Development of Best Management Practices for Fertigation of Young Citrus Tree

Similar documents
Development of Best Management Practices for Fertigation of Young Citrus Trees, 2003 Report

Effects of fluid nitrogen fertigation and rate on microsprinkler irrigated grapefruit

Nitrogen and Phosphorus Fertilizer Requirements for Young, Bearing Microsprinkler-Irrigated Citrus, 2005 Report

ARIZONA is one of four important citrus-producing

Response of Micro-Sprinkler Irrigated Lisbon lemons to N Rate and Source on a Superstition Sand

Arnold Schumann, Kevin Hostler, Kirandeep Mann, Laura Waldo (UF/IFAS, CREC) 3rd UF Water Institute Symposium February 15-16, 2012 Gainesville, FL

Watermelon Response to Soluble and Slow Release Nitrogen Fertilizers

Nitrogen Fertilizer Movement in Wheat Production, Yuma

Improving Fertilizer Use Efficiency for Horticultural Crops. Tom Obreza and Jerry Sartain Soil and Water Science Dept.

Managing Pistachio Nutrition. Patrick Brown Muhammad Ismail Siddiqui

Davie Kadyampakeni UF/IFAS CREC

New Approaches to Almond Nutrient Management. Sebastian Saa-Silva, Saiful Muhammad, Patrick Brown UC-Davis

Davie Kadyampakeni UF/IFAS CREC

RESEARCH REPORT SUWANNEE VALLEY AREC 92-5 August, 1992 COMPARISON OF VARIOUS N SCHEDULING METHODS FOR SNAPBEANS

LIQUID SWINE MANURE NITROGEN UTILIZATION FOR CROP PRODUCTION 1

Fertilizing Small Grains in Arizona

Optimizing Nitrogen and Water Inputs for Trickle Irrigated Watermelon

Fertigation management for tomato production in saline soils

Reclaimed Water for Citrus Irrigation in Florida

Efficient nitrogen fertility and irrigation management in California processing tomato production

Fertilizer Management for Plant Health and Environmental Water Quality Protection

Using Nitrate-N Petiole Sap-Testing for Better Nitrogen Management in Vegetable Crops

Hay Yield and Quality of Sudangrass and Sorghum-Sudangrass Hybrid Varieties Grown for Export from Western Arizona

EVALUATING WATER REQUIREMENTS OF DEVELOPING WALNUT ORCHARDS IN THE SACRAMENTO VALLEY

SOIL APPLIED AND WATER APPLIED PHOSPHORUS APPLICATION. M. J. Ottman, T. L. Thompson, M. T. Rogers, and S. A. White 1 ABSTRACT

Water and Nitrogen BMPs for Tomato and Watermelon: Water Quality and Economics 1

SUSTAINABLE NITROGEN FERTILIZER REGIMES FOR SNAP BEANS IN VIRGINIA

DEVELOPMENT OF A NUTRIENT BUDGET APPROACH AND OPTIMIZATION OF FERTILIZER MANAGEMENT IN WALNUT

Alternative Systems for Cultivating and Side Dressing Specialty Crops for Improved Nitrogen Use Efficiency

Nitrogen dynamics of standard and enhanced urea in corn

Nitrogen Fertilization of Sugar Beets In the Woodland Area of California 1

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF TEMIK ON CITRUS IN THE INDIAN RIVER AREA IN SOUTHEASTERN FLORIDA. Lindsey Blakeley, Richard Weldon, and Gary Fairchild

Principle Investigators:

SULFUR AND NITROGEN FOR PROTEIN BUILDING

Progress Report (task 3) Project Title: BMPs for Florida blueberries. Contract # : Dorota Z. Haman Agricultural and Biological Engineering

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF ALDICARB ON CITRUS IN THE INDIAN RIVER AREA IN SOUTHEASTERN FLORIDA. Lindsey Blakeley, Richard Weldon, and Gary Fairchild

Evaluation of Compact Bed Geometries for Water, Nutrient, and Economic Efficiency for Drip-Irrigated Tomato and Pepper

THE BENEFITS OF MANAGING MANURES WITH ALFALFA. Roland D. Meyer

Almond Nitrogen Budgeting and Reporting Using the Almond Board s Online Tool

Hydrophilic Gel Amendments to Sand Soil Can Increase Growth and Nitrogen Uptake Efficiency of Citrus Seedlings

Dr. Larry R. Parsons. Reclaimed Water A Sustainable Source for Florida s Growing Water Demands. Citrus Research & Education Center Lake Alfred, FL

Nursery BMPs. Keeping Nutrients in the Root Zone. Tom Yeager and Bob Stamps Department of Environmental Horticulture

PEPPERMINT RESPONSE TO NITROGEN FERTILIZER IN CENTRAL OREGON 1. Alan R. Mitchell and Neysa A. Farris. Abstract

Foliar Fertilization of Field Crops

EXPERIMENTAL SITE AND METHODS

MICRO-SPRINKLER IRRIGATION AND FUSTIGATION AND LAND CONFIGURATION AS A BEST MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE FOR GROUNDNUT

Large Scale Studies. UC Cooperative Extension, Monterey Co

project Leader: Dr. R. J. Zasoski (916) or cooperators: R.D. Meyer, H. Schulbach, and J.P. Edstrom.

University of California Cooperative Extension Kings County Small Grain News. Volume V, Issue 1 March 2008

Sugarbeet Response to Nitrogen Fertilizer Rates K.A. Rykbost and R.L. Dovell

Fertilizer Management in No- Tillage Cucurbits

Nitrogen BMPs for horticultural crop production Tim Hartz UC Davis

Fertility management in organic strawberries

Availability of Nutrients in Manure Jeff Schoenau Department of Soil Science University of Saskatchewan Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Interpreting Nitrate Concentration in Tile Drainage Water

Calcium Thiosulfate S-6Ca LIQUID FERTILIZER. Gypsum Field Study

Nitrogen Monitoring Techniques for Vegetable Crops

Biochar Field Trial in San Mateo County, California: Presented to AQWA August 29 th 2016 by Brittani Bohlke & Sara Polgar

Nitrogen Management and Budgeting. Gabriele Ludwig Almond Board of California

Title: Fertigation Applications and Costs in Organic Vegetables. Personnel: Carol Miles 1, Jonathan Roozen, Alice Riot, and Maggie Taylor

TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE...V CONTRIBUTORS... VI I. MICROIRRIGATION THEORY AND DESIGN PRINCIPLES CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION...1

Number 209 September 11, 2009

UPLAND COTTON LINT YIELD RESPONSE TO SEVERAL SOIL MOISTURE DEPLETION LEVELS

SOIL FERTILITY RESEARCH IN SUGARCANE IN 2007

Strawberry: Drip Irrigation and Fertigation

Overview of Florida s s Commercial Blueberry Industry. Jeff Williamson Horticultural Sciences Department IFAS, University of Florida

Applying Dairy Lagoon Water to Alfalfa

A top issue: Quality. Manual of Tomato and Eggplant Field Production

Review of Current Sugarcane Fertilizer Recommendations: A Report from the UF/IFAS Sugarcane Fertilizer Standards Task Force 1

INJECTING LIQUID HOG MANURE FOR IMPROVING CROP YIELDS

Nutrient Management for Hay Production and Quality

Swine Manure Nutrient Utilization Project

Timing of Foliar Applications

G Fertilizing Winter Wheat I: Nitrogen, Potassium, and Micronutrients

Using Dairy Manure as a Fertilizer Source for Forage Crops. Workgroup. Marsha Campbell Mathews University of California Farm Advisor Stanislaus County

Soil Amendment and Foliar Application Trial 2016 Full Report

FACTORS AFFECTING CROP NEEDS FOR POTASSIUM WESTERN PERSPECTIVE TERRY A. TINDALL AND DALE WESTERMANN MANAGER OF AGRONOMY J.R

Monitoring soil moisture helps refine irrigation management

Lessons Learned from Iowa On-Farm Studies Testing Manure Nitrogen Availability

Phosphorus Dynamics and Mitigation in Soils

Optimal Leaf Analysis Norms for Avocado (cv. Fuerte)

Determining Optimum Nitrogen Application Rates for Corn Larry Bundy, Todd Andraski, Carrie Laboski, and Scott Sturgul 1

Irrigation Management for Trees and Vines

Purpose and Introduction:

Urea Volatilization and Enhanced Efficiency Nitrogen Fertilizers for Small Grains Crop Pest Management School January 6, 2011

TheHelper, A User-Friendly Irrigation Scheduling Tool In Florida and Hawaii A. Fares 1, M. Zekri 2 and L.R. Parsons 2. Abstract

SLOW RELEASE NITROGEN FOR IRRIGATED HARD RED SPRING WHEAT YIELD AND PROTEIN. B. D. Brown University of Idaho, Parma Research and Extension Center

IMPROVING PERFORMANCE OF RYE COVER CROP SYSTEMS

ECONOMIC TRENDS IN THE FLORIDA AVOCADO INDUSTRY

POTASSIUM MANAGEMENT, SOIL TESTING AND CROP RESPONSE. Antonio P. Mallarino and Ryan R. Oltmans Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, Ames

Unit F: Soil Fertility and Moisture Management. Lesson 3: Applying Fertilizers to Field Crops

Irrigation Workshop. Brad Rathje, AquaSpy Inc

Optimizing Strip-Till and No-Till Systems for Corn in the Biofuel Era

Do not oven-dry the soil

NITROGEN, SULFUR, POTASSIUM AND PHOSPHORUS FERTILIZATION IN ALFALFA WHEN ARE THEY NECESSARY? Richard T. Koenig 1 ABSTRACT

Tree Physiology: Nitrogen. December 8, 2016

Nitrogen Rates and Forms for Maximum Quality and Growth of Penn A-4 Creeping Bentgrass

NITROGEN MANAGEMENT 2013 YWTG

Simplot FŪSN Fertilizer Potato Trials

Irrigated Acreage in Florida: A Summary through

Transcription:

Development of Best Management Practices for Fertigation of Young Citrus Tree Item Type text; Article Authors Thompson, Thomas L.; White, Scott A.; Walworth, James; Sower, Greg Publisher College of Agriculture, University of Arizona (Tucson, AZ) Journal Citrus and Deciduous Fruit and Nut Research Report Download date 23/04/2018 18:31:15 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/226095

Development of Best Management Practices for Fertigation of Young Citrus Trees Thomas L. Thompson, Scott A. White, James Walworth, and Greg Sower Abstract Newhall navel oranges on Carrizo rootstock were planted in Mar. 1997 at the Citrus Agricultural Center. The objectives of this experiment were: i) to determine the effects of N rate and fertigation frequency for microsprinkler-irrigated navel oranges on tree N status, and crop yield and quality; and ii) to develop Best Management Practices which promote optimum tree growth and production while minimizing nitrate leaching. The trees are equipped with a microsprinkler irrigation system. The experiment is a randomized complete block factorial with N rates of 0, 0.15, 0.30, and 0.45 lb N/tree/year, and fertigation frequencies of weekly, monthly, and three times per year. Unfertilized control trees are also included in the experimental design. Each of the ten treatments is replicated five times. The trees were harvested for the first time in Feb. 2001. Fruit were processed through an automatic fruit sizer, and fruit from each plot were further evaluated for fruit quality. Although unfertilized control trees had lower leaf N content than fertilized trees, fruit yield and quality of controls was no lower than fertilized trees. Similarly, there were few statistically significant differences in fruit yield and quality between trees receiving different N rates and fertigation frequencies. Introduction Presently there are more than 14,000 acres of citrus in Maricopa County under commercial production (Sherman and Oaks, 1999) of which about 2,500 acres are microsprinkler irrigated. As water costs increase, many new plantings of citrus trees will be microsprinkler irrigated. The development of accurate fertilization guidelines for commercial citrus production is important to maximize profitability and minimize nitrate leaching to the ground water supply. A large number of wells in the Phoenix area are already contaminated with NO 3 (Reffruschinni and Watson, 1994). The level of N fertility has more influence on the growth, yield, and quality of citrus than any other single plant nutrient because it is the nutrient most often deficient in Arizona soils. Nitrogen fertilization is generally required in greater amounts by citrus than any other plant nutrient to maximize tree growth and development. Adequate supplies of N are necessary to optimize growth and development of newly planted citrus trees. Optimal growth requires optimal levels of N and irrigation, but an excess of either is nonproductive, costly, and may result in loss of N by leaching and/or runoff. Currently, University of Arizona citrus fertilization guidelines are based on the best available research at the time and were developed primarily for flood-irrigated production systems. The current Arizona recommendations are 0 0.5, 0.25 0.75 and 0.25 1.0 lbs/n/tree/year for the 1 st, 2 nd 3 rd and 4 th 5 th years, respectively (Doerge et al., 1991). Nitrogen fertilizer recommendations in California are 1 tablespoon, 0.25, 0.50, 0.75 and 1.0 lb/n/tree/year for the 1 st 5 th years, respectively. In Florida, recommended rates are 0.15 0.30, 0.30 0.60, 0.45 0.90, 0.80 1.0 and 1.1 1.4 lb/n/tree/year for the 1 st 5 th years, respectively (Tucker et al., 1995). Recent research conducted at the University of Arizona and This is a part of publication az1275: "2001 Citrus and Deciduous Fruit and Nut Research Report," College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 85721.

elsewhere suggests that these recommended rates can be decreased significantly for microsprinkler-irrigated young trees. Further research is needed to refine N fertilizer recommendations for citrus trees in the 3 rd 5 th years as the trees begin producing fruit (Davies, 1997). Fertilizer requirements for citrus need to be reevaluated due to the recent changes in fertilizer formulation, application technology, irrigation practices (microsprinklers) and evidence of nitrate contamination. Microsprinkler irrigation with fertigation, when properly managed, has the potential to reduce leaching losses of nitrate and minimize the contamination of ground and surface waters. Recently, the University of Florida revised citrus fertilization guidelines for young citrus trees and reduced recommended fertilizer rates 50% for the first 3 years after planting (Tucker et al., 1995). However, these new recommendations were based on years of research and the development of a relevant local database. Previously, most fertilizer studies on young citrus trees were conducted to determine the optimum rate or application frequency needed for maximum tree growth with little consideration given to the effects on ground water quality. However, nitrate movement into ground water is of concern particularly in central Arizona. Groundwater studies indicate that many wells around citrus producing areas contain nitrate concentrations above the EPA s Maximum contaminant Level (MCL) of 45 ppm (Reffruschinni and Watson, 1994). Fertigation may reduce leaching of nitrate and minimize the contamination of ground and surface waters. The increased use of fertigation has led to many questions concerning optimum fertilizer rate and frequency of application for liquid fertilizers. Nitrate is readily leached through the soil profile with excessive irrigation or heavy rainfall (monsoons). Research in Florida showed that fertigating a newly planted citrus tree 10 or 30 times per year resulted in very little change in soil nitrate concentrations at a depth of 18 30 inches. However, treatments applied 5 times/year fluctuated considerably and had higher nitrate concentrations at the 18 30 inch soil depth (Willis et al., 1990). In addition, newly planted citrus trees have 85% of their roots located between 3 and 12 inches within the soil profile (Marler and Davies, 1989). Due to the limited root zone, it may be important to increase fertigation frequency to reduce nitrate-nitrogen downward movement beyond the root zone. Willis et al. (1990) recommended that producers consider fertigating on a weekly or bi-weekly basis. Concern over the introduction of fertilizer materials into ground water also requires greater attention to efficient fertilizer management practices. Therefore, in Arizona where soil and climatic conditions make soluble fertilizers prone to substantial leaching losses, the use of Best Management Practices is particularly important. The objectives of this experiment were: i) to determine the effects of N rate and fertigation frequency for microsprinklerirrigated navel oranges on tree N status, and crop yield and quality; and ii) to develop Best Management Practices which promote optimum tree growth and production while minimizing nitrate leaching. Materials and Methods Site Characteristics. Field studies have been conducted since March 1997 at the University of Arizona Citrus Agricultural Center in Waddell. The experiment is conducted on a Gilman loam soil, which has a ph of 8.0, Ec e 0.7 ds/m, extractable K 702 ppm, exchangeable sodium <1%, and CaCO 3 <1%. Newhall navel orange trees on Carrizo citrange rootstock were planted in January 1997. This scion/rootstock combination was selected because navel oranges are the prominent citrus crop in Maricopa County and the rootstock is currently the most common for newly planted citrus trees. Cultural Practices. The trees were equipped with a microsprinkler irrigation system and plumbed to separately deliver the 10 N fertigation frequency x rate treatments listed in Table 1. Treatments were arranged as a 3 (fertigation frequencies) 3 (fertilizer rates) factorial experiment with 5 dual tree replicates per treatment. Treatments include 3 fertigation frequencies of 3 times per year, monthly and weekly fertigation. Included in the design is a control treatment, which has received no N fertilizer since the experiment began. Trees are irrigated using single 300-degree microsprinklers to deliver 10 gallons per hour. Irrigation was applied to maintain soil moisture above 1/3 soil moisture depletion, which is the optimum level for young citrus trees. Water and N are delivered through a microsprinkler irrigation system with all buried main lines and laterals and one 300 o pattern microsprinkler per tree. The N is supplied as urea-ammonium nitrate solution (UAN-32) and is injected into the

appropriate fertigation lines using an in-line Dosatron injector. Crop and Soil Measurements. Tree growth and development were monitored by leaf tissue analysis. Leaf tissues were collected in August and analyzed for total N, P, and K to determine nutrient status of the trees as affected by fertigation frequency and N rate. Trees were harvested for the first time during February 2001. Fruit were processed through an automated fruit sizer, and ten fruit per plot were analyzed for fruit quality. Results and Discussion Fruit Yield and Quality. There were few significant differences in fruit yield and quality between the treatments (Tables 2 and 3). In fact, yield and quality of unfertilized control trees were higher than in some of the treatments. Leaf Tissue N. Nitrogen concentration in leaves sampled in late August 2000 (Fig. 1) ranged from 26 to 29 mg N/g. N concentrations were lower than in previous samplings conducted in 1998 and 1999, but remained fairly high. There were statistically significant differences in leaf N between N rates and fertigation frequencies. Control trees had the lowest N concentration among the treatments. This shows the relatively poor N status of these trees. However, as shown in Tables 2 and 3, this poor N status did not diminish fruit yield and quality. Conclusions Fruit was harvested for the first time in Feb. 2001 from navel oranges planted in Mar. 1997. Although unfertilized control trees had lower leaf N content than fertilized trees, fruit yield and quality of controls was no lower than fertilized trees. Similarly, there were few statistically significant differences in fruit yield and quality between trees receiving different N rates and fertigation frequencies. These trees have been receiving the same N rate and fertigation frequency treatments since 1997. We assume that subsequent harvests will result in greater differences between the various treatments. Continued experimentation will be needed to develop best management practices. Literature Cited Davies, F.S. 1997. Nitrogen fertilizer research on young, nonbearing citrus trees in Florida. Citrus Industry. 78(3): 46 51. Doerge, T.A., R.L. Roth, and B.R. Gardner. 1991. Nitrogen fertilizer management in Arizona. University of Arizona, College of Agriculture, No. 191025. Marler, T.E., and F.S. Davies. 1989. Microsprinkler irrigation scheduling and pattern effects on growth of young Hamlin orange trees. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 102:57 60. Reffruschinni, K., and J. Watson. 1994. Groundwater quality database for nitrate in Maricopa County. University of Arizona, Cooperative Extension, Arizona Water Series: Number 20. Sherman, W., and E. Oaks. 1999. 1998 Arizona Agricultural Statistics. Arizona Agricultural Statistics Service, Phoenix, AZ. Tucker, D.P.H., A.K. Alva, L.K. Jackson, and T.A. Wheaton. 1995. Nutrition of Florida citrus trees. University of Florida, IFAS SP 169. Willis, L.E., F.S. Davies, and D.A. Graetz. 1990. Fertilization, nitrogen leaching and growth of young Hamlin orange trees on two rootstocks. Proc. Fla. State Hort. Soc. 103:30 37.

Table 1. Fertigation frequency and N fertilizer application rate treatments for the 1996-98 growing seasons. Treatment N Fertigation Frequency Fertigation Events per Cumulative N Rate (lb/tree) Season 1 Weekly 27 0.15 2 Monthly 7 0.15 3 3X/year 3 0.15 4 Weekly 27 0.30 5 Monthly 7 0.30 6 3X/year 3 0.30 7 Weekly 27 0.45 8 Monthly 7 0.45 9 3X/year 3 0.45 10 None 0 0.00 Table 2 Fertilizer rate and frequency effect on yield of Newhall navel orange trees harvested Feb. 2001. N Rate (lb N/tree) N Fertigation Frequency Marketable Yield (g) % Choice Fruit 0.15 Weekly 15600 5.0 0.15 Monthly 12000 3.1 0.15 3X/year 11100 5.4 0.30 Weekly 13700 3.3 0.30 Monthly 9400 4.7 0.30 3X/year 12500 1.7 0.45 Weekly 15100 6.0 0.45 Monthly 14800 5.4 0.45 3X/year 15600 2.0 0 None 14650 4.4 Table 3. Fertilizer rate and frequency effect on fruit quality parameters of Newhall navel oranges harvested Feb. 2001. N Rate (lb/tree) N Fertigation Frequency Brix % Avg. Fruit Wt. (g/fruit) Avg. Juice Wt. (g/fruit) Avg. Rind thickness mm 0.15 Weekly 263 87 7.8 13.6 0.15 Monthly 299 85 8.4 12.8 0.15 3X/year 254 89 7.9 14.2 0.30 Weekly 245 80 7.9 13.7 0.30 Monthly 241 85 7.9 12.8 0.30 3X/year 286 79 7.8 13.6 0.45 Weekly 250 76 7.7 12.6 0.45 Monthly 286 89 7.5 13.0 0.45 3X/year 290 82 8.3 13.5 0 None 268 86 7.6 13.0

Figure 1. Leaf N in navel oranges sampled in August 2000.