Apple packout audits were conducted during 1991 to 1993 to assess effects of five orchard systems (three cultivars, two age groups) on fruit packout and determine if relationships exist between light quality and productivity. Cultivar/rootstock combinations on 1979 T-trellis and central-leader systems had the lowest light levels and relative yields. Trees on either 1979 3-wire trellis, 1986 MIA, or 1985 West Virginia spindle had the highest light transmission, and trees on 1979 or 1985 West Virginia spindle systems had the highest yields. Extra fancy/fancy packouts across systems ranged from 40% to 85%. `Empire', regardless of system, had the highest packouts, and `Golden Delicious' on 1979 or 1986 central leader had the lowest packouts. A regression analysis comparing percentage packout in grades below fancy to percentage full sun indicated that reduced packouts were related to low light conditions. Orchard system influenced the number of fruit downgraded due to color, russet, bruises, bitter pit, cork spot, apple scab, rots, sooty blotch/fly speck, and tufted apple budmoth. Regression analyses comparing defects to field data indicated that bitter pit decreased as yield efficiency increased, and rot and sooty blotch/fly speck incidence were related to low canopy light penetration. Revenue losses were disproportionate to percentage of downgraded fruit because some defects had a greater impact on grade than others. The greatest revenue losses were for russet in `Golden Delicious' on 1986 central leader ($1656.60/acre) and for bitter pit in `Golden Delicious' on 1979 T-trellis ($1067.30/acre). Total losses in returns for individual systems ranged from $453.71/acre for `Empire' on 3-wire trellis to $3145.49/acre for `Golden Delicious' on 1986 central leader. The comparisons of young versus mature system yields and packouts indicate that medium- to high-density vertical or inclined canopy systems are superior to horizontal or low-density vertical freestanding systems. The cost-benefit analyses prescribe areas where management can be changed in existing systems to increase profitability.
This report presents preliminary data and arguments supporting the investigation and possible adoption of a low-cost method of cherry and grape tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) production. Cherry and grape tomato crops are currently grown using indeterminate or relatively large determinate plants requiring trellising and significant hand labor at harvest. In contrast, processing tomato crops are usually determinate cultivars raised without supporting systems, and they are harvested mechanically. In Summer 2009, a Mississippi trial of home garden tomato cultivars included a compact, mounding yellow-fruited cherry tomato that produced more than 2 kg of fruit per plant in the first harvest. The architecture of the plant, high yield potential, and concentrated set indicate that there is potential to grow commercial cherry and grape tomato crops in much the same way commercial processing tomatoes are grown: unsupported on bare or mulched beds, with once-over harvest. Such a system could reduce the monetary and labor costs of production of cherry and grape tomatoes. Seed companies, tomato growers, and supporting agencies should work together to further investigate the potential of this system of cherry and grape tomato production.
Floricane red raspberry (Rubus idaeus) produces biennial canes that are traditionally managed by annual selective removal of previously fruited floricanes and training of primocanes that will bear fruit in the next growing season. This process of pruning and training is labor intensive and costly, and growers would benefit from more economical methods of pruning and training. This 6-year project evaluated the economic viability of alternate-year (AY) production in a commercial floricane red raspberry field in northwest Washington and compared it to traditional, every-year (EY) production to assess whether the former could save costs. Despite savings from reduced chemicals, fertilizers, labor, general farm supplies, and other variable costs, the overall benefits of AY production were not enough to offset losses in revenue resulting from reduced yields under the conditions of this experiment in northwest Washington.
growth. Past research with bedding plants has shown that the transplant of large seedling plugs to containers can increase production efficiency and reduce costs ( Fisher, 2008 ; Fisher et al., 2006 ). In this study, transplanting basil seedlings at
manufacturers of blueberry harvesters will be able to improve their current designs, which could lead to improved fruit quality and enhanced highbush blueberry production efficiency. Units Literature cited Brown, G.K. 1983 Status of harvest mechanization of
. Understanding how temperature impacts flowering time could allow these petunia cultivars to be grouped into temperature-response groups to improve production efficiency. For example, more temperature-sensitive cultivars, such as ‘Picobella Pink’ and ‘Wave Purple
vineyard management that have increased production efficiency along with the ability to improve yield and berry composition. Recent vineyard mechanization research performed in California in a climate corresponding to Region V of the Winkler scale [>2222
of access to restricted use pesticides and cultivars with limited resistance to insect and disease may result in extensive losses. Improved crop protection strategies may lead to significant increases in production efficiency ( Lucas, 2011 ). Due to
which cacao beans were dried until water content was ≈8%. The percentage of healthy pods (no disease observed), total dry weight (grams), yield potential (calculation of hypothetical total yield equivalent to sum of healthy and diseased pods), production
Farming operations must be environmentally sound and economically viable if they are to be sustainable over time. Thus, farmers of the future must balance environmental and economic concerns in making management decisions. An integrated farm decision support system, PLANETOR, has been developed to help farmers balance soil loss, water-quality risks, production efficiency, and profitability in the farm planning process.