• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Table of Contents
 Main






Title: Vegetarian
ALL VOLUMES CITATION PDF VIEWER THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00087399/00391
 Material Information
Title: Vegetarian
Series Title: Vegetarian
Physical Description: Serial
Creator: Horticultural Sciences Department, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Publisher: Horticultural Sciences Department, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Publication Date: November 1982
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00087399
Volume ID: VID00391
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:

Vegetarian%201982%20Issue%2082-11 ( PDF )


Table of Contents
    Table of Contents
        Page 1
    Main
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
Full Text

INSTITUTE OF FOOD AND
AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


FLORIDA
COOPERATIVE
EXTENSION SERVICE


VEGE TAPIAN

A Vegetable Crops Extension Publicatior

Vegetable Crops Department. 1255 HSPP Gainesville. FL 32611 Telephone 392-213,


Vegetarian 82-11


November 5, 1982


CONTENTS


I. NOTES OF INTEREST


Home Horticulture In-Service Training
Vegetable Seed and Plant Companies
Fifth Annual Allied Industry Workshop


II. PESTICIDE UPDATE


Permethrin on Celery
Methamidophos on Celery
Mevinphos on Watercress
Dyrene on Watercress
Permethrin on Tomatoes


Sa4mm III. COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE PRODUCTION
A. Water Applications on Full Bed Mulched Tomatoes
in Manatee and Hillsborough Counties
B. Plant Arrangement for Increased Bell Pepper
Yield


IV. HARVESTING AND HANDLING

A. MUM Containers Tested for Florida Tomatoes


V. HOME VEGETABLE GARDENING

A. Know Your Minor Vegetables Herbs




The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences 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, or national origin.
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION WORK IN AGRICULTURE AND HOME ECONOMICS, STATE OF FLORIDA, IFAS, UNIVERSITY OF
FLORIDA, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, AND BOARDS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COOPERATING


11~1







-2-


I. NOTES OF INTEREST

A. Home Horticulture In-Service Training

The dates of June 28-30, 1983, have been set for the home
horticulture in-service training session for Florida county
extension agents and para-professionals. The site will be the
Lake Yale Baptist Assembly in the Ocala forest near Eustis.
Currently, 31 extension workers are enrolled. The session will
include one-half day on vegetable gardening, one day on
ornamental horticulture, and one-half day on back-yard fruit
growing.

Specialists from University of Florida departments relating
to horticulture will conduct the training.

(Stephens)


B. Vegetable Seed and Plant Companies

Included with this issue of the Vegetarian is Vegetable
Crops Report 82-8, Vegetable Seed and Plant Companies, by A. M.
McDonald and J. M. Stephens. This updated version replaces the
old listing "Vegetarian Newsletter 72-11, Vegetable Seed and
Plant Companies" under Varieties in the Florida Vegetable Crops
Production Guide handbook.

(Sherman)


C. Fifth Annual Allied Industry Workshop

The Fifth Annual Workshop for agri-chemical salesman, field
men, and technical representatives concerned with vegetable pro-
duction will be held on 9 December 1982 in Kendrick Auditorium,
Manatee County Fairgrounds, Palmetto, Florida. A preliminary
program was published in last month's Vegetarian. For more in-
formation, contact Dr. Phyllis Gilreath, Manatee County Coopera-
tive Extension, 1307 17th St., Palmetto, FL 33561.

(Marlowe)


II. PESTICIDE UPDATE

The Environmental Protection Agency has granted specific
exemptions under the provisions of Section 18 of the Federal In-
secticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, as amended, to the
Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services for the
following materials:








-3-


A. Permethrin on Celery

Permethrin (Ambush, Pounce) may be applied to control the vege-
table leafminer on celery in Orange, Palm Beach, Sarasota and
Seminole counties. Permethrin may be applied at a maximum rate
of 0.2 lb ai per acre per application. A maximum of 21 applica-
tions may be made at 5 to 14 day intervals. The exemption is in
effect until June 30, 1983.

B. Methamidophos on Celery

Methamidophos (Monitor 4) may be applied to celery for the con-
trol of vegetable leafminer in Zellwood (Orange County), Oviedo
(Seminole County), Belle Glade, Pahokee and South Bay (Palm Beach
County) and Sarasota (Sarasota County). Monitor may be applied
at a maximum rate of 1.0 lb ai per acre per application at 7 day
intervals, with a maximum of 8 applications. A 21 day preharvest
interval will be observed. The specific exemption is in effect
until July 1, 1983.

C. Mevinphos on Watercress

Mevinphos (Phosdrin) may be applied to watercress for the control
of aphids at a rate of 0.5 lb ai per acre. A single application
per crop is authorized. The exemption is in effect until August
31, 1983.

D. Dyrene on Watercress

Dyrene may be applied for the control of leafspot on watercress
at a maximum rate of 0.5 lb ai per acre. A maximum of 4 applica-
tions may be made per crop at 5 7 days intervals. A 7 day pre-
harvest limit is established. The exemption is in effect until
August 31, 1983.

E. Permethrin on Tomatoes

Permethrin (Ambush, Pounce) may be applied to tomatoes for the
control of leafminers. The material may be applied at a maximum
rate of 0.1 lb ai per acre, with a maximum of 10 applications.
The exemption is in effect until June 30, 1983.

Before using any pesticide, read the labels carefully and
follow all instructions and restrictions.


(Stall)











III. COMMERCIAL VEGETABLE PRODUCTION

A. Water Applications on Full Bed Mulched Tomatoes in Manatee and
Hillsborough Counties

A recent survey of tomato grower irrigation practices in the
Manatee-Hillsborough County production area involved 18 fields in
the spring and 19 fields in the fall for 1979-82. All of the
tomatoes were grown using the full bed mulch system, with seep
irrigation, fumigation, high levels of fertilizer, and a complete
pest control program. The three leading cultivars grown were
Duke, Sunny and FTE 12.

Land preparation started in January for the spring crop and
in July for the fall crop. Water is vitally needed in this period
of the production sequence to insure germination of weed seeds,
hatching of nematode eggs, provide a moist environment for soil
amendments to react, and to allow the proper conditioning of soil
for bed formation and fumigation. Good tomato growers know how
important it is to have adequate soil moisture in the bed before
the plastic is applied. A bed with inadequate moisture is
difficult to shape, form, press, fumigate and manage. It may be
noted in Table 1 and 2 that the irrigation applied during land
preparation only represented between 8 to 11% of the total
applied. Rainfall and evapotranspiration (ET) data are included
to give an idea of the environmental conditions during this
study.

Table 1. Average water application by month for 18 spring-grown
crops of tomatoes, Manatee-Ruskin District, 1979-82,
(Inches/Month).

Operation Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Total
Land Preparation 5.2 --- --- --- -- --- 5.2
Crop Production --- 5.3 10.5 11.8 12.3 2.5 42.4
Pest Control --- 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0
Total 5.2 5.5 10.7 12.0 12.5 2.7 48.6
Rainfall 3.3 2.7 1.6 1.6 4.4 4.8 18.4
ET (Pan) 2.9 3.8 4.9 5.7 5.8 5.7 28.8


Table 2. Average water application by month for 19 fall-grown
crops of tomatoes, Manatee-Ruskin District, 1979-82,
(Inches/Month).

Operation Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
Land Preparation 3.8 -- --- --- --- --- 3.8
Crop Production --- 7.3 8.9 10.3 12.1 4.3 42.9
Pest Control --- 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 1.0
Total 3.8 7.5 9.1 10.5 12.3 4.5 47.7
Rainfall 5.7 9.1 4.6 0.7 2.0 1.1 23.2
ET (Pan) 10.2 9.3 8.5 7.4 6.4 4.8 46.6








-5-


Averages can be very misleading. It is far more important
to know the range of measurements when planning inputs rather
than just the mean (total divided by the number of measurements).
The ranges of irrigation applied are presented in Table 3 and 4.
It would be much safer to consider the average to high ranges in
planning water needs than placing full emphasis on the average
alone. It is of interest to note that the range in the fall crop
applications 26.3 inches (low) to 67.7 inches (high) was greater
than for the spring crop 41.9 to 55.2 inches. Average applica-
tions were about the same for spring (47.6 inches) and fall (46.7
inches).


Table 3. Range of irrigation water applied to spring crop toma-
toes, Manatee-Hillsborough, 1979-81.

Water applied (inches)
Month Low Average High
January 4.3 5.2 6.1
February 6.0 5.3 6.7
March 9.9 10.5 10.8
April 10.1 11.8 13.6
May 10.9 12.3 13.5
June 0.7 2.5 4.5
TOTAL 41.9 47.6 55.2


Table 4. Range of irrigation water applied to fall crop toma-
toes, Manatee-Hillsborough, 1979-81


Month
July
August
September
October
November
December
TOTAL


Low


1.4
3.5
4.3
7.0
8.1
2.0
26.3


Water applied (inches)
Average
3.8
7.3
8.9
10.3
12.1
4.3
46.7


Averages may be fine for the ideal, average year. It is
very much lika the hotel bell boy's response to the question as
to what his average tip was. He said ten dollars. He was given
ten dollars and responded thanks you are the first person ever to
come up to average.


(Marlowe)


High
6.3
11.1
13.5
13.7
16.2
6.9
67.7


Low


--


- ---~--







-6-


B. Plant Arrangement for Increased Bell Pepper Yield

Bell peppers are typically grown on beds at 3.5 to 6 ft.
centers with 1 or 2 plant rows per bed. In-row spacings of pep-
pers range from 9-16 inches.

A recent study was conducted to determine, among other
things, the influence of bed width, number of plant rows/bed and
plant spacing on bell pepper production. Results of the one year
study were presented at the Florida State Horticultural Society.
The study was conducted using plastic mulched beds with 4 ft and
6 ft centers. In-row spacing between plants were 9 or 12 inches,
with 12 inches between rows. Bed/row arrangements were 4 ft beds
with 1 row (4/1), 4 ft beds with 2 rows (4/2), 6 ft beds with 2
rows (6/2), and 6 ft beds with 3 rows (6/3). Plant populations
for the 4/2 and 6/3 arrangements at the 1 ft in-row spacing were
the same (21,780 plants/acre). The 6/2 arrangement at 1 ft in-
row spacings were 14,520 plants/acre and the 4/1 was 10,890
plants/acre.

The results showed that the yield/plant was significantly
affected by bed/row arrangements. The yield per plant decreased
with increasing plant populations. The 4/2 arrangement had a
slightly higher yield/plant than the 6/3 even though the popula-
tion was the same. The 4/1 at 12 inch spacing had the greatest
number and greatest weight of fruit/plant.

The yields/acre were almost reversed from this. Early mar-
ketable fruit yields were similar with 4/2 and 6/3 and lowest
with the 4/1. Total marketable fruit number was significantly
greater with the 4/2 bed arrangement than the other treatments
with 4/1 being the lowest. Total marketable fruit weights were
affected similarly, yields were highest in each bed width with
the higher number of rows/bed. Marketable weights were higher,
but not significantly so, with the 4/2 as compared to the 6/3.

The differences in marketable yields due to bed arrangement
were primarily a response to differences in plant population.
The 4/2 bed arrangement had twice as high a population as 4/1.
The yield per plant of 4/2 was one-third that of the 4/1 result-
ing in a significant increase in total yield for the 4/2. The
two 6-foot bed/row arrangements did not significantly differ in
yield/acre. Although the number of plants/acre was 50% greater
with 3 rows as compared with 2 rows, the yield/plant was 40%
greater with the latter arrangement.

Marketable pepper fruit yields were not affected by the 9 or
12-inch in-row spacing, although the plant population was one-
third greater with the 9-inch spacing. The yield/plant was









inversely related to plant population and the increased yield/
plant with the 12-inch spacing compensated for the fewer plants.
Yields/acre were similar with the 2 in-row spacings.

This study plus other observations indicate several things:

1. Increasing the plant population of peppers below 12 inches
in-row will not increase yields significantly.

2. Two rows on a four foot bed will give the highest yield/acre
of any system now in use in Florida.

3. For those growers set up for 6 ft beds, increasing from 2
rows to 3 rows/bed is probably not warranted because of the
additional cost of plants and difficulty in harvesting.

The study cited in this article will be repeated next
spring. Results from it will be reported fully at that time.

(Stall)


IV. HARVESTING AND HANDLING

A. MUM Containers Tested for Florida Tomatoes

During the last several years the USDA and United Fresh
Fruit and Vegetable Association have been cooperating in
"Project:MUM" (Modularization, Unitization, and Metrication).
The objective of this project is to reduce the number of shipping
container sizes used in the produce industry and to encourage
unitization. Thorough discussions of Project:MUM and shipping
container standardization are contained in the Vegetarian News-
letter, Issue 80-12, and Handling Florida Vegetables, Issue 81-1.

When the Florida tomato industry adopted a 25-lb unit rather
than a 30-lb unit for mature-green tomatoes in January 1982,
there was an excellent opportunity to use a standard container.
However, no shipping tests had been performed with tomatoes and
shippers were reluctant to adopt an unproven container that re-
quired tight stacking patterns when palletized. Most shippers
utilized a cut-down version of the 30-lb container and retained
the "air" stacking pattern. This had the undesirable effect of
decreasing the weight of tomatoes per pallet by 6.3% compared to
the 30-lb. carton (Fig. 1). In contrast, standard containers in-
crease the weight of tomatoes per pallet and therefore, increase
ripening room and truck load capacities by 4% over the old 30-lb
carton, and by 11% over the cut-down 25-lb carton.

In a study done in cooperation with Naples Tomato Growers,
two standard-sized containers were compared with the cut-down
carton currently used by the Florida tomato industry for shipping
25-lbs. of mature-green tomatoes. Results were reported at the






-8-
110



0 105 MUM



2 100

0
C 95




90
SCut-down




Figure 1. Impact of container on the net weight of tomatoes per
pallet.

Annual Meeting of the Florida State Horticultural Society in
Miami, November 2, 1982. Pallets of all three containers shipped
well and arrived at the receiver in excellent condition. There
was little mechanical damage to the tomatoes and no significant
difference among containers for damage due to cuts, creases,
punctures, scuffs, pressure bruises, and flat spots (Table 1).
Differences in fruit temperatures among containers during ripen-
ing initiation and transit did not exceed 30F, but fruit packed
in the test containers was slower to cool and warm than those
packed in the present shipping container.


Table 1. Damage indexes for tomatoes packed and shipped in three
fiberboard containers.

Container Cuts Creases Punctures Scuffs Pressure Flatspots
bruises
Cut-down 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.9 1.7 1.1
Long MUM
(50 x 30cm) 1.5 1.4 1.2 2.1 1.6 1.1
Short MUM
(40 x 30cm) 1.2 1.3 1.1 2.3 1.9 1.2

Significance N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S. N.S.
ZIndex value = Z (numerical damage rating x number of fruit with that
rating) + total number of fruit; with damage rating, 1=no damage; 2=
slight damage; 3=moderate; 4=severe; and 5=extreme, unmarketable.








-9-


Based on these results, both MUM containers may provide
suitable alternatives to the cut-down carton currently used.
This test was done during an extremely cold period in south
Florida and further testing is needed during warm shipping sea-
sons. Agents who would like more information about MUM contain-
ers for their tomato shippers should contact me for a complete
copy of the report.

(Sherman)


V. HOME VEGETABLE GARDENING

A. Know Your Minor Vegetables Herbs

Herbs are plants grown for the special flavor and aroma of
their various parts. They are used mainly to season, enrich, or
otherwise improve the taste or smell of certain foods. Since
they are not primary dishes, they are not classified as vege-
tables. However, due to similarity of their growth habits and
cultural requirements, herbs are often included with vegetables
for discussion.

Most of the common savory herbs can be grown seasonally in
Florida in sufficient quantities for home use. In South Florida,
many herbs may be grown in the home garden throughout the year.
Since only a small portion of the plant is usually needed at any
one time and because the plants are generally small, herbs are
adapted to container culture. Their attractiveness as an orna-
mental plant makes them fit well into the home landscape, either
in a border planting, or included in the flower garden. Specially
designed formal herb gardens are both practical and attractive.
Due to popular belief, herbs are being planted among vegetables
to repel certain insects and other pests. While the benefits of
this practice are yet undocumented in scientific journals, gar-
deners will at least have a steady supply of various herbs by
growing them as repellant plants.

Location and Soil Preparation

Since only a few plants of each herb are required for family
use, only a small section of the vegetable garden is needed. Some
of the herbs live from year to year (perennials), so they should
be grouped together to one side of the garden where they will not
interfere with the preparation of the rest of the garden. The
annuals also may be grouped together, away from the vegetables.
Such grouping would allow specific cultural practices, such as
spray for pest control, to be restricted to vegetables only.

In general, the majority of herbs will grow satisfactorily
under the same conditions of sunlight and soil, and with cultural








-10-


techniques similar to those used for vegetables. Special consid-
eration should be given to the location and care of a few of the
herbs that are somewhat sensitive to soil moisture conditions.
Sage, rosemary, and thyme require a well drained, slightly moist
soil, whereas parsley, chervil and mint give best results on
soils retaining considerable moisture.

Propagation

Older plants of chive, costmary and tarragon can be
multiplied by dividing the crown clumps into separate parts.
These subdivisions can be set as individual plants.

Mint spreads rapidly by means of surface or underground run-
ners which may grow several feet from the parent plant. These
plants, with roots attached, can be removed and transplanted to
other locations.

The annuals and biennials ordinarily are grown from seed
sown directly in place. Perennials generally are best started in
plant beds or boxes using seed or cuttings, and then are trans-
planted into the garden or growing containers.

A few plants, such as sage, lemon balm and rosemary, can be
propagated best by cutting. Stems from new growth or the upper
parts of older stems make the best cuttings for easiest rooting.
Cut the stems into 3 to 4 inch sections, each containing a set of
leaves or leaf buds near the upper end. To prevent wilting,
place the cuttings in water as soon as they are removed from the
plant. A shallow box filled with 4 to 5 inches of clean sand
makes a good rooting bed. Insert the cuttings to a depth of one-
half to two-thirds their length in the moist sand, firm the sand,
and saturate the sand with water. Place the box in a protected
place and keep moist (but not saturated) continuously until roots
develop in about two weeks. Continue to water until the cuttings
are ready to set out in pots or in the garden.

The following table gives information on the cultural re-
quirements for growing several popular herbs in Florida.








-11-


Herbs In The Florida Garden


Propagation


Spacing Main
Part
Used


Anise
Basil
Borage
Caraway

Cardamom

Catnip
Chervil
Chives
Comfrey
Coriander
Costmary
Cumin
Dill

Fennel

Garlic
Ginger
Ginseng
Horehound
Lemon balm
Lovage
Marjoram
Mint

Oregano
Parsley
Rosemary
Sage
Savory
Tarragon

Thyme


annual
annual
annual
biennial

perennial

perennial
annual
perennial
perennial
annual
perennial
annual
annual

perennial

perennial
perennial
perennial
perennial
perennial
perennial
perennial
perennial

perennial
biennial
perennial
perennial
annual
perennial

perennial


seed
seed
seed
seed


division

seed/cuttings
seed
seed/division
root cuttings
seed
seed/division
seed
seed

seed

cloves
root division
seed/seedlings
seed/cuttings
seed/cuttings
seed/plants
seed/cuttings
cuttings/
division
division
seed
seed/cuttings
seed/cuttings
seed
cuttings/
division
seed/cuttings


12"
12"
12"
12"

18"

12"
12"
8"
18"
12"
12"
1"
12"

12"

6"
24"
12"
12"
12"
12"
12"

12"
24"
12"
24"
18"
12"

12"
12"


seed
leaves
flowers
seed

seed

leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
seed
leaves
seed
seed-
heads
seed
leaves
bulb
rhizome
root
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves

leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves
leaves

leaves
leaves/
flowers


when ripe
as needed
as needed
slightly
unripe
slightly
unripe
as needed
as needed
as needed
as needed
when ripe
as needed
when ripe
as needed

when ripe
as needed
when mature
when mature
when mature
before bloom
as needed
as needed
as needed

as needed
dry leaves
as needed
as needed
as needed
as needed

as needed

as needed


(Stephens)


Growth
Cycle


When
to
Harvest


- `L --


Herb








-12-


Prepared by Extension Vegetable Crops Specialists


D.N. Maynard
Chairman

G.A. Marlowe
Professor

W.M. Stall
Associate Professor


S.P. Kovach
Assistant Professor

M. Sherman
Assistant Professor

J.M. Stephens
Associate Professor


A. McDonald
VEA-I Multi-County


NOTE:


Anyone is free to use the information in this newsletter.
possible, please give credit to the authors.


Whenever


The use of trade names in this publication is solely for the purpose
of providing information and does not necessarily constitute a recom-
mendation of the product.





Statement: "This public document was promulgated at a cost of $ 149.23
or 25 ( per copy for the purpose of communicating current technical
and educational materials to extension, research and industry person-
nel.




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