Partial budget analysis was used to evaluate soil treatment alternatives to methyl bromide (MeBr) based on their cost-effectiveness in the production of strawberries (Fragaria ×ananassa). The analysis was conducted for two geographical areas: the piedmont and coastal plain area (including North Carolina and Georgia) and the mountain area of western North Carolina, based on 7 years of field test data. The fumigation alternatives evaluated were Telone-C35 (1,3-dichloropropene 61.1% + chloropicrin 34.7%), Telone II (1,3-dichloropropene 94%), chloropicrin (Chlor-o-pic 99% and TriClor EC), InLine (1,3-dichloropropene 60.8% + chloropicrin 33.3%), and metam sodium (Vapam or Sectagon 42, 42% sodium methyldithiocarbamate). The MeBr formulation was 67% MeBr and 33% chloropicrin (Terr-O-Gas) with the exception of the earlier trials where a 98:2 ratio was used. In the piedmont and coastal plain area, the soil treated with chloropicrin showed the best results with an additional return of $1670/acre relative to MeBr, followed by Telone-C35 with an additional return of $277/acre. The projected return associated with shank-applied metam sodium was approximately equal to the estimated return a grower would receive when applying MeBr. Fumigating with drip-applied metam sodium, InLine, and Telone II as well as the nonfumigated soil treatment resulted in projected losses of $2182, $2233, $4179, and $6450 per acre, respectively, relative to MeBr. In the mountain area, all of the alternatives resulted in a projected increase in net returns relative to MeBr. The largest projected increase was $1320/acre for the InLine treatment, while the added returns for the TriClor and Telone-C35 applications were estimated to be $509 and $339 per acre, respectively. The drip-applied metam sodium application resulted in an additional return of $40/acre, and the added revenue for the nonfumigated soil treatment was $24/acre more than MeBr treatment. Although technical issues currently associated with some of the alternatives may persist, results indicate that there are economically feasible fumigation alternatives to MeBr in the production of strawberries in the southeastern U.S.
Olha Sydorovych, Charles D. Safley, Lisa M. Ferguson, E. Barclay Poling, Gina E. Fernandez, Phil M. Brannen, David M. Monks, and Frank J. Louws
Theodore M. Webster and A. Stanley Culpepper
Halosulfuron is a proposed alternative to methyl bromide for managing nutsedges (Cyperus spp.) in several vegetable crops, including cucurbits. Field studies were conducted to evaluate the crop sensitivity to halosulfuron in a spring squash (Cucurbita pepo L.)—fall cucumber (Cucumis sativus L.) rotation from 2000 to 2002. Treatments included application of halosulfuron to the soil surface after forming the bed, but before laying mulch (halosulfuron-PRE), halosulfuron applied through drip irrigation (halosulfuron-DRIP) after forming bed and laying mulch, metham applied through drip irrigation after forming bed and laying mulch, a nontreated control with mulch, and nontreated control without mulch. Each treatment was applied to both direct seeded and transplanted zucchini squash. Halosulfuron treatments reduced squash plant diameter relative to metham, however plant diameters in halosulfuron-PRE (transplant and direct seed) and halosulfuron-DRIP (transplant) treatments were not different from the nontreated control. Halosulfuron-PRE delayed squash fruit production relative to the mulched nontreated control. However, application of halosulfuron-PRE and halosulfuron-DRIP did not reduce squash yield at the conclusion of the season, relative to the nontreated control. Cucumbers were transplanted and direct seeded into previous squash plots and received either an application of halosulfuron-DRIP, or were not treated. Differences in cucumber yields were not detected with second crop treatments. Cucumbers appear to have adequate tolerance to halosulfuron, making it a potential replacement for methyl bromide for nutsedge control. Suppression of early season squash growth by halosulfuron may hinder the adoption of halosulfuron as a methyl bromide alternative for squash.
Jayesh B. Samtani, J. Ben Weber, and Steven A. Fennimore
supplement methyl bromide alternative fumigants to control weeds in strawberry HortTechnology 11 603 609 North Carolina Crop Improvement Association 2012 Strawberry plant varieties. 1 May 2012. < http://www.nccrop.com/varieties.php/17/Strawberry
Sanjeev K. Bangarwa, Jason K. Norsworthy, and Edward E. Gbur
potential methyl bromide alternatives are available in vegetable production. However, no single alternative is a stand-alone replacement for methyl bromide ( Noling, 2002 ). Thus, research efforts are needed to develop an integrated weed management program
Benjamin C. Garland, Michelle S. Schroeder-Moreno, Gina E. Fernandez, and Nancy G. Creamer
.E. Brannen, P.M. Monks, D.M. Louws, F.J. 2006 Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for the production of strawberries in the southeastern United States HortTechnology 16 118 128 Taylor, J. Harrier, L. 2001 A comparison of development and mineral
John E. Beck, Michelle S. Schroeder-Moreno, Gina E. Fernandez, Julie M. Grossman, and Nancy G. Creamer
.D. Ferguson, L.M. Poling, E.B. 2006 Economic evaluation of methyl bromide alternatives for the production of strawberries in the southeastern United States HortTechnology 16 118 128 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 2015 Agricultural statistics for 2014. U
Eva García-Méndez, David García-Sinovas, Maximo Becerril, Antońeta De Cal, Paloma Melgarejo, Anselmo Martínez-Treceño, Steven A. Fennimore, Carmen Soria, Juan J. Medina, and Jóse M. López-Aranda
.M. García-Sinovas, D. García-Méndez, E. Becerril, M. Medina, J.J. López-Aranda, J.M. 2005b Alternatives to MB for strawberry nurseries in Spain. 2004 results Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. Methyl Bromide Alternatives and
Mary C. Stevens, Rui Yang, and Joshua H. Freeman
cultivation. Proc. Annu. Intl. Res. Conf. on Methyl Bromide Alternatives and Emissions Reduc. < https://www.mbao.org/static/docs/confs/2007-sandiego/papers/115LeeBMBAO2007PosterEDN2-CHUNGetalFinal.pdf > Draycott, A.P. Last, P.J. 1971 Some effects of partial
Michelle M. Leinfelder and Ian A. Merwin
This research was supported by USDA–IREE Methyl Bromide Alternatives projects NYC-145560 and 145-530, and by CSREES project NYC-145409. The authors thank Gennaro Fazio and George Hudler for critical reviews of the manuscript.
Timothy S. Prather, James J. Stapleton, Susan B. Mallek, Tarcisio S. Ruiz, and Clyde L. Elmore
A double-tent solarization technique, which accumulates higher soil temperatures than solarization of open fields, was recently approved by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) as a nematicidal treatment for container nurseries. Due to the need for broad-spectrum pest control in container nursery settings, this technique was tested to determine its usefulness as an herbicidal treatment. Laboratory-derived thermal death dosages (temperatur × time) for several weed species important in California, including common purslane (Portulaca oleracea), tumble pigweed (Amaranthus albus), and black nightshade (Solanum nigrum), were previously determined and the data were used as guidelines for devising treatment duration in this study. In two field experiments conducted in 1999 and 2000 to validate the laboratory data, moist soil was placed in black polyethylene planting bags [3.8 L (1 gal) volume], artificially infested with seeds of the three test species, and subjected to 0 to 24 hours of double-tent solarization after reaching a threshold temperature of 60 °C (140 °F) (about 1.5 to 2.0 h after initiation of the experiment). In 1999, samples were removed at 2, 4, 20, and 24 hours after reaching the 60 °C threshold, then incubated to ameliorate possible secondary dormancy effects. Seeds failed to germinate in any of the solarized treatments. In 2000, samples were removed at 0, 1, 2, and 6 h after reaching 60 °C. Again, apart from the nonsolarized control treatment, all weed seeds failed to germinate at any of the sampling periods, in accordance with prior laboratory thermal death results. Reference tests to estimate effects of container size on soil heating showed that soil in smaller container sizes (soil volume) reached higher temperatures, and were maintained at high temperature [above 60 °C (140 °F)] for a longer period of time, than larger container sizes. The double-tent solarization technique can be used by commercial growers and household gardeners to effectively and inexpensively produce weed-free soil and potting mixes in warmer climatic areas.