Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items for

  • Author or Editor: Amy F. Fulcher x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Free access

Amy F. Fulcher, Thomas G. Ranney, James D. Burton, James F. Walgenbach, and David A. Danehower

Japanese beetles (JB), Popillia japonica Newman, are destructive, highly polyphagous herbivores that show a general preference for Rosaceous plants. Choice and nochoice feeding assays were conducted to determine the level of resistance among 10 taxa of Malus spp. Mill. Under no-choice conditions, M. baccata (L.) Borkh. `Jackii', M. × `Hargozam' Harvest Gold and M. transitoria (Balatin) Schneider `Schmitcutleaf' Golden Raindrops were highly resistant, with <2 cm2 leaf area consumed in 24 hours. M. × `Radiant' was highly susceptible, with 7.6 cm2 consumed, and the remaining six cultivars were intermediate. Under choice conditions, eight taxa were resistant with <10% defoliation, M. × `Red Splendor' was intermediate with 26%, and M. × `Radiant' was susceptible with 73% defoliation. Feeding responses to eight individual phenolics were tested in artificial diets over a range from 0 to 100 mm. Phloridzin, phloretin, naringenin, and catechin were all feeding deterrents, whereas quercetin and rutin were feeding stimulants. Chlorogenic acid stimulated feeding at low concentrations and deterred feeding at higher concentrations (i.e., a peak response). Kaempferol had no effect. Analysis of endogenous foliar phenolics showed considerable variation in concentrations among taxa. Stepwise multiple regression analysis identified phloridzin as the only endogenous phenolic that was significantly related to resistance under both choice and no-choice feeding conditions.

Full access

Matthew R. Chappell, Sarah A. White, Amy F. Fulcher, Anthony V. LeBude, Gary W. Knox, and Jean-Jacques B. Dubois

In 2014, the Southern Nursery Integrated Pest Management (SNIPM) Working Group published both print and electronic versions of IPM for Shrubs in Southeastern U.S. Nursery Production: Volume I. Five hundred print books (of 3000 copies) were distributed to commercial ornamental growers and extension educators in return for their participation in a follow-up survey. The survey was administered to determine the value of book contents, savings that growers realized from using the book, perceived value of the book had users been asked to pay for it, and demographic information. The survey response rate was 46.2%, with respondents from 18 states. Of 243 respondents, 194 (79.8%) had used the book. Entomology information was most used and most useful, followed by plant pathology, weed science, and cultural information. Collective savings attributed to book use totaled $408,832/year for the 194 nurseries that used the book. Applying the use rate (79.8%) identified in this survey, this represents $5.62 million in savings per year for the 3000 printed books, of which 2394 are estimated to have been used. Savings varied by the type and size of operation. Larger operations had greater savings per year. Container growers saved $44.15/acre and field growers $28.37/acre. The price that growers were willing to pay for the book also varied by operation type and size. Extension educators and growers were willing to pay an average of $41.20, with an additional $0.063/acre for container growers and $0.126/acre for field growers. Return on investment for the U.S. Department of Agriculture grant funding for the project was $187.60 per dollar of funding. This survey demonstrates that collaborative efforts can produce high-value deliverables with significant regional and/or national impact.

Full access

Amy Fulcher, Juang-Horng (JC) Chong, Sarah A. White, Joseph C. Neal, Jean L. Williams-Woodward, Craig R. Adkins, S. Kristine Braman, Matthew R. Chappell, Jeffrey F. Derr, Winston C. Dunwell, Steven D. Frank, Stanton A. Gill, Frank A. Hale, William E. Klingeman, Anthony V. LeBude, Karen Rane, and Alan S. Windham

With increased mobile device usage, mobile applications (apps) are emerging as an extension medium, well suited to “place-less” knowledge transfer. Conceptualizing, designing, and developing an app can be a daunting process. This article summarizes the considerations and steps that must be taken to successfully develop an app and is based on the authors’ experience developing two horticulture apps, IPMPro and IPMLite. These apps provide information for major pests and plant care tasks and prompt users to take action on time-sensitive tasks with push notifications scheduled specifically for their location. Topics such as selecting between a web app and a native app, choosing the platform(s) for native apps, and designing the user interface are covered. Whether to charge to download the app or have free access, and navigating the intra- and interinstitutional agreements and programming contract are also discussed. Lastly, the nonprogramming costs such as creating, editing, and uploading content, as well as ongoing app management and updates are discussed.

Full access

Amy Fulcher, Sarah A. White, Juang-Horng (JC) Chong, Joseph C. Neal, Jean L. Williams-Woodward, Craig R. Adkins, S. Kristine Braman, Matthew R. Chappell, Jeffrey F. Derr, Winston C. Dunwell, Steven D. Frank, Stanton A. Gill, Frank A. Hale, William E. Klingeman, Anthony V. LeBude, Karen Rane, and Alan S. Windham

Mobile device applications (apps) have the potential to become a mainstream delivery method, providing services, information, and tools to extension clientele. Testing, promoting, and launching an app are key components supporting the successful development of this new technology. This article summarizes the considerations and steps that must be taken to successfully test, promote, and launch an app and is based on the authors’ experience developing two horticulture apps, IPMPro and IPMLite. These apps provide information for major pests and plant care tasks and prompt users to take action on time-sensitive tasks with push notifications scheduled specifically for their location. App testing and evaluation is a continual process. Effective tactics for app testing and evaluation include garnering focus group input throughout app development and postlaunch, in-house testing with simulators, beta testing and the advantages of services that enhance information gained during beta testing, and postlaunch evaluations. Differences in promotional and bulk purchasing options available among the two main device platforms, Android and iOS, are explored as are general preparations for marketing the launch of a new app. Finally, navigating the app submission process is discussed. Creating an app is an involved process, but one that can be rewarding and lead to a unique portal for extension clientele to access information, assistance, and tools.