PAGE 1

1 Calendar of Events March 24 Fumigation Meeting, Trinkle Center, Plant City. Please contact Alicia Whidden at 813 744 5519 ext. 134 for more information see Page 9 of this newsletter. March 28 Worker Protection Standards Train the Trainer Program, Polk County Extension Office, Bartow, Fl. 10:00 1:00. Register at http://polksmallfarms.com. April 5 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Program Workshop, Hillsborough County Extension Office, 1:00 5:00. See article in newsletter. April 12 Pesticide Testing at Hillsborough Co. Extension office. 9:00 am. For more information contact Susan Haddock at 813 744 5519 ext. 103. June 5 7 2011 Florida State Horticulture Society Meeting, The Renaissance Vinoy, St. Pete. For more information go to www.fshs.org/. IFAS is an Equal Employment Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer authorized to provide research, educational information and other services only to individuals and institutions that function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap, or national origin. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Ext ension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of the County Commissioners Cooperating. Berry/Vegetable Times March 2011 A University of Florida/IFAS and Florida Cooperative Extension Service Newsletter Hillsborough County, 5339 CR 579 Seffner, FL 33584 (813) 744 5519 Alicia Whidden, Editor Gulf Coast Research & Education Center 14625 County Road 672, Wimauma, FL 33598 (813) 634 0000 Jack Rechcigl, Center Director Christine Cooley, Layout and Design James F. Price, Co Editor http://gcrec.ifas.ufl.edu Mark your calendar for the 2011 Florida Ag Expo Wednesday, November 9, 2011 Important Changes in New Fumigation Rules and Restricted Pesticide License Holders Alicia Whidden and Dr. Joe Noling There is a very important point that is being repeatedly emphasized at the fumigation meetings and that we are sure will be pointed out again and again at upcoming meetings. The point that we would like to bring to your attention, and that is printed on each and every new fumigant product label, defines a new requirement and responsibility of the certified applicator of soil fumigants. From ordering to receiving delivery of the fumigant, from the beginning to the end of applying the product in the field, to signing off on the Fumigation Management Plan, it all falls on the restricted pesticide license holder/certified applicator to be at the field means in practical terms for our farming operations is that the Two Applications of Assail Permitted on Strawberry James F. Price and Curtis A. Nagle Note: The maximum number of applications of Assail in strawberries is two per growing season regardless of the rate per acre used. A different number of applications was reported in the February Berry/Vegetable Times. Reduce Spotted Wing Drosophila from Strawberries to Blueberries James F. Price and Curtis A. Nagle Strawberry farmers should destroy all fruit, both on and off the plant, as soon as possible, following the end of the season in order to reduce spotted wing drosophila ( Drosophila suzukii ) movement from strawberries to blueberries.

PAGE 2

2 pesticide license holder or another designated pesticide license holder / certified applicator must be at the field site at all times, ie., in the line of sight of the application and providing direct supervision of all persons performing handling activities from the very beginning to the very end of dispensing the fumigant in the field. This is a very important point for some of our farm operations to consider how they will satisfy this new fumigant label requirement. This can be a problem if the operation has multiple locations with multiple fumigation crews making daily applications and having only one person holding a pesticide license or the person that holds the license is not dedicated to being on the farm at all times. Clearly, to resolve such a problem will require licensing of new certified applicators to assume responsibilities for fumigant applications when either the primary applicator cannot remain at the site, or when fumigations are proceeding concurrently at multiple sites. There will be a fumigation meeting for strawberry growers on March 24 at the Trinkle Center at HCC from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. Dinner will be provided. See page 9 of this newsletter for all the details. Cultural Practices for Vegetable and Small Fruit Crops: and Spain Bielinski M. Santos, Craig K. Chandler, Alicia J. Whidden, and Mara del Carmen Snchez The strawberry dried calyx disorder (SDCD) has been observed since 2005 in farms around Plant City, Florida and Huelva, Spain. This disorder starts as a slight darkening of newly opened and already formed flowers (Figure 1), resembling salt injury and progressing towards calyx burning, and fruit discoloration and deformation (Figure 2). Field surveys performed in both locations during the 2005 06, 2006 07 and 2007 08 seasons suggest that certain strawberry cultivars are more susceptible than others to the appearance of SDCD. Figure 1. Strawberry dried calyx disorder in immature fruit and flower. Huelva, Spain, 2008 (Picture by B.M. Santos). Figure 2. Strawberry dried calyx disorder in mature fruit. Huelva, Spain, 2008 (Pictures by B.M. Santos). In Florida, strawberries are planted in open fields, while in Spain, they are produced exclusively under high tunnels, mini tunnels, and passively ventilated greenhouses. At both locations, growers plant several cultivars concurrently to achieve continuous fruit production by overlapping each cultivar production peaks. Cultivars undergo equal irrigation, fertilization and pest management programs all season long. Field observations indicated the cultivars Strawberry Festival, Camino Real, and Palomar showed the SDCD earlier and more severely than others. More detailed surveys conducted in Spain during the 2007 08 season confirmed that out of the 16 farms visited, representing about 2500 ha (6,718 acres) (38% of all the planted area in Spain), 15 experienced

PAGE 3

3 moderate to severe SDCD symptoms. These symptoms consistently developed after exposure to stressful conditions, such as low temperatures and/or low light. Regardless of the production system, the symptoms appeared to be associated with high electric conductivity (EC; salt concentration) of hydroponic (perlite or coconut fiber mix) or soil. In those farms with the highest incidence of SDCD, it was common to find soil EC values at or higher than 0.3 mS/cm and as high as 0.75 mS/cm. Only moderate SDCD was associated with EC soil values below 0.2 mS/cm. As expected, soil texture also plays a major role in allowing salt farm with both sandy and loamy soils and under the same fertigation programs, the cultivars planted in sandy soil had about 30% less affected plants than those planted in heavier soils. In Florida, the SDCD has been fields within 10 days after a freeze or after nights with very low temperatures (36 o F = 3 o C or less) and where very aggressive fertilization programs with poor irrigation and drainage are used. Growers with farms affected with SDCD have reduced the incidence of the disorder by providing only irrigation water or reducing fertilizer use during the 3 or 4 days before and after a stressful event (e.g. a freeze). The effect of the type of protective structure was assessed in 2007 on a strawberry farm in Huelva, Spain. Plants of October 4 and 6 under three types of protective structures: a) low tunnels (9.5 ft high = 2.85 m), b) high tunnels (11 ft high = 3.30 m), and c) passively ventilated greenhouses (16 ft high = 4.80 m). These structures were covered with the same polyethylene plastic covers, which reduced photosynthetic active radiation by 40%. Plants in all three structures had the same growing substrate (perlite), received the same fertilization and irrigation programs, and crop management throughout the season. The EC of the nutritional solution at the injection points was 1.6 mS/cm, while it was 1.7 mS/cm at the drainage points. The temperatures at the center of each structure measured at 3 pm were 77, 72.5, and 67 o F (25.0, 22.5, 19.5 o C), respectively. However, approximately 13 weeks after transplanting, six samples of 75 plants within each structure (450 plants per structure) were randomly assessed for SDCD incidence, regardless of the severity of the damage. The data revealed that there were significant differences on the number of plants with SDCD. Strawberries in low tunnels had the lowest number of plants with SDCD symptoms (8.9%), followed by those in the high tunnels (14.5%), and by those in the greenhouses (23.2%). Therefore, it appears that SDCD problems increased as the temperature decreased. Another test was conducted in 2006 at the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, IFAS, University of Florida under greenhouse conditions using six strawberry cultivars. sand culture under greenhouse conditions to determine whether the SDCD could be reproduced in isolated conditions. Plants were irrigated three times per week with nutritive solutions containing 0, 0.6, 1.2, 2.4, and 4.8 mS/cm and the incidence of SDCD was monitored twice weekly by counting the number of affected plants. Symptoms of salt injury (similar to those observed in farms) solution (Figure 3), whereas the other cultivars did not show visible injury. The remaining cultivars developed salt damage at 45 and 55 days after initial treatment of 1.2 and 2.4 mS/ cm solutions. These preliminary observations

PAGE 4

4 to high EC fertilizer solutions than the others. Circumstantial evidence seems to eliminate biotic entities (i.e. fungi, bacteria, viruses and nematodes) as the causal agents of SDCD because: a) symptoms comparable to SDCD were developed under pathogen free greenhouse conditions; b) none of analyzed calyx samples from Florida and Spain with SDCD has yielded positive pathogen results; c) SDCD tends to disappear during the growing season when either fertigation practices are modified and/or stressful conditions disappear; and d) SDCD distribution in high tunnels and fields seems to be more accentuated in rows closer to entrances and at the end of drip lines. Figure 3. Strawberry dried calyx disorder reproduced under greenhouse conditions. Balm, Florida, 2007 (Picture by B.M. Santos). Until the nature of this disorder is fully understood, strawberry growers should exercise caution on their fertilization and irrigation programs during stressful environmental conditions for susceptible cultivars. Reducing the fertilization rates during the days before an expected freeze, while maintaining regular irrigation programs, appears to help to minimize the incidence of SDCD. Summary of Fall 2010 Tomato Bacterial Spot Trials Gary Vallad Two tomato trials were conducted in the fall of 2010 to evaluate Actigard, bactericides and biopesticides for activity against bacterial spot. Both trials were planted on 3 Sept and consisted of 25 ft long plots within 300 ft long, raised beds with 5 ft center to center bed spacing. Beds were covered with black virtually impermeable mulch and irrigated with a drip system. Tomato cv. SecuriTY 28 seedlings were transplanted at 18 in spacing along beds skipping a 4 ft alley between plots as a buffer. Treatments, including a non treated control (sprayed with water only to eliminate differences in leaf wetness between treatments), were arranged in a randomized complete block design with each treatment repeated six times. For both trials, treatments were applied weekly using a CO 2 back pack sprayer calibrated to deliver 60, 90, and 120 gal/A at 40 psi. Each plot was inoculated on 14 and 23 Oct with a suspension (10 6 cfu/ml) of Xanthomonas perforans race 4 using a backpack sprayer. Plots were monitored regularly for bacterial spot, and rated after disease reached appreciable levels. Marketable yield was assessed from two harvests on 22 Nov and 7 Dec in the first trial, and a single hand harvest on 29 Nov in the second trial. Alternating applications of Revus Top (7.7 fl oz/A) and Quadris (16.4 fl oz/A) was included to minimize the impact of early blight and target spot when conducive conditions occurred in the latter half of Oct through November. Although last fall was quite dry, high dew points and scattered showers in the latter half of Oct through November were sufficient for moderate to severe disease development. The percent of foliage exhibiting bacterial spot over a two week period increased from 1.5% to 81% in Trial 1 and from 4.5% to 95% in Trial 2. The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose of providing specific information. It is not a guarantee or warranty of the products named and does not signify that they are approved to the exclusion of others of suitable composition. Use pesticides safely. Read and

PAGE 5

5 TRIAL 1: Evaluation of bactericides and biopesticides for bacterial spot management. The first trial assessed several bactericides (Kasumin, Cuprofix 40D + Penncozeb, and Kocide 3000), several biopesticides (DT 9, Actinovate, and Vacciplant), Actigard, applied individually or in an integrated system for the management of bacterial spot. All treatments, with the exception of Actinovate alone and Actinovate with DT 9, significantly reduced disease severity by 39.6 83.9% on the first rating compared to the non treated control. However, as disease pressure increased only Actigard and Actinovate Actigard maintained a significant reduction in disease severity. Neither Cuprofix Penncozeb nor Kocide 3000 provided a significant reduction in disease severity compared to the non treated control beyond the first disease evaluation on 11 Figures (Top, left to right). Leaf symptoms of bacterial spot of tomato caused by Xanthomonas perforans (Bottom, left to right). Blighting of leaf margins caused by Xanthomonas perforans infecting hydathodes often associated with conditions that promote heavy dew formation. Nov. Overall, Actigard alone (0.33 oz/A) and Actinovate Actigard significantly performed better than the copper based in this study. Treatments had no statistical effect on fruit yields. TRIAL 2: Evaluation of bactericides and Actigard for bacterial spot management. The second trial assessed the effect of Actigard rate, frequency, and two application strategies [foliar and chemigation (through drip irrigation)], in addition to several copper formulations (EXPERIMENTAL 1, Kocide 3000, and Nordox 75WG), Firewall (streptomycin sulfate), Agriphage, and three integrated programs for the management of bacterial spot. Significant difference in disease severity among treatments was detected on three rating dates. Most treatments, except Kocide 3000 Penncozeb, Kocide 3000 Penncozeb Quintec EXPERIMENTAL 1 (rates of 1.14 to 6.90 pt/100 gal), and Agriphage, significantly reduced the final disease severity by 15.6 54.0% in comparison to the non treated control. Firewall (streptomycin sulfate) applied alone or as part of a spray program provided the greatest level of disease control in Trial 2. Bactericides that significantly reduced disease severity did not statistically improve marketable fruit yield or the numbers of extra large fruits when compared to the non treated control. Similar to previous trials, weekly foliar applications of Actigard were superior to biweekly (14 day) foliar applications. The biweekly application of Actigard through the drip irrigation provided the same level of control as foliar applications ( P = 0.9066, based on final disease severity). The weekly 0.75 oz/A drip application rate reduced plant height by 7.3% compared to the 0.25 oz/A rate. However, such a difference was not at the 14 day drip application interval (data not shown). Drip applications of Actigard successfully reduced the seasonal progress of bacterial spot on tomato, but the 0.75 oz/A rate caused a

PAGE 6

6 significant reduction in yields relative to 0.75 oz foliar rate ( P = 0.0164 for contrasting drip and foliar applications at 0.75 oz/A). Additional research is underway to better define appropriate chemigation rates with the goal of balancing disease suppression with improved yields. In the end, this goal will probably be accomplished by integrating Actigard with bactericides like Firewall, as was accomplished in two of the integrated programs. Actigard is not currently labeled for chemigation. The current Actigard label recommends weekly applications at 0.33 to 0.75 oz/A. Recent work at GCREC found that the lower rates of 0.33 to 0.50 oz/A were sufficient for disease control. Firewall (streptomycin sulfate) is not labeled for field use, only for transplant production. However, efforts are being made to expand the label. Developing effective resistance management strategies will be critical to prevent an increase resistant to streptomycin sulfate among Xanthomonas perforans strains (the predominant cause of bacterial spot on tomato in Florida). It is unlikely that rotations with copper based bactericides will be sufficient for resistance management, since copper resistance is prevalent among Xanthomonas strains in Florida. Rotations with other products like Quintec (also not labeled for tomato, but has a supplemental label for bacterial spot of pepper) may also be ideal. Table 1: Evaluation of bactericides and biopesticides for management of bacterial spot of tomato fall 2010. Disease severity (%) x Marketable fruit yield v Treatment, rate/A (application) z 15 Nov 22 Nov 29 Nov AUDPC w Weight (boxes/A) Extra large (numbers/ A) Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (1 5); Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (1 5) 12.2 cd y 83.1 a 92.5 ab 781 c 2184 47844 Actigard 50WG, 0.33 oz (1 5) 11.4 cde 65.7 c 90.2 b 680 d 2050 45593 DT 9, 2 oz (1 5) 13.8 cd 91.0 a 94.0 a 831 ab 2221 48352 Actinovate, 3 oz (1 5) DT 9, 1 oz (1 5) 21.7 ab 84.7 ab 94.0 a 811 bc 2223 51256 Serenade Max, 1 lb (1 5) Actinovate, 3 oz (1 5) 8.25 de 84.7 ab 93.3 ab 785 c 2034 45811 Actinovate, 3 oz (1 5) Actigard 50WG, 0.33 oz (1 5) 4.50 e 61.5 c 86.3 c 633 e 2058 46972 Actinovate, 6 oz (1 5) 24.8 a 84.7 ab 93.3 ab 814 bc 1938 40511 Kasumin 2L, 32 fl oz/50 gal (1 3); Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (4 5); Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (4 5) 12.2 cd 87.8 ab 93.3 ab 809 bc 2108 46969 Kasumin 2L, 16 fl oz/50 gal (1 3); Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (4 5); Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (4 5) 16.9 bc 89.4 ab 94.8 a 831 ab 2120 45375 Vacciplant, 14 fl oz (1 5) 15.3 bcd 89.4 ab 93.3 ab 823 abc 1987 43197 Kocide 3000, 1.75 lb (1 5) 12.2 cd 87.8 ab 94.0 a 811 bc 2191 45811 Non treated control 28.0 a 91.0 a 95.3 a 860 a 2046 44504 P > F < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 0.8159 0.6508 z Listed treatment rates are on a per acre basis unless noted otherwise. biopesticide treatments were applied on 6 Oct, 19 Oct 26 Oct, 2 Nov, and 8 Nov (corresponding with applications 1 to 5 above) y Values followed by the same letter are not statistically significantly different ( P x The severity of bacterial spot was assessed as the percentage of canopy affected. The Horsfall Barratt scale was used for all r atings, but values were converted to mid percentages prior to statistical analyses. w Area under the disease progress curves (AUDPC) was calculated using the formula: x i +x i 1 )/2](t i t i 1 )) where xi is the rating at each evaluation time and (t i t i 1 ) is the time between evaluations. v Marketable yield is based on two single harvests on 22 Nov and 7 Dec, assumes 4356 plants/A and 20 lb/box, and includes mediu m, large, and extra large fruits.

PAGE 7

7 Table 2: Evaluation of bactericides and Actigard for management of bacterial spot of tomato fall 2010. Disease severity (%) x Marketable fruit yield v Treatment, rate/A (application) z 11 Nov 22 Nov 29 Nov AUDPC w Weight (boxes/A) Extra large (numbers/A) Actigard 50WG, 0.25 oz (Drip; 1 8) 2.50 cde y 28.0 efg 65.7 cde 404 def 1393 ab 33469 ab Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1 8) 4.00 abc 30.6 def 57.3 defg 394 ef 875 d 19384 d Actigard 50WG, 0.25 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7) 4.00 abc 21.7 fgh 65.7 cde 370 fg 1076 cd 26354 bcd Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7) 5.25 a 32.2 def 58.3 def 410 def 1082 cd 28459 bc Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Foliar spray; 1 8) 2.50 cde 27.4 efg 50.0 fgh 346 fgh 1248 abc 27370 bc Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Foliar spray; 1,3,5,7) 2.50 cde 38.5 cde 68.8 bcd 478 cde 1183 abc 25918 cd Kocide 3000, 0.5 lb/100gal (1 8); Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1 8) 3.75 abcd 45.8 abc 73.6 abc 542 abc 1422 a 36373 a Nordox,2 lb (1 8); Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1 8) 2.00 de 16.9 gh 45.8 ghi 267 ghi 1197 abc 31944 abc EXPERIMENTAL 1, 1.14 pt/100 gal (1 8). 2.00 de 42.7 bcd 78.3 ab 535 bc 1220 abc 29330 abc EXPERIMENTAL 1, 2.32 pt/100 gal (1 8). 2.00 de 54.2 ab 79.9 ab 610 ab 1359 ab 32670 abc EXPERIMENTAL 1, 6.90 pt/100 gal (1 8) 2.00 de 39.5 cde 76.8 abc 511 bcd 1291 abc 31871 abc EXPERIMENTAL 1, 17.0 pt/100 gal (1 8). 1.50 e 28.0 efg 54.3 efg 361 fg 1355 ab 32743 abc Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1 8) 2.00 de 9.83 h 38.5 hi 199 i 1186 abc 31509 abc Agriphage, 2 pt/100gal (1 8) 3.00 bcde 46.8 abc 76.8 abc 557 abc 1201 abc 30592 abc Kocide 3000, 0.5 lb/100 gal (1 8); Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1 8) Quintec 6 fl oz (4,5,6,7) 2.00 de 42.1 bcd 76.8 abc 528 bc 1335 abc 31436 abc Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1,3,5,7) Agriphage 2 pt/100gal (2X per week; 2,4,6,8) Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1 8) 3.50 abcd 15.3 gh 41.7 hi 247 hi 1197 abc 28459 bc Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1,3,5,7) Agriphage 2 pt/100gal (2X per week; 2,4,6,8) Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7) 3.00 bcde 10.6 h 37.5 i 202 i 1132 bcd 25555 cd Non treated control 4.75 ab 58.3 a 81.5 a 647 a 1196 abc 26499 bcd P > F 0.0010 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0316 0.0059 z Listed treatment rates are on a per acre basis unless noted otherwise. The treatments were applied on 29 Sep, 6 Oct, 13 Oct, 2 0 Oct, 26 Oct, 5 Nov, 12 Nov, and 19 Nov (corresponding with applications 1 to 8 above). y Values followed by the same letter are not statistically significantly different ( P x The severity of bacterial spot was assessed as the percentage of canopy affected. The Horsfall Barratt scale was used for all r atings, but values were converted to mid percentages prior to statistical analyses. w Area under the disease progress curves (AUDPC) was calculated using the formula: x i +x i 1 )/2](t i t i 1 )) where xi is the rating at each evaluation time and (t i t i 1 ) is the time between evaluations. v Marketable yield is based on one single harvest on 29 Nov, assumes 4356 plants/A and 20 lb/box, and includes medium, large, a nd extra large fruits.

PAGE 8

8

PAGE 9

9 2011 Fumigation Management Meeting March 24, 2011 John R. Trinkle Building HCC Campus 1206 N. Park Rd. Plant City, FL 33566 5:30 8:30 Agenda 5:30 6:15 p.m. Fumigant Management Plans and Post Application Summaries, Required Handler Training Materials and Other Significant Label Changes Dr. Joe Noling, UF/CREC 6:15 7:00 p.m. Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs), Buffer Zones, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Requirements for Air Monitoring Dr. Andrew MacRae, UF/GCREC 7:00 7:30 p.m. Dinner sponsored by AMVAC, DOW, TriEst 7:30 8:00 p.m. Vapam and K Pam Required Training for 2011 Mike Herrington, AMVAC 8:00 8:30 p.m. Telone Required Training for 2011 Jerry Nance, DOW Please RSVP to Alicia Whidden at 813 744 5519 ext. 134 or awhidden@ufl.edu. by March 23,2011. If special accommodations are needed please call Alicia at 813 744 5519 ext.134.

PAGE 10

10 Strawberry Expo New Name and Major Success Christine Cooley With over 380 people in attendance the 2011 Florida Strawberry Expo was a big success this year. GCREC was pleased to be able to include the North American Strawberry Growers Association and despite the cooler temperature, the event included brief presentations with most of the information being offered in the field allowing guests a more hands on examination of the research here at the center. Thanks to the following vendors who donated funds towards the event and to JayMar Farms for providing the flats of berries. Sponsors of the 2011 Florida Strawberry Expo Syngenta Chemtura Marrone Bio Innovations AMVAC BASF Isagro USA Natural Industries Heartfelt Congratulations to Dr. Natalia Peres and her husband, Renato Lauretti, on the birth of their precious baby boy, Lucca Peres Lauretti. Born Thursday, March 10.


Berry/vegetable times
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PDF VIEWER PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00087388/00070
 Material Information
Title: Berry/vegetable times
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: Gulf Coast Research and Education Center, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Publisher: Gulf Coast Research and Education Center
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 2011
 Record Information
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
System ID: UF00087388:00070

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

( PDF )


Full Text






UFNIVFLERIA IFAS EXTENSION


Calendar (
March 24 Fumigati
Trinkle Center, Plar
contact Alicia Whid
5519 ext. 134 form
see Page 9 of this n

March 28 Worker P
Standards Train the
Polk County Extens
Bartow, Fl. 10:00-1
http://polksmallfarn

April 5 Renewable
Energy Efficiency P
Workshop, Hillsbor
Extension Office, 1:
article in newsletter

April 12 Pesticide T
Hillsborough Co. E:
9:00 am. For more
contact Susan Hadd
5519 ext. 103.

June 5-7 2011 Flori
Horticulture Society
Renaissance Vinoy,
more information g
www.fshs.org/.





fLORIDA
Mark your calend
Florida A
Wednesday, Nov
A Umversity ofFlorida/IFAS
Extension Servic
Hillsborough Count
Seffner, FL 33584
Alicia Wlhdde
Gulf Coast Research &
14625 County
Wimauma, FL 33598
Jack Rechcigl, Ce
Christine Cooley, Lay
James F Pnce,
http //gcrec ifa


Berry/Vegetable Times

March 2011


)f Events Important Changes in New Fumigation Rules
on Meeting, and Restricted Pesticide License Holders
it City. Please Alicia Whidden and Dr. Joe Noling
[den at 813-744-
re information There is a very important point that is being repeatedly

emphasized at the fumigation meetings and that we are sure
protection will be pointed out again and again at upcoming meetings.
Trainer Program, The point that we would like to bring to your attention, and
ion Office, that is printed on each and every new fumigant product label,
:00. Register at defines a new requirement and responsibility of the certified
ns.com.
applicator of soil fumigants. From ordering to receiving
Energy and delivery of the fumigant, from the beginning to the end of
program applying the product in the field, to signing off on the
ough County Fumigation Management Plan, it all falls on the restricted
00-5:00. See pesticide license holder/certified applicator to be at the field

application site for each day's fumigation activity. What this
testing at means in practical terms for our farming operations is that the
tension office.
information
ockat 813-744- Two Applications of Assail Permitted on

Strawberry
da State James F. Price and Curtis A. Nagle
SMeeting, The
St. Pete. For Note: The maximum number of applications of Assail in
o to strawberries is two per growing season regardless of the rate

per acre used. A different number of applications was
, reported in the February Berry/Vegetable Times.

Reduce Spotted Wing Drosophila from
4L9 EXPF ) Strawberries to Blueberries
ar for the 2011 James F. Price and Curtis A. Nagle
g Expo
ember 9, 2011 Strawberry farmers should destroy all fruit, both on and off
and Florida Cooperative the plant, as soon as possible, following the end of the season
e Newsletter
y, 5339 CR 579 in order to reduce spotted wing drosophila (Drosophila
81 d3)7i44-5519 Suzukii) movement from strawberries to blueberries.
Education Center
Road 672,
(813) 634-0000
nter Director
yout and Design
Co-Editor
s ufl edu


1
IFAS is an Equal Employment Opportunity-Affirmative Action Employer authorized to provide research, educational information and other services onlyto individuals and institutions that
function without regard to race, color, sex, age, handicap, or national origin U S Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service, University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A & M
University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of the County Commissioners Cooperating









pesticide license holder or another designated
pesticide license holder / certified applicator
must be at the field site at all times, ie., in the
line of sight of the application and providing
direct supervision of all persons performing
handling activities from the very beginning
to the very end of dispensing the fumigant in
the field.
This is a very important point for
some of our farm operations to consider how
they will satisfy this new fumigant label
requirement. This can be a problem if the
operation has multiple locations with
multiple fumigation crews making daily
applications and having only one person
holding a pesticide license or the person that
holds the license is not dedicated to being on
the farm at all times. Clearly, to resolve such
a problem will require licensing of new
certified applicators to assume
responsibilities for fumigant applications
when either the primary applicator cannot
remain at the site, or when fumigations are
proceeding concurrently at multiple sites.
There will be a fumigation meeting
for strawberry growers on March 24 at the
Trinkle Center at HCC from 5:30 p.m. to
8:30 p.m. Dinner will be provided. See page
9 of this newsletter for all the details.


Cultural Practices for Vegetable
and Small Fruit Crops:
Characterization of the "Strawberry
Dried Calyx Disorder" in Florida
and Spain
Bielinski M. Santos, Craig K. Chandler, Alicia J.
Whidden, and Maria del Carmen Sanchez

The strawberry dried calyx disorder
(SDCD) has been observed since 2005 in
farms around Plant City, Florida and Huelva,
Spain. This disorder starts as a slight
darkening of newly-opened and already
formed flowers (Figure 1), resembling salt
injury and progressing towards calyx


burning, and fruit discoloration and
deformation (Figure 2). Field surveys
performed in both locations during the 2005-
06, 2006-07 and 2007-08 seasons suggest that
certain strawberry cultivars are more
susceptible than others to the appearance of
SDCD.


, -.4 ...... ,
Figure 1. Strawberry dried calyx disorder in immature
fruit and flower. Huelva, Spain, 2008 (Picture by B.M.
Santos).


Figure 2. Strawberry dried calyx disorder in mature
fruit. Huelva, Spain, 2008 (Pictures by B.M. Santos).

In Florida, strawberries are planted in
open fields, while in Spain, they are produced
exclusively under high tunnels, mini-tunnels,
and passively-ventilated greenhouses. At both
locations, growers plant several cultivars
concurrently to achieve continuous fruit
production by overlapping each cultivar
production peaks. Cultivars undergo equal
irrigation, fertilization and pest management
programs all season long. Field observations
indicated the cultivars Strawberry Festival,
Camino Real, and Palomar showed the SDCD
earlier and more severely than others.
More detailed surveys conducted in
Spain during the 2007-08 season confirmed
that out of the 16 farms visited, representing
about 2500 ha (6,718 acres) (38% of all the
planted area in Spain), 15 experienced









moderate to severe SDCD symptoms. These
symptoms consistently developed after
exposure to stressful conditions, such as low
temperatures and/or low light. Regardless of
the production system, the symptoms
appeared to be associated with high electric
conductivity (EC; salt concentration) of
hydroponic (perlite or coconut fiber mix) or
soil. In those farms with the highest
incidence of SDCD, it was common to find
soil EC values at or higher than 0.3 mS/cm
and as high as 0.75 mS/cm. Only moderate
SDCD was associated with EC soil values
below 0.2 mS/cm. As expected, soil texture
also plays a major role in allowing salt
"washing" away from the root zone. At one
farm with both sandy and loamy soils and
under the same fertigation programs, the
cultivars planted in sandy soil had about 30%
less affected plants than those planted in
heavier soils.
In Florida, the SDCD has been
observed mainly in 'Strawberry Festival'
fields within 10 days after a freeze or after
nights with very low temperatures (36F =
3C or less) and where very aggressive
fertilization programs with poor irrigation
and drainage are used. Growers with farms
affected with SDCD have reduced the
incidence of the disorder by providing only
irrigation water or reducing fertilizer use
during the 3 or 4 days before and after a
stressful event (e.g. a freeze).
The effect of the type of protective
structure was assessed in 2007 on a
strawberry farm in Huelva, Spain. Plants of
'Strawberry Festival' were set between
October 4 and 6 under three types of
protective structures: a) low tunnels (9.5 ft
high = 2.85 m), b) high tunnels (11 ft high =
3.30 m), and c) passively-ventilated
greenhouses (16 ft high = 4.80 m). These
structures were covered with the same
polyethylene plastic covers, which reduced
photosynthetic active radiation by 40%.
Plants in all three structures had the same


growing substrate (perlite), received the same
fertilization and irrigation programs, and crop
management throughout the season. The EC of
the nutritional solution at the injection points
was 1.6 mS/cm, while it was 1.7 mS/cm at the
drainage points.
The temperatures at the center of each
structure measured at 3 pm were 77, 72.5, and
67F (25.0, 22.5, 19.5C), respectively.
However, approximately 13 weeks after
transplanting, six samples of 75 plants within
each structure (450 plants per structure) were
randomly assessed for SDCD incidence,
regardless of the severity of the damage. The
data revealed that there were significant
differences on the number of plants with
SDCD. Strawberries in low tunnels had the
lowest number of plants with SDCD symptoms
(8.9%), followed by those in the high tunnels
(14.5%), and by those in the greenhouses
(23.2%). Therefore, it appears that SDCD
problems increased as the temperature
decreased.
Another test was conducted in 2006 at
the Gulf Coast Research and Education Center,
IFAS, University of Florida under greenhouse
conditions using six strawberry cultivars.
Mature plants of 'Strawberry Festival', 'Winter
Dawn', 'Camarosa', 'Camino Real',
'Treasure', and '00-51' were transplanted in
sand culture under greenhouse conditions to
determine whether the SDCD could be
reproduced in isolated conditions. Plants were
irrigated three times per week with nutritive
solutions containing 0, 0.6, 1.2, 2.4, and 4.8
mS/cm and the incidence of SDCD was
monitored twice weekly by counting the
number of affected plants. Symptoms of salt
injury (similar to those observed in farms)
developed at 30 days in 'Strawberry Festival'
and 'Camino Real' with the 1.2 mS/cm
solution (Figure 3), whereas the other cultivars
did not show visible injury. The remaining
cultivars developed salt damage at 45 and 55
days after initial treatment of 1.2 and 2.4 mS/
cm solutions. These preliminary observations










indicated that both 'Strawberry Festival' and
'Camino Real' appeared to be more sensitive
to high-EC fertilizer solutions than the
others.
Circumstantial evidence seems to
eliminate biotic entities (i.e. fungi, bacteria,
viruses and nematodes) as the causal agents
of SDCD because: a) symptoms comparable
to SDCD were developed under pathogen-
free greenhouse conditions; b) none of
analyzed calyx samples from Florida and
Spain with SDCD has yielded positive
pathogen results; c) SDCD tends to disappear
during the growing season when either
fertigation practices are modified and/or
stressful conditions disappear; and d) SDCD
distribution in high tunnels and fields seems
to be more accentuated in rows closer to
entrances and at the end of drip lines.


Figure 3. Strawberry dried calyx disorder reproduced
under greenhouse conditions. Balm, Florida, 2007
(Picture by B.M. Santos).

Until the nature of this disorder is
fully understood, strawberry growers should
exercise caution on their fertilization and
irrigation programs during stressful
environmental conditions for susceptible
cultivars. Reducing the fertilization rates
during the days before an expected freeze,
while maintaining regular irrigation
programs, appears to help to minimize the
incidence of SDCD.


Please remember...
The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the
purpose of providing specific information. It is not a
guarantee or warranty of the products named and does not
signify that they are approved to the exclusion of others of
suitable composition. Use pesticides safely. Read and
follow directions on the manufacturer's label.


Summary of Fall 2010 Tomato
Bacterial Spot Trials
Gary Vallad

Two tomato trials were conducted in
the fall of 2010 to evaluate Actigard,
bactericides and biopesticides for activity
against bacterial spot. Both trials were planted
on 3 Sept and consisted of 25 ft-long plots
within 300 ft-long, raised beds with 5 ft center-
to-center bed spacing. Beds were covered with
black virtually impermeable mulch and
irrigated with a drip system. Tomato cv.
SecuriTY 28 seedlings were transplanted at 18-
in spacing along beds skipping a 4 ft alley
between plots as a buffer. Treatments,
including a non-treated control (sprayed with
water only to eliminate differences in leaf
wetness between treatments), were arranged in
a randomized complete block design with each
treatment repeated six times. For both trials,
treatments were applied weekly using a CO2
back pack sprayer calibrated to deliver 60, 90,
and 120 gal/A at 40 psi. Each plot was
inoculated on 14 and 23 Oct with a suspension
(106 cfu/ml) of Xanthomonas perforans race 4
using a backpack sprayer. Plots were
monitored regularly for bacterial spot, and
rated after disease reached appreciable levels.
Marketable yield was assessed from two
harvests on 22 Nov and 7 Dec in the first trial,
and a single hand harvest on 29 Nov in the
second trial. Alternating applications of Revus
Top (7.7 fl oz/A) and Quadris (16.4 fl oz/A)
was included to minimize the impact of early
blight and target spot when conducive
conditions occurred in the latter half of Oct
through November. Although last fall was
quite dry, high dew points and scattered
showers in the latter half of Oct through
November were sufficient for moderate to
severe disease development. The percent of
foliage exhibiting bacterial spot over a two
week period increased from 1.5% to 81% in
Trial 1 and from 4.5% to 95% in Trial 2.









TRIAL 1: Evaluation of bactericides and
biopesticides for bacterial spot
management.
The first trial assessed several bactericides
(Kasumin, Cuprofix 40D + Penncozeb, and
Kocide 3000), several biopesticides (DT-9,
Actinovate, and Vacciplant), Actigard,
applied individually or in an integrated
system for the management of bacterial spot.
All treatments, with the exception of
Actinovate alone and Actinovate with DT-9,
significantly reduced disease severity by 39.6
-83.9% on the first rating compared to the
non-treated control. However, as disease
pressure increased only Actigard and
Actinovate-Actigard maintained a significant
reduction in disease severity. Neither
Cuprofix-Penncozeb nor Kocide 3000
provided a significant reduction in disease
severity compared to the non-treated control
beyond the first disease evaluation on 11


Figures (Top, left to right). Leaf symptoms of
bacterial spot of tomato caused by Xanthomonas
perforans. (Bottom, left to right). Blighting of leaf
margins caused by Xanthomonas perforans infecting
hydathodes often associated with conditions that
promote heavy dew formation.


Nov. Overall, Actigard alone (0.33 oz/A) and
Actinovate-Actigard significantly performed
better than the copper-based in this study.
Treatments had no statistical effect on fruit
yields.

TRIAL 2: Evaluation of bactericides and
Actigard for bacterial spot management.
The second trial assessed the effect of Actigard
rate, frequency, and two application strategies
[foliar and chemigation (through drip
irrigation)], in addition to several copper
formulations (EXPERIMENTAL 1, Kocide
3000, and Nordox 75WG), Firewall
(streptomycin sulfate), Agriphage, and three
integrated programs for the management of
bacterial spot. Significant difference in disease
severity among treatments was detected on
three rating dates. Most treatments, except
Kocide 3000-Penncozeb, Kocide 3000-
Penncozeb-Quintec, EXPERIMENTAL 1
(rates of 1.14 to 6.90 pt/100 gal), and
Agriphage, significantly reduced the final
disease severity by 15.6-54.0% in comparison
to the non-treated control. Firewall
(streptomycin sulfate) applied alone or as part
of a spray program provided the greatest level
of disease control in Trial 2. Bactericides that
significantly reduced disease severity did not
statistically improve marketable fruit yield or
the numbers of extra large fruits when
compared to the non-treated control.
Similar to previous trials, weekly foliar
applications of Actigard were superior to
biweekly (14 day) foliar applications. The
biweekly application of Actigard through the
drip irrigation provided the same level of
control as foliar applications (P = 0.9066,
based on final disease severity). The weekly
0.75 oz/A drip application rate reduced plant
height by 7.3% compared to the 0.25 oz/A rate.
However, such a difference was not at the 14
day drip application interval (data not shown).
Drip applications of Actigard successfully
reduced the seasonal progress of bacterial spot
on tomato, but the 0.75 oz/A rate caused a











significant reduction in yields relative to 0.75 oz foliar rate (P = 0.0164 for contrasting drip and
foliar applications at 0.75 oz/A). Additional research is underway to better define appropriate
chemigation rates with the goal of balancing disease suppression with improved yields. In the
end, this goal will probably be accomplished by integrating Actigard with bactericides like
Firewall, as was accomplished in two of the integrated programs. Actigard is not currently
labeled for chemigation. The current Actigard label recommends weekly applications at 0.33 to
0.75 oz/A. Recent work at GCREC found that the lower rates of 0.33 to 0.50 oz/A were
sufficient for disease control.
Firewall (streptomycin sulfate) is not labeled for field use, only for transplant
production. However, efforts are being made to expand the label. Developing effective
resistance management strategies will be critical to prevent an increase resistant to streptomycin
sulfate among Xanthomonasperforans strains (the predominant cause of bacterial spot on
tomato in Florida). It is unlikely that rotations with copper-based bactericides will be sufficient
for resistance management, since copper-resistance is prevalent among Xanthomonas strains in
Florida. Rotations with other products like Quintec (also not labeled for tomato, but has a
supplemental label for bacterial spot of pepper) may also be ideal.

Table 1: Evaluation of bactericides and biopesticides for management of bacterial spot of tomato, fall
2010.


Disease severity (%)x


Marketable fruit yield


Treatment, rate/A applicationsz
Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (1-5);
Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (1-5)
Actigard 50WG, 0.33 oz (1-5)
DT-9, 2 oz (1-5)
Actinovate, 3 oz (1-5)
DT-9, 1 oz (1-5)
Serenade Max, 1 lb (1-5)
Actinovate, 3 oz (1-5)
Actinovate, 3 oz (1-5)
Actigard 50WG, 0.33 oz (1-5)
Actinovate, 6 oz (1-5)
Kasumin 2L, 32 fl oz/50 gal (1-3);
Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (4-5);
Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (4-5)
Kasumin 2L, 16 fl oz/50 gal (1-3);
Cuprofix 40D,3 lb (4-5);
Penncozeb 75DF, 1 lb (4-5)
Vacciplant, 14 fl oz (1-5)
Kocide 3000, 1.75 lb (1-5)
Non-treated control


Weit Extra large
boxWeit (numbers/
15 Nov 22 Nov 29 Nov AUDPC (boxes/A) A)


12.2 cdy
11.4 cde
13.8 cd


83.1 a
65.7 c
91.0 a


92.5 ab
90.2 b
94.0 a


781 c
680 d
831 ab


21.7ab 84.7 ab 94.0 a 811 bc

8.25 de 84.7 ab 93.3 ab 785 c

4.50 e 61.5 c 86.3 c 633 e
24.8 a 84.7 ab 93.3 ab 814 bc


12.2 cd 87.8 ab 93.3 ab 809 bc


16.9 be
15.3 bcd
12.2 cd
28.0 a


89.4 ab
89.4 ab
87.8 ab
91.0 a


94.8 a
93.3 ab
94.0 a
95.3 a


831 ab
823 abc
811 be
860 a


P >F <0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0002 < 0.0001 0.8159 0.6508
z Listed treatment rates are on a per acre basis unless noted otherwise. biopesticide treatments were applied on 6 Oct, 19 Oct, 26 Oct, 2 Nov,
and 8 Nov (corresponding with applications 1 to 5 above)
Y Values followed by the same letter are not statistically significantly different (P = 0.05) according to Fisher's LSD test.
x The severity of bacterial spot was assessed as the percentage of canopy affected. The Horsfall-Barratt scale was used for all ratings, but
values were converted to mid-percentages prior to statistical analyses.
w Area under the disease progress curves (AUDPC) was calculated using the formula: ([(x,+x .1)/2](t,-t-.1)) where xi is the rating at each
evaluation time and (t,-t,-.) is the time between evaluations.
SMarketable yield is based on two single harvests on 22 Nov and 7 Dec6 assumes 4356 plants/A and 20 lb/box, and includes medium, large,
and extra-large fruits.


2184
2050
2221

2223

2034

2058
1938


2108


2120
1987
2191
2046


47844
45593
48352

51256

45811

46972
40511


46969


45375
43197
45811
44504











Table 2: Evaluation of bactericides and Actigard for management of bacterial spot of tomato, fall 2010.
Disease severity (%)x Marketable fruit yield
Weight Extra large
Treatment, rate/A applicationsz 11 Nov 22 Nov 29 Nov AUDPCw (boxes/A) (numbers/A)


Actigard 50WG, 0.25 oz (Drip; 1-8)
Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1-8)
Actigard 50WG, 0.25 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7)
Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7)
Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Foliar spray; 1-8)
Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Foliar spray;
1,3,5,7)
Kocide 3000, 0.5 lb/100gal (1-8);
Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1-8)
Nordox,2 lb (1-8);
Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1-8)
EXPERIMENTAL 1, 1.14 pt/100 gal (1-8).
EXPERIMENTAL 1, 2.32 pt/100 gal (1-8).
EXPERIMENTAL 1, 6.90 pt/100 gal (1-8)
EXPERIMENTAL 1, 17.0 pt/100 gal (1-8).
Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1-8)

Agriphage, 2 pt/100gal (1-8)
Kocide 3000, 0.5 lb/100 gal (1-8);
Penncozeb 75DF, 2 lb (1-8)
Quintec, 6 fl oz (4,5,6,7)
Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1,3,5,7)
Agriphage 2 pt/100gal (2X per week;
2,4,6,8) Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1-
8)
Firewall, 16 oz/100 gal (1,3,5,7)
Agriphage 2 pt/100gal (2X per week;
2,4,6,8)
Actigard 50WG, 0.75 oz (Drip; 1,3,5,7)


2.50
cdey
4.00 abc


28.0 efg
30.6 def


65.7 cde
57.3 defg


404 def
394 ef


4.00 abc 21.7 fgh 65.7 cde 370 fg
5.25 a 32.2 def 58.3 def 410 def


2.50 cde 27.4 efg

2.50 cde 38.5 cde


3.75
abcd


50.0 fgh

68.8 bcd


346 fgh

478 cde


1393 ab
875 d


33469 ab
19384 d


1076 cd 26354 bcd
1082 cd 28459 be
1248 abc 27370 be

1183 abc 25918 cd


45.8 abc 73.6 abc 542 abc 1422 a 36373 a


2.00 de 16.9 gh 45.8 ghi 267 ghi


2.00 de 42.7 bcd 78.3 ab
2.00 de 54.2 ab 79.9 ab
2.00 de 39.5 cde 76.8 abc


1.50 e
2.00 de
3.00
bcde


28.0 efg 54.3 efg


9.83 h


38.5 hi


535 be


1197 abc 31944 abc
1220 abc 29330 abc


610 ab 1359 ab 32670 abc
511 bcd 1291 abc 31871 abc
361 fg 1355 ab 32743 abc
199 i 1186 abc 31509 abc


46.8 abc 76.8 abc 557 abc 1201 abc 30592 abc


2.00 de 42.1 bcd 76.8 abc 528 be


3.50
abcd


3.00
bcde


15.3 gh 41.7 hi 247 hi


10.6 h


37.5 i 202 i


1335 abc 31436 abc



1197 abc 28459 be



1132 bcd 25555 cd


Non-treated control 4.75 ab 58.3 a 81.5 a 647 a 1196 abc 26499 bcd

P>F 0.0010 0.0001 < 0.0001 < 0.0001 0.0316 0.0059

z Listed treatment rates are on a per acre basis unless noted otherwise. The treatments were applied on 29 Sep, 6 Oct 13 Oct 20 Oct, 26 Oct
5 Nov, 12 Nov, and 19 Nov (corresponding with applications 1 to 8 above).
Y Values followed by the same letter are not statistically significantly different (P = 0.05) according to Fisher's LSD test.
x The severity of bacterial spot was assessed as the percentage of canopy affected. The Horsfall-Barratt scale was used for all ratings, but
values were converted to mid-percentages prior to statistical analyses.
w Area under the disease progress curves (AUDPC) was calculated using the formula: Z([(x,+x,.1)/2](t,-ti.)) where xi is the rating at each
evaluation time and (t,-t.li) is the time between evaluations.
SMarketable yield is based on one single harvest on 29 Nov, assumes 4356 plants/A and 20 lb/box, and includes medium, large, and extra-
large fruits.





















L:5- A -.. IcU JL 4:f rhI "7 ? i*,ni- T A ir i I k'7 .n L jr-.n.
~lir ;hirp-

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY NEWS
March 1. 2011

For more Information, contact:
Stephen Gran, Agriculture Industry Development Manager
Economic Development Department
Telephone: (813) 272-5506


County Teaming with USDA to Teach Local Farmers and Rural
Businesses How to Fund "Green" Energy Projects

Whal: USDA Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Program Workshop for Local
Farmers, Ranchers and Rural Businesses
Dale: Tuesday. April 5,2011
Time: 1 pmr- 5 pm
Where: Hillsborough County Extension Office Auditorium
5339 County Road 579, Seffner
FREE

HLIlborough County's Agriculture Industry Development Program and Extension Service are
partnering with the U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Development Office to provide a
workshop on government programs available to assist farmers, ranchers and rural businesses
with renewable energy projects and energy efficiency improvements

This workshop wiD help participants learn more about the programs available through the U.S.
Department of Agriculture Rural Development Office.

Specific topics will include:
Renewable Energy Prgram Provides guaranteed loans and grants to help agriculture
producers and rural small businesses purchase and Lnstall renew able energy systems and
make energy efficiency improvements.
SBiomass Research & Development Initiative Provides financial assistance for research
and development of biomass based products, blcenergy, blofoels and related processes

This workshop is FREE, but seating is limied, Please register by calling Alayna Shiver in the
Hill borough County Economic Development Department at (813) 272-5909.

For more information, contact Stephen Gran. Hillsborough County Agricuhure Industry
Development Manager, Economic Development Department, at (813) 272-5506.
P lai OITiLo: TiJ. 1110 -Tanmp., FT;lrid .L;U
www.hilsIbi'ruigthcrnty."rg








2011 Fumigation Management Meeting
March 24, 2011
John R. Trinkle Building
HCC Campus
1206 N. Park Rd.
Plant City, FL 33566
5:30-8:30

Agenda
5:30 6:15 p.m. Fumigant Management Plans and Post Application Summaries,
Required Handler Training Materials and Other Significant Label Changes-
Dr. Joe Noling, UF/CREC

6:15 7:00 p.m. Good Agricultural Practices (GAPs), Buffer Zones, Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE), Requirements for Air Monitoring-
Dr. Andrew MacRae, UF/GCREC

7:00 7:30 p.m. Dinner sponsored by AMVAC, DOW, TriEst

7:30 8:00 p.m. Vapam and K-Pam Required Training for 2011-
Mike Herrington, AMVAC

8:00 8:30 p.m. Telone Required Training for 2011- Jerry Nance, DOW

Please RSVP to Alicia Whidden at 813-744-5519 ext. 134 or
awhidden(gufl.edu. by March 23,2011.
If special accommodations are needed please call Alicia at 813-744-5519 ext.134.








Strawberry Expo New Name and
Major Success
Christine Cooley
With over 380 people in attendance the
2011 Florida Strawberry Expo was a big success
this year. GCREC was pleased to be able to
include the North American Strawberry Growers
Association and despite the cooler temperature, the
field tours were filled to capacity. This year's
event included brief presentations with most of the
information being offered in the field allowing
guests a more hands-on examination of the
research here at the center.
Thanks to the following vendors who
donated funds towards the event and to JayMar
Farms for providing the flats of berries.

Sponsors of the
2011 Florida Strawberry Expo
Syngenta
Chemtura
Marrone Bio Innovations
AMVAC
BASF
Isagro USA
Natural Industries



S Heartfelt Congratulations to
Dr Natalia Peres and her husband,
Renato Lauretti, on the birth of their
precious baby boy,
Lucca Peres Lauretti.
Born Thursday, March 10.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2011 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated May 24, 2011 - Version 3.0.0 - mvs