Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 6 of 6 items for :

  • "mesh cages" x
Clear All
Free access

D.S. Lawson, S.K. Brown, J.P. Nyrop and W.H. Reissig

A barrier system for pest control consisting of insect-exclusionary cages covered with three types of mesh material was placed over columnar apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) trees. This system has been shown to provide arthropod control equivalent to insecticides. Light intensity, evaporation, and air and soil temperature were reduced inside the cages. Shoot elongation of columnar apple trees grown inside insect-exclusionary cages was significantly greater than that of trees grown outside the cages. However, this increased shoot growth was not due to etiolation. Tree performance was unaffected by insect-exclusionary cages. Fruit set and fruit soluble solids concentration were not reduced by the cages; however, fruit color intensity was reduced as the degree of shading from the mesh increased. These findings, in conjunction with high levels of arthropod control by insect-exclusionary cages, may allow insect-exclusionary cages to be used for evaluating integrated pest management thresholds, predator-prey relationships, and apple production without insecticides.

Free access

James E. Motes and Raymond J. Schatzer

Fresh market tomato cultivar and cultural trials are conducted yearly at the Oklahoma Vegetable Research Station near Tulsa. From 14 to 18 cultivars have been evaluated each season since 1985 comparing the Florida stake-and-weave and the wire mesh cage cultural systems. Results from 7 years of trials indicate caging produced 32% greater marketable yield than the stake-and-weave system. Percentage early yield was reduced with the cage system. Percentage of cull fruit was greater with the stake-and-weave system due to a higher incidence of fruit cracking. Average fruit size was not affected by cultural system. Cost of production analysis showed a lower cost of production with the cage system. The cage system is more capital intensive and the stake-and-weave system is more labor intensive. Undesirable factors in the use of cages are greater difficulty in picking the early fruit clusters, logistics in off-season storage of cages and the larger capital investment required for the cage system.

Free access

Anil Khar, Jernej Jakse and Michael J. Havey

iiCCllrr ) and brown ( bb ) seeds. All self-pollinations and crosses were completed with mesh cages and house flies [ Musca domestica L. (Rincon-Vitova Insectaries, Ventura, CA)] as described by Havey (1993) . Hybrids were identified by white bulb color

Free access

María Engracia Guerra, Ana Wünsch, Margarita López-Corrales and Javier Rodrigo

trees. To avoid the arrival of pollinating insects, two trees of each female parent were enclosed in a 0.8-mm mesh cage before bloom. In these caged trees, 120 to 1560 flowers per cultivar were cross-pollinated ( Table 1 ) using a thin paintbrush every

Free access

Andrea Quintana, Rosanna Freyre, Thomas M. Davis and Robert J. Griesbach

formed. In addition, these F 1 individuals were vegetatively propagated and one replicate plant for each individual was maintained in isolation inside a mesh cage in the greenhouse. Over 1500 flowers were produced per plant during a period of 3 months

Free access

María Engracia Guerra, Ana Wünsch, Margarita López-Corrales and Javier Rodrigo

supplementary pollination in caged trees ( Guerra et al., 2010 ). For this purpose, two trees of ‘Sweet August’, ‘Rubirosa’, and ‘Simka’ were enclosed in 0.8-mm mesh cages before bloom to avoid the arrival of pollinator insects. Pollinations were done by hand