Group Title: Immokalee AREC Research Report
Title: Vegetable field day
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00094211/00004
 Material Information
Title: Vegetable field day
Series Title: Immokalee AREC Research Report
Physical Description: v. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: University of Florida -- Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
University of Florida -- Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences
Agricultural Research Center (Immokalee, Fla.)
Agricultural Research and Education Center (Immokalee, Fla.)
Publisher: University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, Agricultural Research Center.
Place of Publication: Immokalee Florida
Immokalee Florida
Publication Date: 1980
Copyright Date: 1973
Frequency: annual
regular
 Subjects
Subject: Vegetables -- Varieties -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Vegetables -- Field experiments -- Periodicals -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
periodical   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Issuing Body: Issued by the Agricultural Research Center in Imokalee, Fla., which changed its name to the Agricultural Research and Education Center.
General Note: Description based on: 1973; title from caption.
General Note: Latest issue consulted: 1984.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00094211
Volume ID: VID00004
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 - 433028245
lccn - 2009229391

Full Text




o ) Immokalee ARC Research Report SF80-1





AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH CENTER
Immokalee, Florida

of the

INSTITUTE OF FOOD.AND AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES
i UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


April, 1980


VEGETABLE FIELD DAY

Wednesday,; April, 23,, 1980


*** ***************


D. W. Lander, Collier County Extension Director MODERATOR

1:00 p.m. Assembly aand Registration

1:15 p.m. Welcome Dr. P. H. Everett, :In-Charge. ARC-Immokalee

1:20 p.m. Dr. W. E. Waters Comments on research programs at AREC-Bradenton,
ARC-Dover and ARC-Immokalee

1:30 p.m. Reports on Current Research

Mrs. A. J. Overman Economics of soil fumigation

Dr. D. E. Dougherty Vegetable disease,control

Dr. L. H. Shaw Alternate energy sources for agricultural equipment

Dr. D. J. Schuster Control of vegetable insects

Dr. J. J. Augustine Tomato varieties and breeding program

Dr. P. H. Everett Vegetable nutrition and cultural practices

3:00 p.m. Tour of Vegetable Research Plots and Machinery Demonstration
including:

1. Mechanical planter for gel-seeding Dr. H. H. Bryan

2. Biomass gasifier for irrigation power units Dr. L. N. Shaw


Soft drinks Courtesy of MC Agrcultural Chemical Division (Howell Heald, Mgr.)
Soft drinks Courtesy of FMC Agricultural Chemical Division (Howell Heald, Mgr.)


i' I J








TOUR OF RESEARCH PLOTS*


Block no. Page
Field "K"

2 Watermelon variety trial 15

3 Watermelon fungicide 16

5 Oil spray vs bacterial leaf spot 17

6-North Tomato variety trial non-staked (rep.) 18

6-South Tomato variety trial non-staked (obs.) 19

7-North Tomato Variety trial staked (rep.) 20

7-South Pepper varieties 21

8 Fertilizer rates on tomato varieties 22

9 Controlled release nitrogen fertilizers 23

11 Cantaloupe fungicide 24

12-North -Insecticides on tomato 26

12-South Pepper weevil control- 27


Field "L"

7 & 8 Biomass (cassava) production 28


Field "M"

9 Double-cropping tomatoes and cucumbers 29


**********************


*Results reported in this Field Day Program are preliminary and
do not constitute an official recommendation unless so stated.


-2-











Tomiat Breeding Program
J. J. Augustine (AREC-Bradenton)


The tbmatdbreedidig program continue to strive for the development of superior
tomat ivarieieis& Th emphasis has been oh developing material with superior
horticultural yield attributes and increased pest resistance.

Some of the horticultural attributes include:
1. Larger fruit..
S 2. Pirtterlfruit
3. Smooth fruit
4. Miany fruit
5. Concentrated fruit maturity
6. Jointless
7. Earliness
8. Better color
9. Better flavor


-,:. Some of
1.
S2,
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.


the pest resistance work includes;
Bacterial leaf spot
Late, blight
TMV resistance
Leaf mold
Early blight
Fusarium crown rot
Bacterial wilt
Nematode
Brown root rot
Bacterial speck


-3-


,I-:;








Effect of Three Fertilizer Rates on the
Production of Four Tomato Varieties
[Evrfaill g79 'Result2s


An experiment was conducted during the 1979 fall season to determine the effect
of three fertilize,-rates- on,the. yield :and-fruit- size -of four tomato varieties.

Fertilizer rates we:: !


lb/acre Fert.
Fertilizer rates N P205 K20 Cost/A
Low = 500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 5-8-8
250 Ib/A ( 3.5 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25 70i 40 '102 $ 57.95
Medium = 500 Ib/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row 't)~ 5-8-8 "J
500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25 115 40 165 $ 82.60
High 500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 5-8-8
1,000 lb/A (13.8 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25 205, 40 290 $131.90
Note:
All 5-8-8 fertilizer was spread ia 30 wide band on a pre-bed then bedded-
over to 4" depth. .1 :
All 18-0-25 fertilizer was banded on bed surface 9',;to each side of plant
row.


The four tomato varieties were:
1. Florida MH-1
2. Flora-Dade
3. FTE #12
4. 648 x MH-11 (IFAS breeding line)

Cultural practices included soil fumigation, full-bed plastic mulch, seep
irrigation, non-staked, and once-over harvest. Three and one-half-week-old
container grown seedlings were transplanted to the field on Oct. 3, 1979, and the
single harvest was made Dec. 26, 1979.

After harvest the fruit were sized into 5 categories using a belt-sizer.
Fruit in each size category were graded, counted and weighed.

Results:
Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the marketable yield, the average weight/fruit and
the percent fruit in each size category, respectively, for each of the 4 varieties
at each of the 3 fertilizer rates.









Table 1 Influence of fertilizer rate on
yield of four tomato cultivars Fall 1979


Cultivar or Fertilizer rate Cultivar
breeding line Low1 Medium2 High3. mean

30# bx/A 30# bx/A 30# bx/A 30# bx/A

Florida MH-1 1271 1591 1644 1502

Flora-Dade 1367 1585 1542 1498

FTE-12 1579 1828 1751 1719

IFAS 648 x MH-11 1510 1525 1609 1548

Fertilizer rate 1432 1632 1636


1 70-40-102 lb
3115-40-165 lb
205-40-290 lb

Cultivar mean

Fertilizer
rate mean

Cultivar x ferl


N-P205-K20/A
N-P205-K20/A
N-P205-K20/A

L.S.D. 5% =

L.S.D. 5% =
1% =

ilizer rate


66 bx/A

129 bx/A
174 bx/A

interaction not significant


t








Table 2 Influence of fertilizer rate on average
fruit:'e'ight of four tomdt6o 'ultivars -8 Fall 1979


C -utivar or - ---Fertilizer rate
breeding line L- Medim2 High3

oz/fr oz/fr oz/fr

Florida MH-1 4.37 4.69 4.64

Flora-Dade 4.35 4.32 4.21

FTE-12 4.78 5.01 4.86

IFAS 648 x MH-11 4.64 4.56 4.42

Fertilizer rate 4.53 4.64 4.53


1 70-40-102 lb N-P205-KO2/A
115-40-165 lb N-P205-K20/A
3205-40-290 lb N-P205-K20/A

Cultivar mean L.S.D. 5% = 0.16 oz/fr
1% = 0.22 oz/fr

Fertilizer rate mean not significant

Cultivar x fertilizer rate interaction not


significant


Cultivar
mean

oz/fr

4.56

4.28

4.88

4.54










Table 3 Influence of three fertilizer rates on
fruit size of four tomato cultivars Fall 1979


Cultivar or Fertilizer Fruit in each size category
breeding line rate Mini Small Medium Large X-Large (Lg + X-Lg)
- - - - - % by weight - - - - -
Florida MH-1 Low 8.8 7.3- 23.3 .31.9 28.5 60.4
Medium 5.2 7.3 29.4 29.4 28.8 58.2
High 3.3 7.6 31.2 32.1 25.8 57.9
Mean 5.8 7.4 28.0 31.1 27.7 58.8
Flora-Dade Low 7.0 8.3 33.7 31.0 19.8 50.8
Medium 7.2 10.0 34.6 320 16.2 48.2
High 6.6 11.5 35.0 31.9 14.9 46.8
Mean 6.9 9.9 34.4 31.6 17.0 43.6
FTE-12 Low 4.1 6.5 25.9 31.1 32.4 63.5
Medium 2.5 5.0 24.3 34.4 32.7 67.1
High 2.8 6.1 27.9 31.1 32.1 63.2
Mean 3.1 5.9 26.0 32.2 32.4 64.6
IFAS Low, 6.7 8.2 27.'5 30.3 27.2 57.5
648 x MH-11 Medium 4.8 9.3 31.2 2.9 21.7 54.6
S.High 6.4... 8.5 .1 31.5 21.5 53.0
Mean 6.0 8.7 30.3 31.6 23.5 55.1
Fertilizer Low 6.6 7.6 27.6 31.1 27.0 58.1
rate effect Medium 4.9 7.9 29.9 32.2 24.8 57.0
High 4.8 8.4 31.6 31.6 23.6 55.2


70-40-102
115-40-165
205-40-290


N-P205-K20/A
N-P205-K20/A
N-P205-K20/A


1Low
Medium
High


* / I








Effect of Fertilizer Rate and Plastic Mulch on
the Production of Two Cultivars of Head Lettuce
Winter 1980 Results


An experiment was conducted during January and February 1980 to determine the
effect of 3 rates of nitrogen (N) and potassium (K20), with and without plastic
mulch, on the yield and head weight of two cultivars of head lettuce.

N, P205 and K20 rates:

N Ib/A P205 lb/A K2O lb/A
100 40 145
150 40 175
200 40 :268


All plastic mulched plots received 500 lb 5-8-8-1.8/A applied in a 30" wide
band on a pre-bed and then bedded oVer. An 18-0-25 fertilizer at either 420, 700
or 970 Ib/A was applied in narrow bands on the bed surface 7" to each side of the
bed center. The plots without plastic mulch were fertilized in the same way except
the various rates of 18-0-25 were placed in narrow bands on the pre-bed and then
bedded over.

Cultivars:
; 1. 'Shawnee'
2. 'Ithaca'

On Dec. 31, 1979, 4-week-old container grown lettuce seedlings were trans-
planted 3 rows per bed with 14" between rows and 10" between plants in the row.
Bed centers were 6' apart. This arrangement resulted in 26,136 plants per acre.

Lettuce was harvested on Mar. 4, 1980.

Results:
Table 1 shows the yield in hundred-weights/A, number of heads/A and the average
weight/head for all lettuce harvested regardless of head-weight. Neither fertilizer
rate nor cultivar had any significant effect on hundred-weights/A, number heads/A
or on average weight/head. Plastic mulch was very significant in increasing the
hundred-weights/A and the average weight/head but not the number of heads/A.
However, many of the heads from no-plastic plots were quite small. This is shown
in Table 2 where only the heads weighing 1.7 lb or more are considered. Again,
neither fertilizer rate nor cultivar had any significant effect, but the use of
plastic mulch resulted in a 2-3 fold increase in the yield of these larger sized
heads.


-8-










Table 1 Effedt-bf fertilizer rate and plastic mulch on
the production1 of two cultivars of head lettuce


.. Fertilizer Mulch
N-P205-K20 (+ or -)


Shawnee


Cultivar
Ithaca


lb/A cyt/A heads/A Ib/head cwt/A heads/A Ib/head
100-40-145 + 567 26,086 2.2 582 25,361 2.3
375 26;086 1.4 360 26,086 1.4

150-40-175 + 610 25,361 2.4 598 24.636 2.4
370 26,086 1.4 414 26,086 1.6

200-40-268 + 555 24,636 2.2 630 24,636 2.6
-372 26,086 1.4 427 26,086 1.6
.:1 .


Includes all







' '. "{':'


marketable heads.


Table 2 -Effect of fertilizer rates and plastic mulch on
S the pl0roduction- of two cultivars of head lettuce


Fer slizenr 5ulci I Cultivar
N-P205-K20 (+ or -) Shawnee Itheaa'
lb/A cwt/A heads/A lb/head cwt/A heads/A lb/head
>190-4p145. i:-:+ :526 23,187 2.3 518 20,289 '2.6
.. 167 7,971 2.1 '-197 8,695 '2.3

150-40-175 + 574 23,187 2.5 552 21,738 2.5
208 10,144 2.1 232 10,144 2.3

200-40-268 + 528 21,738 2.4 581 21,738 2.7
193 8,695 2.2 262 11,594 2.3


1Includes heads weighing 1.7


Ib or over.








Tomato Variety Trial Results
S( Fall,&-tWinter-1979,80 .,
J., -I

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of 10 tomato varieties and/or breeding lines
with respect to four planting dates during the 1979-80 fall and winter growing
season.

Seeding, transplanting and harvest\dates, respectively, for the four plantings
were as follows:
First planting Aug. 15, Sept. 11 and Dec. 6, 1979
Second planting Aug. 30, Oct. 3, 1979 and Jan. 2, 1980
Third planting Sept. 20, Oct. 12, 1979 and Jan. 14, 1980
Fourth planting Oct. 12, Nov. 6, 1979 and Feb. 18, 1980

Cultural practices (for all four plantings):
1. Seeded into Speedling type trays
2. Soil fumigated with VorlexR at 12 gal/treated acre using 3 chisels/bed
3. Fertilizer: (1) 500 lb 5-8-8-1.8 + micros/A (6.9 lb/100 row ft) spread in
30" wide band on pre-bed and bedded-over to 4" depth
(2) 1,000 Ib 18-0-25/A (20.7 lb/100 row ft) banded on bed
surface 9" to each side of plant row
4. Beds mulched with white plastic
5. Bed spacing 6' on center, in-row spacing 18", 4840 plants/A
6. Ground (non-staked) culture
7. Harvest once-over by hand

Weather conditions: From Sept. 11, 1979, through the last week of Jan. 1980, the
weather was generally wetter and warmer than normal. From Feb. 1 to Feb. 18,
1980, the last 18 days of the fourth planting, the weather was cold and cloudy
but with little rain.

Comments on disease: Bacterial spot (Xanthomonas vesicatoria (Doidge) Dows.) was
the only disease of any consequence during the four plantings and was most
severe on the second planting. On Oct. 22 early infection of bacterial spot
was found in the second planting but did not appear in the first or third
plantings until about Nov. 23. Although defoliation in the second planting
was moderate, there was very little fruit spotting.

Resultsi The following four tables show the yields, average fruit weight and
percent fruit in each size category for each of the four plantings. The fifth
table gives the rank, with respect to yield and fruit size, of the 10 varieties
for each planting and an average ranking for the four plantings.



Ji


-10-







.1 's


First planting Replicated ground tomato variety trial (MH types)

- 4Marketable fruit % Culls
Variety or Yield Avg wt of % of total marketable weight
breeding line T/A oz/fr total wt Mini Small Medium Large X-Large
Flora-Dade 23.3 5.0 4.9 1.0 3.3 28.5 36.1 31.0
Florida IIH-1 26.4 4.9 5.1 2.1- 5.5 26.8 35.5 30.1
Duke 28.4 5.6 7.7 0.3- 1.6 19.9 33.9 44.4
FTE #12 34.7 5.4 5.7 0.6. 2.6 21.4 32.2 43.1
ug MH-I 21.0 4.9 7.2 1.2 3.5 30.7 40.5 24.5
71057 25.7 4.8 10.7 1.9 3.5 29.7 34.9 30.0
648 x 1H-l1 30.9 5.2 6.1 2.5 3.5 25.3 32.6 ,36.1
91914 34.6 5.0 4.4 2.9 4.5 23.9 34.8 33.9
FI hybrid No. 1 31.1 6.0 7.5 --0.9 1.9 19.9 29.3 48.0
FI hybrid No. 2 31.9 5.6 7.4 :0.5 1.8 22.1 36.7 38.9

1Seeded 8/15/79; transplanted 9111/79; harvested 12/6/79.











Second planting1 Replicated ground tomato variety trial (MH types)


SMarketable fruit % Culls
Variety or Yield Avg wt of Z of total marketable weight
breeding line T/A oz/fr total wt Mini Small Medium Large X-Large
Flora-Dade, 27.4 4.0 5.6 8.9 10.4 37.0 27.8 15.8
Florida MH-1 23.8 4.0 9.0 9.6 9.7 36.9 27.9 15:-
Duke 27.0 4.6 9.4 5.2 6.9 29.3 30.6 28.2
FTE #12 27.3 4.3 6.4 7.1 8.5 32.9, 31.8 19.7
ug MH-l 23.0 4.0 5.1 7.8 9.2 38.2f 29.6 15.1
71057 30.7 4.4 4.9 4.8 6.9 .33.6 33.4 20.8
648 x MH-11j 28.1- 4.2 '5.5 7.6 8.7 34.6 29.~ 19.7
91914 29.0' 4.4- 5.0 5.9 7.4 32.i r31. 23.0
F1 hybrid No. 1 22.5- 4-7 10.8 3.4 6.7 28.7 32.4 28.9
FI hybrid No. 2 27.2 4.5 9.6- 5.6 8.0 29.5 27.0 29.9

'Seeded 8/30/79; transplanted 10/3/79; harvested 1/2/80.


-11-








Third planting1 Replicated ground tomato variety trial (MH types)


Marketable fruit % Culls
Bariety or Yield Avg wt of % of total marketable weight
breeding line ...T/A oz/fr total wt 'Mini 5all Medium. Large X-Large
Flora-Dade, 25,8. 4.5 3.7 3.3 7.7 36.2 30.5 22.3
Florida H-V.A ..i.4 4.1 7.6 30.,0 34.1 j 24.2
Duke 30 5T 92 4 22w6'O4 33.1 38,5
FTE #12 34,0 448 6 2..4 5.4 : 2 25.9 34.2 32..0
ug MH-1 27.7 4.3 4.5 4.8 7,5, 31.9 36.4 19.3
71057 36.4 4.8 3Z5 2.2 4.1, 27.4 32.1 34.2
648 x MH-11 31.2 4,7 4r.9 2.6 6.7 26.6 33.8 30.3
91914 30.7 4.8 5.8 1.9 5.9 25.6. 35.2 31.6
F1 hybrid No. 1 27.1 5.1 6.9 2.1 4.1 23.0 33.1, 37.7
Fl hybrid No. 2 32.2 5.1 7.4 2. 6 4.6 22.1 32.8 37.3

!Seeded 9/20/79; transplanted 10/12/79; harvested 1/16/80. i-











Fourth planting Replicated ground tomato variety trial (MH types)

j I. . .' :; f- .
Marketable fruit % Culls
Variety or Yield Avg wt of % of total marketable weight
bre-edThng i e TA. oz/fr total wt inji Small Medin m;.Large X-Large
Flora-,ade ij 154: 3.9 ;, 7.0 6.2 10.7 37,7i 28.9 16.6
rida M- 7. 4.... 4& 14.4 5.4. 7- 30.5 3.0. 26.5
Due .0 4,. 76 2T 6.9 28.. 30.9 31.4
FTE #12 19.1 4.4 11i8 3.1 7.1 37,4 30,8 21.6
ug MH-1 15.9 4.4 1241 4.0 8.2 33.1I 34.7 20..0
71057 24.2 4.3 9.7 4.5 7.7 34.1 31.0 22.6
6,48 x MH-11 16.7 4.6 9,7 2.1 8.0 33.5 28.2 28.2
91914 17.6 4.5 9.3 2 9 7.9 32.1 32.6 24.5
F1 hybrid No. 1 17.2 5.4 12.1 :li7 3.6 23,9 25.7- 45.0
F1 hybrid No. 2 18.9; 4.8 11i.0 01.8 4.5 31.5 32.6 29.6
,, __,____,_,__, -, -- ____- __ .. .. f : 'j *, -


1Seeded 10/12/79; transplanted 11/6/79; harvested 2/18/80.


. (':. r 'j \ ',* ,% : .


-12-










Performance ranking of ten tomato cultivars
or breediig:iines by planting date


Planting date Average
Cultivar or 9/11/79 10/3/19 10/12/79 11/6/79 all dates
breeding line Yield -SIe -Yild ie Yield Size Yield Size Yield Size
Flora-Dade 9 7 5 1d 9 10 10 10 10 10
Florida MH-l 7 8 9 9 10 9 7 6 9 8
Duke 6 2 8 2 6 1 2 3 6 2
FTE #12 1 -4 6 .6 2 5 3 8 2 6
ug MH-1 10 9 4 8 7 10 9 7 8 9
71057 8 10 1 4 1 6 1 9 1 7
648 x MH-11 5 5 3 .7 4 7 8 4 5 5
91914 2 6 2 5 5 4 5 5 3 4
F, hybridNo. 1 4 1 10 ;1 8 2 6 1 7 1
F1 hybrid No. 2 3 3 7 73 3 3 4 2 4 3


2Ranking: 1 best and 10
Last six entries are IFAS


- poorest.
breeding lines.


I Un


j~ i U\:~;


ic. J.(


* I


) I.'.


7; -.- 1 r I ".


-13-








Watermelon Variety Trial
1979 Results


Variety or


Melons


breediing hiel T/A1 No./AI 1b/melon1
Dixielee ---" 23.0 cd 3007 d 15.4 c
FL 77-2 (Dixielee type_- 35.4 b 4831 .b 14.6 c
Crimson Sweet 32.4 bc 3757 cd 17.2 bc
FL 79-1 (icebox type) 21.1 d 6906 a 6.2 d
Petite Sweet (icebox type) 22.5 d 5578 ab 7.9 d
78 SE1 (Jubilee type) 46.7 a 4704 be 19.8 ab
78 SE4 (Jubilee type) 33.4 b 3467 cd 19.3 ab
Jubilee 39.9 ab 3629 cd 22.0 a
78 SW2 (Chas. Gray type) 36.9 b 3794 cd 19.5 ab
Charleston Gray 36.3 b 3650 ,.cd 20.0 ab
1Mean separation by Duncan's multiple range test, 5% level.


Planting data:


Seeded Feb. 6, 1979
3' x 6' hill spacing
Thinned to 1 plant/hill


Harvest: May 16 and May 24, 1979

Cultural practices:
Full-bed plastic mulch
Fertilizer: 5-8-8-1.8 500 lb/A (6.9 lb/100 row ft) spread
in 30" wide band on pre-bed then bedded-over.
18-0-25 1500 lb/A (20.7 lb/100 row ft) banded on
bed surface 9" to each side of plant row.


-14-


''







WATERMELON VARIETY TRIAL


Block 2 P. H. Everett


Purpose: To compare 6 IFAS breeding lines (Dr. J. M. Crall, ARC-Leesburg) and 4
commercial ,varieties for melon yield, size and quality.

10 entries 4 plots of each entry.


Plot Variety or Seed
no. breeding line source
1 Dixielee (new release IFAS) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
2 Fla. 77-2 (Dixielee type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
3 Crimson Sweet FMC
4 Charleston Gray Asgrow
5 Jubilee Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
6 79 SE 1 (Jubilee type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
7 79 CE 1 (Jubilee type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
8 78 SW 4 (Chas. Gray type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
9 79 NW 1 (Chas. Gray type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)
10 79 NE 1 (Chas. Gray type) Dr. Crall (ARC-Leesburg)


Planting data:


Jan. 21, 1980 field seeded
Bed spacing 6' on centers
Down-row spacing 3'
Thinned to 1 plant/hill


Type of culture: Plastic mulch


Fertilizer:


(1) 600 lb 5-8-8-1.8 (8.3 lb/100 row ft) spread in 30" wide band on
pre-bed and bedded-over to a 4' depth.
(2) 1250 lb 18-0-25 (17.2 lb/100 row ft) banded on surface of pre-bed
9" to each side of plant row then bedded-over to a 4" depth.


-15-









WATERMELON FUNGICIDE


7!'


Standard fungicide therapy for control of downy mildew and gummy stem blight
(including the foliar symptoms) on watermelon is Benlate with either Manzate 200
or Dithane M-45. Either Bravo or Difolatan may also be used. Three new systemic
fungicides for CeW ontrlI of only downy mildew are now available, Prevtiur N
(Nor-Am), Ridomil (Ciba-Geigy) and Aliette (Rhone-Poulenc). Each of these three
has been factorially combined ;with Benlate and the new materials Rovral (Rhone-
Poulenc) and CGA64250 (Ciba-Geigy) for the additional control of gummy stem blight.


r,, .. -. Table of Treatments R .


I I


Plot Rate per ,100 gallons
no. for downy mildew.-:; :- for Rummy stem
1 Manzate 200 3 lbh +-- Benlate 1/2 1b
2 i Ridomil 1/4 lb at, + Benlat 1/2 lb
3 Riddmi 1/4 Ib ai + Rovral 1.25 lb
4 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + CGA64250 3/8 pt
5 Previcur N lbM at + Benlate 1/2 lb.
6 Previcur N 1 jblt -aL + Rovral 25 lb
7 Previcur N 1 Ib ai + CGA64250 3/8 pt
8 Aliette 3 lb 4+ Benlate 1/2 Ib
9 Aliette 3 lb + Rovral 1.25 lb
10 Aliette 3 lb + CGA64250-i 3/81 pt


Note: Of the above materials, only Manzate 200
Sand BnlatIehaWe,,EPA registration for use
on cucurbits oand.ionly-, these two --from the
., :r, ,, above ls9toftreatments) are recommended!
by hQ;AfUitversity ofJLtlorida.,


Planting data:


3 plots of each treatment
First spray of treatments applied 3/24/80 and
weekly thereafter


Jan. 24, 1980 Seeded ('Charleston Gray')
Bed spacing 6' on center
Hill spacing 36" down row


Comment: On Mar. 31 (just after the second spray) phytotoxicity (malformed vine
growth) was observed in the plots receiving CGA64250. Therefore, this
material was withdrawn from the test after the second spray. Consequently,
Treatments 4, 7 and 10 have received mainly downy mildew control since
Mar. 31.


-16-


n i 'Tr.


'.J


Table of Treatments


-Ir !









OIL SPRAY VSB. -ATERIAL LEAF SPEO 'OE- TOMATOE S

Block 5 P. H. Everett


Purpose: To make preliminary observations on the interaction of oil spray (virus
control) andbacterial spot of tomatoes.

Treatments (non-replicated):
1. Oil + copper (applied as separate sprays)
2. Cu alone
3. Oil alone


Oil (JMS Stylet OilR) applied once a week beginning Mar. 25, 1980.
pesticides were applied in separate.sprays, not tank-mixed.,


Oil and


Planting data:


Feb. 19, 1980 -Bedded and fertilized (no soil fumigant)
Feb. 20, 1980 -Container grown seedlings ('Tempo') transplanted
to field
Mar. 5, 1980 First copper spray
Mar. 25, 1980 First oil spray


If


-17-









TOMATO VAiTY TRIAL k Fi. ONCE-OVER HARVEST (REPLICATED)
(NON-STAKED GROUND CULTURE)

Block 6-North J. J. Augustine & P. H. Everett


Purpose: To compare advanced machine harvest type breeding lines for fruit yield,
size, quality, fruit set, earliness, vine habit, and other characteristics
important to machine harvest fresh market tomatoes.

10 varieties and/or breeding lines 4 plots of each.


S"Plot Variety or Seed
rio. breedilfg lin : source
1 Flora-Dade Foundation seed
(:*. 2 Fia. l Foundation seed;'
: : 3 Du Petoseed Co.
4 FTE #12 Petoseed Co.
5 ug MH I- :' IFAS
6 71057 IFAS
7 648 x MH-11 IFAS
8 91914 IFAS
9 F1 hybrid No. 1 IFAS
10 F1 hybrid No. 2 IFAS


Planting data




Fertilizer:


: Jan. 11, 1980 Seeded in Speedling trays
Jan. 25, 1980 Soil fumigant applied
Feb. 11, 1980 Transplanted to field
6' bed centers, 18" between plants (4840

(1) 500 lb 5-8-8-1.8 + micros/A (6.9 lb/100
wide band on pre-bed and bedded-over to
(2) 1,000 lb 18-0-25/A (13.8 lb/100 row ft)
9" to each side of plant row.


plants/A)

row ft) spread in 30"
4" depth.
banded on bed surface


-18-










TOMATO VARIETY TRIAL -,FOR ONCE-OVER HARVEST (NON-REPLICATED)
(NON-STAKED GROUND CULTURE)

Block 6-South -J. J. Augustine& P. H. Everett


Purpose: To screen tomato breeding lines for advancement to replicated trials and
for eventual commercial use; also, to make single plant and/or bulk seed
selections for use in the IFAS tomato breeding program.

15 breeding lines and 3 commercial varieties 1 plot of each entry.
Commercial varieties Plot #15 Duke
SPlot #16 Count 7
Plot #17 Baron


Planting data




Fertilizer:


.: Jan. 3, 1980 Seeded in Speedling trays
Jan. 25, 1980 Soil fumigant applied
Feb. 11, 1980.- Transplanted to field
6' bed centers, 18" between plants (4840 p

(1) 500 Ib 5-8-8-1.8 + micros/A (6.9il1b/100 r
wide band on pre-bed and bedded-over to 4
(2) 1,000 lb 18-0-25/A (13.8 lb/10lO row ft) b
9" to each side of plant row.::


lants/A)

ow ft) spread in 30"
" depth.
anded on bed surface


i i)L


I '


j L I.


U l.

C-'i~ r


-19-









STOWATO VARIETY TRIALA T'FOR 1ULTPLE HARVEST (,EPLICATED)


Block 7-North --. J, Augustine & P, H. Everett


Purpose: To compare advanced lhad harvest type breeding lines having potential as
commercial varieties for fruit yield',, size, and quality; vine habit;; and other
characteristics important to fresh market tomatoes.

10 varieties and/r breeding 1nes -.4 plots of each. .
tqe. t of ec..


ot Variety or
o. breeding line
1 FlQra-Dade
2 Walter,
3 Duke.
4 FTE #12
5 645
6 i 631
7 626 .
8 71057
9 648 x MH-11
0 91914


Seed
source
Foundation seed
LFoundation seed.
Petoseed Co4 ,
Petoseed Co,.
IFAS
F.. AS ;
IFAS ,
IFAS
IFAS
IFAS


Planting data




Fertilizer:


: Jan. 15, 1980 Seeded in Speedling trays
Jan. 25, 1980 Soil fumigant applied
Feb. 13, 1980 Transplanted to field
6' bed centers, 18" between plants (4840

(1) 500 Ib 5-8-8-1.8 + micros/A (6.9 lb/100
wide band on pre-bed and bedded-over to 4
(2) 1,000 lb 18-0-25/A (13.8 lb/100 row ft) 1
9" to each side of plant row.


plants/A)

row ft) spread in 30"
i" depth.
banded on bed surface


-20-


S . .1



1


Pi
n


. .. { :: . .,








PEPPER VARIETIES

Block 7-South P. H. Everett


Purpose: To compare several IFAS breeding
for horticultural characteristics.


lines with one or two commercial varieties


Trial No. 1


Plot no. Variety or breeding line
1 78F-6 (IFAS)
2 Big Bertha (Peto)
3 79S-25 (IFAS)
4 Early Calwonder (Asgrow)
One plot of 78F-6 and 2 plots of
other entries.


Planting data: Jan. 25, 1980 Bedded, fertilized and fumigated
Feb. 25, 1980 Container grown seedlings transplanted in field
Bed 6' on center
2 rows/bed with 12" between rows and 10" between plants down
row (17,424 plants/A)

Fertilizer: (1) 500 Ib 5-8-8/A (6.9 lb/100 row ft) spread in 30" wide band on
pre-bed and bedded over to 4" depth
(2) 1,000 Ib 18-0-25/A (13.8 lb/100 row ft) banded on each shoulder
of bed 9" from plant row


Trial No. 2


Plot no. Variety or breeding line
EV1 75-42 (IFAS)
EV3 TL-78-92 (IFAS)
EV4 Early Calwonder (Asgrow)


Planting data: Jan. 25, 1980 Bedded, fertilized and fumigated
Mar. 3, 1980 Container grown seedlings transplanted in field
Bed 6' on center
2 rows/bed with 12" between rows and 10" between plants down
row (17,424 plants/A)

Fertilizer: Same as Trial No. 1


-21-







THREE FERTILIZER .ATESS,ON FOUR.TOMATO VARIETIES


B.Ack 8 P. H. Everett.


Purpose: To compare: the-effect of, 3.f. tilizer, ates :on:the yield and fruit size of
4 tomato varieties. .


lb/acre Fert.
Fertilizer rates N P205 K20 Cost/A
Low = 500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 5-8-8 9.40
250 Ib/A ( 3.5 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25 70 40 102 $ 7940
Medium = 500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 5-8-8-8 ',
500 Ib/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25 5 40 165 $104
High 500 lb/A ( 6.9 lb/100 row ft) 5-8-890 $1
1,000 lb/A (13.8 lb/100 row ft) 18-0-25' 205 40 '29 $153.3
Note:
All 5-8-8 fertilizer was spread in a 30" wide band on a pre-bed then bedded-
over to 4" depth.
All 18-0-25 fertilizer was bahded on bdd surface 9" to each side of plant
-row. L


Tomato varieties
1. Florida MH-1
2. F1ora-Dad
3. FTE #12
4. 648ikMH-11 (IFAS


'breedindg"li4)
breeding line)


Table of Treatments


Plot
no.*


Tomato
variety
Fla. MH-1
Fla. MH-1
Fla. MH-1
Flora-Dade
Flora-Dade
Flora-Dade


Fertilizer
rate
Low
Medium
High
Low
Medium '
High


7 FTE #12 Low
.8 ;FTE #12 Medium
9 FTE #12 High
10 648 x MH-11 Low'
11 648 X MH-11 Medium'
12 648 x MH-11 High
*4 plots (A,B,C,D) of each treatmel


Planting and cultural data:
Feb. 8, 1980 Soil fumigant applied
Feb. 25, 1980 Transplanted 4-week-old container grown seedlings
Bed spacing 6' on center
18" between plants
4840 plants/acre
Full-bed plastic mulch with seep irrigation
Non-staked (ground) tomatoes for once-over harvest
-22-


S


*


nt.


0


i .









CONTROLLED RELEASE NITROGEN FERTILIZERS FOR
PLASTIC MULCHED PEPPERS AND TOMATOES

Block 9 P. H. Everett


Purpose: To compare a standard fertilizer program with four fertilizers each
containing 50% nitrogen from four different controlled release materials for the
effect on pepper and tomato production.. ,

Controlled release materials 50% N from:
1. Osmocote 15-5-20 (4 months release)
2. Sulfur coated ureaS(SCU) 37% N (28.8% water insoluble N)
3. IBDU 31% N (27.9%,water insoluble N):
4. Nitroform 38% N (27.0% water insoluble N)

These materials were used to formulate 4 complete (N-P205-K20 + micros)
fertilizers with an approximate analysis of 14-8-24. These four fertilizers
were applied broadcast on the flat at a rate of 200-112-340 lb N-P205-K20 per
acre, respectively. Other materials used.in, these fertilizers were: ammonium
nitrate, potassium nitrate, potassium sulfate and triple superphosphate. The
standard fertilizer program consisted of 500olb 5-8-8 + micros/A (6.9 lb/100
row ft) spread in 30" wide band on pre-bed then bedded over ,to 4" depth plus
1,000 lb 18-0-25/A (1318 lb/100 row ft) in 2 bands on bed surface 9' from plant
row. This treatment totaled 205 N 40 P205 290 K20 b/A..


Plot Fertilizer Fertilizer
no ;:treatment. placement
1 50% N from Osmocote (15-5-20) .-Broadcast
2 50% N from sulfur coated urea Broadcast
3 50% N from IBDU Broadcast
4 50% N from Nitroform Broadcast
5 5-8-8 + 18-0-25 Standard
' t ''


Planting data:


SFeb. 8, 1980 Bedded and fertilized
Feb. 11, 1980 Pepper (Early Calwonder) and tomatoes (Tempo)
transplanted ..
Beds 6' on center
Peppers double row/bed (17,424 plants/A)
Tomatoes single row/bed (4,840 plants/A)


-23-


::







CANTALOUPE FUNGICIDE

,.l. ock 11 D E. Dougherty


Cantaloupe production in southh Florida may be limited by downy mildew, powdery
mildew and/or gummy stem blight (often as a foliar disease). Manzate 200 plus
Benlate therapy or Bravo or Difolatan or either of the last two plus Benlate ar c;
recommended for disease control. Resistant or tolerant varieties should be uise- with
these therapies as disease pressure is often quite severe.

Improved disease control would allow a wider.selection of varieties having ,
little or no tolerance to certain diseases. Previcur N (Nor-Am), Aliette (Rhone-
Poulenc), and Ridomil (Ciba-Geigy) are three new systemic fungicides to control only
downy mildew. For this experiment these, thFee systemics are factorially combined
in a three-way design, 3 x 2 x 2, with Rotvral (Rhone-Poulenc) and Ronilan (BASF
Wyandotte) for control of gummy stem blight and with Benlate and Afugan (Am. Hoechst)
for control of powdery mildew.

Te. 'use of Beinlate for powdery mildew contriolhas resulted in selection of a
Benlatel esistant train of powdey imiidew in this area. Afugan has been included
as a com6 prison material.' Benlate controls gummy stem blight but is not effective
against Al~ei aria cnciumeria spot, hichi may cause severe losses. Therefore, the
Ronilan and Rovral, nec"essay for gummy stem blight control in Afugan plots, is
intended chiefly for i6trio of A. cucumerina spot in Benlate plots.

Also in this experiment are a no-fungicide treatment and three standard treat-
ments of Benlate plus Difolatan or Bravo or Manzate 200. Baycor (Mobay), BAS421
(BASF Wyandotte), and CGA64250 (Ciba-Geigy) are each combined once with Ridomil to
assess their ability t educe powdery mildew and gummy stem blight. These are
preliminary screening tests. '

Table of treatments: "S9e following page

Planting data: FkM 14, 1980 Seeded ('Harper Hyibrid')
Be&~.ispacing 6' on-center
Hill spacing 18" down row

Comment: No phytotoxicity observed with CGA64250 (Tr. 15) as of April 2.
l'o L;


-24-








CANTALOUPE FUNGICIDE cont.


Table of Treatments


Plot Material and rte per acre.,
no. for downy mildew for gummy stem blight and/or powdery mildew
1 Previcur N 1 lb ai + Rovral 1.25 lb + Benlate 1/2; bi
2 Ridoii 1/4 lb ai + Rovral 1.25 lb + Benlate 1/2 ib
3 Aliette 3 lb + Rovral 1.25 lb + Benlate 1/2 b,.
4 Previcur N 1 Ib ai + Ronilan 1.5 lb + Benlate 1/2 lb
5 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + Ronilan, .5 b + Benlatei /2 lb
6 Aliette 3 lb + Roniilan 1.5 b + Benlate 1/2 lb
7 Previcur N 1 lb ai + Rovral 1.25 lb + Afugan 5 oz
8 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + Rovral 1.25 Ib + Afugan 5 oz
9 Aliette 3 lb + Rovral 1.25 Ib + Afugan 5 oz
10 Previcur N lb ai + Ronilan 1.5 Ib + Afugan 5 oz
11 Ridomil 1/4 Ibai + Ronilan 1.5 lb + Afugan 5 oz
12 Aliette 3 lb. + Ronilan. 1.5 lb + Afugan 5 oz
13 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + BAS421 1/2 Ib ai
14 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + Baycor l/2,lb ai
15 Ridomil 1/4 lb ai + CGA642501/2 pt
16 Difolatan 5 pt + Benlate1/2 lb
17 Bravo 2.75 pt. + Benlate 1/2 lb
18 DPX7331 5 pt + Benlate 1/2 lb
19 Manzate 200 3 lb + Benlate 1/2 lb
20 Water control


4 plots of each treatment
First spray of treatments


applied 3/26/80, and weekly


thereafter.


-25-







INSECT CONTROL ON TOMATOES

Block 12-North D. J. Schuster


Purpose: To evaluate new materials or new combinations of old materials for insect
control on tomatoes.

Crop: Tomato cv. Flor -Dade .908 -rown unstaked

Statistical design: Randomized complete blocks with 4 replications


Transplants set: March 6, 1980


J.


Weekly treatments:


Will begin. heb aistiJtart to increase


1 Table. of Treatments

Plot no. lb ai/100 gal.
S1 _heck.(watr) --
2 ionikor 4Ed+ 0.50
Pounce 3.2EC 0.05
3 Monitor EC+ 0.50
Thiddan 2EC 1.00
4 Monitor 4EC' 1.00
5 Monitor 4EC ; 0.50
6 Pounce 3.2EC 0.10
.7 Pounce 3.2EC 0.05
8 Lorsban 4EC 0.50
9 ZR-3210 2EC 0.20
S10: ZR-3210 2EC 0.10


Operation: Insect counts will be taken at
and undamaged fruit will be determined.


two-week intervals.
Fungicides will be


Yields of damaged
applied weekly.


-26-


0







.1.. -I


PEPPER WEEVIL CONTROL ON PEPPER

Block 12-South D. J. Schuster


Purpose: To evaluate new materials for control of pepper weevil on pepper.

Crop: Pepper cv. Keystone Resistant Giants

Statistical design: Randomized complete blocks with 4 replications

Transplants set: March 6, 1980

Weekly treatments: Will begin at first bloom


Table of Treatments ,


Plot no. .: .. lb ai/100 gal.
1 Check (water) --
2 Toxaphene 8EC 2.00
3 Lorsban 4EC 0.50
4 Monitor 4EC 1.00
5 Monitor 4EC 0.50
6 Orthene 75SP 1.00
7 Orthene 75SP 0.50
8 Pounce 3.2EC 0.10
9 Pounce 3.2EC 0.05
10 Pydrin 2.4EC 0.10
11 Kryocide 96WP 8.00


Operation: All dropped fruit
incidence of pepper weevil
larvae and adults at least


will be collected from each plot and examined for
larvae. All harvested fruit will be examined for
once a week.


-27-


;







BIOMASS (CASSAVA) PRODUCTION FOR CONVERSION TO ALCOHOL

Block 7 8 P. H. Everett


Purpose: To evaluate biomass production from four cassava varieties for conversion
to alcohol as #n alternate e. rgy saoc :;.i.:': .


0


Plot no. Variety
1, ,- ; CM 0 : :., ..
2 CMC-92
3 M Col-1684:
4 HMC-2
3 plots of ,each:variety


Planting data:


Feb. 15, 1980 Be4edd (no fiertilzer)
Feb. 22, 1980 Stem cuttings planted
Mar. 26w 1980 Feitilized with 500 lb 5-8-8/A. Fertilizer was
banded down center of bed 2" below bed surface.


f** (


S


-28-


i'


.,.;


.i.~ ns


I:








DOUBLE-CROPPING TOMATOES AND CUCUMBERS AFTER TOMATOES


Block 9 P. H. Everett


Purpose: To determine the response of tomatoes and cucumbers, planted as a second
crop after fall tomatoes, to factorial rates of nitrogen and potassium.


Table of Treatments


Plot lb/acre
no. N P205 K20
1 0 0 0
2 50 0 75
3 50 0 150
4 50 0 300
5 100 0 75
6 100 0 150
7 100 0 300
8 150 0 75
9 150 0 150
10 150 0 300


Fall tomato crop:
Fertilized with 500 lb 5-8-8 plus 1,000 lb 18-0-25/acre
Fumigated with Vorlex
Sept. 14, 1979 Transplanted
Dec. 5, 1979 Harvested
Dec. 19, 1979 Old tomato plants removed
Feb. 11, 1980 Area sprayed with paraquat


Second crop tomatoes:
Feb. 13, 1980 Container grown seedlings (Walter) transplanted to field
Mar. 14, 1980 Fertilizer treatments (see Table of Treatments) applied
Beds 6' on center
18" between plants


Second crop
Feb. 13,
Mar. 14,


- cucumbers:
1980 Seeded (Poinsett)
1980 Reseeded due to cold damage


The supplemental fertilizer for the second crops was applied by the punch method -
a 1-1/2" x 3" deep hole was punched 5" to the side of each tomato plant, then the
nitrogen (NH4NO3) and/or potassium (K2SO4) was placed in the hole. For cucumbers
the hole was punched 5" to the side of every other plant.


-29-








I(' 'V f'i


".4


.. 1>


921


ijj


0


1


" ",i




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