To date, grafting has been used successfully in vegetable production for disease control and yield improvement in many parts of the world, especially in Asia and Europe (Lee and Oda, 2003; Lee et al., 2010). A number of rootstocks have been developed for managing various soilborne diseases and root-knot nematodes in production of tomato, eggplant (Solanum melongena), pepper (Capsicum annuum), cucumber (Cucumis sativus), melon (Cucumis melo), and watermelon (Citrullus lanatus), particularly in intensive cultural systems (King et al., 2010; Lee et al., 2010; Louws et al., 2010). Moreover, many of these rootstocks demonstrate tolerance to abiotic stresses and show great potential for enhancing crop vigor and productivity even under low disease pressure (Di Gioia et al., 2010; Fernández-García et al., 2002; Schwarz et al., 2010). In the United States, greenhouse hydroponic tomato growers are currently the primary users of grafted seedlings, whereas vegetable grafting is still a relatively new technique for open-field producers (King et al., 2010; Kubota et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2010).
With the phaseout of methyl bromide soil fumigant and new search for integrated disease management practices in field vegetable production, interest in vegetable grafting under field conditions has been growing recently in the United States (Barrett et al., 2012a; Kubota et al., 2008; Rivard et al., 2010a; Rivard and Louws, 2008). However, the high cost of grafted transplants still remains the major concern limiting the adoption of grafting by vegetable growers, especially large-scale open-field producers (Kubota et al., 2008; Lee et al., 2010). In addition to the costs of rootstock seeds, grafted transplant production requires investment in space, supplies and materials, and labor for making and healing the grafts, which ultimately increases the costs of grafted vegetable production (Barrett et al., 2012b; Rivard et al., 2010b). For example, estimated prices for grafted tomato transplants ranged from $0.59 to $1.88 as opposed to $0.13 to $0.76 for nongrafted plants in two transplant production operations in the United States (Rivard et al., 2010b).
A recent study on grafted heirloom tomato production demonstrated the economic feasibility of using grafted plants for root-knot nematode control when there was a high level of infestation in the field (Barrett et al., 2012b). However, limited information is available as to whether grafting can be used economically in open-field production. Considering the multifaceted benefits of vegetable grafting, a comprehensive approach involving different production scenarios is needed to evaluate the economic feasibility of using grafted tomato transplants as a viable component of field tomato production systems.
The main objective of this 2-year study was to determine the costs and benefits of using grafted transplants for field production of fresh-market tomato in fumigated sandy soils in northern Florida. A partial budget analysis of grafted vs. nongrafted tomato production was performed to assess if the additional costs associated with grafting can be offset by the improved marketable fruit yield. In addition, given that grafted transplant prices may decrease as research advances and the profitability of tomato production is also determined by tomato market prices, sensitivity analyses were conducted to examine the net returns of grafted tomato production as influenced by the grafted transplant costs and tomato selling prices.
BarrettC.E.ZhaoX.McSorleyR.2012aGrafting for root-knot nematode control and yield improvement in organic heirloom tomato productionHortScience47614620
BarrettC.E.ZhaoX.HodgesA.W.2012bCost benefit analysis of using grafted transplants for root-knot nematode management in organic heirloom tomato productionHortTechnology22252257
BesriM.2003Current situation of tomato grafting as alternative to methyl bromide for tomato production in Morocco. Proc. 12th Annu Intl. Res. Conf. Methyl Bromide Alternatives Emission Reductions 31 Oct. – 3 Nov. San Diego CA. 47:1–3
Di GioiaF.SerioF.ButtaroD.AyalaO.SantamariaP.2010Influence of rootstock on vegetable growth fruit yield and quality in ‘Cuore di Bue’, an heirloom tomatoJ. Hort. Sci. Biotechnol.85477482
DjidonouD.ZhaoX.SimonneH.E.KochK.E.EricksonJ.E.2013Yield, water-, and nitrogen-use efficiency in field-grown, grafted tomatoesHortScience48485492
Fernández-GarcíaN.MartínezV.CerdáA.CarvajalM.2002Water and nutrient uptake of grafted tomato plants grown under saline conditionsJ. Plant Physiol.159899905
GazulaA.2009Impact of irrigation and nutrient management programs on fruit yields nitrogen load and crop value of fresh market tomato grown with plasticulture in the era of best management practices. PhD Diss. Univ. Florida Gainesville
KingS.R.DavisA.R.ZhangX.CrosbyK.2010Genetics, breeding and selection of rootstocks for Solanaceae and CucurbitaceaeSci. Hort.127106111
KubotaC.McclureM.A.Kokalis-BurelleN.BausherM.G.RosskopfE.N.2008Vegetable grafting: History, use, and current technology status in North AmericaHortScience4316641669
LeeJ.M.KubotaC.TsaoS.J.BieZ.Hoyos EchevarriaP.MorraL.OdaM.2010Current status of vegetable grafting: Diffusion, grafting techniques, automationSci. Hort.12793105
LouwsF.J.RivardC.L.KubotaC.2010Grafting fruiting vegetables to manage soilborne pathogens, foliar pathogens, arthropods and weedsSci. Hort.127127146
O’ConnellS.RivardC.HartmannS.PeetM.LouwsF.2009Grafting tomatoes on disease resistant rootstocks for small-scale organic production. 1 May 2012. <http://www4.ncsu.edu/∼clrivard/OFRF_Final_Report.pdf>
OlsonS.M.StallW.M.ValladG.E.WebbS.E.TaylorT.G.SmithS.A.SimonneE.H.McAvoyE.SantosB.M.2009Tomato production in Florida p. 291–312. In: S.M. Olson and E. Simonne (eds.). Vegetable production handbook for Florida. Inst. Food Agr. Sci. Univ. Florida Gainesville FL
PittsD.J.SmajstrlaA.G.HamanD.Z.ClackG.A.2002Irrigation costs for tomato production in Florida. Univ. Florida Dept. Agr. Biol. Eng. Inst. Food Agr. Sci. Florida Coop. Ext. Serv. Publ. AE74 FL
Ricárdez-SalinasM.V.Huitrón-RamírezM.Tello-MarquinaJ.C.Camacho-FerreF.2010Planting density for grafted melon as an alternative to methyl bromide use in MexicoSci. Hort.126236241
RivardC.L.O’ConnellS.PeetM.M.LouwsF.J.2010aGrafting tomato with interspecific rootstock to manage diseases caused by Sclerotium rolfsii and southern root-knot nematodePlant Dis.9410151021
RivardC.L.SydorovychO.O’ConnellS.PeetM.M.LouwsF.J.2010bAn economic analysis of two grafted tomato transplant production systems in the United StatesHortTechnology20794803
SchwarzD.RouphaelY.CollaG.VenemaJ.H.2010Grafting as a tool to improve tolerance of vegetables to abiotic stresses: Thermal stress, water stress, and organic pollutantsSci. Hort.127162171
SydorovychO.SafleyC.D.WelkerR.M.FergusonL.M.MonksD.W.JenningsK.DriverJ.LouwsF.J.2008Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for the production of tomatoes in North CarolinaHortTechnology18705713
TaylorM.BrutonB.FishW.RobertsW.2008Cost benefit analyses of using grafted watermelon transplants for fusarium wilt disease controlActa Hort.782343350
University of Florida Center for Agribusiness2009Spring tomatoes: Estimated production costs in the Manatee/Ruskin FL area. 18 Apr. 2012. <http://fred.ifas.ufl.edu/iatpc/files/RuskinSpringTomato09.pdf>
U.S. Department of Agriculture2011Fruit and vegetable market news. 25 Apr. 2012. <http://marketnews.usda.gov/portal/fv?paf_dm=full&paf_gear_id=1200002&startIndex=1&dr=1&rowDisplayMax=50&displaySort=&navClass=&repType=shipPriceDaily&termNavClass=&shipNavClass=&movNavClass=&locName=&locAbr=&commAbr=TOM&commName=TOMATOES&varName=&repDate=07%2F01%2F2010&environment=&organic=&x=13&y=7>