Search Results
Off-target deposition of pesticidal spray material is both an economic loss to the grower and a potential environmental problem in southern Florida. This study evaluated the reduction in non-target deposition of copper resulting from different approaches to spraying row-ends in typical Indian River citrus (Citrus) production systems. Using copper as a model pesticide, applications were made in a commercial citrus grove in June and July 2001. Non-target deposition on the water surface within an adjacent drainage canal, as well as on surrounding ground surfaces, was measured using Teflon spray targets. Specific row-end spraying scenarios included: 1) leaving both banks of nozzles on while turning; 2) turning the outside-facing nozzles off (leaving tree-facing nozzles on); 3) turning both banks of nozzles off at the tree trunk; and 4) turning all nozzles off at the end of the foliage of the last tree within the row. Deposition directly onto surface water contained within drainage canals was reduced significantly when nozzles were turned off at the last tree within a row, or when the outside-facing nozzles-only were turned off through the turn. Likewise, deposition was reduced on ground surfaces adjacent to the sprayer under the same scenarios. No differences were observed on ground surfaces on the opposite side of the canal. Significant reductions in direct application of agrichemicals to surface waters within Indian River citrus production groves can be achieved by turning nozzles off when turning from one tree row into the next.
Grapefruit are susceptible to melanose from initial set until fruit diam. is 6-7 cm, which can span 3 months. Common Indian River melanose-control practice has been application of Cu fungicides at petal fall, with reapplication every three wks. through the infection period. Research data were previously used to develop a computer model to estimate Cu levels on fruit and indicate when reapplication is needed to prevent potential infection. The purpose of this study was to compare melanose control using spray timings suggested by the computer model vs. standard 3 week intervals vs. non-sprayed checks and was conducted over 3 years in mature grapefruit groves near Ft. Pierce, Fla. All applications were made using airblast at 1180 L· ha-1. Melanose and melanose-like Cu injury could not be distinguished and were combined in a melanose/Cu marking (MCM) score for each fruit. Separate fruit samples from the interior and exterior of tree canopies were randomly selected from each tree. In no year was there a significant difference in interior fruit MCM from computer model vs. calendar spray timings when treated with standard rates of Cu fungicide. However, rainfall never occurred when calendar-sprayed fruit were projected to be at low Cu levels. In 2 of 3 yrs. exterior fruit in the non-sprayed checks had less MCM than those from trees treated with Cu, indicating that Cu injury predominated over melanose on exterior fruit. In these fruit, MCM increased linearly with maximum fruit Cu concentration, which was lower on trees managed using the computer model. The computer model appears to be a sound approach to managing melanose, but economic benefit over calendar-based spray timing may only become apparent when practiced over numerous groves and seasons.
Wind-induced blemishing known as windscar and lesions from the disease melanose (caused by Diaporthe citri) are two of the most important causes of fresh grapefruit (Citrus paradisi) cullage in Florida. Copper hydroxide fungicides are the primary means of controlling melanose, but high air velocities from passing sprayers have been suspected of increasing windscar. In 1998 and 1999, airblast applications of Cu(OH)2 (1.7 kg·ha-1 Cu) were made at a range of early fruit development stages to a fresh grapefruit orchard in the Indian River region of Florida. These applications supplemented aerial sprays of Cu(OH)2 that were made uniformly across the entire experimental site at biweekly intervals beginning near full bloom. During the commercial harvest period fruit were sampled from three regions (interior, upper exterior, and lower exterior) of each treatment tree and were evaluated for percentage of fruit surface covered by windscar and severity of melanose. Airblast applications did not affect windscar in either year, but windscar was significantly greater from the upper exterior of the canopy, which is likely to experience the highest natural wind velocities. From these data, it appears unlikely that airblast applications significantly contribute to windscar of Indian River grapefruit. In 1998, no trees receiving airblast applications had significantly lower melanose incidence than the trees sprayed only via aircraft; however, trees receiving four airblast applications were scored as having higher apparent melanose on exterior samples than trees receiving most other treatments. This is consistent with high levels of Cu injury on these fruit which can superficially resemble melanose. Following treatment in 1999, trees receiving four airblast applications of Cu(OH)2 had significantly lower melanose scores than trees receiving either no or only early airblast applications, but were not significantly different from trees receiving a single spray 5.5 weeks postbloom. A computer model, which estimates Cu levels on fruit based on fruit growth, rainfall, and application parameters, indicated exterior fruit receiving four airblast sprays had >3 μg·cm-2 [Cu] for 40 days in 1998 but only 10 days in 1999, which reflects increased probability of Cu damage in 1998. It appears that aerial application supplemented by airblast merits further study as an economical means of melanose control.
Bloom in individual citrus (Citrus) trees often continues for more than 1 month in south Florida, with even greater bloom duration within most orchard blocks because of variation in bloom timing between trees. Prolonged bloom contributes to variable fruit maturity as harvest approaches and increases severity of postbloom fruit drop (PFD) disease (caused by Colletotrichum acutatum). Hydrogen cyanamide (cyanamide) has been effective in accelerating bloom in various deciduous fruits, and its potential use in citrus was investigated in this preliminary study. Cyanamide was applied at a range of concentrations, from 0% to 1.0% a.i., to potted trees of six citrus types reflecting fairly broad diversity in commercial citrus that was readily available as seed [alemow (Citrus macrophylla), ‘Duncan’ grapefruit (Citrus paradisi), sour orange (Citrus aurantium), ‘Smooth Flat Seville’ sour orange hybrid (C. aurantium hybrid), ‘Swingle’ citrumelo (C. paradisi × Poncirus trifoliata), and ‘Sun Chu Sha’ mandarin (Citrus reticulata)] in Dec. 1999 while trees were quiescent. Phytotoxicity increased with cyanamide rate, with some damage at 0.125% cyanamide on most tested plants, and large variation among citrus types. All cyanamide rates hastened flushing. Airblast application of cyanamide (0, 0.025%, 0.05%, and 0.10%) was made to mature trees of ‘Valencia’ and ‘Navel’ sweet orange (Citrus sinensis) in Ft. Pierce, FL, on 27 Jan. 2000. On 15 Feb. and 28 Feb. additional trees received cyanamide at 0.05%. There was considerable defoliation, which increased linearly with cyanamide rate. Flushing and flowering were unaffected by cyanamide compared with controls except in February where cyanamide applied at 0.05% increased flowers per tree in ‘Valencia’ sweet orange, and in contrast, 0.1% cyanamide on 27 Jan. reduced ‘Navel’ sweet orange flowering. Cyanamide application to ‘Valencia’ sweet orange on 28 Feb., after initial flowering but 16 days before peak bloom, significantly reduced yield per tree but there were no other effects on cropping. In these trials, cyanamide was not an effective agent for hastening bloom in south Florida citrus with applications late January through February. Further work is needed to determine whether December applications of cyanamide to trees in the field may be more effective in concentrating subsequent flush and bloom.
Foliar application of spray materials is an integral component of commercial citrus production. An intensive assessment of spray application practices has been stimulated by low fruit value and increased concern about potential surface water contamination in the Indian River citrus region of Florida. Many publications report research results regarding distribution of spray materials within orchards and off-target deposition, but interpretation is challenging because so many factors influence spray results, and integrating this information into practical recommendations is difficult. Canopy geometry and density are prominent factors contributing to variable deposition and spray drift. Environmental factors such as temperature, relative humidity, wind speed, and wind direction also greatly influence spray deposition and drift, and substantial changes can occur within seconds. In addition the physical and/or mechanical set up of the sprayer interact significantly with the other factors. A better understanding of these interactions should help growers optimize spray effectiveness and efficiency while reducing potential off-target effects.
Parts I and II of this series revealed substantial opportunities for improving spraying of Indian River citrus (Citrus spp.). In this segment of our work we develop guidelines for growers to select the spray parameters providing an optimal balance between efficiency and efficacy while minimizing environmental contamination.
It is proposed that these guidelines could be codified in a simple expert system to make them easier to use. We propose that understanding limiting conditions may be the key to choosing spray options. Wind is a major factor influencing spray deposition and offtarget drift. Based on weather records, wind speeds below 5 mph (8.0 km·h-1) are only routinely observed from 2000 HR until 0800 HR, making night spraying a good choice for low-volume applications. The importance of adjusting sprayer set-up for individual groves is demonstrated, with economic estimates of the cost of failing to make these adjustments. Routine use of careful sprayer adjustments is also likely to reduce off-target drift. Improvements in equipment and spray chemicals are also discussed. Use of non-orchard buffer areas and/or windbreaks appear to offer considerable opportunity for reducing off-site spray movement.
Although citrus (Citrus spp.) is sensitive to salinity, acceptable production can be achieved with moderate salinity levels, depending on the climate, scion cultivar, rootstock, and irrigation-fertilizer management. Irrigation scheduling is a key factor in managing salinity in areas with salinity problems. Increasing irrigation frequency and applying water in excess of the crop water requirement are recommended to leach the salts and minimize the salt concentration in the root zone. Overhead sprinkler irrigation should be avoided when using water containing high levels of salts because salt residues can accumulate on the foliage and cause serious injury. Much of the leaf and trunk damage associated with direct foliar uptake of salts can be reduced by using microirrigation systems. Frequent fertilization using low rates is recommended through fertigation or broadcast application of dry fertilizers. Nutrient sources should have a relatively low salt index and not contain chloride (Cl) or sodium (Na). In areas where Na accumulates in soils, application of calcium (Ca) sources (e.g., gypsum) has been found to reduce the deleterious effect of Na and improve plant growth under saline conditions. Adapting plants to saline environments and increasing salt tolerance through breeding and genetic manipulation is another important method for managing salinity.