AG RX Spring 2014 Avocado- March 4,5, 2014 David Holden

Transcription

1 AG RX Spring 2014 Avocado- Citrus Meeting March 4,5, 2014 David Holden

2 Topics for Today Soil Amendments When to use gypsum, sulfur, sulfuric acid, or sulfurous acid? Soil Adjuvants for water saving. NUE Nutrient Use Efficiency. How to get more from less. Observations on the effects of the this past winter s lack of rain and heat. Young tree establishment utilizing a phosphate plus Transit Soil Program.

3 Amending your Soil When and why to use: Gypsum or possibly CaTs (calcium thiosulfate) Sulfuric Acid water amendment Sulfurous Acid water amendment (Sulfur burners) Soil Sulfur Limestone

4 Gypsum Lack of water percolation and not enough calcium in your soil dictates the need for gypsum Based on simple laboratory soil test by adding known amounts of gypsum to your soil and seeing how varying rates improve water infiltration By the way, gypsum does not acidify your soil, but limestone does raise the ph of soils.

5 No need for Gypsum

6 Sulfuric Acid or Sulfurous Acid Both of these acids treat hard water and drop the ph of that water The difference is Sulfuric acid is a strong acid and the Sulfurous Acid is a weak acid With Sulfuric acid you can drop your water ph to close to zero, with sulfurous acid, depending on the buffering capacity of the water you can only drop the ph to about Also sulfurous acid is made by burning sulfur in a sulfur burner.

7 Sulfur Burner on Left, Sulfuric Acid Injection System on Right

8 When to use either of these Acids High water ph and/or potential irrigation system or soil clogging potential from hard waters that produce limestone when dried. Blueberry production Additional elements to consider Chloride Boron Sulfur burners have also been utilized to lower pond water ph and to help control algae in the ponds.

9 What A Water Candidate Might Look Like. Critical Numbers to look at and Why?

10 Resulting Solutions

11 Limited help from Sulfuric Acid in this water.

12 Sulfuric Acid or Sulfur Burner Things to consider Environmental Issues - Safety Ease of handling Effectiveness Cost

13 Soil Sulfur Why would you choose soil sulfur over the previous options? Where water is good, but soil ph is slightly elevated due to low amounts of limestone or other alkalinity issues.

14 Let s Look how Soil Sulfur Works. On most of our soils lbs per acre of pure soil sulfur will lower the ph of a foot of soil one whole point from say 7.5 to 6.5 Depends on soil type and buffering capacity If soil has much limestone, it takes a lot more soil sulfur to burn up that limestone Let s se how it works.

15 Tigersul Dispersible Sulfur Comes in 90% S and 65% S plus 18% Zinc Finished two year project on new lemon replants in 2010 Rates of ½ lb to 1 lb/tree applied in 2009 and 2010 to the surface of the soil and scratch in. Significant ph change over two years and new tree growth response

16 The movement of Sulfur into plants. Uptake of S Plants take sulfur from the soil in the sulphate form ( SO 4 = ) Small quantities of S0₂ can be absorbed through the plant leaves. Plants require a constant supply of S during it s growing period, and cannot move sulfur from it s older leaves. sulfur in the elemental S form has to be oxidized to sulfate for plant uptake. Finely Divided Elemental sulfur + Water + Oxygen With Bacterial activity Sulfuric Acid H 2 SO 4 = 3/5/2014 Copyright Tiger-Sul Products (Canada) Co. 17

17 To help prote ct y 5 Key Factors for Oxidization of Elemental Sulfur (PNES) 1. Thiobacillus concentration (Sulfur bacterium) Naturally in all soils Sulfur Microbe < 1 micron Elemental Glue Sulfur food source bacteria per gram of soil Higher concentrations increase oxidation After PNES applied 6-8 weeks in good soil conditions, population increases to approx million per gram of soil. Concentration will increase year after year. Scanning Electron Micrograph Showing Thiobacillus attached To 3/5/2014 Sulfur Particle Copyright Tiger-Sul Products (Canada) Co. 18

18 Why use a product like Tigersul? Micronutrient and phosphate availability increases as ph is decreased from basic to a neutral ph.

19 Data from Citrus Tree Establishment Trial Started at tree planting Repeated applications for two more years. Similar trial repeated in , on strawberries with very similar and positive results.

20 Average increase in Tree Height Chart 2: Tigersul Program for Lemon Planting Establishment - Ventura County, Summer 2010 Tree Growth 45.0% 40.0% Percent Chang ge in Height 35.0% 30.0% 25.0% 20.0% 15.0% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 10/26/2010 Untreated 17.6% Tiger 90 1 lb/tree 21.9% Tiger 18% Zinc 1/2 lb/tree 26.8% Tiger 90 w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree 29.6% Tiger 18% Zinc 1 lb/tree 33.2% Tiger 90 1/2 lb/tree 34.0% Tiger 18% Zinc w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree 41.2% c bc bc abc ab ab a

21 Average Increase in Trunk Diameter Chart 6: Tigersul Program for Lemon Planting Establishment - Ventura County, Summer 2010 Tree Growth 90.0% Trunk Diameter Perc cent Change 85.0% 80.0% 75.0% 70.0% 65.0% 10/26/2010 Untreated 73.9% Tiger 90 w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree 76.3% Tiger 90 1 lb/tree 76.4% Tiger 18% Zinc 1 lb/tree 77.5% Tiger 18% Zinc 1/2 lb/tree 82.0% Tiger 90 1/2 lb/tree 86.5% Tiger 18% Zinc w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree 87.1%

22 Soil ph change in 2010 Chart 8: Tigersul Program for Lemon Planting Establishment - Ventura County, Summer Soil ph ph /16/2009 1/20/2011 Tiger 18% Zinc 1 lb/tree Tiger 90 w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 90 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 90 1 lb/tree Untreated Tiger 18% Zinc 1/2 lb/tree

23 Soil Zinc Levels Chart 9: Tigersul Program for Lemon Planting Establishment - Ventura County, Summer Soil Zinc Level PPM /16/2009 1/20/2011 Untreated Tiger 90 w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 90 1 lb/tree Tiger 90 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc 1 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc 1/2 lb/tree

24 Leaf Zinc Levels Chart 13: Tigersul Program for Lemon Planting Establishment - Ventura County, Summer Leaf Zinc Level PPM /16/ /9/2010 Untreated Tiger 18% Zinc 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 90 1 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc 1 lb/tree Tiger 90 w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 18% Zinc w/humic Granules 1/2 lb/tree Tiger 90 1/2 lb/tree 57 29

25 How to Apply Tigersul Products Pre-plant worked into soil based on soil analysis Post-plant under the sprinklers, raked in would help, but not necessary. Rates determined by soil analysis, higher ph or limestone, the more needed.

26 When to Use Limestone Almost never in Coastal California We generally have alkaline soils (high ph) and as you learned earlier we make limestone with our hard waters We generally want to lower our soil ph and limestone raises the soil ph. So When? Some wine makers may ask for higher ph soils If your soil is very acid (below ph of 6.0) If your are growing brassicae type crops with Club root present in the soil)

27 Tests with Water Adjuvants. Looked at five products in vegetables and avocados, we will discuss the three best. Aqua Plus Kalo 3051 (Water Right) Integrate 20 Applied early in irrigation Cycle Applied monthly

28 How do these Adjuvants Work? Some increase water percolation, while others hold water The ones we are looking at hold water and allow for volumetric fill, that is lateral movement in the soil. Probably more effective in vegetables, but we saw some good results in Avocados.

29 Results in Avocado 80.00% Chart 8: Water Fill Improvement overtime when compared to an Untreated Check. Avocados. Best overall average at Day % 60.00% 50.00% 7 Day Tensiometer Readings Prior to Treatents 7 Day Tensiometer Readings After Treatents Percent Improvement 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% 6" 12"

30 Observations After each application noted the following We were able to extend the irrigation cycles from seven to ten days after the first application, then nine days after this irrigation, and eight days after the second irrigation. By the fourth irrigation we were back to the same cycle In theory this should give us about 6 extra days a month without the need for water or about 70 days a year. This would equate to a savings of about.25 to.5 acre foot of water per year.

31 Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE) What is it? Getting a better bang for our buck. Why? Nitrate loss to ground water, atmosphere, and surface water Cost of materials I have conducted at least 40 separate trials this past two years with over 20 different products looking at utilizing nutrients more efficiently and reducing nitrate leaching.

32 Celery Trials Replicated sampling (8) of celery in season as it sized. SPAD sampling in same order to measure relative chlorophyll levels in the leaves In season soil and petiole samples (no significant differences noted) End of season (two days prior to commercial harvest) replicated sample harvest of 8 replicates from each treatment.

33 Sizing Results Chart 1: Multi Participant Trial on Celery in Ventura County, California Season - Whole Plant Weight Pounds per Total Plant All trimmed for market 12/17/2012 1/3/2013 2/1/2013 2/26/2013 3/27/20134/1/2013(trimme Grower Standard G.S. at 75% N G.S. at 75% N/Ocean Organics Exp G.S. at 75% N/Kelpgrow G.S. at 75% N/Algamin XT G.S. at 75% N/Global Organics Program G.S. at 75% N/Steric P-S-K Program G.S. at 75% N/Steric S-S-K Program

34 Financial Return Data Chart 4: Multi Participant Trial on Celery in Ventura County, California Season - Net Return per Acre after Harvest Costs - Pre Cultural Costs Percent 's 24's 30's 36's 48's Total Return/acre Grower Standard $8,566 $3,919 $5,102 $823 $0 $18,410 G.S. at 75% N $3,777 $9,787 $1,166 $1,694 $0 $16,424 G.S. at 75% N/Ocean Organics Exp 3 $7,845 $9,571 $1,211 $0 $0 $18,626 G.S. at 75% N/Kelpgrow $12,221 $8,697 $629 $0 $0 $21,547 G.S. at 75% N/Algamin XT $13,675 $8,132 $634 $0 $0 $22,441 G.S. at 75% N/Global Organics Program 0.00 $11,961 $7,296 $1,847 $0 $0 $21,103 G.S. at 75% N/Steric P-S-K Program $8,790 $6,896 $2,908 $0 $0 $18,594 G.S. at 75% N/Steric S-S-K Program $10,154 $6,388 $2,939 $0 $0 $19,482

35 Soil Nitrogen Pre-Crop 92 ppm NO3 nitrogen Post Harvest Grower Standard 100%N 39 ppm Grower Standard 75% N 2 ppm Grower Standard 75% N with additives 9 ppm (average for all) Almost 75% less nitrogen left in the soil on average in the 75% nitrogen plots with additives when compared to the Grower Standard at 100% nitrogen. That in theory is 120 less leachable pounds of nitrate nitrogen per acre, with 7.5% on average better production (( )/1280)!

36 How does this Apply to Avocados Use the proper timing when applying nutrients Nitrogen prior to leaf flushes particularly in April and late June, July Phosphate in the winter when soil is cold and phosphorus availability is limited Potassium and zinc when roots are actively growing and can take it in between late April and September Don t waste products to leaching when plant cannot use the nutrient efficiently.

37 Winter 2014 Observations No rains really since the fall-early winter of 2012 until this past week. East winds, dry, and hot in January. Resulting effect, particularly on the avocados, was not good and worse with salty water.

38 This is what many of you are seeing!

39 Or Possibly this?

40 So what is the difference?

41 Salt in the Soil

42 Lime Induced Chlorosis

43 What salts Generally Chlorides Bicarbonates Sulfates Nitrates Phosphates

44 So Why does the lack of leaching rain have these effects.

45 A Simple Solution?

46 What to do next year. Irrometers, a shovel or soil probe, and irrigation scheduling calculator for water to be found at avosource.com Maintaining good irrigation scheduling in Maintaining good irrigation scheduling in the winter, when the rains are not coming is critical to tree health.

47 A little side information How does a windbreak affect fruit size. Average weight of fruit on March 2, 2013 at xx distance from Eucs: 20 feet 4.8 oz 35 feet 5.1 oz 50 feet 5.5 oz No windbreak influence 5.9 oz

48 Fruit Sizing on March 2, 2013

49 Final Subject New Planting Establishment Trials Almonds Avocados

50 Fertilizer Rates -Almonds UTC No fertilizer Grower Standard 1 oz/5 gallon planter of month slow release in March 25 ppm in water of P2O5 as a soil drench once per month, March-June. Transit alone 12 floz/acre equivalent Grower Standard plus Transit

51 Transit Soil on Almond Trees Key Improvements 64% increase in whole tree weight 64% increase in root growth 19% increase in SPAD chlorophyll readings significantly improved canopy growth overall improvement in tree establishment From left to right the treatments were untreated control, 50 ppm only, Transit/Carbon Boost Soil only, and Transit/Carbon Boost Soil + 50 ppm. Transit/Carbon Boost Soil treated almond trees were significantly greater at the 99% confidence level.

52 Transit Soil on Almond Trees 95 days after transplant 3 applications applied UTC 50 ppm Transit/Carbon Boost Soil Transit/Carbon Boost Soil + 50 ppm

53 Second Year Trees Untreated Grower Standard Program Transit/Carbon Boost G. S./Transit/Carbon Boost

54 Final Results 2012 On Average Trees treated with Transit had 10-22% higher chlorophyll readings over both years when compared to the untreated check (this was in absence of any extra fertilizer) 88% increase in whole tree weight and root weight when Transit was added to the grower standard fertilizer program The Transit treatment increased leaf mass by 71% over the untreated check and the grower standard program plus Transit/Carbon Boost increased leaf mass by 30% over the grower standard alone.

55 Two year old Almonds Untreated Grower Standard Program Transit/Carbon Boost G. S./Transit/Carbon Boost

56 Almond Leaves Untreated Grower Standard Program Transit/Carbon Boost G. S./Transit/Carbon Boost

57 AG RX/Holden Avocado Establishment Trials April 2010 January 2012 April 2011

58 Avocado Planting Details Planted April 15, 2009 Trial Started Spring 2010 at one year of age Soil is semi limey, with a calcium carbonate rating of.5% and a ph of 7.5 and a cec of 28.7 Soil is low in manganese, copper, and iron

59 Study Details Random Complete Block Design Ten single tree replicates, completely randomized Three treatment regimes Grower standard consisting of UN 32, KTS and Zinc 9% EDTA chelate as a foliar. Advanced Grower Standard of UN 32,KTS, and Iron 4.5% HEDTA chelate all in soil along with foliar applications of Nutri-Phite , Acadian SEL, and Zinc 9% EDTA FB Sciences based program of UN 32, KTS, Photogreen- S and , all with Transit/Carbon Boost in the soil. Foliar program of and Zicron F with Kafe.

60 Results as of March 16, 2011 Average Vigor Rating (1-5 Scale, 5 being the best) Grower Standard 3.4 b Advanced Grower Standard 4.2 a FB Sciences Based Program 4.5 a Percent of Trees rated as a 5 Grower Standard 10% b Advanced Grower Standard 30% ab FB Sciences Based Program 60% a Separation of the means based on DMRT at 90% confidence

61 Results as of March 16, 2011 Trees not in bloom as an indicator of tree health Grower Standard 50% a Advanced Grower Standard 10% a FB Sciences Based Program 0% a Separation of the means based on DMRT at 90% confidence

62 Average Fruit Load on July 4, 2012 Grower Standard 2.4 b Advanced Grower Standard 2.5 b FBS Program 3.3 a

63 Final Production 2013 Equivalency on a per Acre Basis for Four Year Old Trees Grower Standard 9030 lbs/ac Advanced Grower Standard 9450 lbs/a (5% increase over grower standard) FBS Program with lbs/a (19% increase over grower standard)

64 Review Soil Amendments Soil and Water Adjuvants Nutrient Use Efficiencies Climate 2014 Tree establishment.

65 Thank you David Holden 110