Vegetable Production & Marketing News
JANUARY 2000 - VOLUME 10, NUMBER 1

Edited by
Frank J. Dainello, Ph.D.
Extension Horticulturist - Commercial Vegetable Crops
The Texas A&M University System
College Station, Texas 77843-2134

In this issue . . .

Upcoming Meetings
Mark Your Calendar

WEST TEXAS VEGETABLE CONFERENCE
January 18, 2000 — 8:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Hereford Community Center, Hereford, Texas

Specific topics which will be addressed by qualified speakers include:
  • Impact of Food-Quality Protection Act on Vegetable Growers
  • Good Agricultural Practices Ensure Safe Vegetables for Consumers
  • Potato Integrated Pest-Management for Late Blight and Psyllid Control
  • Potato Crop Moisture and Nutrient Management to Maximize Yield and Quality
  • Texas Project PLANT and High Plains Vegetable Industry Initiative
  • Cultural Methods for Vegetable Crop Establishment Success
  • Irrigation Management for Best Vegetable Growth and Water Conservation
  • Managing Soil/Water Salinity to Prevent Injury to Sensitive Vegetables
For more information, contact Dr. Roland Roberts at the TAMU-AREC at Lubbock: (806) 746-6101.

CROSS TIMBERS VEGETABLE CONFERENCE
January 27, 2000 – 8:30 a.m. 0 4:00 p.m.
DeLeon Community Center, DeLeon, Texas
For specific information, contact Bob Whitney at (915) 356-2539.

EAST TEXAS VEGETABLE CONFERENCE
February 15, 2000 – 8:30 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Tyler Civic Center, Tyler, Texas
For specific information, contact Keith Hansen at (903) 535-0885.

HILL COUNTRY VEGETABLE MEETING
February 24, 2000 – 6:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.
Stonewall Volunteer Fire Department, Stonewall, Texas
For specific information, contact Jim Kamas at (830) 997-7047.

High Plains Report:
1999 Statewide Watermelon Performance Trial
Texas A&M Research and Extension Center at Lubbock

By Roland Roberts, Dave Bender, Frank Dainello, Stanley Young, Mike Turner, Christi Carpenter, Brad Gruner, and Greg Durbin (TAEX Extension Horticulturist, TAEX Research Horticulturist, Extension Vegetable Specialist, Lubbock County Extension Agent, and TAES Research Technicians, respectively)

esults presented here are from the fifth planting in a season-long chronology of TAEX statewide watermelon trials established in 5 different regions of Texas. The High Plains trial was conducted at the Texas A&M Research and Extension Center at Lubbock.

Seed of 40 watermelon varieties were sown into coarse-grade peatlite in super 6-packs at Caprock Growers Greenhouses in Lubbock. Triploid seedless varieties were sown on April 20, and seeded varieties on April 27. Soil tests showed P and K levels to be very high. Urea was broadcast on field soil, and disced-in to provide 150 lb N/acre. On June 3 and 4, transplants were field-set into black-plastic-mulched raised beds, 80 inches on-center, with a Water Wheel planter. Three replications of all variety entries were established.

Sunflower windbreaks were seeded on June 11. First male blossoms opened on June 10. Hail shredded leaves on June 12. Open male blossoms were observed again June 15 to 17. Female blossoms opened June 14 to 24.

Irrigation was applied through Netafim drip lines located 12 inches deep and 6 inches to one side of each watermelon row. Rows were 80 inches apart. Emitter spacing was 24 inches. Tensiometers were inserted to a depth of 12 inches, 15 feet from each end of one row, per replication. Each tensiometer was positioned between plants in a row until blossoming time, then moved 12 inches to one side of the row when fruit set began. Irrigation was started when tensiometer readings in the morning were 20 centibars or higher. More volume of irrigation water was required to re-wet the soil as the crop developed. A volume of 0.3 to 1.0 acre-inch per irrigation was required to saturate soil to the 12-inch depth. A total of 13.0 inches of irrigation water was required, and 4.8 inches of rain fell.

First harvest of mature melons began on August 12, and final harvest of mature melons was on August 20. Each melon was weighed and measured for length and diameter, and several fruit of each variety were photographed. A grower field day was presented August 12. Dave Bender conducted statistical analyses of data, using a SAS program which he tailored to this study.

Watermelon yields in 1999 were lower than in previous years, primarily due to hail damage sustained June 12 when plants were running and flowering was beginning. Some varieties seemed to recover more quickly than others, so flowering was less uniform.

What Is IR-4 Anyway?

This article appeared in “The Vegetable Gazette,” September 1999, Volume 3, Number 9.

IR-4 stands for Interregional Project No. 4, and is a federal program funded through USDA. It was established to help minor-crop producers obtain new pest control materials.

Minor crops are those for which ‘the volume of pesticide involved for a particular use is not sufficient to justify the monetary expenditure by the pesticide manufacturer’. Most, if not all, vegetables, small fruit, tree fruit, and ornamental crops fall into this category. Ag researchers, state Extension personnel, and/or commodity-grower groups carry out field trials funded and overseen by IR-4 to obtain crop safety data and residue samples. These samples are then analyzed in IR-4 regional labs. IR-4 compiles the data collected, then prepares and submits petitions to the EPA requesting tolerances or exemptions for these pest control products.

Anyone (growers, Extension personnel, etc.) can request that a particular material be evaluated on a particular crop. This request will be discussed at a national workshop, and if certain criteria are met (sufficient need and/or benefit, cost involved, and chance of the work actually result in a labeled use), the request results in an IR-4 study and, hopefully, a new option for control of a pest.

This program is extremely valuable to the well-being of the Texas Produce Industry. Without it, considerably fewer compounds would be available to combat our pest problems. We are fortunate in Texas in that we have a very active committee involved in the IR-4 process: MUPAC (Minor Use Pesticide Assessment Committee). MUPAC is comprised of university researchers and Extension personnel, crop consultants, processor field men, and growers from throughout the state. These individuals meet regularly to determine priority pesticide needs. As a result, Texas pesticide needs are now being considered in the decision-making process of the IR-4 program.

If you, as a grower, shipper, or processor, have a need for a compound to control a specific pest on a specific crop for which no, or ineffective, controls are available, make your needs known to a member of MUPAC. The names and phone numbers of the committee members, as well as information on IR-4 and MUPAC, can be obtained by contacting Dr. Rodney Holloway at (409) 845-3849.

Organics in Transition:
Plan eases move from conventional

This article appeared as an editorial in “The Packer,” October 4, 1999.

hree years can be a long time.

That’s how long fields must be farmed with organic growing methods before they typically can be certified ‘organic’ and use the organic name in their marketing. That requirement is important in maintaining the value of organic produce. But what becomes of that product, produced with all the time, care, and cost of organic farming but without the ability to command a premium price at the market?

Traditionally, growers have marketed such transitional product through normal distribution channels, frequently losing yield and money along the way. Recently, Albert’s Organics Inc., Bridgeport, New Jersey, and Mothers & Others for a Livable Planet (a non-profit organization that provides marketing support for produce grown using integrated pest-management methods) teamed up to create Transitional Organic, a marketing plan for produce caught in the middle.

Organic industry leaders are worried about the lack of definition of the term [transitional organic] in the industry and the possibility that the public will be confused by the term.

Let’s give consumers some credit. If a product is clearly labeled, and supporting materials explain what makes the product different from organic and conventionally grown produce, consumers can make an informed decision on whether this is worth the price. If consumers don’t see value in transitional products, they won’t pay the extra cost. No harm done. In the same way retailers see value in eco-labels, they may see value in ‘transitional product’. Eco-labels market the use of sustainable-agriculture practices that reduce pesticide use and promote social responsibility while reserving the right to use a minimal amount of chemicals when necessary. If the industry and the U. S. Department of Agriculture are worried about the term’s lack of a definition, it’s time to create one. It’s not a good time to shut down a marketing opportunity that could reduce the cost of converting to organic production.

New Machine Promises Consistent Root And Top Removal

This article appeared in “Onion World,” May/June 1999.

rop-handling specialist Nicholson Machinery has extended its range of root-crop equipment with the Top-Tail, a machine capable of removing tops and tails from onions, radishes, red beets, and other root crops in a swift, smooth action. Developed to suit the exacting demands of supermarkets wanting a high-quality finished product, the Top-Tail becomes the final link in the crop clean-up process in pre-packing stations.

The Top-Tail uses a unique, patented design of polygonal, twisted prism rollers contra-rotating against smooth-faced, spring-loaded polypropylene rollers. Edges are in continuous contact with the polypropylene rollers, and cut the top and tail of the crop as they pass over it. The ‘twists’ run at right angles to the crop flow, and have left- and right-hand twists. This ensures maximum movement of the crop in all directions, ensuring both top and tail are presented to the cutting edges before passing off the bed. This continuous, smooth flow, without oscillation or vibration, minimizes damage. This design also keeps dust and noise levels very low, the company says. Compared to traditional labor-intensive systems, the Top-Tail produces a more consistent finish, with low levels of damage to the crop. And by using rollers, the system offers a continuous crop flow, without oscillation, and with a through-put of about 4 to 5 tons per hour.

Nicholson Machinery is based in Southery, Downham Market, in the heart of England’s onion, carrot, bulb, and beet growing area. The company manufactures onion toppers, high-frequency webs of onion, bulb, and potato lines, and also installs whole or part grading and handling lines. For more information, contact Tom Woollard, Nicholson Machinery, 1 Westgate Street, Southery, Nr Downham Market, Norfolk, England PE 38 OPA. Telephone: 01 366 377458; fax 01 366 377331.

Hydroponic Hurrah:
Popularity is growing for produce grown without soil

The following is excerpted from an article by Bob Johnson appearing in “The Grower,’ June-July 1999.

he hydroponic revolution that until a few years ago was confined to Europe, Canada, and Australia has reached the United States. After a decade of double-digit growth, U. S. hydroponic vegetable production has approached the 1,000-acre mark. With tomatoes leading the way, followed by bell peppers and cucumbers, the United States has surpassed Canada in hydroponic vegetable production, and industry insiders think the boom has just begun.

Large enterprises have discovered the mainstream U. S. Market. Nearly one-fourth of all the hydroponic vegetables in the United States are grown by two firms – Colorado Greenhouses, Fort Lupton, Colorado, and Village Farms, which has greenhouse operations in Virginia, Texas, New York, and Pennsylvania. The largest hydroponic grower in Canada, Houweling Nurseries, Delta, British Columbia, recently has set up operations in Southern California.

“Some companies were growing 25 percent a year, and to the best of my knowledge are continuing to grow,” said Pedro Sole, vice president for quality assurance and research and development, Colorado Greenhouses. “It will continue as long as the consumer is willing to pay the extra price for the quality of hydroponic tomatoes.” Dave Walker, western regional manager for Agro Dynamics, Ventura, California, a sister company of Village Farms, said, “There are 1,000 acres of vegetables under glass in this country right now. We feel at 7,000 acres we will be approaching the saturation point.”

Encroaching Entries.
The fast-growing hydroponic industry already has begun taking bites out of the market for field-grown fresh-market tomatoes. The imported hydroponic-tomato markets are growing, and are expected to continue to grow. It is difficult to tell precisely how much the hydroponics have cut into the market for field-grown tomatoes, because the greenhouse sector has taken off at the same time as growers in both Florida and California have found themselves besieged by tomatoes from Mexico in the post-NAFTA era.

The hydroponic revolution began in the Netherlands, inspired largely by the importance of reducing reliance on methyl bromide. Until the 1980s, 70 percent of all the methyl bromide used in the Netherlands was used to fumigate the soil for tomato cultivation. That use has been entirely eliminated in the Netherlands, however, largely because most tomatoes are now grown hydroponically.

Growers Face Challenges Without Soil.
The hydroponic grower must take care to monitor and control the growing process vigilantly. “The biggest mistake I see in the growing process is a lack of investment in environmental controls,” Dave Walker said. He cited in particular the need to invest adequately in equipment that will monitor and control the humidity, temperature, venting, and light. “It [hydroponics] requires much tighter control than cut flowers or bedding plants,” he said. “And it all translates into kilos per meter. Other than that, hydroponics is a lot more forgiving than people think.”

Besides controlling the greenhouse environment, it is essential to monitor and control the irrigating solution. And nothing is more important than maintaining a properly acidic solution. “Incorrect pH is the biggest problem with the solution. If the pH is too low, you burn the roots, and if it is too high, the plant turns yellow because the roots can’t absorb manganese,” said a commercial hydroponic grower, who suggested a pH of 6.0 for tomatoes. Maintaining a proper pH requires constant adjustment. Commercial growers check and adjust the pH of the solution by hand everyday, while the control system automatically monitors the control system every second.

Once the proper pH has been determined, it is necessary to determine the changing nutrient needs of the crop as it matures. In general, early on, the plants need a solution rich in nitrogen and calcium. Later, fruiting plants such as tomatoes need a solution rich in potassium to feed the fruit.

When a problem develops in the solution, the medium can be flushed out. Or it can be discarded and replaced, once the proper balance in the nutrient solution has been established. Besides restoring the proper nutrient balance, this solution is a key advantage hydroponic growers have over greenhouse soil growers when it comes to eliminating a disease-infested growing medium.

Research on the best growing medium for hydroponic vegetables currently is being conducted in Europe and by the leading companies in North America. But rockwool still is the medium of choice for vegetables.

Numerous books on hydroponics, which include recommended pH and nutrient solution-requirements, have been written recently. However, the literature tends to trail behind the latest technologies in this fast-changing field. Byron Smith, president of Sunizona, Pearse, Arizona, which grows cucumbers hydroponically, thinks the best source of current information on the environmental and nutrient needs of the major crops, as well as the newest technologies, can be found in the “Greenhouse Vegetable Guide,” which is available through the Ministry of Agriculture in British Columbia (604) 633-4211.

Click http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu to return to aggie-horticulture home page.

Web page construction by Jill Stavenhagen