19.5 16.0 25.1 20.6 4.7 5.4 1950 670


Test Average --- 23.9 14.0 18.0 15.8 23.2 20.3 5.9 5.4 2930 910
Std. Dev., % 3.3 1.2 1.6 1.3. 2.0 1.7 1.4 0.6 20 170


See footnotes to the.two confection tables: Tables No. 1


and 2.


V.E. GREEN, JR.










Table 5. Cultural characteristics and meteorological data for confectionery
sunflower hybrids planted at three dates at the Green Acres Farm near Gaines-
ville, Florida, 1978.

Agronomic or
Meteorological 14 March 13 April 17 August
Characteristics EAST WEST

Emergence date 25 Mar 24 Apr 24 Aug 25 Aug

Mid-flower date 16 May 13 Jun 14 Oct 14 Oct

Days to flower, number 63 61 58 58

Stalk dia. above 12th
petiole, cm. 2.77 ---- 2.'05 208

Seedhead diameter, cm. 23.9 14.0 15.5 14,.7

Stalk height, cm. 159 147 137 135

Yields, @10%H20, kg/ha. 2930 910 1290 1180

Test wt., Lbs/bushel 18.0 15.8 24.4 23.8

Test wt., Kg/hectoliter 23.2 20.3 31.4 30.6

Heads, per 3 m., number 5.9 5.4 8.3 9.1

Rainfall received, mm. 206 328 87 87

Solar Radiation,Total,MJ/m2 2210 2181 1657 1657

Solar Radiation, Photosyn-
thetically active, E/m 4435 4437 3346 3346

Growing Degree Days,GDD,32F 4144 4243 4323 4323

Harvest Date 14 Jun 25 Jul 27 Nov 27 Nov

Irrigation water applied, mm. 100 100 38 38

Damage by Alternaria spot None Heavy 1/ Light Light

Damage by Head moth None None None None

Losses due to lodging None None None None

Losses due to bird damage None None None None


1/ This test, along with the oilseed sunflower test planted on the same day,
had the first epiphytotic of Alternaria leaf and stem black spot disease to
be reported in the United States of America.










Table 6. Meterological conditions accompanying the 1978 sunflower tests in north-central
Florida: Rainfall, Solar radiation, and Growing Degree Days.

Tests and Dates Rainfall, Solar Radiation 1/ Growing Remarks
mm PAR Total Degree
E/m2 MJ/m2 Days;
Base 32F


Greenacres Early Test
February 14-28
March
April
May
June 1-12

Total

Agronomy Farm Test
February 24-28
March
April
May
June 1-14

Total

National Test 8278
March 14-31
April
May
June 1-19

Total
June 20-26

Total

National Test 8378
April 13-30
May
June
July 1-25

Total

Greenacres Late Test
August 17-31
September
October
November
December 1-5


Total


13
30
9
94
64"

210


3
115
16
88
89

311


369
1030
1347
1349
455

4550


150
1030
1347
1349
544

4420


669
1347
1349
775

4140
295

4435


824
1349
1259
1005

4437


602
1044
901
702
97
3346


5
9
94
90

198
8

206


9
94
99
126

328


3
17

63
3
87


184
515
688
668
217

2272


75
515
688
668
260

2206


337
688
668
374

2067
143

.2210


419
668
610
484

2181


299
515
448
347
48

1657


2/
580
870
1082
1328
524

4384


103
925
1135
1364
527

4054


518
1082
1328
887

3815
329

4144


629
1082
1328
1204

4243


630
1378
1127
1001
187

4323


Same as March
Confectionery
Test








Same as April
Confectionery
Test





Same as
August
Confectionery
Test


-10-


Data collected in the Agronomy Department, courtesy of Drs. D.E. HcCloud and G.M. Prine.
_/ PAR-Photosynthetically active radiation; E/m =Einsteins per square meter; MJ/m2-mega-
joules per square meter. 2/ GDD data have been historically reported in Fahrenheit degrees,
and are done so here. PAR was recorded with a Licor Quantum Sensor and integrator. Total
radiation was measured with an Eppley Pyranometer and recorded on a Kipp and lonen integrator.










Table 7. Rainfall amounts and distribution at the Greenacres Farm, Gainesville, FL


MAR
.50


2.28
.02


APR MAY
.03


2.50
.24


JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV
1.62 .03

.25 .48
.68. .03


1.02 .12
.02 .23
.29

.03 .36
.05
.09 .12


BAY/


11 .46 .20

12 .01 .74 .05
13 .25 .07
14 .03 .22 .02

15 .11 1.50 1.48
16 .06 .68 .05
17 .17 .11
18 .11 .26
19 .01 .30
20 Tr.
21 .22 .37
22
23 .06 .20 .32
24 .02 1.15 .45
25 .13 .04 Tr.
26 .10
27 2.16 1.07
28 1.10 .02 .05
29 .28
30 .18 .24 2.50
31 -- .22 1.77
Total 1.18 0.37 3.69 3.9110.69 4.94 0.68 .05 2.50 2.08


Mr. Harry Wood, Agronomy


-11-


MONTH


2
3
4

5
6
7
8
9
10


.03
.25
.04


Feb 3-16= 2.62"; Feb 16-Mar 1= 0.50". Data courtesy
Department, IFAS, UF, Gainesville, FL 32611.






-12-


Growing degree days (GDD) for sunfl
Acres Farm, Gainesville, 1978.


ower from a base of 32F, Green


MONTH
Day/Month MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC


1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1 1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Total


26.5
33.5
22.5
13.5
9.5
26.5
33.5
30.5
22.5
16.0
23.5
26.5
33.5
38.5
40.5
22.5
26.5
36.5
24.0
28.0
31.5
33.0
37.0
40.5
38.0
26.5
18.0
21.0
27.5
30.0
32.5
870.0


33.0
33.0
34.0
35.0
34.0
38.0
40.0
42.0
38.5
41.0
42.0
42.5
38.5
36.0
37.0
44.5
41.0
39.0
35.5
29.5
29.5
34.5
38.5
37.0
36.5
25.5
23.0
31.5
34.0
38.0
1082.0
1082.0


39.0
42.5
43.0
36.5
39.0
43.5
44.0
46.5
46.5
37.0
41.5
42.5
38.5
40.5
41.0
43.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
40.0
43.5
46.5
45.0
44.0
44.0
42.0
40.5
43.0
44.5
45.0
47.0
1327.5


47.0
48.0
44.5
44.5
44.5
48.5
48.5
51.0
48.0
50.0
49.5
45.0
49.0
50.0
44.0
43.5
44.0
42.5
45.0
46.5
47.5
47.0
46.0
49.5
46.5
45.5
50.5
50.0
52.0
51.0
1419.0
14ig.o


GDD
51.0
51.5
52.0
50.5
49.0
47.0
46.0
45.0
48.0
49.0
49.5
47.0
47.0
48.0
41.5
48.0
46.0
46.5
45.5
49.0
50.0
50.5
48.5
48.5
49.0
47.0
46.0
44.5
46.0
48.5
46.0
1481.5


46.0
47.5
46.5
45.5
48.5
47.0
48.0
48.5
48.0
48.5
47.0
48.5
45.5
48.0
51.0
49.5
50.5
48.0
49.5
48.5
47.5
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
46.0
48.0
46.0
48.5
1472.0


47.5
47.5
47.5
47.5
47.0
45.5
45.0
49.0
50.0
44.0
44.5
46.5
46.5
47.5
46.0
46.5
46.5
46.5
43.5
47.0
46.5
47.5
47.0
48.0
46.0
44.5
43.0
41.0
41.5
41.5
1378.0
1378.0o


39.5
40.5
40.5
39.5
39.5
38.0
25.0
34.0
36.5
41.0
40.5
44.5
44.5
31.5
18.5
22.5
30.5
27.0
35.5
33.5
38.0
38.0
33.5
35.5
40.0
44.0
43.5
44.5
43.0
35.0
29.5
1127.0


28.5
26.0
25.0
24.0
28.5
31.0
38.5
33.0
33.5
32.5
27.0
29.5
39.0
39.0
39.5
39.5
37.5
37.0
39.0
31.0
30.5
35.0
33.5
28.5
25.5
34.5
38.0
37.0
44.0
36.0
1001 .0
1001 .0


26.5
34.0
41.5
39.0
20.0
29.0
43.5
42.0
25.5
11 n
12.5
12.5
18.0
15.0
27.5
33.0
17.5
20.0
31.0
37.0
27.5
26.5
27.5
25.0
19.0
22.0
10.5
17.5
21.5
33.5
24.5
791.0


See footnotes to Table 7


Since GDD figures have historically been shown in


Fahrenheit units, they are done so here also


V.E. GREEN, JR.


Table 8


I


I


I


I


I


I


I


I


I


I




























Figure] Immature sunflower head from which the flowers have been rubbed to show
empty achenes where flowers were not pollinated due to an attack by the
black spot disease fungus, Alternaria helianthi, Gainesville, FL,32611.
This damage can also be caused by certain genetic and environmental factors.


Figure 2. Three mature sunflower heads showing the persistent flower characteristic
in the center of the heads caused by Alternaria helianthi black spot
disease at Gainesville, FL,32611. This damage can also be caused by cer-
tain genetic and environmental factors.









-15-


1979 CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA









JOHN GERARDE HERBALL, LONDON, 1633






-17-


CONFECTIONERY (NONOILSEED) SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA-- 1979 1/

Victor E. Green, Jr. 2/


This type of sunflower is variously referred to as confection, confectionery,
birdseed, sunnut, nonoilseed, edible, striped, among others. When grown as
widely separated plants, the leaves and seedheads grow extremely large on
beautiful composite flowerheads. The mature seeds acheness) have striped
seedcoats, usually alternate black and white stripes. Individual seeds are
very large and can be hulled easily when compared to the small, black, oilseed
types that have tightly fitting hulls. They
make delicious nuts that are found for sale "in-shell", sometimes salted and
roasted, or as "sun-nuts" usually salted and roasted.

Research on the confection hybrids has been conducted at Gainesville only during
1978 and 1979 crop years in conjunction with the oilseed tests with sunflower.
To this date, there are only a few hybrids that are available for testing and
only 15 have been under test thus far. The older, sometimes open-pollinated,
varieties such as Mennonite, Sundak, Mingren, Mammoth Russian, Gray Stripe,
Black Stripe, and the like, were never tested together under Florida conditions.

Generally, the testing has been of a variety comparison with collection of data
such as yields, bushel weights, plant heights, head diameters, etc.

1/ This research was conducted cooperatively by the Agronomy Department, Insti-
tute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611
and the following seed companies: Dahlgren and Company, Crookston, MN 56716, a
division of Beatrice Foods; Kraig Seed and Supply, Inc. (Sheyenne Seed), Sheldon,
ND 58068; and Sigco Sun Products, Breckenridge, MN 56520.

2/ Professor (Agronomist), Agronomy Department, Agricultural Experiment Station,
IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville, 32611.

Grateful acknowledgement is made of a grant-in-aid to carry on part of this re-
search from the National Cottonseed Products Association, Memphis, TN; the Buckeye
Cotton Oil Division of the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA; and the
Farmers and Ginners Cotton Oil Company, Birmingham, AL. Mr. Jasper Jernigan and
Mr. P.S. Smithwick were especially helpful in obtaining this grant of funds.

Fiscal assistance in kind was also provided by the Elanco Corporation that fur-
nished the Treflan and the FMC Corporation that furnished the Furadan used in
the tests. Columbia Nitrogen Company and the International Minerals and Chemicals
Corporation gave a very generous donation of fertilizer materials, mixed fertil-
izers, and ammonium nitrate that were used in these tests.

Assistance in the field and in the laboratory was provided by Mr. Billy Crawford
and Mr. Donald Eddington. This assistance is gratefully acknowledged.

Special thanks are due to Dr. James R. Lofgren, Dr. Gary Fick, and to Sandy Kraig
(Sheyenne) for furnishing seed and advice for these tests.






-18-


CONFECTIONERY TESTS


Winter and Spring, 1979

Only six hybrids were made available by three companies for testing in 1979.
These were planted in randomized complete block tests in close proximity and
on the same dates as the oilseed tests. Cultural details and results are found
in Table 1 (Feb 2), Table2 (Feb 28), and Table 3 (Apr 2). Table4 is a summary
table of the important agronomic characteristics of the entries. The confectionery
entries yielded less than the oilseeds in the early February planting and about
equal to the oilseeds in the two later plantings. However, the price per pound
of the confectionery seeds is much greater since these large, striped seed are
used in the birdseed trade and in making shelled, salted nuts for direct human
consumption. Although the stalk heights were greater in the middle planting,
the head diameters were largest in the earlier and later tests. Weights per
unit volume, as well as 200-seed weights, were higher for the April 2 planting.


To ascertain whether there was any relation between emergence dates and flower-
ing dates as regards yields, correlation coefficients were calculated for the
1978 tests planted on March 14, April 13, and August 17 as well as for the three
confection tests in 1979 planted on Feb. 2 and 28, and April 2. There seemed
to be no relation between elapsed days from emergence and flowering and yields.
Combining the data for the three 1979 plantings also resulted in an insignif-
icant correlation. The data obtained were as follows:


Planting "r" values Regression Statement
dates and sig. equations

1978
Mar. 14 -0.14ns 53.40-0.006X Days to flowering did not affect yields

Apr. 13 +0.37ns 42.93+0.008X -do-

Aug. 17 +0.56ns 46.70+0.002X -do-

1979
Feb. 2 +0.25ns 57.83+0.005X -do-

Feb. 28 -0.47ns 69.37-0.005X -do-

Apr. 2 +0.43ns 54.07+0.002X -do-

Combined -0.38ns 71.82-0.005X -do-

Aug. 16 +0.15ns 694.07+7.11X -do-

In the years to come, an attempt will be made to obtain larger numbers of entries
in the confectionery tests. A surprisingly small number of confectionery hyb-
rids are presently available to farmers and many of the older open-pollinated
varieties are no longer available for purchase by farmers.






-19-


Additional entries have been requested for 1980 from Dr. Jerry Miller, Research
Geneticist, USDA-SEA-NC, the scientist in charge of the National Confectionery
Sunflower Breeding Program at Fargo, ND.

Samples from the 1979 confectionery tests have been sent to Dr. James R. Lofgren,
Agronomist, Dahlgren and Company, Crookston, MN for quality determinations of
the sun-nuts produced in the Florida program to ascertain whether locally produced
are acceptable in the national market as whole or salted and roasted shelled nuts 3/.
There continues to be increasing interest manifest by local farmers and home gar-
deners in growing these large, striped hybrids for sale for human and animal
consumption in the various forms, such as whole, shelled, salted or unsalted, etc.
and for ornamentals because of the quick-growing plants with beautiful, large
flowering heads.

Table5 shows the yields of the confection hybrids grown in 1978 and 1979. To
date only 15 hybrids have been made available for testing in north-central Florida.
In 1978, 12 cultivars yields varied from 1950 to 4010, averaging 2930 kg/ha from
a March 14 planting. The April 13 planting suffered from a severe attack by the
leaf and stem fungus disease caused by Alternaria helianthi, yielding an average
of only 910 kg/ha. The off-season August 17 planting yielded 910 to 1890 kg/ha,
averaging 1180 to 1290 kg/ha. The best 1979 yields were obtained from the Feb-
ruary 28 planting of from 1970 to 2620 with an average of 2310 kg/ha.

Other recapitulation tables for 1978 and 1979 performance of the confectionery
hybrids as follows are: Table 6 : Days required from emergence of the plants to
mid-flowering; Table 7 ; Heights of the plants; Table 8 : Diameters of the seed-
heads; Table 9, Weight per unit mass (weight per bushel); and Table 10, weights
of 200 seed in grams.

None of the confectionery hybrid entries in the extensive disease and insect test
was found to be resistant to the stem and leaf disease caused by the fungus Alter-
naria helianthi (Hansf) Tubaki & Nishihara (Helminthosporium helianthi Hansf.) or
to the sunflower head moth Homoeosoma electellum Hulst.

A list of publications prepared by workers in Florida during 1979 occurs on page
5 of this revised report on confectionery sunflower testing.

The Dahlgren Compamy performed some quality measurements for the several tests,



3/ Dr. Lofgren has listed the ideal characteristics of a sunflower cultivar for
use as a confection as follows: 1) a black with white striped seed color, 2) a
distribution of seed sizes to give the processor the highest return per pound
processed, 3) a low hullability score with a high nut-eat recovery (high shelling
percentage), 4) a high weight of nutmeats with high volume weight, and 5) a low or
zero dark count with a low color score and uniform coloring as the result of roast-
ing. To these he might have added the necessity of a low oil content for those
persons who would like to taste the nuts with a minimum of calories for intake.







-20-


Fall, 1979

A six-entry confection test was planted on 16 August 1979. In addition to obtain-
ing agronomic data, data on disease incidence and severity was recorded. Table 11
shows the disease ratings for Alternaria after flowering over five dates, the
number of active leaves on 31 October, and the dates of physiological maturity.

Table 12 shows the agronomic and meteorological data gathered from this fall test.
Yields from this fall test were similar to those in the fall of 1978 even though
the present test was sprayed to prevent damage from the insects and the stem and
leaf disease. In addition, it was well fertilized and side-dressed with nitrogen.
August plantings seem to be able to yield only about half that expected from
similar plantings made in February for reasons as yet unknown to this agronomist.
Weights of 200 seed were the lightest of any of the 1979 tests while seedhead
diameters the smallest. See Table 13.

Table 14 is a recapitulation table of the meteorological and cultural character-
istics of all the tests grown in 1979.



INDUSTRIAL MEASUREMENTS

A scientific paper has been written by this author along with Dr. James A. Lofgren,
Dahlgren Seeds, Crookston., MN and it has been submitted in a popular form to the
Sunflower Magazine, Sunflower Association of America, Fargo, ND. A more scientific
version of the paper has been submitted to the Sunflower Newsletter, International
Association, Zevenaar, Netherlands for publication.

A recapitulation table showing the average results of four tests of six confectionery
sunflower hybrids grown at Gainesville, FL on four planting dates from 2 Feb.-16 Aug.
appears herein as Table 15. The cooperation of the laboratory of Dahlgren Seeds and
that of Dr. Lofgren is gratefully acknowledged.


*vTe







-21-

For additional reading on non-oilseed ( stripes, birdseed, or confectionery)

sunflower, readers are referred to the following articles:

THE SUNFLOWER, Official Publication of the Sunflower Association of America

Volume 1, Number 4. December 1975. David W. Cobia. Where'd They Go? pp. 14,
16.

Volume 3, Number 3. March 1977. Lou Smerling. Confectionary Sunflower Oil
Markets in the United States. pp. 10, 14.

Volume 5, Number 3. February 1979. Ralph Taylor. A Look at the Nonoil Scene.
pp. 14, 26-27.

Volume 5, Number 3. March 1979. Don Lilleboe. Sunflower Logs: A Hot Product
Made from Confectionery Hulls. pp. 12-13.

Volume 5, Number 9. December 1979. Mary Wallace Sandvik. Will We See Sunflower
Flour in Bread Products? pp. 10, 34.

Volume 6, Number 1. January 1980. Mary Wallace Sandvik. Promoting Sunflower
Keeps Her on the Move: Judi Adams, North Dakota Sunflower Council. pp. 16-17.

Volume 6, Number 2. February 1980. Don Lilleboe. Nonoils Have Stable Track
Record. pp. 18-19.

Monthly Article and Menus. Savory Sunflower Sensations. Edna Holm, NDSU. Fargo.


PROCEEDINGS--SUNFLOWER FORUM. Sponsored by: Sunflower Association of America.

First--January 8, 1976. James R. Lofgren. Seed Quality of Confectionery Sun-
flowers (Helianthus annuus). pp. 2-3.

Second--January 12-13, 1977. William E. Dinusson. Sunflower By-Products as
Feeds. pp. 1-2.

Third--January 23, 1979. Ralph Taylor. Market Outlook for Birdfeed and
Confection Sunflower. pp. 18.

E. W. Lusas, K. C. Rhee, and P. J. Wan. Sunflower
Utilization in Human Foods. pp. 20-22.

BOOKS

Sunflower Science and Technology, Agronomy Monograph Series No. 19. Chapter 14:
Sunflower for Confectionery Food, Birdfood and Petfood, pp. 441-456, by James
R. Lofgren. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI. 1978.

The Sunflower. Charles B. Heiser, Jr. 198 pp. University of Oklahoma Press,
Norman. 1976.

SunflowerProduction and Marketing. David W. Cobia and David E. Zirmmer. North
Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science. Extension Bul. 25
(Revised), Third Printing, i-iii, 73 pp. February 1979.






-22-


Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Gainesville, FL 32611. Agronomy
Research Reports, Series AG-

AG 79-6. 1978 Sunflower Tests. Victor E. Green, Jr. and William G. Genung.
Revised March 1979. 42 pp. Contains both oilseed and non-oilseed data.

AG 80-1. Confectionery (Nonoilseed) Sunflower Research in Florida--1979.
Victor E. Green, Jr. September 1979. Revised December 1979. 20 pp.








The USDA forecast of 1980 confectionery sunflower by state as of January was:

North Dakota--170,000; Minnesota--60,000; South Dakota--3,000; and Texas--1,000

acres, totalling 234,000 for the USA.


S~ & &


t c
ik


a r ~* J C g ~ ~ s ~ o~ ~ r ~ ~





Table 1. Some agronomic characteristics of confection sunflower cultivars planted at the Green Acres Farm,
Gainesville, Florida in the winter of 1979, February 2.


Date of Stalk Flower- Head Heads per Weight Yields" Yields
Brand Hybrid Emer- Hei- ing Date Dia- 10 feet per bu. per per
gence ghts meter of row Acre Hectare

February In. April In. No. lbs. Ibs. kgs.
C-7. Sheyenne 853 17 59 5/5 7.4 11.5 21.3 1500 1680


C-9. Sheyenne 923 19 71 24 7.4 11.8 16.8 1140 1280


C-12. Sigco Sun 924 17 64 25 7.0 12.5 20.0 1650 1850


C-13. Dahlgren D-820 17 56 21 6.7 15.0 21.5 1460 1640


C-14. Dahlgren D-933 17 63 26 7.6 11.0 18.0 1640 1840


C-15. Dahlgren D-716 16 70 22 6.8 13.3 19.5 1580 1800

Test Average 17 64 25.5 7.2 12.5 19.5 1500 1680
Standard Deviation 0.98 5.91 4.63 1.46 1.46 1.85 189 211
* Yields corrected to 10% moisture and rounded to the nearest 10 pounds or 10 kilograms.
Planted 2/02/79; Harvested 5/21/79. 10' row segments harvested. 4 replications. Average population = 18,150
plants per acre. Rows north and south. No irrigation water applied. Rainfall: Planting to emergence = 1.27";
Emergence to flowering = 8.15"; Flowering to maturity = 2.97; total = 12.39". Monthly Average Temperatures:
Minimum/Maximum: February: 38.5/66.8; March: 43.6/77.8; April: 53.3/82.4; May: 57.3/87.6.
Applied 600 pounds per acre of 4-8-16 fertilizer with 60 Ibs/ton ZnS04 and 20 Ibs/ton Borax on January 26.
Applied Treflan, 1 quart/Acre and Furadan, 25 Ibs/Acre of 10% a.i. on January 29.
Sidedressed NH4NO3 200 Ibs/Acre on March 28; 125 lbs/Acre on April 4.


One shallow cultivation with sweeps at layby almost completely controlled weeds.


V.E. GREEN, JR.


No apparent insect or disease damage. No bird damage. No lodging occurred this year.

Growing Degree Days (32F-80F): Emergence to Flowering = 1933; Flowering to Harvest = 948.5; Total = 2881.5.
Grateful acknowledgement is made of a grant-in-aid of funds to carry on this research from the National CoLtonseed Products
Association, Memphis, TN, the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA, and the Farmers and Ginners Cotton Oil Company,
Birmingham, AL.







Table 2. Some agronomic characteristics of confection sunflower cultivars planted at the Green Acres Farm,


Gainesville, Florida


in the winter of 1979,


February 28.


- r u I_ if1


Brand


Hybrid


Date
of
Emer-
qence


Stalk
Hei-
ghts


Flo-
wer-
ing
Date


Head
Dia-
meter


Heads per
10 feet
of Row


Weight
per
bushel


Yields*
per
Acre


Yields*
per
Hectare


March In. May In. Ibs. Ibs. kgs.
C-7. Sheyenne 853 12 72 6 7.2 15.3 25.0 2150 2410

C-9. Sheyenne 923 11 74 13 6.7 14.5 19.3 1810 2030

C-12. Sigco Sun 924 11 67 7 7.0 15.5 23.0 2340 2620


C-13. Dahlgren D-820 11 75 7 6.5 15.5 23.5 2070 2320

C-14. Dahlgren D-933 12 72 8 7.0 13.0 19.3 1760 1970


C-5.____ ____D-716 12 69 9 7.1___ __17 ____21__2230 2500

Test Average 11.5 72 8 6.9 15.2 21.9 2060 2310
Standard Deviatio 0.55 3.02 2.50 0.26 1.41 2.33 272 305
Yields corrected to 10% moisture and rounded to the nearest 10 pounds or 10 kilograms.

Planted February 28, 1979; Harvested June 4, 1979. 10' row segments harvested. 4 replications.
Average population = 18,150 plants per acre. No irrigation water applied. Rainfall: Planting to emergence =
0.94"; Emergence to flowering = 8.16"; Flowering to maturity = 3.24"; Total = 12.34". Monthly Average
Temperatures: Minimum/Maximum: February: 38.5/66.8; March: 43.6/77.8; April: 53.3/82.4; May: 57.3/87.6.
Applied 600 pounds per acre of 4-8-16 fertilizer with 60 Ibs/ton ZnS04 and 20 lbs/ton Borax on February 22.
Applied Treflan, 1 quart/acre and Furadan, 25 lbs/acre of 10% a.i. on February 22 and 27, resp.
Chiselled (subsoiled) over the 3-foot rows on February 27. Dragged level. Sidedressed with NH4N03 at
250 lbs/acre on April 4 and with 125 lbs/acre on April 18. Covered with sweep cultivation both dates.
Almost complete weed control.No lodging occurred this year.
V.E. GREEN, JR.

No apparent bird, insect, or disease damage. Growing Degree Days(32F-80F): Emergence to flowering =
1803.5; F lowering to harvest 925.0; Total 2728.5.

Grateful acknowledgement is made of a grant-in-aid of funds to carry on this research from the National CotLon-
seed Products Association, Memphis, TN, the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA, and the Farmers and
Ginnerso Colton Oil Company, Birmingham, AL.






Table 3.


Some agronomic characteristics of confection sunflower cultivars planted at the Agronomy Farm, campus;
Gainesville, Florida in the spring of 1979. Test planted: April 2.


FL Date Stalk Flo- Head Physio- Heads Weight 200 Yields @ 10% H20*
Acc. Brand Hybrid of Hei- wer- Dia- logical per per Seed
No. Emer- ghts ing meter Maturity, 25' Bushel Weight Lbs/seed Kg/Ha
gence Date Days row
April In. June In. Lbs. Gms.
C-7. Sheyenne 853 12 48 9 6.4 98 21 24.8 21.50 1380 1550

C-9. Sheyenne 923 12 59 12 7.4 98 18 23.0 21.94 1710 1920

C-12. Sigco Sun 924 12 58 9 6.4 97 23 23.8 22.14 1660 1860

C-13. Dahlgren D-820 12 53 9 7.0 98 13 24.5 23.31 1300 1460

C-14. Dahlgren D-933 12 52 8 8.2 98 12 23.5 27.09 1400 1570

C-15. Dahlgren D-716 12 53 9 7.4 99 17 23.0 23.80 1840 2060 I
Test Average 12 5.------9. 7.] .3 23. 23.30 1550 170 '
Standard Deviation 0 4.07 1.37 0.69 0.63 4.32 0.76 2.05 217 243
* Yields corrected to 10% moisture and rounded to the nearest 10 pounds or 10 kilograms.
Planted April 2; Harvested July 13, 1979. 25 foot row segments harvested. 4 replications. Average population=
7,000-13,000 plants per acre. Rows east and west. No irrigation water applied. Rainfall: Planting to emergence:
4.38"; Emergence to flowering: 7.97"; Flowering to maturity: 4.62"; Total during growing season: 16.97".
Monthly average temperatures(Minimum/Maximum): April: 59.2/82.7; May: 62.5/86.0; June: 68.1/90.7; July 1-13
73.2/93.5.
Applied 600 lbs/acre of 4-8-16 fertilizer with 60 pounds/ton of ZnS04 per ton and 20 pounds/ton of Borax per acre.
Applied Treflan, 1 quart per acre and Furadan, 25 pounds of 10% a.i. just prior to planting(furnished by parent co).
Sidedressed NH4N03: On May 16 with 300 Ibs/acre.
One shallow cultivation just prior to layby almost completely controlled weeds.
Considerable damage by the sunflower moth (Homoeosoma electellum Hulst), Alternaria and minor leaf and stem spots,
and by birds grackless, redwings, doves, and sparrows) from flowering to maturity. No lodging occurred this year.
Growing Degree Days (32-80F): Planting to emergence: 410.0; Emergence to flowering: 2266.5; Flowering to maturity:
1288.5; Total--Emergence to Maturity: 3555.

Grateful acknowledgement is made of a grant in aid from the National Cottonseed Products Association, Memphis, TN,
the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA, and the Farmers and Ginners Cotton Oil Company, Birmingham, AL for
funds to carry on this research.
V.E. KREhN, JK.








Table 4.Some comparisons in performance of six confectionery (birdseed) sunflower hybrids when planted on three dates in the winter and spring near
Gainesville, Florida, 1979.


Acc- Brand or Hybrid Average
ess- Company Desig- Stalk Hei hts, inches Head diameters, in. Weights per bu, lbs. 200-seed wt.,grams Yields @ 10% H20, Ibs/A. yield
ion Desig- nation Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 for 3
Nos. nation__ dates

C-15 Dahlgren D-716 70 69 53 6.8 7.1 7.4 19.5 21.3 23.0 20.2 19.9 23.8 1580 2230 1840 1880

C-12 Sigco Sun Prod. 924 64 67 58 7.0 7.0 6.4 20.0 23.0 23.8 21.8 20.41 22.1 1650 2340 1660 1880

C-7 Sheyenne(Kraig) 853 59 72 48 7.4 7.2 6.4 21.3 25.0 24.8 21.8 19.8 21.5 1500 2150 1380 1680

C-13 Dahlgren 0-820 56 75 53 6.7 6.5 7.0 21.5 23.5 24.5 21.1 19.9 23.3 1460 2070 1300 1610

C-14 Dahlgren D-933 63 72 52 7.6 7.0 8.2 18.0 19.3 23.5 20.2 18.3 27.1 1640 1760 1400 1600

C-9 Sheyenne(Kraig) 923 71 74 59 7.4 6.7 7.4 16.8 19.3 23.0 20.2 19.6 21.9 1140 1810 1710 1550


Test Average 64 72 54 7.2 6.9 7.1 19.5 21.9 23.8 20.9 19.7 23.3 1500 2060 1550 1700
Standard Deviation 5.9 3.0 4.1 0.4 0.3 0.7 1.9 2.3 0.8 0.8 0.7 2.1 190 230 220


Each of the three tests received 600 pounds per acre of a 4-8-16 fertilizer containing 60 Ibs/ton ZnSO4 plus
20 Ibs/ton Borax. Planted on 36-inch rows. Four replications. Soil treated with one quart of Elanco Treflan
and 25 Ibs/acre of FMC 10% a.i. Furadan. No irrigation water added this year. No lodging observed in 1979.

Grateful acknowledgement is made of a grant-in-aid of funds to carry on this research from the National Cottonseed
Products Association, Memphis, TN, the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA, and the Farmers and Ginners
Cotton Oil Company, Birmingham, AL.

The Treflan for these tests was furnished by ELANCO. The Furadan was furnished by FMC Corporation.

See footnotes to Table 1, 2, and 3.


V. E. GREEN, JR.





Table 5. Confection and Birdseed Sunflower Hybrid Seed Yields 1978-1979. Gainesville, FL.


Acc. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1973 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979
No. ---------------------------------------------- Date of Planting ------------------------------------------------
No. Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(W) Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug 16
-------------------------------------------------- Kg/a -----------------------------------------------------
C-1 Dahlgren D-715 3000 860 --- --- -- --- -- ---

C-2 Dahlgren D-717 3100 1340 -- ---- ---- -- --

C-3 Dahlgren 0-818 2930 840 -- ----- -- -- ---
C-4 Dahlgren D-719 1950 670 -- -- -- -- --- ---

C-5 Dahlgren D-821 2840 970 -- -- --- --

C-6 Dahlgren D-823 2430 930 --- ---- -- -- --

C-7 Sheyenne 853 2670 880 --- ---- 1630 2410 1550 1050

C-8 Sheyenne 883 2970 730 910 ---- --- -- -- --

C-9 Sheyenne 923 2830 950 1020 ---- 1280 2030 1920 1280

C-10 Sigco 852 3610 950 1080 1370 -- -- -- --

C-11 Sigco 923 2810 950 1000 1200 --- -- --

C-12 Sigco 924 4010 1020 1890 1290 1850 2620 1860 1150

C-13 Dahlgren D-820 --- --- --- --- 1640 2320 1460 1120

C-14 Dahlgren 0-933 --- ---- -- -- 1840 1970 1570 1120

C-15 Dahlgren D-716 ---- -- -- --- 1800 2500 2060 1120

TEST AVERAGE 2930 910 1180 1290 1680 2310 1740 1140

Accessions temporarily dropped from commercial production: C-7 through C-ll.


V.E. GREEN, JR.







Tsble 6 Confection and Birdsped


DAYS: EMERGENCE TO FLOWER
Sunflower IlybridCharacteristics, Gainesville, Florida, 1978-1979.


Hybrid


1978
Mar 14
Mar 14


1978
Apr 13
Apr 13


1973
-----------Aug 17()-----
Aug 17(W1)


1978 I 1979
----- Date of Planting ------
Aug 17(E) Feb 2


1979
Feb 28
Feb 28


1979
Apr 2
Apr 2


I I I. ___________ L~ L I -....-.---.-'.-.-- -4


C-il SIgco

C-12 Slgco

C-13 Dahlgren

C-14 Dahlgren

C-15 Dahlgren


TEST AVERAGE


t I


0-715

0-717

D-818

0-719

D-821

0-823

853

883

923

852


----------

52

53

52

48

53

54

52

50

56

50


923 50

924 49

0-820 ---

0-933 --

0-716


52


C-1

c-2

C-3



C-5

c-6

r-7

c-8

C-9

C-10


Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Slgco


Davs


1


52

52

51

48

52

47

45

45

53

51

58

52







51


--------------












55



63


-------------












58



61


---------------














48

51

49

49

51







50


V.E. GREEN, JR.


-28-


A c.
No.


Brand


52

49

52







'51


76



64


1979

Aug 16


I


r


----------- -












44



50





51
50

40

40


46


67

63

.68

65


67


57 58

57 58

57 57

58 58


58 58


[-I

C-2





Table 7 Confection nnd.Birdseed


PLANT HEIGHTS
Sunflower IlybrldCharacteris tcs, Gainesvill, Florida, 1978-1979.


Acc. Brand
No.



C-I Dahlgren

C-2 Dahlgren

C-3 Dahlgren

C-4 Dahlgren

C-5 Dahlgren

C-6 Oahlgren

C-7 Sheyenne

C-8 Sheyenne

C-9 Shcyenne

C-10 Slgco

C-ll Slgco

C-12 Slgco

C-13 Dahlgren

C-14 Dahlgren

C-IS Dahlgren


TEST AVERAGE


I I Ir


Hybrid


0-715

0-717

0-818

0-719

0-821

0-823

853

883

923

852

923

924

0-820

0-933

0-716


1978

Har 14


1978

Apr 13


1973

Aug 17(W) .


I 1 1971
--.--- a-e of Plantin ---
Auc 17(E) Feb 2


1979
Fch 28
Feb 28


.' 79 1979
Apr 2 Aug 16
Apr 2 Aug 16


SI I I ______________ It-- -1. 1 --


-.----------
159

161

166

165

152

159

166

130

169

169

156

155






-159
159


V.E. GREEN, JR.


-29-


1-52

152

152

152

145

152

147

109

150

157

152

157







147


----------------













112

140
140

137
147







135
135-


--- Centimeters






---- 150





150


-- 180

137

137
137 163
142

-- 160

--- 178


137 162


--------------












183


188




170

191
183

175


182


---- ---------












122


150




147

135
132

135


137


---- ---- - -












135


147





152

135
117

119


134






HEAD DIAMETERS
Table8 Confection and Birdseed Surnflower lybrld Characteristics, Gainesville, Florida, 1978-1979.

,, tF_


1973

Aug 17(1)


----------

24.4

21.8

20.6

20.6

24.6

21.6

20.6

22.9

23.1

30.7

29.0

26.4


C-1



C-3

C-4

C-5

C-6

r-7

c-8

C-9

c-o10

c-11

C-12

C-13

c-n 1

C-15


TEST


1978 I 1979
------ Date of Planting ------
Aug 17(E) Feb 2


---------------

16.5

14.5

13.5

14.0

15.0

15.2

13.0

12.4

14.2

13.7

13.0

12.2


1 5.4


18.2


1979

Feb 28


----------------














11.9

15.2

15.5

16.3

14.5


V.E. GREEN, JR.


-30-


SII I I I --- --


- -


-- --


S'?179
S----- 16
Aug 16


1978

Mar 14


1978

Apr 13


Brand


Hybrid


Apr 2


Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Oihlgren

Oahlgren

Oahlgren

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

SIgco

Sigco

SIgco

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren


D-715

D-717

D-818

0-719

o-821

D-823

853

883

923

852

923

924

0-820

D-933

D-716


14.7


Centimeters












18.8



18.8

15.0 -

16.3 -

15.0 17.8
17.0

19.3

17.3
--------7-------


-------------











18.3



17.0





17.8
16.5

17.8

18.0


- -T-






16.3



18.8




16.3

17.8

20.8

18.8


18. 1


10.9



14.0





12.2

11.9

13.2

12.2


12.4


23.9


14.0


17.6


AVERAGE






T.ble 9 Confection and B!rdsred


WEIGHTS PER BUSHEL
Snflower Ilybrid Characteristlics, Cainesville, Florida, 19/8-1979.


1978 197
------ Date of Planting ------
Aug 17(E) I Feb 2


I I I i I I _______________________.L-------


I A


1979
- Fb 28
Feb 28


C-1

C-2

c-3

C-4

c-5

C-6

r-7

c-B

C-9

C-10

C-ll

C-12
r t q


I I -- - _..


_ 18. 15.8 23.8 -24.4 19.5 21-.9
18.0 15.8 23.8 '24.4 19.5 21.9


9/9 1979
Apr 2 Aug 16
Apr 2 Aug 16


Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahigren

Dahlgren

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Sigco

Sigco

Slgco

Dahigren

Dahlgren


D-715

D-717

D-818

0-719

0-821

0-823

853

883

923

852

923

924

0-820

D-933

0-716


16.6

18.0

20.0

19.5
18.1

17.8

19.3

19.3

17.1

16.1

14.5

19.1


V.E. GREEN, JR.


-31-


Brand


Hybrid


I


1978

Mar 14


19789
Apr 13
Apr 13


1973
Aug 17(1)-
Aug 1701)


[


C- '11


I


16.5

17.0

16.8

16.0

16.0

16.0

15.5

17.5

13.9

13.9

13.9

16.5


-- ----- - -











25.0

23.3

24.6

21.6

24.5


C-15 Dahlgren


TEST AVERAGE


Pounds/Bushel












21.3



16.8

24.5

24.0

24.6 20.0
21.5

--- 1-8.0

19.5


.--.--------------












25.0



19.3





23.0

23.5

19.3

21.3


--------7' ---


24.8



23.0





23.8

24.5

23.5


20.4


21.3


-- ----------- -












22.2



21.0





22.3

22.3

19.6


S23.0


23.8


-I)







Tr 10. Confection nnd Birdsred


200-SEED WEIGHTS
Sunflower Ilybr'. CharacterisLlcs, Gainesville, Florida, 1978-1979.


-, r_ 1 I--


Brand


S----I- 1


Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlgren

Dahlqren

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Sheyenne

Slgco

Sigco

Slgco

Dahlgren

Dshlgren


C-3

C-4

C-5

c-6

C-7

c-8

C-9

c-IO

C-11

c-12



C- 14

C-15


TEST


Hybrid


D-715

D-717

D-818

D-719

D-821

D-823

853

883

923

852

923

924

D-820

D-933

0-716


1970
Mar 14-
Mar 14


----


1978
Apr 13
Apr 13


L ----


1973
Aug 17()---

--------------


Ii


1978 I 1979
----- Date of Planting -----
Aug 17(E) Feb 2

-. Grams


----------


V.E. GREEN, JR.


-32-


Dahlgren


AVERAGE


1919
Feb 28
Feb 28


c---


1979

Apr 2


21.8



20.2





21 .8

21 1

20-.2

20.2

20.9
20.9


1979
Aug 16
Aug 16


13.42


14.02





13.76

15.82

16.07

13.81

14.48
14.48


19.8



19.6





20.4

19.9

18.3

19.9

19.7
19.7


..I-


I





I I


21.5



21.9





22.1

23.3

27.1

23.8

23.3
23 .3







-33-


Table 11.


Disease ratings after flowering over 5 dates and the number of
active leaves remaining on the plants of 6 commercial sunflower
confection hybrids, Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL 1979.


Index of Disease Number of Date of
on the indicated Active Physio-
Acc. Date Leaves logical
Designation Brand Hybrid 10/1 10/8 10/15 10/22 10/29 Oct. 31 Maturity,
Nov.

C-7 Sheyenne 853 0.8 2.6 4.4 4.7 4.9 8.7 10


Sheyenne 923 0.7 2.3


Sigco


924 1.1 2.8


Dahlgren D-820 0.3 2.3

Dahlgren D-933 0.3 2.2


3.9 3.9 4.3

3.7 4.5 4.6

4.0 4.5 4.5

4.4 4.8 4.8


C-15 Dahlgren D-716 0.6 2.5 4.8 4.8 4.8 7.7 8

Mean 0.6 2.5 4.2 4.5 4.7 9.9 10


Test planted 16 August 1979.
Disease index for Alternaria helianthi 0.0
Active leaves are those still remaining on




5.0

.4.2
4.0

X MID-FLOWER DATE,
WL OCTOBER 1014.6
a 3.0-
z
*2.5 0.2

c) 2.0 -
w
1)
a 1.0-


= disease free to 5.0 = epiphytotic
plants and capable of photosynthesis.


4.7 + 0.2
4.5 +0.3 0

0.4






R= -2.05 + 3.43 D 0.415 D0


C-12

C-13

C-14


13.5

10.8

10.7

8.1


0 I 8 15 22 29
OCTOBER








Table 12. Some agronomic characteristics of a fall-planted test with 6 commercial sunflower confection hybrids
at the Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL, 1979.


Acc- Date Dates of: Growing Deg. Days Plant Head Yields per unit area
ess- of Mid- Phy- Emerg. Mid-flo- Hei- Dia-
ion Brand Hybrid Emer- Flo- sio- to wer to ght meter Acre Hectare
Des- Desig- gence, wer, log. Mid- Physio.
igna- nation AUG. OCT Mat., flo- Matur-
t ion NOV wer ity

GDD GDD In. In. Lbs. Kg.


C-7 Sheyenne 853

C-9 Sheyenne 923


C-12 Sigco


C-13 Dahlgren D-820

C-14 Ddhlgren D-933

C-15 Dahlgren D-716


Test Average


25 8 10

27 16 12

23 13 11

25 14 11

27 6 9

26 5 8


2b 10 10


1790

1968

2032

1981

1647

1659


1846


1084


959

929

111l

I I I I


1014


53 4.3

58 5.5

60 4.8

53 4.7

46 5.2

47 4.8


53 4-.9


Test planted 16 August 1979. Lodyiny, ',, at harvest: C-7=1.5; C-9=3.23; C-12=3. ; C-13=1.3; C-14=0.1; and C-15=2.0',.
Furadan, FMC, N-methyl carbamate, at 25 Ibs/A. 10% a.i. granules and Treflan, Elanco, tri luralin, one quart/A. liquid
applied and both chemicals disked in on 7 August. Fertilized with 600 Ibs/A. 4-8-16 containing bO Ibs/ton ZnSO4 and
20 Ibs/lon borax disked in on 7 August. Subsoiled with a Brown and Harden Superseeder Subsoiler to a depth of 24 in.
Rows 3 leCCt apart, north and south; 1-row plots; 6 replication. Sidedressed wilh 220 Ibs/A. NHINO on 13 Sept. and
layed-by with a shallow cultivate ion to control weeds. No soil thrown to lhe rows ( at cultiva o ). iinal stand
planted to two seed every 6 inches. Thinned on 17 Sept. to one plant/lill. Applied one Ib/A. Orltho Orlllene (40 psi
in 40 gallons water) to control sunflower head moth on 27 Sept. and 5 Oct. Applied one Ib/A. DuPoni Manzate per acre
at 40 psi aiid 40 gallons water per acre on 5 Oct. and 12 Oct. as a preventit ive measure to control Alternaria leaf and
stem sp, disease. No insect or bird damage noted. Number of heads harvested per 20 loot row segment: L-/: 28; C-9:23,
C-12: 14; C-13: 29; C-14: 26; and C-15: 36; averaging 29. Ilarvest Date 29 Novemlber 19/9.
(raltelul .t knowledgement is made ot a grant in aid to carry on this i eseach lI 10om1 lie National Cottonseed Products
Asso. i, ion, Memphis, TN; the Buckeye Cotton Oil Division, Buckeye Le lulose Coipoi action, Augusta, (,A; anid l t l-ajinii ,
and Gilntri (.,loton Oil Company, Birmoiingham, AL.


V I (lRI I N, II


1140

1020

1000

1000

1000


1020


1050

1280

1150

1120

1120

1120


1 140







Table 13 A recapitulation of the agronomic and industrial characteristics as averages for the eight planting
dates for the 15 confectionery hybrids tested during 1978 and 1979. Gainesville, Florida.


Agronomic or 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979
industrial charact- ----------------------------- Date of Planting -------------------------------
eristic Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(W) Aug 17(E) Feb 02 Feb 28 Apr 02 Aug 16


Yields, Kg/Ha. 2930 910 1180 1290 1680 2310 1740 1140

Emergence to Flowering, days 52 51 50 51 67 58 58 45

Plant heights, cm. 159 147 135 137 162 182 137 135

Seedhead diameters, cm. 23.9 14.0 14.7 15.4 18.2 17.6 18.1 12.4

Test weights, Lbs/Bu. 18.0 15.8 23.8 24.4 19.5 21.9 23.8 21.3

Test weights, Kg/HI. 23.2 20.3 30.6 31.4 25.1 28.2 30.6 27.4

Weight of 200 seed, gms. --- --- --- ---- 20.9 19.7 23.3 14.5


Number of entries repre-
sented in each of these
averages 12 12 5 3 6 6 6 6


A total of only 15 cultivars, all hybrids from three seed companies, have been tested at Gainesville in 1978-79.


V. E. GREEN, JR.






-36-
Tablel4. Meteorological and cultural characteristics of the agronomic tests with
confection sunflower at Gainesville, FL in 1979.

Planting Dates
Characteristic 0202 0228 0402 0816
- - - - 1979 - - - - - -


Emergence date

Mid-flower date

Physiological Maturity, Date

Planting to Emergence, Days

Emergence to Mid-flower, Days

Mid-flower to Maturity, Days

Emergence to Maturity, Days

Rainfall, in, & hundredths
Planting to emergence

Emergence to Mid-flower

Mid-flower to Maturity

Total in life cycle

Grow. Deg. Days (GDD), 32-80F
Planting to Emergence

Emergence to Mid-flower

Mid-flower to Maturity

Emergence to Maturity

Solar Radiation, PAR, E/m2
Planting to Emergence

Emergence to Mid-flower

Mid-flower to Maturity

Emergence to Maturity

Solar Radiation, Total, MJ/m2
Planting to Emergence

Emergence to Mid-flower

Mid-flower to Maturity

Emergence to Maturity

Original meteorological data f
Harry Wood, Agronomy Departmen


0217

0416

0521

15

58

35

93


1.27

8.15

2.97

12.39


295

1933

949

2882


400

1942

1409

3351


0312

0508

0604

12

57

27

84


0.94

8.16

3.24

12.34


348

1804

925

2729


391

2176

1246

3422


0412

0609

0713

10

58

34

92


4.38

7.97

4.62

16.97


110

2267

1289

3555


375

2494

1422

3916


0826

1010

1110

10

45

30

75


3.23

11.61

0.40

15.24


533

1846

1014

2850


424

1339

902

22L1


200 198 186 226

944 84R 1234 707

698 610 704 458

1642 1468 1933 1165

or this table were furnished by Dr. D.E. McCloud and Mr.
t, IFAS, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.
V. E. GREEN, JR.






Table 15. A recapitulation table showing the test average results
of the achenes and kernels of six confectionery hybrids
Gainesville, Florida, 1979.


of laboratory and industrial measurements
of sunflower from four planting dates at


S-------- ------ -ACHENES --------------- -------------------- KERNELS---- ----------------
Growing Season of Percent sample retained on screen Hull K e r n e l s Weight of 20 Roasting Data
the Experiment 22/64 20/64 18/64 16/64 Abil- Per- Adjus- Ker- CC of Dark Color
ity cent ted % nels Kernels count Index

% % % % % % g. 9.


Feb. 2-May 21


Feb. 28-Jun.4


Apr. 2-Jul. 13


Aug. 16-Nov. 10


76 88 9


63 83 13


66 84 9


53 79 31


43 41


43 42


44 42


41 37


1.11 4.84


1.08 4.89


1.38 4.91


1.14 5.08


James A. Lofgren
V.E. Green, Jr.


3.1
I





-38-


ftltj Intiatn iuttnnc/ o clorcn flour of
crrcowe. it"opptti.
.C.- The Defriplion. Chryfanthemum Peruuianum.
t '- oIie of .crro cit apltautc, of
i'ff ThCc ffatrt c anitl talttii, ttim .'. ..-.
ocG ain ~ .r itgroaicti t to t2 e t flcgt) of h.." --'"
t'rCti c'n fouctcntiiefootc,titb infoiue
place to tije icigt1 of foture T t1ecntic, Nr
: ~;'.i t t y -uitj foots, tty fralc bcb .--
ilr &t ;.,gilt atib t ick c, sab tj, iSicautc -
r3eryEX manYp, cp cciallp tIjp tlioatgtwo
tpiloft, foa tot btnDct lCacstt Do qttirk.s {
it f~i a'Sb tia)iC) : crpcciall, tilofc great
b;cZGatelattesu iyt)u bcfoett)e fpzing
ing 1ip of tije ftalf are ia q uantitie al- c;.
mnof as large tle C leatteu of tItc Cote -
25turcc3ttlc.brerp top ofte fatbpDc bigt
Rltak ti cre geo u ett a b etp large t molt
c:lenert flourc moft ltikeC to Camomill,
oCC1pfantI)enutm, but nmcl3 largrc,
in q ntaitit atnottliofe to a pzet e til ab e
latt,fto tiat oftentimen ulanM tcirc C
(r1t, oz bttermoat Compalffof tlIcfapt e
routc~zi' ieaftlrxct, it i$f fount1Oto be of
ti)c bctitlj of ljatfe a foote,. ile int ibDJl
of tijc toutte f U inuiJ)C t)e fccDecgrowtt
cti),i li e to a fine cloat uiizototgt a% it.
ucrctuittl) ectilctuo;e:tl fmnalleauc~
tuJiclfec tou in compaffe abotttc, are of ------
a liugt? flinfig pellowu colour, atlb Cen ---< s- --'-'
g ,r:,~ ca arcarofii fffti in numbcrcomoc. V)c fccbte i flatanD longantib
lo i; t a" "5tbp o t fuwtatrte, ittq ieli o uatntitet 4 oik t iob C cO Cot. T C, ttooteo ,,
arc likto tle ooteg of Vce' 0. Cant -
*ZThe Place.
Tl5i1 plante growet) ntt tb~e ItciteIntia, ttje ti) klye ( caillc America,
n!tb i t1e Cotttrtcp of crroWce: anb beingfomcn Lit papnc, it grot ctl) to
ati*c: mibafre flmaigncit growtcti notabouctteilao;lii,footeltsigly,anb itbotl- -
r.ra p bzing fooztil i51 ffoure,ant; if it cdauncc aCointiinc to bcatc ti0 ouettte ,
ptt tj anttU ep be finatllcr ant l cp little auti cp cone fo ozttl) gapnatl Wtutc, fo
tiat tep can come to Ino pefection.-: -
T mes. ..

192 The second Booke of
bi$ fl our n 3r j3 t Sol Indianus, antl Chryfanth-Mum? Pe'unuinnm:
bafelan e itp lfo _l ib ,nt',n We, nn. ;3,
t ole sol'ett oure of,-er.ol e"
S ., The Naturt and Verrues.
ttl Imate ofttit% cbano floute,wo are able toap notsing,bpcauft
theaInetatt l notbenepetfounb out, ozppoucb of anp man.






-39-


1980 CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA













Q)rog3tbtarjnfc Flos Solis Peruuianus.
e6iqpatblum.


WOODCUT DRAWING OF SUNFLOWER PARTS FROM AN HERBAL BY PIERANDREA MATTIOLI 1586

This was a German version published nine years after Mattioli's death in 1577.
Note the name of the plant is given in both Latin (Flos Solis Peruuianus)and
German (Sonnenblum). This drawing appeared, among other places, in the 1586
herbal from Frankfort, Germany, entitled DE PLANTIS EPITOME UTILISSIMA.


V. E. GREEN, JR.







-41-


CONFECTIONERY (NONOILSEED) SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA--1980

by


Victor E. Green, Jr.; James A. Robertson; James R. Lofgren; Robert A. Dunn;
Shaw-Ming Yang; Gary W. Simone; and William G. Genung


The research work reported herein is the result of cooperative efforts of
The University of Florida and the United States Department of Agriculture
and the Dahlgren & Company Division of Beatrice Foods, Incorporated






-42-

A Proposal to reratP a Eiuing Pfemorial to Ameriran
3armper hby erlaring our only Natiue Worlb Trop -
tep Annuial unflowurr-our National Flouwr.
(Revised to 25 June 1981)
------------------'------------------- ----- -- ---------


1 I f PErrP s, the United States of America has evolved from
2 thirteen agrarian colonies into a largely urban society in which
3 1980 census figures showed only 2.8 percent farm dwellers, yet
4 these few farmers continue to make our nation the greatest food
5 grower and exporter in the history of civilization; and

6 I ~rrf the annual sunflower 'Helianthus annuus' is the
7 only world important food plant domesticated by American Indians
8 in what is now the United States of America; and
9 ~~~prrra, Arerican far-ers have, in recent years, again
10 made sunflo;ler an important crop in their native land; and
11 ri SPr i, the annual sunflower is the only native plant
12 species .ith various forms valued as crops, ornamental garden
13 flowers, and as ubiquitous *:ildflowers; and
14 301erPrP g, the annual sunflower, in some form, is grc:n in

15 each of the ..any United -tates of America; and
16 f~9prPag, the annual sunflower, named for the sun on
17 which farmers depend -o ro:'. our fooa, ;/ill also zerve as a
18 symbol of our leadership in: scientific conversion if sol7.r -e
19 to meet gro':ing human needs; and
20 I rTPB e au.l snflo:er -- rld re- .n, f er
21 children easily dra::, artists have painted masterpieces of, 3n i
22 ideally suited for graphic reproduction; therPforP -
23 o t rerPat a liuing AMrmorial to Ampriran Farmers.
24 from parly inhian. up to thp present. anb of future Eras.
25 3p it PnartPir t:; e 'onress 3f '.:.-
26 America: That the native plant species :eliant.hus ann-us or
27 annual sunflower in its .11_, agricultural, and or:.a.entah r .-
28 [is made designated and declared the official flower and floral
29 emblem of che United --ates of hmeric ". -n:


Based on research by four noted geneticists: the late Professor Edgar
Anderson, Washington University, St. Louis; Dr. Charles 3. Heiser, Jr.,
Distinguished Professor of Botany, Indiana University, Bloomington, where ne
has researched sunflower ancestry since 1947; Dr. Benjamin H. Beard,
USDA research geneticists, UC Davis; and Professor Victor E. Green, Jr.,
Sunflower Coordinator, University of Florida, 3ainesville.
See: Andersons's Plants, Man & Life, Univ. of California Press, 1952
Heiser's The Sunflower, Univ. of Oklahoma Press, 1976
Beard's The Sunflower Crop, Scientific American, May 1981
Green's The Sunflower on the 'orld's Postage Stamps, International
Sunflower Conference, Malaga, Spain, June 1980
by Marc Askew, 1850 Kubel Circle, Sacramento, California 95825
(9161 483-9516 office hours, 481-7874 other times.








-43-


AGRONOMY RESEARCH REPORT July 1981 *--*
AG 81-1 Second Revision


CONFECTIONERY (NONOILSEED) SUNFLOWER RESEARCH IN FLORIDA --1980 1/

Victor E. Green, Jr., James A. Robertson, James R. Lofgren, Robert A. Dunn,
Shaw Ming Yang, Gary W. Simone, and William G. Genung 2 /

TESTS OF CULTIVARS

Tests with these cultivars have been conducted in 1978, 1979, and 1980. Both
spring and fall plantings have been made. During this era of testing, only 22
entries were available for the experiments. Some of these were open-pollinated
varieties. Although sunflower is resistant to frost and sub-freezing temperatures,
tests planted on 16 January and 12 February were almost destroyed on 2-3 March with
lows of 19-21F. They were abandoned and the soil prepared for testing in other
similar experiments. Results of a 6 March planting at the Agronomy Farm and a
12 March planting at the Green Acres Farm are shown in Tables 1 and 2 for the
agronomic characteristics and Tables 3 and 4 for the industrial characteristics.

The test at the Agronomy Farm was grown on soil that had been in tobacco for
nany years and was heavily infested with nematodes. Yields averaged only 590 pounds
per acre in this test from plants only 43 inches tall with head diameters of only
4.7 inches, on the average. A similar test planted in August 1977 following tobacco
at the Green Acres Farm gave only 500 pounds per acre from 40 inch plants with
2.5 inch diameter heads. Weight per bushel measurements for the 1980 test showed
that the achenes weighed only 19.7 pounds. Minnesota grades and standards call for
24 lbs. for No. 1 grade, 22 for No. 2, and 21 for No. 3 confectionery seed. The
seed in the present test could qualify only for sample grade.

Yields at the Green Acres Farm were much higher. Three entries yielded more
than 1500 Ibs/A: Dahlgren D-818: 1590; Interstate IS-924: 1580, and Sigco 924: 1530.
Plants averaged 57 inches tall and head diameters averaged 5.8 inches. However ,
the seed were light as reflected by the weight per bushel figure of only 19.6 lbs.
HD-ever, 200-seed weights .ere heavier in this test (16.4 grams) compared with 13.5
grams in the other test at the Agronomy Farm, with only 6 days difference in planting.

Table 5 shows the agronomic and meteorological (GDD) characteristics of a test planted

1/ This research was conducted cooperatively with the Agronomy and Entomology and
Nematology Departments, AES Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Univer-
sity of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611; the United States Department of Agricul-
ture, USDA-SEA-AR, R. B. Russell Agricultural Research Center, Athens, GA 30604;
and the following seed companies: Dahlgren and Company, a division of Beatrice
Foods, Crookston, MN 56716; the Kraig Seed and Supply Company, Inc.(Sheyenne
Seeds), Sheldon, ND 58068; and the Sigco Sun Products, Breckenridge, MN 56520.
The USDA Conservation and Production Research Laboratory, Bushland, TX also cooperated.
2/ Professor (Agronomist), University of Florida; Research Chemist, USDA-SEA-AR;
Plant Breeder, Dahlgren & Co., Nematologiit ,UJ),; Ph.yapiartthqltgi-t (iSi,3A6Ve);Plant
Pathologist, and Profess.or (Entomologist) AREC-Belle Glade, FL, respectively.
Grateful acknowledgement is made of a generous grant-in-aid to carry on part of
this research from the National Cottonseed Products Association, Memphis, TN, the
Buckeye Cotton Oil Division of the Buckeye Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA
and the Farmers and Ginners Cotton Oil Company, Birmingham, AL. Mr. Jasper Jer-
nigan, Mr. Pres Smithwick, and Mr. Jack Kidd were especially helpful in obtaining
this grant of funds with the cooperation of Dr. Lynn Jones, Director, Research and
Education, NCPA, Memphis, TN. and Dr. William Powell, Agronomist.








-44-


Footnote continued:

Assistance in the field and in the laboratory was provided by Mr. Billy D. Craw-
ford, Agricultural Technician III, Agronomy Department, UF and the following
advanced undergraduate and graduate students in the courses Agronomy 4905 and 6905
entitled Sunflower Culture: Miss Lori Stender, Mr. Howard Shweky, Miss Karen
Thel, and Mr. Perry Yates, to all of whom great appreciation is expressed.

Special thanks are due to Dr. Gary Fick, Sigco Sun Products and to Dale and
Sandy Kraig, Sheyenne Seeds for furnishing seed and advice in these tests.

Appreciation is also expressed to the FMC Corporation and to the ELANCO Corp-
oration for furnishing all the Furadan and the Treflan used in these tests.

Achene quality measurements were made in the laboratories of Dahlgren and Com-
pany and total oil and fatty acid composition assays were performed in the
USDA laboratories of the R. B. Russell Center at Athens. Agronomic characteristics
were determined at the University of Florida. Disease identifications were made at
the Southwestern Great Plains Research Center at Bushland. TX.


on 14 August at the Agronomy Farm following spring-planted sunflo.-er and con-
taining ten entries including three old open-pollinated varieties on the market.
However, severe attacks by redwing blackbirds, both resident and migratory pop-
ulations, devastated the test during the last week of October and the first week
in November. This precluded the taking of yield data from the test.

Table 6 shows the meteorological and cultural characteristics of the agronomic tests
with confectionery hybrids at Gainesville, FL in 1980.




1979 DISEASE STUDY

In Table 11 of Agronomy Research Report 80-1, September 1979 are shown the
disease ratings made weekly on entries in a test of 6 confectionery nyorids. Since
that publication was released, the senior author of this present report: has -ade
a graph of the incidence of Alternaria helianthi leaf and stem disease in the test.
This graph of the results appears as Figure 1. Note that the most rapid rise in
severity of the disease is immediately before flowering. The form of this cjrve
will be the subject of a separate paper concerning the disease in ooth confection-
ery and oilseed hybrid sunflower by the senior author and Dr. Gary Simone, Plant
Pathologist. See also Figure 2 in Agronomy Research Report 80-4 (Revised), March
1980. The regression equation for that very similar curve was:

R= -2.05 + 3.43D 0.41502

where R= rating and D= day of the month these oilseed hybrids were scored for
incidence of the Alternaria leaf and stem spot disease.

Mr. Donald Eddington, formerly Laboratory Technician, Agronomy, performed :he
computer analysis for these data.


V. E. GREEN, JR.








-45-


RECAPITULATION OF DATA


Since confectionery sunflower has been tested at Gainesville, FL for only
three years, it is possible to show a recapitulation of all the data collected
as cultivar averages for the agronomic and industrial characteristics in only
six tables. These characteristics and :he data tables pertaining to them are:
Days from emergence to mid-flowering--Table 7; Stalk heights--Table 8; Seedhead
diameters--Table 9; Seed achenee) yields--Table 10; Bushel weights of the clean
and dry achenes--Table 11; and Weights of 200 seed--Table 12. These tables fairly
well characterize available cultivars for the United States, and to date number
only 22. All but one, Dahlgren D-722, have been tested one or more times at
Gainesville during 11 plantings in February, March, April, or August of 1978-1980.

It is difficult to draw definite conclusions concerning the varietal reactions
to the different planting dates. This is due to the tests containing a differing
number of entries of different hybrids that suffered variously from too little or
too much rainfall, none to excessive Alternaria disease, none to severe head moth
damage, etc. depending more on the year grown than the months planted and harves-
ted. A few generalizations are apparent: Generally, August plantings were ear-
lier, that is, required fewer days fro- emergence to flowering; had shorter plants;
were lower yielding, but had plumper seed(higher bushel weights) than plantings
made in February, March, or April. February or early March plantings suffered less
from both Alternaria disease and sunflower head moth damage, which might account
for the higher yields in these plantings.

Table 13 recaps the averages of a number of agronomic traits and industrial
characteristics as averages over the several planting dates during 1978-1980.



LABORATORY MEASUREMENTS

A sample from each plot in the two 1980 tests was sent to the laboratories of
Dahlgren and Company, a division of Beatrice Foods, Inc., for quality assessment.
They received examination for size distribution, shelling percentage, ease of
hulling, weight of 20 kernels and 20 cc. of kernels, dark count and color index
of the roasted kernels, and weight per oushel of achenes. These data appear as
Tables 14 and 15. Data of this nature for 1979 have been incorporated into a
scientific paper oy Lofgren and Green and it has been sent to Sunflower magazine
at Fargo, ND as a popular article anc to the International Sunflower Newsletter,
journal of the International Sunflo..er Association, at Vlaardingen, the Netherlands
in a more scientific version. A copy of the paper appears at the end of this
present research report.

A scientific paper entitled "The Fatty Acid Composition of Some Confectionery
Sunflower Hybrids--1979" has been sucnitted to the Journal of the American Oil
Chemists Society by Robertson and Green and it is believed to oe the first paper
on this subject ever to be published in the world.


V. E. GREEN, JR.









-46-


APPENDIX TABLES SHOW METEOROLOGICAL DATA FOR 1980 AND CUMULATIVE DATA FOR 1976-1980


There are 9 Appendix Tables with meteorological data as follows:


Agronomy Farm,

Agronomy Farm,

Agronomy Farm,

Agronomy Farm,

Green Acres,

Both Farms

Both Farms,

Agronomy Farm,

Both Farms ,


1980, Growing Degree Days (GDD), 32-80F.

1980, Total Radiation, MJ/m2

1980, Photosynthetically Active Radiation, E/m2.

1980, Rainfall Distribution, Inches and hundredths.

1980, Rainfall Distribution, Inches and hundredths.

1976-1980, Maximum and Minimum Temperatures, Monthly.

1976-1980, Monthly Rainfall Averages.

1977-1980, Photosynthetically Active and Total Radiation, Monthly.

1978-1980, Growing Degree Days, GDD, 32-80F, Monthly Averages.


NOTE: Radiation is measured only at the Agronomy Farm, Main Campus, but should De
applicable at the Green Acres Farm, located about 8 miles west.





DISEASE INFORMATION

Alternaria Leaf and Stem Disease of Sunflower is the title of an Information Sheet
Number 1295 of the Mississippi Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station which
was written by Dr. Larry E. Trevathan and Dr. Ken W. Roy, Plant Pathologists. It
is reproduced in its entirety and occurs in this present report on pages 6 and 7.

Regular Table 16 lists the sunflower diseases that have been identified on Flo-
rida plants by Dr. G. W. Simone, Plant Pathologist, IFAS and Dr. Shaw-Ming Yang,
USDA-SEA-AR, Bushland, Texas.


FLORIDA SUNFLOWER WORKERS

A list of Florida sunflower scientists appear in a letter on pages 8 and 9 of
this present report, which letter was sent to the Editor of the 2nd Edition of the Sun-
flower Directory.


V. E. GREEN, JR.








-47-

No. 1295 Information Sheet .January 1980


Alternaria Leaf and Stem

Disease of Sunflower

Larry E. Trevathan and Ken W. Roy, assistant plant
pathologists, Mississippi State University, Plant Pathology
and Weed Science Department


Alternaria helianthi lesions on
sunflower stems (top) and leaves
(left).


A disease previously unre-
ported in Mississippi has been
observed on sunflower for the
second consecutive year. The
disease was first noticed in Au-
gust 197! on a late planting of
sunflower at the MAFES
Black Belt Station. The dis-
ease occurred during the 1979
growing season on the Plant
Science Research Center at
Mississippi State, on several


farms in lA)wndes County and
on the Black Belt Station. Ob-
servations made in a sun-
flower hybrid performance
test on the Black Belt Station
indicated some differences in
variety! susceptibility. Holw-
ever, hybrids most resistant in
this test were infected severely
in a later planting on the Plant
Science Research Center at
Mississippi State.


Typical leaf symptoms are
Ihrown to black necrotic spots
with a pronounced chlorotic
halo. These spots generally
are 3-5 mm in diameter. Lower
leaves on the plant often are
affected more severely:
however, all leaves sometimes
are infected urnformly regard-
less If position ,.:1 the plant.
Dark, longitudinal lesions
about 5-15 mm long occur on


the stems. The cuticle often is
ruptured along the longitudi-
nal axis of these lesions. Stem
lesions are prevalent from the
base of the stalk to the apex,
and lesions often occur on the
back of the seedhead.
All plant parts appear to re-
ceive inoculum simultaneous-
ly, and the disease develops
rapidly and uniformly in the
field. Secondary infection has


S ' MSS SS -P AGRICULTURAL & FORESTRY EXPERIMENT STATION
-- R RCODNEV FO.L DIRECTOR MISS'SSIPPI STATE MS 39762

/M.ssissipp. State Unversity
James D McCornas P-es dent LOUIS N Wise Vice Presilent /









-48-


not been observed to develop
from inoculum produced on
primary leaf spots and stem le-
sions. However, acropetal
development of symptoms oc-
curs on a whole plant basis in
some cases, while limited en-
largement of leaf spots and
stem lesions does take place.
Incidence and severity of the
disease were greater during
the summer of 1979, apparent-
ly as a result of frequent and
abundant rainfall.
Several fungi were isolated
from diseased plants in the
licld, but only one, Alternaria
lhelianthi, was associated con-
sistently with diseased sun-


flower. This fungus was cul-
tured and used in greenhouse
inoculation studies to deter-
mine (1) if the fungus could re-
produce disease symptoms o,)-
served in the field. t2) if hy-
brids exhibit differential sus-
ceptibility to the organism
and (3) if the organism can be
reisolated from artificially in-
oculated plants. Inoculum was
prepared by harvesting spores
from pure culture and sus-
pending them in sterile water.
This spore suspension was ap-
plied with a hand sprayer to 18
different sunflower hybrids in
the greenhouse, when plants
were just beginning to flower.


'lants were coerei with
pllast "- bi '; overnight ;i
pi o\ .l an tm.-lhspi rif; h{ I .

1 diseasee de\ elopment w.. .-.
rapid under greenhou, coil 0 -0
tions that symptoms were e\:
dent the following morning.
'I'here were some differences in
susceptibility i anmo;g the hi-
brids.

The source of primary inocu-
lum of this organism i. dif'i-
cult to determine, but it seems
unlikely, in view of the occur-
rence and (distribution of the
disease, that thie cusal fungus
is seedblornie.


Suntlower producers should
:.,::niharize :hem.-elves with
he sy-r.ptuon- :f this disease
an; rep,,r ail -c urrences to
itnei'- cu :y agevt. Such infer-
:".::un wil in,._a e the distr-
:.:'; of the causal organism
t;,hO ughout tr.- state. Pro-
iucers should be aw .re that.
:-. tears of near normal rain-
t'. this disease most likely
wI: appear on late-planted
>un.:owers. lithwever. during
ipr. longed pt'rio!s of relatively
high temperature accompa-
nied by unusual periods ofrain
cr heavy dew. the disease may
become severe at any time dur-
ing the growing season.


Mississippi State University does not discriminate on the basis of race. color, religion, national origin, sex, age, or
handicap.

In conformity with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Dr.
T. K. Martin, Vice President, 610 Allen Hall, P. O. Drawer J, Mississippi State, Mississippi 39762. office telephone
number 325-3221, has been designated as the responsible employee to coordinate efforts to carry out responsibilities
and make investigation of complaints relating to nondiscrimination.




t" ograph.
r central 7'.phica:;r.g
7 mm ,ts-.qpi Staze Un'--v."iv?







-49

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA

IFAS INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES


GAINESVILLE FLORIDA 32611

September 25, 1980


AGRONOMY DEPARTMENT

Agronomy Laboratory, Building 857


MEM RANDUM

SUBJECT: Florida workers in the sunflower program

TO: Dr. David W. Cobia, Editor, Sunflower Directory, Box 5193, Fargo, ND
58105

FROM: Dr. Victor E. Green, Jr., CPAg., Sunflower Coordinator, Florida J;c~c 2 -


1. The following persons are involved in sunflower research in Florida:


Dr. Victor E. Green, Jr., Agronomist
Agronomy Laboratory, Building 857, IFAS
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Hybrid testing, Agronomic characteristics, Fertilizer, Spacing,
Populations, Yield studies. AC 904 392-6140

Dr. Gary W. Simone, Plant Pathologist
Plant Disease Clinic, HSPP Building, IFAS
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Plant pathogens, Plant diseases, Fungicide tests, Extension pathology,
Disease identifications and control measures. AC 903 392-1980

Professor William G. Genung, Entomologist
Agricultural Research and Education Center, IFAS
University of Florida; P. 0. Drawer A
Belle Glade, FL 33430
Insect identifications and damage estimates, Insect controls,
Integrated Pest Management, Secondary Host Studies.
AC 305 996-3062

Dr. Freddie A. Johnson, Entomologist
Newell Hall 208, IFAS
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Insect identifications, Damage estimates, Insect control,
Extension entomology, Integrated pest management, Secondary Hosts,
AC 904 392-1937

Dr. Robert A. Dunn, Nematologist
Nematology Laboratory, Building 78, IFAS
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611
Nematode Identifications, Damage Assessments, Nematode Controls,
Integrated Pest Management. AC 904 392-1990 Extension Nematology
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER

COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONS COOPERATIVE EXTENSION SERVICE


TECH^-EERH-ll-1


SCHOOL OF FOREST RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION


CENTER FOR TROPICAL AGRICULTURE









-50-


25 September 1980, Letter, Editor, Sunflower Directory, Box 5193, Fargo, ND 58105 p.2



Dr. Jimmy R. Rich, Nematologist
Agricultural Research Center, IFAS
University of Florida
P. 0. Box 657, Live Oak, FL 32060
AC 904 362-1725
Nematode identifications, Damage Assessments,
Nematode controls, Integrated pest management.

2. I am also a Collaborator, Oilseeds Research, USDA-SEA-AR as Agronomist.

3. Best of luck in your new undertaking with the revised directory.

4. Please advise if I can be of further assistance from Florida.







-51-


United States
Department of
Agriculture


Science and
Education
Administration


Agricultural Research
Southern Region
Conservation and Production
Research Laboratory


P.O. Drawer 10
Bushland, Texas
79012


February 3, 1931


Dr. Milivojae Acimovic
Research Coordinator
FAO Sunflower Group
Institute of Field and Vegetable Crops
M. Gorkog 30
21000 Novi Sad, Yugoslavia


Dear Dr. Acimovic:

I received your letter of January 5, 1981. I greatly appreciate that you
will include the sunflower diseases in the United States of America in your
future mapping of FAO-Sunflower diseases in Europe.

Enclosed are a list of sunflower diseases which occurred in the United States
in 1980 and a map of the USA.

Have you sent your cultures of Diaporthe to Dr. Littrell for identification?

Sincerely,


Sam Yang
Research Plant Pathologist


Leffel
Thomas
Gulya
Klisiewicz
Trevathan








-52-


Table 1. Sunflower diseases in, "e USA in 191


North Central (North Dakota a-,d ','innesotci


Disease

Downy mildew


Sclerotinia Stalk rot


Sclerotinia head rot


Rust

Verticillium Wilt

Phoma stem rot


Premature ripening

Septoria leaf spot

Rhizopus head rot

Powdery mildew

Alternaria seedling
blight

Apical chlorosis

South Central & South

Alternaria leaf blight


Sclerotinia Stalk rot


Sclerotinia head rot


Charcoal rot


Powdery mildew


Pathoaen

Plasmopara halstedii
,Farl.) Berl and de Toni

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
(Lib.) de Bary

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
(Lib.) de Bary

Puccinia helianthi Schw.

Verticillium dahliae Klebahn

Phoma oleracea var.
helianthi-tuberosi Sacc.

Unknown

Septoria helianthi Ell and Kell

Rhizopus so.

Ervsiphe cichoracearum DC

Alternaria helianthi (Hansf.)
Tub. and Nish.

Pseudomonas sp.

East (Mississippi and Florida)

Alternaria helianthi (Hansf.)
Tub. and Nish.

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
(Lib.) de Bary

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum
[Lib.) de Bary

Macrophomina phaseolina
(Tossi) Goid.

ErysiDhe cichoracearum DC


Comment

Minor disease


Minor disease


Minor disease


Major

Minor

"ajor


Major

Miror

Minor

Minor

Sinor


disease

disease

disease


disease

disease

disease

disease

disease


Minor disease



Major disease


Minor disease


Minor disease


Minor disease


Minor disease


__~~~







-53-


Phoma stem rot


Southern blight

Rhizoctonia root rot

Bacterial Wilt

Erwinia stalk rot

Bacterial leaf spot

Southwest (Texas)

Rhizopus head rot


Charcoal rot

Phoma stem rot


Powdery mildew

Rust

Downy mildew


Bacterial leaf spot

Alternaria leaf spot

West (California)

Rhizopus head rot

Sclerotinia stalk rot

Charcoal rot


Phoma oleracea var.
helianthi-tuberosi Sacc.

Pellicularia rolfsi(Curzi) West

Pellicularia filamentosa (Pat.) Rogers

Pseudomonas solanacearum E. F. Sm.

Erwinia carotovara (Jones) Holland

Pseudomonos sp.



Rhizopus arrhizus Fischer
R. stolonifer (Ehrenberg ex Fr.) Vuill

Macrophomina phaseolina (Tossi) Goid.

Phoma oleracea var. helianthi-tuberosi
Sacc.

Erysiphe cichoracearum DC

Puccinia helianthi Schw.

Plasmopara halstedii(Farl.) Berl and
de Toni

Pseudomonas sp.

Alternaria alternate (Fries) Keissler



Rhizopus oryzae Went et Prinsen-Geerligs

Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (Lib.) de Bary

Macrophomina phaseolina (Tossi) Goid.


Minor disease


Minor

Minor

Minor

Minor


disease

disease

disease

disease


Minor disease



Minor disease


Major

Minor


Minor

Minor

Minor


disease

disease


disease

disease

disease


Minor disease

Minor disease


Minor

Minor

Minor


disease

disease

disease











CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER ACCESSIONS IN FLORIDA INDEXED BY SUPPLYING COMPANY


DAHLGREN & COMPANY, 1220 Sunflower Street, Crookston, MN 56716


C-1
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
C-6
C-13
C-14
C-15
C-16
C-17


218 281-2985


D-715
D-717
D-818
D-719
D-821
D-823
D-820
D-933
D-716
D-722
D-135


GURNEY SEED & NURSERY COMPANY, Yankton, SD

C-18 Black Stripe
C-19 Mammoth Russian (Grey Stripe)


57079 605 665-1671


INTERSTATE SEED & GRAIN, Box 470, Fargo, ND 58107


701 235-4431


C-22 IS-924


DR. JERRY MILLER, Research Geneticist, USDA-SEA-AR, Agronomy Department,
Walster Hall, Fargo, ND 58105 701 237-7971


NDSU,


C-20 Sundak


KRAIG SEED & SUPPLY, INC., Sheyenne Seed, Sheldon, ND


58068 701 882-3346


C-7 853
C-8 883
C-9 923


SIGCO RESEARCH, Box 150, Breckenridge, MN 56520 218 643-8466


C-10
C-ll
C-12
C-21


-54-







THE SUNFLOWER MAGAZINE (AUSTRALIA) INDEX TO VOLUMES I THRU L


Marketing
Th current demand for sunflower D. J. Mason
oil in Australia.
The year of the oilseed. Howard Colbert
Have confidence in sunflower it's A. W. Barr
well founded.
Buoyant markets for sunflower John D. Rankin
I can see sunflower all down your Dr. Murray Kinman
Eastern States.
All groups must be aware of others A. W. Barr
problems.
Buyers are waiting with empty silos. R. J. Tarlington
We must build for a heavy export Hurley Zook
trade.
S. A. watch over crop explosion Kenn Williams
Sunflower is a good cash crop. Roger Smith
Is Sunflower here a growth industry? Michael Furzer
Another tight rope walk seems likely. Neil Crang
Large shipments of our sunflower Phil Holmes
seed.
Phil is confident Anon.
High world demand. John D. Rankin
A note of optimism for Australian D. J. Mason
growers.
Domestic market the key. R D. Fountain
Sunflower seed a price taker. Phil Holmes
New oilseed crushing mill for D. J. Ball
Central Qld.
Machinerv
Precision planting of sunflower Jack Twyford
reality or myth?
It's costly but an economic invest- David Bailey
ment.
Fahse versus Nodet B. F. Grey
Precision in Victoria Robin Jessop
Dalby engineers work on U.S. planter Anon.
will reduce costs.
Row crop planter evaluation trial. Jack Twyford
Combines achilles heel of sun- Steve Sutherland
flower.
It's spot on planting carrots or coarse Anon.
bean seed.
Scraperplane complements laser Anon.
beam equipment in new irrigation
layouts.
Precision planter for uneven ground. Anon.
The latest in row crop equipment. Anon.
Monitors give planting accuracy. Anon.
Boom spray for sunflowers Anon.
Considerations in selecting a suit- J. G. Twyford
able sunflower planter.
Farm Equipment Finance E. W. Reynolds
Air Conditioned Tractor Cabs are C. Warmington
they a potential health hazard?
Planter proves its versatility. Anon.


INDEX and BACK COPIES
Your magazine is entering its 5th year. Production of'SUNFLOWER'
started in October 1976, and since that time many important articles
have been published.
We have available back copies of most issues for new subscribers.
To assist you in ordering these, we have prepared an index of all
articles that have appeared in Sunflower since the first issue.
Should you require any back copies please write to:
The Secretary,
A.S.A.,
P.O. Box 337,
TOOWOOMBA, 4350
Queensland, listing the copies you require.
To cover the cost of postage, please enclose the following amounts
with your request:
1-3 copies $1.00
4-6 copies $2.00
Over 6 copies $3.00


Oct. 76

Feb. 77
Feb. 77

May 77
May 77

May 77

Aug. 7-
Nov. 77

Nov. 77
Feb. 7S
May 78
Aug. 78
Nov. 78

May 79
Aug. 79
Nov. 79

Feb. 80
May 80
Aug. 80



May 77

Aug. 77

Nov. 77
Feb. 78
Feb. 78

Feb. 7S
Aug. 7

Aug. 7S

Aug. 79


Aug. '7
Au_. -9
Aug. 79
Aug. 79
Aug. ;9
Nov. 79

May SO
Aug. 80

Aug. 80


On the North West Slopes
Sunflower growing under irrigati
A summer field trial with Sunfol


Dann
G. R. Sc
on Ian Mer
a John Pal
Marc


3ailey



dtord
C.,ne


Oct. 76

Feb. 77

Feb. 77
Feb. 77


tugruinojy
"55- Bailey explains how sunflowers David I
are grown overseas.
Why 1 decided to grow sunflower Various
this season.
Some of the ills that beset sunflower. Bruce R
The target spring crops which R. W. C
yield as well as wheat.
Water management is the key to Prof. J. R
dryland sunflower
Sunflowers.. fertility key issue. Bill Dov
4 growers qualify for the 3 tonne Arthur F
club.
Victorian survey of irrigated crops. John Co
Peter Tu
Big crop during a big dry. Owen D
Open pollinated is favoured in the John S.
Murray Valley. Hende
Pollination in Sunflower A. Law
Research in the Cooma district B. S. D5


-dle
Rogers


Aug. 77
Aug. 77


rnish & Nov. 77
rner
uncan Feb. 78
C. Feb. 78
rson
& G. Pistillo May 78
ear & P. R. May 78

oui May 78
n lees Aug. 78
mer&John Aug. 78


Molybdenum if it's short yields W. J. McDonald
will suffer.
Full story of the great Lake crop. Wolfgang Brederick
Sex is critical in the life cycle of the Malcolm Mackay
sunflower.
Identification of physiological John Thompson
maturity.
Success stories from the Highlands. Phil Murphy
Assessing sunflower yield Owen Duncan
Soaking seed helps Owen Duncan
Predicting oil content and quality of Hazel C. Harris
Australian sunflower crops.
Sunflower a cool climate crop. Ste e Lambert
W.I.P. Can it work for you? Anon.
Downs irrigators getting top yield. Anon.
Qld. dryland growers hit the tonne Anon.
The influence of day length on sun- P.J. Goyr.e
flower growth.
Plant population charts. Anon.
Precision planting does water David Bailey
irrigation have a role?
Irrigated sunflower research at Mike Wocdroofe
Numurkah.
Sunflower a new champion. P. G. R. Cory
Soils and water. Ken DowlIser
What price bees for sunflower. D. F. Lanz-idge
Irrigation in the eighties. J. T. Rumble
Connection of Molybdenum defi-
ciency in Dryland sunflowers in acid D. C. Le is


sands in the South East of South
Australia.
To till or not to till?
Frost fixes flowers.
Aerial spraying of sunflowers
The effect of pollination and com-
patibility on seed set in sunflowers
Considerable interest in early spring
planting.
Top yields from irrigation
Deep Ripping for suntllwer success


David Baiiey
Trent Potter
L. H. Mouiden
D. L. George. S.
Shein
C. WVarr;en:on

M. WoC, roofe
P. .1. Spargo


The sunflower rust story. P. L. Thomson
Sunflower diseases Dr. Joe Kochma
Major investigation into sunflower Anon.
rust.
Sunflower disease in Victoria. R. G. Clarke
Treatment with Ridomil to control W. E. Sackson
downy mildew of sunflowers.


E.


In


Aug. 78

Aug. 78
Nov. 78

Nov. 78

Nov. 78
Feb. 79
Feb. 79
May 79

May 79
May 79
May 79
May 79
Aug. 79

Aug. 79
Aug. 79

Nov. 79

Nov. 79
Nov. 79
Nov. 79
Feb. SO

May SO


May 80
lMay 80
NMav 80
Aug. 80

Aug. 80

Aug. 80
Auk. SO




AAu. 77
Nov. 77
Aug. 79

Nov. 79
Feb. 80


.McWdliam May 77


197u-lgi F _,ri 4(4); 2:
No v i ,) _- '








-56-


Oil aind Les
What does polyunsaturated mean? K. J. Eyies
Strike oil with sunflower U.S. Dept. of
Dramatic lift in margarine use. Alan Lemon
Quality control is the money spinner. Dick Tarlinton
Why use N M.R.? D. M. Finch
The versatility of sunflower oil. J. F. Logan
High energy content in hull of sun- D. J. Mason
flower.
Crushing plant ensures demand in the John M. Lacy
Murray.
Domestic uses of sunflower oil. Len Brookes
Flower power Chris Warmin
The subject of our workshop what Chris Warmin
were its uses before the days of poly-
unsaturated?
Sunflower meal as stockfeed. Mike J. Gleesi
The future of oil quality. A. I. Scott &


Ethanol may not be the ultimate
answer for farm fuel "Oilseeds are
a potential Cinderella."
Follow the Sun Part 1


Ag.


gton
gton


P. L. Thomson
lan Shedden


B. Lathlean


Pests and i veeds
Bird watching David Bailey
Seedling pests of sunflowers. Cut- Peter Allsopp
worms & Wireworms.
Insect damage to seedling sunflower W. J. McLaughlin
Wireworm baiting success P. J. Mowatt
Insects can reduce oil quality Agricultural Gazette
Pre-emergent weed control is vital Dr. J. T. Swarbrick
Insect pests of sunflower N. W. Forrester
Effective control of weeds Important Dr. J. T. Swarbrick
The cocky and the cockies can be W. Easdown &
friends with sound sunflower growing. B. Beeton
Controlling birds electronically John T. Callaghan
White-Fly attacks Sunflower N. W. Forrester

Seed and H1-lbrids
Why breed hybrids? Dr. F. Johnson
Research into hybrids Colin Hacking
The development and future of hybrid P. L. Thomson
sunflowers here.
Breeding program for hybrids augers Doug George
well.
New hybrids look promising Keith White
New hybrids yield well Doug George
Seed sizes.will be a forum topic John Herbert
High oil yield is one big advantage of Col Seccombe
hybrid sunflower.
A.S.A. seed size standards set. Anon.
Commercial release of Suncross 52 Keith White
How important is crop variety? David Frame
World release of new hybrid. G. Bryant
Hybrid sunflowers are here to stay. Dr. Walter Dedio
Is large seed better? Chris Warmington
How far has seed sizing progressed? Owen Duncan
Cost of planting hybrid seed isjustified Florence Trump
Sunflower varieties how adaptable D. J. Frame
are they to N.S.W.?
1980-81 Sunflower Seed Survey Anon.
The Secret of Success D. Bailey

N'arie!' Irials
Sunflower variety trials open pol- Doug George
linated Vs. hybrid.
N.S.W. variety trials Anon.
Sunflower varietal evaluation in T. D. Potter
South Australia
1980 Workshop highlight Sowing A. L. Garside
time effects of the yield and oil
content of four sunflower varieties
grown under irrigation in the Ord
River Valley
1978/79 Variety Trials


Oct. 76
Aug. 77
Nov. 77
Feb. 78
May 78
Aug. 78
Feb. 79

Feb. 79

May 79
Nov. 79
Feb. 80


Feb. 80
May 80

May 80


Aug. 80


Feb. 77
Nov. 77

Aug. 78
Feb. 79
Aug. 79
Aug. 79
Nov. 79
Nov. 79
Feb. 80

May 80
Aug. 80


Oct. 76
Oct. 76
Oct. 76

Feb. 77

May 77
Aug. 77
Feb. 78
Feb. 78

Aug. 78
Aug. 78
Feb. 79
May 79
Aug. 79
Nov. 79
Nov. 79
Feb. 80
May 80

Aug. 80
Aug. 80


Nov. 78

Feb. 79
May 79

May 80


Aug. 80


Harvesting nld Dr in r
Use of dessicant can mean an earlier
harvest and reduce bird damage.
A new harvesting front for row crops.
Dessication tests over 8 sites.
Header sample equal to graded
sample.
Artificial drying of sunflower seed.
Seed dried but not the stems.
Headsnatchers and stalk walkers.
Headsnatcher is the great leveller of
sunflower stalks.
Headsnatcher living up to it's
reputation.
Heading for failure? You need not
be! (Interview)
Heading for success
Reglone dries off sunnies for prompt
harvest.


J. A. Whitehead

Ian Grevis-James
M. D. Barrett
Len Caton

Tom Fusae
Ian Merrylees
Owen Duncan
Anon.

Owen Duncan

Len Caton/ C.
Warmington
Chris. Warmington
Brian Newman &
Malcolm Wyse


Miscelinpeous
The crop of the future Dalton Gandy
Golden sunflower tour David Bailey
England welcomes the dazzling Anon.
newcomer
Your group has no peers Dalton Gandy
Progress in our first twenty months Owen Duncan
The changing sunflower scene Robert Freebaim
Why don't we have a sunflower Ian Sachier
festival?
Cargill building a seed research Anon.
centre.
Amazing world growth in just a Anon.
decade.
120 at seminar, despite floods on Stan Walsh
border.
Golden sunflower tour. David Bailey
3 seminars in Victoria. P. L. Turner
Striped seedcoats and large nuts. VictorE Green
More oilseed research grants are Anon.
offering.
Wide range of subjects covered at Anon.
special sunflower association meet-
ing.
1979 irrigation technology study Anon.
tour offers first hand look at U.S.
irrigation.
Interest in sunflower in South West John Herbert
Australia.
Yates new research station major Anon.
contribution to Australian agricul-
ture.
Wally on tour South Africa Chris Warmington
Sunflower workshop 1980 Anon.
Shepparton workshop 1980 Anon.
Ninth international sunflower con- Anon.
ference.
Use good commonsense and best Wally Sackston
available farm practice.
Rapeseed prospects look good. Chris Warmington
1980 workshop highlight. The Anon.
thoughts of chairman Owen.
New developments in bright industry Brian Newman
Sunflower continues to expand Anon.
500 attend field day.
International Assn. Honours Sun- Anon.
flower Workers.
Flower seeds new way to no smoking Anon.
Dryland Soybeans:are they an Chris Warmington
alternative?
Dryland Soybeans for Northern I. A. Rose
Inland Areas of N.S.W.


4,


Nov. 77

Nov. 77
Feb. 78
May 78

May 78
Aug. 78
Nov. 78


Nov. 79

May 80

May 80
Nov. 80


Feb. 78
Feb. 78
Feb. 78

May 78
May 78
May 78
Aug. 78

Nov. 78

Nov. 78

Nov. 78

Nov. 78
Nov. 78
Feb. 79
Feb. 79

Feb. 79


May 79


May 79

May 79


Aug. 79
Aug. 79
Nov. 79
Feb. 80

May 80

May 80
May 80

May 80
May 80

Aug. 80

Aug. 80
Aug 80

Aug. 80


on





Table Some agronomic characteristics of a winter test with 9 commercial confectionery sunflower cultivars at the Agron-
omy Farm, Gainesville, FL, 1980, on soil heavily infested with nematodes following years of tobacco.


Date of Dates of: Growing Deg. Days Head
Acc. Emerg- Mid Phy- Emerg Mid Flo- Plant Dia- Yields, per:
Desig- Brand Hybrid ence, Flo- sio. to Mid wer to Height meter Acre Hec-
nation March wer, Mat. Flower, Physio. tare
May June Maturity,

In. In. Lbs. Kgs.
C-3 Dahlgren D-818 15 18 19 2324 1321 37 4.6 810 900

C-12 Sigco 924 15 21 22 2452 1325 43 4.8 500 570

C-13 Dahlgren D-820 13 23 24 2593 1326 39 4.1 490 550

C-14 Dahlgren D-933 17 22 23 2424 1326 39 5.1 700 790

C-15 Dahlgren D-716 14 18 19 2380 1321 38 4.7 530 590
-1
C-17 Dahlgren D-135 12 18 19 2423 1321 39 3.9 410 460

C-18 Gurney Black Stripe 15 25 26 2618 1331 39 4.7 580 650

C-19 Gurney Mammoth Russian 14 25 26 2645 1331 68 5.8 720 800

C-20 G. Miller Sundak 15 24 25 2579 1327 42 4.6 610 690

Test Average 14 22 23 2493 1325 43 4.7 590 670
Standard Deviation, % 1.4 3.0 3.0 114 4 9.7 0.5 130 140
Planted 6 March after test planted 16 January was destroyed by a hard freeze on 3 March. Prior crop: continuous tobacco.
Applied 600 lbs/A.10-10-10 fertilizer. Disked in I quart of Elanco Treflan and 25 lbs. FMC Furadan, 10% a.i. granules.
Sidedressed with NH4N03 + KC1. Applied 280 Ibs/A. 16-0-30 on 18 March, cultivated shallow. Applied 166 Lbs/A. NH4N03 on 4/10.
3-row plots E-W. 6 replications, rows 3-feet apart. Plant 2 seed every 12 inches. Harvested Reps. l-lV on 1 July:
Reps. V-VI on 7 July. Dried at 100F to constant moisture, about 7%. Threshed in large Vogel Thresher; aspirated in
Bates Aspirator. Populations varied from 12,340-18,880 per acre. No irrigation water added. No bird damage or
lodging. Yields severely affected by nematodes. Some damage by Alternaria helianthi leaf and stem spot.
Rainfall= Emergence to Flowering= 9.17 in.; Flowering to Maturity= 2.04 in.; Total for the season= 11.21 inches.


V. E. GREEN, JR.






Table 2 Agronomic characteristics of nine confectionery sunflower commercial cultivars planted in March at the
Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL. 1980.

Fla. Date of Date of Growing Degree Days Plant Head Heads Yields per unit area
Acc. Brand Hybrid Emerg- Mid-flo- Emer- Mid-flo- Height Dia- per Per Per
Desig- ence, wearing, gence wearing meter plot Acre Hec-
nation Mar. May to mid- to physio. harves- tare
flower Maturity ted
In. In. Lbs. Kg.
C-3 Dahlgren D-818 23 19 2083 1320 56 5.4 33 1590 1780

C-12 Sigco 924 22 19 2111 1320 62 5.7 28 1530 1710

C-13 Dahlgren D-820 24 21 2132 1325 55 5.6 32 1170 1310

C-14 Dahlgren D-933 24 22 2174 1326 58 6.3 24 1510 1700

C-15 Dahlgren D-716 24 19 2048 1320 51 5.3 30 1060 1180

C-17 Dahlgren D-135 22 20 2154 1322 51 5.3 30 1300 1460

C-20 Interstate Sundak 23 20 2126 1322 58 5.7 22 1050 1180

C-21 Sigco 934 23 17 1997 1278 55 5.8 32 1180 1320

C-22 Interstate IS-924 25 23 2176 1326 64 7.3 20 1580 1770


Test Average 23 20 2111 1318 57 5.8 28 1330 1490
Standard Deviation, 1,0 1.8 60 15 44 6 4.8 220 250

A hard freeze on 2 March destroyed the 12 Feb. planting. Replanted 12 Mar. Prior crop: Peanut 1979.
Applied 600 lbs/A.4-8-24 w/0.8% Zn. ; Disked in 1.33 quarts/A. Elanco Treflan; Disked in 30 Ibs/A. FMC Furadan 10%
granules, all on 4 Feb. 4-row plots N-S; 6 replications, rows 3 feet apart, planted 2 seed every 12 inches.
Harvested entire test on 30 June. Dried at 100F to constant moisture, about 7%. Threshed in large Vogel thresher;
aspirated in Bates Aspirator. Physiological maturity about 31 days after mid-flowering date. Plant population per
acre: 20 heads= 14,520; 33 heads= 24,000. No irrigation wanted added. No lodging. Some damage by birds. Some damage
by Alternaria helianthi leaf and stem spot. Sidedressed with NH4N03 + KCI (16-0-30) 300 Ibs/A. on 2 Apr. Applied
125 Lbs/A. NH4N03 on 16 April. Rainfall: Emergence to Flowering= 11.85 in.; Flowering to Maturity= 5.00in; Total=
16.85 inches.


V. E. GREEN, JR.







-59-


Table 3


Industrial characteristics of nine confectionery sunflower hybrids
planted in March at the Agronomy Farm after continuous tobacco,
Gainesville, FL, 1980.


FL Weight/Volume 200- Heads
Acc. Brand Hybrid Mois- Per Per Seed Har-
Desig- ture Bushel Hecto- Weight vested
nation at liter per
Harvest plot

% Lbs. kg. Gms.

C-3 Dahlgren D-818 7.63 21.2 27.3 13.50 23
C-12 Sigco 924 7.62 19.0 24.5 13.34 21
C-13 Dahlgren D-820 7.68 20.4 26.3 11.60 24
C-14 Dahlgren D-933 7.60 18.0 23.2 13.82 18
C-15 Dahlgren D-716 7.60 19.2 24.7 14.18 23
C-17 Dahlgren D-135 7.70 19.8 25.5 11.48 26
C-18 Gurney Black Stripe 7.83 19.3 24.8 13.82 17
C-19 Gurney Mam. Russian 7.90 20.8 26.8 15.56 20
C-20 G.Miller Sundak 7.76 19.3 24.8 14.18 17

Test Average 7.70 19.7 25.4 13.50 21
Standard Deviation 0.11 0.99 1.27 1.28 3.24

See footnotes to Table 1.


V. E. GREEN, JR.







-60-


TABLE 4


Industrial characteristics of nine confectionery sunflower hybrids
planted in March at the Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL. 1980.


Fla. Acc. Mois- Weight / Volume 200-
Designation Brand Hybrid ture per Seed
at per Hecto- Weight
Harvest Bushel liter
% Lbs. Kg. Gms.
C-3 DAHLGREN D-818 7.5 20.5 26.4 14.74
C-12 SIGCO 924 7.5 19.5 25.1 14.40
C-13 DAHLGREN D-820 7.8 20.1 25.9 14.40
C-14 DAHLGREN D-933 7.9 19.5 25.1 19.18
C-15 DAHLGREN D-716 7.6 17.8 22.9 14.90
C-17 DAHLGREN D-135 7.8 20.3 26.1 15.36
C-20 INTERSTATE SUNDAK 7.8 20.4 26.3 17.42
C-21 SLGCO 934 7.6 18.9 24.3 16.30
C-22 INTERSTATE IS-924 7.6 19.4 25.0 21.18


Test Average 7.7 19.6 25.2 16.42
Standard Deviation, % 0.2 0.9 1.1 2.39


See Footnotes to Table 2.


V. E. GREEN, JR.





Table 5. Agronomic characteristics of confectionery hybrids planted in August at the Agronomy Farm, 1980. Fall test.

FL Dates of: Growing Deg.Days Leaves
Acc- Emer- Mid- Physio- Emer- Flower- Stalk Head per
ess- BRAND HYBRID gence, Flo- logical gence ing to Height Dia- Plant,
ion Aug wer, Maturity, to Flo- Physio- meter Active
Oct Nov wearing logical as of
Maturity 16 Oct.
GDD GDD In. In. No.


Dahlgren


C-12 Sigco

C-13 Dahlgren

C-15 Dahlgren

C-17 Dahlgren

C-18 Gurney

C-19 Gurney

C-20 Interstate

C-21 Sigco

C-22 Interstate


D-818


D-820

D-716


D-135

Black Stripe

Mammoth Russian

Sundak

934


23 6


IS-924


Test Average
Standard Deviation, %


Planted August 14: Fertilized w/600 Ibs/A. 8-8-8 w/1OO Ibs/A. 10% Furadan granules + 1 Qt./A. Treflan. Side-dressed
w/300 lbs/A. NH4NO3 on 9/18. Cultivated twice. No irrigation water added. No lodging. Plots devastated by Redwing
Blackbirds. Rainfall: Emergence to Flowering: 4.35 in.; Flowering to Maturity: 3.48 inModerate attack by Alternaria
leaf and stem disease. Yield data were not possible.


V. E. GREEN, JR.


1841

1847

1890

1864

1899

1832

1812

1933

1856

1899

1867
37


1108

1180

1180

1213

1215

1352

1285

1144

1124

1285

1209
78


19 -;


4.9

5.2

4.8

4.9


21.4
2.0






-62-
Table 6. Meteorological and cultural characteristics of the agronomic tests with
confection sunflower at Gainesville, FL in 1980.

Characteristic Planting Dates

6 March 12 March 14 August

Planting to Emergence, Days 9 12 9
Emergence to Mid-flower, Days 68 68 43
Mid-flower to Maturity, Days 31 40 33
Emergence to Maturity, Days 99 108 76
Rainfall, inches
Planting to emergence 1.67 0.87 2.25
Emergence to Mid-flower 9.17 11.85 4.35
Mid-flower to Maturity 2.04 5.00 3.48
Total in life cycle 12.88 17.72 10.08
Grow. Degree Days (GDD), 32-80F 1/
Planting to Emergence 260 356 401
Emergence to Mid-flower 2493 2111 1867
Mid-flower to Maturity 1325 1318 1209
Emergence to Maturity 3818 3429 3076
Solar Radiation, PAR, E/m 2/
Planting to Emergence 258 426 392
Emergence to Mid-flower 2741 2292 1515
Mid-flower to Maturity 1396 1758 910
Emergence to Maturity 4137 4051 2425
Solar Radiation, Total, MJ/m2 3/
Planting to Emergence 121 202 188
Emergence to Mid-flower 1137 994 734
Mid-flower to Maturity 870 973 463
Emergence to Maturity 2008 1966 1197

1/ GDD is the summation of average daily temperature less the base temperature
of 32F.
2/ PAR recorded with a Licor Quantum Sensor and integrator in Einsteins per
square meter.
3/ Total solar radiation was measured with an Eppley Pyrenometer and recorded on
a Kipp and Zonen integrator in megajoules per square meter.

Original meteorological observational data courtesy, Dr. D. E. McCloud, Professor
(Agronomist) and Mr. Rick Hill, Laboratory Technologist, Agronomy, IFAS, Univer-
sity of Florida.
V. E. GREEN, JR.












-63-


Table Confection and Birdseed Sunflower Hybrid Characteristics, Gainesville, FL. 19/8 1980. DAYS. EHNGEBCE TO FLOWER
Acc. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980
lo. ..------------------------------------Date of Planting--------------------------------
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(W) Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug 16 Mar 6 Mar 12 Aug 14
--....----------------.------------------------------ Days----------------------------------------------------
C-L Oahlgren 0-715 52 52 --- --- -- --
C-2 Dahlgren 0-717 53 52 ---- -- ---- -- --
C-3 Dahlgren 0-818 52 51 ---- ---- -- ---- ---- 64 57 44
C-4 Dahlgren 0-719 48 48- -- -- -----
C-5 Dahlgren 0-821 53 52 ---- -- -- --- -- ---
C-6 Dahlgren 0-823 54 47 -- -- -- -----
C-7 Sheyenne 853 52 45 ---- ---- 76 55 58 44 ---
C-8 Sheyenne 883 50 45 48 --- --- ---
C-9 Sheyenne 923 56 53 51 ---- 64 63 61 50 -- ---
C-10 Sigco 852 50 51 49 52 ---- .--- -----
C-11 Sigco 923 50 58 49 49 ----- ---- ----
C-12 Sigco 924 49 52 51 52 67 57 58 51 67 58 44
C-13 Dahlgren 0-820 ---- ---- ---- --- 63 57 58 50 71 58 45
C-14 Dahlgren D-933 ---- ---- ---- ---- 68 57 57 40 66 59
C-15 Dahlgren 0-716 ---- ---- ---- ---- 65 58 58 40 65 56 44
C-16 Dahlgren 0-722 ---- ---- ---- ---- -- ------- ---- ----
C-17 Dahlgren D-135 ---- ---- ---- -- ----- -- -- ---- 67 59 45
C-18 Gurney Black
stripe ---- ---- -- -- -- -- 71 --- 43
C-19 Gurney Mamoth us ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- 72 ---- 43
C-20 Interstate Sundak -- --- ---- ------ ---- ---- ---- 70 58 46
C-21 Sigco 934 ---- ---- ---- -- --- ---- -- -- ---- 55 44
C-22 Interstate 15-924 ---- ---- ---- --- ---- ---- -- 59 45


Test Average 52 51 50 51 67 58 58 46 69 58 44













Tablet Confection and Birdseed Sunflor Hybrid Characteristics, Gainesvllle. FL. 1978 1980. PLANT HEIGHT
Acc. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980
NO. ......-----------------------------------ate of Planting-------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17() Aug 17E) Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug 16 Mar 6 Mar 12 Aug 14
S................................. .......cent ters--------------------------------- --------------
C-I Danigren 0-715 159 152 ----- --- -- -- --
C-2 Dahlgren 0-717 161 152 -- ---- ---- --
C-3 Dahlgren D-818 166 152 --- -- -- -- ---- ---- 94 147 130
C-4 Dahlgren 0-719 165 15 ---- ---- .... ---- ---- ---
C-5 Oahlgren 0-821 152 145 ---- -
C-6 Oahlgren 0-823 159 152 ... .-- ---- ---- --. ---- --
C-7 Sheyenne 853 !66 147 --- ---- 150 183 122 135
C-8 Sheyenne 883 130 109 112 .... --- ---- -
C-9 Sheyenne 923 169 150 140 --- 180 188 150 147 .
C-10 Sigco 852 169 157 140 137 --. ---- -- ----
C-ll Sigco 923 156 152 137 137 --- --- ---- .. ---
C-12 Sigco 924 155 157 147 131 163 170 147 152 109 157 132
C-13 Dahlgren D-820 ....---- ---- -- -- 142 191 135 135 99 140 119
C-14 Oahlgren D-933 ---- -- ---- ---- 160 183 132 117 99 147
C-15 Dahigren D-716 -.-- -- --- --- 178 175 135 119 97 130 114
C-16 Oantgren 0-722 ---- ---- .. --- ---- -- -- -
C-17 Dahlgren 0-135 99 30 122
C-18 Gurney lack
stripe 99 -..- 130
C-19 Gurney Maimoth Rus 173 ---- 147
C-0O Interstate Sundak 107 147 11I
C-21 Sigco 934 ---- 140 I14
C-22 Interstate IS-924 ---- 163 119

st ra----------------------------- 59 14 137 62 1--2 137 -----------34 109- - -45_-- 124
Test Ae'r age 159 -041__ 13 32 6? 18 137 i34 109 A4S 124












-64-


Table Confection and Birdseed Sunflawer Hybrid Characteristics, Gainesville, FL. 1978 M18. *EAD DIAMETERS
Acc. Brand Hybrid 1918 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 19W0 1980 198
o. -------------------------------------Date of Planting-------------------------------------------
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(U) Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb Z8 Apr 2 Aug 16 Irr 6 Iar 12 Aua 14


Danlgren D-715 24.4 16.5
Oahlgren 0-717 21.8 14.5 -
Dahlgren D-818 20.6 13.5 ---
Dahigren 0-719 20.6 14.0 -
Dahlgren 0-821 24.6 15.0
Dahlgren 0-823 21.6 15.2
Sheyenne 853 20.6 13.0 ----
Sheyenne 883 22.9 12.4 11.9
Sheyenne 923 23.1 14.2 15.2
Sfgco 852 30.7 13.7 15.5
SIgco 923 29.0 13.0 16.3
Sigco 924 26.4 12.2 14.5
Dahlgren 0-820 --- --- --
Dahlgren 0-933 --- -- ---
Dahlgren 0-716 ---- --- ---
Dahlgren 0-722 --- ---
Dahlgren 0-135
Gurney Black


-------- ----------- .. .. en t ime ters .......----... ......---.... ............. .............----------
---------- --enttrs-------C e------------



---- ---- -- ---- 11.7 13.7 12.7




--- 18.8 18.3 :6.3 10.9 ---


--- 18.8 17.0 18.8 14.0 .-
15.0 -- -- -- .... -- -- ----....
16.3 --- --- -- ..
15.0 17.8 17.8 16.3 12.2 12.2 14.5 13.5
--- 17.0 16.5 17.8 11.9 10.4 14.2 11.7
---- 19.3 17.8 20.8 13.2 13.0 16.0
---- 17.3 18.0 18.8 12.2 11.9 13.5 13.2


9.9 13.5 12.2
9.9 13.5 12.2


stripe 11.9 ---- 124
C-19 Gurney Maoth Rus 14.7 ---- 13.2
C-20 Interstate Sundak II.7 14.5 12.2
C-21 Sigco 934 ---- 14.7 12.4
C-22 Interstate 15-924 ..-- 18.5 12.2

Test Average --------23.9 --14.0 -- 14.7 --15.4-18.2 --17.6 -18.1 --12.4 11.9 14.7 -12.7
Test Average 23.9 14.0 14.7 15.4 18.2 17.6 18.1 12.4 11.9 14.7 12 7


Tablef4 Confection and Birdseed Sunflower HyDrld Characteristics, Gainesvlle, FL. 1978 1980. SEED YIELDS
Acc. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980
No. ------ ----------------------Date of Planting---------------------------------------------------------------
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17() Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb 8 Apr 2 Aug 16 Mar 6 Mar 12 Au 14
-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
C-1 Dahlgren 0-715 3000 860 .-- -- --- -- --
C-2 Dahlgren 0-717 3100 1340 ---- ... ------ -
C-3 Dahlgren 0-818 2930 840 ---- --- ---- -- ---- 90 1780 Sirds
C-4 ahllgren 0-719 1950 670 --- ---- -- ---- ----
C-5 Dahlgren 0-821 2840 970 ---- .... .- --
C-6 Dahlgren 0-823 2430 930 ---- --- -- -.--
C-7 Sheyenne 853 2670 880 ---- ---- 1680 2410 1550 1050 .. -
C-8 Sheyenne 883 2970 730 910 -- --- -- -
C-9 Sheyene 923 2830 950 1020 ---- 1280 2030 1920 1280 ---
C-10 SIgco 852 3610 950 1080 1370 -- --- -- --
C-ll Sg1co 923 2810 950 1000 1200 ---- -- -- ..
C-12 SIgco 924 4010 1020 1890 1290 1850 2620 1860 1150 570 1710 Birds
C-13 Dahlgren 0-820 ---- ---- ---- 1640 2320 1460 1120 550 1310 Birds
C-14 Dahlgren 0-933 --- --- ---- ---- 1840 1970 1570 1120 790 1700 -
C-15 Dahlgren 0-716 ---- ---- ---- ---- 1800 2500 2060 1120 590 1180 Birds


Dahlgren 0-722
Danlgren U-135
Gurney Black


460 1460


stripe 650 ---- ,ires
C-19 Gurney amOtn h us *) ---- -s
C-20 Interstate Sundak 690 180 B'res
C-21 Sigco 934 ...-- 3 Birds
C-22 Interstate 15-924 ---- '770 Birds


Test Average 2930 910 1180 1.90 1680 2310 1740 1140 670 1490 Birds




















Table fI, Confection and Birdseed Sunflower Hybrid Characteristics, Gainesville, FL. 1978 1980. 200-SEED WEIGHT'
Acc. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 19 1980 1980 1980
No. -- ------ ------ ------Date of Planting---- --------------------------------------
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(1) Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug 16 Mar 6 Mar 12 Au9 14
--------------------------........ .--------------------Grams----------- ---------------------------------------
C-1 Dahlgren 0-715 ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- ---- .... ----
C-2 Dahlgren D-717 --- -- -- ---- ---- ---- ...-
C-3 Dahlgren 0-818 ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- 13.5 14.7 Birus
C-4 Dahlgren 0-719 ---- ---- -- -- ---- --- --
C-S Dahlgren 0-821 --- ---- -- ---- ----
C-6 Dahlgren D-823 ---- ---- ---- --- ---- --- -
C-7 Sheyenne 853 ---- -- -- ---- 21.8 19.8 21.5 13.5 -- -
C-8 Sheyenne 883 --- -- --- -- ---- ----
C-9 Sheyenne 923 ---- -- ---- -- 20.2 19.6 21.9 14.0
C-10 Sigco 852 --- --- ----- ---- -- -
C-11 Slgco 923 ---- -- ---- ------ --- ----
C-12 Sigco 924 ---- ---- ---- ---- 21.9 20.4 22.1 13 B 13.3 14.4 Birds
C-13 Dahlgren 0-820 ---- --- --- ---- 21.1 19.9 23.3 15.8 11.6 14.4 Birds
C-14 Dahlgren 0-933 ---- ---- ---- -- 20.2 18.3 27.1 16.1 13.8 19.2
C-15 Danlgren 0-716 ---- ---- --- ---- 20.2 19.9 23.8 13.9 14.2 14.9 Birds
C-16 Dahlgren 0-722 ---- ---- --- ---- ---- ---- --- --
C-17 Dahlgren 0-135 11.5 15 4 Birds
C-18 Gurney Black
stripe 13.8 ---- Birds
C-19 Gurney Mamoth Rus 15.6 ---- Birds
C-20 Interstate Sundak 14.2 17.4 Birds
C-21 Sigco 934 ---- 16.3 Birds
C-22 Interstate IS-924 ---- 21.2 Birds
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Average ... .... ---- 20.9 19.7 23.3 14.5 13.5 16.4
SThese easureents did not begin until the 1979 Crop.
SThis test was ravaged by bird depredation,











Table J2 Contection and Birdseed Sunflower Hybrid Characteristtcs, Gainesville. FL. 1978 1980. KILOGRAMS PER HECTROLITER
Act. Brand Hybrid 1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 1980 1980
Ac. .. -----------------------------------. ate of Planting------------- ......
Mar 14 Apr 13_ Aug 17(W) Aug 17 Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug16 r 6 ar 12 Aug 14
------------------------------------------------------ h-----b
C-1 Uahlgren 0-715 21.4 21.2 --- --- --- ----
C-2 Dahlgren 0-717 13.2 21.9 ---- -- ---- .....
C-3 Uanlgren 0-818 25.7 21.6 .... .. 27.3 26.4 Birds
C-4 Dahlgren 0-719 25.1 20.6 -- ---- ---- -
C-b Danlgren 0-821 23.3 20.6 ---- ----
C-6 Dahlgren 0-823 22.5 20.6 ---- ---- .... ...
C-7 Sheyenne 853 24.8 19.9 ---- -- 27.4 32.2 31.9 28.6
C-8 Sheyenne 883 24.8 12.5 32.2 ---- -
C-9 Sheyenne 923 22.0 17.9 30.0 --- 21.6 24.8 29.6 27.0 --
C-10 Sigco 852 20.7 17.9 31.7 31.5 ---
C-ll Sigco 923 18.7 17.9 27.8 30.9 -- ---- -- -- -- -
C-12 5igco 924 24.6 21.2 31.5 31.7 25.7 29.6 30.6 28.7 24.5 25.1 Birs
C-13 ODhlgren 0-820 ...- -. 27.7 30.0 31.1 28 7 26.3 25.9 Birds
C-4 DaOhlgren 0-933 -- -- -- -- 23.2 2.8 30.2 25.2 23.2 5.1 .
C-15 Dahlgren 0-716 -- -- 5.1 27.4 29.6 263 24.7 22 9 Birds
C-16 ODhlgren 0-722 -- --- -- --- ---- ---- -- -- .-
C-17 Dahllgre -b ---- ....--- ---- 25.5 26 I Birds
C-18 Gurney Black
stripe .-- -------- -- ---- 26.8 -.-- Birds
C-19 gurney ammoth Rus *--- ---- -- 26.8 6.... Aids
C-20 Interstate Sundak ---- ... 24 26 3 Birds
0-21 -.-- 4 BirdS
C-22 Inrstt IS-924 ---------- --- ---- ---- ------------------------------------- ---- 250 ------------------------


et Average 23.2 0 3 30.6 31.4 25I 28.2 30.6 774 254 25.2
V This test was ravraed by Blrd depreation.

















RECAPIIULAII ON- AGONOMIC AND ItlDUiSfIIAL CIIARAC lRISTICS

"4'I1 13. Conifectlon and Blrdbed Sunflower Hlybrid ChardILterIst Ics, Galnesville, FI. 1978 1980.

1978 1978 1978 1978 1979 1979 1979 1979 1980 198q 8'j0
....----------------------------------Date of Planting ---------------- ------------------- ------ ---
Mar 14 Apr 13 Aug 17(W) Aug 17(E) Feb 2 Feb 28 Apr 2 Aug 16 Mar 6 Mai 12 Auj 14


Yields, Ki lograins/illu l .Ltur 2930 9 0 118 0 1290 1680 2310 1/'0 1140 G70 1'i 1. I/

Emeryiince Lu Hluower ilny, Days 52 51 50 51 67 58 58 45 b9 5U Ij3

Plant I eiyht CLent i ct.e-s 159 147 135 137 162 182 137 1 5 109 I'i' I

Seedhedd UidgmelLc[i Cm. 23.9 14 14.7 15.4 18.2 17.6 18.1 12.1 1 1.9 1 ./ 1 /
tri

re.s Weighl Poundb/Buu icl 18.0 19.8 23.8 24.4 19.5 21.9 23.8 21.3 19 .7 1 6 ..

Il st WuightL Ky/III. 23.2 20.3 30.6 31.4 25.1 28.2 30.6 27.4 25.4 2 1/

Weijlhts ol 100 ccud, Li .III- -- --- 20.9 19.7 23.3 14.5 1/. 15 I /


Niumitb: i l e iili l g iepi c l uted
IIn Uda(h f thLl c .vulig9e 12 12 1 3 b 6 6 6 9 9 10

1/lho lill I jOU j eSt. wa duv ,. tied by Ridwini, Bl lk bi li dud uOuld iot be sanpled lou yields aid otlier pidi lllu l urs' .





VICTOR E. GREEN




Table Il Laboratory quality analyses of the achenes and kernels of nine confectionery hybrids planted March 6 and 12, 1980.
Green Acres and Agronomy Farm, Gainesville, FL 1980.
--------------------ACHENES------------------------------------------KERNELS------------
BRAND HYBRID Percent Sample Retained on Screen Grams/ Hull- Adjusted Weight Weight of Roasting Data
22/64 20/64 18/64 16/64 200 Seed ability Percent of 20 20 CC Dark Color
score Kernels Kernels Kernels count Index

Green Acres Farm 3/12 -------- .
C-3 Dahlgren D-818 2 12 40 75 14.3 41 53 1.25 5.23 1.8 1.8
C-12 Sigco 924 14 58 90 98 17.6 50 54 1.26 5.15 1.3 2.3
C-13 Dahlgren D-820 6 20 48 78 15.1 24 55 1.21 5.34 3.2 2.7
C-14 Dahlgren D-933 11 48 78 91 19.2 17 48 1.32 5.19 1.8 1.9
C-15 Dahlgren D-716 9 30 65 87 16.3 36 47 1.18 5.14 4.7 2.7
C-17 Dahlgren D-135 5 19 52 85 15.3 23 52 1.15 5.51 1.0 2.2
C-20 Interstate Sundak 21 53 80 93 17.7 45 55 1.21 5.28 2.8 2.7
C-21 Sigco 934 15 44 62 93 16.5 47 53 1.18 5.14 3.5 2.2
C-22 Interstate IS-924 42 83 96 99 21.2 38 56 1.47 3.54 1.3 2.3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Average 14 41 68 89 17.0 36 53 1.25 5.06 2.4 2.3
Std. Dev. 12 23 19 8 2.2 12 3 0.10 0.58 1.2 0.3

Agronomy Farm 3/6
C-3 Dahlgren D-818 4 9 24 54 14.2 30 52 1.08 5.02 2.4 1.8
C-12 Sigco 924 4 33 67 89 13.9 50 52 1.10 4.91 0.6 1.2
C-13 Dahlgren D-820 0 5 26 67 14.0 31 47 1.15 5.26 0.6 2.2
C-14 Dahlgren D-933 0 15 58 84 15.8 28 40 1.03 5.10 1.2 1.7
C-15 Dahlgren D-716 4 17 50 78 15.3 31 48 1.09 4.99 1.2 2.2
C-17 Dahlgren D-135 3 9 30 70 12.7 33 50 0.91 5.10 1.8 2.8
C-18 Gurney Black
Stripe 9 24 57 81 14.6 44 48 1.10 5.35 3.0 3.0
C-19 Gurney Mammoth
Russian 18 44 71 90 16.8 39 53 1.05 5.18 0.5 2.2
C-20 G. Miller Sundak 7 24 60 86 14.6 44 36 1.16 5.22 0.6 2.0
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Test Average 5 20 49 78 14.7 37 47 1.07 5.12 1.3 2.1
Std. Dev. 5 13 18 12 1.2 8 6 0.07 0.14 0.9 0.5

See Tables 2 3 4 and 5 for the Agronomic and other characQteristics of the entries in these tests. Data courtesy
Dahlgren and Company, 1220 Sunflower Street, Crookston, MN, 56716, a division of Beatrice Foods.
James R. Lofgren
Victor E. Green,








Table 15. A recapitulation table showing the test average results of quality analyses of the achenes and kernels of
six confectionery hybrids of sunflower from four planting dates at Gainesville, Florida, 1979 and 9 hybrids
from two 1980 tests.

----------------ACHENES----------------- ---------------------KERNELS----------------------

Growing Season of Percent sample retained on screen Hull K e r n e l s Weight of 20 Roasting Data
the Experiment 22/64 20/64 18/64 16/64 Abil- Per- Adjus- Ker- CC of Dark Color
ity cent tes % nels Kernels count Index


1979 % % % % % % % g. g.

Feb. 2-May 21 16 50 76 88 9 43 41 1.11 4.84 0.9 3.5


Feb. 28-Jun. 4 7 32 63 83 13 43 42 1.08 4.89 0.0 2.7


Apr. 2-Jul. 13 11 40 66 84 9 44 42 1.38 4.91 1.0 2.8


Aug. 16-Nov. 10 10 25 53 79 31 41 37 1.14 5.08 0.1 3.1
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1980

Mar. 12-Jun. 30 14 41 68 89 36 53 1.25 5.06 2.4 2.3


Mar. 6-Jul. 1-7 5 20 49 78 37 47 1.07 5.12 1.3 2.1

See also Agronomy Research Report AG 80-1, Revised, December 1979 and Tables 1-4 of this present report.


James R. Lofgren
Victor E. Green, Jr.




NUT hUK PUBLILAIIUN


Table 16. List of the fungal and bacterial diseases recorded on sunflower plants at Gainesville, Florida,
1981..

1981
Disease and/or organism JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC


1. Alternaria alternate
(Fr) Keissler
2. Alternaria helianthi
(Hans.) Tubaki and Nishihara
3. Curvularia crepenni
(Westerd.) Boedijn
4. Curvularia lunata
(Wakker) Boedijn
5. Curvularia lunata var. aeria
(Baosta, Lima & Vascollcelos) Ellis
6. Drechslera halodes (Drech.)
Subram. and Jain
7. Fusarium spp.

8. Nigrospora spp.

9. Macrophomina phaseolina
(Tassi) Goid. charcoal rot
10. Sclerotium rolfsii
Sacc.
11. Rhizoctonia solani
Kuehn
12. Pscudomonas solanaccarum
E. F. Sm.
13. Erwinia carotavora var. atroseptica
(L. R. Jones) Hol ,
14. Rhizopus head rot

15. Erysiphe cichoracearum powdery mildew
DC
16. Pythium root rot


X X X X X


X X


X X


X X X

X X X


17. Phomopsis spp.

18. Cercospora helianthi leaf spot
Ell. and Ev.
(continued on next page)





NOT FOR PUBLICATION


Table 16. List of the fungal and bacterial diseases recorded on sunflower plants at Gainesville, Florida, 1981.
continuede)


1981
Disease and/or organism JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC


Fusarium solani (Mart.) Appel & Wr.

Alternaria zinniae Pape

Pestalotia sp.


22. Curvularia sp.

23. Penicillium sp.

24. Pseudomonas sp.

25. Fusarium roseum Link

26. Cladosporium sp.

27. Drechslera sp.

28. Trichoderma sp.


X



X X X X X



X


X X


Determinations courtesy of Dr. Shaw-Ming Yang, USDA-SEA-AR, Bushland, TX 79012




Appendix
Table 1


Growing Degree Days (GDD) (32-80F)* at the Aqronomy Farm, Campus, Gainesville, FL, 32611, 1980.


MONTH
Date/Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
.------------------------ -------- L---- GDD, 32-80F -----------

1 15.5 10.0 29.0 35.5 37.5 39.5 43.5 43.0 43.0 43.5 31.5 25.5
2 14.5 -- --34.0 36.5 39.0 45.0 44.5 44.5 38.5 31.0 30.0
3 17.0 ---- 38.5 36.5 40.5 44.0 44.5 43.0 40.0 38.0 30.5
4 21.5 11.5 --- 41.5 37.5 41.5 43.5 43.5 43.5 34.0 38.0 26.5
5 J190 14.0 28.0 30.0 38.0 435 44.5 4U 5 44- 9 3 4 11 32.0
6 11.0 15.5 35.0 28.0 37.5 45.0 45.0 45.0 41.5 34.5 23.0 31.0
7 18.0 13.5 35.0 34.5 37.5 42.0 43.0 45.5 44.0 34.5 25.0 26.0
8 25.0 16.5 38.0 39.5 38.5 41.5 45.5 45.5 42.0 36.0 29.5 29.0
9 31.0 27.5 36.0 40.0 37.5 45.5 45.0 44.5 42.5 36.0 36.5 (31.0)
10 32.5 i26.5 35.0 32.5 35.0 43.0 44.0 44.0 40.5 -.0 2- 31.O
11 34.0 17.5 36.5 31.0 39.5 42.5 44.5 44.5 42.0 36.0 32.0 28.0
12 31.5 18.5 36.5 39.0 37.5 40.5 46.5 44.5 41.5 37.0 28.0 20.5
13 21.0 20.5 43.0 40.5 39.5 42.5 43.5 44.5 41.5 33.0 30.5 22.0
14 20.5 25.5 29.0 38.5 40.5 37.5 48.0 44.5 43.0 37.5 35.5 23.5
15 23.0 32.0 27.5 25.5 40.5 39.0 43.5 43.5 42.5 38.0 40.5 25.0
16 26.0 31.5 31.5 27.0 39.0 41.0 44.0 44.5 43.5 40.5 40.5 20.5
17 32.0 19.5 38.5 30.0 43.5 39.0 44.0 45.0 43.5 40.5 38.5 21.5
18 35.0 16.0 41.0 34.0 43.0 42.0 44.0 46.5 43.0 40.5 36.0 16.5
19 30.5 26.0 34.5 38.0 43.5 44.0 46.0 45.0 43.5 41.5 24.0 20.0
20 25.0 26.0 40.5 34.5 43.0 43.0 45.0 44.5 43.0 43.5 21.0 21.0
21 .U 34.5 43.5 32.5 41.5 45.0 45.5 44.5 43.0 40.0 19.0 23.5
22 31.0 33.5 26.5 34.5 42.0 44.0 44.0 44.0 43.5 41.0 24.5 12.5
23 30.5 38.0 28.0 36.0 42.5 43.0 44.5 43.0 42.5 39.0 34.5 18.5
24 13.0 38.0 35.5 35.0 43.0 43.0 44.0 43.5 42.5 37.0 40.0 22.5
25 17.0 36.5 40.5 36.0 38.5 44.0 38.5 42.0 43.0 34.5 29.5 20.5
26 29.0 21.5 36.0 37.5 40.5 42.5 44.0 42.5 43.0 24.5 30.5 10.0
27 33.5 14.5 38.5 39.5 40.0 42.5 41.5 4 5 44.0 29.0 33.0 11.5
28 27.0 19.5 39.5 34.5 39.5 44.0 44.5 43.0 44.0 39.0 20.0 8.5
29 21.0 26.0 38.5 28.5 37.5 43.0 43.0 44.5 43.0 40.5 15.0 15.5
29 27.0 -- 38.5 34.5 39.0 43.5 43.5 43.5 43.0 41.5 18.0 20.0
31 28.5 ---- 37.0 -- 41.0 --- 43.0 43.0 ---- 32.0 ---- 17.5
Total 767.0 610.5 996.5 1040.5 1226.5 1266.5 1368.0 1368.5 1287.0 1150.5 916.0 691.5
Cumulative 767.0 1377.5 2374.0 3414.5 4641.0 5907.5 7275.5 8644.0 9931.0 11081.5 11997.5 1268J.0
Original data for weather furnished by Dr. D.E. Mc Cloud, Professor (Agronomist), IFAS, Gainesville.
Observations by Mr. Rick Hill, Laboratory Technologist, Agronomy Department, IFAS, Gainesville.
*Data omitted for days with minimums of lower than 28F. Light frow on 3/2; 22F on 3/3. V. E. GREEN, JR.






Total Radiaton, /m2, Agronomy Farm, Campus, Gainesville, Florida, 32611,
Total Radiation, MJ/m Agronomy Farm, Campus, Gainesville, Florida, 32611,


MONTH
Date/Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
-----------------------------------------Total Rad, MJ/m2 ---- --------1--------- ------------

1 8.7 16.6 8.1 11.6 7.3 25.9 27.9 22.0 20.7 13.5 16.5 12.2
2 13.9 14.3 2.4 3.4 22.0 26.8 24.4 19.2 10.1 12.5 16.7 12.2
3 13.0 10.8 22.0 19.9 16.1 27.2 21.8 22.5 13.3 12.5 11.3 13.9
4 2.0 17.2 21.8 6.1 23.2 23.8 26.9 25.4 20.0 21.5 8.9 12.5
5 13.6 16.6 13.2 26.2 24.3 24.9 24.3 24.5 22.1 20.8 17.0 12.2
T- 14.2 15.9 18.2 18.0 23.7 23.1 24.1 23.3 21.1 19.9 16.8 11.6
7 13.6 17.1 18.9 6.9 23.0 22.0 24.1 23.7 20.7 6.7 16.6 13.2
8 9.1 12.7 15.0 19.8 8.5 23.3 21.4 22.6 18.6 20.1 15.4 12.6
9 6.8 16.0 2.7 11.5 6.3 13.6 26.6 23.7 16.8 19.8 7.9 11.0
10 4.4 3.2 3.5 25.7 22.9 13.7 26.1 21.1 20.5 19.3 8.9 7.5
711 3 9.7 17.7 26.3 27.2 25.5 20.3 26.4 22.1 18.3 7.6 10.1
12 2.6 12.6 12.4 22.6 26.6 25.1 16.5 19.4 13.3 19.9 15.0 13.2
13 2.8 5.9 9.5 24.0 27.0 23.2 21.0 11.1 15.2 19.7 11.5 13.2
14 4.2 5.3 22.6 14.3 23.0 26.1 16.7 10.7 20.0 17.2 10.2 13.1
15 13.9 14.4 21.8 24.0 16.2 22.0 21.2 20.8 20.6 17.6 6.4 12.1
16 14.1 7.3 18.0 26.9 12.5 24.3 24.8 24.5 11.4 16.7 7.7 4-6
17 9.2 17.7 13.9 26.2 17.6 25.8 26.2 22.3 9.8 16.8 2.6 7.2
18 7.9 11.6 9.7 23.8 25.5 21.4 18.7 12.2 16.2 14.0 11.6 13.0
19 14.4 14.6 12.9 13.3 25.5 21.8 24.7 20.9 22.0 14.7 11.2 12.9
20 15.1 13.0 14.6 16.3 21.5 16.3 19.8 22.3 20.0 12.7 4.2 12.3
21 14.5 12.4 19.5 25.6 25.1 19.4 25.1 19.4 17.6 10.2 14.5 4.b
22 11.8 17.9 24.9 25.9 12.7 14.3 21.4 22.1 16.2* 5.6 12.6 4.5
23 8.0 10.2 22.4 21.3 8.5 18.3 18.6 12.5 21.2 2.8 10.0 6.7
24 16.2 4.8 17.6 24.7 23.7 20.1 3.5 22.6 22.6 3.6 2.3 9.3
25 5.9 8.0 17.4 22.4 17.2 13.2 2.0 18.1 12.9 17.3 10.4 12.6
26 1.6 21.3 20.0 23.0 24.7 5.4 12.0 18.3 19.6 18.8 8.1 10.1
27 9.1 17.0 6.3 16.2 23.8 21.0 18.6 19.6 12.5 16.2 4.7 7.9
28 6.2 20.2 16.5 25.2 22.3 22.1 23.5 20.8 14.5 4.2 8.5 2.8
29 15.5 15.8 3.9 21.8 25.7 22.7 14.6 20.8 16.0 12.4 15.2 2.2
30 15.6 ---- 9.2 21.2 24.9 11.6 22.1 20.1 13.7 7.0 14.1 12.5
32.4 ---- 24.9 ---- 24.6 24.9 20,4 44 13.5


Total
Cumulative


297.6
297.6


380.1
677.7


461.5
1139.2


593.9


632.8


1733.1 2365.9


623.6
2989.5


643.8
3633.3


__ __ __ __ a __ _ _._ _ _. .- __ __ _ __


633.1
4266.4


521.3
4787.7


436.7
5224.4


324.5
5548.9


_317.4
S5866.3,


Original data for weather furnished by Dr. D.E. Mc Cloud, Professor (Agronomist), IFAS, Gainucville.
Observations by Mr. Rick Hill, LaboraLory Technologist, Agronomy Department, IFAS, Gaincsville.
* Estimated value. V. E. GREEN, JR.


Appendix
Table 2


1980.




Appendix
Table 3


Photosynthetically Active Radiation, (PAR), E/m2, Agronomy Farm, Campus, Gainesville, FL 32611. 1980


MY MONTH
Date/Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
--------------------------------- -------- PAR, E/m2/day--------

1 18.5 32.9 18.2 25.0 16.3 52.2 55.6 45.8 42.7 26.5 31.5 24.1
2 28.7 29.2 5.5 8.1 45.5 54.9 50.4 40.8 22.1 25.5 32.6 24.5
3 27.6 22.5 43.3 42.5 33.8 55.6 46.1 47.2 28.2 25.2 22.6 26.3
4 5.4 34.2 43.3 13.7 47.9 49.0 56.6 52.6 42.3 41.1 18.5 23.7
5 27.8 34.2 28.3 52.2 49.5 50.8 51.4 50.4 45.7 40.3 31.7 22.8
6 28.9 32.4 38.5 37.1 46.7 46.8 50.0 48.2 44.3 39.2 31.5 23.5
7 28.3 34.5 39.5 15.9 46.5 44.4 49.1 49.2 42.6 13.7 31.1 25.5
8 20.1 26.8 32.5 41.6 18.2 46.8 43.7 47.0 38.3 39.3 29.4 23.5
9 15.6 34.2 6.7 24.7 14.0 28.8 53.8 49.1 34.0 39.2 16.6 20.7
10 10.2 i 7.5 8.6 52.7 47.1 28.7 53.5 43.8 42.1 37.8 18.1 15.1
11 16.1 20.6 37.5 52.4 56.3 52.0 41.5 55.1 44.7 36.2 15.4 21.7
12 6.7 26.8 27.6 47.0 54.9 50.0 33.7 40.9 28.1 38.5 28.3 25.4
13 6.8 14.2 21.1 49.6 55.4 46.6 42.6 24.3 32.0 38.0 22.7 25.3
14 9.9 12.8 45.7 29.7 47.8 51.3 34.7 23.2 41.9 33.6 20.7 23.9
15 28.8 33.0 45.2 48.0 34.9 44.1 43.2 43.5 42.9 34.5 13.9 (24.7)
16 30.3T 17.2 38.3 53.1 26.7 48.5 50.9 51.2 24.3 33.5 16.2 .0
17 20.9 38.2 30.7 52.8 37.2 52.1 53.3 46.7 21.2 34.3 6.1 19.7
18 18.0 25.9 22.0 48.8 53.4 43.9 38.8 25.7 34.5 28.3 22.8 24.5
19 30.9 32.6 28.5 28.1 53.2 44.6 51.8 43.8 45.1 29.0 21.4 24.5
20 32.3 30.0 31.8 33.8 i45.5 34.6 42.2 46.6 41.3 25.2 8.8 (25.2)
21 31.4 28.5 40.6 51.3 52.5 40.1 52.2 40.0 37.1 20.4 27.1 9.6
22 25.8 40.2 49.2 51.6 27.1 30.3 45.1 45.0 33.1 12.0 24.4 9.3
23 17.9 23.8 45.4 42.8 18.5 38.6 40.2 25.8 43.0 6.3 20.1 17.4
24 32.9 11.5 37.3 49.9 49.4 42.4 8.1 45.9 43.8 7.8 5.2 1 O.0
25 13.5 18.6 37.4 45.6 35.4 28.5 4.8 37.8 27.8 32.1 206 22.6
26 4.2 44.9 42.5 47.2 50.6 12.1 25.9 38.3 40.5 34.6 16.6 17.2
27 20.5 36.4 14.3 34.0 48.1 44.1 40.0 40.9 27.7 31.5 10.3 13.3
28 14.0 43.3 34.9 49.5 45.3 46.6 49.0 43.8 28.5 9.1 16.7 5.5
29 32.9 35.0 9.5 43.7 51.4 47.1 31.8 43.2 33.6 25.2 27.4 (9.5)
30 33.4 ---- 20.1 43.0 50.3 24.5 45.7 41.9 31.0 14.8 26.9 2338
31 6.0 ---- 50.4 ---- 49.8 .- 52.0 42. 94 r 27.6


Total
r I imI t i P


644.3 J821.9
-AT. T l466~2-


974.4
A4o 6 -


1215.4
3656.0


1309.0
4965.0


1280.0
6245.0


1337.7
7582.7


...u II. a -I I


1320.3
8903.0


1084.4
9987.4


862. 4 6358.1 L 6z240.
10849.8 11484'9i12109.;3


Original data for weather furnished by Dr. D.E. Mc Cloud, Professor (Agronomist), IFAS, Gainesville.
Observations by Mr. Rick Hill, Laboratory Technologist, Agronomy Department, IFAS, Gainesville.
V. E. GREEN, JR.


I i


i





Appendix
Table 4


Rainfall distribution at the Agronomy Farm, Campus, Gainesville, FL, 32611.


1980.


Rainfall in inches and hundreths
MONTH
Date/Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
---------------------------- inches & Hdts. -----------------------------------------

1 .15 T .11 .15
2 .10 1.68 T T T
3 .02 .91 .44 T
4 1.10 .19 .02 .59 T
5 T .36 .30 ___
6 T
7 .04 .12
8 90 .04 .06
9 T 84 .09 1.09 .18 .32
10 .12 .61 .02 T .21 .38 T
T11 T .06
12 .10 14
13 1.40 .22 .54
14 .22 .02 .62
15 _T .45 .29 57
16 .46 .48 .64 .04 .02 .12
17 .13 .40 .23 .51 .07
18 i .02 .06 .04 .55 .02 .02
19 .25 .13 .21 .04 T
20 ..02 .03 __ T
21 .04 .16 .03 .52
22 .59 .44 T .01 .05
23 1.05 .53 .02 .58 .72 .04 .74 .01
24 1.13 .15 1.57 .01 .06 .35
25 .02 .56 .16 2.51 .08
26 1.62 .03 .59 .87 .09
27 .58 T .01 .21 .20
28 .01 .01 .12 .60 .32 .03
29 .11 .15 .97 .31 .ol
30 .87 .19 1.31 .43 T
31 .12 ---
Total 6.20 1.88 2.97 4.18 5.08 2.29 8.66 3.18 3.71 1.70 2.02 0.28
Cumulative ~6.2 1 -O F.- 05 15.23 20.31 22.60 31- 2 -34.'4 38.15 39.85 41.87 42.15
Original data for weather furnished by Dr. D.E. Mc Cloud, Professor (Agronomist), IFAS, Gainesville.
Observations by Mr. Rick Hill, Laboratoiy Technologist, Agronomy Department, IFAS, Gainesville.
Light snow on 3/2/80. V. E. GREEN, JR.





Appendix Table 5. Rainfall distribution at the Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL, 32611. 1980. Data
courtesy of Mr. Harry Wood, Agronomy Dept. Institute of food Agricultural Sciences.

MONTH
Qate/Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
--------------------------------.-------- Inches & Hdths.---------------------------------------

I 0.17 0.04
2 0.30 3.20
3 0.15 o
4 1.20 0.84
5 _____ 0____.60
6 0.81
7 0.03 E
8 T 1.87 0.07
9 0.01 1.33 0.05
10 0.21 0.98 0.16 0.22
11 0.77 0.57 0.06
12 0.02 0.71
13 1.32 0.02 0.52 0.17 o
14 0.04 0.10
15 ____0.61 0.16 0.23
16 ) 0.17 U
17 0.56 0.19 0.66 0.90 j
18 1.04 0.85 0.01 0.07
19 0.26 1 .24
20 0.14 0.54 0.01 .o
21 0.Ol 0.14
22 0.49 0.30 0.26 0.54
23 0.04 0.40 0.01 0.21
24 0.32 2.85 0.14
25 0.03 ____0.50 1.70___


26
27
28
29
30
31


2.23


1.51


0.01


1 .23


0.13


0.37
0.73


3.87

1 .25


0.14
0.13
0.08
0.07


J


0.44


0.02


Total 5.50 0.97 4.99 5.33 6.25 3.76 9.37 4.98 1.25 1.56 0.37
Cumulative 5.50 -.-7 1-1. 4- q l.679 23.T- 26.'0o 36.17 41.15 42.40 43.96 44.33
Original data for weather furnished by Dr. A.J. Norden Professor (Agronomist), IFAS, Gainesville.
Observations by Mr.Harry Wood, Laboratory Technologist, Agronomy Department, IFAS, Gainesville.
V. E. GREEN, JR.







-75-


Appendix
Table 6 Maximum and minimum Temperatures, Monthly, Agronomy
Farm and Green Acres Farm, Gainesville, FL. 1976-1580.


Agronomy Farm


Month/Year


January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December


1976
MAX MIN


67.9
75.4
81.2
82.2
84.9
88.1
92.5
91.1
88.8
80.4
70.9
67.6


39.3
46.8
54.9
55.4
63.2
67.9
71.1
71.0
68.2
55.5
45.4
44.9


1977
MAX MIN


60.4
68.4
80.8
83.2
89.5
95.7
95. 1
92.1
91.1
81.6
77.5
68.6


36.2
40.5
56.7
55.4
62.6
70.5
71.9
73.0
71.9
56.5
55.1
45.4


1978
MAX MIN


63.5
62.4
74.8
84.6
88.4
90.8
90.7
91.9
91.2
84.1
81.3
73.1


40.1
39.5
48.8
55.1
64.1
70.6
72. 1
71.1
69.0
60.2
56.1
49.5


1979 1980
MAX MIN MAX MIN


66.0
68.5
77.2
82.7
86.0
90.7
93.2
91.5
88.1
84.8
77.2
69.5


42.0
42.1
48.6
59.2
62.5
68.1
72.8
71.2
71.9
58.8
53.3
46.9


68.6
66.7
78.3
81.2
87.0
91.5
93.2
93.3
91 .5
82.2
73.6
67.3


44.6
41.3
53.7
55.0
63.4
68.4
72.3
72.3
69.8
59.5
51.6
41.2


Green Acres Farm


-- ---- 64.1 35.6
---- -- 66.8 38.5
75.9 44.2 77.8 43.6
85.7 50.1 82.4 53.3
89.7 59.1 87.6 57.3
92.3 66.6 92.2 63.8
92.0 67.6 95.2 68.1
93.7 65.3 94.0 66.9
89.4 63.4 90.0 68.2
86.6 51.2 85.4 51.1
80.9 49.8 75.7 42.1
70.9 44.8 .


Data from
Green Acres
was not used
in 1980 since
recordings
are not made
for weekends
or holidays.


Data courtesy Dr. Darell E. McCloud, Professor, Agronomy
Department, IFAS, UF, Gainesville, FL. and Mr. Harry Wood,
Agricultural Technician, Green Acres Farm.

V. E. Green, Jr.


1978
MAX MIN


1979
MAX MIN


January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December


1980
MAX MIN







-76-


Appendix
Table 7 Rainfall, Monthly, Agronomy Farm and
Green Acres Farm, 1976-1980 Gainesville, FL.


Month/Year

January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December


1976
In.
1.20
1.49
1.46
3.19
6.38
11.37
4.59
2.84
5.36
2.21
2.78
4.97


Agronomy Farm
1977 1978
In. In.
3.35 6.20
4.16 4.98
1.22 4.52
0.83 0.64
0.46 3.48
2.26 3.90
1.44 10.36
7.10 9.64
5.72 0.25
0.13 0.47
1.95 0.07
4.94 4.79


Annual Total 47.84 33.56 49.27 62.17 -- 42._15_


January
February
March
April
May
June
July
August
September
October
November
December


Annual Total


Green Acres Farm
1976 1977 1978
In. In. In.


3.98
0.37
3.69
3.91
10.59
4.94
0.68
0.05
2.50
2.08


1979
In.
9.09
2.32
1 .34
6.76
4.17
4.46
7.43
6.69
9.82
0.21
1.55
4.91


1980

5.50
0.97
4.99
5.33
6.25
3.76
9.37
4.98
1.25

----


58.75


Data courtesy Dr. Darell E. McCloud, Professor,
Agronomy Department, IFAS, UF, Gainesville, FL.
for the Agronomy Farm Data and Mr. Harry Wood
for the Green Acres Farm.


V. E. GREEN, JR.


1979
In.
10.04
3.34
1.17
8.18
3.36
4.55
4.39
7.39
12.23
0.11
1.32
6.09


1980

6.20
1.88
2.97
4.18
5.08
2.29
8.66
3.18
3.71
1 .70
2.02
0.28


_







-77-


Appendix
Table 8. Solar Radiation: Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) and
Total Radiation (TOTAL) recorded at the Main Station Agronomy Farm, 1977-


1980, Gainesville, Florida.


By Month.


1/
Photosynthetically Active (PAR) and Total Radiation -

1977 1978 1979 1980
PAR TOTAL PAR TOTAL PAR TOTAL PAR TOTAL
Month E/M2 MJ/M2 E/M2 MJ/M2 E/M2 MJ/M2 E/M2 MJ/M2

January ---- --- 664 341 631 316 644 298

February ---- --- 651 325 669 333 822 380

March ---- --- 1030 515 1112 564 974 462

April ---- --- 1347 688 1151 574 1215 594

May ---- --- 1349 668 1335 663 1309 633

June ---- --- 1259 610 1247 614 1280 624

July ---- --- 1180 567 1336 655 1338 644

August 1219 562 1227 606 1170 568 1320 633

September 1138 551 1044 515 804 425 1084 521

October 976 496 901 448 976 517 802 437

November 682 316 702 347 805 364 635 325

December 554 291 602 298 652 304 624 317
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL ---- --- 11,956 5,928 11888 5897 12109 50oc

/ E/M2 = Einsteins per square meter; MJ/M2 = megajoules per square
meter. To nearest unit.
Datafurnished by Dr. D. E. McCloud, Professor (Agronomist) IFAS,
University of Florida, Gainesville. Mr. Rick Hill, Observor.
PAR recorded with a Licor Quantum Sensor and integrator. Total radia-
tion measured with an Eppley Pyrenometer and recorded on a Kipp and
Zonen integrator.


V. E. GREEN, JR.







Appendix Table9 .


Growing Degree Days (GDD), 32-80F for sunflower, per day at the Green Acres (GA)
Farm and the Agronomy (AY) Farm, 1978-1980, Gainesville, Florida.


Growing Degree Days (GDD) per day, 32-80F
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

1978

GA --- ---- 27.6 32.4 37.6 41.3 41.8 40.6 39.8 33.9 32.4 25.0

AY 20.4 19.5 29.4 35.4 40.1 43.3 44.0 43.5 42.5 37.9 35.6 28.5

1979

GA 19.6 21.4 27.5 33.8 36.0 39.9 42.1 41.5 42.1 33.6 28.2

AY 22.7 23.5 30.7 37.4 39.2 42.1 44.4 43.5 44.0 37.4 32.7 26.3

1980

GA

AY 24.7 21.1 32.1 34.7 39.6 42.2 44.1 44.1 42.9 37.1 30.5 22.3

AVERAGE

GA 19.6 21.4 27.6 33.1 36.8 40.6 42.0 41.1 41.0 33 8 30.3 25.0

AY 22.6 21.4 30.7 35.8 38.8 42.5 44.2 43.7 43.1 43.1 32.9 25.7


V. E. GREEN, JR.





Appendix
Table 1Q List of the fungal and bacterial diseases recorded on sunflower
1978- 1980.


plants at Gainesville, Florida,


1980
Disease and/or organism 1978 1979 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV UEt


1. Alternaria alternate
(Fr) Keissler
2. Alternaria helianthi
(Hans.) Tubaki and Nishihara
3. Curvularia crepenni
(Westerd.) Boedijn
4. Curvularia lunata
(Wakker) Boedijn
5. Curvularia lunata var. aeria
(Baosta, Lima & Vascollcelos) Ellis
6. Drechslera halodes (Drech.)
Subram. and Jain
7. Fusarium spp.


X X


X X

X

X
x


X X


8. Nigrospora spp.


9. Macrophomina phaseolina
(Tassi) Goid. charcoal rot
10. Sclerotium rolfsii
Sacc.
11. Rhizoctonia solani
Kuehn
12. Pseudomonas solanacearum
E. F. Sm.
13. Erwinia carotavora var. atroseptica
(L. R. Jones) Holl.
14. Rhizopus head rot

15. Erysiphe cichoracearum powdery mildew
DC


16. Pythium


root rot


17. Phomopsis spp.


18. Cercospora helianthi leaf spot X I/
Ell. and Ev.
------------------------(continued on next page)
(continued on next page)


VICTOR E. GREEN




Appendix
Table 1Q List of the fungal and bacterial diseases recorded on sunflower plants at Gainesville, Florida,
(continued)1978- 1980'.


1980
Disease and/or organism 1978 1979 JUL AUG SEP OCI NUV Eu-


19. Fusarium solani (Mart.) Appel & Wr. X X

20. Alternaria zinniae Pape X

21. Pestalotia sp. X

22. Curvularia sp. X

23. Penicillium sp. X X

24. Pseudomonas sp. X

25. Fusarium roseum Link X
--------------------------------- a
1/ Isolated from Helianthus tuberosus, Jerusalem artichoke.











Determinations courtesy of Dr. Shaw-Ming Yang, USDA-SEA-AR, Bushland, TX 79012.and Dr. G. W. Simone, IFAS, UF.


V. E. GREEN, JR.





























Fmarmn


Battle

By TIORNTON HARTLEY
Tmies-Union Form Editor
GAINESVII.I.E A fungus
ease known as Alternaria leaf
continues to take the Iluster from
bright hopes that farmers had a
pie of years ago for sunflowers to
come an Important crop for then
But Dr. Victor Green Jr., an
ronomlsl, and some associates at
University of Florida have not
come discouraged ahoul the p
pecls for sunflowers.
They have continued research
sunflowers, with Alternaria one of
main subjects in mind as they
duct tests and trials on varieties
cultural practices.
A report on the work that
been done in Florida in 1979 has
come out It Is a 100 page docur
enllled, "Oilseed Sunflowel
search in Florida, 1979." with p;


Jha loriba Mimes- ln1on

Jacksonville, Monday, March 17, 1980 B-3


against sunflower fungus to continue

and cover a bright sunflower yellow gus disease. Five of the lines, all orig- disease wiped out much of the corn again in 1980 in hopes of attaining ml- is real tough against fr
color inating near Corpus Christi, Texas, crop nor use or state labels for Florida In trials this year,
dis- In it Green called the Altenaria did have some slight resistance, The tall crop did well, encourage. use, he said in the report. found out that the bla
sot leaf and stem disease "the main though, said Green, which offers hope ing many more farmers to plant in Simone feels that it will be March 2 was too mud
y stumbling block in the successful pro that resistant lines can be developed. the spring, shown that there are materials which flowers.
cou. duclion of the crop." Green indicates in conversations But Alternaria hit, cutting yields are effective against the fungus. He had plots out
be lie said this in a discussion about that he views Alternaria as a problem so that most growers lost money But he stresses that "it's planted on Jan. 16 and
plans for a plant breeder to begin that can he solved and will be in a University specialists had ad- premature to endorse any fungicide." had survived freezing
working in the Southeast to develop few more years, vised against extensive plantings of Even when proven to be effec the big freeze, but the
ag- improved varieties for the area the crops, saying that not enough re live, a chemical would have to go subfreezing weather w
the "Th first duty of the breeder lie says he is not making predic search had Ixen done to know all the through the process of labeling for they could take.
be will logically btx to locate and develop tion but feels that a goal would be pitfalls that night beset the crop this use. This is costly for the co The report noted
ros resistance it) Allernalla leaf and that "within five years we will have i The report noted
res istance to Allenana leaf and ot pretty well licked Green says now that Alternaria palies and it would be a question of of sunflower oil being u
stemi disease of sunflower," he wrote P e ikr is the only botlleneck to production of whether they would do so the tight oil situation
h on The breeder will be located at le tis tht the n as the crop. "We've got everything else Simone agrees that the final an-
the Clemson University, he said, with will be in the development of resis figured out," he said from production swer would be to breed In resistance "If any of these u
con support coming from institutions and tant vaS ties to marketing but he thinks that while this Is being cessful, it could chat
ani groups interested in the development "It's no different than any other What about fungicides to control done a fungicide ran be found that make tng practice of
ol the crop crop," he said. "When you grow them the disease? Dr. Gary Simone, Unt- can give sufficient control for the f the ahene oversee
has About 500 lines of sunflowers the first time they have a bunch of versity of Florida plant pathologist, farmers to make some money in the report
)lst were planted in a "itisease nursery" diseases," conducted research on this, but the "Once we get Alternaria licked "In addition, if t
ent Ito lest the plants against Allernaria Farmers turned to sunflowers as results were inconclusive because of sunflowers can be planted from Feb pressed in the USA, I
Ie. and olher diseases, an alternate crop in the fall of 1977 poor disease buildup in the test plots. ruaiy through August," said Green available many thousa
aKgs All were susceptible to the fun and spring of 1978 after drought and The miaerials will be evaluated "'lhe crop has so much going for It It high portein meal for li


I
ost."
Green, though, I
st of cold on
h for the sun-

which he had
Feb. 12 They
nights before
many hours of
'as more than

the possibility
Lsed for fuel in

ses prove suc-
ige the usual
shipping most
s," said Green

he seed were
t would make
iuds of tons of
vestock feed "


























S P TD,


A beautiful semi-postal from Indonesia with the word MATIHARI
in the upper right corner. The leaves show either senescence
or a nutrient deficiency for realism.


iYf~i$ -







-83-


PUBLISHED LITERATURE AND MANUSCRIPTS ON CONFECTIONERY SUNFLOWER IN FLORIDA













roga3nbtifc Flos Solis Peruuianus.
eodciutlm.


WOODCUT DRAWING OF SUNFLOWER PARTS FROM AN HERBAL BY PIERANDREA MATTIOLI 1586

This was a German version published nine years after Mattioli's death in 1577.
Note the name of the plant is given in both Latin (Flos Solis Peruuianus)and
German (Sonnenblum). This drawing appeared, among other places, in the 1586
herbal from Frankfort, Germany, entitled DE PLANTIS EPITOME UTILISSIMA.


V. E. GREEN, JR.







-84-

Reprinted from Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida
Proceedings, Volume 38, September 12-14, 1978

Sunflower in Florida: History, Progress, Problems,
and Prospects'
VICTOR E. GREEN, JR., WILLIAM G. GENLNG,
AND GORDON B. KILLINGER2


ABSTRACT
In anticipation of sunflower (Helianthus annus L.)
becoming an alternative crop and an entry in multiple
or relay cropping systems in Florida, agronomic tests
with the crop have been conducted. Very early plant-
ings, as soon as the danger of hard frosts has past,
have been the most successful. Yields equal to or
higher than those normally received in the usual areas
of production'in the USA, the northern and southern
great plains, have been obtained in north-central
Florida, especially in years when diseases have not
been serious. Hybrids have been tested as soon as they
became available. Oil yields per unit weight and unit
area of production have been satisfactory. Yield varia-
tions of non-oil hybrids have followed the general
pattern of the oil-seed hybrids, i.e., very early planted
tests produced high yields of largeseeded, heavy test
weight seeds of high quality. Commercial production
of oilseed hybrids has produced high quality oil in
cottonseed mills adapted for oil extraction from
Florida produced seed. Early plantings seems to be
the only solution for escaping the ravages of an Al-
ternaria-like disease until a breeding effort is success-
ful in producing cultivars tolerant or resistant to the
disease. Since no Florida state improvement program
is planned, it is fortunate that companies in the pri-
vate sector are producing hybrids for use in Florida.
A survey of insects possibly damaging to sunflower
in south Florida was conducted at the Agricultural
Research and Education Center at Belle Glade. A list
of these insects arranged according to order and
family appears in the text. A sufficient variety of in-
secticides is available on the present market to combat
these pests.
Additional Index Words: Helianthus annuus L.;
Fatty acids, Oilseed, Compositae.


INTRODUCTION
The sunflower, Helianthus annuus L., a North
American wildflower of the Compositae family of
plants, has made great evolution to the improved oil-
seed plant of today. It probably originated in Mexico
and was introduced into Europe in the 16th Century.
It spread across Europe as an ornamental and was
fit t grown and improved as an oilseed crop in the
USSR. Its value as a silage crop there is well docu-
mented. Oil contents now are over 50%1 of the dry
weight of the fruit and 60%1o of the decorticated seed.
As a worldwide oilseed crop it is second only to soy-
bean. The meal ricmnining after oil extraction contains
about 30%' protein and is high in fiber. The crop is

'Contribution from the Agronomy Department, IFAS, Uni-
\ersity of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611 and the AREC, IFAS,
University of Florida, Belle Glade, FL 33430. Journal Series No.
1638.
1Professor (Agronomist); Professor (Entomologist); and Pro-
fessor Emeritus (Agronomist), respectively.


also grown to provide a confection for human con-
sumption as nutmeats, both hulled and unhulled, and
as a feed for both wild and tame birds. Good crops of
sunflower average about two metric tons of seed per
hectare. The crop is resistant to temperatures slightly
below freezing in both the seedling and maturity
stages, enabling it to be planted from February
through August in north Florida, to ripen from June
until December. It is more resistant to drought than
corn and sorghulm since its roots can feed at lower
depths. As with all other crops, it is subject to damage
by a number of insects and diseases. Improvement
efforts for resistance are underway in both public
and private breeding programs. Main areas of pro-
duction in the USA are in the Red River Valley in
Minnesota and the Dakotas. The crop matures in
Florida months ahead of these areas and can enter
the export markets earlier.
Sunflower is in its early stages of development in
the USA. Hybrid sunflower was not generally planted
until 1972. Most private companies had only a few
hybrids ready for sale in 1978. These include hybrids
made from inbreds released from the USDA program,
which dates from the 1960 decade. Most of the USA
sunflower area is planted to USDA 894 germplasm.
The research effort on sunflower in Florida is
generally limited to characterizing the available hybrids
for agronomic and industrial potential. This paper
outlines that effort from 1971 through 1978. In addi-
tion, a survey of the potential insects was made in
southern Florida.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
All the experiments reported in this paper were
made on plowed and disked land. Rows were 90 cm
apart. Tests were performed on sandy soils at the
Agronomy Farm and the Green Acres Farm in Alachua
County. Weeds were controlled with Treflan (tri-
furalin) while soil insects and nematodes were
controlled by Furadan (N-methyl carbamate). No
disease control measures were practiced. Fertilizers
were applied according to needs as assayed by soil tests
to furnish plant foods above the thresholds of values
established for the crop. Each plot was seeded to give
sufficient plants for thinning to final stands of 50,000
plants per hectare. Plots were harvested as they
imatured t) cutting the seed heads, putting them into
loose mesh bags, dri-ing in forced air ovens at about
43 C to constant weight, threshing in a Vogel thresher,
aspirating chaft inl a Bates aspirator, weighing, and
extrapolating these weights to hectare yields, corrected
for moisture content to a 10, base. Weights per unit
volume were converted to kg/hl from apparatus using
avoirdupois measures in the laboratory.
Oil analyses were made in the USDA laboratories
at Athens, GA and Fargo. ND using nuclear magnetic
resonance, a non-destructive assay. Fatty acid analyses
were performed by the usual methods employed at
those laboratories.








-85-

PROCEEDINGS, VO1.UME 38, 1979 29


The tests were irrigated only as necessary to pre-
vent water stress. Sidedressing of ammonium nitrate
during crop growth was geared to the crop needs.
All tests were planted in randomized complete
blocks with four replications. There were either three
or four rows per plot. Rows selected for harvest were
bordered by either one or two rows of the same cultivar
of sunflower.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 1 shows the results of yield tests between
1971 and 1974 with open-pollinated (OP) varieties
and USDA hybrids. These were the best yields ever
obtained in Florida and we have been unable to
reproduce these results in recent years even when
using the newer proprietary hybrids planted at the
same time of year. Very early planting evidently had a
lot to do with obtaining these high yields, up to
5140 kg/ha, probably due to the plants escaping injury
from insect and disease damage.

TABLE.I-SEED YIELDS OF OPEN-POLLINATED VARIETIES AND USDA
HYBRIDS IN THE EARLY 1970s AT GAINESVILLE FROM FEBRUARY
PLANTINGS.

Yields during indicated
growing sea-,ont
Variety or hybrid 1971 1972 1973 1974

.......... kg/ha ....
Krasnodarets 2710 2170 2960 -
Peredovik 2640 2410 3720 3620
Northrup-King HO-1 2860 3830 3740 -
Record 3510 2530 3990
HS 52 (Romsun) 4350 3190 4230
Ishanka 4540
USDA 8946 5140
USDA 896 3640

tYields rounded to the nearest 10 kg/ha. Planted 1 Feb
1971; 7 Feb 1972; 16 Feb 1973; and 11 Feb 1974. Detailed cultural
practices are outlined in Agronomy Research Reports AG 72-5;
73-3; and 75-3, Agronomy Department, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL 32611.

Table 2 shows the results of eight tests involving 44
hybrids and varieties. The three tests that gave the
highest yields were those that were planted in Febru-
ary. The highest average yields of individual hybrids
were made in the test of 24 Feb 1978 by Northrup-
King Brand Sunbred 212 at 3560 kg/ha and by RBA
Brand Gold II at 3450 kg/ha. Yields of tests planted
in March, April, and August were lower on the average
and would probably not be commercially acceptable.
Table 3 shows the comparisons of some agronomic
characteristics when confection hybrids were planted
in March and April. The data show that the seedhead
diameters were much larger from a March planting.
that the March planting test weights were larger, that
the number of mature heads were larger per 3 m (10
feet) of row in the plots, and that the yields of seed
were over three times those in the April planting.
Data collected but not shown revealed that the March
planting had taller plants with larger stalk diameters.
In both the oilseed and confection tests planted
in March and April 1978, as well in many of the com-
mercial fields in Alachua County, there was premature
senescence and a rapid blackening of many of the


plants that occurred soon after flowering, a symptom
usually associated with Alternaria disease of the leaves
and stems of sunflower. If the disease struck earlt, onlv
a few rings of achenes filled seed along the outer edge
of the flowers. The later the disease struck the plants.
the greater was the number of rings maturing good
seed. The seed in the centers of many of the flowers
were empty, consisting only of hulls or very light
seed. Diseased plants produced lower oil contents than
healthy plants.

PROSPECTS

At this time, most USA sunflower seed production
is shipped to northern Europe for oil extraction and
meal production. Test marketing are underway in the
USA now and Lever Brothers is marketing Promise
margarine in selected cities while Procter and Gamble
is test marketing Puritan sunflower vegetable oil.
Hunt-Wesson is marketing sunflower oil in certain
western cities.
The Buckeye Cotton Oil Division of Buckeye
Cellulose Corporation, Augusta, GA received several
train boxcar loads of sunflower seed that was grown
near Alachua, FL in 1978. Seed from fields yielding
from 225 to 3360 kg/ha were received at the mill. Oil
contents ranged from 32 to 48% with the lighter,
smaller seeds yielding less oil per unit volume.
Samples from north-central Florida have contained
low and satisfactory free fatty acid contents which
assures that rancidity is not occurring from moist or
germinating seeds. The protein contents of the meals
resulting from the crushings has been satisfactory.
Dockage values of between 4.8 and 6.1% showed that
the production was surprisingly clean of trash although
the only cleaning the seeds received was in the action
of the combine. Moisture content of the lots ranged
from 8.6 to 11.4% field run as the seed were not
artificially dried. Ammonia content in the meal, an
indication of crude protein content, varied from 3.49
to 3.5%, or about 18%, crude protein, a suitable
content for animal feeds.:

SUMMARY OF INSECT OBSERVATIONS
In Florida it appears that a considerable number
of general insect pests as well as species specific to or
preferential to composites find in the cultivated species
and cultivars of sunflower a suitable host. It is an-
ticipated that under widespread cultivation several
now benign (or possibly even beneficial) insects (weed
feeders) may become pests in the crop. Certain species
that are either major pests of sunflower in other areas
of production or are closely related genericaliv and
in host preferences to such species are already active
and attacking the crop to the concern of g-.owers.
At this point we have not conducted chemical
control trials on sunflower insects. This needs to be
done as chemical insecticides will undoubtedly play a
part in sunflower production commercial.
In view of the sources of certain infetations, weed
control and crop management may also asiume greater
importance than in the past. It was show.n. for
example, by Gentung (1953) that management of large

3Personal communication with Mr. P. S. Smithwick. District
Manager, Buckeye Cotton Oil Division, Augusta, GA 30903.








-86-

SOIt. AND CROP SCIENCE SOCIETY OF FLORIDA

TABLE 2.-SUNFLOWER SEED YIELDS OF COMMERCIAL VARIETIES AND HYBRIDS AT GAINES ILLE
1976-1978.


Brand


Cargill
Interstate
Northrup-King
Pacific Oilseeds

Growers
Northrup-King
Northrup-King
Dahlgren
Pacific Oilseeds
Glowers
Interstate
Cargill

RBA
RBA
Interstate
RBA
Cal. West
RBA
RBA
Funk's
SIGCO
Cargill
Cal/West
Nortlhrup-King
ROB-SEE-CO
Funk's
Imperial
Daligren
ROB-SEE-CO
SICCO
MN Farm Bureau
Dahlgren
Sle)yenne
Interstate
Sheyenne
Interstate
DeKalb
Jacques
Funk's
Dahlgren
Jacques
ROB-SEE-CO


Hybrid


201
891
HS-52
Sun-Hi 304
Peredovik 66
SunGro 372A
Sunbred 212
Sunbred 223
DO-410
Sun-Hi 301A
SunGro 380A
8944
204
Sputnik 71
Gold Rush
Big Top +
8943
Mr. Gold
903
Oilmaster-X
Gold II
894
894A
372A
894
Sunbred 254
GH-30
G-6630
894
DO-704
GH-20
241
Hi-Sun 101
DO-844
893
IS-7775
898
894
Exptl. A
J-701
G-6677
DO-714
J-501
GH-10


1976 1977 1977 1978 1978 1978 1978 1978
.................. ... Planting date ... ........................
14 Apr. 18 Feb. 8 Aug. 14 Feb. 2- Feb. 1 Mar. 13 Apr. 17 Aug.


Hybrid


Test Average for all cultivars 550 170 450 1110
grown in the test 1280 2220 560 2230 2550 1720 450 1110
Total Oil Content, Average 47.7 48.3 42.7 44.7 42.9 39.8 34.9 43.5

TABLE 3.-COMPARISON OF SEVERAL CHARACTERISTICS RECORDED IN THE MARCH AND APRIL PLANTINGS
OF SUNFLOWER FOR CONFECTION AND BIRD SEED NEAR GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA IN 1978.
Number of
Seedhead heads per
diameter Test weight for plumpness 3 m row Yields
Brand Hybrid March April March April March April March April March April

cm ... ... lbs/bu. ..... kg/hl... ... kg/ha...
SIGCO 924 26.4 12.2 19.1 16.5 24.6 21.2 4.9 5.4 4010 1020
SICCO 852 30.7 13.7 16.1 13.9 20.7 17.9 4.4 5.1 3610 950
Dahlgren D-717 21.8 14.5 18.0 17.0 23.2 21.9 6.8 6.5 3100 1340
Dahlgren D-715 24.4 16.5 16.6 16.5 21.4 24.6 6.3 5.0 3000 860
Sle)enne 883 22.9 12.4 19.3 17.5 24.8 22.5 5.7 5.0 2970 730
Dahl-ren D-818 20.6 13.5 20.0 16.8 25.7 21.6 7.5 5.0 2930 840
Dahlgren D-821 24.6 15.0 18.1 16.0 23.3 20.6 5.8 5 0 2840 970
Sht'enne 923 23.1 14.2 17.1 13.9 22.0 17.9 6.8 5.7 2830 950
SIGCO 923 29.0 13.0 14.5 13.9 18.7 17 9 3.3 5.0 2810 950
Sheyenne 853 20.6 13.0 19.3 15.5 21.8 19.9 7.8 5.1 2670 880
Dahllgren D-823 21.6 15.2 17.8 16.0 22.9 20.6 7.0 6.8 2430 930
Dalilgren D-719 20.6 14.0 19.5 16.0 25.1 20.6 4.7 5.4 1950 670

Test Average 23.9 14.0 18.0 15.8 23.2 20.3 5.9 5.4 2930 920

Planting dates: 14 March and 13 April. Harvest dates: 14 June and 25 July.


. . . .. . . . .. .. . . . . .. k g /h a . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . .
1650 -
1650 2150 740 1860 -
1470 1380 200 -
1450 2080 520 2070 2490 1420 320 950
1310 2740 650 2200 2520 2080 610 1100
1280 1890 750 2480 1520 340 1150
1280 2890 810 2730 3560 2350 520 1280
1220 1700 950 2330 2480 1650
1210 -
1160 2220 280 1770 2230 1600 450 1400
1140 1850 760 1900 2220 1500 400 1150
1110 1950 460 2130 1260
990 2440 550 2030 1950 1430 430 1180
970 2540 370 2370 2740 1690 450 1340
2920 920
2870 2630 1380
2740 1200
2630 940
920
2580 1950 450 920
2460 3450 1810 580 800
2060 2330 -
2030 2180 1450 320 920
2020 -
2000 2830 -
1880 2200 1430 300 1320
1800 2650 1830 380 1470
1790 1140
2510 910
2110 660 960
1950 470 820
1890 590 900
1860 320 1030
1790 480 930
1750 400 -
1680 580 1070
1340 400 740
1280 410 -
1550
1390
1260
-- 1200
1030
900







-87-
PROCEEDINGS, VOLUME 38, 1979 31

TABLE 4.-INSECTS ATTACKING CULTIVATED F IELIANTHUS IN FLORIDA ARRANGED ACCORDING TO ORDER
AND FAMILY. 1978.

Common name
(or convenient Organs(s) Area of Economic
designation) Scientific name Order Family affected observation status2 Remarks


A bumble Euphoria
flower beetle sepulchralis (F.)


A long-horned
borer


A long-horned
borer

A stem-boring
weevil
Corn wireworm



Sou. green
stinkbug

A brown
stinkbug
Leaf-footed
bug

A mirid bug


Hippopsis
lemniscuta (F.)


Afecas
cana Newman
Lixus sp.


Melanotus
communis
(Gyllenhal)

Nezara
viridula (L.)
Euschistus
ictericus (L.)
Leptoglossius
phyllopus (L.)

(undetermined)


Coleoptera Scarabaeidae

Cerambycidae


Curculionidae


Elateridae



Hemiptera Pentatomidae


Flower-heads E'g., E.C.
acheness) 1


Stems


Injures or destroys
V.E. developing seed

E. Infestations in young
plants could
probably be serious
? Attacked Jerusalem
artichoke


Evg. ? Normal hosts are
Pluchea spp.


Roots


Flower-heads Evg., E.C.
acheness)
r *


? Very few
observations


? Sucks developing
seed


" Coreidae


" Miridae


Sharpshooter Oncometopia
undata (F.)


A leafhopper

Sunflower
stem moth


Southern
Armyworm

another
Armyworm

Corn earworm

A climbing
cutworm
Granulate
cutworm
Saltmarsh
caterpillar
Sunflower
moth


A blotch
leafminer
Vegetable
leafminer

American
grasshopper
Larger obscu
grasshopper
Olive green
swamp grass
hopper
Southern
red-legged
grasshopper


Empoasca sp.

Suleima
helianthana
(Riley)
Spodoptera
eridania (Cramer)

Spodoptera


Homoptera Cicadellidae

-

Lepidoptera Olethreutidae




Noctuidae


latifascia (Walker) Lepidoptera Noctuidae

Heliothis
zea Boddie
Anicla "
infecta (Ochs.)


Feltia
subterranean (F.)
Estigmene
acraea (Drury)
Homoeosoma
electellum (Hulst)


" Arctiidae

" Pyralidae


A mauromyza Diptera Agromyzidae
maculosa (Malloch)
Liriomyza
sativae (Blanchard)

Schistocerca Orthoptera Acrididae
Americana (Drury)
Ire Schistocerca
obscura (F.)
Paroxya
clavuliger (Serville) "


Leaves and
stems
I,

Stems,
petioles,
peduncles
Foliage,
flower-head

Foliage,
flower-head

Developing
seed-head
Foliage
flower heads
Stem
foliage
Foliage

Seedhead


Foliage


? Sucks peduncles,
stems and foliage

? 0


Heavily attacked
plants appeared
" E. relatively unthrifty

Severely damaged
S V.E. Expmt planting


Evg., E.C.


" ?
? Severely damaged
J. artichokes
E.

E.

' E. Occurs on many
wild composites

, n ?i


ff f


Melanoplus
femur-rubrum
propinguus Scudder


lEvg. Everglades; E. C. East Coast.
2V. E. Very economic; E Economic; ? = unknown.


" f"


n n


n rr


n n


Il N


N B



rr ,,







-88-
SOIL AND CROP SCIENCE SOCIETY OF FLORIDA


stands of ragweed resulted in greatly lowered infesta-
tions of Hippopsis lemniscata (F.) in stems of kenaf,
Hibiscus cannabinus, well before the era of the
modern concept of integrated pest management
(IPM). The alert sunflower grower should be aware
of the adjacent as well as in-field natural flora in all
its relationships to his crop. Genung and Orsenigo
(1970) have in a general way touched upon some of
these relationships.
Table 4 depicts the insects attacking sunflower in
Florida and is arranged according to order and family
of insects. Besides the order and family, the table
gives the scientific and common names of the insects,
the areas of observation, the organs of the sunflower
plant affected, the economic status of the insects, and
a remarks column.
Although no insect problems have been en-
countered in north-central Florida, a new crop in an
area carries the risk of insect infestations after a few
years of culture. Florida has many weeds and wild-
flowers in the plant family Compositae that could
act as secondary hosts for sunflower insects.4
OPPORTUNITIES
Screening of inbred lines and promising lines in
*Late plantings in 1979 were attacked by the sunflower head
moth, Homoeosoma electellum, causing severe damage to un-
treated plants.


advanced stages of selection must be conducted in
close cooperation with plant pathologists to identify
material that could be put into test crosses in existing
breeding programs already underway. Seed production
companies are usually willing to supply experimental
hybrid crosses for testing in new areas, especially if
there is a possibility of increased sales of seed. We
already have promises of such materials.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks are given to Mr. Dalton Gandy, de-
ceased; Dr. James A. Robertson, Research Leader and
Supervisory Research Chemist, Oilseeds Crops Re-
search, USDA-SEA-SR; and Dr. William W. Roath,
Research Geneticist, USDA-SEA-NCR, Fargo, ND for
supplying seed, advice, and oil analyses during this re-
search. Mr. Jimmy Beckham and Mr. Billy Crawford
are thanked for assistance in the field and laboratory.

REFERENCES
Genung, W. G. 1953. Biology of Hippopsis lemniscata (F.) as a
pest of kenaf in southern Florida. Univ. of Florida Master
of Science Thesis.
Genung, W. G. and J. R. Orsenigo. 1970. Some insect-weed re-
lationships that the grower should know. Fla. State Hort.
Soc. Proc. 83:161-165.
Sunflower Science and Technology. 1978. Monograph 19. Ameri-
can Society of Agronomy, 505 pp. Madison, WI.


eh1eo


























Sun fow tr


VOLUME 5, NUMBER 2


FEBRUARY, 1979


In This Issue


LARGE CROWD ATTENDS 1979 FORUM ............................. 4
Photos of the January 23 event
HERBICIDE SPRAY DRIFT: AN OVERVIEW .......................... 6
Factors affecting drift and ways to reduce it
MARKET OUTLOOK APPEARS BRIGHT .............................. 8
Joe Smith comments on the domestic and export scenes
INSECT PESTS OF SUNFLOWER IN FLORIDA ....................... 10
A summary of current and potential problem insects
SUNFLOWER PRODUCTION COSTS COMPARED ..................... 12
North Dakota study breaks down costs for several crops
A LOOK AT THE NONOIL SCENE ................................ 14
A view of the confectionery and birdseed realm
1979 ACREAGE TO BE UP SHARPLY................................. 16
Preliminary USDA stats project nearly 50 per cent
SAVORY SUNFLOWER SENSATIONS ................................. 18
Something that's good for you and tastes good too
THE SUNFLOWER CIRCUIT ......................................... 22
Who, what and where it's happening


PUBLISHER Sunflo\\ i Association of America
EDITOR Don Lilleboe
PUBLICATIONS CHAIRMAN DeAnn Hofstad
ADVERTISING DIRECTOR Bill Rudd

COVER: Though attractive here from an artistic standpoint, the cobweb is hardly
indicative of the rapidly growing and changing sunflower industry. Check
out the statistics on page 16. Photo by Larmj Simpson.

The Sunflower is published nine times a year bh the Sunflower Association of America. Box
2051. Fargo. North Dakota 58107. Controlled Circulation postage paid at Fargo. N.D. 58107.
Advertising in The Sunflower is not meant to imply endorsement by the association. Requests
for inclusion on the mailing list of this controlled circulation publication should be addressed to
The Sunflower. Box 2051. Fargo. North Dakota 58107. Controlled Circulation Publication
(USPS 099-210).
Printed by Kave's, Inc.. Fargo. North Dakota 58102.


president's


comments



- GUEST COLUMN
DON LILLEBOE
Editor

First. our thanks to Dick Kalgren for
allowing us to utilize his "President'.
Comments" space for this month. There
are a couple items we would like to pub-
licize regarding The Sunflower s new sub-
scription system, and felt this would be a
good opportunity to do so.
To begin with, thousands of you have
already sent in your subscription payment.
Most have been on our list in the past.
while many others are new readers. \\e'd
like to remind all of you that we mail The
Sunflower via a computerized mailing list.
Because of the logistics involved in this.
you should allow usually three or four
weeks for address changes or new listings
to take effect.
Secondly, it's quite possible that, as
with any new system, there will be some
"bugs" to iron out. Should you encounter
any continuing problem in receiving \our
cop\ of The Sunflowecr. please let us know
and we ll work to straighten it out. Feel
free also to write in with any general
suggestions or comments you may have
concerning 'yur subscription.
Finally for those of you who have not
sent in your subscription pax ment, we en-
courage you to do so soon. \Ve want to
keep sending The Sunflower to all our
readers, but the "grace period" is running
out for those who have not \ et subscribed.
If you have not done so, we hope you'll
send in the coupon in this month's issue so
that you may continue receiving the
magazine. Thank vou.


-t89-











Insect


Pests


Of


Sunflower


In


Florida




By WILLIAM G. GENUNG
and VICTOR E. GREEN, JR.'


-90-

F or many years, sunflower (Helian-
thus annuuus) swas gros\n in the
Florida Everglades agricultural area
around Lake Okeechobee. It was planted
in paired rows, separating eight to 12 rows
of green bean, and acted as a windbreak to
present damage to the tender pods b\
bruising due to flying debris on the or-
ganic soils. Most of the maturing achenes
of sunflower were devoured by minrators
and resident bird life.
Beginning in 1977. commercial pro-
duction of sunflower was undertaken by
certain growers in north central Florida.
Thousands of acres were planted before
any research of consequence could be per-
formed on the special needs of sunflower
culture in the area. The first intent of the
farmers was to search for a crop that could
be planted to salvage the fertilizer and
farm operations that had already been ex-
pended on drought-killed corn crops. This
resulted in sunflower plantings later than
common sense would dictate.
Although many species of the wild
Compositae family, to which sunflower be-
longs, grow in Florida, we did not know
for sure which insects, nematodes. bac-
teria, rusts and smuts, or other fungi or
viruses the crop would be exposed to
when planted commercially. What follows
is an effort toward predicting and catalogu-
ing the insect species that might be pests
of the infant sunflower industry in Florida.

SOME INSECTS AFFECTING
CULTIVATED SUNFLOWER
IN FLORIDA

Cultivated sunflower is subject to at-
tack by a wide range of insect pests in most
areas of its production. In many instances.
wild sunflower, related genera and other
native Compositae serve as reservoirs of
infestation. All parts of the sunflower plant


The long-homed borer Mecas cana Newman girdles the stem in the adult stage, with the
larvae feeding therein. Photos courtesy of William Genung.


are attacked b\ some general or ho.t-
specific insects
The most serious insect enemies ;it
sunflo\\er n1 Florida are \rinou- Lepid,'p-
tera of the families Notuidae i:,d
Psraidae. and Coleoptera of the famih-iie
Scarabaeidae and Cerambt cidae Di- ui-
sion of these llnse(t appears below\ At the
same time. se eral otherr insects of \ nru-
order and family relationship- must be
considered ot potential importance Here-
in. w\e record and attempt to e aluate the
insect enemies of Helianthus anniuu,
isunflo\\er in Florida that have fallen
under our obseration. while bearing min
mind that species not noted by us ma\ ap-
pear as the youthful industry develops
The insect, reported here were c>!-
lected from and ober ed on commercial.
experimental and home garden plantings
As the sunflower industry expands. geo-
graphically as well as in total acreage, an
increasingly greater arra\ of insect prob-
lems can reasonably be anticipated. Since
most sunflower insect pests tend to be
high\ preferential concerning plant
parts' attacked. thex will be so
categorized in this discussion.

INSECTS ATTACKING
STEMS AND PETIOLES

CERAMBYCIDAE long-horned bor-
ers' Hippopsi.s lemniscata. This beetle at-
tacks a wide range ofcomposites, as well as
other plants. The known distribution is
from New York to the Great Plains and
south to Argentina. It became a serious
pest of experimental and commercial bast
fiber crops in the Everglades in the 1950s.
and was found in about two per cent of
soybean stems in a Florida stud% pub-
lished in 1965. Attack on sunflower \wa
reported in studies published in 1950 and
1977 in Nebraska and Texas. respectively'
11
During 1975. nearly 75 per cent of
sunflower stems were attacked in the
Exerglades. and about .35 per cent on the
east coast of Florida The slender fellow
and brown.-striped females oviposit in
holes chewed in the stem The eloneate
legless larvae tunnel in term and least
petioles. and then pupate therir...
The lone-horned borer I\. i
Nessnan 1 .1 .i ,teL-girdling ,.'ratb c'' n
that normalikx ,tt.icks r.. ,' .'id .
other composite, Tht trum ,. it-tre-'-
\estitured beetle. xith .1 i ;:'t r :i!it. ,
stripe along the ne ucturr .nti mar1i.-
girdles the host stem, anit! depsit- -ingle
ege m the girdled portion ;r,.ss ibsena-

1V'illioam G. Genrungc s pr, (.i sir o en-
tomology, Agricultural Restarch and
Education Center. Belle Giade. Fla. Vic-
tor E Green. Jr is professor of ag-
ronomy. Institute of Food and Agricul-
tural Sc;ences. Unirrsity of Florida.
Gainesville










tions on its habits and biology indicate that
these insects are almost identical with
those described in 1977 for the related
long-horned beetle .1. inornata Say in in
the Texas Plains region (2).
CURCLLIONIDAE (weevils): Li.rus
sp. attacked sunflower in the Everglades
in 197S. The elongate, powdery weevils
were common on stems of adjacent and
infield marsh fleabane. where larval tun-
neling occurred in nearly 75 per cent of
stems. The quarter inch (approximately)
adult wee\ils with the tan bloom quickly
become xworn and blotched. revealing the
underlying brown body w all. It probably
would not become difficult for the weevil
to adapt more freely to sunflower, particu-
larly if the native host was destroyed at a
time of high adult numbers.
OLETHREUTIDAE (a sunflower
stem moth': This moth. possibly Sulcima
helianthiana. heavily\ bored the stems,
petioles and peduncles in experimental
plantings in the Everglades. Heavily at-
tacked plants appeared relatively un-
thrifty. and in many cases the insect's ac-
tivity appeared to pave the way for stem
rot organisms. We believe the species,
which has also caused problems in the
northern Great Plains, would be an eco-
nomic problem in the south Florida area.
DIPTERA (a stem maggot): Undeter-
mined maggots have caused damage in
stems and petioles and at the base of flow-
ers. The tunnels are not as extensive as
with stem moths, but they appear to be
sites of infection by rot organisms.
NOCTUIDAE (cutworms): Black cut-
worm. IAgrotis ipsilon) and granulate cut-
worm Feltia subterranean) are general
feeders that sever young stems of manml
species of field, vegetable and ornamental
crops. as well as of wild plants. They have
damaged homegrown sunflower, and


-91-

would undoubtedly attack commercial
plantings in heavily infested land.

INSECTS ATTACKING
FLOWER AND SEED

SCARABAEIDAE iscarla beetles): A
relative iof the white grubs (max beetles),
the adult of a humble flower beetle
(Euphoria epulchralis) has attacked and
se\erel damaged developing sunflower
seed in south Florida. This species has be-
come increasingly important as a general
pest in the area in recent years, causing
economic damage in sweet corn. field corn
and okra. Catches taken from a sw imming
pool where it is a pest) indicate that adults
are active 12 months per year.
PYRALIDAE (sunflower moth):
tHomonosonia elctellum is a serious pest of
sunflower throughout the United States,
as \well as abroad. It has a number of wild
hosts among the Compositae, therefore.
almost any planting of sunflower may be a
likely\ victim. It caused some concern in
southern Florida when it attacked com-
mercial seed plantings, though it x as not
observed in an experimental planting at
Belle Glade.
NOCTUIDAE (corn earworm. south-
ern armvyworm, fall armyworm and
Spodoptera latifascia): This complex was
observed in light numbers or heavy spot
situations to feed on the developing
sunflower achenes. In consideration of
their general importance in the area. they
are deemed to have an economic potential
in the crop.
HEMIPTERA (stinkbugs. plantbugs
and undetermined mirids): The large plant
bugs. southern green stinkbug Nezara
ceudiil. brown stinkbug Euschistus ic-
tericius and leaf-footed plantbug Leptoglos-
sisu plhyllopus occurred in moderate num-


4


Pictured here are nymphs of various stages and typical egg mass of the southern green
stinkbug Nezara viridula.


:it















The salt marsh caterpillar (Estigmene
acraea), a foliar chewer.

bers in most sunfl\ower plantings ob-
served. While evidence of economic scale
injury was lacking. in consideration of the
damage caused by these and related bugs
to other seed crops, it would appear that
hea\v infestation by these and other plant
bugs could result in .serious sunflower
damage.


INSECTS ATTACKING ROOT ZONE

ELATERIDAE twireworms): In
examination of the root zone of sunflower,
occasionally the corn w ireworm Meclanotus
communis was found in pro\imit\ of the
roots. Damage. if any. could not be asses-
sed on account of their low numbers.
though young plants on heavily infested
soil might possibly he damaged or killed.
The corn wireworin is a general pest on
the organic soils \where sugarcane. corn.
carrots, radishes. and cole and salad crops
can be serious\ damaged on untreated or
unflooded land.
FORMICIDAE (undetermined ants):
Ant hills at the base ,appear to have occa-
sionally resulted in unthrifty plants, it is
not known. however, if this a cause or ef-
fect. It would not appear to pose an eco-
nomic problem at present infestation
levels

INSECTS ATTACKING
SUNFLOWER FOLIAGE

NOCTUIDAE: The Spodoptera
species discussed under tlowerhead in-
sects also attack foilage. and on individual
or small groups of plants have caused seri-
(continued on page 29'


al











(continued from page 11
ous to complete defoliation. It would thus
seem that these species have a high eco-
nomic potential as sunflower pests in
Florida.
ARCTIIDAE (saltmarsh caterpillar):
This species extends from Canada to (Cent-
ral America. and shares with related
species the local name of"woolybear." It is
a general pest of usually moderate signifi-
cance. Many young sunflower plants at
Belle Glade were completely defoliated by
its foliar feedings. Few North American
caterpillars have a wider host range, but
our observations indicate that sunflower
ma\ be among its preferred hosts.
AGROMYZIDAE dipterouss leafinin-
ers): The larvae of these flies make charac-
teristic tunnels between the leaf surfaces
of various plants. The vegetable leafininer
Lirionmyza saticac. a rather general and se-
vere pest of many crops, has been of rela-
tively light occurrence in sunflower in
southern Florida. and probably would be
of little concern under commercial pro-
duction. Its hea\y, serpentine mining in
vegetable crops has been of major concern
in recent years, however. A blotch leaf-
miner, Amanuron!nza niaculosa, is mainly
found attacking plants in the Compositae.
Its irregular-shaped blotchy mines often
show up on a number of common weeds.
While nearly 100 per cent of the sunflower
plants at Belle Glade were attacked, the
level of damage on these large leaves is
presently considered to be of minor con-
sequence.
ACRIDIDAE (short-horned grasshop-


continuedd from page 29)
specific to or preferential to composites,
find the cultivated species and cultivars of
sunflower to be suitable hosts. It is antici-
pated that under widespread cultivation
several now-benign ior maybe even bene-


-92-

pers): Several species of these general
feeders have attacked sunflo\\er in penin-
sular Florida. These include the Xinrician
grasshopper Schistocirca aln rU'I a(o.I
obscure grasshopper S. obscIira the r1d-
leigged grasshopper MielIlano'r l ti ir-
rirlnum Ipropii.nquius and the hl\le-ticen
swamp grasshopper Paroxia clailiyc/r.
While grasshoppers would nor11nllIb be of
little or no concern in Florida sunflow\er.
the\ could be a problem ti.im the state
line south to the Everglades ariicultuial
area during the occasional outbr-ak \ ears.
CICADELIDAE leafhoppeir The


ficial) insects weed feeders) ma\ become
pests of the crop. Certain species that are
either major pests of sunflower in other
areas of production, or are closely related
generically and in host preferences to such
species, are already active and. to the con-


large blue and sellow-orange "sharpsh'oot-
er" Oinconmtopia undata is often c.-
spia uins on both stems and foli.ae ntu cli-
t\.ttcd slunflower. and inght be ot pote'.-
ttal Importance in the crop The niall,-r
but equally colorful zreen ard purple-pink
striped Spana-,d rii_ Itla p rand the pA.le
green Eimpoalca sp. are probably of 1,, c-c
onomlic significance inm unflower
SUMMARY OF
INSECT OBSERVATIONS
It appears that a considerable number
of general insect pests. as well .as species
Continued in parec 30









cern of growers. attacking the crop.
At this point, we have not conducted
chemical control trials on sunflowser in-
sects. This needs to be done. since chemi-
cal insecticides will undoubtedly play a
part in sunflower production in the region
In view of the sources of certain infe-
tations. weed control and crop manage-
iment na\ also assume greater importance
than in the past. The alert sunflower
grower should be aware of the adjacent as
well as in-field natural flora in all its rela-
tionships to his crop.

REFERENCES

ill Genung, W.G. 1953. "Bioloes of Hippopsts
lemniscata F.' as a Pest of Kenaf in
Southern Florida." M.S thesis. Uni-
versity of Florida.
Genung. W.G. and V.E. Green. Jr.. 1965
'Some Stem Boring Insects As-
sociated with Soybeans in Flonda
The Florida Entomologist 4S 1
29-33
Muma. M.H R.N. Lvnes. C.E Claasen
and A Hoffman 1950. Control
Tests on Sunflower Insects in Neb-
raska. Journal of Economic En-
tonmlogy. 43 i4 : 477-80
Rogers, C.E. 1977. "Cerambycid Pests of
Sunflower. Environmental En-
tomology. 6 ,6': 833-38.
Stoner. W.N.. F.G Stevenson. W.G
Genune. X.H Thames. r CC
Seale. E.O Ganestad and J.B Pate
1952. "Preliminary Report of some
Disease and Pest Problems of Kenaf
Hibiscus cannabinus L in South
Florida. Plant Dis Rpt 36 4.
121-6.
2' Rogers. 1977.


--




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