Title: Vegetarian
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00087399/00406
 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: January 1970
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00087399
Volume ID: VID00406
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.


This item has the following downloads:

Vegetarian%201970%20Issue%2087 ( PDF )

Full Text


George A. Marlowe, Jr.

Mason E. Marvel
Associate Vegetable Crops Specialist

James Montelaro
Vegetable Crops Specialist

James M. Stephens
Assistant Vegetable Crops Specialist

January 26, 1970


NO: 87


1. Potato Vine Killers
A. Physical top removal
1. Mechanical
2. Flame Fuel Oil and Butane or Propane Gas
B. Chemical Control
C. References
2. Proposed Potato Grade Changes

1. Potato Vine Killers

Recently there has been much confusion and doubt about what chemicals
or treatments may legally be used for killing potato tops prior to digging.
This information has been compiled to try to clarify not only which treatments
may be used but which are most applicable.

With all removal or killing methods-a wa!t of 7 days and preferably
10-14 days between treatment and harvest is desirable to allow for tuber
maturity and skin set to reduce skinning and bruising. At times when the
market, weather conditions, or scheduling of harvest makes it necessary to
dig sooner then many of the benefits of top killing are reduced or lost.
With some of the chemical treatments a minimum waiting period Is required.

A. Physical top removal

1. Mechanical

a. Rotobeating or rotary mowing has been successfully used
for many years. The advantages of this type treatment are that it knocks
down heavy vine growth, eliminates heavy or tall weed growth and reduces the
amount of debris going over the digger that causes stoppages and mechanical
break down. Some diggers are designed so that vines going over the conveyer
serve as a cushion and reduces damage to tubers.



Vegetable Crops Department


Disadvantages are that power requirements are high and wear and
maintenance particularly on the flail type rotobeaters, used on sandy soils,
is high which makes the total cost per acre for mechanical top removal some-
what higher than chemicals. Some potato varieties tend to regrow very quickly
following rotobeating and do not with chemical treatments, Some varieties
set tubers shallow and may be mechanically Injured by the machine. The
removal of tops will allow exposed tubers to become green anid sunburn. It
will also allow erosion and bed wash down if heavy rains occur following the
destruction of tops. This is more severe on sandy soils than on others.

2. Flame Fuel Oil and Butane or Propane Gas

a. Fuel oil burners have been used for removal of potato
tops but have not been as suitable as bottled gas because of the need for
much more complicated burners and heat generators. Fuel costs have been
somewhat higher than bottled gas.

b. Bottled gas is used with good success. Advantages are that
plant growth is stopped quickly and the amount of kill may be controlled by
the speed and amount of flame applied. Weeds and weed seeds, insects and
diseases are all reduced. Burning may be used to clean up either chemically
killed or rotobeat vine debris.

Disadvantages are: Heavy weed and vine growth may require two
burnings to eliminate. Removed vines expose shallow tubers and sunburn and
greening occur. Erosion is Increased. Special equipment is necessary where
any weed sprayer or even a row crop high volume prayer may be used for
chemical application.

B. Chemical Control

Eight chemicals are listed In the U.SD.A. Summary of Registered
Agricultural Pesticide Chemical Uses Volume 1, Herbicides, Defoliants,
Desiccants, Plant Regulators.

The attached sheet gives the reference page :n the Summary, the com-
pound name, the tolerance If any, the dosage and ar} limitations that apply
to labeled use in the United States. There are mo-e restrictive labels for
the use of some of these compounds in Florida.

Always read a current label and make sure of the conditions of use and
precautions that must be heeded. Sone of these follow.

a. Ametryne 2(Ethylamlno)-4-(isopropylamino)-6-(methylthio)-
S-triazine. Sold as an emulsiflahle or wettable powder. Acute oral LD5o
(rat) 1110 Mg/Kg. This chemical has been used experimentally In Florida and
has worked quite well so it is labeled for use only !n Florida.

b. Paraquat (Gramoxore). 1,l'-Dimethyl-4,4'-bipyridinium ion.
(Available as bismethyl sulfate or dichloride containirg 2 lbs per gallon).
Acute oral LD5o (rat) 140-150 Mg. Paraquat/kg. Skin exposure to the concen-
trated chemical may cause dermal rash. Paraquat used on potatoes for top
killing at the 0.5 lb active rate nay require two applications to kill heavy
growth, a wait of five days between applications is necessary for greatest

effectiveness. A minimum of 3 days between last application and harvest is
required. Exposed tubers may be injured by direct contact.

c. Sodium arsenite has been used most successfully for years.
However, as of January 1, 1970 it Is no longer allowed for use as a potato
vine killer in Florida under Section 487.021 Florida Statutes.

d. Sodium chlorate has been registered for use in the past
and the label was extended 8-31-68 until January 1, 1970; no notification
of extension has been received. This compound has not been extensively used
on potatoes and Is not recommended because of the explosive characteristics,
requirement for a 2 week wait between last application and harvest and its
lesser effectiveness.

e. DNBP or Dinoseb and related compounds. Three of these
4,6-Dinitro-O-Sec-Butylphenol related compounds have been used in the past.
They were also given label extension 8-31-68 to expire January 1, 1970.
For most effective kill of potato tops they should be mixed with fuel oil
In the following manner. Mix one pint of a nonionic emulsifier (such as
Triton X-100, Tween 85, Glim, etc.) in 5 gallons of fuel oil and emulsify
in 35 gallons of water then add sufficient Dinitro for one acre (2.25 to
2.5 actual per acre) while agitating vigorously. Spray at moderate pres-
sure making sure that thorough wetting occurs. Action may be slow and
10-20 days should be allowed between application and digging. Do not apply
when it is cloudy and overcast.

f. Petroleum Solvents, sometimes called Stoddard Solvent,
purified kerosene, or mineral spirits. It is labeled for use at 45 gallons
per acre. However, Petroleum Solvents are not used in Florida because of
cost and unpredictable results.

C. References

1. Anonymous. U.S.D.A. Summary of Registered Agricultural
Pesticide Chemical Uses. Volume 1.

2. Findlen, H. et al. Vine Killing in Relation to Maturity of
Red River Valley Potatoes. U.S.D.A. AMS, ARS Tech. Bul 1306. 1964.

3. French, G. W. An Evaluation of Cost Factors in the Produc-
tion and Harvesting of Potatoes. U.S.D.A. ARS Prod. Res. Rept. No. 98.

4. Initani, W. M. et al. Potato Vine Killing in Idaho. Idaho
Agri. Ext. Current Info Series #55. 1967.

5. Kunkel, R. et al. Results with Potato Vine Killers in Colo-
rado. Col. Agric. Exp. Sta. Tech. Bul. 46. 1952.

6. Mosher, Paul N. Potato Vine Killing. Maine Ext. Serv.
Potato Info Sheet #10.

Taken From 3rd Edition USDA Summary of Registered Agricultural Pesticide Chemical Uses
Volume 1 August 31, 1968 (Revised)





I-S-3 Sodium arsenite

I-S-4 Sodium chlorate

I-D-19.3 DNBP 4,6-Dinitro-O-Sec-
Butylphenol (Dinoseb)

I-D-21.3 4,6-Dinitro-O-Sec-Butylphenol
(Ethanol and Isopropanolamine

I-D-22.3 4,6-Dinitro-0-Sec-Butylphenol
(Triethanolamine Salt)

l-P-3.4 Petroleum Solvents



by State of Fla.
Extended 8-31-68
to 1-1-70

Extended 8-31-68
to 1-1-70

Extended 8-31-68
to 1-1-70

Extended 8-31-68
to 1-1-70

Extended 8-31-68
to 1-1-70


2 lbs actual/A

0.5 Ibs active
per acre

14.5 Ibs As203
actual per acre

16 lbs actual
per acre

2.5 lbs actual
per acre

2.25 lbs actual
per acre

2.25 lbs actual
per acre

45 gallons
per acre

Use limited to Florida. Vine
desiccant. Apply to mature green
vines. Do not graze livestock on
treated areas.

Preharvest vine killer. Do not
apply within 3 days before harvest.
May apply as split application with
interval of 5 or more days. Do not
pasture livestock in treated fields.
Do not use on muck or peat soils.

To kill vines and weeds. Do not
apply closer than 7-10 days before
harvest. Do not apply to exposed

Do not apply within 2 weeks of

Preharvest vine killing. Apply
10-14 days before expected harvest.
Do not spray exposed tubers. Do
not graze livestock in treated areas.

Preharvest vine killing. Apply 10-
20 days before expected harvest.
Do not spray exposed tubers. Do
not graze livestock on treated areas.

Preharvest vine killing. Apply 10-
20 days before expected harvest. Do
not graze livestock on treated areas.
Do not spray exposed tubers.

Preharvest vine killing. Apply 14
days before harvest.


2. Proposed Potato Grade Changes

The following information was extracted from two sources. The January
1970 U.S.D.A. Agricultural Marketing News Letter and the table from the Jan-
uary 5 Cornell Veg-News. You can get more detailed information from The
Fresh Products Standardization Fruit and Vegetable Division C&MS, U.S.D.A.
Washington, D. C. 20250.

The proposal was published in the October 22, 1969 Federal Register,
and comments on it will be accepted until May 1, 1970. USDA will then decide,
on the basis of all comments received, whether or not to issue the revised

The following comments were made by L. E. Ide, Head, Standardization
Section C&MS, USOA, Washington.

Essentially, here is how the proposed revision would change U.S.
No. i grade:

It would reduce the "tolerances" for defects allowed, so that there
would be fewer potatoes with cuts, bruises, or sprouts in consumer packs and
particularly potatoes so damaged that the defect causes more than 10 percent

It would require that potatoes (except those marketed as "new
potatoes") be more mature than those that may now be marketed as U.S. No.
1. These more mature potatoes would be more resistant to skinning, would
be less likely to be shriveled, and would keep better.

It would require that potatoes in consumer packs be largely free
from dirt or staining, with little loose dirt in the containers.

The minimum size of U.S. No. 1 potatoes would be increased to 2
inches in diameter or 4 ounces in weight, if the size of the potatoes is
not otherwise indicated on the label. In addition, the proposed standards
set up size designations, such as "Medium" or "Large," which may be used if
the packer wishes. If the potatoes were labeled with the designation "Medium,"
for example, the size of potatoes permitted would range from 24 to 34 inches
in diameter or from 5 to 10 ounces in weight.

The proposal also would replace the present top grade--U.S. Fancy--
with a new grade, U.S. Extra No. 1 U.S. Fancy grade was seldom used because
the requirements were too strict.

U.S. Extra No. I potatoes would be the premium grade for consumers
who want to buy the best. The tolerances for defects would be stricter than
those for U.S. No. 1, and the potatoes could have no internal defects or
sprouts. The minimum size would be 21 inches in diameter or 5 ounces in
weight, and the variation in sizes of these potatoes would be no more than
1k inches or 6 ounces.

Many of the proposed changes reflect not only what consumers want,
but practices now prevalent in many potato production areas. All potatoes


are now sized, and in most areas, a large percentage of shippers pack pota-
toes sized to 2-inch minimum diameter. In potato growing areas where soil
adheres to potatoes when they are dug, the potatoes are washed. If they
are grown in sandy soil, potatoes now are brushed before marketing. The
proposed revision does set stricter tolerances for defects, so shippers
would need to sort potatoes more closely to meet the grades. This would
provide consumers with the better quality they have been asking for.

Comments on the proposed revision may be sent to the Hearing Clerk,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C. 20250, until May 1, 1970.
Copies of the proposal may be obtained from the Fruit and Vegetable Division,
C&MS, USDA, Washington, D.C. 20250.



Shape Well shaped Fairly well shaped with 50% or more
well shaped.
Clean unless specified as fairly
Dirt clean, Clean
Sprouts Free from damage Free from sprouts
I nterrna
Discolora- Free from damage Free from Internal defects
F i rmness Free from damage by shriveling Firm
Unless otherwise specified: 2 in.
minimum diameter; round varieties All varieties: minimum 2L in, dia-
Size 60% 2k in. or larger but not over meter or 5 oz. weight and not more
4 in. including 30% 2 3/4 in. or than 11 in. or 6 oz. variation in
larger; long varieties 60% 6 oz. or size (Medium or Large or a "Count
more including 30% 10 oz. or larger. Pack" designationa).
No change except present 2% restricted tolerance for frozen, late blight,
Tolerances etc., changed to 2% restricted tolerance for serious damage.


Firmness Free from damage by shrIveling Fim nFI
No change when in containers of more
than 25 Ibs. or when in bulk. Fairly;
clean when in containers of 25 Ibs.
Dirt Not more than slightly dirty or less.
No: over 5% of tubers may have
sprouts over 3/4 in. long or any
sprouts or clustersof sprouts
Not over 10% of tubers may have materially detracting from appear-
Sprouts sprouts over 3/4 in. long. an;e.
Fairly well matured except no re-
Maturity No requirement quirements for new potatoes.
Unless otherwise specified, all
varieties not less than 2 in. dia-
Unless otherwise specified not neter or 4 oz. weight. For "new
Minimum Size less than 1 7/8 in. diameter. potatoes" 1 7/8 in. diameter.
1 7/8 in. minimum diameter Rouna Al varieties 2 in. or 5 oz. mini-
varieties 60% 2I in. or larger; mcm with 50% 2- in. or 50% 6 oz. or
Size A Long varieties 40% 6 oz. or larger, larger.
Size C 1 to 1. Inches DELETED
Other Size Small, Medium, Large, Bakers,
Designations NONE "'count pack" designations.
Total 11% with not more than 6% for Total 8% with not more than 5% for
external or 5% for internal defects; external or 5% for internal defects;
including 3% for certain condition Including 3% for serious damage
Tolerances defects which includes 1% soft rot. which includes 1% soft rot.


Masor E. Marvel
Associate Vegetable Crops Specialist

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